It lies beyond the scope of this paper to provide an overall view of ceremonial and political alliance on Palu’é.^[18] Here I shall restrict my focus to three domains: Ko’a, Cawalo and Tomu. Within the system of ceremonial and political alliance that encompasses all fourteen domains of the island these three make up the core of one alliance bloc (Map 1). This core is set against a nonallied grouping made up of three other “domains of water buffalo blood”: Kéli, Ndéo and Nitu.^[19] Ko’a, Cawalo and Tomu are referred to as “the domains of the three hearth stones” (tana liga telu). Their alliance is both political and ceremonial. It is political in that every appointment of a new priest leader is subject to confirmation by the priest leaders of the two allied domains and in inter-domain warfare, which until very recently was endemic on Palu’é, these three domains are ideally expected to lend each other their unconditional support. Open warfare against each other is prohibited by a mutual non-aggression pact (tura caji). The alliance between these domains is ceremonial in that at all stages of the water buffalo sacrificing cycle the allies are the guests of the sacrificing domain. By their presence they enhance its prestige and contribute to the success of the sacrifice. According to popular interpretation, the designation of the three domains as “three hearth stones” implies a notion of equality. It is said that “no stone may be higher than the other lest the pot breaks”.

At another level, this notion of equality is overridden by a system of dual classification. In a recursive and complementary mode each domain classifies the other as either conceptually male (laki) or conceptually female (vai). Categorical asymmetry is achieved by defining male as being superior to female. This form of male-female classification is a relative one and it is crucial to note that the category to which a domain is assigned varies according to the standpoint of the classifier.

An important criterion of maleness is the size of the population. Another one is the notion of the “head” (taba) and “feet” (va’i) of a domain. Thus, if a territory reaches from the sea up to the mountain top, its “feet” are at the sea and the “head” at the top of the mountain. Only if a domain has both “head” and “feet” is it ritually complete and can exploit the whole range of ritual manipulations that are based on the concept of the domain as a living body (Map 2).

Finally, the actual size of the territory claimed by a domain may also be an important factor in its classification. In the chanting of “the names of the domain” preceding the sacrifice, place-names are evoked that trace lines from the four corners of the domain towards its ceremonial centre. In terms of the body metaphor applied to the domain this chain of names corresponds to lines reaching downhill from the “head”, or rather from both its “shoulders” (baja), to its “navel” (busé) and from its “feet” uphill again to the “navel” (Map 2). This movement towards the “navel” is referred to as “taking in the names of the domain” (nala tana ngarané). In structural terms the domain contracts during the ceremonial cycle towards its two centres, the ceremonial courtyards. After the cycle is completed the centres are believed to have the potential to increase in size. In an expansive movement its “sides” (ka) can grow outward. It is these expanding “sides” that constitute the boundary lines towards the neighbouring domains. By setting offerings to the Supreme Being at intervals along the “sides” of the domain claim is laid over the space delineated by them. When these lines conflict with those of the neighbouring domain then, unless there is a pact prohibiting armed conflict the boundaries are redefined by means of warfare.^[20]