Routinization of Behavior in a Charismatic Leader

Author(s): Jonathan G. Andelson

Reviewed work(s):
Source: American Ethnologist, Vol. 7, No. 4 (Nov., 1980), pp. 716-733
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/643478 .
Accessed: 04/07/2012 13:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Blackwell Publishing and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to American Ethnologist.
http://www.jstor.org
Seminario Doctorado - Campagne 2014 19 Cop.
(6003)
routinization of behavior in a charismatic leader
JONATHAN G. ANDELSON-Crinnell
College
Process and the
importance
of
processual analysis
have
recently
attracted
increasing
comment in
anthropology.
Turner
(1977) traces much of the ultimate
inspiration
for this to
the work of Van
Gennep,
who has
obviously
influenced Turner himself. Another of the
ancestral
figures
who addressed
processual questions,
but whose work
generally
has been
ignored by anthropologists,
is Max Weber. This is
particularly surprising
since Weber was
interested in cultures around the world and at various levels of
complexity.
An
important
part
of Weber's
(1968[1922]) thinking
about
process
is contained in his
writings
on
legiti-
mate
domination, particularly
his seminal
theory
of charisma and its
routinization,
which
had the virtue of
stimulating
other scholars to do further research on the issues Weber
raised.
Recent studies of charismatic
leadership have, however,
failed in two
ways
to
provide
satisfying
elaboration of Weber's
original
ideas.
First, only
some
aspects
of the
theory
have
received
attention, notably
the circumstances
surrounding
a charismatic
figure's appear-
ance.1 But as Willner and Willner
(1965:80) point out,
Weber himself was more interested in
routinization
processes,
which have received little consideration. Tucker
(1968:753),
for
one,
has attributed this to the
vagueness
of the routinization
concept.
A
second, perhaps
more
serious, shortcoming
involves the lack of coherence
among
the various studies. This
problem
has been noted
by
other writers (Bord 1975; Cohen
1972;
Dow 1969; Friedland
1964;
Ratnam
1964).
The lack of coherence at the
general
level is attributable to a lack of
rigor
in
particular studies,
which tend to be
speculative
and
post
hoc. Bord
(1975)
has
gone
farther than
anyone
to
rectify
this
by developing
a model to
analyze
characteristics of
communication in situations of
emerging
charisma.
This
paper
documents an instance of
waning
charisma in the Amana
Society,
a sectarian
community
in Iowa. The
society originated
in
Germany
as the Church of True
Inspiration
Processual studies in
anthropology
can benefit from a consideration of Max
Weber's
theory
of charisma. Two charismatic leaders in the sectarian and
formerly
communal Amana
Society
of Iowa have
always
been
regarded by
members as
possessing
different
degrees
of charisma. A statistical
analysis
of the
inspired
revelations of the two leaders reveals that the testimonies of one were
highly patterned.
The
patterning
is indicative of the "routinization of charisma"
process
described
by
Weber and is accounted for
by
the historical particulars of
the case. Loss of
creativity
is identified as one factor in the routinization
pro-
cess.
[processual analysis, change,
communitarian societies,
charismatic
leadership]
Copyright
? 1980
by
the American
Anthropological
Association
0094-0496/801040716-18S2.30/1
716
american
ethnologist
and was centered around the
preachings
of several charismatic
figures
called
Werkzeuge
(singular: Werkzeug).
These men and women were
alleged
to be
divinely inspired, revealing
God's will to the faithful
through
formal utterances called testimonies. The
Inspirationists,
as members of the sect call themselves,
have
recognized
14
Werkzeuge
since the church's
founding
in
1714,
2 of whom were active after the sect settled in Iowa: Christian Metz
(1794-1867)
and Barbara Heinemann Landmann
(1796-1883).
Landmann's death left the
community's spiritual
welfare in the hands of church elders.
The
arguments put
forth in this
paper grew
out of discussions I had with informants
about the two Amana
Werkzeuge. Although
Metz and Landmann held the same formal
status in the
sect,
and
although
both died before the birth of
any still-living Inspirationists,
my
informants all held Metz in
higher
esteem. When I asked
why
this was
so,
the answers
were
vague:
"Metz's
gift
was a
higher one,"
or "Landmann's testimonies had less love in
them." Metz is said to have loved children,
and
they sought
him
out;
but children feared
Landmann and crossed to the other side of the street when
they spied
her
coming.
This
assessment is
expressed formally
in that an annual commemorative service is held for Metz
but not for Landmann. The difference seems to be a
perpetuation
of beliefs that have ex-
isted in the
community
for some time. Metz's
grave
is the
only
one in the Amana
cemetery
to have a double-sized
plot.
Such a situation is not uncommon.
Disparities
often exist between the amount of
charisma attributed to two holders of the same
status,
even when the
position
itself is de-
fined
by
its charismatic
quality. Attempts
to account for such
disparities-when they
are
made at
all-usually
focus on the sociostructural
origins
of the individuals in
question
or
on
"personality"
differences between them. However,
the latter factor is felt
by
some in-
vestigators
to lie outside the realm of
objective explanation.
Sociostructural
explanations,
while
useful,
seem
incomplete
when
dealing
with situations which so
clearly depend
on the
qualities
of individuals.
The
following analysis emphasizes
individual differences between the two Amana
Werkzeuge.
This
analysis
is
possible
because an unusual
body
of evidence-the testimo-
nies
given by
the
Werkzeuge-permits
an
objective
demonstration of those differences. The
analysis
focuses on Landmann's
position
in the
community
before and after Metz's death
in 1867. I will
present
evidence that Landmann's status had
always
been less secure than
Metz's,
and I will
argue
that without his active
support
her
relationship
with the elders and
the members was altered.
Although
she remained a
Werkzeug,
her
leadership
became more
routinized,
as revealed in
objective
differences between her
inspired
testimonies and those
of Metz. In the final
discussion,
I
inquire
into the cause of the routinization and its
significance.
historical
background
The Church of True
Inspiration emerged
in the wave of Pietist reform that
swept
Ger-
many
in the late 17th and
early
18th centuries. Pietists
sought
God and
spiritual improve-
ment
through
a return to
Apostolic Christianity.
At the same
time, they
believed that Old
Testament
prophets
still walked the
earth, providing
an
ongoing
manifestation of the divine
presence.
In the Church of True
Inspiration, inspired Werkzeuge
directed the activities of
the faithful and bound them into
congregations
scattered
through
southern
Germany
and
Switzerland.
They distinguished
themselves from other Pietists
by emphasizing
a distinc-
tion between true and false
inspiration.
Following
the death of the first
great inspired
leader in
1749,
the sect
experienced
a
decline in
spiritual
zeal until a
reawakening
in 1817
brought
the
group
new
Werkzeuge
and
routinization of behavior 717
a new enthusiasm. The Lord's first call came to Michael Krausert of
Strassburg.
Krausert
was not an
Inspirationist;
but
following
a vision in which he
spoke
with
God,
he was
directed
by
friends to one of the sect's
congregations.
There he found a
group
of
young
ac-
tivists, including
Christian
Metz, who believed he was
truly inspired.
Members of this
group
began
to travel with Krausert to other
congregations
in an
attempt
to revive the faith. The
next
year, 1818,
an uneducated Alsatian servant maid
by
the name of Barbara Heinemann
came to the
Inspirationists looking
for an
explanation
of a vision she had had. In
inspiration
Krausert
judged
her visitation to be
true,
and she was
accepted
as a
Werkzeug by
the
group
of reawakened members.
For the next five
years
conditions in the
group
were unstable. Krausert
quarreled
with
Heinemann,
lost the
power
of
inspiration,
and was ordered to leave the
community.
Ful-
filling
a
prophecy
of
Heinemann's,
Metz became
inspired;
after
giving only
two testi-
monies, however,
he lost the
gift
at the time of Krausert's excommunication. Three
years
later,
Heinemann fell in love with an
Inspirationist by
the name of
George Landmann, but
she abandoned
plans
to
marry
him when the elders threatened her with banishment. In
1823 Metz became
inspired
for a second time. Five months later Heinemann ceased
being
inspired;
she
subsequently
married Landmann and was
temporarily
banished. From then un-
til 1849 Metz was the
only Werkzeug
in the
community.
