Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest

Religion (2001) 31, 41–61 doi:10.1006/reli.2000.0313, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest S D. K The Crypto-Jews of New Mexico present a fascinating case of a modern community shaping and constructing identity in the context of competing identities. This article applies two concepts derived from structuralism as a means of examining and analysing this process. Bricolage is the primary theoretical concept. It provides the model of the different patterns which shape the construction of Crypto-Judaic identity. The second concept, that of the juggling of identities, shows the ways in which individuals with different Crypto-Jewish identities consciously and unconsciously emphasise different aspects of the underlying structural pattern. This aspect of agency creates the dynamic and transformational aspect which is significant to both Crypto-Jewish and modern  2001 Academic Press identity.

Bricolage and Jonglerie are part of the dynamic of transformation that is characteristic of culture and the interface of culture and the individual. These processes are especially apparent within situations of both conflict between cultures and the assimilation of multiple cultural patterns. This article examines the process of the construction of identity within the Crypto-Judaic community in the Southwestern United States. This case exemplifies the issue of the construction of identity in the modern world. This article focuses on two main issues: identity and bricolage. The discussion of identity is presented as foundation for the theoretical questions suggested by the issue of bricolage. I present a range of fluid identities, each of which emphasises different constituent elements of self. Depending on the individual’s unconscious and conscious understanding of self-identity, different aspects within the process of bricolage will come into play. This secondary process which builds upon that of bricolage is labelled here jonglerie, or identity juggling. Claude Lévi-Strauss introduced bricolage as an anthropological concept in relation to his concept of underlying structure (see Lévi-Strauss 1966:16–36). Lévi-Strauss suggests that bricolage is the unconscious process through which mythical thought expresses itself in the form of particular myths. Like the bricoleur, somewhat analogous to a tinker, the myth-maker uses a range of materials from heterogeneous sources, in other words uses whatever comes to hand. Myth making is an unconscious process of combining and recombining these elements in new forms. The myth-making bricoleur makes use of a finite range of elements, for example, mythemes,1 that is, the fragments that are used to construct myths, and puts them together in novel ways to construct the myth which is required. One of the key features of this process is the finite, closed nature of the conceptual forms with which the bricoleur must work. The process is set over and against the forms created in the past and those created both within and especially outside the cultural community. I suggest that the conceptual universe of the Crypto-Jew is primarily constrained by the way in which the elements are related to one another rather than by the origin of the elements. Clearly, one is also limited by those elements that are available through the chances of history, for example, the oral traditions that have survived. As identities and cultural options expand, the range of material out of which culture is constructed becomes increasingly diverse.  2001 Academic Press 0048–721X/01/010041+21 $35.00/0

42

S. D. Kunin

The elements employed by the bricoleur come from a wide range of sources, including previous myths of the community, myths of neighbouring communities and elements from the wider context. In creating myths, the bricoleur is, unconsciously, examining issues and ideas. The key difference between the human bricoleur and the process of myth-making is that of consciousness. Cultural bricolage is entirely unconscious. What is significant about the process of bricolage are not the materials used to create the myth but the underlying pattern or logic used to fit the elements together. That underlying structure is mythological thinking. Although Lévi-Strauss uses the concept of bricolage primarily for myth-making, I suggest that it also functions for other cultural symbolic constructs and in fact for all cultural constructs (Kunin 1995, 1998). The key aspect of bricolage is the underlying structural pattern that shapes the cultural artefacts created by the bricoleur. The underlying structural pattern forms the basis for how a particular culture understands and shapes its reality. The issue of underlying structure is complicated in the case of Crypto-Judaism by the array of conflicting identities characteristic of Crypto-Jews. Crypto-Judaism is not a clear and unambiguous identity. It is a highly contested identity, constantly in the process of negotiation. Still, it is possible to highlight the underlying structural equation characteristic of Crypto-Jewish identity. The primary underlying equation presents a clear opposition between categories, with symbolic elements often used in direct opposition to their use in the wider, Christian environment. The rejected category is strongly negatively valenced. Yet the underlying structure, unlike more common Jewish structural patterns, includes mediation and transformation (see Kunin 1998). The concept of jonglerie, or identity juggling, refines bricolage and underlying structure. This concept allows the introduction of the aspect of human agency into the process of identity creation. It also allows the examination of the processes which occur in the context of competing underlying structural patterns and in which structural equations include aspects of mediation.2 Jonglerie highlights the fact that to some extent individuals and groups consciously negotiate their sense of identity. The Crypto-Jewish experience is by its nature one in which there are many different identities being contested. Negotiation works on several levels. As individuals emphasise one aspect of identity, such as the Jewish or Catholic aspect, there is a re-alignment of unconscious structural patterns that can reshape the way in which cultural elements are understood. For example, in one context the oppositional aspect of structure might be emphasised; in another, the mediatory or transformational aspects might be emphasised. An element that apparently comes from a Jewish source can be emphasised, thereby emphasising the oppositional aspect of the cultural element; or a Christian or Latino aspect might be emphasised, thereby emphasising the transformational or mediatory aspect.

Ethnographic Background The modern Crypto-Jewish community is a segment of the Hispanic community which claims descent from the Jews forced to convert to Catholicism in Spain between 1390 and 1492. Other terms used to describe this community are Marrano, Converso, Secret Jew, Anusim and Sephardim (see Ward 1999:677–86). Of these terms, the word Marrano is particularly disliked by many people within the community. They see it as deriving from the Spanish word for pig (see Liebman 1974:27–30; 1982:216–8; Roth 1974:27– 8). Some individuals within the community, particularly those more aware of trends in

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 43 the wider Jewish community, call themselves Sephardim, the traditional word for Jews from Spain. This term is not used here because it is too general. The term ‘Crypto-Jew’ is used instead because it emphasises secrecy, a significant feature of the culture that distinguishes these Jews from other segments of the Sephardic community. Although nomenclature may seem to be merely of academic interest, it can be significant. Whichever term is selected in turn defines the boundaries of the identity. The term ‘Sephardim’ makes a claim to Jewish authenticity and a link to what is perceived to be a significant branch of Jewry, and the term ignores the issues of conversion and of the possibility of an identity separate from that of normative Judaism. Other terms like Anusim highlight the community as distinct and privilege one aspect of the identity. Individuals and sometimes groups claiming to be Crypto-Jews are found throughout Spain and the Spanish and Portuguese diaspora. Communities have been found in many parts of Spain, South America (see Beller 1969), Mexico and the Southwestern United States. Other communities, primarily those of Portuguese descent, are found in the Northeastern United States. This article focuses on those Crypto-Jews from New Mexico, and to a lesser extent on those in the surrounding states. It is not possible to give an estimate of the Crypto-Judaic population of this region because of the problems of identification and self-identification, both of which are extremely fluid. Also, the culture of secrecy is still prevalent in many parts of the community. Individual Crypto-Jews are spread throughout New Mexico. Some of the most interesting areas and groups are those in and from isolated villages in Northern New Mexico. Some informants suggest that some of these villages are composed of large endogamous groups of Crypto-Jews. Some communities included clusters of up to fourteen families of Crypto-Jews that are reported to have consistently intermarried. Other Crypto-Jews live in Southern New Mexico and the urban centres. The economic and social profile of the Crypto-Judaic community in New Mexico appears to cover the full range of the wider Hispanic community. Individuals interviewed included unskilled labourers, farmers, teachers, lawyers, politicians and the unemployed. All reported that their ancestors within a generation or two had worked the land. Some were tenants or small landholders, and some had larger holdings. Within the Crypto-Judaic community itself there do not appear to be formal aspects of hierarchy outside of family structures, though some individuals, through their perceived knowledge, claim informal authority. Today other nodes of authority are developing in association with the development of formal and informal organisations within the Crypto-Judaic community. It is through organisations such as the Society for CryptoJudaic Studies that a more structured community is beginning to take shape. The question of whether there even is, or was, a Crypto-Judaic community is somewhat problematic. There is little or no documentary evidence to demonstrate the existence of formal structures or group identity prior to the last ten years. Indeed, there are those who question whether Crypto-Judaic identity in New Mexico existed as such prior to the latter half of the twentieth century. For example, one of the most significant voices in Crypto-Judaic studies, Judith Neulander (1996), suggests that the phenomenon is actually one created by misinterpretation by untrained ethnographers and individuals who wish to move out of a mestizo identity to one of higher status. Parallelisms and misunderstandings are transformed into a created history. Neulander implies that the phenomenon is therefore not worthy of further study. But if one is concerned not with demonstrating a historical link but rather with examining a culture as it exists today, and as it imagines its past, then a community in creation or recreation

