TERRITORIALITY



 
 
 
______________________
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 15:50:03 +0000
Reply-To: kjansen@GWDG.DE
Sender: Anthro-L <Anthro-l@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <kjansen@popper.gwdg.de>
From: Kristin Jansen <kjansen@GWDG.DE>
Subject: Territoriality
Comments: To: ANTHRO-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU.

Dear list

I am suppose to write a paper on how different cultures define and
percieve 'territorialtiy'.
So far the only useful book I was able to find on this topic was Fred
Myer's 'Pintupi Country. Pintupi Self'.
I would be most thankful for any advise where else to look out for
information!
KRISTIN
 

_________________________________
From ???@??? Mon Jan 12 08:08:00 1998
To: ANTHRO-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU
From: negenter@worldcom.ch (Nold Egenter)
Subject: Re: Territoriality
 

You wrote:

>Dear list
>
>I am suppose to write a paper on how different cultures define and
>percieve 'territorialtiy'.
>So far the only useful book I was able to find on this topic was Fred
>Myer's 'Pintupi Country. Pintupi Self'.
>I would be most thankful for any advise where else to look out for
>information!
>KRISTIN

Dear Kristin,

a very interesting, but very difficult - and, in your formulation - a very far reaching question.

Robert Ardrey (The territorial Imperative, 1966) has brilliantly dealt with the great importance of territory in the animal world, but gives only some very questionable 'biologisms' in regard to human territoriality. Questionable because 'territoriality' of humans is a cultural problem.

However, the main problem seems to be: human territoriality has been absorbed by the theoretical pyramid of 'religion', thus covering up its phenomenological characteristics of 'demarcation' and 'organisation of settlement space'.

The history of this misrepresentation is closely related to the diffusion-history of 'higher' religion, particularly Christianisation. In the latter case the scholastic absolutism of the 'spiritual' at the top of the theoretical pyramid had the consequence that all data at its basis - worldwide - were apriori interpreted according to the parameters of the top. Materially represented phenomena were devalued, primitivised (fetish, spirit huts, idols, etc.) and integrated into the primitive belief-system (superstition, idolatry etc.). Modern ethnology inherited this huge body of prejudiced data and continues to project its Eurocentrisms on it. I think, this is the main reason why you did not find any literature on the topic. Very likely territoriality is a very important aspect, particularly in traditional cultures, but it has been distorted and put into the wrong section of the humanities (religion instead of law or constitution).

In a particular culturo-geographic domain (agrarian Japan) which is only marginally touched by higher religion (Buddhism, which is very tolerant in this regard) I have done a study which comes close to what you might be looking for (Egenter: Bauform als Zeichen und Symbol, 1980; Semantic and symbolic Architecture 1995 -> Website, Books on Architectural Anthropology). In the framework of a new approach (anthropology of architecture and space), this study documented the cyclic ujigami-cults (clan- or settlement protector deity) of 100 villages in central Japan. The focus was initially on 'semantic architecture' (non- or pre-domestic fibroconstructive buildings) and its territorio-socio-semantic functions. One of the most important results of this study: it shows that the ritual core of rural Shinto is basically a system of cyclic renewal of territorial demarcation (see 'Architectural Anthropology' in our website ->Whats new?). There are strong indicators that the early imperial state in Japan in the 8th century (Taika reform) was built up on these rural cult traditions (see 'Shin no mihashira' in our website).

Very similar results are found also in post-mythical schools of Egyptology, particularly with Hermann Kees (der Götterglaube im Alten Aegypten, 1956). He explained the formation of the imperial level in Ancient Egypt (Ancient, Middle and New Kingdoms) on the development and hierarchical organisation of village-, district- and imperial cults (Orts- Gau- und Reichsgötterkulte) in which physically represented deities and their temples had strong territorio- socio-semantic functions.

Note that this territorial component appears also in the Hebrew religion, if one reads the Ancient Testament dominantly from its constitutional aspects (Mose as state founder). And, finally, Christianity too had strong territorio- constitutional implications for instance when, in 391 it became Roman state religion in the final 80 years of the Western Roman empire (basic: 325 Nicaenum/ Identity dispute), which explains the strange mixture of Christ's humanism and the highly centralised power of an oriental theocracy erected on the ruins of imperial Rome. And, last but not least, European scholasticism too can be put into this line of a theocratic territorio-constitutional continuity: Neoplatonism was used to construct a supra-imperial constitution against the Franconians and their successors (struggle for universals ['Universalienstreit'] and struggle of investiture ['Investiturstreit'].

In other words, 'territoriality' can be seen as a basic component in most of what the humanities call 'culture' if one relates it to what we call 'nuclear demarcation', a basic term in 'architecture and habitat' anthropology. Following O. F. Bollnow's anthropology of space per-/conception we can reconstruct the origins of vertical and horizontal 'cosmological' axial systems generated by 'nuclear demarcation' in traditional or early settlements and thus provide an anthropological 'infrastructure' for instance to Eliade's historical axiality (axis mundi). Since 'nuclear demarcation' appears paired with the highest ontological values presumably in all cultures, it is evident that this might be a new anthropological acces to culture. It would evolve along the physical and social instruments it develops to control space, territoriality being an important component of this evolutionary phaseology from small to big.