Inspired
revelation in the 1830s directed the members to
gather
on four estates in the
province
of
Hessen, Germany,
and later to move to
America,
first to New York State (in
1843),
where
they
formed the Ebenezer
Society,
and
subsequently
to Iowa
(in 1854),
where
the sect has since resided. While
living
on the German
estates,
the
Inspirationists
estab-
lished
cooperative
business
enterprises
for the benefit of members. In New
York,
a "com-
munity
of
goods"
was
adopted
for reasons of economic
expediency (purchasing
land and
materials and
paying passage
for the brethren still in
Germany),
but the communal
arrange-
ment was sanctified in 1846
through
divine revelation.
In 1849 Barbara Heinemann Landmann
began receiving inspiration
after a
lapse
of 26
years.
For a time the faithful
expected
other
Werkzeuge
to
appear.
In the
1840s, the son of
an
important
elder manifested the motions
generally
associated with
inspiration.
Metz
directed two testimonies to the
young
man in
1848, prophesying
he would receive
inspira-
tion,
but the
prophecy
was not fulfilled.
Resettlement in Iowa
began
in 1854 and was
completed
in 1863. In
Iowa,
the
society
grew
until it consisted of 7 semiautonomous
villages
on
26,000 contiguous
acres of farm
and timberland on either side of the Iowa River in Iowa
County.
The
villages ranged
in size
from 100 to 400
residents,
comprising
a total
population
of
approximately 1,700
individ-
uals.2 Each
village
had its own
farm, bakery,
meat
market,
and craft
shops,
and the
larger
villages
contained
sawmills,
flour
mills,
a
calico-print mill,
and two woolen mills. Members
worked in the businesses without
pay,
but
they
received
food, clothing,
and
lodging
from the
society,
as well as small
spending
allowances.
Surplus production
from the farms and mills
was sold outside the
community.
The
paramount authority
in the
society
was the
Werkzeug,
whose
inspired
revelations
might pertain
to
temporal
as well as
spiritual
matters. Beneath the
Werkzeug
in
authority,
and in
charge
of all
aspects
of
community life,
was a 13-member Grosser Bruderrath
(great
council or board of
trustees),
which was elected
by
members from the
divinely appointed
body
of church elders.
Village-level
affairs were administered
by
a local Bruderrath of from
three to six elders
appointed by
the Grosser Bruderrath.
Metz died in 1867. Landmann remained
inspired
until her death in
1883, but no new
Werkzeuge,
true or
false, appeared
either
during
her lifetime or afterwards. After her
death,
control of the
society's spiritual
and
temporal
affairs was
entirely
in the hands of the
church trustees and
elders,
who exercised it
prudently
for
nearly
50
years.
718 american
ethnologist
The
Inspirationists
abandoned communalism in 1932 in favor of a
joint-stock corporate
organization.
The theocratic structure of old Amana was
separated
into church and
business branches: while Amana retains its sectarian
character,
this is no
longer
the most
visible
aspect
of the
community
as it once
was;
nor can the
corporation's
boundaries be
regarded
as coextensive with those of the
church,
which no
longer
claims the
allegiance
of
all of the
Society's
residents. Since
1960,
the
corporation
and
private
individuals have
capitalized
on a
growing
tourist trade,
and
today
the Amana
villages display
a
bucolic, but
modern, prosperity.
Most church members believe that the
group
has become too
worldly
to be
again
favored with
divinely inspired
direction.
the
Werkzeug
and charisma
The most
important
social
position
in the Church of True
Inspiration
was that of Werk-
zeug (literally "instrument").
In the context of
Inspirationist theology,
the
Werkzeug
was an
instrument of the Lord,
someone who
conveyed
divine will and divine decrees to the
peo-
ple
and who stood in
relationship
to the Lord
"just
as the tone of a
trumpet
is to the trum-
pet."
The
Werkzeuge spoke
not
through
free will but
through
the will of the
Holy Spirit.
They
were thus said to be
"inspired."
No
temporal authority
could be above the
authority
of God. Thus. a
Werkzeug's inspired
pronouncements
were deferred to
by
all other
authority figures.
It would be
incorrect,
however,
to consider the
Werkzeug
as no more than a
principal
elder. The basis of the
Werkzeug's authority
was
directly supernatural,
while that of the
elders,
who were
ap-
pointed through inspired revelation,
was mediated
by
their own
temporality
and
fallibility.
The
truly inspired Werkzeug
was infallible.
Furthermore, although only
men became elders,
both men and women could be
Werkzeuge.
The faithful in Amana believed that
Werkzeuge
were subject to divine
inspiration
at
any
time,
but the
overwhelming majority
of divine visitations occurred
during
church services.
With little
warning,
the
Werkzeug began
to
tremble,
and a
mysterious presence
filled the
room.
Then,
sometimes
standing,
sometimes
kneeling,
with
eyes open
or
shut,
and
speaking
in what witnesses
say
was an unnatural
voice, the
Werkzeug conveyed
the Word of the
Lord to the
congregation.
The
powerful impact
of this is
eloquently
stated in a
description
of Christian Metz
by
a
contemporary
observer:
It is
surprising
to see his
motions, kneeling
down and
standing up,
which are of such a nature as if
an unseen
being
held him and
joined him; also,
in these
states,
he
goes
out with closed
eyes
between
the benches and knows
everyone
as
though through feeling.
And the
prophetic quality
of this, com-
bined with the
faultless,
humble character of Christian Metz and the
testimony,
and the trust of the
experienced
and wise members, whose
honesty
cannot be
doubted, makes the members of this com-
munity
live in a bond of brotherhood which is so
strong
that
they
will submit to
every privation
for
the sake of Cod and this
Word, which for them is one and the same
thing (Duval 1948:261; transl. R.
Seifert).
Such
episodes
left the
Werkzeug
drained of
energy
and the
congregation
in a state of
spiritual
and emotional arousal.
The
Werkzeuge
have the classic attributes of Max Weber's "charismatic leader." Weber
(1968:241-242)
defined charisma as
a certain
quality
of an individual
personality by
virtue of which he is considered
extraordinary
and
treated as endowed with
supernatural, superhuman,
or at least
specifically exceptional powers
or
qualities.
These are such as are not accessible to the
ordinary person,
but are
regarded
as of divine
origin
or as
exemplary,
and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a
"leader" ....
It is
recognition
on the
part
of those
subject
to
authority
which is decisive for the
validity
of
charisma. This
recognition
is
freely given
and
guaranteed by
what is held to be a
proof, originally
routinizatlon of behavior 719
always
a
miracle,
and consists in devotion to the
corresponding revelation, hero
worship,
or ab-
solute trust in the leader.
The
Werkzeug's power
was
individual, extraordinary,
and
supernatural.
It was validated
by
public recognition
which consisted of devotion to
continuing
revelations.
Although
the
Werkzeuge
had
charisma, authority
in Amana was not
purely charismatic;
it had become
partially
routinized. Weber considered the routinization of charisma a nor-
mal
part
of social
process.
Pure charismatic
authority,
he
argued,
is
always ephemeral.
It exists in statu
nascendi,
"in a state of
becoming."
Pure charisma is
incompatible
with
routine and with all
systematic
economic
activity;
it is an antieconomic force
(Weber
1968:1113).
It is also a force of what Turner
(1969) calls "antistructure." Associations of
people
cannot hold
together
under such conditions
indefinitely. Eventually
a
strong
desire
arises "to transform charisma and charismatic
blessing
from a
unique, transitory gift
of
grace
of
extraordinary
times and
persons
into a
permanent possession
of
everyday
life"
(Weber 1968:1121).
This desire is
particularly pronounced following
the death of a charis-
matic leader, but Weber (1968:1121)
was clear on the
point
that a
degree
of routinization
can and
usually
does occur
during
the leader's lifetime as well.
To find
pure
charismatic
authority among
the
Inspirationists
one must
go
back to the
sect's
beginnings. Only
then was charisma
truly
unencumbered
by precedent; only
then did
it exist in a state of
becoming.
As soon as the
newly inspired
leaders
appointed
elders to
help govern
the
sect,
noncharismatic
authority principles
were introduced. Even the
reawakening
of
1817,
which revived charismatic
principles,
had to deal with
preexisting
structures and a
well-developed
set of traditions. Another factor
compromising pure
charismatic
authority
was the birth of a second
generation.
