Patriarchal views on family relationships. Patriarchal family: pros and cons

23.07.2019

Of particular importance is the typology of families, which has concentrated in itself information about the structure of power in the family, about the predominant family functions of men and women, about the specifics of intrafamily leadership. In accordance with these criteria, the following types of families are distinguished: traditional patriarchal, traditional matriarchal, neopatriarchal, neomatriarchal and egalitarian. The first four types of family can be called asymmetric, the last type - symmetrical.

V traditional patriarchal The husband is the undisputed head of the family, the dependence of the wife on her husband, and children on their parents is clearly expressed.

A man is assigned the role of "master", "breadwinner", "breadwinner". Male authority is recognized without question, or accepted under duress. The domination of the paternal authority is unlimited. The authority of other family members depends on their gender and age: the elderly are the most revered, men have more rights than women. Clan interests prevail over individual interests. Therefore, such a family is called authoritarian-patriarchal.

A man makes a fundamental contribution to the material security of a family, manages its financial and economic resources, determines its status and social circle, makes responsible decisions on the most important problems. He deals with intra-family disputes and represents the family outside. Male sexuality is given an active role, this attitude is concentrated in the concept of "potency". The spouse is released from household duties. The wife is either a housewife or earns very little. The organization of normal life and consumption falls on her shoulders, and she is required to conduct an exemplary household, create a cozy and comfortable atmosphere in the house. She is also responsible for looking after the children and raising them.

In its classic version, the patriarchal family is briefly characterized as follows: the husband is the sole head and patron of the family, female obedience is the natural duty of the spouse. Marriage was perceived as a state established by God in which a man and a woman live together, in mutual understanding, giving birth to offspring and thereby avoiding fornication. Thanks to the consecration of the church, marriage in the eyes of society acquired the features of constancy and durability. The vitality of marriage was determined by pragmatic goals: it made it possible to strengthen the material position of the husband's family.

Famous patriarchal image- a virtuous wife. The social activity of a woman was limited to the range of household chores and daily care of the spiritual and physical needs of children. Children had to be raised in obedience and piety. The best qualities of a woman were recognition of a dependent position and service in marriage to her husband. It is appropriate here to recall the native Russian words "to get married", "married". The meaning of female sexuality was seen in childbirth. The spouse is a representative of the superior sex with natural physical and intellectual strength.

This cultural stereotype was reinforced by the religious and legitimate formulas of male dominance, which localized the social space of women.

Distinctive features of the patriarchal family - patrilocality and patrilineal. Patrilocality consists in the fact that the woman follows her husband, that is, settles in the house of his father. Sons, married and unmarried, live in the parental home; daughters leave him only when they get married. This reveals respect for the father's family. In modern Russian families, the issue of the place of residence of the newlyweds is decided much more freely. Patrilineal means calculating relationship in the male line. Consequently, material values are transferred to the heirs of the male line, and the father has the right to decide whether to reward the sons or not. Fathers of families and to this day are interested in the birth of boys, "successors of the surname", at least as the first child. This position of young Russian men is subject to the unconscious "pressure" of centuries-old traditions.

In science, there are conflicting views on the problem of the relationship between the patriarchal family, society and the state. Outstanding psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich in his work Psychology of the Masses and Fascism, he unequivocally expressed his point of view: “... an authoritarian society reproduces itself in the individual structures of the masses with the help of an authoritarian family ... the most important instrument of his power ”. For sons, deep identification with the father serves as the basis for emotional identification with any form of authority. In an authoritarian family, there is not only competition between adults and children, but also competition among children in their relationships with parents, which can have more serious consequences.

According to another point of view, the patriarchal family protected the rights of the individual from encroachment on them by the state. Primary in it were the relations of spontaneous cooperation in the process of family production, thanks to which individual egoism was overcome. Views Elton Mayo, one of the founders of the famous theory of human relations, can be attributed to the so-called neo-paternalism.

The idea of paternalism assumes that relationships in an enterprise and in a firm should be built on the basis of patriarchal, family ties, when the manager performs the function of a “father”.

Until the middle of the XX century. traditional values have retained their influence in both Europe and Asia. But the process of transforming the family into a "moderately patriarchal" one steadily gained momentum. In the 1950s, in post-war Europe, there is a weakening of the dominant positions of fathers in almost all social strata.

Acceptance / rejection of the patriarchal model by contemporaries is largely determined by the decrease in the social and economic dependence of the wife on her husband. At the same time, working women carry out the overwhelming majority of household chores and provide psychological relief for the husband and children. German historian R. Seeder writes that the attitude of the wife to her husband is still of an official nature: “As before, the satisfaction of the objective and subjective needs of the“ main earner ”has absolute priority over the needs of the wife and children. Patriarchy has not yet been overcome. In any case, however, the patriarchal basic relations of family members, inherently socio-economic and determined by cultural tradition, are overlapped by more and more partner forms of treatment. "

V traditional matriarchal family personal supremacy belongs to the woman. Matriarchy, like patriarchy, did not exist among all peoples. But many peoples had maternal descent, for the reliability of the mother is objective. At all times, the mother played an exceptional role in maintaining family ties. A woman's ability to regulate interpersonal relationships and use indirect methods of influencing others helps her to win in the struggle for power. In individual families with formal male leadership v in fact, the dominant position is occupied by a woman.

If you talk about Russian family, then the feminine, maternal principle is more strongly expressed in it. I.S. Con reminds that Russian wives and mothers in the pre-revolutionary era were often strong, dominant, self-confident personalities. This is reflected in Russian classical literature: "He will stop a galloping horse and enter a burning hut."

Under Soviet rule, the "strong woman syndrome" persisted and even intensified. Women are primarily responsible for the family budget and the primary issues of home life. Typical of Soviet times is the image of a peasant with a ruble or three rubles in his pocket, given out daily by a compassionate but powerful wife. This is not the fault, but the misfortune of the woman, whose spouse brought home a salary, the amount of which could have little effect. My wife had to contrive and "stretch" this amount until the next salary. She had to take the reins into her own hands. This was the price of the stability of the existence of a socialist family.

The Russian woman's aspirations for leadership in the family can be understood based on a general trend in the history of Soviet society - the tendency towards de-masculinization of men. The most reputable specialist in the field of gender psychology and sociology, I.S. Con says that neither in professional activity, nor in social and political life, the average Soviet man could not display traditionally masculine traits. The stereotypical image of a man includes qualities such as energy, initiative, courage, independence, and self-government. Social and sexual lack of freedom was aggravated by the feminization of all institutions and personified in dominant female images: mother, teacher, etc. In such conditions, the strategy of transferring family responsibility to the wife was psychologically justified. From the deformation of the male character, the woman is unlikely to gain anything. Where the husband rebelled against the power of his wife, she either endured rudeness and humiliation, or sacrificed her abilities and professional achievements. In a family where the husband accepted his subordinate position, the wife was deprived of the necessary support.

