Direct Democracy and some of My Anarchist Socialist thinking

ref

ref

Analysis: How did the patriarchy start – and will evolution get rid of it?

Matrilineal societies exist around the world – it’s time to look beyond the patriarchy.

Hopewell Mound Builder culture (200 BCE–500 CE)

“The Hopewell inherited from their Adena Mound Building culture (500 BCE–100 CE) forebears an incipient social stratification.” ref

“These cultures likely accorded certain families a special place of privilege. Some scholars suggest that these societies were marked by the emergence of “big-men/women”, leaders whose influence depended on their skill at persuasion in important matters such as trade and religion. They also perhaps augmented their influence by cultivating reciprocal obligations with other important community members. The emergence of “big-men/women” was a step toward the development of these societies into highly structured and stratified chiefdoms.” ref

On the Significance of Matrilineal Chiefship

” UNDER the term chiefship as here used we include only that civil office in which the incumbent is the head of a family and has under his rule a band of families, a tribe, or a nation. Such chiefs are, for example, the band chiefs of the north and east Algonkian, the chiefs of the households of the Nootka, of the households or matrilineal “families” of the Iroquois; the tribal head chiefs of the Nootka, Coast, and Delt Salish, Tsimshian, etc., and the kings of the Natchez, man African states, modern European nations, etc. The first essential fact we have to note about this office is that universally it is the prerogative of an adult male. Occasionally, it is held by a child, the functions of pending the child chief’s maturity, being exercise warmer” or regent. Occasionally also, which is more the office is held by a female. A child holds office those peoples with whom the chiefship has become hereditary, and the heir presumptive may not be A woman holds office only where the office is strictly a given family, and when no eligible male heir is near enough in blood to be considered acceptable in a closely related female who can be expected soon son and so perpetuate the chiefship through the descent.” ref

“An example of the type of situation which gave rise to the installation of queens even among so-called “primitive” folk may
well be noted at length at this point, in part because of certain remarkable features which will interest us more in a moment. In the year 1660 the Piscottoways (Ganawagas, Conoys) of Maryland applied to the governor of the province for ratification of their choice of an “emperor,” and to his inquiry as to their customs relative to succession they replied that the office went, on the death of an incumbent, to his brother, “and for want of such, to a sister’s son,” and stated that in such wise the office had descended from their first emperor-who had been some one come to rule over them from the eastern Shore of Maryland-for thirteen generations, without interruption, until the time of the emperor Kittamaqund who preceded the emperor just deceased.” ref

“Kittamaqund had died without having brother or sister, (and, presum without a sister’s son) to succeed him, and took it upon him, therefore, to appoint his daughter to be “queen.” The perejected this appointment, however, as contrary to tribal custom and chose as emperor, Weghucasso, who was descended “from of the brothers, which one, they knew not, of the first emperor “And Weghucasso at his death appointed to be king some descendant of one of the first kings.” This appointee was Jan Wizous, which in their language signifies a true king [they] would not suffer us to call him Towzin, which is the they give to the sons of their kings who by their custom ar to succeed in rule, but his brothers, or the sons of his sisters.” To avoid possible misconceptions it is perhaps at this point to consider a practice prevailing among
Kwakiutl of British Columbia.” ref

“For them Boas patrilineal inheritance is the rule for certain circumstances the annual or winter ceremonies of the secret societies, such as that of master-of-ceremonies, those of caretaker of the drum, of the batons, of the eagle-down, etc. Civil privileges also are sometimes so inherited but much the larger number of these are given by a father to his son-in-law expressly in trust for the donor’s grandson. Hill-Tout has noted for the not-distant Siciatl that the chiefship, a civil “privilege” on the Northwest Coast, maybe so inherited, or bestowed; regularly it goes to the eldest son of a chief but where there is no son the son-in-law will succeed,5 as a consequence of which in the third generation the reigning chief will be the grandson of the chief whose son-in-law succeeded, the chiefship, thereby descending in the direct line of succession just as if the daughter herself had actually succeeded to the office and exercised its functions. It has been suggested that the practice of the southern Kwakiutl indicates an adaptation of a former patrilineal inheritance to concepts diffused from the tribes farther up the coast with whom all privileges and property including the privilege of chiefship descend matrilineally.” ref

“However, it has also been pointed out that the kinship terms of the Kwakiutl correspond to a loose organization in which relationship is reckoned bilaterally, as is the case with the closely related Nootka. For the Nootka Sapir has shown that privileges are inherited through both the male and female lines, with a preference for the male line, the inheritance of privileges being in a measure conditioned by the fact that privileges are not only personally owned but also definitely associated with the local group among whom they originate. More data, especially on the inheritance of the particular of chiefship, is desirable, but it seems evident that the Kwa represent simply a people reckoning bilaterally, but who, like peoples whose developing institution of chiefship has not be affected by the influence of a matrilineal kinship reckoning, the develop a patrilineal inheritance of office.” ref

“Rather than an indication of influences from the northern tribes and an addition to the idea of a matrilineal reckoning, the peculiar Kwa inheritance practice we have noted is simply an indication of Kwakiutl concern that privileges, in general, should descend patrilineally. And, in case a chief only has daughters, the Kw, like the Society, with the son-in-law arrangement, are able to the chiefship in the direct line of descent and, at the same, avoid having a woman chief or queen. We may now confine ourselves to the actual chiefship. Typically, though not always, it is cor the mother-sib. Despite the fact that with many whom the sib, and, specifically, the mother-sib, is a institution-such as the Iroquois, the Haida, etc.-this does not include the concept of even a fictitious kin its members, it yet remains obvious that sib member
patrilineally or matrilineally reckoned, is acquired the blood relationship to a father or a mother member obvious, and is perhaps superfluous to observe, also, whether transmitted matrilineally or patrilineally inherited by virtue of actual blood relationship cumbent of the office.” ref

“But a matrilineal reckoning for an which is universally the prerogative of a male and his male cessors appears as a noteworthy phenomenon, particularly of the fact that different types of inheritance reckonings for ent prerogatives, privileges, things, relationships, etc. contained within the same cultural considered in connection with the processes by which chiefship undoubtedly evolved. Definitely, instituted chiefship is itself an office which cannot be placed too far back in social evolution; and the concept and practice of the inheritance of the office exclusively within some one family of the group of families concerned must be placed reltively later, in that obviously intermediary developments remain on record as the existing practice of many peoples-though very definite records of this gradual evolution for any one people are hardly available. This evolution of the concept of ban and higher chiefships as hereditary within a given family and even as with many peoples, through an inflexible rule of picture took place of course concurrently with the of concepts of the inheritance of other things such ship, real, and personal property, songs, names, other office, etc.” ref