Rather than
spontaneously
acknowledging
the
Werkzeuge's legitimacy,
as their
parents
had
done,
the children of In-
spirationists
were socialized to
accept
the
inspired
leaders. If the effect is the
same,
the
principle
behind the affiliation is different and is not
part
of true charisma.
Pure charismatic
authority
was reduced even further in the 1830s when the
Inspirationist
Church
changed
from a
strictly spiritual organization-a congregation-into
a
community
with economic needs and interests. This
period
of
gathering
on estates in
Germany
was one
of consolidation and
organization,
of
forging
the structures and routines of
community
life.
The sect's leaders became concerned at this time with the members' material needs.
By
1854,
when the
Inspirationists
first came to
Amana,
charisma had
clearly
become
part
of a
continuous
institution,
and to that
degree
it was routinized.
the testimonies
The
Werkzeuge's
charisma issued
originally
from unsolicited and uncontrolled visita-
tions
by
the
Holy Spirit
and carried over into all of their social interactions with the faithful.
It was the basis of their
authority
and was reaffirmed each time
they
were
inspired.
One
became a
Werkzeug by receiving
true
inspiration.
Inspirationists
identified two
types
of
inspiration: Einsprache (the
written word)
and
Aussprache (the spoken word).
There is no indication that one was
systematically regarded
as more
sacred,
but
Aussprache
was seen as a
special gift.
It was also
significantly
more
common.
Aussprache
had two
recognized components:
the
Bezeugungen,
or
messages
(which Einsprache
also
had),
and
Bewegungen,
or
bodily
movements associated with its
delivery.
Certain other features, including pitch, tone,
and
volume,
do not fit into either
category
but function more like the
Bewegungen.
The two
components
of
Aussprache
interacted to
produce
an emotional and
probably
cathartic effect on the
congregation.
The
vocabulary, syntax, metaphors,
and
imagery
of
720 american
ethnologist
the
Bezeugungen,
all of which showed affinities to the
language
of the
Bible,
related the
testimonies to
past
moral and
religious training
and communicated a notion of the
super-
natural associated with that
training.
The
paralinguistic
features enhanced the
impact
of
the testimonies.
Society
chroniclers stress the
autonomy
of the
body movements, at-
tributing
them to
supernatural
forces. The effect served to
separate
the
Werkzeug
as a
per-
son from the content of the
testimony.
This
signaled
to the
congregation
that the
message
being
delivered was divine. All of the
Werkzeuge could,
of
course,
talk
apart
from the in-
fluence of
inspiration.
When
they did,
the
bodily
movements and
auditory phenomena
associated with
inspiration
were absent.
The
Werkzeuge
delivered more than
2,000
testimonies after the
reawakening
in
1817,
in-
cluding 1,300
after
arriving
in Iowa in 1855. Scribes recorded the
testimonies,
which were
printed
and
periodically
bound into books. The books were available to church
members,
and elders read selections from them at
every
church service. The individual
testimony
varied in
length
from 300 to
1,200
words. Each bore a number and was
preceded by
a short
precis,
in
German,
written
by
the scribe
shortly
after the
testimony
was
given.
For
example:
No. 5. Homestead the 16th of
July,
1865
Sunday morning
in the services,
as the
people
stood for a
prayer,
the
following testimony
of the
spirit
of the Lord came
through
Sister Barbara Landmann to this
community
as a lament over the
reluctance here to do the Lord's
bidding.
These short
paragraphs
are
particularly
useful in
supplying
information about the
time,
place,
and occasion of the
testimony.
In
theory,
testimonies could occur at
any
time and in-
volve
any subject;
the vast
majority, however,
were
given during
church services and in-
volved the
spiritual
condition of the faithful.
the Amana testimonies
If Metz had more charisma than
Landmann,
if
Inspirationists
viewed his
inspiration
as a
higher gift
than
hers,
evidence of this should
appear
in the
testimonies,
which were the
basis of a
Werkzeug's authority.
This
hypothesis
led to a detailed statistical
analysis
of the
testimonies
given by
Metz and Landmann between 1855
(the year
the
Inspirationists
first
arrived in
Amana)
and 1883
(the year
of Landmann's
death).
The
analysis
verified the
hypothesis.
It revealed that the testimonies of the two
Werkzeuge, ostensibly
the
product
of
the
Holy Spirit,
differed in
striking
and
significant ways.
The
procedure
for the
analysis,
which involved
making
cross-tabulations of several
variables,
is described in the
Appendix.
Landmann's testimonies in the
aggregate
differ from Metz's in several
ways,
but more
particularly
the testimonies she
gave
before his death in 1867 differ from those she
gave
afterwards. Landmann
began giving
testimonies in Amana in
1859,
on visits there from the
Ebenezer
community
in New York. Not until 1862 did she reside in Amana on a full-time
basis. Landmann delivered 768 testimonies in
Amana,
which is 64
percent
of the total
number of testimonies
given
there. Of this
number,
82
(11 percent)
were
given
before
Metz's death-an
average
of 15
per year
or about one
every
24
days-and
686 after-
wards-an
average
of 40
per year
or one
every
9
days.
With this
increase, Landmann's out-
put
came closer to Metz's annual
average
of 54 testimonies. Landmann's annual
output
began
to decrease
slightly
in
1873, the seventh
year
after Metz's
death,
when she was 77
years
old. In no
year
before 1883 did she deliver fewer than 29 testimonies.
The
proportion
of testimonies Landmann
gave
in each of the seven Amana
villages
changed
after Metz's death
(see
Table
1). Metz most often became
inspired
in Main
Amana, partly
because
failing
health curtailed his travel. Before his death Landmann lived
routinizatlon of behavior 721
Table 1. Number and
percentage (in parentheses)
of testimonies
given
in each Amana
Village
by
Metz and Landmann.a
Metz Landmann Landmann
(1859-67) (1859-66) (1867-83)
Main Amana 311 (61.7) 20
(25.3)
27
(39.3)
East Amana 17
(3.3)
4
(4.9)
66
(9.6)
Homestead 29
(5.7) 33
(40.2)
85
(12.4)
South Amana 46 (9.1) 10
(12.2)
63
(9.2)
West Amana 42
(8.3)
7
(8.5)
68
(9.9)
High
Amana 34
(6.7) 3
(3.7)
64
(9.4)
Middle Amana 25
(5.0)
5
(6.3)
69
(10.0)
Total 504(100.0) 82(100.0) 686(100.0)
a
See
Appendix
for
explanation
of variable.
in Homestead
and,
not
surprisingly,
delivered most of her testimonies there. After 1867 the
distribution of Landmann's testimonies
changed
in two notable
ways.
Main Amana became
the most common site for her
inspiration,
due
simply
to her
moving
there
(without
her hus-
band)
and
taking
over Metz's residence.
Except
that she continued to
slightly
favor
Homestead when
traveling
out of Main
Amana,
she delivered an almost identical
propor-
tion of her testimonies at each of the other
villages.
This
consistency
is
quite significant
and will be
explored
below in more detail.
The distribution of Landmann's testimonies
among
the various church occasions differed
from Metz's (see
Table
2). Metz became
inspired
most often at
regular
church services,
Unterredung services,
and at small
meetings.
The distribution of Landmann's testimonies
before 1867 was
generally
similar, except
that she did not
very
often become
inspired
in
small
meetings,
and she never had
Einsprachen (written testimony),
the two of which ac-
counted for over 20
percent
of Metz's testimonies. After Metz
died,
the distribution of
Landmann's testimonies
changed
to favor certain
special
church services: Liebesmahl,
Bundesschliessung,
and
especially
Kinderlehre.
Together
these
comprise
one-fourth of her
testimonies,
whereas
they
accounted for
only
a small fraction of Metz's. The
special
Unter-
redung
service was also more
important
for her than for Metz. At the same
time,
she
became
inspired
less often at
regular
church services. Landmann seems to have favored the
Table 2. Number and
percentage (in parentheses)
of testimonies
given
on different church occasions
by
Metz and Landmann.a
Metz Landmann Landmann
(1859-67) (1859-66) (1867-83)
Regular
service 185
(36.7)
27
(32.9)
111
(16.2)
Funeral service 38
(7.5)
8
(9.8)
57
(8.3)
Einsprachen
22
(4.3) 0 (0.0)
1
(0.1)
Elders'
meeting
24
(4.8)
2
(2.4)
51 (7.4)
Unterredung
108
(21.4)
30
(36.6)
234
(34.1)
Liebesmahl 3
(0.6)
0
(0.0)
57
(8.3)
Holiday
service 32
(6.3)
11
(13.4)
45
(6.6)
Bundesschliessung
3
(0.6)
1
(1.2)
14
(2.0)
Kinderlehre 7
(1.4) 0
(0.0)
97
(14.1)
Small
meeting
82
(16.3)
3
(3.7)
19
(2.8)
Total 504(100.0) 82(100.0) 686(100.0)
a
See
Appendix
for
explanation
of variable.
