All too often we hear on the news that efforts to prosecute a criminal, especially in the case of murder, are in order for the family of the victim to have closure. We seem to have an obsession with solving cold cases; letting a criminal run free for years on end is almost considered an offense to the deceased.
This idea isn't unique to modern "western" culture, the Native American "Blood Law," Anglo Saxon Weregild, "rido" in the Philippines (which is loosely based in family honor and shame) all look for some sort of retribution or price for murder.
Famously in the bible this passage from Numbers "Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it" suggests that the slaying of a murderer is a method by which a victim can be atoned. While capital punishment is illegal in many parts of the world, there are plenty countries still believe it to be a legitimate process of law.
If we look at the prosecution/punishment/slaying of a murderer in terms of a rite of passage, it could be seen to represent the final step, "reincorporation," where the "unknown" has been crossed, the mystery of the murder has been solved. Failure to atone for the victims' death leaves them in the unknown, and the rite of passage is unable to be completed.
In "cultures" where the death of a murderer is considered the only viable method of finding closure, the result is all to often to be feuds between groups, or outright war. As closure requires the murderer to be himself murdered, a chain of bloodshed results as the kin of the murderer in turn seeking vengeance for his death.
The Clan MacDonald-Clan Campbell feud of the 14th-17th centuries which culminating in the "Massacre of Glencoe" is in my mind the most famous example of a feud Of course not all feuds initiated by vengeance, the case above has strong ties to religion, and aftermath of the Glorious Revolution. Regardless of the cause of conflict, it can easily be argued that the rite of vengeance is always a factor in prolonging a feud.
I could find an example of a feud elsewhere in the world, but I like Scotland, and any excuse to throw in "family" history, so I'll end this post by summarizing some events of the Gunn-Keith feud.
After the purported abduction of Helen of Braemore (whom was betrothed to an Alexander Gunn) at the hands of the Kieth Chief, the Clans Gunn and Keith agreed to a pitched battle. The terms for the battle were that each clan was allowed 12 horsemen and would be fought outside the chapel of St. Tears near Caithness. Clan Keith arrived with two men on each horse and slaughtered the warriors of clan Gunn.
One source that describes the battle (based on Sir Robert Gordon's "Genealogical History of the Earldom of Sutherland") states that "Their blood may be seen to this day [1764] upon the walls within the Chapel at St. Tyre, where they were slain." An emphasis is placed on the loss of blood, which represents the treachery of the Keiths and the overall feud.
The son of the Gunn Chieften (whom was slain in the battle) went on to ambush the Keiths decades later during a feast. After releasing several arrows through a window and into the chief of clan Keith, he is reported to have shouted "A Gunn's compliment to a Keith."
This feud involved significantly further bloodshed between the two clans prior to and after the above events, and was not officially settled until the 1970's. I have a hard time believing much of the information on the internet about this feud, but it certainly appears to be driven by a 500 year pact of vengeance between the clans.
Death is a difficult fact of life to deal with, and I guess some are more violent about it than others.
Famously in the bible this passage from Numbers "Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it" suggests that the slaying of a murderer is a method by which a victim can be atoned. While capital punishment is illegal in many parts of the world, there are plenty countries still believe it to be a legitimate process of law.
Gallows in Tombstone, Arizona.
If we look at the prosecution/punishment/slaying of a murderer in terms of a rite of passage, it could be seen to represent the final step, "reincorporation," where the "unknown" has been crossed, the mystery of the murder has been solved. Failure to atone for the victims' death leaves them in the unknown, and the rite of passage is unable to be completed.
The Clan MacDonald-Clan Campbell feud of the 14th-17th centuries which culminating in the "Massacre of Glencoe" is in my mind the most famous example of a feud Of course not all feuds initiated by vengeance, the case above has strong ties to religion, and aftermath of the Glorious Revolution. Regardless of the cause of conflict, it can easily be argued that the rite of vengeance is always a factor in prolonging a feud.
Romanticized depiction of the Massacre of Glencoe.
After the purported abduction of Helen of Braemore (whom was betrothed to an Alexander Gunn) at the hands of the Kieth Chief, the Clans Gunn and Keith agreed to a pitched battle. The terms for the battle were that each clan was allowed 12 horsemen and would be fought outside the chapel of St. Tears near Caithness. Clan Keith arrived with two men on each horse and slaughtered the warriors of clan Gunn.
The son of the Gunn Chieften (whom was slain in the battle) went on to ambush the Keiths decades later during a feast. After releasing several arrows through a window and into the chief of clan Keith, he is reported to have shouted "A Gunn's compliment to a Keith."
Gunn archer.
Death is a difficult fact of life to deal with, and I guess some are more violent about it than others.
Something to follow on with what you've been talking about - violent or tragic death often invokes specialised funerary practices... I wonder if there's ever been any research into memorials or grave stones associated with Scottish clans and feuding?
ReplyDelete