RESEARCH
Sö́sö̀öpa—Jerusalem Cricket:
An Important Insect in the Hopi
Katsina Pantheon
John G. Stoffolano, Jr., and Barton Wright
Keywords: Hopi katsina, Jerusalem cricket,
sand cricket, Stenopelmatidae, Stenopelmatus
Abstract: The Jerusalem cricket is celebrated as a Hopi katsina and
goes by the Hopi name Sö́sö̀öpa. On the basis of the biology and
morphology of the Jerusalem cricket, we attempt to explain why
the Hopi created Sö́sö̀öpa as he is represented in various katsintithu
(carved figurines) or katsinam (dancers) and we discuss carving
variations and their significance. Based on the literature and correspondence with various individuals, we have put the collected
information into an entomological perspective and discuss various
misinterpretations. The first difficulty encountered in researching this
topic was the origin of the name “Jerusalem cricket.” One possible
explanation for the name is that Franciscan priests working with
the Navajos heard them call the cricket “skull head” and associated
this with Skull Hill, the suggested burial place of Jesus.
N
ative American culture and mythology draw heavily on the
rich biodiversity of insect species (Hitchcock 1962, Cherry
1993). What remains to be done is an entomological interpretation of the various Hopi insect carvings known as katsintithu
(singular, katsintihu). We hope that this article will stimulate other
entomologists to tackle the problem of bringing an entomological
perspective to other insect katsintithu.
Unlike Disney’s Jiminy Cricket, few insects reach stardom status
or get to be portrayed as a katsintihu (a carved figurine incorrectly
known to non-Hopi as a doll) or katsina (plural, katsinam) (known
to non-Hopi as kachina dancers or runners). Secakuku (1995), who
is Hopi, writes, “The katsinam are the benevolent spirit beings who
live among the Hopi for about a six-month period each year.” Even
though non-Hopi refer to the carvings as kachina dolls, the Hopi
people do not perceive them as collectable items. To the Hopi, they
are extremely important. “We believe they are personifications
of the katsina spirits, originally created by the katsinam in their
physical embodiment” (Secakuku 1995). It should be noted that
Hopi people also use the word tihu (plural, tithu) when referring
to a kachina doll because “doll” is a white man’s term (E. Malotki,
Northern Arizona University, personal correspondence). There is
174
little doubt that insects played an important role in the lives of the
early Plateau peoples, often expressed in the katsina cult (Adams
1991, Capinera 1993).
The Jerusalem cricket, which is featured in Hopi tradition as a
katsintihu and katsina, is very different from Walt Disney’s Jiminy
Cricket (Gryllidae). “Jerusalem cricket” is a common name and refers
to all members of the genus Stenopelmatus, family Stenopelmatidae.
In this article, we focus on the insect, the katsintihu, and various
views held by carvers, traders, and some Hopi people.
A brief description of the Jerusalem cricket will help in understanding how the Hopi might have used this knowledge base to
construct both the katsintihu and katsina.
The Jerusalem Cricket—Biology and Description
Jerusalem “crickets” are not crickets at all; they belong in the
genus Stenopelmatus. True crickets belong in the family Gryllidae,
whereas the Jerusalem, sand, or stone crickets (i.e., Stenopelmatus
Burmeister, Ammopelmatus Tinkham, and Viscainopelmatus Tinkham, respectively) belong in the family Stenopelmatidae. Jerusalem
crickets are found throughout the western United States in almost all
terrestrial habitats. Weissman (2001a) estimates that there may be
100 or more species in the genus Stenopelmatus, and few have been
identified to species. Those inhabiting sand dunes are typically light
in color (e.g., beige). Those inhabiting woodlands and forests tend
to be dark in color (e.g., mahogany, brown, or black). The banding
on their abdomens results from dark cuticular abdominal segments
separated by light-colored arthrodial membranes (see Fig. 1). They
are usually nocturnal, burrowing through the substrate using their
large heads and extensive mandibles. Compared with most other
insects, their size is formidable (20–50 mm long).
Stenopelmatids produce a drumming vibration that is perceived
by another member of the same species. Lacking a tympanum, they
use a subgenual organ, located in each leg, to sense the vibrations of
the substrate. The vibrations are produced by striking the substrate
with the abdomen, or sometimes with the abdomen and the thorax.
