The ethnohistoric and archaeological research which is the basis for this analysis of prehispanic Philippine craft specialization was supported through grants and fellowships from the following institutions: the Fulbright-Hays Foundation, the Social Science Research Council, the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, the Rackham Graduate School at the University of Michigan, and the University Research Council of Vanderbilt University. Archaeology Division Director at the Philippine National Museum, Mr. Wilfredo Ronquillo, and Staff Archaeologist, Dr. Eusebio Dizon, graciously provided logistical support during the fieldwork in the Philippines. Dr. Wilfredo Arce and Ms. Maria Dalupan of Ateneo de Manila University, Dr. Juan Francisco (formerly of Philippine Fulbright Foundation), Ms. Amalia de la Torre of the Philippine National Museum, and Dr. Rowe Cadelina and Mr. Rolando Mascunana of Silliman University also provided invaluable assistance in the Philippines. As always, my thanks to Karl Hutterer and Bill Macdonald for generously allowing me to work with archaeological materials obtained from earlier research in the Bais Region. A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the 1993 Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, and I gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Karl Hutterer, Richard Pearson, Rasmi Shoocondej, Karen Mudar, Gil Stein, John Monaghan and Anne Underhill.

¹ Carneiro, Robert, “The Chiefdom as Precursor of the State”, in The Transition to Statehood in the New World, ed. Jones, G. and Krautz, R. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1981), pp. 37–79Google Scholar; Earle, Timothy, “Chiefdoms in Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Perspective”, Annual Review of Anthropology 16 (1987): 279–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Johnson, Alan and Earle, Timothy, The Evolution of Human Societies: From Foraging Group to Agrarian State (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1987)Google Scholar; Elman Service Origins of the State and Civilization (New York: WW. Norton, 1975Google Scholar).

² Hutterer, Karl and Macdonald, William (ed.), Houses Built on Scattered Poles: Prehistory and Ecology in Negros Oriental (Cebu City: Univ. of San Carlos Press, 1982)Google Scholar; Junker, Laura, “The Organization of Intra-Regional and Long-Distance Trade in Prehispanic Philippine Complex Societies”, Asian Perspectives 29, 2 (1990): 167–209Google Scholar; Nishimura, Masao, “Long Distance Trade and the Development of Complex Societies in the Prehistory of the Central Philippines — The Cebu Archaeological Project: Basic Concept and First Results”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 16 (1988): 107–157.Google Scholar

³ For summaries of ethnohistoric evidence on prehispanic Philippine economies, see Junker, Laura, “Long Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms of the First Millennium to Mid-Second Millennium a.d.” (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1990)Google Scholar; Junker, Laura, “The Organization of Intra-Regional and Long-Distance Trade”Google Scholar; also see Junker, L., “Craft Goods Specialization and Prestige Goods Exchange in Philippine Chiefdoms of the 15th-16th Centuries”, Asian Perspectives 32, 1 (1993): 1–35.Google Scholar

⁴ Hutterer, Karl, “Prehistoric Trade and the Evolution of Philippine Societies: A Reconsideration”, in Economic Exchange and Social Interaction in Southeast Asia, ed. Hutterer, K. (Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, 1977), pp. 177–96.Google Scholar

⁵ Frankenstein, S. and Rowlands, M., “The Internal Structure and Regional Context of Early Iron Age Society in South-Western Germany”, Bulletin of the Institute for Archaeology 15 (1978): 73–112.Google Scholar

⁶ Dalton, George, Tribal and Peasant Economies (Garden City, New York: Natural History Press, 1967)Google Scholar; Polanyi, Karl, Arensberg, C. and Pearson, H.W. (eds.), Trade and Market in the Early Empires (Glencoe, Illinois: Falcon Wing's Press, 1957).Google Scholar

⁷ Brumfiel, E. and Earle, T.K., “Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies: An Introduction”, in Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies, ed. Brumfiel, E. and Earle, T.K. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1987), pp. 1–9.Google Scholar

⁸ Ibid., p. 5.

