Qk / T5964 JOURNAL (fr ETHNOBIOLOGY Is the Frailejon a Life Form or an Unaffiliated Generic?: Examining the Rank of an Endemic Paramo Plant — Zent and Zent Gitksan Plant Classification and Nomenclature — Johnson Ethnobotanical Overview of GOGD (Allium ramosum L.): A Traditional Edible Wild Plant Used by Inner Mongolians — kKhasbagan et ai. Plant Species (Poaceae, Asteraceae, Fabaceae and Solanaceae) at an Archaeological Site in the Southern Argentine Puna — Rodriguez Recent Doctoral Dissertations of Interest to Ethnobiologists XVII — Hays The Process and Sociocultural Significance of Gopher Trapping in a Modern Yucatec Maya Community — Hovey and Rissolo Volume 19, Number 2. Winter 1999 JOURNAL STAFF EDITOR: William Balée, Department of Anthropology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70118 mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu) ASSOCIATE EDITOR i cana Alejandro de Avila B., A. P. 533, Oaxaca, Oaxaca C.P. 68000, MEXICO (serbo@anteque eee — STANT. Meredith Dudley, Department of Anthropology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA ( il tulane.edu) BOOK REVIEW EDITOR: Michael K. Steinberg, Department of Geography-Anthropology, University of Southern Maine, Gorham, ME 04038 (mstein@usm.maine.edu) SOCIETY OFFICERS PRESIDENT: Deborah M. Pearsall, American Archaeology Division, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211 PRESIDENT-ELECT: Karen R. Adams, Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Cortez, CO SECRETARY/TREASURER: Virginia Popper, UCLA Institute of Archaeology, Box 951519 Fowler A-210, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1510 CONFERENCE ¢ Mollie S. Toll, Museum of New Mexico, Office of Archaeological Studies, Box 2087, Santa Fe, NM 87504 BOARD OF TRUSTEES Eugene N. Anderson, University of California, Riverside, CA Enrique Salm6n, Fort Lewis College, Durango, Gail Wagner, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC E Past presidents: Steven A. Weber, Amadeo M. Rea, Elizabeth S. Wing, Paul Minnis, Cecil Brown, Catherine S. Fowler, and Nancy J. Turner. Permanent board member panies D. Emslie. The editor, president, president-elect, secretary / treasurer, and EDITORIAL BOARD Eugene N. Anderson, beget 7 sesopapeisinn neiespicndt ore ohepbioaiiiiy China, Maya. Scott Atran, CNRS, Paris, FR I , cognition, history of science, Maya. Brent Berlin, Unversity of mars Athens, GA: nie: th classification, medical ethnobotany, Maya. Robert a e, Jr. tte Botanico, Universidad Nacional Aut6noma de México, México, D.E., MEXICO: ethno- sain xico. H. flee Carr, El a California: zooarchaeology. Nina Etkin, University of Hawaii, Honolulu , HL medical oo the Pacific. Gayle J. Fritz, Washington University, St. Louis, MO: paleoethnobotany. Terence E. Hays, Rhode Isl and College, coniee 7 ethnobiology, Papua New Guin Chris Healey, Northern Territory University, Darw USTRALIA: ethnozoology, panies and New Guinea. Timothy ren Macdonald College of McGill ek Quebec, CANADA: chemical ecology, ethnobotany, East Afr Harriet V. raloilite: McGill University, Quebec, CANADA: ethno/human nutrition, First Nations of Canad Brien A. Meilleur, Center for Plant Conservation, Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO: aL tee plant conservation, ethnobotanical gardens Naomi Miller, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA: paleobotany, ethnobotany, Near “ei Archaeology. Gary Nabhan, Arizona Sonora Desert Museum, Tucson, AZ: ethnobiology, Sonoran desert cu Darrell A. Posey, Oxford Centre for the Environment, ene aes sian Oxford aah ‘Oxfond, ENGLAND: natural resource management ethnoecology, t madeo M. Rea, San Diego, CA: cultural ecology, Sue ilvceacnnniics. Elizabeth J. Reitz, University of Georgia, Athens, = oe Mollie S. Toll, Museum of New Mexico, Santa F historic eth Lal PUUIUIURY. The Journal of Ethnobiology is published semi-annually. Manuscripts for ape and book review sections should be sent to the appropriate editors as listed on the inside back cover of this issue © Society of Ethnobiology ISSN 0278-0771 COVER ILLUSTRATION: Illustration of Maya gopher trap (courtesy Charles Bonscaren). Journal of Ethnobiology MISSOURI BOTANICAL AUG 0) 7 2000 GARDEN LIBRARY VOLUME 19, NUMBER 2 WINTER 1999 CONTENTS ETHNOBIOTICA : IS THE FRAILEJON A LIFE FORM OR AN UNAFFILIATED GENERIC?: EXAMINING THE RANK OF AN ENDEMIC PARAMO PLANT Egleé L. Zent and Stanford R. Zent 143 GITKSAN PLANT CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE Leslie Main Johnson 179 ETHNOBOTANICAL OVERVIEW OF GOGD (Allium ramosum L.): A TRADITIONAL EDIBLE WILD PLANT USED BY INNER MONGOLIANS Khasbagan, Narisu, and Kevin Stuart zi PLANT SPECIES (POACEAE, ASTERACEAE, FABACEAE AND SOLAN- ACEAE) AT AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE IN THE SOUTHERN ARGENTINE PUNA Maria Fernanda Rodriguez ae RECENT DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS OF INTEREST TO ETHNOBIOLOGISTS XVII Terence E. Hays 201 THE PROCESS AND SOCIOCULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF GOPHER TRAPPING IN A MODERN YUCATEC MAYA COMMUNITY Kevin Hovey and Dominique Rissolo 261 BOOK REVIEWS 177, 219, 226, 248, 258 GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS a | ee ae rs ee GE ee “ = _ ~e Ae pe eee ; : J mat ese i Baie) Sar carte na fas mie Behe a ee oe % aa a i peer Serene hin ee yet eee We ates oe - ETHNOBIOTICA y ee | 5 i aes | * h Be 1 ic , Se hl y before being int Yet for many people, the meaning of ethnobiology remains enigmatic. From tropical for- ests to Arctic tundras, in the environs of the lab, archive, and field, ethnobiology in prac- tice seems to exhibit few spatial or temporal restraints. You will find it wherever relations between people and other organisms occur and where such relations are or have been de- scribed. Ethnobiology represents a slice of the subject matter in many fields (anthropology, botany, folklore, history, linguistics, pharmacology, psychology, zoology, and so on). It’s eclectic in geographic and temporal scope, but not nies Gan in ai cs its internal, driv- ing forces. Those driving forces are theories and meth plines, and the scholars and scientists who exemnplity them in their work. y Jounal itl oci ty, a nd th ieties without a jour- nal. Ethnobiol tunate i having both Ethnobiol gy al | wide publi ic interested in issues of ti t, globalization, and Ge is of folks who have both intellectual and atilitarian familiarity i in their daily lives with a remarkable range of plants and animals. That mass appeal, in part, bespeaks a need for more and better training of scholars in ethnobiology. Whereas knowledgeable folks and their corresponding wealth of associated habitats and species undergo increased impoverishment, as the global economy has expanded toward but not in general benefitted them, salvage ethnobiology seems to be an ineluctable trend. If ethnobiologists as a bloc lack the political clout to in- crease the ante on the intrinsic value of folk knowledge and its associated biological rich- ness, they can certainly continue documenting it in prehistory, history, and the present. Someday the valuable stakes in which ethnobiology as a field has invested may be more widely known and appreciated, the subject matter of textbooks for young and older read- ers alike, worldwide. That education could enhance the palpable prospects of remaining cultures, languages, flora, and fauna, whatever losses in these had been sustained today. For ethnobiological documentation to be truly excellent, ethnobiologists should seek training in whatever field their research problems demand competence. A social anthro- pologist is likely to know more about Crow kinship terminologies (and to know that these are fundamentally unrelated to birds) than a myrmecologist, whereas the myrmecologist will likely be more acquainted with the properties of ant venoms. If both were ethnobiologists also, each might need something from the other. The social anthropologist might need data on ant phylogenetics, and the myrmecologist on ant sting rituals. Ethnobiology is a field with a journal and a society but generally speaking it is not a disci- pline (with peril en a peas, and so on), a fact of life students often do not know beforehan gy should stay that way. It is one field where the term Sainte eat is senilesed in an unmistakably bona fide way. As the Journal of vaarenini.) aan its pees a see year), [hope ete same join me in cel- ebrating A of A/VUsL I AtpLY wh ider iced i t ial herein ee ne pene ee Ree ete ei Te, Journal of Ethnobiology 19(2): 143-176 Winter 1999 IS THE FRAILEJON A LIFE FORM OR AN UNAFFILIATED GENERIC?: EXAMINING THE RANK OF AN ENDEMIC PARAMO PLANT EGLEE L. ZENT AND STANFORD R. ZENT Departamento de Antropologia Laboratorio de Ecologia Humana Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cientificas (IVIC) Ado. 21827, Caracas 1020A, Venezuela ABSTRACT.-— The debat the distincti between life form and paaee ie theenetionl oes = as =— The case hs the frailején folk Nona dace gt eee | refers to a group of endemic ut of the high gs ee and ae permanent frost ane ss sed to 4,700 m a.s. 1. Je distributed uth America. The center of origin and dispersion of this botanical group is oy Venezuelan paramo, the precise location of whe fieldwork upon which this anes is Bats. oe and Hemastic identification, head fication. --ashaaai seme use, and ecological association of the frailejon are reviewe polytypic and displays perceptual and taxonomic aspects of both life form and generic ranks. The high salience of this plant from morphological, utilitarian, and ecological points of view may help to explain this structural complexity. This case calls into question the validity and universality of a sharp distinction between the two ra Key words: paramo, frailej6n, ethnobiology, folk biological range, Andean flora. RESUMEN.— El contexto tedrico de este articulo gira alrededor del debate sobre la distinci6n entre los rangos genérico y forma de vida etnobiolégicos. Un intento por definir el rango del taxon StSORANICD lei ies ee la incursion de los — en ’ debat J jon aun grupo de plantas | ist de alt t lpa (entre la linea continua de bosques y la nieve permanente, 2 800-4700 m.s.n.m. di el cual se extiende a lo largo de los Andes del Norte de Suramérica. El centro de origen y dispersion de este grupo botanico se localiza en los paramos venezolanos, justamente donde se llev6 a cabo el trabajo de campo del que provienen los datos de este articulo. Se eer ole las ssrinegeesinamars floristicas bf eave aah on ambiente i y asociaciones ecolégicas destacadas por los habitantes del paramo con respe cto al frailejon. Nuestros datos muestran que la categoria frailején es botanicamente politipica, ademas de presentar aspectos perceptuales y taxonémicos de tanto el rango genérico como del de forma de vida. Tal complejidad estructural podria verse explicada mediante el alto grado de conspicuidad de este taxén desde diversos puntos de vista, morfoldégico, utilitario y ecol6gico. De esta manera se cuestiona la validez de una distincién discreta universal entre los dos rangos. Palab | 4 frailejé6n. etnobiologia. ranzo etnobiolé¢i flora andina = 7 a sf oO wi oO o * 144 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 RESUME.-- Le débat sur la distinction entre les formes de vie biologique et les rangs Eneee sert de = de a pains nee a et —— Nous y décrivons le cas du t rang. Le frailejon se réfert 4 un groupe de plantes endémiques de l’écosystéme de haute altitude paramo (entre la ligne superieure de la foret et la zone de neige permanente, 2800-4700 m), CISHEISE & a sina les Andes du Nord de jhe du Sud. Le centre d’origine itués dans le paramo vénézuelien, précisément la ow a été menée la recherche sur laquelle est basé cet article. Les caractéristiques écologiques et floristiques de l'environnement du paramo y sont décrites et l’identification, la classification, la nomenclature, l'utilisation et l'association écologique y sont passées en revue. Nos données indiquent que la catégorie frailej6n est botaniquement polytypique et présente également les aspects perceptuels et taxonomiques aussi bien des formes de vie biologique que des rangs génériques. L’importance de cette plante du point de vue morphologique, utilitaire et écologique peut peut-étre expliquer cette complexité structurelle. Ce cas met donc en doute la validité et l’universalité de la forte distinction entre les deux rangs. Mots clé fraileion. etl biologi istre etl biologi flore andine I J ~ Oo Oo os s + THEORETICAL BASIS OF LIFE FORM AND GENERIC RANKS The concept of rank is a central element in most theoretical formulations of folk biological classification (Glick 1964; Berlin et al. 1973, 1974; Berlin 1972, 1976, 1978, 1992; Bulmer 1970, 1974; Kay 1975; Hunn 1976, 1977, 1982, 1987; Brown 1977, 1979, 1984, 1987; Randall and Hunn 1984; Randall 1987; Wierzbicka 1985; Atran 1985, 1987, 1993; Atran et al. 1997). The theory of Brent Berlin (1992) de- scribes a hierarchical organization of biological taxa into a minimum of three and a maximum of six major ethnobiological ranks, and this basic taxonomic structure has been confirmed for a considerable number of cultures (cf. Brown 1984). Ethnobiological ranks are conceived as being analogous to the ranks found in sys- tematic biology, in which taxa occupying the same rank are mutually exclusive. The following ranks, ranging from most to least inclusive, have been recognized: kingdom, life form, intermediate, generic, specific and varietal. Taxa of the same ethnobiological rank usually (but not always) occupy the same level in a particu- lar taxonomic structure (Berlin et al. 1973:215; cf. Atran 1993:53). While the notion of rank is an intuitively appealing organizing concept for explaining the obvious hierarchical structures observed in most (if not all) ethnobiological classification systems, the ontological, epistemological, logical, perceptual, and biological status of ethnobiological ranking behavior in general and of some of the individual ranks in particular have been a matter of consider- able debate and disagreement among the principal proponents of ethnobiological theory. The discussion about the naturalness, intellectual motivation, functional- ity, and definitional borders (i.e. intentional and extensional limits) of life form and generic categories has been especially lively and tendentious, marked by sev- eral competing points of view. According to Berlin ( 1976, 1992), ranks are nonarbitrary and psychologically Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 145 real (i.e. not a mere cataloguing device imposed on the data by the analyst), and correspond to distinctly bounded groupings of ethnobiological taxa at different levels of psychological and biological reality according to similar or comparable internal degrees of variation within a category and external degrees of separation between categories. His view of rank makes clear that the ethnobiological domain is discretely partitioned by the folk taxonomist and not perceived in terms of con- tinuous variation. The high degree of correspondence between native genera and scientific species is offered as partial proof of the objective reality of natural discontinuities encoded in folk classifications, whereas instances of noncorrespondence are attributed to external influence by the cultural domain (Berlin 1973). Life form (e.g. tree, vine) is defined as the second most inclusive rank, broadly polytypic, encompassing a few morphotypes, recognized on the basis of a small number of biocharacters, and perceptually natural although it frequently crosscuts phylogenetically valid natural categories, such as Family. The generic category (e.g. oak, maple) is considered the nucleus of the classificatory system, typically the most numerous category, the first recognized by children, implying the naturalness and effortlessness with which it is discriminated, named by pri- mary lexemes, and mostly monotypic. Whereas most folk generics are observed to be taxonomically included within taxa of life form rank, a minority of folk gener- ics appears to be conceptually unaffiliated to life forms. Berlin accounts for the taxonomic irregularity of the unaffiliated generics as resulting from morphologi- cal aberrance (e.g. bromeliads) or special economic importance (e.g. cultigens) (Berlin 1974, 1992). An early alternative viewpoint to the universalist, intellectualist and objectiv- ist perspective of Berlin was offered by Ralph Bulmer, who endorses an integral ecological model of folk biological classification in which the importance of the specific cultural and natural environment in determining the taxonomic space is emphasized (Bulmer 1974:11-2). He considers the higher inclusive taxa (Berlin’s life forms) as largely variable in configuration because local cultural as well as perceptual criteria are used to construct the categorizations. In other words, the generative criteria of categories — cultural significance, use patterns, and ecologi- cal relationships in addition to morphology and behavior — do not produce pancultural patterns because they are dependent on culturally and ecologically specific circumstances which are numerous and variable (Bulmer 1974:20, 1967:6). The highly inclusive taxa are regarded as logically natural, but they may not al- ways be biologically natural (Bulmer 1970:1087; cf. Hunn 1987). Instead, Bulmer argues that mology natural reality is more closely reflected by the lesser — sive taxa which he labels the “specieme,” defined as discontinuities differentiated lexically. This minimal natural unit is described as being segregated not by single characters but on the basis of multiple overlapping definitional criteria: morphological salience, habitat, and behavioral habits such as nourishment, reproduction, etc. (Bulmer 1967, 1970, 1974). This definition is nearly identical to Berlin’s concept of the folk generic. Eugene Hunn (1976) rejects the strict taxonomic framework and instead elabo- rates a more flexible and process-oriented perceptual model of folk biological classification, which considers the structural complexity (e.g. taxonomic anoma- 146 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 lies, like taxonomic structures) and variability of folk biological classification sys- tems to be the product of the empirical perception of the classification space in different environments. Life form and generic categories are distinguished by es- sentially different pace processes: deduction and induction respectively. The life form cat rocesses in the sense of being monothetic, defined by a few abstract features, arbitrary, special-purpose, and artificial in a biological sense. By contrast, the generic category involves induction in being polythetic, a gestalt (i.e. whole image) pattern abstracted from the sharing of many concrete attributes, general-purpose, and natural in a logical sense. The natural perceptual salience of the generic is defined in algebraic terms as the higher criti- cal ratio (CR) of a taxon or its higher inherent stimulus capacity [CR (t) > CR (t + n), where +n indicates a taxon including t or included within it] (Hunn 1976:518- 527). Offering an explanation to the ponderable recurrent non-transitivity of certain reported taxa, Hunn argues that this definition of the generic in terms of CR per- mits a generic taxon to occupy different ranks depending more on empirical phenomena than on theoretical axioms: the non-finite boundaries of taxa are gen- erated by the variable prominence (CR value) of the perceptions. The theoretical problem of the unaffiliated generic is thus resolved as “a situation in which the same taxon is both a generic and a life form... i.e. if CR(x) < CR(y) < CR(z), x, z I “a (Hunn 1976:520). Hunn (1987) later qualifies his position somewhat regarding the perceptual, biological and logical bases of the life form rank. He admits that some life form taxa, notably “grass”, “bird”, and “fish”, display clearly inductive “configurational integrity” similar to moll generics whereas other life forms, such as “herb”, “vine”, “mammal”, and “wug” are indisputably deductive and artificial in nature. Mean- while, “tree” is considered to occupy an intermediate position in a logical and biological sense — that is, lacking the natural configurational integrity characteris- tic of folk generics but nevertheless perceptually compelling. This qualification implies that the perceptual and logical distinctions between life form and generic ranks are not as clear-cut as Hunn himself stated earlier, and instead the differ- ences are more accurately conceived as a continuum ranging from artificial deduction at one pole to natural induction at the other. Thus the question of what rank a taxa should be assigned to may not be a simple either-or choice but rather a matter of degree of conformity to whichever pole. Robert Randall and Hunn (1984), building upon Hunn’s earlier perceptual model, argue that highly inclusive folk biological categories comparable in scope and function to life forms are motivated by recognition of functional (i.e. utility) and ecological (i.e. local biodiversity) criteria in addition to perceptual attributes (i.e. behavior, morphology), and therefore are culturally idiosyncratic constructs. Randall (1976:543-545, 1987) further elaborates his opposition to universalist and essentialist taxonomic thinking in stating that the structure of folk biological clas- sification resembles a perceptual network based on the fuzzy logic of focal or prototypic categories with extended ranges rather than a rigid hierarchical scheme conceived vertically in terms of transitive set inclusion and ey as mutu- ally exclusive classes. P: lity facilitates t of d sharing a range of features through inclusion at peripheral positions of the class Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 147 (ie. categoric membership grading, central nucleus, and extended percepts; see also Gal 1973:206; Ellen 1975:221; Kempton 1978:44). Both higher inclusive and generic categories are said to be characterized by this focal-peripheral logical struc- ture. Randall considers that generics frequently lack the attributes necessary for focal membership in a higher inclusive category and the so-called unaffiliated generics are those displaying unique uses and/or atypical perceptual attributes to the degree that they are completely outside: the ranges of the higher inclusives. Scott Atran, influenced by classic Arist vhilosophy (cf. Mayr 1982; Ruse 1992), reaffirms the universalist, essentialist, ane transitive taxonomic approach to ethnobiological ranking. He refutes Hunn in stating that life form and generic categories are equal in terms of deductive/inductive or monothetic/polythetic logical distinctions, largely because biotaxa of all levels pertain only to essences of kind (i.e. underlying nature) and not actual appearance. Logically necessary fea- tures are imposed on both sorts of taxa and hence there is no vagueness of boundaries at either level. Atran considers the difference between life-form and generic taxa as two-fold: the latter comprise subsets of the former and the life forms divide the conceptual categories of biological domains into a contrastive lexical field. As a result, the lexical system marking the life forms make up fundamentum divisionis, indicating a logical fractioning of the category into fea- tures that are “positive and opposed” along one or more perceptible dimensions. The generics, by contrast, are characterized by a conjunction of features, and thus in order to define a generic it is sufficient that the other generics lack one or more of its attributes. The partitioning of a living kind as a generic represents a logical fundamentum relationis, meaning a relational segregation of bioforms into specific configurations. Morphologically unaffiliated generics, also referred to as monogeneric life forms, display both divisional and relational segregational as- pects and therefore are simply double indexed in taxonomic trees at life form as well as generic ranks (Atran 1985, 1993). The preceding review of the ethnobiological literature makes clear that the concept of rank and in particular the distinction between life form and generic ranks is a topic of widely contrasting opinion. Major disagreements persist re- garding the issues of the fa: bie hen pete sony, —— functionality, transitivity, { of folk biological ranks. Scientific acceptance of one or the other nat viewpoints will depend upon how well the theories conform to the empirical facts uncovered by further field investigations. Studies of endemic bioforms in geographically restricted and eco- logically stressed biomes may be especially revealing here in the sense of testing the outer empirical limits of theoretical explanation by giving due consideration to the so-called special or exceptional cases. Accordingly, the present article con- siders the case of the frailejon folk taxon among Venezuelan Paramero peasants in the context of the debate on ethnobiological rank. We consider the frailején to be especially pertinent to this debate because it appears to display diverse percep- tual, logical, and biological features which have been associated with both life form and generic ranks. Thus our specific aim is to describe what these features are and analyze whether the frailejoén should be defined as a life form or an unaf- filiated generic. 148 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PARAMO VEGETAL BIOTYPES: THE CAULIRROSULA The high altitude ecosystem known as pdramo in the northern Andes exhibits a unique vegetation of about 3,000-4,000 species of vascular plants, of which 60% are considered to be endemic (Luteyn 1992:6). Although there are different defini- tions of paramo, based on floristic, geomorphological, climatic, physionomic and human features (see Lopez 1993, 1995 for different notions of paramo), plants are one of the most conspicuous features and not surprisingly constitute one of the diagnostic criteria for distinguishing this tropical high mountain zone. The recur- rent presence of certain botanical types throughout the paramo habitat points to the high biological potentiality in terms of species richness (Cuatrecasas 1968:165) as well as the ecological restrictiveness in terms of mophophysiological develop- ment. The most common life forms are: Caulirrosula (caulescent rosette), Cryptofrutex (partially hidden, dwarf or prostrate woody shrub), Herba (herba- ceous plant), Fascigramina (bunch grass), Proteretum (mat or cushion plants such as moss, lichen and hepatica), Arbor (tree, usually small or even dwarfed but with distinct trunk and crown), Frutex (woody shrub) and Suffrutex (subshrub: woody at the base, herbaceous above) (Cuatrecasas 1968:166-69; Heldberg 1992:15; Monasterio 1980:22; Troll 1968:29; Lauer 1979:33). The botanical element is clearly emphasized in biogeographical descriptions of the paramo as a high open humid region characterized by the dominating pres- ence of tussock, cushion and rosette plant communities (Lauer 1979:29-30). These vegetationally distinct landscapes are discontinuously distributed in high eleva- tion islands, between 2,800 and 4,700 meters above sea level (Vuilleumier 1979:186; Monasterio & Vuilleumier 1986:3), mainly throughout the Northern Andes of South America (Lauer 1979:29; Azocar 1980:16) but with sparser formations extending to Costa Rica in the north (Cordillera de Talamanca, 11° N) and to Hudnuco prov- ince, Peru in the south (8° S). Isolated paramo biomes are also found in Panama, on the humid cesteen ee slopes of Peru and Bolivia (Cleef 1978:367) and atop tepuy (tabletop tain) formations in the Guiana Shield (Cleef 1983). Moreover, high mountain regions similar in ecological structure and function to the paramos can be found between the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn on all continents: the Central Andes (punas), East Africa (afroalpine level), Malaysia, Hawaii, and New Guinea (tropical-alpine level; Troll 1968:29; Lauer 1979:29; Monasterio 1979:117; Monasterio & Vuilleumier 1986:3). It should be mentioned, however, that studies carried out in the Colombian and Ecuadorian paramo have raised questions about the origin of this biome, whether natural or human-made (cf. Balslev & Luteyn 1992; Leegaard 1992; Verweij & Beukema 1992). Specifically, observations of vegetational dynamics in response to fires and grazing give some weight to the hypothesis that human activities ee partly responsible for shaping this particular environment (Ramsay & Oxley 1996). Paramo plant types are commonly characterized by a number of special mor- phophysiological features that crosscut phylogenetic lines and are thus explained as resulting from adaptive convergence to the stressful climatic conditions pre- vailing in this environment (Jahn 1931:105; Billings 1974:403; Mani 1980: 127). Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 149 Significant climatic parameters include: considerable diurnal fluctuation of tem- perature (up to 25°C difference between minima and maxima), ocurrence of frost, dry atmosphere, high intensity and rapid change of ultraviolet solar radiation, and strong winds. Such conditions, along with highly drained soils, exacerbate the potential dehydration of plants and therefore select for species with persistent foliage and xeromorphic structure, despite the constantly humid weather (Pittier 1929:29; Tamayo 1958:13-15; Cuatrecasas 1968:165; Heldberg 1992:21). High hu- midity is in fact largely offset by high solar radiation and low atmospheric pressure, and consequently the vegetation cover is specifically designed for efficient ab- sorption and storage of water (Guhl 1982:43-44). The high rate of evapotranspiration induces the slow and stunted growth of many plants — for example, internodal spaces are often shorter (Pittier 1929:29; Jahn 1931:105; Troll 1968:30), and also exerts selective pressure on leaf size, shape, and structure. In regards to the latter, common morphological traits include: spiral arrangements; spatulate, obovate or oblanceolate overall shapes; lobed or dentate margins; broad apices; pinnate ve- nation; pubescent or tomentose surfaces; coriaceous (i.e. leathery) texture; and thickened epidermic cells (Pifano 1961:124; Guhl 1968:208; Mani 1980:130; Azocar 1980:19). Especially common are the so-called “dwarf” and other low volume spe- cies as well as plant types growing very close to the soil (especially in rocky sites) in order to maximize the capture of heat energy (Budowski 1968:157), as is typical of cushion, cespitose (i.e. tufted), and acaulescent (i.e. stemless) plants. The morphophysiological traits mentioned above overlap not just diverse phylogenetic classes but also different geographical regions, being most prevalent in the provenance zones of the contemporary paramo species. Evidence of open habitats populated by paramo-like vegetation is found in pollen data of the Middle Eocene (Van der Hammen & Cleef 1986:172). However, it is believed that the most likely direct precursors of paramo vegetation evolved as early as five million years ago in the Early Pliocene (Van = Hammen & Cleef 1986:173). The first indica- tions of a definitely paramo tion date to the Late Pliocene or Early Pleistocene geological periods, around 1. 9 million years ago (Van der Hammen 1979:55; Van der Hammen & Cleef 1986:175, 182), and point to a neotropical origin. Later, bo- tanical traits originating from the holartic or austral-antarctic regions appear on the scene (Van der Hammen & Cleef 1986:175; Monasterio 1980:22). Both groups of plants successfully adapted to the paramo environment, the neotropicals to the low temperatures and the holartics/austral-antarctics to the tropical thermal re- gime, in which the diurnal range of temperature far exceeds the annual range. It is the neotropical Caulirrosula life form (perennial caulescent rosette) that is of most interest to us here. The presence of this plant type distinguishes the high elevation ecosystems of the tropics from those of the temperate latitudes (Smith 1981:1). Smith (1981) affirms that it evolved independently in the high mountain belts of Eastern Africa (Senecio, Carduus, and Lobelia), South America (Espeletia and Puya), Hawaii (Argyroxiphium), and New Guinea (Cyathea), but is not found in the extra-tropical highlands. In the Northern Andes, it is represented primarily by members of the genus Espeletia (Asteraceae), and is deemed the most distinctive biotype of the paramo biome (Cuatrecasas 1968:167, 1979, 1976:43-4). This plant appears in the form of large rosettes (10 to 100 cm diameter), with whitish-grayish 150 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 to yellow-gold, pubescent to tomentose (although a few species are glabrous), densely basal or radical oblanceolate leaves (10 to 70 cm long, 3 to 50 cm broad), and with usually yellow (although orange-reddish in some species) scapose and bracteolate flowers. They are either acaulescent or erect (unbranched woolly trunks), reaching heights up to 10 meters in undisturbed paramo. The Caulirrosula is also represented by some plants of the genus Puya (Bromeliaceae) but its pres- ence in the paramo is less common than Espeletia. The genus Espeletia displays an extraordinarily high degree of diversification and endemism, g about 150 species (Luteyn et al. 1992:74). As more speci- mens of this group of plants were collected, analyzed and described by José Cuatrecasas (1934, 1954), the leading taxonomic expert of the group, significant ff in habit and inflorescence were discovered and consequently the group was reclassified into seven distinct genera based on the differential sharing of cer- tain floral, fruit and other characters. The entire grouping was then reconsidered as a new sub-tribe, the Espeletiinae (Helianthae tribe, Asteraceae family; Cuatrecasas 1976:47). The seven genera (Carramboa, Tamania, Libanothamnus, Ruilopezia, Coespeletia, Espeletiopsis, and Espeletia) be oes to various taxonomi- cally significant growth forms: three types of trees, four cat of acaulirrosula (acaulescent rosette), and two kinds of caulicrositia LG of which is subdivided into two es). The latter group Ir include tic “form of frailejon” (Cuatrecasas 1976:45; Robinson 1981: 35): The biotype of ‘caulirrosula’ with short or long stem, is the most character- istic feature of the plant life of the high tropical mountains. It accounts for the physiognomy of the most part of the paramo vegetation (Cuatrecasas 1976:46). The Espeletiinae inhabit an area stretching about 1,700 km from Llanganatis, Ecuador to El Avila, Venezuela, with the largest concentration of taxa being found in the Sierra Nevada de Mérida in Venezuela (Cuatrecasas 1986:274). All seven genera, four of which are endemic, as well as 65 endemic species are found in the Venezuelan Andes alone (see Figure 1). Thus biogeographical evidence supports the hypothesis that this latter area corresponds to the center of origin and disper- sion of this botanical sub-tribe (Cuatrecasas 1986:275; Robinson 1981:35). The genus Polymnia, which typically inhabits tropical mountain forest zones, is believed to be ancestral to the sub-tribe. E. neriifolia Sch. Bip., one of the 15 arborescent forms with a currently wide distribution, has been identified as the most primitive mem- ber (Smith 1981:2). Sometime during the Pliocene or Pleistocene, the Andes reached their present height (Schubert & Vivas 1993:29, 307; James 1975:62-63; Vuilleumier & Ewert 1978) and probably about the same time an ancestor of the Espeletiinae evolved “along the Venezuelan Andes” (Cuatrecasas 1986:275). Early to Middle Pleistocene sedi- ments from the Venezuelan High Andes have been analyzed for paleoecological reconstruction (Rinaldi 1993:200; Salgado-Labouriau 1986:203). The principal sources of pollen and spores from this period are the Asteraceae and Gramineae, including members of the Espeletiinae. It is believed that the proto-Espeletiinae were peren- nial, evergreen, woody, shrubby, branched, and had xeromorphic foliage (Rinaldi Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 151 GAR ! 86 B E AN S € A Ca. - Carramb nn Co. - CoEspeletia - Esp a ; 1 Paice. i ‘ 2 wo Vig ¢- So ar ne es Waa | (i; ? Jf) \Maracaiag__ La | ae So PY 7 ; ig cf v% "em ’ V E ~ ( ) ; Co aa. NEF ZU*SE LA Li-cg re ~. L, \ 4 oly CES ¢ - - H ( \ nS dae Wy) Por 2 (ans im. 4 ; : \ 19) £ . Pa V CARIBBEAN SEA ss ~ Ll A Ss f Es; is os, \ j Esp.to. {ye i 2 | rd CaLi. a Fadil { om re. a y ‘a gee a i ny + Ta ee 7 VE NSE|ZUELA ) E = * - sp. ( % COLOMBIA 4 \ COLOM\B1 A i OO Km. ‘ y a grea BRAZIL i FIGURE 1.- Geographic Distribution of the Espeletiinae Sub-Tribe. 1993:201-202). Isolated islands of paramo environment were probably invaded by a proto-Espeletiinae, “presumably by genotypes of arborescent forest species similar to E. Neriifolia- producing numerous isolated populations. This comparative isola- tion combined with new selective forces imposed by the paramo environment, apparently contributing to extensive speciation” (Smith 1981:3). e seven genera of the Espeletiinae exhibit various bioforms and occupy con- fined areas. The genus Tamania for example is monotypic and restricted to very particular areas; it consists of medium-sized trees and is found only in the paramo of the Tama-El Cobre massif (Cuatrecasas 1986:275) on the Venezuelan-Colom- bian border. Seven arboreal species belonging to the genus Carramboa are restricted to the cloud or humid mountain forest of the Mérida Andes (Cuatrecasas 1986: 286) in the States of Trujillo, Mérida, Lara, and Tachira 3 in hanashars The genus Libanothamnus is characterized by trees of d shows a very wide distribution, from the Colombian Tama paramo, throughout the whole Ven- ezuelan Andean Cordillera, and even appearing in the Venezuelan Coastal Cordillera. The characteristic form of Ruilopezia is a branched or monocarpic 152 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 caulirrosula and it is restricted to the ecotone between the paramo and the mon- tane forests, with the exception of four species that inhabit open paramo, from Lara State, Venezuela in the east to the Colombian border in the west (Cuatrecasas 1986:281). The genus | Coespeletia, described as a polycarpic (i.e. producing mul- tiple fruits) biotype, is endemic to Mérida State, Venezuela with some species adapted to the dry desertic paramos (Cuatrecasas 1986:298). The Espeletiopsis are also characterized by the caulirrosula form, but some individuals reach up to 12 meters, “raising their sclerophyllous rosette to the top of the canopy” (Cuatrecasas 1986:283), in cloud forest, whereas others grow mostly in the more open paramos. Finally, the Espeletia, which is of prime concern to us here, is “the most representative genus of the ecological concept of paramo” (Cuatrecasas 1986:288). Espeletia is a gregarious genus specially adapted to cold and humid habitats, developing best in the paramo proper even though it has a low repro- ductive rate. It usually appears as the dominant species in altitudinally or topographically circumscribed, spatially segregated communities (e.g. at the top of peaks), which over prolonged periods may thus differentiate into sub-species or new species (Cuatrecasas 1986; Sturm & Rangel 1985; Smith 1981; Robinson 1981). About 45 species of Espeletia are reported for the Mérida paramos (Vareschi 1970:293), which correspond to the area of fieldwork described in this article. Some of these species are endemic to localized areas and others also exhibit a very re- stricted distribution. RESEARCH SITE AND FIELD METHODS The fieldwork on which this research is based took place in two glacial valleys in the paramo mountain level ranging from the timberline to the border of the snowcap. The two localities are situated in the northernmost part of the Northern Andes in the Mérida Cordillera, Venezuela (7°30'-10°10' N and 69°20'-72°50' W; Schubert 1980:29), which is divided into a Northern Range (Culata) and a South- ern Range (Nevada) (see Figure 2). The first locality, the Las Gonzalez valley (3100-3800 masl) in the Conejos paramo extends seven kilometers and is located in the northwest sector of the Northern Range. In 1988, the valley had a resident population of 144 people distributed among 22 dispersed homesteads. By 1992 some families had emigrated to another mountain valley or closer to the city of Mérida, and the population was reduced to 84 people. The second locality, the Micarache valley (3000-3700 masl), located within the Llano del Trigo paramo in the south-central part of the Southern Range, is about six kilometers long and is home to 75 people grouped into 12 family compounds. Environmentally, both valleys display the characteristic glacial and periglacial features common through- out the paramo habitat (Schubert 1980). Culturally, the people are monolingual Spanish-speaking peasant farmers wl tain a traditional paramo subsistence- oriented lifestyle, although some market participation has recently been adopted. The contemporary human inhabitants of the paramo, known as Parameros, display a cultural pattern which is likely the result of syncretization processes between Indian and Hispanic populations. The permanent (i.e. year-round) prehispanic human presence in the Venezuelan paramos has not yet been conclu- Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 153 EDO. ZULIA Pmo Piedra Blanca f Pmo de Mucuchies Ap Po PMICARACHE DO. a eter, BARINAS Pe ° 08% { = nv ee a Pui et ye" 4Picq Bolivar Kilometros 5° a © Sn Juan Bautista % - Field Study Sites * MAR CARIBE ; YP J , iu Bailadores x EDO. MERIDA ‘ \ if ; , \ ; SA dN, , %, ae ~\ Pe EDO. TACHIRA \ ws { rr’ \ i r a Li wv i FIGURE 2.