...
Blood Feuds in Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery Mimic Life
While reading Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, there were many issues that stood out. I was especially captivated by the familial interactions, and the ways in which a family that was once so close can be quickly torn apart. For many people, it may be hard to understand how a family can be so quick to judge another, to demand blood for an alleged wrong. That is, until one understands the concept of vendettas - or blood feuds - which have existed in Upper Egypt as well as many other regions around the world for centuries. Despite the country's best efforts, the vendetta system still has a strong hold in rural parts of Egypt, and many go unreported as families believe it is a local matter and not a concern of the government. Under this context, it is easier to understand the desire Safiyya would feel to see justice carried out by her own son, rather than seeking appeal to the court system.
Vendettas have always existed throughout history, not just in the Middle East, but all around the world. I feud may start over a simple argument, but continue to escalate until a family believes there is no solution other than to take the life of a member of the other family. Blood feuds have especially been a problem in recent times in rural parts of Upper Egypt, where the central government has trouble controlling the villages because of their locality. This is why we also see the appearance of The Outlaws. There is simply not enough government control to reach all these small, remote places. In the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, tensions seemed to already be on the rise when Harbi came with the bey to ask for Safiyya's hand. It had always been assumed that she would marry Harbi, and I think that a part of everyone was hurt in one way or another by her marriage to the bey. Safiyya proves herself to be a bit of a loose cannon, when rumor are spread that Harbi wants to kill her newborn son and she throws herself into the gossip completely. Blood feuds almost always involve men, and Safiyya knows she is at virtually no risk as she spreads the lies around. The responsibility of maintaining a vendetta is almost always that of the closest living male relative, in this case Safiyya's son Hassaan.
Also according to the rules followed in a feud, if a person is unable to carry out the vendetta because of the death or disappearance of the accused, the man carrying out the vendetta can target the next closest member in the family. In the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, this would probably be the narrator or his father. Is this the reason we learn that they have ended up all leaving the village? Of course, we also learn that one of the narrator's brothers is working for Hassaan, so this does not seem likely. But the fact that they all ended up leaving should not be seen a mere coincidence. A feud does not end with the death of the accused, but instead must now be carried out by the other family, and can extend until it has captured the lives of an entire community. Perhaps other villagers would begin to feel it was their responsibility to see to the vendetta, after all, the narrator does tell us at one point that everyone in the village is related in one way or another.
A huge story out of Upper Egypt which occurred on August 10, 2002, happened when a family known as the Hashanat were attacked in their village, leaving 22 men dead. The Hashanat family had been in a feud with the Abd al-Halim family since two children from each family had fought at a wedding more than ten years before. The fighting escalated until members of both families had been killed by the other. These revenge killings eventually led to a trial for the two Hashanat family members involved in one of the killings, but a car carrying family members to the ambushed on their way to the court date, resulting in the massacre. While the blood feud between families is, sadly, not unusual, what was unusual was the large number of people killed in one incident. For this reason it grabbed headlines around the world. However, learning about events like this make it easy to understand why the narrators family is so fearful from the beginning when the rumors first start to circulate. It is not just paranoia to worry that a small incident could turn into a horrific massacre.
Another example of an actual vendetta carried out in Egypt in a similar style can be found in an article dating from 2005, in which a farmer from the town of Dar Al-Salam was killed by five men in front of his wife and teenage son. He was a member of a clan known as the Hababza clan, which had been in a long feud with a clan known as the Barawra clan. The victim had done nothing wrong other than being a member of the wrong clan. He was walking home with his family at night at the time of the incident. In this aspect, it is probably easy for Americans to understand clan vendettas in comparison to current gang activity, or when compared to mafia activity such as that of Al Capone, or fictionalized in movies like The Godfather. A famous example stemming from the United States is that of the Capone-Moran gangs and the St. Valentines day massacre, in which seven men were lined up and killed. It was a retaliation killing for an attempt on a member's life.
