The Nahua The Nahua callicalli of ancient Mexico: of ancient Mexico:

household, family, and genderhousehold, family, and gender

““It is simply untrue as far as we can yet tell that there was ever 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 a time or place where the complex family was the universal

background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people.”background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people.”—Peter Laslett, —Peter Laslett, Family & Household in Past TimeFamily & Household in Past Time, 1972, 1972

A neolithic, complex household from A neolithic, complex household from Ancient Mexico (1540): 13 people, Ancient Mexico (1540): 13 people,

4 generations, 5 marital units4 generations, 5 marital units

Marriedhead of

householdMarried

Married one

year ago

Married

Married Married

Married Married MarriedMarried

oneyear ago

Male10 years

of age, not married

Simplyan old widow

Female, 20 years old,

not yet married

1540: 4 lateral extensions, 1540: 4 lateral extensions, Only 1 complete conjugal family Only 1 complete conjugal family 3 incomplete (2 widows+children)3 incomplete (2 widows+children)

Marriedhead of the household

Married

Male,8 years

old

Girl, 1 year old

Boyborn this

year

Widowthis year Single

Male 20 years old

MarriedMarried

three years ago

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 1990, 450 years later: An example of a patrilateral household from rural patrilateral household from rural

MMorelos (5 conjugal unions)orelos (5 conjugal unions) Married

head of the household 50 years

old Married48 years

old

Son 15 years old

Daughter10 years

old

Son 22,free union

Daughter 22, free union

21, free union

Unión libre, 25

años

Daughter2 years

old

Daughter5 years

old

Son, 2 years old

Daughtermonths of age

Daughter 14, free union

29free

union

16 free union

19, free union

(not kin)(not kin)

25free

union

Competing theories of family history Competing theories of family history (regarding co-residence)(regarding co-residence)

Evolutionary, 4 stages: Evolutionary, 4 stages: Foragers: co-residence not limited to family or kin Foragers: co-residence not limited to family or kin Neolithic, agriculturalists: compound multi-familyNeolithic, agriculturalists: compound multi-family Ancient to early modern: complex, extended familyAncient to early modern: complex, extended family Modern: nuclear familyModern: nuclear family

High mortality simplified family structures in the past High mortality simplified family structures in the past (Peter Laslett, 1972): (Peter Laslett, 1972): ““It is simply untrue as far as we can yet tell that there was ever a 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 time or place where the complex family was the universal background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people.”background to the ordinary lives of ordinary people.”

There once was a place, where the complex There once was a place, where the complex family, “the classical family of Western family, “the classical family of Western

nostalgia,” was the rule.nostalgia,” was the rule.

Nahua agrarian villages, early 16th centuryNahua agrarian villages, early 16th centuryuniversal early marriage (<13 years female)universal early marriage (<13 years female)high mortality (ehigh mortality (e00 <20 years) <20 years)

Household system: joint, complex, or Household system: joint, complex, or compound?compound?

Gender relations: parallelism & symmetry Gender relations: parallelism & symmetry or hierarchy & subordination? or hierarchy & subordination?

Source: Source: The Book of TributesThe Book of Tributes S. L. Cline (1993) S. L. Cline (1993)

Census listings made by Aztec scribes, writing in Nahuatl, according to prehispanic conventions (translated by Cline).

Morelos: QuauchichinollanMorelos: Quauchichinollan

Morelos

Mexico City

$

E

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

...transcribed ...transcribed ……translated translated ……microdatamicrodata

Nahua population and land registerNahua population and land register

Codex Santa María de Asunción, ~1550Codex Santa María de Asunción, ~1550

Lines are used to connect kin rather than to separate households

Darkened faces = dead

CemithualtinCemithualtin (those around a (those around a patio): the importance of kin patio): the importance of kin

Nahua households (Nahua households (cemithualtincemithualtin): ): “those who live in a house” “those who live in a house” “people who live in only one house” “people who live in only one house” “those from a patio,” etc.“those from a patio,” etc.