More harsh in his judgments V.N. Druzhinin:"... the dominant role of the Russian woman was imposed by the Soviet regime and the communist ideology, depriving the father of the basic paternal functions." Family relations in a totalitarian society become psychobiological, not socio-psychological. A man is deprived of social and economic opportunities to provide for his family and raise children, his role as the main agent of socialization is reduced to naught. The totalitarian state takes on the entire burden of responsibility and replaces the father.

At the same time, the importance of the natural psychobiological connection between the child and the mother is increasing. Breaking this bond leads the family to disaster. Then the state and society are again forced to turn to the problems of motherhood. A “vicious circle of imaginary causes and real consequences” arises: “... in a modern Russian family, a woman wants (and is forced by the force of circumstances) to rule completely and completely. A man is not able to provide for his family, be responsible for it and, accordingly, be a role model. " Way out of the current situation V.N. Druzhinin sees in the creation of social conditions for the manifestation of male activity outside the family.

The division of family power is also implemented in modern married couples. In order to prevent destructive conflicts, it is imperative that such separation be acceptable to both spouses and facilitate the family's performance of its functions. The traditional family model can be perfectly acceptable if there is a consistency in the positions of the spouses regarding the structure of power. With regard to the family, the famous question of power is family leadership question or, more precisely, primacy. The head of the family brings together both the leader and the manager.

V neo-patriarchal family a strategic and business (instrumental) leader is the husband, a a tactical and emotional (expressive) leader- wife. The spouse determines the long-term direction of the family's development, sets the priority goals of its existence, chooses ways and means to achieve these goals, formulates appropriate instructions and instructions for family members. He is well aware of the current state of affairs and foresees the possible consequences of the decisions made. It is the spouse who plays the role of the plenipotentiary representative of the family in society, the position of the family in the surrounding world depends on his actions. The extrafamilial activity of the husband (father) - professional, social, political, etc. - is encouraged by the household. The man himself has high claims in this area, is distinguished by a business orientation, pragmatism, and cares about the material well-being and social status of his loved ones. The outlook and life strategy of a man serve as a guide for all family members. He sets the style of family life and ensures its implementation. The younger generation sees in the father an example of strong-willed qualities and organizational skills.

The father is impressed by the desire of children to express their opinions, realistic assessments of people and events, and successfully master the skills of independent activity. The spouse finds life support in her husband, and his labor achievements become a matter of pride for the whole family.

If the spouse is responsible for the long-term planning of family affairs, the spouse develops short-term plans, which are easily and quickly correlated with the specific actions of adults and children. The prerogative of a woman is to build everyday contacts between family members. She develops a relationship of mutual assistance and cooperation. With an interest in increasing family cohesion, she organizes joint events, the spectrum of which can be extremely wide, from general cleaning and Sunday lunches to anniversary celebrations. I am amazed by her competence in the intricacies of home life. She is also in charge of the sphere of family leisure. She is endowed with sensitivity to the needs and emotions of all family members. The spouse corrects the psychological climate in the family, creates an atmosphere of emotional and moral support, develops her own leadership style and "support style". The wife (mother) ensures the functioning of the family as a medium for emotional release. In a neo-patriarchal family, the father acts as an expert for children in business and production issues, and the mother in intimate and personal relationships.

V neomatriarchal the family is the opposite. A common feature of the considered options for families - joint leadership of the husband and wife in the division of their spheres of influence. Conflict in a marital dyad can arise as a result of an unclear distribution of spheres of influence or claims of one of the spouses for another role.

Egalitarian family assumes complete and genuine equality of husband and wife in all matters of family life without exception. The current Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Family Code of the Russian Federation declare the principle of equality between men and women, which is the legal basis for the development of an egalitarian family.

The husband and wife make a (proportional) contribution to the material well-being of the family union, jointly manage the household, jointly make all the most important decisions, and are equally involved in caring for and raising children.

The role and importance of each of the spouses in the formation of the psychological climate of the family are equal, the status of the family is established by the spouse who has a higher position. The social circle is formed by both spouses. This conjugal union is called biarchy, or cooperatively symmetric marriage. To be spouses means to "run in the same team." Apparently, this is more convenient to do ?!

In an egalitarian family, the principle of consistency in the positions of the spouses takes on special significance. It is necessary to come to an agreement on a very flexible division of spheres of influence, on a high degree of interchangeability. Everyone should be ready to become a leader, business executive or educator. Disagreements that arise should be resolved through mutual agreements, compromises or mutually beneficial exchanges.

Children are full members of the family, as far as they can, participate in the discussion and implementation of the decisions made. In their upbringing, humane methods are used, based on trust in the personality of the child, recognition of his rights. The initiative and independence of the child is encouraged, his needs for autonomy, the development of individuality, and creativity are respected. Children from such families may tend to use a similar relationship model in their marriage.

The ideal model of an egalitarian family is presented in the concept of open marriage, according to which it is believed that in marriage, each of the spouses can remain themselves, reveal their abilities, and maintain individuality. Spouses should not be "one body and one soul." A marriage is built on mutual attraction and trust; spouses do not seek to manipulate each other's behavior, to subjugate a partner.

Open marriage principles:

· One must live in the present, proceeding from realistic desires.

· The privacy of the partner should be respected.

· Communication should be open and based on the consideration: “say what you see and feel, but do not criticize”.

· Family roles should be flexible.

· The partnership should be open: everyone's right to their own interests and hobbies should be respected.

· Equality is affirmed as a fair division of responsibility and benefits.

· Should give the other the opportunity to live according to his ideas; know your worth and maintain your dignity.

· Trust each other and respect non-family interests.

The creation of an egalitarian union is difficult because it requires, first, a careful and scrupulous description of the rights and responsibilities of the spouses; secondly, a very high culture of communication, respect for another person, mutual information and trust in relationships.

Some scholars speak of the egalitarian family as conflicting: power functions are distributed, but their distribution is a constant ground for conflict. In this case, the egalitarian model in Russia is assigned the role of a transitional one. Its appearance is due to the growth of the economic independence of the family from the totalitarian state, the growth of the economic, social and political role of men. A family in which, along with equality of rights, the responsibility for the upbringing and maintenance of children will be assumed by the father while maintaining other family responsibilities for the mother and children is considered preferable for our country.

