MORTUARY METAPHOR:

LOCATION OF THE REMAINS OF THE DECEASED AS A

SYMBOL OF GROUP MEMBERSHIP

By

Barbara Allen Fuchsman

B.A., Swarthmore College, 1963

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Oberlin College

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the Degree of Master of Arts

in the Department of

Sociology and Anthropo1qgy

1979
 i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My studies at Oberlin College have been full of the excitement and

stimulation as well as the frustration of learning. Numerous people on

the faculty and in the Library have given generously of their time and

effort on my behalf. There are too many to thank each individually, but

I am grateful for their help and encouragement. I am especially grateful to

Professor Kiyoshi Ikeda for careful advice during the preliminary study

for this thesis and to Professor Jere Bruner for his help with statistics,

including carrying out the factor analysis. I also owe special thanks to

Professor Betty Meehan of the Australian National University, who took

precious time away from a very busy schedule for inspiring discussion and

thoughtful guidance. I wish to thank Professor Ronald Casson for his

encouragement and helpful advice. The assistance of Professor Stephen

Cutler was indispensible in my endeavor!') achieve methodologically sound

research. Professors Linda Taranik and Jack Glazier have given invaluable

assistance throughout this project. I owe them a great deal for their

constant encouragement and penetrating criticism. I extend special thanks

to my sisters Professors Catherine Allen Wagner and Edith Allen-Schult for

their expert advice and moral support. I am grateful to Suzanne Overstreet

for her expert typing of both manuscript and tables. The patience and

encouraging interest of my family have made this research possible. I owe

special thanks to my husband for his work in editing and proofreading the

final text.
 ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements i

List of Tables and Figure iii

List of Maps vi

Introduction 1

Chapter One. Theoretical Perspectives 7

Chapter TWo. Research and Sampling Methods 40

Chapter Three. Hypotheses 61

Chapter Four. Descriptions of Patterns in the Data 90

Chapter Five. Data Analysis 134

Chapter Six. Discussion and Conclusions 232

Refe rences:
1. Sources of the Ethnographic Extracts 243

2. References Cited 246

Appendix I. Code Book: Variables Used in This Thesis Al

Appendix II. Data Array:

A. Specific Data on Each Sample Society Al3

B. Variable Codes AlB

Appendix III. Maps A23

Appendix IV. Code Sheet A29

 iii

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE

Table .1 Binford's Mortuary Study

A. Number of dimensional distinctions symbol-
ized in mortuary practices summarized by
subsistence category 24
B. Average number'of dimensional distinctions
obtaining by subsistence category 24

Table 2 Binford's Mortuary Study: Characteristics of the

social persona recognized in the treatment of
the dead 27

Table 3 Frequencies of Social, Demographic and Economic

Variables Wi thin Each Subsistence Stratum 75

Table 4 Characteristics of the Social Personality of the

Deceased Recognized in the Handling of the Dead
A. Settled Agriculturalists 100
B. Shifting Agriculturalists 101
C. Fishing Economies 102
D. Pastoralists 103
E. Hunters and Gatherers 104

Table 5 Sex of the Deceased Recognized in Handling of

the Dead 107

Table 6 Social Affiliation of the Deceased Within His

Own Society Recognized in Handling of the Dead 110

Table 7 The Characteristics of the Social Personality of

the Deceased Recognized through the Location
of the Disposition of the Remains III

Table _8 Comparison of Coding of Location of Disposition

as Determined by Social Affiliation for Societ-
ies Found in Both Binford' s and Fuchsman's
Samples 114

Table 9 Units of Social Affiliation Used to Define

Location of Disposition 117

Table 10 Units of Social Affiliation Used to Define

Location of Disposition Summarized Numerically 129

Table lla Location of DispOSition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Degree of Fixity of Residence 141

Table lIb Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Degree of Fixity of Residence
Dichotomized 142

Table llc Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According to Fixity of Residence 144
 iv

Table l2a Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Mean Density of Population 151

Table l2b Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According to Density of Population 154

Table l3a Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Size of Local Communities 159

Table l3b Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Size of Local Communities
(Categories combined) 160

Table l3c Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According to Degree of Urbanization 162

Table l4a Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Degree of Social Stratification 167

Table l4b Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According ·to Degree of Social Stratification 171

Table l5a Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Level of Political Integration 176

Table 15b Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According to Degree of Political Integration 179

Table l6a Location of Disposition as a SymboL of Social

Affiliation by Technological Specialization 184

Table 16b Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Technological Specialization
(LOCDP categories combined) 185

Table l6c Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According to Level of Technological Special-
ization 188

Table 17 Societies Which Distinguish Four or More Units

of Social Affiliation 190

Table l8a Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Degree of Dependence on
Agr.iculture 194

Table 18b Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

Acconting to Degree of Dependence on
Agriculture 197

Table 19a Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Subsistence Categorization 204

Table 19b Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation by Subsistence Categorization
(LOCDP categories combined) 206
 v

Table 19c Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation

According to Subsistence Categorization 207

Table 20 Comparison of Measures of Association 212

Table 21 Comparison of Somers' d With Economic and

Social Variables Dependent 215

Table 22a Measures of Association for Multivariate

Relationships; Location of Disposition as a
Symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased by
Social, Demographic and Economic Factors
Controlling for Subsistence
(No categories of any variables are combined) 217

Table 22b Measures of Association £COT Multivariate

Relationships: Location of Disposition as a
Symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased by
Social, Demographic and Economic Factors
Controlling for Subsistence (Categories of
LOCDP and Urbanization combined) 219

Table 23a Measures of Association for Location of Disposi-

tion as a Symbol of Social Affiliation of the
Deceased By Subsistence Categorization Control-
ling for Level of Political Integration (With
no categories of any variables comb~ned) 220

Table 23b Measures of Association for Multivariate Rela-

tionships: Location of Disposition as a Symbol of
Social Affiliation of the Deceased by Subsis-
tence Controlling for Social, Demographic and
Economic Factors (Categories of LOCDP and
Social, Demographic and Economic variables
are combined) 221

Table 24 Measures of Association for Multivariate

Relationships: Location of Disposition as a
Symbol of Social Affiliation by Demographic,
Social and Economic Indexes Controlling for
Subsistence Category 227

Table 25 Stepwise M~tiple Regression:·30cial, Economic

and Demographic Variables Regressed on LOCDP 230

Figure 1 Schematic Causal Model For Use of Location of

Disposition As a Mortuary Metaphor of the
Social Affiliation of the Deceased 233
 vi

LIST OF MAPS

Map 1: Africa A23

Map 2: West Eurasia A24

Map 3: East Eurasia A25

Map 4: Insular Pacific A26

Map 5: North America A27

Map 6: South America A28

 1

INTRODUCTION

"Where are we going to put him,

what place do we have for him?"
(Menget 1968:56; excerpt from a
Tzotzil Maya prayer).

The question of where to place the dead is a universal problem for

mankind. The body of the deceased is not regarded as ordinary carrion.

It must be cared for in a correct manner and disposed of in an appropriate

place, not simply for hygienic reasons, "but out of moral obligation"

(Hertz 1960:27). Death creates similar psychological and social problems

in all human societies. Consequently similar kinds of rites, such as rites

of separation, of protection, of reaggregation within a new order, and of

commemoration, are very widespread, as is the ritual sequence in which they

~re found (Hertz 1960; Van Gennep 1960; Malinowski 1925; Goody 1962; Rosenblatt,

et al., 1976). At the same time, great variation is found in the specific

ways in which mortuary ritual is given concrete form. Disposition of the

body may consist of cremation, burial in the dirt, enclosure in a container

placed either above or below the ground, exposure, cannibalism, the keeping

of relics, or some combination of these procedures. Likewise, the location

considered appropriate for the disposition varies widely. The meanings in-

vested in the form and location of the disposition of the dead also differ

in different societies. It is my contention that these meanings can be

usefully categorized. The variation in meaning does not seem to be random.

My research project consists of a cross-cultural study of mortuary

ceremonialism in sixty societies, the purpose of which is to investigate

the influence of sociological and economic variables on certain aspects of

mortuary ritual. The aim of this thesis is to examine the extent to which
 2

predictable variation occurs in the way social affiliation is symbolized

by the location of the disposition of the dead. This work is built upon

studies of both the relationships between ritual and socio-cultural

organization and also the social and psychological functions of funerary

ritual. It entails study of ecological adaptation in its widest sense,

involving the intersection within funerary activities of demographic,

economic, sociological, cultural (in the sense of ideas and values in-

cluding concepts of the supernatural and afterlife), and psychological

aspects of human behavior. In addition, an important purpose of this

project is to increase the understanding of the ways in which mortuary

artifacts excavated by archeologists can be expected to reflect the

organization of the societies of which they are the tangible remains.

Systematically searching out ways in which aspects of funerary ceremonies,

such as the location of disposition of the deceased, vary with changes in

such factors as population density, fixity of residence, degrees of political

integration and social strati{ication, systems of subsistence, technological

development, systems of inheritance and measures of overall complexity

should reveal the strength of the influence of each and the effects of

their interaction. In addition, the reliability with which one can pre-

dict backward from the mortuary practice to the presumed presence of one

or another of the economic or social variables should become clear.

Lewis Binford (1971), in an effort to marshal information for the use

of archeologists, extensively reviewed anthropological theory pertaining

to mortuary practices. He was especially interested in understanding

reasons for variations in mortuary practices. On.. the basis of .,_,.numerous

_ ._ ........ v_.·.· __ .. ...•.

,.... "-.
prexJ.oJ.l."'._studies of mortuary ritual (most notably those of Wedgwood 1927;
---_. - .-.--.,--.,-.- -.--..-",.,. - ~" , -----.
 3

Bendann 1930 and Griffin 1930), he concluded that within a given soc~ety

people customarily may be tr.eated differently at death according to their

sex, age, social position, social affiliation, the causes of their deaths

and the location of their deaths in space or time. Binford predicted

that while age and sex will often be symbolized in funerary ritual at all

levels of social complexity, differences of social position and social

affiliation should increasingly be expressed in funerary ritual as societal

complexity increases. The results of a modest cross-cultural survey sup-

ported these predictions. Binford also noticed that each of these six

characteristics of the deceased tends to be symbolized in similar ways

in many societies. He found that differences in cause of death lead to

differences in treatment of the body and form and location of disposition,

while sex is usually s~boli~y dress qr kinds _~LAr.~y_e.J!2.()~"_ . '!I,l!i,"sQ.c;j,al

~-- ---~. - -~- ... ,...- ,
affiliation and age by the location of the grave.

My research confirms Binford's results while going beyond them. First,

I have brought this work into the context of recent studies of natural

syrrillols, or metaphors, which are widely intelligible across cultures

(Douglas 1973; Beck 1978). How the body is prepared for its funeral,

the treatment accorded to it (for example, it may be mummified or muti-

lated), the kind of disposition given to it, the use of relics from the

body, the kind and quantity of grave goods placed with it, the form and

marking of the facility in which the remains are placed, and the orienta-

tion and location of the disposition may each be invested with special

meaning. Each may be used to symbolize the deceased's age, sex, social

position, or group membership, or the cause or circumstances of his or

her death. In other words, the body or its at~i~~t9S ~~ten_used in__
..-
 4

possessed befor~th. Furthermore, certain metaphors are more likely

to be used to express certain aspects of that social personality than

group are given the same form of disposition, but their sex is frequently

indicated by the objects placed with them. The bodies of criminals and

enemies may be treated extraordinarily; often they are mutilated in some

way. Group membership is often symbolized by placing the remains of de-

ceased members near each other. Use of such metaphors is very widespread.

They seem to constitute a class of symbolic systems whose incidence and

variation in use deserves investigation.

Second, I have refined some of Binford's dependent variables and

introduced additional independent and dependent variables. Binford used

types of subsistence economy as his only measure of organizational com-

plexity. I was able to use the more detailed and refined measures of

organizational complexity formulated by the Cross-Cultural Cumulative

Coding Center (the CCCCC) at the University of Pittsburgh (Murdock and

Provost 1973). This allowed me to examine the effect of variables such

as degree of fixity of residence and level of political integration in-

dependently of each other. In addition, Binford recorded the presence

or absence of each distinction in characteristics of the social persona

of the deceased on the basis of attributes of the mortuary ceremonialism

which would probably leave tangible, archeological remains. I added

purely ritual attributes such as numbers of people attending and length

of time involved which, while giving a more complete picture, also pro-

vides a good indication of the extent to which archeological materials do

 5

accurately reflect the larger· ritual complex of which they are only a
•
part. I was also able to develop a measure of the intensity with which

the distinctions in characteristics of the social persona>of the deceased

are made. For each society, I recorded the reasons given for making each

distinction, and the ways each attribute is distinguished. The reasons

given for making each distinction, for example, the kinds of social affilia-

tion symbolized by orientation or location of the disposition of the de-

ceased, are of considerable interest.

In addition, I formulated variables which measure differences of

elaboration of mortuary ceremonial from one society to another, and

variables meant to measure the timing and importance of inheritance.

Jack Goody's (1962) comparison of two African communities wh~re ownership

of property is important indicates that inheritance occurring at death

with a relative absence of alternative ~ethods of acquiring property may

be closely connected to ancestor worship and elaborate mortuary ceremonial-

ism. Unfortunately, the type of inheritance was difficult to define con-

sistently, and information was uneven. This area of research proved

provocative, but incomplete. It is beyond the scope of the present thesis,

but should constitute a fruitful area for further research. It is also

beyond the scope of this thesis to investigate the extent to which archeo-

logical materials do accurately reflect the larger ritual complex of which

they are a part. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the use of the

location of disposition of the dead to symbolize the social affiliation of

the deceased.

Third, Binford did not attempt to determine whether the ways in which

the characteristics of the deceased were symbolized varied with changes

 Sa

in economic or social organization. Using statistical measures, I have

shown that non-, partial or full use of social affiliation to define loca-

tion of disposition does vary in a regular way with variation in fixity of

residence, density of population, degrees of social stratification and

political integration and in subsistence economy. In order to do this,

I first had to describe what units of social affiliation are used by the

societies in my sample and determine that specific units of social affilia-

tion, such as family, village or religion, tend to be used under certain

circumstances and not in others. Economic, . demographic and social factors

interact to form various kinds of social groups CR. Dyson-Hudson and Smith

1978). At the present time, this interaction seems most efficiently

summarized by subsistence categorization. The data seem to indicate that

the need for a strong stable local group is expressed by use of location

of disposition to symbolize the social affiliation of the deceased. Where

the local social group is fluid in composition, use of the location of

disposition to' symbolize group membership is rather rare. Where the local

social group is more stable in composition, the social group or groups

s)~bolized by location of disposition seem to be those with organizational

or administrative importance at the local level.

To implement this research, I took a disproportional stratified un-

biased sub-sample of sixty societies from the CCCCC's Standard Cross-Cultural

Sample of 186 societies. This sub-sample was stratified according to geo-

graphical location, subsistence economy and level of technological special-

ization. I collected the data on variables relating to the mortuary ritual.

These dependent variables and the independent variables developed by the

CCCCC were placed on the computer. Bivariate and multivariate analyses

 6

were carried out. As the variables are either ordinal or show a strong

ordinal relationship, multiple regression analysis was used to confirm

results indicated by multivariate analysis.

In Chapter One, the theoretical basis for this project is derived from

the largely functional approaches of Hertz (1960), Malinowski (1925), Goody

(1962) , and Binford (1971), the symbolic analyses of Turner (1967), Munn

(1973) and Douglas (1973) and the ecological study. of Dyson-Hudson and

Smith (1978). A possible theoretical explanation for the existence of a

pool of symbolic systems from which different societies can draw to em-

broider their own variations is explored. The use of metaphors of space

in relation to the individual and to group membership is discussed, and

applied to its expression in mortuary ritual. The specific predictions

concerning variation in the use of location of disposition t o symbolize

social affiliation of the deceased are detailed in Chapter Two. The

sources and nature of the data and the sampling methods used are included

in Chapter Three. In Chapter Four , the results of my research are compared

with Binford's study. The extent to which location of disposition of the

dead is used to symbolize the deceased's social affiliation is more closely

defined. The units of social affiliation are defined and their distribution

described. The tabulation of the data is presented in Chapter Five.. Chapter

Six includes a summary of the thesis, my conclusions, and suggestions for

f urther research.
 7

CHAPTER ONE . THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

This study addresses four important theoretical issues which are

conjoined in the study of mortuary activities: social determinants of

variation in the use of widespread metaphoric themes, determinants of

variation in systems of mortuary practices, the interrelationships

between the ecological system of a society and its ritual systems, and

reconstruction of socio-cultural systems from archeological data. As

the structural study of human cultures has become increasingly sophisticated

(Levi-Strauss 1967; Leach 1972; Turner 1967), there has been intensified

interest in metaphoric themes which are cross-culturally widespread. Most

work to date has dealt with the human body as a source of possible meta-

phors. Attention was first focused upon classification systems based

upon the opposition between the right and· left hand (Hertz 1960; Needham

1973). Douglas (1966; 1973) expanded investigation into other metaphoric

systems derived from the human body. Beck (1978) recently pointed out the

need for more exploratory work to determine what categories of imagery

(such as celestial movements) provide widespread metaphoric themes, and

how cultures differ in their use of metaphor. Douglas (1978) stressed

the importance of investigating how variation in social structure in-

fluences variation in use of possible metaphors. Use of metaphors is

involved in mortuary rituals. Goody (1962) observed that certain kinds

of metaphors have a wide cross-cultural occurrence in mortuary ritual;

examples are cleaving or cutting as a rite of separation, and sweeping

or bathing as a rite of purification. In this context, it is important

,
t o establish whether the ways the body of the deceased is handled and

where and how it is deposited are expressions or metaphors of important

 8

characteristics of the social personality the individual possessed before

death. It is also important to investigate how variation in economic and

social organization affects t he use of this class of metaphoric themes.

This study is grounded in the insights of previous socio-cultural

research into mortuary ritual (Hertz 1960; Van Gennep 1960; Radc1iffe-

Brown 1922; Malinowski 1925; Geertz 1957; Goody 1962; Faron 1967; Carter

1968; Ablon 1970; Rosenblatt, et al., 1976), and requires concepts de-

veloped in the ecological study of social and cultural anthropology (Vayda

1969; R.Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978). Death challenges both the con-
- - - '- - ...... ..~ .. _ .,'. · •."·'R .. '.',. ,"' ~

ceptual order and the soc ial order of society. Beliefs and practices

relating to death reestablisll or .. r",aff.i~ J)oth. the . soc4·a·l

... . . _ .-....... . . . " ..... ·- ~ ·~A ...... _ ~.~ ~ , ~ ". ". ' • • -_~ __ -_ •• ~ , ."' . - - - ••••
a.n,L .th~ . moral

orde.rs.·· The cl'nnnon need for social regulation of inheritance at death

is one indication that e.conomic influences are also importan~. Therefore,

mortuary ritual has the potential for assuming great significance within

socio-cultural systems. The study of mortuary activity has led to im-

portant insights into various social systems (Carter 1968; Rabenstein

1968). Funerals provide an ideal vehicle for research into the inter-

cDnnections between ritual systems and sDcio-ecDnDmic s ystems. CrDss-

cultural research is one appropriate approach to . this problem. If it can

be shDwn that certain aspects of ritual systems change predictably when

sDcio-economic organizatiDn is varied in a regular wa~ some insight may

be gained into mDrtuary ritual as a generic form of activity. At the

same time, the utility Df concepts derived from eCD1Dgica1 research will

have been demDnstrated.

The researches of an archeo1Dgist ,. BinfDrd (1971), first drew

attentiDn to the high probability that the mortuary fDrms used to symbDlize
 9

distinctions between people after death vary according to t he character-

istic, such as sex or social affiliation, being distinguished. Replica-

tion, refinement and extension of this research should in turn prove

relevant to archeologists' attempts to reconstruct economic, social and

cultural organization from mortuary remains.

The Sequence and Functions of Mortuary Practices

Death in any community is a crisis which creates several different

kinds of demands upon the immediate attention of the living. I t is the

function of the beliefs, norms and ritual system composing a people's

mortuary complex to provide an accepted and consistent way of coping with

these demands. Whether or not these aims are satisfactorily accomplished

depends upon individual circumstances.

Death challenges humanity's ability to understand and order experience.

Geertz (1966) demonstrated that an important function of religion is to

bring recurring situations which are either analytically or morally

baffling, or cause real suffering, into the framework of beliefs about

the order of the universe, thus rendering such situations intelligible and

bearable. Death is inescapable and seems baffling in relation to both

one's own death and the deaths of others. It pushes at the limits of our

understanding and of our ability to endure suffering. In certain circum-

stances, a person's death may raise issues at the . limits of moral insight.

It is therefore not surprising that every known society possesses re-

ligious beliefs about the meaning of death and the probable destiny of

those who have died. Within this theoretical perspective, the practices

surrounding death can be seen to include religious ritual in which the in-

strumental aspects of ritual are at least as prominent as the confirmatory

aspects.
 10

In addition, death presents a number of other imperative requirements.

The corpse must be disposed of in a manner appropriate for a human member

of one's own group. The deceased must be invested with a new status. The

bereaved must be comforted and their position in the community reestablished.

They are faced with both emotional and social needs with which they need

help. Death also often alters the social relationships within a group.

The rights, duties and property of the deceased must be redistributed and

his or her roles reallocated.

The demands imposed by death are normally met thro,u gh a series of

activities in which behavior is more or less standardized. At various

times ritual behavior is required. Ritual may be considered to be a series

of symbolic actions. I use Geertz's'(1966:4) definition of a symbol:

any object, act, event, quality or relation

which serves as a vehicle for a conception -
the conception is the symbol's meaning.

I use "ritual" to mean a category of standardized behavior in which the

relationship between the means and ends of the action, while meaningful,

is not intrinsic in the action itself (Goody 1962:41). I follow Goody in

defining "ceremonial" as a sequence of ritual acts performed in public.

The fact that these acts are rituali zed invests the changes they bring

about with an aura of meaning and finality (Geertz 1966).

The sequence of rites and other practices found in mortuary ceremonial

is shaped to perform the interconnected functions discussed above . The

sequence of ritual events in the order of the entire ceremonial complex is

important. The sequence normally proceeds with preliminary rites of

separation between the dead and the living, followed by an un~ppy inter-

mediate period of transition for both the living and the deceased which is
 11

characterized by liminary rites of marginality; finally, postliminary

rites of aggregation effect a new integration of the bereaved into society

and between the deceased and society (Hertz 1960; Van Gennep 1960). The

period of transition may be very long in some societies and very short in

others. Rites of purification and rites of protection against the forces

causing the death or against the anger of the deceased may be much more

important in some societies than in others, but the basic sequence is the

same.

The period of separation includes the preparation of the body for its

disposition, attendance upon the body, the funeral rituals and the actual

disposition. During this period the bereaved normally are afflicted with

acute grief acc'o mpanied by loss of patterns of conduct (Rosenblatt et a1.

1976; Goody 1962). The emotions of the bereaved are very often conflicting,

comprising feelings of attraction to and repulsion from the deceased

(Malinowski 1925) and feelings of guilt and relief mingled with deep sorrow.

Rosenblatt et a1. (1976) conclude from a study of grief and mourning in

seventy-five societies that the experience of grief is universal. The

ritual action helps to direct, shape and control this emotion (Goody 1962;

Myerhoff 1974). For, the social group, death disrupts the normal network

of social relations. If this is to be reestablished,_the dead must be

separated from the living and invested with a new status •. . As a part of
...... . _, _- -- ~·_N.. _ _ . • ' . . ,' . . . ,, #~,._~,._.• " " ,_"_,~,~,,,,,,,, ._'_' •• ,.... ,--'w~ ··,,-· ... - · " . '

this separation process, the a chievements, the kind and quality of life,

the roles and duties of the deceased are summed up in some way, by informal

talk, by joking or by formal orations (Goody 1962). In this context,

funeral ceremonies can exert pressure for proper behavior. The obituary

may constitute a public reformulation of social norms and act as a sanction.

 12

••• death-as a social phenomenon consists in a

dual and painful process of mental disintegration
and synthesis. It is only when this process is
completed that society, its peace recovered, can
triumph over death (Hertz 1960:86).

This transitional process is the period of mourning for the bereaved.

It is a time for gradual recovery from acute grief, for reorientation and

reorganization of attitudes and behavior. For the deceased's soul (or

souls) this period effects a change to a new permanent status. In many

societies, it is a precarious period for both the new soul and the living

upon whom the soul may cause harm through its own suffering. In these

societies, the initiatory charactor of the funeral ceremonial as a whole

is very clear. For the soul, the change may be believed to be long and

difficult or it may take place within a few days. In the latter case,

the period of reorganization for the bereaved will necessarily be longer.

Every change of status in the individual

••• implies a deep change in society's mental
attitude toward him, a change that is made
gradually and requires time. The brute fact
of physical death is not enough to consummate
death in people's minds: the image of the
recently deceased is still part of the system
of things of this world, and looses itself from
them only gradually by a series of internal
partings .•• (Hertz 1960:81).

The postliminary rituals of reaggregation are often very formalized,

unlike our own practice where the reintegration of the bereaved is left

up to the individual. In many societies the mourning period is officially

terminated by final funeral ceremonies which may involve attention to the

remains of the deceased (Hertz 1960; Rosenblatt et al . 1976) . During this

period the living are definitely separated from their previous roles and
 13

statuses in relation to the deceased and enter into a new system of roles

and status relationships. As it is among the LoDagaa of West Africa,

this may be accomplished by explicit rites of purification and tie break-

ing from the spouse or parent prior to the reintegration of the living

spouse or children into normal social life (Goody 1962). LoDagaa final

ceremonies may also include settlement of the deceased's estate. In many

societies the final ceremonies are ended with a feast.

It should be emphasized that the reintegration of the dead does not

entail a re-entry of the deceased into the company of the living. Radcliffe-

Brown (1922) stressed the social need for this separation: the rights and

obligations of the deceased must be reallocated to permit social life to

continue. Usually the spirit of the dead is accepted into the company of

the other dead who live in their own comm~nity. Interaction"between the

living and the dead can be either beneficial or harmful to the living,

and usually communication between the living and dead.is considered an

awe inspiring or frightening rather than a normal event. When it occurs

in an institutionally established framework, such as during All Souls'

Day (Todos Santos) among the Aymara of Peru (Carter 1968) and the Maya

of Mexico and Guatemala (Guiteras-Holmes 1961), events are carefully

scheduled and contact is ordinarily (not always) indirect.

I have described the general sequence of typical funerals common in

many societies. However, within a given society, all funerals are by no

means identical. As Hertz (1960) noted long ago, mortuary ritual will be

varied according to the deceased's previous status in the society of the

living and with the way in which that status is believed to relate to

status in the society of the deceased.

 14

The cause or circumstances surrounding a person's death may drastically

alter the status of the decelj,sed in relation to bo.th the living and the

other dead. Wedgewood (1927) found that in Melanesia those who had

alienated themselves from society or whose abnormal death was believed

to have endangered society were frequently not given a normal funeral and

were not permitted to share the general communion of the dead. For example,

women who die in childbirth are · feared in many places; protective rites are

often added to their funeral while the final funeral ceremonies are not held

for them. This is so among the Toradja (Adriani and Kruyt 1951; Downs 1956) .

The Aztecs, on the other hand, accorded such women the same privileged

status in the afterworld as warriors slain in battle. These women were

buried in the temple courtyard of particular goddesses instead of being

cremated with the jar of ashes interred in· the house. Here the deceased

has joined a distinct group whose members do not require normal ritual

attention after death (Sahagun 1961; Soustelle 1961; see also Menget 1968

for similar Maya practices concerning the murdered). Those executed for

particular crimes, or those who have died of revolting diseases such as

leprosy or smallpox often are not accorded a normal funera l.

Under more mundane circumstances, a person's position within the

social network of his society will be reflected in the kind and intensity

of ritual treatment accorded him or her at death. Each individual lives

within a network of social relationships with other people. As an individ-

ual passes from one status to another, such as through marriage, birth of

a first child, taking a regular job or ascension to office, his relation-

ships with others may change in character. The status of relatives may

change at the same time. Mother becomes a grandmother; wife may become
 15

the Boss's Wife. Some ties may disappear as new ones are established.

When a person dies all these ties are broken, altering the social re-

lations immediately involved in the network. The number and range of

the ties broken depends upon the importance of the deceased within the

social network of which he or she was a part. (The range of ties broken

also depends upon the type of society within which the deceased has lived.

This aspect of inter-societal variation will be exami ned below.) The im-

portance of the deceased depends upon his or her age, social position and

social affiliation. A young child of ordinary social position does not

have responsibilities toward, or reciprocal relations with, a fairly large

number of people. Similarly, the death of a very old person who no longer

actively participates in the economic and social life of his community will

involve only minor disruption of the social networks within that community.

In many societies fewer people will attend funeral ceremonies for very

young or very old people, and the ceremony itself may be somewhat abbreviated.

Old people, however, may be accorded a high status in the community and

exercise continuing authority. In this case, the funeral may be more

elaborate with a normal or large attendance. In general, attendance at

the funeral will be required of those in the social network up to and

including the highest level of social organization involved in readjust-

ment of that network (Goody 1962). Attendance will include close relatives

of the deceased who live nearby. It may include members of the wider kin-

ship group. Attendance will include, if they exist: the heirs of the

deceased and members of corporate groups or associations in which the

deceased had been a participating member, including work groups. Group

membership may also be expressed in the ritual used. If the deceased

 16

held governing responsibilities, attendance at the funeral will be larger

while the funeral itself will be more lavish and may be prolonged.

The roles and status of the deceased must be well defined in the

funerary ritual partly because the status of the mOurners is thereby

reflected. Definition of the social personality of the deceased is

accomplished through use of symbols. One important function of symbolic

systems of communication (Munn 1973) is the development and maintenance

of social relationships. Social roles and social groups, prestige and

rank are given concrete form and differentiated from each other through

symbolism (Cohen 1969). Relationships between people are not visible

but are abstractions observable only through symbols. The objectification

of roles and relations by the use of symbolism gives soci'al .life necessary

stability and continuity. Symbols of. social (including political and kin)

relationships and symbols dealing with the supernatural and the perennial

problems of human existence are integrated within the same symbolic

, communication system informed by the same dynamic ideology or worldview

(Gohen 1969). They are part of the same culture and are often used together .

Rituals and the symbolic communication systems of which they are , a part

contain within themselves implicit definitions of the relationships among

the different participants (Munn 1973). Funerary ritual, like all symbolic

action, consists of both models of and for reality (Geertz 1966:7). The

implicit definition of the social relationships within the ritual is re-

created and reaffirmed by the symbolic action at the same time that the

symbolic action depends upon the definition for its very existence. When

this mutual understanding breaks down the ritual loses its meaning or

fails to achieve its aim. The failure of the Javanese funeral analyzed by

Geertz (1957) is a notable example.

 17

The social readjustment required by death is fad.litated through

ritual. The roles and status which the deceased held in life are defined

at the same time that the separation of the deceased from the living re-

quiring a drastic change in roles and status is effected. Ritual always

becomes involved at some point between the time of death and the time of

disposition. The degree of ritual elaboration varies greatly between

societies. The amount of ritual activity required after the disposition

is quite variable. However, routines or ritual are needed to facilitate

transfer of wealth or power, especially at the death of a very powerful

person. These routines and rituals may be purely secular, as probating

a will or the inauguration of a former vice-president as president is in

our own society.

Death threatens the continuity of the group in which it takes place.

When someone important in maintaining a social network dies, disintegrative

pressures, such as competition, must be contained if the group is to con-

tinue. The readjustment required by death also presents an opportunity

for reallocation of resources and realignment of social relationships.

The importance of maintaining the unity of the group involved as well as

use of the opportunity to restructure social relationships can· be clearly

seen in the central ritual of the funerary ceremonial of the Mapuche of

Chile (Faron 1967). Among the Mapuche, the wake is followed by a large

public ceremony the stated purpose of which is to ensure the safe de-

parture of the spirit of the deceased through propitiation of the ancestral

spirits. It is at this time that the social reordering and the restoration

of cosmic equilibrium necessitated by death is accomplished. The coffin

is removed from the house and placed in the center of a field where members
 18

of the ritual congregation can gather. The atmosphere is very serious.

The ceremonies begin with a formal encirclement of the coffin by horsemen

for the purpose of dispelling evil forces. The lineage elders, who are

the highest representatives of moral order, then give important recita-

tions of the deceased's life history and his ancestry. These recitations

are directed toward the ancestral spirits of the lineages involved, re-

minding them of their obligation to protect the newly released spirit.

People place gifts· within the coffin and may say a few words at that time.

Although a sumptuous and expensive feast is provided and drinking is im-

portant, the people listen attentively to the orations. According to

Faron (1967), the orations function as classrooms where the elders set

forth detailed comments on Mapuche values and beliefs. Local history is

retold. Upon occasion, the outstanding ancestors of two branches of one

lineage are combined into one figure in order to increase the closeness

between the members of the lineage and produce greater solidarity. A

relatively large community of people is purposefully united •

••• death and burial services serve to intensify

the kinship relations among the several patri-
lineages involved. They also unite in sympathy
(a psychological expression of social obligation)
persons of unrelated households ••• and reaffirm
family friendships which are rooted in long con-
tact and local residence (Faron 1967:228).

The burial of a chief has even greater unifying consequences. Many people

bring gifts of food in order to establish a reciprocal relationship with

the deceased who will become an active protecting spirit. The orations

take on an added importance. Here the social, moral and cosmic structure

of the Mapuche world are recreated and reanimated for the participants.
 19

The unification of the affected group is a manifest function of the

funeral ceremonies in many societies. When whole groups of people feel

severely threatened by outside forces, funerals may assume added importance

as a unifying mechanism (Ablon 1970). The need to reaffirm the unity of

the group may well be explicit even where no competitive forces are present.

For example, for the Mbuti there are few worldly goods to inherit and

authority is personal and dispersed according to particular ability. The

Mbuti hold a festival after the burial of an adult, the purpose of which

is to restore normality, to redress the imbalance which has caused the death

and so "rejoice the forest" (Turnbull 1965: 144-145). This ceremony is not

i ntended to safeguard the recently deceased, but does affirm the continuity

of life and of the band in the face of death.

Widespread similarities in the structure of mortuary complexes have

been demonstrated (Hertz 1960;' Bendann 1930; Carter 1968; Rosenblatt et

al. 1976). It is also apparent that variation in mortuary practices within

and between societies is important. It seems reasonable to predict that

variation in the kind and size of social networks i nvolved in different

types of social organization will cause differences in mortuary practices.

However, teasing questions remain unanswered (Goody 1962). Further study

of factors ,contributing to differences in mortuary practices is of particular

interest to archeologists (Peebles and Kus 1977), but coul d also prove ex-

citing to socia-cultural anthropologists.

Binford's Study of Variation in Mortuary Practices

As discussed above , variations in mortuary practices within societies

,

have been shown to depend in part on the roles of the deceased in the social
 20

organization of his society (Gluckmann 1937). The expression of the re-

lationship between major social groupings as they exist in relation to the

deceased is a central part of the funerary proceedings of many societies

' (for example, Forde 1962; Blackman 1973; ' Faron 1967). A smaller number

of studies have indicated that variation in mortuary activities between

societies (or within the same society over time) depend in part on differ-

ences (or changes) in socia-economic organization (Bendann 1930; Geert,z

'1957; Goody 1962; Carter 1968; Binford 1971). Goody (1962) has suggested

that differences in degree of elaboration of the funeral may depend in

part upon the structure of inheritance rules and the extent to which an

individual's access to resources depends solely upon inheritance.

The specific purpose of this thesis is to determine the extent to

I '
which use of location of disposition-as a symbol of social affiliation

varies predictably with variation in social and economic organization.

Kroeber (1927) believed he had demonstrated the essential independence of

forms of disposition from social and economic organization. While Egyptian

funerary forms demonstrated an impressive stability over a long period of

time, the conventional methods of disposing of the dead among the aboriginal

peoples of California and sub-Saharan Africa are highly variable in space

and over time. In California, use of burial and cremation forms showed

no association with other mortuary practices or with geographic or cultural

boundaries. In Africa, the same symbol, such as tree and platform burial,

might be used for kings in one society and criminals in another. Several

forms of disposition often were used within one society. Kroeber concluded

that forms of disposition were not inherently stable and should be classed

as fashions. Service (1971:141) rather recently stated on the basis of

Kroeber's paper that "forms of disposal of the dead should be highly suspect
 21

as evidence of relationship ." However, Binford (1971) found. a fruitful

way around the problems Kroeber pointed out by shifting attention away

from the actual form of disposition used toward the dimension of the mor-

tuary situation symbolized by the form of disposition. Reasoning that

the relationship between a ritual symbol and its referrant is by definition

purely arbitrary, Binford argued that the same referrant, such as sex or

rank, can be symbolized any number of ways. The same symbol can de-

liberately be used antagonistically by neighboring groups. It is necessary

to understand the organization of a sbcio-cultural system before the con-

tent of its symbols can be meaningfully compared with the content of another

social system's symbols. Therefore, Binford felt it is analytically more

useful to focus on the dimension of the mortuary situation symbolized rather

than on the symbol itself.

Binford (1971) marshaled a quantity of evidence demonstrating that,

while Kroeber was correct that mortuary practices were nei ther inherently

stable or unstable, this variability could only be understood in terms of

organizational properties of the socio-economic systems of which the

mortuary practices are a part. Carter (1968) illustrated briefly that

funerary rites are capable of rapid change in response to transformations

in economy and society by summarizing the rapid changes which have occurred

in our own attitudes towards death and in our funerary practices with the

rapid socio-economic changes of the last three generations . Binford (1971)

undertook a modest cross-cultural survey to demonstrate that certain aspects

of mortuary practices will vary predictably as social organization becomes

increasingly complex.

~ Summarizing a number of studies of mortuary ceremonialism, Binford

concluded that within a given society people customarily may be treated

 22

differently at death according to their sex, age, social position, social ..

affiliation, the causes or circumstances of their deaths and the location

of their deaths in either space or time. As socio-economic systems change

in complexity, the six dimensions of the social personality of the deceased

and circumstances of the individual's death will be perceived and treated

differently. As social systems become increasingly complex, it is expected

that more of these distinctions will be symbolized and that they will be

symbolized in more ways. .Differences of , age and ",sex"il.

# - .. ..
r !:'.J.:t".!:'mJE!H1;ly symbol-
, .. _ ., ',-, .•,.'. ...-•• ,- .• • .. -.
'-"- "~ '"' ~ ~. ~ ~

ized in funerary ritual at all leve~:, . of so_:~,,:~_.,:o~jl~_e.~i~y. As previousiy

.-,'y,,'

discussed, a person's position within the social network of his society will

be reflected in the kind and intensity of ritual treatment accorded him or

her at death. In small, homogeneous societies where the main social unit

is the small hunting ~nd gathering band, the main divisions of labor are

made according to age and sex. Leadership, based upon ability, is large.ly

informal and shifts somewhat depending upon the task at hand. Position

within the social networks of the society is largely determined by age and

symbolized by' objects indicating occupation. Consequently, distinctions

of mortuary treatment in hunting and gathering societies should be largely

limited to those of age and sex. As societies become-more complex,_n._.',social

__•,.
_ _. ~ __ ,_.~ _ _ ."_, ,r_ _ _ _ _ ., _ • . ,' ._. _ _.;. ', .,~ '-'I

positions become more formalized and multiply. Differences in social

- -- • ..,y'",.,-" ."-~' ,,. .-,-',. ~. -~ •. • • y--- •.• - " .. ~

affiliation, such as membership in clans, fraternities, or guilds may also

become more significant as social organization becomes increasingly complex.

Therefore, while differences of age and sex remain important, differences 1

of social position and social affiliation should incr.easingly be expressed

in funerary ritual as societal complexity increases. I

 23

Binford made a preliminary test of this proposition on data gathered

from a sample of fort y "non-state organized societies" drawn from the Human

Relations Area Files. It was impossible to tabulate the actual number of

discrete patterns of mortuary r~tual practiced within each society. In-

stead, Binford recorded the number of dimensions of the death situation

relating to the social personality of the deceased which were reported as

being distinguished.

For instance, we might be informed that members of

different clans were buried in separate cemeteries.
This would allow us to tabulate that subgroup affilia-
tion was one dimension in terms of which mortuary dis-
tinctions were made. We might not, however, know how
• many clans there were or how many f ormally distinct
patterns of mortuary ritual were practiced. In spite
of this inadequacy, it was reasoned that there should
be a general correlation between the number of dimension-
al distinctions employed and the complexity of the status
structure within the society (Binford 1971:18). •
His results are shown in Table 1A and lB. As can be seen in Table 1B , while

there are no significant differences among the calculated mean values for

hunters and gatherers, shifting agriculturalists, and pastora1is'ts; there

is a significant difference between the mean values ' for these three groups

and the mean value for settled agriculturalists, the subsistence category

assumed to have overall the most complex status systems. Sex (but not age)

is the most commonly made distinction among the hunters and gatherers, while

sex , social position and social affiliation are most frequently distinguished

among settled agriculturalists (see Table 1A). These tests use very crude

measures and are applied to a sample "which cannot be considered represen-

tative of the categories employed" (Binford 1971:20). Nevertheless, the

findings support Binford's proposition that the organizational character-

istics of a society condition the form and structure of its mortuary practices .
 24

Table 1 BINFORD'S MORTUARY STUDY:

A. Number of dimensional distinctions symbolized in mortuary practices summarized

by subsistence category. '

Dimensional distinctions Hunters ~ Shifting Settled Pastoralists

Gatherers agriculturalists agriculturalists

Conditions of death 1 0 6 1
Location of death 1 1 0 0
Age 2 1 7 1
Sex 12 !!.- 10 J ...
Social po si tion '6 5 11 0
Social affiliation 4 3 10 1

Total cases 15 8 14 3

B. Average number of dimensional distinctions obtaining by subsistence category.

'Subsistence category Average number of dimensional

distinctions per category
,
(1) Hunters and gatherers 1. 73
(2) Shifting agriculturalists 1. 75
(3) Settled agriculturalists 3.14
(4 ) Pastoralists 1.66

From: Binford 1971:20, Tables 2 and 3.

 25

In order to carry the study of the relationships between socio-economic

organization and mortuary practices any further, it is necessary to use

more refined measures of the social, demographic and economic factors

which may be involved. The Cross-Cultural Cumulative Coding Center at

the University of Pittsburgh has rated each society in their Standard

Cross-Cultural Sample for a large number of demographic, economic, social,

political, and psychological characteristics (Murdock and Morrow 1970;

Barry and Paxson 1971; Tuden and Marshall 1972; Murdock and Wilson 1972;

Murdock and Provost 1973). Use of their work greatly facilitates in-

dependent examination of the effect of factors such as degree of social

stratification, population density, subsistence economy, and level of

technological specialization. However, in order to develop more careful

hypotheses involving the i nterrelationships between these factors, it is

necessary to examine the interconnections between economic and social

organization. In the development of specific predictions concerning the

influences particular kinds of subsistence economies exert on mortuary

practices, I have found the studies of human ecology carried out by Steward

(1938; 1955) and Dyson-Hudson and Smith (1978) especially helpful.

In his cross- cultural study, Binford (1971:21) was also interested in

examining ways in which the composition and size of the social network

with status responsibilities to the deceased is symbolized or recorded in

the preparation and disposition of the deceased. He reasoned that as the

number of duty-status relationships with the deceased increases, the loca-

tion and performance of the mortuary ritual,. including the location of

burial, will increasingly interfere with the normal activities of the

community. Therefore, people with a high social position are more likely
 25

In order to carry the study of the relationships between socio-economic

organization and mortuary practices any further, it is necessary to use

more refined measures of the social, demographic and economic factors

which may be involved. The Cross-Cultural Cumulative Coding Center at

the University of Pittsburgh has rated each society in their Standard

Cross-Cult'ural Sample for a large number of demographic, economic ', social,

political , and psychological characteristics (Murdock and Morrow 1970;

Barry and Paxson 1971; Tuden and Marshall 1972; Murdock and Wilson 1972;

Murdock and Provost 1973). Use of their work greatly facilitates in-

dependent examination of the effect of factors such as degree of social

stratification, population density, subsistence economy, and level of

technological specialization. However, in order to develop more careful

hypotheses involving the interrelationships between these factors, it is

necessary to examine the interconnections between economic and social

organization. In the development of specific predictions concerning the

influences particular kinds of subsistence economies exert on mortuary

practices, I have found the studies of human ecology carried out by Steward

(1938; 1955) and Dyson-Hudson and Smith (1978) especially helpful.

In his cross-cultural study, Binford (1971:21) was also interested in

examining ways in which the composition and size of the social network

with status responsibilities to the deceased is symbolized or recorded in

the preparation and disposition of the deceased. He reasoned that as the

number of duty-status relationships with the deceased increases, the loca-

tion and performance of the mortuary ritual,· including the location of

burial, will increasingly interfere with the normal activities of the

community. Therefore, people with a high social position are more likely
 26

to be placed in locations central to the life space of the community. In

egalitarian societies, very young individuals should have very few duty-

status relationships with others, while adults should share duty-status

relations with many people. Therefore, he predicted that differences in

social position and age are likely to be symbolized by differences in the

location of the disposition of the deceased within the life space of the

community. In addition, Binford wbhed to explore the possibility that

other forms of ritual differentiation may be correlated with those character-

istics of the social persona of the deceased which are given recognition by

differential mortuary treatment.

•
In order to carry out this part of his study, Binford (1971:21) de-

veloped a series of nominal attributes for three categories of ritual

discrimination (see Appendix 1): 1. "differential treatment of the body

itself" he measured by whether distinctions were made in preparation,

treatment (e,g., mummification, =emation), or disposition of the body;

2. "differential preparation of the facility" where the body is placed

he measured by whether distinctions were made in the form, the orientation

and/or the location of the facility; and @ "differential cont.r ibutions to

the burial furniture placed with the body" he measured by whether dis-

tinctions were made in the form, the quantity, or both the form and

quantity of grave goods.

The tabulation (in Table 2) of the results of this investigation con-

firmed Binford's predictions and indicated some interesting, unsuspected

associations as well. Differences in age between young children and adults

were most often distinguished by the location of the grave. At the death

of a child who could not have inherited an important social position, the
 27

Table 2 BINFORD'S MORTUARY STUDY:

Characteristics of the social persona recognized in the treatment of the dead.

Condition Location Age Sex Social Social

of Death of Death Position Affiliation

The Body
(1) Preparation 2
(2) Treatment 2 1 2 2
(3) Disposition 2 1 3 2 1
•
The Grave
(4) Form 1 1 3 1
(5) Orientation 3 9
(6) Location 3 7 8 15

The Furniture
(7) Form only ~
. . . .w,,:
5
(8) Quantity only 9
(9) Form and Quantity 7

From: Binford 1971:22, Table 4.

 28

level of corporate involvement in the mortuary rites is largely within the

family. Binford further observed that in these circumstances the ritual

is often performed and disposition takes place within the immediate life

space of the family (under the house floor), or alternatively, outside

the periphery of the settlement. In either case, the wider society is un-
•
involved . On the other hand, adults in these societies are buried in

corporate facilities (cemeteries) or in public locations. Burials are

often accompanied by rites and processions within the life space of the

wider communi ty.

Social affiliation is also most often differentiated by placing group

members in corporate facilities.

Examination of the cases revealed that in societies

in which various membership groups (clans, kindreds,
lineage~, etc.) are present, each may maintain a
distinct burial location, a cemetery or charoal house,
in which members ,are exclusively buried or their re-
mains stored (Binford 1971:22).

Sodality, or sub-group affiliation is also often 'distinguished by the

orientation of the grave, usually in reference to important features in

the sodality origin mythology.

~strong contrast, difference in sex was very commonly made by

~
lacing different kinds of grave goods with the deceased. These differences

included sex-differentiated clothing and tools symbolizing division of

labor according to sex.

Differences in social position received the most variable and complex

mortuary treatment. The most common forms of distinction tended to ' be

made in the form and quantity of grave goods and in the location of the

facility.
 29

The distribution of the small number of cases in which differentia-

tions were made according to the causes or conditions of death suggest

that these circumstances are most likely to be symbolized by differences

in the treatment of the body or in the location of the disposition.

In other words, each particular dimension of the social personality

of the deceased tends to be expressed in the mortuary ritual with character-

istic types of mortuary metaphor.

Mortuary Metaphors

Classes of potential symbols, rather than particular symbols, can

•
usefully be compared cross-culturally from an etic perspective. Use of

particular symbols should be studied on three levels (Turner 1962:125).

The first includes the interpretations of the . indigenous members of the

society in question.
.
The second, the operational meaning, is based upon

actual use of the symbol. The third involves examining a symbol within

the symbolic complex of which it is a part. Because of the limited nature

of a portion of my data, much of my analysis is confined to comparing

variation in use of operational meanings of ·c1asses of symbols.

Binford (1971) assumed that the relationship between mortuary symbols

and their referents is purely arbitrary . From this perspective, it is

puzzling to find that each particular dimension of the social personality

of the deceased tends to be expressed in the mortuary ritual with character-

istic types of mortuary metaphor concerned with the handling and disposition

of the body of the deceas ed. · There may indeed be some quality inherent in

the referent (in the problem at hand: social affiliation) influencing

choice of a symbol from wi thin one class (location of the facility) rather
 31

somewhere between icon and a purely abstract symbol. They may bear no

physical resemblance to their referents at the same ,time that their relation-

ship to their referents is not wholly arbitrary.

In many cases we are dealing not with an indefinite

range of possible "symbols", nor with the more or
less arbitrary association of sign and referent we find
in language, but rather with certain nuclear clusters
of acts, certain general themes, certain widespread
applications of the "association of ideas." Acts
that maintain the input-output system of the human
body are given a generalized significance as acts
of aggregation (eating, sexual intercourse) and acts
of separation (the ,removal of dirt and exuviae), re-
spectively. From the observer's standpoint, the
meaning of an act can be seen as built up through
associations, certain of which are common to a large
number of societies. Purification by lustration is
one such constant (Goody 1962:41).

The meanings and associations built up around objects or acts in the

course of everyday living are believed to be the source of ritual symbols

(Radcliffe-Brown 1922; Evans-Prit chard 1940; Rosaldo 1968; Munn 1973) .

This continuity between ritual vehicles and every day life is consistent

with findings in related fields. Blumer (1972) does not regard meaning

as coming either from inherent qualities of the referent or from in-

dividual psychology. Rather, the meanings of ideas, other people, acts

and objects arise from the ways other people act toward .the person with

regard to those things. Interaction between people operates to define

meanings, which consequently are social products. These meanings are

developed and modified through a formative, interpretative process of

self-interaction on the part of the person in dealing with the objects ,

acts, people and ideas which he or she encounters. Beck (1978) suggests

that both verbal and non-verbal metaphors rest on a mesh of pre-linguistic

emotional and motor assoc iations which continue to build up through

 32

experience as the person grows old. The resulting system of sensory

logic is far more individualized than language. However, each culture

seems to focus the attention of its members "toward certain specific

highly valued, sense-based configurations" (Beck 1978:84). Some of

these especially salient sets of associated qualities seem to cluster

universally around body-based imagery.

Douglas (1973) investigated variation in the use of body-based

imagery as this use is related to variation in types of social systems.

Her argument recalls Goody's (1962) thinking. Where sets of associations

recur in different social systems, the same natural systems of symbols

• should also recur and will be intelligible across cultures. For example, Douglas

(1973:39) observed that where the form of personal relations does

not "correspond in some obvious way to the form or functions of the body" ,

the use of bodily symbols will be irrelevant. This line of argument has

proven quite fruitful, but it ignores the intrinsic relationship which

seems to e~ist between some aspects of natural systems of metaphors and

their referents.

Victor Turner (1967) made the very important observation that an

essential quality of ritual symbols is the juxtaposition within the same

symbol of a grossly physical referent (including even the use of sub-

stances like blood, semen, or urine as the symbol) with more abstract

socially normative meanings. Symbols of central importance often have

not one, but many different meanings. As these meanings are connected

by simple analogies, a wide spectrum of social activity and feeling may

be condensed within one highly charged symbol. The symbol, including its

abstract ideological meanings, is invested with the intense emotion in-

herent in the primordial substance used or evoked. This "multi-vocality"

 33

of the symbol, Turner (1967) illustrates with an Ndembu symbol, the mudyi

tree. The white latex sap of the tree suggests milk to the Ndembu. Be-

ginning with the grossly physical and concluding with the ideological pole,

the white sap symbolizes milk, breasts, breast-feeding and the nurturance

of a mother for her children, learning (drinking knowledge), matriliny,

tribal custom as a whole and the unity and continuation of Ndembu society .

Munn (1973) suggests that most ritual symbols are multi-vocal or contain

iconic elements. To distinguish them from arbitrary symbols she terms

them "iconic-symbols". Current usage prefers the more general term

"metaphor" (Beck 1978). However, the concept implied in the term "iconic-
•
symbol" is important. The multi-vocal ritual sign is an icon of those

concepts (such as mother) at the physical pole of the multi-vocal symbol.

It stands in an abstract relationship "to, and thus is (in the strict defini-

tion of the term) a symbol of those concepts at the ideological pole (such

as matriliny). Nevertheless, the relationship between mother's milk and

matriliny is not arbitrary. This by no means implies that any particular

object or act must necessarily be chosen to refer to certain concepts.

Other societies may well ignore the mudyi tree, at least for ritual purposes.

It is common knowledge that any given symbol may mean quite different

things in different societies (Spradley 1972; Binford 1971). In funerary

ritual, as I have discussed, the same methods of disposing of the body

may have quite different significance. Witches may be burned to destroy

their dangerous spirits. In other societies (such as the Yanomamo) corpses

are routinely cremated in order to release, or liberate, the soul. In

both practices, the soul and body are believed to be so closely connected

that destruction of the body by this intense means will have a determining
 34

effect upon the future state of the soul. The pattern of Binford's (1971)

data supports the implication of the above analysis that in the natural

metaphors of interest here, the relation of the metaphor to its referent

may range from being an index to being a purely abstract symbol but is not

haphazard. A train of association exists from physical experience to the

metaphoric, ritual form. For this reason, ritual metaphors expressing

each particular dimension of the social personality of the deceased tend

to be chosen from characteristic classes of mortuary metaphor. Many

metaphors used in mortuary ritual are not at the fully abstract pole of

symbolic use. Goody (1962) pointed out that the LoDagaa do not consider

physical washing or sweeping to achieve spiritual purification to be an

abstract or an arbitrary action. In many societies, the clothes one wears

and the tools one uses in everyday living assume the nature of an index

to one's sex. The relationship between the object and the associated Sex

is not abstract. To d~ess the corpse in the best attire to insure the

soul will be respected in the next life is an analogous usage. Among the

Aymara (Carter 1968), elaborate costuming is a principal art form appropriate

during fiestas. Social prestige is acquired partly through the display of

expensive clothing. In these circumstances, clothing is close to being

an index of relative affluence and may be used to symbolize status and

certain types of 'authority. Inclusion of the deceased's best clothing in

the disposition indicates the status of both the deceased and his family

in this life and assures him a good status in the life to come.

