l{\~\Hc

Beyond the Visible and

.1..3 the Material
'v

Thc Arncrindianization of Socicty in

the \Vork of Peter Rivicre

Edited b),
LAVRA RIVAL
ti 1/(1
NEIL \VHITEHEAD

OXFORD
VNI\'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' •••• ••••, 11I••• , "ti, ••""I" .1,,1'
11
.11.1tll",,",," h, ,",hh,",", •.",','.ul. '" '11", ',,,,,A' " ,/,',//.",,',1," ,!Ir ""''''tI~)' IIf
Ihl",,1 ",. \",.
'",h,'II' (.'", I', I/HJ I'J'J'J
"I"m, "IIILI••"I II.",L"L I~""u IIUIII'" \" •• 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 "r
1"'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'rlrr
I. !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"n
IIn ,dd·r,1't rire' h~
I"
lIi •••• L •••.• (iuildr", •• '" "'In,-, I.~nn
 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 Cenlral
Ilrazil 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 he
has 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 or
I(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 deseent

l'\ 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,("
does nol appeólr 1lI0rder short c)'ch:s: 'R,lIhcr il is ,I scheme uf l'UllliIlUil~, jusl ,IS
efTecli\'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 "re
concerned' (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 óIques-
lion 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"l
wllmen 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, O1S
I 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 of
Amerindian popu1;llions) in comparison 10 lhe far larger \'illages found in Cenlral
Ill'a!.il. The mOli\'e gi\'en br Ri\'icre was Ihal a \'iJlage tends to disintelCrate when
lhe leader falher-in-Iaw dies. Brolhers-in-Iaw onlr remain togelher afler the dealh
of 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 c1se-
where.
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 ceremo-
nial inlerdependence of the matri-houses; aôded together the)' produce an organic
wl1Ole. Name confirmation ceremonies not onl)' produce beauliful people
lhe)' also produce inler-personal harmon)' (IIIMj/lll/tlri II/(I.r). and if the)'
(11I(111(1.\'),
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 owners
or 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
159
10 'wurk', il hl'illlC pruhlcl1llllic III stage majnr ceremonies whilst simultaneously
engaging 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:ri-
ods, 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 in
Gnrulire in IlJH.l, ~'lI,,1uf Ih~' XinlCiI ri\'cr (Lea I'JH"),
1 wish 10 refute Turncr'. arltul\1cnl (l97lJlllJ,)lhal oldel' men cnnlrol )'ounlter
men through uxorilnc:alil)', ",hich cn"ure" Ihal thc:ir daulthlen remain living wilh
them, 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 to
mainlain 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 formulat-
ing 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 people
who can bc impinlt,'d lIpnn lu hunl and 10 JlTllCessgarden 1'T1Kluce,thereby hclp-
ing 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 originally
intended, 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 in-
marrying hushandll of her IlilulChlerll. The faet Ihat widowed CITdi\'orced men
alwa)'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 may
become 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's
house, 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 is
cuslomary 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 parts
of 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
 160 Val/(ssa L(a Th( Cumpusiriun ufMlbengulm I/ous(hu/ds 161

where they reside and 50 matri-uxorilocality entails a man mo\'ing into the house T.\UI.t: 8.1. Propor/io" Df Mttyltlir( ma"itJ mtn lI'itll a"J ",illloul (hilJrtn
of his wife's mother. Ir the latter is dead, then the husband, even if living neolo- Married men ",ilh Married men ",ilhoul TOlal of married
Ycar
eally, should Iive in that portion of the village eircle traditionally allocated to hi. children ",ilh children ",ilh prt'Sc:n1 men
wife's matri-house. The faet that residential continuity between a mother and her presenl ",ife ",ife
daughters is more important than the role played by the father-in-Iaw is compllli-
ble with the key institution of Mebengokre matri-houses (or Houses) Ihal I have 1978 30 6 36

