You are on page 1of 14

M A U R I C E BLOCH

Zafimaniry birth and kinship


theory:)

The Zafimaniry are a small group of people from Madagascar and this article concerns
their ideas about birth. There has of late been much interest in anthropology about
notions concerning birth mainly focusing on what it tells us about the folk theories of
the body and the person. Very recently some anthropologists have argued that the
introduction of new reproductive technologies has led to a veritable cultural revolution in the West, where notions of kinship and gender in particular have been
fundamentally changed (Strathern 1992), and that as a result we must d o what kinship
theorists have had to d o periodically since the beginning of our discipline, revise our
theoretical assumptions of what is universal. Be that as it may, I want simply to argue
here that, without the need to keep ourselves glued to newspapers for yet more
startling announcements of the advances of medicine and law, the ethnographic record
concerning such people as the Zafimaniry offers just as challenging data to received
ideas concerning kinship in general.
This is because for the Zafimaniry, as for other Malagasy and Southeast Asian
peoples, birth and biological parentage in itself has not much significance in the
determination of the person and that, this being so, almost none of the traditional
concerns of kinship theorists working in other parts of the world apply to people such
as the Zafimaniry, since almost all usual theories of kinship implicitly accept that birth
and parentage has, of itself, some sort of determining role. For example, if birth is not
significant for the determination of the person, it simply does not make sense to ask
whether the Zafimaniry use patrilineal descent to form groups o r whether they practise cross-cousin marriage since all these questions imply that birth and parentage are
relevant for status.
A similar point was recently made for Southeast Asia by Fox (1987), who argues
that in this type of society the person only belongs to a kinship group after death.
Indeed I argued something like this for the Merina of Madagascar (Bloch 1971: 174).
More recently R. Astuti, writing about the west coast fishermen of the island, the
Field work was carried out among the Zafimaniry in 1971 and again in 1989-90. The earlier
research was financed by the Social Science Research Council and the more recent research was
financed by the Spencer Foundation. Among previous literature on the Zafimaniry is Vrin 1964,
Coulaud 1973, Raminosoa 1971-2, Bloch 1975.
1 In the Austronesian world ones identity is not given at birth. One gets the impression, if one reads
some of the African monographs that a persons social identity has been defined by the fact of being
born in a lineage. N o w my view would be that in the Austronesian world social identity is not
fixed. You are launched as the Timorese, Rotinese and the Savunese all say, you are on a path but
have not necessarily reached any specific point. (Fox 1987: 174-5)

::-

Social Anthropology (1993).I,


I B , 119-132. @ 1993 European Association of Social Anthropologists

119

Vezo, discusses this general point in great detail and is led to conclude: Living Vezo
are unkinded, not only because they learn to be what they are and shape themselves
contingently through practice: . . . they are unkinded also because they share undifferentiated links of relatedness ... O n the other side ... there are tombs with solid
concrete walls which house the ruzu, membership of which separates the dead into
kinds (Astuti 1991: 326).
This is going even further than Fox and, although the Vezo may be an extreme
case, even for Madagascar, Astutis formulation illuminates much of what has been
obscure in the ethnography of that part of the world.
In this article I shall follow Astutis lead and Foxs more general comment in order
to see how far they enable us to understand the practices surrounding birth among
another Malagasy group: the Zafimaniry.
One of the implications of the general points made by Fox and Astuti considered
above is the relative lack of significance of birth as an event for creating the social
person. Consequently, since birth is not the prime mechanism through which the
person enters the moral world or becomes defined socially, it is not surprising that, as
we shall see, the significance attributed to birth is subordinated to the logic of other
more central representations. These more central representations must therefore be
considered before we turn to the specific matter of birth.
For the Zafimaniry specifically, the representation which creates enduring positions in society is the process of marriage and house building; this means that the
Zafimaniry are to a certain extent unlike the other people referred to above in that for
them it is not entry into the tomb which ultimately defines the person, but rather the
association with houses.

Zaflmanlry houses and marriage


The Zafimaniry are a group of shifting cultivators, living in eastern Madagascar,
traditionally relying mainly on maize, beans and taro, and numbering approximately
20,000. They live in a narrow band of montane forest at an altitude of approximately
1,400 m. Their social organisation is, I believe, well characterised, though merely in an
indicative way by what LCvi-Strauss has called a house-based society (Lki-Strauss
1984), especially if we emphasise the close association he sees between the symbolism
of the house as a building and the centrality of monogamous marriage. According to
LCvi-Strauss, in house based-societies, instead of alliance occurring between units,
marriage actually forms the core of the unit, a unit which is also the material house.
Such characterisation applies well to the Zafimaniry.
Zafimaniry marriage and house creation are two very long drawn-out processes,
o r rather two sides of the same process. Marriage without a house is a contradiction in
terms, because the Zafimaniry notion which I choose to translate as marriage is
distinguished from other forms of sexual union precisely by the fact that the couple set
up a separate house together, something reflected in the normal Zafimaniry way of
asking the question corresponding to our are you married?, by a phrase which
literally means Have you obtained a house with a hearth?2
The process which leads to marriage begins, however, quite some time before the
construction of the house. The beginning of this process is the tentative sexual affec2 Efa nahazo tokotrano ve?

