8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 1/25

 Journal of The Royal Anthropological Institute vol 14 nº1 (2008 : !"

10#

$e%nitive evi&ence' fro )u*an go&s

+artin ,ol*raa& 1 1 -niversity )ollege .on&on

)orrespon&ence to $epartent of /ocial Anthropology' -niversity)ollege .on&on' oer /treet' .on&on )13 5T' -677hol*raa&ucl7ac7u9 

ABSTRACT

5ase& on evi&ence collecte& &uring %el&or9 aong practitioners of Afro")u*an religion in ,avana' this paper see9s recursively tore&e%ne the notion of anthropological evi&ence itself7 It &oes so *ye;aining ethnographically practitioners concern ith the evi&ence&eities give (e7g7 successful &ivinations' &ivine cures' etc7#' *y virtueof hich peoples relationships ith &eities are ceente&7 To thee;tent that this in&igenous concept of evi&ence is &i<erent fronotions of evi&ence anthropologists ta9e for grante& in their onor9' it occasions the opportunity to transfor those veryassuptions7 5ut such a proce&ure is itself evi&ential = pertaining tothe relationship *eteen ethnography an& theory7 The paper sets out

the virtues' *oth ethnographic an& theoretical' of this circularity7

Résumé

/ur la *ase &es preuves recueillies au cours &un travail &e terrainpari les praticiens &une religion afro"cu*aine > .a ,avane' lepr?sent article cherche' &e ani@re r?cursive BB' > re&?%nir lanotion &e preuve anthropologiCue elle"De7 Eour cela' il

ethnographie lattention apport?e par les praticiens au; preuves BBCue leur envoient les &ivinit?s (par e;eple &es &ivinations r?ussies'&es gu?risons &ivines' etc7#' grFce au;Cuelles la relation entrehuains et &?it?s est consoli&?e7 $ans la esure oG ce conceptautochtone &e preuve est &i<?rent &e la notion &e preuve Cue lesanthropologues tiennent pour acCuise &ans leur propre travail' il&onne loccasion &e transforer ces hypoth@ses De7 )etteproc?&ure a toutefois valeur &e preuve par elle"De' puisCuelle estli?e > la relation entre lethnographie et la th?orie7 .auteur e;pose iciles vertus' ethnographiCues aussi *ien Cue th?oriCues' &e cetterelation circulaire7

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 2/25

 

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 3/25

Ethnographic evidence

In )u*a people see concerne& ith the evi&ence go&s give7 +uch

ethnographic evi&ence coul& *e a&&uce& to sho this' though' iththat intention' I ta9e a &etaile& vignette (see also the Intro&uction tothis volue#7 This is Jorge' a ell"esta*lishe& actor an& tango singerin his H0s' spea9ing to e in his at in the l& )ity of ,avana in 200Ha*out Afro")u*an religion' an& particularly a*out hat he callsprue*as' or' in rough 3nglish' proofs:

I love this religion an& I love all the &eities (santos#' *ecause theyvegiven e a lot of prue*as7 /hall I tell you the storyK I& *een antingto ove here to the centre for any years = too any *uses to or9 =*ut it asnt easy Lreferring to the legal *an on house purchases in)u*a' hich prevents people fro oving hoe unless they canpersua&e soeone to sap their on ith theM7 /o four years ago'hen I as on tour in /antiago ith the troupe' I ent to see theNirgen &e la )ari&a& &el )o*re Lthe patron saint of )u*a hosesanctuary outsi&e /antiago &e )u*a is the focus of pilgris &evotion'an& ho is often i&enti%e& ith chOn' the Afro")u*an &eity of se;uallove an& riversM7 e ere stan&ing there ith to pals of ine = Iasnt really into it at that tie7 ne of the goes to e' as9 her forhat you ant' as9 her' an& I thought all I ant is to ove house' soI &i& as9 her' an& I sai& that if she helpe& e I oul& coe *ac9 an&

*ring her her oers Lthe )ari&a& &el )o*re particularly li9es o<eringsof sunoersM7 hen I get *ac9 hoe to ,avana y neigh*our tellse that a an ha& *een *y y hoe an& ha& a&e enCuiries a*outa house"sap (peruta#7 An& really' I not Po9ing' ten &ays laterhere I as in y ne apartent an&' ell' here e all are an& here ischOn ith her oers7

 Jorge as pointing at the cereonial pot insi&e of hich chOn isplace&' in the for of a *eautiful river stone' as part of consecrationcereonies in /anterQa = the ost i&esprea& Afro")u*an religioustra&ition in ,avana' on hich this paper focuses7 Jorges chOn = the

&ecorous pot ith its consecrate& contents = as on &isplay alongsi&ea nu*er of other santos ()hang' Seay' y' *atal' etc7#' eachith his or her ritual insignia an& paraphernalia' to for hat is calle&a throne (trono#' a cereonial &isplay that /anterQa initiates(santeros# ount for special occasions (5ron 200!#7 The occasion inthis case as Jorges thir& anniversary of initiation = his thir&*irth&ay' as santeros put it' to ephasiUe that /anterQa initiation isa*out giving *irth to the neophyte an& to the &eities he or shereceives as part of the cereony: the ones Jorge is no &isplaying inhis trono7 In fact' the occasion of his thir& *irth&ay an& the story of 

chOns prue*a are not unrelate&7 Jorge continue&:

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 4/25

Ive ha& so any prue*as its har&ly orth counting7 A fe onthsafter oving into this house I starte& getting hea&aches all the tie'the light oul& *other e 777 a lot of pain7 I tol& a frien& of ine hois a spiritist an& she sai& that I shoul& chec9 to see if theres a &ea&spirit (uerto# *othering e in the house 777 /o I ent to see a oan

ho ha& atten&e& e *efore in these atters' a santera' an& shecae here an& cleane& e up an& the house too Lnaely a ritualcleansing referre& to as lipieUaM an& everything as %ne afterthat 777 It as these things that *rought e closer to the hole storyof /anterQa an& the spirits' so I &eci&e& that it oul& *e goo& for eto &o it Lto a9e hiself santo' naely to get initiate& into/anterQaM7

 Jorges story is one of persuasion = conversion even7 Vour years ago'on tour ith his troupe' he as not really into /anterQa7 Then' iththe prue*as ounting' three years ago he &eci&e& to *e initiate&hiself7 An& no' surroun&e& *y his go&s on his *irth&ay' he tells eof their prue*as7

Arguing with evidence

 To intro&uce the arguent of this paper' e ay *egin *y noting thatrecounting Jorges story at the outset is suppose& to &o to things atonce' *oth of hich are characteristic of anthropological ays of 

arguing7 Virst' suita*ly conte;tualiUe&' Jorges story is suppose& toprovi&e ethnographic evi&ence' in this case of religious practice inconteporary )u*a' an& particularly of the role of prue*as in thepractice of /anterQa7 To the rea&er unverse& in Afro")u*an religion' Jorges story is eant to serve as a &escriptive entry into a set of i&eas an& practices that are to a &egree unfailiar' an& to provi&esoe of the &ata that the rea&er ill have to *ear in in& in or&er toun&erstan& the arguent that is *uilt upon the &ata' as e ightsay' an& to Pu&ge its erits7

/econ&ly' as ell as provi&ing ethnographic evi&ence' Jorges story

serves to set up an ethnographic pro*le7 Vor hile the &egree tohich hat Jorge ha& to say ay appear unfailiar to the rea&eroul& &epen& on hat the rea&er happens to 9no a*out prue*as'/anterQa' or siilar phenoena in other parts of the orl&'1  Jorgesstory' presente& as an ethnographic vignette' is also eant to *eunfailiar in a ore &eli*erate or principle& sense7 +uch li9e theclassical pro*les of cross"cousin arriage' agic' or gift e;change' Jorges account of prue*as is anthropologically interesting at leastpartly *ecause it conicts ith assuptions the anthropologist ayfairly &ee' for the sa9e of arguent' to share ith his rea&ers (e7g7

that proises to a saint are not an eWcient ay of securing a at'that hea&aches are not &ue to spirits an& cannot *e cure& *y ritualcleansings' an& that none of this is evi&ence of the santos poers#7

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 5/25

,ere unfailiarity is not a atter of a rea&ers psychological state orcultural *ac9groun& *ut rather an analytical con&ition that resi&es inthe &i<erence *eteen a set of assuptions' on the one han&' an&'on the other' ethnographic &ata that appear to contra&ict the7 Vorall I care (anthropologically#' you' or I' ay actually thin9 spirits give

hea&aches an& so on = in&ee&' you ay happen to *e Jorge7 The pointis that such notions are anthropologically interesting = they constitutea pro*le= insofar as they are entertaine& critically' hich is to sayin relation to their alternatives7 5y ay of convention' e ay call theconstitutive unfailiarity of ethnographic &ata alterity7

