,^0, m^ .^ ^ ^^ip^^ ^ ^ ^^ G^" ^"^o ^/r.T^' A ^. .M" -V/7:^>._ .^' 0- ^- ''^ -V -<» ^ N// ,7V, '\- , .V k\VA' i: ^^' -^^ ".vM\y.- .«.^'"-^. '-mm: j-'^-u. ':mm': ^"h \,^ -•MC'.X/ '' ^ o V"^ . "> ^0-^, '^^ A^' .^;r?^:0^^ ■ -it .^'^ /-r^-^l-o > ^■f^^^^'^^ ^^ 4' ~ & -^o. v^' o ^oV ^ ^^-^ ,^ O" s> ^0 (^^. o V ^0 ^ m '# ,4' \^J e^^ -2: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS IN AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 139-194 June 24, 1916 MIWOK MOIETIES BY EDWARD WINSLOW GIFFORD CONTENTS PAGE Introduction 139 Moieties 140 Exogamy 141 Totemism 142 Ceremonies 14.5 Personal Names 146 Marriages 161 Genealogies 165 Terms of Relationship 170 Terminology and Social Customs 181 Cross-cousin Marriage 189 Conclusion 193 INTRODUCTION The Miwok Indians of the Sierra Nevada of California are divided by anthropologists into three dialectic groups, termed Northern or Amador, Central or Tuolumne, and Southern or Mariposa. These three groups occupy the western slope of the mountains from El Dorado County in the north to Madera County in the south. ^ Their social organization takes the form of totemic exogamic moieties with paternal descent. To Dr. C. Hart Merriam and to Dr. S. A. Barrett belongs the credit of calling attention to the Miwok moieties.^ The present contribution. 1 For geograj)hieal information see C. Hart Merriam, Distribution and Classi- fication of the Mewan Stock of California, Am. Anthr., n. s., ix, 338-357, 1907; and S. A. Barrett, The Geography and Dialects of the Miwok Indians, Univ. Calif. Publ. Am. Arch. Ethn., vi, .333-368, 1908. 2 C. Hart Merriam, Totemism in California, Am. Anthr., n. s., x, 558-562, 1908; S. A. Barrett, Totemism Among the Miwok Indians, Journ. Am. Folk-Lore, XVII, 237, 1908. 140 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Etlin. [Vol. 12 while treating of the moieties in a general way, deals especially with two subjects with which they are closely interlocked, viz., personal names and terms of relationship. The former are connected with the totemic features of the moieties, the latter with the exogamic features. The writer has recently found an organization, bearing a resem- blance to that of the Miwok, among the Shoshonean Mono on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada in Madera County, and among the Chukchansi, Gashowu, and Tachi, which are Yokuts. tribes. The Chukchansi inhabit Madera County north of the San Joaquin River ; the Gashowu inhabit Fresno County south of the San Joaquin River ; and the Tachi inhabit the plains north of Tulare Lake. These discov- eries, which will be treated in a forthcoming paper, indicate that social organization on a dual basis was common to a large part of south central California." The data here recorded refer, except where otherwise noted, to the Central Sierra Miwok, and were obtained during three visits to their territory in Tuolumne County. These visits were made in 1913, 1914, and 1915. Information was also obtained from people who spoke the Northern Sierra dialect and who were employed on ranches in the vicinity of Elk Grove, Sacramento County. These people had come down from their homes in the Sierra Nevada foothills of Amador County. A brief visit was also paid to the Southern Sierra Miwok of Madera County. In the preparation of this paper I am indebted to Dr. A. L. Kroeber, who has unstintingly given me the benefit of his knowledge of Californian ethnology. MOIETIES As already related, the Central Sierra Miwok are divided into ex- ogamic moieties with paternal descent, usually spoken of as kikua (water side) and tunuka (land, or dry, side). Frequently the former are referred to as "bullfrog people" (lotasuna) and the latter as "bluejay people" (kosituna). The presence of two exogamic divisions with animal nicknames has at least a superficial analogy to a case mentioned by Dr. W. H. R. Rivers as occurring on the island of Raga or Pentecost in the northern New Hebrides.* 3 For a preliminary notice see Dichotomous Social Organization in South Central California, Univ. Calif. Publ. Am. Arch. Ethn., xi, 291-296, 1916. 4 Totemism in Polynesia and Melanesia, Journ. Eoy. Anthr. Inst., xxxix, 172, 1909. 1916] Giford: Miwoh Moieties 141 With the Miwok th'e moiety has no subdivisions. At first glance the fact that 16 per cent of the Central Sierra Miwok are named after bears, and the remainder after numerous other animate and inanimate objects and phenomena, would seem to suggest a phratral system, with numerous totemic gentes, gone into decay. The Indians, nevertheless, positively deny the existence of smaller divisions. They in no way regard the people witli bear names, for example, as forming a special group. Nothing in the information obtained points to a phratral system ever having been in operation. Individuals from the Northern Sierra division of the Miwok were found to disagree as to the occurrence of the moiety system among their people. An informant from West Point in Calaveras County and one from Jackson in Amador County stated that the dual divisions were in force in those places. Two other informants, one thirty and the other about forty years of age, from Plymouth, in Amador County, knew nothing about the moieties. Exogamy The exogamic rules of the moieties were not rigidly adhered to even before the coming of the whites. Out of a series of four hundred and thirteen individuals, whose names were obtained, one hundred and eighty-four, or 45 per cent, belonged to the water moiety, and two hundred and twenty-nine, or 55 per cent, to the land moiety. The greater number of these four hundred and thirteen individuals were either of the generation of the oldest Indians of today or of the pre- ceding generation. Had the exogamic rules been strictly enforced it would have meant that ten people out of every hundred went un- married or else married late in life. The natural result of this pre- ponderance of one moiety over the other would be the breaking down of strict exogamy in actual practice, especially in a case like the present, where the system lacks the rigidity of the Australian marriage- class system. Informants stated that strenuous efforts were never made to prevent improper marriages. The relatives merely objected and pointed out the impropriety of such marriages. Under the head- ing "Marriages" are listed the recorded Miwok marriages, of which actually 25 per cent are improper. The figures in the last paragraph show the division into moieties of the Central Sierra Miwok as a whole, at least so far as the data go. A list of the inhabitants of only one village was obtained. This village 142 Vniversiiy of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 was located on Big Creek near Groveland. The total number of indi- viduals listed is one hundred and two and includes people of all generations within the knowledge of the informant. Out of this total, 56 per cent belonged to the water moiety and 44 per cent to the land moiety. This is the reverse of the situation among the Central Sierra Miwok exclusive of the Big Creek people. A table will perhaps make the situation clearer. Percentage Percentage of water of land moiety moiety Central Sierra Miwok in general 45 55 Village at Big Creek 56 44 Central Sierra Miwok, except Big Creek people 41 59 Unfortunately no other village censuses have been taken, so that in comparing the Big Creek people with the remainder of the Central Sierra Miwok we are comparing with a very miscellaneous and scat- tered lot of individuals. Roughly stated, however, they may be said to be mainly Jamestown and Knights Ferry people. At Big Creek twelve people out of a hundred were ineligible for monogamic mar- riage within the village, if strict exogamy were enforced. In the region outside of Big Creek, however, eighteen people out of a hun- dred were ineligible. Totem ISM That totemic symptoms of one sort or another are present in the Miwok organization cannot be denied ; yet, on the other hand, it must be acknowledged that the classing of the Miwok with totemic peoples is based on a rather Aveak foundation. The claims for such classifi- cation rest on three well established facts. First, all nature is divided between land and water, in a more or less arbitrary manner, to be