A Study on Hierarchical/Normative Order, Marriage and Family Patterns in Bin Yousuf Tribe of Southea

Advances in Applied Sociology

2012. Vol.2, No.1, 19-29

Published Online March 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/aasoci) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/aasoci.2012.21003

A Study on Hierarchical/Normative Order, Marriage and Family

Patterns in Bin Yousuf Tribe of Southeastern Turkey

Tülin G. İçli1, Şevket Ökten2, Aslıhan Öğün Boyacıoğlu1

1Department of Sociology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

2Department of Sociology, Harran University, Şanlıurfa, Turkey

Email: ticli@hacettepe.edu.tr, sevketokten@harran.edu.tr

Received January 30th, 2012; revised February 27th, 2012; accepted March 12th, 2012

Ashirat (tribe), an Arabic-origin word, defines the first and the most important community among the

small groups, constituting a tribe and it refers to a big family. The aim of this study is to describe hierar-

chical order and social status, normative/legal order and marriage and family patterns in Bin Yousuf ashi-

rat settled in Harran valley of Sanliurfa province, Southeastern Turkey. Naimi and Bradat are the two

clans loyal to Bin Yousuf ashirat. In this study, by using techniques of in-depth interview, observation

and focus group interviews, a qualitative research was carried out upon the members of the Bin Yousuf

Tribe. Results of the study revealed that the basic feature of this social structure is the loyalty to the in-

troverted institutions such as the tribe and aghaism, which are interlaced with each other through the very

long history. Ashirat as an institution in the area where there is no strong governmental organization or

security over any matter, maintains its function in overcoming difficulties and solving the problems such

as the need of getting and using bank loans, establishing security and solidarity. This situation considera-

bly maintains the loyalty of the members to the ashirat.

Keywords: Ashirat; Tribe; Ashirats in Turkey; Social Structures of Ashirats

Introduction

A societal organization primarily depends on the thoughts,

beliefs and emotions of its members. In this sense, in regional

communities where tribal organization is effective, the kinship

system which embraces economic, social, political and moral

dimensions, largely defines the place of the individual in com-

munity and specifies the proper behavioral codes as well. In

other words, economic, social and political aspects of daily life

is dominated by the ideology of the tribe.

Tribal identity is just one of the identities in the region that

people may acquire and although loosing its effect there are

always people being e member of a tribe. According to Heck-

mann the tribal ideology is primarily constituted through a form

of patriarchal type of solidarity, which is based upon patrilineal

ancestry, common culture and history. At the central core of this

interdependence and solidarity we see close and strong bonds

between patrilineal kins and these bonds weaken in the pe-

riphers of tribal kinship (Heckmann, 2002: p. 146).

Ashirat (tribe), an Arabic-origin word, defines the first and

the most important community among the small groups, con-

stituting a tribe and it refers to a big family. On the other hand,

the words of kabila (clan) and ashirat are used in this region

differently from their standart use in the Turkish language.

While the word kabila is used for family in the Arabic language,

being not used in the meaning of big family, the same word in

Turkish refers to “oymak” (tribal subdivision) or “boy” who lives

a nomadic or semi-nomadic life (Yinanç, 1995: pp. 709-710).

There is no other term than “tribe” to describe such a com-

plex organization type in English. Given the geographical cha-

racteristics of the region, this conceptual contradiction or re-

duction seems to be accounted for. Orientialists firstly studied

the northern Africa where Arabs and Bedouin groups were

living. The type of organization that is described as Ashirat in

Turkish is called “Kabila” (qabilah), whereas sub-units in this

organization type is called “Ashirat” (ashirah) in Arabic. There-

fore, the identification of tribe with qabilah became dominant

in previous studies on the topic and then, all similar organiza-

tions have been covered and analysed under the concept of tribe

(Aydın, 2004: p. 12).

The term tribe in Social Sciences Dictionary is defined as “a

society basing its membership on kinship” (Reading, 1978: p.

223). Therefore, ashirat nearly in all related research has been

regarded as a kinship group based on blood relation.

This orientalistic view can be seen both in Durkheim’s model

of solidarity, Maine’s theory of social contracts, and in Weber’s

typology of traditional authority. According to this view, these

types of communities form the basis of rural organization in

closed societies where the primary type of social relationships

based on kinship is prevalent. However, when we look closer, it

can be seen that the central importance given to blood ties in

qabilah dissapears in tribal organizations. Relationships based

on blood ties in the sub units of the tribe are usually constituted

through marriage and they are temporary. In fact it is quiet possi-

ble that social units within the tribal community may join other

groups as well as new units from different social groups may

join the tribal community.

Theoretical basis of the definition of ashirat as a group de-

pending on blood relation is mostly the analyses of Henry Lewis

Morgan and of Engels. When a deeper approach is adopted, it is

seen that the principle of blood relation becomes vague and

insignifcant in the ashirat type of organization. In fact, ashirat

is a type of organization that units around “common interest

unity” and is a political entity in nature. “Common origins” and

“common lineage” that are regarded as a dominant and basic

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

quality in regard to ashirat organization are significantly fictive

(Aydın, 2004: p. 12).

Today, the concept of ashirat is perceived in different ways

with different perspectives. Very common of this perception,

which is the most erroneous is describing tribes romantically as

nomadic shepherds. This perception is completely incorrect. In

the past, although the number of real nomads was much more

than today, they were not even the half of the population living

in the region. For this reason, regarding the ashirat and asiratchilik

(tribalism), it is necessary to avoid the unrealistic view of ‘no-

madic tribes’. Since “the factor which distinguishes tribes from

the other groups is not being nomads or shepherds, but exis-

tence of powerful relations between its members” Another er-

roneous evaluation is to undoubtedly assume the people who

live in the region as members of a tribe. Here there have always

been people living out of tribes. These people are called Kir-

manj, qualifying them as belonging to no tribe (Bruinessen,

1992: p. 205).

The other miscoption about this topic stems from the reduce-

tionist perspective that is dominant in the Western anthropolgy.

In accordance with this perspective, ashirat organizations rep-

resent a common type of organizations for all socities of the

Central Asia, Asia Minor, Africa, South America and Oceania

that are based on common lineage and underdeveloped in con-

tast to feudal organizations of modern states. One of the dis-

agreements about the concept of ashirat is the use of kabila in

the same meaning with ashirat. The uncertainty around the the

term of qabilah which cannot be classified among the standart

concepts of anthropology, resulted in its common use as im-

plying nomads. On the other hand the use of the term kabila

meaning as lineage groups implied in the concept of “segmen-

tary lineage”, which is borrowed from anthropology is largely

accepted among many historians and writers (Aydın, 2004: p.

27). In this sense, Crone, a writer studying the early Islamic

period defends gabilah as being “exclusively and absolutely a

rural concept” (Crone, 1986: p. 55).

It is significant that studying human groups based on the

findings of ethnogrphic studies or studying history of these

groups require to take into consideration the cultural differences

and to avoid ethnocentrisim and anacchronism. In other words,

such studies should consider cultural differences at the dimen-

sions of place and time among societies. This is particularly

evident in the studies on tribes and ashirats. As stated earlier,

using the findings of the studies regarding African and Ameri-

can societies are not so much functional for the studies of Turkish

ashirat and tribe facts. Because the economical and political

systems as well as geographical position of socities are very

significant.

