prehistoric rites of passage

JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 16, 121–161 (1997)ARTICLE NO. AA970307

Prehistoric Rites of Passage: A Comparative Studyof Transegalitarian Hunter–Gatherers

D’Ann Owens

Millennia Research, 204-10114 McDonald Park Road, North Saanich, British Columbia V8L 5X8, Canada

and

Brian Hayden

Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada

Received November 25, 1996; revision received January 13, 1997; accepted March 26, 1997

Footprints and handprints clearly indicate that adolescents took part in the cave rituals of UpperPaleolithic Europe. We argue that the cave paintings were created by transegalitarian hunter–gather-ers. To better understand the significance of adolescent involvement in cave rituals, we undertooka study of maturation events involving rituals among ethnographic transegalitarian hunter–gather-ers. Our results show that the costs associated with all of these events increase as social complexityincreases and as the rank of individuals within communities increases. Furthermore, on the basis ofthe comparative ethnographic evidence and archaeological parameters pertaining to the differenttypes of ritual events, we argue that the presence of adolescents in Upper Paleolithic caves suggeststhe initiation of elite children to secret societies. q 1997 Academic Press

INTRODUCTION knowledge which should soon enable pre-historians to reconstruct the basic structure

What were cave rituals like in Upper Pa- of these rituals with relative confidence.leolithic Europe? In informal archaeological These include recent discoveries of undis-discussions and occasionally in the litera- turbed cave sanctuaries, as well as advancesture, it is easy to find statements of despair, in direct dating of rock art, in recordingstatements to the effect that we will probably traces and remains on undisturbed Paleo-never really know the function and nature lithic cave surfaces, in understanding en-of these events. This is reminiscent of the topic and shamanistic phenomena, in identi-despondency of earlier generations regard- fying seasonal messages and thematicing other archaeological unknowns such as patterns, and in reconstructing paintingwho built Stonehenge and the nature of techniques and acoustic effects. The goal oftheir motivations (Camden cited in Clark this article is to provide pertinent informa-1953:215). Subsequent methodological and tion on a little explored dimension of inter-theoretical advances have often proven such preting ritual activities in cave sanctuaries:pessimism unwarranted. the comparative study of rites of passage

In contrast to the despair expressed by among transegalitarian hunter–gatherers.some authors regarding our ability to know Transegalitarian societies are societies thatthe nature of the rituals performed in caves, are neither egalitarian nor politically stra-we feel that there is a growing corpus of tified; they are thus intermediate between

generalized hunter–gatherers and chief-factual, methodological, and theoretical

1210278-4165/97 $25.00Copyright q 1997 by Academic PressAll rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

AID JAA 0307 / ai04$$$$$1 07-01-97 17:37:55 jaaa AP: JAA

Tony

Typewriter

http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/archaeology/Publications/Palaeolithic/A%20Comparative%20Study%20of%20Transegalitarian%20Hunter%E2%80%93Gatherers.pdf

Edited by Foxit Reader Copyright(C) by Foxit Corporation,2005-2010 For Evaluation Only.

Tony

Typewriter

"C:\Documents and Settings\Tony\My Documents\Current documents\History\Evolution\Human evolution\Upper Paleolithic\Prehistoric Rites of Passage.pdf"

122 OWENS AND HAYDEN

doms in terms of the social and economic role and importance of maturation eventsin Upper Paleolithic societies? Did only ainequalities that characterize them (Blake

and Clarke 1989). privileged few undergo maturation ritualsin the caves or were all band members in-There are a limited number of plausible

suggestions in the literature as to the basic cluded? Were such initiations limited toboys and men only or were women and girlsnature of cave rituals. These include hunting

magic, shamanistic rituals, initiations, and also involved? How rigorous were the initia-tions?band or inter-band rituals which either pro-

mote the increase of animal species or pro- In order to obtain some notion of the so-cial and economic patterning common tomote solidarity among participants for pur-

poses such as information or mate exchange. these phenomena cross-culturally, we de-cided to examine ethnographies of trans-For recent reviews, see Bahn and Vertut

(1988) and Dickson (1990). Of course, none egalitarian hunter–gatherers covering therange of complexity that we viewed as pos-of the above possibilities are mutually exclu-

sive. It seems almost certain that the caves sible for the Upper Paleolithic Europeanhunter–gatherers that painted inside caves.were used for more than one type of ritual

activity given the distinctly different organi- This has never been done before. The notionthat at least some Upper Paleolithic bandszation of paintings in the main galleries of

caves versus the deep recesses as docu- were transegalitarian hunter–gatherers maybe treated as a working hypothesis, how-mented by Leroi-Gourhan (1965) and others.

While all of these suggestions merit in-depth ever, we feel that it is firmly supported byindications of relatively high populationexploration, this is not possible in a single

article. Rather, given recent indications of densities, rich resources, specialized exploi-tation, food storage, increased seasonal sed-the importance of rites of passage and other

maturation events in the initial development entism, prestige objects, the intentionalbreakage of some prestige objects, status dif-of transegalitarian societies (Hayden 1995),

we decided to concentrate our analysis on ferences in grave goods, and possible humansacrifices (see Beaune 1995; Dickson 1990;the maturation events that may have oc-

curred in the caves. We are not the first to Hayden 1990, 1993a, 1993b; Soffer 1989;White 1993). However, the identification ofsuggest that the total darkness of caves may

have been used for initiations (Mithen 1988, transegalitarian hunter–gatherer culturesrequires refinement since the gamut ofDickson 1990), and it is certain from the size

of footprints and painted handprints in known transegalitarian hunter–gatherersranges from petty despots to entrepreneurscaves such as Gargas, Montespan, Tuc

d’Adoubert, Fontanet, Pech Merle, and Ni- to chiefs (Hayden 1995). Most important forthe present analysis, the magnitude and roleaux that adolescents were significant partici-

pants in cave rituals. As Clottes (1992:59) has of various maturation events seems to varyas a function of the socioeconomic complex-observed, in every case where footprints

have been preserved in Paleolithic caves, ity of the group and the amount of surplusresources which are available.children were present.

Assuming that Upper Paleolithic caveswere used for rituals involving children and THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVESadolescents, there follows a suite of subsid-iary questions which archaeology alone is We realize that the analysis of ethno-

graphic data and the use of results to makepoorly equipped to deal with at this time.Such questions include: why was so much inferences about prehistoric societies are

fraught with potential problems: culturaleffort expended on initiations at some timesand places but not others? What was the changes during early contact with traders


123PREHISTORIC RITES OF PASSAGE

or colonists, observer biases and omissions, strictly unilineal or unidirectional terms.There may be varying cultural expressionsGalton’s problem, and many others certainly

exist. Nevertheless, to negate any relevance of complexity depending on such factorsas mobility, corporate exploitation of re-of ethnographic observation to prehistory is

to despair of ever being able to say much sources, or other factors. And, clearly caveart, mobiliary art, and social and economicthat is significant. We proceeded with cau-

tion, and with the conviction that if rela- complexity waxed and waned from stadialto interstadial to postglacial conditions.tively robust, clearly defined trends are pres-

ent in cross-cultural observations of trans- However, we do assume that at some basiclevel, the magnitude of socioeconomic com-egalitarian hunter–gatherers, then these are

most likely due to organizational principles plexity is dependent on the richness and na-ture of the resource base and in particularthat transcended the various contact histor-

ies and observer biases of individual cases that it is dependent on the ability to producesurpluses (Hayden 1992 1995). We take the(Carr 1995:149–150). If clear patterning is

present in our data, it can provide one im- view that under similar conditions, withsimilar technologies, cultures are likely toportant source of inference concerning the

relationship between maturation events and develop similar adaptations at a very basicsocial and economic level. Thus, whileaggrandizive strategies among prehistoric

hunter–gatherers organized at similar levels ethnographic Northwest North American,Asian, or Australian hunter–gatherers wereof complexity.

Given the theoretical debate concerning not and are not relicts of Paleolithic Europe,data collected on many facets of their cul-the term complexity, we feel it is important

to clearly outline our perspective on the use tural, social and economic adaptations maybe relevant to the understanding of Upperof the word. The term complex, by defini-

tion, means ‘‘consisting of various con- Paleolithic groups with similar resourcecharacteristics. In the Upper Paleolithic, sur-nected or interwoven parts; composite’’ and

complexity is defined as ‘‘the state of being pluses would have been in the form of driedmeat, dried fish, buckskin, or similar com-complex’’ (Funk and Wagnalls 1986). These

strict definitions are associated with no judg- modities. As environments changed overtime and from place to place in Upper Paleo-mental values; complex does not equate

with superior. The association of the term lithic Europe, animal migration routes andherd sizes must have fluctuated resulting incomplexity with ideas of superiority—the

more complex the better—tends to limit our major shifts in socioeconomic complexity.These factors would, in turn, have affectedability to describe and discuss differences

among societies. All societies are by their the methods used by aggrandizive individu-als to increase their social and economicvery nature extremely complex; an outcome

of the subtle and not so subtle interactions power. In particular, we argue that variationin the availability and reliability of surplusesof people and the environment, and of indi-

viduals of varying dispositions with particu- could have influenced the importance ofmaturation events as aggrandizive strate-lar needs and wants. When discussing the

complexity of a culture we recognize this gies.Given the possible permutations of re-truism. In this paper the term complex is

solely associated with the number and na- source characteristics, aggrandizive strate-gies, and ethnographic distortions, our anal-ture of various practices and institutions

which a society and the individuals of which ysis can only be considered a preliminary,coarse-grained, heuristic foray into theit is composed, use in relating to each other,

outsiders, and the surroundings. realm of transegalitarian hunter–gatherermaturation events. The patterns that weFurther we do not view complexity in



have been able to document are certainly value of marriageable children by ex-pending wealth at their maturation events;gratifying, and they reassure us that we are

probably on a productive avenue of explora- and the formation of secret societies to createspecial relationships of political, economic,tion. We anticipate that many refinements

will be possible in the future. The working and supernatural support.model that we used to structure our collec-

If costly or exclusive initiation rituals cantion and analysis of data was based on Hay-be documented in the transegalitarian socie-den’s (1995) previous study of a wider rangeties of the Upper Paleolithic, then they areof transegalitarian societies. This study indi-probably of a broader importance in thecated the pervasive and fundamental impor-complexity and transformation of hunter–tance of the use of maturation events as onegatherer societies in Europe as part of theseof several basic strategies for creating andlast strategies. Some of the cave rituals weremaintaining inequalities in transegalitariancertainly elaborate, time-consuming, costly,societies. Following this lead, the major con-and probably prestige-conferring events thatcepts that have guided the theoretical for-involved adolescents. To what extent weremulation of this analysis are that:they strategies for transforming surplus eco-nomic production into investments and re-1. Under conditions of scarce, unreliable

resources vulnerable to overexploitation, ciprocal debts including the transformationof egalitarian ethics into hierarchical rela-sharing becomes mandatory. This limits the

development of prestige technologies as tionships, and the creation of incipient eliteswith more elaborate training, education, andwell as economically based competition; ag-

grandizive behavior is curtailed and pro- upbringing than others in the community?Examining a broad range of transegalitar-scribed;

2. As resources become more abundant, ian hunter–gatherer societies for which eth-nographic data is available as a special sub-more reliable, and less vulnerable to overex-

ploitation, private ownership and the use of set of transegalitarian societies can providea much firmer basis for evaluating the abovesurpluses for competition and prestige is tol-

erated as long as these activities do not ad- possibilities. Since transegalitarian hunter–gatherers arguably constituted the initialversely affect the subsistence prospects of

other community members. These develop- context for the development of socioeco-nomic complexity, this inquiry is also of con-ments differentiate generalized from trans-

egalitarian hunter–gatherers; siderable relevance to research on the veryorigins of complexity itself. At the least, this3. Every sizable community has at least a

few individuals with aggrandizive and com- study will provide a better understandingof how transegalitarian hunter–gatherer so-petitive tendencies; and

4. Under varying conditions of surplus cieties functioned in terms of brokering theirsurpluses and socioeconomic power.production, aggrandizive individuals use

combinations of strategies to persuade other Given the above considerations, we sus-pected that there might be several basiccommunity members to produce surpluses

and to surrender some degree of control trends or patterns in our ethnographic sam-ple. Specifically, if maturation events wereover these surpluses. These strategies in-

clude fomenting disputes with other com- being used as a strategy to increase the valueof children for wealth exchanges in marriagemunities to be settled by wealth payments;

obtaining marriage and war allies through it seemed likely that as resources and socio-political complexity increased, so would thefeasting; making reciprocal or interest-bear-

ing loans of wealth; establishing wealth pay- cost and exclusiveness of various matura-tion events. Alternatively, it seemed possiblements as part of marriages, increasing the



that if such ceremonies were held for all Degree of authority/power of those inpolitical/leadership positionsmembers of the society regardless of gender

or rank, those of the higher ranking individ- • Social complexityPresence or absence of marked socio-uals would be more intense, more costly and

of a longer duration. It was suspected that economic inequality (Hayden 1993b:209)A system of structured social rankingmembership in secret societies and other

such institutions might be restricted to those Restriction of marriage partners to one’sown social statuspeople with a high social status, and possi-

bly only to high ranking males. Finally, it Use of titles or honorific names by theelites of the societyseemed likely that the education which high

status individuals or high status occupa- Presence or absence of slavery (Hayden1993b:209)tional specialists received would be more

detailed than that of lower ranking individ- • Economic complexityOwnership of resource areas by indi-uals, and that the costs associated with this

training would be greater. viduals or lineages versus communal rights(Hayden 1993b:209)

METHODOLOGY AND DEFINITIONS Presence or absence of systems oftribute

Definitions Exclusion of elites from common laborPresence or absence of economically

Transegalitarian hunter–gatherers. Trans- based competition (Hayden 1993:209)egalitarian hunter–gatherers, also known as Presence or absence of occupationalcomplex hunter–gatherers, have been de- specialization (Winters 1974:x)fined as those hunter–gatherer societies thatdisplay some degree of socioeconomic in- The least complex socioeconomic systemsequality, follow a sedentary or semiseden- included in our sample possessed a majoritytary settlement pattern with permanent of the following characteristics. Populationdwellings grouped in relatively dense settle- densities were relatively low in comparisonments, and exhibit socioeconomic inequality with other complex hunter–gatherer cul-through the use of prestige goods or other tures. Positions of leadership among thesesuch measures (Hayden 1993b; Winters societies were generally achieved by1974:x). Many groups also possess methods wealthy, strong, intelligent individuals.of storing surplus foods. Considering this These leaders did not command but maydefinition, the criteria used to identify trans- have exerted a strong influence over otheregalitarian hunter–gatherers and to infer community members. The cultures did notrelative complexity were: have formal political councils although in-

formal meetings of influential individuals• Population densitymay have been held in certain instances.A minimum value of 0.1 people perThere was little socioeconomic inequalitysquare kilometer (Hayden 1993b) (Table 1)within local groups, with no or few preroga-• Settlement patterntives for leaders. Slavery was absent or infre-Semisedentary yearly round (Haydenquent. Community ownership of property1993b:209; Winters 1974:x)was recognized, with members having com-• Political complexitymunal access to resources. Leaders or richPresence or absence of formal politicalindividuals did not receive tribute. Econom-councilsically based competition was expressed inComplexity of such councilsthe attempts by leaders or wealthy individu-Degree of exclusiveness with regard to

political/leadership positions als to attract labor and spouses through gen-



erosity and feasting. There was no signifi- nity. Furthermore, it remained possible forindividuals to achieve positions of influencecant occupational specialization and all

members of the society were included in the through intelligence and the acquisition ofwealth. Leaders exerted a strong influencelabor force.

