Stewart Sync Ret is m

7/29/2019 Stewart Sync Ret is m

1/24

Syncretism and Its Synonyms: Reflections on Cultural MixtureAuthor(s): Charles StewartSource: Diacritics, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Autumn, 1999), pp. 40-62Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566236 .

Accessed: 31/07/2011 13:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Diacritics.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1566236?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1566236?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup


2/24

SYNCRETISMN D I T SSYNONYMSREFLECTIONSON CULTURALMIXTURECHARLES TEWARTThe subjectmatterof anthropologyhas graduallychangedover the last twenty years.Nowadays ethnographersarelysearch or a stable ororiginal ormof cultures; heyareusually more concernedwith revealinghow local communitiesrespondto historicalchangeandglobal influences.Theburgeoningiterature n transnationallows of ideas,global institutions,andculturalmixture reflects this shift of attention.This increasedawareness of cultural nterpenetrationas, furthermore,been instrumentaln the cri-tiqueof earlierconceptionsof "culture"hatcast it as too stable,bounded,andhomoge-neous to be useful in a worldcharacterizedby migrations voluntaryor forced),cheaptravel,internationalmarketing,andtelecommunications.'Contemporaryocial theoryhas accordingly urned o focus on phenomenasuch as globalization, ransnational a-tionalism,and the situationof diasporacommunities. nthisbodyof literature hewordsyncretismhas begunto reappearalongsidesuch relatedconceptsas hybridization ndcreolizationas a means of portrayinghe dynamicsof global socialdevelopments.Inwhat follows Iconsidersome currentattempts o theorizemixturebeforeturningto examine the suitability,or not, of the terms listed above.Anthropologistsand othersocial scientistshaveexpressedambivalenceaboutall threeterms-syncretism, hybrid-ity,and creolization.I discussthese reservationsbeforepresentinga genealogicalcon-siderationof the single termsyncretism.My purpose n considering he historyof syn-cretismupto the present s not to enforce a standardusage confined to the domain ofreligion;noris it my goal to promotesyncretism o a positionof primusinterpares inthe companyof all otherterms for mixture.I see my approach nstead as anattempt oillustratehistoricallythatsyncretismhas an objectionablebut nevertheless nstructivepast.If thispastcan be understood, hen we arein a positionto consciouslyreappropri-atesyncretism Shawand Stewart2] andset the ethnographic tudyof culturalmixtureon new tracks.

Thismightseemtoominimalist o readerswhocurrently aveno reservations boutthe term,butmany anthropologists, n both sides of theAtlantic,have personallyex-pressedto me strongreservationsabout everemployingthe wordsyncretism. f askedwhy they hold this view, they are often unable to articulatea specific reason.Some,however,didexpressone or both of thefollowing objections: 1) syncretisms apejora-tive term,one thatderidesmixture,and/or(2) syncretismpresupposes"purity"n theI amgratefultoRosalindShaw andStephanPalmieforsuggestionsthat enriched hisarticle,andIprofited romseminardiscussionsat Keele UniversityandCornellUniversity.Support rom theNational Endowmentor the Humanities and a fellowship at the National HumanitiesCentermade thecompletionof this articlepossible.1. Critiquesof the(old)cultureconcepthavebeen numerous ince themid-1980s.Exampleswould be Cliffordand Marcus, Clifford,Predicamentof Culture;Rosaldo, CultureandTruth;Barth;Abu-Lughod;Friedman.

40 diacritics 29.3: 40-62


3/24

traditionshatcombine.Both of these reservationswill be consideredbelow,but t is thebroaddisagreementwithinthe anthropological ommunityon the appropriatenessfthe very termsyncretismthat has stimulatedthis inquiry.Such ambivalence reflectsbasic uncertaintiesabouthow to conceptualizeculturalmixture.

CurrentDiscussions of MixtureCultures, f we still wish to retainthis term (and I do), are porous; they are open tointermixturewithother,differentculturesandtheyaresubjectto historicalchangepre-cisely on account of these influences.2This has no doubtalways been the case. Cer-tainly decolonizationand the entry into a postmodernitywhere master narrativesofpurityandhomogeneityare vulnerable o doubthavecontributed ovalorizingrecogni-tions of mixturewhere formerlythey had been stigmatizedas inauthenticand henceuninterestingor anthropological tudy.Research in the Caribbean, n Sidney Mintz'sview, startedrelatively atepreciselybecause thisregion"wasconsidered heoreticallyunfruitful .. its peoples supposedlylacked culture,or were culturallybastardized"[303].Culturalborrowingand nterpenetrationretodayseen aspartof theverynatureofcultures[Glissant 140-41; Rosaldo,Forewordxv]. To phraseit more accurately, yn-cretismdescribes heprocessbywhich culturesconstitute hemselves atany givenpointin time. Today'shybridizationwill simply give way to tomorrow'shybridization, heform of whichwill be dictatedby historico-political vents andcontingencies.Inexam-iningculturalhybridity,writerssuch as EdwardSaid and JamesClifford[Predicament14-15] have lifted syncretismout of the frameworkof acculturation.Syncretism s nolongera transient"stage"which will disappearwhen,withtime,assimilationoccurs.AsSaid expressesit: all culturesare involved in one another;none is simple andpure,allarehybrid,heterogenous,extraordinarilyifferentiated nd unmonolithic" xxv]. Eventraditionalistmovements mountedby minoritygroupsorperipheral,postcolonialsoci-eties in the conscious, nativist effort to resist "Westernization" r "Americanization"cannotescape culturalhybridity.ForSahlins,"syncretisms not a contradiction f theirculturalism-of the indigenousclaims of authenticityandautonomy-but its system-aticcondition"[389].

In literarytheoryand cultural studies-some of the best examples of which areproducedby cosmopolitanwriterswho themselves have migrated o Europeor NorthAmericafromrecentlydecolonizedcountries-the condition of hybridityhas becomesomething o celebrate. nBhabha'sview displacementandmixturegiveriseto a"ThirdSpace" romwhichcolonialism'sfailedprojectof promotingpurityandpolaritymaybeproperlyseen, criticized,andrejected[37]. For Gilroy the "blackAtlantic"poses anexample of a diaspora oosely linked by a varietyof overlappingand criss-crossing

2. 1 use the term culture to refer to loosely bounded zones of differencebetween humangroups in the world(for example, anguage, law,religion).Differencedoes not imply nferiority.Totalglobalizationwould spell the end of cultures and thus the end of culture,as Wallerstein[ "TheNational and the Universal"]and Fardon["Introduction:Counterworks"] ointout. Butnoneof theauthors na samplingof recentvolumeson globalization[Featherstone;King;Fried-man; Hannerz,TransnationalConnections]sees thisoccurring.People across the worldmaybelinkedby their commonaccess to similargoods and ideas, buttheymakeverydifferent ense ofthem.Theyuse themto build quite differentworlds. Parkin has suggestedthat wildly varyingconsumption ractices,themselvesgrounded n "people's heoriesof themselvesamongobjects,"are the routeby which the "exotic"returnsand reassertsdifference n theface of thepotentialglobal homogenizationof culture[97].

diacritics / fall 1999 41


4/24

historicalexperiences,aesthetictastes,andpoliticalorientations. ts plural,syncretic,polytheticform rests on no generalizedcommonculture,andin thatrespectfurnishesan instructivemodel of what a nonessentializedsocial formationmight look like. Onthese groundshe terms the black Atlantic a "counterculture f modernity."A primeexample, perhaps helocus classicus,for these and other similar heoriza-tions wouldbe the following quotation rom SalmanRushdie'sIn Good Faith(1990),his firstpublicstatementafterAyatollahKhomeini issuedhisfatwa in 1989:

The SatanicVersescelebrateshybridity, mpurity,ntermingling, hetransfor-mationthat comesof newandunexpectedcombinationsof humanbeings,cul-tures, deas,politics, movies,songs.It rejoicesinmongrelization nd ears theabsolutismof the Pure.Melange,hotch-potch,a bit of thisand a bit of thatishow newnessenters the world.It is the greatpossibility that mass migrationgivestheworld,andI have triedtoembrace t. The SatanicVerses sfor change-by-fusion, change-by-conjoining. t is a love song to our mongrelselves. [4,emphasisin original]

TheSatanicVersesprovedto be more thanjust a theorizationof hybridity,but an ex-pressionof a hybridized,diasporicviewpointthat was received as a directchallengetoIslamicauthority ndscriptural mmutability.Rushdie'sparodicandpollutedIslam,theproductof dislocation andestrangement cf.Yalmin-Heckmann],hreatenedan Islamic"internalmemory"[Bloch] predicatedon the faithful,accurate nternalization f theKoran-the "absolutism f thePure."To distortscriptureby lampooningandmisrepre-senting propernames,as Rushdiedidin TheSatanicVerses,amounted o blasphemyasan instanceof syncreticsin [Bhabha226;Asad 267].

Vocabulariesof MixtureTheprecedingntroductionketches heplaceof culturalmixturencontemporaryheory,global processes,andcurrent oliticalcontests.Dissatisfactionhas beenexpressed,how-ever,over our termsforconceptualizingmixture.Forexample,the arthistorianBarbaraAbou-El-Haj,commentingon a paperby Ulf Hannerzpresentedat a symposiumonglobalization,remarked:

Todescribeprocessesof culturalsynthesisandtransformationHannerzoffers"creolization," "corruptmetaphor"now mainstreamedopdown todescribea true culturaldialectic, itsformer racist baggage of debasementsubverted.For those of us outsideanthropologicalandsociological discourse,theafter-image lingers uncomfortably.Beyond our primary categories, global/local,we haveyet tofind a language capable of describing unequalexchange in aworldof unequalexchanges.Is ourvocabulary o impoverishedbecausethereis nosuchthingto bedescribed,orbecause we have suchdifficultyenvisagingit? [Abou-El-Haj143-44]Hannerzhas borrowed he termcreolizationdirectlyfromthe field of creole lin-guistics [Jourdan]. nparticular, e uses it to alludeto one particular henomenon: hecontinuum[Drummond]of "mesolects" hat arises in situationsof prolongedcontactbetweentwo (or more) historicallydistinct anguages.The spectrumof diverse,over-lapping,sometimesmutuallyunintelligibledialectsextendingfromthe speechof, say,European olonists to the original anguage(s)of thelocal people serves as a model for

42


5/24

.=i.. . . . . . . .. . . . .

