5 The Potlatch MARVIN HARRIS Franz Boas, the father of anthropology in the United States, was one of the first to study the practice of the potlatch. On the face of it, the potlatch would appear to be a bizarre, if not irrational, cultural practice. As practiced by the Kwakuitl and other Native American groups in British Columbia, the potlatch is a form of competitive feasting which involves giving away or destroying more material wealth (e.g., food, clothing, and blankets) than one's rival. Since the original description of this practice by Boas in the late nineteenth century, the potlatch has been cited often as an excellent example of conspicuous consumption gone berserk, or at least an irrational practice. By taking a materialist interpretation rather than a psychological one, Harris suggests that the potlatch is more than just an insane pursuit of social status. Instead, Harris sees the potlatch as a rational response to economic and social forces. While not denying that the potlatch involves fierce competition for status and prestige, it also serves a number of other important functions which contribute to the overall well-being of the society, not the least of which is as a mechanism of economic distribution. Some of the most puzzling lifestyles on exhibit in the museum of world ethnography bear the imprint of a strange craving known as the "drive for prestige." Some people seem to hunger for approval as others hunger for meat. The puzzling thing is not that people hunger for approval, but that occasionally their craving seems to become so powerful that they begin to compete with each other for prestige as others compete for land or protein or sex. Sometimes this competition grows so fierce that it appears to become an end in itself. It then takes on the appearance of an obsession wholly divorced from, and even directly opposed to, rational calculations of material costs. Vance Packard struck a responsive chord when he described the United States as a nation of com- petitive status seekers. Many Americans seem to spend their entire lives trying to climb further up the social pyramid simply in order to impress each other. We seem to be more interested in working in order to get people to admire us for our wealth than in the actual wealth itself, which often enough consists of chromium baubles and burdensome or useless objects. It is amazing how much effort people are willing to spend to obtain what Thorstein Veblen described as the vicarious thrill of being mistaken for members of a class that doesn't have to work. Veblen's mordant phrases "conspicuous consumption" and "conspicuous waste" aptly convey a sense of the peculiarly intense desire for "keeping up with the Joneses" that lies behind the ceaseless cosmetic alterations in the automotive, appliance, and clothing industries. From Cows, Pigs. Wars and Witches by Marvin Harris. Copyright © 1974 by Marvin Harris. Used by permission of Random House, Inc. 24 ARTICLE 5 THE POTLATCH 25 Early in the present century, anthropologists were surprised to discover that certain primitive tribes engaged in conspicuous consumption and conspicuous waste to a degree unmatched by even the most wasteful of modern consumer economies. Ambitious, status-hungry men were found competing with each other for approval by giving huge feasts. The rival feast givers judged each other by the amount of food they provided, and a feast was a success only if the guests could eat until they were stupefied, stagger off into the bush, stick their fingers down their throats, vomit, and come back for more. The most bizarre instance of status seeking was discovered among the American Indians who formerly inhabited the coastal regions of Southern Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington. Here the status seekers practiced what seems like a maniacal form of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous waste known as potlatch. The object of potlatch was to give away or destroy more wealth than one's rival. If the potlatch giver was a powerful chief, he might attempt to shame his rivals and gain everlasting admiration from his followers by destroying food, clothing, and money. Sometimes he might even seek prestige by burning down his own house. Potlatch was made famous by Ruth Benedict in her book Patterns of Culture, which describes how potlatch operated among the Kwakiutl, the aboriginal inhabitants of Vancouver Island. Benedict thought that potlatch was part of a megalo-maniacal lifestyle characteristic of Kwakiutl culture in general. It was the "cup" God had given them to drink from. Ever since, potlatch has been a monument to the belief that cultures are the creations of inscrutable forces and deranged personalities. As a result of reading Patterns of Culture, experts