Annotated Bibliography Assignment

A Typology of Settlement and Community Patterns in Some Circumpolar Societies Author(s): Kwang-chih Chang Reviewed work(s): Source: Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1962), pp. 28-41 Published by: University of Wisconsin Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40315538 . Accessed: 19/11/2012 23:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Wisconsin Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Arctic Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A Typology of Settlement and Community Patterns in Some Circumpolar Societies^

KWANG-CHIH CHANG

The effect of cultural ecology (Steward 1955: 3Off) upon social organization through the settle- ment pattern is a problem area that has received little of the concentrated attention it deserves in current social anthropological literature, yet it is of vital concern to archaeologists who attempt the reconstruction of prehistoric society. As the author has suggested in another article (Chang 1958), American archaeologists who have recently begun to make use of the settlement patterns con- cept for their reconstructions may have unwitting- ly limited its usefulness by overburdening its con- ceptual load. Including a whole range of seeming- ly related subject matters, all of which pertain to the spatial aspects of prehistoric settlements but each of which may actually be determined by a separate set of factors, the term

* settlement pat- terns" has tended to serve as a catchall which must be defined for each archaeological usage or confusion inevitably occurs. In view of this state of affairs, the author has suggested distinguishing those spatial aspects of prehistoric settlements that could be assumed or demonstrated to be re- lated to cultural ecological forces from those that could be attributed to efficient causes in the sphere of sociology and social psychology. It is further proposed that for the former the term "settlement patterns" be retained, whereas the term u community patterns" might be employed to designate the latter. It is gratifying to see that similar classificatory devices have recently been advanced by other archaeologists (Sears 1961).

It is the attempt of the present article to fur- ther such lines of inquiry by sharpening a handful of basic definitions, outlining a problem and of- fering a hypothesis, and finally by testing this hypothesis against the ethnographic data from some circumpolar societies of the Far North. Some typological definitions will be made in the following passages, but one basic dichotomy, that between u settlement" and * settlement patterns" on the one hand and "community" and "community

patterns" on the other, should be initially charac- terized at this juncture. To put it briefly, the settlement refers to the locality of the societal occupation in relation to natural environment, technology, and subsistence, whereas the commu- nity designates a local social group. Assuming that the dwelling houses in a village can be re- garded as the basic spatial constituents of the village, we may consider that the problems as to where these houses are located topographically, what considerations in terms of natural resources underlie the selection of locales, during what sea- sons of the year and/or for how many years these locales are occupied, and what subsistence activi- ties are engaged in by their occupants, can be re- ferred to as problems pertaining to the settlement patterns. On the other hand, in a conglomeration of such houses, no matter where and how these are located in terms of cultural ecology, there exist spatial as well as socio-political relation- ships among the constituent houses. Such matters as the placement of houses in a community, the social ties among their inhabitants, their rela- tionship in terms of political control, social be- havior, and mental attitude, can be made the sub- ject of the study of community patterns.

Such a dichotomy inevitably leads to the prob- lem of whether there is a correlation between the settlement and the community patterns in the so- cial structure of a local group. Most students would probably assume that there is, and the author is convinced that a correlation cannot only be assumed, but the general mechanism involved in this correlation can be understood by an ex- amination of a structurally meaningful typology of the settlement and community patterns of particu- lar societies.

Devising such a typology has motivated the writing of the present article. The circumpolar region of the northern hemisphere is selected for this purpose for two reasons. First, the settle- ment patterns among hunter -fishers provide a wide range of varieties particularly suitable for microtypological purposes. The circumpolar re- gion further widens this range by means of the marked seasonal fluctuations of climate and the resultant seasonal cycles of animal and plant life.

1. The author is grateful to Raymond Thompson, Leopold Pospisil, and William Davenport for suggestions and criticisms on the first drafts of this article.

28

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 29 Under such a natural environment, the impact of cultural ecology upon society is more plainly ob- servable and is less complicated by historical factors than in other areas of the world. This area, furthermore, happens to be abundant in ethnographic data. Second, it is hoped that this typology for the circumpolar societies may sug- gest new approaches to archaeological recon- structions of some of the Palaeolithic and Meso- lithic materials which are often regarded as rep- resenting occupation during climatic conditions similar to those of the present Far North. Al- though an extensive survey of the literature on the Far North would seem to be a tremendously for- midable task, the author believes that a controlled comparison with regard to the settlement and community patterns of some of the circumpolar peoples may possibly lead to limited but useful generalizations (Eggan 1954).

The Settlement

By settlement is meant here any form of hu- man occupation of any size over a particular lo- cale for any length of time with the purpose of dwelling or ecological exploitation. The term conceptually stresses the " locale* rather than its inhabitants. Taking a bird's-eye view of a portion of the landscape, we observe a number of locales where cultural activities serving various purposes record themselves by altering the natural land- scape and by leaving marked or latent traces of human occupancy. Some of these are clusters of dwellings which groups of men have occupied for considerable periods of time, developing group consciousness and common interests; we call these community sites. Others are short- time residences for certain seasons of the year where people gather for certain subsistence purposes and leave as soon as these purposes are achieved; these we call hunting or fishing camps. Still other locales might be temporary gathering places where people come periodically to exchange goods; we refer to these as markets. All these locales perform certain specific functions and people gather at them at intervals; the length of such gatherings depending on the purposes for which they come together. The landscape in a certain region can thus be regarded as yielding an ecological cycle by assigning to various locales different functional potentials, while a human group occupies different locales at intervals ac- cordingly. We call each of these locales, which serves certain purposes for its inhabitants, a "settlement." To rephrase this from another

angle, the human occupants select different lo- cales suitable for their seasonal subsistence pur- poses. As the subsistence level of the people changes, so does the settlement pattern, or the time-space relationship of settlements.

