monaghan, john. the mesoamerican community as a great house

7/28/2019 Monaghan, John. the Mesoamerican Community as a Great House

1/15

University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education

The Mesoamerican Community as a "Great House"Author(s): John MonaghanReviewed work(s):Source: Ethnology, Vol. 35, No. 3, Special Issue: Mesoamerican Community Organization:Barrios and Other Customary Social Units: Part II (Summer, 1996), pp. 181-194Published by: University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher EducationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3773917 .Accessed: 27/02/2012 18:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education is collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access toEthnology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upitthttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3773917?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3773917?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upitt


2/15

THE MESOAMERICANCOMMUNITYAS A "GREATHOUSE"

JohnMonaghanVanderbiltUniversity

Divisions below the level of community n Mesoamericanocieties have beenvariouslydescribedas descentcorporations, onical clans, marriageunits, cultgroups,andsimply erritorial nd/orpoliticaldivisions fordiscussions ee Carrasco1976;Chance1996;Hicks1986;Hill andMonaghan 987;Kellogg1986;Mulhare1996;Offner1983). Ourdefinitional roblem s due in partto the organizationaldiversityof Mesoamerica, o that the local divisionsof one area are not at allcomparableo those of another.But it may alsobe due to a tendency o highlightparticular spectsof what s a morecomplexphenomenon.f so, it suggests hat hecategoriesof social structure hatwe have traditionally mployedto understandMesoamericanollectiveenterprises renotreallyupto the taskbecause heycauseus to view certainorganizing rinciples sexcluding neanotherwhenthey maynotbe opposed n Mesoamericanrganizations.One way of addressing his problemis to focus on local theories of howcollectivities form and accomplishgoals. Althoughsome anthropologists ndhistorianshave recognized he importance f the symbolicdimension of groupsolidarity n understandingrocessesof change, this has not been a focus forMesoamericanthnology.Trying o breatheife into thevagueandultimately mptyconceptof community,as somesuggest,doesnot seemto be the answer,since thewidespread seof the term ntheethnographyf theregion s theprimary eason orour inattentiono the issue in the first place (Monaghan1995:10-11).Yet if weexaminehe termsusedbyMesoamericaneople or localdivisions t is strikinghowmany ncorporateheword"house."The Nahua alpolli,forexample,was translatedin the sixteenth enturyasmeaning"house" nd"largehall"aswell as "barrio"deMolina 1977 [1571]:12).This suggests hat one placeto beginin dealingwith theproblemof local divisionsis with an examination f how the notionof the housefunctionsas an imageof socialrelatednessn Mesoamerica.The ethnographicocus of this essay is the Mixtec-speakingown of SantiagoNuyoointhe southernMexican tateof Oaxaca.At the outset t shouldbe noted hatNuyoo is not characterizedy barrio-likeerritorial r ritualdivisions,nor is thecommunitycalled a house by its members(ve'i in Nuyoo Mixtec; the termNuyootecosuse to describe heirtown is iuu). However,Nuyoowas a unit in alargerMixtecpolity, andNuyootecos oday say that one of the thingsthatmakesthem into a groupdistinct romotherpeoplesis thattheyrelateto one another nhousehold-like ays.Since he actsthroughwhichNuyootecos onstitutehemselvesas a groupvery consciouslyparallelhosethatgive formto thehousehold,we startby examininghow Nuyootecos reateandmaintain ouseholds. 181ETHNOLOGYvol. 35 no. 3, Summer 1996, pp. 181-94.ETHNOLOGY,c/o Departmentof Anthropology,The Universityof Pittsburgh,PittsburghPA 15260 USACopyrightt 1996 The Universityof Pittsburgh.All rightsreserved.


3/15

182 ETHNOLOGYTHE GREATHOUSEAND THEHOUSEHOLD

Nuyootecossay thatpeople are able to establisha cohesiveandfunctioningdomesticgroupbecausethey have nakara(love) for one another.Nakara s anintense,emotional elationshipetweenparents ndchildren,andbetweenmen andwomenromanticallynvolved.More han ove alone,nakara onnotesa willingnessto takeresponsibilityoranother yprovidingwhat s needed or a healthyife. ThusNuyootecos requently efinenakara s the act of feedingorclothing omeone.Themost commonexpressionof nakara ccurs n thekitchenhut,when children ometo wheretheirfather its near he hearth o get a pieceof his tortillaanddip it intohis bowl of beans or squash.His wife, who has servedhimthe food, mightalsocome to eat from the same bowl. Amonghouseholdmembers, here is no needtoapportionoodseparately.Theyshare n the mostintimateway possible,eatingoutof the samebowl anddrinkingrom he samecup.Thisstandsncontrasto visitors,who areservedseparate ortionsof foodin thehouseor out on thepatio,but neverin the kitchen.