l20

MAURICE BLOCH

tion and intercourse which occurs between very young people. The Zafimaniry seem
particularly to stress the chaotic, fluid and fickle character of this type of relationship,
largely to contrast it with the stability and immobility ultimately achieved by a
successful union fixed in a solid house. Ideally, out of chaotic promiscuity a more
stable monogamous relationship based on mutual compatibility will gradually emerge,
which will ultimately lead to the partners establishing a house with a hearth.
There are a number of points in this gradual process where minor rituals make it,
as the Zafimaniry say, ~ l e a r .One
~ of the most important of these rituals is the
fanarnbarana (literally that which renders evident). This should end with the bride
being given by her parents a cooking pot, a plate and a large stirring spoon, which she
will take back to her husbands locality, where the marital house will normally be built
and where these objects will furnish the hearth.
Before this ritual, if it takes place at all, the young man will have started to build
a house, o r rather the framework for a house. This will be situated near his parents
house, though in an inferior position, usually to the south and 10wer.~It will be a
very simple house, but it will have a hearth consisting of three stones within a wooden
frame, and three posts. One of these, the central post, is the so called hot post because
it is near the hearth; it will be the largest piece of wood in the house and be made from
a wood said to be the hardest of all woods. At this early stage of the marriage process
however, the rest of the house will be merely made of flimsy, woven, flattened out
bamboos and reed mats which let in light and sound.6
In a way that is so obvious that it only rarely gets mentioned, the house posts are
associated with the man of the couple. They are what he must put up, and the mans
place in the house is traditionally sitting leaning against the central hot post. The
woman, on the other hand, is associated with the activity of the hearth and the
furniture of the hearth, the cooking pot, the serving plate and the big stirring spoon
which she brings to the marriage.
However, the marriage is not completed merely by the building of the house and
the furnishing of the hearth. A Zafimaniry marriage, to be a marriage and have any
chance of lasting, also needs children. The practices surrounding childbirth are therefore a further element of marriage creation and growth.
The birth of the first child in a way strengthens the marriage and in a way weakens
it. It strengthens the marriage in that as a direct result the spouses become terminologically related through teknonimy ; this links the two parents since, henceforth, they
have the name of their child in common. However, the marriage is also weakened by
the geographical displacement of the mother which birth brings. When a woman is
pregnant and when the birth is approaching, she will leave either the house of her
husbands parents, or of her husband if she is already living there, and go back to her
natal house, whether this be in another village or in her own village. There she will
remain for a number of months.
In theory at least, after a few months, the mother will return to her husbands
3 For Zafimaniry concepts of clarity see Bloch forthcoming a.
4 Recently, because of extreme poverty, the ritual has been missed out but the bringing of the
implements is done nevertheless.
5 As everywhere in Madagascar the north is a superior direction to the south.
6 The wood of the hot post should be nato. The wood of the cold posts should be tamboneka. For
descriptions of the structure of Zafimaniry houses, see Vrin 1964 and Coulaud 1973.