In Russia, younger and better educated men are more egalitarian and take on more domestic, including paternal, responsibilities than was previously the case.

Quite often in all exams the concept of "patriarchal family" is encountered. This is not a coincidence: to distinguish this type of family from all others: a partner family, for example, is constantly required at exams both at school and at a secondary school or university. Moreover, the material is not as complicated as it might seem at first glance. In one of the previous articles, by the way, we analyzed the nuclear sem

Definition

The patriarchal family is a small social group based on kinship, traditions, general economic and living conditions, as well as on the primacy of the masculine over the feminine. She is also an extended family, when many relatives lived under one roof.

This type of family is typical for a traditional society, as well as for a transitional to an industrial one. The latter is more typical. Why did the masculine prevail over the feminine? There were several reasons for this.

First, the existing way of doing business made it extremely difficult to get food. Therefore, it was only possible to survive together.

Secondly, who, other things being equal, will get more food: a man or a woman? Of course a man. I understand that now there are a lot of such "men" who look more like women. And there are enough women who look like men. But this is today, when the stores are full of food. But before this could not have been: a stern man was a man and rightfully occupied a leading place in the family.

Therefore, to whom did the bride's dowry go? To my husband. As the doctor of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Samuel Collins (17th century), wrote, if a woman was convicted of treason, then she was simply buried in the ground up to her throat, and she slowly died. But if a wife accuses her husband of the same, then when she goes to court, they first tortured her. If he can withstand the torture, then he is telling the truth, then they were mistaken for a husband, but he usually had nothing.

Samuel Collins also wrote in his notes that when an agreement between families about the wedding of the young couple, the bride's parents, concluding such an agreement, asked that the future husband, of course, even though he beat his wife for decency and ostracism, so that he would not beat him to death. The young people did not take any part in this, and they could see each other for the first time at the wedding. This is the origin of many Russian folk sayings: "If it suffers, it will fall in love", "If it hits, it means that it loves," etc.

Violence, by the way, was the norm in such family groups, not only in relation to the wife, but also to the children. Here is an interesting excerpt from Sylvest's Domostroy (16th century):

« 17. How to teach children and save them by fear
Execute your son from his youth and rest thee for your old age and will give the beauty of your soul and do not weaken the bey of the baby, unless he dies with a rod, but you will be healthy for beating his body, and you will save his soul from death, whether imashi's daughter lay on them my threat, keeping me from the bodily, so that I do not shame my face, but walk in obedience so that I do not accept my will, and curse my virginity in foolishness, and we know yours in mockery and shame you in front of a multitude of people, if you give your daughter the demon of vice, then as if you did a great deed and in the middle of the cathedral, boast at the ends without ever letting go, loving your son and teaching him his wounds, and follow him, rejoice in the execution of your son, and rejoice in him in courage, and in the midst of the evil you boast and envy will receive your enemies, educate your children with rebuke and find peace and blessing about him, not laughing at him, creating games in a small amount of fear, loosen up in greatness, help grief and after the same set of teeth you create your souls, and do not give him power in his youth, but crush him at the ribs it is much easier to grow, and having hardened it will not obey and there will be annoyance and sickness of the soul and the vanity of the house and destruction of the estate and reproach from neighbors and mock enemies before the authorities, payment and vexation of evil. "

The passage shows that the constant beating of children was the norm. It was believed that then in old age the child will not forget you and will pay tribute to you. Corporal punishment was considered a godly deed and the upbringing of the soul, moreover, its salvation! But daughters were even more suspicious. The demon is close to them as to anyone! Therefore, it is necessary to teach her meekness and humility - again through beating. Oddly enough, but most people believe that assault is an absolutely normal thing.

Signs

Thus, the patriarchal family is a small social group based on:

Ancestral traditions. Traditional consciousness is deeply mythological.

Deep religiosity. In traditional society, as you know, it is religion that takes a very important place in public life. The clergy was one of the pillars of power in the brainwashing of believers.

The primacy of the masculine over the feminine. All other things being equal, it was the man who played the leading role in the prosperity of the family and in its provision. Another situation is considered for example.

Perception of a woman as a devil of vice and chaos. No offense will be said to the fair sex, but the lion's share of the history of mankind, women occupied a secondary place. Although there are people who claim the existence of matriarchy, the matriarchal family, the main historical concept is that this is not the case. It was patriarchy, men dominated the whole history, and even now there are remnants of this: does the employer, for example, look at a woman worker as well as a man? I leave the question open for discussion in the comments.

Women, on the other hand, were predominantly brought up in a spirit of meekness and from birth were doomed to occupy a secondary place.

In fact, children were not perceived as children. This happened only in very wealthy families, and even then not earlier than the 18th century, when a specific children's material culture arises: clothes, toys, etc.

There are a lot of nuances in this topic. Articles are certainly good. But the whole and complete material is laid out in mine. And so, like it, share the material with your friends on social networks.

Best regards, Andrey Puchkov

Time does not stand still, and social relations change with it, including the types of families that replace each other. So, among some ancient tribes, a woman was an immutable authority - such a unit of society is called matriarchal. Now is the era of the egalitarian family, in which partners are equal. But the most widespread in the history of society was the patriarchal type.

This family way empowered a man, leaving the role of a subordinate to the woman, and existed in most countries from ancient times until the 20th century. Of course, now patriarchy is a thing of the past, however, we still feel its influence on ourselves. So what is a patriarchal family?

Definition and general description

First of all, it should be said that a patriarchal family is a type of family structure that corresponds to patriarchy. The very word "patriarchy" in translation from Greek means "power of the fathers", hinting to us about the main feature of this form of social organization. Under her, the man is the main bearer of both political power and moral authority. So, in Russia, the head of state was the monarch, and the head of the family was the autocrat in miniature - the father. The country was subject to one, the household to the other.

Thus, families of the patriarchal type are cell of patriarchal society where a man dominates, a woman is dependent on her husband, and children are dependent on their parents. In it, the man completely provides for his relatives, the wife obeys him unquestioningly and monitors life. Moreover, spouses will never be able to switch roles. In a patriarchal family, a woman will not go to work under any circumstances, and a man will not begin to devote time to household chores. They raise children, as a rule, in severity, instilling in them a sense of respect for their parents from their youth.

