Monday, September 21, 2020

A detailed Note on Kinship Usages: Functional Aspect of Social Institution



 Kinship refers to a principle by which individuals or groups of individuals are organized into social groups, roles, categories, and genealogy using kinship terminologies and it encompasses all relations of Consanguinity and marriage alliance. It is the central organizing force for virtually the whole of the social structure and Kinship usages guidelines of social interactions and defines proper and acceptable roles and relationships among social members by acting as a regulator of social life.

                The famous anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan was the founder of kinship studies after he reported on the Iroquois. English scholar Radcliffe Brown involved the comparative method in Kinship studies and Evans Prichard through his study of the Nuer revealed its importance in social as well aa s political organizationtion.

From anthropological perspective, there are mainly 6  types of kinship usage those are certain kind of coactive behavior pattern which exhibits regularity and hold special significance with respect to societies with definite structure and continuity. These are-

v Teknonymy:

            It is the practice of designating adults according to the names of their children (mostly of their 1st child) and is frequently assumed to be a minor nomenclature usage through kinship behavioral patterns. It is a system of name-changin which tend to be confined to the most personal and domestic spheres of life as well.

 Significance in different communities:

                      Teknonymy distinguishes the main generational strata, the children, parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, strata which are significant components of any society. After this kinship usage, a man and wife as a couple essentially represents the same name as joint procreators.

Ø  As reported by Clifford Geertz, for the Balinese, the very old and the very young are near to the world of Gods. With respect to Balinese society we can understand that,

·         Through this kinship usage the referring  status of a person keeps on changing as many as for 4 times in a course of life and each teknonymous name represents the current familial status of that person.  The delineation of this four-position chain of filiation presents the 'descent'-line with all members bearing the same name.

·         It is not only found within a family but it also accepted in the whole social structure of a community even it  makes its contribution to hamlet organization by providing a classificatory frame, a set of categories of like-named people.

·         It is the enduring form of social interaction within a particular group, the stable system of regular social relationships.

·         Dual man-and-woman membership also play important role specially in the governing body or village council as well as in the hamlet rituals duties, temple affiliations, traditional allegiances to feudal lords and other obligations related to community associations.(specifically reported by Clifford Geertz in Balinese community )

·         The  teknonymic generational strata are verbal categories which are adjusted in everyday interaction to coincide roughly with the community's real (but un-named) social organizational layers of minors, active citizens, elders, and senile dependants.

·         Teknonymy brings about systematic genealogical amnesia through its regular replacement of each man's personal name with a series of teknonymous ones.

How does it works?

             At birth each person is given a proper name, by which he or she is called until he marries and has a child. After having child people begin to address him or her as ‘Father-of-so-and-so’ or ‘Mother-of-so-and-so’, employing his or her child’s personal name.

             When the couple become grand parents the transition to 2nd  teknonymous name take place. Now their children lose their childhood names in turn and are referred to as ‘Father-of ….’ Or ‘Mother-of….’ And their names shift to ‘Grandfather-of…..’or ‘Grandmother-of…’ as they became grandparents.  And

            when they become great-grandparents, all the names again shift upward, with the older couple and they being called as ‘Great-parent-of-so-and-so’(the most recent or elder offspring). 

 The  mode of address in the social situation, sum up the various vectors of prestige, corresponding to the shifting of social position of an individual.

 

                            When an individual  has reached the status of great-grandparenthood, he or she has fulfilled his generational obligations and socially (and, according to some, mystically) reincarnated himself. A set of four generations is thus a complete unit, with a beginning, an end, and a new beginning, with the status of kumpi (great-grandparent; great grandchild) marking the point of juncture between units, the end of one cycle and the beginning of another. In this way the Balinese version of teknonymy creates an ever-repeating sequence of four impersonal statuses-child, parent, grandparent, and great-grandparent-and systematically erases the knowledge of collateral kinship ties.

Ø  As reported by Needham in 1954 among the Penan of Central Borneo, they give teknonyms only to couples with living offspring. They have no grandparental or great-grandparental teknonymic levels, while childless couples, or those who have lost the child after whom they were named, retain their personal names. Thus teknonymy has the function of focusing attention on the marital couple as joint procreators by classifying them together socially under the single name of their child, and setting them apart from the immature, the childless, and the aged.

