The Punishment Monopoly. Pem Davidson Buck
with such a diminished population, a werowance needed to control more people to gather enough tribute. However, there is no actual evidence either way about whether epidemics had hit the Chesapeake chiefdoms.21
For whatever reason, by the time Wahunsonacock inherited his position, he reigned over at least six chiefdoms, not just one. From that base, he went on, through conquest, negotiation, and intimidation to control almost the entire Chesapeake Bay region, thirty-some chiefdoms. He became the imperial figure who so impressed English people like X, laborers and gentlemen alike. Tsenacommacoh was on the verge of state formation, one of the most complex polities on the East Coast of North America at that time, perhaps in all of what is now the United States.22 Getting to that point, however, meant some real changes in social structure and with them the growth of the solidified class structure that characterizes states.23
INEQUALITY WAS SOLIDIFYING INTO inherited class in Tsenacommacoh by the time X arrived. There were clear distinctions between chiefly families, the respected and wealthy families of the “better sort” as the English put it, commoners, and “the poor.”24 These distinctions existed even though all free members of the polity had rights to use land for farming as portioned out by the local werowance, and all could hunt in the territory claimed by the polity. There were also servants, although little is said about who they were, and there were slaves who were war captives. Local werowances, who once had shared sovereignty only with their priests, now were no longer independent; they and their priests were inserted into the new, larger hierarchy somewhere below the top. Perhaps there was a certain amount of resentment at the loss of sovereignty. Again, we don’t really know.
Within this system Wahunsonacock as mamanatowick was the paramount secular authority. He didn’t yet have a true monopoly on the use of force, although in the early 1600s he was making progress on this front. The first step in the process was to get punishing into the hands of the local elite families and out of the hands of clan leaders and individuals. He was shifting punishment, particularly for murder and stealing, to local werowances who were answerable to him, who owed him tribute and ideally obedience. In some cases, it appears that he actually bypassed the local werowance and priest to take charge of punishing himself. Acting as judge is a very concrete demonstration of authority.25
Before the English arrived, Wahunsonacock had gained a “plurality,” rather than a monopoly, on the use of force. While absolute in the sense that what he ordered did happen, including punishment, subchiefs also had the ability to punish on their own authority, although they could not override Powhatan. Local werowances could still punish on the authority of their priests, and clan leaders and even individuals could take revenge for personal affronts.26 Nevertheless, by coming closer to confining punishment to elites he could control, Wahunsonacock clustered punishers higher up the hierarchy, closer to himself. People were losing local control of punishment. This was a dramatic extension of power over local people, a move toward the monopoly on force that is part of state-making.
But whenever power to punish is being concentrated, there must be beliefs to legitimize it, beliefs that make people’s behavior, good or bad, a matter of concern, not just to their neighbors and kin, the people directly affected by it, but to a larger polity. Additionally, punishment needs to be defined as the correct response to transgression. Antisocial behavior in non-state societies gets dealt with by peer pressure, by manipulation on the part of local elders and leaders to bring about a change in an individual’s behavior, or maybe even by a locally-sanctioned killing. The goal is not punishment, but the restoration of community balance. To centralize the power to punish, that goal has to change. Certain behaviors must be redefined as a transgression worthy of punishment—retribution becomes the goal, not just the restoration of community balance. The behavior of individuals has to be made to carry meaning beyond the local group, so that transgressions can no longer be dealt with locally. An individual’s behavior becomes relevant to a much larger entity ruled by those gaining power within the developing state, who may feel their ability to extract wealth is threatened by certain behaviors that they therefore define as transgressions.
The Powhatan legitimized this move by a very common shift, gradually establishing an elite-controlled religion. Earlier beliefs could then be extended to claim that certain behaviors were so offensive to the gods that their protection could be withdrawn, not just from the offending individual or local group, but from the entire polity. Thus the authority for this transition came from a higher source, from the gods. Expanding the earlier diarchic structure, so that transgression came under its purview—not under the purview of clan or neighbors, with issues of revenge and honor to be handled, not by those who were injured, but by authorities representative of the polity-wide hierarchy—helped to accomplish this goal. Whether such a shift means that actual perpetrators are more or less likely to be the ones picked for punishment is an open question, but it is clear that the decision is now made by people further up the hierarchy. Priests can identify the behavior relating to the entire polity that will offend the spiritual forces. Punishment becomes a religiously mandated sacrifice, performed for the benefit of the entire polity, to be handled by the spiritual and secular power of the polity itself. A king or a paramount chief in this system is merely the tool to interpret and carry out the will of the gods, and his power comes directly from the religious authorities. The king’s exercise of power thus takes on a sacred aspect, and disobedience takes on the aura of “sacrilegious transgression”; there is a corresponding “sacralization” of the social order itself.27
Transgressive behavior becomes more a sin than a crime, an offense to the gods, not to the state, and such sins are seen as indeed threatening the entire polity, not just the local group, through displeasing the gods or upsetting the balance of spiritual forces. Mixed in and disguised by the mantle of sin is behavior that is actually threatening to the elite ability to extract wealth. Refusing to give tribute, for instance, becomes an offense against the gods, as does a king’s refusal to redistribute some (usually relatively small) portion of that wealth in rituals that promote the well-being of society.28 Beliefs about sin, figuratively speaking, provide a smoke screen.
The belief that Powhatan gods spoke directly only to priests, and the priests spoke only to werowances and influential men, strengthened the process of consolidation. Priests, as in other diarchies, were the most powerful individuals in the Powhatan empire. This despite the fact that Wahunsonacock was seen as half god. It was the priests, not the king, who would know, by way of the gods, if you committed a wrong, and would single you out for sacrifice. Priests thus played a role in directing the use of force internally as punishment. Additionally, personal disobedience to Wahunsonacock or to subchiefs was punishable with a beating or clubbing to death on a sacrificial stone.29 That stealing became punishable by death administered by the werowance perhaps reflects the importance that personal wealth played in Powhatan society. Stealing was much more than merely taking someone else’s stuff. Taking someone’s corn, beads, or copper was seen as a threat to the entire social hierarchy, since it shifted wealth, thereby potentially shifting status. Thus it was as reprehensible as murder, which, by shifting people, likewise threatened the social hierarchy. As the Powhatan social structure became more stratified, both theft and murder could no longer be a matter for individuals to deal with. It was perhaps for this reason that punishing those transgressions became a chiefly function. As if all this was not adequate, the disobedient could look forward to a tormented afterlife, at least according to some accounts.30
As Wahunsonacock gained greater control of punishing, he made himself more and more central to people’s lives. The mamanatowick was beginning to matter even more than the local werowance, who now had to look further up the hierarchy. At the same time, Wahunsonacock began shifting the focus of the aggression men were trained from babyhood to exhibit in defense of their honor. Men now vied with one another for reputations as great hunters, able to give the gifts of skins that satisfied the increasing demand for tribute.31 Warfare was another important component of this shift. War in service of the expanding Powhatan empire became the focus of aggression and a source of great prestige. Distinguishing yourself on the battlefield, like being a great hunter, began to replace feuding as the proper way to prove your honor and manhood—aggression was to be expressed externally in war. Internally within the polity, aggression was to be expressed only in competition that served to enrich