It is y contention in this paper that the i&ea that ethnography can*oth constitute evi&ence an& *e an in&e; of alterity is in a crucialsense incoherent' an& that uch anthropological arguent is hostageto this u&&le7 /ince I ta9e it that a concern ith alterity as outline&a*ove lies at the heart of anthropological thin9ing (although yarguent &oes not &epen& on the stronger clai that alterity ust *ethe only concern of anthropology#' it oul& follo that the notion of ethnographic evi&ence reCuires revision7 In the ain *o&y of thepaper this is &one ith reference to prue*as an& hat Jorge ha& tosay a*out the7 As ill *e e;plaine&' notions of prue*as are *othclose enough to anthropological i&eas a*out evi&ence to arrantcoparison' an& &i<erent enough fro the to occasion a revision75efore getting to this' hoever' it is necessary to a9e clear hyanthropologists Point concern ith evi&ence an& alterity is incoherent7

 The issue' I argue' turns on ho one interprets the notion of alterity7As e sa' alterity can *e articulate& in foral ters (rather thancultural or psychological ones# as an apparent &ivergence *eteenethnographic &ata an& the assuptions that are ta9en as initial forpurposes of analysis7 Vor e;aple' Jorges story is alter since' as eshall see in ore &etail' it appears to negate a nu*er of coonassuptions a*out the nature of evi&ence' uch li9e' say' for +aussthe ethnography of +aori e;change seee& to negate coonassuptions a*out the ar9et' or for 3vans"Eritchar& Xan&eitchcraft seee& to negate coon assuptions a*out causation72

5ut hat &o these apparent negations aount toK .ogically spea9ing'

there are to possi*ilities7 ne is that the apparent negations arein&ee& genuine7 Vor e;aple' the reason for hich Jorges storyappears to contra&ict' say' the assuption that hea&aches are notcause& *y spirits ay *e that Jorge is in fact asserting that hea&achesare cause& *y spirits7 There is' hoever' an alternative possi*ility7 Theappearance of contra&iction *eteen Jorges coents an& our initialassuptions ay Pust as ell *e &ue to isun&erstan&ing7 Jorge ayappear to *e asserting that hea&aches are cause& *y spirits *ut ayin fact *e saying soething Cuite &i<erent = soething e fail tograsp' not *ecause it contra&icts our assuptions' *ut rather *ecause

it goes *eyon& the7 .i9e haers to hich everything loo9s li9enails' e ay *e thin9ing that Jorge is tal9ing a*out hat eun&erstan& as hea&aches' causation' spirits' an& so on' hile he

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 6/25

ay in fact *e attaching Cuite a &i<erent eaning to such notions = aeaning that is unavaila*le to us fro ithin the fraeor9 of ouron assuptions7 Jorge ay' in other or&s' *e tal9ing not against us*ut rather past us7

In vie of the &istinction *eteen the alterity of genuine negation an&that of isun&erstan&ing' it is plain to see that the notion of ethnographic evi&ence is copati*le only ith the forer7 Ill"un&erstoo& &ata can har&ly serve as evi&ence that ay infor (letalone support# an arguent7 It follos that if ethnography is to serveas evi&ence' as anthropologists ha*itually assue' then its alterityust ta9e the for of a genuine (an& therefore straightforar&#negation of the analytical assuptions anthropologists ta9e forgrante& for the purposes of their arguents7

hile such a foral &e%nition of alterity ay see soehattechnical' the strategy it &escri*es is argua*ly a very failiar one inanthropology7 Vor e;aple' if I ere to say that in this paper yo*Pective is to un&erstan& hy Jorge ight thin9 spirits causehea&aches' I &ou*t any anthropologists oul& *at an eyeli&7-niversalists aong the oul& perhaps e;pect e to go on toi&entify the processes (e;istential' psychological' evolutionary' orhat have you# that e;plain ho Jorge ay have coe to hol& such avie7 Relativists' on the other han&' oul& ten& to e;pect an anserith reference to other local i&eas an& practices ith hich Jorgesvies ay *e shon to cohere7 In either case it is assue& that

 Jorges vies are un&erstoo& as such' so that the anthropologicalpro*le they pose is hy he ight hol& the7

I suggest that this assuption is *oth unarrante& an& pernicious7 Itis unarrante& *ecause' as e have seen' there is an alternative toassuing that the content of ethnography is un&erstoo&' naely thatit is not7 In fact' the i&ea that the alterity of ethnography ust lie inits negation of our on assuptions sac9s of a crie ostanthropologists = universalists an& relativists ali9e = proclai ascapital' naely ethnocentris7 If the fallacy of ethnocentris turnson rea&ing onto another ethnos (or culture# assuptions &ran

fro ones on' at issue here is a siilar proPection7 The ethnographic&og' iagine& as the locus of alterity' is in fact agge& *y the tail of the analysts on assuptions' al*eit *y negation7 +oreover' hata9es this fallacy of negative proPection particularly pernicious isthat hat it proPects onto ethnography = i7e7 onto people li9e Jorge = isessentially falsehoo&7 n this vie' after all' ethnography posesanalytical pro*les Pust *ecause it negates hat e' for hateveranalytical reason' ta9e to *e true (e7g7 hy ight Jorge thin9 thathea&aches are cause& *y spirits' given that' as e assue' they &onotK#7 /arter"than"thou chauvinis' fairly ta9en as the *runt of 

ethnocentric sin' here eerges as a constitutive principle of anthropological reasoning7!

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 7/25

/o' provi&e& one ishes to avoi& the unarrante& assuption thathat a9es the people e stu&y interesting is that they get thingsrong' e are left ith the i&ea that' far fro constituting evi&ence'ethnographic &ata consist in isun&erstan&ings7 The Po* of anthropological analysis' then' is not to account for hy ethnographic

&ata are as they are' *ut rather to un&erstan& hat they are = instea&of e;planation or interpretation' hat is calle& for isconceptualiUation7 An& note that such a tas9 e<ectively inverts thevery proPect of anthropological analysis7 Rather than using our onanalytical concepts to a9e sense of a given ethnography(e;planation' interpretation#' e use the ethnography to rethin9 ouranalytical concepts (see also )orsQn Ji?neU Y illerslev 200Z[,enare' ,ol*raa& Y astell 200Z[ Niveiros &e )astro 200!#7 Thisfollos &irectly fro the foral &e%nition of the pro*le of alterity7 If our isun&erstan&ings of ethnography ste fro the fact that it isincongruous ith the assuptions e ta9e as initial' then it ust *ethose assuptions that reCuire analytical attention7

Vurtherore' the fact that these initial assuptions lea& us toisrepresent ethnographic &ata as a series of falsehoo&s (i7e7negations of assuptions e ta9e to *e true# suggests an appropriateetho& for the or9 of conceptualiUation' naely that of alteringthose assuptions in such a ay as to arrive at the position of *einga*le to represent the ethnographic &ata as truths7 If' for e;aple' theassuption that spirits &o not cause hea&aches lea&s e toisrepresent Jorge as claiing the opposite' then the onus is on e

to rethin9 y assuptions a*out spirits' causation' hea&aches (an&their relevant corollaries# in a ay that oul& allo e to forulate Jorges vies as stateents of truth7 /o the Cuestion oul& *e: hatust e ta9e spirits' causation' an& hea&aches to *e in or&er to*e a*le to assert truly that spirits cause hea&achesK 3lsehere I havecalle& this approach ontographic (,ol*raa& 200!#' to in&icate that'*y contrast to soe ha*itual anthropological strategies' it a&&ressesalterity in ontological ters (e7g7 hat is a spiritK# rather thanepisteic ones (e7g7 hat &o )u*ans = or hoever = thin9 a*outspiritsK#7

 The rest of this paper illustrates an& further e;plores such anapproach ith reference to the ethnography of prue*as7 Its arguentserves as an e;aple inasuch as prue*as present the pro*le of alterity in the ters alrea&y outline&7 As e shall see' hile the *esttranslation of prue*as is evi&ence' Jorges coents on prue*as(an& other relevant ethnography# conict ith our coonun&erstan&ing of the notion of evi&ence to such an e;tent that theyappear a*sur&7 Illustrating the approach I have outline&' the latterhalf of the paper see9s to reconceptualiUe the i&ea of evi&ence insuch a ay as to reove this apparent a*sur&ity7

It ill *e note&' hoever' that *y a&&ressing an ethnography of evi&ence' the paper a&opts a strategy that coul& *e &escri*e& as

