BLOOD FEUD – TRADITIONS OF RECONCILIATION IN SOUTH WEST GEORGIA

Abstract

In the customary law of southwestern Georgia, first of all, the criminal law draws attention, which contains very riveting traditions. Firstly, criminal law reflected customs and folk forms of punishment related to vengeance, particularly the reconciliation of enemies. In the second half of the 19th century, the common Georgian customary law operating in Samtskhe and Adjara preserved several signs of customary norms in the sphere of hostility. The functioning of customary law, in turn, was determined by the existence of this type of communal category – the avenge rule and composition system. Because the legal norms of the avenge and composition system corresponded to the customs, thus it contained the noteworthy aspects of the old social relationship.

Keywords: Reconciliation, Mediators, Alliance, Mediation court, Fraternity, Foster-father

Introduction

The custom of avenging was characteristic of almost all peoples of the world. Vendetta[1] existed in the consciousness of the people who created the states. In addition to the peoples of the Caucasus, including the mountain people of Georgia, it was typical among many peoples of the world, especially among the Greeks and Germans. The tradition of blood revenge had no less place in the legal life of primitive societies. For example, among Australians, if the husband refused to take revenge, his wife would divorce him. Its origin was related to the distant past - the early stages of human history. In particular, most scientists believe that the method of avenge originated in the pre-industrial, primitive-tribal era. It continued to exist in oligarchic - socially divided societies. Thus, the rule of avenge, which has functioned even in a heterogeneous - oligarchic society since ancient times, was reflected in the collections of laws of the world people, including Georgian legal monuments.

In the conditions of Georgian statehood and socially differentiated society, the rule of avenge got a clearly expressed class nature, i.e., In Georgian feudal law, social status was taken into account, and the price of blood was accordingly determined[2]. The existence of the custom among Georgian mountaineers, in particular, among Mtiuls, is confirmed by the "judgment" document. In the conditions of statehood, the habit of blood revenge appeared in the traditional peripheries at a time when political governing cells and, consequently, legal institutions were weakening. However, over time and in the process of epochal changes, this custom was forgotten, but in peculiar circumstances, it appeared in a modernised form.

In the customary law of southwestern Georgia, first of all, the criminal law draws attention, which contains very riveting traditions. Firstly, criminal law reflected customs and folk forms of punishment related to vengeance, particularly the reconciliation of enemies. In the second half of the 19th century, the common Georgian customary law operating in Samtskhe and Adjara preserved several signs of consuetudinary norms in a field of hostility[3]. The functioning of customary law, in turn, was determined by the existence of this type of communal category - the blood revenge rule and composition system. Because the legal norms of the blood revenge and composition system corresponded to the customs, thus it contained the noteworthy aspects of the old social relationship.

Matching terms for composition in Adjara

In Adjara, the corresponding term for composition was “Darigeba” – Edification, Exhortation. That was named the reconciliation of hostile families, kinship groups, and clans. They had older, distinguished, and authoritative persons in the blood-related union. While resolving disputed issues, they did not receive material benefits, but they were observing and interested in the daily life of the relatives themselves. Authoritative elders acted as defenders of the lineage and tried to prevent blood relatives from being unjustly oppressed by a representative of another family. Such persons behaved as conciliators, and with the heads of villages and other clans, they also appeared as mediators. Distinguished persons were called "respected men" and "leading men" in some places. These peculiar elders determined not only the matters of reconciliation of the sworn but issues of mandatory revenge too. In Adjara, at the time of vengeance, atonement and composition had sufficiently established form. To reconcile the sworn parties - several elders of the clan or village, three or five men were allocated, among whom the most influential person was responsible for solving all the issues raised in the reconciliation process[4]. According to the legal monuments, in ancient Samtskhe-Saatabago, mediators appeared as conciliators of disputing parties. The court of negotiators was the same as the court of mediators. There was a court of elders in Khevsureti - "Khevsuruli Rjuli", and its representatives were called Mebtcheni – Btcheebi (Arbiters)[5].

