MATRILOCALITY, CORPORATE STRATEGY,AND THE ORGANIZATION
OF PRODUCTION IN THE CHACOAN WORLD
Peter N. Peregrine
Kinship is central to an understandingof sociopolitical organization and the organization of production in Chaco Canyon.
Between A.D. 700 and 900, lifeways in the Chacoan wor7ldunderwenta transformationthat reflects the evolution of matrilocal residence. Matrilocal groups became thefoundation of a polity based on a corporatepolitical strategy.Matrilocalityprovided the peoples of the Chaco region a social structure in which women were able to form stable agricultural communities
while men werefreed to takepart in long-distance resourceprocurementand trade. Leaders mobilized goods from across the
activities, such as construction of great houses. This corporate strategy is evident in an examipolity for corporate-affir-ming
nation of turquoiseproduction. The production of turquoise ornamentswas diffuse and uncontrolled,but the consumption of
turquoise,at least in Chaco Canyon, was highly centralized. This is what we would expect to see in a polity operating within
a corporate strategy.
Elparentesco es centralpara entenderla organizaci6nsocio-politico y la organizaci6nde produci6nen Cafi6nChaco. Entred.C.
700 y 900 la manerade vida en el mundoChaquefiose cambi6 reflejandola evoluci6n de la residencia matrilocal. Los grupos
matrilocales convenieronla fundaci6n de una regi6npolitica basada en una estrategiapolitica corporativa.La matrilocalidad
suministr6a la gente Chaquefiasuna estructurasocial en que las mujeresfueroncapaz aformar comunidadesagriculturalesestables mientraslos hombresfueronlibres a conseguirrecursosy hacer neg6cios de larga-distancia.Los lider-esmobilizar-onrecursos al trave'sde la regi6n politica para actividades corportiva-afirmando,como la construci6n de las Casas Granzdes.Esta
estrategia es evidenteen una investigaci6nde la produci6n turquesa.Los ornamentosturquesosfuei-onfabricados por familias
quienespecializaronen la produci6nartisticapero la produci6nfue difusay incontrolada.Sin embai-gola consunci6nde turquesa
ver en una region politicafunfue altamenteespecializada, al menos entreCan6n Chaco. Eso es precisamenteque espe7rar-iamos
cionandoentre una estrategiacorporativa.
mong the most striking monuments of
ancient North America are the Chacoan
greathouses.Generationsof archaeologists
have marveledat theirscale and craftsmanshipand
wonderedwhy they were built, whatpurposesthey
served,what kind of society fosteredthe construction of such impressivestructures.These questions
are made only more enigmaticwith knowledge of
the archaeologicalrecordfortheeraprecedinggreat
houseconstruction.BetweenA.D.700 andA.D.900
lifeways in the Chacoanworld underwenta transformation.Single-familypit structures,a basic residentialform since as earlyas 200 B.C., were given
up for multifamilypueblos.Whataccountsfor this
transition?Whatdoes it meanfor ourunderstanding
of the organizationof productionin the Chacoan
world?
I suggestthe developmentof pueblosmayreflect
A
the evolution of matrilocal residence and, more
specifically,of a polityrootedin thepossibilitiesand
constraintssuchresidentialgroupscreate.I suggest
emergentleadersin the Chacoanpolityusedmatrilocal groupsas the foundationof a corporatepolitical
strategy.As my colleagues and I have explainedin
a series of recentarticles(Blanton1998; Blantonet
al. 1996; Feinman2000), leadersfollowing a corporate political strategyattemptto build a power
base by developing and promotingactivities that
reinforcethe corporatebonds that tie membersof
the politytogether.A commoncorporatestrategyis,
for example,to mobilize goods fromacrossa polity
for largepublic ritualsor constructionprojectsthat
bringmembersof the polity togetherin corporateaffirmingactivities(activitiesthatseem reflectedin
the Chacoangreat houses and pre-Chacoangreat
kivas).
Peter N. Peregrine * Departmentof Anthropology,LawrenceUniversity,515 E. College Ave., Appleton,WI 54911
AmericanAntiquity,66(1), 2001, pp. 36-46
Copyright( 2001 by the Society for AmericanArchaeology
36
MATRILOCALITY,
CORPORATE STRATEGY,AND ORGANIZATION
37
My colleagues and I have arguedthatcorporate or status,receiveno tributeorcompensationfortheir
strategyshouldbe seen as one end of a continuum work,andarepowerlessin termsof judicialauthorofpoliticalstrategywiththeoppositeendbeingwhat ity. Yet Leach (1954:206) argues that in terms of
we have called an exclusionaryor "network"strat- politicalauthority,"inpracticea gumlao 'headman'
egy. Leadersfollowing a networkstrategyattempt maybe hardlydistinguishablefroma gumsa'chief."'
to build a powerbase by controllingaccess to net- How do such gumlao leaders gain authority?The
worksof exchangeandalliancebothwithinandout- answerLeach (1954:263, 275) gives is thatthey do
side the polity (Blantonet al. 1996:4-5; Peregrine so by appealingto corporateideology and support1992).Thusa networkstrategyis one in whichlead- ive mythsandprinciplesof behavior.It is important
ers attemptto monopolizesources of power,while to notethatpolitieswitha gumlaoorientationarenot
a corporatestrategyis one in which leadersattempt hinderedin what they can accomplish-they build
terraces,defendthemselves
to sharepower across differentgroups and sectors andmaintainagricultural
of a polity.
against enemies, engage in trade with other poliIt is importantto note thatcorporateandnetwork ties-and yet they do so within a frameworkthat
strategieslie on a continuumand are not "pure" downplaysstatusdifferencesandindividualaggranstrategiesin any given case. Rather,leaderstend to dizement(Leach 1954:231-238).
promotemorecorporate-oriented
strategiesor more
Whilethe ideaof corporatepoliticalstrategywas
network-orientedones, but it is unlikelyany leader initiallyput forwardas partof a theoryfor the evowill promotea "purely"corporateor networkstrat- lution of complex societies in Mesoamerica(Blanegy. It is also importantto make clear that these ton et al. 1996), severalof the papersin this issue of
strategiesareused in societies with varyingdegrees AmericanAntiquityuse it as a model of political
of political centralization,scale, and technological behaviorto provide insight into the structureand
complexity.They do not define societal"types"nor operationof the ancient Chacoanpolity. Timothy
do they define a unilinealevolutionarytrend.
