Thursday, June 25, 2015

Political Leadership among Swat Pathans -Fredrik Barth

Reading notes for Fredrik Barth:
Political Leadership among Swat Pathans

Fredrik Barth is a Norwegian scholar, whose life and career has taken him throughout the world.  He was born in Germany and his early education was in Norway.  After receiving an M.A. at the University of Chicago in 1949, he began doctoral studies at the London School of Economics under Edmund Leach.  He did fieldwork in Swat from February to November, 1954, with funding from the Royal Norwegian Research Council.  While Barth was in the field, his advisor Leach was appointed to a lectureship at Cambridge University.  Barth followed him there, where he completed his doctoral thesis, "The Political Organization of Swat Pathans" in 1957.  He indicates that this monograph, published in 1959, is "essentially identical" to the dissertation.  [For details on Barth's subsequent career, see Ahmed Afzil's project site.]

The Swat Valley is a narrow, lush agricultural valley in the western extension of the Himalayas, in the Northwest Frontier District of Pakistan, bordering on Afghanistan.  At the time of Barth’s study in the early 1950s, its densely-settled population was Islamic, although it was sufficiently Hinduized that caste was a salient principle (at least as a secular hierarchy of occupations).  Controlling the land and Valley politics were the Pakhtuns, comprising about 20% of the total population.  They were warriors and administrators, and all non-Pakhtuns, except the Saints, were clients and working tenants of the Pakhtuns.  The Pakhtun chiefs collected rents of 3/4 to 4/5 of tenant harvest, which they used [in the absence of a commercial market for grain] in hospitality, gifting, and lending The Saints were a complementary elite, basing their status on Islamic virtues of piety, learning, and sanctity.

Like The Nuer, this monograph is a study of politics in a zone of anarchy and acephalous structure, a "land of freedom and rebellion" (133).  Here it was arable land, not cattle, that was sought and contested.  Barth, too, found a social structure of segmentary branching and balanced oppositions.  However, his view of politics was diametrically opposed to E-P's.  He opens with R-B's famous definition of the political system in African Political Systems, but his own formulation followed Isaac Schapera's critique that emphasized leadership as the basis of politics.  Barth is interested in choice and decision-making in the formation, actions, and changes of hierarchical groups of a leader and followers in a shifting field of similar groups.  Leadership and followership must be constantly performed, and enacted.  Thus, as David Jacobson observes, E-P formed his Nuer monograph around chapters on the structural planes of Nuer "politics," but Barth's book is framed by chapters on leaders, followers, and alliances.

In a sense, Barth is still concerned with the longstanding British anthropological theme of social order and how it is insured, like Gluckman and E-P and others.  He puts it more directly as a matter of personal security—how a Valley resident can secure for himself and his family a house, land, and the support of others.  But for Barth, this order is not to be sought in the normative structure of society but in the strategic patterns of interaction.  His interest is not in structural imperatives, nor in structural contradictions but in human intention.  He does not look for systemic function but for personal gain.


Expository logic of the book

Barth announces that “the main purpose of the present study is to give a descriptive analysis of the political system of Swat, with special reference to the sources of political authority, and the form of organization within which this authority is exercised” (1).  After introductory (1) and background (2) chapters, Barth lays out the “component parts” of the political system (chapters 3-6), then shows how these bases of authority combine to define the position and followings of the chiefs (chapter 7) and the saints (chapter 8).  Then he moves to the “second main step in the synthesis”—that of showing “how combinations and oppositions of these smaller groups create the actual political organization of the valley.”  This is subject of chapter 9, the longest of the chapters.  This is followed by an account (in chapter 10) of the emergence of a “native state” in Swat between 1917 and 1926 “within the pre-existing framework” and of how the state continues to rely upon that framework.  The book concludes with a brief statement of the complementary nature of chiefly and Saint political leadership.