Like the symbols Turner discusses, the body of the deceased is emotion-

ally charged. Any metaphorical use of the body will evoke and direct this
emotion. Differential treatment of the body, for example, mutilation of
 35

criminals or mummification of kings, can be expected to be an especially

intense metaphor.

Verbal and non-verbal use of spatial metaphors is very widespread

and must be based on patterns of sensori-motor experience developed very

early in life (Beck 1978; Brown 1973). Very widespread patterns of

association must underlie the use of spatial metaphors of aggregation and

separation. Spatial location is often used to symbolize social and psycho-

logical relationships. We speak of a close friend, or a distant acquaintance

and we maintain a certain social distance from others depending on the

situation. Group membership can be expressed in spatial metaphors, such

as the English use of "in", "out", or "thrown out" of a social group. In

everyday life, social relationships may be given concrete phYSical expression.

In many societies, seating arrangements often express hierarchical relation-

ships among people present. A community must arrange the public and private

use of space according to the needs of its members. The settlement plan

of that community will, therefore, reveal a good deal about its social

organization.

When Binford (1971) tabulated the characteristics of the social

personality of the deceased which are recognized in the treatment of the

dead, he noticed that membership in groups, that is social affiliation,

was most often distinguished by the spatial location of the .disposition

(see Table 2, page 27). He found that membership groups such as clans

or kind reds often maintain a special location where deceased members

are exclusively placed. During preliminary work, I found, in addition,

that members of the same household may be buried within their hous~or

very near to it, or the people of the same village or religious group may
 36

buried or cremated together. Relics of the deceased may be kept and used

by close relatives.

It is explicit in the literature that the location of disposition

of the deceased can be an important symbol of social affiliation. On

the· other hand, in some societies location of death determines the loca-

tion of the disposition; in others, group membership is expressed through

the location of the disposition of the deceased for only those people who

have achieved outstanding social position.

Where the deceased are placed together in a way which stresses group

membership, the location of the disposition simultaneously symbolizes the

deceased's former status as a member of the group, his new status as a

member of the community of the deceased of that group, and the unity of

th~ group as a whole. The Merina of Madagascar place their dead in

communal tombs, which are located where a man believes that his ancestors

actually lived (Bloch 1971) •

••• by placing his relatives in the tomb when they are

dead and wishing to go there himself, he closely
associates himself with the lost society of the an-
cestors •.• He thus makes the land of his ancestors • . •
the·land of his dead relatives •.. (Bloch 1971:112) .

••• placing in the tomb is a depersonalizing

process in which a particular individual becomes
merged with all the ancestors •.• and ultimately the
tomb itself. It is the dead as a whole and the tomb
which retain [the] power of life and the ability to
transfer it (Bloch 1971:222).

Some peoples,like the Toradja of the Central Celebes, symbolize the

liminal status of the deceased by placing the body alone, away from the

community (Adriani and Kruyt 1951; Downs 1956). After some period of time,

the bones of the dead are collected, and brought back to the community.
 37

Here, with elaborate ritual, the souls are conducted to their final resting

place while the bones are bathed, put in miniature coffins and placed in

the village bone cave . Spatial location of the disposition has been used

first to symbolize the separation of the deceased from the community,

then his or her reunification with the community as an ancestor.

There are other societies whose members bury their dead alone in out

of the way places often not too far from the place of death. Some people,

such as the Lipan Apache of the American southwest, go to great trouble

to remove the dead from all possible contact with the living, not only

through various rites of purification, but also by placing the deceased

in a remote, preferably mountainous location.

As soon as the burial is over, the immediate family

moves camp, always in the opposite direction from
the fresh grave. If this is not done "the ghost
of the dead or other ghosts will come back to bother
them." .Even though the move is a token one, i t
operates as a symbol of distance and as a means of
creating an unbridgeable gap between the bereaved
and the dead (Opler 1945:126).

The Merina and Apache pose a strong contrast in belief and practice .

The Merina place their dead together and seek physical contact · with them

in order to promote health and fertility. The Apache fear contact with

any dead person or grave. They isolate and avoid their own dead. How-

ever, the location of disposition of the deceased on the basis of his

social affiliation does not necessarily accompany a positive feeling

toward the dead, while isolation or avoidance of the place of disposition

is not always accompanied by fear. Some peoples do not let their very

strong fear of the dead prevent them from placing the remains all together

according to their membership in important social units. The Iban of

 38

Borneo are a good example. A number of Iban stem families live in long-

house communities along river bank~. While the stem family is the largest

corporate kin group, the long-house community is the largest jural and

ritual unit. The burial ground is the only land belonging to the community

as a whole.

This invariably consists of a spur r1s1ng from the river,

on the banks of which the long-house is situated ••• Here,
all G;temJ families inter their dead, ••• Occasionally
it happens "that two neighboring long-houses share the
same ~raveyardJ. but in general, each community has
its own site, where the bodies of those who once lived
together lie buried (Freeman 1955:45).

The graveyard is feared and usually avoided. The men responsible for

the interment are in haste to leave. They make a shallow grave which

th~y do fence. The grave goods, which constitute the last inheritance

of the dead, are placed on and hung around it. Thene is nothing to

prevent the wild beasts from successfully digging up the body. At the

same time the stem family faithfully carries out elaborate mortuary rites

and a rigorous mourning period concluded by an expensive feast held about

a year after death.

The Mbuti of the Ituri Forest, on the other hand, seem not to fear

the dead. They do, however, avoid the place of disposition. When a

Mbuti dies in the forest, the body is buried by pulling the hut down on

top of it. The whole camp is then pulled down and abandoned. If death

occurs in a Bira village, with whom the Mbuti have institutionalized ties,

the deceased is buried in the Bira graveyard under Bira supervision. In

the forest, burial of the body in the middle of his or her hut seems to

express the membership of the deceased in the domestic residence unit.

The abandonment makes a strong separation between the living and the dead.
 39

The burial in the Bira graveyard is a consequence and expression of the

institutionalized ties maintained between the Bira and Mbuti. The name

of the dead person is never again mentioned, at least in front of relatives

of the deceased. According to Turnbull (1962; 1965), this is not out of

fear of the dead person but reflects the Mbuti attitude that it is better

to forget the dead quickly. Turnbull stresses the informality of their

treatment of their dead at burial in the Bira graveyard in comparison with

the seriousness and attention to ritual of their Bira partners.

These few examples give some idea of the complex variation existing

in the use, or non-use, of the spatial location of the disposition of the

dead to symbolize the deceased's membership in one or more units of social

affiliation within his or her society. I t is my purpose to look more

closely at this variation, and to try to determine some of the factors

influencing the forms it takes.

 40

CHAPTER TWO. RESEARCH AND SAMPLING METHODS

Many scholars have based their statements about the influences

operating on mortuary practices on an in-depth study of one or two par-

ticular groups (Radcliffe-Brown 1922; Goody 1962; Lienhardt 1962 ; Faron

1967; Carter 1968). A cross-cultural study testing concepts developed

through in-depth study can help to determine whether conclusions drawn

from these studies are more generally applicable to a large number of other

societies. I am not concerned with determining what is close to being uni-

versal when a death occurs, but in isolating factors which lead to vari-

ability.

For the purposes of this thesis, the different units of social affilia-

tion which may be used to define the location of disposition among different

societies need to be determined. I need to know whether the disposition of

most, only a few, or no members within a given society is affected by the

social affiliation of the deceased; which types of social affiliation tend

to be used together to define lo cation of disposition and which seem to

be mutually exclusive; and whether certain units of social affiliation tend

to be used under certain circumstances and not in others. Once the phenomenon

has been systematically described, it can be determined whether the use or

non-use of social affiliation to define location of disposition, and the

use of specific units of social affiliation to do so, vary in a regular

way with differences in social, economic and demographic conditions.

To this end, r have made a cross-cultural study of funeral practices

in sixty societies. My research has been based upon Binford's (1971) study.

I have used the variables he formulated, and consequently I have replicated

his work in part. I have also created additional variables and used more
 refined measures of economic and social conditions. Further, the aim of

this thesis is to determine ways in which the use of mortuary metaphors

varies as socio-economic conditions change, a problem which Binford did

not address.

Variables Used; Sources and Nature of Data

During the preliminary stages of my research, I conducted a pilot

study of 19 societies in which I replicated Binford's (1971) study and

added variables referring exclusively to ritual behavior, the size and

•
composition of the ritual group, and the keeping of relics. Differential

mortuary handling within each dimension (cause or circumstances of death,

location of death, age, sex, social position and social affiliation) was

tabulated according to six nominal variables. The ~irst three were out-

lined in some detail by Binford (1971:21) and refer to preparation, treat-

ment, and disposition of the body, form, orientation and location of the

facility used for disposition of the remains, and the form and quantity

of burial furniture. The last three variables, constructed by me, refer

to differential participation in mortuary activities, alteration of the

ritual events and differential mourning behavior, within which I included

differential use of relics. I pre-tested both Binford's variables and

my own during the pilot project. After the pilot project was completed,

but on the basis of that experience, I added variables designed to measure

the degree of elaboration of mortuary behavior and variables designed to

measure time and importance of inheritance. Of these latter variables,

.
.I have used only those pertaining to the. location of disposition in this
thesis. Some information recorded for its relevance to inheritance

practices has proven useful for the problem at hand in discussion of the
 42

nature of the organization of local groups. All variables are fully de-

fined i n Appendix I (and AppenUix IV).

The pilot project also confirmed the utility of using social, economic,

demographic and technological variables developed by the Cross-Cultural

Cumulative Coding Center for use with their Standard Sample of 186 societies.

In the pilot project , I used the non-state societies of the "Standard

Sample" as my sampling population, and drew a stratified random sample

from it .

• Both the authors at the CCCCC and I used all ethnographic and other

reliable accounts available for each society. I read each source for, and

recorded information on, mortuary practices, religious beliefs and social

organization. Whenever possible, I used the sources contained in the

Human Relations Area Files. Additional 1iteratQre and all information .on

societies not included in the HRAF was obtained from the Oberlin College

Library or through inter-library loan. Translation of many sources, in-

cluding Russian and Japanese authors, were available in the HRAF. I read

some reports in both French and German. Certain sources on the Australian

Tiwi and Aranda, notably the handwritten manuscript of Chewings' transla-

tion of C. Strehlow's (1907 ) Die Aranda- und Loritja-stame in Zentra1-

Australien, were obtained at the Institute for Aboriginal Studies, Canberra,

Australia. Extremely useful information on the Fijians, unavailable in

this country , was obtained at the National Library, Canberra, Australia.

The qual ity of the material varied enormously. Some description of

a t y pical funeral is included in the literature for all of the sixty

societies in my sample. (Discussion of my procedures when information

was inadequate follows.) Variation i n mortuary practices is at least

 43

mentioned in much of the literature, although the amount of detail varies

considerably. In some cases a great deal of information concerning

funerals for those of a high social position is available, while very

little information is included concerning mortuary practices held for

ordinary people. Information about mortuary ritual is weakest for those

societies which pay the least attention to death. Fortunately for the

purposes of this thesis, information on the location and form of disposi-

tion is included if mortuary practices are discussed at all. Information

concerning attitudes is very uneven •

•
In response to the uneven quality of the data, I developed four ways

to measure the degree to which distinctions in the death situation are

made within each society. First, following Binford, I recorded which of

the six dimensions of the death situation and the social personality of

the deceased are distinguished in any way. This is a crude measure, but

for many societies this information has been recorded with at least

reasonable accuracy. Second, I counted the number of kinds of groups

which were being distinguished. This count of characteristics distinguished

is a somewhat more sensitive measure for which there is also reasonably

accurate information. For causes or conditions of death, I recorded the

particular causes which required differential treatment, such as execution,

or being struck by lightning. Age categories varied according to in-

digenous categorization. .Sex was counted as two groups, male and female.

Following Binford, location included the location of death in either space

or time. Therefore, it included death during epidemics as well as death

far from home. Social position included a wide variety of kinds of groups.

These include entirely informal achieved respect for wisdom or other i~

portant qualities, achieved prowess in an occupation such as hunting or

 44

curing, and formal, inherited positions of status such as kingship. The

dimension of social affiliation I divided into affiliations based on kin-

ship and those' based on residence. Social affiliation included ascribed

membership in the larger group itself, in social classes and in religious

affiliation, as well as the status of being an alien or an enemy. The

third measure for ordering my data is a count of which ways of handling

the dead (such as preparation, treatment and disposition of the body,

form of the facility, sequence of ritual acts) are used to make distinctions

in the death situation. This is a more sensitive measure for differences

in the degree to which sex is distinguished, and is also reasonably accurate.

Fourth, it is possible to count the number of ways distinctions in handling

of the deceased are made, for example, how many forms of disposition are

used. This is the most sensitive measure, but the most inaccurate. Un-

fortunately, the quality of the data is too uneven for this measure to

be considered reliable.

Incorrect or imprecise reporting by the ' ethnographer or other observer

is an important source of error in ethnological classification, the only

correction for which is further research. I have consulted as many sources

as possible to correct for inconsistency and misclassification by the

observers.

I was unable to properly correct for a further possible source of

error in the coding of the data for this study because of financial and

education limitations. I was the single rater to evaluate the mortuary

information. Preferred procedure requires the principal researcher to

hire two or more trained raters to independently evaluate and code in-

formation for each society. The interrater reliability in coding can

 45

then be measured (LeBar 1970 ) . When problems of classification arose,

I did consult trained anthropologists.

Certain problems in coding are of interest. 1. When a person dies

far away and this is felt to be abnormal, if the body is not brought back

and no facility of any kind is built at the home location, this is coded

as a difference in the location of the facility. If the body is not

brought back, but tokens of the deceased are disposed of in the normal

manner and location, this is coded as a difference in treatment but not

• in location. A difference in the form of the facility may also be re-

quired. The body is substituted for by tokens. Therefore, the normal

dispOSition and location have been maintaihed. I have classed sub-

stitution as a distinction of Treatment of the Body because it seems

closer to the differences in kind a~d form implied in mummification or

cremation than it is to differential washing or exhibition of the body

prior to the graveside ritual . Grave markers erected with no facility

underneath are a variation in the Form of the Facility. 2. Objects of

ordinary daily use placed on top of the grave should be coded as grave

goods. Within the culture of any given society, beliefs may dictate

that such objects be placed either in or on the grave. "Grave goods"

refers to goods that were placed with any type of disposal including

cremation . (This definition is consistent with that used by Meehan

(1971).) 3. Objects especially erected for the sole purpose of marking

the presence of a grave, such as headstones, grave poles, buildings, or

thin wooden poles hung with cloth, should be coded as part of the Form

of the Facility. 4. Infanticide or killing twins at birth is coded as

Condition or Cause of Death. Giving twins who have died natural deaths
 46

as children or adults special differential treatment because they are twins

is coded as Social Position of ' the Deceased. 5. The achieved status of

the shaman is classified as Social Position, while membership in a priest-

hood is classified as a Social Affiliation.

I have defined the "funeral" as the culturally defined procedures

carried out from the time of death up to and immediately following the initial

disposition. Where compound disposal (Meehan 1971) is carried out, all

further ritual handling of the remains is classified as further funeral

ritual. The final ce,remony for the deceased, when present, is included

in the sequence of funerary ritual. "Mourning" I have defined as culturally

defined acts expressive of grief or loss which mayor may not be required
[
regardless of feeling.

There were a number of important advantages in using the Standard

Cross-Cultural Sample as my sampling population. The Standard Sample has

been carefully constructed to constitute a representative sample of the

universe of all human societies (Murdock and White 1969). Each of the 186

societies has been rated for a large number of demographic, economic,

social, political, cultural, and psychological characteristics (Murdock

and Morrow 1970; Barry and Paxson 1971; Tuden and Marshall 1972; Murdock

and Wilson 1972). On the basis of this work, Murdock and Provost (1973)

developed ten ordinal scales ordered according to a five-point scale of

relative complexity: 1. Writing and Records, 2. Fixity of Residence,

3. Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture, 4. Urbanization, 5. Techno-

logical Specialization, 6. Land Transport, 7. Money, 8. Density of

Population, 9. Level of Political Integration, and 10. Social Stratifi-

cation. The scores of each society for each of these scales was summed
 47

to obtain an index of Overall Cultural Complexity for each society. I

have used their scales for Fixity of Residence, Degree of Dependence upon

Agriculture, Urbanization, Technological Specialization, Density of Popu1a-

tion, Level of Political Integration, and Social Stratification in this

study.

Use of these ordinal scales of the social, economic, and demographic

factors which influence variation in the use of mortuary metaphors en-

I
•
sures that the scale values assigned to each society will not be biased

toward the theoretical issues of interest in my study. The coding has been

carefully done by a number of raters, reducing the problems of reproducibility.

In addition, the CCCCC has corrected their coding in some instances where

cogent reasons for doing so have been presented to them. I n spite of this

careful procedure, I sometimes found their ratings puzzling. In most cases,

the reasons for their coding became clear upon further investigation. However ,

I continue to disagree with t heir coding the Level of Political Integration

(Appendix I, Variable 7) of the Aztec Empire at 3 rather than 4 because it is

considered to be a confederacy. The only rating I judge to be inaccurate is

coding of the Density of Population of the Inca Empire at Cuzco as level 2

(the density of population averages between 5.1 and 25 persons per square mile) .

According to Cieza de Leon (1864:322), Cuzco is at the head of a very rugged

valley nine miles long and two to three miles broad. Rowe (1946:228), after

careful consideration, accepts Sancho's estimate that the population of

the whole valley of Cuzco was over 100,000 families. If these figures

are reasonable, the population density of the whole valley can be ca1cu-

1ated to be roughly 4,500 families per square mile. It may be that the

coders for the CCCCC interpreted their restriction to lithe Quechua-speaking

 48

Indians in the vicinity of Cuzco (13'30'S, , 72"W) in 1530, immediately prior

to the Spanish conquest" (Murdock and White 1969:367) to include a much

larger and more sparsely populated hinterland. Therefore, I did not

attempt to change the rating, but I do feel that it is misleading at the

very least.

In order to avoid precisely this kind of problem, Murdock and White

(1969) constructed the Standard Sample so that each unit (that is, each

society) in the sample has been precisely defined in both space and time.

• Most commonly the "pinpointed" location and time were restricted to "the

local community where the principal authority conducted his most intensive

research" at the time this research took place (Murdock and White 1969:330) .

It is necessary to use rigorously defined, comparable units, both for mean-

ing~l statistical sampling and for building theory by use of statistical

techniques (Naroll 1970a). Without precise definition of this kind, it

is difficult to code data accurately. For example, the Andaman Islanders

include a number of geographically separated groupings with somewhat

different social, economic and cultural systems, while the Copper Eskimo

refer to a particular loose grouping within the Eskimo as a whole. The

units are not comparable. Also, it is important to know that all the

behaviors being compared were actually present at the same time among the

same group of people (Murdock and White 1969).

The "pinpointing" of location ' and time for each society has been an

enormous aid in my evaluation and coding of the data, and is a very real

advantage of using the Standard Sample. Unfortunately, problems of

comparability of units do remain. Barnes (1971) argues that the problem

is insoluble. However , a number of the difficulties I encountered could

 49

have been avoided; First, the scale of the unit defined was not con-

sistent, in spite of Murdock and White's (1969) definition. For example,

the Rif are confined to mean "the Riffians as a whole (34' 20' to 35" 30'N,

2'30' to 4"W) in 1926, at the beginning of Coon's field work" (Murdock

and White 1969:357). There are a number of regions within the Rif as a

whole, with relevant differences between them; for example, Some are more

strictly Islamic in practice than others. Regional variat i on should be

considered. On the other hand, the Bushmen focus is restricted to "the

Agau Kung of the Nyae Nyae region (19"50'S, 20'35'E) in 1950 . .... (Murdock
•
and White 1969:354). Here, regional variation is excluded, although it

does exist between Bushmen groups. Where there was evidence that regional

variation was being deliberately symbolized in local communities, I coded

for its presence no matter how reStricted the focus in· time or place .

Second, in one instance their coding was not consistent with the

time specified. The Tiwi are precisely defined as "the Tiwi of Bathurst

and Melville Islands as a whole (II' to 1~45'S, 130' to 13~E) in 1929 .

the date of Hart's field work" (Murdock and White 1969:361). They were

evaluated for the period of Hart's reconstruction of pre-contact social

and economic organization. As the coding was self-consistent, I conformed

to their practice. Therefore, the existence of the mission settlement and

consequent differences of religious affiliation are ignored. One additional

problem of apparent inconsistency in coding has caused difficulties in

the statistical interpretation of my data. The focus for the Khalka Mongols

is restricted to the Narobanchin temple territory in 1920 (Murdock and

White 1969:359). At that time the temple territory was a rural area within

a Mongolian nation state whose capital city was Urga . Quite properly, the
 50

Level of Political Integration is coded at level (4). Level of Social

Stratification was also evaluated to include the social classes present

within the nation as a whole although no nobles lived in the Narobanchin

temple territory. However, Population Density, Fixity of Residence and

Urbanization are all evaluated for the rural area alone. Consequently,

the Khalka appear to have a nation state lacking any degree of urbaniza-

tion. This is clearly misleading.

A further advantage to using the Standard Sample is that it provides

a sampling population that gives a reasonably unbiased representation of

•
the universe of human societies (Rosenblatt et al. 1976). In order to
• make valid generalizations from a sample of human societies to humanity

as a whole, it is necessary to obtain a sample representative of all human

societies. In developing a sample of ~ocieties to be used in cross-cultural

studies of functional relationships, it is consi~ered necessary to draw

the sample from a population which has been previously divided into groups

or strata between which a minimum of mutual influence has existed. If

this is not done, significant correlations may be the result of diffusion,

functional relationships, or both operating together (Babbie 1975; Naroll

1970b; Murdock and White 1969; Murdock 196B; Marsh 1967). It is widely

accepted that ideas and practices diffuse from one society to another

when they are perceived to be useful; the process of borrowing is functionally

related to needs of the socio-cultural system doing the borrowing and is

not somehow purely mechanical (Steward 1949). Barnes (1971) has argued

that ' it is not necessary to structure sampling to avoid the effects of

diffusion. As I predict that differences in socio-economic organization

will lead to different uses of mortuary metaphors, it is useful to include

 51

societies of different socio-economic organization from roughly the same

culture areas in my study. At the same time, it is important that societies

of similar socio-economic organization have a widespread geographic dis-

tribution as one aspect in securing a truly representative sample of the

variation of human societies.

In developing the Standard Sample, Murdock and White (1969) attempted

to minimize diffusion effects and maximize the representativeness of the

sample. Murdock (1968) first divided the world into six major regions :

Sub-Saharan Africa (A), Circum-Mediterranean (C), East Eurasia (E), Insular

Pacific (I), North American (N), and South American (S). These he sub-

divided into distinctive world areas separated on the basis of closeness of

linguistic relationships, close cultural resemblances and close geographical

contiguity. Of these,· two were omitted from the Standard Sample because

pinpointing to a particular date and place proved impossible (Tasmania and

Ancient Egypt). Areas where societies are only sparsely represented are

(1) those largely uninhabited, such as the Sahara Desert; (2) those where

cultures judged to be essentially similar spread over large areas, as in

Australia ~d China; and (3) those whose indigenous cultures largely

disappeared before they were recorded, notably in the eastern sections

of Brazil and the United States. This last lack is a serious one as in

both American continents the sample is certainly biased as a ' result.

However, the distinctive world areas have been carefully separated. The

societies constituting the sampling universe were distinguished by several

of the rigorous methods advanced by Naroll (Murdock and White 1969:331).

(Murdock and White (1969) do not specify which of Naroll's (1970b) five

methods they used.) Although their methods are not as clearlY and
 52

rigorously set out as Naroll and Tatje's (Naroll 1970 a & b; Tatje and

Naroll 1970), it appears to me that Murdock (1968:306) stated correctly:

"it "has now become possible ••. for any researcher to

draw by random means a stratified sample of the world's
known cultures that will satisfy the rigorous require-
ments for the use of probability statistics."

In general, stratified probability sampling is preferable to judgmental

sampling because many biases are ruled out, the sample is more likely to

be a representative one, and the computational methods of probability

theory can be appropriately used. As Naroll (1970b:889) emphasized,

judgmental samples as usually taken in cross-cultural research "may have

large and unmeasurable biases". He advocates, therefore, first limiting

the sampling bias to "a few well-defined restrictions and otherwise to

use probability sampling". This must be followed by measurement and

control for the biases inherent in these restrictions, as h e has done for

the bibliographic bias in his WSC Sample.

Murdock, in spite of the statement quoted above, has preferred to

use judgmental methods of sample selection in choosing the Standard Sample.

"The "selection of the particular society to represent

an area was based in most cases on the adjudged superior-
ity of its ethnographic coverage. Sometimes, however,
the overriding criterion was its distinctiveness in
world perspective as regards either language ••• , economy .•• ,
political organization ••• , or descent .•. too, the choice
was determined by the availability of information in the
Human Relations Area Files .•. " (Murdock and White 1969:332) .

(The Standard Sample does include societies not found in HRAF.)

Systematic error or bias in sampling can be avoided through the use

of probability sampling methods (Babbie 1975; Naroll 1970b). Unfortunately ,

as all societies in the world are not well reported enough to be included

within the survey population, it is difficult to assess biases of the

 53

sampling frame used (Babbie 1975). Essentially, the researcher is trying

to study:

"a small subset of a larger population in which many

members of the subset are easily identified, but
enumeration ' of all would be nearly impossible"
(Babbie 1975:168).

According to Babbie, occasionally very well informed judgmental sampling

may be justified under these conditions. The representativeness of the

sample must be constantly tested, however. Therefore, it is doubly im-

portant in carrying out cross-cultural research to compare results with

those obtained by others using different methods .

In common with all other cross-cultural studies of which I am aware ,

this sample is explicitly "representative of the world's known and well

described cultures" (Murdock and White, 1969 :352). The inevitability

and implications of bibliographic bias are discussed in detail by Naroll

(1970b). When he carried out a painstaking analysis of his War, Stress

and Culture Sample, which was selected through rigorous, stratified,

random sampling methods, he found that more has been written about societies

with settlement patterns consisting ,of large settlements, societies with

less frequent warfare, societies with more evidence of aggression such

as witchcraft and wife-beating, and societies experiencing either terri-

torial expansion or other change . However, he also found that many traits

were very little biased. Twenty-six out of 141 traits had "a probability

of at least 0.95 that universe correlation with bibliographic coverage

has an absolute value of less than 0.4" (Naroll 1970b:916 ) . If biblio-

graphic bias affected all trai ts in the sample, this would be expected

to occur fewer than one in a million times. Included among these traits

is, comfortingly enough, "public expression of grief is customary at funerals".

 54

Many of the problems described above would not have been encountered

if I had chosen to use Naroll's War, Stress and Culture (WSC) sample of

58 societies (Tatje and Naroll 1970). Unfortunately, Naroll's WSC sample

is unsuitable for my purposes. My initial intention was to replicate and

improve upon Binford's (1971) study. To do so required comparison of

variation in mortuary practices among different subsistence economies. In

studying the way differences in social, economic and demographic conditions

may affect use of location of disposition to express the social affilia-

tion of the deceased, it is important to determine whether significant

differences in use of this mortuary metaphor occur among different sub-

sistence economies. The WSC sample, being small and representative of

all human societies, contains too few hunting and gathering and pastoralist

societies to permit their meaningful comparison with other . subsistence

groups. The Standard Sample of 186 societies is large enough to permit

disproportionate sub-sampling; the authors working with the CCCCC have

published information about the Standard Sample in a form intended to

facilitate sub-sampling. In addition, although Tatje and Naroll (1970)

have published excellent measures of political-administrative differ-

entiation and craft specialization, measures of social stratification

and fixity of residence for the societies of the WSC sample were not

available. The ordinal scales developed by Murdock and Provost (1973)

have facilitated appropriate statistical analyses. Therefore, in spite

of the problems I encountered, I have found the Standard Sample to con-

stitute a useful tool.

 55

It was necessary to restrict my sample to about sixty societies

because the labor of coding a larger sample would have taken too long

for one person working alone. The time allowed for this project was

pushed to the limit by this sample size. At the same time, analysis in

some depth is still possible when working with a sample of sixty, and the

sample is large enough to permit useful statistical analysis. Samples of

roughly this size are a reasonable compromise between limitations of time,

finances and library resources and the need for the statistical power of

a large sample; the WSC sample is 58 societies (Tatje and Naroll 1970),

while Rosenblatt et al. 's (1976) sample is 78 societies. However, a pro-

portional, random sample of about sixty societies would not contain enough

hunting and gathering, fishing or pastoralist societies to allow meaning-

ful statistical comparison among these subsistence economies.

Because the purpose of this study is to compare sub-groups of human

societies, disproportionate stratified sampling is appropriate (Blalock

1972). As organizations or institutions become larger and more complex,

the variability between them usually increases (Sudman 1976). The

variability between whole societies can be assumed to be large. We cannot

assume that the different subsistence groups will have the same variability

in use of location of disposition as a symbol of social affiliation. In

this situation, it is preferable in carrying out statistical analyses to

have strata of equal sizes. Therefore, I chose a sample of equal sized

strata.

In the pilot project I followed Binford (1971) by including only

non-state societies, but consequently a number of interesting questions

could not be answered. In the full project, I included societies at all

 S6

levels of political integration. The data ' from the pilot project also in-

dicated a strong correlation between numbers of dimensions distinguished

in the death situation and increasing technological specialization, but

the distribution of cases at the different levels was very uneven.

For the full project, I chose a sample of sixty societies consisting

of five equal si~ed strata, stratified according to subsistence, geo-

graphical distribution and level of technological specialization. My

sampling population consisted of all 186 societies of the Standard Cross-

Cultural Sample (Murdock and Provost 1973).

Current methods of cross-cultural sampling, based on the need to

achieve a world-wide distribution and avoid influences due to diffusion,

require stratification according to major geographical areas (Naroll1970).

Stratification according to Murdock's (1968) six major world regions was

sufficient to satisfy this requirement.

I defined five types of subsistence economy which formed equal .s ized

strata of twelve societies each: settled agriculture, Shifting agri-

culture, fishing, pastoralist and hunting and gathering. Murdock and

Morrow (1970) published a detailed tabulation of subsistence practices

for the societies of the Standard Sample. I used their coding and Murdock

and Provost's (1973) scales for Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture and

Fixity of Residence to sort all 186 societies into these subsistence groups.

Agricultural societies were defined as those in which agriculture con-

tributes more to the food supply than does any other subsistence activity,

but mayor may not be conducted by intensive techniques (Degree of Dependence

upon Agriculture, rankings #3 and #4; see Appendix I). The settled agri-

culturali sts includ~ all agricultural societies with a Fixity of Residence

 57

of rank tf4 ("settlements are sedentary and relatively permanent") . The

shifting agriculturalists include all agricultural societies with lower

fixity of residence (see Appendix I).

I chose to treat fishing as a separate subsistence economy originally

because I felt it would combine greater degrees of sedentism with little

or no agriculture. There is important precedent for studying fishing

economies as a generic group (Firth 1966; Murdock and Wilson 1972 ; Breton

1973). When choosing my sample, fishing societies did form a natural sub-

sistence grouping defined as all those societies in which fishing con-

tributes more to the food supply than all other subsistence techniques

combined. It was also necessary to include those societies in which

hunting and gathering together contributed less than half of the food

supply , agriculture and animal husbandry were low contributors, and

fishing contributed less than half but more to the food supply than any

other economic endeavor (Murdock and Morrow 1970).

Pastoralist societies included all those in which animal husbandry

contributed more to the food supply than any other subsistence technique

(Murdock and Morrow 1970). 1 also placed the Hottentots in this category;

they seem to be unique in depending equally upon animal husbandry, hunting

and gathering . Hunting and gathering societies were defined as those in

which the hunting and gathering to gether contributed more to the food supply

than any other subsistence activity. Agriculture and animal husbandry

could each contribute only less than 10% of the total food supply . Fishing

could not contribute more than the other techniques combined (Murdock and

Morrow 1970).
 58

Within the Standard Sample, 95 societies (51%) practice settled agri-

culture, 28 societies (15%) practice shifting agriculture, 19 societies

(10%) are primarily fishermen, 17 societies (9%) are pastora1ists and 27

(15%) are hunter-gatherers.

The levels of Degree of Technological Specialization are fully defined

in Appendix I. The sampling population was not large enough to permit

stratification by subsistence, geographical distribution and all five

levels of technological specialization. My primary objective was to

achieve equal sized strata of the five subsistence groups. Therefore,

I dichotomized level of Technological Specialization, classing all those

societies lacking metalworking together (levels # 0, 1, and 2) and those

practicing -metalworking together (levels II 3 and 4).

It is impossible to take a true random sample whEm using this complex

a stratification design with a sampling population of this size. I set

up a matrix ¥ith geographical region defining the rowS and Subsistence

Economy sub-divided by level of Technological Specialization defining the

columns. Each society was placed in the appropriate square.. The dis-

tribution of societies was very uneven. For example, there are no

Pastoralists in the Standard Sample from the Insular Pacific or North

America, no Fishing societies from Africa or the Circum-Mediterranean

region, and no Hunting-gathering society from the Circum-Mediterranean

area. Where only one society appeared in a square, it was necessary to

select that society. The number of societies selected from the other

squares had to be carefully adjusted. If there were four or fewer societies

within one square, straws were drawn to determine which would be selected.

Otherwise a random number table was used. The straws and numbers were
 59

selected by uninvolved associates. A true weighting of this sa~ple is

complex, and was not considered necessary for the problems being considered.

In retrospect, the balance of the sample would have been improved if

• I had increased the sample size to 72 by adding an additional stratum. All

societies rated at the most complex level of Technological Speci alization

(level 4) are also settled agriculturalists. Creating an additional stratum

defined as settled agricultural societies possessing complex technology

including pottery, loom weaving and metalworking would have been useful .

The sample was further constrained by the necessity that the literature
• for all 60 societies contain a minimal amount of information about mortuary

practices. In two societies selected for my sample, the Bogo and Botocudo,

this requirement was no~ fulfilled. I was completely unable to obtain in-

formation about two other societies, the Atayal and Tobelorese . In three .

of these cases, I randomly selected a replacement society from the same

square as the first. There were no additional shifting agriculturalists

from the Insular Pacific in the Standard Sample; to replace the Atayal, I

randomly chose another society from the square with the largest number of

shifting agriculturalists, obtaining by this method the Tupinamba. I did

not make substitutions unless it was absolutely necessary. If information

was missing in one or several areas of interest, this was recorded as in-

adequate information. Rosenblatt et al. (1970) also selected other societies

when information on the first selected society was inadequate. I concur

with their conclusion that if bias exists, it would be against those people

whose mortuary practices are very simple and so have not been fully de-

scribed, or against peoples who hide their mortuary beha~ior from outside

observers.
 60

The resulting sixty society Mortuary Sample is included in Appendix

II, the Data Array, where the lang~age family, precise location in both

space and time, and the maj or proselytizing religion, if any, are also

listed. Each subsistence grouping contains 12 societies. There are 9

societies from Sub-Saharan Africa, 9 societies from the Circ~Mediterranean,

11 societies from East Eurasia, 9 societies from the Insular Pacific, 11

societies from North America, and 11 societies from South America. There

are 36 societies from Technological Specialization levels 0 - 2, and 24

societies from levels 3 and 4. The maps in Appendix III show the geo-

graphical location of each society in the Mortuary Sample.

 61

CHAPTER THREE. HYPOTHESES

Utility of a Cybernetie Model of Soeiety

Mortuary praetiees are by and large well established, patterned

proeedures worked out over time to be, at least under normal eireumstanees,

effieacious in dealing with the physieal, social and psyeho10giea1 problems

ereated by a death. Sueh praetiees ean be eoneeived to be the result of

a eomplex interaetion of beliefs, soeia1 organization and teehno-eeonomie

faetors. The loeation of disposition ean usefully be thought of as an

element within an open, eybernetie system in whieh eu1tural, soeial,

eeonomie, and teehno10giea1 systems and demographie and defenee faetors

are all interaeting upon eaeh other (Yinger 1970). Use of a eybernetie

model allows the researeher to analyze a strueture whieh makes observed

behavior theoretieally intelligible without losing emphasis on the dynamie

nature of human soeieties. Cybernetic analysis should also draw the

attention of the researeher toward all the different elements of the

interaeting system.

Beliefs and praetiees relating to the dead may possibly affeet as

well as be eaused by other elements of the ongoing, open, eybernetic

system. Perry (1972), for example, postulates that the Western Apaehe's

extreme fear of the dead effeetive1y prevents formation of lineages by

eliminating all aneestors. The aet of plaeing all the dead relatives

of one's family or elan together may inerease an individual' s sense of

the traditions of unity and solidarity of that group, thereby helping to

perpetuate the group's traditions. However, I know of no ease in whieh

the elan, family or other unit of social affiliation exists primarily as

a eonsequenee of where the dead are p1aeed. For the purposes of this study ,
 62

the use of location of the disposition of the remains to express the

social affiliation of the deceased can be safely considered to be a

wholly dependent variable.

Whether generations of dead are buried in the house within which

the family continues to dwell, are placed together with others of the

same sib, village, social class or religion, or are left exposed and

alone on a hillside gives concrete expression to ideas and emotions held

by the people involved. Depending upon the time, place and individuals

concerned, the symbol may be pondered on or may be taken for granted as

• the right or proper way. But what has been considered to be appropriate,

meaningful or even necessary has varied through time as well as geo-

graphically.

Using a model of society which is open and cybernetic, it is reason~

able to suppose that changes in any part of the system might well affect

the use or non-use of location of disposition of the dead as a symbol.

However, some elements of .the system may have more direct influence on

the location of disposition of the dead than others. Marvin Harris (1968),

for example, derives most religious practice ultimately from ecological

conditions. Mary Douglas (1973) finds variation in types of symbolic

expression and comprehension largely dependent upon variation in social

structure. Others, who do not use (or actively reject) a cybernetic model

of socio-cultural behavior see religion as independent of socio-economic

organizations or at best useful in functional models only as an independent

variable (Penner 1971). Kroeber (1927) believed he had demonstrated the

essential independence oa forms of disposition from economic and social

organization, that they were idiosyncratic and easily subject to change.

 63

Binford (1971) seems to have found a fruitful way around the problems

Kroeber pointed out by shifting attention from the form of disposition to

distinctions among the basic components of the social personality of the

deceased being symbolized by the form. Concentration exclusively on the

problem of how variations in Some parts of mental systems influence

variations in their expression leaves open the question of whether or

how the cultural system is affected by other elements of the whole on-

going interactive structure. For example, it is reasonable to predict

that people practicing ancestor worship will be likely to locate the

disposition of the dead on the basis of kin-based units of social affilia-

tion. Once this hypothesis was tested, it would remain to determine what

socio-economic constraints are operating on such systems. It seems to me

that if the nature of socio-economic influences or constraints are uttder-

stood for a range of important variations or types of symbolic practices

(such as the non-use or different kinds of use of social affiliation to

place the dead) then a more profound analysis of each type of cultural

system should be possible.

Specification of Hypotheses

It is possible to propose single cause or more complex hypotheses to

explain variation in use of .location of disposition as a metaphor of social

affiliation. Examination of several contrasting examples reveals a number

of social and economic factors which may be involved; The mortuary

practices of several societies were described in Chapter I in order to

illustrate the complex variation which exists in the use, and non-use,

of the social affiliation of the deceased to define the location of the

 64

disposition of the remains. Among these examples, the settled agri-

cultural Merina and the shifting agricultural Iban use location of dis-

position of the dead to symbolize the unity of the social group . The

horse-herding Apache hunters do not do so. The hunt i ng and gathering

Mbuti Pygmies do not seem to attach much importance to the location of

the disposition of the dead, although membership in the nuclear family

or ties , with settled villages may be weakly expressed. In these societies,

differences in subsistence economy entail differences in population den!!.ity,

in degree of fixity of residence, in complexity of political integration

and social stratification and in the stability of the local social group.

It is possible that either the nomadic , or sedentary pattern of life or the

density of population a10n'e exerts a critical influence on the use of loca-

tion of disposition as a mortuary metaphor. When people are highly mobile,

or live widely spaced from each other, considerable e ffort may be required

to place the remains of the deceased of one's group together in one loca-

tion. However, where mobility is great social affiliation can be symbolized

through placement of the remains in other ways; for example, it is possible

to carry relics of the deceased with the group, or to bury the dead in a

specified location in the life space of the temporary camp site. People

Who live in small, thinly scattered homesteads could theoretically bury

the dead in the floors of their homes. Intuitively, explanations based

on simple practicality seem insufficient.

According to Douglas (1973), the dimensions of social l ife govern

the fundamental attitudes to spirit and matter which underlie use of '

natural symbol s. Social constraints and socially shared forms of ex-

pression exist in all societies. Douglas (1973) suggests that as the

 65

degree of constraint varies, the kinds of symbolic expression people feel

are appropriate will change predictably. Where social constraints are

less and the need for independent individual action is greater, interest

in ritual expression will be less than where social constraints are high

and means of expression are constrained.

Lienhardt (1962) has made an interesting study of the contrasting

attitudes held by settled and nomadic peoples. His comparison of three

related groups of people, the Anuak on the one hand, on the other the

Dinka and Nuer, spells out the implications of these different forms of

life very clearly. The Anuak live in sedentary, self-sufficient agri-

cultural villages. These villages are crowded; the Anuak live in constant

and intense contact with other people and have a strong interest in psycho-

logy and personalities. The Dinka and Nuer are transhumant pastoralists

whose local communities regularly disperse and regroup. They are alone

much more often than the Anuak and are more interested in their cattle

than in other people. The Anuak are very involved in village politics

and engage in intrigue to gain favor from those of higher social rank

or to push their sectional interests. Neither the Dinka or Nuer have

systems of ranking or the accompanying institutionalized intrigue. Im-

portant religious ritual is carried out in the Dinka and Nuer sacrificial

cults; their "ideas of moral causation are God-oriented" (Lienhardt

1962:85). In contrast, the Anuak have little religious ritual but carry

out elaborate ceremonies for headmen and nobles. That Anuak ideas of

moral causation are man-oriented is clearly seen in their concern with

the moral force of the words and intentions of the dying. These exert

a force which can act either as a blessing or a curse for many years.
 66

The Anuak are interested in the importance of the dead and dying and do

not avoid the subject. In strong contrast, the Dinka will not talk about

death, and "crouch with their backs to the grave and push in the earth

without glancing behind" (Lienhardt 1962:75). Douglas (1973:92) observes

that ideas of moral causation are not man-oriented for groups like the

Dinka and Nuer because their social relations are "infrequent, interrupted

and irregular". Instead of feeling dominated by other men, individuals

feel dominated by non-human forces responsible for such important concerns

as the quality of pasturage, t he weather, or movements of game. Due to

differing ecological conditions, the Dinka social and political system is

more fluid and mobile than the Nuer social system of formal ' segmentary

lineages, in spite of the Dinka's higher density of population (Douglas

1973). The Dinka, whose social system places the least constraint on
•
the individual, show the strongest rejection of death. The Nuer, under

stronger social constraints, have a god-oriented acceptance of death.

The Anuak, who have the strongest social constraints and are most in-

terested in social groups, are most concerned with the importance of

the dead and dying.

The Apache rejection and fear of the dead are consistent with

Douglas' (1973) scheme. Their environment and mode of subsistence require

fluid social groups and individual self-reliance. They need to have

different attitudes toward their social groups than are appropriate for

settled agriculturalists (Perry 1972). The Iban also constitute an , in-

teresting example. The opportunity exists for individual Iban to join

with others to form pioneering ·communities (Freeman 1955 a and b). Their

long-house communities are sedentary but impermanent and movement between

 67

communities is common. However, the individual families depend upon the

other members of their stem family and the long-house community for

cooperation in clearing the land, gardening, and in ritual and jural

activities. The Iban can be assumed to occupy an intermediate position

relative to degree of social constraint with a strong system of shared

classifications (Douglas 1973). They fear the dead, but honor them;

all members of the basic cooperative ritual and jural unit are placed

together in death.

There is good reason, then, to expect that demographic, economic

and social conditions do affect where people decide it is appropriate

and meaningful to place their dead. These factors may affect the people's

perception of their social group altering as well their conceptions of

death, as Lienhardt (1962) suggests." This in turn may influence the ,Mays

in which the group is symbolized in mortuary practices, including whether

or not the location of disposition should depend on membership in certain

social groups.

In addition, it 'is possible that physical location is a more meaning-

ful symbol to people tied closely to particular locations on the land,

either through the practice of agriculture or through dependence on a

geographically fixed resource such as acorn groves or seasonal runs of

spawning fish. Unfortunately, it is difficult to test this possibility

directly using the present ethnographic literature. ,It seems clear that

all groups of people do have strong feelings of being closely related to

a territory, although concepts and definitions of ownership vary widely.

Information about the subtle differences in these attitudes is poor. In

general, differing subsistence methods do necessitate differing attitudes

 68

toward land and land use. Pastoralists and hunter-gatherers must know

their land intimately, but inheritance of land by individuals does not

occur in most such societies, while it must be carefully defined by

people practicing sedentary agriculture. However, with the information

available to me, it is difficult to make more subtle comparisons within

a subsistence group. For example, I can not at this time examine the

differences between the Goajiro and Rwala or Ingalik and Barama Carib

attitudes toward land in enough detail to be useful. Furthermore, in

the societies I have studied, reasons why a particular place was chosen

as a site for disposition of the remains are often not given. It is not

specified if the location was chosen for convenience, for its connection

with mythology, for its beauty, or because it stands in a special symbolic

relationship to other important living spaces.· For example, when we know

that people are buried within their own dwelling places, the attitudes and

feelings of the participants toward this location are not given. Despite

these problems in analyzing the causal relationships between economic,

demographic and social factors and the location of disposition, it is

important to keep in mind that attitudes may vary both towards the social

groups involved and toward location as a possible symbol.

Given the difficulties in determining and comparing attitudes toward

both social groups and land in these sixty societies, it is necessary to

begin by determining whether or not presence or absence of placing the

dead according to social affiliation of the deceased is correlated

statistically with relevant demographic, economic and social variables.

If no or a low correlation is obtained then it can be safely concluded

that the apparent relationships depend upon chance or are not generalizable.
 69

Seven demographic, economic and social factors seem to me to be possible

influences upon the way social affiliation may be used to define place-

ment of the remains of the dead.

Fixity of Residence (Appendix I, Variable 3, th~ extent to which a

people's mode of life is nomadic or sedentary) is commonly believed to

have an important influence on placement of the dead. When purely

physical problems are considered it seems apparent that social groups

which stay in one 'place will need, after a number of years, to regulate

placement of the dead, especially if there is any belief that the affairs

of the living and the dead should be kept apart. Fully nomadic groups,

on the other hand, would have to go to significant effort to place their

dead together. Death of members of the same group may occur many miles

apart or in isolated places. There are often economic pressures upon

highly nomadic people which keep the composition of the most local groups

unstable rather than permanent. If the physical problems are most im-

portant we should expect to obtain a very high correlation between fixity

of residence and use or non-use of social affiliation to define placement

of the dead. If the stability of the local group or of some higher level

of organization such as the clan is a more important determining factor

than degree of nomadism itself, we should expect a somewhat lower correla-

tion. The deviant cases might include societies with home ranges (R.

Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978) requiring relatively . stable routes of migra-

tion as well as highly mobile yet more stable local groups, and those

societies where higher levels of social organization have a determining

influence on placement of the dead.

 70

Density of Population (Appendix I, Variable 5) may be an important

•
factor. Possibly the local groups in a very thinly scattered population

would see little need to define placement of the dead by units of social

affiliation other than the domestic unit. If this is true, relatively

sedentary people would either not use social affiliation to place the

dead or would use only the family or domestic residence unit. If the

population is quite dense, mo re different kinds of units of social affilia-

tion are likely to exist, and, as Lienhardt (1962) has suggested, people

themselves are much more likely to be thinking in terms of these social

units. It is possible that the average size of the population of local

communities (Degree of Urbanization, Variable 4) might be more important

in this respect than the overall density of population. This would seem

to be true if societies with overall low density of population clustered

in moderately sized local communities used social affiliation, such as

membership in the community itself, to define placement of the dead. In

this case, we would expect to have a somewhat higher correlation between

average size of the population of local communities and use or non-use of

social affiliation to place the dead than between overall density

of population and use or non-use of social affiliation to locate disposition

of the dead. In any event, it would 'be interesting to know whether there

is a critical size above which the local community itself may be used to

define placement of the dead.

Murdock and Provost (1973) created only two scales concerned with

different aspects of social organization, Social Stratification (Variable

6) and Level of Political Integration (Variable 7). Binford's (1971) major

contention was that as social complexity increases the numb'e r and kinds of
 71

status positions in the social organization also increase. Individuals

• of different rank and of different social position will often be dis-

tinguished from each other in death as they were in life. Following

this argument, we would expect to find a strong correlation between

degree of social stratification and use of social affiliation to place

the dead. Strongly articulated egalitarian principles might be expressed

by placing all the dead in the same way, while importance attached to

ordering people into different ranks could well lead to differential

placement of the dead. Relatively highly stratified but also highly

nomadic societies do exist. In these cases, I predicted that the differ-

ence in ranking will lead to differences in placing the dead in spite of

the effect of the low fixity of residence.

As the number of recognizable jurisdictional levels, that is, the

level of political integration, increases over the local level, some kind

of bureaucratic organization must be created to administer the government.

More administrative roles must be distinguished from each other as political

organization becomes increasingly complex. Differential location of dis-

position on the basis of social position should be strongly and positively

related to level of political integration. At the same time, the social

units with which the members of the society can be affiliated increase.

Their concern with the importance of units of social affiliation may

well also increase at the same time. Therefore, we should expect a strong

correlation between level of political integration and use of social

affiliation to define location of disposition of, the dead. However, ' the

strength of this association may be weaker as a result of at least two

other factors. First, egalitarian beliefs operating in a system of open

 72

stratification may suppress distinction of ascribed differences in societies

with relatively high levels of political integration. Second, at the

lower levels of political integration the autonomous local community

may exist with many different forms of political organization including

band, dispersed hamlet and concentrated village organization. Some kinds

of band organization are informally administered; they are essentially

less complex organizations than autonomous village organizations. Within

this classification, membership in a village is far more likely to be

distinguished by location of disposition of the dead than is·-band member-

ship.

Social affiliation is more likely to be distinguished in the location

of disposition as occupational specialization is increasingly complex.

This dimension is most closely approached in Level of Technological

Specialization (Variable 9) "designed to measure the degree of complexity

and specialization in technological crafts" (Murdock and Provost 1973:381) .

Because of the lack of discrimination between types of political organiza-

tion at the level of the autonomous local community, occupational special-

ization should prove overall a better predictor on this question than

level of political organization. Unfortunately, there are serious problems

with Murdock and Provost's formulation of Variaple 9, which I will discuss

in detail below.

Binford used forms of subsistence production as a very crude index

of societal complexity. His data reveal that both ~hifting and settled

agriculturalists were more ·likely than hunter-gatherers to distinguish

social affiliation of the deceased in a variety of ways in their burial

practices: 4 out of 15 hunting and gathering societies, 3 out of 8

 73

shifting agricultural societies and 10 out of 14 settled agricultural

societies do so (see Table 1). He found, as discussed above, that the

social affiliation of the deceased was most likely to be symbolized by

the location of the grave. He did not carry this aspect of his in-

vestigation any further. I have used more inclusive criteria in my

coding than Binford, the reasons for which I will discuss presently.

In my sample, 7 out of 12 hunting and gathering societies (58%) dis-

tinguished social affiliation in some manner while 23 of the 24 shifting

and settled agriculturalists (96%) did so. Among the agriculturalists

in Binford's sample, 59% made some distinction on the basis of social

affiliation while only 26% of the hunting and gathering societies did

so. His data show a difference of 33% between the two groups, while I

obtained a corresponding difference of 38%. We found, therefore,

essentially the same magnitude of difference. It is reasonable to

predict that this difference will be maintained when the aspect of the

location of disposition is considered alone.

This result can be expected simply because hunting and gathering

peoples include those societies ranking lowest on all the variables

discussed above from Fixity of Residence to Level of Technological

Specialization, while the reverse is true for the sedentary agricultural

societies. At first glance inclusion of subsistence as a separate

variable seems useful simply as a double check on our assumptions and

to facilitate comparison with Binford's work. However, each subsistence

group, given a range of variation within each group, represents a different

constellation or pattern of combination of the variables under considera-

tion. It is likely these forces are consequently interacting in different

 74

ways to produce different kinds of attitudes toward social groups at the

most local or at a wider level. If the kind of social groups and the

attitudes toward them a~e indeed more important in determining practices

of placing the dead than the influence of anyone of the above variables,

such as Fixity of Residence or Social Stratification, acting alone, then

inclusion of the subsistence groups as a separate variable may help us

to get at the effect of these variables about which the literature is

often inadequate.

The subsistence groups are fully defined in the chapter on my

sampling procedures. The difference in the constellation of variables

within the five subsistence groups can be seen in Table 3, which gives

the frequencies of Murdock and Provost's (1973) rankings. on a scale of

o to 4 for each of the variables discussed above.

Agriculture requires a relatively stable, cooperative household

group to carry out the ca1endrica11y scheduled necessary tasks. The

practice of agriculture produces predictable, territorially defined, and

relatively bountiful food supplies. Consequently, it will require the

defence of its harvests both through physical and social means. Terri-

toria1 behavior is highly appropriate (R. Dyson-Hudson and Smith 197B) .

Sedentary agriculture especially engenders exclusive attitudes toward

the land. In the agricultural societies in my sample, including the

Korean and Incan, the domestic household unit must satisfy most of the

subsistence needs of that group (Shanin 1966; Wolf 1966).