sure, as shown by the classing of such animals as the coyote, deer, and quail on the "water" side. Second, the exogamic moieties are identified respectively with land and water. Third, an intimate connection exists between the land and water divisions of nature and the land and water moieties. This connection is through personal names, which usually have an implied reference to animate or inanimate natural objects or phenomena, although not infrefpiently to manufactured objects instead. The objects or phe- nomena referred to in personal names belong, as a rule, either to the water or to the land side of nature. The names are applied according 1916] Giford: MiwoTc Moieties 143 as the individual is of the water or of the land moiety. Hence, it may be said that each moiety is connected through the personal names of its members with a more or less definite group of objects and phenomena. The ensuing very incomplete lists, the contents of which were spontaneous on the part of informants, give some idea of the dual classification of nature. The reason for placing on the ''water" side certain creatures which are actually land animals is hard to under- stand. An informant explained two of the cases to me as follows: The quail is placed on the water side because a turtle once turned into a quail ; while the coyote is placed on the water side because Coyote won a bet with the creator and the latter had to go to the sky and take a land-side name, while Coyote remained on earth and took a water- side name. On the water side are coyote, deer, antelope, beaver, otter, quail, dove, kingbird, bluebird, turkey vulture, killdeer, jacksnipe, goose, crane, kingfisher, swan, land salamander, water snake, eel, whitefish, minnow, katydid, butterfly, clouds, and rainy weather. On the land side are tree squirrel, dog, mountain lion, wildcat, raccoon, jay, hawk, condor, raven, California woodpecker, flicker, salmon-berry, " Indian j)otato, " sky, and clear weather. Another, though slender, bit of evidence in favor of totemism is a fragment of a myth recounting the origin of the moieties. It was obtained from a woman of the water moiety, Mrs. Sophie Thompson, formerly chieftainess at Big Creek, near Groveland. She stated that her father, Nomasu, told her the story. In this myth it is interesting to note that, although an animal of each side is concerned, it is the coyote, usually classified by the Miwok as a water animal, which actually gives birth to the four founders of the moieties. However, the part the coyote plays may perhaps be as much that of culture hero as of water totem. The myth, the scene of which is laid in Hetch- Hetchy Valley, runs as follows : Coyote said to his wife, Bear, as he was about to cohabit with her: "We will have a boy and a girl. ' ' His wife gave birtli to twins, a coyote-boy and a coyote-girl, who grew up. Coyote girl married a bear. Coyote himself dreamed and "made the first four people when he was dreaming. He dreamed how he was going to make two kinds and how he was going to call them." Coyote-girl and her husband told each other they would have four children, two girls and two boys. Coyote- girl gave birth to them and they were the first four people about whom Coyote dreamed. 144 University of California Fublications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 Coyote named one of the male children Tunuka and one of the female children Kikiia. The other male child he named Kikua and the other female Tunuka. Coyote thus made the moieties and gave people their first names. The new couples, although brothers and sisters, married and had children. The gopher acted as messenger and told Tunuka (woman) to come and help Kikua (woman) give birth to her child. After his wife Kikua had given birth, Tunuka (man) went out and killed a turkey vulture so as to wrap his baby in the feathers. Next Tunuka (woman) had a baby and gopher went to Kikua (woman) and asked her to come and assist at the delivery. Then Kikua (the husband of Tunuka) went out and killed an eagle to wrap his baby in. He also killed a deer and tanned the hide to make a cradle-board of it for the baby. Coyote-boy also married his sister's daughter Tunuka, the wife of Kikua. The above myth is the only one obtained which points to a belief in actual descent from animals. When applied to people with bear names it looks very much like a myth of descent from the totem, or at least from the animal after which these people are named. Especi- ally is this true if a genealogy shows bear names continuously on the male side of the family. Such was very nearly the case with the family of the informant's husband (see genealogy III). With one exception, all possessed bear names, at least during the four generations shown in the genealogy just mentioned. When asked if her husband be- lieved his paternal ancestors to be descended from a bear, Mrs. Thomp- son replied in the affirmative ; but the bear she referred to was Coyote- girl's husband, who, according to the myth, was the paternal ancestor of all the Miwok regardless of moiety or personal name, and not merely the paternal ancestor of the Miwok with bear names. Negative an- swers were received from all other informants when similar questions were propounded to them. They were usually amused at the idea of one of their ancestors being a bear, the sun, a dance-pole, or some other object. In short, the Central Sierra Miwok as a whole do not believe that they are descended from animals. They do believe, however, that they succeeded the animals on earth, which is the belief common to the typical central Californian stocks. This belief, that before the coming of the Indians animals possessed the world, is very different from the idea of descent from the totem. Informants stated that in former days it was customary for people to "show respect" to the bear, the eagle, and the falcon after any of these had been killed. This was done by laying the body of the slain creature on a blanket and having a little feast in honor of it wheu it was brought to the hunter's home. So far as I could ascertain, this was not a ceremony connected with moieties or with totemism. It was no different in import from tlie offerings made by tlie Miwok wlien 1916] Gilford: Miwolc Moieties 145 a condor was killed or when the young of a certain hawk were taken from the nest.^ This type of ceremony was common to a large part of California. The purpose was to appease the animal or its spirit. The ceremony was based on the belief that the animals possessed dangerous supernatural power. Obviously the three cases in question are no different in motive from the above, or from the practices of other stocks, of which a notable example is the Maidu treatment of bears." The supernatural powers obtained by shamans from animals were not received, except by coincidence, from the animal after which the shaman was named. A man of the water moiety might become a bear shaman just as readily as a man of the land moiety, even though bears and bear names are associated only with the latter moiety. Appar- ently a man's moiety and his personal name had no influence on his acquisition of supernatural power. The animal he was n-amed after did not become his familiar or guardian spirit, except, as I have said, by coincidence. Ceremonies The participation of the moieties as such in games and cere- monies was unimportant. Out of forty-four known ceremonies, the moieties took part as such in only four — the funeral, the mourning ceremony, the girl's puberty ceremony, and a dance known as the ahana. At least at Big Creek the moieties had reciprocal funerary functions, it being the duty of one moiety to care for the dead of the other. In the washing of the people which terminated the mourning ceremony washers of the water moiety tended one basket and washed people of the land moiety, while washers of the land moiety tended another basket and washed people of the water moiety. This custom, together with that of the moieties taking sides in games, obtained regu- larly at Big Creek, but not to such an extent elsewhere. This perhaps points to Big Creek as a place in which the moiety system was more firmly established. In the girl's puberty ceremony it was customary for some girl, for whom the rites had previously been performed, to exchange dresses with the initiate. In all cases the two girls belonged to opposite moie- ties; if the initiate was of the water moiety, the girl who exchanged dresses with her must be of the land moiety. In the ahana dance the 5 See the meaning of Teuke in the list of personal names, p. 157. 