Home Region:  New Guinea (Oceania-Australia)

Orokaiva - Pre-Colonial

D G SC WF HS EQ 2020  pg_orokaiva_pre_colonial / PgOrokE

Preceding:
[continuity; Orokaiva Tribes] [continuity]   Update here
Add one more here.

Succeeding:
1884 CE 1942 CE Orokaiva - Colonial (pg_orokaiva_colonial)    [elite migration]
Add one more here.

The Northern Province of Papua New Guinea has long been inhabited by the Orokaiva. This is an umbrella term used to describe a number of culturally similar groups, including the Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida. [1] Though these groups did not have an inclusive name for themselves until Westerners coined the label ’Orokaiva’, they distinguished among themselves as the river (umo-ke), saltwater (eva’embo), and inland (periho) peoples. [2] The Orokaiva were primarily subsistence farmers in the period under consideration (1734-1883 CE). [3] The first known contact with Europeans occurred in the 18th century, but the Orokaiva formally became part of a wider polity in 1888, when the British annexed the island. [3]
Population and political organization
The Orokaiva lacked central authority and hereditary leadership. The closest thing they had to leaders were big men (embo dambo) and elders, who commanded the respect of their neighbours due to their personal qualities, including their ability to make wise decisions and their skill in organizing ceremonies. However, they still lacked authorities with the power to issue sanctions. [3]
The number of Orokaiva at the time of Western contact is unknown. [3] In the early 20th century, the anthropologist Francis Edgar Williams estimated that the Orokaiva numbered around 20,000 people. [4]

[1]: (Reay 1953, 110) Reay, Marie. 1953. “Social Control amongst the Orokaiva.” Oceania 24 (2): 110-18. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/FQKM3Z7S.

[2]: (Latham and Beierle 2004) Christopher S. Latham and John Beierle. 2004. Culture Summary: Orokaiva. New Haven: HRAF. http://ehrafworldcultures.yale.edu/document?id=oj23-000.

[3]: (Latham and Beierle 2004) Latham, Christopher S., and John Beierle. 2004. “Culture Summary: Orokaiva.” eHRAF World Cultures. http://ehrafworldcultures.yale.edu/document?id=oj23-000. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/V2AK2FR7.

[4]: (Williams and Murray 1930, 7) Williams, Francis Edgar. 1930. Orokaiva Society. London: Humphrey Milford on behalf of Oxford University Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KUPJA2X4.

General Variables
Identity and Location
Utm Zone:
55 L  
Original Name:
Orokaiva - Pre-Colonial  
Capital:
none  
Alternative Name:
Umo-Ke  
Eva'Embo  
Periho  
Aiga  
Binandere  
Hunjara  
Mambare  
Wasida  
Temporal Bounds
Duration:
[1,734 CE ➜ 1,883 CE]  
Political and Cultural Relations
Suprapolity Relations:
none  
Supracultural Entity:
Melanesia  
Succeeding Entity:
Orokaiva - Colonial  
Scale of Supracultural Interaction:
940,000 km2  
Relationship to Preceding Entity:
continuity  
Preceding Entity:
UNCLEAR:    [continuity]  
Succeeding: Orokaiva - Colonial (pg_orokaiva_colonial)    [elite migration]  
Degree of Centralization:
quasi-polity  
Language
Linguistic Family:
Papuan Languages  
Language:
Orokaiva  
Religion
Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[600 to 800] people  
Polity Territory:
-  
Polity Population:
-  
Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
1  
Religious Level:
1  
Military Level:
5  
Administrative Level:
3  
Professions
Professional Soldier:
absent  
Professional Priesthood:
absent  
Professional Military Officer:
absent  
Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
absent  
Merit Promotion:
absent  
Full Time Bureaucrat:
absent  
Examination System:
absent  
Law
Professional Lawyer:
absent  
Judge:
absent  
Formal Legal Code:
absent  
Court:
absent  
Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
absent  
Irrigation System:
absent  
Food Storage Site:
absent  
Drinking Water Supply System:
absent  
Transport Infrastructure
Road:
absent  
Port:
absent  
Canal:
absent  
Bridge:
present  
Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
absent  
Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent  
Script:
absent  
Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent  
Nonwritten Record:
present  
Mnemonic Device:
present  
Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent  
Sacred Text:
absent  
Religious Literature:
absent  
Practical Literature:
absent  
Philosophy:
absent  
Lists Tables and Classification:
absent  
History:
absent  
Fiction:
absent  
Calendar:
absent  
Information / Money
Token:
present  
Precious Metal:
absent  
Paper Currency:
absent  
Indigenous Coin:
absent  
Foreign Coin:
absent  
Article:
present  
Information / Postal System
Postal Station:
absent  
General Postal Service:
absent  
Courier:
absent  
Information / Measurement System
Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
  Wooden Palisade:
present  
  Stone Walls Non Mortared:
absent  
  Stone Walls Mortared:
absent  
  Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present  
  Modern Fortification:
absent  
  Moat:
absent  
  Fortified Camp:
absent  
  Earth Rampart:
unknown  
  Ditch:
unknown  
  Complex Fortification:
absent  
  Long Wall:
absent  
Military use of Metals
  Steel:
absent  
  Iron:
absent  
  Copper:
absent  
  Bronze:
absent  
Projectiles
  Tension Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling:
present  
  Self Bow:
unknown  
  Javelin:
present  
  Handheld Firearm:
absent  
  Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent  
  Crossbow:
absent  
  Composite Bow:
unknown  
  Atlatl:
unknown  
Handheld weapons
  War Club:
present  
  Sword:
absent  
  Spear:
present  
  Polearm:
unknown  
  Dagger:
unknown  
  Battle Axe:
present  
Animals used in warfare
  Horse:
absent  
  Elephant:
absent  
  Donkey:
absent  
  Dog:
absent  
  Camel:
absent  
Armor
  Wood Bark Etc:
present  
  Shield:
present  
  Scaled Armor:
absent  
  Plate Armor:
absent  
  Limb Protection:
absent  
  Leather Cloth:
absent  
  Laminar Armor:
absent  
  Helmet:
absent  
  Chainmail:
absent  
  Breastplate:
absent  
Naval technology
  Specialized Military Vessel:
absent  
  Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
present  
  Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
absent  
Religion Tolerance Nothing coded yet.
Human Sacrifice Nothing coded yet.
Crisis Consequences Nothing coded yet.
Power Transitions Nothing coded yet.

NGA Settlements:

Year Range Orokaiva - Pre-Colonial (pg_orokaiva_pre_colonial) was in:
 (1734 CE 1883 CE)   Oro PNG
Home NGA: Oro PNG

General Variables
Identity and Location

Original Name:
Orokaiva - Pre-Colonial

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] ’"Orokaiva" is the name for a number of culturally similar tribes in Papua New Guinea who speak mutually intelligible dialects. Although the tribes did not have an inclusive name for themselves until "Orokaiva" was introduced by Westerners, they generally distinguished among themselves as the river people (UMO-KE) saltwater people (EVA’EMBO), and inland people (PERIHO).’ [2] We follow the ethnographic record and the Human Relations Area Files in employing the term Orokaiva. For ethnonyms and sub-groups, see below.

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


The Orokaiva population was not organized around a capital.


Alternative Name:
Umo-Ke

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Eva'Embo

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Periho

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Aiga

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Binandere

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Hunjara

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Mambare

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110

Alternative Name:
Wasida

’Orokaiva’ as an ethnic umbrella term was introduced in the colonial period: ’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] The terms Aiga, Binandele, Hunjara, Mambare, and Wasida refer to regional sub-groups or tribes: ‘"Orokaiva” is a general term denoting people speaking Binandele and related dialects who occupy a large part oft he Northern Division of Papua. Orokaiva society was investigates in some detail in the 1920’s by the late DR. F.E. Williams, Government Anthropologist. […] My own observations refer to the Wasida or Jegase Sarahu tribe, whereas some of Dr . Williams’ information was gathered from the Aiga, Bindandele and Tain Daware tribes, which are situated in other parts of the Division but nevertheless reveal a social organization practically identical with that of the Wasida people.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Reay, M. 1953. “Social Control Amongst the Orokaiva”, 110


Temporal Bounds
Duration:
[1,734 CE ➜ 1,883 CE]

The Orokaiva population relied on a decentralised political system based on clans and relatively autonomous local groups: ’Every Orokaiva is recruited by birth into the clan of his or her father. All members of a clan claim, but cannot necessarily trace, common descent from a usually eponymous ancestor. Each clan is subdivided into named subgroups or lineages that trace their origin to a named ancestor.’ [1] In the late 19th century, much of New Guinea was brought under British imperial control: ’In response to Australian pressure, the British government annexed Papua in 1888. Gold was discovered shortly thereafter, resulting in a major movement of prospectors and miners to what was then the Northern District. Relations with the Papuans were bad from the start, and there were numerous killings on both sides. The Protectorate of British New Guinea became Australian territory by the passing of the Papua Act of 1905 by the Commonwealth Government of Australia. The new administration adopted a policy of peaceful penetration, and many measures of social and economic national development were introduced. Local control was in the hands of village constables, paid servants of the Crown. Chosen by European officers, they were intermediaries between the government and the people.’ [1] ’Capt. John Moresby of Great Britain surveyed the southeastern coast in the 1870s, and by the 1880s European planters had moved onto New Britain and New Ireland. By 1884 the German New Guinea Company was administering the northeastern quadrant, and a British protectorate was declared over the southeastern quadrant. Despite early gold finds in British New Guinea (which from 1906 was administered by Australia as the colony of Papua), it was in German New Guinea, administered by the German imperial government after 1899, that most early economic activity took place. Plantations were widely established in the New Guinea islands and around Madang, and labourers were transported from the Sepik River region, the Markham valley, and Buka Island. Australian forces displaced the German authorities on New Guinea early in World War I, and the arrangement was formalized in 1921, when Australian control of the northeastern quadrant of the island was mandated by the League of Nations.’ [2]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea/History