in many fields concluded that the drive for prestige makes a shambles of attempts to explain lifestyles in terms of practical and mundane factors. I want to show here that the Kwakiutl potlatch was not the result of maniacal whims, but of definite economic and ecological conditions. When these conditions are absent, the need to be admired and the drive for prestige express themselves in completely different lifestyle practices. Inconspicuous consumption replaces conspicuous consumption, conspicuous waste is forbidden, and there are no competitive status seekers. The Kwakiutl used to live in plank-house villages set close to the shore in the midst of cedar and fir rain forests. They fished and hunted along the island-studded sounds and fiords of Vancouver in huge dugout canoes. Always eager to attract traders, they made their villages conspicuous by erecting on the beach the carved tree trunks we erroneously call "totem poles." The carvings on these poles symbolized the ancestral titles to which the chiefs of the village laid claim. A Kwakiutl chief was never content with the amount of respect he was getting from his own followers and from neighboring chiefs. He was always insecure about his status. True enough, the family titles to which he laid claim belonged to his ancestors. But there were other people who could trace descent from the same ancestors and who were entitled to vie with him for recognition as a chief. Every chief therefore felt the obligation to justify and validate his chiefly pretensions. The prescribed manner for doing this was to hold potlatches. Each potlatch was given by a host chief and his followers to a guest chief and his followers. The object of the potlatch was to show that the host chief was truly entitled to chiefly status and that he was more exalted than the guest chief. To prove this point, the host chief gave the rival chief and his followers quantities of valuable gifts. The guests would belittle what they received and vow to hold a return potlatch at which their own chief would prove that he was greater than the former host by giving back even larger quantities of more valuable gifts. Preparations for potlatch required the accumulation of fresh and dried fish, fish oil, berries, animal skins, blankets, and other valuables. On the appointed day, the guests paddled up to the host village and went into the chiefs house. There they gorged themselves on salmon and wild berries while dancers masked as beaver gods and thunderbirds entertained them. • 26 SECTION I ECONOMICS AND ECOLOGY The host chief and his followers arranged in neat piles the wealth that was to be given away. The visitors stared at their host sullenly as he pranced up and down, boasting about how much he was about to give them. As he counted out the boxes offish oil, baskets full of berries, and piles of blankets, he commented derisively on the poverty of his rivals. Laden with gifts, the guests finally were free to paddle back to their own village. Stung to the quick, the guest chief and his followers vowed to get even. This could only be achieved by inviting their rivals to a return pot-latch and obliging them to accept even greater amounts of valuables than they had given away. Considering all the Kwakiutl villages as a single unit, potlatch stimulated a ceaseless flow of prestige and valuables moving in opposite directions. An ambitious chief and his followers had pot-latch rivals in several different villages at once. Specialists in counting property kept track of what had to be done in each village in order to even the score. If a chief managed to get the better of his rivals in one place, he still had to confront his adversaries in another. At the potlatch, the host chief would say things like, "I am the only great tree. Bring your counter of property that he may try in vain to count the property that is to be given away." Then the chief's followers demanded silence from the guests with the warning: "Do not make any noise, tribes. Be quiet or we shall cause a landslide of wealth from our chief, the overhanging mountain." At some potlatches blankets and other valuables were not given away but were destroyed. Sometimes successful potlatch chiefs decided to hold "grease feasts" at which boxes of oil obtained from the candlefish were poured on the fire in the center of the house. As the flames roared up, dark grease smoke filled the room. The guests sat impassively or even complained about the chill in the air while the wealth destroyer ranted, "I am the only one on earth—the only one in the whole world who makes this smoke rise from the beginning of the year to the end for the invited tribes." At some grease feasts the flames ignited the planks in the roof and an entire house would become a potlatch