ABSTRACT

Power in any system is to be thought of as an attribute of ‘office holders’, that is of social persons who occupy positions to which power attaches. Technique has economic material consequences which are measurable and predictable; ritual on the other hand is a symbolic statement which ‘says’ something about the individuals involved in the action. The structure which is symbolised in ritual is the system of socially approved ‘proper’ relations between individuals and groups. These relations are not formally recognised at all times. Ritual performances have this function for the participating group as a whole; they momentarily make explicit what is otherwise a fiction. The classical doctrine in English social anthropology is that myth and ritual are conceptually separate entities which perpetuate one another through functional interdependence—the rite is a dramatisation of the myth, the myth is the sanction or charter for the rite.