The maritime Koryak of the Kamchatka over local group members but they couldnot command obedience. The developmentPeninsula provide a good example of this

type of transegalitarian society as defined in of an elite group identified through preroga-tives and titles becomes more common. Thethis study. The following description is

based on Jochelson (1975). In 1908 Jochelson payment of tribute to leaders may have beenpracticed although it was not a common oc-recorded that the population of the Koryak

numbered only 3782. Presumably battles currence among these groups, and leaderstended to remain as members of the com-with Russians and deaths from introduced

diseases seriously impacted the population. mon labor force. Slavery became more fre-quent, as did corporate group or privateThe traditional Koryak village was led by

individuals who achieved higher social ownership of resources. Economically basedcompetition between individuals and lin-ranking through their bravery at war and

their success at hunting. These same individ- eages was important for the attraction of la-bor and spouses. This competition could ex-uals ‘‘lost their influential positions during

famines in years when hunting and fish- press itself in competitive feasting practices.Occupational specialization was a commoning had been unsuccessful’’ (Jochelson

1975:765). In times of war the ‘‘strong men’’ means through which individuals achievedor augmented high social status.were accorded utmost authority, but this he-

gemony did not necessarily translate into The peoples of Northwest Alaska providea good example of moderately complex so-power in times of peace. Leaders were not

granted special privileges, although they cioeconomic systems. This region supporteda population density of 0.06–2.38 people pertended to have polygamous marriages and

many children, presumably as they were square kilometer (Burch 1975). Productivesalmon and seal areas were privately ownedable to support large households. Winter

festivals in which whole villages and visitors (Nelson 1899:307), and the right of individu-als to hunt in certain areas was recognizedfrom neighboring villages participated, were

hosted by the owner of the boat from which (Giddings 1961:151). Slavery was relativelycommon. Strangers may have been en-the year’s last whale was killed. Although

these festivals reconfirmed the solidarity of slaved, as were poor and orphaned individ-uals who depended on others for food,the community, they presumably also pro-

vided opportunities for the development of clothing, and protection in exchange fortheir services (Burch 1975:25, 209).intervillage relationships and the attraction

of spouses. Influential positions were achieved throughone’s age and skill and through the acquisitionModerately complex socioeconomic sys-

tems were recognized as having a majority and disposition of wealth (Burch 1975:210,226, 228; Murdoch 1892:429; Nelson 1899:304).of the following characteristics. Population

densities were relatively high among these Wealth, age, and skill were not sufficientalone to gain influential positions (Murdochsocieties. Informal political councils com-

posed of family heads and influential elders 1892:430; Spencer 1969:153); ‘‘to retain thepublic good will (these men) are forced to bewere common. With respect to the acquisi-

tion of leadership positions, preference was very open-handed with the community . . .’’(Nelson 1899:305). The distribution of wealthoften shown to a relative of the deceased,

although the acceptance of the position usu- in the form of food, clothing and skins, boats,and other equipment (Burch 1975:209; Spencerally required the approval of the commu-



1969:156) bolstered the position of influential most intense level among these cultures,with high rates of interest charged on loans,individuals. Men who acquired much influ-

ence were known by the title umealiq (Mur- elaborate wealth displays, and wealth de-struction being common.doch 1892:430). The umealiq exerted a strong

influence over his followers, and his prestige The Tlingit of the northern NorthwestCoast typify highly complex hunter–gather-was recognized even outside his community

(Nelson 1899:304; Spencer 1969: 152). The po- ers. The Tlingit were dominated by a com-plex system of ranking individuals, ex-sition of umealiq may have been inherited by

the son (Nelson 1899:304), presumably as a tended house-groups, and clans. The rankof an individual or house-group was pri-consequence of the wealth and influence of

his family. marily associated with wealth (Krause1956:77). Emmons and de Laguna (1991:27)‘‘In the political sphere, as in the economic

one, the traditional Northwest Alaskan Eski- state that the house-groups held rights toparticular salmon streams, hunting, trap-mos were ranked, and some individuals had

much more power than others’’ (Burch ping, sealing, and gathering grounds. Oberg(1973:55) states that these rights were owned1975:223). This ranking and the wealth that

supported it were recognized by a few spe- by the clan to which the household be-longed. Personal property included smallcial prerogatives, including the title umealiq.

Other rights to which umealiq and wealthy canoes, tools, weapons, clothing, and someceremonial objects. The house itself, as wellindividuals were entitled included tattooing

and the wearing of special headdresses as slaves, large canoes, important ceremo-nial objects, and many utensils, were the(Murdoch 1892:139, 142). Umealiq were

seated according to their prestige at the Mes- property of the house-group and were heldin trust by the house leader (Oberg 1973:30,senger Festival (Spencer 1969:154).

Finally, cultures with highly complex so- 62). This leader, called the yitsati (Oberg1973:62), controlled house-group activitiescioeconomic systems were generally identi-

fied as the most densely populated societies (Krause 1956:77) and represented the familyat public and ceremonial events (Emmonsin which leadership positions tended to be

inherited by a close relative of the predeces- and de Laguna 1991:27; Oberg 1973:30, 31).Succession to the position was hereditarysor. Often however, occupying the position

still required the approval of community or (Emmons and de Laguna 1991:37) and wasusually assumed by the nephew of the pre-lineage members. Formal political councils

developed among some of these cultures, al- decessor (Krause 1956:77).Clan leadership positions were hereditarythough informal councils of headmen and

influential individuals remained common. within the principle lineage of the clan, butalso depended on the approval of maleAmong these groups, socioeconomic in-

equality was marked, with elites being ad- members (Emmons and de Laguna 1991:38).As with household leaders, the clan leader’sdressed by special titles, receiving preroga-

tives and tribute, and often being exempt power was limited; he represented thegroup to outsiders, led the clan in war, pre-from common labor. Slavery was a common

practice. Many resources were owned either sided over the clan council, assisted theneedy, settled disputes, and provided theby lineages or by private individuals. As

with moderately complex socioeconomic death feast for those whose family could not(Emmons and de Laguna 1991:39).systems, occupational specialization aug-

mented one’s social standing; however, such Despite their limited authority, lineageand clan leaders were shown great respectroles tended to become restricted to individ-

uals already possessing a high social status. and were entitled to certain prerogatives.High-ranking individuals and their familiesEconomically based competition reached its



were addressed with special titles, given the debtor may have been claimed until thedebt was returned.seats of honor at potlatches, and were ex-

During the potlatch, which could last forcluded from the labor of commoners andseveral days, the host fed all the guests.slaves (Emmons and de Laguna 1991:27;Slaves belonging to the host’s family mayKrause 1956:84, 109; Oberg 1973:30, 126).have been killed or freed. All who attendedThese individuals, known as anyeti, main-were presented with a momento in returntained their social standing, not through suc-for witnessing the event. Those who werecess at hunting or fishing, but through theformally recognized as witnesses were pre-use of inherited resource rights and wealthsented with more substantial gifts, includingto produce economic surpluses and to obtainslaves, in recognition of their service (Obergthe coppers and slaves necessary for hosting1973:117, 123–124, 127; Veniaminov 1840 ina potlatch (Oberg 1973:103). Few poor fami-Emmons and de Laguna 1991:321).lies would ever acquire the wealth necessary

This and similar examples of trans-to become anyeti.egalitarian hunter – gatherer cultures withWithin Tlingit society, economically basedhighly complex socioeconomic systemscompetition expressed itself most overtly inclearly show the substantial increases inthe potlatch. Oberg (1973:121) notes that thewealth, social, and political differentia-Tlingit recognized two types of potlatch: antion from moderately complex socioeco-intravillage ceremony given for importantnomic systems.life events; the other was a forum in which

Life maturation events. Our research fo-to display wealth and prerogatives to eco-cused on four major types of ‘‘maturationnomic rivals from outside the community.events’’: (1) growth payments, (2) pubertyRegardless of the primary motivation, bothceremonies, (3) initiations, and (4) training.feasts increased the prestige of the host andWe use the terms ‘‘initiation’’ and ‘‘matura-the host’s clan. The potlatch provided themtion events’’ in a different way than social

with the opportunity to display their tangi-anthropologists such as La Fontaine (1989)

ble wealth, their crests, songs and dances, and therefore define these terms here.and their generosity. Subsequent to each Child growth payments include events atpotlatch, the host could add a cedar ring to which payments were made, or feasts werethe clan crest hat and he received an ances- held, in recognition of an important socialtral name (Emmons and de Laguna 1991:254; stage in a child’s or adolescent’s life. SuchOberg 1973:124, 128). His fame spread with events include birth; naming; tattooing; ear,stories and songs relating the events of his septum, or lip piercing; a child’s first kill,potlatch (Oberg 1973:128). first formal food gathering, or other similar

Potlatching was and is an expensive un- events.dertaking, generally requiring years for the Puberty ceremonies are those rites that pro-accumulation of necessary goods. In order vide a social marker symbolizing the adoles-to finance a potlatch, the host was usually cent’s transition to adult status; these cere-required to draw on the resources and labor monies may involve formal training in tribalof both his immediate family and his clan. customs and mythology, payments to edu-The host also could borrow goods and food cators, periods of seclusion and fasting,from outside the local clan division. These feasting, and disposal of goods.debts were to be paid back with 20% interest Initiation, as used by us, refers to a social(Oberg 1973:118–119). The host was re- and/or ritual ceremony that introduces anquired to invite all who had invited him to initiate to a potentially exclusive non-nataltheir potlatches. Failure to do so could bring institution within the general society. Such

institutions include secret societies, as wellshame to the family and clan, and a crest of



as religious and social councils. These insti- ture revealed a large absolute number oftransegalitarian hunter–gatherers. Becausetutions differ in several ways from cults

found among a number of generalized of the broad nature of the research question,it was therefore necessary to sample the eth-hunter–gatherers. For example, member-

ship in Australian totemic cults is patrilin- nographically documented transegalitarianhunter–gatherers. Twenty-one transegali-eally inherited or associated with one’s place

of birth regardless of social status or individ- tarian hunter–gather cultures from variedgeographical and cultural regions were se-ual wealth. The cult leaders, or the custodi-

ans of mythology and ritual are simply those lected for inclusion in the sample. Every at-tempt was made to cover as broad a rangeindividuals whose conception or birth is as-

sociated with a sacred location and who of geographical and environmental zones aspossible, and to include at least one or morehave attained suitable age (Berndt and

Berndt 1964:196–197). In contrast, secret so- societies from each geographic or culturalregion as representative of that region.cieties and elite institutions are identified as

those organizations in which membership or While the vast majority of the ethnographi-cally documented transegalitarian culturesleadership is restricted to a particular socio-

economic status. While it could be argued are located on the Northwest coast fromAlaska to Washington, we have tried to in-that at one level, dance societies into which

all free members of the community are initi- clude a diversity of groups from this zone.As well we made efforts to gather informa-ated serve a similar function, our analysis

suggests that influential positions in such in- tion on groups from northeast Asia, Japan,Australia, and Florida. The availability,stitutions are either exclusive to high rank-

ing individuals or that the initiations are so quantity, and quality of ethnographic litera-ture was also an important criteria used inexpensive as to preclude the involvement of

all but those with wealth and position. Thus, the selection of these cultures. The groupsselected for inclusion are presented in Table‘‘tribal initiations’’ or ceremonies which

mark the social transition of an adolescent 1. Cultural groups which met the criteria oftransegalitarian hunter–gatherers but whichto adulthood, or initiate him or her to full

tribal status (such as with Australian totemic were not included in the sample are listedbelow:clans), are not considered initiations as de-

fined in this analysis, but are included in the• Aboriginal groups of Arnhem Land,discussion of puberty ceremonies.

Australia are not represented since notTraining includes instruction received byenough information was available to the au-any members of the culture as part of thethors.general social and domestic education. But

• Haisla, Haihais, Bella Bella, Bella Coola,training also includes additional instructionMakah of the North American Northwestreceived only by particular members of theCoast. Northwest Coast groups were al-society as a means of acquiring wealth,ready well represented in the sample.power, and status. Shamanic training has

• Chilcotin, Shuswap, Okanagan, andnot been considered in this analysis becauseother Northwest Plateau cultures. Plateauit appears to be structured according to dif-cultures were already represented by the in-ferent principles (e.g., see Lewis 1989).clusion of the Lillooet and Thompson.

• Chilula, Whilkut, Gabrielino, and otherThe SampleCalifornian groups. An analysis of manyCalifornian groups is hampered by the ef-Although the ratio of transegalitarian tofects of early European contact. Those cul-generalized hunter–gatherer cultures is rel-

atively small, a cursory survey of the litera- tures included in the sample were ones for



TABLE 1Population Densities of Sample Trans-egalitarian Hunter–Gatherer Groups

Geographical/cultural Pop. densityCultural group region (per sq. km.)*

Tiwi (Goodale 1982) Australia 0.4Koryak Siberia ?Chukchee Siberia ?Southeast Australia (Lourandos 1980, 1977) Australia 0.28–0.7Northwest Alaska (Burch 1975) Northwest Alaska 0.06–2.38Yurok (Cook 1976; Kroeber 1925) California 1.3–4.7Hupa (Cook 1976; Kroeber 1925) California 0.55–5.2Thompson (Teit 1900) Interior Plateau (B. C.) 0.23Lillooet (Hayden 1993) Interior Plateau (B. C.) 1.0Ainu (Watanabe 1983) Japan 0.17Yokuts (Kroeber 1925) California 0.56–0.76Aluet (Graburn & Strong 1973; Holmberg 1985; Kroeber 1939) Southwest Alaska 0.28–2.29Koniag (Holmberg 1985) Southwest Alaska ?Tlingit (Boyd 1990; Jorgensen 1980; Krause 1956; Schalk 1981) Northwest Coast 0.08–1.0**Tsimshian (Halpin & Seguin 1990) Northwest Coast 0.18–2.12Haida (Boyd 1990; Kroeber 1939; Schalk 1981) Northwest Coast 0.95–2.46Kwagiulth (Boyd 1990) Northwest Coast 0.32–0.73Nuu-Chah-Nulth (Boyd 1990; Kroeber 1939) Northwest Coast 0.35–1.7Coast Salish (Suttles 1990) Northwest Coast 0.94Chumash (Blackburn 1975; Cook 1970) California 1.08–2.04Calusa (Goggin & Sturtevant 1964; Marquardt 1988; Widmer 1988) Southeast Florida 1.2–2.4

* Estimated range suggested by population estimates given by authors cited.** Figures seem low; this may be the result of high incidence of warfare or the inclusion of unused space in

culture area.

which ethnographic materials were most event, both within and across levels of socialand political complexity, is provided. In-available.