Even more related to the plot of Aunt Safiyya in American culture is blood feud between that of the Hatfields and McCoys. A member of the McCoy family was murdered after returning home from the Civil War for having joined with the Union Army. The feud escalated despite intermarriage in the families. From 1881 to 1891, it is believed that more than a dozen people on both sides were killed for the purpose of vendetta. Retaliation murders happened in both families, until the McCoys were forced to leave the area to escape the raids that were happening on their properties. The case eventually made headlines all over the United States, and even caught the attention of the Supreme Court. Eventually eight men from the Hatfield family stood trial for the murder of a McCoy woman killed in one of the raids, known as the New Years Massacre. They were all found guilty and given life sentences, and one member was hanged. This is seen by many as the last great family vendetta in the United States, although many have been reported in Appalachia throughout American History.
Today, the government of Egypt as well as it's citizens have done much to try and eliminate blood feud killings. On a day-to-day level, it is expected that if an argument breaks out in a public place, a person will step in to try and defuse the anger and resolve the problem. Elders who are influential in the community are often called on to help settle disputes between families. However, in the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, it is the villagers themselves who start the ball rolling in the feud, and one of the elder highest officials in the village - the bey - is involved in the argument. Perhaps this is why it escalated so quickly; with no one in the village to stand up to the families and help dissolve the conflict, it grows to a level where no one is in control. We do see some villagers trying to help Harbi when he is cornered by the bey in the field, but all they can do is send for the narrator's father, and are helpless against the bey and his armed guards.
Another way these arguments can be settled, although not mentioned in the book, is by council. Across Upper Egypt, councils based on tribal traditions rather than on state or sharia law are used to settle disputes among villagers and families. People who are in a traditional dispute can seek the help of these councils, which are often composed of elders and sheikhs. In a case like that of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, Harbi would have still been sent to a regular state court for sentencing, but when he was released he would go before a blood feud council in the village, instead of being hidden away in the monastery. The council would hear arguments from both sides, and then try and reach a settlement between the two in order to prevent further killings. After an agreement has been reached, the two parties must embrace and then statements are made concerning reconciliation, religion, and why it is important to avoid an on-going vendetta. These councils are highly respected throughout Egypt, and provide an indispensable service to the rural areas. Somehow, however, I cannot see Safiyya agreeing to go before such a council, so strong is her blood lust.
When the subject of vendetta and blood feuds quickly became a central theme of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, I at first had trouble wrapping my brain around the idea of killing just to get revenge. When anyone is angry, it is easy to imagine taking one's revenge on another, but it seems to rarely happen except in cases that end up on the national news. But after talking in class about the subject and completing research, I understood that it is not only about revenge, but also deeply rooted in tradition, which can be even harder to shake than feelings of anger and vengence.
http://www.isim.nl/files/newsl_13-12.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/739/eg3.htm
http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Feuds
Also according to the rules followed in a feud, if a person is unable to carry out the vendetta because of the death or disappearance of the accused, the man carrying out the vendetta can target the next closest member in the family. In the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, this would probably be the narrator or his father. Is this the reason we learn that they have ended up all leaving the village? Of course, we also learn that one of the narrator's brothers is working for Hassaan, so this does not seem likely. But the fact that they all ended up leaving should not be seen a mere coincidence. A feud does not end with the death of the accused, but instead must now be carried out by the other family, and can extend until it has captured the lives of an entire community. Perhaps other villagers would begin to feel it was their responsibility to see to the vendetta, after all, the narrator does tell us at one point that everyone in the village is related in one way or another.
A huge story out of Upper Egypt which occurred on August 10, 2002, happened when a family known as the Hashanat were attacked in their village, leaving 22 men dead. The Hashanat family had been in a feud with the Abd al-Halim family since two children from each family had fought at a wedding more than ten years before. The fighting escalated until members of both families had been killed by the other. These revenge killings eventually led to a trial for the two Hashanat family members involved in one of the killings, but a car carrying family members to the ambushed on their way to the court date, resulting in the massacre. While the blood feud between families is, sadly, not unusual, what was unusual was the large number of people killed in one incident. For this reason it grabbed headlines around the world. However, learning about events like this make it easy to understand why the narrators family is so fearful from the beginning when the rumors first start to circulate. It is not just paranoia to worry that a small incident could turn into a horrific massacre.