dt:scribed in more detail eJscwhere (1986, 1995). 1979 32 7 39

There is a huge variation in Mebengokre household eomposition. The ide;,1

19111-2 H 6 40
19117 56 17 73
household, in terms of quality of life, eharaclerized by abundance of filOd, iM
199+--5 80 18 99 (including I
eonslilUted bya marrieJ eouple with their daughters and unmarried sons, married case wilhoul
daughters' husbands and daughters' ehildren. In praetiee, householdll Are informalion)
frequently 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 aln-ady mentioned, children of an in-marrying male whose mother has died, the
temporarily or permanently in a different portion of the \'iIIage circle. oCf.'3sional amne of this fringe, and grandehildren whose mother has died and
Neverthcless, they eonlinue to regard themselves, and to be regarded by otherN, 11M father remarried.
belonging to the same matri-house. During the period studied, there \Vere \'lIriouN llelween 1978 and 1982 lhe number of Mêbengokre houses in the village stuc.l-
cases of separated or widowed sisters, along with their ehildren, living together ied (Krelire) gre\V from 19 to 23. \Vhen the inhabitants of this village joined up
with married ones. There were several cases or married brothers li\'ing Wilh \Vith those or Jarina, the number of houses totallec.l 31 in 1987. In 1994, after a
married sislers, usually when lhe brother's mother-in-Iaw was dead, living in 11 further \'illage fission, there were H Mebengokre houses anc.ltwo Tapayuna houses
distant villagc, or a foreigner.s There were a number or nuclear families (see Fil(, in the "illage of the \'on Martius waterrall \Vith a population or 205 people, and 27
H.I), when a woman ladted a living mother or sister. Elderly \Vidowed men some- Mêbengokre houses plus one Tapayuna house in the village or the KapolO with a
times remain living with their daughters temporarily, unlil they remarry or die. population of 337 people. The Metyktire population has grown steadily since
They tend to spend much time in the men's house, e\'en sleeping there at nil(hl, ficldworL: was begun in the late 19705, despi te the precarious health situalioll
due to the faet that onee their wire is dead they are deprived or their raisond'/Iu pro\'Oked by malaria, tuberculosis, and sexually transmitted diseasl.'S.
for eontinuing to Iive at lhat house. The matrilateral weighting or kin c1assifiealion In 197H the population of Kretire was slightly larger Ihan lhe population of lhe
is attt:sted to by caleulations sueh as a woman residing \Vith a c1assificatory mOlher \'illage of Jarina. These two \'illages totalled the whole of the Mctyktire subdivi-
who is her MMZD. sion of the Mcbengokre, which merged togelher in a single village around lhe mid·
\Vilh the demise or rt:sidenee in the men's house on the pari of adolt:seent men, 19110s.The sehism that later touk place continues as registered in 1994-5. Totalling
youths are now laking up n:sidence with their \Vire berore the birlh of their firsl ali lhe periods rcsearclwd, the predominant houschold pattern was one covering
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 by T.\IIU: 11.2. Pupu/Iltio" Df. Uit)'ltlir( t'i/lllJ{ts

daybreak and thus bein!: invisible to ali but the \Vife. This is no longer the case. Yl.'ar \'illage Populalion
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)' 1978 Krelire 155
continue to have further ehildren with lhe latest husband. 1979 Krelire 162

Together with the eore members of the household there is frequently round a
1981-2 Krelire 18.• + Tapayuna
fringe of other relatives and visitors. This fringe includes adopted members, ehil-
1987 ~Iêl)'klire 369 + Tapa}'una
199 .• cachoeira \'on ~Iarlius 205
dren fostered to an e1der relative, putative members or the matri-house in question, 337
1995 Kapolo
the odd relative rrom the same House or from another House (sueh as the ehildren
199+--5 cachoeira and Kapoto H2 (ind. approx ..• O Tapayuna)
or a dead sibling or other orphans), half or step-siblings, the c1derly widowed men
162 I illlwa J.tll

