Transcript No Slide Title

The Nahua calli
of ancient Mexico:
household, family, and gender
“It is simply untrue as far as we can yet tell that there was ever
a time or place where the complex family was the universal
background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people.”
—Peter Laslett, Family & Household in Past Time, 1972
A neolithic, complex household from
Ancient Mexico (1540): 13 people,
4 generations, 5 marital units
Simply
an old
widow
Married
Married
head of
household
Married
Married
one
year ago
Married
Married
one
year ago
Married
Married
Married
Male
10 years
of age, not
married
Married
Female, 20
years old,
not yet
married
1540: 4 lateral extensions,
Only 1 complete conjugal family
3 incomplete (2 widows+children)
Married
head of
the
household
Male,
8 years
old
Widow
this year
Married
Girl, 1
year old
Boy
born this
year
Married
Married
three
years
ago
Single
Male 20
years old
Male,
single 10
years old
Male,
already
dead
Widow,
10 years
ago
Female,
single 15
years old
1990, 450 years later: An example of a
patrilateral household from rural
Morelos (5 conjugal unions)
Married
head of
the
household
50 years
old
Son 15
years old
Married
48 years
old
Daughter
10 years
old
Son 22,
free union
Daughter
5 years
old
21, free
union
Son, 2
years old
Daughter
22, free
union
Daughter
months
of age
25
Unión
free25
libre,
union
años
Daughter
2 years
old
Daughter
14, free
union
29
free
union
19, free
union
16 free
union
(not kin)
Competing theories of family history
(regarding co-residence)
 Evolutionary,
4 stages:
Foragers: co-residence not limited to family or kin
Neolithic, agriculturalists: compound multi-family
Ancient to early modern: complex, extended family
Modern: nuclear family
 High
mortality simplified family structures in the past
(Peter Laslett, 1972):
“It is simply untrue as far as we can yet tell that there was ever a
time or place where the complex family was the universal
background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people.”
There once was a place, where the complex
family, “the classical family of Western
nostalgia,” was the rule.
Nahua
agrarian villages, early 16th century
universal early marriage (<13 years female)
high mortality (e0 <20 years)
Household system: joint, complex, or
compound?
Gender relations: parallelism & symmetry
or hierarchy & subordination?
Source: The Book of Tributes
S. L. Cline (1993)
Census listings made by Aztec
scribes, writing in Nahuatl,
according to prehispanic
conventions (translated by Cline).
Morelos: Quauchichinollan
E
Mexico City
$ Morelos
Museo de Antropología, Mexico City:
“Here is the home of one named...”
...transcribed …translated …microdata
no. name
sex baptized relationship to head age
marital statuscomments
263 Cuilol
male not head
x
married
Here is the home of... He has 2 children
264 Xilotl
female not spouse
x
wife
265 Matapach
male not child
7 years old x
266 Ilhuicacihuatl female not child
born last yearx
267 Xilotl
female x
mother
x
widowed Ten years ago her husband died'
268 Matlalihuitl
male not uncle
x
married
269 Magdalena Ollacatl female not spouse of uncle
x
married
270 Necahual
female not sister-in-law of uncle x
widowed Her husband died four years ago'
271 Coatl
male not child of sister-in-law of uncl
15 eyears old x
householder
Here is his tribute. Every 80 days he delivers one quarter-length of a Cuernavaca coat. Here is his provisions tribute:
household
Here there are eight [sic, nine] included in one house.
Nahua population and land register
Darkened faces = dead
Lines are used to connect kin
rather than to separate households
Codex Santa María de Asunción, ~1550
Cemithualtin (those around a
patio): the importance of kin
 Nahua
households (cemithualtin):
“those who live in a house”
“people who live in only one house”
“those from a patio,” etc.
 99% live with kin:
47% as spouse or children of head;
52% as extended kin of head.
 1% have no kin ties with the head (3
orphans, 20 servants and 1 [Indian] slave).
Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin
relationships with 19+ occurrences
Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540
Relationship Frequency (total n = 2,486)
child
596
mother-in-law
40
spouse
316
brother-in-law’s spouse 38
head
315
sister-in-law
37
brother
158
daughter-in-law
36
brother’s spouse 88
nephew
34
son-in-law
77
brother-in-law’s child
33
brother-in-law
76
sister’s child
33
sister
67
mother
26
grandchild
56
cousin
19
brother’s child
51
niece
19
Household and family definitions
 Household
classes with only 1 conjugal family:
nuclear: pa, ma, &/or child
extended: some non-nuclear, unmarried kin
 Household
classifications for 2+ conjugal
families:
Joint - families connected by kin of same sex,
under single head
Complex - tangled, intricate, diverse, multiple
Compound - fusion, blending or amalgam of parts;
hierarchy
5 conjugal families, 4 generations,
3 married brothers, 2 widows,
1 unmarried woman and a boy
Simply
an old
widow
Married
Married
head of
household
Married
Married
one
year ago
Married
Married
one
year ago
Married
Married
Married
Male
10 years
of age, not
married
Married
Female, 20
years old,
not yet
married
Table 2. Multiple households were
the norm among rural Nahua
Household type
Households (Percent)
Simple
13.4
No children
1.9
Children
11.5
Extended
13.4
Upward
1.9
Downward
0.3
Lateral
6.7
Combinations
4.5
Multiple
72.1
Upward
0.3
Downward
15.1
Lateral
26.3
Combinations
30.4
Polygamous
1.0
Total (n)
312
Illegible (n)
3
Individuals
7.2
0.5
6.7
10.1
1.0
0.2
4.9
3.9
81.1
0.3
14.6
26.6
39.5
1.6
2,486
17
Nahuatl sense of “joint”
differs from classic definition of family
historians: “Joint - families connected by kin
of same sex, under single head”
“They pay the tribute jointly.”
“They all produce what they eat jointly”.
“Their wives make it jointly.”
“They just do their tribute together.”
“They just share the tribute.”
“They just do it jointly.”
“He just feeds them all as a unit.”
“All of them do the tribute jointly.”
“They just produce his tribute jointly.”
The different
houses
Icnocalli (casa humilde)
humble house
Coloti calli (choça)
hut or hovel
Totecujo calli (hermita)
hermitage
Xacalli (casa paxija)
Straw house
Çaça ie xacalli (choça)
another kind of hut
Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580
Colotic calli: “It means it is
unpretentious, a lowly house.”
Commoner’s
house
(choça o
cabaña)
14 meters
square
Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580
Icnocalli (casa humilde)
“the unpretentious house, or the
house of the humble or…the poor.”
Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580
Excavated residences
“those of one patio…”
M.E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)
“those of one patio…”
note grouped ground-level houses
M.E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)
Table 3a. Headship designation by
frequency of occurrence.
District identities of households and head
freq
165
47
39
25
20
6
6
1
1
1
2
1
Key
Explanation
H “Here is the home of ...”; “Here is ....'s home.”
R “Here is the householder named ...”
S “Here is the home of some people...” “ The household
head is named...” or “The head of the household is
named...” or “The householder is named...”
T “The tribute payer is named...”
. illegible
m migrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”)
G “one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named ... is in charge”
b “one who belongs to the tlatoani”
g “Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani”
n “Here is a nephew...”
C “Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss”
a “Here is a goodly maiden...”
Table 3b. Headship designation by order of
appearance in district:
“Here
is an altepetl named Huitzillan” (H1-H41):
GbH.HHHHHH.HHH.HHH.HHHHHHHmHmH.HHHHm.HHHH
Quauhchichinollan
people (Q1-Q66):
GgRSSSSSSSSTSSSSSHHHHHSSSSRSSSSSSSHSTTTTSSTT.TTTTTT.T
TTTTTTT.T.TTT
District
illegible (Q67-Q135):
GHRRRRRHHRR.RRRRRR.RRRHHRRRRRRRR.RSSSSSSSSHHHHHHH
HHHn.HHHH.mHHHHHHHHH
Tlacochcalco
(H#1-H#18):
HHHHHHHHHHCHHHHHHH
Coloteopan
(H#19-H #35):
GHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
District
illegible (H#36-H#62):
GHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHmHHHH.HHm
Xanyacac
(H#63-H#72):
CHHHHHHHH
...cenhuitzco
Key: Here is...
H - Home
R - Householder
S - Some people;
household head
T - Tribute payer
m - migrant
(H#73-H#139):
SSSSRRRRRRRRRRRRR.RRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHa
Household H-38: 9 people,
3 generations, 2 widows
Widow
10 years ago
Married
household
head
Boy
7 years old
Married
Girl
1 year old
Married
Married
Single
15 years old
Widow
4 years ago
Table 4. Position of married individuals in
rural Nahua households was strongly
structured by gender
Relationship
Head
Spouse
Son/daughter
Other kin:
Brother/sister
Brother/sister-in-law*
Son/daughter in law
Brother/sister-in-law’s spouse
Father/mother
Father/mother-in-law
Other
Not related:
Total married (includes 2nd wives)
Male
306
1
36
323
98
63
75
14
3
8
62
11
677
Female
1
309
75
285
26
106
36
38
3
8
68
11
681
Rules of household headship
(inferred), the 3Ms:
 1.
