312 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 196 



Ethic. Correlates of this ethic ramify into all of their behavior. 

 It is by their behavior that one is best able to identify them. 



There is also a large group of people who are phenotypically Indians. 

 They look upon themselves as Indians, and are called "Indians" by 

 Conservatives. However, except for appearance, and the Uving 

 arrangements of some of them, they do not act like Conservatives. 

 These people have been called Generalized Indians up to now. I 

 propose to call them Modern Indians, for, while they are Indians, their 

 orientation is not primarily to the past or to the traditional. 



The third group has been called Rural Whites. They are, of course, 

 phenotypically White. Except for some of their Hving conditions and 

 some of their educational aspirations, they do not resemble Conserva- 

 tives. The group to which they bear the greatest resemblance in 

 manner of living and in behavior is the Generalized Indians. As a 

 matter of fact, when Thomas first distinguished between these two 

 groups, he did so on qualitative differences which he did not clarify. 

 It is now my impression that Thomas based his division of the General- 

 ized Indian and the Rural White, in great measure, on phenotypic 

 differences. I do not wish to do violence to his findings, but I 

 cannot ascertain, according to any of my variables, a significant 

 difference between them. It well may be that a systematic investiga- 

 tion of basic personality might reveal meaningful differences. 

 However, on the basis of behavior, goals, and interests, the two groups 

 are very similar. Therefore I will include Thomas' "Rural Whites" 

 among my "Modern Indians." 



We are left with the fom-th category, called the Middle Class. 

 Members of this aggregate are either phenotypically White or pheno- 

 typically Indian. There is a wide range in the blood degree repre- 

 sented in this group. These people are far removed from 

 Conservatives in values and behavior, but they are not so distinctly 

 separate from the Modern Indians in most characteristics. I will, 

 therefore, include them also among the "Modern Indians." 



Thus the analysis has led to only two acculturative groups, 

 Conservatives and Modern Indians. How then can the differences 

 among those called Modern Indians be explained? I intend to 

 explain them by adding another dimension — stratification — to our 

 model. 



STRATIFICATION 



A stratified society is characterized by differences among people 

 which can be evaluated by others as being "higher" or "lower." 

 Students of the social-class concept have proposed various criteria 

 by which groups can be ranked. Some have defined class in strictly 

 socioeconomic terms as aggregates whose distinctions are rooted in 



