MATRILINEAL

KINSHIP

Edited by DAVID M. SCHNEIDER

and KATHLEEN GOUGH

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS

 Price: $11.75

Matrilineal Kinship
Edited by DAVID M. SCHNEIDER
and KATHLEEN GOUGH
The structure of all societies is based,
in some degree, an kinship. Matri-
lineal kinship is that form of kinship
where membership in the descent
unit is determined by consanguineol
relationship through females. The
father does not belong to the same
descent unit as his wife and children,
yet he is a member of the family
group. His loyalties and interests are
thus split between his own descent
group, o decision-making body, and
his family. Matrilineal descent there-
fore creates a recurrent set of struc-
tural problems which are different
from those created by other forms of
descent.
MATRILINEAL KINSHIP deals with
the structural and evolutionary prob-
lems of matriliny by means of a
threefold approach: it analyzes the
structure of particular matrilineal so-
cieties, examines their cultural ecol-
ogy, and inquires into the implica-
tions of matrilineal descent for the
evolution of kinship systems.
After on introductory chapter,
"The Distinctive Features of Matri-
lineal Descent Groups," the book is
divided into three main ports. Port
One provides well-rounded exposi-
tions of nine matrilineal systems:
Plateau Tonga; Navaho; Trukese;
Trobriond Islanders; Ashonti; Tiyyor,
Moppillo, and Nayor of North Ker-
ola; and Noyor of Central Keralo .
Port Two discuHes the variation
among these and six additional mo-

Ccpy IQil'cd nal "1,!1

MATRILINEAL KIN SH IP

T h 1e One

1111111111111IIIll~ ~ 111111111
ESBB-BZO- DWFD
wL , n 1
h r 1 n
I
1
MATRILINEAL
KINSHIP

EDITED BY

David M. Schneider
and Kathleen Gough

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS

Berkeley a..d Lo1 A11gele1, 1961

Copyrighled malerial
 University of California Press
Berkeley and Los Angeles, California
Uni\•ersity of California Press, Ltd.
London, England
© 1961 by The Regents of the University of California
First Paperback Edition, 1973
California Library Reprint Series Edition, 1974
ISBN: 0-520-02529-6 (paper-bound)
0-520-02587-3 ( clotb-boWld)
Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 61-7523
Printed in the United States of America

Copyrighted material
To Audrey I. Richards
 PREFACE

This book has grown out of a Social Science Research Council Summer
Seminar which met at Harvard University in 1954. It appears just
one hundred years after the publication of J. J. Bachofen's Das Mutter-
recht ( 1861), which first posed matrilineal descent as a problem. That
the two publications are not quite of the same order goes without
saying, but the period between them bas certain continuities.
Bachofen argued that human society began in a state of "primitive
promiscuity," in which there was really no social organization and no
regulation of behavior, sexual or othem'ise. Matriliny, the second stage
of cultural evolution, Bachofen argued, was associated with the in-
vention of agriculture by women. In this stage women ruled the house-
hold and tlle state, and passed their names and property to their chil-
dren. Essential to the matrilineal stage was a set of religious beliefs
which centered, naturally enough, on an Earth Goddess. Indeed, the
political structure and descent rule, according to Bachofen, merely
reflected the cult of a female deity and depended directly on the re-
ligious mentality of women. Only late in the evolution of culture was
this system thought to have given way to a patrilineal and patriarchal
one.
Other nineteenth-century writers, notably McLennan, Tylor, and
Morgan, agreed on the priority of matriliny over patriliny. They dis-
agreed, however, as to the nature of matriliny, how it arose and how
it finally yielded to patrilineal descent.
The nineteenth-century theorists wanted, on the whole, to estab-
lish general laws of cultural development, not merely particular his-
torical sequences. In attempting to formulate such general laws they
looked to the systematic interconnections among institutions within a
particular culture and tried to explain them on a variety of grounds:
in terms of other institutions, historically antecedent conditions, psy-
chological states, or the biological nature of man. Yet despite their
great intellectual gifts their theories were at best open to serious doubt.
Quite apart from the question of the legitimacy of their problem or
the general nature of their explanatory framework, one shoal on which
there was much foundering was that of the empirical referents for the

Copyrighted material
viii Preface
concepts and categories of comparative analysis. Was "matriarchy"
a single, indivisible entity and if so had it ever existed? Was "matriliny"
the same as "tracing relationship through the mother"? Was "residence
with the family of the bride" the "natural concomitant" of matriliny?
Was the avunculate an integral part of "the matrilineal complex" and
hence invariably a survival of a prior matrilineal state wherever it oc-
curred? What was "matriarchy" and how did it work? What was "the
avunculate" and how did it work?
Whatever the merits of the early theorists, and they were many and
cannot be overlooked, they posed a succession of problems of this sort
which the era of modem intensive field work has done much to unravel.
Thus Bachofen's contention that matri.liny (descent through women)
and matriarchy (rule by women) were but two aspects of the same in-
stitution was accepted only briefty. For as evidence was sought in terms
of which his contention could be evaluated it became clear that the
generalized authority of women over men, imagined by Bachofen, was
never observed in known matrilineal societies, but only recorded in
legends and myths. Thus the whole notion of matriarchy fell rapidly
into disuse in anthropological work.
Similarly, descent groups formed in terms of the matrilineal principle
were confused at first by a kind of semantically inevitable error, with
"tracing relationship through the mother"; ink pots spilled over in the
heated effort to disentangle these two notions and their correlates.
Morgan ( 1877) was particularly important in clarifying this problem.
It was first suggested that matrilineal descent groups were an inevitable
concomitant of this mode of tracing relationship and, indeed, matri-
lineal descent was defined in those terms. But it soon became evident
that most societies were observed to relate members to both the kins-
men of the father and the ki.nsmen of the mother but that only some of
these had organized descent groups as distinct from categories of kin.
Hence descent had to be treated separately from the manner of tracing
relationship and came to refer only to the form of social grouping, while
the mode of tracing relationship was no longer expected necessarily to
yield descent groups.
A closely related difficulty was the early suggestion that the true
matriarchal or matrilineal complex did not include the husband or
father and therefore ·could not include a discernible nuclear family as
a social group. This followed from the idea that in true matriliny "kin-
ship was traced only through the mother" and therefore there could
be no social father. This view was consistent with the prevalent as-
sumption of a stage of primitive promiscuity as the state prior to

Copyrighted material
Preface ix

matriliny, for if promiscuity did settle down to orderly relationship it

must first have settled in terms of mother-child relationships; only
later, when paternity could be demonstrated, could the father-husband
be brought into this unit. A further source of confusion which not only
exacerbated this problem but cre.ated confusions of its own was the
identification of kinship relationships with biological relationships.
Kinship was held to be essentially the social recognition of biological
facts : that is, that the social relationship of mother and child was es-
sentially the social aspect of their biological relationship; that the social
relationship of father and child was the social aspect of their biological
relationship. So, the argument ran, until biological paternity could be
established- at least on probabilistic grounds-there was no basis for
the idea of social paternity. A m-other had to be able to locate the
biological father of her child befo~e be could become the social father
of her child. It followed therefore that descent groups were biological
as well as social groups.
It took the clear statement of such assumptions, and the heated con-
troversies of tl1e time often forced their clear statement, to generate
the kind of empirical research which alone could cast light on them.
By now we know that though descent groups may be established in
terms of matrilineal principles this does not mean that relationships
cannot be or are not traced through the father as well as the mother,
for the establishment of a descent group is something quite different
from tho principle in terms of which relationships among its members
are traced. Social paternity need llOt be and often is not identical with
biological paternity, nor is a descent group necessarily composed of
biologically related members. The essential clarification which has
occuned consists in the recognition that real biological relationships
are distinct from and need not necessarily conelate with the social
designation of a kinship relationship; in the distinction between a
mode of tracing a kinship relationship and the formation of social
groups of kinsmen.
Yet another difficulty which required clarification was the notion
of residence, but this problem is even now far from clear. When matri-
liny and matriarchy were identined with each other as an indivisible
unit it was difficult to see residence as anything but matrilocal. If
women indeed had the power over men that was postulated, how could
a man take a woman away from he.r group? For a time "matrilocal mar-
riage" was used almost interchangeably with matriliny. In separating
the variables of descent and residence, however, the precise referent
for the notion of residence was left very uncertain. Tylor ( 1889), for

Copyrighted material
X Preface
instance, spoke of residence with the "family" or at the "home'" of. N. W.
Thomas (1906), who introduced the terms "matrilocal" and "patri-
local," did so specifically in terms of their parallel to the terms "matri-
lineal" and "patrilineal" but, except for acknowledging that they were
not entirely satisfactory, left the matter as it was. Rivers in 1914 still
used the bride and groom as the points of reference and continued, as
had Tylor, to refer only vaguely to "the wife's people" as the place
where the groom lived in matrilocal residence. In 1936 Firth first used
the term uxorilocal, and in 1947 Adam suggested the paired terms viri-
local and uxorilocal on the ground that "matri-" and "patri-" referred to
"mother" and "father" respectively, while the concern was not with
them but with the husband and wife, for whom the roots "viri-" and
"uxori-" were more appropriate. But in 1949 Murdock specifically
stipulated the parents of the couple as the deSning criterion, matri-
local residence being dellned as residence with the bride's mother,
patrilocal as residence with the groom's father. In 1957, however, he
altered these dellnitions so that matrilocal residence meant that the
couple lived with the bride's matrilineal kinsmen; patrilocal residence
meant that the couple lived with the groom's patrilineal kinsmen. In
1953 Hogbin and Wedgwood added community to the referents of
residence and proposed a whole new set of terms.
With these uncertainties in the dellnitions of what appear to be
crucial terms the possibility of the husband and wife living with the
husband's matrilineal relatives was only appreciated slowly. Despite
the fact that excellent accounts of this form of residence were available
for some time it was not until 1938 that Kroeber coined the term
"avunculocal," using the ,groom's mother's brother as the point of refer-
ence for the residence of the couple. Nor did this form of residence ap-
pear as a feature of historical reconstruction or evolutionary theory in
any signillcant role before then. Perhaps the major dilliculty in seeing
avunculocal residence as anything but anomalous was in part a con-
sequence of the semanttic confusion generated by the term "patri-
local; since in both cases the couple did indeed live with the "groom's
family" or "people." At t.h e same time the urgent insistence on the as-
sociation of matrilineality and matrilocality as the only "natural con-
comitants" simply left no room for avunculocality. As late as 1914 Rivers
maintained this position, saying, "Mother-right in its typical form is
associated with a mode of marriage most suitably called 'matrilocal'
in which the husband Bves with his wife's people" (Rivers, 1914b:
851).
Equally important was the almost unalterable conviction in the face