Ø  Among the Land Dayak, also of central Borneo, teknonymous usage is somewhat more developed. Here teknonyms are applied to nearly every adult member of the society, and the principle of 'graduation' to grandparental status is found in the Land Dayak system of teknonymy which functions through the layering of the society into three levels: children, parents, and grandparents (Geddes 1954).

Apart from these societies there are many traditional Hindu societies can be found to be practiced this kinship usage with a lot of social importance like Hindu wives does not refer to her husband through his name but use his teknonymous name as ‘father of X’ (X is their child) and even neighbours used to address  the parents as ‘father of X’ or ‘mother of X’ instead of using their personal name.    

Limitation of this Kinship usage:

             For this kinship usage a man does know the personal names of those of his own generation and below, but don’t know the names of his or her grandparents or great grand-parents,  it is theoretically possible for the oldest men in the neighbourhood to identify every living person by an individual, absolute, and fixed designation, but he or she may likely to have forgotten many people's personal names after years of addressing them as 'Father-of' or 'Grandfather-of' someone else. Thus the identities of older persons remains untraceable. So there is a huge chance of loss of personal identities and identities of family members as well as the historic information of a society itself. 

In most of the societies it is found to be extremely discourteous to use a person’s childhood name instead of his or her teknonymous name and also can be a map of certain social locations, a set of culturally agreed-upon indicators of social status. Teknonymy  has certain formal structural elements which can be analytically compared from culture to culture, and their functions assessed within each society. So apart from it’s limitation it is found to be maintained by different communities in the different parts of the world.


v Couvade:

                        The couvade is classically defined as the custom by which "the father, on the birth of his child, makes a ceremonial pretence of being the mother, being nursed and taken care of, and performing other rites such as fasting and abstaining from certain kinds of food or occupations, lest the new-born should suffer thereby" (Tylor 1889:254)

                        Basically this is the kinship usage pattern between a husband and his wife. The term Couvade was first coined by E. B. Tylor in 1865.  Anthropologists regard this behavioral usage as a symbolic representation of establishing paternity on the child followed by the maintenance of taboos, strict diets, fasting and other rituals and obligations along with his pregnant wife during her gestation period for the survival of their common offspring. More frequently found in matrilocal societies (Tylor 1889) and concerns primarily the head of the nuclear family.

   Functions and importance of couvade:

  "The function of couvade is the establishment of social paternity by the symbolic          assimilation of the father to the mother" (Malinowski 1930:631)

Basically this is the way by which child parents construct and constitute identity and gender by defining the positive and negative characteristics through pre-birth ritual behaviors. Thus ,

·         This ritual is a way that inscribe, enact and reproduce social relations and identities in a complex society with a strong basis in patriarchy as well as a social strategy that serves a symbolic value of recognition to the process of socialization of an individual.

·         It is a way to formulate models of behavior for pregnant woman, new born, new mothers, fathers and kin and works out symbolically to bring back into their social, family and kin group.

·         It helps to understand and measure the historical development and social progress through establishing the social paternity for the child through the protected sympathetically restrictions.

·         It is that the rite of parenthood as well as the expression of a strong spiritual connection between a father and his child.

·         It is also reported as a rite corresponding to the process of conceptualizing human sexuality as the channel through which a new human person is brought to life, through  parenthood and new intimate relations, remodelling of the structure of affinal and consanguineal ties within the social group are formed. (Rival 1998, Middleton 2000)

So ultimately it is  the joint effort through which the husband-wife pair transfers life onto a new human person. Among the Bearn and Basques along with other communities of Europe believe this practice as “man-childbed”.


              Community representations:

1.       As witnessed by British anthropologist Margaret Hasluk. Among Albanian communities a husband must subjected to extremely numerous taboos extent to food as well as behavior along with his pregnant wife and the remnants of the custom must be seen as based effectively on beliefs about or collective representations of an essential bond between the new born child and its father.

2.      The  fatherhood rites summed up under the term couvade are still practiced, found in South America and Southeast Asia.

3.      There is hardly a South American indigenous group in which there have not been reports of restrictions or prohibitions on the activity, diet and sex life of the parents at the time of birth (Metraux 1949).