Political and Cultural Relations
Suprapolity Relations:
none

Prior to colonial annexation, the Orokaiva were a group of autonomous tribes without central political organization: ’Political organization incorporates no central authority or hereditary leadership. Instead, it is characterized by big-men(EMBO DAMBO) and an ascendancy of elders who have proved themselves equal to the task. Such men command the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities. This status confers no sanctioning authority, however. The Orokaiva tribes, around twelve in number, are very loose units politically and recognize no single leader. The largest unit is the tribe, which has a common territory usually demarcated from neighboring tribal territories by a belt of uninhabited land.’ [1] ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [1] Some attempts at colonization were made before the 1880s, but those largely remained superficial: ’Malay and possibly Chinese traders took spoils and some slaves from western New Guinea for hundreds of years. The first European visitor may have been Jorge de Meneses, who possibly landed on the island in 1526-27 while en route to the Moluccas. The first European attempt at colonization was made in 1793 by Lieut. John Hayes, a British naval officer, near Manokwari, now in Papua province, Indonesia. It was the Dutch, however, who claimed the western half of the island as part of the Dutch East Indies in 1828; their control remained nominal until 1898, when their first permanent administrative posts were set up at Fakfak and Manokwari. Capt. John Moresby of Great Britain surveyed the southeastern coast in the 1870s, and by the 1880s European planters had moved onto New Britain and New Ireland. By 1884 the German New Guinea Company was administering the northeastern quadrant, and a British protectorate was declared over the southeastern quadrant. Despite early gold finds in British New Guinea (which from 1906 was administered by Australia as the colony of Papua), it was in German New Guinea, administered by the German imperial government after 1899, that most early economic activity took place. Plantations were widely established in the New Guinea islands and around Madang, and labourers were transported from the Sepik River region, the Markham valley, and Buka Island.’ [2]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea/History


Supracultural Entity:
Melanesia

The Orokaiva population is Melanesian, but Micronesian and Polynesian groups are present around the main island: ’Papua New Guinea’s social composition is extremely complex, although most people are classified as Melanesian. Very small minorities of Micronesian and Polynesian societies can be found on some of the outlying islands and atolls, and as in the eastern and northern Pacific these people have political structures headed by chiefs, a system seldom found among the Melanesian peoples of Papua New Guinea. The non-Melanesian portion of the population, including expatriates and immigrants, is small. At independence in 1975 the expatriate community of about 50,000 was predominantly Australian, with perhaps 10,000 people of Chinese origin whose ancestors had arrived before World War I.’ [1] Some attempts at colonization predate the colonial period proper: ’Malay and possibly Chinese traders took spoils and some slaves from western New Guinea for hundreds of years. The first European visitor may have been Jorge de Meneses, who possibly landed on the island in 1526-27 while en route to the Moluccas. The first European attempt at colonization was made in 1793 by Lieut. John Hayes, a British naval officer, near Manokwari, now in Papua province, Indonesia. It was the Dutch, however, who claimed the western half of the island as part of the Dutch East Indies in 1828; their control remained nominal until 1898, when their first permanent administrative posts were set up at Fakfak and Manokwari.’ [2] There may have been some contact with the Americas as well: ’The intensity and length of time of human occupation of the Highlands are evidenced by the extent of man-made landscapes in the region. Those discoveries are made even more interesting by the fact that the sweet potato, the present staple crop of the region, seems not to have arrived in the area from the Americas until 300 or 400 years ago. It is presumed that taro was the earlier staple, as it still is in some isolated Highlands basins such as that at Telefomin. The ancestors of the Polynesian peoples who migrated to the eastern Pacific passed through the Bismarck Archipelago in the past 5,000 years.’ [2] We have opted for Melanesia as the most suitable entity. Wikipedia gives the geographical extent of Melanesia as 940.000 km squared [3] .

[1]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea

[2]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea/History

[3]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanesien


Succeeding Entity:
Orokaiva - Colonial

Protectorate of British New Guinea; Australian Mandate In the late 19th century, much of New Guinea was brought under British imperial control: ’In response to Australian pressure, the British government annexed Papua in 1888. Gold was discovered shortly thereafter, resulting in a major movement of prospectors and miners to what was then the Northern District. Relations with the Papuans were bad from the start, and there were numerous killings on both sides. The Protectorate of British New Guinea became Australian territory by the passing of the Papua Act of 1905 by the Commonwealth Government of Australia. The new administration adopted a policy of peaceful penetration, and many measures of social and economic national development were introduced. Local control was in the hands of village constables, paid servants of the Crown. Chosen by European officers, they were intermediaries between the government and the people.’ [1] ’Capt. John Moresby of Great Britain surveyed the southeastern coast in the 1870s, and by the 1880s European planters had moved onto New Britain and New Ireland. By 1884 the German New Guinea Company was administering the northeastern quadrant, and a British protectorate was declared over the southeastern quadrant. Despite early gold finds in British New Guinea (which from 1906 was administered by Australia as the colony of Papua), it was in German New Guinea, administered by the German imperial government after 1899, that most early economic activity took place. Plantations were widely established in the New Guinea islands and around Madang, and labourers were transported from the Sepik River region, the Markham valley, and Buka Island. Australian forces displaced the German authorities on New Guinea early in World War I, and the arrangement was formalized in 1921, when Australian control of the northeastern quadrant of the island was mandated by the League of Nations. This territory remained administratively separate from Papua, where the protective paternalist policies of Sir Hubert Murray (lieutenant governor of Papua, 1908-40) did little to encourage colonial investment. The discovery in the 1920s of massive gold deposits in eastern New Guinea at the Bulolo River (a tributary of the Markham River) and Edie Creek, near Wau, led to a rush of activity that greatly increased the economic and social impact on the mandated territory compared with those in Papua to the south. In the early 1930s an even greater discovery was made-contact with nearly one million people previously unknown to Europeans who were living in the Highlands basins of the Australian mandate.’ [2]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea/History


Scale of Supracultural Interaction:
940,000 km2

km squared. The Orokaiva population is Melanesian, but Micronesian and Polynesian groups are present around the main island: ’Papua New Guinea’s social composition is extremely complex, although most people are classified as Melanesian. Very small minorities of Micronesian and Polynesian societies can be found on some of the outlying islands and atolls, and as in the eastern and northern Pacific these people have political structures headed by chiefs, a system seldom found among the Melanesian peoples of Papua New Guinea. The non-Melanesian portion of the population, including expatriates and immigrants, is small. At independence in 1975 the expatriate community of about 50,000 was predominantly Australian, with perhaps 10,000 people of Chinese origin whose ancestors had arrived before World War I.’ [1] Some attempts at colonization predate the colonial period proper: ’Malay and possibly Chinese traders took spoils and some slaves from western New Guinea for hundreds of years. The first European visitor may have been Jorge de Meneses, who possibly landed on the island in 1526-27 while en route to the Moluccas. The first European attempt at colonization was made in 1793 by Lieut. John Hayes, a British naval officer, near Manokwari, now in Papua province, Indonesia. It was the Dutch, however, who claimed the western half of the island as part of the Dutch East Indies in 1828; their control remained nominal until 1898, when their first permanent administrative posts were set up at Fakfak and Manokwari.’ [2] There may have been some contact with the Americas as well: ’The intensity and length of time of human occupation of the Highlands are evidenced by the extent of man-made landscapes in the region. Those discoveries are made even more interesting by the fact that the sweet potato, the present staple crop of the region, seems not to have arrived in the area from the Americas until 300 or 400 years ago. It is presumed that taro was the earlier staple, as it still is in some isolated Highlands basins such as that at Telefomin. The ancestors of the Polynesian peoples who migrated to the eastern Pacific passed through the Bismarck Archipelago in the past 5,000 years.’ [2] New Guinea covers an area of around 821,400 square km: ’New Guinea, island of the eastern Malay Archipelago, in the western Pacific Ocean, north of Australia. It is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the north, the Bismarck and Solomon seas to the east, the Coral Sea and Torres Strait to the south, and the Arafura Sea to the southwest. New Guinea is administratively divided into two parts: its western half comprises the Indonesian propinsi (or provinsi; provinces) of Papua and West Papua (collectively, formerly called Irian Jaya); and its eastern half comprises the major part of Papua New Guinea, an independent country since 1975. The second largest island in the world (after Greenland), New Guinea is about 1,500 miles (2,400 km) long (from northwest to southeast) and about 400 miles (650 km) wide at its widest (north to south) part. Area island, 317,150 square miles (821,400 square km).’ [3] But Melanesia as a supra-cultural entity encompasses numerous islands and societies. As indicated above, we have opted for Melanesia as the most suitable entity. Wikipedia gives the geographical extent of Melanesia as 940,000 km squared [4] .

[1]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea

[2]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea/History

[3]: http://www.britannica.com/place/New-Guinea

[4]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanesien


Relationship to Preceding Entity:
continuity

Prior to colonial annexation, the Orokaiva were a group of autonomous tribes without central political organization: ’Political organization incorporates no central authority or hereditary leadership. Instead, it is characterized by big-men(EMBO DAMBO) and an ascendancy of elders who have proved themselves equal to the task. Such men command the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities. This status confers no sanctioning authority, however. The Orokaiva tribes, around twelve in number, are very loose units politically and recognize no single leader. The largest unit is the tribe, which has a common territory usually demarcated from neighboring tribal territories by a belt of uninhabited land.’ [1] ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Preceding Entity:
Orokaiva Tribes

Prior to colonial annexation, the Orokaiva were a group of autonomous tribes without central political organization: ’Political organization incorporates no central authority or hereditary leadership. Instead, it is characterized by big-men(EMBO DAMBO) and an ascendancy of elders who have proved themselves equal to the task. Such men command the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities. This status confers no sanctioning authority, however. The Orokaiva tribes, around twelve in number, are very loose units politically and recognize no single leader. The largest unit is the tribe, which has a common territory usually demarcated from neighboring tribal territories by a belt of uninhabited land.’ [1] ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

Preceding Entity:
Orokaiva - Pre-Colonial [pg_orokaiva_pre_colonial] ---> Orokaiva - Colonial [pg_orokaiva_colonial]

(Relationship): ’The first European attempt at colonization was made in 1793 by Lieut. John Hayes, a British naval officer, near Manokwari, now in Papua province, Indonesia. It was the Dutch, however, who claimed the western half of the island as part of the Dutch East Indies in 1828; their control remained nominal until 1898, when their first permanent administrative posts were set up at Fakfak and Manokwari.’ [1] Papua was later annexed by the British: ’In response to Australian pressure, the British government annexed Papua in 1888. Gold was discovered shortly thereafter, resulting in a major movement of prospectors and miners to what was then the Northern District. Relations with the Papuans were bad from the start, and there were numerous killings on both sides. The Protectorate of British New Guinea became Australian territory by the passing of the Papua Act of 1905 by the Commonwealth Government of Australia. The new administration adopted a policy of peaceful penetration, and many measures of social and economic national development were introduced. Local control was in the hands of village constables, paid servants of the Crown. Chosen by European officers, they were intermediaries between the government and the people.’ [2]
(Entity): Prior to colonial annexation, the Orokaiva were a group of autonomous tribes without central political organization: ’Political organization incorporates no central authority or hereditary leadership. Instead, it is characterized by big-men(EMBO DAMBO) and an ascendancy of elders who have proved themselves equal to the task. Such men command the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities. This status confers no sanctioning authority, however. The Orokaiva tribes, around twelve in number, are very loose units politically and recognize no single leader. The largest unit is the tribe, which has a common territory usually demarcated from neighboring tribal territories by a belt of uninhabited land.’ [2] ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [2]