ZAFIMANIRY B I R T H AND K I N S H I P THEORY

l.21

house, but, in fact, this never happens smoothly. For her to d o that she has to be
courted again in order to be convinced to go home. If this renewed courting is
successful, she will probably obtain quite a few new clothes and renewed promises to
be treated with great consideration by the family of her husband. However, the
husband will very often not be successful in getting his wife and child back at this stage
and the marriage will abort. Exactly the same return of the mother to her natal home
and subsequent renegotiation is repeated after the birth of the second child and it is
usually only after the birth of the third or fourth child of that marriage that the process
of local oscillation ends. Then, instead of the mother of the child moving, it is the
mother of the mother who comes to help in the birth at the house of her daughter and
son-in-law.
The repeated remarriages occasioned by the birth of the first children, are an
early part of the growth, creation and transformation of the union into a permanent
reproductive unit of society, and it is only when children have been born in the marital
house that one can see that the process of marriage is well on its way.
This process of growth is not the creation of a merely social unit. For the
Zafimaniry this process is also that of house creation in a material sense. As the
negotiations and movements of the participants create the marriage, they also create
the building, since during the period of their occurrence the house is also changing
physically. When first built, the house is highly permeable to the outside. O n e can see
in when one looks through the roughly woven bamboo walls, and neighbours are
continually looking in; one can also speak from the outside to people in the house as
though no partition existed. With time however, as children are born to the couple,
this flimsy permeability diminishes. The Zafimaniry say that the house is then gradually acquiring bones. This refers to the massive wooden planks which little by little
replace the woven bamboo. In the end the house will look like a Canadian log cabin,
except that the timbers are vertical. The hardening of the house is not a finite process:
more can always be done, especially because the hardening process is soon accompanied by the decorative, low relief carving which the Zafimaniry put everywhere
on the hard woods which constitute the house - especially on doors, windows and
above all on the central posts. This beautifying is considered by the Zafimaniry as
merely a further process of the general hardening of the building.
With time therefore, the house hardens and becomes more and more beautifully
decorated. When this process is well advanced, and if everything has gone well, the
children of the couple will themselves have begun the process of marriage and the
family will be enlarging. The girls will to a certain extent have left, but only to a certain
extent, since they will return continually, especially to have their children in their
parents house. They will also return more frequently, but for shorter periods,
together with their husbands and children to seek blessing from the womans
parents, something which is necessary for any major enterprise they prepare to undertake, either as a couple or individually. The sons, for their part, will be building their
own houses near to that of their parents but they, together with their wives and
children, will continue to use the parental house in all sorts of ways on a daily basis.
They will, like the daughters, together with their spouses and children, also seek
blessing from their parents in their house.
7 Like the Merina, the Zafimaniry kinship system largely subsumes spouses of children under the
general category of children.

122

MAURICE BLOCH

What all this means is that, in some important contexts, grown up sons and
daughters, their spouses and children will act and speak of the house of their parents as
if it was the one to which they are principally attached. This is so in an emotional and
symbolic way but also in a practical way since they will behave there just as though
they had never left and they will share in the tasks which maintain the house. In
particular they, together with their spouses and children, will contribute through their
labour to the hardening and decorating of the parental house. The same will be true of
grandchildren and subsequent generations.
The production, maturation, marriage and reproduction of descendants therefore
leads to, and is necessary for, the continuing construction and beautification of the
house of the original couple, or to put it another way, it leads to, and is necessary for,
the continuation and growth of the process of the marriage of the original couple, a
process which, it will be remembered, began weakly with the chaotic affection and sex
that joined them as children but which, if successful, now stands evident and beautiful
in the form of a proud building.
Ultimately the house of such a successful couple will become for the descendants a
holy house. This means that this is a house where the descendants come to ask for
blessing, the central act of Zafimaniry religion. If the original couple are still alive they
will be asked in person, but if they are dead it is the central house post and the hearth
which are addressed as though they were the human couple. These things in particular
and the house as a whole have therefore by then become the successful couple itself
which endures in this way in the form of a growing house and which indeed continues
to multiply and grow, perhaps more than a hundred years after the house and couple
was formed.
It is therefore not through birth as an individual but through marriage as a couple
with a hardening and beautifying house that the person becomes a fixed and permanent element of Zafimaniry moral society. However, in the process whereby the
person becomes part of the social order they pass from being a living couple to become
a permanent wooden object.
It is therefore not as an individual but as a couple that the person becomes a
permanent and significant member of society but clearly among the Zafimaniry, as
elsewhere people are not born as couples and so it is necessary to consider what
happens to individuals before they begin to be merged into a couple and a house.
Like other Malagasy, the Zafimaniry stress the malleability, softness, bendiness
and wetness of infants in contrast to the hardness, rigidity and dryness of the adult and
the dead. But unlike the Merina who hold similar ideas, the hardening, straightening
and drying of the body occurs not so much in terms of what happens to the body but,
as we saw, in terms of the hardening, becoming rigid and drying of houses. This means
that the fundamental contrast is between an individual who has not yet begun the
process of marriage/house creation and one who has.
The contrast between a non-house/social person and one who is engaged in house
support is also informed by the contrast between hunting and gathering and the
agriculture of householders. Children and young men (girls marry younger and therefore become domesticated earlier) are typically unpredictable, continually mobile
forest foragers. By contrast the married pair should be agriculturalists in order to
8 Trano Masina.
9 I have several examples of such cases.