lhree generalions (fJ(1 houses). Nol Car bchind wcrc hUllse~ CO\'Crlllll 1\\11 \II'm'r.l- dren oUlside Iheir 1ll,lrrilllll' ",hil'l renlllininlC mllrried ler Iheir ",ife, One mlln
lions (52 houses). Onl}' a minoril)' of houses allainecllhl' si/c uC '"ur Ill'm'rlllierlls cermmenled Ihal Ihi~ Pflll'lice uselllU he much more cermmern in lhe JlllIII.
(17 houses). In 19711lhere was une woman ali,'c whul\lul a Ilrl'alllrUI'\Ir'"lllrhilll. I
Belween CJ7Hand IlnC} \lIrieru~ hou!lehuldN hlld une ur more IIdopled IIdoles-
enlailing Ihc cocxislenee of fi\'e generaliuns wilhin her famil~, IlulI~ehlllll ~ilr cenls of eilher sex Ii\'inll wilh Ihem, mllinly I'lInllrlÍ. In Ialer ce",!Usell Ihese
ranges from a minimum of 2 members 10 a maximum uf H, wilh lhe mllionl~ (h,\ numbers dwindled as Ihcy l11arried, lhe men li\'inl{ uxurilucall)' and lhe wumen
houses) in lhe (.-10 range, and wilh a Cair prul,urliun (.H heru~I''') in lhe 11··15 living wilh Iheir IIdnlllell fal11il~',lhe hu~hand'N famil)',llr nenllrc:lll)'. There was one
range. Of lhe tolal of 136 houses sludied, Ihere werc 22 hUII~l'~\\ IIh !lI'IIICl'n 2 ;mel case of an adopledN l\llIdlipu frerm lhe upper XinllÍl wher h"d heen rejecled by ilS
5 members, I1 wilh )(.-20 members, and 6 wilh 21-25 ml'm!lcn., I>e~pile lhe mOlher, and Iwo calle!'luf une erf li pOlirof IwinN hcinl{ IIdnpled OUI b)' ils parenls.
demographie imbalance bclween Houses, an)'lhinll frum unc 111 ei\lhl hIlUSl'~repre- Adopliern is dislincl frerm ferslerinll, In lhe laller case, ,I child i!'lhroughl IIp b)' an
senling a single malri-house in a particular "illaltc, unly lll'u ca~I's \I erc leluml uf c1der relali"e: M~I, F~I, FZ, elC" wilh wherm il li\'Ci'Idurinll childhoud, bUI il is
marriage wilhin a malri-house." slill regarded ali lhe child of ils pllrenl!'lllnd 11IIerrelurn!! lU li\'e wilh Ihem if a girl.9
In lerms of Ihose who conslilule lhe inhabilanls of a ~I~henltul.rc herusehulel. In lhe pai'll, during lhe ClIlIr!'leIIf wllrfllre, !'Imllllchildren IIf Ihose allacked were
whal )'OUsee is nol alwa)'s whal you gel. AI firslglance, un lhe hOlsiserf rl·hlli'e alte, laken caplive, whilsl men were murdered lInd wOl11enwere laken c"pli\'e if Ihey did
one appears freljuenlly 10 encounler Iypic:al nuclear families mOlde "1' of aelull nerl pUI upgre"l resislance; if lhe)' did resiSI ,lI1d \Vere diflicult ler ahducI hack lu a
eouples and Iheir chilclren. When dcl\'ing deeper, one diitCO\'ers lhal a nUlllher of ~Ichengokre ,'illage, Ihen lhl'~' were killed and Iheir !'Imall children laken C:lplÍ\'e.
Ihese families are whal I ha\'e lermed 'compusile nuclear families', for w.ml of a Wilh lhe dcmise of w;uf,lre, new slralellies ha\'e evulved lu en1arlle lhe pllpulll-
helter lerm, c:onslilUlec\ hy marriecl couples wilh some uf lhe chihlrell heilllC lhe lion, alie was lhe hlrlCe-sc;lle allopliern erf I'anar.i in lhe 1;1li.~ ICJ711s.SuhseljUenl til
mOlher's by one or mor~ pre\'ious marriages and only lhe ~'ounger sihlings heing lhis was lhe inCllrporalilm inllllhe ,'illage uf lhe small gruup of Tapayuna who ned
lhe children lIf lhe mOlher's presenl husband.i Occasionall)', men lake children b)' from lhe Su)'á \'illage in lhe ICJHlIs,afler lhe murder of one llf Iheir leaders in Ihal
a previous m'lrriage 10 lil'e wilh Iheir presenl wiCe, bUI in ali such cases (wilh onl)' village. Aparl frum lhe few whll had already inlerl11arried wilh lhe Mcbcngokre,
one exeeplion) lhe mOlher of lhese children ",as deacl. The figures for married lhe resl resided in lwo separale houses wilhin lhe \'illage of lhe von Marlius waler-
men whose eo-resiclenl chilclren are Iheir own is doubtless exaltgeraled bec,luse (ali, and in une huuse aI lhe Kal'OIO ,'illage, Wilhin lhe ne\V seuing uf lhe Xingú
every lime lhOll 1 relurnecl to lhis ljueslilln 1 c1isco\'ered more cases of children Park, c:realec.1in I % I, indi\'idual membcrs of ulher inc.1ilCenuusgroups have grac.1-
whose apparenl falher was lhe paler bul nol lhe genitor. \\'omen were somelimes uall)' inlermarried Wilh lhe Mcbengokre. The number uf lilrcign wÍ\'es is slightly
reluclanl to admil lhis and often did 50 onl)' because I queslioned Ihem abOUI il higher Ihan Ihal of foreilln hushands for, when lhe)' come lu li\'e in a Mchcngokre
explicill)', ha\'ing oblained lhe information c1sewhere. In \'arious cases, lhe ",omen village, lhe)' orrer lhe alh'anlage of aCljuiring a spouse wilhouI simultaneously
concerned askecl me nol 10 re,'eal Ihis fael in lhe census Ihat I was elahoraling, aCljuiring parenls-in-Iolw wilh whom lhe husband is expeclcd 111 reside.
requesling me 10 lisl lhe children in queslion as Ihose of Iheir prcsenl husband. I The few men mosl dosei)' linked 10 nalional sneiel)', lhe (11/';1(;010 and FUNAI
carne acruss IWO cases of women ha\'ing children \\'ilh a lo\'er whilsl remaining ,(i':alional Indian Foundalion) wage-earners, appeared 10 employ one of IWIlslrale-
married to Iheir husband. I also disco\'ered aI leasl Ihree cases of men ha\'ing chil- 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
T.~IIU:8.3. Tlrt rhilt/rttl ,lfil)'!''''rr mrn lil'r Il'ilh 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
Y('al' No, or married
27
2(,
62
28
39 No,
'1
1
21
236
\I'"5huse
alllheir
No.
7 (&men
3with
marriageC\\'C
oror
2 C nol
marriecl
ownaare
marriecl
hylil'ing men
men
former
grandehildren) Iheir aged husband. In lhe une case of Ihis I)'pe, lhe slrategy used 10 foreslalllhis
wilh Iheir presenl \\' WOIS for 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,
 1M Panará
!'anará
I'anará
\Vives
Panará
Husbands.•
223 I1 Lta
Val/tssa
Tapirapé
Tap)'una nu Compos/tio" o/AlibOlgokr( lIousellO!Js 165
ai
una1 2
ai/Waurá
'una 1 Karabi
Ka)'abi 1
Year TAIIU: 8.4. fim;tl/ "usbanJs IInJ "';t'tS TABU: 8.5. Ftmlllt-"taJtJ "oum

