Showing posts with label Polygamy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Polygamy. Show all posts

Tuesday, 1 October 2019

Great Social Revolution of 1848

Andrew Stepanenko
June 07, 2019 <https://scan1707.blogspot.com/2019/06/8.html>

Translated by Berenkova Violetta Michailovna

Discourse about the replacement of feudal legal norm with bourgeois norms.

CORRECT DATING
In China slavery abolition and peasantry liberation happened in 221-206 BC, however the blind trust to such evidences is inappropriate. In practice, the most events, characteristic for the end of the feudalism epoch took place in 1848-1869. Only the “Spring of Nations” in 1848 raised the question about change of legal bases for the first time.


Thus, Russia did not stay behind – neither for 300 years, even nor for 20. Moreover, Austria which had already twice released the serfs, in 1862 still observes the act of serfs liberation in Russia with horror.


Land-owning aristocracy of all part of Austria were worried with the peasantry reform being prepared and carried out in Russia at that time (1859-1862). Austrian reactionary circles loudly argued about revolutionary but not historical” character of the Russian reform and were greatly afraid of total and free of charge liquidation of feudal survivals kept in Austria after 1848.

Taking into consideration that the last Czech knights-vassals - in the most developed region of Europe - got freedom only in 1869, it is not surprising. The process had not come to the end yet, and last trial of the nobleman who had performed his feudal seigneur’s right, happened in 1875.

MAIN ANTI-FEUDAL REFORMS
1. Abolition of inalienability of patrimony
2. Abolition of patrimonial courts
3. Abolition of personal dependence without redemption
4. Abolition of feudal duties (corvee, tithe) for redemption

Not specified:
1. Abolition of the seigneur’s right (composers got embarrassed)
2. Abolition matrilinial status inheritance (it directly concerns succession to the throne that is why it was entirely removed from the history)
3. Change of the order of property inheritance from matrilinial to patrilineal
4. Polygamy prohibition
5. Cancelation of such inheritance form as nepotism - from the uncle to the nephew

In practice, only the basic social changes constituted the list of more than forty positions. We will also go directly to the points - in the real order of importance.

MATRILINIAL DOCTRINE
In matrilinial relations owing to the old Roman doctrine Partus sequitur ventrem the child inherits the mother’s status. It is classical matriarchy, and in 1662 it reigned not only in Virginia, but also in other states. It means that in 1662 in the North America still there were no translations of the Old Testament corrected from the patriarchal positions. It not an idle statement; protests about new translations were fixed by Llorente.

PATRILINEAL DOCTRINE
The patrilineal doctrine is legally fixed in “Liberties of nobility” of 1785: the nobleman transferred the nobility to his children … the noblewoman … did not transfer their nobility … to her husband and children. It is the direct opposite to the ancient Roman doctrine Partus sequitur ventrem, valid in America, at least, till 1662. It is important that the new doctrine was directly connected with the granted liberties to nobility.

DATING OF DOCTRINES CHANGE
The Old Testament, persistently promoting patriarchy, is impregnated with the matriarchal society organization. It is necessary to search for change of translation of the Old Testament in connection with polygamy prohibition and matriarchy remainders.
1768 Scotland. James Watt got Glasgow citizenship thanks to his marriage
1768 Spain. Inquisitors tried to take hold of processes of polygamy cases
1769 Russia. All copies of the Old Testament were ordered to be destroyed
1771 Spain. Inquisitors took hold of processes of polygamy cases
It is also possible to date later terms; the main idea here is logic coherence of the events.

MATRILINIAL PROPERTY INHERITANCE
Inheritresses of the woman - her daughters, inheritors of the man - nephews, children of his uterine sisters. James Watt was introduced into the science world by his uncle in 1750. Transfer of the Holy See from the uncle to his nephew existed until Napoleon's intrusion into Rome, that is, till 1798. To Vsevolod Alekseevich Vsevolozhskiy (the Rjurikovs’ family) bequeathed all his wealth to his nephew in 1796. Yevgeny Onegin came into a fortune from the uncle (instead of his father) n about 1819. Up to the middle of 19 century, the dowry was inviolable: the father and the husband of the woman managed it, but it was not in their full dispose.

PATRILINEAL PROPERTY INHERITANCE
The distinct evidences specifying on patrilinial character of inheritance, are closely connected with giving liberties to nobility and the redemption of feudal duties in the middle of 19 century.

MAN'S PROPERTY
In tribal communities the male and female property is mutually tabooed, and the situation developed in such a way so that the real estate (the house and lands) are mainly female and movable are mainly male. Both types of property are inherited matrilinially, but man's one, transferred from the uncle to the nephew, is liquid, alienated, that is why it rarer becomes the crediting subject. As a result, the man's property did almost not get to usurious schemes and the cattle in Russia Concerning draft animals the landowner depended on peasants, as peasants depended from the landowner in the question of the land.
Pay attention, feudalism was known in fishing and cattle tribal communities, and redemption operation - not. The reason: boats and cattle were man's property.

REASON OF THE TITHE WAR OF 1832
The war happened in Britain when the authorities encroached not only on the tenth part of crop, but also on the tenth of livestock. In the considered above scheme of relations all is clear: cattle is man's property separated from the female part, which was pledged - the lands.

FEMALE PROPERTY
The main thing in female property (land, constructions) is that it needs attraction of resources from the outside. It is the basic moment. The land requires working hands, draft animals, and sowing material in lean years as well. Moreover, the owner of land is doomed to bear losses every lean year while the owner of movable liquid resources, following the conjuncture, flexibly changes the policy and regularly benefits even in case of the fiercest hunger. In such situation, the land was simply obliged to follow the personal estate status.

INALIENABILITY
The inalienability of patrimony was the main obstacle in the capitalism way. The father had no right to waste the dowry of the daughter. The husband could not redeem his loss by sale of his wife’s house. The creditor could not withdraw the land from the run into debt community. The patrimonial right did not contain self-destruction procedure that is why it was possible to transfer fixed capital only together with souls.
Thus, there was need in repartition of fixed capital; operations were just carried out under the existing legal norms. Werner von Bolland was the vassal of 43 various sovereigns from whom he received more than 500 fees, including 15 counties, and himself, in turn, had more than 100 vassals. In practice, alienation and rotation of fixed capital took place, but had some veiled character.

INALIENABILITY CRISIS
The main gravedigger of the out-of-date rules is crisis. Each economic collapse in the history generates repartition, but in a case with tribal system, such repartition meant rearrangement of marriages, and repartition of statuses of already born noble posterities. As a rule, the emperor castrates tens princes, depriving their right to the power, then the sultan already castrates three hundreds princes, but then repartition happens in Europe, and it was hundred thousands of small and large fees.
In 1833 in Russia there were 127103 owners of people, that is, in Europe - more than 500 thousand total, and in the existing matrilinial system it meant several millions applicants for the power. It was necessary to break the link between matrilinial relationship and formal rights.

