THE ALKATCHO CARRIER OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 359

sibling, and in function younger siblings were expected to exhibit
respect attitudes toward their seniors. The generation principle
operated upon the same basis. The behavior of a man towards
his parents-in-law was very clearly expressive of dominance rela-
tions. For at least the first two years of matrilocal residence the
groom was a complete subordinate in the home of his father-in-
law. He assisted him in every way, yielding up his entire fishing
and hunting catch. In inter-familial disputes, or disputes between
individuals of different families, the ultimate solution was fre-
quently decided by force. In such disputes the individual belong-
ing to the numerically stronger family had the advantage. Some
men were known to be violent and quick tempered. That too
gave their families an edge in a dispute.

AGE

The Alkatcho Carrier recognized a number of age classes, and
in general the older people, excluding the very old men, were
looked up to by the younger as superior persons. Young boys, not
yet pubescent, constantly tagged along after the post-pubescents,
who formed a sort of big-brother class for them. The older boys
inducted the younger into sex. Age dominance was continuous
from very early childhood. Within the household each child was
responsible for the care of the next younger sibling, and un-
doubtedly the attitudes of dependence upon an older sibling re-
flected itself generally in age-status relations.

RANK

All dominance relations and rivalries found formal expression
in the potlatch-rank system. The precise extent to which motives
of social prestige and rivalry permeated all strata of Carrier so-
ciety is difficult to determine. The poor people did not potlatch
and were relegated to the side lines. But when we consider that
as a rule potlatches occurred no more frequently than once in
every two years, and that social status did not imply political
power, it is evident that rank distinctions were for the most part
of no extraordinary social significance. But social distinctions