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 8/25

recursive (see also ,enare et al7 200Z: 1H#7 -nli9e other conceptsone ight see9 to conceptualiUe anthropologically (spirit' person'gift' or hat have you#' the concept of evi&ence pertains to the veryprocess of anthropological analysis' as alrea&y shon7 Vor' as ill *e&etaile&' the assuptions ith hich the ethnography of prue*as

conicts (an& hich ren&er the i&ea of prue*as a*sur&# are integral toha*itual ays of thin9ing a*out the role of evi&ence in anthropology7It follos that if the present analysis uses the ethnography of prue*asto rethin9 the concept of evi&ence' it also uses it' e<ectively' torethin9 itself= or at least its on evi&ential proce&ures7

 

Indefnite evidence

+y &ictionary translates the )astellan prue*a as proof' an& that isho people in )u*a often use it7 5ut Jorge' spea9ing of his prue*as'sees to *e &escri*ing evi&ence = the evi&ence go&s gave hi7 If' ase or&inarily un&erstan& it' proof is eant to *e an incontroverti*le&eonstration of a hypothesis' then Jorges plural usage of prue*as(proofs# as a succession of events (har&ly orth counting# thatcuulatively *rought hi closer to /anterQa an& the spirits seesre&un&ant7 In his rec9oning' go&s are not proven once an& for all = li9ea theore ight *e in atheatics' or li9e o& ight have *een forsoe scholastic theologians = *ut rather sloly' as if *y a process of in&uction' or perhaps' to sitch fro logical analogies to legal ones'

*y &eposition (see oo&' this volue#7 In either case (in&uction or&eposition#' hat is at issue is not proof *ut evi&ence' un&erstoo& asfacts that len& a hypothesis support (see' e7g7' ,oson 2000#7 Jorge'one ight surise' is spea9ing loosely' uch li9e I &o hen I say thaty 9ettle proves that ater *oils at 100\' or that our ina*ility to %n&eapons of ass &estruction in IraC prove& that /a&&a &i& nothave the an& therefore = ore loosely = that the ar in IraC asillegal7

 The ipulse that a9es us thin9 of Jorges in& as a 9in& of la* orcourtroo allos us to assue the sae of anthropology7 In&ee&' the

scienti%c analogy is particularly intuitive to anthropologists' as theinstitute& aggran&iseent of the &iscipline as a social sciencein&icates = hac9neye& o*Pections notithstan&ing (e7g7 eertU 2000[/per*er 18H' for critical coent see /trathern 200H: !!"4#7 urnotion of evi&ence is integral to the intuition7 Anthropology isscienti%c ainly inasuch as it a&its ethnographic evi&ence thatay o<er support for theoretical hypotheses7 hen 3rnest ellnerrote' fro the *or&ers of anthropology an& philosophy' of thelegitiation of *elief' he also ha& in in& the erits of ethnographiclegitiation for theoretical *elief (ellner 1Z4: 14"Z#7 In &oing so'

he as fortifying a connection (self"evi&ent to hi# *eteenanthropologists interest in ethnographic particulars an& philosophersconcern ith the rigours of evi&ence in science = concerns ith

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 9/25

veri%cation' falsi%cation' pre&iction' an& so forth74 /o' on this preise'if Jorges prue*as can *e translate& as evi&ence *y analogy to9ettles an& *oiling"points' it can &o so *y analogy to anthropologytoo7

It oul& see' then' that Jorges interest in the evi&ence the go&sgive hi is *asically siilar to the evi&ence he an& other inforantsay give to us a*out' say (an& this is here y arguent turnsrecursive#' the concept of evi&ence itself7 e hypothesiUe that Jorgesnotion of prue*as concerns the relationship *eteen a hypothesis an&its evi&ence7 ur hypothesis to this e<ect is suppose& to *esupporte& *y y ethnographic vignettes a*out Jorge on prue*as7 Voris he not &oing the sae thingK In his case the hypothesis in Cuestionregar&s the eWcacy of the go&s at the %rst instance an& ay*e' *yiplication' their e;istence7 The evi&ence' cuulative in character' isthe prue*as: chOns help ith the house sap' the hea&achescause& *y spirits an& the santeras cure' an& all the help the santoshave given Jorge since his initiation7 If' as Ire .a9atos put it' thehallar9 of scienti%c *ehaviour is a certain scepticis even toar&sones ost cherishe& theories (1Z8: 1#' then Jorges approach to hisgo&s has soething of science a*out it7

Vor .a9atos' hoever' such a coparison' though apposite' &oes notserve to elevate Jorges concerns ith prue*as as scienti%c' *ut onlyto &enigrate scientists concerns ith evi&ence as superstitious7 In thefaous lecture fro hich the Cuotation is ta9en' title& /cience an&

pseu&oscience' .a9atos a9es a point of refuting the i&ea thatillingness to provi&e evi&ence for hypotheses ay in itself Cualify asthe 9in& of scepticis he consi&ers the hallar9 of science7Eertinently' the &iscussion is set up ith itchcraft in in&: If e loo9at the vast seventeenth"century literature on itchcraft' it is full of reports of careful o*servations an& sorn evi&ence = even of e;perients7 lanvill' the house philosopher of the Royal /ociety'regar&e& itchcraft as the para&ig of e;periental reasoning(.a9atos 1Z8: 2#7 5astar& sisters spring to in&: as for VraUer'.a9atoss assuption is that lanvills concern ith evi&ence coul&only ever *e pseu&oscienti%c (cf7 VraUer 111#7 5ut hile for VraUer

hat a&e the coparison *eteen science an& itchcraft via*leas partly their coon appeal to evi&ence' for .a9atos appeals toevi&ence ere e;actly hat a&e itchcraft suspicious fro hat heoul& ant to &ee a properly scienti%c point of vie7 In&ee&' hat isso interesting a*out .a9atoss arguent is the ay it attri*utes theconcern ith evi&ence not to a har&"nose& scienti%c outloo9' *utrather to an essentially theological in&set = science as *astar& sisterof agic' so to spea97 I Cuote hi at length:

ne can to&ay easily &eonstrate that there can *e no vali&

&erivation of a la of nature fro any %nite nu*er of facts[ *ut estill 9eep rea&ing a*out scienti%c theories *eing prove& fro facts7hy this stu**orn resistance to eleentary logicK There is a very

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 10/25

plausi*le e;planation7 /cientists ant to a9e their theoriesrespecta*le' &eserving of the title science' that is' genuine9nole&ge7 ]o the ost relevant 9nole&ge in the seventeenthcentury' hen science as *orn' concerne& o&' the $evil' ,eavenan& ,ell7 If one got ones conPectures a*out atters of &ivinity rong'

the conseCuence of ones ista9e as no less than eternal&anation7 Theological 9nole&ge cannot *e falli*le: it ust *e*eyon& &ou*t7 ]o the 3nlightenent thought that e ere falli*lean& ignorant a*out atters theological7 There is no scienti%c theologyan&' therefore' no theological 9nole&ge7 6nole&ge can only *ea*out ]ature' *ut this ne type of 9nole&ge ha& to *e Pu&ge& *y thestan&ar&s they too9 over straight fro theology: it ha& to *e proven*eyon& &ou*t7 /cience ha& to achieve the very certainty hich ha&escape& theology7 A scientist' orthy of the nae' as not alloe& toguess: he ha& to prove each sentence he uttere& fro facts7 (.a9atos1Z8: 2#

 There are to stran&s of arguent here' *oth of hich are relevant to Jorges prue*as' though for present purposes one is ore interestingthan the other7 The less interesting point regar&s the socio"historicalpsychology of persuasion' as it ere: caught up in the transition to3nlightenent' seventeenth"century scientists naturalis coul& *ea&e respecta*le *y &raing on alrea&y esta*lishe& theologicalconcerns ith proof7 A converse arguent coul& *e a&e a*out)u*ans li9e Jorge7 Insofar as the i&io of evi&ence is peculiarly salientin the case of Afro")u*an religion (an& this is an open ethnographic

Cuestion#' one ay ish to argue that in a +ar;ist conte;t =inci&entally' .a9atoss  conteporary *ug*ear of pseu&oscience(1Z8: !# = here religions li9e /anterQa have *een represse& untilrecently' santeros religiosity ay *e a*le to curry ore favour *y&raing on &oinant scientistic concerns ith evi&ence (cf7 Eali?2002#7 Vor e;aple' the popularity aong santeros &uring y%el&or9 of a *oo9 ritten *efore oWcial openings toar&s /anterQain )u*a' title& +aterialis e;plains spiritis an& /anterQa' *y anauthor soeties assue& to have *een a santero hiself (astonAguero 11#' ay len& cre&ence to such a hypothesis7 An& certainlythere is no &enying the enthusias ith hich y inforants

recounte& their prue*as to e in particular' ta9ing e not only as alucrative potential neophyte (cf7 ,ol*raa& 2004#' *ut also for ascientist7