[1]: http://www.britannica.com/place/Papua-New-Guinea/History

[2]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Degree of Centralization:
quasi-polity

Orokaiva political organization was fluid and not centralized: ’Political organization incorporates no central authority or hereditary leadership. Instead, it is characterized by big-men(EMBO DAMBO) and an ascendancy of elders who have proved themselves equal to the task. Such men command the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities. This status confers no sanctioning authority, however. The Orokaiva tribes, around twelve in number, are very loose units politically and recognize no single leader. The largest unit is the tribe, which has a common territory usually demarcated from neighboring tribal territories by a belt of uninhabited land.’ [1] ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Language
Linguistic Family:
Papuan Languages

Language:
Orokaiva

’In the central part of the Northern District of Papua there is a concentration of approximately 26,000 people who are known collectively as the Orokaiva. The term Orokaiva came into use some years after European contact, and before that time the Orokaiva did not recognize themselves as a single group, nor did they all interact for any common purpose. Although they do not claim common ancestry, the various sub-groups possess a relatively homogeneous cultural heritage. The Orokaiva speak several dialects which are mutually intelligible and belong to a common language. [The term Orokaiva has no precise connotation but is here used in its widest sense to include such culturally related groups as the Notu, Binandere, Aiga and Sangara. The word is often used in a more restricted sense to refer to those people (predominantly speakers of the Kombu-Sangara dialects) who are served by the Higaturu Local Government Council.]’ [1] ’Orokaiva, the most representative language, is classified in the Binanderean (or Binandere) family in the non-Austronesian Trans-New Guinea phylum languages spoken in most of the more densely populated parts of Oro Province. Orokaiva is spoken by about half of the population in the Orokaiva-Binandere area. Dialect divisions within the Orokaiva language area are minor; the boundaries of the area coincide with those of the region administered by the Higaturu Local Government Council, which covers the Saiho and most of the Sohe-Popondetta census divisions. While there are considerable vocabulary differences between the Binanderean languages, there is a close resemblance in grammar and enough similarity in vocabulary to make a limited degree of communication possible.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 1

[2]: Latham, Christoper S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Religion

Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[600 to 800] people

Inhabitants. Residential villages were predominant in the pre-colonial period: ’Small villages with populations not exceeding 720 are the typical units of settlement, with houses dispersed in a more or less rectangular form around a central earth or grass "square." Villages are in flat clearings where the grass is scrupulously cut and kept free of rubbish. Houses are built by the men, each house normally being occupied by one nuclear family. Bachelors’ houses, of the same size and construction, are also built.’ [1] ’This chapter describes briefly the Orokaiva pattern of production and distribution, with particular reference to Sivepe and Inonda. Traditionally the villager operated within quite narrowly circumscribed physical limits. Each community functioned largely as an independent subsistence unit, almost all the requirements of life being produced through shifting agriculture and the subsidiary pursuits of fishing, hunting and foraging on its own land. Production was directed almost entirely to immediate and direct consumption, none of the staple foodstuffs except yams lending themselves to storage; exchange was confined largely to kindred within the community or in closely neighbouring communities. Beyond this, minor and informal trade links had developed between some of the inland and coastal peoples, but the degree of inter-dependence established can be considered insignificant.’ [2] The rural settlement pattern may have become more dispersed during the colonial period: ’Williams and others judge that with the modern pacification, the Orokaiva have tended to disperse in even smaller living units than before. This appears to apply particularly to the relatively densely populated Lamington slopes, though a few instances of larger aggregations approaching a village type also occurred, particularly as a result of Mission influence. Over against this greater dispersal, the people have mingled more freely as a result of travel on the government roads and trails (which they have to keep in order), trading, Mission and official gatherings, and other new opportunities for interpersonal relations. One special feature of Orokaiva life in modern times is the annual burning-off of grasslands by hunting parties in order to get wild game. This has probably involved the assembly of larger groups and is one of the few activities which could induce intersettlement co-operation. The writer sensed the parallel of the crude local fires set for garden clearing and the general burning-off of grasslands to the major burning and blackening in the wake of the volcano-doubtless a mighty job of clearing to the Orokaiva eye.’ [3] There were no large-scale settlements prior to colonization. We have provisionally chosen to follow the figure provided above, and given a range around it. It remains to be confirmed whether there were any settlements significantly larger than that prior to colonization (as indicated above, some sources follow this view but provide no numerical estimates).

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: Waddell, Eric, and P. A. Krinks 1968. “Organisation Of Production And Distribution Among The Orokaiva: An Analysis Of Work And Exchange In Two Communities Participating In Both The Subsistence And Monetary Sectors Of The Economy”, 23

[3]: Keesing, Felix Maxwell 1952. “Papuan Orokaiva Vs Mt. Lamington: Cultural Shock And Its Aftermath”, 18


Polity Territory:
-

in squared kilometers The following information refers to the contemporary and colonial periods: ’New Guinea, island of the eastern Malay Archipelago, in the western Pacific Ocean, north of Australia. It is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the north, the Bismarck and Solomon seas to the east, the Coral Sea and Torres Strait to the south, and the Arafura Sea to the southwest. New Guinea is administratively divided into two parts: its western half comprises the Indonesian propinsi (or provinsi; provinces) of Papua and West Papua (collectively, formerly called Irian Jaya); and its eastern half comprises the major part of Papua New Guinea, an independent country since 1975. The second largest island in the world (after Greenland), New Guinea is about 1,500 miles (2,400 km) long (from northwest to southeast) and about 400 miles (650 km) wide at its widest (north to south) part. Area island, 317,150 square miles (821,400 square km).’ [1] The Orokaiva are found in the Northern Division, the district system originating in the colonial period: ’In response to Australian pressure, the British government annexed Papua in 1888. Gold was discovered shortly thereafter, resulting in a major movement of prospectors and miners to what was then the Northern District. Relations with the Papuans were bad from the start, and there were numerous killings on both sides. The Protectorate of British New Guinea became Australian territory by the passing of the Papua Act of 1905 by the Commonwealth Government of Australia. The new administration adopted a policy of peaceful penetration, and many measures of social and economic national development were introduced. Local control was in the hands of village constables, paid servants of the Crown. Chosen by European officers, they were intermediaries between the government and the people. In 1951 an eruption occurred on Mount Lamington, completely devastating a large part of the area occupied by the Orokaiva.’ [2] ’THE Orokaiva occupy the major part of the Northern Division of Papua. From Oro Bay, some little distance below Buna on the north-eastern coast, a line might be drawn westward, skirting the foothills of the Hydrographers and the Lamington group and passing over the small divide of the Kumusi and Yodda rivers, to the neighbourhood of Kokoda; thence, curving round the Ajura Kijala, it would proceed northwards, keeping on its left the uninhabited mountains which are merely eastern appendages of the Main Range, and passing through Ioma would continue on to the border of the Mandated Territory. This line, together with the territorial boundary which coincides with the 8th meridian, would enclose the demesne of the people whom we call Orokaiva. One cannot do better than follow the distribution given by E. W. P. Chinnery and the late W. N. Beaver, both of whom travelled the Northern Division more widely than the present writer, and the actual boundaries of the Orokaiva country which appear in the map are approximately theirs.’ [3] Ethnic boundaries are not always clearly drawn: ’It must be understood, however, that while marking the limits of those people who are distinctly and exclusively called Orokaiva, these boundaries are nevertheless somewhat arbitrary. In a general treatment it would be permissible to include, for instance, the people of the lower Waria and beyond, although they go by a different name. Similarly in the south the specified boundary beginning at Oro Bay cannot be regarded as a rigid limit, for along the coast of Dyke Ackland Bay almost as far as Cape Nelson, there are settled several groups of people who are virtually identical with the Orokaiva although commonly named Okeina. The present report, however, will observe the limits already set down.’ [3] The Northern Division today is around 22,800 km squared. It is assumed here that the Orokaiva resided in the same territory during the immediate pre-colonial period. But the kind of regional integration that created the Northern Division as a political entity was a product of colonial policies. Prior to that, unstable quasi-polities dominated the scene. The territory controlled by these probably fluctuated heavily, depending on the influence of local big men and the size of the villages supporting them. Also, tribes used to keep large tracts of uninhabited land betweem them. We therefore cannot confidently provide a proxy measure here.

[1]: http://www.britannica.com/place/New-Guinea

[2]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAf Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[3]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 1


Polity Population:
-

People. The largest unit was the tribe. In the early 20th century the Orokavia population was about 9000, which would make each tribe about 750 people, on average. The Aiga had 1300 people spread over 50 villages. [1] [2] The number of Orokaiva at the time of first contact is unknown due to lack of demographic data: ’The indigenous population of the Popondetta district totals some 36,500, of whom 26,500 are Orokaiva in the central lowland area. The number of Orokaiva at the time of Western contact is not known. [Editors note: Ethnologue (SIL International), lists 33,400 as of 1989.]’ [1] Williams claims around 9,000 residents for the early 20th century. [This is a realistic figure. If conflicting figures exist, these will be found in the Papua Annual Reports.] ’It is on the assumption of general uniformity among the tribes that the present report claims to refer to the people as a whole. The tribe with which I am best acquainted is that of the Aiga, who seemed to offer the best opportunities for research because they are fairly central and as yet less contaminated by European influence than most of the others. Out of a total Orokaiva population of some 9,000, this tribe numbers approximately 1,300, who are scattered in nearly fifty villages on or between the Opi and Kumusi rivers. To avoid confusion it will be the rule of this report to use the Aiga dialectal form for native words.’ [2] ’Koropata is part of the Orokaivan linguistic division which according to Williams (1930:7) numbered about 9000 in the 1920s. The Orokaivans live mainly in the Saiho Census Division which is the most densely populated part of the Northern Province. In the 1980 census the population of this division was 8715 (National [Page 62] Statistics Office 1980:14). The Saiho Census area covers the rich volcanic plains around Mt Lamington, criss-crossed by numerous streams and rivers, notably the Kumusi River. The thick dark brown topsoil combined with a thin layer of volcanic ash produces extremely fertile soil. The warm humid climate and very high rainfall (2000-3500mm per annum) mean that the land is excellent for subsistence gardening and offers some of the best prospects for agricultural development in Northern Province (CSIRO 1954:4, 10-12).’ [3] It is assumed here that this figure is more or less valid for the century prior to colonization as well, although this remains in need of further confirmation, if at all possible. But the kind of regional integration that created the Orokaiva as a unit was a product of colonial rule. There was no shared Orokaiva polity prior to colonization; as indicated below, temporary alliances on an ad hoc-basis, influential big men, and autonomous settlements predominated. The size of such unstable quasi-polities probably fluctuated heavily, depending on the influence of local big men and the size of the villages supporting them. We therefore cannot confidently provide a proxy representing a ’typical’ quasi-polity.

