From: John P Hughes (john.hughes@anu.edu.au)
Date: Wed 04 May 1994 - 22:23:02 EEST
/\ /\
Is this a rune, mating ducks or what?
First of all, we have to chuck out our C20 western notions of love,
romance and marriage. The western myth of marriage is different
to the western reality (serial monogamy and single parent families),
and both are fairly unique cross-culturally. Romance and 'twue
love' is a recent western invention, and personal attraction has little
or nothing to do with marriage in most cultures. (The Chinese say:
'why wait until the water is boiling to put it on the stove?') We
must also be careful not to confuse sex and marriage.
Also, there is no generally accepted anthropological definition of marriage - too many variations, too many different strategies; and many anthropologists believe it futile to attempt such. Even within a single culture, a definition should encompass the complex interplay of sexual, economic, legal, political and symbolic elements.
Western marriages are also unusual in that they are the focus of primary relationships, and so bear MORE PRESSURE and GREATER INTENSITY than most. In societies with extended families, large numbers of children and separate male and female domains, things are generally a little more relaxed.
I am sceptical of any too literal reading of sociobiological data on mating for information on human marriage. Yes, there is a correlation between environment, land use and mating/marriage patterns, but these elements are further transformed by the symbolic and ritual capacities of the human mind. Different marriage types often exist in the same environmental area.
In the broadest sense, marriage is about allocating 'bundles' of rights and relationships into different 'packages'. Elements present in most marriages include an agreement between groups (perhaps for future marriages) and a transfer or flow of rights - work services, sexual access, children, property, hunting or planting rights etc. It's always two-way, so when you ask, "What is being transferred here?" you must also ask, "What balances it?" Also, be careful to remember the female side of the equation: marriage grants a woman rights, sexual and otherwise, over her husband.
In most marriages, sexual rights are usually NOT exclusive. In Murdoch's cross-cultural survey, 63% of cultures surveyed sanctioned extra-marital relations of some kind.
If a partner dies prematurely, many cultures will replace him or her with a close relative. (Remember, most forms of marriage are a relationship between groups, not individuals). The most common forms of replacement are called levirate (where the brother of a deceased husband will marry the wife), and sororate (where the sister of a deceased wife will marry the husband).
Also divorce rates vary widely from culture to culture.
Marriage is a process as much as an event. The obligations between the two groups concerned may continue after the death of both partners. There will be opening exchanges, engagement and marriage exchanges, first child exchanges etc. Often a marriage becomes legally binding only after the conception or birth of the first child.
POLYGYNY (ONE WIFE, MANY HUSBANDS) Polygyny on earth is associated with areas where the most important resources are human resources (i.e. human labour).
Despite Martin's assertion, the main problems associated with polygyny have to do with access to resources, relative power, and conflicts concerning children rather than sexual jealousy.
And despite the more purient fantasies of some males, you can forget the sheik/harem model. The strongest bonds are frequently between the co-wives, rather than husband and wife. In fact, many cultures practice sororal polygyny, where sisters all marry the same husband.
Now if the gender split is roughly 50/50, you have to ask where all these extra wives come from. Well, polygyny is usually associated with a large age difference between partners: older men have several wives; younger men have none. Effectively, there is a male underclass. Polygyny also correlates to a high incidence of (young) males dying in war or raiding - of course, this might be cause or effect! Surprisingly, it also correlates to a high incidence of witchcraft accusations (which is different to a high incidence of witchcraft). Jealousy DOES seem to be the cause here, but it's frustrated young men taking it out on older men and their (unobtainable) wives.
You might also obtain extra wives through abduction and rape, but I don't think anyone would want to build pc Gloranthan societies based on this. (see below).
POLYANDRY (ONE WIFE, SEVERAL HUSBANDS) Despite some feminist rhetoric, polyandry on terra is NOT associated with matralineal descent (tracing descent through women) nor a high status for women. (This is the reason I didn't posit polyandry among the matralineal Doraddi, a culture where women do possess high status and much power. Still Doraddi women enjoy sexual freedom, cause sex ain't marriage).
The reason for this becomes apparent when one ask where the
'extra' men come from. It turns out to be not a surplus of men but
an artificial shortage of women. Sadly, polyandry correlates with
female infanticide (the murder of female children). Both polyandry
and infanticide seem to exist mainly as a form of population control
in marginal environments.