,oever' in line ith .a9atos' this is not the 9in& of evi&ence in hiche can a<or& to *e intereste& here' for .a9atoss point a*out thetheological roots of proof fro evi&ence argua*ly has oreiplications than he ha& foreseen' pointing toar&s a &i<erentconcept of evi&ence' an& thus leaving the &oor open for analternative conceptualiUation' as outline& a*ove7 In particular' e ay

ta9e up his suggestion that scientists concern ith evi&ential proof isotivate& *y &ivine stan&ar&s of in&u*ita*ility7 Vor .a9atos' theapparent para&o; of this position is a atter of historical contingency7

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 11/25

/cientists are caught *eteen to orl&s' using the teplate of atheological past to articulate the aspirations of a scienti%c future'stu**ornly resisting eleentary logic7 5ut leaving the historicalarguent to one si&e' .a9atoss logical point relies on a clear"cutnorative &istinction *eteen proof as a theological concern an&

evi&ence as scienti%c one7 ,oever' hile it ay *e fair to chargescientists ith stra&&ling that &ivi&e o;yoronically' it certainly is notfair to Jorge (an& presuing the sae to9en' nor is it to lanvill an&the alcheists#7 ,is interest in evi&ence is unapologeticallytheological7 Var fro see9ing to prove that unprova*le' to .a9atosslights Jorges concern oul& eerge as that of provi&ing evi&ence forthe in&u*ita*le7 5ut then Jorges thin9ing loo9s not erely fallacious*ut altogether a*sur&7 ne can see hy one ight aspire to &erive aproof fro evi&ence = .a9atos hiself gives a plausi*le account7 5utas to hy one ight conspire to provi&e evi&ence for a hypothesisthat is alrea&y &e%ne& as *eing *eyon& &ou*t' e are in the &ar97 If theological 9nole&ge is in&u*ita*le' then hy *other to provi&e itith evi&enceK There are to ays out of this re&uctio7 3ithertheological 9nole&ge is not in&u*ita*le or evi&ence is not hat is atissue7 r' liiting the arguent to the case in han&' either in /anterQathe inuence of the santos is not *eyon& &ou*t' or evi&ence is insoe crucial respect a islea&ing translation of prue*as7 I shall arguefor the latter option7

 

Infnitive evidence

 That the Cuestion of in&u*ita*ility is at the heart of /anterQa *ecoesclear hen one consi&ers the a*i&ing role of &ivination in the life of the cult7 Eractically all aspects of orship' fro inci&ental appeals tothe santos to help solve every&ay pro*les (li9e Jorges hea&aches#to soliciting &ivine sanction for the perforance of iportantcereonies (such as the consecration of neophytes' as in Jorges*irth as a santero# reCuire the &isclosure of the santos ill through&ivination (,ol*raa& 200H[ in press#7 In&ee&' orshippers ascent

through a series of initiatory steps is largely easure& against a scaleof &ivinatory e;pertise' starting ith 9nole&ge of the ru&ientarycoconut"shell oracle (los cocos# that all orshippers are free to use fortheir on *ene%t' through the cory oracle (los caracoles' &iluggOn#that only fully initiate& santeros are taught to use for theselves orfor clients' an& up to the ost prestigious oracle' that of If' hichreCuires a special initiation reserve& for heterose;ual en ho arechosen as fathers of secrets (*a*alaos# *y rula' the patron &eityof &ivination' through the oracle of If itself7

 That &ivination shoul& *e so iportant in the life of orshippersin&icates the essentially pragatic character of /anterQa7 As is oftenrear9e& in the literature' /anterQa has alost no eschatology' its

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 12/25

iperatives are &eci&e&ly practical rather than categorical' an& evenits rear9a*ly rich ythology is interesting to orshippers ainly asa gui&e for the perforance of hat they call or9s (tra*aPos# =often glosse& as itchcraft (*ruPerQa# (see' e7g7' .achata^ere 11contra rtQU 10' cf7 ol&an 200H#7 $ivination is integral to this

here"an&"no orientation' since it provi&es the principal eans *yhich orshippers can gauge the ill of the santos regar&ing theirparticular concerns' fro house oves an& hea&aches to initiationsan& funerary rites7 In fact' it is precisely the pertinence of the santos&ivinatory pronounceents that orshippers ost typically have inin& hen' li9e Jorge' they spea9 so enthusiastically a*out theprue*as they have ha&7 Inasuch as it is through &ivination that thego&s typically spea9' it follos that evi&ence that hat they saycoes to pass is evi&ence for the eWcacy of the oracles7 $ivinationposits hypotheses' it oul& see' an& prue*as con%r the7

]otice' hoever' ho peculiar these hypotheses are7 As &ivinerstheselves ephasiUe' oracles are reCuire& to ar*itrate on so anyaspects of orshippers lives precisely *ecause their pronounceentsare *eyon& &ou*t7 In &ivination' they often say' the santosnever liean& they never a9e ista9es7 $iviners theselves ay certainly&o so = since they are iperfect huans' as one practitioner put it =*ut not the santos ho spea9 through the7 5ut if in /anterQa false&ivinations are logical o;yorons' it follos that &ivination here is&e%ne& as in&u*ita*le7 To &ou*t the truth of a &ivination is to &ou*thether it is really a proper &ivination' since proper &ivinations

cannot *ut *e true (see also ,ol*raa& 200!#7

/o e are left ith the Cuestion: hy the santeros apparentlyre&un&ant interest in prue*asK iven that' as e sa' provi&ingevi&ence for the in&u*ita*le is a*sur&' a possi*le suggestion oul& *ethat prue*as are relevant to the one Cuestion that &oes a&it of &ou*t in these atters' naely hether any particular &ivination is agenuine one7 n such a vie' the ore truth one %n&s = accuulatingprue*as li9e Jorge' ho has ha& so any= the ore groun&s one hasfor *elieving that its origin is &ivine' the tra&ear9 of &ivinity *eing'precisely' truth7 That such a solution to the conun&ru coits

orshippers li9e Jorge to the in&uctive fallacy (> la .a9atos' piling upthe evi&ence as if it prove& soething# is perhaps e;cusa*le7 The realpro*le is that the clai is ethnographically untena*le7 As Jorgein&icates at the very outset of his story' his prue*as fuel his love of the santos' not of the santeros_ In&ee& in his %rst story' a*out thehouse ove' &ou*tful huan e&iation &oes not feature at all[ it ischOns &ivine poer that the prue*as are eant to &eonstrate7

e are left ith the a*sur&ity of evi&ence7 In line ith theintro&uctory coents to this paper' the onus is upon us to

reconsi&er the preises of such a notion' changing ourconceptualiUation of evi&ence in light of the ethnography of prue*as7 The 9ey for &oing so' I argue' lies in the relationship *eteen prue*as

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 13/25

an& &ivination' since it is in this connection that the a*sur&ity of provi&ing evi&ence for in&u*ita*le truth eerges7 In&ee&' the nee& toreconceptualiUe evi&ence in this conte;t is oe& to the fact that theconcept of truth itself in /anterQa &ivination &eparts ra&ically frocoon"sense assuptions a*out truth7

As I have argue& in ore &etail elsehere' &ivinatory truths present apro*le (that of alterity# *ecause' although practitioners &e%ne theas in&u*ita*le' they see to ta9e the for of or&inary stateents of fact = i7e7 stateents that can *e &ou*te& ith reference to facts(,ol*raa& 200!#7 Vor e;aple' the truth of the santeraspronounceent that Jorges hoe as occupie& *y spirits appears to&epen& on hether Jorges at as in fact occupie& *y spirits = a&ou*tful atter' to say the least7H  ,oever' this apparentcontra&iction &epen&s on our assuption that the santera is a9inghat philosophers call a pre&icative stateent' that is' that hat sheis &oing is ascri*ing a property to his house (the property of *eingoccupie& *y spirits#' in the sense 6night an& Astuti &iscuss in theircontri*ution to this volue7 -n&er such an interpretation' the i&eathat &ivinatory pronounceents are in&u*ita*le appears &ogatic =as if' *y cultural %at' hat a9es such pronounceents in&u*ita*le isthe fact that they are pronounce& *y a &iviner7 5ut hat 9in& of truthis this that can *e *rought a*out *y a ere speech"actK

