The
below article is my attempt at understanding human history of civilization
through the writings of Friedrich Engels' The Origin of Family, Private
Property and the State. Engels in his theory links the creation of family to
the origin of private property which ultimately birthed the state.
Engels
begins his narrative from the phase of human history which he calls by the name
'Age of Savagery'. The age is characterised by the classification of human
societies as 'tribes' which ultimately formed its smallest social unit. People
had not yet learned to split themselves into the present day social units
called 'families'.There had not yet been any kind of political divisions such
as provinces or nationalities since there was no concept of even a 'governing
state' as yet. This eventually meant that there was no king or an associated
police force or an army and hence no need for taxation that shall support the
state apparatus.
People
heavily depended upon hunting for subsistence and whatever came out of it was
shared equally among the tribe. People occupied their inhabiting lands as a
whole tribe and since there was no further subdivision of the society there was
no need to split and distribute land for individual or family possession.
The
mother-right:
This
kind of primitive society allowed people to mate among themselves and there had
not yet been any restriction on part of the individual when it came to choosing
sexual partners. People mated freely with their siblings, uncles or aunts and
even with sons or daughters. As time progressed, there was need for some kind
of restriction due to various reasons and tribes decided to prohibit people
from engaging in what we call now as 'incest'. A tribe was eventually split
into a 'gen'. This subdivision forced women to marry/mate with any men but not
with those belonging to their own gens. Hence there was officially allowed
polygamy in place even after restrictions had been imposed within the tribe.
At
various places in the book, Engels tries to find out the point from where the
tribe begins to get rid of polygamy and move towards monogamy. There is a Greek
legend which speaks about the story of a son slaying his mother who killed his
father since he had objected to her mating with another man. Engels posits that
'jealousy' on part of the male which ultimately led to killings and destruction
would have forced the tribe to implement a new form of marriage which goes by
the name 'group marriage'.
According
to this custom, a group of men belonging to a gens within a tribe shall enjoy
conjugal association with a specific group of women belonging to another gens.
From this point onwards, the communal property which had so far been
accumulated by the tribe and belonging to them as a whole, began to be split
among its subdivisions- gens. In other words, with relation to property each
gens had become a separate 'tribe'. This necessitated the development of new
regulations with respect of dividing property among the gens. The regulations
were strongly in favour of the mother lineage or mother-right which meant that
on the death of the mother, the property belonging to the mother's gens will
remain within the gens and will not be enjoyed by her husband since he belongs
to the other gens. This phase of human development is of tremendous importance
since this marks the beginning of division of property which was hitherto
common to the whole tribe and hence indivisible.
During
these times women were equally involved with men with respect to occupation and
even after the emergence of agriculture, men could not deprive women of their
position in the society.
Primitive
democracy:
The
tribe or the aggregation of gens had a 'council' that did not allow
unrestricted power to any individual especially in times of peace. The military
commander could issue orders only when they had to fight and could be deposed
by the council if people unanimously voted him out. All decisions were reached
democratically and no individual's opinion had a higher precedence over that of
others.
It
is to be noted that wars were fought only as a result of personal enmity that
could have been triggered by say, an abduction of a woman from a tribe by
another, etc. These wars were not fought over material possessions most of the
time which is a way of saying that there was no need of plunder since most of
the tribes were economically self-sufficient. They produced through agriculture
or hunting whatever they needed and consumed it themselves. Since wars were far
and few, there was no need for the masses to rally behind a single individual
who would promise them safety to ensure their survival. When an individual was
hurt, the tribe as a single unit felt that it was their duty to avenge it and
this ensured wholesome participation in their assault. In other words, it was 'all
for one and one for all'.
