This article examines the agnatic notion and the organisation of local groups among the Muduga of Attappady in Kerala. Ethnographic evidence shows that the actual practices of the Muduga deviate from an ideal patrilineal type, exhibiting bilateral tendencies which are not characteristic of a strong patrilineal system, thereby making the Muduga case appear to fall between the African and Melanesian type. In the understanding of kin groups, there is a need to differentiate between social groups and cultural categories. The nature of Muduga kinship can be understood only by meaningfully linking ideal and actual behaviour through the interrelationship between structural premises and practice.
AiyappanA.1959. ‘Megalithic Survival among the Mudugas of Attapady Valley, Kerala’. Adibasi3 (2): 7–14.
2.
BarnesJ.A.1962. ‘African Models in the New Guinea Highlands’. Man62 (1): 5–9.
3.
BarnesJ.A.1990. Models of Interpretation: Selected Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BerndtR.M.1964. ‘Warfare in the New Guinea Highlands’. American Anthropologist66 (4): 183–203 (special publication).
5.
BerndtR.M.1976. Love Songs of Arnhem Land. Melbourne: Nelson.
6.
BourdieuP.1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BrownP.1962. ‘Non-Agnates among the Patrilineal Chimbu’. Journal of the Polynesian Society71 (1): 57–69.
8.
BurkhartG.1978. ‘Marriage Alliance and the Local Circle among Udayars of South India’. In American Studies in the Anthropology of India, edited by VatukSylvya, 171–210. New Delhi: Manohar Publications.
9.
BusbyCecilia. 1997a. ‘Of Marriage and Marriageability: Gender and Dravidian Kinship’. Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute3 (1): 21–42.
10.
BusbyCecilia. 1997b. ‘The Permeable and Partible Persons: A Comparative Analysis of Gender and Body in South India and Melanesia’. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute3 (2): 261–78.
11.
CarstenJanet. 1995. ‘The Substance of Kinship and the Heat of the Hearth: Feeding, Personhood and Relatedness among the Malays in Pulau Lang Kawi’. American Ethnologist22 (2): 23–41.
12.
CucciariSalvatore. 1981. ‘The Gender Revolution and the Transition from Bisexual Horde to Patrilocal Band: The Origin of Gender Hierarchy’. In Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality, edited by OrtnerSherry B.WhiteheadHarriet, 31–79. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
De LepervancheM.1967. ‘Descent, Residence and Leadership in the New Guinea Highlands’. Oceania38 (2): 134–58.
14.
De LepervancheM.1968. ‘Descent, Residence and Leadership in the New Guinea Highlands’. Oceania38 (3): 163–89.
15.
DumontLouis. 1953. ‘The Dravidian Kinship Terminology as an Expression of Marriage’. Man53 (3): 34–39.
16.
DumontLouis. 1957. Hierarchy and Marriage Alliance in South Indian Kinship(Royal Anthropological Institute, Occasional Paper-12). London: Royal Anthropological Institute.
17.
DumontLouis. 1983. Affinity as a Value: Marriage Alliance in South India, with Comparative Essays on Australia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
DysonT.MooreM.1983. ‘On Kinship Structure, Female Autonomy, and Demographic Behavior in India’. Population and Development Review9 (1): 35–60.
19.
ElkinA.P.1938. ‘Kinship in South Australia’. Oceania8 (4): 419–52.
20.
Evans-PritchardE.E.1935. ‘The Nuer: Tribe and Clan’. Sudan Notes and Records, Part 3, 18 (1): 37–87.
21.
Evans-PritchardE.E.1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
22.
Evans-PritchardE.E.1951. Kinship and Marriage among the Nuer. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
23.
FirthRaymond. 1951. Elements of Social Organization. London: Watts & Co.
24.
FirthRaymond. 1963. ‘Bilateral Descent Groups: An Operational View Point’. In Studies in Kinship and Marriage(Royal Anthropological Institute, occasional paper-16), edited by SchaperaI., 22–37. London: Royal Anthropological Institute.