722 american
ethnologist
less
frequent, highly
ritual-laden
occasions,
while Metz favored the
regular
or
informal, less
ritual-laden occasions.
Some of this difference is due to routinization in the
scheduling
of
special
services which
occurred late in Metz's life or after his death. Under Metz's
leadership,
Kinderlehre was
held
irregularly
at the discretion of
inspiration;
the same was true of
Bundesschliessung
un-
til 1866. Liebesmahl was an
important
and
unpredictable
event while Metz lived and was
held
only
twice before 1867.
Unterredung
was an annual
event,
but in some
years
it
began
later or lasted
longer
than it did in others. After Metz's
death,
the occurrence of these ser-
vices became more
closely
tied to the calendar. Liebesmahl was held
every
other
year
on
precisely
the same
days;
Kinderlehre was held
every year
in
September
and October
(except
in
1875, when, inexplicably,
some of it was held in
July); Unterredung
was held
every year
in
January
and
February;
and
beginning
in
1866,
the
year
before Metz's
death,
Bundesschliessung
was held
every year
on
Thanksgiving Day.
Another difference between Landmann's testimonies before and after 1867 is found in
the
specific groups
to which she addressed testimonies
(see
Table
3).
Before Metz
died,
Landmann became
inspired
before the sub-Assemblies
(Versammlungen)
in church (four
divisions in a
village's congregation
based on level of
piety)
more than Metz did and more
than she
spoke
to the entire
congregation
of a
village (General Assembly).
After 1867 the
proportions
reversed
dramatically,
and Landmann
gave
far more testimonies before
General Assemblies than before sub-Assemblies. This shift is found in
regular
church ser-
vices
(some
of which were for General Assemblies and others for
sub-Assemblies),
Unter-
redung
services (in which a
concluding
service
brought together
all of the small
groups
already
examined
separately),
and Kinderlehre
(a two-part ceremony consisting
of a morn-
ing
service with members of the Third
Assembly,
for
young adults,
and an afternoon service
for the whole
community).
The shift indicates a
preference
for
large gatherings
rather than
smaller,
more intimate ones. The one
possible exception
to this involves
inspiration
in the
presence only
of the elders. The
frequency
of Landmann's addresses to this small
group
in-
creased after 1867.
Perhaps
the most
striking
feature of testimonies to be revealed
by
statistical
analysis
is
the
pronounced pattern
in Landmann's
inspiration
after 1867. Testimonies
given by
both
Werkzeuge
before 1867 do not show this
pattern. Although
these
early
testimonies cannot
be said to have occurred
randomly,
there is no indication that
they
were
given according
to
a schedule. Almost
immediately
after Metz's
death, however,
Landmann's
inspiration
Table 3. Number and
percentage
(in
parentheses)
of testimonies addressed to various
groups by
Metz
and Landmann.a
Metz Landmann Landmann
(1859-67) (1859-66) (1867-83)
First
Assembly
54
(10.7) 14
(17.1) 23
(3.4)
Second
Assembly
16
(3.2) 5
(6.1) 16
(2.3)
Third
Assembly
36
(7.1) 10
(12.2)
36
(5.2)
Children's
Assembly
4
(0.8) 0
(0.0) 9
(1.3)
General
Assembly
150
(29.8) 25
(30.5) 339
(49.4)
Other combinations 50
(10.0) 8
(9.6) 56
(8.2)
Elders 65
(12.9) 5
(6.1) 157
(22.9)
No
congregation
97
(19.2) 3
(3.7) 15
(2.2)
Missing
data 32
(6.3)
12
(14.6) 36
(5.2)
Total
504(100.0) 82(100.0) 686(100.0)
a
See
Appendix
for
explanation
of variable.
routinlzatlon of behavior 723
assumed a
highly regular quality.
The distribution of her testimonies in
any given year
closely
resembled the distribution of testimonies she had
given
the
year
before.
This contrast between Metz's and Landmann's testimonies exists in
virtually every
variable. Some
examples
are
given
below.
example
1. testimonies given
In West Amana
Metz 1858 to 1867
(5, 7, 9, 3, 6, 3,
2,
3, 2)
mean =
4.45;
standard deviation
= 2.30
Landmann 1859 to 1866 (0, 1,1, 2,1,1, 0, 1)
mean
=
0.875;
standard deviation
=
0.6
Landmann 1867 to 1882
(5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 5, 5, 4, 4, 4, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
mean
=
4.125;
standard deviation
= 1.00
example
2. testimonies
given
In
Unterredung
services
Metz 1858 to 1867
(13, 9, 2, 20, 15, 10, 11, 22, 6)
mean
=
12.0;
standard deviation
=
6.0
Landmann 1859 to 1866
(0, 9, 0, 4, 4, 6, 2, 5)
mean
=
3.75;
standard deviation
=
2.86
Landmann 1867 to 1882
(16,13,13,12,15,14,14,14,13,15,14,14,14,14,
14, 14)
mean
=
13.85;
standard deviation
=
0.895
example
3. testimonies given
In October
Metz 1858 to 1867
(4, 5, 0, 2, 4, 1, 8, 5, 1)
mean
=
3.33;
standard deviation
=
2.36
Landmann 1859 to 1866
(0, 1, 0, 0, 1, 3, 2, 0)
mean =
0.875;
standard deviation = 1.06
Landmann 1867 to 1882
(3, 3, 7, 3, 5, 4, 3, 3, 5, 4, 2, 4, 4, 4, 5, 4)
mean
=
3.92;
standard deviation = 1.095
example
4. testimonies
given
before First
Assembly
Metz 1858 to 1867 (4, 2, 6, 3, 10, 5, 9, 9, 8)
mean
=
5.22;
standard deviation
= 4.36
Landmann 1859 to 1866 (0, 5, 1, 1, 1, 3,
1, 3)
mean =
1.75;
standard deviation
=
1.92
Landmann 1867 to 1882
(4, 4, 0, 2, 0,2,0,
2, 0, 3, 0,2,0,
2, 0, 2)
mean =
1.43;
standard deviation = 1.43
After
1867,
the
only
time
during
the
year
that Landmann was
inspired
before the First
Assembly
was at Liebesmahl. The
regular
biennial
pattern
in this case is due to the biennial
scheduling
of Liebesmahl after Metz's death. With monotonous
precision
Landmann ad-
dressed the four sub-Assemblies at Liebesmahl in the
pattern
2-2-2-1.
example
5.
Unterredung
testimonies
given
in Main Amana After Metz's death,
testimonies were delivered to the various Amana
villages
more regularly than while Metz
lived and
they
were delivered
according
to the occasion. Shown below are the numbers of
Unterredung
testimonies delivered in Main Amana
by year by
either Werkzeug:
724 american ethnologist
1859 to 1866
(8, 7, 1, 10, 5, 6, 4, 9)
mean =
6.25;
standard deviation = 2.74
1867 to 1883
(4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
mean =
2.12;
standard deviation = 0.828
Other data reveal
constancy
in the number of
Unterredung
testimonies
everywhere
after
1868. Each
year,
13 or 14 testimonies were
given
at
Unterredung
services
throughout
the
society,
one to the elders in each
village
and one at the
Schlussversammlung (a concluding
ceremony
for all
members)
in each
village. During
16
years
in 7
villages (a total of 112
separate Unterredungen),
the number of testimonies
given per year per village
deviated
from 2
only
11 times.
Similarly, every year
after
1868,
7 testimonies were
given
at
Kinderlehre,
1 in each
village.
Landmann's testimonies are
highly regular
and
predictable.