99% live with kin: 99% live with kin: 47% as spouse or children of head; 47% as spouse or children of head; 52% as extended kin of head.52% as extended kin of head.

1% have no kin ties with the head (3 1% have no kin ties with the head (3 orphans, 20 servants and 1 [Indian] slave).orphans, 20 servants and 1 [Indian] slave).

Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin relationships with 19+ occurrencesrelationships with 19+ occurrences

Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540

RelationshipRelationship Frequency (total n = 2,486)Frequency (total n = 2,486)childchild 596596 mother-in-lawmother-in-law 4040spousespouse 316316 brother-in-law’s spouse 38brother-in-law’s spouse 38headhead 315315 sister-in-lawsister-in-law 37 37brotherbrother 158158 daughter-in-lawdaughter-in-law 36 36brother’s spouse 88brother’s spouse 88 nephewnephew 34 34son-in-lawson-in-law 77 77 brother-in-law’s childbrother-in-law’s child 33 33brother-in-lawbrother-in-law 76 76 sister’s childsister’s child 33 33sister sister 67 67 mothermother 26 26grandchildgrandchild 56 56 cousincousin 19 19brother’s childbrother’s child 51 51 nieceniece 19 19

Household and family definitionsHousehold and family definitions

Household classes with only 1 conjugal family:Household classes with only 1 conjugal family: nuclear: pa, ma, &/or childnuclear: pa, ma, &/or childextended: some non-nuclear, unmarried kinextended: some non-nuclear, unmarried kin

Household classifications for 2+ conjugal Household classifications for 2+ conjugal families:families:Joint - families connected by kin of same sex, Joint - families connected by kin of same sex, under single head under single headComplex - tangled, intricate, diverse, multipleComplex - tangled, intricate, diverse, multipleCompound - fusion, blending or amalgam of parts;Compound - fusion, blending or amalgam of parts; hierarchy hierarchy

5 conjugal families, 4 generations, 5 conjugal families, 4 generations, 3 married brothers, 2 widows, 3 married brothers, 2 widows, 1 unmarried woman and a boy1 unmarried woman and a boy

Marriedhead of

householdMarried

Married one

year ago

Married

Married Married

Married Married MarriedMarried

oneyear ago

Male10 years

of age, not married

Simplyan old widow

Female, 20 years old,

not yet married

Table 2. Multiple households were Table 2. Multiple households were the norm among rural Nahuathe norm among rural Nahua

Household typeHousehold type HouseholdsHouseholds (Percent) (Percent) IndividualsIndividualsSimpleSimple 13.413.4 7.2 7.2

No childrenNo children 1.9 1.9 0.5 0.5ChildrenChildren 11.511.5 6.7 6.7

ExtendedExtended 13.413.4 10.110.1UpwardUpward 1.9 1.9 1.0 1.0DownwardDownward 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2LateralLateral 6.7 6.7 4.9 4.9CombinationsCombinations 4.5 4.5 3.9 3.9

Multiple Multiple 72.172.1 81.181.1UpwardUpward 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3DownwardDownward 15.115.1 14.614.6LateralLateral 26.326.3 26.626.6CombinationsCombinations 30.430.4 39.539.5

PolygamousPolygamous 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.6Total (n)Total (n) 312 312 2,486 2,486Illegible (n)Illegible (n) 3 3 17 17

Nahuatl sense of “joint”Nahuatl sense of “joint”differs from classic definition of family differs from classic definition of family

historians: “historians: “Joint - families connected by kin Joint - families connected by kin of same sex, under single head”of same sex, under single head”

““They pay the tribute jointly.”They pay the tribute jointly.”““They all produce what they eat jointly”.They all produce what they eat jointly”.““Their wives make it jointly.”Their wives make it jointly.”““They just do their tribute together.”They just do their tribute together.”““They just share the tribute.”They just share the tribute.”““They just do it jointly.”They just do it jointly.”““He just feeds them all as a unit.”He just feeds them all as a unit.”““All of them do the tribute jointly.”All of them do the tribute jointly.”““They just produce his tribute jointly.”They just produce his tribute jointly.”