Earle,for example,explainsthatthe focus of politWhile archaeologistshave tendedto ignorecor- ical strategyin theChacoanpolityappearsto be "staporatelyorientedpolities in favorof the often more ple finance"-the mobilization of goods for
colorfulnetwork-oriented
ones, severalgood exam- corporateactivities.Similarly,Colin Renfrewsugples do exist, perhaps the most prominentbeing gests thatgreathouseswereusedfor largepublicritTeotihuacanandtheInduscivilization.In bothcases uals,ritualscoordinatedandfundedby leaderswhose
we find few of the typical indicatorsof powerful activitiesmaintainedthe corporateorientationof the
rulers-there are no royal tombs, few or no repre- polity.Whilenotdirectlyemployingtheideaof a corsentationsof rulers, and where writing is present porate-orientedpolity,he suggeststhatthese rituals
rulers are rarely mentioned-such polities seem also servedto legitimatethe authorityof the leaders
"faceless"(Blanton1998:149).And yet these "face- who hosted them,just as the mobilizationof mateless" polities were able to constructcities, conquer rialsused in themdid.ThusbothEarleandRenfrew
largeregions,andintegratetensof thousandsof peo- suggestthata basicpoliticalstrategyin the Chacoan
ple. SimilarlyColinRenfrew(1974) describedwhat worldwas the coordinationof corporaterituals.
he called "group-oriented"
chiefdomsin thirdmilWhateffects might a corporateorientationhave
lenniumB.C. Europethatwere capableof organiz- on the organizationof production?Wewouldexpect
ing laborto producelargepublicworks suitablefoi productionin corporate-orientedpolities to be difcommunal ritual within an apparentlyegalitarian fuse, with no clearcentersof control,andto be disframeworkwhere political authoritywas "faceless persed across the polity. This is what we appearto
see in the Chacoanworld. We would also expect
and anonymous"(1974:79).
The ethnographicliteratureprovidesanotherpic- productionto be directedtowardgroupratherthan
ture of such "faceless" polities. Leach (1954) individual consumption. Again, this is what we
describesgumlaochiefdomsorganizedaroundegal- appear to see in the Chacoan world. We would
itarianprinciples among the Kachin of highland expect consumption, on the other hand, to be
Burma.Leadersin gumlaopolities(whoLeachterms focused at points of grouparticulation.In the Cha"headmen"to distinguish them from the gumst coan worldthose points of articulationappearto be
chiefsof otherKachinpolities)haveno specialrights greathousesandgreathousemiddens.Thusthe idea
38
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 66, No. 1, 2001
-xample,the dataon small sites presentedby Peter
M\1cKenna
(1986) suggest that during the period
betweenA.D. 500 and 700, pit structuresaveraged
about15 squaremetersin floor area,and this average size remained fairly constant in the period
betweenA.D. 700 and 900, althoughvariationin
Matrilocal Residence in the Chacoan World
size seems to have increased. When the pueblos
Ratherthan furtherdiscuss the natureof corporate beganto be constructed,in the periodbetweenA.D.
political strategiesin the Chacoanworld (which is 900 and 1100, individualrooms averagedabout 7
discussed in more detail by Earle and Renfrew),I squaremetersin floor area,but each site consists of
would like to focus on the context in which those anagglomerationof theserooms,givingoverallsizes
strategieswere employed-the context of matrilo- of the roomblocks a rangefrom roughly70 square
cal residence.As I statedabove,I believethatthepit- meters(29-SJ-629) to over 300 squaremeters(29structure-pueblotransitionreflects a transitionto SJ-633). Clearlydwelling size increasedin a manmatrilocalresidence (also see James 1994), and I ner consistent with the evolution of matrilocality,
have two fundamentalreasonsto acceptthis asser- and, in fact, the conclusion reachedby McKenna
tion.Thefirstis thata numberof themostlikelymod- (1986:38), thatthis changemarksa transitionfrom
ern descendants of the Chacoan people are single-familyto multifamilydwellings,is also conmatrilocal.Couldtheinhabitantsof theChacoregion sistent.
transiIf we acceptthatthe pit structure-pueblo
havebeenmatrilocalfromveryearlyin theirhistory?
who tion marks the evolution of matrilocal residence
It seemsunlikely.TheArchaichunter-gatherers
populatedthe AmericanSouthwestwere probably amongthe inhabitantsof the Chacoregion,it is reapatrilocalor neolocal, as patrilocalresidenceis by sonableto ask why matrilocalityevolvedandwhy it
farthemost commonformof post-maritalresidence evolvedwhen it did.The answersto these questions
in the world (about60 percentof known societies), go well beyond the purposeof this paper,but there
andneolocalresidenceappearsto be a commonadap- are severalgeneralconditionsthat appearto foster
in marginalenvironments. matrilocality,each of which may have playeda role
tationof hunter-gatherers
Matrilocalresidenceonly occursin about10 percent in the Chacoancase. Matrilocalresidencehas been
of known societies, and thereis an unusualcluster- shownto evolve whereeither(1) a groupof migrants
ing of matrilocal groups among likely Chacoan has entered a previously inhabitedregion (Divale
descendants(includingthe modernHopi andZuni). 1984); (2) there is frequentextra-communitywarIt is very likely, therefore, that this "pocket"of fare (Emberet al. 1974); (3) significantlong-dishasrelativelyrecentroots(Martin1950; tance traderelationshave recentlybeen introduced
matrilocality
Steward1955).
