and L eadership VB Modern Microcultures VA Modern Folk Societies IIII States III Chiefdoms II Tribes I Bands Political Organization and Leadership VB Modern Microcultures VA Modern Folk Societies ID: 776404
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document " Tim Roufs © 2010 Political Organizatio..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Tim Roufs
© 2010
Political Organization
and
L
eadership
Slide2Slide3V.B. Modern MicroculturesV.A. Modern Folk SocietiesIIII. StatesIII. ChiefdomsII. TribesI. Bands
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide4V.B. Modern MicroculturesV.A. Modern Folk SocietiesIIII. StatesIII. ChiefdomsII. TribesI. Bands
Political Organization and Leadership
“Savagery”
“Barbarism”
“Civilization”
Slide5Multilinear
Evolution
Unilinear Evolution(19th Century Evolution)
“Civilization”
“Barbarism
”
“Savagery”
Slide6Multilinear
Evolution
Unilinear Evolution(19th Century Evolution)
“Civilization”“Barbarism”“Savagery”
Marshall
Sahlins
Elman
Service
Julian
Steward
Slide7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilineal_evolution
Slide8Slide9Slide10Slide11Slide12Slide13Slide14Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
MajorCharacteristicsExamples
Slide15I. Bands
the political organization of foraging groups
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide16Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
Major
CharacteristicsExamples
Slide17II. Tribes
a political group that comprises several bands or lineage groupseach with similar language and lifestyle and occupying a distinct territory
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide18Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
Major
Characteristics
Examples
Slide19III. Chiefdoms
a political unit of permanently allied tribes and villages under one recognized leader
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide20Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
Major
Characteristics
Examples
Slide21IIII. States
a centralized political unit encompassing many communities and possessing legitimate coercive power
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide22Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
Major
Characteristics
Examples
Slide23V.A. Modern Folk Societies
a social type of rural farmer associated with preindustrial civilizationdominated by the city and its culture but marginal to both
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide24Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
Major
Characteristics
Examples
Slide25V.B. Modern Microcultures
a distinct pattern of learned and shared behavior and thinkingfound within larger cultures such as ethnic groups, and institutional cultures
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide26V.B. Modern MicroculturesV.A. Modern Folk SocietiesIIII. StatesIII. ChiefdomsII. TribesI. Bands
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide27Slide28Bands
Slide29I. Bands
the political organization of foraging groupssmall groups of households, between twenty and a few hundred people at mostrelated through kinship
Political Organization and Leadership
Slide30Slide31Band Societies
Slide32Hunting / Gathering
99% of human’s time has been that of a hunter-gatherer
Slide33Ascent to Civilization
, p. 10.
10, 000 B.C. – 100 % Foragers
Slide34Ascent to Civilization
, p. 10.
A.D. 1500 – 1 % Foragers
Slide35Ascent to Civilization
, p. 11.
A.D. 1982 – < 0.001 % Foragers
Slide36Slide37Societal Level or Stage
Characteristic Means of Socio-Cultural
Integration
MajorCharacteristicsExamples
Slide38Slide39Slide40Band Societies
Until the mid-1980s the !Kung model of the foraging lifeway dominated the band paradigm
(
Science
, May 1988)
Slide41Slide42Map 12-3
Slide43Band Societies
Anthropologists no longer take the !Kung as
the
model of pre-agricultural band societies
Slide44Band Societies
Anthropologists now recognize a much greater variability among foraging bands
(
Science
, May 1988)
Slide45Band Societies
But The Desert People are not hunters
The Hunters are
hunters, for example . . .
Slide46Slide47Band Societies
The Desert PeoplePfeiffer, Ch. 15
The Hunters
Pfeiffer, Ch. 16
Slide48Hunting / Gathering
The Desert PeopleAustralian “aborigines”
The Hunters
“Bushmen”
!Kung San
Khoisan
zhun/twasi
(“ourselves”)
Slide49Aborigines of the
Western Australian Desert
!Kung San of the
Kalahari Desert
Hunting / Gathering
Map 12-3
Slide50desert dwellers
Aborigines of the
Western Australian Desert
!Kung San of the
Kalahari Desert
Slide51desert dwellers
Aborigines of the
Western Australian Desert
!Kung San of theKalahari Desert
Slide52Band Societies
The Desert Peoplesimple material culture
The Hunters
simple material culture
Slide53The households come together at certain times of the year, depending on their foraging patterns and ritual schedule
Band Societies
Slide54Band Societies
Moving puts a premium
on multi-purpose tools
e.g., digging stick, blade tools . . .
Slide55Hunting / Gathering
While foraging groups are usually bilineal in descent and inheritance, some early hunting groups may have been patrilineal bands . . .
Slide56Hunting / Gathering
The Desert People“band” society
The Hunters“band” society
and many hunting band societies
are still patrilineal
Slide57patrilineal kinship
Hunting / Gathering
Slide58Hunting / Gathering
patrilineal kinship
Slide59Hunting / Gathering
patrilocal residence
patrilineal societies are patrilocal
Slide60Band Societies
small groups of familiesca. 20 – 50 / group
simplest level of social organization
Slide61Band Societies
!Kung San in Camps
Slide62Band Societies
20 – 500 persons integrated by a shared language and a sense of common identity
exact numbers depend on the carrying capacity of their geographic area
Slide63Band Societies
“magic numbers” are 25 and 500
Slide64Band Societies
External conflict between groups is rare since territories of different bands are widely separated and the population density is low
Slide65Band Societies
Band membership is flexible
Band composition is fluid as people shift residence frequently
Slide66Band Societies
If a person has a serious disagreement with another person or a spouse, one option is to leave that band and join another
Slide67Band Societies
no official leadersleadership is informalleader has no power and only limited authorityposition carries no rewards of power or riches
Leadership is “charismatic”:
Slide68Band Societies
Leadership is based on the quality of the individual’s advice and personality
Slide69Band Societies
Band leaders have limited authority or influence, but no power
Slide70Band Societies
strongly male dominatedbut the old people -- male and female -- are respected and are influential
Age and sex
generally determine
who will exert influence:
Slide71Band Societies
influence may dissolve or be created in an instant
a person may come to the fore as a leader for specific tasks or events
Slide72Band Societies
status positions are fluid from generation to generation
Slide73Band Societies
There is no social stratification between leaders and followers
Slide74Band Societies
Group decisions are made by consensus
Slide75Band Societies
Political activity in bands involves mainly decision making about migration, food distribution, and interpersonal conflict resolution
Slide76Band Societies
Marriages are through alliances with members of other bands
Video:
N!ai, The Story Of A !Kung Woman
Slide77Bands are often nomadichunting-gathering groups
Hunting
Slide78Hunting
usually there are male associations
When bands are hunters,
male – male relationships
dominate
Slide79Hunting
Difference between
young males and old males
is intensified in hunting societies
Slide80Hunting
Ability to hunt signifies change of status and may be required for adulthood
Slide81Hunting
Hunting intensifies
differences between sexes . . .
Slide82Hunting
Hunting creates a “male world”
and a “world of the women and children”
Slide83Hunting
Hunting increases the division of labor between sexes
Slide84Hunting
But hunting thus also creates more need for
cooperating between sexes
Slide85Hunting
In hunting societies, sharing becomes important
for survival
Slide86Hunting
Females specialize
in collecting
Slide87Hunting
75 % of “hunters”
rely more heavily on collecting
than on hunting
(Martin and Voorhies, 1975)
Slide88Hunting
In the Gibson Desert, for e.g., 90 % of the timewomen furnish at least 80 % of the food
Slide89Hunting
In hunting societies
females stay
in the home base more
Slide90Hunting
Female division of labor
by age
Slide91Hunting
Home base
changes socialization patterns
Slide92Hunting
Delayed maturity is related to home base
emphasis is placed on learning
Slide93Hunting
From the child’s point of view
the home base
= a self-contained world
Slide94Hunting
Home base
allows sick to survive
Slide95Understanding Physical Anthropology and Archaeology, 8th Ed., p. 117.
Paleopathologists Wil Salo (left) and Art Aufderheide (right).
Slide96V.B. Modern MicroculturesV.A. Modern Folk SocietiesIIII. StatesIII. ChiefdomsII. TribesI. Bands
Political Organization and Leadership