44

S. D. Kunin

like that of the Crypto-Jews is of great interest. I am not here denying or demonstrating historical authenticity. Rather, I am suggesting that it is of secondary interest to the anthropologist. I also suggest that any identity, whether or not historically authentic, is a real identity. The primary concern of this article is thus with the identities that this group is constructing and reconstructing today. I am also aware of the issues surrounding the use of stories of events not witnessed by informants but simply reported as family traditions. In all cases these reports are not assumed to convey historical information but rather are taken as ways in which individuals use the past to validate their present identity. All reports of childhood memories are understood in the same way. Many of the elements put forward to justify the existence of early communal structures appear to be modern constructions or reconstructions of the past to justify or explain modern action or innovation. Still, there are reasons that it is appropriate to address both individual and wider cultural issues. First, one of the significant features of Crypto-Judaism today is the development and creation of communal structures. These structures are significant mechanisms for defining who is a Crypto-Jew. Whether or not similar structures existed historically, they are a key feature of modern ethnography. Second, both the interviews and the professional genealogies researched by historians support a pattern of endogamy, that is, the rule or preference of marrying among families with strong Jewish ancestry. There might therefore have been informal ties among these families. Third, the identity is communal: the individual is defined as part of a class of individuals in opposition to other classes. The approach taken here is anthropological with a structuralist basis, as opposed to the historical or folklorist approaches usually applied to this kind of material.3 I am interested in how people within different cultures perceive and construct identity in and how these identities are transformed through time. The Crypto-Judaic community in New Mexico has developed in a context different from that of other segments of the Jewish community.4 The primary distinction is its strong association with the Catholic Church. By necessity, most Crypto-Jews in New Mexico participated in the life of the Church. This association has led to the shaping of Crypto-Jews by Catholic culture. The necessity to compartmentalise one’s internal, hidden Jewish identity and one’s external Christian identity has also shaped the culture of the Crypto-Jew. Since the conquest of New Mexico by the United States, Protestant churches have also affected the identity of the Crypto-Jews. Influences have included the use of biblical names and the reading of biblical texts. While these customs might have been already present within the community, the Protestant sects enabled these practices to be openly performed.5 Like all other Jewish communities, the Crypto-Judaic community is also integrated into other larger cultural communities such as Western American culture. This cultural integration adds a further level of complexity. Each period of development, be it Spanish, Mexican or American, influenced the development of Crypto-Judaic culture. American influence is strongest today because of the pervasive nature of American culture and the degree of assimilation into that culture. This influence is leading young people of Crypto-Judaic origin to move in several directions. One group is attempting to assimilate into American culture and is abandoning much of its Hispanic and potential Crypto-Judaic inheritance. A second group, conforming with multicultural trends in the United States, is aligning itself with Hispanic culture. Some individuals in this group have felt that Crypto-Judaic identity is not compatible with Hispanic identity.6 Others have begun to rediscover their Crypto-Judaic identity.

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 45 Compartmentalisation, proposed by Dozier about Pueblo culture (see Dozier 1961, 1970) needs to be addressed. It suggests that religious traditions can be separated into mutually exclusive categories. Structuralist theory suggests that when the elements are internalised, they will be restructured and organised according to the underlying structure of the culture. Compartmentalisation is essentially an external model, responding to persecution and intolerance, whereas internally even the Catholic material will be reconstructed and transformed. While mutually exclusive categories are theoretically possible, because of the isolation of the Crypto-Judaic community and the process of bricolage one in fact finds overlap between the categories. Elements are taken from Catholic and other traditions and reconstructed into new Crypto-Judaic rituals. Two religious traditions or other aspects of culture maintained simultaneously will continue to be mutually exclusive for only a limited time. Because of structural transformation, overlap will eventually occur. Complexity is also found to an even greater extent because of the idiosyncratic history of families. Each family has its own history of movement from Spain and Portugal to the New World. Some families trace their roots to the early colonisation. Other families trace their roots to later periods of migration. Geographic settlement is also a significant feature. Settlement in urban centres such as Santa Fe or in more remote areas of New Mexico also has a significant impact on identity.7 Within the community of people identifying themselves as Crypto-Jews, there is a wide range of affiliation. Some individuals have identified themselves strongly with mainstream Judaism, often converting in order to be accepted into synagogues. These synagogues range from Reform to Habad. Other individuals, while identifying themselves with Judaism, have not identified themselves with any mainstream community. They consider themselves already authentically Jewish and see no reason to convert. Still others recognise their Jewish origins but choose to continue identifying themselves with various Christian groups, including Catholicism, various Protestant groups and modern messianic sects. Yet others are members of the Mormon Church, or LDS. In many cases, genealogical descent appears to be the significant factor.8 Finally, some individuals, while recognising a Jewish ancestor, do not consider themselves to be Crypto-Jews at all. Neulander (1996:34–43) suggests that in most cases the Crypto-Jewish identity emerges from Christian or Mormon identity. But many individuals interviewed in this study had no Protestant, messianic or Mormon roots within their families. More importantly, individuals utilise elements from a wide range of sources to determine their identity. Persons are not born with identity. One of the key features of Crypto-Judaic identity is fluidity. Individuals are constantly juggling, both consciously and unconsciously, the elements that constitute their identity. They emphasise different elements, which depend on a whole range of factors, including whom they are interacting with, including the anthropologist, the point in the life cycle, economics and status, and the attitudes of the wider community. Identity as a Crypto-Jew is not static. Individuals are constantly moving in and out. This fluidity means that Crypto-Jews are constantly reconfiguring their past in line with their current identity. If bricolage is the unconscious process by which Crypto-Jews construct their identity, jonglerie, with the individual as jongleur, is the partially conscious process by which constructs created by the bricoleur are emphasised or deemphasised. The community can be broken down into four ideal types based on selfidentification, practice and beliefs. As stated below, genealogy is an additional factor in Crypto-Jewish identity. These factors are highlighted by Crypto-Jews themselves. Each