— Map of the Field Study Sites and Surrounding areas. sively demonstrated, but archaeological (Wagner 1967, 1973; Rivera 1992), ethnohistorical (Rodiguez Xuarez 1558; AH Mérida 1791, 1803, 1804, 1806, 1807 and 1837; Sim6n 1627) and ethnographic data (L6pez 1992) confirm at least a very longstanding seasonal human presence. One may infer the survival of Indian traits mixed with Hispanic cultural features among contemporary Paramero people, especially in regards to subsistence strategies and speech habits (i.e. antiquated Spanish dialect laced with some indigenous-derived lexical items) (Lopez 1992). The Parameros traditionally maintained a subsistence-based economy and this emphasis has changed little except that some cash-cropping is now practiced. The main economic activities include field agriculture (with potatoes as the main crop plant), dooryard gardening (secondary crops, medicinal plants, and flowers), cattle husbandry (on a very small-scale, with no more than a few animals per family), occasional fishing (primarily trout), and the gathering of a wide variety of wild plants (mostly for local consumption or occasionally for sale). The construction of paths, lodgings, fences, and plows are important ancillary activities. The first author carried out intensive fieldwork from March to August 1988, dividing her time between the two sites mentioned in rotating stays of 3-4 weeks. Both authors participated in a follow-up study in December 1992 and again in June 1998, which were limited to the Las Gonzalez community. The research con- sisted mainly of botanical collections and systematic interviews with 90 people of different sex and age groups, 60 in the Las Gonzalez community and 30 in 154 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 Micarache. Additionally, 40 children aged four to 12 (18 girls and 22 boys) from these two localities and another paramo community, Gavidia (Southern Range), were interviewed individually about the most salient paramo plants. Three kinds of data were thus obtained: botanical material (plant specimen collections), oral ethnographic data (interviews about ethnobotanical topics), and behavioral eth- nographic data gathered through daily participant observation with the Parameros. A total of 1121 botanical samples were collected with 23 paramero collaborators in the Northern Range and 27 collaborators in the Southern Range. The samples were deposited in the Manuel Ovalles Herbarium at the Venezuelan Central University and have been partially identified by the curator, Stephen Tillett. The interviews account for the core of the data on which the present paper is based and covered a range of ethnobotanical topics and techniques: free association listing of plant names, recording of nomenclature and activity signatures during plant collection trips, queries about the morphological characters and ecological ranges of par- ticular plant types, and free ranging conversations dealing with plants held within the household compounds. In addition to direct questions about particular plants, the Parameros were also asked to define the paramo environment, through a set of circumscribed questions such as: “What is the paramo?”, “What characteristics of the environment (landscape, animals, plants, etc.) define the paramo?”, “Where does the paramo eee and end?”. All but one a pmual (98.9%) mentioned the frailejon as the mo eature, in reference to the entire range » of salient ee (and not just botanical coin of this ecosystem. From the beginning of fieldwork, it became evident that the Parameros are well acquainted with the extreme climatic conditions of the paramo (wide daily temperature fluctuations, frost, constantly high humidity, etc.) and how these in- fluence or nurture particular plants that grow almost exclusively in this environment. Plant gathering is a daily activity among the Parameros and most people possess an impressive knowledge of a large number of the plants inhabit- ing their local environment. No significant differences in plant knowledge according to gender were detected, although systematic comparisons were not made. Although there is no formal method of teaching local botanical knowledge, the elderly impart their wisdom to the younger generation during trips moving livestock to new grazing ranges, working distant farm lots, and plant gathering excursions. The latter activity is oriented to finding plants for household use and for sale in rural and urban markets, where considerable demand exists for certain specimens, especially medicinal plants. PARAMERO CLASSIFICATION OF THE FRAILEJON Analysis of the data supports the belief that the daily close contact of the Parameros with plants easnarune alternative ethnobotanical classifications orga- nized on the basis of three disti 1, ecological (or contextual), and utilitarian. This three-part classification system reflects the different ways that plants can be cognitively distinguished or associated and is productive and flexible by nature, thus easily permitting the people to situate (or add) any plant (including new ones) they encounter within their botanical Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 155 encyclopedia. All Parameros possess a basic or core knowledge of their plant environment, meaning that a large number of plants are commonly identified and named by everyone. However, this basic knowledge is mediated by an individual’s particular life experience with the flora (L6pez 1991). The frailejon is the first plant group learned and apprehended by children. It was among the first five kinds of plants mentioned by 87% of the 40 children inter- viewed, and among the first 10 plants stated by all respondents. Furthermore, the frailej6n was also considered to be the single most representative plant of the “paramo proper” habitat. We hypothesize that the extreme overall salience of this plant is enhanced by the combined effect of it being regarded as simultaneously salient on morphological, utilitarian, and ecological grounds. Thus the frailejon is cognitively outstanding due to its highly distinct form, multiple uses in the Parameros’ everyday life, and floristic conspicuousness (i.e. numerical dominance within the vegetal community). Almost the entire sample of adults interviewed underlined its pronounced importance from all three points of view. The classifi- cation of the frailejon from each point of view and the significance of each dimension for the rank determination of this folk botanical category will be con- sidered next. Morphological Classification According to Paramero oral tradition, the group of plants called frailejon acquired its name as a result of its perceived similarity to a friar walking partially hidden by the fog or mist. As this etymological tale would suggest, it is our argument that the frailejon taxonomic group is perceived by the Parameros as a complex yet unitary (i.e. gestalt) image, thus similar to the way folk generics are normally perceived. At the same time, however, other cognitive features of this class suggest it corresponds to the rank of life form. We argue that one reason for this case of cognitive complexity (and indeed ambiguity) is the fact that perception of group dist gical features actually occurs at two levels of abstraction. On one hand, the Parameros recognize global attributes such as size, shape, and texture that correspond to abstract attributes (cf. Hunn 1976:509) and usually define segregates of larger inclusivity. We contend that this process (deduction) generates the frailején category as a fundamentum divisionis (Atran 1993). The second level focuses on the concatenation of unique structural parts of the plants, like flowers or inflorescence, pubescent or tomentose leaves, stemless (acaulescent) or ligneous stems (monocaule), succulence and depth of roots or rhizome, as well as altitude above sea level where the plant habitually grows. The referential features here are equivalent to concrete attributes (Hunn 1976) and usually generate segregates of lesser inclusivity corresponding to the minimal discontinuities in nature (cf. Berlin et al. 1974) of the conceptual form described as fundamentum relationis (Atran 1993). However, we intend to show that such relational (or inductive) processes also form a core part of the organiza- tion of the frailején taxon in a higher inclusive sense. In sum, our analysis of the frailej6n as a morphology-based folk botanical taxon identifies both divisional and relational conceptual processes as responsible for the category generation. The taxonomic status of frailejoni in relation to the other higher inclusive rank categories of the Paramero system clearly suggests its place- ment at this higher ‘taxonomic level. The Paramero life forms uncovered by the 156 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 present research include five taxa which have been commonly reported in the eth- nobotanical literature (cf. Berlin et al. 1973, 1974; Brown 1984): arbol ‘tree’, arbolito ‘small tree or bush’, bejuco ‘vine’, yerba ‘herb’, and pasto ‘grass’. Two other cul- ture-specific categories, frailején and dictamo, are not included within any of the aforementioned taxa, but are classified during free association list exercises as kinds of mata ‘plant’, the named unique beginner of the domain. Thus from a purely taxonomic perspective it appears that frailejon and dictamo correspond to the life form rank level. Nomenclatural and biological evidence also support this conclu- sion. Consistent with previous formulations of the hallmark characteristics of the life form rank (Berlin 1992), these taxa are named by primary lexemes and consti- tute classes composed of highly polytypic and biologically divergent organisms. In addition to these higher inclusive taxa, several unaffiliated generics have also been identified: cafia ‘cane’, musgo ‘moss’, paja ‘straw’, and papa ‘potato’. How- ever, the degree of polytypicality within these latter categories is notably smaller. The considerable polytypicality and biological divergence of members within the frailején class has been proposed as partial evidence of its status as life form rank. Figure 3 provides a taxonomic schematic representation of the internal dif- ferentiation of the class as well as the correspondence of folk to scientific taxa. From a folk standpoint, the group is divided into at least 20 different named segre- gates at the first descending taxonomic level, while five of these categories show further differentiation into subtypes on a still lower taxonomic level for a total of 27 terminal taxa. Meanwhile, this same inventory of plants is classified by scien- tific systematic botanists into at least five genera: Espeletia, Gnaphalium, Lucilia, Oritrophium and Paragynoxis, all in the Asteraceae family, the last three kinds be- ing of neo-tropical origin (Asteraceae; Luteyn et al. 1992:74). Four of these genera (all but Paragynoxis) are in turn polytypic. The Espeletia group is especially di- verse, with thirteen distinct species being represented here. It is interesting to note some departures in the correspondence of folk to scientific taxa. Five species of Espeletia (E. weddelli, E. moritziana, E. aurantia, E. lindenii, and E. spicata) are mildly overdifferentiated (into two or three folk segregates per scientific species). On the other hand, underdifferentiation of scientific species and genera is observed in just two terminal folk taxa, frailején morado (three species of Orithrophium) and frailejon amarillo grande (two species of Espeletia). In addition to the included taxa mentioned above, three other segregates (viravira, familia del frailejon, and sin nombre ‘no name’) are tentatively grouped under the frailej6n folk category in figure 3 (marked with the broken lines). The first of these refers to members of the genera Icurtegia and Gnaphalium, whereas the latter two were identified as corresponding to the genus Senecio. However, this inclusion refers only to a qualitatively more distant (i.e. extended range) connec- tion, based on the fact that the informants refrained from directly calling them frailejon, but did expressly recognize some degree of affinity through statements such as: “esa es familia del frailején” ‘that belongs to the family of the frailején’, “o sea que van juntas porque son del mismo familién” ‘they go together because they belong to the same family’, and “esas son la misma cosa” ‘they are the same thing’. These extended range taxa are cited here as providing partial evidence in support of our claim that the higher inclusive category in fact constitutes a graded or fuzzy set class. frailejon, f. comin, f. de embojotar queso, f. chiguito (E. schultzii) Wedd. f. de fabrica fina (E. angustifolia) Cuatr. f. amarillo fino (E. spicata) Sch. Bip. f. amarillo (E. jahnii) Stan] ts amarillo grueso (E. moritziana) Sch. Bip. f. dorado (E. aurantia) Arist. f. e’indio (E. lindenii) Sch. Bip. f. gigante (E. alba) Sm. f. amarillo grande (E. aurantia) Arist. (E. spicata) Sch. Bip. f. dorado fino (E. lindenii) Sch. Bip. f. platea’o fabrica gruesa - grisea) Stand. f. platea’o (E. floccosa) Stand! See (E. spicata) Sch f. tieso, f. verde (E. weddellii) Sch. Bip. f. casco e’burroftauco (E. weddellii) Sch. Bip. frailejon f. lanoso (E. pannosa) Standl. f. de fabrica lanuda ( ian gaudichaudianum) D.C. f. largo (G. moritziana) Sch. Bip. f. de algodén (Gnaphalium sp.) h frailejoncito (Gnaphalium meridanum) Arist \ f. morado/mora’o, frailejoncite (Orithrophium peruvianum) Cuatr. \ Orithrophium venezuelensis) Cuatr. ‘ (Orithrophium limnophilum) Cuatr. ‘\\\\f. cigarrén (Lucilia venezuelensis) Stmk. railejonote (Paragynoxis venezuelae) Badil. \\\'f. de arbolito (E. et Sch. Bip. tutana (Gnaphalium sp.) \ arrastrada (Espeletia moritziana) Sch. Bip. y \wiravira (Icurtegia stoechadifolia) Arist. a amit del frailejon ( Senecio sp.) ‘sin nombre ( Senecio sp.) — a — _- = FIGURE 3.— Taxonomic Representation of the Frailején Folk Category f. platea’o fino (E. oie A.C. Sm. ole ome pequeno (G. siege DC frailejon mot’uo (G.m rien motoso (Lucila. ‘ongitolia) Cuatr. Arist. tutana blanea (Gnaphalium sp.) viravira macho (Gnaphalium sp.) viraviron (G. moritziana) Sch. Bip 6661 497UTM ASO'TOISONHLA JO TVNUNOL ZST 158 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 Nomenclaturally, the entire class can be designated by the primary lexeme of frailejon. At a lesser inclusive level, frailején also names the class prototype or focal taxon, identified botanically as Espeletia schultzii. This taxon may also be called frailején comin, f. chiquito, or f. de embojotar queso, but this binomiality is op- tional and it is more commonly omitted. We have designated this taxon as the class prototype due to the fact that a large number of our paramero collaborators explicitly identified it as the “true frailejon” or “proper fratiejan" . The other lesser inclusive taxa are named by simple J rimary lexemes (e.g. arrastrada, tutana, tauco, and chirique),? complex ia primary lexemes (e.g. frailején- cito and frailejénote),? secondary lexemes (e.g. f. amarillo, f. dorado, f. e’indio, etc.), unnamed or covert categories (familia de frailején and sin nombre), and tertiary lexeme constructions (e.g. f. amarillo fino, f. amarillo grueso, f. amarillo grande, etc.). Nomenclature is not, however, a consistent indicator of taxonomic level since both primary and secondary lexemes contrast at the first lower inclu- sive level, whereas primary, secondary, and tertiary lexemes contrast at the lowest inclusive level. Furthermore, the primary lexeme frailejéncito is actually polysemous, referring in one case to a polytypic class composed of species of the Gnaphalium and Lucilia genera and in the other case to the monotypic taxon also known as f. morado, made up of various species of the Orithrophium genus. A strictly taxonomic model of the frailején group, as depicted in figure 3, un- derestimates the true complexity of the internal structure of this folk category. A consideration of the contrast and combination of diagnostic attributes used to dis- tinguish the different types of frailejon is necessary in order to get a better grasp of the variable perceptual distances among different taxa and to appreciate our claim that this folk category encompasses elements of both life form and generic ranks. Table 1 presents a list of the diagnostic morphological, ecological and utili- tarian attributes according to each folk taxon. The inventory of specific morphological attributes found in this table (second column) can be analyzed in terms of thirteen abstract (i.e. widely applicable) attributes or dimensions of op- positional contrast: (i) plant shape (rosette or not), (ii) plant size (large vs. small), (iii) plant stem habit (acaulescent vs. stemmed), (iv) leaf color, (v) leaf length or size (short vs. long, thick vs. thin), (vi) leaf toughness (tough vs. bland), (vii) leaf texture (tomentose vs. pubescent), (viii) flower color, (ix) flower stem (scapose vs. nonscapose), (x) flower texture (hairy vs. smooth), (xi) flower disposition (com- pound vs. noncompound), (xii) root toughness, and (xiii) root size. Certain attributes are sometimes transparently named in secondary lexemes indicating lower inclusive taxa; for example, color (f. amarillo, f. plateado, f. morado, f. dorado, etc.), size (f. gigante, f. chiquito, etc.) and texture (f. motoso, f. tieso, etc.). Produc- tive secondary lexemes reflecting the cultural context (f. e’indio, f. cigarrén, etc.), as opposed to ecological context, were also recorded. Taxa at the lowest inclusive taxa are usually distinguished by nomenclature referring to the attributes of leaf size and color (e.g. f. amarillo grande, f. amarillo fino, f. dorado fino, f. plateado grueso, tutana blanca). The typical ecological range, mainly referring to different altitudinal levels, of the plant constitutes another important defining feature (see third column) but this is rarely expressed in the nomenclature (to be discussed below). The distribution of morphological attributes within the set of segregates is TABLE 1. Folk perceptual, ecological and utilitarian diagnostic features involved in the discrimination of the different “classes of Frailején” Name (s) Morphological Ecological Utilitarian frailejon, f. comin, f. | grows attached to the grows in groups Leaves:: g ial for cheese, butt ges; bedding f sole si tic de 0 al queso, | ground, long firm whitish- | throughout the entire I ll f. chiqu grayish cottony basal leaves | paramo range** cleaning household artifacts and for see bathing; toilet paper; feminine in rose-like arrangements, ary ; intense yellow compound burning fuel. S ] d fl tal, in christ ity scer es, flowers. mortuary arcs, and spiritual altars. Root licinal. Seedli: inal, g Pom } ¥ g 1 } k SE, Be f. rad (d rey eI ) and anne (hoyas). whitish-grayish cottony relatively flat open Scape and flowers:: ornamental. frailejon de fabrica fina leaves in rose-like arr; ment, hairy stem ange- ye 2g per Pet frailejon amarillo long yellow — leaves, branched flower omy in patches near lakes, in paramo bajero (‘lower paramo’)**** T 4 al 4 s 1 we beats for clea g Oo Ld oO f oO a household artifacts and for personal bathing; toilet paper. Dry underground stem ge y | £ 1 << Pi mam tal frailejon amarillo grows attached to the ground, | proper paramo*** Und i stem : fire burning fuel. Root dicinal fino yellowish slightly hairy leaves in rose-like arrangement, compound flowers long broad yellow cottony grows in the highest/ ‘ fi ing fuel. Leaves : d tic animal bedding. Whole plant : frailejon amarillo leaves, orange-reddish coldest areas of the ornamental grande ompound flowers stemless, grows attached to | growsin groups near | League | bedding tuffing; patching of hol cena frailejon amarillo the ground, broad tough rocks, highest / coldest in sponges, for personal bathing; f y nap paper yellow hairy leaves in rose- | areas of the paramo like arrangemen long broad yellow cottony | grows inthe highest/ | Roots : medicinal. Leaves : ornamental. frailejon dorado lleaves, orange compoun coldest areas of the flowers. paramo* long smooth greenish- proper paramo*** Root { 1. Stem : fire k g fuel. Leaves : d i lhedd frailejon dorado whitish leaves in rose-like ‘i fino arrangement, short thin stem. frailejon e’indio long a cottony | gcreek deltas and rs*: ornamental. Root | 4 cy a ee leaves in rose-like arrange- dried lake beds, in : sponges, for cleaning household items and personal bathing; animal food; human food. ment, short thin stem. proper paramo*** 6661 FOJUIMA XSOTOISONHLA JO TVNINO[ 6S1 TABLE 1. Continued Name (s) Morphological Ecological Utilitarian frailejon gigante large single stem hairy plant, gray-white leaves in rose-like arrangement. proper paramo*** d for personal bathing (of seeps toilet paper. Stem resin : combustible fuel. frailejon platea’o firm silver hairy leaves in humid areas in proper amo*** ae sie it infusion for cay asthma attacks, cough. and bronchial anched flower-stem. rose-like arrangement, thick | p infec soft compound flower with long stem. chirique grows close to ground level, | wet-rocky areas in Whole plant:: ornamental. silverish slightly hairly proper paramo and leaves in rose-like arrange- | higher***** frailején platea’o grows close to ground level, | proper paramo**™* Scape and fl ial R 4 1 abrica gruesa long silver hairy leaves, long branched flower-stem. frailejon platea’o single short and thick iy paramo calentano S d fl tal. R 4 | fino long silver hairy leaves (‘warmer rose-like arrangement, paramo’)***** frailejon tieso, f. verde small plant, grows close to ground level, small and thin greenish leaves large thick roots wet-rocky areas in proper paramo and higher***** heali l and bronchial R f = | 1 2 Dp Bt fea pee 1 scoo0d ¢ infections and neck pains. Whole plant: animal food. frailejon casco e’burro/ tauco small plant, grows close to ound level, long wet-rocky areas in proper paramo and Roots : medicinal, mixed with F. morado for curing bronchial infections. green leaves, large thick tough higher***** roots. frailejon lanoso single hairy stem, soft or lower paramo and Leaves:: sponge for personal bathing; toilet paper; femini itary napkins. bland cottony leaves in rose-} proper paramo***** if d root Aa cniamnnad atin daa wad Anant lieving chest . ri. f like arrangement. pen frailejon de fabrica lanuda white-green hairy stem, pound flowers. montana (‘closed canopy forest’) and proper paramo******* 4 ie | 4.4: fe: t nabas Lhal = sponges for aaa ark ane toilet paper. bine 091 LNAZ 7? LNAZ Z ON ‘61 TOA TABLE 1. Continued Name (s) Morphological Ecological Utilitarian Patacaeatie frailejon largo broad whitish hairy leaves, lots of yellowish compound flowers. mainly lower paramo and less so in proper paramo*** No uses reported. frailején de algodén cottony small plant, short airy a = of white- green lea entire paramo range** 14 2. 4 £0 . 11 ie p21 44 pa em Pg | | M4 1 walls; Scape and flowers : ornamental. frailejoncito grows close to SePre level | entire paramo range | No uses reported. but with very short hairy stem, lots of white-green cottony leaves, creamy- yellowish compound flowers. | frailejoncito small ‘genes bia long grows near rocks in the | Whole plant:: ornamental. pequenio grayish lea hghest/old coldest areas frailejoncito small cottony plant, bland | proper paramo*** Whole plant 1. Leaves : d ki | bedding mot’uo off-white hairy leaves. frailejoncito motoso | small cottony plant, grows in | grows in humid soils | Root: dicinal, for cough and chest pain. Whole e plant: ers prepared a chain-like arrangement and | in the proper b ge and d varicose v forms ma i eS paramo*** whitish hairy leaves, bonnie flowers. frailején morado/ tiny plant, grows very close | wet and shady spots, | Roots, | d fil licinal, prepared as ab d taken f mora’o 0 ground level, green hairy | near lakes an digestive and circulatory disord fy 7 ial medicinal, famous asthma leaves, white-violet swampy lands, inthe | remedy. compound flower. roper paramo** frailejon cigarrén grows close to ground level grows among rocks in Whole plant:: medicinal; animal food. but with short somewhat the highest/coldest hairy = hairy leaves | areas of the paramo* in rose-like arrangement, violet sreitene flower. frailejonote small tree, tough broad slightly hairy leaves, white hairy flowers grows in monospecific stands or forest patches of few species in the proper paramo*** Ste ava construction, house or f pole; technological, shaft of agricultural too TA], A. re 1 bed re 1 2 a 1 s. g pong leaning tools. 6661 4o}UTM XDOTOISONHLA JO TVNINO[ 191 TABLE 1. Continued small cottony plant, gro ina chain -like arra seni whitish hairy leaves, hairy stem. Name (s) Morphological Ecological Utilitarian frailejon de arbolito | small tree but taller than grows in groups in the | Stem : construction, house or fence pole; technological, sk ft of \tural fie tough oblong closed canopy | forest: or | tools. Woody parts : fire burning fuel. iry leaves, whitish flowers. | lower paramo*** arrastrada stemless plant, grows close | grows inthe highest/ | Scape and flowers: ornamental. Whole plant: animal food. to ground level, yellowish- | coldest areas of the whitish hairy leaves in rose- ‘J like arrangement, cream colored compound flowers. tutana proper paramo*** animal food, eaten by cattle. Leaves : domestic animal bedding; Whole plant:: construction, patching for house walls slightly hairy stem, cream- hite hairy and cottony leaves, cream- white compound flowers tutana blanca cottony plant, grows ina proper paramo*** ii | | bedding truct patching for } walls. chain-like arrangement, whitish hairy — white- yellowish flow viravira proper paramo*** Root {I d |, prepared as a beverage and Itice (applied r, hypertension ne body aches, Leaves:: feet), for g infl domestic animal bedding. viravira macho tough slightly hairy stem, m-white hairy leaves, hairy compound flowers grows in groups f in the lower paramo* | heddine 5 Cc rom Wee pi § viraviron tough hairy stem, cream- proper paramo*** Leaves:: domestic animal bedding, oe rabbits. L eaves and fle owers white hairy es S, oe medicinal, prepared omun a compound flowers. drunk as a cough supressant. familia del frailej6n | small cottony plant, white grows in groupe t in the | No uses reported. hairy leaves, yellow flowers. | lower paramo** sin nombre hairy herb, oblong hairy grows in grons in the | Whole plant tal; animal food, eaten by cattle. leaves, yellow flowers. lower paramo** 3800-4000 masl aprox ** between 3200-4000 masl aprox. ** between 3000-4500 masl aprox. ee" between 1500-3500 masl aprox. * over Prox. * from 2500 to 4700 masl aprox. *“ between 3000-3500 masl aprox. eee between 2000-3000 mas aprox. HEHEHE between 1900-3000 masl apro col LNAZ 7? LNAZ Z ON ‘61 “TPA Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY # aS € ai al aX : re ae = a ~~ as i 7 Tes x ; eer a xe eo tek et a - . . ” é F - - i f a , 4 . Ce Ave FIGURE 4.— Nonflowering Individual of the Frailején comuin (Espeletia schultzit). 164 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 not entirely even or random. Notice that several specific attributes are more widely distributed among numerous members of the group, namely: rosette shapes, acaulescence, pubescent leaves, white-silver-green colored leaves, and scapose flowers. These are in effect the dominant morphological attributes that define the entire grouping, and indeed their clustered yet variable distribution throughout the class point to the existence of a prototypical gradient. The frailején (comun) is characterized as an acaulescent rosette, with long (5-100 cm) whitish-grayish firm pubescent basal leaves, yellow scapose compound flower, and grows up to ap- proximately one meter high (see Figure 4). Thus the morphological makeup of the focal taxon largely coincides with the attributes that are found to be dominant throughout the entire class. The varying significance of the abstract attributes among different taxa within the group, the existence of a class prototype, and the implied class membership gradient point us toward the generic-like (ie. configurational set) aspects of this life form-like category. However, the perceptual complexity and indeed ambigu- ity of this category, whether generic or life form, became apparent to us during interviews in which we asked our Paramero collaborators to name the defining features of the frailejon group in general and the prototypic frailejon in particu- lar. On one hand, a number of them were simply unable to abstract single morphological features and suggested that the most appropriate way to know the plant is simply to look at it, thus implying that they apprehend the group as a gestalt-like totality. On the other hand, a minority of people did point out some abstract attributes, such as plant shape, referring particularly to the rosette ar- rangement (“una mata redonda que se abre desde el centro” ‘a round plant that opens from the center’), the pubescent leaf (lanosa ‘wooly’, algodonosa ‘cotton- like’, cobijosa ‘blanket-like’), and/or the scapose flower (flores altas ‘tall flowers’). Such expressions seem to provide us with a divisional (i.e. positive and opposed) type of contrast with the other so-called life forms. An examination of the variable distribution of attributes among the different types of frailejon permits us to chart the pattern of graded membership (i.e. per- ceptual distance from the prototype) within this grouping. Gradations may be observed in terms of particular attributes: stem habit (or alee for example, ranges from acaulescent (pega’o al suelo, ‘attached to > ground’) (e. g f. comin E. Schultzii; f. dorado E. aurantia; f. mora’o O. ; f. motoso L. Longifolia; f. motu’o G. Antennarioides) to monocaule (e.g. ae largo G. moritzianum; f. gigante E. alba; f. platea’o E. Floccosa; f. e’indio E. cf. lindenii) to tree-like (up to 3 meters tall) (e.g. frailejonote P. venezuelae; f. de arbolito E. neriifolia). But, due to the multiple overlapping of certain attributes, the distance of a taxon from the prototype can also be es AES as a function of the number of attributes that it does not share with th totype, as depicted in figure 5. Those taxa (tutana, f. largo, frailejénote, he thvien lanuda, : morado, f. de arbolito, frailejéncito, and f. cigarron) shown within the outer ring of the concentric circle drawing, labeled as “generic con- trast”, differ from the focal frailején (comin) by five or more specific attributes. We ccniaiio that this number of differences adds up to a configurational gap of gestalt-like proportions, instantaneously appreciated from its general aspect, and thus similar if not equal to the contrast between distinct folk generics. Those taxa (f. dorado, f. tieso, f. gigante, f. lanoso, f. de algodon and f. casco e’burro) depicted Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 165 generic Contras, / Vv (vr) \ ecific-Gene,; é SP c Con Tp ~ge wt °%, ific Cont, ? ook A - Arrastrad F = _- Frailejon (Comun) Fd -— F.dorado Fj - Frailejoncito Ff - Fdefabrica fina Fdf — F. dorado fino Fjp —- Frailejoncito pequeio Fa -—- Famarillo Fg - F. gigante Fim — Frailejoncito motu'o Faf — F. amarillofino Ft —- F tieso Fjt — Frailejoncito motoso Fag - F. amarillogrande Fb -— F. cascoe’burro Fk — Frailejonote Far -—- F. amarillo grueso Fl — F.lanoso T - Tutana Fp - F. platea' Fo -— F. dealgodon Tb — Tutana blanca Fpr -— F. platea'o Ffl — F. fabrica lanuda Vv — Viravira fabrica gruesa Fe - F largo Vm -—- Viravira macho Fpf —- F platea’o fino Fm -— F. morado Vr = Viraviron Ch -— Chirique Fe -—- F cigarron Sn - Si Fi —- F.eindio Fs — F. de arbolito Fif — Familia del frailejon FIGURE 5.- Relative Perceptual Map of the Frailején Higher Inclusive Category. in the middle ring, labeled as “mixed specific-generic contrast”, differ from the focal taxon by three or four specific attributes. This level of difference is perhaps more than what we would expect to find between folk specifics (cf. Berlin 1992:102- 108), but we would still hesitate to postulate an instantly recognizable configurational or total image (i.e. generic) contrast. Rather, it appears to be some- where in between. Those taxa (arrastrada, f. fabrica fina, f. e’indio, f. amarillo, and f. platea‘o) included in the inner ring, labeled “specific contrast”, differ from 166 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 the class prototype by no more than one or two specific attributes, noticed by detailed inspection, and therefore correspond to the expected difference between folk specifics. Within some of the small circles, we have drawn even smaller circles to indicate inclusive subordinate taxa. Taxa at this level are distinguished nomenclaturally by a tertiary lexeme (e.g. f. plateado fino, f. plateado grueso) that refers to a very specific formal attribute, and thus are similar to what Berlin has called folk varietals. Finally, the taxa belonging to the far extended range of the class (viravira, familia de frailejon and sin nombre) are shown in a smaller par- tially tangent, slightly overlapping circle. Ecological Classification. The strong cognitive association of the frailejon with the paramo landscape is reflected in the use of ecological attributes to define the higher inclusive class as well as to distinguish among the lower inclusive taxa. By eco- logical attributes, we mean the habitat of the plant as expressed in terms of altitudinal range, geological features, humidity conditions, or interspecific asso- ciations. The ecological parameter may in fact be more important than morphological criteria when it comes to conceptualizing the entire grouping of plants, for the most common answer to our question about what are the defining features of the frailejon was that it is a plant that grows exclusively in cold envi- ronments and uniquely in the paramo. Thus a higher level of consensus could be observed regarding the ecological definition of the frailején as opposed to the naming of diagnostic morphological traits. The frailején not only stands out as the most ubiquitous and conspicuous biotype in the paramo, but it is also common to find more than one species inhab- iting the same area. The prototypical Espeletia schultzii displays the broadest FIGURE 6.-A Typical P Paramo ees Dominated sabe eae Plants. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 167 distribution (growing between 2,500 and 4,700 m.a.s.].) and is usually the domi- nant species throughout its entire range (see Figure 6). Due to its exceedingly common appearance over the landscape, it is sometimes aptly called the frailejon comuin. No other frailejon segregates are explicitly named by ecological features, but the ecological range is nonetheless an important attribute recognized and ver- balized by many of our Paramero collaborators. Particular types of frailején are closely associated with different mountain ecological zones. Six such zones, corre- sponding to distinct altitudinal ranges, topographic features, and biotic communities, were recorded: montafia ‘closed canopy forest’, boca e’ paramo ‘paramo-forest ecotone’, paramo bajero ‘subparamo, gradual slope’, paramo calentano ‘subparamo, steep slope’, propio paramo ‘paramo proper’, and filos mas altos/frios ‘superparamo’ (cf. L6pez-Zent 1995). Within the paramo proper, more geographically circumscribed microenvironments are discriminated and ex- pressed through a variety of terms, such as: barro/cafada ‘creek confluence or delta’, pedregal ‘rocky patch’, pantanal ’swampy land’, laguna ‘lake’, laguna tapada ‘dried up lake’, seco ‘dry region’, sabana ‘relatively flat open spot’, and bosque ‘wooded spot’. The f. e’indio, for example, is frequently found growing in humid soils, such as the creek deltas or dried lake beds, and f. morado typically inhabits swampy lands (see Table 1). Utilitarian Classification.— The considerable utilitarian significance of the frailejon plant group should also be considered an important cognitive property that con- tributes to its overall recognition value, in a collective (i.e. higher inclusive) as well as individual (i.e. lower inclusive) sense. Many of our collaborators verbally identified the higher inclusive category with a notion of general and recurrent utility. A sampling of their statements to this effect include: “esa es la mata que FIGURE 7.— Parameros collecting Frailején. 168 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 wa mas jusamos nosotros” ‘that’s the plant that we use the most’, “esa se usa pa’ toi’tico, jesa si es giiena!” ‘that’s used for everything, it really is (a) good (thing)’, or “a nosotros todo lo mds la buscamos diario, no vé que crece en todo la’o aqui en el paramo” ‘above all else, we look for it on a daily basis. Don’t you see that it grows everywhere here in the paramo.’ (see Figure 7). A total of twenty use classes explicitly recognized by the Parameros have been identified (L6pez 1991:364-372), of which twelve describe uses of different frailejon. These include: medicinal, ornamental, firewood, animal feed, human food, con- struction, animal bedding, human bedding, personal hygiene, cleaning agent, fertilizer, and food wrapping. The most widely applicable use class is medicinal, since nearly half of the terminal taxa in the group are recognized for such func- tion. The distilled essence of the roots of f. comin, f. morado or f. e’indio comprise the most common key ingredients, along with other herbal roots, of the jarabe paramero. This well known elixir, it is believed, is endowed with multiple cura- tive properties, including a cure for the so-called jumores.* Frailején. amarillo fino, f. dorado, f. dorado fino, f. platea’o fino, and f. platea’o fabrica gruesa may also be used to prepare the jarabe paramero, but are not considered as essential as the previous types. The leaves of f. cigarrén are soaked in miche ‘cane liquor’ and poulticed on the soles of the feet (plantillas) in order to alleviate fever, while a tea is prepared using the whole plant and drunk as a remedy for severe headache (almorranas). The stem resin of f. e’indio is boiled and then rubbed onto rheu- matic body parts. The roots and leaves of this same plant are imbibed in order to relieve cough and chest pain, and more importantly are considered instrumental in restoring the vital internal organ known as cuajo.