Weissman (2001b) reports that in some species, the drumming can
be heard by humans 20 m from the source.
American Entomologist • Fall 2005
where Jesus was crucified. The word Calvary (i.e., Latin Calvaria)
means “a skull” and is equivalent to the original name Golgotha.
Thus, circumstantial evidence suggests that the name “Jerusalem
cricket” is due to the resemblance of the insect’s head to a skull and
arose from a mixing of Navajo and Christian terminology. In an
accompanying article in this issue [Jerusalem! cricket? (Orthoptera:
Stenopelmatidae: Stenopelmatus); Origins of a common name, p.
138], Weissman provides other ideas on the origin of the name
Jerusalem cricket.
E. Malotki, professor of languages at Northern Arizona University
and one of the authors of the Hopi dictionary, says that the correct
Hopi spelling for the cricket katsina is Sö́sö̀öpa, not Sosopah or
Susopa as used by many individuals, native and non-native (private
correspondence). Spanish-Americans call Jerusalem crickets niñas
de la tierra, or “children of the earth,” because of the insects’ large,
bald heads, and they make no specific reference to the word “skull.”
The Hopi do not use the term “skull head” (Hopi Dictionary Project
1998), and thus the hypothesis that the insect got its name from an
association with Skull Hill has to be attributed to the Navajos.
Fig. 1. Jerusalem cricket (Stenopelmatus sp.) showing ‘baldness’, shiny
head, and red color. Photograph by Robert B. Parks.
Origin of the Name Jerusalem Cricket
Where did the name “Jerusalem cricket” originate? The Jerusalem
cricket most commonly mentioned in the literature is Stenopelmatus
fuscus; while other species remain undescribed. This species was
well known to the Navajo people. Stenopelmatus fuscus Haldeman 1852 goes by the Navajo names c’ic’in lici (“red-skull”), c’os
bic’ic lici (“red-skull bug”), or c’ic’in lici’ I coh (“big red-skull”)
(Wyman and Bailey 1964); and it appears in the story of the Hail
Chant (Vickery and Kevan 1983). It also has the common Navajo
name “skull insect” (wo se c’ini or rositsini) or “sand cricket” (yo
sic’ini, y o sic’ini) (Wyman and Bailey 1964, Vickery and Kevan
1983). The Navajo word for “skull” is tsiitśin (Young and Morgan
1969). In 1978, Rentz named a new species of Jerusalem cricket,
Stenopelmatus navajo Rentz, in honor of the Navajo people. Thus,
the Navajo gave the Jerusalem cricket its common name because its
head had a human skull-like appearance.
According to the Hopi Dictionary Project (1998), the cricket
katsina is known as qalatötö or Sö́sö̀öpa. The dictionary also refers
to the insects associated with these names as the “Jerusalem” or
“sand cricket.” Joseph Day, a traditional Hopi carver, however, says
that the Hopi call the Jerusalem cricket Sö́sö̀öpa and not “Jerusalem
cricket” because it is a pahaana word (Anglo but not Spanish, Mexican, or Mormon; unpublished letter). The Hopi name qalatötö, or
“shiny bug,” refers to the large shiny head of the insect (see Fig. 1)
(Malotki 2001). We found no reference in which the Hopi use the
adjective “skull” to refer to this insect.
Stoffolano suggests an origin for the common name “Jerusalem
cricket” based on the book Navaho Indian Ethnoentomology
(Wyman and Bailey 1964). In the book, the authors acknowledge
Father Berard Haile, a Franciscan priest, for his help with specific
aspects of their study. Also, two references (Franciscan Fathers
1910, 1912) suggest a strong connection between the Navajos and
the Franciscans. The priests were involved in establishing a dictionary and vocabulary of the Navajo language and probably heard the
natives speak about the skull insect. Cognizant of religious history,
they knew that just outside Jerusalem is a cliff called Skull Hill, or
the Garden Tomb, where it is suggested that Jesus is buried. Golgotha, on the other hand, means “the Place of the Skull” and was
American Entomologist • Volume 51, Number 3
Role of Jerusalem or Sand Crickets in Native Cultures
Early references to members of the Stenopelmatidae failed to
recognize the genus of the insect being discussed because it was
unknown. Thus, references to sand crickets could just as well have
meant Jerusalem crickets. Essig (1934) reported that the coastal tribes
of northwestern California treated the sand cricket with almost human regard: “This insect was supposed to have brought mortality
to man, when he might otherwise have remained immortal.” Should
this statement relate to Jesus, child of the earth, and Christianity and
rebirth, it may reflect a Western influence on native culture.
Capinera (1993) reports, “Although the specific roles of most
insect-form kachinas seem to have escaped description, their mere
presence documents a religious role.” Hitchcock (1962) writes,
“Crickets (Stenopelmatus fuscus Haldeman?) were useful to these
Indians [Yuma tribes] as giving power to cure a certain kind of bewitchment (Spier 1933) and to the Tarahumara as help in making
rain (Lumholtz 1894).”
Wyman and Bailey (1964) provide the most extensive information
about the Jerusalem or sand cricket as it relates to the Navajos. The
strong mandibles can inflict a painful bite, and they suggest this may
have led to the erroneous belief, which persists today, that the bite
is venomous. A Navajo remedy for the bite is to eat a “preparation
of yucca fruit.” A Navajo myth holds that if you kill a sand cricket,
you will become bald, and that these insects can remove hair. This
probably relates to the bald appearance of the insect’s head. This
myth makes it easier to understand the Hopi animal story about
Sand Cricket (Malotki 2001); however, we doubt that the Hopi
adopted the Navajo belief.
What role does the cricket katsina play in Hopi culture? Colton
(1959) lists Sö́sö̀öpa as a runner and Wright (1973) listed it as a racer.
McManis (2000) infers that he is a runner, and notes, “Sösö’pa or
Sö́sö̀öpa, the Cricket kachina (katsina), will thrash a loser with yucca
whips.” A yucca whip, made from Yucca angustissima Engelm. ex
Trel., the narrow leaf yucca, is also used in purification rites of the
Hopi (Whiting 1939).
Is there a historical or religious significance attached to the katsina
runners in Hopi culture? Wright (1992) says there are “religious
overtones and other Hopi have said that, ‘As the men race so the
water will rush down the arroyos’.” Secakuku (1995) writes, “The
coming of the racers has two purposes: to bless the people and to
encourage them to begin training for long- and short-distance running. Tough races are an important part of the upcoming activities in
the ceremonial calendar.” In addition to ceremonial functions, Hopi
175
runners are “a very important factor in that it has enabled them to
cultivate with ease fields at a distance of fifty miles or more away
from their concentrated, protected mesa villages” (Whiting 1939).
Joseph Day (personal correspondence) notes, “Racing makes the
men and boys strong and brings the rain.”
Variations of Cricket Katsintihu and Katsinam
The art of making katsintithu and dressing or outfitting a katsinam is rapidly changing, and often the carver or dancer adds his or
her own interpretations (Dockstader 1985, Erickson 1977, Wright
2000). Wright (unpublished observation) notes that katsintithu given
in Hopi villages are not elaborately carved and never have signatures or bases on them. These katsintithu are not changing except
in minute details. The katsintithu that are made for the collectors’
market have carved bases, elaborate postures, and exquisite carving,
and they carry the maker’s name. A third group that has emerged
in recent years is represented in Day (2000). These are purportedly
“old Traditional dolls.” The effort is to make these carvings in the
proportions of the older dolls. However, what has emerged is an
idiosyncratic image that is held only in the mind of the artist making the carving. While they are inspired by kachina images, they are
the most fluid in form, and Wright has yet to see any given in the
Hopi villages; however, Barry Walsh (Buffalo Barry’s Indian Art,
personal correspondence) notes, “I’ve seen them given at dances
very frequently in the past 6–7 years.”
Various interpretations about a particular kachina, whether
katsintihu (figurine) or (katsina) dancer, may depend on the mesa the
Hopi is from (Adams 1991). Also, the use of various paraphernalia
or accessories (e.g., feathers, hair, yarn) (Plate 1, fig. 2) has changed
considerably (Roediger 1941, Dockstader 1985). According to many
Hopi, the use of paraphernalia depends on the carver or dancer. Some
traditionalists, however, believe that the use of paraphernalia or accessories for tithu (figurines) would be counterproductive because
these were originally for girls who would wrap them up and carry
them around. Any added paraphernalia either would be broken or
would interfere with the wrapping.