Definitions of several other terms are here in order. If the annual cycle of the main mode of subsistence of the inhabitants can be completed at a single locale, and the main body of them occu- pies that locale all the year round, we may call the locale a "year- round settlement." An irri- gated agricultural settlement, for instance, be- longs to this category. Such a settlement may further be characterized by the permanent occu- pancy of the particular locale year after year, un- less that locale's ecological potentiality is cata- strophically terminated. The term "permanent settlement" seems to agree with the ordinary usage for such types. Nevertheless, a year-round settlement might not be made to occupy a particu- lar locale forever, because the relative ecological potential of that locale may be exhausted after a short time interval without the possibility of arti- ficial recuperation. A slash- and-burn agricul- tural settlement is an example in point. Though within the cycle of a single year it can serve the principal subsistence activities at one locale, a slash- and-burn agricultural settlement has to be abandoned several years after its initial forma- tion, and can be conveniently called a "semi- permanent settlement." On the other hand, if the annual cycle of subsistence activities of a group of men cannot be completed at a single locale, and a number of different locales are consequently necessary for different seasons of the year, we may call this network of functionally complemen- tary locales, within the confines of which the an- nual cycle of subsistence of the group is com- pleted or so restricted, an "annual subsistence region." The settlements within this region may then be called "seasonal settlements." If the an- nual subsistence region can be occupied year after year, we have within it "sedentary seasonal settle- ments." The seasonal settlements remaining within the annual subsistence region and at the same locales year after year are "sedentary sea- sonal settlements with permanent bases." Those remaining within the limits of annual subsistence regions but changing their main occupation sites from one set of locales to another after one or several years' occupancy are "sedentary settle- ments with transient bases." If the ecological po- tentials of the annual subsistence region will be exhausted after one or several years of occupancy, and the whole group of inhabitants within it will have to move to a new region, we have "temporary

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

30 ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY 1,1 seasonal settlements." It is altogether clear that the settlement pattern is determined by the ecolo- gical potentiality of the locale on the one hand, and by the exploitative ability of the human occu- pants on the other. (Table 1; compare Beardsley et al 1956.)

Table 1. Categorization of Some Important Settlement Patterns

I. Year-round settlement (abbreviated as Y- settlement): A settlement within which the annual cycle of the main subsistence activities of its occupants can be completed.

A. Permanent settlement: one which occu- pies a locale permanently.

B. Semi-permanent settlement: a settlement to be abandoned after one or several years' occupancy because of the exhaustion of the ecological potentiality of the locale and the occupants' inability to effect arti- ficial recuperation, among other factors.

II. Seasonal settlement- complex: a network of seasonal settlements (abbreviated as S-settle- ments) occupied by a group of people in turn in different seasons of the year and being dis- tributed within the confines of an annual sub- sistence region.

A. Sedentary S-settlements: the annual sub- sistence region of a group of occupants remaining permanently unchanged.

1. With permanent bases: the locales of the main seasonal settlements remain permanently unchanged.

2. With transient bases: the locales of the various seasonal settlements (particu- larly the main sites of occupation) keep changing after one or several years' occupancy because of the exhaustion of ecological potentiality of particular lo- cales and the occupants' inability to effect artificial recuperation, among other factors, though the whole annual subsistence region of the group re- mains unchanged.

B. Temporary S-settlements: a group of people has to change its habitation from one annual subsistence region to another after one or several years' occupancy be-

cause of the exhaustion of the ecological potentiality of the whole region and the occupants' inability to effect artificial re- cuperation, among other factors.

To make a settlement pattern classification of a people on the basis of ethnographic sources is evidently no easy task. Such oft- seen words of characterization as "a permanent settlement,

" "a winter base," "a nomadic camp," "a semi- nomadic people," and so forth, cover a wide field and one may often find himself at a loss in trying to transform them into the more precise terms suggested above. Notwithstanding this difficulty, after a review of the literature on the circum- polar peoples one would probably not be too hesi- tant in classifying the settlement patterns of this whole zone into the second major category, SEA- SONAL SETTLEMENT-COMPLEX. The circum- polar zone is by and large characterized by a seasonal cycle of human settlements, as well as a seasonal cycle of the subsistence pursuits, the movements of animals (fish, land and sea mam- mals, and birds), the growth of vegetation, and the climatic and physiographic changes (Bogoras 1931). It is evident that a circumpolar hunting- fishing group cannot subsist on the basis of a single kind of food resource all the year round at a single locale and has to move about among vari- ous locales according to the seasonal movements and growths of wild animals and plants, which in turn follow the seasonal climatic fluctuations. Such movements of settlements usually are made among a network of locales, with a central base where most of the members of the group gather together at a particular season of the year and a varying number of scattered camps occupied by large or small branches of the group in particular seasons, engaging in various and specific kinds of subsistence activities.

Such a generalization could only be rendered meaningful by specific descriptions of certain representative regional cases. Except for the Tungusic reindeer herders and the Reindeer divi- sions of the Chukchi and the Koryak, who seem to have a pattern of temporary seasonal settlements, most of the Siberian hunter-fishers appear to have a sedentary seasonal settlement pattern, with either permanent or transient bases. The latter subdivision is in many cases impossible to make due to the paucity of pertinent data. The rhythm of seasonal movements of the Siberian hunter - fishers seems to fall into three major types ac- cording to their ecological adaptations: (1) The interior river and lake fisher-hunters, including the Vogul-Ostyak (Raun 1955:14), the interior

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 31

Samoyeds (Kopytoff 1955:32), the Ket (Shimkin 1939:151; Czaplicka 1917:578), and the Yukaghir (Jochelson 1910:48-53). The main cycle of their annual movements is characterized by a winter settlement, where they spend the frozen winter and occasionally pursue some hunting in order to obtain meat to supplement their winter stores of fish, and one or several summer settlements along the rivers or by lake shores where they follow the migratory shoals and fish. They seem to occupy the same locales for winter settlements year after year, though the Ket are said to be * never living long in one place." (2) The Arctic Samoyeds, who settle in the winter at the edge of forests, move to the tundra in the summer, pre- sumably to follow the reindeer herds. The whole range of this forest-tundra migration can be re- garded as an annual subsistence region for each group: a region which can reasonably be assumed to have expanded considerably during relatively recent periods on account of the adoption of rein- deer herding. Accordingly their settlements can be considered as being of the sedentary seasonal type, although whether they occupy the same lo- cales every winter is not altogether clear. (3) The eastern coastal hunter-fishers, including the Goldi (Ling 1934:226), the Ainu (Murdock 1934: 168), the Gilyak, the Kamchadal (Chard 1953:22), the Maritime Koryak (Jochelson 1908:453, 466), and the Maritime Chukchi (Bogoras 1909:28). All of these peoples live a highly sedentary life, which means that instead of being marked by a winter gathering and a summer scattering pattern, their annual subsistence cycle is characterized by a winter site and a summer site, one on river banks and the other by the sea shore in many cases, though temporary hunting and fishing camps are also common during the summer. These two sites may be overlapping and are in some cases differentiated merely by two different sets of dwelling houses at the same locale. Fur- thermore, there are settlements occupying the same annual subsistence region permanently, though in other cases a set of seasonal settle- ments has to be moved to a new region, following the infrequent change of faunal habits. Bearing these points in mind, some of the sedentary S- settlements with permanent bases, such as those among the Goldi, the Ainu, and the Kamchadal, are from a classificatory standpoint so close to the real annually sedentary settlement that their differentiation from the latter category is a mat- ter more of kind than of degree.