SahagSahagún, ún, CCóódice Florentino, ~1580dice Florentino, ~1580

The different The different houses houses

Icnocalli (casa humilde)Icnocalli (casa humilde)humble househumble house

Coloti calli (choça)Coloti calli (choça)hut or hovelhut or hovel

Totecujo calli (hermita)Totecujo calli (hermita)hermitagehermitage

Xacalli (casa paxija)Xacalli (casa paxija)Straw houseStraw house

Çaça ie xacalli (choça) Çaça ie xacalli (choça) another kind of hutanother kind of hut

14 meters 14 meters squaresquare

Commoner’s Commoner’s househouse(choça o (choça o cabacabañaña))

Colotic Colotic callicalli: “It means it is : “It means it is unpretentious, a lowly house.”unpretentious, a lowly house.”

SahagSahagún, ún, CCóódice Florentino, ~1580dice Florentino, ~1580

Icnocalli (casa humilde)Icnocalli (casa humilde)“the unpretentious house, or the “the unpretentious house, or the

house of the humble or…the poor.”house of the humble or…the poor.”

SahagSahagún, ún, CCóódice Florentino, ~1580dice Florentino, ~1580

Excavated residences Excavated residences “those of one patio…” “those of one patio…”

M.E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)M.E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)

““those of one patio…” those of one patio…” note grouped ground-level housesnote grouped ground-level houses

M.E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)M.E. Smith, Archaeological Research (1992)

Table 3a. Headship designation by Table 3a. Headship designation by frequency of occurrence.frequency of occurrence.

District identities of households and headDistrict identities of households and head

freqfreq KeyKey ExplanationExplanation165165 HH “Here is the home of ...”; “Here is ....'s home.” “Here is the home of ...”; “Here is ....'s home.” 4747 RR “Here is the householder named ...”“Here is the householder named ...” 3939 SS “Here is the home of some people...” “ The household“Here is the home of some people...” “ The household

head is named...” or “The head of the household is head is named...” or “The head of the household is named...” or “The householder is named...” named...” or “The householder is named...”

2525 TT “The tribute payer is named...”“The tribute payer is named...” 2020 .. illegibleillegible 66 mm migrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”)migrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”) 66 GG “one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named ... is in charge”“one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named ... is in charge” 11 bb “one who belongs to the tlatoani”“one who belongs to the tlatoani” 11 gg “Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani”“Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani” 11 nn “Here is a nephew...” “Here is a nephew...” 22 CC “Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss”“Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss” 11 aa “Here is a goodly maiden...”“Here is a goodly maiden...”

Table 3b. Headship designation by order of Table 3b. Headship designation by order of appearance in district:appearance in district:

““Here is an altepetl named Huitzillan” (H1-H41):Here is an altepetl named Huitzillan” (H1-H41):GbH.HHHHHH.HHH.HHH.HHHHHHHmHmH.HHHHm.HHHHGbH.HHHHHH.HHH.HHH.HHHHHHHmHmH.HHHHm.HHHHQuauhchichinollan people (Q1-Q66):Quauhchichinollan people (Q1-Q66):GgRSSSSSSSSTSSSSSHHHHHSSSSRSSSSSSSHSTTTTSSTT.TTTTTT.TGgRSSSSSSSSTSSSSSHHHHHSSSSRSSSSSSSHSTTTTSSTT.TTTTTT.TTTTTTTT.T.TTTTTTTTTT.T.TTTDistrict illegible (Q67-Q135):District illegible (Q67-Q135):GHRRRRRHHRR.RRRRRR.RRRHHRRRRRRRR.RSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHGHRRRRRHHRR.RRRRRR.RRRHHRRRRRRRR.RSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHn.HHHH.mHHHHHHHHHHHHn.HHHH.mHHHHHHHHHTlacochcalco (H#1-H#18):Tlacochcalco (H#1-H#18):HHHHHHHHHHCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHCHHHHHHHColoteopan (H#19-H #35): Coloteopan (H#19-H #35): GHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHDistrict illegible (H#36-H#62):District illegible (H#36-H#62):GHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHmHHHH.HHmGHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHmHHHH.HHmXanyacac (H#63-H#72):Xanyacac (H#63-H#72):CHHHHHHHHCHHHHHHHH...cenhuitzco (H#73-H#139):...cenhuitzco (H#73-H#139):SSSSRRRRRRRRRRRRR.RRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHHSSSSRRRRRRRRRRRRR.RRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHaHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHa

Key: Here is...Key: Here is...H - HomeH - HomeR - HouseholderR - HouseholderS - Some people; S - Some people; household head household headT - Tribute payerT - Tribute payerm - migrantm - migrant

Household H-38: 9 people, Household H-38: 9 people, 3 generations, 2 widows3 generations, 2 widows

Marriedhousehold

head

Married

Girl1 year old

Boy7 years old

Widow 10 years ago Married Married Widow

4 years ago

Single15 years old

Table 4. Position of Table 4. Position of marriedmarried individuals in individuals in rural Nahua households was strongly rural Nahua households was strongly

structured by genderstructured by gender

RelationshipRelationship MaleMale FemaleFemaleHeadHead 306306 1 1SpouseSpouse 1 1 309309Son/daughterSon/daughter 36 36 75 75Other kin:Other kin: 323323 285285

Brother/sisterBrother/sister 98 98 26 26Brother/sister-in-law*Brother/sister-in-law* 63 63 106106Son/daughter in lawSon/daughter in law 75 75 36 36Brother/sister-in-law’s spouseBrother/sister-in-law’s spouse 14 14 38 38Father/motherFather/mother 3 3 3 3Father/mother-in-lawFather/mother-in-law 8 8 8 8OtherOther 62 62 68 68

Not related:Not related: 11 11 11 11Total married (includes 2Total married (includes 2ndnd wives) wives) 677677 681681

Rules of household headship Rules of household headship (inferred), the 3Ms:(inferred), the 3Ms:

1. 1. MaleMale (311 of 315 households) (311 of 315 households) 2. 2. MarriedMarried (97%) or recently (97%) or recently

widowed (3%).widowed (3%). 3. 3. Most sonsMost sons resident (or the eldest resident (or the eldest

son resident).son resident).

The Codex Mendoza: life at The Codex Mendoza: life at age 13 and 14 yearsage 13 and 14 years

GirlsBoys13:

14:

unmarriedmarried

Marriage (at 15)Marriage (at 15)

15:

Child Brides and Patriarchy Child Brides and Patriarchy in Ancient Mexicoin Ancient Mexico

Codex Mendoza, 1540Codex Mendoza, 1540

1540 vs 19901540 vs 1990Persistence of Mexico Persistence of Mexico

“profundo”?“profundo”?

Pre-hispanic survivals?Pre-hispanic survivals?– Virilocal stem families?Virilocal stem families?

– Residence around the paternal home? Residence around the paternal home? Or transformations?Or transformations?

– The world Mexico has lost: extended families The world Mexico has lost: extended families are now rareare now rare

– But family and kin ties remain importantBut family and kin ties remain important

1540: 4 lateral extensions, 1540: 4 lateral extensions, Only 1 complete conjugal family Only 1 complete conjugal family 3 incomplete (2 widows+children)3 incomplete (2 widows+children)

Marriedhead of the household

Married

Male,8 years

old

Girl, 1 year old

Boyborn this

year

Widowthis year Single

Male 20 years old

MarriedMarried

three years ago

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 1990, 450 years later: An example of a patrilateral household from rural patrilateral household from rural

MMorelos (5 conjugal unions)orelos (5 conjugal unions) Married

head of the household 50 years

old Married48 years

old

Son 15 years old

Daughter10 years

old

Son 22,free union

Daughter 22, free union

21, free union

Unión libre, 25

años

Daughter2 years

old

Daughter5 years

old

Son, 2 years old

Daughtermonths of age

Daughter 14, free union

29free

union

16 free union

19, free union

(not kin)(not kin)

25free

union

Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Morelos, 1540 and 1990,Morelos, 1540 and 1990,

and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990

15401540 19901990 19901990

Rural MorelosRural Morelos RepublicRepublicRelation to HeadRelation to Head % % % % % %

HeadHead 13 13 20 20 19 19

SpouseSpouse 13 13 16 16 16 16

Son or DaughterSon or Daughter 24 24 54 54 53 53

Other kinOther kin 49 49 6 6 7 7

Not relatedNot related 1 1 4 4 5 5

Total %Total % 100100 100100 100100

N (sample size)N (sample size) 2,5032,503 1,6331,633 801,981801,981

Gender relations: Gender relations: parallelism & symmetry or parallelism & symmetry or

hierarchy & subordination?hierarchy & subordination?

Situs: Tenochitlan (Mex. City) or the countryside?Situs: Tenochitlan (Mex. City) or the countryside? Parallelism, symmetry and complementarity with less Parallelism, symmetry and complementarity with less

hierarchy?hierarchy? Or patriarchy: subordination, domination, and Or patriarchy: subordination, domination, and

submission?submission? Evidence: Evidence:

– Widows, “just a little old woman”.Widows, “just a little old woman”.– Married women in the household (Table 4).Married women in the household (Table 4).

Debate: Debate: Condition of Nahua WomenCondition of Nahua Women

Leon-Portilla (1958): prominent and Leon-Portilla (1958): prominent and of great social recognitionof great social recognition

Nash (1978): subordination emerged Nash (1978): subordination emerged with predatory empirewith predatory empire

Rodriguez-Shadow (1991): devalued Rodriguez-Shadow (1991): devalued and dominated and dominated

Kellogg (1995): gender parallelism: Kellogg (1995): gender parallelism: complementary and symmetricalcomplementary and symmetrical

Nahua gender relations over the life Nahua gender relations over the life course: assymetry, hierarchy, course: assymetry, hierarchy,

subordinationsubordinationI. Naming patterns I. Naming patterns II. Marriage: II. Marriage:

girls: 12.7 yearsgirls: 12.7 yearsboys: 19.4 yearsboys: 19.4 years

III. Household: only male headsIII. Household: only male headsIV. Widowhood: a female affairIV. Widowhood: a female affairV. Division of laborV. Division of labor

Gender and ‘earthly names’ among Gender and ‘earthly names’ among the ordinary (rural) Nahua at the ordinary (rural) Nahua at contact: “a linguistic thicket”contact: “a linguistic thicket”

Names provide a compendium of Names provide a compendium of the history of a civilization--Tibon.the history of a civilization--Tibon.

Why are the names of ordinary Why are the names of ordinary Nahuas excluded from history?Nahuas excluded from history?

What do gender differences in What do gender differences in names suggest about relations names suggest about relations between the sexes?between the sexes?

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

The Nahua Naming CeremonyThe Nahua Naming Ceremony

The Midwife Bathes the Newborn BabeThe Midwife Bathes the Newborn Babe““And all during the time that she bathed the And all during the time that she bathed the baby, a pine torch stood burning. It was not baby, a pine torch stood burning. It was not extinguished.”extinguished.”

““And then they there gave him a name, And then they there gave him a name, they there gave him his earthly name.”they there gave him his earthly name.”

Earthly Names Ceremony Earthly Names Ceremony differs by gender differs by gender

Boys waitingBoys waitingto snatch the to snatch the

umbilical cord umbilical cord offering and offering and

eat it.eat it.

Strict Strict division division by by gender gender from from birth.birth.

girlsgirls

boysboys

And as she washed it all over, its And as she washed it all over, its hands, its feet, she gave a talk to all...hands, its feet, she gave a talk to all...

Its hands, it was said, she cleaned of Its hands, it was said, she cleaned of thievery. Everywhere on its body, its thievery. Everywhere on its body, its groin, it was said, she cleaned it of groin, it was said, she cleaned it of vice.vice.