4.      According to Rival 1998, the institution exists throughout Amazonia or in other contexts where birth observances fundamentally consist in perinatal dietary and activity restrictions for both parents, there is no necessary native term for 'couvade' .

5.      In South American regional context, the couvade appears clearly for a rite of co-parenthood. Metraux, in his short article on the couvade written for the Handbook of South American Indians (1949), emphatically stressed that the Amazonian couvade was not motivated by a male desire to imitate childbirth, along with it the perinatal food and activity restrictions applied to both parents.

6.      Ainus of Japan, few communities in China ,Nayers, Toda and Khashi community of South India can also be cited as examples who practice Couvade.

Thus, the couvade is interpreted as a paternity ritual institutionalizing the father's right, as a rite of adoption that a woman's husband performed in order to gain social recognition of his legal rights over her offspring, and finally as an expression of the equal values between mother and father in the procreation of their child. It is not a male rite but a rite of a couple. The  system of the couvade is not an autonomous reality and it seems to be a remnant of the ancient and hypothetical matriarchal civilization.

 

 

v Avunculate:

                 As suggested by Dumont in 1971 Descent and alliance approach , both the pre-Schneiderian theory has considered avuncular relations as being tense and contradictive, associated with certain privileges of the maternal uncle and his senior hierarchical position in relation to Ego .

                 Avunculate is the relationship between a mother’s brother and his sister’s children mostly found among the matrilineal societies, where maternal uncle assumes many of duties of father as a matter of convention. Here nephew and niece remains under  their Maternal uncle.

Importance  in community level:

               The Avunculate kinship usage mostly exists among the Trobriand islanders of Melanesia, the Fijians, the African tribes, the Mongolian communities and the Nayers of South India.

               From the context of contemporary social and political realities in Buriad diaspora communities in north-eastern Mongolia, China as well as in Russia’s Eastern Siberia we can understand this phenomena. According to the predominating Marxist social evolution theory in the Soviet period, avuncular relations, even if they were currently observed among different groups of Buriads, were viewed as 'remnants of the past' (Rus. perezhitki proshlogo) (e.g. Viatkina 1946: 142)

               Here it can be observed that in dyadic relations of mother’s brother and sister’s son, the Buriad diaspora flexibly place themselves as Ego in different positions, such as   1/  in relation to Mother’s Brother, where MB is used as a metaphor for the homeland and the people who expelled them from there; and 2/ In relation with Sister’s son, where ZS is used as metaphor for the dominant ethnic group in the current host society. Among them MB is referred to and addressed as nagasa, and sister's children are called zee.

·         This relationship implies status difference through particular roles.

·         The MB has the right to inflict capital punishment on his sister's children and in folk aphorism was metaphorically called the 'master of zee' (Schram 1954:98-9)

·         According to Krade, 1963,  Monguor kinship also shows that respect behavior towards MB can be even reinforced 'over and beyond the inherent respect owed by the ZS' through kinship term.

·         Various  manifestations of avuncular relations among different groups of Buriads can be found, those are mostly based on observations of life-cycle rituals like the first hair-cutting of the child, (milaanguud) to funeral rituals.

·         As reported by Basaeva in 1984, the cluster of ceremonies accompanying a wedding such as the bride’s farewell feast, poetic panegyrics (magtaal) praise the lineage of maternal uncles of the bride and maternal uncles of both bride and groom participate in the ceremony of bride-price presented among Selenga Buriads and also reported by Khangalov in 1903 that Maternal uncles are offered a ceremonial gift of fat when the zee comes to the wedding of nagasa's son among Irkutsk Buriads.

·         Among Buriad community, the kin majority has very strong notions of avuncular relations, and considers the nagasa to be a person who can either be supporting and protective towards obedient and respectful zee, or even can call down curses and miseries upon rebellious and disrespectful zee as well.

                So basically among Buriad society avuncular terminology has been considered to be a kin-idiom expressing the concern of the Buried diaspora about their antagonistic relations with their former territorial and political ally and Avuncular relations have room for a wide range of equivocal feelings, both 'curse and blessing' which involves defining their concerns and tensions in relation both to colonizers in the homeland in Russia and to the social inequality of migrants in the host societies of Mongolia and China.