It is relatively uncommon on terra: one of the anthropological problems has been to identify whether instances of 'polyandry' are really situations where the husband 'loans' the sexual services of his wife to other men, i.e. where the woman does not control her sexuality. The most common form is adelphic polyandry, where a group of brothers marry a single woman. As Pam noted, the custom is concentrated in Nepal and parts of India.
MARRIAGE IN GLORANTHA OK. Marriage takes different forms on earth mainly for economic/resource reasons, not sexual experimentation. Marriage is about two groups meeting, and only secondarily about the union of individuals. The mother-child bond is an almost universal constant, but other than that almost anything is possible.
We have terran examples of marriages where husband and wife
never meet, of 'ghost marriages' where a woman's children are
recognised as belonging to a long dead husband, of heterosexual
woman-to-woman marriages where the children conceived by the
'wife' are socially credited as being children of the (socially
powerful) female 'father', celibate marriage, homosexual marriage,
child marriage.
All of these are possible in Glorantha, as well as certain manifestations unknown on earth. How about marriage to a spirit or dead ancestor, with voluntary or involuntary possession for the fathering of children?
Just how DOES magic affect sex, fertility and marriage in a given Gloranthan culture ? TOTRM #6 and #11 will set you thinking, whether or not you agree with the examples and conclusions. Is androgeny taboo, even if homosexuality is not? Are transvestites automatically tricksters? Surely contraceptive magic or herbs are readily available, one of the reasons for the relative freedom of women in most Gloranthan societies. What exactly CAN Uleria do? What is the effect of a weekly lunar cycle on fertility, or do Gloranthan women become fertile only at certain times of the year? Sea Season? Can they consciously decide when they wish to be fertile (wouldn't that be nice for all concerned?) Could a woman say, promise her services to a warrior god for a certain number of years, and then automatically conceive through the intervention of a fertility goddess of the same pantheon? Can parted couples meet in spirit form? Can a woman's sister bear her children for her if she decides on the warrior path? What about couvade among humans? If spirit essence is as important as genes, what effect does this have on parenthood?
In previously discussing these issues with Greg, a few points have come up. Glorantha is generally not the place for the worst aspects of patriarchy to manifest (recall Sandy's comment on Greg vetoing strongly patriarchal societies in Pamaltela). In most Gloranthan societies, women and men are regarded as different though equal. There are powerful female role models of all types among the divinities. Powerful magics reinforce women's special powers and responsibilities. (The daughters of Genert cover just about everything...) In other discussions, Greg has mentioned that Gloranthan's enjoy and respect sex too much to engage in the mutilations practised by various peoples on earth.
And of course Glorantha has matriarchies! Earth, on currently available evidence, has not, and never has, despite lots of wishful thinking and contemporary myth-making. (Please note carefully what I'm saying: we have examples of matraliny (lots!) we have archaeological examples of highly visible goddess/female principle worship (lots!), we have examples of cultures where the relationships between men and women are respectful and fairly equal (unfortunately, not so lots). None of these are the same as a matriarchy. Most supporting evidence for matriarchies comes from historical myths and optimistic interpretation of archaeological evidence, and are far from conclusive. This is my own academic caution here, I'd like to think we have had matriarchies, and so might have variations on them again, but I don't see any evidence. With Glorantha, we have an opportunity to build and explore a matriarchy and see how it works! (It will be far different than the reverse image of a patriarchy). This is an exciting opportunity.
Not that Glorantha is some kind of gender paradise, far from it. For example, GRAY portrays a strong undercurrent in Solar mythology against women - they believe that men and women are not the same and are not equal. (In the First People myth, it is stated that women have less FLAME than men - roll POW on 2d6?!?!?). GRAY portrays stodgy misogynistic Light Priests, fearful of pollution and women and bodies and change, longing for a Solar womb that is eternally denied them. It suggests that the entire Yelmic religion is neurotic, longing for Oneness, longing for a return to a masculine womb that can never be. It has no imagination for change or for different approaches. It is afraid to grow, afraid to change, and incidentally, afraid of the feminine principle.
Enough on the Solars. Wouldn't it be nice to take the wider portrayal of mutual power and respect seriously, as well as the magical possibilities, and explore some of the implications, stead of bitchin' about relative strength or sulking about Babeesta Gor's cute gal-only spells? The topic of fertility and marriage has barely been touched, but it's pretty fundamental to everything Gloranthan. Over to you, folks.
John.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:34:07 EEST