University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange

Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School

5-1998

Induced Altruism in the Maintenance of Institutionalized Celibacy

Hector N. Qirko University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss

Part of the Anthropology Commons

Recommended Citation Qirko, Hector N., "Induced Altruism in the Maintenance of Institutionalized Celibacy. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 1998. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4056

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council:

I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Hector N. Qirko entitled "Induced Altruism in the Maintenance of Institutionalized Celibacy." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Anthropology.

Michael H. Logan, Major Professor

We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance:

Benita Howell, Jan Simek, Gordon Burghardt

Accepted for the Council:

Carolyn R. Hodges

Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School

(Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council:

I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Hector N. Qirko entitled "Induced Altruismin the Maintenance of Institutionalized Celibacy." I have examined the finalcopy of this dissertationfor form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Anthropology.

We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance:

Accepted forthe Council:

Associate Vice Chancellor and Dean of The Graduate School

INDUCEDAL TRUISM IN THE MAINTENANCE OF INSTITUTIONALIZED CELIBACY

A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Hector Nako Qirko May 1998

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In preparingthis dissertation, I benefitedgreatly fromthe assistanceof many individuals andorganizations. Michael H. Logan, as DissertationCommittee Chair, reviewed numerousdrafts and provided thoughtfulcriticism, patient editing,and continued encouragement. Committeemembers Gordon Burghardt, Benita Howell, and

JanSimek, throughtheir detailed comments,much improved the final version. Bruce

Tomaso and Gerald R. Landonassisted me with their editorial and statistical skills, respectively. The Inter-LibraryServices staffof the Universityof Tennessee library system gave me access to a largenumber of otherwise unavailablesources. I received generous financialsupport fromthe University of Tennessee Department of

Anthropologyand the TennesseeValley Authority.

Finally, I owe special thanks to SarahSherwood forher help in formatting and editing portions of thiswork, and aboveall for her support and encouragement throughout. ABSTRACT

Celibacy is analtruistic act when it involves anindividual's sacrificeof lifelong reproductionfor the benefit of others. Where this occurs forthe primary benefitof non­ kin, as in many institutions which demand celibacy of their members, it will often be difficultto maintain. This dissertation explores the institutionalized maintenanceand reinforcementof celibacy vows throughthe concept of induced altruism. Because humansgenerally recognizekin only by meansof indirect cues, these cues may be manipulatedso that individualsbehave altruisticallyfor the benefitof non-kin. Human kinship-recognition cues include association,phenotypic similarity, andthe use of kinship termsand symbols. Additional factors which canaid kinship manipulationinclude young developmental age of potential altruists and their separationfrom truekin. A central prediction stemming fromthis model is that the manipulation of these kinship recognition cues andassociated factors should be present in celibate institutions whose members are unlikely to be close genetic relatives. An appraisal of historicalsources on major religions that exhibit institutionalized celibacy, as well as a comparativeanalysis of ethnographic data drawnfrom the Sample of Cross-CulturalSocieties, support this prediction. TABLEOF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. THEORETICAL PERSPECTNES ...... 11 "Standard social science" models ...... 12 Interactionist models ...... 18 Darwinianmodels ...... 21 Evolutionarypsychology ...... 24

3. CELIBACY AS ALTRUISM ...... 26 Altruism ...... 26 Biological altruism ...... 28 Psychological altruism ...... 32 Celibacy andmanipulated altruism ...... 35 Kinship recognitionmechanisms and humancognition ...... 45 Researchmodel ...... 54

4. HISTORICALDATA ...... 60 Christianrty ...... 60 Buddhism ...... 67 Hinduism ...... 77 . . 0ther re 1g1ous 1. . organizations ...... 85 Jainism ...... 85 Islamicdervish groups ...... 88 Protestant celibate sects ...... 90 Supportfor predictions ...... 94

5. CROSS-CULTURALDATA ...... 108 Methodology ...... 108 Celibacy absent ...... 113 Non-institutionalized celibacy ...... 116 Unlikely institutionalized celibacy ...... 120 Institutionalized celibacy...... 127 Individual contexts ...... 129 Kin contexts ...... 135 Non-kin contexts...... 141 Supportfor predictions ...... 168 6. DISCUSSION ...... 181

7. CONCLUSIONS ...... 198

BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 205

APPENDIC ES...... 244 Appendix A ...... 245 Appendix B ...... 256

VITA...... 264 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1. Categories of PermanentAbstinence in the Cross-Cultural Sample ...... 114

2. Categories of PermanentAbstinence in InstitutionalContexts ...... 128

3. PermanentAbstinence in Institutions: Contexts andPatterning of Kin Cue Manipulation ...... - ...... 1 70

4. Distribution of Kin Cue Manipulation Practices in Sample Societies Exhibiting InstitutionalCelibacy ...... 171

5. Non-kin Institutionalized Celibacy by Population Size, Population Density, andLevel of Political Integration: Analysesof Total Sample...... 175

6. Non-kin Institutionalized Celibacy by Population Size, Population Density, and Level of Political Integration: Analysesof Societies Exhibiting Institutionalized Celibacy ...... 176

7. Celibacy andLevels of Political Integration ...... 179

CHAPTER1

INTRODUCTION

Vows or decisions of lifelong sexual abstinence appear difficult to understandin evolutionary terms. Richard Dawkins (1995:2) says that we "love lifeand love sex and love children" because each of us comes from anunbroken line of ancestorswho were able to survive andreproduce. Ridley (1993:4) goes further: "Reproduction is the sole goal for which human beings aredesigned; everything else is a means to that end."

Darwinianevolutionary theory is predicated on a drive forreproductive survival; behavior favoredby selection should therefore be that which leads to individual reproductive success (Archer 1991). Thus, froma Darwinianperspective, a decision -­ conscious or unconscious -- by normal, healthy individuals to forego reproductionseems to makeno sense. 1 Yet it is a decision individuals do make. Sometimesit is only temporary, as in the case of young Americanswho choose to remainchaste until marriage

(Wyattet al. 1988). Similarly,Cheyenne men initiated into the Dog Soldier warrior society pledged celibacy for a period of seven years(Moore 1990). Often, however, the decision to remaincelibate is made for life. The most familiarexamples are monastic orders, where initiates vow to foregoall reproductive behaviors.

1 For introductionsto Darwinianevolutionary theory and, specifically,the role of individual reproduction, see Alexander 1979, 1987; Dawkins 1976, 1995; Symons 1979; Williams1966. The present researchfocuses on how the concept of induced or manipulated altruismmay facilitatethe reinforcement andmaintenance of celibacy2in institutionalized settings. In evolutionaryterms, lifelong sexual abstinence canbe construedas sacrifice performedfor others, and evolutionarytheory predicts that individuals may sacrifice themselves forthe benefitof genetic relatives. However, because humans generally recognizekin only by meansof indirect cues, they can be manipulated into behaving altruistically towardnon-kin.

Theoryand research on kin recognition suggest thatclose association and phenotypicsimilarity areavenues throughwhich humans assess relatedness. In addition, general consensus amongcultural anthropologists, as well as the findingsof several studies on the use of kin terms in facilitatingaltruism, strongly suggests the importanceof kinship terminologyand other symbols as kinship cues for humans. Finally, two additional factorsappear relevantto a discussion of human kin recognitionand its potential manipulation. One is age; children seem to be more malleablethan adults in accepting others as kin. Theother is separationof individuals fromactual kin, whichcan favorthe manipulationof kinship cues.

Two testable predictions pertaining to institutionalized celibacy will be explored in the present research. First, institutions which demand celibacy from unrelated members should make use of the cues andrelated factors describedabove. In other words, such institutions should prefer young, impressionable recruits and discourage their

2 Celibacy has historically referredto sexual or maritalabstin ence, or both (de Valk 990). In this dissertation the term is synonymous with lifelongsexual abstinence. 3 association with kin. In addition, these institutions should encourage or require close association among members, makeuse of falsephenotypic matches, andregularly employ linguistic and othersymbolic kin referents. The second prediction is that these manipulative practices are likely to takeplace only in institutions where thepool of potential recruits is sufficientlylarge that the average degree of relatedness among members is small or nonexistent. In this dissertation,both of thesepredictions are tested throughan appraisal of historical sources on major religions thatexhibit institutionalized celibacy, as well as a comparativeanalysis of ethnographic data drawnfrom Murdock and

White's (1969) Sampleof Cross-Cultural Societies. In both cases, patterningof institutional practices associated with celibacy lends direct support to these hypotheses.

The application of evolutionarytheory to human socialbehavior can be conducted in a varietyof ways. One of these, which Gray (1996) labels "Darwiniansocial science," involves attempts to measure the effectsof behavior on individual or inclusive fitness. It provides information on the possible role of natural selection in present, andperhaps future, environments, andthus deals directly with questionsof evolutionaryprocess (Caro andBorgerhoffMulder 1987). An exampleof this approach is the "cultural success hypothesis," which predicts thatindividuals who best attain cultural goals will also exhibit enhanced reproductive success (Irons 1979; see also Betzig 1997a; Betzig et al.

1988; Cronk 1991; Irons 1996).

Another approach, however, is thatof evolutionarypsychology, which attemptsto identifyevolved, pan-humancognitive adaptations throughan analysis of their likely designfe atures. Support forposited adaptations is generatedby their congruence with 4 current behaviors, not by the relationship between these behaviors andreproductive success (see Chapter 2).

A key difference between the two approaches rests on whether the environments in which specificbehaviors occur arethought to be similarto ancestralones in which humans evolved (Gray 1996). If they arenot, variabilityin currentreproductive success is immaterial, butbehavioral "errors" occurringin modem environments may provide insights into the nature of underlying psychological adaptations (Symons 1990). Thus, while the relationship between culture and evolved psychology may often be adaptive, novel circumstances (in termsof humanevolution), such as increased population size and density,may lead to behaviorally maladaptive outcomes because of pan-human psychological design features. This may be the case concerningthe relationship between celibacy and the inducement of altruism throughmanipulation of kin recognitioncues.

Although varioustheoretical perspectives dealing with sexuality andcelibacy will be addressed in the nextchapter, approaches which might account forthe origin and functionof celibacy in particular societies liebeyond the scope of thiswork. For example, in institutional contexts, celibacy is a relatively recent historical phenomenon, associated forthe most part with large,highly stratifiedsocieties. Its rise and relationship to other cultural traits might thereforebe described by meansof a cultural evolutionist perspective, as in Carneiro's(1968a) sequences of cultural development. From a functionalistperspective ( e.g., Radcliffe-Brown 1952), celibate institutions probably help maintain the structureof societies, with celibates often fulfillinga varietyof important religious andeconomic roles. In cultural materialist terms( e.g., Harris1979), a group's 5 ideologyand philosophy should be explicable throughan understanding of its economic circumstances. In manycases, abstinents profitmaterially by joining celibate institutions; they arerecompensed with status andother resources forforgoing sex. Moreover, through celibacy a society cancontrol population growth by removing some individuals fromthe reproducing population. Symbolically ( e.g., Geertz 1973), in manycultural settings the ideology associated with celibacy is inextricablylinked to societal themes, andthe "meaning" of celibacy may serveto reinforce other collective values, such as sacrifice,dedication, or obedience. In addition, historical, andperhaps even ecological

(Reynolds 1986, 1988), processes affect the presence or absence of celibate institutions in particularsocieties.

Other issues which will not be dealt with in detail in this dissertationare the many culturaland individual rationales given forlif elong celibacy. These include the demonstrationor test of religious faith, escape from restrictive social roles, andthe acquisition of personal strength, good fortune, purity,status, power, andmaterial success.

All of theperspectives briefly mentioned above can shed lighton both the nature of the celibate experience in specific societies and the cross-cultural patterningof institutionalizedcelibacy. In addition, froma Darwinianpoint of view, lifelongcelibacy should be rareand difficultto sustain. Genes promoting celibate be);iavior would undoubtedly be eliminated fromsubsequent generations with ·the death of the celibates.

"Superorganic"and "extra-somatic" properties of culture ( e.g., Kroeber 1952; White

1969) might thereforeappear sufficient to explain celibacy's continued maintenance in manyinstitutional settings. After all, the argument that culture "makes people want to do what they have to do" (Carneiro1968b:553, original emphasis) has long been used as anexplanation for virtually alltypesof humanbehavior. This is the "Standard Social Science Model"

{Tooby andCosmides 1992), one in which culturemolds humanpsychology, including sexual psychology (O'Donohue andPlaud 1994). Because celibacy runs so clearly counter to one of the fundamental tenets of evolutionary theory,it appearsa perfect candidate forthe SSSM.

Even as ardenta Darwinian as Dawkins essentially accepts this model when he discusses celibacy as a "meme;" that is, a unit of cultural, and not biological, selection. A gene forcelibacy is obviously fatedto fail, he says, but "The meme forcelibacy" is transmittedby priests, through personal influenceand example, "to young boys who have not yet decided what they wantto do with their lives" (Dawkins 1976:213). He is

''throwing out the gene" (p.205) in his attempt to address culturaltraits apparently beyond the reach of Darwinianexplanations.

Clearly, the importance of culture in patterningsexual behavior cannotbe denied, and "in the secret coming together of two bodies, all society is the third presence"

(Rostand1961, in Suggs andMarshall 1971). There areat least three reasons, however, why a strictlycultural explanationfor the maintenance of lifelongsexual abstinence is unsatisfactory. First, "superindividual" explanationsfor human behavior often ignore the role of competing individualinterests in shaping specificbehavioral strategies (Symons

1979). Second, if in factcelibacy can be maintained as a stable culturaltrait in varied geographic andtemporal settings, aspects of evolved humancognition may be involved. 7 For example, Dawkins theorizes that memes succeed when they carry"deep psychological impact" (Dawkins 1976:212); thus, celibacy's psychological impact may be universal and subject to evolutionaryinterpretations. Finally, aspects of evolutionary theory have helped illuminate a number of related behaviors such as mate choice, child care, andsexual competition for which purelycultural explanations had sufficedin the past ( see reviews in Betzig 1988b, 1997; Cronk 1991). It seems reasonable to explore the possibility that a Darwinian perspective can shed additional light on the maintenance of celibacy as well.

However, two additional potential objections to this approach must be addressed, andhopefully forestalled, at the outset. First, lifelongabstinence could in factbe rareand wmsual amongthose who profess to practice it. In the early 16thcentury MartinLuther claimed that only "one in a thousand" priests actually kept his vows (Ozment 1972).

Similarly, Freyd and Johnson (1992) suspect that lifelong celibacy is maintained only in rarecases. A recent survey of North American Roman Catholics found that only half the priests and a third of the nuns support mandatoryclerical celibacy (Rosetti 1994).

However, Wynne (1988) demonstrates that religious rules, including ones pertaining to celibacy, have generally been adhered toin Catholic monastic orders throughouttheir history. This also appearsto be the case for manyBuddhist orders (Bunnag 1973; Spiro

1971), Hindu branches (Denton 1991; vander Veer-1987), andother celibate institutions, including the Shakers (Kitch 1989). It is thereforereasonable to assume thatvoluntary, lifelong celibacy is a cultural trait that has enjoyed continuityfor centuries in diverse ethnographicsettings, and one that has been adhered to by relatively large numbers of healthy, childless (including virgin) men and women all over the world.

Another possible explanation forthe maintenanceof institutionalized celibacy which does not draw on a Darwinianpsychological perspective rests on idiosyncratic variabilitywith respect to sexualdesire, or libido (for variabilityin humansexuality, see

McDonald Pavelka 1995; Rosen and Beck 1988). Spiro, for example, suggests that dependency, avoidance of responsibility, "above average" fearof women, and latent homosexuality are typical personality traits of BurmeseBuddhist monks (1970:343).

Celibate institutionsmay simply be aggregations of those rare individuals who exhibit littleor no interest in sex.

However, this is unlikely to be fullyexplanatory. Factors other thanindividual sexual inclinations clearly influencemembership in celibate institutions. For example, most Tibetan recruits to lamaseries aresecond sons and,due to inheritance patterns

(primogeniture) and familyeconomic strategies, these males hold littlechance of ever marrying (Durham1991:71n). Manyrecruits to Christian monasteries in themiddle ages were "dedicated" by their parentsat very early ages, well beforeanyone couldhave knownthe recruits' futurelevels of sexual interest (Knowles 1963).

The best reason,however, to question the relevance of idiosyncratic variabilityis the factthat maintaining celibate vows has been described by so many as extremely difficult. Members of manyreligious orders report that adhering to. vows of celibacy is the most demandingaspect of their discipline (e.g., Suddard1966). Additionally, celibacy has historically elicited a great deal of controversyin both Buddhism (Wei-hsun Fu and Wawrytko 1994) andChristianity (Wynne 1988) because of the difficultiesit entails. Manybranches andsects have been formedspecifically to either escape or reinforceadherence to celibacy.

Celibacy is unlikely to be anevolved trait. It arises and persists in particular societies due to the complex interaction of a variety of factors. As suggested in this chapter, however, a Darwinianpsychological approach may prove usefulfor identifying the meansthrough which institutional practices of kin cue manipulation serve to maintain and reinforce celibate behavior in any cultural setting. In Chapter 2, various relevant theoretical perspectives through which celibacy has been, or may be, profitablyexplored will be identified. The strengths andweaknesses of each perspective will be illustrated through specific examples whereverpossible. Chapter 3 contains a discussion of aspects of evolutionaryand related biological theory relevantto the present study. It opens with the argumentthat celibacy is oftenan altruistic act in evolutionaryterms. An additional argumentsuggests the importanceof induced or manipulated altruism as a theoretical constructthrough which to explore non-kin altruism in institutional settings. This leads to a discussion of the meansthrough which humansidentify kin, and thus how the manipulation of kinship cues cantake place. Finally,a research model forthe maintenanceof institutionalized celibacy in non-kin contexts is presented.

The hypotheses generated by meansof this model aretested in Chapter 4. Data used forthis test are drawnfrom major religions, as well as some well-knownsects, that demandcelibacy fromsome, or all, of their members. Chapter 5 contains a similar test of hypotheses through theuse of cross-cultural ethnographicdata. While some discussion of 10 the test results occurs in these two chapters, additional discussion of the hypotheses tested, as well as related methodological issues, takesplace in Chapter6. Chapter 7 contains a summaryof the findings, as well as a number of conclusions concerningthis research. 11 CHAPTER 2

THEORETICALPERSPECTIVES

Organizing the literaturethat addresses celibacy is difficult,because the topic is so

rarelydiscussed in depth. Although the literature on humansexuality is enormous,

celibacy is almost inevitably dealt with either peripherally or not at all ( e.g., Betzig et al.

1988; Caplan 1987, Daly andWilson 1978; Ford andBeach 1951; Frayser and Whitby

1995; Marshalland Suggs 1971; Ortner andWhitehead 1981a; Suggs andMiracle 1993;

Symons1979). This would makesense if celibacy were generally viewed as an act

unrelated to sexuality, andthus more properly discussed in the context of another

behavioral domain. However, apart fromthe literature concerningcelibacy in

. moral/religious ( e.g., Frein 1968) or historical contexts ( e.g., Cholij 1989; de Valk 1990),

there appears to be no other such domain. There simply has not been much researchin

the areaof lifelongsexual abstinence (Sobo and Bell n.d.).

With respect to "traditional" (non-Darwinian)perspectives, there areseveral

reasons which might explain this paucity of research. One is that celibacy's role as

"meaningful[ sexual] inactivity"appears to have generally been overlooked (Sobo and

Bell n.d.). Also, Tuzin (1995) suggests that anthropologistshave generally under­

explored certainbehaviors when interpretingcultural systems. While there is

considerable informationon sexual behavior, it is often"theoretically unassimilated and

conceptuallyunderdeveloped" (1995:257). In addition, the relationship between norms 12 and actualbehavior withrespect to sexuality is particularlyuncertain, as ideal constructs areoften poor predictors of how people really behave.

Another importantfactor is the difficultyof observing, or otherwiseobtaining reliable data on, sexual practices. Broude (1981) suggests, particularlywith respect to cross-cultural research on sexuality, that "samples tend to be small andmeasurement validity can be problematic" (1981:635). Manyethnographers do not mention sexual matters, as data are hardto obtainand sexuality is oftennot considered anappropriate investigative domain.

With respect to evolutionaryperspectives, some of the samebarriers to research apply, but an additional factormay be the paradoxthat celibacy appearsto represent. It may be thatresearchers expect thatcelibacy is more properly understood in strictly cultural terms.

A brief discussion of relevant theoretical perspectivesand illustrative studies is presented below. It should become clearthat at least one areaof inquiryappears to have been overlooked: themaintenance and reinforcement of celibate vows or decisions in the context of social institutions.

"Standard Social Science" models

Much anthropologicalresearch pertaining to humansexuality has focusedon culturally-specificexplanations. This is consistent withanthropolo gy's traditional position that culture shapes human sexual behavior to a much greaterextent thandoes biology. Ortner andWhitehead's view is that"natural features of gender, andnatural 13 processes of sex andreproduction, furnishonly a suggestive andambiguous backdrop to the cultural organization of gender and sexuality" (1981b:l). While their conclusion may appear extreme, it does reflectan assumpt ion that underlies much of the anthropological research on sexual practices. This is particularlytrue with respect to celibacy.

Ortner andWhitehead note that researchers properly begin by "asking what male and female,sex andreproduction, mean in given social and cultural contexts, rather than assuming that we know what they mean in the first place. Gender, sexuality, and reproduction are treated as symbols, invested with meaning by the society in question, as all symbols are" (1981:1; original emphasis). Thus, there are two appropriate approaches: exploring the inner logic andrelationships among symbols, and,alternatively, exploring relationships between symbols andmeanings with respect to social relations.

Davenport(1987) agrees: "The most signalcontribution that the anthropological study of sex has made is the demonstration that everyhuman culture contains a complex of patterns that shape, structure, andcontrol all manifestationsof sexuality, frombirth to death, of all members of the society. This complex canbe called the 'culture of sex' ... sexual customs isolated fromtheir cultural contexts areeither meaninglessin themselves or subject to grossmisinte rpretation when not seen in their cultural environments" (Davenport1987: 198-9).

He continues: "Althoughsexuality is a fundamentalpart of humanbiological existence, thatwhich separates Homo sapiens fromother species asregards sex is the enormous capabilitythat humanshave to embellish andelaborate ideationally upon their underlying genetic predispositions. For humans the reality of sexuality is what the 14 individuals in each society believe it to be, andthat is but anotherway of saying that the realityof sex is the culture of it" (Davenport1987 :234).

This perspective inevitably precludes asking questions about physiologically and psychologically evolved underpinnings to sexual choices. No hypotheses with respect to pan-humantendencies are possible given the underlying paradigmthat sex andgender are

"cultural constructs, shaped in variousways by the largersocial and cultural matrixes in which they areembedded (and inturn shaping those matrixes)" (Ortnerand Whitehead

198l b:25; see also Leach 1991).

However, the culture-specificapproach canprovide detailed analyses of the many social, economic, political, andother variableswhich shape celibacy in particular societies. For example, Phillimore( 1991_; n.d.) describesa rare, recent, and extremely localized practice whereby pre-pubescent girls of the pastoralist Gaddis in the Himalayas canbecome celibate by adopting a sadhin role. Although the termcarries ascetic connotations, it primarily describesthe renunciation of marriage andmotherhood.

Moreover, sad.bintake male dress, rights, and obligations, andthereby become eligible to inherit and own property.

Apparently, sadhin-hood is a choice which runs counter to familywishes and is a

"preferencerather than an ordeal,more blessing than burden" (Phillimoren.d.: 12). There arehints, however, that other factors may be at play. For example, a lack of brothers in the family can be a strong incentive fora womanto assume this status,thereby improving her family's economic andreligious well-being through her decision. Other factorswhich 15 play a role in the patterning of this custom include migration patternsof the Gaddis and neighboring Hindu groups, the relationship between castes, andgender economic roles.

Phillimore concludes that "where nonmarriage takes on an intentional character andthereby poses an implicit challenge to conventional codes of practice, it becomes necessaryto define an institutional framework within which to legitimate andcontain it"

(1991 :347).

Young (n.d.) similarlydescribes northern Albanian "swornvirgins" who, in a society in which women are traditionally powerless to changetheir subordinate role of wifeand mother, may renounce marriage and sexualityand take on male status. "Sworn virgins" adopt men's clothing and customs (such as smoking, drinking,and carrying weapons) and other social andeconomic roles reserved formen. Girls either choose celibacy or have it assigned at birth by a father with no sons. "Powerfulsocial sanctions" such as intense scrutiny, traditionalconformity, and notions of honor preclude deviation fromlif elong celibate vows ( although see Coon 1950, andfurther discussion of this practice in Chapter 5). In addition, specific culturalpractices appearto reinforcethis decision; for example,sworn virgins are referred to using male pronouns. Young argues thatthe renunciation of sexuality is not a great sacrifice, since sex is seen only as a means of procreation in this cultural environment. Her interviewswith swornvirgins provide a window into the many variables that impact celibate choice.

Kitch (1989) examinedthree 19th centuryutopian celibate communities in

America: the Shakers,Koreshans, and Sanctificationsists. Descriptions of the Shakers appear later in this study, but Kitch's interpretationof celibacy is relevant here. She 16 maintains that celibacy is a key symbol working in opposition to the symbolically rich domain of heterosexuality. The mainstream symbol, and its implications of a subordinate role for women in American society, is replaced with one which helps move women from consumption and submission to production andleadership. Celibacy is thereforea

"symbolic reversal of heterosexual intercourse" (Kitch 1986:23), and these utopian groupsformed communal families "devoid of the sexual needs that create the opposed gender identities required in the nuclear family form"(p.74).

A more overtlyeconomic perspective is taken by Messenger (1993) in his description of "Inis Beag," a small Irish islandcommunity where over a quarter of the men and women of marriageableage are single and many remain so forlife. The primary cause of this phenomenon, according to Messenger, are inheritance rules, under which one son ( oftenthe eldest) must wait to be wed until his fatheris ready to give up his land and familial authority. Parents often delay their loss of independence andcontrol as long as possible. A variety of social norms, including the prestige of priesthood and male age­ grading terminology (a manis called "boy" until he is fortyyears old, and "middle-aged" untileighty) serve to delay and discourage marriage. Many men of eligible age, even with land andparental consent, avoid marriageunder these conditions. They oftencite the complications and responsibilities of sexual relations and their wish to continue to

"run with the lads" (Messenger 1993:259).

An understanding of sexual roles andrelationships in lightof power has been explored by Foucault, who arguesthat sex is not a drive,but "an especially dense transfer point for relations of power" (1981 : 103; in Caplan 1987 :7). This perspective has 17 influencedseveral scholarswho have researchedcelibacy. Elm (1994), for example, describes female sexual asceticism in the early Christianchurch as a means through which women could attain higher statusvis-a-vis males. The only otherroute available through which women could escape the authority of fathers,brothers, andhusbands was prostitution (see also Kitch 1989). Foucault has also influenced Alter's(1997) analysisof the discourseon male celibacy in NorthIndia. In contrastto the Westem European emphasis on "who does what to whom" (p.291) sexually, andthus on rules and regulations pertaining to sexual behavior, Alter finds that Hindu discourse on celibacy focuses on the good health andvitality provided by resisting ejaculation. Celibacy is therefore devoid of moral ramifications, andreaches beyond a focuson the individual and his actions to elemental and universal truths about "the naturalorder of things" (p.292).

Many cross-culturalanalyses of human sexualityalso tend to emphasize the importance of culturalfactors, although they go beyond the particularistic views of sexuality espoused by Ortner andWhitehead, as well as Davenport. Cohen (1969), for example, in a sample of sixty societies drawn from Murdock's World Ethnographic

Sample( 1961), findsa statistical relationship between the "inchoate" incorporativestate andpunishment forviolation of celibacy. (An inchoate state is one where "rulers are attemptingto consolidate power over culturally equivalent local groups" [Cohen

1969:670].) This relationship suggests that institutionalized celibacyis "a symbol of the ideological gap between the traditionalideology of marriage andprocreation ...and the yet unformed ideology appropriate to marriage in a nation with a fullyformed and successful incorporative state" (1969:672). It is thereforea reflectionof transitional uncertainty with 18 respect to marriageand procreative goals, and should disappearin societies that become fully integrated into the state level. Societies in which celibacy has independently (in his view) arisendo not share similar viewsof sexuality; instead, they share the dynamicsof the relationships between the forming nationand the groups being incorporatedby it.

Ford (1964), in his cross-cultural examinationof sexual behavior in 64 societies coded in the Human Relations Area Files, concludes that the humandesire forchildren

"is not aninnate component of human nature;it is not a basic drive. On the contrary, it is anacquired motive which is continuously being reinforced by social rewards and punishments... if indeed thereis a maternal instinct it hasbeen foundtoo weakto override other conflictingwishes unaided ..." (1964:86-87).

Ford does not deny that a desire forsex may be a basic drive, however; only that the "pains and cares"of having and raising children will be avoided by some adults unless there is cultural reinforcementto override such a decision. It is an individual cost/benefit calculation, Ford argues,and society must finda way to makethe benefitsoutweigh the costs in order to perpetuate itself.

Interactionist models

Abramson and Pinkerton (1995)embrace Foucault's position that, with respect to sex, "'natural'is merelya label in the nomenclature of culturallycapricious categories"

(1995:2; see also Seidler 1987). However, they do arguefor an "interactionist" approach to analyzing sexuality, where both biological and cultural factors areconsidered. Further, they ask how these factorsinteract and give shape to human sexual behavior (1995:5-6). 19 Their conclusion is that physical pleasureis the principal motivator forsex, andtherefore forreproduction andhuman evolution. The desire for pleasure is a "universal human imperative," and so it, as opposed to reproduction, is themore powerfulexplanatory frameworkfor understanding humansexual behavior (1995:10). Specificcultural constructsfor human sexualitymust takethis motivator into account.

Thisposition, one not inconsistent with thatof manyevolutionists, opens the door to the celibacy paradox: if sexual pleasureis an"imperative," then what to make of celibates? Although theydo not explicitly discuss this, "historical, cultural, and psychological variables determinewhich sexual acts are pleasurable, andunder what circumstances. Indeed, even the distinction between the sexual andthe nonsexual is subject to cultural and historical variation" (Abramson and Pinkerton1995: 12).

However, the emphasis on nature/nurture does provide a biological basis foran understandingof sexualbehavior in culture-specificcontexts. Because of this, their edited volume -- Sexual Nature/Sexual Culture(1995) -- contains discussions of primate sexuality(McDonald Pavenka) andpsychoneuroendocrinology (Meyer-Bahlburg) alongside ethnographicdescriptions of "third-gender" roles in India (Cohen) anda discursive analysisof anthropological inquiry into sexual behavior (Tuzin). Reynolds and

Kellett's (1991) approach to marriageand mating similarlyutilizes a varietyof perspectives.

According to Broude (1981), the earliestand most influentialinteractionist cross­ cultural study of human sexuality is Ford and Beach's Patternsof Sexual Behavior (1951).

These authors examine sexual behavior across cultures andmany species, as well as 20 underlying physiological factors. A more recent exampleof interactionist researchis

Frayser's (1985) model of human sexuality. In it biological factors(anatomy and physiology), cultural factors(patterned belief s and rules), and social systems factors

(patternedinteractions, e.g., ceremonies) collectively comprise the human sexual system

(1985:10). In her review of 62 societies from Murdock and White's (1969) Standard

Cross Cultural Sample, Frayser describes patterned temporarycontinence as usually

correlated with significantevents in individual life cycles ( e.g., birth andpostpartum taboos) andmajor aspects o( social life (e.g., economic pursuits).

Elsie Clews Parsons'Religious Chastity: An Ethnological View (written by"John

Main" in 1913) is an early cross-cultural approach to an understandingof sexual

continence in religious contexts. Foreshadowing later evolutionarypsychological

perspectives, Parsons argues that earlycultural evolutionisttheory (e.g., E.B. Tylor,

Lewis Henry Morgan; for an overview, see Rambo 1991) has run "amuck,"because

"customs aredescribed as if they were living species," and that "similarities in culture

point not to the existence of set cultural stages through which all societies must pass, but

to the homogeneity of humanmind andits tendency to express itself, given like

circumstances, in like ways" (Main 1913 :vii). Relevantpsychological universals in

understandingreligious chastity are, in her view, the fear ofinfection fromthe dead, the

perceived efficacyof bribing deities through sacrifice,and the perceived connection

between continence andan awakened religious spirit. 21 Darwinian models

Celibacy has received modest attention fromresearchers utilizing a Darwinian perspective. The theoretical position typically advancedis that celibacy may benefit genetic relatives. That is, "natural selection acts on the occurrence of celibacy, ifby being celibate, an individual's inclusive fitnessis maximized. Since reproductive success is achieved both directly and indirectly (through the reproduction of relatives), a celibate individual is not necessarilyan evolutionary dead-end if he/she can contribute to the reproduction of relatives" (Hager 1992:386). For example, a celibate individual's financialand social success might benefit relatives (Alexander 1979:80). As Fox

(1993: 183) says, quoting an old Irish proverb, "There is nothingas conceited as a

Monsignor's niece."

Hager's review of femalereligious claustrationin medieval Europesuggests that convents benefit nuns' families as "depositories of excess females," although the founders of nunneries receive other economic benefitsas well. Betzig (1995:203) similarlyfinds monasteries were "reservoirsof [male] reserve heirs." Celibacy is thereforea familial strategyto minimize parentalinvestment in offspring when cultural circumstances such as inheritance laws render it practical (Betzig 1995; Boone 1986; Hrdy 1997).

A related factor is competition for mates. Highly stratified societies aretypically composed of a few men of high status controllinga disproportionate number of women while "largenumbers of beggars, outcasts, floatermales, and celibates exist at the bottom" (Dickemann 1997:318). Female hypergyny in stratified societies, which

Dickemann (I979a:166) suggests "will ultimately be shown [to be] an extremely 22 widespread humanbreeding system," leads to an excess of both high status women and low statusmen. Celibacy is one means by which members of these groups areremoved fromthe mating pool. Models of parental sex-ratio manipulationof offspring ( e.g.,

Trivers andWillard 1973), extended to include cultural manipulation,predict that, in stratifiedsocieties, families in lower socio-economic strata should invest in daughters, while those in higher strata should invest more heavily in sons. As Dickemann( 1979b) suggests, celibacy, along with suicide andinfanti cide, appear to be patternedin ways that supportthese predictions in a varietyof cultures. Members of monastic institutions in hypergynous, stratifiedsocieties aregenerally lower status males andhigher status females(see also Chapter 7).

Finally, Betzig (1986; 1995) has found that, cross-culturally, male access to power correlateswith differential reproduction. Celibacy, both of women controlledby despots andof the men denied their access, is a frequent consequence.

There are,therefore, a varietyof perspectives with which celibacy canbe, andto some extent has been, examined. However, the issue of motivation on the part of the celibate has not received a great deal of attention. In the case of culture-specificand interactionist perspectives, it appearsto be taken for granted thatideology of the group will fullysuffice to explain lifelongcommitment to the practice. More surprisingis the position takenby evolutionists; here, it appearsthat force, whether familial or institutional (as in claustration)is sufficientto cause individuals to abandonsexuality in favorof celibacy. While it might make evolutionarysense for a familyto deposit its

"excess" sons anddaughters in a monastery or convent, what compels these individuals, 23 many of whom must be presumed to have normal sexual appetites, to go along? As Ford andBeach point out, "There areindeed very few societies in which any method of control appearsto be completely effectivein preventing intercourse among youngunmarried couples" (1951: 183). For example,Lynch (1991:90), in reviewing Hajnal's(1965) description of the typical Europeanmarriage patternof late marriage andhigh incidence of celibacy, suggests that, at least for 19th centuryurban workers, levels of permanent celibacy are likely to havebeen lower thanreported due to the high incidence of nonmaritaland premarital sex. The only generally effectivemethod of controlis separationof the sexes and strictsurveillance, but even this strategyoccasion ally fails

(Ford andBeach 1951: 183).

What is lacking in the literature cited above is discussion of the means through which institutions maintainand reinforce in individualsa preferencefor celibacy. For manythis choice must be a difficult one. The desire forsex is not likely to be an

"emergency," as is the requirement for oxygen or food. Because of this, notes Tuzin

( 1995:259), it is all the more remarkable"that millions of people through theages have eagerly risked life, limb, property, freedom,tranquillity, fam ily, reputation, happiness, have even accepted sure and eternal damnation, all forthe attainment, not of offspring, but of sexual pleasure." Some scholarly attempt must be made to explain the willingness of individuals, notwithstandinginstitutional power andfamilial press ure, to forego reproduction andits powerfulproximate motivators. The specific nature in which institutional power is wielded is important, not so much in the case of groups who 24 literally force celibacy through violence or isolation, as in the case of the millions of voluntary celibates living today or in the past.

Evolutionarypsyc hology

Evolutionary psychology is a relatively new approach to the evolutionarystudy of

human behavior. Its focusis on the humanbrain as anorgan with a complex set of

evolved psychological mechanisms, or modules, each designed to deal with a different

facet of the practical and specific problems of survivaland reproduction. These

adaptations areposited to direct decisions andtendencies related to a variety of domains,

including languageacquisition, mate choice, social interactions, tool-use, food

preferences, etc. (Allgeier and Wiederman 1994; Barkow et al. 1992; Mithen

1996a:chpt.3). While some researchers(e. g.,Tooby andCosmides 1992) propose that

modularity alone can explain human behavioral flexibility, others (e.g., Gardner1993)

suggest that some more general cognitive attributes must exist to facilitateaccess between

and among modules. How manymodules exist, and how specificare their domains,

remain debatable issues. But most evolutionarypsychologists agree that modularity must

be a key aspect of thehuman brain's architecture, and particularlyso during critical

learningperiods in childhood. In addition, it seems clearthat modules aremost likely to

pertain to the domains which are, or were in ancestralhuman environments, the most

critical for human survivaland reproduction.

Thus the mind is not a "blank slate" shaped exclusively by cultural contexts.

Another consequence of viewing the brain as, at least in part, modularis that some 25 maladaptive behaviors become understandable, particularly in environments dramatically differentfrom those typical throughout human evolution (Logan and Qirko 1996). For example,a preferencefor sweet foodsthat may have been adaptive in ancestralhuman environments can be decidedly maladaptive in modernsocieties where sugaris all too easily accessible (Allgeier andWiederman 1994: 223-4).

The theoretical perspective of evolutionary psychology is perhaps the most productive forexploring the maintenanceand reinforcement of celibacy in institutionalized settings. Celibacy, while sometimes the choice of rareindividuals in a group, is oftenrelated to sacrifice for others. It can, therefore, be a formof altruism. In this context, evolutionarytheory predicts that discerning degreesof relatedness is crucial.

For this reason, Tooby andCosmides (1992:113) suggest that a "kin oriented motivation module" is likely to exist. Daly et al. (1997:289) similarlypropose that kinship may be "a special domain with its own rules," as children "acquire an understandingof kinship terminology in ways that cannot beaccounted for by the hypothesisof domain-general inductive processes." As will be discussed in the next chapter, research on kin recognition suggests that psychological mechanismsare indeed involved in the identification of human kin. Further, it appears likely that these mechanisms aresubject to manipulationor error, which may be directly related to the effectivereinforcement of celibacy in non-kin, institutionalcontexts. 26 CHAPTER 3

CELIBACY AS ALTRUISM

Altruism

Altruism, or "self-denying or self-destructivebehavior performedfor the benefit of others" (Wilson 1987: 10), has a stricter Darwiniandefinition : the sacrificemust

involve fitness,or reproductive success (Williams 1981 ). That is, in evolutionarytenns,

altruismis an act which results in a loss of reproductive potential for one organism and a

gain for another,measured either with referenceto viability ("somatic effort")or

reproduction itself (Alexander1979).

Individuals of manyspecies, including primates (Bernstein1991 ), oftenbehave

altruisticallyto assist siblings or other close relatives. With particularreference to non­

procreation, in many species additional related adults ("alloparents")play importantroles

in raising young (Emlen 1997), and in the process they often delay andsometimes forgo

their ownreproduction (Emlen 1984). Humansappear to behave nepotistically aswell.

Kin receive more unreciprocatedhelp thannon-kin, andclose kin more than removed kin

(Cunningham1985/1 986; Essock-Vitale and McGuire 1980, 1985; Piliavin andCharng

1990). This help can include foregoingreproduction, as in the case of an older sibling

who remains single andchildless to help raise younger siblings or carefor parents

(Kiernan1988). In some cases, younger siblings may foregoprocreation so that their kin

will benefitin terms of overall reproduction and the conservationof scarceresources. For

example, among the Tikopia of the Solomon Islands, 27 The younger male members of a family, especially if it is not a richone in lands, areexpected to remain single. The head of the house may issue aninjunction to them to refrain frommarriage on the groundsthat the offspring of their elder brothers will occupy all the food resources at command. Extra-marital satisfactionis not denied these men, but their sex activities rarelyresult in children. Deference to family interests is strong, and the choice of celibacy is quite oftenvoluntary (Firth1936:82).

With the Tikopia it is procreation and not necessarilysexuality that is sacrificed.

In manyother contexts, however, sexual abstinence is involved as well. One example comes from Tibet, where the common practice of sending second sons to Buddhist monasteries appearsto reproductively benefit typically polyandrous families (Durham

1991:71-2; see also Messenger 1993 for an analogous situation in the Irish community of

Inis Beag). Thereforecelibacy, along with contraception,emigration, and infanticide, can be a strategy that removes potential drains on a family'sreproductive and material resources. The influenceor wealth celibates typically accrueas teachers and priests may also indirectly benefitrelatives (Alexander 1979:80).

Celibacy oftenbenefits non-kinas well. Celibates devote time andenergy to the furtherance of organizationsby performingduties requested of them. In some cases, as in celibate military units, these duties include risk of injuryor death. In religious institutions, duties can include the maintenanceof communal quarters, carefor fellow members and communities at large,and the performanceof religious functions.

Reproduction, time, and energy aresacrificed, not foroff spring and other close kin, but for unrelatedothers, including not only institutional leaders and members, but abstract entities and supernaturaldeities. 28 A second benefitof celibacy for institutions is thecontrol of wealthand other resources that this practice canhelp insure. Celibate members have fewerconflicts of interest withrespect to acquiring resources forfamily members, andthe legal transferof propertyand wealth to family members does not, in general, occur (Balch 1985). Infact, in many cases celibate members of organizations donate their resources to the organization forthe advancement of its goals.

In sum, celibacy is oftenan altruistic act, especially in organizationalsettings. In

Christian monasticism, forexample, "There is a vast body of incontrovertibleevidence about the remarkablehardships and suff erings which manyorder members voluntarily accepted on behalf of the church andtheir orders" (Wynne 1988:47). While this sacrifice comes in manyforms, the loss ofreproduction certainlyqualifies. Kitch (1989:74) views celibacy as fundamentalto cooperative, communal, andegalitarian living. And "Celibacy may be one reason for the extended longevity of monasteriesas social systems -- perhaps communes cangenerally be handledno other way" (Hillery1992: 102).

Biological altruism

In evolutionaryterms, traits promoting altruismshould not persist in a population except under fourconditions: where traits increase fitness of close relatives, where return benefitsexceed the costs of sacrifice,where a generalized tendency to be altruistic has

evolved through group selection, andwhere traits areforced or manipulated by others.

Inclusive fitness( or kin selection) theory, firstformally proposed by Hamilton

(1964), is based on the factthat individualsshare copies of their genes in differing 29 degrees dependingon the extent to which they arerelated. Therefore,any genetically- driven traitthat confers anadvantage to more individuals sharingthe traitthan are lost due to its instructions can spread in a population. (For example,"You should die to keep several of your brothers or sisters alive.") This simple notion, with its attendant mathematical formulations,has helped explain many of the apparentparadoxes of the natural world, including non-reproducing worker castes of social insects (Wilson 1975).

Moreover, inclusive fitnesspredictions have received support in almost every species where they have been tested (Emlen 1995, 1997). As discussed earlier, it is becoming increasingly clearthat humans oftenbehave altruistically in accordance with the predictions of inclusive fitness theory.

A recent expansion of inclusive fitness theory is Rushton's ( 1995) genetic similarity theory. Genetically similarindividuals should tend to seek each other out and behave altruisticallytoward eachother. Altruismtoward close kin is only one manifestation of this process, as people interacting with others not identified as close kin

(or, more importantly, not related closely enough forinclusive fitnesstheory to operate) areargued to nevertheless discriminate on the basis of genetic similarity.

In the case of reciprocal altruism, anapparently altruistic act can be selected for if it yields a returnbenefit larger than its cost. Reciprocal altruism,then, occurs where

''two individuals tradealtruistic acts" (Trivers 1985:48). The necessaryconditions are that there be repeated interactions between individuals, andthat there be a "significant" delay between the benefitreceived andthe return act (Piliavin and Charng 1990). For example,if a man jumps into icy waters to save a drowning, unrelated child ( a risky, but 30 not suicidal act), there are direct andindirect benefitswhich can accrue to the "hero" ifhe is successful (Wilson 1975). Of course, "we must remain alive to receive the return effect. There is always some chancethat we will not survive to enjoy the returnbenefit, and this chanceof mortality will lead us always to devalue futureeff ects when compared to present effects" (Trivers 1985:49).

As in the case of inclusive fitness, there is evidence that humansbehave in accordance with predictions based on reciprocal altruism theory(Schroeder et al. 1995).

Reciprocity canoperate alongside kinship as a factorpromoting altruism. In fact, in humans,while there appears to be a tendency to reciprocate more often andstrongly toward kin than non-kin, even close kin who fail to reciprocate are eventually abandoned

(Essock-Vitale andMcGuire 1980).

A generalized tendency to be altruistic might also evolve throughgroup selection. Groupselection is "a system of natural selection in which the inclusive fitness of anindividual is positively related not only to the frequencyof his/her own genes in the population but also to the genes of unrelated group members" (Peres and Hopp

1990: 123). According to Sloanand Wilson (1994), selection between groupsis expected to lead to altruism between members within groups, even if not close kin, if this permits altruistic groups to outcompete non-altruisticgroups. Several conditions appear to be necessary for group selection to operate:

I. Where individuals cannotsurvive without constantinteraction with other group members, or where individual fitnessis seriously compromised if group population size drops below a certain point. 2. Where individuals cannotfreely move fromone group to another. 31 3. Where the ratio of individual to group life expectancy is high. 4. Where there is high competition between groups, but low competition within groups. 5. When individuals are personally rewardedfor their contributionsto the group (Peres andHopp 1990).

A related possibility is culturally-mediated group selection (e.g., Knauft1991; see also Caporael 1989). That is, throughsocialization and symbolic communication, traits which favor the group at the expense of the individual can spread, an4 "group selection and genuine altruism become possible" (Knauft 1991:398). Eibl-Eibesfeldt

(1995:257) argues that bonding patternsevolved by kin selection proved so efficient that non-kin could bond as well, and "supportedby cultural techniques(identification via symbols, indoctrination), this enabled groups to become a unit of selection."

Knauftsuggests that "simple" (i.e., egalitarian)human societies, which areusually nomadic foraging groups, differ frommore complex hunter-gatherer societies andother

"middle-range"groups (tribes and chiefdoms) in ways that suggest cultural group selection that favors altruism. Members of simple groups behave altruistically, regardless of relatedness, with respect to food-sharing,dominance structure, sexual competition, and overall patterns of cooperation and episodic aggression. More complex societies, however, typically develop fraternalinterest groups to protect concentrations of resources, and cooperation between unrelated group members decreases. Violence also increases in such settings.

Finally, forced or manipulated altruism can occur where "the recipient induces altruismthat would normallybe directed elsewhere or not displayed at all"(Trivers 1985: 32 49, original emphasis). Importantly,"all systems of altruism are vulnerable to parasitism in which individuals pretend a degreeof relatedness they do not possess or a degreeof reciprocity they will not express... " (Trivers 1985:52). Thus, induced altruismcan take the formof kinship deceit, or the manipulation of kin-recognition mechanisms to elicit altruisticacts from non-kin. Thisis relatively common in non-human species(Conner

1995). Parasitization of nests by cowbirds and cuckoos is a well-documented example: when the foreignegg hatches, the chick is fed by its new "parents," who are fooledinto feedingand caring fornon-kin because of location and,perhaps, behavior of the nestling.

Connerreports that adult white-winged chough will often"kidnap" unrelated young for the help they can later provide in raising true offspring. The young birds are apparently fooledby feeding behavior of the kidnappers into perceiving them as kin.

Psychological altruism

Proximate, psychological mechanismsare also likely to be importantin human

altruistic behavior. That proximate mechanisms, such as sexual pleasure, have led humans to engage in behaviors that in tum lead to greaterreproductive success is a

"centralhypothesis in evolutionarybiology" (Alexander 1987:26).

In the case of altruism amonghumans, various proximate mechanisms have been

proposed. One categoryrelates to the pleasurablefe elings that can accompanyaltruistic

acts, ranging from a "warmglow" of self-satisfaction(Andreoni 1990) to narcissistic ego­

gratification (Rappoportand Kren 1993). 33 The human capacity for empathy can also account forsome altruistic behaviors

(Hoffman1981; MacDonald 1984). For example,Batson (1990) conducted experiments where college students were told some of their fellowswere receiving mild electrical shocks. Manyagreed toreceive the shocks instead, but their altruism was not unlimited.

Batson's subjects refusedto taketheir colleagues' places when the shocks were perceived as "clearlypainful."

Another possibility related to reciprocal altruism is that having an"altruistic behavioral disposition" gives an individual a reputation that results in payoffs over many exchangeseven though it can be costly in any particularinstance. This assumes a genuine psychological disposition which can be detected by others (Sesardic1995).

The most plausible mechanisms underlyinghuman altruism, especially in cases that appearto run counter to the predictions of evolutionarytheory, arerelated to human social learningand conformity. Humans are easy to instructand convince (Bandura

1980; Campbell1983 ), and it is also quite po�sible that altruistic behavior canbe learned.

Whileit is clearthat much altruismcon formsto the expectations of kin selection and reciprocal altruism, humanmalleability could account forbehaviors even when they have deleterious outcomes in terms of fitness (Fialkowski 1990; Seardic1995). MacDonald

(1984) attempts to integratetendencies to imitate with the affective environment of the developing child. In thiscontext, research suggests that children behave more altruisticallyif exposed to generous, as opposed to selfish,models (Piliavin and Charng

1990). 34 In addition, "the altruistic tendency could well be justifiedsimply by our seeming necessity to achieve social acceptance" (Cela-Conde 1990:148; see also Alexander 1987).

Some researchershave suggested the existence of a pan-humantendency to conform, or what Simon (1990) calls "docility." The existence of such a psychological mechanism has manyimplications regardingthe acceptance of fitness-reducingcultural traits(Boyd andRicherson 1985; Flinnand Alexander 1982; Loganand Qirko 1996). A "rule"to accept traitsunder certain conditions (e.g., the most frequentlyencountered, depending on thestatus of the donor, traits encountered in the developmental process, etc.) is more likely, given our "bounded rationality" (Simon 1990: 1665), thancost/benefit assessments of single traits. This could accountfor the perpetuation of maladaptive traits, of which certain altruisticbehaviors could be one category. 3

Anotherconcept relevantto the perpetuationof maladaptive traits is the

"Environment of EvolutionaryAdaptedness ," or EEA. As alluded to earlier,humans, regardlessof cultural setting,exhibit a strong preference for sweet foods. However, over the last several thousandyears there hasbeen a dramatic departurefrom human ancestral environments, which has rendered the "sweet tooth" traitmaladaptive. Psychological mechanismsinfluencing altruism, presumably evolvedin the context of small nomadic bands(Buys and Larson1979; Ike 1987), could similarlylead to detrimentalbehavioral changes in a "novel environment" (Turke 1990; for extendeddiscussion of the EEA, see

Ethology andSociobiology 11 [ 4/5], 1990).

3 For reviews of evolutionaryand psychological altruism and the relationship between them, see Hoffman 1978; Krebs1987; Piliavin andCharng 1990; Schroederet al. 1995; Sesardic 1995; Wilson 1992. 35 The literature reviewed here collectively suggests that altruism encompasses a varietyof distinct classes of behaviors. It is therefore likely that no one evolutionary explanationwill sufficefor all, as there are different, and at times contradictory, scenarios under which altruistic behavior might evolve. Similarly, differentpsychological mechanisms may be involved in differentclasses of human altruism. For example,

Rosenhan (1970; in MacDonald 1984:104) distinguishes between "normativealtruism," which is associated with acts of low personal cost and risk, and "autonomous altruism" which involves greaterrisk andmore sustained involvement. For the lattercase,

Rosenhan argues that parental modeling of altruistic behaviors is an important factor.

Wilson (1978:155-157) makes a similar distinction between "hard-core"and "soft-core" altruism. Hard-core altruismis irrationaland instantaneous, with no expectation of returns, no cost-benefitcalculations, andis "unaffected by social rewardsor punishments beyond childhood" (p.155). Soft-corealtruism, on the other hand, is calculated behavior, and ultimately selfish, with expectations of returns either forthe individual or close genetic relatives. Clearly,it is important to definethe nature of celibacy as analtruistic act in order to ascertainwhich theory( or theories) likely best relatesto its maintenance in celibate institutions.

Celibacy andmanipulated altruism

How do vows or decisions of celibacy fitinto the theoretical frameworkof altruism? At firstglance, one is forcedto conclude, not too neatly. Where celibacy directly benefits kin it canbe explained in termsof inclusive fitness,and several 36 proximate cultural andpsychological factors,as well as direct, conscious calculations, can easilypromote celibate behavior. But inclusive fitness alone cannotexplain cases where celibacy appears to primarily benefit non-kin. Even if indirect benefitsaccrue to thefamily by a celibate's removal fromits material and reproductive concerns, or by

means of the celibate's increased status as a member of a celibate institution, thedaily

maintenanceof vows in non-kin settings requires additionalexplanation.

Genetic similarity theory may have a fundamentalflaw. While Rushton produces

data which suggest individuals sharea greater degreeof genetic similaritywith mates and

friendsthan should be expected by chance, Symons (1987:111-112) points out that this

positive assortative mating ·could be due to accidental byproducts of other mechanisms.

For example, a "rule" thatsaid "prefertallness" would lead to tall people preferringmates

who arealso tall, and short people would end up mating together through a lack of

choice. At anyrate, genetic similaritytheory does not apply in the context of non-kin

celibacy because of the nature of the sacrifice: celibacy costs the celibate so much that

the sacrificeonly makesevolutionary sense when performedfor those perceived as close

kin.

Similarly, with respectto reciprocal altruism, vows of non-procreation belong to a

classof altruistic behaviors which may be called ''terminal." If one foregoes reproduction

fora lifetime, no benefitcan be personally incurred whichwill outweigh the resulting loss

of fitness, andno reciprocal benefits canbe obtained at a later date.

Furthermore, the resulting reproductive sacrifice is direct and obvious. As will be

discussed later, human rationality is constrained by evolution - but it is unlikely to be so 37 constrained that humans will overlook the obviously maladaptive consequences of consciously chosen traits,such as the sacrificeof lifeor lifelongreproduction. Therefore, psychological mechanismssuch as empathy, whileperhaps appropriate forlower-cost acts, should not apply (as in the case ofBatson's experiments with electricshocks, where empathizersdid not take the victims' places when the shocks reportedlybecame more severe). Even the "altruistic behavioral disposition" and "docility"theories, which potentially explain a wide varietyof sacrificialacts, operate under the assumption of greater eventual gains which arenot possible if the actors foregothe ultimate currency, reproduction, fora lifetime.

To clarifythe problem terminalaltruism poses for Darwinian theory, another examplemay be helpful: altruisticsuicide in combat. Of the 207 Medals of Honor awardedin the VietnamWar, 63 were earned for ''voluntarily usingon e's body to shield other men from exploding devices" (Blake 1978:47). Since in thesecases death was, in all probability, a "psychological certainty,"reciprocal altruism, as well as related proximate mechanisms, shouldnot apply. And while families may receive benefits by having members celebrated as heroes, the non-kin contexts of the altruistic acts render inclusive fitnessexplanations implausible. Vows or decisions of lifelong sexual abstinence for the benefit of non-kin can be viewed as equivalent acts, in that reproductive "death" is likewise a psychological certainty.

Group selection theories, whether involving cultural-mediation or not, similarly do not appearto explain celibacy in the context of non-kin. However, because of the

continuing debates regardingtheir applicability (Wilson and Sober 1994) and the still 38 widely held position that culture renders evolved aspects of humanbehavior of little consequence (Caporael 1989; Lieberman1989; Tooby and Cosmides 1992), the reasons these theories are probably inapplicable to celibacy forthe benefit of non-kin require more detailed explanation.

First,with respect to non-mediated group selection, celibate vows often occur in contexts which appearto violate several of the conditions of group selection described by

Peres andHopp (1990). Furthermore, the general consensus among theoristsis that such conditions arelikely to have been so rare in humanevolutionary history that it is unlikely that group selection could engender generalized altruism (see, forexample, the many authors in commentaryto Wilson and Sober 1994 ). Thus, either groups arecompeting in the present, in which case Peres and Hopp's conditions apply, or one or more altruistic groups outcompeted other groups in the past andall present populations stem fromthem.

But if "selfish"strategies will eventually invade andsupplant altruisticones (Williams

1966), andgroup selection is apt to be a weak force at any rate (Hamilton1995: 191 ),

tendencies to be terminallyaltruistic toward non-kin, as well as remote kin, should not

survive.

A second important objection is that the tendency in cultural anthropologyto

accept categories of people as actual groups is misleading. As Palmer et al. (1997) argue,

human "groups"(bands, tribes,clans, etc.), rather than being "enduring bounded discrete

gatherings of people" (p.306), are so transientwith respect to individuals that they are

inappropriate to supporteither genetic or cultural group selection models (see also Kelly

1995:chpt.2). 39 However, even if the possibility of bounded groupsis granted,the degreeof relatedness within ancestral groups is another issue. The generally accepted model forall but very recent ( ca. 10,000 BP) groups is one of small, kin-based groups. With a likely mean of around 25 population size (see review of models in Kelly 1995:chpt.6) most members were likely to be close consanguineal or affinalrelatives. Therefore, inclusive fitness theory appears to be sufficientto explain behaviors that Wilson and Sober feel emerged through group selection. For example, they posit a scenario in which members of a village cooperate to build a stockade forthe benefitof the collective. But an inclination towards such a behavior makessense in termsof inclusive fitnessif all or most of the participantsare closely related.

Another exampleof a behavior which Wilson and Sober posit can be explained as a group-level adaptation is "drawing straws," or participationin a gameof chance which, forthe loser, will result in the performance of an altruistic act, oftenfor non-kin. Wilson and Sober believe that only generalized altruistictendencies will explain participationin such a game. However, it is far more likely that individuals assess the risk and benefitof a) not playing andthus sufferingrepercussions by other members of thegroup, b) playing but not getting the short straw,c) playing and getting the shortstraw, d) the nature and importance(in terms of their own survival) of the task they draw strawsfor, and e) the chances of surviving even if drawing the short straw. In real life (as opposed to lifeboat movies) there is plausibly a greatdeal of debate and conflict aroundsuch an "adaptation."

In fairness,Wilson and Sober admit that drawing strawsusually does not happen, and that 40 "evidently there are other social conventions that areeven better at promoting sacrificial behavior among nonrelatives" (1994:644).

With respect to culturally-mediated selection, similar points canbe made. Knauft

( 1991) describes simple hunting and gatheringgroups as consisting of approximately 3 0 individuals; it is hard to imagine that theyare not, for themost part, related affinallyor consanguineally. However,Knauft repeatedly presumes thereare relatives and non­ relatives in such groups. His examplesof non-kin associationsat this level, such as trading partners, are easily explained through reciprocity, and do not require even culturally-mediated group selection. He appears to believe that cooperation is altruism, in thesense that it should not be expected to be exhibited by individuals towardsnon-kin unless culturally-mediated group selection is involved. However, as Betzig (1991) points out, "If foodsharing or some other kind of cooperation helps keep sharersalive, helps them get mates, andhelps themraise children, then cooperation should be as 'natural' as the kinds of conflictsthat can,under different conditions, be a means to

reproduction ...There should, in short, be genes forcooperation as well asfor competition; bothshould be naturallyselected when they increase their bearers'

reproduction" (1991 :410). Cooperation, even amongnon-kin, is not the same as altruism,

especially terminalaltruism.

Most importantly, to suggest that culture, or symbolic communication, can drive

altruistic behavior in humansis insufficient. How this can take placeis thelogical

question, andthere is no reason to presuppose, as does Knauft,that evolution applies only

to general adaptations such as the evolution of symbolic communication. 41 Thus, theories of inclusive fitness,reciprocity, andgroup selection appear insufficientto explain the occurrenceof voluntarycelibacy in institutionalized settings.

However, induced altruism through kinship deceit provides a plausible explanation for how these behaviors can be maintained in non-kin settings. Johnson (1986, 1989;

Johnson et al. 1987) has suggested that altruismcan be elicited through socialization by the manipulation of the meansthrough which humans identifykin. This is because it is not kinship itself that humans recognize, but "environmentalcues that have typicallybeen highly correlatedwith kinship" (1987:158). As these are indirect cues, errors and manipulation canoccur. Johnson lists association, phenotypicsimilarity, and the use of kin terms as the cues most likely to be utilized by humans in kin recognition,and suggests that patrioticvolunteerism, risking one's life in combat, andaltruistic suicide areoften elicited through the manipulation of these cues.

Similarly, McGuire et al. (1994) discuss six ''traitsignaling-recognition systems" that have been selected for in humans. These systems facilitatethe transmission and encoding of information aroundindividual "identity, motives, values, andemotional states" with respect to potential altruism and reciprocity-related behavior (1994:301 ).

Three of these pertain specificallyto the identificationof kin: context (close proximity, e.g., parent-childrelationships); association (identificationthrough social learning, including kin termsand behavioral rules); and phenotypic matching or similarity.

Significantly, "[h]owothers arerecognized and the categories (kin, non-kin) to which they areassigned have important consequences. If kin arerecognized, one set of altruistic decision-making rules is likely to apply (invest in kin, do not expect immediate 42 payback). A differentset of rules is likely to apply to non-kin (invest cautiously and await a payback before investing further)"(McGuire et al. 1994:304). It is easy to see the benefits foran unrelated individual to be recognizedas kin by a potential altruist.

In small groups, where kin-relatedness is to be expected and there is little institutional control of individuals ( e.g., non-stratified societies), it is likely to be unnecessaryto induce altruism. But where groups of generally unrelated individualsare brought together in activities forwhich a willingnessto sacrifice oneselfis desirable, inducing andmaintaining altruismis effectiveand relatively inexpensive.

Balch ( 1985) has discussed the historical controlof reproduction, labor, and resources in non-kin organizations through abduction, enslavement, castration,and forced celibacy. Organizations (more properly, leaders of organizations)attempt to minimize the disruptive effectsof familial obligations by destroyingor preventing family attachmentsand attempting to substitute themselves as kin. Balch, too, refers to kinship recognitioncues such as association, familiarity, andthe use of kinship-evoking language andsymbolism as mechanismsto facilitatethis process.

Although his emphasis is on the forciblemanipulation of recruits, Balch's logic applies to organizations that rely on voluntary sacrifice, including vows of celibacy. The

line between forced and voluntarymembership in institutions can be a blurryone. For example,in the case of recruits who are delivered to institutions by their familiesat very earlyages, their opportunitiesto choose non-participationare likely to be minimal.

Nevertheless, the point is that attempts to replicate familial environments and relationships should be even more importantwhere enslavement or other examples of 43 brute forceare not an option. In such organizations, thenature of relations between members is likely to be more critical thanin involuntaryinstitutions, where the coercion maintains stability (Wynne 1988:39-40). In fact,where asymmetricalpower relationships anda lack of "liberal scruples" (Balch 1985 :316) arepresent, forcedaltruism has often occurred. Wheresensibilities have changed,less brutal meansof obtaining organizational loyalty have resulted (Salter 1995).

Balch's work also suggests thatthe EEA is a relevantfactor in thedeveloping

nature of non-kin altruistic relationships. We have lived in small kin-groups for most of

our history as a species, andmechanisms for recognition of genetic relatives presumably evolved in that context. Therefore,frequent interaction with non-kin is a novel --­

development, a consequence of rapid population growthand increased mobility. This

point is important forevaluating the potential effectiveness of kin cue manipulation

amonghumans. Where induced altruismevolves over time, counter-adaptationsto

prevent it should be expected to evolve as well (Trivers 1985). To returnto a non-human

example, as naturalselection exerts pressureon cuckoos to refinethe meansthrough

which they parasitize their hosts, the hosts develop increasingly sophisticatedways to

detect and combat strategiesto induce altruism. Even within species, this type of

evolutionary"arms race" can occur (Dawkins 1987: 178-193). In humans,for example,

Cosmides and Tooby (1992) provide support forthe possibility that aspects of evolved

cognitionfacilitate "che ater-detection" in social contracts. Sulloway (1996) shows how

"anevolutionary arms race played out within thefam ily" (p.xiv) results in siblings

reacting differently to radical ideas, even revolutionarymovements, based on theirbirth 44 order. However, in novel circumstances such as those described earlier,manipulation may take place without counter-adaptations being in place to combat it. As Pinker

(1997:42) points out, "[o]ur ancestralenvironment lacked the institutions that now entice us to nonadaptive choices, such as religious orders ...so until veryrecently there was never a selection pressure to resist the enticements." This suggests thatkinship cue manipulation might be highly effectivein eliciting altruisticbehavior among non-kin.

Kinship manipulation is also emphasized by van den Berghe ( 1981) in his cross­ cultural discussion of ethnicity. He findsthat "the ideology of nationalism is replete with the rhetoric of kinship" (1981: 15) and cites as examplesthe common use of close kin terminology to describe unrelated ethnics and "mystical notions of blood" said to be shared by nationals.

His basicargument with respect to ethnicity supports Balch and Johnson's claims: ethnic and racial sentiments areoften extensions of kinship sentiments, as "thereexists a general behavioral predisposition, in our species as in manyothers, to react favorably toward other organismsto the extent that these organismsare biologically related to the actor. The closer the relationship is, thestronger the preferential behavior" (van den

Berghe 1981:19). Association is usually used to identifyfellow ethnics, but when the group is too large "the unknownindividual claims membership through filiationwith knownmembers" (1981:28).

Also, vanden Berghe also suggests thathuman systems of inequality, especially in large, centralized states, "arealmost invariablybolstered by an ideology thatdisguises the parasitismof theruling class as either kinselection or reciprocity" (1981 :60). The 45 most common approach, paternalism,is typical of the preindustrialstate. In Swaziland, for example, the king intentionally marries wives fromall the clans,and gives away daughters to favoredchief s in other clans. He thus cements kin relations, both in actuality andsymbolically, with all members of his kingdom (1981 :70). Moreover, a slave is first andforemost " a person tom out of his network of kin selection" (1981 :115), and "[a]ll chattelslave regimes developed a legitimating ideology of patemalism ... a kind of big, unhappyfamily" (1981:131).

It thereforeseems likely that kinship deceit is universally associated with the maintenanceof celibacy in non-kin settings, even if other factors, such as genuine inclusive fitness and reciprocal altruism, also sometimes apply. In order to further examinethis hypothesis, though, a review of the literature on kin recognition, particularly withrespect to humans, is necessary.

Kinship recognitionmechanisms and human cognition

Relevantliterature on kin recognitionmechanisms (Alexander 1990; Hamilton

1964;Hepper 199la,b; Sherman and Holmes 1985; Wells 1987; Wilson 1987) appearsto support the notion of manipulated human altruism. The subject has been extensively researched(see review in Alexander1990) and, across species, "kin recognition of one kind or anotherhas been implicated in most kinds of social behavior" (Wilson 1987:9).

In humans, in addition to visual identificationat birth, mothers are soon capable of 46 identifyingnewborns through olfactoryand auditorycues (Porter 1991; Piontelli 1995). 4

There is mounting evidence that neonates, and even prenates, canrecognize their mothers through the same means(Hepper 1991b; Porter 1991). However, these kinship recognition abilities pertain primarily to the firstmonths of life. In later years, and for other relationships, much more indirect cues are utilized, and individual recognition is much less certain. Spatial distribution (if you're here, you're kin), association (familiar individuals, especially during development, are kin), and phenotypic matching (where a

"template" is innate or learnedand those who match it are kin)are the traditional mechanismsdescribed in the literature. 5

These kin recognition mechanisms can work in combination with each other

(Hepper 1991 b ), andappear to do so in non-human primates (Bernstein 1991). In humans, phenotypicmatching andassociation arethe most likely to apply (Wells 1987), as spatial distributionrequires the predictable distribution of kin(Sherman and Holmes

1985). The humanbrain appears particularlyendowed to discriminate amonghuman faces, which supportsthe importance of phenotypicsimilarity in kin recognition(Wilson

1987). In addition, humans may use mannerisms, habits, and speech patternsto help

identifyrelatives (Alexander 1990). Much of the literature on uniforms focuseson the

function they serve to differentiate members of a society (military versuscivilian, for

example), or between ranks within a group (e.g., Bush and London 1965; Joseph 1986;

4 Yet there is anecdotal evidence that "baby-switching" can successfullybe carriedout, undetected by mothers.

5 Additionally, direct genetic recognition without learningis theoretically possible but unlikely, particularly for humans (Wilson 1987). 47 Langer1965). However, much more obvious (and so perhaps less discussed) is the role of uniform clothing in maskingdifferentiation within a group. Thus, when clothing of members in a groupis identical, altruisticresponses to cues associated with phenotypic similarity may be triggered.

Some support forthe importanceof association is foundin studies of Israeli kibbutzim, where children reared together tend to avoid each other sexually (Talmon

1964 ), and in Taiwanese arrangedmarriages, where thepractice of rearingchildren together and forcingthem to marryoften results in sexual dissatisfaction (Wolf 1995).

Less direct evidence is available forother societies (Brown1991: 118-129; Wolf

1995:423-438; but see Scheidel 1996).

All humansalso clearlycategorize relationships through languageand other symbolic referents. As summarized by Daly et al. (1997), all societies exhibit ego­ centered kinship terminology based on parent-offspring relationships, anddistinguish between genders, generations, anddegree of relatedness. Further, in all societies kin termsare also "metaphorically extended ...for evocative andpropagandistic purposes"

(1997:287) to apply to non-relatives andeven abstractentities (e.g., "motherland,""Uncle

Sam"). In addition, kin relationships are oftencommunicated through a wide variety of insigniasand forms of adornment. Among the Kayapo, forexample, girls wear crocheted armand leg bandsto signifymembership in their immediate families (Turner1969).

Knowledge of ancestorsand the ability to tracedescent is also a cue to kinship; thus a

stranger is often accepted as kin if he or she canprovide the appropriate genealogy ( van den Berghe 1981). 48 The factthat kin terms do not always correspondto genetic relatedness hasled to vigorous debate between anthropologistsand biologists as to whether inclusive fitness theorycan apply to humans(see Alexander1979; Daly et al. 1997; Fox 1979; Sahlins

1976). Anthropologists have long observed anddiscussed the presence of fictivekinship in societies and its role in forgingand cementing alliances between unrelated (or only distantly related)members within and between groups (Keesing 1975). For some, the ubiquity of fictivekinship terminology and the variabilityin kinship systems indicate a lack of relationship between culturaland biological notions of kinship ( e.g., Sahlins

1976). However, individuals appearto be generally awareof the genetic relationships that underlie kin nomenclature (Alexander1979; vanden Berghe 1981). For example,

Chagnonfinds that Yanomamo males often manipulatekinship classificationsfor female kin to increase the number of potential mates (1979; 1988) and, regardlessof kinship terminology, favorcloser biological relatives in village fissioning (Chagnon 1981).

Heider (1976) notes that while New Guinea Dani children sometimes confusesocial and biological kinshipcategories, adults never do.

Further,namesaking (naminga child after oneselfor a close relative) is likely to

be an importantmeans through which a child is accepted into kinship networks (Gutman

1977). Naming a child afterthe father, particularlywhen there is some question as to paternity,may be a deliberate strategyon thepart of mothers to strengthenchild/father

bonds (Furstenberg andTalvitie 1980). Johnson et al. (1991) foundthat adopted children

aresignificantly more likely than natural children to be namedafter parents or relatives.

They suggest that naminga child in such a manner canreinforce parentalbehavior and 49 generally enhance relatedness by making the child "instantlymore similar, familiar, and hence, more likeable to potential caregivers"(1991 :368).

Because individuals learnkin termsat a very earlyage and in the context of those individuals who most closely interact with them, Johnson (1986) suggests that classical conditioning explains the power of these termsin eliciting altruism. In his view, kin terms are therefore a cultural extension of the association cue. However, kin terms may themselves be anaspect of evolved psychology. Universal linguistic categories pertaining to kinship (Daly et al. 1997) are potentially an aspect of the innate structure of language(Pinker and Bloom 1992). It is conceivable that selection has shaped adaptive responses to kin-related linguistic categories in much the sameway that selection has apparently instilled in humans a preference for certainnatural environments ( Oriansand

Heerwagen 1992). In either case, it is clear that kin terminology and related symbolism serve as powerfulindicators of relatedness.

In addition to association, phenotypic similarity, and kin symbolism, human development suggests two associated factorsrelevant to human kin recognition. Far from being "blankslates" who learn solely throughcultural transmission,humans appear to be biased toward learningin particulardirections, or domains, as a result of selective pressures encountered over the course of human evolution. Lumsden (1984:114) reviews a number of such domains, including colors, visual patterns,non-verbal cues, facial patterns,fear of strangerresponse, phobias, and others. Geary( 1995) differentiates between "biologically primary"and "biologically secondary"human abilities, the first easily acquired during development, the second only mastered slowly, with effort,and 50 usually through sustained instruction. Examplesof biologically primaryabilities include languageacquisition, habitat navigation, and basic mathematical abilities such as counting and dealing with small sets of items. Examplesof secondaryabilities include reading, geometry, andmore sophisticated mathematics.

In manycases, learningappears to involve sensitive periods, duringwhich learning at a particulardevelopmental stage is greatly facilitated. The most well­ understood example is first language acquisition, the facilityfor which appears to end roughly aroundpuberty (Hurford 1991 ). To illustrate, "young children learnabout seven new vocabularyitems a day, everyday, everyweek, everymonth, during the period from about 18 months to 6 years old; all of them, even the dullest, do so; theevidence that adults cannotperform like feats is quite good" (Marshall et al. 1984:692). This sensitivity to environmental cues during development (in the case of languageacquisition, exposure to words andforms in a particularlanguage), resulting in behavioral outcomes during adulthood, appearsto apply to a varietyof domains. Klaus et al. ( 1972; in Lumsden

1984) reportthat nonverbal cues picked up by newbornsfrom their mothers have long­ lasting effectson theirdeveloping relationship. Belskyet al. (1991) suggest thatchildren raised in stressful familialenvironments develop insecure parental bonds, experience early pubertal development and, as adults, characteristically formunstable pair bonds and limit their investmentin child-rearing. As Draper and Harpending (1988 :341) put it,

"Our view of learningis that humans have been selected to be differentially sensitive to certain cues in their immediate earlychildhood environment.. .I t is as if human young acquire early socialization with their antennaetuned to detect certain attributes in their environment." 51

With respect to forming relationships, then, earlysocial environments have a powerfuleff ect on later behavior (MacDonald 1988). This effect does not disappearat a particular age, but slowly stabilizes with time. Further, "the intensity of environmental stimulation canovercome declining plasticity" (MacDonald 1988: 135). This suggests that individuals aremost susceptible to kinship manipulationduring childhood, although it can occur, at least to some degree, at later ages. As Smith (1988) points out, however, children's use of kinship termsand kin-related behavior areunder-researched areas.

It also seems reasonable to suggest that new attachments areeasier to make if old ones do not persist to confound them. Attachment, or "a relationship with a discriminated person or persons," is presumed to have the function of protecting the attachedfrom physical andpsychological harm, and appearsto be a distinct, evolved motivational system (Bretherton 1985).

Certainly new, stable attachments can replace severed ones. Ainsworth (1977) suggests that an individual may make several attachmentsduring the course of development, andchildren separated fromtheir parentscan successfullyform substitute attachments with others who were once strangers. Bowlby found that Britishchildren separatedfrom their parentsduring World War II were able to form new, stable relationships with non-kin parental figures(in Cole and Cole 1989:228-229). Dontas et al. ( 1985) foundthat institutionally-reared infants can form bonds with new primary caregivers,and that children around 18 months of age can have multiple attachmentswith no apparentdifficulties. Sagi et al. (1985) foundthat kibbutz-rearedchildren 8 to 20 months old formattachments to other caregivers as well as their mothers. 52 Attachment theory is relevant to humans' entire life-spans (Goldberg 1991 :396), andthe attachment system clearlyoperates in older children (Bretherton 1985:12).

However, little researchhas been carried out in this area, and attachment transitionin general has not been systematically studied (Dontas et al. 1985: 146). Of course, attachment may not be related to kin recognitionand altruism, especially afterinfancy, but data suggest that separation from real kin may facilitatethe formationof artificial kinship ties.

Thus, there are threecues and two additional factorswhich may be expected to apply to kinship manipulationin humans. These are close association, phenotypic similarity,kin symbolism, young age, andseparation from real kin. Butcan people really be "fooled" into seeing non-kinas kin?

Researchfrom several areassupports the contention that they can. Deceit andits

identification arefundamental aspects of human relationships, and"entire institutionsin

human cultures arepredicated upon deception," including games, folklore, warfare,and

the socializationof children (Anderson1986:333; see also Cronk 1995; Mitchell and

Thompson 1986). The importance of deception in human interactions has oftenbeen

discussed by politicalphilosophers, historians, social psychologists, and anthropologists

(LaFreniere 1988).

In evolutionaryterms, the social environment is more likely to have driven the

evolution of intelligence thanthe non-human environment (Alexander 1990), and

manipulation, particularly with respectto sexuality, is a fundamental aspect of human

cognition(for a review, see Ridley 1993 :329-344). "We use our intellects not to solve 53 practical problems but to outwit each other. Deceiving people, detecting deceit, understanding people's motives, manipulating people -- these are what the intellect is used for. So what matters is not how clever and craftyyou are but how much more clever and craftyyou arethan other people" (Ridley 1993:33-34). Self-deception may be an importantfactor in manipulation as well: "According to [evolutionary] theory ...the practice of deception may over a period of time engender unconsciousness in the deceiver. The deceiver begins by deceiving one andends up deceiving two! {Trivers

1991, original emphasis; see also Krebsand Denton 1997).

Byrneand Whiten (1988, 1992) findthat tactical deception, involving "acts from the normalrepertoire of the agent, deployed such that another individual is likely to misinterpret what the acts signify, to the advantage of the agent" (1992:611), is widespread in primates, particularlyin the two chimpanzee species and in Papio baboons.

Most importantly,though, as discussed earlier, ·human cognition appearsto involve a varietyof evolved mechanisms through which the "practical problems of living" canbe solved, but which can lead to mistakesand manipulation (Flohr 1987: 195).

A good exampleof aninnate mechanism is language acquisition (Pinker 1994).

However, in the areasof sexual attraction, mate choice, habitat selection, parental reproductive strategies, social categorization,and prejudice, humans may also operate as much through evolved tendencies as through rational, cost/benefit calculations (for reviews, see Barkowet al. 1992; Logan and Qirko 1996; Wright 1994).

Humandecision-making also appears guided by "ratiomorphichypotheses" that, although usually effective, canlead to errors. For example, one common hypothesis leads 54 to the expectation that events occurring together arein factconnected; thus, "imagine you have visited Vienna three times and thatit has been raining throughout each stay. Now you areplanning a fourth visit, and you will think that it will probably be raining again.

This is a ratiomorphic conclusion -- rationally there is no reason to believe thatit rains all the time in Vienna" (Wuketits 1990:85). Othersuch hypotheses include the supposition that withincreasing confirmationof consecutive events, the second should result as a cause of thefirst, andthat phenomena sharing similar featureswill servethe same purpose.

We arenot always as logical and rational as we think, particularly in domains which have been crucial to our survival throughout evolutionaryhistory (Tooby and

Cosmides 1990). As the recognition of kin is clearlyone of thesedomains, it is not farfetched to expect evolved rules of thumb that can,particularly in novel environments, lead to errors andmanipulation. It is also importantto realize that complete fooling of humanswith respect to kin is not necessaryfor kin manipulation to take place. Evolved tendencies can operate in concert (andin conflict) with rational decision-making. The manipulation of kin cues might elicit behaviors even among individuals who know perfectly well who their kin areand are not, particularlyif reinforcedby conditioning and enculturation (Fialkowski 1990).

Researchmodel

The literature reviewed above suggests thathuman altruism among non-kin (or verydistantly related kin) can be facilitatedby inducement throughthe manipulationof 55 kinship recognition cues. Celibacy in institutionalized settings is an altruistic act for the primary benefit of non-kin. Because it is an act of terminal altruism (like altruistic suicide), reciprocal altruism theories are unlikely to apply. Inclusive fitnesstheory may well explain a desire on the part of families to remove members fromresource and reproductive pools through celibacy. This theorywill not, however, fully explain the maintenanceof celibacy on the part of individuals once they have been removed from the familial setting. In addition, institutions will often have a strong interest in controlling potentially nepotistic behavior on the partof members. Therefore, celibacy in non-kin settings can be expected to be maintained and reinforced, regardlessof proximate reasons forits choice, through the manipulation of kinship recognition cues.

Based on kin recognitionand related literature, several traitswhich are likely to lead to manipulated kinshiprecognition in institutions can be identified. Manipulators should:

a) Encourage close association which replicates naturalkin contexts (particularly parent/child andsibling relationships).

b) Encourage the use of false phenotypic matches (uniforms, emblems, hair styles, speech patterns,mannerisms, etc.) among members of the non-kin association.

c) Encourage the use of linguistic and other symbolic kin referents among members of the non-kin association.

In addition, manipulators should:

d) Preferyoung, impressionable recruits, and

e) Discourage association with actual kin. 56

The followingpredictions can thereforebe made:

1) Where volwitaryvows of lifelongcelibacy occur in the context of direct benefits to non-kin (even if there areindirect benefits to kin), the manipulationof kinship recognitioncues (as cited above) should occur as well.

2) Manipulationof kinship recognitioncues in institutions should correlatewith recruit-poolsize (i.e., increased non-kin interactions).

In order to attempt to ascertainthe quality and quantity of relevant data, preliminaryreviews of historical and cross-cultural ethnographic data were conducted.

The preliminaryreview of historical literature suggested that all or most of the traits predicted to be associated with kinship manipulation are likely to be present in a wide varietyof celibate organizationswhere thepool of recruits is primarilynon-kin based.

These organizationsinclude Greek Pythagoreans(Larson 1967); Essenes (Jones 1985;

Larson 1967); monastic orders in Buddhism(Dutt 1960, 1962; Parrinder 1980; Wei-hswi

Fu andWawrytko 1994), Christianity(Hillery 1992; Knowles 1963; Wynne 1988), and

Hinduism (Goergen 1974; Klostermaier 1989; Oman 1973); dervishgroups in Islamic

societies (Karamustafa 1994); Christian religious-militaryorders such as the Templars,

Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights (Buist-Thiele 1992; Nicholson 1993; Forey 1992);

andvarious Christianseparatist sects, such as the Shakers (Andrews 1963), Harmonists

(Kring 1973), the Skoptzy(Larsen 1971) andthe St. Nazianzcolony (Fogarty 1990). 57 This review suggests that the major religions, as well as some offshoots forwhich multiple sources ofreadily accessible, including first-hand,data exist (e.g., the Shakers) could be examinedin some detail with respect to predictions. Data forother groups( e.g., the Essenes) appeared to be insufficientto justifytheir inclusion in the present study.

The preliminaryreview of cross-cultural ethnographicdata consisted of examining societies listed in Murdock andWhite 's 1969 Standard Cross-CulturalSample

(SCCS) forwhich ethnographic data were available in the Humans Relations Area Files

(HRAF). All codes that pertainedto celibacy or sexual abstinence were utilized: Celibacy

(589), Asceticism (785), Holy Men (792), Priesthood (793), Sexuality (831), andGeneral

Sex Restrictions(834). In some cases, it was not clear whether researchers described sexual abstinence, marital abstinence, or both, or whether vows or decisions accompanied the behaviors; thus, any evidence of permanentmarital or sexual abstinence was examined.

Although Murdock and White rank the quality of the HRAF filesavailable for societies in their sample, these rankings were ignored due to the exploratorynature of the preliminaryreview. Additionally, no attempt was made to limit investigation to the authorities recommended by Murdock andWhite or to the temporal and geographic settings they specify. Any mention of sexual or maritalabstinence in a societal filewas investigated to attemptto determinethe context in which it occurred, and if all or most of the traits predicted to be associated with kinship manipulation were present.

Of the 118 societal filesavailable, fivemade no mention of celibacy or abstinence. Ninety-three filesdescribed celibacy or abstinence as nonexistent, rare, 58 temporary( as in the case of celibacy for the widowed, or abstinence in preparationfor hunting), or due to the unavailability of a mate foreconomic or social reasons( for example, in some polygynous societies, men who wish to marry maybe unable to do so because they lack the necessaryresources with which to compete for brides; see Hartung

1997). In the greatmajority of these cases, HRAFdescribed the societal view of celibacy asnegative, rangingfrom the unfortunateto the abnormal. Thus, in these groups, voluntarylifelong celibacy appears to occur only in rareand unusual cases.

The remaining 20 societal filesdescribed some formof patternedlifelong celibacy. Theseare: (22) Barabara, (48) Gheg, (51) Irish, (52) Lapps, (54) Russians,(66)

KhalkaMong ols, (68) Lepcha, (71) Burmese, (73) Vietnamese, (75) Khmer, (82) Negri

Sembilan, (100) Tikopia, (114) Chinese, (115) Manchu, (116) Koreans,(153) Aztec,

(160) Haitians,(171) Inca, (172) Aymara,(184) Mapuche.

Celibacy in fourof these cases appeared to be kin-based (Irish, Lapps, Tikopia, andMapuche ). In 13 of the r�mainingsocieties celibacy wasapparently related to the

presence of Christianand Buddhist monastic systems ( and, in the case of the Gheg of

Albania, to dervishgroups). Two others are the Aztecand Inca, where additional sources

suggest the predictedpattern applies (respectively, Berdan1982; Sahagun 1932; andde la

Vega 1961).

Only one of the 118 societiesexamined appeared to maintainpatterned permanent

abstinence in non-kin settingswithout the expected kinship manipulation traits. Dieterlen

( 1951) worked with the Bambara of centralMali in the 1940s anddescribes Somas,or

religious diviners, whocould not marry. However, little additionalinf ormationis 59 available in the HRAF,and inf ormantsinterviewed by Brett-Smith (1994) describe the position of Soma as passed on fromfather to son, which obviously calls the earlier claim of celibacy into question.

Based on these preliminary:findings, the likelihood of obtaining sufficient data to

test predictions was judged to be reasonable, and a decision was made to expand the

cross-cultural studyin the followingways:

1. include all societies in the SCCS;

2. restrict datato geographical and temporal settings specified in the SCCS;

3. forsocieties with no HRAF files, or forfiles judged inadequate by Murdock andWhite, consult authorities recommended in the secs directly ( as well as additional sources, if relevant);

4. Consult primarysources forall societies where evidence of permanent

abstinence was found.

A more detailed description of the methodology forthe cross-cultural study

followsa description of celibacy in Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, andother religious

organizations. 60 CHAPTER 4

HISTORICAL DATA

Christianity

Since its earlyhistory, the ChristianChurch has been characterized by one form or

another of voluntary, yet enforced, vows of sexual abstinence. The firstwritten law on

abstinence for all priests appearsto have been issued by the Council of Elvira in 305 AD

(Cholij 1989; de Valk 1990). RomanCatholic priests are required to observe a "total and

irrevocable" commitment to sexual abstinence (Napier 1989). In the EasternChurch,

priests canbe married beforeordination, but must swearabstinence as a prerequisite to

clerical duty. Bishops and those who take monastic vows must be chaste.

The debate over marriage for priests which characterizesthe Churchtoday

(Rosetti 1994) occurred at least twice in its earlyhistory, but theGregorian reform in the

eleventh centuryand the Council of Trent in 1563 reaffirmed the commitmentto the ideal

of celibacy. Restatements of this position have periodically continued to the present ( de

Valk 1990). Therefore, in spite of a great deal of historical variability in both de fa cto

· and dejure celibacy (Betzig 1995), largenumbers ofbishops, priests, monks and nuns

have takenand maintained vows of celibacy in the ChristianChurch.

St. Anthony was an influential3rd century Christianrenunciant who gave up his

(not inconsiderable) property and begana lifeof self-denial. However, "withina fe w

yearsand quite contraryto his purposes, the world, as it were, came out to him" (Timko

1990:108). Soon he had a largenumber of disciples. Linge (1990:39) sees this as the 61 point of departureof Christianity from Judaism andIslam, in that here began a disciplined and permanent patternof asceticism. The initial impulse by earlyrenunciants to withdraw soon became"do mesticated," and those who fled the material world organized in communities which were structured much like the cities they abandoned, with specialized tasks andeven the creation of surplusfor sale (Geary1990:194).

The New Testament gives as instructionsfor an ascetic life: " ...hating one's father and mother, forsakingone's family, becoming a eunuch forthe kingdom of God and renouncing all possessions ..." (in Linge 1990:44). Wanderingcharismatics who followedthese instructionsspread the gospel and organized householder Christianity. By the early 2nd century, this wandering approach was viewed with suspicion and replaced with settled churches andclergy. By the 4th century, when Christianitybecame the official religion of Roman society, there was an even greaterpush to controlit through organization. So "the virtually simultaneous appearanceof Christianempire and cenobitic monasticism is ...no accident" (Linge 1990:46).

While the destructionof sexual and material desires is a fundamentalprerequisite to asceticism (Linge 1990:48), it is also clearthat one of the major goals of demanding celibacy fron;imembers has been to benefit the organizationand its leaders (including supernaturalfigures), thus rendering it an altruistic act. Saint Paul is oftenquoted with reference to the apostolic origins of Christian celibacy: "The unmarried man is busy with the Lord's affairs, concernedwith pleasing the Lord; but the marriedman is busy with this world's demandsand occupied with pleasing his wife" (in Cholij 1989:201). This 62 passage is an invitation to devote one's life to "immediate serviceof the Church and to avoid the more immediate concernsof familylife" (Cholij 1989:201 ).

CardinalStickler reviewed explicit motives forcelibacy in the earlyChurch. In addition to purifying the body and soul, removing the "chosen" fromthe populace ( as priests must always be engaged in the ministry), and promoting general temperance,

Stickler foundthat celibacy encourages organizational loyalty: "As sacred ministers, furthermore,they must be completely free from anyother occupation or stable commitment, especially that of a family of their own, in order to be able to dedicate themselves completely to the sacred ministryin its variousexigencies and obligations.

To servethe People of God it is necessaryto belong exclusively to God... " (Stickler 1972, in de Valk 1990:4).

This servicewas envisioned in material as well as spiritual terms. The early decrees were in largepart designedto prevent priests fromdiverting Church resources to their families (Balch 1985; Lea 1932). TheChurc h's desire to control wealth was often cited as a reason forits insistence on celibacy, especially by earlyProtestant reformers

(Ozment1972). Even presumably asceticmonasteries were, in a sense, business ventures. Manycontrolled greatwealth (Dickinson 1961), demanded additional produce and rent fromtheir tenants (Knowles 1963), and elicited contributionsfrom pilgrims who cameto view holy relics (Hunt 1971 ). Administration of these resources was oftenin the hands of individual monks.

That it proved difficultto prevent individuals fromutilizing organizationsfor their ownends is illustratedby the number of abbots and monks who were "richer ...than 63 bishops" in 11th and 12th centuryEurope (Joannelinus, in Leclerq 1971:222). The appointmentof abbots was frequentlypolitical. In England during the middle ages, for example, such appointmentswere under royal control, and were often usedas a reward forpersonal or political services. Abbots, whose power within the monastery was absolute, oftenlived apart from othermembers of the order, with personal servantsand employees (Knowles 1963).

There were many opportunities for members, particularlyhigher-level members, to provide material benefitto relatives, and thus continual tension between attempts to outlaw kinship and the desires of individuals to promote it. "Kinship fightsback" says

Fox (1993:183), when describing the nepotism which arosein the middle ages: "By instituting celibacy,the church outlawed kinship fromits own ranks (theoretically)... even if the term 'nepotism' had to be invented later to cover thereproductive proclivities of various ecclesiastical dignitaries.. . " This, rather than undermining the theory explored here, reminds of the impetus behindmani pulating individuals to conform to organizationalexpectations.

With both the practice of celibacy andthe benefits to the Church of its members' compliance having been established, manipulation of kin recognitioncues is predicted to be present as well. This appearsto be the case, particularlyin monastic orders. Although there is some variability amongorders over time, the generalpattern has consisted of immature recruits, averaging fourteento fifteenyears of age (and often much younger), who are separatedfrom relatives to live in nearor total isolation with other recruits and members, with whom they shareroutine andintense experiences. Orders are 64 characterized by uniformclothing, hairstyles andaccouterments that areused even where thereis no contact with outsiders andsocial identificationis not an issue. Behavior is similarlyuniform, including, forexample, vows of silence or constantprayer in both individual and group settings (Timko 1990). Finally, the use of kin terms and other symbols of kinship to describe each other andauth ority figurespermeates all aspects of daily life(Wynne 1988). As one example,the "Our Father" was "universally regardedas the model prayer" (Timko 1990:102).

Thispattern of kin cue manipulation canbe illustratedby theEuropean monasteries of the centralmiddle ages (900-1200), epitomized by Cluny,which was the most influentialmonastery of a stronglyreligious age (Brooke 1974; Hunt 1971).

Recruits, separatedfrom real kinupon entering themonastery, were ofteninfants whose parents "dedicated" themto lifelongservice (Knowles 1963). Initiallythey were stripped of their clothesand dressed in novice habits. No boy was allowed to be alone, or even with monks, but only in the company ofother initiates andthe "master" who oversaw them. At age fifteen( and thus, often,after many years of initiation), boys could be admitted as novices. At this point individuals who wished to join themonastery from the outside world could join initiates in being shaven, stripped, and uniformlyattired. Again overseen by masters, novices spent most of their time learning therules of appropriate behavior. At the end of this learningperiod, usually a year, theypetitioned to enter the order, and,if accepted, took their formal vows. They received their robes, cowls, capes, and other clothes,all made of black wool. Members were clean-shavenand wore identical ''tonsure" hairstyles. Thenew "brothers" were continually followed''to see that 65 their conduct was in every detail in accordancewith the usages of Cluny" (Evans

1968:49). Abbots were "fathers"(in fact, the original derivation of the monastic term).

Kin terms were similarlyapplied to abstract entities ("Mother Church,""Our Holy

Father"), and occurred frequentlyin the prayers and music that were a daily part of monastic life. Nothing could be called "mine" by a member except for his mother and father- everything else was "ours."

Militarizedmonastic orders created to fightin theCrusades, such as the

Hospitallers andTeutonic Knights, also conformto thepattern as described above

(Seward1972). Perhaps the best known exampleare the Templars, formed around 1119

AD andabolished in 1310 (Barber1994). During the13th century they numbered around

7000 knights and priests, as well as manymore attending members. The institution was extremelywealthy, thanksprimarily to a complex system of gifts anddonations, and built

870 castles andother houses throughoutEurope. These provided forceswhich foughtin

Palestine, Cyprus, Syria, andIberia. As the Templarsneeded to continually attract members and donations to remainviable, they constructedelaborate public churches where precious relics were displayed, serving as magnets to draw pilgrimsand potential recruits.

Individual Templars, however, pledgedcelibacy, poverty,and obedience, and submitted to a "rigorous monastic rule" (Barber1994:193). They were not permitted to will away their possessi

While nunneries were less common historically andtheir practices are less well­ documented, thegeneral patternof kin cue manipulation applies to female recruits as well. There were manynunneries in Britain in the middle ages ( 1000-1300), forthe most part sponsored by the royal family or founded by other aristocrats(many of them women).

Members were usually seen as lower in statusthan male ascetics, but they followedthe

Rule of Saint Benedict or that of Saint Augustine, andgenerally lived in even greater

isolation thantheir male counterparts(Burton 1994:chpt.5).

An examplefrom modern times shows that the historical association in

Christianity of sexual asceticism with institutionalkin cue manipulation remains. Hillery

(1992), utilizing ethnographictechniques, researchedAmerican Trappist-Cisterian abbeys

andmonasteries in the 1970s and1980s. He foundthat candidateswere usuallyyoung

men who remained in the monasteryfor four to six weeks and, if accepted, remained as

postulantsfor an additional six weeks to six months. They then took temporaryvows and

were novices fortwo to fiveyears. A novice master (or, in one case,a teamof the abbot

andthree monks) instructedthe novices until they took their permanentvows. Monks

had only limited contact withthe outside world. Both novi�es andmonks or nuns wore

distinctive uniforms. Although most members had some contact with their families, ''the

biosocial familyis absent from thecommunal organization in the monastery[ and] certain 67 institutions must be substituted." Kinship models (including the terms"father,"

"brother," and"sister") were anintegral part of the monasteries' social structure.

