“Rethinking gitano kinship: the calós of Catalonia”, Europaea, vol. 2. Cagliari. Italia. 2000. ISSN 1124-5425 [http://vaxca1.unica.it/europaea/] (trad. “Pehodnocení píbuzenství u gitanos: katalánští calós”, en Jakoubek, Marek; Budilová Lenka (eds.), 2009, Cikánské skupiny a jejich sociální organizace, Brno, Centrum pro Studium Demokracie a Kultury. República Checa. 2009. ISBN 978-80-7325)

Europaea

2000, VI-1/2

Index

Studia Insularia: 1. Jacques Fusina Repères pour une approche de la littérature corse

2. Margherita Marras Écrivains insulaires et auto-représentation

3. Margherita Marras Écriture féminine et univers insulaire

4. Margherita Marras Une nouvelle façon de raconter les îles: le roman policier en Corse, Sicile et Sardaigne

5. Silvia Contarini Beniamino Joppolo: un Sicilien universel

6. Corrado Belluomo Anello La Sicile entre mythe et réalité    

    Varia

Monica Iorio, Anna Leone, Fabiola Podda L'immigration marocaine en Italie entre la clandestinité et la légalité: un regard sur la Sardaigne

Francis Mobio Le "rituel footballistique" entre religion et droit

David Lagunas Arias Rethinking Gitano Kinship: The Calós of Catalonia

Raphaël Rousseleau La fontaine "sacrée" de Saint-Gré. "Paganisme" et usage du paysage

Steffan Igor Ayora Diaz Hospitality in Sardinia: The Moral Construction of Identities    

1

RETHINKING GITANO KINSHIP: THE CALOS OF CATALONIA.

The invisibles Calós: a necessary approach

In Catalonia, Valencia, the Baleares Islands and the South of France a series of gypsy groups have settled that have become known by other such groups and indeed call themselves gitanos catalans (catalan gypsies)1. In Catalonia, the division into different groups of gypsies is maintained on the grounds of toponymy, just like the Sinti but not as the Rom2. The classifications from the gypsies are related to the transmitting group and so differ of the external non-gypsie point of view.In this sense,the catalans divide their conceptual world into two big groups, the gypsies and the payos (a non-Gypsy), and within the gypsies there is no precise definition or refined knowledge of the others: all of the others groups were the castellanos, opposeds to catalans.

The catalans, who interest us here, call themselves Calós. This term in the spanish-gypsy dialect is more like a noun that designates its own split dialect in the romany language, the caló, as an adjective means black or dark,and is derived from the Romany word kalé. The catalans use it as a self-designated appointed ethnic (in plural Calós) and in order to refer to the spanish-gypsy dialect. The term caló is used by the catalan gypsies in their daily conversations and in public but when they speak to payos they use standard gypsy terms because the payo does not speak or understand the appropriate language, and when speaking to a non-catalan gypsy, the Calós prefer to speak gitano (gypsy), although they may promptly slip back into and speak caló.

In Gypsy literature however, the term Caló or Calé is hardly ever used. Starkie (1956), de Luna (1949), Borrow (1979) all use Caló/Calés, and this Zincaló (something that remains the same), Romany and Chai for the singular. Leblon (1987) uses Kalé for the masculine singular; Kaprow (1978) uses Caló as a synonym of the Gypsy-Spanish dialect; Ramirez Heredia (1983,1985) uses it to a lesser degree than Gypsy, in a hotchpotch Caló (tongue,language,idiom), Caló (Gypsy), Cali (Gypsy feminine), Calé (Gypsy singular and plural). San Román (1976,1984,1986,1994,1996), only uses it as simple information datum for the reader in a part of the introduction,the same as Ardévol (1986). Others such as Quintana and Floyd (1986) reserve Caló for the dialect, and Calé as a citation for other Gypsy logos for the term. Finally, Anta (1994) do not make any reference to it.

What do the linguists say with regard to the subject under discussion? Román (1995:105) has pointed out that the original Indo-European plural has disappeared and is frequently used in the singular.In order to form the plural it follows the Spanish model by adding a final -s at the end of a noun: Caló/Calós, Calé/Calés, both terms

1 The Calós main identifying characteristic is that they speak Catalan (although there are some meaningful individual exceptions), unlike other groups settled in Catalonia which do not. To be more precise,this characteristic is understood by other Gypsy groups as a sign of apayamiento (wannabe payos) of being more integrated into the non-Gypsy world. This is why I use the term Catalanes (Catalans) to define a Gypsy group of which we know how long has settled and become established in Catalonia, their linguistic and cultural characteristics and a feeling of belonging and differentiation with respect to other groups. The term may be ambiguous but I find it useful as a self denomination and heterodenomination.2 Among the Rom,the identification is ergonomical with regard to traditional occupations, which even though do not presently exist, symbolise the group difference. See Liégieois 1976.

2

are interchangeable. However, the Catalan Calós use exclusively Caló/Calós as ethnic name3 , and Calí/Calís to refer to the feminine forms.

The catalan Calós under analysis here, are concentrated in cities of a medium and large size, in the nucleus of the highly populated provincial capital cities of industrial and commercial importance such as Barcelona (being the most important), Gerona, Lerida, Tarragona, as well as Mataró, Salt, Reus, Figueras, Igualada, Vilanova and Sitges.

The community under analysis is that of Mataró, the costal capital city of the Maresme region, and one of the most important textile centres in Catalunya. Around 150 individuales live here, the majority of whom devote their time to travelling and selling in market stalls mainly in the inland and costal towns and cities of Gerona, and to selling clothes around houses and other establishments. Their presence in this city has been recorded since the XVIII century but what is not understood is why it had not previously been inhabited. This is a group in the heart of the city and, paradoxicaly, unprovived for the others citizens and, also, traditionally for the anthropologist’s. My challenge is, precisely, to think the “normality” of this gypsies.

In this sense, my methodical position is established within an experimental anthropological framework and not of an analytical imposition, "The difference highlited by Kant between analytical knowledge,in which, ironically,the analyst already fundamentally knows what one is going to learn,and the synthetic knowledge,in which new knowledge is going to emerge mutually in interaction with the interviewee".(Fernandez en Bestard 1993:49).I propose a more patient and humble attention, in the sense of being an anthropological novice who neither imposes categories nor conclusive explanations,but rather one who focuses on the concept of culture,reclaimed from the attacks of sociology and folklore.

This enquiry into such a small community allows me to analyse the social and cultural life in finer detail,gaining in quality what is sometimes lost in an amplitude of statistics, while trying to give the most coherent interpretation possible as to how they construct their world. One of the problems that I had to face was the minor relevance that Gypsy culture (and kinship) holds in academic debate, partly due to the impartiality that is provoked fromn the point of view of their own culture, not sociological, and to the absence of ethnography albeit of an experimental type, at least of a classical type.The first important ethnographic work by Quintana and Floyd (1986) on the Gypsies from Sacromonte in Granada, orientated towards folklore although with interesting contributions. Only Kaprow (1978), in radical opposition to San Román, affirmed the inexistance of Gypsy lineages pointing out the importance of bilateral relationship (kinship) in her study on the Gypsies of Zaragoza. Ardévol (1986) made a timid reference to the relevance of kinship between the Gypsies of Granada but continued to place patrilineal lineage as a social privileged entity in a model of a segmented society. Recently, Anta Félez (1994), realized his praiseworthy ethnography adventure on a marginal community in Málaga applying the theory of lineages, expliciting forms of leadership that had more to do with drugs than with the gypsy social structure itself.

The lineage in the head of the anthropologist

3 This is different to what Kaprow 1978:95 pointed out. He discovered that the gypsies from Zaragoza only use it in political context, for instance when there was a public discussion about their ethnic specificity. For the Calós, the term are usual.

3

One of the most relevant themes for scientific study and that has still not come into or been aknowledged in anthropological debate is that of social Gypsy structure,or to be more precise, the system of kinship. Thirty years ago, the only spanish anthropologist who specialised in Gypsy culture, San Román, managed to keep alive an interest in Gypsy communities. In her book, La diférencia inquietant in 1994 (The anxious difference) she affirmed and recognised that it was a provocation to suggest that the Gypsies organised themselves into lineages. Two years later, the Castilian edition of her work, partially corrected her position, recognising the influence that recent blows to the theory of filiation had in its academic formation, and to demand and clarify from the authorities with urgency new datum that was being piled-up against the theory of lineages.

My academic education predisposed me to find the social structures that built up Gypsy culture.The readings of San Román taught me that the organisation of Gypsy culture followed a structural law that allows us to affirm the existence of an social architecture as a coherent whole. I was soon able to realise the impossibility of applying this model to the Gypsy communities that I was about to come into contact with. To be more precise, it was the Catalan Calós, that did not study San Román, that were to give the different keys to the established academic theories.

According to San Román (1976,1994) and Ardévol (1986), Gypsy society organised its social relations on the grounds of a logic of kinship articulated into patrilineal lineages,a system of organisation that is found in societies of a segmented type.Such a jurisdictional position creates convincing answers for only two types: a group of legal people (the possessor of a status that distributes) and a list of descendents in the articulation of such groups,that succeeded in explaining the mass of well known and accepted facts within its conceptual world (Verdon 1991:64).

