l{\~\Hc

.1..3

'v

Beyond the Visible andthe Material

Thc Arncrindianization of Socicty inthe \Vork of Peter Rivicre

Edited b),LAVRA RIVAL

ti 1/(1

NEIL \VHITEHEAD

OXFORDVNI\'ERSlTY J'RESS

()X H )Itl)"'UH"I" ,••••

(IrUI ( 1"'"''''11 ""t1I, I h',tI,1 ",' "1"

("'", •• , ',""""' ", •• ,,,. ,1"',"11I,,11 "'li" , "I",,,,, ,,'11.1",,1

11 'uIIII,,, 111, "IIIH"I" '. ,d"fllllf fI' •••• 11••••, 11I••• , "ti, ••""I" .1,,1'.11.1tll",,",," h, ,",hh,",", •.",','.ul. '"

Ihl",,1 ",. \",.

"I"m, "IIILI••"I II.",L"L I~""uIIUIII'" \" •• I "" I"."C",nn •• I I" ,,~ •• I"III 111'h. 11••••"'> li"", 10."'" 1.""1,,.' 10. ••• , I"

I.;"IL." I.;,••I.l.unl"u, .\\ ••h,,' \\.11"""". '" li,,, C," \\"",10" 'fI,,,I,.l'ArI' S~"I'.ul" SII.",h •• SI",.,,,,,. "1'''' I"L", '"'''''',, \\ ••••••

• ",1 " ••••.••1."11I11I1•••"" I" ''',111I Ih ••I."(hl••"I". ","lfllI'IIf'" "",L ,,' Ihl••"I' ",,,,.,,,I'" ••

'" Ih, '110. •• ,,1,,1, •• ,,'" "I hll "'''''' .".

1',,10".111"'" li" , ""li' "I.".

I•• 1hl",,1 """11"1' I'" •• li" . " •• \",.,. Cl, ,,,,,1 , '"'" li'" "" •• )11'1

I tu· m ••,,1 lI,h" 11' .fI •.• tllh ••, tu" I•••" .". t Ii ,I"."10,,.· ",hll h ,,,,,I, "I"",,, I'" •• I"' ••" I

11"1 ,,,,101,,1,, ,I 1'."

,\11",1". 11'\1","1 :'10" "'" ,,' 11", 1",1,1"•••,," ,,, •• I•• "1.".1" ••·.1.

\llIrr,lm. Irlrl""I"'I''''. 11'"'''''"lu,.I, lU'm ""m li' h, "" I11r.•n"••"h"ullh, 1""" '''"I1I''I''n'n .""11' ,,' I hl""'I,,," ,,,I' I'"·,,.

nr ., r'l"r"h Itr'l1l1l1l'1l tu I.","' "Iul., I. f lU' .,,, 1.1 ",I" lh •. '1'1''''1'''.11('r("I',ull"I,I ••, •. ri_tu, 1ftli ''''''"111'', I '''IUtr •••.• """ r um, fll'fl"hH Ilon

m",,,I, Ih, ""'IC' ,,' Ih, .1••••, .h"III,II •• "1111" 1111 M.,ht. 1),'1""""'11'.

0"",,11 'IItH"I" I'"".••Ih. "1,1",, .1•••,·

\'''u """1""I 'li' ul••, Ih" I•••L I" .". """' 111,,,1,,,, fI' " ••.,'11I1 ~II" n"I" 11111"""Ih" •• ",. ,,,,,,1"1"" "" '"\ •• "IIUC"

Ilrlll.h '.110, ••• ( ••• 1"'11I'" 11I "u"l" fi'"" 11•••, I "I' fi fll.hh

1.,10•••• "r (."""'" ( .1.1",.", 11I 1'""1,, '11"11 I' •••

Ik~,,",I,11f",,"', ••111Ih,· ", •••.• 1.1 11" """,""1 ••"" •••",, ,,' "0"1' 11I ,h" "",L "r1"'11"!t••,•.•r /c·,hl•.•' I•• I ,••u. !t11.1"li' ".,1 \\ hlldll ••1

I' tt",\ ",,11"'1"'" "r I. 1"'11''' """"",,,,,1'" .,,11.1••"I, ",1II"'lIr. '" h""", "I !t,,, •.••..•

,,",L o, h, nn" Iflll,m,nll,,,,,, Ihr (",,,,,1''''11111'' "r St•.••I.n,ll.uhll ••I.\"lh •••,.,',,~.In,h"l"hlhh"1I"I.hll,1 ,dufII' r' ""lm.l,,

I. In,hon. "r S"lIlh :\mr"" 0\" •• ,,," !t,,,, !tr"",, 1 I. ,I",,," 'lf, ,I !t,,,rrr.I'rlrrI. !ti"'If, I',IU 11 !t1••1 l.tll" " 111 \\ hlld••.••I. ,\,,11.

FHI'II M, lU" 11.11'IKI'.IlM~'I" ,1111 1lMIIlllltHII,

ISII' 11·1'1 'I1H7\ "ISII' \I 1'1 "HHI, I.(I'M )

1.'~7"IlII1I,~1

T)'~' in t:h,hmll h~Co1mh,i.n '1)!'C"Cllfl\, '''lIm',~, S"m~

I'rinlfd in (i'"1 IIm"nIIn ,dd·r,1't rire' h~

lIi ••••I" L •••.• (iuildr", •• '" "'In,-, I.~nn

'11", ',,,,,A' " ,/,',//.",,',1," ,!Ir ""''''tI~)' IIf

'",h,'II' (.'", I', I/HJ I'J'J'J

8

The Composition of Mebengokre(Kayapó) Households in Central Brazil

Vanessa Lea, Campinas Universily (UNICAMP), São Paulo

I:'\'TRODUCI'ION

Ri\'icre (l98.J) in his synlhesis of lhe social Slructure of lhe Guianas uses CenlralIlrazil as a kind of inlerloculor Wilh which to reneCl on lhe conlraSl belween lhese

IWII arcas. His analysis of lhe signifil.-ance of houses in lhe Guianas (199Sb)

pw\'ides a slriking contrasl Wilh my portrayal of Mcbcngokre houses in Cenlral

Ilrazil (Lea 1995), hclping 10 highlighl lhe wealth of social and cultural diversily

\\hieh is gradually being appreeialed in lhe elhnographies of lowland Soulh:\rneriea,

SlIme perlinent remarks aboul lhe ]êl ha\'e been made by Riviêre although hehas nlll undertaken ficldwork Wilh lhem direetly. Viveiros de Caslro crilicized him

for redueing lhe socielies of lhe Guianas 10 lheir individuaIs, remarking lhal:

'Despile his reference 10 lhe reproduclion of lhe pasol/, he seems to persisl in

\\orking Wilh an unanalysed concept of ;l/dit'id/ltJI, as socielY's nalural atom'(\'i\eiros de Caslro 1985: 280; my lranslalion). The direclilln of lhe crilicism eould

hc in\'crted beeause in 1980 Riviêre had argucd lhal:

Sl'Cltcr ano olhers [R. Da~\lalla and E. \'h'eiros oe: Caslrol ha\'e reeenlly slaleo lhal 'lhe:" ••..ielil·Suf lhe eominenl are slruelureo in Ie:rms of symbolic ioioms Ihal-ano Ihis is lhe:dilli:rcllce frum European ano :\fric-.1I1symhols-ha\'e nu eoneern wilh lhe definilion orI(rtlUJlSand lhe IranSrer of goods, bUI \\ilh lhe conslrucliun nr lhe rersnn aml lhe rabrk-a­

lillll nf lhe ~y' (1979: lU), This roim is \\'ell maoe:,hUI alu'o-U'a'y jlou' ir itll'olt',J, ar I{"

(;1 II/II/(rilll II/II1·,s (/,ar. Til, socilll p"ro"a ((sultrfroll/ ((CrUilll/,nl i" c"'ai,, Kroupr u·Mcll Il,ur

11/,11I11,11I'I/"II/rr/t',r u'il/' 111,(IIwlll/rnlll/i"Jit'iJuall. (Ri\'ii:re IlJHll:537; my emphasis)

1)3 .\Ialla opposes 'subslilulion', lhruugh name lransmission, lU deseentl'\ idcnced 'through a conlinuum ... ordered in lemporal lerms (c1oscr lu or more

1I1\lalll from a commun anCl.'Slor.. .' (11)79: 127). Ri\'iêre raisl.'Slhe imporlant qu •.'S­

.ion lhal: '\t might bc asked aI lhis point if lhe Norlhern Gê do nol in fael have

unilinc-al •.beent disguised as name lransmission' (1980: 538). In lhe light of data

fwm Da ~Ialla, ~Iclatli, and ]c-an La\'e, Ri\'icre eommcnts lhat name transmission

1511 I í/llrJJ" 1,(" 159

does nol appeólr 1lI0rder short c)'ch:s: 'R,lIhcr il is ,I scheme uf l'UllliIlUil~, jusl ,ISefTecli\'e as unilineóll descenl. whereh)' social persoll"c succccd ulle anulher in

orderl)' lineólr pr0ltression' (11)1I11:5]1)).2 Thirll'en )'l'ólrs Ióller, Ri\icre ClIl1lmcnls

Ihal despile lhe inOuence of lhe nOlion of lhe person 'lhe IHuhlem of llescelll ólnd

linealilr has failed 10 go cOOlplelclr aWól)'~specióllly as far as lhe tiê "reconcerned' (11)1)]: 511<J).·1This is one of Ri\'iêre's insílthls inlolhe Jê maleriallll he

laken up in Ihis ehaplcr.There is nol space here III analrse in dclaillhe imporlanl role phl)'cd h)' wi\'cs

as lhe dislribulllrs of prolein. handed o\'er 10 Ihem hy Iheir hushands. Ri\'icre

(I 91H: 111))noled lhe polilical imporlance accruinlt lolhose who dislrihule me,lI and

fish as opposed 10 Ihose who ohlain il Ihroulth hunlinlC or fishinl'. This ís óIques­lion Ihal has heen lillle explored in lhe elhnolCraphics of lhe rqcion, hUI \\hich is

\'i,al for elucidaling issues relalcd 10 gender. In Mchenlt0he sociely, lhc fóll:l Ih"lwllmen lake charge of lhe dislribulion of raw and ClIoked prolein and lIardcn

produce is one of lhe faclllrs lhal reinforces Iheir pimlO1Imie in lhe houscholds, O1SI 1;hall allempl 10 demonslrale in lhe remaindcr of Ihis chapler.

