[52]
CHAPTER FOUR
The Evolution of Inequality
Radin's view of how shamans and elders gained control of ritual is full of
volition, scheming, competitiveness
;...
At the level of equalitarian society—simple hunting and gathering tribes—Radin's scheme...
is compelling. But what I like about Hocart's view of the growth of privilege at a later stage of social evolution is that it accents the other side:
the common accord with which men reach for their own subjection.
In Radin's equalitarian society organismic well-being is achieved by an economy of reciprocal exchange;...
In Hocart's rank society there is a new economic process: the flow of goods funnels to a center of power...
he takes the surplus, pools it, and then gives it out as needed.
Immediately the question arises, Why did people go from an economy of simple sharing among equals to one of pooling via an authority figure who has a high rank and absolute power? The answer is that man wanted a visible god always present to receive his offerings, and for this he was willing to pay the price of his own subjection. In Hocart's words:
The Fijians had invisible gods, sometimes present in the priest or in an animal; they preferred a god always present, one they could see and speak to, and the chief was such a god. That is the true reason for a Fijian chief's existence: he receives the offerings of his people, and in consequence they prosper.
[53]
That is, they prosper because there is a god right on the spot that visibly accepts their offerings; thus there is no doubt about their favor in his eyes.
...
Prosperity and chiefs were associated because the tribes with great chiefs were actually more prosperous. Hocart explains this as a
circular
process
:
the wealthier tribes were more energetic, and so they rose among their neighbors.
But part of the reason that they were more energetic was that "there is no doubt that present divinity evoked an enthusiasm which acted as a tonic, and braced men to greater efforts."
"A Fijian will put his back into his work when striving to shine in the eyes of the great man." Imagine what a stimulus it would be to our own efforts today
if we could
actually see
that God was satisfied with the fruits of our labors.
...
...
Besides, says Hocart,
if you are without a king you are in a position of inferiority in relation to your neighbors
; when others parade their visible god, and their favor in his eyes, how can you stand being shown up as having no god of your own? The Jews were mocked in the ancient world because they had no image of their god, he seemed like a mere figment of their imagination;...
...
one always knew how one stood with the visible god
, but the Israelis were
never sure how they stood with their invisible one
—the whole thing must have seemed sick.
To speak of the Pharaoh is to sum up the whole process: once you have a visible ritual principal in the form of a chief or a king,
[54]
a visible god, by definition you already have divine kingship—the great emergent tyranny of the ancient world.
...
Divine kingship sums up the double process of macro- and microcosmization: it represents a "solarization of man, and a humanizing of the sun."
