Abstract
This brief article analyses Max Weber's theory of “traditional domination” from the viewpoint of the status of administrative staffs. This work is part of my study of Islamic feudalism which I have already dealt with in other. Of course, there are many comments on Islamic feudalism made by historians, but my aim is, on the hand, to reconstruct this problem with the help of historical studies which have appeared since Weber's death, and on the other, I intend to ascertain the concept of “Pfründen-feudalism” presented by Weber in his Wirt-schaft und Gesellschaft.
The concept of “feudalism” is already treated in my previous article “The Decentralized Structure of State Power in Traditional Societies-On the Character of Pfründen-and Lehensfeudalism-”. In that paper I concluded that the social character of “feudalism” can not be understood simply in terms of the feudal framework itself. Therefore, I would like to discuss a theoretical framework of premodern societies in general. Then I would like to formally reconstruct Weber's concept of “traditional domination”. This work is starting point for probing his theory of “feudalism”.
Now, Weber's key concept of “traditional domination” is “patrimonialism”. He wants to propose transformable types of “patrimonialism” and thereby typologize the whole structure of domination in pre-modern societies. This article consists of four parts. First, “patrimonialism” as a universal type of domination in pre-modern societies is compared with “patriarchalism”. In comparing the two types of domination I indicate that political communities generally tend to form the former with administrative staffs and show its inner and outer peculiarities. This concept is used for explaining the “patriarchal structure” of administration. Secondly, I summarize the nature of “patrimonialism”. Indeed its concept is very important for interpreting Weber's theory of “traditional domination”. Unfortunately, we usually do not pay any attention to its nature and origin. Thirdly, I analyse the character of four types of traditional domination : “patromonialism”, “sultanism”, “the estatetype of domination”, and “feudalism”. Furthermore, these four types divide two categories of administration : “patriarchal structure” and “the estate-type structure”. Finally, I clarify the correlations between “patriarchal structure” and “the estate-type structure” of administration.