 To avoi& the iputation of native &ogatis' I have argue&' e nee&to ove aay fro the assuption that the truth of &ivinatory

stateents is eant to *e pre&icative' for an alternative oul& *e totreat the not as stateents of fact *ut rather as &e%nitions7 n sucha vie' the truths of &ivination are to *e un&erstoo& not in episteicters' as representations that a9e clais a*out the orl&' *utrather as ontological operations7 /o' for e;aple' hen the santerasays that Jorges at is occupie& *y spirits' she is not a9ing a claia*out an alrea&y e;isting state of a<airs7 /he is *ringing such a stateof a<airs a*out' pronouncing a change in the orl&s furniture' to usethe ontologists e;pression: Jorges hoe is re&e%ne& as one occupie&*y alevolent spirits' his hea&aches are re&e%ne& as cause& *y thespirits' the spirits theselves are re&e%ne& as vulnera*le to the

santeras e;pert cleansing' an& so on7 $ivinatory poer' then' resi&esin the possi*ility of inventing entities through acts of &e%nition7Volloing a suggestion *y 3&uar&o Niveiros &e )astro (pers7 co7#' Ipropose to call these acts of inventive &e%nition in%nitions7/horthan& for inventive &e%nition (cf7 ,ol*raa& in press#' the teroul& also in&icate that such acts presuppose that entities are in%nitein their potential for transforation through re&e%nitionZ= their onlyconstancy is that they are un&er peranent ontologicalreconstruction7

Eositing &ivinatory pronounceents as in%nitions gets us out of iputing &ogatis to the santeros7 In%nitions are in&u*ita*le*ecause they are true *y &e%nition' rather li9e the stateents

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 14/25

philosophers call analytic (e7g7 *achelors are unarrie& en#7]evertheless' the i&ea that in%nitions (ere speech"acts li9e yourhoe has spirits in it# can have properly ontological e<ects aysoun& ystical or' orse' constructivist7 Is it really cre&i*le to saythat Jorges hoe can *e *rought forth as a ne entity (one that is

occupie& *y spirits# Pust on a santeras say"soK Is this not erely toelevate the very a*sur&ity of &ivination as an analytical principleK 5yay of &efence' I propose to &eonstrate that the i&ea of in%nition isnot as logically a*horrent as it perhaps soun&s7 As e shall see'&elving into the logic of in%nition also *rings us closer toconceptualiUing prue*as7

)onsi&er hat I a &oing right no7 /tringing eanings together(&e%nition' ontology' e<ect' etc7#' I a proposing that you ta9e on*oar& a ne concept' appropriately christene& ith a ne nae=in%nition7 3ven if you see no sense in this ne concept' surely youcan accept that it is at least conceiva*le that it ay a9e sense assuch (unless you are a Elatonist' in hich case you see any sense theconcept a9es as proof of its prior e;istence as an iuta*le Vor#7In (non"Elatonic# principle' then' you accept the possi*ility of conceptual novelty7 Sou ay even agree that the history of i&eas isa&e of such instances of conceptual invention = e7g7 ho ha&thought of a Vor *efore ElatoK In&ee&' those philosophers ho havefolloe& ]ietUsche in thin9ing of philosophy as an untielyenterprise have sought to theoriUe this possi*ility of conceptualinvention (e7g7 $eleuUe 14[ ,ei&egger 18[ cf7 ]ietUsche 1Z#7

An& so have anthropologists ho see the creation of ne eaningsnot Pust as a philosophical prerogative' *ut as an irre&uci*le aspect of social living (e7g7 Ar&ener 18[ .atour 1[ /trathern 1[ Niveiros&e )astro 2002[ agner 181#7

]o' hy clai that in%nitions ust ipso facto have ontologicale<ects' *ringing forth the o*Pects they &e%ne as e;isting entitiesK8

ell' consi&er the alternatives7 ne oul& *e to clai that hen I'say' &e%ne in%nitions as inventions of ne concepts' I a erelygiving a nae to a phenoenon that alrea&y e;ists = in&ee&' hoelse coul& I appeal to Elato an& his Vors as a convincing prece&ent

of hat I have in in&K 5ut this is contra&ictory7 If in%nitions alrea&ye;ist' then they &o not e;ist as ne concepts' hich is hat they are&e%ne& as7 In%nitions ay *e logically Cuir9y' *ut not as Cuir9y ashaving the capacity to pre"e;ist theselves7

 The other alternative oul& *e to clai that the concepts thatin%nitions inaugurate ay ell *e Pust that' ere concepts7 n thisvie' in%nitions are treate& on a par ith unicorn' the gol&enountain ' or the current 6ing of Vrance' as at ost senses ith noreference' in philosophical parlance (e7g7 Vrege 180#' an& hence their

purporte& ontological e<ects are' Cuite literally' fanciful7 5utappealing as it ay *e to a coon"sense viepoint that oul&&ee &iviners in%nitions as unicorn"li9e psyche&elia' such a ove is

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 15/25

a thro*ac9 to the episteic frae' hich insists on treatingconcepts as representations (here rea& sense# to *e contraste& tothe orl& (here rea& reference#7 Apart fro the Cuestion"*egging'the pro*le here is that treating in%nitions as representationsiplicitly pastes over their putative novelty7 If one assues that the

ontological e<ects of in%nitions ust *e easure& against the orl&of evi&ence that gives the their episteic purchase' then onepreclu&es novelty on to counts7 Vor one thing' the orl& to hichin%nitions ight refer is presue& to *e alrea&y given (as anevi&ential *enchar9' so to spea9#' so any Cuestion of theirontological e<ects upon such a orl& is alrea&y foreclose&7 5ut oreto the point' such episteic litus tests (&oes the ne concept referto an e;isting entity or notK# also iplicitly &eny the novelty of theconcepts they purport to easure against the orl&7 The suggestionthat an in%nition ight not' as it turns out' have a referent giveslogical priority to the putatively ne concept (rea& representation#over the orl& to hich it ay or ay not refer a posteriori7 Thus forthe Cuestion of an in%nitions reference even to *e raise&' thesuppose& novel concept ust *e ta9en as alrea&y given' that is' itsnovelty' Cua in%nition' ust *e e<ace&7

Erovi&e& this re&uctio of the alternatives is fair an& the alternativesare e;haustive' it follos that *y accepting the notion of a neconcept e illy"nilly accept that such ne concepts ust haveontological e<ects = they ust *ring forth' into e;istence' the entitiesthey in%ne7 ]o I ant to argue that such a ove allos us to a9e

sense not only of the santeros clai that hat their go&s say isin&u*ita*le' as e have seen' *ut also of their apparently para&o;icalinsistence that these in&u*ita*le truths nevertheless a&it of a 9in&of con%ration = I ill not say evi&ence_ = *y prue*as7

A chief reason' perhaps' for hich one is tepte& to %n& the i&ea of in%nition psyche&elic is hat one ight call its hyper"noinalis7  If noinalis' loosely' is the thesis that every thing is itself an& nothingother than itself' then in%nitions are hyper"noinalist inasuch asthey are theselves an& nothing other Cua ne concepts' an&novelty' as e have seen' ears o< Cuic9ly7 ]o sooner has Jorges at

*een in%ne& as occupie& *y spirits than the in%nition *ecoesunavaila*le for a posteriori testing' so to spea9' lest its novelty&isappear7 In%nitions pertain to the oent of hat Roy agner hascalle& invention (181#7 In&ee& they are such oents7 Thisteporal hyper"noinalis' I oul& suggest' has &irect iplicationsfor the Cuestion of hat ay count as a con%ration of an in%nition'that is' for the Cuestion of prue*as7

If hat a posteriori evi&ence tests is the episteic purchase of arepresentation upon the orl&' then at issue for in%nitions ust *e

soething li9e an ontological purchase7 Return to the e;aple7 As anin%nition' the santeras &ivination *rought Jorges spirit"infeste& hoeforth as a ne entity7 It follos that its con%ration is the e;istence of 

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 16/25

 Jorges hoe as such an entity' for e;aple as one that can *ecleanse& ritually so as to cure Jorges hea&aches7 ,oever' Jorgescure& hea&aches cannot *e construe& as evi&ence for the e;istenceof his nely &e%ne& house"of"spirits' since' as e sa' in%nitions &onot a&it of evi&ence' at pain of evaporating into thin (episteic# air7

In&ee&' since an in%nition &oes not outlast its on novelty (naely it&oes not outlast itself#' it oul& follo that the only ay to con%r itsontological purchase is to re"enact it: an in%nitions test can only *ea further in%nition7 In a logical universe here entities are un&erperanent ontological construction' as e have sai&' their e;istenceCua constructions only has purchase inasuch as they *ecoeiplicate& in further acts of construction7 An& such acts of furtherconstruction = in%nitions in their on right =con%r the e;istence of the in%nitions they transfor *y shoing that they can in&ee& *eengage& as transforations= ta9ing the' as it ere' for anontological spin7 Eut in tentieth"century pop science ters: ithin%nitions' to 9no soething really is to change it7