In this region, the term kabila is used for sub-branch of an

ashirat. During our study, we found that the biggest community

in this kind of social organizational hierarchy is called ashirat,

and other families constructing the tribe are called “kabila”.

Gokalp also specifies the same structure. He stated that the tribe

consists of a few clans and the clans include families. Accord-

ing to Gokalp’s description, “the tribe is a community in which

there are members having common ancestors or kinship rela-

tions and it is governed by their own leaders (rais)” (Gökalp,

1992: p. 159).

Bruinessen who made research upon the tribes living in the

Eastern and South Eastern regions of Turkey, defines the tribe

as “a socio-political and in general, territorial (and as a result of

this, economical) unit based on actual or close family rela-

tions”( Bruinessen, 1992: p. 77).

Clan communities, ashirat, in Arabic mean “big families”

coming from the same source (from one grandfather, his son

and grandsons) and it is regarded as the first and the smallest

unit. On the other hand, the concept of tribe does not mean a

big family in Turkish; it is used in the meaning of oymak or boy

living nomadic or semi-nomadic life. According to Yalkin, the

word “oymak” is used in Turkish for ashirat in Arabic, and

“oba” is used for kabila (Yalkın, 1997: p. 18).

All the terms translated into English as “tribe” (kabile) are

vague (for instance, kabile, il, aşiret, taifa) and therefore, as-

signing definite meanings to these terms will lead to miscon-

ceptions. It is argued that the term “tribe” as an analytical con-

cept should be defined as a type of social organization that is a

thinking style and an action model that is against the public

institutions (Tapper, 2004: p. 31).

Historical Process

With its own historical conditions and different social and

cultural characteristics, the Southeastern Region of Turkey de-

picts a specific social structure distinguishing it from the other

regions of the country. The economy in the region is mainly

based on stockbreeding. As a result of this, the nomadic and

semi-nomadic life style has been dominant in this region until

recently. Even today, the tribal order, which is regarded as a

typical organization that is characterized by a nomadic life, is

prevalent in almost every kind of social institution or relation.

The main reason for this is that, in the tribal structure, the

strong relationships among the members of the tribe, not the

nomadic life, is the distinguishing factor. The origin of the

tribal order goes very far back in the history. The distinctive

structural feature of the region is based upon the beylik/aghalik

order (local, big landownership order). And the tribe relations

are interlaced with this order. Whether sedentary or semi-sed-

entary, the tribal organization in this region is balanced with the

order of local big landowners. The most significant factors that

affect the development and continuation of the tribal organiza-

tion in the region are as follows: the difficulties in the admini-

stration of the area is directly related to its geographical loca-

tion (being at the border line) and in being a buffer zone be-

tween two or more countries.

Ziya Gokalp, the Turkish sociologist who conducted the first

systematic study on clans and tribes in Turkey, indicates that

both geographical and political factors are effective in the de-

velopment and maintenance of the tribal organizations in the

region. Gokalp (1992: p. 45) states that people living in desserts

and mountains are faced with threats of consecutive attacks and

accordingly, they have to be organized and armed perpetually

against potential enemies. This organization is generally consti-

tuted under the leadership of one person or by coming together

with other members of the same family or different families.

According to Bruinessen (1992: p. 208), the administration

of the Southeast Region of Anatolia has generally been pro-

vided by leaders (rais) of the tribes; a situation, which still is

the case today. Tribal relationships have been very influential

upon the social structure of the region. Apart from this, coun-

tries that are geographically close to each other have provided

power to the personalities who are leading the political activi-

ties in the area.

This situation continued from the time of the Ottomans until

the foundation of the Turkish Republic and it can still be ob-

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

served today. In 1517 during the invasion of Ottoman Empire,

the Southeast Anatolian Region and some parts of the East

Anatolia were considered as a buffer zone against the Shiite

State in Iran and the administration of this area was organized

in this sense. “At the time of Yavuz Sultan Selim, some places

were given to the leaders of tribes as yurtluk-ocaklik and Sanjak

due to their loyalty to the Empire, their success won against

Shah Ismail and their contribution to the invasion of the area by

the Ottomans in 1517” (Sencer,1997: p. 595).

Although the actual conditions that caused the emergence of

the tribes no longer exist, they are still influential at political,

economic and social levels. Today, due to the progress in in-

dustrialization, urbanization, communication facilities and trans-

portation, the structure of the tribes has changed. Most of the

factories and commercial enterprises in this area belong to lan-

downers and noblemen of the tribes. Landlords who employed

the villagers as shareholders or tenants of their lands have turned

to be the ‘bosses’ of factories and workplaces in urban areas.

The findings of recent studies carried out on this Region in-

dicate that the rate of people who specify themselves as being

members of a tribe and report that this membership is very

important for them is very high (Baran vd., 1998). According to

the findings of a research conducted by Sencer (1993: p. 38) in-

cluding the provinces of South Eastern Anatolia Project (GAP),

nearly half of the families (47.3%) stated that they belong to a

tribe. This ratio increases up to 57.2% in rural settlements and

decreases to 33.3% in urban areas. When the province of San-

liurfa is considered alone, the ratio of family members belong-

ing to a tribe is 80.9% in urban settlements and increases to

92.6% in rural settlements. Since 1995, when effective irriga-

tion started, a great increase in the agricultural production is

recorded in the GAP region.

One of the significant problems experienced in the region is

unequal distribution of the ownership of agricultural fields and

of the running of these fields. Majority of the agricultural busi-

ness have non-productive fields that are not enough to have

high levels of profits. Therefore, such economical activities pro-

vide the people with only income levels for their living. Major-

ity of the agricultural fields are controlled by minority. The rate

of the people without any land ownership is higher than that of

those who are owners of fields (For details, please see Sencer

1993, Ökten 2006, GAP Bölgesinin Sosyo-Kültürel ve Yapısal

Özelliklerinin Aile Yapısına Etkileri, Aile ve toplum dergisi yıl:

8. cilt: 3. sayı 9, T. C. Başbakanlık Aile ve Sosyal Araştırmalar

Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara: 2006). In order to improve this une-

qual distribution, a series of arrangements has been realized.

However, it may be argued that such arrangements have not

solved the problems, but increased the inequalities (Aksoy,

1992: p. 53).

The land ownership order in the area has been dominant for a

very long time and people earn their living from agriculture and

livestock rising. In fact, most of these lands belong to the lead-

ers of tribes. Deputies of the area and other important political

figures coming from this region are either leaders or noblemen

of a certain tribe. Consequently, they play important roles and

occupy critical positions in the government and in the decision-

making mechanisms concerning the Region.

The leaders of tribes have always received great compliments,

since for politicians to obtain the votes of majority of people in

the area is much easier by just negotiating with the leaders of

the tribes who hold an important influence on members. There-

fore, for the leader, keeping members together using “the tribal

tie” is important for the sake of being more powerful in the

above-mentioned aspects. In this regard, the leaders use their

economic and political powers to keep members tied to the

group. Members of the tribe work at their leader’s lands as

tenants or shareholders, they are provided with job facilities,

obtain financial aid and every kind of support they need. Con-

sequently, the members who are well aware of these advantages

and opportunities regard this “tie” as very important.

On the other hand, apart from economic and political factors,

there are social and cultural factors which support tribal ties;

within the socio-cultural context, loyalty to tribe is regarded as

a norm, carrying primary importance.

