Marriage in Themiclesia: Difference between revisions
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
===Archaic Period=== | ===Archaic Period=== | ||
During the 660-year Archaic Period, the prehistoric exchange marriage seems to have evolved into the Rite of Congression (啇), as the political context that supported exchange marriage also evolved. The Rite of Congression was an indispensible element of political life as political power and leadership passed collaterally through it, unlike personal property which likely descended differently and linearly. | |||
By the Late Archaic, the prehistoric exchange marriage seems to have concentrated or coalesced into a form of {{wp|plural marriage}}, that is between one person simultaneously married to a group of persons. This accompanies the assumed shift from a kinship group with joint leaders representing multiple lineages, to one with a paramount leader with recognition for other lineages. As representative of the entire kinship group, the paramount leader would have desired to concentrate the marital connection onto himself as much as possible, both to secure external support and to repress internal challengers. | |||
While the | While it is known that this alliance marriage confers political authority, it is unknown if and for how long has a paramount leadership existed within the Tsinh kinship group during the Archaic Period. Much will depend on how one interprets the [[Royal Canon of Tsinh]] and if simultaneous leaders are permitted amongst the individuals mentioned therein. It appears, at present, most scholars hold that the earlier part of the Canon does recall simultaneous leaders who are legitimized by their participation in the alliance marriage, while a transition taking place in the Archaic gradually (and perhaps intermittently) eliminated simultaneous leaders and concentrated their positions on a single paramount leader who comes to be known as the Elder of Tsinh (㚾晉). | ||
The | The best historical evidence of the alliance marriage system is the presence of the ''′eng''-women (嬴), who accompanied the paramount leader's spouse in the Rite of Congression. Some or most ''′eng''-woman were in a coital relationship with the paramount leader, but it remained customary that at least one ''′eng''-woman should be enter into a coital relationship with the paramount leader's ''paternal half-brother''. Moreover, a child born of this union was considered a congression-child (帝子), that is capable of succession. In the historical period where successive rulers' relationships are known, a congression-child born of the paramount leader was preferred over a half-brother's child, but it is widely speculated that it was the half-brother's child that anciently had the higher right to succeed, as it is better interpreted as a legacy rather than an intentional measure. | ||
In the archaeological record, marriage is often inferred through joint burials and well-preserved domiciliary buildings and remains therein showing co-habitation. A common burial includes a male and female skeleton interred next to each other, at different times. As most Themiclesian eating vessles are assumed to serve an individual's portion, given the typical diet, the presence of multiple sets of utensils and a larger communal cooking vessel is often considered indicative of marriage. Size, enlargement, or compartmentalization in domiciles can also be interpreted as signs of marriage or childbirth. In general, inferring marriage and related customs in less privileged social strata often is more challenging and controversial than the same through oracular and bronze inscriptions. Bronzes in particular are more easily traced to their origins through art style and practices in combination, while pottery vessels usually exhibit fewer traceable factors. | In the archaeological record, marriage is often inferred through joint burials and well-preserved domiciliary buildings and remains therein showing co-habitation. A common burial includes a male and female skeleton interred next to each other, at different times. As most Themiclesian eating vessles are assumed to serve an individual's portion, given the typical diet, the presence of multiple sets of utensils and a larger communal cooking vessel is often considered indicative of marriage. Size, enlargement, or compartmentalization in domiciles can also be interpreted as signs of marriage or childbirth. In general, inferring marriage and related customs in less privileged social strata often is more challenging and controversial than the same through oracular and bronze inscriptions. Bronzes in particular are more easily traced to their origins through art style and practices in combination, while pottery vessels usually exhibit fewer traceable factors. | ||
Revision as of 01:37, 25 November 2023
Marriage in Themiclesia is regulated by both customary and statutory law. Each of the parliaments in Themiclesia has power to legislate regarding the definition, registration, and solemization of marriages within their respective jurisdictions. Polygamy is forbidden in all jurisdictions and a criminal offence in Themiclesian-proper, Estoria, and Helia. Same-sex marriage is legal in Themiclesia and granted the same protections as other marriages.