⁹ Renfrew, Colin, “Trade as Action at a Distance”, in Ancient Civilizations and Trade, ed. Sabloff, J. and Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. (Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mexico Press, 1975), pp. 1–59.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Barnes, Gina, “The Role of the Be in the Formation of the Yamato State”, in Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies, ed. Brumfiel, E. and Earle, T.K., pp. 86–101Google Scholar; Kristiansen, K., “From Stone to Bronze: the Evolution of Social Complexity in Northern Europe, 2300–1200 b.c.”, in Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies, ed. Brumfiel, E. and Earle, T.K., pp. 30–51;Google ScholarEarle, T.K., “Chiefdoms in Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Perspective”, p. 296.Google Scholar

¹¹ Brumfiel, and Earle, , “Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies: An Introduction”, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

¹² Balfet, Helene, “Ethnographical Observations in North Africa and Archaeological Interpretations”, in Ceramics and Man, ed. Matson, F. (Chicago: Aldine, 1965), pp. 161–77Google Scholar; Feinman, Gary, Upham, S. and Lightfoot, K., “The Production Step Measure: An Ordinal Index of Labor Input in Ceramic Manufacture”, American Antiquity 48 (1981): 871–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Van der Leeuw, Sander, Studies in the Technology of Ancient Pottery (Amsterdam: Univ. of Amsterdam Press, 1976)Google Scholar; Wright, Rita, “Standardization as Evidence for Craft Specialization: A Case Study” (Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, 1983).Google Scholar

¹³ Longacre, William, Kvamme, K. and Kobayashi, M., “Southwestern Pottery Standardization: An Ethnoarchaeological View from the Philippines”, The Kiva 53, no. 2 (1988): 101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Underhill, Anne, “Pottery Production in Chiefdoms: The Longshan Period in Northern China”, World Archaeology 23, no. 1 (1991): 12–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Blackman, M. James, Stein, Gil and Vandiver, Pamela, “The Standardization Hypothesis and Ceramic Mass-Production”, American Antiquity 58, no. 1 (1993): 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴ Hagstrum, Melissa, “Measuring Prehistoric Ceramic Craft Specialization: A Test Case in the American Southwest”, Journal of Field Archaeology 12 (1985): 65–75Google Scholar; Wright, R., “Standardization as Evidence For Craft Specialization”.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Irwin, Geoffrey, “Chieftainship, Kula and Trade in Massim Prehistory”, in The Kula: New Perspectives on Massim Exchange, ed. Leach, J. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1983), pp. 29–72Google Scholar; Rice, Prudence, “Evolution of Specialized Pottery Production: A Trial Model”, Current Anthropology 22 (1981): 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁶ Longacre, et al. , “Southwestern Pottery Standardization”.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Graves, Michael, “Ethnoarchaeology of Kalinga Ceramic Design” (Ph.D. diss., Dept. of Anthropology, Univ. of Arizona, 1981)Google Scholar; Longacre, W., “Kalinga Pottery: An Ethnoarchaeological Study”, in Patterns of the Past: Studies in Honor of David Clarke, ed. Hodder, I., Isaac, G. and Hammond, N. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1981), pp. 49–66Google Scholar; Stark, M., “Ceramic Change in Ethnoarchaeological Perspective”, Asian Perspectives 30, no. 2 (1991): 193–216.Google Scholar

¹⁸ The coefficient of variation measures the degree of dispersion (i.e. variability) around the sample mean. If the coefficient of variation (standard deviation/mean) is relatively low, this suggests a high degree of “standardization” or homogeneity; conversely, if the coefficient of variation is relatively high, this indicates a high degree of intra-assemblage variability or heterogeneity.