It is certain that ashirat organzations in the region differ in

terms of both forms and activities. Based on geographical con-

ditions, coexistence of social groups and the levels of moderni-

zation, the existence and activities of ashirats vary.

On the other hand, the tribal tie has been very important in

every aspect of people’s lives in this region for centuries. Loy-

alty to the tribe not only means nobility in the area, but also is a

symbol of “priority” over people or groups who do not have

such a tie. Tribal structures include religious, political and so-

cial values, which depict their members’ “ideal” behavioural

patterns. People who obey the rules of their tribes are regarded

as self-governing and noble heroes in the region and are rewarded

with the title of asir, which, according to Gökalp (1992: p. 18),

means “knight”.

Asirs who behave in consistency with the rules of the tribe

should carry certain characteristics. These reflect his and his

tribe’s honour and prestige: such as bravery, generosity, honour,

chastity and good fortune.

Granting good fortune (baht, aman) means to protect a per-

son who is in difficulty and to take him under protection. An

asir who gives baht to a man has to protect this man even he is

the murderer of his father. If he does not so, he loses his honor

and pride1. Namus (honor) is another concept, which is strongly

emphasized among the tribal values; According to tribal tradi-

tions, “Kara Çadir namussuzlugu asla affetmez” (The Black

Pavilion—in which the leader of the tribe lives—does never

forgive dishonesty).

Aim of the Study

As it was in the past, the tribal formation still preserves its

function in providing most of the needs of the local people in

the region. Many “facilities” from finance to protection, from

providing justice to receiving help from each other have been

provided by or through this formation. In this sense, industri-

alization, urbanization, or social changes alone cannot wipe

away these social formations. On the contrary, they may trans-

form and empower them. Unless modern organisations, which

will perform the functions of tribes, are set up, to evaluate the

transformation of tribal constitutions as downfalls will not be

logical or realistic.

The aim of this study is to describe hierarchical order and

social status, normative/legal order and marriage and family

patterns in Bin Yousuf tribe settled in Harran valley of Sanli-

urfa province, Southeastern Turkey. Naimi and Bradat are the

two clans loyal to Bin Yousuf tribe.

1There are many proverbs among tribes on this matter such as “Bahti tahta

degismem” (I do not give up baht even if I am enthroned), “Baht yigidin

kalesid ir” (Baht is the castle of a braveman), “bahtsiz insan köprü de olsa

üzerinden geçme” (even if a person who does not have baht is a bridge, do

not cross over it).

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

Methodology

In this study, by using techniques of in-depth interview, ob-

servation and focus group interviews, a qualitative research was

carried out upon the members of the Bin Yousuf Tribe who

dwell in the villages and pastures that are within the adminis-

trative regions of Akçakale and Harran districts of Sanliurfa

province for four months from June 2011 to September 2011.

Their population in 1970 was 5378 and it is estimated to be

10,000 today.

The tribe of Bin Yousuf is a sedentary tribe who lives around

the Harran valley. Naimi and Bradat are the two clans who are

under this tribe (Table 1). The reason why we have concen-

trated more upon the Bin Yousuf tribe during our interviews

and observations is that because it is believed that the members

of Bin Yousuf tribe are descendents of the Prophet and consid-

ered as having the most trustworthy and highly honoured fami-

lies in the region.

In the region, the titles of sayyid or sheikh has been used for

those persons whose ancestry is regarded as distinguished. This

“honor” that belongs to the families having this “royal” ances-

try differentiates the families and is owned by the same families

and the members of these families. Therefore, divinity includes

not only sheikh and his immediate family but also his extended

family members as a result of social thinking in which the ide-

ology of ashirat/kinship and its basis, namely blood relations,

are very decisive (Ökten, 2010: p. 183).

At the beginning of the research, we determined the exact

places where the Bin Yousuf tribe is densely populated. We

used the techniques of in-depth interview and observation in the

villages of Karali and Karatepe where a great number of Bin

Yousuf members dwell. We asked appointments from the lead-

ers who would be interviewed as key informants. At first, they

refused our requests, so we acquired the expert assistant of

locally well-known people who have a great influence over the

tribe.

Table 1.

Tribes and sub-clans that are settled in the Harran valley: tribes and

clans who speak Arabic (Doğanay, 1997: p. 21).

CUMAYLE SIYALE Bin. MUHAMMAD BİNİECİR B. YOUSUF

Isahasan Hubait Gajar Nubakne Naim

Zeyneddin Taan Fiteet Saramda Bredet

Nafle Maacile Ubade Duveyced

Abucindi Nuaceh Davud Biniset

Hileybi Binizeyt Bişecma Meşhur

Haşimi Cihem Çuağan Biniamir

Ciedana Abuisi Tammah

Benenzin Dannadle

Halava

Seccu

Marabde

Muğeylet

Çive

Suadi

Kaf-Kaf

Sevzat

Bihamait

During the interviews, a considerable amount of data con-

cerning the family life and structure, the normative order, the

hierarchy and the status system within the tribe, was gathered.

Interviews were held as either open personal interview or in

some cases as group discussions with both male and female

members of the tribe. These interviews were realized in order to

collect data about the critical subjects like blood feud, property

rights, relations between the agha (the local big land-owner)

and the tribe members, responsibilities and duties for the agha.

In addition to these interviews, we held face-to-face focus

group discussions with a group of six young members of the

tribe on issues concerning the process of social change, which

has occurred in the tribe. Furthermore, we held group discus-

sions with twenty old members of the tribe in order to get in-

formation about issues like social relations, history and tradi-

tions of the tribe.

Results

Hierarchical Order and the Concept of Status

Status is considered as a very important concept in tribes and

the “status” of a person depends on his/her family, wealth and

acquired holly/spiritual powers.

The influence of status is reflected in the daily lives of the

local people in various ways. For example, in tribal gatherings

and house visits, the words to be spoken and the place where

the leader will sit are pre-planned carefully. Another important

subject to be emphasized here is the sensitivity of indicating the

equality of status: people having the same status, state this

clearly when they come together. Another symbol of status is

having “primacy”. Taking the first order in the row and a prior-

ity is a symbol of high status according to the culture of this

region.

Since there is a leader of every level in the hierarchical order,

each tribe and clan have their own leaders. Dynasty, the family

from which the leader comes, is the core of the tribe. All of the

members have a wide range of responsibilities against their

leader who is dominant in both ruling the tribe and taking deci-

sions regarding the tribe. In the patriarchal kinship structure of

the tribe, as soon as a girl gets married with a man from another

tribe, she is considered to be a member of her husband’s tribe.

In the specific terminology of the area, there is an important

difference in naming the leaders of different levels in tribes,

clans and families: all of them are called agha in Kurdish and

sheikh in Arabic, but the leaders of tribes, clans, groups (taife)

and families (soy) have different names. Including close rela-

tives, households at the basic level of the tribal hierarchy are

called “soy”. Households coming from the same leader (who is

named as mezin (great) or maqul (wiseman), father, grandfather

or ancestors distinguish themselves from the others. People

speaking Arabic or living close to the Arabs use sheikh/rais

(Arabic word for leader) for the tribe or clan leader.