Before discussing how the Sö́sö̀öpa katsintihu or katsina may
show specific characteristics of the Jerusalem cricket, we stress that
early indigenous peoples were careful observers of life around them.
It should be possible for anyone familiar with the animals carved to
represent a particular katsintihu, in this case the Jerusalem cricket,
to find relationships between the insect and the design, color, and
possibly accessories used by carvers to make the katsintihu. For
whatever reason, however, modern carvers may not be familiar with
the details and/or life history of the original animal the katsintihu
represents.
The characteristic that distinguishes a katsina at a public performance is the mask, the cult (if it is associated with one), and the
ceremonial setting (i.e., a kiva or plaza) (Adams 1991). “The katsina
mask symbolizes the presence of the cult and reinforces the esoteric
knowledge required to produce and wear the mask” (Adams 1991).
If this is true, carvers and dancers should pay particular attention to
the mask of Sö́sö̀öpa. What does the cricket katsina mask and body
look like in shape, color, and accessories?
Colton (1959) describes the Sö́sö̀öpa tihu as having a “muddy
yellow case mask, with pseudo-horns on top of head resembling
antennae” (see Plate 1, fig. 5). The Hopi dictionary makes no distinction between antennae or horns, referring to both as aala. Wright
(unpublished observation) notes that the antennae are made from
the tassels (Songòoltala) of sand grass (songowu) [also known as big
sandreed or Calamovilfa gigantea (Nutt.) Scribn. & Merr.] and at
the base are soft feathers (Fig. 2, on the right). Joseph Day (personal
correspondence) says that in place of ears, Sö́sö̀öpa should have
hair, and this is the way some carvers are now depicting him (Plate
176
1, fig. 1). Secakuku (1995) shows two dolls: one older, painted a
white or light beige color (Fig. 2, left), and the more recent one is
yellowish (Fig. 2, right).
Wright (1973) notes that Sö́sö̀öpa has feathers for ears (Plate 1,
figs. 3, 4, 8). However, the katsina painted as the cricket katsina
on p. 230 of Wright’s (1973) book is incorrect and represents the
scorpion katsina, Puchkofmoktaka (Putskòomoktaqa from the Hopi
dictionary) (see Plate 1, fig. 8, lower left). The description with the
painting, however, is of the cricket katsina.
Branson (1992) gives greater detail in his description of Sö́sö̀öpa
than Wright (1973) does (see plate 1 for examples).
The body and mask of this rather plain kachina doll is painted brownishyellow. The case mask has a rounded top with black spots for eyes and
mouth. Some dolls have flat tab ears painted red or dingy yellow. He often
has antennas sticking up from each side of his head like the antennas of
an insect. On most dolls, however, the antennae are actually sprigs of seed
tufts of a plant similar to bluegrass tips. Over each ear is a small bunch of
feathers. However, some dolls are carved with the regular black breechclout.
There is also an all-white example of this rare doll. In real life he is usually
portrayed by a small person, as crickets are small and usually the dolls are
carved small also (Branson 1992).
Day (2000) notes that antennae are made from a Hopi plant
known as siwi (i.e., common dunebroom, or Parryella filifolia Torr.
& Gray, a leguminous shrub found on sand dunes). The yellow
flowers of siwi make a yellow pigment that is often used to color
other katsintithu. Whether the pigment from the siwi was or is used
today to paint Sö́sö̀öpa, we do not know.
Fig. 2. Two versions
of the cricket katsina.
Left: Carved by
White Bear (Oswald)
Fredericks (1959)
and painted white
(Goldwater collection).
Right: Carved by Clyde
Honyouti (c. 1970),
painted yellow (Byron
Harvey III collection).
Photo from Secakuku
(1995).
American Entomologist • Fall 2005
The material and shape of the antennae seem to vary considerably depending on the carver. Colton (1959) shows the antennae
as nonplant material and curving at the tip with an outward curve
(Plate 1, fig. 5). His scorpion kachina, however, is depicted with
similar antennae (even though scorpions lack antennae), but the
curve is inward and the antennae are shown with tiny hairs. Most
carvers after Colton’s work, including the 1970 carving by Clyde
Honyouti and the 1959 carving by White Bear (Oswald) Fredericks
(see Fig. 2 and Secakuku 1995), represent the antennae with plant
material. In the oldest Sö́sö̀öpa katsintihu we could find (McManis
2000, fig. 9), no plant material, no bandolier, and no ear feathers
are shown (Plate 1, fig. 6).