• Several Russian hunter–gatherer–fishers cluded in our analysis of growth payments,puberty ceremonies, initiations, and trainingwere excluded because little information re-

garding these cultures was available in En- is a discussion of differences between elitesand commoners, and between males and fe-glish.males of the same culture. These differences

This list is not exhaustive; however, it are then examined across levels of socioeco-should serve to illustrate the reasoning in- nomic complexity in a search for patterning.volved in the selection and exclusion of par- It was anticipated that many maturationticular transegalitarian hunter–gatherer cul- events would become more physically de-tures. manding and of longer duration as socioeco-

nomic complexity increased, mirroring theSummary Distribution general trend toward increasing socioeco-

nomic complexity evident in our classifica-Because the selection of cultures to be in- tion.

cluded in the sample was not random, a sta-Organizationtistical analysis of our findings was consid-

ered inappropriate. However, a discussion In order to facilitate analysis, the datawere organized in a manner which approxi-of the distribution of each life maturation



mates varying levels of complexity within Growth Paymentsthe sample. The categorization of the cul-

The analysis of the ethnographic materialtures is best viewed as comprising three lev-in this study suggests that the presence ofels of socioeconomic complexity (least com-costly ceremonies marking important stagesplex, moderately complex, and highly com-in a child’s life is an established phenome-plex), as determined by the criteria outlinednon in highly complex hunter–gatherer so-previously.cieties (Table 2.1–2.3). In 8 of the 10 highlyWithin each level we have also attemptedcomplex cultures examined, payments,to order the groups in terms of the relativecostly feasts, and/or the distribution of giftscomplexity of their socioeconomic systems.was an established practice to mark certainHowever, the ordering of the cultures withinphysical or social stages in a child’s life. Fiveeach level is less precise than the overall dis-of the eight groups with moderately com-tinction made between the levels. In addi-plex socioeconomic systems had similartion, little gradation is implied for groupspractices. There is no record of growth pay-of the Northwest Coast of British Columbiaments among the sample groups with thesince all are very similar in their degree ofleast complex socioeconomic systems. It issocioeconomic complexity. Instead, theircertain that body deformation was not a partlisting reflects the geographical location ofof the maturation process of the Tiwi (Spen-the cultures from the north to the south.cer 1966:92) but there is no information re-As a consequence both of the numbers ofgarding birth, naming, and other such possi-variables involved in this classification, andble growth events for the Tiwi, Chukchee,by considering other variables such as tech-or Koryak. As the quality of the ethnograph-nology, religion, and artistic complexity, ar-ies is generally high, either there is no infor-guments might be made for a somewhat dif-mation because there were no such eventsferent arrangement of the cultures in termsor, as seems more likely, no elaborate cere-of their relative complexity, both within themony accompanied the event and they weregraduated levels and between them. How-therefore overlooked.ever we feel that, even with some modifica-

Differences between the exclusivity oftions to the arrangement of the culturesgrowth payment events in moderately andbased on alternative criteria, the generalhighly complex socioeconomic systems aretrend toward higher population densitiesalso evident. The most obvious difference isand increasing social, political, and eco-the almost total lack of expensive events fornomic complexity would closely resemblechildren of high status families in moder-the sequence which we have developed.ately complex socioeconomic systems. Somegradation between the growth ceremoniesof the poor and wealthy probably existedANALYSESeven in moderately complex hunter–gather-ers, but few ethnographers have recorded

The following analyses address the rela- such details. Of the eight moderately com-tionships between gender, sociopolitical plex socioeconomic systems investigated incomplexity, individual social status, and the this study, Teit (1900), in his discussion ofcosts associated with growth payments, pu- the Thompson is the only ethnographer toberty ceremonies, initiations, and training. imply differences between the practices ofIn addition to the analysis of each type of community members. He states (1900:322)maturation event, we also discuss the theo- that only some Thompson families gaveretical importance of the specific event and feasts and distributed gifts at the birth of a

child. It may be inferred that the limitingits potential archaeological implications.



TA

BL

E2

Ch

ild

Gro

wth

Eve

nts

Eve

nt/g

ener

alG

end

erE

vent

/hig

hG

end

erG

roup

popu

lati

onof

child

Cos

tsst

atus

child

ofch

ildC

osts

2.1:

Lea

stco

mpl

exso

cioe

cono

mic

syst

ems

Tiw

i•

?•

?K

orya

k•

?•

?C

hukc

hee

•?

•?

2.2:

Mod

erat

ely

com

plex

soci

oeco

nom

icsy

stem

s

Sout

heas

tA

ustr

alia

•?

•?

Nor

thw

est

Ala

ska

•W

alki

ng•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

?•

•(G

idd

ings

1961

:153

;Mur

doc

h18

92:1

39,

•In

trod

ucti

onto

kash

im•

F&

M•

?•

••

144;

Nel

son

1899

:286

,307

;Spe

ncer

•Fi

rst

kill

•M

•M

oder

ate

••

•19

69:1

41,2

41)

•L

ippi

erce

d•

M•

Low

••

••

Tat

toos

•F

•?

••

•Y

urok

•?

•?

Hup

a•

?•

?T

hom

pson

•E

arpi

erce

d•

F&

M•

?•

(Bir

th)

•F

&M

•(M

oder

ate)

(Tei

t19

00:2

22,2

91,3

09)

•Se

ptum

pier

ced

•F

•?

•N

amin

g•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

?L

illoo

et•

Bir

th•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

?(T

eit

1975

:220

,222

,260

)•

Ear

pier

ced

•F

&M

•?

•Se

ptum

pier

ced

•F

&M

•?

•T

atto

os•

F•

?A

inu

•T

atto

os•

F•

Low

•?

(Ohn

uki-

Tie

rney

1974

:61)

Yok

uts

•N

amin

g•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

?(S

pier

1978

:478

;Wal

lace

1978

b:45

5)•

Tat

toos

•F

&M

•?

•E

ars

pier

ced

•F

&M

•?

•Se

ptum

pier

ced

•F

&M

•?

2.3:

Hig

hly

com

plex

soci

oeco

nom

icsy

stem

s

Alu

et•

?•

?K

onia

g•

Intr

oduc

tion

toka

shim

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•?

(Lan

tis

1971

:5,3

0)

AID JAA 0307 / ai04$$0307 07-01-97 17:37:55 jaaa AP: JAA


Tlin

git

•B

irth

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•B

irth

•F

&M

•(H

igh)

(Em

mon

s19

91:2

20,2

42–2

47,2

53,2

62–

•L

ippi

erce

d•

F•

Mod

erat

e•

Lip

pier

ced

•F

•H

igh

264,

265;

Kan

1989

87,8

8;K

raus

e•

Sept

umpi

erce

d•

F&

M•

(Mod

erat

e)•

Han

ds

tatt

ooed

•F

•H

igh

1956

:162

,165

,166

;Obe

rg19

73:8

1,•

Ad

dit

iona

lna

mes

•?

•H

igh

262–

264)

•E

ars

pier

ced

•F

&M

•H

igh

•A

dd

itio

nal

ear

hole

s•

F&

M•

Hig

hT

sim

shia

n•

Nam

ing

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•B

irth

•F

&M

•H

igh

(Gar

field

,196

6:25

,26–

27)

•E

ars

pier

ced

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•N

amin

g•

F&

M•

Hig

h•

Ear

spi

erce

d•

F&

M•

Hig

h•

Ad

dit

iona

lea

rho

les

•F

&M

•H

igh

•T

atto

os•

F&

M•

(Hig

h)•

Anc

estr

alna

me

•?

•H

igh

Hai

da

•T

atto

os•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

Tat

toos

•F

&M

•H

igh

(Bla

ckm

an19

90:2

52,2

53;D

awso

n•

Lip

pier

ced

•F

•M

oder

ate

•C

hild

hood

lippi

erci

ng•

F•

(Hig

h)18

80:1

08,1

09,1

26,1

27,1

31;

•E

ars

pier

ced

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•A

dd

itio

nal

ear

hole

s•

M•

(Hig

h)Sw

anto

n19

75:1

69)

•N

amin

g•

M•

Mod

erat

e•

Sept

umpi

erce

d•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

eK

wag

iult

h•

Nam

ing

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•N

amin

g•

F&

M•

Hig

h(B

oas

1966

:79,

362;

Cod

ere

1990

:366

;•

Hea

dsh

apin

g•

F•

?R

ohne

r&

Roh

ner

1970

:98)

•Po

tlat

chna

me

•M

•H

igh

Nuu

-Cha

h-N

ulth

•B

irth

•F

&M

•(M

oder

ate)

•B

irth

•F

&M

•(H

igh)

(Ari

ma

1983

:85,

86;D

ruck

er19

51:1

00,

•N

amin

g•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

Nam

ing

•F

&M

•(H

igh)

101,

124,

125,

137,

371)

•W

eani

ng•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

Lob

e&

helix

ofea

rpi

erce

d•

F&

M•

Hig

h•

Firs

tki

ll/be

rry

pick

ing

•F

&M

•M

oder

ate

•Se

ptum

pier

ced

•F

Hig

h•

Ear

spi

erce

d•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

e•

Hea

dsh

apin

g•

F&

M•

?•

Sept

umpi

erce

d•

F&

M•

Mod

erat

eC

oast

Salis

h•

Hea

dsh

apin

g•

F&

M•

?U

pper

Stal

o•

Sept

umpi

erce

d•

F&

M•

(Hig

h)(D

uff

1952

:80,

90,9

1)L

ower

Fras

er•

Hea

dsh

apin

g•

F&

M•

?•

Anc

estr

alna

me

•?

•H

igh

(Bar

nett

1955

:74–

76;S

uttl

es19

90:4

63)

•E

ars

pier

ced

•F

&M

•(M

oder

ate)

•(S

eptu

mpi

erce

d)

•?

•?

•Se

ptum

pier

ced

•F

&M

•(M

oder

ate)

Chu

mas

h•

Ear

spi

erce

d•

F&

M•

?(G

rant

1978

:509

)C

alus

a•

?•

?

Not

e.(?

)N

oin

form

atio

nav

aila

ble.

Wor

ds

inpa

rent

hese

sin

dic

ate

anin

fere

nce

mad

efr

omet

hnog

raph

icd

ata

orsi

mila

rcu

ltur

algr

oup.

F,fe

mal

e;M

,mal

e.C

osts

:lo

w,n

opu

blic

reco

gnit

ion;

mod

erat

e,fe

ast

and

/or

paym

ents

;hig

h,po

tlat

cheq

uiva

lent

and

/or

paym

ents

.



factor on this practice was the wealth and cial position appears to have been muchmore secure than that of leaders amongstatus of the family involved.

The general absence of such displays communities with moderately complexsocioeconomic systems. In general, publicmakes sense for two reasons. First, individu-

als in cultures with moderately complex so- economic competition between leaders inhighly complex socioeconomic systems alsocioeconomic systems tend to achieve their

status by recruiting a group of economic becomes more obvious. [Northwest Coastpotlatch hosts and Chumash financiers forsupporters. These supporters are attracted

and maintained not only by the abilities of Annual Mourning Ceremonies exemplifysuch competition. In addition, Widmerthe leader but also by the personality of the

leader and the benefits provided for them. (1988:268) argues that the Calusa systemof wealth redistribution ‘‘would resembleExcessive hoarding or too open displays of

advantages by aggrandizers among these the competitive feastings and ‘giveaways’among lineages of the potlatch system in thegroups would be resented or resisted by

supporters (Hayden 1995:34, 66–67). As a Northwest Pacific Coast’’.] Under these con-ditions, large expenditures of wealth on theconsequence, for most cases of moderate

complexity there was no extreme social dif- growth maturation events of high rankingchildren were more tolerated than for chil-ferentiation between leaders and the rest

of the community (Goddard 1903:58; Gold- dren of aggrandizers in moderately complexsocioeconomic systems. Not only did the ex-schmidt and Driver 1965:104; Kroeber

1925:3, 132–133; Nelson 1899:303, 305; Peng penditures accompanying the growth eventsserve to distinguish high-ranking childrenand Geiser 1977:170–171; Pilling 1978:141;

Teit 1900:289; Teit 1975:255, Wallace from commoners but they could also beviewed as another expression of economic1978a:171; Waterman and Kroeber 1965:1).

Given that a leader tended to be very depen- competition between socioeconomic groups.The number of names individuals pos-dent on his followers for his wealth, that

his position was not necessarily a permanent sessed, the number of ear holes they had,and the numbers or style of tattoos they dis-one, and that the symbols and prerogatives

associated with his position were a conse- played were all symbols through which highstatus individuals expressed their rank.quence of his wealth, it would follow that

costly growth events for his children could Thus, the development of very elaborate andexpensive growth payment events for highbe viewed by other community members as

unwarranted and boastful display. Never- status children can be seen to be a conse-quence of the larger and more differentiatedtheless, aggrandizive individuals in these

communities undoubtedly viewed the in- social, economic, and political arena.There are, in general, few differences be-vestment of surpluses in their offspring as

being in their own self-interest and probably tween the cost and nature of events associ-ated with males versus those associated withmade initial steps to develop child growth

payments in many groups with moderately females of moderately and highly complexsocioeconomic systems. This is true both forcomplex socioeconomic systems.

Among transegalitarian hunter–gatherer those events associated with the generalmale and female population and for thosesocieties with highly complex socioeco-

nomic systems, especially those with subsis- associated with high-ranking individuals.The most obvious exception is among thosetence based corporate groups, ascribed so-

cial status becomes much more common, as cultures in which females wore labrets butthe males did not. Usually the piercing ofdo expensive and exclusive growth events.

Although high-ranking individuals contin- the lip required payment to the person pro-viding the service and was followed by aued to provide for their followers, their so-



distribution of goods (e.g., Sergei 1989:87– because of the marriage often result incontinuing exchanges of commensurate88; Emmons and de Laguna 1991:245, 247;

re: Tlingit lip piercing). amounts of wealth, and in an expansion orreaffirmation of both military and economicThis analysis of the child growth events

of transegalitarian hunter–gatherers has at alliances. The greater the investment in achild given in marriage, the greater the mar-least two important theoretical and archaeo-

logical implications. First, as many events riage wealth and the stronger the militaryand economic alliance. Such alliances andare restricted only to children of high social

status, it is clear that they serve as indicators continued exchanges result in increased per-sonal power for the individual or socialof ‘‘ascribed’’ social status. Typically, for

most hunter–gatherers, status is achieved group which finances the child’s maturationevent. In this manner, child growth pay-through the actions of the individual and

is therefore, associated with older persons. ments serve as one of several avenues whichincrease archaeological manifestations ofAscribed social status, that is, status which is

a direct result of the social position of one’s economic inequality and general social com-plexity.family or ancestors, has previously been as-

sumed to be associated only with stratified,primarily agricultural societies. However, Puberty Ceremoniesethnographic evidence indicates that as-

Rites marking the social transition tocribed social status was common in manyadulthood are common features of hunter–transegalitarian hunter–gatherer cultures.gatherer societies. In our analysis, these ob-For example, among the Tlingit the wearingservances include both spirit quests andof ear ornaments was almost universalpractices which function as social markersamong adults, however children ‘‘of bothof the transition to adult status. Amongsexes of the higher class above the age oftransegalitarian hunter–gatherers these cer-eight years, and even younger, . . . woreemonies can provide a means throughsome ornament in the lobe of the ear’’ (Em-which the social position of high status indi-mons and de Laguna 1991:243). Further,viduals is not only reflected but also en-Krause (1956:166) states that, ‘‘according tohanced. By increasing the severity of the se-Veniaminof, the Indians with pierced earsclusion associated with puberty rites, andare called angaschi meaning ‘of the nobility,’by celebrating these with an elaborate andand similar honor is supposed to be enjoyedcostly feast, an adolescent’s sponsor can in-by their descendants. . . .’’flate the social value of the youth. For ourSecond, Hayden (1995:44–45, 54–55) haspurposes, the severity of seclusion wasargued that child growth payments werejudged on the basis of its duration and theone means through which the social andnumber of associated restrictions, includingeconomic value of a child increased. Accord-those connected with foodstuffs, personalingly, the costs involved in growth pay-contacts, and limitations on activity. As withments (e.g., piercing a child’s ears, septumgrowth payments, the benefit of the in-or lips, having tattoos applied, names be-creased social and economic value is in thestowed, or those expenditures made in rec-creation of marriage alliances and wealth ex-ognition of a child’s birth, first kill or firstchanges between families of superior wealthgathering) can be viewed as investments.and power. The Salish provide a good exam-The return on these investments comes inple of a severe seclusion and its conse-the form of marriage arrangements for thequences for marriage.child. Not only do the high child growth

payments justify a large dowry or bride- The development of ‘conspicuous leisure’ for thewell born girl was carried to its fullest by the Sa-price, the ties established between families



TABLE 3Puberty Ceremonies

Existence of Severity Severitypuberty (general (high status

Group ceremony population) Costs child) Costs

3.1: Least complex socioeconomic systems

Tiwi • U • Moderate • Moderate • ?(Goodale 1971:48–49, 205; Hart

1979:94; Hart 1955:136,Spencer 1966:91)

Koryak • ? • ?Chukchee • ? • ?

