Whom we imagine when talk about hunter-gatherer? A dark-skin small man almost without any clothes, with a spear or bow and arrows. His family live in a deep rainforest or in an endless savannah, they make a fire by drilling, live a nomadic life and know nothing about agriculture and pastoralism. It is enough for a standard person who is ready to forget everything that doesn’t concern with his everyday job. But if you read this book – you are not such a person.

We also know that their lifestyle is the most ancient and 90% of all human beings who ever lived on our beautiful planet (~80 000 000 000 individuals) were hunter-gatherers (Lee & DeVore 1968). It is the most effective, most harmonized and ecological way of connection between humans as biological specie and all the nature itself. Living as a hunter and gatherer, human don’t opposite themselves to the nature by a constant fighting in a constant process of production food by keeping cattle (making pastures, killing predators, overgrazing) or agriculture (slash-and-burn cultivation, deforestation, invasion of plants). Every anthropologist who is interested in hunter-gatherers knows such iconic peoples as Hadza of Tanzania, Baka of South-East Cameroon and Mbuti of North-East DRC, Bushmen of South Africa and Kubu of Sumatra, about Andamanese and Indigenous Australians

But at the same time there are several peoples who are always very far from the mainstream anthropology. They seem to be classical agriculturalists who live normal sedentary life.

Sometimes it is almost impossible to be sure about some concrete ethnic group – are they real hunters and gatherers or just have some elements of occasional foraging (and such elements may be non-indigenous). People of Zanzibar archipelago go to forage wild fruits and berries, fallen coconuts and many kinds of seafood at a low-tide at a regular basis – the resources of islands and surrounding waters are limited and strongly depend on the weather season and ocean streams. But at the same time most of them involved in farming, fishing and trade – traditional occupations of this archipelago for many centuries. Still it is hard to classify such peoples as Veddahs of Sri Lanka and Mikea of Madagascar. Meanwhile such peoples as Birhor of Central India and Chepang of Central Nepal aren’t connected with living traditions of hunting and gathering. But exactly these peoples go to forage and even sometimes hunt small game more often than such “classical” hunter-gatherers as Veddahs. There are extremely few studies about the origins of the Mlabri and about their hunting and gathering traditions. Less can be found about Ahikuntikas people (it is good if you just heard about them).

By writing of this book I tried to use a powerful basement of previous studies since XIX century till modern days and build a little (but comfortable I suppose) house, entering which a wanderer can find some answers. In this book we will try to make a short overlook on some of such people who live around Indian Ocean – from Northern Thailand to South Madagascar, from Sri Lanka to Himalaya. We will point islands and coasts, mountains and savannahs. And everywhere we will meet them – hunter-gatherers who remain hidden. So, let our journey begins!

I want to thank those people who always help me on the path of my life – my beloved wife Elena Erkina, my darling mother Tatiana Khromova and my dearest father Marlen Gabbasov. Thank you for everything!

Sergey Marlenovich Gabbasov

SPIRITS OF THE YELLOW LEAVES

Mlabri are an important people, one of the few remaining cases of mongoloid hunters who hunt using spears, rather than bows and arrows or blowpipes. Documentary records made by local Buddhist priests inform that Mlabri offered honey, rattan, wax and other forest products to the kings as tribute every year (Bernatzik 1938).

Most studies about the Mlabri prior to the 1970’s described them as a nomadic group living in the jungle, with some contact with outsiders such as exchanging forest resources for tools and rice (Nimmanahaeminda and Hartland-Swan 1962; Young 1961; Bernatzik 1951; Wanadorn 1926; Seidenfaden 1919). Studies after the 70’s began to mention a transition in the patterns of exchange – not only for bartered goods, but also labor was exchange for goods, especially for food (Trier 1992; Pookajorn 1992).

The Siamese elite in Bangkok attitude to the Mlabri as “khon pa” and considered them completely different from the Thai (“khonthai”). The “khon pa” are defined as “early men” or “old humankind” (“khonderm”) who are still living in the jungle (Pookajorn 1985). Other ethnic groups, such as the Lawa, the Yang (Karen), the Khmu, as well as the Hmong or the Lahu, are sometimes also included in this classification (Na Nan 2007). For the Mlabri, the term “phi pa” (“forest spirits”) was sometimes used and referred to their lack of permanent settlements. All these peoples, especially the nomadic Mlabri, were of little interest to the Kingdom of Thailand until the 1970’s (Na Nan 2016).