Copyrighted material
Preface xi

of readily available evidence to the contrary that residence meant CO·

residence, and the possibility of a married couple living apart was not
dignified as a form of residence at all. Murdock in 1949 did not recog-
nize it formally, though in 1957 he used the term "duolocal" for it.
The evidence that this form of residence occurred among the Nayar,
Ashanti, and the Ga of West Africa was available in the literature for
many years.
One direct consequence of the seminar's concern \vith this problem
was Goodenough's paper "Residence Rules," published in 1956. In
attempting to organize the material on Truk, Schneider raised the ques·
tion of the apparent discrepancy between Fischer's and Goodenough's
residence data, and this particular problem was settled in Good-
enough's paper by what appears to be a considerable advance in clarify·
ing some of the problems of residence.
The early twentieth century saw a widespread revolt not only against
tl1e particular theories of the nineteenth, but against cultural evolu-
tion in general. In America, Boas and his students turned to highly spe·
cilic historical reconstructions. They eschewed all theories of general
development on principle. In Britain, by the 1920's, Malinowski and
Radcliffe-Brown, though holding very different assumptions from each
other, condemned wholesale as "conjectural history" both the general
evolutionary tl1eories and the specific historical reconstructions of pre·
vious anthropologists. Both turned instead to analysis of the functional
connections between contemporaneous institutions of a society. They
emphasized that even if one could discover the historical origins of any
particular institution, such knowledge would not explain why it per·
sisted in its current setting today. Radcliffe-Brown, in particular, showed
that many of the customs which the evolutionists had seen as survivals
(such as certain patterns of ki.nship terms), when carefully investi·
gated, made better sense in their present, real context than in any
hypothetical previous one. Where customs were found whose existence
could not be readily "explained" in terms of their relations with other
institutions of tho contemporary society- such as, for example, rules
of descent themselves-these tended to be brushed aside as funda-
mentally inexplicable "historical accidents."
In modem social anthropology, therefore, matrilineal kinship systems
came to be stuilied merely as particular examples of functionally in·
tegrated social structures, or else within the context of wider theoretical
interests, rather than as the foci of special problems. Malinowski's
monumental study of the Trobriand Islands in 1914-1918 concerned a
matrilineal people, but be directed his attention to a general under·

Copyrighted material
xii
standing of the interrelatedness of institutions, and used the matrilineal
character of Trobriand society only incidentally to counter some gen·
era! theories of psychoanalysis. Similarly Radcliffe-Brown, in 1924, used
the specific theme of .avuncular relations among the patrilineal Tonga
and in various matrilineal societies in the general cause of his war on
survivals a.nd conjectural history. And although he contrasted patri·
lineal and matrilineal .systems in his 1935 paper, his focus seemed to be
on unilineal systems in general and he did not devote detailed attention
to matrilineal systems as such.
Nevertheless, it is the work of these writers and their students which
today offers the most fruitful insights into the special characteristics and
problems of matrilineal descent. Malinowski's ethnography provided
the 6rst full-dress description of a matrilineal system in operation. Even
today his are some of the clearest statements on the general position
of the male in matrltineal societies, his equJvoc.al relationship to his
wife and children, the special importance of his relationship with his
sister and sister's husb and, and the conflict between a man's loyalties
to his natal and his conjugal kin. Radcliffe-Brown, with a different theo·
retical orientation and a clearly structural view, also influenced most of
the succeeding work on the structure of unilineal systems. The con·
cepts of these two writers concerning matriliny have since been espe·
cially valuably documented and extended in the lleld studies of Fortune,
Richards, Eggan, Fortes, and, more recently, Mitchell, Colson, and
Turner.
British social anthropology has so far tended to be distinguished by
depth of analysis of particular societies and by discussions of general
concepts, rather than. by extensive cross-<:ultural research into prob·
!ems of co-variation. This makes the more remarkable Audrey Richards'
paper of 1950 on the comparative study of Central Bantu matrilineal
societies. This paper reintroduced, in a framework of modem anthropo·
logical theory, problems peculiar to matrilineal societies, and systemat·
ically compared and contrasted household composition, domestic au-
thority, residence, inlleritance, and succession patterns, in relation
to subsistence base and to political structure, for six closely related
matrilineal groups. In our view Richards' paper marked a major ad·
vance in the analysis of matrilineal descent groups. It provided the
immediate stimulus for the present research, Md for this reason the
book is dedicated to Richards.

In this book three types of approach appear, now separately, now

blended. One interest, shared by all the authors, is in the structural

Copyrighted material
PrefMe xiii

analysis of particular matrilineal societies, in their mode of operation

and in the generalizations that can be made about all of !Jlem. An-
othm intere~1 is in cultural ecology: it is concerned with the significance
for the form of a kinship system of the technico-environmental features
of the culture in which it is found. A third interest is evolutionary: it
is concerned with a typology of general levels of cultural development
and, within this framework, with the implications of the evolution of the
technical, political, and economic spheres of culture for the evolution
of kinship systems. The second and third interests, shared especially
by Gough and Aberle, derive much from American Culturology as
represented by Leslie A. White and his students.
In this third interest especially the book takes up again the problem
w hich the nineteenth-century theorists left in mid air. There is no
question but that much of the confusion and entangling underbrush
which tripped the nineteenth century theorists has been cleared away
by the advances in both structural analysis and in analysis of the rela-
tionship between technkoo-environmental conditions and the institu-
tions of kiosltip. But it is equally clear that much remains yet to be done
in this area before we can say that even most of the underbrush is
gone. It is precisely tltis problem which remains an open question: is
adequate control over structural analysis, including technico-environ-
mental relations, a prerequisite to the development of general laws of
cultural development, as some people feel, or must the efforts to solve
these go hand-in-hand, distinct but interrelated problems?
In general the authors have different degrees of commitment to
these three interests. Not all the authors agree with all the conclusions
drawn in the book, and each takes responsibility only for his or her
own contribution. It is important to note that the different approaches
and conclusions are indeed compatible.

The original seminar out of which this volume grew was convened
by Schneider, because he felt that-except for Audrey Richards' work
-insufficiently systematic attention had been paid to matrilineal sys-
tems and, particularly, that knowledge of their structure lagged behind
that attained for patrilineal systems. The present volume is not a record
of the seminar itself, but rather embodies thinking which originated
there and developed beyond the point a.t wltich the seminar left off.
In the Introduction Schneider attempts: to state, in theoretical terms
rather than as empirical generalizations, the constant features of the
structure of matrilineal descent groups. Such constant features occur
within a variety of cultural frames and in ru variety of ecological settings.

Copyrighted material
xiv Preface
The actual organization of any particular group must therefore be seen
not only in terms of its structural constants but as a product of those
features in interaction with cultural and ecological conditions peculiar
to the group. In selecting organization of matrilineal descent groups
as the focus of the problem, it is not implied that the descent rule is in
any sense causal or determinate, or even that it is the most important
aspect of a particular kinship group, such as the Nayar taraoild or the
Ashanti lineage. On the contrary, the particular determinants of each
particular case, both in its present condition and in its historical back-
ground, remain to be established. All that the delineation of the con-
stant structural features of matrilineal descent groups can do is to
state certain limiting conditions inherent in that mode of organization.
Part One of the book provides expositions of nine matrilineal sys-
tems. Each chapter includes material on what the author believes to
be the crucial variables in dealing with matrilineal descent. The chap-
ters in this part are not, however, intended as a random, stratified, or
typical sample of matrilineal societies. The decision to use certain
data for the seminar, to be worked up for presentation later in book
form, stemmed from the original selection of members for the seminar.
The aim, of course, was to find as many members as possible who had
had firsthand experience, particularly recent Geld experience, with
matrilineal peoples. This was not entirely possible for a variety of
reasons. Gough, Aberle, Colson, and Basehart had nll worked with
matrilineal groups, but Basehart's Oneida materials did not prove
suitable because of certain. gaps in the data on the traditional system,
which could not be filled from historical records. Fathauer knew the
Trobriand and Northwest Coast literature and had worked with it for
some time. Schneider had worked in Micronesia among a people who
had been supposed to be matrilineal but who proved instead to have a
system of double descent. He was, however, familiar with the Micro-
nesian literature in general and had available to him excellent material
on Truk. He was also able to discuss this material with Ward H.
Goodenough and with John and Ann Fischer, who had recently worked
there. It was hoped that this would make up for his failure to find
matriliny where it was said to be.
The selection of societies did provide a wide diversity of types of
matrilineal system. Drawing them from four continents minimized the
possibility that any constant features discovered might result from
diHusion rather than from matrilineal descent. The traditional Navaho
and Plateau Tonga societies were examples of loosely stntctured,
acephalous tribes; similarities between them proved particularly in-

Copyrighted material
Preface
teresting in view of their great diversity of cultural origin. Both rely
not only on cultivation but also on herding- unusual for matrilineal
peoples. Truk and Trobriand are examples of more tightly structured
matrilineal systems with relatively settled cultivation, organized into
chiefdoms. The Ashanti were a large, mabilineally organized state,
while the Kerala castes were differentiated occupational and social
strata \vithin still larger states. The six regions offered, also, a wide
variety of residence patterns: irregular among the Plateau Tonga,
dominantly matrilocal among Navaho, Trukese, and North Kerala
Mappillas, dominantly avunculocal among Trobriand Islanders and
North Kerala Nayars, and with a custom of "visiting spouses" among
Central Kerala Nayars and a high proportion of Ashanti.
The chapter on the Navaho consists of new, unpublished informa·
tion and a synthesis of the enormous literature on this well-studied
group. Aberle has worked among the Navaho intermittently since 1940.
He was fortunate in having access to some census data not widely
available.
When she first presented it to the seminar, Colson's paper on the
Plateau Tonga contai.ned a large amount of material not published at
that time. She later included much of this information in her book
(Colson, 1958). The editors are especially grateful to her for redrafting
her original paper to minimize overlap with her other published work,
yet at the same time to highlight those aspects of the society which had
special interest for the group.
The materials on Ashanti, Trobriand, and Truk are drawn from
published literature. Each chapter is specially organized with refer·
ence to the ecological and social structural variables which, as the
seminar progre.<Sed, came to seem most significant for the comparative
study of matriliny. Anyone who has attempted to wade through Mali-
nowski's voluminous writings will appreciate the magnitude of Fa-
thauer's task and the skill with which he condensed the information
into a straightforward account of social structure. Basehart, too, faced
knotty problems in reconciling accounts of the political structure and
of kinship among the Ashanti, and the editors feel he has solved
many of them. The chapter on Truk contains some information not
published elsewhere, kindly supplied by Ward H. Goodenough and
John L. Fischer in response to enquiries which arose out of the seminar
discussions.
The chapters on the Nayars and other Kerala castes contain a syn·
thesis of historical literature, together with much hitherto unpublished
material collected in the field. It is hoped that the information on the

Copyrighted material
xvi Preface
Central Kerala Nayars may be of especial use to theorists of kinship,
who have long been interested in this group because of the former ab-
sence among them of any organized nuclear family.
In Part Two Gough treats problems of variation in matrilineal sys-
tems, paying particular attention to the determinants of variation in
descent-group structure, residence, patterns of interpersonal kinship
relationships, and marriage preferences. She derives her hypotheses
from investigation of the nine cases presented in Part One and from
six other matrilineal systems for which literature is available.
Part Three is also comparative, but where Gough used a small num-
ber of cases, each treated as a whole system and in detail, Aberle
selects more limited variables and treats statistically a large number of
cases which were readily available through Murdock's World Ethno-
graphic Sample. \11/bile concentrating on ecological determinants of
social structure, Aberle also returns to some of the problems posed by
the nineteenth-century writers who tried to stipulate general evolu-
tionary sequences of culture. There are, of course, many differences
in Aberle's approach. Perhaps the chief one is that he does not regard
matrilineal descent as a primary characteristic of one general stage
of cultural evolution. Rather, he sees it as one of several modes of
descent possible in at least three general stages: namely, the acepha-
lous, egalitarian tribe; the ranked, hut not politically centralized, chief-
dom; and the small-scale state. The problem of the incidence of matri-
lineal descent thus becomes, for Aberle, a problem not of general but
of specific evolution.
The editors thank the other four participants for their patience and
good will in corresponding over long distances, and in redrafting their
chapters to suit changing plans for the book.
United thanks go to the Social Science Research Council for its
excellent program of summer seminars, of which this book is but one
product. The council's financial support made the six-week seminar
possible, provided a Navaho informant for part of the period, and pro-
vided for a reporter who kept a valuable daily record of the discus-
sion.
Harvard University and the Department of Social Relations gave
generous hospitality, a meeting place, and such facilities as were availa-
ble.
Professor Fred Eggan of the University of Chicago offered wise
counsel in assembling the membership of the seminar and in first stat-
ing the problems for discussion. He joined the seminar for a short
period. His advice proved excellent, his participation was enlighten-

Copyrighted material
Preface xvii

ing, and his encouragement, particularly in the preparation of this

volume, has been unflagging.
Dr. Titiev, Dr. Fortes, and Dr. Turner were of much help to Gough
in her work on Part Two, in reading and commenting on pre!Jminary
versions of the various chapters.
Marshall Sahlins came to the seminar as its reporter, immediately
following the completion of his doctorate. His official task was to keep
a record of the discussions, which he did with immense diligence and
consummate skill. Fortunately he also participated fully in the seminar
and contributed many of its most fruitful ideas. He was invited to write
a part of the book, but declined. He is, however, clearly represented
in the thinking that went into Parts Two and Three of this book. Added
warm thanks are due Barbara Sahlins for the long hours she put into
typing the original manuscripts.
D.M.S.

