Chiefs

CHIEFS. Chieftainship occurs among many but not all primitive peoples at all levels of culture. Its essential feature is the fact that there is always some individual person who is re garded as the official head of the community, and who acts as its leader, ruler and representative. Almost everywhere he bears some distinctive title; and by virtue of his office he frequently enjoys special rights and privileges, and is held in a high degree of honour and appreciation by the other members of the com munity.

Forms of Chief tainship.

The institution varies according to the size and structure of the community. Among the lower hunting peoples, where the political unit is a small local group, there is generally only a single chief ; and this is also the case even among such relatively advanced peoples as the Bantu tribes of South Africa. Elsewhere there may be found a dual chieftain ship, as, e.g., under the dual organization (q.v.) , where each moiety often has a chief of its own. Or, as among many North American and Melanesian tribes, there may be a division of func tions resulting in the occurrence of two chiefs, one of whom is generally associated with the economic and religious side of tribal life, while the other is associated with the military and pro fane aspects. Thus, among the Mekeo peoples of New Guinea, each clan possesses two chiefs, the high chief and the war chief, while among the neighbouring Roro peoples, the high chief is associated with another, whose business it is to see that the orders of the high chief are carried out. In both cases the func tions of the high chief are mainly of a sacred kind. Again, as in Polynesia and parts of Africa, where the community is divided into a number of distinct social classes, there may be several chiefs or grades of chiefs. In general, with the advance in politi cal organization, political powers and functions are multiplied and diversified, and this increasing complexity of duties and func tions requires the existence of different grades of officers. Thus, the highly organized Iroquois and Creek of North America have civil chiefs and sub-chiefs, chosen for personal merit, and per manent and temporary war chiefs. These several grades of chiefs bear distinctive titles, indicative of their diverse jurisdiction.

In most communities the office of chief is hereditary within a certain family or group of families, so that only members of this family or group of families can become chiefs. Where inherit ance is thus recognized it is almost always reckoned in the male line. The chieftainship goes only exceptionally to a woman, and then usually only in default of a suitable male successor. Female chiefs occur sporadically, especially in parts of Africa, but there is hardly a single people among whom the chiefs are regularly women. The rule of descent generally follows that of the com munity. Where it is patrilineal, the chief is usually succeeded by one of his sons, most frequently the eldest, but primogeniture is by no means universal. In matrilineal societies, the successor is normally a brother of the chief, or one of his sister's sons. Even where the office is thus inherited, however, the succession is often dependent upon the fulfilment of certain conditions. If the rightful heir is regarded as incompetent, or is physically unsound, or suffers from some other disability, he may be passed over. Sometimes he is required to pass through certain tests before he is allowed to take up office.

In other communities the chief is elected. Where this is the case, the choice is often determined by personal qualities or attributes, such as bravery in war, skill in hunting, fishing or some other occupation, ability in council or debate, knowledge of tribal lore and tradition, wealth, generosity, character and so on. Some times the chief is elected for a certain period only, as among certain North American tribes, where special war chiefs are chosen to hold office only as long as the war lasts.

Powers and Functions.

These vary considerably; in many parts of the world the office is unaccompanied by the exercise of authority or political functions ; at any rate, as far as the administration of justice is concerned. This is the case es pecially in Oceania and America; in Africa, on the other hand, the chief is often not only the chief judge of his people, but also the law-giver. But his other activities extend over a very wide range. He is often a prominent figure in the economic life of the tribe, and directs hunting, fishing, planting, harvesting, pas toral migrations and trading, according to the mode of life of the people. In many tribes he is regarded as the owner of the tribal land, and regulates its distribution and tenure. He is generally the wealthiest man in the tribe, and often has a very definite function as a sort of tribal banker, providing his people with feasts and, if need be, with the necessities of life, in return for the tribute which they pay him. In war, he is often the actual leader, fighting at the head of the tribe, and where he is too old or too sacred to do that, he plans campaigns and creates morale by incantations and medicines. In a number of cases he assigns wives, manages marriages, confirms inheritances, and otherwise makes his influence felt at many junctures of family life.

The chief plays an extremely important part in the religious life of the community. He acts as priest in public rites, prayers and sacrifices; he is frequently the chief magician of his people, and is often held responsible for the weather and the crops, for the health of his subjects and the fertility of their herds. So that, especially among the more highly organized peoples, he is often regarded as sacred or even divine, both during his lifetime and after his death. There are almost always special prohibitions and obligations regulating the relations between him and his subjects, and some form of etiquette and ceremonial to be observed in approaching him. His own health and soundness are in some cases of vital importance to the community. For their sake he must observe many irksome rules of conduct and diet, neglect of which is regarded as harmful not only to himself but also to his people; and bodily weakness may render him liable to deposi tion and even death.

Origin.—Of the various theories put forward to explain the existence of chiefs, one of the most famous is that in which Sir James Frazer argues that the chief developed out of the medicine man, and was primarily a magician, his juridical and other func tions being a subsequent development. By Davy's theory the chieftainship arose through the concentration of wealth in the hands of one man, whose superior economic position gave him authority over the rest. Rivers, again, stresses the fact that chiefs usually have customs peculiar to themselves, frequently with a similarity between the functions of chiefs in different societies widely separated; and he therefore thinks that the strong basis of "group sentiment" in the government of early societies changes to that of individual authority by the advent of a race of rulers, "enterprising strangers," imposing their ideas upon a community, and becoming chiefs.

There is something to be said for each of these theories, but while each of them lays stress upon a factor of great importance, none of them is exclusive. There is no single factor which can be regarded as having produced chieftainship, which is probably the resultant of a whole series of different factors acting in different combinations in different parts of the world. The essential fact about chieftainship, wherever it occurs, is that it serves as a means of concentrating the activities of the community under the direc tion of one person. The chief is not merely the representative and leader of the community ; he is also frequently the symbol of its corporate unity.

See J. G. Frazer, "The Magic Art and the Evolution of the King ship" (The Golden Bough, vols. i. and ii., 191I) ; R. H. Lowie, Primi tive Society (1920) ; G. Davy, La Foi Juree (1922) ; W. H. R. Rivers, Social Organisation (1924). (I. S.)