Mir and bey (read as bay, meaning sir) are originally feudal

titles and used only for great leaders. These titles, which are

attached to names such as Bedirhan Bey, Sidar Bey are no

longer used today. They lost their validity in terms of their feu-

dal roles.

Bey/Beg (sir) was used for old landowners at managerial po-

sitions. Agha (master) is the tribe leader living together with the

members of the tribe in mountains or valleys (villages). Bey

may live in the city and he is not necessarily the leader of a

tribe. But the important thing here is that the term agha has a

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

rather different meaning from the one, which is normally used

in daily, spoken Turkish. According to the standard Turkish,

the agha is the richest person in the village and possesses lands,

but not necessarily political power. However, the agha in this

region may not possess a significant amount of wealth, but he is

the absolute governor.

The most determinative factor in the hierarchical organiza-

tion of the tribe is the dynasty family, which constitutes the

foundation of the tribal organization. Selected members of the

dynasty form the ruling and decision-making mechanism of the

tribe. A leader coming from the dynasty is situated at the top of

this hierarchical order. Follow respectively after the leader, the

siblings, the children of the leader’s and the leaders of the clans

of the tribe, respectively.

Although the high number of population and possessing

economic wealth has great significance in the eye of local peo-

ple, being a member of the dynasty is a privilege in this area.

The dynasty acquires a special inborn status. People coming

from the dynasty, also naturally come into the possession of the

leadership (reis or agha). The basic distinguishing factor of the

dynasty is the “nobility”.

The feelings of “honor” and “dignity” are dominant in ashi-

rats. Therefore, they always need to make a connection between

themselves and a noble lineage. Noble lineages such as Khalidi,

Abbasi and Umayyad are frequently preferred noble ancestry

for sayyids (Kılıç, 2003: p. 131). Thus, tribe leaders in the re-

gion attempted to use lineage register, linking them to leading

Islamic, mostly Arabic, figures in order to legitimize their posi-

tions in the society. However, these connections are false, but it

seems that such attempts reinforce their power (Bruinessen, 2003:

p. 308).

As the leader often consults it, the council constituted by the

elderly and noblemen of the tribe has an important function in

the tribal system. The responsibility of the council is to solve

disagreements and provide judicious decisions in accordance

with tribal customs. Among the tasks of the council are solving

the problems related to ending vendettas, struggles among the

members of the tribe or with other tribes, returning stolen goods

to their owners and acting as a mediator in disagreements con-

cerning kidnapping young girls for marriage, grazing livestock

and watering. The council of the older people expresses the will

of the community while common people of the tribe affect the

aims and decisions of tribal leaders.

Although for giving important decisions, the leader consults

the older and experienced members of the tribe such as the

Talba, Arfa, he still holds the the right to give the final decision.

Upon the leader’s call, arfas and talbas meet and discuss a

matter but the leader gives the last decision.

There are two important consultant groups in the tribe con-

cerning the implementation of the customs and solving indi-

vidual and social problems. One of these groups is called Talba

carrying the function of solving individual or social conflicts, as

a judiciary and conciliating institution for the inter-tribal and

intra-tribal problems even today. The later one is called arfa, a

group of people function as a family consultancy and as an aid

agent within the community that provide solidarity.

The people in these groups are selected from the older people

who know the history of the tribe very well and receive respect

from their own members and from other tribes. They are not

selected by vote or appointed. With their manners, experience

and knowledge, the older individuals who in time gain trust and

respect from the other members automatically undertake this

responsibility.

People who later join into the tribe are at the lowest level of

this hierarchy, simply because they are out of the family soli-

darity.

Normative/Legal Order

It is a well-known fact that each society has developed cer-

tain rules and norms of behaviour in accordance with their own

customs and traditions in order to regulate rights and obliga-

tions among individuals. Each society’s perception of law and

regulations are directly connected with their socio-economical

and cultural structures.

Cognitive and symbolic anthropologists such as Goodenough,

Schneider and Geertz define culture as symbolically coded

information rather than collective behavior. According to them,

the notion which distinguishes certain information and beliefs

as “cultural” is the collective use of it by community members.

As collectively shared information and common belief systems

propose meaning pertaining to social world, it is quiet possible

to evaluate them as meaning systems. For Geertz, culture is “an

historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in sym-

bols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic

forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and

develop their knowledge about and their attitudes toward life”

(Geertz, 1973: p. 89) The agents responsible for a child’s so-

cialization such as parents, relatives and teachers, play an im-

portant role in transmitting ideas, emotions, reactions and be-

havioral patterns. In other words, the meaning system, which

includes culturally constructed beliefs and values of the com-

munity are transmitted to the child. (Altuntek, 2008: p. 40).

Living a communal life, tribes have also developed certain

rules regulating the relations within the tribe. These norms,

being altered from the previous generation to the next, have

formed the customs and traditions.

One of the most important mechanisms of a tribe is the un-

written social rules or conventions, which are called tore-örf

(mores). Each tribe has its own particular fundamental values

(mores). Obeying these rules in any condition is obligatory for

the tribal members and heavy punishments are applied in cases

of violation. Within the tribe, the leader’s authority is rein-

forced by intensively emphasizing the peace, the privilege of

and respect to the ancestors in the tribe.

The most common conflicts break out in the region is the

disputes over lands, vendettas, molestation and attacks against

one’s property and kidnapping girls with the intention of get-

ting married. According to the customs and traditions of the

tribe, there are certain sanctions for these crimes. According to

these sanctions, to kill or exert any other criminal act against

one member of the tribe is considered as the whole tribe mem-

bers are assaulted, because all of the members of the tribe are

believed to descend from the same ancestor and any damage or

harm to one of them is taken as it is done to the common an-

cestor and since all members are accepted as relatives, tribe

members react such cases in concord a situation which causes a

dispute that breaks out between two men to spread into two

tribes as vendetta.

The religion has been organized around common blood rela-

tion. Therefore, each person is “blood” of the others. Here the

term “blood” sociologically refers to coming from the same

ancestry and to kinship. It also refers to the fact that each per-

son is one of the basic elements in maintaining the life of the

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

group as “blood” in bological terms is one of the basic elements

in one’s life. Furthermore, blood represent the groups’ honor.

Thus, attacking anyone belonging to the group is perceived as

an attack to the whole group. In other words, since attack

against any member of the group is regarded as an attack to the

blood and honor of the group, it is considered to spatter the

group as a whole. In order to socially fix it, the only solution is

taking the revenge or “cleaning the blood” (Ökten, 2010: p. 4).

In the region, vendetta indicates hostility as a result of killing

a member of a tribe by a member of another tribe. The basic

criterion is “blood relation” as indicated above. A vendetta is

pursued with the idea/principle in mind that revenge should be

taken for “shading the blood of their member”.

Two basic internal dynamics of the ashirat organization are

the very strong feeling of “we” and of “solidarity”. These dy-

namics developed both common attack and common defense

mechanisms (Doğanay, 1995: p. 18). Basic reason for solidarity

in ashirats is the “confrontational” patterns between individuals

and groups. The most known example of this fact is vendetta.

Confrontational pattern and solidarity pattern that cause and

reinforce each other is a way of surviving developed against all

people and groups that are considered to be “the other” (Al-

tuntek, 2002: p. 4).

As a result of the “we” concept which is widespread in the

social/cultural structure of a tribe, it causes an attack to be

committed altogether and defence mechanisms are activated by

all members of the tribe. That means, the tribe in a full unity

takes a defensive position fencing around their member who is

a murderer.