Copyrighted material
 C O NTENT S

Introduction: The Distinctive Features of Matrilineal Descent

Groups
DAVII> .M. SCHNEIDER 1

Part On e
Nim Matrilineal Kinship Systems
Introduction to Part One

l. Plateau Tonga
F1 JZ4BE1B COLSON 36
2. Navaho
DAVID F. ADERLE ll6
3. Truk
DAVID M . SCHNEIDER

4. Trobriand
CEOACE H. FATHAIJEII 234
5. Ashanti
HARRY W. BAs£HAlrT 270
6. Nayar: Central Kerala
XA'nD...EEK COUCH .298
7. Nayar: North Kerala
l<ATBLEEN COUCH 385
8. Tlyyar: North Kerala
ltATII1.EEK COUCH

9. Mappilla: North Kerala

~THLEEl'\ COVCH 415

Copy·10n1ted
XX Contents

Part Two

Variation in Matrilineal Systems

Introduction to Parts Two and Three 445

10. Descent Groups of Settled and Mobile Cultivators

U'IBLEEN COUCH 450
11. Descent-Group Variation among Settled Cultivators
UTHLEEN COUGH 457
12. Descent-Group Variation among Mobile Cultivators
UDILEEN COUGH 522
13. Variation in Residence
ICA-mLE£N COUCH

14. Variation in Interpersonal Kinship Relationships

][Ann.££N COUCH 577
15. Variation in Preferential Marriage Forms
UTBLEEN COUCH 614
16. The Modem Disintegration of Matrilineal Descent
Groups
KATHLEEN COUCH 631

Part Thre e
Cross-cultrtral Comparisons
17. Matrilineal Descent in Cross-cultural Perspective
DAVD> F. A.BEIIL£ 655

Bibliography 731

Index 757

Copyrighted material
 Bibliography

Preface

Adam, L.
1947. Virilocal and uxorilocal. American Anthropologist, 49: 678.
Colson, E.
1958. Marriage and the Family among the Plateau Tonga. Man-
chester: Manchester University Press.
Fortes, M.
1953. Structure of unilineal descent groups. American Anthro-
pologist, 55: 17-41.
Gcodenough, W. H.
1956. Residence rules. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology,
12: 22-37.
Hogbin, H. 1., and C. H. Wedgwood
1953. Local grouping in Melanesia. Oceania, 23: 241-276; 24:
58-76.
Kroeber, A. L.
1938. Basic and secondary patterns of social structure. Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute, 68: 299-309.
McLennan, L. H.
1886. Studies in Ancient History. New York: The Macmillan
Company.
Morgan, L. H.
1870. Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family.
Smithson.i an Contributions to Knowledge, 17: Art. 2.
1817. Ancient Society. New York: Holt and Company.
Murdock, G. P.
1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Radcliffe-Brown, A. R.
1924. The mother's brother in South Africa. South African Journal
of Science, 21: 542-555.
1935. Patrilineal and matrilineal succession. Iowa Law Journal,
20: 286-303.
731

Copyrighted material
732 Bibliography
Richards, A. I.
1934. Mother-right among the Central Bantu. In: Essays Pre-
sented to C . C. Se11gman, ed. by E. E. E vans-Pritchard
et al. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner and Company,
Ltd. Pp. 267-280.
1939. Land, Labour and Diet in Northern Rhodesia. London:
Oxford University Press.
1950. Some types of family structure amongst the Central Bantu.
In: African Systemr of Kinship and Marriage, ed. by A. R.
Radcliffe-Brown and C. D. Forde. London: Oxford Uni-
versity Press. Pp. 207- 251.
Rivers, W. H. R.
1914a. Kinship and Social Organization. London: Constable and
Company, Ltd.
1914b. Mother-right. In: Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics,
ed. by James Hastings. Edinburgh: Clark; New York:
Scribner.
Thomas, N. W.
1906. Kinship Organisations and Croup Marriage in Australia.
Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
Tylor, E. B.
1889. On a method of investigating the development of institu-
tions. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 18:
245-272.

lntrodudlon
Fallers, L. A.
1957. Some determinants of marriage stability in Busoga. Africa,
27: 106-121.
Firth,R.
1957. A note on descent groups in Polynesia. Man. no. 2. January,
PP· 4-8.
Gluckman, M.
1950. Kinship and marriage among the Lozi of Northern Rhodesia
and the Zulu of Natal. In: African SystetM of Kinship and
Marriage, ed. by A R. RadcliHe-Brown and C. D. Forde.
London: Oxford University Press. Pp. 166-206.
Goodenough, W. H.
1955. A problem in Malayo-Polynesian social organization. Amer-
ican Anthropologist, 57: 11-$3.
Homans, G. C., and D . M. Schneider
1955. Marriage, Authority and Final Causes. Glencoe, Ill.: The
Free Press.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 733
Murdock, G. P.
1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.
RadcliiJe-Brown, A. R.
1924. The mother's brother in South Africa. South African Jour-
nal of Science, 21: 542-555.
Richards, A. I.
1934. Mother-right among the Central Bantu. In: Essays Pre-
sented to C. G. Seligman, ed. by E. E. Evans-Pritchard
et a/. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner and Company,
Ltd. Pp. 267- 280.
1950. Some types of family structure amongst the Central Bantu.
In: African Systems of Kinship and Marriage, cd. by A. R.
Radcliffe-Brown and C. D. Forde. London: Oxford Uni-
sity Press. Pp. 207-251.
Schneider, D. M.
]953. A note on bridewealth and the stability of marriage. Man,
no. 75, pp. 55-57.
Plateau Tonga
Allan, W., M. Gluckman, D. U. Peters, and C. G. Trapnell
1948. Land holding and land usage among the Plateau Tonga of
Mazabuka District. A reconnaissance survey, 1945. Rhodes-
Livingstone Paper 14.
Colson, E.
1948a. Rain shrines of the Plateau Tonga of Northern Rhodesia.
Africa, 18: 272-283.
1948b. Modern political organization of the Plateau Tonga. Afri-
can Studies, 10: 85-98.
1950. A note on Tonga and Ndebele. Northern Rhodesia Journal,
2: 35-41.
1951a. The Plateau Tonga of Northern Rhodesia. In: Seven
Tri1Jes of Britl$/t Central Africa, ed. by E. Colson and
M. Gluckman. London: Oxford University Press. Pp. 94-
162.
195lb. The role of cattle among the Plateau Tonga. Rhodes-
Livingstone Journal, 11:10-46.
1951c. Residence and village stability among the Plateau Tonga.
Rhodes-Livingstone Journal, 12: 41-67.
1953a. Social control and vengeance in Plateau Tonga society.
Africa, 23: 199-212.
1953b. Clans and the joking-relationship among the Plateau
Tonga of Northern Rhodesia. Kroeber Anthropological So-
ciety Papers, ~: 45-60.

Copyrighted material
734 Bibliography

1954. Ancestral spirits and social structure among the Plateau

Tonga. International Archives of Ethnography, 47: 21-68.
1958. Marriage and the Famay·among the Plate<Ju Tonga. Man-
chester: Manchester University Press.
Doke, G.
1945. Bantu, Modem Grammatical, Phonetical and Lexicographi-
cal Studies rince 1869. London: Percy Lund, Humphries
&Co.
Jaspan, M.
1953. The Ila-Tonga Peoples of North-Western Rhodesia. Ethno-
graphic Survey of Africa.

Navaho
Aberle, David F., and Orner C. Stewart
1957. Navaho and Ute peyotism: a chronological and distribu-
tional study. University of Colorado Studies, Series in
Anthropology no. 6. Boulder: University of Colorado Press.
Adair, John
1944. The Navafo and Pueblo Silversmiths. Norman: University
of Oklahoma Press.
Bailey, Flora L.
1950. Some sex beliefs and practices in a Navaho community,
with comparative material from other Navaho areas. Re-
ports of the Ramah Project, no. 2. Papers of the Peabody
Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Har-
vard University, vol. 40, no. 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody
Museum.
Bellah, Robert N.
1952. Apache Kinship Systems. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press.
Bourke, John G.
1890. Notes upon the gentile organization of the Apaches of
Arizona. Journal of American Folklore, 3: 111-126.
Carr, Malcolm, Katherine Spencer, and Doriane Woolley
1939. Navaho clans and marriage at Pueblo Alto. American An-
thropologist, 41: 245-257.
Collier, Malcolm Carr
1946. Leadership at Navaho Mountain and Klagetoh. American
Anthropologist, 48: 137- 138.
1951. Local organization among the Navaho. (Unpublished MS.)
Curtis, Edward S.
1907. The North American Indian. VoL 1. The Apaches. The

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 735
Jicarilla. The Navaho. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press.
Dapah, Jimmie
1954. DFA's unpublished notes of discussions with this Navaho,
formerly of Coolidge and Pinedale.
Dyen, Isidore
1956. Language distribution and migration theory. Language,
Journal of the Linguistic Society of America, 32: 611-626.
Dyk, Walter
1938. Son of Old Man Hat, a Navajo Autobiography. Recorded
by Walter Dyk. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.
1947. A Navaho autobiography. Viking Fund Publications in An-
thropology, no. 8.
Forbes, Jack D.
1959. The appearance of the mounted Indian in Northern Mex-
ico and the Southwest, to 1680. Southwestern Journal of
Anthropology, 15: 189-212.
Franciscan Fathers
1910. An Ethnologic Dictionan1 of the Navaho Language. St.
Michaels, Ariz.: The Franciscan Fathers.
Goldfrank, Esther S.
1945. Irrigation agriculture and Navaho community leadership:
case material on environment and culture. American An-
thropologist. 47: 262-277.
1946. More on irrigation agriculture and Navaho community
leadership. American Anthropologist, 48: 473-476.
Goodwin, Grenville
1942. The Social Organization of the W estern Apache. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Government Survey
n.d. Various manuscript items consulted at Window Rock, Ari-
zona. Presumably overlaps with Kluckhohn and Spencer,
1940, pp. 44-45, items listed under United States, Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
Haile, Berard (Fr. Berard)
1941. Learning Navaho. Vol. 1. St. Michaels, Ariz.: St. Michaels
Press.
195()..1951. A Stem Vocabulary of the Navaho Language. Vol.
1, Navaho-English. Vol. 2, English-Navaho. St. Michaels,
Ariz.: St. Michaels Press.
1954. Property concepts of the Navaho Indians. The Catholic
University of America Anthropological Series, no.l7. Wash-
ington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press.