Thai exonym to the Mlabri is “Phi Tong Luang” (lit. “spirits of the yellow leaves”). According to the Thai perspective, this nomadic group would move to another places whenever the banana leaves (“tong”) covering the roofs of their shelters turned yellow (“luang”) and it was said that they could move as quickly as if they were spirits (“phi”) (Kerr 1924).

Their endonym – Mlabri – consists of two words: “Mla” means “people” and “bri” is “forest”. The term “Yumbri” with the same meaning was in use in the past times (Nimmanahaeminda 1963). Diffloth put Mlabri and Yumbri in two different branches of the Mon-Khmer subdivision: Mlabri to Paluangic and Yumbri to Khmuic (Diffloth 1973). Bernatzik also separated Mlabri and Yumbri (Bernatzik & Bernatzik 1958), but Rischel assumed that they were varieties of the same language (Rischel 1995).

The Mlabri were also called “Phi Pa” (“forest spitits”) or “Khon Pa” (“forest people”) in Thai and “Mang Koo” in Hmong. The Laotian know them as “Kha Tuang Luang”. They usually call themselves “mlaq” (“human beigns”) and “mlaq briq”, but they are better known to the general Thai people as “phi tong lueang” (“spirits of the yellow leaves”): “spirits” is an allusion to their hiding in the forest to avoid to contact with outsiders, and “yellow leaves” refer to the fact that they abandon their windscreens when the palm or banana leaves they are made of turned yellow (Surin 1992; Bernatzik 1951). Later, the attitude of the State changed, and the Mlabri, as many other upland ethnic groups, were classified as “chao kao” or “hill tribes” (Rischel 1995).

The Mlabri speak an Austro-Asiatic language belonging to the Khmuic branch of the Mon-Khmer language family. Some scholars (Chazée 2001; Boeles 1963; Flatz 1963; Nimmanahaeminda 1963) refer to the Mlabri as Mrabri. However, Danish linguist Jørgen Rischel, who researched the Mlabri language in Thailand and Laos in the late 1980’s, argues that, from a linguistic perspective, “the alleged ethnonym Mrabri is simply phonetically erroneous” (Rischel 2000).

The origin of the Mlabri is still debated: Proto-Mongoloid (Bernatzik 1951), Paleo-Mongoloid (Flatz 1963) or Austroloid (Trier 1981). A genetic study conducted by Hiroki Oota suggests that the Mlabri descend from a very small founder group that split 500—800 years ago from an agricultural community and later reverted to a hunting-gathering subsistence mode (Oota et al. 2005). This would imply that they have not always been hunter-gatherers but what Endicott calls “re-specialized foragers” (Endicott 1999).

Mlabri firstly appeared in Thailand in Chaiyaphum, Loei and Chiangrai (Seidenfaden 1919). Many scholars argue that the Mlabri residing in Thailand today migrated in the early 20th century from the Lao province Sayaburi bordering the Thailand province Nan (Trier 2008; Boeles 1963; Bernatzik 1951). Some scholars declare that a few Mlabri still live in Laos: in 2000, 28 individuals according to Chazée (Chazée 2001), 40 individuals according to Schliesinger (Schliesinger 2003). There could also be a few Mlabri living in Myanmar (The Lahu National Development Organization 2005).

Nowadays the Mlabri live a sedentary life in permanent settlements in Phrae and Nan, engaging in wage labor, cash crop cultivation and ethnic tourism, they traditionally used to lead a nomadic life in the forests of northern Thailand, spear-hunting wild animals such as boars, monkeys and barking deers, catching small animals such as bamboo rats, mole rats and lizards and also gathering various kinds of wild yams, plants and fruits (Nimonjiya 2013). Like other hunter-gatherers elsewhere, the Mlabri used to live in “bands” which constituted autonomous social units. A band consisted of two to five families, totaling twelve to twenty-five individuals. The bands changed their campsite every five to ten days (Pookajorn 1988).

Many scholars of the Mlabri noted, that they were extremely afraid of outsiders (Trier 2008; Boeles 1963; Bernatzik 1951). The reason for such behavior seems to be that the Mlabri had fearful memories of their kin being shot dead or raped by outsiders (Trier 2008; Boeles 1963; Bernatzik 1951). Some Mlabri were even exhibited in a zoo in the Bangkok shopping mall alongside various rare animals (Baffie 1989).