One of lhe recurring queslions lhal Ri\'iêre asks is \\h)' \'illages in lhe Guianas

rarel)' allain populalions of m'er fiflr pcople (011leasl hefore lhe ad\'enl of missions

and go\'ernmenlal POSIS. which ha\'e resulted in larger concenlralions ofAmerindian popu1;llions) in comparison 10 lhe far larger \'illages found in CenlralIll'a!.il. The mOli\'e gi\'en br Ri\'icre was Ihal a \'iJlage tends to disintelCrate whenlhe leader falher-in-Iaw dies. Brolhers-in-Iaw onlr remain togelher afler the dealhof their father or father-in-Iaw if their children ha\'e intermarried. Otherwise the)'

tef1ô to split up to eslablish new selllemenls or to join alreadr existing ones c1se­where.

ReOecting upon Ri\'ii:re's question from the perspecli\'e of the 1\lcbengohe. I

argue Ihat their vilJages allain rclali\'eI)' large-size populations due 10 the ceremo­nial inlerdependence of the matri-houses; aôded together the)' produce an organicwl1Ole. Name confirmation ceremonies not onl)' produce beauliful people

(11I(111(1.\'),lhe)' also produce inler-personal harmon)' (IIIMj/lll/tlri II/(I.r). and if the)'fail.lo do so lhe)' are not alJowed 10 run their course, being cancelled before

complelion. Ceremonies can be rendered untenable in lhe absence of lhe ownersor Iheir constituenl elemenls. In lhe Mcbengokre \'iJlage of Krelire, in lhe earl)'

1980s, il was affirmed Ihal Ihere were nOI enough people 10 slage lhe major Bemp

ceremon)'. despile Ihere being nearl)' 200 inhabitants in lhe \'iIJege. There was.

howe\'er, no song and dance leader ("gr( "IIõ djwo)), lhe prerogati\'e of one of lhe

mJtri-houses. The owning House was in fact presenl but none of its inhabitanls

had inheriled lhe role. This was e\'enlually resoh'ed b)' bringing a song and dance

le:fder from the ncighhouring Mêt)'klire \'illage of larina. One ma)' Ihen ask ho\\'

smaller villages whieh have occurred in post-contact times can be aceounted filr.

The answer appears 10 be Ihal eilher Iher team up with olher \'iJlages for cere­

monies, as in lhe example gi\'en here, or Ihey desist from performinl;' them.

Nowadays il is nol uncommon for people to refer 10 ceremonies as being opposed

10 'wurk', il hl'illlC pruhlcl1llllic III stage majnr ceremonies whilst simultaneouslyengaging in 11Irge-'~1I1~'\\urk prujeClll, such a.'! IJrazil nul collection or gold extrac­

tion ~ar""JI"Rr",), tu uhll1in ~alih fur purcha!ling \Veslern g(){Kis.t\lthough Ihi5 \\'a5

one or the reallnnllltivcn tu me lilr explaininlt lhe lack of ceremonk'5 in certain pc:ri­ods, in ulheTll il ",a" lhe rCliullrn'lIltcncraled Ihruugh a mnnetary ineome that were

ehannellcd inln lhe Jl~'rliJrnlillln' of l\1ajor ccrcmonies, !luch as the Bemp hcld inGnrulire in IlJH.l, ~'lI,,1uf Ih~' XinlCiI ri\'cr (Lea I'JH"),

1 wish 10 refute Turncr'. arltul\1cnl (l97lJlllJ,)lhal oldel' men cnnlrol )'ounltermen through uxorilnc:alil)', ",hich cn"ure" Ihal thc:ir daulthlen remain living wilhthem, along wilh Iheir hll"hlllllhl allll children, Rivii:re (IWI") con!lider!l that this

argumcnl thrO\\,.liithl on lhe "ncilll'lrllclure uf lhe (iuiana region, where a sellle­

menl is conslllillalcll aruuml il" limmlinlt lealler lu lhe eXlmt that he manages tomainlain his lIun!l-in-la\\ rCllidinlt wilhin hill cllmmunily, all1ng wilh married sons.Ri\"iêre (198 .•: I) I, IH, and JI,Ullln) "ali in!lpircd by Turner (l1J7I),,1 b) in formulat­ing his characlerilalilln uf lhe 'Ilulilical econnmy uf people' in the GuiaOóls, where

it is not land or Jlmlei" ",hidl cunlllilulell limiting faclorll but rather the peoplewho can bc impinlt,'d lIpnn lu hunl and 10 JlTllCessgarden 1'T1Kluce,thereby hclp­ing 10 creale and sUlllai" \'illhle lielllcl\1CnlS, 11 i5 my cunlenliun Ihal Turner's

mudei (l979alb) ma)' 1Il'T\'e ICIelucidale lhe s(lCial organi;~atilln of the Guianas

more Ihan il d(lClI li,r Ihc l\I~henltukre. for whom lhe m(Kicl was originallyintended, For Ihc M~henlCu~rr, il is lhe c1dest female uteriTle memhcr of a matri­

house'who is lhe ke)' lilturc IITllllnd whnm a household is f(Jrmcd. Men come and

go. through muriagc. di\'(Jrn', .nd dealh, \Vhen a woman i,; di\'(Jrced. aI her own

instigalion or thal or lhe hUllhand, her children remain with her. along wilh lhe in­marrying hushandll of her IlilulChlerll. The faet Ihat widowed CITdi\'orced menalwa)'s tend 10 remar r)' meanll Ihal e\'cn Iholle men who do allain lhe stalus or

father-in-Iaw are oflen ohlilted In lea\'e lhe hnulle of Iheir daulthters and sons-in­

la\\~ to mo\'e inlo the huusc uf Iheir lalellt wife, \Vhen they rlmarry, older men maybecome c1asllifieatur)' falhcrs-in-Iolw in rclatinn 10 the sonll-in-Iaw of their latest

wife, bUI this ma)' (lCCIISionIheir IIlcJldaulChters In mo\'e oul of Iheir mOlher'shouse, sellinlt up a new huu!le i1lungside Ihal nf the mlllher.

~It\TR I-UXORII.O(,.AI.IT\'

This hrings me to lhe ohjecl uf Ihis chapler, \Vhich is 10 examine Mcbcngokre resi­

dential patterns, 1 argue Ihal Turner (19791/) is corrcet in dcsignating lhe relliden­

tial norm as mlllri-uxorilocalily ralher Ihan mercly as uxoriloc:l1ily,· as iscuslomary in lhe anlhropologiellllileralure on lhe Jê, for lhe ideal is to live with lhe

wife in lhe house or her mOlher and nol mercly in lhe wire's plal"C. In olher partsof lowland South America, uxorilocality referi 10 lhe faet that a husband should

.ti\'e in his wife's village, logether wilh her parenta, pc:rforming bride-scrvice filr a

cerlain number or yellrs. MOllt Mt'!hcngokre mllrry lIomeone wilhin the village

where they reside and 50 matri-uxorilocality entails a man mo\'ing into the houseof his wife's mother. Ir the latter is dead, then the husband, even if living neolo­

eally, should Iive in that portion of the village eircle traditionally allocated to hi.

wife's matri-house. The faet that residential continuity between a mother and her

daughters is more important than the role played by the father-in-Iaw is compllli­ble with the key institution of Mebengokre matri-houses (or Houses) Ihal I havedt:scribed in more detail eJscwhere (1986, 1995).

There is a huge variation in Mebengokre household eomposition. The ide;,1household, in terms of quality of life, eharaclerized by abundance of filOd, iM

eonslilUted bya marrieJ eouple with their daughters and unmarried sons, married

daughters' husbands and daughters' ehildren. In praetiee, householdll Arefrequently headed by divoreed, widowed, or remarried \Vomen. Married sisten 111111

their ehildren ideally live together, and in faet rrequently do so; alternatÍ\'eI)', the~Iive in neighhouring hOllses. If there is lad or spaee to aeeomplish this, or ir Ihere

is animosity betwcen sisters or matrilateral parallel eousins, then the)' mllY li\'e

temporarily or permanently in a different portion of the \'iIIage circle.

