7/23/2019 Faron

1/10

University of New Mexicois collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Southwestern Journal of

Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

A Reinterpretation of Choc SocietyAuthor(s): Louis C. FaronSource: Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring, 1961), pp. 94-102Published by: University of New MexicoStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3628872Accessed: 28-02-2015 16:41 UTC

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 contentin 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 support@jstor.org.

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unmhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3628872http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3628872http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unmhttp://www.jstor.org/

7/23/2019 Faron

2/10

A REINTERPRETATION OF

CHOCO

SOCIETY*

LOUIS C. FARON

PUBLISHED

ACCOUNTS of the Choc6 (Panamaniannd Colombian)

are

ltogether

ketchy

nd,

n

themselves,

nadequate

o

significant

ociological

interpretation.

side from

ome

good descriptions

f material

ulture nd

the

incorporation

f numerous

yths,

ccounts ecordittle

more han

bservations

f

quaint

ustom

nd belief. his

scanty thnographic

iterature,

owever,

as

been

summarized

nd

nterpretedy

David Stout1

n an article

which erves

s a

good

introductiono

Choc6

culture ut

which s

quite

misleading

n the rea

of social

structure.

On

the asis f nformationbtained

n the

field,2would

ike o make imited

observationsn thesystemsf kinship,marriage,nd residence ith pecific

reference

othe

ollowing

tatement

bout heChoc6:

All three

roups

f

Chocd

ppear

o be

exogamous,

hough

o what xtents not

known.

side

from his

xogamy,

here s also

obligatory

xogamy

n reference

o

patrilineal

ineages

hich

may

be clans.

.

.

Marriage

esidence,

deally

atrilocal,

actually

s

alternately

atrilocal

nd

matrilocal,

orwomen

ave

wnership

ights

n

some f

the

gricultural

lots; onsequentlyhey

nd their usbands

eriodically

e-

turn

o

thewoman's

arents'

ouse

owork er and.Thus

ach

household,

omposed

of several

onjugal

amily

nits,

as

constantlyhifting

embership.3

DEMOGRAPHY

AND ETHNIC

RELATIONSHIPS

The

Choc6

re a riverine

eople nhabiting

he

ropical

orests

f Panama nd

Colombia.

here

re

possibly

etween 000 and

5000 Choc6 cattered

long

he

river

ystems

f

Darien.

Between

00

and

1000of these ive

n

the

tudy

rea on

theChicoRivernd ts

tributaries,

etweenhe

own f Yaviza and the

errania

del

Darien.

Of

importance

o an

understanding

f

Choc6

ociety

s thefact

hat

hey

ave

* I wouldike ogivereditoMrPhilip oung or criticaleadingf he inalraftf his

paper,

romhichbenefitted

ubstantially.

1

David

Stout,

The

Choco"

in

Handbook

f

South

American

ndians, .

H.

Steward,

ed.,

Bulletin

43,

BureaulfAmerican

thnology,

ol.

, pp.269-276,

948).

2

The field

esearchhich

as

made

his

aper ossible

ould

not

havebeen

ccomplished

without

he

generous

ssistance

f theNational cience

oundation.

uring

he esearch

eriod,

the

ummerf

1960,

woweeks ere

pent

n theChico

River

n a

place

nown

s

El

Naranjal.

Here

obtained

y

most etailed

nd

quantified

nformation.

3

Stout,p.

it.,

.

273.

94

VOL.

17,

1961

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

3/10

CHOC6

SOCIETY

95

been

migrating

orth rom

olombia,

pparently

or enturies.

heyexplain

his

migration

s

theresult

f a

desire

ornew nd

adequate

ands,

timulated

y

the

pressure

f an

impinging egro (colombiano)

opulation.

he

colombianos

re

alsomovingorth nd aredisplacinghoc6,notonlynColombia ut alsofrom

their

entersf earlierettlement

n

Panama-the

ower

eaches

f themain ivers

and

arger

ributaries.