¹⁹ Feinman, G. et al. , “The Production Step Measure”Google Scholar; Miller, G.L., “Classification and Economic Scaling of 19th Century Ceramics”, Historical Archaeology 14 (1980): 1–41;CrossRefGoogle ScholarWright, R., “Standardization as Evidence for Craft Specialization”.Google Scholar

²⁰ Miller, G.L., “Classification and Economic Scaling of 19th Century Ceramics”, p. 3.Google Scholar

²¹ Feinman, G. et al. , “The Production Step Measure”.Google Scholar

²² Hodder, Ian, “Some Effects of Distance on Patterns of Human Interaction”, in Spatial Organization of Culture, ed. Hodder, I. (Pittsburgh: Univ. of Pittsburgh Press, 1978), pp. 155–78Google Scholar; Renfrew, Colin, “Trade as Action at a Distance”, in Ancient Civilizations and Trade, ed. Sabloff, J. and Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. (Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mexico Press, 1975), pp. 1–59Google Scholar; Renfrew, Colin, “Alternative Models for Exchange and Spatial Distribution”, in Exchange Systems in Prehistory, ed. Earle, T.K. (New York: Academic Press, 1977), pp. 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²³ Renfrew, C., “Trade as Action at a Distance”.Google Scholar

²⁴ Larkin, J.A., “Negros: An Historical Perspective”, in Robustiano Echauz' Sketches of the Island of Negros, ed. Hart, D. (Athens, Ohio: Ohio Univ. Press, 1978), pp. xii–xxi;Google ScholarLegaspi, Miguel Lopez, “Relation of the Voyage to the Philippines (1565)”, in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 2, ed. and trans. Blair, E. and Robertson, J. (Cleveland: Arthur H. Clark Co., 1903), pp. 196–216Google Scholar; Cuesta, Angel Martinez, Historia de la Isla de Negros, Filipinos, 1565–1898 (Rome: Pontificia Universitas Gregoriana, 1974).Google Scholar

²⁵ Oracion, Timothy, “The Culture of the Negritos in Negros Island”, Silliman Journal 7 (1960): 201–218Google Scholar; Oracion, Timothy, “The Bukidnons of Southeastern Negros, Philippines”, Silliman Journal 8 (1961): 205–210Google Scholar; Oracion, Timothy, “Kaingin Agriculture Among the Bukidnons of Southeastern Negros, Central Philippines”, in Social Foundations of Community Development, ed. Espiritu, S. and Hunt, C. (Manila: R.M. Garcia, 1964), pp. 233–49.Google Scholar

²⁶ Hutterer, Karl L., “Introduction: Background to the Bais Project”, in Houses Built on Scattered Poles, pp. 3–18.Google Scholar

²⁷ Hutterer, Karl L., “Bais Anthropological Project, Phase II: A First Preliminary Report”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 9, 4 (1981): 333–41Google Scholar; Hutterer, Karl L. and Macdonald, W.K. (eds.), Houses Built on Scattered Poles: Prehistory and Ecology in Negros Oriental, PhilippinesGoogle Scholar; Junker, Laura, “Archaeological Excavations at the First Millennium and Early Second Millennium a.d. Settlement of Tanjay, Negros Oriental: Household Organization, Chiefly Production and Social Ranking”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 21, 2 (1993): 146–225Google Scholar; Macdonald, William K., “The Bais Anthropological Project, Phase III: A Preliminary Report with some Initial Observations”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 10 (1982): 197–210.Google Scholar

²⁸ Junker, L., “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”Google Scholar; Junker, L., “The Organization of Intra-Regional and Long-Distance Trade”Google Scholar; Junker, L., “Trade Competition, Conflict and Political Transformations in 15th-16th Century Philippine Chiefdoms” (Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, 1991).Google Scholar

²⁹ Junker, L., “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”, pp. 663–709Google Scholar; Junker, L., Mudar, K. and Schwaller, M., “Social Stratification, Household Wealth and Competitive Feasting in 15th-16th Century Philippine Chiefdoms”, Research in Economic Anthropology 15 (1994, in press).Google Scholar