Male (311 of 315 households)
 2. Married (97%) or recently
widowed (3%).
 3. Most sons resident (or the eldest
son resident).
The Codex Mendoza: life at
age 13 and 14 years
13:
Boys
Girls
14:
married unmarried
Marriage (at 15)
15:
Child Brides and Patriarchy
in Ancient Mexico
Codex Mendoza, 1540
1540 vs 1990
Persistence of Mexico
“profundo”?
 Pre-hispanic
survivals?
– Virilocal stem families?
– Residence around the paternal home?
 Or
transformations?
– The world Mexico has lost: extended families
are now rare
– But family and kin ties remain important
1540: 4 lateral extensions,
Only 1 complete conjugal family
3 incomplete (2 widows+children)
Married
head of
the
household
Male,
8 years
old
Widow
this year
Married
Girl, 1
year old
Boy
born this
year
Married
Married
three
years
ago
Single
Male 20
years old
Male,
single 10
years old
Male,
already
dead
Widow,
10 years
ago
Female,
single 15
years old
1990, 450 years later: An example of a
patrilateral household from rural
Morelos (5 conjugal unions)
Married
head of
the
household
50 years
old
Son 15
years old
Married
48 years
old
Daughter
10 years
old
Son 22,
free union
Daughter
5 years
old
21, free
union
Son, 2
years old
Daughter
22, free
union
Daughter
months
of age
25
Unión
free25
libre,
union
años
Daughter
2 years
old
Daughter
14, free
union
29
free
union
19, free
union
16 free
union
(not kin)
Table 5. Household Composition in Rural
Morelos, 1540 and 1990,
and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990
Relation to Head
Head
Spouse
Son or Daughter
Other kin
Not related
Total %
N (sample size)
1540
1990
Rural Morelos
%
%
13
20
13
16
24
54
49
6
1
4
100
100
2,503
1,633
1990
Republic
%
19
16
53
7
5
100
801,981
Gender relations:
parallelism & symmetry or
hierarchy & subordination?




Situs: Tenochitlan (Mex. City) or the countryside?
Parallelism, symmetry and complementarity with less
hierarchy?
Or patriarchy: subordination, domination, and
submission?
Evidence:
– Widows, “just a little old woman”.
– Married women in the household (Table 4).
Debate:
Condition of Nahua Women
Leon-Portilla (1958):
prominent and
of great social recognition
Nash (1978): subordination emerged
with predatory empire
Rodriguez-Shadow (1991): devalued
and dominated
Kellogg (1995): gender parallelism:
complementary and symmetrical
Nahua gender relations over the life
course: assymetry, hierarchy,
subordination
I. Naming patterns
II. Marriage:
girls: 12.7 years
boys: 19.4 years
III. Household: only male heads
IV. Widowhood: a female affair
V. Division of labor
Gender and ‘earthly names’ among
the ordinary (rural) Nahua at
contact: “a linguistic thicket”
Names provide a compendium of
the history of a civilization--Tibon.
Why are the names of ordinary
Nahuas excluded from history?
What do gender differences in
names suggest about relations
between the sexes?
“Ordinary women…we don’t even
know their names.”--Blanco, 1991
The Nahua Naming Ceremony
The Midwife Bathes the Newborn Babe
“And all during the time that she bathed the
baby, a pine torch stood burning. It was not
extinguished.”
“And then they there gave him a name,
they there gave him his earthly name.”
Earthly Names Ceremony
differs by gender
Strict
division
by
gender
from
birth.
Boys waiting
to snatch the
boys umbilical cord
offering and
eat it.
girls
And as she washed it all over, its
hands, its feet, she gave a talk to all...
Its hands, it was said, she cleaned of
thievery. Everywhere on its body, its
groin, it was said, she cleaned it of
vice.
The
naming
ceremony
began at
sunrise
… and
concluded
with a
banquet
Then she raised it as an
offering in the four directions;
then she lifted it up, she raised
it as an offering to the heavens.