Interspersed

mong

heriverineouses f theChoc6 re those f

colombianos

and

(a

few)panamefos

predominantly

egroid

ationalsf

Panama).

A

rounded

study

f theChoc6

would f course nclude

detailed

ppraisal

f

relationships

with hese

Negropeoples,

ut,

for

present urposes,

he

most

mportant

eature

of

the

relationshipay

e stated

uccinctly.

t is

simply

hatChoc6do

not

marry

with

ther

eoples,

una

ncluded.

hey

rean

ideally thno-endogamousociety,

and

there eems o be a

nearly

ne hundred

ercentpproximation

o this

deal.

Even n the

Choc6

"settlement"

nPanama

City,

here

s not much

vidence

f

miscegenation.

anamefiosnd colombianos

aintain hat

they

re able

to live

in close

harmony

ithChoc6 because

hey

either

molest or

attempt

o

marry

Choc6 women.While there s

significant

nteraction

etween hoc6

and

Negro

(economic,

agico-religious,ecreative),

hoc6

endogamy

nd

its

corollary,

he

notion f

"racial

distance,"

erve o maintain

thnic

ntegritymong

his mall

and

shifting

opulation.

GREATERCHOC6 SOCIETY

When

Stout

described

all

three

roups"

s

exogamous

nd contrasted

his

exogamy

o

obligatory

xogamy

n

patrilineal

escent

roups,

e

posed

problem

insoluble

f

nterpretation.

hile t s inconceivable

hathe meant

ach

"group"

was

exogamouswith

eference

o thetwo

other

roups?),

we

are,

nevertheless,

faced

with

efining

wo kinds

f

exogamic

nits.

t is

likely

hat

Stout

merely

meant hat rule f

exogamy

s in

evidence

mong

ll Choc6 nd

that ne

might

at

east e certainhat

partial

efinition

f this ule ould

be made

with

eference

to

patrilinealineages.

We are confronted

ere,

owever,

ithmore han nfortu-

nate

phrasing.

ather,

his

ind

f statementndicates

misapplication

f

theory.

In

any

ase,

herereno

patrilineages

n

Choc6

ociety.

A further

ifficulty

f Stout's

ummary

s that

the

concepts

f culture

nd

society

re

not

lways

learly

istinguished.

mong

all

three

roups"

re

ncluded

the

Colombian

atio

of

theUrubfi

egion,

ronting

n theCaribbean.We

have

then heNorthern

Panamanian)

nd Southern

Colombian)

Choc6

long

with

theColombian atio

n some

ort f triad.

resumably,

his dentification

s made

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

4/10

96 SOUTHWESTERN

JOURNAL

OF

ANTHROPOLOGY

on

thebasis

of

Severino's

escription

f the

Catio.4

t is

my mpression

hat

he

Catiodo not

omprise

segment

f

greater

hoc6

ociety.

hile here re

obvious

cultural

imilaritiesetween

hoc6 nd

Catio,

here

reno

ndications

f

sustained

socialntercourseetweenhem--andhe ulturalimilarities,sidefromanguage,

seemno

greater

han

hose etween hoc6 nd Cuna. But theres

really

o ade-

quate

nformationbout

Catio

society

nd

whatever

elationships

ight

xist

with

other

ocieties,nd,

therefore,

o

justification

n

sociological rounds

or heir

inclusion

mong

he

Choc6.Whatever heir

elationship

ith he

Choc6,

t re-

mains o

be

discerned.

I

would, owever,

lassify

heNorthern

ndSouthern hoc6 s

comprising

single ociety,

lthough

hishas not been

done

heretofore.tout

umps

hem

culturally,

ut this

s

a

classificationf

a differentrder.

