Home Region:  Mississippi Basin (North America)

Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian II

EQ 2020  us_emergent_mississippian_2 / USMisME

In the Emergent Mississippian Period (900-1050 CE) the Upper Mississippi region was populated by a number of small communities. The population of the largest settlement was probably in the region of 500 people - but a population is not thought to have been resident at the site that later became Cahokia until towards the end of the period.
In this period the trends established in the Sponemann-Collinsville-Loyd Period continued. Maize farming was intensified and consumption increased creating higher yields and needs for storage and larger populations. [1] [2] Paregrine and Trubitt (2014) note that Cahokia was an excellent environment for growing maize and its geographic location meant it was easily accessible from many directions. [3] It is thought that many different groups created the initial settlement at Cahokia, bringing with them a social structure. [4]
The levels of social complexity in Emergent Mississippian societies were increasing creating specialised social roles for "community defense, organization of labor, and communal storage of maize". Settlements now consisted of court-yard clusters and "toward [1000 CE], the southern pattern of civic-ceremonial centers with large earthen mounds was established in many places." [1] Warfare appears to have become established. The percentage of sites that were palisaded increased throughout this period from 0.5% 800-950 CE, to 1.5% of sites 1000 CE, to 3% of sites in 1050 CE. [5] The nucleated nature of the settlements themselves may also have been a "defensive response to bow warfare." [1]

[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) J H Blitz. E S Porth. 2013. Social complexity and the Bow in the Eastern Woodlands. Evolutionary Anthropology. 22:89-95. Wiley.

[2]: (Milner 2006, xx) G R Milner. 2006. The Cahokia Chiefdom: The Archaeology of a Mississippian Society. University Press of Florida. Gainesville.

[3]: (Peregrine/Trubitt 2014, 20) Peregrine P, Ortman S, Rupley, E. 2014. Social Complexity at Cahokia. SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004. Sante Fe Institute.

[4]: (Peregrine/Iseminger 2014, 27) Peregrine P, Ortman S, Rupley, E. 2014. Social Complexity at Cahokia. SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004. Sante Fe Institute.

[5]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013) G R Milner. G Chaplin. E Zavodny. 2013. Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America. Evolutionary Anthropology. 22:96-102. Wiley.

