Pacific Northwest Tribes Social Hierarchy Module 2.
The political and social hierarchy of the Native
Peoples of the Pacific Northwest really surprised me to learn that their social
hierarchy was extremely similar to that of European and early societies of the
United States. Early American societies
were based on ranking or social classes from the richest to the poorest. Wealth defined the person and the perceived
power associated to the person’s wealth.
The perceived power and wealth enabled certain rights and privileges to
the person. American society’s hierarchy
was based on wealth and power.
So
too were the Native Peoples of the Pacific Northwest tribes. Most tribes were highly layered in a social
and hierarchy standing based on wealth leading to power. Among the tribes of the Northwest, there were
Nobles, Commoners, and even slaves (1); sounds a lot like early America. The separation of classes among the people filtered
down to every generation of the tribe.
The hierarchy even included the children from which those of the nobles
were isolated from “lesser” standing peoples and even included the prohibition
of play among the classes. Nobles even
kept separate residences and had limited interactions with other members of the
tribe (1).
A highly complex and intricate set of social relations existed among the Northwest Coast societies, with social distinctions between individuals and between groups permeating every aspect of social life. Typically, societies consisted of a four-level set of relationships (loose social "classes"): (2)
- highest status (elites,
"nobles,") - the wealthiest members of a local group who would
claim elite status through heredity and the accumulation and distribution
(through potlaching) of food, goods, and wealth items
- secondary status -
respected members of some standing in the community but who didn't
generally accumulate wealth or potlatch
- low status -
former slaves or persons who had lost their prior status standing
- no status -
slaves and war captives
Many tribes of the Northwest placed a high value on the accumulation
of wealth with a singular purpose for the wealth. Wealth allowed individuals to advance their
prestige enabling ways for the powerful to even become more powerful and exert
their influence to maintain social order.
(1)
Reading and learning about the gathering of wealth and social
hierarchy really struck me in comparison to the history from around the
world. Here we have a society of Native
American peoples with a confirmed history that dates to 14,500 years ago
(1). Their society was thriving 2,500
years prior to the earliest of English history and consequently England was
still in an Ice Age at approximately 12,000 years ago (1). English society was also based on a hierarchy
system for the ruling of their government, lands and peoples.
When comparing to similarities, one might think that England’s
hierarchy was based upon that of the Pacific Northwest Tribes but Europeans did
not have any contact with Native Americans of the Pacific Northwest till the
1700’s and Russians actually colonized that part of the U.S. before any European
settlers or the established U.S Government.
Reference:
(1) Atlas of
Indian Nations, Anton Treuer
Great post. I didn't realize these facts about the different classes although I had the expectation that the chief and his family may have held an elevated status. In reading through the link you provided, I found the idea of the Potlatch very interesting.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the link, "[a] potlatch was essentially a public feast at which events of social importance were proclaimed and validated, including the ascention of a new chief, rites of passage (when a girl reached marriageable age; a boy came of age; a new career; unusual success; birthdays; death), for services rendered (helping raise a house or build a canoe), and as face-saving devices". It also speaks to the fact that the potlatch is also a form or social security as their was an expectation of a reciprocation of a potlatch from others in the future.
Another point I found interesting is that the potlatch was used as a redistribution of wealth to provide food and other items such as blankets to those in attendance.
Hi Gary,
ReplyDeleteGreat post. It's important to know that many American Indians (nearly all) had slaves often POWs from tribal wars. Often over their lifetime, the POWs would be incorporated into the tribe perhaps as socially lower but s/he could have a family that could rise up in the tribe. When someone was adopted into the tribe (POW, lost child, kidnapped colonial, etc.) they became a full member of the tribe - but as you note on your list lower socially. Hierarchy was common as well across tribes differing with female leadership happening in a variety of tribes and male dominance being most well-known amongst the Sioux. However most tribes believe in the complementary nature of male/female within their society and the natural world. Good read. NN
That is very interesting information regarding Native american hierarchy . But it makes since most societies have always valued wealth over all else.This has been going on since the earliest of times. Our consumer society still places wealth at the top of the social hierarchy. The wealthy still control the power and status as much as ever, its kind of sad that we as a society still have not evolved enough to have changed the status qua, changed the things we value.
ReplyDeleteI found your post very interesting. Social heirarchy was important among tribes. Lower class Prisoners of war, colonial, slaves, etc., were treated different among various tribes. I am researching the Northeast region and in particular the Iroquios tribes. I discovered that before the 5 nations united, they would often capture natives from the other tribes. For example, I reviewed War of the American Documentary on the History of the Iroquois from the discovery channel, and it describes how captures were treated when Hiawatha and his warriors bring home captured Mohawks. The males must make it through the gaunlet where they are beaten and reveals who are strong. A female elder then sorts through the prisoners. The Iroquois were Matriarch tribes. Accepting women and children however, men must meet her criteria. If accepted they must fill the roles of the men who they lost. They assume the identity of the dead person, and even their name.
ReplyDeleteReference:
War of the American Indians Documentary on the History of the Iroquois. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aettO4zNdAI