Best wishes for your work!

Nold Egenter
 

P.S.: O. F. Bollnow's 'Man and Space' (Mensch und Raum 1963) may also be recommended for reading (Bollnow: Review in our website).
 

____________________________________
From ???@??? Mon Jan 12 08:11:01 1998
Reply-To: Nold Egenter <negenter@WORLDCOM.CH>
Sender: Anthro-L <Anthro-l@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
From: Nold Egenter <negenter@WORLDCOM.CH>
Subject: Re: Territoriality
To: ANTHRO-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU
 

You wrote:

>Dear list
>
>I am suppose to write a paper on how different cultures define and
>percieve 'territorialtiy'.
>So far the only useful book I was able to find on this topic was Fred
>Myer's 'Pintupi Country. Pintupi Self'.
>I would be most thankful for any advise where else to look out for
>information!
>KRISTIN

Dear Kristin,

a very interesting, but very difficult - and, in your formulation - a very
far reaching question.

Robert Ardrey (The territorial Imperative, 1966) has brilliantly dealt with
the great importance of territory in the animal world, but gives only some
very questionable 'biologisms' in regard to human territoriality.
Questionable because 'territoriality' of humans is a cultural problem.

However, the main problem seems to be: human territoriality has been
absorbed by the theoretical pyramid of 'religion', thus covering up its
phenomenological characteristics of 'demarcation' and 'organisation of
settlement space'.

The history of this misrepresentation is closely related to the
diffusion-history of 'higher' religion, particularly Christianisation. In
the latter case the scholastic absolutism of the 'spiritual' at the top of
the theoretical pyramid had the consequence that all data at its basis -
worldwide - were apriori interpreted according to the parameters of the
top. Materially represented phenomena were devalued, primitivised (fetish,
spirit huts, idols, etc.) and integrated into the primitive belief-system
(superstition, idolatry etc.). Modern ethnology inherited this huge body of
prejudiced data and continues to project its Eurocentrisms on it. I think,
this is the main reason why you did not find any literature on the topic.
Very likely territoriality is a very important aspect, particularly in
traditional cultures, but it has been distorted and put into the wrong
section of the humanities (religion instead of law or constitution).

In a particular culturo-geographic domain (agrarian Japan) which is only
marginally touched by higher religion (Buddhism, which is very tolerant in
this regard) I have done a study which comes close to what you might be
looking for (Egenter: Bauform als Zeichen und Symbol, 1980; Semantic and
symbolic Architecture 1995 -> Website, Books on Architectural
Anthropology). In the framework of a new approach (anthropology of
architecture and space), this study documented the cyclic ujigami-cults
(clan- or settlement protector deity) of 100 villages in central Japan.
The focus was initially on 'semantic architecture' (non- or pre-domestic
fibroconstructive buildings) and its territorio-socio-semantic functions.
One of the most important results of this study: it shows that the ritual
core of rural Shinto is basically a system of cyclic renewal of territorial
demarcation (see 'Architectural Anthropology' in our website ->Whats new?).
There are strong indicators that the early imperial state in Japan in the
8th century (Taika reform) was built up on these rural cult traditions (see
'Shin no mihashira' in our website).

Very similar results are found also in post-mythical schools of Egyptology,
particularly with Hermann Kees (der Götterglaube im Alten Aegypten, 1956).
He explained the formation of the imperial level in Ancient Egypt (Ancient,
Middle and New Kingdoms) on the development and hierarchical organisation
of village-, district- and imperial cults (Orts- Gau- und
Reichsgötterkulte) in which physically represented deities and their
temples had strong territorio- socio-semantic functions.

Note that this territorial component appears also in the Hebrew religion,
if one reads the Ancient Testament dominantly from its constitutional
aspects (Mose as state founder). And, finally, Christianity too had strong
territorio- constitutional implications for instance when, in 391 it
became Roman state religion in the final 80 years of the Western Roman
empire (basic: 325 Nicaenum/ Identity dispute), which explains the strange
mixture of Christ's humanism and the highly centralised power of an
oriental theocracy erected on the ruins of imperial Rome. And, last but
not least, European scholasticism too can be put into this line of a
theocratic territorio-constitutional continuity: Neoplatonism was used to
construct a supra-imperial constitution against the Franconians and their
successors (struggle for universals ['Universalienstreit'] and struggle of
investiture ['Investiturstreit'].

In other words, 'territoriality' can be seen as a basic component in most
of what the humanities call 'culture' if one relates it to what we call
'nuclear demarcation', a basic term in 'architecture and habitat'
anthropology. Following O. F. Bollnow's anthropology of space
per-/conception we can reconstruct the origins of vertical and horizontal
'cosmological' axial systems generated by 'nuclear demarcation' in
traditional or early settlements and thus provide an anthropological
'infrastructure' for instance to Eliade's historical axiality (axis mundi).
Since 'nuclear demarcation' appears paired with the highest ontological
values presumably in all cultures, it is evident that this might be a new
anthropological acces to culture. It would evolve along the physical and
social instruments it develops to control space, territoriality being an
important component of this evolutionary phaseology from small to big.
 