In the conditions of kindred, the duties assigned by custom were carried out by the heads of the family and the clan, and not by the elders of the governing body of the community, because avenge or reconciling - the composition was a legal event of a personal-legal nature and it only expressed the competence of the opposing parties. However, in the case of hereditary feud in generations, when the avenge continued permanently, when it threatened the functioning of the community as a single social organism, then, naturally, the community relied on its rights, and the problem was discussed in the deliberative body of the community. Therefore, the mediators were chosen by a general resolution of the community. In such a situation, the powers of conciliators were presented in a sufficiently expanded form. Both sides had to obey the decision of the heads of the village and community, in which the oldest members of the kinship groups - "Nogros" could also participate. In case of an objection from any of the parties, they used to end the case regardless of the will of that parties. If the sworn enemy did not agree to reconciliation, then the conciliators would forcefully put a tie around the neck of the murderer or his relative - father and brother and take him to the house of the murdered person without the permission of the victim and his relatives.

As we can see, in Adjara, when it came to murder, due to the complexity of the reconciliation process, both sides were involved in it. At the beginning of the reconciliation process, the sufferer's family members did not directly participate, and the guilty party usually asked the victim's friend or, in the conditions of the Muslim society, the godfather of the family - Kirva to intercede with the victim. The envoy's desire was informed to the elder of the kinship group - Nogro, the leading man. In the next step of the reconciliation process, several people from both sides participated. At this stage, depending on the family name and the complexity of the problem, it was permissible to choose three to five elders from the village and, in general, the community for reconciliation. That is why it is assumed that since the reconciliation itself was a heavy process and with the consent of both parties, one of the conciliators was appointed as the leader, which should have been the head of the affected village or the related group - Nogro, based on the fact that the final result greatly depended on his authority and eloquence.

Customary law recognised different types of murder and, appropriately, in the composition-exhortation process, it distinguished intentional and negligent murders from each other. In addition, Georgian customary law distinguished the forms of murder from each other. The outcome of reconciliation depended a lot on the type of murder. That was also the case in Adjara, where there was a distinction between intentional killing and careless killing. The participation of a hired killer was also significant in the proceedings. There were cases when the aggrieved party could not take revenge on the aggressor for some reason, so they would take the appropriate kind and amount of expenses and fulfil the plan through a hired assassin. Under similar conditions, it was permissible to reconcile with the customer, but the hostility with the direct executor continued eternally. Several kinds of reconciliation and blood atonement were distinguished: 1. Negligence - Keza, 2. Kill Accidentally - when the killer would have killed another instead of one; 3. Imposition of blood on one family name; 4. Premeditated murder - when the killer committed a premeditated murder or the victim was seriously injured but did not die; 5—murder for hire - when the Avenger would hire the person to kill the enemy[6].

It is established in the literature that when one particular person was intended to be killed, and another was mistakenly killed, the completed murder and the attempted murder had importance in the reconciliation. It is also interesting here that tradition forbade the avenge in case of murder within a kin group - Nogro, and if the murder still took place - blood would be imposed on the members of the same clan. Then the problem had to be resolved by reconciliation[7].

Different forms of reconciliation in Adjara

One of the common forms of reconciliation in Adjara was Damokvreba – make related. In the late medieval Adjara, the term "Dadosteba" was also spread along with the "Damokvreba". After the murder, for reconciliation, mediators from both sides would intervene and marry a woman from the killer's relatives to a relative of the assassinated. The opposite did not happen. The side of the victim would never marry a woman to the murderer's side to reconcile, and if such a marriage would take place, then it would be considered a humiliation to the relatives of the killed. After the settlement, enmity and bloodshed between clans would cease. Still, in the mountains of Adjara, in the past, quarrels appeared between possible relatives by marriage, especially when a son to be married abducted a woman without her parent's consent - took her by force. Usually, the abduction of a woman used to be a common custom not only in Adjara but also in other parts of Georgia and generally in the Caucasus. The rule of abduction found its reflection in the Samtskhian laws of the high Middle Ages. In the code of Beka Jakeli and her grandson - Agbugha, it is listed point by point what kind of ruling could be made subsequently such an article of law. In the code of Beka-Agbugha, Article 39 of the law states that the Kidnap of an engaged fiancee by another was not considered a crime until the wedding[8]. In such a situation, the relatives of both sides had to decide the case themselves, and the abductor had to win the heart of the woman's old fiance. With this, the enmity between the families was over.