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 7

[3]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 61


Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
1

levels.
(1) Small Residential Villages
Residential villages were predominant: ’Small villages with populations not exceeding 720 are the typical units of settlement, with houses dispersed in a more or less rectangular form around a central earth or grass "square." Villages are in flat clearings where the grass is scrupulously cut and kept free of rubbish. Houses are built by the men, each house normally being occupied by one nuclear family. Bachelors’ houses, of the same size and construction, are also built.’ [1] ’This chapter describes briefly the Orokaiva pattern of production and distribution, with particular reference to Sivepe and Inonda. Traditionally the villager operated within quite narrowly circumscribed physical limits. Each community functioned largely as an independent subsistence unit, almost all the requirements of life being produced through shifting agriculture and the subsidiary pursuits of fishing, hunting and foraging on its own land. Production was directed almost entirely to immediate and direct consumption, none of the staple foodstuffs except yams lending themselves to storage; exchange was confined largely to kindred within the community or in closely neighbouring communities. Beyond this, minor and informal trade links had developed between some of the inland and coastal peoples, but the degree of inter-dependence established can be considered insignificant.’ [2] The rural settlement pattern may have become more dispersed during the colonial period: ’Williams and others judge that with the modern pacification, the Orokaiva have tended to disperse in even smaller living units than before. This appears to apply particularly to the relatively densely populated Lamington slopes, though a few instances of larger aggregations approaching a village type also occurred, particularly as a result of Mission influence. Over against this greater dispersal, the people have mingled more freely as a result of travel on the government roads and trails (which they have to keep in order), trading, Mission and official gatherings, and other new opportunities for interpersonal relations. One special feature of Orokaiva life in modern times is the annual burning-off of grasslands by hunting parties in order to get wild game. This has probably involved the assembly of larger groups and is one of the few activities which could induce intersettlement co-operation. The writer sensed the parallel of the crude local fires set for garden clearing and the general burning-off of grasslands to the major burning and blackening in the wake of the volcano-doubtless a mighty job of clearing to the Orokaiva eye.’ [3] ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: Waddell, Eric, and P. A. Krinks 1968. “Organisation Of Production And Distribution Among The Orokaiva: An Analysis Of Work And Exchange In Two Communities Participating In Both The Subsistence And Monetary Sectors Of The Economy”, 23

[3]: Keesing, Felix Maxwell 1952. “Papuan Orokaiva Vs Mt. Lamington: Cultural Shock And Its Aftermath”, 18


Religious Level:
1

levels.
(1) Local Practitioners
Ritual practices were initially confined to the household and community levels: ’The belief in ghosts and spirits is a predominant characteristic of the northern native. In almost every tribe I have observed the propitiation of family ghosts with individual offerings of food by ordinary persons to secure the vitality of their food supply, and by sorcerers to stimulate their charms. Ghosts are invoked during ceremonies by divination to reveal crimes and criminals. Food offerings to ghosts are made during death feasts and during certain initiation rites. The house of initiation and the paraphernalia of the dance are believed to have spiritual powers, and when the paraphernalia are thrown into the river at the completion of the rites, they are invoked to smite the enemies of the dancers.’ [1] ’The Orokaiva religious history is also particularly interesting here. Their traditional faith, Williams says, though in many respects vague and locally variable, concerned itself “primarily with the spirits of the dead” and their influence on the welfare of the living. Death was appraised with particular realism, although it was considered ultimately as the result of supernatural causes. Magic had a consistent place.’ [2] ’Orokaiva shamans, or "taro men" serve as healers, weather magicians, and sorcerers.’ [3] The spread of Christianity and the emergence of new supralocal religious movements did not predate colonization: ’The traditional beliefs of the Orokaiva, though in many respects vague and locally variable, focused primarily on the "spirits of the dead" and their influence on the living. The Orokaiva had no high god. Formerly, they were animists, believing in the existence of souls (ASISI) in humans, plants, and animals. The taro spirit was of particular importance and was the inspiration and foundation of the Taro Cult. The Orokaiva have been swept recently by a series of new cults, indicative of their religious adaptability in the face of fresh experience. Mission influence is strong in the Northern District. Religious training is provided almost exclusively by the Anglican church, although mission influence has not totally eradicated traditional beliefs, producing an air of mysticism about the resultant religious system.’ [3] ’Mission influence is strong in the Northern District. This is provided almost exclusively by the Anglican church and is of a fairly orthodox nature. Mission influence is mixed somewhat with traditional beliefs and there is an air of mysticism about the resultant religious system.’ [4]

[1]: Chinnery, E. W. P., and Alfred C. (Alfred Cort) Haddon 1917. “Five New Religious Cults In British New Guinea”, 448

[2]: Keesing, Felix Maxwell 1952. “Papuan Orokaiva Vs Mt. Lamington: Cultural Shock And Its Aftermath”, 19

[3]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[4]: Kearney, George E. 1966. “Cognitive Capacity Among The Orokaiva”, 6


Military Level:
5

levels.
1. Tacticians
2. Shamans3. Front-liners4. Scouts5. Boys and men who had not killed
"In interclan warfare, the Binandere organised a division of fighting labour. The first group, the scouts, were sent ahead to kill the scouts of the enemy’s main body. Then there were the front-line fighters, experienced men armed with clubs/spears and shields, forming the vanguard. Then there was a group of young people and men who had not killed. They beat drums, blew conch shells, sang war songs and generally used sound to frighten the enemy. Full-scale tribal warfare required the addition of two more groups. Firstly, sorcerers were carried on roofed litters from which they attempted to ward off enemy spirits. Being ritually pure they could have no contact with water. They ate only baked taro or bananas with coconut juice as well as much ginger. The second additional group were the strategists who were vital for long-drawn-out battles. This small group planned tactics, directed the front line and organised ambush killings and so on." [1]

[1]: Newton, Janice 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production”, 490


Administrative Level:
3

levels.
1. Leaders of Ad Hoc Alliances
2. Village Elders and Big Men (Embo Dambo)3. Wives and retainers.
Political authority was confined to the informal leadership of elders and local big men who "command[ed] the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities" but whose authority did not extend beyond their immediate community. [1] Big men relied on the support of wives and retainers. [2] According to Williams, village and clan clusters occasionally formed ad hoc alliances when facing external threats, [3] so we included them in the code as well.

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 204

[3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36


Professions
Professional Soldier:
absent

Full-time specialists The Orokaiva did not employ professional military officers in interclan warfare, relying on residential and kin ties as well as informal leadership: ’In interclan warfare, the Binandere organised a division of fighting labour. The first group, the scouts, were sent ahead to kill the scouts of the enemy’s main body. Then there were the front-line fighters, experienced men armed with clubs/spears and shields, forming the vanguard. Then there was a group of young people and men who had not killed. They beat drums, blew conch shells, sang war songs and generally used sound to frighten the enemy. Full-scale tribal warfare required the addition of two more groups. Firstly, sorcerers were carried on roofed litters from which they attempted to ward off enemy spirits. Being ritually pure they could have no contact with water. They ate only baked taro or bananas with coconut juice as well as much ginger. The second additional group were the strategists who were vital for long-drawn-out battles. This small group planned tactics, directed the front line and organised ambush killings and so on (1972:13-25).’ [1] ’Kinship and local affiliation together were the basic principles by which subgroups of the raiding party seem to have been drawn up during attack and on which leaders within the party based their rights to command specific combatants.’ [2] ’Waiko (1972) describes in detail the warfare of the Binandere, a society which like the ancient Spartans was reputed to practise infanticide on weak or deformed sons (Monckton 1922:130). Training for warfare began at an early age for boys. At about 12 years old they began living together in a men’s house and learning to dodge spears and to hold shields. Eventually they were required to prove themselves by killing a person in a raid (Waiko 1972:21). Part of the education imparted to the youths in the house was their primary duty to take revenge for the death of a clan member. A clan victim represented the clan and failure to avenge his death badly weakened their prestige and status. Killings had up to two generations delayed payback (1972:24-5).’ [3] ’Prior to European contact, aggression against the members of another tribe took the form of organized, often cannibalistic raids.’ [4]

[1]: Newton, Janice 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production”, 490

[2]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 30

[3]: Newton, Janice 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production”, 489

[4]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Professional Priesthood:
absent

Full-time specialists Ritual practices were initially confined to the household and community level: ’The belief in ghosts and spirits is a predominant characteristic of the northern native. In almost every tribe I have observed the propitiation of family ghosts with individual offerings of food by ordinary persons to secure the vitality of their food supply, and by sorcerers to stimulate their charms. Ghosts are invoked during ceremonies by divination to reveal crimes and criminals. Food offerings to ghosts are made during death feasts and during certain initiation rites. The house of initiation and the paraphernalia of the dance are believed to have spiritual powers, and when the paraphernalia are thrown into the river at the completion of the rites, they are invoked to smite the enemies of the dancers.’ [1] ’The Orokaiva religious history is also particularly interesting here. Their traditional faith, Williams says, though in many respects vague and locally variable, concerned itself “primarily with the spirits of the dead” and their influence on the welfare of the living. Death was appraised with particular realism, although it was considered ultimately as the result of supernatural causes. Magic had a consistent place.’ [2] ’Orokaiva shamans, or "taro men" serve as healers, weather magicians, and sorcerers.’ [3] The spread of Christianity and the emergence of new religious movements did not predate the colonial period: ’The traditional beliefs of the Orokaiva, though in many respects vague and locally variable, focused primarily on the "spirits of the dead" and their influence on the living. The Orokaiva had no high god. Formerly, they were animists, believing in the existence of souls (ASISI) in humans, plants, and animals. The taro spirit was of particular importance and was the inspiration and foundation of the Taro Cult. The Orokaiva have been swept recently by a series of new cults, indicative of their religious adaptability in the face of fresh experience. Mission influence is strong in the Northern District. Religious training is provided almost exclusively by the Anglican church, although mission influence has not totally eradicated traditional beliefs, producing an air of mysticism about the resultant religious system.’ [3] ’Mission influence is strong in the Northern District. This is provided almost exclusively by the Anglican church and is of a fairly orthodox nature. Mission influence is mixed somewhat with traditional beliefs and there is an air of mysticism about the resultant religious system.’ [4]

