The Nahua calli of ancient Mexico household family

The Nahua calli of ancient Mexico: household, family, and gender “It is simply untrue as far as we can yet tell that there was ever a time or place where the complex family was the universal background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people. ” —Peter Laslett, Family & Household in Past Time, 1972

A neolithic, complex household from Ancient Mexico (1540): 13 people, 4 generations, 5 marital units Simply an old widow Married head of household Married one year ago Married Married Male 10 years of age, not married Married Female, 20 years old, not yet married

1540: 4 lateral extensions, Only 1 complete conjugal family 3 incomplete (2 widows+children) Married head of the household Male, 8 years old Widow this year Married Girl, 1 year old Boy born this year Married three years ago Single Male 20 years old Male, single 10 years old Male, already dead Widow, 10 years ago Female, single 15 years old

1990, 450 years later: An example of a patrilateral household from rural Morelos (5 conjugal unions) Married head of the household 50 years old Son 15 years old Married 48 years old Daughter 10 years old Son 22, free union Daughter 5 years old 21, free union Son, 2 years old Daughter 22, free union Daughter months of age 25 Unión free libre, 25 union años Daughter 2 years old Daughter 14, free union 29 free union 19, free union 16 free union (not kin)

Competing theories of family history (regarding co-residence) ® Evolutionary, 4 stages: ®Foragers: co-residence not limited to family or kin ®Neolithic, agriculturalists: compound multi-family ®Ancient to early modern: complex, extended family ®Modern: nuclear family ® High mortality simplified family structures in the past (Peter Laslett, 1972): “It is simply untrue as far as we can yet tell that there was ever a time or place where the complex family was the universal background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people. ”

There once was a place, where the complex family, “the classical family of Western nostalgia, ” was the rule. ®Nahua agrarian villages, early 16 th century universal early marriage (<13 years female) high mortality (e 0 <20 years) ®Household system: joint, complex, or compound? ®Gender relations: parallelism & symmetry or hierarchy & subordination?

Source: The Book of Tributes S. L. Cline (1993) Census listings made by Aztec scribes, writing in Nahuatl, according to prehispanic conventions (translated by Cline).

Museo de Antropología, Mexico City: “Here is the home of one named. . . ” . . . transcribed …translated …microdata

Nahua population and land register Darkened faces = dead Lines are used to connect kin rather than to separate households Codex Santa María de Asunción, ~1550

Cemithualtin (those around a patio): the importance of kin ê Nahua households (cemithualtin): “those who live in a house” “people who live in only one house” “those from a patio, ” etc. ê 99% live with kin: 47% as spouse or children of head; 52% as extended kin of head. ê 1% have no kin ties with the head (3 orphans, 20 servants and 1 [Indian] slave).

Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin relationships with 19+ occurrences Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540 Relationship Frequency (total n = 2, 486) child 596 mother-in-law spouse 316 brother-in-law’s spouse head 315 sister-in-law brother 158 daughter-in-law brother’s spouse 88 nephew son-in-law 77 brother-in-law’s child brother-in-law 76 sister’s child sister 67 mother grandchild 56 cousin brother’s child 51 niece 40 38 37 36 34 33 33 26 19 19

Household and family definitions ê Household classes with only 1 conjugal family: nuclear: pa, ma, &/or child extended: some non-nuclear, unmarried kin ê Household classifications for 2+ conjugal families: Joint - families connected by kin of same sex, under single head Complex - tangled, intricate, diverse, multiple Compound - fusion, blending or amalgam of parts; hierarchy

5 conjugal families, 4 generations, 3 married brothers, 2 widows, 1 unmarried woman and a boy Simply an old widow Married head of household Married one year ago Married Married Male 10 years of age, not married Married Female, 20 years old, not yet married

Table 2. Multiple households were the norm among rural Nahua Household type Households (Percent) Simple 13. 4 No children 1. 9 Children 11. 5 Extended 13. 4 Upward 1. 9 Downward 0. 3 Lateral 6. 7 Combinations 4. 5 Multiple 72. 1 Upward 0. 3 Downward 15. 1 Lateral 26. 3 Combinations 30. 4 Polygamous 1. 0 Total (n) 312 Illegible (n) 3 Individuals 7. 2 0. 5 6. 7 10. 1 1. 0 0. 2 4. 9 3. 9 81. 1 0. 3 14. 6 26. 6 39. 5 1. 6 2, 486 17