In synthesis, the assignment to the lineage would be carried out by the man. He would inherit the name and the ownership of the lineage from his parents, lineage A through his mother and lineage B through his father. If Ego were to get married to a CD woman, the newly married couple would conserve the assignment and the name of their two own lineages of their respective family orientation, but the woman would play a subordinate role in her husband lineage. If he were to have a baby boy he will be AC and the same if the baby were a girl. What has to be said is that the uterine lineage of the mother and the father looses itself in favour to the agnate.

According to this model, the uterine branches would have no possibility to perpetuate through the generations, a lineage that only bears girls would be condemned to die out. If the filiation is patrilineal the ownership of lineage would be handed down by the men.

Raza (Race) can be partly identified independently (San Román 1976b,1978a). Raza would be a lineage of patrilineal filitation, independently forming a social segment or corporate entity with its own name of not more than four or five generations or 200 individuals. The "strength" of the lineage would be measured by the number of members.The patriarch would have the competence to exercise social control and defence by force (1978b), uniting in the case of agression shown by any particular member,aswell as binding together economically and participating in rituals as a united unit. Reality would be segmented, starting from a group of brothers, typical features of the lineages.

Hence two conclusions can be drawn;1.That a man belongs to a real "group" of people,a lineage or group of corporated descendency, a distinguishable and operative group,a single-linear descent group of Rivers;and 2.that an Ego identifies and names himself by making reference to a "category" of people that belong to a social unit.San

4

Román emphasises point 1, giving ontological importance to the group, defining substantial identities,while not contemplating on the expressive function,distinction and classification that will be suggested in point 2.This will be extended further on.

In her latest work, San Román (1996:92-95) drops the idea of Gypsy kinship organised into lineages,but continues using the concept of "lineage" assimilating the race, and speaks of patrigroups and those that assume a permanent basis. Lineage would not be the only ideology of the social organisation, in spite of not imposing its dictates in an absolute form on social behaviour, if it would have a significant influence on the action.In her revision of her apparatus concept, she aligns herself with Murdock to define the “compromise kingroups or patriclans” (that San Román prefers to call patrigrupos), like a synthesis of patrilineal filiation and patrilocal residence. She says that the patrigroup is a local group and that race is patrilineal. Likewise he points out that the Gypsies speak of race, sometimes in order to refer to the local patrigroup and others to the patrilineal.

Prior to discussing these ideas it is important to analyse the categories of the Catalan Calós in order to afterwards construct an alternative model to the system of Gypsy kinship. This return to ethnography is an indispensible condition in order to be able to confront anthropological models, which may change from theory to practise.

Gypsy embriology

Among the Calós of Mataró, the sang (blood) is not a biological substance but a symbolic means that indicates communion and identity. As a native category it possesses a privileged list in beliefs of conception. Blood is invoked in order to justify as the son of a Gypsy father and paya mother is considered to be more of a Gypsy than one of a payo father and gypsy mother. The father gives the blood, the lineage, therefore, passing on the ethnic identity. However,this discourse, appears next to one another of a more sociological type that justifies the dominance of the men in the ethnic assignment: as the father is a Gypsy, the child will be influenced more by the Gypsy customs, because it is the father who gives the orders in the family.If the mother is a Gypsy but the father a payo, the child will be influenced more by payo customs. Therefore, the marriage of a Caló to a paya is considered to be less serious than a Gypsy woman to do so with a payo: there is no Gypsy woman married to a payo who actively participates in the life of the community, this puts the family to shame.

Although the meaning that the Calós give to the concept of blood is far broader and co-exists with other symbolic elements. Semen is considered by the men to be the creator of the identity, that gives the genes to the children, while the woman is considered only as a recipient.

Once, in a gathering, a male Caló said me that the man creates and the woman mates [the child]. After one moment, another male view my expression of doubt and answered:

¡Is easy to understand! Your grandfather, great grandfather...you are the direct descendent of them because you have their blood. In the case of a woman, who has another inheritance, there is no direct lineage. Yes, the father give the semen and the mother give the blood. But the man command. The chromosomes, the genes, are given by the man...uh... it seems to me that the woman gives three chromosomes.

5

The woman is worth nothing, she only make the nursing. A woman without semen cannot conceive. It`s like before, the woman is only there to have children and take care of the house. There are men who have more women spermatozoids and others that have more men spermatozoids, and so there is more possibility of having boys or girls. The genes are given by the father. So you see how the children are born more alike, in character,in looks,the face...everybody says,’¡he looks like his father!’. The children are more Gypsy if they have a Gypsy father, ¡it’s clear!. Besides, he gives the surname. (A 56 year-old male)

The Calós recognise that the mother and father mix their blood in order to conceive a child. The woman is considered to be nothing more than a container,who brings the blood,while the man is the creator and the giver of life, who contributes with both blood and semen. This is a discourse about Aristotelian roots following his homogenate theory,

"[...] The woman is considered to be nothing more than passive material and the male with spiritual activity and the giver of form...the mother provides basting matter (the menstrual blood), while the father gives, with his semen, shape and soul, the active participant that creates organic life from inert material." (Pomata, 1994:315).

However, I believe that when the informants introduce this blending to refer to the man not giving all but the main part of the genes,the argument is not so absolutely Aristotelian as it may appear,but more like Galeno`s version of the same discourse,

"Galeno rejects the Aristotelian polarisation of a paternal and maternal principle as shape verses material .The male semen, in its appearance, brings material as well,and not only the spirit in the formation of the embryo,while the feminine semen,on the other hand, also has an activing and forming function. Mixed together,the two semen work together in the formation of the foetus, but not in a parity way. The masculine semen plays a far more important role than the feminine".(Pomata, 1994:318)

It is as if the belief in the bond of blood created equally by both mother and father appear together in an ideology that the paternal blood gives the father the privilege to be the transmiter of the ethnic identity. It is this a characteristic typically European, a patrilineal orientation appears to have co-existed with the conception of relations as the claim in the blood relationship (Pomata, 1994:299). Agnation and the blood relationship are compatible as native categories.

This preponderance of the paternal bond would likewise explain the different native categories of the brothers and sisters of different mothers and fathers: two brothers or sisters of the same father but a different mother are categorised as being brothers and sisters, on the other hand, two brothers or sisters of the same mother but a different father are half-brothers or half-sisters, and as such are related in this way. Fatherhood is a fixed point of reference for the identity, the child receives most of the genes from the father who in turn had received his from his own father,the paternal grandfather of the child. This is why the argument about the Calós and filiation

6

emphasises both behaviour and physical similarity of the sons with respect to the fathers and to the grandfathers4.

However, identity and not embodiment, does not exclusively follow the masculine and the descending genetic, lineal chain, but can be invoked in any relationship within the circle of the relations. In this sense the bonds of fictitious kinship have a privileged place in order to express the identity. Therefore, the Calós have pointed out many times the similarity in character of a godmother and godfather and his or her godson or goddaughter. Present day examples of similar behaviour can be obtained and identical incidents that took place in the godmothers and godfathers childhood in order to express the special identity between both of them. The identity would be more spiritual than physical.

In a parallel way, affinity also comes into the circle of beliefs of spiritual-behavioural identity, but in a lesser way, a son-in-law or a daughter-in-law, like a godson or goddaughter with respect to their godmother and godfather can remind them of other in-law relatives because of their behaviour or their actions,which may appear trivial, such as the way a young woman washes her clothes. The identity would be a consequence of the entry of the in-laws into the family circle.

The women, on the other hand, are a long way from sharing absolutely this discourse about the conception in that the seminal contribution of the man is prioritised. Some of them affirm that their contribution in the creation of the child is as important as that of the father because it is they who llevan al niño en la panza (carry the child in their bellies), feed and give birth to the child. This question raises a lot of polemic between women as they differ in their opinions with some supporting, with resignation, the dominance of the father in the genesis of the child, and others doing the same with an equally important contribution of the woman in the conception of the child. If the men have a very clear position it is because the ideology is with them, ideas about the conception are a constant dialectic between women. Ideology places importance on the male, again re-defined, without being questioned, that their contribution to society is very important. This again confirms the myth that the subordination of the Gypsy woman to the man is as fragile as in many societies in which women were believed to be passive. They will as well reply to this discrimination through strategy and ideology. We will see these feminine discourses appear with respect to other institutions and social phenonema.

If blood, as a cultural category, is invoked as given by the parents,it can aswell be extended as a symbolic mediator to the ownership of relations. The idea of a gradual recession in the similarity of blood within the relations (Du Boulay 1984:538) as generations go by beginning with a group of apical brothers is used to evaluate the nearness of the relatives.This acts in accordance with the custom to trace their descendency, the relationship with another individual beginning with the genealogical relation of their ancestors (my father and his father are children of first-cousins, my grandfather and his mother are first-cousins, etc) that this is the coception of "similar" blood and therefore, more identical. Comparably, a greater closeness greateer degree of effectivity but, equally, the rules of incest appear.