Naturally, the government's attempt to prevent the vendetta between the plaintiffs can see here, and the official law opposes the customary norms for the sake of innovations. In the mountainous regions of Georgia, which is confirmed by mountainous ethnographic materials, abducting a woman was considered a violation of the rules and seemed restricted. However, the act itself was not regarded as shameful[9].

 The ethnographic history of Adjara has preserved the facts of the exhortation process at the time of the abduction. If the abductor was unlucky to abduct the bride and, nevertheless, he tried to kidnap the woman again, or on the contrary, if the prosecution of the female relatives failed the abduction, then the father-in-law asked the abductor for a negotiable amount of money[10]. Disagreement - enmity arising on the grounds of kidnapping women, in most cases, ended with a settlement, and the storytellers explained that hostility was inadmissible in a community. Because of this, the community also could intervene in solving the case of the woman's inaccessibility. Reconciliation was easier when abducting a woman than for raping her or other types of moral crime. This is ordinary because rape - the act of dishonouring a woman by force, was perceived as a specific physical insult. In contrast, kidnapping was perceived as a manifestation of custom, although, nevertheless, this was also included in the category of punishment.

An attractive custom in Adjara was to tie a rope to the neck of the sworn person and perform a simulation of sacrifice in the name of the murdered person. The last moment of this kind of reconciliation process was humiliating for the offender. Thus the injured party received moral satisfaction. If it were a matter of reconciling the sworn, they would tie a rope around the killer's neck and walk around the house of the killed three times. Carrying a murderer with a rope around his neck three times to the home of the deceased was an imitation of a sacrifice in the deceased’s name. According to ethnographic sources, a murderer was led by an influential elder with a rope around his neck to the family of the murdered person, who knelt in front of his brothers. He would kick up the murderer and thereby violate his dignity. With the second similar option, for reconciliation, the killer was tied around the neck and carried three times to the grave of the murdered person. If the deadly enemy did not agree to reconciliation, the conciliators would tie the neck of the murderer or his relative, father, or brother to the neck and bring him to the house of the killed without agreement with the victim's brothers, cousins, fathers, and uncles. Researchers of the history of law in Adjara have identified other variants of the humiliation of personal dignity in the reconciliation process. For example, when the criminal was led around the victim's house by kneeling. In such cases, the victims would tie the offender to the cattle stall and put a few tufts of straw and salt, especially in abducting a woman or committing other minor crimes. In Svaneti, when the mediators reached a reconciliation agreement, the victim would enter the offender's house to reconcile and extinguish the fire by pouring water on the hearth of the murderer's household. There were cases when the offender begged the victim for forgiveness at the fireplace.

Begging at home was performed by the decision of the mediators and at the request of the victim, as well. According to Mikheil Chartolani, the comparison with the hearth could be of different types: coming to the fireplace with a rope tied around the neck, lying down near the fireplace, kneeling in front of the fireplace, or kneeling from the door to the fireplace, begging by kneeling on each other or lying down next to the fireplace, going around the fireplace three times with a kneeling knee[11].

The hearth, as a holy place of reconciliation, is also reflected in the oral history of the legal character of the population of the adjoining  Georgian corners of Adjara, which are now in Turkey. According to one such story, culled from diaries of field materials collected at Sinope, such sacred symbols as the woman and the white scarf, the splinter, the candlestick, the lit fire, the hearth, and the fireplace are prominent in the process of reconciliation.

In almost all people, the accompanying component of the reconciliation process was a payment of compensation to the damaged family. Material compensation took place, especially during property revenge. In Adjara, when taking property revenge, they knew how to burn houses, kill cattle, and destroy crops. The crime had to be repaid with a fine. Sometimes the offender was forced to compensate the loss materially, for example, one bull for the dead bull. In the case of property revenge, when the avenger wanted to burn down the house, he would inform the family members or the relative group of the enemy - some members of the Nogro about the impending disaster by throwing a stone on the roofing of the house and giving the signal to the members of the house. Avengers chose a time when no one was home to fulfil the goal. If they did not manage to burn down the house, the Avengers would cut the corn in the garden of the rival, kill the cow, and throw down the beehive in the forest. This form of revenge excluded the killing - taking of blood, even though the ground was ready for it.