Nuyootecosdonotspeakof givingfood andclothingas anexpression rsymbolof nakara.Rather,hose temsgiveform o therelationshipothatnakara xistsonlyas long as the nurturinglow of food andclothingcontinues.The notionthatthegoods one person gives to another onstitute heirrelationshipn substantive ndemotionalerms s somethinghat s true n other elationshipsswell. Forexample,whensomeoneeatsa mealand aterbecomes ll, this is a signthatthepersonwhopreparedthe food, despite appearances,did so with reluctance.People areaccordingly eryconcernedf someonebecomes ick aftereating,sinceit bodesillfor the relationship.t is not onlythatitemspassedbetweenpeopleobjectify heirrelationshipsn a waythat hestateof therelationshipomesto be characterizedythephysicalproperties f theitems.Throughhese temspeoplealsoexperience neanother:hrough he food in theirbellies, throughhe clotheson theirbacks,andthrough he illnesses heysuffer.MARRIAGE NDTHEHOUSEHOLD

Nuyootecos peakof the household s emergingout of actsof nakara.Yet thegenerationalontinuity f thehousehold s alsodependentn thereplacementf itspersonnelhroughmarriage. heNuyooverbke'edescribes household's cquisitionof a bride for one of its sons, the same verb used for purchasinghings in themarket.The ideathat onesidebuyssomethingromanother uggests hatmarriageis a contractwherebywohouseholdsedecertain alues o oneanother.Nuyootecossaythatthe expensesof theweddingceremony,whichcan be considerable, re themajor ransfermadeby thegroom'shousehold.Therationale eoplegive forthis isthat hegroom'shousehold s receivinganothermemberwhilethebride'shouseholdis losingone, so the feast is in exchange orthebride.Labor is one thingtransferredromthe bride'shousehold o the groom's in


4/15

THE MESOAMERICANCOMMUNITYAS A "GREAT HOUSE"marriage.Whenquestioned uring he marriage egotiations, ither he boy or hisparentsmaysayto the futuren-laws:"Ibelievethat romyourhousewill comethetortillas will eat andthe waterI will drink" ve'ira na kua na ninikenee stakajinuteko'o kachinya). That s, thegroom'shouseholdwill receivesomeone o aid itsfemales n preparingortillasanddrawingwater.It is notsurprisinghatthe seniorwomenof the householdsnvolvednthemarriageormallyakealeading oleinthistransfer,as whenthe bride'smotherbringsherdaughterntothegroom'smother'skitchenandpresentsher to the otherwomanas a "loaneddaughter."This expressionmeansthatalthough he bridemaycome to residein anotherhousehold,hernatalhouseholdetains ightsoverherandresponsibilitiesowardher.Her parentsand other relativescan warnher in-lawsnot to mistreather and canremoveher fromherin-laws' householdf thingsarebad.Thebride,traditionallyof a verytenderage, is usually gnorant f all thetasksexpectedof a woman.It isupto hermother-in-law,s the "caretakerf the loaneddaughter,"o teachher andsocializeher into the work habitsof the householdcf. Galwanty1970:86).This isa pointof conflictbetweendaughters ndmothers-in-law,ince mothers-in-law reoftenoverbearing,nddaughters-in-lawrequentlyesistolderwomen'sauthoritycf.Nutini 1968:249). In any event, the first several months of the daughter-in-law'sstayin her new householdare crucial o the development f her relationshipwith hermother-in-law,who scrutinizesher performanceo see if she is a good worker,even-tempered,and trustworthy.The last is particularly mportantsince thedaughter-in-laws a strangero her in-laws.When a daughter-in-law proves to be a cheerful and diligent worker, hermother-in-law s able to state: "Theday thatI die my daughter-in-lawwill be in myplace. It will be as if I do not die, because my daughter-in-law s going to continuedoing exactlyas I am doing." These remarks how thatas a daughter-in-lawsincorporatednto her new household or, in localparlance,"truehousehold") hebecomesthe replacement f her mother-in-law.Nuyoo marriages a processbywhich identitiesbetweenmother-in-lawnddaughter-in-lawecome shared.Thisprocess nturnallows he household o perpetuatetself,by replacing ldermemberswithyoungerones.ThusNuyootecos ometimes peakof marriage s tu'un eeyiira(aninfusionof life fromone household o another).

EATINGFROMTHESAMETORTILLAOne of the most significantmoments in the wedding ceremony occurs when thebrideandgroomareseatedon a matin frontof the guests.A stack of tortillas splaced n front of themwhile the groom'sgodfather irects hemto "eatandgrowtogether."He then takesthetoptortilla, ears t in half, and sets the two halvesona plate,on top of one another,n theformof a cross.The bride akesthe tophalf,

thegroomthebottomhalf, andtheycarefully atthem.Nuyootecossay thatby eatingthe tortillatogether, he brideandgroomwill"speak ogether"ka'anuu ). This means heywill treatoneanotherwithrespect.