Neverthcless, they eonlinue to regard themselves, and to be regarded by otherN, 11M

belonging to the same matri-house. During the period studied, there \Vere \'lIriouN

cases of separated or widowed sisters, along with their ehildren, living together

with married ones. There were several cases or married brothers li\'ing Wilh

married sislers, usually when lhe brother's mother-in-Iaw was dead, living in 11

distant villagc, or a foreigner.s There were a number or nuclear families (see Fil(,H.I), when a woman ladted a living mother or sister. Elderly \Vidowed men some­

times remain living with their daughters temporarily, unlil they remarry or die.

They tend to spend much time in the men's house, e\'en sleeping there at nil(hl,due to the faet that onee their wire is dead they are deprived or their raisond'/Iufor eontinuing to Iive at lhat house. The matrilateral weighting or kin c1assifiealion

is attt:sted to by caleulations sueh as a woman residing \Vith a c1assificatory mOlherwho is her MMZD.

\Vilh the demise or rt:sidenee in the men's house on the pari of adolt:seent men,youths are now laking up n:sidence with their \Vire berore the birlh of their firsl

child, or between the dt'3th of the first ehild and the birth or a subsequent one.

Turner (1966) menlion~ that at the lime he began fieldwork, in lhe 1960s, such

men only entered the wife's house surreptitiously after dark, being sure to lca\'e bydaybreak and thus bein!: invisible to ali but the \Vife. This is no longer the case.

Given the high rate of bOlh mortality and divoree, many men end up li\'ing \Vith

wives who have already had ehildren by a previous marriage, though the)' ma)'continue to have further ehildren with lhe latest husband.

Together with the eore members of the household there is frequently round a

fringe of other relatives and visitors. This fringe includes adopted members, ehil­

dren fostered to an e1der relative, putative members or the matri-house in question,the odd relative rrom the same House or from another House (sueh as the ehildren

or a dead sibling or other orphans), half or step-siblings, the c1derly widowed men

aln-ady mentioned, children of an in-marrying male whose mother has died, theoCf.'3sional amne of this fringe, and grandehildren whose mother has died andfather remarried.

llelween 1978 and 1982 lhe number of Mêbengokre houses in the village stuc.l­

ied (Krelire) gre\V from 19 to 23. \Vhen the inhabitants of this village joined up

\Vith those or Jarina, the number of houses totallec.l 31 in 1987. In 1994, after a

further \'illage fission, there were H Mebengokre houses anc.l two Tapayuna houses

in the "illage of the \'on Martius waterrall \Vith a population or 205 people, and 27

Mêbengokre houses plus one Tapayuna house in the village or the KapolO with a

population of 337 people. The Metyktire population has grown steadily sinceficldworL: was begun in the late 19705, despi te the precarious health situalioll

pro\'Oked by malaria, tuberculosis, and sexually transmitted diseasl.'S.

In 197H the population of Kretire was slightly larger Ihan lhe population of lhe

\'illage of Jarina. These two \'illages totalled the whole of the Mctyktire subdivi­

sion of the Mcbengokre, which merged togelher in a single village around lhe mid·19110s.The sehism that later touk place continues as registered in 1994-5. Totalling

ali lhe periods rcsearclwd, the predominant houschold pattern was one covering

Th( Cumpusiriun ufMlbengulm I/ous(hu/ds

T.\UI.t: 8.1. Propor/io" Df Mttyltlir( ma"itJ mtn lI'itll a"J ",illloul (hilJrtn

T.\IIU: 11.2. Pupu/Iltio" Df. Uit)'ltlir( t'i/lllJ{ts

161

TOlal of marriedmen

36

39

40

73

99 (including Icase wilhoul

informalion)

155

162

18.• + Tapayuna369 + Tapa}'una205

337

H2 (ind. approx ..• O Tapayuna)

Populalion

676

17

18

Married men ",ilhoul

children ",ilh prt'Sc:n1",ife

\'illage

KrelireKrelireKrelire

~Iêl)'klirecachoeira \'on ~Iarlius

Kapolocachoeira and Kapoto

Married men ",ilhchildren ",ilh

presenl ",ife

30

32

H56

80

Yl.'ar

1978

1979

1981-21987

199 .•

1995

199+--5

Ycar

1978

1979

19111-2

19117

199+--5

Val/(ssa L(a160

162 I illlwa J.tll

lhree generalions (fJ(1 houses). Nol Car bchind wcrc hUllse~ CO\'Crlllll 1\\11 \II'm'r.l­

lions (52 houses). Onl}' a minoril)' of houses allainecllhl' si/c uC '"ur Ill'm'rlllierlls

(17 houses). In 19711lhere was une woman ali,'c whul\lul a Ilrl'alllrUI'\Ir'"lllrhilll.

enlailing Ihc cocxislenee of fi\'e generaliuns wilhin her famil~, IlulI~ehlllll ~ilr

ranges from a minimum of 2 members 10 a maximum uf H, wilh lhe mllionl~ (h,\houses) in lhe (.-10 range, and wilh a Cair prul,urliun (.H heru~I''') in lhe 11··15

range. Of lhe tolal of 136 houses sludied, Ihere werc 22 hUII~l'~\\ IIh !lI'IIICl'n 2 ;mel5 members, I1 wilh )(.-20 members, and 6 wilh 21-25 ml'm!lcn., I>e~pile lhe

demographie imbalance bclween Houses, an)'lhinll frum unc 111 ei\lhl hIlUSl'~repre­

senling a single malri-house in a particular "illaltc, unly lll'u ca~I's \I erc leluml uf

marriage wilhin a malri-house."In lerms of Ihose who conslilule lhe inhabilanls of a ~I~henltul.rc herusehulel.

whal )'OUsee is nol alwa)'s whal you gel. AI firslglance, un lhe hOlsiserf rl·hlli'e alte,

one appears freljuenlly 10 encounler Iypic:al nuclear families mOlde "1' of aelulleouples and Iheir chilclren. When dcl\'ing deeper, one diitCO\'ers lhal a nUlllher ofIhese families are whal I ha\'e lermed 'compusile nuclear families', for w.ml of a

helter lerm, c:onslilUlec\ hy marriecl couples wilh some uf lhe chihlrell heilllC lhe

mOlher's by one or mor~ pre\'ious marriages and only lhe ~'ounger sihlings heinglhe children lIf lhe mOlher's presenl husband.i Occasionall)', men lake children b)'

a previous m'lrriage 10 lil'e wilh Iheir presenl wiCe, bUI in ali such cases (wilh onl)'one exeeplion) lhe mOlher of lhese children ",as deacl. The figures for marriedmen whose eo-resiclenl chilclren are Iheir own is doubtless exaltgeraled bec,luse

every lime lhOll 1 relurnecl to lhis ljueslilln 1 c1isco\'ered more cases of childrenwhose apparenl falher was lhe paler bul nol lhe genitor. \\'omen were somelimesreluclanl to admil lhis and often did 50 onl)' because I queslioned Ihem abOUI il

explicill)', ha\'ing oblained lhe information c1sewhere. In \'arious cases, lhe ",omenconcerned askecl me nol 10 re,'eal Ihis fael in lhe census Ihat I was elahoraling,

requesling me 10 lisl lhe children in queslion as Ihose of Iheir prcsenl husband. Icarne acruss IWOcases of women ha\'ing children \\'ilh a lo\'er whilsl remainingmarried to Iheir husband. I also disco\'ered aI leasl Ihree cases of men ha\'ing chil-

T.~IIU:8.3. Tlrt rhilt/rttl ,lfil)'!''''rr mrn lil'r Il'ilh

Y('al' No, or married menNo, or marriecl menNo. or marriecl men

whose eo-resident

\I' huse \\'C are nolwith C hy a formerWC= their C

alllheir own Cmarriage lil'ingwilh Iheir presenl \\'

1978

2(, "'1

1979

27 51

1982

28 71

1987

39 236

1994-5

62 213 (& 2 grandehildren)

dren oUlside Iheir 1ll,lrrilllll' ",hil'l renlllininlC mllrried ler Iheir ",ife, One mlln

cermmenled Ihal Ihi~ Pflll'lice uselllU he much more cermmern in lhe JlllIII.

Belween ICJ7Hand IlnC} \lIrieru~ hou!lehuldN hlld une ur more IIdopled IIdoles­

cenls of eilher sex Ii\'inll wilh Ihem, mllinly I'lInllrlÍ. In Ialer ce",!Usell Ihese

numbers dwindled as Ihcy l11arried, lhe men li\'inl{ uxurilucall)' and lhe wumen

living wilh Iheir IIdnlllell fal11il~',lhe hu~hand'N famil)',llr nenllrc:lll)'. There was onecase of an adopledN l\llIdlipu frerm lhe upper XinllÍl wher h"d heen rejecled by ilS

mOlher, and Iwo calle!'luf une erf li pOlirof IwinN hcinl{ IIdnpled OUI b)' ils parenls.