Copyrighted material
736 Bibnogrophy
Henry, William E.
1947. The Thematic Apperception Technique in the study of cul-
ture-personality relations. Genetic Psychology Monographs,
35: 3-135.
Hill, W. W.
1936. Navaho warfare. Yale University Publications in Anthro-
pology, 5.
1938. The agricultural and hunting methods of the Navaho In-
dians. Yale University Publications in Anthropology, 18.
1040a. Some Nnvnho oulturo ohnngos during two centuries (with
a translation of the early eighteenth-century Rahal manu-
script). Essays in historical anthropology of North America
published in honor of John R. Swanton. Smithsonian Mis-
cellaneous Collectioru, 100: 395-416.
1940b. Some aspects of Navaho political structure. Plateau, 13:
23-28.
1943. Navaho humor. General Series in Anthropology, no. 9.
Menasha: George Banta Publishing Co., Agent.
1944. The Navaho Indians and the Ghost Dance of 1890. Amer-
ican Anthropologist, 46: 523-527.
n.d. Various notes on Navaho clans, clan groups, kinship, con-
sulted in the Iiles of Clyde Kluckhohn. Includes kinship
terminology charts, part of which are published in Bellah,
1952. Also notes on Navnh o lnw, supplied to DFA.
Hoijer, Harry
1938. The Southern Athapaskan languages. American Anthro-
pologist, 40: 7'iH>7.
1956. The chronology of the Athapaskan languages. International
Journal of American Linguistics, 22: 219-232.
Jones, Paul
1950. DFA's notes of various discussions with this Navaho, for-
merly of Naschitti, long resident at Pinon, former inter-
preter, District Superintendent, and now ( 1958) Chairman
of the Navajo Tribal Council.
Kaut, Charles R.
1957. The Western Apache clan system: its origins and develop-
ment. University of New Mexico Publications in Anthro-
pology, no. 9. Albuquerque : University of New Mexico
Press.
Kimball, Solon T.
1950. Future problems in Navajo administration. Human Organ-
ization, 9: 21-24.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 737
Kimball, Solon T., and John H. Provinse
1942. Navajo social organization in land use planning. Applied
Anthropology, 1: 18--30.
Kluckhohn, Clyde
1939. Some personal and social aspects of Navaho ceremonial
practice. The Harvard Theological Review, 32: 57-81.
1944. Navaho witchcraft. Papers of the Peabody ~fuseum of
American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard Univer-
sity, vol. 22, no. 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum.
1945. A Navaho personal document with a brief Paretian analysis.
Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 1: 260-281.
1956. Aspects of the demographic history of a small population.
In: Estudios Antropol6gicos, Publicados en Homenafe al
Doctor Manuel Gamio. Mexico, D.F.: Direcci6n General
de Publicaciones.
Kluckhohn, Clyde, and Dorothea Leighton
1946. The Navaho. Cambridge, ~fass.: Harvard University Press.
Kluclchohn, Clyde, and Katherine Spencer
1940. A Bibliography of the 'lt.1avaho Indians. New York: J. J.
Augustin.
Leighton, Dorothea, and Clyde Kluckhohn
1947. Children of the People. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press.
Leighton, Alexander, and Dorothea Leighton
1949. Gregorio, the hand-trembler: a psychobiological personality
study of a Navaho Indian. Reports of the Ramah Project.
Report No. 1. Papers of the Peabody ~fuseum of American
Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, vol. 40,
no. 1. Cambridge, 1\.1ass.: Peabody 1\.1useum.
McAllester, David P.
1954. Enemy Way music: a study of social and esthetic values
as seen in Navaho music. Reports of the Rimrock Project
Values Series no. 3. Papers of the Peabody Museum of
American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University,
vol. 41, no. 3. Cambridge, Mass.: Peabody Museum.
Mandelbaum, David G.
1949. Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture,
and Personality. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Matthews, 'Vashington
1890. The gentile system of the Navaho Indians. Journal of Amer-
ican Folk-Lore, 3: 8~110.
738 Bibliography
1897.
Navaho legends. Memoirs of the American Folk-Lore So-
ciety, vol. 5. Boston and New York: Houghton, l\.1iHlin and
Company.
Mooney, James
1896. The ghost-dance re1igion and the Sioux outbreak of 1890.
Fourteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American
Ethnology, part 2. Washington, D.C.: Government Print-
ing Office.
Murdock, George Peter
1957. World ethnographic sample. American Anthropologist, 59:
66~7.
Navajo Yearbook, The
1954. The Navajo yearbook of planning in action, no. 4. Comp.
by Robert \V. Young. \Vindow Rock, Ariz.: Navajo Agency.
1957. ReJX>rt No. 6. Comp. and ed., with articles by Robert ~7 •
Young. \Vindo\v Rock, Ariz.: Navajo Agency.
Packard, Robert L.
1882. List of Navaho clans. 4-p. ~fS in Bureau of .~merican
Etlmology Navaho 183. Transcript of copy prepared by the
BAE for W. W. Hill consulted in the files of Clyde Kluck-
hohn. Letter from ~f. W. Stirling of the BAE (attached to
transcript) dates ~fS as 1882. Presumably same item listed
by Kluckhohn and Spencer, 1940, p. 44 (dated 1881 or
1889), and by Pilling 1892, p. 76.
Pilling, James C.
1892. Bibliography of the Athapascan languages. Bureau of Amer-
ican Ethnology Bulletin 14. Washington, D.C.: Govern-
ment Printing Office.
Radcliffe-Brown, A. R.
1952. Structure and Function in Primitice Society. Glencoe, Ill.:
The Free Press.
Ramah Files
n.d. Files on the Ramah Navaho by various field workers. ~lain­
tained at Harvard University by Clyde Kluckhohn.
Rapoport, Robert N.
1954. Changing Navaho religious values: a srudy of Christian
missions to the Rimrock Navahos. Reports of the Rimrock
Project Values Series, no. 2. Papers of the Peabody ~fuseum
of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard Uni-
versity, vol. 41, no. 2. Cambridge, ~fass.: Peabody ~fuseum.
Reichard, Gladys
1928. Social life of the Navaho Indians, with some attention to
 minor ceremonies. Columbia University Contributions to
Anthropology 7.
1939. Dezba: Woman of the Desert. New York: J. J. Augustin.
Roessel, Robert A., Jr.
1951. Sheep in Navaho culture. M.A. thesis, Washington Uni-
versity, Department of Sociology and Anthropology.
(Mimeo.)
Sapir, Edward
n.d. MS on Navaho clans and clan groups, consulted in the files
of Clyde Kluckhohn. See also Mandelbaum, David G.
Sapir, Edward and Harry Hoijer
1942. Navaho texts. William Dwight Whitney linguistic Series.
Iowa City: Linguistic Society of America.
Spuhler, James N., and Clyde Kluckhohn
1953. Inbreeding coefficients of the Ramah Navaho population.
Human Biology, 25: 295-317.
Stephen, Alexander M.
1890a. ~{arriage among the Navajoes. Our Forest Children, 3:
222.
1890b. Notes about the Navajoes. Canadian Indian, 1: I:>-16.
Strodtbeclc, Fred L.
1951. Husband-wife interaction over revealed differences. Amer-
ican Sociological Review, 16: 468-473.
Swanson, G. E.
1958. The birth of the gods. (Unpublished MS.)
Underhill, Ruth
1956. The Navajos. Norman, Olda.: University of Oklahoma
Press.
[1953]. Here come the Navaho( A history of the largest Indian
tribe in the United States. Indian Life and Customs 8.
United States Indian Service.
Van Vallcenburgh, Richard
1936. Navaho common law. ~fuseum Notes, Museum of North-
em Arizona, 9: 18-22.
Vogt, Evon Z.
1949. Navaho Veterans: a study of changing values. Reports of
the Rimrock Project \' alues Series, no. 1. Papers of the
Peabody ~{useum of American Archaeology and Ethnol-
ogy, Harvard University, vol. 41, no. 1. Cambridge Mass.:
Peabody ~1useum.
Young, Robert ~7 •
1957. See Navajo Yearbook, The.
740 Bibliography
Young, Robert W. and \~illiam Morgan
1951. A vocabulary of colloquial Navaho. tTnited States Indian
Service.
1954.Navajo historical selections. Navajo Historical Series, 3.
Bureau of Indian Affairs.
n.d. The Navaho language: the elements of Navaho grammar
with a dictionary in two parts containing basic vocabularies
of Navaho and English. A Publication of the Education
Division, United States Indian Service.
Zelditch, Morris, Jr.
1959. Statistical marriage preferences of the Ramah Navaho.
American Anthropologist, 61: 470-491.

Truk
Fischer, Ann
1950. The role of the Trukese mother and its effect on child
training. National Research Council, Pacific Science Board,
\ \ a.shington, D.C. ( ~limeo.)
7

Fischer, J. L.
1950. Native land tenure in the Truk District. Civil Administra ..
tion of Truk. June 6, 1950. ( Mimeo.)
Glad,,in, T.
1953. The role of man and woman on Truk. Transactions of the
New York Academy of Sciences, Series II, Vol. 15.
Gladwin, T., and S. B. Sarason
1953. Truk: l\fan in paradise. Viking Fund Publications in An-
thropology, no. 20.
Goodenough, W. H.
1949. Premarital freedom on Truk. American Anthropologist,
51: 615-620.
1951. Property, kin and community on Truk. Yale University
Publications in Anthropology, no. 46.
1956. Residence rules. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology,
12: 22-37.
1\-1urdock, G. P., and'"'· H. Goodenough
1947. Social organization of Truk. Southwestern Journal of An-
thropology, 3: 33-43.
Swartz, M. J.
1958. Sexuality and aggression on Romonum, Truk. Arnerican
Anthropologist, 60: 467-486.
Bibliography 741

Trobriand
Fortune, R. F.
1933. A note on some forms of kinship structure. Oceania, 4: 1-8.
Leach, E. R.
1951. The structural implications of matrilateral cross·cousin
marriage. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute,
81: 21-55.
1958. Concerning Trobriand clans and the kinship category
"t,.hn.n Tn: The Oevelopmental Cycle in Domestic Groups,
ed. by Jack Goody, Cambridge Papers in Social Aothro.
pology. Vol. 1.
Malinowski, B.
1926. Crime and Custom in Savage Society. London: Kegao Paul
and Co.; New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
1927. Sex and Repression in Savage Society. London: Kegan Paul
and Co.; New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
1929. The Sext1al Life of Savages in North·Westem Melanesia.
New York: Halcyon House.
1932. Argonauts of the Western Pacific. London: George Rout·
ledge & Sons, Ltd.; New York: E. P. Dutton & Company.
1935. Coral Gardens and Their Magw. Vol. 1. New York: Amer-
ican Book Company.
1948. Magic, Science and Religion and Other Essays. Glencoe,
Ill.: The Free Press.
Murdock, G. P.
1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.