LEADERS OF REFORMS
Synchronously there were two hierarchies: patrimonial and financial and economic, imposed on the first one from the top, however, it was arranged according to patrimonial rules. In the Church sphere, these two pyramids confidently coincided: monasteries were also the largest usurers of that epoch, and, simultaneously, objects of the feudal property. In the situation of several series of hungry years, followed by transition of the third of the property to the Church and the legal right of a monastery to prohibit marriages (this was a really important advantage) the Church could successfully dictate its prices to the other two thirds.

SLAVERY AS DEADLOCK
The word combination "God's servant" definitely had a literal sense, however termless enslaving created a new problem: stably unprofitable agricultural industry ruled by financiers threatened to collapse the system. Monasteries confidently managed such large social spheres as medicine and formation, but nobody could accept for support 95 % of chronically starving population. Slaves on continuing basis were an unprofitable sector from the first day of enslavement.

THE REDEMPTION LOAN AS A TYPICAL SCHEME
The usurer who has received pledge (people and their inalienable lands) does not hold it, and will try to sell it off somehow. To give all it to the redemption via the loan is an expected method of realization, just because this method is typical.

PYRAMID OF DEBTS
The debtor was not only the peasant, but also the majority of those who were above him. Each businessman owed to his seigneur and demanded debts from his vassals. The redemption scheme was necessary not only to vassals who were the bottom link above peasants; in this pyramid, everyone paid off from the mister. Class obstacles did not exist: peasants could redeem themselves as well - if there was money to pay and understanding how it worked. As a result, the redeemed person became the full legal owner of those who were under him. For example, the head of the family became the legal mister for his wife and children - for the first time.

INALIENABILITY LIQUIDATION
The debt together with pledge could be sold, the trade began on the first day of the redemption, and in 1848-1853, and the principle of patrimony inalienability was abolished. There was only one level where the principle of pledge inalienability from the debtor was preserved up to 1880 - level of the peasant. It also created illusion of serf trade.

SLAVERY ILLUSION
In practice, the serfdom is slavery - in original historical sense of the term: debt bondage without the loss of legal capacity. The community remained a legal subject – of the feudal law indistinguishable from family law, where the younger relative totally subordinated to the senior one. However, there was a nuance: in practice, the landowner sold the related right to his manor and people, not the manor and the people.

ABOUT THE COMMON LAW
The law of the Russian empire of first half of 19 century was the written law - publicly announced, but for 91 % of the population there was absolutely other law in force – the common law, and only it determined the peasant’s life.
We will not find exact texts of norms of this common law. Those accessible fragments of the law are modified: so, they write that the Buryats had the penalty for the woman murder twice lower than for the man murder, but it should be vice versa. We consulted the expert person who explained that nowadays the law is vice versa at the Caucasus region and it is correct.
Owing to the common law, there were no penal servitude for a long time Russia, - there was nobody to imprison, and the community solved all problems. The horsestealer was trampled to death by all village, and in case of poor harvest, they could bury an old woman - alive. There is an evidence for 1855. The landowners did not hesitate to use the right of the seigneur, and that communities seemed not to object to it: the mechanism to hold birth rate under the strict control was still necessary.
Here is a question: how the procedure of the landowner change passed following the results of the manor sale? How was this owner change affirmed in the common law? The community was simply obliged to confirm such change. The answer: according to standard feudal norms: for example, through "civil" marriage with the main princess of the community.
Let us remember such "bad custom" as arsia - breast feeding of the children landowner by peasants that made the peasants and their new misters relatives. Here again it is necessary to remember that there were also procedures of living the family - for the landowners selling the manors. The common law since ancient times contained the norms, allowing bypassing patrimony inalienability, and the very bottom of the social pyramid used them not less skilfully than the top.

THE EXACT PERIOD OF RADICAL CHANGES
This data concern only Russia.
1875 The last seigneur right court
1875 The earliest date of fixing snokhachestvo in a village (the seigneur right passed downwards)
1876 The splash of notes about illegitimate children in Google Ngram Viewer
1876 The first idea about the peasantry redemption with the help of state credits
1876 Confirmation of the landowners’ rights to the land (not yet redeemed)
1877 The process of "193th" revolutionaries going to the people
The same must occur everywhere and at the same time.

PATRIMONIAL COURTS
Patrimonial courts were mostly cancelled following the results of the “Spring of Nations” in 1848. The reason: the change of legal norms simply left no place for these forms of judicial authority. Peasants solved current problems within the common law, but vassals, having signed contracts with banks, were not under the control of the seigneurs any more. Oaths on fidelity given by vassals during the homage lost their sense.
Thus, besides patrimonial judicial structures, there had to be matrimonial ones solving women's problems. The most probable place of their existence were female monasteries. Abbesses solved number of questions.

FUNCTION OF FEMALE MONASTERIES
Lavoisier’s spouse, rather high-ranking person possessing the part of the French East Indian company property, was brought up in a monastery. The reason: the monastery could give system education and, surely, preserved the wards against risk of casual conception. In a situation when the father of the child got the right to the dowry, the elite had to be careful.
It is necessary to remind that the matriarchal society did not impose prohibitions on sex. In such situation, monastic severity was not useless. In Poland female monasteries were mostly liquidated in 1860th, and then the control over the daughters’ affairs laid down on the families shoulders. Puritanism and the Family Tyranny were early bourgeois models, which were typical just because the feudal model of the moral behaviour control, including personal check of the bride virginity by the seigneur, were destroyed by the bourgeoisie.

PROHIBITION OF DIVORCES
That fact that the Catholic church (unlike Orthodox) does not know the concept of divorce, specifies the extreme youth of the present version of the Catholic church. At least until 1730, the right to divorce in Russia was ordinary, and it is necessary to notice that encyclopedic articles carefully avoid exact dates of acts of the right to divorce abolition. There are only dates of this right renewal, and in Germany it was 1874 - 2 years after crash of the Viennese stock exchange (1872), basing on the calculation (1848 + 24 = 1872) coinciding with the end of fees redemption.
The main interested party in legal firmness of marriage is the usurer who had lent money to the vassal signing the agreement on the pledge redemption of the total property of his spouse. The largest usurer who possessed the third of the property in his regions was the Church, and so the Church prohibited divorce.
In Europe the laws concerning divorces prohibition should chronologically coincide with the corvee and tithe redemption laws in 1848-1852.

THE AMICABLE SCHEME OF THE REDEMPTION
I have just understood, what exactly I have written. Amicable schemes of the redemption of a manor from pledge is possible like that: the husband signs the paper and pays off the pledge, though the manor formally belongs to his wife as her dowry. Such strictly family schemes certainly existed.