Nahuatl sense of “joint” differs from classic definition of family historians: “Joint - families connected by kin of same sex, under single head” “They pay the tribute jointly. ” “They all produce what they eat jointly”. “Their wives make it jointly. ” “They just do their tribute together. ” “They just share the tribute. ” “They just do it jointly. ” “He just feeds them all as a unit. ” “All of them do the tribute jointly. ” “They just produce his tribute jointly. ”

The different houses Icnocalli (casa humilde) humble house Coloti calli (choça) hut or hovel Totecujo calli (hermita) hermitage Xacalli (casa paxija) Straw house Çaça ie xacalli (choça) another kind of hut Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580

Colotic calli: “It means it is unpretentious, a lowly house. ” Commoner’s house (choça o cabaña) 14 meters square Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580

Icnocalli (casa humilde) “the unpretentious house, or the house of the humble or…the poor. ” Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580

Excavated residences “those of one patio…” M. E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)

“those of one patio…” note grouped ground-level houses M. E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)

Table 3 a. Headship designation by frequency of occurrence. District identities of households and head freq 165 47 39 household Key H R S head is named. . . ” or “The head of the household is 25 20 6 from afar”) 6 in charge” 1 1 Explanation “Here is the home of. . . ”; “Here is. . 's home. ” “Here is the householder named. . . ” “Here is the home of some people. . . ” “ The T. m named. . . ” or “The householder is named. . . ” “The tribute payer is named. . . ” illegible migrant (“Here are some people who. . . came G “one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named. . . is b g “one who belongs to the tlatoani” “Here is the one who guards things for the

Table 3 b. Headship designation by order of appearance in district: Ø“Here is an altepetl named Huitzillan” (H 1 -H 41): ØGb. H. HHHHHHHm. HHHH ØQuauhchichinollan people (Q 1 -Q 66): ØGg. RSSSSTSSSSSHHHHHSSSSRSSSSSSSHSTTTTSSTT. TTTTTT. T TTTTTTT. T. TTT ØDistrict illegible (Q 67 -Q 135): ØGHRRRRRHHRR. RRRRRR. RRRHHRRRR. RSSSSHHHHHHH HHHn. HHHH. m. HHHHH ØTlacochcalco (H#1 -H#18): ØHHHHHCHHHHHHH ØColoteopan (H#19 -H #35): ØGHHHHHHHH ØDistrict illegible (H#36 -H#62): ØGHHHHHHm. HHHH. HHm ØXanyacac (H#63 -H#72): ØCHHHH Ø. . . cenhuitzco Key: Here is. . . H - Home R - Householder S - Some people; household head T - Tribute payer m - migrant (H#73 -H#139): ØSSSSRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHa

Household H-38: 9 people, 3 generations, 2 widows Widow 10 years ago Married household head Boy 7 years old Married Girl 1 year old Married Single 15 years old Widow 4 years ago

Table 4. Position of married individuals in rural Nahua households was strongly structured by gender Relationship Male Female Head 306 1 Spouse 1 309 Son/daughter 36 75 Other kin: 323 285 Brother/sister 98 26 Brother/sister-in-law* 63 106 Son/daughter in law 75 36 Brother/sister-in-law’s spouse 14 Father/mother 3 3 Father/mother-in-law 8 8 Other 62 68 Not related: 11 11 nd 38

Rules of household headship (inferred), the 3 Ms: ê 1. Male (311 of 315 households) ê 2. Married (97%) or recently widowed (3%). ê 3. Most sons resident (or the eldest son resident).

The Codex Mendoza: life at age 13 and 14 years 13: Boys Girls 14: married unmarried

Marriage (at 15) 15:

Child Brides and Patriarchy in Ancient Mexico Codex Mendoza, 1540

1540 vs 1990 Persistence of Mexico “profundo”? ê Pre-hispanic survivals? – Virilocal stem families? – Residence around the paternal home? ê Or transformations? – The world Mexico has lost: extended families are now rare – But family and kin ties remain important

1540: 4 lateral extensions, Only 1 complete conjugal family 3 incomplete (2 widows+children) Married head of the household Male, 8 years old Widow this year Married Girl, 1 year old Boy born this year Married three years ago Single Male 20 years old Male, single 10 years old Male, already dead Widow, 10 years ago Female, single 15 years old

