COMMENT ON GERMAN DZIEBEL
Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Kinship

Kinship bannerUCLA

COMMENT ON GERMAN DZIEBEL

Published Web Location

https://doi.org/10.5070/K71253738Creative Commons 'BY' version 4.0 license
Abstract

Lea focuses on Dziebel’s analysis of the section on South America, composed of two chapters that deal with the Northern Jê (Gê) societies, some displaying Omaha features, others Crow, or a mixture of the two. In his review article, Dziebel argues enthusiastically about the merits of large kinship data bases. However, there is not even consensus among social anthropologists concerning the characterization of the Northern Jê peoples. Dziebel is very critical of the book edited by Trautman and Whiteley, but he naively takes T. Turner’s model of societal reproduction at face value, despite it not even dealing directly with the kinship terminology. The other contributor, Marcela Coelho de Souza, sums up her position affirming that kinship is made, not given. Both of these authors dismiss Lea’s alternative analysis of the Mẽbêngôkre as a house-based matrilineal society, but Dziebel sidesteps this issue.

Main Content
For improved accessibility of PDF content, download the file to your device.
Current View