Findings of the studies on the region indicate that there is a

causal relationship between vendetta and events leading to it

and that there are common problems reinforcing all disagree-

ments as well as vendetta. These findings also reveal that the

reasons for vendetta are related to similar topics. These topics

are as follows: landowning, irrigation, grazing areas, distribu-

tion of family inheritance, rape, honor killings, status contradic-

tion among families and political confrontations (see Ünsal,

1995: p. 102; Tezcan, 1991: p. 57).

Basically, economical, political and social causes lie beneath

vendettas. Major economical reasons involve conflicts over

landowning, grazing areas and watering, political reasons are

related to the local administration (muhtarlik) of a village, bitter

rivalling to gain the “power” especially in local and general

elections, while problems associated with “women” are the

basic social reasons that break out vendettas. A “woman” is one

of the most important reasons for committing murder because

of the importance the society give to chastity and honour.

However, there is no necessary causal relationship between

problems contributing to the disputes and vendetta. Because it

is observed that in addition to disputes stemming from the

socio-economical conditions of the region, very simple dis-

agreements may lead to vendetta. The significant point here is

not the reason for the beginning event of vendetta, but tradition

that recommends taking the revenge. Therefore, the significant

point here is not the complexity or simplicity of the event lead-

ing to vendetta, but the social environment that provides the

grounds to make any dispute the cause of vendetta.

Although the principle of collective responsibility assumes

that all members of the groups to which perpetrator and ag-

grieved belong may attack or be the subject of this attack, there

are various criteria about who will be responsible for the event.

The first criterion is the kinship rank. The actualization of this

criterion appears to differ in different societies. For instance, in

the Arabic tribes, responsible individuals are all male relatives

from first to fifth rank of the aggrieved, in Kurdish tribes rela-

tives from seventh rank are also considered to be responsible.

Additionally, age and gender factors are also taken into con-

sidereation to determine responsible individuals in the revenge

attempts (Ökten, 2010: p. 6).

Tradition of carrying guns, lack of proper governmental au-

thority, extreme devotion to honour, display of bravado, swag-

gering show of courage, fights that erupt due to the excitable

nature of people, the strong urge to take revenge and high level

of ignorance because of lack of education are among the other

social causes, which support vendettas. Although today, it is

not as widespread as it was in the past, to consider gun-carrying

merely as a tradition and as a phenomenon that has roots in the

earlier times of the history, is necessary for us to understand the

subject in terms of “sociological imagination” in Mills’ termi-

nology.

According to traditional norms, if a girl falls in love with a

boy from another tribe and runs away with him, both the girl

and the boy are sentenced to death. Even if they may get mar-

ried, this punishment is applied to the boy who takes away the

girl, because he or his family did not pay the “bride price” (ba-

slik) to the girl’s family and disgraced their honour.

If a married woman escapes with another man, both of them

are also sentenced to death. Either the husband or the relatives

of the woman may kill them as soon as they find them.

However, vendettas are effective factors in reinforcing the

solidarity in the tribe, because it provides a sort of peace within

the tribe and consolidates the authority in terms of concepts like

“us” and “them”. Tribes that commit vendettas strengthen inner

solidarity in their own tribe by clamping together, as they are

always vigilant and equipped with arms.

In a vendetta, target people at the first rank to be killed or the

people who are responsible for paying the blood indemnity are

determined. These people are selected according to their level

of kinship with the murdered person. By this way, family

groups coming from a common ancestor are also categorized.

So, it is claimed that those who are at the target or those who

are primarily responsible for paying the blood indemnity form a

true family group. This situation reveals a differentiation in the

region between the Kurdish tribes and Arabic: Arabs regard

people going back until the fifth father in the family tree who is

the common ancestor, as responsible for paying the blood in-

demnity; whereas the Kurdish tribes consider people until the

seventh father responsible for the indemnity.

Another significant factor that causes vendettas to occur is

the very common and unbreakable traditional practice of kin-

ship marriages; a phenomenon, which can be seen at all levels

of the tribe. By reinforcing the segmental structure of families,

the insistent practice this tradition caused a total separation

among families.

In an event of vendetta, united altogether within their own

community, tribes come face to face filled with rigorous feeling

of “taking revenge”. This revenge feeling is not exerted only

towards the murderer, but the whole tribe including the leader

and the family of the murderer and consequently in return,

members of the opposing tribes murder a member of the origi-

nal tribe and this feud goes on by mutual murdering.

In the nomadic or semi-nomadic periods, carrying weapon

was necessary due to the factors such as unsafe roads, am-

bushes, difficult natural conditions, exports and imports con-

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

ducted over borders between different regions or countries,

potential conflicts among tribes, etc. Moreover, at the time of

the Ottoman Empire when relations with the government was

limited to paying taxes and providing the Empire with armed

forces when necessary, the more a tribe had members and

armed forces, the more it was favored by the government. Un-

der the superior identity of Ottomans, Muslims and non-Muslims

were living peacefully together where non-Muslims working on

non-prestigious jobs were not taken into the army service, (they

did not wish to join the army any way). In those days when the

concept of bravery was strongly emphasized, carrying weapon

was a symbol of being prestigious in the society. Walking

around without a gun was regarded as something “disgraceful”.

There used to be many cases reflecting this situation one of

which was explained by Erdost (1987) who performed his army

service in Şemdinli (Hakkari) in 1965, as this:

“Osman Kaya who had ambushed six soldiers at the begin-

ning of summer in 1960 was in Iraq at the time. Towards the

end of the summer of 1964, he went to the farmers who culti-

vated the lands that Osman was used to cultivate before, and

seized all the harvest by claiming that it is his share. Upon that,

Molla Mustafa called Osman, took all his guns and expelled

him. Those people telling the story commented about the case

as follows: Osman was walking around without a gun. This was

such a shame of him that it would be better if he would die”.

A man who does not take his revenge for his “shaded blood”

is not considered as an adult, real man in the region. He looses

his entire honour and status in the society and he is treated as an

alien.

In the social settings where vendetta is perceived or regarded

as a social task or value, taking revenge is not a personal choice,

but a compulsory social task given to the individuals by society.

Revenge of the person killed can only be taken through killing

the responsible individuals. Otherwise, it is thought that the

spirit of the person killed cannot be pleased and that the honor

of his relatives will be “spattered”. Taking revenge is a basic

and dominant behaviour in ashirats that are in continous power

struggle with one another. It means nobility and having honor,

while those who did not take their revenge lose their material

and spiritual power and are regarded as inferior by their rivals.

An elderly interviewed in the study summarizes this fact as fol-

lows: “Here those who have power win” (Ökten, 2010: p. 6).

Upon the explanations on vendettas and some events that are

evaluated based on the tribal traditions that can be regarded as

causes of vendettas, give us an idea about solutions. Some in-

formation about the applications of tribal traditions was ob-

tained through interviews as follows:

When a murder is committed as a result of struggle between

two members of a tribe, relatives of the murderer have to per-

suade the relatives of the murdered by paying them the blood

indemnity. If they don’t do it, the relatives of the murdered

(may) kill the relatives of the murderer whenever and wherever

they see him.

In a case of a murder, the tribe or the relatives of the mur-

dered may plunder the goods of the murderer. This is called kan

tozu (blood dust) in the region. Plunderers are not accepted as

criminals, since this plundering is a right according to tribal

traditions. Besides, if peace is generated, the plundered goods

are accepted as blood indemnity.

Traditionally, when a fight breaks out between two tribes and

their members start to beat each other, tribes that are nothing to

do with the fight try to stop the fight and prevent them to injure

each other.

To achieve a peaceful solution to the conflict, a mediator

who is accepted by both of the sides should be chosen. If the

mediator is a member of one of the fighting tribes or if the me-

diator has an organic tie with one of them, his mediation is not

accepted.

In some cases, the leader of the neighbour tribe tries to be a

mediator between the conflicted tribes in a vendetta. But some

powerful members of conflicting tribes may not permit the

leader to mediate. Because this situation provides more prestige

to the mediator in his own tribe which turns the situation against

them.

For this reason, generally mediators are accepted from those

who belong to the upper positions such as a sheikh or an unbi-

ased person from the government. A proverb is widely used in

the area summarizing the situation; “leaders are found very

easily, but a leader to whom other leaders listen is found very

rarely”.

Generally, sheikhs are outside of the tribal structure, they do

not belong to any tribe. They are religious figures, who receive

loyal devotedness from a group of believers. Their positions are

deemed to be very respectful. Consequently, they are regarded

as the most appropriate individuals to be applied for being a

mediator. Nearly in all conflicts sheikhs are chosen as media-

tors. This, in turn, reinforces their positions within the society.

According to traditional rules, if a fight between two families

in a village ends with a murder, the murderer and his family

should migrate from the village. They cannot come back to the

village until the peace is settled. The same rule also applies to

other situations such as “kidnapping a girl”, etc. If there is any

plundering during the attacks of two tribes, the plundered goods

should be returned to provide the peace. Otherwise, the tribe

whose goods are plundered will continue the hostility and they

will try to find out an opportunity to re-attack the enemy.

Debts taken from the members of the tribe or other tribes

must be paid back. The leader should solve problems that have

risen among the members of the tribe because of these debts.

He can transfer the goods of the debtor to the creditor to com-

pensate the loss. If one of the members of two different tribes

does not pay his debt on due, under the protection of his own

tribe, the creditor can confiscate the goods of one members of

the debtor’s tribe as a pledge. These goods are given back when

the debt is paid. This is not accepted as robbery in the area. It is

called vesge in the terminology of the area. Members of a tribe

can renounce their credits. But the creditor has the right to take

the debtor’s goods such as his livestock as compensation for the

debt.

For a robbery case that has been committed in the village, the

tradition applied by the tribe is as follows; somebody who is

protected follows the tracks of the thief. If these tracks end in a

village and the thief cannot be found there, the people of the

suspected village have the right to follow the tracks on their

own by the help of other followers. If the people of the village

cannot prove the tracks going out of their village, for instance if

the follower brought by the suspected villagers is agreed on the

tracks’ ending in the village, the owner of the goods has the

right to require from these villagers to compensate his loss or to

search for his goods at each house in the village. If he chooses

to search for his goods in the village and cannot find them, then

his right for compensation is no more valid.

“Feuds” of a tribe is tried to be solved by their own efforts in

accordance with traditions. These cases are not brought before a

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

judicial court or any other authority of the state. If a tribe can-

not find the solution themselves, it will cast a shame upon them

because their shedded blood and murdered member would be

left without any retaliation.

The murderer may be arrested by the security forces of the

state and sentenced to certain punishments or released, the hos-

tility still will not be erased, until the indemnity is paid or the

peace is provided. The tribe does not give up their allegation

until the case is solved in accordance with their conventional

law. According to the tribe, tribal law and the law of the state

are different and the former is more important than the latter.

The basic and the most important factor recognized in every

event is the fact that the tribe members are accepted as part of

one family in terms of their inter-relations among themselves.

In tribes, paternal kinship is valid and all members are close or

distant relatives to each other. Nobility, blood ties, being a

whole family or coming from the same race are important at-

tributes of this kinship to be protected. According to traditions,

members of a tribe in which the concept of ‘us’ is dominant act

together in every event. The same thing happens also in other

events as well as vendettas or facing any attack. Members of a

tribe help each other in funerals, weddings, in cases of illnesses,

etc. Other members or the relatives of a person, who is ill,

murdered or in jail are jointly responsible to take care of his

wife and children.

Honesty, chastity, keeping one’s words all of which is sum-

marized as controlling of one’s hand-waist-tongue, bravery,

friendship, good reputation and dignity are sacred values in

tribes. Hospitality, generosity, thanking God for the things He

gives and being modest are the basic characteristics of a tribe.

Patterns of Family and Marriage

In the following section, the results of our interviews and ob-

servations, our findings related to marriage, family and posi-

tions of man and woman in the family are discussed.

Although extended families are still seen, nuclear family

structure is dominant in the tribe. Especially among families

who do not have lands, nuclear families are prevalent due to

economic hardship.

Although nuclear family structure is dominant in the area, the

tribe and kinship ties are still effective in the constitution of

these families. These ties also influence their behavioural pat-

terns in the frame of traditional values and norms.

At the end of our interviews, we have found out that, as an

institution, the tribe is an important impediment for the nuclear

families to put forward their individual enterprises and inde-

pendent participation. The most outstanding example of this

effect can be seen during the elections when the political party

for which individuals will vote is pre-determined by the tribe.

In our interviews, the majority of people state that lands

should be inherited only to men. Another study that is carried

out in the region16 revealed that the ratio of people who

claimed that lands should be inherited to only males was 55.7%.

The rate of people asserting that all children should equally

share the heritage was 49%. On the other hand, due to the so-

cialization, opinions of girls upon the heritage sharing devel-

oped in favour of their brothers. Since owning vast lands is

considered as the real source of gaining wealth in the area, it is

clear that sharing and controlling of heritage are done on behalf

of men. Another factor, which supports this control, is the in-

termarriages. A certain level of flexibility can be seen when

goods, rather than lands, are under concern

A typical family of the region is a core family including

mother, father and children. On the contrary to what is gener-

ally believed, families based on monogamous marriages and are

not patriarchal. Marriage is a must; there cannot be seen old

bachelors or maidens in the area. Neither bachelor oath due to

religious reasons nor free love can be found in the region. The

age of marriage is low; men at the age of 20, girls at the age of

16 - 17 get married by the demand of their families (Baran vd.,

1998: p. 25).

Our informants indicated that although intermarriages are

common, some brides from other tribes are also taken in mar-

riage in order to develop a kinship with them and to provide a

peace among tribes, which are in conflict. Marriages among

cousins are also quite common.

The ties of ashirats have continued to affect the behaviour of

individuals. Kinship has to functions: a holding system encom-

passing the individuals and a basic context for social solidarity.

Therefore, the groups in the region are based on kinship de-

pending on real or imagined “blood relations”. Ashirat order is

organized around the principle of patriarchal solidarity. In this

order, solidarity is determined based on kinship degree. Mar-

riages are also shaped depending on the preferrence over patri-

archal kinship degree. Thus, such a preferrence entails the mar-

riages between children of two brothers.