The idea of blood dissoluteness is also featured with an inter-ethnic beginning. When the blood is mixed with outsiders (payos) the purity of the blood, and therefore the Gypsy race, is spoilt. One reason that brings the Calós to preferably marry other Catalan Calós is that by so doing, la raça la fem més pura (the race is made purer).

4 I have confirmed that other non-Catalan gypsy groups in Catalonia still strongly believe in the physical and spiritual incarnation of the grandfather into the grandson

7

Such a connection to individual payos does nothing but contaminate the Gypsy women with payo blood and genes. A payo who comes into the family brings another inheritance,and this fact is lived with a mixture of rejection,resignation and fear, and can be,in the long term,if it is repeated excessively, lead to the extinction of the Gypsy race for the Calós. This is a prominent eugenic discourse between the Calós.

The familiar machinery

One of the fundamental analytic units that is also a native category, is the concept of the famila (family). Despite San Román (1996:89) denying the term of total analytic relevance, considering this to appear as a weak concept, I believe it deserves a more detailed analysis with respect to the Catalan Calós, at least because it is the most used concept for the Calós to think of their kinship relations. The Calós say that la familia és tot (the family is everything), implying an effective identity beyond any moral oligation with respect to the rest of the relations.

Basically,the Calós classify those they consider to be family as who are included within the consanguinity, among them the Xoraxane Roma. (Piasere, 1991:9) The family is a personal group to which one owes loyalty and moral solidarity. This obligation is expressed in a symbolic way through the language: an argument between two adults could end with the words such as, I would screw you up if you weren’t my family, which means that any irritation between relatives does not go further. Likewise, two youths could be seen exchanging taboo words in a loud voice and a third says, look at them insulting each other and they say everything but it doesn’t matter,here we are all family.

It is based on the ego as what the two individuals share is a common family relationship and not one of the forefathers. It is a family of blood, this is to say that they share the same substance,that of blood.However, the blood family is included in the bilateral relations. These relations are personal not corporate,and the delimitation of each one must be carried out by a group brothers who share a common relation. The relations overlap one another and do not perpetuate from generation to generation, therefore, there is no possiblity that groups of relations are formed perfectly delimited.

The criterion of ownership5 is cognatic kinship. The Calós include the decendents of the four grandparents (if they are alive or known well enough) collaterally until the second cousins. The limit is not rigid as it depends on the genealogical memory. The collaterals of the ascending generations are continuously forgotten. In his way the age, the memory and the settlement are key factors in the recognition of relations. The old aged and especially the very elderly, are the ones who have the better knowledge of the family history and know how to trace the kinship of individuals. The memory does not, normally, go further than two or generations of ascendents. The Calós are use to saying that we are one of the most unmethodical races in the world because beyond the grandparents we do not remember our family. This type of amnesia might make the family relations more dynamic. As the local residence is shared the bonds are not easily forgotten and are constantly revived,so it is not uncommon for an individual not to know the name or daily affairs of a first cousin, simply because they live in another place and never meet each other,nevertheless,they may know the family tree of one individual who

5 Verdon 1980:145 shows three implications about the concept of descendant: ownership criteria, single functionality of groups and aggregation criteria. All these aspects are developed through this essay.

8

they are related to by affinity or without being related to at all.Briefly, structural amnesia and residence (although the latter is relative seeing that the visits to the local settlements, the daily meetings in the markets, the death rituals and festivals are approved of) might make the carnal or blood family a "pragmatic category". As Piasere (1985:106) affirmed, "the zlahta" or family relations of Slovensko Roma reaches the second cousins only if they are well known and familiar with one another.

Added to these characteristics would be the fact that the blood family is not a "social" group or a pure category, and neither an exogamous or ceremonial group. There are no empirical examples that might suggest the group as being exclusive for all type of activity. As Piasere (1985:107) affirmed with respect to the Roma,the characteristics of the family network6 does not allow for a reticulation that binds various nuclear families together. The in-laws form part of the relations because they are related to carnal relatives7, and fulfil certain activities that are also carried out by the carnal relatives. Mitchell (1963:344) briefly summarised the characteristics of the family relations as, 1) defined by reference to the ego; 2) the same for the brothers; 3) it is not a corporate group; 4) not having a leader; 5) its limits are not relatively undefined; 6) not being a group of descendents.

The family is not a group of action but a social category (Verdon 1980:139). Relatives do not act as a group except at certain moments. This operational criteria, the absence or presence of activity8 will be used in order to diferentiate the group from a category. For example, a visit to the cemetery on the anniversary of the death of a loved one, mobilises nearly all the community: relatives, distant relatives,and friends all come to show their respect. In other rituals the cycle of life such as births, marriages and baptisms, the community acts as a unit. In other cases, the participation in community rituals is not exclusively based on genealogical recruitment but on the community bonds and the ties of friendship.

The relations apply themselves to a simple operation, characterised by degrees of closeness. Although it is flexible enough so as not to convert itself into a discrete unit or to become independent in society, lacking an apparent leader and organiation, without a united perception but with a resemblance. What a category of cognates have in common is that they are cognatically related to the same person in diverse ways. This would be a category of near of kin relatives, recognizable and clearly defined, different from a category of more diffused relatives of kinship, where a consciousness exists that they are somehow related. All the Calós are aware that a common decendence units them maybe directly or through the collaterales and matrimonial relations.

The nuclear family constitutes the ideal of the economic, sexual, educative, and reproductive unit. Although it does not always exclusively perform the economic 6 The network of Ardevol 1986:157, recognises how importantly functional,in spite of granting a more socially substantive and more socially relevant character to the structure of lineage.7 A Caló with children, one of whom was about to get married, said he considered his family as the most important thing for them, and explained this sensible example: Look, the family is everything. If a girl marries my son I´d tell her: ‘Look, this is your house, this is your family, you´ll be living us but you´ve got to show respect for what you´ve go't’.8 Common residence is an activity. If a daughter-in-law or a son-in-law live for a period of time with his/her parents-in-law until he/she can have his/her own place, they form an greater attachment because they have to share the market-stall. In any case, this living-together is not encouraged as it may suggest the parents as being mean and not allowing their children to have independance. That is the reason why the Calós regard their children-in-law as their own children, because they share all activities. An elder woman stated: I´d do the same for my daughter-in-law, if she is a good girl, as I´d do for my own daughter.

9

function (the associations of work vary both formally and informally), nor the educative since the community shares the power of vigilance and control over the children and neither the sexual, since the husbands can deceive their wives if they guard a certain amount of discretion. Only the reproductive function falls back on the nuclear family. On the other hand, it must ideally coincide with the domestic group. The independence of the nuclear family has always been a hypothetical attainment but hardly ever succesful. Consequently the nuclear family is ideologically more of a priority than the family relations as it constitutes the explicit ideal form of family organisation. Does this idealogical primate uderline the tyranny that the relatives and the community exercise in their entirety over the nuclear family? I believe that the system is maintained on the grounds of compromise between the parts in such a way that flexibility exists both inside and outside.

The terminology.

The Gypsy kinship terminology is a synthesis of two systems: the gypsy and the catalan payo. I will base my comparison on the article by Piasere (1994:183-208) about kinship terminology of the Hungarian Rom "vlax", the Rom Kalderash and Roma Slovenian.

Linears Collaterals

+2 Iaio Iaia Onclo (carnal/meu) Onclo carnal/meu)

+1 Pare Mare Onclo (carnal/meu) Tia (carnal/meva)

0 Germà Germana Cosí germà

Cosina germana

-1 Fill Filla Nebot/cosí prim Neboda/cosina prima

-2 Net Neta Nebot/cosí Neboda/cosina

Figure 1. Terms of the reference of the consanguinity.

Linears Collaterals

+2 Iaio Iaia Onclo Tia

+1 Papa Mama Onclo Tia

0 Cosí Cosí

Figure 2. Terms of address of the consanguinity.

10

sibling of the spouse

spouse of the sibling

parent of the spouse

spouse of the child

Reference Address

cunyat cunyat cunyat cunyatsogre gendre nora sogre

Figure 3. Diagram of the alliance.

In figure 1 the term of reference is non-Gypsy, the Catalan system, but with certain peculiarities. The term onclo (uncle) is a variant of the Catalan word “oncle” and is usually used in some parts of Catalonia. The Calós use onclo as an allocution when refering to all men of a certain age (from 40 to 50 years of age). In order to distinguish the uncles of the family from those who are not the term meu (mine) is added in front or behind, or carnal (of the same flesh) is added behind to mean that he is a relative of the blood family.

The Catalan system uses tia (aunt) or the nickname tieta for the female carnal collaterals. The Calós employ and extend tia to all women of a certain age, the same being the case for the onclos, showing a respect towards the elderly. Some nickname as teta appears as a reliable social form, an affectionate distortion of tia, but the more significant is that in all documented cases the Calós employ it as an allocution for non relatives.