[1]: Chinnery, E. W. P., and Alfred C. (Alfred Cort) Haddon 1917. “Five New Religious Cults In British New Guinea”, 448

[2]: Keesing, Felix Maxwell 1952. “Papuan Orokaiva Vs Mt. Lamington: Cultural Shock And Its Aftermath”, 19

[3]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[4]: Kearney, George E. 1966. “Cognitive Capacity Among The Orokaiva”, 6


Professional Military Officer:
absent

Full-time specialists The Orokaiva did not employ professional military officers in interclan warfare, relying on residential and kin ties as well as informal leadership: ’In interclan warfare, the Binandere organised a division of fighting labour. The first group, the scouts, were sent ahead to kill the scouts of the enemy’s main body. Then there were the front-line fighters, experienced men armed with clubs/spears and shields, forming the vanguard. Then there was a group of young people and men who had not killed. They beat drums, blew conch shells, sang war songs and generally used sound to frighten the enemy. Full-scale tribal warfare required the addition of two more groups. Firstly, sorcerers were carried on roofed litters from which they attempted to ward off enemy spirits. Being ritually pure they could have no contact with water. They ate only baked taro or bananas with coconut juice as well as much ginger. The second additional group were the strategists who were vital for long-drawn-out battles. This small group planned tactics, directed the front line and organised ambush killings and so on (1972:13-25).’ [1] ’Kinship and local affiliation together were the basic principles by which subgroups of the raiding party seem to have been drawn up during attack and on which leaders within the party based their rights to command specific combatants.’ [2] ’Waiko (1972) describes in detail the warfare of the Binandere, a society which like the ancient Spartans was reputed to practise infanticide on weak or deformed sons (Monckton 1922:130). Training for warfare began at an early age for boys. At about 12 years old they began living together in a men’s house and learning to dodge spears and to hold shields. Eventually they were required to prove themselves by killing a person in a raid (Waiko 1972:21). Part of the education imparted to the youths in the house was their primary duty to take revenge for the death of a clan member. A clan victim represented the clan and failure to avenge his death badly weakened their prestige and status. Killings had up to two generations delayed payback (1972:24-5).’ [3] ’Prior to European contact, aggression against the members of another tribe took the form of organized, often cannibalistic raids.’ [4]

[1]: Newton, Janice 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production”, 490

[2]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 30

[3]: Newton, Janice 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production”, 489

[4]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
absent

The political system was informal and decentralized. [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Merit Promotion:
absent

The political system was informal and decentralized. [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Full Time Bureaucrat:
absent

The political system was informal and decentralized: ’The social system is characterized by flexibility in arrangements for group membership and for transmission of rights to land. A village normally contains more than one clan branch and consequently is not necessarily a landholding unit. Residents may have closer kinship ties to residents of other villages than with some of their coresidents. Nevertheless, common residence implies some community of interest and a degree of group solidarity that is reinforced by government policy, which recognizes villages rather than descent groups as functional entities. Marriages between members of different clan branches within the village also reinforce this solidarity, which is expressed in ways such as daily food gifts, cooperation in certain tasks, and joint ceremonial activities. On the average, a lineage comprises three households. Usually, several clans are represented in a village, with members of a single clan (clan branches) being scattered among a number of neighboring villages. Lineages are more localized in cha racter, frequently being confined to a single village and tending to occupy one section of it.’ [1] ’Political organization incorporates no central authority or hereditary leadership. Instead, it is characterized by big-men(EMBO DAMBO) and an ascendancy of elders who have proved themselves equal to the task. Such men command the respect of the village, based upon observed qualities of generosity, diligence, wealth, ability to make wise decisions, and skill in arranging ceremonial activities. This status confers no sanctioning authority, however. The Orokaiva tribes, around twelve in number, are very loose units politically and recognize no single leader. The largest unit is the tribe, which has a common territory usually demarcated from neighboring tribal territories by a belt of uninhabited land.’ [1] These local strongmen were recruited into the constabulary during the colonial period: ’Village Constables. The suppression by force which had marked the early contact phase gave way to a form of ‘indirect rule’ through the appointment of Village Constables. The earliest Village Constables were the strong, leading men who had confronted the Europeans as warriors. As time passed war leaders were no longer a feature of the society, but patrol reports indicate that by and large Village Constables were influential and effective in the maintenance of law and order. The position of Village Constables was an uncomfortable and interstitial one. They had the difficult task of attempting to juggle the interests of their relatives and exchange partners and of the Administration, so that both sides were reasonably happy most of the time. Between 1907 and 1914 the number of Village Constables in the Northern Division rose from fifty-four to eighty-three, indicating that this system of administration was satisfactory to the Australian authorities. The Village Constables were concerned with enforcing legislation which impinged upon many aspects of daily life: burial of the dead, upkeep of roads, construction of latrines, neatness of houses and so on. Failure to obey these regulations could lead to imprisonment.’ [2]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 38


Examination System:
absent

The political system was informal and decentralized. [1]

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Law
Professional Lawyer:
absent

Local law was informal, [1] and courts were of colonial origin. [2]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 323

[2]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1969. “Cultural Consequences Of A Volcanic Eruption Experienced By The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 182p


SCCS variable 89 ’Judiciary’ is coded as ‘1’ or ’absent’. Village procedure remained informal even after colonization: ’There is no judicial procedure among the Orokaiva, and no ‘police force’. In so far as sorcery is concerned, by the way, these deficiencies are perhaps not altogether deplorable. The suspicion of sorcery, where it is backed up by ignorant legal authority, may go to extraordinary lengths of oppression. No Papuan people has reached that stage of legal development which would have made possible such condemnations as those of West Africa’ [1] ’There are customary restrictions upon feuding within the tribe, which exist in sharp contrast to the standard acceptance and formalization of hostility between tribes. Formerly, official legal penalties, generally violent, were meted out to criminals. Fear of the ancestors and desire to avoid unfavorable public opinion remain the major mechanisms of social control.’ [2] ’For those who remain in the village, the sanctioning mechanisms are mostly informal. Failure in one’s obligations means loss of status, leads to gossip, derogatory remarks to one’s face, perhaps even a harangue at night by a man at the other end in the village. The councillor, the court and the police are only a last resort in serious quarrels. I saw a councillor enter a dispute once, playing a mediating role between disputants from two villages, but without playing more than an advisory role. One quarrel was taken to court, but this was not a case where traditional mechanisms of social control had failed. A woman accused her husband of adultery with one of the new Garombi arrivals. She and the husband fought and had to be separated as the lady had an axe; the domestic dispute soon died down but the Garombi woman laid a complaint for slander with the police. Before this came to court, the wife had been roundly condemned by almost everyone in the village; she had repented, had gone round the village to signify her regrets, and been as contrite as her pride could possibly allow her to be. The court let her off with a reprimand. The episode, far from suggesting a flagging of Orokaiva traditional social control, had demonstrated to me that it was still effective. Nonetheless, the Orokaiva, as so many other peoples in contact with Western civilisation, have been quick to see the advantages of a judicial system providing an impartial arbiter in disputes, to whose decisions both parties will defer. At the moment, this western judicial system is an additional resource of Orokaiva law, without undermining its existing institutions.’ [3]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar) 1928. “Orokaiva Magic”, 224

[2]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[3]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1969. “Cultural Consequences Of A Volcanic Eruption Experienced By The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 182p


Formal Legal Code:
absent

SCCS variable 149 ’Writing and Records’ is coded as ‘1’ or ‘None’, not ‘Mnemonic devices’, or ‘Nonwritten records’, or ’True writing, no records’, or ‘True writing; records’ Local law was informal: ’There is a word igege (Binandele yege) which may be translated ‘moral law’, or perhaps, since the examples are all negative, ‘moral prohibition’. The examples were such as the following: not to steal a man’s vegetables, canoes, spears, &c.; not to usurp his fishing rights; not to take his dog to hunt, but to drive it back if it followed the hunter of its own accord; not to commit adultery; not to beat one’s wife overmuch; not to commit assault on another man. These igege were for adults; they did not apply to children, who had to be treated with so much indulgence; still less to dogs, whose nature it was to steal on sight. While not implying standardization, the mere existence of the word hints at a definite conception of right and wrong.’ [1] ’There are customary restrictions upon feuding within the tribe, which exist in sharp contrast to the standard acceptance and formalization of hostility between tribes. Formerly, official legal penalties, generally violent, were meted out to criminals. Fear of the ancestors and desire to avoid unfavorable public opinion remain the major mechanisms of social control.’ [2] Local mechanisms remained important even after colonization: ’For those who remain in the village, the sanctioning mechanisms are mostly informal. Failure in one’s obligations means loss of status, leads to gossip, derogatory remarks to one’s face, perhaps even a harangue at night by a man at the other end in the village. The councillor, the court and the police are only a last resort in serious quarrels. I saw a councillor enter a dispute once, playing a mediating role between disputants from two villages, but without playing more than an advisory role. One quarrel was taken to court, but this was not a case where traditional mechanisms of social control had failed. A woman accused her husband of adultery with one of the new Garombi arrivals. She and the husband fought and had to be separated as the lady had an axe; the domestic dispute soon died down but the Garombi woman laid a complaint for slander with the police. Before this came to court, the wife had been roundly condemned by almost everyone in the village; she had repented, had gone round the village to signify her regrets, and been as contrite as her pride could possibly allow her to be. The court let her off with a reprimand. The episode, far from suggesting a flagging of Orokaiva traditional social control, had demonstrated to me that it was still effective. Nonetheless, the Orokaiva, as so many other peoples in contact with Western civilisation, have been quick to see the advantages of a judicial system providing an impartial arbiter in disputes, to whose decisions both parties will defer. At the moment, this western judicial system is an additional resource of Orokaiva law, without undermining its existing institutions.’ [3]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 323

[2]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[3]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1969. “Cultural Consequences Of A Volcanic Eruption Experienced By The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 182p