1: Introduction

Barth’s starting point is skepticism about R-B’s definition of a political system as “the maintenance or establishment of social order, within a territorial framework, by the organized exercise of coercive authority through the use, or possibility of use, of physical force” (APS 1940:xiv).  Barth accepts Schapera’s criticism of this:

“In studying political organization… we have to study, in fact, the whole system of communal leadership and all the functions (as well as the powers) of the leaders; and in this context such activities as the organization or religious ceremonies or collective hunts, or the concentration and redistribution of wealth, are as relevant as the administration of justice and similarly significant for comparative purposes” (1956:218-219)

Barth identifies three "underlying frames of organization" (that he elaborates in chapter 3), and which he likens to the social structure of Raymond Firth’s distinction.  This formal social structure of Swat society was not unlike the Nuer, with segmentary lineages overlaying political locality relations.  But to him of greater importance was an informal political structure of (1) dyadic contractual ties between a single khan leader and his followers and (2) a kind of balance of power, a violent equilibrium, among the khan.  Politics was thus the maneuvering for advantage, "the art of manipulating these various dyadic relations so as to create effective and viable bodies of supporters" (p. 4).  That in turn required constantly making and reassessing choices, and shifting coalitions.

There had already been a state authority in the valley since the 1920s, the Wali of Swat.  Barth insisted that the Wali had to rely on traditional leadership patterns, although later (65) it turns out that thirty years before he ordered permanent land ownership (that is, no wesh redistribution)

2: General Ecology and Ethnology of Swat

Swat is a 120-mile-long valley setting.  The 400,000 densely-settled residents of the Swat valley are a group of Pashto-speaking Yusufzai Pathans.  There is intensive grain cultivation through capital-intensive artificial and natural irrigation. Land is valuable and is held in common by a lineage; each male adult has claim to a share of lineage land, which is subject to periodic reallotment (wesh).  Leadership is secured by land ownership but depends on lavish hospitality and reckless spending to hold a clientele.

3: Underlying Frameworks of Organization

Barth here returns to detail the three "underlying frames of organization" that he introduced in the introduction

1.  spatial/territorial: locality = Swat »» regions (13 @ 20-30,000) »» "local areas" »» village groups »» villages (@ 500-10,000) »» wards (@ 200-500, @ unit of admin and mosque) »» houses (@ 40-80 of economically-independent elementary families)

A village will thus have a diverse group of persons: Pakhtuns and their tenants, other rival Pakhtuns and their tenants, Saints and their tenants and dependents.  In each ward will be at least one men's house, the social, recreational, and political center

2.  castes (Qoum): roughly ten major patrilineal, hereditary, ranked occupational groups, conceptually endogamous, but without religious importance and not forming localized communities

3.  patrilineal descent groups (khel): segmentary but not corporate (23-30).  Although this is strictly true for only the 1/5 of valley residents who are Pakhtuns, their clients are aligned with their leader’s genealogy

4: Neighborhood, Marriage and Affinity

The above three frameworks are more or less ascriptive, but there were also another set of relations that were achieved—those of neighborhood and association and marriage and kinship.  The former are organized mainly through local associations for life-cycle rituals, and the latter by marriage contract.

Barth details in the chapter the teletole associations (all permanent residents of a ward who associate for Moslem life-cycle rituals—e.g., circumcision, marriage, funerals—providing mutual assistance) and marriage contracts and rituals.

5: Relations of Inequality and Authority

Barth turns here to the overtly “political” groups with more overtly political character, which also differ from above in being internally hierarchical and based on dyadic contractual relations with a leader. 

(a)  economic contracts—six main types, including land tenancy and agriculturalists and craft specialists

(b)  house tenancy contracts—i.e., landowners own houses in proportion to their land, so most villagers must rent

(c)  the men’s house—which serves as a meeting house and dorm

(d)  Saints and their followers—Saints are not leaders of men’s houses, but their followership is a structural equivalent.  Saints are expected to use their religious standing to keep/make peace, and for that they are given land by Pakhtuns.