A tendency exists not to take into account the principle of the generations starting from the most important collateral. therefore the genealogical position does not always determine. The age factor is important so if two individuals are of a similar age but one of them is the cousin of the father,they do not call each other onclo but cousin. One thing is the real genealogical position,and the other is the behaviour and the cetegorisation in practise. The Calós voice this difference speaking of "representation".

Onclo and tia is extended to the elderly both inside and outside the community. As Williams pointed out for the Kalderash, the unit is created through a collateral and in a symetrical way for men and women of the same age. What is important is the present,therefore the temporary dimension as not having an ideology of decendency, is put between brackets (Williams, in Piasere 1994:188)

Another social term taken from Catalan terminology is fadri/na. In the rural districts with its undivided heritage, it is transmuted into "fadristern" or "cabaler" as the younger son who does not inherit the home and its patronage. The Calós employ it as a generalised term to indicate all young people that are of matrimonial age. The state of being fadri/na begins, aproximately, at the age of 16 (sometimes before) and loose it when they get married.The ideal age for a woman to marry is between 18 and 20 years of age, and for a man until 259. Those that surpass the age find themselves in

9 Some ties told me that they delivered young daughters to their husbands to be so that these could take good care of them. Being little girls,their husbands and fathers-in-law should treat them with parental

11

the ambiguous position of being neither adults nor youths. However, this only happens to the fadrins who may have decided to delay their marriage, but it is not possible for a fadrina to go beyond threshold except because of your bad reputation o little atractive physical.

The allocable relations that the Calós use are not obligatory but any one of them has the option to call another by their name. The term cosi/na (cousin) is denotative and can be used as a connotation. It is a frequently used allocation between first cousins, and is reflected as such in figure 2, and can also be used before or after meu. It is not so often used between cousins or between individuals that recognise a certain kinship,and might already be related by marriage or situated outside the immediate family relations. This also appears between the non relatives,in this case as a sign of fraternity. It is always used in the same generation level. Although its use as a denotation could include non relatives following the social interaction context,for example,a patroness from another community that may not be in Mataró could say that the person at her side is her cousin, when in reality she has no bond of kinship with her. The community bonds expsess themselves through this type of interaction. The cosins germans (first cousins) can also use meu or meva before or after cosin/na as an allocutive in order to mark their geneological closeness.

Another connotative extension is that iaio/iaia (grandfather/grandmother) both for a collateral and real. It is not normative but can reproduce itself due to some acquired custom10. The presence of caló lexeme is very reduced: Chavó (boy) and chaví (girl), which means son or daughter, can be extended to any young man or woman in the Caló community. Chavó is more commonly used than chaví as an allocution, and appears between young men in many cases at an unexpected moment to express suprise, delight or fright. The Calós are very conscious of the differences that exist between the real genealogical position with respect towards them,and the treatment that is given out.

To say that an individual represents a first cousin is to say that he is a first genealogical cousin, but when the time comes to apply the points of reference he is approached as a nephew, for example, if there is a significant difference in age between both that implies respect. The relative age of the interlocutors is what determines, the genealogical contraction make the denotations and connotations readapt themselves to the norms of treatment and respect, but the relationship,the personal treatment that these two individuals maintain will also make a change to the attitude and the allocution towards him, so, two distant relatives will treat each other as if they were genealogical first cousins.

One can often here from the mouth of a Caló that "X" family is meva of which it is supposed that they are close or blood family, but it is not always so, as the expression is sometimes used without precision and accuracy in reference to the genealogical relationship Therefore, an individual could say that he and “X” son were cousins, leaving the genealogical connection as a second class term. All feel algo de familia (a little bit related). There are factors such as frequent communication,the presence or absence from the locality,friendship, including courtesy, that provoke an extension that the denotations and conotations make towards the non relatives.

Let us give an example. Aunty Lola told me that Manuel was not her family but was married to her granddaughter’s nephew, Sarai, suddenly and by chance Julia

love..10However, what is meaningful is that the elderly of the community call themselves iaio and iaia in front of the young children who do not belong to the family, when they meet at the crucial moment of acknowledging their forefathers. For a time the children may address certain elders as iaio/a.

12

turns up and has the opportuntity of speaking to Aunty Lola for a few seconds. Lola is really glad to be able to do this,and furthermore, Julia is very pretty, and why not? She could be a good match for Lola´s son. Lola says to Julia, "you are my family", and out of courtesy Julia smiles and lets Aunty Lola speak. The following day I saw Julia who told me with a mixture of indignation and mock, "you see what Aunty Lola told me, that I were family of hers! I am not, he is my brother." This significant example demonstrates the flexible use of the concept of family, that is shown by the elasticity of Gypsy kinship.

Apart from these ascending generational levels,the relatives seldomly use these terms and prefer to call men and women by their names. However, the Calós have extended the use of other terms, as compare (comrade). Compare is a family allocution between two men related to by ritual kinship through and is often used by the young Calós as an allocution of companionship. This term deserves further development. As a term of reference it has two meanings: to designate the real comrade and to become a friend and to develop a great friendship, or as a comrade of fellowship to go on a spree. As an allocution it refers to the real godfather to the friendship, but is also used while joking in fun. So, the relationship of friendship is expressed symbolically through the language of kinship. I can say the all of them have called me compare at some time, but not all of my good friends have called me this at any time. The reading will be considered as an expression of masculine solidarity, especially among the youth. This is to say that here we have an example of fraternity between young men that would be comparable, on a much more reduced scale, of course, to the fraternity of the Rom "vlax" men from Hungary, who call each other "my brother" between themselves, according to Stewart (1997). Among the Calós this fraternity is given to young men since the adults employ compare even to their real comrade. The young Calís do not extend the use of comare (midwife) outside the denotative sphere.

The other term of ritual kinship, padri/na (godfather/godmother) are used by the grandchildren but the godfathers and godmothers do not symetrically use the denotative fillol/a (stepchild) as an allocution to call their godchildren, but do it by name. The use of allocutions from top to bottom are expressed with respect to the elderly.

In figure 3 we can see how the system with reference to the alliance is the same as the Catalan. However, the Calós convert the denotations (except gender and relationship by marriage) into allocutions,from top to bottom always (mother/father in law) or between equals (brother/sister in law). In the first case of mother/father in law, the treatment of respect implies an address of vos (formal) and not tu (informal) In the case of the second brother/sister in law, the treatment is the informal tu.

Among the Calós the names are used habitually are can be denoted as Piasere pointed out for the Roman Slovenian that through them they could understand the family relation network that bond the bearer to the name. Inveresely, the Roma do not have a taboo word to pronounce the name of the dead,in spite of it always being made by adding a question tag en gloria estigui (a glorious blessing for dead people) or que l’hagin perdonat (God forgive his/her sins). The name of a dead person can be pronounced in order to situate this individual in the family tree. This manner of speaking functions the same for the living as for the dead: the son of...,brother of...,etc.

It is also important as it is the same for the Rom Kalderash that not all women may be considered as granddaughters, but a slight difference exists between men and women, in a similar way to the Rom "vlax", that there are more females than male

13

children so the word nena (little girl) is used as an allocution so as to refer to the fadrines than nen (little boy) for the fadrins. The fadrins, husbands and onclos call each other noi (boy) sometimes as an interjection and others as an allocution from head to foot or between those of the same generation. The married, fadrines and tias use nena and noia (girl) indistinctly, that is to say that if at any time the children were to become fadrins,the women are considered to be more like girls than the men like boys, and at the time of an acceptance of a marriage proposal, the fadrí must be elder than his fiancé, as it is supposed that the nena is too girllike so the fadrí, being elder than her, has to teach her how to become a adult woman. This example indicates more of a sharper male dominance while the woman is a fadrina but extenuates more and more as she acquires more responsibility as a dona (a mature woman). Piasere (1994) affirmed how the difference between man and woman, the principle of male domination being reflected in the field of allocution and not that of reference, is produced in the Gypsy groups.

I think that the Calós choose non-Gypsy terms of reference, peculiar to Catalan nomenclature, and connote them in a derivable way. This is their creative art, adapting non-Gypsy terms of reference to semantic field, adding their own caló words and extending the denotation of terms of reference and the connotation of terms of address. Two systems,internal and external,allocutive and of reference, definetely, caló and payo, coexist in nomenclature kinship.

To name: the transmision of the identity

The term familia,as a native category, has a more extensive sphere of application than was previously suggested. It is identified with a group of relatives of which affirm or suppose a close or distant kinship. The grouped sobrenom (sobriquets) is a system of domination that is typical of rural Catalan communities that have been partly adapted by the Calós, but only in form, because in spite of obeying an ideology of the transmission of the family relation name, in practise implies a variable function of the chosen individual and the context of the interlocutor11. The sobriquets or nicknames are a series of names that are transmitted from the ancestory, habitually masculine, in order to name a family. They feel united not because of having a relative in common but by having a common ancestory, that sometimes they do not remeber who they were. It is more than this,from where some sobriquets such as Faletos or Marreus originate is not known not only by the youth but also the old-aged neither know where to pin point the exact origin. Each individual can identify themselves with their mother’s or father’s nickname. Although the nickname of the father determines mostly, it could happen that that of the mother’s might be from a more prestigious and famous family. In other cases it will depend on the interlocutor that he had before, as the same individual will be better known by his father´s sobrenom in some places, and by his mother’s in others. It is so, because when an outsider comes into contact with another they are both able to search through their forefathers, alive or dead, for a genealogical connection through the nickname. It could be that both individuals have the same nickname without knowing so beforehand. In the daily interaction in the same local community,an individual will be able to recognise him/herself by one of the nicknames whoever the interlocutor might be.