1990, 450 years later: An example of a patrilateral household from rural Morelos (5 conjugal unions) Married head of the household 50 years old Son 15 years old Married 48 years old Daughter 10 years old Son 22, free union Daughter 5 years old 21, free union Son, 2 years old Daughter 22, free union Daughter months of age 25 Unión free libre, 25 union años Daughter 2 years old Daughter 14, free union 29 free union 19, free union 16 free union (not kin)

Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Morelos, 1540 and 1990, and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990 1540 1990 Rural Morelos Republic Relation to Head % % % Head 13 20 19 Spouse 13 16 16 Son or Daughter 24 54 53 Other kin 49 6 7 Not related 1 4 5 Total % 100 100 N (sample size) 2, 503 1, 633 801, 981

Gender relations: parallelism & symmetry or hierarchy & subordination? Ø Ø Situs: Tenochitlan (Mex. City) or the countryside? Parallelism, symmetry and complementarity with less hierarchy? Or patriarchy: subordination, domination, and submission? Evidence: – Widows, “just a little old woman”. – Married women in the household (Table 4).

Debate: Condition of Nahua Women ðLeon-Portilla (1958): prominent and of great social recognition ðNash (1978): subordination emerged with predatory empire ðRodriguez-Shadow (1991): devalued and dominated ðKellogg (1995): gender parallelism: complementary and symmetrical

Nahua gender relations over the life course: assymetry, hierarchy, subordination ðI. Naming patterns ðII. Marriage: ðgirls: 12. 7 years ðboys: 19. 4 years ðIII. Household: only male heads ðIV. Widowhood: a female affair ðV. Division of labor

Gender and ‘earthly names’ among the ordinary (rural) Nahua at contact: “a linguistic thicket” ðNames provide a compendium of the history of a civilization--Tibon. ðWhy are the names of ordinary Nahuas excluded from history? ðWhat do gender differences in names suggest about relations between the sexes?

“Ordinary women…we don’t even know their names. ”--Blanco, 1991 The Nahua Naming Ceremony

The Midwife Bathes the Newborn Babe “And all during the time that she bathed the baby, a pine torch stood burning. It was not extinguished. ” “And then they there gave him a name, they there gave him his earthly name. ”

Earthly Names Ceremony differs by gender Strict division by gender from birth. Boys waiting to snatch the boys umbilical cord offering and eat it. girls

And as she washed it all over, its hands, its feet, she gave a talk to all. . . Its hands, it was said, she cleaned of thievery. Everywhere on its body, its groin, it was said, she cleaned it of vice.

Then she raised it as an The namingoffering in the four directions; ceremony then she lifted it up, she raised began at it as an offering to the heavens. sunrise … and concluded with a banquet

From classic texts, elite male names: few female names, fewer names of ordinary people ðSahagun’s General History, “Persons and Deities”: 436 names, but very few are female names. ðTax records reveal names of ordinary people, including females: few share names with deities (of 661 names in tribute lists only 47 occur in Sahagun’s General History).

4 most common names for each sex. What are the differences? Males Females u Teyacapan (First one) u Tlaco (Middle one) u Teicuh (Second one) u Necahual (Quiet one) 315 182 151 1201 females 87 unique names u Yaotl 74 (Rival/Enemy) u Matlalihuitl 63 (Rich Feather) u Nochhuetl 52 (Ideal Bean) u Coatl 48 (Serpent) 1303 males 574 unique names

Common names 6 th-10 th most frequent by sex Females u Xoco 53 (The Last one) u Centehua 42 (One’s Woman) u Xocoyotl 38 (Youngest one) u Tlacoehua 22 (Second daughter) u Cihuaton 15 (Littlest female) u Tepin 15 (Elder Sister) Males u. Tototl 19 (Bird) u. Quauhtli 18 (Eagle) u. Tochtli 17 (Rabbit) u. Zolin 16 (Quail) u. Matlal

Frequency of Common Female Names

Common Male Names Note low frequency of most names

Inequality of marital condition: fewer never married females, more widowers, concubines, etc.