From classic texts, elite male names:
few female names,
fewer names of ordinary people
Sahagun’s General History, “Persons and
Deities”:
436 names, but very few are female names.
Tax records reveal names of ordinary people,
including females: few share names with
deities (of 661 names in tribute lists only 47
occur in Sahagun’s General History).
4 most common names for each
sex. What are the differences?
Males
Females
 Teyacapan
(First one)
 Tlaco
(Middle one)
 Teicuh
(Second one)
 Necahual
(Quiet one)
315
182
182
151
1201 females
87 unique names
 Yaotl
74
(Rival/Enemy)
 Matlalihuitl
63
(Rich Feather)
 Nochhuetl
52
(Ideal Bean)
 Coatl
48
(Serpent)
1303 males
574 unique names
Common names
6th-10th most frequent by sex
Females
 Xoco
53
(The Last one)
 Centehua
42
(One’s Woman)
 Xocoyotl
38
(Youngest one)
 Tlacoehua
22
(Second daughter)
 Cihuaton
15
(Littlest female)
 Tepin
15
(Elder Sister)
Males
Tototl
19
(Bird)
Quauhtli
18
(Eagle)
Tochtli
17
(Rabbit)
Zolin
16
(Quail)
Matlal
12
(Indigo Plant)
Xochitl
12
(Flower)
n u m b e r o f o ccu r r e n ce s
Frequency of Common
Female Names
1,013 females share 10 names with 15 or more occurrences
55 names occur once; 20, 2-14 times (n=108); unknown (n=25)
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Teyacapan
Teicuh
Xoco
Xocoyotl
Tepi
n=1
unknown
Tlaco
Necahual
Centehua
Tlacoehua
Cihuaton
n=2-14
Fig . 1 . Freq ue nc y of na m e s fo r 1 ,2 01 fem a le s
n
nu
um
mb
be
e rr o
o ff o
oc
cc
cu
u rr rr e
en
nc
ce
es
s
Common Male Names
Note low frequency of most names
1,013
341 males
females
share
share
10 names
10 names
withwith
12 or
15more
or more
occurrences
occurrences
55
428
names
names
occur
occur
once;
once;
20,
143,
2-14
2-11
times
times
(n=108);
(n=494);
unknown
unknown
(n=25)
(n=40)
500
500
450
450
400
400
350
350
300
300
250
250
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0Teyacapan
Yaotl
Nochhuetl
Teicuh
Xoco
Tototl
Xocoyotl
Tochtli
Matlal
Tepi
n=1
n=1
unknown
unknown
Matlalihuitl
Tlaco
Necahual
Coatl
Centehua
Quauhtli
Tlacoehua
Zolin
Cihuaton
jXochitl
n=2-14
n=2-11
Fig
Fig
. .1 2
. .Freq
Freq
ue
ue
nc
nc
y yofofna
na
mm
ee
s sfofo
r r1 1
,2,3
01
03fem
m aales
le s
frequency
Inequality of marital condition:
fewer never married females,
more widowers, concubines, etc.
female
male
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
not
not yet
married
concubine
no longer
widowed
M a rita l C o n dition of m a les an d fe m ale s : a s y m m e tric al
frequency
4. Widowhood is a female condition
widowers quickly remarry;
widows do not (cannot?)
female
male
40
30
20
10
0
0days
1last
2two
3three
4four
5five
7seven
8ten
stated duration of widowhood ('years ago')
fifteen
twenty
A s y m m e try : W id ow s ex c ee d W id ow e rs at all d uratio ns
Household composition
Brothers
of heads:
of 135 coresiding, 98 were married and 2
recently widowed.
90 older brothers were heads; 8 younger.
26 mothers lived in households headed by
sons;
40 mothers….by sons-in-law
1/5 of residents were related to the head
through marriage (affinal kin tie).
Conclusions
 1.
Nahua households were large (ave. = 8) and
complex (75% contained two or more conjugal
families)
 2. Mortality, rather than braking, accelerated
the formation of complex families.
 3. social constraints were of greater importance
than mortality: Nahua offspring formed new
households after the birth of a child, not simply
with marriage.
Conclusions, social flexibility:
 1.
Marriage norms and family forms are
social constructions and are highly plastic,
even in ancient Mexico.
 2. Marriage age (including informal unions)
has increased greatly over the centuries,
from as little as 13 years in rural “Morelos”
five centuries ago to as much as 22 years by
1930, and 24 by 1990.