Courts were of colonial origin: ’The term pure ari is appropriate to describe the white man’s labour if for no other reason than that a ‘job’ just like the pure is a place where one spends the day. The new dispensation has, sure enough, its own conflict (isoro) and mode of conflict resolution. Councillor-Colin brings this out by his example of the policeman who puts village men into handcuffs and takes them off to court. In such a case it was the task of the sorcerer to ensure that the men would escape conviction and be set free again.’ [1] Institutions remained informal on the village level even after colonization: ’For those who remain in the village, the sanctioning mechanisms are mostly informal. Failure in one’s obligations means loss of status, leads to gossip, derogatory remarks to one’s face, perhaps even a harangue at night by a man at the other end in the village. The councillor, the court and the police are only a last resort in serious quarrels. I saw a councillor enter a dispute once, playing a mediating role between disputants from two villages, but without playing more than an advisory role. One quarrel was taken to court, but this was not a case where traditional mechanisms of social control had failed. A woman accused her husband of adultery with one of the new Garombi arrivals. She and the husband fought and had to be separated as the lady had an axe; the domestic dispute soon died down but the Garombi woman laid a complaint for slander with the police. Before this came to court, the wife had been roundly condemned by almost everyone in the village; she had repented, had gone round the village to signify her regrets, and been as contrite as her pride could possibly allow her to be. The court let her off with a reprimand. The episode, far from suggesting a flagging of Orokaiva traditional social control, had demonstrated to me that it was still effective. Nonetheless, the Orokaiva, as so many other peoples in contact with Western civilisation, have been quick to see the advantages of a judicial system providing an impartial arbiter in disputes, to whose decisions both parties will defer. At the moment, this western judicial system is an additional resource of Orokaiva law, without undermining its existing institutions.’ [2] ’There are customary restrictions upon feuding within the tribe, which exist in sharp contrast to the standard acceptance and formalization of hostility between tribes. Formerly, official legal penalties, generally violent, were meted out to criminals. Fear of the ancestors and desire to avoid unfavorable public opinion remain the major mechanisms of social control.’ [3]

[1]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1979. “Self And The Product: Concepts Of Work In Comparative Perspective”, 303

[2]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1969. “Cultural Consequences Of A Volcanic Eruption Experienced By The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 182p

[3]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva


Specialized Buildings: polity owned

The foreign authorities established colonial settlements (see above), enabling trading relations with the Orokaiva population: ’European contact was to alter radically two major facets of pre-contact Orokaivan life. Forced pacification and compulsory labour would inhibit the scope of feasting and fighting. It would also open the path for the more regular association of different clans and tribes in the context of voluntary market exchange and government carrying and road work. This wider, peaceful association would modify the narrow moral universe. This was also to be challenged by the introduced missionaries, who would call on people to love all fellow humans.’ [1] Accordingly, it is assumed here that markets did not predate colonization.

[1]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 24


Irrigation System:
absent

The Orokaiva practiced no irrigation: ’Very full data on the size of these gardens have been provided by Crocombe and Hogbin (1963) and Rimoldi (1966). A household tends to establish something like one and a half to two acres of garden per year. A garden is never used for more than one taro season, but as planting and consumption of the taro each tend to be stretched over most of a year, almost two years elapse between the clearing and final abandonment. This gives time for the bananas and sugar-cane to reach maturity too. Once a garden is abandoned, it is not used again for at least eight years or so. The usual swidden agriculture techniques are used, burning, clearing, careful removal of ‘rubbish’ remaining after the burning process, planting with a digging stick, periodic attention to weeding and heaping up of earth around growing taro, removal of corm-bearing bases of petioles of mature taro for removal and planting in a new garden. The Orokaiva practise no irrigation, no form of terracing or drainage, no manuring, no measures against parasites. Sometimes a fence is made out of tree trunks to keep pigs from breaking in. This is usually done only after a pig has made its first expedition, and only on the side where the pig entered.’ [1]

[1]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1973. “Exchange In The Social Structure Of The Orokaiva: Traditional And Emergent Ideologies In The Northern District Of Papua”, 20


Food Storage Site:
absent

According to SCCS variable 20 ’Food Storage’ ’Individual households’, not ’Communal facilities’, ’Political agent controlled repositories’, or ’Economic agent controlled repositories’ were present, coded in the SCCS as ‘2’. Roots and tubers were stored in yam-houses. [These were the property of individuals, usually men (though in some respects it might be more accurate to call them the property of married couple or households). Some yam houses had internal divisions such that the yams in different areas belonged to different persons, who were invariably related.] ’While time devoted to taro cultivation always exceeds that of the other two crops, harvesting falls off markedly during the dry season. In contrast, the time devoted to the harvesting of sweet potato increases steadily through the survey, while that of yams is confined almost entirely to the wet season when large quantities are stored in specially constructed yam houses (or occasionally in holes in the ground).’ [1] ’The storing of yams is in the harau or yam-houses, seen commonly in many of the southern villages of the division. The harau usually takes the form of a small platform sheltered by a gabled roof in which there is a sort of attic. The platform is simply a place of social intercourse; the attic is the storehouse for yams. It is closed at either end, and thus dry and dark. When the yams are sprouting it is time for replanting.’ [2] ’A mere roofless platform is sometimes to be seen as a place of social intercourse. Among the southern tribes it is more usually combined with the picturesque little harau or yam-house, in which a small attic compartment above is the repository for the sprouting yams.’ [3] Other crops were accumulated for feasts: ’The fact that there is never real famine and that scarcity is a rare thing, brings about an attitude of mind which we might call improvidence. Yams are stored where they are grown; so also are Tauga nuts and Puga. But the two former are not common except in the south of the Division. Beyond these, and of course the coconut, the native puts by no vegetable food. When a feast is preparing, the taro will be gathered in great quantities and stacked on platforms. Some is eaten at the feast, some distributed with a great display of cordiality to the guests, who take it home. There is no method of preserving taro, and sometimes, when a feast is for any reason delayed, a great deal of food may deteriorate and become inedible.’ [4] ’Coco-nuts are accumulated, under strict taboo, for a feast. The huge coco-nut-laden tripod in the centre of the village, or the long lines of dry nuts on the ground, indicate that there is some entertainment pending towards which all the villagers will contribute. Sometimes one may see the tragedy of a feast over-long delayed and the nuts sprouting head high, too far gone to eat and perhaps too far gone to plant.’ [2] [The yams stored in yam houses were distinctly not constructed for the purpose of communal feasts only, but for feasts as well as general consumption. It was (and still is) usual for Orokaiva to plant special garden plots whose produce is earmarked for consumption or distribution at communal feasts, but the main crop for that is taro, and usually the food is stored, basically, in the ground (it is left to continue "hardening" or "ripening" in the unharvested garden) until just several days before the feast will be held. There may be some regional variation involved, though.]

[1]: Waddell, Eric, and P. A. Krinks 1968. “Organisation Of Production And Distribution Among The Orokaiva: An Analysis Of Work And Exchange In Two Communities Participating In Both The Subsistence And Monetary Sectors Of The Economy”, 83

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar) 1928. “Orokaiva Magic”, 145

[3]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 70

[4]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar) 1928. “Orokaiva Magic”, 144


Drinking Water Supply System:
absent

The absence of irrigation systems suggests that drinking water was collected from streams nearby rather than supply systems: ’Very full data on the size of these gardens have been provided by Crocombe and Hogbin (1963) and Rimoldi (1966). A household tends to establish something like one and a half to two acres of garden per year. A garden is never used for more than one taro season, but as planting and consumption of the taro each tend to be stretched over most of a year, almost two years elapse between the clearing and final abandonment. This gives time for the bananas and sugar-cane to reach maturity too. Once a garden is abandoned, it is not used again for at least eight years or so. The usual swidden agriculture techniques are used, burning, clearing, careful removal of ‘rubbish’ remaining after the burning process, planting with a digging stick, periodic attention to weeding and heaping up of earth around growing taro, removal of corm-bearing bases of petioles of mature taro for removal and planting in a new garden. The Orokaiva practise no irrigation, no form of terracing or drainage, no manuring, no measures against parasites. Sometimes a fence is made out of tree trunks to keep pigs from breaking in. This is usually done only after a pig has made its first expedition, and only on the side where the pig entered.’ [1]

[1]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1973. “Exchange In The Social Structure Of The Orokaiva: Traditional And Emergent Ideologies In The Northern District Of Papua”, 20


Transport Infrastructure

According to SCCS variable 14 ’Routes of Land Transport’ only ‘1’ or ’unimproved trails’ were used for land transport, not roads. The Orokaiva intially relied on trails: ’(a) As an Identity Token. So far I have not mentioned the uses of the plant emblem. If one asks a native what he actually does with his heratu, he will assuredly answer: ‘I place it on the track so that others who may follow may know I have passed that way.’ This, indeed, though not the only use for the heratu, is the commonest. At the juncture of two paths I have come upon eight different kinds of leaves or grass, placed there during the morning and as yet scarcely wilted. My boys, who were inhabitants of the district, were able to identify each clan by its heratu; the owners of them had passed this spot at intervals, all bound for one village as guests to a feast and dance. The stem of the leaf, the root of the grass, or the butt of the branch, should point in the direction which its owner has taken, but apparently this rule is not observed with strictness.’ [1]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 115


According to SCCS variable 14 ’Routes of Land Transport’ only ‘1’ or ’unimproved trails’ were used for land transport, not roads.


According to SCCS variable 14 ’Routes of Land Transport’ only ‘1’ or ’unimproved trails’ were used for land transport, not roads.


Bridge:
present

According to SCCS variable 14 ’Routes of Land Transport’ only ‘1’ or ’unimproved trails’ were used for land transport, not roads. The Orokaiva constructed wooden bridges or gangways: ’Bridges. Formerly, I am told, stretches of swamp were spanned by single logs supported on cross-trestles. The modern type of this bridge has an adzed surface to make walking safer, and is certainly preferable to the other style (viz. a raised gangway with clumsily laid cross-pieces) until, as is so often the case, the log is found to be slippery and aslant. Small creeks are crossed by single tree-trunks, over which the native, a fearless balancer, walks without misgiving, despite the queer and disconcerting vibrations set up by his footsteps on a long log.’ [1]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 72


Special-purpose Sites

Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent

SCCS variable 149 ’Writing and Records’ is coded as ‘1’ or ‘None’, not ‘Mnemonic devices’, or ‘Nonwritten records’, or ’True writing, no records’, or ‘True writing; records’ Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


SCCS variable 149 ’Writing and Records’ is coded as ‘1’ or ‘None’, not ‘Mnemonic devices’, or ‘Nonwritten records’, or ’True writing, no records’, or ‘True writing; records’ Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent

SCCS variable 149 ’Writing and Records’ is coded as ‘1’ or ‘None’, not ‘Mnemonic devices’, or ‘Nonwritten records’, or ’True writing, no records’, or ‘True writing; records’ Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Nonwritten Record:
present