Composition - reconciliation with material compensation in the mountainous region of Adjara was at least an accompanying phenomenon of blood feuds in the past. In connection with bodily injury or murder, the accusing party would offer its demands for blood price. Even in Adjara, to equalise the "pledged blood", it was necessary to pay a definite material compensation in "Mosankleno". „Mosankleno“ was a certain material and monetary compensation during the period of revenge. One fixed norm of payment or the determination of the amount of blood price depended on the conciliators. It was taken into account intentional murder, as well as when the murdered person was guilty. Naturally, in such a case, the culpability was facilitated. When taking blood, the introduction of a certain material tax for the family of the affected party was a sign of the weakening of the blood relationship. Reimbursement of the blood price was mainly in material and monetary form. Blood relatives were paid in kind, but sworn enemies were reconciled by giving money or land and cattle. Also, they knew to hand over precious family utensils to the victims. When determining the blood price, the hierarchical status of the surname of murdered was important. That can is clear from the high medieval legal system of Samtskhe. In the Beka-Agbugha law system, the injured party was satisfied with half of the material wealth of the murderer, considering the relevant conditions that the victim was to be compensated according to his surname and honour. As Isidore Dolidze pointed out, the composition system in the monument of the law changed by the material compensation that should have been given to the victim's relatives according to the name, surname, estate, and honour of the murdered person. In Khevsureti, the amount of compensation was determined by the Council of the Elderly. According to the Georgian ethnographic materials, two types of composition are established: one, when it was for the benefit of the affected family, and the other - as compensation for public violation, for the benefit of the village community. For example, according to the rules of the Svan folk law, the family that violated the rules established by the society and thereby harmed the community paid "Hibar'' in the form of a fine for the benefit of the village and community. Based on the analysis of the Ganchineba (Judgement), a composition known as the bloodline was established, which was judged and accepted by the men of the community – Btche (Judge). The payment was made according to the relative categories, the most important of which was the tax of house rank, fraternity rank, and maternal rank, which the murderer and his relatives had to compensate by giving a certain amount of goods.

It is clear from the brought materials depicting the folk legal norms that the blood price was not so small, and it could only sometimes be afforded by one family. The close and wide circle of kinship was included in the composition. Even in the Adjara mountains, when the family of the blood debtor was unable to pay the blood fee due to the economic situation, then the family group – Nogro, as well as the whole clan and close circle, participated in paying the material compensation. Field-ethnographic sources directly indicate the nature of rights and duties between members of the kinship group in customary law, where, often, the burden of the offender was assumed by the father, brother, or cousin. Also, this is evidenced by the custom of bringing the father, brother, and cousin of the murderer to the residence or grave of the murdered person with a tied rope. The moral and material support for blood relatives was more vital among close relatives than among relatively distant separated families. But if the family did not have the opportunity to provide conciliatory goods, land, or money, and could not compensate it with the forces of close relatives, then, despite the differentiation of blood relatives according to the distance-proximity, the whole patrimonial appeared as a defender and supporter of the damaged family. In the reconciliation process, they agreed with the mediators. They met the demands of the affected family and clan, after which they paid the compensation set in favour of the affected party. One of the proofs of this point of view is similar data from different parts of Georgia. In case of wounding in Mtiuleti, the mediators would consult with the relatives and genealogical organisation of both sides - Mamishviloba and after that, they would put as many grains of wheat on the victim's wound, and the family of the guilty had to give as many cows to the family of the wounded. Interestingly, in the case of material poverty, families of the small kinship group, then the kin, appeared to support the family[12].

Thus, during the bloodshed in Adjara, the mutual assistance of the kinship group members - Nogro and clan was clearly defined. However, the protection and material and moral support of cognates confirmed during the revenge sometimes took place secretly within certain limits. The family that sheltered the killer supported him, and helped him materially, could become the object of the victim himself. As a rule, the murderer should have been enabled by a relative group - Nogro. That is how enmity between individuals would grow into hostility between blood-related groups.

The cycle of customs related to mother in Adjara

In the system of composition in Adjara, attention is drawn to the cycle of customs related to a woman's breast and milk, which is related to quite old social and legal norms in origin[13]. One group of businesses was associated with artificial kinship - kinship through milk, and the other group - with historically established blood revenge customs. In various ritualised forms, kinship through milk led to fraternisation in Adjara; it was marked by such terms as fraternity from milk (breastfeeding). Also, from the traditional terminology, attention was paid to the words expressing kinship with milk - suckling (lactation), fed by one breast, one breast suckled, and the other. Significantly, the milk relationship and blood relationship were considered on the same level. Therefore, the rule of prohibiting exogamy - inter-family marriage was also strictly regulated, although it was not blood that was decisive, but mother and milk. In Adjara, based on the agreement between the families who wanted to get closer, milk kinship was formally established by placing a tooth on the nipple. A person related through the milk and adopted would be carried in the mother's shirt. During adoption, a child’s three teeth were often put on the mother's nipple. The fraternisation of adult men, in addition to an oath, was done by placing a tooth on the other's mother's breast. In Adjara, putting a tooth on the nipple and kinship in this way is reflected in traditions and fairy tales found in Adjara[14].

In some parts of Guria, adjoining Adjara, the symbolic ceremony of placing a tooth on the mother's breast by the adopted was performed even in the priest’s presence in the church, which the father and his close relatives attended. In Samegrelo, putting a tooth on the mother's breast was one of the constituent parts of the custom. The custom of adoption with the symbolic suckle of the breast was known in Svaneti, Pshavi, and other parts of the Caucasus, including Balkareti, besides Georgia.

In the mountains of Adjara, the symbolic expressions of placing a tooth on the nipple were especially frequent in the rituals related to blood hostility, particularly in the process of blood enmity in the composition system. Mother played the role of mediator, and breast and milk served as means of kinship. The enemies were reconciled by senior, authoritative men of the sworn kinship groups and sometimes the entire community. Their reference could lead to the adoption of the killer by the damaged family. In Adjara, we find scarce material on the role of milk relations in blood enmity, although one part of the narration describes several interesting related episodes. According to the ethnographic sources of Adjara, in the blood feud process, one of the killers was able to enter the house of the affected brothers. He forced the family’s mother to put the nipple in his mouth. Brothers saw this, lowered their guns, and bowed their heads. Placing a tooth on the breast of the mother of the murdered killer, e., the Simulation of breast-suckling as one of the forms of reconciliation is preserved in Adjara only in narrations. Similar variants of this rule, including forceful placing a tooth on the nipple for reconciliation, were verified in other parts of Georgia, for example, in Guria, Samegrelo, and Abkhazia, as well as in Khevi.

In the composition system in Adjara, the facts of the adoption of the sworn were also confirmed. When the vengeful father gave the murderer the place of his dead son, this was caused by a particular situation and the careful intervention of intercessors. According to one report recorded in upper Adjara, the mediators brought the murderer to the house of the deceased's father, but he was not at home by chance. They hid the killer under the bed. When the father returned home, seeing the intermediaries, he thought the culprit was with them, then found him and pulled him out from under the bed. The murderer was kneeling by the bed during the mediation’s entire negotiation. In the end, the matter turned so that the father adopted the killer and dressed him in bloody and especially kept clothes of his dead son. According to another version of the story, in Tchvana Valley, the son who swore to take revenge for his father's murder caught the murderer, dragged him to his father's grave, tied his hands and feet, and threw him there to be punished. The avenger’s mother understood this news, ran to the cemetery, took out her nipple, and said to her son: Son, if you do not let that man go, my milk will not benefit you. The son could not resist his mother's command and followed her will. He made the murderer his brother, and his mother adopted him. Mother sometimes played a particular role in the heavy burden of reconciling clan members and pacifying enemies. After adoption in Adjara, peaceful relations were established between the kin groups of the adoptee and the adopter, and the rights and duties related to blood kinship were laid. Among the artificially inbred kin groups, exogamy - the prohibition of intermarriage was observed in certain generations, and there was solidarity in the field of marriage, the birth of a child, burial of the dead, and other such types of relations, as it happened between members of a naturally arising blood kin group.

