E.E. Evans Pritchard

Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azade

Emile Durkheim once said that every society had its own internal logic that meaningfully and logically explain the events happening in the external world, and that no human society, however some of them may seem totally irrational to modern Western eyes, has ever lived in perpetual chaos and confusion. This piece by Evans Pritchard is an exemplary anthropological work that can attest to this claim by Durkheim - with its search for the inner logic of seemingly primitive and illogical practices conducted by a society with primordial social organization, and with its emphasis on social factors as accountable for the existence of these practices. By the way, although I referred to Durkheim, I would not think that Evans-Pritchard is a Durkheimian in any strict sense even though the methodological approach used in this work is somewhat similar to that of The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. This is because there is no sense that Evans-Pritchard believes that historical development of human society is governed by evolutionary laws, instead he seems to equate both modern and "primordial" societies on an equal footing.

The Argument

As Durkheim stressed the logic and rationality of all forms of primitive religion, rather than perceiving of them as an irrational expressions peculiar to the "unenlightened people", here the practice of witchcraft as performed by Azande people is explained so it can be viewed as a logical form of behavior to deal with particular social problems the society is facing.

Okay, so we are looking at the people who explains misfortunes by attributing them to "witchcraft". Evans Pritchard notes that Azande are perfectly aware of the natural causes of misfortunes that are attributed to the witchcraft. It is not that explanation of misfortunes through witchcraft is done indiscriminately in a chaotic and irrational manner, but rather Evans Pritchard argues that Azande has a clear sense of distinction for natural and supernatural difference (although, since such distinction has not been "intellectualized" as in the Western conception, no Azande will be able to give a thematically systematized account on this distinction) and the explanation through witchcraft is applied only to those matters that cannot be explained via natural causes. Rather, the witchcraft is used to explain misfortunes in socially relevant terms - that is, the question of why a certain misfortune happened in certain temporal and spatial relations, given the social context it was embedded in. It tries to explain the peculiarity associated with certain misfortunes, consequences that cannot be accounted for by resorting to natural and perceivable causes alone. For instance, if a hut collapses and people who had been under it were killed, an Azande knows that a hut collapsed because termites had been gnawing away at the straws, and that he also knows that people had been under the hut as it was a hot day. But, why is it that these two events must have had happened concurrently to kill people who had been in the hut? This is the kind of question that must be attributed to witchcraft. And insofar as this involves attributing the act of "bewitching" to someone who would be perceived as causing the misfortunes, this attribution is always "socially relevant". There must have been social reasons for such misfortunes.

So here the implicit, and broader, argument is that the reason for the existence of the witchcraft explanation is social, but not scientific in any modern sense. In fact, Evans Pritchard implies that in a sense Azande "knows" better than modern men in industrial society do, for to them witchcraft explains the kind of questions regarding the peculiarity of the misfortunes that modern world science cannot explain or is not concerned with in the first place.

In many senses, then, witchcraft in the Azande society fulfills the function science does in the modern society, that of the explaining the previously unexplainable phenomena - it is only that while the former is concerned with the social explanations, the latter has to do with natural concerns. Further, just as in our society science is perceived to be incapable of dealing with questions regarding what ought to be in a society, among the Azande witchcraft is not used to explain the violation of laws or moral imperatives that have taken place. These would be regarded as a conscious infraction of social rules that violators must be responsible for.

Critique and Relevance

Overall, it is striking that Evans Pritchard views the practice of witchcraft as qualitatively similar to any modern social mechanisms used to explain phenomena previously unexplained. In one sentence, the gist of the work may be phrased as follows: All societies are capable of organizing its own world in a meaningful way, and there is no absolute difference regarding this capacity - only a style in how this is achieved is different. In that sense, this work is a good antidote against many anthropological/sociological works that tend to posit, or imply, the irrationality of the so-called primitive peoples. Further, perhaps it is interesting to note that this work shares a striking similarity to Frame Analysis by Goffman.

There, Goffman's main argument is that humans cannot stand the idea of anything being "inexplicable" and must explain all phenomena in terms of either the natural or the social causes (Goffman calls these causes used to of explain phenomena "primary frameworks"). Applying this logic, then it may be said that Evans-Pritchard's analysis of the Azade people is that the compared to modern Western people, the Azade gives more weight to the explanation using social frameworks than the natural ones. Again, the claim is that there is no difference in psychological motives or the degree of "rationality" between modern people and the Azade, only that their method in explaining the unknown is different.