SENSE OF THE PRIMOGENITURE RIGHT
In tribal communities first-borns often belonged to seigneurs or monasteries who, in practice, conceived them. This social stratum of first-borns was extremely important for the society: it was impossible to find better state employees, as they were not connected with their matriarchal families that is why were not inclined to family corruption. This approach was applied even later: the elder children were sent to build civil service career, and younger ones remained with old their parents: daughters got estates, and nephews - barns and ships.
This postremogeniture scheme was the best for the tribal structure, first of all, because it allowed to rejuvenate the membership of senior parantelas. A 14-year-old teenager was legally equal to his 36-year-old brothers that is why he sat with them at meetings with full right and when they died, continued to keep the power belonging to him as the eldest in the family.
Since the middle of 19 century, the eldest son became the inheritor more often. The reason is obvious: in case of death of the father, there should be a person in the family, mature enough to undertake continuation of the redemption procedure, and it was better, if this person was not restrained in his rights by his much younger brothers and sisters. Here we have the usurer’s interest of the middle of 19 century time, which was included in the Old Testament as an ancient, so sacred norm.

THE RIGHTS OF FIRST-BORNS
It is an individual question. When the primogeniture was accepted, some part of the first-borns who were conceived from the seigneur and were brought up out of the mother’s family, got undeserved rights to the family inheritance. Those who didn’t recognize these rights, I think, got under inquisition tribunal - with all following consequences. In France they introduced a strict formula, cutting all ways for the maneuver: “the father of the child is the husband of his mother”. It meant that all children from seigneurs after death of the legal fathers became heads of their families.
So it happened not everywhere: in the Ottoman Empire the janizaries were simply butchered - in order to avoid tensity growth in the vassal provinces.

THE RIGHT OF THE DEAD HAND
It is a part of the law of succession: the seigneur could choose from the dead’s inheritance everything that he wished. As a matter of fact, this is a parental right, existing now in the changed form: parents can inherit for the dead the same as their children. Earlier the parental right extended on seigneurs too, as the eldest in their families. Patrilineal character of the inheritance, introduced by "the Spring of Nations”, threw out the seigneur from the group of inheritors.

THE HUSBAND AND THE WIFE
The husband and the wife were not blood relatives, it is common nowadays as well. The wife’s parents can inherit for her but her husband’s parents cannot do it. Earlier on, such relationship meant that the wife, having killed the husband, did not commit an inexcusable blood crime, and had to pay a common penalty. Therefore, the tradition to bury the husband-killer alive is extremely young (the same period of the middle of 19 century) and it did not exist for a long period: the state hastened to interfere. It is curious that the murder of the wife by her husband was regarded as less serious crime, here again, we see the interests of the usurer: the husband paid the loan that is why he had to live.

ROTATION OF PARANTELAS
Violent replacement of elder parantela by the following one according to the rank is actual only in a tribal community. The murder of old men is clearly fixed in the isolated communities, including, those in Russia and at the Caucasus. Now it has remained only in Africa. “The Spring of Nations” de facto liquidated the rotation, and matrilinial parantelas as well, and the revolution together with regicide lost any sense. Surely, the tsars were killed in the second half of 19 century, but it was not already connected with parantelas in any way. The tsar was replaced with his son, instead of one of his nephews the mother’s side.

THE TSAR: THE INHERITOR OR THE SUCCESSOR?
In 1418, the famous French lawyer Jean de Terrevermeille stated: the elder son of the king or other inheritress cannot be named actually by the inheritor of the one whose inheritor he is; it is common but not hereditary succession.
In 1830 Isabella, the daughter of the Spanish king Ferdinand VII had already the right to inherit her father’s throne.
Commentators focus attention on the sex of the inheritor, however the unique significant aspect is the right of succession from the father: not from mother, or the uncle on the mother’s side, or the uterine brother or sister, but from his/her own father (who is legally of the other blood). In 1418, it was legally impossible.

ADOPTION
Bourgeois revolution resulted in adoption loosing any sense. The adopted person inherited the property of the foster mother, nothing more. The throne together with the status was already transferred patrilinially, and the monarch of the masculine gender physically could not feed the potential son with his breast.
The last possible adopted prince in Russia was Konstantin. He aspired to the Ottoman throne and died early together with his spouse in 1831.

CEREMONY OF EXILE FROM THE FAMILY
Entirely lost its sense.

CASTRATION
The great Social revolution princes’ castration in case of turnover devoid of sense. The throne could be occupied by the daughter of the monarch, but the main thing was that lands concentration had already been finished and the government started to work in a different, not matrilinial sense. The last live eunuchs were fixed in the second half of 19 century.

THE EXILE INTO THE MONASTERY
It is a specific topic, which needs investigation, but it is typical, that exactly in 19 century tsarinas stopped to rush to end their days in monasteries and preferred to enjoy themselves at secular balls and parties.

IMPOSTORS
It is interesting that in Russia tsars-impostors disappeared together with the old version of the Old Testament and polygamy. I will remind that I do not trust to the dates, but here are the logic links.

VASSALS’ PARLIAMENTS
The number of records concerning parliaments greatly increases in two epoch: the reception of Ekaterina's liberties by noblemen and the first liberation of peasants and during the period of the "Spring of Nations» (in Germany they brought up the question of the tithe redemption in 1830-1832). The reason of growth of evidences is obvious: all who signed the obligation to redeem the fee became legal subjects in the eyes of the law, so they had the right to expression of their political will.


I will remind here that I do not trust dates, and again I will emphasize that dates are unimportant: logic link with other social changes - that is important.

WHAT POLYGAMY WAS AN OBSTICLE TO
It is clear that the governing top agreed about polygamy abolition - not at once, there were also obstacles from the Spanish king in 1768, but they finally came to the agreement. My today's answer: polygamy did not disturb anything; it just became unnecessary. Concentration of resources moved via other channels. However, of course, it is possible to assume that the monarchs, who managed to collect the lands of their countries thanks to the resources of their wives, simply cut off that possibility for all others.

JOINT LIABILITY
The matrilinial doctrine predetermines joint liability of the family and legally results in enslaving of all tribe: if the princess could not pay off the credit, all young and old members of the family got under the power of the usurer.
The patrilineal doctrine is more progressive, as the chief of the family bears responsibility for his debts himself. The family of a merchant, for example, has the right to know, how many money the head of the family has, but not to aspire to participation in business. The son enters into the business, only when the father allows, anyway, the signboards say “Ivanov and son”. One person responsibility is very high concentration of responsibility: yesterday's vassals, stealing and shirking because they don’t care who is at the top, are trying now as much as they can, that is important for loan repayment.
In the history there is a short period of debt prisons popularity, mainly in 1848-1849. This is the period of paradigm change: families deny joint liability, leaving formal heads of business to rot in a pit - when it is worth it. A bit later, they found means to cope with this category of non-payers, and before 1880, the permanent conflict with non-payers would be mostly settled.