³⁰ Alcina, Francisco Ignacio, “Historia de las Islas e Indios de las Bisayas (1688)”, in The Munoz Text of Akina's History of the Bisayan Islands (1668), ed. and trans. Lietz, P. (Chicago: Philippine Studies Program, Univ. of Chicago, 1960), p. 104Google Scholar; Blair, and Robertson, (ed. & trans.), The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 3, pp. 102–103Google Scholar; 16th Century Boxer manuscript, in The Philippines at Spanish Contact, ed. Jocano, F. Landa (Quezon City, Philippines: Garcia Publ., 1975), pp. 197, 229Google Scholar; Dampier, William, A New Voyage Round the World (1697), ed. SirGray, Albert (London: Argonaut Press, 1927), p. 227Google Scholar; Morga, Antonio, “Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas” (1609), in Readings in Philippine Prehistory, ed. Garcia, Mauro (Manila: Filipiniana Book Guild, 1979), pp. 292–93.Google Scholar

³¹ Dampier, W., A New Voyage Round the World, p. 227.Google Scholar

³² Warren, James, The Sulu Zone, 1768–1898: The Dynamics of External Trade, Slavery and Ethnicity in the Transformation of a Southeast Asia Maritime State (Singapore: Singapore Univ. Press, 1981).Google Scholar

³³ Blair, and Robertson, (ed. and trans.), The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 3, pp. 102–103.Google Scholar

³⁴ 16th Century Boxer Codex, in The Philippines at Spanish Contact, p. 197.Google Scholar

³⁵ Ibid., p. 229.

³⁶ Morga, Antonio, “Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas” (1609), pp. 292–93.Google Scholar

³⁷ Echevarria, Ramon, Rediscovery in Southern Cebu (Cebu City: Historical Conservation Society, 1974)Google Scholar; Fenner, Bruce, Cebu Under the Spanish Flag, 1521–1898 (Cebu City: Univ. of San Carlos Press, 1985).Google Scholar

³⁸ Junker, L., “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”, pp. 663–90;Google ScholarJunker, L. et al. , “Social Stratification, Household Wealth and Competitive Feasting”Google Scholar; Spoehr, Alexander, Zamboanga and Sulu: An Archaeological Approach to Ethnic Diversity (Pittsburgh: Ethnology Monograph No. 1, Univ. of Pittsburgh, Dept. of Anthropology, 1973), pp. 79–102.Google Scholar

³⁹ Fox, Robert, “The Calatagan Excavations: Two 15th Century Burial Sites in Batangas, Philippines”, Philippine Studies 7 (1959): 325–90Google Scholar; Fox, Robert and Legaspi, Avelino, Excavations at Santa Ana (Manila: National Museum Publications, 1977)Google Scholar; Hutterer, Karl, An Archaeological Picture of a Pre-Spanish Cebuano Community (Cebu City: Univ. of San Carlos Press, 1973)Google Scholar; Junker, Laura, “Archaeological Excavations at the 12th-16th Century Settlement of Tanjay, Negros Oriental: The Burial Evidence for Social Status-Symboling, Head-Taking and Inter-Polity Raiding”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society 21, no. 1 (1993): 39–82Google Scholar; Legaspi, Avelino, Bolinao: A 14th–15th Century Burial Site (Manila: National Museum of the Philippines Publication No. 7, 1974)Google Scholar; Solheim, Wilhelm, “Philippine Prehistory”, in The People and Art of the Philippines, ed. Casal, G. et al. (Los Angeles: Museum of Cultural History, Univ. of California, 1982), pp. 59–71.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ 16th Century Boxer Codex, in The Philippines at Spanish Contact, pp. 190–91, 206–207, 214Google Scholar; Chirino, Pedro, “Relation de las Islas Filipinas”, in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 12, ed. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , pp. 262–71Google Scholar; see also Biernatzki, William, “Bukidnon Datuship in the Upper Pulangi River Valley”, in Bukidnon Politics and Religion, ed. Guzman, A. and Pacheco, E. (Quezon City, Philippines: Inst. For Philippine Culture, Paper No. 11, Ateneo de Manila Univ. Press, 1973), pp. 36–37Google Scholar; Cole, Fay Cooper, The Bukidnon of Mindanao (Chicago: Natural History Museum Press, 1956), pp. 94–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴¹ Loarca, Miguel, “Relacion de las Islas Filipinas”, in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 5, ed. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , pp. 81–93Google Scholar; Morga, Antonio, “Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas” (1609), pp. 287–90Google Scholar; also see Scott, William H., Prehispanic Source Material for the Study of Philippine History (Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publ., 1984), pp. 68–74.Google Scholar