From as early as at least the late 1910’s the Mlabri sometimes went out to visit Khmu (Khamu), Karen, Lahu, H’tin, Hmong and even those Thai who live in the hills to exchange forest products for consumer items such as salt, steel, tobacco, blankets, clothes, pigs and rice (Vongvipak 1992). The ethnic group with whom the Mlabri had the closest relations were the Hmong (Ikeya and Nakai 2009; Morrison and Junker 2002). According to Trier, this preference emerged very soon after the arrival of the Hmong in Thailand (Trier 1992) back into the 1930s. The Hmong sometimes employed the Mlabri to work in their fields (Bernatzik 1951). Bernatzik pointed out that the Mlabri trusted the Hmong more than any other ethnic group because they “never took advantage of their own superiority; they gave them protection and assistance” (Bernatzik 1951).

Ikea and Nakai (2009) proposed a model that divides the relationship between the Mlabri and Hmong into 3 stages. In the first (before 1980’s) the Mlabri were forest hunters and gatherers while the Hmong were highly mobile farmers (as well as occasional hunters and gatherers, but living in permanent villages). In the second stage (1980’s – 1998), the Mlabri remained nomadic hunters whereas the Hmong settled in the areas where they have continued to live until the present (Culas & Michaud 2004; Geddes 1976). During the third stage (1998—2004) the Mlabri regrouped and began a sedentary lifestyle under Thai government initiative, living in many places near the already settled Hmong communities (“chao bannok”, villagers).

In 1973, a lumber company from Song district in Phrae obtained an official logging permit and began to cut down the forest from Huai Rong, which is next to the Phrae-Nan highway, to the forest between Phrae and Nan where the Mlabri lived. At the end of the logging in 1981, the forest no longer provided any of the natural resources that the Mlabri had been depended upon (Seidenfaden 2005). As a result, the Mlabri started to sell their labor to the Hmong (Nimonjiya 2013; Na Nan 2009).

Some studies suggest that originally, the natural environment the Mlabri inhabited was confined to the provincial borders of Phrae and Nan (Nimmanahaeminda and Hartland-Swann 1962; Bernatzik 1951; Seidenfaden 1926), but according to a recent study (Trier 2008), until 1970s, the Mlabri population was scattered all over northern Thailand, especially to east and north (Nimmonjiya 2013).

However, since 1950s onwards, this area progressively shrank (Na Nan 2013). One obvious cause was large-scale deforestation in northern Thailand (Rischel 1995), but it is not only one. According to Delang, there were three main causes: agricultural expansion, logging and road construction (Delang 2002).

The contacts between the Mlabri and the Hmong became frequent and closer after the 1970s. The Mlabri worked in the fields only during the peak seasons and spent the rest of the time in the forest (Nimmonjiya 2013). At the beginning, the Mlabri were able to sustain themselves without the support of the Hmong for a large part of the year, but as deforestation worsened, the Mlabri’s dependence on the Hmong gradually increased: the labor period increased (Na Nan 2009; Seidenfaden 2005). It was one month in the 1970s, two or three in the 1980s, and four or five in the 1990s (Trier 2008). Also, the items exchanged between the Mlabri and the Hmong changed: in the 1980s, the Hmong traded rings, earrings, watches, flashlights, shampoo, medicines, radio in exchange for the Mlabri’s baskets, rattan mats and labor (Vongvipak 1992). As a natural resource that the Mlabri depended on the forest has dramatically decreased, the Mlabri have to increase their economic dependence on other hill tribes, especially the Hmong, by working as wage labors (Vongvipak 1992).

The Mlabri distinguish three seasons: hot season (“nyam thu. ul”), rainy season (“nyam mèq hot”) and cool season (“nyam takat”). Moreover, they consider that forest has various characteristics: dry evergreen forest (“briq cabor sung”), tropical dry evergreen forest (“briq mëk / briq krum”), mixed deciduous forest (“briq citce”), sparse forest (“briq praw”) and so on (Nimonjiya 2015).

Bernatzik described their daily life as getting up and scattering in search of food in the forest, then the meal is cooked and eaten and the family rest under the windscreen, after three or five days they wander slowly then set up the new camp (Bernatzik 1951).

A Danish anthropologist Jasper Trier who conducted a fieldwork among the Mlabri in the late 1970s, also described their daily life in a similar way – men leave the camp early in the morning to hunt small game, dig out bamboo rats, collect roots and honey and, occasionally, to catch fish from a small stream, sometimes staying away for several days; women and girls collect roots, edible plants, crabs, etc. not far away from the camp. Each family usually eats separately. They often take short rests and go to sleep early (Trier 2008).

A set of widescreens (“géng”) was a social unit of a band. The group size was not fixed, depending on the time and situation (Nimonjiya 2015).

