What is unthinkable is the revolutionary process of replacing existing
laws with new ones. The inflexibility of such a system can easily be
exaggerated since in practice, as with English common law, old laws
can be reinterpreted in new circumstances or quietly ignored as being
no longer appropriate.
But does not the enforcement of law and the defence of the group
require centralised government? The example of the Tiv suggests one
way round this problem. They operated what the social anthro-
pologists term a ‘segmentary lineage system’. This means basically
that every Tiv’s place in society is governed by the lineage to which
they belong – i.e. how they are descended from the ancestor of the
group, ‘Tiv’. It is not that the more closely related you are to the
founder of the tribe the more important you are – there is no royal
family since all are held to descend from the same source. Thus every
Tiv is equal and a fierce egalitarianism reigns. Instead, in any dispute
people claiming descent in the same line are expected to take sides
together. Naturally should non-Tiv attack a Tiv, all members of the
group would be expected to assist if need be. If fighting or quarrelling
takes place between Tiv, however, support would be due to people in
‘your’ lineage.
Such a system seems merely to encourage conflict and disorder. If
everyone can rely on a host of supporters in a dispute with others,
will not disputes be the order of the day? Especially in a situation
where there are no established permanent tribal chiefs or headmen
(in the sense this is usually understood). In fact, though, the system
seems to have worked well in practice. One reason for this was the
existence of a considerable consensus on the customs (laws) to be
applied. Disputes were not automatically the subject of violence or
warfare but settled through meetings (or ‘moots’) of those concerned
in the broad, Tiv, sense. After a certain amount of more or less violent
posturing, the form was for all to have their say on the rights and
wrongs of the dispute with relatives helping the aggrieved sides to
present their case. Then a resolution of the dispute was attempted by
mediation between the two lineages. If a solution could not be found
the two groups would remain ‘at daggers drawn’ until a solution
could be found.
In such a situation a premium was placed on bargaining and
reconciliation rather than mechanical law enforcement. Many of
those on either side might not feel too deeply affronted by (say) an
SYSTEMS 29