Page 17 - caltrans2008fortier

17
17
17
17

Generally, the mainland Gabrielinos were situated between peoples with significantly
different natural resources. This situation allowed them to advantageously pursue
mercantile trade by profiting from the transportation of valuables such as asphalt and
steatite inland while transporting other valuable goods back toward the island
communities and northern ethnic groups.

3.4 Gabrielinos on the Eve of Colonialism: An Incipient Complex Foraging Society
The question of Gabrielino social complexity and stratification on the eve of colonialism
remains a vexing one. Evaluation for this overview of indigenous Gabrielino society will
focus on the degree of social stratification in Gabrielino society on the eve of
colonialism, circa 1750 AD. Outside of this time period, social stratification would have
varied according to time periods and spheres of social interaction (political, social,
religious, economic spheres). Generally, foraging-based societies move toward increasing
social stratification under certain conditions and are known as “complex foraging
4
societies” when they satisfy a number of conditions. For example, Haida, Tsimsian,
Kwakiutl and other Northwest coastal societies are considered to have an indigenous
social organization marked by access to abundant resources during relatively short
opportunities of food collection. In these cases, material technologies developed
enabling long-term food storage. Social stratification has also occurred among fishing-
based societies with incipient population pressure, as among island-based foraging
societies. These conditions were not met among the indigenous populations of Los
Angeles, however. While there was an indigenous fishing-based economy among
Gabrielino communities living along coastal areas, there was little population pressure.
Fissioning of patriclans occurred in which social conflict was been resolved by families
in conflict migrating away from the area for a few years, if not a generation or longer.
There are a few reports in the ethnographic record of such disputes in which clans
involved in disputes migrated to nearby islands, inland, or southwards into Juaneño and
Luiseño speaking territories.

Evidence in favor of social stratification does exist, though it may be explained as a
function of later increasing social contact with colonial stratified societies. The strongest
evidence involves Gabrielino names for social positions. The role of leaders appears to
have changed over time, from egalitarian part-time leadership roles based upon natural
skills of elders, to one in which male and female elders represented the clan on a part-
time but hereditary basis when dealing with others, to one in which the role of leader
became a full-time and inheritable social role. The named types of leaders include
tomyaar (village head, chief); maniisharom (female leaders); pa’mo tomyaar (patriclan
headman); ‘ahuuhvarot (shaman, doctor, healer); nahoo'enar (law givers); and paxaa' or
taaxkwa' (two names for ceremonial leaders). While there was evidence that leaders had a
moral obligation to give away to their relatives and in-laws the trade goods and valuables

4
As a comparative benchmark, features of complex foraging societies generally include 1) High population
densities; 2) Sedentitism; 3) Occupational specializations; 4) Defence of territory; 5) Focal exploitation of
resource (fish, commonly); 6) Large group residences; 7) Ranked, inherited status; 8) Ritual feasting; 9)
Standardized valuables (money currencies); 10) Prestige goods; 11) Food storage; 12) Hi rates of violence,
warfare (Kelly 1995). They have also been called other names such as “non-egalitarian” foraging societies,
“transforaging hunter-gatherers” and “delayed-return” foraging societies.

Caltrans D7 Region/Los Angeles County Ethnographic Consultation 17