This paper critiques the recent use of Marshall Sahlins' model, which opposes big men to chiefs to establish a contrast between Austronesian and Non-Austronesian communities in Oceania. By reviewing Sahlins' model and drawing upon Oceania-wide ethnographic work, I argue that the two opposed paradigms underlying Sahlins' model of leadership, namely achievement and ascription, are in fact entangled in practices and in ideologies. I contend that the cooccurrence of ‘achievement’ and ‘ascription’ is widely supported by ethnographies of Oceania; that these two features can simultaneously characterize a single leadership position; and that this dual aspect of leadership is conveyed in Remote Oceania by the indigenous concept of mana. This suggests that the historical analysis of leadership in Oceania should move beyond this the achievement/ascription dichotomy. Thus, instead of mapping the region in terms of their absence or presence, it is more productive to analyse how these features articulate, or to focus on other aspects of leadership in Oceania such as the relation between leaders and deities or ancestors.

中文翻译：

---

成就、归属和法力：大洋洲领导力研究中超越二元对立的一步

本文批评了最近使用的马歇尔·萨林斯模型，该模型将大人物与酋长对立起来，以在大洋洲的南岛语族和非南岛语族社区之间建立对比。通过回顾萨林斯的模型并借鉴大洋洲范围内的民族志工作，我认为萨林斯领导模型背后的两种对立范式，即成就和归属，实际上与实践和意识形态纠缠在一起。我认为“成就”和“归属”同时出现得到了大洋洲民族志的广泛支持。这两个特征可以同时表征一个领导地位；在偏远的大洋洲，领导力的这种双重方面是通过当地的法力概念来传达的。这表明，对大洋洲领导力的历史分析应该超越这种成就/归因二分法。因此，与其根据他们的缺席或存在来绘制该地区的地图，不如分析这些特征如何表达，或者关注大洋洲领导力的其他方面，例如领导人与神灵或祖先之间的关系，这样会更有成效。。