The Real Mound Builders of North America: matrilineal chiefdom

 Mississippian Chiefdoms

“Although groups speaking several different languages produced Mississippian societies, they shared many cultural traits. The most spectacular features of these societies were the temple- and burial-mound centers they constructed. The largest such site is at Cahokia in what is now Collinsville, Illinois, just east of St. Louis, Missouri; the village area extended for six miles along the Illinois River, contained eighty-five temple and burial mounds, and sustained a population perhaps as high as seventy-five thousand persons. Being master farmers allowed the Mississippians to develop such large societies, although most chiefdoms were much smaller than Cahokia. All Mississippian sites utilized maize or corn as a primary staple and supplemented it with other plants and meats.” ref

“Chiefdoms. Mississippian societies are called chiefdoms because they were governed by small groups of elites or even by a single individual, called a paramount chief. Commoners and outlying satellite villages paid tributes of corn, deer meat, animal skins, and prestige items to the principal town. In some cases new towns joined a chiefdom by military conquest. The labor of commoners built the mounds and suggests that elites held the power to assemble large bodies of people to do their bidding. Leadership passed through hereditary lines in at least some of these chiefdoms, but high status was most likely based upon command of spiritual forces. The general population recognized the large amounts of power that leaders manipulated and honored them with positions of prestige. Matrilineal kinship characterized Mississippian culture, and female paramount chiefs greeted Spanish expeditions, such as the “Lady of Cofitachequi” from the chiefdom of Cofitachequi in present-day South Carolina who welcomed Hernando de Soto in the 1540s.” ref

“Decline. Mississippian chiefdoms still existed in the mid 1500s when de Soto and others traveled through the Southeast, but just a century later, the mound sites were abandoned. Because of this timing, scholars looked to the de Soto campaign as the cause of this phenomenon. It is probable that some of de Soto’s men, or maybe the horses and pigs that accompanied them, carried diseases to which the Indians had no immunity. Pandemics may have wiped the Mississippians from the map, replacing them with refugee groups of survivors who banded together for protection but lacked the numbers to maintain the mounds. Many Mississippian sites became vacant before European contact, however, which suggests that local reasons contributed to abandonment. Perhaps Mississippians overused their resources, depleting the soil for corn and cutting down trees necessary for their buildings and fires. Possibly, climatic changes resulted in drought or a shorter growing season, thus reducing the food supply. Political conflict and war between chiefdoms could have weakened some to the point of being unsustainable. Likely, all of the above factors contributed to the abandonment of the mound sites. The Choctaws, Creeks, Chickasaws, Cherokees, and Seminoles descended from the Mississippian peoples and held many traits in common with their ancestors.” ref

“Although the first people entered what is now the Mississippi about 12,000 years ago, the earliest major phase of earthen mound construction in this area did not begin until some 2100 years ago. Mounds continued to be built sporadically for another 1800 years, or until around 1700 CE. Archeologists, the scientist who study the evidence of past human lifeways, classify moundbuilding Indians of the Southeast into three major chronological/cultural divisions: the Archaic, the Woodland, and the Mississippian traditions. To date, no mounds of the Archaic period (7000 to 1000 BCE) have been positively identified in Mississippi; the mounds described herein all date to the last two cultural periods.” ref

“The Middle Woodland period (100 BCE to 200 CE) was the first era of widespread mound construction in Mississippi. Middle Woodland peoples were primarily hunters and gatherers who occupied semipermanent or permanent settlements. Some mounds of this period were built to bury important members of local tribal groups. These burial mounds were rounded, dome-shaped structures that generally range from about three to 18 feet high, with diameters from 50 to 100 feet. Distinctive artifacts obtained through long-distance trade were sometimes placed with those buried in the mounds. The construction of burial mounds declined after the Middle Woodland, and only a few were built during the Late Woodland period (circa 400 to 1000 CE). Woodland burial mounds can be visited at the Boyd, Bynum, and Pharr sites and at Chewalla Lake in Holy Springs National Forest. (The Chewalla Mound is not included in this itinerary because it is not listed in the National Register of Historic Places).” ref

“The Mississippian period (1000 to 1700 CE) saw a resurgence of mound building across much of the southeastern United States. Most Mississippian mounds are rectangular, flat-topped earthen platforms upon which temples or residences of chiefs were erected. These buildings were constructed of wooden posts covered with mud plaster and had thatched roofs. Mississippian platform mounds range in height from eight to almost 60 feet and are from 60 to as much as 770 feet in width at the base. Mississippian period mounds can be seen at the Winterville, Jaketown, Pocahontas, Emerald, Grand Village, Owl Creek, and Bear Creek sites.” ref

“Mississippian period mound sites mark centers of social and political authority. They are indicators of a way of life more complex than that of the Woodland and earlier periods. In contrast to the relatively simple, egalitarian tribal organization of most societies of the Woodland period, regional Mississippian populations were typically organized into chiefdoms–territorial groups with hereditary, elite leadership classes. Across the Southeast, the chiefdom system of political organization arose as a means of managing increased social complexity caused by steady population growth. This population growth was sustained by agriculture (corn, beans, and squash)–a revolutionary new means of subsistence that became an economic mainstay during the Mississippian period.” ref

“Mound construction was once again in decline by the time the first Europeans came to this region in the 1500s. Shortly thereafter, epidemic diseases introduced by early European explorers decimated native populations across the Southeast, causing catastrophic societal disruption. As a result, by the time sustained contact with European colonists began about 1700 CE, the long tradition of mound building had nearly ended.” ref

Ancient Colombian chiefdoms

“Chiefdoms in Central America were small groups who developed unique art forms in order to distinguish themselves and compete with one another. c. 500 B.C.E.–1600 C.E.” ref

Tribe versus Chiefdom in Lower Central America

“Abstract: It has commonly been argued that chiefdoms were the dominant form of prehispanic political organization in Lower Central America. Reexamination of the data base, however, reveals that tribal forms of organization were also present in Lower Central America at the time of Spanish contact and before. The salient characteristics of both tribes and chiefdoms are discussed, and criteria for identifying tribes and chiefdoms in the archaeological record are outlined. Data from the Central Provinces of Panama and the Gulf of Nicoya are then examined in light of these criteria. We argue that while a chiefdom form of organization prevailed in Panama, the Gulf of Nicoya was occupied by tribal groups immediately prior to contact with the Spanish.” ref

“The customs and social systems of South American peoples are closely and naturally related to the environments in which they live. These environmental relationships are mediated by the systems of technology that the people use to exploit their resources. Four basic types of social and cultural organization of South American peoples emerge from the archaeological and historical records: (1) central Andean irrigation civilizations, (2) chiefdoms of the northern Andes and the circum-Caribbean, (3) tropical-forest farming villages, and (4) nomadic hunters and gatherers. Each type developed in its own fashion during thousands of years, and since the 16th century each has made a distinctive adjustment to the impact of European civilization. The original migrants to the New World had no knowledge of the domestication of plants or animals, with the exception of dogs, which were used in hunting. Recent discoveries in Mexico indicate that agriculture was independently discovered in the New World in roughly the same era that it was established in the Middle East (about 7000–8000 BCE) and that New World civilizations were built on an indigenous agricultural base.” ref

