Orlanth Umathi:
> But will they actually place emphasis on this direct form of ancestry?
> This is my whole point, different family build = different concept of
> family. Mother is not necessarily the strongest bond in a maternal
> group. If your Aunt is older than your mother (or possibly has had
> children first, depending on outlook) she may be the one who instils
> discipline or makes decisions on your behalf.
Generally, there is a difference between degrees of kinship and degrees of authority.
Mother-child and sibling-sibling are always close kin, no matter what the family setup. In this general case, you will be more closely related to your siblings than your cousins and to your mother rather than your aunt.
However, the head of the household could well be an aunt, great-aunt or similar relative. In a household with several sisters, when their mother dies, the head of houshold would pass to one of the sisters, or perhaps the mother's sister. So it is quite conceivable that the Aunt would be the head of household and make descisions/instill discipline.
From a clan point of view, it is even more likely that the Queen is not a close relative, but she will almost certainly be a relative, however distant.
> Maternal ancestry is not just a mirror of paternal ancestry. You might quote your lineage as:
> I am Ria
> Daughter of Glenda
> Niece of Glenna
> Who's Aunt is Helen the Green, Matriarch of our Clan.
Well, you could equally well quote famous uncles or cousins in a patriarchal lineage. I've nothing against that, but I still think that you could quote your mother and mother's mother - Ria Glendasdottir.
> In this structure your brother, sisters and cousins have a roughly equal
> standing, and so, I propose, would an adopted child.
Certainly brothers and sisters would have a similar standing, cousins are still removed one step, unless they are fostered. Adopted children legally have the same rights as natural siblings, but there are quite often tensions and jealousies between adopted and natural children.
Andrew Larsen:
> What you're describing here is matrilineal descent, not matriarchy. A
> culture can trace its ancestry, transmission of property, and so on via the
> mother's family without being matriarchal, that is, transmitting
> family/political power to a woman. For example, Judaism is matrilineal;
> Jewishness is dependant on one's mother being Jewish, while the religious
> affiliation of one's father is irrelevant.
Of course, you are right. I was confalting the two terms as, in Esrolia, I think they both apply.
> Esrolia is a matriarchy. Whether it's matrilineal remains to be
> discovered by the list or revealed by Greg. There's no inherent reason why
> it would necessarily be more accepting of orphans. Esrolian culture could
> very plausibly penalize those whose mothers aren't from good families. The
> most obvious Gloranthan matriarchy, uz culture, scorns uz females who have
> given birth to trollkin. The concept of bastardy is unlikely to develop,
> since one normally knows who one's mother was, and Esrolian culture might
> therefore not stigmatize a woman who has a child outside of marriage. They
> might have an inverted double standard about marriage--men are expected to
> be faithful, while women are permitted to take extra lovers.
Well, we know the Esrolians are matiarchal in that they have Queens and their clan leaders are women. It's probably deeper than that in that their main religious leaders are women (the Earth priestesses) and many of the clan ring positions are filled by women. The Husband Protectors have their place, but as peripheral people.
Bastardry would only occur if a baby/infant was abandoned and not adopted into another family. Unadopted orphans would also have a stigma, because nobody wanted them.
> The Esrolians may also be matrilocal, that is to say, the husband
> marries into the wife's family, moves to her family property, and adopts the
> worship of her family gods and spirits.
I personally think that _some_ Esrolians are matrilineal and _some_ are matrilocal, in fact _most_ would probably be better. Some are not. I can see a mixture of systems where some clans have Heortling, Malkioni, Helering and Esrolian influence.
> Andrew E. Larsen
> (unlurking briefly)
And very usefully, thanks.
Mikko Rintasaari:
>> Cool example, but clearly the woman is legitimised by her relationship
>> to the land owner. Not like this in Esrolia as far as I know.
Interesting to assume that the land owner was not the woman!
In Esrolia, the man is legitimised by _his_ relationship with the land-owner.
> Huh? I don't think so. The culture really wasn't as patriarchal as you
> seem to think. It could very well be the wife whose lands they were to
> start with, and she definitely didn't give all that power to her husband
> in marriage.
Jane Williams
>--- Andrew Larsen wrote:
>> What you're describing here is matrilineal
>> descent, not matriarchy. A
>> culture can trace its ancestry, transmission of
>> property, and so on via the
>> mother's family without being matriarchal, that is,
>> transmitting
>> family/political power to a woman. For example,
>> ... There is some evidence (though
>> not real solid evidence) that the Picts, who were,
>> so far as we know,
>> patriarchal, were at the same time matrilineal.
>
> What I had heard of them was that inheritance went
> from male to male: but to your sister's son, not your
> own. This was in the context of an "interesting"
> theory about the relationship between Arthur and
> Mordred (Arthur's sister's son, of course), so was
> probably twisted towards what the author wanted to
> prove at the time, but it's a model worth thinking
> about even if it never in fact existed.
Yes, so we could have different systems of inheritance depending on which clans are involved and which customs are invoked.
Mother-Daughter inheritance is clearly possible, as is Mother-Son. Uncle-Nephew is likely when you need to pass to a male heir - if descent is matrilineal than a male's closest male relative is his sister's son. Father-Son is possible if a man's heirs are identified as his wife's sons, this causes interesting possibilities when a woman has had two husbands.
Inherited women's titles are probably passed Mother-Daughter, inherited men's titles are probably passed uncle-nephew or father-son, depending on their origin.
What happens when you have a mixture of cultures? Yelm cultists pass membership of the cult to their sons, so I assume that Yelm is not worshipped in Esrolia. Similarly, Waha Khans claim descent from Waha, so they are not worshipped in Esrolia.
Donald R. Oddy:
>> The Esrolians may also be matrilocal, that is to say, the husband
>>marries into the wife's family, moves to her family property, and adopts the
>>worship of her family gods and spirits.
>
> It's clear from TR that some Sartarite clans tend to be matrilocal.
> Indeed one of the recognised types of marriage is precisely this.
> Given that it is called an "Esrolian Marriage" I expect it is the
> commonest type in Esrolia. I don't think that all Esrolian marriages
> are this type.
No, I don't think so, either. They would have a mix of cultures and customs - in the same way the Heortlings do.
There is no overriding Esrolian culture.
> That argument breaks down as soon as you identify a social group
> where the majority of women hand over nurturing to someone else
> though choice. One such social group is the English upper classes
> who routinely employ nannies to handle child care.
Children were often looked after by their relatives rather than their mothers, not just in the English upper classes. Many women used wetnurses to feed their babies, either by choice or necessity. Not everyone had nannies, but a lot of people had nurses in medieval times.
> The Heortlings of Sartar also share responsibility for children
> among the women of the stead and while not a strict patriarchy
> they certainly aren't a matriarchy.
> I'm all for using a different models for families in different
> parts of Glorantha and different male and female roles. The
> biggest constraint on that isn't nurture however, it's the
> physical activities of pregnancy and breast feeding. These are
> incompatable with much of the heavy work of farming. So however
> Esrolia is structured the men will be doing most of the outdoor
> work.
Possibly, but after the child is born, wetnurses can be used. Women used to work the fields while pregnant in the real world, so why not in Esrolia? After a while, the children can help in the fields as well. So, I don't really think that men working the fields and women staying at home is particularly relevant.
> I've never heard of a society which regards the aunt/niece relationship
> which means she takes decisions but it doesn't superceed the mother/
> daughter relationship.
That's right. You may feel almost as close to your aunts, especially if they are of similar ages to your mother and have similar aged children, but you will generally feel closer to your mother. Of course, in hypothetical societies where there is no mother-child bond and everyone is raised equally by their aunts then this might not apply, but these are quite contrived. (Yes, I wrote the Gord'Un as being like this, but that is completely contrived)
See Ya
Simon Received on Thu 06 Jul 2006 - 12:48:07 EEST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed 18 Jul 2007 - 23:38:05 EEST