offering, causing the greatest shame to the guests and much rejoicing among the hosts. According to Ruth Benedict, potlatching was caused by the obsessive status hunger of the Kwakiutl chiefs. "Judged by the standards of other cultures the speeches of their chiefs are unabashed megalomania," she wrote. "The object of all Kwakiutl enterprises was to show oneself superior to one's rivals." In her opinion, the whole aboriginal economic system of the Pacific Northwest was "bent to the service of this obsession." I think that Benedict was mistaken. The economic system of the Kwakiutl was not bent to the service of status rivalry; rather, status rivalry was bent to the service of the economic system. All of the basic ingredients of the Kwakiutl giveaways, except for their destructive aspects, are present in primitive societies widely dispersed over different parts of the globe. Stripped down to its elementary core, the potlatch is a competitive feast, a nearly universal mechanism for assuring the production and distribution of wealth among peoples who have not yet fully acquired a ruling class. Melanesia and New Guinea present the best opportunity to study competitive feasting under relatively pristine conditions. Throughout this region, there are so-called big men who owe their superior status to the large number of feasts that each has sponsored during his lifetime. Each feast has to be preceded by an intensive effort on the part of an aspiring big man to accumulate the necessary wealth. Among the Kaoka-speaking people of the Solomon Islands, for example, the status-hungry individual begins his career by making his wife and children plant larger yam gardens. As described by the Australian anthropologist Ian Hog-bin, the Kaoka who wants to become a big man then gets his kinsmen and his age-mates to help him fish. Later he begs sows from his friends and increases the size of his pig herd. As the litters are born he boards additional animals among his neighbors. Soon his relatives and friends feel that the young man is going to be a success. They see ARTICLE 5 THE POTLATCH 27 :ch offering, guests and tlatching was nger of the lards of other re unabashed object of all meself supe-l, the whole acific North-obsession." en. The eco-; not bent to status rivalry imic system. ;he Kwakiutl ft aspects, are ;ly dispersed ripped down is a competi-ism for assur-on of wealth lly acquired a :sent the best easting under ghout this re-řho owe their • of feasts that ne. Each feast effort on the cumulate the )eople of the status-hungry iking his wife rdens. As de-jgist Ian Hog-me a big man ■mates to help lis friends and > the litters are lis among his lends feel that cess. They see his large gardens and his big pig herd and they redouble their own efforts to make the forthcoming feast a memorable one. When he becomes a big man they want the young candidate to remember that they helped him. Finally, they all get together and build an extra-fine house. The men go off on one last fishing expedition. The women harvest yams and collect firewood, banana leaves, and coconuts. As the guests arrive (as in the ease of potlatch), the wealth is stacked in neat piles and put on display for everyone to count and admire. On the day of the feast given by a young man named Atana, Hogbin counted the following items: 250 pounds of dried fish, 3,000 yam and coconut cakes, 11 large bowls of yam pudding, and 8 pigs. All this was the direct result of the extra work effort organized by Atana. But some of the guests themselves, anticipating an important occasion, brought presents to be added to the giveaway. Their contributions raised the total to 300 pounds offish, 5,000 cakes, 19 bowls of pudding and 13 pigs. Atana proceeded to divide this wealth into 257 portions, one each for every person who had helped him or who had brought gifts, rewarding some more than others. "Only the remnants were left for Atana himself," notes Hogbin. This is normal for status seekers in Guadalcanal, who always say: "The giver of the feast takes the bones and the stale cakes; the meat and the fat go to the others." The feast-giving days of the big man, like those of the potlatch chiefs, are never over. On threat of being reduced to commoner status, each big man is obliged to busy himself with plans and preparations for the next feast. Since there are several big men per village and community, these plans and preparations often lead to complex competitive maneuvering for the allegiance of relatives and neighbors. The big men work harder, worry more, and consume less than anybody else. Prestige is their only reward. The big man can be described as a worker-entrepreneur—the Russians call them "Stakhanovites"—who renders important services to society by raising the level of produc- tion. As