“The evidence on early hunting and gathering peoples in Peru is still sparse. It is not yet possible to reconstruct social patterns, since most of the remains consist only of shellfish middens and small, widely scattered campsites along the coast. It was a period of thousands of years’ duration, however, toward the end of which some knowledge of plant domestication reached the Peruvian coast. The next major era is set off by incipient agriculture and also is characterized by the remains of small, hamlet-type communities along the Pacific Ocean near river mouths, where the alluvial soil was able to support crops. Technology remained simple, irrigation was not practiced, and population remained small.” ref

“After the passage of 1,000 years or so, marked developments appear in the archaeological record. These include many new crops, irrigation ditches that extended the arable area and controlled the supply of water, more and larger communities that attest to a growing population, and important temple mounds that formed the symbolic centres of theocratic government controlled by a priestly class. The formative era saw the development of the basic technologies and life-styles that were to become elaborated into even more complex cultural forms and state institutions. The emergence of city-states and empires in the central Andes is the result of local cultural-ecological adjustments of this sort, based on an irrigation agriculture that supported growing populations and necessitated controls in the hands of priests and nobles, with a warrior class subservient to the state.” ref

Subsistence Economy and Chiefdom Emergence in the Muisca Area

“ABSTRACT: Muisca societies located in the central mountains of Colombia impressed early Spanish arrivals in the sixteenth century with the power and level of respect commanded by their chiefs and the quality and variety of the crafts their artisans produced, sometimes from raw materials obtained from other regions. Early Spanish accounts especially emphasize the “advanced” economic development of Muisca societies, with what seemed to European eyes especially well-organized and flourishing trade and dense populations that were well-provisioned despite the fairly cold, wet, high-elevation zone they inhabited. As several regional chiefdoms in northern South America have been studied archaeologically, it has often turned out that their subsistence and craft economies do not involve very high degrees of trade, tribute, or household interdependence. This emerging pattern contrasts with sixteenth-century descriptions of the Muisca.” ref

“The archaeological evidence of Muisca societies has provided at best only incomplete confirmation of the descriptions in historical sources, particularly in regard to the development of local, regional, and supra-regional patterns of economic interdependence and the importance of such an economy to the emergence of chiefly power. One aspect of economic interdependence specifically discussed in the historical sources, however, has been subject to very little archaeological investigation. This is the agricultural exploitation of warmer low-elevation zones located quite close to some of the principal Muisca chiefly centers. In these areas higher temperatures led to greater productivity as well as protection from the frosts that were a constant risk to agriculture in the Muisca heartland. There are detailed sixteenth-century historical accounts of the importance of these resources for sustaining the very high population densities of the Muisca heartland, high densities fully attested to by both historical and archaeological information.” ref

“Under the supervision of Dr. Robert D. Drennan, Pedro Argüello will carry out a systematic regional survey of some 100 sq km in the Tena region on the slopes leading down from the western edge of the Muisca heartland toward the valley of the Magdalena River. The Tena region, which ranges from 2200 m above sea level down to about 700 m, is specifically mentioned in sixteenth-century documents as a major source of agricultural produce for the Bogotá chiefdom. If its agricultural resources were increasingly intensively exploited as Muisca chiefdoms emerged and developed and population levels in the high-elevation Muisca heartland grew, this will be reflected in changing patterns of distribution of human occupation in the Tena region. Such a result would provide stronger support for the historical accounts of one of the economic foundations of Muisca chiefly power than has been forthcoming from archaeological investigations of other aspects of Muisca economy. It would help to explain the relatively late but extremely rapid development of the Muisca chiefdoms and to position these societies properly in comparative analysis of the pathways toward the consolidation of political power in general.” ref

“The societies of the Muisca area in the eastern highlands of Colombia were described by early Spanish conquerors as among the richest and most highly developed societies they encountered in northern South America. Chiefs were rich and powerful, and controlled regional populations engaged in well-organized intensive agricultural production to sustain quite high population densities. Archaeological evidence tends to agree that these societies developed vigorously during the last few hundred years before the sixteenth-century arrival of the Spanish, but evidence available to date provides conflicting views about their earlier trajectories of development. In several ways archaeological evidence has failed to convincingly substantiate sixteenth-century written accounts. One aspect of Muisca demography and agricultural production is described in these accounts in particular detail. It involves the expansion by Muisca populations from the high-elevation Bogotá Savannah down the slopes toward the Magdalena River at the expense of Panche people who had previously occupied the zone. The driving force behind this expansion was said to be the need to increase and intensify agricultural production in the warmer Tena region in order to sustain burgeoning populations in the Bogotá Savannah.” ref

“The archaeological research confirmed that Muisca people did, in fact, live in the Tena region, not only in the last few hundred years before the Spanish Conquest but in much earlier times as well. The history of this occupation goes back at least 2400 years to the initial period of sedentary farming. During the earliest occupation of the Tena region—during the Herrera period (400 BCE–800 CE)—the majority of the population lived in widely scattered dispersed farmsteads, although a cluster of occupation more like a nucleated village also occurred. This settlement pattern continued in similar form during the next period—Early Muisca (800–1200 CE)—during which the region witnessed quite substantial population growth. During the last prehispanic period—Late Muisca (1200–1550 CE)—a combination of dispersed farmsteads and nucleated villages persisted, but in sharp contrast to the implications of the sixteenth-century accounts, population actually decreased somewhat, making the Tena region extremely unusual among the demographic patterns for the Muisca area at this time.” ref

“The region’s inhabitants, like those of earlier periods, were Muisca farmers living there year-round, and practicing relatively extensive agriculture. There is no sign of a major influx of seasonal occupation by people whose permanent residences were in the higher-elevation Bogotá Savannah. Nor is there indication of more intensive agricultural production. These results question literal interpretations of sixteenth-century written accounts of late Muisca expansion beyond the Altiplano Cundiboyacense and of the intensive and organized exploitation of the agricultural resources of adjacent lower-elevation zones as a source of chiefly wealth and power. They thus add to our knowledge of the variety of pathways followed in the development of very early complex societies, in which the foundations of much modern human social organization were constructed.” ref

Chiefdoms in northern South America

“Abstract: The multiple and varied trajectories of chiefdom development in northern South America (and adjacent Central America) offer a rich opportunity for evaluating generalizations about the processes of chiefdom development. Sequences of the south coast of Ecuador, the Alto Magdalena, Calima, the Muisca region, Barinas, and the Tairona region are well enough documented to attempt to use in this way. Although centralized, hierarchical societies develop in all these regions, there are many differences in the character of centralization and hierarchy and in the pacing of the development, and none of the traditionally proposed forces of social change is entirely adequate to account for these cases. Attention to the role played by competition between aspiring chiefs and their factions offers promise for more satisfactory generalizations that could be evaluated through further comparative study.” ref