6 Eoland B. Dixon, The Northern Maidu, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., xvii, 194, 1905. 146 University of California Publieaiions in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 1:1 spectators, who made gifts to the dancers, were always of the opposite moiety but of the same sex as the dancers to whom they gave presents. Among the Southern Sierra Miwok of Madera County dancers indicate their moiety by means of paint, especially on the face. The land moiety is indicated by stripes, usually horizontal; the water moiety by spots. The latter are said to represent the spots of fawns, which are water moiety animals. Informants did not know what the land moiety stripes represented. PERSONAL NAMES A child was named shortly after birth, preferably by a grand- father, but not infrequently by any one of the near relatives. The name received at that time was kept throughout life. Names of men and women did not differ. Occasionally a person received a nickname later in life. The literal meanings or derivations, in part at least, as well as the connotations, of one hundred and forty-four personal names were obtained. Thirty-four of these names prove to be nouns or deriva- tives of nouns, and one hundred and two verbs or derivatives of verbs. Of the remaining eight names, three are adverbial, while five may be either nouns or verbs. It is likely that a similar proportion will be found throughout the remaining two hundred and eighty-seven names, of which record was made, when the literal meanings are worked out. It is interesting to find that in the use of both nouns and verbs Yokuts personal names, as obtained by Dr. A. L. Kroeber, agree with the Miwok.'^ To a strange Indian, not acquainted with the individual whose name is mentioned, verb names have only their literal meaning. To the friends and acquaintances of the individual, however, the name has more than its literal meaning. It has an implied meaning, which usually brings in a reference to an animate or inanimate object. For example, the personal name Wiiksii is a form of the verb meaning "to go." Yet to the friends and relatives of the man his name meant "Sun going down." Another interesting case is found in the per- sonal names Hausii and Hautcu, both derived from hausus, to yawn, or to gap(\ The former is a land moiety name and a bear is implied ; the latter is a water moiety name and a salmon is implied. An ex- treme case, but one which throws light on the uumtal attitude of the Yokuts Names, Jourii. Am. Folk Lore, XIX, 142-143, 1906. 1916] Gi ford: Mi wok Moieties 147 name-giver, is that of the name Kuyunu. This name, according to the informant, had the connotation, "Dog wagging its tail/' Kuyunu contains the same root as kuyage, to whistle. Apparently the name- giver thought of the whistling of a man to a dog as the cause of the dog wagging its tail, and, instead of naming the child after the action of the dog, named it after the cause of the dog's action ; namely, whis- tling. Without knowledge of the individual, a Miwok, on hearing any of the above names, would be unable to decide as to the person 's moiety or as to the animal or object implied. In the seventy bear names obtained, the word for bear is actually used in only one case. In other words, among the Miwok there is absolutely nothing in the literal meanings of over 70 per cent of the personal names even to suggest totemism. It is only in the implied meanings that the totemic element appears. In this respect there is a striking resemblance to the Mohave custom of calling women by names which have only an implied and perhaps esoteric reference to natural objects or phe- nomena, the coyote, for instance.^ A close parallel to Miwok names is found in Hopi personal names, as set forth in the Rev. H. R. Voth's paper on "Hopi Proper Names. "^ The names as a rule are considerably longer than the average Miwok name, because they are usually made up of two or more elements, in many cases a noun and a verb. Pure verb names among the Hopi are scarce, but, when they do occur, they do not differ from Miwok verb names in their application. For example, consider the name Una, which means "remember"; in this there is nothing to indicate the animal or object for which the person was named. Yet the coyote is implied, and the name "refers to the fact that a coyote is said to remember some food that he has buried somewhere and that he then gets." As stated above, each Miwok name has an implied or actual reference to an object associated with the moiety to which the pos- sessor of the name belongs. Each Hopi name, however, does not refer to the clan totem of the possessor, except coincidentally, but does refer to the clan totem of the name-giver. The most striking resemblance between the Miwok and the Hopi systems of naming lies in the fact that in each system names identical in form, when applied to different individuals, may connote entirely different objects. Half-breeds born of Miwok mothers and white fathers are always considered as belonging to tlie moiety of which the mother is not a 8 A. L. Kroeber, Preliminary Sketch of the Mohave Indians, Am. Anthr., n. s., IV, 278, 1902. 9 Field Col. Mus. Anthr., vi, 61-113, 1905. 148 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Etlin. [Vol. 12 member. For example, if the mother is of the land moiety, the half- breed child will be of the water moiety and his or her name will refer to an animal or object identified with the water side of nature. The matter of naming foreigners who take up their residence with the Miwok proceeds after a somewhat similar fashion. It is particu- larly well exemplified by a number of Yokuts and Costanoan men who lived with the Miwok and married Miwok women. As a rule these men were placed in the moiety to which their wives did not belong. The same practice is shown in the marriage of Yottoko, a negro, to Ukunulumaiye, a Miwok woman of the land moiety. Yottoko was given a water moiety name. The above custom is just the reverse of the Winnebago practice, in which foreigners who marry Winnebago women are given a name from the wife's clan.^'^ Descent with the Winnebago is paternal as with the Miwok, hence the children of such marriages belong to the mother's clan, not directly through the mother, however, but through the father. The ensuing list gives the names for which complete or partial derivations have been worked out. The sex and moiety of each indi- vidual is indicated as follows: (m.) for male, (f.) for female, W. for water moiety, L. for land moiety. The italicized words in this list indicate the animals or other objects to which the personal names refer. It is to be noted that the connotation of a name occasionally brings to light an interesting old custom, for example, in the ease of the name Tcuke (see p. 157). Lack of familiarity with the language prevents a fuller linguistic analysis of the names. Akaino. L. (m.) Bear holding its head up. Akaiye, to hold one's head up. Akulu. L. (m.) Looking at the sun. Akule, to look up. Apanta. W. (m.) Salamander in the water. Apanta, salamander. Atce. W. (f.) Cutting and drying salmon. Ate, to split off. Awanata. W. (m.) Turtle. Elki. L. (m.) Bear hanging intestines of people on top of rocks or bushes. Elkini, to hang on top of or over. Efieto. L. (m.) Bear's manner of walking. Ena, bent or crooked. In this case reference is made to the bear bending its foot when walking. Epeta. L. (f.) Lizard lying on top of rock. Epetitcii, to lie on the belly. Etu. L. (m.) Sun rising from the hills. Etu, sun; etunni, to get warm in the sun, that is, to sun one's self; etuniii, to ascend a hill. According to a Big Creek informant, etu is the term for sun at that place. Cf. watu, sun, in Southern Sierra dialect. Among the Central Sierra Miwok, other than Big Creek people, hiema is the term for sun. Etumu. L. (m.) Bear warming itself in the sun. Etumu, to sun one's self. 10 Paul Radin, The Clau Organization of the Winnebago, a Preliminary Paper, Am. Anthr., n. s., xii, 212-213, 1910. 