 That' then' is ho prue*as or97 The cure of Jorges hea&achescon%re& the santeras &ivination a*out the spirits not *ecause itprovi&e& evi&ence that it as correct' *ut *ecause it too9 the entityin%ne& *y the &ivination = Jorges house"of"spirits = as the *aseline foran act of further in%nition' naely that of the cure itself7 Vor' Pust li9ethe &ivination transfore& a seeingly or&inary house into oneoccupie& *y spirits' so its prue*a transfore& the alleviation of Jorgespain into an event of spiritual signi%cance: not siply a

&isappearance of hea&aches *ut a cure"of"spiritual"inuence7 Theontological purchase of the latter in%nition (the e;istence of Jorgescure of spiritual inuence# con%rs that of the forer' since it is *yappealing to the santeras in%nition of his hoe that Jorge is a*le toin%ne his alleviation as a cure of spiritual proportions7 5ut note thatthis con%ration is not a atter of coherence' as it ight *earticulate& ere one to thin9 of the in%nitions episteically asrepresentations or' as it is sai&' *eliefs (e7g7 3vans"Eritchar& 1Z[see also 6eane' this volue#7 Jorges cure con%rs the perniciousspirits in his house not *y erely presupposing their previouse;istence' *ut *y actively transforing it = in this case *y reoving

the spirits fro the house through the cleansing ritual7 ,is prue*ata9es the for of an in%nition that is not Pust precipitate& *y thein%nitions of the &ivination' *ut also (an& *y that virtue# acts totransfor the7

In this sense the relationship *eteen &ivination an& prue*as' hichso loo9e& li9e that *eteen hypotheses an& evi&ence' elevates theaforeentione& pragatis of /anterQa to the level of logic7 Thelogic of /anterQa practice' if you li9e' is that logic is practical' or evenpragatical= to follo the ree9 association of actions (pra;es# ith

things (pragata#' as in%nitions &o7 The fact that /anterQa is soorientate& to the here an& no' ren&ering &octrinal or cosologicallyspeculative concerns su*servient to or9 (itchcraft#' is not a

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 17/25

atter of ar*itrary local convention7 /uch an orientation is a functionof its in%nitive logic7 In place of in&uction (rea& evi&ence#' &e&uction(rea& proof#' a*&uction (rea& hypothesis#' or hat have you' the logicof /anterQa posits pro&uction' un&erstoo& as the activity of ontologicaltransforation that in%nition involves7 In&ee&' it is for this reason that

practitioners interest in prue*as is far fro a*sur&' as it oul& haveto *e if it ere glosse& as a atter of provi&ing evi&ence for thego&s in&u*ita*le truths7 The pro*le there' as e sa' as thatevi&ence is logically re&un&ant in the face of in&u*ita*ility7)ontrastingly' if prue*as are recogniUe& as in%nitions' far frore&un&ant' they eerge as an in&ispensa*le constituent of the logicof orship' for' as e have seen' prue*as are e<ectively aconcoitant of the teporal hyper"noinalis of in%nition7 3ven if provi&ing evi&ence for &ivinations ere not a*sur&' it oul& certainly*e optional = representations &o not as such &epen& on the provisionof evi&ence for their e;istence7 In%nitions' on the other han&' e;ist *yvirtue of *eing iplicate& in further acts of transforation' an& that ishat a9es prue*as not only logically sensi*le *ut also pragaticallynecessary7

 The in%nitive logic of /anterQa has far"reaching iplications' an&charting these in &iverse areas of orshippers lives is y ongoingproPect7 That such a proPect shoul& reain ongoing follos fro itson in%nitive character = a eta"anthropological point raise& in theconclusion of this paper7 5efore &oing so' hoever' e ay notesoe of the &ivi&en&s of such an analysis' %rst for Jorges story' an&

then a *it *eyon&7

 Jorges account' e note&' can *e rea& as one of personal conversion7Vro a position of relative in&i<erence four years ago at thesanctuary of the 3l )o*re in /antiago' his prue*as helpe& hi get tohere he is to&ay' a prou& initiate cele*rating his *irth&ay7 ]o'anthropological accounts often present conversion as a atter of persuasion or at least as soe 9in& of change in peoples *eliefs=an approach that ta9es o< fro the 9in&s of episteic assuptionse have sought to &iscar& here' an& hich ere no &ou*t central toErotestant issionaries thin9ing on the atter (cf7 hitehouse 2000#7

,oever' the ephasis Jorge places on the role of prue*as inprecipitating his initiation oul& suggest otherise7 Vor if initiationitself can fairly *e thought of as the apogee of ontologicaltransforation = an& hat *etter etaphor for *ringing forth neentities than *irth' hich is ho santeros conceptualiUe neophytesinitiation (see a*ove an& ,ol*raa& in press# = then Jorges notion thathis prue*as' in his or&s' *rought LhiM closer to /anterQa an& thespirits a9es perfect in%nitive sense7 As in%nitions in their on right'prue*as *rought Jorge closer to initiation not *y convincing hi thatit ay *e a goo& i&ea' *ut *y iplicating hi into the orl& of the

santos through successive acts of ontological reconstruction7Initiation' then' coes as a consuation of a longer traPectory of transforation ith hich it is logically continuous7 In&ee&' in this

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 18/25

conte;t' the ostentation of the initiates cele*ratory trono &isplay'hich alloe& Jorge in the intervie literally to point to his santos asin&icators *oth of his prue*as an& of his conversion' illustrates (no'constitutes# the ontological pro&uctivity of this traPectory inappropriately pragatical ters = pots' stones' an& other *eautiful

regalia *eing the pragata of the santos (see also ,ol*raa& 200Z#7

f course' Jorges story happens to *e a happy one7 In fact' uch li9e3vans"Eritchar&  shoe& for the AUan&e (1Z: 1H4"!#' in /anterQa&issatisfaction ith &ivinations is far fro uncoon7 ,orror storiesa*oun& in /anterQa pro*a*ly as uch as those of prue*as' ithpeople freCuently laenting ho far &ivinations they ere given&iverge& fro ho things turne& out to *e7 )onsi&ering that oracles in/anterQa are infalli*le' it ay not *e surprising that such &ivergencesprovo9e reactions ranging fro confusion to in&ignation' an& cansoeties cause consi&era*le &istress7 Vor e;aple' this is hat ayoung oan tol& e after a long an& particularly iportant&ivinatory s?ance (it#' con&ucte& for her as part of an initiatorycereony:

It as terri*le7 LThe &ivinersM sai& any things that have nothing to&o ith e 777 That I ill never prosper until I 9neel at y othersfeet an& as9 for her forgiveness7 hat is thatK Ive spent the pasthour tal9ing an& crying ith y u' trying to or9 out hat Ive&one to her7 I as9e& her for her forgiveness *ut she &i&nt give it*ecause I havent &one anything_ eve alays *een so close' an&

none of this is going to change that7

 Tra&itionally' anthropologists 9een to a9e sense of native *elief systes' so calle&' have felt that such stories pose a pro*le7In&ee&' if one assues that the &iviners stateent is *est construe&as a representation of the oans relationship to her other' thenher veheent &enials are certainly pro*leatic: the oan appearsnot to *elieve in the &ivination' so' inasuch as &ivination isconstrue& as part of the local syste of *elief' such a case reCuirese;planation7 Ingenious analytical footor9 such as 3vans"Eritchar&ssecon&ary ela*orations of *elief is then pro&uce& (1Z:

1HH#710

,oever' an analysis *ase& on in%nitive logic &issolves the pro*le7 This is a point in its favour' I ta9e it' since the hole point is that forthe natives such cases' &istressing as they ay *e' pose nopro*le= or not' at least' the 9in& of crisis of representation thatlur9s un&erneath anthropologists orry that &ivination ight *eshon up as a sha to the natives theselves7 n an in%nitiveaccount' the oans &ivinatory %asco is articulate& not as a atterof the orl& giving the lie to the &ivination' *ut rather as a refusal on

the oans part to accept the oracles reinvention of her7 The notionof acceptance is of course use& a&vise&ly here7 At issue is not soe9in& of &isagreeent *eteen neophyte an& priest (you ay say I

