Ethnographics Gallery University of Kent

Turkish Village

Copyright 1965, 1994 Paul Stirling. All rights reserved.

Paul Stirling
CHAPTER EIGHT

KINSHIP

previous page

Page 165


The emaining fourteen households were isolated agnatically; they included three brothers claiming agnatic connection to G Lineage, another agnatic set of three landless households, Ismet (T) `s large and rich immigrant household plus a small offshoot (p. 2). 127-8), one moderate household which was the last of a once large lineage, and one or two poor households isolated or paired with brothers.

Elbshï Lineages

The arrangement of lineages in Elbashï was even less tidy than in Sakaltutan. A high proportion of households seemed uninterested in agnatic connections. The village contained eighteen households which were fairly recent immigrants from the east of Turkey, who had failed to return to their homes after the Russian invasion of I877 and I915, and eight immigrant households of local origin. In a few cases agnatic connections were known on a wider range than any in Sakaltutan, but the effective lineages were no larger.

A Lineage was by far the largest agnatic stock I came across. One man put its strength at one hundred households, another at sixty. In fact, about fifty households claimed or were said to be agnates of this stock - most of them on reliable grounds. In this lineage, unlike others, the main segments had not acquired names of their own. But the leading households in the stock were split into two hostile groups, one (Ax) containing ten and the other (Ay) eighteen households. This second larger wing was itself genealogically segmented into two. In one of these, all eight households, who were close agnates of the four brothers who lead it, were effective members, but in the other segment only some of the households seemed to take much interest. Another group of four households, brothers or brothers' sons to each other, acknowledged agnatic connection to this main stock, but seemed uncommitted if not unfriendly. A fourth group of six agnatically related households had a separate lineage name, and one of its wealthy members denied any connection with A. But the evidence including some of his own, was against him. The remaining households of the fifty were divided into small groups of close agnates, ranging from two to five households, not too sure of their agnatic connections, and not particularly interested.

next page
Contents Page