Adopliern is dislincl frerm ferslerinll, In lhe laller case, ,I child i!'lhroughl IIp b)' an

c1der relali"e: M~I, F~I, FZ, elC" wilh wherm il li\'Ci'Idurinll childhoud, bUI il is

slill regarded ali lhe child of ils pllrenl!'lllnd 11IIerrelurn!! lU li\'e wilh Ihem if a girl.9

In lhe pai'll, during lhe ClIlIr!'leIIf wllrfllre, !'Imllllchildren IIf Ihose allacked werelaken caplive, whilsl men were murdered lInd wOl11enwere laken c"pli\'e if Ihey didnerl pUI upgre"l resislance; if lhe)' did resiSI ,lI1d \Vere diflicult lerahducI hack lu a

~Ichengokre ,'illage, Ihen lhl'~' were killed and Iheir !'Imallchildren laken C:lplÍ\'e.Wilh lhe dcmise of w;uf,lre, new slralellies ha\'e evulved lu en1arlle lhe pllpulll­

lion, alie was lhe hlrlCe-sc;lle allopliern erf I'anar.i in lhe 1;1li.~ICJ711s.SuhseljUenl tillhis was lhe inCllrporalilm inllllhe ,'illage uf lhe small gruup of Tapayuna who nedfrom lhe Su)'á \'illage in lhe ICJHlIs,afler lhe murder of one llf Iheir leaders in Ihal

village. Aparl frum lhe few whll had already inlerl11arried wilh lhe Mcbcngokre,lhe resl resided in lwo separale houses wilhin lhe \'illage of lhe von Marlius waler­(ali, and in une huuse aI lhe Kal'OIO ,'illage, Wilhin lhe ne\V seuing uf lhe XingúPark, c:realec.1in I% I, indi\'idual membcrs of ulher inc.1ilCenuusgroups have grac.1­uall)' inlermarried Wilh lhe Mcbengokre. The number uf lilrcign wÍ\'es is slightlyhigher Ihan Ihal of foreilln hushands for, when lhe)' come lu li\'e in a Mchcngokre

village, lhe)' orrer lhe alh'anlage of aCljuiring a spouse wilhouI simultaneouslyaCljuiring parenls-in-Iolw wilh whom lhe husband is expeclcd 111 reside.

The few men mosl dosei)' linked 10 nalional sneiel)', lhe (11/';1(;010 and FUNAI

,(i':alional Indian Foundalion) wage-earners, appeared 10 employ one of IWIlslrale­

gics 10 a\'llid lhe burden uf aflincs, Eilher lhe)' married a foreign girl (a Trumai IIr

Tapa)'una), or a powerless Mcbcngukre orphan, wilh neilhl:r p.uenls nor sihlings,

wilh whom lhe)' li"ed neolocall~' eilher aI lhe POSIII or within lhe \'illage, in lhe

space Iradilionall)' allocaled 10 lhe wife's malri-house. Women who hcar only male

children are doomed, Iheurelicall)', 10 a lonel)' old age, living on lheir own or wÍlh

Iheir aged husband. In lhe une case of Ihis I)'pe, lhe slrategy used 10 foreslalllhisWOISfor lhe woman concerned lu ac.1opla l'anará who marriecl her son. This enabled

lhe woman 10 mainlain her son in her housc frum lhe slarl of m}' fic1dwork unlil

looa)'. The (tl/'i/(io ano his wife, and se,'eral olher families, managed 10 mainlain

married sons li,'ing wilh Ihem h)' similarl)' marr)'ing lhem to orphans, Ihough wilh

lhe one exceplion, alread)' menlioneo, lhis pro\'ed 10 bc a tçmporary arrangement.

Although malri-uxorilcrcalit}, is predominanl, il is no longl:r li mechanical norm.

allhough il is impossihle 10 lell \\'helher il in facl used 10 hc in lhe pasto

It has been fairi)' consensual in lhe anlhrupologicallileralure (see. for example,

• \\'hcn .";Ikul~ling gcncr~lions per housc I counlcd 135 houSts, omining 1,..0Tal'ayun~ hUUKllfur"hi.,h d~u "crc I~ding, Thcrc "'as in fael a 10lal of JoII houses, inclu<ling Ihc Tal'ayuna una; jun",cnliunc:d, and ~ lhird Tal'~yuna housc (in 1995) for ,..hieh Ihere are some dal~. Thc rangc of inhllhi­I~nts per huusc includc:d 136 houses for ,..hich Ihcre "'crc dala.

again 10 23 per cent in 1987, then decreasing to 16 per eent in 1994-5. This shows

Ihal il is \'iable for women 10 head households wilhout a male partner and thatIhere are insufficient men a\'ailable to ensure thal the oldest women in the commu­

nil)' ha\'e lhe chanee to remarry.

Prniousl)' I had pondered m'er lhe faclthal no widower remains unmarried forlong whereas \'arious widows do. Initially 1 interpreted this as disinlerest on lhe

pari of older women to remarr)'. \Vhen I asked one of them about Ihis silualion shcn:lUrll'l1 Iaughingly: 'And who am 1 to marry?' I was able to verify frum my dalaIhal due lU lhe fael Ihat men lemIto marry women younger than themselves, thl:re

~'mls up being a eontingenl of unmarried older women for whom it is impossiblclU lind a II~'\\, parlm'r, Of lhe six fema1e hOllsehold heads that 1 knew in 19711,none01 11ll'1II Iall'r rClllarried. 11)' 11)1)5t\\O had died and une was living with her sisteralld sister's husband.

In Turncr's model of the de\'elopment eyele of Jê and Uoruru domestie groups

(11)71)'1)il is implicd that marriage is 'until dL-ath us do part', and the standard

pallern is for young sons-in-Iaw to be living with the wife's parents until the

parents-in-Iaw beeome old and Wc-Jk,k-ading them to becume eeonomieally depen­

denl lIpun their daughters and sons-in-Iaw, whereupon the sons-in-law are them­

scln's allaining the status of father-in-Iaw in their own right, replaeing their own

falher-in-Iaw. It is interesting to compare this model with the stalistical results of

111)'uwn fieldwork cuncerning who married men were living Wilh in the periodsllltlied (1978-95).

Gi\en the high mortality rate and divorce rate, eoupled with thc facl that

dimreed men, e\'en if they do ha\'e une or more sons-in-Iaw by a decl.-ased or

di\Orced wife, forfeit the right to reside with them when thcy remarry, as lhey

ine\'itably do, then it is hardly sllrprising to find that a very small number of menwho become a father-in-Iaw or wife's mother's husbanu \ViII simuhaneuusly be

li\'ing with their own wife's father (column V of Table 1l.6b). Howe\'er, e\'en when

nu Compos/tio" o/AlibOlgokr( lIousellO!Js

TABU: 8.5. Ftmlllt-"taJtJ "oum

1M Val/tssa Lta

TAIIU:8.4. fim;tl/ "usbanJs IInJ "';t'tSYear

\VivesHusbands

1978

I'anará 2Tapirapé 1Trumai 11979

Panará 2Tapirapé 1Trumai 1

!'anará 21981-2

Panará .•Tapirapé 1Trumai 1

!'anará 2Tapa)'una 21987

Panará .•Tapirapé 1Tapa)'una 2

Panará 3

Karabi 11994-5Panará .•Tapirapé I

Tapayuna 2Panará 2

Trumai/Waurá 1Tap)'una I

Ka)'abi 1

R. Fox 1967 and Gough in Schneider and Gough 19(1) that matrilineal sodelil'~tenu to bc disrupted by eonlaet with \Vestern civilization and this dOllbtless alslI

applies to the Mêbengokre with their marri-houses,12 There is a tendenc\' fm

people who would once have supposedlv lived under the one roof to nowada,'~ lin­next door to one anOlher, and internal divisions ha\'e now been constructed i~ a fl'\\houses !li separa te one ~r more nuclear families from the rest of the househllhl.

Gne sue h case in\'Olved a dead sister's daughter's family who moved out of Ih~'house of her matrilaleral parallcl eousins to live ne:ol()(:ally wilh her hush'lIltl 111111their ehildren. The inlruduelion of wage earners, linL:ed to lhe Natillnal Intli.1II

Foundation (FUNAI), i!i cOnlrihuting to this processo Ooe of these wage earn~'rH,

who moveu out of his wife's father's house to the f>ost (her mother being u~'ad),explaineu to me that this mOldeit casier to separa te out what belonged !li him frlllll

what helonged to his wife's falher. Non-Indian \'isitors to l\têbengokre \'iIlIlJll'Hautomatkally refer to the houses as bclonging to the eldest male residenl IIN

opposed to the female resident; inadvertently this is one of numerolls fae!llrNcontrihuting to the demise of the malri-houses.

The prominent role played by women within l\têbengokre sociel)' is not mcrelysymbolie, ueriving frum the faet that matri-houscs trace their existenee hlld

through a line of uterine aseendanls. In praclÍl.-allerms, the)' play a significant role:as household heads, with or wilhout husbands. In 1995 there were three female:

widowed or divorced hellds of householus who had occupied this same role sinec: 1first knew them in 1978, that is, for seventeen ycars. Two other women \\'ho hadalso bcen household hcads since 19711 remained unmarried lIntil their dealh

between 1987 and 199". In 19711,O\'er a quarter of hOUSL'S(26%) were headed h,'

women (Sl.'CTable 11.5).There was a small decn-ase in 1979 and 1981-2, inereasin~

Ycar

1'17111'1791'1111-21'11171'1'14-5

Toral 1'178-95

TOlal no. ofhouses

20

21

23

31

42

137'

No. of female-headedhousc:holds

76698

36

'lú of female-headedhouseholds

26

22

21

23

16

21

165

166 /ill/(JJQ /"</1 nu CnmpnJitinn nfMibtngnl"( //nllJ(/In1JJ 167

VIII'Iillaln't ofmarriedmen

I ]6(..-ilhMI

\'11Li.C5 'A'ilhfIlherelller rei•.

