The DOI matches its Crossref record.
On the Development of Unilineal Descent
Abstract
This paper describes the reasoning and results of cross-cultural research on the conditions that may lead to the emergence of unilineal descent and some of the major variations thereof. We suggest that the presence of warfare in conjunction with a unilocal pattern of residence may be the impetus for the formation of unilineal descent groups, and that the kind of warfare which is present together with demographic factors may determine the particular kinds of unilineal descent groups which develop. The major variations of unilineal descent systems we deal with include contiguous versus dispersed descent groups, demonstrated descent groups (lineages) versus putative descent groups (clans, etc.), and dual (moiety) organization versus other kinds of putative descent systems. Finally, we present and discuss evidence suggesting that a system of putative descent groups (a "clan" system) generally develops before a system of demonstrated descent groups (a "lineage" system).
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Anthropologists have repeatedly noted that the political salience of unilineal descent groups is greatest in societies of ‘intermediate social scale’ (Korotayev47 and its citations on p. 2), which tend to be post-Neolithic small-scale societies that are acephalous, i.e. without hierarchical institutions48.”
From Cultural hitchhiking and competition between patrilineal kin groups explain the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck (2018) · cites this paper as [48]
Citations
Cited by
Zeng, T. C., Aw, A. J., & Feldman, M. W. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-04375-6 · Cited by 121
Worldwide cross-cultural studies and their relevance for archaeology
Ember, M., & Ember, C. R. (1995) · Journal of Archaeological Research · doi:10.1007/bf02231488 · Cited by 52
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ember, C. R., Ember, M., & Pasternak, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Anthropological Research
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1974-07
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 69-94
- ISSN
- 0091-7710
- 2153-3806
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review