a result of the big man's craving for status, more people work harder and produce more food and other valuables. Under conditions where everyone has equal access to the means of subsistence, competitive feasting serves the practical function of preventing the labor force from falling back to levels of productivity that offer no margin of safety in crises such as war and crop failures. Furthermore, since there are no formal political institutions capable of integrating independent villages into a common economic framework competitive feasting creates an extensive network of economic expectations. This has the effect of pooling the productive effort of larger populations than can be mobilized by any given village. Finally, competitive feasting by big men acts as an automatic equalizer of annual fluctuations in productivity among a series of villages that occupy different microenvironments—seacoast, lagoon, or upland habitats. Automatically, the biggest feasts in any given year will be hosted by villages that have enjoyed conditions of rainfall, temperature, and humidity most favorable to production. All of these points apply to the Kwakiutl. The Kwakiutl chiefs were like Melanesian big men except that they operated with a much more productive technological inventory in a richer environment. Like big men, they competed with each other to attract men and women to their villages. The greatest chiefs were the best providers and gave the biggest pot-latches. The chief's followers shared vicariously in his prestige and helped him to achieve more exalted honors. The chiefs commissioned the carving of the "totem poles." These were in fact grandiose advertisements proclaiming by their height and bold designs that here was a village with a mighty chief who could cause great works to be done, and who could protect his followers from famine and disease. In claiming hereditary rights to the animal crests carved on the poles, the chiefs were actually saying that they were great providers of food and comfort. Potlatch was a means of telling their rivals to put up or shut up. í t t David. Mgr. 8004 11. K. a knihovnictví Mt, Miroslav, Mgr. »Halt, Helena m*m,PhDr.Dr. iE«*. Petr. Mgr. n,m.pnt.tWi.CSc. (, Zbyněk, PhDr. Ph.D. 3106 3158 1532 3211 3313 3392 3574 Ei Michaela, doc PhDr. CSc. 3363 Pavla, PhDr. 1508,4179 , SU doc PhDr. CSc. 4497 •jfcMUnl Mgr. 4665 '""* lutea, Mgr. PhD. 5610 •V. 7435 Zuzar* Mgr. Ph.D. 7710 Rampart, Nele, Mgr. 6408 Slanovská, Sylvie, Mgr. Or. 6724 Uhrová, Eva, obe. mir. CSc 7584 Urvátok, Ales, Mgr. «i.D. m» Vackovi, Blanka 7752 Zeman, Jaromír, obe. PhDr. CSc. 8382 Katedra anglistiky a amerikanistiky Drábek, Pavel Mgr. PtiD. 3509 Fktumová, Jarmila. PhDr. 3561 Franková, Milada, doc Mgr. CSc, MA 3629. 3639 Hardy, Stephen Paul, Ph.D. 3743 Chamonikolasová, Jana, PhDr. Ph.D. 3510 Chovanec, Jan, Mgr. Ph.D. 3573 Kamenická, Renata, Mgr. 3846 Kolínská, Klára. Mor. MA 4140 Kudrnáčová, Naděžda, PhDr. CSc. 4518 Mateiciucová, Inna, Mgr. Ph.D. 5127 Měřtasky, Zdenek, pro/. PhDr. CSc SU Htkuda, Vladimír, /mV. PhOr.Qóc 5713 P«*.M>«ÉwUk»fl«r. 5875 Podborský.Vtodknlr, prof. PhDr. DrSc. 6114 Přkhystalová, Renála, Mgr. 7416 Sabatová, Klára, %r. 7812 Svalbachová, Danuše 7374 Švestková, Libuše 7458 Tlusták, Vlastimil, RNDr. CSc. 7431 Ungerman, Simon, Mgr. 8057 Urbánková, Naděžda, PhDr. 7516 Ústav slavistiky Aleksoski, Goce 3236 Binová, Galina Pavlovna, doc. PhDr. CSc. 3203 Brandner, Aleš. doc. PhDr. CSc. 3275 Bumbálkova, Jana, Mgr. 3366 Jungová, zuzant. ■{ate***" • 3/41, a/ii 4413 5760 amttMnXDmha Kantova, Mfchaaki .;..j Nosková, Jana, Mgr. 5589 Kepákavá, Jandh Pavicová, Martina, PhDr. CSc 5883 KsMkkMt, Dagna* Válka, Miroslav, PftOr. Ph.D. 787« ÜMMMltllly Jfflftj Mfl MtcMckooá, JvPjtMt š Úst» hudební vidy Bek, MikuláS. doc. PhDr. PUD. 3202 Mtrmrtktrrt. iíikIiéi. M Filip, David, Mgr. Ph.D. 3702 Mautrová,Ama Holfmam, Andreas, Mgr. Ph.D. 3153 Hakovárová,Darja,Hg. Leníkova, Jitka 4623 Ondráčková, Hana Macek, Petr, PhDr. PUD. 4770 Otevfdová, Jana, Mgr. Marhounová, Monika, Bc. 5043 Pauková, Judita Mizerova, Blanka, Mgr. Semridová,OldfiSka Osolsobe, Petr, PhDr. Ph.D. 5736 Slavíčkova, Hana Pečman, Rudolf, prol. PhDr. DrSc. 5946 Spáčilová, Tafána, PhDr. Perutková, Jana, PhDr. Or. 5988 Starová, Věra 28 SECTION III ECONOMICS AND ECOLOGY Despite the overt competitive thrust of pot-latch, it functioned aboriginally to transfer food and other valuables from centers of high productivity to less fortunate villages. I should put this even more strongly: Because of the competitive thrust, such transfers were assured. Since there were unpredictable fluctuations in fish runs, wild fruit and vegetable harvests, intervillage potlatch-ing was advantageous from the standpoint of the regional population as a whole. When the fish spawned in nearby streams