From 1867 to 1882 she
delivered 11 to 15 testimonies in Main Amana in odd-numbered
years,
and 17 to 22 in even-
numbered
years,
the difference
resulting
from the biennial Liebesmahl. From 1867 to 1871
Homestead received an
average
of 8 testimonies
per year;
all other
villages averaged
5
per
year, including
2 at
Unterredung,
1 at
Kinderlehre,
and 2 at other church services. From
1872 to 1875 Landmann
gave
an
average
of 4 testimonies
per year
at
every village except
Main
Amana,
2 at
Unterredung,
1 at
Kinderlehre,
and 1 at another kind of service. After
1875 her
average
of 3 testimonies
per year
at
every village except
Main Amana included 2
at
Unterredung
and 1 at Kinderlehre,
addresses to other kinds of services
being
eliminated.
Nothing resembling
this
pattern
of distribution existed while Metz lived.
The
foregoing
information should suffice to demonstrate
that,
at least in the
scheduling
of
inspiration, major
differences exist between Metz and Landmann and also for Landmann
before and after 1867. I have
gone
into some detail because these differences are unam-
biguous
and not a matter of
interpretation.
The content of the two
Werkzeuge's
testimonies is more difficult to
analyze.
This is
par-
ticularly
true of what
may
be called the
spiritual
content of the
inspirational message,
which defied
rigorous coding.
The material
content, including
references
by
a
Werkzeug
to
individuals, places,
or
events,
was less
problematic.
Differences in the content of Metz's
and Landmann's testimonies are summarized below.
1. Metz named
specific
members of the
congregation
five times more often in his
testimonies than did Landmann.
2. Well over half of the individuals named
by
Metz were
being reprimanded
or warned
about sin or
misbehavior; most of the individuals named
by
Landmann were
being ap-
pointed
to some
community
office
(elder, teacher, etc.); in
fact, she made more
inspired ap-
pointments
than did Metz.
3. Metz
spoke
far more often than Landmann about economic concerns and state or na-
tional
politics, although
the number of such references for either
Werkzeug
was small
(53
for
Metz;
19 for
Landmann).
4. Metz
spoke
about a
greater diversity
of
spiritual
themes
(e.g., grace,
human
sinfulness,
God's
goodness)
than did Landmann.
discussion
What have the
objective
differences between Metz's and Landmann's testimonies to do
routinizatlon of behavior 725
with the esteem in which the two were held
by
their
contemporaries
and
by
modern
Inspira-
tionists? And what do the differences reveal about the nature of charisma and its routiniza-
tion? Landmann's testimonies reveal
greater regularity
than Metz's in three areas: schedul-
ing
of
special services,
distribution of testimonies in time and
space,
and the
spiritual
con-
tent of testimonies. What caused this
regularity?
And what did it
signify?
To answer these
questions
I must turn to the social situation in Amana to see in
greater
detail how the com-
munity responded
to the two
Werkzeuge.
I will first consider Landmann's status in the com-
munity
before
1867, then the
possible
reasons for her
status,
and
finally
how Landmann's
position
in the
community
was affected
by
Metz's death.
First, the
society's
records contain several
thinly
veiled references to Metz's dominance
over
Landmann,
as well as to the members'
preference
for him
personally.
Metz's
precedence
is seen in
complaints lodged
with him
by
members over certain of Landmann's
actions. Her
pronouncements
were
occasionally
overruled
by Metz, but his were never
ap-
pealed
to or overruled
by
her.
Second, before 1867
only
Metz made
inspired
decisions that
affected the whole
community.
The decision to move from New York to
Iowa,
and its im-
plementation,
were his. So were all announcements to hold
special
fasts and the
major
church services of
Liebesmahl, Kinderlehre,
and
Unterredung. Finally,
all elders
appointed
before 1867 were named in
inspiration by
Metz.
Only once,
in
1863,
did Landmann
attempt
to
appoint
an elder. The man
refused,
but
accepted
two
years
later when named
by
Metz
(Heinemann 1925:363). Not until after Metz died did Landmann assume this
particular
func-
tion of a
Werkzeug.
Disgruntlement
is
reported among
some elders over the
recognition
of Landmann's in-
spiration,
both in 1818 and
1849,
and also over her
performance
as
Werkzeug years
later.
This is
clearly
shown
by
an incident which took
place
in 1862 in Ebenezer. A
strong
disagreement
between Landmann and the head elder-over an issue not disclosed in the
account-"came so far that she felt that she had no more
sphere
of
activity.
She was in a
subdued condition and wanted to be released from her office as
Werkzeug" (Scheuner
1900:749). Metz's solution at the time was to
bring
Landmann to
Iowa, thereby solving
the
particular dispute
but not the
underlying problem
of relative
authority.
Several
years later,
in
1868, Landmann took an
opportunity
to assert herself over the same
man, who was then
head elder in Middle Amana. Because of his
illness, the other elders wanted to
postpone
the
Unterredung there,
but Landmann overruled their wishes and ordered that the Unter-
redung
be held without him.
Why
was Landmann's status inferior? Several reasons can be
suggested.
Resistance to
Landmann
may
have stemmed
originally
from her sex.
Although
women were
among
the
sect's
founders,
none until Landmann had held a
position
of real
importance
for
long.
The
Inspirationist
Church retained elements of Pauline
misogyny;
women were viewed as men's
spiritual equals
but as inferior to men in
temporal
and
practical
affairs
(see
Andelson
1979).
Since the office of
Werkzeug
combined
temporal
and
spiritual ministrations,
some
men,
particularly elders, may
have resented Landmann's
abrupt
rise to
power.
Other reasons
might
have been Landmann's
poverty,
lack of
education,
and
origin
out-
side the
Inspirationist
Church. While none of these characteristics were
particularly
sen-
sitive issues
by themselves,
their combination
perhaps stigmatized
an individual who had
pretensions
of
receiving
divine visitations.
Here,
the
community's
records are of little
help.
Some
Inspirationists unquestionably
felt their earlier
opinions
of Landmann were vin-
dicated when she fell from
grace
and married
George
Landmann. Others
may
have been
scandalized
by
such behavior in a
Werkzeug
and turned
against
her.
For these
reasons, it is
perhaps surprising
that Landmann
enjoyed
as much status in the
community
as she did. To
argue
that she was chosen
by
God can be
only
a
partial explana-
tion;
other
Werkzeuge
had fallen from
grace,
and she had
virtually
driven the
Werkzeug
726
american ethnologist
Krausert out of the
community
herself. A more
likely explanation
is that she had the
sup-
port
of the
strongest figure
in the
community:
Christian Metz.
Shortly
after Landmann lost
her
inspiration
in
1823,
Metz
promised
her
through inspiration
that it would return. Years
later,
on 21 November
1849,
the Lord
spoke
to the
community through Metz, saying
He
would
"again open
the mouth of
My
servant Barbara." A week later an
inspired
Metz
said,
"So
speak,
when
you
have received a word of
reminding
and
punishment, yes reprimand,
out of
my grace,"
and Landmann answered in
inspiration,
"I am in
your
hand as a
drop
of
water,
as a
particle
of dust." There followed an
amazing exchange
between Metz and Land-
mann,
both in
inspiration, adding
to each other's sacred
words,
sometimes
finishing
each
cther's sentences. From then until he
died,
Metz
gave
Landmann
unequivocal backing
in
her role as an instrument of God.
While Landmann
always
deferred to Metz's
"higher gift,"
he
consistently
conducted
himself with
humility
towards her and the
congregation.
If he
occasionally reprimanded
her for
being overzealous, it was done
privately
and in such a
way
that she admitted
wrongness
in her actions. Several times he
sought
Landmann's
opinion
about
community
issues and
incorporated
her ideas into his treatment of the
problem.
He also maintained a
sense of his own
fallibility, acknowledging
his
shortcomings publicly.
Metz
gave
the follow-
ing testimony
in 1859 in Amana:
0, the soul of the Lord has
spoken
and
says today,
Wake
up!
Even
Werkzeuge
can fail if
they
don't
stand
freely enough
in
my grace.
This
you
should
recognize
in
your
new
surroundings [Iowa], my
maidservant
[Landmann]
and
my
vassal
[Metz],
and
you
should now
begin
another
way,
so that
you
can take back that which comes out of
your
human nature and seek the
damage
in
your
own hard-
heartedness, which can
only
be made soft
through
a new
grace
in
pure
love and in heartfelt
humility
(Scheuner 1869:196).