> The root of f. platea’o is famous as a cough depressant and is even sold on the market on a small scale. Numerous nonmedicinal uses of the frailején were also mentioned and ob- served. The tender hearts of f. comtin and f. e’indio are considered edible, and although rarely eaten nowadays were formerly consumed in soups or confections. The leaves of several kinds, most commonly f. dorado, f. amarillo and f. comin, are used in the fabrication of domestic animal shelters (for horses, mules, cattle, poultry, dogs, and cats), in the manufacture of tamos ‘mattresses’, or for chinkin drafty house walls. Leaves are also used as sa for cleaning utensils or for personal bathing and hygiene, as f iapkins (during the menstrual period), and as handkerchiefs. The prototypical frailejn, sometimes called f. de embojotar queso, is appropriately used “for wrapping aac or eggs. The woody stem of the frailejonote is hewn in order t (structural poles in the houses), fences and garrochas ‘agricultural tools’. The entire inventory of uses ———. to plant type is described i i fourth column. of table 1. What is the outlined here? It is logical to suppose that the everyday special-use of various types of leaves, stems, roots, and flowers would provide sufficient motive for the Parameros‘ abil- ity to differences among the different species. CONCLUSION The Paramero perception and classification of the frailején plant group have been reviewed here and it was found that this folk taxon exhibits features charac- Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 169 teristic of both life form and generic ranks. In attempting to explain this case of classificatory ambiguity, we began by pointing out that it is highly significant from different cognitive and behavioral points of view: morphological, ecological, and utilitarian. On one hand, the outstanding salience of the higher inclusive category of frailején vis-a-vis other such categories is due to the combined effect of the distinct appearance of its members, its conspicuous presence throughout the paramo landscape, and the great number and frequency of uses. On the other hand, discrimination of lesser inclusive taxa within this folk botanical group is also enhanced by the knowledge of particular attributes according to three (in- stead of just one) semantic dimensions, thus leading to the considerable internal taxonomic variation we have described here. The taxonomic evidence reviewed here showed that the frailejon is not grouped under any of the more common (i.e. cross-culturally present) life form categories abstracted by the Parameros. The frailején, along with the dictamo,® are higher inclusive categories unique to Paramero folk botany that appear to be generated by more than purely biomorphological criteria, thus confirming Bulmer’s (1979) claim that higher inclusive categories are constructed upon ecological and cul- tural considerations. The life form status is also suggested by the group’s broadly polytypic and biologically divergent composition. From a folk standpoint, at least 20 lower inclusive taxa were identified and a few of these taxa are further differen- tiated at a lower level. Scientifically, all members of the group belong to the Asteraceae botanical family, but they encompass six genera, three of which are in turn polytypic for a total of seventeen species (and possibly more since determi- nations of some of the plant material collected are still in progress). Meanwhile, the fuzzy set character of the higher inclusive category is suggested by the discov- ery of covert categories of plants considered to belong to the “frailejon family” but not designated as full-fledged frailejon. Categorical complexity is also reflected in th here. The term frailej6n is used poly ly to refer to the higher incl group ing of all the plants discussed above or to the lower inclusive prototype exclusivel However, the prototype can also be named by the alternative binomial construc- tions of f. chiquito, f. comtin, or f. de embojotar queso. Significantly, the modifiers refer to salient morphological (i.e. plant size), ecological (i.e. population frequency), and use (i.e. food packaging) features respectively. Among other taxa at the lower inclusive level, one observes a variety of nomenclatural forms: secondary produc- tive lexemes, primary productive lexemes, and primary unproductive lexemes. At the lowest inclusive level, secondary or tertiary lexeme combinations are found. Turning to the identification of taxa, we have argued that two cognitive pro- cesses are involved here. The higher inclusive concept of frailejon is apprehended as a total image phenomenon, with the prototypical attribute complex serving as the focal image for the entire group. Within the group, a range of perceptual dis- tance between the prototype and other lower inclusive taxa was observed based on a count of the number of shared attributes. Some taxa differ from the prototype by no more than one or two very specific features, indicating that the perceptual gaps between them are relatively small. Meanwhile other taxa are perceptually more peripheral in that they differ from the prototype in a more integral way, by at least five distinct attributes (pubescence or tomentosity of the leaves; shape of Lae 1 LE observed 170 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 1 1 1 ,etc.). The degree of contrast among lower level taxa thus ranges ; from folk specific- -sized to generic-sized gaps. The finding of generic-like p I contrasts at the lower inclusive level gives further weight to the claim that the | higher inclusive category of frailej6n approximates the rank of life form and should not be considered as merely an unaffiliated generic. In other words, the solution of double indexing this taxon at both ranks must be ruled out on empirical grounds. Furthermore, when describing the affinity of more distant taxa to the prototype, Parameros tend to speak of one to a few abstractable attributes such as long whitish hairy leaves, scapose flowers/inflorescences, and acaulescence. This sort of deductive discrimination for purposes of associating perceptually more distant taxa with the prototype implies that a divisional con- trast between the higher inclusive grouping and other higher inclusive categories, however latent, is in fact being made. We have also observed that individual mor- phological attributes of the frailejon are sometimes abstracted in order to provide a reference mark for describing other plants, such as ‘this plant is round or has woolly leaves, like the frailején’. The prototypic structure of the higher inclusive frailejon segregate and the range of variable perceptual contrasts among lower inclusive taxa provide a chal- lenge to Berlin’s (1992:31) previous definition of rank as “comparably sized perceptual gaps.” In short, we believe that a model of rank based on rigid notions of perceptual discreteness and category boundedness is unable to explain the em- pirical complexity observed in the frailejon concept. In our opinion, a continuum concept of rank provides a better fit between model and data in the case studied here. That is because it is more consistent with the concept of graded category membership and more importantly is more capable of accounting for certain higher inclusive biological taxa whose perceptual salience is more natural or integral than others. Regarding the latter point, we concur with Hunn’s (1987) observation that some higher senna (i.e. life form) categories are as perceptually natural as folk generic categories or here in between, and propose that the frailején is one of them. This finding ; in turn supports the position that perceptual salience is con- trived more as an empirical issue rather than a theoretical axiom, and therefore the particular biological, ecological and cultural context is a potentially important influence on the structure and depth of ethnobiological rank observed in different cultural settings. Accordingly, we offer an empirical ecological explanation of the paradoxical, ank-crossing mode of classifying the frailején group. Our explanation focuses on “i peculiar evolutionary and biogeographical history of this plant grouping within the paramo biome. Cuatrecasas (1986:274) has written that the original center of the Espeletiinae (Asteraceae, tribe Heliantheae) is found in the Venezuelan Andes, in the Cordillera de Mérida. It is well known that centers of origin of biological genera and species are marked by high diversification of organisms within a rela- tively compact area. Diversification is attributed to the fact that processes of speciation are assumed to have longer histories (i.e. more time in which to diver- sify) in these regions. Where the process of diversification is older and more advanced one should also expect to find a greater range of differences among species since some specific distinctions reflect relatively recent separations while others are the result of more ancient separations. Thus some species of frailejon/ Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 171 Espeletia found in the paramo have diverged relatively recently and are differenti- ated for systematic purposes on the basis of the number of petioles shown. In fact, a number of the key traits used by biosystematists to identify different species of Espeletia involve the florescence or reproductive parts, which often appear for short seasonal periods in the paramos, thus for much of the year the plants do not dis- play flowers or fruits. It just so happens that the Espeletiinae geographic center named by Cuatrecasas corresponds to the local environment where our fieldwork took place. How does the local population respond when the local area they in- habit is a center of biological origin and dispersal marked by high diversification locally of a group of related organisms? In this case we see the smaller differences (recent changes) treated as contrasts at the specific rank and the larger differences (ancient changes) treated as generic distinctions. Meanwhile the overall high bio- logical diversity of this clade within the same local environment stimulates classificatory treatment of the group as a segregate at the life form rank. Finally, we would like to point out a more general significance of the present case study for the advancement of ethnobiological theory. The study of endemic or distributionally limited plants or animals and of folk classifications systems operating within ecologically unique regions such as centers of biological origin and dispersal or stressful ecosystems may serve to expand and refine the current outlines of ethnobiological theory. For too long, theorists have regarded these kinds of organisms or areas as exceptional and hence theoretically uninformative. We hope to have shown on the contrary that the study of so-called aberrant organ- isms and spatially restricted ecosystems may provide useful theoretical insights. NOTES 1 Certain genera of the Bromeliad (e.g. Puya) and Orchid (e.g. Elleanthus) families are also treated as unaffiliated generics because they are not included within any higher inclusive taxon. 2 The last three segregate names mentioned here appear to be of Indian origin, judging from their phonetic characteristics. However, no linguistic studies of the aboriginal lan- guages of this region were made before they ostensibly went extinct nor can it be con- firmed (although speculation abounds) that speakers of these languages survived to the present day. Notice that the botanical terms are primary lexemes, as may be expected of folk generics. 3. The primary lexemes, frailején-cito ‘small frailej6n’ and frailejon-ote ‘large frailejon’, contrast according to the dimension of size, the lexemic form thus consisting of two mor- phemes (plant name + size modifier suffix). chus, circulatory system (e.g. varicose veins), Or menstrual cycle. A frequently mentioned symptom of this infection is white urine. 172 ZENT & ZENT Vol. 19, No. 2 5 The Parameros believe that the concept of human beingness entails the possession of at least four vital elements: the body, the soul, the cuajo, and the paletilla. The latter two are said to be located in determinate positions within the human body and there they should remain still or only move slightly within well defined restricted spaces. Such areas are delimited differently according to the age, sex, and fertility status of a person. The cuajo is situated above the abdomen to the right side of the navel and the paletilla is housed just below the right rib cage in the upper section of the stomach. Maintaining the correct posi- tioning of these organs is considered to be absolutely critical to the continued life and health of human beings. Thus any abrupt or sudden movement of them can endanger the life of a person. The sudden 3 ampere of unexplained disorders or pain, especially ab- dominal ailments tic of such movements. In the event of their movement, the Parameros deem that the correct position can be restored only by way of sobas ‘massages’ performed with certain plants, and therefore they regard such plants as permitting and extending their lives. 6 The dictamo consists of at least nine folk species and is highly polymorphic, perhaps more so than the frailejon category. Three Species of this group have been identified as belonging to th Poaceae, Campanulaceae, and Gentianaceae). e main criteria for class inclusion appear to be cultural (i.e. ideological) and functional: that is, these plants are considered to be invested with chemical-spiritual powers relating to notions of vitality and immortality among the Parameros and thus they are typically employed in the concoction of youth elixers and the like (see Lopez 1991: 310-312, 371-373, 413-414). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are very grateful for the hospitality and friendship of the Parameros and for their willingness to share their botanical, cultural and ecological knowledge with us. This paper was improved by comments made on earlier versions by Drs. Brent Berlin and Eugene Hunn, and by two anonymous reviewers. However, we also acknowledge that they do not necessarily agree with all of the ideas presented herein. Thanks are also due to Carlos Quintero for drawing the maps and one of the figures LITERATURE CITED ARCHIVO Histérico de la Provincia de ATRAN, S. ESTIN, P., COLEY, J. & MEDIN, Mérida (Registro Principal). 1791, 1803, D. 1997. Generic species and basic 1804, 1806, 1807 y 1837. Asuntos Sb a Essence and appearance in folk diversos. Ventas y pleitos de Derechos ae | alee of Ethnobiology de Tierras en el pdramo de Los Conejos. rae i? Tomos XXXV, XLVIII, XLIX, LI, LIII y AZOCAR, a 1980. Los paramos de 3 Venezuela. Pp. 16-21 in Paramos ATRAN, S. 1993. a sab 9g ach : Venezolanos, Weidmann, K. (editor). Natural Histo Towards Libreria Alemana/Fundaci6n Polar, anthropology ae science. Canbeidoe acas. University Press, London. BALSLEV, H. and LUTEYN, J.L. 1992. —_—_—— . The essence of folkbiology: Introduction. Pp. x-xiv in Paramo: An Areply to Randa ll and Hunn. American Andean Ecosystem under ee Gana 89(1):149-151. Influence, H. Balslev and J. Luteyn aig EI nature of folk-botanical (editors). Academic Press, New York. life-forms. pias ieah Anthropologist 87(2):298-315. Winter 1999 BERLIN, B. 1992. Ethnobiological ae cen les of f Plants and Animals in Bact ae pene. University Press, New Jer: 8. Bthnebiclogieal Classification. Pp. 9-26 in Cognition and ate sicseh pepe E. . Rosh & B. Lloyd (editors). L Associates Hillsdale. —___——. 1976. The concept of rank in ethnobiological peering Some evidence from a folk botany. American ihislasiet 303): 381-99, ee DR urther notes on bas categories and f ply to Brown. American permed 76:327-329. 1973. Folk systematics in relation to biological classification and enclature. A 1 Review of re and Systematics 4:259-71. —_—— 1972 . Speculations « on the growth ae of Language “ saat pot BERLIN mB S SLCVE, on li EN. 1974. Principles of Tzeltal Plant oe Academic Press, New BERLIN, B., BREEDLOVE, D., & RAVEN, PF. 1973. classification and nome biolo y. American Anthropologist 75(1):214-42. BILLINGS, WD. 1974. Artic and alpine vegetation: Plant adaptations to cold mmer climates. Pp. 403-43 in Artic and Alpine Environments, J. Ives & Barry (editors). Methuen, Great Britain. BROWN, C. 1987. The folk subgenus: A new ethnobiological rank. Journal o Ethnobiology 7(2): ean 192. es, ew LE e and Living things. Rutgers —_ Press, New Jersey. . 1979. Folk zoological life-forms: Their univer sality and growth. American Anthropologist 81(4):791-817. . 1977. Folk biological life forms: Their peer necech and grow American Anthropologist 79:317-342. 15(58):23 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 173 BUDOWSKL G. 1968. La influencia humana regions of the Tropical Americas, C. Troll (editor). Proceedings of the UNESCO, México. BULMER, R. 1979. Mystical and mundane in Kalam classification of birds. Pp. 57- 79 in Classification in their Social Context, R. Ellen and R. Reason ini * Sppene Press, London. 4. Folk biology in the New Guinea cnsinate Social Science Information 13(4/5):9-28 —___s 1970. Which came first, the chicken or the egg-head? Pp. 1069-91 in Echanges et communications, J. Povillon and P. Maranda (editors). Mouton, The Hague —____—.. 1967. Why is the cassowary not a bird? A problem of zoological taxonomy among the Karam of the New Guinea Highlands. Man 2(1):5-25. CLEEF, A.M. 1983. Fitogeografia y Colombia: Una eal, oan’ con otras Revista Académica Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas 197 Characteristics of neotropical paramo vegetation and its subantartic relations. Pp. 365-90 in Geoecological Relations between the Lauer (editors). Edwiss. Forschung ‘l, iesbaden. Tropical Biogeography, F. Vuilleumier an . Monasterios (editors). Oxford University Press American Museum of Natural History, New York. 979. Comparacion fitogeografica de paramos entre varias cordilleras. Pp. 89-99 in El Medio Ambiente Paramo, M is oe (editor). CEA / IVIC, Caraca nee | { S A new subtribe in the Heliantheae oe ae oe Espeletiinae. Phytologia 35(1):43-6 174 ZENT & ZENT ——— 8. Paramo vegetation and its life — Pp. 163-186 in ates ed of the Mountainous regions of th Tropical Americas, C. Troll joad. Proceedings of the UNESCO, México. _______. 1954. Distribution of the genus Espeletia. Rapports Comm. 8 Congress International of Botany. Sect. IV: 131- 152. Be ae 1934. Observaciones geobotanicas en Colombia. Trabajos del Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Serie Botanica, 27:1-44. ELLEN, R.F. 1975. Variable constructs in Nuaulu zoological classification. Social Science Information 14(3/4):201-28. GAL, S. 1973. Inter-informant variability in an ethnozoological taxonom Anthropological Linguistics 15(4):203- iee ee L.B. 1964. Categories and relations n Gimi natural science. American Andivepeopnt 66:273-280. GUHL, E. 1982. Los Paramos Circundantes de la Sabana de ces Jardin Botanico ii me Bogota ___ 1968. Los Paramos Circundantes de la zeae de Bogota. Pp. 195-212 in Geo-Ecology of the Mountainous regions of the Tropical Americas, C. Troll (editor). Proceedings of the UNESCO, O. HELDBERG, O. 1992. Afroalpine vegetation compared to paramo: Convergent aptation divergent differentiation. Pp. x-xiv in Paramo: An Influence, H. Balslev and J. Luteyn (editors). Academic Press, New York. NN, E. 1987. Science and common sense: A re to Atran. limes Anthropologist 89(1):146-14 na =, I, 2 eas ae in folk biological classificatio merican games 84(4):830- 34 is —_____. 1977. Tzeltal Folk Zoology: The classification of discontinuities in e. Academic Press, New York. 01976. Toward a perceptual model of folk biological classification. American Ethnologist 3(3):508-28. JAHN, A. 1931. Los paramos venezolanos. Boletin de la Sociedad Venezolana de Ciencias Naturales 1(3):93-132. JAMES, D. 1975. The evolution of the des. Scientific American 229(2):61-69. Vol. 19, No. 2 KAY, P. 1975. A model- — approach to folk taxonomy. Social Sciences Information 14:151-166. KEMPTON, W. 1978. — grading and ip sae relation: mug is a sort of cup. American Ethnologist 5(1):44-65. LASGAARD, S. 1992. ere seat sot in the 156- 170 in Paramo: ce ch Ecosystem under Human Influence, H. Balslev and J. Luteyn (editors). Academic Press, New York. LAUER, W. 1979. La posicién de los paramos en la estructura del paisaje de los naar —— Pp. 29-45 in El Med aramo, M.L. Salgado- Taped (editor). CEA/IVIC, Caracas. LOPEZ, E. 1993. Paéramo: Diferentes visiones. Pp. 109-121 in El] Cuaternario de la Cordillera de Mérida. Andes Venezolanos, C. Schubert and L. Vivas (editors). Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida. . 1992. Notas etnogrdaficas de los Parameros Venezolanos. Boletin ee 24:59-82. —_., 1991, Etnobotanica de los Parainibe Venezolanos. Tesis de Grado. (Ms Scientiarun en Biologia, mencién Antropologia), Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cientificas, Altos de Pi ipe. LOPEZ-ZENT, E. 1995. Percepciones locales del ecosistema paramo: Un anilisi Guiane: Naturaleza y Ecologia Humana en el Neotrépico. (5): 238-268. LUTEYN, J.L. 1992. Paramos: Why study them? Pp. 1-14 in Paramo: An egies Ecosystem under Human Influence, H. Balslev and J. oe (editors). Academic Press, New Yor A.M. ei (editors). Academic Press, New MANI, M. 1980. Introduction; The vegetation of Highlands. Pp. 1-10; 127- 139 in Ecology of Highlands, M. tae and L.E. Giddings. W. Junk, Bosto Winter 1999 MAYR, E. 1982. The Growth of Biological ought: diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Belknap Press, Cambridge. MONASTERIO, M. 1980. Las formaciones vegetales de los paramos de Venezuela. Pp. 93- ily in Estudios Ecoldgicos en los Paramos Andinos, M. Monasterio fednen\. icine: de la ULA, Mérida. Se ee aramo desértico en el Altiandino de Venezuela. Pp. 117-146 in El Medio Ambiente Péramo, M.L Salgado-Labouriau (editor). VIC/CEA, aracas. MONASTERIO, M. and F. VUILLEUMIER. 1986. Preface and Introduction. In High Altitude Tropical Biogeography, F. Vuilleumier and M. Monasterio (editors). Oxford University Press and e American Museum of Natural History, New York. PIFANO, F. 1961. Investigacién y docencia medicina tropical. Archivos en venezolanos d bog tape Facultad de Medicina, UCV. IV(1):1-199. PITTIER, H. 1929 (1970). aa Usuales = Eugen cas. RAMSAY, PM. and E.R.B. OXLEY. 1996. Fire temperatures and postfire shh community dynamics in Ecuadori grass paramo. Vegetatio 124:129- 144. RANDALL, R. 1987. The nature of highly inclusive folk-botanical categories. American Anthropologist 89(1):143-146. . 1976. How tall is a taxonomic tree? Some evidence of dwarfism. American Ethnologist 3(3):543-55. RANDALL, R. & E. HUNN. 1984. Do life- forms evolve or do uses ‘for life? Some doubts about Brown’s universal RUE Seaice American Ethnologist 11(2):329-34 INALDI, 4 1993. Paleoecologia cuartenaria. Pp. 199-222 in El Cuaternario de la Cordillera de Mérida. Andes Venezolanos, C. Schubert and L. Vivas (editors). Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida. RIVERA, S. 1992. Neusa 9.000 anos de presencia humana en el paramo. Banco de la Republica, Bogota ROBINSON, H. 1981. A Revision of the Tribal and Subtribal Limits of the Heliantheae (Asteraceae). Smithsonian Contribution to Botany, Number 51, Washington. JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY ar5 RODRIGUEZ XUAREZ, J. 1558. Repartimientos de 1558. ie del Registro Principal de Mérida. RUSE, M. 1992. Biological species: Natural kinds, = panei or what. In The Units of Evolution: Essays on the Nature of Species, phates, (editor). MIT Press, bri EOTIGES. SALGADO-LABOURIAU, M.L. 1986. Late quaternary Li cage gf of Venezuelan igh mountains. Pp. 202-17 in High Ahitude Tropical Biogeography, F. Vuilleumier and Monasterios ema Oxford Clee Press and Am n Museum of Natural History, ew arm SCHUBERT, Cc. 1980. Contribucién de Venezuela al inventario mundial de glaciares. Boletin de Ciencias Naturales 34(137):267-79. SCHUBERT, C. and L. VIVAS. 1993. El Cuaternario de la Cordillera de Mérida. Andes Venezolanos. Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida. SIEVERS, W. 1888. Die Cordillere von ¥ Univer presented by Prof , SIMON, Fray Pedro. 1627 (1963). Noticias Historiales de Venezuela. Biblioteca de la Academia Nacional de la Historia, Fuentes para la Historia Colonial de Venezuela, Tomos 66-67. SMITH, A. 1981. Growth and Population Dynamics of Espeletia (Compositae) in the Venezuelan Andes. Smithsonian Contributions to Botany, Number 48, Washington. STURM, H. and O. RANGEL. 1985. Ecologia de los Paramos Andinos: Una Gerénimo Triana, Number = Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Bogot TAMAYO, F. 1958. Notas explicativas del Venezuela 1(1):7- TROLL, C. 1968. The cordilleras of the tropical Americas: sis ects of climatic, Je hina age rae a agrarian ecology. Pp. 15-56 in Geo-Ecology of the Mountainous regions of the Tropical Americas, C. Troll (editor). Proceedings of the UNESCO, México. 176 ZENT & ZENT VAN DER HAMMEN, T. 1979. Historia y tolerancia de Ecosistemas parameros. Pp. 55-78 in El Medio Ambiente Paramo, M.L. Salgado-Labouriau (editor). CEA/IVIC, Caracas. VAN DER HAMMEN, T. and A. CLEEF. 1986. Development of the high Andean vegetation. Pp. 153- 201 - ae Altitude Tropical Biogeo Vuilleumier and M. Monsees (editors) Oxford University Press and American Museum of Natural History, New York. VARESCHL, V. 1970. Flora de los Paramos. Ediciones del Rectorado. ULA, Mérida. VERWEYJ, P.A. and H. BEUKEMA. 1992. Aspects of human influence on upper Andean forest line vegetation. Pp. 171- n Andean Ecosystem ie ae , H. Balslev and J. Luteyn feditote), Academic Press, New York Vol. 19, No. 2 aap area F. 1979. oe y evolucion de us comunidades de aves de paramo na. Pp. 181- 206 in El Medio rece St Paramo, MLL. Salgado- Labouriau (editor). CEA/IVIC, Caracas. VUILLEUMIER, F. and D. EWERT. 1978. The distribution of birds in Venezuelan paramos. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 162:49-90. WAGNER, E. 1973. The Mucuchies phase: An extension of the Andean cultural pattern into western Venezuela. American a 75(1): 195-213. 1967 rehistory and Ethnohistory e - Carache Area in Western Venezuela. Yale University Asari in Anthropology, New WIERZBICKA, A. 1985. a aie oh = Conceptual Analysis Publishers, Ann Arbor. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 77 The Political Ecology of Bananas: Contract Farming, Peasants, and Agrarian Change in the Eastern Caribbean. Lawrence S. Grossman. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill and London. 1998. Pp. 268. $19.95 (paper) $49.95 (hardcover) ISBN 0-8078-4718-6. Bananas seem such a simple fruit, but their route to the local market has al- ways been a complicated one, bound up in political and economic imbalances whose roots reach back to the colonial era. In The Political Ecology of Bananas, geog- rapher Lawrence Grossman adds an interesting new chapter to this history, analyzing the recent trend away from vertical monopoly toward contract farming of bananas in the Windward Islands. His book arrives at a time when the geogra- phy of the banana industry seems likely to change d tically, because of a recent World Trade Organization decision that may open the European market to the cheaper bananas of such traditional powers as Dole, Del Monte, and Chiquita, at the expense of farmers in the Windwards. Grossman’s aim is examine how well banana contract farming fits ideas about the rise of contract farming generally in this new era of globalization. In contract farming, a purchaser agrees in advance to buy farmers’ output but sets proce- dures for crop production and often provides technological and ic assist to ensure crop quality. The guaranteed market and the assistance are a benefit to farmers, and the buyer sheds the risks associated with growing the crop. This arrangement has now become common in tropical export agriculture, particularly for labor-intensive specialty crops grown in small peasant plots. As Grossman ex- plains, contract farming has often been seen as responding to the same forces that drive broader industrial restructuring, and contract farmers have been seen as analogous to factory workers, diverted from producing varied food crops for local consumption to producing a standard export commodity to exacting specifica- tions and with high inputs of pesticides and fertilizers. Grossman’s thesis is that this view is oversimplified and misleading, and he demonstrates it via a detailed case study of the banana industry of St. Vincent. The first four chapters of the book provide a progressively detailed introduc- tion: the history and organization of the Leeward Islands banana industry, the rise of banana contract farming, the agricultural history of St. Vincent, and finally the agricultural life of a small village, Restin Hill, where Grossman has carried out detailed studies of the local response to contract farming. Thereafter, the author applies insights from each of these scales to three themes in the literature of con- tract farming, termed the “labor question,” the “food question,” and the “environmental question.” Grossman points out that farmers in general are not industrial automatons but rather skilled workers who have always had to master a variety of tasks to produce their crops, and that banana farmers in particular have had to adopt increasingly complex technological “improvements” designed to produce the perfect fruit expected on European tables. The inventive ways in which individual farmers adapt to these new requirements show well how they maintain a degree of autonomy despite the power wielded by the buyer. Grossman shows that banana growing is not necessarily done at the expense of local food production, as commonly supposed. In fact, Vincentians have a tradition of food 178 BOOK REVIEWS Vol. 19, No. 2 importation that goes back to the salted codfish of colonial days, and that is pres- ently encouraged by the lower prices of imported than local staples. Contract farming is commonly believed to encourage wasteful and dangerous pesticide use, but in Restin Hill villagers recognize some compounds as toxic and take pre- cautions with them, while experimenting in a variety of ways with their application, not always with detrimental effects. In all these themes, Grossman emphasizes that the complexity of the local adaptation to contract farming often defies both intuition and easy generalization. Grossman’s prose is direct and sometimes vivid, particularly in descriptions of village life and the practical hardships of banana growing. I especially enjoyed his brief discourse on the Vincentian diet. All those chicken backs and necks we don’t eat at Kentucky Fried Chicken are exported to places like St. Vincent, where they make up an astonishing 40% of chicken imports. This book would certainly be a useful supplement to courses in agricultural geography, Latin American re- gional geography, and courses focusing on the rise of globalization. It could have been improved by shortening and better integrating the chapters in the first half of the book, and by including some background information (for example, about the various banana genotypes and diseases) in appendixes. I also wish he had explored further some of the questions raised. For instance, can the Windward Islands banana industry shift to production of specialty crops (including specialty bananas)? Is there any possibility of establishing grower-owned cooperatives to redress the present power imbalance in banana production? What other environ- mental impacts besides pesticide contamination might be exacerbated by banana production? How similar is the situation on St. Vincent to that on the other Wind- ward Islands, particularly those outside the British sphere of influence? These questions aside, Grossman’s book is a valuable contribution to our understanding of the volatile historical geography of bananas and a useful illustration of the value of detailed local field work for leavening theoretical generalizations. Timothy S. Brothers Department of Geography Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis Indianapolis, IN 46202 Journal of Ethnobiology 19(2): 179-218 Winter 1999 GITKSAN PLANT CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE LESLIE MAIN JOHNSON Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2H4 ABSTRACT.— The Gitksan of northwestern British Columbia are speakers of an Interior Tsimshianic language. They live in a mountainous, densely forested environment transitional between the Northwest Coast and the Boreal interior plateau. Traditionally the Gitksan pursued a mixed fishing/hunting/ gathering subsistence strategy. The Gitksan have a roughly hierarchical classification of plants. The general domain ‘plant kingdom’ or ‘floral form’ is recognized but not overtly labelled. Within this, several broad groupings of the life form sort can be distinguished. Three of th large groupings composed of | subordinate generics: gan ‘trees,’ sgan ‘plants,’ and maa’y ‘berry’ or ‘fruit plants.’ ‘Plants’ include a diverse mixture of forms ranging from small trees to some perennial herbs, and prostrate sub-shrubs. The ‘plant’ and the ‘berry’ groups overlap extensively. The remainder are residual taxa which are empty, containing few or no named subtypes, though encompassing morphological and t ically di f habasxw ‘grass’ or ‘hay,’ ’yens ‘leaves’ or ‘herbaceous plants,’ majagalee ‘flowers,’ umhlw ‘moss,’ and gayda ts’uuts ‘fungi.’ A mixture of morphologic and utilitarian characters seems to underlie the system of plant classification. TI lationship of partonomy to utility d classification is explored. Ninety distinct generics have been documented. Eighty-four represent vascular plants and six represent mosses, fungi and lichens. £ | Of flaihea Keywords: classification, Gitksan, ethnobotany, Canada, Northwest Coast RESUMEN.- Los Gitksan hablan una léngua tsimsiana interior. Viven en una region montafiosa y de bosques densos. Es una zona de transici6n entre la costa noroeste y la meseta interior sub-boreale de la Columbia Britanica. Tradicionalmente, eran pescadores del salm6n, cazeros, y recolectores de diversas plantas. Los Gitksan tienen una clasificacién de plantas mas 0 menos jerarquica. El dominio de ‘forma floral,’ o sea del las plantas, no es marcado. Dentro de ello, varios agrupaciones generales se pueden distinguir. T grupos grand puestos de genéri subordinados numerosos: ‘arboles’ (gan), ‘plantas’ (sgan) y ‘bayeros o fruteros’ (maa’y). ‘Plantas’ incluyen a una mezcla de formas diversas desde arboles pequefios a hierbas perenias, y arbustos pequenos prostrados. Los grupos de ‘plantas’ y ‘bayas’ coinciden en parte. Los demas son grupos residuos ‘vacios,’ de contener solamente de formas desnombradas, 0 de pocas formas nombradas, aunque contienen plantas de una variedad morfologica y taxon6mica. Incluyen: ‘sramineas’ o ‘heno’ (habasxw), ‘hojas’ o ‘plantas herbaceas’ (“yens), ‘flores’ (majagalee), ‘musgos’ (umhlw), y ‘hongos’ (gayda ts’uuts). El sistema de clasificacion de las plantas parece subyacer en una mezcla de caracteres morfolégicas y utilitarias. Se exploran las relaciones entre la partonomia y la utilidad. Noventa genéricos han sido documentado. De ellos, ochenta y cuatro representan plantas vasculares, y seis representan MUusgos, hongos y liquenes. 180 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 RESUME.- Les Gitksan du nord ouest de la Colombie britannique appartiennent a un groupe Hinguistique a de ’ intérieur. [Ils habitent un ns la région transitoire entte la cbte nord pains tet le e plateau boréal de Vintérieur. De tradition, les Gitksan g asée sur la péche, la chasse, et la cueillette. Les Git tilisent téme de classifi végétale plus ou moins hiérarchique. Le domaine universel ’ régne végétal’ ou ‘forme végétale’ est reconnu mais des qualifications ne sont pas évidentes. A l’intérieur de ce domaine, on distingue pasos grandes =—— du genre pate vivant. Il s ‘agit, wale trois de ceux-ci, désignées: gan ‘arbres,’ cae ‘plantes,’ et ‘maa 'y ‘baies’ ou ‘plantes fruitiéres.’ Le groupe ‘plantes’ rassemble tout un éventail de formes, allant de petits arbres jusqu’a certaines herbes as et des sous-arbrisseaux procombants. Les catégories ‘Plantes et ‘baies’ a cheysuetent beaucoup. Les autres groupements vides, c’est-a-dire dénouées de, ou ayant que peu de, sand ciorain nommés, — ae es ae cia ih des formes basxw ‘herbes’ ou ‘foins,’ ‘yens ‘feuilles’ ou ‘plantes herbacées,’ majagalee pated sane’ mousse,’ et gayda ts’uuts ‘mycétes.’ Un amalgame de caractéres morphologiques et fonctionnels semble servir de base pour le systeme de classification bbisoomae oe rapport entre la partonomie et l’utilité d’une plante, et sa e. De parmi les 90 genres distincts documentés, 84 représentent des plantes vasculaires et 6 représentent des mousses, des mycétes, et des lichens. INTRODUCTION The Gitksan of northwestern British Columbia are speakers of an Interior Tsimshianic language. They are in contact both with Coast Tsimshian and Nisga’a to the west and northwest, and interior Athapaskan peoples to the east and south north. They live in the drainage of the Skeena River in a mountainous, densely forested environment, transitional between the mild, wet northwest coast and the boreal interior forests. Traditional subsistence was a mixed fishing, hunting and gathering strategy, with Sees dispersal | and winter aggregation in large, per- manent villages. Modern six ges along the central portion of the Skeena River and two of its tributaries, the Kitwanga and Kispiox Rivers (Figure 1) and in adjacent towns and cities. The modern villages are approximately in the same areas as precontact winter villages. In the recent past two villages further north on the Skeena River were also occupied. People of the three western villages speak a slightly different dialect than the three modern eastern villages. People of the two northern villages, now largely absorbed in the eastern villages, had some distinctive features of speech. The Gitksan are skilled woodworkers. Traditionally they built plank houses and made dugout canoes as well as totem poles and many smaller wooden items. Other traditional plant uses included gathering of numerous types of berries, a few edible root types, a few green vegetable types, and tree inner bark or ‘cam- bium’ principally from hemlock and lodgepole pine for food; use of a number of types of roots, barks and other plant parts for medi ; and use of various barks, roots, and herbaceous plants for cordage, basketry, matting, and clothing. 181 Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY GALDO'O GISGAGA'AS BABINE RIVER GISBAYAKWS GIT-ANYAAW Zz Figure 1~ Map showing locations of Gitksan territory and villages. The classification system of the Gitksan is similar to other reported ethnobo- tanical classifications of indigenous groups from northwestern North America (Compton 1993; Gottesfeld 1993; Hunn 1982, Hunn and French 1984; Johnson- Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998; Turner 1974, 1987, 1989; Turner et al. 1990). The presence of berry plants, mosses and mushrooms as major plant groups along with the more widespread woody plant (or tree and shrub) and grerb (or herb and grass) life forms, seem typical of other classification systems found in this region, as does the loose and overlapping major plant groups found in Gitksan classifica- tion. Also similar to other northwestern North American classification systems is the presence of non-taxonomic relationships of affiliation (Turner 1989) or coordi- nation (Hunn and French 1984) between classes. These types of relationship are not taxonomic in the strict sense (see discussion in Ellen 1993) in that classes of ostensibly the same level in the classification system are seen as somehow belong- ing together, or as being related to one another, without their being included ina superordinate grouping, or one being a kind of the other. 