and the berries ripened close at hand, last year's guests became this year's hosts. Aboriginally, potlatch meant that each year the haves gave and the have-nots took. To eat, all a have-not had to do was admit that the rival chief was a great man. Why did the practical basis of potlatch escape the attention of Ruth Benedict? Anthropologists began to study potlatch only long after the aboriginal peoples of the Pacific Northwest had entered into commercial and wage-labor relations with Russian, English, Canadian, and American merchants and settlers. This contact rapidly gave rise to epidemics of smallpox and other European diseases that killed off a large part of the native population. For example, the population of the Kwakiutl fell from 23,000 in 1836 to 2,000 in 1886. The decline automatically intensified the competition for manpower. At the same time, wages paid by the Europeans pumped unprecedented amounts of wealth into the potlatch network. From the Hudson's Bay Company, the Kwakiutl received thousands of trade blankets in exchange for animal skins. At the great potlatches these blankets replaced food as the most important item to be given away. The dwindling population soon found itself with more blankets and other valuables than it could consume. Yet the need to attract followers was greater than ever due to the labor shortage. So the potlatch chiefs ordered the destruction of property in the vain hope that such spectacular demonstrations of wealth would bring the people back to the empty villages. But these were the practices of a dying culture struggling to adapt to a new set of politi- cal and economic conditions; they bore little resemblance to the potlatch of aboriginal times. Competitive feasting thought about, narrated, and imagined by the participants is very different from competitive feasting viewed as an adaptation to material constraints and opportunities. In the social dreamwork—the lifestyle consciousness of the participants—competitive feasting is a manifestation of the big man's or potlatch chief's insatiable craving for prestige. But from the point of view followed in this book, the insatiable craving for prestige is a manifestation of competitive feasting. Every society makes use of the need for approval, but not every society links prestige to success in competitive feasting. Competitive feasting as a source of prestige must be seen in evolutionary perspective to be properly understood. Big men like Atana or the Kwakiutl chiefs carry out a form of economic exchange known as redistribution. That is, they gather together the results of the productive effort of many individuals and then redistribute the aggregated wealth in different quantities to a different set of people. As I have said, the Kaoka redistributor-big man works harder, worries more, and consumes less than anybody else in the village. This is not true of the Kwakiutl chief-redistributor. The great potlatch chiefs performed the entrepreneurial and managerial functions that were necessary for a big potlatch, but aside from an occasional fishing or sea-lion expedition, they left the hardest work to their followers. The greatest potlatch chiefs even had a few war captives working for them as slaves. From the point of view of consumption privileges, the Kwakiutl chiefs had begun to reverse the Kaoka formula and were keeping some of the "meat and fat" for themselves, leaving most of the "bones and stale cakes" for their followers. Continuing along the evolutionary line leading from Atana, the impoverished worker-entrepreneur big man, to the semihereditary Kwakiutl chiefs, we end up with state-level societies ruled over by hereditary kings who perform no basic industrial or agricultural labor ARTICLE 5 THE POTLATCH 29 and who keep the most and best of everything for themselves. At the imperial level, exalted divine-right rulers maintain their prestige by building conspicuous palaces, temples, and mega-monuments, and validate their right to hereditary privileges against all challengers— not by potlatch, but by force of arms. Reversing direction, we can go from kings to potlatch chiefs to big men, back to egalitarian lifestyles in which all competitive displays and conspicuous consumption by individuals disappear, and anyone foolish enough to boast about how great he is gets accused of witchcraft and is stoned to death. In the truly egalitarian societies that have survived long enough to be studied by anthropologists, redistribution in the form of competitive feasting does not occur. Instead, the mode of exchange known as reciprocity predominates. Reciprocity is the technical term for an economic exchange that takes place between two individuals in which neither specifies precisely what is expected in return nor when they expect it. Superficially, reciprocal exchanges don't look like exchanges at all. The expectation of one party and obligation of the other remain unstated. One party can continue to take from the other for quite a while with no resistance from the giver and no embarrassment in the taker. Nonetheless, the transaction cannot be considered a pure gift. There is an underlying expectation of return, and if the balance between two individuals gets too far out of line, eventually the giver will start to grumble and gossip. Concern will be shown for the taker's health and sanity, and if the situation does not improve, people begin to suspect that the taker is possessed by malevolent spirits or is practicing witchcraft. In egalitarian societies, individuals who consistently violate the rules of reciprocity are in fact likely to be psychotic and a menace to their community. We can get some idea of what reciprocal exchanges are like by thinking about the way we exchange goods and services with our close friends or relatives. Brothers, for example, are not sup- posed to calculate the precise dollar value of everything they do for each other. They should feel free to borrow each other's shirts or phonograph albums and ought not to hesitate to ask for favors. In brotherhood and friendship both parties accept the principle that if one has to give more than he takes, it will not affect the solidary relationship between them. If one friend invites another to dinner, there should be no hesitation in giving or accepting a second or a third invitation even if the first dinner still remains unreciprocated. Yet there is a limit to that sort ofthing, because after a while unreciprocated gift-giving begins to feel suspiciously like exploitation. In other words, everybody likes to be thought generous, but nobody wants to be taken for a sucker. This is precisely the quandary we get ourselves into at Christmas when we attempt to revert to the principle of reciprocity in drawing up our shopping lists. The gift can neither be too cheap nor too expensive; and yet our calculations must appear entirely casual, so we remove the price tag. But to really see reciprocity in action you must live in an egalitarian society that doesn't have money and where nothing can be bought or sold. Everything about reciprocity is opposed to precise counting and reckoning of what one person owes to another. In fact, the whole idea is to deny that anybody really owes anything. One can tell if a lifestyle is based on reciprocity or something else by whether or not people say thank you. In truly egalitarian societies, it is rude to be openly grateful for the receipt of material goods or services. Among the Semai of central Malaya, for example, no one ever expresses gratitude for the meat that a hunter gives away in exactly equal portions to his companions. Robert Dentan, who has lived with the Semai, found that to say thank you was very rude because it suggested either that you were calculating the size of the piece of meat you had been given, or that you were surprised by the success and generosity of the hunter. In contrast to the conspicuous display put on by the Kaoka big man, and the boastful ranting ei?A tyiolBls 8869 •JOWeufjei'woiHfds 9t69 euBH '*A0)|3Aí|S 9U9 B«!JPI0 'f »opfjuras eipif 'eAO>(ned £M)9 'jfiiY 'euer 'cao|3JA310 OUt BUBH '?AOH5tipuo K9t ■6ui 'efea 'eAOjtAOipN ESIC euuv 'EAOjanew zoiE £fí 'ejiunpeiA tAOftnoitH ZOll BABlSOier'»AOlHfiptH """"" Mild 'euer tAoipíiHodin —— EU3(V 1A0S«1 8£8i jeiu6ecľCA0WUi0)| £889 eguuer litován 6899 eiaetpjW fAOSUiM 09Í9 ia W 'W '?AOninjad osia 'aid fid 'Jiopna 'ireuijad aid mid "iisd'?qos|oso •j% 'E5(ue|a 'fftOjazjH ■og 'e^uon 'f AOunoqjiH and KNd 'Wd%nm ew'fAoiflyai Old vffiV 'SB3jpuv 'uueuiHOH avd jfiw wea 'dim aid >aid mp imm 't88 AP9A Aigapnn ACisn ■oso vid 'm«n t»oo!iA«d ■£n 'euer '»AOnsoN eumewfAopMii mu-xmdii»N*mi* 99£E -jfirv 'euer 'pAo>||pquing S£ZC «3 'Old :>op 'S3|V '»upinua ZOH '3S3 Vld *>P 'euA0|AEd eu!IB9 'fAouig Mit _________3309 'nposipiv AWSIAtIS AUSR 919Í 'Old 'epZSPBN 'iAOHU?qin £90g j6wuou«s'ueuu«Bun iíU oso JONU ÜwnseiA "Wsnil 8SU "Wl 'fAomsMS HU asnuBQ 'lAotpeqieA; nu ■jBH-am'vmvs 9M jBih 'eieuaa *»w>|tjsXipud HL9 :OTJÜ«c//^'WP«W'WUW! OH* ViVJ^'eifftľnsuMOM 9I,8E J% 'eieuaa '»viuauii» £iS£ Vld 'BW 'W '09UBA0IID 019C Vid -'Old 'euer '»Aos«|0)||uou»qo im aid 'insd "«(dais 'ap»H 6E9E '6Z9E VW "*3'J%,*¥>'«P«l!W'*A0!|UtU 199E J0iWBiUU«r1MMW!IW 609E___________0lfc< J»» 1»Wd 'WHO foins!umu9UB t ftpsirM iiptuM 28E8 VS3 'did '**> 'JHUonr 1mu»Z JSU BHueifltAOiptA «U - VlvAtlVNlmn WSi -osOJODd-oapmlMm na jajBH-wfc-nwms BOrg 'Jim -91«« "WtdunB KOKTŮ WVK WWW** out SEH 019S 999t Í6tt 6Ut 'B091 £9E£ OSO 'Old *V ttwPM KSE TO «W« jstt wKruioiťvt t\Vi JßW'll»d uze Ja md ZESl jßW *W 8SIE «WW VŘ 901E_______________vfty 'A8|SQJ