ZAFIMANIRY BIRTH AND K I N S H I P THEORY

123

produce the boiled starch foods which are seen as the basis of life and which will
support a growing family. This activity, based on swiddens, further increases the
image of the anchoring to the central place which is the house.
For the Zafimaniry therefore, as they endlessly repeat, though admittedly in a
half-joking manner, children and young people are animals, because of their lack of
moral responsibility as well as because of their tireless vitality. In a similar way the
Vezo told Astuti that young children were not yet living people and, although the
Zafimaniry never said this exactly to me, I believe they would agree.
It is as if humans were of two sorts. Firstly, they are animal beings with wildness,
strength and lack of localisation and morality. Secondly, these animal beings may turn
into social and moral beings as they become married and householders. The passage
from one state of being to another is gradual and somewhat different for girls and
boys. It is never quite completed in life in that the living, however old, always retain a
little of their original wildness and unsociability, but it is the fundamental change that
occurs in people, while birth is much less significant since it does not mark entry into
the social world.
This dichotomisation partly explains the startling lack of any attempt at disciplining young children, especially of young boys, among the Zafimaniry. They will say
that there is no point in teaching them good manners when they are still so animal-like.
In fact young Zafimaniry children are a little like very much loved pets in Europe.
Everybody is drawn to small children; adults will drool over them, hug them, nurse
them and blow affectionately into their mouth, but nobody seems to see in them the
future caretakers of society.
In order to understand Zafimaniry birth and coming into the world practices it is
therefore essential to remember two facts. First, the child that is born is not born a
socialhoral being and second its birth is an essential part of the process by which its
parents become such a being, since it is a part of their marriage and house.

Zafimaniry birth
It is convenient to begin an examination of Zafimaniry concepts concerning birth with
their ideas about conception.
The Zafimaniry are maddeningly vague about the nature of conception especially
when asked what either parent contributes to the child as a result of sexual intercourse.
Although the Zafimaniry are curious about this matter they are not sure. This is not a
topic for dogma but for free, scientific, discussion. I was thus given a whole range of
different theories by different people. For example I was sometimes told that the child
is formed by the water of life which comes from the brain of the father through his

10 Although the Zafimaniry are shifting cultivators, their fields are created within fixed village terri-

tories and arc used for up to seven years.


1 I The change may brgin to a certain extent for boys at circumcision but at the moment I dont think

so. I need to go through my notes on Zafimaniry circumcision before being sure. Another element
which goes against the analysis here is that I was once told that in the past children were given at
their naming ceremony a toy axe in the case of boys and a toy kettle in the case of girls. This I am
told is not done any more and I have serious doubts about whether it ever really was so.

124

MAURICE BLOCH

spinal cord via the penis in the form of semen and that this then solidified into the
child, probably as bone. I was also told that mothers had in them an egg of life from
which the foetus was formed and that the father merely fed this egg. I was told by
some people that they had learnt from the Catholic priest during a retreat that the child
comes from the mixture of the blood of the mother and the father. In fact, when I
raised the subject I was commonly answered by questions concerning what I thought
about this matter and most often people simply told me that they did not know.
There is thus little of certainty in strictly genetic beliefs. O n the other hand the
Zafimaniry are much more confident about what affects the growth of the child in the
mothers womb. Apart from a few not very serious taboos the Zafimaniry think of the
process of in utero maturation as fairly unproblematic.* There is one idea that is
continually alluded to. The child, before it is born, is presumed to be highly malleable
to environmental influences. These influences, which will permanently affect the body
and character of the child, include what the mother does when pregnant, the people
with whom she has sexual relations, the people whom she comes into contact with and
who live in the same house as her, the character and state of the house (or houses) she
lives in, the weather and so on . .. In fact this malleability, which is linked to the ideas
concerning the softness and wetness of the infant and embryo noted above, is believed
to continue through infancy so that throughout the period until marriage the child is
being affected in a permanent way, both in body and in mind, by its human and nonhuman environment.
The malleability of the embryo and young person is also demonstrated in a ritual
celebrated with greatly varying elaboration according to wealth and circumstances.
This is the custom called tolotra hanina o r given food. The ritual consists principally
of the giving of a chicken which has been cooked wholeI3 to a mother of an unborn o r
relatively young childI4 by a man.15 This gift is intended to ultimately feed the child
and makes the child of the woman resemble the giver physically and psychologically.
The giver is usually the father but it may be any other man, for example the mothers
brother. There is also a particularly elaborated form of this ritual when a man who has
had several daughters who have borne children will give such a chicken to his
daughters for each of his grandchildren to make these grandchildren look like him.
Although there is much to be said about this practice, I simply note its existence here
as yet a further mark of the general concept of the malleability of the child not only in
utero but also post partum, especially since this ritual shows the relatively small
importance attributed to who the parents of the child are against the significance
attributed to the environment.
Even if pregnancy seems viewed with very little apprehension the actual birth is,
and is well realised to be, a time of very great danger. The event is usually only
witnessed by women but this is said to be merely because men do not know about

12 A stillbirth or an aborted foetus is no great worry to the community at large and such an occurrence
is a totally private and outwardly untraumatic event.
13 Normally the Malagasy cut up chickens before cooking them. I could get no explanation of the
significance of cooking the bird whole.
14 I saw this done for children up to the age of approximately eight.
15 I do not know whether it would be possible for a woman to make such a gift to a mother. All the
cases I heard about involved men.

Z A F I M A N I R Y B I R T H AND K I N S H I P T H E O R Y

125

these things. After the birth the placenta is immediately buried near the hearth. It is
essential that when it is buried by the midwife she looks neither to the right nor the left
lest, as a result, the child should grow up with a squint. This belief is linked to the fact
that, as in many parts of southeast Asia, the placenta is considered to be a twin of the
child.
Immediately after the birth, or perhaps just before it, a model house is built on the
bed of the house where the birth has taken place and the mother and child should
remain in this for a period of up to two months. The overt reason for such a house is to
keep the child and mother warm. This is because the whole process of birth is for the
Zafimaniry, as elsewhere in Madagascar, thought of as a process requiring the warming
of the child and the mother. This is because birth is a cooling process which threatens
the mother as it opens her up to harmful drafts which will blow up her womb, and
which, to a lesser extent, threaten the child.18 It is therefore essential that the mother
be kept warm by fires and by the building of an interior house. For reasons considered below there is quite a lot of ambiguity about the building of such a house and
some villages taboo it altogether.
What most differentiates Zafimaniry concerns with birth from those of Europe is
something which it is difficult to illustrate ethnographically but which informs the
whole proceedings. While perhaps it is true that in Europe the practices surrounding
birth are predominantly child-centred, the Zafimaniry birth practices, precautions and
rituals are almost entirely mother-focused. It is the threat to her life that is of dominant
concern and which is talked about and it is above all what happens to her which
matters. Indeed Zafimaniry mothers very often die in childbirth and everybody,
including them, know this and are very anxious. O n the other hand, it seems that the
Zafimaniry attitude towards infant death and miscarriage is that this is not a great
tragedy, at least to anybody except the mother herself, and then it is hoped she may
forget. I was told on the occasion of a difficult birth, when the mother did indeed die,
that it did not much matter if the child died since she (the mother) will have many
other children but if she dies she is ended.
After the birth most people in the village will visit the house of the mother giving
little presents in her honour and perhaps also blessing her. The most stressed moment
connected with birth however, is the naming ceremony which takes place six days after
the birth of girls and seven days after the birth of boys. The name seems to be chosen

16 Men are not necessarily excluded and some fathers hang about sheepishly during the delivery and

17

18
19

20

get ordered about. For example, after I had asked about childbirth I was told by the mother of a
young pregnant woman whom I know very well and whom I had known as a small child that, if I
wanted, I could be present at the birth. She had n o difficulty in agreeing. The suggestion caused
much hilarity and a few scandalous hypotheses but I believe they meant it. Actually the child was
unfortunately born after 1 left. Some of the information on childbirth was obtained by Rita Astuti
when she visited me in the field.
Actually an older twin, because it comes out second and is therefore thought to have pushed out the
younger sibling and thereby demonstrated its seniority. In other parts of Madagascar the placenta is
thought to be a younger twin.
Premature cooling is often given as the cause of miscarriage.
Others seem to dare to build only an incomplete house and so taboo such houses with roofs.
Certain words for this house are also tabooed.
This does not mean that there is also not real joy at the birth of the child. Birth is an event for
rejoicing and children are always welcomed whether the mother is married o r not.

l26

MAURICE BLOCH

most often by the mother of the mother. There are no very strict rules of naming but
the names given are often puns or variants on other names of members of the family.
Some rich people consult astrologers concerning the suitability of the name but this is
uncommon.
The naming ritual is attended by the women who were present at the actual birth
and the father and perhaps some other male relative such as the mothers father who, in
the absence of a father, takes on the role. The main part of the ritual consists in the
marking of the forehead of the child with soot from the hearth and covering the
parents face, and then that of all others present, with chalk. Chalk is auspicious and a
mark of blessing for most Malagasy but among the Zafimaniry it is also said to make
clear o r bright. This theme is picked up again in the treatment of the umbilical cord.
This is wound round some dried flattened bamboo from the roof of the house which is
then lit and which burns particularly brightly. As the bamboo is burning the child is
raised six times above the flames (the number for blessing among the Zafimaniry) and
the following words are intoned, though not too seriously:
Bright, bright,
May his eyes see clarity
May he see lots of money/silver
May he see rnoney/silver which has been dropped
May he see rnoney/silver which has been lost!

The remains of the umbilical cord are then placed in a beehive if it is a boy and in a reed
bed if it is a girl. This hive and reed bed will ultimately be inherited by the child after
the death of the person to whom it belongs.

Analysls o f the birth rituals and practices


So far in this chapter I have argued that for the Zafimaniry the entry into society
occurs not at birth but as part of the process of marriage and house creation. This
section will look in more detail how this general fact is reflected in the practices and
ideas concerning birth discussed above.
The fact that the embryo and the infant are not seen as social beings accords well
with the Zafimaniry lack of dogmatic theories about conception and their emphasis on
the physical and psychological malleability of early life. What is being said is that the
child is not made by either conception or birth. The embryo and the infant live in a
state which precedes the process of determination, hardening, localisation and ultimately of substitution by the house which will mark maturation in life and beyond.
The child is only a potential person and this potential, because of the high infant
mortality rate will, in most cases, not be fulfilled. Children are therefore malleable.
The birth of children is as interesting as the birth of animals, an interesting area for
speculation but of no great ideological importance. Everything about these animal21 Hito Hito
Dia mahirata mahirata
Hohitan vola be
hohitan vola totraka
Hohitan vola very

ZAFIMANIRY BIRTH AND K I N S H I P THEORY

127

beings is fascinatingly thought-provoking and delightful but not important morally or


socially.
This being so, the relative elaboration of birth practices calls for explanation since,
for the ritual of name-giving at least, the analogy with what happens in other systems,
such as Christian baptism, seems to suggest that it marks the childs entry into social
life. Such a comparison is however misleading because it forgets the essential character
of teknonyms in general and of the specific form they take among the Zafimaniry.
Any person who has produced a child, whether this child survives o r not, will
always be called by a teknonym unless a most deliberate and serious insult is intended.
The teknonym will most commonly refer to this first child but if the person has other
children they may occasionally be addressed by teknonyms referring to these other
children. Even after death, on the rare occasion when an ancestor will be referred to by
name, as, for example, when a blessing is asked by the descendants in the ancestors
house, the original teknonym will be used. Thus, as far as names are concerned, having
produced a child transforms you for good. Furthermore, for most people, the name
that is given at birth is totally abandoned as soon as they produce a child. The only
adults who are not addressed by teknonyms are those people who have not produced a
child and who have not been able to adopt one. These are people who cannot be fully
married since having children is an essential part of the process of marriage, they are
therefore not proper social beings and are the most despised members of Zafimaniry
society. Their total social and moral failure is marked whenever they are addressed. I
remember very well an old lady in my village to whom this had happened who was
constrained into playing a perpetual clowning role in the village as a way of deflecting
the lack of respect to which she continually feared she might be treated.
The name that is given in the naming ceremony is therefore much more a name for
the parents than it is a name for the child and that is what is so misleading in comparing
Zafimaniry name-giving with a practice such as baptism. Nothing shows better that
name-giving is above all a matter for the parents than the fact that if the first child dies,
even in early infancy, the teknonyms based on the name of that child will be retained
by the parents for the rest of their lives and beyond, even if they have many subsequent children. The name-giving ritual, especially when it is for a first child, is
therefore above all a celebration of the entry into society of the parents not of the
child. It is a part of that general process of marriage (after all, as noted above, it links
the parents together since henceforth they share their childs name as the basis of their
two teknonyms) o r house creation which dominates Zafimaniry symbolism.23
Some of the more detailed aspects of the naming ritual are also understandable in
this general view. Firstly, the marking with chalk of the two parents, and subsequently
of the other people present, denotes the fact that the giving of the name is first of all a
blessing for the parents which, again like the name of the child itself, links the spouses
by the simple fact that their faces are decorated together.
Secondly, the marking of the child with soot from the hearth, an act which might,
at first, seem child focused, conveys above all the linking of the child to its parents
hearth, the core of their growing house process. It is almost as if what is being
22 In order not to hurt such a persons feelings people try to avoid addressing them by any name at all
but even this marks their failure.
23 Someone who is very young and whose parents are still active will not be addressed by their
teknonym except on very formal occasions.

