Key Arguments

• Weber states that when the leader dies and the community wishes to continue, 'The resolution to this can take one of the following forms:' and then enumerates alternatives a)–f).
• Under a) he describes 'A renewed search on the basis of particular features for a man who can be the bearer of charisma,' illustrated by 'the search for the new Dalai Lama, a child to be selected because he embodies divine qualities,' and notes that in such cases 'the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is based on features, in other words, “rules” around which traditions are formed and to which they are connected (traditionalisation)'.
• Under b) he treats 'revelation: by oracle, the drawing of lots, divine judgement, or another selection technology' and says, 'In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is derived from the legitimacy of technology (legalisation).' Saul’s selection by war oracle is given as an example.
• Under c) he describes 'the designation of a successor by the incumbent bearer of charisma, and acknowledgement by the community,' giving early Roman magistracies and dictators as a case where 'Legitimacy is thus acquired by designation.'
• Under d) he discusses 'designation as a successor by the charismatically qualified administrative staff, and recognition on the part of the community', insisting this is not a modern election but an obligatory selection of 'the proper person, the real bearer of charisma', in which 'Unanimity is a postulate and realisation that a mistake has been made, a duty'. He notes that in practice 'legitimacy can be treated as an acquisition of rights governed by all the provisos of propriety, and for the most part effected with particular formalities (enthronement and so forth)'.
• He interprets Western coronations in this light: 'This is the original meaning in the Occident of the coronation of bishops and kings by the clergy or princes with the community’s active agreement.'
• Under e) he presents 'the idea that charisma is transmitted by blood, and that it is therefore a quality inherent in a kinship grouping, especially in next-of-kin: this is hereditary charisma,' explaining that belief shifts from the person’s qualities to 'the legitimacy of the position acquired by virtue of hereditary succession' and that 'The concept of God’s “gift of grace” was entirely transformed and now means: authority by personal right, not from the acknowledgement of those over whom authority is exercised.'
• Under f) he analyses the 'objectification of charisma, the charisma of office' whereby charisma 'can be transmitted by ritual means from one bearer to another, or ... created (originally through the use of magic)': legitimacy now rests on 'the qualities acquired and a ritual act’s effectiveness', as in anointment, consecration, and the laying on of hands.
• He notes that this objectification leads to 'an indelible spiritual character' and to 'constant conflict' between office charisma and personal charisma, 'starting with donatism and montanism, and up to the Puritan and Baptist Revolution'.

Source Quotes

The way this is resolved—if it is resolved and the charismatic community continues to exist (or came into existence for the first time) is very important in determining the general nature of the social relationships thereby arising. The resolution to this can take one of the following forms: a) A renewed search on the basis of particular features for a man who can be the bearer of charisma. A fairly pure type here is the search for the new Dalai Lama, a child to be selected because he embodies divine qualities, rather like the search for the new Bull of Apis.

A fairly pure type here is the search for the new Dalai Lama, a child to be selected because he embodies divine qualities, rather like the search for the new Bull of Apis. In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is based on features, in other words, “rules” around which traditions are formed and to which they are connected (traditionalisation): and hence retrofitted to the purely personal character. b) Through revelation: by oracle, the drawing of lots, divine judgement, or another selection technology. In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is derived from the legitimacy of technology (legalisation).

A fairly pure type here is the search for the new Dalai Lama, a child to be selected because he embodies divine qualities, rather like the search for the new Bull of Apis. In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is based on features, in other words, “rules” around which traditions are formed and to which they are connected (traditionalisation): and hence retrofitted to the purely personal character. b) Through revelation: by oracle, the drawing of lots, divine judgement, or another selection technology. In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is derived from the legitimacy of technology (legalisation). It is said that the Israel schoftim sometimes had this character.

It is said that the Israel schoftim sometimes had this character. Saul was supposed to have been identified by an old war oracle. c) Through the designation of a successor by the incumbent bearer of charisma, and acknowledgement by the community. This is a very common form.

The creation of Roman magistracies was originally entirely characterised in this way—most clearly maintained in the creation of dictators and the institution of the “interrex.” Legitimacy is thus acquired by designation: d) Through designation as a successor by the charismatically qualified administrative staff, and recognition on the part of the community. This should in no way be treated as an “election,” a “primary,” or a “right to nomination”; the real meaning of the process is nothing like this.