Wasskn5

istinguishes

between rue and Nonomi Choc6 (in Colombia),primarilyn the basis of

dialect

ifferences.ith

respect

o

kinship erminology,

ialectdifferenceser-

tainly

xist,

ut

they

n no

way

lter

he

pattern

f

nomenclature.t least hree

such

differencesere

noted

long

theChicoRiver nd

seem

o be

a

fairly

ide-

spread henomenon,

nderstandables a result f continual

opulation

ovement

and ocial

nteraction.

It

seems ome hat his

s a datum

f

great

alue

n

uggesting

hat he

kinship

system

s

essentially

he

amefor oth anamanian

nd Colombian hoc6.

make

this

point

imply

ecause he

customarythnological

ivision f

theChoc6 nto

northernnd southern

opulations

eems o

deny

t.

Wassin's

description

f

household

omposition

nd domestic

elationshipsmong

atypical)

Colombian

Choc6

families6

olds,

s

far s it

goes,

or

anamanian

hoc6.

My

field ata are

also in

agreement

ith

tout's

bservationhat

persons

make

::tended

isits e-

tween

he wo

reas.'

There s

evidence,herefore,

hat he ocial

ystems

n both

areas

re alike

and

that

here s sustainedocial

ntercourseetween

oth

reas.

If

itwere

otfor he

nternational

oundary

nd the

watersheds

ith

whicht

tends o

coincide,

t s

unlikely

hat

thnographers

ould

have

made

more

han

passinggeographicalistinctionetween he Northern nd Southern hoc6.

However,

hey

ave een

fit

o

make ultural istinctions

etweenhem

nd have

not

eriously

onsideredhe rea of social

relationships.

he cultural

ifferences

are

light,

nd thosewhich xist

re

n

evidence

mong

olombian hoc6

n

their

4

(Fr.)

Severino e Santa

Teresa,Creincias, itos,

sos

y

costumbrese los indios

Catios

de

la

prefectura

postdlica

e Urubd

(Bogoti,

1924).

5

HenryWassen,

Notes on

Southern

Groups

of

Choc6

ndians

n

Colombia

Etnologiska

Studier,

o.

1,

pp. 35-182,G6teborg,935).

6

Idem,pp.

43-44.

7

Op.cit.,p.271.

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

5/10

CHOC6

SOCIETY

97

native abitat

nd do

not, herefore,

erve o

distinguish

orthern

rom

outhern

Choc6.

ince

heres no

evidence rom he

thnographic

iteraturend nonefrom

my

own

fieldnotes f this

kindof

separateness,

feelthatthe

generalizations

made n thispaperholdforbothPanamanian nd Colombian hoc6. suggest

that

hey omprise single

ociety

hroughout

hich

inship

erms

unavailable

to Stout

whenhe

summarizedhe

material)

nd institutionalizedehavior

re

generally

xtended.

STRUCTURAL CORRELATESOF THE TERMINOLOGICAL SYSTEM

Kinship

erminology

n use both n

Panama nd Colombia

dialect

ifferences

not

ndicated) ppears

n the

ccompanyinggo-chart

Table 1),

and

s identi-

fiable s Hawaiian.AccordingoMurdock,8heHawaiian ype ystemorrelates

TABLE

1

Choc6

kinship erminology

ith eferenceo

Ego*

I.

Imberana:

xogamic

roup

GFs,GFBs,

GMBs zawand

GMs,GMZs,

GFZs

pakond

F

data

M

papaFBs,MBs,FZh,MZh droa

B, Z, c-Cs,

-Cs

jaba

Bch,

ch

teabea

S

hurra

D

kau

Sw

hurra

ima

r

haingti

Dh

kaukima

r

bigsd

gch

ainzake

II.

