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

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

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

4. 1990, 450 years later: An example of a patrilateral household from rural Morelos (5 conjugal unions) Married head of the household 50 years old Married 48 years old Son 15 years old Daughter 10 years old Son 22, free union Daughter 22, free union 21, free union Unión libre, 25 años Daughter 2 years old Daughter 5 years old Son, 2 years old Daughter months of age Daughter 14, free union 29 free union 16 free union 19, free union (not kin) 25 free union

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

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

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

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

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

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

12. Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin relationships with 19+ occurrences Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540 Relationship Frequency (total n = 2,486) child 596mother-in-law40 spouse 316brother-in-law’s spouse 38 head 315sister-in-law 37 brother 158daughter-in-law 36 brother’s spouse 88nephew 34 son-in-law 77brother-in-law’s child 33 brother-in-law 76sister’s child 33 sister 67mother 26 grandchild 56cousin 19 brother’s child 51niece 19

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

14. 5 conjugal families, 4 generations, 3 married brothers, 2 widows, 1 unmarried woman and a boy Married head of household Married Married one year ago Married Married one year ago Male 10 years of age, not married Simply an old widow Female, 20 years old, not yet married

15. Table 2. Multiple households were the norm among rural Nahua Household typeHouseholds (Percent) Individuals Simple13.4 7.2 No children 1.9 0.5 Children11.5 6.7 Extended13.410.1 Upward 1.9 1.0 Downward 0.3 0.2 Lateral 6.7 4.9 Combinations 4.5 3.9 Multiple 72.181.1 Upward 0.3 0.3 Downward15.114.6 Lateral26.326.6 Combinations30.439.5 Polygamous 1.0 1.6 Total (n) 312 2,486 Illegible (n) 3 17

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

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

18. 14 meters square Commoner’s house (choça o cabaña) Colotic calli: “It means it is unpretentious, a lowly house.” Sahagún, Códice Florentino, ~1580

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

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

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

22. Table 3a. Headship designation by frequency of occurrence. District identities of households and head freqKey Explanation 165H“Here is the home of...”; “Here is....'s home.” 47R“Here is the householder named...” 47R“Here is the householder named...” 39S“Here is the home of some people...” “ The household head is named...” or “The head of the household is named...” or “The householder is named...” 39S“Here is the home of some people...” “ The household head is named...” or “The head of the household is named...” or “The householder is named...” 25T“The tribute payer is named...” 25T“The tribute payer is named...” 20.illegible 20.illegible 6mmigrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”) 6mmigrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”) 6G“one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named... is in charge” 6G“one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named... is in charge” 1b“one who belongs to the tlatoani” 1b“one who belongs to the tlatoani” 1g“Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani” 1g“Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani” 1n“Here is a nephew...” 1n“Here is a nephew...” 2C“Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss” 2C“Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss” 1a“Here is a goodly maiden...” 1a“Here is a goodly maiden...”

23. Table 3b. Headship designation by order of appearance in district:  “Here is an altepetl named Huitzillan” (H1-H41):  GbH.HHHHHH.HHH.HHH.HHHHHHHmHmH.HHHHm.HHHH  Quauhchichinollan people (Q1-Q66):  GgRSSSSSSSSTSSSSSHHHHHSSSSRSSSSSSSHSTTTTSSTT.TTTTTT.T TTTTTTT.T.TTT  District illegible (Q67-Q135):  GHRRRRRHHRR.RRRRRR.RRRHHRRRRRRRR.RSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHH HHn.HHHH.mHHHHHHHHH  Tlacochcalco (H#1-H#18):  HHHHHHHHHHCHHHHHHH  Coloteopan (H#19-H #35):  GHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH  District illegible (H#36-H#62):  GHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHmHHHH.HHm  Xanyacac (H#63-H#72):  CHHHHHHHH ...cenhuitzco (H#73-H#139):  SSSSRRRRRRRRRRRRR.RRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHa Key: Here is... H - Home R - Householder S - Some people; household head T - Tribute payer m - migrant

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

25. Table 4. Position of married individuals in rural Nahua households was strongly structured by gender RelationshipMaleFemale Head306 1 Spouse 1309 Son/daughter 36 75 Other kin:323285 Brother/sister 98 26 Brother/sister-in-law* 63106 Son/daughter in law 75 36 Brother/sister-in-law’s spouse 14 38 Father/mother 3 3 Father/mother-in-law 8 8 Other 62 68 Not related: 11 11 Total married (includes 2 nd wives)677681

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

27. The Codex Mendoza: life at age 13 and 14 years GirlsBoys 13: 14: unmarriedmarried

28. Marriage (at 15) 15:

29. Child Brides and Patriarchy in Ancient Mexico Codex Mendoza, 1540

30. 1540 vs 1990 Persistence of Mexico “profundo”? ê Pre-hispanic survivals? –Virilocal stem families? –Residence around the paternal home? ê Or transformations? –The world Mexico has lost: extended families are now rare –But family and kin ties remain important

31. 1540: 4 lateral extensions, Only 1 complete conjugal family 3 incomplete (2 widows+children) Married head of the household Married Male, 8 years old Girl, 1 year old Boy born this year Widow this year Single Male 20 years old Married Married three years ago Male, single 10 years old Male, already dead Widow, 10 years ago Female, single 15 years old

32. 1990, 450 years later: An example of a patrilateral household from rural Morelos (5 conjugal unions) Married head of the household 50 years old Married 48 years old Son 15 years old Daughter 10 years old Son 22, free union Daughter 22, free union 21, free union Unión libre, 25 años Daughter 2 years old Daughter 5 years old Son, 2 years old Daughter months of age Daughter 14, free union 29 free union 16 free union 19, free union (not kin) 25 free union

33. Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Morelos, 1540 and 1990, and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990 15401990 1990 Rural Morelos Republic Relation to Head % % % Head 13 20 19 Spouse 13 16 16 Son or Daughter 24 54 53 Other kin 49 6 7 Not related 1 4 5 Total %100100 100 N (sample size)2,5031,633 801,981 N (sample size)2,5031,633 801,981

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

35. Debate: Condition of Nahua Women  Leon-Portilla (1958): prominent and of great social recognition  Nash (1978): subordination emerged with predatory empire  Rodriguez-Shadow (1991): devalued and dominated  Kellogg (1995): gender parallelism: complementary and symmetrical

36. Nahua gender relations over the life course: assymetry, hierarchy, subordination  I. Naming patterns  II. Marriage:  girls: 12.7 years  boys: 19.4 years  III. Household: only male heads  IV. Widowhood: a female affair  V. Division of labor

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

44. Names in a Tlatoani (chief’s) Family  Don Tomas [illegible]…zatzin.  Females: dona Maria Tonallaxochiatl Ana Tlaco, Maria Xocoyotl, Magdalena Tlaco, Cocoyotl, Maria Tlaco, Marta Xoco, Teicuh (2), Necahual, Magdalena Teya[ca]pan.  Males: Pedro Tecue[tlaca?], Pedro Omacatl, Cocoliloc

45. 4 most common names for each sex. What are the differences? Females u Teyacapan 315 (First one) u Tlaco 182 (Middle one) u Teicuh 182 (Second one) u Necahual 151 (Quiet one) Males u Yaotl 74 (Rival/Enemy) u Matlalihuitl 63 (Rich Feather) u Nochhuetl 52 (Ideal Bean) u Coatl 48 (Serpent) 1201 females 87 unique names 1303 males 574 unique names

46. Common names 6th-10th most frequent by sex Females u Xoco 53 (The Last one) u Centehua 42 (One’s Woman) u Xocoyotl 38 (Youngest one) u Tlacoehua 22 (Second daughter) u Cihuaton 15 (Littlest female) u Tepin 15 (Elder Sister) Males u Tototl 19 (Bird) u Quauhtli 18 (Eagle) u Tochtli 17 (Rabbit) u Zolin 16 (Quail) u Matlal 12 (Indigo Plant) u Xochitl 12 (Flower)

