e - CIFAS

,
~
68 GOVERNMENT IN ZAZZAU
(a) BUTeaucrary at Ahuja
At first glance, the system of government at Ahuja may seem to
approximate closely to Max Weber's ideal-type of 'traditional
authority'l; but here also there are significant differences, and
these have certain theoretical implications.
In an especially interesting passage, Weber compares traditional
and bureaucratic administrations, and relates them developmentally.
'Bureaucracy first developed in patrimonial states. with a body of
officials recruited from extra-patrimonial sources; but. as will be
shown presently, these "officials" have originally been personal followers
of the chief. In the pure type of traditional authority, the
following features of a bureaucracy are absent: (a) a clearly defined
sphere of competence subject to impersonal rules; (b) a rational
ordering of relations of superiority and inferiority; (c) a regular
system of appointment and promotion on the basis of free contract:
(d) technical training as a regular requirement; (e) fixed salaries, in
the type case paid in money. In place of a well-defined impersonal
sphere of competence, there is (in traditional systems of authority)
a shifting series of tasks and powers commissioned and granted by
the chiefthrough his arbitrary decision of the moment. An important
influence is exerted by competition for sources of income and advantage
which are at the disposal of persons acting on behalf of the
chief or of the chief himself. It is often in the first instance through
these interests that definite functional spheres are marked off, and
with them definite administrative organs.>ll
Several elements of this definition, such as rationality and impersonality,
are unsatisfactory because of their imprecision and
normative qualities. Such tenus imply scales, in terms of which
some systems of rules are more 'rational' than others, and some
patterns of r,elations are more 'impersonal'. But as regards the
relative rationality of systems of rules, it is surely necessary to have
precise criteria; rules which are quite 'rational' or instrumental
with respect to one set of objects may be quite irrational or unserviceable
with regard to another. s Likewise, with regards to the
impersonality of relational structures, care must be taken to distinguish
and include the informal and the formal aspects of such
structures. Itis quite conceivablethat a formally impersonal system
I Weber, op. cit., pp. 313-29. I Ibid., p. 31S_ I Ibid., pp. 33~ 312.