Moorhouse (1969) describes historic and modemChristian asceticism in great detail, and notes that manydifferent approaches were taken by various groups. In his view, 20th century Christian monasticlif e "has only fourcommon denominators, andthey are poverty, obedience, chastity and prayer. Therest is infinitevariety" (p.86). However, a reading of his work suggests anothercommon denominator. With ve:ryfew exceptions, the hundredsof groups Moorhouse describes conform as well to the institutionalized practices of kincue manipulationas described above.

Buddhism

The organizationof followersof the Buddha who renounced their household lives andbecame alms-seeking wanderersis knownas the Sangha. They were initially in the traditionof the Hindu Saman� or sects of wanderingascetics who renouncedfamilial and societal ties andgathered yearlyduring the monsoon season. However, the Sangha soon developed settledmonastic communities, and "a collective lifewhich found active expressionin institutions, customs, and practices of a congregationalnature" (Dutt

1962:54). By 300 BC, or approximately two centuries afterthe Buddha's death, there were manysuch communities servingvillages throughout India. By 800 AD the small monasterieswere generally abandoned in favorof large,wealthy monastic centers. These becameeasy prey forTurkish Muslims who invaded India in the 11th and 12th centuries, and Buddhism there generally died out about this time, although it had been in decline for 68 several centuriesfor reasons not well understood (Dutt1962). The newly-homeless monks andnuns fledto otherBuddhist areas, primarilyTibet, but Buddhist ideas and traveling monks had already spread to China, Burma,Sri Lanka,and theNear East.

Since its beginnings as aninstitution, Buddhist monasticism has actively sought recruits and depended on patronage·and popular supportfor its survival. The resources it accumulatedallowed monasteries to become verywealthy, so much so thatby the 7th century AD, a Chinese pilgrimvisiting Indian monasteries found it "unseemly fora monasteryto have too great wealth, granaries full of rotten com, many servants, male and female, money and treasures hoarded without use in the Treasury" (in Dutt 1964:162).

The Pratimoks� or the written code of behavior forBuddhist monks andnuns, is fundamentalto both Indian Buddhism and the formssubsequently exported to other parts of the world (Y amagiwa 1994). The Pratimoksa describes various levels of proscriptions and one of the most importantoffenses, characterizedas a "defeat," is sexual behavior.

Any voluntaryact of sexual intercourse with males, females, eunuchs, hermaphrodites,or

animals calls for expulsion fromthe group. Intentional masturbation, physical contact with members of the opposite sex, the speaking of lewd words while "affected by desire," and serving as a go-between forothers' sexual activities require a formal meeting of the

Order fordiscussion and judgment(Homer 1982a).

By the 4th century manyBuddhist branchesadded additional precepts andin some

cases, as in the Tendai school of Japan, supplantedthe Pratimoksa itself (Tsomo 1994).

However, voluntarycelibacy has remained a necessary,if in some cases only ideal,

component of monastic behavioral codes throughout the Buddhist world. 69 The initial reasons forcelibacy appearto be linked to a general separationfrom all temptations which candistract from the path to enlightenment. The Buddha said "the household lifeis fullof hindrances,a path forthe dust of passion" (in Parrinder1980: 43).

Closely linked is the idea of impurity that resides in carnallust. However, complete isolation from society was not a goal, as it was in Christianmonasticism, and"a cordial association" between monks andlay society, particularly on holy day celebrations, was maintained (Dutt 1962:26). Lay society received spiritual guidancefrom monks andin turnprovided the resources forbuilding monasteries andfor the monks' subsistence through patronage, land-grants, andcontinuous small gifts. Particularly wealthy patrons provided the resources forthe more ambitiousand even opulent monasteries which characterizedIndian Buddhism in later centuries.

Since the beginning of the Sangh�Buddhist monks have worndistinctive robes in a fashionwhich separatedwearers from both laity andmembers of other religious groups.

There aremany rules as to their proper wear: three robes are required, aninner robe held witha stripof cloth bound in a distinctive mannerand an upper robe, wornwhen monks are in residence, which covers neck to ankle,one shoulder bare. Whengoing out, an outer robe or cloak must be worn. Other cloth garmentsare permissible for the rains but arespec ifically proscribed as to measure and wear. Robes areideally made in patchwork style, with materials provided by laity in strict ceremonial fashion, andcut, sewn, and dyed by the monksthemselves. Only six kinds of materials, with six respective typesof thread, are permissible, andyellow is the traditionalcolor. Robes arethe propertyof specificorders. One reason forthe attention given to clothingis that it servedto 70 differentiate members from naked asceticsand from the laity(Homer 1982b:2-3, 47, n2,3). Hopper states that "the yellow robes of the Bhikkhu [monks] are comparableto the western'habit,' the frock andcowl" (1982a:xlviii). The best evidence of uniformityin clothing lies inthe factthat "disfigurement" of robes by means of a small darkdot is necessaryto make them individually identifiable. Penalties apply to monks who wear other members' robes or fail to marktheirs appropriately (Homer 1982b:407).

Manyproscriptions apply to the use of begging bowls as well. Monksmay have one bowl only, which is assigned communally. Only iron and clay bowls may be used, and there are three specific sizes. There are rules pertaining to the proper mendingof bowls and the avoidanceof "inferior" bowls. As withclothing, the importanceof regulating the appearance ofbowls appearsto be related to distinguishing the Sangha fromother groups, especially fromsects which "go about for alms-food (to be put) into their hands ..." (Homer 1982b:113-115, 119).

In addition, Buddhist monks traditionallyshave their heads on the eve of each holy day ( or roughlyfour times a month). Throughoutthe volumes of the Book of the

Discipline there are many references to individuals who, " ...having cut offhair and beard, having put on theyellow robes, have gone forthfrom home intohome lessness." (Homer

1983:27, 239,261).

"Going forth,"or becoming a novice, occurs at roughly the age of fifteen, and ordination, or finaladmission, is prohibited beforeage twenty. Those to be ordained must possess bowls androbes beforeadmission is granted. There is usually an extended period of time forindoctrination beforeand between the two stages. Initiates renounce 71 kin ties, take a new, shared name, and performwork in service of higher-rankingmonks and the community.

Thestrength of this traditionalpattern can be illustrated by means of Yalman's

(1962) description of the Buddhist Tapasa group in Ceylon. The Tapasaclaim to be returning to the original teachings of the Buddha by truly renouncingthe world, in contrast towhat they view asthe comfortable, even wealthy lifeof ordinaryBuddhist monks andpriests. However, they too livecommunally and uniformlywear soiled brown robes. Although they live in a remote cluster of caves, they have a well-organizedlaity which supports their existence, and arethemselves as rigidly ranked as temple-dwelling monks. Their novices are initiated in almostthe samefa shion as traditional monks, including the renunciation of kin ties andthe adoption of new names, andperform all the menial tasks requiredin the community. Thus the samepattern applies, even to ascetics rebelling against the traditional asceticpattern.

Yalman's observations regarding the typical Buddhist patternin Ceylon match those seen forother Buddhist areas. As he notes, " ...it is kinship, with the attendant troublesbetween kinsmen, the difficultieswhich beset the family,and the uncertaintyof making a living, which is alwaysemphasized in the religious utterancesof the priests"

(Yalman 1962:325). Separationfrom kin is therefore a veryimportant componentof the pattern. In part,this is because the only legitimate way to surpasscaste and kinship and move to higher statusis to abandonone's natal family through the priesthood. Families thereforetypically benefitvery little, in material terms,from having members enter

Buddhist institutions. Usually young boys aregiven to the church by families which, 72 although earningreligious merit forthe act, do not receive greater status or resources.

Giving up a child does "reduce the number of mouths to feedin the family" (Y alman

1962:326) but, as has previously been discussed, thisdoes not sufficientlyexplain the maintenanceof lifelongcelibacy.

Spiro's (1970; see also Pfanner1966) description of Buddhist monastic life in

Burmain the 1960s shows that the general patterndescribed in the Book of the Discipline

continues to apply. Celibacy is reportedly rigidly adheredto. While ordination occurs

afterthe age of twenty, novicesmust be eight yearsold, and"small novices" canenter the

institution even earlier. Novices must continuously conformto precepts, including those

pertainingto sexuality. Their ordination involves vows of poverty,chastity, and

homelessness, and the candidate "kneels in frontof the assembled monks, head and

eyebrows shaven, dressed in the yellow robe" which he wore even as a small novice. The

candidate,who is now at least twentyyears of age, attests to being free,solvent, andof

sound mind andbody. In addition, he brings to ordination his begging bowl androbes, as

well as the consentof his family. At this point he "dies a civil death," and divests himself

of all his possessions and rights to inheritable resources (Spiro 1970:291).

Spiro describes two categories of propertyin Buddhism monasticism. The first is

corporate,and all belongs to the order. However, personal property, made up of gifts

given to individual monks (land,money, andsometimes even monasteries themselves),

also belong to the order upon thedeath or departureof the individual, andcannot be

transferred to laity. Bunnag (1973:103), who studied 15 monasteries in central Thailand,

reports the samecorporate own ership of resources, extending even to the smallest 73 personal gifts, which are pooled whenever possible (see also Ingersoll 1966). Separation from kinand lay society is accomplishednot only by residence in a monasterybut "by diacritical features of dress and personal appearance... etiquette anddeportment" (Bunnag

1973:34). The majority of monks, at least in Burma, Thailand, and China, come fromthe ranks of the most economically and socially deprived, and often do not have strong family ties to begin with (Spiro 1970:325; Bunnag 1973:1).

The importanceof institutional living is evidenced by the factthat the few remaining followers of mendicantways are viewedwith suspicion by both monastery monks and laityin general. Monks do not visit the nearby villages except to carryout

specificreligious duties. Whilethey may travel, they must do so onlywhen engaged in a

"serious" purpose. They must carry no money,av oid traveling alone with a woman, and

not be outside the walls of a monastery aftersunset. However, monks do sometimes

travelto monasteries neartheir home villages to renew relations with kin andfriends.

The decision to join is usually made at an early age. In Spiro's (admittedly small)

sample,50 % decided to join between the ages of twelve to fifteen,and 25% between the

ages of sixteen to twenty. Also, "[i]t is extremelyunlikely foran adult to become a monk

if he has never had theexperience of living in a monasteryduring hisearly,

impressionable years." (Spiro 1970:328).

Monks are known to themselves andothers as "Sons of the Buddha." In addition,

"it is no accident ...that the parentalimage is explicitly andespecially evoked in the

monk-sponsor dyad" (Spiro 1970:343). Each novice obtains a lay sponsor before 74 ordination. This sponsor pays forordination andfor the monk's subsequent needs as much as possible. The sponsor is called "my father" or "my mother" by the monk.

Spiro describes both the practice of celibacy andits material benefitsto orders, as well as the predicted patternof kin cue manipulation. Inaddition, he highlights a seeming contradiction: except with respect to sexuality, "the standard of living of the average members of the Order is surpassedonly by that of the wealthiest laymen" (Spiro

1970:310). Monks eat well, dress well, and performno work other thantheir own spiritual endeavors except forinstruction of novices and, in village settings,of schoolchildren. Even the collection of alms, highly organizedand a far cryfrom the

symbolism of the begging bowl, is usually conducted by novices. In addition, members of the laity arecontinuously preparing meals that they personally deliver to the monks, and in some cases specificfamilies attend to individual monks' needs on a rotating basis.

Thus, "although formally recruitment to the Order meansrenunciation of the world and

acceptance of an ascetic regime, life in a Burmesemonastery is, paradoxically, a life of material abundance -- even, as comparedto thelif e of the average layman, luxury" (Spiro

1970:308).

InThailand, since the giving of material aid brings merit, the most significant

merit-making activity forthe laity is to sponsor ritual ceremonies at the variousimportant

stages of kin or importantindividuals' lives, including birth, marriage, cremation, and the

ordination of kin. While social and political ties amonglaity arereinforced through these

ceremonies, monks benefitgreatly from the meals andgifts they receive. Inaddition, many of the ceremonies arefor their ordination or promotion, andthus fortheir direct 75 benefit. These ceremonies are numerous: while religious giving is possible at anytime, it is mandatory"seven days afterthe death of a relative, upon embarkingon anylarge venture, andafter the success of any venture" (Nash 1963 :292). "The contributions [by laity] are so numerous, so frequent, andso varied in size and content ( cash, food, clothing, utensils, or labor) that it is verydifficult to determinehow much of its income a familymay contributein a year"(Ingersoll 1966:66). Charitablefunds are set up to help providefor monks' needs, and small giftsare received everytime a ceremony is performed.

In sum, "Buddhism ... diverts a good part of the individual and communal wealth in the channelsof religious expenditure" (Nash 1963:294). The "Middle Way" between asceticism and wordly living described by the Buddha appears to lean heavily towards the temptations of the flesh. Spiro's explanation is that, while the laity provides the resources, it is the lay person who needs the monk: "forit is primarily by offeringdana -­ food, robes, housing, andso on -- to the monk that the layman acquires the merit necessary forhis salvation" (Spiro 1970:287).

Nash ( 1963) makes some relevant additional points. Villagers, even if monks, usually know littleof scriptureand rules, except that monks must be celibate, beg for their livelihood, live in monasteries, only possess the eight necessities, not eat at midday, andspend their time in religious pursuits. Monks do take instruction to the young in monastic schools very seriously, and they do reinforce merit-giving among the laity, but little else. And "[a]sk a Burmanwhy he gives to a monk, why he performsany religious act, and his reply is forthe kutho [merit] involved." (1963:286). This pared-down 76 understanding of Buddhism illuminates the importancein day-to-day monastic lifeof generating a livelihood fromlaity, sharingof resources within the organization,and recruitment of the young.

However, it is important to note that the only proscription that remains in force among monks is sexual abstinence. Whatever other motivations may be involved, the

Buddhist monastery is anextremely efficient resource-acquiring institution. Celibacy, by limiting potential conflictsof interest of monks with respect to their close kin, servesto keep those resources within the institutional "family." Phenotypic similarity,avoidance of contact with non-members, the earlyage of recruits, andthe use of kin symbolism all help mold members' behavior in this crucial respect.

The situation with respect to women celibates is somewhat different. Wawrytko

(1994) suggests that the opportunityto become liberated from lives of drudgery and inferior status by becoming nuns must have been a "powerful attraction" to Indianwomen in earlyBuddhism. Nuns, however, although conformingto the general pattern outlined above, are not equivalent in status to male ascetics, but appearto fall somewhere between laity andmonks (Hopper 1982a; Spiro 1970). Traditionally,women entering the

Buddhist religious community were subject to harsherdiscipline, and were ordained first by a group of nuns andthen a group of priests who ultimately controlledthem (Auboyer

1965). 77 Hinduism

Hinduism, although characterizedby scriptures, beliefs, and practices generally held in common, encompasses a significantnwnber ofbranches andsub-branches, their

analysiscomplicated by the great nwnber ofcastes andsub-castes with which they, at

leasttraditionally, have been associated (Sanna 1953). A detailed examinationof this

complexity is well beyond the scope of this work, but the relationship between celibacy

and thekinship manipulation modelin Hinduism canbe discussed andillustrated.

Three of thefour stages of theideal lifein Hinduism are characterized by celibacy

(Goergen 1974). In the first,the young student (eight to twelve yearsold) moves in with

his teacher, or gym, forat least 12 yearsof discipline and celibacy. The name of this

stage, bramacarya, is Sanskrit for celibacy. Thesecond stage is characterized by an active

social life,including marriageand family, where sexual activity and the pursuit of

descendants is required (Elder 1990). Whilemost remain "householders" forlife, a few

move on to the third stage and live as hermits, removed from social life. Spouses may

enter this stage together, but they are to live as celibates. Thefourth stage involves

complete isolation andmeditation.

The stage of student traditionallyrequires that initiates stay with the teachers,

along with other students, firstin secluded hermitages( often caves) andlater in "youth­

trainingcenters" (Elder 1990:29). Total obedience, arduous physical labor andscholastic

studies, andbegging to feed boththemselves and theirteachers are demanded. Students

wear distinctive clothing thatmarks their status. Althoughthey canopt to move between

gurus to find the best teacher, at least12 years are spent in total service,and students in 78 their thirties are not rare. The Brahmanuniversities, largecenters of learningwhich are also anoption forstudents of the Brahmancaste, aresimilarly structured (Auboyer 1965).

This traditional pattern, with a fewmodifications, remains in modem times.

Students oftenlive in their teacher's house, usually with other students, fora period of manyyears. A student is expected "to apply himself diligently to his studies, to live a celibate life, and to honor his teachers as he would his parents" (Dandekar 1953:137). In addition, he will ideally live frombegging, although kin often provide assistance.

Thus, although celibacy required in this stage is temporary,it is nonetheless long­ lasting. Moreover, it occurs during a period when a male's sexual drive is at its peak.

Manyelements of the kinship manipulationmodel explored here areseen with respect to celibacy for Hindu students.

Some Hindus skip the householder stage entirely andbecome monks or nuns, maintainingthe celibacy of their earlyyears. An important condition underlying this choice is that "aspirantsshould taketo it beforethey have tasted sex in ordinarycourse andsettled downas marriedmen andwomen" (Ghurye 1964:21; emphasis added). Such analternative is mentioned in sacred texts as earlyas 900 BC. However, the firstclear evidence of sectarian,settled ascetics appearedaround 400-500AD, andby the 7th century distinguishable brancheswith distinctive clothing andpractices were described by foreign visitors. The first Hindu monasteries, which arosearound 788-820 AD, are traced to the influenceof anascetic namedSankaracarya (Ghurye 1964).

Sankaracarya, following the model ofBudhhist andJain monasteries, established membership rules, initiation vows andrituals, andadminis trative structures still in use 79 today (Ghurye 1964; Elder 1990). His goal was to provide "freedomfrom the bother of wandering" (Ghurye 1964:85), and orders were to rely upon lay communities' contributionsfor survival. He organized ascetics into ten orders, each markedby a suffix added to all members' names. Soon a class of younger attendants was formed to help provide forelder ascetics and to physically provide forthe monasteries themselves. Each center was originally assigned a territory from which to draw resources and recruits. Not surprisingly, competition among ascetic groupssoon followed, with concomitant attention to in-groupidentification through clothing, language (e.g. greetingformulas), initiation rituals and other practices. This emphasison markers denoting membership continues today. For example,novices among the Samnyasis(Siva followers)are told to let themselves be "taught," not by the particulardoctrines or even by their masters, but by their distinctive membership badges: their yellow robes, the removal of their top-lock, etc. (Ghurye 1964:93).

Some monasteries becameso rich that "their management and atmosphereis not verydissimilar to that of a state" (Ghurye 1964:97), andcompetition among these organizationsquickly becamefierce. Groups formed military sub-divisions (Nagas)

which hired out as mercenariesor, more commonly, foughteach other for territory and

status. Concerning the latter, conflictfrequently arose over the order in which different monasticbranches should advanceduring a processional. The Nagas also oftenbecome

verywealthy. For example, in their temple/trainingcenters, or akhadas:

"Honorific giftsbrought by lay followersof the sect areonly one of the sources of income forthe akhada. Other sourcesof income areformed by 'inam'lands and 80 buildings owned by the akhada. The abbot, more oftenthan not, carrieson a successfulbusiness in local banking. A Naga ascetic on his becoming a Naga is expected to go on a pilgrimage andbring back for hisakhada all giftsthat he collects" (Ghurye1964: 185).

K.lostermaier( 1972) estimated there were between 8 and 15 million "professional religious" individualsin India. While some are not formally associatedwith specific religious orders, all apparently "don the religious garb"(p.329). Specific orders number at least 300, of which the majority require celibacy, andmany regularly employthe manipulation of kinship recognition cues. Novices are usually youngand separatedfrom family. Initiation commonly involves a ritual rebirthby strippingthe novice of ordinary clothes and replacing them,for boys, with a waistcloth, staff, andwaterbowl. After years of religious instruction,ordination leads either to a pilgrimage, usually with companions, or to residence in communal monk quarters. In manybranches wanderingoccupies many months of the year,yet members typically must returnto monasteries for the monsoon season (three to fourmonths). Distinctive phenotypic markingis common: this includes painted symbols on the face andbody, shaved heads or particularhairstyles, stringsof beads aroundthe neck, and bells. In some Samyasi orders, the name of the patrondeity will be brandedinto the skin of initiates. NathapansisYogis weardistinctive red and yellow clothing, a bead and a goat's hornaround the neck, and,in some branches,an iron ring in the ear (Klostennaier1972; Oman1973).

The variousascetic branchesalso appear to conformto the kinship manipulation model. Members areinitiated into the order, oftenwhile quite young (as one teenage informant said to Oman (1973:264) "one is never too young to enter upon a good path"), 81 are given distinctive clothing andinsignias to wear, and become either permanent residents of a monasteryor wanderingmendicants. However, even the wanderersgather together for the rainy season andoften longer. They usually traveltogether in groups and seek shelter at other monasteries of their branchwhile on the move. Essentially, they live in close association with each other while being separated,both physically andsocially, fromthe rest of society.

Religious property is oftenconsiderable, and corporatelyheld. Locallaity contributes cash, buildings, lands, labor, and foodto the extent that not only arethe monks well cared for,but there is oftena materialprofit for the contributors themselves.

Building a temple andits associated monasteryand rest houses can be a profitable venture: "The daily offeringsof worshippers, together with the alms (mostly food) collected in daily begging expeditions amongst householders, soon provide sufficient meansnot only forthe support of the resident priests, scholars, andattendants, but also for a fairdividend on his outlay to the owner of the shrine" (Oman 1973 :250). In addition, while the concept of merit is not as developed as in Buddhism, the benedictory giftoffered by the abbots is often"very strictly proportional to the size andquality of the honorificgift brought by the followers"(Ghurye 1964:209).

Many monasteries become wealthy, so much so that in colonial times the British involved themselves in regulating their economic affairs. Religious trustsare passed on withinthe groups and "neither [property] nor its managementis divisible among members of the family"of the contributor(Mayne in Oman1973:253). Monks do not work, and landsbelonging to branchesare leased to be tilled by laity. As in Buddhism, merit is 82 accrued proportionate to the effortsand resources contributed. This is oftendiscussed in sacred texts, and merit promises salvation not only forindividual contributorsbut ancestorsand descendants as well (Oman1973).

Members of orders generally "must disclaim kinship ties with [forefathers] as well as with the living" (Bhattachryya 1953). In many groups, identical surnames are given to all members, thus rendering them symbolic kin (Oman1973). Otherkin symbolism abounds; forexample, hailing the Lord as "fatherand mother" is common (Narayanan

1990:168).

While female asceticsare less common thanmales, their presence too has great antiquity, andin reformist branchesthe doors have been opened to women, as well as to male members of other castes (theoretically, at least originally, onlymale members of the first three castescould become members of organized ascetic groups) (Ghurye1964).

One exampleof the typical patterncan be seen in vander Veer's (1987) fieldwork among the Ramanandis,a North India, Vishnu-worshipping order. Celibacy is emphasized, and "is clearlyone of the major aspects of the organization of the Ramanandi order as a whole" (p.685). As is the case withmost orders, thereare bothspecialist members, or sadhu, and the laity which provides forthem, and "a long process of sedentarisationhas resulted in the tamingof the wild, free-movingascetic andthe success of the temple-dwelling, law-abiding devotee" (p.683).

Laitycan choose anysadhu as their guru,and do so based more on personal characteristics of the guru thanon elements of religious doctrine. A sadhu who wantsto sustain his way of lifemust thereforeattract followers, and the more laityhe attracts, the 83 more sadhu disciples he will attractas well, as he cansupport andfeed them. An initiate surrendersboth his personal name and that of his patrilineal clan and takes on a religious personal name with anorder suffix. Kin terms are used to refer to members of his new spiritualfa mily.

Ramanandissadhu arecan be ascetic renunciants (tyagis), fightingascetics

(nagas), or devotees of Ram's wifeSita (rasiks). Tyagis have a verydistinctive appearance,with long matted hair andbodies covered in ashes. They arecompletely celibate and live in temples. When a � is successfulin attractingsupporters and disciples, he breaks offfrom the groupunder whose � he is residing andforms his own. In turn,a� who can obtain support fromother � may become anabbot, or even a regional overseer.

Tyagis travel occasionally, but they do so as a group, andall caste distinctions

(but not their internalhierarchy) are put aside. Historically, groups of mobile sad.bushave been importanteconomically in India due to their "greatadvantages as traders,since they could pool resources without being forcedto divide them amonginheritors" (vander

Veer 1987:690).

Nagas reflect the longstandingassociation between asceticism and organized violence in India, and have traditionally competedwith other orders over resources, including territories, followers, andstatus displays. They are highly organized,as are the

�- One of their functionsis to protect therasiks, who live in lavishly decorated temples, dress as fe males, andobserve taboos of menstruation. They are generally celibate, but, as they do make caste distinctions, are usually headed by Brahmin abbots 84 who have entered temple life in their lastlife stage. Manyof these abbots become wealthy, andbenefit directly fromthe resources gathered by the roaming � andthe protection provided by the nagas.

Another illustrationof the general patternis the Dasanamiorder, which is over a

1000 yearsold and one of the most respected andinfluential orders in India and elsewhere (Dazey1990). Family, clan,and lineage structureare the central organizing

principles of the group. Divided into the 10 ascetic lineages which tracetheir ancestryto

Sankaracarya, all members of each lineage sharethe same name. A larger subdivision,a

gotr� which includes several lineages, also has distinctive, sharednames for its members

based on its foundingsage. These names are used for"m utual recognition," and are

"especially usefulwhen on pilgrimageto distant and unfamiliar areas" (Dazey 1990:290).

Disciples of the sameteacher arecalled guru-bhai (gurubrothers), anda senior monk

taught by the same teacher of one's guru is caca-guru('uncle-guru'). Their nagas,

functioning as described earlier,emphasize guru-brotherhood rather than the guru­

disciple (father-son) relationship. The Dasanamiorganization thus "parallels that of a

biological lineage or 'family tree"' (Dazey 1990:292).

Denton ( 1991) looked at femaleascetics in the city of V aransi,which hasthe

largestascetic population in India. Resident female ascetics number about 1300, and are

divided, as are males, into threecategories, two of which are celibate. Denton describes

these women as "selfishly" religious because theyhave given up householder service to

kin and communities. However, membership in thisorder always involves commitment 85 to a particular school, entryinto a communityof aspirants, and serviceto their new associations.

Renunciant ascetics, who give up householding, choose a ID!!]!and perform their own funeral rites as partof their initiation. Aftertaking new clothesand new names

(personal plus lineage suffix),they associate in groups at their teacher's ashram or as travelers to visit sister ascetics. Their leaders spend a greatdeal of time managing worldly contacts andfinancial affairs. Mostrenunciant ascetics areolder women truly renouncing householder andmothering roles, but "a largenumber of adolescent girls and young women" areinitiated at annual festivals.

Roughly two-thirds of the femaleascetics in Varansiare "celibate students" who

extend the firststage of life into a lifelongstatus. Some schools have a period of training prior to initiation. All celibate students live organized andcontro lled lives in "convent­ like establishments" overseen by "Mother-Teachers." They average twenty-threeyears of

age, weardistinctive haircuts andstyles of dress, and go out only in chaperoned groups.

Their lives arecentered aroundlearning and worship, but also around service, including

tending to gardens and milch cows fortheir teachers.

Other religious organizations

Jainism

Jainism is anancient Indianreligion which, along with Buddhism, influenced the

development of organized renunciation in Hinduism around the7th and8th centuries. It

originated about the 6th centuryBC in the Gangesriver basin. Mahavira, the generally 86 acknowledged founder, organized the community of followersand promoted the practices of preaching and conversion to gain recruits. There aretwo main sects, the largestbeing theShvetambara, whose members wear white robes and use begging bowls. In theother sect, Digambar� male ascetics renounce all clothes and forego begging bowls, receiving offerings in theircupped hands. The sectarian split was apparently fueledmore by these behavioral and apparelchoices than by doctrine, and was complete by 300 BC. In 1981, there were approximately 3.2 million Jains in India (Dundas 1992).

The centraltenet of Jainism, and its "Great Vow," is that no living creatures should be harmed;also veryimportant are proscriptions against lying, theft,sexual activity, andall attachments, including possessions (Dundas1992:13 7). Jain laity is encouraged to pursue strict monogamy and to avoid over-attachments. The latter is to be accomplished by religious gifting and public participation in religious ceremonies, which

are viewed as more important than conformity to canon. Many of the numerous sacred

days in the Jain calendarinvolve ritual giving, sometimes by means of bidding forthe

right to contribute. As in Buddhism, gaining merit is the reward to Jain laity for giving

food,lodging, robes, and medicines to ascetics.

Earlyin Jainism the practice of accepting alms fromanyone who would give them

developed into "the acceptance of the necessity of an accommodation withwhat had

become a specificallyJain community of almsgiving supporters ... " (Dundas1992: 129).

Today, wanderingascetics are accompanied by lay persons "who form an almost

triumphalprocession and see to their needs in a varietyof ways" p.150). 87 Earlytexts and Mahavira's exampleemphasize isolation and separation, but Jains almost immediately forgedrelationships with "kingly patrons" (Dundas 1992:101).

Temple-dwelling monks appeared around the 4th century BC. The yatis, who "descend" from these earliesttemple dwellers, aredivided into various groups, most of which are celibate (Cort 1991). Even wanderingascetics, however, travel only with other Jain mendicants, and"for an individual to leave the ascetic band to which he was attachedand wander alone was regardedas highly inappropriate" (Dundas 1992: 131 ). "Going forth" involves joining a new society with its own rules, internalrelationships, and groupings which in many respects replicate those of the social world that has been abandoned.

Earliest Jain scriptures discussthe impossibility of attaining religious goals with familyattachments, and Jain initiation requires the severing of family andother wordly ties, although some branches,particularly for nuns, permitoccasional familyvisits.

Shvetambaracan be initiated as earlyas age six, and "[w]hile the laity has not always been united about the validity of child initiation, the ascetic community seems unanimous in its approval, and the sight of veryyoung novices among monks and nuns is not uncommon" (Dundas 1992: 135). The dress and demeanor of an initiate resemble thatof someone about to be married. Moreover, one of the most frequentlyused earlyterms to

describe Shvetambara monastic groups is kul� or "family"(Dundas 1992: 15).

One illustrationof the patternof kinship manipulationis found in Cort's(19 91) study of Indian Murtipujak Svetambarmendicants. Most become members between the ages of fifteen andthirty, with some initiates as young as four or five. Cortreports that there has always been "a custom of veryyoung boys being given into the careof [Jain 88 ascetics] andtaking [vows] themselves beforepuberty" (Cort 1991:668, n.13). Although in the past there were many married or widowed· Svetambar mendicants, their proportion has dropped dramaticallyin the last 200 years,and today most mendicantsare never­ marriedyoung men and women.

The Svetambarinitiate renounces all individually andfamily-held rights and resources to join fellowmembers, either in temples or in traveling groups, fora lifetime.

He or she receives a new name which includes a "lineage indicator." Initiates pledge non­ violence, honesty in word and deed, celibacy, andthe renunciation of all possessions. In general, "[t]he internalorgan izationof Murtipujak mendicancy reveals a strong hierarchicalranking, and sub-divisions which closely mirror those of lay caste and kinship" (Cort 1991 :651). Mendicantlineages are traced as in the case of kin groups, and each group publicly recites its lineage back to Mahavira.

Islamic dervish groups

While Islamis farmore "pro-natalist"than Christianity(Vernon 1986), asceticism, including celibacy, has always been a strong,if secondary,movement in this religion (Bellamy 1979). One of the primary motives associatedwith celibacy is to avoid distractionsfrom God and God's service,as "... everything that distractsyou from God -­

family, money, and even children -- is inauspicious foryou" (Ghazzali 1352/1933, in

Vernon 1986:33; original emphasis).

The dervishgroups of the middle ages (13th-16th centuries), particularlyin non­

Arab Islamic areas,practiced total renunciation of established societal norms (including 89 kinship) coupled with "deliberate andblatant social deviance"(Karamustafa 1994:3).

They appearto have had a symbiotic relationship with the institutionalized Sufismwhich aroseat roughly the same time, but which did not demand renunciation in general or celibacy in particular (e.g., Lewis 1969:140-154). Rejection of marriage, sexual reproduction, and, in most cases, all sexual activity was "beyond doubt" necessaryto followingthe (exclusively male) dervish paths (Karamustafa1994:16). While people apparently oftenjoined fortemporary periods, many remained dervishes forlife.

The variousdervish groups arecharacterized by group seasonal wanderingand

begging in combination with community life in tekkes, or religious hospices. There were frequent largegatherings of members, and hospices contained largenumbers of members

studying under masters. Highly organized begging andpatronage led to many hospices

being "veritable institutionsdependent upon carefullymanaged economic surpluses and

subject to political control" (Karamustafa1994 : 15). One Abdal tekke was "mosque,

hostel, hospice, refectory, and center of pilgrimage in one," housed over 200 members

and servants, and"apparently never ceased to receive financialsupport fromthe central

government" (p. 77).

All groups were characterizedby highly distinctiveand uniform styles of

appearance. The Haydaris, for example, wore long beardsand hair, dressed in sacks and

sheepskins, and wore iron rings on ears, necks, wrists, andgenitals. The Abdals went

naked exceptfor a felt garment belted over their genitals, sometimes sheathingtheir

penises in iron. They had shaved heads and beards, carried hatchets, leather pouches,

anklebones, begging bowls, and largeyellow spoons, and their bodies were decorated 90 with burnspots anddrawings of snakes. They also carriedmusical instruments, which they played while screaming(Karamustafa 1994:68,71).

Membership was heavily youth-oriented, foundersoften being young elites (who oftencontinued to received parentalsupport as dervishes). Dervishes"apparently took a

special interest in adolescents andyoung men," andthese appearto have been

"exceptionally responsive" to their calling (Karamustafa1994:94). Founders and current

masters were referredto as fathers,and groups referredto themselves as families.

Protestant celibate sects

Protestant reforms,beginning with MartinLuther in the early16th century,were

primarilyspurred by opposition to the celibate andmonastic institutions characteristicof

the Catholic Church (Ozment1972). The organizationalbenefits of celibacy are

highlighted in the rhetoricof the reformers: Luther said that even freelyundertaken

monastic celibate vows encourageda "narrow andartificial love ... preventing service to

any but fellow monks" (Clemen 1950, in Ozment 1972:43). In addition, the Church's

desire for control of its wealth was seen by the early Protestants as related to its insistence

on celibacy. The result wasclerical marriage andthe general absence of monasticism in

the Protestantchurches. However, celibacy was (and is) still occasionally practiced in

Protestantcommunal organizations,and manipulationof kinshiprecognition cues appears

to have accompanied it.

The Shakers are perhaps the most famous example of a Protestant celibate sect.

The group's communal organization took shape in Albany, New York, around the time of 91 American independence. The death of its charismaticleader, AnnLee, in 1784 inspired expansion, andby 1826 there were 19 communities and additional branchesin theUnited

States. In 1840 there were roughly 3600 Shakers, but less than half that by 1880, and their numbers continued to decline steadily. Women typicallyoutnumbered men, and equality of thesexes was always an important component of Shaker ideology.

Commitment to celibacy appearsto have been extremelyconsistent, with veryfew infractions(Kitch 1989; Muncy 1973).

Nordhoff(1961)describes Shaker societies of the 1870s based on his personal visits. He foundprosperous communal societies, manyof whose members were brought

in as children either by member-parents or through adoption. The number of adoptions decreased over time, as did the number of children, adopted or otherwise, who chose to

remain with the group afterreaching maturity (Muncy 1973).

As earlyas 1830, when Shaker initiationpractices were codified, three stages of

membership were developed. These were the novitiate, junior, and seniororders, each

requiring a greatercommitment in terms of material possessions and energy. Full

members were required to giveall of their wealth, including property, to the organization.

Typically members worked veryhard, and men and women ate, slept, and worked apart

(Kitch1989 :88).

Shakers advocated "nonsexual, affectionate, sibling love" as the purest love on

earth. Members referredto themselves as "brothers," "sisters," and "siblings in Christ,"

andlived in communal houses knownas "families"(Kitch 1989:87). Children lived apart 92 in their own "Children's order," and were caredfor by non-kin. Clothing was identical in color andmaterial within orders andgenders (Andrews1963).

Leadership was explicitly modeled afterparental roles: "supervisorsin the Shaker family system treatedtheir workers as loved children of God" (Kitch 1989:88). Mother

Ann Lee wrote: "I am married to the Lord Jesus Christ. He is my head and my husband, andI have no other" (Muncy 1973: 19).

A varietyof otherChristian sects (e.g., Zoarites,Sanctifi cationists, Harmonists) appear to followthe predicted pattern of kinship manipulation. All of these sects demanded close association between members and carefullyregulated social contacts with non-members. These organizationsinsisted on uniform dress, utilized kin termsand symbolism, andshowed a willingnessto accept, if not an outright preferencefor, young recruits.

The relationship of celibacy to altruism is clearlyseen in the case of the Zoarites, a group of independentGerman families who emigrated to the mid westernUnited States in theearly 1800s. Upon arrivingthey were too poor to buy land, and so made a conscious decision to live communally. Their 1819 resolution to forego all private goods andto shareeverything collectively was accompanied by a resolution forcelibacy.

Celibacy was not, however, a major part of their theology. Instead, they viewed themselves as "too poor to raise children" (Muncy 1973 :28). After settling debts and makingsome profit fromfanning, celibacy was abandoned. However, marriageshad to be approved by leaders, andafter agethree children were separatedfrom parents and raised communally. 93 The Sanctificationists,most of whom were women, lived in Belton, Texas. Their membership peakedin 1880 with about 50 members. As with the Shakers, their theology was based on "sibling love" (Kitch 1989: 105). At firstthey did not require separation fromunsanctified spouses, but changedtheir policy as men joined the group. Private propertycould not be reclaimed even if a member left,and strong measures forseparation fromnon-group members, including family, developed. Memberscommunally shared work, food,lodging, and clothing. Children were wardsof the organizationuntil they becameadults. Many of the group members were related (sisters, mother/daughter), and a "no special attention" clause was developed to prevent kin attachments from underminingcommunal life(Kitch 1989: 108).

The Harmonists,founded by "Father" George Rapp, lived in colonies in

Pennsylvaniaand Indiana in theearly 1800s (Muncy 1973). Members were required to give up personal possessions and toforego marriage and familylife. Collectively, they

amasseda II sizable fortune,11 andpurchased landsno single member could have afforded.

George Rapp's son, Frederick, was their business manager,and all accounts werekept in his name. Apparently, the Harmonists voluntarilyand unanimously adopted celibacy, but

never formalizedit. Althoughthey did not proselytize, they regularlyadopted children in an attempt to maintain the viability of the group. Their membership gradually dwindled afterFather Rapp's death in 1847; by 1864, only 200 remained. 94 Support forpredictions

The preceding review of historicaland ethnographic materials on major religious

institutions,as well astheir associateddivisions andoff shoots, lends support to the

prediction that voluntaryvows of lifelongcelibacy occurring in the context of direct

benefits to non-kin should be accompaniedby theinstitutionalized manipulationof

kinship recognitioncues.

In themajority of cases,celibate members are non-kin. Only the Shakersand

other small Protestant sects appearto have actively recruited related initiates, andit is

significant thatin these cases everyattempt was made to minimize thepotentially

disruptive impact of kin-based relationships. In most cases it is clearthat individuals,

especially higher rankingones, sometimes utilize theresources andstatus theyderive

fromcelibacy and institutional membership to providebenefits to their kin. However,

benefitsare primarilychanneled to other institutional members. Here, true kinship is not

a factor, yet symbolic or fictivekinship, and its manipulation, clearlyare.

That celibacy in theseinstitutions is altruisticappears well- supported. In all

cases, membership requires the voluntarysurrendering of personal and family resources.

Attempts to gain additional personal resources areforeclosed. Furthermore, thesacrifice

of time and labor experienced by initiates is directed to the organization, specificgroup

leaders, andsupernaturals. Celibacy is explicitly discussed in religious doctrine, in

statements by leaders and members, and in direct observationby researchersas beingan

important,if not essential,component of individual sacrifice. All of the major

organizations discussed here, even the most ascetic, arehighly organized and successful 95 with respect to the acquisition of resources fromrecruits andnon-members. Thus organizations standto gain a great deal by demandingand reinforcing vows of celibacy.

As celibacy in these institutions occurs in non-kin, altruisticcontexts, institutionalized manipulationof kinship cue recognitionis predicted to be present as well. This appearsto be the case. All of the groups discussed here, from the largest monastic institutions to the smallest Protestant sects, rely on close association of members, separationof members fromtheir biological relatives, the replication of family roles, andextensive use of kin referents in order to organize andcontrol membership. A willingness to accept, andsometimes a strong preference for, young recruitsis also prevalent. Additionally, all of these groups demand phenotypicsimilarity, achieved

through uniform dress codes and the homogenization of other aspects of personal appearance.

The second prediction is that institutional kin cue manipulation should correlate with the size ( and thus relatedness) of the recruit pool. The sources consulted provide data regarding the development of these institutions which lends inferential support for this prediction.

The major religious institutions described sharesimilar patternsof historical development, perhaps best illustrated by looking once again at Hinduism. EarlyIndian

asceticism appearsto have lacked the teaching, recruiting, andstructured communal

living arrangementsthat the Jains and Buddhists later introduced. Prior to these

innovations, asceticism appears to have been much more individualistic and truly

renunciatory (Ghurye1964). 96 Olivelle (1990) suggests that the "anti-culture" of ascetic renunciation began in northeast India aroundthe 6th centuryBC in thecompany of demographic changes driven by a shift to intensive agriculture:

" ...early village-based tribal organizationgave way to relatively largekingdoms under the absolute authority of monarchs. Centralizedpolitical authorities made travel relativelysaf e andeasy, facilitatingcommerce andcreating a rich and powerfulmerchant class. The economy becamemore complex andintegrated, andthere was greatercontact and communication across a relatively largearea of North India. Urban centers grewespecially around the capitals of kingdoms" (Olivelle 1990:129).

Two traditions arose within early Hinduism. The path of the sedentary hermit, soon obsolete but idealized, ofteninvolved sexual abstinence. However, celibacy is not likely to have been a centraltheme. Thesecond traditionis that of the itinerant mendicant,a tradition which survivedand became organized. Renouncers abandoned their places in a strictcaste system, aswell as their families, andbegan to associate in non-kin groups. Celibacy and poverty becamecentral organizing principles. The dress of members was not uniformat first,but simply symbolized renunciation (by not being white,the normalsocietal color). According to Olivelle, all this becamepossible only afterthe socioeconomic changesalluded to above took place. After all, "povertybecomes a virtue only in anaf fluentsociety andnot in a subsistence economy. The value of social structuresand roles is more easily challengedand 'experimental life styles'are tolerated more in urbancenters thanin villages" (Olivelle 1990:142). However, "[c]elibacy makes 97 it impossible for [ ascetic communities] to propagate and,therefore, it was imperative for them to maintain ties to societyfrom whichthey could recruit new members" (p.144 ).

The asrama, or religious retreat, "typically arisesaround a charismaticreligious figure" (Elder 1990:30). Once disciples gather, resources and internal organization become necessary. Begging becomes systematized, andpatrons provide additional support by donating propertyand construc ting worship halls andother buildings. "Rules, patterns, and traditionshave been made up as events required, with daily life centering aroundthe guru and his/her public appearances, teachings,or spiritual exercises" (Elder

1990:30-31). Most of these fade away after the charismatic figureis gone, but some

survive. As Elder suggests, "A fascinating study could be done of those factorsthat

contributeto the survival and growthof anasrama followingthe death of its founder"(p.

31). A clear possibilityis that the effective use of kin cue manipulationcontributes to the

success of such groups.

Therefore, two processes appearimportant concerning the perpetuationof celibate

sects. First, population growth,with an correspondingly large pool of potential recruits,

favorsthe maintenanceof such groups, as does increased traveland communication.

Second, charismaticleaders who attract groups of recruits must then be able to maintain

their loyalty.

As in Hinduism, both processes can be observed in early Christian asceticism.

Wanderingcharismatics beganto organize householder Christianity,but were eventually

supplanted by settled churches andclergy who viewed them with suspicion because of

their lack of orthodoxy, as well as the difficultyin controlling them (Linge 1990). This 98 led to organizedmonasticism when Christianitybecame the officialreligion of Roman society, and when the ease in travel provided by Romanorder facilitated anincreased pool of potential recruits.

The role of spiritual guides is very importantin earlyChristian asceticism, and this is clearlyreflected in the earliestChristian writings (Linge 1990). Timko (1990) describes three patternsin early Christian asceticism: anchorites, who lived alone; semi­ anchorites, who, although also living alone, formeda close and constant association around a "spiritual father," usually in the context of a church; andceno bites, usually near townsand cities, who ownedproperty, worked farms or herds, and provided religious servicesto the neighboring communities. Strict discipline andcommunal organization characterizedthe latter two groups.

Buddhism arosedue to the influenceof anindividual charismaticwho organized his religious movement as the ever-increasing number of disciples demanded it. The first section of the Mahavagga begins withthe nightof the Buddha's enlightenment and discusses various issues pertaining to the "development and stabilisation of the Order as a uniform institution" (Homer 1983 :xiii). At one point, the Buddha becomes awarethat the

practice of monks bringing recruits to him for personal ordination has become unwieldy,

andhe permitsmonks to ordain others themselves "in any quarter, in anydistrict" (Homer

1983 :30). The Buddha says:

"And thus, monks, should one let go forth,should one ordain: First, having made him have his hair andbeard cut off, having made him put on yellow robes, having made him arrangean upper robe over one shoulder, having made him honour the monks' feet, having made him sit downon his haunches, having made him salute 99 with joined palms, he should be told: Speak thus: 'I go to the awakened one for refuge,I go to the dhamma forrefuge, I go to the Order forrefuge. "' This formula was repeated two more times (Homer 1983:30).

Eventually thismethod of assimilating recruits also became logistically demanding, and candidates began to be presented by a preceptor to the Order as a whole for ordination.

Buddhism developed in an already populous time andplace (northeast India ca.

530 BC), andits success depended on regulating the behavior of its many recruits. As

Homer (1983:xiii) notes, it organized "for the sake of its ownpreservation and continuancewhich, in turn,depended on the essential qualities of scrupulousnessand strivingon the part of the individuals who becameits members. These thereforewere being continually brought to live in conformity with a standard of behavior suitable to recluses, samana, who had 'leftthe world ..."'

In Jainism, also begun by an individual charismatic, a formalsystem of confession andrepentance of faults developed early, as did the idea of dire consequences in the next lifefor breaking Jain rules. Dundas (1992:146) suggests "a growing need to emphasize solidarity" is responsible, and that rules were developed not only to instruct ascetics but to

"regulate inter-monastic relationships, delineate acceptable forms of connections with lay supporters, and enable senior monks to impose penances for misdemeanours" (p.153).

Monks were instructednot to join or remain in groups which did not include a teacher, preceptor, promoter, elder, andleader of the troop(p.156).

Even among dervish groups,an original patternof individualistic mendicancywas often supplantedby community life. Individual renunciants,typically in urban settings, 100 succeeded in attracting followers, and random beggingwas replaced, in some cases partiallyand others almost completely, by highly organized group collection of resources and giftsfrom patrons(Karamustafa 1994). This was accompaniedby aspects of kinship manipulationdiscussed earlier.

Thus it may be arguedthat the patternof kinship manipulationwhich appearsto accompanycelibacy in these religious institutions correlateswith the size and lack of relatedness of the pool of potential recruits. In Christianity andHinduism, where no single charismatic leader initially fueledthe development of organized,cenobitic life

( although note the importance in Hinduism of Sankaracarya who, following the model of

Budhhist andJain monasteries, provided thelast importantste p in organization), this patterndeveloped when population sizes andgeographic mobility increased sufficiently.

In the case of Buddhism and Jainism,each was established in densely populated areas where geographicmobility was common, andthe presence of a largeand ever-gro wing number of (unrelated)followers aligned with specific leaders created the need for effectiveinternal organization.

Wach ( 1962), in a detailed cross-culturalanalysis of the relationship between religion andsociety, describes a number of conditions necessaryfor the development of

"specificallyreligious" groups. First, there must be population increases in the relevant

"sociological unit -- family, clan,or tribe"(p.109). There must additionally be social stratificationwith respect to theownership of property, occupations, andranks. Finally, there must be leaders who, responding to momentous events like warsor plagues, break fromthe traditionalconservatism of their groups. A new group can then appear, 101 "characterizedby the concept of relationship as spiritual fatherhoodand spiritual brotherhood" (p.110). The nature of the new, usually magical or religious experience sets members apart fromthe rest of society, although "motives such as lust forpower and desire forhealth, wealth, or protection do characterizethe more degenerate formsof secret societies" (p.116).

Membership in these organizations is not automatic, andtests of some sort must be passed. Admission is typically symbolized by "'death' and'rebirth,' rejuvenation, perhaps the choice of a new name, andknowledge of the secret language" (p.117).

Wach's description of the three stages in development of AmericanIndian religious groups appearstypical. First, outstanding, charismatic individuals gather followers; next, progressivelymore complex organizational structuresemerge; and, finally, stratification withinthe organizations occurs. Wach sees a similar processin the development of major religions. Individual personalities obtained disciples who were willing to sacrificefor them ("permanenthelpers," as Weber [ 1964 :60] characterized them). "Ties of family and kinship andloyalties of various kinds [were] at least temporarilyrelaxed or severed" (Wach 1962:135), andlife in the groups was integrated by means of rites and religious practices such as prayer and meditation. Upon thedeath of the founder,the "circle" of helpers becamea brotherhood, afterwhi ch, withincreasing membership, previously simple rules and rites wereextended. Discipline became more important,which eventuallylead to the formationof anecclesiastical body and the distinguishing of clergy. "Here and herealone" concludes Wach, "the term 'institution,' oftenloosely used, can rightfullybe applied" (1962: 144 ). 102 While manipulation, psychological or otherwise, is never addressed by Wach, his perspective, as well as thehistory of specific institutional developments as discussed earlier, suggest a model which pertains to celibacy and the manipulation of kinship recognition cues. Individuals in anysociety may choose celibacy andother formsof renunciation foridiosyncratic or culture-specific reasons. These may involve true renunciation, as appearsto be the case with Saint Anthony,Buddha, and others, or they may involve attemptsto manipulate other individuals into sacrifice. In eithercase, if these individuals and/ortheir embraced religious ideologies possess qualities which are attractive to others, and if a sufficientnumber of unrelated followersare obtained, methods to organize thegrowing membership become necessary. It is at thispoint, when renunciation becomes an altruistic act, that the patternof kinship manipulation should appear. Thus,it is not the growing size of non-kin associations per se that is thedriving factor,but rather theneed to engender altruisticsenti ments and behavior among unrelated groupmembers.

Themany Protestant sects which have arisen over the last several centuries are too numerous to fullydiscuss in this context. However, their existence has spurred research into sect development which may provide additional clues concerning the historical fonnation of institutions which embrace celibacy andother formsof altruisticbehavior in non-kin contexts.

In a review of theliterature on communal utopias, vanden Berghe andPeter

(1988) find that "all communal groups makeconcer ted attemptsto controlindividual self-interest and special relationships ..." (1988:522; original emphasis). Most appear 103 to fail when they arenot able to subordinate those interests to the common good.

Through celibacy, manygroups "eliminated the two most powerfuland ubiquitous bases of special relationships: kinship andsex ...and prevented the emergence offamilism as a competing basis of sociality" (1988:523).

Non-celibate groups such as the Hutterites andKibbutzim have succeeded where many others failed because they "modifiedtheir ideology to accommodate anirrepressible individualism andfamilism" (p.524). Both beganas strongly anti-familistic,not recognizing marriageor familyties, collectively rearing children, and restricting parent­ child contact. The Hutterites even attempted communal breastfeeding. But there has been a steady movement towardfamilism in both groups. Only "big ticket" goods are now bought communally, although distribution of some resources is still based on equality ( of family unit) or need. "Creeping privatisation" has led to compromises forthe survivalof the organization,and both groups have made their peace with nepotism. Thus

"extensive networks of kinship and marriageinterpose themselves between the individual andthe community,affect the distributionof resources, andconstitute a clearlydistinct level of social organization"(van den Berghe andPeter 1988:535).

This process is also illustratedby the Communityof TrueInspira tion, or the

AmanaSociety, which moved to the United States fromGermany in 1843, and which attempted to de-emphasize the family by valuing (although not requiring) celibacy. Kin bonds andindividualism nevertheless reassertedthemselves after1900. By 1932, when members voted to changefrom a socialistic community to a joint-stock corporation, 104 "familiesin the new Amanaimmediately took on characteristics of families outside

Amana" with respect to economic consumption (Andelson 1983:61 ).

More examples canbe drawn fromthe religious movements which appearedin

the United States in the 1970s. The Children of God, founded by "Papa" Berg, were

originally strongly,and efficiently,communal. Davis and Richardson ( 1973) describe the

"tension" in the group which resulted from its initially young recruits marryingand

having children. Individuals spent more time andenergy in familial concernsand less in

meeting organizational goals, and this had "animportant effect" on the evolution of the

Children of God as anorganization (1973 :339).

In the UnificationChurch, founder Reverend Moon, knownas the "TrueSpiritual

Father," attempted to promote andmaintain selflesscommitment to the organization by

requiring his approval forall marriages, and,in manycases, personally matching

marriageablepairs. In 1978, a sampleof single members was surveyed by Bromley et al.

(1982) with respect to expectations aroundmarriage. Ninety-two percent expected to

either have church leaders select their spouses or to select a partnerfrom those suggested

by them. However, Bromley et al. note that, in spite of strong pressure to leave these

matters to the church, "members' currentbehavior seems more individualistic thantheir

statements about futureintentions," which underscores "the endemic tension of individual

andcollective needs in communalgroups" (1982:128).

Moon's attempt to combat individualism and familism through the control,rather

thanthe prohibition, of sexual expression is not without precedent. In the Oneida

community, a groupof roughly 200 people founded in 1848,founder John Humphrey 105 Noyes oversaw a system of "complex marriage," wherein all members considered themselvesmarried to each otherand regularly exchanged sexual partners(Foster 1995).

Oneida members lived, worked, and raised theirchildren communally, andall property was held in common. Noyes' strategywas explicitly implemented to curb "special love," or romanticattachments which could threaten this communal organization. By 1879, the system of complex marriagewas abolished due to bothinternal and external pressures.

Only two years later, "the group also officiallygave up its communistic system of economic organization, reorganizedas a joint-stock corporation, and went on to become one of the most successful small businesses in the United States ... " (Foster 1995:54).

The foregoing analyseshighlight the value of celibacy forthe survival of many sects. In groups where celibacyis not required or maintained, its absence typically leads to the encroachment by nepotism of non-kin altruism. The examplesof theHutterites, the

Kibbutzim, and others illustrate how compromise may be needed to ensure non-celibate groups' survival.

Muncy (1973) holds that, in communal groups where celibacy is explicitly adopted foreconomic reasons, it does not last long. Where it becomes a partof ideology andreligious dogma ( and is thereforestructurally integrated), it fares much better. "Not all celibate communities adopted the practice forthe same reasons, but one factor appears paramountin each: celibacy served to reorder the priorities of the members and thus aided the effective establishment of communistic societies. The interest of the communitytook precedence over selfish interests of theindividual" (Muncy 1973:35). 106 Galanter( 1993) findsthat modem charismaticreligious sects recruit primarily through psychological engagement ratherthan coercion. Other members shower new convertswith affection,and intense social ties are formed. Members apparentlyoften stay affiliatedto maintain those ties rather thanto embrace particularreligious messages.

Galanterproposes a "biologically grounded inclination among individuals to coalesce into such groups, particularlywhen ties to other sources of affiliationare weakened"

(1993:122).

Galanter'soverview suggests the widespread utilization of kinship cue manipulationin modem sects. Communal living is characteristic, and "sect members frequentlyrefer to each other as family"( Galanter 1993: 124 ). Constraintsare often established over all facetsof communication, and charismaticgroups also establish their

"distinctive character"through dress,custom, and ideology. Implicit in his overviewis the fact that members,when recruited,are usually young. It is no coincidence that deprogramming,or "a set of techniques forremoving persons fromnew religiousgroups andin volving them in a rigorous andeven coercive resocialization process" (Richardson

1980; in Galanter1993: 130), is ideally accomplished with thestrong involvement of actual kin. Thereforeit seems likely that the interest individuals have in maintaining ties with non-kin is facilitatedby the manipulation of kinship recognitionmechanisms.

Galanteralso foundthat joining cohesive, communalgroups can result in increased general psychological well-being anda decrease in levels of neurotic distress for new members. It can also result in attitudinaland behavioral conformity to group normsand expectations. In his view, this is because "complex psychological mechanisms 107 to ensure the integrityof well-integrated extended kin groups" are likely to have evolved, including rieuroticdistress in the absence of membership in such groups" (1978:590). 108 CHAPTER S

CROSS-CULTURAL DATA

The materials reviewed in the previous chapter support manyaspects of the proposed kinship manipulation model. The non-kin natureof membership, the connectionbetween celibacy and altruism, andthe various facetsof kinship cue manipulationhave, hopefully,been established. However, the groups reviewed do not in anysense constitute a sample; they are simply commonlyfound (and known) instances of institutionswhere celibacy is asked of members. To furthertest the value of the kinship cue manipulation model forunderstanding celibacy in non-kin settings, a systematic analysisof cross-cultural data froma variety of societies was conducted. The results, presented below, provide data regarding the general natureand patterningof permanent abstinence worldwide, as well as additional support forthe predictions already reviewed.

Methodology

Murdock andWhite 's (1969) StandardCross- Cultural Sample (SCCS) was utilized forthis analysis. This standard sample consists of 186 societies chosen from

1250 societies in theEthnogr aphic Atlas. Sampleunits were selected by Murdock and

White on the basis of geography, linguistics, subsistence economies, social organization, depth of ethnographic coverage, andother factors. Societies were "pinpointed" with respect to time andplace, andthe names of authoritiesfor each sample were provided. 109 Murdock andWhite's goals were to "adequately represent the entire rangeof known cultural variationand at the same time eliminate as far as possible the number of caseswhere similaritiesare presumably due to the historical influencesof diffusionor common derivation" (1969:331). The degreeto which they have beenjudged successful by the academic community is reflectedin thelarge number of studies conducted utilizing the sample (Embler and Embler 1988), although manyproblems concerning this sample have been identified ( e.g., Broude 1981; see also Chapter 6).

As Pelto andPelto (1978:38-53) suggest, operationalizing (or consistently definingand describing) relevant concepts andvariables is indispensable forgenerating more accurate observations andmore effectivehypothesis testing. In addition, operationalism provides theonly meansavailable in a non-experimental study forreaders to gauge theob jectivity of procedures followed. For these reasons thefollowing definitions of termsare important.

Permanentabstinence: The term"celibacy" is used by sources in variousways, and in this work it is definedas lifelong sexual abstinence (or, forthe sake of brevity,

"permanentabstinence"). Since one of theuniversal functionsof marriageis the legitimization of sexual activity (Goodenough 1970), where marriageis described by the sources consulted, it was assumed that sexual activity accompaniedthis institution

(although this is obviously not always true). Thus a statement to theeffect that "all marry"was taken to meanthat there is no permanentabstinence. However, the reverse is even less necessarilytrue; statements thatsome individualsdo not marrydo not imply 110 that they do not have sex. Therefore,while the surveysearch involved both maritaland

sexual abstinence, permanent sexual abstinence remains the variable of interest.

Institution: An institution is "a [structured] stablecluster of values, norms,

statuses androles ...that develop around abasic need of society" (Delamater1987 :23 8).

Thus idiosyncratic permanentabstinence, without accompanying statuses and roles, was judged to be non-institutional. While a good marker ofpossible institutionalization in

this context is a term forthose who abstain, this is not sufficient: forexample, the term

"spinster," whilecon notinga greatdeal, does not necessarilyimply that

institutionalizationexists. Thereforeevidence of statuses androles associated with

permanentabsti nence was taken to signifyinstitutionalization.

Altruismwas definedas discussed earlier: "self-denying or self-destructive

behavior performedfor the benefitof others" (Wilson 1987:10), whether or not it was

characterizedas voluntaryor conscious. Kinwere defined as "close" family, i.e. nuclear

and extended blood relatives. Non-kin were definedas verydistantly related or unrelated

individuals. Thefive posited institutional practices associatedwith the manipulationof

kinshiprecognition were definedearlier, as were the two predictions of interest (see pp.

55-56).

Of the 186 societies in the sample,7 4 were coded by Murdock and White as

having "satisfactory"or "useful"Human Relations AreaFiles (respectively, "A,"

including all major sources; and"B," including major sources but lacking some other

importantsources). These microfiche filescontain indexed, ethnographic data which are

commonlyutilized in cross-culturalstudies (e.g., Barry1981 ; Betzig 1986; Ross 1993). 111 In addition, Files forfifteen additional societies in the SCCS were foundto have been created since Murdock andWhite's coding. Nine of these, as they contain sources cited as authorities in Murdock andWhite, were judged as satisfactoryfor the survey.

Thus 108 societies for which adequate data were available in the HRAFwere examined. HRAF codes that pertainedto marital or sexual abstinence were utilized:

Celibacy (589), Asceticism (785), Holy Men (792), Priesthood (793), Sexuality (831), andGeneral Sex Restrictions(834). All referencesby authorities to permanent abstinence, whether marital, sexual, or both, were sought. Additional sources in the Files which pertained to the societies in the sample were examinedas well.

Authorities recommended by Murdock andWhite and/orsubstitute sources were consulted directly forsocieties with no HumanRelations Area Files, forsocieties with existing Files judged unsatisfactoryby Murdock andWhite (19) and, in the case of Files created afterMurdock andWhite's coding, for those judged unsatisfactoryby this researcher ( 6). Sources were also consulted directly for all societies which appearedto exhibit permanentabstinence in institutional contexts, even if the Files were judged satisfactoryby Murdock andWhite. Following Betzig's (1986) method, sources utilized included those listed in bibliographiesof a series of papers with standardcross-cultural codes (Barryand Paxson 1971; Broude andGreene 1976; Murdock andMorrow 1970;

Murdock andProvost 1973; Murdockand White 1972; Tuden andMarshall 1972). In addition, sources in Cohen (1969) which pertainedto celibacy were consulted. Finally, more recent publications by authorities andother relevantsources were consulted as well

(Appendix A lists samplesocieties and sourcesutilized). 112 Everyattempt was made to restrict analyses to times andgroups delimited by

Murdock andWhite. In some cases related to the availability of sources and/or depth of data, substitutions were made with respect to sources or sampleunits. In addition, supplementarysources were oftenutilized to clarifydata obtained from authorities.

Where relevant,this is discussed in subsequent sections.

In 10 cases, data were considered insufficientand the societies were dropped from the samplefor one or more of the following reasons:

1. Even if judged assatisfactory or usefulby Murdock andWhite, Files did not include sufficient discussion of relevant domains.

2. For societies with no or inadequate Files, primaryand supplementarysources did not include sufficient discussion of relevantdomains.

3. Authorities andsupplementary sources were not available or were foundonly in languages which would require a great deal of additional labor to translate.

Thus, samplesize was reduced to 176 societies. The firstquestion examined was if permanentabstinence appeared to occur in individualistic or institutional contexts. If the latter, it was then determinedwhether the direct beneficiariesof the reproductive sacrificeappeared to be kin or non-kin. Finally,it was determinedif the fivetraits associated with kin cue manipulation were associated with permanentabstinence. As previously discussed, these traitsare: close association of celibates, induced phenotypic similarity,use of false kin terms andsymbolism, young recruits, andseparation of celibates fromactual kin. 113 Where data revealed explicit statements regardingthe presence andcontext of permanent abstinence,societies were coded accordingly (i.e., "Institutional," "Non­

Institutional," "Absent"). Where there was no specificmention, but a depth of coverage strongly suggested that institutional permanent abstinence was not present, societies were coded as "Unlikely." Societies found to exhibit institutional permanent abstinence were then coded according to the contexts in which it occurred: "Individual," "Kin," and"Non­

Kin." Finally, the presence or absence of the fivetraits associated with kin cue manipulation model was coded as well. Although verificationof coding throughthe use of additional coders is a recommended technique forcross-cultural surveys( e.g., Broude

1981), it was not utilized due to the large amountof data involved.

Celibacy absent

Permanent abstinence was explicitly reported as missing in 17 societies in the sample(see Table I; Appendix B lists codes, as well as geographicdescriptions of samplesocieties, forthe entire data set). In many cases, statements arecategorical enoughto appearreliable. For example, Murphyand Quain (1955:94) report "not a single virgin" in the single survivingBrazilian Trumai (SCCS #175) village. For the

Siuai of the Solomon Islands (99), Oliver (1955:151-152) states that even physically or mentally "defective" men manage to marry,and all women are either wives or mistresses.

Henry (1964)similarly found all Brazilian Aweikoma (180) adults in sexual unions, manyof themlong-standing, although they apparentlyhave no termfor marriage. 114

Table 1. Categories of PermanentAbstinence in the Cross-Cultural Sample.

Category Number of societies Percentage Absent 17 9.7 Non-Institutional 49 27.8 Unlikely 78 44.3 Institutional 32 18.2 Total 176 100.0 115 Among the Kapaukuof northwesternNew Guinea (94),

"Every Kapuakumale wants to have as manychildren as possible ... females are urged into marriage fromthe time their breasts start to grow( about 13 years of age); by the time they are 17, almost all the girls are already married. Similarly, widows of child-bearing age invariably remarrywithin six months of the husband's death"(Pospisil 1963:6 3).

Males must be able to affordbride price before they can marry, so some are called "old bachelors" (although oftenas young as twenty-five). However, even in this case,

"Sooner or later, theyeither will succeed in gatheringthe necessary money forthe bride price, or a rich man may take pity on them and buy them a wife"(Pospisil 1963 :63-4 ).

In other cases, while statements are not as definitive, it is clear that permanent abstinence is not present. For the Yapese (110), voluntary celibacy is completely unknown, andthose who have not married have sanctioned sexual relationships. Among the Manusof the Admiralty andW estem Islands (96), to be single at age twenty is a

"menace" to the inflexiblesex code.

It should be kept in mind that Murdock and White'sdelimitation of the sampleto

specificlocations anddates, while providing methodological rigor to cross-cultural analyses, renders categorical statements such as those abovemore open to doubt. Other locations of the same group may very well have individuals who, for whatever reason, abstain permanentlyfrom marital or sexual unions. However, while it is thereforealways possible (andeven likely) that some individuals in these societies abstain from sex or marriage, it is highlyprobable that abstinence does not occur in institutional contexts. 116 Non-institutionalized celibacy

Over one quarter of the societies in the sample appearto exhibit perm.anent abstinence, but only in non-institutional contexts. That is, abstinence appears to be a matterof individual choice, opportunity,or necessity, and is not accompanied by specific statuses, roles, or vows. Although the numbers of individuals involved areusually fewin any given society in this category, the reasons, circumstances, and group views regarding the behavior vary across societies. The most commonly foundpatterns include:

1. Physical/mental [e.g., Nyakyusa(8); Tallensi (23); Otoro (30); Nicobarese abnormality (78); Negri Sembilan (82); Ainu (118); Bellacoola (132)]

2. Idiosyncraticchoice [e.g., Hausa (26); Somali (36); Gond (60); Balinese (84); Alorese (89); Zuni (149)]

3. Lack of male [e.g., Suku (6); Ibo (17); YurakS amoyed (53); access to mates Pentecost (101); Omaha (143); Yanomamo (163)]

In addition, although with no specificcontext described, perm.anentabstinence is reported as practically non-existent andundesirable in several societies [ e.g., Riffians (42);

Egypti3.D:S (43); Montagnais(125)].

For the Negri Sembilanof Malaya andSumatra (82), "Marriageis considered the normalstate fora manor a woman. Only a person with a severe deformity,a serious disease, or sufferingfrom insanity or imbecility is considered unmarriageable ... Thus, all but the hopelessly abnormalare expected to many" (Wilkinson 1911: 160). Similarly,

"with the exception of lepers, lunatics, andcertain 'sexual perverts'known as tomere" who are described as homosexuals, all Nuba Hills Otoro (30) men many,and no spinsters 117 arereported (Nadel 1947:109). The Teda of Tibesti (40) describe the rarewomen without husbandsas "dead young girls" (Le Coeur 1950:11), and of the six social classes

reported by Cline (1950), all marry, including slaves.

Man (1932:127) says of the Nicobarese(78):

"Except forindivi duals who have some serious physical defect-- a veryrare occurrence-- it is unusual to finda man or woman who is unmarriedat middle age. Some will, of course, be widows or widowers, but veryfe w people remain single by choice afterthey aregrown up."

Amongthe Nyakyusaof Tanzania(8), Wilson encountered only one instance of permanentabstinence, a "famouscase" of a man who dressed as a woman, lived alone in the hills, andwho had sexual relations with no one. Otherwise,those who do not marry arefew and described as "half-wits" by informants(Wilson 1967: 197). Similarly,only one transvestitewas recalled by Honigmann's( 1946) informantamong the Slave Indians of Western Canada(128).

In some cases, permanentabstinence as a matter of individual choice is met with extreme socialdisappro val. Among the Eyak(130; ca. 1890) "there were men who lived

like women, who did women's work anddid not hunt. They did not marryother men and had no supernatural powers. They were despised and had to live on left-overscraps. The

namefor such a man means'no good"' (Birket-Smithand de Laguna 1938:206).

For the Ibo around193 5 ( 1 7), 118 "Married lifeis a normalcondition ...The [Ibo] who remains single does so not out of choice but because of economic necessity: the inability to provide the bridewealth payment. The unmarriedadult male is referredto as oke okporo (male woman),a pejorative term, while the umarried woman is referredto by a descriptive phrase... ('she has no husband').. .lgbo is a society which has no concept of celibacy but tolerates celibates as victims of economic forces" (Uchendu 1965:581).

In later years, the influence of the RomanCat holic Church led to "indigenous bishops, priests, anda hierarchyof church elders" (p. 92), but Uchendu's observation describes the common context of a specificmarriage practice which potentially leads to permanent abstinence as anacciden tal andinvoluntary consequence.

The Lolo (67) of the TaliangShan mountains (ca. 1910) observe rigid class distinctions between the Heh-I andthe Wa-tzu, the latter being hereditaryslaves who, aftertwo or three generations, aregiven the freedomto become serfs (D'Ollone 1912).

Although both groups marry,bride price can beso expensive that many Heh-I males cannotaf forda mate. This apparently led to the practice of "wifetransfer, " actually the levirate, where the younger brother marries his older brother's widow (Tseng 1956). For the Lengua of the Paraguayan Chaco (182), "There is no such thing as a spinster ...nor have they even a word expressing such a condition. Not only in theory,but also in actual fact, everymarriagea ble womanis married." However, here too some men might be unwed because of the unavailabilityof a spouse (Grubb 191 1 :214-5).

In the case of the Pentecost (101) of the New Hebrides islands,Lane and Lane

(1956: 156) report that the availabilityof eligible mates for"heathen" males has decreased as a result of the Christianization of many villages,and thus long-termbachelors, 119 previously unknown, arefound. The Mapuche of Chile, living in many small reservations, alsohave a fewunmarried adults due primarilyto mate unavailability.

These individuals usually leave theirreservation; women become servants, factory workers, or prostitutes; men join the army or police, or work as laborers. There is no indication that they have entered the Catholic Church(Faron 1964).

Of course, many individuals arelikely to be engaged in sanctioned, as well as clandestine, sexual liaisonsin many ofthese groups. For example, unmarriedpersons in

Toradja (87) villages arethose who have not developed normally, who "by nature have an

aversion to the opposite sex," or who aremerely "quarrelsome and foolish" (Adrianiand

Kruyt 1951 :264). However, many individuals arereported to have affairs, and so marital celibacy cannot be assumed to equate with sexual abstinence.

Thus the groupsin this categorydo exhibit examples of permanentabstinence due

to individual abnormalities,poverty, or choice. These areclearly idiosyncratic phenomena, however, andshould be expected in anypopulation. In many cases,though,

access to women presents a problem for males who must delay or, in some cases, forego marriage. For example,among the Yanomamo (1 63), polygynyand kinship rules force

some men to remainbachelors (Chagnon 1983). Bridewealth, social stratification,and the spread of Christianity areother conditions that may have a similareffect. It is clear,

though, that the factorsresponsible forindividual celibacy varyconsiderably.

While maritaland sexual abstinence may be patterned by institutional forces, the

cases cited above are not examplesof institutionalized celibacy. Individualsin these

cultures are not voluntarilyforgoing reproduction, but striving to achieve it. The 120 Yanomamo area case in point. Chagnon (1988) foundthat Yanomamomales frequently attempt to manipulatekinship classifications to increase theirlikelihood of obtaininga mate.

Permanentabstinence in the societies reviewed above does not occur in the context of altruism,nor does celibacy appearto benefit others. Additionally, there is no evidence that individual cases of abstinence aremaintained or reinforced by others or the society at large.

Unlikely institutionalized celibacy

For many societies in the sample (44%), sources consulted do not explicitly discuss permanentabstinence. As Broude has explained (1981; see also Frayser 1985), one of theproblems with cross-cultural surveysis that ethnographers will often report the presence of a traitbut fail to explicitly report its absence. Researcherstempted to code thetrait as absent thereforerun the risk of error, as the lack of discussion may simply result fromethnographers' lack of interest in, or knowledge about, thesub ject.

Inferences have thereforebeen made based on the depth of detail in relevant domains (marriage,sexual practices, religion, etc.). Wheredata strongly suggest that permanentabstinence does not occur except in non-institutional contexts, if at all, sample units have been coded as "Unlikely." This, of course, is verymuch a judgmentcall, and the rationales for coding decisions require some discussion andillustration. Wheredata were deemed insufficient,the societies in question were dropped from the sample. 121 In some cases, sexual practices aredescribed as so freeand open that it would seem impossible forresearchers not to have discussed patterned abstinence if it existed.

For example, the Yukaghirof northernSiberia (120) arereported as extremelyfree sexually, especially pre-maritally. Virginity is not a valued quality. Even male shamans, some of whom "tend to assume the external resemblanceto a woman," regularly marry

(Jochelson 1975:194).

WhileBuddhism swept Manchuria in later years,with over 30 sects by 1942

(Washington 1956), Shirokogoroffmakes no mention of the religion in two of his accounts of fieldworkbetween 1915 and1918 (1923, 1973). He reports that Manchu

(115) males areusually wed by age twenty-one, or "everybodywill laugh" (1973:64).

Women enjoy a great deal of sexual freedom, which leads to many illegitimate children.

Yet the fewrestrictions around marriageand sexuality aredesigned "to prevent the young women to conceive fromold men, but not to obstructtheir conceiving fromyoung men"

(1973: 103).

The "unnaturalness"of marital andsexual abstinence in severalgroups is typified by Donoghue et al.'s (1962:22) observations regardingthe Rhadeof South Vietnam(74):

"A woman does not consider herself grown up, her duty to her ancestors fulfilled or her future position assured until she has a child of her own. A man has no position until he has takena wife. Thus ...the union betweenman and woman is natural andmarriage is the rational consequence which is approved by social conventions and customs." 122 Some of the processes described earlierwhich can affect male access to mates occur as well in societies within thiscategory. For example, Tonganivalu (1911) and

Waterhouse (1978) report thatalthough polygyny amongthe Mbau Fijians(102) leaves manymen withoutwives, chiefs "lend" some of their wives to bachelors in exchangefor service, andother single men capture wives through warfare. Who remains celibate thereforeappears to be a matterof luck of the draw, or of idiosyncratic characteristics.

Hallpike (1972:138) makespassing reference to the belief amongthe Konso of

Ethiopia(35) that males who do not marryare perceived as weakor effeminate,and

"bullied andridiculed, but they are allowed to live inside towns." So, although in a society where too much indulgence in sexual intercourse is said to dissipate strength, permanentabstinence is unlikely except forrare cases.

For the Kutenai of westernCanada (139), berdaches andtransvestites are

"indignantlydenied" to exist (Tumey-High1941: 128). While the Kutenai idealize monogamyand "great continence,"pre-marital and extra-marital sex areadmitted by elders to be much more common thanwould appearto be the case,and permanent abstinence appears unlikelyto exist.

Haida (131) society, as reconstructedby Murdock andothers forca. 1875, similarlypresents no evidence for institutional celibacy. Haida slaves, taken or bought fromdistant Haida groups or mainlandtribes, could not marry. However, both Murdock

(1934:240) and Niblack (1970:252) describe hereditaryslaves, manyof whom had sex with their masters. Any resulting offspring, however, remained slaves. Thus formal marriagewas absentamong slaves, but apparentlyboth voluntaryand involuntaryunions 123 with others did occur. While slaves were generally verybadly treated andoccasionally murderedor sacrificed, they rarelyattempted to escape because of the repercussions that would certainlybefall anykin leftbehind.

In some cases, permanentabstinence is associated with castration. However, the effects of castration on human sexual behavior vary with the age of the individual at the time of theoperation, as well as other factors (Ellis 1951). Although a general disinterest in sexualbehavior appears to be typical (Rosen and Beck 1988), it is difficultto ascertain with certaintywhether sexual abstinence invariably occurs as a result of castration. In addition, the involuntarynature of most castrations complicates the issue. However,

Larsen(1971) cites the case of the Skoptzy, a Christiansect whose members took the notion of reproductive sacrificeto the extreme-- that of voluntary castration. Although data aresketchy, this choice too appearsto have been associated with the predicted patternof kin cue manipulation.

For the purposesof this survey, societies in which eunuchs are present were coded as unlikely to exhibit institutionalized celibacy, unless there was specific reference to other forms of sexual abstinence (but see Balch 1985). One example are the Ashanti

(19), whose king, a paramountchief , had royal haremswith eunuchs to protect them. The kingalso could sentence individuals to castrationfor a varietyof offenses (Rattray 1969).

Another example arethe Fur of westernDarfur (29), whose powerfulhereditary sultans andother rich men oftenhad eunuchs. These, although slaves, were treated as special confidants. Eunuchs sometimes attainedgreat wealth and"some of the most influential of themmarry, in order that they may appearto have a family"(Felkin 1885:234). 124 However, in general, theFur did not value chastity; fatherswho attemptedto preserve the chastity of their daughters were ridiculed.

Several societies in the samplehave been influenced by major religions

(Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity,and Islamic orders), but do not appear to participate in their celibate institutions. For example, the Somali (36) aroundthe turnof the century are knownto have had Islamicorders. However, these were Sufigroups which did not practice institutionalized celibacy, although the term"dervish" is sometimes used by observers and ethnographersin reference to them. "It is importantto remark that residence in a Sufi convent by no means implied celibacy," says Arberry(1950:84).

Sufism arose in the 9th centuryas a bridge between renunciatory and world-affirming perspectives in the Islamic community. It is characterized by strongsocial andeconomic integration,including marriage. Thusan ascetic traditionin Islam,which spawned the anti-social dervishes,was "domesticated" withinSufism (K.aramu stafa 1994:31). Sufism, without evidence of celibate dervishes, similarlycharacterizes the Kurds(57).

Another exampleof apparentnon-participation in thecelibate institutionsof major religious movements is the UttarPradesh ( 63) village of Senapur, where almost all

1400 inhabitants are Hindu. Although celibacy is discussed fora fewindividuals who have completed the marriedhouseholder stage of ideal Hindu life, there is no discussion of any individuals who opt out of marriedlif e to join ascetic branches. Therefore, permanent abstinence, while possible, seems unlikely. This pattern is not unusual; while partof a largersociety with institutionalized celibacy, rural villages may not be feeding the ascetic sects with members as much as largercommunities or urbanareas. 125 In other cases, a national religion may not be fullyincorporated into traditional societies residing within its borders. The Quiche community of Chichicastenango (155; ca. 1930) is comprised of roughly 25,000 Indiansand only 600 Ladinos, or individuals

acculturated into national society. The Catholic Church is one of the town's most

importantinstitutions, but the Quiche are"not Catholics at all" (Bunzel 1952:164). At age six or seven sacristans are chosen to spend one week out of every four performing

service forthe Church. At age fifteen, boys areconscripted for public service froma list,

and30 become "servantsof the convent." Only a small minority of the population is

involved in these temporaryduties, however, andmost Catholic religious serviceends at

this point.

The Church is viewed as "the ecclesiatical arm of the government," as in pre­

conquest times (Bunzel 1952: 164). Quiches never take communion or otherwise

participatein Church affairssave for weekly service as required. The parish priest, the

richest manin town, is well-respected, but is anoutsider, and no Quiche appears to follow

a traditional Church route to priesthood or monastic life. As Rodas et al. (1940:55-56)

express it, "religion embraces the whole lifeof the Kiche. But not theCatholic

religion ... ". In Chichicastenangoprenuptial chastity is valued for both sexes, but "only a

married manis regardedas a complete person" (Bunzel1952:122).

Similarly,due to the influenceof Catholicism, at first glance theAymara (172; ca.

1940) would appearto exhibit permanentabstinence. However, Tschopik is emphatic in

describing the Church as outside the cultural system of the group, with participation

"nominal, to say the least" ( 1951 : 170). LaBarre( 1948 :3 7) goes furtherin describing the 126 Bolivian priests as enemies who demand contributions which put Aymarasin debt and cause them to lose their land. Aymaraparticipation in the priesthood, therefore,is likely to be rareor nonexistent.

In addition, celibacy appears to be a foreignconcept forthe Aymara. Bachelors andspinsters areunusual (LaBarre1948:129). Children experiment sexually a great deal, beginning long beforepuberty. Marriageis a formof "brittle monogamy,"with trial unions, frequentadultery, and divorce. Even having illegitimate children does not bar subsequent marriage (Tschopik 1951: 167).

Another exampleare the Huichol (152), where once again Catholicism overlays indigenous deities andbeli efs (Grimes andHinton 1969:806). The functionsof the

Catholic priest are performedby a maestro,or "Catholic lay-reader," and areviewed as minor and unimportant. Zingg reports a great deal of" sexual laxity." For example, one of the severest vows a Huichol can make is to "abstain fromadultery for five years"

(1937:140).

Finally, in one case reproduction is delayed in a manner that hints at the

institutionalization of permanentabstinence. Amongthe Basseri (58), tent-dwelling

pastoral nomads in South Iran, the youngestson must often postpone marriageuntil

parents are elderly so that he may head the household they will continue to inhabit. Other

sons postpone marriage as well, sometimes until age thirty-five,so that they canamass

enough sheep andgoats to support wives. Barth (1961, 1964) does not reportcases of

permanentabstinence amongthe Basseri. However, this pattern,where reproductive 127 interests of individuals aretied to family needs and strategies, in some cases does lead to institutionalized permanent abstinence, as will be discussed in the next section.

Institutionalized celibacy

In 33 societies, permanent abstinence was reported by sources in institutional contexts; that is, accompaniedby specificroles andstatus es that go beyond simply a descriptive namefor individuals who are not marriedor who abstain fromsex.

Moreover, in several societies, more than one institutional context forpermanent abstinence was found. For example, The Gheg (48) of Albania appear to have three institutional avenues through which individuals are required to remain permanently abstinent: by becoming a "swornvirgin, " by joining the Bektashi order of dervishes, or by becoming a Christianpriest or monk. Second-centuryRomans ( 49) likewise appearto have had at least three suchaven ues: service as "Vestal virgins," earlyChristian asceticism, andmembership in a group of wandering renunciantsknown as the Cynics.

To test the predictions centralto this dissertation, each institutional context must be explored independently. Table 2 lists a total of 41 institutional contexts in which permanentabstinence is reported as occurring. These canbe divided into three categories: where the context is primarily individual;where it is directly related to kin; andwhere it occurs in the context of non-kin. As will be discussed below in detail, the patternof kinship cue manipulation that formsthe basis forthis study appearsto occur only in the context of non-kin institutions. It should be pointed out, however, that institutionalized celibacy does not preclude the possibility of individuals exhibiting 128

Table 2. Categories of PermanentAbstinence inInstitutional Contexts.

Category Number of Societies Percentage (rounded) Individual 9 22 Kin 6 15 Non-Kin 26 63 Total 41 100 129 permanentabstinence under non-institutional conditions. For example, the Amhara(37) exhibit both Christian monastic celibacy and occasional"mistakes of God" (Messing

1985). Cases of idiosyncratic abstinence arenot discussed in detail below, however, as the thrust of this study is to identifyinstitutional contexts with which to test the predictions of the kinship manipulation model.

Individual contexts

Among the Tiv ofNigeria (16), some males remain uncircumcised, do not have sex or marry, and areknown as ihundu, or "mad," but the differencebetween them and the trulyinsane is recognized(Bohannan and Bohannan 1953 :65). They do not farm, but beg as they wander. There is no institutional frameworkfor vowing or maintaining celibacy -- it is simply a role assumed once someone has chosen it. The posited traits associatedwith manipulationdo not appear to occur here. Althoughtheses individuals wear"eccentric" clothi ng, it is highly variable. Moreover, they do not appearto associate in groups,and there is no formal separationfrom kin. Further, theircelibacy appears to benefitno one, but is simply anexpression of individual variability.

Similarly, the lngalik of the Yukon (122) use the termeniglani, connoting shame and helplessness, to describe lazy,deviant members of their society, oftensons and daughters of "rich men." Afterrepeated warnings,they are turnedaway fromtheir homes and families when often still quite young (10 to 12 years of age). While occasionally they will be adopted by others andreform their ways, most oftenthey remain ostracizedand alone, begging andstealing fromhouseholds, "usually [living] out their 130 lives in what seems to others amiserable fashion, not infrequentlystarving or freezingto death in theend" (Osgood 1959:62).

These individuals, of whom there are only a fewat anygiven time, do not marry.

Although they are forciblyostracized, and so have not undertakenthis life-way of their own free will, they apparentlyhave the opportunityto reformtheir characters, and so have some measure of choice in their destiny. Some may occasionally have sexual relations when they can (Osgood 1959:63). To whatever degreethis status can be described as celibate, it seems to relate to the necessity of everyone in Ingalik traditional society pulling his or her own weight so thatfam ilies can survive in aninhospitable environment.

Familymembers areoften castigated and even beaten if othersfeel they arenot contributing(Osgood 1958, 1959). The eniglaniappear to be incorrigibleswho are finallyabandoned by their families. However, while theirexclusion fromhouseholds may benefitkin, it is not anideal strategy, as everyone'scontribution is expected and valued. Instead, it is a measure of last resort to banishfrom the group individuals who choose in some sense not to participate. Therefore, ratherthan a sacrificefor the benefit of kin, eniglani status appearsto be an individually-baseddecision driven by personality, upbringing, or other factors.

Barnett ( 1966) provides substantial evidence thatmost if not all Palauans ( 111; ca.

1947) have sexual relations. He cites an informant who claims thatall young people have secret love affairs. Additionally, girls stay in boy's "club houses" forextended periods of time, offering themselves sexually to inhabitants, a custom which Barnettlabels as

"prostitution" (1949: 130). Marriageis described as a more overtlyeconomic arrangement 131 thanin most other societies, but one undertaken by the vast majority of Palauans. Smith, although conducting his fieldwork25 years later, agrees that sex is a ubiquitous component of Palauan life: "Abstinence fora prolonged period is thought to cause physical illness in both boys and girls"(1983: 136).

However, Barnettdiscusses Korongs, present in pre-Europeantimes and remembered by informants as having disappeared 40 or 50 years prior to Barnett's fieldwork. To be a Korong, a manor womanwho claims to have been personally contacted by particulargods repeatedlyinforms community members of the occurrence.

If takenseriously, theindividual is in factaccepted as the god when the deity chooses to speak through him or her. TheKorongs thus serve as intermediaries when communicationwith a goC:iis necessaryor desired. Korongs' status rises to that of chiefs, and wealth accrues by meansof the offerings made to gods through them. However, a god may abandon a Korong at any time, an event causing the person's status to revert to its original one.

Female Korongs areexpected to refrain from marryingmo rtal men, while men, described by Barnett as transvestites,are transformedinto wives by the gods who possess them (1949:221-223). Whilemany appear to have been married, the possibility that some were celibate must be considered. However, because Korongs were apparentlyrare even in pre-European times, and because of the widespread sexual activity described earlier, permanentabstinence is likely to have been rareand unusual in Palauansociety.

The decision to become Korong is an individual one, whether driven by material or spiritual concerns, and only later is it group sanctioned. No informationwas found 132 regarding relationships of Korongs with other kin, so the degreeto which a Korong could benefit his relatives throughincreased wealth and status is unknown. There is also no information regarding kinship manipulation traits, although one can infer from Barnett that close association, kin terms, uniform dress,and recruiting amongyouths were not involved.

Berdaches arediscussed by ethographers in several sample groups,and so a brief overview of this role is warranted. According to Callender andKochems (1993 :367), a berdache is "a person, usually male, who was anatomically normalbut assumed the dress, occupations, and behavior of the other sex to effect a changein gender status." In their surveyof the practice, Callender and Kochems found"reasonably good evidence" forthis status in 113 North American Indiangroups. Although usually described as rare, they appear to have been more numerous the farther back in time a description goes.

Many berdaches married, and their sexual behavior is variedand complex. While most accounts stresshomosexuality, some berdaches appearto have been transvestites.

Others were "asexual," exhibitingweak or nonexistent sex drives. Some berdaches were clearlyheterosexual. Regardless of the sexual orientation of berdaches, their sexual partners were always non-berdaches (Callender and Kochems 1993:369). Apparently, the berdache role was not a complete shift to the opposite gender, but instead this status

"allowed men to combine roles assignedto male andfemale genders, mixing aspects of these categories" (pp. 387-388). 133 Therefore,it is inappropriate to assume permanentabstinence, homosexuality, or any other category of behavior across societies with respect to berdaches. An examination of the particular context in each case is required.

Among the Klamath(138), berdaches arecharacterized by Spier (1930:51) as a

"socially canalizedabnormality," involving a "very minor fraction" of the population.

However, thereis a great deal of variability in sexual and marital behavior among participants. For example, one individual Spier heard of abandoned the role of berdache and became a manof influencewith seven wives.

There is no evidence ofberdaches amongthe Hidatsa (141; ca. 1836), according to Matthews (1971) and Lowie (1924). However, Bowers (1965) discusses two in the memory of older informantswhen interviewedaround 1930, although they reported more in the past. These individuals wore women's clothesand attached themselves to older men who had no children and who had trouble obtaining wives. They lived completely as women, andwere always the brother or son of "a man holding tribal ceremonial rights in the WomanAbove and Honey Womanbundles" (Bowers 1965:167). They would adopt orphansor captives and pass on propertyand ceremonial knowledge.

These individuals were pitiedby others, and they were considered prisoners of

Honey Woman. They had been "captured" by this spirit when they had a dreamof

Village-Old-Woman, or a dream about of a loop of sweetgrass(p.326). Thus, only upon admitting to such a dream would individuals be expected to adopt the berdache role.

Swanton(191 1 :100) describes Natchez (146) men who assumed a female role,

wore women's clothing, cooked, and perhaps had sex with men. Such an individual was 134 called "chief of women," andparticipated in raiding partiesand performed women's work whenever women were not available forthese tasks. Berdaches apparentlywere found amongthe Chiricahua Apache (148), although veryrarely. The last one forwhom Opler

(1941:416) had a record died before18 80. This mannever married andadopted the femalesocial role.

The berdache phenomenon is not confined to native North America. Handy

(1923:103) says of the Marquesans (105) that:

"Mahoi or mahu were men who adopted the life of a woman, dressed in woman's garb,allowing their hair to grow long. They devoted themselves to all the activities andrelationships of women rather than men. Nativeinformants told me that these men were not deformedphysically, but that they merely preferred a woman's life ...".

Based on available ethnographicdata, it becomes clearthat in many societies it is possible forindividuals to choose permanent abstinence by embracing legitimate, socially-sanctionedroles. Korongs had animportant religious role in society. Berdaches typically took on the economic duties linked to the female role they assumed (Callender andKochems 1993). Among the Tiv of Nigeria, the eniglani met with much less social approval thanin the previous cases, yet they apparentlyconformed to a specific social role and behaved accordingly. In thissense, each of these examplescan be considered an institution. However, they differfrom other institutions related to permanent abstinence foundin the sample in that they appearto be individually motivated. No one recruits individuals to adopt these roles. Likewise, no one, except perhaps the individuals 135 themselves, appears to benefitfrom their choice. There is no clear evidence foraltruistic sacrifice. A possible exception are the Korongs; while they obviously benefitmaterially fromtheir status, they may also be benefiting others in the process. Unfortunately, data are insufficientto further examinethis question.

Not surprisingly, the predicted traitsassociated with kinship manipulation are not reported by sources forthese institutions. Participants,while they may make vows in some cases, do not appear to be manipulated through kin cues into maintaining their celibacy.

Kin contexts

As suggested by the previous discussion of the Basseri (see p.126), in some cases delayed or rejected reproductionmay provide direct benefitsto relatives. In six of the societies appearing in the sample, permanent abstinence appearsto be strongly associated with benefitsto kin. For example,among the Basques (50; ca. 1934), upon marriage one son supplants the parental generation in a household, with the parents remaining until their death. Parentsprovide money andeducational opportunitiesto other sons so they might succeed in otherways: by joining religious orders or the military, or by emigrating

(CaroBaroja 1958: 268). However, some sons remain in the household as well, sometimes in a "permanentlysingle anddependent state" (p.268, translationadded). Old bachelors and spinsters are sufficientin numbers to forma recognizableand often mocked social class. In manycases, foregoingmarriage does not necessarily mean foregoingsex. Single parentsare relatively common, with infantsoften left on others' 136 doorsteps in nearbyvillages, where theyare usually adopted. However, in many cases permanent sexual abstinence forsingles is likely (Caro Baroja 1944:146-147).

The Irish residents of CountyClare (5 1; ca. 1920), witha population of 95,064 in

1926, typifya phenomenon of small farmersin Ireland who are "unique amongcivilized peoples" (Arensberg and Kimball 1968). Theirs is a patternof very late marriages and unusually high proportions of unmarriedsof all ages. In 1926, 80% of males between twenty-fiveand thirty were unmarried; 62% of thosethirty to thirty-five; 50% of those thirty-fiveto forty; and 26% aged fifty-five to sixty-five. Figures for women are only slightly lower. In addition, a strict moral code renders premarital sex andadultery rare, although fertilityfor those marriedis very high (see also Messenger 1993).

Arensberg andKimball explain thisphenomenon as follows. Landholdings are typically passed in whole to theeldest son upon his marriage,with the newlyweds taking over households. Parentsrelinquish their authorityand usually keep only one room and access to the kitchen, while theson takes over the farm and his wifebecomes the "woman of the house." Siblings arethen to disperse with as much assistanceas can be provided them. The femalesideally receive dowry money fortheir own weddings, but may be helped to become nurses, teachers, or nuns. Single femalesmay also emigrate, thisbeing the "favoriteremedy forhard times" (Arensberg and Kimball 1968:95). Sons likewise are provided educations forprofessional, business, or religious careers, or arehelped to emigrate. Money is amassedfrom life savings andthe dowry brought in by the wifeof the eldest son. The size of the dowryis negotiated by bothsets of parentsbased on the value of their lands. Tirrough this process, "one family,that of the old couple in which 137 theson was merely one of the children, is partiallydestroyed in order to make way fora new one, in which theson andthe incoming wifeare now the adult marriedcouple"

(p.135). Moreover,

"Late marriageand the high incidence of bachelorhood are associable with the reluctanceof the old couple to renounce their leadership, the necessity of acquiring sufficientmeans to portion children, andthe delay in dispersing the closed corporation of the family groupsuntil it is possible to establish the new one" (Arensberg andKimball 1968:149).

In the period of Arensberg and Kimball'sresearch, a couple typically gave up its holdings to the son when the father reached seventy, the age at which he became eligible fora small governmentpension.

This pattern, similarto that of the Basques, is a somewhat more complicated exampleof kin-related celibacy. It is of direct benefitto parents and the family as a whole for sons to delay marriage. It is importantto note that, except among those who decide to enter the religious life, individuals generally do not vow celibacy but simply postpone marriage untilcircumstances permit. However, manymen andwomen remain single fora lifetimeor emigrate to find economic andreproductive opportunities elsewhere.

The Lapps of northernSweden (52; ca. 1950) exhibit a slightly differentpattern.

Celibacy is rareamong nomadic Lapps (Pehrson's 1954, 1964). However, Bernatzik

(1938), whose fieldworkof Swedish Lapps was conducted in 1934, reports that many village men do not marryat all due to "civilization." Paine (1965), doing his fieldworkin 138 the village of Nordbotn, shows a patternof increasingly postponedmarriages for men due to economic reasons. Early marriagecan hinder men, as they canmore easily earn money outside the village without maritalties. Women, on the other hand, find economic advantagesin marryingearly, andoften leave the village to do so. Thus, spinsterhood is

"negligible," but "there arecases in Nordbotnwhere men deliberately foregomarriage, anddissuade their children from marrying, forthe sake of retaining a sibling work group intact" (Paine 1965:42).

An unmarriedman of twenty-eight canexpect to have to wait manyyears before his ownhousehold will economically match the one he was borninto. Paine (1965:54) describes the logic of late marriagefor a typical male:

"If he postponesmarriage, he andhis brothers ( as they growup) canfurther expandthe economy and raise the productivity of the parentalhousehold, andhe vaguely surmisesthat, in thiscase, he will be able to marry at some later date without a precipitate fall in his economic position."

However, some men arethen unable to find a mate, and others intentionally elect never to try. The village Lapp strategy, primarilybenefiting groups of siblings, is related to a differentinheritance pattern than that of the Basquesand Irish: each son inherits a portion of household resources. "Where there is but one heir [as in only one son], marriage is not economically restrictive"(Paine 1965:54).

The Gheg of Albania( 48) exhibit yet another contextthrough which permanent abstinence candirectly benefit close relatives. Durham (1928) reports that marriage is strongly economic and political, andvery much male-dominated. However, if a woman 139 "could findtwelve elders of her tribegroup to act as conjurors she could swear perpetual virginity. If she broke the vow the honour of the conjurors was blackened and a blood­ feudensued. " Coon (1950:24) describes the same practice: "By this meansshe not only gets out of her engagement [arranged by her father],h':,lt also prevents a feudbetween her father'skin andthose of her fiancee." She is now "technically a man." This arrangement if often initiated by a fatherwho has no sons. In other groups, the husband of a daughter might be adopted, but "so strongis the belief in the continuity of the male line that this could not be done in Ghegnia"(Coon 1950:25).

These women dress andact as men, associate with them on equalterms and carry weapons. They may sell younger sisters in marriage (typically a male role), and inherit forthe duration of their lives, after which inheritance passes to the nearest male heir.

Coon findsthis status is sometimes adopted by "defective" [lesbian] women and, in other cases, that women nevertheless have heterosexual sex, but it is clear thatmany abstain from sex fora lifetime(see also Chapter 2).

Therefore, amongthe Gheg, a fatheroften insists on a daughter's becoming a

"man"for economic, social, and political reasons, all to the benefitof the family,although the role might also provide a sanctioned outlet forindividual inclinations.

Another example of kin-based altruismrelated to celibacy involves the

·Vietnamese (73). In village settings, such as KhanhHau (Hickey 1964), the youngest son is expected to remain in the household and care for his aging parents,and "if a girl is the only child, she is expected to care for her aging parents"as well. They usually do marry, however, and,in the case of the only daughter, the husband may move in with her, 140 although in general villagers practice patrilocalresidence. "The goal of all villagers is to have a mate, children, anda house of one's own" (Hickey 1964:99). Children of poor parents must wait until they cansupport themselves andhave sufficient money fora

"proper feast, ti so they are oftenpast the ideal marital age of twenty-onefor males, and seventeen forfemales.

However, Varet(1932; in Tran-Van-Trai1942:214) describes urbanVietnamese patterns as slightly different. "Celibacy amonggirls is nowadays considered a markof filial pietywhen they refusea husbandin order to carefor their aged parentsor bring up their brothers andsisters. On theother hand,complete disfavorgreets celibacy among boys, as this is an act of impiety. ti

Finally, the Tikopia (100; see Chapter 3) present yet another instructivecase. In thisculture, younger members of a family areexpected to remain single, and may even be enjoined to do so by the head of the family. "Deferenceto familyinterest is strong," notes Firth (1936:82), �d so sons tend to comply, although sexual activity is oftenopen to them.

The preceding six cases involving kin-related altruismthrough marital and, in

manycases, sexual abstinence supporttraditional evol utionarypredictions. Such

sacrifices among individuals who sharegenes areconsistent with inclusive fitness theory

andcould formpart of anevolved psychology of altruism. Manipulation of kinship

recognitionto reinforce abstinence should not be expected to apply, as individuals who

standto benefitare already recognized askin. And, in fact,sources provide no evidence

that such manipulation takes place. Celibates do not live in close association with each 141 other, but with the families they appear to be aiding. Fictive kin terms are not employed, nor arefalse phenotypic markers utilized. For example,while Gheg "sworn virgins" dress as men, they dress as they please within the choices available to their new gender role.

Non-kin contexts

In 26 cases, permanent abstinence appearsto occur primarilyin non-kin contexts.

In other words, the primarybeneficiaries of the behavior are individuals who are not related to the celibate. Here, the predicted traits associated with kinship manipulation should apply regardlessof cultural setting. In 18 cases, the religions involved are

Christianityand Buddhism, which, as described earlier,typically exhibit the five predicted kinship manipulation traits. However, as pointed out in the earlier discussion of the Quiche, Aymara,and other groups, the presence of a religious institution in a given setting does not necessarily mean thatall of the practices associated with it will also be present. Therefore, primary sourceswere utilized in an attempt to ascertain the degreeto which the predicted traitsare found in eachspecific context.

Messing ( 1985) describes a patternof monasticism amongthe Amhara of Central

Ethiopia(37; ca. 1953) thatconforms to the Christian monastic pattern described earlier.

TheEthiopian Orthodox Churchis very important in Amhara society, and 10 to 20 percent of the population are priests, monks, or nuns. The Churchreceives numerous endowmentsand owns a great dealof land, andparish populations support the local church through "tithes, rents, services, periodic supplies, memorial gifts, etc." (Messing

1985, I:157). 142 Priests are attached forlong periods to specificparishes. Typically, each church will have one sacristan as administrator, seven junior administrators,12 deacons, and several monks andnuns. Interestingly,priests ofteninvite kin (nephews, forexample) to settle nearthe church, attempting to "create a residential kinship unit forthemselves similar to the residential hamletsof free-holdfamilies" (Messing 1985, I: 157). Priests are expected to marry, but cannot remarry should they become widowed. In that case, they are expected to takemonastic vows.

Monks, however, do not marry. They aretypically foundin landowning monasteries, headed by anabbatacchin ("our father"),a council of elder monks, and a co­ administrator. Manylive in close association within these monasteries, andfor life. All monks wear distinctive white caps androbes, andhierarchy is markedthrough changes in dress. Allcarry hand-crosses for others to kiss. If school boys over ten yearsof age are interested in a careerin theChurch, they attendmonastery schools, where they serve monks, assist in theirbegging, and weardistinctive sheepskins. Aftergraduating at eighteen to twentyyears of age, they can eithertake vows or returnhome to kin.

If a nunneryis attached to a monastery, itis geographicallyseparated from it.

Nuns are typically older women, either unhappily marriedor widowed. There are also a small number of hermits who live where they please,but are provided for by monks.

The emphasis on celibacy in Amhara religious groups occurs in marked contrast to the norms of everydaysecular life, where marriageis veryimportant. "Spinsters areso rarethat they seem not to exist at all, unless so sick or handicappedas to be unable to functionas a wife" (Messing 1985,Il:220). The same is trueof males, unless following 143 the monastic path. Women generally marryaround age thirteen. Two typesof marriages,

permanent andtemporary, are socially acceptable, but only eucharistic permanent

marriagesare sanctioned by the church. Divorce froma first marriage is not uncommon,

and men may simultaneously have permanent and temporary wives. Male virility is

championed,and there is a great deal of sexual activity both within and outside both

marriageforms (Messing 1985, II:270). In rarecases, women andmen take on opposite

gender roles, and areconsidered "mistakes of God." If women, they areblamed and

insulted; if men, they arepitied (11:273).

TheBasques (50) andIrish ( 51 ), both previously described in referenceto kin

contexts, share the influence of Christianity as well. Basque christianizationwas

essentially completed by the 12th century, although some regions were rapidly

christianizedas earlyas the5th or 6th century (Collins 1987:59-61). TheChurch exerts a

very stronginfluence in Vera de Bidasoa, thesample focus, and village members faithfullyobserve religious obligations, with manybecoming priests or monks (Caro

Baroja1958: 180). As discussed previously, manyIrish County Claresons anddaughters

also become nuns, priests, and monks. In both cases the typical pattern of kin

manipulationappears to apply.

Russianpeasants of Viriatino(54), as reported by a variety of ethnographersin

Benet (1970), exhibited institutional celibacy associated with the Russian Orthodox

Church. While celibacy was required formonks and nuns, parishpriests were allowed,

and in some cases obligated, to marry. Afterthe 1917 revolution, organized religion was

banned, and ethnographersof the day make no reference to monks or nuns. However, 144 most are Communist Partyethnographers, and perhaps only reported data consistent with state ideology.

Celibacy is also associated with the Armenian(56) Church during the late 19th century (Lynch 1967). Celibate monks (although few nuns) were common in the sample regions of Erivan and Edgmiatsin, and they resided in wealthy monasteries. Resources, including land�, buildings, and donated funds, were held corporately. Audits by the synod,or ecclesiastical council, were common. As in other orthodoxchurches, parish priests, who were elected by the laity, could marry,but monksand bishops could not.

Children entered seminaryat age thirteen to fourteen,primarily as a means to gain an education, althougha fewindividuals went on to become novices. While earlierbishops chose monks more informally,after 1892 anymonk had to have gone throughseminary andbeen approved by the synod. Monks "were always connected with convents," and identically attired. The usual kin termsabounded: "brothers," "Mother Church," and, for the highestofficials, "little fathers"(Lynch 1967:246-275). While Lynch also discusses in detail the largepopulation of Moslem Azerbaidjanin thearea, he makes no mention of celibacy among them.

Anothersetting where Christiancelibate organizations exist is Haiti (160).

Herskovits (1964) conducted his fieldworkin the townof Mirebalais during the 1930s.

Thistown had a population of approximately 50,000. Herskovits describes a community

where having manychildren was highlyvalued, especially in termsof male prestige.

Because RomanCatholic Church marriageswere veryexpensive, placage marriages often

took place. These informal unions were also binding. Church marriagessometimes 145 followeda placage, if yearsof saving money permittedthem. Herskovits notes the importance of Catholicism in Haiti, with manychildren having no choice but Catholic schools for an education. He also notes the "instransigenthostility" of the Church towardsVoudoun. However, most individualswere members of bothgroups and, according to Herskovits, "no dichotomy exists" (1964:287-9).

Despite the high visibilityof the Catholic Church in Haiti, premaritalsex was apparentlyquite common. There were also many pluralmarriages. Only 20 percent of marriageswere legal in the eyes of the Church. The rest were different kinds of placage relationships, ranging fromlong-lasting cohabitation to the maintenance ofseparate households. Simpson (1942) estimated that three-fourthsof all peasant men in the nation had or once had multiple mates. Sex was described as "the greatest pleasure," andalmost all, maleor female,had sexual relationsbefore entering a marriage or placage. In fact, women who died as virgins were believed by manyto be transformedinto evil spirits, and some peasants had a ritual sexual service forthose who died in that state (Simpson

1942:668)

The system of multiple matings left somemen unmarried. A few"remain single by preference,particularly in thecities, where the incidence of homosexuality far exceeds that foundin the country" (Herskovits 1964:117). Unavailability of a spouse was commonly dealt withby having relationships with marriedwomen. Homosexuals were tolerated with "derision rather thanvindictiveness." Simpson (1942), however, working in northernHaiti, foundhomosexuality described as a "curse." 146 At the time of Herskovits' observationsa fewpriests were Haitian, although their relatively low number was a source of considerable annoyanceto the population.

Metraux(1972) reports that most Catholic priests in the countryare white Frenchmen, especiallytrained for service in Haiti. "Some fewHaitians" go to Franceto become priests as well. Therefore, it seems likely that fewHaitians choose celibacy, yet when they do, it appears to be within the context of the Catholic Church.

The lamasof Lepcha( 68) generally belong to unreformed sects "more freely tinged with pre-Buddhist practices" thancharacteristic of the Church of Tibet, and celibacy is not required of them(Morris 1938:71). However, many members clearly are celibate. For example, Waddell (1958:285-286) reports the presence of several orthodox

(celibate) monasteries. Although TibetanBuddhism is characterized by variousschools, andmuch of the male population becomes monastic only temporarily,there arealways some permanentmonks who take fullvows, including celibacy (Snellgrove1971 ).

Waddell (1958) describes the rise of lamaismduring the 8th century. This movement was originally orthodoxwith respect to Buddhism in general, but "decadence" slowly arose as the church was infiltratedwith pre-Buddhist practices anda lack of monastic discipline. Bythe 11th century reformist sects, such as the Kah-dam-p� reintroduced strict monastic discipline, including celibacy vows, which were reaffirmed during the 15th century. The "wholly unreformed,"or Nin-ma-p� knownas "red-hats" fortheir distinctive head gear,were much more lax with respect to celibacy than"yellow­ hats." But again, many celibate monkswere found in this sect. 147 Lamasof Lepcha aretherefore generally red-hats and occasionally yellow-hats,

and certainlyin thelatter case thepredicted patternwith respect to kinship manipulation

applies. Characteristics of the orthodox sects areseclusion in monasteries, rigid

discipline, organizedbegging, and distinctive wear.

In the red-hat sects, only some aspects of the predicted patternapply. Corporate assets areplentiful, including land and attached peasants who are "practically monastery

serfs," and additional service is demandedof laity to provide forlamas. A strict hierarchy permeatesthe lamasery,and lower-level lamasmust work forthose above them (Gorer

1967: 192). Whether one is to be a lama is determinedshortly after birth by means of a

horoscope, although children of non-celibate lamas, particularly eldest sons, are expected

to become lamasas well. A teacheris chosen between the ages of ten and fifteen,

although at aneven earlierage the predestined child is given a yellow sash andtaken to

ceremonies. Separationfrom real kin is, however, not strictly enforced, andthe use of

kinshipterminology andsymbolism amongmembers does not appear to be present.

While lamasdress andwear their hair differently thanlaity, they oftenwear ordinary

clothes.

According to Gorer, working in Sikkim (the sample focus),

"Lamas do not forma group within the society; the factthat a manis a lamais only one of the aspects of his personality,less important thanhis wealth or poverty, his industryor laziness,his relations by kin andmarriage and friendship with other people" (1967:194). 148 However, there is one noteworthyexception: "It is permissiblefor anylama, even one with a family, to renounce the world and become age-long, a celibate monk. Such celibates live under a verystringent discipline" (Gorer 1967:419n). Ge-long typically live in monasteries, but Gorer provides little information about their strict discipline. And manyvillagers apparently suspectthat ge-longs engage in surreptitious sex.

As Gorer expressess it, the Lepchas "swallowed lamaism whole, but excreted the irritating portions"(1967:193). Celibacy is not a key ingredient, and it is significantto note that the expected patternof kin cue manipulation does not appear to hold in this case, except perhaps forthe fewascetic renunciants.

In Outer Mongolia, LamaistBuddhists, mostly KhalkanMongols ( 66; ca. 1920), were organized into 13 Khutukhtuswhich controlledlarge monasteries and "ruled the territory and people aroundthem like feudalfiefs" (Rupen 1966:18). Until 1929, the church owned18 to 20 percent of total livestock andcontrolled 20 percent of the country's wealth. The monasteries were the only fixedpoints in thisregion of nomads, andwere the centers of influencefor 115,000 to 200,000 lamasdrawn from almost every familyin the territory. Manylamas lived with women in private quarters,but at least

40,000 resided in monasteries. They usually servedabout 20 years, although many remained lamas forlife (Plank1956).

The "yellow sect" of reformistlamas migrated fromTibet to Mongolia during the

16th and17th centuries. Their arrival, along with other aspects of Tibetan andIndian culture, was initially welcomed by locals as a unifyingtool against China. Even after

Chinese domination the lamas were utilized by them as a mechanism for regional 149 pacification(Rupen 1956). However, by the 1930s, the communists succeeded in their planto systematically destroyBuddhism in this region.

As a branch of Mahayana Buddhism, lamaisminvolves a great deal of ritual, including sacred formulas, idol worship,the reading of sacred texts, chants, and the use of prayer wheels. The position of "Living Buddha" illustrates the focus on institutional control: "Now, one could not attain nirvanawithout the aid of the Buddhas and boddhisattvas, that is, without the Church and its ritualsand idols" (Plank 1956:323).

Reincarnationwas used to controlthe succession of religious leaders, andopened the door to political manipulationby the Church, Manchus and, more recently, the Chinese

Communists in Tibet.

Vreeland(1 962) discusses the N�obanchintemple territoryin particular,which housed 1600 to 2000 people, 300 of whom were lamas. It was afforded independent civil status andwas effectively a state withina state, controlling its own resources andobeying its own laws (Plank 1956).

Ordinarylamas lived in communal compounds. Two "Living Buddhas" presided over civil andreligious administration, eachwith servan ts. Each also lived in a single, elaborate dwelling. These LivingBuddhas camefrom theranks of the "incarnated," for they were born afterthe death of the previous incarnates, and each was "marked by some unusual signs or circumstancesatte nding his birth" (Vreeland 1962:93).

Contributions provided by sponsors who requested ceremonies fromspecific lamasprovided the temples with enormous wealth, including "buildings and lands, livestock, clothing, gold andsilver ..." andgreat amounts of stored food(Vreeland 150 1962:99). Income was also earnedthrough patronage, "free-will"off erings from laity, resources willed to temples by laity and lamas, and the sale of livestock andother products of herds and lands. The Church treasurywas corporate;treasuries for the living

Buddhas were semi-corporate,passed on to others in each incarnation;thus, to "the office, not theman" (Vreeland 1962: 102). The personal fame of a particularLiving

Buddha could dramaticallyaffect the flowof contributions. The laity received merit for dedicating sons to serviceand formaking contributions, and "a lama had oftento be consulted [and thus paid] in orderto determinewhether the simplest act of daily life should be undertaken" (Plank 1956:315).

Lamasand novices owned their ownlivestock andhad to provide for their own sustenance,teceiving only occasional bonuses from theChurch treasury. They were exempt frommilitary service andfrom taxes on theirlivestock. Their greatnumbers were in part explained by inheritancerules. In general, only one son was chosen heir to family resources, while others were given shares andset up individually. So there was a

"general practice of sending at least one son into the lamachurch. Lamas were required to remain single andnormally resided in the temple" (Plank 1956:53). Parents could dedicate children as young as six or seven, or individuals could join as adults with parental consent. Marriednovices had to be divorced at the time of pledging.

Full ordination at age twenty involved a new given name and the maintenance of

253 prohibitions (Plank 1956: 105). Dress and hairstyle were uniform. Individuals occasionally dropped out of the Church to help their families when in need. In special 151 cases, lamas could continue to head their families and, if " good citizens," might be permitted, although unofficially,to live with women and even have children.

Therefore, while manylamas married, many did not, but all were subject to institutional control. Lamas andlaity alike contributedresources andlabor to the institution, and "a formidablecorporate organizationcame to control a greatportion of the population andthe wealth of the country" (Rupen 1956:11 ). Having sons become lamas certainly benefitedfa milies in many ways (including spiritually, as salvation was assured for families who did so), but lamas clearly contributedaltruistically to non-kin.

The expected patternof kin cue manipulationappears to have been present, especially for the manywho lived truly ascetic, monastic lives.

When permanent abstinence occurs in Buddhist orders in other sample societies, it conformsin most respects to the predicted pattern,although details are oftenlacking.

Buddhism in Burma (71) has already been described at some length, andsources confirm the patternof kin cue manipulationas discussed. An additional point, however, should be made. In Burma,as in several other Buddhist societies, almost every child becomes a novice, at least temporarily (Appleton 1953:22), andeven ordained monkscan leave at anytime. However, there is a core of permanentmonks who maintain life-long vows, including celibacy. These monks served as the focusof Spiro's (1970) research,which was discussed earlier.

Available data forBuddhists residing in the Tonkin Delta in Vietnam (73) are insufficientto supportany conclusions regardingcelibacy. Gourou (1955), the cited authority, makes no mention of it. Hickey (1964), however, in a discussion of Mekong 152 Delta hamlets, describes a scenariotypical of Buddhist villages in other parts of Asia.

Theyare nominally Buddhist, but more stronglyinfluenced by Cao Daism, which does not involve celibacy. A fewBuddhist priests visit the hamletsin rotation or reside in villages, while more "standard" Buddhism is present in urbancenters. Depending on the order, some Buddhist priests marry, while others arecelibate. For the villagers, "social expectations are that an individual marry, have children, and provide well forthem.

Bachelors and spinsters are fringepeople, childless couples are viewed with pity (usually theyadopt a son), andpoor providers are scorned" (Hickey 1964:233).

Donoghue (1968), in his study of a fishingvillage in centralVietnam, similarly findsa blend of Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, animism, and ancestor-worshipin the religious practices of the general populati�n. As in the Mekong Delta, Buddhist priests occasionally visit the village.

Dutreuil de Rhins ( 1879) describes the bonzes( as Buddhist monks areknown in

SoutheastAsia) of Tagne-phenoc,who do undertake vows of chastity. He also describes training schools for novices. Bonzes areexempt frommilitary service (as long as they remain chaste), aregiven rice allotmentsby the governmentand "abundant" alms,and are encouraged to makemoney by selling votive objects. They leave their retreatsonly for public ceremonies, funerals,and holidays. "In short, theyare good men with tonsured heads, peaceful and growing fat in their contemplative life" (p.139).

In Vietnam, males oftenleave their birth villages andbecome Buddhist priests and monks in urbancenters. Theywill then oftenfind themselves "working"villages other than their own. Based on this, and the fact that manyBuddhist celibate orders in Vietnam 153 appearto conformto the predicted patternof kin cue manipulation (e.g., Ling 1970; Wei- hsunFu andWawrytko 1994), it seems reasonable to conclude that this patterngenerally applies, although more information is needed about the Tonkin Delta sample.

The movement of potential Buddhist priests to urbancenters also holds true for

Korea (1 16). Sondup'o, the sample unit, like manyKorean villages, is essentially

Confucian, with no avowed Buddhists. Marriageis "almost as certain as death" (Osgood

1951: 113). However, visiting Buddhist monks andpriests make regularvillage rounds.

Some are reputed by villagers to have sex with marriedwomen. In urbanareas, although bachelors and spinsters arerare (Hewes andKim 1952), Buddhism is established to the degreethat some individuals take andmaintain vows of celibacy. This is also verylikely the case forChristianity. In the mid-l 940s there were 7000 monks in all of Korea, but also 700,00 Christians, roughly half of themRoman Catholics (Osgood 1951 :249).

In Kaihsienkung(114 ca 1936), a northernChinese village with approximately

1500 inhabitants in 1935 (Fei 1947), it is seen as every individual's dutyto marryand have children. However, due to female infanticide (in turndue to primogeniture), men in searchof mates outnumber women; Fei found 43 men still bachelors at or past their mid­ twenties, although "not a single womanabove 25 is a spinster" (p.52). Migration to urban areasin searchof wives -- or religious careers -- is a common solution.

While the communityhas two Buddhist temples, most religious practices, primarilyrelated to ancestorworship, takeplace in private homes. Only one priest resides in each temple, where he "lives on the income of the temple andkeeps aloof from 154 secular activities" (Fei1947:105 ). Typically the priests arenot fromthe community, and they areviewed by locals as respected strangers.

Fried (1953), in the course of his fieldworkin severalother Chinese villages, confirms the general patternof worship in the home, occasionaluse of priests fromother regions for Taoist and Buddhist rituals when affordable, andfe w villagers actually joining religious ranks. Thus, while celibacy is indeed present in Chinese society andconforms to the expected patternof kin cue manipulation, it is noticeably absent fromKaihsienkung and similar villages.

In Japanese(117) villages during the early19th century,third to fifthorder sons were oftenstarved or killed in infancy, adoptedout, or allowed to remain "unmarried

'uncles' in their natal homes, potential nuisancesor threats to household harmony"

(Beardsleyet al. 1959:242). At the time of Beardsleyet al.'s fieldwork, "excess" males typicallymoved to urban areas. DeVos (1973:83) reports that anunmarried person in

Japan is "strange," andcomparatively rare.

However, Buddhismand Shintoism are both powerfulinfluences in Japanese village life, with differentvillages stressing one over the other. In Niiike, a village of roughly130 people, Buddhismis emphasized. Village priests (furn)of the Nichiven sect reside in a local temple andmake periodic rounds to the community, supported by begging, contributions,and payment forconducting religious ceremonies (Beardsley

1972). As withsmall villages in other areas, it is unlikely that manyof the resident priests areof local origin. In all respects, theyappear to conform to the traditional

Buddhist pattern. 155 Anoth�r group within the research sampleare the Khmer or Cambodians (75) in

Angkor during the late 13th century. Theravada Buddhism slowly replaced Brahmanism in Cambodiabetween the 6th and15th centuries, and by the 1950s, the countrywas 90 percent Buddhist (Steinberg 1959). Chou Ta-kuan, whovisited Angkor in 1296, described three religions in the area: Taoism (althoughthis may have been anascetic

Hindu sect), Brahmanism, and Hinayanist Buddhism (fromwhich Theravada Buddhism originated). Although he does not specifically discusscelibacy, he describes bonzes who appearto conformto the classic Buddhist pattern:living in wealthy monasteries, begging forfood, wearing distinctive clothing, etc. (in Briggs 1951 ). Therefore,there is reason to believe that the general Buddhist patternobserved earlieralso applies to the Khmer.

Data presented by Sharpand Hanks (1978) forcentral Thailand (76) are entirely consistent with other Buddhist societies previously described. Thai monasteries are large andwell-off due to laitycontributi ons, withhead priests having both a "lay managerand corpsof assistants" (1978: 140). Begging is highly organized, and "temple boys," who may be eight yearsold or younger, are oftendedicated by their parentsto serve meals to priests and accompanythem on daily rounds. These boys live in the temples and their services areoff ered forindeterminate lengths of time, oftenmany years. Whilemany returnto family life, others remain and become monks at age twenty. Monks wear traditionalgarb and shave their heads and eyebrows.

Additionally, Sharp and Hanksprovide descriptions that contradictthe notion that familiesbenefit materially fromhaving members join monasteries. In Bang Chan, 156 " ...parents, by giving their sons to the temple, makegreater merit thanby any other single act of devotion. They give up their valuable helpers at a time when they are most competent. Indeed, a son's obligation to his parentsends at this point, andif parentswish his help afterhis resignation fromthe monastic order [many,but by no meansall, of monks are temporary] they must bargainfor his services almostas in the open market" (Sharp andHanks 1978: 143).

Thus, while there are spiritualand perhaps status-related gains, giving up a son in these circumstanceshas a very real cost. Ordinationis also very expensive, andusually paid forby the parents aftersaving for several years. Consistent with the relationship of merit to resources is Sharpand Hanks' observationthat " ...priests do not thankthose who fill their begging bowls with food; they receive their donations in silence, forthey are enabling members of the communityto makemerit. The almsgiver thanksthe priest for accepting his offering" (1978:95).

There areseveral other non-kin institutional contexts involving permanent abstinence that need to be identifiedand discussed. These areof particularinterest because they may represent independent, though parallel, organizational innovations. To the extent that these cases conform to the predicted patternof kinship manipulation, they strengthenthe propositionthat kinship deceit reinforces reproductive sacrificein non-kin settings.

Among the Fon ( 18) peoples of Dahomey during the late 19th century, the

"Amazons" exhibited anunusual formof permanent abstinence involving females. The king's palace, home to 6000 to 8000 residents, was a "kingdom within a kingdom." Save forthe king, it consisted of women and neutered men, all knownto the general population as "our mothers" (Skertchly 1874:458) and"wives of the king" (Argyle 1966:63). 157 Palace women were grouped into classes, each having a distinctive nameand dress. One small group consisted of the mother of the king (who, upon her death, was replaced by an appointee) andthe symbolic mothersof all previous kings. Another group of approximately 40 women wasmade up of those permitted to bearheirs forthe king.

The largest group,however, was composed of celibate women periodically chosen from the general populacewhile veryyoung. After years of training,they perfonned a variety of functions, including serving as palace administratorsand bodyguards. Others were enrolled in special fightingunits in the king's army, and it is these in particularwho were described as "Amazons" by Westernobservers.

Within this largestgroup there were several divisions, each identified with particularclothing, hair styles, and names. Members' separation fromthe populace was complete: even when outside the palace they appearedonly in groups,between long poles set on the ground by eunuchs (who wore warning bells around their necks). Only the chief eunuchs could cross the boundarieswith impunity, andany transgressing males were to be killed.

While some members of this group were given as wives by theking to high rankingmales, most were to remain celibate forlife, risking death for themselves and their male companions if found to be unchaste. Although violations appear to have been rare, the fact that "only a fewwere executed in satisfactionof the demands of the law" suggests that the severest punishmentwas indeed carried out (Argyle 1966).

Each of the Amazons had fromone to 50 fe male slaves, chosen fromenslaved families in the populace. These slaves worked the fields,carried water to the palace, and 158 attendedto their masters' personal needs. The Amazonsin administrativeposts mirrored the males holding similarposts in thekingdom. Each was designatedthe "mother" of her male counterpart and accompanied him to meetings withthe king. This system "thereby check[ed] anyrebellious intention that might enter the mind of any ambitioussubject, and ensure[d] [the king's] personal safety" (Skertchly 1874:454).

Betzig ( 1986) suggests that eliminating this manywomen fromthe general population favoredthe relative reproduction of the king. However, thisexplanation seems less imperative thanthe control of other males and resources (Balch 1985). After all, "no one canmarry a wifewithout first submitting her to the king, who, ifhe pleases, enlists her in the Amazoniancorps" (Skertchly 1874:444). The king thus selected women fortheir reproductive value first,then forgifts to other prominent men,and lastlyas administratorsand soldiers for his kingdom. Forced celibacy, along with kinship recognition manipulation, appearsto have been utilized to help engender and maintain the altruismdemanded by the king. Prohibiting lovers and kin ties provided a cadre of trustworthy altruistsand prevented any significantloss of resources.

Data for the Babyloniansat the close of Hammurabi's reign(45; ca. 1750 BC) are sketchy and oftencontradictory. Bachelors appearto have been rare, althoughthere were eunuchs, most likely individuals punished for their homosexuality (Saggs 1969:185, 213).

Additionally, there were priestesses engaged in the full-time serviceof various deities. In some cases, as in the temples of the deity Marduk, priestesses were to remain celibate for the length of service, typically 30 years. 159 Women were offeredfor temple serviceby their parentswhen young girls. They were given new sharednames, and were prohibited fromleaving the cloister (Driver and

Miles 1952). There were no prohibitions against marriageafter temple service, and some even adopted children forthe purposes of inheritance. However, marriage and children typically were not contemplated by a retired priestess, as "she would in all probability be beyond the age of child-bearing" (Driver and Miles 1952,II:367).

For Babyloniansof this period it appears that long-term, at times permanent sexual abstinence was fairly common. Such institutionalized celibacy conforms,in most respects, with the kinship manipulation model advancedhere.

Within the RomanEmpire ( 49; ca. 110 AD) there were at least three different avenues of potential celibate behavior. Augustus (ca. 18 BC) penalizedwomen and men over the ages of twenty andtwenty-five, respectively, who remained celibate (Friedlander

1979, I:233), although it is unclearto what degree social sanctionsagainst celibacy remained in Trajan'stime, which serves as the sample focus. Slaves were numerous, and the mannerof their treatmentwas essentially leftup to their owners, although their castrationwas prohibited after83 AD (Carcopino1940). Slaves could not legally marry, but could form sexual relationships that would be legally recognized if andwhen they were freed (O'Rourke 1971: 177). For individuals in the general population, marriage occurredat anearly age. Premarital sex was frownedupon, anddivorce and remarriage were apparentlycommon (Friedlander 1979, I:234,243). Prostitution and concubinage were also tolerated (O'Rourke 1971:182). 160 One exception to this general patternwere the priestesses of Vesta, the goddess of the hearth. These "Vestal virgins" were chosen by Rome's highest priest to serve for30 yearsas guardiansof the sacred firekept in the public temple in Rome. These priestesses had to be bornof freecitizens and were chosen to serve at anearly age, usually between six and ten. They wore a special bridal dress, at least on public occasions. Unchaste behavior was punishable by death, a penalty clearly enforced, particularly under

Domitian'sreign (81-96 AD [Benko 1971:66]).

Temples associated with foreign religions, such as the worship of the Egyptian god Isis, were commonlyviewed as centers for illicit liaisons, adultery, andprostitution

(Friedlander 1979:Ill). On the other hand, Cynics, wanderingascetics who followedthe teachings of Diogenes of Sinope, appear to have been celibate. Stronglyinfluenced by

Hinduism, Cynics carried only a cloak,wallet, and club. Members underwent prolonged andintense training,associated primarilywith each other, and sustained themselves through begging and contributions from sympathizers. Mainstream Romansviewed them as con artists andseducers. However, Benko (1984) suggests that many of them were sincere in their beliefs, and that their examplestr ongly influencedChristian renunciants in theearly Roman Empire.

According to Benko, there were two ascetic paths adopted by early Christians.

The first involved renunciationsimilar to that of the Cynics, andrequired followingJesus' admonitions to abandonall possessions and separate fromthe world, including fromkin.

At some point these renunciantsbegan to associate in a more organizedfa shion, leading to monastic organizations in the East during the 3rd and4th centuries. For example, 161 Tatian left Rome around172 AD and formed a sect of "Abstinents" who condemned marriage, and who were viewed by the Church as heretics (Benko 1984:44-46).

The second path described by Benko is one of "mainstream"Christiani ty in Rome andother urban centers, where renunciation was not required. Whether or not these individuals were celibate is unclear, but appearsunlikely. Trajan prohibited the hounding of Christians and permitted those who recanted their faith to escape punishment.

However, Christianitywas clearly seen as a threat to Rome, and Christians were tortured and killed when identified (Friedlander 1979:III; MacDonald 1996). In such an

environment, celibacy would have servedas aneasy markerof Christianaffiliation.

Pliny's description of Christian customs of the time includes injunctions against adultery,

but he makesno referenceto celibacy. M�cDonald (1996:61) arguesthat celibacy was not encouraged in the earlyChurch except for those "naturally" so inclined. It appears thatinstitutionalized celibacy did not emerge in Christian Rome until monasticism floweredseveral centuries later.

Albania has a complicated political and religious history. Catholic and Orthodox

Christianbranches were the principal faiths until theTurks cameto power during the 15th

century. Thishistorical event explains why mountain tribes such as the Gheg (48; ca.

1910) could be influenced by both Islamic and Christiantraditions. The Bektashiorder of

Muslim dervishes hada powerful influence on Albanians, particularly in urban areas.

Although both marrying and celibate branches of the order were present, the former had

few followers,while the latter had 70 monasteries throughout the country(Hasluck

1954:39). 162 Birge (193 7) notes that the Bektashi had a long historyof conflictwith orthodox

Islam, culminating in the order's reestablishment in the 19th century. Followingthis the

Bektashi gained strong supportin Asia Minor and the Balkans. Highly organized, this order obtained much of its revenue fromcontributors, especially those residing in Turkey.

Afterbeing abolished there in 1925, the order remained verystrong in Albania. In the

1930s the Bektashi community comprised 15 to 20 percent of the Albanian population

(Birge 1937:86).

The mursit, or religious teacher, is veryimportant in the Bektashiorganization.

Adherents believe "a man must be born twice ...he must be bornof his mother, andhe must be bornof his mursit"(Birge 1937:96-97). Approximately 10 years of trainingare necessaryto become a dervish. Officialheadgear is then worn,and special gestures and headshakes areadopted. Monasteries areheaded by abbots, and the predicted patternof kin cue manipulationappears to be utilized.

Coon (1950:35) discusses the additional presence in Albaniaof native-born

Catholic priests trained in Rome. For the Gheg, there are therefore two possible religious contexts for permanent abstinence, andeach appearsto conform to the predicted pattern of kinship manipulation.

In the Americas, three institutional contexts for permanentabstinence appearin the sample. A very interesting one is that of the Pawnee(142), a Caddoan groupof the midwesternprairies, who numbered roughly 12,000 in the 1830s. Their numbers were already very likely reduced by then, andcertainly afterwards, due to disease and violent contact with whites (Weltfish1965:3). Around 1867, the Pawnee were divided into four 163 independent groups, the largestbeing the Skidi, which was composed of thirteen villages or bands.

Murie, himself a member of the Skidi tribe, describeda number of traditional

Pawnee sodalities, including a celibate societyknown as the "Childrenof the Iruska"

(1916:580-581). According to Skidi oral tradition, the societywas created by a blackbird which appointed a humanleader to select formembership "boys who seemed queer, even insane." These recruits were known as saaro (youths). They were contraries, in that they did the opposite of what they were asked or expected to do. They always wore black facialand body paint, symbolizing their readiness forbattle. They also placed a blackbird skin on their heads and carrieda quiver fullof prized arrows. "They never marriedor had anythingto do with women," and spent their time associating only amongthemselves, usually playing a gambling wheel game. lruska had a double meaning among the Skidi -­ it literally meant "the fireis in me," but symbolically the termtranslates more faithfully as

"I can extinguish the lifein the fire" (Murie 1916:608). Among the Skidi there was also a powerful (non-celibate) medicine societycalled lruska, whose members specialized in the treatmentof burns, but Murie describes no other connection between the two groups.

The Children of lruska was apparentlya short-livedsociety, no doubt owing to its members' behavior in battle. In the faceof conflict, they would continue to play their wheel game until told by others not to fight,at which point they would shoot arrows into the frayand then attempt to retrieve them. In Murie's words, andfrom an outsider's perspective, such contrarybehaviors were "anidiotic performance." All members of the 164 society, save for one, were killed in battle. Thelone survivor disappeared shortly thereafter.

Murie describes this and several other "private organisations" as created by individuals who were not accepted into the manyformal Pawnee associations, yet who had enough personal influenceto attract followers. As in the case of the Children of the lruska,"a great misfortuneor disaster was almost certainto end the organization." While

Murie describes 29 formal and private societies among the Pawnee, only the Children of the Iruskaemployed kin symbolism in their names.

The Aztecs (153; just prior to conquest) had roughly5000 priests, virgins, and novices caring for the Huitzilopochtli temple in Tenochtitlan, thecapital city. There were also many similarindividuals, though fewerin number, at other temples in Tenochtitlan andelsewhere throughout the empire (Thompson 1933). Priests took a vow of chastity, and"in no wise were they to look upon a woman"(Sahagun 1965:65). They wore long white cotton skirts and fringed capes, distinctive featherwork, anddid not cut, comb, or wash their hair. Thiswas in contrastto therest of the population, who kept their hair and bodies "scrupulously clean"(Thompson 1933:224). Soustelle (1962) describes priestly robes as black or darkgreen, often withembroidered humanskulls andbones.

Regardingvalued resources, Soustelle says:

"The wealthof the gods was enormous: therewere not only the buildings and their land, the statues, the countless implements of worship, which were of great value, and the offerings of provisions and clothes, continually brought by the faithful, but also the agriculturalland which the ecclesiastical corporationslet out or had worked forthem, and their share of the tributefrom the subjected provinces" (1962:53). 165 Villages were chargedwith providing temples with food,wood for the fires which were never allowed to go out, incense, and other necessities. For example, the temple at

Texcoco, situated just east of the Azteccapital, had 15 villages assigned to provision it.

Each of the hundreds of deities within the Aztec pantheon had priests, attendants, and novices. Each priest wore the name of the god he served, and the god he literally became during rituals. TheAztecs were a theocracy, where the gods ruled but the priests interpreted. Accordingly, priests had enormous power. However, "It is hardto recognize a priesthood completely separate fromcivil officialdom;both were mutually dependent.

There was a priestly hierarchy, it is true, but it probably operated in conjunction with civil position" (V aillant 1944:118).

The lives of priests were "outside of their personal control, since their religious duties occupied them both day and night and since unfaithfulness to their vows brought themthe severest kind of punishment" (Soustelle1962:143). "Lecherous or drunken behavior" brought them death. They also lived lives of "austere poverty" (p.58).

However, they paidno tax,and allof their basic needs were takencare ofby the commoners.

Boys of middle-classfamilies were sent, at age six or earlier, to special schools attached to temples. There they received instruction frompriests, and also maintained the temples by sweeping, caring for fires, getting water, preparing paint forpriests to wear on ritual occasions, etc. Sons of nobility also went to a special school known as the

Calmecac, attached to the main temple, where they "shared the lifeand austerities of the priests" (Soustelle 1962:51). There they were trainedas religious andmilitary leaders. 166 Their duties forserving the main temple were the same as those of middle-class children in smaller temples. The children from both classes rarely saw their parents, were required to sleep in dormitories, and were subject to verystrict discipline. For most, this period of training lasted six to eight years. Parentssometimes vowed their infantsto the priesthood, and later took them, at around age ten, to the Calmecac. Children of the noble class, as well as ordinarychildren who showed religious promise, becamenovices and junior priests, remaining for manyadditional yearsat the Calmecac.

Girls were also taughtin special schools, which they entered at age five. They lived closely chaperoned and in daily association with each other. They had to abide by the same strict discipline as boys, and they performedtemple duties such as guardingfires andpreparing foodoff erings. They serveduntil claimed in marriage. Female infants

were also dedicated by their parentsto religious service, entering the novice ranks when

of a suitable age. Priestesses were to remain celibate as long as in service, and, although they could marryif asked, "manypref erredto give themselves up entirely to religion"

(Soustelle 1962:55). Those who chose permanent religious service becamethe

instructors of subsequent generations of novices.

The emperor was called "fatherand mother" of all, and some gods were referred

to by kinship names,such as the goddess Toci ("our grandmother"). Otherwise there is

little referencein Aztec sources to the use of kinship terminologyin priestly guilds. The

emperor controlledthe enormouswealth of the empire, obtained primarily through tax

and tribute. He also personally received the greatest shareof it, as "there was no

distinction between the public treasury andthe sovereign'sprivate fortune" (Soustelle 167 1962:55). However, he personally undertookthe costs of warand of providing foodto the populace when times were lean between harvests.

The Inca (171) arethe last society in the sampleto be discussed. According to de la Vega (1871), "Virgins of the Sun" were oftenset apart fromtheir familiesat age eight or earlierto live in permanentseclusion in the Temple of the Sun at Cuzco, the Inca capital. These women were chosen only if they possessed "pure" royal blood. However, because their numbers oftenexceeded 1500 at any one time, the average degree of relatedness among them was likely to be low. Unlike other women reserved for service to royalty, the women set aside for the Sun were to live in lifelongchastity and were looked upon as his wives. They lived in close association only with themselves, the mama-cuna

("a women who has to performthe duties of a mother") who oversaw them, and their servants, also virgins, who assisted them. These servantsalso lived in permanent seclusion andwere supervisedby their own mama-cunas, but they were not of royal blood and merely served their humanmasters.

Only_ the Ccoya, or queen of the empire, andher daughters could visit the Virgins of the Sun. Death awaited anyman who "violated" one of these women, and his family would be executed as well. Punishment forthe nun involved was to be buried alive. That these rules were enforcedis clearlyevident in ethnohistorical documents:

"When Pizarroand his men reached Cajas they saw 'a building occupied by five hundred women doing nothing else but spinning andmaking maize'; outside were the bodies of a number of men hung up by their feet. On asking what crimes these poor wretches had committed, Pizarro was told 'a manhad succeeded in approaching one of these women andhad been put to death, along with the guards who had allowed it to happen"' (Metraux 1969:113). 168 The virgins, although set aside forthe Sun, also performed a varietyof duties that directly benefitedthe Inca rulerand his wife. They wove all of the royal clothing, as well as clothing offered by the ruleras a sacrifice tothe Sun. The nuns also made the identifying tassels wornby those with royal blood (including, presumably, themselves).

In addition, the nuns made analcoholic beverageconsumed by the Inca andhis familyat festivals.

The Virgins of the Sun were explicitly a haremfor the Sun god. While the Inca emperor had "innumerable wives and concubines (more thanseven hundred, it is said)"

(Metraux 1969:82),he could not touch these women. The finegold andsilver housed in the temple were (at least described) as the Sun's property, not the Inca's. Additionally,

"The widest landsand largest herds belonged to him, andhe it was who received the richest offeringsof gold and silver and finecloth. When the emperors returnedtriumphant from a successfulcampaign, they would dedicate a partof their booty to him" (Metraux1969: 123).

Supportfor predictions

Although the cross-culturalanalysis presented here is far fromexhaustive or conclusive, it does lend supportto the prediction that permanentabstinence in non-kin settings is associated with the manipulation of kinship recognitionmechanisms. This manipulation involves close association of abstinents, theirseparation from actual kin, induced phenotypic similarity, use of false kin terms and symbolism, andthe preference foryoung recruits. In addition, a relationship between non-kin altruismand institutional 169 resources which are protected through the permanentabstinence of members is strongly suggested.

Table 3 shows the distribution of the fivetraits associated with cue manipulation, as listed above, in the 41 institutional contexts where permanentabstinence is reported in the sample. Of these 41 contexts, as discussed in the previous sections and enumerated earlierin Table 2, 26 are contexts where the primarybeneficiaries of permanent abstinence appear to be non-kin, six are contexts where the beneficiaries are primarily kin,and nine are contexts in which only the individual abstinents themselves, if anyone, appearto benefit. As can be seen in Table 3, traitsassociated with manipulation tend to be reportedby sources as present in non-kin institutional contexts, and arenot reportedas present in individual andkin institutionalcontexts.

Table 4 shows the number of instanceswhere each practice associated with kin cue manipulation is reportedby sources as present in non-kin institutional contexts as comparedto individual andkin contexts. Among individual andkin contexts, only in one case do sources report a practice associated with the manipulation of kinship cues: The

Gheg "sworn virgins" are recruited as youths.

In light of cross-cultural data, there appear to be fourscenarios through which permanentabstinence is either forciblyor voluntarilyadopted:

1. Individuals, due to their unique physiological or psychological disposition, lifechoices, etc., abstain permanently from sex. There is no institutional context for such a decision. This applies to the majority of societies in the sample,as shown originallyin

Table 1. Forty-nine societies in the sampleare explicitly described as exhibiting 170 Table 3. PermanentAbstinence in Institutions: Contexts andPatterning of Kin Cue Manipulation.

I: individual; K: kin; N-K: non-kin; Y: mentioned in sources; * empty cells in columns 5-9 mean no mention in sources -- note that this does not necessarily mean trait is absent.

SCCS # Name Context Celebate *Close *Pheno- *Kin *Young *Separation Group Assoc- Typic Symbolism Recruits fromActual {if non-kin} iation* Similari!I Kin 16 Tiv I 18 Fon N-K Amazons y y y y y 37 Amhara N-K Christian y y y y y 45 Babylonians N-K priestesses y y y y 48a Gheg K swornvirgin y 48b Gheg N-K Bektashi y y y y y 48c Gheg N-K Christian y y y y y 49a · Romans N-K Christian y 49b Romans N-K Vestal virgins y y y y 49c Romans N-K Cynics y y y 50a Basques K 50b Basques N-K Christian y y y y y 51a Irish K 51b Irish N-K Christian y y y y y 52 Lapps K 54 Russians N-K Christian y y y y y 56 Armenians N-K Christian y y y y y 66 Khalka Mongols N-K Buddhist y y y y y 68 Lepcha N-K Buddhist y y 71 Burmese N-K Buddhist y y y y y 73a Vietnamese K 73b Vietnamese N-K Buddhist 75 Khmer N-K Buddhist y y y y y 76 Siamese N-K Buddhist y y y y y 100 Tikopia K 101 Pentecost 105 Marquesans 111 Palauans 114 Chinese N-K Buddhist y y y y y 116a Koreans N-K Buddhism y y y y y 116b Koreans N-K Christianity y y y y y 117 Japanese N-K Buddhism y y y y y 122 Ingalik I 138 Klamath I 141 Hidatsa I 142 Pawnee N-K c. oflruska y y y y 146 Natchez 148 Chi. Apache I 153 Aztec N-K priests y y y y y 160 Haitians N-K Christian y y y y y 171 Inca N-K virgins of Sun y y y y y 171

Table 4. Distributionof Kin Cue Manipulation Practices in SampleSocieties Exhibiting Institutionalized Celibacy.

Kin-manipulation Non-kin Contexts Kin and Individual Institutional Practice (n=26) Contexts (n=l5)

close association 23 0 0 phenotypic similarity 23 0 kin symbolism 21 young recruits 23 1 0 separationfrom actual kin 23 172 abstinence only in these contexts. In addition, this scenario likely applies to 17 additional

societies where permanent abstinence was explicitly reported as absent, 78 societies where institutionalcelibacy is unlikely, andeven in societies which also exhibit some

forms of institutionalized celibacy (forexample, see page 134 fordiscussion of the

Amhara [37]).

