The key terms to consider here are the Rotinese words dae (Proto-Austronesian *daReq), meaning variously ‘earth’, ‘land’ and ‘territory’, and nusa(k) (Proto-Austronesian, *nusa) which can be translated, in different contexts, as ‘island’, ‘land’ or ‘domain’. I begin with an exegesis of the word dae.

In ordinary language, dae refers to the earth. In ritual language, dae, ‘earth’, pairs with batu, ‘stone’. Thus the formal expression for the earth is dae bafak ma batu poin, ‘Land’s Mouth and Rock’s Point’, in contrast with the ‘Heavens and Heights’, poin do lain, and the ‘Depths of the Sea’, liun do sain. (Dae can also have the meaning of ‘below’ as in the phrase, ndia neme lain leo dae: ‘it goes from above to below.)’

One can refer to the ‘land of Roti’ as dae Lote but Roti itself is described generally as a nusa, an ‘island’. Thus Roti is simply Nusa Lote. Nusa, however, also forms the semantic basis for designating the named territories or domains (nusak) that form the local polities of the island: Nusak sanahulu falu lai nusa Lote a: ‘There are eighteen domains (nusak) on the island (nusa) of Roti.’

Each nusak was headed by a ruler whose title was that of Manek or ‘Male’ Lord. Rule was centred on the site of the ruler’s residence, which was designated as the nusak lain, the ‘high domain’. The power of the ruler was based in, and emanated from, this ‘high domain’. The ruler presided at a court in the ‘high domain’. The symbolic ordering of this court centre was intended to reflect the state of the domain as a whole. In Rotinese, nusak thus denotes court and court centre as well as the domain as a whole (See Fox, in press a).

Each nusak _±≠was composed of a number of leo. These leo are the clans or ‘origin groups’ of the domain. The existence of each leo was acknowledged by a position in the ‘high domain’, by representation at the Lord’s court and by assignment of a role in the performances of the origin rituals of the domain. Each leo was thus represented at court by its own Mane Leo.

Leo, in turn, are generally divided into smaller named lineages or -teik (‘wombs’, ‘stomachs’), which can be distinguished further into bobongik (‘birth groups’). Houses (uma) are the basic units of Rotinese society but rarely encompass more than two generations. Unlike other societies in eastern Indonesia, there are no houses that represent an entire ‘origin group/clan’ (leo) or even an entire lineage (-teik). Clans make general claims to ancestral areas—different parts of a particular domain associated with ancestral actions or earlier historic residence—but ownership of productive land—fields, gardens, portions of an irrigated rice complex—is maintained at the level of the household (uma) or among closely related households that derive from the same immediate ancestor.

Marriage rules for the leo of Roti vary. In some domains of Roti, leo are strictly exogamous. In others, such as Termanu, small leo are generally exogamous, whereas large leo permit marriage among individual teik or lineages (see Fox 1979a for a comparison between the domains of Thie and Termanu).

Clans (leo) have no existence outside their particular nusak; hence, there is no system of island-wide clan connections nor any clan network that transcends a particular nusak. The rulers of different domains intermarried but each ruler retained his own dynastic line based on a distinct genealogical origin. Thus no form of comprehensive nobility emerged on Roti. The nusak established strict (physical) boundaries for definition of all origin groups.

In ritual language, nusa pairs with ingu, another term for ‘land’, ‘territory’, ‘place of residence’. Thus one can refer to nusa no tola-non, ingu no ka’a-fadi: ‘a domain of relatives, a land of lineage mates.’ In some dialects of Rotinese, such as Bilba, the term ingu-lain is used with the same sense as nusak lain in the dialect of Termanu. Ingu, however, also forms a pair with leo, meaning ‘clan’s or ‘origin group’. Ingu is also a common element in the name of various origin groups: Ingu-Beuk, Ingu-Fao, Ingu-Nau. There are thus, linguistically and culturally, close linkages between the concepts of nusa, ingu and leo. A key point that needs to be emphasised is the fact that there is no presumed size to any of these categories. Some nusak on Roti are large units, either in terms of land or population, and are comprised of many leo; others are much smaller and are only a fraction of the size of the larger nusak.

In present-day Roti, members of different origin groups (leo) tend to cluster in different parts of a domain but the leo itself has lost most of its associations as a residential group. The origin narratives, however, describe the leo as if they were originally residential groupings: as separate small ingu or independent nusak that were, by conquest or deception, brought under the power of the high domain (nusak lain) of the ruler.

In Roti, residence is scattered. There are no discrete ‘villages’ and only limited evidence of a period when there might have been such discrete villages. The Rotinese terms for village are taduk or nggolok (nggolo-taduk), which imply a ‘promontory’ or headland. Generally, settlements are designated by specific names and names change as one moves through any particular settlement.

The existence of the various domains on Roti was acknowledged formally by a succession of contracts between their individual rulers and the Dutch East India Company beginning as early as 1662 (Fox 1971). As local polities, they continued to be recognised until 1968 when they were subsumed within the bureaucratic structures of the Indonesian Government. Warfare among these polities, especially over issues of land, continued well into the 19th century when the Dutch Colonial Government asserted the right to determine and maintain fixed borders between states. ^[3]

Each domain possesses its own narrative of the origin of the nusak, whose foundation and initial formation is regarded as having occurred before the arrival of the Europeans. The narratives provide an account of the ancestral foundation of the state, of the dynasty of its rulers and of the precedence and prerogatives of its origin groups. These state narratives, as told from the point of view of each ruling line, also recount the conquest, assimilation and absorption of other origin groups as the state expanded. This process of state incorporation allowed for the inclusion of other outsider groups within the domain.