25.
FirthRaymond. 1965. Primitive Polynesian Economy. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
26.
FortesMayer. 1962. ‘Introduction’. In Marriage in Tribal Societies(Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology, 3), edited by FortesM., 1–13. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
ForthGregory. 2009. ‘Separating the Dead: The Ritual Transformation of Affinal Exchange in Central Flores’. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute15 (3): 557–74.
28.
FruzzettiL.OstorAkosBarnettSteve. 1976. ‘The Cultural Construction of the Person in Bengal and Tamil Nadu’. Contributions to Indian Sociology10 (1): 157–82.
29.
FuchsStephen. 1973. The Aboriginal Tribes of India. New Delhi: Macmillan India.
30.
von Furer-HaimendorfC.1954. ‘Hereditary Friendship and Intertribal Sex Relations between Todas and Mudugas’. Man54 (2): 28–29.
31.
GoodAnthony. 1980. ‘Elder Sister’s Daughter Marriage in South Asia’. Journal of Anthropological Research36 (4): 474–500.
32.
GoodAnthony. 1981. ‘Prescription, Preference and Practice: Marriage Patterns among the Kondaiyan Kottai Maravar of South India’. Man16 (1): 108–29.
33.
GoodenoughWard H.1970. Description and Comparison in Cultural Anthropology. Chicago: Aldine.
34.
GoughE. Kathleen. 1956. ‘Brahmin Kinship in a Tamil Village’. American Anthropologist58 (5): 826–53.
35.
GoughE. Kathleen. 1966. ‘CA Review of Dumont’s Une Sous-Caste and Hierarchy and Marriage Alliance’. Current Anthropology7 (3): 332–35.
36.
HeldD.J.1957. The Papuas of Waropen. The Hague: Nijhoff.
37.
HiattL.R.1962. ‘Local Organization among the Australian Aborigines’. Oceania32 (4): 267–86.
38.
HiattL.R.1966. ‘The Lost Horde’. Oceania37 (2): 81–92.
39.
HockingsPaul, ed. 1989. The Blue Mountains: The Ethnography and Biogeography of a South Indian Region. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
40.
HolyLadislav. 1976. ‘Kin Groups: Structural Analysis and the Study of Behavior’. Annual Review of Anthropology5 (1): 107–31.
41.
HolyLadislav. 1996. Anthropological Perspectives on Kinship. London: Pluto Press.
42.
JonesTodd. 1998. ‘Interpretative Social Science and the “Native’s Point of View”: A closer Look’. Philosophy of the Social Sciences28 (1): 32–68.
43.
KapadiaKarin. 1994. ‘Kinship Burns! Kinship Discourse and Gender in Tamil South India’. Social Anthropology2 (3): 281–97.
44.
KappD.B.1980. ‘Die Ordination Despriesters bei den Alu-Kurumbas (Siidindien)’ [The Ordination of the Priest among the Alu-Kurumbas]. Anthropos75 (2): 433–46.
45.
KappD.B.1985. ‘The Kurumbas’ Relationship to the “Megalithic” Cult of the Nilgiri Hills (South India)’. Anthropos80 (2): 493–534.
46.
KeesingRoger M.1970. ‘Shrines, Ancestors and Cognatic Descent: The Kwaio and Tallensi’. American Anthropologist72 (4): 755–75.
47.
KellyR.C.1977. Etoro Social Structure: A Study in Structural Contradiction. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
48.
KhanC.G.H.1994. Marriage and Kinship among Muslims in South India. New Delhi: Rawat Publications.
49.
KolendaPauline. 1987. Regional Differences in Family Structure in India. Jaipur: Rawat Publications.
50.
KumarPushpesh. 2006. ‘Gender and Procreative Ideology among the Kolams of Maharashtra’. Contributions to Indian Sociology40 (3): 279–310.
51.
KuperAdam. 1982. ‘Lineage Theory: A Critical Retrospect’. Annual Review of Anthropology11 (1): 71–95.
52.
La FontaineJ.1973. ‘Descent in New Guinea: An Africanist View’. In The Character of Kinship, edited by GoodyJack, 35–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
LangnessL.L.1964. ‘Some Problems in the Conceptualisation of Highlands Social Structure’. American Anthropologist66 (2): 162–82 (special publication).
LeachE.R.1968. Pul Eliya: A Village in Ceylon: A Study of Land Tenure and Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56.
Levi-StraussC.1969. The Elementary Structures of Kinship. London: Eyre and Spottis Woode.
57.
LiPumaEdward. 1979. ‘Sexual Asymmetry and Social Reproduction among the Maring’. Ethnos44 (1–2): 34–57.
58.
LiPumaEdward. 1988. The Gift of Kinship: Structure and Practice in Maring Social Organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59.
LuizA.A.D.1962. Tribes of Kerala. New Delhi: Bharatiya Adimjati Sevak Sangh.
60.
MalinowskiB.1944. A Scientific Theory of Culture and Other Essays. Chapel Hill, North California: North California Press.
61.
MandelbaumDavid G.1970. Society in India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
62.
MathurP.R.G.1977. Tribal Situation in Kerala. Trivandrum: Kerala Historical Society.
63.
MayerAdrian C.1960. Caste and Kinship in Central India. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
64.
Mc CormackW.1958. ‘Elder Sister’s Daughter Marriage in a Mysore Village’. Man in India38 (1): 34–48.
65.
MeggitM.J.1962. Desert People. Sydney: Angus and Robertson.
66.
MeggitM.J.1965. The Lineage Systems of the Mae Enga. New York: Barnes and Nobles.
67.
MillerBarbara. 1981. The Endangered Sex: Neglect of Female Children in Rural North India. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
68.
MorganLewis Henry. 1871. Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.
69.
NobleW.A.1976. ‘Nilgiri Dolmens (South India)’. Anthropos71 (1): 90–128.
70.
ParkinRobert. 1996. ‘On Dumont’s “Affinal Terms”: Comment on Rudner’. Contributions to Indian Sociology30 (2): 289–97.
71.
PeletzMichael G.1995. ‘Kinship Studies in the Late Twentieth-Century Anthropology’. Annual Review of Anthropology24 (1): 343–72.
72.
PouwerJ.1960. ‘Loosely Structured Society in Netherlands, New Guinea’. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-, en Volken Kunde116 (1): 109–18.
73.
Radcliffe-BrownA.R.1950. ‘Introduction’. In African Systems of Kinship and Marriage, edited by Radcliffe-BrownA.R.FordeD., 1–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
74.
Radcliffe-BrownA.R.1951. ‘Muringin Social Organization’. American Anthropologist53 (1): 37–55.
75.
RaoKodanda. 1973. ‘Rank Difference and Marriage Reciprocity in South India: An Aspect of the Implications of Elder Sister’s Daughter Marriage in a Fishing Village in Andhra’. Contributions to Indian Sociology7 (1): 16–35.
76.
RaoKodanda. 1982. ‘Kinship and Marriage among the Jalaris of Coastal Andhra: A Study of Dravidian Kinship Terminology’. Contributions to Indian Sociology16 (2): 197–223.
77.
RaoN.S.2004. ‘Yanadi Kinship Terminology and the Expression of Affinity’. Contributions to Indian Sociology38 (3): 351–78.
78.
ReddyN.S.1984. ‘The Essence and Evanescence of Dravidian Kinship System’. Asian Profile12 (4): 367–85.
79.
RiversW.H.R.1906. The Todas. London: Macmillan and Company.
80.
RiversW.H.R.1907. ‘The Marriage of Cousins in India’. The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland32 (3): 611–40.
81.
RivierePeter. 2004. ‘The Amerindianization of Descent and Affinity’. In Kinship and Family: An Anthropological Reader, edited by ParkinRobertStoneLinda, 104–09. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
82.
