Stanford University Press

Political Anthropology Author(s): David Easton Source: Biennial Review of Anthropology, Vol. 1 (1959), pp. 210-262 Published by: Stanford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2949205 . Accessed: 12/10/2011 08:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Stanford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Biennial Review of Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

7
POLITICAL ANTHROPOLOGY
David Easton
.

University ofChicago

Anthropologists are concerned with such political mattersas the sources of social conflict and the integrative devices formutingit; the nature and function of law and legal processes; the impact of to the complexsocietiesupon primitive ones, with special attention the transformations of political consequences forpolitical structure; data to the soluelites; the applicationof available anthropological tion of urgent issues of political policy; and the introduction of anthropological conceptsand methodsintothestudyofmodem comin this field,I have plex societies. In coveringthe recentliterature on a few centralissues, and some two dozen chosen to concentrate and papers,thatseem to me of exceptionalinterest.To monographs meet the needs of thisvolume fora more comprehensive surveyof ofothernoteworthy theyears1956-57,abstracts publicationsofthese years are given at the end of this chapter. The burden of my argumentwill be that althoughthe title of such a subfielddoes not yet this essay is "political anthropology," a and will not exist until exist greatmany conceptual problemsare solved. Ad hoc researchis valuable and more of it is needed; but the centralneed of political anthropologists today is for a broad, to politics. In the past therehave been two theoreticalorientation basically different approaches to the study of politics in primitive systems.On the one hand, a few scholarshave directedtheirattentionto strictly themfor politicalphenomena,seekingto understand theirown sake. Originally sparkedby Sir HenryMaine and Louis H. in the work of Morgan,this grand,if slender,traditionis reflected Franz Oppenheimer, W. C. MacLeod, and R. H. Lowie, and more recentlyin AfricanPolitical Systems (11) and I. Schapera's (19)

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

211

book. The authorsof such studiesforthe mostpart have not undertakenthe directcollectionof politicaldata; rather, theyhave sought to make some theoreticalsense out of the researchof others. They have been theorists striving to providesome sortof theoretical matrix forthe further developmentof this area of anthropology. On the otherhand, thereare the fieldworkers, the collectorsof data, most of whom are concernedwith political phenomena as a matter of indirectratherthan of centralinterest.Since the publicationof African Political Systems therehas been much moreresearch on political questions; but aside fromethnographic descriptions of political life (2, 5, 6, 12, 14), or studies of some special aspect of politicallife (10, 23), thisincreasedvolume reflects efforts to determinethe effect of politicallifeon otheraspects of primitive societies, with the otheraspects normally the point of interest. For example, Turner (22) presentsimportant data on political lifeamongtheNdembu,but his majorconcernis withbroaderissues. He seeks to answersuch questionsas: Over what matters does conflictoccur? (These he findsto be such issues as succession,inheritance, and marriage and death payments.) What are the determinantsof these disputes? (These he identifies as the incompatibilitiesarisingfromthe coexistenceof the principlesof matrilineal descentand virilocalmarriage.) The Ndembu being a statelesssociety,how are social cohesion and stabilitymaintainedin the face of the stressesand strainsso created. (Cohesion and stabilityare fostered in part by ties and kinship, by political and economiccooperation,and in much largerpart by ritualistic reinforcement of an awareness among the Ndembu thattheyare a distinctsocial unit.) Since one of the major conflict areas is the question of successionto the village headship-an obvious political issue-Turner engages in considerablediscussionof political life at the village level. But his interest hereis onlyincidentalto the main questionof the regulation of conflict in general,of which political contention happens in this societyto be one important variant. The same emphasis is found in the extensivebody of literature thathas grownup in recentyearson the statelesstypeof segmentary lineage societies. Fortes and Evans-Pritchard (11), in theirIntroductionto African PoliticalSystems drew attention to the possibility

212

DAVID EASTON

of political systemson lineage segmentation. of basing a taxonomy societies is freYet we findthat subsequent work on segmentary among political quently much less concernedwith the differences and consequences of systemsas such than with the ramifications lineage structures: purely political different types of segmentary are incidentalto the emphasis on kinshipstructure considerations and its general social effects.Winter's(25) studyof the Bwamba is a case in point can be found in a veryperceptiveessay by Anotherillustration lineages,whichwe shall considerat some Smith(20) on segmentary has made a majorcontribution toward Smith below. Although length of the theoretical premisesof political anthropology, a formulation his foraysinto political theoryare an almost accidental adjunct to in lineage strucconcernforthe natureof segmentation his primary tures. As he himselfpoints out: in terms ofthemselves. cannot be explained systems, likekinship lineages, in a widerframe of referand analysis is onlyfruitful Theirexamination and proceeding by the comparative implications, ence withcomparative aspectof thisexaminathatone important method.We have suggested which and ideologies of myths tionmustbe the studyof the variations in theorganization ofgovernmental ordifferences tosimilarities correspond showvariability in theinterrelation and processes as thesein turn systems and administrative units and systems (p. 78). functions, ofpolitical in politicsonly in so faras politiIt is clear that Smithis interested the lineage structure. cal questions seem to affect and practices To put the matterformally, political institutions researchas independentvartend to be viewed in anthropological and on otherinstitutions fortheireffect primarily iables, of interest practices of the societyof which they are part. At first glance it may seem that any objection to this appraisal hairs. If the data gatheredare relevant is just a matterof splitting and the hypothesesdrawn fromthem are sound, what difference can it make to our ultimateknowledgeabout societieswhetherpolitics is viewed as a primaryor a secondaryconsideration? difference.One of The fact is that it makes a very important of the major consequences of the relegating political data to accescontinues not to say confusion, sorystatushas been thatambiguity,

POLITICAL ANTHROPOLOGY

213

to obscurethe analyticdistinction betweenpoliticaland otherforms of social behavior. And this has meant in turnthat in spite of the increasingvolume of research touchingon primitive political life, we are leftwith no reliable test to tell us what is to be included in or excluded fromthatset of politicalrelationships we call a political it is not a matterof whetherthe descripsystem. For the moment, is useful for researchpurposes,but only tion of such relationships of whethera reasonablywell articulateddefinition existsat all. As we shall see, the most impressivefact about the literature in the period underreview-and thisapplies equally to earlierwork-is the of political relationships degree to which the generalproperties are eitherassumed to be known or briefly sketchedin, as though the matterwere not in the least problematic. at Radcliffe-Brown's Let us look first characterization of politics, which exemplifies several typical shortcomings and ambiguitiesin thenatureofpoliticalphenomena. In effect, he overconceptualizing of political activity and overemphasizes the generalizesthe function role of coercive sanctions,especially force. latest and most comprehensive Radcliffe-Brown's descriptionof primitive political life appears in his suggestivePreface to African Political Systems(11). In it he tells us that"the political organizawhichis contionof a societyis thataspect of the total organization cemed withthe controland regulationof the use of physicalforce" (p. xxiii); the specificphrasingis frequently repeated by otheranthropologists.And fromthe same Preface: "in studyingpolitical we have to deal withthemaintenance or establishment organization, of social order,withina territorial framework, by the organized exthe use, or the possibility ercise of coerciveauthority of the through use of physicalforce"(p. xiv). the functionof a political It is clear that for Radcliffe-Brown to "the maintenanceor establishsystemconsistsof its contribution mentof social order." Many othersshare his point of view. For example, Gluckman (13) suggeststhat politics concernsproblemsof law and order,of assuring"public control"(pp. 71, 72) preserving and of warding offexternalthreats. And over internaldifferences, Schapera (19), who in otherrespectshas helped to clarify the criteria that mightbe used to identify political actions,believes that

214

DAVID EASTON

political systemsexistto guaranteeintemal cooperationas well as externalindependence (pp. 217-18). bias in these Firstof all, thereseems to be a slighteufunctional apparent assumptionthat a political systemmust formulations-an have positive consequences for a society;that it must in fact contributeto the maintenanceof social order. But let us assume that thisbias is as unintendedas it is unwarranted: i.e., thatwhat Radand othersintend to say is that political activityhas cliffe-Brown of the social order,whetherfor relevance only forthe preservation good or forill. no clear way of diswe are offered Even with thismodification political relationshipsfromother types, either empiritinguishing have cally or analytically.The factis thatall kindsof social activity and maintenanceof order; for consequences forthe establishment some scholarsorderis the centralproblemof all social science. In such any event,therecan be no doubt thatotheraspects of a society, in culture and ritual, as economic exchange,socialization,religion, of social order. But the narrowsense are relevantto the attainment if we were to call all such processes political,it would so broaden question would the concept as to make it useless. The important in which poway is the specific stillremainto be answered: What is related to to otherkinds of activity, as contrasted litical activity, or maintenanceof social order? the attainment more carefullythan many discriminated Here Radcliffe-Brown otherswho appear to share his formulation.For him political acrelatesto orderin a unique way, it is "the organized exercise tivity throughthe use, or the possibilityof the use of coercive authority Two elementsare involvedhere: theremustbe force." of physical fororderto emerge,and the of the coercingauthority organization coercion musthave to do with the use offorce.We shall examine both of these elementsmore closely. mean by organization?In this First,what does Radcliffe-Brown clear. When Prefacehe has used the word in one sense thatis fairly as an aspect of the "totalorganihe speaks of "politicalorganization" zation" of society in the passage already quoted, organizationis forrelationship.He is makingthe clearlybeing used as a substitute fromotherkinds politicalrelationships point thatwe can distinguish

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

215

even though in fact they may of social relationshipsanalytically, be combined in the same complexof relationships.This sometimes desirableformulation. He is identifyand theoretically is a familiar not as a structural mechanism. ing politicsas a function of a society, But when he speaks of the existenceof political organizationin sense and then makes it depend upon the presence this functional the idea of organiof the "organizedexerciseof coerciveauthority," it into a specifictype zation assumes a new dimension. He converts of means. If it is to conveyanything here,it mustsuggestthe existbut of a special ence not of just any kind of political relationship, kind in which a group of personsare related because theyare pursuing certain common goals. In this case the behavior would be directedto the goal of exercisingcoercive authority.This implies in the much more limitedsense the use of the concept organization implied when we speak of a business or religiousorganization. It between the correspondsto what we mean when we discriminate religiousorganizationof society,by which we referto all types of among persons,and a religiousorganization, religiousrelationships by whichwe referto a specificcollectionof personsjoined together in the pursuitof certainreligiousgoals. The ambiguityof the term plagues Radcliffe-Brown when he to the stateless societies discussed attemptsto apply his definition in AfricanPolitical Systems. He might easily have demonstrated or in his terms, that these societies all display political functions, of some sort. But because he associated have political organization with the existenceof an organized coercive political relationships he was compelled to go much further.He had to show authority, can be identified in stateless thatsuch a specific, organizedauthority systems.It is here that he encounteredsevere problems,which he avoided only by a subtletyof reasoningthat in the end subverted his whole conceptualizationof political life. of statelesssystemsis the lack of an One of the characteristics tranobvious and unmistakablecentral organizationof authority scendingthe maximallevel of lineage segmentation.For example, the societythatRadcliffe-Brown selects amongthe Bantu Kavirondo, thereis no administrative or otherexplicitform forspecial mention, at least in the usual meaning of the term,linking of organization,

216

DAVID EASTON

the clan segments together withina structure of authority.To have accepted thisinterpretation, however,would have forcedRadcliffeBrown to exclude this society fromthe range of those possessing politicalrelationships, or organization in the more generalizedsense of the term. He was too aware that some means for political control existseven in such groups as these to have readily yielded to thispossibility.He could have redefined his views of the natureof political relationships to have made it reasonable to include these societies;but insteadhe chose a highlyrefined interpretation wherein he makes two points. First,he legitimately observes that force as a sanctionneed not be implemented by a small specialized group but may be undertaken collectively by a society,as frequently happens when opinionin a primitive is roused againstthose community who are viewed as a social menace. The spontaneous arousal of public opinionmay end withthe death or expulsionof a pernicious offender.Even in societies that do not have formalgovernment, forceful sanctionsmay in thisway be imposed. Second, he suggests that if the behavior of a group under circumstances like the above could have been carefully observed,"it would have been foundthat [those involved] were directedby leaders who had some measure of recognizedauthority" is wherethe or(p. xv). Here, he suggests, sense of the term) of the sanctionlies. ganization (in the narrower It is clear thatin thus turning to the assumed presence of informal enforcersof an emergentpublic sentiment, Radcliffe-Brown a good point,at least to the extentthathe was morethan stretching such an informal structure of enforcement, if it sought to identify included within does exist,with the organized means of authority thateven the most his definition. We can agree withhis assumption of groupactionpossesses some minimalinformal informal structure; leaders of group action with an organbut to equate such informal is to refineaway any special meaning to the term ized structure sense. organizationin his second and more restrictive into which his conceptualizationof politics led This difficulty to his failureto view politics consistently him can be attributed in terms. Althoughthe first definition analyticratherthan structural could be we quoted indicatesthathe realized politicalrelationships viewed simplyas an analyticelementin society,in the body of his