182 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 METHODS The data on which this synthesis is based were gathered over a period of thir- teen years in a series of unstructured interviews with elders and other knowledgable people regarding healing, medicinal plants and other plant uses, identification and naming of plants, and landscape classification, and several field trips to gather medicinal plants and plant foods. In 1996, I undertook a short series of more directed interviews. From 1985 to 1988, and sporadically in 1992-1995, some interviews were conducted with the assistance of Beverley Anderson, a Gitksan public health nurse, who also conducted interviews on her own and con- tributed a great deal of information to the project. I recorded information relevant to plant classification from 41 people: 22 men and 19 women. The majority of these were over 50 years old at the time of interviewing. I elicited information about plant names and uses by a variety of methods. I often elicited plant information by bringing fresh specimens to elders and inquir- ing what specific plants were called, and what, if any, their uses were. I also used a looseleaf notebook of colour photos of local plants and plant parts such as ber- ries, stems, petioles or rootstocks during interviews. Some data was obtained during field trips with elders about plants present in the immediate environment. Other plant data were volunteered spontaneously. I confirmed the identity of spontane- ously described plants by reference to fresh plant material collected to confirm postulated identifications, and to “case” specimens (Bye 1986) of known identity (e.g. a dried plant rhizome carried as a charm) or by freehand sketches and verbal descriptions, later verified by showing a plant or specimen to an elder to confirm the identification. However, some Gitksan plant information may have been missed as [made no prehensive attempt to elicit names of all botanical species present in Gitksan territory.! I also encountered some terms and/or descriptions and uses for which I could not identify the botanical species referent. I conducted inter- views in English, or in Gitksan with a bilingual translator, with use of Gitksan plant names and other botanical terms. I identified vascular plant specimens by reference to Hultén (1968), and Hitchcock and Cronquist (1973), supplemented by various publications by the Royal British Columbia Museum, and other more recent field guides. The Botany Division of the Royal British Columbia Museum assisted with identification of difficult vascular plant specimens. Bryophytes and fungi were identified with the assistance of the staff of the Cryptogamic Herbarium in the Biological Sciences Department of the University of Alberta. Vouchers are on deposit with the her- barium of the Royal British Columbia Museum (V) and the Vascular Plant Herbarium of the University of Alberta (ALTA), and in my personal collection. CLASSIFICATION Overview of Gitksan Plant Classification — The Gitksan have a roughly hierarchical classification of plants (Figure 2). The general domain of “plant kingdom” or “flo- ral form” is unlabelled. Within this, several broad groupings of the life form sort can be distinguished. The classic definition of life form includes plant groupings TABLE 1.— Gitksan Generics. sa name(s) Gitksan Generics English Name amgiikw western hemlock giik western hemlock amhaawak paper birch haawa paper birch amhat'a’l western red cedar amk’‘ooxst trembling aspen amliuux alder lu Ide am’mal (E)/am’mel (W) ‘waasan (E)/’waasen (W) ax higandihi ax sgana baxbok’ (E only) belena ‘watsx (E) belena ‘wetsx (W) damtx eo, (W) nk aa ook’, haluuts’ ook’ k’ e, k’al “sean ale ait (W) oan (E) sgangem (W) gapk’oyp sgangapk’oyp gasx gayda ts’uuts gesgan alder black cottonwood lowland willow trees willow spiny woodfe spiny wooden aa (stem) spiny woodfern n ‘inedible fern root’ northern gooseberry s’ a ‘braided’ looking moss or liverwort black aetna (black fruited) yellow pond | lilly saskatoon bush saskatoon bush bunchberry bunchberry plant riceroot lily fungus, mushroom ‘tree hair’ (Kaf.) Sarg. a hete eroph ylla Betula papyrifera Marsh na (L.) and Populus peieae ee ssp. trichocarpa (Torrey & Gray) Brayshaw Salix spp. Salix s Drypoteris a (K.B.Presl) Fraser-Jenkins and Jermy Drypoteris expan Drypoteris pitt Taraxacum officinale Weber Lycopodium clavatum L., L. annotinum L., L. complanatum L., L. leche Michx. Lycopodium clavatum, L. annotinum, L. complanatum, L. dendroid Athyrium filix femina (L.) Roth, Drypteris filix-mas (L.) Schott, peal D. expansa Ribes oxyacanthoides Inonotus obliquus (Pers: Fr.) Pilat and Fomes igniarius (L. ex Fries) Kickx Prunus virginiana L. var melanocarpa (Nels.) Sarg Prunus virginiana L. var melanocarpa {unknown Vaccinium membranaceum Dougl. m Fritillaria camschatcensis (L.) Ker-Gaw] 1 oy: ‘ a Py See } 4: y 8 bodies Bryoria spp. ASO TOISONHLA JO TVNANOL 6661 FO}UTM €8L TABLE 1.— Gitksan Generics. Gitksan Generics pol aad Name v8L Latin name(s) sganhaxdekw (W) hinak hisgahldaatsxw hoo’ cna ae 4 hoobixs ‘w hu’ums B)/e wa ao (W) ihlee’em ts’ak is sgan’i isxum sga’nisxw (E) isxum sk’ooks (W) k’‘awts k’ooxst k’ots laxsa laxnok sgannaxnok mountain alder nee ‘frog blanket large leaved avens, nee cow parsnip, ‘wild rhubarb’ fireweed peavine, ‘wild sweet peas’ ete fern, tall fern grass, hay cattails, bullrush, sedge? w and/or Rocky Mountain juniper yew and/or Rocky Mountain juniper skunk cabbage wild calla or water arum Northern rein orchid pach root fer horsetails and scouring r rushes ri 0 ? timberline mountain hemlock swa rant subalpine fir, ‘balsam’ ‘s cup or beadlily devil’s clu ed columbine and Indian paintbrush eres soapberry bush Sitka wild mint? sei valer an r Dou uglas map] false Solomon’s Seal juniper juniper Alnus crispa (Ait.) Pur Lobaria pulmonaria and : oregana Epilobium angustifolium Lathryus nevadensis re and L.ochroleucus Hook. Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Ku graminoid plants; Poaceae, Cyperaceae, Typhace Large graminoid plants in lakes Typha latifoilia, paris spp., Carex? Taxus brefivolia Nutt. and/or Juniperus a m Sarg. Taxus brefivolia and/or Juniperus scopulo Lysichiton americanum Hultén & St. Jo Calla palustris L. Platanthera hyperborea = ) Lind]. 5S Polypodium glycyrrhiza D.C. Eat T Equisetum arvense L., ie arian Schleich., E. hyemale L., E. sylvaticum L. rd quisetum arvense, E. varieg j Smilacina stellata (L.) Desf and ?trifoliata (L.) Des = Chimaphila umbellata (L.) Bart.; Pachystima hee (Pursh.) Raf. Tsuga mertensiana (Bong.) Carr. ? (stunted high elevation specimens) Ribes lacustre (Pers.) Poi Abies lasiocarpa (Hook) Nutt Clintonia uniflora (Schult. : Kunth. Oplopanax horridum (Smith) Miq. Aquilegia formosa Fisch. an Castilleja miniata Dougl. Shepherdia canadensis (L. Shepherdia canadensis Valeriana sitchensis Bong.; Mentha arvensis L.? Valeriana sitchensis Daucus carrota L.; Lupinus ?nootkatensis Donn s Acer glabrum Torr. var. Douglasii (Hook.) Dippel = Smilacina racemosa (L.) Desf. ie) Juniperus communis L. and J. scopulorum Sarg. 7 Juniperus communis and J. scopulorum i) N TABLE 1.— Gitksan Generics. Gitksan Generics English Name Latin name(s) leek spreading dogbane, ‘nylon plant’ Apocynum sganleek Apa 5 ages Leper plant’ Apocynum androsimaefolium ligimtxhl gan ee fur’, ‘black tr Bryoria spp. loots’ red elderberry Sambucus racemose Ly maa’ya gaa black twinberry, ‘crowberry’ Lonicera ae (Rich.) Banks b sganmaa ‘yagaak E a’ytx wid smex (W) jagalee sari Melan k (E) ‘me neg k (W) maa'y w we maa’ya sae ae ’w maa’ya smex mihlxw miikooxst/miik’ooxs miigan sgandaxdo’ohl black twinber adow horsetail ‘flower’ puffball wild blue currants ‘frogberries’ Queen’s cup or beadlily ‘charred’, birch fungus salmonber highbush blueberry wild strawberry wild strawber ay bog prvares and ? lowbush cranberry choke p sh igs a Pacific crabapple tree lowbush blueberry raspber thimbleberry stinging nettle ce Labrador tea, ‘swamp tea’ Lonicera involuc Symphoricarpos ee (L.) Blake Clintonia uniflora Rubus pedatus J.E. Smith Aralia nudicaulis L Aralia nudicaulis seen pratense Ehrb. esidual taxon | ith conspicuous flowers Aes spp. and perhaps others, gh s as = Rachels pila Ribes laxiflorum Pursh. Rubus pubescens Raf. ae esha and Fomes igniarius Rubus spectabilis Pursh. Vaccinium ovalifolium Sm. F i ob sp a a Duchesne Fragaria virginiana Oxycoccos microcarpus Turez. and perphaps V. vitis-idaea L. runus virginiana var cana carpa Malus fuscus (Raf.) Schneid a Vaccinium caespitosum Michx. Rubus idaeus L. Rubus ple pa Nutt. Urtica dio Picea reloads Parry, P. i (Moench.) Voss, P. x lutzii, and P. mariana & Proggna (Mill) Brit., Sterns Ledum groenlandicum Oeder 6661 19}UTM KOOTOISONHL JO TVNUNOS S81 TABLE 1.— Gitksan Generics. 981 Gitksan Generics English Name Latin name(s) SpHattsa anpits sgants’ak’ (E) sgantsek’ (W) sgants’imwil’oo’o t ts‘anksa gaak ts’eex ts’idipxs sa ill ee ay aiinhl gan h Sahixum “ yip wih e ‘yans (E)/’yens (W) mountain ash beaked hazelnut swamp currant snowberr fool’s huckleberry pincherry black hawthorn, ‘thornberry’ Indian or False hellebore the root of the Indian hellebore the root of the Indian hellebore black huckleberry highbush cranberry Labrador tea, ‘swamp tea’ kinnikinnick kinnikinnick plant stonecro nodding on juniper (shout knee to mid-thigh high) highbush cranberr rry moss underneath the reo moss-on-soil; t trial mosses unknown one aad with three parts red osier na amabilis ona ha bells and twisted stalk baneberry, fairy bells and twisted stalk yarrow and pearly everlasting ‘leaves’, herbaceous plants Sorbu Greene and S. scopulina Roem. Corylus cornuta Marsh. Ribes means Symphoricarpos albus Menziesia frais Smith Prunus pensylva L Crataegus douglasii Lindl. Veratrum viride Ait. the root of Veratrum viride! the root of Veratrum viride r Ne ~~ 2 oO = NOSNHO[ eisai cernuum Rote iperus co nis 2and J. scopulorum Viburnum ade Vibernum edule terrestrial forest floor Musci Sphagnum do nok a pale) and perhaps other spp.; Musci in general terrestrial Mus Ch no nea eG (D. Don) Spach SF Cornus stolonifera Michx. Abies amabilis (Dougl.) Forbes Disporum hookeri (Torr.) 5 eel Actaea rubra (Ait.) Willd, and Streptopus amplexifolius (L.) D Achillea millaefolium L. and Aigphile margaritacea (L.)B. & H. Z ON ‘6T ‘TPA Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 187 that are morphologically based, encompass a number of named generics, and are transitive (Atran 1985, 1990; Berlin 1992; Brown 1994). An adequate rene y for cand pina groupings which do not satisfy these conditions is prok of the “intellectualist” school would main- tain that groupings based on other criteria are not part of the general purpose ethnobiological classification of a cultural group (Atran 1990; Berlin 1992; Brown 1984). Others, such as Eugene Hunn (1982), Nancy Turner (1987), Brian Morris (1984) and Alejandro de Avila (personal communication 1995), whose positions have sometimes been characterized as “utilitarian” would suggest that a priori limiting consideration to morphologically based life forms may obscure understanding the ordering of the cognitive domain as experienced by members of the study community. In a previous paper (Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998), I chose to retain aah — life slim - major ia groupings, despite some differences in definin has Berlin (1992), Atran (1985, 1990) and Brown ee In light of peak confusion caused by retention of the term life form while rejecting ts of the 2 original authors’ criteria, I will here adopt the more neutral ’ ‘major plant group” to include all large groupings of plants, whether based on morphological gestalt or other characters, and whether encom- PLANT KINGDOM maa'y “berries” “flowers” Figure 2.— Gitksan Plant Classification: schematic relationship of broad plant classes. trast sets of numerous named generics are bounded with solid black lines. “Empty life forms” are shown with vertical dashed lines. The semantic domain “floral form” or “plant kingdom” is outlined in gray. TABLE 2.~ Major Plant Group Affiliations of Gitksan Generics 881 NOSNHO!I Gan ‘Trees’ Sgan ‘Plants’ M’aay ‘Berries’ 'Yans/’Yens ‘Leaves’ am’mal (E) pecans sgan naxn maa’ya gaak black twinberry ts vanksa gaak (?) nodding onion am’‘mel (W) ottonwood sgansxduu'lixs ‘bear’s berries maa’ yhl litsxw Queen’s cu yans (E) ‘leaves’ amk’ooxst aspen sgandaxdo’ohl Labrador tea aa’yim hagwi strawberry bramble asi (W) ‘leaves’ am’wasaan willow tree sganmaa’yagaak black twinberry maa’ytxwhl smax (E) ‘bear's berries’ sdetxs (?) stinging nettle amgiik hemlock sgansa’angitl’ mountain as maa’ytxwhl smex (W) _ ‘bear’s berries’ amhaawak irc sgant’imi’yt kinnikinnik maa’y welgan blue currant awak birch sgants’ak’ (E) hazel bu maa’ya ganaa’w trailing raspberry amhat’a’l red cedar sgants‘imwil’oo’o = swamp currant maa’ya smex Queen’s cup amluux alder tree sgantya’ytxw (E) snowberry bush maa‘ya luulak’ (W) snowberry giist (?) mountain alder sgantye’ytxw (W) _fool’s huckleberry miik’ooxst salmonberry hoo’oks (E) oo a sgan’ax woodfern plant iidoots strawberry hoo’oxs (W) _ subalpine sgan’eluuts’ook chokecherry tree miigan highbush blueberry luugan mountain a sgangam (E) saskatoon bush iigu strawber k’ooxst Douglas maple gangem (W) saskatoon bush miik’ooxs salmonberry eek pruce sgangak’oyp bunchberry plant miits’ook’ chokecherry sginist pine sganhaxdekw ‘bow plant’ milkst wild crabapple simgan red cedar sganis soapberry bush ‘miyahl (E) lowbush blueberry ihl yellow cedar sgankale’est rose bush ‘miyehl (W) lowbush blueberry anleek dogbane plant naasik’ aspberry sganmilkst crabapple tree nisk’o’o thimbleberry sgansnaw pincherry tree soapberr sgansnax em pane bush wsa gooseberry sgantsek’ (W) hazel bus gale’e/k’ale’e rose hips sgantsiks Indian haichore plant gam saskato sgantsidipxst highbush cranberry — gadimis black ‘oueremmats (black fruit) hissgant’imi’yt (?) | wintergreens etc simmaa’y black huckleberry general and dark bronze fruited form ots red elderberry ts‘idipxs highbush cranbe sbikst highbush cranberry k’ots (?) Solomon's tipyeest (?) ‘lavaberries’ t‘imi’yt (?) innikinnik loots’ (?) red elderry Majagalee ‘flowers’ Habasxw ‘grass’ a te ts’uuts ‘fungus’ Umhixw ‘moss’ majagalee ‘wildflower’ habasxw ‘hay’ or grass gayda t fungus umhixum miinhl ‘moss under trees’ ihlee’em ts’ak _— ‘bleeding nose’ habasxum t’ax _ lake grass mask Tuuluk’ (E) Lycoperdon spp. umhlxw moss xsneenauntwxt —_yarrow/ everlasting whl ‘birch fungus’ umhlxum ‘yiip ‘moss on soil’ agimgasxw ‘wiping plant’ oe ‘birch fungus’ gaanaxws unidentified falcate Z ‘ON ‘61 TOA Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 189 passing a relatively large contrast set of generics, or few to none. I consider these groups to contrast at the level of Berlin’s life form rank (1992). Three of the Gitksan major plant groups are large groupings encompassing a number of named subordinate g ics: gan ‘trees’ (approximately 15 types),? sgan ‘plants’ (approximately 26 types), and maa’y ‘fruit plants’ (approximately 26 types) (see Table 2). The remainder are residual taxa which are empty in the sense of Turner (1974), containing few or no named subtypes (ranging from 4 to 0), though comprising forms of morphological and taxonomic diversity: habasxw ‘grass’ or ‘hay,’ ‘yans/‘yens ‘leaves’ or ‘herbaceous plants,’ majagalee ‘flowers,’ umhlw ‘moss,’ and gayda ts’uuts ‘fungi’. The precise nature of these groupings is open to debate; one could also perhaps consider them unaffiliated generics of distinctive habit (cf. Berlin 1992), or small intermediate groupings. As indicated in Figure 2, fungi seem to be peripheral to the concept of ‘plant’ and are not similar to any other types of plants,? which indeed reflects their fundamentally distinct biology and is paralleled by the modern scientific classification of fungi as a separate king- dom, of equal rank with ‘plant’ and ‘animal.’* Lichens may form an unaffiliated intermediate; no overall term linking the several named classes was offered by consultants, and no mention of similarity to other types of plants was made. Within the major plant groups are found numerous generics, or basic kinds, which roughly correspond to the species and/or genera of the scientific botanical classification system (see Table 1). Asmaller number of covert int diate group ings of generics are also found (see discussion below). Some generics, and some intermediate groupings may not be subsumed in major plant groups, and may in fact be unaffiliated, a situation reported by other authors (Berlin 1992; Taller de Tradiccion Oral and Beaucage 1987). Major Plant Groups.— Gan, Gitksan trees, (see Table 2) comprise forms that are tall and woody, which are used for their wood and/or bark for technological purposes and for medicine or food. Height relative to people, large size and woodiness appear to be the primary diagnostic characters. The word gan is employed to indicate forest, ‘among the trees’ (spagaytgan). It is also the term for the tissue wood. Many tree names are of the formula ‘good for__’ (am___). Three examples are am ‘mal (cottonwood, ‘good for canoe’), am k’ooxst (aspen, ‘good for maple’), and amgiikw (hemlock, ‘good for hemlock’). Other names of this type can be found in Tables 1 and 2. This type of name is only found for tree species, though not every tree has a name of this type. Sgan ‘plants,’ seems to be a more heterogenous grouping; I have included plants in this group for which consultants spontaneously used the ‘plant’ term sgan as part of the name when discussing the plant. Morphologically, these range from small trees and large shrubs, to small shrubs and evergreen perenniel sub- shrubs, to large herbs, including at least one fern species. The boundaries between sgan ‘plant,’ and ‘yans/’yens ‘leaves,’ may be hat fuzzy, and some smaller herbaceous forms such as Cornus canadensis (sgangapk’oyp) are included in sgan (see Table 1 for a complete listing of Gitksan, English and scientific names of spe- cies). Taxonomically, gymnosperms, dicotyledonous and monocotyledonous angiosperms and ferns are included in this diverse class. Although consultants consistently offer ‘plant’ as the translation of the term sgan, Tarpent has analysed /sgan/ to mean ‘support’ (Compton et al. 1997). On deeper probing, some con- 190 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 sultants suggest a linkage between sgan and ‘stem,’ which is consistent with Tarpent’s interpretation. Plants in this grouping are often called by the name without the preceding ‘plant’ term, as loots’ instead of sganloots’. Taxa in this grouping overlap exten- sively with the ‘berry’ grouping; most, or perhaps all ‘berries’ are also ‘plants.’ In fact, in some cases the name, when used without the preceding sgan suggests the berry rather than the entire organism, as t’imi’yt (kinnikinnick fruit) versus sgant’imi’yt (kinnikinnick plant). Which term is used depends on the situation in part, i.e., whether the plant body or the fruits are the focus of attention. The third evident grouping of plants is that of fruit-bearing species, or ‘ber- ries,’ (maa’y).° The primacy of berries in the Gitksan diet is reflected in the importance of having berries as a perceptual character of plants. I was often asked, for example, when presenting fresh plant specimens for identification, what the ‘berry’ was like, or if it had berries. The berry grouping contains the largest num- ber of named types; at least ten of these are shared with the ‘plant’ group (see Table 2). This grouping is clearly focussed on edible fruits; plants with inedible berries such as black twinberry, Lonicera involucrata, seem to be peripheral mem- bers of the class. The empty major plant categories seem to be ecologically important group- ings of plants of distinctive morphology which are of little economic importance; within or associated with these life forms may be a few types of economic impor- tance, which appear to serve as prototypes. For example, in the moss grouping, which includes all terrestrial and aquatic or wetland moss species as well as per- haps morphologically similar vascular plant forms such as Huperzia selago,° the prototype is clearly “diaper moss” (umhIw), large pale Sphagnum species which grow in wetlands and were traditionally important for diapering and menstrual needs (Johnson-Gottesfeld and Vitt 1996). As is common in folk classifications, the prototype is unmarked (e.g., Ellen 1993: 83,85; Gottesfeld 1993; Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998; Hunn and French 1984; Turner 1987). Mosses from other envi- ronments are designated by descriptive phrases ‘moss-on-soil’ (Jeff Harris Sr. interview notes 10/19/87) or ‘moss-under the tree’ (e.g., Rhytidiadelphis triquetrus, a forest floor “feather” moss) ( Olive Ryan interview notes 7/25/95). One moss or liverwort (uncollected), reputed to form good waterproof bedding or thatch, has its own name. The fungus grouping comprises “mushrooms,” the fleshy fruiting bodies of basidiomycetes and some ascomycetes, and “conks” (bracket or shelf fungi), the woody perenniel fruiting bodies of polypores, woodrotting fungi. They are all referred to as gayda ts’uuts’ ‘bird hat’ or metaphorically ‘penis,’ whether fleshy mushrooms on soil or woody polypores on trees or rotting logs. The two types distinguished by generic names are polypores on birch trunk which could be glossed in English ‘birch fungus,’ and certain puffballs, which are called ‘ghost fart’ masxwa luulak’ (E)/mesxwa luukak’ (W).§ ‘Birch fungus’ is called by two alternate terms, mihIxw ‘charred,’ or diuxw; it comprises at least two distinct Lin- nean species, the cinder conk Inonotus obliquus (Gottesfeld 1992) and Fomes igniarius. Similar appearing species growing on hemlock trunks, for example, have no dis- tinctive name, and are simply called gayda ts’uuts’. Despite the great variety and Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 191 abundance of fungal species in the environment, and their seasonal salience, only the species growing on birch, which have economic use, and the perceptually sa- lient and uncanny puffballs are named. No species of fleshy fungi were traditionally eaten by the Gitksan. The situation with the three major plant groups encompassing herbaceous species is not entirely clear. They are groupings which cluster around the promi- nence of plant organs, i.e., the possession of conspicuous flowers or large leaves with no woody stem, or habit (in the botanical sense, that is, characteristic form of growth, particularly for graminoid plants). Few herbaceous types have economic uses or are distinguished with names, and a certain degree of overlap may be present between classes, for example, ‘yans/’yens ‘leaves’ and habasxw ‘hay,’ or ‘yans/’yens ‘leaves’ and majagalee ‘flower,’ depending on the focus of discus- sion. Graminoid plants in recent times have had two economic uses: a certain ‘swamp’ or lakeshore type (probably a sedge or bulrush) was used for a type of basketry, and since the introduction of domestic livestock, grasses and sedges have had importance as winter feed and pasturage. ‘Yans /’yens ‘leaves’ seems significant as a residue of small and inconspicuous plants, and ecologically describes herbaceous ground cover or undergrowth. No named generics were unequivocally associated with this group. Luke Fowler told Harlan Smith in 1926 that the introduced ion (Taraxacum officinale) was ‘yens.? Sometimes the term ’yens can be translated “plant”; the topical section in a bilin- gual Gitksan dictionary entitled (in English) “Names of Trees, Plants, and Flowers” used the term ‘yens along with gangan ‘trees’ and majagalee ‘flowers’ in the Gitksan title.!° TABLE 3.— Plants Identified as ‘Flowers’ by Harlan Smith’s Consultants in 1925-26 Latin Name Common Name Smith’s orthography Gitksan term Mentha arvensis field mint mezerul majagalee Heuchera glabra alum root skan mezerul sgan majagalee Parnassia palustris grass-of-parnassus _skan mizerlay sgan majagalee var. montanensis Corydalis aurea golden corydalis megerle maj agalee Clematis columbiana Virgins-bower mezerul majagalee Majagalee ‘flowers’ are conspicuous in season, especially in environments balpi d lpine tundra. The term applies both to the plant organ, as in the rose, which has flowers, but for the Gitksan, is not a ‘flower,’ and to what would be called in English “wildflowers.” A few flower types have names, and will be discussed as examples in the Generics section (see also Table 2). The common and conspicuous red columbine and Indian paintbrush are designated ihlee’em ts’ak ‘bleeding nose.’ It is probably the perceptual saliance of these forms because of their brilliant colour which causes them to be named; symbolic significance is also possible. Another generic which may be a ‘flower’ is xsneenauntwxt, which is composed of two common white flowered composite species of similar stature, pearly everlasting (Anaphalis margaritacea) and yarrow (Achillea millaefolium). The 192 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 two peavine species (Lathrys nevadensis and L. ochroleucus), common understory herbs with vivid purple or cream flowers, are a third possible ‘flower’ generic. They are lumped by the Gitksan as hagimgasxw ‘wiping plant,’ named for their use in wiping the slime off of salmon skin during fish processing. In the 1925 and 1926 Harlan Smith collected names for various plants we would call wildflowers, including in addition to those mentioned above, mountain avens (Dryas drummondii), sweet cicely (Osmorrhiza spp.), goatsbeard (Aruncus sylvester), and others. The names in general are either descriptive of uses (‘wiping plant’ for peavine) or are coordinate (‘resembling spreading dogbane’ for goatsbeard and sweet cicely). In addition, there were five species simply called ‘flowers’ or, interestingly ‘flower plant’ (Table 3), and a number of types which had no names (Table 8). The prototypes of the two most economically important major plant groups, gan ‘trees,’ and maa’y ‘berries,’ are named ‘real or true’: simgan ‘real tree’ or ‘wood,’ the western red-cedar Thuja plicata, and simmaa’y ‘real or true berry,’ the black huckleberry Vaccinium membranaceum. TABLE 4.—Plants of Unknown Affiliation Gitksan name English meaning probably sgan ambiguous oro gahldaats yellow pond lily Vv gasx riceroot lily V haast fireweed Vv ha’mook cow parsnip V hagi peavine V hoobixs ‘wiigat Queen’s V isxum sgan’isxw (E) ‘smelly plant’ valerian, mint? V isxum sk’ooks (W) ‘smelly plant’ valerian, mint? V k’awts ‘wild carrots’ and carrots V wa’umst devil’s club V xsneenauntwxt yarrow and everlasting V xh red osier V hisgahldaatsxw water arum, calla lily V The major plant group affiliation of a number of taxa remains unclear (Table 4), including distinctive, important, and widespread plants such as devil’s club. Whether, for example, its unique morphology and impressive spininess, actually create a unique and unaffiliated position, or whether its singularity and salience simply make reference to a major plant grouping unnecessary because of its very familiarity, remains unclear. Other plants whose affiliations with “life forms” are unclear include large fleshy herbs whose roots, rhizomes or underground parts are used : yellow pond lily, an important medicinal plant, and cow parsnip, im- portant both for medicinal roots and for its edible stems. In 1996 I conducted several interviews to address the issue of classification of these ambiguous plants, and the nature or meaning of the general term sgan. When I asked the most elderly and fluent consultant I interviewed in 1996 whether one could say sgan ___ for several plants of ambiguous affiliation, she appeared to find Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 193 the question odd, and simply repeated the plant names without sgan, confirmin that in ordinary speech there are a series of plants with which one cannot generally substitute sgan + name for the name itself (O. Ryan 9/10/96 and 9/20/96.) A second consultant, the daughter of the elder mentioned above, felt that none of the plants on my list of 12 forms could be called sgan ___.! For her, the word sgan carries connotations of the annual cycle and the bearing of fruit, rather than necessarily a sense of stature (J. Ryan 9/10/96.) The aquatic habit of yellow pond lily gave one consultant some hesitation, and she indicated that for her, sgan car- ries a terrestrial and upright connotation, usually with woody or distinct stems (B. Anderson 9/7/96). Familiarity was suggested by one consultant as the reason that devil’s club, rice-root lily (Fritillaria camschatcensis) and fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium) were not generally referred to as sgan (Art Mathews Jr 9/15/96.) Another consultant used appropriate Gitksan questions to elucidate the affiliation of various plants (S. Howard notes 9/14/96). Her response suggests that, depend- ing on stature, one could ask : Gwilx la gan de tun? What kind of tree is this? Sgan gwi tun? What kind of a plant is this? Gwilx la ‘yens si tun? What kind of ‘leaves’ is this? She indicated that for her xhlaahl (red osier dogwood), gasx ( rice-root lily), and ha’mook (cow parsnip) are sgan. Art Mathews indicated a possible ecological slant: if one wanted to talk about a bear walking through cow parsnip, one would say that the bear is in the sganha’mook (transcript 9/15/96.) Some of the terms on my initial list seem to fit into the broader classification scheme with more or less ease, such as red osier dogwood and Sitka valerian. Others, as suggested above, probably are grouped with sgan, but are highly sa- lient and important plants, as well as somewhat distinctive in morphology. A last grouping includes unusual plants such as the emergent aquatics yellow pond lily and water arum, the fleshy leaved stonecrop, and low growing herbaceous plants such as Queen’s cup, which may in fact be unaffiliated, or not members of sgan. Queen’s cup may be a berry, or perhaps a ‘leaf’ or ‘flower,’ but in the absence of evidence which indicates how it is perceived by Gitksan people, I prefer to con- sider it and other ambiguous forms unaffiliated. Intermediates.— Below the major plant group or life-form rank, one can distinguish a jumble of covert groupings and isolated generics, which may or may not be included in any superordinate classes below the general rank of “plant kingdom or “floral form.” Several such groupings are suggested in Table 5. Some covert groupings seem to be cross-cutting, as indicated by the fact that evergreen coni- fers are found in both the sgan and gan groupings (coniferous trees being gan and the shrubby or small tree Juniperus species being sgan). Similar patterns of rela- tionship of int iate groupings to life forms are found among the Sierra Nahuatl (Taller de Tradicion Oral and Beaucage 1987.) Other small clusters may be indi- cated by coordinate naming patterns, such as the horsetails, or the aquatic grouping formed by yellow pond lily and wild calla (Figure 3). These clusters of plants have distinctive habits, and, in the case of the pond lily group, habitats. By the criteria employed by Taylor (1990) evergreen coniferous trees would be ak 194 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 TABLE 5.—Postulated Intermediate Groupings ‘ferns’ damtx (E)/demtx (W) inedible fernrootstock, Athyrium filix foemina, Dryopteris elix-mas, and D. expansa, in part ax edible fern rootstock, Dryopteris expansa in part hap’iba’a bracken, Pteridium aquilinium hisdemktxwt licorice root fern, Polypodium glycyrrhiza ‘clubmosses’ belena ‘watsx (E)/belena ’wetsx (W) xaadax unknown various Lycopodium spp. ‘horsetails’ hismaawintxw various Equisitum spp. maawin Equisetum hiemale and pratense ‘conifers or evergreens’ amgiikw hoo’oxs seeks sgannaxnok or laxsa laxnok sgini simgan or amhat’a’l hemlock, Tsuga heterophylla ‘balsam’, subalpine fir, Abies lasiocarpa spruce Picea x Lutzti common and rocky mountain juniper, Juniperus communis and J. scopulorum lodgepole pine, Pinus ae western red cedar, Thuja yellow cedar, setae mite nootkatensis oe amabilis fir, Abies amabilis ‘alders’ iist ‘mountain alder’, Alnus crispa amluux alder, Alnus incana and A. rubra ‘willows’ aa xhlaahl ’waasan and am’waasan ? giist no ee * 4 and relatives’ ‘red willow’, Sella stonolifera willow, Salix ‘grey willow’, ae incana sgant’imi’yt hisgant’imi’yt “bear’s berries’ kinnikinnick Arctostaphylos uva-ursi; and low bush cranberry? accinium Vitis-i prince’s pine, Chimaphila iadeliate false box, Pachystima myrsinites; and ?wintergreens, ?Pyrola spp. maa’ytwhl smex maa’ya smex wild sarsaparilla, Aralia nudicaulis Queen’s cup Clintonia uniflora; rosy twisted-stalk Streptopus roseus; star-flowered Solomon’s seal, Smilacina stellata; and ?three-leaved Solomon’s seal, ?S. trifoliata xsduu’lixs aneberry, Actaea rubra; clasping-leaved twisted-stalk, Streptopus amplexifolius, and Hooker’s ferry bells, Disporum hookeri hissgank’ots star-flowered Solomon’s seal, Smilacina stellata; and ?three leaved Solomon’s seal, 2S. trifolia lichens gesgan ‘tree hair’, arboreal fruticose lichens ligimthl gan ‘tree fur’, arboreal fruticose lichens gwilalh ganaa’w ‘frog blankets’, Lobaria spp Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 195 ‘WATERLILIES' Ps Pl =e // carcasts —* \ isgahidaats = { / ‘resembling waterlily aru it — pan ny i wild calla or water t \ i \\ Nuphar ee / Calla palustris Ni a ea Sis @ prototype Figure 3.— Coordinate naming: waterlilies. considered to be a covert intermediate grouping. This is indicated by the term laxs, which means ‘conifer bough.’ This term applies to trees such as spruce, and also to the low shrubby common juniper, included in the ‘plant’ life form. The term ‘cone’ (meek) might yield a different grouping, as it applies to the cones of any coniferous species, and also to the cone-like woody female catkins of the al- ders (commonly called ‘cone’ in English as well); however, I think that modern Gitksan speakers do not group alder with evergreen conifers, despite the superfi- cial similarity of the reproductive structure, as, indeed modern English speakers also do not consider them of a group. et The three Linnean species of alder, grouped in two indigenous generics, are perceived as similar (Figure 4). Both possess the distinctive alder cones (meek). Similarly, the linguistic confusion for Gitksan speaker in English between red willow’ and ‘yellow willow’ or simply willow, indicates a possible grouping com- prised of Salix species and Cornus stolonifera. The overlap of their uses in basketry as well as similarity of habitat and growth from of shrubby willows with red osier dogwood may be the basis for this grouping. = — eee: a Three generics of fern are also perceived as similar based on distinctive plan habit; a fourth smaller generic is named in coordinate fashion (Figure 5). These are 196 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 'ALDERS' eee eee amuse ~\ Ae ‘mountain alder’ Alnus rubra \ f or ‘grey willow' \ \ ° Alnus incana} | @ Alnus crispa eee | / \ j @ prototype Figure 4.— Distribution of scientific species of Alnus in relation to the two Gitksan generics within the postulated intermediate ‘alder.’ ax ‘edible fern root’ (spiny woodfern, Dryopteris expansa, in part), damtx ‘inedible fern root’ (Dryopteris expansa with small rhizomes, Athyrium filix-femina, lady fern, and Dryopteris felix-mas, male fern), and hap’ iba’a (bracken fern, Pteridium aquilinum).'> They are distinguished, perhaps, because only ax has an edible rhi- zome, which was formerly an important winter carbohydrate food. The small and locally uncommon licorice fern Polypodiutn Slycyrrhiza) was called by one con- sultant hisd tir y in habit to the larger fern species, but its small size wcda preclude confusion with ax. The name means ‘resembling demkt (inedible fern root).’ lubmosses” may perhaps be considered an intermediate grouping. Four botanical species of clubmoss (Lycopodium clavatum, L. annotinum, L. complanatum and L. obscurum) are all designated belena ’watsx(E)/ -’wetsx(W). The small al- pine species Lycoposium sitchense was not designated by this term. Perhaps allied to these would be the fir clubmoss, Huperzia selago, considered by one consultant to be similar to the elusive taxon xaadax (David Green notes 7/24/95). However, another consultant considered this clubmoss to be an aberrant member of umhlw, ‘moss’, which simply happened to have its several branches come together to form a single stem at the base, with a root apparent below (O. Ryan notes 7/25/95). A grouping of inedible berries, called in English “bear’s berries” maa’ya smex, includes the Gitksan generics maa’ytwhl smex ‘bear's berries,’ maa’ya smex also ‘bear’s berries,’ and xsduu’lixs ‘teardrops’ (Figure 6). Maa’ytwhl smex is a me- dicinal plant, wild sarsaparilla, Aralia nudicaulis, which has dark inedible berries. Maa’ya smex includes several other species with inedible berries, such as Clinto- nia uniflora and some of the species that also can be called xsduu’lixs. Xsduu’lixs is Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 197 "ferns" ee ia wan e Blac ai WITH D FRONDS j NOL EDIBLE RHIZOME f \ hap bats Jt Penden sin a / oe i Soe aii. ee \ oa yeh ces i z OODY WITH TAN } : TruAncniLae “FINGERS” ~ H EDIBLE RHIZOMES \] / EN a ‘FINGERS’ peer expansa j | damtx o H wy wo beep i ‘ bec moet izomes GQ male fem °° Ahthryium filix-femina \ ine akon lady fern eet ot teal aad ee ice aaa pce FRONDS | gestae } \ qromniza iz wa nice ne ae Figure 5.- “Fern” intermediate showing characters which differentiate = three Gitksan generics of large fern, and the small, uncommon coordinate hisdemktw a sort of catch-all for red-fruited large leaved herbs with leafy stems, and has no use, though the species are relatively common and conspicuous. Smilacina ?stellata, called hissgank’ots or resembling large false solomon’s seal is included in the in- termediate ‘bear’s berries’ by Art Mathews, who writes, “This berry is one of the bear berries.” (Mathews n.d.) A last possible covert grouping includes the several lichen forms named by the Gitksan. These aberrant, morphologically and ecologically unique forms are sometimes lumped by ecologists with bryophytes, as “bryoids.” Taxonomic bota- nists emphasize their connection with fungi, which provide the gross morphology of lichen “species.” The Gitksan appear not to connect the arboreal tree hair’ or ‘tree fur’ and ‘frog blankets’ (lungwort, Lobaria spp.) types with any other types of lants.'4 : Generics.— There are a number of basic kinds of plants recognized and named by the Gitksan (Table 1). These are generics in the sense of Berlin (1992) and other authors, or basic kinds in the sense of Taylor (1990). All of the local tree species ( in the English and botanical senses) and the majority of woody shrubs are distin- guished and named by the Gitksan. Likewise, most species of plants, whether 198 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 “bear's berries" maa'ya smex eee rm ee Oe maa eats iro \ sganxsduu 'lixs \ 2 Actaea rubra Streptopus amplexifolius 4 i Aralia nudicaulis re) twisted-stalk \ | sarsaparilla i Cc re) | _% /\ (ehite ad red / ruited forms) j eos rum hookeri H O “fairy bells i team nee - aa'ya-smex\ Soar s Seal # ewer sous aL ai Queen's cug twist ie $x “Tes WOO rf a Figure 6.— The “bear’s berries” intermediate grouping is a group of two generics of inedible fruits. Maa’ytwhl smex, whose name means “bear’s berries,” is medicinal. Xsduu’lixs, whose name refers to tears, is not. A third grouping, called maa’ya smex, includes members of three named generics, and rosy twisted stalk. It may be an artifact caused by people referring to the botanical species within it by the intermediate group name, or it may constitute some kind of residuum for speakers who do not use the other generic names for the included forms. shrubs or herbs, which have edible berries, are named. Anumber of herbaceous or low- growing perennials 2 are e also named and recognized. pecies recognized in scientific taxonomy and the generics recognized and named by. the Gitksan is variable (Figures 7, 8, and 9). For tree species, and the recognized edible species of the berry group, the correspon- dence seems to be one to one.!» The two species of true fir, for example, Abies lasiocarpa (by far the most common in Gitksan territory) and A. amabilis, were given different names by Jeff Harris Sr., who said in English that amabilis fir was a different type of ‘balsam’ (the local common name of Abies). In other cases, a Gitksan generic term may encompass two or more separate species recognized by scientific taxonomy; these may be distantly related from the perspective of scientific botany, with mem- Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY sginist laxsa laxnok pine junipe we lait re % an ma on { \ ‘ie niperus scopworum | e Hl i i f \ Pinus contorta j me wie Re a ” j ? Cj j % ee \ ‘id / ’ *s ae we Wie we i a re ad ihlee’em ts'ak habasxw ‘pleeding nose' grass, hay oot Pat hin i ris ‘ eZ Oo \ . : ? % z — aera Cyperaceae, sedges Typha latifolia | Castilleja minia bullrushes ee * @ aquatic sedge . bulrueh | Aquilegia formosa O used for bask \ted columbine Z true grasses, Poaceae 1@) ™ \\ Juncaceae, rushes,“ = "Waasan Ni scepite willow ctr. fra sitchensis ~~ .