Features and signs

The following features are characteristic of the classic patriarchal family:

Traditional patriarchal family

People who follow the traditional patriarchal canon live by strict rules: all life decisions are dictated by reasonable reasons and goals leading to their prosperity. In a traditional cell of the patriarchal type:

It is worth noting that these characteristics are generalized and, to one degree or another, are applicable to any patriarchal people. However, the cultural characteristics of each of them endow the patriarchal family with their own characteristics. For example, in ancient Rome, the head was the pater familias, who had the right to a woman, like a thing or a slave, and among the Slavs he had no right to interfere in women's affairs at all. In our article, we will touch on in more detail the description of the patriarchal Russian family.

Patriarchal family in Russia

The Russians, like many Slavic peoples, had a large patriarchal family for a long time. Several married couples owned property and took care of the household. Supervised the family housebuilder or otherwise a highway - the most experienced, efficient and mature man. The power of the head of the family extended to all its members. Usually he had a great counselor. This is the eldest of the women who was engaged in the household. However, her position was not much better than that of less significant female family members. Let us recall that in Russia, widows, for example, did not have the right to inherit.

In the 18th-19th centuries, the individual patriarchal family, consisting of 2-3 generations of relatives, became widespread. In the lower strata of society, she completely took the form of an Orthodox - of 3 people: father, mother and son / daughter.

At the beginning of the 20th century, there were drastic changes in the economy and industrial relations, and with them the patriarchy that dominates the family began to decline. The power of a man in the house often led to intra-family crises. This tendency is easy to see in classical Russian literature. Just remember "Anna Karenina" by L. Tolstoy!

One way or another, and already in the 80s, the position of women has improved markedly. For example, financial management has become the norm for her. Male power at this stage was only of a regulatory nature.

Patriarchy and modern society

Now the patriarchal family is not uncommon except that in the countries of the East. In Europe and Russia, this type of family structure has completely outlived itself. According to psychologists, it is extremely destructive for the individual, and only an insecure person with low self-esteem can grow up in such a family. Nevertheless, the influence of the era of patriarchy is still felt. After all, there are still isolated exceptions in which there are several signs of patriarchy.

It is worth considering: maybe this is not as bad as it is commonly believed in modern society? After all, under patriarchy there can be no abandoned and disadvantaged old people or children left without supervision. And an adult will never be left alone with his problems. And the education of responsibility and respect for elders has not harmed anyone yet.

The most archaic type is patriarchal: the leading attitude is consanguineous, the obvious dependence of the wife on her husband, and children on their parents. The domination of the husband is carried out due to the concentration in his hands of economic resources and the adoption of basic decisions, in connection with which there is a rigid consolidation of roles.

Let us recall that in two classic works - L. Morgan and F. Engels (see works 1 and 2, Ch. I) - the patriarchal family is singled out as a transitional institution of the steaming monogamous model. Its blossom is attributed to the border of barbarism and civilization. Both researchers considered the ancient Roman family as a model, in which the dominance of the father's power over a certain number of free and unfree people, united by the goal of cultivating the land and protecting domestic herds, was consolidated. Marriage form -

polygamy or monogamy did not have any significant meaning.

F. Le Play put a fundamentally close meaning to the concept of "patriarchal family" (see work 3, Ch. I). The sociologist observed such relations among the Bashkirs, Russians who lived in the Urals, and the South Slavs, however, already in the 19th century. Although the families of these peoples consisted exclusively of relatives and in-laws, the economy remained, as in the past, indivisible, and the power of the father was unlimited.

As for, in particular, the southern Slavs, their traditional principles were preserved until the middle of the 20th century. Let's present them in general terms.

The most common type of family among these peoples was a complex multi-line relationship. While maintaining the main features that characterize the country (collective ownership of land and property, collective consumption), this form of the family also had local differences. For example, in Macedonia, the elderly enjoyed great prestige, regardless of gender; while in Dalmatia the power of the father, the head of the zadruga, is celebrated.

The family of Yugoslavian peoples is patrilocal. Sons, married and unmarried, in the overwhelming majority of cases remained in the parental home, and the daughters lived in it until they got married, after which they moved to their husband's community. In extraordinary cases, this order was violated. For example, a widowed daughter with her children could return to the parental home, or a stranger could become a member of the family after having worked for a long time.

hired in her, and then married one of the daughters.

The number of family clans was not regulated. In the first half of the XIX century. families of fifty or more people were not uncommon; along with them there were also small associations. Large communities were more common among the Christian than among the Muslim population.

Collective ownership of all movable and immovable property of a friend was a prerequisite for its existence. This property, or at least its main part, was not subject to sale. The actual owners were males, since girls, getting married, in principle, were deprived of the right of inheritance. The tradition of inheritance was not the same in all Yugoslavian regions: in some, only males acted as heirs, in others - formally persons of both sexes, but in practice women abandoned their share in favor of men - this is what customary law dictated.

The head of the zadruga, as a rule, was the oldest man-grandfather, father or first son, only occasionally, however, the tradition of seniority was not observed and the most energetic and authoritative person became the head. The scope of his duties was very varied. He represented a friend to the outside world, participated in solving common agricultural affairs, paid taxes and debts, was responsible to society for the moral actions of all family members. He decided, and sometimes participated in the direct execution of economic affairs, control

shaft and guided them, concentrated in his hands the family treasury. He also headed religious cults, family and calendar holidays, participated in weddings, christenings, funerals.

A strict hierarchy reigned in this community. The word of the head of the zadruga was the law for each of its members; any orders were carried out without question. The authority of other family members was in direct proportion to their gender and age. In the patriarchal family, the most respected were the elderly, whose opinion was taken into account. The custom of getting up at the entrance of a senior’s house, not smoking in the presence of the father, and giving other signs of attention to elders, for example, kissing their hand (in areas of Eastern influence), calling them “you” (in areas with Western influence), has become widespread. It is not out of place to emphasize: the honor was predominantly expressed to men, they had more rights than women, and were, in comparison with 1shmi, on a higher rung of the hierarchical ladder. The woman, with rare exceptions, was deprived of the right to tgogos and "was in a subordinate position. One of the answers received in Bosnia, during a questionnaire survey conducted before the First World War, very accurately characterizes the attitude towards women. This entry read:" A man five years older than a woman of fifty. ”Until the middle of the 20th century, women ate secondarily after men finished eating.

I'm going. The position of junior daughters-in-law was especially deprived of rights. Dedo_vl "Mg-that" among women there was a hierarchy of their own, headed by a grandmother, a mother, and also older daughters-in-law. All of them, regardless of status and age, could not publicly, in the presence of other members of the family, express their feelings, be happy or sad.