For the sake of brevity but at the risk of over- simplification, the settlement patterns of the Northern Na-Dene2 can also all be classified

under the category of sedentary seasonal settle- ments. All of the groups under examination, in- cluding the Haida (Murdock 1934:227), Tlingit (Krause (956:85, 91), Chilcotin (Teit 1909), Carrier (Jenness 1943:531-532), Tahltan (Teit 1906:341; Emmons 1911:30), Kaska (Honigmann 1954:31-32, 41, 44), Ingalik (Osgood 1958), Ahtena (Allen 1889: 261-262), Tanaina (Osgood 1937:55), Kutchin (Osgood 1936b:48-54), Satudene (Osgood 1932), Slave (Honigmann 1946:40; Jenness 1932:390), Sekani (Jenness 1937:32-33), Beaver (Goddard 1916:210-212), Sarsi (Jenness 1938:11-12), and Chipewyan (Birket-Smith 1930:29; Jenness 1932: 386), seem to have an annual cycle of shifting occupations among one or two concentrated settle- ments and a number of scattered camps, all of which, occupied in turn by a certain group of people, seem to remain in one and the same an- nual subsistence region year after year, though the locales they choose for settlement (within the limits of this region) might be constantly changing. This general pattern, on the other hand, further diversifies, owing to the variety of ecological con- ditions in different parts of the whole area. A useful, but possibly oversimplified, subdivision in this regard is to subdivide the whole Northern Athapaskan area into a Western Zone, where fish- ing is equal to, if not dominant over, game hunting as the subsistence here, and an Eastern Zone, where the hunting of wild game (mainly caribou) predominates though fishing remains important. In the former zone people gather on the seashore or by the river banks or lake shores in concen- trated settlements in the fishing seasons, the tim- ing of these depending on the running seasons of various species of fish (mostly salmon). During the intermittent seasons, small groups move about, often into the mountains, to hunt wild game. In the Eastern Zone, on the other hand, people follow the migratory routes of their game herds, caribou or buffalo, settling on the forest borders in the winter and moving out onto the barren grounds in the summer. This Western-Eastern subdivision based on settlement patterns largely coincides with the generally accepted subdivision of the Northern Athapaskans on the basis of gen- eral cultural configurations (Jenness 1932:351- 404; Osgood 1936a:20-21; Kroeber 1953:99-101)- with the single exception of the Kaska, who are

2. For subdivision and names of tribes, Osgood 1936a is followed here. The Tlingit and the Haida, belonging linguistically also to the Na- Dene phylum, are added here because they help to clarify some points with reference to the Northern Athapaskans in the strict sense.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

32 ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY 1,1

classified by Osgood into his Arctic Drainage Culture (in contrast to the Pacific Drainage Cul- ture) but are here placed in the Western Zone with respect to settlement patterns. Generally speaking, the settlement patterns of the Eastern Zone resemble those of the Arctic Samoyeds in Northern Eurasia. Those of the Western Zone, on the other hand, can be classified with the Siberian Interior Fisher-hunters, though their fishing sea- sons are not necessarily alike.

The settlement patterns of the Eskimos have been dichotomized into a Canadian Arctic or Cen- tral Eskimo type and an Alaskan- Greenland Eski- mo type. The former is that of "the only truly migratory Eskimos . . . who live in snow houses built on the sea ice in winter, and who roam in the interior, hunting caribou, in summer," while the latter type is that of those groups who "live in permanent settlements of semi-subterranean houses. In summer they live mostly in skin tents and move about from place to place hunting and fishing." (Collins 1954:18-19.) A closer look into details of the Eskimo settlements tends to show that a more elaborate subdivision and an explana- tion of such terms as "migratory" and "perma- nent" is pertinent and called for. The Eskimos inhabiting both shores of the Bering Strait seem to be characterized, in our terminology, by a sedentary seasonal settlements-complex. Their annual cycle is divided into a winter season when people gather together at their winter settlements, having limited subsistence activities, and a hunt- ing-fishing season from the spring to the fall when people are scattered in small sealing or fishing camps (Moore 1923:349; Lantis 1946:158-159; 171-181; Nelson 1899:241, 267, Birket-Smith 1953:5). The settlement patterns of the Northern Alaskan Eskimo are not very clear in our terms, though the division between a winter base and summer camps is also recorded (Murdoch 1892: 72, 83). According to a recent report by Robert Spencer (1959:46-61), the North Alaska Eskimos seem to have seasonal settlement-complexes of the temporary variant, though the maritime settle- ments are reported as being considerably more "stabilized" than the interior ones. Compared with the Southern Alaskan Eskimos, the settle- ments of the Greenland Eskimos seem much more of a "temporary" pattern. They too divide their annual cycle into a winter season when subsist- ence activities are carried out on a smaller scale and people gather together at concentrated "vil- lages" or "long houses," and a summer hunting season when people split into small camps scat- tered about. Their winter sites seldom remain at the same locales year after year, however, unless

those locales have proved to be particularly favor- able for the pursuit of game. Nevertheless, there seems to be considerable diversity of patterns of settlements even within a single area. There are completely temporary seasonal settlements (Mirsky 1937; Holm 1914:26; Thalbitzer 1941:625; Ekblaw 1947:41; Ekblaw 1927/28:156; Kroeber 1900:268-269); there are also sedentary seasonal settlements with transient bases (Birket-Smith 1924:133; Ekblaw 1927/28:156), to which category some of the settlements of the last category proba- bly can be assigned if considered as wandering in one annual subsistence region instead of several. Among the Polar Eskimos there even are seden- tary seasonal settlements with permanent bases (Ekblaw 1927/28:158) or even annually sedentary settlements (Ekblaw 1947:41). Such great diversity of settlement patterns in Greenland is by no means remarkable, because in this region there happen to be more detailed descriptions available on set- tlement patterns. For other areas, the data are much more scanty and far less specific. On the strength of the available data, one would tend to characterize the settlement patterns of the Cen- tral Eskimos as of the temporary seasonal settle- ment type, even though this may only reflect our ignorance in this respect. The annual cycle of the Central Eskimos is divided into an inland caribou hunting season and a coastal sealing season, with local variations (Boas 1888:419-420; Tanner 1944: 491; Jenness 1921:546; Stefánsson 1919:61ff; Birket-Smith 1929:71; Mauss 1904/05:83). Their settlement pattern is characterized by the im- permanence of all seasonal settlements with re- spect to particular locales, while the range of their movements is too great to be considered as being within the same annual subsistence regions (Turner 1894:204; Birket-Smith 1929:261).