What kind of clothing does Sö́sö̀öpa wear? Colton (1959) notes
that he wears a rag ruff and breechclout. Wright (1973) describes
S ö́sö̀öpa as follows: “Usually this kachina appears with a black
bandolier. The kilt he wears is almost universally the folded, plaid,
man’s shoulder blanket (Plate 1, figs. 1–4, 8). The hands are painted
white. The artist has portrayed this kachina in the act of offering a
challenger piki bread. From the disgruntled look on the face of the
person accepting the bread, he has just lost the race.” Branson (1992)
describes him as, “He wears a black, or black and white banded rag
ruff, a bandolier of black yarn around his wrists and knees. He is
barefooted and usually wears a Hopi man’s handwoven black and
white plaid blanket as a kilt.” Figure 9 of McManis (2000) shows
Sö́sö̀öpa without a rag ruff or bandolier (Plate 1, fig. 6).
Does Sö́sö̀öpa carry anything in his hands? Wright (1992) states,
“He is one of the few kachinas that carries nothing in his hands
when he dances.” Hopi katsina carver Ronald Honyouti (personal
communication) noted, “The susopa usually comes with a group of
‘runner katsinas’ to challenge males from the village to short sprints.
Therefore, they are usually impersonated by the younger strong
men.” Wright (1992) defines runner katsintithu (wawarkatsinam,
Hopi dictionary, 1998) as “those who race with the men during the
spring dances.” Joseph Day (unpublished letter) says, “When he
comes with the wawarkatsinam (runners), he carries yucca; but when
he comes to dance, he carries either spruce, flowers, or a stick with a
prayer feather attached. When he is racing, he carries the yucca.”
This seems to represent the portrayal by traditional and early
carvers, but current carvers depict him with various things in his
hands, especially a yucca whip (Plate 1, fig. 5) because he is believed
to be a runner. Colton (1959) supports this belief and reports that, as
a doll, he carries a yucca leaf whip; Secakuku (1995) also notes that
the tihu carries a yucca shoot. However, Secakuku (1995) shows two
older cricket katsintithu (dates carved are 1959, 1970) with nothing
in their hands (see Fig. 2). In fig. 56 of McManis (2000), however,
Sö́sö̀öpa holds a blue gourd rattle in his right hand, while nothing
is shown in his left hand (see Plate 1, fig. 7).
Why carry a yucca leaf whip or shoot? Secakuku (1995), who
is Hopi, notes, “Sösö’pa is the Cricket Racer katsina who whips
his opponents gently with a yucca shoot.” Branson (1992) writes,
“Carvers are likely to show him holding a rattle and a few red chili
peppers, but usually he carries nothing.” Barton Wright (unpublished
observation) notes that holding a rattle or carrying red chili peppers
is a confusion on the part of carvers, who make him like Tclikomoqtaka (i.e., scorpion kachina, aka Puchkofmoktaka). Wright says
that Sö́sö̀öpa never carries peppers or a rattle.
Navajo carvers, in contrast to Hopi carvers, may use the yucca
shoot or leaf whip for another connection: to symbolize an antidote,
which is made from yucca fruit against the bite of the Jerusalem
cricket (Wyman and Bailey 1964). This myth may have spread to
the Hopi and may help explain why some carvers connect the cricket
katsintihu with the yucca plant. Barton Wright (personal correspondence), however, doesn’t accept this idea since the Hopi remained
isolated and probably adopted few, if any, of the Navajo ideas.
American Entomologist • Volume 51, Number 3
Wright (unpublished observation) states that when the Sö́sö̀öpa
katsina comes as a racer, he carries a yucca whip and wears a black
breechclout and does not have black dots over the eyes. He (as
dancer) may wear small bells at the knee or waist. He appears in the
plaza in the daylight but not as a dancer. Wright (1992) notes that
all of the Hopi who contributed information for his book felt that
Sö́sö̀öpa is a kiva dancer and is not to appear anywhere else, but
the discrepancy may be due to mesa differences. When he comes in
the kiva, he appears only in the night dances and wears the kwikwilhoya (i.e., a checkered blanket and the first a Hopi boy usually
receives), carries nothing in his hands, and has black dots over the
eyes. These dots possibly represent raindrops, but one Hopi says it
is the style of the individual carver and has no connection to rain.