This should in no way be treated as an “election,” a “primary,” or a “right to nomination”; the real meaning of the process is nothing like this. It is not a matter of free selection, but a selection process that is strictly obligatory and that does not involve a majority vote but the proper identification, the selection of the proper person, the real bearer of charisma, a figure that even a minority could have successfully identified. Unanimity is a postulate and realisation that a mistake has been made, a duty; persevering with a mistake is a major transgression, a “wrong” choice being a wrong that has to be expiated—originally through the use of magic.

This is the original meaning in the Occident of the coronation of bishops and kings by the clergy or princes with the community’s active agreement; there are many analogous predecessors throughout the world. That the idea of “election” grew out of this will be discussed later. e) Through the idea that charisma is transmitted by blood, and that it is therefore a quality inherent in a kinship grouping, especially in next-of-kin: this is hereditary charisma. The order of hereditary succession need not be the same as that for appropriated rights but can vary from it.

The clear principle of succession by primogeniture to positions of power gained ground only in medieval Europe, in Japan, and in a few other places; this very much reinforced the consolidation of political organisations by avoiding a struggle among several pretenders in the hereditary charismatic kinship group. Belief is then no longer directed to a person’s charismatic qualities, but to the legitimacy of the position acquired by virtue of hereditary succession. (The processes of traditionalisation and legalization.) The concept of God’s “gift of grace” was entirely transformed and now means: authority by personal right, not from the acknowledgement of those over whom authority is exercised. Personal charisma can be entirely absent.

Personal charisma can be entirely absent. Hereditary monarchy, the mass hereditary hierocracies of Asia, and the hereditary charisma of kinship groups as characteristics of the status and qualification of fiefs and benefices (see the following paragraphs) all belong here. f) Through the idea that charisma can be transmitted by ritual means from one bearer to another, or that it is a quality that can be created (originally through the use of magic): this involves an objectification of charisma, the charisma of office. Belief in legitimacy, then, no longer relates to a person but instead to the qualities acquired and a ritual act’s effectiveness.

Hereditary monarchy, the mass hereditary hierocracies of Asia, and the hereditary charisma of kinship groups as characteristics of the status and qualification of fiefs and benefices (see the following paragraphs) all belong here. f) Through the idea that charisma can be transmitted by ritual means from one bearer to another, or that it is a quality that can be created (originally through the use of magic): this involves an objectification of charisma, the charisma of office. Belief in legitimacy, then, no longer relates to a person but instead to the qualities acquired and a ritual act’s effectiveness. The most important example: the transmission of priestly charisma through anointment, consecration, or the laying on of hands; or royal charisma transferred or confirmed through anointment and coronation.

Key Concepts

• The resolution to this can take one of the following forms:
• a) A renewed search on the basis of particular features for a man who can be the bearer of charisma.
• In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is based on features, in other words, “rules” around which traditions are formed and to which they are connected (traditionalisation): and hence retrofitted to the purely personal character.
• b) Through revelation: by oracle, the drawing of lots, divine judgement, or another selection technology. In this case, the legitimacy of the new bearer of charisma is derived from the legitimacy of technology (legalisation).
• c) Through the designation of a successor by the incumbent bearer of charisma, and acknowledgement by the community.
• Legitimacy is thus acquired by designation:
• d) Through designation as a successor by the charismatically qualified administrative staff, and recognition on the part of the community.
• It is not a matter of free selection, but a selection process that is strictly obligatory and that does not involve a majority vote but the proper identification, the selection of the proper person, the real bearer of charisma, a figure that even a minority could have successfully identified.
• e) Through the idea that charisma is transmitted by blood, and that it is therefore a quality inherent in a kinship grouping, especially in next-of-kin: this is hereditary charisma.
• Belief is then no longer directed to a person’s charismatic qualities, but to the legitimacy of the position acquired by virtue of hereditary succession. (The processes of traditionalisation and legalization.)
• f) Through the idea that charisma can be transmitted by ritual means from one bearer to another, or that it is a quality that can be created (originally through the use of magic): this involves an objectification of charisma, the charisma of office.
• Belief in legitimacy, then, no longer relates to a person but instead to the qualities acquired and a ritual act’s effectiveness.

Context

Middle of §11, where Weber systematically enumerates the main types of succession arrangements for charismatic leadership and interprets them as mechanisms of traditionalisation and legalisation.