Even where land is plentiful the production of a

surplus over subsistence needs is limited by the
amount of work that can be performed by the hands
of the cultivator and his dependents. Cultivators,
indeed, commonly see themselves in competition for
a common and limited pool of resources; so that one
 75

Table 3

Frequencies of Social, Demographic and Economic

Variables Within Each Subsistence Stratum
(Data is from Murdock and Provost 1973)

Fixity of Residence (Variable 3)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 4.00 4-4 0 4
Shifting Agriculture 2.50 2-3 1 2 &3
Fishing 1. 75 0-4 4 1
Pastoralist .25 0-2 2 0
Hunt ing and Gathering .67 0-2 2 0

Average Community Size (Variable 4)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 2.35 0-4 4 1
Shifting Agriculture 1. 33 0-3 3 1
fishing . 75 0-4 4 0
Pastoralist .67 0-3 3 0
Hunting and Gathering .50 0-2 2 0

Populat ion Densit y (Variable 5)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 3 . 00 1-4 3 4
Shifting Agriculture 1.42 0-4 4 0
Fishing 1.17 0-4 4 0
Pastoralist .83 0-3 3 0&1
Hunting and Gathering .17 0-1 1 0
 76

Table 3 (continued)

Frequencies of Social, Demographic and Economic

Variables Within Each Subsistence Stratum
(Data is from Murdock and Provost 1973)

Social Stratification (Variable 6)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 2.00 0-4 4 1
Shifting Agriculture 1.17 0-3 3 1 &0
Fishing .67 0-2 2 1
Pastoralist 1.08 0-3 3 1
Hunting and Gathering .08 0-1 1 0

Political Integration (Variable 7)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 2.40 1-4 3 2
Shifting Agriculture 2.08 0-4 4 1
Fishing 1.17 0-3 3 1
Pastoralist 2.08 1-4 3 . 2·
Hunting and Gathering .75 0-1 1 1

Degree of Dependence Upon Agriculture (Variable 8)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 3.58 3-4 1 4
Shifting Agriculture 3.33 3-4 1 3
Fishing .58 0-2 2 0
Pastoralist .83 0-2 2 1
Hunting and Gathering .17 0-1 1 0

Level of Technological Specialization (Variable 9)

Average Rank Minimum to Maximum Range Mode

Settled Agriculture 3.00 2-4 2 2 &4
Shifting Agriculture 2.00 0-3 3 3
Fishing 1.25 0-3 3 o &1
Pastoralis t 2.08 0-3 3 3
Hunting and Gathering . 75 0-3 3 0
 77

man's gain inevitably involves another man's loss

A man is in 'competition with his own kinsmen for
position and property' in what is, or is at least
perceived to be, a 'limited' economic system
(Baxter 1972:172).

However, each family must also depend upon a network of kin, or in some

cases their neighbors, for mutual aid of all kinds. Extra need for labor ,

for example, can be predicted at certain seasons . The Mapuche mingaco

system exemplifies one type of cooperative system of labor exchange. On

the appropriate occasions the patrilineal kin group or the entire reserva-

tion (a unit defined by residence and kinship) form labor gangs. These

work groups give each family unit involved needed help at periods when

extra hands are necessary in the fields , in housebuilding or in making re-

pairs on reservation roads or canals (Faron 1968). In addition, an im-

portant need for unity of a larger group may be created by the need for

defence of themselves, their lands and their gardens against the incursions

of rival groups. The agricultural village, whatever kind of settlement

pattern it may have, often forms a level of nearly total social self-

sufficiency. It is a small, close community. "The village is the peasant's

world" (Shanin 1966).

It seems reasonable to suppose that the need of the larger group to

maintain unity in the face of competitive · pressures within the group would

require occasions for reaffirmation of the group's solidarity. Death

alters the relationship between group members and requires readjustment

both socially and psychologically. It also may create situations in which

competition over inheritance becomes intense and overt. Therefore, it

would seem to require strong, obvious symbols reaffirming group solidarity .

Placing the remains of deceased members together is one such symbol. At

 78

the local level, the most predictable units of social affiliation would

seem to be the domestic family unit, the extended kin group and the

village. The agricultural villages may be part of a larger, more complex

society in which part of the peasant's production is contributed to those

who carry out administrative, protective and religious functions. In

this event, units of social stratification or religious affiliation may

also be distinguished in placing the dead.

The shifting agriculturalists are by definition less sedentary and

can be expected on the whole to be at lower levels of political integra-

tion with somewhat less complex status structures, as can be seen in

Table 3. Population density and community size are also smaller.

Competition for land is not so intense. Economic resources may be· more

diversified but the major economic resource is 'spatially clearly defined.

Intermittent raiding or feuding between rival, but in many ways similar,

groups may be intense. The local group must be stable enough throughout

the year to permit a predictable ability to follow through with the labor

needs of the gardens.

If one or two of the socio-economic variables are overwhelmingly im-

portant in determining where the dead are placed, we would expect fewer

shifting agriculturalists to use units of social affiliation for this

purpose. However, if the cohesiveness of the local social group is an

important factor we would expect little difference between the settled

and shifting agriculturalists.

The effect of agriculture, isolated from other subsistence practices,

can be shown by the using of Variable 8, Degree of Dependence Upon Agri-

culture. Increasing dependence upon agriculture is directly related to

 79

increasing sedentism, increasing density of population, increasing

technological complexity, and increasing social and p~litical complexity.

It also requires a fairly stable social group and probably engenders

sttitudes toward land conducive to the use of location upon the land

as a symbol at death. Increasing dependence upon agriculture can be

expected, therefore, to have a strong positive correlation with the use

of social affiliation to define the location of disposition of the de-

ceased. However, as I will show shortly, it can be predicted that use

of social affiliation to place the dead will also be extremely likely in

certain societies in which agriculture is not practiced at all. There-

fore, many more exceptions should be expected at the lower levels of

Degree of Dependence Upon Agriculture than at the higher ones •

. Most hunting and gathering societies depend on quite diversified

economic resources. The technological level is low, with a mode of 0

and an sverage rank of .75 in Table 3. These economies, when compared

with agricultural societies, require a quite different form of social

structure and general relationship of individuals to locality. Many con-

temporary hunting and gathering people live in areas where resource pre-

dictability is low and the abundance of the resources varies seasonally.

Therefore the economic defendability of these resources is low - not worth

the effort which would be involved. Either information sharing or a high

degree of dispersion are called for CR. Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978). An

exclusive attitude toward the land is not appropriate. Nonetheless, the

!Kung and the different Australian peoples have very strong emotional

attachments, each group for its own land (Lee 1976; Hiatt 1965; Meggitt

1962). In Australia a person may individually hold ritual rights and

 80

responsibilities in the land. At the same time, the economic use of

that land is open to a wide group of people, subject of course to their

following the proper, more or less informal preliminary procedures. A

person's ritual or social right to belong to a particular region is not

dependent upon being grouped with others upon the land, either in life

or death.

Lee (1976:76) concludes that the prevailing form among contemporary

hunter-gatherers seems to be "a relatively open social group with over-

lapping shared territories" characterized by a flexible land use pattern .

This is consistent with Dyson-Hudson and Smith's (1978) predictions where

resources are dispersed and unpredictable. Adjustment to conditions of

scarcity or abundance, often seasonal, requires people to come together

at one time and disperse widely at another. In the face of environmental

disaster in one area, reciprocal access to resourc.e s in another, more

fortunate area, is vita~ to survival. Under these circumstances, it is

important for individuals or nuclear families to be able to visit or

claim the right to live with different bilaterial and affinal kin at

different times. Yellen (1976) illustrates the fluid composition of a

local group of !Kung between 1964 and 1969. Lee (1976) sees this flex-

ibility of the local groups as highly adaptive for the San, Eskimo, the

different Australian peoples, the sub-Arctic and Great Basin Indians and

the Pygmies. Peterson (1978:344) discusses "tandem specialization"

(symbiotic economic system) characteristic of the Palanan and Agta of

the Phillipines and the Mbuti and Bira of the Ituri Forest. She demon-

strates that the seemingly unpredictable, flexible behavior of the hunting -

gathering Agta, which is similar to that of the Mbuti, is a critical and

 81

necessary part of the economic system. Here also flux is " an adaptive

response to the ever-changing environment".

For hunter - gatherer societies where resource predictability is low,

the wider s.ocial group remains highly important. However, the dispersion

of people for much of the year and the high fluidity of the most local

groups invests the wider social network with a different meaning. Although

often named, it is not as carefully defined or clearly bounded an entity

as the agricultural village. Moreover, it will vary somewhat in composition

from ego to ego in contrast to the more closely defined clans and lineages

of many landholding peoples.

Death of an adult in these circumstances will not directly affect

the responsibilities and daily activities of. a very large number of people.

Typically, there are few economic assets to quarrel over. Material pos-

sessions needed are few and can usually be made by each adult. Often

intangible assets such as the right to ritual or use of spiritual power

are transferred before death. Conflict can be solved in any case by simply

moving away and living apart.

These people are likely to be moving frequently and to be widely dis-

persed. Their status structure is very simple; leadership is achieved and

dispersed. Occupations are divided largely according to sex. Jurisdictional

levels are absent above either the family or the band. The local group is

small and, except for those happily married, people are not very likely

to be living continuously with each other over an extended period of time.

The wider group suffers a real loss at the death of one of its members,

but its unity is not based upon bringing together all its members i~to

one plac e . The single domestic residence unit or the immediate relatives
 82

would seem to be the only membership units for which the location of

disposition would carry any real meaning.

Clearly, in the typical cases, the economic and social variables

I have considered are predicted to all act in the same direction. Hunting

and gathering societies for which economic resources are dispersed and

unpredictable will not be likely to use location of disposition as a means

of differentiating between people or grouping them together, and location

of disposition on the basis of social affiliation is likely to be absent .

Of course, examination of those cases which are not typical of this

pattern should prove quite instructive, especially if their practices of

placing the dead do not conform to this prediction. Members of groups

like the Mbuti, living in tandem specialization with settled communities,

have institutionalized ties with members of these communities. The . nature

of these ties may vary from intermarriage, or religious ties to con-

tractual, or patron-client relationships. It is possible to predict that,

unless these ties are very weak, members of the nomadic community who die

at the settled community are likely to be placed with the dead of that

community. This is especially likely if location of death is an important

determinant of location of disposition for members of the nomadic society

in any case.

It can be predicted in advance that those societies with a hunting

and gathering economy whose resources are highly predictable will be more

likely to have stable local groups. Therefore, if the stability of the

local group is a determining factor, they should be more likely to place

the dead on the basis of social affiliation. R. Dyson-Hudson and Smith

(1978), applying models developed by sociobiologists from animal behavior,

 83

predict that where resources are predictable but relatively scarce, the

following are true: economic defendability is fairly low; the degree of

nomadism is low to medium; and the basic pattern of land use is that of

home ranges with Some degree of overlap between groups. In this situa-

tion, the same people may well return to roughly the same places year

after year. It is possible t hat at least part of the year a given resource

may be both predictable and abundant. Here it becomes highly practical

to defend the resource. Territorial behavior is appropriate. The resource

is likely to be divided among the different local groups which thus claim

inheritable ownership of certain areas. A territory can be defended both

physically and through social sanctions. I note that inheritance from

this poi~t of view is an aspect of the social regulation of territoriality.

The importance of inheritable economic assets, if they are not passed on

prior to death, can be expected to sometimes produce tension in the local

group at the time of death. This may contribute to the need to stress

both the unity of the group and to define the deceased's place in that

group. If the use of the territory is regulated, through social sanctions

for its members and neighbors and by force to outsiders, by the larger kin

group or by a village group it would be extremely likely for social affilia-

tion with that group to be expressed in placing the dead.

I chose to treat fishing as a separate subsistence economy type

because I felt it would combine greater degrees of sedentism with little

or no agriculture. The data in Table 3 (page 76) confirms that agri-

culture is low or absent in most of these societies; the mode is 0; the

highest rank is 2, and the mean is .58. However, fixity of residence is

quite variable, covering the entire scale from 0 to 4 with a low mode of
 84

1 and mean of 1.75. Most of these societies fall logically into three

different sub-groups for which different predictions should be made.

In one sub-group of the twelve fishing societies, agriculture is

absent and the fishing, which takes advantage of seasonal runs of spawn-

ing fish, is predictable in both time and place. In some cases, each

family or larger kin group owns and inherits the right to use particular

fishing locations. The economies and regulation of land use in these

societies are similar to those of hunting and gathering societies with

home ranges and territorially defended, owned, seasonally exploited

locations. The local groups tend to be stable in composition. Many

of these peoples live for a part of the year in villages and identify

themselves as members of the village . It is very likely that the village

or the extended kin group will be distinguished in placing the dead in

these societies. Where social stratification exists, it may also be

used as a basis for differentiating the place of disposition.

Three fishing societies in my sample are located in the Pacific

islands . Population density is high. Agriculture .yields over 10% of

the food supply in two cases, which also have complex chiefdoms and sig-

nificant social stratification. Although membership in work units in

deep sea fishing communities may tend to be fluid (Breton 1973), the

villages form stable, close communities. Where the village itself is

the autonomous governing unit, the members may vie with each other for

political predominance. Here either the individual family or the village

itself may be distinguished in placement of the dead. Where the political

organization is more complex, peopl~ may curry favor in a way similar to

that described by Lienhardt (1962). Here where social stratification is

 85

used to reinforce the political organization, I predict that different

ranks, occupations and/or important family lineages will be distinguished

by the location of disposition of the dead. I expect that the village

might also be used to define location of disposition.

Two fishing societies, the Yamana (Yahgan) and Copper Eskimo, do

not practice agriculture, but their fishing, hunting and gathering re-

sources are all dispersed and relatively unpredictable in space . . Degree

of abundance varies with the season. Their socio-economic systems are,

therefore, like those hunting and gathering societies whose resources

vary seasonally from unpredictable snd scarce to unpredictable and dense.

Local groups are fluid in composition. Identification with a region is

not defined by exclusive economic use of that land. Kin relationships,

but no ' larger social organization such as a clan, regulates use of

territory. It is reasonable to predict that in these societies use of

units of social affiliation to define placement of the dead is likely to

be absent, or only the nuclear family or domestic camp group will be so

distinguished.

Pastoralism represents still another, and a particularly interesting,

constellation of the variables under consideration. Eleven of the

pastoralist societies in my sample are fully nomadic while one, the Toda,

is semi-sedentary. The population density, the size of the local community

groups and the contribution of agriculture to the food supply tend overall

to be low, as can be seen in Table 3 (page 76). However, the level of

political integration is relatively high with a mean of 2.08 and a mode

of 2. In seven societies "formal class distinctions are lacking among

freemen, but hereditary slavery prevails and/or there are important

 86

status differences based on the possession or distribution of wealth"

(rank #1, Variable 6, Murdock and Provost 1973:383). In addition to

hereditary slavery, the freemen are stratified into two social classes

(nobles and commoners) in two societies. The social structure is

typically organized into lineal kin groups having important functions

for defense, leadership and, in some cases, maintenance of wells. These

functions vary in relative importance from society to society.

Livestock constitute a predictable and abundant resource which must

be protected from the depredations of others. Raiding by outsiders is

endemic in many pastoralist societies. Within the group, inheritance of

livestock may be an important aid to increased wealth and power. But,

in the context of ownership, livestock is often not as restricted a

resour£eas land (Baxter 1972). In many of the pastoral societies in.

my sample, the few cattle given to a child at birth, and perhaps on

several other important occasions, do form the basis for a herd of re-

spectable size by the time that child has reached adulthood. As a

result, inheritance at death may often not be a predictable source- of

tension among siblings.

Mpaayei writes: "The Maasai say that the cow

is the head of a man - that is, a man can
build up a home by the good care of one cow"
(Baxter 1972:188).

Cooperation between members of the same group is essential for good herd

management. To spread the risk of loss from disease and raiding, live-

stock belonging to the same person are often kept in several herds, 'mixed

with livestock of others who follow the same practice.

Boran •.. perceive their herds, given good management

and God's blessing, as always containing the po-
tentiality of increase which is not at the expense
 87

of other Boran but depends, rather, on their active

and amicable co-operation. The activities of elders
are constantly directed to maintaining those co-operative
social relationships ••• (Baxter 1972:172).

~t the same time, the livestock must live off the land. In many

cases, notably in Africa and the Middle East, the resources of the land

are relatively unpredictable. Their economic defendability is therefore

low. In these societies access to grazing and water is regulated; it is

not vested in individuals but is open to all members of the larger

community. The low predictability of good grazing requires a high degree

of disperson during seasons when grazing is poor, and results in highly

fluid local groups (R. Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978). Baxter feels there

is good evidence for the fluidity and independence of the local stock-

keeping groups for the Boron, Turkana, Karimojong, Somali, Samburu, Fulani,

Masai and Tuareg. Of these, the Somali, Fulani, Masai and Tuareg are in-

cluded in my sample. This description of the Turkana seems especially apt:

Each stock-owning unit [nuclear family] is a self-

determinant pastoral unit, moving more or less in-
dependently of like units, and there is no fixed
community life anywhere ••. There are only exiguous
temporary connections with relatively fortuitous
neighbors. A man's category of stock associates
is spread over a wide, irregular area, and spatial
relations frequently change (Gulliver and Gulliver
1955:252 as cited in Baxter 1972:17).

This fluidity of the local group and the need of individuals for self-

reliance in a world controlled by non-human forces seems very widespread

in pastoral societies. However, the role of the larger kin group or

higher political authorities is more variable, as is the relationship of

the pastoralists to nearby settled populations •

•
Dyson-Hudson and Smith (1978) predict a home range system will occur

where grazing resources are not abundant but their location is highly
 88

predictable. In a home range system, pastoralists tend to keep to the

same migration routes every year. Membership in a clan may determine

which route to follow, or the migration may be directed by important

leaders. Where grazing is both fairly predictable and abundant, less

nomadic, more stable local groups may be able to develop .

A number of alternative predictions are possible for the relation-

ship between pastoralism and the use of location of disposition to

symbolize the social affiliation of the deceased . If social stratifica-

tion is important, and is an integral part of a rather complex level of

political organization, it is reasonable to predict that social stratifica-

tion will be used to distinguish between individuals when placing the dead:

If the unity of the larger kin group is vital for leadership, defence,

and/or regulation of grazing, of significant inhtoritance , or payment. of

brideswealth, it is reasonable to predict this group will be distinguished

in placing the dead. If nomadism, low population density and a fluid social

group are the most decisive influences on mortuary practices, it is reason-

able to predict that use of social affiliation to define location of dis-

position will either be absent altogether or will reflect nuclear family

or camp unit affiliation.

Finally, the relationship of the pastoral peoples with settled popula-

tions does vary. Often pastoralists and settled peoples live in a system

of interlocking, i.e., tandem, specialization (Peterson 1978) in which

each benefits from the economic activ ity of the other. Where there are

close patron-client, religious, or family tie's institutionalized between

these groups, the behavior of the pastoralists may well be affected. Where

these ties are very strong, it can be predicted that the pastoralists'
 89

association with the settled community will be made tangible by placing

their dead with the dead of the village community. Where these ties are

relatively weak, it might be expected that people will be buried at the

settled community only when they actually die ' in or near that community.

Each of the possible causal factors so far considered will be further

discussed when their relationships with use or non-use of social affilia-

tion in placing the dead is presented and analyzed statistically. The

interaction of these factors will then be considered in more detail.

 90

CHAPTER FOUR. DESCRIPTION OF PATTERNS IN THE DATA

Four types of information must be obtained from my data before

quantitative analysis of the data can p egin. 1. My predictions concern-

ing the relationships between location of disposition of the dead and

subsistence economy, degree of dependence upon agriculture, fixity of

residence, population density, size of local communities, and levels of

political integration, social stratification and technological specializa-

tion depend upon replication in my data of Binford's (1971) finding that

the social affiliation of the deceased is very likely to be symbolized

by the location of the disposition of the remains. 2. The different

degrees to which use can be made of social affiliation to define location

of disposition of the dead must be determined on the basis of the patterns

observed in the data. 3. The units of social affiliation which are used

to define the location of disposition among the societies of my Mortuary

Sample must be systematically described. 4. The major proselytizing re-

ligions have expanded to include societies with quite varied subsistence

and social systems. This widespread diffusion has often involved drastic

social and economic changes accompanying the attempt to teach new patterns

of belief and ritual practice. If, however, practices of placing the dead

become largely uniform within each major religion even where socio-economic

circumstances have remained very different, this will have to be an im-

portant consideration in my analysis. The effects of proselytizing re-

ligions will be discussed first.

Influences of the Proselytizing Religions

Where possible, Murdock (1968) chose time periods for the societies

in his sample to be prior to strong European influence. Consequently,

 91

there are only two societies in my sample which are Christian: the
It II 'I
Roman Catholic Gheg of Albania in 1910 and the Lapps of Konkama, Finland

in 1950. Some important pre-Christian practices have been retained for

centuries in both places. In addition, the Quiche Maya practice a syn-

cretic religion strongly influenced by Catholicism.

Both the Gheg, who practice shifting agriculture, and the reindeer

herding Lapps bury their dead in church cemeteries. The Lapp cemetery

is located at the ethnically different village near which each reindeer

herding group traditionally winters and with whom they have established
It ""
economic and social ties. At Konkama village the Christian cemetery is

a burial island in the river. A dead person may be transported long

distances in order to be buried finally in the cemetery of the group to

which he or she~e10nged.
.
In pre-Christian
. times separate burial islands

were maintained near both winter and summer pastures. Conversion to

Christianity changed practice somewhat • . If a person dies in the summer ,

the body is placed on a sledge in a tree on the ancient burial island

according to pre-Christian forms until the fall when the group returns

to the village. At this time, the sledge with the body is brought to the

Christian island cemetery for burial (Pehrson 1957, Collinder 1949,

II
Nordstrom 1930, Haglund 1935).

Each Gheg maximal lineage or clan has its own burial ground. The

Christian Gheg locate these cemeteries in the churchyard. It is terribly

important that all lineage members be buried there. If, as often happened,

a man was excommunicated by the priest for feuding and then killed, his

relatives would first bury him in unconsecrated ground as required. In-

variably, a short time later they would move the body at night with great
 92

secrecy into the lineage cemetery in direct violation of the Church's

orders (Durham 1909; 1928; Hasluck 1954) .

Comparing the Gheg and the Lapp, we find that while both distinguish

religious affiliation in similar ways, the agricultural Gheg place great

importance on the clan while the nomadic Lapp distinguish not only their

social affiliation with their local bilateral kin group, but attach im-

portance to their affiliation with the ethnically different settled village

with which they maintain institutionalized ties.

Eleven other societies in my sample had been affected by Christianity

to some degree: Samoyed, Yukaghir, Huichol, Creek, Santal, Papago, Tiwi,

Igbo, Toradja, Bambara and Marshallese. Within this group, .practices are
(
very dissimilar to each other. The majority of people within each society

continue more ancient customs during t~e period for which data was obtained.

It is true that conversion to Christianity in many places required a

drastic change in the location of disposition of the dead. Christianity

has often required that the new religious affiliation of the converts define

and determine the location of disposition of the deceased. It is important

to notice that conversion to Christianity often entailed more than drastic

reorientation of a people's culture. Christian missionaries tried to

convert hunters and gatherers, pastoralists and fishermen alike to settled

agriculture. They often tried to bring about changes in the social systems

of those already practicing settled agriculture. Therefore, in many cases

conversion to Christianity can not be considered to be change in belief

alone. The Quiche experience is an example of this. The Spanish tried

to use the combined authority of the Church and force of arms to chsnge

the dispersed settlement pattern of these settled agriculturalists into

 93

one of compact villages. They were unsuccessful at Chichicastenango,

the pueblo to which my research is restricted. Chichicastenango has a

cemetery located at the "vacant" Center. Burial there is determined by

membership in the pueblo and ethnic affiliation.

Islam had succeeded in converting most members of six societies in

my sample (Basseri, Somali, Tuareg, Rif, Rwala and Gheg), had strongly

influenced three others (Tawi-Tawi Badjau, Kenuz and Fulani), and had

converted only a minority of two others (Bambara and Toradja). Con-

version to Islam brought about attempts to make the form of the grave

conform to specifications in the Koran, and practice is remarkably uniform.

However, location of disposition remains quite variable. The agricultural

Rif and Kenuz have village graveyards. The Gheg have Islamic, clan or

lineage graveyards. The "pastoralists, the Basseri, Somali, Tuareg, Rwala

and Fulani, have no graveyards. Social affiliation may often play no part

in location of disposition of the dead among the Rwala, Tuareg and Somali.

For these societies, the socio-economic system, degree of sedentism, or

density of population seems to have a greater influence upon location of

disposition than does allegiance to a common religion. For example, the

AI Murrah Bedouin's attitudes towards death are typically Islamic. Cole

(1975) believes their practices differ from their urban fellow Muslims

for social - ecological reasons.

Independence of action rather than social solidarity

is the first demand of the ecological setting in which
they live (Cole 1975:135).

On important religious occasions and at important moments in the life cycle

there is no need to bring

 94

all the members of a big social group together for big celebrations ,

although marriage prompts some attempt to bring people together. When

in the desert, a person "knows that his lineage, his clan, and the whole

tribe is there around him," but he does not need to be with them (Cole

1975 :135).

It is instructive to further compare the Christian and Islamic Gheg.

The Gheg of Albania were .converted to Christianity by the Roman Church.

The Turks introduced Islam. In 1910, the majority of Gheg were Islamic

while Christianity was most common in the remoter, more rugged mountainous

country. The Gheg, whether Christian or Muslim, remained shifting agri-

culturalists with a segmentary lineage system. Clan headmen and Tribal

Councils were formally constituted authority. The unwritten Law of Lek

Duka$in, which defined many aspects of behavior including that between

affines, within the household, in feuding and in political succession,

was observed strictly. It is interesting that there is essentially no

difference between the Muslim and Christian Gheg in the distinctions they

made relating to the social personality of the dead and in the conditions

of death as Binford and I have defined them. Of course, differences in

religious affiliation led to differences in preparation of the body,

orientation and form of the grave, ritual and ritual specialists. But,

the same causes of death were distinguished and usually treated in exactly

the same way. The same distinctions were made on the "basis of age, sex,

and social position in both religious groups. The cemeteries were defined

both as being either Catholic or Muslim and as belonging to maximal

lineages. Each maximal lineage, or possibly clan, had its own burial

ground in which all members were placed (Durham 1909, 1928; Hasluck 1954;

Coon 1950; Garnett 1891).

 95

There is only one society in my sample most of whose members are

Buddhist, the Khalka Mongols. A minority of Koreans are also Buddhist.

In 1920 the Khalka Mongols were a politically independent state whose

capital was Urga. In the rural area to which my attention is confined ,

the people were seminomadic sheep and cattle herders. Some also kept

yaks, horses and camels. Urga was more densely populated and urban with

a minority of non-Buddhist Chinese and a smaller number of Europeans ,

especially Russians.

Buddhist belief states quite explicitly how the dead ought to be

placed. Buddhist practice was followed when possible by both the Khalka

and the Buddhist Koreans. Ritual exposure is the form of disposition for

all dead people regardless of rank or social standing. Exceptions are

made fQr very outstanding individua ls whose remains are mummified. When

a Khalka Mongol is dying, a lama divines the location for his or her ex-
..
!
posure (Maiskii 1921). The spot so divined has to be purchased from the

"God of the Earth" and is carefully regulated by the religious · authorities.

These practices are directly derived from Buddhist conceptions about the

meaning of life and the structure of the universe . Egalitarian concepts

suppress distinctions of ascribed, ranked social affiliation. The out-

standing achieved status of rare individuals is directly expressed in

both the form of their disposition and its location within the temples.

In rural areas, such as the Narobanchin Temple Territory, the dead

were normally ritually exposed out in the countryside. The pla ce of ex-

posure was determined by divination and was not confined to any given

area . Generally people attempted to detour around the spot. For three

years, children were required to act in certain respectful ways near the

site where their parent was exposed. However, in the larger towns and
 96

villages, notably at Urga with a population of about 30,000, it was im-

practical to allow a place to be divined and purchased individually for

each corpse. Corpses could no longer be dispersed about the countryside.

Some reasons for this are obvious. It would have been impossible for

most people to avoid such places. The practice would have become un-

sanitary and increased the number of carnivorous animals within and

around the city. It was necessary to set aside certain areas as cemeteries

where all the dead could be e~posed together. A small valley outside Urga

was used for this purpose. The packs of dogs in this area were extremely

dangerous. The Chinese and European foreigners were stringently restricted

to particular cemeteries in the more urban areas (Maiskii 1921). (The

deceased Chinese were all periodically returned to their home families

in' China in spectacular camel caravans •.) In this society, strong re-

ligious directives, suitable for a sparsely populated area, had to be

modified for practical reasons when population density reached a critical

level.

In both the Mongol nation and the Islamic countries, there are im-

portant differences between the settled urban population and the nomadic

pastoralists. Both religions dictate that their urban and pastoral

followers have similar attitudes toward death. In spite of this, in many

cases their deep rooted attitudes toward the dead are different. There

are important differences in attitude between nomadic and settled Muslims.

It is common for Muslims in settled communities to visit the graves .of

their relatives frequently. The tombs of exceptional men, notably religious

leaders, are often visited in the hope that the supplicant may earn specific

gain from her or his offering. This behavior is far less frequent, and
 f

97

in some places absent, among the Islamic pastoralists. Outstanding Mongol

leaders were preserved as relics and visited in commemoration, but were

not worshipped. Unfortunately, my information on who visited these

relics is inadequate to allow a parallel comparison. Examples of con-

trasting behavior among the Muslims, however, are numerous.

Rif women cheerfully visit the graves of relatives every Friday,

as the deceased is supposed to be there on that day. Graves are also

visited on feast days. The graves of exceptional or holy men may be

visited with ritual gifts to cure headache. A saint's tomb is used as

a sanctuary by fugitives, as a women's social center, and as a place

to which pilgrimages are made. Saints have power to work many kinds of

miracles, but the power of a given saint may be somewhat specialized

(Wesbemarck 1926; Hart 1957; Blanco Izaga 1975) .

In contrast, the Tuareg generally fear and avoid contemporary graves,

although in the 1950's the great drum chief Rali was given a ritual

sacrifice every year by the current drum chief and his household

(Nicolaisen 1959). The Rwala Bedouin believe that it is correct to

sacrifice at the graves of outstanding ancestors, but, at least in normal

circumstances, they fail to do so.

Worship of the saints has never been known among

Rwala and presumably never will be ....
Nor have they any permanent burying places, ...
but bury their dead wherever death overtakes
them. They therefore do not know and never visit
individual graves. This is due to the great
distance between their pastures; to some of their
camping places they return only after many years -
so why should they care for a grave? They do not
know even where the graves of their older princes
or headchiefs are (Musil 1928:418).
 98

Musil had often heard that when anyone from the reigning family happen~d

to be near the tomb of a particular ancestor, they would sacrifice a

camel to him. But when Musil himself was at the place "not a single

member of the reigning house thought for a moment of sacrificing the

camel." In one instance, a dome was built over the grave of a notable

Rwala by merchants who thought highly of him. These townspeople

sacrificed animals for him at the tomb, while his own kin did so rarely

at best.

The foregoing analysis has indicated, first, that change of belief

certainly does alter ritual behavior and mayor may not require some

change in where the dead are placed. Second, evidence is strong that

religion is not operating independently of social and economic forces.

Practices determining ~here the dead are placed are not uniform in

Islamic societies. In a single society with a fairly uniform socio-

economic system (the Gheg) , differences in religious affiliation did

not change the units of social affiliation used to define the location

of disposition. In one society where the universally espoused religion

strongly dictates how the deceased should be placed (Khalka Mongol),

practice varied with changes in rural - urban demography.

This investigation of the influence of the proselytizing religions

on practices of placing the dead has shown in some detail that an im-

portant kind of diffusion has not distorted the results of this study.

There is good reason, then, to expect that demographic, economic

and social conditions do affect where people decide it is appropriate

and meaningful to place their dead. These factors may create physical

situations which require a change of practice, as in the Khalka cities.

 99

cole's (1975) observations on t he A1 Murrah Bedouin are entirely con-

sistent with Douglas' (1973) analysis. Where independence of action

is more important than social solidarity, ritual in general tends to

be less important. The need or lack of need for bringing the larger

kin group together in order to symbolize its unity, may influence the

ways in which the group is symbolized in mortuary practices, including

whether or not the location of disposition should depend on membership

in certain social groups.

Comparison with Results of Binford (1971)

Investigation of the effect of the proselytizing religions revealed

patterns which support my predictions. When I turn to a comparison of

my and"Binford's (1971) tabulations of the characteristics of the social

personality of the deceased recognized in the handling of the dead

(Binford's results: Table 2, page 27; my results: Table 4 A, 4 B, 4 C,

4 D, 4 E), it is clear that my results confirm his findings. It is also

apparent from my data that there are very real differences between the

subsistence groups (a question not examined by Binford). There are many

fewer empty cells in my table. I believe my data to be more complete. In

spite of my efforts to follow his definitions closely, my coding .was more

inclusive than Binford's.

I had difficulty with Binford's (1971) none too clear distinction

between Cause and Condition of Death and Location of Death. A more mean-

ingful classification of the components of these categories can be de-

veloped. First, those distinctions carried out for reasons of expediency

should be explicitly separated from distinctions based upon ideology.

 100

Table 4A Characteristics of the Social Personality of

the Deceased Recognized in the Handling of the
Dead (According to Subsistence Category).

SETTLED Cause or Location Age Sex Social Social

AGRICULTURALISTS Condition of Death Position Mfiliation
of Death Groups
Total number of within Aliens
societies: 12
own
(inad. information) society
The Body
(1) Preparation 7 (1) 1 5 (3) 5 9 (1) 9 1
(2) Treatment 7 (1) 3 2 (1) 1 2 2 (1)
(3) Disposition 9 (1) 3 3 (2) 1 1 3 1

The Grave
(4) Form 8 (1) 1 (1) 6 (3) 3 11 (1) 7 1
(5) Orientation 2 (1) 1 (1) 1 4
(6) Location 8 (1) 5 (1) 6 (2) a- 8 (1) 12 strong 1 (1)

The Furniture
(7) Form only 4 1 3 (1) 9 5 {1) 4
(8) Qu"ntity only (1) 1 (1)
(9) Form and Quantity 7 (1) 1 1 (2) 7 (1) 4 2

The Ritual GrouE

(10) Constitution only 1 1 (1) 1 3
(11) Numbers only 1 2 (1) 1 2
(12) Constitution and
numbers 4 (3 ) (1) 4 (4) 3 7 (1) 6 (1) 1
(l3) Specialized roles 4 1 2 (1) 4 7 6 1

The Ritual Events

(14) Sequence of
Funeral Rites
only 5 3 2 7
(15) Length only 5 2 3 (1)
(16) Sequence and
length 9 (1) 1 8 (2) 4 7 7 2
(17) Other symbolic 2 4 4 (1) 4 10 5
changes
Mourning Behavior
(18) Acts only 3 2 7 3 1 4
(19) Duration only 1 1
(20) Acts and duration 4 (4) (2) 3 5 (1) 1
(21) Treatment of
Relics 3 2 (1) 2 2
 101

Table 4 B

SHIFTING Cause or Location Age Sex Social Social

AGRICULTURALISTS Condition of Death Position Affiliation
of Death Groups
Total number of within Aliens
societies: 12
own
(Tnad. information) society
The Body
(1) Preparation 6 (2) 3 4 (2) 4 7 (1 ) 4 2
(2) Treatment 6 (2) 3 (2) 2 3 6
(3) Disposition 7 (1) 2 3 (2) 4 3 6

The Facility (Grave)

(4) Form of the facility 8 (2) 4 6 (2) 3 (2) 10 7 (1) 4
(5) Orientation (1) 1 (2) 3 (1) 1 3
(6) Location of the strong:
facility 5 (2) 4 4 (2) 3 5 10 (1) 6

The Fu~niture
(7) Form only 1 1 5 7 4 2
(8) Quantity only
(9) Form an~ Quantity 3 (2) 1 1 (2) 1 6 (1) 2 3

The Ritual GrouE

(10) Constitution only 1 3
(ll) Numbers only 1 2 1 1
(12) Constitution and
numbers 2 (4) 1 (2) 5 (1) 3 2
(13 ) Specialized roles 3 (2) 3 (2) 3 5 3 (1) 4
The Ritual Events
(14) Sequence of
Ritual Events
only 1 1 4 1 1
(15 ) Length only 2 1 3 1
(16 ) Sequence and
length 7 (2) 3 4 (2) 5 (1) 6 6
(17 ) Other symbolic
changes 3 (1) 1 2 (1) 4 7 4

Mourning Behavior
(18) Ac ts only 4 3 6 2 3
(19) Duration only 1 1
(20) Acts and Duration 3 (4) 3 (1) 1 3 (2) 2
(21) Treatment of
Relics 3 (1 ) 3 2 (1) 5
 102

Table 4 C

p,lSHING Cause or Location Age Sex Social Social

Condition of Death Position Affiliation
Total number of of Death Groups
societies: 12 within Aliens
own
(inad. information) societI
The BodI
(1) Preparation 5 (3) 3 (2) 5 (1) 2 10 (1) 2 2
(2) Treatment 4 (3) 3 (2) 1 (1) 4 (1) 1 2
(3) Disposition 5 (3) 5 (2) 5 (1) 5 (1) 5 3

The Facilitl (Grave)

(4) Form of the
facility 3 (2) 4 (1) 4 (1) 1 6 (2) 6 1
(5) Orientation (2) (1) (1)
(6) Location of the weak:2
facility 5 (2) 5 (1) 6 (1) 4 (2)strong:8 (1)
The Furniture
(7) Form only 1 (3) 1 (J.) 3 (2) 8 (1) 1 (1) 1 1
(8) Quantity only 1 (3) (1) (2) (1) 1 (1)
(9) Form and Quantity 3 (3) 1 (1) 3 (2) 1 (1) 9 (1) 2 (1)
The Ritual GrouE
(10) Constitution only (3) (1) (2) 1 (1) 2
(11) Numbers only (3) (3) 1 (4 ) 1 2 (3)
(12) Constitution and
numbers 2 (3) 2 (2) 4 (2) 5 (3) 1 (1) 2
(13) Specialized roles 2 (3) 1 (1) 1 (2) 4 3 (1) 1
The Ritual Events
(14) Sequence of
Ritual Events (3) 1 (3) 1 (1) 1 3 (1) 1
only
(15 ) Length only (3) (3) 1 (1) 2 4 (1)
(16 ) Sequence and
length 5 (3) 5 (3) 2 (1) 3 (1) 3 (1) 3
(17) Other symbolic
changes 6 (2 ) 4 (2) 2 (2) 5 (1) 1 1
~urnin~ Behavior
(18) Acts only 4 (2) (2) 2 (3) 1 (1) (4)
(19) Duration only (3) (2) 1 (2) 2 (1) 1 (4)
(20) Acts and Duration 3 (3) (2) 2 (2) (1) 1 (4) 2 (1) 2
(21) Treatment of
Relics 3 (3) 2 (1) 1 1 2 (1) 1 2
 103

Table 4 D

PASTORALISTS Cause or Location Age Sex Social Social

Condition of Death Position Affiliation
Total numb~r of of Death Groups
societies: 12 within Aliens
own
(inad . information) societ:l':
The Bod:l':
(1) Preparation 5 4 4 4 4 (1) 2 (1) 1
(2) Treatment 3 1 1 (1) 1
(3) Disposit ion 5 4 5 4 4 (1) 1

The Faci1it~ (Grave~

(4) Form of the
facility 7 4 5 (3) 5 (1) 5 (5) 4 (1) 1
(5) Ori entation 1 1 1 4 (1)
(6) Location of the weak: 7
facility 2 5 4 2 4 strong:5

The Furniture
(7) Form only 1 2 6 1 (1)
(8) Quantity only 1 (1)
(9) Form and Quantity 2 3 1 5 (1)

The Ritual GrouE

(10) Constitution only (5) (4 )
(11) Numbers only 1 3 (5) 1 2 (4) 1 (1) 1
(12) Constitution and
numbers 5 2 1 (5) 3 (5 ) 1 (1)
(13) Specialized
roles 3 1 4 4 2 3 (1)

The Ritual Events

(14) Sequence of
Ritual Events
only 2 (1) 2 2 (2)
(15 ) Length only 4 (1) 1 1 (2)
(16 ) Sequence and
length 9 4 2 (1) 1 3 (1) 2 (2) 1
(17 ) Other Symbolic
Changes 1 3 4 (2) 5 4 (2 ) 2 (1)

~ourning Behavior
(18) Acts only 3 (1) 2 4 (2) 4 2 1 (1)
(19) Duration only (1) (2) (1)
(20) Acts and Duration 3 (1) 1 (3) 1 3 2 (1) 1
(21) Treatment of
Relics 1 (1)
 104

Table 4 E

HUNTERS AND Cause or Location Age Sex Social Social

GATHERERS Condition of Death Position Affiliation
of Death Groups
Total number of within Aliens
societies: 12 own
(inad. information) societ:z:
The Body
(1) Preparation 6 (2) 4 4 (1) 2 3 (1) 1
(2) Treatment 2 (1) 1 (1) 1
(3) Disposition 6 (1) 4 (1) 3 1 (1) 1

The Facilit:z:
(4) Form 5 (2) 5 5 2 6 (1) 1 1
(5) Orientation (1) 1 (1) 1
(6) Location 1 (1) 1 2 1(1)strong:1 1
weak:5

The Furniture
(7) Form only 2 (1) 5 7 1 (1) 1
(8) Quantity only (1) 1 1 (1)
(9) Form and Quantity (3) 1 (1) 2 3 (1) 1

The Ritual Groue

(10) Constitution only (1) 1 1 (1) (1 )
(11) Numbers only 1 (1) 2 2 3 (1) (1)
(12) Constitution and
numbers (3) 4 (4) 1 1 (5) (1)
(13 ) Specialized
roles 1 3 3

The Ritual Events

(14) Sequence of
Funeral rites
only 1 (1) 2 (1) 4 (1) 2 (1)
(15 ) Length only (1) (1) 1 (1) 1 2 (1)
(16 ) Sequence and
length 5 (3) 4 (1) 5 (1) 1 3 (1) 1
(17) Other symbolic 1 (1) 2 (1) 1 2 4 (1) 1
changes
MOurnin~ Behavior
(18) Acts only 4 (2) 1 5 (1) 3 5 (2 )
(19) Duration only (2) 1 1 (1) (2)
(20) Acts and Duration (4) (1) 3 (3) (1) 1 (2) 1
(21) Treatment of Relics 1 2 1 1 1 1
 105

Wit hin the latter group, it would be useful to deal with social outcasts

(cast out for whatever reason) as a separate group because the relatively

small numbers of metaphors used to express this condition are extremely

widespread. I have developed a more refined classification for this

group of characteristics of ·the death situation, as a starting point

for further study. Additional details are beyond the scope of this

thesis.

Careful perusal of Table 4 indicates that treatment and disposition

of the body are most often used to distinguish cause or condition of death.

Certain symbols, such as dismemberment of the bodies of criminals and

enemies, have a very wide cross-cultural distribution. As Binford (1971)

suggested on the basis of a few cases, the location of the disposition is

also often used to indicate drastic differences in status du~ to conditions

of death. Often for outcasts, differences in preparation of the body, in

form or form and quantity of grave goods, and in sequences and length of

ritual are differences of omission, ~.~. nothing is provided. For those

who have been murdered by force or sorcery, however, ritual elements

connected with exacting retribution for the murder may be added.

Practices expressing the social position of the deceased are quite

complex, as Binford (1971) observed. In many societies, the remains of

powerful leaders, whether shamans or kings, are placed in differently made

facilities. Among societies which keep relics, the relics of important

people are often kept longer and used more. Among societies with formal

offices, the body of the principal leader is often given special prepara-

tion, and may be mummified or otherwise speCially treated. For important

people, a larger and more complex ritual congregation is involved in the

 106

longer and more complex sequence of ritual events . The remains of the

deceased leader may be placed in a more central location. Very frequently,

the special status of the deceased is indicated by specific symbols of the

social position being celebrated, accompanied by more grave goods of finer

quality. Form of grave goods is an important way of indicating most kinds

of social position of the deceased.

't oi';u'nd that, as Binford (1971) observed in Table 2 (page 27), it

is common to locate the remains of infants and young children either within

the family's life space or outside the community altogether. However, this

distinction is far more important among Settled Agriculturalists and Fishing

Societies than among Pastoralists and Hunter-Gatherers. Differences in

\ the form of the facility are an important part of handling the disposition

of infants and children differently among all five subsistence categories,

while the graves of adults may be more conspicuously marked. Age is also

often expressed through differential preparation of the body and the kinds

of disposition accorded the remains.

Only one society in my sample uses a difference in disposition to

express the difference between men and women. Among all the subsistence

categories (see Table 5), sex is most frequently expressed through the

form of grave goods. Table 5 includes the six classes of mortuary metaphors

most frequently used to express the sex of the deceased. The percentages

must be used with caution as each subsistence group contains only twelve

societies. In Table 5, the number of societies which distinguish both

Form and Quantity of grave goods has been added to those distinguishing

Form Only to obtain a count of all those in some way distinguishing sex

through the form of the grave goods. It can be seen in Table 4 that sex
 Table 5 Sex of the Deceased
Recognized in Handling of the Dead

Total number of Form of % of all Preparation Form of Specialized Other Acts and Total
societies: 60 Grave using of Body Facility Roles Symbolic Duration
(missing cases) Furniture grave Changes of Mourn-
goods ing

Hunters &
Gatherers 7 (58%) 58% 2 2 3 2 3 19
Pastoralists 7 (58%) 87% 4 5 (1) 4 5 5 30
Fishing 9 (1) (81%) 81% 2 1 4 0 1 (1) 17
.....
o Shifting
.-<
Agriculturalists 8 (66%) 88% 4 3 (2) 3 4 3 25
Settled
Agriculturalists 9 (75%) 75% 5 3 4 4 3 28

Total 40 17 14 18 15 15
- - - - ----
 108

is only rarely distinguished through both form and quantity of grave

goods.

Very often a hierarchical relationship is not the most important

aspect of the differences between the sexes being expressed. Rather,

the different roles and occupations of the sexes are symbolized by in-

cluding the tools with which they have become associated. Dress and the
..:....... - w ~,,;:.. .... .. ·• _~ c e' , , " , - _. " .

tools
... ..."..... or othelO"
~- -,~ " ••.. .•$pqd.s .. .each sex . usesexclusive.l y. become .. so ..clpsely, . .i\s.sq.ciated
-.,.-,.~"- " '~' ' " . ... . .... . . " ,' "":" "" " " " - "" , ", , ~

with sex that.... . .they

_ , "- ' . '- '_~" ".",. ' >'
.. __
come to stand
~ ,_ ~._-;;-1. ~
' - . ---¥ . .. . . ,.•• .•
..the natur.
iI:t-,'---.-
~ . -- ..
e ..of.•."'~n
-~"
ind,ex to•. -- • •being
~--
.• ," --, .•".-•... - , • .:..-,--
male

or female (as I have discussed on page 34). It is in this sense that these

folO"ms of grave goods alO"e most often used in the mortuary lO"itual. Exactly

parallel use of the form of grave goods occurs in distinguishing many kinds

of social position, especially those dependent upon occupation, and, to a

somewhat lesser extent, in distinguishing age.

There is much more which could be said about Table 5. There is some,

but not a great deal, of variation between the subsistence categories in

the use of these mortuary metaphors. FUlO"ther examination of the expression

of sex in mortuary practices is beyond the scope of this thesis. I have

included discussion in this detail in olO"der to show that one of the more

stlO"iking of Binford's findings is confirmed by my study. However, I found

40 out of 60 societies (67%) use the form of grave goods to express differ-

ence in sex, while Binford found only 16 out of 40 (40%) that did so. I

believe this discrepancy is the result of my more thorough research. Bin-

ford's study was quite frankly intended to be only preliminary and in-

dicative of what could be done.

Among the societies in my Mortuary Sample, the single mo st frequently

used mortuary metaphor is the use of location of the disposition of the

 109

dead to express the deceased's social affiliation. It is clear from

Tables 6 and 7 that both the Social Affiliation of the Deceased and the

Location of Disposition of the remains of the deceased are distinguished

far more often by Settled Agriculturalists than by Hunter-Gatherers. Further,

there is a progressive increase in the frequency with which social affilia-

tion is distinguished and in the frequency with which location of dis-

position is used as a mortuary symbol from Hunter-Gatherers, through

Pastoralists and Fishing societies, to Shifting and then to Settled Agri-

culturalists. These differences between Subsistence groups in the use of

mortuary metaphors contrast with the distribution of the symbols used to

express sex (Table 5), which does not show a progressive change.

My data do not replicate Binford's finding that Orientation of the

Facility is the second most common way of expressing social affiliation of

the deceased. Orientation of the facility is used to symbolize religious

or sub-group affiliation in some Pastoralist, Shifting and Settled Agri-

cultural societies. However, among the societies in my sample, the Form

of the Facility is more frequently used to express Social Affiliation.

Binford's and my results do not fully coincide. Therefore, it is

necessary to compare our methods and results in more detail as they pertain

to the problems of this thesis. The two dependent variables under con-

sideration, Social Affiliation of the Deceased and Location of the

Facility, were defined as follows by Binford (1971):

Social Affiliation of the Deceased (that dimension of the social

personality of the deceased which is symbolized through differential

mortuary treatment) refers to the deceased's affiliation with

 Table 6 Social Affiliation of the Deceased Within His Own Society Recognized
in Handling of the Dead

Total number · . Preparation Disposition Form of Orientation Location Form & Constitu Sequence Total
of societies of Body of Body Facility of Facility of Dis- Quantity tion and & Length
60 position Grave Numbers of Ritual
(missing Furniture of Group
cases)
Hunters & 0 0 1 1 strong:1 1 0 0 4 or
Gatherers weak:5 9
Pastoralists 3 (1) 4 (1) 4 (1) 4 (1) strong:5 o (1) 2 (1) 5 (2) 27 or
weak: 7 34
a Fishing 2 5 6 0 strong:8 3 (1) 3 (1) 4 (1) 31 · or
.-<
.-< weak:2 33
Shifting 4 3 "7 (1) 3 strong:10(1) 4 7 6 44
Agriculture
Settled 9 3 7 4 strong:12 8 9 (1) 11 63
Agriculture

Total 18 15 25 12 strong: 36 16 21 26
-- - - - - - - - - -
weak:14
-
 Table 7 The Characteristics of the Social Personality of the
Deceased Recognized Through the Location of Disposition
of the Remains

Total number Cause or Location Age Sex Social Position Soc ial Affiliation Total
of societies: 60 Condition of Death 1. Within own Aliens
(missing cases) of Death society_
Hunters and 1 (1) 1 2 0 1 (1) strong:l 1 7 or
Gatherers weak:5 12
Pastoralists 2 5 4 2 4 strong:5 0 22 or
weak : 7 29
Fishing 5 (2) 5 (1) 6 (1) 0 4 (2) strong:8 o (1) 28 or
M weak:2 30
M
M
Shifting 5 (2) 4 4 (2) 3 5 strong:10 6 37
Agriculturalists (1)
Settled 8 (1) 5 (1) 6 (2) 1 8 (1) strong :12 2 42
Agriculturalists

Total 21 20 22 6 22 strong:36 9
weak:14
 112

mUltiple membership units within the society and lor

membership in the society itself ..•
•
..• in the case of intersocietal symbolism, the f orm
appropriate to the society itself (Binford 1971: 14
and 17).

Location of the facility: whether the facility was

differentially placed in the life space of the
community, or in spatially differentiated burial
locations (Binford 1971:21).

I have followed both definitions. However, in actual practice my inter-

pretations of them have been more inclusive than Binford's. His definition

of the location of the facility is too vague when applied to societies

which practice cremation and those which practice multiple disposal of

the dead, that is, secondary burial or cremation. The following examples

illustrate both some COmmon problems in coding and my solutions for them.

Where communities, such as those in the Klamath tribal divisions,

have cremation grounds' in which the ashes of the thoroughly consumed pyre

are buried, the grounds themselves become the final depository. In other

societies, relics may - be collected after the burning and treated in various

ways. The Santal cremate their dead at the community's cremation ground.

The ashes are left covered over at the cremation ground. Particular bones

are picked out of the ashes, washed and placed in an earthenware pot. This

pot is buried at the base of a tree in the grove at the end of the village

street and remains there for at least five days. On the fifth day the whole

village takes part in purification rituals at which time the bones mayor

may not be dug up, placed in a new receptacle and kept in the house. ' Even-

tually, after a variable period of time the relics are taken to the Damodar

River. In villages distant from the river, this may be over a year after

death. At the river, the relics are floated away with proper ritual. In

this case, there is no one location of a single facility. I consider the

 113

community cremation grounds used by the Klamath and Santal t o be equivalent

to burial grounds or cemeteries. In the case of the Santal, the bone

fragments are kept eith~r in a well defined village grove or in the

house of the deceased's relatives for from several months to ov~r a

year. Therefore, I have recorded that the location of the deceased's

· remains is determined by , first, the membership of the deceased in a

particular community, and second, sometimes by his or her family member-

ship.

Both the village community and the family I consider to be "member-

ship units within th\! society". In doing so, I considered myself to be

following Binford's (1971) definition. However, in practice I believe his

coding was more restricted. I n Table 2 (page 27), Binford found 15 out

of a samPle of· 40 societies (35 %) which distinguished social affiliation

by their location of the mortuary facility. I found that 48 out of my

sample of 60 (80%) did so, with inadequate information for only one society,

the Lamet. I have the impression from Binford's reference to clans,

lineages, etc. , which maintain distinct burial locations, cemeteries or

charnal houses (quoted on page 28) that he did not include cremation in

his coding, and may also not have included either the village or the

family as membership groups. As can be seen in Table 8, we agreed, as

nearly as that can be determined, on six out of the 14 societies occurring

in both samples. Of the remaining, the Pomo and Klamath, have community

cremation grounds. The Iban have burial grounds for each longhouse

community. The discrepancy of coding for one society, the Samoyed, can

not be explained. The Samoyed to which I am restricted have clan cemeteries .

The coding of the remaining four · societies is problematic. The Siriono

 114

Table 8: Comparison of Coding of Location of Disposition

as Determined by Social Affiliation for Societies
Found in Both Binford's and Fuchsman's Samples

Fuchsman's Fuchsman's Coding Binford's Social Affiliation

Sample for Location of Sample Symbolized in M~rtuary
Facility as Practices.
D.etermined by Dimension Symbolized
Social Affilia-
tion of the
Deceased

Andamanese Weak Andamans x

Barama Carib Weak Barama Carib

Bemba Strong (clan) Bemba x

tKung Bushmen Absent Kau Bushmen

Copper Eskimo Absent Copper Eskimo

Nama Hottentot Weak Hottentot

Iban Strong (longhouse) Iban

Klamath Strong (cremation Klamath

grounds)

Eastern Pomo Strong (cremation Pomo

grounds)

Yurak Samoyed Strong (clan) Samoyed

Siriono Weak Siriono

Menabe Tanala Strong (clan & Tanala x

village)

Ahaggaren Tuarel Weak Tuareg

Yahgan Absent Yahgan

 115

and Barama Carib both dispose of the body within the house in which he or
•
she resided, but abandon the dwelling. The Barama are nominally supposed

to ieave food for the ghost until the house collapses, while the Siriono

return to the skeleton for the skull which is then kept for healing.