SECULARIZATION
In Poland, the clergy property got into the treasury of the Russian empire in 1864 – that was rather late. In England and France, secularization of national education passed in 1880 - even later. But it is all - not that. Secularization must be closely be connected with the tithe redemption, and this period of 1848-1849 is not noted for secularization acts.
How did it occur in practice? The Church’s vassals redeemed their pieces of land, and banks, accepting payments, simply transferred the required some of money to the Church - minus the commission fee. Actually, here is all scheme. A question, what all these serious money sums (the third of all property) were spent on, is better to be put in front of conspirologists.

ECONOMY AND LAW LINK
The scheme shows the acts legally destroying the feudal norms and notes about stock exchanges, trading fixed capital, and correlation here is very rigid.


Stock exchanges worked in earlier times, - it was required sell the property confiscated by the inquisition from adherents of a different faith and heretics, but also in this case alienation of fixed capital was often conjugated with legal destruction of the community which had got into trouble.


THE INNOVATIVE SCHEME OF INQUISITION
From the very beginning, the Inquisition contradicted the usual patrimonial right as it applied innovative law norms to the matrilinial society. There was a certain person under charge, and this person could not pay off with the penalty, which was pinned on all community.
Legally it is possible only in the direct link with liquidation of feudalism and introduction of bourgeois rights, which calls into question the dating of the inquisition actions. I have no ideas about dating at present.

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS
Here we have the Great Social Revolution, officially happened in 1768-1883, (mainly in 1848-1849), and this revolution is seriously underestimated, thus, all necessary facts are available, and these facts are strictly official.

LIST OF MAIN TEXTS
24. Chronological shifts: Catherine's shift and 59-year-old one. https://chispa1707.blogspot.com/2020/03/chronological-shifts-catherines-shift.html
25. The Roman numeration - a key to the chronology secret. https://chispa1707.blogspot.com/2020/04/the-roman-numeration-key-to-chronology.html
27. Lacuna
28. Lacuna
.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Friday, 16 August 2019

Matriarchy: from Vatican to Mecca

Andrew Stepanenko
July 04, 2019 <https://scan1707.blogspot.com/2019/07/blog-post_4.html>

Translated by Berenkova Violetta Michailovna

Most legends about matriarchy are fantastic. One chronicler argued that amazons cauterized their left breast; the other one noticed that they killed men, and all of them were sure in one fact - that matriarchy means the reign of women. In practice, matriarchy is based on two principles:

1. The man and only the man rules.
2. The relationship is considered on the mother's side.

This is the basic concept.

MATRIARCHY TODAY
(Sources: vsegda_tvoj; urs_sonam)

The Akan are the most part of the population of the Republics of Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire. In their families, everything, including surnames and property, is inherited on the mother’s side. Governing positions traditionally belong to men, but the right to them is given through their female relatives - mothers, sisters and daughters.

The Minangkabau populate the Western Sumatra and number about 4 million people. Mother is the head of the family. All family property is given from the mother to her daughter. The family is always headed by a man, but if he is unable to cope with his duties, women displace him and choose another one on its place. At political and religious institutes are mostly governed by men.

The Garo are one of the main ethnoses of the Indian state of Meghalaya. The head of the family is a woman, this "post" is by the inherited right is given to the youngest daughter, as well as the main part of the family property. Elder sisters remain without their dowry and arrange their life themselves. The man disagrees to marry until his future wife agrees to obey to him. Official organizations are operated by men, they control the large property.

The Мосо are the people living on the territory of the Chinese provinces Yunnan and Sichuan.
The lineage is kept through the female line, family traditions are given from the senior women to younger ones, and the property is inherited in the same way. Children receive the mother’s surname. The institute of marriage is absent. Women are free in their choice of partners and do not live with them under one roof. Instead of bringing-up their own offspring, the man are engaged in upbringing of the children belonging to their mothers’ families. Policy is mostly men’s occupation.

MATRIARCHY BASICAL PRINCIPLES
Combining the data of the past, it is rather simple to make the list of the basically principles of matriarchy.

1. As the relationship is kept through the female line, the husband and the wife are not blood relatives
2. As the husband and the wife are not blood relatives, they are not inheritors to one another
3. For the woman her children are inheritors, and the same do for the man his brothers and sisters and children of his sisters
4. For the child the closest relative-man is the uterine brother of his mother
5. The property of husbands and wives is divided and is mutually tabooed, no one can encroach on it
6. The real estate, as a rule, is fixed to the woman: the house, the earth
7. Therefore, mothers have some inherited property for their daughters, and there is nothing left to their sons
8. The personal estate, as a rule, is fixed to the man: cattle, a cart, a boat
9. Therefore, the uncles have some inherited property for their nephews and there is nothing left to their nieces
10. As a rule, the last-born child in family becomes the inheritor
11. The senior children remain without the inheritance (dowry) and arrange their life themselves
12. Pay attention that in fairy tales big brothers (or sisters) usually hate the last-born child
13. The marriage union is sometimes fixed by some reciprocal voice: with divorce, the guilty side loses it
14. The husband runs the property of his wife, for example, ploughs her earth, but does not own it
15. it is not the wife moves to the house of her husband, but the husband - to the house of his wife, the family is located matrilocal
16. The house is run by the senior woman, therefore the main problem for the son-in-law is his mother-in-law
17. The husband comes to the earth of his wife with his cattle, and with it he leaves in case of divorce
18. If the woman is a princess, the marriage means the right to govern her people
19. A knight in fairy tales receives after his marriage the princess her half-kingdom under the law
20. The king in the past often ruled as a regent with his child
21. When the princess marries, her father usually leaves his position in favor of his son-in-law
22. In some occasions, the prince, the blood relative of the mother, becomes the king

Some features from the listed above are actual even now, even in the most developed countries of Europe. Below are some clear historical examples.

AZTECS’ MATRIARCHY 
Moctezuma (Motecuhzoma II), the most known ruler of the Aztecs, accepted his throne not from his father, but from hs uncle Ahuitzotl. And, if to be clear with details, the following becomes obvious:
- Motecuhzoma II accepted the power not exactly from his uncle, but from his widow;
- Motecuhzoma II accepted the power only because managed to marry the daughter of his uncle’s widow;
- Motecuhzoma II was the brother and the nephew of his uncle’s widow, so here we see again - the female line!