RudnerDavid. 1990. ‘Inquest on Dravidian Kinship: Louis Dumont and the Essence of Marriage Alliance’. Contributions to Indian Sociology24 (2): 153–74.
83.
RudnerDavid. 1997. ‘Re-exhuming Dravidian Kinship: A Response to Parkin’. Contributions to Indian Sociology31 (2): 299–311.
84.
SalisburyR.1956. ‘Unilineal Descent Groups in the New Guinea Highlands’. Man56 (1): 2–7.
SchefflerH.W.1966. ‘Ancestor Worship in Anthropology: or, Observation on Descent and Descent Groups’. Current Anthropology7 (5): 541–51.
87.
SchefflerH.W.1973. ‘Kinship, Descent and Alliance’. In Hand Book of Social and Cultural Anthropology, edited by HonigmannJohn J., 747–93. Chicago: Rand Mc Nally.
88.
SchneiderDavid M.1965. ‘Some Muddles in the Models: Or How the System Really Works’. In The Relevance of Models for Social Anthropology(ASI Monograph 1), edited by BantonM., 25–85. London: Tavistock Publications.
89.
SillitoePaul. 1998. An Introduction to the Anthropology of Melanesia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
90.
SrinivasM.N.1952. Religion and Society among the Coorgs in South India. London: Oxford University Press.
91.
StoneLinda, ed. 2001. New Directions in Anthropological Kinship. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
92.
StrathernAndrew J.1968. ‘Descent and Alliance in New Guinea Highlands’. Proceedings of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. No. 1968: 37–52.
93.
StrathernAndrew J.1972. One Father, One Blood. London: Tavistock Publications.
94.
StrathernAndrew J.1973. ‘Kinship, Descent and Locality: Some New Guinea Examples’. In The Character of Kinship, edited by GoodyJack, 21–33. London: Cambridge University Press.
95.
StrathernMarilyn. 1992. Reproducing the Future: Essays on Anthropology, Kinship, and the New Reproductive Technologies. New York: Routledge.
96.
TambiahS.J.1965. ‘Kinship Fact and Fiction in Relation to the Kandyan Sinhalese’. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute95 (2): 131–73.
97.
GeorgeTharakan C.2003. ‘The Mixed Economy of the South Indian Kurumbas’. Ethnology42 (4): 323–34.
98.
GeorgeTharakan C.2006. ‘Louis Dumont and the Essence of Dravidian Kinship Terminology: The Case of Muduga’. Journal of Anthropological Research62 (3): 321–46.
99.
GeorgeTharakan C.2007a. ‘Gift and Commodity: On the Nature of Muduga Transaction’. Anthropos102 (2): 441–54.
100.
GeorgeTharakan C.2007b. ‘The Muduga and Kurumba of Kerala, South India and the Social Organization of Hunting and Gathering’. Journal of Ecological Anthropology11 (1): 5–24.
101.
TrautmannThomas R.1981. Dravidian Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
102.
TylerStephen A.1964. ‘Koya Kinship: The Relation between Rules and Behavior’. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
103.
TylerStephen A.1966. ‘Context and Variation in Koya Kinship Terminology’. American Anthropologist68 (3): 693–707.
104.
Van VelsenJ.1967. ‘The Extended-Case Method and Situational Analysis’. In The Craft of Social Anthropology, edited by EpsteinA.I., 129–49. London: Tavistock Publications.
105.
VerdonMichel. 1980. ‘Descent: An Operational View’. Man15 (1): 129–50.
106.
WagnerRoy. 1967. The Curse of Souw. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
107.
YalmanNur. 1962. ‘The Structure of the Sinhalese Kindred: A Re-examination of the Dravidian Terminology’. American Anthropologist64 (3): 548–75.
108.
YalmanNur. 1967. Under the Bo Tree: Studies in Caste, Kinship and Marriage in the Interior of Ceylon. Berkeley: University of California Press.
109.
ZvelebilKamil V.1981. ‘Problems of Identification and Classification of some Nilgiri Tribes’. Anthropos76 (2): 467–528.