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 19/25

oe y other an apology' *ut I &ont accept that#' *ut rather aore literal = or at least pragatical= sense of acceptance7 Theoan &oes not ta9e the &iviners in%nition of her inasuch as sherefuses to use it as the *asis for further acts of in%nition7 ]othing isgoing to change her closeness ith her other' she says7 /uch

stances pose no analytical pro*le since they are alrea&y iplicit in ahyper"noinalist characteriUation of &ivinations' hich preises theirpurchase not upon accurate &epiction' *ut upon ongoing acts of transforation7 In &ivinatory %ascos the oracles in%nitions are siplyalloe& to &issipate out of e;istence7 /o in response to the classicalorry a*out ho people can continue to practise &ivination in theface of its any failures' e ay Pust note that there is no a*sur&ityin alloing soe in%nitions to &rop out of the orl&' hile *uil&inghole lives on others7 In%nitions a9e no clai on the orl&' forthey parta9e of it7

 

Anthropological evidence

Anthropology' too' parta9es of the orl&7 r so the present o&e of analysis oul& see9 to &eonstrate7 At the outset of this paper eraise& the possi*ility that the ethnography of prue*as coul& serve asa lever for transforing anthropological assuptions a*out the natureof ethnographic evi&ence7 The hoology *eteen anthropologistsconcept of evi&ence an& santeros concept of prue*as suggeste& this

possi*ility' hile their &i<erence a&e it orth pursuing7 iven itssu*Pect atter' it as propose&' such an approach oul& in this casehave to *e recursive7 /ince anthropologists oul& assue that therelationship *eteen ethnographic aterial (such as )u*an notions of prue*as# an& anthropological analysis (such as the notion of evi&ence# is itself evi&ential' the erits of transforing the latter inlight of the forer oul& have to *e *orne out in the act7 Anevi&ential account of ho the notion of anthropological evi&encecoul& *e cashe& in coul& har&ly recoen& itself7

(RESUE! AR"UE!T#$/o the strategy of this paper instantiates

its arguent7 e *egan *y testing evi&entially the hypothesis thatthe notion of evi&ence captures Jorges concern ith prue*as7 This'e foun&' oul& ren&er Jorges concern a*sur&' since the in&u*ita*letruths of the go&s &o not' logically' a&it of evi&ence as this isor&inarily conceive&7 iven that evi&ence is hat prue*asnevertheless loo9 li9e (certainly that is hat such concerns havealays loo9e& li9e to classical anthropology#' an e;traor&inaryanalysis of prue*as oul& *e reCuire&' hich oul& transfor thenotion of evi&ence in a ay that coul& ren&er prue*as intelligi*le7 Tothis en&' e foun& e ha& to &iscar& the episteic assuptions upon

hich or&inary concepts of evi&ence are foun&e&' in favour of theanalytics of in%nition7 The a*sur&ity of provi&ing evi&ence forin&u*ita*le &ivinations as thus reove&' since the role of in%nitions

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 20/25

is not to a9e clais a*out the orl& that coul& *e &ou*te&' *utrather to populate the orl& ith entities through acts of conceptualtransforation7 Erue*as &o not test these acts' *ut ratherconsuate the Cua transforations *y prolonging the as such'that is' *y transforing the further7

(RECURSI%I&A&$5ut this is also hat e have *een &oing7 Theconceptual transforation reCuire& to arrive at in%nition is' of course' itself an in%nition7 In&ee&' the analytical strategy that I have Pust suariUe& coul& *e tol& in the language of /anterQa7 urhea&ache has *een the relationship *eteen ethnography an&analysis7 ut of an ipulse that oul& appear no less e;otic than Jorges love of the santos (it certainly &oes to non"anthropologists_#'e too9 our ailent to )u*a7 )oul& an ethnography of /anterQa cureitK ]ot unless that act as itself un&erstoo& as part of the cure' asthe ethnographic oracles pronounceent = that is' not unless eaccepte& that hat e ere &oing as hat e ere %n&ing:prue*as7 e coul&' of course' &o li9e the young oan an& siply&rop the ethnographic pronounceent' stic9ing to our initialassuption that ethnographys role is to provi&e evi&ence7 5ut thatoul& not reove the hea&ache7 /o e too9 the ethnographicpronounceent' con%ring its ontological purchase *y transforing itinto the analytics of in%nition7 ReconceptualiUing anthropologicalanalysis as reconceptualiUation' e transfore& ethnographicprue*as into anthropological ones7 The upshot of the e;ercise is notonly a ne anthropological concept (in%nition#' *ut also a ne

concept of anthropology (again' in%nition#7

 To close' e ay erely note that the i&ea of anthropology asin%nition e<ectively &ras a line un&er anthropologists long"stan&inginsecurities a*out their relationship to science (see a*ove#7 n theassuption that the proPect of science is characteriUe& partly *y itsinvestent in the notion of evi&ence (a contentious assuptionperhaps = cf7 .atour 1#' our escheal of this i&ea here oul&ren&er the attept to easure anthropology up to science a straightcategory ista9e7 5ut this is not to thro anthropology into the softars of interpretation or the arts' as it is often assue&7 Rather'

the i&ea of in%nition argua*ly places anthropology uch closer tophilosophy' inasuch as philosophy can *e seen as a proPect of conceptual pro&uction (see a*ove# *y eans of hat Anglo"/a;onphilosophers soeties call conceptual analysis7 5ut this iscontentious = though' again' recursively so' since &e%ning philosophyis itself a philosophical pro*le7

 

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 21/25

!#TES

Viel&or9 in 200H as fun&e& *y the 5ritish Aca&ey7 I than9 AllenA*rason' Niorel Anastasoaie' Eatric9 )urry' $iana 3spirito"/anto')arrie Jen9ins' Jaes .ai&la' +orten Ee&ersen' $avi&",illel Ru*en'+arilyn /trathern' an& 3&uar&o Niveiros &e )astro for coenting on&rafts of this paper' an& participants in the .on&on /chool of 3conoics or9shop on evi&ence' especially +atthe 3ngel9e'3leonora +ontuschi' an& e** 6eane' for their any suggestions7 Ia ost grateful to Jorge .uis &e )a*o for alloing e to relay hisstories7

1  In fact' nothing is that unfailiar after a century of professionalanthropology an& other fors of self"conscious travel7

2 hile such coon"sense assuptions are often ost relevantfor gauging the alterity of ethnography' there is no principle& reasonfor assuing they are the only ones7 As the anthropological tra&itionof inter"regional coparison &eonstrates' one ay set theethnography of any locality against assuptions prevalent in anyother = for an e;aple see ,ol*raa& Y illerslev (200Z#7 (I than9)hloe ]ahu")lau&el for thoughts on this atter7# +oreover' since

the relation of alterity is to *e un&erstoo& at a logical rather than acultural level' there is no principle& reason even to territorialiUe geo"culturally either ethnography or the assuptions fro hich it ay&iverge (cf7 ,ol*raa& 2004#7

! ith respect to the in&elicacies of this chauvinis' universalistsan& relativists part copany7 hile the forer ten& to *ite the *ullet'ta9ing it as their tas9 to e;plain the con&itions for the occurrence of native falsehoo&s' the latter erely refuse to pass Pu&geent'claiing = *y li*eral &oga = that native vies ust hol& their onlocal truth7 5ut relativist agnaniity = hat Nassos Argyrou  calls

the stance of re&eption (2002: 28"H# = is Pust an a*sur& fu&ge: *yla of e;clu&e& i&&le' if the natives contra&ict our assuptions'only one of us can actually *e right7

4 It ay not *e acci&ental that the present volue shoul& *eassociate& ith the .on&on /chool of 3conoics an& Eolitical /cience'here ellners concerns ith scienti%c rigour ere fore& in(&isciplinarily liinal# &ialogue ith such %gures as Eopper' .a9atos'at9ins' an& Veyera*en&7

H

 In his story Jorge &i& not ention the &ivinatory origin of thesanteras conclusion7 5ut this is only *ecause he assue& that I oul&

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 22/25

9no that santeros use their cory oracles to &eterine (an& then toresolve# such pro*les = &ivination is the preise of santerose;pertise7

 Vor a fully or9e&"out theoriUation of this possi*ility' see 5oyer

(10#7

Z An a&&e& connotation of the ter relates to the philosophical&istinction *eteen intensional an& e;tensional theories of eaning7 3;tensional theories &e%ne the eaning of a givene;pression in ters of its purchase on a orl& of referents (i7e7 inepisteic ters#7 Intensional theories &e%ne eaning ith referenceto the con&itions that oul& &eterine such a reference (see' e7g7')halers 2002#7 /o in &e%ning ;' the e;tensionist procee&s *y as9inghat things are ;K' hile the intensionist as9s hat counts for athing to *e ;K In%nitions transfor intensions (a atter of conceptual&e%nition# rather than erely changing e;tensions (an epiricalconcern ith the application of a pre&eterine& concept#7