When Motecuhzoma died, no one of his numerous sons pretended to the throne. The power shifted only with his daughters, as a dowry. And the supreme power was fixed to his daughter Tekuichpo .So again we see that the blood of Motecuhzoma had no importance; what was important was the fact that Tekuichpo was the daughter his most highborn wife, and moving upwards the lineage makes it clear that she was distant great-granddaughter of Ilancueitl, the foundress of the dynasty. For this reason, the following rulers were Cuitláhuac and Cuauhtémoc who married her in turn. Then this woman became the wife of smart Hernan Cortes, and his son from Tekuichpo, who was Motecuhzoma too, was the Aztec lord and the viceroy of Spain*. He signed orders, which were legal in Mexico and California. Hernan indeed became Regent with his son.

* in official history of Spain the viceroy Motecuhzoma is not mentioned, but there is some information about him in some unedited Spanish evidences

"INTERPRITER" MARINA
The christened Indian, Hernan Cortes’s interpreter and companion was not lucky with posthumous glory. The Spaniards, who thanks to Marina got the power over all Mexico, carefully avoided the description of the true role of this unusual "interpreter".

Bernal Dias called her "the most magnificent" woman.
Gomara named her as "girl-slave" or “our Indian interpreter”.
Cortes himself mentioned her as “the woman-interpreter, local Indian” in his second letter to Charles V.
On one hand, she was also considered as a slave for sexual pleasure of Aztec rulers, as if she was a thing presented to Cortes. And on the other – his lover, spy and adviser for Indian psychology. And even La Chingada - the greatest whore who had sold her people to Spaniards. All these colorful epithets are concealment devices of the essence of the matter.
Cortes surely had two interpreters besides Marina. Cortes had enough slaves, whores and even psychology advisers. But he could approach to the power only with the help of Marina. To begin with that Malinalli (so was her called actually) was the daughter of the captured and sacrificed main rival of Motecuhzoma II in fight for power. Moreover, in the family hierarchy Malinalli was higher than the spouse of Motecuhzoma II. Therefore, when Cortes (according to the advice of Motecuhzoma’s enemies) married her, he got the title of Malinche – which means “Malinalli’s husband” - and together with the title, he got enormous dynastic rights.
Thanks to this marriage Cortes also got total control of Mexico - from the Indians’ point of view it was absolutely legal. So princess Malinalli was neither the whore, nor the traitress, nor an ordinary interpreter, of course. Even if she would be silent as fish, all doors would open before them. Malinalli was embodied nobility herself. There was nothing more to expect from her.
Cortes, who was a notary, that is, a lawyer, immediately perceived the advantages and … historians somehow do not attract attention to that fact, but Cortes's all actions in Mexico were reduced to seizure of noble women and children. He took women in his dynastic harem, and used children as an alive board. By the way, it saved his life when he escaped from Tenochtitlan.
In the long term, Malinalli’s son from Cortes, Don Martin Cortes, would have among Aztecs the same rights, as other princes, and he would receive the status of the viceroy from the Spanish crown. But Don Martin was not lucky; the council of tribe chiefs conducted a ceremony of expulsion of his mother from the family, and Cortes gave the former queen to one of the officers, who adopted unaccomplished viceroy.
Cortes made some more attempts: has adopted one of Motecuhzoma’s daughters, got children from his other daughter, and after capital assault, captured and married the most noble princess - Tekuichpo. And Mexico obeyed - not to Cortes, but to Tekuichpo’s son from Cortes - next Motecuhzoma.

MATRIARCHY IN INDIA
It is not a secret that before the European invasion the power in India was given on the mother’s side. Europeans successfully used the Indian mother right, - as soon as certain "pirate" John Every* had stolen the Great Mogul harem.

* "Every" (sometimes written as "Avery") - a pseudonym the Odysseus "Anybody" type; so “Every” means "Everyone". It is quite an unusual pseudonym for a pirate; they used to have more simple nicknames. Every’s flag was also unordinary: four gold chevrons on the red field. And if red color symbolizes courage and so it is quite suitable, four gold chevrons are nonsense for a pirate. Gold symbolizes the power and nobility, and chevrons reflect hierarchy among naval officers.

Several separately employed by him in America piracy ships caught Mogul’s fleet at the coast of Arabia, captured the vessel with his harem then Every married the Great Mogul Aurangzeb’s main relative and declared (according to one of versions) the beginning of a new dynasty in India.

Clearly that the Mogul got furious and started to close trading stations and to throw Englishmen into prisons so the British parliament had to pretend that all were awfully upset by the piracy evidence, and to send a well-known “ruthless pirate” William Kidd into a pursuit of the thief of the harem. Everything shows it was a setup: an elderly businessman William Kidd owning several ships wanted just to live a quiet life occupying his elective post; but he got caught on a bribe, and the authorities forced him under the threat of judicial punishment to take a role of a pirate hunter, more precisely, one pirate hunter - Every.

Kidd started up into a pursuit, moved round Africa, visited some piracy moorages and when he returned with those data that he had collected about Every, he was immediately sent to London for interrogation in the Parliament. Thus, Tori party members immediately tried to use Kidd for discredit (!) of Wig-lords. Moreover, Kidd was forced to call someone's names! He knew what he was involved in, and trying to save life, did not give any name and only wrote a letter to King Wilhelm. As a result, the papers did not appear at trial at all, and he was sentenced to the death for the murder of the officer who had arose revolt on the ship (but not for the piracy). The owner of four gold chevrons on the banner and one-time pseudonym "Every" - together with the harem - remained off-camera forever.

It seems that so in 1707 in India there appeared a new Mogul whose name was Bahadur Shah – according to this context, he was juvenile son of Aurangzeb’s relative captured in the sea and "pirate Every" who remained off-camera. There is one rather symptomatic coincidence that the British East Indian Company in India was named "Bahadur’s Company", and this Bahadur’s Company had the right to collect tax from the population. In the author’s opinion, there was only one real way to pull out such powers from hands of Great Mogul’s collectors - to become the Great Mogul himself (or his regent). It seems that "Every" became such regent for Bahadur, - as Cortes became a regent for Tekuichpo’s son.

In 1712 when the son of the stolen princess and "pirate Every" was 16 (for that time, he was considered as an adult person for 2 years), Bahadur died. However he left 4 sons (probably, from different noble mothers), and the fight for power began between clans as a result. This war was inevitable and consequent because of that in matriarchal India did not include any primogeniture and the true lord of the stolen harem - secret "Every" - could find for 14-15-yearold Bahadur such marriage parties which obviously lead to war.

THE BYZANTIAN MATRIARCHY
The fact of normal maternal right in Byzantium is proved by almost all facts. Here is the main evidence: custom to geld noble princes. At those times, chroniclers named it differently: “to cut off a nose”, for example, but after digging up other sources the nose turns into other part of the body. We will try to explain the reasons for that.
As family and tribe traditions approve relationship on the mother's side, the best way to come to the power was to marry a noble woman. The country was actually her this dowry. And the best way to keep the power was to make her a child. After that the wife could be banished into a monastery or one could help her to die because of puerperal fever, and her husband as the father of the baby could easily become a regent with the royal (on the mother’s side) child till his/her adulthood. However if the prince-baby was a castrate he was nobody. And his regent was nobody too. Therefore, all revolutions began with seizure of noble women and castrations of their sons.
So, for example, in the beginning of VII century two Heraclii, the father and the son, started revolt in Byzantium. They began it with taking the usurper Phocas’s family away consisting of three royal women. By the way, these women were really precious for Phocas, when the revolt began, he immediately hid them in the monastery Nea Metanoia. But the merchant corporation of Prasinoi pulled out tsarinas from the monastery and passed them to the Heraclii. It also became the main condition of recognition of Heraclii’s legitimate power. The situation is absolutale the same as with Cortes and Malinalli.
Tsarinas belonged to three generations: the grandmother (Epiphania), the mother (Fabia) and the daughter (Fabia too). The grandmother became the wife of Heraclius the Elder, and - attention! - there and then she became his son’s foster mother. Form that date the chroniclers started writing: “Epiphania – the mother of Emperor Heraclius”.
Heraclius the Younger married the younger women, and in May 612 one of them (by then christened as Eudoxia) gave birth to Heraclius’s son, and three months later when the kid got stronger, she died because she became absolutely useless. It is necessary to emphasize here that the tsarina’s death was a correct political action. She, being alive, was dangerous, as she could give birth to a prince from someone else. And Heraclius was the only one who had the right to this baby. As a regent he ruled those who obeyed the family of the baby’s mother.

The NOTE: there are no data on the boys born by three tsarinas before the revolt. Probably, they were gelded during the revolution. Sons of Emperor Heraclius were gelded during the following revolution (soon after his death).

The NOTE 2: John of Nikiû stated the story a bit different. Three royal women belonged to the family of Justinian - one of the previous emperors. Therefore, the marriage with one of them meant for Heraclii’s clan building relation with Justinian’s family. Probably, therefore the soldier's emperor Phocas who first captured the family and had a plan to marry one of the women, after consultations of priestly and judicial officials, refused his idea and resignedly gave all three women to the son of the eldest matron.

MATRIARCHY IN VATICAN
In encyclopedias this phenomenon reveals as so: nepotism (from an Lat. nepos, gen. case nepotis - grandson, nephew) - distribution by the Popes of the highest church positions or lands to the closest relatives. It was well spread in XV-XVI centuries. In a more comprehensive sense (modern meaning), it means favoritism.
This definition contradicts the facts and documents, because in XI century (but not in XV) Peter's throne passed to the nephew of the previous Pope. And since then it was a non-stop process - up to the beginning of XIX century. Here is the list of those Popes who were appointed by the church directly in the result of nepotism. They are 12.

Benedict IX. 1032-1044. Theophylactus, Count of Tusculum, Benedict VIII and John XIX's nephew.
Innocent III. 1198 1216. Lotario de' Conti, Count of Segni. Clement III’s nephew.
Celestine IV. 1241. Goffredo da Castiglione, Urban III’s nephew.
Alexander IV. 1254-1261. Rinaldo de' Conti, Count of Segni. Gregory IX's nephew.
Adrian V. 1276. Ottobuono de' Fieschi, Count of Lavagna. Innocent IV’s nephew.
Honorius IV. 1285-1287. Giacomo Savelli. Honorius III’s grandnephew.
Gregory XI. 1370-1378. Pierre Roger de Beaufort. Clement VI’s nephew.
Eugene IV. 1431-1447. Gabriele Condulmer. Gregory XII’s nephew.
Paul II. 1464-1471. Pietro Barbo. Eugene IV’s nephew.
Alexander VI. 1492-1503. Rodrigo de Borgia. Callixtus III’s nephew.
Pius III. 1503. Francesco Todeschini Piccolomini. Pius II’s nephew.
Leo XI. 1605. Alessandro de' Medici. Leo X’s nephew.

The complete list is much larger. We managed to find 64 Fathers (from 535 till 1799), who got their positions due to family relations, but that fact was not emphasized. And the point is not that they are someone's relatives; the matter is that the Holy Sees were inherited strictly on the mother’s side. The father delegated the power to the nephew, the son of the sister on mother. Here we see normal maternal right, as in case with Greeks, Aztecs and Moguls. This maternal right was recognised in Rome by everyone, as papal destiny was lifelong, and the nephew of the dead (and consequently already powerless) Pope could ascend the same throne only if his right was recognized by all members of the Curia.
It lasted up to Napoleon Bonaparte's intervention.

MATRIARCHY IN ASSYRIAN CHURCH
The same scheme existed in the East Assyrian Church (we have not found the data on throne transfer in other Eastern Churches). The patriarchate was given only from the uncle to the nephew, without consideration of the candidate’s age, experience or, say, personal qualities. Mar Simon, for example (who decided to join the Gregorian calendar in 1964), became the patriarch when he was 12.

NEPOTISM IN RUSSIA
In July, 1796 Vsevolod Alekseevich Vsevolozhsky, being childless, bequeathed all his fortune to his nephew Vsevolod Andreevich Vsevolozhsky who, after death of his uncle on October, 6th, 1796, became the owner of all inheritance of Vsevolod Alekseevich.
In history, the number of cases when the nephew inherited from his uncle, instead of his father, is critically great and is usually explained with childlessness. However, considering that the Vsevolozhskys belong to the Rurik family, it is impossible to exclude the fact that Vsevolod Alekseevich was a castrate – as the last castrates in Europe lived up to 1860.

SOME WORDS ABOUT “PORNOCRACY”
The maternal right also results in the so-called “pornocracy”, the huge power of women over Popes. Here is a short list of the Popes openly depending on their “female popes” (in practice, all of them depended on their sisters, aunts or mothers).

Lando. 913-914. He was put on the papal throne by Theodora the Elder.
John X. 914-928. He was put on the papal throne by Theodora the Elder.
Leo VI. 928. He was put on the papal throne by Marozia.
Stephen VII (VIII), 928-931. He was put on the papal throne by Marozia.
John XI. 931-936. Marozia and Pope Sergius III’s son.
Innocent X. 1644-1655. Ruled the Church together with his sister Olimpia Maidalchini.

Such situation could not be in the society based on the paternal right principles. Any "family tyranny" would mean near the Pope neither his sister or mother, but his father or elder brother. It turns out that churches lived and delegated the power by the maternal right long enough – up to XIX (the Roman Catholics), and even till the end of XX (the Assyrian) centuries.

The NOTE: Repeatedly described ceremony of palpation check of the future Pope having male testes could occur only due to historical memory of Popes- castrates and later ban of tradition to appoint female Popes. The support to this thesis is the case with as though mythological Pope Joan who pretended to be a man.
In our opinion, John could give herself out to be not a man but a castrate. Yes, and celibacy in the Catholic church could be legalized as the sign of the castrates’ caste lobby. Moreover, castrates, as well as harems were a relict residual of the matriarchal way of the power concentration. We will shown now, why.

SECRET OF FAMILY MUHAMMAD
The Prophet Muhammad had 12 wives.

Name and age at marriage, Muhammad’s age, years of marriage, number of children
Khadijah bint Khuwaylid, 40 years old, Muhammad was 25 years old, 25 years of marriage, 7 or 8 children
Sawda bint Zamʿa, from 55 till 65 years old, Muhammad was 50 years old
Aisha Banu Taim, from 6 till 20 years old, Muhammad was 53 years old, 50 years of marriage
Hafsa bint Umar, 20 years old, Muhammad was 54 years old, 8 years of marriage
Zaynab bint Khuzayma Banu Hilal, 3-8 months of marriage, died
Umm Salama Hind bint Abi Umayya Banu Makhzum, 29 years old, Muhammad was 55 years old, 7 years of marriage
Zaynab bint Jahsh Banu Asad, 35 years old, Muhammad was 56-58 years old, 4-6 years of marriage
Juwayriyya bint al-Harith, 20 years old, Muhammad was 57 years old, 5 years of marriage
Ramlah binte Abi-Sufyan Umm Habibah, from 24 till 34 years old, Muhammad was 59-61 years old, 1-3 years of marriage
Safiyya bint Huyayy Banu Nadir, 17 years old, Muhammad was 61 years old, 3-5 years of marriage
Maymuna bint al-Harith Banu Hashim (Sahaba), 36 years old, Muhammad was 60 years old, 3 years of marriage
Maria al-Qibtiyya, 20 years old, Muhammad was 58 years old, 4 years of marriage, gave birth to the son Ibrahim

Khadijah seven children had with Muhammad. Their names were al-Kasim, at-Tahir, at-Tajjib, Zajnab, Rukajja, Umm Kulsum and Fatima (according to the Sunnite, there was also the eighth child - son Abdulla). All boys (and only boys) died in the early childhood. All girls lived till the beginning of the prophetical mission, took Islam, moved from Mecca to Medina and died before Muhammad’s death. Фатима died six months later after the death of her father.
The Christian Maria of Greek-Egyptian origin had from Muhammad one son Ibrahim. He, as well as other boys, died in infancy. By tacit agreement, it is supposed that Muhammad had no more children from other ten wives.
And what did actually happen?

Sawda married the Prophet in her ripe old age, and, perhaps, she must be excluded from the number of potential women in childbirth. However, elementary calculation shows that other nine wives of the Prophet could easily give birth from 15 to 25 children during their marriage period. Moreover, some wives had an honorary title meaning the child birth, for example, Umm Salama and Umm Habibah.
Indeed, for the most Muhammad’s wives he was not the first husband, that is, they could receive the title before marriage with the Prophet. But Aisha who married as an absolutely young girl could give birth to a child only in marriage with the Prophet, and Muhammad named her Umm Abdallah, that is literally translated as Abdallaha’s Mother and means that Aisha gave birth of the son to her husband. However, no data on this Muhammad’s son are found, as though Aisha gave birth to nobody. However, even if we not consider all five listed above women, there are seven more. After all, were they all sterile? Muhammad was definitely not sterile. Seven (according to the Sunnite - eight) children with Khadijah and one with Maria (one of the last wives) clearly prove the Prophet’s virile well-being. However, children are absent.
Let's ask themselves a question - why data on children of Muhammad from Khadijah, Maria and - presumably from Aisha were preserved. The answer is simple: in all three cases it was impossible to vanish the data on children. Ibrahim was a noble Egyptian Copt on the mother's side so, he was repeatedly mentioned in the Coptic annals. Aisha also had “information background” - in the person of Negus Ethiopian chromatists, and children from Khadijah were born, when their father had not become the conventional leader yet, and there were a lot of household data left about them, so it was impossible to vanish them to the end.
There are absolutely no data on those children of the Prophet who were absolute Arabians and Moslems, that is, they had no annalistic history abroad and, in fact, could apply for natural inheritance of their father’s deed. Well, winners write the history, and children of the Prophet, as the results show, have lost.
The winner in this fight is Ali’s family – Fatima’s husband, who suddenly died after her father’s death. Here we have a classical matriarchal model of coming to the power: marriage with a noble woman, a birth of her children (girls are more desirable) and her death when she is not needed anymore. The widower becomes the regent with his children and the only lord over their tribes.
The question, why girls are more desirable as children, is natural. The answer is easy: the regent can give his daughter to the relative under his control and continue his ruling for two more decades, but he should give his power his son. Muhammad also tried to stop this out-of-date practice and … won everywhere, except his own family.

The NOTE: It is strange, but among children of Ali and Fatima we can see Zajnab and Umm-Kulsum in succession, that is, Ali’s children are namesakes of the 4th and 6th children of Muhammad. In my opinion, Ali could easily adopt the Prophet’s daughters. It would give him paternal power over them - with all legal consequences.

MATRIARCHY IN ANCIENT ROME
And here are three citations from the article of a historian Alexander Victorovich Koptev “The Legal mechanism of the imperial power transfer in archaic Rome and sacral functions the celer tribune”.

According to the tradition the Roman emperors acted as a husband of the daughter of his predecessor (Numa - the husband of Titus Tatius’s daughter, Servius Tullius – of Lucius Tarquinius Priscus’s daughter, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus – of  Servius Tullius’s daughter), or as a son of the emperor’s daughter (Romulus - the son of Numitor’s daughter, Ancus Marcius - Numa Pompilius’s daughter, Lucius Tarquinius Priscus – Lucumo’s daughter in Etruria, Servius Tullius - Ocrisia from Corniculum) or, that means the same, as a emperor’s grandson (Tullus Hostilius, Romulus’s grandson = Hostilia, Tarquinius Superbus - Prisca).
The bearer of royalty were the women of the emperors’ families whose husbands became the owners of the imperial title by the right of marriage with them. Traditionally it is Lavinia, Ilia (Rhea Silvia), Tatia, Hersilia , Pompilia, Egeria, Tarquinia, Tullia, Lucretia. In the ceremony of "sacred" marriage the tsar and the tsarina represented the main deities of their community. Their children of "divine origin” could not aspire to an imperial title in their community, but were desired grooms for emperors’ daughters of other "cities" of Latium. Sacral union of “30 cities”, apparently, bound all royal families into a single system of potential marriage partners.
The bearer of the royal title became either the tsar’s son-in-law, who was simultaneously his nephew, or the tsar’s grandson, who was his daughter’s son, whose husband was the tsar in other "city".

