| by thirteen families ranging from moderate to very poor. The villagers are well aware of the problem, and the children more concerned than their fathers. Thus Mahmut (son of AG 1), one of six brothers, who was a skilled plasterer, announced firmly his intention of leaving his share of the land to his five brothers, and hope that his father would educate the youngest brothers, so as to leave only two to share the land in this case 120 donum. If all the brothers take a share, the family, from being one rich household, will become in one generation, six very poor households. The eldest son of Sukru (PK 1), who has moved nearer Kayseri and started a profitable business retailing cloth in the villages near his new home, in like manner says he wishes nothing from his father or his brothers. |
| 4. | Daughters’ Inheritance of Land |
| According to Islamic law, as recognised in the Ottoman Empire, (3) daughters should receive shares of the father’s land and property equal to half that of their brothers. However, I did not come across a single example of this in the village. I attributed this at first to an acceptance of the new secular law, the Swiss civil code, which was adapted for Turkey in 1926 in place of the existing partly Islamic code. But I was told that equal division among sons and daughters was the practice even before the introduction of this law in 1926. I am inclined to believe this, since it is indeed curious that this item of the new law alone should win complete acceptance, while other reforms affecting Islamic practices are either tolerated, to some extent unwillingly, or else ignored. On the other hand, as the villagers certainly known the Islamic law on this point, it is supposing that they did not practise it. Whatever the truth about former practice may be, no examples of a half shares of land and property going to daughters came to my notice. The recognised and stated rule in the village conforms to the new law - that is, equal division among all children, male and female, but inheritance by women is not by any means invariable. In practice, daughters who marry and remain |
| in the village often take a full share along with their brothers, which remains their own and is farmed as part of their husbands’ land. They are only likely to do so if their fathers are comparatively well off, and if the number of brothers and sisters is small. When a girl who has married to another village inherits land, one of several things may happen. If the village is near enough, her new family may reckon it worth the trouble of making the journey to work her inherited land. This arrangement is rare unless the land is near the borders of the girl’s conjugal village, but near the borders one does find a good deal of cultivated land held outside the boundaries of the owner’s own village. If the land is too far to farm, her co-heirs may by her out. In some cases, these two arrangements are combined, land near the border of the girl’s affinal village being accepted, and more distant land being sold. I came across one or two cases of exchange of land on this basis, border land within reach of the girl’s new home being given in place of land close to her native village. One girl, who was the sole remaining heir of her family, took her inheritance, which her husband now rents to people in Sakaltutan, but this case is unique. Very often, however, daughters take no share at all. If a girl marries and goes to another village a long time before her father dies, and her husband is making a reasonable living, and she may well not bother. Again, where there are several brothers, so that they are likely to be poor, or at least a good deal poorer than their father, the sisters do not generally take land. Abdullah (PB 4), I was told, owing to a quarrel with his mother’s right, but in view of their poverty, and in spite of his own, accepted only a token settlement of one donum. Yet a third arrangement may govern the daughter’s claim to a share of the paternal lands. The division of inheritance is often long postponed, and the sisters are neither finally cut out, nor do they receive their share, but the status quo is left undisturbed, the future uncertain. Such cases usually arise because division will rob a brother of his minimum livelihood. But when such arrangements are left vague for long periods, memories grow dim, |
| circumstances alter by deaths and the growing up and marrying of children, and those whose livelihood depends on the maintenance of the status quo now claim it as of right. The way is thus open for disputes, and even fighting, should the representatives of the sisters whose claims are unsettled decide to press them. In the middle of a quarrel about land I heard a bystander remark: “They do not take the land at the time, then later there is a quarrel.” In this case, a man had ploughed his brother’s land for fifty years, and now that his brother’s son’s widow claims her husband’s inheritance, refuses to give it up. I was not privileged to observe the division of an estate during my stay, and it was difficult to get full and reliable details of what had happened in past cases. In no case was the complex pattern of female inheritance said to have been carried through. Two examples where I was able to learn some of the details, illustrate the attitude to female inheritance. Huseyn, who is about thirty years old, was oxherd this year, and often goes away to work as an unskilled labourer. His father’s land was little and his brother, Mehmet (BA 