(Peregrine1994); or (4) a group'sculturalpractices
My secondreasonfor suggestingthe adoptionof areunderstressdue to contactwith more dominant
pueblo dwellings reflects the evolutionof matrilo- societies (Helms 1970). These four explanations
cal residence comes from Melvin Ember's (1973; share a common element: competitiveinteraction
replicated by Divale 1977; also see James with othersocieties.
1994:120-124)findingthatmatrilocalsocietieshave
Why does competitiveinteractionfostermatrilosignificantlylargerdwellings than patrilocalones. cality?Two answershavebeen given:(1) matrilocal
The dwellingsarelargerbecausetheyhousethefam- residence creates a culturally stable core group
ilies of severalrelatedwomen who togetherform a throughwhich childrencan be raised in a "tradisingleeconomic(andresidential)unitundermatrilo- tional"manner(Helms 1970; Peregrine1994); and
cal residence.Ember's(1973) findingssuggest that (2) matrilocalresidence allows men to be absent
societies with patrilocal residence tend to have fromthe coregroupforlong periodsof timefortraddwellingsthatareless than60 squaremetersin floor ing, raiding,or diplomacy(Emberet al. 1974;Perearea, while matrilocal societies tend to have grine 1994). Both of these explanationsare really
dwellingslargerthan100 squaremetersin totalfloor oppositesides of the samecoin. On the one side, the
area.Sucha shiftis clearlyevidentin ChacoCanyon matrilocalhome groupallows domesticlife to condwellingsin the periodfromA.D. 700 to 100. For tinue with stabilityeven in the face of political and
that the Chacoanpolity was corporatelyoriented
seems both a reasonableanduseful one. It appears
to fit the patternof the materialrecordandprovides
useful insights into how productionmay have been
organized.
Peregrine]
MATRILOCALITY,
CORPORATE STRATEGY,AND ORGANIZATION
economicactivitiestakingmen awayfromthehome
groupfor long periodsof time.On the otherside, the
fact thatmen marryout of theirnatalgroupappears
to foster the developmentof fraternalassociations
thatcan coordinatethe laborof largegroupsof men
for activitiesof pan-societal,ratherthannatalgroup
or lineage, importance.
Competitiveinteractionhas been routinelyput
forwardas an explanationfor boththe development
of pueblodwellingsandof politicalcentralizationin
Chaco Canyonitself. Wilcox (1993), for example,
arguedthatthe Chacoanpolitybeganas a refugefor
displacedpopulationsfrom the northernSan Juan
basin,andbecamecentralizedas a militaristicpolity
with an eye to expansionand conquest.Such situations are ones thathave repeatedlybeen suggested
as fosteringmatrilocalresidence (see Emberet al.
1974; Helms 1970). Similarly, Weigand (1992;
WeigandandHarbottle1993)arguedthatanexpanding tradenetworkwith Mesoamericawas centralto
sociopolitical developmentsin Chaco Canyon. In
this scenario,one can easily envisionmatrilocalresidence being fosteredas a way to allow groups of
malesto leaveforlong periodsof time on tradeexpeditions (see Peregrine1994). Thus, while I am not
able to put forward a specific argumentfor why
matrilocalityevolved in the Chacoanworldwhen it
did, the sociopoliticalconditionsof the region during the periodfrom roughlyA.D. 700 to A.D. 900
(and perhapseven earlier)seem ripe for fostering
matrilocalresidence.
39
matrilocalresidence(see Driver1956 versusDivale
1984),the datado clearlysupportAberle'sargument
for NorthAmericansocieties (Divale 1974; Ember
andEmber1971).
Subsistenceproductionin a matrilocalChacoan
world would be organizedaroundwomen's work
groups.These workgroups,in turn,would likely be
composed of membersof individualmatrilineages
who controlaccess to the areasof agriculturalland
they work.The matrilineageswould similarlycontrolaccessto theagricultural
productsproducedfrom
that land, and women's work groupswould handle
the tasks of processingand storingthose products.
Thuswe can envisionChacoCanyonbeing divided
upintoareasof landcontrolledby localmatrilineages
residentatnearbypueblos.Groupsof relatedwomen,
althoughlikelywith somehelpfromhusbands,sons,
or brothers,would prepareand sow fields of corn,
beans, and squash,rotatingthose fields on a regular
basis aroundthe areasof land they control.!These
groupswould harvestthe crops, and preparethem
for storageby dryingthe beans and squashes,and
grindingthe corn.Womenwouldhavebeenthemost
likely producersof basic storage utensils; that is,
ceramics.Ceramicproductionwas likely organized
in muchthesameway as subsistence,throughgroups
of relatedwomen.Thesegroupswouldhaveformed,
slipped,fired, and paintedthe ceramicsas a group,
with the whole processtakingseveraldays andperhapsbeing repeatedonce everyfew months,as new
ceramicswere needed.