SCCS variable 149 ’Writing and Records’ is coded as ‘1’ or ‘None’, not ‘Mnemonic devices’, or ‘Nonwritten records’, or ’True writing, no records’, or ‘True writing; records’ The Orokaiva had nonwritten mythical traditions: ’Hunting figures prominently in a widely-known Orokaivan myth concerning the origin of marriage. To become fully married the single men had to become the meat-givers to the single girls who swept, harvested and cooked for them. Brothers showed lineage solidarity and co-operation, and husbands and wives ideally established a balanced exchange of services. Themes such as these reassert themselves in the fishing and hunting activities of the Koropatans today.’ [1] ’As in many parts of Melanesia, pigs in Koropata are extremely important for feasts and in some senses they represent or sybmolize human beings. Speaking of the Orokaivan Sivepe people, Schwimmer has noted that a gift of pig meat restores relations after a quarrel, and establishes new social relations. He suggests that pig sacrifice can be seen as communion with primeval ancestral beings (Schwimmer 1973:138-9, 145, 148, 153). In Koropata too the gift of pig meat can be used to emphasize the strength and importance of a particular social relationship. The creation myth told by Koropatans is centred on Totoima, a pig-man figure with long teeth (cf. Schwimmer 1973:55). His death and subsequent division into pieces represents the origin of the different language groups around the Orokaiva area. There are examples of pig-man association in myth, ritual and exchange throughout Melanesia. Societies project humanity on to pigs in contexts as varied as myths and compensation payments (see Modjeska 1977; Meggitt 1974) and in the household situation of raising pigs.’ [2]

[1]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 99

[2]: Newton, Janice 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change”, 105


Mnemonic Device:
present

SCCS variable 149 ’Writing and Records’ is coded as ‘1’ or ‘None’, not ‘Mnemonic devices’, or ‘Nonwritten records’, or ’True writing, no records’, or ‘True writing; records’ Tokens called heratu served multiple purposes: ’There is another use similar in principle. When a hungry man sees a ripe bunch of bananas in the garden of his friend he will not hesitate to help himself. It is to be feared that he would not hesitate over long if he met-the same temptation in the garden of a stranger. In the first instance, however, he will eat his fill of the bananas, or whatever it may be, and leave his heratu. When the owner comes to his garden and sees this, he will be satisfied, for no native grudges food to his friend.’ [1] ’Of the three main uses of the heratu previously described, viz. (1) as an identity token, (2) as a mark of individual abstinence, (3) as the naterari, or village tabu post, the last will seem tolerably clear. The naterari stands as a symbol of the dead man in whose behalf the tabu is imposed. Formerly it may have been something more than a formal symbol of the dead, in fact a crude image. This association between the wooden post and the dead man which it represents is strengthened by using his particular namesake tree: then, besides other associations, the two have this important bond between them-a common name.’ [2]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 115

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 125


Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Sacred Text:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Religious Literature:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Practical Literature:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Philosophy:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Lists Tables and Classification:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


History:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Fiction:
absent

Written records were introduced by colonial authorities and missions.


Calendar:
absent

Native time measurements followed the natural cycle: ’The Inonda people refer to the dry season as huvira because the huvira tree (Erythrina indica) flowers at that time. The wet season is divided into a number of periods which are recognized by the ripening of various nuts (especially hauga) and edible pit-pit (ina), and by the flowering of the garepa tree. For instance, the garepa season begins about November or December and lasts for two or three months. These are the wettest months of the year and plant growth is therefore rapid at that time. The pasiro (a variety of pit-pit) ripens about March, which is a time of more moderate rainfall. Food is in abundance at this period, and it is accordingly the most popular season for feasting.’ [1] During the colonial period, European calendars were superimposed on the native system: ’In recent years, two further calendars have become superimposed upon the traditional one: that of the Christian festivals and that of the European economy, notably monthly coffee sales from June to December and the payment of Local Government Council tax supposedly in September.’ [2]

[1]: Crocombe, R. G., and G. R. (Geoffrey Robert) Hogbin 1963. “Land, Work, And Productivity At Inonda”, 6

[2]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1969. “Cultural Consequences Of A Volcanic Eruption Experienced By The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 26


Information / Money

According to SCCS variable 17 ’Money (Media of Exchange) and Credit’, ‘1’ or ’No media of exchange or money’ was present, not ’Domestically used articles as media of exchange’ or ’Tokens of conventional value as media of exchange’ or ’Foreign coinage or paper coinage’, or ’Indigenous coinage or paper currency’. Shell beads served as tokens of exchange in brideprice negotiations: ’Traditional valuables. The possession of hambo (bone and shell ornaments) and di (feather headdress) may give some indication of a man’s adherence to traditional values. In traditional Orokaiva society the possession of such valuables demonstrated wealth and prowess, but this function is now being taken over by money, as the relative importance of cash as the means of procuring desirable products increases, and money transactions become more frequent. Hambo and di are inherited through the father and sometimes other relatives, and they are usually distributed among the surviving sons. It is difficult to assess the traditional valuables owned by any one individual, as a man often looks after his younger brothers’ shares and more than one person, both within and without the nuclear family, may have rights to the hambo and di kept in a particular household.’ [1] ’Traditional bridewealth exchanges in Papua New Guinea invariably incorporated important valuables symbolizing male and female qualities and duties, the linking of two kinship groups or family networks and so on. The modern stress on cash seems almost an obsession. Orokaiva brideprice includes traditional goods such as pigs and taro, and sometimes feather head-dresses and shell necklaces. But it is the cash component which dominates the aggressive demands and which becomes a focus of talk in the village.’ [2] ’In the first case this was the exchange between man and woman in making their own contributions and deriving their own benefits in the taro garden - a cycle of exchange which parallels the cultivation cycle of the taro itself. In the second case it was the exchange between clansmen which is complete only when the man who received the brideprice provides recruits for the clan, as well as a steady new affinal alliance. It does not concern me here whether psychologists would, in such cases, accept the exchange breakdown as the real cause of the social breakdown; I have illustrated that the Orokaiva view social breakdowns in this manner.’ [3]

[1]: Oostermeyer, W. J., and Joanne Gray 1967. “Twelve Orokaiva Traders”, 35

[2]: Newton, Janice 1989. “Women And Modern Marriage Among The Orokaivans”, 39

[3]: Schwimmer, Eric G. 1973. “Exchange In The Social Structure Of The Orokaiva: Traditional And Emergent Ideologies In The Northern District Of Papua”, 50


Precious Metal:
absent

According to SCCS variable 17 ’Money (Media of Exchange) and Credit’, ‘1’ or ’No media of exchange or money’ was present, not ’Domestically used articles as media of exchange’ or ’Tokens of conventional value as media of exchange’ or ’Foreign coinage or paper coinage’, or ’Indigenous coinage or paper currency’.


Paper Currency:
absent

According to SCCS variable 17 ’Money (Media of Exchange) and Credit’, ‘1’ or ’No media of exchange or money’ was present, not ’Domestically used articles as media of exchange’ or ’Tokens of conventional value as media of exchange’ or ’Foreign coinage or paper coinage’, or ’Indigenous coinage or paper currency’. Monetary exchange was introduced by the colonial powers.


Indigenous Coin:
absent

According to SCCS variable 17 ’Money (Media of Exchange) and Credit’, ‘1’ or ’No media of exchange or money’ was present, not ’Domestically used articles as media of exchange’ or ’Tokens of conventional value as media of exchange’ or ’Foreign coinage or paper coinage’, or ’Indigenous coinage or paper currency’. Monetary exchange was introduced by the colonial powers.


Foreign Coin:
absent

According to SCCS variable 17 ’Money (Media of Exchange) and Credit’, ‘1’ or ’No media of exchange or money’ was present, not ’Domestically used articles as media of exchange’ or ’Tokens of conventional value as media of exchange’ or ’Foreign coinage or paper coinage’, or ’Indigenous coinage or paper currency’. Monetary exchange was introduced by the colonial powers.


Article:
present

According to SCCS variable 17 ’Money (Media of Exchange) and Credit’, ‘1’ or ’No media of exchange or money’ was present, not ’Domestically used articles as media of exchange’ or ’Tokens of conventional value as media of exchange’ or ’Foreign coinage or paper coinage’, or ’Indigenous coinage or paper currency’. Members of different tribes exchanged animal products and artifacts: ’Intertribal trade was mainly in animal products, betel-nut products, feathers, and certain artifacts known to be of high quality in particular districts. Although small in volume, trade was politically important in providing a motive for terminating warlike disputes.’ [1] Salt was occasionally used as a form of payment: ’Salt. The native shows the usual craving for salt, so that among the inlanders it is useful pay for carriers. Visiting the coast, these inlanders will even take calabashes and bring them home full of sea-water. The only means of obtaining it locally is by burning certain leaves and the husks of coco-nut or Tauga nuts. Over a layer of dry wood are set a number of large pottery fragments, and over these again are piled the leaves and husks. Ignited, the pile smokes abundantly, and when it has burnt away leaves a residue of [Page 65] ash in the pottery fragments. For actual use the ash, which has a salty taste, is placed in a half coco-nut shell and watered; and the salty water percolates through the eyehole of the coco-nut into the cooking-pot.’ [2] This may predate the colonial period, buth this remains in need of further confirmation.

[1]: Latham, Christopher S.: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Orokaiva

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 64


Information / Postal System

General Postal Service:
absent

Courier:
absent

Travellers, sound-signals, and emissaries communicated information to other groups, but no professional runners were used: ’So much at present for the native theories of the manner in which the Taro is passed on. In reality the movement has spread in two ways. (a) The common way is for travellers or visitors to acquire the cult and return to inaugurate it in their own villagers; this is merely contact transmission. (b) The other way is that of active proselytism. One or two examples will illustrate these methods.’ [1] ’Trumpets. The Orokaiva chorus is accompanied not only by drums but usually also by a conch shell, blown by one of the most juvenile of the performers. This instrument adds much to the volume but little to the harmony of the concert. It is commonly a large spiral shell with a hole, but an alternative, somewhat rarely seen, is made of wood. Both are called hui. The principal use of the hui is for making sound-signals, such as the alarm of war, the announcement of a death, or the approach of a party bearing a pig. For such purposes there are distinctive rhythms of long and short notes, though it cannot be said that they amount to any elaborate system.’ [2] ’In the article referred to elsewhere in this report, viz. ‘The Movements of the Tribes of the Mambare Division of Northern Papua’ (Chinnery and Beaver), there is an interesting anecdote, still well remembered in the region of which it is told. The Binandele, led by a man Waia, had been raiding on the river Gira, and searching for their real enemies had in error attacked the Yema tribe, killed the chief, and captured a youth Jiani. For this unhappy mistake Waia expresses his sorrow, and desires that Kewatai, the absent son of the chief, be sent on a visit to the Binandele country in order to effect reconciliation and alliance.’ [3]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar) 1928. “Orokaiva Magic”, 17

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 87p

[3]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray 1930. “Orokaiva Society”, 126


Information / Measurement System

Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
Wooden Palisade:
present

’It seems that in certain cases at least the village was provided with some kind of stockade, though no trace of these defences remains to-day.’ [1] ’In former times, if native accounts are to be trusted, villages were more extensive through need of mutual protection against the raider; and a resident magistrate patrolling the river Gira in 1901 speaks of a village 200 yards long by two chains broad, which contained seventy-one houses and was ‘barricaded in with a look-out and fighting platforms on the stockade’. But nowadays [1923] pacification has brought about a tendency to scatter in small isolated groups.’ [2] ’Norton (1962:6) says that sometimes villages, which ‘are known to have been quite large’ and stockaded (cf. Williams 1930:67, 164-6), were separated by tracts of unclaimed virgin land until the time of the suppression of feuding.’ [3] ’That warfare was a constant in precontact Orokaivan life is also borne out by descriptions of material defence arrangements. Villages along the Kumusi, Ope, Mambare and Gira rivers, in particular, were reported to be stockaded in many cases and several had lookout platforms in large trees. In 1906 the Resident Magistrate reported fighting in the Kumusi area in which 102 houses, including several tree-houses, were burned.’ [4]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 166

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 68

[3]: Rimoldi, Max, Cromwell Burau, and Robert Ferraris 1966. “Land Tenure And Land Use Among The Mount Lamington Orokaiva”, 36

[4]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 488


Stone Walls Non Mortared:
absent


Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present

’Villages were often built on hill-tops (where there were any hills) by way of defence, and many such sites are marked by clusters of coco-nut palms in the Tain-Daware district. In these easy-going times they have been abandoned for more accessible positions.’ [1]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 164






Williams and Murray report the construction of spear pits: ’As a last point may be mentioned the miniature spear-pits (see p. 49) with which the paths were sometimes beset. They are mentioned as occurring in the Kokoda district, often beside a tree-trunk that has fallen across the path, so that the unwary might step over the log and into the trap. Several of the police had their feet spiked in this manner. Near Bogi, again, Mr. Alec Elliot, attacking a force of natives established in a strong position on the opposite side of a garden, found this garden to be ‘one mass of small spears and spear-pits’.’ [1] Whether these traps qualify as fortifications remains in question.

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.", 166




Military use of Metals

Newton’s and Williams’ comments suggest that iron tools were introduced in the colonial period: ’Shotguns, iron-ended spears, goggles, lanterns and nylon fishing nets made hunting and fishing easier and have, according to the villagers, contributed to decimation of game and fish as well as to a decreased need for co-operation in the tasks.’ [1] ’Fishing-spears. Any spear will serve on emergency for a fishing-spear, but nowadays it is frequently furnished with a point of iron wire. The fishing-spear proper, however (bosau or saita), which I have seen among the Bush People, has two prongs of palm wood bound on to a long light shaft. In some of the coastal villages is found a long leister or spear (sagi) furnished with perhaps ten prongs of hard-wood bound on to a light shaft about seven feet long.’ [2] Wooden and stone tools were in use prior to colonization (see below). This remains in need of confirmation.

[1]: Newton, Janice. 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change.”, 229

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 57




Projectiles


’The Sling. The sling (taiha) is said to have been once a genuine weapon, yet the early reports contain no mention of it as being used by the hostile natives. W. E. Armit speaks of the men of the Upper Kumusi and Yodda river as ‘stone-throwers and rushing natives’, but other stories tell of the natives sometimes attacking with no weapons save large stones which they had picked up on the track, and there is no reason to suppose that the stone-throwers mentioned by Mr. Armit threw with anything but their hands. Now, at any rate, the sling is little more than a toy, though why elderly men should sometimes carry these playthings in their bags I have not been able to discover. In the typical example the pouch is of roughly netted string (Plate XVIIIb). Of the attached strings one is in the form of a loop, which is passed round a finger; the other is released in throwing.’ [1] Slings were assumed present despite of the ambiguities in Williams’ account. This remains in need of further confirmation.

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 83


The use of bows and arrows has been reported for other Papua New Guinean societies, such as the Wola: ’Food. Highlanders were able to meet their food requirements easily and with scarcely any direct use of flaked lithics. Garden vegetables are available all year and the domestic pig is the main source of meat. Some animals are hunted, but hunting is not important to subsistence (Pospisil 1963; Salisbury 1962; Sillitoe 2001). Wild pig is the largest and most dangerous animal hunted and people use their most effective weapons to hunt it, or employ other techniques such as trapping. Though hunting is relatively danger-free, the same equipment is used for warfare, thus relating it to danger. Hunting equipment comprises bows and arrows hafted with slivers of bamboo and palm. Stone arrowheads were not made. There is no connection between perilous activities and stone which might enhance its status. The all-important agricultural tools are made predominantly of wood. Not only is more care taken with these extractive tools, they also take considerably longer to make (e.g. digging sticks took on average four hours using stone tools) (Sillitoe 1988).’ [1] This code may therefore be in need of reconsideration.

[1]: Sillitoe, Paul and Hardy, Karen 2003. "Living Lithics: ethnoarchaeology in Highland Papua New Guinea", 562p


’The beha is held under-grip in the warrior’s left hand, which also contrives to hold a club and even an extra spear. His right hand poises or brandishes the spear which he is about to throw, giving little jerks which cause it to vibrate like a twanged string.’ [1]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 84


Handheld Firearm:
absent

Guns were introduced during the colonial period (see next sheet).


Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent




Handheld weapons

’Stone Clubs. Stone clubs are of two principal kinds, the ‘pineapple’ (gishi) and the disk (emi). They are made from river pebbles. The former variety has a hole through the longer axis for the haft, and its striking surface is serrated by means of longitudinal and lateral grooves, which leave a number of processes or points. The latter is more or less disk-shaped, the outer edge being ground down to a fairly sharp cutting-edge.’ [1] ’Wooden ‘Swords’. The wooden sword (asivo) is a blade-shaped length of black palm-wood usually some 3 feet 6 inches long. The point and edges are not so sharp as to pierce or cut, and the weapon is virtually a club. Being used with two hands, it is much less unwieldy than the stone-headed club, and probably gains in effectiveness by its lightness. The asivo is often painted and befeathered.’ [2]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 83

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 82


Oro "Swords" were all wooden. Williams & Murray describe them as "virtually a club" [1] (see above) and they have been coded as such.

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 82


The principal weapon is the spear, of which several varieties are distinguished.’ [1] ’One or two varieties of hard-woods are used for spears, but these weapons as well as the wooden ‘sword’ are usually made from the tough and springy Koropa palm.’ [2] ’The significance of warfare to Orokaivan men is obvious but several descriptions suggest that Orokaivan women were also directly involved. Women had their own weapon, a quarterstaff ‘poreha’ (Williams 1930:163) and on at least one occasion joined in with the men in spear fighting. On most occasions it seems that women used only their staffs and fought alongside men in aggressive sham fights between clans (Waiko 1972, Williams 1930:162-163). They were more noted for their verbal contribution. The people most difficult to pacify were women, who, while doing little actual violence with their … quarterstaffs, were very successfully inciting to violence with their tongues (Williams 1930:163).’ [3]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 80

[2]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 16

[3]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.”, 492




Battle Axe:
present

According to Newton, colonial intruders were on occasion attacked with tomahawks: ’As the miners and carriers moved into Gira River and Yodda Valley districts there was more violence between villagers and intruders. Over a period of about 18 months, large numbers of Kumusi villagers joined with the Kokoda people to attack miners and storekeepers nearly every week. Resident Magistrate Armit intervened in an attempt to reduce the tension, but in various encounters with parties of Orokavians armed with stones, spears and tomahawks, he shot between fifty and sixty.’ [1]

[1]: Newton, Janice. 1985. “Orokaiva Production And Change.”, 26


Armor
Wood Bark Etc:
present

Warriors protected their bodies with wooden shields: ’The Shield. The shield (beha or pere) is made of light wood, about ½ inch thick, strongly bound with narrow strips of cane to prevent splitting. The handle is a loop of stout rattan which passes through the wood. The shape of the shield-square cut above and pointed below-caused early observers to refer to it very appropriately as ‘Gothic’. It sometimes bears a device-in no manner heraldic but purely decorative-made by interlacing black strands among the yellow cane binding strips; and when this is well done the effect may be artistic and even dainty (Plate XIX)... Shields are used very adroitly in turning or intercepting missiles, and a broken spear-point buried in the wood is regarded as a trophy. Despite the fact that their serious use is over they are still very commonly kept in readiness-at least by the Aiga-and they always make a fracas possible. Like most other men the Orokaiva has no stomach for the plain spear, and he enjoys his inter-tribal brawl much more when he has a beha in his hand.’ [1]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 84


Warriors protected their bodies with wooden shields: ’The Shield. The shield (beha or pere) is made of light wood, about ½ inch thick, strongly bound with narrow strips of cane to prevent splitting. The handle is a loop of stout rattan which passes through the wood. The shape of the shield-square cut above and pointed below-caused early observers to refer to it very appropriately as ‘Gothic’. It sometimes bears a device-in no manner heraldic but purely decorative-made by interlacing black strands among the yellow cane binding strips; and when this is well done the effect may be artistic and even dainty (Plate XIX)... Shields are used very adroitly in turning or intercepting missiles, and a broken spear-point buried in the wood is regarded as a trophy. Despite the fact that their serious use is over they are still very commonly kept in readiness-at least by the Aiga-and they always make a fracas possible. Like most other men the Orokaiva has no stomach for the plain spear, and he enjoys his inter-tribal brawl much more when he has a beha in his hand.’ [1]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 84










Naval technology
Specialized Military Vessel:
absent

Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
present

Canoes were used for multiple purposes: ’With few exceptions the trees are soft-woods, and these supply easy material for canoes and much of the house-building.’ [1] ’The Binandere “built canoes and explored the river, extending their settlement wherever land was suitable” (Chinnery and Beaver 1917:160).’ [2]

[1]: Williams, F. E. (Francis Edgar), and Hubert Murray. 1930. “Orokaiva Society.”, 16

[2]: Newton, Janice. 1983. “Orokaiva Warfare And Production.” Journal Of The Polynesian Society 92 (4): 487-507


Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
absent


Human Sacrifice Data
Human Sacrifice is the deliberate and ritualized killing of a person to please or placate supernatural entities (including gods, spirits, and ancestors) or gain other supernatural benefits.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.
Power Transitions
- Nothing coded yet.