:{}uiiuu(»]{} •,^^' CfECRARY 'of the UNIVERSITY or ILLINOIS 573.05 V.33 -.41 . Fig. 21. Aboriginal Creek and Seminole descent pattern. 167 168 Changing Kinship Systems Lower Creeks.^ My own field survey also uncovered a series of variant schedules among this division. Morgan's, Swanton's, and my own schedules are presented in the following pages and are exhibited according to the degree of variation from a "pure" Crow type. The material is arranged with a diagram of a particular kinship variant on one page and explanatory remarks on the page opposite. ^ Morgan obtained his schedules from R. M. Loughridge, a Presbyterian missionary, who worked extensively among the Lower Creeks. Swanton believes his schedules were probably from Lower Creeks (personal communication). EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 22 This schedule is that recorded by Swanton and by Morgan. I obtained in the field only one schedule conforming to this type. It varies from that shown in Figure 21 in that the father's sister's descendants through both males and females are classed with the father and the grandmother, depending on their sex. Eggan (1937a) cited Swanton's schedule as an example of a probable shift in the manner of classifying relatives, whereby greater emphasis was given the paternal line of descent. However, in the case I recorded, the variation in terminology occurred simply because the father's sister's son married a woman of his own clan. Their children belonged, therefore, to the clan of ego's father. Logically, the children could be either "brother" and "sister," or "little father" and "grandmother." However, one of the strongest principles of the aboriginal Creek system was that everyone in the father's clan must be either a "little father" or a "grandmother." My informant, Sam Bear, was conscious of this principle and said that in the present instance the father's sister's children would be "little father" and "grand- mother." On the other hand, he preferred the use of "little mother" for the father's sister's son's wife, though she too was a classificatory grandmother. In Sam Bear's case, the variation in kinship terminology was explained by a breakdown in clan exogamy rather than by a change in the manner of classifying relatives. This may possibly have been true of Morgan's and Swanton's schedules also, though the probability is greater that they represent a shift in classification. The breakdown of clan exogamy in itself reflects a decline in matrilineal emphasis, though not necessarily in the manner of classifying relatives. Note that the descent pattern from the mother's brother shows no variation from Figure 21. It should be noted that this schedule was provided by a member of Nuyaka, an Upper Creek town. Informant Name Sex Age Creek town Sam Bear Male 45+ Nuyaka 170 A= O Grandfather Grandmother A= O Father Mother A= O Uncle Sister-in-law A o A Little Father Grandmother Ego (Male) A Son ~1 o Daughter A O A O LiTTiE Grandmother Little Grandmother Father Father A O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Fig. 22. Creek kinship variation No. 1 (after Morgan and Swanton). 171 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 23 The striking fact about this schedule is the shortening of the line of descent from the father's sister. The father's sister's children are "brother" and "sister" instead of "little father" or "grandmother." They in turn call ego "sister." Curiously enough, the informant stated that the members of the father's clan other than the father's sister's children were "little fathers" and "grandmothers." In other words, the traditional extension of kin terms to the father's clan remains the same, but the immediate relatives have been classed separately according to a different application of terms. The bilateral family has thus been split off from the father's clan, the latter drifting into obscurity as it becomes functionless. Among most of the Lower Creeks today the clan is of traditional interest but of little or no social importance. The mother's brother's son is also called "brother," whereas he would formerly have been a "grandchild." However, the informant stated that he in turn called her "little mother"; unfortunately, ego's mother's brother's son was not in the vicinity and the inconsistency could not be checked. The terms for the relatives of the first ascending generation have not changed, including the mother's brother's wife, who is still classed with the sister-in-law. Informant Name Sex Age Creek town Dicey Stake Female 45-f Hitchiti Informant spoke Muskogee, which replaced Hitchiti in this town. 172 A= O A = O Grandfather Grandmother Father Mother A= O Uncle Sister-in-law A o o A tOTHER Sister Ego (Female) Brother Fig. 23. Creek kinship variation No. 2. 173 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 24 Figure 24 is based on the testimony of three informants. In the schedule there is an inconsistency in that the father's sister's children are "brother" and "sister," but the mother's brother's children are classed as "grandchild." Unfortu- nately, in no case were the father's sister's children available, and so the incon- sistency could not be checked with them. The mother's brother's children called ego "grandmother," which conformed to the old system. In the first ascending generation, all informants called the father's sister "little mother," instead of "grandmother." Informant 1 called the father's sister's husband "grandfather," but informants 2 and 3 were more consistent, and classed him as a "little father." All informants called the mother's brother's wife "little mother," instead of cahacawd (sister-in-law). The levirate among the Creeks (including marriage with the mother's brother's wife) has long since passed away; so the change in terminology for the mother's brother's wife is what one might expect. The terminology for the father's sister and her husband, however, shows that basic shifts in application have reached the first ascending generation. On the father's side, all informants stated that except for the father's sister and her children, the father's clan were "little fathers" and "grandmothers." As with the previous schedule, the bilateral family has been split off from the clan by changes in the application of kinship terms. Informants Name Sex (l)Mrs. Lewis Deer .Female (2)Elizabeth Sapulpa Female (3)Mrs. Liza Manley Female Eufaula is an Upper Creek town. Age Creek town 60+ Coweta 65+ Kasihta 45+ Eufaula 174 A=0 A=0 (1) Grandfather Little Mother Father Mother (2) (3) Little Father A=0 Uncle Little Mother A o 0 A o brother Sister Ego (Female) Grandchild (1) Grandchild A (1) Grandchild Fig. 24. Creek kinship variation No. 3. 175 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 25 In this schedule, the old lineage pattern so characteristic of the traditional kinship system has been replaced by a pattern based squarely on generation. The father's sister is classed with the mother's sister, and her husband with the father's brother; their children are brothers and sisters. On the mother's side, the mother's brother retains his old term of "uncle," testifying to his traditional social impor- tance in the family circle; but his wife is classed with the mother's sister, and his children are brothers and sisters. Parallel cousins remain siblings, so that all cousins — parallel and cross — are classed with brothers and sisters. And in the first ascending generation, except for the distinctive "uncle" term for the mother's brother, males are "father" or "little fathers" and females are "mother" or "little mothers." V This pattern has the making of a stable system. The lineage principle has been virtually discarded and the terminological system is based on generation and sex differences. If conditions of life for the Creeks were more stable, and if English were not replacing Muskogee with younger individuals, I would predict that this pattern would become established and generally common. Change is still rapid, however, and the system will probably never get a chance to become stabilized in this particular form. Informants revealed some interesting sidelights. Jasper Bell insisted that this was the old Creek system and became rather indignant when I suggested that perhaps it was not. On the other hand, he agreed with the other informants that except for immediate relatives, all members of the father's clan were "fathers" and "grandmothers." All informants said kin terms are not applied to children of parallel or cross-cousins, and that the members of ego's clan and the father's clan outside of immediate kin are no longer relatives except in a purely traditional sense. This gives an indication of how the bilateral family has split off from the clan, and of the limited effective range of kinship today. Mulsey Chalakee, a very observant woman, was conscious of the changes in application of kinship terms and pointed out precisely what "should be" according to the old ways, and what actually had happened; she was a very unusual informant. Although a member of Lucapoka, an Upper Creek town, she lived in the northern part of the Creek territory. So did Loney Hardridge of Taskigi. Informants Name Sex Jasper Bell Male Loney Hardridge Male Mulsey Chalakee Female Taskigi and Lucapoka are Upper Creek towns. Age Creek town 60+ ■ Kasihta 55+ Taskigi 55+ Lucapoka 176 A=0 Little Little Father Mother A=0 Little Little Father Mother A==0 Father Mother A = 0 Little Little Father Mother A=0 Uncle Little Mother A o A O A O A O A o OTHER Sister Brother Sister Ego (Male or Female) Brother Sister Brother Sister Fig. 25. Creek kinship variation No. 4. 177 178 Changing Kinship Systems summary of terminological change The evidence from the Upper Creeks in the very southern part of the Old Creek Nation, and from the Seminole, demonstrates that for the Creek tribe generally the aboriginal descent pattern froni the father's sister and the mother's brother conformed to a "pure" Crow type. However, the series of schedules obtained from the more acculturated Creeks in the north show a progressive variation away from the aboriginal pattern. This variation has a definite direction. First, the variant schedules recorded by Morgan and Swanton express a greater emphasis on paternal descent in classify- ing the descendants of the father's sister, although my own data indicate that this variation may be due to the breakdown of clan exogamy. Next, the variant schedules of Figures 23, 24, and 25 show a shortening of the line of "grandmothers" through the father's sister, with her children coming to be classed as siblings. The same thing happens with the mother's brother's children, who also change their generation classification and become siblings. Then modifi- cations occur in the first ascending generation, with the father's sister being classed as a "little mother" and her husband becoming a "little father." In the meantime, the mother's brother's wife has become a "little mother," although the change does not affect the term applied to the mother's brother. The end product is a system in which the original overriding emphasis on lineage has been discarded for a simple generational scheme. An important fact is that changes in the application of kin terms took place within the framework of the bilateral family. No attempt was made to extend the shifts in terminology to the full limits of the aboriginal kinship system. Lower Creek informants consistently stated that members of the father's clan were classed in the traditional manner, although at the same time they applied a new pattern of terminology to immediate kin. It was this latter group of close relatives who retained real social importance; clan kin, on the other hand, became kin by courtesy only. Traditionally they were relatives, and kin terms could be applied to them; actually, they fell outside the ever-contracting effective range of the kinship system, for the clan lost its vital social ? functions. Today among most Lower Creeks the clan is essentially i just an interesting item of Creek tradition. J From my experience with the Creeks I feel that the terminological shifts were preceded by this contraction in the range of the kinship system. Even among the Upper Creeks who gave me straight Crow I! Changing Patterns of Terminology 179 type schedules, there was disagreement as to the effective range of the kinship terminology— in other words, what persons on the outer fringes should really be reckoned as kinfolk. This contraction apparently made itself felt first with affinal relatives. The father- in-law's clan kin and then the clan kin of the spouse were among the first to be dropped. Among consanguineal relatives, the clan kin of the father's father and mother's father— all formerly called "big grandfather," regardless of sex or age— gradually were shifted outside the range of the system. The same thing happened to classificatory siblings whose fathers belonged to the same clan as ego's father. In other words, the clan suffered a progressive weaken- ing as a kinship unit. By the time terminological shifts became common, the bilateral family had emerged as the largest inclusive functioning kin unit, while the clan drifted into obscurity. The kinship pattern shown as Creek variation No. 4 is consistent within itself and has the makings of a stable system. But the pressures of change are unremitting and another step in the process is already evident. The kinship variants I have presented held true for informants of middle age or older who were perfectly fluent speakers of Muskogee. In addition, they were conscious of their rich heritage of Creek tradition. The generation of young adults and adolescents, however, shows a marked difference. Many younger individuals have a deficient knowledge of the Creek lan- guage, and even with those that speak it fluently a further change in kinship terminology is evident. This change is one whereby an attempt is made to equate Creek kinship terms with English ones and to use them in the same way. The Creek term for mother's brother is being applied to all uncles, while the term "little father" is going out of common use, except that I recorded two instances where it was used by young men for stepfathers. The term "little mother" is used for all aunts, probably because there is no other Creek term for aunt. Children of either brothers or sisters are nephews and nieces. The term iticd- kkiya-t, which used to mean a sibling, male or female, has become equated with the English "cousin" and is used in the same way. The old term "big grand- father" to designate clan kin of the paternal or of the maternal grandfathers is being forgotten. Here is a final step in the shifting series of patterns. At least it is the last step within the framework of the Creek language. It represents a breakdown of the classi- ficatory principle of terminology in classing together lineal and collateral relatives, and an equating to white practice. It is true, of course, that this final change is taking place very unevenly, for -180 Changing Kinship Systems families vary greatly in conservatism. Also, English personal names have come into general use instead of kin terms, so that incon- sistencies between young and old in the use of terms do not become a focus of conversation in everyday life. Any changes beyond those that have been outlined above will no doubt consist of the substitution of English for Muskogee terms. On the other hand, it should be stressed that the variations in kin- ship pattern recorded from informants of middle age or older and shown in Figures 22-25 represent shifts within the frame of reference of the Creek language. The Indian kinship terminology retained its vigor despite the aggressive invasion of white ways and of the foreign English tongue. The Cherokee evidence for the former existence of a crow type system Gilbert's material from the Eastern Cherokee shows a straight Crow type terminological pattern of descent from the father's sister and the rnother's brother (Gilbert, 1937, 1943). This pattern of descent is shown in Figure 26. The social organization of the Eastern Cherokee, with its matrilineal exogamous clans closely related to a consistent, widely organized kinship system displaying the characteristic Southeastern emphasis on lineage, looks much more aboriginal than anything I found among the Oklahoma Chero- kee. On the basis of the more conservative nature of the Eastern Cherokee and on the picture of their social organization, I believe it can be safely assumed that their terminological system represents the form closest to the aboriginal Cherokee of which we have any record. VARIATIONS FROM THE CROW TYPE PATTERN Both Morgan's schedules and those I collected in Oklahoma are variations on the pattern recorded by Gilbert and shown in Figure 26. Morgan's schedules are closer to the Crow type and will be examined first. As in the case of the Creek data, a diagram of the terminology is shown on one page, with explanatory remarks on the opposite page. A=^0 A=0 Grandfather Father s Sister Father Mother A=0 Uncle Uncle's Wife r A / 1 o \ Father Father's Sister Ekx) (Male) 1 1 A O 1 1 A O Brother S ISTER Fath ER Father's Bister A Child o Child A O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild I 1 I A= O A = 0 Grandfather Father's Sister Father Mother A Father A=0 Uncle Uncle's Wife o Father's Sister o Ego (Female) A Child I o Child I I I I I 1 I 1 A O A O A O A O brother Sister Father Father's Sister Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Fig. 26. Aboriginal Cherokee descent pattern (after Gilbert). 