⁴² Alcina, Francisco Ignacio, “Historia de las Islas e Indios de las Bisayas (1688)”, p. 104.Google Scholar

⁴³ Cole, Fay Cooper, Wild Tribes of the Davao District (Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History Publication No. 162, Anthropology Series 12, no. 1, 1913), pp. 85–86;Google ScholarMednick, Melvin, “The Maranao”, in Insular Southeast Asia: Ethnographic Studies. Section 4: The Philippines, ed. Lebar, F. (Human Relations Area Files Publication, 1977), p. 194.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Reid, Anthony, Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce: 1450–1680. Volume I: The Land Below the Winds (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1988), pp. 101–102.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Ibid., p. 103; also see Gullick, J.M., Indigenous Political Systems of Western Malaya (London: Athlone Press, 1965), p. 31.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ For example, see description of Aceh craft organization in Dampier, William, Voyages and Discoveries (1699), ed. Wilkerson, C. (London: Argonaut Press, 1931), pp. 98–99Google Scholar; for discussion of slave craftsmen in Malacca, see de Albuquerque, Braz, The Commentaries of the Great Alfonso Dalboquerque, Vol. III (1557), ed. de Gray Brich, W. (London: Hakluyt, 1880), pp. 166–69.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Reid, Anthony, Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, p. 101Google Scholar; for a description of the court-sponsored Orang Kaya traders in 17th-century Johor, see Andaya, Leonard, “The Structure of Power in 17th Century Johor”, in Pre-Colonial State Systems in Southeast Asia (Monographs of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society No. 6, 1975), pp. 6–7.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Solheim, Wilhelm, The Archaeology of the Central Philippines: A Study Chiefly of the Iron Age and its Relationships (Manila: Bureau of Printing, 1964).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ For more detailed description and dating of the Bais Region earthenware ceramics, see Junker, L., “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”, pp. 620–42 and 930–42 (appendix I).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Junker, Laura, “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”, pp. 663–91;Google ScholarJunker, L., “Archaeological Excavations at the Late First Millennium and Early Second Millennium a.d. Settlement of Tanjay”Google Scholar; Junker, L. et al. , “Social Stratification, Household Wealth and Competitive Feasting”.Google Scholar

⁵¹ The F-statistic in the ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) determines whether the density of a particular artifact class is significantly greater between the two areas of the site (i.e. the Santiago Church locale and the Osmena Park locale) than within an area of the settlement (i.e. between house structures in the same locale). If the F-statistic is significant at the .05 level (denoted by * in Table 2), this indicates that there is less than a 5% chance that these areal differences in densities are merely due to sampling error.

⁵² Junker, Laura, “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”, pp. 691–712;Google ScholarJunker, Laura, “Archaeological Excavations at the 12th-16th Century Settlement of Tanjay, Negros Oriental: The Burial Evidence”.Google Scholar

⁵³ In the interest of space, the statistical analysis of the spatial distribution of Santiago Phase (a.d. 1100–1400) “status goods” at Tanjay was not included here. The complete statistical analyses for this period is available in Junker, L., “Long-Distance Trade and the Development of Socio-Political Complexity in Philippine Chiefdoms”, pp. 683–91.Google Scholar Due to our inability to distinguish discrete “house-compounds” in the Santiago Phase deposits, the statistical analysis compares “residential zones” rather than distinct “houses”, using Student t-tests rather than ANOVA. While the procedure is statistically less powerful, the results are consistent with the Osmena Phase (a.d. 1400–1600) habitation, indicating the presence of two spatially-distinct residential areas: one rich in foreign and locally-manufactured luxury goods, and the other yielding relatively few of these goods.