Monogamy and the
rise of 'family':
As
time progressed, man was becoming a 'barbarian' from being a 'savage' as Engels
puts it. This phase of human development had already witnessed the splitting of
tribes into numerous gens each of which had already graduated into becoming a
separate tribe. As you may have already noted, this division was created owing
to restrictions in marriage. By this time among various tribes in different
parts of the world, there were newer rules that prohibited free marriages
significant among them being 'the sibling nature of nephew/niece'. None could
marry their nephew or niece or cousins which in course of time led to some
inchoate set of prescriptions as to who should marry whom. Some groups of gens described
themselves as a 'phratry' which means 'brother gens'. Hence marriage was not
possible within the phratry even if one was to marry someone belonging to
another gens of the phratry, since it was tantamount to marrying his/her own
sibling. These restrictive practices slowly eliminated group marriages and with
it the practice of polygamy. Please note that the concept of phratry and
elimination of polygamy were not born together and that the latter was a result
of passing of many generations of such restrictive practices in marriage.
It
is to be noted that the emergence of phratries had brought with them newer
restrictions with respect to property relations.
The
elimination of polygamy slowly gave rise to monogamy which prohibited adultery
on the parts of both male and female. Thus monogamy further split the hitherto
smallest social division of gens into an even smaller unit- the 'family'. The
man, his wife and children composed of a family and hence the property
relations were radically altered during this phase. People who had hitherto
accumulated property for their tribe or gens began to do the same for their
families.
One
remarkable event that probably coincided with the advent of 'family' was the
division of labor among societies. In earlier societies there were not many
occupations that a tribe had to engage themselves in, for the sake of
subsistence. They hunted game, gathered fruit and sometimes involved themselves
in horticulture. This did not require a diverse set of skills and each member
of the tribe were able to manage all of them seamlessly. Man slowly learned to
rear cattle for wool, meat and milk which was an entirely different occupation
from hunting which meant immediate killing of an animal for immediate
consumption. Man also learned fishing and even mining of metals to improve his
agriculture and other household activities. Hence human intelligence led to
development of science which expanded man's avenues to diversify his means of
subsistence. A single individual obviously cannot master all these occupations
since each occupation required a specific set of skills that need to be
cultivated in him right from his childhood.
The
atomization of society into smaller units of families came in handy at this
moment as each family decided to pursue one among different occupations. Since
there was no diversified occupation hitherto, men had been producing whatever
they needed and consumed it themselves. But this was going to be no longer
possible as each family slowly identified themselves with a specific
occupation. The herder family needed cereal for their consumption and had to
'buy' it from the farmer. The miner needed milk and meat and had to purchase it
from the herder. This was the beginning of the concept called 'exchange' which
was hitherto immaterial and hence non-existent.
The
exchange, as many of us would know was achieved through barter system.
Something that needs special notice here is the fact that man till then had not
produced more than what he needed. Since the emergence of diversified
occupation, man began to produce more than what was needed, probably because he
did not know how much was needed by the market. This led to surplus production
for the first time in human history.
Since
man needed someone to enable him to gauge the demand of the market, a new class
of people called merchants was created. Before we go into mercantilism, we will
check how the property relations had been altered ever since 'family' took the
place of gens.
Private
Property:
The
emergence of family subsequently altered the rules of inheritance which allowed
man to accumulate property and pass it on to his wife and children for the
forthcoming generations. Property which was hitherto communal belonging to none
but the tribe as a whole, began to be split leading to the emergence of 'Private
Property'. This engendered what we call individual pursuit of prosperity. Man
who was hitherto concerned about every individual in his tribe was slowly
concerned only about his family. The well-being of society came secondary to
him or sometimes as a superfluous concern when all that was paramount to him
was his family's welfare. He no longer was worried about exploiting others to
sustain himself. With such a diversified society, each family owning a means of
production began to find ways to accumulate more wealth by exploiting the other
families. The crudest form of such exploitation was slavery where the owners of
surplus production needed slaves to accumulate more wealth. Such families had
more than what they needed and were able to purchase slaves to expand their
fortunes. Engels makes a point here that the word familus which gave rise to
the word family, means a group of slaves whose head was their master along with
his wife and children.
By
this time, the class of merchants who had been created merely to bring the
producer and consumer together began to assume more power over the processes of
production. For the first time in human history, someone other than the
producer of a commodity and the consumer of it, determined the way how the
commodities must be produced. By then, the military commanders of the tribal
days began to wield more power than they had hitherto since the class of
merchants and producers, each class in pursuit of more markets for their
products, had rallied behind him goading him to engage in war and conquer more
territories. More territories meant more markets for the producers and
merchants and hence more profits. The commander was well taken care of by them
along with his retinue. The difficulties associated with barter were beginning
to be felt which gave rise to a new concept called money. For the first time in
human history, something other than a commodity that could be of some use in
daily activity began to assume more value than others. A bunch of useless coins
was soon bestowed with more value than a sackful of grain.