Mothers must carry the skulls of their babies. In both cases, the social

unit which determines the location of the disposition is the nuclear

family or domestic residence unit. However, residence is not continued

i n this location. The Hottentots bury their dead near the kraal, their

minimal lineage residence unit, but then apparently leave the area follow-

ing the normal dictates of their pastoral economy. The lineage residence

group has determined the location of the facility, but no burial ground

exists and it is not clear that the site is returned to. The pastoral

Tuareg lease villages to farming people upon whom they depend for agri-

cultural goods. If they die near these villages they are buried in the

Islamic village cemetery. Otherwise, if they die out in the Saharan

hills they are buried near where they die.

Scale Developed For Location of Disposition on the Basis of Social Affiliation

Problems of coding caused me to develop a somewhat more sensitive

scale to measure whether the location of the disposition of the deceased

is determined by his or her social affiliation. I defined three ranks

differentiated according to the degree to which social affiliation is

dist~nguished, as follows:

1. Distinction Absent - The deceased's affiliation · with multiple member-

ship units within the ·society and/or member-
ship in the society itself is not symbolized
through location of the disposition of the
remains, either through differential location
of the facility in the life space ·of the
community or through spatially differentiated
burial or cremation locations.
 2. Distinction Weakly Determined - The deceased's affiliation with
multiple membership units within the society
and/or membership in the society itself is
symbolized through location of the dis-
position of the remains either through
differential location of the facility
in the life space of the community or
through spatially differentiated burial
or cremation locations for only ~ minority
of the total population; or membership in
a defined group does determine the location
of the disposition for most people, but
this location is solitary and is abandoned
and usually avoided after a more or less
carefully specified period following the
death and disposition.

3. Distinction Strongly Determined - The location of the final

remains either through differential lo-
cation of the facility in the life space
of the community or through spatially
differential burial or cremation lo-
cations normally, for most members of the
society, symbolizes the deceased's affilia-
tion Mith one or more o~ the multiple
membership units within the society and/

I
or membership in the society itself.

Use of Units of Social Affiliation to Define Location of Disposition of the Dead

It is helpful at this point also to clearly define the units of social

affiliation which were or are used by the societies in my sample in placing

their dead. The specific kinds of social affiliation distinguished in its

mortuary activities were recorded for each society in my sample. The

following definitions have been arrived at through comparison of this

data. The units may be categorized as kin or non-kin groups and as groups

based on residence or not based on residence. The numbers refer to the

tabulation in Table 9 of these kinds of social affiliation as they are

distinguished in my sample.
 TABl.l!: 9
UnttlJ of Social Affiliation \lIJed to Define Loedtion o[ DLapol itlon
(PIIEe 1 o[ 5)

,. Ib 2 3
• , , 7
• • 10 11
Distin ct ion
Stronr.ly
Deteru:ined
SlnRlc
DoWlen lic .t.
1llll1lC!di- Horoo-

Reddance Reb- 0,
stea d
Lineage Sib
0,
Extended Clan
Guild Vllhr,e
0,
Dt ,triets Social Rel1gJ.oU8
0/
Community Several Claas
Affiliation
Ethnic
Affilia-
tion
l nsti tu- Location
tion-
aUzed
0/
De.th
UnIt tive . C"mp FM.ily Settle- V1l1agea •• Gro up' b. COU!- Ties·
Hot Unit tribe _nt Within petlng Wit h
Society : Uvlng 00. ~Uglon. Villagn
Toge- ReU glo n
ther

11 Igbo X X X X X
22 Raelban X X X I X X
39 KcnUl: X X

U Rtf X
r-
M 62 Santa! X X X
M
87 Toradja X X

110 Yap X (or Jr.) X

116 Korn X X X X X X

IS2 Rulchol X X X

133 A:i:te e X X X X

ISS Quic he X X
171 Inca X X X
 TABU: 9

Unit. of Social AffiliAtion Used to Define Location of DiBpoaltion

(Page Z of 5)

,. lb Z l 4 5
• 7
• 9 10 11

Dhtinctlon Slogle ltADe.di- HOIlle- Lineage. 51b Guild Village Districts Social Religious Ethnic ~n8tltu- Loe.tioo
Strongly Do_IIItie .t. IItead Or Or Of Affiliation AffUia- ·tion-
ClaBS .U.nd .
Detera1~.d Re!'li- Reh- Or Extended Cl . . ~O~UditYSever.l tiOI1 Of
a.Croups b.Co.- lies
denee tivell CdP Fald1y Settle- Villages Within peting With
Unit Hay Unit _at

Society:
No,
Li_
tribe
"".
Religion
Religion. Vi11agea
""ath

Together

00
.-i
3 Thonaa
• X X X

4 Lod X X X
.-i
7 Betllba X X X X X

.48 Cheg X (or X)

• X X

7Z Laaet

81 tanda X X X

85 Iban X

145 Creek. X

163 Y1\no .... , X X

177 tupia.alllba X X X

13.5 POllIO X
 TABU: 9

Unlu of Sodal Affi11atloa U.ed to Define lDcatioa of D1spodtioa.

(PagE 3 of 5) .

10 1b 2 )
• 5
• 7
• • 10 11
Diatinc:tion SiDgie I_di- Home.- Liv.age Sib Guild VillaS' District_ Social lte.U.P.OUIl Ethnic lastitu- Location
Strongly Domestic .t. _tead 0, 0, Of AHUJatiOD AffiUatloo cion&!- Of
0,
CIa .. . . Groupe h.Co.... hed 'Daatb
Deterudned Ie.idenee Rela- Exteuded Clan Co~iCYSeyeral
Unit Uve. Camp Faudly Se. ttle- VUla • WirdLln peting Tie .
Hay Unit tribe Mnt se Oae Rdigiotl8 With
Not JI.d.1s:t.OD Villa ••a
Soe.iety: Li_
To,ather

86 'adJau , I

....
....'"
96 Hanllll
• • •
102 PlJi
•
119 CU~ .k I I

120 tubghlr X I I X

121 lD.aaUIt X I

133 Twana
• •
138 ltlslllath , X

52 Lappa
• X X

53 SalllOyed I X

S8 Buaed X X

61 Toda
• X

lS9 Goajiro X I
 TABLE: 1)

Units of So~ial Affiliation Used to Define Location of Disposition

(Page 4 of S)

in Ib , , ~ 8 , 10 11

Distinction SinBle II!I.Ired.1- Ilomc- Llne8.ge SIb GuUd Village Districts Social Religious Ethni~ Institu- Lo~atiOQ
Wu.i.ly (b_sti~ Ate 8tead 0, Clan OT CIa. . Affiliatlon AffUia- tlon- D.
Detl!ndned Residence Rcl.l:' OT Extended Tribe Comraunt,ty Of t10n al1zed Death
Unit tives Camp Fan.ily Settle- a.Groups b.ColIt- Ties
""'Y Unit ... t Sev~r"l Within petlng Wh.b
Not Villages On. Religions Villages
Society: Live Religion
Together

1) Hbuti I 1 I

90 Tivi I I
a
N 118 Ainu X
..... 1
79 And ..lm.1 .. X 1

173 SirioDO I I
• X
1 tin ..,
Hottentot X X

34 Mud I 1

2S Fulani I X
36 SQ ~ll X X

41 Tuareg I X

46 Rwda X X

66 Hongols I X I X

108 MarshaUs X I X X

164 Sa rama
Cartb X X
 'TABU:: ,

Units of Social Affiliation Used to Define Location of Diapodtl!m

(Page 5 of 5)

1a 1b 3 4 , 6 8 , ,. 11

Dbtinctlon SingLe Innedi- lIol!le- Lineage 51b Guild VllLag~ Districte SociAl llel1g1ou8 Ethnic 1nlltltu- LocatIon
Absent DoilieS tIe at. !!tead Dr Clen Dr ClafJII Affiliation Affiliation tIon· .f
Residence Reia- Or Extended Tribe Community Of dh.cd Du.r.h
Unit tlves Cnmp Family Settle- R .Groupe b .Com- Tiett
..... y Unit ..eftt Several Withln petlng With
Not Villages On. Religions Villages
Society: Lt.ve ltel1gion
Together

2 :luns

M
Bushmen
•
N
M
91 Aranda
•
137 Paiute

1)9 Lower
•
lutena! X

180 Ave1lr.olM
•
185 Tehue.lche X

121t CQPper
EllIkllllo
•
186 Yamana
(or Yahgan) X

170 Aaahua;ca
 122

1. Nuclear family unit:

a. Single domestic residence unit; usually the nuclear family
with possibly one or more others.
b. Immediate relatives not necessarily living together : most
often parent and child, sometimes including grandparent or
more rarely spouse; sibling - sibling relationships are
more often important in keeping relics.

2. Homestead or camp unit: may include several nuclear families

residing together, for example, a minimal lineage or extended
family.

3. Lineage , up to maximal lineage, or extended family, all of whom

do not necessarily reside together .

4. Descent categories which recognize common kinship but whose members

are not able to trace exact kin relationships to other members.
In the literature these have been variously termed sib, clan
and even tribe.

5. Guild: kin or non-kin based occupational group which requires

common occupation for all its members.

6. Village or community settlement: composed of more than one home-

stead which may or may not all belong to the same kin group;
may be either dispersed or nucleated.

7. Districts: including several villages or settlements, for example,

Klamath tribal divisions or Korean administrative districts.

8. Social class: may distinguish slaves from free men and/or people
of rank from free COmmoners.

9. Religious affiliation:
a. special groups within a religious body, for example priest-
hoods or elders.
b. competing religious groups · as whole units, e.g., indigenous
religions, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism.

10. Ethnic affiliation: includes subgroups in a complex society and

politically independent people distinguishing themselves from
other societies.

11. Villages, to some degree at least ethnically distinct from the

people studied, but with whom these people have ·institutionalized
ties. In each case, the pinpointed group is nomadic.

12. Enemies

13. Strangers
 123

The treatment of enemies and strangers, where distinguished, is quite •

different from treatment based on units of social affiliation within the
•
group and in many cases is similar to the treatment afforded social outcasts.

Analysis of the disposition of enemies and strangers raises somewhat

different, though related questions. Unfortunately, discussion of these

questions is beyond the scope of this thesis.

Inspection of Table 9 indicates that while it is not clear in certain

cases whether or not a particular unit of social affiliation was dis-

tinguished, there is only one society, the Lamet, which can not be assigned

.to a Weak, Strong or Absent category for lack of information. Karl

Izikowitz (1941) is the only reliable source on the Lamet available to

me. Lamet burial places could be large or very small and were located

deep in the forest with no paths ·leading to them. Izikowitz' s (1941: 12)

statement "the cemetery is always situated outside the village" implies

they may be village cemeteries, although the small size of some suggests

they may be more narrowly defined on the basis of kin affiliation. I con-

sider it quite likely that more information would allow the Lamet to be

categorized with those societies making strong distinctions.

In general, the information concerning the distinction of the location

of disposition on the basis of social affiliation is good. The presence

or absence of burial places or cremation grounds, and who is buried or

cremated there may be noted where little additional information on mortuary

activities was recorded. However, information on most of the pastoralist

sO,c ieties in the weak category was brief and scattered. Categorization of

the Tuareg and Rwala is based on relatively limited evidence. It is ex-

pressly stated that when a Tuareg dies near an "ar'erem," a village, that
 124

he or she will be buried in the village cemetery. Otherwise they wi ll be

•
buried out in the hills (Benhazera 1908:19). The Rwala also take part

of the produce of a non tribal population which cultivates the soil in

their tribal territory (Marx 1978). Musil (1928), in the example given

on page 98, cites the case of a Rwala buried and honored at the settled

community with which he had close ties.

Of the 59 cases for which I obtained adequate information, nine

societies (15%) make no distinction in location of disposition according

to social affiliation and are "classed as Distinction Absent. This probably

overestimates the percentage occurring in the sampling population and the

sampling universe. In order to obtain equal sized strata to facilitate

study of variation, I deliberately undersampled the settled agriculturalists,

the subsistence group most likely to contain many societies which make a

strong distinction, while ov~rsampling the other subsistence categories, notably

pastoralism and fishing. A percentage more representative of the popula-

tion percentage could be obtained by proper weighting procedures. How-

ever, this figure is not of great interest to my present purposes. It

is clear that a large majority of societies choose to symbolize social

affiliation of at least some of the deceased through the place at which

the remains are deposited or kept. I am interested in comparing societies

with different practices in order to gain some understanding of why the

variation exists.

In eight of the nine societies where no distinction is made, the

location of the facility is determined largely by the location of the death.

By this I mean that the dead are buried or cremated near where they have

died. Time of year also determines location of disposition among the Copper
 125

Eskimo, while age and social position are important determinants to the

Yamana (Yahgan). The ninth society , the Amahua ca , are a very special

case as no facility of any kind remains. Cremation apparently is not

confined to a particular location. The ashes are carefully floated away

in the river and within two weeks the bones are ground into powder and

consumed at once by the closest relatives of the deceased. IVhen Some-

one dies of disease, the body is given a primary burial in the center

of his or her house for a short period, but by two weeks all is grine.

It could, be argue d that endocannibalism is an ultimate f orm o f disposing

of the deceased within the c enter of his or her family . In the absence

of substantiating evidence, I did not use this ar gument.

I have classified fourteen societies (about 24%) as "Distinction

Weakly Determined". Thi s percentage also a lmost certainly overestimates

the percentage occurring in the sampling population. In eleven of these

societies, the location of the facility for most people is determined at

least partly by the location of their death. They are placed fairly near

the location of their death and are not transported long distances to

places more appropriate for ritual and disposition. In one a dditional

case, the Saru Ainu, location 'of death is used to determine the place

of burial only in cases of death by accident or drowning. Normally, the

deceased is transported to his or her house, if death has not occurred

t here, for the proper mortuary ritual and is then buried in a remote and

secret place. The location of death does not influence the l ocation of

t he disposition in either the Marshall Islands or the Narobanchin Temple

Territory of the Khalka state.

 126

In five of these societies, the Fulani, Hottentot, Carib, Mbuti, and

Siriono, the deceased is normally interred in a defined location central

or peripheral to the life space of the domestic residence kin group. The

Carib, Mbuti, and Siriono are buried or left in the hut. The Fulani and

Hottentot are buried in positions peripheral to the camp. This space is

subsequently left. The Marshallese buried children of the chief in the

house but the space was not abandoned.

Children are likely to be · buried, or exposed, near their parents by

the Somali, Tiwi and Khalka Mongol if this can be conveniently accomplished.

This is true regardless of the age of the deceased. In two societies, the

Siriono and Andamans, the family normally keeps relics of all deceased

members for at least several years.

If an Mbuti, ~ala or Tuareg dies in a village with which he or· she

has institutionalized ties, he will be buried in the village cemetery. The

Tuareg and Rwala are also follOWing the practice of their religion in this

circumstance, while the Mbuti are not.

In four societies, people holding notably important social positions

were after death differentially placed within the life space of their

communities, the location being determined by their social affiliation.

The Masai and Ainu place distinguished elders near the Kraal or family

homestead respectively, and treat these graves in ritually special ways.

The Marshallese buried particularly important nobles, such as the Paramount

Chief, in clan burial grounds, although most people were deposited in the

ocean, the method of disposition depending upon social class. The Khalka

embalm extremely notable lamas or political leaders and keep them in

t emples or monastaries, the location of disposition determined by religious

affiliation.
 127

The practices of the Marshalle se and Mongols were difficult ' to classify .

The Marshall Islands are small atolls in the Pacific where land is very

precious. Most deceased were either sunk in the ocean or floated away

on small rafts. However, clan burial grounds did exist for very prominent

people. When Christian missionaries required the dead be buried on the

islands , clan cemeteries were created which continue in use today. This

change was beginning at the period to which my study is restricted. A

good case can therefore be made for classifying them with those where

the distinction under study is strongly determined.

The problem in classifying the Mongols arises partly because the group

to which they are pinpointed, the Narobanchin Temple Territory, is a small,

rural part of a larger state. Within the state as a whole there is no

question that religious an~ ethnic affiliation determine ,place of burial.

In urban areas cemeteries are set aside for Buddhists and foreigners such

as Chinese and Russians. If a Chinese or Russian happened to die in the

Narobanchin Temple Territory in the course of his travels, he would have

to be transported back to a designated urban area, it being illegal and

supernaturally dangerous to expose or bury him in the countryside. How-

ever, in the rural areas the location of exposure for the majori'ty of

the population, who are Buddhist, was determingd by religious divination

and was not confined to any given area. The location could be said to be

determined by religious affiliation in a distant way.

The Marshalls' and Mongolian practices seem closer to the strong

than the absent category, although strictly speaking the location of the

disposition of the majority of the population is not defined by the de-

ceased's social affiliation~ The other twelve cases can be correctly

grouped with the Absent rather than the Strong category, for a majority

of the population.
 In this Weak Category of 14 societies, location of death is a

determinant of location of disposition in 12 cases. Of the different

kinds of social affiliation which may determine this location, an in-

stitutionalized relationship with ethnically different villages is

important in 3 cases. The family or domestic residence kin group (Table

9 #la, lb, and 2) is important in 12 societies, the Tuareg and Rwala being

the only peoples which apparently do not make any of these distinctions (Table 10).

Religious affiliation influenced placement of the dead for both the Mongols

and }~rshallese. The Marshallese are the only people in this problematic

group placing their dead on the basis of clan and social class.

Of the 59 societies for which I obtained adequate information, 36

societies (61%) normally make important distinctions in the location of

disposition according to social affiliation of the deceasep and are classed

as Distinction Strongly Determined. For reasons stated above, this per-

centage almost certainly underrepresents the percentage occurring in the

sampling population and universe.

Location of death is not a major determinant of location of disposition

in any of these societies, in marked contrast to the societies in the Weak

I
and Absent categories. Location of death may influence the location of

disposition under certain circumstances in only five cases. For the

Ingalik and Lozi the person's death at different periods of the seasonal

cycle will determine the place of disposition. If a Toda, Yukaghir, or

Gheg dies at a place very distant from his or her kin group or home

settlement, the body mayor may not be brought back. If it is not ,

nothing is subtituted for the body at horne. Six of the societies in

this category do compensate for loss of the body by substituting objects ,

 TABLE: 10

\Jaits o( Soci31 AHthltlon Uoed to {lo!Une Location of Dhpodt.loD

Summ4rized Nuroerlcally

1. Ib 2 J 4 5 , • 9 10 11

Strengrh Sin tie 1lllll1cdi- ifOn!- Lineage S1b Guild Village Districts Social l.el1g1o~ Ethnic Instiru- Locatioo
DoOle5tic ate Bte nd Or Clan Or Clasa ~nl1ation AH111a- tion- Of
O( Realde.nce Rel.- 0, Extended Tribe. Coanunlty O( ti~ alhed Death
Unit. rivet! C1Jmp Fllmily Settle- a.Groupa b.Compe- Ties
Distinction: fuy Not Un!t ~nt Several Wic:hin ting With
Live Vnlagea One llellglons VULagea
Together Rell,loa
(V.lid Cases-
59)

'"
N
M
Abs ent
(9 socie- •
ties)

Wcak
<" , 5 , o 1 o o o 1 1 2 1 3 12
socle tlea)

Strong
(Jfi 10 2 1 10 11 2 24 2 , 5 11 , 2 5
90ciet1es)

•
 1 30

often the deceased's possessions, for the body in order to maintain the

proper place for the ritual and disposition.

It is clear from inspection of Table 9 that several kinds of social

affiliation may be used together to influence the place of disposition.

For example, each Kenuz village has a separate cemetery for the different

tribes living there. These criteria may be used to rigidly separate

people, as the Lozi commoners are buried in neighborhood cemeteries while

royalty is buried elsewhere. Alternatively, two or more criteria may be

used to order the spatial organization of people all "buried" at the same

place. Each !wana village had a burial ground composed of a number of

grave canoes raised above the ground. Each grave canoe held the dead of

one family of the village. In more complicated b.urial patterns, these

different uses - to separate and to order - may both be employed. For

example, most Thonga are buried by their huts, the single domestic

residence unit. However, each clan has a sacred woods which is the

particular responsibility of the men of the elder branch of the family.

These men are buried in the sacred woods, each village having its own

burial section there that is named after the headman of the village.

As Table 9 indicates, the single domestic residence unit and the

village or community settlement are not usually distinguished at the

Same time. People are, for example, either buried in their houses or

in a community burial place. The Bambara and Huichol settlements use

either one or the other practice, but not both. Some Igbo communities

under the influence of Christian missionaries have changed t heir practice

while most have not. Keeping relics allows both the domestic residence
 131

and the village to be distinguished at the same time. The Santal, Manus ,

Yukaghir and Yanomamo keep relics of some or all of the deceased in their

house while the primary disposition occurs at community designated loca-

tions. These latter locations arc permanent in the Santal, Manus and

Yukaghir communities, but shift as the Yanomamo move their settlements.

Of the different kinds of social affiliation which may partially·

determine location of disposition in the 36 societies categorized as

Distinction Strongly Determined, the village or community settlement

(Table 9 #6) is important in 24 (67%) of the cases. Two additional

societies have distinct burial or cremation grounds used by several

villages. The single domestic residence unit and ~arents and siblings

not necessarily living together (Table 9, la and lb combined) is im-

portant in 13 (36%) of the societies . The homestead is ·distinguished

in only one case, while the lineage or extended family not necessarily

all living together is important for nine societies . Sibs are important

in placing the dead for 11 (31%) of the societies, while guilds are also

distinguished by the Aztec and Bambara. Religious affiliation (#9) is

distinguished by 15 (42%) of the societies. Five of these created special

burial locations for particular groups within one religion, while 11 of

them place members of competing religions in different places. Social

class is a basis for distinction in six societies. It is interesting to

no t e that neither religious affiliation nor social class constitute the

only determinant of location of disposition in any of these societies.

Ethnic affiliation is distinguished by four societies, while the Basseri

and Lapps ideally are always buried in the cemeteries of those villages

with whom they have institutionalized ties.

•
 132

As indicated in Table 10, the eleven kinds of social affiliation

distinguished have quite different patterns of distribution in the Weak

and Strong categories. In the Strong category, all units of social

affiliation are distinguished by at least one society. Thirteen (36%) of

these societies use three or more of them in combination or opposition.

Membership in a village or settlement is important in 67% of these

societies. In the Weak category, 12 of the 14 societies distinguish

only the domestic unit, the family, the homestead or villages with whom

they have institutionalized ties (II la, lb, 2, and 11). Nine (64%) make

only one distinction. No societies distinguish membership in a community .

although the Tuareg, Rwala and Mbuti do acknowledge ties with ethnically

different villages when a member of ·t heir group happens to die there.

The domestic residence and immediate kin group, #la and b. important in

57% of the weak category, is the modal unit. Four of the Weak category

distinguish #2. the camp or homestead and none distinguish #3, the lineage

or extended family which do not reside together. In contrast, only one

society in the Strong category locates burial near the residential home-

stead unit, #2, while nine do distinguish #3, the lineage or extended

family which do not reside together. In the Weak category, sib, social

class and religious affiliation are distinguished by only the Marshallese

and Mongols, both of which are extremely difficult to classify. This

finding seems to bear out my feeling that the distinctions made on the

bas.i s of social affiliation by these people are stronger than those made

by the remaining 12 of the Weak category.

In a general way, this pattern is consistent with my prediction that

societies with widely dispersed and fluid social groups will either make
 133

no distinction in location on the basis of social affiliation, or will

distinguish only the domestic family unit or the homestead camp unit.

Those .societies which use social affiliation only in certain cases usually

do distinguish only these family and homestead oriented units. Whether

these societies are indeed those with fluid social groups can be shown

best in the context of the full data analysis.

To summarize these observations, 1. 36 (61%) of the societies in

my sample routinely use criteria of affiliation with certain social units

for placing their dead; 14 (about 24%) do so only weaklY, while nine (15%)

do not do so at all. 2. The location where death occurs is a major

determinant of location of disposition in both the Weak and Absent

categories but becomes unimportant in the Strong category. 3. The modal

unit of social affiliation shifts from the domestic-residence and immediate

kin group ( #la and lb) in the Weak category to the village or

community settlement (#6) in the Strong category (see Table 10). 4. In

addition, those who normally use social affiliation as a basis upon which

to place most of their dead tend to distinguish a greater variety of

social units for that purpose.

 134

CHAPTER FIVE. DATA ANALYSIS •

A. Review of Pertinent Theoret i cal Predictions

In the preceding discussion of social and ec-o nomic conditions which

might affect the location of the disposition of the dead, two types of

theories were contrasted. Theories of one type expect one or two in-

dividual independent variables, such as Fixity of Residence or Social

Stratification, to exert the predominant influence on whether and how

social affiliation is distinguished in the location of disposition of

the dead. Predominance of one independent variable would be readily

apparent when the various economic and social factors are individua lly

correlated with the degree to which Social Affiliation is s~bolized by

Location of Disposition. Theories of the second type" on the other hand,

expect the pattern of interaction of all possible forces to be predominant .

Such theories predict that roughly equivalent strengths of association

will be found between the degree to which Social Affiliation is symbolized

by Location of Disposition and each of the social and economic factors

which exert equivalent influence. Within possible theories of the second

type (cybernetic or field theories), two contrasting hypotheses are

relevant. One hypothesis expects that under any particular set of circum-

stances , anyone or more of the independent variables may exert a critical

influence. If this hypothesis is correct, the pattern of deviant cases

would be likely to seem contradictory and confusing. The other hypo-

thesis, which deals most comprehensively with the processes involved,

i s that differing patterns of economic and social forces create through

time various types of social groups; the type of social group, acting as
 135

an intervening variable, exerts the critical influence on whether and how

social affiliation is distinguished in disposition of the dead. If the

second hypothesis is cocrect, specific economi c and social variables can

be used to predict patterns in the distribution and nature of dissident

caseSe

B. Statistical Measures Used

Eight bivariate relationships were examined in order to distinguish

differing predictions. The relative predictive powers of knowing the Degree

of Sedentism, the Density of Population, the Degree of Urbanization, the

Degree of Social Stratification, the Level of Political Integration, the

Degree of Technological Specialization, the Degree of Dependence upon

Agriculture and the type of Subsistence Economy were elucidated further

I by a multivariate analysis. As all variables are ordinal or show'a strong

ordinal relationship with location of disposition according to social

affiliation, multiple regression analysis is used to confirm results in-

dicated by multivariate analysis. Multiple regression analysis was not

used alone.

The analyses required a choice among a variety of possible statistical

measures. In most instances an ordinal measure of association appeared to

be appropriate. Since I also wished to determine whether strong non-linear

relationships existed, I computed a nominal measure of association. In

using more than one measure of association I followed a school of thought

which holds that reliance on a single index may cause one to overlook im-

portant aspects of the data (Reynold 1977). Because location of disposition

is clearly a dependent variable, I preferred to use an asymmetric measure

 136

of association. I also considered the interpretation of the measure and

its sensitivity to confounding influences.

Each of the eight bivariate cross tabulations resulted in a 3 by 5

table before any categories were comtined. The total number of cases was

59. Both the row (dependent variable) and column (independent variable)

marginal totals were uneven.in most tables. Under these circumstances,

chi square and measures of association derived from the chi square are

somewhat inaccurate (Blalock 1972). However, I included chi square scores

and their levels of significance for even large tables in order to give at

least a rough idea of the significance level obtained for each association.

I used Goodman and Kruskal's tau as a nominal measure of strength of

association. It is an asymmetric measure. Because the dependent variable

(the Location of Disposition as Defined by Social Affiliation) is denoted

~ . ~
LOCDP, ty here becomes tLOCDP' or written mare briefly, t LDP
~
Goodman and

Kruskal's tau is especially useful because it is insensitive to the unequal

magnitude of the row marginals (see Reynold 1977 and Blalock 1972). Tau

ranges between 0 and 1. In general, numerical values of tau are smaller

than those obtained for many other measures of association.

In using ordinal measures of association, it is best to retain as many

categories of each variable as possible in order to reduce the number of

ties and thereby to reduce the differences among the various measures

(Blalock 1972; Loether and McTavish 1974). There are a number of useful

ordinal measures with no clear rule for choosing among them. Kendall's

tau is a symmetrical measure of association which is good for all rby c

c
tables. Kendall has developed a test of significance for tau • Therefore,
c
Kendall's tau c is a useful measure of the significance of the overall
 137

symmetric, linear relationships obtaining in the tables under considera-

tion.
•However, for greater precision an asymmetric measure of association

is needed. Somer's d is asymmetric, appropriate and widely used. Because

they are both useful, I have included both. Both Somers' d and Kendall's

tau c range between -1 and +1. The - and + signs indicate a negative or

positive ordinal relationship respectively.

c. Bivariate Relationships

Discussion of the eight bivariate relationships follows. I will

fully define each independent social, economic and demographic variable.

I will examine the strength of the association and the nature of the re-

lationship between ·each independent variable and the dependent variable.

I will determine when important shifts occur in the use of

Location of Disposition to symbolize Social Affiliation as each

of the social and economic variables changes in degree of intensity or

complexity. I will then explore the theoretical implications of these

shifts. When useful, I will discuss the characteristics of the deviant

cases. In addition, I will observe whether the units of social affilia-

tion tend to change in type as the social and economic conditions are

varied. For each bivariate relationship I will discuss which theoretical

predictions made in the preceding discussion are substantiated. Finally ,

I will compare the bivariate relationships and order them according to

the strengths of their association.

If there is a meaningful relationship between any of the social,

economic and demographic factors and the Degree to which Location of

Disposition is Used to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the Deceased, a

reasonably strong, positive correlation between the two will be demonstrated.

 138

If instead, the measured association between the social, economic or

demographic variable and the Degree to which Location of Disposition

is Used to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the Deceased can be shown

to be reasonably attributable to sampling error alone, then a relation-

ship between the two is unlikely. In order to reject this null hypo-

thesis, I will accept a level of significance for the measure of the

existence of the association of ~. = .05. My expectations will also

be upset if a negative association is demonstrated. In this event , new

explanations would be necessary.

1. Fixity of Residence as independent variable

The degree to which a people are nomadic or sedentary seems to have

an important effect on whether or not they use location of disposition as

a mortuary symbol. The effect may be one of physical convenience or in-

convenience. It may occur indirectly through the type of social groups

required for successful adaptation to a particular subsistence economy

and geography.

Murdock and Provost (1973:380) have rated each society on the

following scale of Fixity of Residence:

4. Settlements are sedentary and relatively permanent.

3. Settlements are sedentary but impermanent.
2. The pattern of settlement is semisedentary .
1. The pattern of settlement is seminomadic.
o. The pattern of settlement is fully nomadic.

These terms are not more fully defined. However, in a previous paper the

following definitions were used (Murdock and Wilson 1972:256-257, order

reversed) .
 l39

Fixity of Settlement
•
P Permanent settlements, occupied throughout the year and for
long or indefinite periods.

I Impermanent settlements, occupied throughout the year but

periodically moved for ecological reasons or because of un-
toward events like an epidemic or the death of a headman.

T Semisedentary settlements, occupied throughout the year by

at least a nucleus of the community's population, but from
which a substantial proportion of the population departs
seasonally to occupy shifting camps, e.g., on extended
hunting or fishing trips or during pastoral transhumance.

R Rotating settlements, i.e., two or more permanent or semi-

permanent settlements occupied successively at different
seasons.

S Seminomadic communities, occupying temporary camps for much

of the year but aggregated in a fixed settlement at some
season or seasons, e.g., recurrently occupied winter quarters.

B Migratory or nomadic bands, occupying temporary camps for brief

periods successively throughout the year .

Murdock and Provost (1973) recoded B as 0, S as 1, Rand T as 2, I as 3 ,

and P as 4. It should be noted that category B does not discriminate

between nomadic groups which follow essentially the same migration routes

year after year and those engaged in more dispersed, less predictable

movement.

The analysis tested the prediction that as Fixity of Residence de-

clines to full nomadism the likelihood decreases that Social Affiliation

will be used to define the Location of Disposition of the dead. As

residence becomes increasingly permanent, use of this symbolism becomes

increasingly more likely. Therefore, a strong, positive correlation

between the two is expected.

The extent to which the Use of Social Affiliation to Define Location

of Disposition is related to Fixity of Residence can be seen in Tables lla

 140

and 11b. In the full 3 by 5 bivariate table (Table lla) , chi square is

20.55 with a significance of « =.01. Goodman and Kruskal's t

LDP
is .220.

Kendall's tau at .433 indicates a reasonably strong overall linear re-

c
lationship which is significant at ct. -.001. The asymmetric Somers' d

is .374. In Table 11b chi square becomes a reliable measure and indicates

that an overall association exists which is significant at a =.001. There-

fore ·, it is reasonable to reject the null hypothesis that no relationship

exists between Degree of Fixity of Residence and Use of Social Affiliation

to Define Location of Disposition. The data indicate a reasonably strong

relationship which is quite unlikely to occur by chance alone. As pre-

dieted, the association is positive; as Fixity of Residence increases,

the likelihood of using Location of Disposition to S.ymbo1ize Social

Affiliation increases .
•
Examination of Table 11a reveals that a major shift in Use of Location

to Symbolize Social Affiliation occurs between seminomadic and semi-

sedentary patterns of settlement. While some fully nomadic or semi-

nomadic peoples do use social affiliation to define location of dis-

position for a majority of the population, most make weak distinctions

or fail to use this type of symbolism at all. Semisedentary or sedentary

peoples are very likely to make this mortuary distinction strongly. The

chi square of 18.91 in Table 11b is highly significant, although the

strength of the overall association is somewhat less than in Table 11a.

When the data are placed in the form of Table lIb the linear relationship

is shown to be very strong, with Somers' d moving from .374 in Table 11a

to .565 in Table 11b. While 87% of the 31 more sedentary societies

regularly use Social Affiliation to define Location of Disposition, 68%

 TABLE 11a
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by pegree of Fixity of Residence
DEGREE OF FIXITY OF RESIDENCE
Count Fully Semi- Semisedentary Sedentary but Sedentary & Row
COL PCT Nomadic Nomadic Impermanent Permanent Total
O. l. 2. 3. 4.
LOCDP 1 0 9
l. 5 3 0
ABSENT 26% 33% .00 14% .00 15%

2. 8 3 1 1 1 14
WEAK 42% 33% 11% 14% 7% 24%

.... 3. 6 3 8 5 14 36
'".... STRONG 32% 33% 89% 71% 93% 61%

Column 19 9 9 7 15 59
Total 32% 15% 15% 12% 25% 100.00

Chi Square ; 20.55 With 8 Deg of Freedom

Significance = .01
Kenda ll's Tau C = .433 Significance; .001
Somers' D (Asymmetric) .374 With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's Tau .220 With LOCDP Dependent
 TABLE lIb
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Degree of Fixity of Residence Dichotomized

DEGREE OF FIXITY OF RESIDENCE

Count Nomadic Sedentary Row

COL PCT 0-1 2-4 Total
1. 2.
LOCDP
1. 8 1 9
ABSENT 29% 3% 15%
'"....
.-i 2. 11 3 14
WEAK 39% 10% 24%

STRONG 3. 9 27 36
32% 87% 61%

Column 28 31 59
Total 47% 53% 100.00
Chi Square = 18.91 Significance = .001
Kendall's Tau C ~ .563 Significance = .001
Somers' D (Asymmetric) . ~ .565 With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's Tau = .206 With LOCDP Dependent
 143

of the 28 nomadic peoples use this distinction we~ly or not at all.

However, roughly one third of the nomadic societies do make this dis-

tinction strongly. A sedentary mode of life is close to being a

sufficient condition for use of Location of Disposition to symbolize

Social Affiliation of the Deceased, but it is not a necessary condition

for use of this symbol.

I have predicted that a substantial number of dissident cases with

low Fixity of Residence (levels 0 and 1) would suggest that the type

of local group or the stability of some higher level of organization is

a more directly determining factor than the Degree of Nomadism itself.

Consistent with this hypothesis would be dissident nomadic and seminomadic

societies with home ranges which have relatively stable routes of migration

and/or more stable local groups tn spite of their high mobility. It is

also possible higher levels of socio-political organization may have a

determining influence on the location of disposition.

In examination of the deviant cases {see Table lIe}, it is helpful

to begin with the four more sedentary societies where Use of Social

Affiliation to Define Location of Disposition is Weak or Absent. The

only society with relatively high Fixity of Residence for whom this

distinction is Absent are the Amahuaca of the Peruvian Amazon jungle.

The exceptional nature of the practices of this society, in which the

remains of the dead are totally dispersed or consumed within two weeks,

Was discussed on page 125. It is possible to argue that Amahuacan endo-

cannibalism is a form of Strong Distinction, although I have not felt

justified in doing so. The Amahuaca are agriculturalists with sedentary

but impermanent settlements. It is suggestive that they are the only

 144

TABLE llc
(Page 1 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Fixity of Residence

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Fixity of Units of social Units of social Units of social
Residence affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 0: (Mean number of (Mean number of

Fully Nomadic units of social units of social
aff ilia tion: 1.13) affiliation: 2.17)

Mean number of Bushmen Mbuti la, 11 Lapps 3, 9b, 11

units of social Aranda Tiwi Ib Samoyed 4, 9b
affiliation: 1.57 Aweikoma Hottentot 2 Basseri 9b, 11
Tehuelche Fulani 2 Goajiro 3, 4
Yamana (Yahgan) Masai 2 Badjau 10
Somali lb Yukaghir la, 6, 9b
Tuareg 11
Rwala 11

Levell: (Mean number of (Mean number of

Seminomadic units of social units of social
affiliation: 2.33) affiliation: 2)

Mean number of Paiute Andamans lb Gilyak 4, 6

units of social Kutenai Siriono la, lb Twana 3, 6
affiliation: 2.17 Copper Eskimo Mongols lb, 9a, 9l Klamath Ib, 7
10

Level 2: (Mean number of (Mean number of

Semisedentary units of social units of social
affiliation: 1) affiliation: 1.63)
Mean number of
units of social Ainu 2 Pomo 6
affiliation: 1.56 Toda 4
Ingalik 6
Lozi 6, 8
Gheg 3, (4), 6, 9b
Tanala 4, 6, Ib
Creek la
Papago 6, 9b
 145

TABLE He
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Fixity of Residepce

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Fixity of
Units of social Units of social Units of social
Residence
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
'. tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 3: (Mean number of (Hean number of

Sedentary but units of social units of social
Impermanent affiliation: 1) affiliation: 2.8)

Mean number of Amahuaca Barama Carib la Thonga la, 4, 6,

units of social 9a
affiliation: 2 .5 Bemba 6, 8, 3, 4,
9a
Iban 6
Yanomamo la & b, 6
Tupillamba la, 2

Level 4: (Mean number of (Mean number of

I Sedentary and
Permanent

Mean number of
units of social
affiliation: 4)

Marshalls la, 4,
units of social
affiliation: 3)

Manus la, 3, 6
units of social 8, 9b Fiji la
affiliation: 3.07 Igbo la, 3, 6,
9a, 9b
Bambara la, 5, 6,
8, 9a, 10
Kenuz 4, 6
Rif 6
San tal la & b, 6,
9b
Toradja 6, 9b
Yap 3, (4), 8
Korea 3, 4, 6, 7,
8, 9b
Huichol la, 6, 9b
Aztec la, 4, 5,
.9a
Quich~ 6, 10
Inca 3, 6, 10
 146

Shifting Agricultural'ists i n my sample in which Population Density, Degree

of Urbanization, Social Stratification and Political Integration have all

been assessed at the lowest rank. They live in a very dispersed settle-

ment pattern in a land rich in resources, partly as a result of the extreme

danger of complete annihilation to which they have been subjected ·for

several centuries. Individuals must be self sufficient. The composition

of the domestic family unit appears to be relatively changeable over time.

Of the three more sedentary societies which make only a Weak dis-

tinction, the Ainus' failure to make a Strong distinction is puzzling.

They follow a semisedentary settlement pattern with largely endogamous

settlements. Social affiliation does define the location of the burial

of elders, but, as far as is known, is not used for the rest of the popula-

tion. The practices of the Barama ~arib of Guyana, on the other hand, are

completely consistent with the hypothesis that the type of social group

acts' as an intervening variable. The Barama depend upon fishing supplemented

by shifting agriculture and hunting. Land is abundant. Access to fishing

is unrestricted both seasonally and territorially. Hunting is individual.

Gillen (1936; 1948) stresses that although settlements are sedentary (but

impermanent), the economy favors individualism. Mobility of individuals

is high. Loyalty to established residence groups is low. The organization

of residence groups is loose. The Barama Carib's extreme emphasis on in-

dividualism is reflected in the burial of the deceased in the house of the

domestic kin group, normally the nuclear family, of which he or she was a

member. The abandonment of the house is accompanied by emphasis on forgetting

the deceased. These individualistic attitudes probably result from "the

loose organization of mortal social life" (Gillen 1936:168) and in turn

either prevent, .o r permit avoidance, of emphasis on tradition.

 147

The only fully sedentary people to use Location of Disposition to

symbolize Social Affiliation for only a minority of their population

live on the Marshall Islands, tiny atolls in the Pacific. Their practices

of ritualized . abandonment in the ocean were.described on page 127. When

Christian missionaries required the dead be buried on the islands, ceme-

teries not only symbolized religious affiliation but also were segregated

by both clan and social class.

There are six societies following fully nomadic lifeways (level 0)

which regularly use Location of Disposition to symbolize Social Affiliation

(see Table lIe). Of these, the Lapps, Samoyed, Basseri, and Yukaghir have

relatively stable routes of migration within a home range system. The

reindeer herding Samoyed clans regulate use of territory. All Samoyed

are buried in clan cemeteries. The pastoral Lapps and Basseri are buried

at villages with which they have institutionalized economic and religious

ties. In 1859 the Yukaghir of the Upper Kolyma River in northern Siberia

depended upon fishing with hunting and gathering also important. The

local settlement group was the important administrative unit above the

bilateral family. Living places were regularly returned to in the course

of seasonal migration. The deceased were placed in elevated graves just

outside the community. According to the old men, "in some places they were

so numerouS that the elevated graves seemed to be large villages on piles"

(Jochelson 1926:223). It is relevant to note that other Yukaghir living

upon the tundra rather than along the rivers followed more unpredictable

patterns of movement within a more dispersed form of economy and social

organization. For these people, location of death was the determinant

of location .of disposition . The Goajiro of Columbia are cattle pastoralists.

Available information on Goajiro land use is inadequate. Although the

 148

Goajiro clans are associated with named territories, their great importance

in the 1950's rested with their very real regulation of inheritance a~d

the payment of bride wealth, and the imperative need for defence against

other clan groups. All Goajiro are buried in clan cemeteries. The Tawi-

Tawi Badjau, who live among the islands of the Sulu archipelago, depend

largely upon fishing and trade for their subsistence. They live either

entirely in their boats, or partly in boats and partly in pile houses.

Some Tawi-Tawi live largely in or around their affinal or home pile

villages, while others are purely nomadic boat-living nuclear family units.

The territory of the Tawi-Tawi is partially defined by the location of

their burial islands. The use of these particular low, uninhabited islands

"distinguish(es) the Tawi-Tawi Badjau from the other Badjau of Sulu, who

I have their own burial islands" (Nimmo 1965 :42"4).

l The three societies following seminomadic patterns of residence (level

1) which regularly use Location of Disposition to symbolize Social Affilia-

tion are the Gilyak, Twana and Klamath. All three are fishing peoples

who live in permanently located villages for a part of the year. All

define location of disposition according to kin affiliation and village

membership.

All nine of these societies which make Strong distinctions despite

low Fixity of Residence either have relatively stable local groups or have

need of a strong sib or territorial organization. In no "case have levels

of socio-political organization above the village had a determining in-

fluence on the location of disposition. This group taken as a whole con-

trasts strikingly with the eight societies with low fixity of residence

for whom Use of Social Affiliation to Define Location of Disposition is

 14~

Absent. The Bushmen, Aranda, Aweikoma, Yamana, Tehuelche, Paiute and

Copper Eskimo follow a dispersed economy with fluid local groups. Residence

in Paiute and Copper Eskimo winter settlements is not predictably stable

from year to year. Further researc~ will be necessary to attempt to

determine the relative stability of the Lower Kutenai local groups. Their

band - village organization appears to have been more tightly knit than

is the case for the other seven societies in this group . The group of

eleven societies with low Fixity of Residence which make Weak distinctions

show a .more complex, variable picture intermediate between the groups

with no and strong distinctions. The distribution of cases supports my

hypothesis that the stability or fluidity of the local group or the need

for a strong organization above the local group exerts a more directly

determining influence than Degree of· Nomadism itself.

2. Population Density as independent variable

If my hypothesis is correct, it is clear that in many instances the

degree to which the local groups are required to move about forms an

important influence upon the fluidity or stability of the local group.

Another influence upon the type of social group which may operate in-

dependently of Fixity of Residence is Density of Population. This is

suggested by the variability of mortuary practice in the Khalka state,

and by the failure of the relatively sedentary Amahuaca to use social

affiliation to define location of disposition.

Each society has been rated on the following scale of Density of

Population (Murdock and Provost 1973:382):

4. The mean density of population exceeds 100 persons per

square mile.
 150

3. The density of population averages between 26 and 100

persons per square mile.

2. The density of population averages between 5.1 and 25

persons per square mile.

1. The density of population averages between one and

five persons per square mile.

O. The density of population averages fewer t han one

person per square mile.

The analysis tested the prediction that in societies with high population

density absence of the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize

,. Social

Affiliation of the Deceased will be rare, but that as Population Density

declines to low levels an increasing number of societies will fail to use

location as a symbol. Therefore, a strong, positive association between

the two is expected.

The bivariate relationship between Density of Population and the Use

of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Deceased's Social Affiliation

can be seen in Table 12a. Chi square is 21 . 54 with a Significance of

~ = .01. Goodman and Kruska1's t LDP is .202. Kendall's tau

c
at .454

indicates a reasonably strong, positive overall linear relationship which

is highly significant at rJ. = .001. The asymmetric Somers' d is .418.

It is therefore reasonable to reject the null hypothesis that no re1ation-

ship exists between Density of Population and Use of Social Affiliation to

Define Location of Disposition. The data indicate a reasonably strong

relationship which is quite unlikely to occur by chance alone.

Table 12a shows that all nine societies which fail to use Location

of Disposition to Symbolize Affiliation have a population level at the

lowest rank, under one person per square mile. However, of the 26

societies with this level of population density, about one third make
 TABLE l2a
Location of Disposition As ,
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Mean Density of Population
DEGREE OF POPULATION DENSITY
Count Under 1 1 to 5 5.1 to 25 26 to 100 Over 100 Row
COL PCT person per people per people per people per people per Total
square mile square mile square mile square mile square mile
1. 2. 3. 4.
o 0 0 0 9
__~J:
J'~
' ______~.~O~O_________~S.~OO~~====~.OO ~===-~~~0~_______1_5%____
:~
4 1 0 1 14
JU 36% ,17% .QQ..,. 13~ 24%
9%
7 5 8 7 36
');(; 64% '-l!3% l~ 88!.J 61%
91%
11 6 8 8 59
19% 10% 14% 14% 100.00

With 8 Deg of Freedom

Significance ~ .OT
With LOCDP Dependent
Significance = .001
With LOCDP Dependent
 152

the mortuary distinction Weakly and the remaining one third Strongly dis-

tinguish social affiliation by location of disposition. This relatively

even distribution of cases at Population Density level 0 depresses the

A
value of t ' Goodman and Kruska1's tau is an asymmetric measure. It
LDP
is not based on a comparison of obtained and expected frequencies, but

is a PRE statistic derived from the ability to predict where an individual

case will be found on the basis of the distribution of cases (Blalock 1972) .

Where Population Density is under one person per square mile, chances of

predicting whether any given society will make a Strong, a Weak or No

mortuary distinction are relatively poor. Statistics based on chi square

are not depressed for the relationship between Population Density and

Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation. Cramer's V

for Table l2a is .427 compared with a Cramer's V of .417 for the relation-

ship between Fixity of Residence and Location of Disposition as a Symbol

of Social Affiliation (Table lla). On the other hand, the progressive

changes in the distribution of the percentages in Table l2a show a reason-

ably strong linear relationship.

It is possible to predict that societies with Population Densities

over one person per square mile are extremely likely to make some use of

Location of Disposition to symbolize Social Affiliation. Peoples with

Population Densities over five persons per square mile are very likely

to make this distinction regularly. At Population Densities below one

person per square mile, it is twice as likely that the distinction will

be Absent or Weak as it is to be made Strongly. It seems that high pop-

u1ation can be regarded as a sufficient but ' not necessary condition for

the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Social Affiliation

of the Deceased.
 153

Lienhardt (1962) and Douglas (1973) both suggest that as population

density increases people become increasingly preoccupied with man-oriented

concerns. The number and kinds of distinctions drawn between people in-

crease. At the same time, questions of social affiliation become in-

creasingly important. It might be expected that more different kinds of

units of social affiliation will be used by peoples with higher popula-

tion density. It is uncertain whether all the units of affiliation each

uses
societYAhave actually been counted in every case. Therefore, the quality

of the data does not justify use of powerful statistics. A simple com-

parison of means is suggestive, however. It is also reasonable to ask

whether the nuclear family or domestic residence unit will be more likely

to be distinguished by peoples with very thinly scattered population.

At population densities under one person per square mile, those people

who make a Weak distinction (see Table l2b) use' only the domestic residence

unit (la), the immediate family (lb), the homestead or camp unit (2), or

villages with which they have institutionalized ties (11) to define the

location of disposition. Of the nine societies at the lowest level of

Population Density which make a Strong distinction, four distinguish the

immediate family (lb) and/or domestic residence group (la) in conjunction

with other units of social affiliation. Three distinguish sib membership

(4). Five distinguish the village or community settlement (6). This

contrast between societies in the Weak and Strong categories suggests

that type of social group may be an important intervening variable in

many cases. Within the group as a whole, the mean number of units of

social affiliation distinguished by each society is 1.53.

 154

TABLE 12b
(Page 1 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Density of Population

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Density of
Units of social Units of social Units of social
population
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 0: fewer (Mean number of (Mean number of

than one person units of social units of social
per square mile affiliation: 1.25) affiliation : 1.77)

Hean number of ·Bushmen Mbuti la, 1 Samoyed 4, 9b

units of social Aranda Tiwi Ib Goajiro 3, 4
affiliation: 1.53 Paiute Ainu 2 Badjau 10
Kutenai Siriono la, It Gilyak 4, ·6
Aweikoma Hottentot 2 Yukaghir la, 6, 9b
Tehuelche Tuareg 11 Ingalik 6
Copper Eskimo Rwala 11 lGamath Ib, 7
Yamana (Yahgan) Barama Carib la Yanomamo la & b,
Amahuaca 6
Tupinamba . la, 2

Levell: Average (Mean number of (Mean number of

of one t o five units of social units of social
persons per squar affiliation: 1. 75) affiliation: 2.43)
mile

Mean number of Andamans Ib Pomo 6

units of social Fulani 2 Lapps 3, 11, 9b
affiliation: 2. 18 Masai 2 Basseri 9b, 11
Mongols Ib, 9a, Bemba 3,4,6,8, 9a
9b, 10 Tanala 4, 6, 11.
Creek la
Huichol la or b, 9b

Level 2: Average (Mean number of (Mean number of

of 5.1 to ?5 units of social units of social
persons per affiliation: 1) affiliation: 2.6)
square mile

Mean number of . Somali Ib Lozi 6, 8

units of social Iban 6
affiliation: 2.33 Bambara la, 5,6,8,
9a, 10
Toradja 6, 9b
Inca 3, 6, 10
 155

TABLE l2b
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Density of Population

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Density of Units of social Units of social Units of social
population affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 3: Average (Hean number of (Mean number of

of 26 to 100 units of social units of social
persons per affiliation: ) affiliation: 2.13)
square mile
Mean number of Toda 4
units of social Manus la, 3, 6
affiliation: 2. 13 Twana 3, 6
Gheg 3, (4) • 6, 9b
Papago 6, 9b
Kenuz 4, 6
Yap 3, B,(4)
QuicM 6, 10
•
Level 4: Exceeds (Mean number of (Mean number of
100 persons units of social units of social
per square mile affiliation: 4) affiliation: 3.43)
Mean number of Harshall Islands Fiji la
units of social la, 4, B, 9b Thong a la, 4, 6, 9a
affiliation: 3.5 Igbo la, 3, 6, ga"
9b
Rtf 6
Santal I, 6, 9b
Korea 3,4, 6, 7,
B, 9b
Aztec la, 4,5, 9a
 156

A similar pattern of kinds of units of social affiliation distinguished

is evident among peoples with mean population levels between one to

twenty-five persons per square mile (levels 1 and 2). Three societies

distinguish special groups within the indigenous religion (9a). The Khalka

Mongolian practices are clearly exceptional among those societies classed

as making a Weak mortuary distinction. In the group of societies which

make a Strong distinction, the Bemba and Bambara are noteworthy. They

distinguish five and six different kinds of units of social affiliation in

contrast to the more common two. The mean number of units of social affilia-

tion used by each society at level lis 2.18. The corresponding means at

levels 2 and) are very close at 2.33 and 2.13 respectively (see Table l2b) .

Societies with a Population Density which exceeds 100 persons per square

mile (level 4) do tend to use more different ~inds of units of social affilia-

tion to define location of dispos i tion . The mean number of units of social

affiliation distinguished by these societies is 3.5. Of the eight so.cieties

using four or more kinds of social affiliation, five are included at this

highest level of population density. Before the introduction of Christian

missionaries, the Igbo and Marshall Islanders each only distinguished three

kinds of social affiliation by location of burial. It is somewhat mis-

leading to include them among societies using four or more kinds of social

affiliation, although they did so during the time period to which my

attention is directed. If they are omitted, three out of six societies

using over three kinds of units of social affiliation are found at level

4. There are seven societies with a Population Density over 100 persons

per square mile which make a Strong mortuary distinction. Four use the

family dwelling (the domestic residence unit, la) as the most common
 157

location for the disposition of their dead. The domestic residence unit

is likely to be distinguished by societies at all levels of Population

Density. Village membership can be a very important determinant of

location of disposition at very low levels of Population Density.

