426 American Anthropologist [63, 19611

(e.g., more specific relational data on the families in the sample) and in purpose (e.g., a representative picture of the community as opposed to the therapeutic view).

Y a m Cultivation in the Trust Territory. JOHN E. DEYOUNG (Ed.). (Anthropological Working Papers, No. 4.) Guam, M. I.: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, May 1959. ii, 65 pp. n.p.

The Oyabun-Kobun in Palau. ROBERT K. MCKNIGHT. (Anthropological Working Pa- pers, No. 5.) Guam, M. I.: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, July 1959. i , 17 pp. n.p.

Taro Cultivation Practices and Beliejs. Part I . The Western Carolines. Part I I . The Eastern Carolines and the Marshall Islands. JOHN E. DEYOUNG (Ed.). (Anthro- pological Working Papers, No. 6.) Guam, M. I.: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, January 1960. Part I: ii, 1-68 pp.; Part 11: ii, 69-140 pp. n.p.

Breadfruit Cultivation Practices and Beliejs in Palau. ROBERT K. MCKNIGHT. (Anthro- pological Working Papers, No. 7.) Guam, M. I.: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, March 1960. i, 1-25 pp. n.p.

Reviewed by ALLAN SMITH, Washington State University These publications, issued in mimeographed quarto form from the Office of the

Staff Anthropologist, have been compiled by current or former Trust Territory per- sonnel, mainly District Anthropologists (abbreviated D.A. below) and Assistant Anthropologists (abbreviated A.A.), the latter themselves Micronesians. They are intended primarily to provide agriculturists, teachers, and other administration per- sonnel with regional cultural data of practical interest. Although presenting the data in a traditional descriptive-functional manner without making explicit the possible action implications of these data, they are clearly of potential value to field adminis- trators. How widely this potential is in fact realized can only be assessed within the Trust Territory, a question not a t issue here.

Since these reports are not designed for an anthropological audience, it is perhaps unfair to judge them thus. In the present context, however, such an evaluation is called for. Viewed as anthropological documents they manifest clear deficiencies. They lay no claim to theoretical sophistication or to an exhaustive descriptive treatment of their subjects, though individual papers naturally vary somewhat on these scores. Occasional unclear sentences, editorial lapses (as when fig. 2 precedes fig. l ) , and typographical errors occur. Except for a brief note in Paper No. 7, no explanations of the phonemic or phonetic systems employed are provided, although these seem required for an understanding of such orthographic sequences as rrdial, tchel, llasch, and dulassch in Palauan, and nidp, n6k, mwok, and kill in Trukese. No maps are included. Botanical identifications are given, but definitiveness in this regard is explicitly dis- claimed. Where several geographical areas are separately surveyed, as in the first and third publications, no attempt is made to provide a terminal summary or comparative section. These may be petty imperfections in view of the admittedly preliminary nature of the data and from the standpoint of the primary purpose of the series, but they limit to some degree the anthropological usefulness of the reports.

On the other hand, the series reports original field research by investigators with a t least a minimal anthropological background and with virtually unrivaled oppor-

Book Reviews 42 7 tunities for field observation. The authors have found their basic aim inconsistent with careful, often perceptive, and soundly objective procedures of data collection, analysis, and organization. Their contributions add new descriptive data in depth to the ethno- graphic literature. Hence, despite their minor deficiencies, these publications are well worth examination by anthropologists interested in Micronesia or in their specific sub- ject matter. The Trust Territory is to be commended for encouraging its anthropolo- gists to undertake fundamental field research as a supplement to routine administra- tive assignments, for initiating single-subject investigations in the several island areas with a generally comparable conceptual framework, for seeing the results of the studies into print, and for making it possible for the findings to reach an audience beyond its own administrative personnel.

In the first of these four publications the yam cultivation complex is discussed in three areas: in Ponape by Frank Mahony (D.A.) and Pencile Lawrence (A.A.) (pp. 1- 13), in Palau by Robert K. McKnight (D.A.) and Adalbert Obak (A.A.) (pp. 14-37), and in Yap by Francis 1)efngin (A.A.) (pp. 38-65). To some extent the data are not entirely comparable, reflecting in particular the differing social and economic impor- tance of the tuber: this ranges from its fullest development on Ponape, continuously downward through Yap, the Sonsorol-Merir group, and the Palaus, finally to Tobi in the southwestern corner of Micronesia where yams are not even cultivated. Never- theless, each study contributes information on the traditional prestige position and economic importance of yams, the principal varieties recognized with their designa- tions (generally without linguistic analysis) and individual status rankings, the fea- tures (botanical and otherwise) upon which the native taxonomic classification is based, their cultivation techniques including variations keyed to the different growth requirements and prestige values of the several types, and the traditional or historic geographic source of many varieties. Some attention is also devoted to the broader context of yam cultivation and use: e.g., to associated beliefs and practices, both magico-religious and more generally social. On the whole, the Palau article appears the least laudable, being soinewhat inclined to discursiveness, obscurity, and seeming irrelevancies. In the second publication, McKnight describes the structural charac- teristics and functional role of two slightly different contemporary Palauan mani- festations of the traditional Japanese “master-apprentice” system. They were de- veloped in imitation of Japanese models within which the present organization leaders functioned in minor roles during the period of Japanese control, Differences between these Palauan units and the Japanese model are described. Since theseunits areevidently of minor social importance, the paper contributes a relatively unimportant body of information to our understanding of Palauan society. The data are nevertheless of some theoretical interest as a documented example of institution diffusion by imita- tion, accompanied by change in structural details as well as in associated values and emotional content to produce a better fit with local conditions.