Whatwould men contributeto subsistence?The
Matrilocal Residence and the
simple answeris meat. Hunting,especially during
Organization of Production
the PuebloBonito phaseandlater,wouldhavebeen
If we accepttheideathatthepitstructure-pueblo
tran- a time-consumingactivity,likelyrequiringthehunter
sitionreflectsthe evolutionof matrilocalresidence, to travelsome distancefrom Chaco Canyonto find
what are the implicationsfor our understandingof game. This is precisely where matrilocalresidence
Chacoanpolity and, in particular,the organization providesgreatbenefits,for it allows groupsof men
of production?A good startingpoint, I suggest, is to be absent for long periods of time without distheideaputforwardby DavidAberle(1961:661)that rupting the core community (Ember et al. 1974;
"Matrilinealgroups arise ... in connection with Helms 1970; Peregrine1994). In termsof utensils,
women'sworkgroupsandthe resourcebases which menwouldlikelyhavemadetheirownhuntingutenthese groups control."In his cross-culturalexami- sils; thatis, chippedstonetools. Unlike ceramics,it
nation of matrilineal societies (and virtually all is unlikelythatmen would have done so in groups,
known matrilocal societies are also matrilineal), but ratheras individualsproducingtools for themAberle(1961:670)alsoarguesthat"matrilinyis most selves.Particularmenwithuniqueskillin flint-knaplikelyto developon a horticultural
base,withwomen ping might producetools for others,but likely not
therehas been on a large scale. Raw materialswould be procured
doing the agriculturallabor."WVhile
some debateover the importanceof women's con- eitherby directlyobtainingthem from the source,
tributions to subsistence on the development of perhapsin the courseof huntingexcursionsor while
40
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 66, No. 1, 2001
visitinghomecommunities.However,the samefree- thatalienationareoften found.One formis the kind
dom thatmatrilocalresidencewould have allowed of fraternal associations mentioned above, but
men to be absentfor long periods of time hunting another,related, form might be cross-community
wouldhavealso allowedthemto spendtime actively associations.A thirdmight stem from createdrelaprocuringrawmaterialsfromlong distancesor trad- tions of debt throughgifts and reciprocalfeasting.
ing withdistantcommunities.Indeed,we mightenvi- In all cases these would requirethe communitiesto
sion a large, formalnetworkof traderelationships become increasinglyinteractive.This leads, in turn,
spreadacrossthe Chacoanworldmuchlike theKula to the notionthat"isolatedcommunities(or smaller
ring of the TrobriandIslanders(who are also matri- groups)consistingof matrilinealcore andin-marrylineal-see Malinowski1922).
ing spouses are extremely difficult to maintain"
Men would also be the most likely producersof (Schneider1961:27).Thus,theincreasedinteraction
special craftwork and, indeed,of the very pueblos so evident archaeologically in the Chaco region
I am suggestinggive evidence of Chacoanmatrilo- would be a logical, perhaps necessary, result of
cality.Therawmaterialsforthepueblosandforcraft matrilocalresidence.
items would be obtainedeitherdirectlyor through
trade,but in eithercase men would have to be able Matrilocal Residence and Corporate Strategy
to leave the home groupto obtainthese items, and Theethnographicrecordsuggeststhatmatrilocalresin large work groups, particularly if the work idence often encouragesleadersto adopta network
involved transportingbeams, or mining stone and ratherthancorporatestrategy(see Peregrine1992for
minerals.Productionof craftitems would likely be examples).This makes some sense as the ease with
doneby individuals,butmatrilocalitycouldpromote which matrilocalityallows large groupsof men to
some form of fraternalcraft"co-ops"at individual leave for long periodsof time to tradeor raidseems
pueblos, and certainlythe constructionof pueblos to fit nicely with a networkstrategy.The Chacoan
themselves would requirea group of coordinated polity,then, may be somewhatunusualin combinworkers(Lekson 1986:257-273;Wills 2000). Such ing matrilocalresidencewith a corporatestrategy.
workor craftgroupswouldbe createdin partto inte- Why did Chacoanleaderspursuea corporatestratgratemen intotheirmarriagecommunity(muchlike egy? An importantfactormay have been the marquiltingsocieties did for ruralAmericanwomen in ginalnatureof the Chacoanenvironment,at leastfor
the nineteenthcentury). Such integrativemecha- an agriculturaleconomy(Judge1979, 1989).Places
nisms are importantin matrilocalsocieties, for in- where network strategiesthrive, such as highland
marryingmales have few formalmeans to tie them New Guinea,westernPolynesia,and the northwest
to the community-they are not importantin the coast of NorthAmerica,tend to have temperateclidomesticeconomy,andtheyhaveno rolein thepolit- matesandextremelyrichenvironments.One factor,
ical life of the community.Thus fraternalassocia- indeed, that may promotea networkorientationis
tions and interestgroupsoften develop as meansto thefactthatvirtuallyanyfamilyorlineagegroupcan
create bonds among in-marryingmen, as well as survive,at least in termsof food, shelter,and other
necessitiesof life, in isolationfrom the rest of socibondsbetweenthese men and the community.
leaderscontrolis access
Such fraternalassociationsand interestgroups ety.Whatnetwork-oriented
would, indeed, extend to other communities. As to socially relevantgoods, knowledge, and events,
David Schneider (1961:20) explained this issue, and not to things needed for survival (Peregrine
"Matrilinealdescent groupshave special problems 1992).A networkstrategymay not be very successin the organization of in-marrying affines with ful in a situationwhere families or lineages cannot
respect to each other" and, I would add, to the easily surviveindependentof others.Leaderswho
matrilocalgroupas a whole. In-marryingmalesmay stresscooperativeactivitiesaimedat mutualsupport
carrypoliticalauthorityandhigh statusin theirnatal andgroupsurvivalmay be moresuccessfulin gaincommunity,buthavenonein thecommunityof their ing followers than those who stress individual
wife. There,they may be subjectto the ruleof other advancementand the exclusion of othersfrom netmales to whom they feel superioror contentious.In worksof power.
How did Chacoanleadersimplementtheir corshort,men become alienatedin matrilinealsocieties
(Schneider1961:20),andsome meansof alleviating porate-orientedpolitical strategies?I suggest there
Peregrine]
MATRILOCALITY,
CORPORATE STRATEGY,AND ORGANIZATION
41
Table 1. Counts of GeneralAbraders,LapidaryAbraders,and CeramicPolishersby Location.
Observed (expected)
Room
Pithouse
Ramada/Plaza
Kiva
GeneralAbraders
211 (182)
131 (141)
34 (41)
75 (86)
451
Lapidary Abraders
28 (36)
24 (29)
16 (8)
21 (17)
89
Ceramic Polishers
3 (11)
32 (18)
5 (5)
18 (11)
58
Total
242
187
55
114
598
4067, df= 6,p< .001
Source Data adoptedfrom Akins (1997): generalabraders= types 10 and 20; apidaryabraders= types 12 and 22; ceramic polishers = type 30.
%2=
are at least three areas where a corporatestrategy house communities. Thus I agree with Windes
seemsmanifestedin the archaeologicalrecord.First, (1992:162) that, at least from a community perit seems clearthatChacoanleaderspromotedevents spective, "participation
in turquoisejewelry manuthatbroughtmatrilineagestogetherforcommonpur- facturewas universal,or nearlyso."
The availabledataalso suggestthatturquoiseproposes at the greathouses. This idea is discussedin
some detail by Earle and Renfrewin their papers, ductionwas not a spatiallylocalized activitywithin
andI will not elaboratehere. Second, I suggestthat communities,butrathertookplacein a varietyof conthe sharedstylistic featuresin ceramicsand archi- texts. Mathien's (1984, 1997) identification of
tecture, features that also undergo coordinated turquoise"workshops"demonstratesthatthey were
changethoughtime, may reflectthe sanctioningby locatedin kivas,pithouses,rooms, andplazas.Thus
Chacoanleaders of efforts to downplaydifference there is no single specialized location where
and division between matrilineages(see Peregrine turquoisebeadproductiontookplace.Is therea loca1991 for similarethnographiccases). Chacoanlead- tion where turquoisework was more likely to take
ers may have used their influence to promote an place than other activities?It appearsnot, as eviemphasison commonbonds of relationshipamong dencedby the datapresentedin Table1.
matrilineagesthoughsharedstylisticpatterns,ritual
Table 1 shows the cross-tabulationof general
practices,andthelike.Third,I suggestChacoanlead- abraders,lapidaryabraders,and ceramicpolishers
ers encourageddiffuseproductionof importantreli- by theirlocationin excavatedcontextswithinChaco
gious orceremonialgoods thatwouldbe pooledinto Canyon.Generalabradersshouldtendto be located
common activities.This would be in starkcontrast whereunspecializeddailyactivitiestakeplace,while
to network-oriented strategies in which leaders ceramicpolishersshouldbe locatedwhere ceramic
tightly manage such goods through the use of productiontakesplace. By comparingthe locations
attachedspecialistsandsumptuaryrules(Blantonet where lapidaryabradersare found (Figure 1), one
al. 1996:5;Peregrine1992).
should be able to determinewhere turquoisebead
Turquoiseappearsto be a goodexampleof anitem productiontookplace.Thevalueof chi-squaredsugwith symbolicimportancein the Chacoanworldthat gests thatthe distributionof these items is not ranis produceddiffuselybut consumedwithin limited dom, andif we examinethis table more closely, we
contexts. Indeed, the available data suggest that see thatgeneralabradersaremuchmorelikely to be
turquoiseproductionis anexampleof whatFlannery foundin roomsthanchancewould suggest,butthat
and Winter(1976:38-39) term "householdspecial- ceramicpolishersare much less likely to be found
ization";that is, activitiesthat take place in every there. Ceramicpolishers appearmuch more likely
communitybut not in every household.While not than would be suggestedby chance to be found in
every Chacoancommunityhas in situ evidence for pithousesor kivas, and lapidaryabradersare more
turquoisebeadproduction,Windes's(1992) studyof likely to be found in ramadaor plaza areas than
turquoisedebrisin foragingantmoundsfound that chance would suggest. This patternholds up if we
94 percentof Pueblo II period sites had turquoise examine only lapidaryand general abraders(X2
debris.Roughlyhalf of all excavatedsites in the val- 15.25, df = 3, p < .01), but changes slightly if we
ley do have in-situevidence of turquoisebead pro- examineonly lapidaryabradersandceramicpolishduction,andsuchevidenceis foundin everyareaof ers. In this case, lapidaryabradersaremorelikely to
Chaco Canyon and in both great house and small be foundin roomsthanwouldbe expectedby chance
42
AMERICAN
RI
410
4w
'b
46
to
t-
it PMV
-i
"
EX
0,
S'.
V,*
4A
vo,
7, 041
-
'P
yo
rVej
-
'k
_
wi-W
10
W-WO-Z.
A
.0.-
4-1
AL
---- --W-11-MON"
---
1.
abrader recovered from Pueblo Bonito.
Figure
0 O Lapi'dary
Institution,Nati'onalAnthropolo cal Archives.
=
(x2
of
df
21.29,
lapidary
abraders
(Akins
production
were
special
no
duction
duced
=
took
in
a
< .001).
3,p
as
an
If
indicator
1997:733),
locations
place;
rather,
variety
of
we
take
of
it
where
presence
turquoise
bead
appears
that
there
turquoise
bead
pro-
beads
were
pro-
preferred
one
turquoise
locations,
the
a
Peregrine]
MATRILOCALITY,
CORPORATE STRATEGY,AND ORGANIZATION
43
cific contextsandonlyafterbeingcollectedintomassive amounts.It is interestingthatthe PuebloBonito
burials that were accompanied by most of the
turquoisefoundin the canyonwerelocatedadjacent
to otherapparentlyritualfacilitiesor storagerooms.
It may be that these are not burialswhose accompanyingrichesdisplayconspicuousconsumptionby
a wealthyeliteas has oftenbeensuggested,butrather
burials of corporateleaders containinggifts from
individualsthroughoutthe polity as a means of displayingthe corporatebondsmanifestedthroughthe
deceased.
Conclusions
Figure 2. Turquoise beads recovered from Pueblo Bonito
averaged 4 mm in diameter, most were discoidal in shape,
and are flat-sided. Variations in form are shown here. From
Judd (1954), figure 12, drawn by Irvin E. Alleman.
Courtesy of the Smithsonian Institution, National Anthropological Archives.
Chaco was a corporate-oriented
polity, but it was,
perhapsmore importantly,a matrilocalpolity. Corporatestrategiesat once fosteredand were fostered
by the evolution of matrilocalresidence. Matrilocality providedthe peoples of the Chaco region a
social structurein which women were able to form
stable agriculturalcommunities while men were
freedto takepartin long-distanceresourceprocurement and trade.Politicalleaderstook advantageof
this situation and developed strategies to build a
powerbase fromthem. Outof this matrilocalstructureandthe associatedcorporatepoliticalstrategies
arosethe large communitiesthatcame to dominate
the Chacoanworld,the intenseinteractionbetween
those communities,and the rise of influentialpansocietalfraternalgroups.To understandthe "Chaco
phenomena,"the organizationof productionin the
Chacoanworld,theintenseinteractionbetweenChacoan communities, or indeed any other aspect of
Chacoansociety, I arguethat one must approachit
throughthe lens of matrilocalresidence.
To argue that kinship is central to Chacoan
sociopoliticalorganization,and to the organization
of productionin particular,shouldnot be surprising
to us as anthropologists.And yet in the literatureon
the Chacoanworld we find little discussionof kinship, and we even find scholarssuggestingthatthe
Chacoanarchaeologicalrecord"indicatesa degree
of centralizationandpoliticalspecializationbeyond
the capacityof societies whose decision makingis
carriedout within the frameworkof kinship . . ."
(Sebastian1991:119).This is unfortunate,for it contradictswhatwe know aboutsocieties fromall over
the world, even highly politically centralizedones
like Natchez,Tonga,and Kongo. I have suggested
elsewherethat archaeologistsoften confuse ethno-
44
AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 66, No. 1, 2001
graphicanalogy with ethnology (Peregrine1996). system dominating the Chacoan world (Lekson
Here I will go fartherto suggestthatarchaeologists 1997), I suggest thatwhatwe see is an overarching
oftenforgetthelessonsethnologytaughtus as anthro- social system, a social system based on matrilocal
pologists. To argue,as an anthropologist,that kin- residenceandthe demandsandopportunitiesit creship is not importantto understandingany given ated.
society is problematic;to suggest it is unimportant Acknowledgments.
I wantto thankall theparticipantsin theChaco
to understanding
theorganizationof a non-statesoci- Organizationof Productionconference-Tim Earle, Melissa
ety is ridiculous.Kinshipin all non-statesocieties Hagstrum,Steve Lekson, PeterMcKenna,JoanMathien,Colin
structuressocial relations.It defines who a person Renfew, Tom Windes, and, in particular,Cathy Cameronand
is, who theirleadersare, what resourcesthey have WolkyToll for invitingme to participate.They providedmany
usefulsuggestionsforimprovingtheideaspresentedin thispaper,
access to, whom they may marry,where they may andthey were exceptionallygraciousandhelpfulin bringingan
live, what occupationsare availableto them, and "outsider"up to speed on currentdataand thinkingin Chacoan
spiritualpracticesthey will follow. Kinship influ- archaeology.My deepestgratitudegoes outto all of them.I would
ences, bounds, and shapes all aspects of life. To also like to thankLynneGoldsteinand the four externalreviewunderstanda non-statesociety,like Chacoan,in the ers who providedsuggestionsand critiquesthathave markedly
improvedthis paper.
absenceof understandingthe relationsof kinshipis
an impossibletask.
References Cited
Onereasonarchaeologistsmayshy awayfromthe Aberle,D.
1961 MatrilinealDescent in Cross-CulturalPerspective.In
discussion of kinship in the societies we study is
MatrilinealKinship,editedby D. SchneiderandK. Gough,
because kinship is not materialin nature.It is not
pp. 655-729. Universityof CaliforniaPress,Berkeley.
somethingwe can readilymeasurelike the volume Akins, N. J.
1997 The Abradersof Chaco Canyon:An Analysis of their
of chertdebrisorthe numberof ceramics.3As I hope
FormandFunction.In Ceramics,Lithics,and Ornamentsof
transition
the discussionof the pit structure-pueblo
Chaco Canyon, edited by F. J. Mathien, pp. 701-946.
suggests,kinshipdoes have materialcorrelatesthat
NationalParkService, SantaFe.
can be identifiedthroughethnology.Indeed,ethno- Blanton,R. E.
1998 BeyondCentralization:StepsTowardsaTheoryofEgallogical studies have demonstratedstrongrelationitarianBehaviorin ArchaicStates.InArchaicStates,edited
ships between social organizationand the material
by G. FeinmanandJ.Marcus,pp. 135-172. Schoolof American ResearchPress, SantaFe.
record(see EmberandEmber1995foranoverview).
But even if suchmaterialcorrelatesareunavailable, Blanton,R. E., G. M. Feinman,S. A. Kowalewski,andP.N. Peregrine
we muststill askthe questionof whatkinshipstruc1996 A Dual-Processual Theory for the Evolution of
37:1-14.
MesoamericanCivilization.CurrentAnthropology
tureswere presentin the ancientsocieties we study
andhow theymayhaveaffectedthingslike the orga- Divale,W. T.
1977 Living Floors and MaritalResidence: A Replication.
nization of production.If we consider only those
BehaviorScienceResearch12:109-115.
processes we can see clearly in the archaeological 1984 Matrilocal Residence in Pre-literate Society. UMI
ResearchPress,AnnArbor.
record,we become like the proverbialdrunkseekDriver,H.
ing his lost wallet underthe lamppost,even though
1956 An Integrationof Functional,Evolutionary,andHistorical Theoryby Meansof Correlations.IndianaPublications
he didnot lose it there,becausethatis the only place
in Anthropologyand Linguistics,Memoir 12:1-35.
whereit is lightenoughto see. Whatthe drunkreally
Ember,M.
needs is a flashlight,and I suggest that archaeoloPatrilo1973 AnArchaeologicallndicatorofMatrilocalversus
cal Residence.AmericanAntiquity38:177-182.
gists needthe flashlightof ethnologyto findkinship
Ember,M., andC. R. Ember
in the archaeologicalrecord.
1995 WorldwideCross-CulturalStudiesandtheirRelevance
in
the
Chacoan
world
was
Production
organized
for Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research
3:87-111.
throughkinship.I havearguedthatChacoankinship
Ember,
M., C. R. Ember,andB. Pasternak
includedmatrilocalresidenceas one of its features.
1974 On the Developmentof Unilineal Descent. Journalof
I mightfurthersuggest,based on its commonassoAnthropologicalResearch30:69-94.
ciationwith matrilocalresidence,thatthe Chacoans Feinman,G. M.
2000 Dual-ProcessualTheory and Social Formationsin the
also practiced matrilinealdescent, and that local
Southwest.InAlternativeLeadershipStrategiesin the Prematrilinealgroupsformedthebasicstructureof ChahispanicSouthwest,editedby B. Mills, pp. 207-224. Universityof ArizonaPress,Tuscon.
coan society. Ratherthan an overarchingpolitical
Peregrine]
MATRILOCALITY,
CORPORATE STRATEGY,AND ORGANIZATION
45
1984 Social and EconomicImplicationsof JewelryItems of
Flannery,K. V., andM. Winter
the ChacoAnasazi. In RecentResearchon Chaco Prehis1976 Analyzing Household Activities. In The Early
tory,editedbyW.J. JudgeandJ.D. Schelberg,pp. 173-186.
MesoamericanVillage,editedby K. V. Flannery,pp. 34-47.
Reportsof the ChacoCenter,Number8. NationalParkSerAcademicPress,New York.
vice, SantaFe.
Francis,P.
1997 Ornaments.In Ceramics, Lithics, and Ornamentsof
1988 The Manufactureof Beads from Shell. In Proceedings
Chaco Canyon, edited by F. J. Mathien,pp. 1119-1220.
of the 1986 Shell Bead Conference,editedby C. F. Hayes,
Publicationsin Archaeology 18G, Chaco CanyonStudies.
pp. 25-36. Rochester Museum and Science Center,
NationalParkService, SantaFe.
Rochester,NY.
McKenna,P. J.
Haury,E. W.
1986 A Summaryof the Chaco Center'sSmall Site Excava1931 Minute Beads from Prehistoric Pueblos. American
tions: 1973-1978. In Small Site Architecture of Chaco
Anthropologist33:80-87.
Canyon, edited by P. J. McKenna and M. L. Truell, pp.
Helms, M.
5-114. Publicationsin Archaeology 18D, Chaco Canyon
1970 Matrilocality,Social Solidarity,and CultureContact:
Studies.NationalParkService, SantaFe.
Three Case Histories.SouthwesternJournalof AnthropolPeregnrne,P. N.
ogy 26:197-212.
1991 Some PoliticalAspects of CraftSpecialization.World
Hill, J. N.
Archaeology23(1):1-1 1.
1970 BrokenK. Pueblo: PrehistoricSocial Organizationin
1992 MississippianEvolution:A World-SystemPerspective.
Papers
theSouthwest.Universityof ArizonaAnthropological
PrehistoryPress,Madison,WI.
18. Universityof ArizonaPress,Tucson.
A HypothesisBasedonWorld1994 TradeandMatrilineality:
Jernigan,E. W.
SystemsTheory.Cross-CulturalResearch28:99-110.
1978 Jewelryofthe PrehistoricSouthwest.Universityof New
1996 Ethnology versus EthnographicAnalogy: A Common
Mexico Press,Albuquerque.
Cross-Cultural
Confusionin ArchaeologicalInterpretation.
James,S. R.
Research30:316-329.
and
1994 RegionalVariationinPPrehistoricPuebloHousehold
Social Organization:A QuantitativeApproach.Ph.D. dis- Renfrew,C.
1974 BeyondSubsistenceEconomy:The Evolutionof Social
sertation,Departmentof Anthropology,ArizonaStateUniOrganizationin PrehistoricEurope.InReconstructingComversity,Tucson.
plex Societies:AnArchaeologicalColloquium,editedby C.