46

S. D. Kunin

carries cultural information in different ways. Each can be either dependent on or independent of the other elements. A fourth factor is genealogy, itself considered essential by Crypto-Jews. Most persons will range among these ideal types rather than fitting any one type. Genealogy is a key aspect of Crypto-Judaic identity. The ability to trace identifiable Jewish ancestors is a catalyst for the creation of identity and for the validation of identity. This is true both for those Crypto-Jews who are aware of their Jewish ancestry and for those who discover their Crypto-Judaic identity through genealogical research. In some cases, individuals who had no inkling of Jewish identity and had no knowledge of Jewish practices within the family felt transformed upon discovering their Jewish genealogical roots. Genealogy is also significant in creating identity through connection to the Inquisition and settlement of New Mexico. Discovery of an ancestor who was persecuted or killed by the Inquisition is often a catalyst in the constructing of Jewish identity. Connection to the early colonists of New Mexico creates, through Mexico, a tie to Spain. Spanish ancestry is a significant feature of the identity of many Crypto-Jews. The significance of genealogy is also strengthened by external forces. Genealogy as historical evidence is used to defend against those who would deny Crypto-Judaic presence in New Mexico. Genealogy is also used to validate the identity of Crypto-Jews as authentic. Genealogy thus becomes a key building block in constructing Crypto-Judaic identity. One Crypto-Jew involved in giving advice to others stated that he regarded a genealogical relation as one of the most significant factors. In effect, he regarded those unable to find such a relation as not authentic Crypto-Jews. Genealogy, however, is a cultural construct. It becomes significant in cultures that value continuity with the past. This is true for both the Hispanic and the Jewish communities. Both place value on clear lines of descent. A Jewish person is defined as having a Jewish mother. In the Crypto-Judaic community this emphasis is both a value and a problem. Emphasis is placed on having a Jewish ancestor, but this emphasis often does not fit in with the normative Jewish pattern. The use of genealogy is also problematic in another respect. Because of the number of Jews forced to convert between 1390 and 1492, it is likely that most persons of Spanish descent can find a Jewish ancestor in their genealogy. However, it cannot be said that all persons with Jewish blood are Crypto-Jews. Genealogy therefore cannot be a sufficient defining characteristic. Other factors must be present as well. But these factors do not need to have been historically present. Individuals today who discover Jewish roots can become part of the modern Crypto-Judaic community. No prior Crypto-Judaic practice in their families is necessary. There is one area in which genealogy moves beyond a cultural construct: genetic illnesses.9 Scholars have identified several genetic diseases that appear to be limited to the Sephardic community both outside of and within the Crypto-Judaic community. These genetic factors create a clear link between these communities. But genetic factors do contain cultural information. How this biological information is used is again within the realm of cultural construction. There are interesting examples of individuals discovering and developing Crypto-Judaic identity on the basis of these genetic diseases. Though in this case as well some informants who discovered that they had these genetic illnesses although interested in Crypto-Judaism still chose to maintain their Christian identity. One of the features associated with the emphasis on genealogy in Judaism is endogamy. Throughout Jewish history, from the biblical period until today, there has

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 47 been an emphasis on marrying within the community. This emphasis is also found in specific parts of the Crypto-Judaic community. It is found in the strongest form among those whose families have both a strong identification with Judaism and a strong element of practice. Several informants indicated that their families married into other families that were known to be of Jewish origin. In one case it was stated that there were thirty-two families of Crypto-Judaic origin in the community which had intermarried. Marriages were determined by parents with the individuals betrothed at an early age. Generally, individuals in this category of Crypto-Jews tended to marry within a specific limited range of families but occasionally married outside of this range if there was known Jewish origin. One informant’s father came from outside the usual range of families but was acceptable because his Jewish origins were known. Some of the marriages to Ashkenazic Jews in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries may fit this pattern. Endogamy is less clearly found among those Crypto-Judaic families with a less strong Jewish identity and practice. Although some genealogies suggest that in these cases there is a slight preference for endogamy, in the majority of these cases there is no discernible preference.

Ideal Types of Crypto-Jewish Identity The first type is composed of persons who have all four components; self-identification as Jews, practices, genealogy and beliefs. They consider themselves to be Jewish. In some cases they have known this all their lives, with their Jewish identity never a secret. In other cases they have been told of their Jewish identity at some time during their childhood. The beginning of puberty is the common time.10 Jewish identity is here perceived as exclusive: they are Jews rather than Christians. Individuals within this category are often in the possession of family trees that they believe connect them with Jewish conversos. In some cases these genealogies have been passed down within the families. In others, they have been researched by members of the families in the present generation. In either case the clear presence of Jewish identity and the identification with Spanish conversos is a common feature. This exclusivity is demonstrated by one particular case. The informant, now a Christian priest, came from a family that he states had a strong Jewish identity. He states that he was informed of his Jewishness as a young boy. He describes the traditions of his family as distinctly separate from the practices of their Christian neighbours. Upon becoming a Christian priest, he states that he was, in effect, ostracised by his family. Initially, his family considered that he was dead and were unwilling to communicate with him in any way. Later, after many years of separation, when he was able to come back into communication, he describes one visit to his brother. After he had drunk a cup of coffee, the cup was destroyed because it had been defiled by someone from outside the community. Whether the story is true or not, it shows that at least in the mind of this individual the two categories were mutually exclusive. This view reflects the oppositional aspect of the Crypto-Jewish structural equation. It was not merely that he became a priest but that he chose to do so out of conviction. While this case may be extreme, within this category, comparable views on exclusivity have been expressed by a wide range of informants. The element of practice is also significant, as practice has always been seen as the identifying characteristic of Jews. Within this category there is a high degree of practice identified as being Jewish. Within each family the elements of practice differ. What remains constant is the identification of these practices as Jewish.

48

S. D. Kunin

Several practices seem to be common within this category of Crypto-Jews. Many informants report that either they or other members of their family have been circumcised. Circumcision has been reported particularly by individuals from Northern New Mexico. One informant, a farmer of approximately seventy-five years of age, reported that he had been circumcised as a baby. The circumcision had been performed by an itinerant healer. In other cases the circumcision has been performed by a midwife or in a hospital. A significant aspect of his information was that the fact of circumcision distinguished him from other boys of the same age, suggesting that circumcision was not a commonly practised operation. In Southern New Mexico several individuals reported that a symbolic form of circumcision was practised, that is, a slit in the foreskin rather than its complete removal. In either case, the individuals emphasised that they knew that they had been circumcised as part of their Jewish identity. Other practices usually found relate to food rules, especially regarding pork and the prohibition on blood. All individuals in this category told stories of their not being allowed to eat pork. Most also described taking animals to particular butchers for slaughter. They suggested that the butchers had a particular place where ‘Jewish’ meat was killed. They also emphasised that, in accordance with traditional Jewish practice, the blood was removed and poured away. It was never used as food. As to belief, one finds a clear rejection of Jesus as the Messiah, an acceptance of one God and a strong focus on the Ten Commandments.11 In several cases it was clear that the rejection of Jesus was emphasised as the defining characteristic of Crypto-Jewish belief. There is also often a strong emphasis on the Hebrew Bible and on rejection of the New Testament. One other common area of belief and tradition is a mythological association between the expulsion from Spain and the exodus from Egypt. This aspect often colours many of the Crypto-Judaic festival celebrations. During Passover the story of the expulsion often is told in place of the exodus. In one case the two stories were mixed together. Pharaoh was connected with Queen Isabella, the Red Sea (and the Nile) with Rio Grande. Similarly, the Sukkah (booth), or Jachal, is usually related to the journey from Mexico to New Mexico rather than the wanderings in the desert described by the Torah. Other beliefs are idiosyncratic.12 The beliefs are usually associated with liturgical elements often in ‘Ladino’.13 One feature that appears to be common to all individuals in this category is a stated preference for endogamy (see Hordes 1996:88). This preference is found both in ideology, that is, ‘our family always married other people in our community’, and in the genealogies and the explanations of genealogies found in these families. In some cases the genealogist suggest that the families consistently married within a very narrow range. Marriage between first cousins and the exchange of sisters are not uncommon.14 At the level of underlying structure, this category of Crypto-Jews strongly emphasises the oppositional aspects of the structural equation and therefore is closest to the A not B pattern commonly found in earlier and contemporary Jewish cultural constructs. Where Christian elements form a part of the rituals or myths, the elements are emphasised as distinguishing the Crypto-Jew from his or her Christian context. The qualitative valence of an item and the meaning attached to it are inverted. This oppositional aspect is highly accented through the process of jonglerie. The individual chooses to de-emphasise the Christian origins of the riteme or mytheme or else chooses to emphasise its oppositional characteristics. The second category is composed of individuals with a Jewish identity but with more ambiguous expressions of the other elements. Individuals within this category have often grown up without knowing that they are Jewish. At some point, sometimes at

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 49 puberty and sometimes only in adulthood, they have been informed that they are Jewish. In several cases individuals were informed of their Jewish identity by a grandparent, either male or female, out in the fields, where they could not be overheard. The time of being informed is explained as a way of protecting the family’s secret identity. If they were told at a younger age, they would not be able to keep the secret. The genealogical aspect of this category is significant as the possession of Jewish identity is directly associated with descent from a Jewish, converso ancestor. When individuals in this category examine their past, they may find that their family had certain practices that can in retrospect be identified as Jewish, for example, practices connected with food prohibitions or with purity. Yet these practices were often done without explanation or identification as Jewish. In respect to food, the practices are often explained in terms of liking a particular food or sometimes claiming an allergy to a particular food or combination of foods. Similar ambiguity is found regarding belief. In some cases there is a family tradition of a belief in one God. In others, there is merely an interest in the Hebrew Bible. This category of Crypto-Jews also includes those persons who, although never told of their Jewish origin, have discovered this identity through genealogical research. In several cases these individuals develop a Jewish identity not present prior to discovery. The genealogical factor is perceived as a significant feature of identity. Examination of family practice in retrospect often reveals practices that are or that become identified as Jewish. Sometimes, when elder relatives are interviewed by the individuals, they reveal that there was Crypto-Judaic identity in the family. In one case an artist whose work was consciously and specifically Christian discovered that she had Jewish roots. In spite of the fact that there appeared to be no tradition of Judaism in her family, the discovery had a significant effect on her. Although her art continued to have a Christian tone, a pronounced Jewish element also began to be found. She also began to express the secret aspect of Crypto-Judaic identity by including secret messages in her art. In a second case an informant stated that he had a Jewish identity and had converted to Judaism prior to his discovering that he actually had a Jewish ancestor. This information had been passed down by his mother to his sister but not directly to him. His discovery of his Jewish origins led him to believe that he had inherited some kind of genetic connection or affinity with Judaism and that this affinity had led him to make his choice of religion. This case is significant because it reveals a common concept among Crypto-Jews. Many believe that aspects of identity are passed down through some genetic mechanism, so that even individuals who do not yet know of a Jewish ancestor or have a clear family tradition can develop Jewish identity through their descent from Jewish ancestors. This concept is one reason that many Crypto-Jews place a high degree of significance on genealogical descent. It is this second category of individuals that most clearly reflects the process of jonglerie. After discovering Jewish identity or connection, individuals look to their family’s practice and reconfigure their understanding of it to reflect their new understanding of self. It should be emphasised that I am not suggesting that these elements were not there, a fact often difficult to determine, but that as identity changes, different aspects are privileged and reinterpreted. As to underlying structure, this category is more complex than the first. At different points the two aspects of opposition and mediation may come into play. It is, however, the oppositional aspect that becomes predominant. This is especially seen in the use of genealogy. As a cultural construct, genealogy reflects both aspects of structure. Within

50

S. D. Kunin

this category of Crypto-Jew, particularly though not exclusively among those who have gained their identity through genealogy, interpretation of genealogy is strongly shaped by the oppositional element. They usually emphasise that a single Jewish ancestor, ‘a drop of Jewish blood’, is sufficient to place them in a clear and unbridgeable category, clearly denying any possibility of transformation or mediation. One does not become a Crypto-Jew. One is born a Crypto-Jew. The third category is composed of individuals who have recognised Jewish practices within their families yet do not have any tradition of Jewish identity or a current Jewish identity. Many of the individuals within this category consider themselves to be Christian or Hispanic, which may be incompatible with Judaism in their eyes. Within the families and traditions of these individuals, however, may be identified, either internally or externally, practices identified with the Crypto-Judaic community. Although these families or individuals cannot be considered to be Crypto-Jews, as they do not consider themselves to be Crypto-Jews, they are potential Crypto-Jews, as it is precisely this category of individual that often develops Crypto-Judaic identity. One example of these defining characteristics is the use of ‘Ladino’. Many Hispanics in New Mexico speak a Spanish that is significantly different from that generally used in Mexico or Spain. This language has been identified by some academics and especially by Crypto-Jews as ‘Ladino’, or Judeo-Spanish. Some of the individuals within the community assume that anyone who speaks this kind of Spanish must be of Jewish origin, and many who do so are beginning to look for Jewish roots to explain the language they speak. The boundaries, however, are not clear-cut. One informant from a small village in Northern New Mexico stated that in her village all persons spoke the same kind of Spanish, that is ‘Ladino’. While some families identified themselves as Jews, using the term ‘Ladino’ as synonymous with Jew, others did not and also were not identified as such by the ‘Ladino’ families. This category is one of the largest. Many persons interviewed can be placed in this group. In one case the informant was aware of many Jewish practices in her family. These practices included restrictions on eating pork, the use of ‘Ladino’, and the building of booths called jachales, similar to those built during Sukkot. Despite this knowledge there was no wish to have or to develop stronger Jewish identity, nor was religion compartmentalised in any way. The informant considered herself a fully practising Christian. Like all of the other categories, this category is fluid. Although members are privileging the Christian or Hispanic aspects, they also choose to privilege to a lesser extent elements that they or others identify as Crypto-Jewish. During the period of fieldwork individuals within this category tended to move in several directions. Some deprivileged the ‘Jewish’ element, while others chose to deprivilege the Christian elements. In many cases individuals fluctuated, depending on the time of the interview. The underlying structural patterns characteristic of this category emphasise the mediatory and transformational. The oppositional aspects of structure are deemphasised. Where there is a family tradition of Jewish origin, it is not seen as an oppositional characteristic. Rather, it a de-emphasised or non-privileged element, part of a mediatory continuum. Similarly, when Jewish practices are recognised, they are seen as mediating between Jewish and Christian identity rather than as creating or emphasising a stronger aspect of opposition. How these aspects of structure are negotiated depends very strongly on the context. Precisely because these identities are contested, the process of jonglerie allows individuals to redefine and re-emphasise the aspects of the underlying structural equation.

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 51 The final category is composed of individuals who have no documented genealogy or tradition of Jewish origins. They often state that although there is no tradition of Judaism within their families, they still feel themselves to be Jewish. In some, though not all, cases their self-identification is associated with membership in some messianic organisation. One individual stated that he knew that he was Jewish from his early childhood. Yet he reported that this was not through his family’s practice or identity. One parent was Mormon; the other a Messianic Christian. His knowledge came as a spiritual message. Respecting the slaughtering of animals, for example, he stated that although the blood was removed, according to both Jewish and common practice in New Mexico, it was eaten, but ‘we did not like it’. This reaction suggests that he was aware of the Jewish practice forbidding the eating of the blood and was trying to understand his family’s way of eating to make it fit to a Jewish model. He also was not able to trace any Jewish ancestors. It is not unlikely that his desire to be Jewish stemmed from his continued association with Messianic Christianity. A second group within this category includes individuals, families or groups whose behaviour suggests to external observers that they may be Crypto-Jews. Yet they neither have particular Jewish identity themselves nor have any genealogical connections to Jewish ancestors. Their behaviour may come from many sources. Some Christian sects have Jewish practices—for example, Seventh Day Adventists—or may use the Hebrew Bible as a guide for behaviour. Two informants demonstrate aspects of this group. They were identified as persons who might have Jewish roots on the basis of Sabbath observance. They observed Sabbath on Saturday rather than on Sunday. They also expressed interest in Jewish practices. When they were interviewed, it became clear that they had no aspect of Jewish identity or roots. One informant suggested that an aunt might have had Jewish roots, but it was apparent that this was said for the benefit of the interviewer. Further questioning indicated that the Saturday Sabbath practice did not have deep roots in the family. It was first practised by a great-grandfather who was hostile to the Catholic establishment and decided on the practice from his reading of the Hebrew Bible. The practice was reinforced in the following generation by membership in Seventh Day Adventism. The current informants and a few additional individuals in their village continue the practice on the basis of their understanding of the Bible rather than through any Jewish roots. They, and others with whom they are in contact, can be characterised as conscious Judaisers. They are Christians who wish to return to the roots of Christianity and the way of life of Jesus. They are not usually considered Crypto-Jews by other Crypto-Jews, and they usually do not consider themselves Crypto-Jews. This boundary, however, may be flexible, with individuals moving from this to other categories of identity.