The The naming naming

ceremony ceremony began at began at sunrisesunrise… and … and

concluded concluded with a with a

banquetbanquet

Then she raised it as an Then she raised it as an offering in the four directions; offering in the four directions; then she lifted it up, she raised then she lifted it up, she raised it as an offering to the heavens.it as an offering to the heavens.

From classic texts, elite male names: From classic texts, elite male names: few female names, few female names,

fewer names of ordinary peoplefewer names of ordinary people

Sahagun’s Sahagun’s General HistoryGeneral History, “Persons and , “Persons and Deities”: Deities”: 436 names, but very few are female names.436 names, but very few are female names.

Tax records reveal names of ordinary people, Tax records reveal names of ordinary people, including females: few share names with including females: few share names with deities (of 661 names in tribute lists only 47 deities (of 661 names in tribute lists only 47 occur in Sahagun’s General History). occur in Sahagun’s General History).

4 most common names for each 4 most common names for each sex. What are the differences?sex. What are the differences?

Females Teyacapan 315

(First one) Tlaco

182(Middle one)

Teicuh 182(Second one)

Necahual 151(Quiet one)

Males Yaotl 74

(Rival/Enemy) Matlalihuitl 63

(Rich Feather) Nochhuetl 52

(Ideal Bean) Coatl 48

(Serpent)

1201 females 87 unique names

1303 males 574 unique names

Common names Common names 6th-10th most frequent by sex6th-10th most frequent by sex

Females Xoco 53

(The Last one) Centehua 42

(One’s Woman) Xocoyotl 38

(Youngest one) Tlacoehua 22

(Second daughter) Cihuaton 15

(Littlest female) Tepin 15

(Elder Sister)

Males Tototl 19

(Bird) Quauhtli 18

(Eagle) Tochtli 17

(Rabbit) Zolin 16

(Quail) Matlal 12

(Indigo Plant) Xochitl 12

(Flower)

Frequency of Common Frequency of Common Female NamesFemale Names

1,013 females share 10 names with 15 or more occurrences55 names occur once; 20, 2-14 times (n=108); unknown (n=25)

nu

mb

er

of o

ccu

rre

nce

s

Fig. 1. Frequency of names for 1,201 females

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Teyacapan Tlaco

Teicuh Necahual

Xoco Centehua

Xocoyotl Tlacoehua

Tepi Cihuaton

n=1n=2-14

unknown

341 males share 10 names with 12 or more occurrences428 names occur once; 143, 2-11 times (n=494); unknown (n=40)

nu

mb

er

of o

ccu

rre

nce

s

Fig. 2. Frequency of names for 1,303 males

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Yaotl Matlalihuitl

Nochhuetl Coatl

Tototl Quauhtli

Tochtli Zolin

MatlaljXochitl

n=1n=2-11

unknown

1,013 females share 10 names with 15 or more occurrences55 names occur once; 20, 2-14 times (n=108); unknown (n=25)

nu

mb

er

of o

ccu

rre

nce

s

Fig. 1. Frequency of names for 1,201 females

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Teyacapan Tlaco

Teicuh Necahual

Xoco Centehua

Xocoyotl Tlacoehua

Tepi Cihuaton

n=1n=2-14

unknown

Common Male NamesCommon Male NamesNote low frequency of most namesNote low frequency of most names

Inequality of marital condition:Inequality of marital condition:fewer never married females, fewer never married females,

more widowers, concubines, etc.more widowers, concubines, etc.

fre

qu

en

cy

Marital Condition of males and females: asymmetrical0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

female male

not not yet married concubine no longer widowed

4. Widowhood is a female condition4. Widowhood is a female conditionwidowers quickly remarry; widowers quickly remarry;

widows do not (cannot?)widows do not (cannot?)

fre

qu

en

cy

Asymmetry: Widows exceed Widowers at all durationsstated duration of widowhood ('years ago')

0

10

20

30

40

female male

0days 1last 2two 3three 4four 5five 7seven 8ten fifteen twenty

Household compositionHousehold composition

Brothers of heads: Brothers of heads: of 135 coresiding, 98 were married and 2 of 135 coresiding, 98 were married and 2 recently widowed.recently widowed.90 older brothers were heads; 8 younger.90 older brothers were heads; 8 younger.

