Molina and others describe how all phases
of ancient Mediterranean society were tightly structured and emphasize meeting
expectations of honor, and avoiding shame. The immediate family relationships,
that is, mother, father; sons, and daughters, and brothers and sisters are the
most important relationships. Closely related cousins are next in importance.
Women become imbedded into the family that they marry into, but are held in a
secondary position, almost like strangers to the family. Even the affection between
married couples is held as secondary to brother/sister and parent/child
relationships. The closest ties are between brother and sister, brother to
brother, and sister to sister. But even in these relationships the intense need
to protect honor overrides affection. Marriages are arranged, and options for
marriage are very limited. Almost all marriages were based on improving status:
they were a very important way of bringing honor or shame to families.
Marriages were arranged by elders who possessed a savvy eye to political and
economic gain. Clans formed by families grouping together; they bonded mostly
by the marriage of their sons and daughters. The main purpose of the clan
system was to strengthen individual and family status.
The best way for a woman to raise her honor
within the strada of her status is to bear a son. A son will often be a women’s
closest bond and best advocate. When sons marry the clan will try to keep the
young family in the same house, or within a kind of courtyard access. Parents
usually advise and interfere in a young family’s issues. The particular status
of a woman and her family is portrayed in complex color designs on the women’s
dress, which is still practiced today. These designs were taught, read, and
obeyed by everyone.
In the family and clan all are responsible
for each other’s shame and honor. Fathers were much wearied by daughters,
because daughters are most vulnerable to shaming the family. If they commit a
sexual violation, or are unable to find marriage and bear a child the family
suffers shame. As a result civil punishments for women were more severe than
for men. If a woman was mistreated by a man her brother would try to avenge the
offense, while the father negotiated with the other party to save honor. If a person
commits dishonor the whole family is shamed, and the clan is also shamed to
some extent. The greater number of strong members in the clan the greater
protection the clan has against destructive events of shame. It is a game of
numbers and survival.
Moving out of, or above ones status is very
unusual, almost impossible. Males follow the occupation of their fathers, and
inherit their social status. Within ones status level each person tries to ally
themselves with those who have influence, power, or good status, and to avoid
those who cause shame. For instance, if a person is known to be ill the
question is asked ‘who’ harmed him or her, not ‘what happened’. If the question
does not lead to a person, but a condition such as a storm, or accident, then
the question of blame is extended to deceased spirits and gods associated with
the clan. When harm is done it is possible that a living enemy put a curse on
the suffering person from a doll, or that someone gave them the evil eye; it is
also possible that a god disfavored them. It was a suedo-science in the ancient
and New Testament world to know all the gods and influential dead for the sake
of discerning how a person may have been caused harm, or how they received
favor. For the Jews this practice of patronizing gods was a source of shame because the Jews were an occupied
people, and according to their own deep rooted belief their God or gods were
supposed to be more powerful than the gods of the pagan Romans, especially on
their sacred land, but the longer they were subjects dominated by the Romans,
the harder it was to sustain this belief.
A person of honor learned how to manipulate
all of these factors. They were consumed in playing this complex social game;
indeed it was a game, a game with terrible consequences. By nature it was
intensely self-perpetuating. Everyone was forced to play, and their identity
was consumed by it. They became numb to its cruelties. The biblical description
of the people being sheep without a Shepard is apt in that the people had no
way change things; they could not even see the trap they were in. The religious
leaders were given very high authority by the people, and these leaders were
keepers of the old ways using every means to maintain their power. Many of them
were only motivated by power and would not tolerate change - as is seen in the
gospels.
In Old Testament times marriage strategy
gradually moves from being somewhat consolatory to agonistic in nature, that
is, it became less about mutual inclination than it was pure competition
between clans. Malina describes the evolution of aggressive marraige strategy
that was the norm in the time of Jesus:
Marriage strategy emerges exclusively as an
agonistic value, a conflict in which the winners are those who keep the
daughters, sisters, and wives and take the woman of other groups in addition,
giving only their patronage, their power and protection in exchange.
In the aggressive perspective (strategy) daughters
should marry relatives as close to home as incest laws will allow. Sons on the
other hand should marry non-relatives and bring the spouse into the family.
Given this preference marriage ends up being a competitive, agnostic affair in
which there are winners and losers.
The object of this competition is to increase the
number of women and loyal men in the clan. Mostly this centers around
accumulating woman into the clan by marriage in exchange for patronage. The
more numbers one has the more power.
This general look into the clan system
gives an idea of how it was that the people did not have a personal conscience,
but an external one. External pressures and expectations consumed their heart
and mind. Malina comments that: “Married dyadic personalities are in a complex
and delicate state of mutual interdependence which tends to greatly limit
personal emotional feeling – or at least its direct expression in action.
Spontaneous affection would impinge on the rights and obligation and interests
of too many others. This need to limit affection is a basic feature of arranged
marriages found in kinship (clan) systems.” The average person’s internal life
was smothered in this system.
This character of the honor/shame society and clan system goes
along with the death of genuine charity in religion and society. It is a dog
eat dog world, perhaps in modern terms it could be compared to the godfather or
gang mentality, except that it dominates all society
No comments:
Post a Comment