The foregoing brief survey of the circumpolar settlement patterns is necessarily incomplete owing to the paucity of data, the lack of precision of terminology in the ethnographic records, and the author's unfamiliarity with a number of spe- cific areas. As far as can be seen, there are in- dications that the overwhelming majority of the circumpolar hunter-fishers have settlements of the seasonal settlement- complex type. The sea- sonal settlements of the North Eurasian hunter -

fishers, the Northern Na-Dene, the Alaskan (Pa- cific) Costal Eskimos, and a part of the Greenland Eskimos seem to be of the sedentary seasonal settlements pattern. Whether their sedentary seasonal settlements are at permanent or transient bases is difficult to determine on account of the inadequate descriptive data, and is further com- plicated by extra-ecological factors (such as the

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 33

problem of territorialism). The seasonal settle- ments which are most likely to be of the tem- porary pattern seem to have been found among the Central Eskimos and some of the Greenland and North Alaska Eskimos.

The Community

A definition of the community may be super- fluous, but it might be emphasized that, in con- trast to the concept of "settlement" which stresses the locale rather than its occupants, the concept of " community," a social group, centers around the occupants of a locale rather than the locale per se. This point may be made clear by stating that conceptually a community does not refer to the community site but to the whole group of in- habitants of that site, whether at a certain point of time they are inhabiting the community site or happen to be scattered around at small camp sites fishing and hunting. With reference to a commu- nity, we aim at investigating its demographic con- stitution, the recruitment of community members, the relations among the occupants at a particular locale, and the regulations governing the relations between a local group and its locale of settlement. In a loose sense, we might refer to the aspects these questions involve as "the community pat- terning." Among these aspects, the physical or tangible ones of the community patterning which in many ways seem to mirror the sociological aspect are of particular interest for the present purposes. In other words, the principal topics to be discussed will include the social grouping of the inhabitants over a significant area (with spe- cial emphasis as regards community), the manner in which buildings of various functions are distri- buted or arranged over that area, and the way in which their distribution or arrangement is indica- tive of the composition, the function, the cohesion, and the internal order of the various groups.

A description of the various features of the local groups can conveniently start with a classi- fication of the community patterns into a Siberian type and an Eskimo type, according to the commu- nity composition and the rule of recruitment (Table 2).

Table 2. Categorization of Major Circum- polar Community Types

COMMUNITY of the SIBERIAN type:

including communities composed of a more or less permanent body of individuals. The mem-

bership of the community is determined or re- cruited by birth, by marriage, and, occasionally, by adoption and is more closed than open to outsiders.

COMMUNITY of the ESKIMO type

including communities composed of a more or less transient body of individuals. The mem- bership of the community is determined or re- cruited by consent of its former members, as well as by birth, marriage, and adoption. It is more open (with or without restrictions) than closed to outsiders.

The community of the Siberian type varies in size but as a rule tends to be on the large side. Ordinarily, it is composed of individuals unilineal- ly determined by descent and/or unilocally re- cruited by marriage. It is a basic unit of economic cooperation and is strongly integrated as a co- hesive body. The internal order is maintained by a relatively powerful political organization on a kinship basis. An alternate term for this type of community in the circumpolar area would be the kinship -bound community. Physically, it often takes the form of a multi-dwelling village, with planned or otherwise symbolically oriented lay-out (segmented or not), or of a single or a small num- ber of multi-compartmental communal houses (for definitions of terms see Chang 1958). Gen- erally speaking, the whole community is composed of either a localized lineage, occupying the planned village or communal house, or a few localized lineages or clan-sectors each occupying a seg- ment. Most of the community -pattern/social grouping correlations for the agricultural commu- nities (Chang 1958) seem to hold good for the communities of the Siberian type in the circum- polar zone as well. The households are integral and subordinated parts of the community, though they maintain to a large extent economic and do- mestic independence which is marked off at the basal settlements by the functional self-sufficiency of household furniture, utensils, and an independ- ent hearth. On the other hand, the community of the Eskimo type is a comparatively weak social unit. It consists of a number (which tends to be small) of loosely organized households, with the "looseness" indicated by the irregularity of com- munity layout, which has resulted from the flexi- bility of membership (a newcomer can settle wherever he likes) (Boas 1888:581; Honigmann 1946:51) and, presumably, by the lack of an ex- plicit tendency for a symbolically oriented layout. The descent system of its inhabitants is often

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

34 ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY 1,1

bilateral, and the post-marital residence bilocal, neolocal, or unilocal. There are no strict kinship bonds among the members of the community ~ hence it could be called a kinship -free community -a household can leave a community at any time and join another by obtaining its members' con- sent. Murdochs (1955:85) characterization of the Eskimo social organization, i.e. that

" nuclear family is the strongest social unit . . . [that] local groups are characterized by shifting affiliations, as are compound families in the few instances where they occur, [that] residence ... is every- where fluid, [and that] in the absence of any kind of localization which would favor a unilinear em- phasis, descent has remained bilateral" seems to hold pretty well for all the circumpolar communi- ties of the Eskimo type. In communities of both the Siberian and the Eskimo types, the inter- community ties seem to be on occasion relatively significant in connection with communal hunting (of reindeer or caribou and buffalo) in particular, but unimportant in general.

The terms "Siberian" and "Eskimo" are used here as typological labels because they are non- characterizing, but they may be slightly mislead- ing in the sense that these terms tend to give the impression that the types have geographically homogeneous distributions. For the sake of clari- fication, a brief area survey is called for. All of the northern Eurasian groups that have been ex- amined, with the exception of the Chukchi and the Koryak, have communities of the Siberian type. A community is usually a localized lineage or a clan sector, while in the latter case sectors of the same clan often occupy several neighboring communities. With the possible exception of the Ainu who are said to be matrilineal, all others have patrilineages or patricians. A localized lineage or clan sector ordinarily occupies a defi- nite territory which is divided among the consti- tuent extended families. The clan is often sym- bolized by a common name, a fixed territory, a common cemetery, and an ancestral cult, and clans are often said to be organized into phratries or moieties (Raun 1955:35; Kopytoff 1955:70-75; Shimkin 1939:154; Jochelson 1910:115-118; Ling 1934:224-225; Murdock 1934:174; Chard 1953:30). Concerning the question of whether the community layout symbolically reflects its kinship -bound structure, there is little information. The signifi- cant point is that when the community makes its seasonal movements, it either splits according to kinship lines of demarcation or moves as a unit, the result being that the same group of people re- turns to its winter base year after year (See, e.g., Shimkin 1939:151). Also noteworthy is the fact