183


5/15

184 ETHNOLOGY"As the tortilla is our sustenance,andwe mustrespect t, so too the manmustrespect hewoman,and hewomanmustrespectheman,"an old womanexplained.Alongwiththis respect, he consumptionf the tortillameans hatthe new couplewill "growold together."This meansthey will remain ogether hroughoutheirlives;theywill always ustainnakara)neanother;heywill growfamiliarwithoneanother kaayo'ma, sikaata'a); anddevelop rueaffection or each other.Eatingtogetherwill alsodiminish onflictbetween hem.As anotherwoman aid,"Wewillbe of one heart,one mind" in ni nasa'oanimao,andunio).The ritualpartingandconsumption f the tortilla s not simplya sign of thebeginning f arelationshipetweenhusband ndwife. Rather,t is an act thatcreatestherelationship. eoplearequiteclearabout his.Byeating hetortilla, he brideandgroomare then "standing p together" kuinikuta'a),andthey "accompany neanother"kuji'iji;nuunuuta'aji), so that hey complete hemselvesandbecomeafunctioning omesticunit.Themarriedoupleeven serveasa legalperson,sincetheonlyinstance n whichawomanmayattend townmeetings whenshegoes inplaceof anabsenthusband.Nor is thesharing f thetortillaanisolated itualact,confinedto the wedding ceremony.It is rathersomething hat is partof a couple's lifetogether, incea husband nd a wife shouldshare he same foodat each meal. Wesee herehow Nuyootecosdefinesocialrelationshipsn termsof theirenactment,othatrelationships ontinue o exist only if the act thatcreated hemis performedregularly.By thesame oken, t is a signof undue amiliarityf a mananda womanwho are notmarried at fromthesametortilla.The partingandconsumption f the tortilla n the marriage eremony s alsosignificantfor what it reveals about the household.As Nuyootecosdefine thehouseholdn termsof members haringwithone another ll that s necessaryor ahealthy ife, parting hetortilla hows thatpeoplebecomemembers f a householdthroughactsof nakara.

NUYOOTECO INSHIPNuyootecosalso define hehousehold smadeupof kin.As inAmerican inship(Schneider1968), it is "sharedblood" thatconnectsNuyootecochildren o theirparents.UnlikeAmerican inship,however,motherandfathercontribute loodtotheir children n fundamentallyifferentways. A childis createdwhen the male'ssemenentersawoman'swomb.Semen,people ay, is blood hat lows fromallovera man's body duringthe sexualact. When semenenters a womanin sufficientquantitiest slowly clots andbeginsto grow. At this stage, peoplespeakof thewomanas a receptaclenwhich hefetusgrows,sinceshedoes notcontributenanysignificantway to the make-upof the child. It is maleblood that is crucial(cf.Galinier1987:424).As it growsinthewomb,thefetus is nourished y its mother'sblood,which treceives hroughheumbilical ord.After he child s born, hemother s weak,thin,andcold fromtheloss of blood.Themidwifeorders hemother o takea sweatbath


6/15

THEMESOAMERICANOMMUNITY S A "GREATHOUSE"to heatherbloodand "re-cook" erveins in order o convert hebloodintoa formthat s suitable or thechildto feeduponoutsideherwomb; hat s, breastmilk.Thechild, then, first receivesthe mother'sbloodthrough heumbilicalcord, and thenagainas it nurses.Althoughmalesand femalescontribute ubstance o theirchildren n differentways, thereis no significantdifferencen the kinds of thingsassociatedwith maleblood as opposedto femaleblood. In Santiago xtayutla,a coastalMixtec com-munity,peopledo not lexicallydistinguish emenfrom breastmilk, andcall bothleche.Yetthe notion hatmalesand emalescontribute loodin differentwaysdoeshaveconsequencesorNuyootecodeasaboutkinrelationships.Males ransmit loodto their childrenat one instance,while women transmit heir blood over a longperiod.It sometimeshappens hat an infant'smotherdies or is unable o producemilk to nurse.Anotherwoman hen nurses he child. Thatchildwill laterrefertobothwomenas "mother."Thereason he nurse s like thebirthmother s becauseshe fed herbloodto thechild,creatinga linkof shared ubstance.This example highlightsan importantdimensionof Mixtec thinkingaboutkinship: hat substance s transmittedhroughnurturing cts, as well as throughsexual ntercourse, ndthat hefeedingof one humanbeing by another an createaspecialbondbetween hem.

SACRIFICE ND KINSHIPNuyootecos onsistently escribe hemselves s a peoplewhoconstitute groupthroughactsthatparallel hoseby whichtheyconstitutehouseholds.One of theseoccurs n the contextof sacrifice.Nuyootecosdefinesoko(sacrifice)as "presentingsomethingo a god." An act of soko canthus be anythingromdropping coin inthe church ollectionplateto burying hehaunch f a deerin the forestfor anearthdeity. Candles, incense, pulque, liquor, flowers, and corn are the things mostcommonlyoffered,and heyplayasignificantoleinsacrificebecause heyrepresentkeyfeaturesof thosewho offer them.Candlesareassociatedwith the life spanandthe destinyof thosewho offerthem. Incenserepresentsmuchthe samething.Thelightemittedby the candle is related o the light of the mind.Pulque representsblood,particularlylood nthe formof sexual luids.Flowersare ikened o childrenand the dnima(heart/soul). n most cases the analogiesmade are betweenthesacrificial tems andbodypartsor human apacities losely related o the anima;blood,heart,mind,emotions.Eachsacrificial temis alsoa foodof somesort.This is easyto see withpulque,whichsomepeopleconsumedaily.Flowersstand or all fruitfulplants,and oftencarrynamesof foods. The odorof flowers,the lightof candles,andthe smokeofincenseareall foods thatgodsconsume.The nineteenth-and early twentieth-centurynterestin definingsacrificeinuniversalterms has given way in our own time to an awareness hat sacrificebecomesmeaningful nlywithin heparticularraditionnwhich t is performed.n