181 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 27 Morgan's schedules, obtained in 1860 from the missionaries Torrey and Jones in Oklahoma, are shown on the opposite page. As Eggan (1937a) has pointed out, the schedule tends to alter the pattern of descent from the father's sister, with the father's sister's male descendants through males and females, instead of only through females, being classed with the father. This pattern would not work with a fully functioning matrilineal clan organization. 182 A=0 Step-Parent Father's Sister (Twrey) A=- Father o Mother I A— O Uncle Step-Parent (Torrey) A o A A o ATHISK Father's Sister Ego (Male) Child Child A Father o Sister A O Father Father's Sister A O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Fig. 27. Cherokee kinship variation No. 1 (after Morgan). 183 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 28 Among my Oklahoma informants, I obtained no schedules corresponding to those of Morgan's. Except for the details discussed below, all informants gave me schedules conforming to the pattern shown in Figure 28. Certain features of this pattern are outstanding: (1) In the first ascending generation, the only change has been the substitution of descriptive terms for mother's brother's wife and father's sister's husband. One exception was Jim Chair, who said he called his father's sister's husband "second father." Although not shown in the figure, father's brothers and mother's sisters' husbands are classed as "second fathers"; and mother's sisters and father's broth- ers' wives are classed as "second mothers." (2) In ego's generation, mother's brother's children and father's sister's children are brothers and sisters. Robert Muskrat did say his father's sister's daughter was either a "father's sister" or a "sister," but otherwise all informants agreed on this point. Parallel cousins are "brothers" and "sisters," so that all cousins, parallel and cross, have been grouped under the sibling terms. These are prefixed by the qualifying term "second" to distinguish them from real brother and sister. (3) In Figure 28, the father's sister's children's children are classed according to the traditional manner of referring to brother's children and sister's children. However, some informants simply referred to them by descriptive terms, stating that these relatives were too far removed to have a kin term applied to them. This difference in classification apparently depended on whether ego ever came in contact with these relatives. If the latter had moved out of the community and were never seen, they fell outside the range of the kinship system. The really important characteristic of this schedule is the loss of lineality and the substitution of the generation principle in the classification of the children of father's sister and mother's brother. In this, it parallels exactly the trend observed among the Creeks. Informants Name Sex Age Ezekiel Acorn Male 60+ Mr. Batt Male 60+ Mrs. Bunch Female 60+ Jim Chair Male 50+ Richard Glory Male 65+ Mrs. Jim Hummingbird Female 60+ Betsy Johnson Female 60+ Johnson Keith Male 50+ John Liver Male 60+ Mary Locust Female 50+ Annie Mankiller .Female 60+ Maggie Ridinggoat .Female 45+ Dan Scott Male 60+ Robert Muskrat Male 60+ 184 1 r Descriptive Term = o Father's Sister A= O Father Mother A= O Uncle Descriptive Term A o A O A iOTHER Sister Ego (Male or Female) Brother o Sister A Child o Child A O Nephew Niece (Male Ego) I I Child Child (Female Ego) A Child o Child A O Nephew Niece (Male Ego) Child Child (Female Ego) Fig. 28. Cherokee kinship variation No. 2. 185 186 Changing Kinship Systems summary of terminological change In the pattern of descent from father's sister and mother's brother, the Cherokee system recorded by Gilbert is a straight Crow type. Morgan's Oklahoma schedules exhibit a variant pattern that places emphasis on the paternal as well as the maternal line of descent from the father's sister. Finally, the schedules collected from present-day old Oklahoma informants follow a generation pattern. As with the Creeks, generation has tended to supersede lineage as the dominant principle in classifying kin. This fundamental change in the manner of classifying descend- ants of father's sister and mother's brother took place within the group of closely related bilateral kinfolk. The new pattern was not extended to the remaining members of ego's clan nor to the members of his father's clan. Paralleling Creek conditions, the clan has dis- appeared as a functioning social group. All the informants men- tioned on page 184 knew the clan to which they belonged. They realized that it was matrilineal and exogamous. Some knew their spouses' and fathers' clans, but in no case was the clan considered as an all-embracing body of kinfolk. Members of the same clan do not regard themselves as related, although older Cherokee are aware that such was once the case. There has been a contraction of the kinship system to the limit of the bilateral family whose mem- bers are actually related by close genetic ties, and it is within this family organization that changes in the kinship pattern have taken place. The generation pattern of Variation No. 2 was apparently well established with the Oklahoma Cherokee, for all the listed informants adhered to it. This is in contrast to the Creeks, where it is not so fully established. But as with the Creeks, social change continues, and with young Cherokee there is an attempt to equate Cherokee terms with English usage, in that the term for mother's brother is being applied to all uncles and the term for father's sister to all aunts; in other words, the classificatory principle in the sense of classing together lineal and collateral relatives is being abandoned. In addition, English is making very rapid inroads and is replacing Cherokee among younger individuals. As in the previous section dealing with the Creeks, however, it should be emphasized that the change from a lineage to a genera- tion pattern took place within the framework of the Cherokee language. The trend exhibited by the Cherokee parallels the trend among the Creeks, although the Cherokee appear to have been Changing Patterns of Terminology 187 ahead of the Creeks in achieving the generational scheme. Here are two tribes, whose terminological systems were originally very similar and who have changed in the same way. What about the third tribe — the Choctaw? The Choctaw The following Choctaw schedules are derived from (1) Morgan (1871), whose material was supplied by the missionaries Edwards, Byington, and Copeland in 1859; (2) material collected and edited by Swanton (1931) ; and (3) schedules that I collected from present- day Oklahoma Choctaw. These materials will be presented in the same manner as followed for the Creeks and Cherokee. evidence for the former existence of a crow type system In his discussion of changes in the Choctaw kinship system, Eggan cited a speech by the missionary John Edwards, outlining the early Choctaw kinship system and explicitly stating that female descendants of the father's sister counted through females were classed with the father's sister (Eggan, 1937a, pp. 40-41; Edwards, 1932 [J. R. Swanton, ed.], pp. 392-425). In addition, I obtained from living Indians a series of schedules that have the same distinc- tive pure Crow type pattern of descent from father's sister and mother's brother. This pattern is shown in Figure 29. Among the Choctaw the father's sister (male speaking) was distinguished by a special term from the grandmother, but the father's sister's husband was classed with the grandfather.^ The mother's brother's wife was classed with the sister-in-law in a manner similar to the Creeks. In other features of the descent pattern from father's sister and mother's brother, the Choctaw system shown in Figure 29 is com- parable to the early Creek and Cherokee systems. The Choctaw informants who provided the terminological system shown in Figure 29 are listed below: Informants Name Sex Age Location Mrs. Battiest Female 70+ Broken Bow Messiah Bohanon Male 654- Antlers (Faris) Vincent Camp Male 65-|- Antlers (Faris) Phylis Canedeby Male 60-j- Broken Bow Caroline Durant Female 65+ McCurtain Mrs. Hudson Female 60+ Idabel Lucy Logan Female 60+ Goodwater Mrs. Nelson Morris Female 50+ Kanima Lizie Tombie Female 70+ Broken Bow 1 The majority of my Oklahoma female informants also distinguished the father's sister from the grandmother (of. Swanton, 1931, p. 87). A=0 A = 0 Grandfather Father's Sister Father Mother A=0 Uncle Sister-in-law A o A A o Father Father's Sister Ego (Male) Child Child A Brother o Sister A O Father Father's Sister A O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchuj) Grandchild A= O Grandfather Grandmother A =0 Father Mother A = 0 Uncle Sister-in-law A o o A o Father Grandmother Ego (Female) Grandchild Grandchild A Brother O A O Sister Father Grandmother A O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Fig. 29. Aboriginal Choctaw descent pattern. 188 Changing Patterns of Terminology ' 189 variations from the crow type pattern The following variant schedules consist of those provided Morgan by Copeland, Edwards, and Byington; Swanton's schedules; and several I obtained from present-day Choctaw in Oklahoma. Inasmuch as Edwards in his speech specifically stated that he was outlining the early form of Choctaw system, the schedule he and Byington gave Morgan is by his implicit admission a later form (cf. Eggan, 1937a). It is also probable that these missionaries associ- ated with the more acculturated members of the tribe, who could be expected to provide variant schedules. EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 30 The pattern of Figure 30 is taken from the schedules of Edwards and Bying- ton (Morgan, 1871); from Copeland (Morgan, 1871); and from Swanton (1931). The peculiarities of this pattern are: (1) The line of "father's sisters" is broken after the father's sister's daughter, whose children become "brother" and "sister." Instead, male descendants through males are classed with the father, with the father's sister's son's daughter becoming a sister. The descent pattern has therefore shifted to the male line. Also the lineage descent pattern is shortened, with father's sister's daughter's children and father's sister's son's daughter becoming siblings. (2) With a female ego, the mother's brother's children are called "child" (cf. Swanton, 1931, p. 86). "There is a difference here from my Oklahoma female informants, who classed the mother's brother's children as "grandchildren." Figure 30 is consistent in this respect, however, if we accept Copeland's classifica- tion of father's sister's daughter as a "mother." 190 A=0 A=0 Grandfather Father's Sisteji Father Mother A= O Uncle Sister-in-law A Fath ER Fathe: Mo (Cop o r's Sister ther eland) A Ego (Male) 1 A ITHER Sister 1 A Broth 1 o ER Sister A Child O Child A O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild A =0 A=0 Grandfather Grandmother Father Mother A = 0 Uncue Sister-in-law A Father o o Grandmother ego Mother (Female) (Copeland) A Choo o Child A O A O Father Sister Brother Sister ^ A ^ O A O Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Grandchild Fig. 30. Choctaw kinship variation No. 1 (after Morgan and Swanton). 191 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 31 This pattern was very carefully checked with Nelson Morris, my Choctaw interpreter, who gave me the schedule. It represents another interesting variation on the Crow type pattern. Here two lines of descent are maintained from the father's sister: One is the line of "aunts" through females, retained from the old system; the second is the curious line of "grandfathers" descending through males from the father's sister. The latter seems to be another example of the develop- ment of a patrilineal emphasis. Unfortunately, there were no father's sister's son's daughters or father's sister's daughter's sons in the informant's genealogy to provide additional information. The pattern of descent from the mother's brother was unchanged; it is not shown in the diagram. Interestingly enough, though Nelson Morris used this terminological pattern, his wife used a conventional Crow type (p. 187). When the inconsistency was pointed out to them, they in no way changed their usages with regard to the termi- nology. Unfortunately, Nelson Morris' paternal cross-cousins were not in the vicinity, but he was emphatic that they called him a grandson. The pattern is a good example of how a kinship system can take strange forms during a period of change. Informant Name Sex Age Location Nelson Morris Male 50-|- Stigler 192 A=0 Grandfather Father's Sister A=0 Father Mother A o A Grandfather Father's Sister Ego (Male) A Grandfather o Father's Sister Fig. 31. Choctaw kinship variation No. 2. 193 EXPLANATION OF FIGURE 32 Here the descent pattern from the father's sister has been radically shortened, with the father's sister's children's children classed as siblings. Likewise, the mother's brother's daughter is a "sister." Although not shown on the diagram, parallel cousins are classed as siblings. This schedule clearly shows an evolving generation pattern. It did not reach its full and logical development with the Choctaw, although the trend is clearly evident. Informant Name Sex Age Location Joe Folsom Male 70+ Keota 194 1 r A= O Grandfather Father's Sister A = Father = o Mother A = 0 Uncle Sister-in-law A o A Father Father's Sister Ego (Male) o Sister A Brother O A Sister Brother o Sister Fig. 32, Choctaw kinship variation No. 3. 