A
tribe is viewed, historically or developmentally, as a
social group existing before the development of, or outside of,
states.
Many people used the term "tribal society" to refer to societies
organized largely on the basis of social, especially familial, descent
groups (see
clan and
kinship).
A customary tribe in these terms is a face-to-face community,
relatively bound by kinship relations, reciprocal exchange, and strong
ties to place.
[1]
"Tribe" is a contested term due to its roots in
colonialism.
The word has no shared referent, whether in political form, kinship
relations, or shared culture. Some argue that it conveys a negative
connotation of a timeless unchanging past.
[2][3][4] To avoid these implications, some have chosen to use the terms "
ethnic group", or
nation instead.
[2][3][4]
In some places, such as
North America and
India, tribes are
polities that have been granted legal recognition and limited autonomy by the state.
Etymology[edit]
The English word
tribe occurs in 12th-century
Middle English literature as referring to one of the
twelve tribes of Israel. The word is from Old French
tribu, in turn from Latin
tribus, referring to the original tripartite ethnic division of the Ancient Roman state: Ramnes (
Ramnenses), Tities (
Titienses), and
Luceres, corresponding, according to
Marcus Terentius Varro, to the
Latins,
Sabines, and
Etruscans, respectively. The Ramnes were named after
Romulus, leader of the Latins, Tities after
Titus Tatius, leader of the Sabines, and Luceres after
Lucumo, leader of an Etruscan army that had assisted the Latins. According to
Livy,
the three tribes were in fact squadrons of knights, rather than ethnic
divisions. The term's ultimate etymology is uncertain, perhaps from the
Proto-Indo-European roots
tri- ("three") and
bhew ("to be").
Gregory Nagy, in
Greek Mythology and Poetics, says, citing the linguist
Émile Benveniste in his
Origines de la formation des noms en indo-européen,
that the Umbrian "trifu" (tribus) is apparently derived from a
combination of *tri- and *bhu-, where the second element is cognate with
the 'phu-' of Greek
phule, and that this subdivided the Greek
polis into three phulai.
In 242–240 BC, the
Tribal Assembly (
comitia tributa) in the
Roman Republic
was organized in 35 tribes (four "urban tribes" and 31 "rural tribes").
The Latin word as used in the Bible translates as Greek
phyle
"race, tribe, clan" and ultimately the Hebrew or "sceptre". In the
historical sense, "tribe", "race" and "clan" can be used
interchangeably.
Tribes and states[edit]
Considerable debate takes place over how best to characterize tribes.
This partly stems from perceived differences between pre-state tribes
and contemporary tribes; some reflects more general controversy over
cultural evolution and
colonialism.
In the popular imagination, tribes reflect a way of life that predates,
and is more natural than that in modern states. Tribes also privilege
primordial social ties, are clearly bounded, homogeneous, parochial, and
stable. Thus, it was believed
[who?]
that tribes organize links between families (including clans and
lineages), and provide them with a social and ideological basis for
solidarity that is in some way more limited than that of an "ethnic
group" or of a "
nation".
Anthropological and
ethnohistorical research has challenged all of these notions.
Anthropologist Elman Service presented a system of classification for societies in all human cultures based on the evolution of
social inequality and the role of the
state. This system of classification contains four categories:
- Gatherer-hunter bands, which are generally egalitarian.
- Tribal societies in which there are some limited instances of social rank and prestige.
- Stratified tribal societies led by chieftains (see Chiefdom).
- Civilizations, with complex social hierarchies and organized, institutional governments.
In his 1975 study,
The Notion of the Tribe,
anthropologist Morton H. Fried
provided numerous examples of tribes the members of which spoke
different languages and practised different rituals, or that shared
languages and rituals with members of other tribes. Similarly, he
provided examples of tribes where people followed different political
leaders, or followed the same leaders as members of other tribes. He
concluded that tribes in general are characterized by fluid boundaries
and heterogeneity, are not parochial, and are dynamic.
[5]
Initiation rituals among boys from a tribe in
Malawi.
Fried, however, proposed that most contemporary tribes do not have
their origin in pre-state tribes, but rather in pre-state bands. Such
"secondary" tribes, he suggested, actually came about as modern products
of state expansion. Bands comprise small, mobile, and fluid social
formations with weak
leadership,
that do not generate surpluses, pay no taxes and support no standing
army. Fried argued that secondary tribes develop in one of two ways.
First, states could set them up as means to extend administrative and
economic influence in their hinterland, where direct political control
costs too much. States would encourage (or require) people on their
frontiers to form more clearly bounded and centralized polities, because
such polities could begin producing surpluses and taxes, and would have
a leadership responsive to the needs of neighboring states (the
so-called "scheduled" tribes of the United States or of British India
provide good examples of this). Second, bands could form "secondary"
tribes as a means to defend themselves against state expansion. Members
of bands would form more clearly bounded and centralized polities,
because such polities could begin producing surpluses that could support
a standing army that could fight against states, and they would have a
leadership that could co-ordinate economic production and military
activities.
Archaeologists
continue to explore the development of pre-state tribes. Current
research suggests that tribal structures constituted one type of
adaptation to situations providing plentiful yet unpredictable
resources. Such structures proved flexible enough to coordinate
production and distribution of food in times of scarcity, without
limiting or constraining people during times of surplus.
See also[edit]
References[edit]