Another example of an actual vendetta carried out in Egypt in a similar style can be found in an article dating from 2005, in which a farmer from the town of Dar Al-Salam was killed by five men in front of his wife and teenage son. He was a member of a clan known as the Hababza clan, which had been in a long feud with a clan known as the Barawra clan. The victim had done nothing wrong other than being a member of the wrong clan. He was walking home with his family at night at the time of the incident. In this aspect, it is probably easy for Americans to understand clan vendettas in comparison to current gang activity, or when compared to mafia activity such as that of Al Capone, or fictionalized in movies like The Godfather. A famous example stemming from the United States is that of the Capone-Moran gangs and the St. Valentines day massacre, in which seven men were lined up and killed. It was a retaliation killing for an attempt on a member's life.
Even more related to the plot of Aunt Safiyya in American culture is blood feud between that of the Hatfields and McCoys. A member of the McCoy family was murdered after returning home from the Civil War for having joined with the Union Army. The feud escalated despite intermarriage in the families. From 1881 to 1891, it is believed that more than a dozen people on both sides were killed for the purpose of vendetta. Retaliation murders happened in both families, until the McCoys were forced to leave the area to escape the raids that were happening on their properties. The case eventually made headlines all over the United States, and even caught the attention of the Supreme Court. Eventually eight men from the Hatfield family stood trial for the murder of a McCoy woman killed in one of the raids, known as the New Years Massacre. They were all found guilty and given life sentences, and one member was hanged. This is seen by many as the last great family vendetta in the United States, although many have been reported in Appalachia throughout American History.
Today, the government of Egypt as well as it's citizens have done much to try and eliminate blood feud killings. On a day-to-day level, it is expected that if an argument breaks out in a public place, a person will step in to try and defuse the anger and resolve the problem. Elders who are influential in the community are often called on to help settle disputes between families. However, in the case of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, it is the villagers themselves who start the ball rolling in the feud, and one of the elder highest officials in the village - the bey - is involved in the argument. Perhaps this is why it escalated so quickly; with no one in the village to stand up to the families and help dissolve the conflict, it grows to a level where no one is in control. We do see some villagers trying to help Harbi when he is cornered by the bey in the field, but all they can do is send for the narrator's father, and are helpless against the bey and his armed guards.
Another way these arguments can be settled, although not mentioned in the book, is by council. Across Upper Egypt, councils based on tribal traditions rather than on state or sharia law are used to settle disputes among villagers and families. People who are in a traditional dispute can seek the help of these councils, which are often composed of elders and sheikhs. In a case like that of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, Harbi would have still been sent to a regular state court for sentencing, but when he was released he would go before a blood feud council in the village, instead of being hidden away in the monastery. The council would hear arguments from both sides, and then try and reach a settlement between the two in order to prevent further killings. After an agreement has been reached, the two parties must embrace and then statements are made concerning reconciliation, religion, and why it is important to avoid an on-going vendetta. These councils are highly respected throughout Egypt, and provide an indispensable service to the rural areas. Somehow, however, I cannot see Safiyya agreeing to go before such a council, so strong is her blood lust.
When the subject of vendetta and blood feuds quickly became a central theme of Aunt Safiyya and the Monastery, I at first had trouble wrapping my brain around the idea of killing just to get revenge. When anyone is angry, it is easy to imagine taking one's revenge on another, but it seems to rarely happen except in cases that end up on the national news. But after talking in class about the subject and completing research, I understood that it is not only about revenge, but also deeply rooted in tradition, which can be even harder to shake than feelings of anger and vengence.
http://www.isim.nl/files/newsl_13-12.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield-McCoy_feud
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/739/eg3.htm
http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Feuds
