Download Applications of Structural Endogamy A Turkish Nomadic Clan as

Power of coherence of a Turkish Nomad Clan
From fieldwork to anthropological theory, 2
Ulla Johansen and Douglas R. White
University 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
Marriages
Non-Relinking
Marriages
Totals
villagers who became clan members
2**
1**
clan Husband and Wife
148
0
“ Hu married to tribes with reciprocal exchange 12
14
“ Hu left for village life
13
23
“ Hu married to village wife (34) or husband (1) 11
24
“ Hu married to tribes w/out reciprocal exchange 2
12
“ members who left for another tribe
0
8
villagers not joined to clan
1
3**
* tribes
**non-clan by origin
Totals
189
85
3
148
26
36
35
5
8
4
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 group
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
Marriages
Non-Relinking
Marriages
Totals
villagers who became clan members
2**
1**
clan Husband and Wife
148
0
“Hu married to tribes with reciprocal exchange
12
14
“ Hu left for village life
13
23
“ Hu married to village wife (34) or husband (1) 11
24
“ Hu married to tribes w/out reciprocal exchange
2
12
“ members who left for another tribe
0
8
villagers not joined to clan
1
3**
* tribes
**non-clan by origin
Totals
189
85
3
148
26
36
35
5
8
4
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
NONCOHESIVE
PAIR
COHESIVE
PAIR
Nodes (dots) are lineage segments add arrows are marriages between them
CHAINED (marriage)
RECIPROCITIES
COHESIVE GROUP WITH
RECIPROCITIES
Data and Representation:
Measuring Structural Endogamy
The traditional representation is a genealogical kinship graph where
Father’s Sister’s Daughter (FZD)
marriage within a larger context
•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
Data and Representation:
Measuring Structural Endogamy
P-graphs link pairs of parents (flexible & culturally defined) to their descendents
P-graphs are constructed by:
•Treating couples as nodes
•Treating individuals as lines
•Usually of different type for
different genders
Data and Representation:
Measuring Structural Endogamy
P-graphs link parental pairs (flexible & culturally defined) to their descendants
Father’s Sister’s Daughter (FZD)
marriage within a larger context
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/brows
er/datasets.xhtml
NEXT: 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
Applications of Structural Endogamy
A Turkish Nomadic Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems:
The Role of Marital Cohesion
Results:
•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)
Structural Endogamy of the nomad clan
Applications of Structural Endogamy
A Turkish Nomad Clan as prototype of Middle Eastern segmented lineage systems:
The Role of Marital Cohesion. 25% noncohesive individuals (mostly unmarried)
Generations
Data: The p-graph shows the conicality of the nomad clan
Applications of Structural Endogamy
A 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?
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.
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 at
https://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