Recognizedognates:marriage

estricted

y ge only

c-Cs

p, -Cs p jabd

kima

c-Cs h, -Cs h teabea

c-Cs

h

p, -Cs

h

p,

Bch

p,

ch

p

teabea

ima

c-Cs

ch, -Cs ch, gch, gch

,iinzake

*

Term orh

(husband)

nd w

(wife)

s

kima.

here

s

little

rno

distinction

etween

vocative

ndreferential

erminology,

ut erms

renot

lways

sed

n

directddress.

xplanation

of

symbols:

Fs

means

randfathers;

stands

or

ister;

h

stands

or

hildren;

-Cs

tands

for

ross-cousins;

p

standsor

pouse;

ch

tands

or

grandchildren.

he same ermsreused

whether

go

s

male r

female,egardless

f

ge.

8

George

eter

Murdock,

ocial Structure

New

York:

Macmillan

o.,

1949).

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

6/10

98

SOUTHWESTERN

JOURNAL

OF ANTHROPOLOGY

significantly

ith he

presence

fkindredsr

demes,

roups

n which

ibling

erms

tend

obe

extendedo

nclude

ross-

nd

parallel

ousins.n

addition,

uch

ocieties

are

characterized

y

the

imited

ppearance

f

polygyny,

he bilocal

extended

family,nd he ilateralxtensionf ncestaboos.

Allowing

for

important ualification,"

ne

may

discern

hese

diagnostic

criteria

mong

heChoc6.For the

purposes

f this

aper,

owever,

hefeature

f

most

mportance

s that f

the

negative

orrelation

f Hawaiian

erminology

nd

exogamous

nilineal

ingroupsl0--a

tatement

f

probability

ith

espect

o

which

the

Choc6

erve s a

case

n

point.

There s

an

nfinite

xtensionf

kinship

erms

mong

he

Choc6,

whether

aken

as

a

local

ector,

regional

riverystem) opulation,

r an ethnic

otality.

hen

kinship

erms re

used

n

addressing

on-relatives

hey

onformo

an

etiquette

of

generational

ifferencer

similarity

ith

egard

o the tatus f two

persons.

Uncle,

nephew,

nd

sibling

erms

re

widely

sed

n

this

way.

They

are

always

used

mong

o-residents

f

any

ector,

enerallymong ersons

iving long

ny

river

nd,

wheneveralutationsre

made,

requentlymong

ll Choc6.

n

a

sense,

all

Choc6 re

kin.

Kinship

erms re notextendedo

non-Choc6.

reation

myths

identify

ll

Choc6 s

"people,"

ometimes

n

pecific

istinction

o

both

Negro

nd

Cuna

who,

n

n

ultimateocial

ense,

renot

people."

The

"equivalence"

f

siblingsmplied y

the

terminology

xists

nly

n

the

very eneralense fstatus quivalence ith espectogenerationembership.t

does serve o

symbolize

imited

olidary

elationshipsmonggeneration

ates

within

ny

ector f

intermarrying

ouseholds,

s well s the

distinctionetween

contiguous

enerationsboth

n the evel f the ector nd the

household)

with

regard

o

daily

ocial ntercourse.his s of considerable

mportance

or

he

ncor-

poration

fnew

membersnto

ny

esidential

ucleus. ut

t nno

way mplies

ife-

long

or

long-term

o5peration

n a

specific

ctivity mong

members f

any

terminological

ategory,

ith

rwithout

egard

o

residence,

ull

iblings

ncluded.

The

actors hown

n

the

ego-chart

ay

constitute

segment

kindred)

f

the ocal sectorwhich, owever,alls hort fachievingommunitytatus o the

extent hat he

deal of local

group deme) endogamy

s not

fully

ealized,

nd

the

esidentsf the

ector

ngage

n

no

corporate

ctivities.

s

shown

n

the

hart,

the xtensionf

sibling

ermsofirst

ousins orrelates

ith hedefinitionf the

incest

roup

imberana).

ut the terms hemselves

eally

o

not

indicate

his

9 These

are

qualifications

f

the sortwhich

will

be discussed n a

forthcomingaper

dealing

with

marriage, esidence,

nd the

domestic

ycle

mong

the Choc6 of

Darifn,

nd

whichwill

consider

ertainnstitutions

n the

ight

f "economic

hange"

nd structural

ontinuity.