In 2020, there were 123,000 marriages in Themiclesia, down from 129,000 in 2000. Marriage ceremonies in Themiclesia can be either civil or religious. In the former case, marriages may take place before certain courts of law or registrars in local administration, and in the latter recognized religious institutions or officials are legally competent to conduct and validate marriages. Divorces are only recognized when registered by the civil authority, regardless of religious ceremonies performed.
History
Prehistoric marriages
Prior to the advent of written records in Themiclesia, some scholars hold a form of exchange marriage was practiced between ruling clan members within or outside the Meng cultural group, which arrived in Themiclesia during or before the 8th century BCE. Details of this early form of marriage is reconstructed through later and mutated information, and it is uncertain how stable the original form of this marriage was.
The foundation of this union was the simultaneous exogamous marriage of multiple couples, consisting of two persons each. The relationship that results from this exchange marriage underlies much that is known about social, political, and religious custom of early Themiclesian society, so much so that it appears the entire social fabric was woven out of this form of marriage. The anthropologist Albert Kim says that this union was "not merely between two groups of individuals but between two societies; its repetition from generations re-animates and recreates a united culture and a holy alliance".
As an example of the importance of exchange marriage, a 10-member sequence (called Heavenly Stems alone and constituting the Ordinal Name applied to persons) on the Royal Canon of Tsinh appears to denote membership in such a group marriage, and a full group of them form a cycle of deified ancestors, regularly given human and animal sacrifices centuries after their passing. Scholars have hypothesized that the assignment of While it is not known whether members on the Royal Canon were kings or a different position of significance, it is clear that political legitimacy proceeded from participation in this form of marriage, during this remote era now called the Themiclesian Dark Ages.
Archaic Period
During the 660-year Archaic Period, the prehistoric exchange marriage seems to have evolved into the Rite of Congression (啇), as the political context that supported exchange marriage also evolved. The Rite of Congression was an indispensible element of political life as political power and leadership passed collaterally through it, unlike personal property which likely descended differently and linearly.
By the Late Archaic, the prehistoric exchange marriage seems to have concentrated or coalesced into a form of plural marriage, that is between one person simultaneously married to a group of persons. This accompanies the assumed shift from a kinship group with joint leaders representing multiple lineages, to one with a paramount leader with recognition for other lineages. As representative of the entire kinship group, the paramount leader would have desired to concentrate the marital connection onto himself as much as possible, both to secure external support and to repress internal challengers.
While it is known that this alliance marriage confers political authority, it is unknown if and for how long has a paramount leadership existed within the Tsinh kinship group during the Archaic Period. Much will depend on how one interprets the Royal Canon of Tsinh and if simultaneous leaders are permitted amongst the individuals mentioned therein. It appears, at present, most scholars hold that the earlier part of the Canon does recall simultaneous leaders who are legitimized by their participation in the alliance marriage, while a transition taking place in the Archaic gradually (and perhaps intermittently) eliminated simultaneous leaders and concentrated their positions on a single paramount leader who comes to be known as the Elder of Tsinh (㚾晉).
The best historical evidence of the alliance marriage system is the presence of the ′eng-women (嬴), who accompanied the paramount leader's spouse in the Rite of Congression. Some or most ′eng-woman were in a coital relationship with the paramount leader, but it remained customary that at least one ′eng-woman should be enter into a coital relationship with the paramount leader's paternal half-brother. Moreover, a child born of this union was considered a congression-child (帝子), that is capable of succession. In the historical period where successive rulers' relationships are known, a congression-child born of the paramount leader was preferred over a half-brother's child, but it is widely speculated that it was the half-brother's child that anciently had the higher right to succeed, as it is better interpreted as a legacy rather than an intentional measure.
In the archaeological record, marriage is often inferred through joint burials and well-preserved domiciliary buildings and remains therein showing co-habitation. A common burial includes a male and female skeleton interred next to each other, at different times. As most Themiclesian eating vessles are assumed to serve an individual's portion, given the typical diet, the presence of multiple sets of utensils and a larger communal cooking vessel is often considered indicative of marriage. Size, enlargement, or compartmentalization in domiciles can also be interpreted as signs of marriage or childbirth. In general, inferring marriage and related customs in less privileged social strata often is more challenging and controversial than the same through oracular and bronze inscriptions. Bronzes in particular are more easily traced to their origins through art style and practices in combination, while pottery vessels usually exhibit fewer traceable factors.
