What do you think?
Rate this book
Custom and Conflict in Africa
A distinguished British anthropologist, Max Gluckman (1911-1975) pioneered the study of traditional African legal systems. His research stressed social conflict and mechanisms for conflict resolution while studying urbanization and social change in colonial Africa.
- GenresAnthropologyAfrica
173 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1956
2 people are currently reading
65 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
September 14, 2011
Max Gluckman’s Custom and Conflict in Africa focuses on social development and conflict
on social values within the community. Focusing on indigenous populations in Africa, he
demonstrates that both customary actions leading to conflict are found throughout all
aspects of life but are rooted in tradition. He uses the colonial perspective to demonstrate
that conflict theory is applicable to many societies including our own.
Gluckman’s work presents a common sense approach to the adaptation of societies living
within the confines of their environment. He demonstrates that for the Zulu kinship ties
and locality often conflict, but the ecology of the region forces cooperation. “…custom
unites where it divides, co-operation and conflict balancing each other” (23). Even though
he was considered to be anti-colonial and used a Marxist approach, this perspective could
work with interregional interaction, world’s systems theory and its application to the
archaeological record. Although it moves beyond Gluckman’s small scale approach, this
system of checks and balances can be applied to the archaeological record when looking
at trade routes and stylistic changes. In particular because he demonstrates that cultures
though their custom, conflict and interaction are never static and always adapting.
In the opening chapter, we are introduced to the concept of conflict theory with the Zulu.
Gluckman demonstrates that for the Zulu kinship ties and locality often conflict, but the
ecology of the region forces cooperation. “…custom unites where it divides, co-operation
and conflict balancing each other” (23). Gluckman is not exclusive to his own work, he
often weaves in others work as well to demonstrate his point. Using Evans-Prichard’s
work on the Nuer, he shows how these communities use the “mystical and secular
qualities” of the earth creating a world view dependent on the survival of the ecosystem and the creation of communal living (16). Thus having established a foundation,
Gluckman moves on to focus on the system of checks and balances as related to the
leaders of the communities.
on social values within the community. Focusing on indigenous populations in Africa, he
demonstrates that both customary actions leading to conflict are found throughout all
aspects of life but are rooted in tradition. He uses the colonial perspective to demonstrate
that conflict theory is applicable to many societies including our own.
Gluckman’s work presents a common sense approach to the adaptation of societies living
within the confines of their environment. He demonstrates that for the Zulu kinship ties
and locality often conflict, but the ecology of the region forces cooperation. “…custom
unites where it divides, co-operation and conflict balancing each other” (23). Even though
he was considered to be anti-colonial and used a Marxist approach, this perspective could
work with interregional interaction, world’s systems theory and its application to the
archaeological record. Although it moves beyond Gluckman’s small scale approach, this
system of checks and balances can be applied to the archaeological record when looking
at trade routes and stylistic changes. In particular because he demonstrates that cultures
though their custom, conflict and interaction are never static and always adapting.
In the opening chapter, we are introduced to the concept of conflict theory with the Zulu.
Gluckman demonstrates that for the Zulu kinship ties and locality often conflict, but the
ecology of the region forces cooperation. “…custom unites where it divides, co-operation
and conflict balancing each other” (23). Gluckman is not exclusive to his own work, he
often weaves in others work as well to demonstrate his point. Using Evans-Prichard’s
work on the Nuer, he shows how these communities use the “mystical and secular
qualities” of the earth creating a world view dependent on the survival of the ecosystem and the creation of communal living (16). Thus having established a foundation,
Gluckman moves on to focus on the system of checks and balances as related to the
leaders of the communities.
June 7, 2010
和TIM INGOLD的书一样，各个章节是并列的，目的都是服务于围绕一个反复强调的主题：conflict in one set of relationships lead to the establishment of cohesion in a wider set of relationships.
164
Gluckman注意到了主体处于多样、多维度的社会关系之中。一种关系中的对立冲突，往往也是另一种团结关系的催化剂。
说实话我怀疑这个人类学的经典，是不是社会学的常识。
问题是，什么程度的conflict就会不是balanced的呢？
所以需要有更精细的研究来填补常识性的结构功能论框架。
164
Gluckman注意到了主体处于多样、多维度的社会关系之中。一种关系中的对立冲突，往往也是另一种团结关系的催化剂。
说实话我怀疑这个人类学的经典，是不是社会学的常识。
问题是，什么程度的conflict就会不是balanced的呢？
所以需要有更精细的研究来填补常识性的结构功能论框架。
November 28, 2019
Slightly outdated but an interesting read that plays a key role in the history of anthropological literature.