POLITICAL

ANTBROPOLOGY

217

discussion his conceptualizationimperceptiblyshifts. He begins in termsof the particularstructures to definethese relationships in which they mightappear; and it is this formulation that trapped him into attempting a forced and insupportableinterpretation of his data. If we turnto the second elementin his definition-the assertion that the presumed organized authority would exercise its power throughthe use of force-we findit equally laden with difficulties. it raises the question about the wisdom of confining Ultimately political relationships to those situationsin which force can be ema course of action. ployed to implement On thispoint,Schapera (19) has performed an invaluable service by drawingtogetherthe littleinformation that existsabout the political systemsof such groups as the Bushmen and Bergdama. Bushmen societies, he points out, consist of small bands, seldom more than a hundredpersons,linked almost exclusively numbering ties. In reviewingthe data about processes by biological and affinal for settlement of disputes among the memberswithinthese bands, Schapera concludes that in any reasonable connotation of the term we must acknowledge the presence of such activity. government, The male eldershave and exercisea special claim to deal withmattersof concernto the band as a whole. We assume thatit is acceptthe adjustment of disputesand decisionsabout the able to interpret collective courses of action of the band as constituting political activity.But if we insist,as Radcliffe-Brown does, that theremust be an organized sanctioning group,then to include the male elders of the kin group in such a categorywould be to make the category meaningless.And even if thiswere not so, thereis no evidence that they undertaketo implementtheirinformaldecisions or opinions, taken unanimously, by physical force. At the most, the collective coercion of the band is psychologicalor moral in character, and to equate moral compulsionwith physical force would be to divest the idea of physicalforceof all meaning. The data would therefore to place Bushmen outside the categoryof compel Radcliffe-Brown those with political systems, and would thus contradict his implicit premisethat all societieshave some sortof political system. I have dealt here extensively withRadcliffe-Brown's conceptuali-

218

DAVID EASTON

attributes of political zation of the over-allor gross distinguishing difficulties they occasion, relationships, not because of the intrinsic but largelybecause no authorin the period under review (except conceptionsto the same M. G. Smith) has developed his underlying degree. It is particularlyremarkablethat in the Introductionto one of the few volumesin recentyears to AfricanPolitical Systems, attempt an overview of anthropologicalthinkingabout politics, sidesteppedthisproblem. Fortesand Evans-Pritchard have carefully At best we have onlysome meagerevidence about what the authors do not believe, e.g., that theyhesitateto endorse Radcliffe-Brown's definition of politics. for distinguishing their In the first place, theirmajor criterion two basic types of political system,states and stateless,is that in or authority struca stateless governmental system thereis no specific of sancture or otherformof organizationforthe implementation tions. Yet the editors are quite explicit in their convictionthat political systems prevail not only in statelesslineage societies,but assertthat"three in the pure kinshiptype as well. They specifically of can be (p. 6, my italics), of distinguished" types politicalsystem two. which states and statelessconstitute In the second place, at one pointtheyview a definition of politiin termsof two formsof forcethey call "military cal relationships action and legal sanctions"as a "narrow"one (p. 23), which would theirdissatisfaction with an emphasis on forceas a seem to reflect attributeof political relationships.But beyond this distinguishing spite of the obvious and necessaryfrequency negativeintimation-in the with which phrase political systemappears in the editors'Inand in spite of the fact that this phrase appears in the troduction aid in determintitleof the volume-we are leftwithoutany further ing what aspect of societytheyinclude under the concept political. In selectingthe organized use of forceas the gross distinguishneitherRadcliffe-Brown nor those ing quality of political systems, who sharehis pointofview can be consideredadventurous pioneers. Rather they have been followinga course laid down by Thomas reinforced by Max Hobbes, well markedout by later utilitarianism, students of professional Weber, and validated by many generations of politics. It is an approach that research in Americanpolitical

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

219

science has all but abandoned, althoughit still has enough vitality to raise its head fromtime to time. It is clear to us today thatthe selectionof organization and force as criteria was a productof the culturally significant problemsgenerated duringthe many centuriesin Westerncivilizationwhen political units were engaged in extendingthe territorial authority of theircentralizedgovernments and in developingtheirnational solidarity. The establishment of national political units depended on the assertionof maximumcontrolover a territory and its people by virtueof the capacity to provide law and order,which is identified as sovereignty. Sovereignty in turnwas associated withthe maintenance of government organized to provide stability of control,and withtheabilityto enforcedecisionsthrough the claim to a monopoly of the legitimateuse of force,to use the familiarWeberian phrase. It is ironicthat anthropology, which has been optimallysituated because of the breadth of its interests, should be so tardyin transcendingthe ethnocentric limitsof past political conceptualization. That the data were therewaitingto be appreciatedhas recently been demonstrated.Reviewing four types of South African societiesthe Bushmen,Bergdama, Hottentots, and Bantu-that range from highlyorganized to pure kinshipsystems, Schapera (19) is able to conclude thatno societyis devoid of politicalrelationships, not even the society,like that of the Bushmen,in which, as we have seen, organized coercion cannot be said to prevail. As Lowie (16) had vigorouslyargued in 1927, and as Schapera explicitypoints out, "organizedforceis only one of the mechanisms makingfororderly lifein any community, and to adopt it as the distinctive criterion of political organizationwould mean neglectingunduly the various othersthathelp to unitepeople intoself-governing groups"(p. 218). A more useful conceptualization of the characterof political interaction seems long overdue in anthropology. Ways of viewing the differences between political and other kinds of social relationships are neitherrightnor wrongbut merely more or less useful for scientific purposes. One such purpose in is the comparison ofpoliticalsystems anthropology in orderto derive generalizations applicable to different categoriesof systems.Efforts

220

DAVID EASTON

been have therefore to develop an adequate mode of classification and ambiguitiesassovery important.Nowhere do the difficulties let alone to cope with basic ciated with the reluctanceto clarify, in political analysisshow up more prominently. conceptualmatters to examineat lengthone of the findit instructive We shall therefore most recentproposals for a typology. to AfricanPolitical Systems. In Here again we must turn first the editors offereda classification their provocative Introduction, thathas providedthe majorpoint of departureformostsubsequent political fordifferentiating sallies in this area. Their chiefcriterion structure, systemsis the presence or absence of an administrative When a societypossesses also called (interchangeably)government. we have a class of political systemsto structure, a governmental does not which they give the name states; when such a structure exist,we have a residual category called stateless societies. Dein the society,stateless pending upon the kind of kinshipstructure societiesbreak down into two subclasses,neitherof which is given by corporatelineage a specificname. One subclass is characterized in such societiesby means of an equiliorderis maintained segments; brium of competinglineage segments. The other subclass is disin which no segmentation tinguishedby a pure kinshipstructure relations are coterminous with kinship takes place. Here "political relations and the political structureand kinship organizationare fused" (pp. 6-7). completely two of This typologyhas been subjected to various criticisms, are those in there who effect here. First, which I shall consider adopt the criteriaproposed by the editorsof AfricanPolitical Sysit further, makingit yield intermedithereby temsbut seek to refine ary classes of systems. Southall (21), for example,has shown that lineages and an instance in which both segmentary the Alur offer different existside by side, but perform funccentralizedauthorities tions. The lineages have controlover succession and inheritance of ritual obwithintheirsegmentsand undertakethe performance of the use in the violence authorities regulate ligations. The central among the lineincludingconflict occupied by the society, territory ages themselvesat the higherlevels, and defend the whole society

POLITICAL ANTHROPOLOGY

221

against externalthreats. Lineage and political personnel are not always or even usually clearly distinguishable but theirfunctions are, and therefore politicaland kin relationships can be demarcated. Thus, Southall added a new class to the two already established a type that by AfricanPolitical Systems. In the Alur,he identified shares the characteristics of unitarystates,since the Alur have an of authority, structure and of statelesssocieties,since overarching they also have counterposedsegmentary lineages. This new kind he called a segmentary of intermediary state. Howpoliticalsystem ever, Southall was in no way challengingthe principlesof classificationalready introducedin AfricanPolitical Systems;he simply of these criteriacould be showed thatsince a different combination meriteda separate class name. observed,such systems Modifications of thissort,important once the basic principlesof a typologyare accepted, are relativelyminorif one undertakesto those principles. Justsuch a challenge the assumptions underlying in the second type of criticism, undertaken challengeis represented in an incisive,closelyreasoned,theoretical critiqueby M. G. Smith (20). To be sure,Smith's revision notonlyofthetypology in African Political Systems but of the whole studyof politics,is promptedless how primitive opby a concernforunderstanding political systems of segmentary erate than by a desire to explore the determinants But thisfactdoes not in any lineages as a kind of kinshipstructure. of his criticisms. way reduce the cogency or effectiveness If we revise our conceptualizationof primitivepolitics, Smith mustthen disappear as one of the criteriafor argues,segmentation states fromstatelesssocieties,or for that matterfor distinguishing differentiating any kind of political system. Segmentationis not it is commonto all. The way systems unique to any kind of system; of in kind units into which they are subdivided. is the differ may he recognizes,will have important Variationsin typesof segments, consequences forthe operationof a system. But since segmentsof theirmere presence one sortor anotherare endemic to all systems, a of to cannot serve distinguish special type system. The task here will be to inquireinto the details of Smith'sproposed mode of conboth formeetingthe ceptualizationand to evaluate its significance

222

DAVD EASTON

specificneed to classifysystemsand for undertaking any kind of researchin politics. Smithsees segmentation as occurring under the threefollowing conditions: (1) larger units subdivide into smaller ones; (2) the segmenting groupsact as unitsforthe achievement oftheirpurposes, that is, they are corporatein nature; (3) this kind of division is fundamentalto the social structure.When segmentation is thus conceived, Smithcorrectly points out, statelesssocieties cannot be distinguished fromstates. Nor forthat matter, he argues, can any political system, since all systemsmust contain such segments. It is true,he says,thatif we look at statelesssocieties,we see thatthey possess lineages,or othertypesof segments, and that these grow or change throughfission, accretion,and fusionof various units. But this is also the case with centralizedprimitive states,althoughthe units of segmentation may not be corporatelineages but localized groups,age-regiments, or associations. Furthermore, he points out, we need not stop withprimitive societies;we can go on to complex modem ones in which we also findsegmentation, even thoughthe units of divisionare quite different and take the formof political parties, interestgroups, political leaders with specificfollowings, and the like. Not onlydoes Smithsee all political systems to be similarin this it just as difficult respect, but he finds to distinguish statesfrom stateless societiesin termsof the presenceor absence of organizedstructures of authority.He points out that in stateless societies with corporatelineages where there are no all-embracingstructures of hierarchies of authority do exist,at least withinthe lineauthority, thisthatstatelesssocietiescanages themselves.He concludesfrom not be distinguished fromstates even by this criterion. of primitive Seekingto explainhow students could oversystems look the universalpresence of authority structures and segmentation,he findsthe answer in a failure at the conceptual level. He to remedythisfailure. From the point of view therefore undertakes of political science,his conceptual repertory is somewhatunusual; his term that this novelty yet he is normallyso clear in defining need not stand in the way of a carefulanalysis of his ideas. One qualificationshould be made, however: Smith gives the concept

POLITICAL ANTH1ROPOLOGY

223

politicala veryspecial meaning,quite different from its usual meaning in this chapter. For Smith,it is possible to compare political systems only if we are prepared to take an analytic approach to political action and view it as just one aspect of a social act. Political life is therefore an aspect of the whole of social life,a set of actions ratherthan a set of units or particularkinds of structures of action. This set of actionshe calls the governmental process; it corresponds to what I have been identifying as a political system. In Smith'swords, government consistsof those actions or aspects of behavior "by which the public affairs of a people or any social group are directedand managed" (p. 47). In theory, althoughnot necessarilyin practice,this over-allset of actions can be divided into two subsets: administrative and "political"actions. Administrative actionsare those directedtoward the organizationand effectuation of policy or programsof action. authorized of They consist processes for-the managementof affairs of a governmental unit. Authority is the assertion of a right to undertake an activityand presumablythe acknowledgment of this right by othersin the society. In a highlycentralizedgovernmental unit, the administrative authorities lay claim to a monopolyof the use of force. "Political"actions,on the otherhand, constitute a "politicalsystem" or subset of actions in governmental processes orientedto the of policy,or to the exertionof power over shaping and influencing it. The "political system"in this special sense consistsof competition amongindividualsand groupsforthispower. Unlike authority, Smithargues,power cannot be hierarchical;once it is, it has been convertedinto authority.Rather,it is "inherently" segmentary-it consistsof differentiated centersof power composed of individuals or groups competingfor controlof public affairs.The particular, definableunitsor segments which power conflict through manifests itselfwill varyfromsocietyto societydependingpresumablyupon otherfactorswhich Smithdoes not discuss. He is carefulto stressthat this distinction between administrative and "political"subsystems withinthe governmental process is purely analytic. Actually,no unit of government need specifically