10

Murdock,

ocial

Structure,

.

228.

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

7/10

CHOC6

SOCIETY

99

definition,

ince

hey

re

extended

ar

beyond

his

genealogical

nit-extended

as

status erms f

another

rder. ne

is

forbidden

o

marry person

who tands

in

a

relationship

loser

han hat f second

ousin.

t is said that his ule s never

broken,ndmydata do not ndicatets nfraction.eyond he ateral ategory

of

first

ousin,

nd the ineal

ategories

f

Bch,

Zch,

S,

D,

gch

and,

f children

have

been orn o

them,

w

and

Dh, therefore,

he

oncept

f

"family,"close

el-

atives,"

kindred" imberana)

oes not

apply,

nd

genealogies

re

usually

ot

known

with

nydegree

f

accuracy.

take

this xtensionf incest o

define

he

kindredn

Choc6

(or

any) society

nd,

since

am

especially

oncerned

ith

Stout's

bservations,

o

indicate n absence f

exogamous

nilineal

in

groups.

The factthat

genealogical

onnections

imperfectly

nown

eyond

ousins

of

the econd

egree

makes esearch

n

this rea of

relationships

ost

difficult

and time onsuming.orexample,nany ocal sectorherere almost ogrand-

parents

having

ubile r

married

randchildren)omprisingsignificant

ocial

category.

ith

respect

o

marriageable

ersons,

his

s

a

two-generationociety,

from ll

indications.ecause f

shortife

pan

on onehand nd

physicalmobility

on

the

ther,

onnections

etween

ectors

long

he ame iver re

difficulto ascer-

tain

with

egard

o

consanguineal

nd affinal

onds,

nd

possible

onnections

f

this ort

which tretch

cross ntire iver

ystems

re

mpossible

o

verify

y

means

of

standard

thnographic

echniques.

dd to

this

ifficulty

he

fact hat

heChoc6

(in

distinctiono other

panish-speakingndigenouseoples) carry nly

the

paternal

urname,

nd

the

verificationf nter-sectorarital

elationshipsppears

most ifficult.s difficult

s this

s for

he

genealogicaleckoning

f the

nthro-

pologist,

t

must e

recognized

s of

great

ocial

ignificance

orthe

Choc6.

t

correlates ith

otions f

(1)

imberana,

n which

marriage

s

proscribed

etween

persons

lassed s within

he

xogamic roup cf.

Table

1);

with

2) "distantly

related"

egments

f

the

ecognizedognatic

roup cf.

Table

1),

and,

negatively,

with

he

xistence

f

patrilineages

nd clans.

RESIDENCE

The final

oint

n

which

wish ocomment

s

Stout's

emark

bout

ost-marital

residence

atterns.

hiswill

not eadtoan

understanding

f

relationships

urround-

ing

marriage-relationships

hich willdiscuss lsewhere

n

connection ith

he

developmentalycle

f

the

omestic

roup.

ere

merely

ndicate

hat

considera-

tion f

the

developmental

ycle

s crucial o a full

nderstanding

f Choc6

ociety.

For

present

urposes

t

suffices

hat

hedomestic

roup de)

invariably

ndergoes

compositional

hange.

At

onetime

r

anothert

may

consist f

contingent

le-

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

8/10

100

SOUTHWESTERN

JOURNAL

OF ANTHROPOLOGY

mentary

amiliesn

temporary

xorilocal

r,

rarely,

emporaryatrilocal

esidence.

The

cycle egins

nd endswith

n

elementary

ousehold.

ny

household,

ow-

ever,

egardless

f

its

composition

s

always patripotestalroup,

n

the

pecific

sense hat he wner f thehouse sits eader

paterfamilias)

ndthepersonwho

allocates he

household

esources

mong

he

membership.

ith

this

n

mind

want o

considerhe

possible

onceptual

outewhiched

Stout o

misinterpret

he

structuref

Choc6

ociety,

specially

ith

eferenceo

patrilineages

nd

clans.

