Power of coherence of a Turkish Nomad Clan From fieldwork to anthropological theory, 2

Ulla Johansen and Douglas R. WhiteUniversity of Köln

University of California Irvine

Wikipedia:Network Analysis and Ethnographic Problems

http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Network_Analysis_and_Ethnographic_Problems

The book drew on previous discovery and applications of Structural Cohesion

• Community and Ethnic Cohesion– “The Cohesiveness of Blocks in Social Networks: Node Connectivity and Conditional

Density” (drw and Frank Harary). 2001. Sociological Methodology 2001, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 305-359

– “Social Cohesion and Embeddedness: A hierarchical conception of social groups” (Moody and White). 2003. American Sociological Review 68(1):101-24.

• Elite and Class Cohesion– “Class, Property and Structural Endogamy: Visualizing Networked Histories,” (Lilyan

Brudner and drw) 1997. Theory and Society 25:161-208.

• Emergence and Fission of Groups and Fields in Social Networks – “Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational

Collaboration in the Life Sciences.” (Walter W. Powell, drw, Kenneth W. Koput and Jason Owen-Smith). Forthcoming 2004: American Journal of Sociology

Book Review by Alvin Wolfe:International Journal of Middle East Studies 38(4):603-605. http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/pw/Int.J.MiddleEastStud.38_2006WolfeReview.pdf

"...could be the most important book in anthropology in fifty years."

Why? Introduces the theory of networks and complexity into ethnography and the concepts and methods of structural endogamy and network cohesion, and uses these concept to understand social and historical processes in community formation and dissolution, cooperation, political leadership and a host of other aspects of social structure and dynamics, extending the work of the Manchester school.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Analysis_and_Ethnographic_Problems

Structural Endogamy (a form of structural cohesion)A Turkish Nomadic Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems:

The Role of Marital Cohesion

Does staying together as a clan depend on marital relinking?Results: Testing the hypothesis for stayers versus leavers

Relinked Non-Relinking

Marriages Marriages Totals villagers who became clan members 2** 1** 3

clan Husband and Wife 148 0 148

“ Hu married to tribes with reciprocal exchange 12 14 26

“ Hu left for village life 13 23 36

“ Hu married to village wife (34) or husband (1) 11 24 35

“ Hu married to tribes w/out reciprocal exchange 2 12 5

“ members who left for another tribe 0 8 8

villagers not joined to clan 1 3** 4

* tribes **non-clan by origin

Totals 189 85 274

Pearson’s coefficient r=.95 without middle cells The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001

How do you measure structural endogamy?

Structural Endogamy: Marriages that form a cohesive groupA Turkish Nomadic Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems:

The Role of Marital CohesionDoes staying together as a clan depend on marital relinking?Results: Testing the hypothesis for stayers versus leavers

Relinked Non-Relinking

Marriages Marriages Totals villagers who became clan members 2** 1** 3

clan Husband and Wife 148 0 148

“Hu married to tribes with reciprocal exchange 12 14 26

“ Hu left for village life 13 23 36

“ Hu married to village wife (34) or husband (1) 11 24 35

“ Hu married to tribes w/out reciprocal exchange 2 12 5

“ members who left for another tribe 0 8 8

villagers not joined to clan 1 3** 4

* tribes **non-clan by origin

Totals 189 85 274

Pearson’s coefficient r=.95 without the intertribal middle cells The two-tailed P value is less than 0.0001

How do you measure structural endogamy?

Controlled Demographic Simulation: A Network Approach to Discovering Marriage Rules and Strategies

• In a quantitative science of social structure that includes marriage and kinship, how does one:

define and evaluate marriage strategies relative to random baselines? separate ‘randomizing’ strategy from ‘preferential’ strategy? detect atomistic strategies (partial, selective) as well as global or “elementary”

marriage-rules or strategies?

D. White 1999 “Controlled Simulation of Marriage Systems,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 3(2).

Next: The comparison of actual and random marriages shows mostly reciprocal marriages but, importantly, type 11-201, chains of reciprocal marriages, as in: Douglas R. White & Michael Houseman. 2002. “Navigability of Strong Ties: - Small Worlds, Tie Strength and Network Topology.” Complexity 8(1):72-81

CHAINED (marriage) RECIPROCITIES

COHESIVE GROUP WITH RECIPROCITIES

COHESIVE PAIR

PAIRNONCOHESIVE

Nodes (dots) are lineage segments add arrows are marriages between them

Data and Representation:Measuring Structural Endogamy

The traditional representation is a genealogical kinship graph where

•Individuals are nodes•Males and females have different shapes

•Edges are of two forms:•Marriage (usually a horizontal, double line)•Descent (vertical single line)

•Has a western bias toward individuals as the key actor

•Not a valid network, since edges emerge from dyads

•Better solution is the P-graph

Father’s Sister’s Daughter (FZD) marriage within a larger context

Data and Representation:Measuring Structural Endogamy

P-graphs link pairs of parents (flexible & culturally defined) to their descendents

P-graphs are constructed by:

•Treating individuals as lines

•Usually of different type for different genders

•Treating couples as nodes

Data and Representation:Measuring Structural Endogamy

P-graphs link parental pairs (flexible & culturally defined) to their descendants

P-graphs can be constructed from standard genealogical data files (.GED), using PAJEK or other programs; today the Kinsources site archives the kinship network and other data of anthropologists

https://www.kinsources.net/browser/datasets.xhtmlNEXT: Kinsources

The Kinsources Puck program incorporates P-graphs and shows greater detail in affinal relationships. R code by Tolga Oztan also does baseline simulation of how actual marriages differ from a random marriage baseline within generations

Father’s Sister’s Daughter (FZD) marriage within a larger context

•The index of relinking of a kinship graph is a measure of the extent to which marriages take place among descendants of a limited set of ancestors.

• For the nomad clan the index of relinking is 75%, which is extremely high by world standards.

•This is a picture of the structurally endogamous or relinked marriages within the nomad clan (nearly 75% or all marriages)

Applications of Structural EndogamyA Turkish Nomadic Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems:

The Role of Marital Cohesion

Results: Structural Endogamy of the nomad clan

The p-graph shows the conicality of the nomad clan

Applications of Structural EndogamyA Turkish Nomad Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems: The Role of Marital Cohesion. 25% noncohesive individuals (mostly unmarried)

Data:

Gen

erat

ion

s

The circled apical ancestor has 90% of descendants down to todays nomad clan members. There are only 10 such apical ancestors attributing common patrilineal descent some less prolific.

Applications of Structural EndogamyA Turkish Nomadic Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems:

The Role of Marital Cohesion

Results: Does the high degree of structural endogamy create a single root to the nomadic clan?

https://www.kinsources.net/kidarep/dataset_file_download.xhtml?dataset_id=24 or:

Aydınlı data available at Kinsources (Puck)

You don't need a password to download the dataset - it is publicly accessible athttps://www.kinsources.net/kidarep/dataset_file_download.xhtml?dataset_id=24

The puc files are read by Puck 2 (download 2014 Manual and program at http://kintip.net). Basically it's just a zipped xml file (look "inside" it by changing the extension from puc to zip). Once Puck is installed the .puc download will open the Aydinli file automatically.

You don't need a password to download the dataset - it is publicly accessible at

https://www.kinsources.net/kidarep/dataset_file_download.xhtml?dataset_id=24

Many anthropologists have contributed their coded data; my role and Michael Houseman’s, Klaus Hamberger’s and Woodrow Denham’s include coding others’ kinship data. Klaus and Tolga Oztan, my Turkish PhD student, have also contributed new kinship software (Simpa and R code). Below: 0=coded by others.

http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Puck