The Ecological-Evolutionary Typology of Human Societies and the Evolution of Social Inequality

10 References

Alexander, Richard D., John L. Hoogland, Richard D. Howard, Katharine M. Noonan, and Paul W. Sherman. 1979. "Sexual Dimorphisms and Breeding Systems in Pinnipeds, Ungulates, Primates, and Humans." Pp. 402-435 in Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behavior: An Anthropological Perspective, edited by Napoleon A. Chagnon and William Irons. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press.

Betzig, Laura. 1986. Despotism and Differential Reproduction: A Darwinian View of History. New York: Aldine.

Blumberg, Rae. 1978. Stratification: Socioeconomic and Sexual Inequality. Dubuque, Iowa: WM. C. Brown.

Chafetz, Janet Saltzman. 1984. Sex and Advantage. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld.

Childe, V. Gordon. 1936. Man Makes Himself. London, England: Watts.

Daly, Martin and Margo Wilson. 1983. Sex, Evolution, & Behavior. (2nd edition.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Diamond, Jared. 1998. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: Norton.

Divale, William. 2000. Pre-Coded Variables for the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, Volume I and II. Jamaica, NY: York College, CUNY. [Distributed by World Cultures.]

Fried, Morton. 1967. The Evolution of Political Society. New York: Random House.

Gray, J. Patrick. 1998. Ethnographic Atlas Codebook. World Cultures 10(1):86-136. [Distributed by World Cultures.]

Goldschmidt, Walter. 1959. Man's Way: A preface to the Understanding of Human Society. New York: Holt.

Holmberg, Allan. 1950. Nomads of the Long Bow: The Siriono of Eastern Bolivia. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Kanazawa, Satoshi and Mary C. Still. 1999. "Why Monogamy?" Social Forces 78:25-50.

Kanazawa, Satoshi. 2001. "Science vs. History: A Reply to MacDonald." Social Forces 80:349-352.

Kanazawa, Satoshi. 2001. "A Bit of Logic Goes a Long Way: A Reply to Sanderson." Social Forces 80:337-341.

Lenski, Gerhard. 1970. Human Societies: A Macrolevel Introduction to Sociology. (1st edition.) New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lenski, Gerhard. [1966] 1984. Power and Privilege. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Lopreato, Joseph and Timothy Crippen. 1999. Crisis in Sociology: The Need for Darwin. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

MacDonald, Kevin. 2001. "Theoretical Pluralism and a Historical Complexity: A Comment on Kanazawa and Still." Social Forces 80:343-347.

Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1877. Ancient Society. New York: Holt.

Murdock, George P. 1967. Ethnographic Atlas. Pittsburgh, PA: Pittsburgh University Press.

Murdock, George P. and Caterina Provost. 1971. "Cultural Complexity." Ethnology 12:379-392.

Murdock, George P. and Douglas R. White. 1969. "Standard Cross-Cultural Sample." Ethnology 8:329-369.

Nolan, Patrick and Gerhard Lenski. 1999. Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology. (8th edition.) New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sanderson, Stephen K. 2001. "Explaining Monogamy and Polygyny in Human Societies: Comment on Kanazawa and Still." Social Forces 80:329-335.

Service, Elman. 1962. Primitive Social Organization. New York: Random House.

Service, Elman. 1975. Origins of the State and Civilization. 1975. New York: Norton.

van den Berghe, Pierre L. 1974. "Bringing Beasts Back In." American Sociological Review 39:777-788.