Wright (personal correspondence) says that the cricket’s function
is to keep the ground damp. Whether the Hopi or Navajo cultures
hold the Tarahumara Indians’ belief that the Jerusalem cricket helps
in making rain (Lumholtz 1894) is not known.
Interestingly, the scarcity of raw materials, such as shrubs and
grasses, for making tithu has resulted from overgrazing and/or land
settlement (Dockstader 1985). David Weissman (personal correspondence) notes that in selected areas, such as the Tula City dunes in
Arizona, overgrazing is a problem, but this is not the case in most
areas that Jerusalem crickets live. Habitat destruction is much more
an important factor. In addition, to conserve time, many carvers and
dancers probably use more readily available materials rather than
traditional ones.
Entomological and Other Interpretations or
Misinterpretations
The names “skull head” and niña de la tierra, or “child of the
earth,” relate to the large head of the Jerusalem cricket in relation
to the rest of its body. The Navajo name “red-skull head” probably
refers to some species having a reddish color to their cuticle, especially the head (see Fig. 1). The head is similar in shape to a human
skull, and its larger size in comparison to the rest of the body is like
that of an infant. The latter idea is also presented in Wyman and
Bailey (1964). The head is large because it houses numerous muscles
that aid the cricket in digging its way through soil, eating roots of
its host plants, and giving a good defensive bite.
Branson (1992) reports that there is an all-white example of
Sö́sö̀öpa and that this katsintihu is considered rare. Some Hopi
also consider the white Sö́sö̀öpa as rare, and one carver said that
the white Sö́sö̀öpa was lost for a while (i.e., not being carved or
Fig. 3. Jerusalem cricket molting. The new cuticle is white (right); the
old cuticle is dark (left). Black arrow shows white antenna; white arrow
shows exuvium (old exoskeleton) of the old antenna. The insects molt on
their backs and usually eat the exuvium. Photograph by D. Weissman.
177
danced). Its rareness makes sense because the Jerusalem crickets
molt underground, only periodically, and at that time are secretive
because they are vulnerable to predation. Also, compared with
the rest of their lives, they spend the least amount of time being
white. Some carvers are starting to paint Sö́sö̀öpa white rather
than yellow.
The use of white for Sö́sö̀öpa (katsintihu or katsina) can be easily explained. If one unearthed a newly molted Jerusalem cricket,
its cuticle would be white because it has not yet tanned or undergone sclerotization and melanization (see Fig. 3). These processes
cause the cuticle to become hardened and darkened, respectively.
Once these processes are complete, the cuticle becomes yellowish,
sometimes reddish, or even dark brown. Wright (unpublished observation) notes that when any dancer appears with the ceremonial
clowns, he is often white; but there is almost no evidence that
Sö́sö̀öpa has appeared with the clowns. If yellow paint were not
immediately available, it is possible that the katsina could come in
white when he appears as a racer because they are a minimal form
and need not conform exactly. Wright (1973) notes, “The hands
are painted white.” The reason for painting just the hands white is
not known. Nevertheless, of the thousands of katsintithu Wright
has looked at, he has yet to see one that is white. The closest is the
aberrant Sö́sö̀öpa made by White Bear (Oswald) Fredericks (see
Fig. 2, left). Branson (1992) is the only one who mentions a white
cricket. Joseph Day (personal correspondence) writes, “On older
dolls, the yellow sometimes will get worn away or fade out revealing the white tuumn (kaolinite) with which all dolls are painted
prior to applying color.”
The case mask covering the head of the Sö́sö̀öpa katsinam is
rounded with black eyes and mouth, plus sprigs of big sandreed
(C. gigantea) depicting the antennae (Plate 1). This fits with the
general morphology of the Jerusalem cricket and its habitat. The
dark eyes match the large compound eyes of the insect in color
and size compared to the head. Because the head is used to burrow
through the soil, the evolutionary consequence is a rounded, large
head and one that is relatively naked compared with other insects,
and very similar to the case mask of the cricket katsina or dancer.
