This file is for students of Sociology and Political Science. It describes authority and it's classifications.

1. 3 TYPES OF AUTHORITY
 Traditional
Charismatic
Rational- legal
Prepared by:
Debolina Ghosh
M.A. (Eng), M.A.(Sociology)
NTA NET Qualified (Sociology)
Contact for U.G. & P.G. Classes:
9836060417
MAX WEBer
(1864- 1920)

2. What is Authority?

3. Weber defines authority as legitimate forms of
domination, that is, forms of domination
which followers or subordinates consider to
be legitimate. Legitimate does not necessarily
imply any sense of rationality, right or natural
justice. Rather, domination is legitimate when the
subordinate accept, obey and consider domination
to be desirable, or at least bearable and not worth
challenging. It is not so much the actions of
the dominant that create this, but rather the
willingness of those who believe in the
legitimacy of the claims of the dominant.

4. Weber outlines three major types of legitimate
domination: traditional, charismatic, legal or
rational. These 3 forms do not constitute the
totality of types of domination but they show
how it is possible for some people to exercise
power over others. Authority extends and
maintains power and shows a study of its origins
can show how people come to accept this
domination as a regular and structured
phenomenon. These are ideal types, with any
actual use of power being likely to have aspects
of more than one type of authority, and perhaps
even other forms of power such as the use of
force or coercion.
Three types of authority are discussed
here:-

5. Traditional Authority

6. Traditional Authority is the type of authority where the
traditional rights of a powerful and dominant person or group are
accepted, or at least not challenged, by subordinate individuals,
by subordinate individuals. These could be:-
a) religious , sacred or spiritual forms
b) well established and slowly changing culture or
c) tribal, family and clan type structures.
The dominant individual could be a priest, clan leader, family
head or some other patriarch, or a dominant elite might
govern. In many cases, traditional authority is buttressed by
culture such as myths or connection to the sacred, symbols
such as cross or flag, and by structure and institutions which
perpetuate this traditional authority. In Weber’s words, this
traditionalist domination “rests upon a belief in the
sanctity of everyday routines”. Ritzer notes that
“traditional authority is based on a claim by the
leaders, and a belief on the part of the followers, that
there is virtue in the sanctity of age- old rules and
powers.”

7. Different types of traditional authority might be 1)
gerontocracy or rule by elders, 2) patriarchy where
positions are inherited. Gerth and Mills observed that
patriarchy is by far the most important type of
domination, the legitimacy of which rests upon
tradition. Sydie notes that, the power of the patriarch is
a personal prerogative. He is able to exercise power
without restraint, ‘unencumbered by rules’, at least to
the extent that he is not ‘limited by tradition of by
competing powers’. This type of authority may have few
limits to the exercise of domination and to those in
modern societies the means by which people are
selected for positions or the practices carried out may
appear irrational. Weber considers a more modern form
to be 3) patrimonialism or rule by administration or
military force. A fourth type of authority is 4)
feudalism. This is a more routinised form of rule, with
“contractual relationship between leader and
subordinate.”

8. For Weber, traditional authority is a means
by which inequality is created and
preserved. Where no challenge to the
authority of the traditional leader is likely to
remain dominant. Marx might argue that
there are economic reasons for such
dominance, but Weber would be more likely
to claim that commonly accepted customs
or religion constitute the underlying source
of such authority. Status honour is accorded
to those with traditional forms of power and
this status helps maintain dominance.
Weber notes that traditional authority blocks
the development of rational or legal forms
of authority.

9. Charismatic Authority

10. Weber defines Charismatic Authority as “resting on
devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or
exemplary character of an individual person, and of
the normative patterns or order revealed or
ordained by him.” That is, charisma is a quality of an
individual personality that is considered extraordinary.
Weber considers charisma to be a driving force that surges
through traditional authority. The sole basis of charismatic
authority is the recognition or acceptance of the claims of
the leader by the followers. While it is not systematic, it
can be revolutionary, breaking traditional rule and can
even challenge legal authority.
Ritzer notes, “Although Weber did not deny that a
charismatic leader may have outstanding
characteristics, his sense of charisma is more
dependant on the group of disciples and the way
that they define the charismatic leader”.

11. Charismatic authority can easily degenerate into
traditional authority. Bit if a charismatic leader originally
claims that traditional forms of authority are to be
disregarded, this is a revolutionary claim.
Ritzer comments that “authority legitimised by
charisma rests on the devotion of followers to the
exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary
character of leaders as well as on the normative
order sanctioned by them. All of these modes of
legitimising authority clearly imply individual
actors, thought processes and actions”. While this
form of authority may seem much less solidly based
than economic power, rationality or legality, or the use of
physical force or coercion, they are no less real as
source of power.

12. Charisma has shortcomings as a long term
source of authority, but it can be quite
effective during the lifetime of the
charismatic leader. If it is to be continued, it
has to be transformed into a traditional or
legal form of authority. In addition it may be
exercised in an irrational manner, preventing
the development of more rational forms,
especially those leading to capitalism. There
is also a possibility that administration of
charismatic authority leads to the
development of legal and rational authority.

13. Legal or Rational Authority

14. This is authority or legitimate domination resting on
“rational grounds __ resting on a belief in the
legality of enacted rules and the right of those
elevated to authority under such rules to issue
commands.” There are various ways that legal authority
could develop. Systems of convention, laws and regulation
develop in many societies, and there are many different
principles of legality that occur. The development of law in
the West leads to establishment of a legal system, such
that there is rule of law, written legal codes, legal rights
and rules, and the “professionalised administration of
justice by persons who have received their legal
training formally and systematically.”In the West,
Weber connects these forms to the development of
rationality and bureaucracy. Other legal forms in societies
in other parts of the world could develop in quite a
different direction, perhaps blocking the development of
rationality.

15. With the development of a rational legal system, there
is likely to be a political system which becomes
rationalised in a similar way. Associated with this are
constitutions, written documents, established
offices, regularised modes of representation,
regular elections and political procedures. These
are developed in opposition to earlier systems such as
monarchies or other traditional forms, where there are
no well developed set of rules.
As a political or legal system develops in this rational
manner, authority takes on a legal form. Those who
govern or rule either have, or appear to have, a
legitimate legal right to do so. Those who are
subordinate within this system accept the legality of
rulers, believing they have the legitimate right to
exercise power.

16. This rational legal form of authority may be
challenged by those who are subordinate. This
challenge is generally unlikely to result in
dramatic changes in the nature of the system
very quickly. For Weber, such struggles need
not be class based though, but could be based
on ethnic struggles, nationalism etc and these
are mainly political struggles. The extent to
which this is true would have to be tested in
each particular situation. Some of the current
political struggles would appear to be class
based, other concerned with states or other
concerns. The farmers wished to have their
market situation improved, and this could be
interpreted as a Weberian class based struggle.

17. Weber viewed the future as one where
rational – legal types of authority would
become more dominant. While a charismatic
leader or movement might emerge, the
dominant tendency was for organizations to
become more routinised, rational and
bureaucratic. It is in this sense that legal
authority can be interpreted. In modern
societies, authority is in large part exercised
on the basis of bureaucracies

18. THANK YOU
Prepared by:
Debolina Ghosh
M.A. (Eng), M.A.(Sociology)
NTA NET Qualified (Sociology)
Contact for U.G. & P.G. Classes:
9836060417