Table 2.1: World Region by Type of Society

	A	C	E	I	N	S	Total	N
HG	4.0	0.0	3.4	13.2	66.7	12.6	100.0	174
SH	7.4	2.5	3.7	46.3	14.2	25.9	100.0	162
AH	73.8	9.1	7.6	6.5	1.1	1.9	100.0	263
AG	3.7	44.4	38.5	8.1	4.4	0.7	100.0	135
FI	11.7	0.0	8.3	23.3	45.0	11.7	100.0	60
HE	15.6	63.6	19.5	0.0	0.0	1.3	100.0	77
Total	27.2	15.7	11.9	16.1	20.1	9.0	100.0
N	237	137	104	140	175	78		871

Note: Type of Society: see Appendix. World Region is EA V91$: A = Africa (exclusive of Madagascar and the Sahara), C = Circum-Mediterranean (North Africa, Turkey, Caucasus, Semitic Near East), E = East Eurasia (including Madagascar and islands in Indian Ocean), I = Insular Pacific (including Australia, Indonesia, Formosa, Philippines), N = North America (indigenous societies to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec), S = South America (including Antilles, Yucatan, Central America)

Table 2.2: Principal Subsistence Activity by Type of Society

	1	2	3	4	6	7	8	9	Total	N
HG	56.9	5.7	23.0	0.0	2.3	0.6	10.9	0.6	100.0	174
SH	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	81.5	18.5	0.0	0.0	100.0	162
AH	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	69.6	30.4	0.0	0.0	100.0	263
AG	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	11.9	88.1	0.0	0.0	100.0	135
FI	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	60
HE	0.0	0.0	0.0	100	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	77
Total	11.4	8.0	4.6	8.8	38.5	26.4	2.2	0.1	100.0
N	99	70	40	77	335	230	19	1		871

Note: Type of Society: see Appendix. Dominant Subsistence is EA V42, Activity that contributes most to subsistence: 1 = Gathering, 2 = Fishing, 3 = Hunting, 4 = Pastoralism, 5 = Casual agriculture, 6 = Extensive agriculture, 7 = Intensive agriculture, 8 = Two or more sources equally, 9 = Agriculture, type unknown.

Table 3.1: Population Density by Type of Society

	1	2	3	4	5	Total	N
HG	77.8	11.1	7.4	3.7	0.0	100.0	27
SH	25.7	14.3	22.9	28.6	8.6	100.0	35
AH	2.5	10.0	30.0	27.5	30.0	100.0	40
AG	0.0	6.5	6.5	25.8	61.3	100.0	31
FI	36.4	9.1	18.2	18.2	18.2	100.0	11
HE	37.5	43.7	6.2	12.5	0.0	100.0	16
Total	25.6	13.8	16.9	21.3	22.5	100.0
N	41	22	27	34	36		160

NOTE: Chi-square 109.0, 20 df, p<.000; more than 20% of fitted cells are sparse (n<5) so significance level is suspect. Type of Society: see Appendix. Population Density is SS V156 (per square mile): 1 = <1 person, 2 = 1-5 persons, 3 = 5.1-25 persons, 4 = 26-100 persons, 5 = >100 persons.

Table 3.2: Class Stratification (0 = ABSENT, 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	78.2	21.8	100.0	165
SH	58.2	41.8	100.0	158
AH	37.7	62.3	100.0	236
AG	14.3	85.7	100.0	126
FI	48.1	51.9	100.0	54
HE	21.0	79.0	100.0	62
Total	45.8	54.2	100.0
N	367	434		801

NOTE: Chi-square 151.7, 5 df, p<.000. Type of Society: see Appendix. Class Stratification recoded from EA V66 as 0 if V66 is 1 = Absence of class stratification among freemen, 1 if V66 is 2 = Wealth distinctions, 3 = Elite based on control of land or other resources, 4 = Dual (hereditary aristocracy), or 5 = Complex (social classes).