Bricolage One significant conceptual model essential to understanding the development of Crypto-Judaic culture, and indeed any culture, is that of bricolage. This concept, first introduced by Claude Lévi-Strauss, suggests that all culture is created from materials at hand as long as the elements can be made to fit or exemplify the underlying structure. The bricoleur unconsciously uses what is available in both the natural and the contextual environment to build elements that fit into his own cultural pattern or structure. It is not

52

S. D. Kunin

the particular cultural elements—the ritemes, for example, or components of rituals or actions—that are significant. It is the way in which the ritemes within these elements and the elements themselves are associated with one another, and their relationship or opposition to elements from neighbouring cultures. I have examined the underlying structural equation and the ways in which different aspects of it are emphasised or de-emphasised by the different categories of Crypto-Jews. These differently nuanced aspects of structure shape how these categories relate to the different forms of bricolage to be examined. The first category emphasises practices that do not include strongly emphasised Christian elements. Where Christian elements are found, they tend to be strongly inverted from their Christian usage and function in a clearly oppositional way. The second category of Crypto-Jews has a greater number of practices composed of ritemes from the Christian context. In many cases, at the level of practice, these ritemes are mediatory, though, unlike the third category, they will also have the oppositional element. In spite of these general patterns, all of the rituals discussed below are found in many different forms in all of the categories of Crypto-Jews. In general, I have refrained from indicating how each of these practices and forms of bricolage fits into the different nuances of underlying structure. In each case the principles outlined can be applied to the practices discussed. The results suggest that although each category may use the same rituals and practices, through different nuanced patterns of emphasis or de-emphasis the ritemes and mythemes work within their unconscious negotiation of the underlying structures. There are several important implications from these concepts to the Crypto-Judaic community. First, it cannot be expected that the Crypto-Judaic community will practise rituals that are identical with those practised by Jews in other cultural contexts. Rituals, especially when not accompanied by written legal texts, change over time. New ritemes are introduced to replace those that no longer fit the cultural or environmental context. Cultural change is a continuous process, and even an attempt not to change is a form of transformation. Thus, some of the rituals found today among the Crypto-Jews, while owing their origin to practices in Spain, are constructed and include ritemes from the cultural context of Mexico and the United States as well as of Spain. It should therefore not be surprising to find elements of Catholic ritual incorporated into some CryptoJudaic rituals. What is significant is how these ritemes fit into the Crypto-Judaic cultural structure. Four examples that demonstrate the integration of Christian ritemes into Jewish rituals or practices in Crypto-Judaic structure are those found in the Kiddush (the Blessing of the Wine), Shabbat Candle lighting, Mezzuzah (the box traditionally containing sections from the Torah placed on the doors of many Jewish homes) and purification practices described by a variety of different informants. In each case, the Christian element is peripheral to the meaning of the ritual. Regarding the purification practices, it is there only as a precaution against discovery. The structural aspect of the practice emphasised depends to some extent on identity. The Kiddush is the traditional Jewish blessing over the wine.15 It is often associated with a similar blessing over bread, especially on the Shabbat. In the traditional practice the two are drunk and eaten separately, the wine first and the bread second.16 Some Crypto-Jews maintain the practice on Friday night of reciting blessings over bread and wine. The bread is then dipped into the wine and eaten. It is possible that this ritual has been constructed from the traditional Kiddush and Christian practice. In its CryptoJudaic form, particularly among those Crypto-Jews with the strongest emphasis on the oppositional aspect of the underlying structure, it is clearly perceived as a Jewish

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 53 practice, without any of the Christian ideological elements. It is performed in the home by the members of the household, and the blessings are similar to the traditional Hebrew blessings.17 On Friday night it is traditional for Jews to light at least two candles to welcome the Shabbat. This ritual is practised by all Orthodox Jews and by many from the Conservative and Reform movements. In some families this is the only Jewish ritual performed and is seen as a key element in Jewish identity. A similar tradition is also reported by many Crypto-Judaic families.18 The usual practice appears to be similar to that of traditional Jewish practice, with the exception of the blessing. In some families a blessing in Spanish or archaic Spanish is recited. In others, no particular blessing is found. The only other significant riteme is that of secrecy. The candles are usually lit in a back room with no windows or in some other location in the house that is not visible from the street. Among other families, particularly those in the second category, who tend to emphasise a more mediatory aspect of the structural pattern, one finds elements of bricolage. The candles are lit on Friday nights, as is the usual practice, but the Rosary is recited as the blessing. It is possible that the Rosary was added as an additional element of secrecy or as a means of bringing together ritual actions that were symbolically powerful. One family which practises this ritual in this way reported that they were performing the ritual as part of their Jewish identity, thus privileging the ‘Jewish’ aspect of the rite. The third example, the Mezzuzah, although reported by only one informant, was performed by all persons identifying themselves as Jews in her village.19 The Mezzuzah is a box containing sections of the Bible and is traditionally placed on every door in a Jewish house. In the informant’s village, Crypto-Jews placed metal crosses on all their doors. They considered, at least in retrospect, these crosses to be equivalent to the Mezzuzah. Although it is possible that this was a Christian custom, in this particular village it was found primarily in Crypto-Judaic homes, that is, among families with a Judaic aspect to their identity. Because of its restriction to families identifying themselves as Jews, it is also possible that this custom is the result of bricolage, with the bricoleur using powerful symbols that were available to him without compromising the secrecy of the Jewish identity. The final example of this form of bricolage uses Christian elements to disguise a Jewish purification ritual. The informant described rituals practised by his mother and grandmother. They kept a bowl of water with some green herbs floating in it. The bowl was kept next to several images of Saints. When asked about the water, the informant was told that it was connected with the saints and that he should not ask about it. The water was used after menstruation for purification. Although this ritual does not fit with the rabbinic model of purification, which requires the use of a mikveh, or ritual bath, it does fit with the spirit of the emphasis on purity in mediaeval Judaism.20 A category of this kind of bricolage is rituals that subvert Christian rituals. One informant stated that after a Crypto-Jewish child was baptised, a practice that was necessary to maintain their secrecy, the baptism was in effect washed off. When the family arrived home, the head of the child was washed with water. Perfume was then poured over the baby, and it was given a new name.21 The identity of the child and the opposition to the Church were thus maintained. This and similar practices are usually found among those with the strongest Crypto-Jewish identity. The rituals clearly create a strong oppositional pattern, emphasising the mutual exclusivity of the two marked categories.

54

S. D. Kunin

A related pattern is found in marriage. On the night before the wedding in the Catholic Church, a formal meeting was held between the families. This meeting was the betrothal, in which gifts were exchanged and wine was drunk.22 It was seen as the actual joining of the two, with the Church wedding needed for the outside community. Although similar betrothal rituals may be found in the wider Hispanic community, it is the perception of the ritual that is significant. In some cases a more clearly Jewish wedding would be performed in the home after the Christian wedding. Informants describe two glasses of wine being drunk by the bride and groom as well as an oral or written contract stating that the two will live under the laws of Moses. This form of wedding includes many of the significant elements found within the rabbinic form of wedding ceremony. The informant clearly indicated that her family saw this home ritual as the real wedding, with the one in the church done to prevent the children of the union from being considered illegitimate by the outside community. This pattern is perhaps also seen in certain hollow crosses reported by several informants, though it should be noted that none of these has actually been seen by the ethnographer. The significant feature is that within the cavities in the crucifixes are occasionally kept relics of their Jewish past, for example, small parchments with Hebrew writing on them. The contents thus subvert the normal meaning of the crucifix, while allowing the relic to be kept safely. Second, one of the key features of bricolage is the transformation of elements of rituals and myths based on those things that are available in the local environment. This aspect of bricolage is demonstrated in connection with the festival of Sukkot. Two features of the festival are the Lulov and the Etrog. The Lulov, based on a biblical commandment, is composed of a palm frond, with branches of willow and myrtle. The etrog is a citron. In New Mexico, where some of these elements were not available, sweet or lemon grass was sometimes used for the lulov, and quinces and other fruits were used for the etrog.23 Interestingly, the quince was seen by some individuals as symbolic of self, as in some way representing the Crypto-Jews. Some families stated that they had a tradition of planting a quince tree wherever they lived. Other families used various forms of willow for the lulov. In some families, however, only one or the other of these elements is present, depending on availability and family tradition. One informant described seeing the ritual use of these objects. They were shaken in four directions. Then they were touched to piles of harvest produce shared among members of the family. This practice is similar to traditional rituals. In mainstream Judaism the Lulov and Etrog are shaken in six directions—north, south, east, west, up and down—rather than four. The touching the produce is, however, not part of halachic practice. The significant element is the use of local elements to replace those elements not available, which is a fundamental principle of bricolage. Third, we also find rituals that have no direct relationship to Jewish practices of pre-expulsion Spain. These rituals may have been constructed of elements available and fit the cultural identity of the Crypto-Jews. It is essential to determine the range of practice. Are they restricted to the Crypto-Judaic community? In some cases these practices may be associated with either the expulsion itself or the culture of secrecy that has been a defining characteristic of the Crypto-Judaic community. One example of this kind of practice concerns colour. Among many CryptoJudaic families, the colour yellow is forbidden for dress and possibly for other uses. In one case an informant reported that one of her cousins had brought home a yellow blouse. The cousin’s mother got so angry that she almost destroyed the blouse. Several different explanations are given for this practice. Some attribute it to the flames

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 55 of the inquisition, others, to the yellow stars and clothing which Jews were forced to wear. A second practice is a variation on a traditional ritual rather than one that is completely new. In mainstream Judaism circumcision is always practised, performed on the eighth day by a Mohel or sometimes in the hospital by a doctor. Circumcision is seen as the sign of the covenant with God and is thus a powerful symbol. As circumcision is not practised among the wider Hispanic community, it also has a strong oppositional character, clearly marking circumcised individuals as part of a different category from those who are not circumcised. Circumcision is practised to some extent by Crypto-Jews.24 In one case an informant reported that he alone among his friends was circumcised and that he did not find out why until his cousins told him that it was because they were Jewish. Many, however, perform a slightly different operation in its place. Rather than the foreskin being removed, a notch is cut in it. This act is perceived as a symbolic circumcision. The modification of the traditional practice was attributed to persecution and secrecy. The operation allowed people to be ‘circumcised’ but not to allow it to be visible. All that was visible was a small scar. Most cases where circumcision of either type is found fall in the first category, which fits with the structural emphasis of clearly marking the opposing and unbridgeable categories. One of the foods eaten during Passover may fit this or the previous category. Almost every informant mentioned a special pudding, capirotada, eaten during Passover. This food was a bread pudding made with flour (some versions use bread), sugar, nuts and raisins. Several informants also mentioned cheese, suggesting that the cheese distinguished it from that eaten by Christians during Lent. The use of a similar food to that used by Christians during a similar part of the year may stem from the desire not to stand out from Christian neighbours. Although the primary version of capirotada contains flour and thus according to rabbinic law is not kosher for Passover, it does not include yeast or other rising agents and thus fits the biblical requirement for Passover.25 Other uses of local foodstuffs during Passover include the eating of flour tortillas made especially crispy and not allowed to rise, thus being identical with Matzah.26 Certain practices involving cleaning houses also fit this category. Several informants reported that their families had the tradition of sweeping the floor towards the centre rather than towards the door. In one case the informant stated that she had been told, as a young child, that there were demons in the corners. Others suggested that the practice was out of respect for the mezzuzah. Although this practice might have been performed in Spain prior to the exile, it has no basis in Jewish law, and is still done by families who no longer have the mezzuzah.27 Fourth, in several cases it has been determined that particular elements of some Crypto-Judaic practice cannot owe its origin to pre-expulsion Spain. An example is that of the ‘dreidel’, to be discussed. A second example is the covering of mirrors and of reflective surfaces after a death. This custom is common in the Crypto-Judaic community. All evidence suggests that it was an Ashkenazic practice that developed after the fifteenth century. Although there are many possible explanations for the introduction of these practices, they are clearly explicable within bricolage. The model suggests that it is possible that when individuals identifying themselves as Crypto-Jews, almost certainly from the first category, came into contact with other aspects of the Jewish community, especially the Ashkenazim who settled in the Southwest after the conquest by the United States, they selected elements of Jewish culture which fit their own structure and enhanced their

56

S. D. Kunin

cultural opposition to the Christian Hispanic aspects of their identity and that of the wider Hispanic community. Jewish cultural elements would be particularly appropriate in emphasising the A not B structure because of their clear and perhaps public association with Jewish identity. Inclusion of these elements into Crypto-Judaic culture would thereby strengthen Crypto-Judaic Jewish identity. This kind of bricolage is demonstrated by the practice of one informant’s family. She describes her grandfather, whom she knew, as strongly conscious of his Judaism. He also travelled widely to other parts of the Western United States. When he returned from his journeys, he would occasionally return with elements of Jewish culture, religion and Hebrew, for example, the Seder and Talit. Interestingly, he wore the talit only during weddings. The informant stated that he would choose those elements that he liked and that fit with his understanding of Judaism and would reject those that did not. The elements which he introduced became part of his family’s practice. The dreidel is an interesting example because of its pervasiveness in the popular literature about the Crypto-Judaic community (see Neulander 1996:22–3). It may be an example of this kind of bricolage on either the concrete or the conceptual levels. Many informants and observers have pointed out the use of a four-sided spinning top used within the Crypto-Judaic community during the late autumn or early winter, coinciding with Christmas. Descriptions of this top are found both in contemporary practice and in practice going back to the beginning of the twentieth century. One informant had a neighbour, a man of seventy or eighty, who claimed Jewish descent. This man made these toys each year for his neighbour’s children. This top is associated in some cases with the celebration of a form of Chanukah. It is often assumed that the dreidel was brought from Spain by early Jewish immigrants. But all evidence suggests that the dreidel was first used several centuries later in Eastern Europe and was not present in Spain in 1492. This historical discrepancy has led several scholars to discount the dreidel as a feature of Crypto-Judaic history and identity, suggesting that it is merely an example of convergent evolution, of two toys which are phenotypically rather than genotypically similar. There are, however, several possibilities that must be examined before determining the status of the ‘dreidel’. It is possible that the dreidel was introduced to the Crypto-Judaic community at some later date, either by the incoming Ashkenazic community in the mid to late nineteenth century or by the Jewish communities established in the twentieth century. Evidence from informants suggests that it was present very early in the twentieth century. If the dreidel was taken from the Ashkenazic community at either of these dates, its history fits well with the model of bricolage. The bricoleur, in continuing the process of cultural construction based on a Jewish identity, would naturally borrow from the community openly identified as Jewish. Thus the presence of the ‘dreidel’, far from weakening the identification of Crypto-Judaic culture, may be understood as part of the natural process of cultural development. This explanation must, however, be examined in the wider context of Hispanic culture in the Southwest. It must be determined whether the toy is used within the broader Hispanic community. If this is the case, then the presence of the toy cannot be used as an indicator of Crypto-Judaic culture.28 Still, the use of the ‘dreidel’ today within the Crypto-Judaic community must be seen as one factor in identity. Individuals use it because they associate it with their Jewish identity. If the ‘dreidel’ is of Hispanic origin, then its use as part of Crypto-Jewish identity can be said to be an example of conceptual rather than concrete bricolage.