195 196 Changing Kinship Systems summary of terminological change As with the Creeks and Cherokee, the evidence clearly indicates that the Choctaw originally had a Crow type system. In addition, a series of schedules exists that shows a progressive variation away from the Crow type. In this variation, two trends are observable. The first is the shift, pointed out by Eggan (1937a), from a matri- lineal to a patrilineal pattern of descent from the father's sister. The second is a further shift to a generation pattern, although this pattern has not evolved among the Choctaw to the same extent as among the Creeks and Cherokee. In fact, pure Crow type schedules and variants thereof were obtained from Choctaw informants of similar age, while the areal differences in acculturation with respect to social organization are not nearly so pronounced as among the Creeks. However, the beginning development of a generation pat- tern among the Choctaw is evident and is sufficient to show that Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw kinship systems have tended to vary in a similar way from a similar base. Turning to the question of the effective range of the kinship system among the Choctaw, one notes a further similarity with the Creeks and Cherokee, in that the bilateral family of immediate kin is the largest unit among whom kinship is recognized. Oklahoma Choctaw informants had no real knowledge of exogamous moieties or clans. These have disappeared as native social groupings. Kin- ship has shrunk to the bilateral family, whose limits are restricted to determinable, genetically related kin, although fluctuating some- what from family to family. The question can be raised as to whether the generation pattern will reach its full development among the Choctaw in the same form as among the Oklahoma Cherokee. Of this I am doubtful, simply because the Choctaw language is being replaced by English. This is particularly true with young people, many of whom prefer the use of English, even in the home. Also English personal names are used largely in place of kin terms. As the next major step, it is probable that the kinship system will be assimilated completely to the Ameri- can pattern with a replacement of Indian by English terms. Conclusions Regarding Terminological Change The following conclusions can be drawn from preceding material: (1) The classification of Southeastern kinship systems can now be stated in more precise terms. Although, Spier, Lesser, and Lowie Changing Patterns of Terminology 197 all rightly considered the aboriginal kinship systems of the Creeks, Choctaw, and Cherokee to be Crow types, the schedules available at that time actually showed these tribes to possess variant forms not conforming to a pure Crow type (Eggan, 1937a). Gilbert's data from the Eastern Cherokee and the new material from the Seminole, Creeks, and Choctaw reveal that the aboriginal systems were much more symmetrical and consistent within themselves than the variant systems previously described. The Cherokee, Choctaw, Creeks, and the latter's offspring, the Seminole, all possessed straight Crow type systems. Although the Chickasaw have not been examined in this paper, it is highly probable that they too had a pure Crow system. Even the Caddo may once have had a lineage type system. Eggan's hypothesis that pure Crow types were widespread among the major Southeastern tribes is thus confu-med. (2) The Creeks, Choctaw, and Oklahoma Cherokee terminological systems have all changed from their aboriginal forms. This change has not been entirely random, but has had a definite direction. The series of variant schedules collected from the three tribes show that two distinct processes have been operative. The first of these is the shift to a patrilineal emphasis in classifying the descendants of the father's sister, evident in Morgan's and Swanton's schedules, and previously pointed out by Eggan (1937a). Additional data from the Lower Creeks and Choctaw, presented in the preceding pages, further elucidate this trend. The second process, and apparently a more recent one, is a shift from a lineage to a generation pattern in classifying the descendants of father's sister and mother's brother. In the first process the overriding of generation was carried over from the old system; the second process was one of ironing out generation differences. The final result was the grouping of both parallel and cross-cousins as siblings. With the Creeks and Cherokee the change also affected the terminology for the father's sister, who came to be classed with the mother's sister, though interestingly enough the mother's brother was not classed with the father's brother but retained his distinctive "uncle" term. The trend toward a generation pattern was found to be not so advanced with the Choc- taw as with the Creeks and Cherokee, and it has attained only an incipient development. Although the Choctaw have been exposed to white influence for decades and in 1860 were ahead of the Creeks in general degree of acculturation, the development of a generation pattern is related to a more recent period of acculturation, in which the Choctaw have been less subject to white contact than the Creeks. 198 Changing Kinship Systems (3) A third major trend is also observable. This change is the final assimilation of the Indian to the white system. A direct attempt is made to equate Indian terms with English terms, the classificatory principle is being abandoned, and in some cases Indian terms are being supplanted by English ones. This final transfor- mation is apparent primarily with younger Indians who are con- sciously attempting to "Americanize" themselves. I feel that this last trend is different from the first two major changes described above, in that the latter have occurred essentially within the frame- work of Indian language and culture and are not so obviously examples of linguistic borrowing. (4) A final change in kinship terminology is not with respect to the patterns of classification, but rather with regard to the effective range or limits of the kinship system. Here there has been a gradual contraction. The reckoning of kindred has shrunk to the limits of the loosely defined but nonetheless restricted bilateral family com- posed primarily of children and parents, grandparents, and parents' siblings, with their spouses and children. In particular, the testi- mony of Creek informants shows that the clan was cut off from this bilateral family group and drifted gradually into obscurity. Termi- nological change took place within the bilateral family and no attempt was made to extend this change beyond it to include the clan. This explains the inconsistency between kinship nomen- clature and the clan organization that Swanton has previously pointed out for the Creeks and Choctaw on the basis of his schedules. There actually was no real functional inconsistency present. The extensions of kinship terminology as recorded by Morgan and later by Swanton did cut across clan lines in a seemingly illogical manner, but the clan was already well on the way out, with the bilateral family representing the largest actively functioning kin unit. Be- tween this bilateral family and the changing terminology there was no real inconsistency. These conclusions refer only to patterns of classification extracted from the terminology of kinship. Terminological systems obviously do not exist in splendid isolation. A whole series of other related changes have taken place among the Cherokee, Choctaw, and Creeks, and to these we now turn. III. RELATED CHANGES IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATION In this chapter an attempt will be made to answer the following questions: (1) What were the basic similarities among the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw in that part of social organization most closely connected with kinship? (2) How have these similar aspects of social organization changed? (3) How are such changes related to change in kinship terminology and behavior? The data will be presented as they refer to three types of grouping — the family, the exogamous group, and the town. As an introduction, a few general statements on the social organization of the three tribes may be helpful. From reading and work in the field, I have become impressed with the length to which the Creeks went in the formal organizing of social relations and the way these were channelized in well-defined patterns. Related to this characteristic is the distinct and highly organized nature of their social groupings. The relatively elaborate organization of the Creek towns into a dual division with functions of war and peace and asso- ciated with intertown ball games, the complicated hierarchy of town officials, and the formality of the extended Creek ceremonials are all examples. In kinship, there was the many-faceted clan organization, used as a basis for a series of well-defined duties, obligations, and behavior patterns among kin. The clans themselves were linked in phratries and split into a dual division. All this is characteristic of the Creeks' attempt at a formal, logical patterning of social groups. At the other extreme are the Choctaw. Swanton has best described them as giving a feeling of "powerful indefiniteness." / The Choctaw were once a large and prosperous tribe. Yet early . / observers and travelers in the Southeast were little impressed by the outward manifestations of Choctaw social organization, judging by the paucity of material relating to social organization in their accounts. The stripping of flesh from the bones of the dead excited considerable comment, but more mundane matters concerning family, clan, and village did not receive much attention. Again to use the words of Swanton, the Choctaw were "just folks." Somewhere in between the Creeks and the Choctaw were the Cherokee. The local group, clan organization, and kinship system stand out more clearly than among the Choctaw and bear a number of similarities to the Creeks, although on the whole the formalization of social life does not seem to have been quite so highly developed as with the latter tribe. 199 200 Changing Kinship Systems These differences may well be related to the survival of the formal social organization of the three tribes. Among the Upper Creeks even today the outline of their old social order, changed and warped though it may be, can be discerned from the testimony of old inform- ants. It has been pointed out that the Creeks, who had the more highly developed native institutions, were much less receptive to the white man's ideas and were slower to change than either the Cherokee or the Choctaw (Swanton, 1931, p. 2). The fact that Creek society was so highly organized around town, clan, and kinship system con- tributed to the survival of the old order despite acculturation. Among the Choctaw, on the other hand, assimilation to the social forms of the white man occurred with less resistance and much greater rapidity. The Family Among the three tribes, the elementary family of parents and children has always been a distinct unit. However, among the Florida Seminole today the extended family built around a matri- lineal lineage is the common household group, with the elementary family a subdivision of this larger and more inclusive unit. Marriage is matrilocal. The Florida Seminole are a highly conservative and much less acculturated offshoot of the Creeks; so there is good reason to believe that a similar type of family organization once prevailed among the Creeks. Documentary material tends to corroborate this view. Bartram's description of the arrangement of houses in small groups of four or so in the Upper Creek villages (Swanton, 1928a, pp. 172-173) and Gatschet's note that the towns of the Lower Creeks were composed of irregular clusters of four to eight houses (Gatschet, 1884, pp. 120-121) are outward indications of an arrange- ment similar to Florida Seminole practice. Swanton states that married daughters' houses were built adjacent or near to those of their mothers, so that the unit of a town consisted of a group or cluster of houses owned by a woman and her daughters and occupied by them, together with their husbands and children (Swanton, 1928a, pp. 170-171). And although the extended family does not exist in Oklahoma today, among both Oklahoma Seminole and Upper Creeks there is a tradition of at least temporary matrilocal residence after marriage. As for the composition of the household among the Chero- kee, we have Gatschet's statement, based on eighteenth century sources, that the Cherokee lived in houses from sixty to seventy feet in length and about sixteen feet in width, which sounds as though Related Changes in Social Organization 201 they housed some form of extended family (Gatschet, 1884, p. 26). These were probably the summer houses of the Cherokee. Foreman (1934, p. 21) quotes a Choctaw chief who said in 1822 that it was Choctaw custom for three or four married sisters to live together in one household, presumably together with their husbands and children. However, for the Cherokee and the Choctaw I have found no really i full and satisfactory evidence for the former widespread existence of a matrilineal extended family as the household unit. Although the composition of the household among the Cherokee / and Choctaw may not have conformed to the Creek pattern, for all "-' three tribes there are numerous statements bearing out the impor- tance of the matrilineal lineage in the family organization. The kinship tie between brother and sister, and mother's brother and sister's child, was particularly close. Turning again to the Creeks, we find that the word cokohami-ca was used to designate the lineage. The oldest woman in the lineage was theoretically its head; men were considered part of the cokohami-ca even when they married and moved away, although their wives belonged to a different coko- hami-ca. Furthermore, a man used the word ihdti (home) only for the home of his sister, where he was always a welcome guest.* The women owned the houses, even though they were built or paid for by their husbands (Swanton, 1928a, p. 171). In case of divorce, the wife retained the house. Another expression of the strength of the lineage was to be found in avuncular practices. Punishment and disciplining of children were undertaken by the mother's brother and not by the father. The mother's brother played the necessary authoritarian role for inculcating and maintaining the prevailing moral code, and as such was a dominant figure in the aboriginal educational system. In addition, each clan of a town had an elder who acted as advisor and counselor to the clan as a whole; so the concept of a powerful uncle was extended from lineage to the clan (Swanton, 1928a, pp. 81, ^ 122-123; Spoehr, 1942, pp. 78-79). In addition to his function in the education of his sister's children, the mother's brother took active part in selecting their spouses and arranging their marriages. In this the father played little or no part (Swanton, 1928a, pp. 871- 373). Finally, in case of injury or disgrace to the lineage, which also might involve the clan to which the lineage belonged, the mother's brother tended to initiate action. This included revenge for murder, and punishment for incest and adultery (Swanton, 1928a, pp. 342-358; Spoehr, 1942, pp. 90-94). 