Ycar TOlal no. of No. of female-headed 'lú of female-headed

houses housc:holds households

1'1711 20 7 26
1'179 21 6 22
1'1111-2 23 6 21
1'1117 31 9 23
1'1'14-5 42 8 16
Toral 1'178-95 137' 36 21

• \\'hcn .";Ikul~ling gcncr~lions per housc I counlcd 135 houSts, omining 1,..0 Tal'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 inhllhi-
I~nts per huusc includc:d 136 houses for ,..hich Ihcre "'crc dala.

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,'~ lin-
next 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 111111
their 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'H
automatkally refer to the houses as bclonging to the eldest male residenl IIN
opposed to the female resident; inadvertently this is one of numerolls fae!llrN
contrihuting to the demise of the malri-houses.
The prominent role played by women within l\têbengokre sociel)' is not mcrely
symbolie, 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: 1
first knew them in 1978, that is, for seventeen ycars. Two other women \\'ho had
also 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~
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 that
Ihere 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 for
long 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 shc
n:lUrll'l1 Iaughingly: 'And who am 1 to marry?' I was able to verify frum my dala
Ihal 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 impossiblc
lU lind a II~'\\, parlm'r, Of lhe six fema1e hOllsehold heads that 1 knew in 19711,none
01 11ll'1II Iall'r rClllarried. 11)' 11)1)5t\\O had died and une was living with her sister
alld 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 period
sllltlied (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 men
who 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
 166 /ill/(JJQ /"</1 nu CnmpnJitinn nfMibtngnl"( //nllJ(/In1JJ 167

I 11 11I IV V \'1 \'11 VIII

rClr Li, es "il h Li,,'S "ilh Li"e. "ilh Li.C$ "ilh Li,'e. "ilh Li.C5 'A'ilh 'Iillal
~I + 1'- \\'M + \\'M \\'1'+ WI' fIlher n't of
in-I~,,' \\'MII WFW elller rei•. married
men
wfINMNIMH
10% W\lZI
II~
I~
11OO
H\H
,11 \lili" 19i9'
19i1l I ]6
(ind, I 19111-2
(ind, I \\~IZI (..-ilhMI
._ A