Labor activity was also regulated by age and gender. For example, children were entrusted with caring for poultry and sometimes for pigs. The elderly and the sick did the lightest work. The main, however, was the sexual division of labor. Men usually performed the most difficult tasks of cultivating the land, caring for livestock, collecting firewood, and repairing buildings and tools. It happened that during a period of recession in agricultural work, they were engaged in waste trades or traded in products of agriculture and cattle breeding.

Women's work focused mainly on serving the zadruga members - taking care of food and clothing, cleaning the house and yard. The works were signed between the women of the family and were carried out by the same persons constantly or for a long time. They, of course, took part in agricultural work - weeding, stinging, harvesting, cultivating orchards. Together with the men, women went to summer pastures, where they lived throughout the entire period of livestock and prepared dairy products. They were also the leaders in domestic crafts - spinning, weaving, knitting and embroidery (4, p. 84-103).

There are a number of significant pieces of evidence that definitely indicate that the patriarchal family is not a purely European phenomenon. At least in Asia, for millennia, it has been just as widespread across the territory of many countries.

Moreover, despite certain nuances due mainly to the religious-caste system, the basic lines of the traditional family of the West and the East are consonant.

According to T.F.Sivertseva's summary, in the so-called developing countries (Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, India, Ceylon, etc.), until recently, the dominant place was occupied by a complex (inseparable) family, which is characterized by the dominance of male power, the prevalence of clan interests over individual, respect for elders, minimal use of birth control, low divorce rate, spread, along with monogamy, and polygamy (5, p. 29, 30). In a word, we have a portrait of a classic patriarchal family.

Another source testifies: relatively recently, the basis of the social structure of Japanese society was the large clan houses - "ie". A distinctive feature of "IE" as a form of family organization was as follows - the eldest sons, as successors of the clan, remained after marriage in their parents' house. The head of the house enjoyed indisputable authority and power. In accordance with tradition, he disposed of all property. The fate of all members depended on his will.

families, for example, marriage of children and grandchildren. The supremacy of men over women was enshrined not only by customs, but also by law. In "IE", individual individuals sacrificed their personal needs in favor of common interests.

Since the second half of this century, there has been a gradual decline in the share of such "houses". This trend is indirectly confirmed by the steady decrease in the average family size and the rapid growth in the total number of families. If in 1955 the average size of a Japanese family was about 5 people, then 20 years later - about 3.5 people; from 1970 to 1975, the total number of families increased by 15.9% (6, p. 6-8). Despite the significant weakening of the strength of customs in recent decades, they nevertheless make themselves felt at the end of the century. The spiritual and social traditions of the clan family are often manifested in such everyday situations as weddings and funerals, inheritance and contacts with neighbors.

30 An excerpt from a letter by Nobel laureate Kenzaburo Oe can serve as a brilliant illustration of the thought expressed. “Recently, I went for a walk along the central streets of Tokyo,” he says, “… and noticed on a telegraph pole a leaflet of some patriotic union, faded from the rains. Its authors, referring to the immutable commandments of the hierarchical system with its vertical core subject ", they accused me of the fact that last year I refused to accept the order for merit in the field of culture. Reading the sentence passed on me, I ... with all my gut" felt "how the the fabric of all our present being "(7, p. 231).

A few sketchy sketches, I believe, will allow us to identify the coinciding principles of a complex (patriarchal) family both within the Asian and in comparison with the European continent.

Young people in most developing countries could not (and partially still cannot) get to know each other without parental permission. Marriage is most often concluded as a transaction based on property and social equality.

In pre-war Japan, conspiracy marriages prevailed. The main actors in the preparation for such marriages were not so much the bride and groom as their parents, as well as matchmakers and matchmakers. After the wedding, wives for the most part moved to the parental home of their husbands and became dependent members of his family clan, headed either by the grandfather or the husband's father. The marriage of children was considered by the parents of both the groom and the bride as an important common cause, primarily associated with economic and material calculations. I will say more, and in the post-war period for a number of years, after the introduction of new laws, the former practice of colluding marriages continued to prevail not only in villages and provincial areas, but also among the petty-bourgeois population of Tokyo and other large cities of the country.

In the complex families of the Arab East, Pakistan and India, childcare and upbringing are traditionally carried out not only by parents, but also by relatives and close neighbors. Children are supported by the community and are required to participate in a community

lective economic activity. This activity, by the way, is never perceived by them as coercion.

We find the same procedure among the Japanese. Their desire to preserve their families primarily explains the high birth rate that was observed in the country both in the pre-war and in the first post-war years. Typical for that period were families with a large number of children, whose upbringing, along with their parents, was the responsibility of grandparents, older brothers, sisters and other close relatives living together in a common "house" ("ie").

The Japanese, guided by the Confucian commandments, showed maximum care and respect for their elderly parents and grandparents, showed them all kinds of honors. Caring for the oldest members and their maintenance, even to the detriment of their own needs, were considered by them as an imperative moral duty, as a matter of honor for the whole family. In fulfilling this duty, they saw a natural expression of their gratitude to their parents. The traditional veneration by the Japanese of the oldest family members is still reminded today of various jubilee celebrations organized by children in honor of their elderly parents. In the past, the first anniversary of the old man was celebrated at the age of 40. The next holiday, often arranged by sons,

31 Even in the early 90s, there were 35.2% of three-generation families in Japan, for comparison, in South Korea - 19.3%, in the USA - 6.1% (8, p. 19).

my and daughters to parents, is "honke gaeri" - the day when one turns 61 years old. From this moment, according to the old belief, the return of the elderly begins in the period of their second childhood. Occasionally, such dates of the life of elderly parents are celebrated as the seventy (koki no ivai) and seventy (ki no ivashi). Holidays is one thing, routine life is another. Indeed, here we can also speak of a great cohesion of generations. For example, opinion polls show that the majority (70%) of young Japanese and the same number of elderly are in favor of living together.

And in other parts of Asia, for example, in India, the elderly are provided with more substantial assistance in inseparable families, relative to nuclear ones. Surveys conducted in rural areas of this country showed that the share of sons who help their fathers as much as possible is 67% in "difficult" families and only 9% in "simple" ones.

And one more cardinal characteristic of the patriarchal family is the relationship between husband and wife.