September 12, 2012
Manchester School
Custom and Conflict in Africa by Max Gluckman
Gluckman’s book was unique in that it was not a book, but instead a compilation of transcriptions of six broadcasts he gave on BBC radio in the spring of 1955. In these broadcasts he discusses the dynamic nature of the social equilibrium he observed within cultures he studied, focusing on the concepts of conflict, and cohesion (conflict resolution), and illustrating these ideas by using his own field research done in British Central Africa and South Africa in the 1930’s and 1940’s and also making use of the work of Evans-Pritchard and other social anthropologists. Gluckman, heavily influenced by Radcliffe-Brown’s structural-functionalism, is credited as being the founder of the Manchester School, a theoretical perspective within social anthropology, which focused on the structure of social stability and social change. As a key member of the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute, Gluckman trained the next generation of anthropologists, including Victor Turner, in the importance of ethnographically capturing the essence of dynamic social processes.
Custom and Conflict is a collection of situational analysis studies, titled in paradoxical terms, where Gluckman looked at social events and processes as a means to better understand the overarching social relations, institutions, coalitions, and variances within a given society. Gluckman believed that the “customary forms for developing relations of kinship, for establishing friendship, for compelling the observance through ritual of right relations with the universe” both divided and reunited men. (Gluckman 1966:1) Focusing on analysis of the village structure and interplay between political and kinship systems, Gluckman studied the processes of how conflicts arose, and how they were resolved, by looking at feuding, hostility to authority, estrangements within families, witchcraft accusations, ceremonies and rituals, and, finally, bonds between ‘Afrikaners and English’ and other conflicting groups in Central and South Africa.
At the end of each situational analysis study (chapter/broadcast), Gluckman attempted to draw parallels back to British society. For example, at the end of ‘Estrangement in the family’, Gluckman postulated that beyond personal disharmonies between couples, social factors might also impact divorce rates.
Both Marxist and Durkheimian in nature, I find Gluckman’s application of structural-functionalism to be operationalizable. Specifically, his situational analysis methodology seems like a valid approach to ethnographic studies. However, I think that Gluckman overemphasized his theme of conflict and cohesion, in that while it is believable that some conflicts can be mitigated because of social ties that exist independently of a particular quarrel, some conflicts proceed to the point that the social structure is impacted and becomes less cohesive. His last broadcast, on race relations in South Africa, illustrates this point. Also, for him to categorize so many unique and different kinds of conflict as occurrences of a single type, and to state that they all are resolved based on a common set of rules under which conflicts produce cohesion, is a dubious claim.
Custom and Conflict in Africa by Max Gluckman
Gluckman’s book was unique in that it was not a book, but instead a compilation of transcriptions of six broadcasts he gave on BBC radio in the spring of 1955. In these broadcasts he discusses the dynamic nature of the social equilibrium he observed within cultures he studied, focusing on the concepts of conflict, and cohesion (conflict resolution), and illustrating these ideas by using his own field research done in British Central Africa and South Africa in the 1930’s and 1940’s and also making use of the work of Evans-Pritchard and other social anthropologists. Gluckman, heavily influenced by Radcliffe-Brown’s structural-functionalism, is credited as being the founder of the Manchester School, a theoretical perspective within social anthropology, which focused on the structure of social stability and social change. As a key member of the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute, Gluckman trained the next generation of anthropologists, including Victor Turner, in the importance of ethnographically capturing the essence of dynamic social processes.
Custom and Conflict is a collection of situational analysis studies, titled in paradoxical terms, where Gluckman looked at social events and processes as a means to better understand the overarching social relations, institutions, coalitions, and variances within a given society. Gluckman believed that the “customary forms for developing relations of kinship, for establishing friendship, for compelling the observance through ritual of right relations with the universe” both divided and reunited men. (Gluckman 1966:1) Focusing on analysis of the village structure and interplay between political and kinship systems, Gluckman studied the processes of how conflicts arose, and how they were resolved, by looking at feuding, hostility to authority, estrangements within families, witchcraft accusations, ceremonies and rituals, and, finally, bonds between ‘Afrikaners and English’ and other conflicting groups in Central and South Africa.
At the end of each situational analysis study (chapter/broadcast), Gluckman attempted to draw parallels back to British society. For example, at the end of ‘Estrangement in the family’, Gluckman postulated that beyond personal disharmonies between couples, social factors might also impact divorce rates.
Both Marxist and Durkheimian in nature, I find Gluckman’s application of structural-functionalism to be operationalizable. Specifically, his situational analysis methodology seems like a valid approach to ethnographic studies. However, I think that Gluckman overemphasized his theme of conflict and cohesion, in that while it is believable that some conflicts can be mitigated because of social ties that exist independently of a particular quarrel, some conflicts proceed to the point that the social structure is impacted and becomes less cohesive. His last broadcast, on race relations in South Africa, illustrates this point. Also, for him to categorize so many unique and different kinds of conflict as occurrences of a single type, and to state that they all are resolved based on a common set of rules under which conflicts produce cohesion, is a dubious claim.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews