The Atoni (Pah) Meto are the dominant population of west Timor. For more than two hundred years, they have steadily expanded westward and northward from the eastern uplands of west-central Timor. Their population now numbers over 750,000 and their social organization shows two modalities that are each the expression of similar organizing principles under different conditions. In one modality, older political centres endeavour to maintain formal relationships established in the past while in another modality, newer settlements establish new relationships as expansion continues.
This sketch derives from various sources: 1) my own intermittent fieldwork in southern Amanuban; 2) the excellent thesis, Narrating the Gate and the Path, by Andrew McWilliam (1989) on the basis of extensive fieldwork throughout Amanuban; 3) the University of Indonesia thesis, Ekologi, persebaran penduduk dan pengelompokan orang Meto di Timor Barat, by Hendrik Ataupah (1992) on the Sonbai area to the north of the Noil Mina; and 4) the “classic” studies of the Atoni by Clark Cunningham (1966, 1967), P. Middelkoop (1931) and H.G. Schulte Nordholt (1971).[3]
Like the Rotinese, the Atoni Meto recognize origin structures of long and of short duration. The Atoni Meto are divided into as many as 400 separate origin groups, each of which is distinguished and identified by the sharing of a common name, kanaf (or in ritual language, kanaf ma bonif). Implied in the possession of this common name is a common origin from an ancestor identified by the term, u(f), which is the metathesized cognate of the terms, fu/pu/hu. The place of origin of the first ancestor is generally associated with an unusual rock outcrop, fatu (or in ritual language, fatu ma hau, “rock and tree”). Andrew McWilliam describes this botanic metaphor brilliantly but succinctly:
The Atoni Meto “conceive of the name group in a botanical idiom whereby the founding ancestor is considered the trunk (uf) and his descendants are the small branches (tlaef), the tips (tunaf), or the flowers (sufan). The name group is therefore considered as a tree (hau uf mese — one tree trunk) in which there is an unbroken and organic link to the ancestral ‘trunk’ father” (1989:142).
Despite their emphasis on a common trunk, individual segments of a kanaf or “name group” exist as fragments scattered over all of west Timor, clustering in greater concentrations in certain areas but still scattered. Certain name groups hold political dominance over particular territories and have gathered other name groups around them in specific ritual relationships. Knowledge of past genealogies is limited. Instead of tracing social origins by means of a succession of genealogical names — as among the Rotinese — Atoni Meto trace their origins spatially as a journey of the kanaf name through a landscape of place names.
The scattering of segments of the kanaf has given rise to the spectacular expansion of the Atoni Meto but it does not of itself provide a basis for the structure of the society. The real genius of the system is the way in which these fragments are structured by means of precedence based on progenitor lines of origin.
Like the Rotinese, the Atoni Meto use the same metaphor of “trunk” to describe origin structures of relatively short duration. Every Atoni settlement must have a kua tuaf who, as lord of the settlement, is referred to as its uf, “trunk” or “origin”. In theory, this “trunk” (uf) represents the name group (kanaf) whose original ancestor founded the settlement, the right to do so having either been delegated from a political centre or from a name group with higher authority in the area. To gain admission to the settlement and to rights to land around it, each incoming member of another name group has to secure a relationship to the settlement’s “trunk”. Those who join a settlement are “those who come wandering” (atoin anao amnemat) or the “strange-eyed [hawk-eyed] people” (atoin mata teme).
A “settlement lord” (kua tuaf) becomes the atoin amaf, “mother’s brother”, a term which in this context designates the ultimate progenitor of the settlement. Generally a settlement lord establishes his position as progenitor by giving a woman to the first, and possibly the second, in-coming member of a different wandering name-group fragment. These groups, in turn over time, give women to other in-coming name groups so that — in theory — a well-ordered settlement is based on a clear line of precedence emanating from a single uf- progenitor. In contrast to the group of the settlement lord, the rest of the settlement are “in-marrying people” (atoin asaot) (see McWilliam 1989:143).
To understand the complexities of this system it is necessary to indicate the complementary categories or operators by which this system is structured. One set of categories is, as might be expected, “earlier”/“later” (nahun/namuni — na-hun being based, I believe, on an earlier form of the term, “trunk”). As the settlement lord’s group develops, it segments along “elder/younger” (tataf/olif) lines, with the tataf or elder line retaining the institutional position of “mother’s brother” (atoin amaf). This means in effect that members of an olif or younger line may marry in ways that do not maintain precedence but do not necessarily jeopardize the overall order of precedence in the settlement that is maintained by the elder line. Relations of precedence based on a uni-directional flow of women from the atoin amaf are phrased in terms of the categories of “male/female” (mone/feto). These categories are used as relational terms to define precedence. Progenitors are “male people” (atoin amonet) as opposed to the “female people” (atoin amafet), whom they engender. The term, “new male” (mone fe’u) is also used for sons-in-law and more generally all junior males who have received a woman from a particular group. The atoin amaf as ultimate progenitor of the settlement can be described figuratively as the “male or bull” (mone/keso) of the settlement.
Although there are established areas on Timor where bridewealth is important, in the expanding domain of Amanuban and especially at its southern and western periphery, bridewealth was previously not recognized and now is still only of minor significance. Formerly, a child was returned for the gift of a woman. As a result, any name group but particularly the name group of the settlement lord may include its own returned progeny. By the logic of the system, these returned progeny and their offspring are categorized as “female”. Thus a settlement lord’s group may have not only “elder/younger” lines but also an internal “female” line. This creates a certain ambiguity. The “male” line of a name group may marry with its internal “female” line. The group as a whole, however, also marries with its initial in-marrying “female” group from which its internal “female” line is often derived. Thus the name group of the settlement lord, in particular, engenders “female” -classified progeny both in the name group to whom it gives women and within itself. In established settlements, these two “female” groups/lines may merge so that it may be difficult to distinguish members of the “female” line of the settlement lord’s group from members of the initial in-marrying group who — as is customary in Timorese tradition — act on behalf of their progenitor.
Only the directionality of the flow of women determines who is classified as “male” or “female” in this situation. Thus a line of precedence is never permanent. By reversing the direction of marriage, which is possible in the Atoni Meto symmetric marriage system, a name group or a line within such a group can alter its relative position of precedence. “Female” can become “male”. This can occur at any position within the progenitor line. Any settlement lord who takes a wife from a female line or from another group in his settlement ceases to be the trunk of the settlement since he must acknowledge his progenitor as the new “trunk” or “origin” of the settlement.