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

2 ~O
(I=M+F
I=MI
12 7.1
(2 = M + F
~ = I\Ih
w/olhers I=MMZ
wlWF
11% I =I'+I'W
3%
...._,__ .._. ~=cn'!:'~ln"l. _
I'IU, 11.1.Residence pallerns of married men I'J'I-I-5 1'1 'I II 2 17 CJCJ

(ind, I (ind.
Key: WM~IZI> ',1'+1'.1,1
The eharl summarizcs nailable informali"n for lhe sum "f dala bclwcc:n 1978 and 1995, = 'WM' & ]1\1"
w/M/F·in-law: ,,'ilh parenls-in-Iaw. .1W~IZ. = I'M'
w/WI\I/WMI·I: wilh lhe wife's mOlher and wife's mOlher's husband (who is nOllhe wife's falher). 'WM'I 2M/Mllr
w/WM: wilh lhe wife', mOlher, IWFZI
WFZII
..-/WI'/WF'W: wilh lhe ..-ife's falher and ..-ife's falher's wife.
11"1'.1/1'1'
w/WF': wilh juS! lhe wife'. falher, 2 \\'MMI
w/olhen: wilh olher elller relali,'e. ('" Table 8.6a, eolumn VII).
WMF
il I'-in-Iaw: men who are co-resillenl falhe,,-in-1aw 10 Iheir daughler" husbands. Married men resid- IWMFI
ing ,.'ilh lheir parenl' (lhu. parenu.in·law 10 Iheir ..-h'cs), Iheir mOlher, falher, falher's wife. ele., WMFWI
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. Tolal •• .1 .lO ~I 8 ]] 287
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 wilh
,\'n/rs:
children of anolher falher/l, plu. Iwo C.IIC'Df IdOplcd ehildren, and one case of male adolcscenlS
11:~Ien li,inll \\'ilh bolh Iheir mOlher Ind falher·in-Iaw.
(who would formerly raide in lhe men', houac) Ii.inll 'A'ilha nuclear family ai lhe POSI.There were
11I:Men Ij,'inlt 'Ailh Iheir ,,'ife', molher and 'A'ifc'. mfllher'. husblnd.
alIO IWOCIICI uf une child of • ~'Uuplehein. f",lered uul 10 anolher housc, lca"ing lhe child's
1\': Mcn Ii\'inll 'Ailh jU'llhe 'Aifc', molhcr.
nudear family incnmplele. \': Men li"inll \\'ilh Iheir "ifú falher and \\'ife'. falher's wifc.
horiz,: 'horilonl.llpreallinll', Thil lerm refen 11I flmllies ,,'hich are nOI htaded b)' elder relalh'cs or \'1: Men li,'ing \\'ilh JUII Iheir wife', falher.
anines of married men. Of lhe IhirlY ellCl in Ih•• nlcllory (and one uncltar one), se.-cnlcen refer \'11: Men li"intc ••i.h olher cl.ler rdAli••" (cAch l'arIÍ(uln CAOl' is spcciliell \\'ilhin Ihis column).
10men resillinll wilh one or more of lhe ,.'il'e'. li•••·,., 10,1 io Ihrcc: ''a.sesmen rcsillcd ..-ilh Iheir O" o \'11I: The 10111numher of married men in ach ecn'u'. .
,isler/,. The remainin. 10 callCl iO\'ul\'Ch.lf· ur Ilep·sislen, or a ..-ife's half- or slep- brolher or
• There "'ere quilc ,ill"ilieanl chanltC5hel'A'ccn 1'I711.nd 197'1in lhe inlernal mmposilion af hOU5C11.
lisler, one el.'le of lhe husbandl Df I'.n.r' CtlUlins,Inl! 1"'0 ca~ Df c1nsilicalory sislers (malrilal-
h One man'5 I'anará parcnI5-in.IA\\' Ih'eJ "'Ílh him and hi5 molher,
eral parallel coulinl, ar linl and IICCOnddeIU'"I, I This calellor,· incluJcs mcn li,inll "ilh foreign "'j,'C5, or ",ilC5 \\'ho ha\'C 1'''1 Ibci, I11Illbcr,.klOlt
collple/eomplel: 2 cnuplca, one Df Ihem 'A'ilh •• nul unmu,.cl! men ("ha ••oulJ ha"e lind in lhe ",ilh elller relalin'5 of lhe "ife.
men'5 housc in former limn). I'our c:&1lft 'AI" t1.,,",1I .s 'l'IImpln' in Ihal lhe" inmh'ed Ihrcc: d '1''''0 ca.scs"'ere leml""a')·, one lIuc lolhe falher'5 iIIncs" and ooc hu~band planninglo move 10hi.
(lCneralional ramilialionlnf cnmJlflllle nurlr., r.mlll •• Thel a,. nll11l"""J of men 'A'ilhInd ",ilh- mlllher-in-Ia",', io Ihc nCAr'inure, ul"'n lhe '·llI1'Iplcli••n of her ne,,· hnusc.
OUIehildren (and ehildren'l ehUdrenl af Ih.ir Q.n,II~ln, .lIh ,hll.Ir,,, .nll Jlu,hler'5 childreo of " 10 one Cl5e a mAn's I'anari I11Illher·in·la••' Ih'cd 'A'ilhhi, ""·n molher,
lheir ",ife, ••'ilh ur wilhuul mUlu.1 chUllren of Ih. ,,.upl. In '1ursllon, r One ca.se"'a.' Icml'mar,',
 O
TAIII.E H.hh.73
3V
20
IV
287
36
TOlal
li
-I
-10W~IZ
&WMH5'"
a-I
3(inel.
Fi-in-la",
11 39 \'1
1O -6li
Fi-in-Ia'"
39
j051WM
li\'ing no.I••.=
eo-
himoclf
0aI ,\1(t1
W~1If of &
iu,lmu,,,
lh 1+
2O
OWMH5
\W-I
15WMII)
(+WMor
(••. ilhWM
li\'ing "'ilh
(u-,,,siJl'llljiJth 'W~I')
••,s-in-luu' ('Ir 11:\111) tu Jllu.~III••,.s husbllnJ, 11
22
10
12
T.\III.t:229
31 7856
1-1 86
6(col•.
38H.6c.
V
••.
11I
5col.ilhW'F'
\'Iof
30
wilhWF
",ilh
IV
(=
W'F'
8.6a)
-I of11Iof
WMH,Table
WFor
col•.
11,V,
Ihi5
~Ienlh'ing
Table8.6a)
Men living 11I& ufTubl" 8.M
lable)
Summll'Y
nel. I 1\\'1' ++ \\'1';
WFW)
W~t
(ind.l
WMZII) ••.ilh wilh
IV of\\'~I
8.6a)
(col•.
Men Table
11,11I,
li\'ing
'l'SiJinX ".ilh o, ".ith"ut "IJ", ujJin"s
olal 33
39
19
16
124 17 I 11
,"ear