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 57 One additional aspect of the bricolage process already alluded to that is perhaps characteristic of Crypto-Judaic culture as a whole is the emphasis on secrecy. This riteme has been essential to protect the community, initially from the Inquisition and subsequently from anti-Semitism.29 One ritual shaped by this riteme is that of Yom Kippur. The families, rather than fasting at home, would go together into the fields. Other families went into the mountains. The informant stated that they would dress in new clothing (which he found strange, as it would get dirty) and then go out into the fields surrounding the village. They would gather wild spinach, but their parents did not let them eat it. This was done all day. In the evening, after sunset, they built campfires and ate the spinach and other foods that had been gathered. Meat was forbidden. This practice allowed them to spend the day fasting without revealing this practice to their neighbours. Some scholars have focused on Crypto-Judaic rituals as remnants of Jewish culture rather than as part of a living and developing culture. But culture is not composed of artefacts or remnants. Culture is composed of living and interrelating elements, each part of a wider structural pattern. Each of the elements, whether ritualistic or conceptual, must fit a structural context that is the foundation of Crypto-Judaic identity.

Conclusions In this article I have examined some of the elements of Crypto-Judaic identity. I have focused on identity construction developed in the related concepts of the privileging of different aspects of the underlying structure and the element of agency found in the concept of jonglerie. This emphasis should not be taken as a denial of the validity of the community. Rather, it demonstrates that the Crypto-Judaic community, like any other living culture, is in the process of development. Similarly, individuals in any culture go through a continuous process of identity construction and reconstruction based on their cultural context and on individual understanding. Because this continuous process of cultural development and transformation is ultimately one contesting and negotiating structure through the medium or processes of bricolage and jonglerie, the culture of the Crypto-Jew is built from materials from many different cultures and times. It contains elements brought from Spain, from Catholic culture, American Protestant and messianic traditions, and from the Ashkenazic Jewish community. It is likely that this process will continue with elements of American, Ashkenazic and modern Sephardic culture being added to the Crypto-Judaic repertoire. These elements are constantly being shaped and defined by both their organisation through underlying structure and the transformational aspect of emphasis through individual identity juggling. All of the practices reveal a common underlying structural equation, that is, A nor B with neutral mediation. The A not B aspect of structure is privileged by those individuals with the strongest aspects of identity, and the mediatory aspect is emphasised by those with more transformative or ambiguous levels of identity. The Crypto-Jewish community is also developing a stronger communal identity. In several places various groups are forming, some for religious and others for secular purposes. To some extent it is these groups who will define and set the agenda for the Crypto-Judaic identity. Far from challenging the validity of Crypto-Judaic culture, these additions and transformations reveal that it is a living culture distinct from the neighbouring Hispanic culture. If the Crypto-Judaic community is to be properly understood both internally and externally, the problems raised here and elsewhere must still be addressed. The nature of

58

S. D. Kunin

Crypto-Judaic identity, the relationship of that identity to its cultural contexts and the objective value of indicators of Crypto-Judaic identity must be critically evaluated. The study of this community is also important for the understanding of Judaism as a whole, for one of the significant features of Crypto-Judaic culture is the persistence of Jewish identity whether or not associated with identifiably Jewish beliefs and practices. This issue is of importance for understanding developments in Jewish culture in the United States and in Eastern Europe.

Notes 1 A mytheme is a narrative or symbolic fragment (on analogy with a phoneme) out of which the bricoleur constructs myths. Similarly, a riteme is a fragment of ritual or symbolic action out of which rituals are constructed. The significant aspect in both cases is that they are not isolated elements but are set in relation or opposition to other mythemes or ritemes. 2 My ideas about competing structures and human agency were in part shaped by conversations with Christian Karner, who is working on new models of neo-structuralism. 3 This research was conducted over five years primarily in New Mexico. It was funded by grants from the British Academy, the University of Nottingham and the Estates of Eva Feld. It used both participant observation and interviews. Fifty individuals with different expressions of Crypto-Judaic identity were interviewed. Interviews ranged from a minimum of an hour to twenty or thirty hours over several weeks and years. Many other individuals were also observed or spoken with in less formal contexts. No names are mentioned in this paper. Several individuals from outside the Crypto-Judaic community were very helpful in this research. I especially wish to thank Dr Stanley Hordes and Mrs Fay Blake. 4 The ethnographic context of this analysis uses the artificial boundaries of New Mexico. The individuals who make up the Crypto-Judaic ‘community’ are found throughout the Hispanic community of the state. Individuals interviewed and observed were found in all parts of New Mexico including both the urban centres and the outlying farming communities. The Crypto-Jews are to a large extent fully integrated into the Hispanic community. Most of the cultural resources employed by them are identical with those of other Hispanic individuals who do not identify themselves as Crypto-Jews. In some cases individuals are activists both in Hispanic politics and in the developing Crypto-Judaic identity. The research does not suggest any present correlation between class and Crypto-Judaic identity. 5 T. Atencio, in a paper delivered at the conference of the Society for the Study of Crypto-Jews in Albuquerque, NM, December 1996, suggested that many Crypto-Jews naturally gravitated towards Protestant sects to get out of the power of the Catholic Church and to be able to perform certain practices associated with Judaism such as reading the Hebrew Bible. Other sects were also preferable because of their association with Jewish practices, for example, the Seventh Day Adventists. Crypto-Jews could thus engage in Jewish rituals while still appearing to be Christian. Some informants have suggested that there is a group of Crypto-Jews in Albuquerque who meet as Jews under the guise of a Seventh Day Adventist Church. This hypothesis is also discussed by Hordes (1996:88). 6 One Hispanic activist felt that if she revealed her Crypto-Judaic identity , she would no longer be accepted as properly Hispanic. This view reveals both a structural opposition between aspects of her identity and the role that secrecy plays for Crypto-Jews. 7 Tomas Atencio (1996:59–68) suggests that these aspects are essentially remnants, with little or no cultural context. Although I agree that aspects of identity are in shreds and patches, I also see them as part of a context that is changing, depending on the aspect being privileged. 8 An additional factor is the attitude of the wider Jewish community to the Crypto-Jews both as individuals and as a community. Different rabbis have dealt with individuals in different ways, often depending on their religious affiliation and their attitude towards Halachah. The rejection felt by many Crypto-Jews when approaching these rabbis has led to feelings of hostility and may be a feature among some Crypto-Jews in avoiding direct contact with Jewish institutions. It is not within the scope of this paper to address the Halachic issues. From an anthropological perspective, what is significant is the way persons see themselves. I am concerned with the elements used by the Crypto-Jewish community and individuals to construct their identity. External views of authenticity are not directly relevant to this issue except as one feature against