Metz
portrayed himself,
and is
portrayed
in the
society records,
as
passing through
a series
of
personal struggles during
his life in which he was forced to overcome self-will. Some of
the same tone is
present
in Landmann's
writings
and
testimonies,
but she is less self-
effacing
than
Metz, especially
in her
public
utterances after his death.
Metz's death in
July
1867 marked the end of a
50-year period
of innovation and
change
in the Church of True
Inspiration.
The
reawakening,
the
gathering,
the
migration
to
America,
and the removal to Iowa constituted
major disruptions requiring adjustments
of a
social and a
psychological
character.
Furthermore, except
for the
adoption
of com-
munalism, the
problems
faced
by
the
community during
this
period
were related to exter-
nal
causes-persecution,
the strain of
relocation,
economic
hardships,
the Civil
War,
and
the advent of the railroad.
In
contrast,
the
period
after Metz's death until the
reorganization
of 1932 was one of
relative
stability
in the structure and
functioning
of the
community.
It was a time when the
old solutions were
applied
with
decreasing efficacy
to a new set of
problems, many
of
which were internal. These
problems began
over the
acceptability
of the new head
Werkzeug.
The death of a revered leader often leads to
problems
over the
question
of succession.
In the
early stages personal
claims on the charisma of the chief are not
easily forgotten
and the con-
flict between the charisma of the office or of
hereditary
status with
personal
charisma is a
typical
process
in
many
historical situations (Weber 1968:252).
This is a fair
description
of what
happened
in Amana. Almost
immediately
there were
signs
that the
community
was not
prepared
to
accept
Landmann's
leadership
as a
complete
substitute for Metz's. One of the Grosser Bruderrath's first decisions was to hold
regular
monthly meetings.
Before
that, meetings
were held
only
when some need arose or when Metz
ordered them
through inspiration.
Since no
explanation accompanied
this
decision, the
reasons behind it can
only
be
conjectured. It is
possible
that the elders
anticipated
an
routlnlzatlon of behavior 727
enlargement
of their
responsibilities,
or it
may
have been that
they
were
attempting
to
pro-
tect their own
authority against
encroachment
by
Landmann.
Alternatively, they may
have
been
moving
to limit Landmann's role themselves.
Landmann's testimonies from
August
1867
suggest
a
temporary instability
in relations
between the
Werkzeug,
the elders and the members. Dissensions and
disputations
arose in
many quarters;
Landmann seems to have been faced
by
rebellious and
uncooperative
members and
by
elders who were not
ready
or
willing
either to control the members or set
an
example
for them. Between
August
3 and
August 10,
Landmann delivered
eight
testimonies, probably
the
greatest
number in such a short
period
of time (outside of
special
church services)
in the
society's history.
On the
morning
of
August 4,
Landmann
spoke
to
the local elders in West Amana:
The members should not be
allowed,
when I have to contradict the elders,
to talk about it, but
they
should learn to realize and condemn that
they
sometimes act like slanderers. When the elders
get
a
lesson from the Lord,
the members act like slanderers and tattle-tales (Scheuner 1870:85).
She went to
High
Amana the same afternoon and chastised the elders. "You elders should
work
together
in love. Otherwise
you
cannot be
recognized
as
helpers
in the
vineyard
of
the Lord" (Scheuner 1870:85). On
August
5 Landmann had a
strong
testimonial for the
members in East Amana:
The
spirit
of
grace,
who is still
among you, says,
when I look into the den of the murderers and I see
the one who hates his brother, there lives no love but self-love. I want to ask if there is no
healing
to
be found that can check that
great misunderstanding
in the
community
at East. Should I not
say,
"You are no
community
of the Lord, but
you
are a
community
of the wicked"? (Scheuner 1870:88).
The
frequency
and
intensity
of these testimonies are unmatched
by anything
in the
Society's history
after 1822.
They
indicate that the elders were not in
harmony
with one
another,
that
they
were
doing
their
jobs inadequately,
and that the members were
talking
about
it,
all
signs
of
deteriorating relationships
in the
community.
The testimonies also
represent
Landmann's
attempt
to establish clear lines of
authority,
with herself in Metz's
vacated
position.
The
disagreements among
the elders alluded to in two of the testimonies
may
have involved differences over what those lines of
authority
were to be.
Metz's death
exposed ambiguity
in the
authority hierarchy
that had been
disguised
dur-
ing
his lifetime. The testimonies of
August
3 to
August
10
suggest
that Landmann used in-
spiration
to
express
her
authority. Subsequently,
the situation returned to
normal,
at least
on the surface. On
August
16 Landmann traveled with other elders to Homestead to renew
the
Unterredung,
which had been
interrupted by
Metz's illness and death. She became
more active as a
Werkzeug
than she had been while Metz
lived, although
the Bruderrath
also became more active. From time to time she
gave
testimonies
contravening
the
elders,
but
they
never
overtly challenged
her
authority.
The absence of overt
challenges
from the elders does not mean Landmann had suc-
cessfully
assumed Metz's
position
in the
community.
Three
pieces
of evidence
suggest
otherwise. One concerns the
objections
members continued to have to some of
Landmann's testimonies. For
example,
in 1880 she issued an unusual order for the destruc-
tion of all
nonfruitbearing
trees in the
villages
because
they
were
nonproductive,
hence
idolatrous. Such
trees,
she
said, belong
in the woods. This order nettled
many
members at
the time it was
given.
Landmann
occasionally
affronted individuals whom she
reprimanded
publicly.
Several times she chastised members for buhlerei
(a
word
connoting
illicit sexual
liaisons);
once she
charged
the eldest
daughter
of a
family
with
making
the
community
into
a Hurenhaus
(whorehouse).
Such
accusations,
true or
not,
were hard to
accept passively.
Some members resisted what
they
viewed as unfair or unreasonable statements from Land-
mann
by malingering
or
withdrawing
from the
community.
In
1877,
testimonies and elders'
728
american ethnologist
proclamations
were issued
concerning
the
growing unwillingness
of some members to
work. The
Society's
records mention 1877 as a
year
in which numerous members "who did
not want to
obey"
left the
Society.
In
1882,
the
year
before Landmann's
death,
more
members left for the same reason. Metz never faced such
problems,
which
suggests
that
Landmann
may actually
have been
losing authority.
She once
publicly
criticized a new
teacher in one of the
villages
for
ineptness.
The
outraged
man walked out of the service
and went home to
pack
his
belongings.
He was dissuaded from
leaving
the
community only
by
a
sympathetic
elder who arrived with an armload of
published
testimonies and
said,
"Look,
see where I
got
a lesson? Do not let it bother
you."
This statement itself indicates a
weakening
of the
authority principle.
Landmann's failure to attain the status that Metz had in the
community
is indicated in-
directly by
her
appointments
of church elders. Of the 42 elders she
appointed,
32 were
close
consanguineal
or affinal relatives of one or more
living
elders.3 In
contrast, only
18 of
39 elders
appointed by
Metz between 1855 and his
death,
and 42 of 79 elders
appointed
in
the 25
years
after Landmann's delth
by
the Grosser
Bruderrath,
were related to
living
elders. In her
appointments,
Landmann favored members of a
small, intermarrying group
of
families whose men ran the affairs of the
community,
both as members of the Grosser
Bruderrath and as
managers
of the
larger
businesses in the
society.
She
thereby helped
perpetuate
the
authority
of those families
already
in
power.
This
might
mean that her own
authority depended
on theirs: either she used
appointments
as a
way
of
earning
the
support
of those in
power
or
they, wanting
to
preserve
for their descendants the
privileges they
en-
joyed,
exerted
pressure
on Landmann to make the
appropriate appointments.
Finally,
there are the
aggregate
characteristics of Landmann's testimonies, including
the
quality
of
regularization,
which we are at last in a
good position
to understand. From the
patterning
of the testimonies alone we
might
construe that Metz's
leadership
was erratic
and
unpredictable,
while Landmann's became stable and reliable. The historical facts do
not allow such an
interpretation.
We know that Metz was a
stronger
leader than Landmann
and that his death made her situation more difficult. His death also initiated
patterning
in
her testimonies. In this
light,
another
explanation
is needed.