Ashantl
Beckett, W. H.
1944. Akokoaso: A Survey of a Gold Coast Village. London:
Percy Lund, Humphries & Co.
Busia, K. A.
1952. The Position of the Chief in the Modem Political System
of Ashanti. London: Oxford University Press.
Fortes, M.
1948. The Ashanti social survey: A preliminary report. Human
Problems in British Central Africa, VI.
1949. Time and social structure: An Ashanti case study. In: Social
Structure, Essays Preset1ted to A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, ed.
by Fred Eggan and Meyer Fortes. London: Oxford Uni-
versity Press. Pp. 54-84.

Copyrighted material
742 Bibliography

1950. Kinship and marriage among the Ashanti. In: African Sys-
tems of Kinship and Marriage, ed. by A. R. Radcliffe-Brown
and C. D. Forde. London: Oxford University Press. Pp.
252-284.
Fortes, M., R. W. Steel, and P. Ady
1948. Ashanti survey, 194~: An experiment in social research.
Geographical Journal, 110: 4-6.
Manoukian, Madeline
1950. The Akan and Go-Adangme Peoples of the Gold Coast.
Ethnographic Survey of Africa. Western Africa, part I.
Matson, J. N.
1953. Testate succession in Ashanti. Africa, 23: .224-232.
Meyerowitz, Eva L. R.
1952. Akan TradUions of Origin. London: Faber & Faber.
Rattray, R. S.
1923. Ashanti. London: Oxford University Press.
1927. Religion and Art in Ashanti. London: Oxford University
Press.
1929. Ashanti Law and Constitution. London: Oxford University
Press.
Richards, A. I.
1950. Some types of family structure amongst the central Bantu.
In: African Systems of Kinship and Marriage, ed. by A. R.
RadcliJJo-Brown and C. D . Forde. London: Oxford Un.i -
versity Press. Pp. 207- 251.
Steel, R. W.
1948. The population of Ashanti: A geographical analysis. Geo-
graphical Journal, 112: 1--3.
Nayar: Cenrral Kerala
Aiya, V. Nagam
1906. The Traoancore State Manual. Vol. 1. Trivandrum: The
Travancore Government Press.
Aiyappan, A.
1932a. Nayar polyandry. Man, 32, no. 99.
1932b. Nayar polyandry. Man, 32, no. 337.
1934. Nayar polyandry. Man, 34, no. 55.
1935. Fraternal polyandry in Malabar. Man in India, 15: 108-118.
Aiyar, P. R. Sundara
1922. A Treali$e on Malabar and Aliyansantana Law. Rev. by B.
Sita Rama Rao. Madras: Madras Law Journal Office.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 743
Ayyar, K. V. Krishna
1938. The Zamcrins of Calicut. Calicut: Norman Printing Bureau.
Baden-Powell, B. H.
1892. The Land Systems of British India. Vol. 3. Oxford: Claren-
don Press.
Buchanan, Francis (Hamilton)
1807. A Journey from Madras thrOt•gh Mysore, Carwra and
Malabar. Vol. 2. London: B.Jack, Perry and Kingsbury.
Burnell, Arthur Coke ( ed.)
1885. The Voyage of John Huyghen Van Linschoten to the_ East
Indies. From the Old Eng'lish translation of 1598, of the
1596 original of Linschoten's Itinerario. London : Hakluyt
Society Publications, no, 70.
Cocbin Government Press
1938. The Cochin Nayar Act of 1938. Emakulam: Cochin Gov-
ernment Press.
Dames, Mansel Longworth ( ed.)
1921. The Book of Duarte Barbosa. An account of the countries
bordering the Indian Ocean and their Inhabitants, written
by Duarte Barbosa and completed about the year 1518 A.D.
Translated by the Royal Academy of Sciences, Lisbocn .
London: The Hakluyt Society.
Fawcett, F.
1915. The Nayars of Malabar. Madras Government Museum
Bulletin, 3: 3.
Gibb, H. A. R
1929. The Travels of Ibn Battuta. in Asia and Africa., 1325-1354.
London: Routledge and Sons.
Gough, E . K.
1952a. Changing kinship usages in the setting of political and
economic change among the Nayars of Malabar. Journal o0f
the Royal Anthropological Institute, 82: 71-88.
1952b. Incest prohibitions and rules of exogamy in three matri-
lineal groups of tl1e Malabar Coast. International Archives
of Ethnography, vol. 46, no. 1.
1955. Female initiation rites on the Malabar Coast. Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute, 85, pt. 2: 45-80.
1958. Cults of the dead among the Nayars. Journal of American
Folklore, vol. 71, no. 281.
1959. The Nayars and the definition of marriage. Journal of the
Royal Anthropological Institute, 89: 23-34.

Copyrighted material
744 Bibliography

Gray, Albert ( ed.)

1887. The Voyage of Francoi$ Pyrard de Laoal to the East lndes,
the Maldioos, the Moluccas and Brazil. Translated &om
the 3d French edition of 1619. London: The Hakluyt So-
ciety.
Gray, Edward ( ed.)
1884. The Travels of Pietro deUa Valle in India. Vol. 2. First
issued in Rome in 1662. London: The Hakluyt Society.
Hamilton, Alexander
112:1. A New Account of the East Indes. 2 vols. Edinburgh: J.
Mosman.
Innes, C. A.
1908. Malabar and Aniengo. Madras: Madras District Gazetteers.
Iyer, L. K. Anantha Krishna
1909--1912. The Cochin Tribes and Castes. 2 vols. Madras.
1932. Nayar polyandry. Man, 32, no. 320.
Jones, J. W. ( ed.)
1863. Travels of Ludovico di Varthema, A. D. 1~. London:
Halduyt Society Publications, no. 32.
Kerr, Robert ( ed.)
1811. History of the discovery and conquest of India by the Por-
tuguese, between the years 1479 and 1525, &om the origi-
nal Portuguese by Herman Lopez de Castaneda. In: A
General CoUection of Voy,.ges and T~nv,ls. Vol. 2, pp.
292-505. Edinburgh
Logan, William
1887. Malabar. 2 vols. Madras: Government Press. (Reprinted,
with additional papers, in 3 vols., Madras, 1951.)
McCrindle, J. W.
1897. The Christian Topography of Cosmas, an Egyptian Monk
of the Sixth Century A.D. London: The Hakluyt Society.
Major, R. H. ( ed.)
1857. India in the Fifteenth Century. A collection of narratives
of voyages to India. London: The Hakluyt Society.
Menon, C. Achyuta
1911. The Cochin State Manual. Emakularn: Cochin Govern-
ment Press.
Menon, K. P. Padmanabha
1908. Report of the Marumak'kathayam Committee (Enclosure
B). Trivandrum: Government Press.
1933. Hmory of Kerala. 3vols. Emaku!am: Coch.in Government
Press.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 745
Menon, .K. R. Krishna
1894. Report of the Malabar Marriage Commission. Madras:
Government PrP.~~.
Moore, Lewis
1905. Malabar Law and C.ustom. Madras: Government Press.
Murdock, C. P.
1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Nair, K. Kannan
1908. The matrimonial customs of the Nayars. Malabar Quarterly
Review, vol. 7, no. 3.
Nair, K. Madhavan
1941. The Malabar Law Digest and Acts, 1861-1941. Calicut:
The Vidya Vilasam Press.
Nambudiripad, E. M. Sankaran
1952. The National Q11estion in Kerala. Bombay: People's Pub-
lishing House.
Neale, W. C.
1957. Reciprocity and redistribution in the Indian village. In;
Trade and Market in the Early Empires, ed. by K. Polanyi.
Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.
Panikkar, K. M.
1918. Some aspects of Nayar life. Journal of the Royal Anthro-
pological Institute, 48: 254-293.
1929. Malabar and the Portug11ese. Bombay: D. B. Taraporevala
Sons and Company.
1931. Malabar and the D11tch. Bombay: D. B. Taraporevala Sons
and Company.
1945. India and the Indian Ocean. Birkenhead, Eng. : Wil.l mer
Bros. and Co., Ltd.
P• oikkar, T . K. Gopal
1901. Malabar and Its Folk. Madras: G. A. Nateson.
Pillai, T. K. Velu
1940. The Travancore State Manual. Vol. 2. Trivandrum: The
Travancore Government Press.
Rao, M.S. A.
1957. Social Change in Malabar. Bombay: The Popular Book
Depot.
Report of a Joint Commission from Bengal and Bombay
1862. Commission appointed to inspect into the state and comH-
tion of the Province of 1\·lalabar in the years 1792 and 1793.
Madras: Government Press. (Reprint.)

Copyrighted material
746 Bibliography
Report of the Census of India for 1931
1931. Cocbin State. Ernakulam: Cocbin Govern.m ent Press.
Ricci, Aldo
1931. The Travels of Marco Polo in the Thirteenth Century.
Translated into En~lish from the text of L. F. Benedetto,
with an introduction and index by Sir E. Denison Ross.
London: George Routledge and Sons, Ltd.
Richards, A. I.
1950. Some types of family structure amongst the Central Bantu.
In: African Systems of Kinship and Marriage, ed. by A. R.
Radcliffe-Brown and C. D. Forde. London: Oxford Uni-
versity Press. Pp. 207- 251.
Sastri, K. A. N ilankanta
1955. A History of South India. London: Oxford University Press.
Stanley, E. J. (ed.)
1865. A Description of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar in
the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century, by. Duarte Barbosa,
a Portuguese. Translated from an early Spa.nish manuscript
in the Barcelona Library. London: H akluyt Society Pub-
lications, no. 35.
1869. The Three Voyages of Vasco da Gama to India. London:
The Hakluyt Society.
Stephenson, Carl
1942. Medieval Feudalism. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University
Press.
Thurston, Edgar
1909. Castes and Tribes of Southern India. Vol. 5. Madras: Gov-
ernment Press.
Zein-ud-Deen
1833. Tohfut-ul-Muiahideen. An Offering to Warriors Who Shall
Fight in D efence of Religion Against Infidels. Written in
1579, translated by Rowlandson. London: The Hakluyt
Society.
Nayar: North Kerala
Aiyar, P. R. Sundara
1922. A Treatise on Malabar and Aliyasantana Law. Rev. by
Sita Rama Rao. Madras: Madras Law Journal Office.
A yyar, K. V. Krishna
1938. The Zamorins of Calicut. Calicut: Norman Printing Bureau.
Buchanan, Francis (Hamilton)
1807. A Journey from Madras through Mysore, Canara and Mal-
aha.-. Vol. 2. London: Black, Perry and Kingsbury.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 747
Gibb, H. A. R.
1929. The Travels of Ibn Battuta in Asia a.ul Africa, 1325-1354.
London: Routledge and Sons.
Gough, E . K.
1952. Incest prohibitions and rules of exogamy in three matrilineal
groups of the Malabar Coast. International Archives of
Ethnography, vol. 46, no. 1.
1955. Female initiation rites on the Malabar Coast. Journal of the
Royal Anthropological Institute, 85, pt 2: 45-80.
1958. Cults of the dead among the Nayars. Journal of American
Folklore, vol. 71, no. 281.
Hamilton, Alexander
1727. A New Account of the East Indies. 2 vols. Edinburgh:
J. Mosman.
Innes, C. A.
1908. Mawbar and Anfengo. Madras: Madras District Gazetteers.
Logan, William
1887. Malabar. 2 vols. Madras: Government Press.
Major, R. H. ( ed.)
1857. India in the Fifteenth CentunJ. A collection of narratives
of voyages to India. London: The Hakluyt Society.
Menon,K.P. Padmanabha
1933. History of Kerala. 3 vols. Ernakulam: Cochin Government
Press.
Menon, K. R. Krishna
1894. Report of the Malabar Marriage Commission. Madras:
Government Press.
Moore, Lewis
1905. Malabar Law and Custom. Madras: Government Press.
Nair, K. Machavan
1941. The Malabar Law Digest and Acts, 1861- 1941. Calicut:
The Vidya Vilasam Press.
Rao, M.S. A.
1957. Social Changes in Malabar. Bombay: The Popular Book
Depot.
Report of a Joint Commission from Bengal and Bombay
1862. Commission appointed to inspect into the state and condi-
tion of the Province of Malabar in the years 1792 and 1793.
Madras: Government Press. (Reprint.)
Ricci, A.ldo
1931. The Travels of Marco Polo in the Thirteenth Ctmtury. Lon-
don: George Routledge and Sons, L td.