The localized

ucleus

the

ector)

f households

onnected

y

blood

nd/or

marriagecharacteristic

f

Choc6

ociety)

eems o havebeen bserved

y

Stout

and

was

interpreted

s

being omprised

f localized

egments

f

intermarrying

lineages or

clans).

f

the

uthorityrinciple

f

patria otestas,learly

bservable

in

the

domestic

roup,

were o be

confused

ith he

upposed rinciple

f

patri-

lineal

descent,

hen-but

only

n

the absence

f

genealogies-residential

ucleii

might

ppear

ohave ome

emblance

f

ocalized

ets

f

ineages

rclan

egments.

Investigation

f

this

possibility

ore

fruit,

ut the

hypothesis

tself

was

not

con-

firmed.

either

atrilineages

or

patriclans

xist

n Choc6

ociety.

For

one

thing,

esidence

s

neither

ideally

atrilocal"

or

ctually

alternately

patrilocal

nd

matri ocal."

esidence

atterns

o

notcontributeo the

definition

of

unilineal

roups. atripotestality

s a

definingrinciplenly

within

he

house-

hold

de)

and

father-right

oes

notextend

o the

households

f

offspring

n

per-

manent ost-maritalesidence.With themarriagef offspring,nd especially

after

he birth f

their irst

hildren,

ouseholds

ragment

nto

virilocal

nits,

the

ocations f which

re

argely

etermined

y

the

vailability

f

plantain

and

and

the

failure"

f the erbalized

ilateral

inheritance)

deal.This

s a

statement

about

ontemporary

hoc6

ociety,

ut tseems

pplicable

o

by-goneays

s well.

In

earlier

imes

menneeded

mple erritory

as

they

o

today

n areas

which

re

not

overwhelmingly

ash-crop

riented)

n which o

hunt;

now

they

eed

ample

land

on

which o

raise

lantains.

ertain

alues nd

goals

have

hanged

ut

dap-

tations

o

these conomic

hanges

ave not

so

much ltered s

perpetuated

he

basic tructurefChoc6 ociety.ntegralothis tructures theruleofvirilocal

residence

nd ts

observance.

he

availability

f

plantain

roves

elps

determine

where

he virilocal

ousehold

ill

be

established,

ithreference

o

one's natal

group,

ut

theres

a

nearly

ne

hundred

ercent

bservancef the

virilocal

ule.

Because

plantain

and

(riverine

and

with

andy oil)

tends o become

ccupied

within wo

generations

n

any

ocal

sector,

ome

f a man's

ffspring

and

their

grown

hildren)

ave to

move

outside he sector o establish

ouseho lds

fter

marriage.

Choc6

residence

atterns

rebest

viewed

with

espect

o the

degree

f

observ-

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

9/10

CHOC6 SOCIETY

101

anceto

a rule

f

residence.here

s

both bservancend

patternedxception,

l-

though

he

observance

s

nearly omplete.

ather han he

rule

beingpatrilocal,

it s

virilocal

ollowing

period

f

uxorilocality.

hen

patrilocality

ccurs,

ither

temporarilyr permanently,1't is a departurerom herule. f patrilocality

were he

rule,

married

ons

wouldbe found

n their atal household ith

heir

in-married

ives ndchildren. nless here ere ome

eaturefhousehold

rgani-

zation

which

rought

boutfissionr

segmentation

t the econd

eneration,

hen

one

might

lso

expect

o

find

ouseholds

ccupied y

cousins nd their

amilies.

None of

this

ccurs

mong

heChoc6.Even as a

temporary

rrangement,

atri-

localityppears

o

be

quite

are,

ot

single

ase

being

ound

n

the

tudy

rea.