General Variables
Identity and Location
Utm Zone:
15 S  
Original Name:
Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian II  
Alternative Name:
Emergent Mississippian  
City Mounds  
Cahokia Mounds  
American Bottom  
Merrell Phase  
Edelhardt Phase  
Temporal Bounds
Peak Years:
1,050 CE  
Duration:
[900 CE ➜ 1,050 CE]  
Political and Cultural Relations
Suprapolity Relations:
none  
Supracultural Entity:
Emergent Mississippian  
Succeeding Entity:
Cahokia - Lohmann-Stirling  
Relationship to Preceding Entity:
continuity  
Preceding Entity:
Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian I  
Degree of Centralization:
loose  
Language
Linguistic Family:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI  
Language:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI  
Religion
Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[400 to 500] people  
Polity Territory:
[100 to 200] km2  
Polity Population:
[400 to 500] people  
Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
2 900 CE 1000 CE
3 1000 CE 1049 CE
Religious Level:
2 900 CE 1000 CE
3 1000 CE 1049 CE
Military Level:
-  
Administrative Level:
2 900 CE 1000 CE
3 1000 CE 1049 CE
Professions
Professional Soldier:
absent  
Professional Priesthood:
present  
Professional Military Officer:
absent  
Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
present  
absent  
Full Time Bureaucrat:
inferred absent  
Examination System:
absent  
Law
Professional Lawyer:
absent  
Formal Legal Code:
unknown  
Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
absent  
Irrigation System:
absent  
Food Storage Site:
inferred present  
Drinking Water Supply System:
absent  
Transport Infrastructure
Road:
present  
Port:
absent  
Canal:
absent  
Bridge:
absent  
Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
present  
Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent  
Script:
absent  
Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent  
Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent  
Sacred Text:
absent  
Religious Literature:
absent  
Practical Literature:
absent  
Philosophy:
absent  
Lists Tables and Classification:
absent  
History:
absent  
Fiction:
absent  
Calendar:
absent  
Information / Money
Token:
inferred present  
Precious Metal:
absent  
Paper Currency:
absent  
Indigenous Coin:
absent  
Foreign Coin:
absent  
Article:
present  
Information / Postal System
Postal Station:
absent  
General Postal Service:
absent  
Courier:
inferred present  
Information / Measurement System
Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
  Wooden Palisade:
present  
  Stone Walls Non Mortared:
absent  
  Stone Walls Mortared:
absent  
  Settlements in a Defensive Position:
absent  
  Modern Fortification:
absent  
  Moat:
absent  
  Fortified Camp:
absent  
  Earth Rampart:
present  
  Ditch:
present  
  Complex Fortification:
absent  
  Long Wall:
absent  
Military use of Metals
  Steel:
absent  
  Iron:
absent  
  Bronze:
absent  
Projectiles
  Tension Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling Siege Engine:
absent  
  Sling:
absent  
  Self Bow:
present  
  Javelin:
absent  
  Handheld Firearm:
absent  
  Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent  
  Crossbow:
absent  
  Composite Bow:
absent  
  Atlatl:
absent  
Handheld weapons
  War Club:
present  
  Sword:
absent  
  Spear:
absent  
  Polearm:
absent  
  Dagger:
absent  
  Battle Axe:
inferred present  
Animals used in warfare
  Horse:
absent  
  Elephant:
absent  
  Donkey:
absent  
  Camel:
absent  
Armor
  Wood Bark Etc:
absent  
  Shield:
absent  
  Scaled Armor:
absent  
  Plate Armor:
absent  
  Limb Protection:
absent  
  Leather Cloth:
absent  
  Laminar Armor:
absent  
  Helmet:
absent  
  Chainmail:
absent  
  Breastplate:
absent  
Naval technology
  Specialized Military Vessel:
absent  
  Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
present  
  Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
absent  
Religion Tolerance Nothing coded yet.
Human Sacrifice Nothing coded yet.
Crisis Consequences Nothing coded yet.
Power Transitions Nothing coded yet.

NGA Settlements:

Year Range Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian II (us_emergent_mississippian_2) was in:
 (900 CE 1049 CE)   Cahokia
Home NGA: Cahokia

General Variables
Temporal Bounds
Peak Years:
1,050 CE

1050-1150 CE. [1] Population peak c1100 CE. [2]

[1]: (Peregrine/Kelly 2014, 25)

[2]: (Pauketat 2014, 15)



Political and Cultural Relations

Supracultural Entity:
Emergent Mississippian

Succeeding Entity:
Cahokia - Lohmann-Stirling


Preceding Entity:
Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian I

Sponemann-Collinsville-Loyd



Language

Language:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI

"Cahokia was made up of different ethnic groups, perhaps even different linguistic groups." [1]

[1]: (Peregrine/Emerson 2014, 13)


Religion

Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[400 to 500] people

Inhabitants.
Population of largest settlement probably in region of 500 people. This is an upper limit estimate. This population was not resident at the site that later became Cahokia. One of the areas with this number of people is called the Range site.


Polity Territory:
[100 to 200] km2

in squared kilometers
Quasi-polities of the American Bottom might cover 100-200 KM2.


Polity Population:
[400 to 500] people

People.
Population of largest settlement probably in region of 500 people and this would be the quasi-polity size. This is an upper limit estimate. This population was not resident at the site that later became Cahokia. One of the areas with this number of people is called the Range site.


Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
2
900 CE 1000 CE

levels.
Nucleated villages
"From the Late Woodland Patrick phase through Emergent Mississippian times, communities in the floodplain and immediately adjacent uplands tended to consist of groups of structures. Most people lived in these nucleated villages, each of which was occupied by at least a few tens of people, and sometimes several times that number. Only a small proportion of the valley’s inhabitants lived in houses that were widely separated from one another." [1]
"It has been argued that villages with well over a hundred buildings had developed by the late Emergent Mississippian period." However "it is equally possible that the feature patterns represent nothing more than multiple super-imposed, short-term occupations that cannot be teased apart." [2] [3]
Houses organized around a courtyard
In the Emergent Mississippian "The community pattern usually included organized groupings of houses and other structures arranged around a courtyard, often with a central post that was sometimes surrounded by four pits, and larger structures probably communal or ceremonial, to one side or in the courtyard area." [4]
"Site plans gained greater internal complexity as houses clustered into court-yard groups and, toward [1000 CE], the southern pattern of civic-ceremonial centers with large earthen mounds was established in many places.
Shift from nucleated to dispersed configuration
"Soon after A.D. 1000 people’s lives changed abruptly. Two of the most obviously signs of a profound alteration in the fabric of this society are a great increase in moundbuilding and a shift in small communities from nucleated to dispersed configurations." [5]
"The beginning of the Mississippian period was marked by an abrupt shift in the character of peripheral communities ... The predominantly nucleated pattern of settlement was abandoned in favor of widely scattered single-family farmsteads." [6]

[1]: (Milner 2006, 98)

[2]: (Milner 2006, 99 cite: Kelly 1990

[3]: Milner 2006, 99-100)

[4]: (Iseminger 2010, 26)

[5]: (Milner 2006, 168)

[6]: (Milner 2006, 100)

Settlement Hierarchy:
3
1000 CE 1049 CE

levels.
Nucleated villages
"From the Late Woodland Patrick phase through Emergent Mississippian times, communities in the floodplain and immediately adjacent uplands tended to consist of groups of structures. Most people lived in these nucleated villages, each of which was occupied by at least a few tens of people, and sometimes several times that number. Only a small proportion of the valley’s inhabitants lived in houses that were widely separated from one another." [1]
"It has been argued that villages with well over a hundred buildings had developed by the late Emergent Mississippian period." However "it is equally possible that the feature patterns represent nothing more than multiple super-imposed, short-term occupations that cannot be teased apart." [2] [3]
Houses organized around a courtyard
In the Emergent Mississippian "The community pattern usually included organized groupings of houses and other structures arranged around a courtyard, often with a central post that was sometimes surrounded by four pits, and larger structures probably communal or ceremonial, to one side or in the courtyard area." [4]
"Site plans gained greater internal complexity as houses clustered into court-yard groups and, toward [1000 CE], the southern pattern of civic-ceremonial centers with large earthen mounds was established in many places.
Shift from nucleated to dispersed configuration
"Soon after A.D. 1000 people’s lives changed abruptly. Two of the most obviously signs of a profound alteration in the fabric of this society are a great increase in moundbuilding and a shift in small communities from nucleated to dispersed configurations." [5]
"The beginning of the Mississippian period was marked by an abrupt shift in the character of peripheral communities ... The predominantly nucleated pattern of settlement was abandoned in favor of widely scattered single-family farmsteads." [6]

[1]: (Milner 2006, 98)

[2]: (Milner 2006, 99 cite: Kelly 1990

[3]: Milner 2006, 99-100)

[4]: (Iseminger 2010, 26)

[5]: (Milner 2006, 168)

[6]: (Milner 2006, 100)


Religious Level:
2
900 CE 1000 CE

levels.
"At Cahokia there may have been no difference between the religious and political hierarchy. They were interlocked, impossible to disentangle." [1]
1. Chief / Priest
In the Emergent Mississippian period: "perhaps the appearance of chiefs" [2]
"Cahokia may have been led by a priesthood or a group of ruler-priests, but a shift to “king” does not appear to have happened at Cahokia." [3]
2. Sub-chief / Sub-priest?
"Members of the highest social strata probably included chiefs, sub-chiefs, elders, priests, and other religious functionaries." [4]
3. Elder / Religious functionary
kin group leaders [4]

[1]: (Peregrine/Kelly 2014, 23)

[2]: (Iseminger 2010, 26)

[3]: (Peregrine 2014, 31)

[4]: (Iseminger 2014, 26)

Religious Level:
3
1000 CE 1049 CE

levels.
"At Cahokia there may have been no difference between the religious and political hierarchy. They were interlocked, impossible to disentangle." [1]
1. Chief / Priest
In the Emergent Mississippian period: "perhaps the appearance of chiefs" [2]
"Cahokia may have been led by a priesthood or a group of ruler-priests, but a shift to “king” does not appear to have happened at Cahokia." [3]
2. Sub-chief / Sub-priest?
"Members of the highest social strata probably included chiefs, sub-chiefs, elders, priests, and other religious functionaries." [4]
3. Elder / Religious functionary
kin group leaders [4]

[1]: (Peregrine/Kelly 2014, 23)

[2]: (Iseminger 2010, 26)

[3]: (Peregrine 2014, 31)

[4]: (Iseminger 2014, 26)


Military Level:
-

levels.
1 or 2. More comfortable at 1 level at this point. Not until Mississippian evidence of warrior specialists.


Administrative Level:
2
900 CE 1000 CE

levels.
1. Chief / Priest
In the Emergent Mississippian period: "perhaps the appearance of chiefs" [1]
"Cahokia may have been led by a priesthood or a group of ruler-priests, but a shift to “king” does not appear to have happened at Cahokia." [2]
2. Sub-chief / Sub-priest?
"Members of the highest social strata probably included chiefs, sub-chiefs, elders, priests, and other religious functionaries." [3]
3. Elder / Religious functionary
kin group leaders [3]

[1]: (Iseminger 2010, 26)

[2]: (Peregrine 2014, 31)

[3]: (Iseminger 2014, 26)

Administrative Level:
3
1000 CE 1049 CE

levels.
1. Chief / Priest
In the Emergent Mississippian period: "perhaps the appearance of chiefs" [1]
"Cahokia may have been led by a priesthood or a group of ruler-priests, but a shift to “king” does not appear to have happened at Cahokia." [2]
2. Sub-chief / Sub-priest?
"Members of the highest social strata probably included chiefs, sub-chiefs, elders, priests, and other religious functionaries." [3]
3. Elder / Religious functionary
kin group leaders [3]

[1]: (Iseminger 2010, 26)

[2]: (Peregrine 2014, 31)

[3]: (Iseminger 2014, 26)


Professions

Professional Priesthood:
present

"Those who planned and organized the construction of the Cahokian cosmographical landscape can be interpreted as being religious specialists." [1]

[1]: (Pauketat 2014, 28)



Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
present

"East St. Louis started out as a residential group, but evolved into an administrative/storage like complex." [1] However, the identification of any Mississippian-period structures in the Cahokia region as specialized government buildings is far from clear. The sites of activity within the "central administrative complex" [2] could have largely been of religious significance and perhaps communal or elite storage rather than used as sites for the administration or processing of taxes and management of records (for which we have no evidence). In general, the identification of any Mississippian-period structures in the Cahokia region as specialized government buildings is far from clear. The sites of activity within the"Central administrative complex". could have largely been of religious significance and perhaps communal or elite storage rather than used as sites for the administration or processing of taxes and management of records (for which we have no evidence). [2]

[1]: (Peregrine/Emerson 2014, 14)

[2]: (Peregrine/Emerson 2014, 14) Peregrine P, Ortman S, Rupley, E. 2014. Social Complexity at Cahokia. SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004. Sante Fe Institute.

Specialized Government Building:
absent

"East St. Louis started out as a residential group, but evolved into an administrative/storage like complex." [1] However, the identification of any Mississippian-period structures in the Cahokia region as specialized government buildings is far from clear. The sites of activity within the "central administrative complex" [2] could have largely been of religious significance and perhaps communal or elite storage rather than used as sites for the administration or processing of taxes and management of records (for which we have no evidence). In general, the identification of any Mississippian-period structures in the Cahokia region as specialized government buildings is far from clear. The sites of activity within the"Central administrative complex". could have largely been of religious significance and perhaps communal or elite storage rather than used as sites for the administration or processing of taxes and management of records (for which we have no evidence). [2]

[1]: (Peregrine/Emerson 2014, 14)

[2]: (Peregrine/Emerson 2014, 14) Peregrine P, Ortman S, Rupley, E. 2014. Social Complexity at Cahokia. SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004. Sante Fe Institute.


Full Time Bureaucrat:
absent

Chiefs are thought to have possibly appeared after 700-800 CE [1] and from this time there were newly created "social roles linked to community defense, organization of labor, and communal storage of maize in secure central places". [2] However it would be a stretch too far to call the new social roles of the Emergent Mississppian "government." It may be telling that there is "no evidence for standards of weights or volumes" - which would be evidence for a formal administration - yet "there may have been a standard unit of length used to lay out ritual spaces)" [3] given that the religious and political hierarchy was thought to have been "interlocked, impossible to disentangle." [4]

[1]: (Iseminger 2010, 26) Iseminger, W R. 2010. Cahokia Mounds: America’s First City. The History Press. Charleston.

[2]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95) Blitz J H, Porth E S. 2013. Social complexity and the Bow in the Eastern Woodlands. Evolutionary Anthropology. 22:89-95. Wiley.

[3]: (Peregrine 2014, 31) Peregrine P, Ortman S, Rupley, E. 2014. Social Complexity at Cahokia. SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004. Sante Fe Institute.

[4]: (Peregrine/Kelly 2014, 23) Peregrine P, Ortman S, Rupley, E. 2014. Social Complexity at Cahokia. SFI WORKING PAPER: 2014-03-004. Sante Fe Institute.



Law

Formal Legal Code:
unknown

"formal adjudication structures were also present, but it is not clear what these might have been." [1]

[1]: (Kelly 2014, 22)


Specialized Buildings: polity owned

There is no evidence for markets, "nothing that would suggest an integrated economy of any kind." [1] "There were probably no markets at Cahokia. Distribution of food and manufactured goods (e.g. shell beads) were likely “event based”, taking place at feasts and rituals. Barter or reciprocal exchange was likely part of an informal economy that circulated goods on a limited basis. Some redistribution of surplus production may have taken place as well." [2]

[1]: (Peregrine 2014, 31)

[2]: (Trubitt 2014, 18)


Irrigation System:
absent

"There is evidence of maize pollen in swales, and some drainage and irrigation facilities." [1] However, there were "no irrigation systems evident at Cahokia." [1]

[1]: (Peregrine/Trubitt 2014, 20)


Food Storage Site:
present

"Most of the people at Cahokia were self-sufficient, but granaries are present in Stirling/Moorehead Cahokia." [1] "Fluctuation in agricultural production (especially due to flooding) would have affected specific areas of the American Bottom on an almost annual basis, and may have required provisioning some parts of the population on an irregular basis. Granaries and other storage facilities may have held the surplus required for this provisioning." [2]

[1]: (Peregrine/Trubitt 2014, 20)

[2]: (Trubitt 2014, 18)



Transport Infrastructure

[1] "Roadways link external centers to Cahokia providing a physical connection between them." [2] "LiDAR helped to identify a causeway 25m wide from Monks Mound to Rattlesnake Mound." [3] "trail networks also are important, and some of the historic east-west ones cross near Cahokia." [4]

[1]: (Peregrine/Pauketat 2014, 28)

[2]: (Pauketat 2014, 28)

[3]: (Peregrine/Kelly 2014, 23)

[4]: (Peregrine/Trubitt 2014, 21)


"There was geographically widespread trade between Cahokia and other communities (and between those other communities themselves) especially along the Mississippi. However, this trade appears to have been low volume, with only small amounts being exchanged at any given time. Canoes identified so far are small, unable to carry high volumes of commodities. There is no evidence for centralized control of this exchange, except perhaps for high-status goods and exceptional ritual objects." [1] [1]

[1]: (Trubitt 2014, 18)



There were no bridges in prehistoric North America.


Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
present

"Large chert cores were roughed out at quarries, not at valley sites." [1] From earliest times people of American bottom were visiting a number of sources. This is not mentioned in current literature. Two examples: Wyandot, in the Ohio river valley and Mill Creek just south of the American bottom.

[1]: (Milner 2006, 82)


Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent

There is no written record for Cahokia. [1]

[1]: (Peregrine 2014, 32)


"There are no inscriptions, images, or even unambiguous houses or burials of political leaders." [1]

[1]: (Peregrine 2014, 31)



Information / Kinds of Written Documents









Information / Money
Token:
present

Shell beads may have been tokens of exchange.






Article:
present

Exchange-system economy. [1]

[1]: (Milner 2006, 138)


Information / Postal System


Courier:
present

No direct evidence for messengers but may be inferred present due to the scale of the integration and hierarchy.


Information / Measurement System

Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
Wooden Palisade:
present

"Mississippian sites often featured curtain walls with frameworks of stout posts accompanied by large bastions, high embankments, and deep ditches." [1] According to the temporal distribution of "131 walled settlements corresponding to Mississippian societies and their immediate predecessors" the breakout point for increasing percent of sites having palisades is around 900-950 CE. 800-950 CE: 0.5% of sites. 1000 CE: 1.5% of sites. 1050 CE: 3% of sites. 1100 CE: 4% of sites. 1200: 7% of sites. [2]

[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 100)

[2]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013)




Settlements in a Defensive Position:
absent

Settlements primarily located for access to water and arable land. [1]

[1]: (Peregrine 2014, personal communication)





Earth Rampart:
present

"Mississippian sites often featured curtain walls with frameworks of stout posts accompanied by large bastions, high embankments, and deep ditches." [1]

[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 100)


"Mississippian sites often featured curtain walls with frameworks of stout posts accompanied by large bastions, high embankments, and deep ditches." [1]

[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 100)


Complex Fortification:
absent

Checked by Peter Peregrine.



Projectiles


Checked by Peter Peregrine.


Self Bow:
present

"Beginning A.D. 300-400, the bow replaced the atlatl in most regions" [1] However, not regularly used as a weapon: evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" increased only during "last half of the first millennium" [2] First evidence of intergroup violence appears in the archaeological record after 600 CE. "For the first time, there is evidence, in the form of group and individual burials with embedded arrow points, of the bow as the primary weapon of intergroup violence." [1]

[1]: (Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95)

[2]: (Milner 2006, 174)


Javelin:
absent

Checked by Peter Peregrine.





Composite Bow:
absent

Checked by Peter Peregrine.



Handheld weapons
War Club:
present

Evidence of victims "struck by arrows and clubs" as inter-group conflicts increased during "last half of the first millennium" [1] Clubs [2]

[1]: (Milner 2006, 174)

[2]: (Iseminger 2010, 78)


Checked by Peter Peregrine.


Handheld thrusting spears absent.


Polearm:
absent

Checked by Peter Peregrine.


Checked by Peter Peregrine.


Battle Axe:
present

"heavy stone axe or mace" [1] However, whilst often referred to as a "stone axe" this weapon also could be called a mace or a club. It was a bludgeoning weapon.

[1]: (Iseminger 2010, 78)


Armor
Wood Bark Etc:
absent

No evidence for wooden shields. [1]

[1]: (Peregrine 2014, personal communication)


Checked by Peter Peregrine.




Limb Protection:
absent

Checked by Peter Peregrine.


Leather Cloth:
absent

No evidence for the use of leather as armor. [1]

[1]: (Peregrine 2014, personal communication)



Checked by Peter Peregrine.



Breastplate:
absent

Checked by Peter Peregrine.


Naval technology

Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
present

"Canoes identified so far are small, unable to carry high volumes of commodities." [1]

[1]: (Trubitt 2014, 18)




Human Sacrifice Data
Human Sacrifice is the deliberate and ritualized killing of a person to please or placate supernatural entities (including gods, spirits, and ancestors) or gain other supernatural benefits.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.