Copyrighted material
748 Bibliography

Tiyyor: North Kerolo

Alyappan, A.
1944. Iravas and culture change. Madras Government Museum
Bulletin, n.s., gen. sec., 5 ( 4).
Gough, E. K.
1955. Female initiation rites on the Malabar Coast. Journal of the
Royal Anthropological Institute, 85, pt. 2: 45-SO.
Logan, William
1887. Malabar. 2 vols. Madras: Government Press. (Reprinted,
with additional papers, in 3 vols., Madras, 1951.)
Nair, K. Madhavan
1941. The Malabar Law Digest and Acts, 1861-1941. Calicut:
The Vidya Vilasam Press.
Moppillo: North Kerolo
Ayyar, K. V. Krishna
1938. The Zamorins of Calicut. Calicut: Norman Printing Bureau.
Buchanan, Francis (Hamilton)
1807. A ]oume1J from Madras through Mysore, Canara and Mal·
abar. Vol. 2. London: Black, Perry and Kingsbury.
Gibb, H. A. R.
1929. The Travels of Ibn Battuta in Asia and Africa, 1325-1354.
London: Routledge and Sons.
Gough, E. K.
1952. Incest prohibitions and rules of exogamy in three matri-
lineal groups of the Malabar Coast. International Archives
of Ethnography, vol. 46, no. 1.
Hamilton, Alexander
1727. A New Account of the East Indies. 2 vols. Edinburgh:
J. Mosman.
Innes, C. A.
1908. Malabar and Anjengo. Madras: Madras District Gazatteers.
Logan, William
1887. Malabar. 2 vols. Madras: Government Press. (Reprinted,
with additional papers, in 3 vols., Madras, 1951.)
Nair, K. Madhavan
1941. The Malaba·r Law Digest and Acts, 1861- 1941. Calicut:
The Vidya Vilasam Press.
Variation in Matrilineal Systems (Introduction and chops. 10-16)
Ayyar, K. V. Krishna
1938. The Zamorins of Calicut. Calicut: Norman Printing Bureau.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 7 49
Baden-Powell, B. H.
1892. The Land Systems of British Indw. Vol. 3. Oxford: Claren-
don Press.
Buchanan, Francis (Hamilton}
1807. A ]oumey from MadrM through Mysore, Canara and Mal-
abar. Vol. 2. London: Black, Perry and Kingsbury.
Busia, K. A.
1951. The Position of the Chief in the Modern PoUtical System
of Ashanti. London: Oxford University Press.
Cabaton, A.
1911. Java, Sumatra and Other Islands of the Dutch East Indies.
Translated and with a preface by Bernard Miall. London:
T. F. Unwin.
Cole, Fay-Cooper
1936. Family, clan and phratry in Central Sumatra. In: Essays in
Anthropology Presented to A. L. Kroeber, ed. by R. H.
Lowie. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pp. 19-27.
1945. The Peoples of Malaysta. New York: D. Van Nostrand.
Colson, E.
1951. The Plateau Tonga of Northern Rhodesia. In: Seven Tribes
of British Central Africa, ed. by E. Colson and M. Gluck-
man. London: Oxford University Press. Pp. 94-162.
De Cleene, N.
1935. Les chefs indigenes au Mayombe. Africa, 8: 63-75.
1937. La famille.dans L'organisation sociale du Mayombe. Africa,
10: 1- 15.
DeJong, J. P. B. De Josselin
1951. Minangkabau and Negri Sembllan. Socio-political structure
in Indonesia. Leiden: E. Ijdo.
Eggan, Fred
1949. The Hopi and the lineage principle. In: Social Structure,
Essays Presented to A. R. RadcTttfe-Brown, ed. by Fred
Eggan and Meyer Fortes. London : Oxford University Press.
Pp. 121- 144.
1950. The Social Organization of the Western Pueblas. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E., and Meyer Fortes ( eds.}
1940. African Political Systems. London: Oxford University
Press.
Forde, C. D.
1931. Hopi agriculture and land ownership. Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Institute, 61: 357-406.

Copyrighted material
750 Bibliography
1948. Habitat, Economy and Society. 6th ed. London: Methuen.
Fortes, Meyer
1949. Time and social structure: An Ashanti case study. ln: So-
cial Structure, Essays Presented to A. R. Radcliffe-Brown,
ed. by Fred E~an and Meyer Fortes. London: Oxford Un.i-
versity Press. Yp. 54-84.
1950. Kinship and marriage among the Ashanti. ln: African Sys-
tems of Kinship and Marriage, ed. by A. R. Radcliffe-
Brown and C. D . Forde. London: Oxford University Press.
Pp. 252-284.
1959. Primitive kinship. Scientillc American (June), pp. 147-158.
Fortune, R. F.
1932. Sorcerers of Dobu. London: Routledge and Co.
Fried, M. H.
1957. The classi6cation of corporate unillneal descent groups.
Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 87: 1-29.
Gladwin, T., and S. B. Sarason
1953. Truk: Man in paradise. Viking Fund Publications in An-
thropology, no. 20.
Goodenough, W. H.
1951. Property, kin and community on Truk. Yale University
Publications in Anthropology, no. 46.
Gough, E. K.
1956. Brahman kinship in a Tamil village. American Anthro-
pologist, 58: 826-853.
1959. The Nayars and the deJlnition of marriage. Journal of tlle
Royal Anthropological Institute, 89: 23-34.
Hill, W. W.
1940. Some aspects of Navaho political structure. Plateau, 13:
23-28.
Hoebel, E. Adamson
1954. The Law of Primitive Man. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
Innes, C. A.
1908. Malabar and Aniengo. Madras: Madras District Gazet-
teers.
Leacll, E. R.
1958. Concerning Trobr!and clans and the kinship category •tabu.•
In: The Developmental Cycle In Domestic Groups, ed. by
Jack Goody. Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology.
Vol. 1.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 751
Levy, M. J., Tr.
1949. the Family Revolution in Modern Chino. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Loeb, Edwin
1934. Patrilineal and matrilineal organization in Sumatra. Pt.
2: The Minangkabau. American Anthropologist, 36: 25-56.
Logan, William
1887. Malabar. 2 vols. Madras: Government Press. (Reprinted,
with additional papers, in 3 vols., Madras, 1951.)
Malinowski, Bronislaw
1922. Argonauts of the Western Pacific. London: Routledge and
Sons.
1926. Crime and Punishment in Savage Society. London: K. Paul,
Trench, Trubner and Company, Ltd.
1935. Coral Gardens and Their Magic. Vol. 1. New York: Amer-
ican Book Company.
Marsden, William
1811. The History of S.umatra. London: Longman, Hurst, Reese,
Orne and Brown.
Mitchell, J. Clyde
1951. The Yao of Southern Nyasaland. In: Seven Tribes of British
Central Africa, ed. by E. Colson and M. Gluckman. London:
Oxford University Press. Pp. 292-353.
1956. The Yao Village. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Murdock, G. P .
1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.
1957. World ethnographic sample. American Anthropologist, 59:
664-687.
Nair, K. Madhavan
1941. The Malabar Law Digest and Acts, 1861-1941. Calicut:
The Vidya Vilasam Press.
Nambudiripad, E. M. Sankaran .
1952. The National Question in Kerala. Bombay: People's Pub-
lishing House.
Polanyi, Karl
1944. The Great TrailS/ormation. New York: Rinehart & Company,
Inc.
Rattray, R. S.
19'29. Ashanti Law and Constitution. London: Oxford University
Press.

Copyrighted material
752 Bibliography
Richards, A. I.
1939. Land, Labour and met in Nvrthern Rhodesia. London:
Oxford University Press. {Reprinted 1951.)
1940a. Bemba Marriage and Present Economic Conditions. Liv-
ingstone: Rhodes-Livingstone Institute.
1940b. The political system of the Bemba tribe. In: African Polit-
Ical Systems, ed. by E. E. Evans-Pritchard and Meyer Fortes.
London: Oxford University Press. Pp. 83-120.
1950. Some types of family structure amongst the Central Bantu.
In: African Systems of Kinship and Marriage, ed. by A. R.
Radcliffe-Brown and C. D. Forde. London: Oxford Uni-
versity Press. Pp. 207- 251.
1951. The Bemba of North-Eastern Rhodesia. In: Seven Tribes of
British Central Africa, ed. by E. Colson and M. Gluckman.
London: Oxford University Press. Pp. 164-193.
1956. Chisungu: A Girl's Initiation Ceremony among the Bemba
of Northern Rhodesia. London: Faber & Faber.
Sahlins, Marshall D .
1958. Social Stratification in Polynesia. Seattle: University of
Washington Press.
Schrieke, Bertram
1955. Indonesian Sociological Studies. 2 vols. The Hague: W. van
Hoeve.
Service, Elman R.
1958. A Profile of Primitive Culture. New York: Harper & Broth-
ers.
Sumatra Handbook
1920. Handbooks prepared under tbe direction of the Historical
Section of the Foreign Office, no. 83. London: H. M. Sta-
tionery Office.
Titiev, Mischa
1944. Old Oraibi: A study of the Hopi Indians of Third Mesa. Pa-
pers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and
Ethnology, Harvard University, vol. 22, no. 1. Cambridge,
Mass.: Peabody Museum.
Turner, V. W.
1955. The spatial separation of generations in Ndembu village
structure. Africa, 25:
1957. Schism and Continuity In an African Society. Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
Van Leur, J. C.
1955. Indonesian Trade and Society. The Hague: W. van Hoeve.

Copyrighted material
Bibliography 753
White, Leslie A.
1949. The Science of Culture. New York: Farrar, Straus.
1959. The Evolution of Culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Cros,s..cultural Comparisons
Driver, H. E.
1956. An integration of functional, evolutionary, and historical
theory by means of correlations. Indiana University Pub-
lications in Anthropology and Linguistics, Mem. 12.
Gurdon, P. R. T.
1914. The Kha.sls. London: Macmillan and Company.
Hart, C. W. M., and Arnold R. Pilling
1960. The Tiwi of North Australia. New York : Henry Holt, Inc.
Marshall, Harry I.
1922. The Karen people of Burma: A study in anthropology and
ethnology. The Ohio State University Bulletin, vol. 26, no.
13. Contributions in History and Political Science, no. 8.
Murdock, G. P.
1949. Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company.
1953. Ethnographic Bibliography of North America. 2d ed. New
Haven: Human Relations Area Files.
1957. World ethnographic sample. Ameriean Anthropologist, 59:
664-687.
1959. Africa, Its Peoples and Thei·r Culture History. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Playfair, A.
1909. The Garos. London: David Nutt.
Sahlins, Marshall D.
1960. Evolution: specific and general. In: Evolution and Culture,
ed. by Marshall D. Sahlins and Elman R. Service. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Seligman, Charles G., and Brenda Z. Seligman
1911. The V eddas. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
Steward, Julian H. ( ed.)
1946-1959. Handbook of South American Indians. 7 vols. Bureau
of American Ethnology Bulletin 143.
Steward, Julian H ., and Louis C. Faron
1959. Native Peoples of South America. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Vroklage, Bernardus A. G.
1952. Ethnographie der Belu in Zentra~Timor. 3 vols. Leiden:
E. J. Brill.

