| Resumo: | <p>1. The aim of the thesis is threefold:<ul><li>i) to present a fully dynamic analysis of leadership among the Baluch in the Persian Province of Baluchistan,</li><li>ii) to illustrate the sociological distinction (or lack of it) between sacré and profane on different planes in the society,</li><li>iii) to make some advance in the theoretical treatment of personality as a sociological factor in leadership.</li></ul></p><p>2. The Baluch in general form a linguistic and sub-cultural unit within the broader cultural context of Eastern or Iranian Islam. The Persian Province of Baluchistan, which is roughly coterminous with the area of Persia where the Baluch form the majority of the population, is an isolated area which presents great extremes of altitude, climate and fertility. Natural conditions break the society down into small communities (whether settled or nomadic), and force it into dependence on a combination of agriculture and pastoralism in varying proportions. In almost every aspect of the material culture utter simplicity and dependence on the environment is evident. However, complex patterns of movement and other sociological factors keep all communities and classes constantly in touch with each other, and counteract the fragmenting effect of the the environment.</p><p>Baluch society within the Province consists of:<ul><li>i) Balush - who are predominantly nomadic,</li><li>ii) shahri - who are generally peasants,</li><li>iii) ghulāms - who until recently were slaves, and</li><li>iv) a superstructure of dynastic families, for which however there is no native term.</li></ul></p><p>From the point of view of leadership, there are also four role-statuses:<ul><li>i) kamāsh - who may be secular or religious,</li><li>ii) maulawi - who is religious,</li><li>iii) darwish - who is also religious, and</li><li>iv) "chief" - who is secular, and for which there is no really equivalent native term.</li></ul></p><p>Political aspirations invariably function through one or other of these role-statuses, which however cannot be said to form a structure. A chief must be a member of a dynastic family, and is a leader by definition. Holders of the other three role-statuses are only potentially leaders: they may or may not lead in fact. The chief is generally but not necessarily more powerful than holders of the other role-statuses.</p><p>Every man inherits a tribal name agnatically, and the word for tribe (zāt) is best translated as "birth status". However, the zāt of a man's mother is also an important factor in determining his status. He may only improve his status within limits by his own achievements. There are also institutionalised forms of behaviour for particular occasions and situations, and there is a "formal" religion - Islam.</p><p>Beyond these factors there is no institutionalisation in the society, and so there is practically no specifically political institutionalisation at all. Furthermore, the terms for the three role-statuses which are named in the society are all of alien origin.</p><p>3. This situation makes it impossible to understand and analyse realistically the present framework of political conceptions in the society without taking cognisance both of the history of these conceptions and of comparative material from neighbouring societies, for all of these conceptions have at least archaistic aspects, and in some respects contact with the semantic origin of the term still conditions its use within the society.</p><p>In general, a zāt represents a group of immigrants to the Province. The people who brought the name "Baluch" and the Baluchi language into the Province appear to have arrived there in the 11th century. There is evidence that agriculture flourished in the Province before the Baluch came, but we know nothing of any pastoral life there before them. The names of the main agricultural settlements were the same before the Baluch came as they are now. There are no other pre-Baluch names in the Province.</p><p>On the basis of the historical and comparative data available a theoretical model is constructed to demonstrate the synchronic and diachronic contexts of the present situation. This model is particularly relevant to the study of:<ul><li>i) relationships between settled and nomadic and the mixture of various ethnic, cultural, and linguistic groups</li><li>ii) the ways in which social stratification may result from such mixtures</li><li>iii) how certain political relationships - particularly the feudal relationship - may develop in these circumstances, and</li><li>iv) how the constellation and importance of kin and affinal relationships may be affected.</li></ul></p><p>4. The kinship terminology is simple and cognatic. There are strong ties between brother and sister, and between cousins. Brothers and sisters generally inherit equal shares of land, except that the eldest son may be given an extra share. Livestock is gnerally inherited by sons only. Landownership is only of secondary importance to leadership. Marriage preference (for first or only wives) is for "cousins", and the bride-price is high and not affected by the choice of a father's brother's daughter. Some communities and classes are generally monogamous, others generally polygymous, and it is possible to discern a difference in the function and conception of marriage in the two cases. Matri- and patri-locality is better interpreted in terms of the fact that solidary political groupings (formed by marriage or allegiance) are generally more important sociologically than geographical and seological groupings. Among the nomadic Baluch a corollary of the orientation towards kinship, tribal affiliation, etc., is the instability of the individual camp. Marriage and inheritance practices reinforce "class" identity - particularly in the dynastic families where this identity is most important. Similarly, because of these practices, members of dynastic families acquire ownership interests in widely scattered pieces of land, and are therefore encouraged to move about continually.</p><p>5. The dynastic families form a superstructure. The chief is generally the paramount leader in a certain area, and has a certain vaguely defined "people". There are communities and areas without chiefs. Holders of the other role-statuses may also function as paramount leaders. Any leader automatically qualifies for one or other of the traditional role-statuses. This essay is concerned primarily with the chief who is seen (by the Baluch) as the most typical form of paramount leader but for whom nevertheless there is no native term. The main functions of the leader are to provide social control and initiative, but he also personifies the prestige of the community.</p><p>A chief (or other leader) rules generally through kenash, who form the basic political denominators of the society. Neither is directly chosen or elected by the other. The extent of a leader's power depends basically on two factors:<ul><li>i) his "ecological" situation, i.e. parentage, alliance, etc.</li><li>ii) his "personality",</li></ul></p><p>of which the first is little use without the latter, but the latter is to a large extent confirmed by the former. A certain quality attaches to this personality of the leader - particularly in the case of the chief - who has affinities with Weber's "charisma".</p><p>In the Baluch Period (before 1928), where possible a chief operated from a fort in an agricultural centre, and generally either owed (informal) allegiances to a senior chief, or was owed allegiances by another chief or chiefs. He was traditionally entitled to a tithe on the produce of the land he controlled (apart from his major share of the produce from the land he owned), and service from the pastoralists. In addition to this in many cases he also collected a tax (in origin nourped from the Persian Government) from all sections of the population. Despite definite class distinctions, n some cases linked with differnces in occupation and conventional behaviour, there is little real differentiation in standard of living between the leader and the led, and no privacy for the chief.</p><p>6. The overwhelming majority of all Baluch are Sunni muslims of the Hanafi rite, and the words Islam and religion are synonyms in Baluchi. Although the chief provides the major force for social control in the society, Islamic law (interpreted by the maulawi) provides an alien standard and constitutes a court of appeal. In present circumstances, now that the chiefs in general no longer have physical force at their disposal, the religious role-statuses play a greater part in social control and leadership. The basis of the legitimacy of this "formal religion" is alien, inasmuch as its representatives have to study outside the Province. Given "personality" this legitimacy may be sufficient to allow the maulawi to rival a chief as a leader. But even so, and despite the charisma of Islam, without physical force he would not be able to impose settlements any more than a chief. The personal element is as much a part of religious as of secular leadership.</p><p>Not all the religious concepts and practices in the Provinces are accepted by the formal religions. We therefore use the term "informal religion" to cover unrationalised religious attitudes and practices which though they may not be denied by the formal religion do not form a conscious part of it, and we treat the role-status of darwish as the personification of the informal religion in the society. The position of the darwish may or may not be tribal, that of the maulawi is never tribal. The chief is often called on to fulfil many of the functions of the darwish.</p><p>7. In practice therefore in Baluch society now a leader may be either secular, formal religious, or informal religious, while the authority of his leadership is based on qualities of personality plus either birth, foreign religious learning, or esoteric religious knowledge respectively. Their power depends on these bases plus a combination of sociological factors such as kin, affinal and allegiance ties. Whatever the basis of the leader's legitimacy, or the scope of his power, the authority which he wields includes both temporal and spiritual aspects and these two aspects are not consciously differentiated. We can go no further in the analysis of leadership without analysing the "personality" of the leader.</p><p>8. In the context of this argument there is much similarity between the Persian Baluch and (among published ethnography) the southern Iraqi Kurds, the Swat Pathans, the Basseri in south Persia, the Marri Baluch in West Pakistan, the Somali, the Arab Bedouin, the Asande, and the feudal society of Medieval Europe, and comparative material from each of these societies is chosen to illustrate further various aspects of this type of leadership's situation, and show the general relevance and importance of the Baluch material.</p><p>9. A third party judges a chief by the quality and quantity of kamash who own allegiance to him. In Baluch thinking men do not create a chief by selecting him as their leader. This is not surprising, for they do not have a word for chief. The chiefs come from certain families (referred to by the family or tribal name in lieu of a general term) which enjoy a higher status than any of the rest of the community. However, none of the role-statuses are in Baluch thinking elective. Four major criteria may be distinguished on which the Baluch choose a particular chief as their leader. These are on two planes:</p><p><ul><li>a) <ul><li>i. ecological situation - in fact, his power,</li><li>ii. personality - the sum of his personal qualities,</li></ul></li><li>b)<ul><li>i. present - what the above factors amount to now, and</li><li>ii. past - what they amounted to in the past, e.g. in the case of his father, etc.</li></ul></li></ul></p><p>It is doubtful whether any one of these factors may be said to be generally more important than the others.</p><p>In general, individual social relationships are amazingly stable, - until they become political relationships, when they tend to be unstable. The Baluch have a certain degree of social, but no specifically political, institutionalisation. This situation leaves a wide field for values of personality, and personality may be regarded as the main factor in political "legitimacy", - though the Baluch themselves do not think in terms of political legitimacy or even of "political stability". Ideological divisions militate against large scale landownership as a stable basis for legitimacy, and together with the traditional isolation of the Province these divisions have meant that it has never been in the interests of the Baluch to have one paramount high-status leader for the purposes of treating with the Persian Administration or other foreign powers. However, the marriage and inheritance practices tend to define and preserve dynasties, even though genealogy as such is never a factor in establishing their legitimacy for the majority of their followers. Nevertheless, the chief always co-ordinates a number of sociological divisions among his followers - only he can have sufficient status and mobility to overcome all the sociological and ecological barriers to political unity.</p><p>10. Social differentiation between religious and secular in the society is forced by the acceptance of an alien formal religion. Decrease in the temporal power of the secular role-status of chief has been compensated by an increase in demand for the spiritual functions he can fulfil. Paramount temporal power generally has its spiritual associations at least, if only because it symbolises the unity of the society. In the Baluch case, lack of institutionalization and formality in the choice of leaders, together with the lack of conscious differentiation between spiritua and temporal, is linked with the political importance of values of personality in the society. Charisma is the "spiritual" aspect of these values.</p><p>The mode of choice defines the society's own conception of its leader, and therefore in this case it is the primary clue to an understanding of what we have felt constrained to call "charisma". "Personality" may be divided into:</p><ul><li>i) objective factors - which may be determined by analysing the total objective ecological relationship between the leader and his followers, and</li><li>ii) subjective factors - which are the values accorded by the followers to certain of the objective factors in the leader's personality.</li></ul><p>Charisma is the combination of the subjective factors. It is the "otherness" which the followers accord the leader subjectively.</p><p>Therefore, there is an inverse ratio between the degree of political institutionalisation and the importance of personality in leadership. And the need to lend a personality political legitimacy causes the follower to accord it a charismatic otherness subjectively, and this takes the leader's authority beyond the purely-temporal sphere.</p>
|
|---|