 3. Likewise, complex families have declined
from 75% to 15% in 1930, and 6% in 1990.
Conclusions: earthly names of
ordinary country-folk
Male names:
individualized, symbolic, diverse
Female names:
categorical, birth order, boring
Gender relations: instead of
parallel and symmetry,
divergence and asymmetry
Nahua gender relations:
patriarchy, assymetry, oppression
Division of labor: strongly gendered
Households: only males are heads
Average age at marriage:
girls: less than 13 years
boys: greater than 19 years
Widowhood: a female matter
Gendering of names: firm rules
With conquest and colonization:
heightened inequalities
Division of
labor: strongly gendered,
heightened by inequalities of class
Households: greater proportion of female
heads
Average age at marriage:
females: rose to 17-18 years
males: rose to 21-23 years
Widowhood: more likely to head household
Gendering of names: Christian saints
End
Museo de Antropología, Mexico City:
“Here is the home of one named...”
...transcribed …translated …microdata
no. name
sex baptized relationship to head age
marital statuscomments
263 Cuilol
male not head
x
married
Here is the home of... He has 2 children
264 Xilotl
female not spouse
x
wife
265 Matapach
male not child
7 years old x
266 Ilhuicacihuatl female not child
born last yearx
267 Xilotl
female x
mother
x
widowed Ten years ago her husband died'
268 Matlalihuitl
male not uncle
x
married
269 Magdalena Ollacatl female not spouse of uncle
x
married
270 Necahual
female not sister-in-law of uncle x
widowed Her husband died four years ago'
271 Coatl
male not child of sister-in-law of uncl
15 eyears old x
householder
Here is his tribute. Every 80 days he delivers one quarter-length of a Cuernavaca coat. Here is his provisions tribute:
household
Here there are eight [sic, nine] included in one house.
Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin
relationships with 19+ occurrences
Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540
Relationship Frequency (total n = 2,486)
child
596
mother-in-law
40
spouse
316
brother-in-law’s spouse 38
head
315
sister-in-law
37
brother
158
daughter-in-law
36
brother’s spouse 88
nephew
34
son-in-law
77
brother-in-law’s child
33
brother-in-law
76
sister’s child
33
sister
67
mother
26
grandchild
56
cousin
19
brother’s child
51
niece
19
Table 2. Multiple households were
the norm among rural Nahua
Household type
Households (Percent)
Simple
13.4
No children
1.9
Children
11.5
Extended
13.4
Upward
1.9
Downward
0.3
Lateral
6.7
Combinations
4.5
Multiple
72.1
Upward
0.3
Downward
15.1
Lateral
26.3
Combinations
30.4
Polygamous
1.0
Total (n)
312
Illegible (n)
3
Individuals
7.2
0.5
6.7
10.1
1.0
0.2
4.9
3.9
81.1
0.3
14.6
26.6
39.5
1.6
2,486
17
Table 3a. Headship designation by
frequency of occurrence.
District identities of households and head
freq
165
47
39
25
20
6
6
1
1
1
2
1
Key
Explanation
H “Here is the home of ...”; “Here is ....'s home.”
R “Here is the householder named ...”
S “Here is the home of some people...” “ The household
head is named...” or “The head of the household is
named...” or “The householder is named...”
T “The tribute payer is named...”
. illegible
m migrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”)
G “one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named ... is in charge”
b “one who belongs to the tlatoani”
g “Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani”
n “Here is a nephew...”
C “Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss”
a “Here is a goodly maiden...”
Table 4. Position of married individuals in
rural Nahua households was strongly
structured by gender
Relationship
Head
Spouse
Son/daughter
Other kin:
Brother/sister
Brother/sister-in-law*
Son/daughter in law
Brother/sister-in-law’s spouse
Father/mother
Father/mother-in-law
Other
Not related:
Total married (includes 2nd wives)
Male
306
1
36
323
98
63
75
14
3
8
62
11
677
Female
1
309
75
285
26
106
36
38
3
8
68
11
681
Table 5. Household Composition in Rural
Morelos, 1540 and 1990,
and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990
Relation to Head
Head
Spouse
Son or Daughter
Other kin
Not related
Total %
N (sample size)
1540
1990
Rural Morelos
%
%
13
20
13
16
24
54
49
6
1
4
100
100
2,503
1,633
1990
Republic
%
19
16
53
7
5
100
801,981