The following chapter finishes setting the scene by describing the organization of local communities, and the subsequent chapters show how the leaders of these contractual groups manipulate their positions to build followings.

6:  Land Tenure and Political Relations Within Local Communities

This chapter, in effect, shows how the above principles of organization interconnect in a local framework, fundamentally tied by land.  See 65-67 for details of the wesh system, whose administrative machinery was the jirga or village assembly, right to speak in which was held by the landowners.  It is this chapter in which Barth really begins to describe political dynamics

69: ‘within such a framework of ideas, let us adopt, for a moment, the point of view of the non-landowners.”  He then analyzes their “choices” within constraints.

7: Authority and Following of Chiefs

The potential authority of chiefs derives predominantly from control of land.  “Though land they gain control over house tenants, occupational contract holders and land tenants, and other dependents; while from it they reap the profits which enable them to enlarge their followings by giving feasts and gifts in their men’s houses.  Furthermore, chiefs gain authority by defending their honor, particularly through blood revenge; but this activity is largely a personal matter and falls outside the field of alliance” (108)

The valley is divided into the “satisfied men” and the “hungry men.”  This is the context for the significance of hospitality and gifts.  A chief will give away hundreds of times the income necessary for his own family subsistence.

Generosity must be complemented by a leader’s reputation for bravado and impetuousness and a sense of honor and a willingness to revenge.  One speaks in the jirga for oneself but also for clients; thus, it is a political forum for demonstrating power and influence.  There was a strong value on personal honor, on defense of one's interests, impetuous bravery.  Feuds in defense of honor both require a following and give one the reputation to attract a following--for whom a khan leader can offer security, hospitality (men's house), and land.  Khan assemble clienteles of cultivator-tenants and craft specialists.  These khan, however, must necessarily compete with one another for followings and for land--thus there is some room for leverage for non-Pakhtun.  Thus, these ties are more contractual than merely dominant/submissive; they are that too, but Barth's point is that everyone is trying to maximize.

89-91: “the general form of a chief’s following”:  see this description


8: Authority and Following of Saints

He notes there are a great variety of Saints, ranging from recluses to minor landowners to headmen and rulers of villagers.  "A majority of saints live as minor landowners in villages dominated by chiefs" (95) Yet the category has very definite social meanings, and “the main sources of political influence and authority of Saints are their control of land, their role as mediators and their reputation for morality and holiness” (92). 

A  control of land (92-96):  In Cyrenaica, the Sanusi were given land along the borders, in a sense “outside” the structure; in Swat, the Saints instead are given the inferior land and the more difficult-to-control villages

B  their role as mediator or arbitrator (96-99)

C  their reputation for holiness and piety (99-102)

102-103: “the general form of a saint’s following”:  Barth describes this as a series of concentric circles, beginning with his close agnatic kin and dependents (land); then wider circles of the territory through which they are spread and his role as mediator is effective; out to the farther reaches of his reputation for holiness.


9: Alliances and Political Blocs

Note the logic of the book above.  In that sense, this chapter, the longest in the book, is really its central chapter, the “second main step in the synthesis”: “that of showing how the combination or opposition of these smaller groups creates the actual political organization of the valley.  This requires a description of the kinds of relationship which imply mutual political support, and, conversely, the kinds of structural situation that imply opposition between leaders” (104).

That is, the elemental unit is a leader and his followers (which is a “politically corporate group”), and “the striking feature of the political organization of Swat is the emphasis on free choice and contract.”  However, such units do not exist by themselves, but rather in combination;  in fact, they tend to be “aligned in two grand dispersed political divisions or blocs” (a gloss for dela suggested to him by Martin Southwold), which is itself the result of a series of alliances among local leaders, who consider themselves equals (unlike the blocs that are relations of leader-followers) of mutual assistance and strategic advantage. 