@) oO ‘ ; shrubby willows f ’waasan \ | a4 iy f \Salix spp. (large tree sized) y, 1@) iy a @ prototype 1) non-prototypic scientific species or groups of species Figure 7. A series of Gitksan generics, showing a range of relationships between Gitksan generics and scientific botanical species. For some consultants, Juniperus scopulorum is united with yew, Taxus brevifolia, both being designated “bow plant’ sganhaxwdaxw. 199 200 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 sganxsduu'lixs “bear's berries" a a te Fie = Actaea rubra Disporum hookeri ‘ j baneberry 1@) © fairy bells \ (white and red t fruited forms) \ ° \ / Streptopus amplexifolius twisted-stalk Figure 8.— The inedible fruit generic xsduu'lixs, red fruited large leaved herbaceous plants with leafy stems. The scientific genera include monocotyledonous forms of the lily family (Streptopus and Disporum), and Actaea rubra, a poisonous member of the dicotyledonous buttercup family. umhixw Musci, general ce) déignis triquetrus onixy yip fe) ‘mo Dn-Si 12) \ . moss Sphagnum magellanicum ° re) (large, pale gametophytes) S. angustifolium stre short, red S. magellanicum swamp mosses @ prototype O non-prototypic scientific species or groups of species Figure 9.— Subtypes and distribution of scientific species within the bounds of the major plant class/ generic umhlxw ‘moss.’ Many more scientific species of bryophytes than those indicated are included in the moss category; for clarity only types that have been identified as umhlxw by consultants and determined to species by a bryologist are named here. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 201 bers drawn from different botanical families. The nomenclatural uniting of two bo- tanical species of juniper, Juniperus communis, a prostrate shrub, and J. scopulorum, a slow-growing tree, often with multiple stems, as laxsa laxnok is an example of two related species united as one generic. (Sometimes the tree form J. scopulorum may also be called “bow plant” and conceptually united instead with yew, Taxus brevifolia, whichd t occur in Gitksan territory, though yew wood was obtained by trade). Two other pairs of scientific species united as single generics are the herbaceous flowering generics, ihlee’em ts’ak ‘bleeding nose,’ and xsneenauntwxt. As noted previously, ‘bleeding nose’ denotes red columbine (Aquilegia fi R ] vy and Indian paintbrush,(Castilleja miniata : Scrophulariaceae), two species classified scientifically in different plant families, but which share the feature of striking scar- let flowers. The nectaries of the first are sucked by children, while the paintbrush may have been used medicinally in the past (Smith 1926:181).!° Xsneenauntwxt com- prises yarrow (Achillea millaefolium) and pearly everlasting (Anaphalis margaritacea), two common white flowered herbaceous plants in different subfamilies of the Asteraceae. The two subtypes have different uses, yarrow as a medicinal, and ever- lasting traditionally used for grave offerings. As discussed above, damtx ‘inedible fern rootstock,’ is defined by an economic character, lack of harvestable rhizomes. It comprises two Linnean species and part of a third (see Table 1) and is differentiated from ax , an edible fern rootstock, part of Dryopertis expansa, by either small size of rhizomes or woody, inedible texture. Another generic defined by disutility is xsduu’lixs (Figure 7). Xsduu'lixs ‘tears’ are large leaved herbaceous plants of ap- proximately 30 cm height with leafy stems and red, inedible red fruits. The scientific genera include yled forms of the lily family (Streptopus and Disporum) and a dicotyledonous form from the buttercup family, the poisonous Actaea. An- other liliaceous herb of very similar appearance to Disporum and Streptopus, but with edible fruit, the false Solomon’s seal (Smilacina racemosa) has a distinct name, k’ots.'” If habit and morphology were the primary diagnostic characters of k’ots, rather than the edibility of its fruits, | would expect it to be included in xsduu’lixs rather than given a distinct name. eee. The exact boundaries of generics may be rather fuzzy, making it a judgement call whether a given cluster of forms should be considered one generic with a prototype and various satellite types of variable distance from the center (cf. Ber- lin 1992), or an intermediate composed of a focal type and a cluster of other generics related by coordination (cf. Hunn and French 1984). The naming and recognition of smaller and less perceptually salient plants is more variable than that of large, salient species like the common tree species, important berry plants, or significant shrubs. In particular, I noted variability in the referents of maawin scouring rush and hismaawintxw. All apply to species of Equisetum, both of ‘horsetail and scour- ing rush’ form. For one consultant, both the northern scouring rush Equisetum hyemale, and the meadow horsetail, E. pratense, were maawin, the prototype of this group, while common horsetail, E. arvense, and the small scouring rush, E. scirpoides, were peripheral, being designated by hismaawintxw. For other infor- mants, E. hyemale and the woodland horsetail E. sylvaticum were also designated by hismaawintxw. Three disti ‘ docionated ac helena urth species of Lyco- Pp ey iT 4; “watsx, ‘otter belt’, by modern consultants (see Table 1). A fo 202 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 podium was reported by Smith in 1926 to have been called ‘otter belt’ (Smith 1926:54- 55). This tidy picture is obscured, however, when we look poo at Smith’s data (Smith 1926:122), where we find that a buttercup, R rtivus, is also des- ignated by ast = Monover mks other local clubmosses which grow in montane and d Lycopodium sitchense, are not called belena "water (David Grech interview notes). Binomial names like “blue oak” or “red alder” are extremely rare. Compound names which consist of two words are usually of the sort __‘s berry, ‘good or good for __’, or ‘real ___’, where the second term is a life form term and the prototypical species is so designated. The one documented binomial which is a secondary lexeme is the word for parsnip, maaxwsxwa k’awts ‘white carrots’, and is obviously a recent term. I elicited similar terms for colour phases of foxes which I think were loan translations or descriptions. Deciding exactly how many generics exist in the Gitksan classification system is methodologically complex. Because there are six modern occupied villages, and two previously somewhat distinctive northern villages, there is considerable dia- lectical variation. This affects plant names. One species, the swamp currant, is given the name hlit in the western village of Gitwingax; however, a completely unrelated name, sgants’imwil’oo’o, is applied to the shrub by an elder from the eastern village of Kispiox whose ancestors came from the northern village of Galdo’o. The latter term was reported from Galdo’o in 1926. Should these be tal- lied as one generic or two? The identity of the plant designated is recognized by speakers of both dialects, suggesting two names but one concept. Synonymy is sometimes obvious. In these cases it seems that the underlying concept is constant, but two distinct different names may be applied, as in the two names for western red cedar, simgan ‘real wood or tree’ and amhat’al ‘good for cedarbark.’ Likewise, for several tree species, the tree can either be called am-or simply by the term itself, as in amgiikw or giikw, both of which mean hemlock, and which can be used interchangeably.'® In these instances, I would count the pair of names as signifiying one generic. A third set of synonyms is recognized by informants as being two alternate names for the same plant such as ’miigunt and ‘miidoots for wild strawberry, or mihlw and diux for ‘birch fungus.’ These also seem to clearly represent one generic. Sometimes similar terms are used inter- changeably, such as laxsa laxnok and sgannaxnok ‘boughs of the supernatural’ and ‘supernatural plant,’ both referring to junipers. These I also count as true syn- onyms, both representing one underlying generic. It is more problematic — different consultants have given different terms for the same botanical species,!? and do not appear to know other names, as in the three distinct names collected from different individuals for the botanical species Clintonia uniflora or the two names for Symphoricarpos albus. If one were talleying the number of botanical species recognized and named by Gitksan people, these clearly would be counted as synonyms, and only one generic would be counted. Similarly, in the botanical lexicon of each informant, only one generic is repre- sented, so perhaps even if one is striving to represent indigenous concepts only one generic should be tallied. However, if one were counting names, clearly mul- tiple names co-exist, and it is not clear that consultants count them as synonyms. Another problem area exists when two Gitksan terms appear to apply to the Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 203 same botanical species, but not to be identical in meaning. Laxsa laxnok_/ sgannaxnok was given above for juniper (usually referring to Juniperus commu- nis). An unrelated term, ts’ex, is also glossed as ‘juniper’. However, there is evidence that, for at least some informants, ts’ex and laxsa laxnok may represent different ecotypes, and that only the latter is ‘supernatural’ and spiritually powerful in medicinal contexts (Tribal Convention Notes October 16, 1986).2° Other consult- ants appear to lump all juniper as Jaxsa laxnok. Should these be considered two generics? One generic with two species? One generic with three synonyms? An- other case where two related forms appear to designate different portions of the named entity is with ‘waasan and am’waasan. ’Waasan “willow” is the more common term, and applies broadly to shrubby or tree Salix species;! the consult- ant Jeff Harris Sr. who provided the term am’waasan apparently meant to contrast large, lowland tree-sized willows from shrubby species we encountered on a for- ested mountain slope. The tree sized willows have economic value for their tough and durable inner bark, used for tying and lashing. Shrubby willows are not uti- lized. Are these one generic with two species? Or two generics? I would prefer to regard them as prototype and extension of one broad generic. ird area of uncertainty is whether the terms postulated for “empty life forms” are also generic concepts. There has been quite a bit of discussion of this issue in the literature (Atran 1990; Berlin 1992). Berlin (1992:175) rejects monogeneric life forms, and the idea that the same term can contrast both at the life form and at the generic level; he prefers to think of these as unaffiliated generics. I have tallied majagalee ‘flower,’ habasxw ‘grass,’ umhlw ‘moss,’ and gayda ts’uuts’ ‘mush- room, fungus’ as generics as well as major plant groups, because they are used in conversation to designate specific plants, contrasting with other (botanically) more restricted names at the generic level. However, I am uncertain if ‘yans/‘yens can be considered a generic rather than an ecological term, and catch-all for things not important or salient enough to distinguish with individual names. Taylor’s dis- tinction between residual taxa and residues would suggest that, at the generic level, ’yens would not be a residual taxon, but would simply be a residue of un- named forms (Taylor 1990: 64-65), with the possible exception of the use of the term to designate lettuce. Reviewing the Gitksan terms on Table 1, Gitksan Generics, there are 85 clearly distinct generics. When synonyms are reviewed to see if the concept apparently named is identical, that is, if the different consultants who gave the names would likely recognize the named entities as the same, five more distinct generics can be counted, for a total of ninety. Two forms may be subgeneric categories, (gadimis, the black fruited form of the black huckleberry, which is contrasted with simmaa y proper, the large, succulent, dark bronze fruited form), and “waasan /‘waasen, which appears to represent either the total category ‘willow , OF the non-proto- typical upland forms), and several forms appear to describe ecological coed which might also be subgeneric categories (higuugan, timberline mountain hem- lock; habaasxum t’ax ‘lake grass,’ cattail, sedge and bullrush; and umhixum miinhl gan and umhixum ‘yip, ‘moss under trees’ and ‘moss on soil,’ respectively). Of these 90 types (excluding the subgeneric and ecological types), 84 represent vas- cular plants and 6 represent mosses, fungi and lichens. This is not an exhaustive list of Gitksan floral terms; a few terms have been omitted from the potential list 204 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 because their referents were not identified, and the terms were from secondary sources. Neither have I included terms elicited by Smith in the 1920s in my tally unless I have obtained modern confirmation of their referents. The fuzzy boundaries of the poorly differentiated less salient taxa makes ex- act determination of the proportion of the flora named difficult. If the more difficult and less salient fungi and mosses liminated, it somewhat more man- ageable to compare the boundaries of indigenous taxa with those of botanical taxa and to arrive at a rough proportion of the total vascular flora named. However, general “catchall” terms like majagalee ‘flower’ and habasxw ‘grass’ or ‘hay’ still make closure difficult. Excluding these problematic terms, the 87 Gitksan vascular plant generics designate in total at least 103 different botanical species. As with the neighbouring Witsuwit’en (Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998), this accounts for only about 10% of the vascular plant species occurring in Gitksan territory.” The majority of these generics correspond with single biological species, but some forms encompass two or more distantly related species, as discussed previously. For woody species, different members of the same botanical genus present in the local flora are usually classified as distinct Gitksan generics. Many herbaceous plants are not differentiated, but are unnamed or subsumed in broad categories such as the mentioned two above, ‘flower’ and ‘grass’ or ‘hay.’ A final area of difficulty is the degree of uniformity of cultural knowledge of plants; clearly, in all societies, some people know more about a given area of cul- tural knowledge than others. For most of the names recorded in Table 1, at least two consultants confirmed the validity and referent of the term; usually this was two living consultants, but in a few cases, living elders confirmed or offered terms recorded by Smith in 1925-26. In a minority of instances, only one consultant pro- vided the name. In these instances, a few especially knowledgable people knew the names and uses of plants no longer remembered by others. These elders were recognized in the community as the people to consult about unusual or difficult plants or terms. Sixteen terms given in Table 1 were provided by these elders.” Where one is dealing with a small speech community and memory ethnography, the possibility of idiosyncratic terms or referents cannot be ruled out, but I have chosen to accept them as valid names and count them as part of the Gitksan bo- tanical lexicon. - NAMING Gitksan plant names fall into several groups. Some names are simple, unanalysable lexemes such as seeks ‘spruce,’ which signify only the plant in ques- tion and have no other meaning in the language. Other names may be descriptive, indicate utility, be metaphoric, or refer to animals or to legend. Plant names may also refer to other plant species in coordinate fashion. Also, some names are evi- dently borrowed from other languages. Two names of important economic plants, ax (spiny woodfern) and gahldaats (yellow pondlily), have an Athapaskan origin (Gottesfeld 1993). A third term, ts’ex, (designating a form of juniper/ krumholz conifer growth) is shared with Witsuwit’en and Sekani (Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998). Plant names may reflect utility, such as am’mel, ‘good for canoe,’ the name for Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 205 black cottonwood. One of the two alder classes, amluux, means ‘good for neckring’ and refers to the red dye which can be made from alder bark, which was used to dye cedarbark red for ceremonial items such as Secret Society neckrings. The bark of the other named alder category, giist, cannot be used for red dye. One of the names of western red cedar, amh’a’tal, means ‘good for cedar bark’, one of the main uses of the cedar tree. The name for western yew, Taxus brevifolia, is haxwdakw ‘bow plant,’*4 because of its dense, hard, springy wood, ideally suited to bow con- struction. Sometimes a sapling sized Rocky mountain juniper, Juniperus scopulorum, is also called sganhaxwdakw ‘bow plant,’ because it too was utilized for bow con- struction. Perhaps allied in concept to utility are the names of the junipers, ‘boughs of the supernatural,’ or ‘supernatural plant.’ Juniper can be used for smudges, as well as having other medicinal uses. Descriptive plant y indicate form or colour. Maa’y hagwilhuxw ‘rope- berry’ is the term for strawberry bramble, Rubus pedatus, a trailing vine with small tart fruit. Maa’ya gaak ‘crow berry’ is the word for black twinberry, which has inedible glossy purple-black fruit. Gesgsan ‘tree-hair’ and ligimtxgan ‘tree-fur,’ referring to black hairlike arboreal lichens, are also clearly named descriptively. The name for soapberry, is, means ‘urine,’ and refers to the foam which develops as the soapberry whip yal’is is prepared, which resembles that which develops when a person urinates on the ground. One of the names for birch fungus, mihlxw, refers particularly to the appearance of cinder conk, Inonotus obliquus, and means ‘charred.’ The term for the rootstock of Veratrum viride, malgwasxw, means ‘some- thing burnt.’ I am uncertain if this refers to the dark colour of the dried rhizome, or to the fact that the rhizomes are commonly burned for purification. Inedible berries may be named by reference to animals, as in in ‘crowberry’ above, and the various fruits grouped as ‘bear’s berries’(maa’ytwhl smex).”° Names of inedible or unused plants may also be metaphoric or refer to legends. Clintonia uniflora, Queen’s cup, an understory lily which has a single inedible blue berry, has been called by three different names: hoobixs ‘wiigat ‘Wiget’s spoon,’ a refer- ence to a story in which the legendary trickster/creator figure uses the spatulate leaves as a spoon; maa’yhl litsxw ‘blue grouse’s berry’; and maaya smex bear’s berry.’ The inedible and unusual appearing white-fruited snowberry is called sgantya’ytxw (E), which means ‘thunder plant,’ or maa’ya luulak’(W) ‘ghost berry. The names for mushroom, ‘bird hat’ or ‘penis’ (gayda ts’uuts’) and puffball (masxwa luulak’ ‘ghost fart’) are metaphoric descriptions. The picturesque name for the nodding onion is ts‘anksa gaak, translates as ‘raven’s underarm-odour (People of Ksan 1980). The name of the lichen species known in English as lung- wort (Lobaria pulmonaria and L. linita) is gwilalh ganaaw, frog blankets,’ conveying the similarity in texture and appearance of the hydrated lichen thallus to the back of a frog or toad. This species was used medicinally. Two large herbs, Angelica genuflexa and Delphinium Brownii [sic] are reported in Smith (1926) to be ern ‘frog parsnip.’ These are plants which in some wise resemble the important edib and medicinal herb cow parsnip or ‘wild rhubarb’ (ha’mook), but are smaller an not edible. In some sense, this is a type of coordinate naming (see below), naming by reference to another plant, as well as indicating lack of edibility by reference to an animal. However, the cloudberry Rubus chamaemorus (People of Ksan 1980), and/or possibly the dewberry, Rubus pubescens (Smith 1926) and strawberry TABLE 6.— Coordinate Names Gitksan term hissgant’imi’yt hisgahldaatsxw hisha’mookxwit hisdemktxwt hismaawintxw hisgamaawin his’ waasantxwit hissgank’ots from Smith (1926): hisleekxwit hisk’aawtsit hissgant’imi’yt hisnisko’otxwit hishaawakxwit hishaastxwit hishabasxwit hishinakxwit hissgank’ots hismaawintxw hisganthoot? English meaning Scientific Names Gitksan name English Name Scientific Name wintergreens or false box wild calla or water arum Northern rein orchid licorice root fern horsetails & northern scouring rush & common horsetai unknown small Solomon’s seal plant sweet cicely & goat’s beard heal all false box white geranium yellow mountain avens agrimony harebell one-flowered rein orchid star flowered Solomon’s seal “branched horsetail rush” hardhack, spiraea . ] Ting rusnes Pyrola, Orthilia and Chimaphila t’imi’yt spp.; Pachystima myrsinites Calla palustris Platanthera hyperborea Polypodium glycyrrhiza gahldaats ha’mook demkt Equisetum arvense, E. variegatum, maawin E. hyemale, and E. sylvaticum Equisetum variegatum and E. arvense unknown Smilacina trifoliata’ Osmorrhiza sp. and (probably) runcus sylvester Prunella vulgaris Pachystima myrsinites Geranium richardsonii Dryas drummondii Agrimonia gyrosepala Campanula rotundifolia Habenaria obtusata Smilacina stellata Equisetum arvense ? Spiraea douglasii var. menziesii maawin ‘waasan k’ots leek k’aawts Uimi’yt nisko’o haawak haast habasxw hinak k’ots maawin ? kinnikinnik yellow pond lily cow parsnip inedible fern rhizome common scouring rush, meadow horsetail common scouring rush, meadow horsetail willow false Solomon’s seal spreading dogbane lupine kinnikinnik thimbleberry birch fireweed grass or hay skunk cabbage false Solomon’s seal “Norsetail rush” unknown Arctostaphylos uva-urst Nuphar polysepalum Heracleum lanatum Athyrium felix femina, small Dryopteri eris, etc Equisetum pratense and E. hiemale Equisetum pratense and E. hiemale Salix spp. Smilacina racemosa Apocynum androsimaefolium Lupinus arcticus Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Rubus parviflorus Betula papyrifera Epilobium angustifolium Gramineae, Cyperaceae etc. Lysichiton americanum Smilacina racemosa Equisetum hyemale (?) 'This identification was made by Art Mathews from a photograph in Plants of Northern British Columbia and appears in Mathews n.d. * This spelling has not been changed to modern orthography as I am not certain of the word. 902 NOSNHO[ Z ‘ON “61 TOA Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 207 bramble, Rubus pedatus, which have been called ‘miiganaa’w (frogberry), may be an exception to this generalization. None of these types of berry is large or abun- dant, and the cloudberry grows in wetlands, which might be metaphorically associated with frogs, but they are edible and palatable berries. Names may also be given in reference to other plants, as in the common prac- tice of calling something his__ ‘resembling __,’ as in hissgant’imi’yt ‘resembling ikinnick.’ Table 6 shows five such present day names and ten collected by Smith in the 1920s. Three of Smith’s terms are the same as terms collected in the 1980s and 1990s. I have interpreted these terms as coordinate (Hunn and French 1984), or as peripheral members of a loose grouping named in reference to a spe- cific prototype, usually a plant which is either more salient or of higher utility. Some descriptive terms or ‘resembling’ names may be more spontaneous inven- tions and may not be stable names.”° The temporal stability of such terms, or their use by consultants from different families or villages c these terms can be taken as names. Lending credence to the reality of his__ names is the fact that not all plants are instantly dubbed with such terms; some plants are said to have no name. Of- ten these are plants which have not been noticed by the consultant prior to questioning, although they certainly occur in the region. Table 7 lists 13 plant spe- cies presented to Gitksan consultants which were not named. Harlan Smith (n.d.) reports a number of plants, usually small herbaceous forms, which were said to TABLE 7.— Plants Unnamed in Gitksan English Name Scientific Name Consultant alpine willow Salix arcticus ssp. crassujulis rattlesnake plantain Goodyera oblongifolia OR, DG northern bedstraw Galium boreale OR sweet cicel Osmorhiza sp. OR, DG heartleaved twayblade See ae) . a river ilobium latifolium wild ar nt arvensis OR, DG?, PM alpine clubmoss Lycopodium cf. sitchense DG fir clubmoss* Huperzia selago DG one-sided wintergreen Orthilia secunda DG green wintergreen Pyrola chlorantha OR Prince’s pine? Chimaphila umbellata oe oak fern Gymnocarpium dryopteris 1 DG’s first reaction was to begin talking about isxumsgan ‘isxw, ‘smelly plant’? Valeriana sitchensis. He seemed confused when I sad the specimen was mint. ? Fir clubmoss was lumped with moss by OR, and likened to xaadax by DG, who did not give it a name. >This was called hissgant’imi’yt by DG 208 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 TABLE 8.—-Plants Said to Have No Name by Harlan Smith’s Consultants, 1925- 1926 (Smith 1926) English Name Latin Name northern bedstraw Galium boreale twinflower Linnea borealis aster Aster junceus Ait.* daisy fleabane Erigeron philadelphicus goldenrod Solidago canadensis var. subserrata arnica Arnica cordifolia ragwort Senecio cymbalarioides ragwort Senecio balsamitae Muhl.* rosy pussy toes Antennaria rosea wooly thistle Cirsium (Carduus) undulatum (Nutt.) Spreng * hawksbeard Crepis elegans yellow rattle penstemon, turtlehead blue-eyed mary blue-bells showy Jacob’s ladder buckbean, bogbean pacific starflower Indian Pipe pink wintergreen Prince’s pine silverweed saxifrage grass-of-parnassus marsh grass-of-parnassus ball mustard draba rock cress wormseed mustard creeping buttercup northern geranium alpine milk vetch field crazy weed birdfoot clover Rhinanthus crista-galli Nothochelone nemorosa Collinisia parviflora Mertensia paniculata Gilia liniaris Gilia gracilis Polemonium pulcherrimum Menyanthes trifoliata Trientalis arctica * Monotropa uniflora Pyrola asarifolia Chimaphila umbellata Potentilla viridescens Rydb. * Saxifraga tricuspidata (probably S. bronchialis) Parnassia fimbriata Parnassia palustris Neslia paniculata (L.) Desv. * Draba lutea Gilib. * Arabis hirsuta (L.) Scopt. * Erysium cheiranthoides L. * Ranunculus repens L. Viola canadensis Viola adunca Geranium erianthum Astragalus alpinus Oxytropis monticola * Hosackia denticulata * * Scientific names may be obsolete or misapplied Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 209 have no name (Table 8). Other plants are recognized by the consultant, but he or she cannot remember what it is called. These are considered to have names, al- though in some cases the name can no longer be recorded because no one recalls what it is.?7 Subtypes of moss are called by their place of growth, as umhlw minhl gan ‘moss beneath the trees’ or umhlxum yip ‘moss-on-soil,’ differentiated from the prototypical umhlw which grows in swamps. A subtype of ‘grass’ (habasxum t’ax) is also named by habitat: it is ‘lake grass.’ I am not certain if these constitute true names or are simply spontaneous coinages, although the term habasxum t’ax for cattails was given by two different consultants. Not included in Table 1 or subsequent tables are a handful of terms of recent origin which refer to cultivated plants. After the penetration of their territories by traders and missionaries, the Gitksan learned about and learned to cultivate com- mon garden vegetables such as carrots, potatos, turnips, cabbages, and rhubarb. The terms for these new plants are almost all borrowed from European languages, usually English, sometimes through Chinook jargon, the regional trade argot of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These forms include k’awts (car- rots), sgusiit (potatos, from ‘good seed’), selali (celery), sganapils (apple tree), maaxwsxwa k’awts (parsnip, ‘white carrot’), and kaabits (cabbage). The deriva- tion of k’inuu, turnips, is not obvious, and lettuce is simply called ‘yens ‘leaves.’ In contrast to other groups such as the Sahaptin (Hunn and French 1984) or the Tobelo (Taylor 1990:22), the Gitksan do not seem very concerned with whether a designation is a true name or just something a thing is called.*? A core of terms are very stable, exhibiting little temporal or geographic variation. Another group- ing exhibits only the generalized phonological variation between eastern and western dialects (indicated on Table 1 by (E) and (W)). Other terms are more vari- able. Generally these refer to smaller, herbaceous plants which may be little or unutilized, though perhaps common or widespread, such as Queen’s cup, dis- cussed above, for which three distinct names were collected in the course of my fieldwork; one of the three terms, hoobixs ‘Wiiget (W), was in use seventy years ago in Gitwingax when Harlan Smith did his field work. RELATIONSHIP OF PLANT GROUPINGS TO UTILITY AND PLANT PATRONS The Gitksan have several terms which describe the parts of plants. These are listed in Table 9. Trees have wood (gan) and bark (maas). Coniferous trees, and the shrubby juniper species, have boughs/needles designated by laxs. Horsetails and clubmosses have small simple needle like or rather obscure leaves, which can be called laxs like conifer needles. In contrast, herk plants and deciduous trees and shrubs have leaves, ‘yens (W)/’yans (E). Conifers have hard dry cones, meek; one deciduous tree genus, Alnus, also has woody catkins that are called meek. Fleshy fruits of angiosperms are called ‘berry.”*° Ferns, horsetails, and clubmosses lack both maa’y and meek. ca Plants in general, both herbaceous and woody, have roots, wis. Plants a - have a plant body, designated at least for intermediate sized to small perennia plants by sgan. This term seems to connote stem or supporting structure (Compton 210 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 TABLE 9.— Plant Organs or ‘Partons’ and Associated Plant Groups Gitksan term English meaning Associated Plant Groups gan wood gan, ‘trees’ gult dry conifer needles coniferous trees hlagant stem sgan, ‘plants’ axs conifer bough or needles —_ coniferous trees; clubmosses and horsetails maas bark gan, ‘trees’; sgan, ‘plants’ (part maa’y berry or fruit maa’y, ‘berries’; sgan, ‘plants’ (part) majagalee flower majagalee, ‘flowers’; sgan, ‘plants’ (part) meek cone coniferous trees (and alder) sgan pitch coniferous trees wiis root gan, ‘trees’; C; ?majagalee, ‘flowers’ ‘yens (W)/’yans (E) leaf gan, ‘trees’ (part); gan, ‘trees’; yens, ‘leaves’ hla’ushl ‘waasen __ willow catkin willows binaakt thorns some sgan, ‘plants’ siiswgit thorns some sgan, ‘plants’ et al. 1997), though by extension, it includes the entire plant. There is also a word which specifies stem, hlagandit. Grasses, in contrast, lack large fleshy or woody roots, and lack (in general) obvious erect stems or broad, discrete leaves. The be- low-ground part of grasses may be referred to as miinyip or miinhabasxw ‘under ground’ or ‘under grass.’ Mosses contrast with other plants in lacking evident roots and stems, and in having extremely small and simple leaves. Plants, particularly angiospermous shrubs and herbs, may also possess flow- ers, majagalee. This term both signifies the plant organ (as a rose flower), and serves as a catchall term for plants which are not perceptually salient except for their flowers. Flower here is intended in the folk sense of a relatively large, brightly coloured, often scented, reproductive organ or infloresence, and does not include the infloresences of grasses or sedges, nor the catkins of trees and shrubs in the Salicaceae and Betulaceae. The catkins of willows can be called hla ushl “waasen (Mathews n.d.) These terms define fundamental aspects of plant appearance and properties; by extension, presence or absence of parts influences the potential utility of plants. Trees, gan, are defined by wood (gan), a polysemous situation reported for the Montagnais (Clément 1995) and many other groups (Brown 1984, 1991). The util- ity of wood, for technology, construction and, important in a northern latitude, fuel, is significant, and pervasive. Trees also have maas ‘bark’ and wis ‘large woody roots,’ which are used both for medicine and technology. A class of medicines whose main ingredients are barks of trees and large shrubs is haldowkumgan, translated as ‘wood medicine.’ The edible inner bark k’anix of several tree species was important for food. In addition, trees form the predominant vegetative cover, aggregated as forest. The loose “plant” grouping, in contrast, is not tidily defined by partons. Plants do have a plant body, cf. ‘stem’ (sgan). This varies from woody perenniel stems with well developed and usable bark (e.g. Sambucus racemosa) to weak and thin perennial or biennial stems and leaves (e.g. the various species of Rubus), to the Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 211 prostrate stems and leaves of evergreen subshrubs (e.g., kinnikinnick, Arctosta- phylos uva-ursi), or simply petioles and leaves and runners of perennial herbs such as bunchberry, Cornus canadensis. They also possess leaves, ‘yens, usually rela- tively large, and often possess fleshy edible (or sometimes inedible) fruits, maa’y. Both trees and “plants” have roots, wis, which may be useful for technology or medicine. I am uncertain if rhizomes such as those of the yellow pond lily are called wis along with true roots. The “berry” grouping, which is obviously defined by possession of (edible) fleshy fruits, “berries” (maa’y), overlaps substantially with the “plant” grouping. Berries are seen as a key identifying character of plants which are not trees; edibil- ity or inedibility of the berries is of high cultural significance, given the paucity of other types of carbohydrate foods. Inedible “berry” types may be marginal to the grouping, and be more properly considered as “plants” (sgan). The residual groupings of herbaceous plants, ‘yens and majagalee are obvi- ously defined by characteristic partons: prominent leaves with no woody stem, and conspicuous flowers, also without woody stem. They also seem to be defined by disutility.% More problematic is the graminoid habasxw group. The term habasxw also means ‘covering’ (Rigsby, personal communication 1996).*4 Rigsby feels the term carries more the sense of the graminoid growth form than of a specific plant struc- ture. The group umhlw is similar in that the group is simply called “moss,” which is not a term for a part of a plant, but a type of plant or growth form. Fungi in some sense resemble “leaves” and “flowers” in being a residual group- ing, but the plant parton in this case is tially the entire visible structure, which is the fungal fruiting body, either a fleshy mushroom or a woody bracket fungus or “conk.” The group name gaydats’uuts’ is a metaphoric descriptive term for a typical mushroom. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Gitksan plant classification differs from scientific taxonomy in being of shal- low hierarchy, in having overlapping and at least partially utilitarian major plant groupings or “life forms”, and in lack of focus on reproductive parts of plants to indicate true relationships. It is similar to other indigenous schemes documented for northwestern and northern North America. As in other docu- mented ethnobotanical taxonomies in this region, vines are not a life form, where berry /fruit plants, mosses, and fungi are recognized life forms (e.g. Compton 1993; Gottesfeld 1993; Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998; Turner 1974, 1987, 1989; Turner et al. 1990). In common with many other folk taxonomies, small and per- ceptually less salient forms such as mosses, fungi, lichens, and graminoid ssa are underdifferentiated in comparison to Western scientific taxonomy (Atran 1985: 300; Berlin 1992: 25, 60-61). This results in so called “empty life forms”, which are taxonomically diverse groups (in scientific classification) of ecological importance and distinctive habit, but which contain few or no named subdivisions in the in- digenous taxonomy (Turner 1974). As Brown (1985) found in the classification systems of other foraging cultures, binomial terms and subgeneric taxa are very weakly developed in Gitksan plant classification. 212 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 The Gitksan classification system is not a unified abstract whole, but a mix- ture of partial cl for different purposes and using diverse criteria, prominently including utility. Morphology, as in all ethnobiological classification systems, is a fundamental basis of classification. Utility, as Clément (1995) has pointed out, bears a relationship to plant partons, which create morphological differences between plant types that make them suitable for different uses. Mor- phology and utility are lic and ecological characters clearly also have a role in Gitksan plant classification. Naming among the Gitksan includes the use of animal terms and mythologi- cal references to indicate disutility or inedibility. The naming of plants by reference to other plants, usually with the term his-, stands out, and recalls coordinate nam- ing by the Sahaptin (Hunn and French 1984) and Wet’suwet’en (Gottesfeld 1993 and Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus 1998). Some names are also directly utilitar- ian (‘good for canoe,’ ‘wiping plant’). Unlike some groups, the Gitksan do not seem overly concerned with true names; more to the point is “what they call it.” Many plants, especially herbaceous and weedy forms, are unnamed, and others are referred to in very broad “catch-all” categories. The few terms for cultivated plants (as one might anticipate), are apparent European borrowings. Binomial names in the classic sense, are extremely rare. I would like to close with a brief consideration of emic views of classification. In the course of 1996 field work, two Gitksan speakers I worked with expressed discomfort with the whole orientation of this project. One consultant commented that it was difficult to render the meaning of the term sgan in English, that English terms like tree and shrub didn’t really have the same connotation. She then tried to express how this term for her encompassed many aspects of the relationship of plants to the cycle of the year, to the bearing of fruit The second consultant expressed dissatisfaction with the way that English al- ways wanted to divide things into boxes. She commented, “Why do outside people have to put things in boxes-the way we think there’s a time for all these [plants] and they’re all linked together. These little plants have a purpose, to help the other ones grow” (S. Howard notes 9/14/96.) For her, the appropriate way to look at plants was to see them in relationship. She said: Life cycle-the cycle continues. Plants start growing, leaves open. Trees first. It feeds the animals. The cycle continues. Then salmon comes. In the fall are the animals. That’s how the life cycle continues. There’s a certain time for something which helps sustain the life of another being, and that’s where the chain link comes in. You have to preserve the link. If you ever destroy that link, then the rest is destroyed (S. Howard 9/14/96.) Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 213 NOTES "Names and/or scientific identifications were sought for all species mentioned by people or noted by people in the course of field trips, and for some species I collected in the course of fieldwork which I had no previous indication were named or used, such as several spe- cies of wild orchids, sedge, and grasses. The extent of some classes was probed by bringing several related botanical species to experts for naming, as, for example the various species of Equisetum. In addition, fieldwork in 1996 was directed at clarifying some questions re- garding classification which had arisen in the course of preliminary analysis of Gitksan plant classification. *Gitksan words in this article are spelled in the practical orthography used by the Gitksan dictionary committee. two dialects, the upst or eastern dialect, and the d stream or western dialect, which differ somewhat in spelling. Where both spellings are given for a single work, I have indicated dialect with E or W. The spelling of “Gitksan” actually differs between the dialects, being best rendered Gitxsan for the eastern dialect, and Gitksen for the western. Therefore, I have retained the standard spelling “Gitksan” for the people and language in this work. In the Gitksan orthography, underlined stops and fricatives indicate velar sounds as op- posed to palatal sounds. /g/ (voiced stop) /k/ (voiceless stop) and /x/ (fricative) can exist as both velar and palatal variants. HI indicates a lateral fricative. Glottalized conso- nants (m, w, y) are written with ’, as ’m, ’y or ‘w. Glottal stops are indicated with ’. Ejectives are written with the ’ after the consonant or digraph, as in ts’ilasxw. Spellings have been checked by Bruce Rigsby, University of Queensland, and Art Mathews Jr. of the Gitksan Dictionary Committee. Any errors that remain are my own. 3 One anonymous reviewer points out, however, that coral root Corallorhiza spp., and In- dian pipe Monotropa uniflora and similar saprophytic vascular plants do have somewhat similar appearance and ecology to macrofungi. 4 Modern classification schemata often include five Kingdoms: Plantae, Animalia, Fungi, Protista (unicellular eucaryotic organisms) and Monera (procaryotic organisms including blue green algae and various groups of bacteria) (cf. Curtis 1983: 385; Barrett et al. 1986: 1069-1074). 5“Berry” is used here in the popular sense of small fruits. Morphologically, the fruits uti- lized by the Gitksan include drupes, pomes, berries, and aggregate fruit, as well as one aberrant example of a spheroidal coloured fleshy leaf. 6 A complete listing of Gitksan, English, and scientific names, with authorities, is given in able 1. 7 Art Mathews Jr. mentioned the name gaanaxws of the moss or liverwort and related i a locality called Wilp Gaanaxws on his traditional territory which was named after it be- cause it is abundant in that area. He offered an identification as a leafy liverwort based on an illustration in Plants of Northern British Columbia (MacKinnon et al. 1992) and also thought it resembled a picture of a Dicranum with falcate secund leaves. 214 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 8 Interestingly, the type pointed out to me by this name, Lycoperdon sp., bears a Latin name which also alludes to an uncanny character and t is ] ic farti 27 tk = i tr lates as ‘wolf fart.’ Th kelike puff of spores that out of a pore in the top of a ripe a J t fruiting body when squeezed or stepped on is th ‘fart’ described in the names. 9 In 1996, Art Mathews indicated that dandelion was called baxbok’ in the Eastern dialect area, although the Western dialect apparently lacks a name for it. Smith’s consultant was from Gitwingax in the Western dialect area. 10“ Huwehl gangan, ‘yens ganhl majagalee” (western dialect), Gitxsenimx - Gitxsanimax to English Dictionary, Learner’s Edition, Volume 1 by the Aboriginal Education Branch, Brit- ish Columbia Ministry of Education, Gitksan Wet’suwet’en Education Society School Dis- trict #88, Sim’algyax Working Group, n.d. | The plants I specifically asked about were yellow pondlily, riceroot lily, cow parsnip, Queen's cup, devil's club, yarrow /everlasting, red osier dogwood, water arum, Sitka vale- rian, moss, grass/hay, and stonecrop. Art Mathews Jr. added fireweed to the list, and sug- gested one only says sgan haast when it is necessary to clarify that one is referring to a plant (floral form) rather than a dog (animal) when speaking to Coast Tsimshian people. Dog aas, is similar to fireweed haast in Coast Tsimshian, where they are unambiguous about Gitksen. 2 This similarity is also recognized in England, where ‘osier’ means willow; both shoots of true willow and the red osier are used for willow basketry (wickerwork). 13 The name means ‘covers to the hips/ groin’ and presumably indicates tl l stature of the plant. '4 Several other lichen names given in Art Mathews n.d. probably belong in this intermedi- ate. I have not included these groups in the present paper because the extension and iden- tity of their referrants have not been checked, nor have field specimens been obtained for technical determination. Mathews lists ges ‘wiiget as Bryoria lanestris, hla’yimkhl gan as Alectoria sarmentosa and hla’anisihl sginist as Usnea lapponica. He based his identifications on pictures in Plants of Northern British Columbia (MacKinnon et al. 1992). 15 The term gadimis is a possib ption; it is a term denoting a less preferred form of the black huckleberry, Vaccinium membranaceum. The name is not related linguistically to simmaa’y, ‘real berry,’ which applies to the species in general, and to the preferred large, dark bronze fruited form. The difficulty is deciding if the term is best considered a second generic, or whether it is a specific or some other type of subdivision (see discussion of growth phases and sex phases of animals in Clément 1995). An exception which overgeneralizes is the typical inclusion of both Picea x Roche and Picea mariana in seeks, though recognition of different species of spruce in the Skeena Valley, where at least Picea sitchensis, P. engelmanni, and P. glauca hybridize and intergrade, is arbitrary at best. 'e “As there are two plants called by this name, this one [Castilleja miniata] is called short, the other...[Aquilegia formosa] tall” (Smith 1926: 181). Smith (1986) reports two medicinal uses for Castilleja: a decoction of the whole plant for “nose bleed, bleeding, stiff lungs, bad eyes, and lame back, possibly caused by kidney trouble,” and a decoction used for cough. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 215 '’ The smaller species S. stellata was named in coordination to S. racemosa by Smith’s infor- mant in 1926 (see Table 6) and was called hissgank’ots. 18 However, amk’ooxst means “aspen,” while k’ooxst means “maple.” Another exception is am’mel, which means “cottonwood,” but ‘mel means ‘canoe.’ '° A related problem occurs when different consultants, speaking different dialects, give the same term for two unrelated botanical species. This occured with the use of sgantya‘utxw(E)/sgantye’txw(W) for I y, Symphoricarpus albus, and fool’s huck- leberry, Menziesia ferruginea. Possibly the name ‘thunder plant’ is a “catchall” term uniting several shrubs which have no edible berries. *0 Although it is tempting to think that the names may correlate with the two botanical species, most of the time people are thinking only of Juniperus communis, which is far more widely distributed, and is the species I have observed being collected for medicine. The elders who first gave the two Gitksan terms and discussed their contrasting uses were from Git-anmaaxs and Gisbayakws, where there is no Juniperus scopulorum nearby. How- ever, the occurrence of the ts’ex form in the unrelated Athapaskan language Witsuwit’en, = ee ee eet “¢ £ Ll 1 | em | th, ¢ (Inhnson-Cottesfeld AFUE OL ae Le, and Hargus 1998), does confuse the issue. 21 ’Waasen/’waasan apparently does ont apply to the perennial montane prostate willows, also botanically placed in the genus Salix (Olive Ryan interview transcript Fey 25/ 95). Olive Ryan did not apply any name to a specimen of the prostrate alpine willow Salix arctica ssp. crassujulis, although she readily named a leafy sprig of Salix scouleriana, the common tree size willow of upland sites in that area. 22 Dr. Jim Pojar of the British Columbia Forest Service gave an estimate of 900-1000 vascu- lar plant species for the Bulkley River drainage for that work (personal communication 1997). As vascular plant diversity is similar for the adjacent Gitksan territories, a figure of 1000 vascular plant species present in the local flora is a reasonable working hypothesis. 23 The elders were David Green, the late Olive Ryan, Pete Muldoe, the late Jeff Harris S., and a somewhat younger but very knowledgeable man, Art Mathews Jr. (Dinim Gyet), whose recently deceased father knew a great deal and also contributed to this project. The terms are gaanaxws, gadimis, gesgan, hisgahldaatsxw, hlit, iscum sgan’isxw, ligimtxgan, maa’yhl litsxw, maa’yim hagwilhuxw, maa’y welgan, maa’ya luulak’, and the descriptive phrases umhlxum yip and umhlxum miinhl gan. 24 This name was also given by Pet Muldoe to the short tree sized juniper Juniperus scopulorum; he said that slender young trees were used for bow construction. The late Ol- ive Ryan in 1996 also provided this name for a photograph of a tree sized Rocky Mountain Juniper. 25 Gottesfeld (1993) and Johnson-Gottesfeld and Hargus (1998) discuss this phenomenon for the Wet’suwet’en and other northwest Coast groups. Compton (1993) also mentions this phenomenon. 26 For example, Olive Ryan described false box (Pachystima myrsinities) as “waxberry” (t’imi’yt), but mentioned that the real kind has berries. Other consultants have called it hissgant’imi’yt. 216 JOHNSON Vol. 19, No. 2 27 An interesting case is presented by Arnica cordifolia, heart-leaved arnica, an indigenous plant which has a medicinal use, but which was simply called, in English “sunflower” and no Gitksan name was offered. 28 These forms were provided by Art Mathews Jr., though my orthography is slightly dif- ferent. 29 Possibly Gitksan people are comfortable with multiple names of different formality ap- plying to plants, because people, too, have various names depending on context and cir- cumstance. Now, of course, people have legal English names which are registered with the government. Traditional Gitksan names include a series of names of different status and rank which a person may hold in the course of his or her lifetime. An adult of high status may hold more than one chiefly name and one or more naxnok names at the same time. These names are passed on separately in the lineage group. In addition, many people have nicknames by which they may be called for most of their lives; I believe this practice ante- dates the introduction of European Christian names and surnames, and may have leant some consistency of reference to individual people as they assumed a series of different names throughout their lives. 3° The fruits of all local species of angiosperms are relatively small and berry-like, gion a botanically they include a diversity of fruit types. In addition there are, of course, variou dry capsules and legumes, which do not seem to be named in sim’al 31 This is reflected in the popular naturalist’s term in English “ferns and fern allies” for vascular plants that produce spores, although the groups so included are diverse groups of very distant relationship and distinct morphology which are distinguishable in the Car- boniferous Period of the Paleozoic and have been distinct for more than 300 million years. 32 When asked directly if one could call the rhizome of yellow pond lily, or Indian hellebore wis, several consultants replied that they could not, and on one occasion suggested that one could use the term for these rhizomes (interview notes 1996). 87am uncertain if named flowers of some utility, such as the peavines, hagimgasx ‘wiping plant,’ belong in this group. The use of ’yens to designate lettuce might also be mentioned here. 34 Habasxw is an antipassive nominalisation (a noun) of the verbal root / hap-/ “to cover,” “covering (n.), what covers” (Rigsby, personal communication 1996-1997). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to acknowledge the Gitksan elders and other people who contributed to my understanding of Gitksan naming and classification of plants: especially David Green, the late Jeff Harris Sr., the late Robert Jackson Sr., Art Mathews Jr. (Dinim Gyet), the late Elsie Morrison, Pete Muldoe, the late Olive Ryan, and the late Walter Wilson. Sadie Howard, Beverley Anderson, and Joan Ryan se — with ae of or in the 1996 field season. I would like to thank Beverley nd cultural interpretation. I would like to a a the Gitxsan Treaty Office and its ce the Office of Hereditary Chiefs and the Gitksan-Wet’suwet’en Tribal Council, for makin this research possible, and for making available Smith’s unpublished manuscript at the beginning of my research. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 217 I wotihd alse ake to ar my gratitude to Dr. aga Rigsby for his help with Gitksan i d to Dr. Brian Compton for making available his doctoral discertatina Thanks are Hare to 5 Dr Adolf Ceska and the late Dr. Robert Ogilvie of the Royal British Columbia Museum for help with plant nies and to Dr. Randy Currah and Dr. Dale Vitt of the Biological Sciences Department of th University of Alberta for identifications of fungi and bryophytes. Financial support te the research was provided by N.N.A.D.A.P. (funding to the Gitksan Education Society for the Traditional Medicine Project, 1987-1988), the Canadian Circumpolar Institute (field support in 1992, 1994, and 1995), and the Jacobs Foundation (field support 1996), and by a doctoral fellowship from SSHRC (1994-1997). LITERATURE CITED ATRAN, SCOTT. 1985. cae of folk- botanical life for American ee 87: 298.3 313, Se es itive Foundations of Natural Piste Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. BARRETT, JAMES M., PETER ABRAMOFF, A. KRISHNA KUMARAN, and WILLIAM F.MILLINGTON. "1986. Biology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. BERLIN, BRENT. 19S. wr near of Societies. Princeton University Press, Princeto BROWN, CECIL. 1984. Language and Living Things, , Uniformities in Folk Classification and Naming. Naga University Press, New Brunsw . Mode of eibaeiace and folk biolo ical taxonomy. Current ee 26(1):43-64. 1. On the botanical life-form vireo.” Pp. 72-78 in Man an ’ Essays in Pacific Anthropology and Ethnobiology in Honour of Ralph Bulmer, Andrew wens ames The Polynesian i Aukl BYE, ROBER JR. 1986. "Voucher specimens = ethnobologica studies an publ Ne al of Reindbiotony 6(1): 1 CLEMENT, a he 1995. Why is taxonomy utilitarian? Journal of Ethnobiology 15(1):1-44 COMPTON, BRIAN. 1993. Upper North Department of Botany, nba of British Columbia, Vancouver. —__———, BRUCE RIGSBY and MARIE- LUCIE TARPENT (editors). 1997. Ethnobotany of the Gitksan Indians of British Columbia by Harlan I. Smith, ae i Museum of beenetar Ottawa. ation, Hull CURTIS. HELENA. 1983. Misiban 4th Animal Categories from Central Seram. Cambri University Press, Cambridge. GOTTESFELD, LESLIE M. JOHNSON. 1992. Short Communication: use of cinder conk seas obliquus) by the Gitksan of vee estern British Columbia si Journal of Ethnobiology. saree 153-156. . Plants, Land, and People, the Ethnobotany of the Wet’suwet’en. MA Thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton. HITCHCOCK, C. LEO and ARTHUR CRONOQUIST. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle HULTEN, ERIC. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories, a Manual of the Vascular Plants. Stanford University Press, Stanford. HUNN, EUGENE S. 1982. The utilitarian factor in folk biological classification. American Anthropologist 84(4): 830- and DAVID H. FRENCH. 1984. er Sahaptin case. Journal of tinier (1): 73-92. 218 JOHNSON ie ee ae LESLIE M. and SH GU 98. ene he nomenclature in Wet’suwet’en ethnobotany-a preliminary examination. Journal of anaes «4 18(1): 69-101 ny A EF VITT. 1996. The seciiee of Sphagnum for diapers by indigenous North Americans. Evansia 13(3): 103-108. MACKINNON, A., J. POJAR and R. COUPE (editors). 1992. Plants of Northern British gale Lone Pine Publishing, Edmont MATHEWS, ART. n.d. Plants for Review. February 1996. Lmao in possession of author, fo of Gitksan Dictiona MORRIS, BRIAN. 1984. The pragmatics of folk amine Journal of Ethnobiology 4(1):45-6 PEOPLE OF KSAN. 1980. eeaia What e Great Nature Provided. Douglas and McIntyre, Vancouver and Seattle. SMITH, HARLAN I. 1926. Ethno-botany “4 the Gitksan Indians of British Columbi, 2nd Copy. 1192.4A.B90 F1. Thrpub lished manuscript on file at the Canadian eum of Civilization, Hull, Québec. TALLER DE TRADICION ORAL a PIERRE BEAUCAGE. 1987. Catégories pratiques et taxonomie: notes sur les classifications et les pratiques botaniques des Nahuas (Sierra Norte de Puebla, Mexique Recherches Amérindiennes au Québec 17(4): 17-35. mid- -range folk plant Vol. 19, No. 2 TAYLOR, PAUL MICHAEL. 1990. The Folk meee of the Tobelo People, a Study n Folk Classification. Smithsonian Contributions to aerate gy No. 34. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D. TURNER, NANCY J. 1974, Plant taxonomic Pacific Northwest (Haida, Bella Coola, and Lillooet). Syesis 7 (Supplement No. ): 1-104. 1987. General plant categories in hompso n and Lillooet, two Interior Salich languages of British Columbia. Journal of Ethnobiology 7(1):55-82. 1989. “All berries have relations” groupings in Thompson and Lillooet Interior Salish. Journal of Ethnobiology 9(1): 69-110. , LAURENCE C. THOMPSON, M. TERRY THOMPSON, and ANNIE Z. YORK. 1990. Thompson Ethnobotany, Knowledge and Usage of Plants by the Thompson Indians of British Columbia. Memoir No. 3, Royal British Columbia Museum. eee British Columbia Museum, Victoria Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 219 Las Plantas de la Milpa entre los Maya. Silvia Teran, Christian Rasmussen, and Olivio May Cauich. Mérida: Fundaci6n Tun Ben Kin, Calle 15-B No. 90, Col. Chuburna, CP 97200, Mérida, Yucatan, México. Pp. 278, including many color plates; 14 further unnumbered pp. of color plates following p. 278. Bibliogra- phy; no index. ISBN 970-92060-0-1. This superb study presents exhaustive detail about the commoner plants cul- tivated by the Yucatec Maya farmers of Xocen, a large and extremely tradition-conscious farming community in the remote eastern forests of Yucatan state. The book brings together virtually all the practical knowledge, medicinal lore, and religious belief that the farmers of Xocen could relate to the investiga- tors. An earlier companion volume, Teran and Rasmussen’s La milpa de los Mayas (1994), provided the relevant biological, pedological and agronomic data, as well as much detail on local fauna and flora. These two books, between them, give by far the best and most comprehensive picture available of agriculture in the low- lands of southeast Mexico. As such, they are indispensable for archaeologists working in the Maya area, as well as for ethnobotanists interested in traditional tropical agriculture. Las plantas de la milpa entre los Mayas includes data on planting, irrigation, pests and pest control, and uses, including food, medicine, forage, and magic. It also provides long texts, taken down directly from Maya farmers’ narration and trans- lated into Spanish, about the plants in question. It also contains a long and powerful prayer, delivered by the ceremonial leader at a first-fruits rite in a milpa. This oration, given in Maya and in Spanish translation, is one of the longest, richest, and most religiously interesting Maya ceremonial texts ever published, and would tudv It rae t} logical int t: tl ° haw Lic © AOTLIGVV ROS well repay y and hawks are called in ( : Maize is significantly referred to as gracia, a Spanish word used in Maya for di- vinities and divine matters. (It is worth mentioning that the Maya epithet for Jesus, kichkelem yum [“handsome lord” ], is apparently a term formerly used for the Maize God.) Another valuable inclusion is a collection of traditional foods, as described by their makers. Christian Rasmussen’s color photographs are not only excellent; they are also particularly well chosen for their scientific value. With this book, Xocen becomes one of the most thoroughly ethnobotanized communities in the world, ranking with Chamula and Tenejapa in Chiapas. In addition to the work of the Teran-Rasmussen group, we have the superb study of forage and animal feeds by Elena Acosta Bustillos (Acosta Bustillos et al. 1998), and Herrera’s truly magistral study of gardens and orchards in the nearby daugh- ter community of Xuilub (Herrera Castro 1994). There is also substantial work by Bruce Love on religion, largely—alas—unpublished. However, from nearby Becanchen, Love brings us a description of a field ceremony with Maya oration text, that is closely comparable to the one in the book under review (Love and Peraza 1984). Xocen regards itself as the center of the world, and perhaps it is, at least as far as lowland tropical ethnobotany is concerned. . i: However, Xocen has also lost its sacred book. According to local tradition, somebody (accounts differ) borrowed the book and never returned it. This too 220 BOOK REVIEWS Vol. 19, No. 2 may be all too prophetic of the future, for the books written about Xocen are diffi- cult to find. Like so many studies of south Mexican life and ecology, the book under review was published in a small edition and distributed locally. The “Fundacion Tun Ben Kin” is a two-person operation; Teran and Rasmussen are an independent ethnographic team, their work supported largely by the Danish aid organization Danida. Olivio May Cauich, their collaborator, is a Xocen Maya. The book can be obtained only by writing the authors or emailing them at chrasmus@prodigy.net.mx. The companion volume was also self-published, and is more or less exhausted. An earlier, and invaluable, collection of texts from Xocen was mimeographed, and distributed (with governmental help) to bilingual schools in the area, most of whom promptly lost it. It deserves full publication. The works of Herrera and Acosta are less obscure, being available from the publisher, but are not easy to find otherwise. Ethnobiologists should make sure that these books are in their local libraries! E. N. Anderson Dept. of Anthropology University of California Riverside, CA 92521-0418 LITERATURE CITED ACOSTA BUSTILLOS, ELENA, J. LOVE, BRUCE and EDUARDO PERAZA SALVADOR FLORES GUIDO, CASTILLO. 1984. Wahil kol, a Yucatec ARTURO GOMEZ-POMPA. 1998. Uso Maya agricultural ceremony. Estudios y Manejo de Plantas Forrajeras para Cria de Cultura Maya 15:251-300. de Animales Dentro del Solar en una ’ Comunidad Maya en Yucatan. TERAN, SILVIA and CHRISTIAN Universidad Aut6noma de Yucatan, RASMUSSEN. 1994. La Milpa de los Mérida, Yucatan. Mayas. Authors, Mérida, Yucatan. HERRERA CASTRO, NATIVIDAD DELFINA. 1994. Los Huertos enews Mayas en el Oriente de Yuc Universidad Aut6énoma de pena Mérida, Yucatan. Journal of Ethnobiology 19(2): 221-225 Winter 1999 ETHNOBOTANICAL OVERVIEW OF GOGD (Allium ramosum L.): A TRADITIONAL EDIBLE WILD PLANT USED BY INNER MONGOLIANS KHASBAGAN Department of Ethnobiology, Kunming Institute of Botany, the Chinese Academy of Sciences Kunming, 650204, the People’s Republic of China NARISU Department of Renewable Resources, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071, USA KEVIN STUART Qinghai Education College, Xining, Qinghai 810008, the People’s Republic of China ABSTRACT.- Plants have figured prominently in Mongols’ food and shelter. The traditional collecting, processing and preservation of gogd (Allium ramosum L.) as a Mongol food are recorded. The authors present the way of preparation of the leaves and inflorescence of the plant as a dish or condiment and suggest efficient means for its conservation and utilization. Key words: gogd, Allium ramosum L., edible plant, Mongol food, utilization RESUMO.- Plantas desempenharam um papel proeminente nas dietas e abrigos dos Mongois. Sao registrados a colheita, 0 processamento e a preservacao tradicionais de gogd (Alli L.) como uma comida Mongélica. Os autores mostram a maneira de preparacao das folhas e inflorescéncias desta planta para ser um prato ou um condimento e eles sugerem meios eficientes para a sua preservacao e utilizacdao. RESUME.- Les plantes figurent fréquemment dans la nourriture et dans I’abri des Mongols. Les méthodes traditionnelles de la collection, préparation et préservation du gogd (Allium ramosum L.) comme une nourriture Mongole sont décrites. Les auteurs présentent la voie de préparation des feuilles et des inflorescences de cette plante comme un plat ou condiment. Ils proposent aussi une méthode efficace de la conservation et de l’usage de cette plante. INTRODUCTION Mongols have been nomadic herders on the Mongolian Plateau grassland for centuries. At present, Mongols are distributed in Mongolia, the People s Republic of China (Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Qinghai, Xingjiang Uighur Au- tonomous Region, Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces), Russia (Buryatia Autonomous Republic Within Russian Federation), and Kazakhstan Republic (within Commonwealth of Independent States). Various factors, such as loss of Fae J KASBAGAN et al. Vol. 19, No. 2 prime grassland to agriculture, have led some Mongols to adopt agriculture, al- though many continue to raise livestock. Khasbagan and Yumzab (1988) have discussed Mongol traditional botanical culture and usage of wild plants. These authors argue that the intimate relationship Mongols have traditionally had with their environment led them to utilize natural resources rationally. Allium ramosum L. is similar to cultivated chive (A. tuberosum Rottl. ex Spreng.). However, A.ramosum has longer, hollower, and narrower leaves that are pointed at the end, and a perianth lobe with a red middle vein, while A. tuberosum has flat, solid leaves, and a perianth lobe with a green middle vein, distinguishing them from each other. Cultivated chive originated in the eastern part of Asia (Shan 1994), while A. ramosum is distributed widely in northern China, Mongolia, and Russia (Uljihutag 1985; Shan 1994; Yuquan 1994). Allium ramosum, also called kherin gogd, and zherlig gogd (kherin and zherlig mean ‘wild’ in Mongolian), is a common edible wild plant traditionally used by Mongols. In the thirteenth century Secret History of the Mongols (Anonymous 1240), the plant was recorded as gogosum and reported as being eaten by Temujin (name of Chinggis Khan) and his family (Khasbagan 1996). Lobsangchuiden (1918) called the plant gogosu and reported it as “a plant used as food by Mongols for a long time” in the Records of Mongol Customs. Yunatov (1958) noted that “the plant is used as food by herdsmen.” The word gogd derives from gogosum (Eldentai and Ardezab 1986). In Inner Mongolia, our identification of collected specimens demonstrates that the plant referred to by locals as gogd is A. ramosum. Gogosu could have been another synonym, al- though we have not found any reference dealing with it. The first two authors’ investigations indicate that the plant remains a source of food in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region grassland area. Unfortunately, no systematic study of the plant’s collection, processing, and preservation has been found in the literature. From 1986 to 1996, the first author carried out investiga- tions in herding areas of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. A number of Mongolian herdsmen, peasants, lamas (practitioners of Buddhism, most of them are also medical practitioners), and physicians were interviewed and specimens of the plant were collected. Additionally, the first two authors were born in Mon- gol grassland areas and are personally familiar with how the plant is used in their home area. During the course of research, twenty specimens were collected from different areas, identified, and housed at the Department of Biology, Inner Mongolia Teachers’ University. MONGOL FOOD CULTURE In the mid 9" century, Mongols began to engage in nomadic herding (Dujian 1985). At present in Inner Mongolia, the geographic areas where Mongols reside can be grouped into herding areas, herding-farming areas, and f g Major traditional food sources have been meat, milk, and milk by-products. Although these traditional food sources continue to be important in the first two areas, grains such as Panicum miliaceum L. var. eftusum Alef. have become an important source of food as well. While Mongols in the farming and herding-farming areas (most of them in eastern Inner Mongolia) have their own gardens to grow vegetables, such Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 220 as onions, cabbages and potatoes, many Mongols in the herding and herding-farm- ing areas do not have access to gardens in order to grow vegetables for family consumption, because of nomadic or semi-nomadic herding practices. Individu- als in these two areas get most of their fresh vegetables from a banner (administrative unit similar to a county) town. In these areas, some wild plants became important tabl For past ten years, we have identified twenty species of wild plants used as vegetables in Inner Mongolia (unpublished data), twenty species of wild plants used as tea (Khasbagan 1990), and fifteen species of wild plants used for their edible fruits (Khasbagan 1995). COLLECTION, PROCESSING, AND USAGE OF GOGD Collection.— Collecting gogd is a part of everyday life during the growing season of a year. Gogd is collected when it is about ten cm tall, and the peak time for har- vesting is May through July. The above-ground parts, consisting primarily of leaves, are picked by women, elders, and children near residential areas, or by men trav- eling on horseback or animal-drawn carts to distant places in order to collect large amounts of gogd (4 to 5 kg, fresh weight) for preservation and future use. It is also common for individuals during the course of traveling on foot and doing outdoor work, such as herding livestock, to gather the plant daily in order to obtain enough fresh material (around 0.3 kg) for a family meal. In August and late July, when the plants blossom, people collect the inflorescence, which is also called soriz. Ap- proximately one to two kg in fresh weight are usually gathered and processed ina similar way to that of the leaves. Processing and Usage.— After collection, gogd can be processed as a main dish. The leaves are washed and cut into 2-3 cm pieces and preserved with salt in a con- tainer. One kg of gogd is commonly mixed with 0.15-0.20 kg of salt. The inflorescence is ground and a similar ratio of salt is added. The dish may be eaten immediately or kept in a container to be eaten within a few days. Gogd leaves are also added to pots of cooking mutton to make the broth and meat more palatable. Some Mongols prefer adding juuhei (liquid that stays above yogurt when yogurt is made ina container) in the soup. Mongols estea d or boiled dumplings stuffed with gogd leaves which are then cut into small pieces and mixed with ground mutton and juuhei. This dish is customary in the Kheshigten Banner of Ulaanhad League. Preservation for winter usage is also common. The amount of material col- lected is related to availability and could reach as much as seven kg. The processed leaves, inflorescences, or mixture, according to availability and individual family preferences, are placed in containers for future use, and salt added in amounts dictated by individual preferences. This preservation method is seen in Kheshigten Banner and Left Barin Banner, Ulaanhad League and the two Ujimchin Banners of Xilingol League. In Left Barin Banner, Ulaanhad League, five to six kg of gogd is collected in late fall when the growing season of the plant ends. After preserva- tion, the dish is ready to be eaten in a few days and is called soriz in Left Barin Banner (Ulaanhad League). It is served ona small plate with other dishes at meal- time. 224 KASBAGAN et al. Vol. 19, No. 2 Fresh gogd may be used as a condiment for dishes. Gogd may also be sun dried for a few days, ground into a powder, and used as a condiment in winter. Soriz may be processed similarly to gogd, but only the inflorescence is used and then mixed with salt (1 kg inflorescence, 0.1 kg salt, 0.5 kg sour milk). Once the mixture is ground into a pulp, it may be served as a condiment for other dishes. Additionally, a small amount of soriz (about 0.01kg) is added to sheep blood in- testines and cooked as sausage. DISCUSSION It is a Mongol taboo to dig out the roots of gogd in most areas (Ulaanhad and Xilingol Leagues). Considerable care is therefore taken while collecting leaves and blossoms so as not to damage the roots. This is an example of traditional Mongols conservation of wild plants. Utilization of gogd as a food by Mongols has been restricted to the level of family consumption. Deteriorating grassland conditions and increasing popula- tion pressures are threatening gogd as a resource. Consequently, some Mongols are growing wild gogd near their homes. The authors believe that this is an impor- tant step toward overcoming a current shortage of wild plant resources. Of special note is that many Mongols assert that gogd is efficacious as a tonic for stomach ailments. Although there is no written information regarding this claim, further work is needed to better understand the nutritional and medicinal values of gogd, as well as possibilities for potential large-scale production. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are grateful to indigenous herdsmen, peasants, Jamas, and Mongolian physicians we interviewed during our investigations in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, the People’s Republic of China. LITERATURE CITED ELDENTAI and ARDEZAB. 1986. Annotated and Restored Secret History of Mongols. Inner Mongolia Education S KHASBAGAN. 1990. A prelimina stud of plants used as Mongolian traditional tea. SMe Botanica Yunnanica 12: 43-48. (In Chinese). KHASBAGAN. 1995. Ethnobotanical study on wild edible fruits of Mongols in Normal University (Natural science edition) 72: 60-63. (In Chinese). sgh aa" — er edible plants corded “Sec History of Mon vente ee of Arid Land Resources and Environment 10: 87-94. (In Chinese). KHASBAGAN and YUMZAB. 1988. Normal University (Natural science edition) 10: 87-94. (In Mongolian). LOBSANGCHUIDEN. 1918. Records of Mongol Customs. Inner Mongolia People’s Publishing House, Huhhot. (In Mongolian). SHAN, C. 1994. Resources of Forage Plants in Chinese Grasslands. Liaoning Nationality Press, Shenyang. (in Chinese). Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY Zan ULJIHUTAG. 1985. re Faber ag Sane 5 YUQUAN, M. 1994. Flora of Inner le’ in Grasslands of Mongolian People Mongolia, Vol. 5, (2"4 edition). Inner Republic. National Publishing Haas, Mongolia People’s Publishing House, Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian). Huhhot. (In Chinese). YUNATOYV, A. A. 1958. (translated by H. ZHAOHUA). Forage Grassland Plants of the Mongolian People’s Republic. Science Press, Beijing. (In Chinese). 226 BOOK REVIEWS Vol. 19, No. 2 People, Plants, and Landscapes: Studies in Paleoethnobotany. Kristen J. Gremillion, editor. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 1997. Pp. xviii; 271. $29.95 (Paperback) ISBN: 0-8173-0827-x. One of the more inexplicable aspects of archaeology this century is that, de- spite growing recognition of the importance to human societies of plant resources, surprisingly little emphasis has been placed on the recovery and interpretation of those remains by archaeologists. There have been notable exceptions, of course, as represented by the work of Braidwood, Yarnell, Flannery, Watson, and others, and by the 1970s, paleoethnobotanical studies were regularly being conducted by a small number of practitioners across North America to produce an unprecedented wealth of information on prehistoric plant use. Yet full acceptance that paleoethnobotany as a vital component of archaeology has been surprisingly slow, and in some respects, it has been ghettoized. Despite its immense potential to con- tribute information pertinent to both Big Questions (e.g., where and when were plants first domesticated?) and those of more local significance (e.g., what plants were eaten at this site?), the recovery and analysis of samples for paleoethnobotanical sampling are still not routinely practiced at most archaeo- logical sites. This well-edited volume offers a strong challenge to this situation by demon- strating how clearly paleoethnobotany can illuminate aspects of past settlement, subsistence, and economic practices otherwise inaccessible. No less importantly, it offers new ways of thinking about the relationships that have existed between people and the dynamic landscapes they occupied, with each influencing the other. The collection is derived from a Society of American Arcl in honor of Richard Yarnell, a pioneer in this field, who in 1992 received the society’ s Fryxell Award for Interdisciplinary Research. Most of the contributors are former students or colleagues of Yarnell. United under the banner of human ecology, the authors explore two central themes: first, the process by which paleoethnobotany has evolved into a multidisciplinary entity, armed with formidable tools (e.g., elec- tron microscopy, accelerator dating), and second, the development of a set of robust explanatory tools that include the integration of ecological and evolutionary theory. This approach gives this collection a coherence seldom found in festschrifts; in- deed as Bruce Smith notes in the Foreword, “There is much in this book...that would please Yarnell far more than any glowing praise for him.” In both her well-crafted preface and introduction, Gremillion sketches the development of paleoethnobotany in North America, and how it has gradually shifted from description to explanation, with impetus provided by Julian Stew- ard, Leslie White, and others. This short essay identifies several major themes in the history of the discipline, and thus provides a firm base for the chapters that follow. The first part of the collection, “The Archaeological Record of Plant Domesti- cation and Utilization,” explores the evidence for the development of food production primarily in eastern North America, which is now viewed as an in- dependent center of plant domestication. Patty Jo Watson begins with a succinct summary of the development of modern paleoethnobotany in the Near East, East- Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 2af ern Woodlands, and Southwest, which has “proceeded at different rates and along different trajectories” in each region. Kristen Gremillion reexamines a collection of plant remains originally recovered in Kentucky in the 1930s, using crop mor- phology and site chronology to explain increases in seed size of sumpweed, chenopodium, and other species through d tication. An amazing collection of five charred bags of seeds stored in an Arkansas rock shelter (also excavated in the 1930s) is investigated by Gayle Fritz, whose analysis of cucurbits, sunflower, and sumpweed from the cache indicates that plant husbandry was already well devel- oped by 3000 years ago. Additional evidence for the indigenous development of Cucurbita pepo (italicize) is further explored by Wesley Cowan’s study of seed morphology in archaeobotanical samples from Kentucky. The final paper in this section is by Gary Crawford, whose study of the ecological processes of domesti- cation in Jomon Japan provides new insights into human influences on local landscape development. The second part of the book, “Plant Resources, Human Communities, and Anthropogenic Landscapes,” focuses on the cultural and ecological contexts of plant domestication and management. Margaret Scarry and Vincas Steponaitis examine changes in agricultural strategies associated with the rise the late prehis- toric Moundville (Alabama) polity; paleoethnobotanical evidence there suggests that crop production strategies, such as communal fields, may have served as a type of risk management, while also influencing local landscape development. The application of evolutionary ecology models to understanding the transition from foraging to farming is detailed by Bruce Winterhalder and Carol Goland, who evaluate diet breadth, risk analysis, and production efficiency. Their study compliments Paul Gardner’s predictive modeling of nut productivity and har- vesting for Eastern Woodlands foragers, whose response to processing costs and periodicity of mast yields may have prepared them for post-foraging food pro- duction. The remaining two chapters utilize historical sources to explore the relationship of people to plants at very different scales. Gregory Waselkov relates a shift in Creek and Seminole agricultural field location to the development of the 18th century market economy, while Julia Hammett offers a sweeping survey of North American aboriginal plant management strategies, correlated to the geo- graphic distribution of economically important plant families and agricultural intensification during the late Holocene. What shortcomings the volume has are minor. All but one of the chapters fo- cus on eastern North America, leaving Crawford’s valuable study on plant domestication and anthropogenesis in Jomon Japan geographically isolated and not as well integrated into the collection as it should be. In fact, a different organi- zational scheme might have reduced the sometimes awkward feel of seemingly dissimilar chapters bound together within Parts 1 and 2, although each addresses the general issues used to define each part. There is also considerable difference in the length of chapters, leaving one wishing for a little more from Watson (13 pages) and a little less from Winterhalder and Goland (38 pages). Still, these ae ee preferential than problematic points. The volume is well illustrated and indexed, and the use of historical maps and paintings in two final chapters particularly informative. 