The
emergence of money as a means of exchange allowed merchants to hoard
commodities to generate demand thereby increasing their prices. Engels calls
this phase where money was invented as the beginning of 'civilization'.
The State:
When
merchants through speculative trading and landlords through surplus production
by the labor of slaves, accumulated money, for the first time a highly
disturbing and unprecedented 'contradiction' was beginning to be felt within
the society. This was nothing but a feeling that for the first time people realized
that in spite of being directly involved in production they were no longer able
to access what they produced. When man was a barbarian, he labored hard and
secured his means of subsistence and all the fruits of his labor was consumed
by himself. But now, the more he labored the more his master accumulated while
his wage or payment remained unchanged.
This
realization among the masses manifested itself leading to slave conflicts and
uprisings. The master did not have any forces at his disposal to suppress the
uprisings and had to apply to his beneficiary, the military commander who had
already become the king. The king realized that these conflicts were inevitable
and systemic and his authority felt the need to create a state owned armed
force to keep these elements in check. To maintain these forces the king, who
had already been showered with lands and money by his merchants, needed funds.
Taxes were brought into vogue which demanded a specific percentage of money
from all that was produced, the majority of which had to be paid by the
consumer who was part of the laboring class. The armed force will not only take
care of any internal class conflict but also assist the mercantile class to
expand its market by waging wars. The people were concerned about a sudden
eventuality of an alien country invading them for plunder. This fear made them
trust the state and its armed forces to ensure their security. In other words,
the laboring class had to pay from its own pocket to support the apparatus that
will keep itself in check.
This
was the origin of state which was nothing but a higher power above the
exploited and the exploiter to ensure that the status quo was maintained.
Aftermath and
Conclusion:
As
everyone would be aware, the state which was birthed by the interests of
private capital needed legitimacy in the eyes of the people, which it believed
could be achieved through universal suffrage. The primitive democracy of
savagery which valued the interest of every individual equally, had withered
with the beginning of human civilization. Men backed by private capital rose to
the positions of contesting elections and people had to choose the less
pernicious among them as their representative. The decimation of mother right
and the emergence of father right, as a result of the monogamous family, showed
women their places in their kitchen and empowered the financially independent
man to subjugate his woman.
As
we have seen so far, as long as man was in groups, he needed no money, no state
to protect his interest since there was no need to depend upon someone else to
ensure his subsistence. The origin of mercantile class with the displacement of
barter by money system engendered speculative practices which took away the
means of control of production from the producer and the consumer. This
resulted in the consumer remaining oblivious to the dynamics of market forces
which were every moment controlling the prices of commodities that he needed,
ultimately holding his subsistence at its will.
As
I wish to conclude, I would like to acknowledge the arbitrariness of whatever
that is stated in this essay. The book by Engels, whose review is what I
attempted to produce, is nothing more than Engels’ own interpretation of human
history. I could find many gaps in its chronicling the history of civilization
which I have to an extent filled through my own knowledge obtained from various
other sources. Anyone who may wish to contest my postulates may write to me to
which I would gladly revert.
- JEEVA P
- JEEVA P
Nice post. Very informative.
ReplyDeleteHelpful in understanding the basic concepts put forward by Engels. Thanks for writing this!!
And can you elaborate on how the seemingly matriarchal system ended up being the patriarchal system that we see today?? (These might be the words used by Engels but nevertheless they help me in expressing my question better)
Thanks for ur interest machi. One of the most important points where engels did not convince me much is where he explains the transition to female subjugation by the male. Engels says soon after the plough was introduced in agriculture there was no need for women to participate in the process of production. Slowly man began to ignore women in other professions as well, as science eliminated the need for more people to participate in production. The financial dependence of woman on her man is cited to be the one of the reasons. I need to investigate more on this.
ReplyDelete