Hunter-gatherers generally do not produce any food but exploited natural resources. Like other hunter-gatherers, the Mlabri’s nomadic life mainly depended on ecological factors (Herda 2007). Thus a composition of band was not stable, it tended to split up during the dry winter season because food became increasingly difficult to find (Trier 2008). The Mlabri’s main diet was obtained by gathering and digging (Nomonjiya 2015) such as roots and tubers while wild animals were indispensable protein (Trier 2008).

The Mlabri hunted with spear (“kòot”), spade (“soq”), spear point (“khabok”) and knife (“tòq”) and they got the cooperation of the dog (Nimonjiya 2015). Several types of animals were hunted, like muntjucs (“polh”), deer (“ciak”), wild boar (“cabut briq / ngay”), hedgehog (“qudok”), bamboo rat (“koc”), mole (“met lèk”), mouse (“hnèl”), big lizard (“pye”). The Mlabri’s spears were not for throwing but for stabbing by hand (Bernatzik 1951). Their traditional weapons and utensils were made entirely of wood and bamboo (Trier 1981, 2008; Seidenfaden 1919). But since mid-1980s hunting gun was introduced so they were able to hunt for monkeys (“thawak”), birds (“ac”), fowls and squirrels (Osawa 2014).

The Mlabri traditionally used bamboo tubes for boiling and wooden skewer for roasting. Large pieces of meat were thrown directly into the fire. They ate and shared everything with all of members in a band (Ikeya & Nakai 2009; Pookajorn 1992).

The Mlabri’s traditional lifestyle continued until around 1975 (Trier 2008), but it has gradually changed since then. The main cause was deforestation (Rischel 1995) due to agricultural expansion, logging and road construction (Delang 2002).

The Mlabri are still practicing hunting and gathering today, but it is much more limited. Mlabri’s consumption of food directly hunted or gathered from the forest has decreased since 1970s and at present amounts to only 7% of average food weight. Under the influence of cash economy, they sometimes sell the the games to the Hmong because they can get more food from that amount of money. The money or bought food is sharing according to the traditional social principle of sharing (Nimonjiya 2015).

Nimonjiya informs that sedentarization also has an impact on the social life of the Mlabri. Young generations were born and raised in permanent settlements, the adults usually work so hard in the fields that they didn’t have time to go into the forest (Nimonjiya 2015). Mlabri traditional ecological knowledge is losing ground – in place of the oral history TV attracts all of them nowadays (Nimonjiya & Holzinger 2014), only during the rainy season when power supply stops occasionally do parents tell their children old stories (Nimonjiya 2014).

Estimated consumption of food in % by weight (Trier 2008):

Marriage rites as performed in most societies do not exist in Mlabri society. Since its population is very limited, the marriage of any couple is known without any public rite (Herda 2002). Remarriage can be done only after a divorce or the death of the former spouse. One can’t marry a person who is a relative. The rate of divorce and changing of spouses is rather high in this society. There are several normative rules that have to be abided:

– Sexual relations between close kin are prohibited. There is the incest taboo which controls the relations between siblings including co-siblings.

– Sexual relations between cousins, including both cross and parallel cousins, are also prohibited.

– Premarital sexual experimentation is not allowed in any case.

– Sexual relations can’t be done with anyone other than his spouse (Paiyaphrohm 1990).

Pookajorn (1988, 1985) gives the information about the mobility of Mlabri. Their residental moves per year are 24 times, average distance is 19 km (with total distance of 196 km). Logistical mobility is 1 day and primary biomass is 35,7 kg per square meter. Total area of mobility is 2826 square kilometers.

Music and dances were very important in the traditional life of the Mlabri. Music is a part of recreational and ritual activities of human society. For Mlabri music is a relaxation when they success in hunting or have a celebration, a festival, for spirit sacrifice or burial ceremony. The only one musical instrument they have is a “khaen”, and a type of songs accompanied by a khaen is named “molum Mlabri” (Paiyaphrohm 1990).

Khaen is a type of musical instrument (mouth organ), commonly found in Northeast Thailand. It is made of bamboo tubes, hollow wood and beewax. No Mlabri musicians make it, that may indicate that Mlabri obtain it from outsiders or they had already forgotten how to make it. Moreover, it is remarkable that Mlabri can’t play Hmong khaen even though they have been in contact with them for a long time. Besides Hmong believe that khaen is a high-class musical instrument, they aren’t allowed to play it without some ceremony except for themselves, so Mlabri have no occasion to play on it.

