MOCHE: A PERUVIAN COASTAL COMMUNITY— GILLIN 



103 



legally unmarried to the fathers of their children, it 

 is customary for most women to be known by their 

 maiden family names, although the courtesy title, 

 "Senora," is used in polite address, whether they are 

 married or not. 



The family name, in addition to identifying family 

 lines of a limited range, serves as a symbol of incest 

 taboo. Although bearers of the same family name 

 do not typically recognize functional membership in 

 an extended kinship group, unless closely related, it 

 is regarded as "bad" to marry or set up a household 

 with a person bearing the same family name. This 

 is borne out in fact by the showing that among the 

 206 persons in my genealogical material not one has 

 married or set up housekeeping with another of the 

 same family name. 



Tlie family names of persons rated as true Mo- 

 cheros are the following : 



Of these 44 family names borne by Mocheros, it 

 will be seen that 30 are unquestionably Spanish. The 

 remaining 14 may be Indian: Angahuaman, Asa- 

 huache, Cafo, Calasan, Colisan, Huaman, Huaman- 

 chumo, Ipanaque, Nique, Rique, Pumayaga, Sicche, 

 Suysuy. Of these Angahuaman, Asahuache, Hua- 

 man, Huamanchumo, Ipanaque, and Pumayaga seem 

 to be definitely Quechua. I am uncertain as to Cafo, 

 Calasan, and Colisan. 



Among the list of Mochero family names only five 

 stand a chance of being Mochica in origin, namely, 

 Nique. Nique (these must originally have been the 

 same name), Sachun, Sicche, and Suysuy, although 

 all of these may be Quechua or derived therefrom as 



well. (In a personal letter to the author, dated 

 October 30, 1944, Dr. J. M. B. Farfan suggests that 

 Sicche may be Aymara {seqclii, ''ragged"). ) 



SUMMARY REMARKS OX KINSHIP 



The usual Spani.sh terms are used for kinship. 

 Tiiese differ from the apposite English terms only in 

 the fact that sex distinction of relative is recognized 

 for grandchildren and cousins. First cousins are 

 always called "primos lienitanos" or "prinuis Iicr- 

 iiianas." The terms for "son" and "daughter" {h'ljo, 

 hija) are commonly extended in address to nonrela- 

 tives who are on intimate terms with the speaker. 

 The terms for "uncle," "aunt." and "grandfather" 

 (tio, tia, abnclo), on the other hand, are not usually 

 extended to nonrelatives, as they are in some Latin 

 American communities, nor are other terms thus gen- 

 eralized. The use of the affectionate diminutive is 

 common both in address and when speaking in the 

 third person, if the individual thus referred to is ac- 

 tually in close and frequent social contact with the 

 speaker. Thus people frequently speak of "papacito," 

 "mauiacita," "abuclito." etc. "Padre" is never used 

 as a kinship term ; the male parent is always "papa" 

 or a diminutive of it, while "padre" is used only in 

 referring to a priest. "Padres." on the other hand, is 

 generally used to mean "parents." "Madre" is 

 usually used as a relationship term only in the third 

 person, and then but rarely, in solenm or formal dis- 

 course. The usual term for "mother" is "mama", or 

 a diminutive of it. 



Among 20 adults from whom I was able to get 

 complete kinship records, the average man or woman 

 could without difficulty call the names of about 45 

 blood relatives and about 18 affinal relatives. Others 

 were recalled only after hesitation, a period of cogita- 

 tion, or consultation with some other relative. Time 

 was not sufficient to study these cases in great enough 

 detail to determine the degree of interaction between 

 each individual and his "relatives," but the fact that 

 one can call by name without difficulty a certain num- 

 ber of relatives may be taken as a rough indication 

 that his social relationships with the individuals 

 named are fairly frequent and meaningful to him. To 

 be on the conservative side, we may reduce these 

 figures to 35 and 14, respectively. To this number 

 may be added a very conservative figure for the aver- 

 age number of fully functioning ceremonial kjnship 

 relationships, which can hardly be less than 20. 

 These figures would eliminate occasional duplications. 

 On this basis, it is probably safe to say that the 



