wHrxE] KIN AND CLAN 37 



opposite the clan name in Column 1 between which there have been 

 maniages. They are listed ui order of numerical frequencies, the 

 greatest number being at the head of the list. It v.-ill be noticed that 

 clans which show the gneatest number of between-clan marriages are 

 also the largest clans, which argues that numerical preponderance 

 rather than psychological affinity accounts for the marriages. To go 

 further, suppose we apply the laws of chance to the maniages between 

 the Sim and Eagle clans, for example. There are 62 Eagle clan 

 members with mates. Excludmg these from the total of married 

 people (388), we have 326 people from which the Eagle people may 

 choose mates, of which the Sun people number 96, or one in three. If 

 the marriages were contracted at random (i. e., without regard to 

 clan affiliation other than Eagle), an Eagle clan member would have 

 one chance in three of getting a Sun clan mate, which for the 62 

 Eagle people woidd give 21 marriages with the Sim clan. Or, suppose 

 we take the mairiages between the Sun clan and the Red Corn clan. 

 Excluding the 96 Sun clan members from the total of 388, we have 

 292 from which they may choose mates. The Red Corn people are 

 represented in this number, 292, in the proportion of one to eight. If, 

 then, the Sun clan members married according to this ratio, they would 

 marry 12 Red Corn clan members, wliich again corresponds to the 

 actual number. But, of course, one must not expect the law of 

 probability to be validated in each instance. If one figures the 

 marriages between the Yellow Corn clan and the Eagle clan, for 

 example, he gets 7 marriages instead of 10. But as the clans grow 

 smaller in size the law of probability becomes less illuminating 

 because of the great increase in the range of choice for members of 

 the small clans. 



We now have two items of testimony, then, which make the exist- 

 ence of a moiety division highly improbable. We can now offer 

 complete and absolute proof of its nonexistence in tliis way: Suppose 

 we take the clans between which marriages are quite numerous, and 

 assume that they belong to opposite moieties or phratries, and Hst 

 them accordingly in two columns (as we have done in Table 4). We 

 soon find that it is impossible not to include a given clan in both 

 columns. Moreover, there are marriages between clans comprising 

 each colunm which we do not show in this table, but which may be 

 ascertained from Table 1. The assumption of a moiety division 

 based upon marriage, then, is completely demohshed by our data. 



Of course, there are some clans which do not mate with some other 

 clans. But this is to be exj)lained by their size ; there are not enough 

 Water clan adults to mate with all the other clans, nor enough Sky, 

 Tansy Mustard, or Turkey clan mcmbei"s. 



