ANT 101: INTRODUCTION TO ANTHROPOLOGY

Lecture 12: Political Systems

Chapter 8: Political Systems

Dr. Bulbul Ashraf Siddiqi

Assistant Professor
Dept. of Political Science and Sociology
WHAT IS ‘‘THE POLITICAL’’?
 Anthropological approach towards political system is global
and comparative, and includes nonstates as well as the states
and nation-states usually studied by political scientists.

 Anthropological studies have revealed substantial variation in

power (formal and informal), authority, and legal systems in
different societies and communities.
 Power is the ability to exercise one’s will over others;
 authority is the socially approved use of power.
Mahatma Gandhi, who fought for freedom from British colonial rule in
India, and Martin Luther King, Jr., who fought for African American civil
rights in the United States, were leaders with great authority who did not
hold formal political office. Both men depended on persuasion and
nonviolent methods of civil disobedience to achieve their political goals.
 Recognizing that political organization is sometimes just
an aspect of social organization, Morton Fried offered
this definition:

 Political Organization comprises those portions of social

organization that specifically relate to the individuals or
groups that manage the affairs of public policy or seek to
control the appointment or activities of those individuals or
groups. (Fried 1967, pp. 20–21)
TYPES OF POLITICAL SYSTEMS
 The anthropologist Elman Service (1962) listed
four types, or levels, of political organization:
 Band,
 Tribe
 Chiefdom and
 State.
 Today, none of these political entities can be studied as a self-
contained form of political organization, since all exist within
nation-states and are subject to state control.

 Service’s labels “band,” “tribe,” “chiefdom,” and “state” are

categories or types within a socio-political typology. These
types are correlated with the adaptive strategies (economic
typology) discussed in the chapter “Making a Living.” Thus,
foragers (an economic type) tended to have band organization
(a socio-political type).
No,Are
Wewe
aretalking
talkingabout
aboutthis
tribal Band
Type as a political system
of Band?
BAND
 A band refers to a small kin-based group (all the members are
related to each other by kinship or marriage ties) found among
foragers.

 Foraging bands, small, nomadic or seminomadic social units,

formed seasonally when component nuclear families got
together. The particular families in a band varied from year to
year.

 Marriage and kinship created ties between members of different

bands. Trade and visiting also linked them. Band leaders were
leaders in name only. In such an egalitarian society, they were
first among equals. Sometimes they gave advice or made
decisions, but they had no way to enforce their decisions.
BAND
 Band sometimes may have structured systems of dealing with
various political issues in the community:

 Conflict resolution among the Inuit: Methods of settling disputes.

However, All societies have ways of settling disputes (of variable
effectiveness) along with cultural rules or norms about proper and
improper behavior.

 Lack of formal legal system in the sense of legal code with trial
and enforcement. The absence of law did not entail total anarchy.

 Some bands had headmen. There were also shamans (part-time

religious specialists). However, these positions conferred little
power on those who occupied them.
BAND
 Challenge for song battle: Insulting song

 Stealing wife

 Can have more than a wife

 The case of Inuit: Read the book for this case. P 187-188.
TRIBES
 Tribes had economies based on non-intensive food production
(horticulture and pastoralism).

 Living in villages and organized into kin groups based on common

descent (clans and lineages), tribes lacked a formal government and
had no reliable means of enforcing political decisions.
 Tribes have organized by village life and/or membership in descent
groups (kin groups whose members trace descent from a common
ancestor).

 Tribes lack socioeconomic stratification (i.e., a class structure) and a

formal government of their own.

 A few tribes still conduct small-scale warfare, in the form of inter-

village raiding.
TRIBES
 Tribes have more effective regulatory mechanisms than
foragers do, but tribal societies have no sure means of enforcing
political decisions.

 The main regulatory officials are village heads, “big men,”

descent-group leaders, village councils, and leaders of pantribal
associations. All these figures and groups have limited
authority.

 Egalitarian society like foragers (Band societies), although

some have marked gender stratification: an unequal distribution
of resources, power, prestige, and personal freedom between
men and women.
TRIBES
 Horticultural villages are usually small, with low population
density and open access to strategic resources.

 Age, gender, and personal traits determine how much respect

people receive and how much support they get from others.

 Egalitarianism diminishes, however, as village size and

population density increase. Horticultural villages usually have
headmen—rarely, if ever, headwomen.
TRIBES – VILLAGE HEAD
 Local tribal leader with limited authority.
 Among the Yanomami is that of village head (always a man).
 His authority, like that of a foraging band’s leader, is severely
limited. If a headman wants something done, he must lead by
example and persuasion.

 The headman lacks the right to issue orders. He can only

persuade, harangue, and try to influence public opinion.

 He has no power to back his decisions and no way to impose

punishments
 A headman sometimes can prevent a specific violent act, but
there is no government to maintain order.
TRIBES – VILLAGE HEAD
 Generosity:
 A Yanomami village headman also must lead in generosity.
Because he must be more generous than any other villager,
he cultivates more land. His garden provides much of the
food consumed when his village holds a feast for another
village.

 The headman represents the village in its dealings with

outsiders. Sometimes he visits other villages to invite people
to a feast. The way a person acts as headman depends on his
personal traits and the number of supporters he can muster
TRIBES – THE BIG MAN
 Generous tribal entrepreneur with multi-village support is
known as the Big Man.

 The big man (almost always a male) was an elaborate version

of the village head, but with one significant difference.

 The village head’s leadership is within one village; the big man
had supporters in several villages.

 The big man therefore was a regulator of regional political

organization.
THE CASE OF A TONOWI (BIGMAN) FROM THE
KAPAUKU PAPUANS LIVE IN IRIAN JAYA, INDONESIA.

 A tonowi achieved his status through hard work, amassing

wealth in the form of pigs and other native riches.
 Characteristics that distinguished a big man from his fellows
included wealth, generosity, eloquence, physical fitness,
bravery, and supernatural powers. Men became big men
because they had certain personalities.
 A man who was determined enough could become a big man,
creating wealth through hard work and good judgment.
 His supporters, recognizing his past favors and anticipating
future rewards, recognized him as a leader and accepted his
decisions as binding.
The “big man” persuades people to
organize feasts, which distribute pork and
wealth. Shown here is such a regional
event, drawing on several villages, in
Papua New Guinea.
The bigman is an
informal leader in many
Melanesian
cultures. Much of his
influence is based on his
ability to distribute
resources, among which
pigs
are most important.