that among some of these peoples the basic unit of subsistence activities is the nuclear family rather than the community or the extended family (Shim- kin 1939:155). In others, there is a tradition of a former existence of the free-recruited "clan" (Jochelson 1910:118). One would wonder whether these do not indicate that the Siberian unilinear system in some groups was derived from a bi- lateral basis, like that of the Koryak and Chukchi. The Chukchi local group seems to be "a group of kindred families," which "is unstable" and "the number of families that 'are together* changes al- most every year" (Bogoras 1919:541). The family with the longest continuous residence in a com- munity inhabits the "front house" and enjoys cer- tain privileges and authority. Their descent is accordingly bilateral, and their households are most often of the nuclear family type (Bogoras 1909:628; Czaplicka 1914:27-28). The community of the Koryak is likewise characterized by lacking unilinear descent and by a kinship-free recruit- ment of new members (Jochelson 1908:761, 767). On the other hand, it is said that in former days "among the Chukchee a union of 'those who are together' was of a stricter character" and con- stituted a localized lineage composed of ten to fifteen families "who always camped together" (Bogoras 1909:542). It would also seem possible, then, that the bilaterality of the Chukchi and Koryak might have been a relatively recent de- velopment out of a former unilinear organization. These may be two alternative interpretations, but probably there is no reason to assume that all of the groups in question passed through the same developmental course.

In contrast to most of the Siberian groups, most of the Eskimo communities are character- ized by the looseness of their organization, the fluctuation of their membership, and the bilateral system of their inhabitants (Murdock 1955:85; Birket-Smith 1936:147; Jenness 1932:120). Among the temporary settlements of the Central Eskimos, the community is "an incoherent conglomerate of families or households, voluntarily connected by a number of generally recognized laws" (Birket- Smith 1929:260), and "every family is allowed to settle wherever it likes" (Boas 1888:581). "The individual members are constantly changing from one group to another, not merely temporarily for some special purpose, such as the acquisition of stone lamps and pots or the obtaining of woods for sleds and tables, but permanently also, whenever the new district offers greater advantages, espe- cially in the matter of game" (Jenness 1922:32). "The new arrival at once acknowledges his de- pendence and is, in a manner, under the influence,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 35 if not control, of the leader of the community which he joins." (Turner 1894:190.) Under such conditions, it can be expected that the kinship tends to be bilateral, the residence ordinarily neolocal or bilocal, and the basic social and eco- nomic unit the nuclear family. Among the North Alaska Eskimos a similar situation seems to pre- vail. There the coastal groups lead a fairly sedentary life, but the intra-community ties seem to be fairly weak; "while a village or settlement represented community interest, it lacked reality as a corporate unit" (Spencer 1959:443). As a while, these groups are said to lack a recognition of unilineal descent, the nuclear family is said to be the only coherently organized social group, and their community pattern is said to be above all characterized by a "haphazard" patterning (Spencer 1959:51, 62).3 The same condition of community composition is also seen among the so-called "sedentary" Greenland Eskimos (Birket-Smith 1924:135-136; Ekblaw 1927/28:156; 1947:41; Kroeber 1900:268; Steensby 1920:365). There "people live together because of prefer- ence" and "it is during the summer hunting sea- son, when they move freely about, that places are made for the following winter's settlements, who is to live with whom and where" (Mirsky 1937). The lack of permanence of the community com- position is attributed to being "due in part to the nomadic restlessness of the Eskimo temperament, but more impellingly to the desirability of obtain- ing at least a seasonal change in diet and the ne- cessity of a variety in skins and furs for the sev- eral articles of dress and home furnishings, of which only a few, at best, may be obtained at any one village" (Ekblaw 1927/28:157). The layout of their winter settlements, described but occasion- ally, is characterized by its irregularity. In Greenland the long-house sheltering a number of families can be distinguished by its extreme brevity of occupancy from the communal house of communities of the Siberian type on the Northwest Coast of North America, or of many agricultural communities all over the world. Except the Greenland long house, most of the Central-East Eskimo households are commensal or hearth units and are composed of nuclear families or extended families consisting of pairs of related nuclear

families, with variations. A possible explanation for the prevalence of two-family households or two-household associations among some Eskimo and Northern Athapaskan groups is that two males are often the minimal number of an effective hunt- ing team in connection with some particular hunt- ing devices (Boas 1888:485).

Among many of the Western or Alaskan Eskimo groups, the fluctuation of community composition is again characteristic; but the extended family household becomes significant (Mickey 1955:18, 20-21). The Eskimos on St. Lawrence Island and those on Nunivak Island even developed a fixed community composition by a sort of unilineal de- scent. There individuals are tied together by common names in the former case and by uni- lineally inherited amulets and songs in the latter. In the course of seasonal movements, a kinship- bound community moves as a concrete unit or splits along kinship lines (Moore 1923:34; Lantis 1946:239-244). Traces of unilineal organization are reported from other Eskimo groups on the Pacific coast of Alaska from the Kuskokwim River northward to the shores of Bering strait and Kotzebue Sound (Nelson 1899:322). Though the reliability of this information is open to doubt (Mickey 1955:20), we do find a tendency toward regularity of community layout in this area (Nelson 1899:247, 261, 265; Birket-Smith 1953:52).

The twofold division of the Northern Atha- paskans into a Western and an Eastern Zone ac- cording to the settlement patterns holds equally good with reference to the community patterning. The community of the Western Zone is largely of the Siberian type, ordinarily composed of a matri- lineage, a localized sector of a matri-clan, or several matri-lineages or matri-clan sectors. A clan has a name derived from the locality and a common territory which is subdivided for use among its constituent extended families. Its lo- calized sector always resides together, either in separate houses or in a communal house. The kinship-bound unity is also symbolically repre- sented by a preconceived plan of house clusters, by segmentation into "barrios," or, as among the Haida, some Tlingit, and some Carrier, by the totem pole. When the segments are inhabited by lineages of the same clan, the segments are fur- ther arranged regularly into a larger whole, re- flecting a two-level structure. During the wander- ing seasons, the inhabitants of a community split according to the kinship line of demarcation, and each section moves to its particular hunting or fishing territories (Murdock 1934:235-237; Krause 1956:85-86, 77; Teit 1909:786; Jenness 1943:482- 488; Teit 1906:348-349; Jenness 1932:375:

3. Spencer's findings may be applicable to only some peoples in the area of Northern Alaska, for an entirely different picture has been re- ported by Leopold Pospisil for the interior Nunamiut Eskimo (see his Law and Societal Structure among the Nunamiut Eskimo, in press).