\'1Li,'e. "ilhWI'

.1 ,19(2=1'.1;

I = FI

2 ~O(I=M+FI=MI

12 7.1(2 = M + F~= I\IhI=MMZI =I'+I'W

...._,__ .._. ~=cn'!:'~ln"l. _

VLi.C$ "ilh\\'1'+WFW

IV

Li"e. "ilh\\'M

11I

Li,,'S "ilh\\'M +\\'MII

I 11rClr Li, es "il h

~I + 1'­in-I~,,'

wfINMNIMH10%

wlWF3%

w/olhers11%

19i1l~ \liO

(ind, IisWMH

W\lZI

7%

19i9'~ li11

________ ._ A

19111-2"H11O

(ind, I \\~IZIIC/lIi

IIHI~,\11

,\'n/rs:

11:~Ien li,inll \\'ilh bolh Iheir mOlher Ind falher·in-Iaw.11I:Men Ij,'inlt 'Ailh Iheir ,,'ife', molher and 'A'ifc'. mfllher'. husblnd.1\': Mcn Ii\'inll 'Ailh jU'llhe 'Aifc', molhcr.\': Men li"inll \\'ilh Iheir "ifú falher and \\'ife'. falher's wifc.

\'1: Men li,'ing \\'ilh JUII Iheir wife', falher.\'11: Men li"intc ••i.h olher cl.ler rdAli••" (cAch l'arIÍ(uln CAOl'is spcciliell \\'ilhin Ihis column).

\'11I: The 10111numher of married men in ach ecn'u'. .

• There "'ere quilc ,ill"ilieanl chanltC5hel'A'ccn 1'I711.nd 197'1in lhe inlernal mmposilion af hOU5C11.h One man'5 I'anará parcnI5-in.IA\\' Ih'eJ "'Ílh him and hi5 molher,I This calellor,· incluJcs mcn li,inll "ilh foreign "'j,'C5, or ",ilC5 \\'ho ha\'C 1'''1 Ibci, I11Illbcr,.klOlt

",ilh elller relalin'5 of lhe "ife.d '1''''0 ca.scs"'ere leml""a')·, one lIuc lolhe falher'5 iIIncs" and ooc hu~band planninglo move 10hi.

mlllher-in-Ia",', io Ihc nCAr'inure, ul"'n lhe '·llI1'Iplcli••n of her ne,,· hnusc." 10 one Cl5e a mAn's I'anari I11Illher·in·la••' Ih'cd 'A'ilhhi, ""·n molher,r One ca.se"'a.' Icml'mar,',

I'IU, 11.1.Residence pallerns of married men

Key:The eharl summarizcs nailable informali"n for lhe sum "f dala bclwcc:n 1978 and 1995,w/M/F·in-law: ,,'ilh parenls-in-Iaw.w/WI\I/WMI·I: wilh lhe wife's mOlher and wife's mOlher's husband (who is nOllhe wife's falher).w/WM: wilh lhe wife', mOlher,..-/WI'/WF'W: wilh lhe ..-ife's falher and ..-ife's falher's wife.w/WF': wilh juS! lhe wife'. falher,w/olhen: wilh olher elller relali,'e. ('" Table 8.6a, eolumn VII).il I'-in-Iaw: men who are co-resillenl falhe,,-in-1aw 10 Iheir daughler" husbands. Married men resid­

ing ,.'ilh lheir parenl' (lhu. parenu.in·law 10 Iheir ..-h'cs), Iheir mOlher, falher, falher's wife. ele.,are liSled in Tahle 8,6a, eolumn VII; il "'1.'1 a lempora')' arrangemenl in ali boi one c•.se.

il WMH:,a man who illhe hUlbanll of lhe ,,'ife's mOlher, bUI nOI falher of lhe wife.nuclear: nuclear f.miliel. There ,,'ere fourleen limple nudear familics anil fourlcc:n eomposile nudear

familin. The laller indudC1l f.milics wilh mulual children of lhe husbanll .nll wife. logelher wilhchildren of anolher falher/l, plu. Iwo C.IIC'Df IdOplcd ehildren, and one case of male adolcscenlS(who would formerly raide in lhe men', houac) Ii.inll 'A'ilha nuclear family ai lhe POSI.There werealIO IWOCIICI uf une child of • ~'Uuplehein. f",lered uul 10 anolher housc, lca"ing lhe child'snudear family incnmplele.

horiz,: 'horilonl.llpreallinll', Thil lerm refen 11I flmllies ,,'hich are nOI htaded b)' elder relalh'cs oranines of married men. Of lhe IhirlY ellCl in Ih•• nlcllory (and one uncltar one), se.-cnlcen refer10men resillinll wilh one or more of lhe ,.'il'e'. li •••·,., 10,1io Ihrcc: ''a.sesmen rcsillcd ..-ilh Iheir O" o,isler/,. The remainin. 10 callCl iO\'ul\'Ch.lf· ur Ilep·sislen, or a ..-ife's half- or slep- brolher orlisler, one el.'le of lhe husbandl Df I'.n.r' CtlUlins,Inl! 1"'0 ca~ Df c1nsilicalory sislers (malrilal­eral parallel coulinl, ar linl and IICCOnddeIU'"I,

collple/eomplel: 2 cnuplca, one Df Ihem 'A'ilh ••nul unmu,.cl! men ("ha ••oulJ ha"e lind in lhemen'5 housc in former limn). I'our c:&1lft 'AI" t1.,,",1I .s 'l'IImpln' in Ihal lhe" inmh'ed Ihrcc:(lCneralional ramilialionlnf cnmJlflllle nurlr., r.mlll •• Thel a,. nll11l"""J of men 'A'ilhInd ",ilh­OUIehildren (and ehildren'l ehUdrenl af Ih.ir Q.n,II~ln, .lIh ,hll.Ir,,, .nll Jlu,hler'5 childreo oflheir ",ife, ••'ilh ur wilhuul mUlu.1 chUllren of Ih. ,,.upl. In '1ursllon,

I'J'I-I-5

Tolal

1'1

•• .1

'I

.lO

II 2

(ind, IWM~IZI>= 'WM' &.1W~IZ. ='WM'I

~I 8

17

(ind.',1'+1'.1,1]1\1"I'M'2M/MllrIWFZIWFZII11"1'.1/1'1'2 \\'MMIWMFIWMFIWMFWI

]]

CJCJ

287

.\'oltl:

11: The 10lal number of men li\'ing ",ilh lhe ",ife'5 mOlher.11I:The 10lal number Df men (h'ing ",ilh lhe ••.ife's falher.I\': Th" lUlaI number of men li\'ing ••.ilh lhe wife'5 molher'5 hUihand.\': The lUlal number of men li\'ing wilh eilher lhe ",ife'i falher or ",ife'i mOlher'i hUiband.

six l'ast:s of t:Iassifil'3lor)' mOlht:rs-in-law, lhal is, five cases of a WMZ and one of

a W~t~tZD. This makes st:nse in lerms of lhe conlinuilY of lhe malri-houses. Ifone wmpares lhe number of married men living Wilh their father-in-Iaw or with

lht:ir n1olhl'r-in-law (Tahle H.6<:), lhe imporlance of lhe laller far llutweighs lhe

former in ali periods examined. E\'en if \Vives' falhers are lumped togelher Wilh

\\'i\'Cs' n1olhers' husbands, lhey are slill far oUI\\'eight:d hy lhe \Vife's molher in

lerms of "ho married men live \Vilh.IJ It can he seen in Fig. H.I lhat 42 per cenl of

married men li"e Wilh lheir wife's molher (either alone (17%), or along Wilh her

dalll(hler'S falher (15%) or currenl hllshand (10%) ). Of the men \Vho are eilher

\\'idll\\'ed or rc:marric:d, only 5 pc:r cent tive \Vilh lheir married daughters, and only"hen lhe laller ha\'l: IOsl-thcir mOlher.

In lhe light of the overwhelming importanee of the Mêbcngokre mOlher-in-law,TlIrncr's claim (1979b) that men dominate women, who oceupy a 10\Verlevei of the

"()l'ial slruclure, deserves reconsideration. 1\1y reSl'arch eonlradicls Turner's image

(11J7IJb) of the domineering falher-in-la\V as the cenlral figure of lhe uxorilocal

hOllsc:hold. He also claims (1979b) lhat socielY is wclded logelher by male eommu­nal inslilulions, based in lhe men's house at the village centre, which he opposes to

lhe alllmislic nalure of lhe domeslic houses on lhe village ·periphery'. Whilst il isl'orreCI lhal divergenl faclional inleresls are played olT againsl one anolher in themen's house, where ali adult males converge to decide lhe outcome of collecliveinlt:resls, his porlrayalof men conslituling lhe superslruclure of sociel)', in oppo­sili,m to women, \Vho constilule the infrastructure, is misk'ading.