224

DAVID EASTON

and exclusively incorporate eitherone of these kinds of action. He pointsout that it is theoretically possible and in fact oftenhappens thatunitsparticularly characterized by one type of action may contain behaviorthatfallsinto the other. Thus in a centralizedadministrative organization it is not unusual to findgroupsand individuals competingfor power. And similarlyin power segments,such as corporatelineages, or we might add, such as interestgroups, administrative actions may and normallydo obtain. In formalterms, what he is sayinghere is that variable structures may perform the administrative and "political" functions;and that any given structuremay fulfill both functions with varyingdegrees of emphasison one or the other. Smith postulates that in every society both the administrative and "political"aspects of action mustbe presentwithinthe governmentalprocesses. Withinhis broad schema he is then able to show the weakness of the classificatory system proposed in AfricanPolitical Systems. If all governmental processes involve administrative and "political" functions, how is it possible to categorize different in terms ofthepresenceor absence ofone or anotherofthese systems kinds of activities? It is true that in primitive states force is regulated through the administrative ofhierarchically activities organized but this does not mean that they lack segmentation authorities; in the formof groups competingforpolitical power, such as associaor territorially based unitsunderthe leadership tions,age-regiments, in the so-called statelessor acephalof strong individuals. Similarly, ous societies,although it is correctto identify the competingsegments in the corporate lineages, neverthelesswithin the lineages themselves,lineage affairsare directed by an organized administrative structure. In neither case, therefore,is a governmental kindof action. If thisis so, Smithconcludes, processdevoid of either in termsof presence or absence of one or the othercandifferences not exist. And he feels he has therebydestroyedthese criteriaas the basis for a useful systemof classification. The meritsof Smith'sanalysisare clear. It demonstrates beyond doubt thatwithoutan antecedentand articulatetheoretical orientation to the studyof primitive political life,comparisonand classification are apt to fall into grievous error. It indicates that to the

POLMCAL ANTHROPOLOGY

225

locus exaggeratesthe structural extent thatsuch a conceptualization of controlover the use of forceand sees this as the centralpolitical it is bound to neglect other equally if not more sigphenomenon, nificantvariables. No longer will it be possible for students of that go on not only primitive politicsto ignorethe power struggles in lineage systemsbut also in all other primitivesystems,quite to the conflicts over policy familiarto us comparable functionally in complex societies. which contributions, But in spiteof theseveryreal and important will certainlyelevate the study of primitive systemsto a new and does display a numplateau, Smith'sformulation highertheoretical thatcould seriously impairresearch. ber of equally real shortcomings step frompostulating In the first place, it is a long and important actions in organized administrative the presence of hierarchically all political systems-usingthe termin my sense-to demonstrating this to be the case, especially in kinshipand lineage or noncentralized systems.The evidence he adduces is far fromconvincing. In within the lineage systemshe locates administration segmentary hierarchy lineages. But he nowhere points to an administrative amongmaximallineages or clans. This was the majorpoint existing of the editorsof AfricanPolitical Systems. It was this very difference between the organized authoritieswithin the lineages and theirabsence between the lineages at the higherlevels that struck and therefore as a useful criterion forpurthemas most significant No one had ever argued thatno administraposes of classification. tive behavior took place in stateless societies. Fortes and Evansor administration, in Pritchardmerelysaw the scope of authority Smith'sterms,to be more restricted.It embraced only subgroups withinthe society,not the whole society. In the second place, Smith's theoreticalanalysis is still at so broad a level of conceptualizationthat it has managed to analyze among sysaway the possibilityof really searchingfor differences consistofpurely he has convincedus thatall systems tems. Assuming at most he provides us actions and power conflicts, administrative the gross similarities with criteriafor identifying among political differ.But the where us to see for few but they enabling systems as the similarities.Morecall foras muchunderstanding differences

226

DAVID EASTON

over,his analysisimpliesthatthereare few groundsforconsidering states and statelesssocieties as representing two different types of systems, whereas to all observersof these societies,substantialand important differences in the way the political systemsoperate do seem to exist. It is essential to provide a schema that will enable us to note and understanddifferences as well as similarities, if a usefulmode of analysis and typologyis to emerge. To discover significant differences among political systems,it will be necessaryto develop an alternative to Smith'sproposed conceptualization.Some extendedthoughts on thissubjecthave already been set forth elsewhere (8, 9) so that here we need only referto a few of the major elements. For the purpose of clarity, I have foundit usefulto avoid characterizingthe political aspects of societyas governmental. In modern complex society,the termgovernment is freighted with such a connotations that I shall reserveit for varietyof specificstructural reference to thosesocial roles thatare devoted to the task of making and executingday-to-day political decisions. In its place I prefer the more familiarterm,political system. I shall use this phrase to the mostinclusiveset of political actionsin a social system. identify Political action will be viewed as an aspect of social action in general. An act will be political,as against economic,religious,or kin-type, forexample,when it is more or less directly related to the formulation and executionof bindingor authoritative decisions for a social system(see Easton [8]). A decisionis an act that allocates valued things amongtwo or morepersonsor groups,eitherby granting something or by denyingsomething.A decision is authoritative when the persons it affects consider themselvesbound by it. For our limitedpurposes here,it does not matterwhy a decision is accepted or what its consequencesare forthe social system as a whole. From thispointof view, politicaldecisionsare made in all kinds of concretesocial systems: families,extendedkinshipgroups,agesets, associations,corporatelineages, business firms, trade unions, parties,and so on. Each of these social units has sets of activities that we can designate as theirpolitical systems, in so far as any binding decisions are made and put into effect. But in political

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

227

science and other social disciplines,we are ultimatelyconcerned and change of societyas a whole, maintenance, withthefunctioning, unless the contextindicates Hence the mostinclusivesocial system. to those activithe idea of politicalsystem I shall confine otherwise, related to the makingof bindingdecisions ties more or less directly for a societyand its major subdivisions. forthe analysis pointsof reference To provide some convenient question: What it is usefulto pose thefollowing ofpoliticalsystems, if a societyis to be able kinds of activitiesneed to be undertaken such binding decisions? As we have seen, to make and implement and Smith has isolated two kinds of activities,the administrative is not thatthisspeciMy criticism the "political"or power-oriented. but that it is too general to be of much use. is erroneous, fication kinds Instead,I suggestthatthereare at least fivebasically different binding if engage must society a of activitiesin which membersof decisions are to be made and put into effect: (1) the formulation (4) adjudication, of demands, (2) legislation,(3) administration, and (5) the marshalingof supportor solidarity.For our purposes is the most important. here the last activity First,if a decision is to be made, it mustbe possible forat least some of the membersof the societyto press demands with regard to what they thinkought to be done. Without the existence of demands there would be no need to make potentiallyconflicting choices between alternativecourses of actions. And especially as the population of the societyincreases,it is necessaryto have acdemands in a way so that decisions tivitydevoted to formulating can be made. In some complexsocieties,forexample,opinionleaders, the mass media, interestgroups,and the like presenta multiof parties demands; it is part of the function tude of heterogeneous sortout what are viewed as realistic them, to collectthese,synthesize relatively theminto contestable, formulate or desirable alternatives, homogeneousissues,and thenseek decisionsbased upon the acceptance of one or anotheralternative.Withoutthe reductionof many demands to a relativefew,it would be impossiblefordecision-makers to cope with them. Second, processes must exist to allow these alternativesto be intobindingrules validatingbehavior. This acted on and converted

228

DAVID EASTON

It may range conceiveof as legislation. is whatwe can broadly by theeldersof achieved consensus from theinformal structurally laws of a self-conscious to the highly a smallband of Bushmen modern legislature. that or activities processes there mustbe administrative Third, need to be will implement the decisions.Personsand facilities of thegoals theattainment toward and directed initially organized process. defined through thelegislative that in everysystem activities thereare adjudicative Fourth, made deof deliberately whether in theform rules, invoke binding requires it,and as theoccasion laws activated cisions or customary breaches. in theface of presumed applythem also be activities there must thatresult in themarshalAndfifth, Thereare three of solidarity. and thedevelopment ingof support, mobilized in every is typically whichsupport levelsor fociaround comand thepolitical theregime, thegovernment, political system: of theseconcepts see [9].) development munity. (For a fuller leadersand an assoIf a government (in the senseof political is to makeits acts binding, it ciatedadministrative organization) for effective bothitskey must be able to mobilize poweror support In complex masssocieties, forexample, govmenand itsdecisions. mobilizeby sponsoring appropriate policies,by adroit ernments use ofthepotential ofpolitical and andbymaking parties publicity, fora government will therefore involve interest groups. Support ofsolidarity around alternative to themobilization devoted activity and organizations demandsand policies,symbols, personalities, out decisions. and with associated binding carrying making in thisbroadsenseis to be capableofperformIf a government to support ofthesystem must be prepared themembers ingitstasks, thewayin which and structures thatorganize norms theparticular mustbe willing are performed. Thatis, they activities all political or regime.Herewe are identiorder" the"constitutional to support as they areoften rulesofthegame, described, thefundamental fying lifeand the particular in political way of participation regulating inthegiven Whenwe distinguish society. political power organizing a parliamena presidential from from a dictatorship, a democracy from a republic, a monarchy we are or,in theolderstyle, tary form,

POLITICAL

ANTEROPOLOGY

229

adopting criteriaof differentiation that referto the regimelevel of the system. It is quite possible and has often happened that the support around a regime is eroded, without,however,disturbing the solidarityof the political community. Political community refers to the most inclusive aggregate of persons who identify with each other as a group,and who are prepared to regulate theirdifferences by means of decisions accepted as binding because they are made in accordance with shared political normsand structures.As a rule, those who do not accept these normsand procedures or who are excluded fromthemare viewed as strangers or aliens,personswho do not belong to the political community.It is quite possible for a person to withdrawhis supportfroma given government, and to seek to change the regime,withouttherebyindicatingany intention of modifying his allegiance to the political community.For example,members of the Frenchpoliticalsystem were recently quite dissatisfied with a series of French governments and with many aspects of the regimecalled the FourthRepublic. Their supportof the new regime,the Fifth Republic, and its new government did not necessarily indicate any intention to withdrawfromor alter the integrity of the French political community. It is clear that we can distinguish analyticallythe three levels I have called the government, regime,and community.The utility in doing so derivesfrom the factthatdifferent mechanisms typically contribute to themaintenance of supportin each case. And although diminution of supportat each level normallyhas consequences for the other levels, each may vary quite independently of the other. Unless we are carefulto identify the consequences of variationsof supportstructure for each level, we shall be likely to obscure importantdifferences in the natureof the political struggle in the various political systems being considered. Of the fivetypesof activities thatI have postulatedas necessary forthe maintenanceof any political system, Smith'sconceptualizationof politicscompels us to pay particularattention to those activities concernedwithsupport. As we have seen, Smith'sidentification of the administrative and "political" aspects of a political system

230

DAVID EASTON

systems.Fromthe point gave us too littleleveragefordistinguishing societies,this weakness is espeprimitive of view of understanding to isolate the subset of activitiesthat he cially true of Smith'seffort for thatis, the nonhierarchical competition calls a "politicalsystem," only to do so he was able to identify power over policy. In striving among various "political systems," one kind of critical difference ranginvolved, and thisdealt withthevariationin typesof segments to age-sets,regiments, ing fromcorporatelineages forsome systems ones for modern and the like for others,and to entirelydifferent has succeeded in obsystems.We can now see thatthisformulation differences:variationsin the scuringtwo otherkinds of important and the among primitivesystems, nature of the supportstructure as comdifferent foci towardwhich supportis directedin primitive pared with modernsystems. grantedthat With regardto the natureof the supportstructures, witheach otherforcontrol struggle segments in all politicalsystems here emphasizes over policy,the mode of analysisI am suggesting that emerge the need to look forthe variationsin political systems members do How and mobilized. is generated support from theway humanand material, resources, of a societyorganizeto mobilizetheir roles and their defor or against the occupants of governmental cisions,the regime,and the community? of statelesssocietiesforspecial In selectingthe lineage segments the editors of AfricanPolitical Systemsseized upon an attention, states, fromprimitive aspect thatdid in factmarkthese societiesoff althoughnot forthe reasons theygave. Statelesssocietiescould not because of theirpossessionof segments;Southall (21), be distinctive Barnes (3), Fallers (10), Turner (22), and numerousothersbeside Smithhave shown thatsome stateswithvaryingdegrees of centralunits. But even though also displaysuch segmentary ized authorities not quite put their could the editors of AfricanPolitical Systems in at least trying on it, theyshowed deep political sensitivity finger between states and stateless systemsin to explain the differences proved to be, termsof segmentation.Inadequate as this criterion toward reacting the fact is that the editorswere quite intuitively process itself. In else in the nature of the segmentation something what they detected was that generallyin statelesssocieties, effect,