11 Williams 1984 and Sutherland 1986 pointed out that the identification of a vitsa (the category of relations that more resemble that which the structural functionalists would call lineage) name for the Rom Kalderash, varyed according to the context in which the Gypsies meet, being able to recognise each other with relevance to wether the mother or father vitsa name.

14

The sobriquet logic must not be confused with assumptions of groups resembling lineages nor patrigroups. The sobriquet system does not reflect substancial identities but what proves to be a representational model of patrilineal orientation that has no practical concretion but is tolerated within a familiar ambilateral system. What would an operational theoretician say about the existance of so many groups as activities. One group one activity. A group of descendency,a lineage should comply with a series of requirements at a political-judicial level (enjoying the material or immaterial possessions, privileges,unquestionable and true loyalty of the group,an exclusive social identity of the belonging to of the group etc) that does not appear between the Calós. Perhaps the problem is rooted in the contnued use of concepts developed within the framework of structural-functionalism accomodating ethnographic datum of this theory and not the contrary.

In this way, with what perception do the Calós use "lineage"? Llinatge (lineage) is a synonym of línea (linear), sang (blood), that gives the assignment ethnic (the father give the blood, the lineage, in this way, the children are more Gypsies). The family identified with the sobriquet not is usually called raza (race), as other Gypsy groups, but the Caló would normally refer to it as familia. Race normal meaning indicates the Gypsy race as opposed of the paya race, and, also, the race of catalans opposed to the race of other Gypsy groups such as the the Castillian race. Despite the filiation being bilateral an agnatic domination exists. in the first case that refers to the ethnic assignment to Gypsy condition; in the second, equally, agnation is predominant in the determination of the family sobriquet.

As Williams affirmed with respect to the Paris Rom, “the lineages are units that can be found in societies said of segmented type. Lineage is a term that possesses a precise sociological content. Segmented society indicates a type of function society of a rigorous manner " (Williams, 1984:139). He further on concludes that the Paris Rom do not correspond to this precise content nor to rigorous functionalism.

On the other hand, as Kaprow pointed out,

“Although lineage organization is absent among the populations [spanish gypsy populations] Quintana and Floyd, de la Peña and I studied, it is true that some Gypsies ‘own kinship nomenclature can give the impression that lineage-like organization exists. Many gitanos refer to their non corporate, ambilateral kindreds patronymically (‘los Hernández, los Giménez, los Sotelo’), even as we in the United States talk of the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, Smith and Brown.” (Kaprow, 1978:140)

And Kaprow, in his lucid review of the work by Salo & Salo on the Kalderash of Canada, clarify the question in consice words,

"unfortunately the authors Salo & Salo confuse filiation with descent. What they call patrilineal three-generational ‘minimal lineages’, existing independently of maximal lineages, are probably kindreds surrounding male egos. Such kindreds may operate occasionally as patrigroups (cf. Van Velsen,in Vincent’s African Elite,(1971:107), but whether exclusively kindreds or also nascent patrigroups, they are fundamentally different from the lineages." (Kaprow, 1980:639)

15

Those that share a patronymic or a sobriquet do not form but a part of a category of people. In this sense, it is important to specify that what we are treating is not bilateral descendency. Descent, as defined by Rivers (see Leach, 1962) , is refered to as a series of rules that implies the belonging to of a corporate group of non-linear filiation. The members of this group share certain rights and obligations such as succession and inheritance, beyond the extensive or nuclear family, and this group must perpetuate from generation to generation. These characteristics are absent in the family relations. As Campbell pointed out (1964:47) it is possible to speak of bilateral corporate groups of bilateral descendency where the ownership depends on the filiation through both parents,but in this case,the group must obligitorily practise inbred marriages. Marriages between the Calós within the kindred is practised between second cousins,as we will see further on. It is therefore more correct to speak of the filiation of an individual with respect to the family orientation that does not “descent”, understanding how the relations step by step of this individual can be traced from a great variety of ancestors. As Leach (1962:131) pointed out "descent" would indicate a combination of precise relations refering to an ambiguity, a permanent and involuntarily ownership to a group sector in a society; "filiation" or "pedigree" are applied to the relations of which the option can be expressed.

In order to identify themselves as relations the Calós not make reference to the apical ancestory that is common to both interlocutors but to the descendents, which maybe expressed in this way,"my grandfather and his mother were brother and sister, my grandmother and his grandfather were first cousins. etc"12. Héritier (1981:147) pointed out that in this sense the traditional cognate societies is fulfilled not so much by precise knowledge of a true genealogical chain that unites both for the fact of knowing (or imagining) that two mediators that are known and situated exactly in the ascending generations are brothers or first cousins. (or the children of first cousins, more rarely). Returning to Campbell,

"It is,therefore, possible to represent the kindred diagrammatically as four interlocking pyramids of cognatic descent. But this kind of abstraction bears no relation to the mental image which a Sarakatsanos [a Caló] forms of his kindred, in which relations are conceived in terms of the extension from the family of origin, not descent from a common ancestor. There is mutual affection and moral obligations between my second cousin and myself because my grandparent and his grandparent were siblings rather than because we are descendants of common great-grandparents. I prefer, then, to speak of equivalent bilateral extension, for this describes precisely the constitution of the kindred." (Campbell, 1964:48)

Like the Sarakatsanos, this bilateral equivalence between the Calós signifies that the second cousins from both sides of the family are likewise recognised, and that the patri and matrilateral are of the same calibre.

In my field of work, I can proove that the Caló have a very clear idea as to what the sobriquet represents,

12 We have always known each other through our parents or grandparents...Who is your grtandfather? ah! he is x [name or apodo –nickname-]... and if you get it, you know who you are.

16

¡Look! The nicknames were to classify. By the nicknames you knew from what part of the country you were from when going somewhere where there were Gypsies you didn’t know. The payos have them as well,in many villages they are known as from Can Frigolé or from Patufets. We haven´t done anything more than copy the payos. (A 60 year-old male)

It is necessary for us to refer to the typology of the sobriquets in order to analyse how they are used by the Calós:

A/Individuals 1 Pilar´s name:

-standard: Pepe

-arbitrary: Rafael

-diminutive: Enriquet

2 personel characteristics:

-physical: Chinita (like a cinese woman)

-behaviour: Rambo

3 place of origin:

-city: La Mallorquina(from Mallorca)

4 Specific works: el pintor (the painter)

B/ Relatives

1 Surnames:

-standard: Pubill

2 Place of origin:

-city: Lerida

3 Familiar characteristics:

-physical: Llargs (being of a great stature)

-arbitrary: the Parrano.

Juliano (1985), distinguished two types of societies that would match the the use of the individual sobriquet (societies with a low level of assignment by birth, e.g

17

Argentina) or familiar ones (in societies with a high level of assignment by birth, e.g. in Catalonia). However, the Calós employ both types as I believe that their social organisation cannot be defined in absolute terms as a high or low appointed type without a synthesis of both systems. Briefly and following Juliano, the individual sobriquet can be a worthy and positive sign whose function is to strengthen the cohesion of the minority, and negatively to contrlol the discordants as well as the neutral,as is the case of specific works. Equally, the familiar sobriquets can be neutral,whose function is to replace the surnames of an inbred community as is that of the Calós, or the negative, although it depends in this case on how the receiver accepts it.

The Calós recognise the loss of the functional character in the categorization of relatives through the sobriquet. So much the youth as the old aged point out that the sobriquets are the business of the elderly, a thing from the past, which may seem paseé13. They are a reminder of the past which must disappear.

Among the Calós in Mataró, it is rare to find families with a sobriquet. Not only this but it is also being used less and less as time goes on, although family surnames fulfill a relatively identifying function, because, due to inbreeding surnames are repeated, whereas names and individual sobriquets are firmly kept,which when uttered,allow them to locate the relations in the genealogical network, usually through the manner of speech (the son of...the first cousin of...). Residential mobility in the past made it immediately easy to identify those who arrived at a place where other Gypsies lived. With residential stability and the establishment of a locality, as well as the intineract work in a prearranged market,make people more acquaintant with each other as they frequent the same places. The functional character of the familiar sobriquet decreases in relation to the home group and the bilateral kindred. The identification of each family with a sobriquet is becoming nothing more than a remembrance.

