348 ACCULTURATION IN SEVEN AMERICAN INDIAN TRIBES

the pretext of an insult “threw property into the fire” by giving
his rival some blankets or other commodity which was not to be
returned. This formalized the disruption of the rivalry. The rival
was temporarily shamed; but at a later date the two might have
resumed the rivalry at scratch. The mechanism could hardly have
been abused because the recipient of the “thrown into the fire”
property, though losing face for the moment, acquired new wealth
which he could utilize at another potlatch.

As elsewhere on the Northwest Coast, Carrier potlatching was
never an individual enterprise. The Carrier potlatch necessarily
had to entail the collective effort of the extended family—the
eroup of siblings, their wives, children, and children’s wives. At
the head of this unit was the oldest of the sibling group, who when
not a noble was called detsa “first one.” In pre-Coast days, when
Carrier social organization approximated that of the Northern
Athabascans, the detsa was probably the equivalent of a band
leader who regulated hunting somewhat, but whose authority was
not strong enough to prevent the constant fragmentation of the
band. Under the conditions of potlatching and the drive for build-
ing social prestige, the extended family became a more cohesive
unit. Leadership was strengthened. The sanctions supporting the
authority of a chief, who had a fixed rank as a noble and who
necessarily had to serve as the spear-head for the collective pot-
latch, were more concretely developed. In addition, a new sanc-
tion revolving around social status—fear of being shamed through
the non-performance of the formal obligations attendant upon the
maintenance of rank—acted as an effective force in strengthening
group unity. The chief could determine his successor, and was
instrumental in elevating one of the family-line-descendants to
nobility.

Group cohesiveness, however, never developed effectively be-
yond the extended family. It is probable that in earlier days, as
elsewhere on the Coast, village and extended family were synony-
mous. But where a number of family lines inhabited the same
village, village solidarity was expressed in two ways; a common
front was presented against invaders of village hunting territory,
and the most important noble of the group was recognized as the
potlatch chief for the entire village. He built the central potlatch