,.· .

Copyrighted material
 Index

Copyrighted material
 Index

Affines: in Asbanti, ~ hypotheses

oonceming relatlonshlps ·between,
lJ!keenamong Nayan, 352-353, 379;
sister and brother, 597-600;
602--$13; among Mapplllas, 434; In T10brland islands, 249
among Navaho, 160-164; among
Nayars, 361. 402-100: nmong Plateau
Tonga, 88-89; In relntion to matri- Bemba, 44~. ~ ecology, 524; kinship
lineal descent groups, !J!; among relations Ips, 580; matrilineal descent
Tiyyars, 410; among Trobriand Is- groups, 533, !534 ~ political <tn.c-
landers, 256; among "Trukese, 2.30. ture, 528; resldc~cc pattcms, 546 556
Alternate generations: among Ndembu, Bridewealth: among Mappillas, 429; In
~ among Plntcnu Toot•· 538: matrlllncal systems, 21-22; among
social equation of, ~ 01~02· Marombe, 566; among Navaho, 120-
among Yao, sal! 121. 587· among Ndembu, 566:
Asbanti, 446, 450: allines, 293; author- amocg Pl~tcau Tonga, !!!!. 566; and
ity in lineages of, 284, S05-l>OO; clans, residence patte rns, 564, 719; among
282· cross-cousin maniage, ~; Tiyyus, ill
ecology, 271. 461; economy, 4111.;
grandparents, 292; household, 2Ba;
b:ahcrit~r)~ 28.5; lchuh.tp re1~tion. C:attlA: ant' m.Atrilineal descent. A64·
ships, 290-293, 587; ldnship termi- among Plutcau Tonga, ~ 5&51
nology, 293-297: land use, 265; law, Chiefs: Ashantl, 27~280, 469, 481,
275, 506: lineages, g§!. 263. m 505-5()6; Bomba, 528; Hopi, 466: In
%Itt 5()5...506; marrlngo, 290-292:
· 'tory system, 277· motherhood,
ICc~o., 3(11. 385; Mayombe, 479. 504i
Ndombu, 526; Trobriand, 235-236,
291; mother's bro~r, gjlli para- 23~0. 467, 479, 501--503; TrUJ(ese,
mount chief, 276: paternal kin, 292· 233. ~ ~ Yao, 521
patrilineal linkages, 287· political Clans, 453; Asbantl, 262.; Mappllla, 419·
structure, 271-261; ~sYnY· 290; Navaho, 108, IC$-119, 181-184, 185-
residence patterns, 269, 547- !.!!fu Nayar, 323, 388; Plateau Tonga,
548 560-S61: siblings, m slaves, 1l!::1l.; Tiyyar, ~ Trobriand, 236--
237: Trukcsc, 203
265; social stratlHcaUon, 279; succes-
sion, 279. 265: trade, m villages, Cross·a>u.sln marriage: in Ashanti, 290i
incidence of, 61W22; among Map·
278. 2ll7
Allthority: of Ashnntl chiefs and lineage pillas, 423; among Nayars, 365. 401-
heads, 276, 284; dOmC$tlC, 6--7: do- 402· among Plateau Tonga, llil::lll.;
mestic, among Naynrs, aal!; domestic, among Tlyyars,
lands. 2:15 -
m In T robriand Is-
among Plateau Tonga,~ of males In
matrilineal systems, 27- 28; In matri- Comparative stlldles, 445
lineal descent groups, H 451--452, Culturol c''Olution, 657~58
498--518· wcaiCness ol,lit Navaho
local and kinship $""'P'· 119, ua
Avoidance relationships: be~ al- Descent gro<1ps: ~tant ~eatures of, fu
liDes, 60'2-{113; among Navaho, 146-- deliDed, ~ dcscnbed, ~

757
758 Index
Descent units: defined, 4 ogy,299-302,385-386,463;economy
Density: lack of close relation to level of of villages in, 314; history of, 302-
productivity, 465 305, 385; land tenure in, 307,309,315,
Division of labor: Navaho, 141; Nayar, 316; law, 319; Muslims of, 313; poli-
338, 463; Tiyyar, 410; Trobriand, tical structure, 307, 386: royal lin-
236, 241; on Trulc, 218 eages of, 307; slaves in, 311; trade,
Divorce, 596; among Mappillas, 426, 304-305, 313, 315-316, 415: villages,
429; among Plateaa >ronga, 67; 307-308, 314, 387; village headmen,
among Tiyyars, 413; among Trukese, 307-308: warfare, 317
213 Kings: Ashantl, 489: Bemba, 528: Ke-
rala, 475: Minangkabau, 470
Kinship relationships: related to the
Ecology: Ashanti, 271, 461; Bemba, form and functions of matrilineal
524; defined, 447; Hopi, 149; of Ke- descent groups, 517-'597
rala, 299-302, 385-386, 463; May- Kinship terminology: Ashanti, 293-297;
ombe, 460; Minangkabau, 462; Nav- Mappilla, 439; Navaho, 172-179,
aho, 98, 522; Ndembu, 523; Plateau 196-200; Nayar, 380-382, 403-404:
Tonga, 57-60, 523; Trobriand, 234- Plateau Tonga, 87-90; Tiyyar, 414;
235, 460; of Truk, 202, 459; Yao, 523 Trobriand, 260-268: Trukese, 221-
Economy: Asbanti, 461; deflned, 447; 225; types of, found with matrilineal
Hopi, 459; of Kerala, 463; Mayombe, systems, 707- 715
460; M.inangkabau, 462; Navaho,
522; Ndembu, 523; Plateau Tonga,
523; of Trobriand Islands, 459; of Leviratic marriage, 432
Trulc, 459; Yao, 523 Land tenu_re: io Ashanti, 283; in Kerala,
Elementary family: not an Institutional- 314, 316, 391, 405; among Navaho,
Ized group among Central Kerala 102, 130-131: among Plateau Tonga,
Nayars, 363, 595 49: in Trobriand Islands, 244; on
Truk, 204, 206
Law: AshantJ, 506; Bemba, 524; Hopi,
498; ln Kert\ln, 514: Mayornbo, 565J
Father: Ashantl, 291; defined, S; Map- Minangkabau, 510; Navaho, 522;
pWa, 431; in matrilineal societies, 14- Ndembu, 526: Plateau Tonga, 522;
15, 22--24; Navaho, 166-167; Nayar,
363---:l64, 400; among Plateau Tonga, Trobriand, 503: Trukese, 501; Yao,
527
74-60; Tlyyar, 413; Trobriand, 247- Lineages: Ashanti, 281, 264, 481, 505-
249; on Trulc, 224
506: Bemba, 533, 534, 543; defined,
453; fission and segmentation of, 456;
Hopi, 477, 496-498; Mappilla, 419-
Hopi, 446, 450; ecology and economy, 420, 487, 514-'515: Mayombe, 479,
45~0; kinship relationships, 583; 504-'505; MinanJZ)cabau, 463-466,
matrilineal descent groups, 477, 496- 509-510; Nayar, 324-334, :rl2-377,
498; residence patterns, 556; political 390, 511-'518: Ndembu, 535, 537;
structure, 466 among settled cultivators, 498-SI8;
Tiyyar, 406: Trobriand, 238, 479,
501-'503; Trukese, 477, 498-S01; Yao,
Joint estate: existence of, with settled 535, 536
subsistence cultivation, 451
Joking relationships: Navaho, 149-151;
among Plateau Tonga, 89; Trulcese, MappUias of North Kerala, 313, 415-
230 441, 446, 450: affines, 434: bride-
wealth, 429; castes, 418; clans, 419;
divorce, 426, 429; dowry, 429-430;
Kerala: castes of, 306-313; Christians economy, 414; elementary family,
of, 313; district chiefs in, 307; ecol- 594; fatherhood, 431: history, 415;

Copyrighted material
Index 759
household structure, 423; ldnshlp and irrigation, 667; and pastoralism,
terminology, 439; lineages, 419-4.20, 664; rango of oxamplos of; 33
487, 514-515; maniage, 428-429; Mayombe, 446, 450; bridewcalth, 566;
matrilineal kinship relationships, 427- kinship relationships, 586; matrilineal
428; matrilinOOI property-owning clescent groups, 479, 504-505; resi-
groups, 420; polygyny, 428; prefer- d ence patterns, 547, 560
ential and prohibited marriages, 432, Mmnngkabau, 446, 450; ecology, 46:2;
433; residence patterns, 421, 546, kinsliip relationships, 588-589; matri-
556,558 lineal descent groups, 483-486, 509-
Market syst·e m: effects of, on matrilineal 510; political structure, 470; residence
and on patrilineal descent groups, patterns, 548, 561
64~52 Mc>bile cultivators: absence of joint
Marriage: Asbanti, 290-292; defined, estate among, 454; levels of prodllc-
363; Bemba, 580; Hopi, 583; Map- tivity among, 522; matrilineal descent
pilla, 428-433; Mayombe, 566, 566; groups among. 454-455, 53Z-54,3;
Mioangkabau, 510; Navaho, 120-128, political stroctures of, 526-532
164-166; Nayar, 357-363, 370, 398; Monolineage communities: and matri-
~lateau. :ronga, 63-73; relatio~ship, lineal descent, 27, 715
m matnb.neaf systems, 1~20; Tiyyar, Mother: Ashanti, 291; -child relation-
410; Trobriand, 257- 260; Trukese, ship in patriliuy, contrasted wi'th
213 father-.:hild relationship in matriliny,
Matrilineal descent: defined, 3; not mir- 22-24; defined, 5; Navaho, 11>9;
ror opposite of patrilineal desoent, 7 Naya<, 344-347; Plateau Tonga, 80;
Matrilirienl desoent groups: in Ashanti, T robrland, 246-247; Trukese, 224
281-283,. 481, 505-506; among Mother's brother: Ashanli, 291; Map-
Bemba, 533, 534, 543; and children of pilla, 427; Navaho, 169-170; Nayar,
male members, 23; conditions neces- 348-351; Plateau Tonga, 84; social
sary for survival of, 489-491; cont.rols dislnltcc in relationship with, 600;
exercised! by, over male and over fe-- Trobriand, 252-253; Trukese, 221
male members, 8-9; disintegration of,
95, 631-'652; fission of, 24; functions
of, 519-$20; Hopi, 477, 496-498; in Nambudiri Brahmans, 306; hyperga-
Kerala, 486-489, 509-510; MappU!a, mous unions of, with Nayars, 320-
419-420; Mayombe, 479, 504-505; 323, 383; temples of, 309, 322; vil-
Minangk.abau, 483-486, 509-510; Eages of, 3IJ1
among mobile cultivators, 53Z-536; Na.valto, 454; allines, 157- 164; Apa-
· Navalio, 113-119, 185-187; Nayar, ehean language. of, 98; avoidance re-
323-344, 372-377, 390; Ndembu, lationships, 149-157; bridewealth,
535, 537; Plateau Tonga, 40-41, 95; 567; clan groups, 108, 111; clans,108,
segmentation in, 24, 536-538; among 109-111, 113-119, 181- 186; division
settled sobsistence cultivators, 451- of labor, 141; domestic authority, 1~8;
454; structure of, 33-34, 491-495; ecology, 98, 522; extended family,
Tiyyar, 406; Trobrinnd, 479, 501- 119, 146; father, 166-167; father's
503; Tru.kese, 203,477, 498-501; Yao, sister, 171; grandparents, 171-172;
535 536 history, 98-100; hogan, 108; bouse-
Matrillneal systems: absent in the larger hold, 119, 141; lcinship system, 109-
agricultural states, 692; defined, 3; 201, 578; kinship terminology, 172-
di.lfusion of, 661; ecological distribu- 179, 196-200; land holding, 130-131:
tion of, 062-102; and OShing. 664; in literary sources, 96-97; livestock re-
highland refuge areas, 667; historical duction, 102-103; local clan element,
linh between. 33; and borticultute, 109-111, 113-119; marriage, 1210-
664; ancl bunting and gathering, 664; 128; matriliueal descent groups, 533,
incidence of, as a problem of specific 536, 539; mother, 169; mother's
evolution, 658; incidence of, in the brother, 169-170; patterns of com-
world's ·cultures, 655-706, 725-727; munication among l<insfolk, 157-164;