1916] Gifford: Miwok Moieties 149 Etumiiye. L. (f.) Bear climbing a hill. Etumii, to asceud a hill. Hatawa. L. (m.) Bear breaking the bones of people or animals. Hate, foot; hate, to press with the foot; atwa, to split. Hateya. L. (f.) Bear making track in the dust. Hate, foot; hate, to press with the foot. Hausii. L. (m.) Bear yawning as it awakes. Hausus, to yawn, to gape. Hautcu. W. (m.) Salmon gaping when out of water. Hausus, to yawn, to gape. He'eluye. L. (f.) Bow, arroirs, and quiver placed against tree while warrior rests. Seelutco, to lay on side. Helaku. L. (f.) Sunny elay without clouds. Helaku, sunny day. Helki. W. (m.) Jacksnipe (?) digging into ground with bill. Hele, to touch. The Miwok name for the bird alluded to its kuiatawila; it is said to come only in the winter. Helkimu. W. (m.) Hitting bushes with seed beater. Hele, to touch. Heltu. L. (m.) Bear barely touching people as it reaches for them. Helat, to reach for and barely touch. Hesutu. L. (m.) Lifting a i/f??o«--JocA-eiia jay hopping on ground. Tuiyaugum, to jump. 152 University of Calif ornin Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 Tukeye. L. (f.) Pine cones dropping and making dust. Tukini, to throw end- wise. Tukiili. W. (m.) Caterpillar traveling hea ' Named after Eskeye L Farewell-to-spring Mateumpaiye L Farewell-to-spring Eskeye L Farewell-to-spring Sumteiwe L Sugar pine Hatawa L Bear Piltcitema W Meadowlark Hatawa L Bear Sumteiwe L Sugar pine Haikiwisu W Salmon Semuki L Wizard Hiinipte L Seed Polneye W Dove Kilikila L Hawk Huatania L Seed Kono L Tree squirrel Natcamila W Acorn Kukse W Valley quail Hesutuye L Yellow-jacket Kutcuyak L Bear Musonotoma W Valley quail Litaiia W Hummingbird Laapisak L Bear Lnkiilkatu L Fox- Mukuye W Deer Lukulkatu L Fox Oivikoisive L Salt Lutein L Goldfinch Tiputa W Valley quail Liitcmu W Salmon Hiimiita L Tolmcco Malila W Salmon Tcumutuye L Bear Malkuyu w Farewell-to-spring Itcimuye L Magpie Metikla w Sucker fish Selipu L Falcon Molestu w Deer Uskuye L Sugar pine 1916] Gifford: Miicolc Moieties 16? Husband Moiety Named after Wife Moiety Named after Mulya L Acorn Yaluta L Farewell-to-spring Mulya L Acorn Yukukukuye W Dove Miikii W Deer Tcumela L Bear Neplii L Bear Kusetuye W ' ' Wild potato ' ' Pati W Fish Tiputa W Valley quail Patiwo W Deer Yuttciso L Chicken hawk Pele 'me L Coyote Posala L Farewell-to-spring Pososu L Great horned owl Loiyetuye L Farewell-to-spring POPOSU L Great horned owl Yaluta L Farewell-to-spring Potou 'e W Football Hisokuye L Bear Punoi L Tree squirrel Liptuye L Pine nuts Putsume L Bear Pukuna W Deer Sipatu L Fox Pukuna W Deer Sitni W Bow Sapata L Bear Sitni W Bow Toloisi L Chicken hawk Sitni W Bow Yuttciso L Chicken hawk Situtu W Arrow, quiv^er Sewati L Bear Sokono W Wizard Matcuta L Pine nuts Solotci L Jackrabbit Epeta L Lizard Soso L Tree squirrel Wasekuye W Acorn Suki L Chicken hawk Tcipuyu W Salmon Sukumi L Great horned owl Talepuye W Abalone Siikumi L Great horned owl Wasilu W Quail-crest ear-plug Suletu L California jay Tcaksepuye L Dawn Takena W Hawk Kututcanati L Bear Talatu L Bear Huata W Seed Tawitei W Turkey vulture Kututcanati L Bear Tawitci W Turkey vulture Satuwii L Farewell-to-spring Telunii L Tree squirrel Paseleno W Vetch Tikmu L Tree squirrel Samtuye W Deer Tikmu L Tree squirrel Tuikuye W Wizard Tolsowe W Deer Ukulnuve L Bear Tumnia L Drum Pikatco' L Acorn Tunaa W Sununu fish Selibu L Falcon Tunaa W Sununu fish Utunya L Falcon Tcilikna L Hawk Tcukpaive L Farewell-to-spring Teititi L Katydid Heteltci" L Pota ceremony Teuimiikse W Black bee Tuwume L Arrow Tcuteubi L Sun Hateya L Bear Umlutuya L Seed Sukukiye L Place name Wenitu L Seed Musonota L Magpie Wininu L Falcon Lupu W Abalone Wininii L Falcon Yukukukuye W Dove Wittcima L Falcon Putceyu W Deer Wootci L Covote Yukukukuye W Dove Wiiksii L Sun Lupu W Abalone Yotimo L Yellow-jacket Samtuye W Deer A berdache, Muliya, who was named after farewell-to-spring and belonged to the land moiety, was "married" to Taktekaiyu, a water moiety man named after deer. It seems possible that the exogamic rules regulated berdache ' ' marriages. ' ' However, this is the only such union recorded, and the evidence is therefore insufficient. Berdaches were not infrequent. Out of five mentioned among Jamestown and Knights Ferry people, Muliya is the only one whose name was ob- tained. He and Taktekaiyu lived together at Tcakatcino, near James- town. 164 Vniversity of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 In the three following tables are summarized all of the regular marriages of three groups of people — those with deer, salmon, and bear names. These three groups of names are the commonest among the Central Sierra Miwok. The absence of any rule in the choice of mates, other than moiety exogamy, is apparent. That is to say, for example, men with bear names did not regularly marry women who were named after one particular animal. So long as the women were of the proper moiety it did not matter what they were named after. Certain marriages occur in more than one table ; for example, a deer- bear marriage would appear under both deer and bear. Irregular or endogamic marriages are excluded. People with deer names Married to Number of occurrences Man Sugar pine 1 Man Bear 2 Man Chicken hawk 1 Woman Fox 2 Woman Bear 1 Woman Tree squirrel 1 Woman Falcon 1 Woman Yellow-jacket 1 People with salmon names Married to Number of occurrences Man Bear 2 Man Chieftainess 1 Man Ground 1 Man Tree squirrel 1 Man Fish 1 Man Wizard 1 Man Tobacco 1 Woman Bear 1 Woman Chicken hawk 1 People with Number of bear names Married to occurrences Man Water 1 Man Coyote 1 Man lee 1 Man Salmon 1 Man Shell nose-stick 1 Man Meadowlark 1 Man Valley quail 1 Man Deer 1 Man Seed 1 Man ' ' Wild potato ' ' 1 Woman Salmon 2 Woman Seed 1 Woman Ant 1 1916] Giford: Miwok Moieties 165 People with Number of bear names Married to occurrences Woman Shell nose-stick 1 Woman Turkey vulture 2 Woman Mud 1 Woman Hummingbird 1 Woman Deer 2 Woman Bow, arrow, quiver 2 Woman Hawk 1 Woman Football 1 Genealogies In the genealogical information obtained there are forty-eight male lines of descent. Some of these are rather long, covering four or five generations. Others consist merely of two generations — a man and his offspring. Of these lines of descent only nine show complete trans- mission of the eponym of the paternal ancestor to the descendants. In other words, less than one-fifth of the Central Sierra Miwok families named all their children after the eponym of the father or other male ancestor of the group. Plainly, there is no rule of transmission of the eponym of the male ancestor, and consequently no widespread belief in descent from the eponymous animal. If we take the forty-eight lines of descent and break them up into smaller groups, consisting in each case of father and child, we get the following results: Number of cases 132 Percentage of children with eponym of father 41 Percentage of children without eponym of father 59 Considered from the standpoint of moieties, the following results as to transmittal of eponyms are obtained : WATEE MOIETY Number of lines of descent 22 Eponym of paternal ancestor transmitted throughout in 14% Eponym of paternal ancestor not transmitted throughout in 86% Number of pairs consisting of father and child 61 Percentage of children with eponym of father 28 Percentage of children without eponym of father 72 LAND MOIETY Number of lines of descent 26 Eponym of paternal ancestor transmitted throughout in 23% Eponym of paternal ancestor not transmitted throughout in 77% Number of pairs consisting of father and child 71 Percentage of children with eponym of father 52 Percentage of children without eponym of father 48 Obviously the results based on the pairs of individuals, consisting of male parent and offspring, give the more accurate data as to the tendencies of the moieties in the matter of names. Judging, therefore, 166 Viiii-ersity of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Etiui. [Vol. 12 by percentages, it appears that the tendency of the water moiety as a whole was to ignore the eponyin of the paternal