The marriages between children of two brothers are common

in the region. Such a marriage, in fact, is not only a preferrence,

but also a right for males. Therefore, males may not accept to

marry to their uncles’ daughter. When a foreigner wants to

marry a girl from the ashirat, her father consult his relatives,

particularly his cousins. If the cousins want to marry her, they

have priority over the other people. Otherwise, male cousin

may refuse the marriage and “prohibit” the girl since he has this

right. Another person cannot propose this girl since it is unac-

cepted traditionally and may lead to serious disputes. There are

several eamples of such cases in the region. On the other hand,

this case is regarded as a result of male cousins (Ökten, 2009:

pp. 88-89).

Marriages among the children of real or categorical uncles

are preferred. It is also preferred to marry a person who is not a

relative but a member of the tribe, a situation that still con-

serves the endogamous character of marriages. Virginity of the

newly wedded girl is absolutely obligatory and she has to prove

this at her nuptial chamber.

The number of polygamy marriages is not so high and

moreover, there is almost no marriage with more than two

women. In a study carried out in the region it is found that 92%

of the males interviewed have one spouse, whereas 6% of them

have two spouses. No participant is found to have more than

two spouses. Polygamy is more widespread among the leaders/

aghas, or the elite people in tribes. This type of marriage is a

symbol of wealth and power, and a means of providing man-

power as well as “soldiers” to the “army” of the tribe; in other

words, the armed forces of the tribe. Beside these features,

household members participated in this study, consider condi-

tions like wife bearing, no child, old age, or having a sickness

as important causes for polygamy (Ökten, 2004: p. 132).

Although this finding allows us to say that the tribal ties are

getting loose in cities, the woman whose husband has brought a

second wife, continues to stay at her husband’s house, as a

widowed woman stays at her father-in-law’s or brother-in-law’s

house. Although there is no such tradition that the wife whose

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

husband died should get married with his brother or one of his

close relatives, this type of marriages (called levirat) still can be

seen. This occasional situation can be explained in terms of the

worries of keeping the widowed woman (who is considered to

be the honour of the family), children and goods inside the

family.

Even though the notion about couples must come from the

same family, creed or village is valid even today; we can say

that the biggest determining factor of marriage is coming from

the same tribe.

It is fundamental to live in accordance with the traditions and

customs of the tribe and marriages and ceremonies are arranged

due to these traditional principles. The bride price is paid to the

bride’s family and berdel, which is a mutual exchange of girls

from two families (it is preferred not to pay any bride price), is

a widespread method of marriage.

The bridegroom or his family pays the bride price or the

goods to the bride’s family. The amount is determined on the

basis of common practice and socio-economical situations of

both families. It can be paid either in cash or in goods such as

giving a certain amount of livestock, mill, land, etc.

This money or goods carry economical importance for the

bride’s family and at the same time, it is considered as a neces-

sary social insurance. Thanks to this practice, men consider

women more valuable, or at least it acts as a dissuasive factor

for divorces.

Another type of marriage is called berdel, a mutual exchange

of girls between two families. In this type of marriages, mutual

attitudes of spouses are fundamental rules directing the mar-

riage. Each spouse should develop appropriate reactions to each

other’s behaviours. This dual marriage tradition is practiced in

many aspects; from the beginning of the marriage to the type of

furniture and jewelry that are bought for the brides, to the

houses for them to live should be the same and as long as the

marriage is valid the same mutuality continues. The man’s fam-

ily chooses the girl to their son’s wife. The wedding ceremony

is performed under the permission of both parents of the girl

and the boy.

Traditionally, a girl is strictly forbidden from declaring the

man whom she loves. The families arrange most of the mar-

riages. Even after getting married, a woman is always responsi-

ble to her father and brother(s). It is just due to the fact that her

father and brother(s) continue to undertake her responsibility in

certain aspects. Her husband, even her father—may be more

than her husband—is responsible of her actions; for example if

a crime is committed by a woman, her father is responsible as

much as her husband, or even more than him, for her misde-

meanour. It is not traditionally proper for a woman to demand

her share from the inheritance. However, there are cases in which

a father can voluntarily leave his heritage to his daughter.

Getting divorced is not welcomed at all by the tribal tradi-

tions. For this reason, divorce is very rare in the area. Instead,

the tradition of bringing a second wife (called hewi) to the

house and keeping her together with the first wife in the same

house is widely spread.

A man may get divorced, but if his ex-wife marries another

man or stays at her father’s house, this is considered as a shame

for him. Moreover, in order to keep his sons under his paternity,

the husband keeps his both wives at the same house.

Polygamy is applied when a man cannot have a son or a child.

On the other hand, if the wife is very old or if the man has an

irresistible desire of showing off power, polygamy becomes a

factual in the area. As mentioned earlier, polygamy marriages

that are practiced in the region generally consist of only two

wives.

Tribe members perceive the above-mentioned negative state

of women very differently. They think that, even though women

do not hold an equal position with men in the family especially

in taking decisions, it is a result of division of labour that exists

between men and women. Moreover, they believe that women

are respected in tribes. The main authority in the family is the

man; but the woman has also the right to express her ideas.

When the relation between husband and wife is considered,

woman has got a sort of priority; she has an equal status with

the men in the village aristocracy and among educated people

living in cities.

The tribe members accept this position of a woman as a

natural phenomenon. It is definitely thought that this situation

arises just because of the fact that woman is in need of protec-

tion because of her fragile, delicate nature.

Women receive great respect among the tribe members and

this is protected under the tribal traditions. The results of our

research reveal that women are untouchable in cases of feuds or

other type of conflicts. Her chastity and honour is strictly for-

bidden to be gossiped about and this wrongdoing is seen as a

great shame and considered as a big crime. According to tribal

traditions, when an attack against a woman occurs, the unbiased

tribes may also interfere.

Another example of respect shown towards women is seen

when they are used as mediators in severe conflicts that cannot

be easily solved. The problems, which cannot be solved by

male mediators, are solved by the support of female mediators.

When a woman comes to solve the problem as a mediator, it is

a very big shame to refuse her, no matter how big the problem

is.

Another important tradition about the need of a woman’s

help for resolution appears during an unfair situation. A woman

in trouble expresses her anger by knotting a respected man’s

puşi, or chafya (headgear) in her tribe. In such a case, whatever

the problem is, and whatever it may cost, all members of the

tribe do their best to help her. If they do not, this will cast a

shame upon their honour and respect.

The position of a woman in the tribe changes depending on

her age and status. This state changing can be observed from

her status at home and in public and from her way of garment-

ing. Within a period that a woman marries and gives birth to a

son and brings him up until a certain age, her status changes in

the tribe and receives an increasing respect. Old women are

said to have the absolute right to express their ideas in the tribe.

The way of dressing for married and single women is differ-

ent. As a girl is dressed up differently from a married woman, a

married woman’s garments are different that of a widowed wo-

man. By this way, it is easily recognized that whether a female

is a virgin girl, a woman or a widow. The most outstanding

difference is the caps used by women. For example, young girls

tie their headscarves called yazma, in a way that their necks are

visible. Married women tie their embraced or plane headscarves

called dolbent to cover their necks and hair. A widow who lost

her husband uses a black or dark coloured headscarf.