The first part of the “Taro Cultivation” pair of publications contains two articles, one relating to Palau by Robert K. McKnight (D.A.) and Adalbert Obak (A.A.) (pp. 1-47) and the other to Yap by Dai You Kim (District Agriculturist) and Francis Defngin (A.A.) (pp. 48-68). Part 11, bound separately from the first, includes papers discussing the matter on Truk by Frank Mahony (D.A.) (pp. 69-98), on Ponape by the same author (pp. 99-132), and in the Marshalls by Tion Bikajle (A.A.) (pp. 133- 140). All articles cover basically the same ground: cultivated varieties of Colocasia, Cyrtosperma, Alocasia, and the newly introduced Xanthosoma (all termed “taro”),

428 A merican A nf hropologist [63, 19611

their respective economic and socio-ceremonial importance, and their traditional and historic origin; the physical characteristics of the cultivation plots; cultivation pro- cedures with their variations according to plant type, individual preference, and soil conditions; and the magico-religious and myth associations of the plants. Brief com- parative data are provided for the Sonsorol, Pulo Ana, and Merir group and for Tobi in the Palauan paper. Similar, but much more substantial comparative information, is given for the various high and low island areas of the Truk complex in the Truk re- port, and for the Polynesian outliners of Kapingamarangi-Nukuoro and for Ngatik- MokiI-Pingelap and Kusaie in the Ponape article. The Palau account is particularly rich in its peripheral data: e.g., on the physical arrangement of the typical taro plot and its functional subdivisions, the cycle of popularity through which a newly dis- covered or introduced variety typically runs, and the role of taro in the socio-ritual life of the developing individual. The Yap article devotes special attention to the magico-religious overtones of taro cultivation and consumption, and attempts, not notably successfully, to explain the relation between the taro complex and the compli- cated caste-class aspect of the social structure. The Truk and Ponape contributions are the most professional in approach and the most facilely written and clearly pre- sented. That describing the Trukese situation is of special interest for its exposition of the methods used in planting dry taro to produce corms with different characteris- tics, in controlling various weed growths, and in preparing the harvested food for con- sumption. As with the Ponape paper, detailed descriptive information is given on the different types of taro recognized (116 are specified for the Ponape area) and on the economic and social value of many. The brief article covering the Marshalls, where only Cyrtosperma is native and taro is today generally only a secondary food, offers a convenient but rather thin survey of the basic data.

The final publication briefly compares the economic and prestige importance of breadfruit in Palau and in the low Southwestern islands. It describes the six cultivated breadfruit varieties (one seeded), methods of propagation, distribution geographically and by soil conditions, harvesting procedures, magical and ritual associations, and especially methods by which the flesh and the seeds are prepared for food. Uses of the breadfruit tree are mentioned. Attention is given to traditional and legendary refer- ences to the tree. Finally, the role of breadfruit in the current agricultural program of the administration is briefly discussed, together with difficulties anticipated in increasing its use, especially on the high islands of the Palauan group.

Ta’u: Stability and Change in a Samoan Village. LOWELL D. HOLMES. (Reprint of the Polynesian Society, Number 7.) Wellington, New Zealand: The Polynesian Society Incorporated, 1958. xii, 87 pp., 2 appendices, bibliography, diagram, map, 3 tables. 12/6.

Reviewed by MARGARET MEAD, American Museum of Natural History This is an account of the first field trip made in 1954 by an American ethnologist,

in which the writer, his wife, and infant daughter spent five months in the Manu’an islands and four subsequent months in Tutuila working with Manu’an informants and government records. It represents almost one third of a Ph.D. dissertation a t Northwestern University. It is presented as a restudy in an area where many previous ethnographical observations exist, with a central emphasis on culture change.

Restudies are still an expensive use of our very limited trained scientific personnel,