According to Severi (1980:99-118) sobriquets and patronymics have two differences. Firstly, nicknames have a short life,they last as long as its meaning,for it is necessary for it to carry a meaning,the remembrance of a founder. Sobriquets can keep the remembrance as being part of the group to which no kinship term can be applied, whereas patronymics have a temporary dimension also,too indefinable to be meaningful. Secondly, the sobriquet allows us to locate them in a residential space, or, more generally speaking, to the individuals toponymy while the patronymic does not possess this special dimension. What is relevant is that the sobriquets and surnames carry out a toponymic function, they characterize themselves not so as to describe the people with whom they share a substantial identity, but to allow

13 The Calós of Mataró categorize everything that does not prove to be functional as a delay. For example,they think that other Gypsies, such as the Castilian, in general who marry by Gypsy ceremony, without going to church or the magistrate office, in order to sign tthe marriage certificate, as a delay, which demonstrates their inferiority. The fact that they also did it in the past is meaningful so as they avoid doing military conscription, passing themselves off as children of single mothers, which arise from personal interests [a Gypsy man who lives with a paya without a marriage certificate for personal or idiosyncratic reasons, a Gypsy woman who marries the Gypsy way because her grandfather is about to die and so would not be able to see her getting married in a church etc...] It seems to be a to send the things they do not want for themselves to the other, the Castilian Gypsy. It is also said that others run away from and do not get married the Gypsy way, and swear by the dead. These attributions emphasise the conviction that the others are not modern Gypsies and are in a previous level of evolution.

18

themselves to contrast and differentiate one person from another14. They do this in a complementary way where the nomenclature of kinship does not have terms to select an individual who believes himself to be a relative, so the sobriquet appears in order to classify him in reference, not in allocution. It follows a line that goes beyond maleascendency, preferentially.

It is as if a rhetoric of filiation appears that carries re-built groups and places the identity of the people as imobile, but this rhetoric is not readily assimilated to a system of descendence that is unambiguous and involuntary, that is to say, where they cannot juxtapose categories of relatives, or where, an individual does not potentially possess the ability to choose his assignment to one category or other of the family. From this point of view, we need differentiate between the two dimensions of logic of the system of the sobriquet: the conceptual-relational and the empirical-normative. In order to classify, the groups must think of themselves beforehand. The categorisation pre-existed the contrast. Two groups could not be contrasted significantly if a builder for this group did not exist. Therfore, to construct a category is a step backwards and this logic obeys the ideology in the transmission of the identity through the man,who indicated the belonging to of a social category that the Calós think as a group in spite of not acting as such. Despite the mass of the present day sobriquets not being complete, given that not all the families or individuals being in possession nor remembering if they ever had one, if it is meaningful is the same as the significance that the Calós attribute symbolic value adding to the patronymics, although the theory affirms the opposite when an ethnic principle is included in the system of Payo-Gypsy system of relations. In this sense, despite the Calós affirming that Gypsy surnames do not exist, they aknowledge the existance of més gitanos (more Gypsy) surnames than others such as Pubill, Cortés, Giménez, etc. In this way the family possesses a symbolic capital that expesses itself through the surname. The presence of payo surnames means that the individual is in a distinct position from the rest because he had payo forefathers in his family. But this, only will be a constant source of irony and sarcasm, frequently secretive, meanwhile on the other hand, while those that have conserved Gypsy surnames legitimate a position that identifies them as members of a stock more "authentically Gypsy", gitano puro (purer Gypsy), without mixes. Therefore, is significant this art of Caló connotation spreads to the patronymics, that we should firstly consider as meaningless.

To summarise, the logic of familiar sobriquets is relationed with the transmission of the identity in order to elicitate groups or families with the contrastive intention expressing itself through the principle of filiation and a patrilineal emphasis making the social importance of the man clear. The transmission of the identity logic does not reflect itself on an operative level, given the relevance of the nuclear family and bilateral kindred.I believe that ideas relating to the sobriquets, the recognition of a common descendancy starting from an ancestory or with relation to an ego constitutes representational models,because they express what the individuals proclaim what the things are, co-existing with operational models, n the manner that they really actuate.(Holy 1996:84)

14 Wagner, in Holy 1996:99 has provided this idea when talking about the Daribi from the Highlands in New Guinea.The names include and exclude,and therefore create symbolic barriers. By creating contrasts, the Daribi name social collectives indirectly rather than by deliberately organising them or by taking conscious part in them.

19

All are a little kinsman here

The idea is that of an indifferent society where the individuals see themselves as consanguineous and affined, staying within a social category, the kindred, with fluid limits, and co-existing with another category of descendency as a secondary principle of accumulative filiation, strongly patrilineal (although of a cognate factor) the consequence of male importance and with a functional character clearly identifiable, that transmits a feeling and a space that we have seen. As Mitchell pointed out (1963:349) both structures are not exclusive because they obey different systems of reference within the same social system.

The individuals who recognize a common filiation assess the function of the degrees of remoteness of common blood that were shared by an ancestory of two brothers or sisters and by two first cousins,and so see themselves as part of a social category (the family) that is expressed with a quantifying adjective, mucha familia (“much family”) or me toca mucha familia (“touch me much familiy”) expresses that two individuals are very near to the terms of degree of the family. As the distance is older, the Calós say that the blood is diluted because itis mixed and therefore less pure.

However, Gypsy kinship is flexible enough for the explicit recognition that "we are all family". It is a popular conviction that a certain tie exists beyond the nearest relation, although sometimes it does not know how to specify the genealogical ties that unites them with clarity. A onclo said me:

All it´s for the treaty. I´ve got two second cousins that I treat well, it´s as if they were my first cousins. I’ve got people wich aren’t family but I treat as if they were...Here, we are all as a big family. (A 30 year-old male)

This treaty, the common activity that makes an individual into being who he is, might be another. This fact includes diverse aspects of the social life, a payo that lives together with Gypsies for a long time can be finally considered to be family, but a Gypsy who does so with payos gives up being one15.

I´ve got 30 or 40 people in my family in Sitges. Those that are not my direct family but are married to relatives and, also, yours parents... all are kinsman, by treaty. (25 year-old female)

In this sense the activity in common, the frequency of the treaty between two individuals widens the concept of the family to the consanguineous of the affined. They are all family, but this is como si (as if) they were family. The frequency of interaction and sentimental ties provokes a configuration in the family network, 15 My integration into this community depends on personal points of view, an acquaintance often tells me that I am more of a Gypsy than many Gypsies and that I am like a family member. Those who are not my acquaintances however,still consider me as a payo who is a friend of the Gypsies. Obviously, I do not intend to be and cannot be a Gypsy,there will always be a sign of origin that always makes me a Payo. However, integration into a community is achieved by sharing activities with others and knowing their language, sleeping, eating and working with them at the market, going to parties, funerals, weddings, etc. In short, Taking part in their daily life makes you less payo. They asked me to work with them in the market and I did business with them sharing half of the benefits, which meant that they were treating me as an equal. Sharing half of the benefits of business is a sign of equality, which they would not do with a payo.

20

paralel to the bonds of formal kinship. In the case of the kindred a formal bond exists that is symbolized by blood and that would construct the heart orcore of the social network. On the periphery would come the affined and their consanguinity which supposes a recognizeable kinship. Beyond these kinship circles the recognition of relations is made more diffused. The global relations fashions itself on an extensive network within to which appears relations partially centered around an ego, that is to say, the circle of all types of relations, are like formal bonds of the family of blood and of the kindred, the informal associations of work or the bonds of friendship.

The network superposes, like the kindred, owing to the network connections of husband and wife, of friends, to close relatives and those not so close,nad in the interior information, services, money and other things circulate16. Hence, the kindred can’t to define firm genealogicaly but must to shelter a social content.

In the other hand, the bonds of ficticious kinship conserve a durability similar to that of the real one17. Convert the no kinsman in kinsman and include not only the close family but also more distant and non relatives, and used to include payos. They are used as allocutive terms and points of reference, padri, padrina ,fillol, fillola, compare and comare. The kiss between them is sometimes an indicator of the relationship,although as we have said the kiss does not only respond to the internal logic of the near or close family18.

According to Appell (1983) it is fundamental to establish, because of this, some analytical abstract concepts,firstly the lack of suppressed culture, in order to facilitate the breakdown of the specific distinctions of the system to which we are refering. in this sense, a socially isolated entity exists between the Calós, the family, that supports with the belief that they share a common identity, but is made up of mobile types, whose composition, size and functions fluctuate so much that it is difficult to establish clear environs. What remains clear is that the family is recognised as a functional unit, that should be nuclear, the kindred, the inclusion of the sobriquets, etc... The categorization of relatives into diverse classes is the language of the social structure, that isolates and assigns groups to connections with others.

Economy and Kinship

One of the spheres of activity where the groups can be better assessed is in the market. The criterior of aggregate is not exclusively based on the descendency. We have pointed out that common activity generates ties comparable to those of kinship in the strict sense. The variability of the associations of work in the market brings us to confirm our hypothesis of the inexistance of corporate groups. Diverse forms of association exist. The most common the working together of the parents and unmarried children in a regular stall the moving market. In this case the income are shared out by the parents to the sons and daughters. When one of the sons or daughters get married it could happen that the parents (or indeed the grandparents or godparents) give them some of the market so they can earn money independently, but 16 See Mitchell and E.Bott in J.Scott´s 1997.17 As an illustration of the strength of a fictitious link, a Caló told me: my grandfather told me he shot a Gypsy in the mouth, but he miraculously survived. my grandfather was sent to jail, but this Gypsy was so afraid that he went to the prison to ask my grandfather to be his son´s godfather.18 At a wedding I remember that a Caló with whom I had hardly met an acquaintance addressed me and gave me a kiss,because at that moment he had a judicial problem and needed to be conforted. The same Caló also did the same to me in a hospital the day after he lost a loved one. I have kissed Calós as well that I have met at some time, to all of those that I have had bonds of friendship.

21

would keep on going to the markey stall either occasionally or in a systematic form (depending on the joint economic necessities). The income here could be distibuted in various ways: the total incoming in a working day of the family of the procreation is shared out 50 per cent, or the parents could indeed leave an independent space of the stall, so the son or daughter can sell their own merchandise or the father may give it up and what he son sells will be his own.

Other alternatives are that the married couple will go their own market, but this will only come after a while, since the bureaucracy at the markets is very slow and it is difficult to get a stall at such places, so to start with the newly married couple must share a few metres of the stall with the parents given the difficulties of access of new stalls. The parents cannot altogether give up theirs to their offspring immediately. So the cooperation at work is also carried out by the affined, in this case between parents in law and son and daughter in law. It is also possible as well that close relatives,a carnal uncle or first cousin could be given space in the stall. Likewise, help is a customary contemplative between relatives, and is possible the support of the godparents and godchildren, in this sense the first hand over the market stall title to the seconds19.

The distribution of the work benefits are determined by the ties (kinship, affinity, friendship, etc) or what unites those willing to cooperate. A son working in the stall will not earn a wage but a claim to benefits that he nedds to cover his expenditure. However,working independently is encouraged. Young Calós can sell merchandise that they have bought with their own money from a supplier carrying suitcases of clothes, watches, ties and other goods, whether in the parents market stall or around shops or companies. This type of work is more commonly seen when the youth is about to get married or at the start of the marriage when money is more needed. The money obtained from the sales will be his. For the young fadrina this work outside the parent´s stall is forbidden, only when he is married can he do it. However, the biggest difference rests on the women: married, elderly or widowed, can dedicate your time, with or without market stalls, to the sale in houses or flats. This job is more fitly femenine as the selling around shops and other such entities.

It is common that at the start of married life the young newly married couple need the support of their respective families. In this case, equality is an ideal. If the two families are from a similar social class a fair distribution is persued in the market. A case is given of one residence that go to markets that others do not because it is considered to be too far away, but it is very common that a young couple will team up with their in-laws at 50 per cent in order that within time they will become independent. Productive independence constitutes an ideal because the individuals must yield to the parents, so an informal association may be made at any time.

A youth who wants to get married early will see his job in the market stall become converted into self-employment and work the few metres that his father gives him to sell what merchandise he wants to sell, although the father could give him

19 This shows that godchildren are very important. Apart from the birthday presents they receive from their godfather since cchildhood ,they inherit market stalls when they get married if their godparents are childless or have too many stalls. An elderly Caló accused of being lucky for being childless and not having to give stalls away, answered by saying that he had no children but helped the godchildren by giving them stalls and money. Likewise, the inheritance of valuable objects such as jewellery and gold watches, which are passed on to every generation,may also be passed on to the godchildren. This proves that the link between godparents and godchildren are lasting, although christenings do not gather or interest as many people as they used to.

22

some of his own to do so,as he will be trusted or a lay brother. This will be a help towards the savings in order to pay for the costly wedding. Many parents complain about this help if they have a lot of children and must share out the market work or even the rights to some of their stalls at others, to all their children which imposes financial straits on the parents when they are older.

What is undeniable is that a tendency existe to colaborate with the nearest relatives that does not exclude other immediate and informal colaboration with two non related individuals. For example,Manuel is not doing very well at his markets and he asks Antonio to let him use 3 metres of space to sell his own goods at Antonio´s stall in the market in Canet de Mar. Manuel brings his merchandise and the money he earns is only for him as he does not pay Antonio anything. For the principle of reciprocity, Antonio may perhaps ask the same favour another time.

Therefore, if we think that the domestic family forms an economic unit, this tolerates the inclusion of the social entity that surrounds the cognatic descendency (with the affined), in the process of work,and likewise, tolerate the exercise of individual rights in its bosom, as is the case of the youths that work independently. The network of the kindred, which also the affined, is very important. Therefore, the kindred is not a specially closed space but sufficiently flexible so as to give capacity to the various relatives. If the group were a corporate group it would be faced with a contradiction, if all cooperation persued maintains the possession intact, as is the case of a domestic group that has the ownership of the market; these, are dispersed between the sons and daughters, and sometimes between the grandchildren and even the friends. The marriages within the consanguinity (children of first cousins) appears to resolve the question and carries with it a regrouping of possession. But the Calós haven’t economic reason a priori for the endogamy. If the domestic group is ideally corporated, that what Apell (1983:309) called “isolated cognatic descent”, the close bilateral kindred for the Calós, represents that their members own rights of scarce goods in different ways. One of them is the dividing of the market stalls. These rights are optional and are not inherited by birth, for which the individual will have the election to exercise them over ane relative or another, in working with the social and economic conditions that become involved in the different types of kindred relations. In this sense, the close bilateral kindred constitutes a social entity and not a group of descendency nor juridicial corporation. However, as we have seen, the cooperation can also be fulfilled between more distant relatives,affines or friends. It is this way throughout the organisation of work there is atendency to form aggregate groups, that is to say, groups that carry out a common activity. The way in which this unit fulfills its attaché responds to the needs of the moment and constitutes an expression of solidsolidarity between the conjugal nucleus within the kindred.Is in this circle of close relations where it is carried, on the one hand, the fluid communication and inter-change of information20.

Where to live? Ideology and practice

Although an ideology exists of a virilocality the exceptions are numerous as to affirm that this,as a representational model, has an empirical reflection. There is no doubt that the majority of the weddings are celebrated in the brides 20 It is significant that a lack of confidence appears towards the non-relative at the time of revealing the origin and economic cost of the goods that each working group acquires to sell to a third party, that may be at a market or around houses or shops or businesses. Each working group jealously conserves this information and does not tell it to others except to the inner family circles.

23

locality,expressing a conservative ideology that wants to keep up with the custom of family dignity of having her presented to the community as pure. The virile-locality native model is loosing more and more force seeing that the responsibility in residential election begins to be shared by the two spouses.This fact tells us that the power of the woman´s decision is put at the same level as the man´s, and that the marriage is one of love,reflecting a major independence for the youth of today with respect to the past.

The elderly express an emphatic agreement with the ideology of virilocality, but recognise that when married, the spouses are the ones who decide where they are going to live.

-Tia Lola: It´s a law, the woman has to go to live wherever the man is...now, only if her mother is a widow....she and her husband have to stay with her. It´s against the law that the daughter stays in her villiage. But, look, my daughter went to live in my son-in-law´s village because she wanted to.-Tia Conchita: My daughter went as well because she wanted to.-Tia Sisqueta: Everybody´s, my daughter too. It’s not a bad law. (Elder women)

Therefore, a reading exixts which is proclaimed as a distinct law for those who could wait,and of this,a residential ideology does not correspond to practise. I remember being present at a marriage proposal, a custom to ask for the hand of the future bride to be that takes place in the future bride´s father´s house, where the onclos on both sides of the family spoke about the future of their children. The bride´s father said: as the girl is still very young it would be better that she stays here in the village with her mother, and the onclo of the other family immediately replied, excuse me, you can´t impose conditions, they´ll decide where they want to live. Everybody present nodded and supported the words of the latter onclo closing the theme.

In Mataró, there are not enough examples to confirm the existance of an empirical virile-community....only one family exists that accomplishes the norm by 100 per cent, from the grandparents to the grandchildren, but this was a rich family and, evidently, the affined, in this case women, will have valued the economic potential that supposes them to be with their in-laws, since we have already said that at the start of married life, the youths receive markets from their parents and share it with others.

For this I am inclined to think that residential election is strongly conditioned by the economic potential that the locality and family offer, without ruling out sentimental and personal characteristics21. The economic power of certain families could tilt the balance so the couple will move to live in the village of either one or the other, as they hope that the in-laws help the young couple in proportion to resources (market places, cars, houses...). For a man to go to live with his in-laws is a source of gibes, taunts and sarcasm,since the reidence is an ambilteral fact, resulting in the difficulty to sustain the existance of patrigroups. I believe that patrigroups are not

21 In the petitions that are fulfilled in the parents and grandparents homes of the bride to be,the two families try to defend their arguments so the young couple stay in their respective villages but finally affirm that conditions cannot be placed and the final decision will be the responsibility of the couple. The women have their own methods of control, such as gossip and rumores.