228 BOOK REVIEWS Vol. 19, No. 2 This collection ultimately works well at two complimentary levels, the first concerned with what we now know about past use of plant resources, and the second with how we know what we know. It therefore serves as a valuable re- source nbd both students and scholars interested in the dynamic nature of past hum , liments other recent volumes, particu- larly ‘Hastorf and Popper’s Current Paleoethnobotany (1988). Paleoethnobotany has become an indispensible component of contemporary archaeology, yet many remain unaware of its potential. In a letter cited by Gremillion (p. 23), William Webb wrote to botanist Volney Jones in 1935: “I have stirred through Indian beds and shoveled out bushels of ‘trash’ which in my igno- rance | regarded as valueless. I now know that I have probably destroyed a large body of valuable information.” This volume reminds us of how valuable that in- formation may be. George P. Nicholas Department of Archaeology Simon Fraser University /Secwepemc Education Institute Kamloops, British Columbia V2H 1H1 Journal of Ethnobiology 19(2): 228-247 Winter 1999 PLANT SPECIES (POACEAE, ASTERACEAE, FABACEAE AND SOLANACEAE) AT AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE IN THE SOUTHERN ARGENTINE PUNA MARIA FERNANDA RODRIGUEZ Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Técnicas Instituto de Botanica Darwinion. Labardén 1642 San Isidro. Buenos Aires, oe ABSTRACT.- Thi h studied the use « ge ] i , mainly from the family Poaceae but also from others (hacia: a a and Solanaceae), by hunter- gatherer groups during the Archaic period (10000-3000 years BP). The work is based on materials recovered at an archaeological site in the southern Argentine Puna, Province of Catamarca: Quebrada Seca 3. The starting point for this study of the archaeobotanical record was a survey of current flora of the area and the ethnobotanical information recovered there. From the comparative anatomical and morphological analysis - the current and archaeological plants, these latter were identified. TI the family Poaceae together with other plant remains from the Asteraceae, Fabaceae and Solanaceae. From these results, both areas of origin and probable uses of these species as well as some seasonality in the site occupation, were inferred. Key words: Paleoethnobotany I botanical record, plant remains, plant use, seasonality RESUMEN.- Este trabajo consiste en una investigacion acerca del uso de especies vegetales pertenecientes a la familia Poaceae principalmente y a otras familias (Asteraceae, Fabaceae y Panapeaty a grupos cazadores- recolectores durante el periodo Arcaico (10000-3000 afios AP). Se basa en un sitio arqueolégico de la Puna er Argentina, Provincia de Catamarca: Quebrada Seca 3. El punto de partida para el estudio del registro arqueobotanico fue el relevamiento de la flora actual del area y la informaci6n etnobotanica recogida en la misma. El andlisis anat6émico y morfolégico comparativo de los vegetales actuales y arqueologicos permiti6 la identificacion de los ultimos. Los resultados indican la presencia de seis especies de la familia Poaceae y de otros restos vegetales pertenecientes a las familias Asteraceae, Fabaceae y Solanaceae. A partir de estos resultados se infieren las areas de procedencia y el probable uso de estas especies y cierta estacionalidad en la ocupaci6n del sitio. RESUME. Ce travail eat une Saeane sur l’usage des espéces de végetaux-qui famille Poaceae et a d’autres familles (Asteraceae, Fabaceae et Solanaceae), par res groupes de chasseurs-recolecteurs pendant la période Archaique (10000-3000 AP). Il se base sur des materiaux recuperés dans un siége archéologique a la Puna Meridionale Argentine, Province de Catamarca: Quebrada Seca 3. Le point de départ pour l’étude du régistre archéobotanique fat le relevement de la flore actuelle de la région et information Sthohetaniqne cueillie dans 14 méme. A partir de l’analy des végétaux actuels et archeologiques, ces derniers ont été determinés. ‘Les résultats indiquent la présence de six éspéces de la famille Poaceae et de restes 230 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 végétaux appartennant aux familles Asteraceae, Fabaceae et Solanaceae. A partir de ces résultats on infére les regions d’origine et l’usage probable des pieces et une certaine regularité stationnelle dans l’ocupation du stége. yi —6° € ‘ --? a § . > g° q Bigs Se - ( 5 ¢ a ~12° \ ee ~“ —\4° —16° @ "/ REAL GRANDE = _.... (RG) 245 SECA —-~—~ tage eed . : a aye OF’ 9s 8 : SS Res + ; $ 7@ Pee cs = Pampa Oeste v3 a, ca ! Pampa Este he 01 4 “hear 00 de zee Qda. SECA oO 0.5 km (OQs) FIGURE 2.— Location of Antofagasta de la Sierra (Catamarca) and the locality of Quebrada Seca. Transects carried out during the analysis of areas of exploitation of plant resources around QS3: T1, transect, E direction; T2, transect, W direction; T3, transect, N direction, and T4, transect, SW direction. 3800 m a.s.l., commences the tolar, where bushy and sub-bushy species of the gen- era Parastrephia and Acantholippia are abundant. Description of the site. —QS3 is a shelter located in the Hoyada of Antofagasta de la Sierra (Catamarca), on the southern margin of the lowland of Quebrada Seca, at 4100 m a.s.l. (Figures 2,3). It is oriented toward the NE and presents a protected area of 9m x 5 m (Figure 4). This surface was divided into an outer sector and an inner sector, designed as eaves and cave respectively, because of the existence of an inner rocky peak which limited the space useful to live in. According to charac- teristics of each of these sectors, the first (with highest artefact densities) would correspond to an area where most of the activities were carried out and the second to a sleeping area (Aschero et al. 1991; Aschero et al. 1993-94). Four main stratigraphic units were found. Layer 0/lens 1 x (muddy-sandy free surface layer with guano, contained carbonaceous sediments of apparent an- 234 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 ¢ EiZE #- = = ne eg een aa gi we me : : oe | ao i a Faycuaui ae" —~. —& vex 0 I 4 Co.mriguaca ee eS ee Cortadera } i qT ; aed oa i o Ay 3563.4 aad = . ) a Sr ewe, ~~ . ? Sgt OS ‘ co“ ce , : JG d ) 372 Fil - hel —_ oe " \ ene a T, ~ Ne \ ae. ie 5 ot ‘eg __\ ; ; ae ’ 3464.4 [PCHIAL ¢ =f = \ ; ae Pug ote , ~“ zx a - ut F = Ve 3S ae sf Omit a LC3 es - ares A °) 3428.6 r a ) Fy aa * Ce = e NTOFAGASTA ee rj ‘de la SIERRA ee \ VK A e 2 1 a 3323.1 ’ 4 be a fo. Colorado Pal 3221 - FIGURE 3.— Antofagasta de la Sierra (Catamarca). Areas of capture of native plant resources from QS3. thropogenic origin); layer 1 aay sandy compact sediment, archaeologically sterile); layer 2a peer com part Sat indy sediment; grey to light brown colouration at the top, with g remains); layer 2b (sandy to sandy-muddy light brown sediment, with important tl ) (Aschero et al. 1991). Within this last layer, 5 — of occupation were differentiated (Aschero, per- sonal communication 1996) ! (Table 1). A date of 2480 + 60 BP (LP — 278) was obtained in layer 2a, which corresponds to the Initial Lower Formative (Late Holocene). For this work, special interest was in layer 2b. The radiocarbon dates assessed from different levels of occupation gave an important archaeological sequence about the Archaic period (Early and Middle Holocene). These datings lay between the extremes of 4510 + 100 BP: Level 2b2 (BETA 27801) and 9410 + 120 BP: Level 2b25 (LP - 881) (Table 1). MATERIALS AND METHODS The starting point of this study was the surveying, identification and ana- tomical analysis of plant species of the area in order to compare these results with the archaeological record of QS3. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 235 _—_ 9 o50 1m FIGURE 4.— Floor of level 2b4 of QS3, indicating the squares (letter and number). Survey carried out by Lic. Carlos Aschero. The ethnobotanical information was used to determine the probable use that human groups who occupied the site made of the plant resources. In this context, four inhabitants of Antofagasta de la Sierra were interviewed.” They were selected because they are very old inhabitants of the area. The questions asked of them were related to use of the plants that grow in the area. Current material. Four transects were carried out in different directions from QS3, following natural topographic lines which connect different microenvironments (Figure 2). The area surrounding the site considered as the most probable area of economic exploitation with minimum energy consumption was determined pre- viously (Bailey 1983). For each transect, the direction, route, distance, duration of the walk, characteristics and changes in vegetation relating to types of soils and presence or absence of water, were all considered. In all transects, relevant geo- graphical points (ravines, water courses, plant associations) were taken as reference and the time taking in walking to get there was recorded. On the return, the collec- tions of plants were made. These were subsequently identified at the Instituto de Botanica Darwinion (SI), where they were later deposited in the Herbarium as part of the reference collection for analysis of the archaeological material. 236 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 TABLE 1.-Stratigraphy and chronology of QS3. | LAYERand LEVEL | DATE (years BP) PALEOCLIMATE-PERIOD 0- lens 1x 1 Late Holocene Formative a 2480 + 60 2b1 5400 + 90 2b2Z 4510 + 100 2b3 4770 + 80 2b4 bf 5380 + 70 DO 2b7 Middle Holocene Archaic b8 6160 + 100 b9 7220 + 60 2b10 b11 7130 + 110 2b12 ZO 1s 2b14 7350 + 80 ok 2b 8330 + 110 b 7 b18 8640 + 80 2b19 2b20 Early Holocene Archaic 2b 2b22 9050 + 90 2b23 2b24 2b25 9410 + 120 For anatomical analysis of structure of Poaceae, leaves and floral stems of these specimens were taken. Transparency of the former was emphasized following the technique of Dizeo de Strittmatter (1973). For floral stems, cross-sections were made manually. All histological sections were stained with safranine fast-green (D’Ambrogio 1986), later examined and photographed by optical mi pe. The epidermis of leaves was also examined and photographed by Scanning Electronic Microscope (SEM). This material is also part of the reference collection (Numbers: SI 28209 to 28211, 28337 to 28342). Archaeological material— The excavation of the site was carried out by sectorial decapage following natural layers. For layer 2b, with sandy matrix, the work was carried out following the distribution of ecofacts and artefacts on site. When con- centration of remains was observed, the extractions were separated until the concentration terminated. In this manner, cultural levels were obtained and named as levels of occupation. At each level of occupation, squares of 1 m x 1 m were drawn (Figure 4) and subdivided into microsectors of 0.5 m x 0.5 m. These latter were the real units of excavation. Within each, the documented material was separated in floors of scale Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 237 1:10. In each floor, the depths of beginning and end of each extraction for the ex- tremes of each microsector were recorded as were those of artefacts, combustion and accumulation structures. In this way, it was possible to determine the density of remains by microsector in cubic meters and to obtain a tridimensional record of the instruments and structures of the site (Aschero et al. 1993-94). Plant remains comprised the archaeobotanical record of the site. The macroremains recovered were gathered in the following ways: (1) Ecofacts (plant remains which gave no evidence of human modifica- tion before use): firewood (wood and charcoal); grasses with and without reproductive organs; other smaller plant remains (flowers, fruits and leaves). These appeared many times in the archaeobotanical record as parts of structures, i.e., of non-portable artefacts, such as fires and straw layers (Renfrew and Bahn 1993 @) Artefacts (plants, with modifications of anthropogenic origin, to be d for some purpose) make fire, shafts, wood cut in bevel, pny woods, worn culms, cords, baskets and remains of basketwork. It is important to indicate the presence of a funeral bundle at level 2b2. It was a cover of camel-hide, tied with a woollen cord, which contained the bony re- mains of a human foetus (Aschero et al. 1991). The bundle was surrounded by, and rested on, bunches of grasses (Figure 5). In this singly, species of Poaceae and cians La remains of Asteraceae, Fabaceae and S were examined. The w 1s of the latter three families were analyzed in a recent publication aera "1998c). The materials FIGURE 5. Funeral bundle, level 2b2: A, human foetus; B, camel-hide; C, truss of grasses; D, woollen cord. 238 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 recovered are held in the Instituto Nacional de Antropologia y Pensamiento Latinoamericano. The grasses with reproductive organs were identified. Some leaves and floral stems of these specimens were separated and current material was examined as detailed above. These histological sections are also part of the reference collection. The leaves and floral stems of Poaceae lacking reproductive organs and forming part of accumulations and straw layers were studied in the same way. The analysis of leaf anatomy, through morphology of stomata, silica bodies and cork cells, and of structure of the floral stem permitted identification of some genera. In such cases, histological sections from the reference collection were used as basis for comparison with standard botany texts (Metcalfe 1960; Nicora and Rugolo de Agrasar 1987). Finally, amplified color laser copies of smaller plant remains were taken; the epidermis of selected remains was examined and photographed by SEM. Families involved were identified by morphological characteristics of reproductive and vegetative tissues. RESULTS Ecofacts.-Poaceae. Grasses (Table 2) were present at some levels of QS3, forming layers of considerable size at 2b10 but more isolated Slseariere At 2b2, they were part of the funeral bundle mentioned above (Figure 5). S ossessed both vegetative and reproductive tissues. The remains generally consisted of iso- lated leaves, husks and floral stems. Analysis of the latter by optical microscope and SEM permitted identification of tribe Festucaceae throughout and placed cer- tain specimens in genera Deyeuxia, Festuca, Puccinellia and Stipa. It is important to emphasize the excellent conservation state of specimens with flowers, identifiable to species in most cases. For each such species from the archaeobotanical record, the origin of current specimens used as comparison ma- terial was recorded. Figure 6, based on Table 2, represents graphically the number of archaeologi- cal specimens of each species or genus from the different levels of occupation. Deyeuxia eminens J. Presl. Origin of current material: Punilla river (20 km from QS3). Plant association: lowland. Archaeological material: epidermis consisted of long cells with ondulating walls, silica bodies and cork cells. The adaxial epider- mis was covered by unicellular hairs and the abaxial epidermis by prickles. The complex of the stomata was of subrectangular shape. Silica bodies and cork cells were grouped in pairs, lying sedan ne long cells. Two inflorescences were also observed. Specimens with v tissues of Deyeuxia eminens were found at layer 2a and at levels 2b2 (funeral bundle, Figure 5), 2b4, 2b5, 2b10 and 2b12 of layer 2b. Isolated vegetative tissues of this species were also found at 2b2 (funeral bundle), 2b5, 2b10, 2b11, 2b12 and of material of the genus Deyeuxia at additional levels, such as 2b11. Deyeuxia eminens was the most frequent member of the Poaceae in the archaeobotanical record of QS3. It was abundant in straw layers and the funeral bundle. Some leaves and husks from genus Festuca were Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 239 also identified in the latter. D. eminens, because of morphological characteristics, formed soft layers suitable for sleeping, possibly therefore being preferred by oc- cupants of the site. Festuca weberbaueri Pilg. Origin of current material: field of the Hoyada of Antofagasta de la Sierra. Very scarce at present, but more abundant in the recent past (Haber 1987). Dense and relatively hard bushes of material. Plant association: tolar. Archaeological material: specimens in flower were found at level 2b4 of QS3. TABLE 2.—Poaceae and other plant remains in the archaeobotanical record of QS3. Symbols: Spp. Species, Dey. Deyeuxia eminens, Fwe. Festuca weberbaueri, Fort. Festuca ortophylla, Fchry. Festuca chrysophylla, Sti. Stipa sp, Puc. Puccinellia frigida, Ast. Asteraceae, Fab. Fabaceae, Sol. Solanaceae, cap. capitula, rec. receptacles, fr. fruits with pappus, cip. cipsela, hus. husks, infl. inflorescences, ow. flowers, leav. Leaves. For Poaceae, only specimens with reproductive tissues were considered. The following frequencies are indicated: +++= very frequent; ++= frequent and += less frequent. POACEAE Frequency Other plant remains pp. | Dey. | Fwe. | Fort. { Fehry. | Sti. laa Ast. a | Sol. Levels 2a + 6 cap | a 4 rec. 2b1 3 cap. i; | | 5 rec. 1 infl. 2b2 | +++ ~ 18 cap. | 20 rec. | 4 hus. 2b4 ++ ++ + 15 cap. 7s 9 leav. | 2 hus. 2b5 ares $f 7 cap Ee ca mh 1 flow. 2b8 | 2 cap. | | | 2b10 | +++ | | 1cap. | L: a 201 | 4 | { 1cap. | 1 hus. | | 2b12 | ++ + 4 cap Bee 1 cip. 4 leav. 1 flow. 2b14 | L | | 3 cap. | ~- 2b15 [ g | 1 fr. 2b17 | | 2 cap. 2b18 1 cap. if. 2b19 | 4 : 2b21 | cap. 2b22 5 cap. 3 fr. 2b24 [ 4 _ : 2b25 { r Total a i 147__| 11 2 240 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 OLLFAALLEDEEELE PEED Fs FIGURE 6.— Poaceae. Symbols: In plotting the Poaceae, the following frequencies are indicated: +++= 3 (very frequent); ++= 2 (frequent) and += 1 (less frequent). Dey. Deyeuxia eminens, Fwe. Festuca weberbaueri, Fort. Festuca ortophylla, Fchry. Festuca chrysophylla, Sti. Stipa sp, Puc. Puccinellia frigida. Only the upper levels (2b1- 2b12) from which the groups of grasses were recovered were considered. Festuca ortophylla Pilg. Origin of current material: slopes and high hillocks of Quebrada Seca. Plant association: range land. Archaeological material: these were plants from arid areas, the leaves of this species therefore being very narrow and generally in rolled. The epidermis, in surface view, consisted of mixed long cells with ondulating walls and short cells. In cross-section, the abaxial epidermis abut- ted various layers of fibers in contact with the vascular truss. This adaxial epidermis was also itself strengthened by fibers and long unicellular hairs and deep furrows. The vascular trusses were characteristic of Festucaceae tribe. A specimen of Festuca ortophylla bearing flower and isolated vegetative tissues was found at 2b5. Given the presence of specimens in flower, this species was apparently not abundant, but could have been present among other specimens of the genus Festuca in the straw layers. Festuca chrysophylla Phil. Origin of current material: Quebrada de Real Grande (Haber 1987). Plant association: range land. Archaeological material: in the epi- dermis, long cells with ondulating walls and short cells were clearly present. This epidermis was covered by abundant long unicellular hairs and prickles. Siliceous and suberose cells were arranged in pairs among the long cells. Specimens in flower and with isolated vegetative tissues were found in straw layers of level 2b10. These layers consisted of an important structure (See Archaeological material) which occu- Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 241 pied the two squares at the center of the cave. Because of its disposition this struc- ture formed a surface suitable for sleeping. Puccinellia frigida (Phil.) I. M. Johnst. Origin of current material: comparison mate- rial was not collected in the study area, since at present the species appear scarce there. Archaeological material: in archaeobotanical material of QS3, the first speci- men of Puccinellia frigida with inflorescences was found at level 2b4. Stipa sp. Origin of current material: slopes and high hillocks of Quebrada Seca. Plant association: range land. Archaeological material: long cells with ondulating walls and short cells formed the epidermis. The silica-suberose pairs were inserted among the long cells. The lower epidermis bore long unicellular hairs. Specimens of Stipa lacking reproductive tissues were found at 2b12. This genus was infre- quent in QS3. Its morphological characteristics make it unsuitable as a bed for sleeping, probably why it appeared only isolately and not as part of layers. Other plant remains.—In this group, isolated vegetative and reproductive tissues, such as flowers, fruits and leaves, were included (Table 2). All such material was very damaged and in most cases only identified to families or more rarely to ge- nus or species. Some of these remains could have arrived at QS3 through natural events as mentioned above. 7 45 n 36+ as wa | rad 15 10 TE 5 2a 21-224) DS.— ss 2HB.-«s-2D10. At «12-214 «= AtS «At? §=2HIB «at =Ah2t 222 2024 «= 2b25 Levels FIGURE 7.~ Other plant remains. Families Asteraceae (Ast.), Fabaceae (Fab.) and Solanaceae (Sol.). 242 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 At all analysed levels of occupation in layer 2b (except at 2b19 and 2b24) and throughout layer 2a, plant remains were found. These were grouped by families and arranged in order of importance based on number of specimens present. Fig- ure 7, based on Table 2, represents graphically the number of archaeological specimens of each family, at different levels of occupation. Asteraceae. The most frequent family in the archaeobotanical record of QS3. Re- mains of inflorescences (capituli), mainly involucral bracts, remains of receptacles, or complete isolated flowers, in layer 2a and at levels 2b1-2b14, 2b17-2b18 and 2b21-2b22, and fruits with dispersal mechanism (the pappus) at levels 2b1, 2b12- 2b15, 2b18, 2b22 and 2b25. Some remains from level 2b12 were examined by SEM. These corresponded to a cypsela. At levels 2b4 and 2b12, leaves of Baccharis incarum Wedd. were found. These were small, subrhomboid, coriaceous and with dentate edges. Those at level 2b12 were examined by SEM. The abaxial epidermis showed a great number of stomata, while in the adaxial epidermis they were scarce. Both epidermies were very papillose. On these leaves were found animal hairs. Fabaceae. Fruits - husks or legumes- of Hoffmanseggia eremophila Phil. were found at levels 2b2, 2b4-2b5 and 2b11; one flower of Adesmia sp. was found at level 2b5; the remains of a flower, petals and shoots were found at level 2b4. At level 2b5 (5380 + 80 AP), a broken husk of Arachis sp. (n. v.: peanut) was found. This prob- ably was a wild species related to A. monticola. It was not a local plant, since it has not found in the study area. The distribution of the native species involved as origin of the cultivated peanut was limited to the north-west of Argentina (Antofagasta de la Sierra was excluded) and south-east of Bolivia (Krapovickas and Gregory 1994). Solanaceae. At level 2b1, an inflorescence was recovered, and at level 2b12 a flower of Fabiana sp. was recovered and examined by SEM. Finally, some plant remains, unidentifiable because very fragmented or in- complete, were found at certain levels. In layer 2a and at level 2b2 were remains of shoots and fruits; at level 2b4 were some shoots; at level 2b12 were diff t fruits. Artefacts. Two fragments of basketwork made with a coiled technique were found at level 2b11. In both cases, the work was produced by using the lateral portion of the leaf of Cortaderia as a basis and the mediam nerve as the stitch (Rodriguez 1998 a - b). A basketwork fragment was recovered at level 2b5 and a completely deco- rated basket, burnt in its lower part, was located in layer 0/lens 1 x. These employed the same raw materials found in previous fragments (Pérez de Micou and Ancibor 1994). Two straw knots made with floral stems of Deyeuxia eminens were recov- ered at levels 2b11 and 2b12 of QS3 (Rodriguez 1998; Rodriguez and Rugolo de Agrasar 1999). Some species of subfamily Bambusoideae were also used in mak- ing artefacts. There were found three shafts and three worn culms (stems) of Chusquea lorentziana Griseb. and two smaller fragments of worn culms of Rhipidocladum sp. (Rodriguez 1998 b). None of these is a local species and the use of the culms is not clear, except for the shaft. Structures.— At various levels of QS3, grasses were distributed forming straw lay- ers, i.e., layers of grasses arranged horizontally; in others, they were grouped Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 243 together in small accumulations. To define locations of these structures at the dif- ferent levels of occupation of the site, the following parameters were considered: orientation of QS3 in the landscape, squares (see Figure 4), and division of avail- able space into two sectors: eaves and cave. In layer 2a there were no other layers or concentrations of grasses. At level 2b1 was a small group in square D4, to the E side of the eaves sector. At level 2b2 there was a straw layer, described earlier, as part of the funeral bundle (Figure 5). Deyeuxia eminens forms the principal species in this structure (Rodriguez and Rigolo de Agrasar 1999). There were other concentrations of grasses in G3 and H3 (W side, cave sector), H5 (W side, eaves sector) and D4 (center, eaves sector). In squares F3/G3 of level 2b4, on the west side of the eaves sector, the main group of grasses of this level was arranged as a layer. Also in F3 animal hairs were found and the wing of a locust was recovered from these same plants. At level 2b5 there were two relatively small straw layers. One was located in D4 towards the center of the eaves sector, the other in E5 to the west in the same sector. At level 2b8 practically no grasses were found. The most important layer was located at level 2b10 in squares E2/F2/G2. This location corresponded to the center-west of the cave sector. The upper border of the layer was surrounded by stones holding it in place, and base was resting on level 2b12. Bird feathers were found mixed with the grasses. At level 2b11, three very small straw layers occurred distributed in D4 (center, eaves sector) and in F3/F4 (to the W, cave-eaves sectors). The two fragments of basketwork associated with the layer and a bunch of compact straw with a sticky substance, mixed with stems of Atriplex sp., were found in F3. At level 2b12, the main group of grasses formed a layer arranged in E4 and extended into E5 (center, eaves sector). Animal hairs mixed with these plants and a bevelled branch of Parastrephia quadrangularis (Meyen) Cabrera were also recov- ered there. Lower concentrations of grasses occurred in G3/G4 and F3/F4 on the west side of the cave-eaves sectors. A knot made with Deyeuxia eminens was asso- ciated with these groups in G3 as was a shaft made with Chusquea lorentziana in At the other levels of occupation, grasses were very scarce, with no important accumulations. The grasses generally appeared mixed with woods and in some cases with charcoal. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS From the available archaeobotanical record, it is possible to compare part of the ethnobotanical information and relate it to possible use of the archaeological plants present in QS3. Taking into account both sources of information, species found at the site were grouped together into the following categories: combus- tible, forage, edible, medicinal and plants used for technological purposes. The forage category is not important in this case, since a hunter-gatherer site is in- volved | It should be pointed out that the use of plants as fuel and for technological purposes can be corroborated with relative certainty from the archaeobotanical 244 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 record. Their uses as foods and medicines, by contrast, can only be established as hypothesis from the available information. rom those categories listed in the first paragraph, primary interest was in the last three. Within these, species present could be grouped as follows. Edible species. Those older people consulted mentioned very few edible plant spe- cies, probably because such plants were largely replaced by agriculture. Haber (1987) mentioned as edible the resin produced during the spring by Baccharis incarum (lejia). Similarly, Hoffmannseggia eremophila, known as algarrobita in Antofagasta de la Sierra, presented edible tubers (Ulibarri 1979). In relation to the husk of Arachis sp. (peanut), it is important to emphasize that, although this spe- cies is now considered edible, since only one specimen was recovered and that no a local plant, certain group mobility and/or probable exchange within other hu- man groups of inhabitants of QS3 were inferred as probable main explanations. Medicinal species.— Baccharis incarum (beneficial to liver function) and Fabiana punensis Arroyo (tolilla) (which relieves muscle pain). The woody specimens (the stems) of both species, used as fuel, were found very frequently within the archaeobotanical record of QS3 (Rodriguez 1998 c). Plants used for technological purposes. Under this heading, only archaeobotanical records were considered, since current use of plants for these purposes hardly agrees with that in the prehistoric past. From the archaeological information here, the following species grouping for plants emerged: Artefact manufacture. Cortaderia sp., Deyeuxia eminens (pastos), Chusquea lorentziana and Rhipidocladum sp (Rodriguez 1998 a—b; Rodriguez and Rugolo de Agrasar 1999). Conditioning of floors of occupation (arrangement in layers of surface grasses). Mainly Deyeuxia eminens but also Festuca chrysophylla, F. weberbaueri, F. ortophylla, Puccinellia frigida and Stipa sp (pastos). Taking into account probable areas of origin and uses of the plant resources found in QS3, the following probable circuits of mobility within small distances were established (Figure 3): Likely edible and medicinal plants. Distances traveled in these cases could have oscillated between 0 and 2.5 km from the site, in SW and N directions. This agrees with the postulated area limitations for plants used as fuel (Rodriguez 1998c). Conditioning of occupation floors. Distances in this case increased, since the most commonly used species, Deyeuxia eminens, grows at present further away from QS3 (20 km; beyond range of transects which were carried out from QS3); how- ever, different species of Festuca (except F. chrysophylla) and Stipa recovered, date near the site. The area therefore includes a radius ranging from 20 km west from QS3. This range probably would have been smaller in the | fey because recent herding practices have somewhat reduced grass coverages. Artefact manufacture. Lower probable distances correspond to the known raw materials used in basket work, and include a radius beginning at 4 km away from the site and ending at 17 km from the site, in a westerly direction. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 245 In relation to mobility over great distances, as mentioned earlier, the presence of Arachis sp. establishes the probable existence of large circuits of considerable mobility and exchange. In QS3, artefacts made with non-local plants, such as Chusquea lorentziana, Rhipidocladum sp. Salix humboldtiana Willd., Prosopis torquata (Cavanilles ex Lagasca) DC, and Acrocomia totai Matt. (Rodriguez 1998 a - b). Finally, in the hypothesis postulated initially, the possibility that QS3 was part of a settlement system and would therefore have been seasonally occupied was considered. The presence of reproductive tissues (flowers and fruits of the fami- lies Asteraceae, Fabaceae and Solanaceae) at most levels of QS3 and equally there of species whose life-cycle completes in a season, corresponding to spring-sum- mer, such as Deyeuxia eminens and Festuca weberbaueri among others, indicated occupation during those months and the beginning of the autumn. This conclu- sion was reinforced by the presence of newborn camelids in the archaeofaunistic record (Elkin 1996). Smaller plant remains could be at the site because of chance natural causes; grasses are therefore in this case more secure as evidence in estab- lishing seasonality. However, the possibility of occupation during the rest of the year cannot be excluded. It is necessary to take into account that at the lower levels (2b15 and following levels) very few reproductive tissues were recovered, and that at some such levels (2b19 and 2b24) these were absent. Grasses too were absent there. Elkin (1996) considered feasible an occupation of the site during the coldest months, based on availability of vicunas, in the lowland and in the pampa near the site, during the whole year. The artifactual data provides no information in relation to seasonality. Taking into account that, in the area of location of QS3, there were available resources during the whole year (Elkin 1992) and from the archaeobotanical data, it is possible that the site could have been temporarily occupied at different sea- sons. Such occupations would have been longer during the warmer months, without necessarily excluding short periods of occupation during the winter. In this study, the potential importance of plants in reconstruction of the past has been emphasized. This emphasis involved biological and cultural aspects. On the one hand, the possibility of deducing palaeoenvironments from archaeologi- cal plant species found in the stratigraphy, has been pointed out. On the other hand and in relation to human culture and living processes, various aspects from the archaeobotanical record, such as use of plants and characteristics of the envi- ronment in the prehistoric past in the Argentine Puna, were considered. Comparative anatomical and morphological analysis of both current and ar- chaeological species permits levels of identification of these latter and aids subsequent conclusions. The two disciplines involved here -archaeology and botany- both constantly cross-contribute to the other throughout this analysis. The questions posed to either lead to responses derived from information acquired jointly by both. 246 RODRIGUEZ Vol. 19, No. 2 NOTES 1 Lic. Carlos Aschero. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Técnicas. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto Miguel Lillo. Universidad Nacional de Tucuman. San Martin 1545. (4000) San Miguel de Tucuméan. E-mail: iarqueo@unt.edu.ar. 2 The population density is 0.02 inhabitants /km2. The informants who participated in this study were: Nemesio Dario Reales, Castulo Epifanio Vazquez, Angela Vazquez and Vicente Morales. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank Drs. Elena Ancibor and Cecilia Pérez de Micou for their guidance in carrying out this work, which is part of my Ph. D. dissertation. I also thank Lic. Carlos Aschero for allowing me to participate in his overall project and for his support during this stage, as well as Prof. Zulma Rugolo for her assistance in the identification of the archaeological grasses and Dr. James Price for his valuable help with the translation of this article. LITERATURE CITED ASCHERO, C., D. ELKIN and E. PINTAR. Santiago eee 1991) 2: 101-114. ASCHERO, C., L. MANZI and A. GOMEZ. 1993-94. Producci6én litica y uso del espacio en el nivel 2b4 de Quebrada Seca 3. Relaciones de la Sociedad Argentina de Antropologia 19: 191-214. BAIED, C. and J. BEELER. 1993. Evolution of high Andean puna ecosystems: environment, climate and culture change over the last 12,000 years in the central Andes. Mountain Research and Development 13 (2): 145-156. BAILEY, G. 1983. Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory: A European Perspective. Cambridge. University Press of London, London. 1953. Esquema la Republica a del Museo de Botanica 8: 87-168. . 1957. La vegetacion de la puna Argentina. Revista de feverthgiones Agricolas 11 (1): 317-413. 6. Regiones fitogeograficas Argentinas. Fasciculo 1, pp. 85. in Enciclopedia Argentina de Agricultura y Jardineria, W. F. Kugler (editor). Acme S.A.C.I., Buenos Aires. CABRERA, A. L, and A. WILLINK. 1980. Biigeeg rae oe Amerie Latina {4 de los Estados Americanos. Serie de Biologia. Monografia 13, aoa D. C. CUTLER, D. F. 1978. Applied Plant Anatomy. Longman Group Limited, ondon. D’AMBROGIO DE ARGUESO, A. 1986. Manual de Técnicas en Histologia Vegetal. Editorial oo Sur. Buenos Aires, Argentin DIZEO DE STRITEMATTER, Cc. 1973. Nueva técnica de diafanizacion. Boletin sadad Arcentina de B ica 15 (1): 126-129. ELKIN, D. 1992. Explotacion de Smt en 1ebrada Seca 3, Antofagasta de la —— Puna de Catamarca. Shincal 2: 1-14. Esuela de Arqueologia, Universidad de Catamarca. 96. Arqueozoologia de -“Oebrada Seca 3: Indicadores de subsistencia humana temprana en la Puna Meridional Argentina. Ph. D. dissertation. Facultad de Filosofia y Letras. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Winter 1999 FORD, R. 1988. Little things mean a lot: Quantification and Qualification in Paleoethnobotany. Pp. 215-222 i Current Paleoethnobotany: Anaiydcl Methods and Cultural Interpretation of Archaeological Plant Remains, C. Hastorf and V. Popper (editors). University of Chicago Press, Chicago. HABER, A. 1987. Andlisis de dipsonibilidad de recursos en Antofagasta de la Sierra, Puna Argentina, en relacién con sistemas nig Seca agre- -alfareros tempranos (Formativos): Primer Informe. Universidad ae Buenos Aires . El recurso del método. Simposio: Estrategias Adaptativas en Arqueologia. Precirculados del IX Congreso Nacional de Arqueologia: 40- 51. Buenos Aires. HASTORF, C. A. bee Ras use of studies of crop production, processing and consumption 9-141 Current Paleoethnobotan ante al Methods and Cultural Interpretation of University of Chicago Press, Chicago. KRAPOVICKAS, A and W. C. GREGORY. 