? .!'

2:44M.:.


6/24

globalizationwherecertainknowledges, astes,andtechnologiesaredistributedn over-lappingcontinuabetween world centers andperipheral ocieties. As Hannerzputs it,"[t]hereare now no distinct cultures,only intersystemically onnectedcreolizingcul-ture" "WorldnCreolisation" 51 . This current onsequenceof creolizationseemsfarremoved rom the New Worldconditionsof forcedmigrationandslaverythat irstgaverise to the term "creole"[Mintz 302]. Although Hannerzacknowledgesthe colonialhistoryunderlying he wordcreole ["AmericanCulture"11], the term's "former acistbaggage"has not clearlybeen subverted.A briefgenealogy of the termcreole mighthelpus to understand ts pastwhile suggesting some new bearings or futureanalyses.Thewordcreole,fromthePortuguesecrioulo,meant iterally,"bred,broughtup,"but in usage referred o a slave raisedin a master'shouse.3It denoted African slavesdislocatedfrom theirnative and.InSpanish, hemeaningof creole(criollo)wasgener-alized over time to refer to anythingof Old Worldoriginthatreproducedtself in theNew World-plants andanimalsas well as humans[Palmi6,"AgainstSyncretism" 4;Mintz301]. The offspringof Africans andEuropeanswere equallycreoles.The (mes-tizo)PeruvianwriterIncaGracilasode laVega, writing n theearlyseventeenth entury,definedcreole as "los que ya no eranespafioles,ni tampoco ndigenas [thosewho hadceased to be Spanish,but werenotIndians,either]" qtd. nPerl 169].Creolization husindicateda connection betweenNew Worldbirthand deculturation.Closely linked tothis deculturingwas a denaturing. n 1612 a SpanishDominicantheologiantheorizedthat ife in the NewWorldbroughtdecadence:"[t]heheavens of America nduce incon-stancy, asciviousness,andlies: vices characteristic f the Indians andwhich the con-stellationsmake characteristic f the Spaniardswho are born andbred there"[qtd.inAnderson,"Exodus"316]. Theconceptof creolization ittedwithinthe overall ogic ofa colonial Lamarckism hatplacedcreoles undersuspicionand subordinationAnder-son, ImaginedCommunities 7-60].4This outlinerevealsthe sort of imperialhistorystampednto the wordcreole beforeit becamethedescriptor f a branchof linguistics;withoutcreolepeopletherewould beno creole linguistics.Thehistoryof the word itself developsas partof a majorevent inthe chronicle of globalization,but the early senses of creole suggesta differentmodelfor this processthan does the continuum heoryof creole linguistics.Creole draws at-tention to theinequitiesof powerthatallowedEuropean olonizersto discursively eg-islate the importanceof "race,"culture,and environment n determiningwhere one fitalong a chainof being thatplacedthe Old Worldhomelandand its subjectsat the pin-nacle.

WhenHannerzcriticizes theunfortunate iologicalovertonesof termssuch as hy-bridityandmongrelization,while extollingcreolization["American" 1], he reveals a3. Crioulo comesfrom thepast participle of Portuguesecriar, "togive birthto, to raise."Criarderives romLatincreare,the irst sense of which was reproductive:"toprocreate,to givebirth to."The "create" n creole is thus bothbiologicaland cultural.A tension betweenculturalcontext andphysical nature has beenpresentin the word rom its inception[Arrom172; Perl;Mintz;Palmie',"Outof Place"]. The OxfordEnglishDictionary[1933 ed., rpt. 1970] defines

creolizationas "[t]heproductionofa Creolerace;racialmodificationnthe case of creoleplantsandanimals."StephanPalmid irst alertedme to the interestof thisword'shistory.4. Segaland Handler draw attentionto racial distinctionswithinthe British colonies [1l].See Chaplinon colonial British naturalphilosophicalviews about the effectsof climate on thebodies of New World nhabitants. n time,the term creole came to referto anyone in the NewWorldof even partial Old Worldancestry.Thuscreole and mestizo became synonymous,al-thoughthere was still some suggestion that a criollo was purelyof Old Worldparentage. InMexico the mestizo was considered the productof mixture between "racial"stocks [Arrom;Knight73], and criollos, in Mexico and otherparts of SpanishAmerica,wereoften consideredmore elite thanmestizos[Helg 37].

44


7/24

generalstate of confusion in social science terminology.How is it that the influentialMexicansociologist/anthropologistCanclini[11 , as well as numerousothersocial sci-entists [NederveenPieterse], can embrace the term hybridity,when it demonstrablydeveloped as part of the vocabularyof scientific racism in the nineteenthcentury?5Nowadayshybridmaybe understood o meanjust"mixture, ross between two things"ineverydayEnglish.It is not restricted obiology andgenetics,butitsracistpastis eveneasierto reconstruct hanthat of "creole."Wordsdochange meaningovertime,andhybridhasembeddedwithinitbothnega-tive and positive attitudes towardmixture.In nineteenth-century acial thinkingthehybridwas deemed to be weak and sterile-proof that human "races"were differentspecies that could not mix-while in the twentiethcenturythe new field of geneticsshowed how plant hybrids, for example, could be especially fruitfuland resilient.Nederveen Pietersegives a broad overview of the acceptationof hybridity n recentsociology andanthropology,where it is increasinglyemployedas a model for global-ization.Virtually he only negativetheoreticalassessment comes from SmadarLavie,who registers the concern that in some formulationshybridity indicates weakness,homelessness, and alienation."This is a response-orientedmodel of hybridity. t lacksagency, by not empoweringthe hybrid.The result is a fragmentedOtherness in thehybrid" [qtd. in Nederveen Pieterse 172]. This obviously echoes, if only implicitly,nineteenthcenturynotionsof the weak hybrid [Young]and this convergence s surelyworth some reflection. Otherwise the notion of hybridityin contemporary heory iscompletelyremovedfromnineteenthcenturyracial notions of sterility.Thedubiousnessof ourmainstreamwordsformixturehasprompted ome anthro-pologists to avoid themaltogetherandopt for termssuchas bricolage,which have noovertones outsideof anthropological heory [Werbner 15]. In my view, this responseavoidsimportantssues."Etymology s notdestiny," s Cliffordhasemphasized n rela-tion to theendeavor o recastthe termdiasporain socialtheory[Routes367]. Butif weareeffectivelyto reappropriate term ike creolizationand extend it intopresentusage,then we mustconfront ts previous history.In this case the coordinatesof power,race/culture,andenvironment-strikingly present n the semantichistoryof creole-are vir-tuallyabsent romcontemporary nthropological pplicationsof the term.What, f any-thing, does creolizationhave to do with these things in the present?Historicalaware-ness raises these questions;it challenges the credibilityof ourcurrent heoreticalvo-cabulary,and some responseis necessary.Syncretisms another erm with a controver-sialpastandanuncertainpresent,andthefollowinggenealogicalconsideration ttemptsto use an awareness of past conflicts andprejudices o generatea creativetheoreticalresponsein thepresent.

TheMeaningsof SyncretismThe termsyncretism,originally coined with a positive sense by Plutarch n the firstcenturyAD [Moralia2.490b], acquiredoverridingnegativeconnotations n the seven-teenthcentury. nthe wakeof theReformation,he LutheranheologianGeorgCalixtus(1586-1656) advocated he unificationof the various Protestantdenominationsand ul-timate reunionwith the Catholic Church[McNeill 273]. His irenic vision of an ecu-

5. The wordhybrid s derived romLatin,where it meant theoffspringof a tame sow and awild boar.This union across animalcategoriesprovideda modelfor talkingaboutprocreativerelations across humancategories whether social (master/slave)or biological ("races"). Theword remains ittle-attesteduntilnineteenth-centuryacial theorizing akes itup.The debateovertheviability of hybridswas central to the debateovermonogenyandpolygeny [Young6].