In lhe last decade or so, gender sludil"S have shown lhat lhe old see-sa\V \'iew of

TAIII.E H.hh. ,\1(t1 u,lmu,,, (u-,,,siJl'llljiJth ••,s-in-luu' ('Ir 11:\111) tu Jllu.~III••,.s husbllnJ,

'l'SiJinX ".ilh o, ".ith"ut "IJ", ujJin"sI

11 '"IVV\'1Y"ar

TOlal no. ofli himoclfli a W~1IfFi-in-la", &Fi-in-Ia'"married m"n

a eo- WMH5&WMH5rnidenl

li\'ing "'ilhli\'ing ••.ilhF-in-Iaw

\Wj051WM10DII"

(+WMorWFW)

1978

36-I3 O

1979

3963 O

1981-2

-10-I-IO O

(inel. I WMZII)1987

7310 2

(ind.l ••.ilhW~t + \\'1';1\\'1' +WFW)199-1-5

1513(nd.-I

(••.ilhWM(inel. Inon-en-

+ WMII)W~IZ =fl"liidenl

'W~I')I's-in-Iaw)

Tolal

2873920 -I

Nu/tI:

11I:Men ••.ho are:co-fl"liidenl falhers-in-Iaw in rclalion 10 lhe daughler'i hUiband.IV: Me:n whu are: lhe: ••.ife's mUlher'i husband (c1assificalury falher-in-Ia ••.) in rclalion 10dauj(hh'r"

husband.

V: Falhe:n-in-Iaw, eilher real or c1assificaIOr)' (alone. ur along ••.ilh lhe ••.if"·5 mOlh"r or ••il.',falher'. wife, as lhe case:may he), who simuhaneously 5lillli.e ••.irh Iheir o"'n falher-in-Ia ••..

VI: Falhen-in-Iaw (real Df dusificalory) ••·ho conlinuc lU li\'C "'ilh jusl Iheir uwn ,,·ife'. mOlher.Culumnl V and VI .how lhe nine: in51anen of pcorle ••.ho arJ'l:'Arin 1"'0 Cllegori'"li iimuhanCl.u\I)· inlhe various lables.

• Falhers-in-Iaw and mlllhe:rl-in-Iaw lUIOns' ",i\'C5can be calculaled ,"iacolumn "li uf Table H,6a,

comparing lhe proportion of fathers-in-Iaw who reside wirh lheir sons-in-Iaw Wilh

lhe toral numhcr of married men, in any one period, it can bc seen lha I it is "er)'small (columns 11 am.l 111 of Table 8.6b), 4 out of 36 ntarrfcd men in 1978, 10 OUI

of 73 in 1987, and 15 out of 99 in 1994-5. This proporlion incn:ases onl)' a little ifone includes men who are wife's mOlher's hushand (Tahle 8.6h, column .IV).

When one compares the single most significant category of e1der affines or

olher c1der rclalives Wilh whom married men reside, lhe majority, in ali bUI lhe

1994-5 sample, is lhe wife's mother (Table 8.6a, clllumn IV). The figures include

I,"ear

1978

1979

1')KI-2

1987

19'1-1-5

TOIal

T.\III.t: H.6c. Summll'Y ufTubl" 8.M

11

11IIVV

Men li\'ing~Ienlh'ingMen livingMen living

wilh \\'~IwilhWF••.ilhW'F'",ilh WFor

(col•. 11,11I,(col•. 11,V,(= WMH,W'F' col•. 11I&

IV of Table\'Iof Tablecol. 11IofIV of Ihi5 lable)

8.6a)8.6a)Table8.6a)

17

7310

16

8-I12

19

5611

33

1-1822

39

22931

124

563086

IIn)' man ur lhe age-grade at which he wll\lld, 1IlhcrIhin[1:sheing cqual, be cxpcclcd 10 allainlhe status lIr 'wire's ralher' and houschuld hcad can, as it "crc, capitalizc \lp"n lhe gcncral­i7.edslatus and preSligc accruing 10 his age-grade, (197911: 160)

This is imporlanl heeause one ean argue, on the basis of this obscr\"alion, lhalwhal is aI slake is in faet a hierarehy of age-grades, while the faet (lf being a falher­in-Iaw or not is of indireet relevanee. As 1 ha\"e noted clsewhere (Lea 19!16), Ihere

is, ~ hierarehy of age based on an empirical eonceplion of knowledge. The olderOnl: is the more one has learnl frum direcI experienee ano henee the more knu\\"­

kogcable one is. This is clearl)' markeo in speeeh b)' the use of the morpheme we

whieh must be appended to ali statements which were reported to one by olhers,

Ihij.'i clearly separating what one has wilnessed with one's own eyes frum thalwhieh has been Icarnt indireelly through other people. The age hierarchr is still

imporlanl, although il is graduall)' being undermined br young men who possess

valuable knowledge about lhe Western world, sueh as spcaking Porluguese, kno\\'­

ing how 10 drive traetors, motor boats, ete., and bcing able to earn wages as emplor­el:S of the nalionallnoian foundation.

In sum, matri-uxorilocalily makes sense in terms of being instrumental 10 the

ellnlinuity of the matri-houses and does not entail male dominanee. \\'hen Turner

e!aimed that women 'remain logether b)' sim pIe inertia' (I9i91l: 178), he had

entircly overlookeo lhe si[tt1ilicanee of lhese matri-houses. J\laybury-Le\\'is makesa similar mislake when he c1aims that: 'The supposed matriliny of the Northern

Gê is thus a misinlerprelalion based on the eumulati\"e eITeets of uxuriloealily'

who oominales sociely, men or women, is anaehrunislie. J\len may oominate in therealm of eXlernal aITairs ano in lhe eSlablishmenl of relalions with non-Inoians,

bUI Ihis ooes not enlail Ihal men dominale women per se, The modern SUbSlilUle

for warfare, henee a male aetÍ\'iIY, is relalions with non-Indians based on negolia­

tion (wilh the go\"ernment or 1':GOs). William and Jean Croder (1994: 123) may

ha\"e exaggerated when Iher talked of the \"irlual ensla\"ement of Canela sons-in­

law by Iheir mothers-inqaw, bUI Ihis c1aim may aI leasl lend some credence 10 whal

has been argueo in Ihis ehapler eoncerning lhe key role of lhe J\lcbengokre1lI0ther-in-law.

Turner argues Ihal: 'lhe extenoed-family household is nOI lhe primary setlingfor lhe re;llizóllion and expression of lhe hierarchy of dominance and subordinalion

gcneraled in il' (197911: 1(7), lIe c1aims Ihal il is lhe Irek, organized for accumu­lólIlinggame for lhe feast Ihat aeeompanies the closure of naming eeremonies, Ihatallllws men 10 asserl Iheir dominam:e, sim:e lhe falher-in-Iaw lakes along his wife,

daughters, and Iheir hushands, 'regardless of the collecli'l'e-group alliliation uf thesuns-in-Iaw' (19790: 17M), Nowada)'s, howe\"er, ali the men tend to go oIT on trek

wgether and lhe women do nol neeessaril)' aeeompan)' them at ali, and so treks donot lead to lhe lemporar)' breaking up of lhe household. Turner notes that a manwilh Ihree sons-in-Iaw ooes not necessarily ha\"e more status than one with nosllns-in-Iaw for:

170 Vonrssa l.<a TI/r Compllsilinn ofMibtngoJ:rr llnusrholJs 171

(19i9b: 3(4). In realil)", Mcbengokre uxorilocillity is matrifilCal and amounts to farmore than a mere residenlial rule for it is embedded in the instilution of the matri­

houses, whieh il ser\"es 10 perpeluale.

~IFlIt:l'ô(jOKRt: ~I:\TRI-IIOUSES (OR 1l0USÚi)

Since (matri-)uxorilocalit), is taken as one of the defining features of the Jê social

strueture, oceup)"ing pride (lf place in Terenee Turner's moc.lcIof Jê societies, thisled me towards a reinterprelation of the signifieanee (lf this residential rule. 1

belie\"e that 1 h3\"e linall)' umlersl'Kld lhe diserepaney bctw\.ocn my perspeetive andIhal of Turner, and Ihat il is a question of the paradigm used. It is not, as some

ha\"e tried to suggest (see Gordon I'J9lJ for example), that Turner represents themale \'iewpoint and m)'5e1f the femólle viewpoinl, fruit of my eoneentration on thewomen. Ile views l\lchcngokre sClCielyIhrough the prism of a mixture of Fortes

and feminist debates in the 1970s (bcsidell the innuenees made explicit in his bihli­ographr), whieh pel5iled the uni\'ersality of male domination due to the faet that

women were eonstrained to the domestie sphere, whereas the men oceupied the

public sphere. Forles's (1%9: 89) eharaeteri1.ation af the jural domain as rclatingto righls, dUlies, and privileges, applies perfeetly to Mcbcngokre matri-houscs,

defineo in terms of righl5 of ownership of jealously guarded and fought overwealth items-perscmal names, eeremonial roles and prerugatives. Eaeh matri­house (or lIouse) clCcupies a Iixed position in relation to East and West, aets as an

exogamie unit, with m)'lhological aseendants and an array of symbolie wealthilems. This inmlves a pie-charl-like model of the universe, in the sense of a

l\lcbengokre representation of an ideallotal villagc in which cultural attributes and

e\"en some ph)'sieal ones, like the pupil5 of the eyes, and biologieal proces5CS likc

death, are attribuled to the aneeslors of present-da)' I-Iouses,

It is eurious that with ali the interest in ethnohistory. in the last couple of

decades there has been 50 little attention given to genealogie!; as a souree of a soci­

etr's rclationship to its pasto The insistenee on the ategori;lI aspect of kin terms

has overshado\\'ed their genealogieal signifianee. For the Mcbengokre, genealogicssho\\" lhe paths that names follow, linking the living to dead a!ieendants, known and

unknown, slretching baek to m)'thologial times. To deny them.thcir interest in

their aneestors is to flatten out their social world as if it were composed only of theli\"ing. Storics of the dead, the wars they waged and their vendettas, are reeountcd

br clders in the men's house. The)' are essential to explain who lhe Mêtyktirc are

as opposed to the Mckrànoli, Gorotire, and Xicrin (other Mcbc:ngokrc subgroups).