 

v Amitate:

           This kind of usage is mostly found in in the lineal societies where the father’s sister gets great respect and prime importance in the life of her nephew. It is assumed to be practiced to balance the social relationship between a woman and her family after her marriage or in the situation of being driven off from their in-law’s house. 

Functions with importance through community insights:

The kinship usage of amitate mostly exists among the Polynesian Tonga, Toda of South India, and some patriarchal communities of the world.

Ø Goldman has postulated a strong bilineal principle in ancient Tongan society, based on brother and sister who “occupy eternally distinct realms . . . the male line organized power and all utilitarian functions; the female lines controlled the more abstract honors”.

Tupou Posesi, an authority on Tongan custom, put it like this:

“You can stand on your mother's relations (kāinga 'i fa'ē) but your father's relatives (kāinga 'i Tamai) stand on you.”

Ø  Observations in Niuatoputapu suggested that the powers of a contemporary mehekitanga over her brother's children became apparent only during the life crises of the children: namely,

·         Conception and birth:           Several Niuatoputapu mothers sent a special portion of baked food to their husband's eldest sister after the safe birth of their babies. It seems to be a positive act of support and also a desire to state publicly that as mehekitanga she bore no grudge against the weak nephew or his parents.

·         Naming:         Most first-born children in Falehau village seems to be named by their mehekitanga. Similar preferences have been reported for Pangai, Nukuleka, and a Tongatapu sample.

·         Marriage:       Bott's observation that the mehekitanga “ . . . has the right of deciding whom he [her brother's child] is to marry”, during this time the father of the guy who wants to marry ought to go to his eldest sister (the child's mehekitanga) and hold a private discussion to arrange details.

Ideally, she decides what kind of ceremony should take place, and who is to be the father or ritual head of the ceremony even if the father's sister can disapprove and stop the marriage.

·         Illness (mahaki), death, and funeral:    Respective mehekitanga of the deceased persons are treated as honored guests at two funerals to be held in Falehau village, one making the distribution of Koloa ‘funerary durables’, and the other being given her choice of the fine mats by the surviving widow of the deceased man.

These examples accord with the principle that the highest status position at any ritual is accorded to the fact, and that the fahu usually is the mehekitanga (father’s sister) of the Ego. Thus Summing up the ideology and role of the mehekitanga there is good evidence even today for her to be seen as the focal point of some form of control and authority on the ‘father's side. She exerts this control over her brothers, her brothers' children, and to some extent, over her brothers' wives. The nature of this control is partly economic, partly attributable to mystical powers.

Ø  In all the south-eastern Bantu tribes both the father's sister and the sister, particularly the elder sister, are persons who must be treated with great respect. They are also both of them members of a man's patrilineal lineage. Amongst the Va Ndau the father's sister is called 'female father' (tetadji) and so also is the sister. Thus by the fiction of terminological classification, the sister is placed in the father's generation, the one that appropriately includes persons to whom one must exhibit marked respect.

Ø  Captain Cook in 1777 recognized the superior rank of the “late King's sister” and her three children over the “present King . . . but why we never could get any other reason than this of their pedigree”.

Ø  William Mariner observed in 1806-10 that “children acquire their rank by inheritance . . . from the mother's side” which attributes superior female powers in Polynesia.

Ø  Mead regarded the “power of the father's sister's line . . . in Samoa,  as well.

Ø   Even Mabuchi has discussed the “spiritual predominance of the sister” in the Ryūkyūan Islands, Formosa, Indonesia, and Oceanic islands; and Hooper and Huntsman have attributed female superiority in Tokelau culture to a mystical power that is decidedly supportive rather than harmful to the brother's children.

So it can be seen from the above insights how this special kinship usage plays important roles in different societies and keep balancing the social relations of a woman with her paternal household.  

 

v Avoidance :

                   In this kinship usage, one is to maintain between two persons so related extreme mutual respect and a limitation of direct personal contact. This is exhibited in the very formal relations that are, in so many societies, characteristic of the behavior of a son-in-law on the one side and his wife's father and mother on the other.