At the highest levels of power, marriages are recorded through regular sacrifices to deceased rulers and their consorts. In Tsins, deceased consorts were deified spirits who could affect the health or wellbeing of living members of the ruling clan; they were commemorated in temples of considerable scale and interred in tombs that contain gold, bronze, and jewellery, in addition to human and animal sacrifices. The sponses of clan patriarchs were called stik (奭), which has the basic meaning of "peer, friend", a high status that is corroborated by the richness of their burials. It is notable that in the cultic, context one patriarch is always paired with the same consort, even though from large-scale burials it emerges that rulers had access to multiple consorts.
Marriage in the historical period
Some of the earliest received histories dealing with marriages are found in the Springs and Autumns of Six States (六邦春秋) and the Antiquities of Themiclesia (震旦古事記). The former, which lacks commentary, is a collation of purported annals from six states, spanning the 3rd c. BCE to 256 CE, while the latter was written around 500 CE, narrating the history of Themiclesia up to that time. The Springs and Autums contains references to 510 marriages between states and the identities of their spouses, but little other information. The Antiquities informs about the motives and results of a smaller number of marriages in biographic detail. In Tsins, more texts survive from the 2nd c. onwards, referencing marriage contracts, marital life, and the milieu of marriage.
As a continuation from the prehistoric period, marriages appear to be monogamous for most people.
Laws forbidding morganatic marriage became common in Themiclesia starting in the 1st century BCE. These laws generally restricted noble households and is considered to have suppressed probate or succession disputes. In a marriage between spouses of unequal status or wealth, some feared that a family's property and privileges would transfer to the guardianship of a different family; this was termed a "false" marriage. The monarchy feared that a baron's allegiances could shift if his spouse did not originate from another baron's family and therefore forbade marriages between them and commoners. At the same time, royalty married with royalty from other states, creating alliances that may last generations; many argued that morganatic marriages undermined alliances and were thus prohibited.
Modern era
Legal restrictions
Consanguineity
Consent of the spouses
Age of the spouses
Divorce
Polygamy
The practice of plural marriage or polygamy is historically attested in Themiclesia, mainly through the variety of polygyny or a relationship between one male and two or more females. Elaborate means of defining relationships between male and female partners developed as early as the Archaic Period, but these were common only within the nobility, and marital relationships in commoners are assumed to have been ordinarily monogamous.
From the earliest period of marriage practice in Themiclesia, it seems group marriage was a feature amongst the nobility. In this political arrangement, a number of pairings between clan boundaries were agreed upon. The clan leader was often paired with more than one consort, so that the alliance would not be severed in the event the primary consort dies. There is some disagreement whether the practice of pairing multiple individuals across clans or that of marrying multiple consorts to the clan leader was older; possibly both were practiced to create a maximally secure alliance. The former seems more in agreement with the idea that early Themiclesian clans seem to have multiple siblings together in charge.
It is known in the late Arcahic Period (1st century CE) that kings possessed multiple female sexual partners within legitimate relationships. These females were termed peks (配), meaning "consort", with the king. However, a king was epxected to continue an existing or forge a new alliance with a foreign state by means of marriage with a princess from the foreign court, who was especially called "arrived consort" (適配). The king's other consorts, who could come from any origin, were "other consorts" (柁配).
To consummate the alliance, the king's offspring through the arrived consort inherited the throne; in time, this became a cultural requirement as much as a political one. In the Archaic and Classical periods, the bloodline of the arrived consort was an absolute requirement to inherit the throne; if the arrive consort did not bear offspring, the throne would pass to the king's brothers from the same mother (who was an arrived consort), in default of which it went to his uncle, and so forth. After the rise of the Empire, in the absence of an heir from the arrived consort, the child of an "other consort" could also inherit with the permission of the arrive consort.