Best wishes for your work!

Nold Egenter
 

P.S.: O. F. Bollnow's 'Man and Space' (Mensch und Raum 1963) may also be
recommended for reading (Bollnow: Review in our website).

> > > > > > > > > > See our INTERNET-Homepage: http://home.worldcom.ch/~negenter

Nold Egenter
DOFSBT, Chorgasse 19
CH-8001 Zuerich, Switzerland
Tel.: +41-1-2516075
Fx: +41-21-3231707
----or:
e-mail: negenter@worldcom.ch
 
 

------------------------------------------
From ???@??? Mon Jan 12 20:35:52 1998
Reply-To: ARCHIVE1 <ARCHIVE1@AOL.COM>
Sender: Anthro-L <Anthro-l@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
From: ARCHIVE1 <ARCHIVE1@AOL.COM>
Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com)
Subject: territoriality
To: ANTHRO-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU

Some suggestions to K.Jansen`s query:

>From graffiti-research we know that certain groups(gangs,not always
criminal)delineate"turf"by signing(walls)and wear of specific colors,clothes.

The way settlements(cities)are being buildt(streets,paths etc.)with their
buildings(walls)set up some"architectural forced matrix"(you cannot get
around...)
that also is limiting our territiry.We normally don`t notice this as it is
totally"normal"(unconscious)to us.

By the conversion of space(free available roaming space)from public to private
property by land-sales("buy land they`ve stopped making it!")territory also is
being"fenced in".

in many big cities you`re told where not to move(fences,walls etc.)which again
is limiting you territiry.

The unaccessability of places(private property)is telling those that lack
means(poverty)that they`re not wanted(unwanted children,psycho-social abortion
etc.)and thus to them space is being transformed into"inimical territory".

Especially"housing-areas"where we find masses of poor the territoriality is
turning to zero.Which means you are being hard put to feel"at home"here.

All these processes also influencing our mental constructs of what territory
may be to us.

Axel Thiel(coordination)
int.work-group on graffiti-research
http://users.aol.com/archive1
Germany
 

------------------------------------------
From ???@??? Mon Jan 12 20:35:55 1998
Reply-To: ARCHIVE1 <ARCHIVE1@AOL.COM>
Sender: Anthro-L <Anthro-l@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
From: ARCHIVE1 <ARCHIVE1@AOL.COM>
Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com)
Subject: territoriality
To: ANTHRO-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU
 

More informations.
Concerning the territorial behaviour you`ll find material in
ZIMABRDO:"Essentials of psychology and life"(10.)Glenview 1997 n sector
behaviour,overpopulation(crowding)etc.
Well researched into(I don`t know if English translation available)by I.EIBL-
EIBESFELD:"Die Biologie des menschlichen Verhaltens-Grundriss der
Humanenthology"(München 1986(2.)
and in behavioral research you also find material via"critical space"where
relations between populations-density,waste and resorces are being looked
into.

A.Thiel
Germany
 

--------------------------------------------
From ???@??? Mon Jan 12 20:35:59 1998

Reply-To: ARCHIVE1 <ARCHIVE1@AOL.COM>
Sender: Anthro-L <Anthro-l@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
From: ARCHIVE1 <ARCHIVE1@AOL.COM>
Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com)
Subject: territory
To: ANTHRO-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU
 

3.delivery:
If territory also means space(also:mental)then you also may look at
availability of informations in general.....
signs(seen and/or invisible)that tell you:
keep out
access denied
no admittance
private property
secret
no trespassing
might also tell you something about aspects of mobility.Here you come to
aspects of unwantedness(surpluslives),psycho-social abortion and all that
belongs to it including education.Not what they`re telling us is important but
what we`re being NOT told.

This way of"cutting you off"etc.is being percieved(also:unconsciously)as
inimical acts and invite revenge.
This is one of the most important hate-generators.

Babies cans mell their mothers(proximity)and desert tribes use huge areals
as"theirs":availability of wells/water

A.Thiel
Germany

---------------------------------------------------
From ???@??? Tue Jan 13 19:33:58 1998
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Territoriality
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <v01530502b0df6ead34d1@[194.235.51.2]>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.52)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
 
 

Nold,

ja, leider ist es 'territoriality' eine sehr komplexe Fragestellung,
was es wiederum abe auch sehr interssant macht.
Ich werde auf jeden Fall in der 'Architektur - Abteilung' mal
Nachforschung anstellen, denn auf diese Idee bin ich bis jetzt noch
gar nicht gekommen, obwohl es ja eigentlich sehr naheligend ist.

Wer ist denn O.F. Bollnow? Haben Sie einen konkreten Literaturtip,
denn auf diesen Namen bin ich bis jetzt noch gar nicht gestossen.

Leider soll ich im Moment nur eine Hauptseminarsarbeit über das Thema
schreiben und da werde ich den Aspekt der 'Religion' erst einmal
ingnorieren, denn ich vermute, dass würde sonst den Rahmen der Arbeit
sprengen.

Auf Fall danke für die ausführliche Antwort
KRISTIN
 



Back to list
Homepage