Copyrighted material
760 Index
Navaho ( oonllnuecl) 60-64; joking relationships, !!fu kin-
poUUcal structure, 525; preferenual ship relationships, 578: ldnshlp terrnl-
and prohibited marriages, 19itl96· oofogy, 87...00· land holding.1l!; mar-
property, I:JG.-139: residence pat- riage, ~ mother's brother, M;
terns, 187 192. ~ ~ sibUngs, neighborhoods, ~ preferential
167-169; social units, !M-!08 and prohibited marriages, 90-91:
Nayar, 446 450: affines, 361-369, ~ political structure, ~ polygyny, !!;!.;
castes, 306-.'liL aaa. of Central Ko- populnt!on and history, 36-40: resi-
rala, 29S-364· chiefs of districts,m dence patterns, 546. ~ simplicity
~ clans, m m cross-cousin of socUi1 structure, ;!!!; vUiage bead-
marriage. 365, 401-402: division of men, ~ 4!!; villages, ~ weak-
labor, 338: domestic au~~J.:
ecology,~ eh:.::toculll•y
m
r· . y, G9G-
ness of authorities, 50
Political organization; Asbantl, 271 281,
59S; fatherhood, 363-364, i2Q; 469; Bomba, 528; deRncd, 447; Hopi,
grondmother, 347: group marr14!iQ: 466· of Kcrala, 307, il§l1. 471; and
351=36.1 370; bypergamy, 363, level of producti>ity, 47H76· M•y-
31~~; kinship relationships, ombe, 468; MinanJtbbau, 41lk Nav-
;!®; ·p terminology, 403-404, aho, 525· Ndcml>u, 526; Plateau
38!bM2· land tenure, 391; law, m Tonga, SZe: TrobriMd, i[l; Trukesc,
Unenges, 323-;324, 38~90, 486. 5.Ll.;. 466: Yao, 527:
Unengo deities, 330: Uneage feUd$. Polygyny; Ashanti, ~ Bomba, 623;
;!;lJ.; linked linc~s, 327-328: mar- general, 622, 718; Mayombe, 504:
riage, 357....:363 ; military organ!· Navaho, 120: Nayar, 357-31!3· Pla-
wtloo, 317-318, a;n. ~ mother, teau Tonga, ~ sororal, 623, 719;
344-347· mothds brother, 348-351;
of North Kcrola, 385-;404· pro-
Tiyyar, 412· Trobriand, 239, m
Tru\ese, 2ll
puberty marriage rite, 328; prohibited Preferentinl marriages, 614-624· Ashantl,
marriages, 401: p=holding Uno- 290: of cross-cousins, 614-622: Map-
ago segments, m resi- pilla, ~ Navaho, !!!§; Nayar, ~
dence patterns, m 378, 393-394, 401-402; Plateau Tonga, 90-91; Tru-
S47, ~ 560 W. royal Unceg.,., kese, 2.Ll
;uz. 372-377: siblings, 352-357 379· Productivity: indicators of the level of,
sorcery, 361· succession to ofD.oe, 37t:. 457--458; level of, dcRncd, 457: and
;n]; village temples, 3.1.0. political structure, 47H76, 531· arod
Ndembu, 446. 454: bridewealth, 566; residence, 55Ch551
ecx>logy, ~ ld.nshlp relatiorubips, Prohibited marriages, 614:624· among
m; matriUneal descent groups, 535, Navaho, 19:tl96: among Nayars, 364,
537, 541; political structure, 526: resi- 401; among Plateau Tonga, 90-91:
dence patterns, 547. 560. among Tru~ese, .213

Patrilineal desoent: defined, 2.:3.

Pbratries: described, 453
Plateau Tonga, ~ affines, !l!!:::8l!; ago-
groupings, lH; breakdown of matri-
Uncal groups among,~ bridowcnlth,
all. 566; brotherhoOd paets,li!!; catOe,
5~ came-links, !!Q; clans, ~
~. !!1; city season camps, ~
ecoi"'\Y• 57-00. ~ father, ~
father s sister, 67; father's matriUneal
group, 11. !!Z. ill; generation dilfer-
cncc$ and their slgniGcanoe, ~
geographical mobillty, !![; hamlets,
~ homesteads, g; households,

Co~ynqhted ma na1
Index 761
4S-51. 6(}...64, ll!i, 546. 563: and 305, 313-316. 415: among Navaho,
political centrallzation, 576: and set- !lfu among Plateau Tonga, !lQ; on
tled subsistence cultivation, 452: Tro- Truk, 203
briand, 239-240: Tiyyar, 408-409: T:robriand Islanders, 446. ~ afllnes,
Trukese, <>14- "17 256: chiefs, 235-236; clans, 236-237:
Residential unit: as main economic co~ cralt-speciaUzatioo, 236; cross--cousin
operating unit, 545: types of, with ma- marriage, 245; cross·cousins, 254: dis·
trilineal C:lescent, 546-548 tricts, 235; division of labor, 24lj ecol~
Roya1 lineages: Bemba, 534; io Kerala, 234-235, 460; fatherhood, 247-
307, 372-379; Minangkabau, 463 father's sister, 253: grandparents,
kinship relationships, 585: kin·
temainology, 260-268: marriage,
Settled subsistence cultivation; implica· matrilineal descent groups,
tions of, for matrilineal descent groups, llOil-.')03; motherhood, 24!>-
451-453 247: mothe•r's 252-253; paral-
Sex: rolMilferentiation according to, fi lel cousins, 254; polygyny. 239, 242;
Siblings: Ashanti, 292: MappUla, 427- ranking of sub-clans, 244: residence
428: in matrilineal systems, 12-14; patterns, 244, 547 560; siblings, 249--
Navaho, 167- 169: Nayar, 352-357, 251; village structure, 235. 241 - 242
379: Plateau Tonga, 81-84: social dis· Truk, 4!!!!. 450: alllnes, 230: chiefs, 231:
tance between, 597-600; Trobriand, clans, &Q;!; history, &Q;!; kinship rela-
249--251: Trukese, 226 tionships, 221-231, 582; kinship tenni·
Slaves; in Asbanti, 285; in Kcrala, 317; nology, 221-225; land tenure, 204
among Mayombe, 566; in Minangka- gOO; lineages, 204: marriage, 213:
bau, 470; among Plateau Tonga, ~ matrilineal descent groups, 203-206,
523: among Yao, 521 477, 499--501; personality character-
Sororal polygyny, 623, 719 istics, 231; political structure, 231-
SororaUc marriage; 624 233: preferential and prohibited mar·
Succession: lateral, 707; primogenitural, riages, 213; production and dJstrihu·
!lllll tion, 218-220; residential patterns,
214-218, 546, 5!1l!

Technology; dellned, ill

Tiyyars of North Kerala, 405-414· 446,
4liQ; afllnes, 410; bridewealth, ill; Warfare: Ashanti, 277: Navaho, 141-
clans, 406; cross-cousin marriage, ill; 142· Nayar, 317-318, 337. 366; Tro-
div;,ion of labor, 410; divorce, 413; briand, 235
economy, 4~06; elementary farnUy, Widow inheritance, 626.
414, 593; fatherhood, 413; inherit- World Ethnographic Sample, 719--725
ance, 408; kinship tenns, 414; land
tenure., 405i marriage, 410; matri-
lineal descent groups, 407-408, 487, Yao, 446. 454: ecology, 523: kinship re-
515: neighborhood and village or- lationships, 581; matrilineal descent
ganizations, 407; polygyny, 412· rc.si- groups, 535-536, 542; residence pat·
<knco patterns, 408-409. 547, 5llll terns, 546. 556. 558; sorority groups.
Trade: in Asbanti, 275; in Kerala, 302- 538; political structure, 521

Copyrighted material
trilineal systems far which literature
is available. Particular attention is
paid Ia the determinants af variation
in descent-group structure, residence,
patterns of interpersonal kinship re·
lationships, and marriage prefer·
ences. PartThree makes cross-cultural
comparisons by selecting more
limited variables, but chooses a
larger number of cases than those
previously discussed and treats the
data statistically.

DAVID M. SCHNEIDER has written

for anthropological journals and has
collaborated in writing Marriage,
Authority and Final Causes, a study
of cross cousin marriage. He is Pro·
fessor of Anthropology, University of
Chicago. KATHLEEN GOUGH has
written on the Nayar and associated
peoples of South India. She is Assist·
ant Professor of Anthropology, Bran·
deis University.
DAVID F. ABERLE has written on the
Navaho, the Hopi, and other groups;
he is Chairman of the Department of
Anthropology, Brandeis University.
ELIZABETH COLSON is the author
of articles and monographs on the
Makah Indians, Plateau Tonga and
the Valley Tonga; she is Professor of
Anthropology, Brandeis University.
GEORGE FATHAUER has written on
the Mohave Indians and is Professor
of Anthropology, Miami University
(Ohio). HARRY H. BASEHART has
written on the Mescalero Apache as
well as the Oneida, and is Professor
of Anthropology, University of New
Mexico.
Lowle's Selected Papers
In Anthropology
Edited by CORA DUBOIS

A •epre~entotive sample of Robert H. lowie's contributions to

o•thropology, I hi~ volume contains thirty-three essays wrillen
between 1911 ond 1955. Six hove not been published before.
lowie, o pioneer ethnographer whose obj~tclive handling of
Of'lthropologic-ol material was instrumental in shaping onthro·
pclogy as a science, was influential in the 5election of the es~
says in the book. ·An author os notoroously disqualified from
properly assessing what he has written,'' t-Ie wrote to his
ed•tor. ·Nevertheless, it is of some psychological interest for
others to learn what he him~elf values as most significant in
his output.··
The essays cover lowies thoughts on kinship and social or ·
gonizotion; literature, language, and aesthetics; the relation
of ethnology to other disciplines; and anthropological theories
ond theorists. Professor A. l. Kroeber, famed anthropologist,
sunmed up the extraordinary scope of lowie's thinking' "Per·
hops o tenth of lowie's 300 titles-apart from probably some
200 reviews-lie outside anthropology in subject-on philo~·
ophy, general science, belles· lett res, aesthetics or biography."
Cora DuBois, both a student and fri~tnd of lowie, is lemur-
roy Professor of Anthropology at Harvard University.

5:<4 pages $10.00

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS

B..keley 4, Colifomio