8/24

menicalChristianitymet with some favoramongCalvinistsbutwas rejectedby ortho-dox Lutheransanddisdainedby the upperechelons of the Catholic hierarchy. n theview of his opponents,Calixtus'sproposedreunion hreatened hereticaland inconsis-tent umbleof theologies-a syncretism-and theensuingdebates,whichcarriedon forthe rest of thecentury,cameto be knownas the "syncretistic ontroversies"Schmid].A negativeassessmentof religiousmixturewasperhaps o be expected,especiallyfromthe CatholicChurch,whichwas concerned o safeguard heintegrityof its doctrineandpracticethroughout he world.This negative view of syncretismwould remainvery much in place duringtheensuing periodof missionary expansion lasting well into the presentcentury.Syncre-tismbecame a termof abuse oftenappliedto castigatecolonial local churches hat hadburstout of thesphereof mission controlandbegunto"illegitimately"ndigenizeChris-tianity nsteadof properly eproducingheEuropean orm of Christianityheyhadorigi-nallybeen offered.Protestantmissionarieswere no less awareof the "danger" f syn-cretism than their Catholiccounterparts,and a prime example may be found in thewritingof the Churchof Sweden (Lutheran)missionaryBengt Sundlker,who servedhis Church n SouthAfrica over a five-yearperiodbeginningin 1937. Sundklerdistin-guishedtwo types of IndependentChurch.The EthiopianChurcheshadsecededfromparentmission churches or racialor ethnic(political)reasonsbut nonethelessstill stuckclosely to the missionaries' form of Christianpractice.Zionist Churcheshad furtherseparatedfrom the Ethiopians through theological innovations such as speaking intongues,resort ohealingandpurification ites,andthe observanceof taboos andclaimsto possess thepower(or medicine)to fighttraditionalZulu diviners' arsenalof sorcery[Sundkler55]. In Sundkler'seyes, Zionism amountedto a "nativistic-syncretistic"interpretationf Christianity, ndin followingthis Church he Zulus were borne,as ifover a bridge,back to "theAfrican animismfromwheretheyonce started" 297].With he case of Sundklerwe can seehow thenegativeattitude f EuropeanChurchestowardsyncretismwas transferredrom thetheologicaldebatesof the seventeenthcen-tury,throughmissionarypolicy andideology,andfinally,through he field researchofan individualmissionary, eliveredatthevery doorstepof academicanthropology. ritishsocial anthropologists f thisperiodwerequiteawareof the differencesbetweenthem-selves andmissionaries. na famouspassageattheveryend of his NuerReligion [322],Evans-Pritchardxpressedthe opinion thatwhen it came to analysis anthropologistsoccupied a position distinctfromtheologians. Anthropologistscould describe the so-ciocultural ormof religiousbeliefs,buttheywere not ina positiontojudge thevalidityof these beliefs. Apparently,anthropologists mplicitly acceptedthatsyncretismwas atheologicalconcern.The term was thus surrendered o theologiansandmissionaries,who preserved ts negativeconnotations.Andthese could never be keptentirelyout ofanthropologicaldiscourse.Theanthropologicalommunity'snegativeassessmentof syncretismwasundoubt-edly reinforcedwhen Africanscholarsas well as the leaders of various SouthAfricanIndependentChurchesbecame familiarwiththeconceptof syncretismand,predictablyenough,reactedstronglyagainst t [Pato;Shaw and Stewart15].Africanistanthropolo-gistshave subsequentlygrownincreasinglyuncomfortablewith thes-word.Some havearguedagainst ts applicabilityon thegrounds hat ndependentAfricanChurcheshavefaithfullyadaptedChristianityo local cultural ontexts[Kiemrnan]ndshouldnot,there-fore,beconsideredsyncretic.Stillotheranthropologists avelargelybypassed he wordordevelopedalternatives uch as "selectiveconservatism"Wilson548] or"bricolage"[Comaroff,Body ofPower 12].6

6. In earlier worksComaroffmakesgreateruse of the concept of syncretism for example,"Healingand CulturalTransformation"1981)], and the term does appear in Body of Power,Spiritof Resistance(1985).

46


9/24

In the New Worlda muchmorepositiveattitude oward he conceptof syncretismhas long prevailed among social scientists. The simultaneousexistence of two suchdifferentpositionsmaybe attributableo the relative ackof interchange etweenAmeri-can and Britishanthropology n the 1940s and 1950s. This mutual solationwas rein-forcedby a regionaldivision of laborwherebyBritish orBritish-trainedocial anthro-pologists largely monopolizedresearch n Africa while American-trained nthropolo-gists carriedoutthemajorityof studiesin the New World.The two opposeddiscoursesof syncretismthus amounted o different"localizingstrategies" Fardon]-regionallygenerated heoreticalcontributionswhichin this case addressed hevery sameconceptandterm[Shawand Stewart13]. These differingtheoreticaldiscourseson syncretismdid not resultsolely fromthediffering ntellectualorientations f the BritishandAmeri-can"schools"of anthropology.Africanand New Worldsocietiespresentedquitediffer-entpoliticalsituations,andthismadefor different ieldworkexperiences ormid-centuryanthropologists.

Whereasmostsub-Saharan fricansocietieswere still under olonialruleupthroughthe 1950s,most New Worldsocieties hadalreadygainedindependence ntheprecedingcenturyandhadlong been engagedin attempts o consolidatenationalcultural denti-ties. ManyNorthandSouthAmericancountriespublicly espousedversions of a "melt-ing pot"ideology as a strategyof nation-building.7 he melting pot is the analogueofsyncretism n theethnopoliticaldomain,and it would havebeendifficultto criticizetheone withoutsimultaneouslyundermining he other.If we consider the links betweenearlytwentiethcenturysociology/anthropology ndgovernmentalocialpolicy,it couldbe argued hatAmerican in thebroadsense of North and SouthAmerican)anthropolo-gists were disposedto developa positive attitude owardculturalmixture.TheanthropologistMelvilleHerskovits, orexample,considered yncretismavalu-ableconceptforspecifyingthedegreeto which diversecultureshadintegrated see alsoApter].It was not a bridge leadingto religious relapse,but rathera stage (forAfricanAmericansand otherminorities)on the road towardthe ideal of culturalassimilationand ntegration.TheBraziliansociologistGilbertoFreyre,who, like Herskovits, rainedin anthropologyunderFranz Boas at ColumbiaUniversity,expressed broadlysimilarviews. FreyreconsideredBraziliansociety to be fundamentallya synthesisof different"races"and cultures[xiii; Skidmore,"RacialIdeas"22]. This synthesiswas facilitatedby the fact that the Portuguesecolonizers were themselves the mixed outcome of acontactwith a more advancedand darkerpeople-the Moors-and hence amenable oculturalborrowingandracialmixture.The views of Freyreon theoriginalmixednessofthe Portuguesecolonizers-a featurehe called "LusitanianFranciscanism" xiii]-in-dicatethat culturalmixtureneednotpresupposeoriginally "pure" ultures.Public acknowledgmentanddiscussion of racial mixturewas much more devel-opedin LatinAmerica han nthe UnitedStates,wheremanystates still hadmiscegena-tion laws on theirbooks in the middle of this century.Boasian anthropologymade acleardistinctionbetween"race"andculture,andFreyre nsisteduponthis differentia-tion [xxvii; da Matta6]. Nevertheless,in popularandpoliticalusage the Spanishtermmestizaje,for example, embracedboth racialandculturalsyntheses,and its politicalvalorizationwas a necessarynation-building trategy hroughoutLatinAmerica.8

7. As Andersonpoints out [ImaginedCommunities47-65], "creolepioneers"fought forindependentnationhoodin the New World.The acknowledgmentof their own mixedness,ordeculturation, elativeto the British "homeland," id notprompt heimmediateenfranchisementof slaves andIndians.But itdidmean that their nationalismscouldembracemixture n a waythatEuropeannationalismscould not and generallyhave not since.8. See Stutzman;Graham;Palmied, OutofPlace"; Skidmore,BlackintoWhite;andHarris[110] for examinationsof mestizaje in LatinAmericancountries such as Ecuador,Argentina,



10/24

The Cubanhistoricalexperienceprovidesyet anotherlluminating xampleto con-trast with the NorthAmericanmelting pot. Cubanculturedevelopedas variousexog-enous cultures primarily panishandAfrican)metandmingled.Therewereonlycreoles.Theindigenasdisappeared ntirelyearlyon. This situationpromptedFernandoOrtiz,aCuban awyer,folklorist,andhistorian, o developthe ideaof transculturationo depicttheCubanexperienceof mixture[97-103; Coronil].Transculturationiffered rom ac-culturationn stressingthatall cultureschange in a situationof contact;it involves asimultaneous oss andacquisitionof cultureand,in the case of Cuba,it is a matterof acontinuing,creativeflux, nevera finishedsynthesis.The Cubanexamplethus did notindicateassimilation o aculturalorethnic dominant tandard s wasthecaseintheUS,nordid it havea teleology of whiteness as did otherpartsof Latin America.In less well-known essays broughtto light by StephanPalmi6 ["Outof Place"]Ortizexplicitlydismissedthe applicabilityof the "meltingpot" conceptfor Cuba andlikened it rather o an ajiaco, a stew of meats andvegetablesseasoned with hot pepper(ajif. "Thecharacteristiching aboutCuba,"Ortizcontended," is that since it is anajiaco, its people arenota finishedstew,but a constant[processof] cooking. ... Hencethe changeof its composition,and [thefact] thatcubanidadhas a different lavorandconsistency dependingon whetheronetastes what is at themiddle [of thepot],or at itssurface,where the foods (viandas)arestill raw,and thebubbling iquidstill clear"[qtd.in Palmi6,"Outof Place"35].9Ortizwas a publicintellectual igurewho, towards he end of his life, brieflyheldpolitical office under Castro [Coronil].Like Freyre,Herskovits,andVasconcelosinMexico [Knight85], Ortizcouldhave had an effect on statepolicy.Differentviews ofmixture n theAmericas husemerge-transculturation,hemeltingpot,andmestizaje-butall of them makepositiveassociationswithmixture.I would contend thatthe largerpoliticalcontextsupportedanoptimisticview of syncretismand this was embracedbythe succeeding generationof Americananthropologists.An examplewould be HugoNutini,who startedhis research n Mexico in the late 1950s. As Nutiniautobiographi-cally writes, "[s]ince I began anthropologicalresearchin Mesoamerica,I have con-ceived of syncretismas a special kind of acculturation,"ndhe cites the researchofHerskovits n Haiti which aided him in formulatinghis views ["OnSyncretism"].Nutini's accountof his entryinto the studyof syncretismevidences no suspicionthat the termmight have pejorativeovertones. He has gone on to publishnumerousstudiesmappingoutthe various forms andmodes of syncretism[e.g., TodosSantos inMexico, Brazil, Cuba, and Bolivia. As Stutzmanpoints out,for Ecuador,lurkingbeneaththeembrace of mestizaje was an invitation to whiteness. As in Brazil (especially before Freyre[Skidmore,Black intoWhite37]) any admixtureof whiteblood could be takenas decisiveforproducingwhiteness. The 1940 Brazil census [Skidmore,Black into White208] andpost-1950Ecuadoriancensuses[Stutzman 9] showthe numberof "whites" o begrowing,andthismaybetaken to indicate the appeal, and theperceivedappropriateness,of the category "white"to abroadlymixedpopulation.Thecategoryof mestizoalso increased in Ecuador at the expenseofothercategories of mixednesssuch as cholo, zambo,andmulato.LatinAmericancountriesdifferfrom the UnitedStates in theirrecognition of one or more intermediatecategoriesof mixturebetweenblack and white. In the USpeople are mainlyidentifiedas either black or white. Thecategory of mulatto exists in name but is little resorted to inpractice, indeedit is perceivedaspejorative.Williams omparesNorthand SouthAmericanracial thinkingn the contextof nationbuilding.9. TheperformanceartistGuillermoG6mez-Pe~iaediscovers,alters and updates heajiacometaphor or the 1990s: "[t]hebankruptnotionof themeltingpot has beenreplacedbya modelthatis moregermaneto thetimes,thatof the menudochowder.Accordingto thismodel,mostoftheingredientsdomelt,butsomestubborn hunksare condemnedmerely o loat" [qtd.inBhabha218-19].