Table 3.3: Jurisdictional Hierarchy Beyond Local Community by Type of Society (Number of Levels)

	1	2	3	4	5	Total	N
HG	88.0	12.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	167
SH	62.3	26.5	10.5	0.6	0.0	100.0	162
AH	24.6	38.5	26.2	10.0	0.8	100.0	260
AG	12.8	18.4	18.4	31.2	19.2	100.0	125
FI	67.9	28.6	3.6	0.0	0.0	100.0	56
HE	10.1	42.0	30.4	17.4	0.0	100.0	69
Total	44.5	27.5	15.6	9.3	3.1	100.0
N	373	231	131	78	26		839

NOTE: Chi-square 483.8, 20 df, p<.000. Type of Society: see Appendix. Jurisdictional Hierarchy Beyond Local Community is EA V33: 1 = No political authority beyond local community, 2 = One level (petty chiefdom), 3 = Two levels (larger chiefdom), 4 = Three levels (state), 5 = Four levels (large state)

Table 3.4: Technological Specialization by Type of Society

	1	2	3	4	5	Total	N
HG	55.6	18.5	22.2	3.7	0.0	100.0	27
SH	20.0	25.7	31.4	20.0	2.9	100.0	35
AH	2.5	0.0	7.5	70.0	20.0	100.0	40
AG	0.0	0.0	6.5	16.1	77.4	100.0	31
FI	45.5	18.2	18.2	18.2	0.0	100.0	11
HE	18.8	6.2	12.5	62.5	0.0	100.0	16
Total	19.4	10.6	16.3	33.1	20.6	100.0
N	31	17	26	53	33		160

NOTE: Chi-square 158.8, 20 df, p<.000; more than 20% of fitted cells are sparse (n<5) so significance level is suspect. Type of Society: see Appendix. Technological Specialization is SS V153: 1 = None, 2 = Pottery only, 3 = Loom weaving only, 4 = Metalwork only, 5 = Smiths, weavers, potters.

Table 3.5: OLS Regressions of Jurisdictional Hierarchy Beyond Local Community and Technological Specialization on Type of Society

	Jurisdictional Hierarchy Beyond Local Community			Technological Specialization
Independent Variable	b	t = b/se	p>|t|	b	t = b/se	p>|t|
Constant	1.120	16.732	.000	1.741	9.725	.000
HG (ref.)	--	--	--	--	--	--
SH	0.374	3.922	.000	.859	3.607	.000
AH	1.119	13.044	.000	2.309	9.968	.000
AG	2.136	20.885	.000	2.969	12.126	.000
FI	0.237	1.777	.076	.350	1.053	.294
HE	1.431	11.562	.000	1.447	4.930	.000
R^2	.407			.578
Adj. R^2	.403			.565
N	839			160

NOTE: Type of Society indicators: see Appendix. Jurisdictional Hierarchy Beyond Local Community: see Table 3.3. Technological Specialization: see Table 3.4.

Table 4.1: Inheritance of Office of Local Headman (0 = ABSENT, 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	47.4	52.6	100.0	133
SH	47.0	53.0	100.0	132
AH	34.4	65.6	100.0	218
AG	70.4	29.6	100.0	98
FI	44.2	55.8	100.0	43
HE	38.3	61.7	100.0	47
Total	45.6	54.4	100.0
N	306	365		671

NOTE: Chi-square 36.6, 5 df, p<.000. Type of Society: see Appendix. Inheritance of Office of Local Headman calculated from EA V72 as 1 if V72 is 1 = Patrilineal heir or 2 = Matrilineal heir, and 0 otherwise.

Table 4.2: Inheritance of Real Property (Land) (0 = ABSENT, 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	83.2	16.8	100.0	101
SH	21.8	78.2	100.0	87
AH	6.9	93.1	100.0	218
AG	2.7	97.3	100.0	110
FI	51.4	48.6	100.0	35
HE	31.4	68.6	100.0	51
Total	25.7	74.3	100.0
N	155	447		602

NOTE: Chi-square 258.9, 5 df, p<.000. Type of Society: see Appendix. Inheritance of Real Property is coded from EA V74 as 0 if V74 = 1, Absence of individual property rights or rules, and 1 otherwise.