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

36 ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY 1,1 Emmons 1911:13, 27; Honigmann 1954:75, 84; Osgood 1937:128; 1933:707). The Kutchin seem to be in an intermediate position between the Western and the Eastern subdivisions in this re- spect, since they possess the matrilinea! clan organization on the one hand, and are in the mean- time believed to be characterized by a "plastic" composition of community on the other (Osgood 1936:107, 110-111). Both of the characteristic features of the Western groups (clan and fixed community membership) are lacking in the East- ern Zone, where nuclear families play eminent roles in social and economic activities, the kin- ship is bilateral, the membership of a community (a "band" or part of it), which is of the Eskimo type, is kinship -free, and families change from one community to the next even within a single season. The layout of the community, in contrast to the Western planning and segmentad patterns, is ordinarily irregularly arranged, the only ex- ception being the circular layout of camp sites of the Sarsi at the southern end which is thought to be an import from the Plains (Osgood 1932:70-74; Honigmann 1946:64-65; Jenness 1932:391; 1937: 44-45, 52; Goddard 1916:221; Jenness 1938:10, 12- 13; Birket-Smith 1930:169). It is believed by many authors (Teit 1906:348; Jenness 1932:373; Emmons 1911:27; Driver 1956:28; Steward 1955: 147-148; Eggan 1955:541-542) that the unilinear system of the Western groups of the Northern Athapaskans (in the strict sense) was derived from their contacts with the Tlingit and that the Eastern pattern is indigenous. Murdock, on the contrary, asserts that the matrilineal kinship groups are indigenously Athapaskan. "I consider it preferable," he says, "to assume that the an- cestors of the Nadene peoples entered the New World with remnants of an old matrilineal organi- zation, that these were lost by the tribes which migrated eastward but retained by those remain- ing in the west, [and] that those of the latter who moved from the interior to the coast and became the Eyak, Tlingit, and Haida elaborated their simple original system into the complex forms found there" (Murdock 1955:85-86). Whether this interpretation is valid or not, it tempts one to consider the possibility of a similar development among the Eskimos. This possibility is suggested by the considerable size and comparative fixity of ancient Eskimo settlements, by the prevalence of multi-family houses among the modern Eskimos though the nuclear family is invariably the basic economic unit (Laughlin 1952:34), and by the pos- sible survival of the unilineal organization in the west, ff the abundance of ecological potentials of the Western Eskimo habitat is significant at all

(Laughlin 1952:37-38), then it would seem that we are faced with two equally plausible alternative explanations for the modern diversity of Eskimo community patterns: one assuming that the west- ern conditions developed subsequent to their move- ment into this area- owing to the rich ecological potentiality of their habitat- whereas the Central- Eastern groups maintain their original conditions; and the other speculating a unilineal proto-Eskimo organization which is now completely lost in the Central-East groups on account of the nature of the resources, while the western groups are able to retain the indigenous pattern to a certain ex- tent. In spite of the fact that the former alterna- tive is in fact accepted by most ethnologists today, the latter one should probably not be ruled out completely (cf. Giddings 1952:118).

Structural Implications

The foregoing analysis and comparison are not extensive, and our categorizations and characteri- zations are obviously restricted in many cases owing to the paucity of pertinent data. But the typology of circumpolar settlement and community patterns that has been worked out can at least serve as a basis for a preliminary structural analysis and correlation of the few societies to which the typology is applicable.

In the first place, the above analysis may serve to elaborate and sharpen the term "settlement pattern," fashionable among American archaeolo- gists. Under this all-inclusive term a wide range of problems concerning the physical characters of prehistoric settlements has been included- prob- lems that actually involve widely different aspects of the physical characters of settlements and widely different determining factors for them. The author has suggested that the term "settle- ment patterns" be retained and reserved for those physical aspects of the settlement that are directly related to ecology and subsistence of the inhabit- ants, and that for those aspects that can best be interpreted in terms of social organization and social psychology the term "community patterns" be coined (Chang 1958:299). The comparative studies presented above for the arctic hunter - fishers further indicate that among the hunting- fishing peoples this dichotomy of concepts is the more necessary and serviceable, for it is evident that among such peoples a community ordinarily inhabits more than a single settlement site. For archaeologists who are left with a network of settlement sites which during prehistoric times were occupied not by many, but by a single group

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 37 of people, it seems to be of crucial importance to consider the problems inherent in settlement pat- terns and those in community patterns separately. For problems concerning settlement patterns among these peoples evoke considerations along the lines of the site ecology and the nature of sub- sistence activities, whereas those concerning community patterns require insights into the so- cial category whose members occupied the vari- ous sites in turn or in sectors. Failure to dis- tinguish between these two different sets of prob- lems may easily result in such blunders as group- ing the various settlement sites into different cultural traditions, or recognizing tribal groups and camp -alliances when these camps had never been occupied concurrently nor by different groups of people.

As far as the settlement patterns of some of the circumpolar societies are concerned, it is evident that the seasonal settlement-complex among the hunter-fishers in this region is the predominant if not exclusive type, no matter how abundant the region's ecological potential may happen to be. This predominant pattern apparent- ly results from the physical environment via its marked climatic fluctuations within the span of a single year and the f aunal movements owing to such climatic changes. Under this general cate- gory, the various circumpolar settlement patterns differ in the extent of movement of the entire settlement- complex, resulting in the further breakdown into a sedentary and a temporary sub- type. This is apparently related to the nature of food resources of the various regions and the in- habitants' preference and material equipment to cope with the ecological potentials. Generally speaking, a predominantly fishing subsistence en- ables not only relatively more intensive sedentism of settlements but also comparatively stable membership of the community- apparently be- cause of the fact that fishing of migratory species of fish assures a stable food supply at single lo- cales both all the year round and year after year (cf . Hewes 1948). On the other hand, a predomi- nantly hunting subsistence tends to coincide with a settlement pattern of the more temporary and transient type. Such generalizations, to be sure, are oversimplified, but they do represent central tendencies as observed among the arctic peoples.