Conclusion

In this study we focused on hierarchical order, status, norma-

tive order and family/kinship structure in Bin Yousuf Tribe and

observed that the dominant traditional organization determines

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

the main aspects of social structure in the region. The basic

feature of this social structure is the loyalty to the introverted

institutions such as the tribe and aghaism, which are interlaced

with each other through the very long history. The most char-

acteristic element appears to be the possession of a strong cul-

tural and emotional commitment to tribal community and a

strong feeling of identity being manifested in ethnocentricism,

like most tribes worldwide. Belonging to the tribe means to be

of distinguished and noble ancestry and is linked to pride. The

people in the tribal community share the notion of being dis-

tinct from others. The “us” feeling creates strong ties among

members which underlines solidarity.

Here we have to emphasize the critical role of the tribal

leader. He acts both as a political and social authority in the

tribe and held responsible for the acts of community members.

The power of the leader come from his noble ancestry.

Majority of the individuals still living in the area consider

themselves, firstly, as members of a clan, then members of a

tribe to which their clan belongs to. Patriarchal loyalty is the

basic factor affecting the inter-relations. In this context, a tribe/

clan is believed to be constituted by families having “blood

ties”. Therefore there’s a strong emphasis on inheriting “blood”

from patrilineal ancestors and accordingly patrilineal inheri-

tance of group membership. As kinship is considered to be

given at birth, it is fixed, ascribed and performative in every

respect. In fact, tribal kinship is seen to be about sharing all

aspects of life including both emotions and substance. On each

level of social life, effects of these ties including various tribal

responsibilities can be observed.

Due to the rapid social change and the transition period that

the region is going through lately, communities living in this

area are suffering from great difficulties and adaptation prob-

lems. An important conclusion we derived from our study is

that although the traditional social structure of the region is in

the dissolution process and reveals transformations, the tribal

values, norms, laws and relations resist against modern life and

tribe members preferentially try to reconstruct the traditional in

modern life. Even though the physical outcomes of this struc-

ture no longer exist today, this structure still retains its influ-

ence at political, economical and social levels, in other words

the more informal local power structures, which are tradition-

ally oriented are effective in the form of a segmentary tribal

system.

We observed that all matters of order are mostly settled

within the traditional tribal norms. In fact, the tribal tie has a

determinative effect on every social stage of social life such as

the political attitudes of individuals, normative order, and the

structure of marriages and families. The tribe mostly decides

upon the party for which the members vote. It still is a consid-

erable means of providing economical support and solidarity.

The tribal ties are especially taken into account when children,

especially daughters, are given in marriages by their families.

Accordingly we have to stress that there is a strong, culturally

based social control system which is reinforced by custom,

mostly unquestioned, which effect and regulate behavior and

decisions. It is observed that these are longstanding practices

that have been operative in the community. As the tribe is par-

ticularist in its normative system and has its own moral order,

an attack against a member means an attack to the whole mem-

bers. Here we have to stress the unilateral form of social control

in the form of self-help which may lead to restroring to exra-

legal methods such as vengeance and vigilantism. Here crime

may be a form of social control (Horwitz, 1990). As tribal so-

cieties need to work around emotive, tight social bonding, they

may fall prey to destructive feuding. This also may be consid-

ered as a form of negative reciprocity.

The most outstanding demographic feature of the population

in the area is the increase rate, which is a result of intention and

desire of having many children. The traditions and values of the

tribal society originate this intention. As far as the maintenance

of the tribal values are concerned marriage seems to be one of

the most important institutions. Endogamous, arranged mar-

riages and bridewealth appears to be quiet common. Tre tribal

community as a whole provides a rather effective control on

women. Girls are expected to get married at early ages.

The tribe as an institution in the area where there is no strong

governmental organization or security over any matter, main-

tains its function in overcoming difficulties and solving the

problems such as the need of getting and using bank loans,

establishing security and solidarity. Here we observed the tribe

as a unit of subsistence and this situation considerably main-

tains the loyalty of the members to the tribe.

In summary, it is seen that the tribal ties continue affecting

the people in the region intensively and extensively. It can be

stated that this structure can undergo some different forms and

dimensions by the time elapses and the tribal structure under

concern may sometimes exert more influence or may recede

depending upon the conjuncture, but it will never lose its func-

tion and effectiveness. On the other hand, the tribe as a struc-

tural concept or as a principal of social order is just a compo-

nent within a more complex social and political web. The only

way to remove the absolute loyalty to the tribe, which keeps

functioning in many matters, is to establish firm and modern

institutions and organizations that will take over all the func-

tions that have previously been performed by the tribe.

REFERENCES

Aksoy S. (1992). The issue of land ownership. The Scientific and

Technological Research Council of Turkey, Journal of Science and

Technology, 292, 52-53.

Altuntek, N. S. (2001). An evaluation of the research on marriage and

kinship in Turkey. Journal of Faculty of Letters, 18, 17-28.

Altuntek, N. S. (2008). A symbolic-cognitive approach to the concept

of honor. Journal of Faculty of Letters, 25, 37-58.

Baran, A., & N. Çabuk, (1998.) Şanlıurfa harran valleys in land and

village development project. Ankara: GAP Administration.

Crone Patricia (1986). The tribe and the state. In J. A. Hall (Ed.), States

in history. Oxford: Blackwell.

Doğanay, F. (1997). Harran valley in social and cultural transforma-

tion process and the southeastern Anatolia project experience. An-

kara: DPT.

Erdost, M. İ. (1987). Şemdinli interview. İstanbul: Onur.

Gökalp Z. (1992). Sociological analysis on Kurdish Tribes. İstanbul:

Sosyal.

Horwitz, A. V. (1990). The logic of social control. New York: Springer.

Kılıç, R. (2005). Sayyids and Sharifs in the Ottoman Empire. İstanbul:

Kitap.

Ökten, Ş. (2004). A sociological analysis of development Attempts in

Turkey: The Southeastern Anatolia Project. Unpublished Ph.D. The-

sis, Ankara: University of Hacettepe.

Ökten, Ş. (2010). Blood feud: Vengenance of blood or the collective

fight for honour. Journal of Anthropology, 24, 165-187.

Ökten, Ş. (2010). Sociological identity of power: The form and sources

of power in tribes. Journal of Sociological Research, 13, 183-215.

Reading, H. F. (1978). A dictionary of the social sciences. London:

Routledge and Kegan Paul.

T. G. İÇLİ ET AL.

Sencer, M. (1993). Research on development trends in the region of

southeastern Anatolia project. Ankara: TMMOB.

Tapper, R. (2004). Frontier nomads of Iran. Ankara: İmge.

Türkdoğan, O. (1998). Southeastern identity: Tribe, culture and people.

İstanbul: Alfa.

Van Bruinessen, M. (2003). Agha, shaikh and state. İstanbul: İletişim.

Yalçın-Heckmann, L. (2002). Tribe and kinship among the kurds. İstan-

bul: İletişim.

Yalkin, A. R. (1997). Turkmenian clans in the South. Ankara: Ministry

of Culture.

Yinanç, R. (1995). The composition of population and ethnic structure

in Anatolia according to the ottoman tax registers. Ankara: Türk

Yurdu.

上一篇:“You Know Who the Sluts Are” 下一篇:Factors Influencing Work Effic

我要分享到：

职称论文发表交流平台！

A Study on Hierarchical/Normative Order, Marriage and Family Patterns in Bin Yousuf Tribe of Southea

最新文章NEWS

推荐期刊Tui Jian

热点文章HOT