2. Culturallysanctioned rolesor institutions exist to legitimize the expression

of celibacy. Once again, the choice andits maintenanceare voluntary or

idiosyncratic. Examplesfound in the sampleare the Tiv ihundu ( 16) and the Korongs of

Palau (111).

3. Celibacy is forced or chosen because of some direct benefitto kin. The

circumstances surrounding celibacy are not idiosyncratic, but familial. Individual

inclinations,although still perhaps a factor, aremerged with benefitsto kin. There is also

cultural legitimization of the chosen role. Rather thanbeing viewed as an aberrant act,

here celibacy is, at least in the case of kin, sanctionedand even valued. Examples in the

sample include permanentbach elors andspinsters amongthe Basques (50), Irish (51),

and village Lapps (52).

4. There is forcedor voluntary membership in institutions which demand,rather

than merely legitimize, abstinence. Examplesin the sample include the major religions,

the Aztec priestly class (153), andthe Inca Virgins of the Sun(171).

Only rarely does permanentabstinence occur in the primarycontext of close kin,

as only in six societies in the sample does this patternappear. In the vast majority of

societies, permanent abstinence, if it exists at all, appears to be idiosyncratic. Whileit is 173 possible that individuals choose to refrainfrom marriage andor reproduction to aidkin

(as, forexample, occasionally occurs in western societies [Kiernan 1988]), this pattern is not reflectedin the data, except in thecase of the six societies so described.

This does not mean, however, thatindirect benefits to kin arenot associated with permanentabstinence in many non-kin institutions. As has been previously discussed, families may reduce the drain on their resources by having members join such institutions. They may also receive resource andstatus benefitsby having members in wealthy and prestigious celibate organizations. However, because in manysocieties it is in fact costly forfamilies to enroll members in celibate orders, and the returnis almost exclusively spiritual(e.g., Burmese [71] andThai [76] Buddhist monasteries and

"merit"), in most cases it is farfetched to 9onsider kin as direct beneficiarieswhen members join celibate institutions.

The second prediction drawnfrom the model is that kinship manipulationin institutions should increase with the size of thepool of potential recruits, as this is a logical indicator of increasing non-kin interactions. This is difficultto adequately test without a detailed examinationof the historical development of specificstructural practices in particularinstitutions. Some support for this prediction is provided in the earlierdiscussion of thedevelopment of major religious institutions and Protestant sects

(Chapter 4). This prediction was additionally, but less directly, explored with cross­ cultural data by testing therelationships between categories of permanentabstinence,

SCCS sampleunits population size, settlement density(both as coded by Murdock and 174 Wilson 1972), and levels of political integration ( as coded by Murdock andWhite 1969)

(See Appendix B fortabulated results anddefinition of variables).

Because several societies exhibit more thanone institutional context in which permanent abstinence occurs, andbecause manipulationof cues forkinship recognition occurs overwhelmingly in non-kin institutions (as shown in Tables3 and4), contexts in which permanent abstinence is found(i. e., "individual," "kin," and"non-kin") were used as substitutes forinstitutional practices of kinship manipulation(i.e., close association, induced phenotypic similarities,etc.). In addition, each society received only one code, regardless of the numberof contexts it exhibited where permanent abstinence was reported. Thus, societies which exhibited both kin andnon-kin contexts of permanent abstinence ( as in the case of the Irish and Gheg)were coded for the non-kin context.

Tables 5 and 6 present theresults of thisanalysis. The dependent variable, permanentabstinence, wasexamined in two ways. In the first(Table 5), societies were coded forthe presence (n=22) or absence (n=154) of permanent abstinencein non-kin institutionalized contexts. In the second case (Table 6), only the subset of societies exhibiting institutionalizedcelibacy was used. Societies were coded as exhibiting permanentabstinence in non-kin institutionalized contexts (n=22), or in kin or individual contexts (n=l 0). Population size anddensity, although coded with numerical data,were treated as ordinal scales because the intervalswere not of equalwidth. Levels of political integration, coded as ranks,were also treatedas an ordinal scale. Utilizing Kruskal­

Wallis nonparametricanalyses of variance with ranks(Blalock 1972:349-350), samples were comparedwith respect to ordinalrankings of population size, population density, 175

Table 5. Non-Kin Institutionalized Celibacy by Population Size, Population Density, and Level of PoliticalIntegration: Analysesof Total Sample.*

CELIBACY BY POPULATION SIZE

MeanRank Cases 82.63 154 non-kin celibacy absent 129.61 22 non-kin celibacy present 176 Total

Chi-Square D.F. Significance 16.8999 1 p < .001

CELIBACY BY POPULATION DENSITY

MeanRank Cases 81.72 152 non-kin celibacy absent 127.45 22 non-kin celibacy present 174 Total

Chi-Square D.F. Significance 16.2228 1 p < .001

CELIBACY BY LEVEL OF POLITICAL INTEGRATION

MeanRank Cases 79.66 154 non-kin celibacy absent 150.39 22 non-kin celibacy present 176 Total

Chi-Square D.F. Significance 41.4735 I p < .001

* Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric analysesof variancewith ranks (data tables in Appendix B) 176

Table 6. Non-Kin Institutionalized Celibacy by Population Size, Population Density, and Level of Political Integration: Analyses of Societies ExhibitingInstitutionalized Celibacy.*

CELIBACY BY POPULATION SIZE

MeanRank Cases 10.25 10 non-kin celibacy absent 19.34 22 non-kin celibacy present 32 Total

Chi-Square D.F. Significance 6.6341 1 p < .05

CELIBACY BY POPULATION DENSITY

MeanRank Cases 9.95 10 non-kin celibacy absent 19.48 22 non-kin celibacy present 32 Total

Chi-Square D.F. Significance 7.4276 1 p < .05

CELIBACY BY LEVEL OF POLITICAL INTEGRATION

MeanRank Cases 6.25 10 non-kin celibacy absent 21.16 22 non-kin celibacy present 32 Total

Chi-Square D.F. Significance 20.1119 1 p < .001

* Kruskal-Wallisnonpara metric analyses of variancewith ranks (data tables in Appendix B) 177 and levels of political integration. The null hypothesis is that there would be no significantdifference in sums of ranksbetween the sampleswith respect to the variables of interest. Chi-square tests of significancewere utilized. As can be seen in the tables, there aresignificant differences between societies exhibiting non-kin, institutionalized celibacy andothers in the direction of larger populations, increased population density, and greater societal complexity.

One problem potentially affectingthis analysisare the differences in "pinpointing" of sample units by researchers with respect to population size, density, and levels of political integration. Population size was coded by Murdock and Wilson foreither

"focal" or "typical" communities. Communities were defined as "units of interaction" larger thanthe familyin which individuals regularly interacted face to face, andwhich were "a significantfocus of social identity forthe members" (1972:255). Focal communities were the specificcommunities in which authoritative sources did their research. Typical communities were those which "seemed to be the focusof the most significant regular interaction and identification"(1 972:256), even though materials

presented in original sources explicitly applied to areas larger than specific communities.

Murdock and Wilson admit that "it was sometimes difficult to identify, among two or

more alternatives, the level of social interaction [beyond the family] most appropriate for

selection as the community" (p.256).

Population density, on the other hand,was operationalized as "the density of

population in the area exploited or controlled by the focal or typicalcommunity"

(Murdock and Wilson 1972:257-258; emphasis added). This can obviously be anarea 178 much larger thanthe community as definedregarding population size, andclearly may affect population density figures.

Finally, levels of politicalintegration, as operationalized by Murdock andWhite

(1969), refernot to communities or the areas they controlor exploit, but to political entities as a whole, of which the sampleunits may only be a part.

For simpler societies in the sample, these differingunits of measurement arenot a problem. For example, the Kung (2) arecoded as a stateless society, with the sample unit containing fewerthan 50 persons and a density of less thanone person per five square miles. However, formore complex groups, the variables oftenutilize differentscales.

The Fur (29), forexample, are coded as a "largestate subdivided into provinces and districts," but the sample unit's population size is only 100 to 199 persons.

Thus, the methods utilized by researchersin operationalizing these variables suggest that, for the purposesof this study, levels of politicalintegration arelikely to be the most relevantvariable withrespect to thepotential size of a recruit pool for institutions. Political integration, almost by definition, suggests facilityin communication andtravel within the cultural entity. Thus higher levels of political integration should correlate with increasednon-kin social relationships. The raw data in

Table 7 show the distribution of non-kinand other institutional contexts in which permanentabstinence was found. Fiftypercent of all societies where permanent abstinence occurred in the context of non-kin arelarge states.

In summary, the analysis of cross-cultural data concerning permanentabstinence lends supportto the prediction that kinship manipulationin institutional settings 179

Table 7. Celibacy andLevels of Political Integration.

Levels of political Societies with celibacy in Societies with celibacy in integration non-kininstituti onal kin or individual contexts institutional contexts I- stateless 5 J- petty chiefdoms 2 4 K- small states 3 1 L- large states 16 M- integrated in large states 1 180 correlateswith an increasing size of the pool of potential recruits. However, while it is likely that non-kin institutions exhibiting both permanent abstinenceand the

manipulation of kin cue recognition are typically foundin large states, this association

only indirectly supports the prediction relating to increased interaction between non-kin.

Only a detailed examinationof the growth and structuraldevelopment of specific celibate

institutions, undertaken preliminarily in Chapter 4, is likely to provide the data needed to

adequately test this prediction. 181 CHAPTER 6

DISCUSSION

Several important qualificationsapply to the interpretation of these research findings. The historical information utilized here is primarilybased on general surveys, supplemented with ethnographic and other first-handaccounts. These surveys are rendered more reliable by the factthat authors were not examiningthe data with this particular research model in mind (Essock-Vitale and McGuire 1980). Even so, they are useful only in identifyinga potential trendin the association between celibate vows or decisions andthe manipulationof kinship recognitioncues.

In addition, the patternspreviously described will not necessarilyapply to all of the many sects and branches within major institutions, particularlyin light of the historical controversy surrounding celibacy in Christianity and, to a lesser extent,

Buddhism. For example, the Little Brothers andSisters of Jesus,inspired by the writings of Charlesde Foucauld, live in groups of usually no more than five, take jobs in the workplace where, in appearance, they are"indistinguishable from their workmates," and possess no property (Moorhouse 1969:65-8). Although they arecelibate, little else about them resembles the typical Christian monastic pattern. The Community of the Glorious

Ascension, anAnglican men's celibate order, while typical of the predicted patternin most respects, obliges its novices to keep their money and property. Although they may not utilize their resources forpersonal use,they may will them to whom they wish

(Moorhouse 1969:102-3). 182 A logical next step in exploring the topic of kinship manipulationin altruistic contexts is to use historical sources to tracethe development of particularcelibate institutions in greater detail. Demographicdata cananswer questions about population growth andincreased contact between communities. Analyses of technological innovations facilitatingtransportation and communications would also be helpful.

Finally, correlatingthe growth of membership in organizationsto organizational changes which might relate to the manipulationof psychological mechanismsunderlying kinship recognitioncould be veryilluminating.

Another potential line of inquiry involves the historyof celibate religious institutions that failedto survive. One promising avenue of furtherresearch pertains to the numerous heretical religious groups, manyof them celibate, which arosein the

EuropeanMiddle Ages. Detailed accountsof institutional practices arefrequently lacking or, in the caseof those deriving frominquisition proceedings, arelikely to be inaccurate.

Nonetheless, there may be sufficientdata available forthe predictions of this study to be tested. For example, the Cathars, particularlyprominent in 12th-centuryItaly and southernFrance, "had organizedcommunities with their ownhierarchy and formulated dogmas" (Borst 1992:95), andrelied on aristocraticpatronage (Lambert 1972:116).

While the majority of followerstook no vows, "perfecti," or those initiated into the highest rank, were celibate. Only these individualshad the right to say the Lord's Prayer -

- "the rank andfile supporter, being still in the domain of Satan, having no right to call his God 'Father' at all" (Lambert1992:106-107). Cathars"wore distinctive, simple costumes that attracted public attentionand elicited public sympathy" (Peters 1980:141). 183 Literature on other groups, such as the Waldensians and the Bogomil of Bulgar (Lambert

1992) similarlyhints at the possibility of institutionalmanipulation of kinship recognition cues.

While a case has been made forthe importance of substituting kinship ties with equally strongties between non-kin in communal groups, more detailed informationon sects and movements might reveal data on the relative success of different techniques employed by groups in order to controlsexuality. It should also be remembered that kinship manipulation appearsto occur in manyaltruistic, but not celibate, religious settings. Data on such cases arelikely to be instructive.

Additional researchon kin cue mechanisms, or psychologicalpredispositions, is clearlyneeded. As has been noted, more work needs to be done regarding childhood (as opposed to infant)attachments anduse of kinterminology. According to Bogin ( 1997), childhood, specificallythe period afterweaning when a child is still dependent upon others forfood and protection, is apparentlya life stage unique to humans, and one markedby specificcognitive changes. It may be thatthe manipulation of kin cues in cases of institutionalized celibacy in some way mimics cognitive patternsaccompanying thisstage, thus keeping members, in a sense, permanentchildren. On the other hand, as members of manynon-kin celibate institutions in time become "fathers" and"mothers" of others, perhaps having fictive children also reinforces altruisticbehaviors amongnon-kin.

Regardingthe cross-cultural surveypresented here, manyspecific issues require further discussion. The firstis the question of historical independence, knownas Galton's problem. Simply stated, the presence of traits in presumed "independent" cases may be 184 due to historical contact and diffusion. Murdock andWhite attemptedto minimize this problem in a variety of ways in theSCCS, including specifyingthe time period andexact

location of ethnographic descriptions, and stratifying samplesocieties by geographical

areas(Frayser 1985; Murdock andWhite 1969; Narron andD'Andrade 1963).

However, the worldwide influence of major religions makesit clearthat

independence cannot beassumed in the sample with respect to the variables explored in

this survey. Major religions have influencedeach other in structureand practice, and

manyof thesocieties in thesample have in turnbeen influencedby thesereligions. For

example,of the 16 state level societies in which permanentabstinence in non-kin

contexts occurs, 11 exhibit at least one celibate context directly related to one of the

major religions. Therefore,while it can be expected that independence does apply in

some cases,it is not assumed in the present analysisof the SCCS. Instead,the sample has

been utilizedmerely as a practical meansthrough which to explore the patterningof

permanentabstinence in various cultural andtemporal contexts.

Thisrenders the analysisweaker, but not invalid. Because the primaryquestion of

interest is if celibacy in non-kin contexts is accompaniedby the manipulationof kinship

recognitioncues, the maintenanceof that associationin major religions asthey spread

aroundthe world cannotbe assumed. Culturaltraits associated with institutions do not

necessarily diffuse en masse,but oftenaccording to their perceived utility, their

congruencewith existing cultural patterns,and other factors (Barnett1963; Rogers and

Shoemaker 1971; Weinstein 1997). 185 A number of syncretic, nativistic, millenarian, and other religious movements demonstrate that structural traitsare not necessarily maintained in institutions as they are introduced into new settings (de Waal Malefijt 1968:329-359; Lantemari1963; Lewis

1986). For example,the Aymara (172), Huichol (152), and Quiche (155) appearto have selectively adopted aspects of Catholicismwhile eschewing others, including celibacy andmonastic life. An argumentfor diffusion with respect to the major religions would still have to explain why, if some traitsdiffuse andothers do not, particulartraits associated with the manipulationof kinship recognition are maintained in so many different settings of the same religious institutions.

Some researchersalso arguethat SCCS sample units aretoo dissimilar forvalid cross-cultural analyses(an exampleof ":'hat is sometimes called Flower's problem; see

Frayser 1985). This is a legitimate concern when attemptingto compare groupsso different in size, degreeof autonomy, and many othervariables. Murdock and White's response to this criticism was that each sampling unit consists of a cultural type, based on linguistic and other criteria, andso each is equally comparable. However, as Narroll

(1973:724; in Frayser 1985:431) points out, "The question always is: What sort of differences matter forthe problem at hand?"

In the present case, Flower's problem is particularly relevant withrespect to villages that are in some sense linked to "national cultures" and largercelibate institutions. It is clearthat in many sampleunits, small communitiesparticipate peripherally, or not at all, in larger nationalaff airs, including religion. The degreeto which communitiesparticipate in largersocial spheres is oftenquite unclear. For 186 example,while lifelong celibacy was not reported for theHindu village of Senapur (Uttar

Pradesh; 63 ), it is verypossible that some residents leave the village to join ascetic organizations requiringcelibacy. The Koreanvillage of Sondup'o (116), on the other hand, was coded positive forBuddhist asceticism under very similar circumstances solely because some priests were reported to have been present. These priests, however, most likely camefrom elsewhere. It is always possible that individuals choose celibacy and

leave their communities in order to practice it.

While this methodological issue andothers remain, it should be remembered that

the focus of this survey is not to ascertain what individuals do in particularcontexts, but

ratherhow institutionsmaintain andreinforce abstinence amongmembers. In addition, in

this case mistakes in coding, if andwhen they occur, only bias towardfalsification, not

support, of thecentral hypothesis that manipulation of kin cues should be seen in non-kin

altruisticcontexts. For example,any Senapur villager opting forHindu ascetic lifeis

most likely doing so in thecontext of aninstitution already shownto exhibit thetraits in

question.

Additional problems exist, pertainingto the quality and consistency of the

ethnographic data. As Frayser (1985:434-438) points out, findingsbased on the SCCS

data set are subject to possible distortion because of informant, ethnographer,or cross­

cultural researchererror. Because of this, Murdock andWhite suggested using data

provided only by "authorities"for each sampleunit. Authorities should be expected to

have obtained the most reliable data because theyhad thelongest first-handexperience

with each group's languageand customs. While this seems reasonable, a review of source 187 materials suggests that ethnographer error andbias are likely to be present on many

fronts. Sources are uneven in terms of depthof coverage not only forthe domains under

investigation here, but others as well. The authorities in some cases include missionaries andadventurers. Even thosewho are professionally trained anthropologists vary

considerably in theirmethodological rigor andaccuracy.

Errors of this typemay have minimal impact because of their random occurrence.

In other words, they mightbe as likely to support as falsifycross- culturalpredictions.

However, ethnocentricbias is also clearly present. For example, consider thefollowing:

"Though I cannotaccept the Gallic proverb 'tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner,' I trustthat fuller knowledge will give fullersympathy with one's brother,be he a dark-skinned barbarian of the shores of Eastern seas" (Whitehead 1924:6, of the Nicobarese [78]).

Later in his book In the Nicobar Islands, Whitehead assertsthat "the idea of chastityis

unfamiliar" amongthe Nicobarese, and provides relativelydetailed ethnographic data as

support. But it is obviously difficultto tell whether his observationscan be taken as fully

valid. Similarly,J ochelson ( 197 5 :62), in discussing the "free intercourse" of the

Yukaghir ofNorthem Siberia (120), asserts that "amongcivilized nations, the ideal of

purityin the relations of the sexes has prevailedover theopposite tendency of sexual

passion." His data suggest that celibacy was unknownamong the Yukaghir, but his

implicit hypothesis regarding "civilized" sexual notions may well have skewed his

perception and interpretations. Bias is also found in Skertchly's (1874:458) assessment of

the braveryof Fon "Amazons" (18). He concludes that_"[ w]henever a woman becomes 188 unsexed, either by the forceof circumstances or depravity, she invariablyexhibits a superlativeness of evil. ... " {It should be noted that Skertchly is a supplemental source, one not listed as anauthority by Murdock andWhite.)

A reasonable retort to the chargesthat cross-cultural dataare flawed to the point of uselessness is advancedby Alexander(1981:510), who arguesthat this is a problem with anydata set:

"Of course, there is [ a problem]: The data areincomplete andimperfect. Like everyrepository of so-called information,the [HumanRelations Area] fileis filledwith factualerrors, observer bias, misinterpretations,and inappropriate codifications. It may even be worse thanmost such repositories."

The use of the SCCS, in his view, canonly minimize, andnot eradicate, these problems.

However, Alexandergoes on to suggest that a lack of general theory(w hich evolutionism

provides), andnot these deficiencies, has been the main problem with the use of cross­

cultural data. In other words, cross-culturalresearchers often do not ask the right

questions of the data. However, his assessment may be too simplistic. Equally important

is the realizationthat ethnographers, whose products makeup the available data set, are

inconsistent in their methodologies, domains of interest, and priorities. The computer-age

maxim of "garbagein, garbageout" while crude, cannot be ignored. As Broude argues,

cross-culturalanalyses are about testing hypotheses statistically, but sampling, especially

in the area of humansexuality, is hamperedby the quality andconsistency of

ethnographicdata. "The absence of detailed andreliable data not only frustrates the

researcherregarding methodology, it also affectsthe scope and sophistication of the 189 hypotheses that canbe tested" (1981:634). For the same reason, the multivariateanalyses necessary to deal with confounding variablesare difficultto carryout.

Therefore, the factthat the data are the best available is not sufficientto warrant blind trust of them, and formany domains, they must be utilized cautiously. In this survey,attempts to mitigate the possibility of error and bias primarily revolve around the assumption thatquantifying data in this case would only cover findingswith a sheen of verisimilitude. Instead, descriptions of the actual source material areprovided as much as possible so the reader may formhis or her ownopinions as to the support the model receives. Additionally, wherever possible, at least two sources were utilized foreach sample unit in anatte mpt to cross-check findings, and supplementary materials, even if secondarysources, were utilized to provide backgroundregarding the celibate institutions discussed.

Also, all that was asked of the data is what they could reasonably be expected to provide. For example, kinship manipulation traitswere treated as nominal categories.

However, "separation fromactual kin" might actually entail partialor complete separation. Similarly, the use of kin terminlogymight be occasional or frequent.

Unfortunately, the data aretoo inconsistent forordinal ranking. Reference to a traitwas simply accepted asevidence of its existence. This, however, is not without precedent, even amongevolutionary-minded researchers. Jankowiakand Fischer (1992), in their search forthe possible universality of romantic love,were forcedby similar methodological issues to code societies in the SCCS only as "love present" or "love 190 absent." Despotism wassimilarly either "present" or "absent" in Betzig's (1986) cross- cultural investigation of its relationship to reproduction.

Notwithstanding these many caveats, both historical andcross-cultural data appearto supportthe predictionsderived fromthe kinship manipulationmodel. Only in institutions where celibacy is associated with altruismfor the benefitof non-kin arethe traitspertaining to kin manipulationgenerally found. Although the statistical analyses should be taken asmerely suggestive, they do demonstrate that manipulation of kinship recognitionbecomes institutionalized only when the pool of recruits is largeenough to ensurethat average relatedness of recruits is small. The literature regardingthe development of communal organizations in general andceliba te religious organizations in particularsuggest the same finding.

In termsof overall patterning, while inclusive fitnesstheory migh t lead to the expectation that celibacy should occur primarily inthe context of close kin, thisdoes not appearto be the case. Even assuming that individuals in anysoc iety may choose to aid kin by foregoingreproduc tion, the evidence appearsclear that permanent abstinence is most frequentlyundertaken by individuals for idiosyncraticreasons. Most casesof permanentabstinence appearto be a matter of individual choice or need; in some cases, where inheritancelaws and other factorsexacerbate familial problems, individuals are culturallyprompted to delay or even foregoreproduc tion. Of course, indirect benefitsto kin may drive membership in non-kin celibate institutions. However, asdiscussed earlier,this is not sufficientto explain the maintenanceof such a choice. Easier alternatives to celibacy which accomplish thesame kin-relatedgoals are oftenavailabl e. 191 For example,emigration is a meansthrough which individuals canhelp their families' interests, one thatis seen in several contexts (e.g., Irish [51]).

However, given that the predicted association between non-kin altruismand the specificinstitutional practices examinedin this study appears to exist, are there better explanations for that association than kinship manipulation?

The firstalternative, as explored earlier in this chapter, is diffusion.Another alternativeis that the practices described here are found in institutions forreasons other thanreinforcing celibate behavior. For example, the need to organize largenumbers of individuals might sufficeto explain the use of uniformsand other insignias. Or kinship terms may be used as an organizing principle solely because of their linguistic universality. It must be stressed, however, that the fivetraits examinedhere were not chosen at random. Rather, they are interrelated elements within an independent, logical theory of kinshiprecognition. Thistheory suggests the likelihood that human kinship recognition relies on association (especially in kin contexts), phenotypic similarity, and the use of kin termsand symbolism. Separationfrom actual kin andyoung developmental age are likewise theoreticallyrelevant to the possibility of errors and manipulationin kin recognition. No alternative theoryappears to better explain these traits'collective presence in organizations.

The predicted patternof kin cue manipulation cancertainly be foundin many organizationsthat do not demand sexual abstinence, such as militaryorganizations and secret societies (forone illustration,see Ricks' [1997] description of indoctrinationinto the United States Marine Corps). But in manysuch cases there is an institutional demand 192 fornon-kin altruism frommembers. Whether the organizational goal is to obtain material resources, loyalty, or cohesion from members, induced altruismappears to facilitatethe attainment of these objectives. While reciprocalaltruism, cost/benefit assessments,and even increased reproductive opportunityare frequently relevant in explaining apparent altruismin manyinstitutions, they do not apply when reproduction is sacrificedfor a lifetime.

The altruismengendered through vows of celibacy need not be of primary importance to the institutions manipulating kin recognition amongmembers. Military institutions, forexample, are unlikely to be overly concernedabout altruistic suicide in battle. Obedience, groupcohesion, anda willingnessto risk (not give) lives while engaging the enemy are much more importantobjectives (Henderson1985). Yet some of the processes throughwhich these behaviors are reinforced may also encourage acts of terminalaltruism . Such is the case as well with vows of lifelongnon-reproduction.

Institutionally it is likely that the avoidance of marriage, andtherefore heirs, is much more important sexualthan abstinence (which may explain why the Christian church has tolerated concubines andillegitimate children at differentperiods in its history).

Certainly general altruism, in the formof labor andcommitment, is a prime institutional objective. Yet again, the means throughwhich these behaviors are engendered can reinforce the reproductive sacrificeinherent in sexual abstinence.

But who does the manipulating? One of the hallmarksof modem evolutionary theoryis its focus on the individual, even with respect to culturalgroups andinstitutions. 193 As Murdock (1972) arguedin one of his last papers, andcontrary to his thinking throughout most of his professional life,

"It now seems to me distressingly obvious that culture, social system, andall comparable supra-individual concepts ... are illusory conceptual abstractions inferred fromobservations of the very real phenomena of individuals interacting with one anotherand with their naturalenvironments ... " (in Palmer et al. 1997:296: see also Alexander1981).

Murdock's sentiments apply to all organizations, including celibate institutions.

They arebest understood in termsof the cooperation and conflictamong individuals who comprise them. It is insufficientto say "organizations"manipulate recruits into altruistic behavior -- who does it, andwho benefits,are fundamental questions which must be addressed.

Possible answers to these questions areseen in the data reviewed for this dissertation. In many cases, it is clearthat leaders of organizationsbenefit directly from the altruisticbehavior engendered in their faithfulfollowers. In some cases, particularly where force may be used to maintain celibacy, leaders are explicitly exempt from sacrifice,including reproductive sacrifice. Rulers of the Amhara, Aztec, and Inca, for example, were obviously not enjoined to observe chastity,and in fact had an abundance of reproductive opportunities. Betzig's (1986) cross-cultural analysisof despotism and differentialreproduction makes it clearthat celibacy forcedupon others has oftenbeen an avenue forincreased reproductive success by leaders. 194 Even when institutionalizedcelibacy applies to all, thosein leadership positions often appear to breakthe rulesand therebygain reproductive opportunities. The wealth

accrued by monastic institutionsin Christianity,Buddhism, Hinduism, andother religions

is often disproportionatelyavailable to thoseholding high ranks. In some cases, leaders

even benefit reproductively, in that they exempt themselves de facto fromreprod uctive

sacrifice. The term "nepotism" derives from "thebestowal of patronage on the bastard

sons, euphemistically called nephews, of popes and other highVatican officials" (Daly et

al. 1997:267). Betzig (1995) provides data suggesting that the highest ranksof medieval

clergy oftenused their wealth andpower to have sex andchildren. Similarly,leaders of

Protestant celibate sects sometimes ignoredsexual restrictions that applied to othersand

pursued their own reproductive interests (Muncy 1973 :44-46).

Wilson (1967:35) arguesthat contemporarysects tend to develop a centralized

organization, andthat

"Elites emerge in sects both at the local level and, once centralisedagencies have arisen, also at the centre. Theymay be elected by the generality,but they tend to become self-recruiting bothlocally and at the centre. Central controlof local leaders may occur, and when it does the local elite will be the group which interprets, explains and rationalisesthe activityof the centralgroup. "

In such cases, allegianceis to "headquarters," "thecentral board," or "the executive,"

rather thanto other members, andvariance in behavioral expectations of the twogroups

oftenfollows. As the reasons for centralization have to do with increased mobilityand 195 the need forcommunication between dispersed groups, there is little reason to doubt that this patternalso applied to historical groups.

It is also important to note thatin manycases leaders of celibate organizationsare not themselves subject to the indoctrinationassociated with kinship manipulation. Many leaders do not work their way up the internal ranks,but enter leadership positions from outside theinstitution. Two examplesare the political appointment of abbots in England during the middle ages (Knowles1963) and Ramanandisabbots who, as opposed to the general membership, areoften Brahmansentering temple lifeafter havingbeen householders (vander Veer 1987).

There are also cases where no one appears to receive disproportionate reproductive benefits. In many celibate institutions, there may not be anyindividuals manipulating others. The foundersare gone, and currentleaders, as well as new recruits, are subject to practices instituted in the past. This illustrates a possible addendum to

Murdock's (andmany evolutionists') expectation thatindividual actions will always explain supra-individualprocesses. Where institutional practices like thosepertaining to kinship manipulation become codifiedover generations, the psychologicalimpact of those practices, as well as the power of conformity in pressuring individuals to adopt cultural practices regardlessof their costs and benefitsin somatic or reproductive terms

(Loganand Qirko 1996), may render the supra-individual scale the most appropriate level at which to understandcertain behaviors.

As discussed in Chapter 4, manyreligious organizations are founded by charismatic catalysts who areeventually replaced by others who develop or furtherrefine 196 institutional practices. These leaders often benefit reproductively fromthe asymmetrical and hierarchicalstructures they help impose. However, theinstitutional practices which develop then become traditional,with no individuals or stratanecessarily benefiting at anygiven point in time.

A finalissue meriting brief discussion is that of gender. Evolutionarytheory predicts patterned sex differences in reproductive strategies, control of reproduction, and parental investment (e.g., Batten 1994; Trivers 1985). As discussed in Chapter 2, Trivers and Willard( 1973) predict that, in stratified societies, families in lower economic positions will typicallyinvest in daughters,while those in the highest ranks will invest more heavily in sons. As demonstratedby Dickemann(1979a, 1979b) and others (Betzig

1995; Hager 1992), institutionalized celibacy is one of several means through which

families cancontrol "excess" males and females, depending on the socio-economic

standing of the family. Additionally, Betzig (1986) has shownthat high-ranking males

oftencontrol vast numbers of women through despotism, thereby leaving many lower

rankingmales with reduced opportunitiesto securea mate.

Thecross-cultural and historical data reviewed in the present analysis lend support

to these predictions and findings. Male celibates appearto far outnumberfemales in most

institutional settings; celibate femalesare more oftenof higher socio-economic rank; and

force appears to be utilized more frequently to maintianpermanent abstinence for females

than males. For example, Burton's (1994) analysisof monastic lifein Britain from1000

to 1300 AD reveals far fewer nunneries than monasteries. Moreover, both foundersand

members of nunneries tended to be of a higher class than males associated with 197 monasteries. Nuns were also generally kept far more isolated than monks. Finally, founders often placed their ownclose femalekin in nunneries, a pattern not matched in male asceticism. However, Burton also suggests that manyfemales joined nunneries for primarily spiritual reasons, sometimes against the strongwishes of theirparents.

It seems clear that thereare important differences in the patterningof celibacy by gender. However, no gender-based differences were foundwith respect to the manipulation of kinship recognition cues. Nunneries appearto employ institutional practices to manipulate kincues in essentially the same manner as do monasteries. This may be because kin recognition mechanisms apply equally to all individuals, regardless of sex. If it is as importantfor a femaleto identifyclose kin as it is for a male, then evolved cognitive mechanismswhich facilitatekin recognitionare likely to be similarfor both sexes. 198 CHAPTER7

CONCLUSIONS

Recent applications of anevolutionary perspective in biology, anthropology, psychology, sociology, economics, andother fieldshave done much to illuminate human cultural behavior. Evolutionarytheory has provided a productive theoretical base from which to explore manyspecific domains, frommate choice, mate competition, and parentingto cooperation, languageacquisition, and evenaesthetics (forreviews andsome examples, see Barkowet al. 1992; Betzig 1997; Betzig et al. 1988; Cronk 1991; Gray

1996; Mi then 1996b). It is becoming increasingly clear, although the contention is still controversial(e.g., Rambo1991), that humansgenerally behave along lines consistent with evolutionarypredictions.

There are, however, some glaringexce ptions. One is the "demographic transition,"or the pattern of reduced fertility associatedwith increasedwealth within and between modem societies. Betzig (1988:6) called this pattern"a major challenge to a

Darwinian view of humanbehavior" a decade ago, andit remains so today.

However, perhaps the greatestchallenge is altruism forthe benefitof non-kin, particularlywhen it is dramaticin somatic or reproductive costs. Examplesof human sacrificein the nameof strangers, supernaturals, andideas appearto be so numerous that one is forcedto ask if humannature hasin some fundamentalway been released fromthe constraintsof individual-levelevolutionary expectations. The apparentparadox of non­ kin altruismhas helped to fuelthe recurring scholarly interestin group-selection ( e.g., 199 Fialkowski 1990; Peres and Hopp 1990; Wilson andSober 1994), as well as other forms

of cultural selection (e.g., Boyd and Richerson 1985; Campbell1975; Goodenough 1995).

Yet potent argumentscan be raised against these theoretical perspectives.

In recent years the"indoctrina bility" of humanshas begun to receive increasing

attention fromevolutionists. While some of the literaturehas focusedon obedience as

related to evolved predispositions for dominance ranking( e.g., Salter 1995), other

researchershave discussed humancapacities forsacrifice in the name of ideals and

values. Eibl-Eibesfeldt(1982) has suggested that the capacity to be indoctrinated into

specificcultural values may only be ultimatelyexplicable through group selection. Somit

and Peterson (1997) argue that, while humanity'sevolutionary heritage of dominance

hierarchiesfacilitates individual obedience to authoritarianregimes, human

indoctrinabilityexplains how ideas, values,and beli efs permit cultureto overcome

"even ...some of our most basicdrives" (1997:78). In their view, indoctrinability

thereforeaccounts for celibacy, altruistic suicide, and the occasional development of truly

democratic political systems.

However, indoctrinabilityremains largely unexplored with respect to its specific

psychological constituents. In addition, the meansthrough which manipulation of human

susceptibility may take place have not received much attention. Evolutionists have added

little to the work of experimental psychologists (e.g., Asch 1956; Milgram 1974) in this

area.

Thisdissertation has incorporatedand expanded upon the suggestions of Johnson

(1986,1989), Balch (1985), and others (e.g., Badcock 1987) concerningthe role of 200 induced or manipulated altruism in overcoming "basic drives," such as reproduction. The proposed model of humankinship deceit is based on three kinship recognition cues and two associated factors. The relevanceof two of these cues -- close associationand phenotypic similarity -- is clarifiedby a substantialliterature on kin recognition mechanisms. The importance of a third recognitioncue -- the use of kin terminologyand related symbols -- is documented in variousstudies (e.g., G. Johnson et al. 1987; J.

Johnson et al. 1991). In addition, cultural anthropologists have long known that linguistic terminologyis animportant means through which humans identifykin.

The model also incorporatestwo additional factorswhich appearto be highly relevantin kinship deceit. The importance of gaining young (i.e., still developing) recruits is demonstratedin literature on kin recognition, as well as by research on child development andatta chment theory. The relevance of the second factor, that of separatingan individual fromactual kin, is less well understood, but studies of attachment theoryand child development suggest thatphysical separationcan be an importantfe atureof kinship deceit andaltruism among non-kin.

Institutional practiceswhich facilitatemisidentification of non-kin as close genetic relatives, a phenomenon that in turnpromotes altruistic behavior with non-kin as the primarybeneficiaries, should be rigorously tested in a varietyof specificinstitutional contexts. Historical and cross-cultural data lend considerable support to the central prediction examinedin this dissertation: altruism in non-kin, institutionalized settings should covary with kinship-cue manipulation. 201 Celibacy, or permanent sexual abstinence, was selected as the principal formof altruisticbehavior to be explored. Several reasons underlie this choice. First, celibacy involves the sacrificeof the most valuable currency, from an evolutionaryperspective, that individualspossess: reproduction. Second, because the reproductive sacrificeis lifelong,the individual altruist derives no returns that compensate, in termsof fitness,for the loss. Therefore, competing models, such as those based on reciprocity and cost/benefit assessments, hold little utility forexplaining the maintenanceand reinforcement of celibacy, although they may be highly relevant forinterpreting other formsof altruisticbehavior.

The theoryof inclusive fitness provides the only other potential explanation for permanent abstinence which does not rely upon idiosyncratic choice, groupselection, or sociallearning. If the act of celibacy benefits close genetic relatives, then kin canreceive gains whichexceed the losses of the celibate. When viewed in this light, abstinencecan be a successfulstrategy in termsof fitnessmaximization, and genes favoringsuch a decision can be maintained in subsequent generations. Such an explanation for institutionalized celibacy, however, while oftenrelevant, appears to be insufficient. It can certainlyexplain whyparents or otherclose relatives may wish, or even force,individuals into permanentabstinence. The removal of these individuals into celibate institutions may concentrateparental investment so that more familymembers will surviveto reproduce, or the resources obtained by abstinents may be made available to kin, facilitatingtheir survival andreproduction. 202 But inclusive fitness does not fullyexplain the sacrificefrom the point of view of thecelibate. If he or she remains in close association with kin, thendirect psychological reinforcement that maintains theindividual's sacrificecan be generated. However, if the abstinent is denied close association with family members, as is typical in institutional cases, other meansof reinforcement are likely to be necessary. Additionally, as has been shownin this work, celibate institutions aremaint ained in large part throughlabor and other resources generated by individual members. To survive, institutions must develop means to combat any tendencies individuals may have to contributethese resources to their kin. The institutionalization of celibacy itself, of course, minimizes thepossibility that these kin will be members' own children. However, the possibility that members will invest resources in other close kin always exists. Thus, even in cases where inclusive fitnesstheory may explain the desire of celibates to aid kin, institutions arelikely to attemptto induce altruismthrough the manipulation of kinship recognitioncues.

Badcock (1987:122) has arguedthat induced altruismis centralto anob jective understandingof "the much-vaunted 'pure' altruismof the humanrace. " Thatcase remains to be made, although his argument receives some support in light of this research. However, even if Badcock's perspective is accepted, it does not negate the possibility that humans frequently act in ways to benefit others for"purely" altruistic reasons. The model of kinship manipulation advanced here is not one of humans as automata, blindly coerced into behaviors that benefit others. It only suggests that cultural practices which tap into an evolved psychology canreinf orce particularbehaviors, even those with significantcosts. Individuals do often choose to live a life of permanent 203 sexual abstinence, thus serving gods, leaders, andcommunities. They make this choice formany reasons, including a genuine desire to help others. It is doubtfulthat any individual can be "fooled"by kinship deceit into adopting behaviors in which he or she does not wish to engage. Yet the continuing desire to remain celibate may frequentlybe reinforced through institutional socialization based on deceit andthe manipulation of kinship recognition cues.

Symons ( 1990) has suggested that attempts to apply Darwinian evolutionary theoryto social institutions must firstdeal with the problem that these phenomena are not, in andof themselves, adaptations ( except perhaps in purelycultural selectionist terms; e.g., Campbell 1975). Therefore, "Darwinismcan be 'applied' to traditional social science phenomena only in so faras it illuminates the psychological adaptations that underpinthese phenomena" (Symons 1990:435). In addition, Symonspoints out that maladaptive behaviors present an opportunity to gain insights into underlying adaptations which, due to novel environmental circumstances, result in current behavioral "errors."

Thus Darwinism can"guide hypothesis formationand help us decide which of the infinite number of questions we might ask about the mind arethe ones most likely to bearfruit"

(Symons 1987:126), even if the hypotheses generated do not deal with evolutionary process per se. The suggestions by Johnson (1986, 1989), Balch (1985), and others about the potential role of induced altruismin reinforcing non-kin altruism amonghumans exemplifythe approach advocated by Symons. Utilizing inclusive fitnesstheory and accompanyingresearch on kinship recognition, these researchersgenerated a novel and testable hypothesis abouta problematic (in Darwinianterms) aspectof human behavior. 204 The present study on celibacy has advancedspecific predictions based on this hypothesis and testedthem with historicaland cross-cul tural data. The manipulation of psychological mechanismspertaining to kin recognition appearsto be a meansthrough which altruisticcelibacy is maintained and reinforced in institutionalized settings.

However, other steps are clearlynecessary to furthertest this possibility. These might include reviewing materials on other societies or groupswhere permanent abstinenceis likely to be present; conducting more detailed historicalanalyses of the development of celibate institutions; exploring the ways in which stratification, gender, andother variablesaff ected this development; andinterviewing membersof celibate institutions to learnmore about the impact of kin cue manipulationon daily life.

There are obvious moral and ethicalimplications resulting fromthe manipulation

of individuals within institutionalsettings. Although it is probably a mistake to attempt

to fashion moral guidelines forhumanity based on our evolved psychology

(notwithstandingWright 1994), it is anotherthing to gather informationon tendencies

andbiases which areshaped by evolution so that better informedmoral decisions canbe

made.

It is hoped that this dissertation will serve both as a catalyst and a foundationfor

future research on the relationship between non-kin altruism andthe cultural and

institutional traits which may promote andreinf orce this complex behavior. 205

BIBLIOGRAPHY 206 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abramson, Paul R. andPin kerton, Steven D. (1995). Introduction: Nature, nurture, and in-between. In Sexual Nature/ Sexual Culture, P.R. Abramson andS.D. Pinkerton (Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago. Pp. 1-14.

Adriani,N. andKruyt, Albert C. (1951). The Bare'e-speaking Toradja of Central Celebes (the East Toradja). Volume II. Amsterdam: Noord-HollandscheUitgevers Maatschappij. [Note: As translated in the HRAF.]

Ainsworth, Mary D.S. (1977). Attachment theory andits utility in cross-cultural research. In Culture and Infancy, P.H. Leiderman, S.R. Tulkin, andA. Rosenfeld (Eds.). New York: Academic Press. Pp. 49-68.

Alexander,Richard D. (1979). Darwinism and HumanAffairs. Seattle: Universityof Washington Press.

Alexander,Richard D. (1987). The Biology of Moral Systems. HawthorneNY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Alexander,Richard D. (1981). Evolution, culture, andhuman behavior: Some general considerations. In NaturalSelection andSocial Behavior, R.D. Alexanderand D.W. Tinkle (Eds.). New York: Chiron. Pp. 509-520.

Alexander,Richard D. (1990). Epigenetic rules andDarwinian algorithms. Ethology and Sociobiology 11:241-303.

Allgeier, ElizabethRice andWiederman, Michael W. (1994). How usefulis evolutionarypsychology forunderstanding contemporary human sexual behavior? Annual Review of Sex Research5: 218-256.

Alter, Joseph S. (1997). Seminal truth: A modem science of male celibacy in North India. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 11 (3):275-298.

Andelson, JonathanG. (1983). Communitarianism, fam.ilism, andindividualism among the Inspirationists at Amana. InternationalJournal of Sociology of the Family 13:45-62.

Anderson, Myrdene (1986). Cultural concatenation of deceit and secrecy. In Deception: Perspectives on Human and NonhumanDeceit. R.W. Mitchell andN.S. Thompson (Eds.). AlbanyNY: SUNY Press. Pp. 323-348.

Andreoni, James (1990). Impure altruismand donations to public goods: A theoryof warmglow -giving. Economic Journal I 00:464-4 77. 207 Andrews, EdwardD. (1963). The People Called Shakers. New York: Dover.

Archer, John (1991). Humansociobiology: Basic concepts and limitations. Journal of Social Issues 47(3): 11-26.

Arensberg, Conrad M. andKimball, Solon T. (1968). Family andCommunity in Ireland. Cambridge: HarvardUni versity Press.

Argyle, W.J. (1966). The Fon of Dahomey. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Asch, Solomon ( 1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs 70(9):70-79.

Auboyer, Jeannine (1965). Daily Life in Ancient India. New York: Macmillan.

Badcock, Christopher R. (1987). The Problem of Altruism: Freudian-Darwinian Solutions. London: Basil Blackwell.

Balch, Stephen H. (1985). The neutered civil servant: Eunuchs, celibates, abductees and the maintenance oforganiza tionalloyalty. Journal of Social andBiological Structures 8:313-328.

Bandura, Albert ( 1980). The social learningtheory of aggression. In The WarSystem : An Interdisciplinary Approach. R.A. Falk and S.S. Kim (Eds.). Boulder CO: Westview. Pp. 141-156.

Barber, Malcolm (1994). The New Knighthood: A Historyof the Order of the Temple. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Barber, Malcolm (1995). Women andCatharism. In Crusadersand Heretics, 12th-14th Centuries, M. Barber(Ed.). BrookfieldVT: Valorium. Pp. 45-62.

Barkow,Jerome H., Cosmides, Leda, and Tooby, John (1992). The Adapted Mind: EvolutionaryPsychology andthe Generation of Culture. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Barnett,H.G. (1949). Palauan Society. Eugene: University of Oregon.

Barnett, H.G. (1966). Being a Palauan. Case Studies in CulturalAnthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Barry,Herbert ( 1981 ). Uses andlimitations of ethnographicdescriptions. In Handbook of Cross-Cultural HumanDevelopment, R.H. Munroe, R.L. Munroe, andB.B. Whiting (Eds.). New York: Garland. Pp. 91-112. 208 Barry,Herbert and Paxson,Leonora M. (1971). Infancy and earlychildhood: Cross­ cultural codes 2. Ethnology10( 4):466 -508.

Barth, Fredrik (1961). Nomads of South Persia. Boston: Little, Brownand Co.

Barth, Fredrik (1964). Capital investment and the social structureof a pastoralnomad groupin South Persia. In Capital, Saving andCredit in PeasantSocieties, R. Firth and B.S. Yamey(Eds.). Chicago: Aldine.

Bartram, William (1853). Observationson theCreek andCherokee Indians. Transactionsof the AmericanEthnological Society, Volume ID, PartI. New York: George P. Putnam. Pp. 1-81.

Batson, C. Daniel (1990). How Social anAnimal? The Human Capacity forCaring. American Psychologist45(3):336 -346.

Batten, Mary (1994). Sexual Strategies: How Females Choose their Mates. New Yorlc G.M. Putnam's Sons.

Beardsley, R.K., Hall, John W., andWard, R.E. (1959). Village Japan. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Beaton, A.C. (1948). TheFur. SudanNotes andRecords 29 (Partl):1-39.

Beidelman,T.O. (1967). The matrilinealpeoples of EasternTanzania. Ethnographic Surveyof Africa,Part XVI. London: InternationalAfrican Institute.

Belo, Jane (1936). A study of a Balinese family. American Anthropologist 38: 12-31.

Benet, Sula (1970). The Village ofViritiano. New York: Doubleday.

Benko, Stephen (1971). The historyof the earlyRoman empire. In The Catacombs and the Colosseum, S. Benko andJ.J. O'Rourke(Eds.). Valley Forge PA : Judson Press. Pp. 37-80.

Benko, Stephen ( 1984 ). PaganRome and the Early Christians. Bloomington: Indiana University.

Berdan, Frances F. (1982). The Aztecsof CentralMexico: An Imperial Society. Fort WorthTX: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.

Bematzik,Hugo Adolf (1938). Overlandwith the Nomad Lapps. New York: Robert M. McBridge & Co. 209 Bernstein,Irwin S. (1991). The correlation between kinship and behavior in non-human primates. InKin Recognition, P.G. Hepper (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 6-29.

Best, Elsdon (1974). The Maori as He Was. Wellington, New Zealand: A.R. Shearer.

Betzig, Laura (1986). Despotism andDifferential Reproduction. New York: Aldine.

Betzig, Laura ( 1988). Mating and parentingin Darwinian perspective. InHuman Reproductive Behavior: A DarwinianPerspe ctive, L. Betzig, M. BorgerhoffMulder, and P. Turke (Eds.). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. Pp. 3-20.

Betzig, Laura (1991). Comment on B.M. Knauft'sViolence andsociality in human evolution. CurrentAnthropology 32(4): 410.

Betzig, Laura (1995). Medieval monogamy. JournalFamily of History 20(2):181-216.

Betzig, Laura (1997a). Human Nature: A Critical Reader. New York: Oxford University Press.

Betzig, Laura (1997b). People are animals. InHuman Nature: A CriticalReader, L. Betzig (Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 1-17.

Betzig, Laura, BorgerhoffMulder, Monique, andTurke, Paul (1988). Human Reproductive Behavior: A DarwinianPerspective. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Bhattacharyya, Sivaprasad (1953). Religious practices of the Hindus. InReligion of the Hindus, K.W. Morgan (Ed.). New York: Ronald Press. Pp. 154-205.

Birge, John K. (1937). The Bektashi Order of Dervishes. Luzac'sOriental Religions Series,Volume 7. London: Luzac.

Birket-Smith, Kaj andde Laguna, Frederica (1938). The Eyak Indians. Copenhagen: Levin andMun ksgaard.

Blalock, Hubert M., Jr. (1972). Social Statistics (2nd edition). New York: McGraw­ Hill.

Blake, Joseph A. (1978). Death by hand grenade: Altruistic suicide in combat. Suicide andLife-Threatening Behavior 8(1 ):46-59.

Bogin, Barry (1997). Evolutionaryhypotheses for humanchildhood. Yearbookof Physical Anthropology40:63-89. 210 Bohannan,Laura andBohannan, Paul (1962). The Tiv of CentralNigeria. London: InternationalAfrica Institute.

Bohannan, Laura andBohannan, Paul (1962). Three Source Notebooks in Tiv Ethnography. New Haven, CT: HRAF.

Boone, James (1986). Parentalinvestment and elite familystructure in preindustrial states: A case study of late medieval-earlymodem Portuguese genealogies. American Anthropologist 88:859-878.

Borst, Arno (1992). Medieval Worlds. Chicago IL: Universityof Chicago Press.

Bowers, AlfredW. (1965). Hidatsa Social and Ceremonial Organization. Smithsonian InstitutionBureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 194. Washington: Government PrintingOffice.

Boyd, Robert andRicherson, Peter J. (1985). Cultureand the Evolutionary Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Brett-Smith,Sarah C. (1994). The Making ofBamanaSculpture: Creativityand Gender. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Briggs, LawrenceP. (1951). The ancientKhtner empire. Transactionsof theAmerican Philosphical Society 41(1): 237-250.

Bromley, David G., Shupe Jr., Anson D., andOliver, Donna L. (1982). Perfect families: Visions of thefuture in a new religious movement. Marriageand Family Review 4(3/4): 119-129.

Brooke, Christopher (1974). The Monastic World: 1000-1300. New York: Random House.

Broude, Gwen J. (1981). The cultural managementof sexuality. In Handbookof Cross­ Cultural HumanDevelopment, R.H. Munroe, R.L. Munroe, B.B. Whiting (Eds.). New York: Garland. Pp. 633-673.

Broude, Gwen J. andGreene, SarahJ. (1976). Cross-cultural codes on twenty sexual attitudesand practices. Ethnology 15:409-429.

Brown, Donald (1991). HumanUniversals. Philadelphia, PA: Temple UniversityPress.

Bulst-Thiele, Marie L. (1992). The influenceof St. Bernardof Clairvaux on the formationof the Order of the Knights Templar. In The Second Crusade and the Cisterians, M. Gervers (Ed.). New York: St. Martin's. Pp. 57-65. 21 1 Bunnag,Jane (1973). Buddhist Monk, BuddhistLa yman: A Study of UrbanMonastic Organizationin CentralThailand. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Bunzel, Ruth (1952). Chichicastenango. Publication of the AmericanEthnological Society 22. Locust Valley NY: J.J. Augustin.

Burton, Janet (1994). Monastic andReligious Orders in Britain 1000-1300. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Bush, George andLondon, Perry (1965). On the disappearanceof knickers: Hypotheses for the functionalanalysis of the psychology of clothing. In Dress, Adornment, andthe Social Order, M.E. Roach andJ.B. Eicher (Eds.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Pp. 64-72.

Buys, ChristianJ. andLarson, Kenneth L. (1979). Human sympathy groups. Psychological Reports45:547- 553.

Byrne,Richard W. andWhiten, Andrew (1992). Cognitive evolution in primates: Evidence fromtactical deception. Man27: 609-627.

Byrne,Richard W. and Whiten, Andrew. (1988). MachiavellianIntelligence: Social Expertise andthe Evolution of Intellect in Monkeys, Apes, andHumans. Oxford: Clarendon.

Callender, Charles (1966). The Mehennab: A Kenuz Tribe. In ContemporaryEgyptian Nubia, R.A. Femea (Ed.). New Haven: HRAF. Volume II, Pp. 1-34.

Callender, Charlesand Kochems, Lee M. (1993). The North AmericanBerdache. In Culture andHuman Sexuality, D.N. Suggs and A.W. Miracle (Eds.). PacificGrove CA: Brooks/Cole. Pp. 367-397.

Campbell,Donald T. (1975). On the conflictsbetween biological andsocial evolution and between psychology and moral tradition. American Psychologist 30(12): 1103-1126.

Campbell, Donald T. (1983). The Two Distinct Routes beyond Kin Selection to Ultrasociality: Implications forthe Humanities and Social Sciences. In The Nature of Prosocial Development, D.L. Bridgeman (Ed.). New York: Academic Press. Pp. 11-41.

Caplan, Pat (1987). Introduction. In The Cultural Construction of Sexuality, P. Caplan (Ed.). London: Tavistock. Pp. 1-30.

Caplan, Pat (1987). The CulturalConstruction of Sexuality. London: Tavistock. 212 Caporael, Linnda (1989). Selfishnessexamined: Cooperation in the absence ofegoistic incentives. Behavioral andBrain Sciences 12(4):683-740.

Carcopino, Jerome (1940). Daily Lifein Ancient Rome. New Haven: Yale.

Carneiro, Robert L. (1964). The Amahuaca and the spirit world. Ethnology 3(1):6-11.

Carneiro, RobertL. (1968a). Ascertaining,testing, and interpreting sequences of cultural development. Southwestern Journalof Anthropology24(4):354-374.

Carneiro, Robert L. ( 1968b ). Cultural adaptation. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Volume3. The MacmillanCompany and the Free Press. Pp. 551-554.

Caro,T.M. andBorgerhoffM ulder, Monique (1987). The problem of adaptation in the study of humanbehavior. Ethologyand Sociobiology8:61-72.

CaroBaro ja, Julio (1944). La Vida Rural en Vera de Bidasoa. Madrid: Biblioteca de Tradiciones Populares.

CaroBaroja, Julio (1958). Los Vascos. Madrid: Ediciones Minotauro.

Cela-Conde, C.J. (1990). On thephylogeny of humanmorality (ten yearslater). Human Evolution 5(2):139-151.

Cerulli, Ernesta (1956). Peoples of South-West Ethiopia andits Borderland. London: InternationalAfrican Institute.

Chagnon, NapoleonA. (I979). Mate competition, favoringclose kin, andvillage fissioningamong Yanomamo Indians. In EvolutionaryBiology and HumanSocial �ehavior, N.A. Chagnonand W. Irons (Eds.). NorthScituate MA: Duxbury. Pp. 86- 131.

Chagnon, Napoleon A. (1981). Terminologicalkinship, geneal ogical relatedness and village fissioningamong the Y anomamo Indians. In Natural Selection andSocial Behavior, R.D. Alexanderand D.W. Tinkle (Eds.). New York: Chiron. Pp. 490-508.

Chagnon, NapoleonA. (1983). Yanomamo:The Fierce People (3rd edition). Fort Worth TX: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.

Chagnon, Napoleon A. (1988). Male Yanomamomanipulations of kinship classificationsof femalekin forreproductive advantage. In Human Reproductive Behavior: A Darwinian Perspective, L. Betzig,M. BorgerhoffMulder, andP. Turke (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 23-48. 213 Chakravarti, A. (1957). The Religion of Ahimsa. Bombay: RatanchandHirachand.

Chamberlain, A.F. (1892). Report on the Kootenay Indiansof South-EasternBritish Columbia. Reportof the British Association forthe Advancementof Science 62:549- 617.

Chesneaux, Jean (1971). Secret Societies in China. Ann Arbor MI: University of MichiganPress.

Cholij, Roman (1989). Clerical Celibacy in East and West. Hereford,England: Fowler Wright.

Christensen, J.B. (1963). Utani: Joking, sexual license andsocial obligations amongthe Luguru. AmericanAnthropologist 65: 1314-1327.

Cline, Walter (1950). The Teda ofTibesti, Borlru, and Kawar. General Series in Anthropology 12:1-52.

Cohen, Yehudi (1969). Ends andmeans inpolitical control: State organization and the punishment of adultery,incest andviolations of celibacy. AmericanAnthropologist 71 :658-687.

Cole, Michael andCole, Sheila R. (1989). The Development of Children. New York: ScientificAmerican Books.

Collins, Rogers (1987). The Basques. New York: BasilBlackwell.

Conner, RichardC. (1995). Altruism among non-relatives: Alternativesto the "Prisoner's Dilemma." Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10(2):84-86.

Coon, C.S. (1950). The mountain of giants. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology andEthnology, Harvard University 23(3): 1-105.

Cort, John E. (1991). The Svetambar Murtipujak mendicant.Jain Man26:651-671.

Cosmides, Leda and Tooby, John (1992). Cognitiveadaptations forsocial exchange. In The Adapted Mind, J.H. Barkow,L. Cosmides, andJ. Tooby (Eds.). New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 163-228.

Cowlinshaw, Guy andMace, Ruth (1996). Cross-cultural patternsof marriage and inheritance: A phylogenetic approach. Ethology andSociobiology 17(2): 87-97.

Cronk, Lee (1991). HumanBehavioral Ecology. AnnualReviews in Anthropology 20:25-53. 214 Cronk, Lee (1995). Is there a role forculture in humanbehavioral ecology? Ethology andSociobiology 16:181-205.

Cunningham, MichaelR. (1985/1986). Levites and brother'skeepers: A sociobiological perspective on prosocial behavior. HumboldtJournal of Social Relations 13:35-67.

Daly, Martinand Wilson, Margo (1978). Sex, Evolution, andBehavior. North Scituate MA: Duxbury.

Daly, Martin, Salmon, Catherine, and Wilson, Margo (1997). Kinship: The conceptual hole in psychological studiesof social cognition and close relationships. In Evolutionary Social Psychology, J.A. Simpson and D.T. Kenrick (Eds.). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 265-296.

Dandekar, R.N. (1953). The role of manin Hinduism. In Religion of the Hindus, K.W. Morgan(Ed.). New York: Ronald Press. Pp. 117-153.

Davenport, WilliamH. ( 1987). An anthropologicalapproach. In Theories of Human Sexuality, J.H. Greer and W.T. O'Donohue (Eds.). New York: Plenum Press. Pp. 197- 236.

Davis, Rex andRichardson, James T. (1993). The organizationand functioning of the Children of God. In New andIntense Movements:1 M. E. Mart (Ed.). Modem American Protestantismand its World No. 11. Munich: K.G. Saur. Pp. 322-340.

Dawkins, Richard (1976). The SelfishGene. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Dawkins, Richard (1987). The Blind Watchmaker. New York: W.W. Norton.

Dawkins, Richard (1995). RiverOut of Eden. New York: HarperCollins.

Dazey,Wade H. (1990). Tradition andmodernization in the organizationof the DasanamiSamyasins. In Monastic Lifein the Christianand Hindu Traditions, A.B. Creel andV. Narayanan (Eds.). Studies in ComparativeReligion, Volume 3. Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen. Pp. 281-321.

De Josselin de Jong, P.E. (1960). Minangkbauand NegriSembilan. Djakarta: N.V. Perdana.

De la Vega, Garcilaso ( 1961 ). CommentariosReales. New York: Orion.

de Valk, Alphonse (1990). Priestly Celibacy in History. Toronto: Life EthicsCentre, Pamphlet#27. 215 de Vaux, Roland (1961). Ancient Israel: Its Life andInstitutions. New York: McGraw­ Hill. de Waal Malefijt, Annemarie (1968). Religion and Culture. London: Macmillan.

Delamater,John (1987). A sociological approach. In Theories of Human Sexuality, J.H. Greer andW.T. O'Donohue (Eds). New York: Plenum Press. Pp. 237-256.

Denton, Lynn Teskey (1991). Varieties of femaleHindu asceticism. In Roles and Rituals forHindu Women, J. Leslie (Ed.). London: Pinter. Pp. 211-231.

Dickemann, Mildred (1979a). The ecology of mating systems in hypergynous dowry societies. Social Science Information 18(2): 163-195.

Dickemann, Mildred (1979b). Female infanticide, reproductive strategies, and social stratification: A preliminarymodel. In EvolutionaryBiology andHuman Social Behavior, N.A. Chagnonand W. Irons (Eds.). North Scituate MA: Duxbury. Pp.32 1- 367.

Dickemann, Mildred (1997). Paternalconfidence and dowry competition: A biocultural analysisof purdah. In Human Nature: A Critical Reader, L. Betzig, (Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 311-328.

Dickinson, JamesC. (1961). Monastic Lifein Medieval England. New York: Barnes and Noble.

Dieterlen, Germaine (1951 ). Essai sur la Religion Bambana. Paris: Presses Universitaire de France. [Note: As translated in the HRAF.]

Dole, Gertrude (1961-1962). Endocannibalismamong the Amahuaca Indians. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences. Series II, 24:567-573.

D'Ollone, Viconte (1912). In Forbidden China. London: T. Fisher Unwin.

Donoghue, John D. (1968). CamAn. Ann Arbor MI: University Microfilms.

Donoghue, John D., Whitney,Daniel D., andIshino, Iwao (1962). People in theMiddle: The Rhade of South Vietnam. East LansingMI: MichiganState University.

Dontas, Cleo, Maratos,Olga, Fafoutis,Maria, and Karangelis, Anigone (1985). Early social development in institutionally rearedGreek infants: Attachment and peer interaction. In GrowingPoints of Attachment Theoryand Research, I. Bretherton and E. Waters (Eds.). Monographsof theSociety forResearch in Child Development 50(1- 2): 136-146. 216 Dorsey, George A. (1904). Traditions of the Skidi Pawnee. Memoirs of the American Folklore Society.

Draper, Patriciaand Harpending, Henry (1988). A sociobiologicalperspective on the development of humanreproductive strategies. In Sociobiological Perspectives on Human Development, K.B. MacDonald (Ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag. Pp. 340- 372.

Driver, G.R. andMiles, John C. (1952). The BabylonianLaws. VolumesI andII. Oxford: Clarendon.

Driver, HaroldE. (1969). Indiansof NorthAmerica (2nd edition). Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.

Dugast, I. ( 1954 ). The Banen, Bafia andBalon of the French Cameroons. Ethnographic Surveyof Africa,Part IX. London: International AfricanInstitute. Pp. 132-169.

Dundas, Paul (1992). The Jains. London: Routledge.

Durham,M.E. (1928). Some Tribal Origins, Laws andCustoms of the Balkans. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Durham,William H. (1991). Coevolution: Genes, Culture, andHuman Diversity. Stanford: Stanford UniversityPress.

Dutt, Nalinaksha (1960). EarlyMonastic Buddhism. Calcutta: CalcuttaOriental Book Agency.

Dutt, Sukumar (1962). Buddhist Monks andMonasteries of India. London: Allen and Unwin.

Dutt, Sukumar (1964). Buddhist education. In 2500 Yearsof Buddhism. P.V. Bapat (Ed.). Delhi: Publications Division, Ministryof Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Pp. 156-171.

Eells, Myron (1877). TwanaIndians of the Skokomish reservation. Bulletin of the U.S. Geographicaland Geological Surveyof the Territories 3:57-114.

Eells, Myron (1985). The Indians of Puget Sound. Seattle: Universityof Washington Press.

Eglar,Zekiye (1960). A Punjabi Village in Pakistan. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press. 217 Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Irenaus (1982). Warfare, man's indoctrinabilityand group selection. Zeitschriftfur Tierpsychologie 60:177- 198.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Irenaus (1995). The evolution of familiality and its consequences. Futura 4:253-264.

Elm, Susanna (1994). Virgins of God: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity. Oxford: Clarendon.

Elmendorf, William W. (1993). Twana Narratives. Seattle: Universityof Washington Press.

Embler, CarolR. and Embler, Melvin (1988). Guide to Cross-Cultural Research Using the HRAF Archive. New Haven: HRAF Press.

Emlen, Stephen T. (1984). Cooperative breeding in birds and mammals. In Behavioural Ecology: An EvolutionaryApproach, J.R. Krebs and N.B. Davies (Eds.). Sunderland MA: Sinauer. Pp. 305-339.

Emlen, Stephen T. (1995). Anevolutionary theory of the family. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 92(18):8092-8099.

Emlen, Stephen T. (1997). Predicting familydynamics in socialvertebrates. In Behavioural Ecology: AnEvolutionary Approach (4th edition), J.R. Krebs and N.B. Davies, (Eds.). Oxford: Blackwell Science. Pp. 228-253.

Essock-Vitale, Susan M. andMcGuire, Michael T. (1980). Predictions derived from the theories of kin selection andreciprocation assessed by anthropologicaldata. Ethology and Sociobiology 1 :233-243.

Essock-Vitale, Susan M., and McGuire, Michael T. (1985). Women's lives reviewed from anevolutionary perspective. II: Patterns of helping. Ethologyand Sociobiology 6:155-173.

Evans, Joan (1968). Monastic Life at Cluny. Hamden CT: Archon.

Faron, Louis C. (1961 ). Mapuche Social Structure. Illinois Studies in Anthropology 1. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.

Faron,Louis C. (1964). Hawks of the Sun. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Faron, Louis C. (1968). The Mapuche Indians of Chile. Case Studies in Cultural Anthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston. 218 Fei, Hsiao-Tung (1947). PeasantLife in China. London: KeganPaul, Trench, Trubner.

Felkin, R.W. (1885). Notes of the Fur tribe. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 13:205-265.

Femea, Robert A. (1973). Nubiansin Egypt. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.

Ferrell, Raleigh (1969). Taiwan aboriginal groups. Taiwan: Institute of Ethnology Academia Sinica, Monograph # 17.

Fialkowski, K.R. (1990). An evolutionarymechanism for the origin of moral norms: Towardsthe meta-trait of culture. Human Evolution 5(2):153-166.

Firth, Raymond W. (1936). We, the Tikopia: A Sociological Study of Kinship in Primitive Polynesia. London: Allen andUnwin.

Flinn, Mark V. andAlexander, Richard D. (1982). Culture theory: The developing synthesis from biology. Human Ecology 10:383-400.

Flohr, H. (1987). Biological bases of social prejudices. In The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism, V. Reynolds, V. Falger, and I. Vine (Eds.). London: Croom Helm. Pp. 190-207.

Fogarty,Robert S. (1990). All Things New: American Communes and Utopian Movements, 1860-1914. Chicago IL: University of ChicagoPress.

Ford, ClellanS. (1964). A Comparative Studyof HumanRep roduction. Yale University Publications in Anthropology No. 22. HRAF.

Ford, Clellan S. and Beach, FrankA. (1951). Patternsof Sexual Behavior. New York: Harperand Row.

Forey, Alan (1992). The MilitaryOrders from the Twelfth to the EarlyFourteenth Centuries. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Foster, George M. (1942). A Primitive MexicanEconomy. Monographs of the American Ethnological Society V. New York: J .J. Augustin.

Foster, George M. (1943). The geographical, linguistic,and culturalposition of the Popoluca of Veracruz. AmericanAnthropologist 45: 531-546.

Foster, George M. (1971 ). Sierra Popoluca folkloreand beliefs. Universityof California Publications in AmericanArchaeology and Ethnology XVII: 177-245. 219 Foster, Lawrence (1995). Sexuality and relationships in the Shaker, Oneida, and Mormoncommunities. Communities 87:52-56.

Foucault, Michel (1981). The Historyof Sexuality. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Fox, Robin (1979). Kinship categories as natural categories. InEvolutionary Biology andHuman Social Behavior, N.A. Chagnon andW. Irons (Eds.). NorthScituate MA: Duxbury. Pp. 132-144.

Fox, Robin (1993). Reproduction and Succession. New Brunswick: Transaction.

Frayser, SuzanneG. (1985). Varieties of Sexual Experience: An Anthropological Perspective on Human Sexuality. New Haven CT: HRAFPress.

Frayser, SuzanneG. and Whitby, Thomas (1995). Studies in HumanSexuality: A Selected Guide (2nd edition). Englewood CO: LibrariesUnlimited.

Frein, George H. ( 1968). Celibacy: The NecessaryOption. New York: Herder and Herder.

Freyd, Jennifer J. and Johnson, J.Q. (1992). The evolutionarypsychology of priesthood celibacy (commentary). Behavioraland Brain Sciences 15(2):385.

Fried, Morton H. (1953). Fabric of Chinese Society. New York: Praeger.

Friedlander, Ludwig (1979). RomanLife andManners under the EarlyEmpire. Volumes I-IV. New York: Arno.

Furstenberg, F.F. and Talvitie, K.G. (1980). Children's names and paternalclaims: Bonds between unmarriedfathers and their children. Journal of Family Issues 1:31-57.

Gager, John G. (1971). Religion andsocial class in the earlyRoman empire. In The Catacombs and theColosseum, S. Benko and J.J. O'Rourke (Eds.). Valley Forge PA: Judson Press. Pp. 99-120.

Galanter, Marc (1978) The "relief effect": A sociobiological model for neurotic distress and large-grouptherapy. AmericanJournal of Psychiatry135(5): 588-591.

Galanter, Marc (1993). Charismaticreligious sects andpsychiatry: An overview. In New and Intense Movements, M. E. Mart (Ed.). Modem AmericanProtestantism and its World No. 11. Munich: K.G. Saur. Pp. 117-140.

Gardner, Howard (1993). Framesof Mind: The Theoryof Multiple Intelligences (2nd edition). New York: Basic Books. 220 Gatschet, Albert S. (1890). The KlamathIndians of SouthwesternOregon. Department of the Interior U.S. Geographicaland Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region. VolumesI and II. Washington: GovernmentPrinting Office.

Geary,David C. (1995). Reflectionsof evolution andculture in children's cognition. American Psychologist 50(1):24-37.

Geary,Patrick J. (1990) The renunciation of renunciation in monasticlife. In Monastic Life in the Christianand Hindu Traditions, A.B. Creel andV. Narayanan (Eds.). Studies in ComparativeReligion, Volume 3. Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen. Pp. 191-200.

Geertz, Clifford (1960). The Religion of Java. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

Geertz, Clifford (1967). Tihingan: A Balinesevillage. In Villages in Indonesia, Koentjaraningrat(Ed. ). Ithaca NY: CornellUniv ersity Press.

Geertz, Clifford (1973). The Interpretationof Culture. New York: Basic Books.

Geertz, Hildred (1961). The JavaneseFamily. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

Geetz, Hildred andGeertz, Clifford (1975). Kinshipin Bali. Chicago IL: University of ChicagoPress.

Ghurye, Golind S. (1964). Indian Sadhus (2nd edition). Bombay: PopularPrakashan.

Gluckman, Max (1968). The Lozi ofBarotselandin North-Western Rhodesia. In Seven Tribes of Central Africa, E. Colson andM. Gluckman(Eds. ). ManchesterUniversity Press. Pp. 1-93.

Goergen, Donald (1974). The Sexual Celibate. New York: SeaburyPress.

Goldberg, Susan (1991). Recent developments in attachmenttheory and research. CanadianJournal of Psychiatry36(6):393 -400.

Goldman,Irving (1963). The Cubeo. Illinois Studies in Anthropology2. UrbanaIL: Universityof Illinois Press.

Goodenough, Oliver R. (1995). Mind viruses: Culture,evolution andthe puzzleof altruism. Social Science Information34(2):287-320.

Goodenough, Ward (1970). Description andcomparison in culturalanthro pology. LewisHenry MorganLectures, 1968. Chicago: Aldine.

Gorer, Geoffrey (1967). HimalayanVillage (2nd edition). New York: Basic Books. 221 Gourou,P. (1955). Peasantsof the Tonkin Delta. Volumes I andII. New Haven: HRAF.

Gray, J. Patrick (1996). Sociobiology. In Encyclopedia of Cultural Anthropology, D. Levinson and M. Ember (Eds.). New York: Henry Holt. Volume4, Pp. 1212-1219.

Green, M. M. (1964). Ibo Village Affairs. New York: Praeger.

Grimes, Joseph E. andHinton, Thomas B. (1969). The Huichol and Cora. In Handbook of Middle AmericanIndians, Ethnology, Part 2, E.Z. Vogt (Ed.). Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 792-929.

Grubb, W. Barbrooke (1911). An UnknownPeople in anUnknown Land. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.

Gutman, H.G. (1977). The Black Familyin Slaveryand Freedom: 1750-1925. New York: Vintage Books.

Hager, BarbaraJ. (1992). Get thee to a nunnery: Female religious claustrationin medieval Europe. Ethologyand Sociobiology 13:385-407.

Hajnal, J. (1965). Europeanmarr iage patterns in perspective. In Population in History, D.V. Glass and D.E.C. Eversley (Eds.). Chicago: Aldine. Pp. 101-143.

Hallpike, C.R. (1972). The Konso of Ethiopia. Oxford: ClarendonPress.

Hamilton, W.D. (1964). The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior, 1,11. Journalof TheoreticalBiology 7(1): 1-52.

Hamilton, W.D. (1995). NarrowRoads of Gene Land. Volume 1. Oxford: W.H. Freeman.

Handy, E.S. Craighill (1923). The Native Culture in the Marquesas. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 9. Honolulu: Museum.

Hansen,Henry H. (1961). The KurdishWoman's Lif e. Copenhagen Ethnographic Museum Record 7. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet.

Harris, Marvin ( 1979). Cultural Materialism. New York: RandomHouse.

Hartung, John (1997). Polygyny and inheritanceof wealth. In HumanNature: A Critical Reader, L. Betzig (Ed.). New York: OxfordUniversity Press. Pp. 331-343. 222 Hasluck, Margaret (1954). The Unwritten Law in Albania. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Hawthorn, H.B. (1944). The Maori: A study in acculturation. AmericanAnth ropologist 46(2):5-130.

Heckethom, CharlesW. (1965). The Secret Societies of all Ages andCountries. Hyde ParkNY: UniversityBooks.

Heider, KarlG. (1976). Dani children's development of competency in social structural concepts. Ethnology 15(1):47-62.

Helm, June (1961). The LynxPoint people. National Museum of CanadaBulletin 176:1-193.

Henderson, Wm. D. (1985). Cohesion: The HumanElement in Combat. Washington DC: National DefenseUniversity Press.

Henry, Jules (1964). Jungle People. New York: Vintage.

Hepper, Peter G. (1991a) Kin Recognition. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Hepper, Peter G. (1991b ). Recognizingkin: Ontogeny and classification. In Kin Recognition, P.G. Hepper (Ed.). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. Pp. 259-288.

Herskovits, Melville J. (1938) Dahomey. VolumesI andII. New York: J.J. Augustine.

Herskovits, Melville J. (1964). Lifein a HaitianValley. New York: Octagon.

Hewes, Gordon W. andKim, Chin H. (1952). Koreankinship behavior andstructure. Research Monographson Korea, Series F, No. 2, P'yongyang.

Hickey, Gerald C. (1964). Village in Vietnam. New Haven: Yale.

Hilger, M. Inez (1957). Araucanian Child Lifeand its Cultural Background. SmithsonianMiscellaneous Collections 133. Washington: SmithsonianInstitution.

Hilger, M. Inez (1971). Together withthe Ainu. Nonnan OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Hillery, George A., Jr. (1992). The Monastery: A Study in Freedom, Love, and Community. WestportCT: Praeger. 223 Hoffman, MartinL. (1978). Psychological andbiological perspectives on altruism. InternationalJournal of Behavioral Development 1:323-339.

Hoffman, MartinL. (1981). Is altruismpart of humannature? Journalof Personality andSocial Psychology 40:121-147.

Hollis, AlfredC. (1971). The Masai: Their Languageand Folklore. FreeportNY: Books for LibrariesPress.

Holub, Emil (1971). Seven Years in South Africa. VolumeII. New York: Johnson Reprint Corp.·

Honigmann,John J. (1946). Ethnographyand acculturation of theFort Nelson Slave. Yale University Publications in Anthropology33:3-169.

Homer, I. B. (trans.) (1982a). The Book of theDiscipline (Vinaya-Pitaka), Volume I. Sacred Books of the Buddhists, VolumeX. London: Pali Text Society.

Homer, LB. (trans.)(1982b). The Book of the Discipline (Vinaya-Pitaka), VolumeIl. Sacred Books of the Buddhists, VolumeXI. London: Pali Text Society.

Homer, I.B. (trans.) (1983). The Book of the Discipline (Vinaya-Pitaka), Volume IV. Sacred Books of the Buddhists, VolumeXIII. London: Pali Text Society.

Howe, K.R. ( 1977). The Loyalty Islands. Honolulu: UniversityPress of Hawaii.

Hrdy, SarahBlaff er (1997). Fitness tradeoffs in the historyand evolution of delegated mothering with special referenceto wet-nursing, abandonment, andinfanticide. In HumanNature: A Critical Reader, L. Betzig, (Ed.). New York: OxfordUniversity Press. Pp. 402-422.

Hudson, Charles (1976). The SoutheasternIndians. Knoxville TN: Universityof Tennessee Press.

Hunt, Noreen ( 1971 ). Cluniac monasticism. In Cluniac Monasticism in the Central Middle Ages. Noreen Hunt(Ed.). HamdenCT: Archon. Pp. 1-10.

Huntingford,G.W.B. (1969). The SouthernNilo-Hamites. London: International AfricanInstitute.

Hurford, James R. (1991). The evolution of the criticalperiod forlanguage acquisition. Cognition40:159-201. 224 Huxley, Matthew andCapa, Cornell (1964). Farewellto Eden. New York: Harper and Row.

Ike, Ben W. (1987). Man's limited sympathy as a consequence of his evolution in small kin Groups. In The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism. V. Reynolds, V. Falger, andI. Vine (Eds.). London: Croom Helm. Pp. 216-234.

Ingersoll, Jasper (1966). The priest role in central village Thailand. In Anthropological Studies in Theravada Buddhism, A. Suddard(Ed.). Cultural ReportSeries No. 13, Yale University Southeast Asia Studies. Pp. 51-76.

Irons, William (1979). Cultural and biologicalsuccess. In EvolutionaryBiology and Human SocialBehavior, N.A. Chagnonand W. Irons (Eds.). NorthScituate MA: Duxbury. Pp. 257-272.

Irons, William (1996). Adaptation. In Encyclopedia of Cultural Anthropology, D. Levinson andM. Ember (Eds.). New York: HenryHolt. Volume1, Pp. 1-5.

Izikowitz, KarlGustav (1951 ). Lamet: Hill Peasants in French Indochina. Goteborg: EtnografiskaMuseet.

Jankowiak, William R. andFischer, EdwardF. (1992). A cross-cultural perspective on romanticlove. Ethnology 31 (2): 149-156.

Jay, RobertR. (1969). JavaneseVillagers. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Jochelson, Waldemar (1975). The Yukaghir and the Yukaghirized Tungus. Memoir of the American Museumof Natural History.Volume IX. New York: AMS.

Johnson, GaryR. (1986). Kin Selection, socialization, and patriotism: An integrating theory. Politics andthe Life Sciences 4(2):127-154.

Johnson, GaryR. (1989). The role of kin recognition mechanismsin patriotic socialization: Furtherreflections. Politics and the Life Sciences 8:62-69.

Johnson, Gary R., SusanH. Ratwik, and Sawyer, TimothyJ. (1987). The evocative significanceof kin termsin patrioticspeech. In The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism. VernonReynolds, V. Falger, andI. Vine (Eds.). London: Croom Helm. Pp. 157-174.

Johnson, Jill L., McAndrew, Francis T., andHarris, Paul B. (1991). Sociobiology and the namingof adopted and naturalchildren. Ethology and Sociobiology 12:365-375.

Jones, Allen H. (1985). Essenes: The Elect of Israel andthe Priests of Artemis. New York: UniversityPress of America. 225 Joseph, Nathan (1986). Uniforms andNonuniforms: Communication Through Clothing. New York: Greenwood Press.

Karamustafa,Ahmet T. (1994). God's UnrulyFriends: DervishGroups in the Islamic Later Middle Period, 1200-1550. Salt Lake City: Universityof Utah Press.

Keane,A.H. (1883). On theBotocudo. Journalof the(Royal) Anthropological Institute 13:199-213.

Keesing, Roger M. (1975). Kin Groups andSocial Structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.

Kelly, Robert L. (1995). The Foraging Spectrum. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Kennedy, John G. (1978). Nubia: Historyand religious background. In Nubian Ceremonial Life,J.G. Kennedy (Ed.). Berekeley: UCB Press. Pp. 1-17.

Kiernan, Kathleen E. (1988). Who remains celibate? Journalof Biosocial Science 20:253-263.

Kitch, Sally L. (1989). Chaste Liberation: Celibacy and Female Cultural Status. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.

Klaus, M.H., Jerauld, R., Kreger, N.C., McAlpine, W., Steffa, M., andKenell, J.H. (1972). Maternal attachment: Importance of the firstpost-partum days. New England Journal of Medicine 286:460-463.

Klineberg, Otto (1934). Notes on theHuichol. AmericanAnthropologist 36:446-460.

Klostermaier,Klaus K. (1989). A Surveyof Hinduism. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Kluckhohn, Richard ( 1962). The Konso economy of SouthernEthiopia. In Marketsof Africa, P. Bohannan and G. Dalton (Eds.). EvanstonIL: NorthwesternUniversity Press. Pp. 409-428.

Knauft, Bruce M. (1991). Violence and sociality in humanevolution. Current Anthropology32(4): 391-428.

Knowles, Dom D. (1963). The Monastic Order in England (2nd edition). Cambridge: At The UniversityPress. 226 Kopytoff, Igor (1964). Familyand lineage amongthe Suku of the Congo. In The Family Estate in Africa, R.F. Gray andP.H. Gulliver (Eds.). Boston UniversityPress. Pp. 83- 116.

Kopytoff, Igor (1965). The Suku of SouthwesternCongo . In Peoples of Africa,J.L. Gibbs, Jr. (Ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston. Pp. 441-478.

Krebs, Dennis (1987). The challenge of altruism in biology and psychology. In Sociobiology andPs ychology: Ideas, Issues, and Applications. C.B. Crawford, M.S. Smith, and D. Krebs (Eds.). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.Pp. 81-118.

Krebs, Dennis L. andDenton, Kathy (1997). Socialillusions and self-deception: The evolution of biases inperson perception. In EvolutionarySocial Psychology, J.A. Simpson and D.T. Kenrick (Eds.). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 21-47.

Kring, Hilda A. (1973). The Harmonists: A Folk-Cultural Approach. Scarecrow.

Kroeber, AlfredL. (1952). The Natureof Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

La Barre,Weston (1948). The AymaraIndians of the Lake Titicaca Plateau, Bolivia American Anthropologist Memoir No. 68, 50(no.l, pt.2): 3-243.

Lafreniere, Peter J. (1988). The ontogeny of tactical deception in humans. In MachiavellianInte lligence: Social Expertiseand the Evolution of Intellect in Monkeys, Apes, andHumans, R.W. Byrneand A. Whiten (Eds.). Oxford: Clarendon. Pp. 238- 252.

Lambert,Bernd (1964). Fosterage in the NorthernGilbert islands. Ethnology3( 3):232- 258.

Lambert, Bernd (1970). Adoption, guardianship,and social stratificationin the Northern Gilbert Islands. In Adoption in Eastern Oceania,V. Carroll (Ed.). Honolulu: University of Hawaii. Pp. 261-291.

Lambert, Bernd (1971). The GilbertIslands: Micro-individualism. In LandTenure in the Pacific,R. Crocombe (Ed.). Melbourne: Oxford UniversityPress. Pp. 146-171.

Lambert, Malcolm (1992). Medieval Heresy (2nd edition). Oxford: Blackwell.

Lane, R. andLane, B. (1956). The heathencomm unities of SoutheastPentec ost. Journal de la Societe des Oceanistes 12(11):139-180. 227 Lane, R.B. (1965). The Melanesiansof South Pentecost,New Hebrides. In Gods, Ghosts andMen in Melanesia,P. Lawrenceand M.J. Meggitt (Eds.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Pp. 250-279.

Langer, Lawrence (1965). Clothes andgovernment. In Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order, M.E. Roach andJ.B. Eicher (Eds.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Pp. 124-127.

Lantemari, Vittorio (1963). The Religions of the Oppressed. New York: Mentor.

Larsen, Egon (1971). StrangeSects andCults: A Study of Their Origins andInfluence. London: ArthurBaker.

Larson,Martin A. (1967). The Essene Heritage. New York: Philosophical Books.

Lea, H.C. (1932). Historyof Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church. London: Watts.

Leach, Edmund ( 1991). The social anthropologyof marriageand mating. In Mating andMarriage, V. Reynolds andJ. Kellett (Eds.). Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Pp. 91-110.

Leach, Edmund R. (1940). Social andeconomic organization of the RowanduzKurds. London School of Economics Monographson Social Anthropology3: 1-74.

Lehar, Frank M., Hickey, Gerald C., andMusgrave, John K. (1964). Ethnic Groups of Mainland SoutheastAsia. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Leclerq, Jean (1971). The monastic crisis of the eleventhand twelfthcenturies. In Cluniac Monasticism in the Central Middle Ages, N. Hunt (Ed.). Hamden CT: Archon. Pp. 217-237.

Lewis, D.K. (1962). The Minangkabau Malayof NegriSembilan. PhD. Dissertation, CornellUniversity. Ann Arbor MI: University Microfilms.

Lewis, I. M. (1961). A Pastoral Democracy. London: OxfordUniversity Press.

Lewis, I. M. (1969). People of the Hom of Africa: Somali, Afar and Saho. London: InternationalAfrican Institute.

Lewis, I. M. (1986). Religion in Context. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Lieberman,L. (1989). The discipline divided: Acceptanceof human sociobiological concepts in anthropology. CurrentAnthropology 30:676-682. 228 Lin, Yueh-hua (1961). TheLolo of Liang Shan. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Ling, T.O (1970). Buddhism in South-East Asia. In A Dictionaryof Comparative Religion, S.G.F. Brandon(Gen. Ed.). New York: CharlesScribner's Sons. P. 160.

Linge, David E. (1990). Asceticism and "singleness of mind" in the desert fathers. In Monastic Lifein the Christianand Hindu Traditions, A.B. Creel andV. Narayanan(Eds.). Studies in ComparativeReligion, Volume 3. Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen. Pp. 37-70.

Logan,Michael H., andQirko, Hector N. (1996). An evolutionaryperspective on maladaptivetraits and culturalconf ormity. AmericanJournal of Human Biology 8(4): 615-629.

Lowie, Robert H. (1924). Notes on the socialorganization andcustoms of the Mandan, Hidatsa, andCrow Indians. AnthropologicalPapers of the AmericanMuseum of Natural History21: 3-99.

Lumholtz, Carl (1973). UnknownMexico, Volume 2. Glorieta NM: Rio GrandePress.

Lumsden, CharlesJ. (1984). Parent-offspring conflictover the transmissionof culture. Ethology andSociobiology 5: 111-129.

Luzbetak,Louis J. (1966). Marriageand Family in Caucasia. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation.

Lynch, H.F.B. (1967). Armenia. Volumes I andIL Beirut: Khyats.

Lynch, Katherine A. (1991). The Europeanmarriage pattern in the cities: Variationson a theme by Hajnal. Journal of FamilyHistory 16(1):79-96.

Mabuchi, Toichi (1960). Theaboriginal peoples of Formosa. In Social Structurein Southeast Asia, G.P. Murdock (Ed.). Chicago: Quadrangle Books.

MacDonald, Kevin (1984). An ethological-sociallearning theory of the development of altruism: Implications forhuman sociobiology. Ethology andSociobiology 5:97-109.

MacDonald,Kevin (1988). Socialand Personality Development: An Evolutionary Synthesis. New York: Plenum Press.

MacDonald, MargaretY. (1996). EarlyChristian Women andPagan Opinion. CambridgeUniversity Press.

Main, John (Elsie Clews Parsons) (1913). Religious Chastity: An EthnologicalStudy. New York: John Main. 229 Man, EdwardH. (1932). The Nicobar Islandsand their People. Guildford: Billing and Sons.

Manker, E. (1953). The Nomadism of the Swedish Mountain Lapps. Nordiskamuseet: Alta Lapponica 7: 1-261.

Maranda,Pierre (1964). Marquesansocial structure: An ethnohistorical contribution. Ethnohistory11(4):301-379.

Maron, Stanley (1957). Pakistan: Society andCulture. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Marshall,Donald S. andSuggs, RobertC. (1971). HumanSexual Behavior: Variations in the EthnographicSpectrum. New York: Basic.

Marshall,J.C., and MortonJ., et al. (1984). Biology of learningin humans-- Group report. In Biology of Leaming, P. Marier andH.S. Terrace(E ds.). Berlin: Springer­ Verlag. Pp. 687-705.

Matthews, Washington (1971). Ethnographyand Philology of the Hidatsa Indians. New York: Johnson Reprint Corp.

Maybury-Lewis, David (1967). Akwe-Ashante Society. Oxford: ClarendonPress.

McDonald Pavelka, MaryS. (1995). Sexual nature: What canwe learnfrom a cross­ species perspective?In Sexual Nature/ Sexual Culture. P.R. Abramsonand S.D. Pinkerton (Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago. Pp. 17-36.

McGuire, Michael T., Fawzy, Fawzy I., andSpar, James E. (1994). Altruismand mental disorders. Ethology andSociobiology 15:299-321.

Messenger, John C. (1993). Sex andrepression in an Irish folk community. In Culture andHuman Sexuality, D.N. Suggs and A.W. Miracle (Eds.). PacificGrove CA: Brooks/Cole. Pp. 240-261.

Messing, Simon D. (1985) HighlandPlateau Amhara ofEthiopia. Volumes 1-3. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Metraux, Alfred (1946a). The Botocudo. In Handbookof South AmericanIndians, Volume 1, J.H. Steward (Ed.). Washington: GovernmentPrinting Office. Pp. 531-540.

Metraux, Alfred (1946b). The Caingang. In Handbook of South AmericanIndians, Volume 1, J.H. Steward(Ed.). Washington: GovernmentPrinting Office. Pp. 445-475.

Metraux, Alfred (1969). The Historyof the Incas. New York: Pantheon. 230 Metraux,Alfred (1972). Voodoo in Haiti. New York: Shocken.

Milgram, Stanley (1974). Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. New York: Harperand Row.

Miner, Horace (1942). Songhoi circumcision. American Anthropologist 44:621-637.

Miner, Horace (1953). The Primitive City of Timbuctoo. Princeton University Press.

Minn, Eeva K (1955). The Lapps. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Mitchell, Robert W. andThompson, Nicholas (1986). Deception: Perspectiveson Humanand Nonhuman Deceit. Albany: SUNY Press.

Mithen, Steven (1996a). The Prehistoryof theMind. New York: Thamesand Hudson.

Mithen, Steven (1996b). The origin of art: Natural signs, mental modularity, and visual symbolism. In Darwinian Archaeologies, H.D.G. Maschner(Ed.). New York: Plenum. Pp. 197-217.

Mole, Robert L. ( 1970). The Montagnards of SouthVietnam. RutlandVT: CharlesE. Tuttle.

Moore, JohnH. (1990). The reproductive success of Cheyenne warchief s: A contrary case to Chagnon'sY anomamo. CurrentAnthropology 31 :322-330.

Moorhouse, Geoffrey (1969). Against all Reason. New York: Stein andDay.

Muncy, Raymond L. (1973) Sex andMarriage in Utopian Communities: 19th-Century America. Bloomington IN: IndianaUniversity.

Munro,Neil G. (1963). Ainu Creed andCult. New York: Columbia University Press.

Murdock, George P. (1934a). Kinship and social behavior among the Haida. American Anthropologist36:35 5-385.

Murdock, George P. (1934b). The Haidasof British Columbia. In Our Primitive Contemporaries, by G.P. Murdock. New York: MacMillan. Pp. 221-263.

Murdock, George P. (1961). World ethnographic sample. American Anthropologist59: 664-687.

Murdock, George P. (1965). The Aranda of CentralAustralia. In Our Primitive Contemporaries,by G.P. Murdock. New York: MacMillan. 231 Murdock, George P. (1972). Anthropology's mythology. Proceedings of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain andIreland for 1971. Pp. 17-24.

Murdock, George P. andMorrow, Diana0. (1970). Subsistence economy and supportivepractices: Cross-culturalcodes I. Ethnology9(3):302-330.

Murdock, George P. andProvost, Caterina (1973). Factors in the divisionof labor by sex: A cross-cultural analysis. Ethnology12(2): 203-225.

Murdock, George P. andWhite, Douglas R. (1969). StandardCross-Cultural Sample. Ethnology 8(4):329-369.

Murdock, George P. and Wilson, SuzanneF. (1972). Settlement patternsand community organization: Cross-cultural codes 3. Ethnology11(3):254-295.

Murie, James R. (1916). PawneeIndian Societies. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History11 :545-644.

Murphy, R.F. and Quain,B. (1955). The TrumaiIndians. Monographs of the American Ethnological Society 24: 1-108.

Nadel, S.F. (1947). The Nuba. London: OxfordUniversity Press.

Napier, Michael (1989). Preface. In Clerical Celibacy in East and West, by Roman Cholij. Hereford, England: Fowler Wright.

Narayanan, Vasudha (1990). "Renunciation" in saffronand white robes. In Monastic Lifein the Christian andHindu Traditions, A.B. Creel andV. Narayanan (Eds.). Studies in Comparative Religion, Volume 3. Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen. Pp. 161:190.

Narroll,R. and D'Andrade, R.G. (1963). Two furthersolutions to Galton's problem. American Anthropologist 65:1053-1067.

Nash, Manning (1963). BurmeseBuddhism in everydaylife. AmericanAnthropologist 65: 285-295.

Niblack, AlbertP. (1970). The Coast Indiansof SouthernAlaska andNorthern British Columbia. New York: Johnson Reprint Company.

Nicholson, Helen (1993). Templars,Hospitallers, andTeutonic Knights: Images of the MilitaryOrders, 1128-1291. Leicester, England: Leicester University Press.

Nimmo, Harry (1965). Social organization of the Tawi-Tawi, Badjau. Ethnology 4(4):421-439. 232 Nimmo, Harry (1965). The Structure ofBajau Society. Ph.O dissertation. University of Hawaii.

Nimuendaju, Curt (1942). The Serente. Publications of the Frederick Webb Hodge AnniversaryPublication Fund, VolumeIV. Los Angeles: Southwest Museum.

Nordhoff, Charles (1961). The CommunisticSocieties of the United States. New York: Hillary.

O'Donohue, Williamand Plaud, Joseph J. (1994). The conditioning of humansexual arousal. Archives of Sexual Behavior 23(3):321-344.

Olivelle, J. Patrick (1990). Village vs. wilderness: Ascetic ideals and the Hindu world. In Monastic Life in the Christianand Hindu Traditions, A.B. Creel andV. Narayanan (Eds.). Studies in ComparativeReligion, Volume 3. Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen. Pp. 125-160.

Oliver, Douglas L. (1949). Land tenure in Northeast Siuai, SouthernBougain ville, Solomon islands. Papers of the Peabody Museum of AmericanArchaeology and Ethnology, HarvardUniversity, 29(4):1-97.

Oliver, Douglas L. (1955). A Solomon Island Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Oman, John Campbell (1973). The Mystics,Ascetics, andSaints of India. Delhi: OrientalPublishers.

Opler, Morris andSingh, Rudva Datt (1953). The division oflabor in an Indianvillage. In A Reader in General Anthropology,C.S. Coon (Ed.) New York: Henry Holt. Pp. 464-496.

Opler, MorrisE. (1941). An Apache Life-way, Part 2. Ann Arbor MI: University Microfilms.

Opler, Morris E. (1955). An outline of the Chiricahua Apache social organization. In Social Anthropology of NorthAmerican Tribes (2nd edition), F. Eggan(Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pp. 173-242.

