anthropos
103.2008: 343-353
The Power of Strangers in Flores and Timor
R. H. Barnes
SaCf ed h ~ Pitt - Rivers notes that the stranger is dangerous and
be ‘- s ° eca use he belongs to an extraordinary world and must
Sarjjy . la ise d, that is to say secularized, a process which neces-
histon lnv °^ Ves inversion.” A striking feature of the traditional
is ^ s °f several local state structures in eastern Indonesia
of p e ° lten they maintained ruling authority is in the hands
bec arr) ^ >ns whose ancestors came as strangers and successfully
Just ^¡ e a hsorbed into the local communities, often by means of
o Utsi(le S r Sort of inversion. Another recurring pattern is that of the
r bai ns r ta king active leadership, while indigenous authority re-
Ti rela tiv e ly immobile. This essay looks at several examples
°f sta tu ° r ancl Flores of attempts to cope with the disjunction
With the 8 3n< ^ P ower ’ suc h as Dumont attributed to India, and
a Uth 0r - c ° ns tructive dilemma of how to combine legitimacy of
^ w hh the prestige of the stranger. [Indonesia, Flores,
a ' Timor, stranger king, authority, power]
*.*. B
°f Qxf arnes ’ Professor of Social Anthropology, University
conciu'^' bellow of St. Antony’s College, Oxford. - He has
^ r r0und ed ex tensive research on Lembata and Adonara and
ir * c lud e . islands in eastern Indonesia. - His publications
^stem T ^ dclan g- A Study of the Collective Thought of an
^httoh' ndones ian People” (Oxford 1974); “Lamakera, Solor.
(^ 1S F >r y of a Muslim Whaling Village of Eastern Indone-
011 a U tr °Pos 1975); “Lamakera, Solor. Ethnographic Notes
Po s ^ "
j^uslim Whaling Village of Eastern Indonesia” (Anthro-
<"6) ; “Ba Naruq. An Eastern Indonesian Narrative” {An-
2002 ); “A Ritual Resurgence in Eastern Indonesia”
r °Pos 2005). - See also References Cited.
S tran
^hey^ ers a ^ Wa ys pose an at least implicit challenge,
be ^ re P re sent danger or potential gain and must
lhe Co w ith hostility or hospitality, brought into
how mmu nity or expelled from it. The problem of
lo° ea ^ strangers Julian Pitt-Rivers (1977)
ca Hed the law of hospitality. Under this
ihg ^ e discusses a variety of responses, includ-
S f e 0rc ^ ea ^ rules governing sanctuary, obliga-
a sting, tests of cultural competence, and in
vestigations of identity and intention. The law of
hospitality, Pitt-Rivers says, is founded on ambiva
lence. The stranger is dangerous and sacred be
cause he belongs to an extraordinary world. “If his
danger is to be avoided, he must either be denied
admittance, chased, or enticed away like evil spir
its or vampires, or, if granted admittance, he must
be socialised, that is to say secularised, a process
which necessarily involves inversion” (Pitt-Rivers
1977: 101).
Themes
How cultures deal with these ambiguities varies
of course, although the problem is universal. In
eastern Indonesia, strangers who arrive without ob
viously hostile intent are generally accorded high
status, but not inevitably. What is striking about
traditional histories of several local state structures
prior to the twentieth century is how often they
maintain that ruling authority is in the hands of
persons whose ancestors came as strangers and suc
cessfully became absorbed into the local commu
nities, often by means of just the sort of inversion
that Pitt-Rivers refers to. 1 This circumstance relates
to another pattern, which has often been described
and has been the subject of a comparative survey by
1 Sahlins (1981) has compared traditions concerning “strang
er-kings” in Indo-European and Polynesian societies, and
Oosten (1988) has criticized some of his formulations. Nei
ther, however, has anything directly to say about these issues
in so far as they relate to eastern Indonesia. Some further
relevant comments may be found in Bellwood (1996).