⁵⁴ Nishimura, Masao, “Long Distance Trade and the Development of Complex Societies in the Prehistory of the Central Philippines: The Cebu Central Settlement Case” (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Michigan, 1992).Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Spoehr, Alexander, Zamboanga and Sulu, pp. 146–56.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Petrographic analysis of the earthenwares from Tanjay is currently in its preliminary stages and the results are not yet in quantitative form. However, preliminary comparisons of the decorated and plain earthenwares from Tanjay classified under the ware type of “Tanjay Red Ware” indicate extremely similar clay matrices and temper composition.

⁵⁷ L. Junker, “The Organization of Intra-Regional and Long-Distance Trade in Prehispanic Philippine Complex Societies”.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Alvarado, Garcia, “Expedition of Villalobos” (1548), in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 2, ed. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , pp. 68–69;Google ScholarLegaspi, Miguel, “Letters to Felipe II of Spain” (1567), in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 2, ed. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , p. 238Google Scholar; Morga, Antonio, “Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas” (1609), p. 301Google Scholar; Sande, Francisco, “Relation of the Filipinas Islands”, in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 4, eds. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , pp. 21–97Google Scholar; see also Scott, William H., The Discovery of the Igorots: Spanish Contacts with the Pagans of Northern Luzon (Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publ., 1982), pp. 181–85Google Scholar; Gungwu, Wang, “The Nanhai Trade”, Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 31, part 2 (1958)Google Scholar; Wheatley, Paul, “Commodities Involved in the Sung Maritime Trade”, Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 32, part 2 (1959): 7–143.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ de Artieda, Diego, “Relation of the Western Islands” (1573), in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 3, ed. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , p. 202;Google ScholarColin, Francisco, “Labor Evangelica, Ministerios Apostolicos de los Obreros de la Compania de Jesus, Fundacion y Progressos de su Provincia en las Islas Filipinas” (1660), in The Philippines, 1493–1898, vol. 40, ed. and trans. Blair, and Robertson, , p. 151Google Scholar; Loarca, Miguel, “Relacion de las Islas Filipinas” (1582), pp. 115, 121;Google Scholar also see Keesing, Felix, The Ethnohistory of Northern Luzon (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1962), pp. 121, 135, 139Google Scholar; Scott, William H., The Discovery of the Igorots, pp. 181–85.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Keesing, Felix, The Ethnohistory of Northern Luzon, pp. 121, 135Google Scholar; Manuel, Arsenio, Manuvu Social Organization (Quezon City: Univ. of the Philippines Press, 1973), pp. 218–19, 343–44Google Scholar; Schlegel, Stuart, Tiruray Subsistence (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila Press, 1979), pp. 105–109Google Scholar; also see Junker, L., “Craft Goods Specialization and Prestige Goods Exchange”, pp. 9–13.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Hutterer, Karl, “The Evolution of Philippine Lowland Societies”, Mankind 9, no. 4 (1974): 287–99Google Scholar; Hutterer, Karl, “An Evolutionary Approach to the Southeast Asia Cultural Sequence”, Current Anthropology 17 (1976): 221–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶² Earle, Timothy, Economic and Social Organization of a Complex Chiefdom: the Halelea District, Kaua'i, Hawaii (Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Anthropological Paper no. 63, 1978)Google Scholar; Earle, Timothy, “Chiefdoms in Archaeological and Ethnohistoric Perspective”Google Scholar; Peebles, Christopher and Kus, S., “Some Archaeological Correlates of Ranked Societies”.Google Scholar

⁶³ Brookfield, H.C. and Hart, D., Melanesia: A Geographic Interpretation of an Island World (London: Methuen, 1971)Google Scholar; Leach, Jeffrey (ed.), The Kula: New Perspectives on Massim Exchange (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1983)Google Scholar; Weiner, Annette, The Trobrianders of Papua New Guinea (Orlando: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1987).Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Junker, L., “Craft Goods Specialization and Prestige Goods Exchange in Philippine Chiefdoms of the 15th-16th Centuries”, p. 15.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Ibid.

⁶⁶ Longacre, William et al. , “Southwestern Pottery Standardization: An Ethnoarchaeological View from the Philippines”.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Ibid.