202 Changing Kinship Systems Similar data are available for the Cherokee and Choctaw. Gilbert states that the mother's line was once the most important means of tracing descent and that the mother's brother, rather than the father, was the person of authority in the family; as with the Creeks, the father did not discipline his own children (Gilbert, 1943, pp. 202-203). Butrick mentions the case of a young Cherokee selected by his uncle for the priesthood. Later the nephew became a Christian and his aged uncle, stricken with grief and mortifica- tion, left his home and went back into the mountains to avoid the sight of familiar things and places that would remind him of his loss (Payne, MS., IV-1, p. 13). In cases of murder, it was the oldest brother or male in the lineage on whom the obligation fell to inflict blood revenge. Among the Choctaw, Cushman states that "in domestic govern- ment the oldest brother or uncle was the head." (Swanton, 1931, p. 95.) We are further told that "in all that concerns the child, the oldest maternal uncle, or, if he is dead, the nearest male relative in that line, is consulted. ... In cases of divorce, the children remained with the mother, and, in case of her death, her relatives had a claim over them prior to that of their father, who had no con- trol over them whatever." (Claiborne, quoted in Swanton, 1931, pp. 125, 131.) In relatively late times, Morgan stated that if a boy were to be placed at school, his uncle, instead of his father, took him to the mission and made the necessary arrangements (Morgan, 1871, p. 158). Bushnell noted that among the Choctaw of Bayou LaComb, if a man died his property was taken by his brothers and not allotted to his own children, who belonged to his wife's, but not to his own family (Bushnell, 1909, p. 27). And even some of my older Oklahoma Choctaw informants stated that the mother's brother was formerly influential in arranging marriages of his nephews and nieces. The material is not so detailed or precise as one would wish, but it is sufficient to demonstrate the strength of the lineage and the importance of the mother's brother in the education of his nephews and nieces, in arranging marriages, and in assuming responsibility for the general welfare of the lineage. Although marriage among the Choctaw and Cherokee was apparently not matrilocal in the sense of forming extended families, as among the Creeks, the two former tribes lived in villages and the wife's kinfolk were always nearby. In case of divorce, it was the husband who left, leaving his children behind. On the whole, we can consider the family of Related Changes in Social Organization 203 the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw as stressing consanguine ties and forming a consanguine, as opposed to a conjugal, type of family- organization (cf. Linton, 1936, pp. 152-172). This is not to deny the existence or importance of the elementary family, the marriage tie, and the role of the father among the three tribes, but as far as the functions of the family are concerned, and, in the case of the Creeks, even the composition of the household, the family was largely built around the matrilineal lineage. The relation of kinship terminology to this emphasis on matri- lineal descent and the lineage will be discussed more fully in con- sidering the clan organization, but one aspect should be mentioned here. The emphasis on the consanguine tie was nicely fitted to the overriding of generation in the terminology. Among the Creeks and Cherokee, four lineages — the mother's, father's, mother's father's, and father's father's — underlay the structure of the termi- nological system (Gilbert, 1943, pp. 235-238; Spoehr, 1942, pp. 73-74). The same probably held true of the Choctaw, although the y information is not complete. The terminology for these lineages was then extended to the four clans of which the lineages formed a part, although it must not be supposed that the Indians lost sight of the difference between clan kin and relatives to whom a close genealogical relation could be traced. We may now ask what has happened to the consanguine family organization during the long period of contact with white men. First, there has been the gradual weakening of the position and authority of the mother's brother. Educational functions tended to be shifted to the mission schools and out of the hands of the mother's brother and the clan elders. Also, the latter were largely the guardians and propagators of tribal tradition, and in their teaching of the young emphasized the importance and the desira- bility of following traditional patterns of behavior. However, the violently shifting situations involved in the removal of the tribes west to Oklahoma, the Civil War, the constant pressure exerted by white men covetous of Indian lands, and the final allotment of Indian lands, all involved a series of rapid social and economic changes for which traditional patterns of action were inadequate. Even today one can see how younger generations question the intrinsic value of Indian tradition more often than would normally be the case in more stable tribes. As in the case of other native groups, the contact milieu has also fostered the growth of indi- vidualism. In view of these changes in the social environment of 204 Changing Kinship Systems the Indian society, it is remarkable that the mother's brother retained his authority as long as he did. It should be noted that the term for mother's brother has never been supplanted in the changing kinship patterns described in the last chapter. Additional changes also occurred to weaken the lineage. English surnames were adopted and were passed down in the male line, with a wife taking her husband's name at marriage. Personal property, although usually never very extensive, began to be inherited by a man's children rather than by his sister's children. The duty of blood revenge passed from the hands of the family and clan to the tribal government. Young people asserted themselves more in marriage, and individual choice played a greater part in the selec- tion of a spouse. Finally, I suspect that the resettling of the Indians in Oklahoma and the turbulent conditions following the Civil War put a premium on individual initiative in securing the necessities of life and may have encouraged the smaller, more intrinsically mobile unit of the elementary family at the expense of the more unwieldy lineage group. The net result has been a shift from a consanguine to a conjugal type of family organization. The matrilineal lineage, with a close tie between brother and sister, and mother's brother and sister's child, has been replaced by an elementary family unit of parents and children with perhaps a relatively stronger emphasis on the husband-wife tie. The extended family of the Creeks has broken down into elementary family units, with the abandonment of matri- local residence. This process of change has brought Creek, Chero- kee, and Choctaw family organization to a form generally similar to our own. The Exogamous Group Unilateral exogamous groups existed among all three tribes. The Creeks had exogamous totemic clans which were further linked into phratries, the exact character of which is not known, although the feature of exogamy may once have been associated with the phratry (Swanton, 1928a, pp. 120 ff.; Spoehr, 1942, p. 53). The clans were also combined into a dual organization which was not exogamous. The Cherokee had seven exogamous clans; at one time they may have had fourteen (Gilbert, 1943, pp. 203-209). Among the Choctaw, exogamy was associated with a moiety division, each moiety consisting of non-totemic clans (Swanton, 1931, pp. 76-84). All these unilateral groups were matrilineal. Related Changes in Social Organization 205 Turning from form to function, one notes that probably the most important aspect of the exogamous group among the three tribes was that it provided a means for extending kinship relations and thereby obtaining the widest possible range for the kinship system. Unfortunately, early documentary evidence on kinship range in relation to the clan is very scant, but the data on the Eastern Chero- kee, and that on the Seminole, indicate the fundamental manner whereby the clan was utilized to extend the range of kinship virtually to the limits of the tribe. Also, the following statement by Stiggins in regard to the Creeks, already quoted by Swanton (1928a, p. 114), is well worth repeating: The strongest link in their political and social standing as a nation is their clanship ... by their observance of it they are so united that there is no part of the nation detached from the other, but all are linked, harmonised, and consolidated as one large connected family, for . . . there is no part of the nation but a man can find his clansmen or their connection (Stiggins, MS., p. 28). Although the data are not adequate for the Choctaw, the infor- mation indicates a widely extended kinship system similar to that of the Creeks and Cherokee. Although information is lacking for the Choctaw, among the Creeks and Cherokee (and the Oklahoma Seminole) clan affiliation also formed the basis of a set of formalized behavior patterns that were virtually identical for these two tribes. Toward the father, the father's sister, and all members of the father's clan, a man or woman maintained an attitude of strict respect, with a further obligation to protect the father's clan from ridicule or defamation. One was free to joke with anyone whose father belonged to one's own father's clan, for they were classificatory siblings. Familiarity prevailed among members of the same clan, except that one respected older people, particularly the mother, and mother's brother and other "uncles." With members of the father's father's and mother's father's clans, one was on terms of familiarity that were correlated among the Cherokee, at least, with a system of preferential marriage with these two clans (Gilbert, 1937, pp. 289-298). Among both Creeks and Cherokee, the clan provided a means of obtaining the fullest extension of kinship relations in the spheres of both termi- nology and behavior. I suspect that a similar condition prevailed among the Choctaw. A third function of the exogamous group, i.e., exogamy, is indi- cated by the adjective that characterizes it. Among the Creeks there is some question as to whether the phratry was not once the 206 Changing Kinship Systems exogamous group rather than the clan. This may well have been the case, but I suspect that phratry exogamy was never complete, in that exogamy was an attribute solely of the phratry. In any case, the clan assumed the exogamous function at a relatively early date in the history of contact with white men. Also, among the Choctaw, exogamy apparently was an attribute of the more inclusive moiety rather than the clan alone. With the Cherokee, the clan was the exogamous unit. Among all these tribes sexual intercourse between persons belonging to the same exogamous group was con- sidered incest and a major crime. The Creeks inflicted scratching, flogging, cutting off the ears, and even death for the offense; the Cherokee inflicted death and later reduced the penalty to a serious whipping; while the Choctaw also used whipping as a means of punishment. Among the Creeks, each clan meted out punishment to its erring members, while for the Choctaw we have an account stating that the maternal uncles and brothers of the guilty persons administered the punishment (Halbert, quoted* in Swanton, 1931, p. 78). The clan, like the lineage, also functioned in other aspects of marriage. The influence of the mother's brother over his nephews and nieces among all three tribes has been mentioned. If a boy or girl lacked an actual mother's brother, the extension of kinship to the clan meant that a classificatory uncle farther removed could always step in and assume the responsibility of the relationship in arranging marriages. Furthermore, marriage was clearly a compact between groups rather than only between individuals, a fact that is brought out in the punishment for adultery. All three tribes punished adultery severely and, although there are not many details as to who did the punishing, for the Creeks the clansmen of the injured spouse punished the adulterer or adulteress, the injury affecting the clan as a whole. Also among the Creeks, when a man died, the women of his clan enforced the mourning restrictions imposed on his widow. The restrictions continued in force for four years unless the dead man's clanswomen specifically released the widow from mourning by combing her hair and dressing her in gay clothes. If the widow herself ignored the restrictions and remarried before being released, she was subject to punishment for adultery by the clan of her former husband (Stiggins, MS., pp. 22-23). Another expression of the importance of the clan, as well as of the lineage, was found in the sororate and levirate. As usual, the evi- dence is clearest for the Creek practice. With the Creeks, the Related Changes in Social Organization 207 brothers — real or merely clan kin — of a deceased man were obligated to marry his widow. The levirate included marriage of the widow with the brother, the mother's brother, or the nephew of the dead man, ar custom that, together with the sororate, is still remem- bered among older Creeks. Also, although adultery was severely punished, a man was free from any suspicion if he acquired an addi- tional wife through the working of the levirate. Among the Choctaw, the sororate included not only marriage with the sister of the dead wife, but also with a woman of the (wife's) family (Swanton, 1931, p. 127) ; the latter certainly included her lineage, and probably her entire clan and perhaps even moiety. Claiborne stated that after the termination of the period of mourning, a widow was freed of further obligation to the deceased's family and was at liberty to remarry, although Swanton adds that if there were children, it was preferred that the widower should marry his wife's sister, and, similarly, a woman was more apt to marry her husband's brother (Swanton, 1931, p. 138). Several of my own elderly Choctaw informants stated that the brother's wife, mother's brother's wife, and wife's sister were formerly all potential spouses, and confirmed both sororate and levirate as former practices. Among both Creeks and Choctaw, the kinship terminology agreed with sororaite and levirate. However, with the Cherokee, Gilbert does not mention the sororate or levirate, and there is no indication of its existence in the recorded kinship terminology, although Butrick noted that, as among the Creeks, a man married his brother's widow (Payne, MS., IV-1, p. 92). Finally, the position of the exogamous group in the larger and more inclusive organization of the town or village should be men- tioned. The exogamous group overrode territorial lines in that members of the same exogamous unit could be found in a number of different towns or villages in each of the three tribes. But in all three of them, the clan, and in the case of the Choctaw the moiety also, was utilized as a means of organizing the ceremonial and political life of each town or village. In the Creek town, each clan had its own section in one of the four structures set around the town- square ground, while the more important town offices tended to descend in clan lines. Ceremonial names were also the property of individual clans and were handed down within the clan membership. Similar features existed with the Cherokee. The seven sides of the Cherokee council house were symbolic of the seven clans, each of which had its place in the house. Gilbert also notes that the clan 208 Changing Kinship Systems organization underlay the white and red councils of seven which helped the chiefs in decisions of peace and war, and that the descent of titles to chieftainship probably represented a matrilineal succes- sion within one clan (Gilbert, 1943, p. 359). Among the Choctaw, we are told that in old times in public hearings on crimes that required the interference of public authority, the people were assembled and seated according to their respective clans. The subdivision (moiety) to which the criminal belonged appeared as his counsel and advocates, and the opposite subdivision as his accusers. In the ceremonial sphere, the involved practices surrounding the bone-picking and care of the dead were performed by one moiety for the dead of the other moiety (Swanton, 1931, pp. 95, 178). The unilateral exogamous group was therefore utilized in the organization of the town, among all three tribes. Turning from past to present, what has happened to the exog- amous group among the Oklahoma Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw? In all three tribes its history has been one of continuous and steady decline. Among the Upper Creeks the names of the clans are still known; it is recognized as being in theory at least an exogamous, matrilineal group; and individuals know to which clan they belong, as well as their father's clan and usually that of the spouse. Except in a traditional sense, however, the clan is not used as a mechanism for extending kinship relations indefinitely throughout the tribe, simply because kinship itself has lost its importance as a means of widely establishing and regulating social relations. As with the Oklahoma Seminole, the distinction between immediate relatives and classificatory kin has become much sharper, with the latter hardly regarded as kin at all, as far as rights and obligations go. Among the Lower Creeks, the fading of the clan as a functioning social group is even more pronounced, although, again, clan names and the clan's matrilineal and exogamous character are remembered. Passing to the Cherokee, I found that those informants with whom I worked had an even vaguer knowledge. The names of the seven Cherokee clans are known and they were described as being matrilineal and exogamous; also, old people usually knew their spouse's clan and I did not record any intra-clan marriages among my particular group of elderly informants, although they agreed that such marriages were common. Younger Cherokee, however, were often ignorant of the clan to which they belonged and generally were unaware even that it was exogamous or matrilineal. Among the Oklahoma Cherokee with whom I worked, the clan could not be Related Changes in Social Organization 209 called a functioning unit. Finally, there are the Choctaw. Swanton found that his informants drew no distinction between local groups, moieties, and clans (Swanton, 1931, p. 80); my own were even vaguer and remembered nothing really distinct about matrilineal exogamous groups of any kind. The decline in the social importance of the clan in Oklahoma is related to the dispersion of its principal functions to other groups. For instance, the punishment for murder was removed as a duty of avenging clansmen and placed in the hands of the tribal govern- ment, whose representatives tried all cases of homicide and carried out all judgments. Likewise, punishment for sexual relations between clanmates and for adultery became a function of the tribal government, although there was a gradual lessening of vigilance in regard to these two offenses. In matters of education, clan elders and the mothers' brothers tended to lose their influence to the mission and the mission schools, which more and more took over educational functions. In marriage, there was and continues to be a growing individualization of behavior, with young men and women seeking spouses of their own choice. Sororate and levirate have passed away, as have the restrictions on widows and widowers. Formalized behavior patterns have faded until only survivals remain. Lastly, the ceremonial functions of the clan have disappeared, as native religion and ceremony gave way before mission teaching and the establishment of Indian churches. The clan has consequently tended to go the way of functionless groups, becoming more and more a matter of traditional interest only. Interestingly enough, exogamy seems to have been one of the functions longest retained. My data are not extensive enough to prove this statistically, but I believe it to be the case. The social and psychological aspects of incest as they refer to the breakdown of clan exogamy among native peoples deserve further investigation. The Town The Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw all lived in small towns or villages, which, although they may not have possessed the compact character that we associate with the terms, did exist as local groups larger and more inclusive than the household alone. The Creek towns were apparently the most compact, the Choctaw least so, with the Cherokee intermediate. Many were more of the nature of loose settlements, particularly the Choctaw and Cherokee towns, whose component households were usually fairly well separated. 210 Changing Kinship Systems Among all three tribes the local group varied considerably in size, with the larger towns maintaining their own ceremonial center and political activities, and the smaller villages or settlements appar- ently participating in the ceremonies of a more populous neighbor. It is not the purpose here, however, to go into the character of village and town in the Southeast beyond pointing out two charac- teristics relating to kinship. The first is that the degree of concentra- tion or dispersion of the local group obviously determines the amount of contact among the members of the group. From the point of view of kinship, the strength of families organized on the basis of a matrilineal lineage will logically be greatest if the popula- tion tends to be concentrated sufficiently so that the members have enough fa6e-to-face contacts to maintain the social solidarity of the lineage, even though married brothers and sisters live in different households. Although the Choctaw towns may have been more dispersed than Creek ones, among both these tribes and also among the Cherokee there was a concentration of households in a more inclusive village or town organization sufficient to ensure that per- sonal contact among the members of a lineage was a feature of daily life. This I believe was an important factor in strengthening the lineage. The second characteristic of the Southeastern town has already been noted; namely, that a large share of its internal organization was based on the exogamous group. In other words, kinship in its various extensions and ramifications was used widely as a principle for organizing town life.^ In both this aspect and in the concentra- tion of households, the Creek, Cherokee, and Choctaw towns have undergone very considerable change. After the removal west to Oklahoma, the Cherokee and Choctaw towns disintegrated, although the trend probably started much earlier. The Creek towns survived the transplanting to Oklahoma and maintained a surprising degree of vitality, even to the present time (cf. Opler, 1937), but as early as 1845 a trend toward dispersion and scattering of the Lower Creek towns was noted by an observer in Oklahoma (Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Annual Report, 1845, pp. 514-517). Although a new form of local integration, the church community, had come into being, among all three tribes there was a certain amount of dispersion of households in the tribal territory in Oklahoma. This in turn must have affected the amount of contact 1 Dr. Mary Haas has in preparation important material on the extensions of kinship as these affected the relations among clans and among towns. Related Changes in Social Organization 211 between members of a lineage and may well have been a factor in weakening it as a functioning social unit. Among Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw, the Christianization of the Indians resulted in the formation of a new local unit — the church community — that exists today in similar form in all three tribes. The Creek church has either superseded the old ceremonial square ground or exists side by side with it, the two being separated by only a mile or two. The important thing is that the town organization has tended to hang on; its ceremonial center is simply changing from the square ground to the church. There are a number of parallels between the two whose description need not be given here. There is one difference, however, well worth empha- sizing. It is that in the church organization the clan and kinship play no important role, or at most only an incidental one. The same thing holds true of the Cherokee and Choctaw. Among these two tribes the old town organization has gone.^ Its place has been partly taken by the church community, the only local grouping that is essentially Indian outside of the household. Each church community consists of a dozen or two families living within two or three miles of a church house. Although all the members of the church community may not be regular churchgoers, they are still considered members of the community, if for no other reason than that they will be buried in the church cemetery. It is the ceme- tery, as much as the church house, that expresses the unity of the group. The pastor is always Indian and the denomination usually Protestant, either Baptist, Methodist, or Presbyterian. This last is also true of the Creeks, and, like the Creeks, the clan and the old kinship system are not utilized as a basis for organizing the members and activities of the church community. In this new form of local integration, the old extensions of kinship play no role. Conclusion It remains to state how changes in family, clan, and local group are related to changes in the kinship system proper. On the one hand, there is the contraction in the range of the kinship terminology, shifts in the application of terms, and the fading of formalized behavior patterns. On the other hand, there is the change in the family from a consanguine to a conjugal organization, a decline of 1 A small group of Oklahoma Cherokee known as "Nighthawks" still attempt to maintain a ceremonial town organization, an exception to the above statement. 212 Changing Kinship Systems the exogamous group, and a change in the form of the local group. How are these two bodies of data related? In the past, a number of attempts have been made to find simple causal relations between social phenomena that are then generalized as holding true for human society as a whole. In addition, «ome anthropologists have further utilized such supposed causal relations in attempts at historical reconstruction. An oft-quoted example is Rivers' generalization that forms of marriage determine systems of terminology and his use of this statement as a premise in a hypo- thetical reconstruction of the history of Melanesian society (Rivers, 1914). Criticisms of this method and of its validity have been made by leading students of social organization and will not be repeated here. Yet it is also apparent that connections do exist among the Southeastern data that have been presented. The contraction in the range of the kinship terminology and the decline of the clan as an actively functioning social group are obviously related. In a sense, they are merely facets of the same thing. The clan owed its existence to the recognition of kin bonds among its members. One way that kinship was given overt recognition was through the extension of kinship terminology. When the clan declined and went out of existence, an important aspect of its decline was that its members ceased to use the customarily appropriate kinship terms among themselves. Another example of interconnection is found in the decline of the clan and the fading of formal behavior patterns based on the clan organization. This latter type of behavior was also a recognition of kin ties, and the passing of the clan was reflected in the fading of these same patterns of behavior. I believe, therefore, that the relation holding between the variable phenomena repre- sented by the contraction in the range of the kinship terminology, the decline of the clan, and the fading of formal behavior patterns based on the clan, is essentially a relation of functional dependence (in the mathematical sense). This is a common-sense observation, whose validity as a principle of wider application depends on com- parative observation among other tribes. A further important relation is that holding between the shifts in the application of kinship terms and change in the family organi- zation from a consanguine to a conjugal type. Among Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw, the native family organization was built around the matrilineal lineage. At the same time, the kinship terminology reflected a similar emphasis on lineage, with a cor- Related Changes in Social Organization 213 responding overriding of generation. As the acculturation process proceeded, the family changed its form to what Linton calls a con- jugal type, with greater emphasis on the elementary family at the expense of the lineage. The application of kinship terms also changed from a lineage to a generation pattern. Both shifts repre- sented a change from an emphasis on matrilineal descent to one favoring a bilateral pattern with relatively greater emphasis on patriliny. At the same time, one should note that as the levirate declined among the Creeks, the mother's brother's wife came to be classed with the mother's sister. Now although I should hesitate to single out any one of these phenomena as being the necessary and sufficient cause of the others, they are certainly related. The relationship, I suggest, is again one of functional dependence. To prove this as a valid principle of wide application is of course diffi- cult, for, in the absence of experiment, recourse must be had to correlations based on comparison among a large number of tribes. Reduced to a statistical process, the validity of the procedure still depends a great deal on interpretation and the adequacy of the particular sampling technique used. Another way of looking at the Southeastern material is to refer the phenomena to wider and more inclusive changes of which they are a part. The decline of the clan, the contraction of the kinship system, the disappearance of formal behavior patterns based on the clan, and the disappearance of the kin tie as a means of integrating the local group are all expressions of a single trend — the ever decreas- ing social importance of kinship among the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw. Among these tribes the kinship relation was used less and less as a mechanism for extending and establishing personal relations throughout the town and tribe; as the basis for organized consanguine groups, such as lineage and clan, which in turn underlay forms of marriage, education, native justice, ceremony, and ritual; and as a general organizing principle around which so much of tribal life revolved. The change in the family organization of Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw and the related shifts in patterns of kinship terminology can also be viewed as parts of a wider and more inclusive trend. First, there is Lowie's suggestion as to the fundamental nature of descent (Lowie, 1930, p. 108) ; both terminological shifts and change from a consanguine to a conjugal family type involved change in the relative importance of matrilineal and patrilineal descent. However, I am inclined to believe these changes can be more satis- 214 Changing Kinship Systems factorily referred to shifts in the social functions of the family in the care and education of children, and in the mechanism — i.e., marriage — for bringing new families into existence. The loss or addition of social functions of the family as these are associated with the obligations and duties of particular relatives in turn seems to be related to shifts in terminology. The decline in the authority of the mother's brother weakened the lineage, facilitated the growing importance of the conjugal family, and was at least a permissive factor in the terminological shift to a generation pattern. In these paragraphs I have avoided attempting to state the immediate necessary and sufficient cause of any given phenomenon, not because the cause does not exist, but rather because it is not apparent in the data so far reviewed. Instead, it is suggested that the social phenomena discussed are related in terms of functional dependence in the mathematical sense. In this relation certain variables no doubt remain unknown. One other aspect of the material, however, should be elucidated further. Without attempt- ing to relate them causally, one can arrange in a temporal sequence certain of the kinship changes discussed. This sequence is as follows: (1) The contraction in the range of the terminological system and the fading of those formalized behavior patterns based on the clan or exogamous group preceded the terminological shifts dis- cussed in Chapter II. This has occurred among the Oklahoma Semi- nole and Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw. (2) The levirate as a prescribed form of marriage disappeared before any corresponding shift in terminology. Among the Okla- homa Seminole and Upper Creeks, and the Choctaw, the mother's brother's wife is classed with the sister-in-law as a potential spouse. She formerly was one, but the levirate no longer is practiced. Among the more acculturated Lower Creeks, change has progressed to the point where the mother's brother's wife has become classed with the mother's sister. Among the Choctaw she is still classed as a potential spouse, but the levirate has fallen into disuse. No adequate data exist for the Cherokee. (3) The decline of the clan and of the lineage as actively function- ing groups, with the consequent greater importance of the elementary family, together with the abandonment of either temporary or permanent matrilocal residence, preceded shifts in kinship termi- nology. This is true for the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw. The temporal sequences noted above indicate that changes in the application of kinship terms tend to lag behind other social Related Changes in Social Organization 215 changes. This is particularly true of referential kinship terminology, the only type considered here. It may be pointed out that vocative kin terms, however, seem to be more susceptible to change than referential terminology. Lowie's data from the Crow suggest that' the vocative terminology has changed, while the referential termi- nology has lagged behind (Eggan, 1937b, p. 94). A similar condition prevails among the Oklahoma Seminole (Spoehr, 1942, p. 61). Relative rates of change in vocative and referential patterns of kinship terminology deserve more attention in studies of kinship change among acculturated tribes. Vocative terminological patterns seem to be more sensitive indicators of change in forms of family life. IV. THE STIMULUS TO CHANGE Changes in kinship and social organization have been discussed here only with reference to the internal relations of Creek, Chero- kee, and Choctaw social organization. The external relations of these groups with white civilization will now be examined briefly. Although social change among these tribes would certainly have occurred in any case, the effects of contact with the gradually engulfing white society so overshadows any other factor in the recent history of the Southeastern groups that the main stimulus to change must be looked for in the contact situation. The Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw have experienced several centuries of first-hand contact with whites. This long history of acculturation can be divided conveniently into three periods: (1) From the time of first acquaintance with Spanish, French, and English, to the removal west (about 1830); (2) from removal to allotment of Indian lands (about 1907); and (3) from allotment to the present day. Fortunately, all these periods have engaged the attention of competent historians. The works of Swanton, Foreman, Debo, Wardell, and others provide historic control for social changes in the Indian tribes. In the present chapter, certain of the findings of these writers will be reviewed in so far as they apply to the modification of native kinship and social organization through contact. Unfortunately, the actual process of interaction between Indian and white man by which changes took place in Indian social organization is not clear and explicit. Specific causal relations and particular explanations of change remain largely conjectural. The reason lies in the limitation imposed by the documentary source materials. This limitation is understandable, for early observers were not specifically interested in acculturation. In judging how the process of acculturation worked, one's conclusions must neces- sarily contain an element of speculation. Let us now consider the following questions: (1) Who were the contact agents — the representatives of white society among the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw? (2) What was the nature of the contact milieu, the environmental setting in which the con- tact took place? (3) How did contact agent and contact milieu affect Indian kinship and related aspects of social organization?^ 1 The terms "contact agent" and "contact milieu" are borrowed from Fortes (1936). 216 Stimulus to Change 217 Contact Agents Until nearly the end of the nineteenth century, the principal contact agents among the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw were the white settler, the missionary, and the government agent (includ- ing the military). Often more than one of these roles was played by the same person, but they are sufficiently distinct to demand separate examination. However, by the turn of the last century, the three tribes began to be literally engulfed by the surrounding whites, a movement that reached a climax after allotment, with the full exploitation of eastern Oklahoma petroleum resources in the 1920's. Consequently, in the period since allotment, it is nearly impossible to classify the contact agents, for they represent an entire array of occupations in agriculture, transportation, petroleum, and related industries. Since allotment, the Indians have been a pre- dominantly rural minority group increasingly submerged in a white society. The following examination of the three major contact agents refers primarily to the first two periods of contact, prior to 1907. The white settler. — Usually a trader, he was probably the first to establish and maintain stable relations with the Indians. The white settler often combined farming with trading, and became an important point of contact between Indians and whites. A well- established system of trade with Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw was flourishing well before the American Revolution. However, from the point of view of kinship, the white settler's greatest influence probably was exerted by the fact that he so frequently had an Indian wife and passed on to his mixed-blood children many of the con- temporary attitudes and usages of white society. Furthermore, the mixed-blood children in turn had considerable influence in Indian society. It is not mere happenstance that so many leaders among Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw were of mixed parentage. Alexander McGillivray and Roily Mcintosh of the Creeks, Greenwood Le Flore of the Choctaw, and John Ross of the Cherokee were all influential mixed-blood leaders. Apparently events forced many mixed-bloods to make a choice between identifying themselves with either the white or the Indian group. George Stiggins, the author of an enlightening manuscript on the Creeks, cast his lot with the whites in the Creek Wars of 1812-13 and was essentially a member of white society. Alexander McGillivray, son of a Scotch trader and an Indian mother, was educated in Charleston, became a Tory and an officer in the British 218 Changing Kinship Systems army, and after the Revolution returned to the Creeks, among whom he became a powerful leader (Debo, 1941, pp. 39-55). As the frontiers of white settlement pushed in on Indian territory, it was the mixed-blood who often had the advantage of knowing both Indian and white ways and who was accordingly in a favored posi- tion to deal with white men, so that it is not surprising that he often became a man of prominence among his people. After removal of the tribes west to Oklahoma, miscegenation continued. Of the three tribes, the Creeks, particularly the Upper Creeks, were least and the Cherokee most affected by intermarriage. Impressions of observers rather than statistics form the basis of this statement, although it is partially confirmed by the Census of 1890, the first attempt at an accurate census of the Five Civilized Tribes. An indication of the extent to which the Cherokee intermarried with whites is found in the records of the Cherokee Nation; between 1865 and 1881, there were 805 recorded marriages between white men and Cherokee women (Murchison, 1928, pp. 302-327). The effect of white intermarriage in Indian society found expres- sion in a marked decrease in the cultural homogeneity of the three tribes. Even before the removal west, there tended to develop a social and economic cleavage between mixed-bloods and more con- servative full-bloods. The former were more aggressive in the accumulation of wealth, acquired Negro slaves and plantations, and engaged actively in trade. The full-blood, on the other hand, was more often content with a modest living and a humble abode. After removal west, the cleavage became just as marked, and despite the destruction caused by the Civil War, economic and social differences soon developed once more (cf. Graebner, 1945c, pp. 328-330). The accounts of Debo and others also indicate that the mixed- bloods were more receptive to mission teaching and educational practices and more readily adopted the attitudes and usages of white society. On the other hand, a hard core of conservative full-bloods has existed and continues to do so to the present day among the Creeks, a small group of Cherokee, and even among the more affable Choctaw in the most rural and isolated areas. Actually, as the term is used today, "full-blood" refers to cultural conservatism as much as to racial purity, and the two are not entirely one and the same thing. The appearance of a relatively large mixed-blood element among the three tribes as early as the time of removal west provided the means for breaking with Indian tradition and introducing new Stimulus to Change 219 cultural forms borrowed from the whites. As a contact agent, the effect of the white settler in increasing the mixed-blood population and imparting to his descendants and Indian affinal relatives white attitudes and usages was his important contribution to change in Indian society. The missionary. — In the years just prior to removal west, mission work became established among the Choctaw, made a con- siderable start among the Cherokee, and progressed little if at all with the Creeks. After removal, the efforts of missionaries became more intense, and their importance as contact agents was largely manifest in the period from removal to allotment and a few years thereafter. The missionaries emphasized the training of native Indian teachers and mission workers, and the church services today are conducted entirely by Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw. Although the Creeks were indifferent to or suspicious of mission- aries, and expelled them from the Creek Nation in 1836, it was not long before they were allowed to return. Thereafter, Presbyterian, Baptist, and Methodist missionaries, despite many discouragements, found a growing field for their work among all three tribes. It was probably through their efforts in establishing schools, however, that their principal effect on native society was felt. Many Creek, Chero- kee, and Choctaw leaders were desirous of establishing schools among their people for teaching English and useful manual skills. Even though the tribal governments eventually contributed a major share of the necessary funds, the teachers continued to be drawn largely from the ranks of mission workers or those trained by mis- sionaries. Important, too, were the concerted and successful efforts of the missionaries to establish boarding schools in addition to the regular neighborhood day schools, for in the boarding schools a more complete control could be established over the daily routine of the students. Thus we find Loughridge, a pioneer missionary among the Creeks, holding that only in the boarding schools could the pupils be shown "the absurdity of their barbarous superstitions." (Foreman, 1934, p. 207.) Finally, with due credit to Sequoyah, the mission- aries were also primarily responsible for promoting a very con- siderable degree of literacy among the Indians by reducing the Indian languages to written form and then making available publications printed in the native tongues, in addition to teaching English in the schools. The educational efforts sponsored by the missionaries were suc- cessful in reaching a considerable part of the three tribes. The 220 Changing Kinship Systems Cherokee were the first to estabHsh a national school system sup- ported by tribal funds, followed by the Choctaw and the Creeks. Even though the Creeks were slower to establish formal education on the white pattern, by 1886 they had four boarding schools and twenty-two neighborhood schools accommodating 940 Indian pupils (Debo, 1941, p. 310). The two other tribes, more advanced in formal education, had comparably greater numbers. In 1888, the Choctaw had a total school enrollment of over 3,000 (Debo, 1934, p. 241). It was through the medium of the education of Indian children, quite as much as through direct attempts at conversion to Chris- tianity, that the missionary's role as a contact agent was made effective. The government agent. — The white government agent, including representatives of the armed services, has been a contact force that the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw have had to deal with through- out the three periods of contact. Relations between the represent- atives of white government and the Indians have varied all the way from bloody war to peaceful cooperation. Regardless of the charac- ter of contact, however, up to allotment the agents of government have exerted pressure on Indian society that resulted in centrali- zation of political power within each of the three tribes. I believe this has been their most important role as contact agents. During periods of war or intermittent hostilities, centralizing tendencies among the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw naturally came to the fore. During periods of peace, the pressure of the white frontier on Indian lands in the Southeast continued, and the same unifying force was apparent. After the removal of the tribes to Okla- homa, agents such as Armstrong among the Choctaw and Logan among the Creeks worked hard to get the Indians to settle their internal differences and establish tribal governments. Less intelli- gent and active agents found it more convenient to deal with a central tribal authority than with a whole series of chiefs or Indian representatives and encouraged the pattern of dealing with the former. The final evolution was the tribal organization of the three tribes, patterned on the forms of our own state and federal govern- ments. These tribal governments of the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw assumed functions formerly the prerogative of clan and town and hence exerted a considerable change in the native societies. It is true that at various times the pressure of white contact agents, usually personified by the United States Army, has resulted in disorganization rather than the unification of the three tribes. Stimulus to Change 221 The frightful and tragic conditions during and immediately following the removal west are a pertinent example. Despite such instances of disorganization, however, the trend was toward centralization of political power within each tribe. But with the allotment of Indian lands a different course was initiated. In response to the political pressure of land-hungry whites, backed by other misguided interests, the United States forced the dissolution of the tribal governments in 1907 and allotted lands in severalty to the Indians. Since allotment, the government agent has continued as a contact force, but one that has followed the government policy of liqui- dating tribal interests. However, this policy has been very much modified in the last fifteen years. Contact Milieu Of the various aspects of the contact milieu, the following three have been selected as being most closely related to changes in Indian social organization: Change in adaption to the natural environment. — Under aboriginal conditions in the Southeast, agriculture was primarily a women's occupation, hunting and fishing that of the men. Whether the Indians themselves would have finally exhausted the game is problematical, but the settlement of the Southeast by whites hastened the depletion of the game resources. Even before removal of the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw west of the Mississippi it was apparent that the Indians would have to rely to a much greater extent on agriculture. Also, after removal, the game resources of Oklahoma were not sufficient to maintain the old adjustment, and continued emphasis on farming was necessary. All three tribes made the adjustment fairly satisfactorily. In 1809, Thomas Jefferson noted that the Cherokee were becoming a tribe of farmers (Foreman, 1934, p. 353). Thereafter, references to the agricultural progress of the Indians become more numerous. By 1837, the Cherokee were supposed to be further advanced in agriculture than any other of the three tribes. In 1836, Superintendent Armstrong reported that except for pleasure the Choctaw had nearly abandoned the chase. In 1849, Agent Rutherford concluded that the Creeks had abandoned hunting as a means of subsistence (Foreman, 1934, pp. 34, 205, 358). Although Indian men enjoyed hunting as long as there was game left to hunt, the increasing emphasis on agriculture changed the economic roles of men and women. Though often on a very small scale, the men became farmers and keepers of cattle and hogs, and 222 Changing Kinship Systems for the bulk of each tribe, the division of labor and standard of living came to approximate that of contemporary neighboring rural whites. Yet, as has been noted, the wealthier Indians, mostly mixed- bloods, tended to adopt the manner of life of the Southern planter. This was transferred to Oklahoma; and even after the Civil War, with its consequent freeing of the large number of Negro slaves owned by Indians, more enterprising members of the three tribes engaged in relatively large-scale agricultural operations, hiring non-citizen labor. On the other hand, the conservative full-bloods continued to live on a modest scale, though nevertheless affected by the general change in the adjustment to the natural environment. Among all the Five Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma, land was held by the nation (tribe), and only the use of improved land was a prerogative of the individual. As there was more than enough land for all, this did not prevent the accumulation of wealth by individual families through farming and stock-raising. These differences in wealth, plus the changes in the economic roles of men and women, coupled with intermarriage with whites, and combined with the influence of the missionaries, were certainly related to changes in the customs regarding inheritance. Widowers and widows became entitled to share in the deceased's estate, and children could inherit from the father. After the dissolution of the tribal governments, the native Indian customs were superseded by white legal practices, but the trend toward a patrilineal emphasis in inheritance was apparent well before allotment. Although the changed adaption to the environment was not the immediate cause, it was a permissive factor facilitating the developing differentials in wealth and the adoption of white customs. Also, the greater emphasis on farming and stock- raising may have encouraged the dispersal of native towns and the scattering of individual households on the rural white pattern, a trend that was evident years before allotment. Violent episodes in contact relations. — Like other Indian tribes, the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw had their share of violence in the long years of white contact. These episodes consisted of the intermittent hostilities that characterized Indian-white relations prior to removal, and also included intra- and inter- tribal strife occasioned by rivalries between Spain, England, France, and later the growing American republic. They included the tragedies accom- panying removal west to Oklahoma, and finally the Civil War, which, though not of the Indians' making, gathered the three tribes in its toils and left them destitute. 1 Stimulus to Change 223 As has already been mentioned, Caucasic influence had a certain unifying effect on the Indian tribes. The Creek Confederacy may well have been largely a product of white pressure. On the other hand, the more violent and prolonged episodes certainly had a dis- organizing effect. The decimation of population during and immedi- ately following removal was a socially disintegrating force. Speaking of the Creeks, shortly after they had been moved to Oklahoma, Debo (1941, p. 122) notes, "The adversities of the preceding years had weakened the influence of the moving native ceremonials and had broken up the moral solidarity of the town and clan." Like- wise, the Civil War involved tribal division, with Indian fighting Indian, and certainly had a disorganizing effect. In the discouraging years after removal and also after the Civil War, the missionaries did much to help the plight of the Indians. It is perfectly true that the men of God participated in, and in some cases even fostered, the differences that led to the Civil War, but by and large they provided a stable moral force that helped a large share of the Indian population to face an uncertain future. Although incipient nativistic tendencies can be found, from the point of view of acculturation the violent episodes in Indian life accompanying removal and the Civil War provided situations for the further modification of Indian society through missionary effort. Peaceful expansion of white settlement. — The greatest inroads on the cultural integrity of the Indians and on their tribal territory, whether in the Southeast or in Oklahoma, have occurred during periods of relative peace. One of the important considerations is the relative local numerical strength of the Indian and the white population during the history of contact. Until nearly the end of the nineteenth century, at which time large numbers of whites had by one means or another settled in Indian territory, the three tribes had been able to maintain their identity largely because they numbered well over ten thousand persons each, living together in a single tribal area. After allotment, however, there was an influx of whites who acquired land from the Indians, settled among them, established numerous towns on the white pattern, and developed transportation facilities. The Indians became largely a scattered rural population and a minority group in a white and negro society, with the resulting virtual disappearance of the three tribes as socially! integrated tribal units. The acculturation of the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw is also closely connected with the development of transportation facilities. 224 Changing Kinship Systems In the Southeast, and in Oklahoma until the building of the rail- roads, transportation and communication followed the rivers and man-made trails and wagon roads. In Oklahoma the more removed position of the Creeks protected them from as direct and intense white contact as the Cherokee and Choctaw experienced. But in the closing years of the last century, railroads began to be built into and through Indian Territory. Finally came the automobile, bus, and truck, and the network of highways and roads built in the last three decades have broken down the last areal barriers to contact. Those tribal differences in general degree of acculturation that still exist will fast disappear, and such few areal differences as can be expected to survive are to be found only in a few rough, hilly, and agriculturally poor areas. The land-hunger of the Americans forced the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw from their old homes in the Southeast and finally caused the dissolution of the tribal nations in Indian Territory. Until the exploitation of eastern Oklahoma oil resources, however, the basic economy of the white population settled on former Indian lands remained an agricultural one. But the full exploitation of petroleum resources contributed to the further alienation of Indian land, brought a great increase in white population, stimulated the building of roads, and encouraged the rapid growth of towns. The Creeks were particularly affected; the Cherokee and Choctaw less so. In addition to oil, the exploitation of natural gas resources and the earlier mining of coal and cutting of timber brought in both whites and negroes. In the end, as the resources of their old lands in Oklahoma have been developed and exploited by whites, the majority of Indians have grown progressively poorer through their inability to compete, so that they are now a relatively submerged minority without the compensations of tribal social cohesion and integration. Conclusion This brief review of the long history of contact makes no pre- tensions to covering completely a highly complex contact situation. However, certain of the main factors in this situation have been outlined. The white settler played an important role as a contact agent by introducing white attitudes and usages through inter- marriage with Indian women; the missionary established and stimu- lated formal education on the white pattern; and the government agent was instrumental in the formation of centralized tribal govern- ments. As for the contact milieu, a brief sketch has been provided Stimulus to Change 225 of the results of a greater dependence on agriculture necessitated by depletion of the game resources, the effects of violent episodes in Indian-white relations, and the consequence of developments in these same relations during times of peace, with the Indians finally- becoming greatly outnumbered, losing most of their tribal lands, and finally their essential social and cultural unity. With regard to kinship, except for the most recent terminological shifts whereby Indian terms have been equated with English ones, contact does not seem to have affected the patterns of kinship terminology directly. Instead, the patterns of terminology have shifted in accordance with related changes in those parts of social organization more immediately affected by contact. As examples of the latter, one can note the decline of the clan and the weakening of the lineage. Associated with this change, the elementary family with its restricted bilateral extensions emerged as the most important kinship unit. Changes occurred in the duties, obligations, and behavior of relatives, particularly the mother's brother. Patrilineal tendencies in the inheritance of names and property became estab- lished. At the same time, kinship as a widely extended means of integrating the society underwent a progressive decline, with a corresponding individualization of behavior. The town households underwent dispersion, with the church community tending to sup- plant the town as a form of local integration. Political centralization in the form of tribal organization weakened the clan and, to some extent, the town. The changes listed above reflect the presence of settler, mis- . sionary, and government agent. The settler was primarily respon- sible for the increasingly large mixed-blood elements, more acquisitive of wealth, desirous of sending their children to mission schools, and receptive to white ways, while the very existence of this mixed-blood group acted as an entering wedge for more pervasive changes in the tribal society. Mission schools tended to supplant the native system -^ of education, with consequent effects on the role of the mother's brother and clan elders. The content of the teaching, with its . emphasis on manual skills for boys and girls, acted to establish patterns of family life and an economic division of labor between the sexes similar to rural white practice. Patrilineal inheritance of names and property was also probably initiated by the missionaries and settlers. The role of the government agent in the centralization of political authority has been mentioned. Finally, elements in the contact milieu contributed to social change, in that the shift to 226 Changing Kinship Systems agriculture facilitated the accumulation of wealth and accentuated differences in material status between families; the discouraging period of removal and the Civil War gave rise to situations con- ducive to further missionary effort; while the gradual infiltration of whites and eventual abolition of the tribal governments alienated the lands of the Indians, further dispersed households, and dis- integrated still more the bonds of kinship. Although the character of acculturation has been very similar for the Creeks, Cherokee, and Choctaw, at different times the intensity of contact has varied for the three tribes. This explains the differences in general degree of acculturation at a given period of time. In Oklahoma between removal and allotment, the Lower Creeks were distinctly more acculturated than the Upper Creeks, and the Choctaw and Cherokee more acculturated than the Creeks as a whole. On the other hand, I believe the Creeks are now rapidly becoming more acculturated than the more isolated Choctaw. These differences can be correlated on one hand with changes in kinship terminology, and on the other with the intensity of contact with whites. Also within each tribe it has always been possible to find differences in the degree of acculturation. These intra-tribal dif- ferences still survive and, as a matter of fact, they determined the selection of areas covered by the present survey of Creek, Cherokee, and Choctaw social organization. I V. REGULARITIES IN KINSHIP CHANGE These final paragraphs consist of a number of tentative generali- zations of wider application than the conclusions reached in previous chapters. Certain of these statements merely confirm the antici- pations of others. Taken together, their utility lies in indicating possible regularities in the acculturation process, based on the South- eastern data. As such, they may be of value in future comparative studies of culture contact. (1) Similar kinship systems of tribes under similar conditions of contact can be expected to change in similar ways. An immediate question is what is meant by "similar conditions of contact." These conditions involve not only contact agent and milieu but also partic- ular mechanisms through which the contact factors work on the society under examination. Thus the missionary is everywhere an important contact agent. The mission school he sets up is a primary means through which the mission influence acts on the society. As such, it is the mechanism or tool of the contact agent and its study is correspondingly important. One deficiency of the Southeastern v/ data is that we know only in a genpal way what actually went on in the schools. With respect to primitive social organization under contact, historical sources are usually suggestive but seldom defini- tive. By and large, they cannot substitute for the field observation of the trained investigator. (2) Although no attempt has been made here to state the neces- sary and sufficient conditions of contact under which lineage types of kinship systems will change to generation types, I suggest that one of these conditions is the decline of lineage ties and clan ties (if clans exist) and the greater independence of the elementary family with its bilateral extensions as the basic family unit. An increasing strength of the husband-wife tie is a probable corollary. I also suggest that one way this happens is that contact extends the natives' range of wants; that individuals react differently to this extension; that differentials in wealth between individuals and between elemen- tary families result; and that, in turn, disturbances are created in the prevailing system of exchange of goods and services and in the distribution of income (cf. Spoehr, 1944, pp. 147-148). Two oppos- ing prestige systems with regard to wealth and its uses underlie these disturbances. In the end, widely extended kin ties are aban- doned as a primary means of social integration and the social 227 228 Changing Kinship Systems importance of kinship undergoes a decline, with a retraction in the effective range of the kinship system. Other factors just as important naturally may be involved, such as changes in the functions of rela- tives following alterations in the prevailing educational system. The changed position of the mother's brother and the clan elders among the Creeks after the introduction of mission schools is an example. There is also good reason to believe that lineage type systems have changed to generation types in the absence of direct contact. Eggan has suggested that this transition may have taken place in the Plains area, in that the recorded system from the Crow themselves reflects an incipient stage in such a trend (Eggan, 1937b). In this case the determining factor seems to lie with a different adaption to the natural environment following the introduction of the horse. There is also the problem here of the relation of kinship to the local group. Dispersion of the town, village, or settlement and a scatter- ing of households seem to favor the development of bilaterality. The scattering of the town among the Lower Creeks following removal to Oklahoma facilitated this trend. On the other hand, the Florida Seminole households dispersed through the interior of the Florida peninsula nearly a century ago; yet the tribe has retained a Crow type system. However, the various households did maintain contact and the group preserved strong clan and lineage ties, while there are other factors that differentiate their situation from that of the Creeks in Oklahoma and from the Plains tribes. (3) The Creek, Cherokee, and Choctaw material indicates that the recorded kinship systems of other Indian tribes may reflect hitherto unsuspected influences of acculturation. The important thing about the Southeastern systems is that change has been from one definable type to another definable type, that is, from a lineage to a generation type. While pondering on the Creeks, Choctaw, and Cherokee, I have often wondered whether the Caddo system did not also once belong to the lineage group, having changed in recent years to a type showing strong generation influences (cf. Spier, 1924; Swanton, 1942). Swanton points out that of all the Southeastern systems the Caddo is the most divergent; they also extend sibling terms to cross-cousins (Swanton, 1946, p. 670). It is also true that among some tribes the breakdown of aboriginal social organization seems to have occurred in such a manner that the system has been virtually assimilated at one step into that of the whites; this type of transition is suggested by Quimby's material Regularities in Kinship Change 229 on the Potawatomi (Quimby, 1939). But in other cases a more or less orderly progression of change may be found within the context of native language and culture. The Southeastern data show that kinship systems do preserve characteristics of a "system" despite radical changes in type. During the process of change, inconsistencies in terminology, between terminology and behavior, and between the kinship system and other parts of the social organization will probably develop. It is doubtful that any social system, be it civilized or primitive, ancient or modern, was ever completely consistent within itself. In studying changes in the social organization of a particular tribe, the ethnologist may find that the apparent inconsistencies are in themselves valuable leads to research, for they may indicate the direction in which the social organization is changing. Greater attention to inconsistencies should lead to a better insight into the dynamics of change. (4) The patterns of kinship terminology, the range of the system, behavior patterns, and closely related aspects of social organization such as the form and function of the family, clan, and local group do not change at the same rate under the pressures of contact. There is nothing particularly new about such an observation. How- ever, I believe further comparative studies may reveal a definite order in the rates of change of different parts of social organization. The Southeastern data indicate that vocative terminology is more susceptible to change than referential terminology and will change more rapidly; that the range of the system and kinship behavior patterns will be affected prior to changes in terminology; and that the clan or exogamous group will be affected before the terminology changes. Other steps in this temporal sequence may be delineated in the future, and the basic factors underlying this change may be more clearly revealed. (5) Kinship systems are sufficiently well defined in their social context to be particularly amenablfe to analysis in the field. A relatively large number of kinship systems the world over have been described and reduced to a workable number of types. But except for a few papers such as Hallowell's on the Abenaki and Eggan's on the Choctaw and related tribes (Hallowell, 1928; Eggan, 1937a) there have been only a limited number of kinship systems considered as phenomena changing over a period of time. The present analysis has attempted to isolate certain regularities in the changing kin- ship systems in the Southeast. Additional research directed toward the examination of kinship during a period of transition holds the 230 Changing Kinship Systems promise of fruitful results in uncovering more general principles of kinship change and as an entering wedge in more comprehensive studies of contact and acculturation. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bloom, Leonard 1939. The Cherokee clan; a study in acculturation. American Anthropologist, n.s., vol. 41, pp. 266-268. BUSHNELL, D. I., Jr. 1909. The Choctaw of Bayou LaComb, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 48. Census Bulletin 1894. The five civilized tribes. United States Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. Commissioner op Indian Affairs 1845. Annual report. Washington, D.C. Debo, Angie 1934. The rise and fall of the Choctaw Republic. Norman, Oklahoma. 1940. And still the waters run. Princeton. 1941. The road to disappearance. Norman, Oklahoma. Edwards, John 1932. The Choctaw Indians in the middle of the nineteenth century (J. R. Swanton, ed.). The Chronicles of Oklahoma, vol. 10, pp. 392-425. Eggan, Frederick 1937a. Historical changes in the Choctaw kinship system. American Anthro- pologist, n.s., vol. 39, pp. 34-52. 1937b. The Cheyenne and Arapaho kinship system. In Social Anthropology of North American tribes (F. Eggan, ed.). Chicago. Foreman, Grant 1933a. Indian removal. Norman, Oklahoma. 1933b. Advancing the frontier. Norman, Oklahoma. 1934. The five civilized tribes. Norman, Oklahoma. Fortes, M. 1936. Culture contact as a dynamic process. Africa, vol. 9, pp. 24-55. Gatschet, a. S. 1884. A migration legend of the Creek Indians, vol. 1. Philadelphia. Gilbert, W. H., Jr. 1937. Eastern Cherokee social organization. In Social Anthropology of North American tribes (F. Eggan, ed.). Chicago. 1943. The eastern Cherokees. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 133 and Anthropological Papers No. 23. Graebner, N. a. 1945a, The public land policy of the five civilized tribes. The Chronicles of Oklahoma, vol. 23, pp. 107-118. 1945b. Pioneer Indian agriculture in Oklahoma. The Chronicles of Oklahoma, vol. 23, pp. 232-248. 1945c. Provincial Indian society in eastern Oklahoma. The Chronicles of Oklahoma, vol. 23, pp. 323-337. 231 232 Changing Kinship Systems Hallowell, a. I. 1928. Recent changes in the kinship system of the St. Francis Abenaki. Pro- ceedings, 22nd International Congress of Americanists, vol. 2, pp. 97-145, Kroeber, a. L. 1939. Cultural and natural areas of native North America. University of Cali- fornia Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 38. Lesser, Alexander 1929. Kinship origins in the light of some distributions. American Anthro- pologist, n.s., vol. 31, pp. 710-730. Linton, Ralph 1936. The study of man. New York. Lowie, R. H. 1930. The Omaha and Crow kinship terminologies. Proceedings, 24th Inter- national Congress of Americanists. Hamburg. Morgan, L. H. 1871. Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family. Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 17. MURCHISON, A. H. 1928. Intermarried whites in the Cherokee Nation. The Chronicles of Okla- homa, vol. 6, pp. 302-327. Opler, M. E. 1937. Report on the history and contemporary state of aspects of Creek social organization and government. Office of Indian Affairs, United States Department of the Interior, 43 pp. (mimeographed). Washington, D.C. Payne, J. H. n.d. MSS. collection in Newberry Library. Chicago. QuiMBY, G. I. 1939. Some notes on kinship and kinship terminology among the Potawatomi of the Huron. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, vol. 25, pp. 553-563. Rivers, W. H. R. 1914. History of Melanesian society. 2 vols. London. Senate Report 1894. The five civilized tribes. Senate Report 377, 53rd Congress, 2nd Session, Washington, D.C. Speck, F. G. 1907a. Some outlines of aboriginal culture in the southeastern states. American Anthropologist, n.s., vol. 9, pp. 287-295. 1907b. The Creek Indians of Taskigi town. Memoirs, American Anthropological Association, vol. 2, part 2. 1938. The question of matrilineal descent in the southeastern Siouan area. American Anthropologist, n.s., vol. 40, pp. 1-12. Spier, Leslie 1924. Wichita and Caddo relationship terms. American Anthropologist, n.s., vol. 26, pp. 258-263. 1925. The distribution of kinship systems in North America. University of Washington Publications in Anthropology, vol. 1, No. 2. Bibliography 233 Spoehr, Alexander 1941. Camp, clan, and kin among the Cow Creek Seminole of Florida. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Series, vol. 33, No. 1. 1942. Kinship system of the Seminole. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Series, vol. 33, No. 2. 1944. The Florida Seminole camp. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthro- pological Series, vol. 33, No. 3. Stiggins, George n.d. A historical narration of the genealogy, traditions, and downfall of the Ispocoga or Creek tribe of Indians writ by one of the tribe. MS. in possession of Wisconsin Historical Society. SWANTON, J. R. 1911. Indian tribes of the lower Mississippi valley and adjacent coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 68. 1918. An early account of the Choctaw Indians. Memoirs, American Anthro- pological Association, vol. 5, No. 2. 1922. Early history of the Creek Indians and their neighbors. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 73. 1928a. Social organization and social usages of the Indians of the Creek Con- federacy. Bureau of American Ethnology, 42nd Annual Report. 1928b. Aboriginal culture of the Southeast. Bureau of American Ethnology, 42nd Annual Report. 1928c. Religious beliefs and medical practices of the Creek Indians. Bureau of American Ethnology, 42nd Annual Report. 1931. Source material for the social and ceremonial life of the Choctaw Indians. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 103. 1932. Choctaw moieties. American Anthropologist, n.s., vol. 34, p. 356. 1942. Source material on the history and ethnology of the Caddo Indians. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 132. 1946. The Indians of the southeastern United States. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137. Thoburn, J. B., and Wright, M. H. 1929. Oklahoma, a history of the state and its people. New York. Wardell, M. L. 1938. A political history of the Cherokee Nation, 1838-1907. Norman, Okla- homa. Weer, Paul 1939. Preliminary notes on the Muskhogean family. Prehistory Research Series, Indiana Historical Society, vol. 1, No, 7. Wisdom, Charles 1937. Memorandum on the present condition of the Oklahoma Choctaw. Office of Indian Affairs, United States Department of the Interior (mimeo- graphed). Washington, D.C. INDEX Acculturation, periods of, 216; present picture of, among Creeks, 159-160, 166, 168, 197, among Cherokee, 160- 162, among Choctaw, 162-163, 197; intensity of, 226 Adaption to natural environment, 221 Adultery, 201, 206, 209 Agriculture, 221-222 Allotment, 216, 217, 221, 223, 224 Behavior patterns, based on clan, 205, 212, 214 Caddo, kinship system of, 197, 228 Church community, 211, 225 Civil War, 203, 222, 223 Clan, Creek, 178, 201, 204, Cherokee, 186, 204, Choctaw, 204; decline of, 170, 208-209; functions of, 201, 205- 208; present status of, 172, 186; relation of, to local group, 207-208, 211 Contact, agents, 217-221, 224; milieu, 221-225; violent episodes in, 222-223 Crow, type kinship system of, 159, 164, changes in, 228 Descent, as reflected in kinship ter- minology, 178, 186, 196, 197, 203 Division of labor, 221-222, 225 Divorce, 201, 202 A Education, 201, 203, 219-220 Edwards, J., 187, 189 Eggan, Frederick, 157, 159, 187, 229 Exogamy, 204, 205-206, 209 Family, aboriginal organization and subsequent changes in, 200-204, 212, 214; relation of, to change in kinship terminology, 178, 186 Field work, genealogical method in, 164-165; plan of, 159-162 Generation, kinship pattern of, among Creeks, 176, 178-179, among Chero- kee, 184, 186, among Choctaw, 194, 196 Gilbert, W. H., Jr., on Cherokee kin- ship, 180, 197; field work of, among Cherokee, 162 Government agents, 220-221, 224-225 Homicide, 201, 202, 209 Houses, 200-201 - Hunting, 221-222 Incest, 201, 206, 209 Informants, 164-165; Creek, 166, 170, 172, 174, 176; Cherokee, 184; Choc- taw, 187, 192, 194 Inheritance, 202, 204, 222, 225 Intermarriage, Indian-white, 214-218 Interpreters, 157, 192 Kinship, Crow type terminology of, among Creeks, 165-168, among Cherokee, 180, among Choctaw, 187; decrease in social importance of, 213; range of terminology of, 178-179, 198, 211-212, 214, 225; referential terms of, 164; variations in termi- nology of, among Creeks, 166-180, 197, among Cherokee, 180-186, 197, among Choctaw, 189-197; vocative terminology of, 215, 219 Land tenure, 222 Levirate, 174, 206-207, 209, 213, 214 Lineage, 200-204, 212, 214, 225 Linton, R., 213 Literacy, 219 Loughridge, R. M., 168, 219 Marriage, 201, 205, 206 McGillivray, A., 217 Missionaries, 168, 182, 189, 219-220, 223, 224, 225, 227 Mixed-blood Indians, 218-219, 222 Morgan, L. H., Creek kinship schedules of, 166-170, 178; Cherokee schedules of, 182, 186; Choctaw schedules of, 190 Mother's brother, 201-204, 206, 214, 228 Mourning, restrictions during, 206-207 Potawatomi, 229 Punishment, for adultery, 206; of children, 201; for incest, 206 Raih-oads, 223-224 Removal, 160-162, 203, 210, 216, 218, 221, 223 Residence, after marriage, 200-201, 202 214 Rivers, W. H. R., 212 V Schools, 203, 219-220, 225, 227 Seminole, households among, 200, 228; kinship system of, 157, 165, 167, 197 Sororate, 206-207, 209 Southeast, characteristics of social organization in, 199-200; classifi- cation of kinship systems in, 196-197 234 Index 235 Stiggins, G., biographical information on, 165, 217; MS. of, on Creeks, 165, on Creek clans, 205 Swanton, J. R., Choctaw kinship sched- ules of, 190-191; Creek kinship schedules of, 166-170, 178; on incon- sistency between kinship and clan, 198 Towns, 207, 209-211, 228 Transportation, social effects of, 223- 224 Tribal government, 220 U. S. Army, 220 Village, see Town Wants, extension of, 227-228 Whites, settlers, 217-219, 224, 225; expansion of settlement of, 223 d 1 1 1 1 ( Sa ^^^111 : f 1 1|& K ! H^^ |HH|§ Ic HMH^Bitl Sf^S 1 1 ^^^S»l UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 3 0112 004363146