                  In its most extreme form, there is complete avoidance of any social contact between a man and his mother-in-law. The usually respected relatives are those of the first ascending generation, the wife's mother and her sisters, the wife's father, and his brothers, and sometimes the wife's mother's brother. This avoidance can mostly be seen between the same generational strata or between the higher generational strata, like,

Communities and Significance :

                The significance is some kind of hidden in this kinship usage. It is tough to understand its moral significance in a community but as a generalization,

·         The avoidance must not be mistaken for a sign of hostility rather this is the mutual respect between both sides as a mode of friendship.

·         'Avoidance' is seem to be a moral injunction that prevents conflict that might arise through divergence of interest.

This is a mechanism to preserve peace in a family. Helps to prevent conflicts and hostilities among different relationships.

·         It also works to prevent intimacy and familiarity and sometimes acts as an incest taboo

·         In community understanding, the more general stipulation of Lukoosi in relationships of all kinds continues to hold, and poses limitations on the types of behavior thought to be suitable.

·          A man's avoidance of his mother-in-law combines both fear and respect. It seems to be a man both that they respect and honor their mothers-in-law because women are more fertile than men and they are afraid to see them in case they might find them beautiful. the prohibitions focus on the fear of sexual contact, of touching or seeing one another naked.

·          The relationship of parent and child, demands formality and respect and provides the model for all behavior between people of adjacent generations like seniors and juniors.

·         The relationship between mother-in-law and son-in-law is asymmetric concerning the basic polarities around which the Gisu community has constructed their kinship universe. Among  them within the latter sphere, the parameters of lukoosi and tsisoni effectively create four basic types of relationship:

1.      those of the same sex and generation (B/B, Z/Z);

2.      those of the same sex, different generation (F/S, M/D);

3.      those of different sex, same generation (B/Z); and

4.      those of different sex, different generation (F/D, M/S).

So actually this is a protective measure against incestuous sexual relations among close relatives which protects the members from unexpected sexual abusing issues or many household issues regarding close contact or intimacy.

 

v Joking relationship:

                 'Joking relationship' is a relation between two persons in which one is by custom permitted, and in some instances required, to tease or make fun of the other, who in turn is required to take no offense. This special privileged relationship indulges in testing each other with different kinds of jokes including vulgar sexual jokes and abusing or ridiculing each other.

Radcliffe-Brown defined joking relationships in terms of their essential ambivalence, a 'peculiar combination of friendliness and antagonism' (1952 [1940]: 91)

How does it work?

          This relationship is of two varieties,

1.      Between symmetrical relation, where each of the two persons teases or makes fun of the other. And

2.       Between asymmetrical relation, where  X jokes at the expense of Y and Y accept the teasing good-humouredly but without retaliating; or X teases Y as much as he pleases and Y in return teases X only a little.

§  In some instances the joking or teasing is only verbal, in others it includes horse-play; in some, the joking includes elements of obscenity as well.  

§  The joking relationship is a peculiar combination of friendliness and antagonism. The behavior is such that in any other social context it would express and arouse hostility, but it is not meant seriously and must not be taken seriously. There is a pretense of hostility and real friendliness. To put it in another way, the relationship is one of permitted disrespect.

§  A very common form of a joke in this connexion is for the grandchild to pretend that he wishes to marry the grandfather's wife, or that he intends to do so when his grandfather dies, or to treat her as already being his wife. Alternatively, the grandfather may pretend that the wife of his grandchild is, or might be, his wife. The point of the joke is the pretense of ignoring the difference in age between the grandparent and the grandchild.

This relationship exists between,

ü  A man and his younger sister-in-law

ü  A woman and her younger brother-in-law

ü  Grand-parents and grand-children

ü  Between Cross-cousins

ü  A man and his matrilineal uncle’s wife reported among matrilineal Hopi and Trobriand islanders. 

Importance of joking relationship:

                   The joking relatives are those of a person's generation, but very frequently a distinction of seniority within the generation is made; a wife's older sister or brother may be respected while those younger will be teased. So joking of this kind only flourishes in the 'safe area of social relationships, 

·         It provides stimulation in a friendly relationship symbolized through jokes.

·         This whole maintain social order depends upon the appropriate kind and degree of respect being shown towards certain persons, things, and ideas or symbols.  