ancestor ; while the land moiety as a whole was about evenly divided on the question. It is possible, of course, that these tendencies are only local or temporary. Disregarding moieties and putting the data on the basis of Big Creek people and Central Sierra Miwok exclusive of Big Creek people, it is found that the latter are the more zealous in the transmittal of eponyms, although in both groups they are transmitted in less than half of the cases : BIG CREEK Number of pairs consisting of father and child 54 Percentage of children with ejionym of father 33 Percentage of children without eponym of father 67 EXCLUSIVE OF BIG CREEK Number of pairs consisting of father and child : 78 Percentage of children with eponym of father 46 Percentage of children without eponym of father 54 Going still further and considering moiety as well as locality, the curious result shown in percentages in the following table is reached : Big Creek Exchisive of Big Creek Water Land Water Land Transmitted 9 71 50 44 Not transmitted 91 29 50 56 It appears that the Big Creek people of the water moiety were remarkably careless about the transmission of the paternal eponym, while their fellow-villagers of the land moiety were the reverse. Upon consulting the figures for people, exclusive of Big Creek, it is found that conditions are very different, about half of the eponyms being transmitted in each moiety. Perhaps the difference in results for the two areas is due to lack of sufficient data from Big Creek. The lines of descent on which the previous discussion is based are listed below. Sex is indicated by (m.) for male, (f.) for female. The word following each name is that of the object mentioned in the con- notation or denotation of the name. WATER MOIETY— BIG CREEK Oualik, bow, arrow, quiver, father of Katuye, water (m.). Wuyi, turkey vulture, father of Notcitcto, coyote (m.), of Yutu, coyote (ni.), and of Wunuti, hunting-man (m.). Yutu, father of Hatcaiya, cloud (f.). Wunuti, father of Tciyifio (m.). Teiyino, father of Tiimii, caterpillar (m.) and of Lii, turtle (m.). Tcotcka, water, father of Tolikna, coyote (f.) and of Feusuye, water (f.). Mosetuya, water, father of Totokono, sandhill crane (m.). Totokono, father of Sawa, rock (m.), of Hunui, salmon (m.), and of Yuttene, seed (m.). Yutteile, father of Onpume, coyote (f.). 1916] Gifford: Miwoh Moieties 167 Tunaa, salmou, father of Miltaiye, water (f.), of Talalu, rock (m.), and of Nomasu, seed (m.). Talalu, father of Putbana, fish (f.) Nomasu, father of Tukubi, tukutucu bird (m.), of Kusetu, "wild potato" (f.), of Tcilawi, seed (ni.), of Hupaiye, "wild cabbage" (f.), of Tcanutuye, valley quail (f.), of Hutamsi, fish (f.), of Hopoto, frog (m.), of Pilekuye, shell nose-stick (f.), and of Pelisu, fish (m.). Pelisu, father of Atce, salmon (f.). Tiisiiku, shell nose-stick, father of Otu, seashells (m.), and of Hautcu, salmon (m.). Hautcu, father of Kolenya, fish (f.), and of Litcitu, salmon (m.). Soloni, place name, father of Kauwiluye, ice (f.), of Posululu, frog (f.), and of Newulo (m.). Tcotcka, water, father of Osepa (f.) and of Almase (m.). WATER MOIETY— EXCLUSIVE OF BIG CREEK Luyu, dove, father of Osoi (m.), and of Yukukukuye, dove (f.). Tusimi, wizard, father of Tuikuye, wizard (f.), and of Sokono, wizard (m.). Ewentcu, deer, grandfather of Tcatipii, deer (f.). Tcuktoko, deer, father of Hotamuye, deer (f.), of Mukuye, deer (f.), and of Miikii, deer (m.). Miikii, father of Tolsowe, deer (m.), of Samtuye, deer (f.), and of Patiwo, deer (m.). Patiwo, father of Yatcalu, deer (m.). Hahiyo, salmon, father of Liitcmii, salmon (m.) and of Yanajaaiyak, cloud (m.). Sitni, bow, arrow, quiver, father of Kukse, quail (m.). Leyati, abalone, father of Musonotoma, valley quail (f.). Situtu, bow, arrow, quiver, father of Nikiti, abalone (m.), of Lupu, abalone (f.), and of Hulutuye, abalone (f.). Metikla, sucker fish, father of Pootci, salmou (f.). Tolsowe, deer, father of Tiinii, deer (m.), and of Putceyu, deer (f.). Miile, quail, father of Uptuye, buckeye (f.). Takeiia, falcon, father of Talulu, falcon (m.) and of Tutce, frog (m.). Malkuyu, farewell-to-spring, father of Elsu, falcon (m.), of Tciwela, falcon (m.), of Hokoiyu, falcon (m.), and of Yutne, falcon (m.). Potcu'e, football, father of Ape, acorn (m.). LAND MOIETY— EXCLUSIVE OF BIG CREEK Luyunu, bear, father of Sutuluye, bear (f.), and of Tcanatcimu, tree squir- rel (f.). Tutaiyati, California jay, father of Luituye, bear (f.), of Lusela, bear (f.), and of Liwanu, bear (m.). Liwanu, father of Katcuktcume, bear (m.). Hoho, bear, father of Solasu, bear (m.), and of Eueto, bear (m.). Solasu, father of Sanuye, cloud (f.). Eiieto, father of Liktuye, bear (f.) and of Sapata, bear (m.). Sapata, father of Anawuye, bear (m.), of Kulmuye, bear (f.), of Molimo, bear (m.), of Wopemii, bear (m.), of Wassusme, bear (f.), of Hehe- muye, bear (f.), of Moemu, bear (ni.), of Hoiyitcalu, bear (m.), and of Etumu, bear (m.). Peeluyak, bear, father of Niwuye, seed (f.). LAND MOIETY, EXCLUSIVE OF BIG CREEK Noksu, chicken hawk, father of Tiwolu, chicken hawk (m.). Sitki, bow, arrow, quiver, father of Mutckuye, bow, arrow, quiver (f.), of Waketnu, bow, arrow, quiver (m.), and of He'eluye, bow, arrow, quiver (f.). Tumma, drum, father of Makuina, seed (m.). 168 University of California PubUcatio)is in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. IL' Semuki, bear, father of Takutcinia, seed (f.)- Tceweksu, tree squirrel, father of Tikmu, tree squirrel (m.), of Telumi, tree squirrel (m.), and of Hiimiita, tobacco (f.). Sukuini, great horned owl, father of Wootci, coyote (m.), of Pososu, great horned owl (m.), of Tiponya, great horned owl (m.), and of Yelutci, bear (f.). Etu, sun, father of Akulu, sun (m.), and of Mulya, acorn (m.). Mulya, father of Suletuye, falcon (f.). Tiilemuyak, star, father of Tcaksepuye, dawn (f.). Talatu, bear, father of Wiiksii, sun (ni.). Wiiksii, father of Siitu, magpie (m.), and of Teasibu, sun (m.). Putepu, chicken hawk, father of Toloisi, chicken hawk (f.). Eskeye, farewell-to-spring, father of Yaluta, farewell-to-spring (f.). Punoi, tree squirrel, father of Matcuta, sugar pine (f.), and of Wittcuna, falcon (m.). Wittcuna, father of Tetmo, dog (m.). Putsume, bear, father of Liiiugse, tule (m.). Pele'me, coyote, father of Ukulnuye, bear (f.), and of Posala, farewell-to- spring (f.). Umhituya, seed, father of Loiyetu, farewell-to-spring (m.), of Loiyetuye, farewell-to-spring (f.), and of La'uyu, farewell-to-spring (m.). Neplii, bear, father of Esege, bear (f.) and of Tcukululuye, bear (f.). Hunipte, seed, father of Wenitu, seed (m.), of Muliya, farewell-to-spring (m.), and of Tcukpaiye, farewell-to-spring (f.). Tcilikna, hawk, father of Hute, star (m.). Soso, tree squirrel, father of Telumu, farewell-to-spring (f.), and of Tcuma- anuye, manzanita (f.). Ciisua, hawk, father of Osmokse, hawk (m.), of Kilikila, hawk (m.), of Sakati, hawk (m.), of Tuiielu, hawk (m.), of Yulestu, hawk (m.), and of Namino, hawk (m.). Kilikila, father of Tcutcubi, sun (m.). Papina, vine, father of Yoskolo, sugar pine (m.), of Sunumptca, sugar pine (f.), and of Kulya, sugar pine (ni.). Suki, chicken hawk father of Wilu, chicken hawk (m.). Of value as indicating the relationship of many individuals not listed in the above lines of descent is a list of brothers and sisters. Where the implied eponym is the same in each name in a group no positive evidence is offered as to the transmission of the eponym of the father. Where the eponym in each name in a group is different it is obvious that the eponym of the father has not been transmitted throughout to the offspring. Of the thirty-four groups of brothers and sisters nine have similar eponyms, while twenty-five have dis- similar. Hunipte, seed (ni.) ; Unilutuya, seed (m.). Pati, fish (m.); Metikla, sucker fish (m.). Etu, sun (m.); Tculu, acorn (m.) ; Sitpu, badger (m.). Taipa, valley quail (m.) ; Situtu, bow, arrow, quiver (m.). Kutcuyak, bear (m.); Tuniakaiyu, bear (m.); Suletu, California jay (m.). Liptcu, salmon (m.); Putsume, pota ceremony (m.). 