47. Frequency of Common Female Names

48. Common Male Names Note low frequency of most names

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

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

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

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

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

54. Conclusions: earthly names of ordinary country-folk  Male names: individualized, symbolic, diverse  Female names: categorical, birth order, boring  Gender relations: instead of parallel and symmetry, divergence and asymmetry

55. Nahua gender relations: patriarchy, assymetry, oppression  Division of labor: strongly gendered  Households: only males are heads  Average age at marriage: girls: less than 13 years boys: greater than 19 years  Widowhood: a female matter  Gendering of names: firm rules

56. With conquest and colonization: heightened inequalities  Division of labor: strongly gendered, heightened by inequalities of class  Households: greater proportion of female heads  Average age at marriage: females: rose to 17-18 years males: rose to 21-23 years  Widowhood: more likely to head household  Gendering of names: Christian saints

57. End

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

59. Table 1. Explicit and inferred kin relationships with 19+ occurrences Huitzillan and Quauhchichinollan villages, circa 1540 Relationship Frequency (total n = 2,486) child 596mother-in-law40 spouse 316brother-in-law’s spouse 38 head 315sister-in-law 37 brother 158daughter-in-law 36 brother’s spouse 88nephew 34 son-in-law 77brother-in-law’s child 33 brother-in-law 76sister’s child 33 sister 67mother 26 grandchild 56cousin 19 brother’s child 51niece 19

60. Table 2. Multiple households were the norm among rural Nahua Household typeHouseholds (Percent) Individuals Simple13.4 7.2 No children 1.9 0.5 Children11.5 6.7 Extended13.410.1 Upward 1.9 1.0 Downward 0.3 0.2 Lateral 6.7 4.9 Combinations 4.5 3.9 Multiple 72.181.1 Upward 0.3 0.3 Downward15.114.6 Lateral26.326.6 Combinations30.439.5 Polygamous 1.0 1.6 Total (n) 312 2,486 Illegible (n) 3 17

61. Table 3a. Headship designation by frequency of occurrence. District identities of households and head freqKey Explanation 165H“Here is the home of...”; “Here is....'s home.” 47R“Here is the householder named...” 47R“Here is the householder named...” 39S“Here is the home of some people...” “ The household head is named...” or “The head of the household is named...” or “The householder is named...” 39S“Here is the home of some people...” “ The household head is named...” or “The head of the household is named...” or “The householder is named...” 25T“The tribute payer is named...” 25T“The tribute payer is named...” 20.illegible 20.illegible 6mmigrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”) 6mmigrant (“Here are some people who...came from afar”) 6G“one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named... is in charge” 6G“one who governs” (tlatoani); “one named... is in charge” 1b“one who belongs to the tlatoani” 1b“one who belongs to the tlatoani” 1g“Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani” 1g“Here is the one who guards things for the tlatoani” 1n“Here is a nephew...” 1n“Here is a nephew...” 2C“Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss” 2C“Here is a tribute collector...”; “...tribute boss” 1a“Here is a goodly maiden...” 1a“Here is a goodly maiden...”

62. Table 4. Position of married individuals in rural Nahua households was strongly structured by gender RelationshipMaleFemale Head306 1 Spouse 1309 Son/daughter 36 75 Other kin:323285 Brother/sister 98 26 Brother/sister-in-law* 63106 Son/daughter in law 75 36 Brother/sister-in-law’s spouse 14 38 Father/mother 3 3 Father/mother-in-law 8 8 Other 62 68 Not related: 11 11 Total married (includes 2 nd wives)677681

63. Table 5. Household Composition in Rural Morelos, 1540 and 1990, and in the Federal Republic of Mexico, 1990 15401990 1990 Rural Morelos Republic Relation to Head % % % Head 13 20 19 Spouse 13 16 16 Son or Daughter 24 54 53 Other kin 49 6 7 Not related 1 4 5 Total %100100 100 N (sample size)2,5031,633 801,981 N (sample size)2,5031,633 801,981