Another connection between the Sö́sö̀öpa katsintihu and the insect’s
biology is the use of natural plant material for the antennae. The
big sandreed or sand grass occurs in the same habitat as many of
the Jerusalem crickets. Finally, the black and white rag ruff around
the neck might have been inspired by the banding that occurs on
the abdomen of most crickets; however, its use in other katsintithu
probably precludes this explanation.
The use of feathers and other paraphernalia probably represents
the choice of the carvers to embellish the Sö́sö̀öpa katsintihu for the
art market. Some carvers are now putting black hair at the base of
the antennae instead of feathers (Plate 1, fig. 1). Jerusalem crickets
Plate 1. Various
versions of the cricket
kachina: (1) Carved
by Verne Mansfield.
(2) Carved by Clark
Tenankhongva. (3)
Carved by Manuel
Denet Chavarria, Jr.
(4) Carved by Gary
Tso. (5) Carved by Leo
Lacapa. (6) Carver
unknown. From fig.
9 of McManis (2000;
listed as Sösö’pa
or Sösööpa). (7)
Carved by Clyde
Honyouti. From fig. 56
of McManis (2000).
(8) Carver unknown.
From fig. 28D of Wright
(1977).
178
American Entomologist • Fall 2005
have subgenual organs that respond to substrate vibrations, rather
than airborne vibrations that require ears as we know them. Thus,
the use of feathers in place of ears (Wright 1973) is a carver’s choice.
Sö́sö̀öpa is never carved with tab ears, which represent animals having visible, human-like ears.
Summary
Sö́sö̀öpa, or the cricket katsintihu, as with other katsintithu, appears to be changing in the minds of the carvers. The driving force
behind this evolution is based not on cultural or spiritual factors but
on market demand (Capinera 1993, Day 2000). The “doll” market
is “hot,” and the large number of different katsintithu makes it difficult for traders to know much about each individual tihu. Also,
carvers of the various insect katsintithu often have never seen the
original insect that the carvings represent.
This article gives collectors, traders, carvers, and entomologists
a better understanding of the cricket katsintihu. It should also help
entomologists understand some of the myths associated with the
Jerusalem cricket. Older katsintithu may represent biological aspects
of the cricket more clearly than do modern carvings. What Sö́sö̀öpa
katsintihu or katsina will look like in the future remains to be seen.
Because the cricket katsintihu represents the Jerusalem cricket, one
would hope that current and future carvers would look at this insect
and learn something about its biology and natural environment.
We believe that our contact with various native people has given us
the correct insight into the being of Sö́sö̀öpa. Hopi children should
be taught something about the biology and natural history of the
various insect katsintithu. At the same time, care should be taken
to save the habitat of the Jerusalem cricket that shares its life with
the Hopi and is known to them as Sö́sö̀öpa.
Acknowledgments
Thanks are due to Ekkehart Malotki and Barry Walsh of Buffalo
Barry’s Indian Art for providing critical information and suggestions
on the text. David Weismann provided critical information and our
interaction with him was a driving force in completing this article.
Appreciation goes to Hopi carvers Ronald Honyouti and Joseph Day,
who provided information about the cricket katsintihu. Appreciation also goes to the following traders who provided information:
David Shultz of Home and Away, and Gail Chehak of The Indian
Craft Shop.
References Cited
Adams, E.C. 1991. The origin and development of the Pueblo katsina cult.
University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Branson, O. T. 1992. Hopi Indian kachina dolls. Treasure Chest Publications, Tucson, AZ.
Capinera, J. L. 1993. Insects in art and religion: the American Southwest.
Am. Entomol. 39: 221–229.
Cherry, R. H. 1993. Insects in the mythology of Native Americans. Am.
Entomol. 39: 16–21.
Colton, H. S. 1959. Hopi kachina dolls with a key to their identification.
University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Day, J. S. 2000. Traditional Hopi kachinas—a new generation of carvers.
Northland Pub., Flagstaff, AZ.
Dockstader, F. J. 1985. The kachina and the white man—the influences of
white culture on the Hopi kachina cult. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
Erickson, J.T. 1977. Kachinas, an evolving Hopi art form? Heard Museum,
Phoenix, AZ.