Precolumbian Chiefdom Settlements with Stone Spheres of the Diquís

“The property includes four archaeological sites located in the Diquís Delta in southern Costa Rica, which are considered unique examples of the complex social, economic, and political systems of the period CE 500–1500. They contain artificial mounds, paved areas, burial sites, and, most significantly, a collection of stone spheres between 0.7 m and 2.57 m in diameter, whose meaning, use, and production remain largely a mystery. The spheres are distinctive for their perfection, number, size and density, and placement in original locations. Their preservation from the looting that befell the vast majority of archaeological sites in Costa Rica has been attributed to the thick layers of sediment that kept them buried for centuries.” ref

“Four archaeological sites (Finca 6, Batambal, El Silencio, and Grijalba-2) located in the Diquís Delta in southern Costa Rica illustrates a collection of unique stone spheres located in chiefdom settlement structures of the Precolumbian period. The four sites represent different settlement structures of chiefdom societies (500-1500 CE) containing artificial mounds, paved areas, and burial sites. Special objects of wonder and admiration are the distinctive Diquís stone spheres, which are rare in their perfection of large-sized (up to 2.57m diameter) spherical structures but are also distinct for their number and location in their original positions within residential areas.” ref 

“The Precolumbian Chiefdom Settlements with Stone Spheres of the Diquís illustrate the physical evidence of the complex political, social, and productive structures of the Precolumbian hierarchical societies. The chiefdoms which inhabited the Diquís Delta created hierarchical settlements expressing the division of different levels of power centers, presented by the different serial components. Likewise, the exceptional stone spheres, which continue to leave researchers speculating about the method and tools of their production, represent an exceptional testimony to the artistic traditions and craft capabilities of these Precolumbian societies.” ref 

Simple Chiefdoms

https://sites.santafe.edu/~bowles/SimpleChiefdoms.ppt

 Elite Status and Gender: Women Leaders in Chiefdom Societies of the Southeastern U.S.

“ABSTRACT: This dissertation presents an ethnohistorical study of women chiefs in the Southeastern United States. Women chiefs were a recurring feature of Southeastern chiefdom societies at and following European contact. Knowledge of how and why women filled these public roles helps explain how chiefdom societies were organized, their political structure, and how gender roles were defined. Chiefdom structure, political economy, and chiefly succession are examined to provided a framework for understanding how chiefdoms operate and how chiefs come to power. Ethnohistoric data are presented and analyzed, supporting the conclusion that women chiefs were present at the very dawn of European contact, even when there were high ranking men available to fill the office. Women sometimes served as regents, usually for an immature child, but some of the women identified as regents were actually chiefs. Women chiefs are present because their elite status takes precedence over their gender. Chiefly offices may not necessarily be gendered male or female, since women accessed them regularly. This analysis shows that elite status, personal ability, and strong support from a faction are needed for both women and men to become chiefs, regardless of gender. Women chiefs were present in both matrilineal and patrilineal societies, so the form of kinship reckoning is not a critical or limiting variable for determining the likelihood of women chiefs being present. The most salient variable is the presence of ascribed, elite statuses that women can access. Therefore, the innate structure of chiefdom societies themselves makes it likely that women chiefs will be present. Baseline comparative data from chiefdom societies having women chiefs from outside the U.S.–Tonga and Taíno –are used to generate a hypothesis about the presence of women chiefs.” ref

Paramount Chief

“A paramount chief is the English-language designation for the highest-level political leader in a regional or local polity or country administered politically with a chief-based system. This term is used occasionally in anthropological and archaeological theory to refer to the rulers of multiple chiefdoms or the rulers of exceptionally powerful chiefdoms that have subordinated others. Paramount chiefs were identified by English-speakers as existing in Native American confederacies and regional chiefdoms, such as the Powhatan Confederacy and Piscataway Native Americans encountered by European colonists in the Chesapeake Bay region of North America. During the Victoria era, paramount chief was a formal title created by British colonial administrators in the British Empire and applied in Britain’s colonies in Asia and Africa. They used it as a substitute for the word “king” to ensure that only the British monarch held that title. Since the title “chief” was already used in terms of district and town administrators, the addition of “paramount” was made so as to distinguish between the ruling monarch and the local aristocracy.” ref

In Asia

“Khan, alternately spelled lowercase as khan and sometimes spelled as Han, Xan, Ke-Han, Turkic: khān, Mongolian: qāān, Chinese: 可汗 or 汗, kehan or han) is an originally Central Asian title for a sovereign or military ruler, first used by medieval Turko-Mongol nomadic tribes living to the north of China. ‘Khan’ is first seen as a title in the Xianbei confederation for their chief between 283 and 289 and was used as a state title by the Rouran confederation. It was subsequently adopted by the Göktürks before Turkic peoples and the Mongols brought it to the rest of Asia. In the middle of the sixth century it was known as “Kagan – King of the Turks” to the Persians. It now has many equivalent meanings such as commander, leader, or ruler. The most famous khan was the Great Khan of Mongols: Genghis Khan. Another famous Manchu khan was Nurhachi.” ref

“Sabah, Malaysian Borneo, Huguan Siou is the paramount leader for the Kadazandusun Murut indigenous community in Sabah. The current and the second Huguan Siou is Joseph Pairin Kitingan. The office is near sacred and can be left vacant if no one is deemed worthy to hold the title.” ref

In Oceania

“New Zealand, Ariki Nui of Ngati Tuwharetoa, a Māori tribe in the central North Island – a hereditary chieftainship which still has great influence. In the 1850s the Māori King Movement resulted in the election of a Waikato chief as Māori King.” ref

“Cook Islands, the paramount chief of the Cook Islands was an ariki of the Makea Nui dynasty, a chiefdom of the Te Au O Tonga tribe in Rarotonga, the Kingdom of Rarotonga was established in 1858 and ended in 1888.” ref

“Fiji, during the October–December 1987 secession agitation on one island, known as the Republic of Rotuma, led by Henry Gibson (remained in New Zealand), his style was Gagaj Sau Lagfatmaro, rendered as Paramount chief or King of the Molmahao Clan. NB: This title was not recognized by the Rotuma Island Council as the titles Gagaja and Sau have never been used together. The closest thing to a paramount chief is the position of Fakpure, currently belonging to the district chief (gagaj ‘es itu’u) of Noa’tau. The British Sovereign was recognized as “Paramount Chief“, even after the country became a republic on 7 October 1987; however, this was not an office of state.” ref

“Polynesia, Rapa Nui (Easter Island) paramount chief or king, the ariki henua or ariki mau*. Samoa, paramount titles in the fa’amatai chiefly system include; Malietoa, Mata’afa, Tupua Tamasese, and Tuimaleali’ifano. American Samoa, paramount chief titles in the fa’amatai chiefly system include; Tui Manu’a, Le’iato.” ref

In Africa

“Eastern African paramount chieftainships and titles, Kenya: Title since 1904 of the former laibon of all the Maasai in Kenya (not in Tanzania), Kenya: Title held by supreme ruler Lago Ogom, after the advent of British colonial rule in Northern Kenya. Sudan: In South Sudan, the title of the chief responsible for a payam (district) elected by the chiefs of each buma (village). The Paramount Chief works with the government-appointed Payam Director, both of whom report to a county Commissioner.” ref

“West African paramount chieftains and their countries, Cameroon: Charles Atangana, Nigeria: Ladapo Ademola, Sierra Leone: Bai Bureh, and Ghana: Otumfuo Nana Osei Tutu II.” ref

“Southern African paramount chieftainships and titles, 

• Kgôsi
  • of each of the eight major tribes of the Tswana, all in Botswana (former Bechuanaland)
• In present Lesotho since it emerged as a polity in 1822, a British protectorate as Basutoland since 12 March 1868 (11 August 1871 – 18 March 1884 Annexed to Cape Colony as Basutoland territory, then as a separate colony, as one of the High Commission Territories). The title changed to king on 4 October 1966, which was the date of the country’s independence from the British Empire.
• In Namibia
  • over the Awa-Khoi or “Red Nation” (more prominent then six other ‘nations’) of the Nama (Khoi) people, a Chiefdom established before 1700.
  • title Okahandja Herero among that people, also Chief Ministers of Hereoroland (two incumbents 20 July 1970 – 5 December 1980), the ‘homeland’ of the Ovaherero
• In Swaziland the term paramount chief was imposed by the British government over Swazi royal objections in 1903, was never recognized by the Swazi royalty, and was changed to “king” in English upon independence in 1968. The SiSwati name for the office is Ngwenyama, a ceremonial term for “lion.”
• In South Africa
  • Khosikulu of the vhaVenda; after the people’s split, (only?) of the haMphaphuli
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the Xhosa people’s following polities: amaGcaleka, amaMbalu, amaRharhabe, amaNdlambe, imiDushane, imiQhayi, amaGasela, amaGwali, amaHleke, imiDange, amaNtinde, amaGqunukhwebe
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the amaBhaca (until 1830 called abakwaZelemu)
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the amaKhonjwayo (currently ruled by Dumisani Gwadiso)
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the amaMpondo, currently ruled by Ndamase NDAMASE (West) and Jongilanga Sigcau (East) .
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the amaMpondomise
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the abaThembu, currently ruled by Buyelekhaya Zwelinbanzi Dalindyebo.
  • title Inkosi Enkhulu of the Nhlangwini, currently ruled by Melizwe Dlamini” ref

Former chiefdoms in North America

“A Chiefdom of Ameca, C Cahokia polity, Casqui, Chiefdoms of Hispaniola, and Coosa chiefdom, G Guale, J Jaega, M Mocoso, O Ocute, P Pohoy, S Saturiwa, T Tacatacuru, Tocobaga, U Utinahica, Uzita (Florida).”

Chiefdoms and Chieftaincy in the Americas

“Much has been learned about the ways chiefdoms were organized, their origins, and their ultimate fates from poring over historical accounts, sifting through archaeological sites, and observing contemporary peoples. This book, which focuses on the Americas, includes general statements on the development of chiefdoms (Elsa Redmond, Robert Carniero, and Pita Kelekna) and case studies of groups in South America (Elsa Redmond, Charles Spencer, William Sturtevant, Neil Whitehead, and Doris Kurella), the Caribbean (William Keegan and coauthors), and the United States (Winifred Creamer and Jonathan Haas, Helen Rountree and Randolph Turner, and Jerald Milanich).” ref

“These authors concentrate on the societies that gave rise to chiefdoms and the process of chiefdom formation. Redmond introduces chieftaincy to cover short-term leadership achieved by especially capable and charismatic people within the context of essentially autonomous villages. A chieftain is like a Melanesian big man, but without the latter’s geographical and cultural connotations. Chieftains exercise some control over their fellow villagers, the scope and duration of their authority are determined by the exigencies of various situations, and their reputation and influence extend to neighboring settlements. A chieftaincy is thus a society with recognized leaders, but their influence is short-lived, limited, and tied to particular circumstances. In contrast, chiefdoms are kin-based societies with social hierarchies headed by permanent chiefs, who inherit their positions of authority over the inhabitants of multiple villages. Chieftaincies came and went over time; only some of them developed into full-blown chiefdoms.” ref

“Whatever the merits of new sociopolitical categories, classification systems reveal nothing about the processes behind cultural change. What is really of interest are the circumstances that led to the crystallization of situationally advantageous leadership positions and intervillage alliances to form institutionalized social hierarchies, including chiefs, and permanent ties among dominant and subordinate villages. Carneiro refers to this transformation as the “flashpoint,” which is appropriate considering its likely suddenness. It makes considerable sense to argue that under the right conditions politically autonomous villages with presumptive leadership positions—Redmond’s chieftaincies—developed into multicommunity societies with fixed chiefly positions embedded within kin-based social hierarchies. But just what combination of circumstances gave rise to chiefdoms? Carneiro argues that whatever factors were behind chiefdom formation, they were few in number. Separate explanations are not needed in all of the many places where these societies arose. His position is arguably the most important and provocative point in this book. It is a challenge to look for ultimate causes, rather than being content with an uninterpretable hotchpotch of context-specific details.” ref

“Simplifying greatly, most scenarios for chiefdom origins invoke either warfare or economic relations, especially the role of chiefs as managers of critical resources or as major players in exchanges of highly coveted prestige goods. Contributors to this book emphasize the part played by warfare in chiefdom development. These societies arose in places where there was little chance of flight to escape severe endemic warfare. This position is argued strongly by Carneiro in an elaboration of his thirty-year-old environmental circumscription and warfare model. In short, the first chief was a highly successful and influential war leader who was determined to hold onto his position of dominance in the affairs of multiple villages located in places where the pressure on resources and harrassment by enemies could not be relieved by movement elsewhere.” ref

The Origin of State Societies in South America

“Abstract: The earliest states developed in the central Andean highlands and along the central Pacific coast of western South America. The consensus in the archaeological literature is that state societies first developed in the central Andes in the early part of the first millennium CE. A minority opinion holds that first-generation states developed as early as the late second millennium BCE in the same area. The Andean region constitutes one of a few areas of first-generation state development in the world. This area, therefore, represents an important case study for the comparative analysis of state formation. This article outlines the arguments for state formation in South America, presents the evidence, analyzes the underlying assumptions about these arguments, and assesses the South American data in terms of contemporary anthropological theory of state evolution.” ref

MATRILINY AND PATRILINY BETWEEN COHABITATION EQUILIBRIUM AND MODERNITY IN THE CAMEROON GRASSFIELDS

“ABSTRACT: The paper explores the principles in the kinship structure of the cluster of speakers of the Ring Group of Grassfield Bantu, who are at once matrilineal and patrilineal, living in the south-western edge of the western Cameroon highlands. Although operating in an inverted mirror image, the seemingly opposed kinship structures have a common logic where the basic kinship unit is residential (household). There is an attempt to strike a balance between descent groups without constituting double descent, and women occupy positions that stress symmetry rather than subordination, although there is patriarchy. The impact of modernity on matriliny in a context of generalized patriliny is also examined with the conclusion that the drift towards “patrilineal” practices does not imply a change of system but implies adaptations that leave the system unmodified.” ref

Traditional leaders in Zambia shift gender norms and strengthen women’s land rights

How community-level dialogues uprooted harmful gender norms that hinder women’s rights to land.

“Across much of Africa, land is not allocated and inherited under statutory law but through customary practices rooted in kinship. In patrilineal systems, land belongs to men’s families and is inherited through the paternal line. In Zambia, many ethnic groups follow a matrilineal system, where women own land and pass it down the maternal line. But ownership does not necessarily translate into access, use and control of land. Even in matrilineal societies, social and gender norms undermine women’s decision-making power. Traditionally – regardless of patrilineal or matrilineal systems − men have authority over household resources, including land − so when it comes to land rights, women are left out.In Zambia’s customary systems chiefs and their advisors – known as indunas – and village headpersons allocate land. These customary leaders are usually men and, as custodians of tradition and culture, heavily influence whether harmful gender norms and practices persist or change.” ref

“A woman headperson in the Nyamphande chiefdom addressed a pressing form of gender-based violence related to land: the use of traditional funeral rites to deny widows’ access to their deceased spouse’s land. Indunas and village headpersons who participated in the dialogues encouraged men in their communities to include their wives in land documentation. And the indunas led by example, committing to share their own land with their wives and children, both boys and girls. Induna Jacob Phiri, from Mnukwa chiefdom, was the first to share his land after the first dialogue session, saying “My wife had access to my land and planted crops of her own choice, but I never thought about what could happen to her if I died. I knew I needed to act while I was still alive, so I gave her a portion of land to be her own. After that, I felt empowered to tell people in my village to do the same.” ref

“Not all indunas embrace change. Despite promising shifts in behaviors and gender norms, many indunas did not support change − taking a backseat or even attempting to block and discourage those willing to drive it forward. Although bringing together indunas from different chiefdoms intended to foster collaboration, the pilot initiative found that individual action by the indunas was much more successful than collective action. Some of the indunas resisted changes in social norms, and it is important to invest more time in supporting the indunas and headpersons to have a deeper understanding of existing gender norms that should be changed before moving to planning and implementation. Change starts with community. The pilot showed that shifting harmful gender norms at the community level is crucial in supporting women to access land rights. Given their role in regulating local culture and advising the traditional authority on land administration, customary leaders like indunas and village headpersons are a key entry point for that shift. Change can be slow. But spaces for dialogue, critical reflection, and support for action-planning enabled the indunas to not only change their own beliefs, but also begin to see their role and their communities in a different light.” ref

Powhatan Complex paramount chiefdom (male) or, more rarely, a (female)

“The Powhatan were a matrilineal society, so his right to be chief was inherited from his mother.” ref

“The Powhatan people are Native Americans who belong to member tribes of the Powhatan Confederacy, or Tsenacommacah. They are Algonquian peoples whose historic territories were in eastern Virginia, and their Powhatan language is an Eastern Algonquian language. All of Virginia’s Native peoples practiced agriculture. Powhatans made offerings and prayed at sunrise. Although, they also prayed and made offerings to specific gods, who were believed to be in control of the harvest. They used the land differently, and their religion was a Native one. Significantly, one of the major duties of Powhatan priests was controlling the weather. Various tribes each held some individual powers locally, and each had a chief known as a weroance (male) or, more rarely, a weroansqua (female), meaning “commander. As early as the era of John Smith, the individual tribes of this grouping were recognized by English colonists as falling under the greater authority of the centralized power led by the chiefdom of Powhatan (c. 1545 – c. 1618), whose proper name was Wahunsenacawh or (in 17th century English spelling) Wahunsunacock.” ref

“In 1607, when the first permanent English colonial settlement in North America was founded at Jamestown, he ruled primarily from Werowocomoco, which was located on the northern shore of the York River. This site of Werowocomoco was rediscovered in the early 21st century; it was central to the tribes of the Confederacy. The improvements discovered at the site during archaeological research have confirmed that Powhatan had a paramount chiefdom over the other tribes in the power hierarchy. Anthropologist Robert L. Carneiro in his The Chiefdom: Precursor of the State. The Transition to Statehood in the New World (1981), deeply explores the political structure of the chiefdom and confederacy. Powhatan (and his several successors) ruled what is called a complex chiefdom, referred to by scholars as the Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom. Research work continues at Werowocomoco and elsewhere that deepens understanding of the Powhatan world. Wahunsenacawh had inherited control over six tribes but dominated more than 30 by 1607 when the English settlers established their Virginia Colony at Jamestown. The original six tribes under Wahunsenacawh were: the Powhatan (proper), the Arrohateck, the Appamattuck, the Pamunkey, the Mattaponi, and the Chiskiack.” ref

“He added the Kecoughtan to his fold by 1598. Some other affiliated groups included the Rappahannock, Moraughtacund, Weyanoak, Paspahegh, Quiyoughcohannock, Warraskoyack, and Nansemond. Another closely related tribe of the same language group was the Chickahominy, but they managed to preserve their autonomy from the Powhatan Paramount Chiefdom. The Accawmacke, located on the Eastern Shore across the Chesapeake Bay, were nominally tributary to the Powhatan Chiefdom but enjoyed autonomy under their own Paramount Chief or “Emperor”, Debedeavon (aka “The Laughing King”). Half a million Native Americans were living in the Allegheny Mountains around the year 1600. 30,000 of those 500,000 lived in the Chesapeake region under Powhatan’s rule, by 1677 only five percent of his population remained. The huge jump in deaths was caused by exposure and contact with Europeans. In his Notes on the State of Virginia (1781–82), Thomas Jefferson estimated that the Powhatan Confederacy occupied about 8,000 square miles (20,000 km²) of territory, with a population of about 8,000 people, of whom 2400 were warriors. Later scholars estimated the total population of the paramountcy as 15,000.” ref 

“Powhatan (died April 1618, Virginia [U.S.]) was a North American Indian leader, father of Pocahontas. He presided over the Powhatan empire at the time the English established the Jamestown Colony (1607). Powhatan had inherited rulership of an empire of six tribes from his father. After succeeding his father, Powhatan brought about two dozen other tribes into the empire that was named for him; at the peak of his power, he is estimated to have ruled between 13,000 and 34,000 people. Powhatan was an astute and energetic ruler, but he was also noted as being strict and occasionally cruel toward his subjects. In the Algonquian language of his people, his title as emperor was mamanatowick, and his territory was known as Tsenacommacah. Each tribe within the Powhatan empire had its own chief, or weroance, and Powhatan ruled as the chief of these chiefs.” ref

“English colonists established a settlement, known as Jamestown, on an uninhabited peninsula within his territory in 1607. The Powhatan empire at the time of the colonists’ arrival essentially covered present-day eastern Virginia, extending from the Potomac River to the Great Dismal Swamp, and its capital was at the village of Werowocomoco. Powhatan initially acted ambivalently toward the English settlement, sometimes ordering or permitting attacks against the colonists while at other times trading tribal food for sought-after English goods such as metal tools. During the colony’s early years, he appears to have viewed the English as potential allies against his own enemies—namely, the Monacan, Mannahoac, and Massawomeck tribes to the north and west. In his trading and negotiation with the colony in those years, the English were generally represented by John Smith, with whom Powhatan played a cat-and-mouse game as each side assessed the other’s capabilities and intentions.” ref 

“Among the Algonquian-speaking Virginia Indians, succession to the status of chief, or weroance, was matrilineal, meaning that Wahunsonacock must have been the son of a sister of a Powhatan weroance, taking his place as chief on the death of his uncle. Despite his status, Wahunsonacock’s childhood likely was no different from other boys; until he was about five, he went to the gardens, marshes, and forests with his mother, probably practicing archery, with her encouragement, on any creature that moved there. As an adolescent, having proved himself a proficient hunter, he endured the huskanaw ritual initiating him into manhood, after which he returned to his family and joined the ranks of the tribe’s warriors and hunters. His status as an heir to the rank of chief probably made him a cockarouse, or member of his uncle’s council.” ref 

“Powhatan’s given name was Wahunsenacawh, also spelled Wahunsunacock. Little of his early life is known apart from what we can assume. We know that he came to power in the town of Powhatan, which was located near present-day Richmond. As a boy he would have aided his mother in tasks like farming and gathering useful plants. As a teenager, he would undergo a coming-of-age ritual called a huskanaw. Now considered an adult, he would have joined the other men in hunting, and might have also served as a member of the chief’s council due to his high rank. At an unknown age, he became the weroance, or chief, of Powhatan. In order to become a weroance in a matrilineal, or female-based system of inheritance, he could have been the son of the previous weroance’s sister. The new weroance of the Powhatan people would expand his political influence using several methods. One such method was force. Warfare was an expected and frequent reality of life in Powhatan’s time, and all men would have been trained as warriors.” ref

Proto-Oceanic Society was Matrilineal

“This article considers the distribution of matrilineality in the daughters of Proto Oceanic (POc) society and asserts that this distribution is most conveniently explained by Per Hage’s (1998) suggestion that POc society/Ancestral Lapita society may have been matrilineal. Proto Oceanic was the Austronesian interstage ancestral to all the Austronesian languages in Oceania with the exception of two—the Western Micronesian languages Palauan  (Palau  Island)  and Chamorro  (Mariana Islands).  POc speakers were the bearers of Early Western Lapita culture which appears in the archaeological record in the Bismarck Archipelago between 3400 and 3300 years ago.” ref

Matrilineality and the Melanesian Origin of Polynesian Y Chromosomes

“Linguists and archaeologists are in general agreement that the Austronesian languages originated in Southeast Asia on or near Taiwan around 3000 b.c. and that Austronesian-speakers dispersed through Island Southeast Asia, reaching Melanesia by 1450 b.c. and Western Polynesia by 950 BCE. This model is supported by genetic data showing a predominantly Asian origin of Polynesian mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Recently, however, Kayser et al. (2000) have shown a Melanesian origin of Polynesian Y chromosomes favoring a Slow Boat to Polynesia model with substantial population interaction components in relation to indigenous non-Austronesian (Papuan) populations in Melanesia. Our hypothesis is that the predominance of maternally transmitted mtDNA of Asian origin and the significant presence of paternally transmitted Y chromosomes of Melanesian origin in Polynesian ancestry can be accounted for as an effect of matrilocal residence and matrilineal descent in ProtoOceanic society.” ref

“For present purposes matrilineal descent groups are lineages or clans in which membership is traced exclusively through female links to a founding ancestor. In matrilocal residence a married couple lives “with or near the female matrilineal kinsmen of the wife”. In a matrilineal chiefdom, as hypothesized for Proto-Oceanic, a man is succeeded by his sister’s son. In a patrilineal descent, group membership is traced exclusively through male links to a founding ancestor, and a man is succeeded by his son. In patrilocal residence a married couple lives “with or near the male patrilineal kinsmen of the husband.” In a cognatic descent group membership is traced through either male or female links. Double descent (not to be confused with cognatic descent) refers to the presence of both matrilineal and patrilineal descent groups in the same society.” ref

There are three lineages of Polynesian mtDNA. The predominant lineage, accounting for 90–95% of Polynesian mtDNA, is a haplotype possessing a 9-base-pair intergenic deletion shared with Asian populations. The greater diversity of this haplotype in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Taiwan implies an Asian origin and an eastward expansion of Austronesian-speakers into Polynesia. A second haplotype, accounting for 3.5% of Polynesian mtDNA, is also found in Melanesia, in Vanuatu and in coastal New Guinea. Kayser et al. (2000) have discovered three haplotypes (lineages) of Polynesian Y chromosomes. The dominant haplotype, DYS 390.3del/RPS4Y711T, accounts for 82% of Cook Island, 70% of Western Samoan, 26% of Coastal Papua New Guinean, and 9–12% of Indonesian Y chromosomes. This haplotype is not found in any other Southeast Asian or Asian population.” ref

“It originated in Melanesia an estimated 11,500 years ago, long before the intrusion of Austronesian-speakers into Melanesia about 3,500 years ago. A second haplotype, M122C/M9G, is infrequent in Polynesia, accounting for 7.1–10.7% of Polynesian Y chromosomes, but frequent in East and Southeast Asia. It probably originated in Asia on the order of 11,000 years ago. Kayser et al. conclude from the Y-chromosome data that the express-train model should be replaced by a slow-boat model in which the Austronesian-speaking (Oceanic) ancestors of the Polynesians moved slowly across Melanesia, “mixing extensively” with indigenous non-Austronesian-speaking (Papuan) populations, leaving behind their genes and “incorporating” many Melanesian non-Austronesian genes. This model is consistent with cultural and archaeological evidence of Austronesian–non-Austronesian interaction and with the linguistic “pause” in the spread of the Austronesian languages between the arrival of the Lapita archaeological culture in 1450 BCE and about 1100 BCE.” ref

“On general comparative grounds, some century or centuries of change would seem to be required to account for the common linguistic innovations that mark all Austronesian Oceanic languages (and no other [living] Austronesian languages) matrilocal residence and matrilineal descent in proto-oceanic society Kayser et al.’s model does not specify the type of “intermixing” between Austronesian- and non-Austronesian-speaking populations in Melanesia, but we suggest that it took place in the framework of matrilocal residence and matrilineal descent in Proto-Oceanic society. By “Proto-Oceanic” we mean the language at the end point of its common development in the Bismarcks before the various incremental and abrupt dispersals that led to more localized varieties of speech. By “Proto-Oceanic society” we mean, formally, what can be reconstructed, linguistically, about the social vocabulary of Proto-Oceanic-speakers and what we infer from that about their society.” ref

By “Lapita society” the archaeologists mean what was surely the same community and what can be inferred about it through archaeology, comparative ethnography, and comparative linguistics. Proto-Oceanic (Lapita) society was a sophisticated maritime and horticultural society of Austronesian origin that developed in the region of the Bismarck Archipelago in western Melanesia around 1500 BCE. The society was based on an extensive voyaging and exchange network. By 1100 to 1200 BCE daughter societies were expanding eastward, arriving in the Fiji-Tonga-Samoa area by 950 BCE. After a “long pause” in Western Polynesia of as much as 1,000 years, as evidenced by numerous innovations in ProtoPolynesian, colonization resumed, reaching all islands in Eastern Polynesia by 1000 BCE.” ref

Trobriander people

“Trobriander, any of the Melanesian people of the Kiriwina (Trobriand) Islands, lying off eastern New Guinea. Subsistence is based on yams and other vegetables, domesticated pigs, and fish. Storage houses for yams and the chief’s house stand in the middle of the village, surrounded by dwellings arranged in circles. Each hut is occupied by a single family. Trobrianders are divided into totemic clans, the members of which trace their descent matrilineally (i.e., from a common ancestor through the female line). The village is the major social unit; members make their gardens together under the guidance of a garden magician, perform ceremonies, and travel together on trading expeditions. Each village has a headman, and high-ranking headmen, or chiefs, may have authority over several villages.” ref

“Wealth is extremely important as a sign of power and the means of exercising it. The Trobrianders are noted for their elaborate intertribal trading system, the kula (q.v.), which was described in the anthropological classic Argonauts of the Western Pacific (1922) by Bronisław Malinowski. Red shell necklaces are traded between permanent trading partners in a clockwise direction around a ring of islands; white shell bracelets are traded counterclockwise. Large seagoing dugout canoes are constructed for the interisland trading expeditions.” ref

Daughter Preference and Contraceptive-use in Matrilineal Tribal Societies in Meghalaya, India

“Abstract: Although son preference in patrilineal society is an established fact, daughter preference in matrilineal society is not thoroughly examined. Very few studies have been carried out on the issue. This paper attempts to explore the daughter preference and contraceptive-use in matrilineal tribal societies in Meghalaya, India. Data from the National Family Health Survey 1998-1999 have been used in this study because, among the large-scale surveys, only this dataset allows identification of matrilineal sample. Mean, percentage, and standard deviation are computed in the present study. Further, the data have been cross-tabulated, and logistic regression has been run through SPSS (version 15). Among the ever-married matrilineal women, 17% desired more sons than daughters but 18.2% desired more daughters than sons. About 11% of ever-married women could achieve their desired sex composition of children. However, a very striking finding suggests that, even after achieving desired sex composition of children, as high as 61.8% of women were still not using contraception mainly because of programme factors while one-fourth were still depending on temporary methods. The rest 13.2% adopted terminal method of contraception, which calls for immediate attention of planners. With the increase in the number of sons but without daughter, contraceptive-use drastically decreased. The most desired sex composition of children seems to be two daughters and a son. Absence of daughter with increase in the total number of sons increased the desire for additional children. Every woman with two or more sons but without daughter wanted the next child to be a daughter. Thus, there are ample evidences to draw the conclusion that there is, in fact, a daughter preference in the matrilineal tribal societies in Meghalaya, India. Policy-makers may, thus, target the women who have achieved fertility and should ensure that daughter preference does not lead to the negligence to sons.” ref

But is Atlantis real?

No. Atlantis (an allegory: “fake story” interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning) can’t be found any more than one can locate the Jolly Green Giant that is said to watch over frozen vegetables. Lol

ref

May Reason Set You Free

There are a lot of truly great things said by anarchists in history, and also some deeply vile things, too, from not supporting Women’s rights to Anti-Semitism. There are those who also reject those supporting women’s rights as well as fight anti-Semitism. This is why I push reason as my only master, not anarchist thinking, though anarchism, to me, should see all humans everywhere as equal in dignity and rights.

We—Cory and Damien—are following the greatness that can be found in anarchist thinking.

As an Anarchist Educator, Damien strives to teach the plain truth. Damien does not support violence as my method to change. Rather, I choose education that builds Enlightenment and Empowerment. I champion Dignity and Equality. We rise by helping each other. What is the price of a tear? What is the cost of a smile? How can we see clearly when others pay the cost of our indifference and fear? We should help people in need. Why is that so hard for some people? Rich Ghouls must End. Damien wants “billionaires” to stop being a thing. Tax then into equality. To Damien, there is no debate, Capitalism is unethical. Moreover, as an Anarchist Educator, Damien knows violence is not the way to inspire lasting positive change. But we are not limited to violence, we have education, one of the most lasting and powerful ways to improve the world. We empower the world by championing Truth and its supporters.

Anarchism and Education

“Various alternatives to education and their problems have been proposed by anarchists which have gone from alternative education systems and environments, self-education, advocacy of youth and children rights, and freethought activism.” ref

“Historical accounts of anarchist educational experiments to explore how their pedagogical practices, organization, and content constituted a radical alternative to mainstream forms of educational provision in different historical periods.” ref

“The Ferrer school was an early 20th century libertarian school inspired by the anarchist pedagogy of Francisco Ferrer. He was a proponent of rationalist, secular education that emphasized reason, dignity, self-reliance, and scientific observation. The Ferrer movement’s philosophy had two distinct tendencies: non-didactic freedom from dogma and the more didactic fostering of counter-hegemonic beliefs. Towards non-didactic freedom from dogma, and fulfilled the child-centered tradition.” ref

Teach Real History: all our lives depend on it.

#SupportRealArchaeology

#RejectPseudoarchaeology

Damien sees lies about history as crimes against humanity. And we all must help humanity by addressing “any and all” who make harmful lies about history.