1916] Giford: Miwok Moieties 169 Tiwitita, killdeer (m.) ; Piltcitema, meadowlark (f.). Tolopoiyu, vine (m.); Sitki, bow, arrow, quiver (m.). Metikla, metakila (m.) ; Kolotomu, oak-leaf gall-nut (f.) ; Tunaa, suuunu fish (m.). Epeta, lizard (f.); Pususu, dog (m.) ; Kuyuuu, dog (m.). Tcitepu, abalone (m.) ; Wiskala, sand (m.). Wasilu, quail-crest ear-plug (f.) ; Moitoiye, valley quail (f.); Sitala, valley quail (f.). Sapata, bear (f.); Hateya, bear (f.). Awanata, turtle (m.) ; Sitni, bow, arrow, quiver (m.). Istu, sugar pine (m.); Ilokuk, "wild potato" (f.). Sipatu, fox (m.); Lukulkatu, fox (m.). Tcuktoko, deer (m.); Pukuna, deer (f.). Tupi, salmon (m.); Hahiyo, salmon (m.). Tolsowe, deer (m.) ; Pateuka (m.); Tusuwe, deer (m.). Hustemeyak, Physa or fresh-water snail (m.); Lutaiyet, Physa or fresh-water snail (f.). Yoskolo, acorn (m.); Septuye, fire (f.). Polaiyu, lake (m.); Paseleno, vetch (f.). Mosetuya, water (m.); Tunaa, salmon (m.). Soloni, place name (m.) ; Teoileka, water (f.). Simutuye, tree squirrel (f.); Peeluyak, bear (m.). Tutaiyati, California jay (m.) ; Wiluye, eagle (f.); Tulmisuye, bear (f.). Situtuyu, berries (m.); Putsume, bear (f.). Bosaiya, eagle (f.); Akaino, bear (m.) ; Tolkatcu, bear (f.); Maiyeiio, chief- tainess (f.). Misu, water (m.); Tentpaiyu, seed (f.). Tcuttoko, deer (m.); Pukuna, deer (f.). Kono, tree squirrel (m.); Soso, tree squirrel (m.). Tcintiye, buckeye (f.) ; Tukeye, pine nuts (f.). Takefia, hawk (m.); Malkuyu, farewell-to-spring (m.), Suki, chicken hawk (m.) ; Sakasaiyu, chicken hawk (f.). The following six short genealogies are inserted in the paper as an aid to the discussion of the Miwok terms of relationship, and also for the purpose of demonstrating the existence of cross-cousin marriage (see p. 189). As heretofore, m. means male, f. female, W. water moiety, L. land moiety. Generation B in genealogy I coincides approximately in time with generation B in the other genealogies; the same is true with the other generations, all having the same letter being approxi- mately the same in age. In addition to the letters after each name indicating sex and moiety, there are inserted, in cases where names occur more than once in the genealogies, Roman numerals and letters referring to the genealogy and generation in which the name is to be again found; for example, (IIC) placed after a name means that it is to be found also in genealogy II, generation C. 170 Vniversity of CaUfornia PuhliratioitN in Am. Arch, and EtJnt. [Vol. 12 TERMS OF RELATIONSHIP Exclusive of the terms eseln, child ; hikime, child in cradle ; and luwasa, foster-child, thirty-four terms of relationship are employed by the majority of the Central Sierra Miwok. The people in the vicinity of Big Creek employ only thirty-three terms, as their term ate (younger brother or younger sister) takes the place of the two terms tcale and kole used for these two relationships elsewhere. In this the Big Creek people correspond with some of the Southern Sierra Miwok and with the Plains Miwok, but not with the Northern Sierra Miwok, who, like the majority of the Central people, use the two terms tcale and kole. One of the striking features of the Central Sierra Miwok terms of relationship is the disregard of generation. Of the thirty- four terms, twenty-one apply to two or more relationships which are in different generations. The following table presents an analysis of the typical Central Sierra Miwok terms on the basis of the categories used by Dr. A. L. Kroeber in his paper on " Classificatory Systems of Relationship."^^ His eighth category, the condition of the connecting relative, has been omitted, as it is not operative in Miwok terms. Dr. Kroeber used twenty-four Miwok terms in his comparative table, while I am using thirty-four. The changes in figures, especially for the category ' ' Gen- eration, ' ' which expresses ' ' the difference between persons of the same and separate generations," are due to the larger amount of data now at hand. As remarked above, these data have shown that, considering the full use of each term, more than one generation is represented in nearly two-thirds of the terms. The crosses in the following table mean that the category named at the head of the column is operative tlirougliout all tlie applications of the term opposite which it is placed. The sex of the relative, and whether the relationship is one of blood or marriage, are the two categories most frequently expressed, the former in twenty-eight of the thirty-four terms, the latter in twenty-six. No term expresses over five categories ; the average term expresses three. Considered as to moiety, it is found that of the twenty-nine terms used by a man twelve apply to relatives belonging only to his moiety, nine to relatives of the opposite moiety only, and eight to relatives who may belong to either moiety. Belonging to the man's moiety only are his afisi, ene, haiyi, kole, kumatsa, moe, pinuksa, tatci, tete, tune. 11 Journ. Eoy. Antlir. Inst., xxxix, 78-79, 1909. Genera' 1. Mosetuya (n^ :2. . . . (f) 3. . . . (mW) :4. . . . (f) 1 5. Tunaa (mW i6. Simutuye (fl Generation , ! 75. . . . (mL) :76. ... (f) — r=77. . . . (f) — Generation B 1 Mosetuya (mW) -.2.. ■ ■ ('> 3 . . • (mW) (0 — =4. . 5. Tunaa (mW) (IIB) =6. Simutuye (fL) (IIB)- C: Generation C Totokono (mW) . . . (O Q 9. Luyu (mW) 10. . . . (f) 11. Nomasu (mW) (JVC, VC) :12. Wiluye (fL) (IVC) :13. Tulmisuye (fL) (JVC) :14. Su'ai.ve (fL) = 15. . . . (fW) (VC)- 16. Talalu (mW) (IIC) = 17. Niwuye (fL) (IIC)- u 18. Miltaiye (fW) (IIIC) 19. Eneto (mL) (IIIC) — GENEALOGY I Generation D 20. Sawa (mW) 21. Yuttene (mW) = 22. Tcanatciinu (fL)- _23. Hunui (mW) 24. Osoi (m\V) 25. Yukukukuye (fW) = 26. A white man = 27. Wootci (mL) 28. Mulya (mL) — = 2 9. Wininu (mL) "30. Tukubi (mW) 31. Kusetu (fW) 32. Pelisu (mW) _33. Liluye (fL) — 34. Tcilawi (mW) = 35. Umuye (fL) 36. Hupaiye (fW) ^7. Tcanutuye (fW) "38. Hopoto (mW) 39. Pileku.ve (fW) :40. Sapata (mL) — 41. Hutamsi (fW) (VE) = 42. Tciyino (mW) =43. Tommy Bill (mL) (VE) "~44. Putbana (fW) (IID) =45. Hautcu (mW) (IID) — 46. Liktuye (fL) 40. Sapata (mL) (ID) =47. Atce (fW) (IE) = 39. Pilekuye (fW) (ID)- Genkration E C48. Onpume (fW) 49. Puitcitu (mW) 50. Sapata (fL) = 51. Sitni (mW) 52. Hateya (fL) = 5 3. Tcutcubi (mL) Obnkkation P C72. Kukse (mW) 73. Hesutuyer is called kaka (mother's brother) by them, while he applies tlie terms 1916] Giford: Miwol Moieties 187 iipsa and lupuba (sister's son and daughter) to them, according to their sex. We thus find that the Miwok classification of cross-cousins seems to be based entirely on this form of marriage ; namely, that of a woman to her father's sister's husband or of a man to his wife's brother 's daughter. The cross-cousins are : Man's mother's brother's daughter — anisii. Man's mother's brother's son — kaka. Man 's father 's sister 's son — iipsa. Man's father's sister's daughter — lupuba. Woman's mother's brother's daughter — anisii. Woman's mother's brother's son — kaka. Woman 's father 's sister 's son — aiisi. Woman 's father 's sister 's daughter — tune. It is to be noted that the mother's brother's son and daughter are called by the terms for uncle and potential stepmother (kaka and anisii), whether the speaker is a man or a woman. A woman's father's sister's son and daughter are called son and daughter, while a man's father's sister's son and daughter are called nephew and niece. The practice of cross-cousins applying to each other the terms used by children and parents, or by children and aunts and uncles, is closely paralleled elsewhere in the world. Dr. R. H. Codrington^** has re- corded a case in the Banks Islands which Dr. W. H. R. Rivers" has cited. Exact parallels to the terminology in the Banks Islands are found among the Minnitarees, Crows, Choctaws, Creeks, Cherokees, and Pawnees.'^ All of the above cases would be the result. Dr. Rivers claims, of the marriage of a man to his mother's brother's wife. This type of marriage is impossible among the Miwok on account of moiety exogamy and descent in the male line, so that here the parallel be- tween the Miwok, Melanesian, and eastern North American cases ceases. The Miwok terminology is probably caused, however, by the reverse custom of a woman marrying her father's sister's husband, or, stating it from the standpoint of a man, of a man marrying his wife's brother's daughter. To me it seems probable that this custom is responsible for the uniting of my mother's brother and his male descendants, immediate and through males, ad infinitum, in the term kaka. Likewise it is probably responsible for the uniting of my 16 The Melanesians, Studies in Their Anthropology and Folk-Lore (Oxford,, Clarendon Press, 1891), 38-39. 17 Kinship and Social Organization (London, Constable & Co. Ltd., 1914), 28. 18 /bid., 53. 188 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 mother's brother's female descendants immediate and through males, ad infinitum, in the term anisii, for all are the potential wives of my father. Dr. Robert H. Lowie points to an identical combination of male descendants of the mother 's brother among the patrilineal Omaha, Oto, Kansa, and other Siouan tribes.^® He would lay this to the operation of exogamy and to the extension of the use of terms of relationship to clan brothers and sisters, rather than to a special mar- riage custom, as Dr. Rivers would. Among the Miwok there are no clan or moiety brothers and sisters, all relationship being based on blood and marriage ties. Marriage custom and terminology among the Miwok would seem, therefore, to support Dr. Rivers' contention. Other features which would arise from the type of marriage just dis- cussed are also present both among the Omaha and the Miwok ; for example, the classing together of father's sister's daughter and sister's daughter. Among the Omaha my mother's brother's daughter's son is my brother; so he is also among the Miwok, where my mother's brother's daughter may be my stepmother, for my father has a right to marry her in case of my mother's death, or in case he desires to have more than one wife. To sum up, I do not deny the potency of exogamy to bring about the Omaha and Miwok type of nomenclature, but I do claim for the marriage custom cited an equal potency to* bring about such a result. The combining of woman's sister's husband and woman's brother's daughter's husband in the term kawu, and of wife's sister and wife's father's sister in the term wokli, are reflections of the marriage of a man to his wife's father's sister and conversely of a woman to her brother's daughter's husband. In iMiwok polygnous marriages it is said to have been not un- common for a man to marry two sisters. Such a marriage is shown in genealogy I, generation C. Nomasu (11) married Wiluye (12) and Tulmisuye (13), who were real sisters (see genealogy IV, generation C). This type of marriage is reflected but faintly in the nomenclature of relationship. The remarks under 107, page 178, in the demonstra- tion of the terms of relationship based on the genealogies, bring to light a reflection of this type of marriage. The term kaka, usually applied to mother's brother and mother's brother's son, is here applied to mother's co-wife's brother's son just as if mother's co-wife was mother's sister, which she is not in this case. The fact that this term is here applied to a person through a co-wife who is not mother's 19 Exogamy and Systems of Relationship, Am. Authr., n. s., xvn, 238, 1915. 1916] Giford: Miwok Moieties - 189 sister leads one to believe that co-wives were usually sisters. For similar examples see 109 and 110. Other terms of relationship are also used on the basis of treating co- wives as sisters ; for instance, see the use of anisli in 104, of ate in 109, and of ami in 12 and 47. In the last two instances the mother's co-wife is called by the term used for mother's older sister. ^ CROSS-COUSIN MARRIAGE When asked if it were proper for a man to marry a cousin, ]\Iiwok informants always replied in the negative. In obtaining genealogical information, however, cases came up in which a man married his mother's brother's daughter. I called my informant's attention to this fact and received the reply that the individuals concerned were not regarded as cousins, for they stood in the relation of ansi and anisii to each other, which translated into English would be son and aunt, or potential stepmother. This affords an excellent example of the futility of using English terms of relationship with natives when discussing native customs. Every Miwok to whom the question was put stated that the proper mate for a man was a woman who stood in the relation of anisii to him, providing she was not too closely related to him.-'^ Although a man might marry his anisii cross-cousin, who was the daughter of his mother's brother, he could under no circumstances marry his lupuba cross-cousin, who was the daughter of his father's sister. This one- sidedness of cross-cousin marriage among the Miwok in no way affected its popularity, or, to be more exact, the popularity of anisii-aiisi mar- riages, of which the cross-cousin marriage is one form. In many cases my informants would state that a certain man and his wife stood in the relation to each other of afisi and anisii. Although these instances w^ere not substantiated, except in four cases, by genealogical proof, they show the popularity of this form of marriage. At Big Creek six of the listed marriages are of this type, eight are not, and on the remaining eight I have no information. Cases were encountered in which a husband and wife claimed to stand in the aiisi-anisii relation to each other, but, when asked to demonstrate the relation, were unable to trace the connecting links. This state of affairs shows clearly that aiisi-anisii marriages must have been the vogue, otherwise married 20 See nieaniugs of term anisii on pages 172 and 179; also discussion of term under "Terminology and Social Customs." 190 University of California Fuhlications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 people who could not prove such a relationship would not lay claim to it. Even among the Northern Sierra Miwok at Elk Grove, among w^hom the moiety system does not seem to exist, aiisi-anisii marriages were the custom. The Southern Sierra Miwok of Madera County state that these marriages were proper, but that the contracting parties must be only distantly related. Informants at Jamestown, while stating that anisu-aiisi marriages were prevalent there as elsewhere, said that marriages between first cousins, who stood in this relation, were commoner higher in the moun- tains than at Jamestown. The men at Jamestown and lower in the foothills were inclined to marry an anisii further removed than a first cousin. There seems to have been a sentiment at Jamestown against the marriage of first cousins. One woman was asked if she would consider it proper for her son to marry her brother's daughter. She replied, ' ' No, she is too much like his mother, ' ' meaning herself. Her reply may have been engendered by the Miwok custom of a man marrying his wife's brother's daughter. By this marriage his new wife, who is also his son's anisii cross-cousin, would become his son's stepmother; hence perhaps the woman's statement with regard to her son 's anisii cross-cousin, ' ' too much like his mother. ' ' The identification of the anisii cross-cousin with the mother's younger sister and father's brother's wife younger than mother has already been discussed under the heading "Terminology and Social Customs." As stated there, there are twelve terms which reflect the marriage of a man to his wife's brother's daughter. Turning now to cross-cousin marriage, let us search for terms which reflect it. We find that there are none. With the popularity of cross-cousin mar- riage in the minds of the people at present, one might expect to find identical terms for such relationships as mother's brother and man's father-in-law, mother's brother's wife and man's mother-in-law, son and daughter and son and daughter of a man's anisii cross-cousin, but such terms are lacking.-^ The only evidence which possibly favors antiquity of cross-cousin marriage lies in the speech tabu which exists between a man and his mother's brother's wife or kumatsa, who in view of cross-cousin marriage is his potential mother-in-law. The -1 As mentioned on page 173 in the discussion of the term kumatsa, two Jajiies- town informants gave the term manisa (normally son-in-law) for husband's sister 's son instead of the usual term pinuksa. If this usage were established it could be said that cross-cousin marriage did have a reflection in the nomen- clature. However, five othei' infoiinants gave pinuksa, not manisa, as the jnojier term. 1916] Gifford: MmoTc Moieties 191 Miwok, like other California Indians, imposed a tabu upon a man and his mother-in-law. The situation there is this : There is in the Miwok terminology of relationship an undeniable reflection of the marriage of a man to his wife 's brother 's daughter ; on the other hand, there is no reflection whatever of cross-cousin marriage. This implies that the former is the more primitive custom of the two. It may be shown in a diagram as follows : A = h E f In this diagram, if E marries /, who is E's mother's brother's daughter (anisii cross-cousin), A cannot marry /, who is his wife's brother's daughter, because / has already become his son's wife, and all intercourse between a man and his daughter-in-law is tabued. If E did not marry /, A would have a perfect right to her, for / is his wife's brother's daughter and his potential wife. Thus we have the two types of marriage in conflict, for either a man or his son may claim the same woman, A claiming / because she is his wife 's brother 's daughter, E claiming / because she is his anisii (mother's brother's daughter). Informants and genealogies vouch for the occurrence of both forms of marriage, which if taken as synchronous for any one woman would mean polyandry, of which there is no trace, a man and his son having one woman in common. It is easily conceivable, how- ever, that the two practices existed side by side. An attempt to show the connection between these two intimately related forms of marriage will now be made. It has already been pointed out that the marriage of a man to his wife's brother's daughter is reflected in twelve terms of relationship. Evidently, therefore, a man regarded his wife's brother's daughter as his potential wife, for in some cases of polygyny, and of the death of the first wife, he mar- ried her. Here seems to me to be the key to the mystery of the one- sided Miwok cross-cousin marriage. The man who thus had a right to marry his wife's brother's daughter may have passed that right on to his son. In other words, the marriage right of the father became vested in the son in cases in which the father did not avail himself of it. This hypothesis explains why two blood relatives, who recip- 192 University of California Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 rocally used the terms for son and potential stepmother, or aunt, and who might actually become stepson and stepmother, should marry. The theory that cross-cousin marriage has been thus evolved from another form of marriage through descent in the male line, displays it as a secondary, and perhaps recent, form of marriage, which has not yet affected the nomenclature of relationship. If it were found in future investigations that the father paid for his wife's brother's daughter and then let his son marry her, our hypothesis would become almost an established fact. Two terms of relationship, which are reciprocals, seem to support this hypothetical origin of cross-cousin marriage. They are kolina and olo. In kolina are united the husband 's sister and the husband 's father's sister, which would be the case where both a man and his father had the right to a woman. To fit our hypothesis more exactlj^ however, the meanings combined should be husband's sister and hus- band's son's sister (that is, stepdaughter). If we admit the cogency of the above theory as to the origin of the unilateral Miwok cross-cousin marriage, we immediately have at hand an explanation of why the other form of cross-cousin marriage is for- bidden. When a man marries his wife's brother's daughter he marries a person who is normally not his blood relative. As I have already pointed out, it is but a simple step to extend to the man's son the privilege of marrying the same woman, providing the man himself does not do so. Now let us try to imagine the forbidden cross-cousin marriage arising in a similar manner. In the first step this involves the marriage of a man to his son's lupuba cross-cousin, that is, to his son's father's sister's daughter, who is his own sister's daughter. She is called lupuba by both the man and his son. In the diagram D and / are the cross-cousins. A has absolutely no right to /. his son's cross- b=A e=G D f cousin. In the first place, she is not related to his wife h, and in the second place she is the daughter of his own sister e, and hence a close blood relative. As we recall, his right to his son's other female cross- cousin (anisii) was based on the fact that she was his wife's brother's daughter and nonnally not his blood relative. It would seem that the HD 1.4B)iQi3i 1916] Gifford: Miwolc Moieties 193 prohibition against a man marrying his lupuba, who is his sister's daughter, had been extended to the son, thus preventing the latter from marrying his lupuba, who is his father's sister's daughter and his own cross-cousin. If Miwok cross-cousin marriage had arisen in any other way than the hypothetical way already outlined it is hard to imagine why it should be restricted to only one pair of cross-cousins. The very fact that it is so restricted strengthens the theory of origin primarily through the passing on of a privilege in the male line. In allowing the one kind of cross-cousin marriage and not the other the Miwok evidently considered inheritance as more important than consanguin- ity ; yet where inheritance had no weight consanguinity became active and prevented the other form of cross-cousin marriage. Two tirst cousin marriages of the cross-cousin type were recorded. The first case is in generation C, in genealogies I and II ; the indi- viduals are numbered 16 and 17. Talalu (16) married Niwuye (17), who is the daughter of his mother's (6, Simutuye) brother (78, Pee- luyak). The second case is in generation D of genealogy I; the indi- viduals are numbered 39 and 40. Sapata (40) married Pilekuye (39), who is the daughter of his mother's (18, Miltaiye) brother (11, No- masu). One marriage between first cousins once removed was re- corded. The marriage is that of Sapata (40) and Atce (47). It is recorded in generations D and E of genealogy I. Sapata (40) mar- ried the daughter (47, Atce) of his mother's (18, Miltaiye) brother's (11, Nomasu) son (32, Pelisu). CONCLUSION The discovery of a dual social organization among the Mono and the Yokuts tribes, as mentioned in the introduction, indicates that they together with the Miwok form a compact unit socially. Judging from Dr. J. Alden Mason's statement" as to the presence of a bear and a deer "totem" among the Salinan Indians, it seems safe to infer that the moiety organization will be found to extend to the coast. Among the Central Sierra Miwok the bear is the animal associated most frequently through personal names with the land moiety; the deer is the animal associated most frequently in a like manner with 22 The Ethnology of the Saliuan Indians, Uuiv. Calif. Publ. Am. Arch. Ethn., X, 189, 1912. 194 University of CaJifornia Publications in Am. Arch, and Ethn. [Vol. 12 the water moiety. These facts suggest that the bear and the deer ' ' totems ' ' among the Salinan may stand for two moieties. The greater complexity of the moiety organization among the Taehi Yokuts about Tulare Lake as compared to the Central Sierra Miwok organization leads to the impression that the latter people are on the periphery of the moiety area. Although it is too early in the study to advance a positive opinion, the distribution of the institution, to- gether with its varying complexity, seems to point to the San Joaquin Valley as the region from which the organization spread to the moun- tain tribes, perhaps to the west as well as to the east.-^ 23 For a preliminary notiee see Dichotomous Social Organization in South Central California, Univ. Calif. Publ. Am. Arch. Ethn., xi, 291-296, 1916. Transmitted September 18, 1915. ^ '4^^ ^s- 'J', "^OV^ p ^. r\^' ,> <'. , r< *• G .'"-L" *,. V '/ >* " /. .«\'/^ "^o. oV^p: -^0^ ^0 -?;- '^ ^^ '.-.^.<>^ ^f^' ^ ^:v^ P^' .^^ ,-^ .^-^ &'- "^-^/..^ o A >- J. • • ^ ^ V ■ <>*_ .■{► V. 1^ ' %.^ o V .0 s^l' ^°-u M% 'o , ,* - 1 o -^ a\ ST. AUGUSTINE ". %r (P *^^J^^ ^^ 'i^ '^-^ D0BB3 BFIOS. ,-\'- '>^iW< o