The only society besides the Marshallese which has a population

density over 5.1 persops per square mile but only Weakly distinguishes

social affiliation by location of disposition is the Somali. Somali

local organization is based on fluid and independent stock-keeping groups

(Baxter 1972). Somalis do prefer to bury immediate relatives together

when this is not difficult to accomplish. This also suggests that the

stability of the local group in many cases may be an important intervening

variable between Population Density and the Degree to which Social Affilia-

tion is Symbolized by Location of Disposition.

It is possible for village membership to be the most important unit

of social affiliation symbolized by location of disposition at very low

levels of Population Density. Perhaps the average size of the population

of local communities might be a better predictor of the Degree to which

Social Affiliation is Symbolized by Location of Disposition than overall

Population Density. Societies with overall low density of population

which regularly distinguish village or community membership in the loca-

tion of their dead may be most often clustered in moderately sized local

communities of at least 100 persons for at least part of the year .

3. Degree of Urbanization as independent variable

Each society has been rated on the following scale of Degree of Urban-

ization (Murdock and Provost 1973:380):

 158

4. The population of local communities averages in excess

of 1,000 persons.

3. The population of local communities averages between

400 and 999 persons.

2. The population of local communities averages between

200 and 399 persons.

1. The population of local communities averages between

100 and 199 persons .

O. The population of local communities averages fewer

than 100 persons.

The analysis tested the prediction that peoples with very small sized

communities will be less likely to use social affiliation to define location

of disposition while those with large sized communities will be very likely

to do so. Therefore, a strong, positive association between the two is

expected.

The bivariate relationship between Degree of Urbanization and the

Use of. Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Deceased's Social Affilia-

tion can be seen in Tables l3a and l3b. In the full 3 by 5 table (Table

l3a), chi square is ,. 9.60, which with eight degrees of freedom is not

significant at'" =.05. Goodman and Kruskal's "'t is .100. Kendall's

LDP
tau at .300 indicates a positive, rather weak overall linear relation-
c
ship which, however, is significant at '" =.01.

The Absent and Weak categories of Location of Disposition on the

Basis of Social Affiliation are combined in Table l3b. Chi square is

reliable, and is significant at a =.02. Goodman and Kruskal's "t in-

LDP
creases to .147. Somers' d is .287. Therefore, I conclude that there is

a weak association in this sample between Degree of Urbanization and Degree

of Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the

Deceased. When tabulated in its most condensed form this association is

acceptably significant.
 TABLE 13a
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Size of Local Communities

DEGREE OF URBANIZATION
100 to 199 200 to 399 400 to 999 Over 1,000 Row
Count Under 100
persons persons persons persons Total
COL PCT persons

o. 1- 2. 3. 4.
LOCDP
1- 6 3 0 0 0 9
ABSENT 23% 20% .00 .00 .00 15%

2. 8 4 1 1 0 14
WEAK 31% 27% 13% 17% .00 24%

3. 12 8 7 5 4 36
'" STRONG 46% 53% 88% 83% 100.00 61%
'"
.....

Column 26 15 8 6 4 59
Total 44% 25% 14% 10% 7% 100.00

Chi Square = 9.60 With 8 Deg of Freedom

Significance = 2.94. not significant
Goodman & Kruskal's tau .100 With LOCDP Dependent
Kendall's Tau C = .300 Significance = .01
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .282 With LOCDP Dependent

-
 TABLE l3b
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Size of Local Communities

DEGREE OF URBANIZATION

Count Under 100 100 to 199 Over 200 Row

COL PCT Peo~le Peo~le People Total
0 1 2
LOCDP
1 14 7 2 23
ABSENT AND WEAK 54% 47% 11% 39%
0 •
'".-I 2 12 8 16 36
STRONG 46% 53% 89% 61%

Column 26 15 18 59
Total 44% 25% 31% 100.00

Raw Chi Square ~ 8.67 With 2 Deg of Freedom

Significance = .02
Kendall's Tau C = .372. Signif icance ~ .01
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .287 . With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's tau = .147 With LOCDP Dependent
 161

Although there is a significant positive linear relationship between

Degree of Urbanization and the Degree to which Social Affiliation is

Symbol ized by Location, it is much weaker than the relationship between

population Density and the mortuary variable. In Table 12a where Popula~

tion Density is the independent variable, if the rows and columns are

collapsed into a 2 by 3 table as the brackets indicate, Goodman and

Kruskal , s "t is .270 and Somers 'd4

is . 28. In Table 13b where Degree
LDP
of Urbanization is the independent variable, t LDP is .147 and Somers' d

is .287. Clearly, Population Density is a far better predictor for use

of this kind of mortuary symbolism than community size •.

Examination of Table l3b reveals that in societies with an average

community· size of over 200 persons (levels 2, 3, and 4) it is very likely

that Social aMiliation will b·e sy'mboliied by Location of Disposition for

most members of the society. Societies with average communities of under

100 per~ons (level 0) are more likely to make this distinction weakly or

fail to make it at all . However, 46% of the societies at this level of

Community Size do strongly distinguish social affiliation by location of

disposition. Therefore, the shape is similar to those obtained for Degree

of Fixity of Residence and Population Density. Only one corner of the

table is relatively empty.

I have speculated that societies wit h low overall Density of Popula-

tion which regularly distinguish village or community membership in the

location of their dead may be most often clustered in moderately sized

local communities of at least 100 persons for at least part of the year.

This is not the case (see Tables 12b and 13c). In my sample, of the

societies with Population Density under one person per square mile (level
 162

TABLE l3c
(Page 1 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Degree of Urbanization

Degree of Absent l-leak Strong

Urbanization
Units of social Units of social Units of social
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinQ:uished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 0: Average (Mean number of (Mean number of

community size units of social units of social
is under 100 affiliation: 1.63) affiliation: 2.08)
persons
Mean number of Bushmen Mbuti la,ll Lapps 3, 9b, 11
units of social Aranda Andamans Ib Samoyed 4,9b
affiliation: 1.9 Aweikoma Ainu 2 Toda 4
Copper Eskimo Siriono la,lb Goajiro 3, 4
Yamana (Yahgan) Tuareg 11 Gilyak 4, 6
Amahuaca Rwala 11 Yukaghir la, 6, 9b
Khalka Mongols Ingalik 6
Ib, 9a, 9b, 10 Twana .3, 6
Barama Carib la Klamath lb, 7
Thonga la, 4, 6, 9a
Iban 6
Kenuz 4, 6

Levell: Average (Mean number of (Mean number of

community size units of social units of social
is between 100 affiliation: 1.75) affiliation: 2.63)
and 199 persons

Mean number of Paiute Tiwi Ib Basseri 9b, 11

units of social Kutenai Hottentot 2 Bemba 3, 4, 6, 8,
affiliation: 2.33 Tehuelche Fulani 2 9a
Marhallese la, 4, Gheg 3,(4),6, 9b
8, 9b Yanomamo la & b, 6
Santal la & b, 6, 9b
Toradja 6, 9b
Yap 3, 8
Inca 3, 6, 10
 163

TABLE l3c
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Degree of Urbanization

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Urbanization Units of social Units of social Units of social
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tin!!uished: tin!!uished: tinguished:

Level 2: Average (Mean number of (Mean number of

community size units of social units of socia l
is between 200 affiliation: 1) affiliation: 1.86)
and 399 persons
Mean number of Masai 2 Badjau 10
units of social Manus la, 3, 6
affiliation: 1.75 Tanala 4, 6) 11:>
Creek la
Papago 6, 9b
Pomo 6
Huichol la, 6, 9b

Level 3: Aver.age (Mean number of (Mean number of .

community size units of social units of social
is between 400 affiliation: 1) affiliation: 3.8)
and 999 persons

Mean number of Somali lb Lozi 6, 8

units of social Tupinamba la, 2, 8
affiliation: 3.33 Bambara la, 4, 5, 6,
8, 9a, 10
Rif 6
Korea 3, 4, 6, 7 .
8, 9b

Level 4: Average (Hean number of

community size units of social
is over 1,000 affiliation: 3)
persons

Mean number of Fiji la

uni ts of social Igbo la, 3, 6,
affiliation: 3 9a, 9b
Aztec la', 4, 5, 9a
Quich~ 6, 10
 164

0) which make the mortuary distinction strongly, four (the Gilyak, Yukaghir,

Ingalik and· Yanomamo) distinguish the local community or village, and one

(the Klamath) distinguishes districts of several villages. Among these,

only the Yanomamo live in communities of over 100 (but fewer than 199) people.

There are twelve societies classed as living in local communities with an

average size under 100 (see Table l3c). Sib organization (4) alone is

distinguished by three of these peoples. Three distinguish the village (6)

or district of villages (7) only. Six distinguish both kin group affilia-

tion and village affiliation, if I include the Lapps who distinguish an

ethnically different village with whom they have institutionalized ties

(11). Three societies also distinguish religious affiliation (9). Clearly,

if there is a critical size above which the local community itself is more

likely to be used to define placement of the dead, it falls somewhere below

100 persons.

Furthermore, there are six societies with Population Density under

one person per square mile who live in average size communities of between

100 to 199 persons (level 1). Of these six, five make only Weak or No

distinction in Location of Disposition on the Basis of Social Affiliation.

The Badjau and Tupinamba are the only societies with a population density

rank of a who live in communities over 200 people. Both distinguish social

affiliation Strongly by location of disposition.

It is instructive to examine the two cases among the societies with

Community Size over 200 (levels 2, 3 and 4) who distinguish Social Affilia-

tion by Location of Disposition only Weakly. They are the Masai with an

Average Community Size between 200 to 399 people (level 2), and the Somali

whose communities average over 400 people (level 3). Baxter (1972) has
 165

determined that in both of these societies, local organization is based on

fluid and independent stock-keeping groups. In spite of their size, the

composition of these groups is not stable from year to year.

It is possible that communities of over 200 people normally distinguish

Social Affiliation of the dead by means of Location of Disposition because

most communities of this size have relatively stable membership over time.

It is also possible that communities of over 200 people tend to have more

complex social and political organization. It is possible that complexity

of social organization is a far more important influence than Community

Size on whether Social Affiliation is symbolized by the place where the

remains of the deceased are deposited or kept.

4. Complel(ity of Social Stratification ss an 'independent variable

Each society has be~n rated on the follOwing scale of relative com-

plexity of Social Stratification (Murdock and Provost 1973 :382) :

4. The society exhibits a complex stratification into three

or more distinct classes or castes regardless of the
presence or absence of slavery.

3. The society is stratified into two social classes of freemen,

e.g., nobles and commoners or a propertied elite and a
propertyless proletariat, plus hereditary slavery and/or
recognized caste divisions.

2. The society is stratified into two social classes of freemen

but lacks both caste distinctions and hereditary slavery.

1. Formal class distinctions are lacking among freemen, but

hereditary slavery prevails and/or there are important
status differences based on the possession or distribu-
tion of wealth.

O. The society is essentially egalitarian, lacking social

classes, castes, hereditary slavery, and important wealth
distinctions.

The analysis predicted that egalitarian societies will be less likely

to use Social Affiliation to define Location of Disposition while those with

 166

a complex system of stratification wil l be very likely to do so. There-

fore, a strong, positive association between the two is expected.

The bivariate relationship between Degree of Complexity of Social

Stratification and the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the

Deceased's Social Affiliation can be seen in Table l4a. Chi square is

23.55, which is Significant at C/. - .01. Goodman and Kruskal's 't LDP is
.223. Kendall's tau at .415 indicates a positive, strong overall linear
c
relationship significant at ~ =.001. The asymmetric Somers' d is .414.

It is therefore reasonable to reject the hypothesis that no relationship

exists between Complexity of Social Stratification and Use of Social

Affiliation to Define Location of Disposition. The data indicate a

reasonably strong relationship which is quite unlikely to occur by chance

alone.

Examination of Table l4 a reveals that all nine societies which fail

\ to use Location of DispoSition to symbolize Social Affiliation have been

classed ' as egalitarian (level 0). Of the 24 egalitarian societies, one

t hird distinguish Social Affiliation by Location of Disposition only

Weakly and 29% make this distinction Strongly. Among the 23 societies

where important status differences exist but formal class distinctions

are lacking among freemen (level I), only 13% do so Weakly. The number

of societies with higher levels of Social Stratification drops drastically .

This creates problems, as a difference in classification of one society

will cause a large change in the distribution of percentages within the

column. At Levels of Social Stratification ranks 2 and 3, where the

society is stratified into two social classes of freemen, one third of

the nine societies so classified make the mortuary distinction under con-

sideration only Weakly. At the most complex level of stratification (level

 168

4) all three socie~ies make a Strong distinction. The nature of the

association can be seen in Table l4a. The upper right corner of the

table is empty. However, the lower left hand corner of the table is npt

empty. Some degree of Social stratification is close to being a sufficient

condition for use of Location of Disposition to symbolize Social Affilia-

tion, but it is not a necessary one.

There is some increase in the percentage of societies making weak

distinctions at levels 2 and 3, those societies stratified into two

social classes of freemen. This increase is interesting. However, it

is important to realize that it may be given unwarrented emphasis in

the statistics. It may be a result of sampling error introduced by the

undersampling of societies at higher levels of social str~tification

caused by the methods of stratification used.

There is a striking contrast between the egalitarian and nonegalitarian

societies. If I had dichotomized the Degree of Social Stratification, it

would be apparent that of the 35 nonegalitarian societies 17% make only

a Weak distinction while 83% Strongly distinguish Social Affiliation by

the Location of the Disposition of their Dead. The percentage of those

classed as Mortuary Distinction Absent or Weak falls from 71% among

egalitarian societies to 17% among nonegalitarian peoples. The percentage

classed as Mortuary Distinction Strong increases from 29% among egalitarian

societies to 83% among nonegalitarian societies.

The three societies classed as Level of Social Stratification level

I whose people make this mortuary distinction only Weakly are the Hottentot,

Somali and Rwala Bedouin. All three are cattle keeping peoples. · The Somali

and Rwala clearly are organized into local stock-keeping groups rather fluid
 169

in composition. Differences in status among free men or free vs. slave

statuses are not distinguished through location of disposition by any

of these three peoples.

The Marshall Islanders are the single society classed as Social

Stratification level 2 which makes a Weak distinction in Social Affilia-

tion with Location · of Disposition. The local groups living on these

small islands are reasonably stable in composition. Those whose social

pOSition warrented land burial were buried in locations appropriate to

both their sib membership and their social class.

The Tuareg and the Khalka Mongols are the two societies classed as

Social Stratification level 3 which distinguish Social Affiliation by

Location of Disposition only Weakly. Baxter (1972) includes the Tuareg

among those societies with a local organization based on fluid and in-

dependent stock-keeping groups. They live in small; widely dispersed

groups of relatives. Their class divisions of noble, vassel and slave

are not distinguished by location of disposition. Location of death is

the most important influence on location of burial. The Khalka living

in the Narobanchin Temple Territory in 1920 were pastoral people whose

seasonal living places and cooperative work associates were rather variable

f rom year to year. It may be that the need for independence and self

r eliance at this local level gave strength to the egalitarian principles

within their Buddhist religion. As we have seen, their religion pro-

hibited recognition in their mortuary ritual of ascribed social status

of any kind. This prohibition was observed throughout the society.

Examination of these dissident cases has demonstrated the incorrect-

ness of my prediction that differences in Social Stratification will lead

 170

to differences in Location of Disposition in spite of the effect of low

•
Fixity of Residence. Instead, the effect of the need for fluid local

groups appears to be strong.

Egalitarian societies with relatively stable local groups or the

need for a strong sib or other kin organization may well be expected to

symbolize the community or kin affiliation of their dead through the

Location of their Disposition. These kinds of Social Affiliation are

unaffected by the absence of ascribed status groups. I have also pre-

dicted that egalitarian societies will be more likely to use the same

criteria for the location of disposition for all their members, with the

possible exception of those who have achieved an outstanding social

position. These expectations are correct.

As can be seen in Table 14b, of the seven egalitarian soc~eties

which Strongly distinguish SClcial Affi-l iation by Location of Disposition,

five distinguish membership in the community (6). Two distinguish- sib

membership (4). Four distinguish the nuclear family and residence (la & b) .

Competing miss ionizing religions (9b) are also present in three societies.

With the exception of this disruptive element, these kinds of social

affiliation are criteria which must be applied equally to a ll members of

t he society. None of the seven societies, for example, make distinctions

in Location of Disposition on the basis of membership in special groups

defined by their religion (9a). Eight egalitarian societies distinguish

Social Affiliation by Location of Disposition only Weakly (see Table l4b).

Of these, three distinguish the single domestic residence unit (la), three

i mmediate relatives not necessarily living together (lb) and three the

homestead or camp unit (2). Only the Mbuti distinguish villages. with

which they have institutionalized ties (11).

 171

TABLE 14b
(Page 1 of 2)
•
Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to
Degree of Social Stratification

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Social
Stratification Units of social Units of social Units of social
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 0: (Mean number of (Mean number of

Egalitarian units of social units of social
affiliation: 1.25) affiliation: 2)

Mean number of Bushmen Mbuti la, 11 Toda 4

units of social Aranda Tiwi lb Gilyak 4, 6
affiliation: 1.6 Paiute Ainu 2 Yukaghir la, 6, 9
Kutenai Andamans lb Creek la
Aweikoma Siriono la & lb Papago 6, 9b
Tehuelcho Fulani 2 Yanomamo la & b, 6
Copper Eskimo Masai 2 San tal la & b, 6,
Yamana (Yahgan) Barama Carib la 9b
Amahuaca

Levell : Formal (Mean number of . (Mean number of

class distinc- units ·of social units of social
tions lacking affiliation: 1) affiliation: 2.1)
among free men;
hereditary slaver; Hottentot 2 Badjau 10
and/or important Somali Ib Manus la, 3, 6
status difference Rwala 11 Fiji la
based on wealth Ingalik 6
exist Twana 3, 6
Klamath Ib, 7
Mean number of Gheg 3,(4), 6, 9b
units of social Iban 6
affiliation: 1.96 Tupinamba la, '2, 8
Porno 6
Lapps 3, 9b, 11
Samoyed 4, 9b
Basseri 9b, 11
Goajiro 3, 4
Igbo la, 3, 6,9a,9b
Kenuz 4, 6
Rif 6
Toradja 6, 9b
Huichol la, 6, 9b
Quiche 6, 10
 172

TABLE 14b
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Degree of Social Stratification

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Social
Stratification Units of social Units of social Units of social
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 2: Strati- (Mean number of (Mean number of

fied into two units of social units of social
social classes of
free men; no
slaves or castes.
aff ilia tion: 4) affiliation : 4.5)
i•
Mean number of Marshallese la, 4, Thonga la, 4, 6, 9a 1
units of social 8, 9b Bemba 3, 4, 6, 8, 9a
affiliation: 4.33

Level 3.: Strati- (Mean number of (Mean number of

fied into two units of social units of social
social classes of affiliation: 2.5) affiliation: 3)
free men; slavery
and/or castes
exist Tuareg 11 Yap 3, 8
Khalka Mongols Ib, Bambara la, 5, 6, 8,10
Mean number of 9a, 9b,lO 9a
units of social Tanala 4, 6,lb
affiliation: 2.83 Lozi 6, 8
,
Level 4: Complex (Mean number of (Mean number of
stratification units of social units of social
with three or morE affiliation: ) aff ilia tion: 4)

I
classes or castes
Inca 3, 6. , 10
Mean number of Aztec la, 4, 5,
units of social 9a
affiliation: 4 Korea 3, 4, 6, 7,
8, 9b
Mean number of
units of social
affiliation for
Levels 2, 3 & 4:
3.5
 173

During the time periods to which I am restricted, foreign mission-

aries had not yet had an important disruptive influence in the three

societies within which they worked. If I disregard the need to dis-

tinguish between competing religions which they created, it is possible

to observe that none of the 15 egalitarian societies simultaneously dis-

tinguished more than two units of social affiliation. These various

combinations all include kin and residence group affiliation. The Mbuti

also sometimes are buried in the graveyards of their Bira partners.

On the other hand, seven of the eight societies which distinguish

•
four or more kinds of social affiliation simultaneously are included in I
the Levels of Social Stratification ranks 2, 3, and 4. These eight societies

includ~ the Marshall Islanders and Igbo both of whom distinguished only

three units of s9cial affiliation before the introduction of Christian

missionaries. Christian influences were recent during the time period

to which this study was confined. Of the 23 societies included at level

1 where formal class distinctions are lacking, only the · Igbo distinguishes

four or more different kinds of Social Affiliation by Location of Dis-

position, and that as a result of Christian influence. Seven of the

twelve societies which do make formal class distinctions (levels 2 - 4)

distinguish four or more kinds of social affiliation. (The seven societies

include all three societies at level 2 if the Marshallese are included.)

Exactly half of the twelve societies which make formal class dis-

tinctions do use class membership (8) to define Location of Disposition.

Information was not always adequate to determine specifically whether

social class as well as sib membership was symbolized in Location of

Disposition. This may have been the case in the Inca empire, for example.
 174

Therefore, this proportion may be underestimated. Of the 23 societies

included at levell, only the Tupinamba clearly distinguish between free

and slave status (8) by the location of burial.

It seems justified to conclude from these observations that as the

number and kinds of positions of ascribed status within the social organiza-

tion increases this increase in complexity will be reflected in the number

and kinds of Social Affiliation of the Deceased which are symbolized by

the Location of Disposition. Following Binford's (1971) reasoning it i

I
I
seems likely that as jurisdictional levels increase in number, the in-
I
I:
crease in complexity of the socio-political organization will often be I'

reflected in all increase in the number and kinds of Social Affiliation i

distinguished in the Location of Disposition of the dead. Of course, a II

fair pro~ortion of .the highl~ stratified societies also have a high level

of political integration. However, as there is not a one to one corre-

spondence between the two, it is useful to separately examine their re-

lationship with mortuary activity.

5. Level of Political Integration as an independent variable

Each society has been rated on the following scale of Level of Political

Integration (Murdock and Provost 1973:382):

4. Three or more administrative levels are recognized above

that of the local community, as in the case of a large
state organized into provinces which are subdivided into
districts.

3. Two administrative levels are recognized above that of the

local community, as in the case of a small state divided
into administrative districts.

2. One administrative level is recognized above that of the

local community, as in the case of a petty state with a
paramount chief rulirtg over a number of local communities.
 175

Societies which are politically completely dependent, lack-

ing any political organization of their own and wholly
absorbed into the political system of a dominant society
of alien culture, are likewise coded as 2.

1. The society is stateless but is composed of politically

organized autonomous local communities.

o. The society is stateless, and political authority is not

centralized even on the local level but is dispersed among
households or other small component units.

The analysis predicted that peoples whose political authority is

dispersed among households (level 0) will be unlikely to use Location of

Disposition to symbolize the Social Affiliation of the Dec~ased; that

societies composed of · politically organized autonomous local communities

may recognize community membership in the Location of Disposition, but

in some cases may fail to distinguish social affiliation through Location

of Disposition or will do so only Weakly; and that societies with adminis-

trative levels above the local community will be quite likely to distinguish

social affiliation by the Location of the Disposition of their Dead. A

moderate or moderately strong, positive association between the two is

expected.

The bivariate relationship between Level of Political Integration and

the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Deceased's Social

Affiliation can be seen in Table l5a. Chi square is 18.70, which is

significant at ~ =.02. Goodman and Kruskal's i is .159. Kendall's

LDP
tau at .353 indicates a positive, overall linear relationship of moderate
c
strength significant at ~ -.001. The asymmetric Somers' · d is .331. It

is reasonable to reject the null hypothesis that no relationship exists

between Level of Political Integration and Use of Social Affiliation to

Define Location o.f Disposition. The data indicate a rather weak overall

association.
 TABLE l5a
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Level of Political Integration
LEVEL OF POLITICAL INTEGRATION
Count Household Local 1 Level 2 Levels 3 or More Levels Row
COL PCT Highest Level Group Jural Above Local Above Local Above Local Total

O. 1. . 2. 3. 4.
LOCDP o 0 9
1. 3 6 0
ABSENT 60% 23% .00 .00 .00 15%

2. 2 5 5 1 1 14
WEAK 40% 19% 36% 11% 20% 24%
" Nf. ':/
-D 3. 0 15 9 8 4 36
r--
.-i
STRONG .00 58% 64% 89% 80%' 61%
6%

Column 5 26 14 9 5 59
Total 8% 44% 24% 15% 8% 100.00

Chi Square ~ 18.70 With 8 Deg of Freedom

Significance = .02
Kendall's Tau C = .353 Significance = .001
Somers' D (Asymmetric) - .331 With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruska1's Tau = .159 With LOCDP Dependent
 177

Examination of Table l5a reveals that at level 0, where authority

is dispersed among households, no societies Strongly distinguish Social

Affiliation by Location of Disposition. Apparently, the people of these

societies are somewhat less likely to make this mortuary distinction

Weakly than to fail to make use of it at all. There are very few c~ses

included at level O. This reflects the scarcity of this family level of

political organization in the sample population. At levell, the

politically autonomous community, more societies are categorized as

Mortuary Distinction Absent than would be expected on the basis of a

chance distribution alone. However 58% of the 26 societies at this

level strongly distinguish Social Affiliation by Location of Disposition.

No societies with one or more administrative levels above the local

community (levels 2 - 4) are classed as Mortuary Distinction Absen~.

Those with only one administrative level above the local community

(level 2) have a somewhat greater likelihood of making the mortuary

distinction Weakly than would be expected from a chance distribution.

At two or more administrative levels above the local level (levels 3

and 4), the frequency of societies making only a Weak distinction de-

clines sharply_ About 86% of these 14 societies make a Strong dis-

tinction in Location of Disposition on the basis of the Deceased's

Social Affiliation. The shape of this association is interesting as

both the upper right and lower left hand corners of Table lSa are empty.

However, roughly 42% of those societies classed as making a strong dis-

tinction occur at level 1.

The scale used fails to discriminate between types of Political

Organization at the level of the politically autonomous community. I

was correct that when one knows only that the society is politically
 178

integrated at level I, it is difficult to predict the relevent mortuary

activity . There are 15 politically autonomous communities which strongly

distinguish social affiliation by the location of disposition of their

dead. Table l5b indicates that of these, 12 are kn.own to distinguish the

membership of the deceased in his community (6 and 7) in this way. Of

these 12, none are organized in bands.

It can also be seen in Table lSb that the eight societies which dis-

tinguish four or more kinds of social affiliation are found among those '.

societies with one or more administrative levels above the local community

(levels 2 - 4) . The seven societies which distinguish social class (8)

show a similar distribution .

With the exception of the Marshall Islanders, the societies with one

or more administrative levels above the locaJ. community (levels 2 - 4)

which make only a Weak distinction in this aspect of their mortuary

practices are nomadic, pastoral peoples. The Rwala, Somali, Fulani,

Tuareg, and Khalka local group membership is dispersed in space and un-

stable over time (Baxter 1972; Vreeland 1954; Musil 1928; Marx 1978) .

The Khalka Mongol present a more complex picture than the rest. As

we have already discussed, social affiliation was strongly distinguished

by location of disposition in the urban areas of the Mongol state.

It seems justified to conclude from the distribution of units of

social affiliation that the kind of political organization will be re-

flected in the kind and number of units of affiliation distinguished by

the location of the disposition of the dead. However, Degree of Social

Stratification is clearly a far bett.e r predictor of the degree to which

Social Affiliation is likely to be distinguished by Location of Disposition.

 179

TABLE l5b
(Page 1 of 2)
•
Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to
Degree of Political Integration

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

political Units of social Units of social Units of social
Integration affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-·
timmis hed : tinguished: tinguished:

Level 0: Authority (Mean number of (Mean number of

is dispersed uni ts of social un i ts of social
among households affiliation: 1. 5) affiliation:

Mean number of Copper Eskimo Mbuti la, 11

units of social Amahuaca Tiwi Ib
affiliation: 1.5

Levell: Political (Mean number of (Mean number of

ly organized auto units of social units of social
nomous local affiliation: 1. 2) affiliation: 1. 8)
communities
Yamana (Yahgan) Andamans Ib Pomo 6
Mean number of Tehuelche Ainu 2 Lapps 3, 9b, 11
units of social Kutenai Siriono la,lb Samoyed 4, 9b
affiliation: 1.27 Paiute Masai 2 Badjau 10
Aranda Barama Carib la Manus la, 3, 6
Bushmen Yukaghir la, 6, 9b
Ingalik 6
Twana 3, 6
Klamath lb, 7
Iban 6
Papago 6
Yanomamo ·1, 6
Kenuz 4, 6
Huicho1 la, 6, 9b
 180

TABLE l5b
(Pa ge 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Degree of Political Integration

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

political Units of social Units of social Units of social
Integration affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 2: One ad- (Mean number of (Mean number of

ministrative leve units of social units of social
above local COlIl- affiliation: 1.6) affiliation: 2.78)
munity; politi-
cally absorbed
Marshallese la, 4, Igbo la, 3, 6,
Mean number of 8, 9b 9a, 9b
units of social Hottentot 2 Bambara la, 5, 6,
affiliation: 2.35 Fulani 2 8, 9a, 10
Somali Ib Toradja 6, 9b
Rwala 11 Yap 3, 8
Quiche 6, 10
.Tupinamba la, 2, 8
Tanala 4, 6,lb
Toda 4
Goajiro 3, 4

Level 3: Two (Mean number of (Mean number of

administrative units of social units of social
levels above loca affiliation: 1) affiliation: 2.25)
community

Mean number of Tuareg 11 Fiji la

units of social Thonga la, 4, 6, 9a
affiliation: 2. 11 Gheg 3,(4), 6, 9b
Creek la
Basseri 11
Rtf 6
Santal la & b, 6, 9b
Aztec la, 4, 5, 9a

Level 4: Three or (Mean number of (Mean number of

more :levels above units of social units of social
local communi ty aff ilia tion: 4) affiliation: 3.75)
Mean number of Mongols lb, 9a, Lozi 6, 8
units of social 9b, 10 Bemba 3,4,6, 8, 9a
affiliation: 3. 8 Korea 3,4,6, 7, 8, 9b
Inca 3, 6, 10
 181

In Table l4a where Social Stratification is the independent variable,

•
Goodman and Kruskal's ~LDP is .223 and Somers' d is .414. In Table 15a

where Political Integration is the independent variable, Goodman and

Kruskal's t LDP is .159 and Somers' d is .331.

6. Degree of Technological Specialization as an independent variable

A third index of social complexity is degree of occupational special-

ization. Occupation is an important aspect of an individual's social

personality. It is often given recognition in mortuary ritual, frequently

in the kind of grave goods or sometimes in the way graves are marked. Un-

less formal occupational groups exist, I have classed occupation as a

social position. Being a notable hunter is a social position. Belonging

to a priestly fraternity or a guild is a social affiliation. The number

of different kinds of craft or occupational specializations recognized by

a society is a good index of the degree of functional differentiation within

that society (Tatje and Naroll 1970). It reflects, among other things, the

importance of making and acting upon distinctions between people, which

may in turn be reflected in many aspects of mortuary ritual including the

location of disposition. This index would not be duplicated by a measure

of degree of social stratification. The Zuni are an example of an

egalitarian people with craft specializations and religious associations.

Tatje and Naroll (1970) have used a count of craft specialization for

Naroll's fifty-eight society WSC study. Murdock and Provost (1973) chose

to use an index which was less tedious to compile and which had a long

history of use.

Each society has been rated on the following scale of Degree of

Technological Specialization (Murdock and Provost 1973:381):

 1M

4. The society is reported to have a variety of craft

• specialists, including at least smiths, weavers,
and potters.

3. The society is reported to have specialized metal-

workers or smiths but to lack loom weaving and/or
pottery.

2. Loom weaving is practiced but metalworking is absent

or unreported.

1. Pottery is made but metalworking and loom weaving are

absent or unreported.

o. Metalworking, loom weaving, and potterymaking are all

absent or unreported.

This scale probably has a positive linear correlation with a measure of

overall societal complexity, although Murdock and Provost (1973) do not

demonstrate such a correlation. This scale is designed to measure degree

of complexity and specialization in technology, but it has serious problems.

One problem is that. important categories of technological specialization in-

volving complex and skilled-techniques will be ignored by this measure.

For example, Tatje and Naroll give Tonga a craft specialization count of

16, none of which include pottery, loom weaving or metalworking. This is

a moderately high count compared to a count of 34 for the ~tec and 2 for

the Andamans, Aweikoma and Ainu. Tongan technology is not greatly differ-

ent from that of the Marshall Islanders. Both are or would be categorized
.
as level 0 by Murdock and Provost. Fiji, very close in many ways to

Tonga, has pottery making and so is classed at level 1. The problem is

further complicated by t he fact that some societies may have metalworking

as one of a very small number of craft specialties. The Coppe~ Eskimo

were given a craft count of 8, the Hottentot of 4 and the Gilyak of 3.

All have a less differentiated technology than the Marshalls or the Fijians,
 183

but are given a higher ranking (level 3) 'on an index taking account only

of metalworking, loom weaving and pottery making. A further problem arises

because societies which depend upon a complex trading network to obtain

metal objects, cloth or pottery and therefore do not have craft special-

ists in these areas will be coded as if they were absent. Therefore, the

Badjau, who depend upon pottery and the products of weaving and metal-

working for their livelihood have been coded at level O. The technology

they use is hardly similar to that of the Bushmen or Aranda also coded

at level O.

I do not consider this scale a very good measure of occupational

differentiation. Also, it is evident that certain egalitarian, small

community groups whose members may often be largely undifferentiated by

occupation except on the basis of a sexual division of labor are likely I

0,

to dis'tinguish community membership and/or kin affiliation of their dead

by the Location of the Disposition. Therefore, a rather weak, positive

association between degree of technological specialization and the degree

of use of location of disposition to define the social affiliation of

the deceased is expected. However, if the scale has any utility, the

number and kinds of social ' affiliation used should increase at the higher

levels of technological complexity.

The' bivariate relationship between Degree of Technological Specializa-

t ion and the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Deceased's

Social Affiliation can be seen in Tables 16a and l6b. In the full 3 by

5 table (Table l6a), chi square is 10.83 which does not attain a .05 level

of significance. Goodman snd Kruskal's ~LDP is .113. Kendall's tau at

c
. 216 indicates a positive but weak linear association which is significant
 ::- '.<

TABLE l6a
Location of Di spositi on As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Technological Specialization
LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGICAL SPECIALIZATION
Count Above All Pottery Looms: No Smiths: No Pottery Smiths Looms Row
COL PCT Absent Only Smiths and/or Looms and Pottery Total
o. 1. 2. 3. 4.
LOCDP
1. 4 2 1 2 0 9
ABSENT 29% 22% 8% 11% .00 15%

2. 4 3 1 6 0 14
WEAK 29% 33% 8% 33% .00 24%

3. 6 4 11 10 5 36
'"
00
M
STRONG 43% 44 % 85% 56% 100.00 61%

Column 14 9 13 18 5 59
Total 24% 15% 22% 31% 8% 100 .00

Chi Square = 10.83 With 8 Deg of Freedom

Significance = .21. not significant
Kendall's Tau C = .216 Significance = .05 .
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .187 With LOCDP . Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's Tau = .113 With LOCDP Dependent
 TABLE l6b
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Technological Specialization
LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGICAL SPECIALIZATION

Count Above All Pottery Looms: No Smiths: No Pottery Smiths Looms Row
COL PCT Absent Only Smiths and/or Looms and Po ttE,ry Total
O. l. 2. 3. 4.
LOCDP
ABSENT & 1- 8 5 2 8 a 23
WEAK 57% 56% 15% 44% .00 39%
•
2. 6 4 11 10 5 36
:ij STRONG
.... 43% 44% 85% 56% 100.00 61%

Column 14 9 13 18 5 59
Total 24% 15% 22% 31% 8% 100.00

Raw Chi Square = 9.44 With 4 Deg of Freedom

Significance = .05:
Kendall's Tau C = .255 Significance = .O~
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .165 With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's tau = .160 With LOCDP Dependent
 186

at -.05. The asymmetric Somers' d is .187 . In Table 16b only the Absent
•
and Weak categories have been combined. Here chi square is 9.44 which is

signifi cant at ~ =.05. Goodman and Kruskal's t LDP is .160. Kendall's

tau is .255 which is still significant at «=.05. Somers' d falls to

c
.165. I conclude that in this sample there is a weak association between

Degree of Technological Specialization and the strength with which Social

Affiliation is Symbolized by Location of Disposition. The association is

barely significant at ~ =.05.

Examination of Tables l6a and 16b is instructive. The only techno-

logical level at which no society is classed as mortuary distinction

Absent or Weak is the most complex, level 4. At level 0 where no metal-

working, loom weaving or potterymaking are practiced, there is a greater

likelihood that societies will make either a Weak distinction or No

distinction at all than would be predicted on tpe basis of a chance

distribution. This likelihood decreases only slightly at level 1 where

pottery only is reported. It drops off sharply at level 2 where loom

weaving is practiced but metalworking is absent, but rises steeply again

at level 3 where societies have specialized smiths but lack loom weaving
\
and/or pottery. The shape of the association is curvilinear rather than

linear . The likelihood of making a strong distinction in location of

disposition on the basis of social affiliation is reasonably great only

at levels 2 and 4. This relationship would seem to have very little to

do with functional differentiation. Inspection of Table 16c reveals

that at level 2 the Amahuaca are the only weaving people who have been

classed as Mortuary Distinction Absent while the Ainu make only a Weak

distinction. The eleven societies which make a Strong Mortuary Distinction

 187

include only two fully nomadic peoples, the pastoral Lapps and Goajiro.

The only semi-nomadic society, the Twana, were organized in winter

villages whose population was definite and constant (Elmendorf 1960) .

The distribution of societies at level 3 poses a strong contrast. These

18 societies have specialized smiths but lack either loom weaving or

pottery. The two which fail to make any distinction in location of

disposition according to social affiliation are the Tehuelche and Copper

Eskimo. The six societies making only a Weak distinction are all nomadic

pastora1ists. I have already discussed the fluidity of the local groups

of all eight of these societies. It is not easy to interpret these find-

ings because it is not clear whether the societies at level 3 are missing

loom weaving, pottery or both. There are two weaving pastoralists at

level 2, and none with pottery only (level 1) ; However, the Eskimo have

pottery and no weaving. In any case, metalworking clearly can be adapted

to the pastoralists' nomadic life. On the basis of this .data, it seems

likely that the technology is not directly affecting the mortuary practices.

Rather, both the teChnology appropriate to the whole economy and the. strength

with which social affiliation is likely to be symbolized by location of

disposition are probably results of similar sets of influences.

The utility of the scale of Technological Specialization is supported

by the observation in Table l6c that the number and kinds of social affilia-

tion used do increase at the higher levels of technological complexity. All

eight of those societies unquestionably distinguishing four or more units

of social affiliation of the deceased in the location of disposition are

found at levels 3 and 4 (see Table 17). If the Marshall Islanders' recent

use of religious affiliation is included, they appear to be an exception to

 188

TABLE l6c
(Page 1 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Level of Technological Specialization

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Technological Units of social
Units of social Units of social
Specialization affiliation dis-
affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguis hed :

Level 0: Absent: (Mean number of (Mean number of

pottery malting, units of social units of social
weaving, & metal ilffiliation: 2) affiliation: 1.5)
working
Mean number of Bushmen Mbuti la, 11 Porno 6
units of social Aranda Tiwi Ib Samoyed 4, 9b
affiliation: 1.7 Paiute Fulani 2 Toda 4
Yamana Marshallese la, .:., Badjau 10
8, 9b Klamath lb, 7
Yanomamo la & b, 6

Levell: Pottery (Mean number of (Mean number of

only is made utlits of social units of sdcial
affiliation: 1 . 33) affiliation: 1.75)
Mean number of
units of social Kutenai Andamans Ib Manus la, 3, 6
affiliation: 1.57 Aweikoma Siriono la, Ib Fiji la
Barama Carib la 1ngalik 6
Papago 6, 9b

.Level 2: Loom (Mean number of (Mean number of

weaving practiced· units of social units of social
no metal working affiliation: 1) affiliation: 2.27)
Mean number of Amahuaca Ainu 2 Lapps 3, 9b, 11
units of social Goaj iro 3, 4
·aff11iation: 2.17 Twana 3, 6
Lozi 6, 8
Creek la
Tupinamba la, 2, 8
Kenuz 4, 6
Santal la & b, 6,
9b
Yap 3, 8
Huichol la, 6, 9b
Quiche 6, 10
 189

TABLE l6c
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Level of Technological Specialization

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Technological
Units _of social Units of social Units of social
Specialization
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
- tinguished: tin.guished: ting uis hed:

Level 3: Metal (Mean number of (Mean number of

working present; units of social units of social
pottery and/or - affiliation: 1.5) affiliation: 2.9)
loomweaving absen
Mean number of Tehuelche Hottentot 2 Basseri 9b, 11
units of social Copper Eskimo Masai 2 Gilyak 4, 6
affiliation: 2.38 Somali lb Yukaghir la, 6, 9b
Tuareg 11 Thonga la, 4,6, 9a
Rwala 11 Bemba 3,4,6,8, 9a
Khalka Mongols lb, Gheg 3,(4),6,9b
9a, 9b, Tanala 4, 6, !b
10 Iban 6
Igbo la, 3, 6,
9a, 9b

I
Toradja 6, 9b

Level 4: Includes (Mean number of units

smiths, weavers, of social affiliation:
and potters 3.8)

Mean number of Bambara la, la, 5, 6,

units of social 8, 9a
affiliation: 3.8 Rif 6
Korea 3, 4, 6, 7,
8, 9b
Aztec la, 4, 5, 9a
Inca 3, 6, 10
 Table 17

SOCIETIES WHICH DISTINGUISH FOUR OR

MORE UNITS OF SOCIAL AFFILIATION

Society Fixity Popu1a- Community Social Political Technological Dependence Sub-

of tion Size Stratifi- Integration Specialization on Agri- sistence
Residence Density cation culture Categoriza-
tion

Korea 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 5

Aztec 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 5
0

'"
.-< Bambara 4 2 3 3 2 4 4 5

Bemba 3 1 1 2 4 3 3 4

Thonga 3 4 0 2 3 3 3 4

Khalka .
Mongols 1 1 0 3 4 3 1 2

Igbo 4 4 '+ 1 2 3 3 5

Marshall
Islands 4 4 1 2 2 0 2 3
 191

this pattern. However, as has been discussed, their craft specializa-

•
tion is actually fairly complex in spite of their low rating on this

scale. In fact, there appears to be a progressive increase in number

of units of social a ffiliation distinguished as the Degree of Technological

Specialization increases (see Table l6c). The quality of the data at

this level of precision does not justify the use of powerful statistics.

But a simple comparison of the mean number of units distinguished at each

Level of Technological Specialization is suggestive. If the Marshalls

are included, the mean number of units distinguished at levels 0 and 1

are nearly the same, 1.7 and 1 . 6 respectively. The means at levels 2

(2.2) and 3 (2.4) are very close. If only those societies making a Strong

Mortuary Distinction are considered, the mean at level 3 rises to 2.9.

The mean at level 4 is clearly higher · at 3 . 8. Although the association

between Degree of Technological Specialization and the strength with which

Social Affiliation is distinguished by Location of Disposition is neither

strong nor highly significant, the information contained in this distribu-

tion is suggestive.

7. Degree of Dependence on Agriculture as an independent variable

It is difficult to discuss the implications of the distribution of

societies at different Levels of Technological Specialization without

reference to the needs of particular subsistence groups. There is, of

course, a range of variation in needs within each type of subsistence

group. Taken as a whole, each type of subsistence group represents a

different constellation of the variables which we have considered up

to this point. In general , intensive agriculture requires different

things of people than following a pastoral economy in an arid environment .

 ~2

Needs are again different if a hunting and gathering economy is being

pursued in an arid environment, or if a seasonally abundant fishing

resource is exploited. The kind of subsistence economy, of technology,

and the ecology of the area interact to influence Fixity of Residence,

Density of Population, Community Size and defense needs. The appropriate

kind of local group and type of political organization will be determined

by these factors. Consequently, it is likely that the most commonly found

attitudes toward social groups at the most local or wider l evel will

differ in different subsistence groups.

The evidence examined up to this point does suggest that the kind of

social groups and the attitudes toward them are more important in deter-

mining whether or not Location of Disposition will be used to symbolize

the Social Affiliation of the Deceased than is the influence of anyone

of the demographic, economic or social factors acting alone. The nature

,of the association between subsistence groupings and use of this type of

mortuary symbolism should provide useful information for deciding whether

or not to reject this suggestion.

The practice of agriculture requires relatively stable households

which join together to form cooperative groups needed to carry out essential,

calendrically scheduled tasks. Increasing dependence upon agriculture is

directly related to increasing Sedentism, increasing Density of Population,

increasing Technological Complexity and increasing Social and Political

Complexity. Some Hunting and Gathering, Pastoralist, and Fishing peoples

depend upon the practice of agriculture for a part of their food supply

and for other needs. Therefore, it is useful to examine the effect of

agriculture isolated from other subsistence practices.

 193

Each society has been rated on the following scale of Degree of

Dependence upon Agriculture for subsistence (Murdock and Provost 1973:380):

4. Agriculture contributes more to the society's food supply

than does any other subsistence activity and is conducted
by i ntensive techniques such as irrigation, plowing, or
artificial fertilization.

3. Agriculture contributes more to the food supply than does

any other subsistence activity but is not conducted by in-
tensive techniques.

2. Agriculture yields more than 10 per cent of the society's

food supply but not as much as does some other subsistence
activity.

1. Agriculture is practiced but yields less than 10 per cent

of the food supply.

o. Agriculture is not practiced or is confined to nonfood crops.

A strong, positive association between Degree of Dependence upon

Agriculture and the Use of Socia~Affiliation of the peceased to Define

the Location of Disposition is expected . It seems likely that agriculture

is a sufficient condition for the Use of Location of Disposition to

Symbolize the Social Affiliation of the Deceased. Agriculture cannot

be expected to be a necessary condition for this usage. Therefore, the

table can be predicted to have only one empty corner. I do not expect

to find societies which practice intensive agriculture but which fail

to use Location of Disposition to Symbolize Social Affili ation of the

Deceased. I do expect to find societies , such as the Twana, with stable

community groups practicing no agriculture who do regularly distinguish

Social Affiliation of the Deceased by the Location of Disposition.

The bivariate relationship between Degree of Dependence upon Agri-

culture and the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Dec~ased's

Social Affiliation can be seen in Table l8a. Chi square is 30.35 which
 193

Each society has been rated on the following scale of Degree of

Dependence upon Agriculture for subsistence (Murdock and Provost 1973:380):

4. Agriculture contributes more to the society's food supply

than does any other subsistence activity and is conducted
by intensive techniques such as irrigation, plowing, or
artificial fertilization.

3. Agriculture contributes more to the food supply than does

any other subsistence activity but is not conducted by in-
tensive techniques.

2. Agriculture yields more than 10 per cent of the society's

food supply but not as much as does some other subsistence
activity.

1. Agriculture is practiced but yields less than 10 per cent

of the food supply.

o. Agriculture is not practiced or is confined to nonfood crops.

A strong, positive association between Degree of Dependence upon

Agriculture and the Use of Social. Affiliation of the .Deceas"ed to Define ,,

I
the Location of Disposition is expected . It seems likely that agriculture 1I
is a sufficient condition for the Use of Location of Disposition to

Symbolize the Social Affiliation of the Deceased. Agriculture cannot

be expected to be a necessary condition for this usage. Therefore, the

table can be predicted to have only one empty corner. I do not expect

to find societies which practice intensive agriculture but which fail

to use Location of Disposition to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the

Deceased. I do expect to find societies, such as the Twana, with stable

community groups practicing no agriculture who do regularly distinguish

Social Affiliation of the Deceased by the Location of Disposition.

The bivariate relationship between Degree of Dependence upon Agri-

culture and the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Deceased's

Social Affiliation can be seen in Table 18a. Chi square is 30.35 which
 TABLE l8a
Loca t ion of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Degree of Dependence on Agriculture
DEGREE OF DEPENDENCE UPON AGRICULTURE
Absent Less 10% Over 10% More than any Intensive Row
Count
Food Supply Food Supply other food supply Agriculture Total
COL PCT
O. l. 2. 3. 4.
LOCDP 8 a a
l. 1 0 9
ABSENT 36% . 00 .00 8% • 00 15%
.00 4%
2. 6 5 3 a a 14
WEAK 27% 56% 60% .00 .00 24%
57% 00.00
3. 8 4 2 11 11 36
""" STRONG 36% 40V 0l 2% -96% _lOO.OIV 61%
'"
.... ... 44%
43%-

Column 22 9 5 12 11 59
Total 37% 15% 8% 20% 19% 100. 00

Chi Square 30.35 With 8 Deg of Freedom

Signif icanc.e = . 001
Kendall's Tau C = .473 Significance = .001
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .418 With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's Tau = .282 With LOCDP Dependent
 195

is significant at ~ =.001. Goodman and Kruskal's t LDP is .282. Kendall's

tau at .473 indicates a positive, strong overall linear relationship

c
significant at ~ =.001. The asymmetric Somers' d is .418. It is there-

fore reasonable . to reject the null hypothesis that no relationship exists

between Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture for subsistence and Use of

Social Affiliation to Define Location of Disposition. The data indicate

a strong relationship which is quite unlikely to occur by chance alone.

Examination of Table l8a shows the validity of my prediction con-

cerning the shape of the relationship between Degree of Dependence upon

Agriculture and the mortuary usage under consideration. All societies

in which agriculture contributes more to the society's food supply than

any other subsistence activity (levels·3 and 4), with the single ex-

ception of the Amahuaca, strongly distingutsh Social Affiliatiop of the

l Deceased by Location of Disposition. The other eight societies for whom

this mortuary practice is Absent are all found among those who do not

practice agriculture for subsistence (level 0). At level 0 the number

of societies making a Weak mortuary distinction is only slightly above

what can be expected from a chance distribution. However, there are

clearly fewer societies making a Strong distinction in Location of

Disposition on the basis of the deceased's Social Affiliation than would

be expected by chance alone.

There are a number of shifts in the data which can be interpreted

meaningfully. Those societies which practice some agriculture but depend

more heavily upon another subsistence resource (levels 1 and 2) show a

similar distribution. None of these societies can be classed as Mortuary

Distinction Absent. At the same time, the number of societies at these

 196

levels who make a Weak Mortuary Distinction increases to over twice what •

would be expected on the basis of chance alone. It looks like the practice

of agriculture has influenced some peoples to make a Weak rather than No

distinction in Location of Disposition on the Basis of Social Affiliation

of the Deceased. The percentage of societies making a Strong distinction

remains below a chance distribution, but increases to 43%. There is

another important shift in distribution between levels 2 and 3, that is,

between those practicing some agriculture and those depending upon agri-

culture as their primary source of subsistence. · At these highest levels

(3 and 4) there are no societies which can be categorized as making a

Weak mortuary distinction. Among the 12 societies practicing extensive

agricultural techniques, one is categorized as distinction Absent. All

11 societies with intensive agriculture make a strong distinction. When

l levels 1 and 2, and 3 and 4 are combined the linear relationship is

strong; Somers' d is .475. If, in addition, the Absent and Weak categories

are combined Somers' d drops to .431, but the overall relationship is very

strong; Goodman and Kruskal's t LDP is .325.

Inspection of the deviant cases (see Table lSb) lends further support

to my hypothesis that the stability of the most local group or the need

for a strong organization at a wider level exerts an important influence

on whether or not Social Affiliation of the Deceased will be distinguished

by the Location of Disposition. The one case in the upper right hand

portion of Table lSa is the Amahuaca. This is the only fully agricultural

people in my sample with relatively fluid local groups and nO formal level

of organization above the family. The eight societies at the lower left

hand corner, on the other hand, can be reasonably shown to have relatively
 197

TABLE lBb
(Page 1 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Degree of Dependence on Agriculture

DegrE!e of Absent Weak Strong

Dependence upon Units of social · Units of social Units of social
Agriculture affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinl1:u1shed: tinl1:uished: tinguished:

Level 0: Not (Mean number of (Mean number of

practiced or only units of social units of social
non-food crops affiliation: 1.17) affiliation: 1.86)

Mean number of Bushmen Mbuti 11, la Pomo 6

uni ts of social Aranda Andamans Ib Toda 4
affiliation: 1.57 Paiute Tiw1 lb Manus la, 3, 6
Kutenai J{ottentot 2 Gilyak 4, 6
Aweikoma Masai 2 Yukaghir la t 6, 9b
Tehuelche Rwala 11 Ingalik 6
Copper Eskimo Twana 3; 6
Yamana (Yahgan) Klamath lb, 7
•
Levell: Yields (Mean number of (Mean number of
{ less 10% of food
supply
u:tits of social
affiliation: 1.B)
units of social
affiliation: 2)
II Mean number of Ainu 2 Lapps 3, 9b, 11
units of social Siriono la, Ib Samoyed 4, 9b
affiliation: 1.B9 Fulani 2 Goajiro 3, 4
Khalka Mongols lb, Badjau 10
9a, 9b,
10
Somali Ib

Level 2: Yields (Mean number of (Mean number of

more than 10% fooe units of social units of social
supply but less affiliation: 2) affiliation: 1.5)
than another sub-
sistence activity Tuareg 11 Basseri 9b, 11
Barama Carib la Fiji la
Mean number of Marshallese la, 4,
units of social B, 9b
affiliation: 1.B
 198

TABLE l8b
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Degree of Dependence on Agriculture

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Dependence upon Units of social
Units of social Units of social
Agriculture affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished :

Level 3: Yields (Mean number of (Mean number of

over half food units of social units of social
supply; is not affiliation: ) affiliation: 2.73)
intensive
Mean number of Amahuaca Thonga la, 4,6, 9a
uni ts of social Bemba 3,4,6,8, 9a
affiliation: 2.73 Iban 6
Creek la
Yanomamo la & b, 6
Tupinamba la, 2, 8
Igbo la, 3, 6,
9a, 9b
Toradja 6; 9b
Yap 3, 8
Huichol la, 6, 9b
Quiche 6, 10

Level 4: Yields (Mean number of

over half food units of social
supply: uses in- affiliation: 3
tensive technique.
Lozi 6, 8
Mean number of Gheg 3,(4), 6, 9b
units of social Tanala 4, 6) 1b
affiliation: 3 Papago 6, 9b
Bambara la, 5, 6, 8,
9a, 10
Kenuz 4, 6
Rif 6
Santal la & b, 9b
Korea 3, 4, 6, 7,
8, 9b
Aztec la, 4, 5, 9a
Inca 3, 6, 10
 199

stable local groups. In the case of the Toda, the clan had important

functions regulating property and ritual participation. The hunter-

gatherer Eastern Pomo of Clear Lake lived in politically organized

community groups composed largely of kin. Each family kept "huts" in

three locations. The most permanent and substantial "hut" was in the

village which was occupied in winter and by some people in mid-summer.