8 It ill *e clear that this arguent is closely relate& to ontologicalarguents in theology7 As such it &eserves a ore e;ten&e&e;position' since such arguents are notoriously &iWcult to pin &on7As 5ertran& Russell  put it' it is easier to feel convince& thatLontological arguentsM ust *e fallacious than it is to %n& outprecisely here the fallacy lies (14: 0' cf7 +illican 2004#7 +in&fulof the pitfalls' I put this arguent up for consi&eration tentatively' in

the hope that criticis ight allo e to sharpen it in the future7 I than9 Erofessor $avi& 6irsh for suggesting this7

10 )opelling as it ay have *een i&"tentieth century as =e<ectively = a precursor of Eopperian philosophy of science (e7g7Eopper 1H[ cf7 ,orton 1Z#' the analytical aroury of secon&aryela*oration is Pust that: a secon&ary ela*oration of 3vans"Eritchar&son' hich serves to preserve his gui&ing assuption that oraclesa9e representational truth"clais that coul& *e veri%e& or falsi%e&*y evi&ence7 The cost of such a ove is charge& on the natives7 The

possi*ility of falsi%cation' live on 3vans"Eritchar&s evi&ential account'is *arre& only *y iputing &ogatis tout court: for every oracularerror another ystical *elief ust *e a&&e& to the natives ta*' itsa*sur& integrity guar&e& cyclically *y its coherence ith others7

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 23/25

RE'ERE!CES

• Ar&ener' 37 187 The voice of prophecy an& other essays (e&7

+7 )hapan#7 ;for&: 5asil 5lac9ell7•  Argyrou' N7 20027 Anthropology an& the ill to eaning: a

postcolonial critiCue7 .on&on: Eluto Eress7

•  5oyer' E7 107 Tra&ition as truth an& counication7)a*ri&ge: -niversity Eress7

•  5ron' $7 200!7 /anterQa enthrone&: art' ritual' an& innovationin an Afro")u*an religion7 )hicago: -niversity Eress7

•  )halers' $7 20027 n sense an& intension7 In Ehilosophical

Eerspectives 1: .anguage an& in& (e&7# J7 To*erlin' 1!H"827;for&: 5lac9ell7

•  )orsQn Ji?neU' A7 Y R7 illerslev 200Z7 An anthropologicalconcept of the concept: reversi*ility aong the /i*erian Su9hagirs7 Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (]7/7#1!' H2Z"447 .in9s 

•  $eleuUe' 7 147 $i<erence an& repetition (trans7 E7 Eatton#7.on&on: Athlone Eress7

•  3vans"Eritchar&' 3737 1Z7 itchcraft' oracles' an& agic

aong the AUan&e (a*ri&ge& *y 37 illies#7 ;for&: )laren&onEaper*ac9s7

•  VraUer' J7 1117 The ol&en 5ough: a stu&y in agic an&religion' part I' vol7 I: The agic art an& the evolution of 9ings7.on&on: +acillan7

•  Vrege' 7 1807 n sense an& eaning7 In Translations fro thephilosophical ritings of ottlo* Vrege (e&s# E7T7 each Y +75lac9' H"Z87 ;for&: 5asil 5lac9ell7

•

 aston Aguero' /7 117 3l aterialiso e;plica el espiritisoy la /anterQa7 ,avana: r*e7

•  eertU' )7 20007 Availa*le light: anthropological reections onphilosophical topics7 Erinceton: -niversity Eress7

•  ellner' 37 1Z47 .egitiation of *elief7 )a*ri&ge: -niversityEress7

•  ol&an' +7 200H7 Voras &o sa*er e o&os &o ser:o*serva`es so*re ultiplici&a&e e ontologia no can&o*l?7Religibo Y /ocie&a&e 2H' 102"207 .in9s 

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 24/25

•  ,ei&egger' +7 187 hat is calle& thin9ingK (trans7 7 ray#7]e Sor9: ,arper Y Ro7

•  ,enare' A7' +7 ,ol*raa& Y /7 astell 200Z7 Intro&uction7 In Thin9ing through things: theorising artefacts ethnographically

(e&s# A7 ,enare' +7 ,ol*raa& Y /7 astell' 1"!17 .on&on:Routle&ge7

•  ,ol*raa&' +7 200!7 3stian&o a necessi&a&e: os orculos &e ife a ver&a&e e ,avana7 +ana : 2' !"ZZ .in9s 

•  ,ol*raa&' +7 20047 Response to 5runo .atours Thou shall notfreeUe"frae (availa*le on"line:http:7a*aete7i9ia7coi9iResponsedtod5runod.atoursd 22ThoudshalldnotdfreeUe"frae22d(+artind,ol*raa&#'accesse& ! January 2008#7

•  ,ol*raa&' +7 200H7 3;pen&ing ultiplicity: oney in )u*an Ifcults7 Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (]7/7# 11'2!1"H47 .in9s 

•  ,ol*raa&' +7 200Z7 The poer of po&er: ultiplicity an&otion in the &ivinatory cosology of )u*an If (or ana'again#7 In Thin9ing through things: theorising artefactsethnographically (e&s# A7 ,enare' +7 ,ol*raa& Y /7 astell' 18"22H7 .on&on: Routle&ge7

•  ,ol*raa&' +7 in press7 Relationships in otion: oracular

recruitent in )u*an If cults7 /yst@es &e Eens?e en AfriCue]oire7

•  ,ol*raa&' +7 Y R7 illerslev 200Z7 Transcen&entalperspectivis: anonyous viepoints fro Inner Asia7 InnerAsia ' 11"20Z7 .in9s 

•  ,orton' R7 1Z7 African tra&itional thought an& esternscience7 Africa !Z' H0"Z1 an& 1HH"8Z7 .in9s 

•  ,oson' )7 20007 3vi&ence an& con%ration7 In A copanion

to the philosophy of science (e&7# 7,7 ]eton"/ith' 108"17;for&: 5lac9ell Eu*lishers7

•  .achata^ere' R7 117 .as creencias religiosas &e losafrocu*anos y la falsa aplicacin &el t?rino *ruPerQa7 Actas &elVol9lore 1: H' 11"1H7 .in9s 

•  .a9atos' I7 1Z87 The etho&ology of scienti%c researchprograes: philosophical papers volue 1 (e&s J7 orrall Y 7)urrie#7 )a*ri&ge: -niversity Eress7

•  .atour' 57 17 Ean&oras hope: essays on the reality of 

science stu&ies7 )a*ri&ge' +ass7: ,arvar& -niversity Eress7

8/10/2019 Definitive Evidence, From Cuban Gods (Holbraad)(JRAI)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/definitive-evidence-from-cuban-gods-holbraadjrai 25/25

•  +illican' E7 20047 The one fatal a in Ansels arguent7 +in&11!' 4!Z"Z7 .in9s 

•  ]ietUsche' V7 1Z7 -ntiely e&itations (e&s7 $7 5reaUeale[trans7 R7J7 ,olling&ale#7 )a*ri&ge: -niversity Eress7

•  rtQU' V7 107 .os negros *ruPos7 +a&ri&: 3&itorial A?rica7

•  Eali?' /7 20027 iUar&s an& scientists: e;plorations in Afro")u*an o&ernity an& tra&ition7 $urha' ]7)7: $u9e -niversityEress7

•  Eopper' 67 1H7 The logic of scienti%c &iscovery7 ]e Sor9:,arper Torch*oo9s7

•  Russell' 57 147 ,istory of estern philosophy7 .on&on: Allen Y-nin7

•  /per*er' $7 18H7 n anthropological 9nole&ge7 )a*ri&ge:-niversity Eress7

•  /trathern' +7 17 Eroperty' su*stance an& e<ect' .on&on:Athlone Eress7

•  /trathern' +7 200H7 6inship' la an& the une;pecte&: relativesare alays a surprise7 )a*ri&ge: -niversity Eress7

•  Niveiros &e )astro' 37 20027 nativo relativo7 +ana 8: 1' 11!"487 .in9s 

•  Niveiros &e )astro' 37 200!7 An&7 +anchester: +anchesterEapers in /ocial Anthropology7

•  agner' R7 1817 The invention of culture7 (Revise& an&e;pan&e& e&ition#7 )hicago: -niversity Eress7

•  hitehouse' ,7 20007 Arguents an& icons: &ivergent o&es of religiosity7 ;for&: -niversity Eress7

 

+artin ,ol*raa& or9s at the Anthropology $epartent of -niversity)ollege .on&on7 ,e has con&ucte& %el&or9 on Afro")u*an religion in,avana since 187 ,is is co"e&itor (ith Airia ,enare an& /ariastell# of Thin9ing through things: theorising artefactsethnographically (Routle&ge' 200Z# an& his onograph on )u*an&ivination an& anthropological truth is in preparation7