1978

1979

1')KI-2

1987

19'1-1-5

TOIal

.\'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.

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)· in
lhe 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 if
one 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
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. If
one 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 eommu-
nal 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 is
l'orreCI lhal divergenl faclional inleresls are played olT againsl one anolher in the
men's house, where ali adult males converge to decide lhe outcome of colleclive
inlt:resls, his porlrayalof men conslituling lhe superslruclure of sociel)', in oppo-
sili,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
170 Vonrssa l.<a
who oominales sociely, men or women, is anaehrunislie. J\len may oominate in the
realm 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\lcbengokre
1lI0ther-in-law.
Turner argues Ihal: 'lhe extenoed-family household is nOI lhe primary setling
for 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 accumu-
lólIlinggame for lhe feast Ihat aeeompanies the closure of naming eeremonies, Ihat
allllws 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 the
suns-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 do
not lead to lhe lemporar)' breaking up of lhe household. Turner notes that a man
wilh Ihree sons-in-Iaw ooes not necessarily ha\"e more status than one with no
sllns-in-Iaw for:
IIn)' man ur lhe age-grade at which he wll\lld, 1IlhcrIhin[1:sheing cqual, be cxpcclcd 10 allain
lhe status lIr 'wire's ralher' and houschuld hcad can, as it "crc, capitalizc \lp"n lhe gcncral-
i7.edslatus and preSligc accruing 10 his age-grade, (197911: 160)
This is imporlanl heeause one ean argue, on the basis of this obscr\"alion, lhal
whal is aI slake is in faet a hierarehy of age-grades, while the faet (lf being a falher-
in-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 older
Onl: 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 thal
whieh 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 emplor-
el: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 makes
a 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'
TI/r Compllsilinn ofMibtngoJ:rr llnusrholJs 171
(19i9b: 3(4). In realil)", Mcbengokre uxorilocillity is matrifilCal and amounts to far
more 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.lcI of Jê societies, this
led 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 and
Ihal 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 the
male \'iewpoint and m)'5e1f the femólle viewpoinl, fruit of my eoneentration on the
women. 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 bihli-
ographr), 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 rclating
to righls, dUlies, and privileges, applies perfeetly to Mcbcngokre matri-houscs,
defineo in terms of righl5 of ownership of jealously guarded and fought over
wealth items-perscmal names, eeremonial roles and prerugatives. Eaeh matri-
house (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 wealth
ilems. 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, genealogics
sho\\" 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 the
li\"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 eonvey
what 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(a
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
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 biologiclIl
links 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 10 one of my formal friends, inheriled palrilinelllly.
To lhe eXlenl Ihal Ihere is conlinuilY, Ihis proeess involves palrilines, submcrltetl
in 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 fur
lhe 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 lIouses
encompass lhe ceremonial slage, for Iheir heritage dictales \\'ho does \\'hal. 11is lhe
rilual complemenlarily of lhe malri-houses, ralher than male inslilulions, \\'hil'h
sews 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's
Iife 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'l
men 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 in
uxorilocal residence. • nUlion of personhood is insufticient as an ana1YliC'J1tool filr unuerslanding the lê.
Men diseuss mallers of colleelive inleresl in lhe men's house, bUI lhe orehes-
Iralion 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(e-
wide 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
1'lt( Cumpusitiun o/Mlbmgu1:r( lIoustllUlJs 173
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 ali
lhe 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
11
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-aUti-
fui 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 up
equaling \\'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, apply
equally well 10 lhe slereotypic..-al and hegemonic \'iew of Ihe]ê anu Bororo, wilh
IlIl'n aI lhe cel1lre of s(JCiely and lhe wllmen on lhe periphery, nexl bUI one to
nalurc. Slralhern repeals the lesson Ihal should alrC'.ldy ha\'e been k-arnl from
Dumonl (1966), that in lhe ahsence of an autonomous economie sphere, separatcd
from 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 they
ulilize'lhem before passing Ihem do\\'n the ulerine fines emhodieu in lhe mal ri-
houses, Riviêre (1980) rightly suspected Ihat lhe Ilarvard Cenlral Brazil Project
h;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
\ldalli (I9íO: 110) notetl the exogamy 01' what he called 'segmenls', hut this ques-
ricm did nUl recei\'e the allel1lion Ihal il dl'Ser\'eu in olher ]ê ethnographies. Ir is a
fllndamel1lal 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\'iues
lhl' Illulti-lillage .\IêbcngoL:re cummunil)'.
174 I ílll(HlI 1,(11
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-Wcslern
sociclies and 1Jrilish uppcr-dass males, sCllreltalCd ai boardinlt schlKIIs where
bullying conslilules a form or inilialion. Sexual sCllrellaliun is wcakeninlt 10 a
ccrlain dcgrec in Mcbcnlt0kre socielY. Ihllulth il remains slrong, 1Jadinler's inler-
pn:lation or segrcgation as a meehanism for defeminizing males in order 10 lurn
Ih;: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 anil
lheir 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 loler-
alcd thal very old men should spend mosl or Iheir lime ai home, !lul few men live
10 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, for
m;lking my' parlicipalion possihle, anil lhe parlicipanls for lheir commenls, cspeciall)' lhe
l1ebaler Slephen Ilugh-Joncs, Anil I Ihank Cambridgc Uni\·ersil)' Compuling Sen·ice for
assislance wilh Exccl.
I'OTF-'i
I. I al10pl lhe slanl1arl1Brazilian spelling Ji:, for ir is nol usual 11Ilranslale names, !lul I
mainlain lhe spelling Gi: in English quolalions,
2. O\'ering (1981: 151-M) hal1equallr rich insighls concerning lhe I-Ianard Cenlral Brazil
ProjecI, nOling Ihal ils memhers had erroneously ignored lhe signilicance of alliance
anil hal1paid 100 Iiule auenlion 10genealogical dala.
3. Turner supc:rvisel1a doclorallhesis on lhe Panar:i. Soulhern Kayal'Ó. whercin lhe)' are
purporlel1lo have malri-<:lans and yel he does nol acknowledge Ihal he failed 10 nOlice
lhe 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:en
mislaken 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 disagree
enlire1y, for in m)' opinion conlacl \\'ith \Veslern socicI)' is leal1ing 10 a l1emise in lhe
importance of lhe malri-houses, as W. Crocker (1994) nOlel1wilh respecllo lhe 110mi-
nanl 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 1979b essa)' on lhe applicalilln of Ihis mnde1lo lhe
nu Cl/ltlpl/sitil/n I/IMibtngnl:rt IItlllstl/llltls 175
Ka~'al'Ó(M~bcng()kre). Charlolle Se)"mour-Smilh (19116:1115),in lhe MI/tmi/ll/II
di~linttui~he~malrilocalil}' and u~orilocalily in lhe follll,,'ing
Dittinlll/,.l' nf,·'"th,nfln1nf..",
wa)': 'Malrilucal p(lSlmarilal re~idence is r~idencc of lhe l.lluple wilh IIr dO!lC10 lhe
wife's family, (Ir more spc:cilic:allylhe wife's mOlher. Malriloc:alily is nol nct."Cs.~rily
associaled wilh malrilinealily, and in urder 10 a\"llidlhe confusion of lhe Iwo L"Oncepls
many anlhrop"llIgiMs prefer 10 use lhe lerm UX()RII,IX:AI. which simply refers 10 resi-
dence "in lhe wife's place" and dues nlll prejudge Ihal lhe mllsl imporlanl elemenl IIf
Ihis residence pauern is eorc:sidence wilh lhe wife's mOlher. The lerm "malri-ullllriln-
cal" has alsu lK:enemplo}ed 111mean residence wilh lhe wife's mlllher or malrilineal kin
group.'
5. Onl)' one case \\ u encllunlcrcd IIf a sisrer sleeping IIcL":Jsillnall}'
ai her brolher's house.
fi, ai
In lhe
onePml, 111hdp oul herbllY
of Ihesc:c:ases,lhe furcitrn
whosisler-in-Iaw whllhis
marriel1 wilhin orten hal1JlU~IS
Ilouse "as lhe for meals. IIf a
descendanl
Xicrin 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 fllrmel1 hy parenls alld Iheir chill1ren; lhe IIlher
half were of lhe cllmposile I)'PC:,
11. Pajam.l',lilerall)' 'armlo c1ulch', \\hich can bc:glossel1as 'Ihose whll ha\'e bc:c:nc1ulched
by lhe arm'.
9. One girl whll was brllulChl up b)' her MM Ih'ed in lhe same hlluse a.~her billlllgical
mOlher bUIslepl in lhe bc:dof her MM and accompanied lhe Illuer and nol lhe mOlher
during 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 tradilional
leader 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 or
Mcbc:ngnkre), '
12, 1-101)' (1996: 102-15) cllnsiders Ihallhe mnde IIf reckoninlCl1escenl may simpl)' shm in
lhe l1ireclilln of cllgnalilln or palrilinealil}'.
13, The rcsidual e;&lcgory(Table lI,fla, column VII) of olher elder relalives wilh whllm
married 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 where
her 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.es a halance and a complex lensioo bc:lween lhe domains of
masculinily and femininil}', prol1uced h}' hierarchical encompassmenls conlcxlually
specilied, and by a symbolic dh'ision of labour where men anil women, lerms and rda-
lions, conslanlly Iransmule Ihcir \'alues' (1985: 276; my Iranslalion).
15, Marily'n Slralhern (communic:alion in a seminar ai UNICA~UJ Unh'ersily in Oclobc:r
1998) was inspired by' Mauss in formulaling Ihis nOlion.
16, An anonymous re\'iewer made lhe following commenl: 'The nOlion of segregalion of
males bc:ing a mc:ehanism for defemini1.ing males was suggcsled long ago; mllsl inlro-
l1uclof}'anlhropolog)' lexlbooks menlion Ihis idea.' \Vhilsl il is imporlanl 10 nllle Ihal
lhe il1eain queslion was nol ne\\' \\'hen formulalc:l1in lJadinler's IxMlk,I mainlain lhe