Most of the village apparently ·did ·move to the spring fishing and fall

acorn gathering locations (Loeb 1.926). The remaining six societies · in

this group all have fishing economies. The Manu l i ved in permanent

fishing villages of reasonably stable population. Within each Gilyak

community, clan members lived together; each clan owned streams and

trapping locations, particular portions of which were inherited by

particular families . I have already discussed the Yukaghir and Twana

communities (see pages 147 and l8 f ). ·The Ingalik lived in permanent winter

villages and ideally practiced village endogamy. The autonomous political

unit among the Klamath consisted of several communities. There was a

good deal of shifting of residence within this unit. Endogamy within it

was preferred. It is interesting that among the Klamath the several

community unit, rather than the individual communities, had its own

cremation ground.

The Weak category at level 0 (those societies without agriculture)

is in an interesting intermediate position. The Rwala and Mbuti have

highly fluid local groups but ties with agricultural villages are recognized

i f death occurs at the Villages. My information of the stability of

Hottentot local herding groups is incomplete. The Masai recognize the

special responsibility of the elders for the well being of the camp unit
 200

by burying them near the camp unit. The Tiwi did frequent at least some of

the same camping places regularly. When compared with the Aranda, the

Tiwi family groups were larger and less dispersed than the Aranda, al-

though s t i ll fluid in composition. Extended family groups were closely

associated with a particular territory. Although their activity was not

confined to this country, their right to it was confirmed by use (Hart

1930; Goodale 1971). Finally, the Andaman Islanders present an in-

structive case study (Cipriani 1966). The forest dwelling Andamanese

had temporary dry season and permanent wet season communal houses. The

dead were buried within the communal houses underneath the sleeping places

belonging to his or her family. The bones were later exhumed, cleaned,

painted and reburied there. Over time a number of burials were made
.t
I very near each other. The Andamanese included in my sample were coast

dwellers. According to Man (1932) nomadism was confined almost entirely

to the coastal groups whose means of subsistence were more varied. The

coastal groups had permanent headquarter encampments, but dwellings were

familial rather than communal. Visiting away from the village was common.

People moved every few months (Radcliffe-Brown 1922). The coastal

,Andamanese buried their dead away from any encampment, but returned to

exhume the bones, which relatives of the deceased,kept in their dwellings

and used in various ways until lost or given away. The more stable

community groups distinguished the community and nuclear family affilia-

tion of their deceased in the location of their disposition. The more

fluid groups distinguished only the family affiliation of the deceased

by keeping relics of the deceased for a time.

 201

Examination of the effect of agriculture independently of the effect

of other subsistence economies has been instructive. It seems clear that

while Dependence Upon Agriculture for most of one's food supply is very

close to being a sufficient condition for the Use of Location to Symbolize

Social Affiliation of the Deceased, it is by no means a necessary one.

Partial dependence upon agriculture for food does seem to increase the
• use of this mortuary symbolism somewhat; there is a greater likelihood

that mortuary symbolism will be used Weakly rather than Strongly. In

the light of what has already been said about partially agricultural

societies, it seems likely that the use of agricultural products is

only one contributing factor in creating the conditions leading to the

, Strong use of mortuary symbolism by the Lapps, Samoyed, Badjau or Basseri.

I Use of agricultural products may have a somewhat stronger influence upon

the Goajiro and Fijian practices. On the other hand, I suspect that the

need for agricultural products or the practice of some agriculture does

decisively influence the Tuareg and Barama Carib to make Weak rather than

No use of this mortuary symbolism. Further research might well indicate

this also holds for the Ainu, Siriono and Somali. However, in all these

societies the need for different kinds of social organization imposed by

•
varying conditions within each type of subsistence economy seems to be a

more important influence upon the strength with which location is used

to symbolize social affiliation of the deceased. For example, the Tuareg

and Basseri pursue contrasting types of pastoralism.

8. Subsistence Categorization as an independent variable

Subsistence economy and the predictability and abundance of resources

directly determine the need for fluid or stable local groups and the need
 202

for a strong wider organization. The intrinsic nature of the resources

exploited (game and wild plant food, cattle, fish, or deliberately planted

and tended crops) requires specific activities, skills and kinds of coopera-

tion which will be needed in all societies depending upon those resources.

On the other hand, the actual subsistence economy of each society within

the Subsistence Categories will vary with the dispersed or concentrated,

and scarce or abundant character of the resources, the technology avail-

able, and the relationship with other peoples (Dyson-Hudson and Smith 1978) .

Therefore, variation 'in the stability of local groups and the need for a '

strong wider organization is expected for Hunting and Gathering, Pastoralist

and Fishing subsistence economies .

With this variability in mind I have made certain predictions. Be-

cause of the dispersed and unpredictable character of the resources avail-

able to most contemporary hunting and gathering peoples, they character-

istically have fluid local groups. Consequently, I expect most of the

hunter-gatherers to be classed as Mortuary Distinction Weak or Absent .

Pastoralists often need to keep their herds or flocks broken up in

separate places in order to prevent complete loss from disease or depreda-

, tion. This tends to keep the local kin unit dispersed. The character

of the range land determines whether the herds must be wide~y dispersed

with migration unpredictable , or whether roughly the same migration routes

can be followed every year. Use of a home range seems to require a

stronger kin organization to regulate use of and to defend the territory

of its members. I have predicted that pastoralists with a home range

system will be more likely to Strongly distinguish Social Affiliation

of the Deceased by Location of DispositiQn. Those with dispersed migration

 203

patterns which require fluid stock keeping groups will be more likely

to make No such distinction, or to use such distinctions only Weakly .

Because of the need for consistent cooperation between close kin in

order .to preserve the health and growth of the herd, it is reasonable

to expect a greater probability that location will be Weakly used to

distinguish Social Affiliation than that it will not be used at all.

The cooperating group may be weakly symbolized either by placing members

of the nuclear family together when this is convenient, or by burying

deceased 'members of the local herding unit near the camp:ing place but

subsequently leaving the area. I expect most Fishing societies to have

stable local groups or the need for a strong organization to regulate

I use of seasonal fishing stations. Therefore, I predict that most of them

f will Strongly distinguish Social Affiliation of the Dead by Location of

Disposition. Those exploiting more dispersed resources in a larger area

will be more likely to have fluid local groups with less need for a strong

wider organization. They will be more likely to be classed as Mortuary

Symbolism Absent or Weak. The previous analysis has already indicated

that the great majority of agricultural people strongly distinguish

Social Affiliation of the Deceased by the Location of Disposition. On

the basis of these predictions, a strong, positive association is expected

between subsistence categorization and degree of use of location of dis-

position to symbolize social affiliation of the deceased.

The bivariate relationship between Subsistence Categorization and

the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Deceased's Social

Affiliation can be seen in Table ' 19a. Chi square is 37.70, which

is significant at« =.001. Goodman and Kruska1's t is .367. Kendall's

LDP
 TABLE 19a
Location of Di8po~ition &9
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Subsistence Categorization
SUBSISTENCE CATEGORIZATION
Count Hunter- Pastoral- Fishing Shifting Settled Row
COL PCT Gatherer ist Agriculture Agriculture Total
l. 2. 3. 4. 5.
LOCDP
l. 6 0 2 1 0 9
ABSENT 50% .00 17% 9% .00 15%
2. 5 7 2 0 0 14
WEAK 42% 58% 17% .00 .00 24%

3. 1 5 8 10 12 36
'"
0
N STRONG 8% 42% 67% 91% 100 .00 61%

Column 12 12 12 11 12 59
Total 20% 20% 20% 19% 20% 100.00

Chi Square ~ 37.70 With 8 Deg of Free.dom

Significance = .001
Kendall's Tau C .574 Significance = .001
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .478 With LOCDP Dependent
Goodman & Kruskal's Tau = .367 With LOCDP Dependent
 205

tau at .574 indicates a very strong, positive overall linear relationship

c
significant at «=.001. The asymmetric Somers' d is .478. It is there-

fore reasonable to reject the null hypothesis that no relationship exists

between Type of .Subsistence Economy and Use of Social Affiliation to

Define Location of Disposition. The data indicate a strong relationship

which is quite unlikely to occur by chance alone.

Examination of Tables 19a and 19b reveals that about 92% of the

twelve hunting and gathering societies have been classed as mortuary

distinction Absent or Weak while only one society makes a Strong dis-

tinction in their mortuary practices. The lower left corner of the

table is nearly empty. No Pastoralists have been classed as Mortuary

Distinction Absent. About 58%, over twice as many as would be expected

by chance, make a Weak Mortuary Distinction. Somewhat fewer than would

I be expected by chance, about 42% as compared to a chance prediction of 61%,

I
make a Strong mortuary distinction. The distribution of the Fishing

Societies is more variable and closer to frequencies expected on the

basis of chance. However, about two thirds of the twelve societies do

Strongly distinguish Social Affiliation of the Deceased by Location of

Disposition. Of the Shifting Agriculturalists, only one is classed as

Mortuary Distinction Absent and None as Mortuary Distinction Weak. All

of the Settled Agriculturalists Strongly distinguish Social Affiliation of

the Deceased by Location of Disposition.

I have already discussed the degree of stability of the local group

and the need for a strong organization beyond the local group which are

found in most of the non-agricultural societies. Perusal of Table 19c

confirms previous expectations. Among the Hunter-Gatherers, all those

 TABLE 19b
Location of Disposition As
A Symbol of Social Affiliation by Subsistence Categorization

SUBSISTENCE CATEGORIZATION
Count Hunter- Pastora1- Fishing Shifting Settled Row
COL PCT Gatherer ist Agriculture Agriculture Total
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
LOCDP
1. 11 7, 4 1 0 23
ABSENT AND WEAK 92% 58% 33 % 9% 0% 39%

'"
0
N STRONG
2. 1
8%
5
42%
8
67 %
10
91%
12 36
61%
100%

Column 12 12 12 11 12 59
Total 20% 20% 20% 19% 20% 100.00

Raw Chi Square 27.85 With 4 Deg of Freedom

Significance = . 001
Kendal l's Tau C = .747 Significance ~ .001
Somers' D (Asymmetric) = .467 With LOCDP Depend ent
Goodman and Kruska1's tau = .477 With LOCDP 'Dependent

,
 207

TABLE 19c
(Page 1 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Subsistence Categorization

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Subsistence
Units of social Units of social Unit,s of social
Categorization
affiliation dis- affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tin guished:

Levell: Hunter- (Mean number of (Mean number of

Gatherer units of social units of social
affiliation: 1.4) affiliation: 1)

Mean number of Bushmen Mbuti la, 11 Porno 6

units of social Aranda Andamans lb
affiliation: 1.33 Paiute Tiwi lb
Kutenai Ainu 2
Aweikoma Siriono la, lb
Tehuelche

Level 2: (Mean number of (Mean number of

Pas toralis.t units of social units of social
affiliation: 1.43) affiliation: 2)

Mean number of Hottentot 2 Lapps 3, 9b, 11

units of social Fulani 2 Samoyed 4, 9b
affiliation: 1.67 Masai 2 Basseri 9b, 11
Somali lb Toda 4
Tuareg 11 Goajiro 3, 4
Rwala 11
Khalka Mongol lb,
9a, 9b,
10

Level 3 : Fishing (Mean number of (Mean number of

units of social units of social
Mean number of affiliation: 2.5) affiliation: 1.86)
units of social
affilia tion: 2 Copper Eskimo Marshallese la, 4, Badjau 10
Yamana (Yahgan) 8, 9b Manus la, 3, 6
Barama Carib la Fiji la
Gllyak 4, 6
Yukaghir la, 6, 9b
Ingalik 6
Twana 3, 6
Klamath lb, 7
 208

TABLE 19c
(Page 2 of 2)

Distribution of Kinds of Social Affiliation According to

Subsistence Categorization

Degree of Absent Weak Strong

Subsistence Units of social Units of social Units of social
Categorization affiliation dis- affiliation dis-
affiliation dis-
tinguished: tinguished: tinguished:

Level 4: Shifting (Mean number of (Mean number of

Agriculture units of social units of social
affiliation: ) affiliation: 2.5)

Mean number of Amahuaca Thonga la, 4,6, 9a

• units of social Lozi 6, 8
I affiliation: 2.5 Bemba
Gheg
3,4,6,8, 9a
3, (4), 6, 9b
Tanala 4, 6,11>
Iban 6
Creek la
Papago 6, 9b
• Yanomamo la & b, 6
Tupinamba la, 2, 8

LevelS: Settled (Mean number of

Agriculture units of social
affiliation: 3.17)
Mean number of
units of social Igbo la, 3, 6, 9a,
affiliation: 3.17 9b
r
Bambara la, 5, 0, 8,
9a, 10
Kenuz 4, 6
Rif 6
San tal la & b, 6, 9b
Toradja 6, 9b
Yap 3, 8
Korea 3, 4, 6, 7,
8, 9b
Huichol la, 6, 9b
Aztec la, 4, 5, 9a
Quiche 6, 10
Inca 3, 6, 10
 209

classed as Mortuary Distinction Absent have been shown to have fluid local

groups, with the possible exception of the Kutenai. Those societies in

the .Weak category, such as the Andamanese, Tiwi and Mbuti, seem to present

a more intermediate pattern, as was discussed on page 200. The Porno are

the only Hunting and Gathering society in my sample to make a Strong

Mortuary Distinction. They have relatively stable local groups; kin and

village organization regulate use of their abundant, seasonably variable

resources. The Pastoralist societies have been discussed in SOme detail .

The Tuareg and Rwala make only a very Weak distinction, burying their

dead in the graveyards of their subordinate agricultural villages if

they happen to die there. The Fulani and Hottentot bury all their dead

close to the camp unit, but subsequently leave the place. Further research

into this contrasting behavior might prove fruitful. Those classed as

Mortuary Distinction Weak, the Fulani, Masai, Somali, Tuareg, Rwala and

rural Khalka Mongols, have ~ather unstable local stock-keeping groups

with migration patterns relatively unpredictable. Those classed as

Mortuary Distinction Strong, the Lapps, Samoyed, Basseri and Toda, have

relatively predictable migration routes. In addition, the Lapps and

Basseri have strong economic and religious ties with ethnically different

villages. The Samoyed, Toda and Goajiro sib organizations regulate the

use of territory, among other important functions.

Among the Fishing Societies, those which exploit seasonally rich

resources of fish (the Gilyak, Yukaghir, Ingalik, Twana and Klamath)

live in village groups and strongly distinguish community and usually

.kin membership,as predicted. The three Pacific island Fishing Societies

did not entirely conform to expectations. The Marshallese inclusion of

 210

the ocean within their usable space constitutes a special case which must

be classified as a Weak mortuary distinction. Marshallese stratification

and clan membership is distinguished in burial of very eminent people.

The Manus village is an autonomous governing unit. Here village and

family membership are distinguished by both location of disposition and

relic keeping. The Fijians buried the deceased in the dwellings in

which they died. Thes e homes were usually their own . My information is

inadequate to determine whether differences in ascribed status were further

symbolized by differences in location of disposition. The Barama Carib of

Guyana follow a subsistence economy unique in my sample. (The Amahuacan

economy is most similar.) Fishing resources are abundant , non-seasonal

and require only minimal cooperation of the local group for exploitation .

Land for agriculture is plentiful. Hunting is dispersed. Their Weak

distinction of Social Aff iliation by Location of Disposition is consistent

with their dispersed but abundant resources and their unstable local groups.

Perhaps the identification of a · person with the family group exploiting the

land is symbolized by burial within the dwelling house and continued feed-

ing of the ghost there for a short time.

In comparing Shifting and Settled Agriculturalists, it was predicted

that there would be little difference between the degree to which they

tended to distinguish Social Affiliation of the Deceased by Location of

Disposition, if the cohesiveness of the local social group is exerting a

major influence upon the strength of use of this mortuary symbolism. Co-

hesiveness is important to social groups of both categories if the agri-

cultural cycle is to be successfully completed. However,· if several

variables are operating independently to influence use or non-use of

 211

mortuary symbolism, Shifting Agriculturalists might show a greater number

of societies classed as Mortuary Distinction Weak. As can be seen in Table

19a, this latter prediction is not correct. However, the Amahuaca demon-

strate that where Population Density and Community Size are extremely low,

there is no level of Political Integration above the family and the Degree

of Social Stratification is egalitarian, the cohesiveness of the local

group is weak despite agricultural requirements. Kin and neighbors do

assemble for a funeral, which is a notable event. However, Location of

Disposition is not used to symbolize family membership after a very brief

period ritually set apart for mourning.

In the light of all variables so far discussed, the hypothesis that

the kind of social group is an important intervening variable appears to

have been sustained. This impression is reinforced by the fact that the

bivariate association between Degree of Use of the Mortuary Symbolism and

Subsistence Categorization is stronger than those other bivariate relation-

ships obtained. Table 20 contains a comparison of the measures of associa-

tion obtained for those relationships which were clearly significant. It

is preferable to use the full table for ordinal measures of association.

The asymmetric Somers' d indicates that Subsistence Categorization has

the strongest relationship with the mortuary distinction. Degree of

j Dependence upon Agriculture, Level of Population Density, and Degree of
I

I Social Stratification are comparable in strength. The relationship with

I degree of Fixity of Residence is somewhat less strong followed by degree

of Political Integration. Degree of Urbanization and Level of Techno-

logical Specialization show a significant relationship with the degree

to which Location of Disposition is used to symbolize the Deceased's

Social Affiliation only when the Absent and .Weak categories of the mortuary

variable are combined. These relationships are weaker.

 Table 20

COMPARISON OF MEASURES OF ASSOCIATION

For 3 by 5 "t Somers'd Kendall's

LDP
bivariate tables LOCDP Dependent tauc

Subsistence .367 Subsistence .478 Subsistence .574

Agriculture .282 Agriculture .418 Agriculture .473
Social Stratification .223 Population Density .418 Population Density .454
Fixity of Residence .220 Social Stratification .414 Fixity of Residence .433
Population Density . 202 Fixity of Residence . 374 Social Stratifica-
Political Integration .159 Political Integration .331 tion .415
'"..... Technological Urbanization* .282 Political Inte-
'" Specialization* .113 Technological gration .353
Urbanization* .100 Specialization* .187 Urbanization* .300
Technological
Specialization* .216

*Chi square indicates a non-significant overall relationship for this table.

The order of the measures of association for the tables for 'these variables which do show a
significant chi square is identical.

- --------
 213

The association between Level of Technological Specialization and

Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the

Deceased is curvilinear. The ordinal measures of association indicate

the strength of linear· rather than curvilinear relationships. There-

fore, to obtain an adequate idea of the relative importance of Techno-

logical Specialization, it is useful to compare values of the nominal

measure of association. When the economic, demographic and social factors

are placed in order according to the values obtained for Goodman and

Kruskal's ttDP' the strengths 'of their relationships remain in essentially

the same order. Population Density has a less strong overall relationship

than linear relationship with Use of Location to Symbolize Social.Affilia-

tion. Subsistence Categorization shows the strongest overall association

with Use of Location to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the Deceased.

Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture, Level of Social Stratification and

Degree of Fixity of Residence follow in strength of association. The

Goodman and Kruskal's t for Degree of Social Stratification and Degree

LDP
of Fixity of Residence are consistently very close. Population Density

shows a somewhat weaker association. Degree of Political Integration,

Level of Technological Specialization and Degree of Urbanization show

the weakest overall associations with Use of Location to Symbolize Social

Affiliation. Level of Technological Specialization does have a somewhat

• A
h~gher t than Degree of Urbanization.
LDP
It is interesting to notice that the asymmetric relationships between

many of the demographic, economic and social variables and Use

of Location of Disposition to Symbolize Social Affiliation of the Deceased

is quite high when the economic and social conditions are considered as
 214

dependent (see Table 21). This is exactly the situation in which the

archeologist is placed. If the thrust of my analysis is correct, the

archeologist is on firm ground in making informed reconstructions of the

constitution and stability of local social groups from a study of mortuary

remains.

Comparison of the measures of association gives some indication of

the relative importance of the influences these economic, social and

demographic factors have upon the degree to which Social Affiliation of

the Deceased will be symbolized by the Location of Disposition. The

relative predictive power of t hese factors can be further elucidated by

multivariate analysis.

D. Multivariate Relationships

Subsistence Categorization shows the strongest bivariate association

with Use of Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation of

the Deceased. Clearly, the effect of the kind of subsistence economy

persists simultaneously with influences of the other social and demographic

factors. As subsistence economy is closely related to the demographic con-

ditions and kinds of social systems under consideration, it is useful to

• determine the predictive power of the other socio-economic and demographic

factors when Subsistence is held constant. The extent to which the other

socio-economic and demographic factors operate on the Use of Location of

Disposition as a Symbol of the Social Affiliation of the Deceased in-

dependently of the effect of Subsistence Economy is further clarified by

holding the effect of each of them constant while the relationships between

Subsistence and the mortuary practice are examined.

 Table 21

COMPARISON OF SOMERS'D WITH ECONOMIC AND

SOCIAL VARIABLES DEPENDENT

Socio-economic variables Somers'd (asymmetrical) For 3 by 5 bivariate

tables

Subsistence .698
Agriculture .575
Population Density .552
Fixity of Residence .526
Social Stratification .504
'"
M
N Political Integration .430
Urbanization* .365 (In Table l3b . 391)
Technological Specialization* .263 (In Table l6b .268)

*Chi square indicates a non-significant overall relationship for this table.

The order of this measure of association for the tables of these variahles which do show a
significant chi square is identical.
 216

~e measures of association obtained for correlations between Location

of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased and the

demographic, social and economic factors while controlling for Subsistence

Categorization are displayed in Tables 22a and 22b. The relationships in

the bivariate
, tables for Degree of Urbanization and Level of Technological

Specialization were statistically significant only when the Absent and

Weak categories of the Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social

Affiliation of the Deceased were combined and when categories of Community

Size were combined in a theoretically meaningful way (see Table 22b) .

Categories of the socio-economic and demographic variables displayed in

Table 22a were not combined; the pattern of results is the same whether

or not they are combined. When the socio-economic and demographic variables

are held constant, the small number of societies in many categories of these

( variables made it necessary to combine them according to meaningful patterns

discerned in the data for each bivariate table (see Table 23b). In the

case of Political Integration, it is meaningful to combine only the two

highest levels; this combination is displayed in Table 23b. Table 23a

displays the measures of association obtained when the relationship between

the Mortuary Variable and Subsistence is controlled for by Political Integra-

tion when no categories of the variables are combined.

A careful perusal of Tables 22a, 22b, 23a and 23b indicates that in

general Subsistence is a more important predictor of the Use of Location

of Disposition to Symbolize the Social Affiliation of the Deceased than

any of the other factors. Most of the relationships displayed in Tables

22a and 22b, where Subsistence is held constant, are insignificant. In

contrast, in Table 23b a greater number of the correlations between

 217

Table 22a
Measures of Association for Multivariate Re1ationship~ Location of Dis-
position as a Symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased By Social, Demo-
graphic and Economic Factors Controlling for Subsistence

(no categories 'of any variables are combined'

Control Social Chi Significance Kendall's Significance I Somers' d
y
Variable: Demographic Square tau
c
Economic
Subsistence Variables
no categories
combined
Fixity of
Residence .16 not sig. .417 .05 .454
Hunter- Population
G~ therer Density 6.24 .05 .444 .05 .800
Social
Valid Stratifica-
cases - tion 12.0 .01 .306 .05 1.00
12 Political
Integration 1.16 not sig. -.11!. not sig. -.148
Agriculture 3.36 not sig •. .278 not sig. .500
Fixity of
Residence 2.13 not sig. .083 not sig. .143
Population .
Pastoral-
Density 2.13 not sig. • 083 not s ig . .065
ist
Social r
Stratifica-
Valid
cases =
tion 2.20 not sig . -.139 not s ig . -.122 I
Political
12
Integration 1.71 not sig. -.278 not sig. -.213
Agriculture .69 not sig . .222 not sig. .182 :
,
Fixity of
Residence 8.38 not sig. .020 not sig. .019
Fishing Population
Density 3.19 not sig. .083 not s ig . .111
Valid Social
cases := Stratifica-
12 tion 10.20 .05 .250 not s ig . .293
Political
Integration 10.99 not sig. .146 not sig. .233
Agriculture 7.75 not sig. -.125 not sig. -.171
Fixity of Fisher s
Residence Exact
Shifting Test ..
.55 -.165 not sig. -.167
Agri-
Population
culture
Density 2.93 not sig. .264 not dg. .170
Valid Social
cases ., Stratifica-
tion 1.93 not sig. .231 not s ig. .159
11
Political
Integration 11.0 .05 .331 .05 .213
Agriculture Fisher's
Exact
Tes~64 • 132 not sig . .143
 218

Tabla 228 (Continued)

Fixity of
Residence
settled Population
Agri- Density
culture Social
Stratifica-
Valid tion
cases = Political
12 Integration
A ricu1ture
 219

Table 22b
Measures of Association for Multivariate Relationships: Location of Disposition as
a Symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased By the Social, Demographic and Economic
Factors Controlling for Subsistence (categories of LOCDP and Urbanization combined)

Soc:\.a1 or
Subsistence Demographic Chi Square Significance Kendall's Signifi- Somers' dy
Variable sig. tau cance
c
Bivariate
relationship
Hunter- Urbanization 12.00 .01 .306 .05 .282
Gatherer
Valid cases= Technological
12 Specialization 1.09 not sig. -.167 not sig. -.133
Pastora1ist Urbanization 2.20 not sig. -.417 not sig. .366
Valid cases= Technological (.057)
12
Specialization 5.73 not sig. -.583 .05 -.512
Urbanization 3.56 not sig. .194 not sig. .200
Fishing
Valid cases= Technological I
12 Specialization 1.13 not sig. .194 not sig. .137 I
Shifting Urbanization 2.93 not sig. .264
..
not S1g. .205
Agriculture Technological I
Valid cases= Specialization 1. 93 not sig. .099 not sig. .077
11
Settled Urbanization - - - - -
Agricul ture Technological
Valid cases= Specialization - - - - - I

12 .
 220

Table 23a
Measures of Association for Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation
of the Deceased By Subsistence Categorization Controlling for Level of Political
Integration (with no categories of any variables combined)

Control Location of Disposition Chi Square Sig. Kendall's Sig. Somers' d

y
Variable as a Symbol of Social tau
c
Affiliation of the
Deseased by Subsistence
Controlled for: I
I

O. Household Autonomous not

valid cases = 5 2.22 sig. -.640 -.571
1. Local Community I
Level Autonomous not
of valid cases = 26 14.64 sig. .590 .001 .541
Political 2. One administrative
Integra- level above local
tion community
valid cases - 14 8.193 .05 .673 .01 .508
3. Two levels above
local community not
valill cases = 9 3.94 sig. .346 .241
4. Three or more levels
Somers'
above local community not
d =
valid cases - 5 5.00 sig. .640 .500 y
1.00 ,
 221

Table 23b
Measures of Association for Multivariate Relationships: Location of Disposition as
a symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased by Subsistence Controlling for Social,
Demographic and Economic Factors (categories of LOCDP and Social, Demographic and
Economic variables are combined)

control Location of Dispositio~ Chi Square Significance Kendall's Sig. Somers'

Variable as a symbol of social tau d
c y
affiliation by Subsis-
tence Controlled for:
1. Nomadic
Fixity
valid cases = 28 9.78 .01 .597 .001 .455
of Resi- 2 . Sedentary
dence valid cases = 31 7.78 not sig. .304 .01 .219
O. Under 1 person per
square mile
valid cases = 26 9.47 .05 .615 .01 .435
popula- 1. One to 5 persons
tion per square mile not
Density valid cases = 11 3.65 not sig. . 496 sig. .367
2. Over 5.1 persons
per square mile
valid cases = 22 6.88 not sig . .281 .02 .214
O. Under 100 persons
Average valid cases = 26 8.87 not sig. .574 .01 .385
Communit y 1. 100 to 199 persons
Size valid cases = 15 12.32 .02 .924 .001 .598
• 2. Over 200 persops
valid cases = 18 18.0 .001 .346 .02 .237
O. Egalitarian
valid cases = 24 11.33 .02 .667 .001 .475
1. Status based on
SOc!ial wealth or slavery
Stratifi- exists
cation valid cases = 23 7.89 not sig, .318 .02 .211
2. Formal class dis-
tinctions exist
valid cases = 12 12.00 .01 .750 .01 .551
O. Pottery, looms &
Techno- smith all absent not
logical valid cases = 14 3.79 not sig. .469 sig . . .343
Special- 1. Pottery only
ization valid cases = 9 5.96 .05 .840 .708
2.• . Looms but no sniths not
valid cases = 13 7.24 not sig. .308 8ig. .213
3. Smith but looms &/or
pottery absent
valid cases = 18 11.83 .02 .864 .001 .593
4. Smiths, pottery &
looms all present
valid cases = 5 - - - - -
 222

Table 23b (Continued)

Dependence O. Agriculture absent

Upon or non-food
Agriculture valid cases = 22 8.39 .02 .612 .01 .487
l. Under half food
supply
valid cases = 14 1. 75 not sig. .245 not sig. .214
3. Over half food
supply
valid cases = 23 .01 not sig. .09l not sig. .09l

Level ' of 3. & 4. Two or more

Political administrative
Integration levels above local
valid cases = 14 8.55 .05 .449 .02 .324
 223

Subsistence and the mortuary distinction remain significant and either

moderate or strong.

However, in some circumstances certain of the social and demographic

factors are important predictors and so can be inferred to be having some

effect on the mortuary practice. Therefore, it is possible to specify

somewhat more precisely certain conditions under which location or dis-

position of the remains of the dead will be used as a symbol of social

affiliation. In Hunting and Gathering societies, use of Location of Dis-

position as a symbol of Social Affiliation of the deceased is more likely

as Population Density and Social Stratification increase. Community Size

has a somewhat weaker effect. In Table 22a, Fixity of Residence in Hunting

and Gathering societies shows a moderate, positive,linear association with

the mortuary practice, .b~t chi square is not significant. When Fixity of

I Residence is dichotomized into Nomadic and Sedentary societies and Sub-

sistence is held constant, for Hunters and Gatherers chi square is 6.24,

significant at 0( =.05; Somers' d is .800. Nomadic Hunters and Gatherers

y .
use Location of Disposition to distinguish Social Affiliation of the

deceased only Weakly if at all, while those hunting and gathering societies

classified as semi-sedentary make either a Weak or a Strong Mortuary Dis-

I tinction. Among the other Subsistence categories, when Subsistence is

held constant no relationships between the socio-economic and demographic

variables and the mortuary practices are significant, with two exceptions.

In Fishing societies, degree of Social Stratification has a significant

chi square and Cramer's V is .632, but Kendall's tau c is not significant.

Among the Shifting Agriculturalists, Level of Political Integration is a

significant but weak predictor of Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize

 224

the Social Affiliation of the Deceased. This reflects the fact that the

Amahuaca, who are the only shifting agricultural people to fail to make

a Strong mortuary distinction, are at the household level of Political

Integration. With Political Integration held constant (see lab1e 23a),

at level 0 where the household is the autonomous governing unit, Use of

Location of Disposition as a Mortuary Symbol of Social Affiliation is

either Absent or Weak. Here, the low level of Political Integration is

explanatory. However, at levels of Political Integration of one or more

administrative levels above the local community, Subsistence Economy is

either a strong or moderate predictor of the mortuary practice when Level

of Political Integration is held constant (see Tables 23a and 23b).

The curvilinear relationship between Technological Specialization

and Use of .Location of Disposition to symbolize the Deceased's Social

Affiliation is further demonstrated in Table 23b. Where pottery, looms

and metalworking are all absent (level 0), use of this mortuary symbol

will be Absent or Weak. Where all are present (level 4) or where looms

are used but metalworking is absent (level 2), use of the mortuary symbol

will tend to be Strong. However, among those societies with pottery only,

or who have metalworking but lack either looms and/or pottery, Subsistence

±s a far better indicator of whether or not Location of Disposition will

be used to symbolize the deceased's Social Affiliation.

When either Fixity of Residence, Population Density or Degree of

Dependence upon Agriculture are held constant, Subsistence Economy is a

moderately strong predictor at the very lowest level. However, at higher

levels of Sedentism, Population Density and Dependence upon Agriculture,

Use of Location of Disposition as a Mortuary Symbol of Social Affiliation

will tend to be Strong regardless of Subsistence Economy. This is

 225

consistent with my previous conclusions that the highest levels of these

factors constitute sufficient but not necessary conditions for the Strong

use of this mortuary symbol. Of course, as the great majority of ex-

tensive and shifting agriculturalists and all intensive and settled

agriculturalists make a Strong Mortuary Distinction, whichever of these

is held constant when the others are varied will seem to be the explanatory

factor.

When Social Stratification is held constant , Subsistence remains a

good predictor among egalitarian societies (level 0) and among societies

making formal class distinctions (levels 2 - 4). The fact that Pastoralist

societies with reasonably high levels of social stratification and political

integration make only a Weak use of Location of Disposition to symbolize

the Social Affiliation of the deceased lowers the predictive power of these

factors. (Note their insignific·a nt, weak negative associations in Table

22a). This behavior helps substantiate my contention that explanations

for the failure to use this mortuary symbol must be sought in the dynamics

of the most local group.

E. Indexes Created

In general, Subsistence Economy is a better predictor of the Use of

Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation of the Deceased

than the other socio-economic and demographic factors considered here.

This fact is further evidence that the need for stability of the most

local group is an important influence on the use of this mortuary symbol.

However, it is possible to more directly test the competing hypothesis

which expects that under any particular set of circumstances, anyone

or more of the socio-economic or demographic factors may exert a critical

 226

influence. If this expectation is correct, an index created by ~dding

the scores given to each society for each of the demographic, social and

economic factors should have a greater predictive power than Subsistence

• economy alone. (Where people make regular use of this mortuary symbol,

low scores on some scales should be compensated for by high scores on other

scales.)

To test this hypothesis, I created three indexes. The first is a

demographic index, termed IndexDM, which is the sum of ratings for Fixity

of Residence, Popualation Density and Community Size for each society.

The second, termed IndexSD, adds scores for the social factors Degree of

Social Stratification and Level of Political Integration to the IndexDM

scores. The third, termed IndexAS, consists of the sum of ratings for

Fixity of Residence, Population Density, Community Size, Levels of Social

Stratification and Political Integration and Degree of Dependence upon

Agriculture. All three indexes have strong, positive associations with

the Use of Location of Disposition to Symbolize the Social Affiliation

of the Deceased. These associations are highly significant at 0( =.001.

IndexDM has a Kendall Correlation coefficient of .474. IndexSD has a

somewhat stronger Kendall Correlation coefficient of .523, and IndexAS

has a Kendall Correlation coefficient of .528.

However, when the correlation between the indexes and the Use of

Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation is controlled

for Subsistence, the measures of association obtained (displayed in Table

24) indicate that Subsistence is a far superior predictor of the use 'of

this mortuary symbol.

 227

Table 24
Measures of Association for Multivariate Relationships: Location of Disposition as
a symbol of Social Affiliation by Index of Demographic Variables {IndexDM), Index
of Demographic and Social Variables(Index SD) and Index Including Dependence upon
Agriculture (IndexAS) Controlling for Subsistence Category

Ind.e>Ces 0 f Chi
Subsistence Demographic Square Significance Kendall's Significance Somers d
y
Social and tau
c
Economic
Variables
Hunter- .375 sig.
Gatherer IndexDM 13.37 .05 not .353
valid IndexSD 12.27 not sig. .271 not sig. .236
cases=12 IndexAS 14.47 not sig. .375 not sig. .321
Pastoralist IndexDM 1.03 not sig. -.139 not sig. .091
valid cases IndexSD 7.20 not sig. -.389 not sig. -.237
= 12 IndexAS .3.77 not sig. -.250 not sig. -.155
•
Fishing IndexDM
. 11.50 not sig. . 167 not sig • .133
valid IndexSD 13.99 not sig. . 250 not sig . .200
cases=12 IndexAS 15.25 not sig. .188 not sig. .145

I
Shifting
Agriculture

valid cases
-II
IndexDM
IndexSD
IndexAS
11.00
11.00
11.00
.05
not sig.
not sig.
.331
.331
.331
.05

.05
.189
Somers'
• 056 (not sig.) .222 dy E1.00
Somers'
dy- 1.00
Somers'
.196
dy a 1.0(,
Settled
Agri- IndexDM - - -- - -
culture IndexSD - - - -
valid IndexAS - - - - -
cases=12
 228

F. Step-wise Multiple Regression Analysis

•
Because of the relatively small size of my Mortuary Sample, con-

clusions based upon multivariate analysis can only be tentative . In

contrast, mult'iple regression analysis does not require a l arge sample

size. It therefore allows simultaneous comparison of the relative strengths

of all the socio-economic and demographic variables in relation to the Use

of Location of Disposition as a Mortuary Symbol of Social Affiliation.

Unfortunately, regression analysis of ordinal measures has received

theoretical support only in recent years (Tufte 1970; Cohen and Cohen

1975). Ordinal measures raise special problems partly because they can

be expected to show a linear relationship only with other ordinal variables.

As all the variables I am using are ordinal, this is not a difficulty.

However, it is important to stress Ghat in using regression analysis on

ordinal data, the coefficients are indicators of monotonic relationship

only, not of linear relationship (Rosenblatt et a1. 1976). I can only

be measuring the strength of the variables relative to each other because

the scales of measurement do not have intervals of equal size.

In a mUltiple regression analysis, any interrelationships among the

various independent variables will have an important effect on the pattern

of the data. The independent variables in this study are all interrelated

in important ways. Subsistence economy is a more inclusive category than

most of the others. Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture is another way

of measuring subsistence. Subsistence economy under specific ecological

conditions determines Fixity of Residence. Population Density and mean

size of the local community are somewhat less clearly tied to subsistence,

although settled agriculture presumably allows for larger settlements than

 229

most other forms of subsistence, while Hunting and Gathering and Pastoralism

are associated with low population densities. Level of Political Integra-

tion and Degree of Social Stratification are related. Societies which

have more complex levels of Political Integration tend to be more highly

stratified. Societies with more complex political systems are not de-

pendent upon hunting and gathering modes of production, but are likely to

depend upon systems of settled agriculture. A factor analysis indicated,

as expected, that Subsistence economy is strongly related to Fixity · of

Residence and Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture. Population Density

is somewhat less strongly related to the other three. Social Stratifica-

tion and Political Integration are more closely related to each other than

to the economic variables. Level of Technological Specialization was·

omitted from the regression analysis because it has a definite curvilinear

relationship with the Use of Location of Disposition as a Mortuary Symbol

of Social Affiliation.

The results of a stepwise multiple regression analysis are displayed

in Table 25. Subsistence economy is the first variable entered into the

equation with Beta - .62 and F = 35. The coefficients of the other variables

with which it is closely related drop very sharply. After this, no other

relationship is statistically significant. Political Integration enters

in step 2, causing the coefficient of Social Stratification to decrease

dramatically. After the social variable Political Integration enters in

step 2, R2 increases only very gradually, indicating that the subsequent

variables explain very little.

The order of the relative strengths of the socio-economic factors

does not entirely correspond to that obtained by comparing the meaSures of

 Table 25
Stepwise Multiple Regression: Subsistence, Fixity of Residence, Population Density,
Urbanization, Social Stratification, Political Integration and Dependence Upon Agri-
culture related to Use of Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation
of the Deceased

Subsistence Political Population Degree" of Fixity Social Degree For whole equation:
Integration Density Dependence of Strat- of Ur- R2 (F)
on Agri- Resi- ifica- baniza-
culture dence tion tion
STEPS: 0 .62 .43 .51 .53 .49 .42 .37
1 .62 .381 (35.05)**
Beta (35.05) **
and 2 .53 .20
0
(F) (21. 33)** (3.02) .412 (19.66)**
'"
'" for each 3
variable
.46
(12.05)*
.16
(1. 66)
.14
(1.07) .424 (13.48)**
.54 .18 .15 -.12
4 (1. 97) .427 (l0.07)**
(7.50)* (1.10) (.33)
.58 .17 .18 -.10 -.09
5 (1. 60) (1. 29) (.22) (.21) .429 (7.98)**
(7.10)'"
.58 .14 .18 -.10 -.09 .05
6 (.22) (.22) .431 (6.56)**
(6.69)* (.73) (1. 31) (.13)
.58 .14 .17 -. ll -.10 .05 .03
7 (6.55)* (.69) (1.13) (.23) (.23) (.12) (.04) .431 (5.51'>,,'"

*"'significant at p =.001
*significant at p =.05
 231

association of the bivari ate relationships . Level of Political Integrati~n

is seen to have a greater explanatory power than expected. The results of

the step-wise regression analysis strongly indicate that Subsistence is

the most important explanatory vari able, receiving little additional help

from the others. A comparison of the nature of the bivariate distributions

of the social and economi~ factors with Location of Disposition used as a

Symbol of Social Affiliation indicates why this is so. While the others,

with the partial exception of Level of Political Integration, have only

the top right corner of the table empty, Subsistence also has the lower

left hand corner much decreased. The implications of these results will

be discussed more fully in the next chapter.

 232

CHAPTER SIX. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The results of each method of data analysis which I have applied

support the hypothesis that differing patterns of economic and social

forces create through time various types of social groups which in turn

exert the critical influence on whether and how social affiliation is

symbolized by the location of the disposition of the dead. Taken together,

the bivariate, multivariate and regression analyses demonstrate that Sub-

sistence Category is the variable with the greatest explanatory power.

The data indicates that Subsistence largely summarizes the effects of the

other socio-economic factors. This conclusion, established empirically,

makes theoretical sense.

"Subsistence" is a shorthand way of referring to a complex interaction

of economic, demographic and. social factors. The modes of production, in-

volving both the kinds of technology and the requirements and restrictions

imposed by the means of production, interact with environmentsl conditions

to determine such factors as fixity of residence, population density,

community size and levels of technological or occupational specialization.

Dyson-Hudson and Smith (1978) show that the predictability and abundance

of resources will lead to spatial organization of local groups appropriate

for the required pattern of resource utilization. These conditions in-

fluence the development of various types of political integration, social

stratification and other systems of social differentiation. Governmental

authority, or perhaps such systems as occupational organizations, may in

turn influence changes in modes of production and may cause changes in

the environment. This complex interacting system has been schematically

diagrammed in Figure 1.
 FIGURE 1:
Schematic Causal Model For Use of Location of Disposition
As a Mortuary Metaphor of the Social Affiliation of the Deceased

Environment
Modes of Production -
Technology
Sources of Food SupEly
f/
~ ~'.".".,"
Level of Political "~:::====~l
.
.y
Population At Higher Levels,

Resource
Abundance
Resource
Predic tability
Density
/ Need for Adminis-
trative order
~

""

Fixity of Dispersion or
Need for Regulation
of use of Territory
and/or of Resources
~ ~
"
Degree of Social
Dit ferentiation:
Social Stratification
Residence Concentration
Religious Differentiation
of Lo cal Gro up '" Ethnic Differentiation
I Importance of Occupational Specialization
~ Inheritance Systems
Need for Cohesion of the Group J
or for
Self-sufficiency of the ~
,------ ------~

Need to Define Social

Role of Deceased 3.
Individual
v ~j,

~
1
Need for Mortuary
Symbol of Cohesion
,. -,
-"
Symbolization of Social
Groups by Location of
Disposition of Remains of
the Deceased
Relations with Other
Groups, e. g.' systems
-j
and urgency of defense ~ ,
 234

Subsistence has breater explanatory power for the Use of Location of

Disposition as a mortuary symbol of Social Affiliation than the Indexes

which sum the scores of the various socio-economic factors involved, be-

cause the modes of production in each society require certain kinds of

local social groups. for example, as I have discussed, agriculture re-

quires a relatively stable, cohesive group to plant and harvest the crop.

In contrast, it is advantageous to pasture large numbers of " livestock in

more than one place at the same time. In addition, resource abundance and

predictability have a direct effect on the dispersion or concentration of

the group and the need for mobility. These factors in turn determine to

a large extent the needs for cohesion of the social groups involved or

for self-sufficiency of the individual. Therefore, Subsistence not only

determines such factors as Fixity of Residence (see Figure " 1), but in
•
addition, exerts direct effects upon the need for cohesion of the local

group.
As shown in the causal model diagrammed in Figure J,
the pattern of resource abundance and predictability also directly

affects the extent of regulation needed for comfortable use of a given

territory or given resources. Where predictability is high it seems that

more regulation is needed . Regulation of the use of resources requires

some cohesive form of social organization invested with formal or informal

authority for enforcing the rules. Where resources are predictable and

abundant , inheritance (whether of farm land, fishing and trapping stations,

groves of trees or herds of cattle) is an important method of regulation of

the use of resources. Where the need for cohesion of the local group is

high and resources are limited, inheritance systems become very important.

Otherwise, the death of a wealthy individual would constitute a dangerous

 235

threat to the continuity of the group. The Tanala of Madagascar exemplify

this situation (Linton 19 33; 1939). In such societies, the need for

mortuary symbols of the cohesion of the iocal social group is very great.

Placing the remains of the dead all together conveniently and strongly ex-

presses the former status of the deceased as a living member of the group,

the deceased's present status as a deceased member of the community (whose

wishes and power in many cases must be taken into account) and the unity

of the group as a whole. For example, depending upon the region, Menabe

Tanala place deceased members of the nuclear family together in clan or

village tombs. If the village moves, the community of the deceased are

all summoned to the tomb, the need for the move is explained, and the

remains are all carefully moved to a new tomb. In many societies, the

use of the location of the remains of the deceased as an expression of

the cohesion of the relevant social group is not as explicit. However, it

seems that very frequently the location of the final remains is a. symbol of the

reaggregation of the deceased as one of the members of the group's community of

the dead.
The data supports those of my hypotheses based on the requirements

of the modes of production most common within each subsistence and on

Dyson-Hudson and Smith's (1978) model of the social consequences of

various degrees of predictability and abundance of resources. Most shift-

ing as well as settled agriculturalists make Strong use of the Location of

Disposition as a Mortuary Symbol of the Social Affiliation of the Deceased .

Pastora1ists with dispersed local groups as opposed to home range systems

tend to make only Weak use of this mortuary symbol. The Hunting and Gather-

ing category contained only one society making a Strong mortuary distinction

because today the majority of Hunting and Gathering peoples are in marginal
 236

areas with dispersed and unpredictable resources. In my sample, there

are a number of Fishing societies with lithic technologies and modes of

production similar to those of many Hunter-Gatherers. Among these, the

societies whose fishing constitutes an abundant, predictable resource live

in transhumant village groups and regularly distinguish kin and village

membership of the deceased by location of the remains of the deceased.

Among ' the two fishing societies in this group where resources are un-

predictable in both location and abundance, l ocal groups are dispersed

and this mortuary symbol is not used. In all Subsistence categories,

the deviant case analysis demonstrated that the actual ecological situa-

tion and the consequent characteristics of the local social groups have

the greatest explanatory power. Subsistence Categorization is only a

crude way of measuring this .

•
In the multivariate analysis (see Table 23b, page 221 ) when Popula-

tion Density, Fixity of Residence and Degree of Dependence Upon Agriculture

were held constant, it appeared that for societies of five or more persons

per square mile, those classed as sedentary, or those classed as practicing

Some amount of agriculture, the subsistence category of the society waS

not a significant predictor. Most of the sedentary societies, those

societies with population density over 5.1 p,e rsons per square mile, and

those societies whose major food supply is obtained from agriculture

regularly use location of disposition as a mortuary symbol of the social

affiliation of the deceased. It can be safely assumed that sedentary

societies with a high population must be dependent upon abundant and

predictable resources, probably including trade. Agriculture, of course,

constitutes such a resource. Such societies are very likely to be

 237

characterized by a high degree of social differentiation. Social stratifica-

tion, religious . subgroups, occupational specialization and specialization

of political roles are likely to be present. In more complex societies,

maintenance of ethnic boundaries, or membership in guilds or competing

religious organizations may become important. The need for continuity

and cohesion of these subgroups and the need to summarize the social

roles of the deceased may be expressed at the time of the death of their

members by use of the location of the disposition of the deceased to

symbolize membership in the group (see Figure 1, page 233). It can be

seen in Table 17 (page 190) that societies which distinguish four or more

units of social affiliation by the location of the disposition of the dead

do in general have more complex levels of social differentiation. Those

societies which symbolize guild membership or ethnic affiliation by the

I location of the remains of the deceased do have rather complex economic

and ·political systems and certainly exist in a complex socio-economic en-

vironment (see Table 9).

The kinds of units of social affiliation symbolized by the location

of disposition of the dead also suggest that the type . of political in-

tegration has an important influence upon which units of social affilia-

tion will be expressed by location of disposition. Very often, the social

organization which has jural authority at the local level has the re-

sponsibility for disposition of the dead. This may be the household

unit, the homestead or camp unit, the lineage, the clan, the village or

a district of villages. As can be seen in Table 10 (page129), the most

widespread units of social affiliation symbolized by the location of dis-

position of the dead are based on either kinship or residence. Often

 238

both are symbolized simultaneously. In this connection, it would be useful

to make a more extensive comparison of societies who place the remains of

most deceased within their family homes with those societies using hamlet ,

kin group or village corporate facilities. It is unfortunate that avail-

I able information about the different Huichol regions, some of which employ

the former practice and some the latter, is too incomplete to permit such

a study.

The scale I used to measure level of political integration was in-

adequate because it failed to make the important distinction between band

and village organization at the level of the autonomous local community.

Band organization is usually more informal than organization of an auto-

nomous village, and band membership is more unstable. No society in my

sample distinguishes band membership in their mortuary practices. Many

distinguish village membership through the location of the disposition of

the deceased. The presence of higher levels of political integration do

not at first seem to be affecting use of location of disposition as a

mortuary metaphor at the local level. However, in actuality, the need

for administrative order in state societies requires that some workable

system be used at the local level (see Figure 1, page 23 ,1 ). Unusual cases

demonstrate the presence of this factor more clearly. The Khalka state

had to set aside Buddhist "cemeteries" in the c'i ties (Maiskii 1921). When

the Japanese controlled Korea, they required that cemeteries be built to

serve districts of several villages where formerly each village had its

own cemetery (Osgood 1951).

In most societies in my sample, the social networks of the most local

group define the units of social affiliation distinguished by location of

 239

disposition of the dead. Variation in the level of organization symbolized

seems to depend upon the range of ties in the social network which are

broken by death. In many cases it is clear that membership of the de-

ceased in ~ocially critical units of mutual interdependence is expressed

through the location of the disposition of his remains. The range of the

social network depends in part on the type of socio-political system in-

volved.

Where local groups are most dispersed and fluid in membership and

the unity of any larger social organization, such as clans or totemic

groups, is not ordinarily symbolized in life by bringing members together

for important occasions, the need for self-sufficiency of individuals is

very high. The social networks actually disrupted by de'ath are usually
I

I
the immediate kin and camp group and those people with whom ehe deceased

had established cooperating reciprocal ties of some type.

Douglas (1973) suggests that where the independen~e of the individual

is most important, the need for carefully worked out ritual will be much

less. In a fair proportion of these societies, there is apparently little

need to symbolize the social affiliation of the deceased. All those

societies which fail to use Location of Disposition as a Mortuary Symbol

of Social Affiliation (with the uncertain inclusion of the Kutenai) are

properly classified in this group. In many hunting and gathering or band

societies social affiliation is rather informal. Tables 6 and 7 (pages 110

and 111) display the ways Social Affiliation is symbolized in the

handling of the dead and which characteristics of the soc'i al personality

of the deceased are recognized through Location of Disposition of the

remains. Inspection of these tables shows that both Use of Location as

 240

a Mortuary Symbol and the need to symbolize the Social Affiliation of

the Deceased are infrequent in Hunting and Gathering societies. The

Pastoralist and Fishing societies show a greater range of practice', while

both social affiliation of the deceased and location of mortuary remains

are important in the majority of agricultural societies. The contrast

.between the Hunting and Gathering peoples and the Pastoralists can be

attributed to the greater need of the pastoralists for cooperation in

the care and defense of their herds.

With one exception, those societies which use Location of Disposition

to Symbolize Social Affiliation only Weakly have local social organizations

of the flexible type just described. Most of these societies have pastoral

or hunting and gathering economies and distinguish most commonly the follow-

ing units: the . ~ingle domestic residence unit (la), immediate relatives

not necessarily living together (lb), the camp unit (2), or settled villages

with whom they have institut i onalized ties (11) . These units correspond to

the social networks disrupted by the death.

It is a difficult matter to predict whether in any given society people

are likely to make a weak distinction or none at all. For example, the

Aranda lived in very dispersed, fluid local groups, but their membership

in totemic groups was very important. The totemic groups for which I have

information were distinguished by the orientation of the grave and at

least sometimes by the inclusion of a few ritual objects with men of the

totem group (Spencer and Gillen 1927). Those peoples, such as the Fulani

(Dupire 1971), who place the dead within the life space of the camp unit,

but abandon the location thereafter, presumably feel the need to keep the

deceased within the social order of the group , but at the same time separate
 241

from it. On the other hand, institutionalized economic ties with settled

agricultural and trading people are very likely to be expressed in the

location of the deceased of the nomadic group at least part of the time.

In this thesis I have considered a narrow aspect of a much broader

subject. Social position and. social affiliation are often distinguished

together in mortuary handling. Where only a minority of the deceased

were disposed of in locations expressing their social affiliation, these

few were deceased of important social position. It would be useful to

relate this study to variation in the handling of the deceased accorded

on the basis of social position. The related social affiliations of

aliens, enemies and social outcasts was not included in this thesis.

1 It would be interesting to compare and contrast the symbols of exclusion

or control used to express the status of the outcast or enemy with the.

lI symbols of inclusion examined here.

In this thesis I have tried to demonstrate that mortuary practices

offer a fertile area for the study of the use of "natural" metaphors.

Clearly, it is useful to focus on the dimension of the death situation

being symbolized and the type of symbol being used. However, certain

symbols are themselves very widespread, for example, dismembering criminals

or enemies, building those in important social positions more imposing

facilities to house the remains, or placing the remains of deceased members

of the same group near each other.

The implications of this study suggest that at least for societies at

the lower levels of political integration use of a cemetery presupposes

the existence of a relatively stable, cohesive local social unit. To

establish this finding conclusively would be of real utility to archeo-

logists. For example, there are cemeteries in southern Australia and

 242

Queensland, Australia (Mulvaney 1969) where the people are known to have

depended upon hunting and gathering modes of production; It seems very

likely in view of the findings of this research that the Australian groups

using these burial grounds depended upon resources predictable and abundant

enough to permit the formation of relatively stable, cohesive local groups.