24

made visible in acts of revenge for crimes or offences, beacuse they simply do not exist. The Calós hate grouped revengeful violence and are use to attributing it as a sign of backwardness to other Gypsy groups22. The uncles are use to being the mediators in the conflicts that go beyond the family sphere and do it in informal manner, without anything appearing similar to the Kris de los Roma.

I believe the question to take up in the difficulty to put names to a unit of analysis in societies that, like the Gypsy, are bilateral. More than dedicating ourselves to sustantive definitions of the organisational forms of kinship,what is intersting is not to loose the literalism of the native and interpret its categories acccording to the context in which it is used. The kindred is what better defines the Gypsy structural family, and starting from this to analyse the social entities both within and outside of it.

The correlative extensive families are something that the Calós deem as that of the past.If a young couple go to live in the house of thein-laws and see it as danger for them,subject to the will of the father´s dictate and as a loss of prestige and masculinity for the man, incapable of being independent of the family. The idea is the establishment of nuclear families in their own homes, with independence from the parents, though this independance is relative because when the youth get married they go to live near their parents, so we can keep an eye on them (a 49 year-old male).

However, the extensive co-residential family appears as an anomaly in cases where the young couple are still not capable of having economic independence, albeit for their youth or being from families with few resources. In any case the co-residentiary of the extensive family can only be justified as a momentary step prior to the setting up of the yong couples married life, conditioned by the tight economic budget.

Is it the residential communities tendency that determines the nature of kinship relations? Certainly, because it is redounded in the frequency of the interactions between individuals of diverse families,but this does not mean that they break the ties with those who are genealogically close to each other who do not live in the same village. The visits are not infrequent and they often help and colaborate with each other. Furthermore, the market, the weddings, the funerals, and other customs are the moments when the periodical meetings take place. Without doubt the physical proximity begets major interraction but it cannot be affirmed that the groups arise from the behaviour of the interactional infrastructure. The infrastructure engenders the social but for them this must be configurated. There is not always a great interraction that generates better solidarity but the shared place of residence is more than a level of identity that is superimposed to the kinship. What they do is gather categories of relatives into a wider collective.

Do exist an ordenador principle?

Have we to conclude that the patrilinear orientation woulds be a reflexion of an

22 Peluts, which in Castilian (“peludo”) is used as an adjective to literally means "que tiene mucho pelo" (having a lot of hair), is a degraging and inferior term that possesses sentiments derived from poor, dirty, violent or savage. It is a category that is extended to all the non-Catalan Gypsies, in spite of explaining that it only refers to the poor Gypsy. The poor Catalan Gypsies have a less offensive term, potul, that in Catalan is a synonym of vagabond.

25

ideology of lineage? I don’t believe this. I understand that as a representative model23

of a social process that is observed empirically through significant features as the patrilocality and patrilineal (conveying various aspects of the ideas and values of the actors), is not only an analytic one but also a "folk model" formed partly by the social ideology of the actors, but this must not be given to understand that it embraces the social totality. And, how can exist an ideology of lineage group without lineages? As we have pointed out the Calós deem three types of categories of people, those that live in the community, those genealogically related (close or distant relatives),and those that have a sobriquet (that does not mean everybody), and we also add that the groups must identify themselves starting from their common activities being a difficult sustenance attributing corporatism, to that category of people.

The problem to postulate the primacy of the an suppossed ideology of lineage or the filiation agnate is that it subsumes the other relations, the especially close ones or the community and the genealogy. Agnation might perhaps be no more than a model of one of the Calós, and I also believe that the emphasis on the organisation of sociey hides the symbolic character of its construction, precisely when the social function order functions because it is strongly symbolic24. The metaphores set the conception to the purity of the race, the virility opposition, etc, would be the elicitation of the structure of prestige, designed in order to prioritise the importance of men abovewomen, and that they need to be symbolically affirmed. The orientation around the man and not the ideology of lineage, would be the expression of this structure of prestige.

The overimportance of the agnate makes this seemingly appear as a principle ideology and cultural computer of society as a whole, as a conscious principle. However, in reality this model does not explain the totality of the social being part of it.It is a partial model that coexists,at a social organisational level, with other ideologies such as the blood family, the near and close kindred and the community ties.

Bibliography.

Anta Félez, J.L. 1994. Donde la pobreza es marginación. Un análisis entre gitanos. Ed. Humanidades. Barcelona.

Appell, G. N. 1983. “Methodological problems with the concepts of corporation, corporate social grouping, and cognatic descent group” in American Ethnologist.

Ardévol, E. 1986. Antropología urbana de los gitanos de Granada. Tesis de licenciatura. UAB. Barcelona. Bestard, J. (Coord.). 1993. Después de Malinowski. VI Congreso de Antropología. A. C. A. Tenerife.

Borrow, G. 1979. Los Zincalí (Los gitanos de España).Ed. Turner. Madrid. 23 See Holy 1996:84 who distinguishes the reperesentative model,that what the actors postulate as to what things are of a operative model to what they really do. 24 See M. Shalins 1988.

26

Campbell, J.K. 1964. Honour, Family and Patronage. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

DuBoulay, J. 1984. “The blood: symbolic relationships between descent, marriage, incest prohibitions and spiritual kinship in Greece” in Man nº 19.

Héritier, F. 1981. L’exercice de la parenté. Gallimard. Paris.

Holy, L. 1996. Anthropological perspectives on kinship. Pluto Press.Chicago.

Juliano, D. 1985. “Apellidos y renoms: dos lógicas de transmisión de la identidad. Comentaris d’Antropología Cultural nº 6. Barcelona.

Kaprow, M.L. 1978. Divided we stand: a study of discord among gypsies in a spanish city. Columbia University. Ph.D.1980. -Review of The Kalderash of Eastern Canada. Matt T. Salo and Sheila M.G. Salo. American Anthropologist 82.

Leach, E. 1962. “On certain unconsidered aspects of double descent systems” in Man, 62.

Leblon, B. 1987. Los gitanos de España. El precio y el valor de la diferencia. Gedisa. Barcelona.

Liégeois, J.P. 1976. Mutation tsigane. Complexe. Bruxelles.

de Luna, J.C. 1989. Gitanos de la Bética. Universidad de Cádiz.

Mitchell, W.E. 1963. ”Theoretical problems in the concept of kindred” en American Anthropologist, 65.

Piasere, L. 1985. Mare Roma. Categories humaines et structure sociale. Une contribution à l’ethnologie tsigane. Etudes et documents balkaniques et méditerranees. Paris. 1991. Popoli delle discariche. Saggi di antropologia zingara. CISU. Roma.1994. “Approche dénotationiste ou approche connotationiste? Les terminologies de parenté tsiganes” en Etudes Tsiganes, n.2. Paris.

Pomata, G. 1994. “Legami di sangue, legami di seme. Consanguineità e agnazione nel diritto romano” en Quaderni Storici, 86. Bolonia.

Quintana, B.B. & Floyd, L.G.1986. ¡Qué gitano! Gypsies of southern spain. Waveland Press. Illinois.

Ramírez Heredia, J. D. 1983. Nosotros los gitanos. Ed. 29. Barcelona. 1985. En defensa de los míos: ¿qué sabe usted de los gitanos?. Ed. 29. Barcelona.

Román, M. 1995. Aportación a los estudios sobre el caló en España. Universidad de Valencia.

27

San Román, T. 1976a. Vecinos gitanos. Akal. Madrid. 1976b. “El buen nombre del gitano” en Lisón, C. Temas de Antropología. Akal. Madrid.1978a. “Los gitanos entre la tradición y el futuro” en Historia 16. Madrid.1978b. “Los miedos del gitano” en Historia 16, n. 22. Madrid.1984. Gitanos de Madrid y Barcelona. Ensayos sobre aculturación y etnicidad. UAB. Barcelona.1986. Entre la marginación y el racismo. Reflexiones sobre la vida de los gitanos. Alianza Universidad. Madrid.1994. La diferència inquietant. Ed. Altafulla. Barcelona.1996. La diferencia inquietante. Ed. Siglo XXI. Madrid.

Scott, J. 1997. Social network analysis. A handbook. Sage. London.

Severi, C.1980. “Le nom de lignée. Les sobriquets dans un village d’Emilie” in L’Homme XX (4). Mouton. Paris. Shalins, M. 1988. Cultura y razón práctica. Contra el utilitarismo en la teoria antropológica. Gedisa. Barcelona.

Starkie, W. 1956. Casta gitana. Plaza & Janés. Barcelona.

Stewart, M. 1997. The time of the gypsies. Westview Press. Oxford. Sutherland, A. 1986. Gypsies. The Hidden Americans. Waveland Press. Illinois.

Verdon, M. 1980. “Descent: an operational view” en Man nº 15. 1991. Contre la culture. Fondament d’une anthropologie sociale opérationelle. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers. Suisse.

Williams, P. 1984. Marriage Rom. Une cérémonie de fiançalles chez les Rom de Paris. L’Harmattan. Paris.

28