4. Widowhood is a female condition widowers quickly remarry; widows do not (cannot? )

Household composition u. Brothers of heads: of 135 coresiding, 98 were married and 2 recently widowed. 90 older brothers were heads; 8 younger. u 26 mothers lived in households headed by sons; 40 mothers…. by sons-in-law u 1/5 of residents were related to the head through marriage (affinal kin tie).

Conclusions ê 1. Nahua households were large (ave. = 8) and complex (75% contained two or more conjugal families) ê 2. Mortality, rather than braking, accelerated the formation of complex families. ê 3. social constraints were of greater importance than mortality: Nahua offspring formed new households after the birth of a child, not simply with marriage.

Conclusions, social flexibility: Ø 1. Marriage norms and family forms are social constructions and are highly plastic, even in ancient Mexico. Ø 2. Marriage (including informal unions) has increased greatly over the centuries, from as little as 13 years in rural “Morelos” five centuries ago to as much as 22 years by 1930, and 24 by 1990. Ø 3. Likewise, complex families have declined from 75% to 15% in 1930, and 6% in 1990.

Conclusions: earthly names of ordinary country-folk ðMale names: individualized, symbolic, diverse ðFemale names: categorical, birth order, boring ðGender relations: instead of parallel and symmetry, divergence and asymmetry

Nahua gender relations: patriarchy, assymetry, oppression ðDivision of labor: strongly gendered ðHouseholds: only males are heads ðAverage at marriage: girls: less than 13 years boys: greater than 19 years ðWidowhood: a female matter ðGendering of names: firm rules

With conquest and colonization: heightened inequalities ðDivision of labor: strongly gendered, heightened by inequalities of class ðHouseholds: greater proportion of female heads ðAverage at marriage: females: rose to 17 -18 years males: rose to 21 -23 years ðWidowhood: more likely to head household ðGendering of names: Christian saints

End

Museo de Antropología, Mexico City: “Here is the home of one named. . . ” . . . transcribed …translated …microdata

Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin relationships with 19+ occurrences Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540 Relationship Frequency (total n = 2, 486) child 596 mother-in-law spouse 316 brother-in-law’s spouse head 315 sister-in-law brother 158 daughter-in-law brother’s spouse 88 nephew son-in-law 77 brother-in-law’s child brother-in-law 76 sister’s child sister 67 mother grandchild 56 cousin brother’s child 51 niece 40 38 37 36 34 33 33 26 19 19

Table 2. Multiple households were the norm among rural Nahua Household type Households (Percent) Simple 13. 4 No children 1. 9 Children 11. 5 Extended 13. 4 Upward 1. 9 Downward 0. 3 Lateral 6. 7 Combinations 4. 5 Multiple 72. 1 Upward 0. 3 Downward 15. 1 Lateral 26. 3 Combinations 30. 4 Polygamous 1. 0 Total (n) 312 Illegible (n) 3 Individuals 7. 2 0. 5 6. 7 10. 1 1. 0 0. 2 4. 9 3. 9 81. 1 0. 3 14. 6 26. 6 39. 5 1. 6 2, 486 17

Table 3 a. Headship designation by frequency of occurrence. District identities of households and head freq 165 47 39 household Key H R S head is named. . . ” or “The head of the household is 25 20 6 from afar”) 6 in charge” 1 1 Explanation “Here is the home of. . . ”; “Here is. . 's home. ” “Here is the householder named. . . ” “Here is the home of some people. . . ” “ The T. m named. . . ” or “The householder is named. . . ” “The tribute payer is named. . . ” illegible migrant (“Here are some people who. . . came G “one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named. . . is b g “one who belongs to the tlatoani” “Here is the one who guards things for the

Table 4. Position of married individuals in rural Nahua households was strongly structured by gender Relationship Male Female Head 306 1 Spouse 1 309 Son/daughter 36 75 Other kin: 323 285 Brother/sister 98 26 Brother/sister-in-law* 63 106 Son/daughter in law 75 36 Brother/sister-in-law’s spouse 14 Father/mother 3 3 Father/mother-in-law 8 8 Other 62 68 Not related: 11 11 nd 38

Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Morelos, 1540 and 1990, and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990 1540 1990 Rural Morelos Republic Relation to Head % % % Head 13 20 19 Spouse 13 16 16 Son or Daughter 24 54 53 Other kin 49 6 7 Not related 1 4 5 Total % 100 100 N (sample size) 2, 503 1, 633 801, 981