2), farms it. Mustafa (BA 1), married his father’s father’s brother’s son’s daughter, who was sole heiress of some sixty donum, which he farms separately. Huseyn, though at present landless, receives a share of Mehmet’s crops. But in common with his brothers, he is entitled, now, to a third share of Haci Ahmet’s lands. Haci Ahmet is one of the richest men in the village, has no children of his own, but adopted his sister’s son (SC 2), when her husband failed to return from the wars. Haci Ahmet’s land has never been divided with his sisters, and the question of inheritance from him on his death is in doubt, since not only are there in all six sisters’ sons and one daughter, but his wife is a member of CS, a rich and acquisitive family, and is an able woman. If Haci Ahmet dies first, I heard it said, her family will try to get the property, and the poor nephews will remain poor. Relations between the BA brothers and Haci Ahmet are cordial. When, for example, Mehmet’s wife died he gave his support and advice, though some villagers, including myself, felt under the circumstances he might have given more concrete assistance. |
| Huseyn’s wife, moreover, is entitled, also now, to a seventh of the lands of DT family. Their father, they say, was the richest man in the village, but they are only moderately well off. Ali (DT 1) is one of the village leaders. Here again, the sisters have been left out. The lands have been divided between the three brothers who, used to their father’s wealth and position, complain of their come down. When I pointed out to Huseyn and his kinsmen that having once divided the land they are unlikely to reopen the matter, I was told “of necessity they will give, it is the law”. Yet again relations are cordial, in fact Huseyn is at the moment living in a house that belongs by right to Ali’s daughter’s son, who lives with his mother in a separate ev in Ali’s house. Huseyn’s wife will also, in due course, be legally entitled to a small share of her father’s land, but as he only owns about forty donum his daughters are very unlikely to get any. Why Huseyn does nothing to claim his rights I do not altogether understand. Action in such a matter would be his elder brother’s responsibility, and clearly any demand would cause bad relations with two powerful and respected village elders, and would, without doubt, be generally condemned as “ayip” - shameful. Against his wife’s mother’s brothers, he would not, in spite of the law, stand a chance, and prefers cordial relations. In both cases the longer the matter is left, the less the hope of ever asserting his rights, and in the meantime he remains poor. Diagram The second example concerns two of the richer families. Ali inherited his father’s land intact and his sisters did not take any. Equally, the four brothers PA, divided their father’s land and did not give their father’s sisters a share. Now Ali (CS 1), Hasan (PA 1), and Abdurrahman (PA 2), are willing to redivide the land according to the law, that is to say, a third of PA lands would go to Ali and a third to FB 2, and in return Hasan and Abdurrahman would receive a third of Ali’s each. If they do this, FB 2 will benefit, and I am told he backs the scheme, but Arif (PA 3) stands to lose two thirds of his land, and thus be reduced from sufficiency to powerty. Hence, not unnaturally, he refused, and in fact has just returned from seven months in |
| prison for shooting his brother’s daughter through the hand, in an attempt to shoot his brother, during a quarrel on this issue. At the moment, Arif and his family are not on speaking terms with the rest of those involved. When Ali recently married his daughter to Vk village, they stayed away from the celebrations, though the other brothers and their families were present and assisting as joint hosts. In both these examples, male inheritance is unquestioned, in contrast to the uncertainty of the nominal rights of the women. The first example is more typical, in that the rights are recognised by those who have not succeeded in claiming them, but seem to cause neither action nor bitterness; even in the second case, the matter may yet rest where it is, and would probably have never become an open quarrel had not persons on both sides stood to gain by a legal readjustment. Thus in spite of lip service to the law which prescribes equal shares for all siblings, in practice, while equal shares for brothers is invariable, the inheritance of women is treated as optional and arrangements to suit particular circumstances. If land passed only in the male line, one would expect to find the land of each village kabile lying in blocks so that the land of present living agnates would be side by side; and significantly to a large extent one does find such an arrangement. Not only do brothers and first and second agnatic cousins have land in such blocks, it would, I suspect, be possible by means of a cadastral survey to reconstruct much more reliably than the villagers themselves can now tell you the genealogical history of the village. Questions which I asked about the original agnatic connections of what are now quite separate kabile my informant answered by working out whose fields are side by side. Obviously, inheritance through the female line tends to break down these agnatic blocks of land. Asking why a man has land between or next to people with whom he has no agnatic connection, I would be told that he got it through a woman of the kabile on whose land it bordered. But not only the symmetry |