,
 243

REFERENCES:

SOURCES OF THE ETHNOGRAPHIC EXTRACTS

Ainu: Batchelor (1892, 1901); Hitchcock (1891); Munro (1963);Ohnuki-

Tierney (1974};Shinichiro (1960); Sugiura and Befu (1962);
·'.'atanab1e (1972)

Amahuaca: Dole (1962); Huxley and Capa (1964)

Andamanese: Cipriani (1966); Man (1932); Radcliffe-Brown (1922)

Aranda: Chewings (1936); Murdock (1934); Spencer and Gillen (1899; 1927);
C, Strehlow (1907); T.G.H. Strehlow . (1947)

Aweikoma: Henry, (1941)

Aztec: Bandelier (1880); Diaz del Castillo (1956); SahagUn (1961);

Souste11e (1961)

Badjau - Tawi Tawi: Nimmo (1965, 1972)

Bambara: Dieter1en (1951); Henry (1910); Montei1 (1924); Pacques (1954)

Basseri: narth (1961)

Bedouin - Rwala: Dickson (1951); Musil (1928); Raswan (1947)

Bemba: Gouldsbury, Cullen and Sheane (1969); Richards (1937, 1939, 1956,
1960, 1964); Whiteley (1950)

Bushmen - !Kung: Bleek (1924); Lebze1tor (1934); Marshall (1959,1962);

Thomas (1959)

Carib - Barama: Gillen (1936, 1948)

Creek: Adair (1930); Swanton (1924/25a, 1924/25b, 1946)

Eskimo - Copper Eskimo: Jenness (1922); Rasmussen (1932)

Fiji - Bau: Belshaw (1964); Quain (1948); Roth (1973); Sah1ins (1969);
Tippett (1968); Toganiva1u (1911); Waterhouse (1866);
Williams (1884)

Fulani: Dupire (1971); Stenning (1959, 1965)

Gheg Albanians: Coon (1950); Durham (1909, 1928); Garnett (1891);

Has1uck (1954)

Gilyak: Hawes (1903); Ivanov et al. (1964); Schrenck (1895); See1and (1882)
Shternberg (1933)

Goajiro: Armstrong and Metraux (194.8); llolinder (1957); Gutierrez de

Pineda (1950); Pineda Giraldo (1950); Santa Cruz (1960,
Simons (1885)
 244

Hottentots - Nama: Hahn (1881); Hoern1~ (1923,1925); Schapera (1930;

Schultze (1907)

Huicho1: Furst (1968); Grimes and Hinton (1969); Klineberg (1934);

LllIIlholtz (1902); Myerhoff (1974); Zings (1938)

Iban: Freeman (1955a, 1955b, 1958); Gomes (1911); Howell (1908 - 1910);
Low (1848); Roth (1892)

Igbo: Basden (1938); Forde and Jones (1950); Green (1947); ~eith-Ross (1965)
Ottenberg (1968); Uchendu (1965)

Inca: Cieza de Leon (1864); Cobo (1893); Garci1aso de 1a Vega (1869 - 1871);
Molina (1873); Polo de Ondegardo (1873,1916); Poma de
Ayala (1936); Rowe (1946r, Zuidema (1977)

IngaUk: Osgood (1940, 1958)

Klamath: Gatschet (1890); Spier (1930); Stern (1965); Voege1in (1942)

Korea: Clark (1932); Heydrich (1931); Landis (1895); Materi (1949);

Moose (1911); Osgood (1951); Saunderson (1894)

Kutenai - Lower Kutenai: Chamberlain (1892); Johnson (1969); Turney-

High (1941)

Lamet: Izikowitz (1941; 1951)

Lapps;.. Kllrtkllmll: Bernatzik (1938); Coflinder (1949); Haglund (1935);

Itkonon (1948); Karsten (1955); Minn (1955); Nordstrllm (1930);
Pehrson (1957); Scheffer (1704); Whitakar (1955)

Lozi: Gluckman (1941, 1959); Jensen (1932); Kuntz (1932); Turner (1952)
• Manus: Fortune (1935); Mead (1930, 1934, 1937, 1956)

Marshall Islanders: Erd1and (1914); Finsch (1893); Knappe (1888);

Krlimer and Nevermann (1938); Mason (1952); Senfft (1903);
Spoehr (19~9); Wedgwood (1942/1943)

Masai: Bernardi (1955); Fosbrooke (1948); Fox (1930); Hollis (1905,1910);

Huntingford (1953); Leakey (1930); Thomson (1887)

Maya - Quiche: Bunze1 (1952); Tax and Hinshaw (1969)

Mongols - Kha1ka: Maiskii (1921); Vreeland (1954)

Nubians - Kenuz: Callender and E1 Guindi (1971); Fernea and Gerster (1973);
Herzog (1957)

Paiute - Wadadika: Stewart (1941); Whiting (1950)

Papago: Castetter and Bell (1942); Densmore (1929); Joseph (1949);

Kelly (1963); LIlIIlho1tz (1912); Underhill (1936; 1939,1946)
 245

Porno: Barrett (1908, 1917a, 1917b); Gifford (1923, 1926); Kroeber (1953);
Loeb (1926); Powers (1877)

Pygmies - Mbuti: Putnam (1948); Turnbull (1962, 1965)

Rif: Blanco Izago (1975); Coon (1931); Hart (1954, 1957); Joseph (1967);
Mikesell (1961); Westermarck (1926)

Samoyed - Yurak: Donner (1926); Engelhardt (1899); Is1avin (1847);

Jackson (1899, 1895a, 1895b); Kopytoff (1955); Lehtisa10 (1924);
Samokvasov (1876); Struve (1880)

Santa1: Biswas (1956); Cu1shaw (1949); Orans (1965); Skrefsrud (1942)

Siriono: Holmberg (1960 )

Somali: Drake-Brockman (1912); Fuccioni (1936); Lewis (1955,1957,1961);

Swayne (1900)

Tana1a - Menabe: Linton (1933, 1939)

Tehue1che: Cooper (1946), Musters (1872,1873); Viedma (1837)

Thonga: Junod (1927); Murdock (1958)

Tiwi: Goodale (1957, 1962, 1971); Harney and Elkin (1943); Hart (1930);
Hart and Pilling (1960); Mountford (1958); Pye (1977)

Toda: Emeneau (1937, 1941), Marshall (1873), Murdock (1934), Rive~s (1906)

Toradja: Adriani and Kruyt (1951); Downs (1956)

Tuareg - Ahaggaren: Benhazera (1908); B1anguernon (1955); Briggs (1958);

Lhote (1944); Murphy (1964, 1967); Nicolaisen (1959, 1963)

Tupinamba: Lery (1880, 1906); Maga1haes (1922); Metraux (1948);

Souza (1851); Staden (1929)

Twana: Eells (1877, 1887); Elmendorf (1960)

Yamana (Yahgan): Cooper (1946), Gusinde (1937), Lothrop (1928)

Yanomamo: Barker (1953); Becher (1960); Chagnon (1967, 1968)

Yap: Beauc1air (1963); Furness (1910); Haas (1907); Hunt et a1. (1949);
MUller (1917); Schneider (1953, 1957); Senfft (1903);Tetens (1873)

Yukaghir: Joche1son (1926)

 246

REFERENCES CITED

Ablon, Joan
1970 The Samoan Funeral in Urban America. Ethnology 9: 209 - 227 .
Adair, James
1930 Adair's History of the American Indians. L.L.D.Williams and
S. Cole, eds. New York: Promontory Press. original edition 1775 .
Adriani, N. and Albert C. Kruyt
1951 De Bare'e Sprekende Toradjas Van Midden-Celebes (De Oost-
Toradjas). Verhandeling en der Koninklijke Nederlandse
Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeling Letterktinde, Niewe Reeks,
Deel LIV, LV, LVI (No.1 - 3). Amsterdam: Noor Hollandsche
Uitgevers Maatschappij .
Jenni Karding Moulton, transl. for HRAF.
Armstrong, Jo.hn M. and A. M!!traux
1948 The Goajiro IN Handbook of South American Indians vol.4.
J .H. Steward,. ed. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin
143: 369 - 383.
Bandelier, Adolph F.
1880 On the Distribution and Tenure of Lands, and the Customs
with Respect to· Inheritance, among the Ancient Mexicans.
Harvard University, Peabody Museum of American Archaeology
and Ethnology Reports 2:385-448. (1876/1879).
Babb ie, Earl R.
1971 The Practice of Social Research. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Barker, James
1953 MemOria Sobre La Cultura de Los Guaika (Memoir on the Culture
of the Waica). Sidney Muirden, transl. for HRAF. Bolet{n
Indigenista Venezolano 1: 433 - 489.
Barnes, J. A.
1971 Three Styles in the Study of Kinship. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Barrett, Samuel A.
1908 The Ethno-geography of the Pomo and Neighboring Indians.
University of California Publications in Archaeology and
Ethnology 6:1-332.
19l7a Ceremonies of the Pomo Indians. University of California
Publications in Archaeology and Ethnology 12: 397-441.
19l7b Pomo Bear Doctors. University of California Publications
. in Archaeology and Ethnology 12: 443-465.
Barry, Herbert III and Leonora M. Paxson
1971 Infancy and Early Childhood:Cross-Cultural Codes 2. Ethnology
10:466-508.
Basden. G. T.
1938 Niger Ibos. London: Seeley, Service & Co.
Barth, Fredrik
1961 Nomads of South Persia. The Basseri Tribe of the Khamseh
Confederacy. Boston: Little, Brown.
Batchelor, Rev. John
1892 The Ainu of Japan. New York: Revell.
1901 The Ainu and Their Folklore. London: The Religious Tract Society.
 247

Baxter, P.T.W.
1972 Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder: Some Suggestions Why
Witchcraft Accusations are Rare Among East African Pas-
troralists. IN The Allocation of Responsibility. Max Gluckman,ed.
Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Becher, Hans
1960 Die Sur~ra and Paki~i, Zwei Yanoami-StHmme in Nordwest-
brasilien. (The Surara and Pakidai, two Yanoama Tribes in
Northwest Brazil). Frieda SchUtze, transl. for HRAF.
Hamburg: Museum fUr VHlkerkunde, Mitteilungen 26:1-133.
Beauclair, Inez de
1963 The Stone Money of Yap Island. Academia Sinica, Institute
of Ethnology, Bulletin 16:147-160.
Beck, Brenda E.F.
1978 The Metaphor as a Mediator Between Semantic and Analogic
Modes of Thought. Current Anthropology 19:83-97.
Belshaw, C.S.
1964 Institutions for Capital Formation and Distribution Among
Fijians. IN Capital, Saving and Credit in Peasant Societies.
R. Firth andB.S.Yamey, eds. Pp. 187-206. Chicago:Aldine.
Bendann, Effie
1930 Death Customs: An Analytical Study of Burial Rites. London:
Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.
Benhazera, Maurice
1908 ,Six Mois Chez Les Touareg du Ahaggar. (Six Months Among the
Ahaggar Tuareg.) A.R.Coleman, transl. for HRAF. Alger:Jourdan.
Bernardi, B.
1955 The Age-system of the Masai. Annali Lateramensi 18:257-318.
Bernatzik, Hugo A.
1938 Overland with the Nomad Lapps. New York: McBride.
Binford, Lewis R.
1971 Mortuary Practices: Their Study and Their Potentiel.
American Antiquity 36:6-29.
Biswas, P.C.
1956 Santals of the Santal Parganas. Delhi: Bharatiya Adimjati
Sevak Sangh.
Blackman, Margaret B.
1973 Totems to Tombstones: Culture Change as Viewed Through the
Haida Mortuary Complex, 1877 - 1971. Ethnology 12:47-56 .
Blalock, Hubert M., Jr.
1972 Social Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Blanco Izaga, Emilio
1975 Emilio Blanco Izaga: Colonel in the Rif. A Selection of His
Material, published and unpublished, on the Sociopolitical
Structure of the Rifians of Northern Morocco.-David M.Hart,
transl. New Haven: HRAF
Blanguernon, Claude
1955 Le Hoggar.(The Hoggar.) T. Turner, transl. for HRAF.
Grenoble: Arthaud.
Bleek, D.F.
1924 Bushmen terms of Relationship, and Notes on Bushmen Orthography.
Bantu Studies 2:57-74.
Bloch, Maurice
1971 Placing the Dead. Tombs, Ancestral Villages and Kinship
Organization in Madagascar. London: Seminar Press.
 248

Blumer, Herbert
1972 Symbolic Interaction. IN Culture and Cognition: Rules,
Maps and Plans. J.P.Spradley, ed. Pp. 65-83. San Francisco:
Chandler.
Bolinder, Gustaf
1957 Indians on Horseback. London: Dennis Dobson.
Breton, Yvan
1973 A Comparative Study of Work Groups in an Eastern Canadian
Peasant Fishing Community: Bilateral Kinship and Adaptive
Processes. Ethnology 12: 393-418.
Briggs, L. Cabot
1958 The Tuareg. IN The Living Races of the Sahara Desert.Pp.83-l03,163-l66 .
Harvard University, Peabody Museum of American Archaeology
and Etl,mology.
Brown, Roger
1973 A First Language, The Early Stages. Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard
University Press.
Bunzel, Ruth
1952 Chichicastenango: A Guatemalan Village. Seattle: University of
Washington Press.
Callender, Charles and Fadwa El Guindi
1971 Life-Crisis Rituals Among the Kenuz. Cleveland: Press of
Case Western Reserve University.
Carter, William E.
1968 Secular Reinforcement in Aymara Death Ritual. American
Anthropologist 70:238-262.
Castetter, Edward and Willis H. Bell
1942 Pima and Papago Indian Agriculture. Albuquerque: University
of New Mexico Press.
Chagnon, Napoleon A.
1967 YanomamB Warfare, Social Organization and Marriage Alliances.
Ann Arbor:University Microfilms. Publications no. 67-8226.
Dissertation (Anthropology) University of Michigan. 1966.
1968 YanomamB, the Fierce People. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Chamberlain, A.F.
1892 Report on the KootenayIndians of South-Eastern British
Columbia. Report of the British Association for the Advance-
ment of Science 1892: 549-615.
Chewings, Charles
1936 Back in the Stone Age: The Natives of Central Australia.
Sydney: Angus & Robertson.
Cieza de Leon, Pedro de
1864 The Travels of Pedro de Cieza de Leon, A.D. 1532-1550.
Clements R. Markham, ed. and transl. London:Hakluyt Society.
Cipriani, Lido
1966 The Andaman Islanders. New York: Praeger.
Clark, Charles A.
1932 Religions of Old Korea. New York: Revell.
Cobo, Bernabe
1893 Historia del Nuevo Mundo. (History of the New World.)
Don Marcos Jimenez de La Espada, ed. Ariane BruneI, transl.
for HRAF •. Sevilla: Sociedad de Bibliofilos Andaluces.
Cohen, Abner
1969 Political Anthropology: The Analysis of the Symbolism of
Power Relationships. Man 4:215-235.
 249

Cohen, Jacob and Patricia Cohen

1975 Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for The
Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cole, Donal d P.
1975 Nomads of the Nomads. Arlington Heights ,Ill. : ARM.
Collinder, BjBrn
1949 The Lapps. Princeton: Princeton University Press for the
American Scandinavian Foundation.
Coon, Carleton S.
1931 Tribes of the Rif. Cambridge: Peabody Museum of American
Archaeology and Ethnology.
1950 Mountains of Giants: A Racial and Cultural Study of the
North Albanian Mountain Ghegs. Papers of the Peabody Museum
of American Archeology and Ethnology XXIII; viii-l05.'
Harvard University.
Cooper, John M.
1946a The Yahgan. IN Handbook of South American Indians Vol.l.
J.H.Steward, ed. Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American
Ethnology Bulletin 143:81-106.
1946b The Patagonian and Pampean Hunters. IN Handbook of South
American Indians Vol.l. Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of
American Ethnology Bulletin 143:127-168.
Culshaw, W.J.
1949 Tribal Heritage. London: Lutterworth Press.
Densmore, Frances
1929 Papago Music. Washington,D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Dickson, Harold R.P.
, 1951 The Arab of the Desert: a Glimpse into Badawin Life in
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. London: Allen and Unwin.
D{az del Castillo, Bernal
1956 The Bernal Dras Chronicles. A. Idell, transl. and ed.
Garden City: Doubleday " (original ed. The True History of
the Conquest of New Spain. 1632).
Dieterlen, Germaine
1951 Essai ,sur la Religion Bambara. (An essay on the Religion of
the Bambara.) K. Wolf, transl. for HRAF. Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France.
Dole, Gertrude
1962 Endo-cannibalism Among the Amahuaca Indians. Transactions
of the New York Academy of Sciences. Series 2 24:567-573.
Donner, Kai
1926 Bei den Samojeden in Sibirien.(Among the Samoyed in Siberia) .
W. H. v.d.Millbe, tansl. and ed. Stuttgart: Strecker and
Schrader.
Douglas, Mary
1966 Purity and Danger. London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
1973 Natural Symbols. New York: Random House.
1978 Response to The Metaphor as a Mediator Between Semantic
and Analogic Modes of Thought. (Beck 1978 ~ Current Anthropology
19:88.
Downs, Richard E.
1956 The Religion of the Bare'e-speaking Toradja of Central Celebes.
 250

Drake-Brockman, Ralph E.
1912 British Somaliland. London: Hurst & Blackett.
Dupire, Marguerite
1971 The Positon of Women in a Pastoral Society. IN Women of
Tropical Africa. Denise Paulme, ed. H.M.Wright, transl.
Pp. 47-92. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Durham, M. Edith
1909 High Albania. London:Arnold.
1928 Some Tribal Origins, Laws and Customs of the Balkans.
London: Allen & Unwin.
Dyson-Hudson, Rada and Eric Alden Smith
1978 Human Territoriality: An Ecological Reassessment. American
Anthropologist 80:21-41.
Eells, Rev. Myron
1877 The Twana Indians of the Skokomish Reservation in Washington
Territory. IN Bulletin of the United States Geological and
Geographic Survey of the Territories. F.Hayden, ed.
VoL 3: 57-114.
1887 The Twana, Chemakum and Klallam Indians of Washington
Territory. IN Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the
Smithsonian Institution for the year ending June 30, 1887:
605-682.
Elmendorf, W.W.
1960 The Structure of Twana Culture. Research Studies Monographic
Supplement no. 2. Pullman: Washington State University.
Emeneau, M.B.
1937 Toda Marriage Regulations and Taboos. American Anthropologist
39 :103-112.
1941 Language and Social Forms: A Study of Toda Kinship Terms
and Dual Descent. IN Language, Culture and Personality. L.
Spier, et al., eds. Pp. 158-179. Menasha: Sapir Memorial
Publication Fund.
Engelhardt, Alexander p,.
1899 A Russian Province of the North. H. Cooke, transl.
Westmenster: Archibald Constable.
Erdland, August
1914 Die Marshall-Insulaner. (The Marshall Islanders.) R. Neuse,
transl. for HRAF. MUnster i.W.: Aschendorff.
Faron, Louis C.
1967 Death and Fertility Rites of the Mapuche (Araucanian) Indians
of Central Chile. IN Gods and Rituals. J. Middleton,ed.
Pp. 227-254. New York: Natural History Press.
1968 The Mapuche Indians of Chile. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Fernea, Robert A. and Georg Gerster
1973 Nubians in Egypt: Peaceful People. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Finsch, Otto
1893 Marshall-Archipel. (The Marshall Archipelag~) IN Ethnologische
Erfahrungen und BelegstUcke aus der SUdsee. J. Honigmann,transl.
Wien: Hlllder.
Firth, Raymond W.
1966 Malay Fishermen: Their Peasant Economy. Hampden, Conn. :
Archon Books.
 251

Forde, Daryll
1962 Death and Succession: An Analysis of YakH Mortuary Ritual.
IN Essays on the Ritual of Social Relations. M. Gluckman,
ed. Pp.89-123. Manchester: University Press.
1950 The Ibo and Ibibio-Speaking Peoples of Southeastern Nigeria.
Oxford University Press.
Fortune, Reo F.
1935 Manus Religion. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.
Fosbrooke, H. A.
1948 An Administrative Survey of the Masai Social System.
Tanganyika Notes and Records 26:1-50.
Fox, D. Storrs
1930 Further Notes on the Masai of Kenya Colony. Royal Anthro-
pological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal 60:
447-465.
Freeman, John D.
1955a Report on the Iban of Sarawak. vol.l. Kuching: Sarawak
Government Printing Of fice.
1955b Iban Agriculture. Colonial Research Studies No.18. London:
Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
1958 The ,Family System of the Iban of Borneo. IN The Developmental
Cycle in Domestic Groups. J. Goody, ed. Pp. 15-52.
Cambridge: The University Press.
Fuccioni, Nello
1936 Antropologia e Etnografia delle Genti della Somalia.
(Anthropology and Ethnography of the Peoples of Somalis.)
Etnografia e Paletnologia 3. K.A.Looner, transl. for HRAF.
Furness, William H.
1910 The Island of Stone Mo~ey:Uap of the Carolines. Philadelphia:
Lippincott.
Furst, Peter
1968 Huichol Conceptions of the Soul. Folklore Americas 27:39-106.
Garcilaso de la Vega, el Inca
1869-1871 First Part of the Royal Commentaries of the Yncas.
Clements R. Markham, ed.and transL London: Hakluyt Society.
Garnett, Lucy M.J.
1891 Albanian Women. IN The Women of Turkey and their Folk-Lore.
VoL 2: 214-345. London: David Nutt.
Gatschet, AlbertS.
1890 The Klamath Indians of Southwestern Oregon. U.S.Geographical
and Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region. Contribu-
tions to American Ethnology 2.
Geertz, Clifford
1957 Ritual and Social Change: A Javanese Example. American
Anthropologist 59:32-54.
1966 Religion as a Cultural System. IN Anthropological Approaches
to the Study of Religion. M.Banton, ed. Pp.1-46. New
York: Preager.
Gifford, Edward W.
1923 Pomo Lands on Clear Lake. University of California Publications
in Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 20:77-92.
1926 Clear Lake Pomo Society. University of California Publications
in Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 18:287-390.
 252

Gillen, John
1936 The Barama River Caribs of British Guiana. Cambridge:
Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology.
1948 Tribes of the Guianas. Bulletins of the Bureau of American
Ethnology 143:799-860.
Gluckman, Max
1937 Mortuary Customs and the Belief in Survival After Death
Among the South-Eastern Bantu. Bantu Studies 11:117-136.
1941 Economy of the Central Barotse Plain. Livingstone: Rhodes-
Livingstone Institute.
1959 The Lozi of Barotse1and in Northwestern Rhodesia. IN
Seven Tribes of British Central Africa. E.Colson and
M. Gluckman, eds.Pp.l~93. Manchester: Manchester University
Press.
Gomes, Edwin H.
1911 Seventeen Years Among the Sea Dyaks of Borneo. London:See1ey.
Goodale, Jane C.
1957 "Alonga Bush": A Tiwi Hunt. University Museum Bulletin 21:12-35 .
1962 Marriage Contracts Among the Tiwi. Ethnology 1:452-466.
1971 Tiwi Wives. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Goody, Jack
1962 Death, Property and the Ancestors. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Gouldsbury , Cullen and Hubert Sheane
1969 The Great Plateau of Northern Rhodesia. New York: Negro
Universities Press. (reprinted from 191L)
Green, M. M.
1947 Ibo Village Affairs. New York:Praeger.
Griffin, James B.
1930 Aboriginal Mortuary Customs in· the Western Half of the
Northeast Woodlands Area. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Department
of Anthropology, University of Chicago.
Grimes, Joseph E. and Thomas B. Hinton
1969 The Huichol and Cora. IN Handbook of Middle American Indians
Vol. 8. Ethnology Pt. 2:792-813. Aust±n: University of
Texas Press.
Guiteras-Holmes, C.
1961 Perils of the Soul. New York: The Free Press.
Gusinde, Martin
1937 Die Yamana: Vom Leben und Denken der Wasser Nomaden am Kap
Hoorn. (The Yamana: the Life and Thought of the Water Nomads
of Cape Horn.) F. ShUtze, transl. for HRAF. M8dling bei
Wein: Anthropos-Bib1iothek.
Gutierrez de Pineda, Virginia
1950 Organizaci6n Social en La Guajira. (Social Organization in
La Guajira.) S. Muirden, transl. for HRAF. Bogota: Revista
del Instituto Etno1ogico Nacional vol.3 1948.
Habenstein, Robert W.
1968 The Social Organization of Death. IN :: ,International Encyclo-
pedia of the Social Sciences vo1.4:26-28. New York: Macmillan.
Haas, Johann G. (Sa1esius)
1907 Die Karolinen-Inse1 Jap. (The Caro1ines Island Yap.)
transl. in 1942 for the Yale Cross-Cultural Survey in connec~
tion with the Navy Pacific Islands Handbook Project.
Berlin: W. SUsserott.
 253

Hahn, Theophilus
1881 Tsuni-//goam, the Supreme Being of the Khoi-Khoi. London:TrUbner .
Haglund, S.
1935 Life Among the Lapps. London.
Harney, W.E. and A.P. Elkin
1943 Melville and Bathurst Islanders. Oceania 13:228-234.
Harris, Marvin
1968 The Rise of Anthropological Theory. New York: Crowell .
Hart, C.W.M.
1930 The Tiwi of Melville and Bathurst Islands. Oceania 1:167-180.
Hart, C.W.M. and A.R.Pilling
1960 The Tiwi of North Australia. New York: Holt.
Hart, David M.
1954 An Ethnographic Survey of the Riffian Tribe of Aith Wuryaghil .
Tamuda 2:55-86.
1957 An 'Imarah in the Central Rif: the Annual Pilgrimage to Sidi
Khiyar. Tamuda 5:239-245.
Hasluck, Margaret
1954 The Unwritten Law in Albania. Cambridge: The University Press.
Hawes, Charles H.
1903 In the Uttermost East. New York: Harpers.
Hertz, Robert
1960 Death and the Right Hand. R. and C. Needham., transl.
Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press. (transl. of Contribution a une
etude sur la representation collective de la mort, L'Annee
Sociologique 10:48-137, 1907 and La pr~eminence de la main
droite: etude sur la polarit~ religieuse •. Revue Philosophique
58:553-580, 1909.)
Henry, Joseph·
1910 L'~me d'un Peuple Africain. (The Soul of an African People.)
transl. for HRAF by Anne Coleman. Mllnster i. W. :Aschendorff.
Henry, Jules
1941 Jungle People. New York: Augustin.
Herzog, Rolf
1957 Die Nubier. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Heydrich, M.
1931 Koreanische Landwirtschaft. (Korean Farming.) transl. for HRAF .
Dresden: Museen fUr Tierkunde und V8lkerkunde, Abhandlungen
und Berichte 19:1-44.
Hiatt, L. R.
1965 Kinship and Conflict: a Study of An Aboriginal Community in
No.rthern Arnhem Land. Canberra: A. N. U. Press.
Hitchcock, Romyn
1891 The Ainos of Yezo, Japan. IN Annual Report of the Board of
Regents of the Smithsonian Institution for 1890. II. Report of
of the U. S. National Museum. Pp. 429-502.
Hoernle, A. Winifred
1923 The Expression of the Social Value of Water Among the Naman of
South-West Africa. South African Journal of Science 20:514-526.
1925 The Social Organization of the Nama Hottentots of South
Africa. American Anthropologist 27:1-24.
 254

Hollis, Alfred C.
1905 The Masai. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
1910 A Note on the Masai System of Relationship. Royal Anthropological
Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal 40:473-482.
Holmberg, Allan R.
1960 Nomads of the Long Bow: the Siriono of Eastern Bolivia.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Howell, \Ulliam
1908-1910 A Collection of articles on the Sea Dyak. Sarawak
Gazette, Pp. 38 - 40. (available in HRAF).
Hunt, Edward E. and David M. Schneider, Nathaniel R. Kidder and William
D. Stevens.
1949 The Micronesians of Yap and their Depopulation. Washington,
D.C.: Pacific Science Board, National Research Council.
Huntingford, G.W.B.
1953 The Southern Nilo-Hamites. London: International African
Iinstitute.
Huxley, Matthew and Cornell Capa
1964 Farewell to Eden. New York: Harper & Row.
Islavin, Vladimir
1847 Samoiedy v Domashnem; Obshchestvennom Bytu. (The Samoyed in
their Domestic and Social Life.) S. Wise, transl. for HRAF.
Sanktpeterburg:Ministerstva Gosudarstvennykh Imushchest.
Itkonen, Toivo I.
1948 Suomen Lappa Laiset Vuoteen 1945 v. 1. (The Lapps in Finland
up to 1945, vol.l.) E.K.Minn, transl. for HRAF. Porvoo,
Helsinki: SBderstrBm OsakeyhtiB.
Ivanov, S.V, M.G.Levin and A.V.Smolyak
1964 The NivkhLIN The Peoples of Siberia. M.G.Levin and L.P; Potapov.
eds. (Based on data by A.M.Zolotarev.) Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Izikowitz, Karl Gustav
1941 •
Fastening the Soul. Gateborgs HBgskolas Arsskrift. Band XLVII.
1951 Lamet Hill Peasants in French Indochina. GBteborg: Elanders
Boktryckeri Aktiebdag.
Jackson, Frederick G.
1899 A Thousand Days in the Arctic. New York: Harper.
1895a The Great Frozen Land. A. Montefiore, ed • . London:Macmillan.
1895b Notes on the Samoyads of the Great Tundra, collected from the
Journals of F.G.Jackson. A. Montefiore, ed. Anthropological
Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal 24:388-410 .
Jenness, Diamond
1922 The Life of the Copper Eskimos. Ottawa:Acland.
Jensen, Adolf E.
1932 Die Staat1iche Organisation und die Historischen tlberlieferungen
der Barotse am Oberen Zambesi. (The Political Organization
and the Historical Traditions of the Barotse on the Upper
Zambezi.) F. SchUtze, transl. for HRAF. WUurtembergishcher
Verein fUr Handelsgeographie E.V., Museum fUr LHnder-und
VBlkerkunde, Linden-Museum Jahresbericht 50:71-115.
Jochelson, Waldemar
1926 The Yukaghir and the Yukaghirized Tungus. Memoirs of the
American Museum of Natural History Vol. XIII parts 1,2, and 3.
Jesup North Pacific Expedition Publication 9 parts 1,2,and 3.
F. Boas, ed. New York.
 255

Johnson, Olga Weydemeyer

1969 Flathead and Kootenay. Glendale: C:ark.
Joseph, Alice, Rosamund B. Spicer and Jane Chesky
1941 The Desert People: a Study of the Papago Indians. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Joseph, Roger, Jr.
1967 Rituals'and Relatives; a Study of the Social Uses of Wealth
in Morocco. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Dissertation.
Los Angeles, University of California. (available in HRAF) .
Junod, Henri A.
1927 The Life of a South African Tribe. London: Macmillan.
Karsten, Rafael
1955 The Religion of the Samek. Leiden:Brill.
Kelly, William H.
1963 The Papago Indians of Arizona. Tucson: Bureau of Ethnic
Research. Department of Anthropology. University of Arizona.
Klineberg, Otto
1934 Notes on the Huichol. American Anthropologist 36:446-460 .
Knappe, C.
1888 ReligiHse Anschauungen der Marschallinsulaner.( Religious
Views of the Marshall Islanders.) Mittheilungen von
Forschungsreisenden und Gelehrten aus den Deutschen
Schutzgebieten 1:63-81. trarls. in 1942 for the Yale Cross-
Cultural Survey in connection with the Navy Pacific
Islands Handbook Project.
K8bben, Andr; J.F.
1968 The Logic of Cross-cultural Analysis: Why Exceptions?

I
IN Comparative Research Across Cultures and Nations.
S. Rokkan, ed. Paris: Mouton.
Kopytoff, Igor

I 1955

1938
The Samoyed. Indiana University. Graduate Program in
Uralic and Asian Studies. New Haven: HRAF.
Krlimer, Augustin andHans Nevermann
Ralik-Ratak. (Ralik-Ratak). C. Brant and J. M.Armstrong,
transl. for the Yale Cross-Cultural Survey. Hamburg:
Friederichsen De Gruyter.
Kroeber, Alfred L.
1927 Disposal of the Dead. American Anthropologist 29:308-315.
1953 Handbook of the Indians of California. Chapters 15 to 17.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kuntz, Marthe
1932 Les Rites Occultes et la Sorcellerie Sur Le Haut-Zambese.
Journal de la Societ~ des Africanistes 2:123-138.
Landis, E.B.
1895 Mourning and Burial Rites of Korea. Anthropological Institute
of Great Britain and Ireland Journal 25: 340-361.
Leach, Edmund
1972 The Structure of Symbolism •. IN The Interpretation of Ritual.
J. LaFontaine, ed. London: Tavistock.
Leakey, Louis S.B.
1930 Some Notes on the Masai of Kenya Colony. Royal Anthropological
Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal 60:185-209.
Le Bar, Frank M.
1970 Coding Ethnographic Materials. IN A Handbook of Method in
' Cultural Anthropology. R. Naroll and R. Cohen, eds. Pp. 707-
720. New York: Columb~ University Press.
 256

Lebzeltor, Viktor
1934 Eingeborenenkulturen in SUdwest-und SUdafrika.(Native
Cultures in Southwest and South Africa.) vol.2. R. Neuse,
transl. for RRAF. Leipzig: Hiersemann.
Lee, Richard B.
1976 !Kung Spatial Organization: An Ecological and Historical
Perspective. IN Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers. R.B.Lee and
1. DeVore, eds. Pp. 73-9.7. Cambridge: Harvard University Press .
Lehtisalo, Toivo V.
1924 Entwurf einer Mythologie der Jurak-Samojeden.(Sketch of a
Mythology of the Yurak Samoyed.) F. SchUtze, transl. for
HRAF. Suomalais-ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 53.
Helsinki: Soci~te Finno-ougrienne.
Leith-Ross, Sylvia
1965 African Women. New York: Praeger.
Lery, Jean de
1880 Histoire d'un Voyage Faict en la Terre du Bresil. Paul
Gaffarel, ed. Alfred Metraux, transl. in HRAF. Paris:
Alphonse Lemerre.
1906 Extracts out of the Histoire of John Lerius a Frenchman
who lived in Brasill with Mons. Villagagnon. ann. 1557 and
58. S.Purchas, ed. rlakluytus Posthumus or Purchas His
Pilgrimes 16:518-579.
Lewis, loan M.
1955 Peoples of the Horn of Africa. London: the International
African Institute.
1957 The Somali Lineage System and the Total Genealogy. Hargeisa:
Somaliland Protectorate.
1961 A Pastoral Democracy. London: Oxford University Press .
Levi-Strauss, Claude
1967 Structural Anthropology. New York: Doubleday.
Lhote, nenri
1944 Les Touaregs du Hogga. (The Hoggar Tuare&) Mary-Alice.
Sipfle, transl. for HRAF. Paris: Payot.
Lienhardt, Godfrey
1962 The Situation of Death: An Aspect of Anuak Philosophy.
Anthropological Quarterly 35: 74-85.
Linton, Ralph
1933 The Tanala, a Hill Tribe of Madagascar. Fieldiana: Anthropology 22.
1939 The Tanala of Madagascar. IN The Individual and His Society.
A. Kardiner, ed. Pp. 251-290. New York:Columbia University Press.
Loeb, Edwin M.
1926 Porno Folkways. University of California Publications in
Archaeology and Ethnology 19:149-404.
Loether, Herman J. and Donald G. McTavish
1974 Descriptive Statistics For Sociologists. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Lothrop, Samuel K.
1928 Tae Indians of Tierra del Fuego. New York: Museum of the
American Indian, Heye Foundation.
Low, Hugh
1848 Sarawak, its Inhabitants and Productions. London: Richard Bentley.
Lumholtz, Carl
1902 Unknown Mexico Vol.2. New York: Scribner.
1912 New Trails in Mexico. New York: Scribner's.
 257

Maiskii, I.
I 1921 Sovremennaia Mongoliia.(Comtemporary Mongolia.) Mrs. Dayton
and J. Kunitz. transl. for HRAF. Irkutsk:Gosudarstvennoe
Izdatel'stvo. Irkutskoe Otdelenie.
Magalhaes, Pero de
1922 The Histories of Brazil vol. II. Documents and Narratives
Concerning the Discovery and Conquest of Latin America No.5.
Malinowski, Bronislaw
1925 Magic, Science and Religion. IN Science Religion and Reality .
J. Needham, ed. Pp. 18.-94. London: Macmillan.
Man. Edward H.
1932 On the Aboriginal Inhabitants of the Andaman Islands.London:
The Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and
Ireland. (first published in 1885).
Marsh, Robert M.
1967 Comparative Sociology. New York: Harcourt Brace and World.
Marshall, Lorna
1959 Marriage Among !Kung Bushmen. Africa 29:335-364.
1962 !Kung Bushmen Religious Beliefs. Africa 32:221-252 .
Marshall, William E.
1873 A Phrenologist Among the Todas. London: Longmans, Green & Co.
Marx, Emanuel
1978 The Ecology and Politics of Nomadic Pastoralists in the
Middle East. IN The Nomadic Alternative. W. Weissleder,
ed. Pp. 41-74. The Hague: Mouton.
Mason, Leonard
1952 Anthropology-geography Study of Arno Atoll, Marshall Islands.
Washington, D.C.: Pacific Science Board, National Research
Council.
Materi, Irma T.
1949 Irma and the Hermit: my Life in Korea. New York: W.W.Norton.
Mead, Margaret
1930 Growing Up in New Guinea. New York: Morrow.
1934 Kinship in the Admiralty Islands. New York: American Museum of
Natural History.
1937 The Manus of the Admiralty Islands. IN Cooperation and
Competition Among Primitive Peoples. M.Mead. ed. Pp. 210-239 .
New· York: McGraw-ilill.
1956 New Lives For Old: Cultural Transformation--Manus 1928-1953.
New York:Morrow.
Meehan, Betty
1971 The Form, Distrib.ution and Antiquity of Australian Aboriginal
Mortuary Practices. MA thesis. University of Sydney. MS 300
Institute for Aboriginal Studies. Canberra. Australia.
Meggitt, M. J.
1962 Desert people: a Study of the Walbiri Aborigines of Central
Australia. Sydney: Angus & Robertson.
Menget, Patrick
1968 Death in Chamula. Natural History 77:48-57.
Me'traux, Alfred
1948 The Tupinamba. IN Handbook of South American Indians Vol.3.
J.H.Steward, ed. Pp.95-l33. Smithsonian Institution. Bureau
of American Ethnology Bulletin 143.
 258

Mikesell, Marvin W.
1961 North.e rn Morocco: A Cultural Geography. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Minn, Eeva K.
1955 The Lapps. Indiana University. Graduate Program in Uralic
and Asian Studies. New Haven: HRAF.
Molina, Christovaldo
1873 The Fables and Rites of the Yncas. IN Narratives of the
Rites and Laws of the Yncas. Clements R. Markham, transl.
and ed. Pp. 1-64. London: Hakl uyt Society.
Monteil, Charles V.
1924 '"
Les Bambara du Segou ,-
et du Kaarta. (The Bambara of Segou
and Kaarta.) K.A.Looney, transl. for HRAF. Paris:La Rose.
Moose, J. Robert
1911 Village Life in Korea. Nashville: Publishing House of the
Methodist Espiscopal Church, South.
Mountford, Charles P.
1958 The Tiwi: their Art, Myth and Ceremony. London:Phoenix House .
Mllller, iHlhelm
1917 Yap. IN Hamburgische Wissenschaftliche Stiftung, Ergebnisse
der SUdsee-Expedition 1908-1910. Vol.2. transl. for the
Yale Cross-Cultural Survey. Hamburg: Friederichsen.
Mulvaney, D.J.
1975 The Prehistory of Australia. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Munn, Nancy D.
1973 Symbolism in a Ritual Context: Aspects of Symbolic Action.
IN Handbook of Social and Cultural Anthropology. J.J.Honigmann,
ed. Pp.579~6l2. Chicago:Rand McNally.
Munro, Neil Gordon
1963 Ainu Creed and Cult. New York: Columbia University Press.
Murdock, George P.
1934a The Aranda of Central Australia. IN Our Primitive Contempor-
aries. Pp. 20-47. New York: Macmillan.
19·34b The Todas of SoutheI1lll India. IN Our Primitive Comtemporaries.
Pp. 107-134. New York: Macmillan.
1958 Cultural Summary. HRAF files.
1968 World Sampling Provinces. Ethnology 7:305-326 .
Murdock, G. P. and Diana O. Morrow
1970 Subsistence Economy and Supportive Practices: Cross-Cultural
Codes 1. Ethnology 9:302-330.
Murdock, G.P. and Caterina Provost
1973 ·Measurement of Cultural Complexity. Ethnology 12:379-392.
Murdock, G.P. and Douglas R. White
1969 Standard Cross-Cultural Sample. Ethnology 8:329-269.
Murdock, G.P. and Suzanne F. Wilson
1972 Settlement Patterns and Community Organization: Cross-
Cultural Codes 3. Ethnology 11:254-295.
Murphy, Robert
1964 Social Distance and the Veil. American Anthropologist 66:1257 -
1967 Tuareg Kinship. American Anthropologist 69: 163 -
 259

Musil, Alois
1928 The Manners and Customs of the Rwala Bedouins. New York:
The American Geographical Society, Oriental Explorations
and Studies. No.6.
Musters, G. C.
1872 On the Races of Patagonia. Anthropological Institute of
Great Britian and Ireland Journal 1:193~207.
1873 At Home With thePatagonians. London: Murray.
Myerhoff, Barbara G.
1974 Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians .
Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Naroll, Raoul
1970a The Culture Bearing Unit in Cross-Cultural Surveys. IN
A Handbook of Method in Cultural Anthropology. R. Naroll
and R. Cohen, eds. Pp.72l-765. New York: Natural History
Press.
1970b Cross-Cultural Sampling. IN A Handbook of Method in
. Cultural Anthropology. A. Naroll and R. Cohen, eds.
Pp. 889-926. New York: Natural History Press.
Needham, Rodney
1973 Right and Left: Essays on Dual Symbolic Classification.
Chicago': University of Chicago Press.
Nicolaisen, Johannes
1959 Political Systems of Pastoral Tuareg in Air and Ahaggar.
Folk 1: 67-13l.
1963 Ecology and Culture of the Pastoral Tuareg. Nationalmuseets
Skriffer, Etnografisk RaeKe 9:1-540. Copenhagen.
Nimmo, Henry
1965 Social Organization of the Tawi-Tawi Badjau. Ethnology 4:421-439.
1972 The sea People of Sulu. Chandler.
Nordstr8m, E.B.E.
1930 Tent Folk of the Far North. London: Jenkins.
Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko
1974 The Ainu of the.'Northwest Coast of Southern Sakhalin.
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Opler, Morris Edward
1945 The Lipan Apache Death Complex And Its Extensions. Southwestern
Journal of Anthropology 1:122-385.
Orans, Martin
1965 The Santal; a Tribe in Search of a Great Tradition.
Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Osgood, Cornelius
1940 Ingalik Material Cultu~e. Yale University Publications
Number 22.
1958 Ingalik Socia.Culture. Yale University Publications
Number 53.
1951 The Koreans and Their Culture. New York: Ronald Press.
Ottenberg, Simon
1968 Double Descent in an African Society. Seattle: University of
Washington Press.
Paques, Viviana
1954 Les Bambara. (TI~e Bambara.) T. Turner, transl. for HRAF.
Paris.: Presses Universitaires de France.
 260

Peebles, Christopher and Susan M. Kus

1977 Some Archaeological Correlates of Ranked Societies.
American Antiquity 42:421-448.
Pehrson, Robert N.
1957 The Bilateral Network of Social Relations in k8nkHmH
Lapp District. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Penner, Hans H.
1971 The Poverty of Functionalism. History of Religions 11:91-97 .
Perry, Richard J.
1972 Structural Resiliency and the Danger of the Dead: the
Western Apache. Ethnology 11:380-385.
Peterson, Jean Treloggen
1978 Hunter-Gatherer/Farmer Exchange. American Anthropologist 80:335-351.
Pineda Giraldo, Roberto
1950 Aspectos ~e la Magia en La Guajira. (Aspects of Magic in
La Guajira.) S. Muirden, transl. for HRAF. Bogota:
Revista del Instituto Etnologico Nacional vol.3. 1947.
Polo de Ondegardo, Juan
1873 Report by Polo de Ondegardo. IN Narratives of the Rites and
Laws of the Yncas. Clements R. Markham, transl .• and ed.
Pp .151-171. London :Hakluyt Society.
1916 Informaciones acerca de la Religion y Gobierno de los
-Incas. (Information Concerning the Religion and Governnrant
of the Incas.) A. BruneI, J. Murra and S. Muirden, transl.
for HRAF. Coleccion de Libros y Documentos Referentes a la
Historia del Peru vol. 3. Lima.
Poma de Ayala, Felipe .Guaman.
1936 El Primer Nueva Coronica; buen Gobierno. (The First New
Chronicle and Good Government.) S. Muirden, transl. for
HRAF. Paris: Institut d'Ethnologie.
Powers, Stephen
1877 Tribes of California. Contributions to North American
Ethnology 3:146-195, 204-217, 491-517.
Putnam, Patrick
1948 The Pygmies of the Ituri Forest IN A Reader in General
Anthropology. C.S.Coon, ed. Pp. 322-342. New York: Holt.
Pye, John M.S.C.
1977 The Tiwi Islands. A.C.T., Australia : The National Library.
Quain, Buell
1948 Fijian Village. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Radcliffe-Brown, A.R.
1922 The Andaman Islanders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rasmussen, Knud J. V.
1932 Intellectual Culture of the Copper Eskimos. Copenhagen:
Gyldendal.
Raswan, Carl R.
1947 Black Tents of Arabia. New York: Creative Age Press.
Richards, Audrey,, !;-
1937 Reciprocal clan relationships among the Bemba of N.E.Rhodesia.
Man 37:188-193.
1939 Land, Labour and Diet in Northern Rhodesia: an Economic
Study of the Bemba Tribe. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
 261

1956 Chisungu : a Girls ' Initiation Ceremony Among the Bemba

of Northern Rhodesia. London: Faber and Faber.
1960 The Bemb~~ Their Country and Diet. IN Cultures and Societies
of Africa. Simon and "Phoebe Ottenberg, eds. pp. 96-109 .
New York: Random House.
1964 The Life of Bwenbya , a Native of N. Rhodesia. IN Ten Africans.
M. F. Perham, ed . Pp. 17-40. Evanston,.Ill.:Northwestern
University Press.
Rivers, W. H. R.
1906 The Todas. New York: Macmillan.
Rosenblatt, Paul C., R. Patricia Walsh and Douglas A. Jackson
1976 Grief and Mourning in Cross-Cultural Perspective. HRAF Press .
Roth, G.K.
1973 Fijian Way of Life. London: Oxford University Press.
Roth, H. Ling, ed.
1892 The Natives of Borneo. Edited frgm the Papers of the Late
Brooke Low, Esq. Anthropological Institute of Great Britain
and Ireland, Journal 21: 110-137.
Rowe, John H.
1946 Inca Culture at the Time of the Spanish Conquest. IN
Handbook of South American Indians vol.2. J.H.Steward, ed .
Pp. 183-330. Smithsonian Institution. 3ureau of American
Ethnology Bulletin 143.
Sahag~n, Fray Barnardino de
1961 Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New Spain
Book 3. C.E.Dibble and A.J.O.Anderson, transl. The School
of American Research and the University of Utah. (Original
edition 16th century.)
Sahlins, Marshall D.
1969 Land Use and the Extended Family in Moala, Fiji. IN Environment
and Cultural Behavior. A.P.Vayda, ed. pp. 395-415. New
York: The Natural History Press.
Samokvasov, Dmitrrl IAkovlevick
1876 Obychai Inorodtsev TobolskoI Gubernii: Vogul', Osti~kov!
Samoyedov' (Customs of the Natives of Tobolsk Province:
Vogul, Ostyak and Samoyed.) IN his Sbornik Obychnago Prava
Sibirskikh Inorodtsev. Varshava, V. Tioografii Ivana
Noskvsksgo. 1876:13-23. S. Wise, transl. for HRAF .
Santa Cruz, Antonio
1960 Acquiring Status in Goajiro Society. Anthropological
Quarterly 33:115-127.
Saunderson, H. S.
1894 Notes on Corea and its People. Anthropological Institute of
Great Britain and Ireland Journal 24: 299-316.
Schapera, Isaac
1930 The Khoisan Peoples of South Africa: Bushmen and Hottentots.
London: George Routledge.
Scheffer, John
1704 The History of Lapland. London: Printed for Tho. Newborough at
the Golden-Ball in St.Paul's - Church-Yard: and R.Parker under
the Royal Exchange.
Schneider , David M.
1953 Yap Kinship Terminology and Kin Groups. American Anthropologist
55:215-236.
1957 Political Organization, Supernatural Sanctions and the
Punishment for Incest on Yap. American Anthropologist 59:791-800.
 262

Schrenck, Leopold von

1895 DieVBlker des Amur-Landes. (The Peoples of the Amur Region.)
vol. 3. St. Petersburg; Kaiseliche Akademie der W1ssen-
schaften, 1881-1895. • Alois Nagler, transl. for HRAF.
Schultze, Leonard
1907 Aus Namaland und Kalahari. (In Namaland and the Kalahari.)
E.C.Knight and T. Ziolkowski, transl. for HRAF. Jena:Gustav
Fischer.
Seeland, Nicolas
1882 Die Ghiliaken. (The Gilyaks.) F. SchUtze, transl. for HRAF .
Russische Revue 21: 97-130,. 222-254. St. Petersburg.
Senfft, Arno
1903a Ethnographische BeitrKge Uber die Karolineninsel Yap.
(Ethnographic Contributions Concerning the Carolines Island
of Yap.) transl. for the Yale Cross-Cultural Survey.
PetermannsMitteilungen 49: 49-60, 83-87.
1930b Die Marshall-Insulaner. (The Marshall Islander&) In
RechtsverhKltnisse von Eingebornen VBlkern in Afrika und
Ozeanien. Pp. 425-455. Julius Springer, transl. for the
Yale Cross-Cultural Survey. Berlin: Julius Springer.
Service, Elman R.
1971 Cultural Evolutionism: Theory in Practice. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
Shan in, Teodor
1966 The Peasantry as a Political Factor. Sociological Review 14:5-27 .

Shinichiro, Ta~kura
1960 The Ainu of Northern Japan. John A. Harrison,· transl.
Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society.
Shternberg, Lev fAkovlevich
1933 Giliaki, Orochi, Gol'dy, Negidal'tsy, Arny; Stat'i i materialy.
(The Gilyak, Orochi, Goldi, Negidal, Ainu: Articles and Materials.)
lA. P. Al 'kor (Koshkin),ed. L. Bromwich and N. Ward, transl. for
HRAF. Khabarovsk: Dal'giz.

Simons, F. A. A.
1885 An Exploration of the Goajira Peninsula, U. S. of Colombia.
Royal Geographical Society Proceedings n.s. 7:781-796.

Skeefsrud, Lars Olsen

1942 Traditions and Institutions of the Santals. P .O.Bodding,
transl. Osol: Oslo Ethnografiske Museum.
Soustelle, Jacques
1961 Daily Life of the Aztecs. P.O'Brian, transl. Stanford:Stanford
University Press.
Souza, Gabriel Soares de
1851 Tratado Descriptivo do Brizil em 1587. (Descriptive Treatise
on Brazil in 1587.) Alfred Metraux, transl. Instituto Historico
e Geographico do Brazil, Revista 14: 1-423.
 263

Spencer, Walter B. and Francis J. Gillen

1899 The Native Tribes of Central Australia. London; Macmillan.
1927 ~
The Arunta: A Study of a Stone Age People. London:Macmillan.
Spier, Leslie
1930 Klamath Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Spoehr, Alexander
1949 Majuro: A Village in the Marshall Islands. Chicago:
Chicago Natural History Museum.
Spradley, James P.
1972 Foundations of Cultural Knowledge. IN Culture and Cognition:
Rules, Maps and Plans. J.P.Spradley, ed. Pp. 3-38.
San Francisco: Chandler.
Staden, Hans
1929 Hans Staden, The True History of His Captivity 1557.
Malcolm Letts, ed. and transl. New York: McBride.
(original edition 1557 in German).
Stenning, Derrick J.
1959 Savannah Nomads. London: Oxford 'University Press .
1965 The Pastoral Fulani of Northern Nigeria. IN Peoples of Africa.
James L. Gibbs, Jr., ed. Pp. 361-401. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
Stern, Theodore
1965 The Klamath Tribe. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Steward, Julian H.
1938 Basin-Plateau Aboriginal Sociopolitical Groups. Bureau of
American Ethnology Bulletin 120.
1949 Cultural Causality and Law: A Trial Formulation of the
Development of Early Civilizations. American Anthropologist
51:1-27.
1955 Theory of Culture Change. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Strehlow, Carl
1907 Die Aranda-und-Loritja-stMme in Zentral-Australien. Frankfurt:
Baer. English translation by C. Chewings. photocopy of hand-
written MS at the Institute for Aboriginal Studies, A.C.T.,
Australia. Original MS in Barr Smith Library, University of
Adelaide.
Strehlow, Theodor G.H.
1947 Aranda Traditons. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
Stewart, Orner C.
1941 Culture Element Distributions XIV: Northern Paiute Anthropological
Records 4: 361-446. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Struve, Bernard von
1880 Einiges liber die Samojeden im Norden von Sibirien. (Some Data
on the Samoyed of Northern Siberia.) S.F.Borhegyi,transl. for
HRAF. Das Ausland 53:741-744, 774-777, 794-748.
Stuttgart: Cotta'schen Buchhandlung.
Sudman, Seymour
1976 Applied Sampling. New York: Academic Press.
Sugiura, Kenichi and Harumi Befu
1962 Kinship Organization of the Saru Ainu. Ethnology 1:287-298.
 264

Swanton, John Reed

1924/25a Social Organization and Social Usages of the Indians of the
Creek Confederacy. U.S.Bureau of American Ethnology,
" Annual Report 42 ~. 23-4 72, 859-900.
1924/25b Religious Beliefs and Medical Practices of the Creek Indians.
UlS.Bureau of American Ethnology, Annual Report 42:473-672.
1946 The Indians of the Southeastern United States. Smithsonian Insti-
tution. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 137.
Swayne, H.G.G.
1900 Seventeen Trips Through Somaliland and a Visit to Abyssinia.
London: Rowland Ward.
Tatje, Terrence A. and Raoul Naroll
1970 Two Measures of Societal Complexity; An Empirical Cross-
Cultural Comparison. IN A Handbook of Method in Cultural
Anthropology. R.Naroll and R.Cohen, eds. Pp.766-833 '; ' New' York:
Tax, Sol and Robert Hinshaw ,
1969 The Maya of the Midwestern Highlands. IN Handbook of Middle
. American Indians. vol. 7. Ethnology Pt.l. R. Wauchope, gen.ed.
Pp.69-l00. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Tetens, Alfred and Johann Kubary
1873 Die Carolineninsel ' Yap oder Guap nach den Mittheilungen von
Alfred Tetens und Johann Kubary. (The Carolines Island Yap
or Guap, according to the Reports of Alfred Tetens and Johann
Kubary.) Dr. E. Grliffe, ed. Hamburg; MuseUlll Godeffroy
Journal 1: 84-130.
Thomas, Elizabeth M.
19.59 The Harmless People. New York: Knopf.
Thomson, Joseph
1887 Through Masai Land. London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle and
Rivington.
Tippett, A.R.
1968 Fijian Material Culture. Bulletins of the Bernice p, Bishop
MuseUlll 232: 1-193.
Toganivalu, Roko Tui Bua
1911 The Customs of Bau. G.F.A.W.Beauclerc, trans1. Transactions
of the Fijian Society for the Year 1911:23-26. Suva.
Tuden, Arthur and Catherine Marshall
1972 Political Organization: Cross-Cultural Codes 4. Ethnology 11:
436-464.
Tufte, Edward R., ed.
1970 The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Reading, Mass:
Addison Wesley.
Turnbull, Colin M.
1962 The Forest People. New York: Simon and Schuster.
1965 Wayward Servants; the Two Worlds of the African Pygmies.
Garden City, N. Y.,: Natural History Press.
Turner, Victor W.
1952 The Lozi Peoples of North-western Rhodesia. London:
International African Institute.
1967 A Forest of Symbols. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Turney-High, Harry H.
1941 Ethnography of the Kutenai. Memoirs of the American Anthropological
Association 56.
 265

Uchendu, Victor C.
1965 The Igbo of Southeast Nigeria. N~w Yo.r k: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Underhill, Ruth M.
1936 The Autobiography of a Papago Indian. Menasha. American
Anthropological Association.
1939 Social Organization of the Papago Indians. New York:
Columbia University Press.
'1946 Papago Indian Religion •• New York: Columbia University Press.
Van Gennep', Arnold
1960 The Rites of Passage. Phoenix Books. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Vayda, Andrew P., ed.
1969 Environment and Cultural Behavior: Ecological Studies in
Cultural Anthropology. New York: Natural History Press.
Viedma, Antonio de
1837 Descripci6n de la oCosta Meridional del Sur, Llamada
Vulgarmente Patagonia. (Description of the Southern Shores of
that Region Commonly Called Patagonia.) IN Colecci6n de Obras
y Documentos Relativos a la Historia Antigua y Moderna de
Las Provincias del Rio de la Plata Vol. 6: 63-8l.
Sydney J. Muirden, transl. for HRAF.
Voegelin, Erminie Wheeler
1942 Culture Element Distributions: XX, Northeast California.
California University Publications. Anthropological ReCords 7.
Vreeland, Herbert H.
1954 Mongol Community and Kinship Structure. New Haven: Greenwood.
Watanabe, Hitoshi
1972 The Ainu Ecosystem. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Waterhouse, Rev. Joseph
1866 The King and the People of Fiji. London:Wesleyan Conference
I Office
Wedgwood, Camilla H.
I 1927 Death and Social Status in Melanesia. Royal Anthropological

I 1942
Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal 57: 377-397.
Notes on the Marshall Islands. Oceania 13:1-23.
Westermarck, Edward
1926 Ritual and .Belief in Morocco. London: Macmillan.
Whitaker, Ian
1955 Social Relations in a Nomadic Lappish Community. Oslo:Norsk
Folkemuseum.
Whiteley, Wilfred
1950 Bemba and Related Peoples of Northern Rhodesia. London:
International African Institute.
Whiting, Beatrice B.
1950 Paiute Sorcery. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology .
New York.
Williams, Thomas
1884 Fiji and the Fijians. London.
Wolf, Eric R.
1966 Peasants. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
 266

Yellen, John E.
1976 Settlement Patterns of the !Kung. IN Kalahari Hunter-
Gatherers. R.B.Lee and I. DeVore, eds. Pp. 48-72.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Yinger, J. Milton
1970 The Scientific Study of Religion. London: Macmillan.
Zings, Robert M.
1938 The Huichols: Primitive Artists. Report of the Mr. and Mrs.
Hanry Pfeiffer Expedition for Huichol Ethnography. New
York: Stechert.
Zuidema, R. T.
1977 Shafttombs and the Inca Empire. The Journal of the Steward
Anthropological Society 9: 133-178.
 Al

APPENDIX I

CODE BOOK:

VARIABLES USED IN THIS THESIS

MORTUARY VARIABLES:

VARIABLES MEASURING DIMENSIONS DISTINGUISHED IN THE DEATH SITUATION AND

THE SOCIAL PERSONALITY OF THE DECEASED:

Variable I. Cause or Condition of Death: differential treatment is

given to the deceased because

peculiar circumstances surrounding the death of a

person are perceived by the remaining members of
a society as substantially altering the obligations
of the survivors to acknowledge the social persona
of the deceased as it was defined in life • ••• such
persons are treated as "members" of a post-mortem
membership unit (those killed in war, those struck
by l~ghtning, etc.) and afforded mortuary ritual
appropriate to such a membership group .•. (Binford
1971:17).

Variable II. Location at Death: differential treatment is contingent

upon the occurrence of deaths spatially and temporally, such as 1.

deaths which occurred far from settlements where

special treatment, such as cremation, dismember-
ment, etc., may facilitate easy transport (Binford
1971:14),

and 2 .

deaths occurring simultaneously as a result of epi-

demics or massacres might be treated corporately,
with mass graves, by virtue of their "unusual"
coincidence (Binford 1971:14) .

Variable III . Age of Deceased: the dimension, or basic component, of

the social personality of the deceased which is symbolized through

differential mortuary handling is the age of the deceased.

Variable IV. Sex of Deceased: the basic component, or dimension, of
•
the social personality of the deceased which is symbolized through

differential mortuary handling is sex.

Variable V. Social Position of Deceased: the basic component of the

social personality of the deceased which is symbolized through differ-

ential mortuary handling is his/her relative social status, the

relative rank and distinctiveness of the social

position occupied by the deceased within the social
unit (Binford 1971:17).

Variable VI. Social Affiliation of Deceased: the dimension of the

social personality of the deceased which is symbolized through differ-

ential mortuary handling is his/her affiliation with

multiple membership units within the society and/or

membership in the society itself (Binford 1971:14).

Each of these six variables has been broken down into six nominal

attributes, which in turn have been further subdivided.

Attribute A. Differential Handling of the Body Itself.

1. Preparation of the body: distinctions made by differential

washing, and/or exhibition of the body prior to graveside
ritual.

2. Treatment of the body: distinctions made by differential

mummification, mutilation, cremation.

3. Disposition of the body: distinctions made by differential

disposition-placed in a grave, on a scaffold, disposed of
in·the river, etc. (Binford 1971:21).

Attribute B. Differential Preparation of the Facility in which the

Body or Other Remains (Bones or Ashes) were Placed for Disposal.

 A3

1. Form of the facility: whether within a single class

of facility, such as a sub-surface grave, there were
differential formal characteristics reserved for in-
dividuals of different status, size, architectural
details, variations in materials used in construction,
etc.

2. Orientation of facility: whether the facility was

differentially oriented with respect to some es-
tablished reference point, such as cardinal directions,
solstice angles, etc.

3. Location of the facility: whether the facility was

differentially placed in the life space of the
community, or in spatially differentiated burial
locations (Binford 1971:21).

Attribute C. Differential Contributions to the Grave Furniture Placed

with the Body.

1. Form of the furniture: whether distinctions were made by

including different forms of grave goods.

2. Quantity of goods: whether distinctions were made solely

by the differential inclusion of varying quantities of
goods.

3. Form and quantity: whether distinctions were made by a

simultaneous differentiation in types of included goods
and in quantities of goods (Binford 1971:21).

Attribute D. Differential Participation in Mortuary Activities. (The

ritual group is defined as all those who participate in any way in

I either the funeral or mourning from moment of death to commemorative
\ rituals held long after death.)

1. Constitution of the ritual group: distinctions made by

differences in the categories of people expected to attend or otherwise

participate, such as all or only certain relatives, patrons, people

affiliated with a particular group, friends, neighbors.

 A4

2. Numbers of people: distinctions made soley by differences in

the numbers of people participating from each of the categories of people

expected to participate.

3. Constitution and numbers: whether distinctions were made by a

simultaneous differentiation in both the constitution of t he participants

and the numbers of people participating.

4. Specialized roles: distinctions made by differences in the

specialized roles assigned during mortuary and mourning activities; is

the role of ritual leader assigned to differently defined people (father ,

headman or priest), or are there different mortuary specialists for

different occasions? Are different people expected to dig the grave?

Attribute E. Alteration of the Ritual Events Centering Around Disposition

•
of and MOurning for the Deceased.

II 1. Sequence of ritual events: distinctions are made through differ-

ences in the sequ~nce of funeral and mourning rituals by changing the order

·of the normal sequence, by adding or omitting elements. This includes

rituals such as secondary burials, purification rites, or those concerned

with conferring inheritance, but does not include acts of mourning such

as seclusion or mutilation of self.

2. Length of ritual events: distinctions made solely by lengthening

or shortening elements of the normal sequence.

I 3. Sequence and length: whether distinctions are made by simultaneous

differentiation of both sequence and length of ritual events.

4. Other alterations in ritual: distinctions made b¥ other a1tera-

tions in ritual, notably, a change in location of ritual activities, or

the use of different symbols in the normal ritual sequence - songs or

speeches may differ in a regular way . or the corpse is treated differently

during the procession perhaps being carried in a different way. This

includes variations in symbolic actions, such as carrying a man out

through the right wall and women out through the left wall of the house,

but does not include changes in physical symbols already coded in differ-

ential treatment of the body itself, the facility or facilities involved,

or the grave furniture.

Attribute F. Differential Mourning Behavior of the Survivors of the

Deceased.

(Variation observed should be based upon. characteristics of the deceased

rather than the social roles of the mourner.)

1. Acts of mourning: distinctions made in the behavior of those

filling defined roles after the funeral, for example, seclusion, mourning

garb, observance of taboos, scarification, etc.

2. Duration of mourning: distinctions made solely in the length

of time during which acts of mourning should be maintained.

3. Acts and duration of mourning: distinctions made by simultaneous

differentiation of both acts and duration of mourning.

4. Differential treatment of relics: whether distinctions are made

by differential treatment of relics of the deceased, such as eating

pulverized bones, preserving different parts of the deceased, or using

preserved parts differently.

An ordinal scale was developed to measure the strength with which

the Location of the Disposition of the Deceased is used to express the

Social Affiliation of the Deceased.

 A6

Scale 1. Location of Disposition as a Symbol of Social Affiliation (LOCDP):

1. Distinction Absent - The deceased's affiliation with multiple

membership units within the society and/or membership in the society

I itself is not symbolized through location of the disposition of the

remains, either through differential location of the facility in the

I l ife space of the community or through spatially differentiated burial

I or cremation locations.

2. Distinction Weakly Determined - The deceased's affiliation with

multiple membership units within the society and/or membership in the

society itself is symbolized through location of the disposition of the

remains either through differential location of the facility in the life

space of the community or through spatially differentiated burial or

cremation locations for only ~ minority·of the total population; or

I membership in a defined group does determine the location of the dis-

r position for most people, but this location is solitary and is abandoned

and usually avoided after a more or less carefully specified period follow-

ing the death and disposition.

3. Distinction Strongly Determined - The location of the final re-

mains either through differential location of the facility in the life

space of the community or through spatially differential burial or cre-

mation locations normally, for most members of the society, symbolizes

t he deceased's affiliation with one or more of the multiple membership

units within the society and/or membership in the society itself.

 A7

MORTUARY VARIABLES MEASURING DEGREE OF ELABORATION:

Variable I. TREATMENT OF THE BODY.

Attribute A. PREPARATION:

O. no special treatment normally made

1. given some summary treatment
2. washed and dressed and/or laid out in simple manner

I 3.

4.
washed, dressed unusually and/or displayed in a prescribed
manner requiring effort
practice variable but including #3
9. inadequate information

Attribute B. TREATMENT - mummification, cremation, burial, cannibalism:

O. no treatment
1. summarily carried out with comparatively little effort
2. treatment requires one or two days effort
3. treatment requires extended effort -specify __________
4. practice variable but including #3
9. inadequate information

Variable II. FORM OF THE FACILITY IN WHICH REMAINS ARE DEPOSITED.

Attribute A. ERECTION OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES OF ANY SORT:

O. absent 9. inadequate information

1. present, if yes, then continue:
Size: 1. of small ,s ize requiring little effort
2. of small to moderate size requiring some effort
3. of moderate size requiring significant effort
4. of large size requiring unusual effort
1-4. specify -,--;:____:-;-_____
9. inadequate information
Permanence:
O. forgotten within lifetime of immediate survivors
I,. ephemeral - kept in memory of immediate survivors
2. lasting two or three generationa
3. lasting more than three generations
9. inadequate information
Marking:
O. absent
1. generalized symbols but no inscription
2. inscribed, or specific identity otherwise symbolized
9. insdequate information
 A8

Reference:
1. to single individual
2. multiple, specify basis for grouping
----~
9. inadequate information

Attribute B. ATTENTION REQUIRED (for upkeep or in supplication):

O. none
1. occasional, unscheduled
2. occasional, scheduled: for a limited time, e.g., 1 year
3. occasional, scheduled: for an unlimited time
4. frequent
5. other
9. inadequate information

Attribute C. LOCATION OF NORMAL SUCH FACILITY:

O. absent
1. located outside community
2. central location within the family
3. central location within the community as a whole
4. other (including burial grounds), specify _____________
9. inadequate information

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES:

Variable I. Subsistence Economy

Attribute A. Hunting and Gathering Economy: hunting and gathering combined

contribute more to the food supply than any other subsistence activity.

Agriculture and animal husbandry can each contribute only less than 10%

of the total food supply. Fishing can not contribute more than the other

techniques combined (Murdock and Morrow 1970) .

Attribute B. Pastoralist Economy: animal husbandry contributes more to

the food supply than any other subsistence technique (Murdock and Morrow 1970) .

Attribute C. Fishing Economy: fishing contributes more to the food supply

than all other subsistence techniques combined; or fishing contributes less

.
 A9

than half the food supply but more to the food supply than any other sub-

sistence technique while hunting and gathering combined contributes less

than half the food supply and agriculture and animal husbandry are low

contributors (Murdock and Morrow 1970) .

Attribute D. Shifting Agriculture: agriculture contributes more to the

food supply than does any other subsistence activity, but mayor may not

be conducted by intensive techniques as determined by scores of 3 or 4

on Variable 8: Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture (Murdock and Provost

1973); settlements may be sedentary or nomadic but must be impermanent as

determined by scores of 3, 2, 1 or 0 on Variable 3: Fixity of Residence

(Murdock and Provost 1973).

Attribute E. Settled Agriculture: agriculture contributes more to the

•
food supply than does any other subsistence activity, but mayor may not

be conducted by intensive techniques, as determined by scores of 3 or 4 on

Variable 8: Degree of Dependence upon Agriculture (Murdock and Provost 1973);

settlements are sedentary and relatively permanent as determined by a score

of 4 on Variable 3: Fixity of Residence (Murdock and Provost 1973).

I
Variable 3. Fixity of Residence (from Murdock and Provost 1973:380,

I Scale 2:

4.
3.
Fixity of Residence):

Settlements
Settlements
are sedentary
are sedentary
and relatively permanent.
but impermanent.
) 2 0 The pattern
1. The pattern
of settlement
of settlement
is semisedentary.
is seminomadic.
1 o. The pattern of settlement is fully nomadic.

Variable 4. Degree of Urbanization or Mean Size of Local Communities (from

Murdock and Provost 1973:380, Scale 4: Urbanization):

 ALO

4. The population of local communities averages in excess

of 1,000 persons.

3. The population of local communities averages between

400 and 999 persons.

2. The population of local communities averages between

200 and 399 persons.

1. The population of local communities averages between

100 and 199 persons.

O. The population of local communities averages fewer than

100 persons.

Variable 5. Degree of Population Density (from Murdock and Provost 1973:382,

Scale 8: Density of Population):

4. The mean density of population exceeds 100 persons per

square mile.

3. The density of population averages between 26 and 100

persons per square mile.

2. The density of population averages between 5.1 and

25 persons per square mile.

1. The density of population averages between one and five

persons per square mile.

O. The density of population averages fewer than one person

per square mile.

Variable 6. Degree of Social Stratification (from Murdock and Provost

1973:382, Scale 10: Social Stratification):

4. The society exhibits a complex stratification into three or

more distinct classes or castes regardless of the presence
or absence of slavery.

3. The society is stratified into two social classes of freemen,

e.g . , nobles and commoners or a propertied elite and a proper-
tyless proletariat, plus hereditary slavery and/or recognized
caste divisions.

2. The society is stratified into two social classes of freemen but

lacks both caste distinctions and hereditary slavery.
 All

1. Formal class distinctions are lacking among freemen, but hereditary

slavery prevails and/or there are important status differences based
on the possession or distribution of wealth.

O. The society is essentially egalitarian, lacking social classes ,

castes, hereditary slavery, and important wealth distinctions.

Variable 7 . Level of Political Integration (from Murdock and Provost

1973:382, Scale 9: Level of Political Integration):

4. Three or more administrative levels are recognized above

that of the local community , as in the case of a large
state organized into provinces which are subdivided into
districts.

3. Two administrative levels are recognized above that of the

local community, as in the case of a small state divided
into administrative districts.

2. One admin:istrative level is recognized above that of the

local community, as in the case of a petty state with
a paramount chief ruling over a number of local communities.
Soc:ieties which are politically completely dependent, lack-
ing any political organization of their own and wholly
absorbed into the pol~tical system of a dominant society
of alien culture; are likewise coded as 2. .

I 1.

O.
The society is stateless but is composed of politically
organized ,autonomous local communities.

The society is stateless, and political authority is not

centralized even on the local level but is dispersed among
households or other small component units.

Variable 8. Degree of Dependence Upon Agriculture (from Murdock and

Provost 1973:380, Scale 3: Agriculture):

4. Agriculture contributes more to the society's food supply

than does any other subsistence activity and is conducted
by intensive techniques such as irrigation, plowing, or
artificial fertilization.

3. Agriculture contributes more to the food supply than does any

other subsistence activity but is not conducted by intensive
techniques.

2. Agriculture yields more than 1'0 per cent of the society's

food supply but not as much as does some other subsistence
activity .
 M2

1. Agriculture is practiced but yields less than 10 per cent

of the food supply.

o. Agriculture is not practiced or is confined to nonfood crops.

Variable 9. Level of Technological Specialization (from Murdock and

Provost 1973:381, Scale 5 : Technological Specialization):

4. The society is reported to have a variety of craft specialists,

including at least smiths, weavers, and potters .

3. The society is reported to have specialized metalworkers

or smiths but to lack loom weaving and/or pottery.

2. Loom weaving is practiced but metalworking is absent or

unreported.

1. Pottery is made but metalworking and loom weaving are absent

or unreported.

O. Metalworking, loom weaving, and potterymaking are all absent

or unreported.
 A13

APPENDIX II

DATA ARRAY:

A. SPECIFIC DATA ON EACH SAMPLE SOCIETY

*from Murdock and White (1969)

Society Language* Religion Focus*

!Kung Bushmen Khoisan Indigenous The Agau !Kung of the Nyae Nyae
region (19°50'5, 20 0 35'E) in 1950

Mbuti Pygmies Niger-Congo Indigenous The Epulu net-hunters of the

(Bantoid) Ituri Forest (1°30' to 2°N, 28·15'
to 28°25'E) in 1950

Andamanese Andamanese Indigenous The Aka-Bea tribe of South Andaman

(11 °45' to l2°N, 93° to 93°10'E}:
in 1860

Tiwi Australian Indigenous The Tiwi of Bathurst and Melville

(1911 Roman Islands as a whole (11° to 11°45'5,
Catholic 130 0 to 132°E) in 1929
mission) (coded to Hart's reconstruction)

AraI\da Australian Indigenous The Arunta Mbainda of Alice Springs

(23°30' to 25°5, 132°30" to
134·20'E) in 1896

Ainu Ainu Indigenous The Ainu of the basins of the

(ancestor Tokapchi and Saru rivers in south-
worship) eastern Hokkaido (42°40' to 43·30'N,
142° to 144·E) reconstructed for
about 1880

Porno Hokan Indigenous The Eastern Porno of Clear Lake

(Kulanapan) (39°N, 123·W) in 1850

Paiute Shoshonean Indigenous The Wadadika or Harney Valley band of

Northern Paiute (43° to 44°N, 118· to
120 0 W) reconstructed for a,b out 1870

Kutenai Kitunahan Indigenous The Lower Kutenai (48·40' to 49·10'N,

(Catholic 116·40 'W) in 1890
mission
active)

Siriono Tupi- Indigenous The Siriono in the forests near the Rio
Guarani Blanco (14° to 15·5, 63· to 64°W) in
1942
 Al4

Society Language* Religion Focus*

Aweikoma Ge Indigenous The Aweikoma of the Duque de Caxias

(Caingang) Reservation (38°S, 50 0W) in 1932

Tehue1che Tehue1chean Indigenous The equestrian Tehuelche (40° to 50 0S ,

(Patagon) (Chon) to 72 OW) in 1870

Nama Khoisan Indigenous The Gei/Khauan tribe (27°30'3,17°E)

Hottentot (Southern) exposed to reconstructed for 1860
Christianity

Fulani Niger-Congo Islamic The Alijam and Degeriji subgroups of

(Atlantic) syncretic Wodaabe Fulani around Adan and Damergou
in Niger (13° to 17°N,5° to 100E) in 1951

Masai Chari-Nile Indigenous The Kisonko or Southern Masai of Tanzania

(Eastern) (1°30' to 5°30'S,35° to 37°30'E) in 1900

Somali Afroasiatic Islamic The Dolbahanta subtribe (7° to lION,

(Eastern syncretic 45°30' to 49°E)in 1900
Cushitic) (Sunni)

Tuareg Afroasiatic Islamic The Ahaggaren or Tuareg of Ahaggar

(Berber) (21° to 25°N,4° to 9°E) in 1900

Rwa1a Afroasiatic Islamic The Rwa1a Bedouin of south central Syria

(Semitie) and northeastern Jordan (31° to 35°30'N,
36° to 41°E) in 1913

Lapps 'Uralic Christian The KBnkHmH Lapps of Karesuando parish

(Finnic) in northern Sweden (68°20' to 69°5'N,
20°5' to 23°E) in 1950

Yurak Uralic Indigenous The Tundra Yurak (65° to 71°N,4lo to 62°E)

Samoyed (SalIlOyedic) exposed to in 1894
(Nenets) Russian Orthodox

Basseri Indo- Islamic The nomadic Basseri (Z7° to 31°N,

European (Shiah) 53° to 54°E) in 1958
(Ir~ian)

Toda Dravidian Indigenous The small Toda tribe as a whole (11° to

12°N,76° to 77°E) in 1900

Khalka Altaic Buddhist The Kha1ka of the Narobanchin temple

Mongols (Mongol1c) territory (47° to 47°20'N,95°10' to
97°E) in 19Z0

Goajiro Arawakan Indigenous The homogeneous Goajiro tribe as a

missions whole (11°30' to 1ZoZ0'N.710 to 7Z030'W)
active in 1947
 A15

Society Language* Religion Focus*

Tawi-Tawi .Malayo- Islamic The Badjau of southwestern Tawi-Tawi

Badjau Polynesian syncretic and adjacent islands of the Sulu Archipe-
(Hespe ronesian) lago (5°N,1200E) in 1963

Manus Malayo- Ancestor .The village of Peri (2°l0'S,147°E)

Polynesian worship in 1929
(Melanesian)

Mbau Malayo- Ancestor The island of Mbau off the east coast
Fijians Polynesian worship of Viti Levu (18°S,178°35'E) in 1840
(Melanesian)

Marshallese Malayo- Ancestor The atoll of Jaluit (6°N,165°30'E)

Polynesian worship in 1900
(Carolinian)

Gilayk Gilyak Indigenous The Gilyak of Sakhalin Island (53°30' to

54°30'N,141050' to l43°10'E) in 1890

Yukaghir Yukaghir Indigenous The Yukaghir Of the Upper Kolyma River

(63°30' to 66°N,150° to l57°E) in 1850

Ingalik Athapaskan Indigenous The village of Shageluk (6Z030'N,

(Northern) l59°30'W) reconstructed for 1885 just
prior to miss ionization

Copper Eskimo Eskimauan Indigenous The Copper Eskimo of the Arctic mainland
(Eskimo) (66°40' to 69°20'N, 108° to l17°W) in 1915

Twana Salishan Indigenous The small Twana tribe as a whole

(47°20' to 47°30'N,123°l0' to l23°20'W)
reconstructed for 1860

Klamath Sahaptin Indigenous The Klamath tribe as a whole (42° to

(Lutuamian) 43°l5'N,12loZ0' to l22°20'W)in 1860

Barama Cariban Indigenous The Carib along the Barama River in

Carib British Guiana (7°10' to 7~40'N,
59°20' to 60 020'W) in 1932

Yamana Yahgan Indigenous The eastern and central Yaghan (54°30'

or Yahgan (mission to 55°30'S,67° to 70 0W) reconstructed
beginning) for 1865

Thonga Niger- Ancestor The Ronga subtribe around Lourenco

Congo worship Marques (25°50'S,32°20'E) in .1895
(Bantoid)

Lozi or Niger- Ances·tor The ruling Luyana (14° to l8°20'S,22°

Barotse Congo worship to 25°E) in 1900, at the height of
(Bantoid) Barotse political expansion
 Al6

Society Language* Religion Focus*

Bemba Niger-Congo Ancestor The Bemba of Zambia (9° to 12°S, 29°

I Gheg
(Bantoid)

Indo-
European
worship

Roman
Catholic;
to 32°E) in 1897

The Mountain Gheg of northern Albania

(41°20' to 42°N, 19°30' to 20 031'E)
I (Italic) Islamic in 1910

Tana1a Ma1ayo- Ancestor' The Menabe subtribe (22°S,48°E)

Polynesian worship in 1925
(Res pe rones ian)

Iban or Ma1ayo- ]ndigenous The Iban of the U1u Ai group (2°N,

Sea Dayak Polynesian 112°30' to 113°30'E) in 1950
(Resperonesian)

Creek or Natchez- I ndigenous The Upper Creek of Alabama (32°30' to

Muskogee Muskogean exposed to 34°20'N, 85°30' to 86°30'W) in 1800
(Muskogean) Christian- prior to removal to Oklahoma

I Papago Piman
ity

Indigenous
syncretic
The Archie Papago near Sells, Arizona
(32°N, 112°W) in 1910
Catholic

I
Yanomamo Yanoaman Indigenous The Shamatari subtribe around the
village of Bisaasi-teri (20 to 2°45'N,
•
64°30' to 65°30'W) in 1965

Amahuaca Panoan Indigenous The Amahuaca on the upper Inuya River

(10°10' to 10 030'S, 72° to 72°30'W)
in 1960
Tupinamba Tupi- Indigenous The Tupinamba near Rio de Janeiro
Guarani (22°30' to 23°S,42° to 44°30'W) in 1550

Lamet Men-Khmer Ancestor The small Lamet tribe as a whole

(Pa1aung-Wa) worship (20 0N,100040'E) in 1940

Igbo Niger-Congo Ancestor The Eastern and Peripheral subgroups

(Kwa) worship of the Isu~Ama division of the Southern
(missions or Owerri Ibo (5°20' to y040'N,7°10'
active) to 7°30'E) in 1935

Bambara Niger-Congo Ancestor The Bambara along the Niger River

(Mande) worship· from Segou to Bamako (12°30' to 13°N,
(missions 6° to 8°W) in 1902
active)

Kenuzi Chari-Nile Islam The Kenuzi or northernmost branch of the

Nubians (Nubian) syncretic Barabra or Nile Nubians (22° to 24°N ,
32° to 33°E) in 1900

Riffians Afroasiatic Islamic The Riffians as a whole (34°20' to

(Berber) regional 35°30'N,2°30 ' to 4°W) in 1926
syncretism
 A17

Society Language* Religion Focus*

Santal MoIL-Khmer Indigenous The Santal of the Bankura and Birbhum

(Mtmda) (missions districts of Bengal (23° to 24°N,
active) 86°50' to 87°30'E) in 1940

Toradja Malayo- Indigenous The Bare'e subgroup of eastern Toradja

Polynesian (Islamic & (2°S,12l0E) in 1910
(Hesperonesian) Christian
missions active)

~Yapese Malayo- Ancestor The island of· Yap as a whole (9°30'N,

Polynesian worship l38°l0'E) in 1910
(Carolinian)

Koreans Korean Complex: The village of Sondup'p and town of

Ancestor Samku Li on Kanghwa Island (37°37'N,
worship, l26°25'E) in 1947
Buddhist,
Confucianism)

Huichol Nahuatlan Ancestor The small Huichol tribe as a whole

worship (22°N, 105°W) in 1890
syncretic
with Christianity

Aztec or Nahuatlan Indigenous The city and environs of Tenochtitlan

Tenochca (19°N,99°l0'W) in 1520

Quich~ Maya Mayan Ancestor The town of Chichicastenango (15°N ,

worship 91 OW) in 1930
syncretic
with Christianity

Inca Kechu- Ancestor The Quechua-speaking Indians in the

maran worship vicinity of Cuzco (13°30'S,72°W)
in 1530
 1

Appendix II.
DATA ARRAY B: VARIABLE CODES

Society ID Subs is- LocDp Var. 3 Var . 4 . Var. 5 Var . 6 Var . 7 Var . 8 Var. 9 Units
tence Location Fixity Degree Popu1a- Social Politi- Extent Tech- of
of Dis- of Resi- of Urban- tion Strati- cal In- of Ag- nologi- Social
position dence ization Density fication tegra- riculture cal Affilia-
by Social t ion Specia1- tion
Affiliation ization Distin-
Hunting & guished
Gathering
Bushmen 002 1 I-absent 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 none
Mbuti 013 1 2-weak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II, 1a
Andamans 079 1 2-weak 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1b
....
00 Tiwi 090 1 2-weak 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Ib
< Aranda 091 1 I-absent 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 none
Ainu 118 1 2-weak 2 0 0 0 1 1 2 2
Pomo 135 1 3-strong 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 6
Paiute 137 1 I-absent 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 none
Kutenai 139 1 I-absent 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 none
Siriono 173 1 2-weak 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 la, 1b
Aweikoma 180 1 I-absent 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 none
Tehue1che 185 1 I-absent 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 none
 Appendix I I
•
DATA ARRAY B (Continued)

Society ID Subsis- LocDp Var. 3 Var. 4 Var. 5 Var. 6 Var. 7 Var. 8 Var. 9 Units
tence Location Fixity Degree Popu1a- Social Politi- Extent Tech- of
of Dis- of Resi- of Urban- tion Strati- cal In- of Ag- no1ogi- Social
position dence ization Density ficadon tegra- ricu1ture cal Affilia-
by Social tion Specia1- tion
Affiliation ization Distin-
guished
Pastora1ist
Hottentot 001 2 2-weak 0 1 0 1 2 0 3 2
Fu1ani 025 2 2-weak 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 2
Masai 034 2 2-weak 0 2 1 0 1 0 3 2
a-
.... Somali 036 2 2-weak 0 3 2 1 2 1 3 1b
..: Tuareg 041 2 2-weak 0 0 0 3 3 2 3 11
Rwa1a 046 2 2-weak 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 11
Lapps 052 2 3-strong 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 3, 9b, 11
Samoyed 053 2 3-strong 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 4, 9b
Basseri 058 2 3-strong 0 1 1 1 3 2 3 9b, 11
Toda 061 2 3-strong 2 0 3 0 2 0 0 4
Mongols 066 2 2-weak 1 0 1 3 4 1 3 1b, 9a&b,1O
Goajiro 159 2 3-strong 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 3, 4
 Appendix II

DATA ARRAY B (Cont inued )

Society ID Subsis- LocDp Var. 3 Var. 4 Var. 5 Var. 6 Var. 7 Var. 8 Var. 9 Units
tence Location Fixity Degree Popula- Social Politi- Extent Tech- of
of Dis- of Resi- of Urban- tion Strati- cal In- of Ag- nologi- Social
position dence lzation Density flcation tegra- rlcul- cal Affilia-
by Social tion ture SpeCial- tion
Affiliation ization Distin-
guished
Fishing
Badjau 086 3 3-strong 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 10
Manus 096 3 3-strong· 4 2 3 1 1 0 1 la, 3, 6
Fiji 10Z 3 3-strong 4 4 4 1 3 Z 1 la
Marshalls 108 3 Z-weak 4 1 4 2 Z 2 0 la,4,8,9b
Gilyak 119 3 3-strong I 0 0 0 1 0 3 4, 6
Yukaghir 120 3 3-strong 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 la,6, 9b
Ingalik lZZ 3 3-strong Z 0 0 1 1 0 1 6
Copper
Eskimo 124 3 I-absent 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 none
Twana 133 3 3-strong 1 0 3 1 1 0 2 3, 6
Klamath 138 3 3-strong 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 lb, 7
Barama
Carib 164 3 2-weak 3 0 0 0 1 2 1 la
Yamana
(Yahgan) 186 3 I-absent 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 none
 Appendix II

DATA ARRAY B (Continued)

Society lD Subsis- LocDp Var. 3 Var. 4 Var. 5 Var. 6 Var. 7 Var. 8 Var. 9 Units
tence Location Fixity Degree Popula- Social Politi- Extent Tech- of
of Dis- of Resi- of Urban- tion Strati- cal In- of Ag- nologi- Social
position dence ization Density fication tegra- ricul- cal Affilia-
by Social tion ture Special- tion
Mfiliation ization Distin-
• Shifting
guished

Agriculture
Thonga 003 4 3-strong 3 0 4 2 3 3 3 la,4,6,9a
Lozi 004 4 3-strong 2 3 2 3 4 4 2 6, 8
..... Bemba 007 4 3-strong 3 1 1 2 4 3 3 3,4,6,8,9a
N
..: Gheg 048 4 3-strong 2 1 3 1 3 4 3 3,6,9b
Tanala 081 4 3-strong 2 2 1 3 2 4 3 4, 6, lb
Iban 085 4 3-strong 3 0 2 1 1 3 3 6
Creek 145 4 3-strong 2 2 1 0 3 3 2 la
Papa go 151 4 3-strong 2 2 3 0 1 4 1 6, 9b
Yanomamo 163 4 3-strong 3 1 0 0 1 3 0 1, 6
Amahuaca 170 4 I-absent 3 0 0 0 0 3 2 none
Tupinamba 177 4 3-strong 3 3 0 1 2 3 2 l a , 2, 8
Lamet 072 4 missing 2 1 0 1 1 3 0 ?
value
 "'-' .. -'
1

Appendix n
DATA ARRAY B (Continued)

Society ID Subsis- LocDp Var. 3 Var. 4 Var. 5 Var. 6 Var. 7 Var. 8 Var. 9 Units
tence Location Fixity Degree Popu1a- Social Politi- Extent Tech- of
of Dis- of Resi- of Urban- tion Strati- cal In- of Ag- no1ogi- Social
position dence iza.tion Density fication tegra- ricu1- cal Affilia-
by Social tion ture Specia1- tion
Affiliation ization Dis tin-
._.-
~ _____ J\.uished
Settled
Agriculture
Igbo 017 5 3-strong 4 4 4 1 2 3 3 1a, 3,6,9a&b
Bambara 022 5 3-strong 4 3 2 3 2 4 4 10,la,5,6, 8,9a
N
N
Kenuz 039 5 3-strong 4 0 3 1 1 4 2 4, 6
..: Rif 042 5 3-strong 4 3 4 1 3 4 4 6
Santa1 062 5 3-strong 4 1 4 0 3 4 2 1,6, 9b
Toradja 087 5 3-strong 4 1 2 1 2 3 3 6, 9b
Yap 110 5 3-strong 4 1 3 3 2 3 2 3, 8
Korea 116 5 3-strong 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3, 4 ,6,7,8 , 9b
Huicho1 152 5 3-strong 4 2 1 1 1 3 2 l a , 6 , 9b
Aztec 153 5 3-strong 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 1a ,4 , 5 , 9a
Quiche' 155 5 3-strong 4 4 3 1 2 3 2 6, 10
Inca 171 5 3-strong 4 1 2 4 4 4 4 3 , 6 , 10
 A23

APPENDIX III

MAP: 1

AFRICA

M.\.? 1: AFRICA

-
@
\
j
"

.'"
r
"
1
"~
ri3 ,,: ,
<S>
.N
<;>
.rr
.29

.18
."
."
• " .
.'

\
\
... ,
This mop locates all 28 of the sample socleties in Suh.Scharan Africa CA},
fifteen of those in the Circum-Mediterranean region (C), artri 0118 in Madagascar,
which is included in East Eurasia (E).

A 1 Nama Hottentots A 22 Bambara

A 2 !Kung Bushmen C 25 Fu1ani
A 3 Thonga C 36 Somali
A 4 Lozi C 39 Kenuzi Nubians
A 7 Bemba C 41 Tuareg
A 13 Mbuti C 42 Rif
A 17 Igbo E 81 Tana1a
A 34 Masai
 A24

MAP 2:

WEST EURASIA

MAl" :2: Wp.~ EtHtASIA

. This map locates thirteen of the sample sodeties or ihe Circum-Mediterranean

region (C) and flv~ of t~ose in East Eurasia (E).

C 46 Rwala Bedouin
C 48 Gheg Albanians
C 52 Lapps
E 53 Yurak Samoyed
E 58 Basseri
 A25

MAP 3:

EAST EURASIA

MAP 3: EAST EURASIA

\1-,
\~

\.
\
/ /

V
I
/

I I J ..
r,t/ •,"
/ ......... ~ ........

6/
,
,,,

." ."

_ _ ...... ~ • • • Ai •• ... - . -

Tilis map locates 25 of the sample societies from the world region of East
Eurc$ia (E) and ono. from th'o Insular Pacific {I}.

E 61 Toda E 116 Korea

E 62 San tal E 118 Ainu
E 66 Khalka Mongols E 119 Gilyak
E 72 Lamet E 120 Yukaghir
E 79 Andamanese
 A26

MAP 4:

INSULAR PACIFIC
•

M,-\H 4: INsUJ.AR P,\CIFIC

\\

'.
.'
~ . \

'. 6)" .107 "

J"
•

---
This map locates two of tho sample societies from
28 of those from the Insular Pacific region (I).
~he East Eurc-;ion region (E) an~

I 85 Iban
I 86 Tawi-Tawi Badjau I 96 Manus
I 87 Toradja I 102 Fiji
I 90 Tiwi I 108 Marsha11ese
I 91 Aranda I llO Yapese

J
 A27

MAP 5:

NORTH AMERICA

This map locates an 33 of the sample societies of the North American region
(N) and two of those from the South American region (5).

N 122 Ingalik N 139 Kutenai

N 124 Copper Eskimo N 145 Creek
N 133 Twana N ISI Papago
N 135 Pome N 152 Huicho1
N 137 Paiute N 153 Aztec
N 138 Klamath S. 155 Quiche Maya

J
 A28

MAP 6:

SOUTH AMERICA

MAP 6: SOUTI-I AMf.RICA

<'

.'"

II * oICIO IICIO mo
- M I~ lS ==

This mop lot'ates 30 of the 32 soc.ieties from the South Amel"iean ~gio" (5).

S 159 Goajiro S 1.77 Tupinamba

S 163 Yanomamo S 180 Aweikoma
S 164 Barama Carib S 185 Tehue1cho
S 170 Amahuaca S 186 Yamana or Yahgan
S 171 Inca
S 173 Siriono

J
 A29

APPENDIX IV

CODE SHEET
"
REGION: STANDARD SAMPLE #

PINPOINTED LOCATION AND DATE

LINGUISTIC AFFILIATION:

BASIC SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ORGANIZATION:

kinship system:
Scale #9 - political integration:
Scale #IO-social stratification:

SUBSISTENCE:
Trade Agriculture Animal Husb. Fishing Hunting Gathering

FIXITY OF RESIDENCE (Scale #2):

POPULATION DENSITY (Scale #8):

URBANIZATION (Scale #4):

TECHNOLOGICAL SPECIALIZATION (Scale #5):

DEPENDENCE ON AGRICULTURE (Scale #3):

RELI~ION:

Indigenous
a. polytheism
b. spirit worship associated with geographic localities
c. ancestor worship

. Syncretic with

Major religion

SOURCES:
 A30

1. Constitution of Ritual Group:

2. Ritual ,Leaders :

3. Mortuary Specialists:

4. Differences of mourning behavior on the basis of characteristics of the

mourner rather than the deceased

a. sex:

b. social position:

c. other:

5. Symbolic aspects of note:

a. abandonment of dwelling

b. orientation of repository or grave:

c. single or multiple repositories:

d. other:

I. CONDITIONS OR CAUSE OF DEATH:

Conditions distinguished for exceptional treatment:

a. d.
b. e.
c. f.
 A3l

1. result of expediency 4. combination of the above

2. result of anti-social action 9. insufficient information available
3. result of cultural concepts or values

A. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

1. Preparation
2. Treatment
3. Disposition

B. FACILITY

1. Form & construction . .

f ilit id d/abandonment rl.tualued
a. no ac y prove, body ignored
b.

2. Orientation

3. Location

C. GRAVE FURNITURE

1. Form: •

2. Quantity

3.· Form and Quantity

D. DIFFERENTIAL PARTICIPATION
1. Constitution of ritual group (categories):

2. Number of people

3. Both constitution and number

4. Specialized roles varied

 A32

E. AI,TERATION OF RITUAL EVENTS

1. In sequence (funeral & mourning rituai events)

2. In length

3. Both sequence & length

4. Other alterations, e.g. , location of ritual activities changed:

F. DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTED MOURNING BEHAVIOR

1. Acts of mourning

2. Duration of mourning

3. Acts & duration

4. Treatment of relics ,(including forms of cannibalism):

II. LOCATION OF DEATH

Situations distinguished for exceptional treatment

a. d.
b. e.
c. f.

lo result of expediency 4. combination of the above

3. result of cultural concepts or values 9. insufficient information

A. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

l. Preparation
2. Treatment
3. Disposition
 A33

B. FACILITY
1. Form & construction .
f il· id d" abandonment rituall.zed
a. no ac l.ty prove" body ignored
b.

2. Orientation

3. Location

C. GRAVE FURNITURE
1. Form
2. Quantity
3. Form and Quantity

D. DIFFERENTIAL PARTICIPATION
~. Constitution of ritual group (categories):

2. Number of people

3. Both constitution and number

4. Specialized roles varied

E. ALTERATION OF RITUAL EVENTS

1. In squence (funeral & mourning, ritual events)

2. In length

3. Both sequence & length

4. Other alterations, e.g.,·location of ritual activities changed:

F. DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTED MOURNING BEHAVIOR

1. Acts of mourning

2. Duration of mourning

3. Acts & duration

4 . Treatment of relics (including forms of cannibalism):

 A34

III AGE AT DEATH

Ages distinguished

a. c.
b. d.

1. more elaborate
2. less elaborate

A. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

1. Preparation
2. Treatment
3. Disposition

B. FACILITY
1. Form & construction . d
't . d d "abandonment rituall.ze
a. no f ac i1 ~ y prov~ e '- b o dy ~gnore
. . d
b.
•
2. Orientation

3. Location

C. GRAVE FURNITURE
1. Form
2. Quantity
3. Form & Quantity

D. DIFFERENTIAL PARTICIPATION
1. Constitution of ritual group (categories):

2. Number of people

3. Both constitution and number

3. Specialized roles varied

 A35

E. ALTERATION OF RITUAL EVENTS •

1. In sequence (funeral & mourning ritual events)

2. In length

3. Both sequence & length

4. Other alterations, e.g., location of ritual activities changed:

F. DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTED MOURNING BEHAVIOR

1. Acts of mourning

2. Duration of mourning

3. Acts & duration

4. Treatment of relics (including forms of cannibalism):

IV. SEX OF DECEASED

1. Occupation primarily symbolized

2. Inherent quality of male or femaleness symbolized
3. Both 1 and 2 symbolized

A. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

1. Preparation
2. Treatment
3. Disposition

B. FACILITY
1. Form & construction
a. no facility prov~·d e d ;' abandonment ritualized
"body ignored
b.

2. Orientation

3. Location

C. GRAVE FURNITURE
1. Form
2. Quantity
3. Form & Quantity
 A36

•DISTINCTION SEX OF DECEASED

D. DIFFERENTIAL PARTICIPATION
1 . Constitution of ritual group (categories):

2. Number of people

3. Both constitution and number

4. Specialized roles varied

E. ALTERATION OF RITUAL EVENTS

1. In sequence (funeral & mourning ritual events)

2. In length

3. Both sequence & length

4. Other alterations, e.g. , location of ritual activities changed:

F. DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTED MOURNING BEHAVIOR

1. Acts of mourning

2 :- Duration of mourning

3. Acts & duration

4. Treatment of relics (including forms of cannibalism):

V. SOCIAL POSITION OF DECEASED

Positions differentiated:
Informal:
a.
b.
c.

Formal
a.
b.
c.

A. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

1. Preparation
2. Treatment
3. Dispositi"on

-
 A37

B. FACILITY
1. Form & construction
"d d ,abandonment ritualized
a. no facility prov1 e ... body ignored
b.

2. Orientation

3. Location

C. GRAVE FURNITURE
1. Form
2. Quantity
3. Form & Quantity

D. DIFFERENTIAL PARTICIPATION

1. Constitution of ritual group (cat"e gories):

2. Numbers of people
3. Both constitution and number
4. Specialized roles varied

E. ALTERATION OF RITUAL EVENTS

1. In sequence (funeral & mourning ritual events)
2. In length
3. Both sequence & length
4. Other alterations, e.g., location of ritual activities changed:

F. DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTED MOURNING BEHAVIOR

1. Acts of mourning
2. Duration of mourning
3. Acts & duration
4. Treatment of relics (including forms of cannibalism):

VI. SOCIAL AFFILIATION OF DECEASED

Social affiliations distinguished:
1. On kinship basis
a. family or lineage c. larger division
b. clan
2. On non-kinship basis within community
a. whole pinpointed group is distinguished against outside other
b. stranger
c.
 A38

A. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

1. Preparation ..
2. Treatment
3. Disposition

B. FACILITY
1. Form & construction .
f i1' . d d "..abandonment ritualJ.zed
a. no ac l.ty provl. e ..,. body ignored
b.

2. Orientation

3. Location

C. GRAVE FURNITURE
1. Form
2. Quantity
3. Form & Quantity

D. DIFFERENTIAL PARTICIPATION
1. Constitution of ritual group (categories):

2. Number of people

3. Both constitution and number

4. Specialized roles varied

E. ALTERATION OF RITUAL EVENTS

1. In sequence (funeral & mourning ritual events)
2. In length
3. Both sequence & length
4. Other alterations, e.g., location of ritual activities changed:

F. DIFFERENCES IN EXPECTED MOURNING BEHAVIOR

1. Acts of mourning
2. Duration of mourning
3. Acts & duration
4. Treatment of relics (including forms of cannibalism):
 A39

VARIABLES MEASURING DEGREE OF ELABORATION

I. TREATMENT OF THE BODY

A. PREPARATION
O. no special treatment normally made
1. given some summary treatment
2. washed & dressed and/or laid out in simple manner
3. washed, dressed unusually and/or displayed in a prescribed manner
requiring effort
4. practice. variable but including 03
9. inadequate information

B. TREATMENT - mummification, cremation, burial, cannibalism

O. no treatment
1. summarily carried out with comparatively little effort
2. treatment requires one or two days effort
3. treatment requires extended effort -specify __________
4. pract i ce variable but including 03
9. inadequate information

II·. FORM OF THE FACILITY IN WHICH REMAINS ARE DEPOSITED

A. ERECTION OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES OF ANY SORT

O. absent 9. inadequate information
1. Present, if yes, then continue:
Size 1. of small size requiring little effort
2. of small to moderate size requiring some effort
3. of moderate size requiring significant effort
4. of large size · requiring unusual effort
1-4 . specify ~~____~__
9. inadequate information

Permanence:
O. forgotten during the lifetime of immediate survivors
1. ephemeral, kept in memory of immediate survivors
2. lasting two or three generations
3 . lasting more than three generations
9. inadequate information

Marking:
O. absent
1. generalized symbols but no inscription
2. inscribed or specific identity otherwise symbolized
9. inadequate information

Reference:
1. to single individual
2. multiple, specify basis for grouping ________
9. inadequate information
 A40

•
II. FORM OF FACILITY (continued)

B. ATTENTION REQUIRED (for upkeep or in supplication)

O. none
1- occasional, unscheduled
2. occasional, scheduled: for a limited time, e. g. , 1 year
3. occasional, scheduled: for an unlimited time
4. frequent
5. other
9. inadequate information

C. LOCATION OF NORMAL SUCH FACILITY

O. absent
1. located outside community
2. central location within the family
3. central location within the community as a whole
4. other (including burial grounds) specify __________
9. inadequate information

III. FORM OF OTHER RELATED PHYSICAL FACILITIES OF ANY SORT (ancestor, shrines,
memorials, etc.)

A. ERECTION OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES OF ANY SORT

O. absent 9. Inadequate information
1. present - if yes then continue:
Size:l. of small size requiring little effort
2. of small to moderate. size requiring some effort
3. of moderate size requiring significant effort
4. of large size requiring unusual effort
1-4. specify
9. Inadequate~i-n~f-o-r-ma~t~i-on

Permanence:
O. forgotten during lifetime of immediate survivors
1. ephemeral kept in memory of immediate survivors
2. lasting two or three generations
3. lasting more than three generations
9. inadequate information

Marking:
O. absent
1. generalized symbols, no inscription
2. personalized (indicating the identity of the deceased)
9. inadequate information

Reference:
1. to single individual
2. multiple, specify basis for grouping ___________
9. inadequate information
 A4l

IV. GRAVE FURNITURE

O. absent
1. mainly personal possessions
2. ritual objects included
3. objects considered expensive
4. practice variable, but including occasions requiring objects of
expense or large numbers of grave furniture
5. animal sacrifice practiced
6. human sacrifice practiced
9. inadequate information

V. RITUAL SEQUENCE (Laying out body, viewing, burial, cremation, etc. ,

rites of purification and mourning, connnemoration
feasts, exhumation, secondary burial, ceremonies
terminating mourning, annual connnemoration, etc.)

A. NUMBER OF STEPS
9. inadequate information
1. specify _ _ _ __

B. Time allotted
9. inadequate information
1. specify _ _ __

C. Actual sequence and time allotted for each:

VI. SPECIAL COMMEMORATIVE RITUALS PRACTICED

O. absent
1. calendrically scheduled ritual activities other than secondary burial
2. secondary burial practiced
3. Other, specify ____
9. Inadequate information

VII. PARTICI PATION

A. AT FUNERAL
1. no special requirements other than closest relatives present at death
2. numbers of different groups required to attend: _____ _
3. proportion of larger community small
4. proportion of larger connnunity attending is moderate
5. proportion of larger community attending is large
9. inadequate information
 A42

B. AT CO~10RATIVE CEREMONIES
l. no special requirements other than closest relatives
2. numbers of different groups required to attend:
3. proportion of larger community small
4. proportion of larger community attending is moderate
5. proportion of larger community attending is large
O. no such ceremonies exist
9·0 inadequate information

VIII • . SUBJECTIVE MEASURE OF RELATIVE POSITION IN WHOLE RITUAL COMPLEX

O. unimportant
1. separate from and only moderately important within whole ritual
complex
2. important within whole ritual complex
3. oneof two or three most important rituals within the whole
ritual complex
9. inadequate information

Quote source:

IX. A. VIEW ·OF AFTERLIFE

•
O. absent
1. dead wholly removed to remote location, communication rare
2. dead removed but communication occasional
3. dead continue to take active role in daily affairs
9. inadequate information given

IX. B. SACREDNESS AND POWER OF SPIRITS OF DECEASED

O. Spirits of deceased do not exist
l. Spirits of deceased are not sacred or powerful
2. Spirits of deceased .are supernatural beings wi th some power
but are not worshipped
3. Some spirits of deceased are supernatural beings with power
and are worshipped
4. Most or all spirits of deceased are supernatural beings with
power and are worshipped
9. Inadequate information

X STATEMENTS INDICATING DEGREE OF CORPORATENESS OF BASIC FAMILY UNIT

O. not corporate
1. lineages present
2. corporate lineages known to be present
3. some form of bilateral family basic property holdi ng uni t
9. inadequate information

QUOTE:
 A43

XI. DEGREE OF THREAT TO AUTONOMY

O. absent
l.
2.
3. physical threat greater than assimilative pressure
4. must resist active assimilative pressure
9. inadequate information

XII. DATA ON INCIDENCE OF MORTALITY

1. infant mortality high
2. mortality between three years and puberty high
3. young adult mortality high
4. adult mortality high
5. mortality greatest among those considered to be in old age
9. inadequate information available

XIII. VALUE PLACED ON MATERIAL -WEALTH

O. no concept of material wealth
1. very low value placed on acquisition of material wealth
2. low value placed on acquisition of material wealth
3. moderate value placed on acquisition of material wealth
4. high value placed on acquisition of material wealth
5. very high value placed on acquisition of material wealth
9. inadequate information

XIV. SYSTEMS OF INHERITANCE:

A. IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
O. not present
1. takes place at death
2. takes place prior to death
9. inadequate information

B. MOVABLE, TANGIBLE PROPERTY

O. not present or all destroyed
1. most destroyed, but remainder distributed after death
2. takes place at or after death
3. takes place prior to death
9. inadequate information

C. INTANGIBLE PROPERTY
O. not present or not transferred
1. takes place at death
2. takes place prior to death
9. inadequate information
 A44

xv. ALTERNATE FORMS OF ACQUIRING PROPERTY

•
A. IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
O. absent
1. present but rarely used
2. present and moderately used
3. hard work earns access
4. very easy access to property
9. inadequate information

B. MOVABLE, TANGIBLE PROPERTY

O. absent
1. present but rarely used
2. present and mOderately used
3. hard work earns access
4. very easy access to property
9. inadequate information

C. INTANGIBLE PROPERTY
O. absent 1. present but rare
2. present and moderate use 3. standardized institutionalized access

Specify: