When it comes to attitudes, rights and duties, all of Ego’s fathers (father and father’s brothers) have authority over Ego. And if Ego does not have a sister to exchange for a wife, he is entitled to expect his other fathers to give him one of their daughters (who are his classificatory ‘sisters’) for the exchange. In addition, as we will see, all of these fathers and all of their children were made from the same sperm as that of Ego’s father and as that of Ego (in the case of a male Ego). Which explains why, even though he also calls the daughters of his mother’s sisters, ‘sisters’, he cannot use them to exchange for a wife: they were not made from the same sperm that made the women of his lineage whom he calls ‘sisters’. Likewise, even though Ego’s mother’s sisters are mothers too, when he addresses his mother, he says Nouaou and when he addresses her sisters, he says Amawo. Finally, grandparents and grandchildren use reciprocal terms, ate (grandfather, grandson) and ata (grandmother, granddaughter). And if your great-grandfather is living and you are a boy, he will call you Gwagwe (‘little brother’) and you will call him Dakwe (‘big brother’). This means that beyond three generations, individuals who carry the same name ‘merge’, and that this merging begins with the third generation, when the grandson carries the same name as his paternal grandfather, the grandmother the same name as her paternal great-aunt, etc. This is direct evidence that for the Baruya an ancestor’s spirit does not die, and to give his or her name to a newborn child is the same as giving this spirit a body in which to reincarnate.
Baruya kinship terminology is thus characterized by three principal features: first, it is a ‘classificatory’ terminology that makes a distinction between cross and parallel kin, the latter being assimilated to siblings; this distinction is present only in Ego’s generation (G0) and not in the ascending and descending generations, as in Dravidian systems. Second, this terminology also possesses specific forms for designating affines, which is also a feature of Iroquois-type systems and distinguishes them from Dravidian systems. Third, the terminology does not carry any indication of the kind of descent rule at work in this society, which is patrilineal. It should be recalled that the Iroquois Indians described by Morgan were matrilineal and that some Iroquois-type terminologies are also associated with undifferentiated, non-lineal descent rules, which we term cognatic. We can already conclude from the above that there is therefore no necessary connection between the existence of a particular terminology and the presence of a particular descent rule.
Finally one last remark: children learn to use these kin terms at a very early age. They are usually taught by their mothers, in concrete situations, and they are quick to grasp that they are supposed to call a given man, distinct from their father, by the same term as they use for their father, noumwe, and that they are supposed to call this man’s children ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’, and so on.
MARRIAGE RULES
What are the principles governing Baruya marriage alliances? The first rule is a negative one: one does not marry in one’s own lineage. This is regarded as behaving like a dog, which mates with his siblings, and is regarded as incest, and incest is usually punished by death. It is also forbidden for a man to marry his matrilateral cross cousins, in other words his mother’s brothers’ daughters, even though he is allowed to make blatantly sexual jokes with them in public. He enjoys the same joking relationship with his patrilateral cross cousins, his father’s sisters’ daughters, but these he can marry. And this is precisely what the Baruya do each time a wife-taking lineage has not given a woman in exchange. In this event, one of the woman’s daughters will come and marry one of her mother’s brothers’ sons (a patrilateral cross-cousin marriage).
Why don’t the Baruya marry their matrilateral cross cousins, since they treat them like potential spouses? In order not to take a wife from the same lineage in two successive generations, in other words so as not to repeat their father’s marriage and not to immediately reproduce the same alliance. At least three generations must pass before repeating an alliance with the same group. It is also forbidden for two brothers to take wives in the same lineage. Over generations and depending on the number of male and female members, each lineage thus finds itself allied with five or six different lineages. This multiplication of marriages and the refusal to reproduce them before several generations have elapsed means that Baruya kinship practices resemble what are called ‘semi-complex’ systems. What differentiates the Baruya system is that their form of marriage is based fundamentally on the direct exchange of (close or distant) ‘sisters’ between two men and two lineages, which is typical of what are called ‘elementary’ systems.
But, if a man cannot marry his matrilateral cross cousins even though they are potential wives, he nevertheless sometimes marries a matrilateral parallel cousin, a ‘sister’, since her mother is also his mother. Why can he marry these ‘sisters’ whereas his own sister is forbidden? Because, unlike his sisters on his father’s side (siblings and female parallel cousins), his sisters on his mother’s side are not made from the same sperm as that which made him and his (real) sisters. This is clearly not the case with the mother’s sisters’ daughters – in virtue of the rule that dictates the dispersal of alliances in each generation, they cannot marry a man from their father’s lineage and thus repeat their sister’s marriage. They therefore marry into other lineages and bear children made from a different sperm and who are therefore potential spouses.
THE FIVE MARRIAGE TYPES
The Baruya distinguish five types of marriage. The basic rule is direct exchange of women between two lineages or segments. This rule has a name: ginamare. The exchange can be organized by the families either at the time of the children’s birth or at the time of puberty if the girl has not yet been promised. The boy’s family always makes the first move, and the mother of the small or adolescent girl has a great deal of say in deciding whether or not to promise her daughter to the lineage seeking her for one of its sons.
The second type of marriage derives from the first. It is practised when a boy’s father has given one of his sisters in marriage without receiving – for himself or someone in his lineage – a woman in exchange. In this case he has rights over one of his sister’s daughters – usually the eldest – who will marry his son as a counter-gift for her mother. This is patrilateral cross-cousin marriage; it is therefore not a general rule but complementary to the rule of direct ‘sister’ exchange. This rule, too, has a name: kouremandjinaveu. The term evokes the shoot that grows at the base of the banana tree (koure), which will replace the old tree when it stops bearing fruit.
The third type takes the form of a staged abduction. Two young people who want to marry against the will of their families, who have already chosen other spouses for them, simulate an abduction with the help of the young man’s co-initiates. This is a serious matter, for many interests are compromised and many promises of alliance are left in tatters. The men of the girl’s family pursue the young man, who allows himself to be struck until blood flows. If he can then mark the girl, whom his accomplices have brought along, with his blood, marriage becomes necessary as a compensation for the