In pre-war Japan, the omnipotence of the husband and the subordinate position of the wife in the family were confirmed by customs, morality, and laws. Husbands were assigned the undivided right of ownership of property, the will of the spouse determined the position of wives in families, and labor activity, and their leisure. We can safely say that in the second half of the XX century. the relationship of spouses is permeated with the spirit of the husband's domination and the subordination of the wife, despite the adopted laws that equalize the rights of spouses. In the special work "Japanese family", published

Noah in 1980 by the Office of Economic Planning, made a note characteristic of traditional society: "As for the role of spouses in the family, the general opinion is that the husband's business is to earn money for a living, and the wife's role is to teach children, educate them, take care of their parents, manage family budgetary affairs, etc. " (6, p. 46) 32.

An important indicator of the Japanese family lifestyle is the separation of the spouses during leisure hours. Thus, a survey conducted by the Ministry of Labor in 1965 revealed that only 12.3% of married couples “often” rest and have fun together, “sometimes” - 41.1% and “almost never” - 3.7% (6, p. 57). According to a number of local sociologists, the reason for the disunity in the rest of the majority of spouses lies in national traditions, according to which, for a long time in the country, husbands and wives spent their time separately, proceeding from the premise that the interests and entertainment of men are one, and that of women are different.

Despite the significant contribution of women in a number of developing countries of the East to the national economy, their status. determined mainly by the economic situation of the father, husband or son. In other words, not professional activity, but a system

32 According to the mentioned comparative study, for example, the wife is responsible for spending everyday resources: in Japan - 82.7%, in South Korea - 79.3%, while in the USA - 40.9%, the opposite distribution of responsibility belongs to men (respectively) - 3.6, 6.7 and 31.3% (8, p. 87).

kinship is a leading indicator of the "sociality" of women. The activity of a woman was (and in many cases remains to this day) primarily focused on family responsibilities: giving birth and raising children, running a household, with the elderly.

The number of children (especially in Islamic countries) also affects the prestige of the wife: the more children, the higher her price. Professional activity in mainland Asia not only does not increase, but in a number of countries even reduces the social status of women, since it means that the father or husband is unable to provide it. In principle, this is evidenced by the fact that of the two girls - working and raising at home - the second is still preferred in the "marriage market". Moreover, in Muslim regions, for example, in Pakistan, the restriction of female labor to domestic boundaries is a matter of family prestige.

I am sure that even a cursory analysis in the paragraph is sufficient to state the following: despite the pronounced ethnopsychic specificity of peoples, and sometimes their conscious isolation from the outside world, the classic patriarchal family has been ubiquitous for many centuries. A convincing demonstration of the above considerations can be the parallel existence of those not directly influencing each other, but nevertheless consonant in the main characteristics of the Yugoslavian "zadruga" and the Japanese house "IE".

§ 2. Variety of models

traditional family in the territory

the former Soviet Union

The Soviet Union - and this is known to many - was a historically formed multinational conglomerate. It goes without saying that each nationality and ethnic group has specific customs, traditions, beliefs and a mechanism of social regulation. It is not at all necessary to be an expert in order to understand the fundamental difference, for example, of a Russian family from a Turkmen one, a Ukrainian one from a Tajik one, and an Estonian one from a Georgian one. This series can be extended further. At the same time, it is difficult to imagine such social and cultural conditions in which the family of a Lithuanian would become a literal copy of a Russian, an Azeri - a Belarusian, etc. The differences noted, it is easy to understand, are far from formal. On the other hand, the family of the indigenous population of the Central Asian and Transcaucasian regions, in terms of some basic indicators (birth rate, divorce rate, dependent status of women, etc.), to a large extent resembles the state of the Russian family at the beginning of the 20th century. From here, I believe, there is an opportunity, within the framework of a once united country, albeit in hindsight, to highlight the vast set of traditional family models, determined by ethnic diversity. Ras-

I cover this consideration, resorting to statistics and polls.

For a start, let's turn to the indicators of cohabitating generations and the level of childbirth. The proportion of married couples living with one or both parents of the spouse ranges from 20% in Russia to 32% in Tajikistan. During the years that elapsed between the 1970 and 1979 censuses, the share of married couples living with their parents in the Central Asian and Transcaucasian regions increased, mainly due to its growth in rural areas, while in other republics it decreased. As for childhood, the picture is as follows. Of the total number of families (according to the 1979 census) have children (under 18), say, in Latvia, 34% have one, 18.7% have two and 4.4% have three or more, 42.9% have no children. A significantly different distribution characterizes, for example, the family of Tajikistan. The corresponding indicators are as follows: 18.1; 17.0; 49.6; 15.3%. Thus, the differences in the size and forms (two- and multi-generational) families are undeniable: the indigenous population of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan is characterized, firstly, by the preservation of the traditions of inseparable families, in which married sons often live with their parents, during -second, a greater number of children per married couple (9, p. 51-59, 87-114).

Focusing on the ethnic specificity of the family, of course, does not mean denying the general direction of its historical development. One thing is clear: the recognition of the progressive nature of the evolution of civilization as a whole entails the recognition of the same regularity for individual societies.

other institutions. A specific analysis of the transformation of, say, Uzbek and Russian families, indicates the identity of a number of empirical patterns.

Let me clarify this thought. Some experts, who do not take into account the specificity and historical sequence of the stages of monogamy, pair its strength once and for all with the effect of having many children. Demographer O. Ata-Mirzaev, when polling 1,363 families in five regions of Uzbekistan, found that 92.5% of women with many children were married, in the first and, with rare exceptions, in the second. Widows accounted for 6.6% and divorced only 0.9%. From this he comes to the conclusion: for the Central Asian peoples, a small number of divorces is directly related to having many children (10, p. 33). It is difficult to say which is more in this judgment: naivety or uncritical national "pride". How can you explain the large number of children and the relatively small number of divorces in an Uzbek family? It is not a secret for anyone the deep influence that the tenets of the Muslim religion have on the people of the indigenous nationality, especially those living in rural areas. Islamic customary law, as you know, sanctioned the despotism of the husband: God created, it is written in the Qur'an, for you from yourself, wives, and her very appearance is caused by the need of men (11, p. 191). The main business of women, according to the same source, is to bear children, raise them and run a household. According to another Uzbek

33 How not to recall the stereotypical phrase: "East is East", and add: "what is Near, what is Middle".

second researcher - N.M.Aliakberova, and today in everyday life there are very strong ideas about the inadmissibility, sinfulness of celibacy, childlessness and birth control (12, p. 24).