Orians, Gordon H. and Heerwagen,Judith H. (1992). Evolved responses to landscapes. In The Adapted Mind, J.H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby (Eds.). New York: OxfordUniversity Press. Pp. 555-579. 233 O'Rourke, John J. (1971). Roman law and the earlyChurch. In The Catacombs andthe Colosseum, S. Benkoand J.J. O'Rourke (Eds.). Valley Forge PA : Judson Press. Pp. 165-186.

Ortner,Sherry B. andWhitehead, Harriet (1981a). SexualMeanings. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity.

Ortner, Sherry B. and Whitehead, Harriet (1981 b). Accountingfor sexual meanings. In Sexual Meanings, S.B. Ortnerand H. Whitehead (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University. Pp. 1-27.

Osgood, Cornelius (1951). The Koreans andtheir Culture. New York: Ronald.

Osgood, Cornelius (1958). Ingalik social culture. Yale University Publications in Anthropology53:3-289.

Ozment, Steven (1972). Marriageand the ministryin the Protestant churches. In Celibacy in the Church, W. Bassettand P. Huizing (Eds.). Herder andHerder. Pp. 39- 56.

Paine, Robert ( 1965). Coast Lapp society II: A study of economic development and social values. Tromso MuseumsSkrifter 4, No. 2. Tromso, Universitetsforlaget.

Palmer, Craig T., Fredrickson,B. Eric, andTilley, Christopher F. (1997). Categories and gatherings: Group selection andthe mythology of culturalanthropology. Evolution and HumanBehavior 18(5): 291-308.

Parrinder,Geoffrey (1980). Sex in the World's Religions. New York: Oxford University Press.

Parry, N. E. (1976). The Lakhers. Calcutta: FirmaKLM.

Patai, Raphael (1959). Sex and Familyin the Bible and the Middle East. GardenCity NY: Doubleday.

Pehrson, Robert N. (1954). The Lappish herding leader: A structuralanalysis. AmericanAnthropologist 56: 1076-1080.

Pehrson,Robert N. (1964). The bilateral network of socialrelations in KonkamaLapp district. Utgittav Norsk Folkemuseum. Universitetsforlaget.

Pelto, Pertti J. andPelto, Gretel H. ( 1978). AnthropologicalResearch: The Structureof Inquiry (2nd edition). Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. 234 Peres, Y. andHopp, M. (1990). Loyaltyand aggression in humangroups. In Sociobiology andConflict: EvolutionaryPerspectives on Competition,Cooperation, Violence andWarf are,J. vander Dennen andV. Falger (Eds.). London: Chapmanand Hall. Pp. 123-130.

Peters, Edward (1980). Heresy and Authority in Medieval Europe. Philadelphia PA: Universityof PhiladelphiaPress.

Pfanner, David E. (1966). The Buddhist monk in rural Burmesesociety. In Anthropological Studiesin Theravada Buddhism, A. Suddard (Ed.). Cultural Report Series No. 13, Yale UniversitySoutheast Asia Studies. Pp. 77-96.

Phillimore, Peter (1991). Unmarriedwomen of the Dhaula Dhar: Celibacy andsocial control in NorthwestIndia. Journalof Anthropological Research47:331-350.

Phillimore, Peter (no date). Being a Sadhin: Celibate lives and anomalousidentities in North-WestIndia. Unpublished manuscript.

Piliavin, JaneA. and Charng,Hong-Wen (1990). Altruism: A review of recent theory and research. Annual Reviews in Sociology 16:27-65.

Pinker, Steven (1994). The Language Instinct. New York: HarperPerennial.

Pinker, Steven (1997). How the MindWorks. New York: W.W. Norton.

Pinker, Steven andBloom, Paul (1992). Naturallanguage and naturalselection. In The Adapted Mind, J.H. Barkow,L. Cosmides, andJ. Tooby (Eds.). New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 451-493.

Piontelli, Alessandra (1995). Kin recognition andearly precursors of attachment as seen in the analysisof a young psychotic adopted boy. Journal of Child Psychotherapy 21(1):5-21.

Plank,Dale (1956). Religion. In MongolianPeople's Republic, W.M. Ballis (Ed.). New Haven CT: HRAF. Vol I, Pp. 308-373.

Platenkamp,J.D.M. (1988). Tobelo: Ideas andValues of a North MoluccanSociety. Ph.D. Thesis. Rijks University, Leiden.

Porter, Richard H. (1991). Mutualmother-infant recognition in humans. In Kin Recognition, P.G. Hepper (Ed.). Cambridge UniversityPress. Pp. 125-160.

Pospisil, Leopold (1960). The KapaukuPapuans and their kinship organization. Oceania 30(3):188-205. 235 Pospisil, Leopold (1963). Kapauku PapuanEconomy. Yale Publications in Anthropology67. New Haven: HRAF.

Radcliffe-Brown,A.R. (1952). Structureand Function in Primitive Society. London: Cohen andWest.

Rambo,A. Terry (1991). The study of cultural evolution. In Profilesin Cultural Evolution, A.T. Ramboand K. Gillogly (Eds.). Ann Arbor MI: AnthropologicalPapers, Museum of Anthropology,University of MichiganNo. 85. Pp. 23-109.

Rappoport, Leon andKren, George (1993). Amoral rescuers: The ambiguities of altruism. Creativity ResearchJournal 6(1&2):129-136.

Rattray, R.S. (1969). AshantiLaw andConstitution. Oxford: Clarendon.

Reynolds, Vernon (1986). Religious rules and reproductive strategies. In Essays in HumanSociobiology, J. Wind and V. Reynolds (Eds.). Brussels: V.U.B. Study Series 26. Pp. 105-117.

Reynolds, Vernon (1988). Religious rules, mating patterns andfertility . In Human Mating Patterns, C.G.N. Mascie-Taylor .andA.J. Boyce (Eds.). CambridgeUniversity Press. Pp. 191-208.

Reynolds, Vernonand Kellett,John (1991). Mating andMarriage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Richardson,J.T. (1980). Brainwashing. Society 17(3):19.

Ricks,Thomas (1997). Makingthe Corps. New York: Scribner.

Ridley,Matt (1993). The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of HumanNature. New York: Penguin.

Rodas, Flavio N., Rodas, Ovidio C., andHawkins, Lawrence F. ( 1940). Chichicastenango. Guatemala: Union Tipografica.

Rogers, Everett M. and Shoemaker, Floyd F. (1971). Communication of Innovations: A Cross-CulturalApproach. New York: The Free Press.

Rosen, Raymond C. andBeck, J. Gayle (1988). Patternsof Sexual Arousal. New York: Guilford.

Rosenhan,D. (1970). The natural socialization of altruisticautonomy. In Altruism and Helping Behavior, J. Macauley andL. Berkowitz (Eds.). New York: Academic Press. 236 Rosetti, Stephen J. ( 1994 ). Statistical reflections on priestly celibacy. America 170(20):22-24.

Ross, MarcHoward (1993). The Culture of Conflict. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Rostand, J. (1961). The evolution of the species. In The Orion Book of Evolution. New York: Orion.

Rowe, WilliamL. (1960). The marriage network and structural change in a North Indian community. SouthwesternJournal of Anthropology 16:299-311.

Ruey, Yih-Fu, Ting-Ju, Ho, Shu-Hsueh, T'ao, Shih-Chen, Hsu, andCh'i-Ch'ien, Ch'iu (1955). Ethnographical investigationof some aspects of the Ayatal. Bulletin, Department of Archaeology andAnthropology, National Taiwan University5:113-127.

Rupen, Robert A. (1956). General character of the society. In MongolianPeople's Republic, W.M. Ballis (Ed.). New Haven CT: HRAF. Vol I, Pp. 1-48.

Rupen, Robert A. (1966). The MongolianPeople's Republic. Hoover Institution Studies 12. Stanford CA: Hoover Institute.

Saggs, H.W.F. (1967). EverydayLife in Babylonia andAssyria. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.

Saggs, H.W.F. (1969). The Greatnessthat was Babylon. New York: Praeger.

Sagi, Abraham, Lamb, M.E., Lewkowicz, K.S., Shoham,R., Dvir, R., and Estes, D. (1985). Security of infant-mother,-father, and-metaplet attachmentsamong kibbutz­ reared Israeli children. In Growing Points of Attachment Theoryand Research, I. Brethertonand E. Waters (Eds.). Monographs of the Societyfor Researchin Child Development 50 (1-2):257-275.

Sahagun, Fray Bernardinode (1932). A Historyof Ancient Mexico. Fisk University Press.

Sahlins, Marshall (1976). The Use and Abuse of Biology. Ann Arbor MI: The University of MichiganPress.

Salter, Frank K. (1995). Emotions in Command: A Naturalistic Study of Institutional Dominance. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Sanna, D.S. (1953). The nature andhistory of Hinduism. In Religion of the Hindus, K.W. Morgan (Ed.). New York: Ronald Press. Pp. 3-47. 237 Scheidel, Walter (1996). Brother-sister andparent-c hild marriage outside royal families in ancient Egypt andIran: A challenge to the socio biological view of incest avoidance? Ethology and Sociobiology 17(5): 319-340.

Schroeder, David A., Penner, Louis A., Dovidio, John F., and Piliavin, JaneA. (1995). The Psychology of Helping and Altruism: Problems and Puzzles. New York: McGraw­ Hill.

Seidler, Victor J. (1987). Reason, desire, andmale sexuality. In The Cultural Construction of Sexuality, P. Caplan (Ed.). London: Tavistock. Pp. 82-112.

Seligman,B.Z. (1963). Social organization. In Ainu Creed and Cult, by N.G. Munro. New York: Columbia UniversityPress. Pp. 141-158.

Serpenti, L.M. ( 1977). Cultivators in the Swamp(2nd edition). Amsterdam: Van Gorcum.

Sesardic, Neven (1995). Recent work on hwnanaltruism and evolution. Ethics 106: 128-157.

Seward,Desmond (1972). The Monks of War: The MilitaryReligious Orders. Hamden CT: Archon.

Sharp, Lauriston andHanks, Lucien M. (1978). BangChan. Ithaca NY: Cornell UniversityPress.

Sherman, PaulW. andHolmes, WarrenG. (1985). Kin recognition: Issues and evidence. In Experimental Behavioral Ecology andSociobiology, B. Holldobler andM. Lindauer (Eds.). New York: Gustav Fischer Verlag. Pp. 437-460.

Shirokogoroff, Sergei M. (1923). Ethnological investigations in Siberia, Mongolia, and Northern China. TheChina Journal of Science andArts 1(5-6): 513-621.

Shirokogoroff, Sergei M. (1973). Social Organizationof the Manchus. New York: AMS.

Simon, Herbert A. (1990). A mechanismfor social selection andsuccessful altruism. Science 250: 1665-1668.

Simpson, George E. (1942). Sexual andfamilial institutions in Northern Haiti. American Anthropologist 44:655-674.

Skertchly, J.A. (1974). Dahomeyas it is. London: Chapman andHall. 238 Smith, DeVeme Reed (1983). Palauan Social Structure. New Bruswick NJ: Rutgers.

Smith, Peter K. (1988). The cognitivedemands of children's social interactions with peers. In MachiavellianIntelligence: Social Expertiseand the Evolution of Intellect in Monkeys, Apes, andHumans, R.W. Byrneand A. Whiten (Eds.). Oxford: Clarendon. Pp. 94-109.

Snellgrove, D.L. (1970). Tibetan Buddhism. In A Dictionaryof ComparativeReligion. B.G.F. Brandon(Ed.). New York: CharlesScribner's Sons. Pp. 613-616.

Somit, Albertand Peterson, Steven A. (1997). Darwinism, Dominance,and Democracy. WestportCT: Praeger.

Soustelle, Jacques (1962). The Daily Life of theAztecs. New York: Macmillan.

Spier, Leslie (1930). KlamathEthnography. University of CaliforniaPublications in AmericanArchaeology andEthnology 30.

Spiro, MelfordE. (1970). Buddhism and Society. New York: Harperand Row.

Spiro, MelfordE. (1971). Buddhism and Society. London: Allen andUn win.

Steinberg, David J. (1959). Cambodia. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Stenning, DerrickJ. (1978). Household viabilityamong the pastoral Fulani. In The Developmental Cycle in Domestic Groups, J. Goody (Ed.). CambridgePapers in Social Anthropology No. I. CambridgeUniversity Press. Pp. 92-1 19.

Stenning, DerrickJ. ( 1994). SavannahNomads. Hamburg: Lit Verlag.

Stem, Theodore (1965). The KlamathTribe. Seattle: Universityof Washington Press.

Suggs, David N. andMiracle, Andrew W. (1993). Culture and HumanSexuality: A Reader. PacificGrove CA: Brooks/Cole.

Suggs, RobertC. and Marshall, Donald S. (1971). Anthropological perspectives on human sexual behavior. In HumanSexual Behavior, D.S. Marshall andR.C. Suggs (Eds.). New York: Basic Books. Pp. 218-243.

Sugiura, Kenichi andBefu, Harumi (1962). Kinship organization of the SaruAinu. Ethnology 1 (3):287-298.

Sulloway, Frank J. (1996). Bornto Rebel: Birth Order, Family Dynamics,and Creative Lives. New York: Pantheon. 239 Swanton,John R. (1911). IndianTribes of the Lower Mississippi Valley andAdjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico. SmithsonianInstitution Bureau of AmericanEthnology Bulletin 43. Washington: GovernmentPrinting Office.

Swanton, John R. (1922). EarlyHistory of the Creek Indians and their neighbors. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of AmericanEthnology Bulletin 73. Washington: Government PrintingOffice.

Swanton, John R. (1946). The Indians of the SoutheasternUnited States. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of AmericanEthn ology Bulletin 13 7. Washington: Government Printing Office.

Swanton, John R. (1975). Contribution to theEthnology of the Haida. The Jesup North PacificExpedition, Vol 1, Part5. New York: AMS Press.

Symons, Donald (1979). The Evolution of HumanSexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Symons, Donald (1987). If we're all Darwinians, what's all the fussabout? In Sociobiology and Psychology, C. Crawford, M. Smith, and D. Krebs (Eds.). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 121-146.

Symons, Donald (1990). Adaptiveness and adaptation. Ethology andSociobiology 11:4 27-444.

Talmon, Yohina (1964). Mate selection in collective settlements. American Sociological Review 29:491-508.

Taylor, Paul M. (1980). Tobelorese Ethnobiology. Ph.D. Thesis, Yale University.

Thompson, J. Eric (1933). Mexico BeforeCortez. New York: CharlesScribner's Sons.

Thompson, Virginia and Adloff, Richard ( 1971). The French PacificIslands. Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress.

Timko, Philip (1990). Pray at fixed times, pray always: Patternsof monastic prayer. In Monastic Lifein theChristian and Hindu Traditions, A.B. Creel and V. Narayanan(Eds.). Studies in ComparativeReligion, Volume 3. Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen. Pp. 97-124.

Tonganivalu, Deve and Bua,Rokotui (1911). The Customs of Bau beforethe Advent of Christianity. Transactionsof the FijianSociety. Pp.25-28. 240 Tooby John andCosmides, Leda (1990). On the universalityof humannature andthe uniqueness of the individual: The role of genetics and adaptation. Journalof Personality 58:17-67.

Tooby John andCosmides, Leda (1992). The psychological foundationsof culture. In The Adapted Mind: EvolutionaryPsychology and the Generation of Culture, J.H. Barkow,L. Cosmides, andJ. Tooby (Eds.). New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 19-136.

Tooker, Elizabeth (1964). An Ethnography of the HuronIndians, 1615-1649. Washington: Government Printing Office.

Torday, E. andJoyce, T.A. (1906). Notes on the ethnography of theBa-Yaka. Journal of the AnthropologicalInstitute of Great Britain andIreland 36:39-58.

Trigger, Bruce G. (1969). The Huron. CaseStudies in CulturalAnthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston.

Trivers, Robert (1985). Social Evolution. MenloPark CA: Benjamin/Cummings.

Trivers, Robert (1991). Deceit andself -deception: The relationship between communicationand consciousness. In Manand Beast Revisited, M.H. Robinson and L. Tiger (Eds.). Washington: Smithsonian. Pp. 175-191.

Trivers, Robert L. andWillard, D.E. (1973). Natural selection of parental ability to vary the sex-ratio of offspring. Science 179: 90-92.

Tschopik, H. (1951). The Aymaraof Chucuito, Peru. AnthropologicalPapers of the AmericanMuseum of NaturalHistory 44(2): 137-308.

Tseng, Chao-lun (1956). The Lolo Districtin Liang-Shan. New Haven CT: HRAF.

Tuden, Arthurand Marshall, Catherine (1972). Political organization: Cross-cultural codes 4. Ethnology 11(4):436-464.

Turke,Paul W. (1990). Which humansbehave adaptively, andwhy does it matter? Ethology andSociobiology 11(4/5):305-339.

Turner,Terence S. (1987). Cosmetics: The languageof bodily adornment. In Conformity andConflict (6th edition), J.P. Spradley and D.W. McCurdy (Eds.). Boston: Little, Brownand Co. Pp. 93-103.

Turney-High,Harry H. (1941). Ethnographyof theKutenai. Memoirs of the American AnthropologicalAssociation. Supplement to American Anthropologist43(2):7-202. 241 Tuzin, Donald ( 1995). Discourse, intercourse, and the excluded middle: Anthropology and the problem of sexual experience. In Sexual Nature/ Sexual Culture, P.R. Abramson and S.D. Pinkerton (Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago. Pp. 257-275.

Vaillant, George C. (1944). Aztecs of Mexico. Garden City NY: Doubleday, Duranand Co. van den Berghe, PierreL. (1981 ). The Ethnic Phenomenon. New York: Elsevier. van den Berghe, PierreL. and Peter, Karl (1988) Hutterites and Kibbutzniks: A tale of nepotistic communism. Man 23:522-539.

Vander Veer, Peter (1987). Tamingthe ascetic: Devotionalism in a Hindu monastic order. Man 22:680-695.

Varet,Pierre (1932). Au pays d'Annam. Les Dieux qui meurent. Paris: Editions Eugene Figuiere.

Vreeland,Herbert H. (1962). Mongol Communityand Kinship Structure(3rd edition). New Haven CT: HRAF.

Wach, Joachim (1962). Sociology of Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press -­ Phoenix.

Waddell, L. Austine (1958). The Buddhism of Tibet (2nd edition). Cambridge: W. Heffer& Sons.

Waterhouse, Joseph (1978). The King and People of Fiji. New York: AMS.

Watson, James B. (1952). Caya culturechange. American Anthropologist Memoir, No. 73, 54(2):3-144.

Weber, Max (1964). The Sociology of Religion. Boston: Beacon.

Wei-hsun Fu, Charlesand Wawrytko, Sandra A. (1994). Buddhist Behavioral Codes and the Modem World. WestportCT: Greenwood.

Weinstein, Jay (1997). Social andCultural Change. NeedhamHeights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Wells, P.A. (1987). Kin recognitionin humans. In Kin Recognitionin Animals, D.J.C. Fletcher and C.D. Michener (Eds.). New York: John Wiley. Pp. 395-415.

Weltfish,Gene (1965). The Lost Universe. New York: BasicBooks. 242 White, Leslie A. (1969). The Science of Culture. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

Whitehead, George (1924). In the Nicobar Islands. London: Seeley, Serviceand Company.

Wilkinson, R.J. (1911). Notes on the Negri Sembilan. Papers on Malay Subjects, Series I: History, Part5. Kualalumpur: Federated MalayStates GovernmentPress.

Williams, B.J. (1981). A Critical Review of Models in Sociobiology. Annual Reviews in Anthropology 10: 163-192.

Williams G.C. (1966). Adaptation andNatural Selection. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

Wilson, BryanR. (1967). An analysisof sect development. In Patterns of Sectarianism, B.R. Wilson (Ed.). London: Heinemann. Pp. 22-45.

Wilson, David S. (1992). On the relationship betweenevolutionary and psychological definitionsof altruismand selfishness. Biology and Philosophy 7:61-68.

Wilson, David S. and Sober, Elliott (1994). Reintroducinggroup selection to the human behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17:585-654.

Wilson, Edward0. (1975). Sociobiology. Cambridge MA: Belknap Press.

Wilson, Edward0. (1978). On Human Nature. Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press.

Wilson, Edward0. (1987). Kin recognition: An introductorysynopsis. In Kin Recognition in Animals, D.J.C. Fletcher and C.D. Michener (Eds.). New York: John Wiley. Pp.7-18.

Wilson, Monica (1957). Ritualsof Kinship Among theNyak.yusa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wilson, Monica (1967). Good Company: A Study ofNyak.yusaAge Villages. Boston: Beacon.

Wolf, Arthur (1995). Sexual Attraction andChildhood Association. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

Woodburn,J runes ( 1968). Stability andflexibility in Hadzaresidential groupings. In Manthe Hunter, R.B. Lee and I. DeVore (Eds.). Chicago: Aldine. Pp. 103-110. 243 Wright, Harrison M. (1959). New Zealand, 1769-1840. Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press.

Wright, Robert (1994). The MoralAnimal: EvolutionaryPsychology and Everyday Life. New York: Pantheon.

Wuketits, F.M. (1990). Evolutionary Epistemology andits Implications forHumankind. Albany: SUNYPress.

Wyatt, Gail E., Peters, StephanieD., andGuthrie, Donald (1988). Kinsey revisited, Part I: Comparisonsof the sexual socializationand sexual behavior of white women over 33 Years. Archivesof Sexual Behavior 17(3): 201-239.

Wynne, EdwardA. (1988). Traditional Catholic Religious Orders: Living in Community. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

Yalman,Nur (1962). The asceticBuddhist monks of Ceylon. Ethnology 1(3): 315-328.

Young, Antonia (no date). Albanianvirgins: A Balkangender. Unpublished manuscript.

Zingg, Robert M. (1937). The Huichols. Departmentof Anthropology of theUniversity of Chicago and theLaboratory of Anthropology SantaFe, New Mexico. 244

APPENDICES 245

APPENDIX A

SCCS SAMPLE AND SOURCES CONSULTED 246 APPENDIXA

SCCS SAMPLE AND SOURCES CONSULTED

"Pinpointing" data were used as astarting point, but descriptions of permanent abstinence, andthe contexts in which it is found, sometimes andexplicitly range beyond subgroups,locations, anddates delimited forthe SCCS. For more details, see Murdock andWhite 1969.

HumanRelations Area Files were utilized only ifjudged "A" or "B" qualityby Murdock andWhite. Several Files created afterMurdock andWhite's 1969 publication were utilized (listed with no ranking). Complete citations of sources consulted arelisted in the Bibliography.

Letters followingthe "pinpointed" yearfor each samplesociety refers to major geographic regions. Definitionsare:

A: Sub-SaharanAfrica C: Circum-Mediterranean E: EastEurasia I: InsularPacific N: North America S: South America

1 Nama - HRAFA Gei/Khauan tribe, 1860 A 2 Kung - HRAF A Agan Kung of Nyae Nyae region, 1950 A 3 Thonga - HRAF A Ronga subtribe around Lourenco Marques, 1895 A 4 Lozi - Gluckman 1968; Holub 1971 Luyana, 1900 A 5 Mbundu - HRAF A Bailundo subtribe, 1900 A 6 Suku - Kopytoff19 64, 1965; Torday andJoyce 1906 Feshi. territory, 1920 A 7 Bemba - HRAF B Zambia, 1897 A 8 Nyakyusa - HRAFB; Wilson 1957, 1967 around town of Mwaya, 1934 A 247 9 Hadza - Woodburn19 68 as a whole, 1930 A Luguru - Beidelman 1967, Christensen 1963 west central Morogoro district, 1925 A 11 Kikuyu - HRAF A Metume or Fort Hall district, 1920 A 12 Ganda - HRAF A Kyaddondo district, 1875 A 13 Mbuti - HRAF;Turnbull 1962, 1965 Epulu net-hunters of the Ituri Forest, 1950 A 14 NkundoMongo - HRAF A Ilanga subtribe, 1930 A 15 Banen- Dugast 1954 Ndiki subtribe, 1935 A 16 Tiv - HRAFA; Bohannanand Bohannan 1962, 1966 Benne province, 1920 A 17 Ibo - HRAF; Green 1964 Isu-Ama division of Southern Ibo, 1935 A 18 Fon -Argyle 1966; Herskovits 1938; Skertchly 1874 near Abomey, 1890 A 19 Ashanti - HRAFA; Rattray 1969 state of Kumasi, 1895 A 20 Mende - HRAFA around town of Bo, 1945 A 21 Wolof - HRAFA of the Upper and Lower Salum in the Gambia, 1950 C 22 Bambara - HRAFA [insufficientdata]

23 Tallensi - HRAFA as a whole, 1934 A 24 Songhai - Miner 1942, 1953 of Bamba or central division, 1940 C 25 Fulani - Stenning 1978, 1994 Alijam and Degeriji subgroups of Wodaabe Fulani in Niger, 1951 C 26 Hausa - HRAF B ZazzagawaHausa, 1900 C 27 Massa- [insufficientdata]

28 Azande - HRAF A of Yambio chiefdom, 1905 A 29 Fur- Beaton 1948; Felkin 1885 of westernDarfur around Jebel Marra, 1880 C 30 Otoro - Nadel 194 7 of the Nuba Hills, 1930 A 248 31 Shilluk - HRAF A as a whole, 1910 A 32 Mao - Cerulli 1956 NorthernMao, 1939 A 33 Kafa - [insufficient data]

34 Masai - Hollis 1971; Huntingford 1969 Kisonko or SouthernMasai of Tanzania, 1900 A 35 Konso - Hallpike 1972; Kluckhom 1962 of town of Duso, 1935 C 36 Somali - Lewis 1961, 1969 Dolbahanta subtribe, 1900 C 37 Amhara - HRAF A; Messing 1985 of Gondar district, 1953 C 38 Bogo - [insufficientdata]

39 Nubians- Callender 1966; Femea 1973; Kennedy 1978 Kenuzi branch of Barabra or Nile Nubians, 1900 C 40 Teda - HRAF; Cline 1950 of Tibesti, 1950 C 41 Tuareg- HRAF A Ahaggaren or Tuareg of Ahaggar, 1900 C 42 Riffians -HRAF B as a whole, 1926 C 43 Egyptians - HRAF A in and near town of Silwa, 1950 C 44 Hebrews - de Vaux 1961; Patai 1959 kingdomof Judah, 621 BC C 45 Babylonians - Driverand Miles 1952; Saggs 1967, 1969 in and around Babylon, 1750 BC C 46 Rwala - HRAFA Rwala Bedouin of south central Syria and northeasternJordan, 1913 C 47 Turks- HRAF B of northern Anatolian plateau, 1950 C 48 Gheg - HRAF A; Birge 1937; Coon 1950; Durham 1928; Hasluck 1954 mountain Gheg of Northern Albania, 1910 C 49 Romans- Carcopino 1940; Friedlander 1979; MacDonald 1996 in and around Rome, 110 AD C 50 Basques - CaroBaro ja 1944, 1958; Collins 1987 village of Vera de Bidasoa, 1934 C 51 Irish - HRAF A; Arensberg andKimball 1968 of County Clare, 1932 C 52 Lapps - HRAF A; Manker1953; Minn 1955; Pehrson 1954, 1964 Konkama Lapps ofKaresuando parish in northernSweden, 1950 C 249 53 YurakSamoyed - HRAF A Tundra Yurak, 1894 E 54 Russians - Benet 1970 Great Russians of peasant village of Viritiano, 1955 C 55 Abkhaz - HRAFB; Luzbetak 1966 as a whole, 1880 C 56 Armenians- HRAF; Lynch 1967 near Erevan, 1843 C 57 Kurd- Leach 1940; Hansen 1961 in and near town of Rowanduz, 1951 C 58 Basseri - Barth1961, 1964 nomadic Basseri, 1958 E 59 Punjabi - Eglar1960; Maron 1957 westernPun jabi of village of Mohla, 1950 E 60 Gond - HRAF A Hill Maria Gond, 1938 E 61 Toda - HRAF A as a whole, 1900 E 62 Santa.I - HRAF; Culshaw 1949 of Bankura and Birbhum districts of Bengal, 1940 E 63 UttarPradesh - Opler andSingh 1953; Rowe 1960 village of Senapur in kingdom of Dobhi Taluka, 1945 E 64 Barusho- HRAF A of Hunza state, 1934 E 65 Kazak - HRAF B of the Great Horde, 1885 E 66 Khalka Mongols - HRAFB; Plank 1956; Rupen 1956, 1966; Vreeland 1962 of Narobachin temple territory,19 20 E 67 Lolo - D'Ollone 1912; Lin 1961; Tseng 1945, 1956 of Taliang Shan mountains, 1910 E 68 Lepcha - HRAF A; Gorer 1967; Snellgrove1970; Waddell 1958 near Lingthem in Sikkim, 1937 E 69 Garo- HRAF;Burling 1963 of Rengsanggri and neighboring villages, 1955 E 70 Lakher - Parry 1976 as a whole, 1930 E 71 Burmese- Nash 1963 village of Nondwin in upper Burma, 1965 E 72 Lamet- Izikowitz 1951 as a whole, 1940 E 73 Vietnamese- HRAFA; Donoghue 1968; Gourou 1955; Hickey 1964; Varet1932 Tonkinese of the Red River delta, 1930 E 74 Rhade - Donoghue et al1962; Lebar et al 1964; Mole 1970 village of Ko-sier on Darlac plateau, 1962 E 250 75 Khmer- Briggs 1951; Steinberg 1959 city of Angkor, 1292 E 76 Siamese- Sharpand Hanks 1978 Central Thai village of Bang Chan, 1955 E 77 Semang- HRAFB Jahai subtribe, 1925 E 78 Nicobarese- Man1932; Whitehead 1924 of the northern islands of Car Nicobar, Chowra, Teressa, Bompoka, 1870 E 79 Andamanese- HRAFA Aka-Bea tribe of South Andaman, 1860 E 80 Vedda - HRAF A Danigala group of Forest Vedda, 1860 E 81 Tanala- HRAFB Menabe subtribe, 1925 E 82 NegriSembilan - HRAFB; De Josselin de Jong 1960; Lewis 1962; Wilkinson 1911 district of Inas, 1958 E 83 Javanese- Geertz,C. 1960; Geertz, H. 1961; Jay 1969 village ofModjokuto, Central Java, 1950s I 84 Balinese - Belo 1936; Geertzand Geertz 1975; Geertz1967 village of Tihingan, district of Klunghung, 1958 I 85 lban - HRAF A of the Ulu Ai group, 1950 I 86 Badjau - Nimmo 1965, 1969 of southwesternTawi-Tawi and adjacent islands of Sulu Archipelago, 1963 I 87 Toradja - HRAF; Adrianiand Kruyt 1951 Bare'e subgroup of eastern Toradja, 1910 I 88 Tobelorese - Platenkamp 1988; Taylor 1980 [insufficient data]

89 Alorese - HRAF A village complex of Atimelang in north central Alor, 1938 I 90 Tiwi - HRAFA of Bathurst and Melville Islands, 1929 I 91 Aranda- HRAFA; Murdock1965 AruntaMbainda of Alice Springs, 1896 I 92 Orokaiva - HRAF A [insufficientdata]

93 Kimam- Serpenti1977 village of Bamol in northeast central Kolekom, 1960 I 94 Kapauku - Pospisil 1960, 1963 village ofBotukebo in Kamu Valley, 1955 I 95 Kwoma - HRAF; Whiting 1941 Hongwam subtribe, 1937 I 251 96 Manus - HRAF A village of Peri, 1929 I 97 New Ireland - HRAF A village of Lesu, 1930 I 98 Trobrianders - HRAF A island of Kiriwina, 1914 I 99 Siuai -Oliver 1949, 1955 northeastern Siuai of southern Bougainville, 1939 I 100 Tikopia - HRAF A; Firth 1983 island of Tikopia as a whole, 1930 I 101 Pentecost - Lane 1965; Lane andLane 1956 village of Bunlap and neighboring pagan villages in southeasternPentecost Islands, 1953 I 102 Mbau Fijians - Tonganivalu and Bua 1911; Waterhouse 1978 island of Mbau offeast coast of Viti Lebu, 1840 I 103 Aj ie - Howe 1977; Thompson and Adloff19 71 [insufficientdata]

104 Maori - Best 197 4; Hawthorn 1944; Wright 1959 Nga Puhi tribe of northernisthmus, 1820 I 105 Marquesans - Handy 1923; Maranda 1964 Te-i'i chiefdom of southwestern Nuku Hiva Island, 1800 I 106 Samoans - HRAF B kingdom of Aana in westernUpolu Island, 1829 I 107 Gilbertese - Lambert 1964, 1970, 1971 northern Gilbertese of Makin and Butiritari islands, 1890 I 108 Marshallese - HRAF A atoll of Jaluit, 1900 I 109 Trukese - HRAF B island of Romonum or Ulalu, 1947 I 110 Yapese - HRAF A island of Yap as a whole, 1910 I 111 Palauans - Barnett 1949, 1966; Smith 1983 village ofUlimang in northernBab elthuap Island, 1947 I 112 Ifugao - HRAF B Central and Kiangan Ifugao, 1910 I 113 Atayal - Ferrell 1969; Mabuchi 1960; Ruey 1955 [insufficientdata]

114 Chinese- HRAFA; Fei 1947; Fried 1953 village of Kaihsienkung in northern Chekiang, 1936 E 115 Manchu - HRAF A; Shirokogoroff19 23, 1973 Aigundistrict of northern Manchuria, 1915 E 116 Koreans - HRAFA; Hewes and Kim 1952; Osgood 1951 village of Sondup' o and town of Samku Li on Kanghwa Island, 1947 E 252 117 JapaneseHRAF; Beardsley et al 1959 village of Niiike in Okayama prefecture, 1950 E 118 Ainu- Hilger 1971; Munro 1963; Seligman 1963; Sugiuraand Befu 1962 of the basins of Tokapchi and Saru rivers in southeastern Hokkaido, 1880 E 119 Gilyak- HRAF A of Sakhalin Island, 1890 E 120 Yukaghir - Jochelson 197 5 of the Upper Kolyma River, 1850 E 121 Chukchee - HRAF A Reindeer Chukchee, 1900 E 122 lngalik- Osgood, 1958, 1959 village of Shageluk, 1885 N 123 Aleut- HRAF A Unalaska branch, 1800 N 124 Copper Eskimo - HRAFA of Arctic mainland, 1915 N 125 Montagnais - HRAFA of the Lake St. John and Mistassini bands, 1910 N 126 Micmac - [insufficient data]

127 Saulteaux - HRAF B Northern Saulteaux of Berens River band, 1930 N 128 Slave - Helm 1961; Honigmann 1946 in vicinity of Fort Simpson, 1940 N 129 Kaska - HRAF A of Upper Liard River, 1900 N 130 Eyak - Birket-Smithand de Laguna19 38 as a whole, 1890 N 131 Haida - Murdock 1934a, 1934b; Niblack 1970; Swanton 1975 village of Masset, 1875 N 132 Bellacoola - HRAF A central Bellacoola along lower Bella Coola River, 1880 N 133 Twana - Eells 1877, 1985; Elmendorf19 93 as a whole, 1860 N 134 Yurok- HRAF B village of Tsurai, 1850 N 135 Pomo - HRAF A Eastern Pomo of Clear Lake, 1850 N 136 Yokuts - HRAFA Lake Y okuts, 1850 N 137 PaiuteHRAF A Wadadika or Hamey Valleyband of NorthernPauite, 1870 N 138 Klamath - Gatschet 1890; Spier 1930; Stem 1965 as a whole, 1860 N 253 139 Kutenai - Chamberlain 1892; Tumey-High 1941 Lower Kutenai, 1890 N 140 Gros Ventre - HRAF A homogeneous Gros Ventre as a whole, 1880 N 141 Hidatsa - Bowers 1965; Lowie 1924; Matthews 1971 village of Hidatsa, 1836 N 142 Pawnee - Dorsey 1904; Murie 1916; Weltfish 1965 Skidi or Skiri Pawnee, 1867 N 143 Omaha- HRAF B as a whole, 1860 N 144 Huron - Tooker 1964; Trigger 1969 Attignawatan (Bear People) and Attigneenongnahac (Cord People) tribes of Huron Confederacy, 1634 N 145 Creek - Bartram 1853; Hudson 1976; Swanton19 22, 1946 Upper Creek of Alabama, 1800 N 146 Natchez - Swanton 1911 politically integrated Natchez as a whole, 1718 N 147 Comanche- HRAFA [insufficientdata]

148 Chiricahua Apache - Opler 1941, 1955 central band or Chiricahua proper, 1870 N 149 Zuni - HRAF A village of Zuni, 1880 N 150 Havasupai - HRAFA as a whole, 1918 N 151 Papago - HRAF A Archie Papago near Sells, Arizona, 1910 N 152 Huichol - Grimes and Hinton 1969; Klineberg 1934; Lumholtz 1973; Zingg 1937 as a whole, 1890 N 153 Aztec - HRAFB; Berdan 1982; Soustelle 1962; Thompson 1933; Vaillant 1944 in and near city of Tenochtitlan, 1520 N 154 Popoluca - Foster 1942, 1943, 1971 Sierra Popoluca in and near town of Soteapan, 1940 N 155 Quiche - Bunzel 1952; Rodas et al 1940 town of Chichicastenango, 1930 S 156 Miskito - HRAF B near Cape Gracias a Dios, 1921 S 157 Bribri - HRAFA Bribri tribe of the Talamanca nation, 1917 S 158 Cuna- HRAFA of San Blas Archipelago, 1927 S 159 Goajiro - HRAFA as a whole, 1947 S 254 160 Haitians - HRAFB; Herskovits 1964; Metraux 1959; Simpson 1942 of Mirebalais, 1935 S 161 Callinago - HRAF A of island of Dominica, 1650 S 162 Warrau - HRAF A of Orinoco Delta, 1935 S 163 Yanomamo - Chagnon1983, 1988 Shamatari subtribe around the village of Bisaasi-teri, 1965 S 164 Carib - HRAF A along Barama River in British Guiana, 1932 S 165 Saramacca- HRAF A Saramacca group of Bush Negroes in upper basin of the Suriname River, 1928 S 166 Mundurucu -HRAFB savanna-dwelling Mundurucu of Rio de Topas drainage, 1850 S 167 Cubeo - Goldman 1963 of Caduiari River, 1939 S 168 Cayapa - HRAF A in drainage of Rio Cayapas, 1908 S 169 Jivaro - HRAF A Jivaro proper, 1920 S 170 Amahuaca - Carneiro1964; Dole 1961/1962; Huxley andCapa 1964 on upper Inuya River, 1960 S 171 Inca -HRAFB; Metraux; Rowe 1946 Quechua-speaking Indians near Cuzco, 1530 S 172 Aymara - HRAF A; La Barre 1948; Tschopik 1951 of the community of Chucuito, Peru, 1940 S 173 Siriono - HRAF A in forestsnear RioBlanco, 1942 S 17 4 Nambicuara - HRAF A Cocozu or eatem Nambicuara, 1940 S 175 TrumaiHRAF - Murphyand Quain 1955 single survivingvillage, 1938 S 176 Timbira - HRAFB Ramococamecra or Eastern Timbira, 1915 S 177 Tupinamba - HRAF A near Rio de Janeiro, 1550 S 178 Botocudo - Keane1883; Metraux 1946a Naknenuk subtribe in basin of Rio Doce, 1884 S 179 Shavante-M aybury-Lewis1967; Nimuendaju 1942 Akwe-Shavante in vicinityof Sao Domingos, 1958 S 180 Aweikoma - Henry 1964; Metraux 1946b of the Duque de Caixas Reservation, 1932 S 255 181 Cayua - Watson 1952 of southern Matto Grosso, Brazil, 1890 S 182 Lengua - Grubb 1911 those in contact with Anglican mission, 1889 S 183 Abipon - HRAFA those in contact with Jesuit mission, 1750 S 184 Mapuche - Faron 1964, 1961, 1968; Hilger 1957 near Temuco, 1950 S 185 Tehuelche - HRAF A equestrian Tehuelche, 1870 S 186 Yahgan - HRAF B eastern and central Y ahgan, 1865 S 256

APPENDIX B

CROSS-CULTURAL CODES 257

APPENDIX B

CROSS-CULTURAL CODES

SCCS # NAME 1 2 3 4 J 1 Nama B 3 A 2 Kung B 1 A I 3 Thonga B 1 F K 4 Lozi B 5 D L 5 Mbundu B 3 D K 6 Suku C 2 D L 7 Bemba B 3 C L 8 Nyakyusa C 3 E K 9 Hadza C 1 B I 10 . Luguru B 4 G I 11 Kikuyu B 3 F I 12 Ganda B 3 F L 13 Mbuti B 2 B I 14 Nkundo Mongo B 3 C K 15 Banen B 4 D I J 16 Tiv D 5 E J 17 Ibo C 6 G 18 Fon F 7 E L 19 Ashanti C 4 E K J 20 Mende B 3 E 21 Wolof B 3 F K J 22 Bambara - 5 D 23 Tallensi C 5 F I 24 Songhai B 5 D L J 25 Fulani B 3 C 26 Hausa C 6 E L 27 Massa - 4 E I 28 Azande B 3 C K 29 Fur B 3 D L 258 SCCS # NAME 1 2 3 4

30 Otoro C 5 D J 31 Shilluk A 5 E J 32 Mao B 2 D J - 33 Kafa 2 E L 34 Masai B 4 C J 35 Konso B 6 F J 36 Somali C 5 D K 37 Amhara F 4 E L 38 Bogo - 5 C J 39 Nubians B 2 - M 40 Teda C 2 A J 41 Tuareg B 1 A J 42 Riffians C 5 F J 43 Egyptians C 6 G L 44 Hebrews C 7 G K 45 Babylonians F 8 G L 46 Rwala B 2 B J 47 Turks A 5 E L 48 Gheg F 3 E K 49 Romans F 8 G L 50 Basques F 6 D M 51 Irish F 5 E K 52 Lapps E 1 C I 53 YurakSamoyed B 1 A I 54 Russians F 6 D L 55 Abkhaz B 4 E J 56 Armenians F 5 E L 57 Kurd B 6 F K 58 Basseri B 3 C J 59 Punjabi B 4 F L 60 Gond C 2 D J 61 Toda A 1 E J 62 Santai B 3 F J 259 SCCS # NAME 1 2 3 4

63 UttarPradesh B 6 G K 64 Barusho A 3 C J 65 Kazak B 5 C L 66 Khalka Mongols F 1 C L 67 Lolo C 3 C I 68 Lepcha F 3 E J 69 Garo B 4 E J 70 Lakher B 4 D J 71 Burmese F 5 F L 72 Lamet B 3 A I 73 Vietnamese F 5 G L 74 Rhade B 5 G I 75 Khmer F 7 E L 76 Siamese F 6 F L 77 Semang B 1 A I 78 Nicobarese C 4 E I 79 Andamanese B 1 C I 80 Vedda A 1 A I 81 Tanala A 4 C J 82 NegriSembilan C 6 G K 83 Javanese C 5 G L 84 Balinese B 5 G K 85 lban C 2 D I 86 Badjau B 4 A I 87 Toradja C 3 D J - 88 Tobelorese - D K 89 Alorese C 3 G K 90 Tiwi C 3 B I 91 Aranda B 1 B I 92 Orokaiva - 2 C I 93 Kimam B 5 B I 94 Kapauku A 3 F J 95 Kwoma B 4 E I 260 SCCS # NAME 1 2 3 4

96 Manus A 4 E I 97 New Ireland B 4 D I 98 Trobrianders B 3 E J 99 Siuai A 2 E I 100 Tikopia E 5 F J 101 Pentecost C 2 D I 102 Mbau Fijians B 6 G K 103 Ajie - 2 C J 104 Maori C 3 B J 105 Marquesans D 3 E J 106 Samoans C 4 F K 107 Gilbertese B 4 F J 108 Marshallese A 3 F J 109 Trukese B 4 G I 110 Yapese A 3 E J 111 Palauans D 2 E K 112 lfugao B 5 F I 113 Atayal 3 D J 114 Chinese F 6 G L 115 Manchu B 3 F M 116 Koreans F 3 G L 117 Japanese F 3 G L 118 Ainu B 1 B J 119 Gilyak C 2 A I 120 Yukaghir B 2 A I 121 Chukchee C 1 A I 122 lngalik D 2 A I 123 Aleut B 4 D I 124 Copper Eskimo A 1 A I 125 Montagnais C 3 A I - 126 Micmac 1 A J 127 Saulteaux C 3 A I 128 Slave C 2 B I 261 SCCS # NAME 1 2 3 4

129 Kaska C 1 A I 130 Eyak C 1 A J 131 Haida B 3 B I 132 Bellacoola C 2 C I 133 Twana A 1 E I 134 Yurok B 1 C I 135 Pomo C 4 C I 136 Yokuts B 4 D I 137 Paiute C 3 A I 138 Klamath D 1 B I 139 Kutenai B 3 A J 140 Gros Ventre B 3 A J 141 Hidatsa D 5 A I 142 Pawnee F 4 B J 143 Omaha C 6 C J 144 Huron B 6 E K 145 Creek B 4 C K 146 Natchez D 5 D J - 147 Comanche 4 A I 148 Chi. Apache D 2 A I 149 Zuni C 6 C I 150 Havasupai C 3 A I 151 Papago B 4 E I 152 Huichol B 4 C I 153 Aztec F 8 G L 154 Popoluca B 5 E I 155 Quiche B 7 E J 156 Miskito C 4 D J - 157 Bribri B 2 I 158 Cuna C 5 E J 159 Goajiro A 2 B I 160 Haitians F 7 F K 161 Callinago B 4 D I 262 SCCS # NAME 1 2 3 4

162 Warrau A 2 B I 163 Yanomamo C 3 B I 164 Carib C 1 A I 165 Saramacca C 3 D K 166 Mundurucu B 3 A I 167 Cubeo C 1 B I 168 Cayapa B 5 C I 169 Jivaro A 2 B I 170 Amahuaca B 1 A I 171 Inca F 3 D L 172 Aymara B 5 F M 173 Siriano C 2 A I 174 Nambicuara B 2 B I 175 Trumai B 1 A I 176 Timbira B 4 C I 177 Tupinamba B 5 B J 178 Botocudo B 2 A I 179 Shavante B 4 A I 180 Aweikoma A 1 A I 181 Cayua B 1 B I 182 Lengua C 3 A I 183 Abipon B 4 B I 184 Mapuche C 2 E I 185 Tehuelche B 3 A I 186 Yahgan C 1 B I 263 DEFINITION OF VARIABLES

Column 1 - Permanent abstinence:

A - none reported B - non-institutional context C - unlikely to be other than non-institutional context D - institutional in individual context E - institutional in kin context F - institutional in non-kin context

NOTE: Althoughin several societies permanent abstinence occurred in more thanone context, these were coded as Fin correlations. See Tables 2 and 3, as well as descriptions in text for specificcontext information.

Column 2 - Communitysize (from Murdock and Wilson 1972):

1 - fewerthan 50 persons 2 - 50-99 3 - 100-199 4 - 200-399 5 - 400-999 6 - 1000-4999 7 - 5000-49,000 8 - 50,000 or more

Column 3 - Density of population(from Murdock and Wilson 1972):

A - less than1 person per square 5miles B - from 1per squaremile to 1 per square5 miles C - from 1.1 to 5 per square mile D - 5.1 to 25 per sq. m. E- 26 to 100 per sq. m. F - 101 to 500 per sq. m. G - over 500 per sq. m.

Column 4 - Level of political integration (from Murdockand White1969):

I - stateless society J - pettyparamount chiefdom K - small state organizedinto districts L - largestate subdivided into provinces anddistricts M - integratedinto largestate (described, but not coded, by Murdock andWhite) 264 VITA

;HectorNako Qirko grew up in New York City, where he was born, as well as in Havana,

Sao Paulo, Caracas,Bogota, Lima, andMexico City. After attending Northwestern

University in Evanston, Illinois, he becamea professionalmusician, working out of

Chicago, New York, andKnoxville. In 1984 he entered the University of Tennessee,

Knoxville, fromwhich he received the B.A. (1986) andM.A. (1989) degrees andhis

Doctoral Candidacy(1992) in Anthropology. From 1992 to 1996 he worked as an applied anthropologist for the Tennessee Valley Authority. In 1997 he became a partner of Howard& Qirko Consultants,a firmspecializing in diversity andorganizational culture issues, and continued work in pursuit of the Doctorate of Philosophy in

Anthropology. He received the Ph.D. in May, 1998.

He is presently continuing his work with Howard& Qirko Consultants. He is also

Instructor in the Departmentof Anthropology at the University of Tennessee, where he

will serveas AssistantPr ofessor(part-time) beginning Fall Semester 1998. He continues

to performand record music.