3.2—Female: Moderately complex socioeconomic systems

Southeast Australia • ?Northwest Alaska • U • Low to • ? • ?

(Giddings 1961:153, 154; Nelson moderate1887–88:291; Spencer1969:244)

Yurok • U • (Low) • (Low) • ?(Kroeber 1925:45; Erikson

1965:266, 290)Hupa • U • Low • (Low) • Low • Moderate

(Goddard 1903:53; Wallace1978a:173)

Thompson • U • Moderate • ? • ?(Teit 1900:312–317)

Lillooet • U • High • ? • ?(Teit 1975:263–265)

Ainu •(Ohnuki-Tierney 1974:59–61)

Yokuts • U • Low • Moderate • ?(Gayton 1948:30; Spier 1978:479;

Wallace 1978:455)

3.3—Female: Highly complex socioeconomic systems

Aleut • U • High • Low • High • Moderate(Graburn & Strong 1973:128;

Lantis 1971:4, 5)Koniag • U • High • Low • High • Moderate

(Holmberg 1985:53; Lantis1971:4, 5)

Tlingit • U • Moderate • Moderate • High • High(de Laguna 1990:217; Emmons

1991:245, 264; Kan 1989:88;Krause 1956:152, 153, 265;Oberg 1973:33)

Tsimshian • U • Moderate • (Moderate) • High • (High)(Garfield 1966:10, 16)

Haida • U • Low–moderate • Moderate • Moderate–high • (High)(Blackman 1990:252, 254;

Dawson 1880:130; Swanton1975:48, 49)

Kwagiulth • U • (Moderate) • Moderate • (Moderate) • High(Boas 1966:368–370)

Nuu-Chah-Nulth • U • Low–moderate • Moderate • Moderate–high • High(Arima 1983:74, 83, 87; Drucker

1951:138, 140–142)



TABLE 3—Continued

Existence of Severity Severitypuberty (general (high status

Group ceremony population) Costs child) Costs

3.3—Female: Highly complex socioeconomic systems

Coast Salish • U • Low • Low • High • High(Barnett 1955:143, 150, 151, 180;

Duff 1952:92)Chumash • U • Moderate • ? • ?

(Harrington 1942:11, 44 inHudson and Underhay1988:45)

Calusa • ? • ?

3.4—Male: Least complex socioeconomic systems

Tiwi • U • High • Moderate • ?(Goodale 1971:48–49, 205; Hart

1979:94; Hart 1955:136;Spencer 1966:91)

Koryak • ? • ?Chukchee • ? • ?

3.5—Male: Moderately complex socioeconomic systems

Southeast Australia • U • High? • ? • ? • ?(Dawson 1981:30; Howitt

1904:599)Northwest AlaskaYurokHupaThompsonLillooetAinuYokuts

3.6—Male: Highly complex socioeconomic systems

Aleut • ?KoniagTlingitTsimshianHaidaKwagiulthNuu-Chah-NulthCoast Salish • • ? • Low • ? • Moderate

(Barnett 1955:143)ChumashCalusa • ?

Note. (?) No information available. Words in parentheses indicate an inference made from ethnographic dataor similar cultural group. Severity—male: low, transition to adult status is gradual; moderate, transition involvesseclusion, fasting and whipping; high, significantly longer, harsher versions of the above. Severity—female: low,transition to adult status involves seclusion and restrictions lasting several days; moderate, transition involvesseclusion and restrictions lasting several months; high, transition involves seclusion and restrictions lasting a yearor longer. Costs: low, no display or feasting; moderate, feast and/or payments; high, potlatch equivalent and/orpayments.



netch, Nanaimo, and Sechelt, who secluded her cost based on socioeconomic status amonglong before puberty and kept her incommunicado these groups. The seclusion of Thompsonin a small compartment on or above the bed plat-

and Lillooet females (Teit 1900:264–265;form. The girl was allowed to go outside only at1906:312) could be quite severe, with the girlnight and then in secrecy and accompanied by her

mother. She did nothing, and her continued inac- spending much of her time in a pit dug in ativity and seclusion made her weak, pale, and in- separate lodge. Although at the time that Teitcompetent to perform any physical task. As a result was among the Thompson, the seclusion ofshe often walked queerly the rest of her life. Yet her

girls generally lasted 4 months, in formervery defects were valued as marks of the ultimatetimes it was noted to have lasted up to a year.aristocrat, and noble families sought these secluded

girls . . . in marriage for their sons (Barnett The duration of a girl’s seclusion among the1955:180). Lillooet could run up to 4 years in length. It

may be that the duration of the seclusion wasThe data regarding puberty ceremonies dependent on the girl’s status, as was com-

indicates that among moderately and highly mon among the highly complex socioeco-complex transegalitarian hunter–gatherer nomic systems. Among cultures with thesocioeconomic systems, the first menstrua- least complex socioeconomic systems onlytion of all females, regardless of social stand- the Tiwi appear to have isolated girls at theiring, was almost universally recognized with first menstruation, and it is interesting to notea period of seclusion or restrictions (Table that she was isolated from the main commu-3.1–3.3). Six of the 8 cultures with moder- nity for a somewhat lengthy period of 4ately complex socioeconomic systems and 9 months.of the 10 cultures with highly complex socio- It seems possible that a long period of se-economic systems practiced seclusion (there clusion, which results in the removal of ais no information available regarding seclu- female from the labor force, was not an eco-sion of Calusa females). It is only for the nomically viable alternative for most cul-Ainu and groups from southeastern Austra- tures with less complex socioeconomic sys-lia that no mention of rites associated with tems. Similarly, less wealthy families inthe event were found. Among groups with highly complex socioeconomic systems mayless complex socioeconomic systems, the have been unwilling or unable to remove aTiwi recognized the first menses by an elab- female from food production activities fororate symbolic ceremony which followed a extended periods. Ethnographers note fe-4-month period of seclusion (see Goodale male seclusion at menses in 8 of the 101971, Spencer 1966). No record was made of highly complex socioeconomic systems andceremonies in recognition of female puberty many recorded that the seclusion of com-among the Koryak or Chukchee. moners was clearly shorter than that of high

The data hint that as sociopolitical com- status females. As noted above, the seclusionplexity increases, so does the severity of fe- of high status Salish women was extremelymale seclusion at puberty for girls of high severe.ranking families. For example, among four of In terms of costs, ethnographers of thethe seven cultures with moderately complex sampled cultures with moderately complexsocioeconomic systems all girls were subject socioeconomic systems did not provideto some restrictions and in two cases a short enough information to allow for a compari-period of isolation (NW Alaska, 5–40 days; son of expenditures associated with pubertyHupa, 10 days). Although ceremonies for ceremonies. Nevertheless, we think it ishigher status females among moderately likely that puberty ceremony costs increasedcomplex socioeconomic systems may have in conjunction with increases in sociopoliti-been more rigorous, the ethnographers did cal complexity. That is, the cost of puberty

ceremonies of high-ranking youths in highlynot generally note differences in severity or



complex socioeconomic systems was proba- this ceremony and the spirit quest, as wehave done in this analysis.bly higher than that of high-ranking youths

Interestingly, spirit quests appear amongin moderately complex socioeconomic sys-cultures with moderately and highly com-tems. We also think that costs probably in-plex socioeconomic systems (Table 4.1–4.3).creased with the socioeconomic position ofHowever, the sample included too few cul-families within communities, with ceremo-tures with spirit quests to allow for any de-nial costs for high-ranking individuals beingtailed analysis, and as a result, many inter-greater than those of commoners, regardlessesting questions remain unanswered. Forof whether the socioeconomic system isexample it is unclear whether the questsmoderately or highly complex. Amongwere generally associated more with maleshighly complex hunter–gatherer groups atthan with females, or whether both gendersleast, it is obvious that the expenditures as-participated equally. Females were knownsociated with the puberty ceremony of ato be participants in the jimsonweed ritualhigh-ranking female far outweighed that ofof the Yokuts (Gayton 1948:118; Wallacecommoners. For example, Lantis (1971:4)1978b:456) and Lillooet and Thompson fe-comments that among the Aleut the isola-males may have sought spirits during theirtion is more frequently noted than the feastpuberty isolation (see Teit 1900:317, Teitwhich follows as ‘‘only the wealthy family1975:264–265); however, the degree towould make a public event out of the per-which females participated in vision questssonal physiological change.’’ The greater ex-is unknown. There is evidence that withinpenditure by high-ranking families is truecommunities, the acquisition of particularfor at least 8 of the 10 highly complex cul-spirits was restricted to certain individuals.tures included in the sample (Table 3.3).For example, literature on the Yurok sug-Recognition of a male’s puberty is limitedgests specialized quests on the part of highto only one each of the cultures with less andstatus heirs (Pilling 1978:142). Occupational

moderately complex socioeconomic systemsspecialists among the Lillooet (Teit 1975:283)

(Table 3.4–3.6). Among the Tiwi and and Thompson (Teit 1900:357) sought partic-groups in southeastern Australia, adolescent ular spirit helpers, and Hill-Tout (cited inmales are ‘‘kidnapped’’ by their male in- Teit 1906:295) states that only those Lowerlaws and undergo a period of seclusion and Lillooet youths ‘‘who had a desire to excel inrestrictions. These may last up to several any particular thing underwent the regularyears among the Tiwi. Among groups with kwaza’ntcut (spirit quest), the ordinary youthmoderately and highly complex socioeco- possessing no personal totem.’’ For example,nomic systems the transition to manhood the spirits sought by warriors, hunters, gam-was generally a gradual process without re- blers, and runners among the Lillooet werestrictions on the youth’s activities. For exam- particularly powerful (Romanoff 1992:474).ple, Giddings (1961:153–154) states that Furthermore, it seems likely that elites gen-among the people of the Kobuk River in erally acquired more helpers or more pow-northwest Alaska, ‘‘boys were subject to no erful ones (see Schulting 1995). As for costs,special observances at puberty although although there is information regardingtheir prestige was enhanced by some form feasts following Yokuts quests (Gaytonof open congratulation as they mastered one 1948:38, 118; Spier 1978:482), and althoughafter another of the accomplishments of feasts are probable for Chumash spiritmanhood.’’ Barnett (1955) states that all quests, it is not obvious whether any costsCoast Salish males went through some form were incurred by Thompson, Lillooet, orof puberty ceremony, but it is unclear Coast Salish participants. Given the costs in-

volved in most other areas of training, itwhether he is making a distinction between



TABLE 4Spirit Quests

Severity SeverityExistence of Gender of (general (high status

Group spirit quest participants population) Costs child) Costs


TiwiKoryakChukchee

4.2: Moderately complex socioeconomic systems

Southeast AustraliaNorthwest AlaskaYurok • U • M • Moderate • (Low)

(Pilling 1978:141)HupaThompson • U • M • Moderate • Low • High • ?

(Teit 1900:318–320) • F?Lillooet • U • M

(Teit 1975:265) • F?AinuYokuts • U • F & M • Moderate • Moderate • ?

(Kroeber 1925:502;Gayton 1948:38,118; Speir1978:482;Wallace1978b:456–457)

4.3: Highly complex socioeconomic systems

AleutKoniagTlingitTsimshianHaidaKwagiulthNuu-Chah-NulthCoast Salish • U • F & M • Moderate • (Low) • ?

(Barnett 1955:77,143, 144; Suttles1990:465)

Chumash • U • F & M • Moderate • (Moderate) • ?(Grant 1978:511,

518; Hudson &Underhay1988:44)

Calusa

Note. (?) No information available. Parentheses indicate an inference made from ethnographic data or similarcultural group. Severity: moderate, transition involves seclusion, fasting and whipping; high, significantly longer,harsher versions of the above. Costs: low, no display or feasting; moderate, feast and/or payments; high, potlatchequivalent and/or payments.



seems very likely that there would have the Coast Salish sxwaixwe dance, may havebeen strictly for elite families.been costs for elite spirit quests to obtain

special powers (Schulting 1995:50–52). An analysis of the sample data suggeststhat secret societies and exclusive institu-tions are not a common feature of culturesInitiationswith less or moderately complex socioeco-nomic systems (Table 5.1–5.2). There is ei-The sponsorship of youths into secret soci-

eties or elite social institutions is another ther an absence of data (suggesting an ab-sence of initiations), or in some cases actualway in which the status of an individual can

be reinforced. It is generally presumed that statements as to the lack of exclusive socie-ties or organizations. Given the quality ofthe possession of esoteric knowledge, which

can be acquired through such organizations, the ethnographic data and the general im-portance of these societies, the lack of infor-is an important element in supporting and

increasing social status in all societies. How- mation regarding initiations seems morelikely to be the result of the absence of eliteever, secret societies also played important

roles in the creation of personal links involv- institutions, rather than an oversight on thepart of the ethnographers. Further, in viewing wealth exchanges and political support

(La Fontaine 1985:95). They were therefore of the social and economic complexity ofthese groups the lack of exclusive institu-another key strategy in attempts by ambi-

tious individuals to restrict others’ access to tions is not surprising. For most of these cul-tures, there were few significant differencespower and to acquire power for themselves

or their corporate group. Membership in se- between the status and prerogatives of thecommunity leaders and those of other com-cret societies can provide such knowledge

but the initiations often involve such high munity members. The differences which didexist tended to be the result of the wealth ofexpenditures, or are of such an exclusive na-

ture, that common individuals are absent or the individuals rather than their birth into afixed rank (Goddard 1903:58; Goldschmidtplay far less prestigious roles. For example,

among the Chumash only high status indi- and Driver 1965:104; Kroeber 1925:3, 132–133; Nelson 1899:303, 305; Peng andviduals were permitted entry to the ’antap

society (King 1990:57). This elite organiza- Geiser 1977:170–171; Pilling 1978:141; Teit1900:289; Teit 1975:255, Wallace 1978a:171;tion was responsible for performances at fes-

tivals and its members possessed esoteric Waterman and Kroeber 1965:1).Our data do show a strong association be-knowledge used ‘‘for maintaining, directing,

and controlling man’s interaction with his tween the existence of elite organizationsand secret societies on one hand, and thecelestial, physical and social environments’’

(Hudson and Underhay 1988:29). As is fre- most socially and economically complexhunter–gatherer societies on the other (Ta-quently the case in secret societies (La Fon-

taine 1985:188), in Northwest Coast commu- ble 5.3). Eight of the 10 groups with highlycomplex socioeconomic systems also had se-nities membership tended to be open to all

members of a community, although ob- cret societies or elite organizations. Of the 8cultures, the Coast Salish and the Koniagtaining the esoteric knowledge associated

with certain ritual positions and particular had initiations into two separate societies,which brings the total number of such insti-dances was dependent upon wealth and so-

cial status. ‘‘Certainly, only persons who tutions to 10. No information is availableconcerning such institutions among the Ca-had wealth could advance in the ranks of

the (Tsimshian) secret societies’’ (Garfield lusa, and the Tlingit apparently did not havesecret societies (Oberg 1973:54).1966:46), while other societies and dances

such as the Kwagiulth cannibal society and The most socioeconomically complex cul-



TABLE 5Initiations

Existence of Gender of Ranking withinGroup initiations participants Inclusiveness organizations Costs


TiwiKoryakChukchee

5.2: Moderately complex socioeconomic systems

Southeast AustraliaNorthwest Alaska • No initiations

(Spencer 1969:242)Yurok • No initiations

(Kroeber 1925:4)Hupa • (No initiations)Thompson •Lillooet •AinuYokuts

5.3: Highly complex socioeconomic systems

Aluet • U • M • All males • ? • ?(Lantis 1971 (1947):27–30)

Koniag • U • M • All males • ? • ?(Lantis 1971:27–30)Whaler’s cult • U • M • Specialists only • ? • ?

(Hrdlicka 1944:54; Lantis 1971:30)Tlingit • No initiations

(Oberg 1973:54)Tsimshian • U • F & M • All (theoretically) • Through repeat • High

(Garfield 1966:44–47) initiationsHaida • U • F & M • (All) • Through repeat • High

(Swanton 1975:156–166) initiationsKwagiulth • U • F & M • Exclusive • Different grades • High

(Rohner & Rohner 1970:106) • Females could nothold all positions

Nuu-Chah-Nulth • U • F & M • All • Through repeat • High(Arima 1983:156; Drucker 1951:366, initiations

391, 387–395, 413, 439, 440)Coast Salish • U • F & M • All • (Through repeat • High

Spirit dances initiations)(Barnett 1955:274–282)

Prestige dances • U • F & M • Exclusive • Different grades • High(Barnett 1955:90–302)

Chumash • U • F & M • Exclusive • Different grades • High(Blackburn 1976:236; Hudson & • Females could not

Blackburn 1986:58; Hudson & hold all positionsUnderhay 1988:29; King 1990:57)

Calusa • ?

Note. (?) No information available. Parentheses indicate an inference made from listed reference or similarcultural group. Costs: low, no public display or feasting; moderate, feast and/or payments; high, potlatch equiva-lent and/or payments.



tures are also the groups among which as- but that non-member males and femalesmixed. It may be that Aleut and Koniag fe-cribed social status, elaborate growth pay-

ments, and definite status-based preroga- males belonged to societies separate fromthose of the men and that these were nottives become most evident. In terms of

involvement in secret societies, this is re- recorded by male ethnographers. It is alsopossible that Koniag and Aleut females wereflected in restricted or costly access to certain

positions within secret societies and elite or- members of the secret societies, as Lantis(1971) believes these institutions were simi-ganizations. For example among the Chu-

mash, training in the dances, songs and eso- lar to those on the Northwest Coast.Beyond these exceptions, females wereteric knowledge of the ’antap required the

‘‘parents of children who became members presumably initiated into all ranks of theelite organizations. The extension of mem-. . . to pay a considerable sum of money for

the privilege; presumably, only high status bership in these societies to women is consis-tent with broader trends toward the recogni-families could afford this . . .’’ (Blackburn

1976:236). Further, in 4 of the 10 highly com- tion of the importance of women withincreased surpluses and as marriage ex-plex socioeconomic systems, strictly exclu-

sive organizations existed. changes became increasingly importantstrategies for establishing wealth exchangesSome male/female differences are directly

evident in the membership of Northwest and debts (Hayden 1995).It is important to note that the presence ofCoast secret societies and the ’antap organi-

zation of the Chumash (Table 5.3). Of the elite organizations, or elite positions withinorganizations among the most socioeco-seven cultures with female participation in

secret societies, the data indicate that among nomically complex hunter–gatherers doesnot appear to be characteristic only of thethe Kwagiulth and Chumash they were lim-

ited in the type of positions they could hold. Northwest Coast. Furthermore, although se-cret societies may have diffused among al-Kwagiulth females were not permitted to at-

tain the position of a ‘‘Sparrow,’’ or man- most all the Northwest Coast and SouthernAlaskan cultures, there is no indication thatager, of the winter ceremonials (Rohner and

Rohner 1970:106). Among the Chumash, fe- these elite organizations are a manifestationsof some larger Pacific Coastal pattern. Themales were not permitted as members of the

siliy?q, a body of ’antap members which elite ’antap organization of the Chumash notonly differs enormously from the secret soci-managed rituals and ceremonies (Hudson

and Blackburn 1986:58; Hudson and Un- eties of the Northwest Coast, but groups sit-uated between the Chumash and the Coastderhay 1988:29). It is possible that additional

limitations were made on the involvement Salish do not possess any organizations withrestricted social access. As well, those Inuitof females in the ceremonies but there can

be no denial of their active participation in cultures with moderately complex socioeco-nomic systems and found in close geograph-the affairs of secret societies.

La Fontaine (1985:45,62,90,209,117) has ical proximity to the Koniag and Aleut, didnot have any initiations to elite institutionssuggested that it is very unusual for males

and females to be members of the same soci- (Spencer 1969:242). If the presence of elitesocial institutions was simply a diffusioneties. However, with the exception of the

Koniag and Aleut, the ethnographic data phenomenon dependent on geographicalproximity then it would seem likely thatsuggests that females played an active, al-

though possibly separate, role in the same elite institutions would appear in at least analtered form among these Inuit groups. Iforganizations as the men. Barnett (1955:282)

notes that among members of Coast Salish however, as is argued here, the developmentof such institutions was associated with adance societies males and females sat apart



TA

BL

E6

Tra

inin

gan

dE

du

cati

on

Tra

inin

g/ge

nera

lSe

veri

ty/

gene

ral

Cos

ts/

gene

ral

Gro

up

popu

lati

onpo

pula

tion

popu

lati

onA

dd

itio

nal

trai

ning

Seve

rity

Cos

ts

6.1—

Mal

e:L

east

com

plex

soci

oeco

nom

icsy

stem

s

Tiw

i•

Inst

ruct

ion

inku

lam

a•

Mod

erat

e•

(Low

)•

?(G

ood

ale

1971

:220

;Har

t&

Pill

ing

cere

mon

y,tu

tore

din

all

1979

:94)

aspe

cts

oflif

eK

orya

k•

?•

?C

hukc

hee

•?

•?

6.2—

Mal

e:M

oder

atel

yco

mpl

exso

cioe

cono

mic

syst

ems

Sou

thea

stA

ust

ralia

•?

•Sp

ecia

lized

trai

ning

ofhe

ir?

(How

itt

1904

:314

)N

orth

wes

tA

lask

a•

App

rent

ices

hip

peri

odas

•(L

ow)

•(L

ow)

•?

(Spe

ncer

1969

:241

)ru

nner

,wha

ler

orhu

nter

Yu

rok

•G

rad

ual

trai

ning

•L

ow•

(Low

)•

App

rent

ices

hip

for

chos

en•

Mod

erat

e•

?(E

riks

on19

65:2

90;P

illin

g19

78:1

41–

heir

142)

•Sp

ecia

ltr

aini

ngfo

rel

ites

Hu

pa•

?T

hom

pson

•Sp

orad

icpe

riod

sof

•M

oder

ate

•?

•O

ccu

pati

onal

spec

ializ

atio

n:•

Hig

h•

?(T

eit

1900

:317

–318

)tr

aini

ngfo

r1–

4ye

ars

grea

thu

nter

s,w

arri

ors,

gam

bler

s&

‘‘ext

raor

din

ary

men

’’L

illoo

et•

Spor

adic

peri

ods

of•

Mod

erat

e•

?•

Occ

upa

tion

alsp

ecia

lizat

ion

•H

igh

•?

(Tei

t19

75:2

65–2

67)

trai

ning

for

appr

ox.4

year

sA

inu

•G

rad

ual

trai

ning

in•

Low

•(L

ow)

•‘‘H

unt

ing

peop

le’’

trai

ned

•?

•?

(Ohn

uki

-Tie

rney

1974

:59;

Wat

anab

ehu

ntin

gan

dfi

shin

gin

perf

orm

ance

ofbe

ar19

83:2

17)

ritu

als

Yok

uts

•T

augh

tof

natu

reof

the

•M

oder

ate

•M

oder

ate

•H

eirs

rece

ived

add

itio

nal

(Gay

ton

1948

:38,

118;

Kro

eber

wor

ldd

uri

ngjim

son

wee

dtr

aini

ngin

spir

itu

alm

atte

rs19

25:5

02;S

pier

1978

:482

;Wal

lace

ritu

al19

78b:

456–

457)



6.3—

Mal

e:H

ighl

yco

mpl

exso

cioe

cono

mic

syst

ems

Alu

et•

Tu

tore

din

gene

ral

•?

•?

•?

(Gra

burn

&St

rong

1973

:128

)cu

stom

s&

tech

niqu

esby

eld

ers

Kon

iag

•?

•T

uto

red

inri

tual

s•

?•

?M

ale

asso

ciat

edw

ith

wha

ling

(Hrd

licka

1944

:540

)T

lingi

t•

Tra

ined

incu

stom

s,•

Mod

erat

e•

Low

•H

eirs

rece

ived

add

itio

nal

•H

igh

•?

(Kan

1989

:86,

88,9

1;O

berg

1973

:25,

man

ners

&or

alhi

stor

ytr

aini

ngin

spir

itu

alm

atte

rs32

,33,

87)

(Obe

rg19

73:3

2)•

Occ

upa

tion

alsp

ecia

lizat

ion:

•?

•?

hunt

ers,

carv

ers,

&sh

aman

Tsi

msh

ian

•(T

rain

edin

cust

oms

&•

(Mod

erat

e)•

?•

?m

anne

rs)

Hai

da

•(T

rain

edin

cust

oms

&•

Mod

erat

e•

Low

•H

eirs

rece

ived

add

itio

nal

•?

•?

(Sw

anto

n19

75:5

0,70

)m

anne

rs)

trai

ning

Kw

agiu

lth

•?

•A

ppre

ntic

eshi

pfo

rhe

irs

•?

•?

(Boa

s19

21:1

349–

1350

)N

uu

-Cha

h-N

ult

h•

?•

App

rent

ices

hip

for

heir

s,•

(Hig

h)•

?(D

ruck

er19

51:1

32,2

66)

mor

eri

tual

know

led

geC

oast

Salis

h•

(Tra

ined

incu

stom

s&

•M

oder

ate

•L

ow•

App

rent

ices

hip

for

heir

s•

(Hig

h)•

?(B

arne

tt19

55:1

33,1

42,1

43,1

44)

man

ners

)(B

arne

tt19

55:3

08)

•O

ccu

pati

onal

spec

ializ

atio

n:•

?•

?hu

ntin

g,ca

noe

mak

ing,

figh

ting

,sha

man

ism

Chu

mas

h•

Rec

eive

dtr

aini

ngd

uri

ng•

Mod

erat

e•

Low

•E

lites

trai

ned

in‘a

ntap

•?

•H

igh

(Bla

ckbu

rn19

76:2

36;G

rant

1978

:511

,sp

irit

ques

tri

tual

s51

8;H

ud

son

&U

nder

hay

1988

:44)

Cal

usa

•?

•Sp

ecia

lized

war

rior

grou

p•

?•

?(G

oggi

n&

Stu

rtev

ant

1964

:192

;•

Chi

efan

dhe

adpr

iest

had

Mar

quar

dt

1988

:171

)es

oter

icce

rem

onia

lkn

owle

dge



TA

BL

E6—

Con

tinu

ed

Tra

inin

g/ge

nera

lSe

veri

ty/

gene

ral

Cos

ts/

gene

ral

Gro

up

popu

lati

onpo

pula

tion

popu

lati

onA

dd

itio

nal

trai

ning

Seve

rity

Cos

ts

6.4—

Fem

ale:

Lea

stco

mpl

exso

cioe

cono

mic

syst

ems

Tiw

i•

(Ins

tru

ctio

nin

kula

ma

•M

oder

ate

•(L

ow)

•?

(Goo

dal

e19

71:2

20;H

art

&P

illin

gce

rem

ony,

tuto

red

inal

l19

79:9

4)as

pect

sof

life)

a

Kor

yak

•?

•?

Chu

kche

e•

?•

?

6.5—

Fem

ale:

Mod

erat

ely

com

plex

soci

oeco

nom

icsy

stem

s

Sou

thea

stA

ust

ralia

•?

•?

Nor

thw

est

Ala

ska

•?

•?

Yu

rok

•(P

erio

dof

trai

ning

•(L

ow)

•(L

ow)

•Sp

ecia

lized

trai

ning

for

•(M

oder

ate)

•?

(Pill

ing

1978

:141

–142

)ac

com

pani

espu

bert

y‘‘r

eal

wom

en’’

secl

usi

on)

Hu

pa•

Per

iod

oftr

aini

ng•

Low

•(L

ow)

•?

(God

dar

d19

03:5

3;W

alla

ce19

78a:

172,

acco

mpa

nies

pube

rty

173)

secl

usi

onT

hom

pson

•P

erio

dof

trai

ning

,•

Mod

erat

e•

?•

?(T

eit

1900

:312

–317

)in

clu

din

gex

erci

se&

prod

uct

ion

ofgo

ods,

acco

mpa

nies

pube

rty

secl

usi

onL

illoo

et•

Per

iod

oftr

aini

ng•

Hig

h•

?•

?(T

eit

1975

:264

–265

)in

clu

din

gex

erci

se&

prod

uct

ion

ofgo

ods

acco

mpa

nies

pube

rty

secl

usi

onA

inu

•?

•‘‘H

unt

ing

peop

le’’

trai

ned

(Wat

anab

e19

83:2

17)

inpe

rfor

man

ceof

bear

ritu

als

Yok

uts

•T

augh

tof

natu

reof

the

•M

oder

ate

•?

•(A

dd

itio

nal

trai

ning

in(G

ayto

n19

48:3

8,11

8;K

roeb

erw

orld

du

ring

jimso

nw

eed

spir

itu

alm

atte

rs)b

1925

:502

;Spi

er19

78:4

82;W

alla

ceri

tual

1978

b:45

6–45

7)



6.6—

Fem

ale:

Hig

hly

com

plex

soci

oeco

nom

icsy

stem

s

Ale

ut

•T

uto

red

inge

nera

l•

?•

?•

?(G

rabu

rn&

Stro

ng19

73:1

28)

cust

oms

&te

chni

ques

byel

der

sK

onia

g•

?•

?T

lingi

t•

Tra

ined

incu

stom

s,•

?•

Mod

erat

e•

Tra

ined

for

impo

rtan

t•

?•

Hig

h(d

eL

agu

na19

90:2

17;K

an19

89:8

88,9

1;m

anne

rs,w

eavi

ng,

cere

mon

ial

role

s,no

tta

ugh

tO

berg

1973

:25,

32,3

3,86

,87)

dom

esti

cd

uti

es,&

tow

eave

cere

mon

ial

role

sT

sim

shia

n•

(Tra

ined

incu

stom

s,•

Mod

erat

e•

(Mod

erat

e)•

?(G

arfi

eld

1966

:25)

man

ners

,dom

esti

cd

uti

es)

Hai

da

•(T

rain

edin

cust

oms,

•M

oder

ate

•(M

oder

ate)

•?

(Bla

ckm

an19

90:2

54)

man

ners

,dom

esti

cd

uti

es)

Kw

agiu

lth

•?

•?

Nu

u-C

hah-

Nu

lth

•T

rain

edin

spin

ning

,•

(Mod

erat

e)•

(Mod

erat

e)•

?(D

ruck

er19

51:1

36)

bask

etry

,coo

king

Coa

stSa

lish

•?

•?

Chu

mas

h•

?•

Elit

estr

aine

din

‘ant

ap•

?•

Hig

h(B

lack

burn

1976

:236

)ri

tual

sC

alu

sa•

?•

?

Not

e.(?

)N

oin

form

atio

nav

aila

ble.

Pare

nthe

ses

ind

icat

ean

infe

renc

em

ade

from

ethn

ogra

phic

dat

aor

sim

ilar

cult

ural

grou

p.Se

veri

ty—

mal

e:lo

w,i

nstr

ucti

onis

grad

ual;

mod

erat

e,in

stru

ctio

nin

volv

esse

clus

ion,

fast

ing,

whi

ppin

gor

use

ofna

rcot

ics,

may

last

from

day

sto

year

s;hi

gh,s

igni

fican

tly

long

er,h

arsh

erve

rsio

nsof

the

abov

e.Se

veri

ty—

fem

ale:

low

,ins

truc

tion

invo

lves

secl

usio

nan

dre

stri

ctio

nsla

stin

gse

vera

lday

s;m

oder

ate,

inst

ruct

ion

invo

lves

secl

usio

nan

dre

stri

ctio

nsla

stin

gse

vera

lm

onth

s;hi

gh,i

nstr

ucti

onin

volv

esse

clus

ion

and

rest

rict

ions

last

ing

aye

aror

long

er.C

osts

:low

,no

dis

play

orfe

asti

ng;m

oder

ate,

feas

tan

d/o

rpa

ymen

ts;

high

,pot

latc

heq

uiva

lent

and

/or

paym

ents

.a

Ass

umes

fem

ales

part

icip

ated

equa

llyin

the

kula

ma

cere

mon

yw

hich

isa

mat

ter

ofd

ebat

eam

ong

ethn

ogra

pher

s(s

eeG

ood

ale

1971

;H

art

and

Pilli

ng19

79;

Spen

cer

1966

).b

Wal

lace

(197

8b)

stat

esth

atd

augh

ters

som

etim

esas

sum

edth

epo

siti

onof

linea

gehe

ad.T

his

bein

gth

eca

se,t

hew

omen

wou

ldpr

obab

lybe

trai

ned

inth

esa

me

esot

eric

know

led

geas

her

mal

eco

unte

rpar

t.



high level of resource productivity as well erarchy, specialized training could be veryimportant in this regard. Additional trainingas economic and social complexity, it would

follow that they would be absent from both for respected specialized occupations oc-curred among four of the eight cultures withthe Southern Inuit groups and those moder-

ately complex cultures located between the moderately complex socioeconomic sys-tems. For example, among the Lillooet, spe-Chumash and the Northwest Coast.cialized hunters, warriors, and ceremonialleaders could exert a powerful influenceTrainingover the actions of others because of theirextensive training and claims of superiorThe final social mechanism through which

the social position of a child or youth could knowledge (Nastich 1954:50, 58–59, 83–84,Romanoff 1992; Schulting 1995:50–52; Teitbe elevated in status and economic potential

was through specialized training and educa- 1975:255). Similar patterns occur with Ainubear hunters (Watanabe 1983:217) and occu-tion. As Table 6.1–6.6 show, often both male

and female youths received some type of pational specialists among the peoples ofnorthwest Alaska (Spencer 1969:241) and theformal education in the customs of their peo-

ple and in their domestic responsibilities, Thompson (Teit 1900:317). Among the Ainu,one was born either as a fishing person orusually around the time of puberty. This

type of education was of a general nature, as a hunting person, with the latter beingthe higher ranking of the two. However, itwith most youths of the same culture receiv-

ing similar basic instruction. Such training was possible for a good hunter among thefishing people to be elevated in status andcould be an aspect of initiations and spirit

quests. For example, Ernest (1952:82) states for a poor hunter to be demoted (Watanabe1983:217–219). Presumably, hunting peoplethat during Northwest Coast secret society

initiations, individuals went through a pe- were adequately instructed in their duties toprevent demotions from becoming a com-riod of training meant to instill qualities of

strength, endurance, and courage. Among mon occurrence. The same privileged claimsand access to resources by trained specialiststhe Yokuts, the jimsonweed spirit quest was

a time for the instruction of youths in the is also true of those societies with a morerigid social structure, although there is notorigin and nature of the world (Kroeber

1925:502). Beyond this, one strategy for in- much information in this regard. Informa-tion on male occupational specialization iscreasing the social value of a child was to

expand on this general instruction, either by available for four of the ten groups withhighly complex socioeconomic systems, in-extending its length and severity or through

training in specialized occupations. cluding the Calusa, Coast Salish, Tlingit, andChumash (Table 6.3). For example, it hasAdditional formal education in presti-

gious occupations and in the development been suggested that ’antap members wereassociated with various brotherhoods of oc-of qualities associated with leadership posi-

tions enhanced the social status of youths, cupational specialists among the Chumash(Blackburn 1976:237).and could be a means through which indi-

viduals gained control over the labor, re- Among groups with ascribed status,high-ranking male children often receivedsources, or products of others. We view this

frequently extensive and esoteric training as additional specialized administrative andesoteric instruction and were subjected toone strategy used by aggrandizers to claim

privileged control over resources and activi- longer training periods than the generalpopulous (Table 6.2 and 6.3) As has al-ties that were held in common among gener-

alized hunter–gatherers. Among transegali- ready been mentioned, ascribed statustends to be associated especially with thetarian groups with a more flexible social hi-



highly complex socioeconomic systems; tial, physical and social environments’’(Hudson and Underhay 1978:29). The lead-however, specialized training of heirs to

high status positions is also evident among ing priest and the Calusa chief also main-tained esoteric knowledge which was associ-three of the six moderately complex socio-

economic systems studied. This training ated with the legitimacy of the chief (Gogginand Sturtevant 1964:190, 192). As previouslymay be the first expression of a trend which

becomes more evident in highly complex noted, the possession of esoteric knowledgeis frequently used to justify elite social posi-hunter–gatherers. For example, Howitt

(1904:314) stated that among the Yuin of tions on the ideological level.But the additional knowledge need notsoutheastern Australia, ‘‘there was a head

Gommera, named Wadyyman, who died only be esoteric. For future community lead-ers to be both competent and respected rep-about 1884 at a great age. His account of

himself was that, when a little boy, he was resentatives it was essential that they knewimportant individuals from outside the com-taken by the then head Gommera, and

raised by him, so that he might take his munity and that they exhibited appropriateetiquette for respectful reception and suc-place when he died.’’ Although there are

no other accounts of such training among cessful negotiations. Therefore, as youths,high-ranking males of the Nuu-Chah-Nulth,the groups of southeastern Australia, it is

tempting to think that this was not an iso- Kwagiulth, and Coast Salish cultures wereformally introduced to society, assumedlated case of administrative training. Simi-

lar training of future leaders took place portions of their future responsibilities, and‘‘hosted’’ potlatches that were financed andamong the Yurok. Pilling (1978:141–142)

states that older high-ranking Yurok indi- organized by their fathers, grandfathers,uncles, etc. (Barnett 1955:133, 142; Boasviduals selected intelligent, responsible

males as proteges. Through training and a 1921:1349–1350; Drucker 1951:266). In thisway, the economic and political influence ofspirit quest these young males came to be

known as peyerk, or elites. the reigning leaders was gradually trans-ferred to the heirs, with the full recognitionWith respect to highly complex socioeco-

nomic systems, Kan (1988) has noted that of the community at large.With the exception of the specialized cere-the additional and often strenuous training

of high-ranking Tlingit males served to rein- monial training received by high status Tlin-git females (Oberg 1973:25), it is unclear asforce the dichotomy between the commoner

and the elite, and resulted in what Kan to how the formal education of elite femalesamong groups with highly complex socio-(1989:88) has called the ‘‘special purity’’ of

the high status individuals. For example, economic systems differed from that gener-ally received by girls during their pubertyelite Tlingit individuals were distinguished

by a ‘‘lengthening of the periods of ritual seclusion. In general, the seclusion period ofelite females was more severe than that ofseclusion and abstinence, as well as by in-

creasing the amount of physical training an commoners, but most ethnographies men-tion little about the other activities of eitheraristocratic youngster underwent’’ (Kan

1989:88). Further, only young nobles were elite or commoner females during this stageof life. It does seem likely however, that eliteinstructed in the complete origin myths of

the clan and the ‘‘esoteric’’ knowledge of the females did not learn many of the tasks com-monly associated with female domestic du-potlatch (Kan 1989:91). Similarly, members

of the siliyik, a council of Chumash ’antap ties. For example, female Tlingit elites werenot instructed in weaving, as women whomembers, had esoteric knowledge which

they used in ‘‘maintaining, directing, and did not engage in menial tasks were highlyvalued as wives (Oberg 1973:87). Further,controlling man’s interaction with his celes-



Swanton (1975:50) states, that an unmarried hunter–gatherers have been supported bythe data in our sample. It was initially hy-Haida female engaged in little labor, ‘‘so that

she might marry a chief.’’ Assuming that pothesized that maturation events wouldbecome increasingly costly and exclusive asHaida elites married only those of roughly

equal status, Swanton’s comment only sociopolitical complexity increased. As analternative to this major expectation, wemakes sense if it was made in regard to

high status females. Finally, Marquardt thought that, if maturation events were opento all children rather than only to high-rank-(1988:171) suggests that Calusa nobles were

also excluded from common subsistence ing children, the growth events, puberty cer-emonies, and training associated with high-based activities.

Among cultures with moderately complex ranking children might be more severe andcostly, thereby making them more exclusivesocioeconomic systems, high status women

received additional training in three of the events. It was also thought that membershipin secret societies and other such institutionseight groups, although among the Yokuts

this may have been limited only to women might be restricted to high-ranking individ-uals. These expectations were derived fromwho were in a position to assume the role

of lineage leader (Wallace 1978b). a model developed by Hayden (1995) inwhich surplus production is invested in ag-The analysis of the training data suggest

two different types of training in addition grandizers’ offspring (and recuperated inmarriage wealth exchanges) as a major strat-to the general education received by com-

munity members: (1) male occupational spe- egy for accumulating wealth and power intransegalitarian societies. In effect, aggran-cialization and (2) administrative and eso-

teric training of elites. We suggest that dizers use their children as pretexts for gen-erating and investing surpluses and creatingamong cultures with moderately complex

socioeconomic systems, occupational spe- ongoing exchanges in surplus wealth. Fromthis perspective, investments in the matura-cialization was a means through which eco-

nomically advantaged individuals assumed tion events of children also serve to justifyclaims of social, political, and ceremonial su-positions of influence. By contrast, the ad-

ministrative and esoteric training of elites periority. Thus, we expected that as resourceabundance, the ability to produce economicamong cultures with highly complex socio-

economic systems was used to support and surpluses, and social complexity all in-creased, so too would the importance andbolster the authority of persons already des-

tined for prestigious and influential posi- costs of some or all of the various kinds ofmaturation events increase. These expecta-tions. In this scenario, occupational special-

ization was an additional means through tions can be viewed as one form of a limitedtest of the initial model used to structure ourwhich such male individuals may have in-

creased their influence. research. If no or little relationship had beenobserved between complexity and matura-Moderately complex socioeconomic systems

• economic r • occupational r • increased tion events, we would clearly have had toadvantage training influence reassess our basic assumptions. Our resultsHighly complex socioeconomic systems support the model expectations and indicate

• high social r • esoteric, r • reinforced that further tests and explorations of it arestatus & administrative & increased

warranted.economic & occupational influenceThe analysis of our data shows the exis-advantage training

tence of a major trend toward escalatingSUMMARY costs and increasing severity of maturation

events as overall social, economic, and polit-Many of the original hypotheses regard-ing the maturation events of transegalitarian ical complexity increases. As the initial



model led us to expect, these trends are es- though there are some instances of thisamong the most highly complex cultures, in-pecially pronounced for the highest ranking

families at each level of complexity. We sug- cluding the restriction of tattoos to elitesamong the Tlingit (de Laguna 1990:220, Em-gest this is because high-ranking individuals

in transegalitarian societies generally repre- mons 1991:253, Kan 1989:87, 88) and Tsim-shian (Garfield 1966:25). The occurrence ofsent the most successful aggrandizive mem-

bers of their communities. As the resource most types of child growth payments amongelites and non-elites may reflect non-elitebase becomes more productive and stable,

elites are able, through wide economic, so- tendencies to copy elite behavior (Cannon1989), especially where the acquisition ofcial, and military support networks, to ma-

nipulate surpluses in ways which further ex- practical benefits, such as in the formationof marriage alliances, is involved. Exclusivetend their personal powers. In terms of our

basic model, increasingly severe and costly events were certainly not common amongthe moderately complex cultures sampled,maturation events are not only correlates of,

but also a stimuli for, an escalation of social while child growth payments appear not tohave occurred at all among the least com-and political complexity. For this reason, in-

vestigations into the maturation events of plex groups in our sample. Among both themoderate and highly complex cultures, childtransegalitarian hunter–gatherers may be

critical for our understanding of general cul- growth events and/or payments were com-monly held for both male and female chil-tural change and more careful attention

should be paid to any archaeological evi- dren, as might be expected where marriagealliances are used as a means to establishdence for maturation events. Results of our

analysis indicate that the maturation events wealth exchanges.identified in this paper should be viewedas processes by which the aggrandizers of Puberty Ceremoniestransegalitarian hunter–gatherer societiesdirectly stimulated the evolution of more The analysis of puberty ceremonies indi-

cates that not only did these ceremonies in-politically, socially, and economically com-plex cultural forms. The specific trends can crease in terms of severity, duration, and

cost for females in a community as sociopo-be summarized as follows.litical complexity increased, but also that theduration, severity and cost also increasedChild Growth Paymentsrelatively more for high-ranking females associopolitical complexity increased. SimilarThe data support the assumption that the

costs associated with child growth payments puberty ceremonies for male children arenot apparent, with the exception of male cer-increase in conjunction with increasing so-

cial and political complexity, and high social emonies among the Tiwi, Southeast Austra-lian Aborigines, possibly the Coast Salish,status. This is true both between the levels

of complexity as well as between the elite and other groups with spirit quests.Spirit quests appear among several highlyand non-elite families within the same com-

munities of highly complex cultures. Despite and moderately complex cultures. Unfortu-nately, there was not enough information re-few differences in the types of events held,

the costs of the maturation events associated garding these quests in our sample to allowfor detailed comparison. As a result, severalwith elite children seems significantly

higher than those for non-elite children. The important questions remain unanswered.For example, did females participate as fre-assumption of the exclusive restriction of

certain growth events to elite children does quently as males, did all members of a com-munity have equal access to all guardiannot appear to be generally supported, al-



spirits, did expenditures or time constraints eral, subjected to a longer and more severeperiod of occupational training than werelimit the acquisition of certain spirits or the

number of spirits to elites or the wealthy? non-elite males. The specialized training ofsome males among the moderately complexGiven our present database, it is possible to

make two tentative suggestions. First, it hunter–gatherers may be a prelude to thismore widespread phenomenon among theseems likely that occupational specialists en-

dured quests of a longer duration and of most complex groups. No specific informa-tion was available regarding the presencegreater severity than did members of the

general population. Second, as suggested by or value of expenditures associated withthis specialized training; however, severalSchulting (1995:50–52) it also seems likely

that the spirits acquired by these individuals sources suggest that significant costs wereincurred. Schulting (1995:14–15) has arguedwere either greater in number or in strength

than those acquired by other individuals that among transegalitarian hunter–gather-ers of the Plateau, access to occupationaland as a consequence involved more elabo-

rate and more costly acquisition procedures specialization was restricted by what Wer-ner (1981) has called an ‘‘inequality of op-that only wealthy families could generally

afford. portunity’’ because the costs in terms of timeand finances were beyond the reach of manyfamilies. In addition, Romanoff (1992:473)Initiationsnotes that among the Lillooet, older men su-

Exclusively elite institutions appear to be pervised the training of hunters. It seemsa rare occurrence among all the transegali- probable that this supervision was suppliedtarian hunter–gatherers sampled. The only in exchange for some form of compensation.truly elite organizations noted were the The lack of information regarding the costChumash ’antap society and the Kwagiulth of training heirs on the Northwest Coastdance societies. While exclusively elite insti- may be due to the tendency to inherit rolestutions were uncommon, societies requiring from family members in order to maintaininitiation were a frequent feature of highly family status and wealth. Since both thecomplex cultures. Although the fact that leader and the heir were members of thethese societies were open to all members of same lineage, some of the payments forthe community did not conform to our ini- training may have been internalized.tial expectations, the finding that their inter- There is little or no information availablenal systems of ranking depended on wealth, regarding the training of elite femalessocial status, and gender did support the among the highly complex cultures, al-general premise of our working model. This though it is clear that the duration and se-internal ranking restricted leadership posi- verity of their puberty seclusion was longertions to the most wealthy within these socie- than that of non-elite females and that thisties. High ranking females played a presti- involved some training in etiquette, mythgious and significant role in all but the Chu- and decorum. Elite females seem to have re-mash ’antap and Kwagiulth elite institutions. ceived less training in practical affairs andNo evidence exists for the presence of simi- were less involved in domestic duties. Forlar institutions in either the least or moder- example, it is known that the ‘‘higher theately complex cultures. rank of a (Tlingit) girl . . . the less work she

will be required to do . . .’’ (Oberg 1973:25).Thus, she would not have received the sameTrainingintensive training in domestic duties as didgirls of lower status. In fact, Oberg (1973:87)Finally, it is clear that high ranking males

of the highly complex cultures were in gen- notes that elite Tlingit females did not en-



gage in ‘‘menial’’ tasks since a wife who had egalitarian hunter–gatherers in richer envi-ronments. Instead, severe rites of passagenever worked was highly valued.

Thus, it appears that high status females are used as signs of elite superiority in thesecircumstances.receive more elaborate puberty ceremonies

while high status males receive more spe-cialized training. Both probably serve the CONCLUSIONSsame function; to increase the socioeconomicvalue of the children. What were cave rituals like in Upper Pa-

leolithic Europe? After the preceding excur-It is important to note that the corporate sion into the ethnography of transegalitarian

group structure of the cultures of the North- hunter–gatherers, we feel we can answerwest Coast may have had some influence on this question with greater precision and in-the development of costly maturation events sight than has heretofore been the case, andamong these groups. The lineage based resi- we feel that we can provide new insightsdence pattern, with extended family mem- into the structure and nature of the Upperbers and ‘‘hangers-on’’ living in the same Paleolithic societies that created art deep inhouse under the guidance and sometimes caves. As noted at the beginning of this arti-influence of a lineage head, may have re- cle, in one context or another, it appears thatsulted in more internal differentiation and adolescents were involved in cave rituals.specialization than generally characterized These rituals are unlikely to have been regu-communities with nuclear family household lar community rituals involving the entirecommunities. Lineage leaders were not only band because most decorated areas of cavesrecognized as caretakers of lineage owned were too small to accommodate groups ofresources, they often controlled resource ex- 25–50 people and seem to have been usedploitation, and in some cases received trib- too infrequently (Beaune 1995:238). Thus, itute from those utilizing its resources. This seems far more likely that adolescents wereconcentrated influence over resources and present in cave rituals as part of maturationlabor could have been manipulated by elite events. Assuming that these groups wereadministrators for their own personal ad- transegalitarian hunter–gatherers, whatvantage, and would very likely have been specific type of maturation event was mostexpressed in elaborate maturation events for probably involved? Puberty rituals cometheir children. Elites of non-corporate group most readily to mind, especially those simi-communities might not have been able to lar to spirit quests. Certainly, this is a possi-exert as much power over followers as elites bility, however, the distribution of paintedin communities where critical resources caves, the apparently low frequency of theirwere owned by corporate groups. use (based on artifact remains, footprints,

The moderate and highly complex ethno- hearths) and the intensity of their decora-graphic hunter–gatherer cultures sampled tion, the range of ages of children (seedo not exhibit the community-wide, egali- Beaune 1995:234; Clottes 1992:59), does nottarian maturation events that seem to seem commensurate with their regular usecharacterize generalized hunter–gatherers. for puberty rituals of adolescents. Moreover,While generalized hunter–gatherer puberty spirit quests were individual endeavors,rites can be severe (e.g., Australia) appar- whereas the cave sanctuaries were clearlyently to reinforce adherence to values pro- used by small groups of people.moting group survival in marginal environ- Nor are the caves suited for events involv-ments (e.g., compulsory sharing and alli- ing child growth payments since these areances), severe rites of passage do not occur generally large public spectacles witnessed

and validated by as many people as possi-at the community wide level among trans-



ble. Given the burial of some Upper Paleo- from region to region depending on the abil-ity of groups to generate food surpluses onlithic adolescents and children with surpris-

ing amounts of wealth and prestige objects a regular basis, e.g., by mass harvesting anddrying of large numbers of migrating or ag-(as at Sungir) we can be fairly certain that

substantial child growth payments were gregated animals or fish.Viewing cave sanctuaries as being pri-part of wealthy Upper Paleolithic family

repertoires. However, deep caves would marily used for secret society initiationsis also consistent with the role of secrethave been inappropriate and ineffective ven-

ues for these events. societies in generating and maintaining hi-erarchical esoteric knowledge availableSpecial training, especially of shamans,

may also have been the purpose of using only to members, as well as concentratingpolitical and economic power in the handsdeep caves. As cogently argued by Lewis-

Williams and Dowson (1988) this in fact, of members (La Fontaine 1985:95; Lewis-Williams 1994; 1995:19, in press). The veryseems very probable. However, it does not

account for the great majority of the evi- location of the art and rituals deep in cavesreflects their esoteric content, as does thedence for cave rituals. Training is usually an

individual or person to person undertaking, distributional structure of the art (perLeroi-Gourhan); the appearance of obscurewhereas the central cave sanctuaries (versus

the remote recesses) make most sense in abstract symbols; the occurrence of mythi-cal animals, ‘‘ghosts,’’ human bodies withterms of small groups of individuals.

This leaves the use of cave sanctuaries for animal heads; and an emphasis on danger-ous prey animals rather than the animalsthe initiation of adolescents into secret socie-

ties or elite institutions. While to our knowl- usually killed for food (lions, rhinoceros,aurochs, bison, and mammoth versus rein-edge such a use has not previously been sug-

gested for Upper Paleolithic caves, this nev- deer, and bouquetin—Clottes 1996). Wa-son (1994: 150–151) also observes that re-ertheless appears to us to conform most

closely to the comparative ethnographic stricted access to ritual areas is an im-portant indication of socioeconomicdata on transegalitarian hunter–gatherers.

Initiation into such societies would not have inequality. The painted Upper Paleolithiccaves certainly appear to have been placesbeen open to everyone and the level, dura-

tion, age at initiation, and elaborateness of of restricted access, and there are other in-dicators of inequalities mentioned in ourinitiations into such societies would have

been a function of the ability of sponsoring introduction. The existence of secret socie-ties is consistent with all these indicatorsfamilies to pay for elaborate preparations

and ceremonies, the most costly of which according to our analysis.Finally, ethnographically, secret societycould have involved deep and prolonged so-

journs into the caves and the creation of new initiations frequently involved displays ofelaborate costumes (Beaune 1995:248) or artpaintings or panels for the initiation. Initi-

ates of less wealthy families might simply to initiates and members or special visitors(Eliade 1958:33). There were also costly pay-undergo initiation ceremonies in open air

camps at night, or in other contexts that ments to ritual specialists whose role was toinduce ecstatic altered states of conscious-would have required less mustering of spe-

cial labor and goods. This would account ness in initiates by prolonged sensory depri-vation, exhaustion, and various forms offor the apparent relatively episodic use and

painting of cave sanctuaries by small groups stimulation resulting in a feeling of spiritualknowledge and power. Elites in most com-of adults and adolescents (Beaune 1995:192,

226). It also implies that the intensity of cave plex transegalitarian societies sought todominate access to this knowledge anduse and cave painting would have varied



power in order to reinforce their tangible yond those of the European Upper Paleo-lithic? There seems little doubt that the samepower within their own communities—a

strategy often found in chiefdoms and even basic types of rituals would have taken placeamong other hunter–gatherers of compara-early states such as the classic Mayan city

states. Similar arguments have recently ble complexity, possibly involving many ofthe same art forms, such as painting, sculpt-been advanced by Lewis-Williams (1994;

1995:19, in press) for the control of cave ing, costumes, and masks. Yet the recogni-tion and interpretation of these rituals mightart by the socially and politically powerful

members of Paleolithic societies, while be much more difficult due to local environ-mental and historical differences. The formBeaune (1995:238, 274) has argued that high

status families painted the caves and that and nature of material remains from manyof the maturation events that we have dis-only the privileged members of society ac-

tually entered the caves. All these features cussed tend to vary in a historical particular-ist fashion and may not even be preservedare also consistent with the nature of cave

sanctuaries and their art. Such features are at all, as in the case of leather or woodenmasks. This variability is due to the almostexemplified ethnographically by the Coast

Salish winter dances which in the 1960’s nonexistent practical constraints on ritualitems and the wide scope of variability thatrequired several thousand dollars for initi-

ations in communities with low cash re- imagination, individual preference, andchance make possible between communitiesserves (Jilek 1982).

However, it is not our goal to systemati- or regions.The rituals with the most practical con-cally evaluate each of the above possibilities

in this exploratory paper. We only wish to straints are child growth payments becausematerial manifestations must representestablish conceptual foundations for analy-

sis and indicate promising avenues to ex- wealth (or control over labor) and they mustbe highly visible to a large public audience.plore using more systematic development of

expectations based on cave art locations, Thus, it is common to find child burials withgrave goods reflecting the magnitude ofcontents, evidence of storage of parapherna-

lia, offerings, artifact density, frequencies of growth payments invested in individualsprior to their death. It is pertinent to empha-painting events, frequency of visits to caves,

age frequencies of foot and hand prints, oc- size that conventional interpretations viewrich child burials as occurring only in stra-currences of feasting fires or other activities.

Such a study constitutes a much more ambi- tified societies, whereas there is now consid-erable evidence that they occur in transegali-tious undertaking for the future. If our pres-

ent interpretation is substantiated, it will tarian societies as a result of child growthpayments (Hayden 1995). However, even inmean that the Upper Paleolithic societies re-

sponsible for cave art were quite complex in these cases, wealth may not occur in formsthat preserve well archaeologically, andtheir overall socioeconomic structure proba-

bly approaching the complexity represented some transegalitarian cultures may not in-clude grave goods with any burials due toon the North American Northwest Coast. In

this regard, it is interesting to note that Fran- alternate ways of displaying wealth.Puberty rituals, initiations into special so-cois Bordes once remarked he thought

Northwest Coast cultures might be better cieties, and special training are all muchmore particularistic and idiosyncratic inmodels than the Kalahari hunters for the Up-

per Paleolithic cultures of southwest France. terms of material expressions, although withsome direct historical documentation, it mayDoes the present study have any implica-

tions for the interpretation of other prehis- be possible to detect some of these ritualforms in specific archaeological cases. Fortoric transegalitarian hunter–gatherers be-



instance, Plateau female puberty ceremonies cific objects. Yet, this is an area of inquirywhich is just opening up, and awareness ofmay manifest themselves in the remains of

small structures, drinking tubes, scratching the potential role and importance of suchremains may lead to new insights, better the-sticks, and other items during the restric-

tions accompanying isolation. Schulting ories, refined methods of analysis, and prin-ciples of material manipulation in ritual or(1995:13) states that among Plateau groups

at least, these items frequently appear in the maturation event contexts. We remain opti-mistic and look forward to future contribu-archaeological record but are often mistaken

for fully utilitarian objects. On the North tions along these lines. Certainly, when cir-cumstances combine to make maturationWest Coast, and perhaps elsewhere, the

lengthy and severe isolation of elite females events or rituals highly visible in the archae-ological record, as in Paleolithic Europe, itmay be visible in their skeletal remains.

Spirit quests can be indicated by the exis- is essential to have a robust theoreticalframework in place in order to situate thosetence of pictographs, petroglyphs, and in-

cised and painted designs appearing on util- remains in their proper interpretive context.That has been our goal from the outset.itarian objects (Marshall 1991; Sanger 1968;

Teit 1930:283). The presence of initiations Whether the trends and patterns of associ-ated variables observed in this ethnographicinto special societies may be indirectly visi-

ble through evidence of specialized ceremo- study will be substantiated by data fromtransegalitarian hunter–gatherers elsewherenial structures such as those reported for the

Chumash ’antap. The restricted distribution in the world remains to be seen. However,given the strength of the trends and patternsof non-utilitarian artifacts, such as the early

elaborately carved antler spoons buried with observed in the ethnographic cases re-viewed here, there is strong reason for opti-some individuals at Pender Island on the

Northwest Coast (Carlson 1991), may also mism that they will be present and recover-able archaeologically through the carefulindicate membership in elite institutions in-

volving initiations. Finally, training might analysis of grave goods, skeletal remains,rock art, caves, special structures, householdbe assumed to occur where there is clear

evidence for highly restricted occupational assemblages, sculptures and other prestigeitems, and the overall economic productivityspecialization and should be reflected in

highly specialized individual grave or do- of prehistoric groups.mestic group assemblages.

In conclusion, the ethnographic analysis ACKNOWLEDGMENTSof the maturation events of transegalitarianhunter–gatherers has been shown to have The authors express their gratitude to all those peoplewidespread and important implications who helped in both the research and the production of

this manuscript. Specifically, thanks to Thomas Black-both for theories of social evolution and forburn, Jane Goodale, and William Marquardt for sharingthe interpretation of the prehistoric archaeo-with us their knowledge of the Chumash, Tiwi, andlogical record. Given the strength of theCalusa, respectively. Thanks also to reviewers of previ-

trends and patterns observed in the ethno- ous versions of this paper. Their comments and con-graphic cases reviewed here, there is good structive criticisms helped us develop a clearer theoreti-

cal focus on which to build our arguments.reason for optimism that they will be presentand recoverable archaeologically.

Because of the wide range of particularis- REFERENCEStic variability in physical remains from mat-uration events, it is clear that we are far from Arima, E. Y.being able to make any generalizations 1983 The West Coast People. The Nootka of Vancouver

Island and Cape Flattery. British Columbia Pro-about the recovery or interpretation of spe-



vincial Museum Special Publication No. 6, Brit- Bradley, Richardish Columbia Provincial Museum, Victoria. 1984 The social foundations of prehistoric Britain.

Themes and variations in the archaeology of power.Barnett, Homer G.Longman, London.1955 The Coast Salish of British Columbia. University

of Oregon, Eugene. Burch, Ernest S., Jr.Berndt, R. M., and Berndt, C. H. 1975 Eskimo Kinsmen: Changing relationships in North-

1964 The world of the first Australians. An introduction west Alaska. West Publishing Co., St. Paul.to the traditional life of the Australian Aborigines.

Cannon, AubreyUniversity of Chicago, Chicago.1989 The historical dimension in mortuary expres-

Blackburn, Thomas C. sions of status and sentiment. Current Anthro-1976 Ceremonial integration and social interaction pology 30:437–458.

in Aboriginal California. In Native Californians.Carlson, RoyA theoretical retrospective, edited by Lowell J.

1991 The Northwest Coast before AD 1600. In theBean and Thomas C. Blackburn, pp. 225–243.North Pacific to 1600. Proceedings of the GreatBallena Press, California.Oceans Conferences, Vol. 1, pp. 110–136. NorthBlackburn, Thomas C.Pacific Studies Center, Oregon Historical Soci-1975 December’s child. A book of Chumash oral narra-ety, Portland.tives. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Blackman, Margaret B. Carr, Christopher1990 Haida: Traditional culture. In Northwest Coast, 1995 Mortuary practices: Their social, philosophi-

edited by Wayne Shuttles, pp. 240–260. Hand- cal-religious, circumstantial, and physical de-book of North American Indians, Vol. 7, Wil- terrents. Journal of Archaeological Method andliam G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Theory 2:105–200.Institution, Washington, DC. Clottes, Jean

Blake, Michael and John Clark 1992 L’archeologie des grottes ornees. La Recherche1989 The emergence of hereditary inequality: The case of 239: 23(1):52–61.

Pacific coastal Chiapas, Mexico. Paper presented 1996 Thematic changes in upper Paleolithic art. An-at the Circum-Pacific Prehistory Conference, tiquity 70:276–288.Seattle.

Codere, HelenBlitz, John H.1990 Kwakuitl: Traditional culture. In Northwest1993 Big pots for big shots: Feasting and storage in a

coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 358–377.Mississippian community. American Antiquity,Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7,58(1):80–96.William G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smith-Boas, Franzsonian Institution, Washington, DC.1921 Ethnology of the Kwakiutl. Based on data col-

lected by George Hunt. Thirty fifth Annual Re- Cook, S. F.port of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the 1970 The conflict between the California Indian andSecretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1913–14, White civilization: 1. IberoAmericana: 21, editedpt. 2. Government Printing Office, Washington, by C. O. Sauer, Lawrence Kinnaird, and A. L.DC. Kroeber. University of California Press, Berke-

ley.Boas, Franz1966 Kwakuitl ethnography, edited by Helen Codere. Cook, S.

University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1976 The conflict between the California Indian andBorgoras, Waldemar White civilization. University of California

1975 The Chukchee. The Jesup North Pacific Expedi- Press, Berkeley.tion. Memoir of the America Museum of Natu-

Dawson, Georgeral History, vol. 7, edited by Franz Boas. Re-1880 On the Haida Indians of the Queen Charlotte Is-printed. AMS. Press, Inc., New York. Origi-

lands. Dawson Brothers, Montreal.nally published 1904–1909, E. J. Brill Ltd.,Leiden. Dawson, James

1981 Australian Aborigines. The languages and customsBoyd, Robert T.1990 Demographic history, 1774–1884. In Northwest of several tribes of Aborigines in the western district

of Victoria, Australia. Reprinted. Facsimile edi-Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 135–148.Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, tion, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies,

Canberra. Originally published 1881, GeorgeWilliam G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smith-sonian Institution, Washington, DC. Robertson, Melbourne.



de Beaune, Sophie A. Goggin, John M., and William C. Sturtevant.1995 Les hommes au temps de Lascaux. Hachette, Paris. 1964 The Calusa: A stratified non-agricultural soci-

ety (with notes on sibling marriage). In Explora-de Laguna, Frederications in cultural anthropology. Essays in honor of1990 Tlingit. In Northwest Coast, edited by WayneGeorge Peter Murdock, edited by Ward H.Shuttles, pp. 240–260. Handbook of NorthGoodenough. McGraw-Hill, New York.American Indians, Vol. 7, William G. Sturte-

vant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Goldschmidt, Walter R., and Harold E. Driver.Washington, DC. 1965 The Hupa White Deerskin dance. In University

Drucker, Philip of California publications in American archaeology1951 The Northern and Central Nootkan Tribes. Smith- and ethnology, Vol. 35, 1934–1943, edited by

sonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnol- A. L. Kroeber, R. H. Lowie, T. D. McCown, andogy, Bulletin 144. Government Printing Office, R. L. Olson, pp. 103–131. Reprinted. Kraus Re-Washington DC. print Corporation, New York. Originally pub-

lished 1945, University of California Press,Duff, WilsonBerkeley.1952 The Upper Stalo Indians of the Fraser River of Brit-

ish Columbia. Anthropology in British Colum- Goodale, Jane C.bia, memoir no. 1. British Columbia Provincial

1971 Tiwi wives. A study of the women of Melville Is-Museum, Victoria.

land, Northern Australia. University of Wash-Emmons, George Thornton ington Press, Seattle.

1991 The Tlingit Indians, edited by Frederica de La- 1982 Production and reproduction of key resourcesguna. Anthropological Papers of the American among the Tiwi of Northern Australia. In Re-Museum of Natural History, 70, University of source managers: North American and AustralianWashington Press, Seattle. Hunter–gatherers, edited by Nancy M. Wil-

Erikson, Eric Homburger liams and Eugene S. Hunn. A.A.A.S. Selected1965 Observations on the Yurok: Childhood and Symposium, no. 67. Westview Press, Boulder.

world image. In University of California Publica-Graburn, Nelson H. H., and B. Stephen Strongtions in American Archaeology and Ethnology,

1973 The Aleuts: Subarctic Islanders. In CircumpolarVol. 35, 1934–1943, edited by A. L. Kroeber,peoples: An anthropological perspective, edited byR. H. Lowie, T. D. McCown, and R. L. Olson,Edward Norbeck, pp. 126–136. Goodyear Re-pp. 257–301. Reprinted. Kraus Reprint Corpo-gional Anthropology Series. Goodyear Publish-ration, New York. Originally published 1945,ing Co. Inc., California.University of California Press, Berkeley.

Ernst, Alice Henson Grant, Campbell1952 The wolf ritual of the Northwest Coast. University 1978 Eastern Coastal Chumash. In California, edited

of Oregon, Eugene. by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 509–519. Handbookof North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C.Garfield, Viola E.Sturtevant general editor. Smithsonian Institu-1966 The Tsimshian and their neighbors. In Thetion, Washington, DC.Tsimshian Indians and their arts, edited by Viola

E. Garfield and Paul S. Wingert. University of Halpin, Marjorie M., and Margaret SeguinWashington Press, Seattle. 1990 Tsimshian peoples: Southern Tsimshian, Coast

Gayton, A. H. Tsimshian, Nishga, and Gitksan. In Northwest1948 Yokuts and Western mono ethnography, vol. Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 267–284.

1. Tulare Lake, Southern Valley and Central Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7,Foothill Yokuts. Anthropological Records, vol. William G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smith-10, no. 11. University of California Press, sonian Institution, Washington, DC.Berkeley.

Hart, C. W. M., and Arnold R. Pilling.Giddings, J. L.

1979 The Tiwi of North Australia. Fieldwork edition.1961 Kobuk River People. University of Alaska Stud-Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Wayne State Uni-ies of Northern Peoples, no. 1, University ofversity.Alaska, Fairbanks.

Hart, C. W. M.Goddard, Pliny Earle1955 Contrasts between prepubertal and postpuber-1903 Life and culture of the Hupa. In University of

tal education. In Education and Anthropology,California Publications in American Archaeologyedited by George D. Spindler, pp. 127–145.and Ethnology, Vol. 1(1), pp. 3–88. University

of California, Berkeley. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford.



Hayden, Brian Washington Press, Seattle. Originally pub-lished 1885, Jena.1995 Pathways to power. The emergence of cultural com-

plexity. Archaeology. The science of once and future Kroeber, A. L.things. W. H. Freeman & Co., New York. 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Smithson-

Holmberg, Henrich Johan ian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology,1985 Holmberg’s ethnographic sketches, edited by Mar- Bulletin 78. Government Printing Office,

vin W. Falk. Translated by Fritz Jaensch. Re- Washington, DC.printed. University of Alaska Press, Fairbanks.

Lantis, MargaretOriginally published 1885–1863, Alaska State1971 Alaskan Eskimo ceremonialism. Reprinted, Uni-Library, Juneau.

versity of Washington Press, Seattle. OriginallyHowitt, A. W. published 1947, University of Washington

1904 The native tribes of South-East Australia. MacMil- Press, Seattle.lan & Co., Ltd., London.

Leroi-Gourhan, AndreHrdlicka, Ales

1968 The evolution of Paleolithic art. Scientific Amer-1944 The anthropology of the Kodiak Islands. Wistar In-ican 218(2):58–70.stitution of Anatomy and Biology, Philadel-

Lewis, Clifford M.phia.1978 The Calusa. In Tocachale. Essays on the IndiansHudson, Travis, and Ernest Underhay

of Florida and Southeastern Georgia during the his-1988 Crystals in the sky: An intellectual odyssey involv-toric period, edited by, Jerald Milanich anding Chumash astronomy, cosmology and rock art.Samuel Proctor, pp. 19–49. University PressesBallena Press, California.of Florida, Gainsville.

Hudson, Travis, and Thomas C. BlackburnLewis-Williams, J. D.1986 Ceremonial paraphernalia, games and amusements.

1994 Rock art and ritual: South Africa and beyond.The material culture of the Chumash interactionComplutum 5:277–289.sphere, Vol. IV. Ballena Press and Santa Barbara

Museum of Natural History, California. 1995 Seeing and construing: The making and ‘mean-ing’ of a South African rock art motif. Cam-Jochelson, Waldemarbridge Archaeological Journal 5(1):3–23.1966 History, ethnology and anthropology of the Aleut.

Anthropology Publications, Oosterhout. Origi- In pressnally published 1933, Carnegie Institution of The incorporation of natural features of rockWashington, DC. surfaces into Southern African and West Euro-

1975 The Koryak. The Jesup North Pacific Expedi- pean Upper Paleolithic parietal art: A cross-tion. Memoir of the American Museum of Nat- cultural, cross-temporal study of religious be-ural History, Vol. 6, edited by Franz Boas. Re- lief. L’Anthropologie.printed. AMS Press Inc., New York. Originally

Lewis-Williams, J. D., and Thomas Dowsonpublished 1908, E. J. Brill, Ltd., Leiden.1988 The signs of all times: Entoptic phenomena in

Kan, Sergei Upper Paleolithic art. Current Anthropology1989 Why the aristocrats were heavy or how eth- 29:201–245.

nopsychology legitimized inequality amongLourandos, H.the Tlingit. Dialectical Anthropology, 14:81–94.

1980 Change or stability? Hydraulics, hunter–gath-Keely, Larryerers and population in temperate Australia.1988 Hunter–gatherer economic complexity andWorld Archaeology 11(3):245–264.‘population pressure:’ a cross cultural analysis.

Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 7:373– Lourandos, H.411. 1977 Aboriginal spatial organization and popula-

tion: South western Victoria reconsidered. Ar-King, Chester D.chaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania,1990 Evolution of Chumash Society. A comparative12(3):202–225.study of artifacts used for social system mainte-

nance in the Santa Barbara Channel region before Marquardt, William H.AD 1804. Garland Publishing, Inc., New York/ 1988 Politics and production among the Calusa ofLondon. south Florida. In History, evolution and social

change. Hunters and gatherers, Vol. 1, edited byKrause, Aurel1956 The Tlingit Indians. Results of a trip to the North- Tim Ingold, David Riches and James Wood-

burn, pp. 161–188. Berg Publishers Ltd., Ox-west Coast of America and the Bering Straits.Translated by Erna Gunther. University of ford.



Marshall, Alan G. Schulting, Rick J.1995 Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Si-1991 Nez Perce subsistence. Paper presented at the

Forty-forth Annual Northwest Anthropologi- mon Fraser, Burnaby.cal Conference. Shnirelman, Victor

Munro, Neil G. 1992 Complex hunter–gatherers: Exception or com-1963 Ainu creed and cult. Columbia Univ. Press, New mon phenomenon? Dialectical Anthropology

York. 17:183–196.Murdoch, John Soffer, Olga

1892 Ethnological results of the Point Barrow Expe- 1989 Storage, sedentism and the Eurasian Paleo-dition. Ninth Annual Report of the Bureau of Eth- lithic record. Antiquity 63:719–732.nology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institu-

Spencer, Baldwintion, 1887–1888:19–441. J. W. Powell, Director.1966 Native tribes of the Northern Territory of Australia.Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Anthropological Publications, Oosterhout.Nelson, Edward William

Spencer, Robert F.1899 The Eskimo about Behring Strait. Bureau of1969 The North Alaskan Eskimo. A study in ecologyAmerican Ethnology, Eighteenth Annual Report,

and society. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of1896–97, pt. 1, pp. 19–518. Bureau of AmericanAmerican Ethnology Bulletin 171. Reprinted.Ethnology, Washington, DC.Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington. Orig-Oberg, Kalervoinally published 1959, Smithsonian Institute1973 The social economy of the Tlingit Indians. Mono-Press, Washington, DC.graph 55, The American Ethnological Society.

University of Washington Press, Seattle. Spier, Robert F. G.1978 Hupa, Chilula, Whilkut. In California, editedOhnuki-Tierney, Ernikoz

by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 509–519. Handbook1974 The Ainu of the Northwest Coast of Southernof North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C.Sakhalin. In Case studies in anthropology, editedSturtevant general editor. Smithsonian Institu-by George Spindler and Louise Spindler. Holt,tion, Washington, DC.Rinehart and Winston Inc., New York.

Peng, Fred C. C., and Peter Geiser Swanton, J. R.1977 The Ainu: The past in the present. Bunka Hyoron 1975 Contributions to the ethnology of the Haida. The

Publishing Company, Hiroshima. Jesup North Pacific Expedition. Memoir of theAmerican Museum of Natural History, Vol.Pilling, Arnold R.5(1), edited by Franz Boas. Reprinted. A.M.S.1978 Yurok. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer,Press, New York. Originally published 1905,pp. 137–154. Handbook of North American In-E. J. Brill Ltd., Leiden.dians, Vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant general ed-

itor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Teit, JamesRohner, Ronald P., and Evelyn C. Rohner 1975 The Lillooet Indians. The Jesup North Pacific Ex-

1970 The Kwakuitl Indians of British Columbia. Holt, pedition. Memoir of the American Museum ofRinehart and Winston, New York. Natural History, Vol. 2(5), edited by Franz

Boas. Reprinted. A.M.S. Press, New York.Romanoff, StevenOriginally published 1906, E. J. Brill Ltd.,1992 The cultural ecology of hunting and potlatchesLeiden.among the Lillooet Indians. In A complex cul-

1930 The Salishan tribes of the Western Plateaus. Amer-ture of the British Columbia Plateau. Traditionalican Bureau of Ethnology Annual Report,Stl’atl’imx resource use, edited by Brian Hayden,1927/1928, 45:295–396. New York.pp. 470–505. UBC Press, Vancouver.

1906 The Lillooet Indians. The Jesup North Pacific Expe-Sanger, Daviddition. Memoir of the American Museum of1968 The Chase burial site, EeQw:1. Contributions toNatural History, Vol. 2(5), edited by FranzAnthropology 6: Archaeology and Physical Anthro-Boas. E. J. Brill Ltd., Leiden.pology, pp. 86–185. National Museum of Can-

1900 The Thompson Indians of British Columbia. Theada, Ottawa.Jesup North Pacific Expedition. Memoir of theSchalk, Randall F.American Museum of Natural History, vol.1981 Land use and organizational complexity2(1), edited by Franz Boas. s.n., New York.among foragers of Northwest America. In Af-

fluent foragers. Pacific coasts east and west, edited Wallace, William J.1978a Hupa, Chilula, Whilkut. In California, editedby Shuzo Koyama and David Hurst Thomas,

pp. 53–75. Senri Ethnological Studies, No. 9. by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 164–179. Handbookof North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C.National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka.



Sturtevant general editor. Smithsonian Institu- Corporation, New York. Originally published1945, University of California Press.tion, Washington, DC.

Werner, Dennis1978b Southern Valley Yokuts. In California, edited1981 Are some people more equal than others? Sta-by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 449–461. Handbook

tus inequality among the Mekranotiic Indiansof North American Indians, Vol. 8, William C.of central Brazil. Journal of Anthropological Re-Sturtevant general editor. Smithsonian Institu-search 37(4):360–373.tion, Washington, DC.

White, RandallWason, Paul 1993 Technological and social dimensions of

1994 The archaeology of rank. Cambridge Univ. Press, ‘‘Aurignacian-age’’ body ornaments across Eu-Cambridge. rope. In Before Lascaux: The complex record of the

early upper Paleolithic, edited by Heidi Knecht,Watanabe, HitoshiAnne Pike-Tay, Randall White, pp. 277–299.1983 Occupational differentiation and social stratifica-CRC Press, FL.tion: The case of northern Pacific maritime food–

Widmer, Randolf J.gatherers. Cultural Anthropology 24(2):217–219.1988 The evolution of the Calusa. A nonagricultural

Waterman, T. T., and A. L. Kroeber chiefdom on the southwest Florida coast. Univer-1965 The Kepel fish dam. In University of California sity of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnol- Winters, H. D.ogy, Vol. 35, 1934–1943, edited by A. L. 1974 Introduction to the New Edition. In IndianKroeber, R. H. Lowie, T. D. McCown and R. L. Knoll, edited by W. S. Webb, pp. v–xxvii. Uni-Olson, pp. 49–80. Reprinted. Kraus Reprint versity of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
