1.
Name the culture areas:
Desert,
Northeast, Southeast, Great Basin, Plateau, Southwest, California, Northwest
Coast
2.
Explore
the correlation between dominant subsistence patterns and "culture areas:
"The Northeast" culture area was an area
where horticulture was the primary source of subsistence, while "The
Plains" was one where hunting-gathering predominated. From this I learned
that harsh, dry areas such as the plains, where plant life was much less likely
to thrive, are much more likely to house tribes that hunt animals for food. Both
the Eastern and Western shores, on the other hand, were forest areas and as a
result the tribes nearby would subsist of more horticulture focused lifestyles.
Therefore, the conclusion that I have observed is that the drier the
surrounding area, the more likely that the tribes who lived there would hunt
for food, because their environment alone could not sustain them.
I
also learned that there were a lot more tribes than I ever could have imagined.
Initially, in my mind, I believed there to be only a dozen or two tribes that
represented the entirety of North America. But, after reviewing the culture
areas map, that is most definitely not the case.
3. Explore the correlations between major linguistic
divisions and culture areas:
The Plains is primarily the Siouan-Yuchi linguistic
stock, with large bits of Aztec-Tanoan, Caddoan, and Algonkian. The fact that
there are plenty of large linguistic areas suggests that the many tribes of the
plains were greatly separated and for the most part were out of contact with
tribes of a different linguistic area. This makes sense because the plains are
huge expansive areas, capable of hosting more tribes than most of the other
culture areas, with greater chance for diversity.
On
the other hand, the Great Basin culture area is dominated by a single language.
For the Great Basin the linguistic stock is Aztec-Tanoan. This area is rich in
natural supplies, and the large variety of natural goods would promote trading
with and fostering relations with other tribes. As a result, a single primary
language would be almost a necessity for the many tribes attempting to communicate
with the other tribes in their surrounding area.
The
California culture are has 2 primary languages,
Hokan-Coahuiltecan and Penutian. That's not a particularly diverse
assortment of linguistic stocks, and I find this culture area to be very interesting, because there are no
reasons that I can discern that would lead this culture are to have a division
of languages.
I
also learned from this, on top of everything else, that there were a lot more
Native American dialects that initially believed. I am actually blown away at
just how diverse and unique each tribe was and just how diversity and
difference there was to the point of having many languages.
4. Compare and contrast the other examples with the
Natchez and with each other. What do you learn from this?
As each tribe is from a different culture area, they
serve as good examples to represent the common tribes of each area. The Natchez
were a well developed tribe for their time, living off of their harvested land
for supplies. They had a class system, and a diplomatic system. They also had
temples for their matrilineal "Great Sun" religion. Their material
luxuries included jewels, trade goods, furniture, pottery, and more. The
Natchez come from the Southeast, and the abundance of supplies and resources in
that area may have fostered trade and progress.
The
Huron were a similar tribe, coming from the woodlands. They were traders, with
access to plentiful resources, and they were quite wealthy. They also had a
diplomatic system, with leaders and upperclassmen upholding unity. The only
distinction between them and the Natchez would be that the Huron were less
religion driven, and focused on trade
more than temples.
The
Cheyenne, on the other hand, were a nomadic tribe from the plains that relied
on hunting buffalo and other animals to sustain themselves. The Cheyenne
bounded together to maintain order, and other than the Chiefs there was no
class system. Trade was minimal. The Cheyenne did not trade or farm the land,
and relied on their skill of riding horseback and hunting, which is the extreme
opposite of tribes like the Natchez.
The
Washo, from California were extremely similar to the Cheyenne. They were a
nomadic tribe that followed a hunter-gather approach to survival. However, the
main difference between them and the Cheyenne was that the Washo had a flexible
and decentralized political system, with no chiefs.
The
Zuni from the southwest are very similar to the Natchez in a lot of respects. They
were very religious, and their society was matrilineal. They stayed in one
place (they werent nomadic), and they farmed corn, maize, and beans off of the
land to survive. They even worshipped a sun priest. There was not a whole lot
of trade though.
The Tlingit from Alaska were a very organized
society, with a class system as well as village order and appointed town
leaders. They had a law, and manufactured many items and fished to trade with
other tribes. They were also a very religious tribe, with many ceremonies. Because of these traits, the Tlingit are
extremely similar to the Natchez and other tribes with more access to
resources.
From
this you learn that the tribes with access to more resources such as those from
the Southeast, Southwest, and Pacific Northwest are more likely to become
further developed and trade with their neighbors. The hunter-gather tribes,
inversely, are more likely to be nomadic and warlike, with little to no trade
or farming. The Natchez were a very advanced society, with customs akin to the
Mayans in the south, and were very successful as a direct result of their
ability to farm and trade.
5. Culture Area Quiz
1 - E
2 - A
3 - D
4 - C
5 - B
No comments:
Post a Comment