The picture changes significantly if we turn to the urban and, especially, to the metropolitan family. Along the way, I will note one important circumstance - there are more married women involved in professional activities, the latter in itself is an economic support in opposing patri-arhat principles. So, in cities there are fewer inseparable families: if in rural areas every third, then in urbanized settlements - the fourth. Further, the birth rate is lower. According to N.M. Aliakberova, the birth rate in the countryside was 111.6% in relation to the urban one in 1950, 140.4% in 1970 and 151.3% in 1977. The same ratio is evidenced by the responses of women (in Uzbekistan as a whole) to the question about the expected number of children (in%): 0.4 - not to have, 5.6 - to have one, 32.7 - two, 15.0 - three, 46.3 - four or more, and Tashkent: 0.5 - 11.2 - 46.9 - 19.0 - 22.4% (12). Finally, higher rates of divorce were found. Let me first dwell on the dynamics of the average number of divorces per 1000 married couples. In the country as a whole, it is as follows: 1958-1959. -

34 According to feminist theory, patriarchy is "... a social system in which men dominate, suppress and oppress women." The concept emphasizes "the connection between different variants of the exercise of power by men over women", including "reproduction, violence, sexuality, work, culture and the state" (13, p. 449).

5.3, 1968-1970. - 11.5 and 1978-1979 - 15.2 (9, p. 38), across Uzbekistan for the same years - 1.4 - 5.9 - 8.1. The divorce rate in Uzbekistan, therefore, is clearly lower than in the country as a whole, but at the same time it is impossible not to notice the fact that the growth in the intensity of family breakdown in the republic exceeded its rate in the Union. More - divorces in Tashkent are noticeably higher than all-Union: 3.7 versus 2.6 per 1000 population.

The rapprochement of these family indicators with the all-Union ones, at the same time, does not exclude the existence among peoples professing Islam, echoes of the most ancient rituals and customs of the classical period of patriarchy. Here are just two of these "relics". Until now, in the course (again, mainly in rural areas) the rite of notification by demonstrating the sheet of the result of the first wedding night. Woe to the bride if the matter turns out to be pure. This is the kind of drama that the Uzbek Moira Okilova experienced, for example. Her husband, without hesitation, refused, sending her in disgrace to his parents' house. (I cite it according to: 14, p. 139-140).

Another example is the spread of polygamy. In the Andijan region alone, in 1975, 58 teachers, 45 students and more than 20 doctors were married in parallel on the basis of Sharia and Soviet legislation. Numerous facts of marriage according to Sharia by representatives of the intelligentsia were established by a scientific student expedition in the villages of Dagestan and Checheno-Ingushetia (11, p. 129). By the way, this phenomenon is confirmed by the data of judicial statistics of the Supreme Court of the USSR. For Azerbaijan, figures in

In particular, such: in 1961, 40 people were convicted, in 1962. -50, 1963 -42, in 1964. -38 in 1965 - 39, respectively across Uzbekistan: 32 - 66 - 39 - 41 -30 and 59 people (11, p. 136).

The depth of inertia of traditional thinking is evident when comparing two Christian peoples living in one country, but in different geographic regions. Sociologists from Estonia compared the answers of students of Tartu and Tbilisi universities regarding their marital attitudes, in particular, young people were asked: do they think that premarital sexual relations are possible for men and women? Students from Tbilisi answered - only for men, the majority of Estonian students did not see any difference between men and women in this regard. The second question was formulated as follows: if a conflict arose between the spouses, how should it be resolved? From the point of view of Georgian students, the last word is always with the man. According to their colleagues from the University of Tartu, the spouses should first discuss the causes of the conflict, and then make an agreed decision. And finally, the attitude of young people about divorce was found out. Every third student in Tartu regarded divorce as a completely natural phenomenon. In Tbilisi, only 2% of students expressed this opinion. A third of Georgians answered that they had never thought about divorce, while there were no such people among Estonians at all (15, p. 27-30). The orientations of the Georgian and Estonian students fully reflect the different se-

Main principles: the former emphasize patriarchal privileges, while the latter emphasize the values of modern models. There is no doubt that the traditional type of family in the territory of the former Soviet Union (with some exceptions) is a modernized version 3, however, it is also heterogeneous, the features of individual models look quite convincing. She (this specificity) shows up in the best way when analyzing the most important parameters of patriarchality - patrilocal, patrilineal and the headship of the husband.

The first question, which, in fact, should have been faced by the newlyweds, is where to start a life together? In the type of family under consideration, the choice of place of residence is practically a foregone conclusion. The woman got married, in connection with which she had to follow her husband, that is, to settle in the family of his father. The departure of men to live with their wives - which took place in exceptional cases - was regarded by the community (patronymia) unequivocally as an insult to the paternal family. And he was branded with the word "primak" for life. Can we talk today about the widespread elimination of this custom? Let us turn again to the materials of Central Asian researchers. We read: for Uzbekistan, "the residence of male sons-in-law in the family of their wife's parents is not typical, and the survey revealed only a few such factors" (17, p. 63).

35 "The Tajiks and Pamir peoples retain (partly modernizing in accordance with the transformations of society) many traditional features rooted in antiquity" (16, p. 221).

The Kyrgyz ethnographer expresses in the same vein: “If in the past the husband never settled in the house of his wife’s parents, now this sometimes happens” (18, p. 82). Is it necessary to specifically prove that for a Russian family (especially an urban one), the described custom is basically lost.

Another core of the traditional family is patri-linearity, that is, the calculus of kinship along the male line. This system implies the transfer of material and family values to the heirs of the male line. The father was the owner of almost all the family property, it depended entirely on his will whether to reward his sons or drive them out of the house, marry or divorce.

One relatively recent study found that the "importance of last name continuation" factor has a direct relationship with the number of children born and with the preference for boys. Namely: 73.7% of the respondents wanted to have boys and only 21% girls (19, p. 32).

Judging by my observations, young men even in Russia up to the present time prefer - at least as their first child - a boy. It would seem, for what sake? Transferring material values - this is how the overwhelming majority of fathers, by and large do not have them, spiritual and moral - so they are undoubtedly equally important for the heirs of both male and female. Apparently, here we are faced with the unconscious "pressure" of centuries-old traditions, which occupy a solid niche in the body of culture.

The domination of the husband in the family, figuratively speaking, closes the circle of the wife's dependent position. That, as already noted, is manifested in the concentration of economic resources in his hands. One should not think that the elimination of the economic and moral priorities of the head of the family is happening everywhere in the same rhythm. "By tradition, the husband," notes the Uzbek ethnographer S. M. Mirkhasimov, "is now considered the head of the family and his word in many cases is decisive. Thus, 43.7% of the respondents answered that the husband decides the most important issues in the family" p. 38). Demographers seem to echo him: "Respect for elders, the dominant position in the husband's family can be considered a characteristic feature of a rural family" (21).