Mlabri songs are in both Mlabri language and in Lao (Harris 1986). It is possible that they copy from Lao songs, which are called “molum”, because they had lived in Laos before migrating to Thailand. The songs’ tempo is rather slow. They rarely have a rhyme between words or sentences. A singer will chant with the melody made by khaen. The singer continues singing impromptu songs, other persons will dance slowly. Their dancing is kneeing a little bit and raising hands with turning wrist like a circle. Someone will dance like animal’s walking and hopping. Sometimes they will clap to give a rhythm or use bamboo tubes for this purpose. They sing and dance till they are tired and then they finish (Paiyaphrohm 1990).

MONKEYS, SNAKES AND FOREST BEINGS

VEDDAHS

Cave dwelling of Wanniyala-aetto

Wanniyala-aetto (“wanniyalätto” – “forest beings”; “me-ätto” – “this being”) live in forests east of central mountains, between Mahiyangana and Maha Oya. This is the most “classical” Veddah, strongly associated with the indigenous people of Sri Lanka.

The physical measurements on the living Veddahs and the skeletal remains available help to fix the definitions of Veddahs anthropometrically, and not only with certain accuracy, but according to certain criteria the physical measurements can be used to establish the racial type and also to compare it with other types that are known. On such a basis the anthropologists have established a racial type called “Veddid” or “Veddoid” (Hill 1941).

Hominids were probably present in Sri Lanka by 130 000 BP, possibly 300 000 BP (Deraniyagala 1992). The word “Veddah” is derived from the Sanskrit word “Vyadha” → “Viaddha” → “Veddha” → “Veddah”, and means “a hunter” or “one who live by the chase”. Another synonym for Veddah is “sabara”, which has two meanings – “Veddah” (hunter) and “an area having sabara trees”. Sabaragamuwa province may have acquired this name because it is considered to be the original habitat of the Veddahs (Wijesekera 1964). Wijesekera (1964) supposed that the aboriginal inhabitants of Sri Lanka who came into contact or conflict with the numerous newcomers from India absorbed the Indian settlers, acquired their status and language and, with some admixture of Dravidian blood or without it, became the Kandyan Sinhalese. They may have occupied the caves before the early Christian era. When Buddhism became established and the caves were occupied by monks, these people left them. These were re-occupied much later but that time they had lost their traditions and language (Kennedy 1974).

The first record of indigenous people in Sri Lanka appears in two quasi-historical scriptures – the “Dipavamsa” (4th century AD) and the “Mahavamsa” (6th century AD). These chronicles, written by Sinhalese, are religious justifications for Sinhalese appropriation of Sri Lanka. The writings describe a heroic conquest of the indigenous population, called the “Yakkahs” (demons / evil spirits), and narrate the Buddha’s blessing of the invaders. The “Mahavamsa” states that Buddha chose the Sinhalese as guardians of his teachings, and protected them against “the demons”. The “demons” withdrew into dense tropical forests (Stegeborn 1999).

Within the central Sri Lanka is situated “Mahayangana” (“Alutnuwara”) – the ancient assembling place of the “Yakkas” where, according to the “Mahawansa”, Lord Buddha appeared and struck terror into their hearts before propounding his doctrines. The “Mahavamsa” (Chapter 7) has recorded the story of the Yakkahs at Mahiyangana: “From Lanka filled with the Yakkahs, the Yakkahs must be driven forth… Mahiyangana was the customary meeting place of the Yakkahs, there was a great gathering of the Yakkahs dwelling in the Island” (Mahavamsa 1912). In about the time of Mahasena (277—304 A.D.) the Yakkahs appear to have been employed in building water tanks (Parker 1999). Most Wanniyala-aetto can’t read and write, they haven’t read the Sinhalese origin myth in the “Mahavamsa”, but the epics have been sung or told to them by literate Sinhalese. Parts of “Mahavamsa” subsequently been retold among the Wanniyala-aetto themselves until it has become an integrated part of their own history. The mythological history narrates that there were no humans in Sri Lanka, only evil spirits before the Sinhalese conqueror Vijaya arrived. Vijaya had a wife named “Kuveni”, a female spirit from Lanka, and they had a son and a daughter. Those children were the first Wanniyala-aetto. The siblings grew up and reproduced and the present Wanniyala-aetto are, according to the “Mahavamsa”, the result of that relationship. The Wanniyala-aetto who do not embrace the “Mahavamsa” story believe their ancestors have lived on Sri Lanka since time began, and do not trace their descent from any specific progenitor (Stegeborn 1993).

1 2 3 >

На страницу:

Перейти

1 из 3