Muhammed Karakoyun (1917319)

We have seen a few essays to understand hunter gather economics and they had differences and

similarities. However, when bringing the matter on a table, Oppenheims approach was a pioneer with

respect to others. For Oppenheim, even a notion existed in a certain time and in a certain place it has a

background beyond of visual scene and this notion must be determined as a whole with its background.

He explains this mistake in his sentence: More important obstacle is the conceptual barrier which
(1)

hampers full understanding of both the real and nature of a recorded transaction and its many-sided

institutional background., so in that way, hunter gather societies economies could be presented in a

precise aspect. Moreover, he also determines judging hunter and gather societies with westerns terms

such as market, price and supply etc. as a fault. Because they were established after these civilizations,

examining these societies with them will become a prejudice. Consequently, because Oppenheim

opened a new era to understand hunter gather societies economies conveniently and his approach

presents evidences, his approach is adopted immediately.

As for differences and similarities Sahlin and Polanyi are consistent with Oppenheim when July

is contrary to Oppenheim in terms of hunter gather economies. To begin with, Sahlin he also reckons

environment and culture when examining societies, so he is far from Europeans aspect. For instance,

because hunter gather societies look for food and water supply, carrying property is difficult and they

used existing objects. Therefore, he concludes private property as a small portable values widely taking

from nature as borrowing. He points out this (2) They do not even want to carry one of everything they

borrow what they do not own. Because of this reason, the accumulation of objects are not considered

as wealth. Consequently, hunters and gathers societies are far from the fact of price, supply and other

our days concept. In terms of subsistence, Sahlin expresses the environmental factor by saying (3)

because there were plenty of food in nature they didnt spend on much more time on subsistence they

have plentiful leisure time. Furthermore, they work for a few hours per a day and they consume their

leisure time on dancing entertaining and visiting. As Sahlin indicates, they appreciated social

relationships and arts due to leisure time. Even more he touches on daily calorie consumption to establish

accurate understanding Mean daily consumption per capita at Hemple Bay as 2160 calories and a
(4)
Fish Creek 2130 calories, so he visualizes them as well-nourished. Accordingly, Sahlin comes to an

agreement of the new approach. Both Sahlin and Oppenheim take the background such as environment

and culture while clarifying old societies economies and they get rid of market terms: price, supply and

wealth. Like Sahlin, Polanyi determines the hunter gather economies as a whole with their background

and he sees defining their economies with the terms which were established after 19th century as a

mistake. he expressed his idea by saying (5)

Adam smiths suggestions about the economics psychology

of the savage, division of labor a phenomenon as old as society, springs from differences inherent in the

facts of sex, geography and individual endowment, and the alleged propensity of man to barter, truck

and exchange is almost entirely apocryphal. As a result, to emphasize this fault, he talks about the

terms such as reciprocity, redistribution could have some variegated forms due to some differences

between societies.

On the contrary to Oppenheim and Sahlin, July clarifies hunter and gather societies differently.

He asserts that to catch a prey they used poisonous arrow to wound, after shooting arrows they used too

much struggle to find it and they spend obtained energy from prey on again finding the prey. He

illustrates the story by giving the Kwa example(6) While Kwa spent the night crouched miserably over

a tiny fire, his prey, crazed by the poison, kept moving, and with down was far away from the hunter.

Consequently, July makes a mistake here by observing them in Eurocentric aspect. Furthermore, he

ignores the differences from sex, geography and individual endowment by saying Every man was
(7)

turned butcher and each butcher was his own cook, each cook his own dinner. Hence, he supposes all

parts of society have same resources. On the other hand, similar to Sahlin, he states these societies dont

own possessions. Because both said these societies have to migrate from one sources to another, they

carry only arrow, spear and some basic requirements and July states this by saying (8)
Carrying only

their small skin bags and bows slung over their left shoulders.

In summary, while July is contrary to Oppenheims precise aspect, Karl Polanyi and Sahlin are

almost agree with Oppenheim, and by this new approach the studies of hunter gather societies were

established on accurate base.

 References

(1) A Birds Eye View of Mesopotamian Economic History page (28)

(2) The Original Affluent Society Ch.1 of Stone Age Economics page (10)

(3) The Original Affluent Society Ch.1 of Stone Age Economics page (3)

(4) The Original Affluent Society Ch.1 of Stone Age Economics page (18)

(5) The Great Transformation Ch.4 M. Sahlin Page (43)

(6) The Hunters July Page (37)

(7) The Hunters July Page (38)

(8) The Hunters July Page (35)