48


11/24

RuralTlaxcala],therebyintroducinga neutralanalyticalconceptionof syncretismtothecurrentgenerationof anthropologists.OtherAmericanMesoamericanistshave alsoapproached yncretismas avalid,unproblematic bjectof analysis[Edmonson t al.].Itbecomesapparent, hen,thatsyncretismhasreceivedpositive ornegativeconnotationsdependingon the regionalscholarlytraditionwithin which one encounters t.

ChurchandState DiscoursesIfAfricanists'conceptionsof syncretismhave differedfromthoseof Americanists, hismay be attributed o the pervasiveinfluence of different arger nstitutionaldiscourseson thetwo anthropological raditions. nAfrica,theEuropeanChurches'negativeviewof syncretismswayed anthropologicalusage, while in the New Worldsociologicallygrounded tatevisions of ethnicsynthesisandintegrationmbuedsyncretismwithposi-tive overtones.On closer examinationthe discourses of these two institutions-theChurchandthe state-were actually quitesimilar.Both envisioned a teleologicalpro-cess of acculturation, r assimilation,wherebyinitialdifferenceswould be eliminatedon the way to adoptinga dominant standard.To be sure, differentChurchand statesocial theorists often allowed that some degree of originalparticularitymight remaineven at the stage of final acculturation.Nonetheless,one may discernan overridingconvictionin bothinstitutionaldiscoursesthata stable,finalphaseof culturalhomoge-neitycould be reached.For the Church, he mainphaseof acculturationwould ideallyhappenin the shortspace of the catechisticperiod priorto baptism,at which time theconverts becamefull, bonafide Christians.Statesociology recognizeda longer periodof agenerationor more forfull assimilation o occur.Oneimportant ifferencewas thatthis dominantstandardwas, in thecase of Africa,externally mposedunderconditionsof colonialism, while in theAmericas it was internallygenerated n a contextof inde-pendentnationbuilding.We haveseenhow missionariessuchas Sundklermediated he institutional iew ofthe Church o the anthropological ommunity.A parallelcase canbe madeforthe me-diatoryrole of social scientists such as Herskovitsin the New World.In 1947, withsupport rom theCarnegieCorporation, e foundedthe firstAfricanStudiesprogramnthe UnitedStatesat NorthwesternUniversityand he continuedas an influential igurein this field untilhis deathin 1963 [Jackson,"Melville Herskovits"123].At the sametime, he was no stranger o the administrators f large foundations and governmentgrantingauthorities.As a spokesman or the Boasianposition,he stressed headaptabil-ityof Americanminorities o newculturaland environmentalurroundings, ndthis ledto a strong integrationistviewpoint. In 1925 he arguedthatAfricanAmericanculturehadalreadyassumedthe samepatternas whiteculture.Later,during he 1930s--espe-cially afterhis firstfield research nAfrica-he developedthe ideathatAfricanAmeri-cansunconsciouslypreserveda numberof Africanisms,mainlyin the areasof religion,folklore, and music. He thus representeda sometimes unpopularposition betweenassimilationism(which he had earlier tended toward)and the insistence on AfricanAmericanparticularity dvocatedby a numberof AfricanAmericansociologists andcommentators.

Herskovits'spost-1930s viewpoint offered one example of how a conviction in"acculturation"ould accommodate degreeof lingering thnicparticularity.fricanismscould surviveamongAfricanAmericans,butthey were often mattersof unconscious,embodiedculturalbehaviorsuchasrhythm,orformsof greetingandetiquettewhich hetermed"culturalmponderables" Apter241]. These cultural raitswere"focal" orAf-ricanAmericansbutnot for the dominantculture, hustheydidnotnegatethesharingof

diacritics I fall 1999 49


12/24

a common culture[Herskovitsxxvi; Jackson,"Melville Herskovits"112].In makinghis case for Africanisms,he appealedto the concept of syncretismtodepicthow Africancustoms wereused to "reinterpret"ew Worldrealities n a distinc-tiveprocessof acculturationApter240].An exampleof syncreticcultural einterpreta-tion was Africanpolygamy,whichhe identifiedas transformedn the New Worldenvi-ronmentinto a recognizablesocial phenomenonwhich he labeled "progressivemo-nogamy" Herskovits168;Apter240]. Syncretismsnotonly contained"survivals"roman Africanpastbutoffereda mode of unitingthe pastand the present.InHerskovits'swords,"[t]heconclusion thatwe reachis that in Africa,as in the New World,the cul-turalprocessesthat will be operativewill be thoseof additionandsynthesisto achievecongruencewitholderforms,rather han of subtraction ndsubstitution,withtheir re-sulting fragmentation"xxvii].It is perhaps ess well known thatTheMyth of theNegroPast was written n thespaceof one year,commissionedby the CarnegieCorporation s partof a large-scalestudyof the "AmericanNegro."The SwedisheconomistGunnarMyrdalwas invitedtodirectthis projectand,with substantial undsat his disposal,he commissionedtwentydifferentspecialiststo prepare"memoranda" hich he would then have the advantageof readingbefore submittinghis final report [Myrdal iv; Jackson,GunnarMyrdal].HerskovitscomposedTheMythof theNegroPastin accordancewiththisbrief.It was abuildingblockforMyrdal'sclassic AnAmericanDilemma,whichappearedn 1944 andwouldhave enormous nfluencein the US forthe next two decadesat least.

Myrdal'scentralargumentwas thatracialsegregationanddiscrimination toodaslarge,disturbing ontradictionsn a nationespousingdemocracy, reedomandequalityfor all-in short,the treatmentandpredicamentof the AfricanAmericanpopulationcontradictedhe "AmericanCreed."Writing duringWorldWarII, Myrdalstressedtheanalogy between American attitudestowardAfricanAmericans and Nazism, and heusedthisparallel o goadAmericanmoralism ntorethinkingandrationalizingpopularattitudes.At the sametime,he pointedoutthatonce AfricanAmericansreceivedequal-ityof rightsandemploymentagreatmanyof theproblems ninterracial elationswouldbe structurallyesolved andthe society would inevitablymove towardgreater ntegra-tionand socialjustice.On theissue of culture,Myrdal ook a strongassimilationistine:"[w]eassumethat it is to theadvantageof the AmericanNegroesas individualsandasagroup o become assimilated ntoAmericanculture, o acquire hetraitsheldinesteemby dominantwhite Americans.This will be the valuepremisehere"[929].The high water markin the receptionof AnAmericanDilemma came in the Su-premeCourt's1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision where Chief JusticeEarlWarren itedMyrdal'sbookinpassingthe decisionoutlawingschool segregation Jack-son,"Making" 64;GunnarMyrdal293]. Echoesof Myrdal's deas arealsodiscerniblein MartinLutherKing's famous"IHavea Dream"speechwhere he exhortedAmerica"to live out the truemeaningof its creed"[Jackson,"Making"265]. These examplesillustrate hedegreeto whichtheCarnegieCorporation-sponsoredtudyof the"Ameri-canNegro"affected nationalpolicy andperceptions.

Theinvolvementof Melville Herskovits n thisprojectmaythusbe pointedto as aprimeexampleof the close relationshipandmutual influencethatsocial science andAmericanpublicsector socialpolicy exertedon each other.Herskovitsdidnot entirelyagreewithMyrdal's indings,orvice versa.Myrdalwas skepticalof Herskovits's hesisaboutAfricanisms[930], and Herskovitswas much less optimisticthanMyrdalaboutthe actualprogressof assimilationand the realprospectsfor interracialharmony." s10. It should also be noted that Herskovitswas not entirelypleased to be engaged in aprojectthat,in retrospect,possessed characteristicsof "socialengineering." t has been amplydemonstrated hatHerskovitsdogmaticallyeschewedappliedsocial science andevenrefused o

50


13/24

we haveseen,Herskovits ncreasingly mphasized he Africanpastof New Worldblacksand the influences that this historycontinued to exercise over presentcultural orms.His ideas on these mattersset him apart romthemajorityof contemporaryiberalso-cial scientists such as E. FranklinFrazier[Szwed], who, like Myrdal, placed greaterconfidencein theprocessof assimilation.Fromtoday's perspectivewe might view his conceptionsof syncretismand cul-turalreinterpretations indicativeof resistances o dominationoraspointingto sites ofstruggle for cultural survival[Apter].If so, Herskovits's notionof syncretismantici-patedmore recent studies of syncretismthathave elaborated his frameworkof resis-tance and the politicsof culture[ShawandStewart19-22]. Althoughout of fashioninthe 1940s and1950s,Herskovits'sworkonAfricanAmericanhistorydramatically ainedin popularity n the 1960s, especiallywith therise of the Black Powermovement ntheUnited States [Jackson,"MelvilleHerskovits"123].

