8 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 197 



Navahos, who represented four out of every five Navahos in 1950, 

 represented only about two out of every three Navahos in 1960.^^ 



The third criterion, that of social solidarity, is particularly difficult 

 to utilize in a determination of Indian population. Reference has 

 already been made to the limited nature of such feelings of solidarity 

 among the Navaho, at least until recent times. In fact, some authori- 

 ties consider the social solidarity which is now found among various 

 Indian tribes to be an artificial development brought about by the 

 exigencies of reservation life, rather than an integral expression of 

 tribal culture (Hill, 1940 b; Kelly and Plackenberg, n.d., p. 9). Fur- 

 thermore, even if it is conceded that with improvements in communi- 

 cations and the organization of tribal governments, such solidarity 

 is today important, the problem remains of applymg this criterion 

 in determining population. The closest indicator of social solidarity 

 that has ever appeared on a census schedule is a question on tribal 

 affiliation, and even that question was not included in the general 

 decennial enumerations after 1930. If an actual measure of social 

 solidarity could be devised, the resultant population would correspond 

 closely to that obtained from using any cultural criterion. Such a 

 measure might thus be used in estimating the "residual" Indian 

 population whose primary identifications remain with the traditional 

 Indian culture. 



The fhial criterion of tribalness, that of political autonomy, has 

 little value in estimations of Indian population, since that autonomy 

 is largely a legal fiction at the present time. Whatever rights an 

 Indian may enjoy in his capacity as a "ward" of the State or as a 

 member of some Indian tribe, he is subject to the basic laws of the 

 land. Such "autonomy" as remains consists largely in the right to 

 share or use properties held by the tribe, and in the other rights and 

 duties entailed by tribal membership. As a criterion for determining 

 Indian population, therefore, political autonomy reduces to a question 

 of inclusion on a tribal roll or similar register. The criterion for 

 such inclusion, in turn, is genealogical, although the minimum quan- 

 tum of "Indian blood" necessary for inclusion varies considerably 

 from tribe to tribe. In addition, the patent impossibility of ascertain- 

 ing such a "quantum" with precision introduces still further variation 

 in the application of this criterion. In the case of the Navaho, there 

 is a further difficulty — inclusion on the register maintained at the 



"The data for 1950 are summarized in Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1954 a, p. 18. The 

 1960 reservation population Is an estimate prepared by the Division of Indian Health, 

 U.S. Public Health Service, from unpublished tabulations of the non-White population by 

 enumeration district, as obtained in the 1960 decennial census. The total Navaho popu- 

 lation as estimated in December 1961 is given in Young, 1961, p. 331. The estimated 

 total Navaho population in 1960 was obtained by interpolation. 