There has been mueh insistenee in the anthropalog:calliteraturc on the faet that

deseent is an imported eonccpt which may distort the reality of lowland South

Ameriea. 1I0wever, I ean lind no other word in the Jo:nglish language to eonveywhat 1 gloss as 'deseent'. For the Mcbengokre, a.~ for other Jê, genealogies are

concei\"ed as upside down (frum our paint of view). Ulerine lines are like plants

172 lílll(ua L(a1'lt( Cumpusitiun o/Mlbmgu1:r( lIoustllUlJs 173

which sprout upwards and oUlwards, as descendanls muhiply. It would be pedan­

tie to dc..'Signale Ihis as 'ascent'. As Goldman aplly PUI it: 'descent is a coneerl of

the generalive pracc..'Ss and of lhe succession and di/Terenliation of emerginJ(gcncrations' (Goldman 1977: 175).

Mêbengokre sodelY accupics lhe inrersliccs of c1assical lypologic..'S,rcscmbling 11

Venn diagram. Malri-houscs are like c1ans, but emphasis is laid on Houscs acCUP)'­

ing a specific spacc, wit~ a herilage of namc..'Sand prerogali\'c..'S ralher Ihan biologiclIllinks 10 a founding anCCSlor. Uterine n:lativc..-sin olher villages are concei\'ed of as

members of. the same 'Iouse ralher than as founders of separale lineages.The Mêbengokre also have submerged palrilines whieh do not enlail double

descenl bec..'lluseone has nothing in common \\'ilh olher membcrs of one's line,bcsides sharing ceremonial ohligalions 10 delermined olhers. Palrilines lhus aCI

vic..'llriously,defining formal friends, c1assified as non-relalives, for whom one musl

perform ceremonial servicc..'S,and designaling idc..'lllmarriage parlners. As a \\'omal1,

I preferahly marry my daughler 10one of my formal friends, inheriled palrilinelllly.

To lhe eXlenl Ihal Ihere is conlinuilY, Ihis proeess involves palrilines, submcrltetlin rclalion 10 lhe 1100./SCS,for lhe laller are manifesl in lhe posilion Ihal Iheir

memhcrs occupy in lhe village cirele. Gregor (1977) descrihcd lhe plaza 01' a

Mehinaku village as a sIage. Its layoul is similar lU Ihal of lhe Mchcngolm: \'illaJ(l's,My conlenlion is Ihal il is as if Turner and olhers mislook lhe aClors on slage furlhe scriplwrilers, aUlhors of Iheir own lines. \Vhen lhe men accupy lhe cenlre ""lhe palio (or plaza), dUl'ing lhe performance of lhe greal name confirmalion eere­

monies, lheir roles and Iheir adornmcnls are defined by Iheir inheriled \\'eallh,righls 10 which perlain exclusively 10 lhe malri-houses. In this sense, lhe lIousesencompass lhe ceremonial slage, for Iheir heritage dictales \\'ho does \\'hal. 11is lhe

rilual complemenlarily of lhe malri-houses, ralher than male inslilulions, \\'hil'hsews sacielY togelher. The \'Ocabulary of 'domination' and 'conlrol' \\'hieh forms

lhe basis of Turner's model proouces a dislorled piclure. Thal \\'omen should

remain for ever in lhe houschold \\'here Ihey are born conslilutes doxa from lhe

Mcbcngokre poinl of view. It is \\'hal women have al\\'ays done as far as elln he

remcmbcred, bar a few exeeplions. Turner's presupposes lhe validily of Forles'sIife cyele mudei \\'ilh, in Turner's depiclion, domin:lled sons-in-Ia\\' evenlualh'

substiluling Iheir falher-in-Iaw'as household hc..'lld.Dala colleeled by me sho\\' Iha'lmen are more likcly to end up living wilh Iheir mOlher-in-la\\' Ihan \\'ilh 'Iheir

falher-in-Iaw, IC'Jding me 10 conclude Ihal lhe falher-in-Iaw is not lhe key figure inuxorilocal residence. •

Men diseuss mallers of colleelive inleresl in lhe men's house, bUI lhe orehes­Iralion of sociely occurs during ceremonic..'S, \\'hen each malri-house cOnlribules ils

dislinclive pieces (roles, '>onb'S,and adornmenrs) 10 lhe jig-sa\\' of \\'hich an)' parlic­

ular ceremon)' is cOmpri!ied. The living congregale in lhe plaza in an acl of \'iIIaJ(e­wide commensalilY during lhe fe..-aslIh:1l marks lhe culminalion of an)' majur

ceremony. The dead OCCUpylhe houSt."S\\'hich musI consequenll)' be 3\'oided b)' Ihl'

living. The laller sil or lie do\\'n in a cirele, and lhe aCli\'e cclehranls (JCcup)' lhe

inncrl1los1 circles of dancers and 'Singers. This is supremely aeslhelie because il

Ilroduces a lUlalil)', like lhe body of lhe lapir, whose meal is divided up amongsl alilhe Ilouses aecording 10 heredilary c1aims 10 ownership of dClermincd euts. The

lapir prO\'ides an apt melaphor for my madel of Mêbengokre saciety, formcd by

inlcrlocking parts \\'hieh produce a \\'holc. In this sense, the symbolic significance

of \\'omen is eminently collective; Iheir uterine lines allest through myth to ali the

cultural auributes \\'hich define the specificit)· of Mebengokre socicty: fire from

lhe jaguar, agricuhure from Venus, ceremonialleadership from a bat-boy, bl-aUti­fui namc..-sfrom a man \\'ho went to live with the tish, and so forth.

CO:'llCJ.USION

Stralhern has noted (1988: 68 and passil1l) that lhe domaining of gender ends upequaling \\'omen with domeslicit)' per se, in lerms of Iheir sociality.14 Her criti­

cisms of lhe public/pri\'ale opposilion, as il has been used in Melanesia, applyequally well 10 lhe slereotypic..-al and hegemonic \'iew of Ihe]ê anu Bororo, wilhIlIl'n aI lhe cel1lre of s(JCiely and lhe wllmen on lhe periphery, nexl bUI one tonalurc. Slralhern repeals the lesson Ihal should alrC'.ldy ha\'e been k-arnl fromDumonl (1966), that in lhe ahsence of an autonomous economie sphere, separatcdfrom lhe uomeslic sphere, lhe laller is nol necessarily denigraled as il bas Icnded

lU be in Eum-American sacielv. Strathern's notion of lhe partible personlS hclps

lU elucidale \\'hv the thcft of ~ames anu prerogati\'es provoJ.:es such gUI feclings

amongsl the ~lcbengoJ.:re. They constÍlute partible aspects of the person,

ml'lIll1\'mS of forebc..-ars \\'ho impregnale names, roles, and ornaments as theyulilize'lhem before passing Ihem do\\'n the ulerine fines emhodieu in lhe mal ri­

houses, Riviêre (1980) rightly suspected Ihat lhe Ilarvard Cenlral Brazil Projecth;ld Idl cerlain questions unans\\'ered.

Slralhern maslerfully demolishes lhe divide belween lhe public and lhe pri\'ale

domains, hUI replaces Ihis with 1\\'0 Iypes of socialilY: • "polítical" and "domestic",ir \\ hat is understood is ~ col1lrast bCI\\'een colleeli\'e aClion (hased on shared iden­

lilies and aims) and particular rclations (baseu on the tlifference and interdepen­

dence bet\\'een them)' (1988: 97). The dividing line bet\\'een Ihese contrasling

l~pes of socialilY is nebulous amongst the MchengoJ.:re, hut Ihis point cannot be

dl'all Wilh at lenglh here. I wish to conclude b}' agreeing \\'ith Ri\'iêre that lhe

nUlion of personhood is insufticient as an ana1YliC'J1tool filr unuerslanding the lê.

\ldalli (I9íO: 110) notetl the exogamy 01' what he called 'segmenls', hut this ques­ricm did nUl recei\'e the allel1lion Ihal il dl'Ser\'eu in olher ]ê ethnographies. Ir is afllndamel1lal aspecI of lhe ~Icbeng()he malri-houses. In sum, il is the ceremonial

,11111 Illalrimonial interdependence of the I Iouses that makes it necessary and uesir­.•hle III li\e in vil1ages, and lhe larger lhe bcller in lerms of pruximily lU lhe itleal

I il1;lge..·,wlllp()setl of ali lhe Ilouses IIn either side of lhe Xingú ri\'er \\hich di\'iueslhl' Illulti-lillage .\IêbcngoL:re cummunil)'.

174 I ílll(HlI 1,(11 nu Cl/ltlpl/sitil/n I/IMibtngnl:rt IItlllstl/llltls 175

lJadinter (191)2: I U~-lcJ) nulcs Ihc parallcl (Ihal I ha\c also nOlcd 1994: 91)

belween lhe sClCrcgalion and inilialiun IIf malcs inw manhlKld in non-Wcslernsociclies and 1Jrilish uppcr-dass males, sCllreltalCd ai boardinlt schlKIIs where

bullying conslilules a form or inilialion. Sexual sCllrellaliun is wcakeninlt 10 accrlain dcgrec in Mcbcnlt0kre socielY. Ihllulth il remains slrong, 1Jadinler's inler­

pn:lation or segrcgation as a meehanism for defeminizing males in order 10 lurnIh;:m inlo men, in ()lher words, aS part of lhe social conslruclion or gender. scems

10 mc 10 help 10 undersland the significancc of lhe ",cn's housc}" The malri·houscs produec Mcbcngokrc, bUI onl)' men produee men, and Ihc)' mainlain Ihcir

id,~nlilY hy avoiding o\'er-exposure to rcmininily in the houses or Iheir mOlhers anillheir wives, onee Ihey surpass lhe androg)'nous phase of carl)' ehildhood spenl in

lhe company of Iheir molher. AI lhe end of lire, gender evaporates and il is loler­alcd thal very old men should spend mosl or Iheir lime ai home, !lul few men live10 reach Ihis slage.

ACKI'OWI.t:I>Gt::llt::'I:TS

Rcsc:arch \\'a.~carried oul bc:lween 1978 anil 1998 \\'ilh lhe supporl of lhe CNPq, FINEI',and lhe Wenner-Gren Founl1alion. For commenlS on an carlier \'ersion, I wish 10Ihank lhe

Pagu Cenlre for lhe slud)' of gender, UNIC:\MI', and m)' slul1enls in lhe Iirsllerm of 1998.I Ihank lhe organize r of lhe feslschrifl, Laura Rh'al. and lhe Unh'ersil)' of Campinas, form;lking my' parlicipalion possihle, anil lhe parlicipanls for lheir commenls, cspeciall)' lhel1ebaler Slephen Ilugh-Joncs, Anil I Ihank Cambridgc Uni\·ersil)' Compuling Sen·ice forassislance wilh Exccl.

I'OTF-'i

I. I al10pl lhe slanl1arl1Brazilian spelling Ji:, for ir is nol usual 11Ilranslale names, !lul Imainlain lhe spelling Gi: in English quolalions,

2. O\'ering (1981: 151-M) hal1equallr rich insighls concerning lhe I-Ianard Cenlral BrazilProjecI, nOling Ihal ils memhers had erroneously ignored lhe signilicance of allianceanil hal1paid 100Iiule auenlion 10genealogical dala.

3. Turner supc:rvisel1a doclorallhesis on lhe Panar:i. Soulhern Kayal'Ó. whercin lhe)' arepurporlel1lo have malri-<:lans and yel he does nol acknowledge Ihal he failed 10nOlicelhe exislence of Mcbc:ngokre malri-houses. Iniliall)' he deniel1lhl!ir exislence (1987,

pcrsonal communicalion) hUI several y'cars laler he recognized Ihal he hal1 bc:enmislaken ahoullhis, brushing il asidc b)' c1aiming lha I lhe houses ha\'e acquired grealer

signilicance since conlaCI. wilh lhe l1cmise of \urfare anil olher faclors. I disagreeenlire1y, for in m)' opinion conlacl \\'ith \Veslern socicI)' is leal1ing 10 a l1emise in lheimportance of lhe malri-houses, as W. Crocker (1994) nOlel1wilh respecllo lhe 110mi­nanl posilion of \\'omen wilhin Canela householl1s.

4, Turner uses lhe lerm malri-ullorilocalil)' in his model of Ji: and Bororo socielies (19791/)bUI re\'ert~ 10 'ullorilocalil)" in his 1979bessa)' on lhe applicalilln of Ihis mnde1lo lhe

Ka~'al'Ó(M~bcng()kre). Charlolle Se)"mour-Smilh (19116:1115),in lhe MI/tmi/ll/II

Dittinlll/,.l' nf,·'"th,nfln1nf..", di~linttui~he~malrilocalil}' and u~orilocalily in lhe follll,,'ingwa)': 'Malrilucal p(lSlmarilal re~idence is r~idencc of lhe l.lluple wilh IIr dO!lC10 lhewife's family, (Ir more spc:cilic:allylhe wife's mOlher. Malriloc:alily is nol nct."Cs.~rilyassocialed wilh malrilinealily, and in urder 10 a\"llidlhe confusion of lhe Iwo L"Onceplsmany anlhrop"llIgiMs prefer 10 use lhe lerm UX()RII,IX:AI.which simply refers 10 resi­dence "in lhe wife's place" and dues nlll prejudge Ihal lhe mllsl imporlanl elemenl IIfIhis residence pauern is eorc:sidence wilh lhe wife's mOlher. The lerm "malri-ullllriln­cal" has alsu lK:enemplo}ed 111mean residence wilh lhe wife's mlllher or malrilineal kingroup.'

5. Onl)' one case \\u encllunlcrcd IIf a sisrer sleeping IIcL":Jsillnall}'ai her brolher's house.

ai lhe Pml, 111hdp oul her furcitrn sisler-in-Iaw whll orten hal1JlU~ISfor meals.fi, In one of Ihesc:c:ases,lhe bllYwho marriel1 wilhin his Ilouse "as lhe descendanl IIf aXicrin immigranl, aduplel1 by lhe malri-huusc: in queslion.

i, Fig. H.I shuws Ihal J(r'í, IIf l1wellingshllused nuclear families bc:tween 1'17Hand 1995.Of Ihese 211nuclear families, half were fllrmel1hy parenls alld Iheir chill1ren; lhe IIlherhalf were of lhe cllmposile I)'PC:,

11. Pajam.l',lilerall)' 'armlo c1ulch', \\hich can bc:glossel1as 'Ihose whll ha\'e bc:c:nc1ulchedby lhe arm'.

9. One girl whll was brllulChl up b)' her MM Ih'ed in lhe same hlluse a.~her billlllgicalmOlher bUIslepl in lhe bc:dof her MM and accompanied lhe Illuer and nol lhe mOlherduring lhe course of dail}' chor~,

10. The Porluguese worl1 ("fI"Jn. lilerally 'caplain', designales lhe inlermediary chief,appoinled b)' non-Indians, The inl1h'idual referred 10ended up eclipsing lhe tradilionalleader in lerms of prcsliLle,

11. The FUNAI 1'lIs1i~ nowada}s buill bc:side lhe villalCe;in il are localed lhe pharmacy,radio, school, anil houses of adminislralive persllnncl (eilher non-Indian orMcbc:ngnkre), '

12, 1-101)'(1996: 102-15) cllnsiders Ihallhe mnde IIf reckoninlCl1escenl may simpl)' shm inlhe l1ireclilln of cllgnalilln or palrilinealil}'.

13, The rcsidual e;&lcgory(Table lI,fla, column VII) of olher elder relalives wilh whllmmarried men reside is numerically far less signiliL":JnlIhan Ihal of lhe parenls-in-Iaw

(real or c1assilicaIOr)').11includes lhe hushand's own mOlher, own falher, own parenls,own mOlher's mOlher's si~ler, own falher and falher's wife, a wife's malri-housc whereher rdalion 10lhe ddesl fem:lIememher of lhe housc is unknown, and one complex case

of a man Ih'ing in lhe malri-house of lhe adoplh'e falher of his Panari wife.14. Eduardo Vh'eiros de C15lro nOles Ihal lhe Ji: and Tukano elhnographies: 'sugg~1 a

perspecli\'e which emphasi1.esa halance and a complex lensioo bc:lweenlhe domains ofmasculinily and femininil}', prol1uced h}' hierarchical encompassmenls conlcxluallyspecilied, and by a symbolic dh'ision of labour where men anil women, lerms and rda­lions, conslanlly Iransmule Ihcir \'alues' (1985: 276; my Iranslalion).

15, Marily'n Slralhern (communic:alion in a seminar ai UNICA~UJ Unh'ersily in Oclobc:r1998) was inspired by' Mauss in formulaling Ihis nOlion.

16, An anonymous re\'iewer made lhe following commenl: 'The nOlion of segregalion ofmales bc:ing a mc:ehanism for defemini1.ing males was suggcsled long ago; mllsl inlro­l1uclof}'anlhropolog)' lexlbooks menlion Ihis idea.' \Vhilsl il is imporlanl 10 nllle Ihallhe il1eain queslion was nol ne\\' \\'hen formulalc:l1in lJadinler's IxMlk,I mainlain lhe