26 mothers lived in households headed by 26 mothers lived in households headed by sons; sons; 40 mothers….by sons-in-law40 mothers….by sons-in-law

1/5 of residents were related to the head 1/5 of residents were related to the head through marriage (affinal kin tie).through marriage (affinal kin tie).

ConclusionsConclusions 1. Nahua households were 1. Nahua households were largelarge (ave. = 8) and (ave. = 8) and

complexcomplex (75% contained two or more conjugal (75% contained two or more conjugal families)families)

2. 2. MortalityMortality, rather than braking, , rather than braking, acceleratedaccelerated the formation of the formation of complexcomplex familiesfamilies..

3. 3. social constraintssocial constraints were of greater importance were of greater importance than mortality: Nahua offspring formed new than mortality: Nahua offspring formed new households after the birth of a child, not simply households after the birth of a child, not simply with marriage.with marriage.

Conclusions, social flexibility:Conclusions, social flexibility:

1. Marriage norms and family forms are 1. Marriage norms and family forms are social constructions and are highly plastic, social constructions and are highly plastic, even in ancient Mexico.even in ancient Mexico.

2. Marriage age (including informal unions) 2. Marriage age (including informal unions) has increased greatly over the centuries, has increased greatly over the centuries, from as little as 13 years in rural “Morelos” from as little as 13 years in rural “Morelos” five centuries ago to as much as 22 years by five centuries ago to as much as 22 years by 1930, and 24 by 1990.1930, and 24 by 1990.

3. Likewise, complex families have declined 3. Likewise, complex families have declined from 75% to 15% in 1930, and 6% in 1990.from 75% to 15% in 1930, and 6% in 1990.

Conclusions: earthly names of Conclusions: earthly names of ordinary country-folkordinary country-folk

Male names: Male names: individualized, symbolic, diverseindividualized, symbolic, diverse

Female names: Female names: categorical, birth order, boringcategorical, birth order, boring

Gender relations: instead of Gender relations: instead of parallel and symmetry, parallel and symmetry, divergence and asymmetrydivergence and asymmetry

Nahua gender relations: Nahua gender relations: patriarchy, assymetry, oppressionpatriarchy, assymetry, oppression

Division of labor: strongly genderedDivision of labor: strongly genderedHouseholds: only males are heads Households: only males are heads Average age at marriage: Average age at marriage:

girls: less than 13 yearsgirls: less than 13 yearsboys: greater than 19 yearsboys: greater than 19 years

Widowhood: a female matterWidowhood: a female matterGendering of names: firm rulesGendering of names: firm rules

With conquest and colonization: With conquest and colonization: heightened inequalitiesheightened inequalities

Division of labor: strongly gendered, Division of labor: strongly gendered, heightened by inequalities of classheightened by inequalities of class

Households: greater proportion of female Households: greater proportion of female heads heads

Average age at marriage: Average age at marriage: females: rose to 17-18 yearsfemales: rose to 17-18 yearsmales: rose to 21-23 yearsmales: rose to 21-23 years

Widowhood: more likely to head householdWidowhood: more likely to head householdGendering of names: Christian saintsGendering of names: Christian saints

EndEnd

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

...transcribed ...transcribed ……translated translated ……microdatamicrodata

Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin relationships with 19+ occurrencesrelationships with 19+ occurrences

Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540

RelationshipRelationship Frequency (total n = 2,486)Frequency (total n = 2,486)childchild 596596 mother-in-lawmother-in-law 4040spousespouse 316316 brother-in-law’s spouse 38brother-in-law’s spouse 38headhead 315315 sister-in-lawsister-in-law 37 37brotherbrother 158158 daughter-in-lawdaughter-in-law 36 36brother’s spouse 88brother’s spouse 88 nephewnephew 34 34son-in-lawson-in-law 77 77 brother-in-law’s childbrother-in-law’s child 33 33brother-in-lawbrother-in-law 76 76 sister’s childsister’s child 33 33sister sister 67 67 mothermother 26 26grandchildgrandchild 56 56 cousincousin 19 19brother’s childbrother’s child 51 51 nieceniece 19 19

Table 2. Multiple households were Table 2. Multiple households were the norm among rural Nahuathe norm among rural Nahua

Household typeHousehold type HouseholdsHouseholds (Percent) (Percent) IndividualsIndividualsSimpleSimple 13.413.4 7.2 7.2

No childrenNo children 1.9 1.9 0.5 0.5ChildrenChildren 11.511.5 6.7 6.7

ExtendedExtended 13.413.4 10.110.1UpwardUpward 1.9 1.9 1.0 1.0DownwardDownward 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2LateralLateral 6.7 6.7 4.9 4.9CombinationsCombinations 4.5 4.5 3.9 3.9

Multiple Multiple 72.172.1 81.181.1UpwardUpward 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3DownwardDownward 15.115.1 14.614.6LateralLateral 26.326.3 26.626.6CombinationsCombinations 30.430.4 39.539.5

PolygamousPolygamous 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.6Total (n)Total (n) 312 312 2,486 2,486Illegible (n)Illegible (n) 3 3 17 17

Table 3a. Headship designation by Table 3a. Headship designation by frequency of occurrence.frequency of occurrence.

District identities of households and headDistrict identities of households and head

freqfreq KeyKey ExplanationExplanation165165 HH “Here is the home of ...”; “Here is ....'s home.” “Here is the home of ...”; “Here is ....'s home.” 4747 RR “Here is the householder named ...”“Here is the householder named ...” 3939 SS “Here is the home of some people...” “ The household“Here is the home of some people...” “ The household

head is named...” or “The head of the household is head is named...” or “The head of the household is named...” or “The householder is named...” named...” or “The householder is named...”

2525 TT “The tribute payer is named...”“The tribute payer is named...” 2020 .. illegibleillegible 66 mm migrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”)migrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”) 66 GG “one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named ... is in charge”“one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named ... is in charge” 11 bb “one who belongs to the tlatoani”“one who belongs to the tlatoani” 11 gg “Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani”“Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani” 11 nn “Here is a nephew...” “Here is a nephew...” 22 CC “Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss”“Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss” 11 aa “Here is a goodly maiden...”“Here is a goodly maiden...”

Table 4. Position of Table 4. Position of marriedmarried individuals in individuals in rural Nahua households was strongly rural Nahua households was strongly

structured by genderstructured by gender

RelationshipRelationship MaleMale FemaleFemaleHeadHead 306306 1 1SpouseSpouse 1 1 309309Son/daughterSon/daughter 36 36 75 75Other kin:Other kin: 323323 285285

Brother/sisterBrother/sister 98 98 26 26Brother/sister-in-law*Brother/sister-in-law* 63 63 106106Son/daughter in lawSon/daughter in law 75 75 36 36Brother/sister-in-law’s spouseBrother/sister-in-law’s spouse 14 14 38 38Father/motherFather/mother 3 3 3 3Father/mother-in-lawFather/mother-in-law 8 8 8 8OtherOther 62 62 68 68

Not related:Not related: 11 11 11 11Total married (includes 2Total married (includes 2ndnd wives) wives) 677677 681681

Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Morelos, 1540 and 1990,Morelos, 1540 and 1990,

and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990

15401540 19901990 19901990

Rural MorelosRural Morelos RepublicRepublicRelation to HeadRelation to Head % % % % % %

HeadHead 13 13 20 20 19 19

SpouseSpouse 13 13 16 16 16 16

Son or DaughterSon or Daughter 24 24 54 54 53 53

Other kinOther kin 49 49 6 6 7 7

Not relatedNot related 1 1 4 4 5 5

Total %Total % 100100 100100 100100

N (sample size)N (sample size) 2,5032,503 1,6331,633 801,981801,981