·         The alternative to the avoidance relation of extreme mutual respect and restraint is the joking relationship which is of mutual disrespect and license.

·         Through this kinship usage the social conjunction is maintained by the friendliness that takes no offense at the insult.

·         A play upon enmity, which gives simultaneous expression to the common and divergent interests among parties to an alliance.

·         The joking or teasing may become an extremely risky strategy in social interaction as it is always open to misinterpretation and conflict may arise due to that.

                 The Gisu have both the Joking and avoidance relationship forms even though they might be said to have extreme versions of them. Avoidance between mother-in-law and son-in-law is virtually total, on the other side joking between non-kin is marked by an exaggerated element of hostility. Affinal relationships may be seen to modify in two directions: one can be intimate towards greater distance.

                   So it can be seen that the discrimination within the wife's family between those who have to be treated with extreme respect and those with whom it is a duty to be disrespectful is made based on the generation and sometimes seniority within the generation. When a man marries he must respect his wife's parents but joke with her brothers and sisters. Similarly, when a woman comes to her marital house she must follow the rules of avoidance with those senior members of the family.

 

Conclusion:

                All the kinship usages are definite and stable in the different organizational modes of society. These constitute bonding between relatives, parents, husband, and wife as well as clans, tribes, or even sometimes between communities.

                Teknonymy is the kinship usage that connects two poles of the important roles which are not only connected through blood rather also connected through marital relations progressing from generation to generation and keeping the traditional way of name giving to a person. When a person is referred to a name that is connected through his or her child, it represents their survival presence as well as the importance of the generational strata of a lineage.  

               Couvade plays the role to get parenthood. It is important to understand that it is not only a practice performed by the father but also the mother as well. Through this kinship usage, a reflection of such a behavioral act of love, affection, and effort to get the peace of having their child who progresses their generational chain takes place. The biological process of having a baby could not be changed but through this behavior somehow the equal effort of a parent to get parenthood can be reflected.

              Avunculate and amitate are special forms of kinship usage that are not bounded within a family or a lineage but connects another family through the mother’s brother and father’s sister respectively. Through this kinship bonding, the families which are not connected by blood got connected and thus the web of social relations keeps connected.

             Simultaneously the avoidance and joking relationship are the kinship tie to keep balance within the relationships. These strategies teach an individual what to do with whom, how to maintain relationships, through spicy joking with youngers or same generation on the other hand through respective and polite behavior with seniors or cross relations.

              So, kinship usages are like the spices of cuisine, which may differ among different communities and traditions. One has to keep in mind that to get the actual or it can say the accurate taste, he or she has to learn for what cuisine which spice and how much is needed and have to add accordingly otherwise one may have to hear  ‘you don’t know how to behave yourself, which of course won’t be expected. 


References:

1.      Heald, S. (September 01, 1990). Joking and Avoidance, Hostility and Incest: An Essay on Gisu Moral Categories. Man, 25, 3, 377-392.

2.      Doja, A. (October 01, 2005). Social Thought & Commentary: Rethinking the Couvade. Anthropological Quarterly, 78, 4, 917-950.

3.      NAMSARAEVA, S. A. Y. A. N. A. (January 01, 2010). The Metaphorical Use of Avuncular Terminology in Buried Diaspora Relationships with Homeland and Host Society. Inner Asia, 12, 2, 201-230.

4.      Geertz, H., & Geertz, C. (July 01, 1964). Teknonymy in Bali: Parenthood, Age-Grading, and Genealogical Amnesia. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 94, 2, 94-108.

5.      Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (January 01, 1940). On joking relationships. Africa, 13, 195-210.

6.      Rogers, G. (June 01, 1977). 'THE FATHER'S SISTER IS BLACK': A CONSIDERATION OF FEMALE RANK AND POWERS IN TONGA. The Journal of the Polynesian Society, 86, 2, 157-182.

7.      James, K. E. (June 01, 1991). THE FEMALE PRESENCE IN HEAVENLY PLACES: MYTH AND SOVEREIGNTY IN TONGA. Oceania, 61, 4, 287-308.

                    


No comments:

Post a Comment

Ethics in Anthropological Fieldwork

  Anthropologist in the Field “ Research ethics govern the standards of conduct for scientific researchers. It is important to adhere to ...