An alliance is a mutual support contract between two leaders; while Swat is acephalous and segmentary, there is none of the branching fusion and fission that E-P describes for the Nuer; these alliances are fixed and relatively permanent.  What develops then is a “two-party system” up and down the valley (106), although at the end of the book he claims that he has not been able to treat adequately the reasons why no more than two blocs develop (134).
108-109: discusses which categories of persons are apt to be rivals and which make typical allies.[Sharpest lines of cleavage are between close patrilineal kin; agnates are more often rivals and enemies than allies.]
115-118: on the hierarchy of public assemblies, which are the major forums for the wider blocs, including an actual case (117-118, which Jacobson also discusses) alliances are made betweenPakhtuns  . 
Barth goes on to consider the use of force and concludes with a section on “the position of leaders in the blocs” (124-126).  That is, the bloc is a political alliance of more-or-less equals; centralized control requires clientage, and thus structurally the blocs do not yield to a centralized Khanate.


10: History and Organization of Swat State

A “native state” emerged between 1917 and 1926 within the pre-existing framework and using (and continuing to use) this pre-existing structure of political leadership. Its ruler, an ex-"Saint" now with the title of the Wali, now controls the upper 2/3s of the valley; he is recognized by the British and treated roughly as the rajahs of British India.  Barth sees this as an unusual development, still vulnerable and tentative.

129-132:  Barth describes the formal organization of the Swat State and its three constituent units of administration, army, and taxation


11: Conclusion

In the brief, three-page conclusion, Barth turns to the two contrasting styles of leadership offered by the chiefs and the Saints, in which "pride, rivalry, and virility" are bases of chiefly reputation and admiration, and “moderation, reasonableness, and meekness” are authoritative qualities of Saints.  This leads, though, to a complementarity.  The followings of chiefs and Saints tend to cross-cut one another, but the two opposed blocs contain both kinds of leaders.

Barth closes by reiterating how different this pattern of persisting opposed blocs of chiefs and their followers is to the situational fissioning and fusing on multiple levels in other segmentary systems like the Nuer (whom he doesn’t cite here nor take up elsewhere in any detail).


Further Thoughts: On Nuer and Swat Feuding

Swat politics is the often violent, ever-tense competition among and within factional blocs.  "Honor" and "shame" are the culturally marked values of reputation.  Revenge is required of any challenges to honor, and revenge requires a response equal or greater to the rebuke.  Thus, there is a constant tendency toward escalation.  Serious challenges require blood revenge and blood revenge carried out begins a feud.

This raises the question of the similarities and differences between Nuer feuding and Swat feuding, or at least between E-P’s account and Barth’s.  To E-P, the feud is a means of maintaining equilibrium between local communities:

"the blood-feud may be viewed as a structural movement between political segments by which the form of the Nuer political system, as we know it, is maintained... The function of the feud... is therefore, to maintain the structural equilibrium between opposed tribal segments which are, nevertheless, politically fused in relation to larger units." (158-159)

David Jacobson notes about Barth that he "argues that a feud occurs not only as a defense of honor but also as a strategy of leadership.  He indicates tactics by which chiefs, through feuding, may enhance their prestige and attract followers.  It could be read as handbook of leadership stratagems for Swat Pathans, a manual on how to score points in the game of Pathan politics....These rules represent Barth's understanding of the working system; they are organizational, not normative, principles" (Jacobson 88).  [Perhaps if E-P had taken Barth's line of explanation, he would have focused more on the "bulls."]

Still, there are other 'rules of the game' that serve as rational checks that contain conflict and preserve a kind of dynamic equilibrium among the blocs, including:

·    as blocs grow larger, internal rivalries grow and sections hive off.
·    winners don't want to take in too many "absconders" from losing side
·    individual khan try to increase land holdings »»» use of violence »»» killings »»» revenge »»» growing number of enemies ("There is an upper limit to every chief's aggressiveness, since he must always keep the number of his enemies lower than the total force of his following" (1959)

·    the Saints as intermediaries (like the leopard-skin priests of Nuer): they are, in a sense, inverse khan

No comments:

Post a Comment