1994. Taxonomia del género Arachis ee Bonplandia 8 (1-4): 1- MARKGRAE V. 1985. rect ple sind ] History of the last 10,000 Years in Northwestern Argentina. Zentralhlatt fur ea und Palantologie, Stuttgart ______ 1987. Paleoclimates of the southern Argentine Andes. Current Research in the Pleistocene 4: 150-157. METCALFE, C. R. 1960. igen st . the Monocotyledons. I Gramineae. rd. itd Z. RUGOLO DE AGRASAR. “1987. Los géneros de oe de América. Ed. Hemisferio PEREZ DE MICOU, C. and E. ANCIBOR. 994. Manufactura cestera en sitios te de Antofagasta de la Sierra, Catamarca. Republica Argentin esos be la Société des Americanistes 80: 207. JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 247 RENFREW, C. and P. BAHN. 1993. Arqueologia, Teoria, Métodos y Practicas. AKAL, Madrid. RODRIGUEZ, M. F. 1998a. Arqueobotanica de Quebrada Seca 3: Recursos vegetales utilizados por cazadores-recolectores dissertation. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de anne eeigets 98b. Arqueobotanica de nae a Seca 3 (Puna Meridional Argentina). Especies Phe 98 utilizadas en la confeccién de artefactos durante el Arcaico. In press: Relacinnec delaS iedad Arcentina de Antropologia 24. —_—— _,1998c. Woody plant species used during the ctor soled in ry Southern Argentine Pun Archaeobotany of Ouebrada Seca 3. _ a Antiquity, 3 (3): 461-485. , C. 1958. Las culturas superiores andinas y el medio geografico. Revista del Instituto de Geografia 5: 3- ULIBARRI, E. A. 1979. Especies argentinas de Hoffmannseggia — eremophila (Leguminosae). Darwiniana 22 (1-3): 35-158. YACOBACCIO, H. 1994. Biomasa animal y consumo en el Pleistoceno-Holoceno Surandino. Arqueologia. Seccién Arqueologia. Instituto de Ciencias Antropolégicas, Facultad de Filosofia y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires 4: 43-71. 248 BOOK REVIEWS Vol. 19, No. 2 Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management. Fikret Berkes. Taylor and Francis, Philadelphia. 1999. Pp. 209. $29.95 (Paper) $59.95 (Hardcover) ISBN 1-56032-694-8. The title mixes so many contradictory signals that the static might, unfortu- nately, cause some to try another station. After all, resource managers typically characterize relationships between people and environment in economistic and mechanistic terms. Under that rubric, the traditional must give way to the mod- ern; the spiritual must yield to the scientific. But this title, on the one hand, seems to imply that traditional and scientific knowledge can merge into some sort of sacred, transcendental resource management for a New Age. On the other hand, contradicting that implied appreciation of non-Western knowledge, categoriza- tion as “traditional knowledge” suggests no more than a static residue of the premodern. And, if so, surely only selected fragments of such static knowledge, perhaps the pharmaceutical properties of a particular plant, not entire systems of belief as to why those properties occur, might usefully merge with Western sci- ence. Those who do get past the unfortunate title will find that it belies a sophisti- cated consideration of just such complex issues by a pioneer in the study and application of non-Western ecologies. Part I (Concepts) defines basic terms and ideas such as traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), attempts to justify the use of “traditional” as an adjective, sketches the recent institutionalization of TEK’s study and application, and describes the longer-term intellectual genesis of re- search on the ecologies of native peoples. Part II (Practice) presents case studies of native ecologies from around the globe, largely drawn from Berkes’s own research and mostly focusing on the Cree of the Hudson Bay region. Part III (Issues) ex- plores how local knowledge emerges, the challenges to maintaining and applying such knowledge, and the broader cultural implications of recognizing the validity of native ecological knowledges. While each part contributes certain insights, the case studies make for the richest reading. Berkes has spent three decades working among the Cree hunters and fishers of Chisasibi, and he cogently recounts what they have taught him about that particular place and how it has incubated more general insights about the dynamism and relevance of native ecologies. The seeming intention to market this book as an undergraduate text, com- plete with “boxes” on such topics as A Cree Legend of the Flood, Zulu Herbalists, and others seems incompatible with the eclecticism necessary a cutting-edge book on “ethnoecology.” Topics range from checking the fat content of a bear carcass to the cultural construction of Chief Seattle as an environmentalist icon. Successfully leading undergraduates through such an intellectual labyrinth might require bet- ter streamlining of such diversity -- and an extensive glossary. With anthropologists, biologists, geographers and many others all contribut- ing diverse perspectives, jargon, and phenomena, transdisciplinary unification remains a precarious goal. When considering cultural processes, for example, Berkes and other natural scientists seem drawn to organismic metaphors that per- sist as part of the myth of Western intellectual superiority that achieved global dominance during the colonial creation of the divide between the “developed” Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 249 and the “underdeveloped,” between the “modern” and the “traditional.” Such teleological thinking, involving concepts such as cultural adaptation and evolu- tion, subsequently validated the belief that the postcolonial “Rests” simply need to emulate and catch up to the exceptional West. That myth and its conceptual residue cannot now provide a realistic basis for transcending itself, for addressing the social and environmental challenges that emerged sie et with that myth. Yet people who write books that begin to forge ss disciplines and cultures, despite epistemological and other chasms, care great respect. Berkes has clearly made such a contribution based on sustained research in other cul- tures, broad reading across disciplines, and deep caring for lands and peoples. Andrew Sluyter Department of Geography The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802 Journal of Ethnobiology 19(2): 251-257 Winter 1999 RECENT DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS OF INTEREST TO ETHNOBIOLOGISTS XVII TERENCE E. HAYS Department of Anthropology and Geography Rhode Island College Providence, RI 02908 USA ABSTRACT.- This bibliography includes recent dissertations of interest to ethnobiologists. For each is given the page number where it may be found in Dissertation Abstracts (D.A.) and the order number for dissertation copies from University Microfilm International, P.O. Box 1764, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106- 1346 U.S.A. (Telephone: 1-800-521-3042; 1-800-343-5299 from Canada). RESUMEN.- En este bibliografia se incluyen disertaciones recientes de interés a los etnobidlogos. Por cada uno se da el ntimero de la pagina donde se halla el resumen en Dissertation Abstracts (D.A.), y el numero de encargar un ejemplar de la disertacién de University Microfilm International, P.O. Box 1764, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 USA (telefono: 1-800-521-3042; desde Canada 1-800-343-5299). RESUME.- Cette bibliographie comprend quelques dissertationes recentes d’interet aux ethnobiologistes. Chez chaqu-une on donne le numéro de la page ow se trouve le résumé dans Dissertation Abstracts (D.A.), et le numéro de commander un exemplaire de la dissertations de University Microfilm International, P.O. Box 1764, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 USA (telephone: 1-800- 521-3042; de Canada 1-800-343-5299). INTRODUCTION This is the seventeenth in an annual series of bibliographies listing selected dissertations drawn from the pages of Dissertation Abstracts (D.A.). All listings were made by scanning the titles and abstracts published in D.A. and making subjective decisions as to which ones might be relevant to work in ethnobiology or related disciplines such as ecological anthropology and economic botany. Dissertations categorized in D.A. under Agricultural Economics, Agriculture, American Studies, Anthropology, Botany, Ecology, Environmental Sciences, Folk- lore, Geography, Language, Linguistics, Nutrition, Palaeobotany, Paleoecology, Paleozoology, Palynology, Veterinary Science, and Zoology were considered for inclusion in the list. An attempt was made to be as inclusive as possible, but some dissertations may have been overlooked. Comments and suggestions would be welcome for items to include in next year’s edition. > Dates covered by the present paper include: Volume A (Humanities and So- cial Sciences): September 1998-December 1999 and Volume B (Sciences and Engineering): September 1998-December 1999. Note that these are the dates for the issues of D.A. in which the abstracts appear, rather than the dates of accep- tance of the dissertations themselves. 252 HAYS Vol. 19, No. 2 The dissertations are listed below alphabetically by author, along with the year of acceptance, title, institution, length, adviser or major professor, number(s) of the page(s) in D.A. on which the abstract may be found, University Microfilms order number, and the ISBN number when this information was included. Most of the d ti instituti in the United States, and some of those from Australia, Canada, South Africa, and the United Kingdom may be obtained from University Microfilms International, either on microfilm or pub- lished by microfilm xerography. Quality of printed matter is generally excellent, but that of figures and photographs varies with the quality of the original. Current prices may be obtained by calling 1-800-521-3042; or 1-800-343-5299 from Canada. Further information and current prices, as well as information regarding how to order dissertations listed above with no UMI order number, may be obtained from UMI Dissertation Services, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346, USA. Abstracts of the dissertations listed below as well as all others included in D.A. are now available online, with the full text of abstracts published since July 1980. This service is updated monthly, and includes UMI’s entire dissertation da- tabase back to 1861. For further information regarding Dissertation Abstracts Online or Dissertation Abstracts Ondisc (CD-ROM) consult your local research librarian or UMI at the address given above regarding orders. ALEXIADES, MIGUEL N. 1999. Ethnobotany of the Ese Eja: Plants, health, and change in an Amazonian society. City University of New York, 467 pp. Ad- viser: Christine Padoch. Order no. DA9917623. D.A. 60(1):21-B. BELCHER, WILLIAM RAYMOND. 1998. Fish exploitation of the Baluchistan and Indus Valley traditions: An ethnoarchaeological approach to the study of fish remains. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, 517 pp. Supervisor: Jonathan M. Kenoyer. Order no. DA9813108. D.A. 59(4):1229-A. BETTISON, CYNTHIA ANN. 1998. The determinants of settlement patterns among prehistoric agriculturalists of the Colorado Plateau: A case study from the Lower Zuni River valley, Arizona. University of California, Santa Barbara, 671 pp. Chairperson: Michael Glassow. Order no. DA9929454. D.A. 60(5):1636-A. BOROJEVIC, KSENITA. 1998. The relations among farming practices, landowner- ship, and social stratification in the Balkan Neolithic period. Washington University, 389 pp. Chairperson: Gayle Fritz. Order no. DA9834775. D.A. 59(5):1637-A. BRODT, SONJA BRIGITTE. 1998. Leaning from the land: Local knowledge sys- tems of tree management in central India. University of Hawaii, 317 pp. Chairperson: Brian Murton. Order no. DA9903826. D.A. 59(8):3143-A. BROOKS, SARAH OSGOOD. 1998. Prehistoric agricultural terraces in the Rio Japo Basin, Colca Valley, Peru. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, 545 pp. Su- pervisor: William M. Denevan. Order no. DA9911668. D.A. 60(5):1699-A. accepted at Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 253 CAVIGLIA, JILL LORRAINE. 1998. Economic analysis of sustainable agriculture in the tropical rain forest of Brazil: Agricultural techniques in Rondénia. The University of Tennessee, 210 pp. Major Professor: James R. Kahn. Order no. DA9903898. D.A. 59(8):3110-A. CHEN, WEI-CHUN. 1998. Models of prehistoric land use in the Gaoping region, southwest Taiwan. The University of Arizona, 291 pp. Director: John W. Olsen. Order no. DA9901765. D.A. 59(8):3050-A. COGGINS, CHRISTOPHER REED. 1998. The tiger and the pangolin: Cultural ecol- gy, landscap logy, and nature conservation in China’s Southeast Uplands. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, 677 pp. Directors: Stanley F. Stevens; Kent Mathewson. Order no. DA9902629. D.A. 59(8):3144-A. CROTHERS, GEORGE MARTIN. 1999. Prehistoric hunters and gatherers, and the Archaic period Green River shell middens of western Kentucky. Washington University, 301 pp. Chairperson: Patty Jo Watson. Order no. DA9926436. D.A. 60(4):1198-A. DELLO-RUSSO, ROBERT D> 1999. Climatic stress in the Middle Rio Grande Val- ley of New Mexico: An evaluation of changes in foraging behaviors during the Late Archaic/Basketmaker II period. The University of New Mexico, 321 pp. Chair: Wirt H. Wills. Order no. DA9926830. D.A. 60(4):1198-A. DIRRIGL, FRANK JOSEPH, JR. 1998. Zooarchaeology and taphonomy of gallina- ceous birds in the northeastern U.S. The University of Connecticut, 186 pp. Adviser: Robert Dewar. Order no. DA9906692. D.A. 59(9):3515-3516-A. EATON, GEORGE FRANCIS. 1898 [sic]. The prehistoric fauna of Block Island, as indicated by its ancient shell-heaps. Yale University, 41 pp. [sic] Order no. DA9921316. D.A. 60(3):1005-B. EHRLICH, CELIA. 1999. The ethnobotany of Cordyline fruticosa (L.) A. Chev.: The “Hawaiian ti plant.” State University of New York at Buffalo, 644 pp. Adviser: Ann B. McElroy. Order no. DA9931479. D.A. 60(5):1644-A. EISENSTRAUT, PHYLISSA JAYDE. 1998. Macrobotanical remains from southern Peru: A comparison of Late Archaic-Early Formative period sites from the Puna and Suni zones of the western Titicaca Basin. University of California, Santa Barbara, 299 pp. Chairperson: Mark Aldenderfer. Order no. DA9840769. D.A. 59(7):2575-A. ERICKSEN, POLLY JOANNA. 1998. An evaluation of the sustainability of land management in a hillside agroecosystem in central Honduras. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, 219 pp. Supervisor: Kevin McSweeney. Order no. DA9813735. D.A. 59(5):1945-1946-B. GASSON PACHECO, RAFAEL ANGEL. 1998. Prehispanic intensive agriculture, settlement pattern and political economy in the western Venezuelan llanos. University of Pittsburgh, 190 pp. Adviser: Robert D. Drennan. Order no. DA9900132. D.A. 59(7):2575-A. 254 HAYS Vol. 19, No. 2 GOLD, DEBRA LYNN. 1999. Subsistence, health and emergent inequality in late prehistoric interior Virginia. The University of Michigan, 343 pp. Chair: Rich- ard I. Ford. Order no. DA9929831. D.A. 60(5):1637-A. GONZALEZ, ROBERTO JESUS, III. 1998. Zapotec science: Farming and food in the Northern Sierra of Oaxaca, Mexico. University of California, Berkeley, 368 pp. Chair: Laura Nader. Order no. DA9902083. D.A. 59(8):3055-A. HAYES-BOHANAN, JAMES KEZAR, IV. 1998. Deforestation in Rond6énia, Brazil: Frontier urbanization and landscape change. The University of Arizona, 196 pp. Director: Marvin Waterstone. Order no. DA9901679. D.A. 59(8):3145-A. HENDERSON, HELEN HOPE. 1998. The organization of staple crop production in Middle Formative, Late Formative, and Classic Period farming households at K’axob, Belize. University of Pittsburgh, 412 pp. Adviser: Robert Drennan. Order no DA9837596. D.A. 59(6):2082-A. HWANG, YOO JEONG. 1998. Forest land disturbance and geomorphological ef- fects in Korea. University of Oregon, 163 pp. Order no. DA9900294. D.A. 59(7):2662-A. ILAHIANE, HSAIN. 1998. The power of the dagger, the seeds of the Koran, and the sweat of the ploughman: Ethnic stratification and agricultural intensifica- tion in the Ziz Valley, southeast Morocco. The University of Arizona, 376 pp. Director: Thomas K. Park. Order no. DA9901680. D.A. 59(8):3056-A. INDRIATL ETTY. 1998. A dental anthropological approach to coca-leaf chewing in the Andes. University of Chicago, 263 pp. Adviser: Jane E. Buikstra. Order no. DA9910881. D.A. 59(11):4202-4203-A. JONES, BRIAN DENIS. 1998. Human adaptation to the changing Northeastern environment at the end of the Pleistocene: Implications for the archaeological record. The University of Connecticut, 299 pp. Adviser: Kevin McBride. Order no. DA9906705. D.A. 59(9):3517-A. KNAB-VISPO, CLAUDIA. 1998. A rain forest in the Caura reserve (Venezuela) and its use by the indigenous Ye’kwana people. The University of Wisconsin- Madison, 219 pp. Supervisor: Timothy Moermond. Order no. DA9825725. D.A. 59(5):1956-B. KOZUCH, LAURA. 1998. Marine shells from Mississipian archaeological sites. University of Florida, 280 pp. Chair: Elizabeth S. Wing. Order no. DA9837413. D.A. 59(6):2082-A. KRAMER, KAREN L. 1998. Variation in children’s work among modern Maya subsistence agriculturalists. The University of New Mexico, 365 pp. Advisers: James Boone; Hillard Kaplan. Order no. DA9826634. D.A. 59(3):874-A. LAGUEUX, CYNTHIA JEAN. 1997. Marine turtle fishery of Caribbean Nicara- gua: Human use patterns and population characteristics of harvested animals. University of Florida, 217 pp. Chairperson: Kent H. Redford. Order no. DA9837417. D.A. 59(6):2502-B. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 255 LAMA, LEWIS. 1998. Conflict and compatability: An inventory and analysis of land use in a Tanzanian wildlife corridor. State University of New York at Binghamton, 274 pp. Adviser: M.A. Little. Order no. DA9830608. D.A. 59(4):1237-A. LIZARRALDE, MANUEL. 1997. Perception, knowledge and use of the rainforest: Ethnobotany of the Bari of Venezuela. University of California, Berkeley, 235 pp. Chair: Brent Berlin. Order no. DA9827018. D.A. 59(3):874-A. MacDONALD, DOUGLAS HARLOW. 1998. Subsistence, tool-use, and reproduc- tive strategies of northern plains Folsom hunter-gatherers: A view from the Bobtail Wolf site, North Dakota. Washington State University, 364 pp. Chair: William Andrefsky, Jr. Order no. DA9917438. D.A. 60(1):175-176-A. MOORE, STAN LEIGH. 1997. Indigenous medical practice and knowledge in the medical culture of Dar es Salaam. University of Kansas, 309 pp. Adviser: John M. Janzen. Order no. DA9903068. D.A. 59(8):3057-3058-A. MURRAY, MARIBETH S. 1997. Economic change in the Palaeoeskimo prehistory of the Foxe Basin, Northwest Territories. McMaster University (Canada), 153 pp. Adviser: A. Cannon. ISBN: 0-612-30163-X. Order no. DANQ30163. D.A. 59(8):3052-A. MUSTANDI, ROBSON. 1998. Locally-evolved knowledge in livestock and range management systems in southern Zimbabwe’s drylands: A study of pastoral communities in Beitbridge district. University of Waterloo (Canada), 340 pp. Adviser: Ronald Bullock. ISBN: 0-612-30634-8. Order no. DANQ30634. D.A. 59(9):3592-A. MUTUNDU, KENNEDY KHABWOLI. 1998. Ethnohistoric archaeology of the Mukogodo in north-central Kenya: Contemporary hunter-gatherer subsistence and the transition to pastoralism in secondary settings. Washington Univer- sity, 312 pp. Chairperson: Fiona B. Marshall. Order no. DA9834825. D.A. 59(5):1638-A. O’FLAHERTY, R. MICHAEL. 1997. Managing a commons: Community manage- ment of indigenous diands in Chi i District, Zimbabwe. University of Toronto (Canada), 318 pp. Adviser: Richard B. Lee. ISBN: 0-612-28296-1. Order no. DANQ28296. D.A. 59(6):2088-2089-A. OMENGAN, ELIZABETH APIL. 1998. Deforestation: Farming, logging, and for- est management in northeast Thailand. University of Hawaii, 317 pp. Chairperson: Lyndar Wester. Order no. DA9903849. D.A. 59(8):3147-A. OUNJIAN, GLENNA LORRAINE. 1998. Glen Meyer and prehistoric Neutral paleoethnobotany. University of Toronto (Canada), 941 pp. Adviser: Gary W. Crawford. ISBN: 0-612-35273-0. Order no. DANQ35273. D.A. 60(1):176-A. PEACOCK, SANDRA LESLIE. 1998. Putting down roots: The emergence of wild plant food production on the Canadian Plateau. University of Victoria (Canada), 381 pp. Advisers: Nancy J. Turner; Michael C.R. Edgell. ISBN: 0- 612-36647-2. Order no. DANQ36647. D.A. 60(3):785-A. 256 HAYS Vol. 19, No. 2 PERALES RIVERA, HUGO RAFAEL. 1998. Conservation and evolution of maize in the Amecameca and Cuautla Valleys of Mexico. University of California, Davis, 350 pp. Adviser: Stephen B. Brush. Order no. DA9900101. D.A. 59(7):3133-B. REED, DAVID MILLARD. 1998. Ancient Maya diet at Lopan, Honduras. The Penn- sylvania State University, 269 pp. Advisers: George R. Milner; Peter Deines. Order no. DA9901123. D.A. 59(8):3052-3053-A. RUBINSKI, PATRICK MICHAEL. 1997. Pronghorn intensification in the Wyoming Basin: A study of mortality patterns and prehistoric hunting strategies. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, 410 pp. Supervisor: James B. Stoltman. Or- der no. DA9810597. D.A. 59(4):1231-1232-A. SCHMIDT, CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM. 1998. Dietary truction in prehistoric humans from Indiana: An analysis of dental macrowear, dental pathology, and dental microwear. Purdue University, 350 pp. Major Professor: R. Criss Helmkamp. Order no. DA9900256. D.A. 59(8):3061-A. SHERPA, LHAKPA NORBU. 1999. Human impacts on high-altitude forest struc- tures in the Nangpa and Hinku Valleys, Sagarmatha and Makalu-Barun National Park, Nepal. University of Washington, 157 pp. Chairperson: Chadwick Dearing Oliver. Order no. DA9924133. D.A. 60(4):1368-1369-B. SHORR, NICHOLAS. 1999. Agricultural intensification in a large Tikuna commu- nity on the floodplain of the upper Brazilian Amazon. Indiana University, 368 pp. Chair: Emilio Moran. Order no. DA9932705. D.A. 60(6):2112-2113-A. SHORT, SUSAN ALICE. 1998. When the animals still danced: Animal images in Mimbres pottery and petroglyphs. University of Minnesota, 510 pp. Adviser: Janet D. Spector. Order no. DA9907523. D.A. 59(9):3517-A. SIMON, JAMES JOHNSON KOFFROTH. 1998. Twentieth century Ifupiaq Eskimo reindeer herding on northern Seward Peninsula, Alaska. University of Alaska Fairbanks, 399 p. Adviser: Peter P. Schweitzer. Order no. DA9842099. D.A. 59(7):2585-2586-A. STAMP, JUDITH. 1998. Indigenous agroforestry and sustainable development in Mutoko Communal District, Zimbabwe. University of Toronto (Canada), 330 pp. Adviser: Michael Bunce. ISBN: 0-612-35332-X. Order no. DANQ35332. D.A. 60(1):211-A. STEWART, FRANCESO LEEDHAM. 1997. Proto-Huron/Petun and proto-St. Lawrence Iroquoian subsistence as culturally defining. McGill University (Canada), 597 pp. Adviser: Bruce G. Trigger. ISBN: 0-612-30393-4. Order no. DANQ30393. D.A. 59(8):3053-A. STRAND, JENNIFER GAIL. 1998. An analysis of the Homol’ovi fauna with em- phasis of [sic] ritual behavior. The University of Arizona, 540 pp. Director: E. Charles Adams. Order no. DA9831838. D.A. 59(4):1232-A. Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 257 STRATTON, SUSAN K. 1999. Reconstructing the role of faunal resource use dur- ing the occupational history of Grass Mesa Village, southwestern Colorado. The University of New Mexico, 304 pp. Chair: Wirt H. Wills. Order no. DA9926880. D.A. 60(4):1200-1201-A. SUMINGUIT, VEL JUTBA. 1998. Indigenous knowledge systems of agroforestry and the restoration of a despoiled environment: A case study in northwestern Mindanao, Philippines. University of Kentucky, 292 pp. Director: John van Willigen. Order no. DA9922639. D.A. 60(3):791-A. SWALES, SUSAN EUGENIA. 1999. Dynamics of land use and agricultural prac- tices in the Lower Amazon. University of Florida, 175 pp. Chairperson: Nigel J.H. Smith. Order no. DA9935300. D.A. 60(6):2167-A. WALKER, PETER ABEL. 1997. Roots of crisis: Population, environment, and the social history of smallholder tree planting in Malawi. University of California, Berkeley, 209 pp. Chair: Michael J. Watts. Order no. DA9827140. D.A. 59(3):915- A. WALKER, RENEE BEAUCHAMP. 1998. The late Paleoindian through Middle Ar- chaic faunal evidence from Dust Cave, Alabama. The University of Tennessee, 302 pp. Major Professor: Walter E. Klippel. Order no.DA9903958. D.A. 59(8):3053-A. WEERATUNGE-STARKLOFF, NIREKA DAYANITHA. 1998. Trees of desire: Gen- der, environmental knowledge and practice in the highland Uva of Sri Lanka. University of Toronto (Canada), 337 pp. Adviser: S.B. Philpott. ISBN: 0-612- 35366-4. Order no. DANQ35366. D.A. 60(1):180-A. WINKLERPRINS, ANTIONETTE M.G.A. 1999. Between the floods: Soils and ag- riculture on the lower Amazon floodplain, Brazil. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, 389 pp. Supervisor: Karl S. Zimmerer. Order no. DA9923209. D.A. 60(6):2168-A. WORK, PAULA THORSON. 1998. Taphonomy and paleoecology of the midddle Holocene Lilenthal fossil biota, Cedar County, Iowa. The University of lowa, 275 pp. Supervisors: Holmes A. Semken; Richard G. Baker. Order no. DA9834536. D.A. 59(5):2090-B. WRIGHT, PATTI JO. 1998. The making of the carbonized macrobotanical record. Washington University, 362 pp. Chairperson: David L. Browman. Order no. DA9834847. D.A. 59(5):1638-1639-A. YOUNG, DENNIS CRAIG, JR. 1998. Late Holocene landscapes and prehistoric land use in Warner Valley, Oregon. University of Nevada, Reno, 193 pp. Ad- viser: Don D. Fowler. Order no. DA9842479. D.A. 59(7):2577-2578-A. 258 BOOK REVIEWS Vol. 19, No. 2 The Ambonese Curiosity Cabinet. Georgius Everhardus Rumphius. Translated, edited, annotated, ees with an introduction by E. M. Beekman. Yale Univer- sity Press, New Haven, CT. 1999. Pp. cxii + 567. Ills., bibliography, index. $45.00 (hardcover). ISBN 0-300-07534-0. This book is a genuine publishing event. Georg Rumph, who Latinized his name as “Rumphius,” was one of the greatest naturalists of all time, and a hero in the history of science. His greatest work was his botany of east-central Indonesia, but that enormous work—it runs to 1,661 folio pages, in six volumes--remains untranslated. We are now fortunate to have, for the first time in English, his shorter work on stones and marine animals. Rumphius (1627-1702) was a German soldier who came into Dutch service. Lured by the remote, he went to Brazil and in 1654 to Amboina, in the Moluccas (now in eastern Indonesia). Here he spent the rest of his life. He became a mer- chant and colonial official. He married a local woman and had children by her; after she died, he married a Dutch widow. In 1670 he went blind, apparently from cataracts, and had to | | natural history work from memory and from the help of his family and friends. I had always envisioned him as a dry- as-dust scholar, but he was in fact a veteran warrior, a man of the world, and an aaa ae businessman—a man of action, par excellence, until his blindness. curiosity cabinet” was a cabinet of shells and stones; such cabinets evolved into natural history collections. (At Cambridge University, one can see magnifi- cent 18'*-century cabinets of this sort and their collections, preserved as a sort of “metamuseum”; they evolved into a full-scale natural history museum there). Rumphius’ is, in modern terms, a virtual cabinet; it exists in the form of a book about Moluccan marine life and interesting stones. The original edition appeared in 1705, in 340 folio pages, with 60 plates and 5 vignettes. These illustrations are all reproduced—excellently—in the present edition. Rumphius described, in exquisite detail, the materials he collected, recording a great deal about the ecology and behavior of even the smallest shellfish. He describes, for example, phosphorescence, including the night-shine still present in slime washed up and onto the sand; he knew its connection with red tides and suspected it was caused by tiny organisms (as, of course, it is). He also recorded local names and beliefs with the same thoroughness. This is what makes his work important to the ethnobiologist. For example, much of the latter part of the book is taken up with descriptions of stones formed in the stomachs or flesh of various animals. Some such stones (bezoars, for example) were real; others were the cre- ations of Indonesian con artists. All were believed by the Moluccans, and by many Europeans, to have magical properties. Rumphius not only records all the beliefs, but provides comparisons with equivalent Classical European beliefs as recorded by Pliny and others. He has always been a prime source, especially to botanists, but those who cannot read Dutch or Latin have had to do without the benefit of his expertise. Beekman’s translation is, in its way, as amazing an effort as Rumphius’ origi- nal labor of love. Beekman provides a full introduction that describes Rumphius’ life and times as well as his oeuvre. Also found herein are 163 pages of notes— Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY a0 large pages densely covered with fine print. Beekman has tracked down every- one mentioned in the text, located virtually every g ite, identified animals and plants, supplied references scrappily indicated by Rumphius, and in every way done a job of annotation so monumental that it truly staggers the imagina- tion. One could quibble with, or add to, several of the notes, but the level of accuracy is extremely high. His translation is lively and easy to read. To make it faithful to Rumphius’ style, Beekman translated it into a somewhat modernized 17*_cen- tury English; no words not found in 17**-century sources are employed, and some 17'*-century spellings and capitalization patterns are used. This sounds bizarre, but works perfectly. I have never had more pleasure in reading a work of descrip- tive natural history. Rumphius and Beekman can make even the description of a mollusk interesting, and, of course, the accounts of local belief are truly absorbing to anyone with a past in ethnoichthyology. One wonders how anyone in this day and age can find time to carry out such scholarship. This was a work of true devotion. The work is also beautifully designed, printed, and bound. The flyleaf notes that it was “Designed by Sally Harris / Summer Hill Books,” and indeed Ms. Harris deserves recognition. In our degenerate age, when poorly bound paper- backs can cost almost $200, it is truly amazing to see a book like this offered for $45.00. Yale University Press deserves our gratitude. This book is absolutely essential for any ethnobiologist with interests in Indo- nesia or neighboring areas. It should also be on the shelf of anyone with an interest in marine ethnozoology. Now if only we can prevail on Dr. Beekman to translate the botany... E. N. Anderson Department of Anthropology University of California Riverside, CA 92521-0418 ' A CPAe ow . aa | ia es ate a hal’ ime Slee : : F a , ; : 7 . me th ' * 7 . : ra , 21s mee bs * Pater i= = 5 7 9 Wey 2) apy 7 psiata SLAY aes | @ ene i set Beh { . aif 3 Dosis Pa es Oe a x oT frou ax ay, ey ae Suet 2 : Journal of Ethnobiology 19(2): 261-276 Winter 1999 THE PROCESS AND SOCIOCULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF GOPHER TRAPPING IN A MODERN YUCATEC MAYA COMMUNITY KEVIN HOVEY Department of Anthropology University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA 92521-0418 DOMINIQUE RISSOLO Department of Anthropology University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA 92521-0418 ABSTRACT.- Pre-Hispanic and early Spanish texts document animal trapping in the Maya area. Snare traps are used by the modern Maya of the Yucatan peninsula to capture hispid pocket gophers (Orthogeomys hispidus Le Conte) for human consumption. We describe gopher trapping in the Maya community of Naranjal, Quintana Roo, México, and provide detailed information on the selection of suitable trap locations, aaa of traditional snare traps, and preparation of gophers for lysis of trapping behavior reveals new insights into the sae function of gopher trapping and the role of trappers in their community. Key Words: Maya, Quintana Roo, Mexico, gopher, snare trap RESUMEN.- El atrapar ae en la peicie a esta documentado en textos trampas de lazada son utilizadas por los Mayas contemporaneos de la ari de Yucatan para capturar tuzas (Orthogeomys hispidus Le Conte) para consumo. Observaciones etnograficas del atrapado de tuzas en la comunidad Maya de Naranjal, Quintana Roo, México, proveén informacién detallada sobre la selecci6n de lugares apropiados para las trampas, la construccién de trampas tradicionales, y la preparacion de las tuzas para consumo. Un anilisis antropolégico del comportamiento asociado con el atrapar provée nuevos entendimientos sobre la funcién social del atrapar tuzas y el papel de los atrapadores en su comunidad. RESUME. — piegeage d’animaux dans la région sec est documenté dans de ents. Aujourd hui, les si que da pl collets sont utilisés par les Mayas du Yucatan pour capturer les taupes de poche (Orthogeomys hispidus Le Conte) a selina ae! Space _ pie auaiirg du Naranjal, Quinta ana : Roo, México, fournissent des informations détaillées sur les locations de piégeage les plus aptes, sur le fagonnage des collets traditionnels, et sur la préparation alimentaire des taupes. Une analyse anthropologique sur cette coutume de piégeage va révéler de nouveaux apercus sur la fonction sociale du piégeage de taupes et le réle de ces trappeurs dans leur communauté. 262 HOVEY and RISSOLO Vol. 19, No. 2 INTRODUCTION Prehistoric and Historic Use of Animal Traps in the Maya Region.— Generic trapping activities among the Maya have been known for some time. Two of the oldest documented examples are provided by the indigenous, pre-Hispanic Maya docu- ment the codex Tro-Cortesianus or Madrid Codex (Anders 1967) and Fry Diego de Landa’s sixteenth century Relacién de las Cosas de Yucatan. As the early twentieth century Maya scholar Alfred Tozzer correctly pointed out (Tozzer and Allen 1910, Tozzer 1941), the Tro-Cortesianus is rife with examples of animal trapping (Figure 1). Indeed, the Tro-Cortesianus clearly demonstrates that the pre-contact Maya took both large and small game with traps (see also José Luis Franco C 1960, J. Salvador Flores 1984). Moreover, the Tro-Cortesianus provides strong evidence that the pre- contact Maya trapped animals using a technology that is still employed to this day. For example, the bent position evinced by all of the trap trees shown in the Tro-Cortesianus, in combination with the use of a snaring rope or cord, implies that the trees functioned as trap springs (see Figure 1). Compared to the Maya document, Landa’s descriptions of the snare traps are anything but detailed. In fact, they are mentioned only twice and then only in passing. He wrote: [t]hese tribes [the Maya] lived so peaceably that they had no quarrels nor did they make use of arms, nor bows even for hunting, although today they are excellent archers, and they only used traps and snares, by means of which they took a great deal of game [Tozzer 1941:31] and [b]esides the fish whose abode is the water...there are many iguanas... There are so many of them that they help every one in Lent, and the Indians fish for them with slip knots fastened up in the trees and in their holes [Tozzer 1941:191]. In addition to snare traps, Landa also mentioned gophers; “[t]here are many very pretty squirrels, and moles and weasels and mice” (Tozzer 1941:205). In his translation, Tozzer noted that “[t]here are no moles in this country, but the early Spaniards so designated an animal now called tuza, in Maya ba. It is a pocket- gopher...” (Tozzer 1941:205). Landa’s reference to snare traps and gophers is important since his documen- tation provides a link between the pre-Hispanic and contemporary Maya. The practice of using snare traps to catch other animals and the fact that gophers are rarely seen above ground, suggests that Landa observed gophers only after they were trapped. Therefore it seems apparent that trapping gophers with snare traps has been continually practiced by the Maya at least since the Late Postclassic era (AD 1250-1521). Archaeologically, evidence for the prehistoric practice of gopher trapping is almost entirely lacking; given the organic nature of the trap and the small size of gophers, this comes as no surprise. H. E. D. Pollock’s and Clayton E. Ray’s inves- tigations at Mayapan, Yucatan, México do, however, allow some hypothesizing in Winter 1999 JOURNAL OF ETHNOBIOLOGY 263 He COMB EE Bi. NRSC kz Go cone : Poe _[20: as et /\

7 rAN ; ay : STC ND OD S . Relationships between } Me »xican Ethnobotanical PREHISTORY AND BIODIVERSITY L Jiversity and Indigenous Peoples . Ethnopharmacology and the Search for New Thera- from Northern New Mexico peutics 8. a yels of Native Biodiversity in Eastern North Ameri . “We Live by Them”: Native — of Biodiversi- ty in the - an hee sin of Western North America 9. Ethnohiston of a Landscapes in the South- . “Just Lik arden”: Tradit ional sisal rce Manage- astern United S i ment aa ‘con rsity Co ynservation on the Interior Visit our new suas ae www.ou. a by 28th eg N.W. © a OK 73 069-8 405.325 20» or poor 7377 © Fax: 405.364.5798 Fax a 735.0476 w.ou wer oupress * AMEX « sons e Master 6. Iwigara: A Raramuri Cognitive Model of Biodiversity ga g 7 Human Disturbance and Biodiversity: A Case Study NOTICE TO AUTHORS The Journal of Ethnobiology’s revised “Guidelines for Authors” appears in this issue (pp. 277-2 280). If you need a copy of these Guidelines yon may neue a anor —_ the Editor. Careful scrutiny of Id recent issues of the Sa should Ppror ) any manuscript you may wish to subm Those submitting manuscripts for consideration for ete in the Journal should send three hard copies and one copy on a high density 3.5" diskette in IBM-compatible or Apple format with original camera-ready figures. Manuscripts aden in inappropriate style and format will be returned. Manuscripts should be sent to: ILLIAM BALEE ra: Journal of lieben ist of Anthr ogy e Uni New Sota LA aa! USA (wbalee@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu) BOOK REVIEWS We welcome alate on bakes to review or meta reviews from readers of the Journal. If you d copies and one on diskette. Send submit a book review f suggestions, eee or reviews to: MICHAEL K. STEINBER' Book Review Editor, Journal of ees Department of Geography-Anthropology University of Southern Maine Gorham, ME 04038 (mstein@usm.maine.edu) SUBSCRIPTIONS Subscriptions to the Journal of Ethnobiology should be addressed to Virginia Popper, UCLA Institute of Archaeology, Box 1510, olen = ae tee sini CA 90095-1510 USA. —— rates are regular individual 1 SLUGEIILLS, fF lon o on ie} oe 2] x. = c ct. ° for Latin America, for whack subscriptions are $25. Joint members (with spouse, receiving a see copy of the Journal) pay $35. For postage outside of the USA, Canada, or Mexico, add $10. Make checks payable to the Journal of Ethnobiology. Defective or lost copies will be replaced if a written request is received within one year of issue. For information on back issues contact Cecil Brown, Department of Anthropology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115 USA, (815) 753-0246 CONTENTS ETHNOBIOTICA . IS THE FRAILEJON A LIFE FORM OR AN UNAFFILIATED GENERIC?: EXAMINING THE RANK OF AN ENDEMIC PARAMO PLANT Egleé L. Zent and Stanford R. Zent 143 GITKSAN PLANT CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE Leslie Main Johnson 179 ETHNOBOTANICAL OVERVIEW OF GOGD (Allium ramosum L.): A TRADITIONAL EDIBLE WILD PLANT USED BY INNER MONGOLIANS Khasbagan, Narisu, and Kevin Stuart ze) PLANT SPECIES (POACEAE, ASTERACEAE, FABACEAE AND SOLAN- ACEAE) AT AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE IN THE SOUTHERN ARGENTINE UNA Maria Fernanda Rodriguez Zao RECENT DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS OF INTEREST TO ETHNOBIOLOGISTS XVII Terence E. Hays aol THE PROCESS AND SOCIOCULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF GOPHER TRAPPING IN A MODERN YUCATEC MAYA COMMUNITY Kevin Hovey and Dominique Rissolo 261 BOOK REVIEWS 177, 219, 226, 248, 258 GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS Zi7