Judd,Neil M.
B. Moore, pp. 69-95. Bulletin of the AmericanSchool of
1954 The Material Cultureof Pueblo Bonito. Smithsonian
OrientalResearch,Supplement20, Cambridge,MA.
MiscellaneousCollections,vol. 124.SmithsonianInstitution,
Schneider,D.
Washington,DC.
1961 Introduction:The Distinctive Features of Matrilineal
Judge,W. J.
Descent.InMatrilinealKinship,editedby D. Schneiderand
1979 The Developmentof a ComplexCulturalEcosystemin
K. Gough,pp. 1-3 1. Universityof CaliforniaPress,Berkethe ChacoBasin, New Mexico. In Proceedingsof the First
ley.
Conferenceon ScientificResearchin theNationalParks,Vol.
2, editedby R. M Linn,pp. 901-905. TransactionsandPro- Sebastian,L.
1991 Sociopolitical Complexity and the Chaco System. In
ceedings Series 5, NationalParkService,Washington,DC.
ChacoandHohokam,editedby P.L. CrownandW.J.Judge,
1989 Chaco Canyon-SanJuanbasin. In Dynamicsof Southpp. 109-134. School of AmericanResearch,SantaFe.
westernPrehistory,editedby L. S. CordellandG. J. Gummerman,pp.209-261. SmithsonianInstitution,Washington, Steward,J.
1955 Theoryof Social Change.Universityof Illinois,Urbana.
DC.
Toll, H. W.
Kelley,J. C., andE. A. Kelley
1984 Trendsin CeramicImportand Distributionin Chaco
1975 AnAlternative
HypothesisfortheExplanationofAnasazi
Canyon.InRecentResearchon ChacoPrehistory,editedby
CultureHistory.In CollectedPapers in Honor of Florence
W.J. JudgeandJ. D. Schelberg,pp. 115-135. Reportsof the
HawleyEllis, editedby T. R. Frisbie,pp. 178-223. Papers
Chaco Center, Number 8. National Park Service, Albuof the ArchaeologicalSociety of New Mexico, Number2,
querque.
Albuquerque.
Weigand,P. C.
Leach,E.
1992 TheMacroeconomicRole of TurquoisewithintheChaco
1954 PoliticalSystemsofHighlandBurma:AStudyofKachin
CanyonSystem. InAnasaziRegionalOrganizationand the
SocialStructure.HarvardUniversityPress,Cambridge,MA.
ChacoSystem,editedby D. E. Doyel, pp. 169-173. AnthroLekson,S.
pological Papers,Number5. Maxwell Museumof Anthroof ChacoCanyon,New Mex1986 GreatPuebloArchitecture
pology,Albuquerque.
ico. Universityof New Mexico Press,Albuquerque.
1997 Rewriting Southwestern Prehistory. Archaeology Weigand,P. C., and G. Harbottle
1993 The Role of Turquoisesin the Ancient Mesoamerican
50:52-55.
TradeStructure.In TheAmericanSouthwestandMesoamerLongacre,W.
ica: Systemsof PrehistoricExchange,editedby J. E. Eric1970 ArchaeologyasAnthropology:ACase Study.University
son andT. G. Baugh,pp. 159-177. Plenum,New York.
17.Universityof Arizona
of ArizonaAnthropologicalPapers
Wilcox, D. R.
Press,Tucson.
1993 The Evolutionof the ChacoanPolity.In The Chimney
Malinowski,B.
RockArchaeologicalSymposium,edited by J. M. Malville
1922 Argonauts of the WesternPacific. Waveland Press
and G. Matlock, pp. 76-90. Technical Report RM-227.
Chicago.
USDA ForestService,FortCollins, CO.
Martin,P. S.
1950 ConjecturesConcerningthe Social Organizationof the Wills, W. H.
2000 Political Leadershipand the Constructionof Chacoan
MogollonIndians.FieldianaAnthropology38:556-569.
GreatHouses, AD 1020-1140. In AlternativeLeadership
Mathien,F J.
46
AMERICANANTIQUITY
[Vol. 66, No. 1, 2001
group in question (the Chacoansin this case) were not unusual in their practices, but ratherto first determine if common
practices are evidenced in the archaeological record before
seeking evidence for more unusual ones.
2. This value is per bead; that is, is calculated by estimating the entire time required to travel to a turquoise source,
mine the raw material, do rough processing, heat treating,
and shape blanks, and then dividing that time by the total
number of beads producedfrom the raw material.
Notes
3. The "drubbing"taken by scholars such as Hill (1970)
1. This is not the case in some modern puebloan groups, and Longacre (1970) who attemptedsuch analyses has probbut it is importantto note that the idea of women agricultur- ably not encouraged others to pursue kinship in the archaeoal groups comes not from ethnographic analogy, but from logical record of the Southwest.
ethnology; that is, in matrilocal societies these kinds of work
groups are the norm, as are all the features I am putting forward here. That modern (or ancient) groups may not have
followed these practices is understood-there is a range of
variation in all human behaviors. However, it seems most ReceivedAugust 10, 1999; AcceptedDecember 16, 1999;
reasonableto begin an analysis underthe assumptionthat the RevisedApril 14, 2000
Strategiesin thePrehispanicSouthwest,editedby B. Mills,
pp. 19-44. Universityof ArizonaPress,Tuscon.
Windes,T. C.
1992 Blue Notes:The ChacoanTurquoiseIndustryin the San
JuanBasin.InAnasaziRegionalOrganizationandtheChaco
System,editedby D.E. Doyel, pp. 159-168. Anthropological Papers,Number5. Maxwell Museumof Anthropology,
Albuquerque.