Conclusion

As we can see, the described form of artificial kinship in the field of blood in Adjara is one of the general Georgian and also one of the regional varieties of common Caucasian milk kinship, which seems to be a natural phenomenon, because in the process of origin and formation, therefore, during a long period of development, it was in close cultural contact with different corners of Georgia and the Caucasus, and Under the conditions of historical connections, it experienced mutual influences. Despite the three-hundred-year rule of the Ottomans, Samtskhe and Adjara preserved the Georgian ethnic traditions, including the ancient traditions of reconciliation in the field of blood relations, as well as the archaic aspects of milk kinship during reconciliation, which are an invaluable source for establishing old forms of social relations and folk legal norms in Georgia. In addition, the population preserved and handed down the ancient Georgian traditions from generation to generation.

Bibliography

1. Bekaia M., (1976). Old and new wedding traditions in Adjara. Batumi.


2. Dolidze I., (1953). Old Georgian Law. Tbilisi.


3. Matsaberidze V., (1958). Diaries of the 1958 Ajara folklore expedition, (Case N3), Batumi: Manuscripts Fund of the Department of Folklore and Dialectology of Batumi Scientific Research Institute.


4. Mgeladze VL., (1973). Zemo Adjarian village in ancient times. Batumi.


5. Mgeladze N., (1984). Some issues of kinship relations in the light of customary norms in Adjara. N3. Tbilisi: Herald, History, Archaeology, Ethnography and Art History Series.


6. Noghaideli J., (1935). Ethnographic essays from the life of the Adjarians. Tbilisi.


7. Shamiladze V., (1961). About one of the remnants of the tribal community. Journal “Literaturuli Adjara“, N5.


8. Kamadadze M., (1997). Issues related to the custom of avenge. Batumi.


9. Chartolani M., (1961). From the history of the material culture of the Georgian people. Tbilisi.


10. Tchkonia I., (1958). Institute of Marriage in Mtiuleti. Tbilisi.


11. Kharadze R., (1947). Khevsuri law (blood-hostility). I, Tbilisi: Annales.

Footnotes

[1] In socio-cultural anthropology and ethnology, blood revenge – vendetta was revenge for murder, resentment or material loss.

[2] Dolidze I., (1953). Old Georgian Law. Tbilisi. 5.

[3] Mgeladze V., (1973). Zemo Adjarian village in ancient times. Batumi. 41-61.

[4] Shamiladze V., (1961). About one of the remnants of the tribal community. Journal “Literaturuli Adjara“, N5, 83.

[5] Kharadze R., (1947). Khevsuri law (blood-hostility). I, Tbilisi: Annales. 164-169.

[6] Noghaideli J., (1935). Ethnographic essays from the life of the Adjarians. Tbilisi. 34.

[7] Kamadadze M., (1997). Issues related to the custom of avenge. Batumi. 20.

[8] Dolidze I., (1953). Old Georgian Law. Tbilisi. 302.

[9] Tchkonia I., (1958). Institute of Marriage in Mtiuleti. Tbilisi. 112.

[10] Bekaia M., (1976). Old and new wedding traditions in Adjara. Batumi. 53.

[11] Chartolani M., (1961). From the history of the material culture of the Georgian people. Tbilisi. 134, 139. 143-144.

[12] Mgeladze N., (1984). Some issues of kinship relations in the light of customary norms in Adjara. N3. Tbilisi: Herald, History, Archaeology, Ethnography and Art History Series. 66.

[13] Mgeladze N., (1984). Some issues of kinship relations in the light of customary norms in Adjara. N3. Tbilisi: Herald, History, Archaeology, Ethnography and Art History Series. 57-58.

[14] Matsaberidze V., (1958). Diaries of the 1958 Ajara folklore expedition, (Case N3), Batumi: Manuscripts Fund of the Department of Folklore and Dialectology of Batumi Scientific Research Institute. 76-77.