The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People

Chapter 4 represents the beginning of Evans-Pritchard’s second stated goal of analyzing the social structures of Nuer culture, beginning with its political structures. Nuer tribes, which are the largest political units in their society, are segmented into sections of various sizes. A single tribe might be segmented into two primary sections, and those primary sections might be segmented into three secondary sections, which then might be segmented into tertiary sections, below which are the level of villages. These segments often have definitive qualities like a distinctive name and a well-defined territory, much as the tribe at large does. Evans-Pritchard continues his use of sketches and charts to supplement his text, and his illustrations in Chapter 4 are particularly helpful in giving a visual presentation of an abstract idea, using subdivided rectangles to represent the segmentation of tribal units.

As with tribes, the identity-values of tribal segments are often defined in opposition to other segments in the same system. Local attachments, at the level of villages and tertiary segments, constitute the strongest affective attachments for the Nuer. Their allegiances to larger tribal groups are often only evident when common action at those levels is called for, usually in opposition to other tribes or primary segments: Thus there is [...] always contradiction in the definition of a political group, for it is a group only in relation to other groups. A tribal segment is a political group in relation to other segments of the same kind […]” (147). This speaks to the theme of Relativity and Equilibrium in Social Groupings, showing that the group identifications being used are relative to varying sets of circumstances and that each group finds its identity in relation to other groups with which it is counter-balanced in the overall structure.

One of the regular features of Nuer political life is what Evans-Pritchard calls “blood-feuds.” Most disputes are settled by fighting, a pattern of behavior instilled in Nuer children at a young age. They possess a strong sense of their own rights and dignity, and when an offense against those values is committed (or some other crime), the normal course of action is to respond with violence to settle the matter. When this violence escalates to the death of its participants, as it frequently does in disputes between villages, the person who has committed a killing may flee to a leopard-skin chief and appeal for his mediation. The leopard-skin chief is a political figure with no fixed authority, but if disputing parties approach him for mediation, then his resolutions are considered binding. He will usually resolve a dispute by listening to both sides and suggesting a compromise (often, a payment of cattle in place of the life that was taken). When violence escalates to the level of a larger blood-feud between villages or lineages, there are certain rules which are observed by all involved, such as limitations on the extent to which violence can be wreaked on the offender’s lineage. Evans-Pritchard views these blood-feuds and wars as an integral piece of Nuer culture, helping to define the boundaries of group-identity markers like tribal segments: “Within a tribe fighting always produces feuds, and a relation of feud is characteristic of tribal segments and gives to the tribal structure a movement of expansion and contraction” (161).

Leopard-skin chiefs may be involved in disputes other than homicides, but in each case the chief’s authority derives solely from the consent of both parties to his arbitration. There is also, however, a sense of sacredness which attaches itself to his person and role, giving him a power to bless or curse. The disputes are resolved through free discussions of the matter at hand, with the aim of reaching a consensus based on the chief’s recommendations. This is one of the primary expressions of the Nuer legal system, which exists only in a moral, not a structural sense: “We speak of ‘law’ here in the sense [of] a moral obligation to settle disputes by conventional methods, and not in the sense of legal procedure or of legal institutions” (168). There is also a growing role for another officer in the Nuer political system—that of the prophet—who exercises tremendous influence in religion and ritual, but whose office is likely a fairly recent development in Nuer culture (possibly influenced by the 19th-century movement of Sudanese Mahdism).

Beyond leopard-skin chiefs and prophets, there are a few other roles of political influence in Nuer society, but these often resist strict definitions. Nuer society is fairly egalitarian, both for men and women, and while certain men achieve status as elders and serve as decision-makers for villagers and family groups, their offices are not endowed with an established authority as in societies which possess hierarchical political roles: “The lack of governmental organs among the Nuer, the absence of legal institutions, of developed leadership, and, generally, of organized political life is remarkable. Their state is an acephalous kinship state” (181). This observation ties in with the sub-theme of equilibrium in social groupings, with Evans-Pritchard noting that the Nuer cultural system appears remarkably stable despite its lack of centralized authority.