Essig, E.O. 1934. The value of insects to the California Indians. Scientific
Monthly, pp. 181–l86.
Franciscan Fathers. 1910. An ethnologic dictionary of the Navaho language.
Saint Michaels, AZ.
American Entomologist • Volume 51, Number 3
Franciscan Fathers. 1912. A vocabulary of the Navaho language. Saint
Michaels, AZ.
Hitchcock, S.W. 1962. Insects and Indians of the Americas. Bull. Entomol.
Soc. Am. 8: 181–187.
Hopi Dictionary Project. 1998. E. Sekaquaptewa, M. E. Black, and E. Malotki,
Univ. of Arizona Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, K.C. Hill.
Hopi Dictionary=Hopìikwa lavàytutuveni: A Hopi–English Dictionary of
the third mesa dialect with an English–Hopi finder list and a sketch of Hopi
grammar. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Lumholtz, C. 1894. Tarahumari dances and plant worship. Scribner’s Magazine
16: 438–456.
Malotki, E. [Ed]. 2001. Hopi animal stories. University of Nebraska Press,
Lincoln.
McManis, K. 2000. A guide to Hopi katsina dolls. Rio Nuevo Publishers,
Tucson, AZ.
Rentz, D.C.F. 1978. New species and records of western Orthoptera. PanPac. Entomol. 54: 81–97.
Roediger, V.M. 1941. Ceremonial costumes of the Pueblo Indians. University
of California Press, Berkeley.
Secakuku, A.H. 1995. Hopi kachina tradition—following the sun and
moon. Northland Publishing, Flagstaff, AZ, with the Heard Museum,
Phoenix.
Spier, L. 1933. Yuman tribes of the Gila River. University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
Vickery, V. R., and D. K. McE. Kevan. 1983. A Monograph of the orthopteroid
insects of Canada and adjacent regions. Lyman Entomol. Museum and
Res. Lab. Memoir No. 13, volume I. Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Quebec.
Weissman, D. B. 2001a. North and Central American Jerusalem crickets
(Orthoptera: Stenopelmatidae): Taxonomy, distribution, life cycle, ecology and related biology of the American species, pp. 57–72. In L. H.
Field [Ed]. The biology of wetas, king crickets and their allies. CABI
Pub., Cambridge, UK.
Weissman, D. B. 2001b. Communication and reproductive behaviour in
North American Jerusalem crickets (Stenopelmatus) (Orthoptera: Stenopelmatidae), pp. 351–373. In L. H. Field [Ed], The Biology of wetas, king
crickets and their allies. CABI Pub., Cambridge, UK.
Whiting, A.F. 1939. Ethnobotany of the Hopi. Museum of Northern
Arizona, Bull. No. 15. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art,
Flagstaff, AZ.
Wright, B. 1973. Kachinas—A Hopi artist’s documentary. Northland Pub.,
Flagstaff, AZ, with the Heard Museum, Phoenix.
Wright, B. 1992. Hopi kachinas—The complete guide to collecting kachina
dolls, 12th ed. Northland Pub., Flagstaff, AZ.
Wright, B. 2000. The changing kachina, pp. 139–145. In P. Schaafsma [Ed.].
Kachinas in the Pueblo world. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Wyman, L. C., and F. L. Bailey. 1964. Navaho Indian ethnoentomology.
University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Young, R. W., and W. Morgan. 1969. The Navaho language. Deseret Book
Co., Salt Lake City.
John Stoffolano is professor of entomology at the University
of Massachusetts in Amherst and coauthor of the introductory
textbook, The Science of Entomology. His professional interests
include the role of nutrition in activating the endocrine system
involved in regulating both egg development and mating in the
queen blowfly, Phormia regina. Current work in his laboratory
involves the role of neuropeptides in the feeding behavior and
reproductive biology of blowflies and tabanids. Barton Wright
was curator and assistant director of the Museum of Northern
Arizona in Flagstaff. He is a leading authority on Hopi Kachinas
and has written several books about Kachinas: Hopi Kachinas and
Kachinas – A Hopi Artist’s Documentary. Currently, he resides in
Phoenix where he continues his studies and writing about Hopi
culture and katsina dolls.

179