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

231

and as it laterturnedout,in some centralizedstatesas well, the support structure formedby varying kindsof alliances or combinations among the segmentstends to be unstable. Fission, fusion,and the accretionof segments, place the whole political systemupon shifting sands. This is such a criticalfactorin understanding the nature ofthiskindofsegmentary system thatitmerits muchcloserattention. Althoughall systems may have segments, thereare some systems in which the segmentsare relativelystable in number,size, and tendencyto maintaintheiralliances. There are others, however,in frewhich the segmentsare expected to and do undergorelatively quent subdivision,and typically readjust theiralliances with equal and modease. We can agree withSmiththatall systems, primitive em, are segmentary; but we also need to recognize that only some tend to maintainto a high rate of continuing systems segmentation. Here we are distinguishing fromsegwhat we can call segmentary lies notin theabsence ofall changes menting systems.The difference in size, number, and alliances of segments but ratherin the factthat in some systems the rate of change is much slower than in others. And in thosein whichthe rate of change is relatively rapid,the supIt is this port structure displaysimportant qualitative differences. thatwe mustgloss over if we are contentsimply major dissimilarity valid pointthat all systems to stop withthe perfectly possess political groups or segments. in rate of change that Barnes In effect it was just this difference (3) was pointingup in his study of the Fort JamesonNgoni. He sought to give it more graphic conceptual significance by calling this systema "snowball state." In his words,"the Ngoni State was like a snowball which growslargerand largeras it is pushed from place to place, but stillremainsuniform throughout.At last it becomes unwieldyand mustbe brokenbeforeit can be moved further. The same accumulationof snow then begins again with each fragthe rate of internalsubdiviment" (pp. 60-61). In othersystems, that the snowballseldomif ever sion or segmentation so maybe slow into separate and that is, seldom fragments subdivides externally, independentpolitical systems. subdividein a numberof ways. New segments Systems typically of a preexisting or subdivision may ariseas a resultofthefission unit,

232

DAVID EASTON

the accretionof a fragment fromsome otherunit,or the fusionof two or more like units. The segmentation may occur internally, in which case the new arrangement of segmentsmay simplyadd to or subtractfromthe numberof available units to which the political leadership can turn. It may occur externally, when segmentshive off from the old societyentirely and establishthemselves as new and competingindependentpolitical systems. In hiving off, the newly created segmentschange the internalsupportstructure by reducing the number of segmentsthat mightotherwisebe available in the competitionamong groups. They also change the externalsetting by adding to the numberof systemswith which the given system must compete or by swelling the power potential of these competitors. In systemsin which the process of segmentation is relatively easy, common,and culturally expected,the mobilizationof support for any purpose that calls forjoint action involvesa constantchallenge to the political leadershipwhich mustseek to maintaina balance of supportin the face ofrelatively in the support frequent shifts structure.This gives the political struggle in such systems a special characterderivingfromthe natureof supportavailable at the governmentallevel. in the supportstructure Instability has consequences at the comlevel as well as the governmental munity level. In primitive systems as opposed to modernsystems, conflict seldom arises over the nature of the regime. In moderncomplexsystems attemptsare commonly made to change not only the occupants of the governmental roles and the policies they pursue, but also the very way of organizing the relationships of rightsand among these roles, the distribution obligationsassociated withthem,and the normsgoverning political action. For example,the change fromthe Weimar Republic to the Third Reich, or fromthe Fourth to FifthRepublic in France, has involved such a transformation. In these cases, however,although the governments and regimes were altered, the integrity of the political community was not violated. In contrast mostpolitical upheavals in primitive systems are not efforts to undermine an existing but efforts to alterthe rulers regime, or theirpolicies withinthe contextof the same regime,or to split

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

233

away entirely from the politicalcommunity. Segmentsmay hive off, in segmenting systems, to establishentirely new chiefdoms; but the regimeof the originalsystemis not modified, nor forthatmatteris a different kind of regime introducedinto the new systemformed as a resultof the withdrawal. The fact that dispute is likelyto occur over adherence to the political community or withrespectto governmental roles and policies, gives political strugglein highlysegmenting primitive systems a unique character.Not onlydoes politicalconflict involvea possible highrate of realignment of supportgroupswithina politicalsystem, but it also may give riseto the constant threat thatsome supportsegmentswill findit possible to withdrawentirely from the community. They may thenfuse withor adhere to othersystems in the environment of the originalsystem, adding to the competitivestrength of these systems;or theymay simplyexistas a new and independent system.In eitherevent,the resultof segmentation has been a modificationin the externalsituationwith which the parent systemis now confronted.It is clear that not only is the internalsupport structure likelyto change frequently, but also the externalsystem of alliances may be subject to a rate of fluctuation to corresponding the rate of externalsubdivision. around the two majorpoliticalfoci in dispute,governSolidarity mentand community, is much less stable in primitive than systems in thosein whichthesegments the supportstructure constituting find it more difficult to fragment and multiply, or fuse and withdraw fromthe competitionfor power. In modern democraticsystems, forexample,entry into the politicalmarketplace forsuch segments as new interest groupsis verydifficult. The rate of internal subdivision of existingsegmentsor of the emergenceof entirely new ones is verylow; the supportstructure and its componentsegmentstend to achieve a fairly high degree of stability.A segmentmay fluctuate in strength, thatis, in the measure of supportit can give fromtime to time; some segmentsmay disappear entirely.But in any decade it is easy to enumeratethe numberof new segmentsof any significance that emerge in the political arena. This is particularly apparentwhen we turnfrominternalto externalfission.In modernsystems, separatism, or external fission, and

234

DAVID EASTON

are processesthatoccur fusionand accretion, irredentism or external even when theydo occur,they And certainly relatively infrequently. are not accepted as part of the normaland expected behavior as is segmenting systems. true of primitive can be expected to varyfor Of course,the rate of segmentation to discover over time,and it should not be difficult any givensystem not all coman actual measureof thisforany system.Furthermore, We need plex or mass societieshave the same rate of segmentation. only look at the so-called developingmass societies today, such as of new political Indonesia, to witnessconditionsunder which entry groups and disappearance of old ones occur at a high rate,relative aspects at least to European societies. And one of the interesting of primitive Africansocietiesunderthe impact of European culture is thedisappearanceofolderkindsofpoliticalgroupsand theconflict groupsand the new ones that thatoccurs between these traditional place (see Apter[I]). But intothepoliticalmarket are seekingentry can be expected in spiteof thefactthatfewif any supportstructures here is that a major to remainstatic,the point thatI am suggesting sysnot onlybetween modernand primitive area of differentiation, tems, but also among primitivesystemsthemselvesis the rate of and the foci with respect both internaland external, segmentation, to which the supportsegmentsare relevant. What requiresfurther are the consequences this has for the nature of the investigation political strugglein the respectivesystems. From the point of view of futureresearchin this area a host of questionsmaybe suggested. What are thevarioustypesof segments rates of that constitute supportstructures?What are the different of resiover giventimespans? Under what conditions segmentation systypes of authority dential patterns, kinshipor social structure, tems,modes of subsistence,technicalor physical means of control and the like can we expect differential in the hands of authority, the rates of segmentation?What are the conditionsthat determine a given thepoliticalmarket and exitfrom rate of entry place or from of allipolitical systemforvarious segmentsand of recombination ances among them? What are the typical objectives of support has thisupon the politiand what effect systems groupsin different

POLITICAL ANTEHOPOLOGY

235

cal struggle? Answersto such questionswill help to shed light on the differential effectsof variationsin the nature of the support structures of political systems. In identifying the rate of segmentation as one of the significant variables of political systems, we have been examiningonly one of thepointsimplicitly suggestedby the isolationof the so-called stateless societies. To do so, however,I have had to make an assumption thatcan no longerbe allowed to lie hidden,an assumptionadopted extensively and withoutquestionthroughout the literature on primitive politics. We are told thatthose societiesdesignatedas statelessare completely devoid of organized authority, and that order is achieved notby the activities of a centralized body formakingand implementing decisions,but simplyby the "balanced oppositionamong segments"or the counterposition of like segmentary units. A political system can therefore be identified in such societiesbut it is different fromother political systems. In stateless societies, it is said, the political functionsare performedsolely throughthe competitive forpower and positionamong the juxtaposedsegments. struggle If we were to accept the implicationsof this analysis,then it seems to me thatwe would notbe justified in sayingthatsuch societiesmanifest politicalsystems.There is littlethatis peculiarlypolitical in the balancing of groupsforthe maintenanceof order,as we have already seen. I have soughtto locate the specifically political aspect of any societyin its capacity to make and execute binding decisions. The fact that most studentsof statelesssocieties have taken it forgrantedthatthese societiesdo possess politicalsystems need not be considereddecisive here. It may have seemed naturalto anthropologists to assume that statelesssocieties must have political systems,but thereis no inherent or ineluctablereason why thisshould be so. In statelesssocietiescomposed of corporatelineages,forexample, thereis no reason why we should not view each lineage, at its highestlevel of internal as an independentpolitical organization, system.Competition forpower on the part of a lineage would then

236

DAVID EASTON

relations. Interlineage be seen as equivalentto behaviorin foreign as an instance of international conflictcould then be interpreted friction. The merefactthatamongthe Bantu Kavirondo,forexample,the highestlevel of organized lineages-the clans-possess homogeneity of culture,acknowledge common ancestors,and reside in a wellcompel us to view themas a politineed not of itself locality, defined cal entity. The United States and Canada have common Anglokinship verysimilarcultures,and many interlocking Saxon origins, region. But theyare by no inhabita well-defined ties,and together means the same society,nor do they share theirpolitical systems. here is not completelyanalogous to the Of course,the relationship lineage societies,but between lineages in segmentary relationship and culsimilarenough to suggestthat proximity it is nevertheless us to force themselves tural or even kinshipconnectionsdo not of in considervarious social units as bound togetherby participation a commonpolitical system. a political systemis a set of actions oriented By our definition of binding decisions for a social to the makingand implementing the processesby means of which and unless we can identify system, this is achieved forstatelesssocieties,it would be quite illogical to insistthat these societiespossess a coheringbody of political relationships. Since they lack a centralorganizationfor resolvingdiferences among themselvesat the highest level, we mightwell be temptedto conceptualize them as separate and independentpolitical entities. What the factsindicate,however,is that even in statelesssocieamong the for adjusting differences ties there are some structures maximallineages. For example,ifwe look at the Logoli of the Bantu two clans it was customary Kavirondo,in cases of disputesinvolving for elders fromthe disputingclans to come togetherand iron out The parties to the dispute could normallybe extheirdifferences. as compelling. At the same time, settlement the to accept pected it was by no means certainthat theywould do so. And if theyreor other formalsanctioning fused, there was no central authority thereis no evidence device to guaranteetheirobedience. Moreover, the confronting settle met to clans problems all of elders that the

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

237

wholesociety orcultural group.Presumably it is for this reason that thesociety has been classified as acephalous. To insist, however, upontheexistence of decisions the covering wholeof a society, or of a centralized authority capable of engaging in suchactivity, or of specific meansforenforcing decisions, is to confuse structure withprocess.Means and structure mayvary, and thedegreeofvariation ranges within certain very broadlimits, as willbe made clearbelow. Whatis clearwithregard to stateless is thatsomedesocieties cisions are taken, eventhough thescopeof thesedecisions maybe limited to the parties to the disputeand even though an informal structure mayariseonlyas theoccasiondictates it. We have here an illustration of whatwe can call a contingent politicalsystem. Politicalrelationships amongthe clans are activatedfor specific purposesand withrespectto limited or contingencies. objectives In other societies, becauseof other circumstances, the structure of decision-making maybe moreextensive in scope,decisions maybe morenumerous and obtaina higher degreeof compliance, and because oftheexistence of specialized thesystem political structures, in operation. maybe continuous Fromthepointofview of research it wouldof coursebe quite feasible to view suchprimitive, contingent systems notas political systems but as something separateand unique. In thiseventwe wouldfind in theawkward ourselves ofhaving to describe position them inother terms. We wouldrapidly becomeinvolved in thevery uneconomical of process developing a specialmode of analysis to deal withthosesetsofrelationships in whichover-all structures of and decision-making authority are notin existence. If thevalue of an analytic increases framework with itssimplicity andinclusiveness, other it seems far things moreeconomical beingequal, to assimilate the politicalactivity foundin stateless societiesto the primitive wholecategory of actions we call political We can then systems. viewthemas a specialtypeof suchsystems rather thanas unique setsofaction.We can thenascribe variations notto theabsenceof functions or processes political but to differences in structure and means.Asis often thecase intheliterature, we maylabelcontingent as beingrudimentary systems but thisdoes not by mostcriteria;

238

DAVID EASTON

themwithinthe whole category of incorporating reduce the utility of political systems. As I have already indicated,a major thoughnot by any means in recenttimeshas been exclusivepreoccupationof anthropologists to help in the developthe collectionof data about politicalsystems ment of a useful typology. Our examinationof recentresearchon is not likelyto be that such a classification thispoint suggestsfirst, attemptto conceptualize the major attained without a forthright in general; and second, that one impropertiesof political systems criterion will be foundto existin the variations portantclassificatory of different systems. But this is only one in the supportstructures and we can now turnto an examinaamong a numberof differentia tion of othersthat have emerged,especially in the time span with concerned. which we are directly the major criteriafor classification have not varied Historically, has been paid much,perhapsbecause on thewhole so littleattention effortsat classificationhave to political systems. Furthermore, of dichotomies bogged down at the veryoutsetin the establishment and have remainedmiredin this mode untilveryrecently. distinguishSir HenryMaine tooktheinitialstep in thisdirection, or political formembership ing systemsaccordingto requirements in which memobligation. For him,at one pole were those systems bership was obtained on the basis of biological or kinshipties; at was sufficient the other,those in which presence on the territory to create political obligations. Lowie (16) gave the coup de grdce that in all systems, even those to this dichotomy by demonstrating mustdepend in some membership in whichkinship tieswere critical, degree upon presencein the locality. Two decades later,the editors of AfricanPolitical Systemsprovided the alternativedichotomyof of presbased upon the criterion states as against statelesssystems, ence or absence of organizedpoliticalauthorities.Despite its merits with polarized types. in otherrespects,it still leftanthropology This most recentdichotomydid induce studentsto examine in detail one or the otherof the relevanttypes,especiallythe stateless systems. (See, forexample,Cunnison [7]; Lienhardt[15]; Mednick as [17]; Wallace [23]; and White [24].) Some went even further,

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

239

we have alreadyseen,and soughtto modify thisclassificatory scheme by adding new types that combined characteristics fromboth state and statelesssystems(3, 21). It is obvious thatthe process of accumulationof typesin and around the originaldichotomy could continue indefinitely to the point where we mightend with a cumbersome set ofad hoc classes withvarying but not necessarily consistent or accumulativetheoretical value. Apart fromSmith'sarticlethere has been littleattention to, or even awareness of,the need to think of reconceptualizing the whole approach to the classification of systems as a guide for the continuedcollection and interpretation of data. Quite unexpectedly, when we scrutinizethe available data, we find thattheysuggesta possible approachto classification thatwould provideus initially notwithtwo fixedand mutuallyexclusiveclasses of systems, but with a continuum of types. Fortunately, as has been found in other sciences, this fitsin with optimal research strategy in constructing typologies,at least in the early developmentof a field. Rather than to attempta classification on the basis of the presence or absence of certaincharacteristics, it is frequently found useful to place phenomena on a continuum, with the expectation that to do so will make it possible to locate clusterpoints. In the lightof the theoretical criteriaused forconstructing the continuum, we are thenable to let the data inform us of the actual distribution of systems and by cuttingthe continuum at these points,we would acquire a set of meaningful types. This procedurehas certainshortcomings with respectto the dethe most serious being that velopmentof general political theory, it yields an essentiallydescriptive withminimaldeductive typology content. It would still remainnecessaryto scrutinizethe typology so obtained in order to discoverwhetherit mightsuggest a theoretical framework with higher deductive capabilities. But this is on a continuum not to say that locatingsystems is of no theoretical advantage. In the first place, we shall see that the properties incorporated on the scale do have important theoretical relevance. And in the second place, since location on the continuum will be correlated with a numberof otherpolitical characteristics, the classification so derived should be rich in potentially verifiable hypotheses.

240

DAVID EASTON

appropolitical systemsis particularly The scaling of primitive priate since it appears that they possess a variety of politically And it is just this thatvaryconcurrently. characteristics significant have been seeking to emphasize by the point that anthropologists theyhave paid to thepresence attention disproportionate apparently apparatus forthe regulaor absence of an organized governmental their point we interpret If force and violence. of tion of the use theyare sayingthat the critically broadly,we can see thatin effect of a political systemis the variable in the functioning important betweenpoliticaland otherkinds differentiation degree of structural of various political functions.As it of social roles in the fulfillment with turnsout, this variationtends to be mutuallyinterdependent othermajor political and social variables. What has not been clarithat can occur, is the types of differentiation fied in the literature to each otherand to are related these in which types and the way of a political systemwithwhich theymay be corotherdimensions as a point of departure, related. Using political role differentiation spirit,let us see what tentativeand exploratory and in an entirely of systems. to the classification with remarks regard imply these itselfappears in several ways. We can differenDifferentiation one tiate political roles fromothersocial roles,we can differentiate can differentiate and between we from role another, kindofpolitical the degree of specializationassociated with various political roles. Let us look at each of these aspects in turn. may referto the extentto which a political First,differentiation fromother social roles. Here there will distinguished role can be between those who govern and always be at least the distinction those who are governed,since in no systemdo childrenparticipate tasks, and normallywomen and strangersare in decision-making far as those who participatein politicalfuncas But also excluded. theremay be completefusionbetweenpolitical tionsare concerned, for exand other social roles. In some Africanpolitical systems, ample, all tasks aside fromthose assigned to women and children, that are performed by the male elders. There are no special criteria a political as when the elder is performing enable us to identify againstan economic,religious,or purelyfamilialrole. There is just

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

241

one role,the male elder,and in it the occupant fulfills all functions. But even thoughthereis an actual fusionof roles,we can differentiatethemanalytically in terms ofthe consequencestherole behavior has forthevariouspoliticalfunctions which,as we postulatedearlier, must be fulfilled in each society. Second, differentiation is used to referto the extentto which political roles are distinguishable fromeach other. Some systems have more different political roles than other systems. Some have onlyone politicalrole, such as that of a paramountchiefor a member of a council of leaders; othershave a number of well-defined roles-considerforexample,a system witha paramount chief, spatially separated local chiefsor vassals, and attached subordinatessuch as indunas, magicians,armed guards, and other palace officials.We may also encounterinformal, influential types,persons who do not hold office but whose opinions are sought and whose interests are consistently taken into consideration.Complex societies reflect the highestdegree of role proliferation in politics. And third,differentiation may referto the degree to which political roles fulfill eitherspecificor multipleand diffuse functions. In so far as in most systemswe have at least some differentiation between rulers and subjects, there is some difference in function. But let us confineour remarksto the ruling group itself. Where thereis only one political role, such as a paramountchief or member of a council, then all political tasks will be performed by this leader and therewill be no differentiation. Where, however,there are two or more political roles, there are two possibilities. There may be differentiation eitherwithrespectto the kinds of tasksperformedby each political figureor only with respectto the level at which similartasks are performed.It is this kind of distinction to which Southall (21) referswhen he draws a distinction between pyramidaland hierarchicalstructures.In the pyramidalstructures he sees similarpowers being repeated at all levels,whereas in hierarchical ones, "certainpowers are reservedat the top of the structure,and lesserpowers distributed to the lowerlevels of it" (p. 251). Thus we have systemsin which, for example, there are paramountchiefsand satellitechiefs,or,as in the ideal European feudal order,thereis a prince or lord at the apex of a pyramidof vassals

242

DAVID EASTON

political roles at all levels of and lesser vassals. In such systems, identicaltypesof politicaltasks. The scope of the perform authority will varywiththe level,but thereis no divisionor specialiauthority zation of tasks associated with each level. The paramount chief, onlyin rank: each collects differ and the sub-subchief the subchief, holds his own court,settlesdisputes for his own subjects, tribute, for those dethe whole range of political functions and performs pendent on him. And this may be true even thoughat each level of authority there may be specialization of political roles, that is, a divisionof tasksbetween the chiefat thatlevel and his associated withinbut officials.Here the specializationis horizontaloccurring not between the variouslevels of the pyramids. specialization In hierarchicalby contrastto pyramidalsystems, as well. For example,the use of force as a sancoccurs vertically tion may be reserved to the paramountchief; he alone may put to death or raise a war party. Here we have not onlyvarioffenders at one level levels, but also functions ous political roles at different other levels. that do not recurat scale of thisthree-dimensional and ultimate simplicity The utility derive fromthe fact that the variables specified of differentiation pohere are interdependent.Thus a systemlow in differentiating litical fromsocial roles will usually also be low on the other two variables. When political roles begin to separate offfrom other social roles, the probabilityincreases that political roles will also among themselves.And the degree to which begin to differentiate this happens will increase the probabilitythat each separate type of role will acquire specialized tasks or activitiesdirected to the of specificfunctions.Thus as we move along the continfulfillment uum fromthe low toward the high end, all dimensionswill have in the same direction. and consistently a tendencyto move together rates. Hence However, these changes may take place at different political fromsocial roles systemsthat are high on differentiating to whichthepolitical withrespectto the extent shouldbe classifiable systemsthat roles are differentiated among themselves. Similarly, amongpoliticalroles may have equivalentdegrees of differentiation of the tasks peror specificity vary with respect to the diffuseness formedby those who fillthese roles.

POLITICAL ANTI1OPOLOGY

243

One of the central kinds of investigation associated with this approach to typologywould be the explorationof the conditions underwhichvarying degreesof differentiation arise. To what extent, for example,does differentiation vary with the size of the society; with its ethniccomposition;with its mode of subsistence;with the frequency, volume,and type of demands made; with the nature of the communication network;with the technical requirements for the implementation of decisions;withthe generalattitudestowards authority; withthesocial structure, as evidencedin kinshipand other kinds of social relationships; with the types of personalities prevalent in the society; and with accessibilityto the physical means (shield and spear as against guns, tanks,aircraft, and bombs) for usurpation, rebellion,and conquest. These variables add up to the physical,social, and psychologicalsettingin which a political system must operate and to which it will respond. If we considerdegrees of role differentiation to be internalvariables, to neglect externalvariables such as those just mentioned would be tantamount to viewingpolitical behavior as a closed system. It is takenforgrantedthat a political systemmustbe viewed as an open system, respondingto changes in nonpolitical, although politicallyrelevant,factors. By and large, aside fromthe effect of such external variables as size, numberof subcultures, kinship, residential patterns, and modes of subsistence, the literature on primitive political systemsdoes not devote much attention to the social in which a systemfunctions.And yet the samplingof environment societiesis so extensivethat statistical correlation techniquescould even now be used to arrive at some initial approximationof the possible relationship of these system to variations parameters in role differentiation. We are not, of course,interested in role differentiation just for its own sake. If a classification of systems along theselinesis to have it mustimproveour understanding any utility of how different types of systemsoperate. The virtueof the role differentiation approach is thatwe can expect to findvariationsof otherimportant political characteristics associated with each clusterpoint on the role-differentiationcontinuum.For example,we can hypothesize that significant increases in role differentiation will be accompanied by sig-

244

DAVID EASTON

nificant differences ( 1 ) in the criteriaof recruitment, (2) in claims to the legitimateuse of force as a sanction, (3) in continuity of political processes,and (4) in rate of segmentation of the support structure-tomention only a few variables. Let us examine this hypothesis in detail. (1) At the low end of the continuum, where differentiation is low or nonexistent, recruitment to the fused sociopolitical roles will be largelyascribed. Societies here consistof small,undifferentiated kinship groups, seldom extendingbeyond the elementary as in the case of the Bushmen. Sex, age, and biological ties family, are the decisive criteriafor assigning a person to his social role. Since the male elders perform all the political tasks,political and roles are indistinguishable.All related adult males in sex-kin-age the band are membersof the camp council,and not even the chief of the familyhas any special rightto make decisions forthe band as a whole or to settledisputes. The seniormale may have by right the nominal role of chief,as is the case among the Bushmen,but aside fromlimited administrative tasks that he may perform, the of the council over the band is as diffuse authority as that of the biological fatherin the nuclear family. As role differentiation increases,kinshipas an ascriptive role determinantbecomes attenuated, especially when specific political roles begin to emerge. Kinship criteriabegin to be displaced by based on personalties of loyalty, achievement and specific attributes such as military prowess,wealth,and status,and othervalues salient in the culture. Kinship need not lose all its importance: among many Bantu tribes with highly differentiated political structures, for example,the role of paramountchief falls only to an aspirant line withinthe royal clan. But an aspirantmust in the hereditary also have enough skilland reputation to marshalsupportfromagesets or other social groups. Ascribed criteriawill limit the range of choice and improveone's chances of becomingchief,but achievewill determine whichof a numberof heredity mentcriteria aspirants wins the chieftaincy. Ascribedcriteriaof kinshipwill also continueto have important consequences forthe way in which role occupantsfulfill theirfunctions. This is the major point of Faller's (10) study of the Soga.

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

245

There he shows that a person will frequently occupy kinshipand political roles that impose incompatibledemands and expectations upon him. The conflictso generated between such a person and his two constituencies imposes significant strainsupon the functioning of the administrative organization. (2) At the low end of the scale we can expect thatthe claim to the use of legitimateforce in sanctioningdecisions will not need to be more than minimal,if it exists at all. Systemsat this level will tend to rely largelyon psychologicalor moral sanctions. But again, as we move along the continuum, we can hypothesizethat the greaterthe degree of differentiation and specialization in the political structure, the greaterwill be the tendencyto reinforce the of the administrative authority organization.Structures will emerge which the rulerscan generatesupport,includinga greater through reliance upon the monopolizationof the legitimateuse of force. Why this tendencyshould prevail is quite apparent. By virtue of a high degree of differentiation, the group of political leaders dominatingan administrative organizationwill be able to control the technicalmeans formakingand implementing decisions. Assertion of the sole rightto use legitimate forceis made possible by this it. It becomes generally control,and at the same time reinforces acceptable because it meetsthe need on the part of the societyas a whole for stabilityand order. (3) At the low end of the continuumhigh-leveldecisions will tend to be episodic, i.e., to be made only when disputes affecting the whole societyhave to be resolved. The increase in differentiation of politicalroles is itselfan index of an increasein conflicts that and musttherefore cannot be handled privately be handled by poincrease in volume and frequency, litical means. As such conflicts the new political roles will tend to acquire greater continuity in The mere fact thatthereis more to be done will theirfunctioning. will need to be constantly mean that a group of authorities available to do it, if the systemis to maintainitself. An increase in the in all respects; political work load leads to greaterdifferentiation and this in turn makes it probable that the authorities will have them enough to do to keep continuously busy. This may well react of roles themselves,if the recently back upon the differentiation

246

DAVID EASTON

enunciatedParkinson'slaw can be shown to apply to primitive as well as to modern systems. (4) The rate of segmentation of the support structure can be expected to vary inversely with differentiation. Where differentiation is low, the rate of segmentation is likely to be high, because the entry or withdrawalof political unitsdoes not threaten the balance of political interests or the positionof any single group. But as differentiation increases and central political leadership and administrative organizationappear, fission,fusion, and accretion tend to jeopardize the interests of all or some sectionsof the central group. This is true even in moderncomplex societies: witnessthe long battle over statehoodforAlaska and Hawaii. So many groups saw theirinterests threatenedby the admissionof these segments to statehood,that no positive action could be taken for decades. As differentiation increases,not only will the rate of segmentation be affected by the fear of upsetting the applecart,but the very existenceof an administrative and an associated politiorganization cal leadershipwill make itpossibleforthe stateto inhibit any growth in segmentation.As differentiation increases,so does the capacity to monopolizethe instruments forthe use of legitimate force. This capacity in itselfcan be and typicallyis used to reduce at least thosekindsof segmentation thatreduce the size of the membership of the political system,and to dictate the termsunder which the entryof new segmentswill be permitted. This is simplyanother of highlydifferentiated way of saying that it is characteristic systemsto develop means formaintaining the integrity of the political as a whole. community has a similareffect An increase in differentiation upon segmentationwithinthe politicalsystem; thatis, wherethereis no question of segments'departingfromthe political community.In systems with a low degree of differentiation, there is no group of political thatviews the whole political leaders or administrative organization is as its There no groupof persons system constituency. accordingly in interfering with the increase or decrease of that has an interest segmentation.Whateverotherfactorsgive rise to this process can operate withoutrestraint.But where we do have differentiation of

POLITICAL ANTHEOPOLOGY

247

leadership and administrative roles, two counteracting tendencies are at work. On the one hand,the leaders who are striving forpolitical power may seek to create new support groups or to favor realignments of existingones, depending on the circumstances.Disinherited sons or otherrelativesin line forthe chieftaincy in primitive systemstypicallywill engage in long and protracteddynasticdison the rate of segmentation. putes with discernibleeffects On the otherhand, those who are in possession of the positions of legitimateauthority will seek to maintainthe balance that enabled them to take power. They will act to stabilize the number and alignmentsof the segments. Althoughthe outcome in terms cannotbe predictedforany given of possible rates of segmentation case, since there are so many purelysituationalor accidental variables at work,we can neverthelessexpect that, at the very least, theover-all effect from will be to reducetherateofsegmentation what had been it would have been if no differentiated political structure in existence.At the most,as it appears from the literature, it is probin the rates of segmentation able thatthereis an absolute difference between those systemsat the extremeends of the scale, the rate corresponding inverselyto the degree of differentiation, allowing in the size of the populationsof the socieof course fordifferences ties involved. I have dealt here with only a few of the characteristics that we role I to with differentiation. As can expect vary have indicated,a classification based upon attributessuch as these, related as they is already imappear to be to degrees of political differentiation, plicit in the data. The task would be to plot all systemson this to discoverwhere the clusterings continuum, occur, and to use this a useful typology. as a basis for constructing information of course,thatcan be undertaken This is not an enterprise, here. My remarksare simplyintendedto show that concentratedattenin the tion mustbe given to problemsof general conceptualization and to suggest one profitable field of political anthropology, path for theorists to follow. The data have been collected. What we need now is theoreticalwork.' urgently

248

DAVID EASTON

LITERATURE CITED a morecomplete In order to provide in survey oftheliterature published 1955-57,the reference section belowis followed by a seriesof abstracts ofimportant booksand articles with dealing political anthropology. These abstracts have been arranged by topic and were preparedby JohnD. in theDepartment a graduate student of Anthropology at the McCaffrey, University of Chicago. References listedbelowforwhichabstracts have also been givenare marked by an asterisk. Princeton: Princeton (1) Apter,D. The Gold Coast in transition. Univ.Press,1955. *(2) Ardener, E. W. The coastalBantuof the Cameroons.London: International African Institute, 1956. Univ. (3) Barnes, J.A. Politics in a changing society.London:Oxford Press,1954. (4) Beattie, J.H. M. Africa 26: 265-76 (1956). * (5) Bradbury, people R. E. The Beninkingdom and theEdo-speaking African Instiof southwestern Nigeria. London: International tute,1957. * (6) Cole,F. C. The Bukidnon ofMindanao.Chicago:ChicagoNatural History Museum,1956. * (7) Cunnison, I. Africa 26: 2-16 (1956). intothestateofpolitiD. The political an inquiry (8) Easton, system, A. Knopf, 1953. cal science. New York: Alfred
* (10)

(9) ---.

(11)
* (12) * (13)

* (14)

(15) (16) *(17)

and Fallers,L. A. Bantu bureaucracy.Cambridge:W. Heffer Sons,Ltd., 1956. African political systems. Fortes, M., and E. E. Evans-Pritchard. Univ. Press,1940. London: Oxford D. P. The WolofofSenegambia.London:International Gamble, 1957. African Institute, M. Politicalinstitutions. In E. E. Evans-Pritchard, Gluckman, ofprimitive societies(Glencoe,Ill.: et al., eds.,The institutions The Free Press,1956). area ofnorthern Nigeria. Gunn,H. Pagew peoplesof thecentral African 1956. London:International Institute, G. Africa 27: 341-55 (1957). Lienhardt, ofthestate. New York:Harcourt, Brace Lowie,R. H. The origin and Co., 1927. M. "Some Problems of Moro Historical and Political Mednick, Stud.Rev. 5: 39-52 (1957). Organization," Philippine

World Politics 9: 383-400 (1957).

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

249

57: 118-21 (1955). Anthrop. (18) Oliver, D., and W. B. Miller.Amer. in tribal and politics societies.London: I. Government Schapera, Wattsand Co., 1956. Inst.86: 39-80 (1956). (20) Smith, M. G. J.Roy.Anthrop. W. Heffer and Sons, (21) Southall, A. W. Alursociety.Cambridge: Ltd., 1953. in African society.Man*(22) Turner, V. W. Schismand continuity chester: Manchester Univ.Press,1957. * (23) Wallace,Anthony 13: 301-21 (1957). F. C. Sthwest. J.Anthrop. C. M. N. Africa 27: 59-74 (1957). (24) White, * (25) Winter, analysis ofa patriE. A. Bwamba: A structural-functional and Sons,Ltd. (forthe linealsociety.Cambridge:W. Heffer Inst.ofSoc. Res.) 1956. East African
*(19)
I. STUDIES OF POLITICAL ORGANIZATION

in The Institutions Max Gluckman, "Political Institutions" ofPrimitive edition:Blackwell and Society.Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press,1956 (first Oxford, 1954). and control, The author is particularly concerned withsocialcohesion thatestablishes a seriesof whichhe feelsdependson internal division tiesof alliance. The various opposedgroups withcross-cutting ties,linking groups-kinship, trade,or ritual-have political functions. In western to as in primitive, society, groupsapparently have an inherent tendency segment and becomeboundby suchcountervailing alliances.Theseprocof orderin esses contribute to social cohesionand to the maintenance of the societies structures. Illustrations lacking specialized governmental of different kindsof linking mechanisms are given. operation I. Schapera,Governments and Politicsin TribalSocieties. London: and Co., 1956. Watts, In thisdetailed, comparative analysis of fourSouthAfrican societies (Bushmen, Bergdama, Hottentot, and Southern Bantu) Schaperamakes use of generalizations concerning primitive politicalorganization, especiallythose developedby Maine, Lowie, Radcliffe-Brown, Fortes,and Evans-Pritchard. Problems concerning territoriality, sovereignty, membership, authority, and publicopinion, and therelation of theseto political organization, are emphasized.Environmental and subsistence factors are correlated withpolitical characteristics. The authornotescertain tendencies in the generaldevelopment of politicalorganization. He hypothesizes that,with increasing size, the as the basis of politicalassociation significance of kinship declines, and heterogeneity becomes predominant. Governmental functions become

250

DAVID EASTON

morenumerous and varied;governmental organizations increases in complexity, degreeofspecialization, and powerand privilege. As powers and privileges increase, conflict overtheir control becomes morefrequent and intense.Thesedevelopments dependuponcommunity size whichin turn is associated withenvironmental conditions and modesof subsistence. F. C. Wallace, "PoliticalOrganization and Land Tenure Anthony 13: Among the Northwestern Indians,1600-1830,"Sthwest. J.Anthrop. 301-21 (1957). of northwestern Aspectsof the politicalorganization United States Indians during thepre-reservation period aredescribed withself-conscious ofprimitive consideration fortheconceptualization political organization. is defined as theprocess Political organization bywhich decisions aremade the behavior concerning of a territorially definable group. The tribeis of intertribal the unitmostextensively analyzed. The structure political roles,the extent of political activity, and the degreeof popularcontrol are discussed. Tribal relations occurred over decision-making through and dependence.These confederation, amalgamation, adoption, alliance, are analyzed withattention underwhichtheyoccurred to the conditions and to their political and economic implications. The basic principle of land tenure was territorial tribalownership within whichland or right to its use was controlled by varioussocial units. Illustrations are given of Indianrecognition of,and respect for,tribalterritorial units.
II. SOCIAL COHESION

and the Ritual of Luapula Villages," Ian Cunnison, "Headmanship 26: 2-16 (1956). Africa The headman's political position dependson his ritualstatus.Mystiis the basis of a headman's relations withvillagers, cal prestige and of in theabsenceof effective control theextent ofhis authority overvillage affairs. A headman's and kinship and the size ofhis economic popularity and prosperity of the village are associatedwiththe health,harmony, the lack of theseelements is popularly conceived to be due population; failure.This results in residential ritual and to theheadman's migration in the maintenance therefore of a balance amongvillages. Individuals are ritually protected onlyby villageresidence whichimposes recognition and observation of ritualtaboos, of the headman's politicalsuperiority taxation, labor,and tribute. Germaine "The Mande Creation 27: 124-38 Dieterlen, Myth," Africa (1957). The significance of a creation myth amonggeographically dispersed in theFrenchSudan claimdescent peoplesis assessed. Numerous groups

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

251

to thesegroups common locatedin Mande. A myth a common stock from Themesfoundin the at a special ceremony. periodically is recounted of manyof the organization appear in the social and ceremonial myth of these lineagesfromthe lineages. The mythassertsthe derivation thefoundby theancestors, oftheworld thepopulation Mande,recounts of of thelineages. The participation and the distribution ing ofvillages, is recited is ritually whichthe myth during all lineagesat the ceremony is conceived to be ofthelineages existence and thecontinued recognized, of this thatthe wide expansion assured. The authorconcludes thereby kind of of an "international" forthe maintenance mythis responsible amongthesegroups forrelations justification by providing organization has hisor notthe myth unity.Whether a traditional and by expressing the same. remain its functions torical validity, and ConofIntegration A Study BantuBureaucracy: LloydA. Fallers, People. Cambridge: of an East African in the PoliticalInstitutions flict and Sons,Ltd., 1956. W. Heffer and intewiththe natureof conflict This case studyis concerned and modernSoga politicalsystems.In the withintraditional gration lineagesand a by corporate authority was organized traditional system, and in thatnorms The twowereantagonistic statestructure. centralized difrole behaviorand the exerciseof authority governing expectations to the same The application feredforlineageand stateorganizations. sets of expectations but equally legitimate of incompatible individuals This and instability. strain and institutional was associated withpersonal to difcommitted did notproducetwo opposedgroups, typeof conflict acceptanceof by the individual's but was characterized ferent norms, foraction. bothpatterns whichemmodel of administration, bureaucratic Today, a western coexists behavior, of official norms and disinterested phasizesimpersonal and perbased on particularism of authority system withthe traditional oftheseopposedtypesofauthority The institutionalization sonalloyalty. in individual conflict results role expectations withtheirconcommitant as each is appliedto thesamesetsofpersons. instability and institutional due to thiscondition. is at leastpartly integration The lackofSoga political theLoDagaba," J.Roy. "Fieldsof Social Control Among JackGoody, Inst.87: 75-104 (1957). Anthrop. in a of thebases of socialcontrol an examination reports The author of an acephalous example to be an extreme thatLowie considered society amongthe LoDagaba by two relais maintained system.Social control descentgroups; of merging systems:one,the system independent tively areasby whichsocial of ritual thesystem and moresignificant, theother sanctions. and supernatural control is based on contiguity

252

DAVID EASTON

The concept of segmentary systems, as developedin African Political Systems, is criticized in detail. The author arguesthatsegmentary opposition and association are not exclusive to developedlineagesystems, or to stateless systems.Modifications of the concept'sapplication are proposedthatwouldretain theprinciple ofthesegmentation without process limiting it to particular kindsof associated groups. MelvinMednick,"Some Problems of Moro Historical and Political Organization," Stud.Rev. 5: 39-52 (1957). Philippine The Moroare distinguished from other Philippine peoplesby thesize and degreeoftheir political organization. Theirpolitical system provided theorganizational mechanism by whichcultural and ecological variations withinthe Moslem Philippine world were minimized.This system is described by the authoras a pyramidial of authority hierarchy having extensive and judicial role division.Authority administrative, military, was exercised overpeople rather thanterritory, withdifferential power determined by the relative population of membership units. Islamiclaw and religion were,withkinship, significant integrative factors. Economic interdependence and thedefense requirements of subordinate socialunits worked to maintain thepolitical system, whileat thesametimetransitory alliancesand fluid principles of succession restricted its stability. P. Murdock, George "Political Moities," in L. D. White, ed., The State ofthe Social Sciences. Chicago: Univ.of ChicagoPress,1956. This analysis is concerned withthe contribution of typesof political structure to socialintegration and stability. The cross-cultural method of analysis is used. The moiety system of the Creekconfederation and the of modern political parties democratic statesare described as beingsimilar,one common function beingthechanneling ofinternal friction toward thecountervailing in sucha waythatpeace through group regulated conflict was achieved. The Berbertribes achievedan integration and stability transcending individual districts their by extending intointertribal moiety system relawhichresulted in a balance-of-power tions, similar to that arrangement of the Triple Alliance. Its success in limiting warfare and preserving institutions to the author democratic the potential suggests of the utility formodern international balance-of-power system politics. F. Murphy, Robert and Social Cohesion," "Intergroup Hostility Amer. 59: 1018-35 (1957). Anthrop. The significance of Mundurucui warfare in the nineteenth is century considered to lie in the maintenance by the author of tribalboundaries,

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

253

the activation of male unity, and thepromotion of tribal cohesion.Warfaregave structure to relationships within thesociety, and between it and othergroups.Tribalsolidarity was maintained a because warsprovided releaseforthe latent hostility generated by the Mundurucui social structure.Morespecific endsofwarfare-prestige, ritually valuedtrophy heads, captives, and economic gain-wereof secondary importance to compared the value of warfare as a "safety-valve" mechanism.Inter-village relationsamongthe Mundurucui werebased on marriage, jointparticipation in raids,and post-raiding ceremonies.Ceremonies and cooperation in war were facilitated by a system of patrilineal descentwithmatrilocal residence. Schism and Continuity in an African V. W. Turner, Society:A Study of NdembuVillageLife. Manchester: Manchester Univ.Press,1957. The character is thefocusof thisstudy of residential structure of the Ndembuvillageand its relations thetotaltribal within system. Analyses of structure and process wererequired to demonstrate theway by which contradictory organizational principles produceconflict among groups, restrict socialunity, and act to disperse kinand affines widely throughout thetotalsystem.The incompatibility of matrilineal descent and virilocal residence accounts forthe frequent largely incidence of disputes among groups alliedby marriage, formartial conflict and thehighdivorce rate, and forconflicting loyalties.Maternal descent formed thebasis ofvillage of succession to political continuity, of continuity office, and,potentially, forpoliticalauthority. The instability of marital relations and the frequencyofvillagesecession by the matricentric family promoted political within thevillageand among conflict related ofmarriage. groups byvirtue Social cohesionwas, to some extent, maintained by the geographic and kinship oftiesofaffinity extension thetribal area. These, throughout A unity ofcommon didnotinsure valueswas promoted however, stability. whichtranscend the whole by ritualactionand cult groupassociations ofkinship and lineage. In thisway,conflicts and are independent society within becomeabsorbed units. within subsystems larger
III. LAW

theTiv. London:Oxford PaulBohannan, Justice andJudgment Among Univ.Press,1957. This accountof Tiv juralphenomenon indicates theconcepts and beoflaw whilesuggesting havior ofa particular a sociological system frameworkof analysis withother by whichthe Tiv system maybe compared in support oftheTiv legalprinciples Cases arepresented systems. inferred by the author. Boththe officially nativecourts and the unofficial recognized courts

254

DAVID EASTON

of thelineage,or "moots," are described: theirorganization, jurisdiction, procedures, and norms ofparticipant behavior.Transgression of thelaw, or breachof norm, is followed and defined by a typeof socialactionthe author terms counteraction. The courtis an institution of counteraction. is followed Counteraction by correction either of actionin acconsisting cordance withthenorm originally or ofactionin atonement transgressed, fortheoriginal breach. Judges ofthenativecourt are thought ofas arbitrators to whom theTiv mayormaynottakea dispute.Judgment consists in suggesting settlements thatpublic opinionwill forcethe litilargely gantsto accept. Courts ofthelineageare community actions fordecision in disputes and neighbors amongkinsmen who cannotdissolve theirestablishedrelationships. These courtsconcernthemselves with action involving magicalpowerand witchcraft, matters whichthe Tiv consider to be of the greatest importance. The Tiv conceptually organize bothof thesejural institutions within a singlesystem.The authorconsiders each to be a meanstowardthe maintenance of a peacefulcommunity, and terms themthegovernmental and religious aspectsofa single task, thecorrection ofthesocialorder. EdwardB. Harper, "Hoylu: A Belief toJustice andtheSuperRelating natural," Amer. Anthrop. 59: 801-16 (1957). Hoyluis a ritualized request forsupernatural administration ofjustice. Appealsto supernatural sanctions occurin cases violating castenorms in such a way thatthe maintenance of social roleis threatened. This may be a consequence ofadversedecisions by governmental courts, or of situationsin whichinsufficient evidenceeliminates the possibility of governmental court action. The kindofrequest made ofthesupernatural varies withcastemembership. The character of theuse of Hoyluby threedifferent castesis described. S. F. Nadel,"Reasonand Unreason inAfrican Law,"Africa 26: 160-73 (1956). Thisis an expanded critical review ofcertain aspectsofthree publications: Anderson's "Islamic Law in Africa," Gluckman's "The Judicial Process theBarotse Among ofNorthern Rhodesia," and Howell's"A Manual ofNuerLaw." Gluckman's volume is themostintensively considered. to whichNadel gave his attention Problems include: the distinction betheself-help tween law and custom; and thejuralsignificance mechanism; moralaction, of reason, and legal flexibility. logic,natural justice, JohnG. Peristiany, "Law," in The Institutions of Primitive Society. Glencoe:The Free Press,1956. The distinctive in the studyof law is the discovery problem of the interests are transcended and relations way by whichsectional among

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

255

groupsregularized.Both complexand simplesocietiesare constituent political organiIn a simplesociety, of a number of segments. composed clearlydefined segment; withthe individual zationmay be coextensive rolesand explicit onlywiththe safenorms maybe concerned political and publicopinion Thus,amongtheKipsigis interests. guardofsectional of factors in the maintenance common tribalvalues are the significant to existthatfunction law and orderamongsegments.Certainstatuses and socialmediation, emphasizing through ritual conflict resolve sectional between public opinion.The relation common values and manipulating and a system of valuesis revealedin the primitive legal a social system process. Sanctions Supernatural "Political Organization, David M. Schneider, Anthrop. 59: 791-800 (1957). forInceston Yap,"Amer. and Punishment organization betweenpolitical focuses on therelationship The author of the associaIdentification of punishment. and severity and thenature essential is considered tion havingthe rightto administer punishment On Yap the lineage to an understanding of the natureof punishment. and the appliforitsmembers is nearly and is responsible self-regulating whena kin grouphas the cationof sanctions againstthem. In general, to chooseto applysanctions it mayeither of the use of force, monopoly agencies. On to supernatural its members or delegatethatresponsibility agencies,perhapsbecause of an Yap, kin groupsturnto supernatural and becauseofthefreoflineagesolidarity emphasis on themaintenance Forexample, ofdisruption. and themagnitude ofthetypeofcrime quency Sanctions and not immediately thought disruptive. incestis infrequent to be applied by supernatural agenciesmustbe of a kindthatmay be of Yap supernatuto occur. Illnessand deathare the sanctions expected ral agencies.
IV. SOCIAL CHANGE

in an Egyptian and Conflict Amer. "Culture B. Adams, Village," John 59: 225-35 (1957). Anthrop. in an Egyptian villagewas imThis paper analyzeshow integration policiesand probpairedand theway by whichvillagecleavagesreflect themare due and cliques within Local factions lems of modernization. aims and methods to the national to differential government's responses are associated These variousresponses villagedevelopment. concerning as interpreted of intent withtheperceived by the manner governmental thanby content the rather evaluation, peer groupinfluence, expression of schoolsand other new of family values,and the effectiveness viability as theprimary is identified The villagemayor institutions. by the author and local factions. between thenational government agentof compromise

256

DAVID EASTON

JohnW. Benett and Robert K. McKnight, "Approaches of the Japanese Innovator to Cultural and Technical Change," Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 305: 101-13 (1956). of Japanese innovative groups during The ideological commitments the historicalcourse of modernizationand theirpolitical implicationsare a case analyzed in this study. Japan is unlike Europe in that it represents of directed change with consciously formulatedends and means. The three major positions to which Japanese innovatorshave subscribed are: conservatism,liberalism, and pragmatism. Although there has been a broad acceptance of technologicaldevelopmentas a goal, ideological oriwith respect to conceptionsof the social implications entationhas differed and theirpolitical significance of technologicalchange. These differences at various periods are described. Robert C. Paddon, "Cultural Change and MilitaryResistance in Araucanian Chile, 1550-1730," Sthwest.J. Anthrop.13: 103-21 (1957). The relativelysuccessfulAraucanian resistanceto Spanish domination political,and ideological is attributedto the developmentof new military, institutions.Two periods of Araucanian social organizationare described. During the early period resistance was based on localized autonomous kinship units, which formed temporarymilitaryalliances. Later Arauwere based upon hierarchically canian political and militaryinstitutions ideology includinga numberof localities. An effective organizedterritories of resistancedeveloped. A dietyassociated with warfarewas rationalized. A public spirit of resistance was cultivated and manipulated. Political aspects of childand militarytrainingbecame significant indoctrination hood socialization.
V. POLITICAL ELITES

Felix M. Keesing and Marie M. Keesing, Elite Communication in Series, No. 3. Samoa: A Study of Leadership. StanfordAnthropological StanfordUniversity Press, Stanford,1956. i.e. mesThis presents a case study analysis of elite communication, sages to, from,and among persons having influencein instances of negoand decision-making. It is also a contiation,public opinion formation, of the possibilitieswithinanthropologyfor the study scious investigation of communication. Research design and problems of analyzing and reto demonstratethe portingdata are considered. There is a special effort contexts. materialsforthe studyof communication importanceof linguistic derived, specificpropoThroughoutthe textappear many self-consciously comparative and sitions that the authors hope will be useful in further theoreticalwork.

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

257

"AnuakVillage Headmen,"Africa27: 341-55 Godfrey Lienhardt, (1957). are and themanner by whichitsheadmen Anuakvillageorganization chosenby sponsors changedis described.Headmenarise as successful by informally organizedage-sets. Selectionof headmenis determined sucan age-set. A particularly to support the sponsors' economic ability a number of distinct age-sets, and support cessful sponsor may organize his political influence. promoting Popularconceptions thereby increasing are analyzed. The authorinterprets the ease of a headman's deposition as reflecting Anuak as having ceremonial this institution significance, independand as beingassociated witha competitive, notions ofprestige, ent sociallife. Elites," Int.Soc. Sci. Bull. 8: 495Kenneth Little, "Two WestAfrican 98 (1956). tribalunitsthe elite of two distinct Littledescribes and compares the Ewe of the Gold Coast,and theBiromof Nigeria. A literate class is for the principal and thereis a tendency guide of Ewe modernization, with rolesto developin association new advisory and decision-making thathave economic functions. organizations to the inSocial changeamongthe Biromhas been due particularly of a new, educatedparamount fluence chief. New popularconceptions whichincludeadvancededucation, of elitequalitiesare developing, maand display. An eliteof individuals terialprosperity, who possessthese is emerging. characteristics S. F. Nadel,"The Concept ofSocialElites," Int.Soc. Sci. Bull.8: 41324 (1955). to define elitesand to determine the heuristic This articleattempts of elite characteristics are enumadequacy of the concept. A number trait eratedwiththefundamental insuring givenas a broadpreeminence and permitting of popuan elite'spopularinfluence the establishment of elites,insocial standards.Nadel assumesa plurality larlyimitated and artistic, and posestheproblem intellectual, cluding political, religious, class's interrelation within thesociety.He argues thata governing oftheir as suchbutwithin lies notwithin itselitecharacter itsorganisuperiority the measureof coercivepowerwieldedby virtueof zationand within a ruling an It is foremost thatorganization. groupand onlyincidentally elite. It may not be characterized superiority. by imitated, generalized forthe processof the emergence of research concerned The significance is considered, character and methods of elitesand theirdynamic approdiscussed. priateforsuch research

258
VI. FACTIONS AND CONFLICT

DAVID EASTON

E. E. Evans-Pritchard, "Zande BorderRaids," Africa27: 217-31 (1957). Borderraids betweenthe Zande and Wando kingdoms were often hastily organized, small-scale actionssuffering few casualties.Theirsignificance was in their frequency, whichsustained hostility and alertness. The raids illustrate the principle of territorial integrity and the fluidity of border provinces thatwere frequently dividedand reformed. William N. Fenton, Factionalism at Taos PuebloNew Mexico. Smithsonian Institution: BureauofAmerican Ethnology. Anthropological Paper, No. 56. Washington, 1957. An analysis of a recent politicalcrisisbetweenthe established, conservative politicalhierarchy and an innovative younger generation. An incident has created a fundamental breachbetween the factions, and the solution appearsdoubtful. Political behavior and governmental structure is described.Authority lies ultimately in the traditional priesthood controlled by one priest of his dominating by virtue personality. J. L. Fischer, "Totemism on Trukand Ponape,"Amer.Anthrop. 59: 250-65 (1957). Variations in the strength of sib totemism on the two islandsare interpreted by theauthor as beingrelated to differences in individual sociopsychological conflict and differences of social structure. One difference is in the politicalstructure of the two,and the politicalorganization of each is briefly analyzed. On Ponape,politicaltitlesare numerous, and theirachievement is associatedwitha system of competition by which thestatus ofbothindividuals and sibsis altered.Competition amongsibs occursfrequently, in internal resulting sib conflict. On Truk,political titles are few,and individual achievement and competition are minimized. Conflict is focusedon generations rather thanon sibs. M. D. W. Jeffreys, "Ibo Warfare," Man 56: 77-79 (1956). Fighting amongthe Ibo in pre-European times was characterized by individual tourneys with protective armament and woodenweapons. Serious injury or death was rare,and war was a friendly displayof force calculated to breakthemonotony of the dryseason. Peter Lienhardt, "Village Politicsin Trucial Oman," Man 57: 56 (1957). This short statement concerns the association betweenchanging politicalrelations and alteredland values. In the past,urbanleadersexer-

POLITICAL ANTHROPOLOGY

259

cised indirect control over tribalcommunities through traditional tribal leaders whoreliedon urbanmilitary support.The possibility oftheexistin whichpoorly ence of oil has altered a situation defined stateand local weretolerated. Urbanleadersare nowattempting tribal rights to convert communities into dependencies, and tribesmen are asserting theirfull independence.
VII. MODERN COMMUNITY STUDIES

in Japan: The SocialPersist"AnEta Community D. Donoghue, John 59: 1000-1017 (1957). ence of OutcasteGroups," Amer. Anthrop. The authorfocusesupon the political, and psychological economic, facts influencing thepersistence oftheeta as a corporate thatsuffers group discrimination it possessesneither although charphysicalnor cultural itspassageintothelarger acteristics thatwouldprohibit Japanese society. Patterns of socialcontrol are related to eta self-government. Community act in matters of internal appointedofficials discipline, organizecollecexternal relations.Community tive action,and maintain serve meetings stress to express and promote publicopinion, distinctiveness, community solidarity. in RuralCentral "Local Government Robert R. Jay, Far Eastern Java," 15: 215-27 (1956). Quarterly an extended This article of manyaspectsof local provides summary administrative, and judicial institutions. political,legislative, The imforlocal issuesofvillagerelationships withregional and national portance is noted, attention withparticular groups paid to thepolitical implications tension.Otherfactors of politicaland jural significance of religious are and operation of the authority considered; theyincludethe organization factors and informal influences on decision-making, structure, personality of social pressures the relationship to jural arbitration, and the way in ofpower, rewards and profit whichpolitical condition theintenprestige, sityof politicalconflict. ManningNash, "The MultipleSocietyin EconomicDevelopment: Mexicoand Guatemala," Amer.Anthrop. 59: 825-33 (1957). in comparison This analysis of Guatemala, withMexico, identifies the innovative potentially groupsthatmight successfully promote economic Variousurbanand ruralsegments are considered development. in terms oftheir command overnational wealth, political influence, and tendencies towardeconomic or innovation. conservatism The middleclass is identifiedas the segment in economic interested potentially development and to promote it successfully. havingthe potentials Realization of middleclasseconomic on political potentialities depends ascendancy and thesup-

260

DAVID EASTON

port of large population segments. Present economic commitments tend to exclude segments other than the Indian and the urban lower class. Consequently, conditions for middle-class political success include an economic program appealing to these groups. Eric Wolf,"Aspects of Group Relationsin a Complex Society: Mexico," Amer. Anthrop.58: 165-78 (1956). Local communitiesare modified by their dependence upon the regional and national systemsof which they are a part. Such communities as peasant societies can not be viewed as self-contained systems,but are more appropriatelytreated as the local terminiof a web of relationsextending throughintermediatelevels fromthe communityto the nation. An understandingof national as well as local institutions contributesto the analysisof these relations. The exerciseof power is an aspect of group relationsmodifiedby means of economic or political forms,and entersat all levels of socioculturalintegration. These and other aspects of group relations require analysis if anthropologyis to treat complex societies. As illustrationof this kind of approach, the author describes ways by which groups in Mexico have rearranged themselves in conflict and accommodation during three historical periods.
VIII. ETHNOGRAPHIES

E. W. Ardener,The Coastal Bantu of the Cameroons. Ethnographic Survey of Africa. Western Africa,No. 11, London: InternationalAfrican Institute,1956. of South-western Nigeria. EthnographicSurveyof Africa. WesternAfrica, No. 13: London: InternationalAfricanInstitute,1957. David P. Gamble, The Wolof of Senegambia. Ethnographic Survey of Africa. Western Africa,No. 14. London: InternationalAfricanInstitute, 1957. geria. EthnographicSurvey of Africa. Western Africa,No. 12. London: InternationalAfrican Institute, 1956.

R. E. Bradbury, The Benin Kingdom and the Edo-Speaking People

HaroldD. Gunn,Pagan Peoplesof the Central Area of Northern Ni-

These accounts are based on both field and libraryresearch. Their purpose is to present a summaryof existingknowledge as a contribution to a comprehensiveAfrican ethnographicsurvey. Each work contains information pertinentto political organizationand law. Data organized in terms of the following categories usually appear. Political organization, which covers: the nature of the political unit; relationsamong politicalunits;politicalunitmembership criteria;politicalrole characteristics; relationships among political office holders; methods and criteriaof selec-

POLITICAL

ANTHROPOLOGY

261

tionforpolitical of mainand sourceof authority; methods office; extent taining authority; functions ofpolitical rolesand political units;thecharacter of politicaloffice installation practices;popularattitudes toward government; popularcontrol of officials; the incomeof thepolitical unit, its sourceand usages; warfare and military organization. Sectionson Law often includeinformation thenature ofciviland criminal concerning the personnel in disputes; disputes; involved the sourceof law; judicial roles;legal procedures; thebehavior ofwitnesses; and oathsand ordeals. Fay-CooperCole, The Bukidnonof Mindanao. Chicago: Chicago NaturalHistory Museum,1956. in thisdescripand behavior Political organization are briefly analyzed is given concerning Information tive, ethnographic summary. political of authority, roles,the extent and effectiveness ritualand judicialfuncof adjudication, tions of politicalstatuses, legal procedure, principles of self-help, and warfare character and extent and slavery. Edward A. Winter.Bwamba-A Structural-Functional Analysis of a Patrilineal Society.Published fortheEast African of Social ReInstitute search. Cambridge: W. Heffer and Sons,Ltd., 1956. Socialcomposition, recruitment, and cohesion are ofparticular interest to the author. Village organization and relations with otherunitsare extensively analyzed. Political is one of a number organization of ethnographicareas considered. The villageis a territorial unitand is organized aroundand perpetuated through the localized patrilineage, the outstanding in the feature system of social relations.The extent of politicalrole specialization is slight.A looselyorganized groupof elders, representing theirown residentialunits,exercise a diffuse, village-wide authority based on advice and mediation.Theirpersonalinfluence and knowledge are significant in the informal jural system which,together withreligious institutions, is important in the maintenance of social cohesionin the absence of strongly developed political authority. Informal leadersarisesporadically. In thepast,the majorforeign policygoals of each villagehave been the maintenance of village integrity, the protection of members, and the acquisition of wives. Allianceswere formed betweenlineagesfor the of marriage regulation and defense.The relations of each lineagewere unique and cut acrossthoseof otherlineagesso thatthe possibility of a centralized power unit developing was minimized.The authorconsiders other features to thegeneral relating political in somedetail: system lineagestructure, villageimmigration, feuds, thesupernatural and witchand participant craft,self-help, jural procedures behavior, intervillage and foreign influences on the indigenous disputes, system.

262
IX. POLICY-ORIENTED RESEARCH

DAVID EASTON

Edward P. Dozier, GeorgeE. Simpson, and J. MiltonYinger, "The Integration of Americans of Indian Descent,"Ann.Amer.Acad. of Pol. Soc. Sci. 311: 158-65 (1957). The authors view the place of Indiansin American society as representative of the generalproblemof the integration of minority groups intoa socialsystem.Past governmental policieshave tendedto perpetuate Indiansas separateand distinct groups, but thishas not prevented migration out of Indiancommunities. The authors predict thatterrninationof Federalgovernmental services and reservation communities would not increaseIndianintegration intothe largersociety.Assumptions underlying FederalIndianpolicy, and assumptions persistent amongIndians as to the implications of Federal policies,are considered.Some recent policiesare reviewed. OliverLa Farge,"Termination ofFederalSupervision: Disintegration and theAmerican Indian," Ann.Amer. Acad. ofPol. Soc. Sci. 311: 41-46 (1957). The author of considers alternative waysof dealingwiththeproblem American Indian populations.One aims at quicklyeliminating the Instatus. The author believessuch a policyto be dian's specialprotected theIndian'sspecialstatus until ill-advised. Another policywouldsupport withFederalsupervision. Patient worktoward Indianschoseto dispense American the Indian to modern lifeto the pointwherehe no adjusting to be essential. longerneeds special statusis thought NancyOestreich Lurie,"The Indian Claims Commission Act,"Ann. Amer.Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 311: 56-70 (1957). ofjurisdiction and finance Awareness oftheneedforsolving problems a desireformoreprompt attention to Indianclaims, in Indianlitigation, werefactors to adopt and administrative expedience prompting Congress Actin 1942and to extend itin 1952. Types theIndianClaimsCommission thatoftheroleoftheanthroofclaimsand somecurrent issues, including are described. pologistas expert witness,