Anthropos: Anthropos, 87.1992,1/6

Anthropos, 87.1992,1/6

Bibliographic Data

Journal

Structure Type:: Journal

Works URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714820

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714820

Persistent identifier:: BV043334262

Title:: Anthropos

Sub Title:: internationale Zeitschrift für Völker- u. Sprachenkunde

Place of Publication:: Fribourg

Publisher:: Ed. St. Paul

Year of Publication:: 1906

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Domain:: Social and cultural anthropology > General overview

Journal Volume

Structure Type:: Journal Volume

Works URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-711880

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-711880

Persistent identifier:: 1513757750074

Title:: Anthropos, 87.1992,1/6

Year of Publication:: 1992

Call Number:: LA 1118

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Journal Issue

Structure Type:: Journal Issue

Title:: Bd. 87, 1992, Heft 1-3

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Anthropos 87.1992; 1-8 Variations in Nias Kinship A View from the Centre Andrew Beatty Abstract. - This article analyses variations in social structure in Nias (Indonesia). Problems with the use of standard asymmetric alliance models are first identified. It is argued that the social systems of central and south Nias can be better understood in terms of a unique form of non-prescriptive asymmetric alliance. The practice of matrilateral cross-cousin marriage found in south Nias is not the basis of the alliance system; rather it can be accounted for by the rules of class affiliation. The article ends with remarks on social organization in north Nias. [Nias, Indonesia, social organization, alliance models] Andrew Beatty, Ph. D., is British Academy Postdoctoral Fel low at Oxford University; fieldwork in Nias 1986-1988 and, currently, in east Java. - Publications see References Cited. 1. Introduction As the variety of forms of marriage alliance in Indonesia becomes increasingly apparent, greater attention is being paid to systems of alliance which depart from the classical asymmetric prescriptive models. One example is that of Nias in west Indonesia. This island presents us not so much with a single system as a cluster of variations on similar themes. The present essay is an attempt to identify a common structure and to account for certain regional differences. My field research was carried out mostly in central Nias, from 1986-1988. On a number of short visits I also collected information in villages near Gunung Sitoli (northeast), Lahusa (southeast), and in south Nias, particularly in the districts of Mazino and Tohene’asi which are less well known than Maenamolo district. I became increasingly convinced that the varieties of social structure made better sense when compared with the system found in the centre than when interpreted in terms of standard alliance models developed elsewhere. Certain ethnographic puzzles are readily explained by this method; others will need further field re search before an answer can be found. The per spective offered here is therefore a view from the centre. The extensive literature on Nias contains very little exact data on kinship until recent times. In the colonial and missionary ethnography there is a great deal on the individual’s life cycle but little on alliance or descent group structure or relationship terminology. Even today practically nothing has been published on north Nias kinship, and there is an urgent need for more fieldwork in this area. Marschall’s ethnography of a village in south Nias, which is the standard work on that area, contains a brief section on alliance (1976: 126 ff.). More recently, Scarduelli (1985) has focused on the political aspect of alliance in the south. I draw on these sources (where specified) to supplement my own data, although I differ in my interpretation of some points. Other important sources are the documents on Nias in the Kom Archive at the Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volken- kunde in Leiden [KITLV]. 2. Theoretical Background One aspect of the controversy over “elementary structures” has concerned the question of whether it is categories, rules, or behaviour which should be the object of analysis (Needham 1973). In dem onstrating the “structural implications of matrilat eral cross-cousin marriage” Leach’s diagrams of the Kachin system represent repeated MBD/FZS marriage (1961: 61). However, the text makes clear that these genealogical positions are to be understood in a classificatory sense and exempli fy a relation between broad categories - a point unheeded in some later discussions. Needham’s papers on alliance have focused more emphatically on terminological prescription as the criterion of an elementary system. Jural rules and preferences may or may not correspond to the positive mar riage rule embodied in the terminology (e.g., as evidenced in the equation WF = MB); but “mar riage preferences ... have no structural entailments in the total social system comparable to those of

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Anthropos, 87.1992,1/6

Journal

Journal Volume

Journal Issue

Table of Contents

Downloads

Full record

This page

Image fragment

Formats and links

Formats

Links

Cite

Full record

This page

Citation recommendation