This paper has presented a complex comparative argument. Its first purpose was to develop a form of comparative analysis that does not rely on the formal categories such as “wife-giver” and “wife-taker” (or their converse, “husband-giver” and “husband-taker”). The southern Tetun and the Ata Tana ’Ai provide ample evidence of the need to develop a different comparative framework. The use of the notions of progenitor and origin are intended to approximate conceptions that societies which I have considered, hold of themselves. The clues to these conceptions are indicated by the recurrent use of common botanic ideas of origin.

The first step in a comparative analysis of these societies is to note that all of them rely on “elder/younger” categories to distinguish genitor or genetrix lines and to order precedence among such lines. This is a common feature of societies of eastern Indonesia where such relative age categories are applied between same sex siblings and marks an important contrast with other Austronesian societies where such categories are applied both among same sex and opposite sex siblings.

There is more to this use of relative age categories among same sex siblings. As is evident among the Ata Tana ’Ai, “elder/younger” categories may also be applied to cross-cousins to designate potential spouses. Relative age categories can thus occur both in a marked and in an unmarked form, a feature which is widespread in Austronesian-speaking societies. In various eastern Indonesian societies where relative age terms are used to refer to same sex siblings, when these terms are applied between members of the opposite sex, they mark out the “marriageable category” of cross-cousins for purposes of directed marriages. Similarly, where the use of relative age terms is not confined exclusively to same sex siblings, as is the case among Javanese or Malay-speakers, these marked forms are used as intimate terms of endearment between a husband and wife or between lovers.

Proceeding further in a comparative analysis of these six societies, we may consider the various cases as relevant pairs as a means to identify commonalities and differences among them.

All of the societies with genitor lines recognize clearly defined progenitors. The Mambai and the Ema recognize two progenitor lines that are ritually fixed. They are conceived of as primordial and the establishment of relationships with other progenitors is mediated through these lines. These primordial progenitors provide the ritual services for those whom they have engendered. In contrast, the Rotinese, who acknowledge a two-generation line of progenitors, establish new lines for each generation of siblings. Bridewealth is essential to the creation of these lines and mortuary payments affirm and eventually serve progenitor relationships. On Roti, these progenitors of short duration perform the necessary rituals for those whom they have “planted”. Among the Atoni Meto of Amanuban, progenitor lines are used as the primary mechanism for structuring new settlements. The progenitor line established by the head of a settlement provides a system of order for the settlement as a whole. A progenitor line of this sort is as precarious as the stability of a settlement.

The relation of progenitor and progeny is expressed as a relative dyadic relationship rather than, as is commonplace in formal analysis, a tri-partite relationship involving the inclusion of a hypothetical ego-line. The various terms that describe and define this relationship have a similar metaphoric cast among all of the related Timorese language populations. They are phrased in a botanic idiom, often contrast male to female, the mother’s brother to the father’s sister, or brother to sister, and invariably trace origins from “trunk” to tip. Similar idioms occur among the Wehali Tetun and among the Ata Tana ’Ai, where progenitor-progeny relations are transformed and internalized. Males marry out requiring progeny to be returned to form new origins with the genetrix group.

Marriage sets the pattern of progenitor-progeny relations.^[6] Among the Mambai and Ema, these relations are conceived of as continuing. They are regarded as ancestral and it is essential that they be renewed through further marriages. As such, the directionality of these marriages is maintained. For the Rotinese, new progenitor-progeny lines are created with each marriage. They continue for two generations as “the path of life” from progenitor to progeny but they need not be renewed. Hence the directionality of marriage can shift from generation to generation. Among the Atoni Meto, marriage relations, unless they are institutionalized in ritual forms, are only as stable as particular settlements. Reversing the directionality of marriage changes political relations within settlements.

The payment of bridewealth and the return of progeny are critical to these relations. Among the Rotinese, bridewealth is considered essential for the establishment of a progenitor-progeny relationship. In cases when a woman becomes pregnant but bridewealth is not paid, progenitor and genitor are confounded and various devices are used to obscure the fact that a progeny has been incorporated as part of the genitor group. Among the Atoni Meto, the incorporation of progeny is a common practice. Traditionally, in Amanuban, a child was returned from each marriage as the appropriate payment for the gift of a woman. This returned progeny established a “female” line in relation to the “male” line of the original genitor group. Theoretically over several generations, this “female” line had three possibilities: 1) to continue as a “female line” with special ritual authority in the origin group; 2) to replace the “male” by reversing the directionality of marriage — the same mechanism utilized by any subordinate group to replace its superordinate in an order of precedence; or, 3) to sever dependent relations to the “male” line by establishing itself as a new “male” line in another settlement, a mechanism also open to any subordinate group in a settlement.

The Atoni Meto with their practice of returning one child from a marriage provide suggestive comparison with both the Wehali Tetun and the Ata Tana ’Ai where the return of progeny is of critical importance. In both of these societies, the return of a woman in place of her father eliminates any need for the payment of bridewealth. Progenitors thus engender themselves via an engendered group. Among both the Wehali Tetun and the Ata Tana ’Ai, it is evident that whereas a group engenders itself by means of an engendered group, this initial engendered group, at a further generation removed, receives a returned progeny and thus also engenders itself. Following the metaphors of the Ata Tana ’Ai, there occurs a reciprocal “planting” of new genetrix-founders.

This paper offers an initial analysis of progenitor lines of origin and their transformations in several related eastern Indonesian societies. In my sketches of each society, I have endeavoured to attend closely to metaphors of relationship and to follow the implications of what they imply. It is thus possible to see how each of these societies is an expression of a set of common concerns about the nature and continuation of life.^[7]

These concerns are not exclusive to eastern Indonesia. They are, rather, a particular expression of ideas found throughout the Austronesian-speaking world. Hence this short paper suggests a form of comparative analysis that might be extended to focus on the transformation of Austronesian ideas of origin and derivation.^[8]