InstitutionalChangesTheyear1963 representsa watershed n thehistoricaldevelopmentof Churchand stateperspectiveson key issues involving the concept of syncretism.This was the secondyearof the SecondVaticanCouncil 1962-65) andalsotheyearthatGlazerandMoynihanpublishedBeyondtheMeltingPot. VaticanIIrevised Catholicpracticeon many pointsso as torender t morecompatiblewithcontemporaryealities.Itstated hatscienceandculture were domainsseparate romreligionandlegislated greaterpursuitandexpres-sion in these areas[Abbott 165]. Furthermore,t promulgatedhe translationof Latinliturgicaltexts into the vernacularanguagesof each particular ongregation[150]. Inthe drive to increasepubliccomprehension f theChristianmessage,the Churchdidnotstop attranslationbutalso offeredthefollowingjustificationof how its messagecouldbe accommodated o the culturalconventionsof varioussocieties:

Living in various circumstancesduringthe course of time, the Church, oo,has used in herpreachingthe discoveriesof differentcultures to spreadandexplainthemessage of Christto all nations, toprobe it and moredeeplyun-derstand t,and togive itbetterexpression n liturgicalcelebrationsand in thelife of thediversifiedcommunity f the aithful.But at the same time, the Church,sent to all peoples of every time andplace, is not boundexclusivelyand indissolubly o anyrace or nation,nor toanyparticularway of life or any customarypattern of living, ancient or re-cent.Faithfulto herown traditionandat thesame timeconsciousof her uni-versalmission,she can enter intocommunionwithvariousculturalmodes,toher own enrichmentand theirs too. [264]

Since ancient times the Churchhas necessarilyworkedthroughcultural ranslationocommunicate hegospel message,first of alltopeople living around he Mediterranean.The reiterationof this idea in the VaticanII decrees was a significantresponseto thejoin the NAACPatfirst (althoughhe agreed with its maingoals and did laterjoin) becausehethought his wouldcompromisehis scientific objectivity Jackson,"MelvilleHerskovits"115ff.;Fernandez151]. He believedthat it was sufficient or social scientiststoproduceknowledgeandthat this woulditself lead to theameliorationof unfortunateocial situations.IfAfricanAmeri-cans were to readhis The Mythof theNegroPast, or example,or simplylearnof itsfindings, itwould enable them to discover that they have a past, and provideassurance that theyhave afutureas well [xxvix].

diacritics I fall 1999 51


14/24

...ii . . ... . . . .. . .. . . . .. .

*-::

.......... wi~ss ,

i::X:'x:''2


15/24

actualpredicamentof Catholic churches n areasof the recentlymissionized and nowdecolonized world.Vatican Iexpresslyallowed,forexample,thatwhere initiationritesarefoundin missionlands,"elementsof these,whencapableof being adapted o Chris-tianritual,maybe admittedalongwith thosealready ound nChristian radition"159].Likewise,a 1563 decreefrom the Council of Trentwas cited approvingly:"[i]f certainlocales traditionallyuse otherpraiseworthy ustoms and ceremonies whencelebratingthe sacramentof matrimony,hissacredSynod earnestlydesires thattheseby all meansbe retained" 161]. The institutionof the Catholic Churchwas, in effect,redrawing heboundariesaroundsyncretismby recognizingthat a certainamountof culturaladapta-tionmightnot affect the contentof the Christianmessage.Note the similaritybetweenthis position and Herskovits'sviews on "focalisms."Widening herangeof allowableculturalexpressionsmadesyncretismsmore diffi-cult to identify,but t certainlydid not leadto an abolitionof theconcept.Therewas stillthe possibility that some adaptationsof Christianity ould distort or misapprehenddi-

vine revelation.A deepenedunderstanding f cultureson thepartof the Churchwouldnotonly helpin findingsuitable ocal formsthroughwhichto expressthe trueChristianmessage,but would also be necessaryin rulingcertainsynthesesoutof bounds:A betterview will be gained of how theircustoms,outlook on life, and socialorder can be reconciledwith the mannerof living taughtbydivine revelation.As a result,avenues will be openedfor a moreprofound adaptationin thewhole area of Christian ife. Thanks o sucha procedure,every appearanceofsyncretismand offalse particularismcan be excluded,and Christian ife canbe accommodated o thegenius andthedispositionsof each culture.[612]

Clearly "syncretism" till receives a negativemeaning in VaticanII usage, butmanypractices hatmighthavebeendisparagedas syncretism n the decadespreviouswouldhenceforthbe allowed as valid, culturallyspecific expressionsof the one faith. Thisshift of "frame"s a matter o which I shall return.Glazer and Moynihan'sBeyond the MeltingPot is nowhere near as importantadocumentas the decreesof Vatican I. I call attention o it becauseits well-knowntitlecaptures henewZeitgeistthatbeganto takeholdinmid- 1960s Americaandsoon flour-ishedin a hostof movementsarticulating thnicpride.BeyondtheMeltingPot was oneof the first nails in the coffin of the optimisticassimilationismof the Myrdalera.AsGlazerandMoynihanwritein theirpreface:"[t]henotion that the intense andunprec-edentedmixtureof ethnicandreligious groups nAmerican ife was soon to blendintoa homogeneousendproducthasoutlivedits usefulness,and also its credibility... Thepointabout hemelting pot... is that t did nothappen" xcvii].Theygo on to elaboratethatall immigrantshave acculturatedn the United States;it is not the case thattheyremainfully Irish or Italian n a fashionconsistent with the currentnhabitants f thosecountries.But neitherdo theybecomefully homogenizedAmericans.Instead heycre-ate a new identityandrecognizethemselvesand arerecognized by others as membersof distinctivegroups[13].A full accountof thepost-1960spoliticsof ethnicity n the UnitedStates is beyondthe scope of this study.It is sufficientfor my purposessimply to note thatsubsequentdebatesoverethnicpolitics,and morerecently,multiculturalism,avegenerally oughtover the boundariesbetweenthe demandsof a nationalcultureand therightsof ethnicgroupsto expresstheirparticularity nd have these expressionsacknowledgedandre-spected.To put it simplistically,the debate can be viewed as a contest over culturalmixture:howmuch shouldbe allowed/required,ndatwhatsociopolitical evel? Undertheguidanceof social science,ethnicpolitics beganto takeanewcourse after1963,one



16/24

thatelaboratedandcelebratedethnicdifferencesandsoughtpublicrecognitionand tol-erancerather hanacceptingthe blanketassimilationismof thepreviousperiod.In thisrespect the discourse of social science apparentlycame to divergefrom the Churchdiscourse t earlierparalleled.While the Churchwas promotinga religious meltingpotwith its post-VaticanInotion of inculturation,Americansocial scienceandethnicpoli-tics wererejecting he melting pot ideaandmoving to a proto-multiculturalism.Since 1963 theCatholic Church ProtestantChurchesadoptsimilarstances,espe-cially regardingmissionization[Pickering])has expandedits acceptanceof culturallymixed religiousexpressionwhere once it would have scornedmany of these as syn-cretic.The Americanstate,on the otherhand,under hepressureof popularmovements,hasbeen forced to concede thatsome of what itonce thought t hadforged nthewayofa common culturemust now be unraveled.But such a contrastmaybe superficial: hetwo discoursesmight actuallystill be on a parallelcoursetoward ncreasedpromotionof syncretism. t is possible that, n thelong run,multiculturalismmaylead to a greaterandmoreprofoundly ntegrated ommonculture.Underthemeltingpot ideology,citi-zens were mainly formedaccordingto a Eurocentric,ndeed a heavilyAnglocentric,model. This teleologicalelementin the masternarrativeof Americahas, I think,nowbeen left behind. Granted he stimulus of improved,more comprehensiverepresenta-tions of other culturesin schools and in otherpublic spheres,there is a chance thatAmericansociety will now take a more profoundlysyncreticcourse. Instead of justrolling back previous assimilationistprogress,the currentphase of multiculturalismmayactuallybe layingthegroundworkorfurther yncretization.This syncretismwillproceedfrombelow, partof a historicalprocessin a situationwhere differentculturalgroups live in close proximityand continualinteractionwith each other. Baumann'sethnographicaccount of a local council's deliberationsover options for representingdifferentreligionsat schools in the Londonsuburbof Southall is highly suggestiveinthisrespect[182].Themultipleoptionsconsideredspanned romseparatedailyassem-bliesforeachfaithtojointassemblieswhereallparticipatedully in each others'prayers.

SyncretismTodayThe genealogyof syncretismdirectsattention o largerinstitutions,governmentsandChurches, hat can shapethe evaluation, ndeed the very perception,of religiousmix-ture.These institutionsare themselvescapableof reversingthemselves andchangingtherules,as the CatholicChurchdid with Vatican I,in order o maintaincontrol.Like-wise, New Worldnationalismsdid not form theirpositive views of mixturesolely onaestheticgrounds,butin subversiveresistanceto the colonial metropolitanarrogationof purityand out of practicalneed to assemble numbers.The history of syncretismalertsus to the politicalagendasthatmotivateclaims to syncretism-or to purity.Wealso witness how putatively completed syntheses may be disassembled.That contin-genciesof powerinflectsyncreticandantisyncreticprocessescanbe seen in the formerYugoslavia. nBosnia, Muslimsonce consideredgood neighborsand fellowYugoslavsbecame enemies [Bringa].In some views the Bosnian Muslims were "really"SerbsorCroatswhohadfoolishlyandweaklyconverted o Islamduring he Ottomanperiodandnow needed to be forciblydehybridizedand returned o their trueethnic fold. Violencein Bosnia was thusantisyncretic;aimed at reducingpeople to unalloyedethnic identi-ties. Anothercase in pointwouldbe India,where some Hindunationalistshave insistedthat theirreligionsyncreticallyencompassesthe Islamof theirIndiancocitizens, thusrelieving hemselvesof any compunctionoverdestroying he BabarMosque nAyodhyain 1993 [vander Veer204].

54


17/24

An anthropologyof syncretismmustcomprehendhow zones of purityandhybrid-ity come intobeing:"theclassificatorymomentof purification,"s Williams[429]aptlyphrases t. This can be achievedthrougha combinationof historicalandethnographiccase studieswheresyncretismorantisyncretism re atissue.If it is accepted hatcultureis not a stable structure uccessfullytransmitted crossgenerations,but rather he re-sult, at anyparticularmoment,of historical and social processesthatbothdeform andconfirm "structure"Bourdieu;Ortner], hensyncretismcan be used within this theo-reticalframework o focus attentionpreciselyon accommodation,contest,appropria-tion, indigenization,and a host of otherdynamic ntercultural ndintraculturalransac-tions.

If we grantthe premisethatthereareno purecultures, hen we are led to supposethat there are no purereligioustraditionseither. Historiansof religionshave, indeed,long expressedthis view [vanderLeeuw 609; Droogers9]. This shouldlay to rest thefrequentlyheardcriticism that syncretismnecessarilyassumes the existence of idealpuretraditions.All thatneed be accepted s thatsyncretism nvolves thecombinationofelements from two or more different raditions.But if we consider all religions syn-cretic,how useful can this termbe?As the historianof religionsRobertBaird has ob-jected:"[t]osay that'Christianity'or the 'mysteryreligions'or 'Hinduism'aresyncre-tistic is not to say anythingthatdistinguishesthem from anythingelse and is merelyequivalentto admitting hat each has a historyand canbe studiedhistorically" 146].Thisobservationdoesnotchangethefactthatallreligionsarecompositesatpresentandwill continue to innovateandforgenew hybrid ormsin the future.In a world thatvalorizespurityandauthenticityt is crucial o attend o theways inwhichsyncretismsnegotiatedat thelocal level. Syncretism,perhaps eferencedby a synonymorcircumlo-cution,can formpartof folk theories of culture[StewartandShaw;Palmie,"AgainstSyncretism"].As such, it plays a role in directingthe invention of traditionsor theaggressivedismissal of neighboring raditions.The studyof how a people contest,ne-gotiate, and act on attributionsof syncretism, f, thatis, they do act at all, requiresaswitch fromtheology to the ethnographyof theology (in both its official andpopularforms).Furthermore,enials of syncretism,whetherby academicanalystsorthepeopleunderstudy,areeverybit as interestingas cases wherethe compositenessof religioustraditions s recognizedandaccepted.The syncreticnessof all religions may be an unexceptional act, butpointingthisoutsociallyoftenamounts o anexpressionof power,differentiation, ndsocial control.It is a term thathashistoricallybeen appliedto someoneelse's body of religiousprac-tice. The bearersof a given tradition arelyacknowledgethatit mightbe syncretic(al-though I thinkthey can and should). When at the beginning of this centurycertaintheologianspointedout thatChristianitytself was syncretic, heyweremetwith broaddisapprovalon the partof WesternChristians Baird143]. Similarclashes of perspec-tive areapparentwhen avant-garde ulturalstudies andliterary heoristscelebratethefundamental ulturalhybridityof postcolonialcommunitiesat the very moment whenthese communitiesareengagingin strategic,essentialistclaims of culturalauthenticity[Thomas188;Asad 264].TheEthnographyof SyncretismLionel Caplanpresentsus with a timely ethnographic tudyof contestedhybridity hatillustrates his last issue. He reportson theAnglo-Indiansof Madrasand theirfortunesover the last two centuries.Under the British,because of theirmixed parentage, heyenjoyed increasinglyprivileged positions in colonial governmentemployment,espe-



18/24

ciallyafter he IndianMutiny nthemid-nineteenthentury.Historicalethnography ndoral histories indicatethatAnglo-Indianculturecompriseda mixtureof forms,manydistributedaccordingto class position,on a spectrumbetween Britishandlocal SouthIndianculturalpractice.Middle-classAnglo-Indianmen would weartrousers ndshirts,and suitsforparties,while the women worefrocks,although heseusuallyfailed topassfor Britishstyle because of theirgarishness.In cuisine, the more elite membersof theAnglo-Indian ommunitydistinguished hemselves from thelocalHindupopulationbyeating beef while less prosperousfamilies ate largely South Indian foods with theirhands.As Caplanpoints out, theirpractices,whichchiefly variedinternallyby class,amounted o a creole continuumsituation[Drummond].Yetfor sociopoliticalreasonstheAnglo-Indiansoftenrepresentedhemselvesas wholly British n the decades beforeIndian ndependence Caplan755]. Postindependence, s onemay easily imagine,thosewhohaveremained nIndiaare inclined to stress theirIndianness. n thiscase, then,wesee a group--a vocalpartof whichhasalways rejectedhybridityas a conceptrepresen-tativeof theirsituation-that anoutsideobservermighteasilyassume sculturallymixed.Caplan's ethnographyof the Anglo-Indiansof Madrashighlights one of the keyissues in the ethnographyof syncretism: he need to distinguishactors'expressedac-knowledgmentsof mixturefrom the opinions and perceptionsof anthropologistsorother outside observers.I refer to this as a problemof "frame."Granted hatwe canrecognizetwo differentculturalor religioustraditions n a given social field, how canwe ascertain hatthey have indeed mixed rather hansimply standjuxtaposedto oneanother? n brief,howcan we differentiate yncretism romreligious pluralism?If we go to ahospital, orexample,and see thatChineseacupunctureoracu-moxa)is beingadministeredn one room whereas asersurgery s beingperformedn the nextroom,we wouldnotseriouslyconsiderthis a syncretismof ChineseandWesternmedi-cine. To offer anotherexample, in Trinidadone may encounterShouterBaptists, fol-lowers of the Hindudeity Kali Mai, and adherentsof Shango (itself a syncretismofAfricanreligion and Catholicism)all subscribing o similar beliefs and practicesre-gardingpossession [Vertovec].At firstone mightbe tempted o considerthis the resultof mutualborrowing,or syncretism,butcloser inspectionrevealsthat the possessionphenomena n questioncan be accounted oras internal eaturesof each of the separatereligioustraditions.Furthermore, oneof the actorsinvolved attributedhese similari-ties to borrowing,but rather ust to "convergence"Vertovec].In this case, we mustonce again rule out syncretismon the groundsthat no "mixture"may be discernedeither from our own or from the actors'points of view. We might,however,want tofurtheranalyzethe local politicsof this discourseof convergence.The issue of frameemergesmost importantly,or ourpurposes, n theverydefini-tionof religionitself, especiallyas regards heboundaries hatare set betweenreligionand culture.As we have seen, the Catholic Church'sopening toward "inculturation"beginningwith VaticanII posed one exampleof how religious specialistsmay them-selves redraw he boundariesbetweenreligionandculture.Is the symbol of the lamb,forexample,essential to the Christianmessage,ormightit bereplaceableby anequiva-lent symbol in regionswhere sheep andgoats arenot herded?Likewise, as Schreiterasks,canwe allow the breadand wine of the Eucharist o be replacedby otherfoods inregionswheretheyare notknown [Constructing8]?3"

11. For the timebeing, theanswerto thisquestionappearsto be no. Communitiesn ChadandCameroon riedsubstitutingmilletbreadandmillet beer or thewaferand wineof the Eucha-rist,but thispracticewas haltedbya Vatican nstruction n 1980.As Schreitercomments,"[t]heEucharistcannot be reducedto theculturalcircumstancesof an everydaymeal"[Towarda The-ology65].

56


19/24

In his study of Sinhalese Catholics,Stirrathas shown how the Catholic Churchinitiallyforbade heuse of drums n Christian itualsand thewearingof white as a colorof mourning.The Church dentifiedthesepracticesas "Buddhist" ndthereforeas in-compatibleelementsfrom a differentreligionthat shouldnot be mixed with Catholi-cism. Afterindependence,however,when Buddhismbeganto set thetone of Sinhaleseculture, t became important or Sri LankanCatholics to participatemorefully in thisnationalculturerather han to be seenpreservingsubcultural ractices hat inkedthemwith Westerncolonialism. Furtherencouragedby the VaticanII pronouncements, heuse of drums and the wearingof white for mourningwere reclassifiedas acceptableelements of Sinhalese culture hatdid not threaten heintegrityof Catholicism.Numer-ous otherexamples,such as Mende (SierraLeone) debates over whetherparticipationin women's initiationrites is consistentwith Islam [Ferme],can be cited to show howwidespread s thisproblematicdivision betweenparticipationn local (or national)cul-tureand commitment o a standardizedworldreligion.

Ultimatelythese frames are not stable,as clearly emergesin the case of Catholi-cism. Even the separate rames maintainedon Trinidadmay one daybe altered,or col-lapsed altogether.What s importanto see andstudy,I think, s thattheimplementationof these framesis socially, politically,andhistoricallycontingent.This is truewhetherthe frame n questionis dictatedby anindigenoussocial ortheological pronouncementor posed as an academic observation rom outside the society in question.As an ex-ample, we may refer to RichardGombrich'sstudy of Sri LankanBuddhism,Preceptand Practice. He discounts the possibilityof a Hindu-Buddhist yncretismhere on thegroundsthat Hindu elementswere time-honored omponentsof Buddhism.Gombrichfurther ffers thatBuddhism s fundamentally oteriological,andonly practicesdirectedat salvationproperlyqualifyas elements of Buddhistreligion.The Hindudeities draftedinto theBuddhistpantheonareprimarilyappealed o formundane,"this-worldly"ndssuch as gaining prosperityor curing illness. Given the narrow frame he sets up forBuddhism, then, Hindugods are excluded;they are not aspectsof Buddhistreligion,hence one more reasonwhy Sri LankanBuddhism s not syncretic[Gombrich49].Thispositioncontrastswithmy ownstudyof GreekOrthodoxy Demons11 , whereI considered hat herewasacertaincore of cosmologicalstructure nd"salvation diom"basicto Christianitywhich, if significantlycontradicted,would be grounds orrulinganinnovative cult non-Christian.The panoply of demons thatI studied, like the Hindudeities withinBuddhism,do notperhapsconformto the letterof Christiandoctrine,buttheydo not contradict he basickernelof ChristianOrthodoxy. considered hem toler-ablevariations, he stuffof local religion,but not elementsthatfall outsidethe frameofChristianity.Thus I deem the coexistence of non-Christiandemons within the basicstructureor frame)of Orthodoxy o be a clearexampleof syncretism.Gombrichcon-cedes somethingsimilarwhen he describes Buddhismas "accretive" 49], buthe thenseems to draw a tighterframe aroundBuddhism such that accretedHindudeities andthethis-worldlyconcernsexpressedaround hemfall outsideof Buddhismproper.Thatotheranthropologists f Buddhismhavedisputed hedescriptionof Buddhist"religion"as limitedstrictly o eschatology[cf. Gellner103],andeven explicitlylabel SriLankanBuddhism"syncretic"[Bechert24, 218], only further ndicates the subjectivityandvariabilitybesettingthe demarcation f frames.

ConclusionMostpreviousdefinitionsof syncretismstipulate hata syncretismmustfuse disparate,disharmonious lements,or that it necessarilycontravenes he tenets of one or more of

diacritics/ fall 1999 57


20/24

the initialreligious systems,that t involvesambiguity,or anynumberof othercriteria.Historians of religion such as Colpe present us with staggering sets of analyticaldistinctions-synthesis, evolution, harmonization,disintegration,absorption,equiva-lence, amalgamation,and so on-for distinguishingandunderstanding he phenom-enon of syncretism.Onemightalmostcontemplateadopting hevocabularyof chemis-try,wherecompounds,mixtures,and colloids are all objectively distinguishable.Thestudyof syncretismcould then be set on a parwith theperceptionof colororsound,forwhich we also have an objectiveset of measurements o set against culturallyrelativediscriminations.Obviously religions andcultures are far too complex andfundamen-tally subjectivephenomena o be tamedby objective analyticalvocabularies,howeversubtle. FromtheperspectivethatI have outlinedabove, these sorts of analyticdistinc-tionsaboutsyncretismneed to be examinedaspartof thestrategicsocialnegotiationofreligioussynthesis,rather han as definitive of syncretismaltogether.Ultimately the anthropologyof syncretismis not concerned with pronouncingwhetherBuddhism,oranyotherreligion,is or is notsyncretic,but ratherwithstudyingthe variousargumentsmadefor or againstthe notion of religiousmixing. It should beconcernedwithcompetingdiscoursesover mixture,whethersyncreticor antisyncretic[StewartandShaw].Wherever yncretismoccurs or has occurred, t is usuallyaccom-paniedbyaparalleldiscourse hatmightbe termedmetasyncretic:hecommentary, ndregisteredperceptionsof actors as to whetheramalgamationhas occurredand whetherthis is good or bad. A strictlyobjectivistview could neverbe sufficient.In agreementwithDroogers[20] I consider the social science studyof syncretismto be cruciallyabout hevariousdiscourses hat seekto controlthedefinitionof syncre-tism in a given social field, whetherpromulgatedby insiders or outsiders.In order toimplement his anthropologyof syncretism,we need to proceedwith the broadestandmost generaldefinition of syncretism: he combinationof elements from two or moredifferentreligioustraditionswithin a specified frame.This muchfounds a consistentstartingpoint.We can establish that two or more different raditionsareinvolved,andwhat the relevant rame s, either on thebasis of what the actors nvolvedsay,oron thebasisof ourown analyticalreasoning,as long as we clearlyindicatewhen we aretakingwhichperspective.Of coursethe differencesof perspectivebetweeninsiders andoutsiders ntroduceanotherdifference n frame.Itmightbe the case thatwe will often endup studyinghowa given social groupnegotiatesthe claims of suchoutsidersas theCatholic Churchorsuch influential ndividualsas the Oxford Professorof Sanskrit.Granted he long-run-ningconflict between themajoritySinhaleseBuddhistsandTamilHindus n SriLanka,one couldeasily see how claims of Buddhistpurity-or even moreominous,Buddhistencompassment f Hinduism-could be drawnuponto legitimategovernmentpolicies.Indeed, Kapfererhas arguedthat a religious scenario involving demonization andexorcisticre-encompassmentof the the Tamil Hindusrunsparallelto the actual vio-lence. Some of Gombrich'sown more recentworkdocumentshow Buddhistborrow-ings of Hinduelements of practiceatKataragama reaccompaniedby a denial of theirHinduorigins [GombrichandObeyesekere163-99; van der Veer204]. Of course,na-tionalistorotherpoliticalleadersdo notneed to wait for authoritative ronouncementsby scholarsto legitimatetheirpolitical agendas,buttheycancertainlyuse them if theyare advantageous.Anthropologicalassessments of syncretismdo, thus, frequentlyaf-fect the social contextsthey attemptonly to study.Inpart his is becauseanopiniononsyncretism-a view on the purityor mixedness of social groups andcultures-is notjust anextrinsicanthropologicalnterest; t formspartof indigenous heories of cultureall overthe world.A community'sevaluationof its own culturalpurityormixturemaygovernopinionas to the group'sdefinitivecultural ormandpolitical destiny.

58


21/24

WORKSCITEDAbbott,Walter,ed. TheDocumentsof Vatican I. London:GeoffreyChapman,1966.Abou-El-Haj,Barbara."Languagesand Models for CulturalExchange."King 139-44.Abu-Lughod,Lila. "WritingAgainstCulture."RecapturingAnthropology:Workingnthe Present. Ed.RichardG. Fox. SantaFe: School of AmericanResearchP, 1991.137-62.Anderson,Benedict."Exodus."CriticalInquiry20 (1994): 314-27.. ImaginedCommunities.Rev. ed. London:Verso.1991.Apter,Andrew."Herskovits'sHeritage:RethinkingSyncretismn theAfricanDiaspora."Diaspora 1 (1991): 235-60.Arrom,Jose Juan."Criollo:Definici6ny maticesde unconcepto."Hispania34 (1951):172-76.Asad,Talal.GenealogiesofReligion:Disciplines andReasonsofPowerinChristianityandIslam.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUP, 1993.Baird,Robert.CategoryFormationandtheHistory of Religions.2nd ed. Berlin: Mou-ton de Gruyter,1991.Barth,Fredrik."TheAnalysis of Culturein Complex Societies." Ethnos 54 (1989):120-42.Baumann,Gerd.ContestingCultures.Cambridge:CambridgeUP, 1996.Bechert,Heinz, ed. Buddhism n Ceylonand Studieson Religious Syncretism n Bud-dhist Countries.Goettingen:Vardenhoeck ndRuprecht,1978.Bhabha,Homi. TheLocationof Culture.London:Routledge, 1994.Bloch, Maurice."Internal ndExternalMemory:DifferentWaysof Being in History."TensePast: CulturalEssays in TraumaandMemory.Ed. PaulAntze andMichaelLambek.London:Routledge, 1996. 215-33.Bourdieu,Pierre.Outlineof a Theoryof Practice.Cambridge:CambridgeUP, 1977.Bringa,Tone.Being Muslim the Bosnian Way:Identityand Community n a CentralBosnian Village.Princeton:PrincetonUP, 1996.Canclini,NestorGarcia.HybridCultures:Strategiesor EnteringandLeavingModer-nity.Minneapolis:U of MinnesotaP, 1995.Caplan,Lionel."CreoleWorld,PuristRhetoric." RAI1 (1995):743-62.Chaplin,Joyce."NaturalPhilosophyand anEarlyRacialIdiom nNorthAmerica:Com-paringEnglish andIndianBodies."WilliamandMary Quarterly54 (1997): 229-

52.Clifford,James.ThePredicamentof Culture.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUP, 1988.-.Routes:TravelandTranslation n the LateTwentiethCentury.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUP, 1997.Clifford,James,andGeorgeMarcus,eds. WritingCulture:ThePoetics and PoliticsofEthnography.Berkeley:U of CaliforniaP, 1986.Colpe, Carsten."Syncretism."TheEncyclopediaofReligion.Ed.Mircea Eliade. NewYork:Simon andSchuster,1995.Comaroff,Jean.Body of Power,Spirit of Resistance: The Cultureand History of a

SouthAfrican People.Chicago:U of ChicagoP, 1985.- . "HealingandCulturalTransformation: heTswana of SouthernAfrica."SocialScienceandMedicine 15b(1981): 367-78.Coronil,Fernando."TransculturationndthePoliticsof Theory:Countering heCenter,CubanCounterpoint."Ortizix-lvi.Droogers,Andre."Syncretism:The Problemof Definition,the Definition of the Prob-lem."Dialogue andSyncretism:AnInterdisciplinaryApproach.Ed.JeraldGortetal. GrandRapids,MI:Eerdmans,1989. 7-25.



22/24

Drummond,Lee. "TheCulturalContinuum:A Theoryof Intersystems."Man5 (1980):352-74.Edmonson,Monroe,et al. Nativism and Syncretism.Middle AmericanResearchInsti-tute,Publ. 19 (1960). TulaneUniversity,New Orleans.Evans-Pritchard, . E. "Introduction: ounterworks." ounterworks:ManagingtheDi-

versityof Knowledge.Ed. R. Fardon.London:Routledge, 1995.- . The Nuer:A Description of the Modes of Livelihoodand the Political Institu-tionsof a Nilotic People. Oxford:Clarendon,1940.- . NuerReligion.Oxford:OxfordUP, 1956.Fardon,Richard,ed. Counterworks:Managing the Diversityof Knowledge.London:

Routledge,1995.-. Localizing Strategies:RegionalTraditions f EthnographicWriting.Edinburgh:ScottishAcademicPress, 1990.Featherstone,Mike,ed. Global Culture.London:Sage, 1990.Ferme,Mariane."What AlhajiAirplane'Saw in Mecca,andWhatHappenedWhen HeCameHome:RitualTransformationn a MendeCommunitySierraLeone)."Stewartand Shaw27-44.Fernandez,James."Tolerancen a RepugnantWorldand OtherDilemmas in the Cul-turalRelativismof Melville Herskovits."Ethos 18 (1990): 140-64.Freyre,Gilberto.TheMastersandtheSlaves. 1933.2ndEnglished. New York:Knopf,1956.Friedman,Jonathan.Cultural dentityand GlobalProcess.London:Sage, 1994.Gellner,David. "Introduction:WhatIs theAnthropologyof BuddhismAbout?" ournal

of theAnthropologicalSocietyof Oxford21 (1990): 95-112.Gilroy,Paul.TheBlackAtlantic:Modernityand DoubleConsciousness.London:Verso,1993.Glazer,Nathan,and Daniel P.Moynihan.BeyondtheMeltingPot: TheNegroes,PuertoRicans, Jews, Italians,andIrishof NewYorkCity.1963. 2nded. Cambridge,MA:MITP, 1970.Glissant,Edouard.CaribbeanDiscourse: SelectedEssays. Charlottesville:UP of Vir-

ginia, 1989.Gombrich,Richard.Precept and Practice: TraditionalBuddhism n the RuralHigh-landsof Ceylon.Oxford:Clarendon,1971.Gombrich,Richard,and GananathObeyesekere.BuddhismTransformed.Princeton:PrincetonUP, 1988.Graham,Richard,ed. The Idea of Race in LatinAmerica,1870-1940. Austin: U ofTexasP, 1990.. Introduction.Graham1-5.Hannerz,Ulf. "AmericanCulture:Creolized,Creolizing."AmericanCulture:Creolized,

Creolizing.Ed. Erik Asard. 7-30. Uppsala:Swedish Instituteof North AmericanStudies,Universityof Uppsala, 1988.. "Scenarios orPeripheralCultures."King 107-28.. TransnationalConnections.London:Routledge, 1996.- "TheWorld n Creolisation."Africa57 (1987): 546-59.Harris,Olivia."Knowing hePast:PluralIdentitiesandtheAntinomiesof Loss inHigh-land Bolivia."Fardon,Counterworks105-23.

Helg, Aline. "Racein ArgentinaandCuba, 1880-1930: Theory,Policies andPopularReaction."Graham37-61.Herskovits,Melville. TheMythof theNegroPast. 1941.2nded. Boston:Beacon, 1958.Jackson,Walter.GunnarMyrdalandAmerica'sConscience:Social EngineeringandRacialLiberalism,1938-1987. ChapelHill: U of NorthCarolinaP, 1990.

60


23/24

- . "TheMakingof a Social Science Classic: GunnarMyrdal'sAn AmericanDi-lemma."Perspectives nAmericanHistoryn.s. 2 (1985): 221-67.- . "MelvilleHerskovitsand the SearchforAfro-AmericanCulture."Malinowski,Rivers,Benedict and Others.Ed. G. Stocking.Madison: U of WisconsinP, 1986.95-126.

Jourdan,C. "PidginsandCreoles:The Blurringof Categories."AnnualReviewof An-thropology20 (1991):187-209.

Kapferer,Bruce.Legends of People,Mythsof State.Washington:Smithsonian nstitu-tionP, 1988.Kiernan,James."Variationn a ChristianTheme:TheHealing Synthesisof ZuluZion-ism." StewartandShaw69-84.King, Anthony D., ed. Culture,Globalizationand the WorldSystem:ContemporaryConditions or the Representationof Identity.Binghamton:Dept. of Art and Art

History,StateUniversityof New York,1991.Knight,Alan. "Racism,Revolution, and Indigenismo:Mexico 1910-1940." Graham71-113.Matta, Roberto da. "A Originalidade de Gilberto Freyre."Boletim Informativoe

Bibliograficode Ciencias Sociais 24 (1987): 3-10.McNeill, John.T.UnitiveProtestantism.Richmond,VA: JohnKnox, 1964.Mintz, Sidney. "EnduringSubstances,Trying Theories: The CaribbeanRegion asOikoumene." RAI2 (1996): 289-311.Myrdal,Gunnar.An AmericanDilemma. 1944.2nd ed. NewYork:McGraw-Hill,1964.NederveenPieterse,Jan."Globalizationas Hybridization."nternationalSociology 9

(1994):161-89.Nutini, Hugo. "On Syncretism."IASSA Conference on Syncretism.University ofGothenburg. une1993.. TodosSantosin Rural Tlaxcala:A Syncretic,Expressive,andSymbolicAnalysisof the Cultof the Dead. Princeton:PrincetonUP, 1988.Ortiz, Fernando.Cuban Counterpoint:Tobacco and Sugar. 1940. 2nd English ed.Durham:Duke UP, 1995.

Ortner,Sherry."Theory n Anthropologysince the 'Sixties."'ComparativeStudiesinSocietyandHistory26.1 (1984): 126-66.

Palmi6,Stephan."AgainstSyncretism: Africanizing'and'Cubanizing'DiscoursesinNorthAmericanOrisaWorship."Fardon,Counterworks 3-104.. "Outof Place:Discoveriesof Africain the New World."Unpublishedms.Parkin,David. "Nemi in the ModemWorld:Returnof the Exotic?."Man 28 (1993):79-99.Pato,L. "TheAfricanIndependentChurches:A Socio-CulturalApproach." ournalof

Theology or SouthernAfrica72 (1990): 24-35.Peel, J. D. Y."SyncretismandReligiousChange."ComparativeStudiesin SocietyandHistory 10 (1968): 121-41.Perl, Matthias."Los dos significados de la voz 'crioulo/criollo': Consideracioneslingiifsticase hist6ricas." slas 73 (1982): 169-78.Pickering,W. S. E "Introduction:Old Positions and New Concerns."Special issue:Anthropology ndMissionaries:Some Case Studies.JASO22.2 (1992): 99-110.Plutarch.Moralia.Vol. 6. Loeb ed. Cambridge,MA.: HarvardUP, 1939.Rosaldo,Renato.CultureandTruth:TheRemakingofSocialAnalysis. Boston:Beacon,1989.

-- .Foreword.HybridCultures: trategiesforEnteringandLeavingModernity.N6storGarciaCanclini.Minneapolis:U of MinnesotaP, 1995. xi-xvii.Rushdie,Salman.In Good Faith. London:Granta,1990.



24/24

Sahlins,Marshall."Goodbye o TristesTropiques:Ethnographyn theContextof Mod-em WorldHistory."AssessingCulturalAnthropology.Ed. R. Borofsky.NewYork:McGraw-Hill,1994.Said,Edward.CultureandImperialism.London:Vintage, 1993.Schmid, H. Geschichte der syncretischenStreitigkeitenn der Zeit des GeorgCalixt.Erlangen:Heyder,1846.Schreiter,Robert.ConstructingLocal Theologies.London:SCM, 1985.--. Towarda Theologyof lnculturation.London:GeoffreyChapman,1988.Segal, Daniel,and RichardHandler."HowEuropean s Nationalism?"Social Analysis32 (1992): 1-15.Shaw,Rosalind,andCharlesStewart. Introduction:roblematizing yncretism."tewartand Shaw 1-26.Skidmore,Thomas.BlackintoWhite:Race andNationalityin BrazilianThought.2nded. Durham:Duke UP, 1993.

. "RacialIdeasandSocial Policy in Brazil, 1870-1940." Graham7-36.Stewart,Charles.Demons and theDevil: MoralImagination nModernGreekCulture.Princeton:PrincetonUP, 1991.. "Syncretism sa Dimensionof NationalistDiscourse nModemGreece."Stewartand Shaw 127-44.Stewart,Charles,andRosalindShaw,eds. Syncretism/Anti-Syncretism:hePoliticsofReligious Synthesis.London:Routledge, 1994.Stirrat,R. L. Power and Religiosityin a Post-ColonialSetting:Sinhala Catholics inContemporary riLanka.Cambridge:CambridgeUP, 1992.Stutzman,Ronald. "El Mestizaje:An All-Inclusive Ideology of Exclusion."CulturalTransformationsndEthnicity n ModernEcuador.Ed. N. Whitten.Urbana:U ofIllinois P, 1981. 45-94.Sundkler,Bengt. BantuProphetsin SouthAfrica. 1948. 2nd ed. London: OxfordUP,1961.Szwed,John."AnAmericanAnthropologicalDilemma:ThePolitics of Afro-AmericanCulture."ReinventingAnthropology.Ed. Dell Hymes. New York:Vintage,1974.Thomas,Nicholas. Colonialism'sCulture.Princeton:PrincetonUP, 1994.van der Leeuw,Gerardus.Religion in Essence and Manifestation.1933. Trans.J. E.Turner.New York:Macmillan,1938.van derVeer,Peter."Syncretism,Multiculturalism nd the Discourse of Tolerance."Stewartand Shaw 196-211.Vertovec,Steven."EthnicDistance andReligious Convergence:Shango,SpiritualBap-tist, andKali MaiTraditions n Trinidad." ocial Compass45 (1998): 247-63.Wallerstein, mmanuel.1991. "TheNationaland the Universal:CanThere Be Such a

Thingas WorldCulture."King 91-105.Werbner,Richard.Afterword.StewartandShaw212-15.Williams,Brackette."AClassAct:Anthropologyand theRace to NationAcrossEthnicTerrain." nnualReviewofAnthropology18 (1989): 401-44.Wilson,Monica.Reaction to Conquest.London:OxfordUniversityPress.Yalmn-Heckmann, ale."ThePredicament f Mixing 'Culture'and'Religion':TurkishMuslimCommitmentsnPost-MigrationGermany." ost-MigrationEthnicity:De-EssentializingCohesion,Commitment nd Comparison.Ed. GerdBaumannandThijlSunier.Amsterdam:Spinhuis,1995.78-98.Young, Robert. Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory,Culture and Race. London:Routledge,1995.