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 59

9 10

11

12 13

14 15 16

17

18 19

20

21

which identity is constructed. The historicity of elements within Crypto-Judaic culture is also not significant. I am interested in how elements are used today, how they fit into the wider structure of culture. Whether a specific cultural element is from the period of the expulsion from Spain or from a more recent period is of historical but not necessarily of anthropological interest. This issue is specifically examined by Hordes (1996:88). The pattern of informing children at puberty or after was established as early as the 1500s (see Gitlitz 1996:223). Gitlitz also states, citing texts from the seventeenth century, that often the education process would begin either in an isolated location or on a journey. Several informants highlighted these elements as features of their family’s practices today. In both the historical texts and the modern phenomena the same explanation is given, that is, the danger posed by the information. One informant spoke of the anger he felt at being told this information only at twelve, and of his ambiguous feelings towards Catholicism. The beliefs displayed by Crypto-Jews in this category are consonant with those highlighted by Gitlitz (1996:99–124). This is especially clear regarding the focus on one God. Many informants mentioned prayers similar to the Shema, emphasising the oneness of God. The aspect of Messianic speculation is less apparent, though it is present in some families through Elijah the Prophet. Many informants mentioned leaving a place for Elijah at the table. Elijah is a popular figure in both Ashkinazic and Sephardic folklore and is the precursor of the Messiah. Other informants also had semi-messianic traditions based on a return either to Spain or to Jerusalem. Many of the beliefs discussed by Liebman (1982:13–14) are also found among persons interviewed, especially the significance of Spain, Spanish blood and the sense of being divided personalities. The term Ladino is not used here in the strict academic sense. Rather, it is used in the way that it is understood by the community today, that is, the archaic kind of Spanish which is characteristically spoken in New Mexico and other parts of the Southwest. Research needs to be done to determine whether this language is spoken solely by the Crypto-Judaic community or more widely in the Hispanic community. This form of Spanish is often seen today by many Crypto-Jews as a marker of Crypto-Judaic identity or descent. Gitlitz (1996:246–7) suggests that endogamy was a clear preference for conversos in pre- and post-expulsion Spain. He also states that this preference towards endogamy was found in Crypto-Judaic communities until the twentieth century. Traditional is used here to indicate that this is a practice followed by religiously observant Jews. All of the cases mentioned are based on the system of Jewish law followed by Orthodox, Conservative and to some extent Reform Jews. In one family an interesting variation on the blessing over the bread developed. Usually, the ‘Ladino’ blessing was recited over the bread prior to eating. When a Catholic Priest or a visitor was present, the blessing would indicate the family’s Jewish identity. In order to preserve the secrecy, the bread was ‘accidentally’ knocked to the ground. When the head of the family picked it up, he recited a short blessing in Spanish to ‘clean the bread’ in a manner acceptable to both the family and the Priest. Gitlitz (1996:452–3) presents prayers used for the kiddush between the fifteenth and the eighteenth centuries. These prayers, especially in their simplicity, are similar to those found among conversos in New Mexico. The emphasis on the wine which he found is also still found. He does not, however, present any material analogous to dipping the bread in the wine. For a discussion of this topic both in regard to the mediaeval and modern practices, see Gitlitz (1996:322–8). This possibly contradicts Gitlitz’s suggestion that the practice did not outlive the generation of the expulsion (1996:528). Other examples of the mezzuzah are also found in the ethnography. In one case a mezzuzah was found on the door of an attic in the house of a Crypto-Judaic family. It should be emphasised that it was a modern Ashkinazic mezzuzah of the type available in any Synagogue. A similar ritual is reported by Gitlitz (1996:273) as practised by Crypto-Jews in Spain in the seventeenth century. Purification practices are widespread in New Mexico. Several informants report washing in preparation for the Shabbat. Others mention specially cleaning genitalia before Shabbat and festivals. For discussion of a similar practice, see Gitlitz (1996:319). A similar, though not identical, practice is discussed by Gitlitz (1996:148) as taking place in 1485. He also states that Crypto-Jews often also gave babies a second Jewish name (see Gitlitz

60

22 23

24 25 26

27 28

29

S. D. Kunin 1996:201). In the cases of additional names found in the modern Crypto-Jewish community, some were biblical names while others were Ladino or Spanish. The events described by informants are not dissimilar from those described by Gitlitz (1996:254–8). The only significant exception is the absence of the Ketubbah, or the marriage contract. The mikveh was also replaced by washing. The quince is a very consistent symbol and was mentioned by most informants who still celebrated forms of Sukkot. It was often kept for its sweet aroma for the year until the following Sukkot. Various names were used for the festival, including Jacales and Las Cabanitas. See also Blake (1997:20). One informant stated that in her family full circumcision was used. It was performed by a man who also functioned as the shochet, or ritual butcher, and ritual expert for the community of which they were part. A similar food is described by Gitlitz (1996:388) as being eaten in the fifteenth century. Some informants information suggests that when the tortillas were made, a small amount was taken and made separately as a tiny tortilla. In some families it was eaten; in others, not. This ritual resembles the traditional Jewish practice of burning a small amount of dough representing the meal offering. Gitlitz discusses this practice in the seventeenth century (1996:321). For an explanation of the practice, see Yerushalmi (1971:37). One folktale seems to indicate that the ‘dreidel’ was already associated with the Jewish community as early as fifty years ago when the story was told. The story makes a clear structural association of the ‘dreidel’ with the Jews and of the top, spun by a string, with the non-Jewish community. The informant who told this story also described the ‘dreidels’ made by her brothers as being carved with designs which had special meanings to her family. Several informants who allowed their Jewishness to become public claim to have been the object of anti-Semitic attacks. These attacks have ranged from graffiti to physical violence.

Bibliography Atencio, Tomas 1996 Beller, Jacob 1969 Dozier, Edward 1961 1970 Gitlitz, David 1996 Hordes, Stanley 1996 Kunin, Seth 1995 1998 Liebman, Seymour 1974 1982 Lévi-Strauss, Claude 1966 Nidel, David 1984 Neulander, Judith 1996 Roth, Cecil 1974 Sperber, Daniel 1975

‘Crypto-Jewish Remnants in Manito Society and Culture’, Jewish Folklore and Ethnology Review 25:59–68. Jews in Latin America. New York: Jonathan David. ‘Rio Grande Pueblos’, in Perspectives in American Indian Culture Change, 94–186. Ed. by Edward Spicer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. The Pueblo Indians of North America. Prospect Heights, Waveland Press. Secrecy and Deceit: The Religion of the Crypto Jews. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society. ‘The Sephardic Legacy in New Mexico: A History of the Crypto-Jews’, Journal of the West 354:82–90. The Logic of Incest: A Structuralist Analysis of Hebrew Mythology. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. God’s Place in the World. London: Cassell. Inquisitors and the Jews in the New World. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press. New World Jewry, 1493–1822. New York: KTAV. The Savage Mind. Trans. not given. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ‘Modern Descendants of Conversos in New Mexico’, Western States Jewish Historical Quarterly 16:249–62. ‘The Crypto-Jewish Canon: Choosing to be ‘‘Chosen’’ in Millenial Tradition’, Jewish Folklore and Ethnology Review 18:19–59. The History of the Marranos. New York: Sepher-Hermon Press. Rethinking Symbolism. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

Juggling Identities among the Crypto-Jews of the American Southwest 61 Ward, Seth 1999 Yerushalmi, Yosef 1971

‘Converso Descendants in the American Southwest: A Report on Research, Resources, and the Changing Search for Identity’, in Proceedings of the 1998 Conference of the European Association for Jewish Studies, 677–86. Ed. by Angel Saenz-Badillos. Leiden: Brill. From Spanish Court to Italian Ghetto: Isaac Cardoso: A Study in Seventeenth Century Marranism and Jewish Apologetics. New York: Columbia University Press.

SETH KUNIN is Senior Lecturer in Social Anthropology of Religion and Jewish Thought in the Department of Divinity and Religious Studies, University of Aberdeen. He is author of The Logic of Incest: A Structuralist Analysis of Hebrew Mythology (Sheffield Academic Press, 1995) and God’s Place in the World (Cassell, 1998). His current research is on the Crypto-Jews of New Mexico. Department of Divinity and Religious Studies, University of Aberdeen, King’s College, Old Aberdeen, AB24 3UB, U.K. E-mail: [email protected]