There
is,
in the absence of
pattern
in Metz's testimonies,
the
suggestion
of
spontaneity,
of
greater flexibility,
of
specific response
to
specific
stimulus. The
patterning
of
Landmann's
testimonies,
on the other hand, implies
less
spontaneity
and more
rigidity.
Beyond
that it
suggests
an increased
separation
between the
inspired
word and the situa-
tion
surrounding
its
delivery.
This is seen most
clearly
in the routinization of
special
church
services. Under
Metz,
the occurrence of such rites as Liebesmahl and Kinderlehre
depended
on the
spiritual
condition of the
congregation.
Metz
frequently
scheduled a service and
then canceled it at the last minute because the members were not
"spiritually prepared."
The occurrence or nonoccurrence of
special
church events thus
conveyed important
infor-
mation to the faithful. Under Landmann the occurrence of
special
services was automatic
and did not
depend
on external factors. The
predictability
of
special
services meant their
occurrence transmitted less information.
Landmann's testimonies also transmitted less information due to their
patterned
delivery.
It
might
be
objected
that in order for this to be true the
pattern
would have to be
perceived,
at least
subconsciously, by
members of the
community.
While some members
might
have
perceived
the
pattern,
it is not
necessary
that
they
did so for the information
content of the testimonies to be lower. Landmann's testimonies could not have been as
responsive
to
community
events as Metz's were. Since
they
occurred "on schedule"
they
could not
produce
as
great
an
impact,
nor could
they
be used
by
Landmann to deal effec-
tively
with
any
but routine
problems.
Problems which arose "between testimonies" stood
routlnizatlon of behavior 729
little chance of
receiving prompt
attention. The narrower content of her testimonies was an
added limitation.
Whether a
high degree
of
responsiveness
was
necessary
after 1867 is debatable. Under
Metz's
leadership,
the
Inspirationists
had
already
dealt with the major
problems
of becom-
ing
established.
By
the time of his death
they
had achieved a
degree
of
prosperity
and
security
not known before. But the
argument
that the routinization of Landmann's
testimonies reflects a more secure and stable situation in Amana is unwarranted for two
reasons. The
regularization
of Landmann's testimonies occurred too
abruptly
to be ex-
plained entirely
as a reflection of
changing
conditions.
Furthermore,
as noted
above,
inter-
nal
problems
in the
community
increased after Metz's death. This increase could be due to
objections people
had to Landmann's
style
of
leadership,
or it could be due to a decrease in
the
responsiveness
of her testimonies to
community
events.
Two other characteristics of Landmann's testimonies should be mentioned in this con-
text: her
preference
for
addressing large groups
and the
infrequency
with which she
reprimanded
individuals in church services. These characteristics reinforce another
impres-
sion about the
regularization
of her
testimonies, namely,
that Landmann was
withdrawing
from close contact with the rank-and-file members. Her
preference
for
addressing large
congregations
meant less intimate contact between herself and individual members of the
community.
The small number and often harsh character of her
personally
directed
testimonies did not
help
to
bridge
the
gulf
this created.
Finally,
the
regularity
of her
testimonials can
easily
be construed as a
way
of
creating
distance between herself and the
members.
Although
the
analysis
of individual motivations is not
my major concern,
one
could
speculate
that Landmann's
patterned
conduct served an
ego-defense
function
against anxiety
and
insecurity
over the demands of the new situation. Under Landmann the
relationship
between
Werkzeug
and
congregation
became a
formal, nonspontaneous one,
the
Werkzeug's part
of which was fulfilled
through rigid
and
stereotyped
behavior.
conclusions
What contribution can the
study
of charismatic
leadership
make to current an-
thropological
concerns? Charisma,
as Weber described it 60
years ago, unquestionably
is a
process
of the kind
anthropologists
have been
urged
to
study.
The rise of charismatic
leaders and the routinization which
legitimizes
their successors is "an endless series of
negotiations among
actors about the
assignment
of
meaning
to the acts in which
they joint-
ly participate" (Turner 1977:63).
Charisma is not
just
the
special qualities
of a leader nor the
recognition
of that leader
by
a
group
of followers. Rather,
it is the
relationship
between the
two-leader and followers-as influenced
by
the
qualities
of the leader and the attitudes of
the followers
(Spencer
1973).
This
relationship
is defined
processually
or,
as Turner (1977)
expresses it,
is
continuously negotiated.
In
light
of
this,
what does routinization mean? Weber and the modern
processualists
dif-
fer. Where Weber
(1968)
saw the
waning
of charisma as the attainment of structure and
per-
manency, process analysis
would not: "the
seemingly
fixed is
really
the
continuously
renewed"
(Turner 1977:64).
Can these views be reconciled? How can we measure
degrees
of
routinization?
Jerome
Bruner (1979)
in an
essay
on "The Conditions of
Creativity,"
has written that "ef-
fective
surprise"
is the hallmark of a creative
enterprise.
Effective
surprises
have "the
quality
of obviousness about them when
they
occur" (1979:18). Although
Bruner is
writing
about artistic
creativity, something
of the same
quality
exists in the
appearance
of
pure
charisma. Above all
else,
charisma is a creative
enterprise. By combining
old elements in
730 american ethnologist
new
patterns,
charisma
produces
effective
surprise;
it works with such
power
that the new
patterns
have the
quality
of obviousness to those who follow the charismatic leader. Put
another
way,
the new
patterns
are sacred in
Rappaport's (1971:69) sense of the word:
they
have "the
quality
of
unquestionable
truthfulness
imputed by
the faithful to unverifiable
propositions."
Routinization
brings
an end to effective
surprises.
The more routinized charisma
becomes, the less
novelty
it creates.
When the tide that lifted a
charismatically
led
group
out of
everyday
life flows back into the chan-
nels of
workaday routines, at least the
"pure"
form of charismatic domination will wane and turn in-
to an "institution"; it is then either mechanized,
as it were, or
imperceptibly displaced by
other
structures, or fused with them in the most diverse forms, so that it becomes a mere
component
of a
concrete historical structure (Weber 1968:1121).
When a
very young
charismatic leader dies
suddenly,
the shift to routinization
may
be
abrupt
if his followers
emphasize
the codification of his
teachings.
In the Church of True
Inspiration
routinization was more
gradual.
Periods of
high creativity
alternated with
periods
of low
creativity. By
the time the
Inspirationists
arrived in
Amana, creativity
was on
the wane. Metz's death diminished it further. Under
Landmann,
the
community
followed
the direction Metz established for
it,
and her
leadership produced
few
surprises.
Landmann was less revered than Metz; possibly
because of that she lacked both his self-
confidence and his
humility.
This resulted in a
pattern
of
leadership, particularly
evident in
her
testimonies,
which minimized
novelty
and
creativity.
I
suggest
that Landmann feared
creativity
because it
might,
in her
hands,
result in what we could call "ineffective
surprises."
Rather than
producing
"a shock of
recognition
after which there is no
longer
astonishment" (Bruner 1979:18),
ineffective
surprise simply produces
a shock. Landmann's
few
attempts
at
creativity (the
tree
episode,
for
instance),
seem to have
produced just
this
effect. Instead,
she retreated into
pattern.
The behavior she
adopted
was
mostly
unob-
trusive;
it affirmed the
sanctity
of
things
as
they were,
or as Metz had left them. It was also
less
cybernetic,
a fact which led back
to,
and
reinforced,
the
relationship
she had with the
community.
She behaved in
ways
which can be seen as a defense
against feelings
of in-
feriority
in a role which she felt should have been
supreme.
The members of the communi-
ty helped
to
shape
this behavior
by
their
responses
to Landmann's
leadership.
The
mutually
determined definition of her role is reflected in the
patterning
of the testimonies she
gave.
Routinization,
in this view,
means a loss of
creativity
but not an absence of
process.
It
can be useful or
detrimental, appropriate
or
not, depending
on the situation. The kind of
routinization that occurred in Amana-in which the behavior of a charismatic leader
became
routinized-may
be uncommon. We need to know how else routinization takes
place
and more about the forces which institutionalize charisma. Unlike some
others,
I do
not believe the
concepts
are too
vague
to be useful.
They
are elucidated
by,
and in turn
may help
to elucidate, process theory
in social science. The data I offer in this
paper
show
that
objective
measurements of routinization are
possible; my analysis
of the data leads
me to
propose
that
creativity
is a variable characteristic of
process.
notes
Acknowledgments.
The
computer analysis
on which this
paper
is
partially
based was done with the
help
of Michael J. Levin and was first used in
my
doctoral dissertation for the
Department
of An-
thropology, University
of
Michigan. Roy
A.
Rappaport,
William D.
Schorger,
Conrad P.
Kottak,
and
Max D. Heirich
provided
valuable criticism. Ronald J. Kurtz and
Ralph
A. Luebben read and com-
mented on an earlier version of this
paper.
The fieldwork on which the
larger study
was based was con-
ducted
during 1971, 1972,
and 1973.
routinizatlon of behavior 731
1
Shils
(1965)
has
argued
that Weber dealt with
only
one
aspect
of a
larger
phenomenon in his treat-
ment of charisma. In this
view, the work of
contemporary
social scientists
might
be seen as even more
specialized
than I am
claiming. Nevertheless,
the studies we do have
(e.g.,
Ake
1966; Apter 1968;
Berger 1963; Dekmejian
and
Wyszomirski 1972;
and Oommen
1967) provide
useful and
interesting
data. Of interest to
anthropologists
is Wilson's The Noble
Savages (1975) which includes a
lengthy
chapter
on charismatic leaders in
less-developed
societies.
2
The seven
villages
are: Main
Amana, East
Amana, Homestead,
South
Amana, West
Amana, High
Amana, and Middle Amana.
3
The new elders were related to other elders in the
following ways:
as
brother, son, nephew,
first
cousin, brother-in-law,
and son-in-law.
references cited
Ake,
Claude
1966 Charismatic
Legitimation
and Political
Integration. Comparative
Studies in
Society
and
History
9:1-13.
Andelson, Jonathan G.
1979 Sexual
Separation
in Communal Amana. Ms. Files of the author.
Apter,
David
1968
Nkrumah,
and Charisma and the
Coup.
Daedalus 97:757-792.
Berger,
Peter
1963 Charisma and
Religious
Innovation: The Social Location of Israelite
Prophecy.
American So-
ciological
Review 28:940-950.
Bord, Richard J.
1975 Toward a
Social-psychological Theory
of Charismatic Social Influence Processes. Social
Forces 53:485-497.
Bruner, Jerome
1979 On
Knowing: Essays
for the Left Hand.
Cambridge:
The
Belknap
Press of Harvard
University.
Cohen,
D. L.
1972 The
Concept
of Charisma and the
Analysis
of
Leadership.
Political Studies 20:299-305.
Dekmejian,
Richard
H.,
and
Margaret J. Wyszomirski
1972 Charismatic
Leadership
in Islam: The Mahdi of the Sudan.
Comparative
Studies in
Society
and
History
14:193-214.
Dow, Thomas, E., Jr.
1969 The
Theory
of Charisma. The
Sociological Quarterly
10:306-318.
Duval, Francis Alan
1948 Christian
Metz, German-American
Religious
Leader and Pioneer. Ph.D. dissertation.
Depart-
ment of German, State
University
of Iowa.
Friedland,
William H.
1964 For a
Sociological Concept
of Charisma. Social Forces 43:18-26.
Heinemann, George
1925
Inspirations-Historie,
Vol. 6
(1906-14). Amana,
IA: Amana Church
Society.
Oommen,
T. K.
1967
Charisma, Social Structure and Social
Change. Comparative
Studies in
Society
and
History
10:85-99.
Rappaport, Roy
A.
1971
Ritual, Sanctity
and
Cybernetics.
American
Anthropologist
74:59-76.
Ratnam,
K. J.
1964 Charisma and Political
Leadership.
Political Studies 12:341-354.
Scheuner,
Gottlieb
1869
(comp.)
Jahrbuecher der Wahren
Inspirations-Gemeinden.
Vol. 39
(1859). Amana,
IA: Amana
Church
Society.
1870
(comp.)
Jahrbuecher der Wahren
Inspirations-Gemeinden.
Vol. 42
(1867). Amana,
IA: Amana
Church
Society.
1900
Inspirations-Historie.
Vol. 1
(1867-76). Amana,
IA: Amana Church
Society.
Shils,
Edward
1965
Charisma, Order and Status. American
Sociological
Review 30:199-213.
Spencer,
Martin E.
1973 What is Charisma? British Journal of
Sociology
24:341-354.
Tucker, Robert C.
1968 The
Theory
of Charismatic
Leadership.
Daedalus 97:731-756.
Turner, Victor
1969 The Ritual Process.
Chicago:
Aldine.
732 american
ethnologist
1977
Process, System
and
Symbol:
A New
Anthropological Synthesis.
Daedalus 106:61-80.
Weber,
Max
1968
[1922] Economy
and
Society:
An Outline of
Interpretive Sociology.
Guenther Roth and Claus
Wittich,
eds. New York: Bedminster Press.
Willner, Ruth Ann, and
Dorothy
Willner
1965 The Rise and Role of Charismatic Leaders. Annals of the American
Academy
of Political and
Social Science 358:77-88.
Wilson, Bryan
1975 The Noble
Savages:
The Primitive
Origins
of Charisma and Its
Contemporary
Survival. Berke-
ley: University
of California Press.
Submitted 24
August
1979
Accepted
8
January
1980
Final revisions received 28
February
1980
appendix:
variables and their attributes
Two sorts of variables were coded:
scheduling
and content. Seven
scheduling
variables are relevant
to the
present
discussion.
1.
Werkzeug:
Christian Metz and Barbara Landmann were the
only
active
Werkzeuge.
2. Location: In
Germany
testimonies were delivered in dozens of different
communities, large
and
small. In America
they
were restricted almost
entirely
to the
villages
in which the
Inspirationists lived,
first the five
villages
of the Ebenezer
Society
in New
York,
and then the seven Amana
villages.
In this
study only
testimonies in the seven Amana
villages
were included
(Main Amana,
East
Amana,
Homestead, South Amana, West Amana, High Amana,
and Middle Amana).
3. Year: An
appreciable
number of testimonies
began
to be
given
in Amana
only
after 1858, when
Christian Metz moved there
permanently.
Testimonies continued to be
given
until
1883, the
year
of
Landmann's death.
4. Month
5.
Day
of week
6. Occasion: The occasion could be one of the 11
regular weekly
church
services,
a funeral
service,
a
written
testimony (Einsprache),
an elders'
meeting,
a
meeting involving only
the
Werkzeug
and a small
number of
associates,
or one of several
holiday
services
(Christmas, Easter, Ascension
Day, Pentecost,
and the fall
harvest).
Four other
important
services were:
Unterredung (yearly spiritual examination);
Kinderlehre
(a
service for
young members);
Liebesmahl
(communion); Bundesschliessung (renewal
of
the
covenant).
7.
Group
Addressed:
Inspirationist congregations
were divided into four
grades,
or
Versammlungen,
subcongregations
which
approximated age groupings
but which also reflected the level of
piety
of the
members. Advancement from a lower to a
higher Versammlung
was attendant not
only
on
age
but on
marital status and church attendance. Demotions also
occurred, being
ordered
through inspiration
or
by
elders as a form of
punishment.
The
Versammlungen
of each
village
met
together
for some
religious
services
(Allgemeine Versammlung)
and
separately
for others.
Many
testimonies were
given
at
meetings
of one or another
Versammlung
and directed to members of that
Versammlung only.
Content was divided into
spiritual
content
(religious messages)
and material content
(practical
or
temporal messages). Spiritual
content was coded
using
a set of
key words, e.g.,
human
sinfulness,
God's
goodness,
the nature of
evil,
divine
wrath, wakefulness, redemption. Despite
the
large
number
of
categories-over
20-the terms were
quite
broad and their
utility
was therefore
compromised.
Material content was
substantially
less
ambiguous,
and
coding
was
consequently
of
greater
value.
One variable
simply
identified whether or not material content was
present.
Four
specific categories
of
material content were also coded:
(1) aspects
of
membership
in the
community (banishments,
reinstatements, appointments, promotions
and
demotions, marriage,
individual misbehavior and
reprimands, etc.); (2)
economic
matters; (3) the
community's
interaction with
outsiders;
and
(4) general
community
affairs
(calls for a fast
day
or a
special
church
service). Primary
and
secondary
content
were coded for each
testimony.
Also coded was whether individual members of the
congregation
were
named in a
testimony.
routinizatlon of behavior 733