A lot in common with Central Asian stereotypes is observed in the families of the indigenous population of the Transcaucasus and the North Caucasus. According to Ya.S. Smirnova, in the pre-revolutionary time, the authoritarian power of men remained in families, consecrated by adat, sharia and, to a certain extent, by the laws of the Russian Empire (22). Field ethnographic observations and special sociological surveys carried out in the same region in the 70s showed that, due to tradition, the husband is still considered the formal head of the family in the overwhelming majority of cases. In the family as a whole, the sex and age division of labor persists. The ideology of gender equality, which is shared by the majority of young and middle-aged spouses, has not yet become for many a reality of their life (23, p. 53-57).

In the Volga region, among the Tatars and other peoples, male dominance prevails, as in the past. A woman (not a widow or divorced) is less likely to lead a family than among Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians and the Baltic peoples. According to the Moscow sociologist M. G. Pankratova, in the Mari family the concept of "head of the family" (indicated by 4/5 of the respondents in the 70s) is unshakable and is still considered a man. Traditional etiquette is preserved. The husband's wife and mother try to emphasize the prestige of the man - the head of the family. The wife speaks respectfully of her husband, at least in front of guests and strangers, and pays special attention to her father-in-law. In domestic life, more than 90% of families retain the inherited division of jobs by sex (14, p. 137). In Siberia, among the Buryats, Altai, Tuvinians and Yakuts, the head of the family, with rare exceptions, is considered an older man. The head of the Tuvan family is "og eezi" - the owner of the yurt. At the same time, the name of a woman - "hereezhok", that is, "unclean" emphasized her isolation and humiliation not only in the family, but also in society (24, p. 15).

It should be clearly understood that traditional relations in the last third of the 20th century are inherent in Russia not only in the Volga and Siberian regions. In the cities of Central Russia, these principles, although not in such a pronounced form, are also tenacious. Let's name some of them: matchmaking, the decision on the most important problems of the life of the family is made by the man, the calculus of kinship is patrilineal, the spouse changes her surname to

the husband's surname; when naming a newborn, the register of generic names is used.

The second central axis of the family is, by definition, the parent-child relationship. For many centuries, the patriarchal family has been dominated by absolute parental authority and an authoritarian upbringing system. The slightest violation of these principles led to inevitable sanctions. For example, according to the Code of 1649, a son, equally and a daughter, regardless of age, were punished with a whip if they spoke rudely to their parents, especially when trying to sue them. "... Children in the Middle Ages were often equated with the insane, with the inferior, marginal elements of society" (25, p. 316), caring for them was not in the customs of the peasant family. Thus, the commoner writer D. V. Grigorovich noted: "... the most tender father, the most caring mother, with inexpressible carelessness, present their offspring to the will of fate, not even thinking about the physical development of the child" (26, p. 87). Reflecting on the village system of life, the famous Russian ethnographer of the early XX century. R. Ya. Vnukov came to the conclusion that

36 The patriarchal family is not typical for Western countries in the second half of this century, however, in some specific aspects of behavior, the man still plays a dominant role. Thus, surveys conducted in England suggest that in the families of the lower strata the husband manages to retain the control of money. In the Dutch sample, the respondents pointed to the sole decision by the father about money expenses, and especially about the purchase of expensive things (25, p. 396-398).

in the worldview of a villager, the concept of parental responsibility to children, but, on the contrary, the concept of children's responsibility to parents existed in an exaggerated form. Hence the peasants' special reverence for the fifth commandment: "Honor your father and your mother."

Such relations in miniature reflected the hierarchy prevailing in society. According to the French historian F. Aries, “the idea of childhood was associated with the idea of dependence: the words“ son ”,“ jack ”,“ garcon ”also belong to the vocabulary of feudal relations, expressing dependence on the lord. Childhood did not end until this addiction ended. That is why, in common colloquial language, the word "child" was used to describe a person of low social status ... They were lackeys, companions, soldiers, etc. " (28, p. 231).

The dependent position of the young peasant in the Russian countryside even at the beginning of the 20th century. lasted until he got married. And in fact, before the marriage, the guy, even if he was over 20 years old, was not taken seriously by anyone. He is "small". Already in the very name of the position of an unmarried man, an infringement of his rights and social inferiority are hidden. However, it was also impossible to move to the status of an adult, i.e., married (or married) without the will of the parents 3.

And today, the peoples of the Caucasus and Central Asia are distinguished by a persistent adherence to the study of traditional principles in the relationship between parents and children. It is noticed, among Azerbaijanis, if a child

37 See Ref. 2, Ch. II.

The large patriarchal family has other names in literature as well: family community, home community, home patriarchal community. This is an economic group that includes three or four generations of the closest relatives, descendants of a single father, together with their wives and children, sometimes with sons-in-law and other relatives adopted into the family. Its number reaches one hundred, sometimes more people. The classic example of a patriarchal family is the Yugoslavian zadruga. In Russia, such a group was called in different epochs and in different localities - "fire", "stove", "smoke", "house", etc.

The economy of the patriarchal family is based on collective land ownership and the use of basic production tools. Then, as in individual possession are only items of personal use. Both production itself and consumption are carried out by the entire collective.

A large family community differentiates within the clan, becomes the main producing and consuming unit of a developed patriarchal society, a largely closed subsistence economy, grows into an independent, economically strong force, acquires ever-growing social significance. The management of the patriarchal family is formed from the outset on democratic grounds. Its head is a "senior" man, senior in age, sometimes even younger - elected. Only he is only the organizer and head of the economy. In the course of his activity, the “senior” strictly considers the opinion of all adult family members. Together with the “older” man, the patriarchal family, as a rule, has the “older” woman at its head, usually the wife of the “elder”. In the family household, she manages all women's jobs. They are quite steadfastly experienced, and the "elder" has considerable power not only among women, but also among young men at home. The woman still remains the "mistress of the house" for a long time. With the growth of the patriarchal family, the management of the entire household undergoes certain difficulties or becomes completely impossible. This is more pronounced in the area of consumption. Cooking food, for example, for a very large family is becoming more and more difficult. This is well expressed by the old Ossetian formula: "there is not enough fire for everyone." The family is divided into several parts, and the division is between the older generation.

However, at this stage, the division of the family community is not complete. Each separated family receives an individual living space adjacent to the main house, and lives in certain relationships, running a separate household. Of property, only movable is divided, while the land remains common. Such a group of relatives, resulting from the demarcation of one family group, families that also grow into large families, forms in a number of relations a single economic and social collective, which has received the name of patronymia.