The

"matrilocality"uggestedy

Stout

s

a

totally

seless nd

misleading

on-

cept

for he

nalysis

f

Choc6residencend

relationshipsontingent

n

marriage.

It

implies

structure hich s

wholly oreign

o Choc6

society.

t

emphasizes

solidary elationship

chieved

hroughlignment

ith hedistaff

ideof a domes-

tic

group.

The

temporary

eturn f a

woman

nd

her husband

o

her

father's

house

n

order o harvest

r careforfields

f her wn ould

by

no stretch

f the

definitione considered

n

expression

f a matrilocal

ule.

And

since,

n this

"bilateral" ociety,

omen

arely

nherit

ife-long ights

o

plantain

and,

and

since he

ultivation

nd,

specially,

he

harvesting

f

plantains

the

onlyholding

of

consequence)

ecessitatesheresidential

roximity

fthosewhodo

the

work,

thenotion f alternateesidenceofany ort)and the constantlyhifting em-

bership"

f

a households nconsistent

ith he tructure

f Choc6

ociety.

As

an

outgrowth

f the

imple

marriage

eremony,

hich onsists

f an

accept-

able

young

man

leeping

few

nights

ithhis bride

n herfather's

ouse,

here

is

a

period

f

temporary

xorilocality.

his

period

s

usually

erminatedbout

he

time f the

birth

f

the

ouple's

irst

hild,

nd

deally

oincides

ith he

groom's

readinessoharvest

lantains

rom

is

own

grove.

After

his,

he

young ouple

establish

permanent

irilocal ousehold.

his

completes

heuxorilocal-virilocal

continuumn Choc6

ociety

nd

constituteshe

rule f

post-marital

esidence.

e-

causeoftemporaryxorilocalitya phase n thecyclical evelopmentf thedo-

mestic

roup)

and because

f a

misinterpretation

f cultural

orms,

t

s

possible

that tout

was led

to view

household

omposition

s

"shifting"

n

membership.

A

good

deal of

visiting

ccurs,

nvolving

riendss well s

relatives,

nd shelter

s

offered

isitors

s

a

matter

f

form,

ut t s

unlikely

hat toutwas

referring

o

this

attern

n

a consideration

f

rules f

residence.

Beyond

he

obvious

act

hat

here re no

patrilineages

r

patriclans--social

11

It

is never

permanent

ith

respect

o

father's

ouse,

since the

dwelling

s

abandoned

when he

paterfamilias

ies,

t

which

ime new house

s built lsewheren the

holdings.

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

7/23/2019 Faron

10/10

102

SOUTHWESTERN

JOURNAL

OF ANTHROPOLOGY

features

eterminablenly

n the

field-my isagreement

ith tout's

nterpreta-

tion

f

Choc6 ocial

tructures

no mere

uibbling

ith

words.

t is an efforto

be

more

pecific

ith

egard

o

concepts

hich

xpress

hoc6

ocial

relationships.

I object nprincipleo overworkingheconcept f "patrilocality"nd to mis-

applying

hat

of

"matrilocality."

his lack of

precision

as

led

to

unfortunate

confusionn a number f

papers

nd

monographs

nd,

n

the ase

of

the

Choc6,

stimulated

heresearchn

which his

paper

s based.The

possible

onfusion

e-

tween

rinciples

f

authority

patri-potestality)

nd descent

patrilineality)

s,

given

he tate fChoc6

thnography,

ectifiable

nly

n

the ield.

ut,

he

umbling

of

principles

uch s

patrilineality,atripotestality,atrilocality,

nd

matrilocality

seems

characteristicf

"reconstructions"

asedon

poor

ourcematerialo which

inadequate

ociologicalheory

as been

pplied.

Los

ANGELES STATE COLLEGE

Los

ANGELES,

CALIFORNIA

This content downloaded from 194.51.135.196 on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:41:32 UTC

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp