In your books, you seem to draw a very definite line between the structure between tribal life, and that of "civilized" people, but I've encountered many tribes, that even before their contact with the civilized world, have had things in common with civilized society. As an example, the Potomac tribes had a vast stretch of land they controlled, had many branching tribes, and a complex system of trading, with their chieftain getting a cut of the action. There were tribes in the western parts of California and Washington that had slaves, people that did agricultural work, and kept them in seperate huts from the rest of the tribe. There were tribes that Spanish conquerors came across in America that had vast storehouses (guarded storehouses) that contained pearls, and gold. My question is, since these "tribes" don't seem to fit under your qualifications for tribal life, are they still bona fide? Since they have been around for so long, and they seem to be working, are they in line with natural laws of conduct? • Ishmael.org, the work & philosophy of Daniel Quinn