We see in Ancient Rome the same model of coming to power, as in Mexico, Arabia, India and Byzantium.

MATRIARCHY IN THE USA
The legal doctrine Partus sequitur ventrem was a part of the colonial law which was taken in Virginia in 1662, and soon in other colonies. The doctrine said: “All children born in this country, should be considered in slavery or free only according to the status of the mother...” Doctrine Partus sequitur ventrem (the literal translation: that which is brought forth follows the belly) directly followed from the Roman civil law and totally dominated in colonies.

CONDITION OF THE TITLE ACCEPTION
John III the Peaceful (von der Mark) married Maria von Jülich-Berg, the daughter and the inheritor of Duke William IV von Jülich-Berg in 1509. After his father-in-law’s death in 1511, he became a regent with the wife, and accepted the title of Duke von Jülich-Berg.

MODERN MATRIARCHY IN TOGO
Nicolas Gerard Victor Grunitzky was the president of Togo in 1963 - 1967. The son of the retired German officer and the African princess Elisabeth Sossime Adjonou from Amegashi royal family. Its predecessor Sylvanus Olympio was the son of the Brazilian slave trader and the princess of the Yoruba people.

POLYGAMY
Polygamy has deep practical sense in the conditions of matriarchy. The more wives one has, the more dowry (lands and people) the polygamist controls.
The Tale of Bygone Years: “Vladimir was obsessed with lust, and he had wives […], and 300 concubines in Vyshgorod, 300 in Belgorod and 200 in Berestov …”.
August II from Meissen, as they write, had 80 "mistresses".
Philipp, Prince and Landgrave of Hesse had two official wives.
Emperors Charles the Great, Lothar and Pepin had several wives.
On July, 23rd, 1534 The city of Muenster proclaimed polygamy as the best form of marriage.
And here is Phillip II's family, the king of Spanish and Portuguese.

1st wife: Maria de Avis. She married when she was 16, had a baby at the age of 18, died in 2 days.
2nd wife: Maria I Tudor. She married when she was 38, had a baby at the age of 39, died when she was 42.
3rd wife: Elizabeth Valois. She married when she was 14, had a baby at the age of 21, died when she was 23.
4th wife: Anna Habsburg. She married when she was 21, had a baby at the age of 22, died when she was31.

Early death rate is a norm of political life. The child is given to a wet nurse, and his mother is helped to die or enter a monastery. The purpose of this operation is to get children with whom the polygamist becomes a lawful regent. In Europe polygamy was regarded as not Christian practice since 1771 when inquisitions allowed to open cases on polygamists for the first time.

OPRICHNINA
Oprichnina it is a part of lands of the grand duchesses, at their full and direct disposal. Oprichnina in the Moscow princedom was the land terror given to out a widow after partition of her former husband’s property. Wiki emphasizes that oprichnina was not regulated by any legislation, and it is a legal nonsense: property cannot exist without any legal tradition.
Her we have normal matrilineal property and power transfer in notable families - in the form of dowry. When a husband dies, the dowry (indivisible in a common law) is reverted to a widow with her children. For this reason, Europe was similar to a scrappy blanket up to second half of 19 century.

MATRIARCHAL POWER PYRAMID 
Ivan the Terrible ruled at four levels:
1. The property and people belonging to his own family
2. Dowry, belonging his wives (oprichnina) - as a regent with common children
3. As the grand duke - boyars of the Moscow kingdom (without direct access to their property)
4. As the elective tsar of whole Russia - zemshchina, that is, the nobility, allied to the Moscow kingdom: Estonia, the Caucasus, the Volga region (without direct access to their property, as well)
We see that at every level tsar Ivan was not a proprietor (the private property did not exist at that time), but only the plenipotentiary managing director. In each case the proprietor is a collective - the family.

MATRIARCHY SOURCE
The write that the matriarchal society has developed due of disordered sexual relation (greetings to Freud), when the authentic parent is one - mum. In practice, any disorder frustrates a person - it complicates prediction. Actively advertised idea about group sex of savages is not proven. The most primitive Amazonian tribes have already got legal norms protecting their families: for seducing of someone’s wife her husband has the right to knock the seducer with a cudgel on the head. And the guilty patiently waits until he is punished.
The so-called “group marriage” is collective responsibility for women and children, instead of group sex; people are inclined to form steady pairs - let them be just for 3-4 years, but during all this time they will be steady. People feel more comfortable in such pairs.

Matriarchy has developed owing to initially different forms of responsibility. Only adults go hunting and each man is obliged to be responsible for himself. In village four people from five are children; seniors bear responsibility for them, and these seniors are woman. As a result, two types of hierarchy develop in a tribe synchronously: the business one (male type) and family one (female type). The purpose of the male type hierarchy is prey, and a person is just means for the purpose achievement. The group can lose a person while hunting and cannot return with empty hands. In the female type hierarchy, prey is only means, let it be a key one, but it is only means, and the purpose is a person (the survived offspring). Therefore, the society arranges business according to the male model, and the main social institutes - to the female one.

ROLE OF THE MAN IN THE POWER
Despite mentioned above, the matriarchal society is in great need of the man on the top. The cause is the following: intrinsic readiness of the man to achieve the purpose, despite the means. In a situation regular (in practice, inevitable) conflicts someone is required, capable to force the most impudent guys to follow the law. Moreover, the far this man from the interests of certain families, the more effective he will work. For this reason the king is usually a stranger for the people, the foreign knight who has anyhow proved that is worthy marriage with the people’s own princess.

EXACT MEANING OF THE TERM
The exact meaning of the word "matriarchy" is "maternal by origin". A root "arch" "power" does not have the meaning “power” and in the best way to see the nature of this root is to compare the words where it is the beginning of a word: archaic, archeology, archive.

THE RESUME
Matriarchal (in exact meaning of this word) relationship entirely predetermined the civilisation growth and development until at least 1771, and to a considerable extent - to the middle of 19 century. Distortion of matriarchal sense of historical events or excluding of this sense out of this research interferes with an establishment of the historical truth, first of all, in history of the power and assets inheritance.

LIST OF MAIN TEXTS
24. Chronological shifts: Catherine's shift and 59-year-old one. https://chispa1707.blogspot.com/2020/03/chronological-shifts-catherines-shift.html
25. The Roman numeration - a key to the chronology secret. https://chispa1707.blogspot.com/2020/04/the-roman-numeration-key-to-chronology.html
27. Lacuna
28. Lacuna
.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)