185


7/15

186 ETHNOLOGYNuyoo it is impossible to fully understandthe efficacy of sacrifice outside thecovenants of mutual obligation that exist between humans and Earth and Rain.Throughthese covenants,Earthand Rainagreedto feed people and, in return,peopleagreedto feed Earth and Rainwith their bodies at death. Death is thus a conditionof agriculturalprosperityandproduction.This is importantbecausewhenNuyootecosinitiate contactwith thegods throughsacrifice, theybase their communicationon thisprimordialagreement(Monaghan1990a;see also Klein 1987:295-97). At some pointin every sacrifice the sacrificer recites the conditions of the covenants. For example,one man said:I give you these things so thatyou will give us food to eat, water to drink, so that we may live in thelight, give me to eat because I am notgoing any otherplace when I die, but I am going to remain here.In this prayerthe sacrificerexplicitly bases his requeston the covenants madeby hisancestors at the beginning of civilized life, and in his restatementof the humanobligation implies that the god is obligatedto grantwhat he asks. If sacrifice is thechannel through which humans initiate contact with the gods, then the covenantsmake this contactpossible.The items the sacrificer offers also become significant in the light of thecovenants. For example, in offering candles to ensure a good corn harvest, thefarmer "bathes" himself with one by rubbing it over his body. This imbues thecandle with the farmer's animaanddestiny, and may then even be addressedas if itwere the person so bathed.The farmer hen burns the candle in the churchbefore thesaints or in a rain shrine. As the candle burns, the god to which it is offered"consumes" it, and the farmerreiteratesthe terms of the covenants.Most significant for the presentdiscussion is that the foods offered are taboo tothe sacrificer becausetheyaremetaphorically elated o the sacrificer'sblood, anima,and body. Yet they are consumedby other Nuyootecos, and in contexts suggestingthat the sacrificer establishes aphysical, kin-like bond withthose who consumethem.That Nuyootecos understand he bonds createdbetween people throughsacrifice tobe similar to kin-like bonds of shared substancecan be seen in a key rite, the VikoAnima.The dates on which Nuyootecos celebrate the VikoAnima, or Todos Santos(October31 to November2), coincide with the beginningof the corn harvest. As inother areas of Mesoamerica,Todos Santos is the time when the deceased leave theirhouseholds in the nuu dnima(the village of the dead), andreturnto visit the living,an event that Nuyootecos look forwardto throughout he year.On the night before the dead return (children on October 31 and adults onNovember 1), the membersof eachhouseholdpreparea largemeal for theirdeceasedkin and compadres. They include the foods the deceased relished most in life, andset them out on a large table constructed n frontof the householdaltar.The head ofthe household then stops before each place to invite the individualanimato receivethe food and to ask pardonfor the humblemeal preparedby the household.On November 1, the prayerleaders andmunicipalbandmembersbegin to make


8/15

THEMESOAMERICAN OMMUNITY S A "GREATHOUSE"the roundsof the housesin the town center. Yearsago the bandwouldvisit eachhousehold,even thoughit took more than a week to makethe rounds. Now theprayer eadersof each hamletandthe membersof the bandof one of the hamletsshare histask,so that hemusicians nd/orprayereaders isit all thehouseswithina few daysof November1.The Viko Anima is a time of unity for each householdthat sponsorsthecelebrations, ince its members living anddead)are togetheragain. One wouldtherefore xpectthe Viko Anima o be a timewhen eachhousehold mphasizestsseparatedentity,celebratinghe ties thatbind ts members.However, n the ritualsof All Saints,livingnonkinbecomeproxies or deceasedkin.Whenthe musiciansandprayer eadersarriveat a householdon the nightofNovember1, theyareusually nthecompany f severaldozenneighbors nda hostof excited children.The rite begins after all gatheraround he table before thehouseholdaltar.When the prayerleadersfinish their orations,the head of thehousehold istributeshe food from he table.Theadults eceive heplatesof tortillas(traditionallymade fromredcorn), soup, meat,and beerset out for the deceasedadults,while the childrenreceivethe sweets andbreadsset out for the deceasedchildren.Bandmembersareservedthe largestportions.Whenthey finisheating,they beginto playa selectionof tunes,while theprayereaders hantmoreprayers.The whole affairlasts a half-hour o 45 minutes,afterwhich the musiciansandprayereadersmove off to another ousehold, ftenbringingwith them hemembersof thehouseholdheyhave ustvisited,thereby ncreasinghe crowdof peoplewhoaccompanyhem.Householdmembers o not eatthe foodtheyhavepreparedor theirdead.Awayfrom the town center,wherepeoplelive dispersedacrossthe landscape,he VikoAnimadistributionmaygo onfor more hana week,as householdmembers all inpassersby o receivefruit and bread eft on the altar.Sometimeshe food preparedforAll Saints nthesehousesspoilswhen oo fewpeoplehappen y. This is theonlytimeI ever sawanythingeft to rotby Nuyootecos,who haveaveryreverent ttitudetoward ood.The significanceof people not eatingthe food they offer to their deceasedchildrenandotherrelatives,giving it instead o thevisitingchildrenandadults, sthat "theguestsbecome ike the anima."Thissuggests hat n the Viko Anima hevisitors tand orthesponsor'sdeceasedkin. Mostsignificantly,t is through fferingitems hatrepresenthe sacrificer's lood(asintheblood-redortillas) ndanimahatnonkinbecome ike kin. Justasparents enerateifeby transmittingheirblood/milkto children,so does the sacrificer; nd as the blood andmilkconnectparentswithchildren s kin, the "blood" hesacrificer eedsfellowNuyootecosunites hem ikekin. Nuyootecosdo in fact referto themselvesby a term that can be translated s"kin" ta'a) (cf. Jay 1992:30-40).

187


9/15

188 ETHNOLOGYCOMMUNITY ND AFFINITY

When speakingof marriage,Nuyoo say that a woman's leaving her natalhousehold s intrinsic o herbeing, since "no woman s born into her truehouse-hold."Peopletherefore all the bride'shousehold seed bed or nursery.Just as agardener ares for young plants n a nurserybeforethey can be transplantedo apermanentite, parentsnurture heirdaughteruntil she is readyto travel to herhusband'shome,her "truehousehold."Nuyootecosview anythingthat preventschildren from circulating amonghouseholdsn marriage s a problem.Forexample,headsof householdswho refuseto allowtheirdaughters nd sistersto marryarefrequently escribedas stingyorself-centered. hese actssupportLevi-Strauss's1969) hesis hatmarriages aformof the total exchange hat takesplacebetweenexogamousgroups.In his terms,Nuyoo women (and sometimesmen) circulateamong the households of thecommunityn a complexexchange, achhousehold iving up its childrenn returnfor itsright o receive hechildren f otherhouseholds.Thereareno rulesspecifyingwhomone shouldmarry,butonlywhomone cannotmarry.Negativemarriageules,such as thoseprohibitingmarriage etween ousinsandritualkin, situatepeople nhouseholdsunrelatedo their natalhouseholdsandcreateties of alliance hatgobeyond hosecreated ythese inks.Althoughhe members f thehousehold hat"letgo" of theirdaughters ndsistersdo notenjoyan immediateeturn, heyknowthatotherhouseholdswill do the same. Thus a manwho refuses o allow his sister tomarry s self-centered,becausehis household s deprivingotherhouseholdsof awoman,and he is stingybecausehe is makinguse of his sister's abor or his ownbenefit.One factor mportantn determininghe tone of thesetransactionss thatbothhouseholds enefit rom heunionof theirdaughterndson. A son is married o hewill acquirehe female abornecessaryor his survival nd ifeina viablehousehold.A daughters married o she will acquirehe malelabor hatallows herto surviveand o maintain viablehousehold.Eachhouseholdherefore eedsotherhouseholdsinorder o sustainandreproducetselfthroughhetransfer fpersonnel, nd o makeaplaceforits childrenwhen heymust indtheir"truehousehold."Thestrongethosof mutualityhatunderliesNuyootecomarriageransactionsppears aliently ntheexampleof the stingymanwho does not let his sistermarry.Theconverse s alsotrue:men who refuse to marry andthere are severalin Nuyoo) are also stingybecause heydo not wantto support woman.Thesemenarequitecontent o liveat home with theirmothersandsisters,despitehavingreachedmarriageablege.Taking omeone nto ahousehold,rom heNuyooteco ointofview, is as importantas giving up personnelo otherhouseholds.Nuyootecos, hen,circulate heirchildren mong hemselves,bringinghem ntotheirhouseholds o growupandreplace ldergenerations.Thiscreatesoverlappingties wherepeoplecometo stand n a relationshipf bothwife-giverandwife-takerto one anotherbutwithoutmplicationsf superioritynd nferiority, r the idea hat


10/15

THE MESOAMERICAN COMMUNITY AS A "GREATHOUSE"one side is greatly ndebted o theother).Perhapsor this reasonNuyootecosoftenreplyto thosewho ask where heyaregoing, "Iamgoingto visit the householdofyoursister."Althoughheresponse uggestsa visit topeoplerelatedby marriageothegreeter, t simplymeans heyaregoingto visit someone n thecommunity, s ifall householdswereaffinally elated.

POOLING,DISTRIBUTION, ND COMMENSALITYNuyootecos,hen,constitutehemselves s agroup hrough cts hatsymbolicallybindthem as consanguines ndaffines, ustas households ecruitmembershroughconsanguineal ndaffinalties. However, t is nakara, nstantiatedn acts such asfeedingand clothingothers,that is key to the creationand maintenance f theNuyootecohousehold,not specificgenealogicalies (Monaghan 995:356;Ravicz1965:128).I would arguethat it is in the fiesta-that most intense momentinMesoamericanitual ife-that Nuyootecoseed one anothern a waythat s directlyanalogouso thewayhouseholdmembers eed andcare or oneanother.To seethis,we mustexamine he threedistinctbutinterconnectedransactionshat akeplaceinall Nuyooteco iestas.The firsttransaction ccursas thesponsorsof a fiesta(whichcan takeplacetocelebrate ife-crisiseventsas well as saints' eastdaysandpatriotic olidays) eceivegifts of tortillas, beans, cash, and other items from guests. Some of these are

reciprocitiesor gifts given by the sponsor n the past, and some are new giftsdesignedo placethesponsorsntheguest'sdebt,so that hesponsorswill attend heguest'sfiestaandrepaywhatis owed.Theseexchangepartnerships eep everyoneinvolvedin the exchange ystem constantly ivingandreceivinggifts (Monaghan1990b).A second ransaction ccurswhen hesponsorsdistributehegoodsamassedthroughgift exchange andothermeans) n meals andcountergiftso those whoparticipate.These distributions antakeplaceoverthe courseof severaldaysandhundreds f peoplemayreceive them.Third,participantsxchangegoods amongthemselves,since each personwho brings something o the celebration eceivessomethingthat anotherparticipantmade (Monaghan1990b). This has greatsignificanceor theparticipants,s seenby theway Nuyootecos eckonwho ownstortillasas they passfrom hand o hand n theexchanges.Earlyin the morningof the celebration,he womenof a householdwhere acouplewish to initiatea gift-exchange artnership ill prepare120tortillas.Halfofthese areforhomeconsumption,nd he other60 will be givento thesponsorof thecelebrationn gift exchange.The couplerefer to the tortillasprepared or homeconsumption s shita maani(own tortillas),while those to be depositedwith thesponsorare shitasa'a (gifttortillas).Whenthe husband nd/orhiswife arriveat thecelebration,heyhandoverthegoods they have broughtto the sponsors.Foodstuffsgo to the women of thehousehold,andthe liquor,beer, and cash to the men. A manfrom the householdrecordswhatthe couple brought n an accountbook. However,the peopleof the

189


11/15

190 ETHNOLOGYhouseholdwhosponsor he celebration o not considerhetortillasas theirown,butreferto them as gift tortillas.

Afterseveralweeks, months,or even years,the timecomesfor the coupletosponsora celebration.The formersponsors henprepare 0 tortillas n return orthosetheyreceived,buttheydo not consider hesetortillas hitamaani,butas shitasa'a.When heformer ponsorsarriveat thecelebration,hey maysay, "Here, akeyourtortillasback,"as theypresent he basket o theirpartner.The partnerhenconsiders hesetortillasasowntortillas.Whatweregivenmonthsoryearsbeforearenow returned.Beyonddemonstratinghe reciprocalnatureof gift exchange, he terminologyused showsthatwhen ortillasarecirculatingheyhavea special tatus; heyaregifttortillaswith no singleowner.It is as if the exchangesn the celebration ake the

form of a giantwheel, thesponsorat the hub andthegift exchangepartners n thespokes.Whenpartners endtortillasdownthe spokesandintothe center,they ineffectpool theirresources o finance hecelebrationMonaghan 990b).Poolinggoodsinthecelebrationasa significance uitedistinct rom hatof giftexchange. nthe latter, hegiftcommunicateshepartner's upportor thesponsor,since fiestasponsorships a timeof crisis. It alsosignals hat hepartners elong oseparate et mutually upportive ouseholds.Here,gift exchangedefinesthe outerrange of commensality.No gift exchangesoccur among the members of thehousehold, incehouseholdmembers oldeverythingncommon cf. thediscussionof ayuda n Nutini1968:227).Thus hosewhoexchange oodsaredissimilar y thevery fact of theirparticipationn the transaction.Giftexchange n Nuyootherebyrelatesstructurallyimilarunitsto one anotherSahlins1972).Incontrasto this,poolinggoods nthecelebrationxpresses morecomprehen-sive solidarity. f gift exchangemarks hosewho exchange s belonging o separateunits,thenpoolingchanges heminto a singleunit. As Sahlins 1972:188-89)putsit, "pooling s the material ide of collectivity."Peoplerefer to the tortillas heycontributeo thepoolof goodsto bedistributedythesponsorasshitasa'a(tortillasof us ta'a). Similarexpressions efer o communaloffeeplots,publicbuildingsnthe town center, and the Nuyoo territory.These thingsare what we mightcallcorporate ssets.Thepresenceof corporate roperty, articularlyand, s adefining haracteristicof Mesoamericanommunities.Corporateness,owever,mustalso be appreciatedas somethingpeoplecreateandexperiencehrough ocialinteraction.n this way,poolingtortillasnotonlyevokesthe assetsheldin communalrust, t also is iconicof intermarriage.his is seenin anexample.Before the sponsorsof a fiestadistribute he tortillas romthe pool of goodsamassed, omething nteresting ccurs.Afterapartner rriveswitha prestation,hesponsorsserve him or her a plate of beans, along with three to five tortillas.Meanwhile,he womenof thesponsoring ousehold ount hetortillas,andcalculatethe size of the countergiftheyshouldplacein the partner's asket.If the partnerbroughta gift of 60 tortillas,theywill placeten tortillas n the basket.It is very


12/15

THE MESOAMERICAN COMMUNITYAS A "GREATHOUSE"important hat the tortillasthe partnereats with the meal, and the tortillas the partnerreceives as a countergift, not come from the tortillas he or she brought as gifts, asthis would be a great insult. The tortillas the partnerreceives are ratherpart of thegeneral pool of tortillasin the sponsors' control. This pool consists of the tortillas thewomen of the sponsoringhousehold and their close kinswomen have prepared,plusthe tortillas that arrive through gifts (as repayments to the sponsor for gifts thesponsormade in the past) and the tortillasthatarenew gifts to the sponsor, given bythose who wish to place the sponsor in debt. Once in the sponsor's possession, nonote is takenof who broughtwhich ones. The idea is to have thetortillasthe partnersreceive with their meal and the tortillas they receive as a countergift come fromdifferent households. People at the celebration are said to "eat from the sametortilla," since the sponsors distribute tortillas among participantsin a way thatresults in everyone getting food that originatedin someone else's kitchen.The exchanges in the fiesta parallelwhat occurs in the marriageritual, when thebride and groom eat from the same tortilla. Specifically, by pooling and thendistributing ortillasso that the tortillas contributedby each household are consumedby the members of many different households, the relationship between thesehouseholds becomes transactionally quivalent o the relationshipsbetweenpeople ofthe same household. As one man explained: "Those who come to the fiesta are likea single household, with several adult women who prepare he tortillas. No one says'Oh, that woman there made these tortillas, while anotherwoman made the tortillasover there.' You take the tortillas as if they were made by a single person." Thismakes hepool of tortillas ike the household ranary;t is a singlereserveandallshare qually nthe foodpreparedrom t. Indeed,peopleexplainedhatwhenpeopledo not distinguishbetween he tortillasmadeby differenthands t meansthey areunited.Thedefinitivesign of a breakups whenpeopledo distinguishortillas,aswhen some householdmembersbegin to prepareand consumetheir own foodseparately(Monaghan 1995:39-41). Furthermore,Nuyootecos consistently identifythe fiesta as a time of "unity," when they are most "happy," "content," and"secure," much as how they describe life in the ideal household.In creating a single store of food, participants n the fiesta model their actionsafter the membersof a householdwho co-operatein subsistenceactivities and sharein the fruits of their labors. Fiesta actions mirror the kind of care and moral conduct(nakara) ound in a household. Andjust as nakaramustbe continuouslydemonstratedand experienced for the household to remain intact, so too collective acts ofcommensalityare continuous.Thereare over 80 celebrationsheld annually n Nuyoo,each lasting two to four days, so thatpeople have many opportunitiesto "eat fromthe same tortilla."

NUYOO AS A "GREATHOUSE"This article has examined the way Nuyootecos constructa collective identityandsense of groupcontinuity.In sacrifice, the sacrificertransforms he items offered into

191


13/15

192 ETHNOLOGYblood andmilk,which he or she thenfeeds to others, hereby ransmittingo themsubstanceshat inkthem ike kin.Inmarriage,Nuyooteco hildren ormwhatmightbe regarded s a commonpool of persons,whowill go to live in otherhouseholdsso these otherhouseholdswill be able to renew hemselves.Finally,by circulatingtortillas n the fiestaparticipantshare a pool of goods that evokesnot only theNuyooteco onception f marriageartners, utalso communalandandother ormsof corporatewealth.The activities describedhere parallelthe processesby which people createhouseholds.By transmissionf "theheat of life"in generative ndnurturingcts,parentsbringchildren ntothe worldand into the household.Throughmarriage,householdsrecruitnew personnelas replacementsor seniormembers.Finally,commensalitymakesothers including odchildren)artof the household. t is notthatsacrifice, ntermarriage,ndpooling nthefiestacreatehouseholds;ather,heycreate household-likerelations,and the image that emerges from this is ofNuyootecos,asa collectivity, haringife inwhatwe mightcall,basingourselvesonMesoamericandioms,a "greathouse."Levi-Strauss1982:174)has invitedus to view the house as an organizationaltype, just as we would a descentgroup,defining t as:A corporatebody holding an estate madeup of both materialand immaterialwealth, which perpetuatesitself through the transmission of its name, its goods and its titles down a real or imaginaryline,considered legitimateas long as this continuitycan express itself in the languageof kinship or affinity,and most often, of both.Nuyoogroupcontinuitys expressedn theidiom of kinship,affinity,andthatkeydomesticactivity,commensality.Commensalitys notsimplya moralcode;it is aninseparable artof the constructionf theNuyoohouse.Justas a mothernursingherchildcreatesa bondof kinship,or as thebrideandgroomeating hetornpiecesofthe tortillacreatesa marriage,he poolingand redistributionf food in the fiestacreates a great house (cf. Ingham1986:100-01 or the important ole of ritualcommensalitynTlayacapan).orNuyootecoshe mageofcorporatenesss theunityof thehousehold,andalthough see thegreathouse ess as a typefromwhichactionflows, and moreof a "summatingmage" Weiner1988)of the socialities hroughwhich collectivities ormandaccomplish oals, which is not anchoredn specificinstitutionalorms, heNuyooteco ollectivitys clearly imilar o whatLevi-Strauss(1982, 1984)models for societiesin Indonesia,he NorthwestCoast,andAfrica,withmembership xpressedn termsof sharedkinshipand/oraffinity.The concept of the Nuyoo great house has implications or understandingMesoamericansocial organizationmore generally. Mesoamericancollectiveenterprises ave nevereasilyfit into thecategories f socialstructure evelopedodescribesocieties elsewherein the world (Mulhare1996; Nutini 1975; Offner1983:171).Onecouldargue hat heeffectiveness f thehouseas animageof socialrelatedness s in the way it mediateswhat otherwiseare conflictingprinciples(Levi-Strauss 982, 1984:152,192-93;Boone 1990;Errington1987;and Grinker


14/15

THE MESOAMERICANCOMMUNITYAS A "GREATHOUSE" 1931994:111-12). In fact, membershipin Nuyoo, and the whole notion of who is andwho is not a Nuyooteco, while primarilybased on descent, can also be defined interms of marriage, fiesta sponsorship, and commensality (most migrantsto Nuyooarrive through marriage;those who don't are requiredto sponsor fiestas-and thusparticipate in the whole feasting cycle-as one of the conditions of acceptance).Moreover, the image of the groupas house is not incompatiblewith stratification,asGrinker(1994) shows in his study of Lese farmers and Efe foragers of Zaire. Leseand Efe create lifelong trading partnerships hrough Efe men joining Lese in onehouse, and use a genderedidiom derived from domestic arrangements o subordinatethe Efe to the Lese. Withsuchexamplest is not hard o see that he Mesoamericangreathouse,besidesallowingmembershipo beextendedn avarietyof ways,couldhaveeffectivelyexpressedhierarchy ndregulated roductionnthehighlystratifiedsocietiesof thePostclassic.

BIBLIOGRAPHYBoone, J. A. 1990. Balinese Twins Times Two: Gender, Birth Order, and "Household" in Indone-

sia/Indo-Europe.Power and Difference: Gender n IslandSoutheastAsia, eds. J. M. Atkinsonand S. Errington.Stanford.Carrasco, P. 1976. Los lineages nobles del Mexico Antiguo. Estratificacionsocial en la MesoamericaPrehispanica,eds. P. Carrascoand J. Broda, pp. 102-17. Mexico.Chance, J. K. 1996. The Barrios of Colonial Tecali: Patronage, Kinship, and TerritorialRelations ina CentralMexican Community. Ethnology 35(2):107-39.Errington, S. 1987. Incestuous Twins and the House Societies of Insular Southeast Asia. CulturalAnthropology2(4):403-44.Galinier, J. 1987. Pueblos de la Sierra Madre:Etnografiade la comunidad Otomi. Mexico.Gawaltny, J. 1970. The Thrice Shy: Cultural Accommodationto Blindness and other Disasters in aMexican Community.New York.Grinker,R. R. 1994. Houses in the Rainforest:Ethnicityand InequalityAmong Farmersand Foragersin Central Africa. Berkeley.Hicks, F. 1986. PrehispanicBackgroundof Colonial Political and Economic Organization n CentralMexico. Supplementto the Handbook of Middle American Indians, 4, ed. R. Spores, pp.35-54. Austin.Hill, R., and J. Monaghan. 1987. Sacapulas: Continuities in Principles of Highland Maya Social

Organization. Philadelphia.Ingham,J. M. 1986. Mary, Michael and Lucifer: Folk Catholicismin Central Mexico. Austin.Jay, N. 1992. ThroughoutYour GenerationsForever: Sacrifice, Religion, and Paternity.Chicago.Kellogg, S. 1986. Kinshipand Social Organizationn Early Colonial Tenochtitlan.Supplementto theHandbookof Middle American Indians, 4, ed. R. Spores, pp. 103-21. Austin.Klein, C. 1987. The Ideology of Autosacrificeat the Templo Mayor. The Aztec Templo Mayor, ed.E. Boone, pp. 293-370. WashingtonDC.Levi-Strauss,C. 1969. The ElementaryStructuresof Kinship. Boston.1982. The Way of the Masks. Seattle.1984. Anthropologyand Myth: Lectures 1951-1982. Oxford.Molina, A. de. 1977 (1571). Vocabularioen LenguaCastellanay Mexicana y Mexicana y Castillana.Mexico.Monaghan,J. 1990a. Sacrifice, Death, and the Originsof Agriculture n the Codex Vienna. AmericanAntiquity55(3):559-69.1990b. Reciprocity, Redistributionandthe Structureof the MesoamericanFiesta. American


15/15

194 ETHNOLOGYEthnologist17(4):148-64.1995. The Covenants with Earth and Rain: Exchange Sacrifice and Revelation in MixtecSociality. Norman OK.Mulhare, E. 1996. Barrio Matters: Toward an Ethnologyof MesoamericanCustomarySocial Units.Ethnology 35(2):93-106.Nutini, H. G. 1968. San Berardino Contla:Marriageand FamilyStructure n a TlaxcalanMunicipio.Pittsburgh.1975. Introduction:The Natureand Treatmentof Kinship n Mesoamerica.Essays on MexicanKinship, eds. H. G. Nutini, P. Carrasco,and J. Taggart. Pittsburgh.Offner, J. 1983. Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco. Cambridge.Ravicz, R. 1965. Organizacionsocial de los Mixtecos. Mexico.Sahlins, M. 1972. Stone Age Economics. Chicago.Schneider, D. 1968. American Kinship:A CulturalAccount. Engelwood Cliffs NJ.Weiner, J. 1988. The Heart of the PearlShell: The MythologicalDimension of Foi Sociality. Berkeley.

monaghan, john. the mesoamerican community as a great house

Documents