Table 4.3: Composite Social Stratification Scale by Type of Society

	1	2	3	4	5	Total	N
HG	92.6	7.4	0.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	27
SH	42.9	37.1	14.3	5.7	0.0	100.0	35
AH	10.0	32.5	20.0	20.0	17.5	100.0	40
AG	3.2	19.4	3.2	6.5	67.7	100.0	31
FI	18.2	45.5	9.1	27.3	0.0	100.0	11
HE	18.8	50.0	0.0	25.0	6.2	100.0	16
Total	31.3	29.4	9.4	11.9	18.1	100.0
N	50	47	15	19	29		160

NOTE: Chi-square 138.0, 20 df, p<.000; more than 20% of fitted cells are sparse (n<5) so significance level is suspect. Type of Society: see Appendix. Social Stratification Scale is SS V158: 1 = Egalitarian, 2 = Hereditary slavery, 3 = 2 social classes, no castes/slavery, 4 = 2 social classes, castes/slavery, 5 = 3 social classes or castes, with or without slavery.

Table 4.4: Slavery (0 = ABSENT, 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	88.4	11.6	100.0	164
SH	80.7	19.3	100.0	150
AH	15.9	84.1	100.0	239
AG	56.3	43.7	100.0	119
FI	49.1	50.9	100.0	57
HE	18.3	81.7	100.0	60
Total	52.0	48.0	100.0
N	410	379		789

NOTE: Chi-square 289.6, 5 df, p<.000. Type of Society: see Appendix. Slavery is calculated from EA V70 as 0 if V70 is 1 = Absence or near absence (of slavery), and 1 otherwise.

Table 4.5: Despotism (0 = ABSENT, 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	100.0	0.0	100.0	21
SH	88.9	11.1	100.0	18
AH	35.7	64.3	100.0	14
AG	86.7	13.3	100.0	15
FI	88.9	11.1	100.0	9
HE	100.0	0.0	100.0	6
Total	83.1	16.9	100.0
N	69	14		83

NOTE: Chi-square 28.7, 5 df, p<.000; more than 20% of fitted cells are sparse (n<5) so significance level is suspect. Type of Society: see Appendix. Despotism is SS V1134 contributed by Betzig (1986, 1988): 0 = Despotism absent (recoded from 1), 1 = Despotism present (recoded from 2). See the SS codebook and Betzig (1986, 1988) for detailed discussion.

Table 5.1: Games of Strategy (0 = ABSENT; 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	100.0	0.0	100.0	131
SH	89.6	10.4	100.0	67
AH	40.9	59.1	100.0	66
AG	43.2	56.8	100.0	44
FI	97.1	2.9	100.0	34
HE	46.2	53.8	100.0	13
Total	77.7	22.3	100.0
N	276	79		355

NOTE: Chi-square 139.9, 5 df, p<.000. Type of Society: see Appendix. Presence of games of strategy calculated from EA V35 as missing if V35 is 0, 1 if V35 is 4 = Strategy only, 6 = Skill and strategy, 7 = Chance and strategy, or 8 = All [type of games], and 0 otherwise.

Figure 5.1: Importance of Self-Reliance in Socialization by Type of Society (Means and Standard Errors). NOTE: R² of regression of Importance of Self-Reliance on Type of Society indicators (with HG omitted) is .153 with N=139. Type of Society: see Appendix. Importance of Self-Reliance is calculated as the average of SS V306 to V309, Inculcation of Self-Reliance in Early Boy, Early Girl, Late Boy, and Late Girl, respectively. Each variable is coded on a scale from 0 = No inculcation or opposite trait to 9 = Strong inculcation.

Figure 5.2: Importance of Obedience in Socialization by Type of Society (Means and Standard Errors). NOTE: R² of regression of Importance of Obedience on Type of Society indicators (with HG omitted) is .129 with N=140. Type of Society: see Appendix. Importance of Obedience is calculated as the average of SS V322 to V325, Inculcation of Obedience in Early Boy, Early Girl, Late Boy, and Late Girl, respectively. Each variable is coded on a scale from 0 = No inculcation or opposite trait to 9 = Strong inculcation.

Table 6.1: Polygyny (0 = ABSENT, 1 = PRESENT) by Type of Society

	0	1	Total	N
HG	10.5	89.5	100.0	172
SH	24.8	75.2	100.0	157
AH	6.5	93.5	100.0	261
AG	41.5	58.5	100.0	135
FI	12.1	87.9	100.0	58
HE	21.6	78.4	100.0	74
Total	17.9	82.1	100.0
N	153	704		857

NOTE: Chi-square 87.9, 5 df, p<.000. Polygyny is calculated from EA V9 Marital Composition: Monogamy and Polygamy as 0 (ABSENT) if V9 is 1 = Independent nuclear, monogamous or 7 = Independent polyandrous families (n=4), and 1 (PRESENT) otherwise.

Table 6.2: Maximum Harem Size by Type of Society

	1	2	3	4	Total	N
HG	52.4	38.1	4.8	4.8	100.0	21
SH	44.4	38.9	16.7	0.0	100.0	18
AH	9.1	18.2	27.3	45.5	100.0	11
AG	61.5	15.4	15.4	7.7	100.0	13
FI	44.4	33.3	11.1	11.1	100.0	9
HE	60.0	20.0	20.0	0.0	100.0	5
Total	45.5	29.9	14.3	10.4	100.0
N	35	23	11	8		77

NOTE: Chi-square 26.0, 15 df, p =.038; more than 20% of fitted cells are sparse (n<5) so significance level is suspect. Type of Society: see Appendix. Maximum Harem Size is SS V1133 contributed by Betzig (1986, 1988) and defined as "Simultaneous conjugal relations with concubines and wives which the individual at the head of the social hierarchy (or, where there is no hierarchy, the most polygynous man), enjoys". Codes are 1 = 3 conjugal relationships or less, 2 = 4-10 conjugal relationships, 3 = 11-100 conjugal relationships, 4 = More than 100 conjugal relationships.

Table 7.1: Evolutionary Patterns in Dimensions of Social Inequality

Dimension of Inequality	Table or Figure	Evolutionary Pattern	Remarks
Measures of Social Complexity
Population density	T3.1	Monotonic
Class stratification	T3.2	Monotonic
Hierarchy (# levels)	T3.3, T3.5	Monotonic
Specialization scale	T3.4, T3.5	Monotonic
Measures of Social Rigidity, Inequality, and Freedom
Inheritance of headman office	T4.1	AG Reversal
Inheritance of real property	T4.2	Monotonic
Stratification scale	T4.3	Monotonic
Slavery present	T4.4	AG Reversal
Despotism present	T4.5	AG Reversal
Ideological Aspects of Inequality
Games of strategy	T5.1	AG Reversal	Probably n.s.
Emphasis on self-reliance	F5.1	Monotonic
Emphasis on obedience	F5.2	Monotonic
Sexual and Reproductive Inequality
Polygyny allowed	T6.1	AG Reversal
Maximum harem size	T6.2	AG Reversal

NOTE: The monotonic pattern is one in which HGAG.

1 Thus "sexual inequality" does not refer here to the inequality between the sexes. The latter is a very interesting topic in its own right, and certainly closely related to social inequality in general; but the relationship is not simple, because the marked division of labor between the sexes that exist in all societies cannot be immediately translated into an "invidious" ordering in terms of power and privilege. Because of the associated complexities this topic is beyond the scope of this paper. For interpretations of the relative statuses of the sexes in the ecological-evolutionary framework see Blumberg (1978) and Chafetz (1984).

2 To obtain an alternative measure of association I did a regression of harem size on the type of society indicators, treating the categories of harem size as an interval scale. R² is .244, adjusted R² is .191, only AH is significant p<.000. Similar results obtain after recoding V1133 to values 3, 7, 55, 100; R² is .276, adjusted R² is .225, AH is still the only indicator significant, p<.000.

Page of