Traditions

Once upon a time I sat in Emory Sekaquaptewa's office browsing through the Hopi dictionary. I saw a word, can't remember what it was, but what it referred to was traditions that could be discarded. That was interesting as the Hopi are one of the more traditional indigenous people in the US today. 

I define traditions as behavior that is transmitted from one generation of kin to the next over many generations. Didn't we talk about this before?  How does an idea or a belief get from one mind into another - it seems clear to me that is is via behavior - talk is a behavior by the way.

The traditions that I find interesting are those that we can find in the archaeological record and that we can continue to find in the historic or contemporary record. In other words, people have maintained the traditions over vast amounts of time. I was reading an article today that was written by Marie Sosressi. It is entitled From the origin of language to the diversification of languages: what archaeology and paleoanthropology say?

Language is interesting, as clearly language is a crucial requirement for storytelling.  Sosressi also looks at pigment use, burial practices, personal adornments, production of depictions and arving, musical traditions in the archaeological record and various anatomical features that would have made speech possible.  

The fact that humans continue to bury the dead, use personal adornments, paint, and make music indicates, at least to me, that these are - or at least once were - of vital importance to humans. The particular way we bury the dead or the uniqueness of the ornaments we use, while interesting (e.g., were the ornaments personal objects or were similar objects used by others, why do we wear ornaments - what is their function - and what prompts the persistence or the change),  what is more interesting is that we continue to do these things. Some of these behaviors - the behavior of using red ochre or wearing personal ornaments have been practiced for tens of thousands of years. It is not clear when language was necessary if, for nothing else, to teach the techniques to the next generation.  I always wonder about the acheulean handaxe which was produced for something like a million years. Some of these axes are beautiful. It always struck me that the producers must have had at least some rudimentary form of language. However, language is not my interest here, except as a behavior that has persisted, transmitted from one generation of kin to the next. What I find interesting are traditional behaviors. How were the techniques taught, which traditions were important (can we assume that if they persisted and are widespread that they were important and may continue to be important?),  what role did ancestors play (after all they were the ones who first created the traditions), what strategies helped promote their persistence across generations? We, in our own time, know how difficult it can be to get many of our children to comply with parental recommendations.  

It seems to me that biological anthropologists ignore traditions at their peril, as t fascinating information can be found in the study of traditions. Part of the problem is that despite the fact that evolution is about persistence - descent with modification - our theorists seem to be  focused on one generation and that generation's behavior.  Attention is paid to parental influence and sometimes people mention ancestors, while showing they know nothing about them. Some anthropologist even claim that traditions never existed, Given a focus on one generation or even one individual is would be a challenge to have to explain the careful transmission across generations of kin. Twenty generations down the line, why are the descendants continuing to replicate ancestral traditions?  Why rather than being self interest seving do they continue to practice traditions that can have high costs?  Do we either say traditions never existed, or that traditions don't have high costs, or should we say that we don't need to account for traditions, but should focus on now or on one period of time in the past?