128

MAURICE BLOCH

celebrated by this action is the production of the child from the marital hearth in
analogy with the food that is cooked there: an analogy reminiscent of that argued by
Carsten for Malaysz4
Thirdly, the symbolism of clarity which, as appears from the spell, is in part
concerned with the sight of the child, is also centrally linked to the symbolism of the
house by the fact that it is a roofing bamboo which is being burnt to produce the clear
light. This is because the roof of the house, with its two sloping sides, is often used in
Zafimaniry symbolism to symbolise the unity of the married couple who live beneath
it. Furthermore, in a way which can only be touched upon here, the symbolism of
clarity in general is also closely linked to the image of the emerging and growing
house.25
All these aspects of the naming ritual therefore emphasise that the birth of the
child is socially important, not because it marks the childs entry into the social world,
but because it is a part of the process of the growth of the parents houselmarriage.
The same theme emerges from the practices which occur at the time of the birth
itself. The burial of the placenta near the hearth marks most strongly the attachment of
the child to his parents house. The placenta, as noted above, is referred to as the twin
of the infant. Twins for the Zafimaniry represent the closest possible kin relation and,
as for all kin, but especially strongly in their case, what affects one affects the other.
This is shown by the fact that the way the placenta is treated may mark the child.
Furthermore, by burying the placenta of the child near the marital hearth the child is
thereby tied for ever by the closest possible social tie to the houses destiny.
Apparently similar is the meaning of the building of the miniature house for the
mother after the birth. This is a kind of hyper-house which encloses again the mother
who has been opened by birth, and by extension emphatically stresses the childs
attachment and containment by the house in which it is born.
Such an interpretation of the practice accords well with what the Zafimaniry say,
but it also leaves us with a problem. If the symbolism is yet again this most acceptable
of themes, why should the building of such a miniature house be surrounded by the
ambiguities and the taboos mentioned above? The answer to this paradox is to be
found in an aspect of Zafimaniry house symbolism on which I have so far barely
touched.2bThis is the fact that Zafimaniry houses retain all their children, grandchildren and so on, regardless of gender, since these all belong to the holy houses from
which they are descended and from where they must obtain blessing. If this were not
enough, because Zafimaniry marriage, to a certain extent, involves the adoption of a
childs spouse by its parents, the inclusive and, one might say, predatory tendency of
the Zafimaniry house to expand in terms of numbers is extraordinary. Such undifferentiation is problematic on an individual level in that it means that any Zafimaniry
belongs to, a t least, the house of the parents of both its parents and of its spouse.27
This multiple affiliation results in a kind of inconclusive tug of war over children
which continues throughout life and beyond, and which, among other things, leads
young couples to oscillate their residence between the houses of their respective
parents.
24
25
26
27

In Carsten and Hugh-Jones, eds., forthcoming.


This will be argued fully in Bloch, forthcoming a.
This is discussed more fully in Bloch, forthcoming b.
In many cases the spouses house is that of a parent.

ZAFIMANIRY BIRTH AND KINSHIP THEORY

I29

It is this element which explains the problem with the building of the house on the
bed of the mother. The building of the hyper-house seems, in the case of the first three
children at least, an emphatic and potentially exclusive celebration of the affiliation of
the child to its mothers parents house. Such an emphasis therefore also carries the
suggestion of the end of the marriage and house of the childs own parents since, if the
child only belongs to his mothers side, this is a sign that the union of its parents has
failed. This possibility is of course very real since such failure is quite a common
occurrence, especially when the husband does not succeed in begging back his wife
and child from her parents after a birth. The potential problem with building a house
in the mothers parents home is therefore that it strongly suggests the possibility of
her non-return to her marital home. Hence the variety of taboos and hesitations
surrounding the building and naming of such a house, to the extent that in some
villages there are rules that forbid such houses being completed with roofs, while in
others they are forbidden altogether. Far from these taboos and hesitations negating
the centrality of the house/marriage theme, they in fact take us ever more deeply into
the symbolic logic of the system.
There is one element of Zafimaniry birth which, however, genuinely does not fit
in with the logic of house/marriage. That is the pre-mortem inheritance of a beehive
for boys and a reed bed for girls which occurs immediately after birth. The gift of these
things is clearly child focused, they will remain its individual property and they herald
the beginning of certain types of economic activities on its part.
In order to understand the significance of such a practice and how it relates to the
dominant symbolism, it is necessary to understand the place of honey and mats, the
products of beehives and reed beds, in Zafimaniry economy and thought. For them, as
for other shifting cultivators, land is not a significant inheritable resource. The main
transmitted property is the house. This remains the joint property of all the descendants of the original couple who founded it and which continues to unite and mystically
guide them as house beings. Beehives and reed beds are different however. As means of
production they are much less important than land but still they have considerable
significance. However, unlike all other means of production they are owned individually and therefore transmitted in a special way. Beehives are inherited from one man to
another and reed beds are passed from one woman to another. As a result beehives and
reed beds contrast with conjugal communal property as one gender alone individual
property.
This is to the fact that honey and mats are intimately linked to a subordinate
though significant aspect of the person which is never totally subsumed by the unity of
the couple and the house during life. This element is the continuation in adulthood of a
little of the pre house/marriage existence of the child with its association with the wild
and hunting and gathering. This leftover of childhood is perhaps not too serious but is
greatly valued as an outlet for occasional youth like individuality and fun. For adults
the element is focused practically and symbolically in a number of ways on honey in
the case of men and mats in the case of women.28 The giving of beehives and reed beds
at birth is therefore an assurance that the new born will always retain access to that
28 Honey is produced by wild bees who come of their own accord into beehives which have been
placed in trees. Honey is therefore thought of as a wild product. The reeds which are relevant here
also grow wild but most importantly they are used by Zafirnaniry women to make mats which they
sell individually and which produce a money income which they retain for themselves.

130

MAURICE BLOCH

individual world. These gifts therefore d o genuinely stress another theme than that
which dominates the principal symbolism of Zafimaniry birth. The dominant theme,
however, remains that of house creation.
Apart from the qualification introduced by beehives and reed beds, it can therefore be said emphatically that for the Zafimaniry the birth of a child does not mark its
entry into social life, rather it is part of the wider process of the entry of its parents into
that life. O n e could say, therefore, that for them, it is not so much the parents which
produce the child but rather that its birth is part of the production of the parents as an
enduring couple.29

Conclusion
It is now possible to return to the quotation from Fox with which I began this
discussion. Clearly for the Zafimaniry he is right when he stresses that in Austronesian
cultures birth does not determine. As for the Rotinese to whom he refers, it is the
passage through life and its continuation after death which determines, so that kinship
could be said to be created through death rather than through birth. But such a
formulation needs qualifying, at least for the Zafimaniry, since for them, it is not
simply the passage of an individual towards a final destination which matters in
creating the person. Perhaps formulation would apply for the very beginning of the
process, but rapidly the individual is subsumed into an undifferentiated couple and
ultimately the couple whose joint destiny is what matters and which will itself be
subsumed into an object, a house which grows, hardens and beautifies. Indeed, in the
case of the Zafimaniry the idiom of launching, which in any case they d o not use, is
still too much what a European kinship system would lead us to expect. Birth, for
them, does not even mark the beginning of the launching of the social/house being;
birth only can be said to launch the uncertain and temporary animal-being whose
abolition is ultimately necessary for the fulfilment of permanent social existence as a
holy house.
But even taking such qualifications into account, Fox is right to generally contrast
Austronesian systems with the African, European, Mediterranean and East Asian
systems where birth does indeed seem to determine fundamental id en ti tie^.^' Building
on such a distinction one could perhaps introduce a distinction in kinship studies
between birth based systems and others, which would include tomb based systems,
house based systems (like the Zafimaniry) and possibly food based systems. The
implications of such a suggestion are clearly much too far reaching to be dealt with
here. However, one thing is clear: much as the comparison of culturally different
kinship systems is problematic, the comparison of different birth systems also
requires great caution. However counterintuitive this might seem, we may not be
dealing with the same phenomena in different places. At the very least the comparison
29 I am grateful to Janet Carsten for a variant of this formulation.
30 But then it is rather puzzling to find that on the next page Fox reiterates his earlier position
concerning Roti, since this is so clearly based on the determining significance of birth, at least as far

as the clan element is concerned, which according to him, is inherited from fathers who give their
children bones, skull and name while blood and life comes from the fathers wife givers. If that is
so, Roti could easily be handled within traditional kinship theory and his strictures about Austronesian systems would not apply to Roti while they d o most strongly to the Zafimaniry. Perhaps it
is time Fox revised what he has to say about the Rotinese in the light of his more general remarks.

ZAFlMANlRY BIRTH AND K I N S H I P THEORY

131

of birth requires a preliminary placing of birth within a wider framework of mean-

ings.
Maurice Bloch
Department of Anthropology
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE
U.K.

References
Astuti, R. 1991. Learning to be Vezo: the construction of the person among fishing people of Western
Madagascar. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London.
Bloch, M. 1971. Placing the dead: tombs, ancestral villages and kinship organisation in Madagascar.
London: Seminar Press.
1975. Property and the end of Affinity, in M. Bloch (ed.), Marxist analyses andsocial anthropology.
London: Malaby Press.
Forthcoming a. People into places: Zafimaniry concepts of clarity, in E. Hirsch and M. OHanlon
(eds.), The anthropology of landscape. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Forthcoming b. The resurrection of the house, in J. Carsten and S. Hugh-Jones (eds.), Houses:
buildings, groups and categories.
Carsten, J. and Hugh-Jones, S . (eds.) Forthcoming. Houses: buildings, groups and categories.
Coulaud, D. 1973. Les Zafimaniry: Un groupe ethnique de Madagascar. Antananarivo: F. B. M.
Fox, J. 1987. The house as a type of social organisation on the island of Roti, in C. Macdonald (id.),
De la hutte au palais. Paris: CNRS.
Livi-Strauss, C. 1984. Paroles donnies. Paris: Plon.
Raminosoa, N. 1971-2. Sysdme iducatif de la femme et sa fonction dans la sociiti zafimaniry,
Bulletin de Madagascar, 307 (Dec. 1971), 936-51; 308 (Jan. 1972), 3-30; 309 (Feb. 1372), 107-39;
310 (March 1972), 215-34.
Strathern, M. 1992. After Nature, English kinship in the late twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Vrin, P. 1964. Les Zafimaniry et leur art. U n groupe continuateur dune tradition esthitique malgache
miconnue, Revue de Madagascar, 27: 1-76.

132

MAURICE BLOCH

You might also like