It is also apparent that the community struc- ture of a group of hunter -fishers is to a consider- able extent conditioned by the same group's settle- ment patterns. Here, as far as the above data can disclose, the stability and mobility of community membership is the area in social structure most immediately influenced by subsistence and

ecology. It seems highly probable that the de- scent system of a local group is intimately related to its rules of membership recruitment: uni- lineality tends to occur under the situation where a community is composed of a number of nuclear families which are by one factor or another held constantly together, by birth and by marriage; and bilaterality where the nuclear families that com- prise a community are not held constantly to- gether, and when the membership of a community can be obtained by consent or even by free will, as well as by birth and marriage. This principle has been clearly formulated by Ralph Linton when he says that * strong functional clan organization . . . does seem to be correlated, in a very general way, with stability of culture and fixity of resi- dence. . . . The membership of local units, espe- cially in agricultural societies, also tends to be fairly constant. Even when such units are nomadic the result is simply a transfer of the total village from one site to another and an individual normally lives and dies among the same neighbors.* (Linton 1936:201-202). A similar point-of-view has also been presented by Paul Kirchhoff (1955). When such rules of fixed residence prevail, a lineage type of kinship is bound to appear if the incest taboo within an expanded extended family is to be observed (Murdock 1949:75; Titiev 1943). Such structural correlations find support of consider- able strength in the circumpolar cases that have been reviewed above. Wherever a cohesive core of inhabitants constitutes the nuclear membership of a community under stable and sedentary condi- tions, one finds in most of the cases a tendency in descent reckoning leaning toward unilineality. On the other hand, when the membership of a com- munity is freely recruited among the ever -movable hunting families, a bilateral kinship and a loosely organized political structure tend to be in evidence.

Furthermore, when the community member- ship is kinship-bound and follows stable rules of recruitment, such internal integrity tends to call for a symbolic projection of the community struc- ture in the lay-out of the settlement site. Levi- Strauss has recognized, along with other social anthropologists (Lowie 1948:239; Nadel 1951:237), that *in many parts of the world there is an obvi- ous relationship between the social structure and the spatial structure of settlements, villages, or camps,* since, in part, « spatial configuration seems to be almost aprojective representation of the social structure* (Levi-Strauss 1953:533-534). As far as the circumpolar hunter-fishers are con- cerned, such symbolic projections are made pos- sible only when there is a fixed rule of member- ship recruitment for the community composition,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

38 ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY 1,1 and are necessary only in cases when such kin- ship ties necessitate symbolic strengthening by means of the physical arrangement of residential quarters.

At the ethnographic level, such structural im- plications are certainly of wide-ranging conse- quence for studies in the static and dynamic mechanisms of the circumpolar peoples' cultural and social growth. To what extent these can also be of use to archaeologists for their reconstruc- tive undertaking is a problem which calls for very careful assessment and scrutiny. The pitfalls in making such uncritical equations as fishing-uni- lineality or hunting-bilaterality are apparent. But such implications should at least be taken into consideration by archaeologists working among hunter-fishers' remains and may hopefully pro- vide some useful hints for making their practical and interpretative devices.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, Henry T. 1889 Atnatanas; Natives of Copper River,

Alaska. Annual Report, Smithsonian Institution, for 1886, Part 1, pp. 258- 266. Washington, D.C.

Beardsley, Richard K. et al 1956 Functional and Evolutionary Implica-

tions of Community Patterning. In: Robert Wauchope (ed.): Seminars in Archaeology: 1955. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 11, pp. 129-157.

Birket-Smith, Kaj 1924 Ethnography of the Egedesminde

District with Aspects of the General Culture of West Greenland. Meddelelser om Grgfaland, Bd. LXVI, Copenhagen.

1929 The Caribou Eskimo. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921-24, Vol. V, Copenhagen.

1930 Contributions to Chipewyan Ethnology. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921-24, Vol. VI, No. 3, Copenhagen.

1936 The Eskimos. London, Methuen. 1953 The Chugach Eskimo. National-

museets Skrifter, Etnografisk Raekke VI, Copenhagen.

Boas, Franz 1888 The Central Eskimo. The 6th Annual

Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1884-85, pp. 409-660, Washington.

Bogoras, W. G. 1909 The Chukchee. Memoirs of the

American Museum of Natural History, Vol. XI, Parts I and HI.

1931 Elements of the Culture of the Cir- cumpolar Zone. The Smithsonian Institution Report for 1930, pp. 465- 482, Washington.

Chang, Kwang-chih 1958 Study of the Neolithic Social Grouping;

Examples from the New World. American Anthropologist, Vol. 60, pp. 298-334.

Chard, Chester S. 1953 The Kamchadal: A Synthetic Sketch.

Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers, Nos. 8-9, pp. 20-44. Berkeley.

Collins, Henry B. 1954 Arctic Area: Indigenous Period.

Instituto Panamericano de Geografia e historia. Comisión de Historia: Program of the History of America. £2. Mexico.

Czaplicka, M. A. 1914 Aboriginal Siberia: A Study in Social

Anthropology. Oxford, University Press.

1917 The Ostyaks. The Encylopaedia of Religion and Ethics, pp. 575-580.

Driver, Harold E. 1956 An Integration of Functional Evolu-

tionary and Historical Theory by Means of Correlations. Memoir 12 of the International Journal of Ameri- can Linguistics, pp. 1-35. Blooming- ton.

Eggan, Fred 1954 Social Anthropology and the Method

of Controlled Comparison. American Anthropologist 56:743-763.

1955 Social Anthropology: Methods and results. Jn: F. Eggan, ed. Social Anthropology of North American

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 39

Tribes. The University of Chicago Press.

Ekblaw, W. E. 1927/28 The Material Response of the Polar

Eskimo to Their Far Arctic Environ- ment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 148-198, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 1- 24.

1947 Distribution of Settlement among the Polar Eskimo. Bulletin of the Massa- chusetts Archaeological Society, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 39-43.

Emmons, G. G. 1911 The Tahltan Indians. Museum of the

University of Pennsylvania. Anthro- pological Publications, Vol. IV, No. 1, Philadelphia.

Giddings, J. L., Jr. 1952 The Arctic Woodland Culture of the

Kobuk River. The University Museum Monographs, University of Pennsyl- vania.

Goddard, Pliny E. 1916 The Beaver Indians. Anthropological

Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 10, Part 4.

Hewes, Gordon W. 1948 The Rubric "Fishing and Fisheries/

American Anthropologist, Vol. 50: 238-246.

Holm, G. 1914 Ethnological Sketch of the Angmag-

salik Eskimo. Jn: William Thalbitzer (ed.): The Ammassalik Eskimo, Part 1, Meddelelser om Grgfaland. Bd 39, pp. 1-148.

Honigmann, John J. 1946 Ethnography and Acculturation of the

Fort Nelson Slave. Yale University Publications in Anthropology, Noo 33.

1954 The Kaska Indians: An Ethnographic Reconstruction. Yale University Publications in Anthropology, No. 51.

Jenness, Diamond 1921 The Cultural Transformation of the

Copper Eskimo. The Geographical

Review, Vol. XI, No. 4, pp. 541-550. 1922 The Life of the Copper Eskimo. Re-

port of the Canadian Arctic Expedi- tion 1913-18. Vol. XH, pt. A. Ottawa.

1932 The Indians of Canada. Canada, De- partment of Mines, Bulletin No. 65. Ottawa.

1937 The Sekani Indians of British Colum- bia. Canada, Department of Mines and Resources, Bulletin No. 84, Ottawa.

1938 The Sarcee Indians of Alberta. Cana- da, Department of Mines and Re- sources, Bulletin No. 90, Ottawa.

1943 The Carrier Indians of the Bulkley River; The Social and Religious Life. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bul- letin 133, Anthropological Papers No. 25, pp. 469-586.

Jochelson, Waldemar 1908 Material Culture and Social Organi-

zation of the Koryak. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. X, pt. E.

1910 The Yukaghir and the Yukaghirized Tungus. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. IX, pt. 1.

Kirchhoff, Paul 1955 The Principles of Clanship in Human

Society. Davidson Journal of Anthro- pology, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-10. Seattle.

Kopytoff, Igor 1955 The Samoyed. Subcontractor's Mono-

graph. HRAF-13, Indiana 49, Human Relations Area Files, Inc., New Haven.

Krause, Aurei 1956 The Tlingit Indians. Translated by

Erna Gunther; University of Washing- ton Press, Seattle.

Kroeber, A. L. 1900 The Eskimo of Smith Sound. Bulletin

of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. XII, pp. 265-325.

1953 Cultural and Natural Areas of Native North America. 3rd Printing, Uni- versity of California Press, Berkeley.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

40 ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY 1,1

Lantis, Margaret 1946 The Social Culture of the Nunivak

Eskimo. Transactions, American Philosophical Society, n.s. Vol. 35, pt. 3, Philadelphia.

Laughlin, W. S. 1952 The Aleut-Eskimo Community. An-

thropological Papers of the Univer- sity of Alaska, Vol. I, No. 1, pp. 25- 43.

Levi-Strauss, Claude 1953 Social Structure. In: A. L. Kroeber

(ed.): Anthropology Today, pp. 524- 533. The University of Chicago Press.

Ling, Johnson 1934 The Goldi Tribe on the Lower Sungari

River. Institute of History and Phi- lology, Academia Sinica, Monographs, S.A., No. 14, Nanking.

Linton, Ralph 1936 The Study of Man. New York.,

Appleton-Century.

Lowie, Robert H. 1948 Social Organization. New York,

Reinhart.

Mauss, Marcel 1904/05 Essai sur les variations saisonnieres

des societies eskimos. L'Annee Sociologique, Vol. 9.

Mickey, Barbara H. 1955 The Family among the Western

Eskimo. Anthropological Papers, University of Alaska, Vol. IV, No. 1, pp. 13-22.

Mirsky, Jeanette 1937 The Eskimo of Greenland. In: M.

Mead (ed.): Cooperation and Compe- tition among Primitive Peoples. New York, McGraw-Hill.

Moore, Riley D. 1923 Social Life of the Eskimo of St.

Lawrence Island. American Anthro- pologist, Vol. 25, pp. 339-375.

Murdoch, John 1892 Ethnological Results of the Point

Barrow Expedition. The 9th Annual

Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1887-88.

Murdock, George P. 1934 Our Primitive Contemporaries. New

York, MacMillan. 1949 Social Structure, New York,

MacMillan. 1955 North American Social Organization.

Davidson Journal of Anthropology, Vol. I, No. 2, pp. 85-98, Seattle.

Nadel, S. F. 1951 The Foundations of Social Anthro-

pology. Glencoe, The Free Press.

Nelson, Edward W. 1899 The Eskimo About Bering Strait. The

18th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1896-97, pt. 1, pp. 19-518.

Osgood, Cornelius 1932 The Ethnography of the Great Bear

Lake Indians. Canada, Department of Mines, Bulletin No. 870, pp. 31-98.

1933 Tanaina Culture. American Anthro- pologist, v. 35, No. 4, pp. 695-717.

1936a The Distribution of the Northern Athapaskan Indians. Yale University Publications in Anthropology No. 7.

1936b Contributions to the Ethnography of the Kutchin. Yale University Publi- cations in Anthropology, No. 14.

1937 The Ethnography of the Tanaina. Yale University Publications in An- thropology, No. 16.

1958 Ingalik Social Culture, Yale University Publications in Anthropology, 53.

Raun, Alo 1955 The Ostyak (Khanty) and the Vogul

(Mansi). Subcontractor's Monograph, HRAF-7, Indiana- 28, Human Rela- tions Areas Files, Inc., New Haven.

Sears, William H. 1961 The Study of Social and Religious

Systems in North American Archae- ology. Current Anthropology, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 223-246.

Shimkin, D. B. 1939 A Sketch of the Ket, or Yenesei

«Ostyak/ Ethnos., Vol. IV, pp. 147- 176. Stockholm.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHANG: A TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS 41

Spencer, Robert F. 1959 The North Alaskan Eskimo. A Study

in Ecology and Society. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 171.

Steensby, H. P. 1910 Contributions to the Ethnology and

Anthropogeography of the Polar Eskimo. Bianco Luno, Copenhagen.

Stefansson, Viljhjalmur 1919 The Stefansson- Anderson Arctic Ex-

pedition of the American Museum: Preliminary Ethnological Report. Anthropological Papers, American Museum of Natural History, Vol. XIV, pp. 1-396.

Steward, Julian H. 1955 Theory of Culture Change. University

of Illinois Press.

Tanner, V. 1944 Outlines of the Geography, Life, and

Customs of Newfoundland- Labrador, in 2 vols. Acta Geographica 8:1, Helsingfors.

Teit, James 1906 Notes on the Tahltan Indians of

British Columbia. Boas Anniversary

Volume: Anthropological Papers, New York, G. E. Stechert, pp. 337- 349.

1909 Notes on the Chilcotin Indians. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 4, No. 2, pt. 7, pp. 759-789.

Thalbitzer, William 1941 Social Customs and Mutual Aid. jfo:

W. Thalbitzer (ed.): The Ammas- salik Eskimo, 2nd part, second half- volume, no. 4.

Titiev, Mischa 1943 The Influence of Common Residence

on unilateral Classification of Kin- dred. American Anthropologist, Vol. 45: 511-530.

Turner, Lucien M. 1894 Ethnology of the Ungava District,

Hudson Bay Territory. The 11th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, pp. 159-360.

Yale University New Haven, Conn.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.226 on Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:20:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions