Religion and Economics 3030444546, 9783030444549

Citation preview

Resit Ergener

Religion and Economics

Religion and Economics

Resit Ergener

Religion and Economics

Resit Ergener Bo˘gaziçi University Besiktas, Istanbul, Turkey

ISBN 978-3-030-44454-9 ISBN 978-3-030-44455-6 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

For my daughters Defne and Balca and my Love Sevda

Acknowledgments

This book grew out of the lectures for a course on religion and economics, which was initially entitled History of Trade and Finance: Sacred Beginnings, which I have been teaching at the International Trade Department, Bo˘gaziçi University, Istanbul. I am grateful to the Department, particularly to Professor Arzu Tektas for making it possible for me to design and teach this course and for supporting me in every way. I thank my students for their interest and enthusiasm. I thank the reference librarians of Bo˘gaziçi University Library, Zeliha Günday, Filiz Ekingen and Yılmaz Kamber for providing all research material in a timely fashion. Special thanks to my daughters Balca and Defne and to my dear wife Sevda for their love and support. I could not have done it without them.

vii

Introduction

Religion is often associated with the spiritual, the metaphysical and afterlife. There are also those who think of religion as a scam which benefits the establishment, both the priestly and the secular, and which provides ideological support to the way things are. Either way, during the course of many years I worked on this book, whenever I shared that I was working on a book on the relationship between religion and economics, the response would almost always be something like: “How interesting. Is there such a link?”—unless of course, the person I was talking to was an academic knowledgeable on the subject. It should be common sense however that an institution that has been with us for so long and is so pervasive is likely to have economic implications—otherwise it would not have lasted. As the story goes, the congregation that a missionary had built with much effort vanishes, when he stops serving beans, bread, meat and coffee to those who attend the Sunday Mass. The succinct explanation for the disappearance of the congregation, provided by the only remaining member, an unfortunate cripple was: “No beans, No Jesus”. (reported by John Wetherill in 1936, cited in Stanish 2017, 269). Humans strive to survive and to be better off. To this end they employ theirs and others’ labor and capital. In order to obtain the material and non—material rewards which they are unable to get through the use of labor and capital, humans can choose to beseech things through prayer

ix

x

INTRODUCTION

and ritual, which activities are not likely to provide the intended material returns, though some practitioners are likely to believe that they do. Yet, even though they do not lead to the desired material rewards, prayer and ritual (and other religious activities) are likely to have unintended consequences, which render them essential for survival and for material wellbeing. Regardless of whether they are undertaken to supplicate for material prosperity or to attain spiritual wellbeing and otherworldly salvation, religious acts are likely to impact our material wellbeing as well, and this has been so ever since our early beginnings. Religious acts such as prayer and ritual and the related beliefs, define and delineate groups, enhance within group solidarity and cohesion and reinforce intra group alliances. Religion, facilitates exchange, contributes to the creation of networks of trust, contributes to the creation and justification of both inequality and charity, enhances and attenuates social hierarchies, and affects economic performance both at the individual and at the macro levels. As one of the two Crusaders in a New Yorker cartoon, published during the days leading to the Gulf War, says looking over an olive orchard: “Let’s face it. It’s all about olive oil” (Fradon n.d.).

References Fradon, Dana. n.d. “‘Let’s Face It. It’s All about Olive Oil.’—New Yorker Cartoon Premium Giclee Print by Dana Fradon.” Art.Com. https://www. art.com/products/p15063247659-sa-i6845439/dana-fradon-let-s-face-it-its-all-about-olive-oil-new-yorker-cartoon.htm. Accessed February 11, 2020. Stanish, Charles. 2017. The Evolution of Human Co-operation: Ritual and Social Complexity in Stateless Societies. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Contents

1 5

1

Defining Religion References

2

An Illusion, a Capability, a Tendency: Formation of Groups and the Encounter with Gods An Illusion: Animism A Capability: The Community Dance Unintended Outcomes of the Community Dance Encounter with “Big Gods” A Propensity: Exchange References

7 8 11 14 18 21 32

3

Exchange with Nature and with Gods: License to Exploit Gifts to Nature, Gifts to Gods Oneness with God: Sufism, Eastern Religions, Monism Abrahamic Religions St. Francis, Pope Francis, and Patriarch Bartholomew Religion and Environmentalism References

37 39 43 46 48 49 51

4

Exchange Among Humans: Divine Supervision Divine Supervision of Trade Sacred Markets

55 57 58 xi

xii

5

CONTENTS

Emporia Religious Texts Promoting the Fulfillment of Contract Obligations References

60

Exchange Among Humans: Networks of Trust Contract Uncertainty Groups and Reputation Insignia: Recognizable Insignia: Genuine Sects and Cults Sects in Diamond Industry Outcast Groups and Trade Diasporas Cooperation and Diffusion: Long-Distance Trade and Spread of Islam in Africa Trade and Religion Today References

69 70 73 75 77 78 81 84 87

63 65

89 92 95

6

Religion and the Rise of Inequality Egalitarian Beginnings Why Share? Aggrandizers Biding Their Time Appropriating by Consent Rather Than Force Spread of Inequality References

99 100 102 103 108 124 125

7

Religion and Hierarchies of Dominance Oppression and Discrimination Myths: Attenuating and Enhancing Oppression Institutions: Attenuating and Enhancing Oppression Religion and Oppression Religion and Subordination of Women Attenuating Oppression: Early Christianity Enhancing Oppression: Christianity After Constantine Christianity and War Islam: Holy Jihad Muslim Empires: Tolerance and Dominance

131 132 133 134 135 138 139 140 144 147 149

CONTENTS

xiii

Pope vs. The Sultan References

153 155

8

Religion and Charity Gaining Prestige and Status Creating Obligations Benefiting the Donor Selfless Giving Punishes Rewards Defines Groups Provides the Leadership Gift Asks Sanctifies Reminds Teachings and Practice of Charity in Abrahamic Religions References

159 160 161 162 162 164 167 169 169 170 171 171 173 177

9

Religion and Economic Performance … Of Individuals … Of Nations References

181 181 200 208

10

Religion and Historical Divergences in Economic Performance Possible Explanations for the Relative Backwardness of Muslim Economies Kinship-Based, Agrarian Coercive, and Market Economies Weber and the Rise of Capitalism Among Puritans Monasticism and the Rise of Capitalism Autonomization of the Economic Sphere and Canon Law Final Words on the Great Divergence References

11

Concluding Remarks References

Index

219 220 223 225 229 235 237 238 243 246 249

CHAPTER 1

Defining Religion

Despite their frequent use, there is a lack of consensus on the definition of both terms religion and economics, there being more of a consensus on the meaning of economics than there is on that of religion. Most, if not all would agree that economic activities are about the use of scarce resources to produce, distribute, and consume goods and services and growth. There is less of an agreement on what makes an activity religious, which renders the term religion harder to define, so much so that a three-year-long high-level interdisciplinary conference held at Çatal Höyük, a significant Neolithic site in central Turkey, ended lacking a consensus among the participating scholars about the use of the term religion (Hodder 2010, 1). This, despite the fact that one of the key questions probed at the conference was whether “changes in spiritual life and religious ritual were a necessary prelude to the social and economic changes that led to ‘civilization’” (Hodder 2010, 18). The participants in the study offered sophisticated definitions of religion and of the religious, such as: A burial is religious “not because of its separateness from everyday life, but because it focuses, refers to broader imaginings and deals with the relationship between self and community” and, lived in houses are religious “in the sense that they” are “about imagining, remembering and interacting with past houses and those who lived in them” (Hodder 2010, 17).

© The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_1

1

2

R. ERGENER

“Religious dimension” is defined “as that emergent sphere of human life in which social groups tend to their fascination with and fear of ultimate boundedness, which shape and are shaped by all other dynamic modes of being bound – religion has to do with the way in which one is ultimately bound together with others” (Shults 2010, 77). “What looks like religion may be the convergence of practices that produce effects of markedness and absence” (Keane 2010, 189). “For some, religion may be the ultimate utility providing protection against misfortune, access to divine powers or guidance to good life” (Keane 2010, 191). As the definitions of religion given above illustrate, the range of phenomena that has been put under the heading of religion in academic and in daily usage has been very wide. Such phenomena have included ritual, taboo, symbolism, morality, altered states of consciousness, and belief in supernatural beings (Sosis and Alcorta 2003, 264). Of all these phenomena, belief in the existence of supernatural beings is probably the one that has been most widely attributed to religion. Tylor, one of the founders of the study of religion, made the remark that “the minimum sign for the presence of religion, is a belief in spiritual beings, in the supernatural” (Tylor 1958; cited in Bloom 2012, 212). Supernatural beings have the capability to provide what humans cannot get through exchange with other humans or through productive labor. Gods are powerful supernatural beings with the additional powers to give and take away life, to control destiny, and to reward good deeds and punish the wrong. Perhaps, the most important function of religion is to open up and to maintain communication channels with supernatural beings and gods, so that they will approach humans favorably and grant their wishes. We agree with Bloom that religion also has the mystical and civic dimensions as well. But these are also experienced in relation to the supernatural (Bloom 2012, 183). We are going to define religion as the sum of the beliefs and actions aimed at obtaining favors from supernatural beings (Rossano 2006, 346). Religious actions include, among others, transcendent rituals, observing taboos, obeying dietary requirements, moral behavior, gifts, and sacrifice. Supernatural beings are not always (probably never!) impressed with gifts and rituals and do not always (if ever!) fulfill the requests of their believers (even though at times, by coincidence, they may appear to be

1

DEFINING RELIGION

3

doing so). And, transcendent and civic aspects of religion seem to be lacking explicit economic goals. Yet, the actions undertaken to win the favors of supernatural beings and the religious activities that are transcendent and civic are not totally void of economic outcomes, as such actions often trigger mostly unintended and significant economic outcomes. Religious actions and beliefs will last to the extent they contribute positively to the well-being of the community. Actions and beliefs that have negative impact may be encouraged by the dominant community in order to keep the negatively impacted community subservient. In this book, we shall explore the myriad ways our worldly well-being has been affected by the unintended by-products of human efforts to gain the favors of the supernatural. We start with an exploration of the beginnings of religion. Archaeological remains related to the religion of our ancestors are rather scarce and consist of no more than some wall paintings and burials. In the absence of sufficient archaeological information, we seek clues about the religion of our ancestors in the religious practices of presentday humans, who have retained the way of life of our early ancestors. The assumption being that contemporary hunter-gatherers have largely (if not wholly) retained not only the way of life but also the religion of our early hunter-gatherer ancestors. There are some problems with this approach. The size of contemporary hunter-gatherer groups is not uniform. There is no uniformity with regard to their beliefs and lifestyles either. And, contemporary hunter-gatherers inhabit marginal habitats, not exploited by agriculturalists, which was not necessarily the case with our ancestors. Also, one should consider that even though their roots stretch back to early ancestors, extant present-day hunter-gatherer groups are not direct replicas of the early ones. Through millenniums, hunter-gatherer groups have experienced technological change and evolved and adapted. This would have happened through their own inertia and also in response to other groups and to the environment. Change would have accelerated in response to relatively recent contact with westerners and (mostly western) agriculturalists. For instance, some (the Hadza) have adopted new tools such as metal arrowheads and pots. However, even though contemporary hunter-gatherers are not living fossils, they are pre-agrarian and they should therefore give us a good idea about the way of life of pre-agrarian communities at the end of the

4

R. ERGENER

last ice age and about the selection pressures that many have suggested brought our species into being (Blurton Jones 1987). Fortunately, there are groups like the Australian aborigines who were observed before their way of life was modified through contact with westerners. What is more, Australian aborigines are all descendants of the original migrants who arrived in Australia 45,000 years ago and managed to avoid contact with any outsiders thereafter. Another group who are the descendants of the original migration from Africa to Australia and who did not have any outside contacts until very recently are the dark-skinned Andaman Islanders, who live on the Andaman island, in the Bay of Bengal, 120 miles off the coast of Burma. Yet a third such group are the !Kung San bushmen of the Kalahari Desert in South Africa, who belong to the oldest of the three lineages of humans who moved out of Africa. Groups such as the three mentioned above, which had none or minimum outside contact at the time the observations about them were recorded, provide us with windows through which we can observe the existence of our hunter-gatherer ancestors (Wade 2009, 98–100). Hunter-gatherers have supernatural beings—who are not (as strictly) bound by the physical and psychological limits that humans are subject to, but who are not all-powerful and who do not know all, as the later powerful big gods would. Supernatural beings of the hunter-gatherers can be tricked by humans and influenced by other supernatural beings. There are no temples, no priests, no idols, and no regular meetings. Punishment of bad and the rewarding of good behavior are issues for the humans to settle among themselves—their supernatural beings are usually not interested in and do not interfere with the interactions among humans. Yet, these beings can reciprocate humans with rewards of their own, if they are approached with properly presented requests, and with calamities, if they are not (Norenzayan 2013, 122–23). We propose that supernatural beings evolved out of the universal illusion that non-humans possess human features (animism). The efforts to communicate with and to propitiate the non-humans (to which human features have been attributed) through prayers and through rituals made up of synchronous movements, a capability unique to humans and through gift offerings, motivated by the human propensity to exchange, led to the beginnings of religion—with economic consequences.

1

DEFINING RELIGION

5

References Bloom, P. 2012. “Religion, Morality, Evolution.” Annual Review Psychol ogy 63: 179–99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100334. Blurton Jones, N. G. 1987. “Tolerated Theft, Suggestions About the Ecology and Evolution of Sharing, Hoarding and Scrounging.” Social Science Information 26 (1): 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901887026001002. Hodder, Ian. 2010. “Probing Religion at Catalhöyük: An Interdisciplinary.” In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization: Çatalhöyük as a Case Study, edited by Ian Hodder, vol. 1, 1–31. Keane, Webb. 2010. “Marked, Absent, Habitual: Approaches to Neolithic Religion at Catalhoyuk.” In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, edited by Ian Hodder. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Norenzayan, Ara. 2013. Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rossano, Matt J. 2006. “The Religious Mind and the Evolution of Religion.” Review of General Psychology 10 (4): 346–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 1089-2680.10.4.346. Shults, LeRons. 2010. “Spiritual Entanglement: Transforming Religious Symbols at Catalhoyuk.” In Religion in the Emergence of Civilization, edited by Ian Hodder, 73–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sosis, Richard, and Candace Alcorta. 2003. “Signaling, Solidarity, and the Sacred: The Evolution of Religious Behavior.” Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 12 (6): 264–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.10120. Tylor, Edward B. 1958. Primitive Culture. New York: Harper. Wade, Nicholas. 2009. The Faith Instinct: How Religion Evolved and Why It Endures. New York: Penguin Press.

CHAPTER 2

An Illusion, a Capability, a Tendency: Formation of Groups and the Encounter with Gods

Order is difficult to attain and maintain with human societies, as humans tend to be selfish, each seeking personal gain. Nevertheless, even though there are times of disorder, there is mostly order. Earlier philosophers such as Hobbes emphasized the role of the state in eliminating disorder and achieving alliance and solidarity. Yet, human societies with some order were in existence, long before the state came into being. Hobbes pointed out that the state emerges out of the need people have to come together for mutual protection. Otherwise, life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 2019b) and “there can be no security to any man, how strong or wise so ever he be” (Hobbes 2019b) as “every man is enemy to every man” (Hobbes 2019a). State has the power to impose order through the use of authority. Hunter-gatherers, which is what humans were 99% of the time of they have been in existence as a species, lived in groups that lacked state authority. Except for the last 5000 years or so, power in human societies remained diffused. In the absence of central authority, it was for the individuals to defend their claims against each other, which would have created disorder. Before the state came into existence, a capability and a propensity contributed hunter-gatherers’ ability to form groups with some order. More precisely, it was the capability to move synchronously with other humans (community dance) and the propensity to exchange, that bonded early humans together and contributed to the formation of groups and to group solidarity and cohesion. © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_2

7

8

R. ERGENER

Religion was born out of the attempts to set up communication channels with supernatural beings using community dances and gift exchange as a means of communication with supernatural beings. Supernatural beings probably never responded to these attempts. Nevertheless, such activities had outcomes which contributed to the survival of humans: Community dance undertaken to impress supernatural beings supplemented the impact of such dance undertaken for other purposes, in defining and delineating groups and in reinforcing group solidarity and screening free riders. (As we discuss later in this chapter, community dance probably started with the synchronous movements undertaken for purposes such as scaring animals during the hunt.) Exchange with supernatural beings would justify the claims humans have on nature and on the produce of the labor of others. But, what led humans to conceive supernatural beings? The answer may be animism, a fundamental and widespread human illusion.

An Illusion: Animism “The belief that ‘natural’ things, such as plants, animals, stones and even phenomena such as thunder, have intentionality (or a vital force) and can have influence on human lives” is known as animism (Peoples et al. 2016). According to a study published in 2016, of all the traits observed with hunter-gatherer spirituality, animism is the oldest that has been observed in the most recent shared ancestor of present-day hunter-gatherers. Other traits observed were: (1) belief in afterlife (“Belief in the survival of the individual personality beyond death.”); (2) shamanism; (3) ancestor worship (the “belief that the spirits of the dead kin remain active in another realm”); (4) worship of ancestors who may influence and who are open to be influenced by the alive; (5) worship of high gods (single, all-powerful creator deities.); and (6) worship of high gods who can interfere in human affairs and enforce morality (Peoples et al. 2016). With hunter-gatherers, any natural being, including animals, vegetables, minerals, trees, mountains, and stones—can be supernatural. (When asked if all stones had a sprit an Ojibwa responded “No, but some do” [Hallowell 1960].) Interestingly, the salient feature that makes natural beings supernatural is their possession of human-like qualities. Animistic tendencies are not unique to hunter-gatherers. They are universal. In his book Faces in the Clouds, Stewart Guthrie discusses how

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

9

we attribute human features to a strikingly large range of objects, which include vehicles of all sorts, buildings, natural calamities such as volcanic eruptions or storms or natural blessings such as rain, heavenly formations, daily items, rocks, and mountains (Guthrie 1995a). We attribute human characteristics even to omnipotent and omniscient gods. Our mind assigns Gods to the same category with humans. The areas of the brain which are alerted when we think of the minds of others are the same areas that are alerted when we think about the minds of gods (Norenzayan 2013, 15). The Abrahamic God knows and can do anything, but he is in many ways like a person (Wright 2009, 473). Book of Genesis says “God created man in his own image.” But, Aristotle’s statement “Men created gods after their own image,” is probably closer to truth (Wright 2009, 473). What led humans to animism was probably the desire and the need to understand how non-humans behave. One of the approaches that can be adopted to this end is to assume that non-humans reason as humans do. Here is how it works: The individual whose behavior we are most familiar with is ourselves. When there is no other explanation, we can choose to assume that other humans will reason and perform like we do. What we know about how we behave and how other humans behave in general, we can use to analyze and predict the behavior of inanimate objects and of animals and plants. We can also apply what we know about the behavior of animals and plants, which are familiar to us, to explain and predict the behavior of other inanimate objects or of other animals and plants. (Guthrie 1995b)

For example, we know on the basis of our experience with other humans that (1) a person can be dangerous, if he is angry, (2) a person gets angry, if something is taken from her, and that (3) anger can be soothed with a gift and by supplementing this act with an invitation to calm and peace. Or, one can intimidate a person to force him to give up claims to what was taken away from him. There would be no harm in applying the above line of reasoning to relations with forces of nature. Storms can be accepted as a sign of heavens’ anger and wrath. The wrath of the heavens may be because they are missing something. The way to calm down heavens may be to make an offer to soothe its anger. Or, one can yell and chant at the heavens or beg with it to invite it to calm down.

10

R. ERGENER

The predictions and explanations one makes based on animistic thinking are likely to be wrong, but useful anyway. Useful, because they lead to action and any action is often better than none: When we hear a noise in the night, it is better that we ask the question “Who is it?” rather than “What is it?” If it is a burglar or a wild animal, we are in danger, if it is just the wind, no harm done by having checked for other causes. Our readiness to attribute human characteristics to non-humans has been illustrated by several experiments. In a well-known experiment conducted in 1944, participants were shown geometric figures (triangles, squares, circles) moving around a screen. The movement was not random. The psychologists who designed the experiment intended to tell a story through these movements. The participants attributed personalities (bullies, victims, heroes) and goals and desires to the geometric figures and interpreted their movements as a story which was very much like what the designers of the experiment had in mind (Heider and Simmel 1944). It has been suggested that animistic thinking was present in early hominids, before language (Peoples et al. 2016, 274). The roots of animism may indeed be deeply grounded in our animal past. For, the tendency to explain the behavior of a species or objects with the knowledge based on the behavior of other species is observed with animals as well. Animals can seek an agency behind the unexplained movement of objects or behind natural events (Guthrie 2002). Among the examples, Guthrie gives in this respect is the barking of the dog owned by Darwin every time a parasol moved, as the dog assumed human agency behind the movements of parasols—just like the Isa Upanishad (First Mantra) assumes the presence of divine power behind every movement. Because supernatural beings had human qualities, one could seek to open up communication channels with them, just like one can seek to open up communication channels with fellow humans, in pursuit of rewards. The tools that have been employed to that end are prayers, gifts, and rituals. Rituals are exaggerated, formal, sequenced, fixed, and repetitive acts. Such acts are powerful tools of communication as they are exciting, stimulating, catchy, and easy to remember and as they revoke associations. A form of ritual ubiquitous with hunter-gatherers involves synchronized movements by the participants, or the “community dance.”

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

11

A Capability: The Community Dance For tens of thousands of years, our ancestors lived in small groups, the largest of which had no more than about 150 members. The formation and the sustaining of groups with more than 150 members became possible about 40,000 years ago. One of the developments that made this possible was the use of language. Language has enabled large-scale cooperation based on the reservoir of human knowledge and experience. Such cooperation is now universal (McNeill 1995, 24–25). Yet, the use of language by itself would not have been sufficient to bond large human groups together. It was probably the dance and other rhythmic activities undertaken by groups that made the difference (Ehrenreich 2007, 23–24). The use of verbal or written representations for communication purposes is possible only if there is an implicit agreement about the predictions with regard to the actions of others (Freeman 2001, 7). The strongest basis for the formation of such an agreement is provided by the dance and other rhythmically repeated motions, because they are predictable and allow people to anticipate and move in accord with their expectations. It was the background beat given by music, a wordless, illogical, emotional human technology that made behavioral consistency possible in masses—first temporary and then, eventually permanent, by enabling the crossing of barriers and the creation of harmony between individuals (Freeman 2001, 9). The Community Dance The capability to initiate and perform synchronous movements such as dance is unique to humans. The chimpanzees whose DNA is so similar to that of humans can be taught to do rhythmic dance. For example, the chimpanzees studied at a compound on the Tenerife Islands in 1913–1917 were taught to circle a post, with their walking turning into a trot, making rhythm by putting emphasis on one foot, stepping the other lightly, and “keeping time” with others (Kohler 1925, 314–15). But no chimpanzee group is known to have initiated the community dance on their own. A “community dance” is performed by an indefinite number of participants who move their muscles rhythmically, “establishing a regular

12

R. ERGENER

beat, and continuing to do so long enough to create euphoric excitement among all dancers and also to a certain extent among the observers” (McNeill 1995, 13). Participants enjoy an ecstasy and deep satisfaction along with a feeling of physical expansion, of growing to be larger than in real life. Feeling of self becomes fuzzy as the feeling of solidarity with the participants in the dance is heightened (McNeill 1995, 8). This state of being has been labeled by a dance historian as “boundary loss” (Hanna 1977, 119 cited in McNeill, 8). “Boundary loss” is experienced not only by those who participate in a community dance, but also by those who participate in other synchronous activities such as marching together (McNeill 1995, 7). What triggers the feelings of boundary loss in the participants of community dances and other synchronous activities may be the invocation by these dances of a state of being belonging to the very beginnings of a person’s existence as a fetus, in the womb, with no separation between the self and the surroundings. The rhythmic inputs which the dancer or the marcher receives from muscles, which lead to boundary loss, may echo the circumstances of the fetus, with the heartbeat of the mother, synchronized with the heartbeat of the fetus, providing the major, if not the most significant stimulus to the developing brain (McNeill 1995, 7). Boundary loss is experienced by hunter-gatherers when performing rituals. Andaman Islanders, for example, lose themselves in the dance, becoming absorbed in the unified community (McNeill 1995, 8). A Swazi king, who happened to have been trained as an anthropologist, said that when rival Swazi warriors danced, they felt that they were one and they could praise each other. Singing and dancing that may go on for eight hours or longer would evoke intense emotions and bind together all who are present with a sense of community and shared exaltation. It is possible that a community dance is conducted simply to experience the feeling of boundary loss. The dances of hunter-gatherers however are often conducted not for the sake of experiencing boundary loss, but with a specific purpose—like to ward off evil, to heal, to invite fertility and the boundary loss is an unintended by-product of vital importance. Indeed, the beginning of community dancing can be traced to the rhythmic activities undertaken by groups with a purpose. One possible scenario is that community dance started with the actions undertaken to hunt big animals.

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

13

Compared with predator animals, humans are physically weak, fragile, and vulnerable, lacking features such as claws or sharp teeth. Nevertheless, early humans managed to prevail against the predators and one of the practices they employed in order to do so was to face the predators in groups, waving their hands and sticks and stamping their feet in unison and with rhythm. Banded together and enlarged with masks, they appeared as large as any animal could be (Ehrenreich 2007, 29–30). The group, pretending to be a single, multi-legged, noisy animal, would succeed in scaring the predator animals and to drive them into nets or cul de sacs or over cliffs. Archaeological evidence shows that this type of hunting goes back to the Paleolithic and that it precedes the stalking of individual animals by small groups of men (Pringle 1997). We may be invoking this multi-headed creature when we feel “being part of something larger” when in a trance, brought about by participation in a synchronous activity. Beginnings of Religion: Dancing to Influence Nature As communal hunting waned, the thrill of overcoming animals could be revoked as ritual. The successful encounters could be repeated to train the youth and to relive the feelings of joy emanating from overcoming animals. Prehistoric dance images show participants wearing animal masks and waving branches. The synchronous movements undertaken when dealing with dangerous predators could have been repeated not only to train the youth and to relive the joys of the hunt, but also to deal with forces of nature—to persuade the forest to give more animals to hunt and more fruits to be collected and to ward off evil, to invite healing and fertility and the like. In reaction to threats related to natural events like thunderstorms or to their rivals, chimpanzees and gorillas can also engage in behavior which is similar to community dancing, foot stamping the ground, swaying rhythmically, swinging saplings, hooting noises, waving arms, and making facial gestures. Such behavior is aimed at relieving tensions, challenging rivals, and impressing the rest of the group. Even though this behavior is labeled as “rain dance” by Goodall, as the movements are so much like those of human dance, it is not dance by human standards as the participating chimpanzees do not move according to a common rhythm (LawickGoodall and Lawick 1967, 77). Ethologists therefore label such acts by monkeys as “display behavior,” rather than dance. What is unique about

14

R. ERGENER

similar acts by humans is that human acts are performed in synchrony, a capability which only humans possess as a species.

Unintended Outcomes of the Community Dance Solidarity and Cooperation Trotting, hooting, and facial gestures performed by the chimpanzees do not keep storms away. Likewise, the synchronous movements performed by humans, do not ward off storms or illnesses. But, synchronous movements or the “community dance” performed by humans generate unintended benefits, the primary benefit being the reinforcement of the solidarity and cooperation—among the dancers and between the dancers and the spectators, which chimpanzee display behavior does not, not to the same extent anyway (McNeill 1995, 26). One of the reasons why humans can attain a much higher level of cooperation than chimpanzees is because humans are able to “keep time” with other humans through dance, a capability which chimpanzees—or members of any other species do not have—which again, only humans have. Particularly when done in circles, group dance, heals divisions and bonds the participants in communitas (Ehrenreich 2007, 23–24). The dance and the higher level of cooperation it led to, made larger groups possible, facilitated intra-group cooperation and contributed to overcome problems of collective action, including cooperative hunting, food sharing, taking care of offspring defense, and warfare (McNeill 1995, 4). Ultimately, the trances that dance led to, together with dreams, would lead to the awareness of big and powerful gods, who were capable of influencing nature and humans. Definition and Delineation of Groups Dance not only reinforces within group stability and cohesion, but also helps to define and delineate groups from each other. During dance rituals, the self does not expand to all humans but only to those one dances with. According to an anecdote attributed to Dr. Livingstone, identity marker of an African is (or, used to be) not where he is from or what his language is, but his dance (Halikarnas Balıkçısı 1982). The delineation of groups leads to the pooling of resources within the group, which brings about their more productive use as compared with

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

15

when the resources are shared with all (Bloom 2012). This is the beginning of the much-criticized tendency religions have to divide peoples, sowing seeds of hatred against those who are different, like the heretics and apostates and justifying violence and war. But, success can be gained only at the expense of others. It is not surprising therefore that successful religions have had a tendency to bind believers more to each other than to outsiders. With most religions, moral teachings are explicitly parochial (Graham and Haidt 2010). Religious commandments advise compassionate treatment of the members of one’s faith but not necessarily of members of other faiths. For instance, the “neighbors” in the Bible, who are to be loved, as one loves himself (Leviticus 19:18), are the Israelite neighbors, not neighbors belonging to other groups. Christians are nice to everybody but not endlessly so. Christian love was not brotherly but familial—directed to the kin, rather than everybody else (Wright 2009, 280). Galatians 6:10 invites Christians to work for the good of all, but particularly for those of the family of those who shared the faith. 1 Corinthians 5:13 invites Christians to expel the wicked from their communities, which can be interpreted to mean that you were an outcast with Christianity, unless you shared the faith (Wright 2009, 300). The Koran has similar dictums, asking believers not to form alliances with Jews and Christians (Koran 5:51; see also 29:68–69). Intra-group Alliances Bonding with other groups through alliances is as important for the survival of groups as their delineation is. Shared ecstasy contributed to the creation of bonds between groups, which provided humans with a selective advantage in survival in a hostile environment (Hayden 1987, 25– 34). Here is how: Up until five million years ago, primate ancestors of early humans were living in the lush environment of the jungles of Africa. Because of a draught which started about five million years ago, jungles dwindled and savannas emerged on some of the land which was originally forested. Ancestors of present-day humans who were relatively small primates weighing no more than about 25 kg on the average were pushed out of the remaining forests by the larger primates. The larger primates who pushed the ancestors of present-day humans out of the forest are still in the forest. They have not been through much evolution. The tough

16

R. ERGENER

conditions in the savanna forced our primate ancestors, which were relatively small, to evolve. The features that evolved which enabled the ancestors of modern humans to survive in the savanna included standing on two feet, running fast and dexterous hands, which could be used to throw things and make tools. Bonding between groups would have also played a crucial role in the survival of early humans in a hostile environment. Groups living in different parts of the savanna which had bonded and formed alliances could mutually support one another at times of need. Groups living in dry regions of the savanna could be hosted by those living in wet regions. When dry regions turned wet and wet ones dry, the hosts and guests could reverse their roles. Such alliances were more likely to evolve between groups made up of kin. Ecstasy attained jointly by members of different groups through jointly conducted dance rituals also helped to create, recreate, reaffirm, and strengthen bonds between groups. Alliances created through shared ecstasy can be as strong if not stronger than kinship bonds for, those who share the same ecstatic states perceive to be connected by forces which are beyond the self and this world. Eliminating the Free Riders Another benefit of community dancing (and singing) would be the elimination of free riders—who want to consume the produce of others, but not contribute to production themselves. The less effort one puts in a collective endeavor like hunting, the greater his gain will be, provided that the fruits of the joint effort are shared equally, regardless of how much effort individual participants put in. Therefore, there will always be those who will attempt to free ride on the efforts of others, even though the total benefits created would be greater if all participated fully in the endeavor. The dance is a powerful tool to encourage cooperation. Many have tasted the joyful exultation experienced when dancing in celebration, with arms joined, together with friends. Experiments show that the synchrony experienced during such dances makes the participants more prosocial. As compared with members of groups who do not participate in synchronous activities such as singing or dancing together, members of groups which participate in synchronous activities are more likely to suppress their self-interest for the sake of other group members (Norenzayan

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

17

2013, 115). For instance, they are more generous in giving away money when participating in economic games (Wiltermuth and Heath 2009). How this happens is not clearly understood. One possible explanation is related to boundary loss. That is, when “I dance with others, and they move with me, their bodies moving as I intend my own body to move, it confuses me into the boundaries of myself to include them” (Bloom 2012, 189). Whatever the cause, human groups that were bonded with the dance would have an evolutionary advantage, as they would have fewer free riders and more cohesion among their members. Screening the Non-committed Dancers questioned by anthropologists have all reported how joyful the community dance is. Dancing makes the hearts of the hunter-gatherers of the Kalahari Desert “happy” (Katz 1982). Greek ritual dancers report feeling “light, calm and joyful” (Danforth 1979, 159). Not all rituals performed to communicate with supernatural beings are pleasant or joyful. Some are very difficult if not painful. Fasting and circumcision are examples of such rituals. Of course, there are more difficult ones. Such actions can generate benefits such as psychological and physical well-being, increased power to put up with difficulties, economic benefits, feeling of membership in a community, solidarity during crisis, fertility, and opportunities to find partners (Sosis and Alcorta 2003, 264). Nevertheless, the material costs of difficult rituals as well as the costs born in the form of physical and psychological pain and discomfort when performing them can be greater than any benefits derived. Why people put up with the painful and time-consuming aspects of difficult rituals remains a mystery unless one realizes that the negative aspects of difficult rituals are the very reason of their existence (Iannaccone 1992). Negative aspects of rituals are actually screens that eliminate those who are not strongly committed. As compared with the committed, uncommitted will find the performance of difficult rituals costlier and leave the group in order to avoid putting up with such high costs. Stronger cooperation will emerge and stabilize among the committed who stay behind. Had the less committed not left, they would have been free riders, enjoying the benefits of membership, without making the necessary sacrifices.

18

R. ERGENER

Their being difficult makes costly rituals hard to fake. Rituals that are easy and therefore not hard to fake can be easily imitated by free riders. A group member will bear the costs of hard-to-fake insignia only if he is sincere with membership in the group and its requirements. Performance of difficult rituals then serves as signal of true commitment and of cooperative intentions.

Encounter with “Big Gods” The synchronous activities undertaken by our ancestors were intended to influence objects such as trees, animals, volcanoes, and storms, which were assumed to have human-like attributes. Ancestors of modern humans were not aware of the presence of gods, who had the capacity to control things in general and to deal punishments and rewards. Gods made their presence felt, as the concept of each tree having human attributes evolved into the concept of a forest god ruling over trees which then led to the concept of a single god who ruled over everything—as initiallly outlined by the nineteenth-century scholar Tylor (Bird-David 1999, 599). We do not know how this transformation happened. It is plausible that ecstatic states attained during the course of synchronous activities provided a venue through which the presence (or the illusion) of gods was experienced, as ecstatic states can lead to transcendental concepts such as deities and spirits. Another such venue would have been provided by dreams. Dreams were believed to be what the souls experienced as they wandered around, as the body where the soul resides remained stationary (Wade 2009, 53). In other words, spirits could exist independent of the body, which meant that the spirits could live on after the bodies which hosted them passed away. The dead ancestors who appeared in dreams were their souls who were living on after the bodies had died (Wright 2009, 13). What comes through dreams, comes spontaneously, which reduces the reliability of dreams as a channel of communication with the supernatural. Also dreams cannot be used in public rituals. Trance induced by communal dances as part of public rituals, provided controlled deliberate access to the supernatural, through which gods were conceived (Wade 2009, 93).

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

19

Dance and the Gods Dance rituals continued under gods. For instance, dance was an essential part of Greek–Roman religious practice (Ehrenreich 2007, 33). Artemis and Demeter were foci of ecstatic worship in Greece. In Rome, ecstasy was experienced during the worship of Isis, imported from Egypt, Cybele, the Great Mother or Magna Mater, imported from Asia Minor and Mithras, imported from Persia. Dances to Artemis were particularly wild in Sparta with men and women wearing only a slip each. With Dionysus, one had no other choice but to obey his call to ecstasy. Otherwise, the person would be driven to madness and destroy his own children. Gods who were very much like Dionysus were, worshipped under many different names over a range of five thousand miles, from Portugal through North Africa to India. Not all gods were like Dionysus or Artemis. Many did not like ecstasy. Or maybe it was the elites who monopolized the relations with gods as their intermediaries, who did not like the dance. Decline of the Dance Our hunter-gatherer ancestors were egalitarian. Community dance had evolved in an egalitarian environment, which it reinforced. The dance would level and bind the society and remove budding inequalities. Dance rituals were conducted without leaders or intermediaries. There were no temples, no priests. Anybody could try to contact supernatural beings. Presumed benefits derived from such contacts were shared. Egalitarianism was probably a necessity for the hunter-gatherers. Living in harsh environments, with (1) no government, (2) limited variety of consumption goods, (3) limited trade with other societies, (4) production of perishable consumption goods only (no food storage), (5) negligible gains from innovation or increasing the variety of goods, (6) immobile population, sharing with other members of the society in return for their commitment to reciprocate, was the rational choice, as a reversal of roles was quite likely in the future (Posner 1980). Such sharing provides a primitive form of social insurance. The impossibility of food storage rendered the choice to share not only the rational but also the only choice, as what is not consumed has to be thrown away—if not shared.

20

R. ERGENER

Social stratification emerged as above assumptions ceased to be true, particularly as storage became possible. During the course of later chapters, we shall be discussing the details of how inequality emerged, how it became entrenched and the role religion played in the process. Suffice it to say for the moment, that the emerging elites, who gained control of stored goods, would not be fond of the elimination of rank and social stratification which was experienced during the community dance. Also, the newly emerging elites would assume the role of being intermediaries with gods and enjoyed the benefits this role entailed. To this end, it was imperative to prevent the less well off from intermingling with gods through rituals which included synchronous actions by the participants. Archaeological evidence shows that as social stratification increased, rather than everybody participating in the dance, only members of the elite would. Ultimately, it was only the priests who conducted religious rituals. One of the sites where these developments are best illustrated is the remains of Oaxaca, in Mexico. Recent carbon-14 dating suggests that the earliest known residents of Oaxaca were hunter-gatherers, who lived about nine thousand years ago. When performing rituals, entire community of early Oaxacans would meet at an area cleared for the “dance.” Later, with the rise of agriculture (which is one of the developments that opens up the paths leading to social stratification, as we discuss in Chapter 7), rather than the whole group participating, rituals were seemingly conducted by members of a male elite. About two thousand years ago, following the emergence of state and military might, it was only the priests who performed the important rituals, at times determined by religious calendars, in temples built by corvee labor (Ehrenreich 2007, 44). With the rise of modern religions, the direct contacts which the less well-off had with supernatural beings were curtailed by the emerging elites. Dance rituals which provided one of the venues for such contacts were discouraged. In the Middle East, the dance scenes which are seen on pottery shards and wall paintings between 8000 and 4000 BC are not seen after 3500, the date when the first city-states appeared. Even though the prophets of Israel belonged to a prophetic and dancing tradition and King David was a musician who danced avidly before the Lord when the ark was brought to his city, Old Testament references to dance are not very positive (Wade 2009, 135).

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

21

Christian Church has wavered between allowing some dancing to meet the challenge by the ecstatic rivals and the fear of letting things get out of control. The church has tolerated music more so than the dance. With Islam, the reverse has been true—synchronous bodily action has been more part of the worship with Islam, than music. Mystical groups like the whirling dervishes who claim to attain union with God through the trance attained through the dance can be regarded as the extensions of Muslim way of bodily worship. Such groups (like the Bektashi, along with the whirling dervishes) have been very widespread and in the lands newly conquered by Muslims, they have historically provided the pathway to Islam for non-Muslims. While the Muslim states welcomed the provision of this valuable service by mystical Muslim groups, such groups were also suppressed by the state because their members sought direct union with god, outside of the religious establishment (Wade 2009, 135–39). Synchronous Movements Today Despite the decline of the dance, promotion of group solidarity in which the community dance provided has remained as one of the primary functions of religion. This function of religion becomes more obvious at times of crisis such as war and natural disasters. On such occasions, religious rituals tend to become more participatory. Synchronous activities are observed in the secular spheres as well. One area is folk dancing. Another is joint exercises conducted by workers, particularly in the Far East. And of course, there is the military. Recent research shows that people are more likely to execute the orders issued by a leader to perform violent deeds if they have previously acted synchronously with the leader (Wiltermuth 2012a). People are also more likely to fulfill the requests to do harm to others, if the request is made by those with whom they have acted in synchrony in the past (Wiltermuth 2012b).

A Propensity: Exchange Another practice which, like music and dance, has played an important role in the creation and maintenance of social order is exchange. Potentially antagonistic individuals seeking personal gain are allied by exchange, while retaining their own strength, and not necessarily submitting to the higher authority of a state (Sahlins 1974, 169).

22

R. ERGENER

How is it that humans choose to cooperate through exchange? Clearly, “taking” has precedence over “giving.” Why don’t humans (always) cheat? Wouldn’t “not returning” be more profitable than “returning?” Wouldn’t natural selection favor the cheats over cooperators? Apparently not—not always anyway. “Friends Make Gifts, Gifts Make Friends” With hunter-gatherers, exchange can be a social activity, as well as, if not more than an economic activity. That is how it has been observed with some contemporary hunter-gatherers, whose way of life is likely to be similar to those of our ancestors. A well-known case is the Nuer studied by Sir Evans-Pritchard, one of the pioneers of the discipline of anthropology. With regard to the economic relations of the Nuer, Evans-Pritchard made the observation that these relations cannot be treated as economic relations only: Economic relations are almost always part of a set of general social relations, to which they must conform (Sahlins 1974, 90–91). Indeed, with the Nuer, much of exchange is undertaken to initiate friendships rather than for material gain as such. The wisdom which enabled Nuer to attain some order without a state is hidden in the words, “If friends make gifts, gifts make friends” (Sahlins 1974, 130–40). With food crises always a possibility, the primary goal of exchange in hunter-gatherer societies was coverage during times of need. Under the circumstances, the most valuable information about an exchange partner is what he or she has to offer and will offer in the long run and whether he or she will be supportive of others at a time of shortage. In this context, exchange can be undertaken at times not only for material rewards, but perhaps in order to cement relationships and to prove and strengthen mutual dependencies (Langdon 1987, 109), or in order to gain information: Through exchange, one is informed about the qualities of the givers from different households (Posner 1980, 41). This explains why members of egalitarian groups can engage in exchange of like things and in equal amounts. Bushmen, for example, are always engaged in the exchange of plentiful gifts of foods, such as antelope meat, tsi nuts and nuts from mangetti trees. On one occasion, anthropologists observed tsi nuts being exchanged among the same individuals, with the quantities getting smaller at each round, starting out with sacks, getting down to small bags and to handfuls until at last to

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

23

the sharing of very small quantities of cooked tsi, which would be shared while being consumed (Sahlins 1974, 213). Displays of supportiveness are reinforced by egalitarian institutions which foster trust and make interactions more predictable (Wiessner et al. 2002, 235). Rather than guessing how cooperative each individual will be at a time of need, group members are left with no choice other than cooperation. Individuals, who refuse to share, are punished. Prestige is gained not by having more of things, but through generosity. Reciprocity as the Rational Choice All this being said for the social aspects of exchange; it is also true that there is a strong tendency with humans to seek reciprocity in exchange. This is partly because to reciprocate is the rational choice, particularly if the exchange partners are likely to meet again: It could be worthwhile to cheat a person if you’d never see him again but not so if you were to meet him at least once more. The case is illustrated by the famous prisoner’s dilemma: Two prisoners, suspected of having cooperated in committing a crime, are being questioned. If neither implicates the other, both will go free. If one implicates the other and the other does not implicate him, the one who implicates will get away. If both implicate each other, both will be punished but both will benefit for having cooperated with the authorities. Under such circumstances, cheating and implicating the other would seem to be the rational thing to do, provided that the parties were not to meet again. Yet, if the parties were to meet again under similar circumstances, it would be advantageous to cooperate and not implicate the other; unless one knew that the other had cheated on him previously, indicating a likelihood of being cheated on again. The prisoner’s dilemma was simulated in computer tournaments (Axelrod 1984). Economists and mathematicians who were skilled in game theory were invited to submit strategies for playing to the first tournament, which involved 200 prisoner’s dilemma games. Computer hobbyists and academicians from various fields including economists and mathematicians were requested to submit strategies to a second tournament, in which the encounters were not exactly 200 games each, but of varying duration with a median average of 200 games. The winner in both tournaments was the tit-for-tat proposed by Anatol Rapaport.

24

R. ERGENER

Tit-for-tat has only two rules: be cooperative at the opening and repeat what the opponent does on all subsequent moves. These rules imply that one should not be the first to cheat, retaliate if cheated on and be ready to forgive if the cheater opponent changes his behavior. Thus, tit-for-tat is both retaliatory and forgiving. If somebody made a mistake, it would be difficult for tit-for-tat to correct itself, as the mistake would set off a series of retaliations. A better strategy would be to repeat the move if successful and change it if not (“win-stay, shift-lose”). One must remember that this strategy is valid only if the players are to meet again. Computer simulations showed that tit-for-tat paid only when the probability of playing with the same player again exceeds 2/3. The implication is that selfish individuals seeking personal gain can cooperate and reciprocate, if the probability of future interaction among them is sufficiently high.

“RULES OF COOPERATION”

Evading reciprocation for a benefit received from others (cheating) benefits the evader. But groups are successful to the extent that members reciprocate (cooperate). In a brilliant article published in Science, Martin A. Nowak summarizes the five conditions under which natural selection can favor cooperation (Nowak 2006). Natural selection can favor cooperation if, 1. exchange partners are related (“kin selection”), 2. the probability of exchange partners’ meeting again is higher than the cost benefit ratio of reciprocating (“direct reciprocity”), 3. the probability of one’s good deeds’ (that he gives to others without expectation of return, which will motivate others to give him without expectation of return) being known by others (reputation) is higher than the cost benefit ratio of giving to strangers, without returns (“indirect reciprocity”),

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

25

4. the benefit-cost ratio of reciprocating to members of networks within larger groups exceeds the number of network members per individual (“network reciprocity”), 5. the benefit cost ratio of reciprocating is higher than group viability, as groups of cooperators will grow and split beyond a certain size (“group selection”).

Reciprocity in Nature Adam Smith was wrong when he asserted that the propensity to exchange was to be found in no other race of animals. Reciprocal exchange, as defined by the saying “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours,” which is the rule with humans, can be practiced by the members of lower species which are capable of making the distinction between cooperation and cheating. Even though all-inclusive generalizations cannot be made in this respect, it seems logical that evolution has favored species which practice reciprocity in their interactions with each other (Trivers 1971). For example, Vervet monkeys and olive baboons are more responsive to the requests for help of those who have helped them in the past (Packer 1977). If a male Hamadryas baboon watches and does not challenge the formation of a bond between a female and another male, then the male he did not interfere with, will subsequently not challenge him, when he forms a bond with another female (Kummer et al. 1974). Monkeys are intelligent and their societies are complex, but reciprocity is not by any means particular to members of such high species only. Striking examples of reciprocity is observed among members of lower species, some of which cannot even distinguish between their opponents. Tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolour) parents generally do not chase off non-breeder swallows, which join their groups. Non-breeders can potentially kill young birds and usurp nests. Yet, when allowed in a group, they refrain from this type of behavior. Mutual benefits are involved in allowing non-breeders into groups. Non-breeders learn about good nest sites. Parents have extra birds in the group against predators. When the young nestlings in a nest were removed to make it seem like non-breeders had defected, parents attacked the non-breeders. Yet, cooperative behavior between the parents and the non-breeders was restored as soon as the

26

R. ERGENER

young nestlings were returned to their nests (Lombardo 1985). The swallows had employed the tit-for-tat strategy of not being the first to cheat, retaliating when cheated and cooperating again when cheating behavior ended. A hermit crab with a shell, which is either too large or too small, can offer to exchange its shell with another crab. To initiate the exchange, one crab taps or shakes shell of the other crab in a way that is unique to the species. The exchange needs to be mutually beneficial. A crab cannot be forced to accept a new shell, which is larger or smaller than its needs. The non-initiating crab does not come out of its shell, unless it agrees with the offer. When it agrees with the offer, it first taps the crab which has initiated the transaction and comes out of its shell. The transaction then takes place (Hazlett 1980). Stickleback fish (Gasterosteus acofeatus ) goes closer to a predator fish (possibly to properly determine what it is and to estimate the likelihood of a bout.) when accompanied by a cooperating companion following it as opposed to when it is with a defecting companion that is staying increasingly behind (Milinski 1987). With humans, archaeological evidence suggests that division of labor and exchange of goods may be as old as the human race itself. The hominids living in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania two million years ago would bring the meat they hunted to central locations. It has been suggested that raw materials and manufactured tools were stored at these sites and carcasses were brought there to be processed (Potts 1984). It is also possible that these sites were locations where food exchange took place (Isaac 1978, 1983; Isaac and Crader, n.d.). Such sites may be the antecedent of the home bases used by contemporary hunter-gatherer peoples where social activity and food processing are concentrated. Exchange as Production Objects in nature can be acquired by means of seizure or through labor, which improves a natural object, both productive activities. Karl Marx, in an early work about Precapitalist Economic Formations (1857–1858), recognized “property” as the object of the feelings triggered by productive activity. “Thus originally property means no more than man’s attitude to his natural conditions of production as belonging to him, as the prerequisites of his own existence; his attitude to them as natural prerequisites of himself, which constitute as it were, a prolongation of his body” (Marx

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

27

1965, 89). Locke maintained that what changed the value of an object was the labor put in it (Locke 1967, 314). Property rights are triggered in the forager on the berries he picks, in the hunter on the bear he hunts and in the miner on the gold he mines (Olivecrona 1974, 227). That exchange is production is another reason why reciprocity is sought in exchange. The keenness to protect property rights to the fruits of one’s labor and not to give it up unless it is reciprocated by an object of equal value are naturally selected inclinations. The propensity to defend the fruits of one’s labor is likely to have evolutionary origin. Those who were genetically programmed to defend their property would have an advantage over those who were not so inclined. The guilt feelings of a thief may too have evolutionary origins (Silver 1989, 102). Not surprisingly, linguistic and ethnological evidence indicates that exchange has been considered as production triggering property rights. Seizure may be the absolute beginning of ownership (Gernet 1981, 257). Romans could assume the ownership of an object which nobody claims by occupatio, meaning “seizure.” The claim to ownership of seized objects is strengthened if the object is improved through labor. Animals demarcate their territories by scent-orsound signals, which are instinctively comprehended by other members of the species (Silver 1989, 34). A piece of stone belongs more strongly to the person who has picked it, if the picker of the stone also chips it. Property rights on land remain provisional unless labor is spent on it, like building a fence, raising a flag, and living on it (Silver 1989, 51). In many ancient Middle East languages, words meaning “purchase” also mean “seize” (Silver 1989, 51). This may be true for the Latin (emo) as well. In this context, the word “seizure” is probably an expression of the productive effort, which makes one the rightful owner of an object, not theft. Akkadian term sibittu meaning “correct behavior” is from sabatu “to seize.” Again, in ancient languages, terms meaning “buying” or acquiring are often derived from terms meaning “producing” or “doing” (Silver 1989, 51). In Middle and Late Assyrian documents (c. 1600–c. 600 BCE), Akkadian uppusu, the intensive of epesu, “to make”, is used in sale documents of slaves, land, and objects. In the second half of the third millennium BCE, the same verb in Egyptian meant both “make, do” and “buy, acquire.” Prekter in Greek means both “trader, merchant” and also

28

R. ERGENER

“doer.” The same Greek verb ergazesthai is used to express both “manual labor” and “the earning of interest from capital.” Latin for business effort, negotium, is from necotium, which literally means the “absence of leisure.” The terms meaning business in German, French, and Italian are related to words meaning “make” or “do.” Geshaft in German is related to schaffen, affari in Italian to fare and affaires in French to faire. That exchange actually “makes” is also illustrated by ethnological evidence. During the seventeenth century, when Indian-European fur trade flourished in eastern Canada, a Jesuit missionary heard a Montagnais remark: “The Beaver does everything perfectly well, it makes kettles, hatchets, knives; and, in short, it makes everything” (Martin 1982, 153). Beginning in the 1950s, meat dealers purchased hunted antelope meat from the Mbuti Pygmies of Zaire’s Ituri Forest and compensated them with cassava flour. That is why pygmies would say that they were hunting for cassava flour when they were hunting for antelopes (Hart 1978). The feeling of indebtedness and the urge to reciprocate which one feels whenever he receives something can be explained by exchange being production (Greenberg 1980, 3–26). In order to elicit reciprocity, humans first display generosity, gratitude, sympathy, and sincerity. If such displays fail to generate appropriate reciprocity, psychological intimidation is employed in order to discipline the cheat. And if psychological aggression fails, then the non-reciprocator faces punishment. But, more than reciprocity is normal when exchanging with kin or individuals that one is very close to and cheating is tolerated if those who are cheated are strangers. Balanced, Generalized, and Negative Reciprocity Charles Darwin believed that reciprocity, based on the golden rule, “As ye would that men should do to you, do ye to them likewise.” was the foundation stone of morality (Darwin 1875, 131). Balanced reciprocity, which entails direct and equal exchanges, is only one type of exchange. Marshall Sahlins points out two other types of exchange: Generalized reciprocity and negative reciprocity (Sahlins 1965, 147–49). Generalized reciprocity is giving with no expectation of immediate return or any return—like the care a mother gives to her offspring. Negative reciprocity is cheating, giving less than one takes, or outright theft.

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

29

The recipient(s) of generalized exchange—for example, the consumer(s) of the meat of an animal he (they) did not hunt—is (are) in a way benefiting from negative exchange or theft—which is being tolerated by the donor of the largesse—who, in this case is the group member(s) who hunted the animal that was shared. (As we shall be discussing later in more detail, the hunter has reasons to tolerate others to consume the meat he hunted: He cannot store the leftover meat and by tolerating others to consume the meat of the animal he hunted, he strengthens his claim to eat the meat of the animals hunted by others at a future date.) Generalized reciprocity is practiced among family members. Balanced reciprocity is practiced with kin and friends. Theft is a “no, no” with kin and friends but quite ok with strangers, or with those that one is not likely to see again. And then, there is the sophisticated technique to take while pretending to give: The Gift. The Gift Gift exchange is a type of tit-for-tat observed only with hominids, and not with other animals. (Undeveloped versions of gift exchange are observed with primates—the deal is often upset by the chimpanzees who trick, cheat, and lie [Burkert 1987, 47–48].) The separation of humans from apes became more evident as hominids began to produce and exchange gifts (Isaac and Crader, n.d., 91). In a sense, there is no real gift with humans either, as each gift creates in the recipient the obligation to reciprocate. The care mothers give to their offspring may be the closest to being pure gift, but even that is reciprocated. Often, gift is the retribution for another gift, given with the expectation of retribution. The existence of a time gap between the giving of a gift and its retribution makes a gift seem like a true gift (Burkert 1987, 47). An interesting anecdote illustrates the point.

“NO RECIPROCITY!”

When Sir Raymond Firth1 was on his way to Tikopia,2 the Bishop of the mission in Melanesia at the time, hosts him on the mission

30

R. ERGENER

yacht and gives him transport. During the voyage which lasts for a few weeks, the Bishop and Firth have discussions on many issues, including the concept of the free gift. The Bishop was about to retire and the likelihood was that the two men were never to meet again. It was quite obvious therefore, that Firth would never have a chance to return the Bishop’s hospitality. When leaving Sir Raymond Firth on the shores of Tikopia, as the two are shaking hands, the Bishop says to Firth: “No reciprocity!” The Bishop was of the opinion that selfless giving, purely in order to do good was possible. The truth is that such cases are rather rare and that even though they are seemingly voluntary, in practice gifts are given and returned under obligation (Mauss 1967, 1).

Exchange of gifts, as discussed above, contributes to maintain equality and build friendships. But, gift can also be used as a tool to build obligations in the recipient toward the donor. Marcel Mauss argued in his book The Gift that gifts indebt individuals, families, societies, and nations to each other, in tight and complicated webs of bondage. It is as if gifts are alive with personhood and spiritual values. One way or another, they are to be repaid. Gift-giving can be an expression not of goodwill but of self-interest. Indeed, the gift can be a sophisticated cultural “weapon,” a way of subliming greed and hostility into a socially acceptable form. Every gift calls forth a counter-gift, so gift-giving can be a way of (not giving) but taking and the receiver of a gift may ultimately be the true giver (loser) rather than the receiver. One who accepts a gift may be set to lose—like the Trojans who accept the gift of the wooden horse (Nagy 1981, 191). Several other stories in Greek mythology also illustrate the point. Hermes, gains the status of a god and his duties as “the herdsman and friend to Apollo” and as the “messenger” are defined after he gives to Apollo, a concert and a lyre as gifts, to compensate for the sheep he had stolen 1 Born in New Zealand, taught mostly at LSE, regarded as founder of economic anthropology. 2 The southernmost of the Solomon Islands, the untouched Polynesians of which were studied by Sir Raymond Firth.

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

31

from his (Apollo’s) herd (Nagy 1981, 194–95). In another story, even though he had been ordered by Zeus to return Persephone, who he had kidnapped, to her mother Demeter, Hades gets to keep Persephone for a third of the year because Demeter makes the mistake of accepting from him a gift of pomegranates, in return for which she is obliged to part with her daughter part of the year (Nagy 1981, 195). Not surprisingly, there are societies that do not allow gift exchange. Inuit Eskimos do not give or receive gifts, for receiving gifts makes one dependent. “With gifts you make slaves just as with whips you make dogs.” (Told to Peter Freuchen after he thanked an Inuit man for giving him a share of seal meat, Freuchen [1961, 154].) Religion and Exchange The interaction between the institution of religion and the propensity humans have to exchange has been diverse and complex, with contradictory outcomes. Religion (or relations with the supernatural) would be employed to fix the exchange rates between humans and nature, between humans and humans and between humans and gods. Driven by their propensity to exchange (rather than seize), humans would attempt to engage in exchange with nature. Religion (or relations with the supernatural) would contribute to set the exchange rates in favor of humans. With regard to exchange in between humans, religion would contribute to reduce cheating and set up networks of trust. Yet, at the same time, with regard to exchange between humans, religion could be employed to justify exchange rates that favor one party over the other. And yet, religion could be employed to support charity, tilting the exchange rates in favor of the weak. With regard to exchange with gods, it would seem that the exchange rates would be in favor of humans, as gods never receive more than a fraction of the benefits they supposedly bestow on humans. On the other hand, with regard to exchange between gods and humans, it can also be said that rates are infinitely better in favor of the former (and those who mediate on their behalf, like the priests and shamans) as they are receiving, without giving anything in return, except perhaps, providing the justification for the emergence and the perpetuation of hierarchies of dominance.

32

R. ERGENER

References Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books. Bird-David, Nurit. 1999. “‘Animism’ Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology.” Current Anthropology 40 (S1): S67–S91. https:// doi.org/10.1086/200061. Bloom, P. 2012. “Religion, Morality, Evolution.” Annual Review of Psychology 63: 179–99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100334. Burkert, Walter. 1987. “Offerings in Perspective: Surrender, Distribution, Exchange.” In Gifts to Gods, edited by Tullia Linders and Gullög Nordquist. Uppsala: Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean. Danforth, Loring M. 1979. “The Role of Dance in the Ritual Therapy of the Anastenaria.” Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 5: 141–63. Darwin, Charles. 1875. Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. New York: D. Appleton. Ehrenreich, Barbara. 2007. Dancing in the Streets: A History of Collective Joy. 1st ed. New York: Holt Paperbacks. Freeman, Charles. 2001. “The Emperor’s State of Grace.” History Today 51 (1): 9–15. Freuchen, Peter. 1961. Book of the Eskimos. 1st ed. World Pub. Co. Gernet, Louis. 1981. The Anthropology of Ancient Greece. Translated by Blaise Nagy and John S. J. Hamilton. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University. Graham, Jesse, and Jonathan Haidt. 2010. “Beyond Beliefs: Religions Bind Individuals into Moral Communities.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 (1): 140–50. Greenberg, Martin S. 1980. “A Theory of Indebtedness.” In Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, edited by Kenneth J. Gergen, Martin S. Greenberg, and Richard H. Willis, 3–26. Boston, MA: Springer US. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3087-5_1. Guthrie, Stewart. 1995a. Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 1995b. Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 2002. “Animal Animism.” In Current Approaches in the Cognitive Science of Religion, edited by Ilkka Pyysiainen and Veikko Anttonen, 38–67. London: Continuum. Halikarnas Balıkçısı. 1982. Dü¸sün Yazıları. Bilgi Yayınları. Hallowell, A. Irving. 1960. “Ojibwa Ontology, Behavior, and Worldview.” In Culture in History Essays in Honor of Paul Radin, edited by Stanley Diamond, 19–52. New York: Columbia University Press. Hanna, Judith Lynne. 1977. “African Dance and the Warrior Tradition.” Journal of Asian and African Studies 12 (1–4): 111–33.

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

33

Hart, John A. 1978. “From Subsistence to Market: A Case Study of the Mbuti Net Hunters.” Human Ecology 6 (3): 325–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF00889029. Hayden, Brian. 1987. “Alliances and Ritual Ecstasy: Human Responses to Resource Stress.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 26 (1): 81–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1385842. Hazlett, Brian A. 1980. “Communication and Mutual Resource Exchange in North Florida Hermit Crabs.” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 6 (3): 177– 84. Heider, Fritz, and Marianne Simmel. 1944. “An Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior.” The American Journal of Psychology 57 (2): 243–59. Hobbes, Thomas. 2019a. “Leviathan, by Thomas Hobbes: Chapter 13.”. ———. 2019b. “Leviathan, by Thomas Hobbes: Chapter 14.”. Iannaccone, Laurence R. 1992. “Sacrifice and Stigma: Reducing Free-Riding in Cults, Communes, and Other Collectives.” Journal of Political Economy 100 (2): 271–91. Isaac, Glynn L. 1978. “The Harvey Lecture Series, 1977–1978. Food Sharing and Human Evolution: Archaeological Evidence from the Plio-Pleistocene of East Africa.” Journal of Anthropological Research 34 (3): 311–25. ———. 1983. “Aspects of Human Evolution.” In Evolution: From Molecules to Men, edited by D. S. Bendall, 509–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Isaac, Glynn L., and Diana C. Crader. n.d. “To What Extent Were Early Hominids Carnivorous?: An Archaeological Perspective.” In Omnivorous Primates: Gathering and Hunting in Human Evolution, edited by R. S. O. Harding and G. Teleki. New York: Columbia University Press. Katz, Richard. 1982. “Accepting ‘Boiling Energy’: The Experience of! KiaHealing among the! Kung.” Ethos 10 (4): 344–68. Kohler, Wolfgang. 1925. The Mentality of Apes. Translated by Ella Winter. 1st ed. New York: Liveright. Kummer, H., W. Götz, and W. Angst. 1974. “Triadic Differentiation: An Inhibitory Process Protecting Pair Bonds in Baboons.” Behaviour 49 (1/2): 62–87. Langdon, Susan. 1987. “Gift Exchange in the Geometric Sanctuaries.” In Gifts to the Gods, edited by Gullög C. Nordquist and Tullia Linders. Stockholm: Almqvist och Wiksell. Lawick-Goodall, Jane Van, and Hugo Van Lawick. 1967. My Friends, the Wild Chimpanzees. 1st ed. Washington, DC: National Geographic Society. Locke, John. 1967. Locke’s Two Treatises of Civil Government. Edited by Peter Laslett. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

34

R. ERGENER

Lombardo, M. P. 1985. “Mutual Restraint in Tree Swallows: A Test of the TIT FOR TAT Model of Reciprocity.” Science 227 (4692): 1363–65. https://doi. org/10.1126/science.227.4692.1363. Martin, Calvin. 1982. Keepers of the Game. Berkeley: University of California Press. Marx, Karl. 1965. Pre-capitalist Economic Formations. Edited by Eric Hobsbawm. Translated by Jack Cohen. New York: International Publishers. Mauss, Marcel. 1967. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. New York: Norton. McNeill, William Hardy. 1995. “Keeping Together in Time: Dance and Drill in Human History.” ACLS Humanities E-Book. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/ heb.04002. Milinski, Manfred. 1987. “Tit-for-Tat in Sticklebacks and the Evolution of Cooperation.” Nature 325 (6103): 433–35. https://doi.org/10.1038/325433a0. Nagy, Joseph Falaky. 1981. “The Deceptive Gift in Greek Mythology.” Arethusa 14 (2): 191–204. Norenzayan, Ara. 2013. Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Nowak, Martin A. 2006. “Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation.” Science 314 (5805): 1560–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133755. Olivecrona, Karl. 1974. “Locke’s Theory of Appropriation.” The Philosophical Quarterly (1950–) 24 (96): 220–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/2217935. Packer, C. 1977. “Reciprocal Altruism in Papio Anubis.” Nature 265 (5593): 441–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/265441a0. Peoples, Hervey C., Pavel Duda, and Frank W. Marlowe. 2016. “HunterGatherers and the Origins of Religion.” Human Nature 27 (3): 261–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-016-9260-0. Posner, Richard A. 1980. “A Theory of Primitive Society, with Special Reference to Law.” The Journal of Law & Economics 23 (1): 1–53. Potts, Richard. 1984. “Home Bases and Early Hominids: Reevaluation of the Fossil Record at Olduvai Gorge Suggests That the Concentrations of Bones and Stone Tools Do Not Represent Fully Formed Campsites but an Antecedent to Them.” American Scientist 72 (4): 338–47. Pringle, H. 1997. “Ice Age Communities May Be Earliest Known Net Hunters.” Science 277 (5330): 1203–4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5330. 1203. Sahlins, Marshall David. 1965. “On the Sociology of Primitive Exchange.” In The Relevance of Models for Social Anthropology, edited by M Banton, 139– 236. New York: Praeger. ———. 1974. Stone Age Economics. Chicago: Aldine. Silver, Morris. 1989. Foundations of Economic Justice. Oxford, UK and New York, NY: B. Blackwell.

2

AN ILLUSION, A CAPABILITY, A TENDENCY …

35

Sosis, Richard, and Candace Alcorta. 2003. “Signaling, Solidarity, and the Sacred: The Evolution of Religious Behavior.” Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 12 (6): 264–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.10120. Trivers, Robert L. 1971. “The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism.” The Quarterly Review of Biology 46 (1): 35–57. Wade, Nicholas. 2009. The Faith Instinct: How Religion Evolved and Why It Endures. New York: Penguin Press. Wiessner, Polly, Shankar Aswani, Chris Ballard, Christopher Boehm, John E Clark, Brian Hayden, Jrg Helbling, Mitsuo Ichikawa, Anton Ploeg, and Paul Roscoe. 2002. “The Vines of Complexity: Egalitarian Structures and the Institutionalization of Inequality among the Enga.” Current Anthropology 43 (2): 233–69. Wiltermuth, Scott S. 2012a. “Synchrony and Destructive Obedience.” Social Influence 7 (2): 78–89. ———. 2012b. “Synchronous Activity Boosts Compliance with Requests to Aggress.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48 (1): 453–56. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.007. Wiltermuth, Scott S., and Chip Heath. 2009. “Synchrony and Cooperation.” Psychological Science 20 (1): 1–5. Wright, Robert. 2009. The Birth and Growth of Gods. New York: Little, Brown.

CHAPTER 3

Exchange with Nature and with Gods: License to Exploit

Hunting, gathering, and farming are economic activities. Praying and performing rituals for the hunt and for the food to be gathered to be plentiful, for the animals to allow themselves to be hunted, and for seeds to mature are religious activities. Most societies use a combination of economic and religious activities to obtain things. In most cases, if not all, religious activities are ineffective in providing the desired economic outcomes. Nevertheless, religious activities do contribute to the worldly wellbeing of believers, through the provision of unintended by-products. At the beginning, humans sought to influence animated beings through dance, music and other rituals. Animated beings were probably not impressed by dance and music. But the performances of dance and music contributed to the definition and formation of groups and to the strengthening of within group cohesion, cooperation, and solidarity. Rituals also contributed to the building up of intra-group alliances and to the elimination of free riders. The trances reached through ritual performances also led to encounters with gods. Religion properly started with the recognition of gods who humans believed had the capability to provide things, which humans could not get otherwise. This too was an illusion also with economic ramifications. Gifts were given to supernatural beings and gods in order to obtain rewards (the use of natural resources)—or to reciprocate for rewards which, it was believed, had already been granted by gods. It was common sense to attempt to exchange with nature or with gods only if cheaper, more efficient alternatives were not available. It was again common sense © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_3

37

38

R. ERGENER

to seek exchange with other humans, before seeking exchange with supernatural beings (nature) or gods. Therefore, the rewards sought from supernatural beings (nature) or gods would be the scarce ones that did not seem to be available through one’s own labor or through exchange with other humans (Stark and Bainbridge 1987, 34). Ethnological studies support this view. For example, the primitive agriculturalist who cannot control the weather or prevent swarms of insects from eating his crops may offer gifts to gods to control these influences in his favor (Malinowski 1948, 29). Yet, the same primitive agriculturalist may not regard gifts to gods necessary in dealing with problems of gardening: He can pull the weeds rather than pray for food. He may resort to work guided by knowledge and reason rather than gifts to gods in order to deal with broken-down fences or destroyed, dried, or washed away seeds (Malinowski 1948, 29). All three types of exchange were observed in the exchange relations between humans and gods. Humans expected supernatural beings and gods to give true gifts with no expectations of immediate returns (generalized reciprocity). They also tried to reciprocate for what they believed gods had given them (balanced reciprocity) and to lure gods to give more to humans by giving them gifts (negative reciprocity). The assumption that humans have the capability to engage in gift exchange with nature and eventually with gods would have very profound consequences. Gifts to nature clear the feelings of guilt one had about taking from her. Once freed from feelings of such guilt, humans were relieved of an important inner restraint that could have put the brakes on the reckless exploitation of nature, which has been ongoing for millenniums, paving the way to the ecological disaster we are experiencing today. For, whereas during the course of gift exchange amongst humans, gifts are reciprocated with larger gifts, when dealing with nature, humans can cheat and return to nature far less than what they receive from her. Because, during the course of gift exchange between (animated) natural beings and humans, the amounts exchanged are evaluated not by both parties, as is the case during gift exchange between human exchange partners, but by the human party only. If the animated non-human has an opinion, it cannot be relayed—definitely not through the conventional channels comprehended by humans. Humans have therefore been free to set the terms of trade with nature in their favor, in many cases outrageously so,

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

39

thereby making gains in the short run, at the cost of depriving themselves of riches in the long run. Here are some examples from different ages and places of gifts offered to nature by humans, often accompanied by rituals. In all cases, humans are receiving far more than what they are giving away as gifts.

Gifts to Nature, Gifts to Gods Several complete skeletons of reindeer, with heavy stones in their thoracic cavities, discovered in 1935, in an ancient lakebed at Meiendorf in northern Germany, are among the oldest known remains of gifts to nature. These animals were probably sacrificed by Mesolithic hunters who were active toward the end of the last ice age. As the ice age was coming to an end, hunters started to follow herds of reindeer during the summer months, far north to the edge of the receding ice. We can imagine that at the beginning of the hunting season, a suitable animal was killed, its chest cavity opened, and that the opened chest cavity was filled with stones. The animal would then be sunk in the lake, as a sacrifice, perhaps accompanied by certain rituals (Gill 1982). The world is extensively animistic for the Eskimo, who believe every pebble on the beach may contain its individual soul (Service 1979, 79). When Netsilik Eskimo hunted a seal, the animal was laid on fresh snow and offered water so that its soul, when reincarnated, would be grateful and allow the seal to be killed again (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 25). The Ainu,1 an indigenous people living in Japan and Russia, regard all animals and plants as spirit beings (“Kamui deities”) who temporarily incarnate themselves, such that “the earth’s surface, covered with fauna and flora, was seen by the Ainu as the abode and activity field of the Kamui deities.” Some of these, such as the bear and the salmon, would visit people as spirit beings, each at the behest of its spirit master. At their visit, the bear and the salmon would offer their flesh in return for hospitality and ritual objects, which, on returning to the spirit domain, would be offered by the spirit (of the bear or the salmon) to its master, along with laudatory reports on the hunter’s family and village (Watanabe 1972, 475–79).

1 Japan (Hokkaido, and formerly northeastern Honshu) and Russia (Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands and formerly the Kamchatka Peninsula).

40

R. ERGENER

This is the Ainu variant of the circumpolar “bear cult,” with roots, possibly, deep into the Paleolithic (Irving Hallowell 1926; cited in Guenther, 1999). The relationship of friendship and respect, as well as reci-procity and complementarity, between the hunter and the game animal is exemplary. (This is of course what the hunter assumes—whether the hunted bear feels the same way, we shall never know.) Bear is the most revered animal among the peoples of the Northern hemisphere who share a common belief that the elusive animal has supernatural qualities. Until recently, ceremonies during which the slain bears are venerated were an important part of the belief system of Sami peoples (Bledsoe, n.d.). The relationship between the hunter and the bear has explicit parallels with the model of the man-woman or husband-wife relationship, as in the myth of the “hunter’s animal wife,” found commonly in North America and southern Africa (Tanner 1979, 136–40; Biesele and Weinberg 1990, 95; cited in Guenther 1989, 86–87, 92–94, 98–100; cited in M. Guenther 1999, 429). In the various versions of this myth, the hunter is married with an animal, which authorizes him and his fellow villagers to hunt the relatives of the “bride.” With the First Nation hunters of the American continent, hunting is not a violent process but a long-term relationship of reciprocal exchange between animals and hunters. First Nation hunters believe that they do not hunt animals but rather receive them as gifts from the animals, who are (none) other—than human persons, who offer themselves as gifts to humans, thereby indebting them. The debt is paid through the performance of certain rituals (e.g., Alfred Irving Hallowell 1960; Speck 1935), such as food taboos, feasts, and disposing of animal remains according to prescribed methods, as well as rules against overhunting and talking badly about, or playing with animals (Nadasdy 2003, 88–94; 2007). For instance, with the Naskapi hunters of the Labrador in eastern Canada, it is believed that animals were humans during the primal era and that, therefore as animals, they were in possession of both human and animal features: Social structure of animals was believed to be like those of the Naskapi and it was believed that they could communicate with each other like humans do. Because animals were half human, the Naskapi could socialize with them, communicating with them with the aid of sorcerers and diviners, through dreams, songs, and drums. The animal gives the hunter its flesh in return for the respect the hunter shows him and the gifts he gives. If the animal is killed properly and if its body

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

41

is properly used, it can go home where it can generate flesh again (Gill 1982, 42). Seneca2 was astonished with the practice of gifts to nature which he ridiculed. In his Naturales Quaestiones, Seneca writes about the imposters who claimed that they could forecast the coming of hail. Those who believed these impostors would sacrifice their lamb or chicken to keep the hail away. Those that did not possess animals which they could sacrifice would cut their fingers and let it bleed for a while (Burkert 2001, 34–35). With the emergence of gods, gifts could be offered not only directly to nature or its elements like animals, lakes, and storms—but also to the gods who ruled over them. In order to persuade him to give some rain, the Manganja of Lake Nyassa offer to the Supreme Deity a meal and a pot of native beer. As they poured the food on the ground, priestesses would chant “Hear thou, O God, and send rain!’ to which the gathered group would respond by clapping their hands softly and intoning “Hear thou, O God!’” (Tylor 1958, 451). In order to stop lightening which they are afraid of, African Nuer would throw small pieces of tobacco into the air as ransom (EvansPritchard 1971, 221). The Haida of North America pour fresh water into the sea, or put some tobacco or deer tallow on the end of a pole, in order to plead with the killer whale deities to cut down a storm (Wright 2009, 467). When starting a journey on the Lake Superior, the Algonquin of North America would stop their canoes about two hundred yards into the lake and their chief would pray in a loud voice for about five to ten minutes, pleading with the god who had created both the lake and the humans to keep the lake calm so that they could have safe passage. At the end of the prayer, the chief would throw some tobacco in the lake as a gift and others would follow (Gill 1982, 41–42). Even though they are god-believing Muslims, some of the Turkic origin people of the Balkans, Turkey, and Central Asia have maintained an unusual relationship with nature that is not observed with other Muslims (Zarcone 2005, 35). In the seventeenth century, Turkmen nomads of the Karakoyunlu tribe based in the north-west of Iran, who were Muslims,

2 Roman Stoic philosopher, statesman, and dramatist, 4 BC–65 AD.

42

R. ERGENER

nonetheless worshipped trees, beside which they lit candles and to the barks of which they attached pieces of iron (Evliya Çelebi 1928, 740–42; cited in Zarcone 2005). Two centuries later, a report presented to the Ottoman sultan Abdulhamid II mentions that some nomad peoples from Anatolia (Asian part of present-day Turkey), “blindly worship the great trees and the monumental rocks that are touched by the first rays of the rising sun” (Zarcone 2005, 35). During the previous century, ethnologists made similar observations in Anatolia and the Balkans (Stahl 1965; Zarcone 2005). Practices such as placating the spirits of trees before felling them or of animals before hunting them are still observed with heterodox Muslims in Turkey like the Bektashi3 and the Alevi,4 who combine Christian and traditional Turkish Buddhist-shamanistic beliefs and rituals with Islam. A group of the semi-nomad Alevis known as the Tahtacı (“woodcutters,” studied in 1960 by Jean-Paul Roux [1970]), who lived on the Taurus Mountains in southern Turkey, making a living by felling trees, never failed to say that they loved trees. The Tahtacı insisted that they did not harm trees, even though they felled them. This is because when felling trees, they followed a number of required rules, the meaning of which sometimes eludes us (Zarcone 2005, 42). The Tahtacı chant devotions to the trees they are made to clear and they even ask forgiveness for what they have been made to do. They also ask forgiveness of an animal which they are going to kill, because they have been forced to do so. A forestry manager, who by chance had the opportunity to witness a clandestine ritual organized by a group of Tahtacı woodsmen, before clearing trees, reported that the leader of the group was given a ritual wash before performing his job. The ceremonial washing was done by women (Zarcone 2005, 42). Some aged trees are never cleared voluntarily. If they are, it is under pressure from a non-Tahtacı superior. Aged trees are cut with great sadness and with feelings similar to those felt when a sacrilegious act is being conducted (Roux 1970, 189–90, 197–201, 280; cited in footnote 38 3 A Sufi order founded in the thirteenth century by Hacı Bektashi Veli. Women and men jointly participate in ritual dance and wine drinking. Bektashis in the Balkans adapted Christian practices such as sharing the bread and the confession of sins. 4 Turkish Muslims who venerate the fourth caliph Ali, son in law and nephew of Propht Muhammed. Alevis believe in the trinity of God, Muhammed and Ali, identifying Mohammed and Ali with the light of God.

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

43

Zarcone 2005; on the secret ritual that precedes tree-felling, see also Gül 1998, 175–76). One should emphasize that the Tahtacı respect all trees, and not one tree in particular (Zarcone 2005, 42). The Tahtacı group belongs to the larger group of Alevi. On the website of an Alevi group, it says that Alevis acknowledge that each thing, including mountains, stones, trees, rivers, and insects has a soul or spirit (“can, ruh” in Turkish). So, none must be harmed, all must be respected and protected.5

Oneness with God: Sufism, Eastern Religions, Monism Sufis are Muslim mystics, who also believe that all creation is Divine because all have emanated from God and all that emanates from God is his manifestation. God was a Hidden Treasure, who was not known, for there was none to know him. He conceived creation so that there would be some who would know him (Denny 1998). There are many schools of Sufism, all known primarily for their rejection of a sharp separation between god and creation. In its version preached by the twelfth-century Andalusian master Al-Arabi, Sufism claims an underlying unity or oneness of all beings,6 with a “common origin in the unique and indivisible Godhead” (Knysh 2000, 171; cited in Zarcone 2005, 44). “There is nothing other than God, Have no doubt”7 Says the thirteenth-fourteenth-century Turkish Sufi poet Yunus Emre. Belief systems that deny that God and the universe have their own separate identities and that the two are one and the same are known as pantheist. Pantheism recognizes the unity of all beings and the identity of the cosmos with the divine. A logical extension of pantheist beliefs cares for the environment. If there is no reality other than God, nature needs to be revered and protected as a manifestation of divine. Not surprisingly, the term “ecology” was invented by a German scholar, who had formulated a teaching of immanence that refuses to acknowledge the existence of any separating boundaries or differences between creation, whether it be plant, animal, 5 Zarcone (2005, 43). 6 Wahdat al-wujud in Arabic, vahdet-i vücut in Turkish. 7 In Turkish: “Haktan ayrı ne vardır, Kalma guman içinde”.

44

R. ERGENER

or human (Haeckel 1866; cited in Zarcone 2005, 44). The name of the scholar is Ernest Haeckel (1834–1919), and the teaching he formulated is known as Monism. “Monism posits that there is ‘a spirit in all things’” (Haeckel 1895; cited in Zarcone 2005, 44). Haeckel also defined the term ecology as a “science that studies the conditions of existence of living beings and the interactions of all kinds that occur between these living beings,” a definition which remains valid (Dajoz 2003; cited in Zarcone 2005, 44). Pantheist ideas probably have roots deep in our hunter-gatherer past— which is not surprising since 99% of our time on this planet we have lived as hunter-gatherers. Beliefs and practices of Mbuti Pygmies, a hunting and gathering people who live in the heart of the Congolese rain-forest, illustrate this point. Every morning as they set out for the hunt, Mbuti Pygmies light a fire at the foot of a tree, in tribute to the forest. In the evening, they share the hunt of the day by this fire and sing songs thanking the forest for the hunt. Even though they thank the forest as a separate entity, the Mbuti are not truly separate from the forest, which is everything that exists, including the Mbuti themselves. It is to the forest, who is the “father,” the “mother,” the “friend” and even the “lover” that the breath of the Pygmy returns to upon his death, intermingling with the breath of the forest, the wind (Godelier 1977, 4). Pantheistic ideas are present in eastern religions. Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Zoroastrianism all teach to some degree that man should respect nature, because he is part of the same whole with nature. A Western Buddhist characterizes Buddhism as a “religious ecology” (Batchelor and Brown 1992; cited in Swearer, n.d.). “The Buddhist worldview or dharma refers not only to the teachings of the Buddha but also to all things in nature” (Batchelor and Brown 1992; cited in Swearer, n.d.). “Out of concern for the living environment as a whole, Buddhist environmentalists extend loving-kindness and compassion beyond people and animals to include plants and the earth itself” (Swearer, n.d.). Buddhists believe that all things, both material and spiritual, are related and they also believe in reincarnation. Humans can be reborn as animals. Buddha himself had been a lion, a dog, and a tree, in his previous lives. One should therefore refrain from mistreating animals as the mistreated animal may actually be a dead relative, like the grandma, for example, who had recently passed away.

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

45

Buddhist environmentalists reject hierarchical dominance of humans over other humans or humans over nature. They have an ethic of compassion that honors biodiversity. Thai monk, Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, taught that we can make our surroundings honorable only if we build our lives on the truth that everything that makes up the entire cosmos, including the stars and earth and animals and trees and humans, are all members of a cooperative enterprise that is mutually interdependent. Otherwise, we shall perish (Swearer, n.d.). The cosmological views of the Hindus may or may not be friendly to ecology. Trees and rivers are held in reverence. The agrarian and even wildlife images found in the Vedas and Upanisads are in harmony with the environment. Various texts in the Vedas exalt the “earth (bhu),” the “air (bhuvah),” and “sky (sva),” and the goddess of “earth (Prthivi)” and the gods of “water (Ap),” fire and “heat (Agni),” and of the “wind (Vayu)” (Chapple, n.d.). The Advaita Vedanta tradition asserts that “the highest truth involves a vision of oneness that transcends nature and, in a sense, dismisses the significance of the material world by referring to it as illusion or maya” (Chapple, n.d.). According to The Rig Veda, a Hindu religious text, the beginning of the uni-verse was brought about by the dismemberment of the Purusha, the primordial cosmic being. All creation is sacred because all have sprung from a part of his body—the sun from his eyes, the earth from his feet. Zoroastrianism, which is practiced in Iran and India today, describes the earth as an “angel.” The Jain tradition, which has coexisted with Hinduism for at least 2800 years, has at its core five vows that dictate the daily life of Jain laypersons, monks, and nuns. These five vows, which can easily be reinterpreted as being ecological, are “nonviolence (ahimsa), truthfulness (satya), not stealing (asteya), sexual restraint (brahmacarya), and non-possession (aparigraha)” (Chapple, n.d.). Adherence to these oaths enables one to do the least damage to all varieties of life. Mahatma Gandhi was inspired and influenced by Jain vows (Chapple, n.d.). Zoroastrianism, which is a religion practiced in Iran and India today, describes the earth as an “angel.” The Jain believers have great emphasis on non-violence and respect for nature. Jain monks sweep the ground before their feet to avoid harming insects and small animals. Finally, in Japan, the bullet train and other high technology products exist in an environment that is thoroughly deified. According to

46

R. ERGENER

Japan’s indigenous religious tradition, Shinto, the world is permeated with “kami,” which are god-like deities. Many Japanese, who claim not to be religious, nevertheless believe in and pay tribute to the kami. New religious movements that proliferate at a high rate are largely based on kami-like animisms (Reader and Tanabe 1998; cited in Bulbulia 2004, 682).

Abrahamic Religions Belief in the “oneness of all beings” is not in line with the standard view of God observed in the Abrahamic religions, namely Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In Abrahamic religions, God and the created universe both have their own separate identities. This is the dualist view in which God exists independently of the world which he created. With the dualist view, nature is deprived of the protective shield accorded to it, by it being part of the divine. The emphasis with Abrahamic religions is on otherworldly salvation, rather than celebrating nature as a manifestation of God, leading to a further devaluing of this world, rendering it more vulnerable to mistreatment and exploitation. How the world will end according to Christian teaching is not very promising with regard to the protection of the environment. With the Apocalypse, the natural world will be destroyed making the way to the Kingdom of God. For a believer of such teachings, there would be no point in protecting the environment, which is going to be annihilated anyway. American fundamentalists, who believe that apocalypse is imminent any day, oppose environmental laws of any sort. Nevertheless, a case can be made in the dualist approach that it is the duty of man to take proper care of the environment, because it is a dominion of god. A conviction commonly shared among Muslims is that nature derives its value from God. For, in the Koran it is clearly stated that it is God who has dominion over all things (Koran 2:107; 5:120) and that all things ultimately return to him (Koran 24:42). An offer of global trust had been made to the heavens and to the earth and to the mountains, which they had declined out of fear. It was then that man undertook to bear the role but he was unjust and ignorant. God guides humans in their stewardship, punishing them for their mistakes (Koran 33:72). In Genesis, Adam, and more as an afterthought Eve, to keep him company, are brought to life after dark and light, the stars, the world,

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

47

and all vegetation and animals. But it is mankind who gives all animals their names, thereby asserting herself as the superior. Being created last, humans were at the apex of creation with a great feast prepared for them by God. God told first humans to be masters of the earth and to have dominion over living things (Fink 1998). There is the argument that when he told man to have dominion over nature, God meant that man would be His steward on Earth. Yet, the Judeo-Christian theology has historically been used to provide justification for the rational and economic conquest of nature by man, rather than man’s stewardship over nature. Lynn White (1967) argues that Christianity, particularly how it has been practiced the West, is the most human-focused religion ever. As early as the second century, both Tertullian8 and Saint Irenaeus of Lyons9 insisted that God had created Adam in the likeness of Christ, who was not only God made flesh, but also the second Adam. With Christianity, humankind is a bit like God, in his separateness from nature. Whereas humans had started out as being one with, or seeking oneness with nature through rituals, Christianity taught that exploitation of nature was humans’ rightful claim, approved by God (White 1967). There have been those who preached that man has been indeed gifted by God but that he should enjoy the gifts of God with discretion and moderation. Rashi, a distinguished commentator of the Torah, pointed out nine hundred years ago, that dominion in Hebrew has the identical origin as with descent in Hebrew and that humans can maintain their dominion over animals so long as they themselves remain worthy. As a psalmist reminds, “The Earth is Lord’s” (Psalm 24:1) and our dominion means that we are guardians of a divine trust. We can enjoy God’s gifts but not waste or destroy them (Fink 1998). And, there is yet another way to interpret men’s being the last of god’s creations: One rabbi has suggested that their being last to be created indicates a lower rank for humans among living beings, not the highest. Along 8 Tertullian (born c. 155, /160, Carthage now in Tunisia—died after 220, Carthage) was an “important early Christian theologian, polemicist, and moralist who, as the initiator of ecclesiastical Latin, was instrumental in shaping the vocabulary and thought of Western Christianity” (Wilken, n.d.). 9 Saint Irenaeus (born c. 120, /140, Asia Minor—died c. 200, /203, Bishop of Lugdunum (Lyon) and leading Christian theologian of the second century. He refuted Gnosticism “and advanced the development of an authoritative canon of Scriptures, the creed, and the authority of the episcopal office” (Wingren, n.d.).

48

R. ERGENER

these lines, thirteenth-century St. Francis of Assisi wanted to replace the notion of man’s unlimited right to rule over all creation with the idea of the equality of man and all other creation (White 1967).

St. Francis, Pope Francis, and Patriarch Bartholomew St. Francis is widely known as the protector of the poor. Environmental concerns of the Saint are not as well known. Yet, his concern for the environment was so keen that it would not be wrong to hail him as the “patron saint of the environment.” Francis believed “in the virtue of humility—not merely for the individual but for man as a species. He tried to depose man from his monarchy over creation and to set up a democracy of all God’s creatures” (White 1967). With St. Francis “the ant is no longer simply a homily for the lazy, flames a sign of the thrust of the soul toward union with God” rather, “they are Brother Ant and Sister Fire, praising the Creator in their own ways as Brother Man does in his” (White 1967). It has been claimed that his approach to the poor, together with his approach to the environment, makes St. Francis “the greatest radical in Christian history since Christ” (White 1967). Pope Francis, who chose Francis as his namesake, followed the footsteps of the Saint with regard to the poor and also to the environment. In line with the environmentalist ideals of his namesake, Pope Francis devoted his Second (“Green”) Encyclical released on June 18, 2015, to climate and environmental issues. The encyclical is named “Laudato Si” or “Praise Be to You,” after an ode to nature written eight hundred years ago by Saint Francis, in which the saint shares his perception of the basic unity of all creation (Doyle 1996). Pope Francis would add active work to save the environment to the list of “seven mercies” which include feeding the hungry and visiting the sick. The pope described the destruction of the environment as a sin (Knight 2016). The environmentalist approach of Pope Francis is comprehensive. He refutes the old theological view that humans have dominion over the earth. He points attention to the food shortages that the destruction of the environment will lead to. He mentions the plight of those who are forced to migrate because of environmental deterioration and are refused refugee status nevertheless (Diaz 2015).

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

49

The environmentalist position of the Pope was welcomed by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, the “first among the equals” of the Orthodox Patriarchs. Bartholomew had been focusing on environmental issues for more than two decades before the issuing of the Second Encyclical. The Ecumenical Patriarchate had drawn attention to the close connection between ecology and economy at a series of conferences held between 1994 and 1998 at the Heybeli (Halki) island off the shores of downtown Istanbul. The Patriarchate had also brought together scholars and politicians and activists to study the problems of world’s major seas and rivers. “…The earth unites us in a unique and extraordinary manner. All of us ultimately share the earth beneath our feet and breathe the same air of our planet’s atmosphere. Even if we do not enjoy the world’s resources fairly or justly, nevertheless all of us are responsible for its protection and preservation.” says the Patriarch (Bartholomew 2015).

Religion and Environmentalism Religious leaders who are usually not able to cooperate on most issues seem to be able to cooperate with regard to the protection of the environment. The position of the Pope and the Patriarch was received favorably by senior Muslim preachers and scholars from Morocco, to Bosnia, to Indonesia, who met in Istanbul in 2015. Muslim clerics had a detailed appeal for a global pact at the coming Paris climate summit and the phasing out of greenhouse-gas emissions no later than the middle of the century. Previously, leaders of world religions had come together at a conference organized by the World Wide Fund for Nature, in Italy 1986. Following this meeting, about 130,000 projects were started worldwide with a religious approach to environmentalism. In Russia and in Greece, the Orthodox Church cleaned some of its holdings of land from waste and started to protect the wildlife on their property. In India and China, conservationist cooperated with holy man to protect forests and mountains regarded sacred by religions. Whether or to what extent religious teachings and initiatives can actually mobilize people and governments to adopt environmentalist attitudes and practices is an open question. Socialist President of France François Hollande seemed to think that they could. The green pronouncements of

50

R. ERGENER

the Pope and of other spiritual luminaries were warmly received by Hollande. The French President toured typhoon-stricken areas of the Philippines in February 2015 in the company of Patriarch Bartholomew, the staunch defender of ecologist causes. In July 2015, Hollande hosted a “summit of conscience” that involved the leaders of many faiths. The Economist newspaper reported that the French President Hollande, who had otherwise firmly renounced the Catholic faith in which he was raised, had been advised to use religion to touch and inspire people toward ecologist causes, by his advisor Nicolas Helot, an environmentalist and also a filmmaker. Helot believed that in order to raise the public interest in global warming, something more than dry statistics was needed (ERASMUS 2015). Like Helot, adviser to the French President Hollande, an increasing number of scholars and theologians are more and more pointing out that now is the time for Christian theology to contribute to a more sustainable relationship between earth and humans (Hessel 1998). Exchange rates in gift exchange between humans and animated objects always favor humans. This is not surprising as these rates are determined by humans. Some water, a few prayers are deemed sufficient to persuade an animal to give itself up to be hunted. One expects those who have a more holistic view of the universe, who regard the whole universe as being sacred, to pay higher rates when dealing with nature. But that is not necessarily so. Even for the most sensitive, saying a few prayers or taking a ritual wash is sufficient to be atoned of a big sin committed by the felling of an ancient tree. A large segment of humankind believes that nature will settle for less, even with nothing. The interpretation of the Genesis story which places humankind at the apex of all creation provides the justification. And the religious establishment worldwide may need to clean its own kitchen before promoting environmentalism. In 1995, Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew was the host for a conference on religion held on a ship cruising from Istanbul to the island of Patmos. During that conference, an Orthodox theologian declared that any damage to the environment would be regarded as a sin. Well, many of those who are inadvertently committing that sin may be the devout religious who may also regard themselves as sincere environmentalists, not being aware of the fact that several well established and widespread religious acts are major contributors to pollution worldwide. In a very interesting book entitled When God isn’t Green, law professor

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

51

and humorist Jay Wexler gives examples of religious practices that are damaging to the environment (Wexler 2016). Candles lit copiously by members of various faiths for myriad reasons create as much pollution as lighting cigarettes does. So does burning incense. The paper money which the Taoists burn in Hong Kong and in Singapore fills the air with smoke and harmful toxins. In Israel, the smoke from the bonfires started during the Lag B’omer holiday, which honors a famous rabbi, is so widespread and so intense, that there is an increase in pulmonary conditions and asthma cases reported to the hospitals. Elephants are slaughtered to make (Buddhist in Thailand and Catholic in the Philippines) icons of their tusks. Leopards are killed for their pelts which are worn in South Africa in rituals to symbolize power. Rain forests of Guatemala and South Mexico are decimated to provide palm frond to be used during Palm Sunday celebrations in the United States. In Mumbai, the Hindus further pollute the scarce water resources of Western India with the twenty-feet tall idols of the elephant god Ganesh, which they sink in the ocean and leave on the ocean floor. Taiwanese Buddhists practice the release with “mercy” of animals, millions of which are captured and caged to be later released “mercifully”—often in unfriendly environments, where most of them perish. The donations made to gain the right to practice such mercy are a major source of income for Buddhist temples. And then there is the methane emitted by sacred cows and the damage done annually to the population of stock animals worldwide with the Muslim sacrifice feast. The imposition of bans on religious behavior such as the lighting of candles and of bonfires can be more effective in relaying the environmentalist message, than simple words.

References Bartholomew, Ecumenical Patriarch. 2015. “Exclusive: Patriarch Bartholomew on Pope Francis’ Climate Encyclical.” Time Magazine, June 18. http://time. com/3926076/pope-francis-encyclical-patriarch-bartholomew/. Batchelor, Martine, and Kerry Brown. 1992. Buddhism and Ecology. London: Cassell. Biesele, Megan, and Paul Weinberg. 1990. Shaken Roots: Bushmen of Namibia Today. With Photographs by Paul Weinberg. Johannesburg: Environmental Development Agency. Bledsoe, Brandon. n.d. “The Significance of the Bear Ritual Among the Sami and Other Northern Cultures.” Accessed January 24, 2020. http://www. laits.utexas.edu/sami/diehtu/siida/religion/bear.htm.

52

R. ERGENER

Bulbulia, Joseph. 2004. “The Cognitive and Evolutionary Psychology of Religion.” Biology and Philosophy 19 (5): 655–86. Burkert, Walter. 2001. Creation of the Sacred Tracks of Biology in Early Religions. Cambridge, MA and London, UK: Harvard University Press. https://www. hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674175709. Chapple, Christopher Key. n.d. “Hinduism | Religion | Yale Forum on Religion and Ecology.” Accessed January 25, 2020. http://fore.yale.edu/religion/ hinduism/. Dajoz, Roger. 2003. Précis d’écologie. 7th ed. Paris: Dunod. Denny, Frederick M. 1998. “Islam and Ecology: A Bestowed Trust Inviting Balanced Stewardship.” Earth Ethics 10 (1): 10–12. Diaz, Elizabeth. 2015. “Pope Francis Urges Climate Change Action in Encyclical.” Time Magazine, June 18. http://time.com/3925736/pope-francisclimate-change-encyclical-laudato-si/. Doyle, Eric. 1996. St. Francis and the Song of Brotherhood and Sisterhood. St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications. ERASMUS. 2015. “How Secular France Is Giving Faith a Voice in the Planet’s Future.” Economist, November 28. https://www.economist.com/erasmus/ 2015/11/28/how-secular-france-is-giving-faith-a-voice-in-the-planets-future. Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1971. Nuer Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/ushe/product/nuer-religion-9780198740032?cc= tr&lang=en&. ˙ Evliya Çelebi. 1928. Seyahatname [Travel Diary]. Istanbul. Fink, Daniel B. 1998. “Judaism and Ecology: A Theology of Creation.” Earth Ethics 10 (1): 6. Flannery, Kent, and Joyce Marcus. 2012. The Creation of Inequality: How Our Prehistoric Ancestors Set the Stage for Monarchy, Slavery, and Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Gill, Sam D. 1982. Beyond the Primitive: The Religions of Nonliterate Peoples. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Godelier, Maurice. 1977. “Economy and Religion: An Evolutionary Optical Illusion.” In The Evolution of Social Systems: Proceedings of a Meeting of the Research Seminar in Archaeology and Related Subjects Held at the Institute of Archaeology, London University, edited by J. Friedman and M. J. Rowlands. London: Duckworth. Guenther, Mathias. 1999. “From Totemism to Shamanism: Hunter-Gatherer Contributions to World Mythology and Spirituality.” In The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers, edited by Richard Heywood Daly and Richard B. Lee, 426–33. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

3

EXCHANGE WITH NATURE AND WITH GODS …

53

Guenther, Mathias Georg. 1989. Bushman Folktales: Oral Traditions of the Nharo of Botswana and the /Xam of the Cape. Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GMBH. Gül, Zeynel. 1998. “Anadolu Aleviligin Özünü Bozmadan Yasatan Toplum: Tahtacılar” [The Tahtacı, a Community That Maintains and Continues the Specificity of Anatolian Alevism]. Alevilik Ara¸stırmaları 1 (1). Haeckel, Ernst. 1866. Generelle Morphologie Der Organismen. Allgemeine Grundzüge Der Organischen Formen-Wissenschaft, Mechanisch Begründet Durch Die von Charles Darwin Reformirte Descendenztheorie. Berlin: G. Reimer. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/3953. Haeckel, Ernst Heinrich Philipp August. 1895. Monism as Connecting Religion and Science A Man of Science. Translated by J. A. Gilchrist and C. Black. https://www.amazon.com/Monism-Connecting-Religion-ScienceMan-ebook/dp/B00849536K. Hallowell, Alfred Irving. 1926. “Bear Ceremonialism in the Northern Hemisphere.” American Anthropologist 28 (1): 1–175. https://doi.org/10.1525/ aa.1926.28.1.02a00020. Hallowell, Alfred Irving. 1960. “Culture and History.” In Ojibwa Ontology: Behaviour and World View, edited by Sigmund Diamond. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. http://fore.yale.edu/forebib/1170.shtml. Hessel, Dieter T. 1998. “Christianity and Ecology: Wholeness, Respect, Justice, Sustainability.” Earth Ethics 10 (1). http://fore.yale.edu/religion/ christianity/. Knight, Nika. 2016. “Deeming Pollution of Earth Sinful, Pope Proposes Climate Action as Sacred Duty.” Common Dreams. September 1. https://www. commondreams.org/news/2016/09/01/deeming-pollution-earth-sinfulpope-proposes-climate-action-sacred-duty. Knysh, Alexander. 2000. Islamic Mysticism: A Short History. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill-Boston-Koln. https://books.google.com/books/about/Islamic_ Mysticism.html?id=7q6cHVn4iuMC. Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1948. Magic, Science and Religion, and Other Essays. Boston: Beacon Press. Nadasdy, Paul. 2003. Hunters and Bureaucrats: Power, Knowledge, and Aboriginal-State Relations in the Southwest Yukon. Vancouver: UBC Press. ———. 2007. “The Gift in the Animal: The Ontology of Hunting and Human-Animal Sociality.” American Ethnologist 34 (1): 25–43. https://doi. org/10.1525/ae.2007.34.1.25. Reader, Ian, and George Joji Tanabe. 1998. Practically Religious: Worldly Benefits and the Common Religion of Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Roux, Jean-Paul. 1970. Les Traditions Des Nomades de La Turquie Méridionale: Contribution à l’étude Des Réprésentations Religieuses Des Sociétés Turques d’aprés Les Enquêtes Effectuées Chez Les Yörük et Les Tahtacï. Bibliothèque

54

R. ERGENER

Archéologique et Historique de l’institut Français d’archéologie d’Istanbul 24. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneauve. Service, Elman Rogers. 1979. The Hunters. 2nd ed. Foundations of Modern Anthropology Series. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Speck, Frank G. 1935. “Mammoth or ‘Stiff-Legged Bear.’” American Anthropologist 37 (1): 159–63. Stahl, Paul Henri. 1965. “La Dendrolâtrie Chez Les Turcs et Les Tatares de La Dobroudja.” Revue Des Études Du Sud-Est Européen, 1–2. Stark, Rodney, and William Sims Bainbridge. 1987. A Theory of Religion. Toronto Studies in Religion; v. 2. New York: P. Lang. Swearer, Donald K. n.d. “Buddhism and Ecology: Challenge and Promise.” Earth Ethics 10 (1) (Fall). Accessed December 11, 2019. http://fore.yale. edu/religion/buddhism/. Tanner, Adrian. 1979. Bringing Home Animals: Religious Ideology and Mode of Production of the Mistassini Cree Hunters. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Tylor, Edward B. 1958. Primitive Culture. New York: Harper. Watanabe, H. 1972. “The Ainu.” In Hunters and Gatherers Today: A Socioeconomic Study of Eleven Such Cultures in the Twentieth Century, edited by M. G. Bicchieri. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Wexler, Jay. 2016. When God Isn’t Green: A World-Wide Journey to Places Where Religious Practice and Environmentalism Collide. Boston: Beacon Press. White, Lynn. 1967. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis.” Science 155 (3767): 1203–7. Wilken, Robert L. n.d. “Tertullian | Christian Theologian.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/biography/ Tertullian. Wingren, Gustaf. n.d. “Saint Irenaeus | Bishop of Lyon.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/biography/ Saint-Irenaeus. Wright, Robert. 2009. The Birth And Growth Of Gods. New York: Little, Brown. Zarcone, Thierry. 2005. “Stone People, Tree People and Animal People in Turkic Asia and Eastern Europe.” Diogenes 52 (3): 35–46. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0392192105055168.

CHAPTER 4

Exchange Among Humans: Divine Supervision

Cephu was a Mbuti pygmy. The social organization he belonged to was the simplest that has existed, a band. Band members have few possessions. They engage in “generalized exchange” with each other, giving whatever is requested of their meager possessions by other band members, expecting to be reciprocated at an indefinite future with what they demand from others. Those who do not participate are punished like Cephu was. Cephu had made a habit of ignoring the rules of his band with regard to food sharing and participation in the hunt. Even though he was not fulfilling his role in the hunt, Cephu was trying to have more than his share of the meat. Other members of the band let him know of their disapproval of his behavior through ridicule, insult, and criticism. They talked with him to persuade him to change his ways. When all this failed, band members threatened to ostracize him and his family. Being ostracized was the equivalent of death for Cephu and his family as they would not have been able to hunt and survive on their own. Therefore, at that point Cephu started to beg the band members to forgive him and he shared with others the food he had hoarded (Turnbull 1961). According to a generally accepted classification of human organization, bands evolved into tribes, chiefdoms and states (Service 1979). Tribes started to come into being about 10,000 years ago, with agriculture. Mostly, they practiced horticulture and herding and had about hundred members on average. Tribes were egalitarian. Tribal chiefs who have been labeled as “big men” tried to get things done not by the use of force, but through persuasion or by setting examples. © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_4

55

56

R. ERGENER

Chiefdoms had social hierarchy and chiefs had varying (minor to considerable) authority. Chiefs collected tribute from commoners, which they then redistributed. States emerged about five to six thousand years ago, as some chiefdoms went through further transformations. States had economic specialization, class divisions, use of writing and centralized governments and the monopoly of authority to punish cheaters and free riders. As the number of groups and group size increased, the number of transactions would increase and there would be variations in the type of transactions conducted. With bands there would be almost only generalized exchange, with a band member exchanging (in a way) with the group as a whole, giving what is demanded from him by any band member and receiving what he requests from any band member. (The renowned archaeologist James Woodburn claims that the Hadza people, whose home territory is the savannah to the east of Lake Eyasi in Tanzania’s Great Rift Valley, exchange only if there is no reward. Indeed, according to Woodburn, the Hadza “share and not exchange:” [Woodburn 1998, 54] “Exchanging with other Hadza is reprehensible. To barter, to trade or to sell to other Hadza was not acceptable as late as the 1990s … Even mutually beneficial bartering without thought of profit was very difficult … People had to give freely without expectation of return.”[Woodburn 1998, 54]) As the group size became larger and the organization evolved from band to tribal to chiefdom to state, there were transactions based on balanced and negative reciprocity as well, with individuals and groups exchanging particular objects with each other. Under the circumstances, individuals’ policing of each other, which was adequate to prevent free riding with the bands, would not be adequate to prevent free riding with the larger groups. This job would be eventually performed by the state which would be equipped with monopoly powers to punish free riders and cheaters. Before the evolution of state, with tribes and chiefdoms, it was for the “big men” or chiefs to perform this job. The powers these men had were limited. They were aided in their tasks with “ritualization” and by Gods. Ritualized behavior is internalized as a norm and conducted voluntarily, without outside enforcement (Stanish 2017, 271). Ritualized trade, conducted according to internalized norms, would therefore reduce the need for supervision by big men and chiefs. Ritual need not be associated with gods. Nevertheless, gods were welcome to supplement the efforts of

4

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: DIVINE SUPERVISION

57

the big men and chiefs in supervising trade. Eventually, the state would assume monopoly powers to punish free riders and cheaters. But, gods would continue to support the state to prevent cheating and to enforce contract obligations. Only countries like Denmark, where the legal and security institutions are very advanced, can be said to rely exclusively on secular institutions to enforce contract obligations.

Divine Supervision of Trade So long as the traders believed that they were around, gods did not need to do much to secure safe trade. One simple task performed by gods was “watching.” The awareness of being watched by gods (and as well as) chiefs possibly led to more honest behavior by the merchants. Recent experiments have shown that being watched or even being in the presence of the picture of an eye make people cheat less (Norenzayan 2013). Scholars have also shown that as a tool to motivate desired behavior, fear of punishment for wrongdoing is more effective than the anticipation of being rewarded for doing the right thing (Shariff and Norenzayan 2011). The powers gods had to punish misconduct would therefore contribute to maintain order in the market. Again, it wasn’t necessary for gods to actually punish traders in order to prevent free riding. It was sufficient for the traders to believe that gods had the capability to punish. Not all gods were honored by all trading parties, but some were. Trade took place in sanctuaries where gods who were jointly honored by the trading partners were represented or where gods of different groups were jointly represented. Such sanctuaries evolved into what we shall call “sacred markets,” where the ritualized performance of merchants was overseen by gods who had the powers to punish cheaters. Ritualization and gods’ involvement reduced the amount of human effort necessary for policing trade (Laurin et al. 2012). Successful behavior by groups spreads, as less successful groups either imitate the behaviors of more successful groups or they are absorbed by the more successful ones, if they do not do so. The institution of sacred markets, with gods overseeing ritualized trade spread, because it was successful.

58

R. ERGENER

Sacred Markets Markets operated as late as the twentieth century by peoples like the Tiv of Tivland, Nigeria, give us an idea about what the earliest sacred markets were like. At the time, the Tiv had no central authority to punish the cheaters and the wrongdoers in the market. The chiefs did the job. Because his powers were limited, chief would seek the assistance of the akombo fetish (Bohannan and Bohannan 2017). The fetish consecrated the market and had the power to punish breaches of market peace with serious disease. The members of various tribes and lineages who attended the ritual erection of the fetish were jointly committed to avoid such calamities by honest trading. Such a market would be an appropriate place for intergroup negotiations even at time of war. The strong man who oversaw the market would make gains out of his efforts (Netting 1972, 229). He would be paid tribute for maintaining safe conduct in the market, with the help of gods (Bohannan 1958, 63). Sacred markets were usually founded at the crossroads of territories belonging to different groups, in areas which are not rich in resources, which meant that no particular group would be interested in claiming it (Stanish 2017, 236). Hilltop locations would allow for a certain kind of theatricality with people staying at the base in temporary camps, ascending the hill in prescribed ways and at prescribed times (Stanish 2017, 236). Simple sacred spaces with fetishes overseeing orderly behavior, over time evolved into monumental complexes designed to attract people to ritualized exchange at fixed times of the year, usually related to the solstices (Stanish 2017, 236). Even though that possibility cannot be ruled out, marking solstices does not necessarily imply a more complicated calendar. It is quite likely that marking solstices was simply an effective way of structuring a calendar of significant events in a stateless society, which does not have writing or other types of formal communication (Stanish 2017, 264). The more spectacular the structures were, more people were attracted and hosted, leading to the intensification of reciprocal relationships and to the creation and distribution of resources (Stanish 2017, 16). The oldest known and one of the most spectacular complexes of this type is at Göbekli Tepe, located in South East Turkey, near Sanlı ¸ Urfa. Discovered during a surface survey in the 1960s and developed in the 1990s by the late archaeologist Klaus Schmidt, Göbekli Tepe is commonly depicted in popular literature as the “first temple” and the “cradle of civilization.” It is as if after tens of thousands of years of existence in the dark,

4

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: DIVINE SUPERVISION

59

all of a sudden, humans had gone through a metaphysical illumination, which led them to build temples at Göbekli Tepe—and civilization had started! The truth is much more complicated—and interesting: Göbekli Tepe was probably a sanctuary, but also a center for ritualized trade. Göbekli Tepe is located on a 780 m tall hill, which is the highest point for kilometers to the south, all the way down to Saudi Arabia, therefore a natural gathering point (Curry 2008, 276). There are at least twenty oval complexes, spread over an area of about nine hectares. Each complex contains two monumental limestone steles, each more than 2 m high (Schmidt 2003, 5). At the earliest phases, there are circular buildings, each with two monumental T shaped pillars. The pillars are 3–6 m high and weigh up to ten tons. The circular structures are surrounded by more pillars and walls. Altogether, the stone pillars and walls create a massive and impressive monumental landscape (Stanish 2017, 235). The main excavator of Göbekli Tepe, Klaus Schmidt refused any claims that the site was occupied as a village and believed that it was “simply” a temple structure without any other functions. But there is evidence which shows that people lived at Göbekli Tepe at least part of the year and that many mundane activities were also conducted there, besides “religious” ones (Stanish 2017, 236). During special times of the year, people would congregate at Göbekli Tepe and engage in exchange and other intense social, economic, and ceremonial interactions. There are clear signs of feasting, including the (Stanish 2017, 235) consumption of alcohol (Dietrich et al. 2012). There is also evidence of production of stone tools (Schmidt 2000). People would bring stone materials from distant places, where they would collectively manufacture lithic objects (Stanish 2017, 237). Here is how the scene would have been, according to Charles Stanish (Stanish 2017, 237). At the base of the hill, there would be temporary tents made of animal skin. Each social group would be clustered with their own. People would have brought with them exotic materials which they would have collected during their seasonal rounds. In and between the structures at the top of the hill, feasts and communal production of stone tools, ornaments, and other commodities would take place. Exchange of highly ritualized nature would be conducted in the structures. The architecture and the placement of the structures on the landscape were designed so that individuals could not cheat the group. Ritualized norms of behavior required that all exchange would take place

60

R. ERGENER

at predetermined times in predetermined places. All this would have made any free riding virtually impossible (Stanish and Haley 2005). Monumental complexes such as Göbekli Tepe where people congregated at fixed times to enhance both their material and social well-being are observed with chiefdom societies in many parts of the world. Prior to the development of the more elaborate monuments, sites such as the Neolithic Hambledon Hill in Dorset, England were the gathering places of communities scattered in the surrounding areas (Renfrew 1983, 154). People would come to the hill for short periods of time, sometimes in spring, sometimes in the fall, sometimes in hundreds, sometimes in smaller numbers. They came from of up to 45 km away to the south, and as much as 80 km away to the northwest. They brought with them dismembered human remains, wheat, barley, hazelnuts, red deer antler and pots from their own area as well as pots and axe heads exchanged from farther away and livestock, especially cattle (Stanish 2017, 255). On the coasts of Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida, archaic nonagricultural peoples constructed U-shaped shell mounds as congregation places (Stanish 2017, 253). At the center of a large trading network that integrated the Mississippi Valley in Louisiana, there was the Poverty Point, built seventeen to thirteen hundred BCE. The allied peoples who came together at Poverty Point for feasting would be filled with “rallying casuistry, joyous friendship, and uplifting unity (Gibson and Melancon 2004, 190). But there was more to Poverty Point. It was also a place where people produced and bartered goods (Stanish 2017, 248). Stonehenge and other henge “monuments are examples of massive labor expenditures by people living in stateless societies. They are special places built into the landscape and are the result of centuries or even millennia of earlier peoples refining and enhancing ritualized economies” (Stanish 2017, 16). Some of the features of gathering places for stateless populations are observed with complexes of later times, where trade was imbued with ritual and sanctity and combined with other social activities.

Emporia There are interesting similarities between the seventh and sixth century BCE Greek emporia (“ports of trade”) and the centers for periodic exchange of hunter-gatherers. Emporia are founded at frontier zones, in

4

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: DIVINE SUPERVISION

61

topographic, cultural, and political terms. They are located at the intersection point of long distance trade between minimum two groups. Safety and neutrality of trade are enhanced by cults. Very few have residential areas accompanying them (Kramer 2016). Temples of the ancient Near East and Greco-Roman world were at the same time, both places of worship and inter-regional trade. Creation of common religious practices, the identification of one group’s god by the other group, and the formation of pantheons reduced transaction costs (Silver c1995, 7–22). In Mesopotamia, the centrally located chief god Enlil was known as the “merchant (damkar) of the wide world,” and his wife as the “merchant of the world” (Silver c1995, 3). 125 sailors and pilots were employed by the Baba Temple in Lagash to help with water transportation (ChaseDunn and Lerro 2016, 145). Payment of debts coincided with the cultic murub-festival (Silver c1995, 3). After the second half of the fourth millennium, complexes for large-scale storage facilities are built near or on temple grounds (Silver c1995, 4). In ancient Greece, panegyris meant both “religious festival” and “market” (McInerney 2010, 191). Shrines and temples shared the same precincts with shops. Having paid homage to the gods, pilgrims would pay silver to the shops (Silver c1995, 19). Then there is the peculiar case of Delos. A small, totally insignificant island, with almost no fertile soil and lacking a well-protected harbor, which became host to one of the most important temples of the Greek world and the center of an important religious federation as well as being a bustling commercial center (Rostovtzeff 1941, 231). The presence of the public statue of Apollo, the patron god of the island, and of other statues and inscriptions, jointly contributed to the creation of an atmosphere of trust that promoted safe exchange among the merchants at Delos (Peralta, n.d.).

62

R. ERGENER

TRADE THE MOST INTERESTING OCCUPATION WITH ISLAM

It is mentioned more than once in the Koran that trade is the most interesting occupation. There are direct reminders to be fair in bargaining. There are words of admiration for the beasts (camels) and particularly the ships that carry merchandise (Torrey 1892, 2–3). The use of commercial and accounting concepts to relay messages probably reinforced the positive approach to trade among the believers. “All is counted, everything measured” … “Life is a business, for gain or loss. He who does a good or an evil work (‘earns’ good or evil), receives his pay for it, even in this life” … “The unbeliever has sold the divine truth for a paltry price, and is bankrupt. Every soul is held as security for the debt it has contracted. At the resurrection, Allah holds a final reckoning with all men. Their actions are read from the account-book, weighed in the balances; each is paid his exact due, no one is defrauded. Believer and unbeliever receive their wages. The Muslim (who has been given manifold payment for each of his good deeds) receives moreover his special reward” (Torrey 1892, 48).

Fairs and festivals have been common throughout history with many peoples and civilizations. They were observed in Roman Greece and in pre-modern, pre-capitalist Europe (Spawforth 1989). In Medieval England, most trade was conducted in periodic fairs and markets (Lipson 1956, 197). First fairs and markets were more religious institutions than commercial ones. Fairs started as “periodic congregations of the pious” around well-known shrines or as pilgrimages. The pilgrims were often merchants and the pilgrimage site a fair ground. The periodical gatherings of the worshippers would provide an environment suitable for trade (Lipson 1956, 197). Mecca was a center of pilgrimage in ancient Arabia, before Islam. As was the case with such centers, idols of different tribes were jointly venerated in Mecca. The practice of pilgrimage and trade continued under Islam. There were four “sacred months” for trade at the “sacred territory.”

4

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: DIVINE SUPERVISION

63

Whether sacred places or months would have existed without trade, is an interesting question. “The cloak of religion” no doubt enhanced security for the pilgrim–merchants at the pilgrimage sites (Lipson 1956, 196– 97). Indeed, even today, merchants everywhere rely to various degrees on the cloak of religion for the prevention and punishment of cheating.

Religious Texts Promoting the Fulfillment of Contract Obligations The recording of information on physical media became available after about 3500 BCE. During the millenniums when religion and exchange evolved, the emphasis was on oral tradition. Koran was delivered by the Prophet Muhammad orally. So was the Old Testament. Historically, orally transmitted sacred texts have provided another channel through which people were reminded of exchange obligations. At Iron Age I Israel, where the events narrated in the Book of Judges takes place, there was no writing and therefore no archives, no authoritative system of written records, no formal courts. Also missing were a capital city, a standing army and the monopoly by the state to use force over an extended area. There was no king either (Miller 1993, 16). Under the circumstances, contracts had to be oral. Oral contracts depend on the twists of memory and are therefore subject to uncertainty and open to the possibilities of fraud (Miller 1993, 16). Also, it is difficult for oral contracts to be as specific as written ones. Again, as compared with written contracts, defecting is easier with oral ones. Once one party has fulfilled his obligations, the other party may well be tempted to exploit the situation and refrain from fulfilling his share of the promises. In the absence of a government apparatus possessing the exclusive right to use violence (as was the case with Iron Age I Israel), non-breaching parties would find it difficult to enforce their rights, when contracts were breached (Miller 1994, 761). Disputes over contracts could be settled by self-help, but, that was undesirable. All this made it very difficult to clearly define property rights and to render them effectively and readily transferable, which greatly enhances welfare (Miller 1993, 16). One solution was to pass on the legal rules about the making of contracts orally, by narrating stories. Several of the captivating stories in the Old Testament fulfill this function. These stories describe the making, the fulfillment, and the breaking of contracts and contract-like arrangements (Miller 1993, 17).

64

R. ERGENER

The stories are mostly found in the Book of Genesis and include the sale by the desperately hungry Esau of his birthright to his brother Jacob for a very cheap price, namely a mess of pottage; Jacob’s earning of Isaac’s blessing through fraud; the marriage of Leah; the deal Jacob makes to work for Laban; the story of Shechem and Dinah and Jephthah’s vow to make a sacrificial offering if he wins a military conflict. These texts are different from explicitly legal material in the sense that they do not entail obligatory bans or injunctions. They are not the decisions of courts with the authority to resolve disputes, either. Rather, they are vibrant, colorful narrations of significant landmarks in the lives of Jewish fathers and heroes. One important feature of such texts is that they are easy to remember. In the absence of written texts, oral narration of stories of this sort, allowed for the preservation and the transmission through generations of laws without the distortions which can be introduced by scribes or lawyers (Miller 1993, 17). That the main characters were tribal ancestors with patriarchal authority further validated the messages relayed by these stories (Miller 1993, 18). On the basis of these stories, we can say that the customary law of the time held that coercion or inequality of bargaining power did not have an effect on the enforceability of an otherwise valid contract (Miller 1994, 759). This position may have been adopted to minimize the possibility of feuds. The moral of the Jacob-Esau story, for example, is that a contract is valid even if the bargaining power of the contracting parties is not equal, with one party being significantly disadvantaged (Miller 1993, 18). To illustrate the point, below we have summaries of the stories of Jacob and Esau and the story of the marriage of Leah. Being the firstborn, Esau has the birthright over his twin brother Jacob. Esau is a hunter and Jacob is a farmer. Esau comes from hunting starving, finds his brother Jacob and demands from him some of the pottage of lentils which he has. Jacob refuses to give any lentils to his starving brother Esau, unless Esau agrees and swears an oath to hand over his birth right to him. An oath makes a deal formal and legally binding, with a god, who is often one of the beneficiaries, bearing witness (Miller 1993, 23–24). Genesis 27:1–40 tells the story of how Jacob and his mother Rebecca conspire to get Isaac’s blessing, which was Esau’s right, for Jacob. Rebecca makes Jacob wear Esau’s clothing and put on animal hide to make him appear hairy, the way his brother is. Wearing this outfit, Jacob deceives his father, whose eyesight is impaired, to believe he is Esau and

4

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: DIVINE SUPERVISION

65

receives from him the blessing intended for Esau. Isaac is upset when he finds out about the con-spiracy but he cannot reverse things. He says to Esau: “Your brother came treacherously and took away your blessing” (Miller 1993, 27). The story of Leah’s marriage narrated in Gen. 29:15–35 is built around a contract undertaken by Jacob with his relative Laban. According to the contract, upon the completion of seven years’ service by Jacob to Laban, one of Laban’s daughters will be Jacob’s wife. It is quite clear in the text that the daughter Jacob intends to marry is Rachel. But when Jacob has fulfilled his obligations, Laban gives him his older daughter Leah, rather than Rachel. Jacob is deceived because he is drunk and the bride is veiled. So, Jacob spends the wedding night with Leah. Jacob protests in the morning when he becomes aware of the switch. Laban explains that according to the custom of the land, younger daughter (Rachel) could not have been married before her elder sister Leah was. Jacob could yet marry Rachel as well if he works for seven more years for Laban. Jacob agrees and serves Laban seven more years, following which he marries Rachel as well (Miller 1993, 31).

References Bohannan, Laura, and Paul Bohannan. 2017. The Tiv of Central Nigeria: Western Africa. London: Routledge. Bohannan, Paul. 1958. “Extra-Processual Events in Tiv Political Institutions.” American Anthropologist 60 (1): 1–12. Chase-Dunn, Christopher, and Bruce Lerro. 2016. Social Change: Globalization from the Stone Age to the Present. London: Routledge. Curry, Andrew. 2008. “Seeking the Roots of Ritual.” Science 319: 278–80. Dietrich, Oliver, Manfred Heun, Jens Notroff, Klaus Schmidt, and Martin Zarnkow. 2012. “The Role of Cult and Feasting in the Emergence of Neolithic Communities: New Evidence from Göbekli Tepe, South-Eastern Turkey.” Antiquity 86 (333): 674–95. Gibson, Jon L, and Mark A. Melancon. 2004. “In the Beginning: Social Contexts of First Pottery in the Lower Mississippi Valley.” In Early Pottery: Technology, Function, Style, and Interaction in the Lower Southeast, edited by R. Saunders and C. T. Hays, 169–92. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Kramer, Robinson Peter. 2016. “Trading Goods–Trading Gods: Greek Sanctuaries in the Mediterranean and Their Role as Emporia and ‘Ports of Trade’ (7th–6th Century BCE).” Distant Worlds Journal 1: 75–98.

66

R. ERGENER

Laurin, Kristin, Azim F. Shariff, Joseph Henrich, and Aaron C. Kay. 2012. “Outsourcing Punishment to God: Beliefs in Divine Control Reduce Earthly Punishment.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279 (1741): 3272–81. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.0615. Lipson, E. 1956. The Economic History of England. London: A. and C. Black. https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001315238. McInerney, Jeremy. 2010. The Cattle of the Sun: Cows and Culture in the World of the Ancient Greeks. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Miller, Geoffrey P. 1993. “Contracts of Genesis.” The Journal of Legal Studies 22 (1): 15–45. ———. 1994. “The Legal-Economic Approach to Biblical Interpretation.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft 150 (4): 755–62. Netting, Robert. 1972. “Sacred Power and Centralization: Aspects of Political Adaptation in Africa.” In Population Growth: Anthropological Implications, 219–44. Norenzayan, Ara. 2013. Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Peralta, Danel Padilla. n.d. “Gods of Trust: Ancient Delos and the Modern Economics of Religion.” Draft 1.5, Prepared for presentation at 2013 ASREC Conference,Stanford University. Renfrew, Colin. 1983. “The Social Archaeology of Megalithic Monuments.” Scientific American 249 (5): 152–63. Rostovtzeff, Michael Ivanovitch. 1941. The Social & Economic History of the Hellenistic World. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Schmidt, Klaus. 2000. “Göbekli Tepe, Southeastern Turkey: A Preliminary Report on the 1995–1999 Excavations.” Paléorient 26 (1): 45–54. ———. 2003. “The 2003 Campaign at Göbekli Tepe (Southeastern Turkey).” Neo-Lithics 2 (3): 3–8. Service, Elman Rogers. 1979. The Hunters —Foundations of Modern Anthropology Series. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Shariff, Azim F., and Ara Norenzayan. 2011. “Mean Gods Make Good People: Different Views of God Predict Cheating Behavior.” International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 21 (2): 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10508619.2011.556990. Silver, Morris. c1995. Economic Structures of Antiquity. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Spawforth, A. J. S. 1989. “Agonistic Festivals in Roman Greece.” Bulletin Supplement (University of London. Institute of Classical Studies ) 55: 193–97. Stanish, Charles. 2017. The Evolution of Human Co-Operation : Ritual and Social Complexity in Stateless Societies. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

4

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: DIVINE SUPERVISION

67

Stanish, Charles, and Kevin J. Haley. 2005. “Power, Fairness, and Architecture: Modeling Early Chiefdom Development in the Central Andes.” In Foundations of Power in the Prehispanic Andes, edited by C. Conlee, D. Ogburn, and K Vaughn, 53–70. Arlington, VA: American Anthropological Association. Torrey, Charles Cutler. 1892. The Commercial-Theological Terms in the Koran. Leyden: E.J. Brill. Turnbull, Colin M. 1961. “Some Observations Regarding the Experiences and Behavior of the BaMbuti Pygmies.” The American Journal of Psychology 74 (2): 304–8. https://doi.org/10.2307/1419421. Woodburn, J. 1998. “Sharing Is Not a Form of Exchange: An Analysis of Property Sharing in Immediate-Return Hunter-Gatherer Societies.” In Property Relations: Renewing the Anthropological Tradition, edited by C. M. Hann, 48–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://ls-tlss.ucl.ac. uk/course-materials/ARCL1008_70065.pdf.

CHAPTER 5

Exchange Among Humans: Networks of Trust

SEIDENSTRASSE

China was once connected to the Mediterranean basin, by a network of trade routes, which went over the tall mountains and through the vast deserts of Central Asia and across the rough seas of the Indian Ocean, stopping at exotic cities and ports en route. This network is now collectively known as the Silk Road, a name (Seidenstrasse) which was introduced by the German scholar Ferdinand von Richthofen in the nineteenth century, therefore, not in use at the time when the route was active, roughly 500 BC to 1500 AD. When active, this network of trade routes was the main trade artery of the world. Interestingly, it was not only goods that circulated along the routes of the Silk Road. Religions did too, being transformed, exchanged, shared, dominated, subdued, taught, lost, and forgotten, on the way … Ancient practices such as fire worship, exposure of the dead, worship of a sky god, reverence for the horse, reverence for the bull, and reverence for the moon were followed by Zoroastrianism, Judaism,

© The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_5

69

70

R. ERGENER

Buddhism, the heretic Christian Nestorian and Manichean beliefs, and the final takeover of the route by Islam.

Silk Road is not the only case of religions spreading along trade routes. Paul preached Christianity along ancient trade routes. Early Islam spread along trade routes in Arabia. Can the spread of different religions along trade routes be explained simply by the dissemination of religious teachings by the missionaries who traveled along these routes together with merchants—and to a certain extent by the merchants themselves? In Syriac, the word for merchant tgr was used as a synonym for missionary (Foltz 2000, 62). It is a fact that not only merchandise but technologies, ideas, and cultural products are transmitted by merchants and by their fellow travelers along trade routes. Cultures and ideas are cross pollinated during the course of long-distance trade. The vocation of a merchant is particularly suitable for the spread of religion. A twentieth-century missionary points out that traders have advantage over other missionaries as trade provides an accepted and legitimate justification for a stranger’s presence in a strange land. Unless there is such a justification, the stranger is likely to be viewed as an “alien,” “criminal,” or “spy” by the members of the local culture. A merchant has a place and is accepted in a foreign culture. He can travel and be welcome where many cannot be. In addition to all that, merchants have the advantage of having a trade that provides funding wherever they go. Therefore, they could serve as “tentmakers,” not be dependent on support from home churches or monasteries (Munson 1968). It is then a generally accepted preposition that trade facilitates the spread of religions. Yet there is another dimension to the relation between the spread of religions and trade: It is not only trade that facilitates the spread of religions but also religions can facilitate trade. Here is how.

Contract Uncertainty The degree to which humans exchange is one of the features which set humans apart from animals. Everything is exchanged: dinners, trading cards, gifts, political contributions, housework, performance, babysitting,

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

71

etc. (Shield 2005, 101). And, exchange can take different forms such as mutual aid, gift exchange, or trade (Davis 1992). No matter what form it takes, by definition, exchange requires give and take between partners. Exchange partners can mutually anticipate benefits from exchange only if there is a high likelihood that the recipient of a benefit will reciprocate (Axelrod 1984). The uncertainty as to whether exchange obligations will be fulfilled is known as contract uncertainty. Unless such uncertainty were eliminated, transactions would take place either at very high costs that take contract uncertainly into account, or not all (Carr and Landa 1983, 138). Legal and financial institutions and consumer organizations as well as the media are employed to overcome the problem. Reputations are tracked and the information is disseminated. Financial institutions keep records of the creditworthiness of individuals and of firms. Individuals and organizations survey and test the quality of products and of the performance of companies and make the results public on the web and through other media. Police and legal institutions keep records of cheaters. The fulfillment of reciprocal obligations is monitored. There are legal and moral punishments for those who do not fulfill such obligations (Hayek 1979, cited in Paxson and Buchanan, 17). The problem would be easier to solve if exchange always required an immediate payback, as the cheater would then be immediately identified. However, reciprocation can often be delayed and can be indirect. One can enjoy the benefits of exchange (e.g., in the case of hospitality) long before the time comes to reciprocate. The true worth of a product may become clear long after the date of its purchase. For example, the weakness in the makeup of a new car may not be apparent until a few months or years after the date of purchase. The monitoring of cheating is relatively easier in societies which are small and closed. If the society is small, those who fail to fulfill their reciprocal obligations will be known by all. Cheaters are easily punished and excluded from the cycle of exchange, temporarily or permanently. The punishment and exclusion of cheaters become more difficult as group size increases. As group size increases, it becomes difficult for all group members to know who all the cheaters are. If the cheaters are not known by all, it is difficult to keep them out of the cycle of exchange as cheaters can continue to exchange with those who are not aware of their records as cheaters.

72

R. ERGENER

The problem becomes more complicated if the society is not closed. In this case, the cheaters will be able to leave the groups where they have built up reputations as untrustworthy exchange partners and join other groups where their reputations are not known. Modern humans live mostly in large and open societies, where the tracking and punishing of cheaters pose challenges. Majority of modern exchange relations take place between agents who do not know each other. Anonymity of exchange agents makes cheating easier, as cheaters have many ways to hide and avoid sanctions. If the frameworks for the monitoring and punishment of cheating were universal and perfect, conditions surrounding exchange relations would be similar to those prevailing in small and closed societies. There would be immediate access to information on the past behavior of exchange partners and on the quality of the goods and services, immediate monitoring and the immediate application of legal and moral sanctions. When formal means to deal with contract uncertainty are not available, exchange partners may have no choice but to resort to the use of less formal methods in order to improve their choices. Being suspicious of unfamiliar persons reduces the risk of being cheated (Enquist and Leimar 1993). It is common to prefer as exchange partners one’s own kind, rather than others, because, one may feel inferior or superior to those who are different, fear or suspect them, have communication problems with them and have difficulties perceiving what drives them and what their conjectures, bonds, traditions, and habits are (Huntington 1996). When a quick decision needs to be made, those who are native speakers of the same language, members of one’s own sex, nationality, religion, clan, tribe, and family are preferred over others as exchange partners. “Old boys” prefer to deal with other “old boys.” In a multiethnic society, where ethnicities are not integrated, members of ethnic groups may choose to trade with members of their own ethnic groups (Carr and Landa 1983, 150). Another shortcut employed when making a quick decision about the trustworthiness of a trade partner is to use proxies, attributing reliability or not to members of certain groups.

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

73

Groups and Reputation And members of groups which monitor and punish cheating behavior of their members are regarded as more reliable. Monitoring and punishment are possible if the group is a closed social structure. Within a closed structure, there is exchange of information on the members breaching contracts, which helps to eliminate cheaters. The group can impose on those who violate the rules of the game sanctions, in addition “to those normally imposed by the market … Such sanctions can be social as well as economic – those who breach contracts can be removed from group membership and prohibited from contact with other members of the group” (Carr and Landa 1983, 138), or they can be deprived of credit or left out of future projects. Within a closed group, members build up reputations. The group itself will have a reputation and membership in that group will give the members a reputation in the larger society. Membership in religious groups is likely to invite the trust not only of coreligionists but also of outsiders, as there is a general expectation for religious individuals to be more moral (than atheists). This is because religions often (if not always!) preach morality. What is more, in comparison with members of other types of groups, members of religious groups can be more eager to monitor the behavior of each other (social monitoring) as “the cognitive awareness of gods is likely to heighten pro-social reputational concerns among believers” (Bering and Johnson 2005). And, members of religious groups are monitored not only by other group members, but also by supernatural beings as well. Supernatural monitoring, to the degree that it is genuinely believed and cognitively salient, encourages moral behavior (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008). Divine punishments and divine rewards raise the cost of cheating for believers and reinforce honesty (Bulbulia 2004, 30; 2005, 86). Critias1 was one of the first to notice the power of religion to enforce moral behavior. In a fragment of a speech which he puts in the mouth of Sisyphus, Critias says that law punished public crimes but was ineffective against what was done privately. An intelligent man introduced the fear of gods among men so that they’d be afraid even when they did something

1 (460–403 BCE), uncle of Plato, associate of Socrates, an author of tragedies, elegies and prose works and a leading member of the thirty tyrants who ruled Athens during the last years of the Peloponnesian war.

74

R. ERGENER

in secret. This is how Critias has Sisyphus explain how the concept of a god who has a sense of justice and who can hear all was invented (Meijer and Versnel 1981, 230).

ADAM SMITH AND MAX WEBER ON GROUPS AND REPUTATION

Adam Smith recognized that membership in a religious group would enhance the reputation of an individual in a large society in which individuals do not know each other (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 255). Smith points out that in a village society, the behavior and therefore the reputation of an individual would be controlled by other villagers. The same individual however would turn into nobody in a city, lacking both a reputation and also effective monitoring of his behavior. Joining a religious group however would immediately provide him with a good reputation since religious groups closely monitor the behavior of their members, in order to protect the credibility of their groups (Smith 1776, 795–96). Weber also noted that membership in a religious group would enhance the reputation of an individual and help him to attain favored business status (Berndt 2007, 1006–7). In 1904, Weber witnessed in the United States the baptism of a banker by immersion in a lake, as practiced by the Baptists. The banker was planning to start a bank in an area that was not populated by Baptists as such. Nevertheless, he had chosen to be baptized like a Baptist as an outward proof of his credibility, as Baptists were very strict with the moral quality of their members. A person would be admitted to the Baptist church only if he passed a character inquiry going back to his childhood. Membership certificate in the Baptist church would therefore open up vast opportunities for networking and credit for its holders (Weber 1948, cited in Shearmur and Klein 1997, 36).

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

75

Insignia: Recognizable The baptism which the banker in the above story goes through provides him with a clear sign of his membership in a group, which has trustworthiness attributed to its members. Membership in such groups should be easily recognizable, as it is difficult for membership to create benefits, if not recognized. Through recognizable insignia, individuals and groups offer definitions of themselves. Potential partners make decisions as to enter into exchange with groups and individuals, based on such definitions (Williamson 1993, 465). Some insignia are natural in the sense that one is born with them. Sex, nationality, language, religion, ethnicity, clan, tribe, and family name are examples of natural insignia. An interesting example of using language as a test to identify friend from foe is narrated in the Old Testament. In order to test to detect the fleeing Ephraimites, Gileadites ask them to spell the word shibboleth, literally meaning torrent of water, because the Ephraimites could not pronounce the sound sh (Judges 12:4–6). This is why in English, the word “shibboleth” means a “word or pronunciation that distinguishes people of one group or class from those of another.”2 The family name that one is born with gives one a unique identity that carries a reputation. Surname can help to identify an individual as a member of a social group of kinsman and clansman, which may invite preferential treatment by wealthier relatives or clan members, who may regard relatives and clan members as more trustworthy (Carr and Landa 1983, 146–47). One can be born to a group or adopt it during his or her lifetime. Insignia of adopted groups can be very manifest such as coat of arms, blazons, flags, totems, and decorations. The way one dresses can also signal manifest messages about membership in a particular group: Scottish clans had one or more tartans with specific colors and patterns (Carr and Landa 1983, 156). Messages of membership in a group can also be relayed not in manifest but in subtler ways through practices such as accent, consumption habits, and lifestyle.

2 The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.

76

R. ERGENER

Dress style signals various messages: Different personality features are associated with those who wear dark suits and with those who wear jeans. Style of haircut, beard (or no beard), jewelry, perfume, watch, are all insignia, which can be interpreted as messages of trustworthiness or lack of. Car, house, neighborhood of residence, level of education, diplomas from various schools, and club membership are all insignia revealing information about the person. A taxi driver has no way of knowing much about the trustworthiness of a potential rider. He makes his decision whether to give a person a ride or not, on the basis of the potential rider’s outlook and his way of defining himself. Behavior such as inefficient gift giving can be undertaken and understood as a signal of the serious intentions of the gift giver (Camerer 1988). Some symbols are secret and their disclosure to the public can be penalized. Insignia, like the Jewish chai symbol, can be easily recognized by Jews but is meaningless for others. It is more common however for insignia to be open and recognizable by all, as members of the group who wear the insignia expect to derive benefits from recognition (Carr and Landa 1983, 155). Insignia, the wearing of which is conditional on the fulfillment of generally recognized education, moral or other requirements, will generate trust not only among those who wear the same insignias—and also among those who do not. Humans seem to have a psychological bias toward those with whom they share the same symbolic identity markers (Fershtman and Gneezy 2001). Trust is generated among those who wear the same insignia, regardless of whether the insignia is associated with certain virtues and qualifications. Experiments have shown that “Cooperation can emerge and stabilize between agents that share identifying markers” even if they “have no prior history of interaction and no expectations of future encounters” (Riolo et al. 2001). Such tendencies may have biological roots. Genetic similarity leads to cooperation among animals (Wilson 1980). In a similar manner, cultural similarity may lead to the reduction of uncertainty in exchange among humans. “In our evolutionary history, symbolic identity markers were likely to be reliable indicators of in-group identity, as they generally, but not always, are today” (Sosis 2005, 207). One of the reasons why members of religious groups often prefer to display their particular insignia such as worship, appearances, and practices

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

77

openly, even at the sake of facing discrimination and persecution, is to invite trust. Perfect strangers in foreign lands can be treated as “brothers” by coreligionists who recognize them through the markers of the religion which they wear. No prior experience of long-term reciprocal relations is required. This was the case, for example, with nineteenth-century migrant Muslim traders from the Sudan who traveled to Ethiopia (Triulzi 1975, 59). As they were dispersed throughout Europe and the Middle East, Jews preferred to remain recognizable through their dietary laws and other particular practices (Carr and Landa 1983, 154). By displaying their insignia openly and by fulfilling religious requirements in public, believers let others know that they are obeying the divine rules, the implication being that they are also fulfilling the related moral requirements, and are therefore “trustworthy” (Bulbulia 2005, 92). The fulfillment of religious requirements privately gains divine favors and inner peace, but not recognition. If worship is to generate trust among fellow humans, it needs to be performed in public: The sanctuary is more useful when others are present (Bulbulia 2004, 28).

Insignia: Genuine Once in a market place in early America, a farmer requests a loan of hundred dollars for six months from a Quaker wearing his traditional attire. When rejected, the farmer inquires whether he can borrow the Quaker’s hat for a few hours, as looking like a Quaker, he would be easily able to collect the credit he needed, Quakers, like the Baptists being known for their reliability and creditworthiness. This story raises the question of how reliable a seal of approval is, if it can be worn so easily (Klein 1997, 5). Indeed, not all insignia are genuine indicators of membership in a particular group (Zahavi 1993, 227). A shortcut to assess the reliability of a signal is whether it requires a high level of investment. Amotz Zahavi, who studied signaling behavior in the animal world, noticed that the reliability of a signal rises with the amount of investment it requires. The investment required by a reliable signal “should be acceptable to an honest signaler and prohibitive to a cheater” (Zahavi 1993, 227). “For example, wasting money is a reliable signal for wealth because a cheater, a poor individual claiming to be rich, does not have money to

78

R. ERGENER

throw away; the message of strength can be displayed reliably by bearing heavy loads; and confidence may be displayed by providing an advantage to a rival” (Zahavi 1993, 227). “Walking toward the opponent is less costly for an individual willing to fight, not frightened of a clash while it may be detrimental to an individual not ready to fight by decreasing its chances to escape the rival, if a real clash occurs” (Zahavi 1980, 79). The genuineness of the insignia is correlated with its strictness, as stricter insignia require higher levels of investment. This is true even if the strictness of the insignia leads to social estrangement and alienation.

Sects and Cults Insignia worn by members of religious groups (particularly those worn by members of “strict” religious groups) tend to be rather strict. Sikhs wear turbans and do not cut the hair on their body. Krishnas have their heads shaved, wear pink-colored robes, and chant in public. Moonies must agree to prearranged marriages. Orthodox Jewish males wear side curls, yarmulkes, and dark hats and tail coats. Orthodox Jewish women cover their heads. Devout Muslim women also cover their hair or their whole body. Muslims are not supposed to drink alcohol or eat pork or charge interest, and Muslims fast from daybreak till sunset during the month of Ramadan. Jews do not eat pork, follow other dietary restrictions, and they are not supposed to conduct business on Sabbath. Seventh-Day Adventists do not eat meat. Mormons refuse do not drink coffee and do not smoke. Jehovah’s witnesses do not allow blood transfusions. Christian Scientists refuse medical treatment. (The list of strict insignia is mainly from Iannaccone 1992, 273.) Religious groups which demand strict stigma of their members, putting their members at odds with the rest of society are defined as “sects” (Iannaccone 1992, 283). Sect members agree to deprive themselves of certain earthly amenities and pleasures, causing physical discomfort for themselves, some to the point of risking their health. Such behavior is often considered by outsiders as not only deviant, but also as irrational and against the best interests of the practitioners. Those who adhere to such rules are likely to be labeled with uncomplimentary terms such as “cult member,” “fundamentalist,” “militant,” “extremist,” or even as “terrorist” and are likely to be alienated from the rest of society, rendering integration with the mainstream difficult (Paxson and Buchanan 2004, 24).

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

79

The physical discomforts and the social alienation brought about by sect membership may actually be not against, but in the best interests of the practitioners. The seemingly irrational dietary, dress and grooming rules, and social customs can serve the rational purpose of screening out the less committed members of the faith. Only those whose devotion is strong enough to put up with the burdens remain (Iannaccone 1994b, 1187). Those who stay behind can enjoy spiritual as well as material benefits. The primary spiritual benefit derived from the screening of less devoted practitioners of the faith is heightened satisfaction (those who stay behind receive) from religious service. The satisfaction one derives from a religious service is based not only on one’s own contribution but also on the contribution of others who participate. “People are better off in a group whose average level of participation is greater than their own” (Iannaccone 1992, 276). One of the material benefits of strict rules, which is a benefit for lowincome individuals, is the reduction in the consumption of worldly goods as the practice of strict religious requirements will raise the costs of participation in alternate activities. Sects therefore tend to be more attractive during recessions and for those from low-income groups (such as lowincome minorities and women). Low-income groups have limited budgets. The restriction of worldly consumption by sects suits the budget constraints of such groups (Iannaccone 1994a, 1188). Another material benefit of sect membership is the enabling of exchange networks, which assure trust when the legal system is not effective. This is so because sect members can be easily and reliably identified (through the rules and requirements they obey) and effectively monitored (because membership is limited) and punished. Punishments such as partial or total exclusion from the group will be very effective in sects, as a sect member who is expelled from his or her sect risks losing “not only his or her membership and belief structure but his or her entire social network as well.” For, the strict rules and prohibitions imposed on sect members isolate them to various degrees from the outside world, rendering the sect as their only universe. Therefore, the excluded member will find himself or herself alone, facing the task of rebuilding new “social networks” (Berndt 2007, 1007).

80

R. ERGENER

One religious group, whose distinctive religious observances lead to gains for them in their interactions with the members of other religions are the “Sikhs” (Paxson and Buchanan 2004, 12).

SIKHS

Sikhs do not cut their hair, which they regard as a gift from God, representing radiance. Males cover their heads with colorful turbans. They also wear steel bracelets (kara) as sign of commitment to their faith. They can also wear “Kangha (comb), symbolizing cleanliness and presentation, Kirpan (saber) for defense and Kachera (breeches) as a token of loyalty to one’s spouse” (Paxson and Buchanan 2004, 7). Sikh insignia require high levels of investment by the individuals who wear them. It is therefore hard to imitate being a Sikh. Cheaters are not likely to wear Sikh insignia because the amount of investment required to wear these insignia will exceed the gains a cheater can make by using them improperly. Sikh insignia are costly not only because of the investment required by the symbols themselves (such as not cutting the hair for a lifetime), but also because the wearing of the insignia is associated with high moral standards. Sikh teaching strongly emphasizes morality and good conduct. The Sikh community closely monitors that the members remain moral and good. The insignia such as colored turbans, long hair, and steel bracelet therefore function as signs of approval which indicate that the person wearing them has accepted and is implementing the Sikh moral codes. This is the reason why Sikhs wearing such insignia are regarded as trustworthy exchange partners not only by other Sikhs and also by outsiders. Because the insignia they wear are so unmistakably visible, Sikhs are easily recognized both by their coreligionists and also by the rest of society at large. Whereas recognition by their coreligionists is in the best interest of Sikhs, as they can always seek mutual support from their coreligionists, their recognition by the rest of society may not always be in their best interest, this may lead to

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

81

their social alienation and estrangement and even to discrimination. For example, during the days following September 11, Sikhs experienced negative attitudes as they were often mistaken for potential Islamic terrorists. Nevertheless, Sikhs insist on the wearing of visible and easily recognizable insignia of Sikhism. From a personal point of view, the insistence of Sikhs to wear such insignia can be explained with the strength of their faith. Objectively however, it is also true that insignia such as turban, long hair, and steel bracelets function as seals of approval, signaling both to other Sikhs and to the rest of the world that the person wearing the insignia is moral and reliable. The benefits Sikhs derive from being recognized as reliable exchange partners exceed the costs of their occasionally being mistaken for terrorists.

Sects in Diamond Industry Approximately 65% of unpolished diamonds go through the Central Selling Organization (CSO) in London. CSO distributes unpolished diamonds through four brokers. The brokers sell presorted diamonds in boxes to 125 specific merchants known as “sight holders” at personal “sights,” or “viewing sessions” in London. Sight holders then sell the unpolished diamonds to a network of individual dealers (Richman 2006, 390). The rough and polished diamonds are sold in ever more smaller bunches, until they reach the hands of jewelry manufacturers for commercial sale to final users (Richman 2006, 390–91). As bunches of diamonds exchange hands, the pieces are priced and matched with demand. The process is potentially very risky. Diamonds are easily portable and therefore easy to hide and steal. It is not too difficult to sell stolen diamonds in the black market, as diamonds are valuable everywhere. Also, it is hard to know for sure whether a dealer stole diamonds or if he wasted them because of poor judgment, when cutting. For these reasons, law enforcement alone is not sufficient to stop the thefts in the diamond industry. This is where the religious groups have had a role to play.

82

R. ERGENER

Half of world diamond jewelry transactions take place in the United States. Over 95% of the diamonds imported into the United States are handled by the merchants of 47th Street in New York (Lueck 1997). The business is overseen by the Diamond Dealers’ Club (DDC). The membership of the DDC is dominated by Jews and particularly by the Ultra-Orthodox ones. DDC provides a hall where diamonds can be safely viewed and traded. The diamond merchants who are members of the DDC can be roughly divided into two groups: the long-term players and the contractors. The long-term players are the dealers or buyers, including the jewelry manufacturers. The contractors do the brokerage, seeking for buyers in return for small sales commissions. The contractors also do the diamond cutting and polishing in return for fixed wages. Cheating would not be too hard for members of either group. The dealers buy and sell on credit, which they can evade. Contractors exchange immensely valuable diamonds on the DDC floor with a handshake and the Hebrew “mazel un b’rachah” (“luck and blessing”). Or, the contractors leave with the cutters the valuable diamonds which are to be polished in plain envelopes. On the envelope, there is the name of the owner and the cutting instructions will be inside, and there will be no other reliable written records (Richman 2006, 405). It would definitely be very easy for the contractors to walk away with the diamonds entrusted with them, without a payment, collateral or written contract. Cheating is not commonly encountered with either the long-term dealers or the contractors. DDC enforces obligations through the dissemination of information on the past performance of dealers. Names and pictures of potential members as well as of those who have failed to fulfill the requirements of their contracts are put on the walls of the DDC—and nowadays on the web. The dealers with records of failure to meet obligations are fined and excluded from the exchange network of the DDC and with the associated bourses worldwide. Those who continue to deal with excluded merchants are also excluded. Two different mechanisms related to the religious and family structures of the two types of merchants contribute to this outcome. Long-term dealers are usually partners in family owned businesses. They expect their offspring to continue with the business. Therefore, what is at stake if they should be caught cheating is not only their reputation but also an income stream spread over several future generations. The

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

83

benefits they would gain from cheating on a contract would be insignificant as compared with the long-term gains of the family business. Unlike the long-term dealers who are wealthy, the contractors are not, because the skills required for their job (brokerage and cutting) are low and the job market is competitive. This is why contractors are widely known as “diamond studded” or “religious paupers.” Unlike the long-term players, contractors do not plan to be in the industry for long. They hope to retire with modest savings so that they can devote the rest of their lives to religious studies. They usually do not have plans to hand over their businesses to their offspring, as they would rather their children not have regular jobs and devote themselves to the study of the Torah, surviving on financial support. Since their earnings are low and spread over a short time span, cheating should be all the more attractive for the contractors. Yet, they remain mostly honest. One of the factors that lead the Ultra-Orthodox contractors to honesty may be their being monitored and sanctioned not only by the DDC but their own community as well. The community prospers as a whole through the success of its members. Like with the Baptists and the Sikhs, honesty is a virtue held in high esteem in the religious belief system of the Ultra-Orthodox community. By assuring the honesty of its members, the religious satisfaction of the community is also raised. Ultra-Orthodox therefore monitor the honesty of their members. There are community sanctions against offenders. An extreme penalty is excommunication by rabbinical courts, which is very severe indeed, because individuals who are used to living within small, insular communities, devoting most of their adult lives to religious studies experience immense difficulties in adjusting to the outside world (Richman 2006, 396).

“WHERE WOULD I GO?”

A Hasidic Jew employed in the New York diamond industry, who was used to concluding diamond transactions worth millions of dollars, with no money changing hands, only with a handshake and the Hebrew “mazel un b’rachah” (“luck and blessing”), was asked why

84

R. ERGENER

he didn’t default on his agreements and went away, his response was “Where would I go?” (Berndt 2007, 1024).

A new group which is beginning to play a major role in the global market for diamonds is also a tightly knit religious group: the Jain from India. Indian cutters and dealers started to make an impact in the 1970s by cutting the small diamonds which others had rejected (Richman 2006, 410). Over decades, Indian diamond dealers built an extensive international network. An active bourse has developed in Mumbai. There are thousands of active cutting factories in the nearby Gujarat province. As of 2000, 90% of the cut stones sold in the world were polished by Indian diamond cutters. Like the diamond merchants of the 47th Street, Indian diamond merchants also rely on monitoring by religious and family networks. The main dealers, including almost all of the leaders of the India’s seven largest companies which control a quarter of the country’s gem exports, are Jain from Palanpur. The numbers of Jain among the Antwerp diamond merchants are rising as the numbers of Jews are dropping. The Jain are active even in the diamond market in Tel Aviv. The Jain are successful in diamond trade because just like the Ultra-Conservative Jews, they have tightly knit social structures which enable them to enforce contracts which public courts cannot.

Outcast Groups and Trade Sects and minority religions are different from the mainstream. Mainstream members of society may perceive “different” (sects and minority) religions as having too many practices and rules which are too deviant. As more and more of the deviant practices of the “different” religions become manifest, the rest of the society can come to suspect that there may be other insignia and particular practices not yet publicly known. It is possible for the members of the mainstream to come to the conviction that the behavior of the members of “different” religions is unpredictable (Berndt 2007, 1009). Unpredictable is resented as it involves a perceived risk. Prejudice can grow among the mainstream members of society, against members of the

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

85

“different” religious groups. There may be derision, discrimination, segregation, prohibition, withholding of opportunities and at the extreme violence and even genocide (Berndt 2007, 1011). All this, makes it very difficult for members of the “different” religious groups to assimilate and socially integrate with the mainstream (Paxson and Buchanan 2004, 24). The uncertainty felt toward members of groups who are regarded as deviant can create difficulties for them in business. Perceived increase in risk associated with the unknown may lead members of the majority to take measures to protect themselves, including “selective exclusion of the ‘different’ person or the withholding of patronage or privilege” (Berndt 2007, 1011). Throughout history, many groups have taken the path of compromise under such pressure and abandoned their belief systems and altered their lifestyles, giving up their insignia and unique practices. Many other groups, however, have chosen to stick to their beliefs and have not compromised under extreme pressure. The choice not to compromise may be primarily a matter of faith and principle. In some cases, however, not compromising under extreme pressure, may be not (only) a matter of faith, but a rational choice, as the economic benefits of being different can exceed the costs. The resentment felt toward “different” religious groups by the rest of society makes it very difficult if not impossible for the members of such groups to survive outside of their deviant group. They are therefore not likely to risk behavior which could lead to their expulsion from the group. Cheating other members of the group is therefore avoided, as cheating can be punished by expulsion. Strong within group honesty makes it possible for such groups to build networks of exchange. Jewish peddlers in the nineteenth-century US West were one such group.

PEDDLERS IN THE US WEST

As the frontiers of the United States expanded to the West during the nineteenth century, consumption needs of the pioneers living in dispersed, small communities would be met mostly by peddlers. (General stores were set up where larger communities existed.)

86

R. ERGENER

Peddlers had start up credit to buy the products they would market. They would then sell for cash or barter and pay back their credit. It was certainly possible for a peddler not to return his loan and to start a new life somewhere. However, this possibility was very unlikely if not nonexistent for the peddlers who were conservative Jews of German origin. Members of this group were so resented by other members of society that it was impossible for them to survive and start a new life outside of their communities. They therefore always paid back the credit they had received from fellow group members. It is possible of course that the loans were repaid because the debtors had high moral standards. The fact is however that they did not have much choice. German Jews, who migrated to the United States in the nineteenth century, stood out within the majority population, even though their numbers were small. They had particular religious traditions, manner of dress, grooming habits, and dietary restrictions, and they were reluctant to work on Saturdays (Berndt 2007, 1023). They were estranged and alienated from the mainstream Christian Americans, because of their immigrant status and religious and language differences. They were also estranged (if not to the same extent) from the older generation of Sephardic Jews, who had immigrated earlier, and whose religious practices and traditions were quite different from those of German Jews (Sklare 1958). These differences led to the social separation of the German Jew from the non-Jew and also (again, if not to the same extent) from the Sephardic Jew, since as a general rule, members of groups prefer the company of those who are alike—not different (Berndt 2007, 1019). German Jews were therefore not in a position to establish trust networks with the rest of society. Consequently, they lacked access to standard credit markets. People would trade with German Jews if necessary but did not trust them sufficiently to extend them credit, especially if they were to go far away as peddlers to sell their merchandise, before returning to pay back the credit. German Jews could borrow only from each other within a religious trust network,

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

87

which was further strengthened by the lack of outside opportunities (Berndt 2007, 1023).

Peddlers in the US West are a typical example of a middlemen minority group. “Around the world, middleman minorities have distanced themselves and their offspring from social involvement with the majority population surrounding them, leading to accusations of being “clannish.” Such groups are often resented by the rest of society. The resentment experienced by middlemen minorities can initially arise exogenously” (Bonacich 1973). However, the resentment can be internalized and made endogenous. As a group distances itself from the rest of society and cultivates inter-group relations, in order to protect its members from abuse, benefits, sometimes in the form of increased economic opportunities arise which can strengthen the desire of the group to maintain a separation from the majority population. The persistence of the separation will lead to an increase in the exogenous resentment (Berndt 2007, 1006). Close ties within the minority group raise the level of trust among group members who will have less need to take precautions when exchanging within the group. This gives members of minority groups a competitive advantage when conducting exchanges as middlemen, where it is particularly costly to take such precautions (Sowell 2005).

Diasporas The nineteenth-century peddler network was within the national boundaries of the United States. Members of strict religions can spread across the borders forming trade networks known as “Diasporas.” Diasporas are formed by peoples who have been dispersed, often in some degree forcibly from their original homelands, from which they are not entirely cut off. Members of a diaspora remain distinct from the host societies they are forced to live with, but united among themselves, with strong ties of religion, language, and ethnicity, across geographical distances. As such, Diasporas have played an important role in social, cultural, and intellectual as well as economic and imperial history (Israel 1985, 3).

88

R. ERGENER

Diaspora was first used in the Greek translation of the Bible, implying a forced scattering, as described in the Deuteronomy (28:25). Initially, the term was exclusively reserved for the Jews. Today, there are more than 30 groups identified as Diasporas (Vertovitch and Cohen 1999, 267). Organized groups of merchant ethnic and religious communities such as Arab, Armenian, Chinese, Greek, Jewish, Japanese, Maltese, Parsi, Scot, or Western Indians and subgroups such as Julfan Armenians, Baghdadi Jews, and Hadhrami Arabs have formed diaspora trade networks which transcend the boundaries of national states. Three classical Diasporas are Greek, Armenian, and Jewish. Historically, Greeks have remained confined largely to the Levant, Balkans, Italy, Russia, and the Black Sea. Armenians connected Central Asia and Mongolia with Middle East and Italy. Jewish traders connected Roman Mediterranean with Silk Road. An interesting case of merchants forming a network in the eleventh century in the Mediterranean is the Maghrebi (Greif 1993). The Maghrebi merchants had a coalition that served both as an informational conduit and an enforcement mechanism in an area of commerce where legal systems failed to adequately address breach of contract (Berndt 2007, 1007). Maghrebi traders were Jewish merchants who originally lived in Baghdad under the Abbasid Caliphate. During the first half of the tenth century, these merchants moved to North Africa, mainly to Tunisia, in order to escape the increasingly insecure circumstances around Baghdad. They were known as Maghrebi traders, because for the Arabs from Baghdad, Tunisia was in the Maghreb, meaning the “West.” At the time, Tunisia was under the rule of the Fatimid Caliphate. The capital of the Fatimid Caliphate eventually moved to Cairo. The Maghrebi merchants also moved to Cairo and from Cairo spread out to Spain, Sicily, Egypt, Palestine, and even to Byzantium and Eastern Europe. They were eventually forced out of the Mediterranean by the Italian naval and military supremacy. They then participated in the Indian Ocean trade. Toward the end of the twelfth century, they were forced by the Muslim rulers of Egypt to withdraw from this activity as well. At that point, they mixed with local Jewish communities and lost their distinct identity. Later yet, beginning in the fifteenth century, Sephardic Jews would build a worldwide trade network. It is important to note that even though the Maghrebi traders retained a strong sense of identity and solidarity among themselves, they did

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

89

not constitute a distinct religious-ethnic community apart from the Jewish communities in general (as did the Jews of German origin in the nineteenth-century United States). Nor did they represent a “natural” group, which binds together individuals in all (or at least most) important aspects of their lives (Sombart 1953, 36, cited in Greif 1989, 862). The bonds of a natural group usually discourage dishonest conduct. Since he had no such bonds, a Maghrebi trader, living far away from most other Maghrebi traders and within a large and well-organized Jewish community, could have cheated his trade partners if he chose to do so and become totally integrated into the group he was living with (Greif 1989, 862). The explanation for the moral behavior of the Maghrebis in trade can be sought in their religious background. There were two aspects of this background. On the one hand, the Maghrebis belonged to the “Jewish community, within which it is a prominent idea that ‘All Israel is responsible for every member’” (Greif 1994, 923). Secondly, having adopted the norms of the Muslim society they lived in, the Maghrebis were obligated not only to stay away from committing sins themselves, but also to make an effort to prevent members of their community from doing so as well (Greif 1994, 922). Along with their religious background, the need to maintain a trustworthy reputation in order to remain in the trade network contributed to the reinforcement of trust in relations of trade among the Maghrebi merchants. Maghrebis were left alone by the Fatimids. They handled their internal problems themselves. Dishonest merchants were punished by exclusion from the trade network. Agents could maximize their gains through honesty. It was against the self-interest of the merchants not to follow the rules (Greif 1994, 923).

Cooperation and Diffusion: Long-Distance Trade and Spread of Islam in Africa Going back to the peddlers in the US West, we noted that the resentment felt toward members of this community contributed to their building of a middlemen trade network. The material prosperity of the members of a strict religion can intensify the feelings of resentment already felt toward them (because they are different) and attract the animosity of non-group members, who are envious of their success. At the extreme, there may be

90

R. ERGENER

violence against the members of the wealthy group and their wealth may be expropriated. Members of the strict religion who have grown wealthy and attracted hostility can reduce the friction with the rest of society through investment in inter-religious cooperation. Such investments may take the form of “veneration of same shrines, adoption of similar languages, customs and norms, creation of inter-religious organizations, or investment in common public goods” (Jha 2005, 12). For example, Ismailis invested in public schools and educational facilities in Zanzibar in order to stay on good terms with the rest of the population (see for India’s syncretic traditions: Keay 2011; Burman 2002). The environment of toleration created by such acts contributes to eliminate intra-religious violence. Such practices may explain the absence of religious violence in medieval Indian coast towns. Trade networks founded by members of religious groups which are not very strict will not attract as much animosity and are therefore less likely to be targets of violence and expropriation. Non-members are able to join the group relatively easily, leading to a diffusion of wealth as well as the spread of the religion, rather than the networking of the members of a strict religion amassing wealth exclusively among themselves. This was what happened as Islam spread in Africa through trade (Farrell 1996). Military might was effective in the conversions to Islam in North Africa, during the seventh century. There were Jihads or Holy Wars throughout Africa during the nineteenth century. Other than these exceptions, politics and military did not play much of a role in the conversions to Islam in Africa, where such conversions were mostly voluntary. The first contact between Islam and West Africa took place in the eighth century, when Islam began to expand along the trans-Saharan trade routes from North Africa (Ensminger 1997, 8). After the eleventh century, there were voluntary conversions to Islam on the whole of West Africa and also in parts of East Africa (Ensminger 1997, 8). The voluntary conversions to Islam in Africa cannot be explained by the similarities between the social, cosmological, and ritual systems of the Africans and of Muslims, as the two were quite different (Horton 1971). The lifestyle required by Islam did not necessarily make life more enjoyable either. On the contrary, becoming a Muslim imposed new burdens on the convert such as praying five times daily, fasting, pilgrimage, abstinence from alcohol, banning of extra marital sex, modification of inheritance systems, and the recognition of offspring.

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

91

The more likely explanation for the attraction of Islam for the African was the economic benefits provided to the converts, namely through long-distance trade. Long-distance trade was not developed in Africa before the arrival of Islam. Credit was not common, and the existing trade was based largely on direct exchange. Islam stimulated trade by providing the institutional structures for the development of credit and “an immediate link to the commercial centers of North Africa and via them to the rest of the world. Islam brought a common language of trade (Arabic), a monetary system, an accounting system, and a legal code to adjudicate financial contracts and disputes. In social and legal terms, Islam provided a way of making outsiders, insiders. By providing a legal structure binding upon individuals of different ethnic groups with otherwise non-binding institutional structures, it greatly expanded the size of potential trading networks. All of the above provided an improved institutional structure in which trade could take place among people who previously had, at best, limited institutional structures with which to regulate trade beyond their own ethnic group” (Ensminger 1997, 7). Much of the conversions to Islam in Africa were done by long-distance merchants (Ensminger 1997, 6). Even though the merchants openly professed their religion, they would initially refrain from initiating conversions. They had come for trade, and they had no time for marketing as well as preaching. “Yet, after they had settled for some time, the desire to educate their … children and, one may add, to introduce the commercial aspect of the Sharia code of law, created the need for fresh conversions” (Ensminger 1997, 9). Conversions were also rendered necessary by trading practices. A key institution that was introduced by Muslim merchants was the commenda, a credit contract and partnership, which “enabled an investor or group of investors to entrust capital or merchandise to an agent-manager, who traded with it and returned the principal and previously agreed-upon share of profits to the investor. The agent received the remaining share of the profits as a reward for his time and labor” (Perinbam 1980, 465, cited in Ensminger 1997, 10). With the expansion of trade as an outcome of the application of practices such as commenda, long-distance merchants felt the need to set up middlemen to deal on their behalf (Ensminger 1997, 10). The amount of credit extended by these agents was quite sizeable. The legal and operational framework for the functioning of these contracts was supplemented

92

R. ERGENER

by the reputations of trustworthiness the agents built for themselves. The most easily recognizable and the most widely sought after signs of trustworthiness were displays of true allegiance to the faith which had provided the framework for the expansion of trade. Abstaining from the consumption of alcoholic beverages, fasting during Ramadan, and pilgrimage were deemed three such proofs of a merchant’s true allegiance to the faith. Of the three, the costliest was the pilgrimage. Some of the costs of pilgrimage could be recouped through the sale of the merchandise brought from Mecca. But mostly, the gains were to be made through the enhanced status the pilgrim had gained and the more reliable image he had acquired by having become a pilgrim. As the number of pilgrims rose, larger acts of piety, like building a mosque, were needed to further enhance a merchant’s reputation (Ensminger 1997, 11). Islamic economic system lacked flexibility due to practices such as fixed tithes and restrictions on credit and interest (Ensminger 1994, 751). Nevertheless, as the above discussion shows, in the African environment, “relative to what existed before, when there was virtually no institutional structure with which to regulate trade across ethnic groups, even a rigid structure was an improvement” (Ensminger 1994, 751).

Trade and Religion Today Networks of trust based on religion or on other bases such as ethnicity, language, race, or nationality are still operational, despite the improvements in contract enforcement within and across countries, which has reduced the need for such networks. In this context, we will review two studies, one by Lewer and Van den Berg (2007) and the other by Matthias Helble (2007). Religious cultures affect commerce directly through facilitating the formation of trade networks. Lewer and Van den Berg call this the network effect. Religious cultures affect commerce also indirectly, through their influences on other “institutions such as traditions, customs, laws, government and other organizations” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 257). This is the institutional effect. “A particular religious culture may, or may not, make a country’s government, laws, regulations, social customs, and traditions supportive of international trade” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 257). “Network effects of religious cultures” can be “fundamentally different from their

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

93

institutional effects. Even when a religious culture’s institutional effects discourage trade, the sharing of the religious culture can still have positive network effects” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). As Greif’s study (1989) on Maghrebi merchants shows, networks can “thrive precisely when institutions fail and impersonal transactions are risky. Hence, it should not be surprising that some religious cultures may have negative or insignificant institutional effects on trade … but still encourage the trust that supports trade networks” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). Lewer and Van den Berg find that “only two religions, Buddhism and Judaism, have trade-enhancing network effects as well as positive institutional effects” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). “That Buddhism is so positively and consistently correlated with international trade” is not surprising as the performance of “Japan after World War II, and China, India, and many other Asian economies more recently,” have proved “that rapid economic growth can be achieved in non-Western societies” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). That Judaism has positive network effects implies that merchants with Jewish affiliation have webs that contribute to the expansion of international trade, like the Jewish Maghrebi merchants did a millennium ago (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). Confucianism has positive network effects which affirms Rauch and Trindade’s findings (Rauch and Trindade 2002) that strong trade relationships are maintained by the ethnic Chinese communities in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Indonesia. Lewer and Van den Berg find that Hindu culture does not lead to any obvious networking effects. This is unexpected given the presence of a large Hindu Diaspora throughout Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean. The reasons may be the divisive nature of the remnants of the Hindu culture’s caste system or the lack of a single unifying written doctrine (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Protestantism do not have clear, visible institutional contribution to international trade. Nevertheless, the three Christian religious cultures, with which secularism and individualism have strong roots, have affirmative indirect effects on trade, through their influence on other institutions that supplement bilateral trade. “The finding that, Protestantism is likely to have indirectly inspired other institutions that encourage international trade, is supportive of Weber’s

94

R. ERGENER

hypothesis that Protestantism was instrumental in the growth of capitalist institutions” (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). Stulz and Williamson (2001) propose that, compared with other countries, Catholic ones provide less protection for the rights of creditors. Blum and Dudley (2001) and McCleary (2007) argue that contractual defaults are more likely in Roman Catholic countries because the Catholic sacrament of penance makes it possible to gain forgiveness of sins at any time, thereby reducing the “cost” of not observing a contractual obligation (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). Lewer and Van den Berg found the network effect of Islam on trade as negative. Unfortunately, in the literature on the economic implications of Islam (Kuran 1997, 2004; Lal 2001; Nafissi 1998; Noland 2003), there are no consistent explanations as to why trade networks founded by Muslims do not increase total trade. One explanation may be that Islamic networks are especially exclusive. Or, the results may be a reflection of the division of Islam into competing Shiite and Sunni sects—the data in the study treats all Muslims as members of a single religious culture (Lewer and Van den Berg 2007, 270). Mathias Helble studies the impact of religious beliefs on trade (Helble 2007). This impact manifests itself in two ways. Sharing same values may enhance trade among coreligionists and religion itself may have a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward trade. Hindu belief favors trade but only by certain castes. Because it has so many varieties, Buddhism does not generate trust among coreligionists across boundaries. Judaism both generates trust across boundaries and is positive toward trade in general. The Prophet Muhammad himself being a merchant, Islam is strongly in favor of trade, but honest trade (Helble 2007). As would be implied by these beliefs, Hindus and Christians are indifferent between trading with strangers or coreligionists, Buddhists would rather not trade with coreligionists, Jews and Muslims have strong preference to trade with coreligionists (Helble 2007).

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

95

References Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books. Bering, Jesse, and Dominic Johnson. 2005. “‘O Lord… You Perceive My Thoughts from Afar’: Recursiveness and the Evolution of Supernatural Agency.” Journal of Cognition and Culture 5 (1–2): 118–42. https://doi. org/10.1163/1568537054068679. Berndt, Colleen E. H. 2007. “Hostile Territory: High-Tension Religion and the Jewish Peddler.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 66 (5): 1005– 27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2007.00534.x. Blum, Ulrich, and Leonard Dudley. 2001. “Religion and Economic Growth: Was Weber Right?” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 11 (2): 207–30. https:// doi.org/10.1007/PL00003862. Bonacich, Edna. 1973. “A Theory of Middleman Minorities.” American Sociological Review 38 (5): 583–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094409. Bulbulia, Joseph. 2004. “The Cognitive and Evolutionary Psychology of Religion.” Biology and Philosophy 19 (5): 655–86. ———. 2005. “Are There Any Religions? An Evolutionary Exploration.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 17 (2): 71–100. Burman, J. J. Roy. 2002. Hindu-Muslim Syncretic Shrines and Communities. 1st ed. New Delhi: Mittal Publications. Camerer, Colin. 1988. “Gifts as Economic Signals and Social Symbols.” The American Journal of Sociology 94: S180–214. Carr, Jack L., and Janet T. Landa. 1983. “The Economics of Symbols, Clan Names, and Religion.” The Journal of Legal Studies 12 (1): 135–56. Davis, John. 1992. Exchange. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Enquist, Magnus, and Olof Leimar. 1993. “The Evolution of Cooperation in Mobile Organisms.” Animal Behaviour 45 (4): 747–57. https://doi.org/ 10.1006/anbe.1993.1089. Ensminger, Jean. 1994. “The Political Economy of Religion: An Economic Anthropologist’s Perspective.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft 150 (4): 745–54. ———. 1997. “Transaction Costs and Islam: Explaining Conversion in Africa.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft 153 (1): 4–29. Farrell, Karen. 1996. “Arab Spice Trade and Spread of Islam: Spice Case.” Ted Case Number 334. American University, Washington DC. Fershtman, Chaim, and Uri Gneezy. 2001. “Discrimination in a Segmented Society: An Experimental Approach.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (1): 351–77. Foltz, Richard. 2000. Religions of the Silk Road: Overland Trade and Cultural Exchange from Antiquity to the Fifteenth Century. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

96

R. ERGENER

Greif, Avner. 1989. “Reputation and Coalitions in Medieval Trade: Evidence on the Maghribi Traders.” The Journal of Economic History 49 (4): 857–82. ———. 1993. “Contract Enforceability and Economic Institutions in Early Trade: The Maghribi Traders’ Coalition.” The American Economic Review 83 (3): 525–48. ———. 1994. “Cultural Beliefs and the Organization of Society: A Historical and Theoretical Reflection on Collectivist and Individualist Societies.” Journal of Political Economy 102 (5): 912–50. https://doi.org/10.1086/261959. Hayek, Friedrich A. 1979. Law, Legislation, and Liberty: Volume III. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Helble, Matthias. 2007. “Is God Good for Trade?” Kyklos 60 (3): 385–413. Horton, Robin. 1971. “African Conversion.” Africa 41 (2): 85–108. Huntington, S. P. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster. Iannaccone, Laurence R. 1992. “Sacrifice and Stigma: Reducing Free-Riding in Cults, Communes, and Other Collectives.” Journal of Political Economy 100 (2): 271–91. ———. 1994a. “Progress in the Economics of Religion.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft 150 (4): 737–44. ———. 1994b. “Why Strict Churches Are Strong.” American Journal of Sociology 99: 1180–211. Israel, Jonathan. 1985. “Diasporas Jewish and Non-Jewish and the World Maritime Empires.” In Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks, Four Centuries of History, edited by Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis, and Ioanna Pepelapsis Minoglu, xxii, 440. Oxford and New York: Berg. Jha, Saumitra. 2005. “Trade, Institutions and Religious Conflict in India.” Draft paper prepared for the Laboratory in Comparative Ethnic Processes Graduate Workshop, Stanford University. Keay, John. 2011. India: A History. Revised and Updated. Revised, Expanded ed. New York: Grove Press. Klein, Daniel B. 1997. “Knowledge Reputation and Trust by Voluntary Means.” In Reputation: Studies in the Voluntary Elicitation of Good Conduct. University of Michigan Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/ Reputation.html?id=p3gUN-oD2n0C. Kuran, Timur. 1997. “Islam and Underdevelopment: An Old Puzzle Revisited.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft 153 (1): 41–71. ———. 2004. “Why the Middle East Is Economically Underdeveloped: Historical Mechanisms of Institutional Stagnation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (3): 71–90.

5

EXCHANGE AMONG HUMANS: NETWORKS OF TRUST

97

Lal, Deepak. 2001. Unintended Consequences: The Impact of Factor Endowments, Culture, and Politics on Long-Run Economic Performance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Lewer, Joshua J., and Hendrik Van den Berg. 2007. “Estimating the Institutional and Network Effects of Religious Cultures on International Trade.” Kyklos 60 (2): 255–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.2007.00371.x. Lueck, Thomas J. 1997. “Diamond District Tries to Dispel Its Private Bazaar Image.” The New York Times, December 12, sec. New York. https://www. nytimes.com/1997/12/12/nyregion/diamond-district-tries-to-dispel-itsprivate-bazaar-image.html. McCleary, Rachel M. 2007. “Salvation, Damnation, and Economic Incentives.” Journal of Contemporary Religion 22 (1): 49–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13537900601114503. Meijer, P. A., and H. S. Versnel. 1981. “Philosophers, Intellectuals and Religion in Hellas.” In Faith, Hope and Worship, 216–63. Leiden, The Netherlands: BRILL. https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004296695/ B9789004296695-s006.xml. Munson, Robert H. 1968. “The Role of Trade Routes in the Spread of Christianity in Asia During the First Millennium.” Prepared as One of the Requirements Due for Student Teaching Practicum, Asia Baptist Theological Seminary, Philippines Branch, Baguio City, Philippines. Nafissi, Mohammad R. 1998. “Reframing Orientalism: Weber and Islam.” In Max Weber, Democracy, and Modernization, edited by Ralph Schroeder, 27: 98–118. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Noland, Marcus. 2003. “Religion, Culture, and Economic Performance.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 472484, Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=472484. Norenzayan, A., and A. F. Shariff. 2008. “The Origin and Evolution of Religious Prosociality.” Science 322 (5898): 58–62. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. 1158757. Paxson, Nathaniel D., and James Buchanan. 2004. “The Entrepreneurial Ethic of the Sikhs: Religious Signaling and the Importance of Social Capital for Trust and Exchange.” Working Paper, Department of Economics, George Mason University. Perinbam, B. M. 1980. “The Julas in Western Sudanese History: Long-Distance Traders and Developers of Resources.” In West African Cultural Dynamics, edited by B. Schwarz and R. Dummett, 455–76. The Hague: Mouton. Rauch, James E., and Vitor Trindade. 2002. “Ethnic Chinese Networks in International Trade.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 84 (1): 116–30. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465302317331955.

98

R. ERGENER

Richman, Barak D. 2006. “How Community Institutions Create Economic Advantage: Jewish Diamond Merchants in New York.” In The Global Diamond Industry, 44–86. London: Springer. Riolo, Rick L., Michael D. Cohen, and Robert Axelrod. 2001. “Evolution of Cooperation Without Reciprocity.” Nature 414 (6862): 441–43. https:// doi.org/10.1038/35106555. Shearmur, Jeremy, and Daniel B. Klein. 1997. “Good Conduct in a Great Society: Adam Smith and the Role of Reputation.” In Reputation: Studies in the Voluntary Elicitation of Good Conduct, edited by Daniel B. Klein. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Shield, Renee Rose. 2005. Diamond Stories Enduring Change on 47th Street. Ithaca: Cornell University Pres. Sklare, Marshall. 1958. The Jews: Social Patterns of an American Group. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Edited by R. H. Campbell and A. S. Skinner. 2 vols. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund. Sombart, Werner. 1953. “Medieval and Modern Commercial Enterprise.” Enterprise and Secular Change 25: 40. Sosis, Richard. 2005. “Does Religion Promote Trust? The Role of Signaling, Reputation, and Punishment.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 1: 1–30. Sowell, Thomas. 2005. Black Rednecks and White Liberals. San Francisco: Encounter Books. Triulzi, Alessandro. 1975. “Trade, Islam, and the Mahdia in Northwestern Wallagg¯a, Ethiopia.” The Journal of African History 16 (1): 55–71. Vertovitch, S., and R. Cohen, eds. 1999. Migration, Diasporas, and Transnationalism. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Williamson, Oliver E. 1993. “Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization.” The Journal of Law & Economics 36 (1): 453–86. Williamson, Rohan, and René M Stulz. 2001. “Culture, Openness, and Finance.” NBER Working Paper 8222. Wilson, Edward O. 1980. Sociobiology. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Zahavi, Amotz. 1980. “Ritualization and the Evolution of Movement Signals.” Behaviour 72 (1–2): 77–80. ———. 1993. “The Fallacy of Conventional Signalling.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 340 (1292): 227–30.

CHAPTER 6

Religion and the Rise of Inequality

“AS GOD DOES…”

Nasreddin Hodja is a Turkish folk hero for jokes. In one of his stories, the Hodja is depicted as delivering his annual alms not to the poor, as preached by Moslem religion, but to the richest man in town. Perplexed, the rich man asks Hodja whether he is making a mistake, as God says that one should give to the poor—not to the rich. “I know what God says” replies Hodja, “but, I thought there may be greater good in doing as God does, rather than as God says.” What is the truth in Hodja’s words? Is it God who gives to the rich—their riches?

There are those who do indeed believe that it is God who has the final say in the dispensation of riches. At least, this is how it is said in various religious texts, which are the words of God for their believers (Ecclesiastes 6:2, Deuteronomy 8:18; Koran 17). Yet, there was once a time when god had not (yet) given riches to the rich and therefore there were no rich and no poor—all were equal— until about five thousand years ago at which point inequality emerged and © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_6

99

100

R. ERGENER

spread to become the dominant structuring principle of human societies (Price and Feinman 2010, 2). How the rich and the poor emerged and what role religion played in the process will be the subject matter of this chapter. We start with an exploration of our egalitarian beginnings and the paths that lead to inequality even in the absence of religion. We then explore the contribution religion makes to the creation and the sustaining of inequality by justifying claims to ownership of resources and to leadership positions and hierarchies, by providing services and by providing a leverage for surplus extraction.

Egalitarian Beginnings Inequality rather than egalitarianism seems to be the norm with most species. One exception is the ancestors of modern humans who “existed well over two million years in a state of relative equality” (Hayden 2001, 231). This, despite the fact that inequality should be deeply rooted in the human psyche, as some sort of hierarchy with differential access to resources was typical of societies of our closest non-human primate ancestors (Knauft et al. 1991; Kummer 1971; Eibl-Eibesfeldt 1974; Salter 1995; Tiger and Fox 1971; all cited in Wiessner et al. 2002, 232). Egalitarian societies emerged during the lower or middle Paleolithic as hierarchical tendencies among our human ancestors were dampened. Societies with egalitarian structures have persisted through the twentieth century into the twenty first. Part of the reason for the dampening of hierarchical tendencies was the physiological changes we went through as we evolved as a species. As sexual size dimorphism declined with evolution to the modest levels which prevail today, the reproductive variance between males and females was reduced. Changes in brain physiology favored cooperative breeding and feeding, making aggression by dominants more difficult, thereby softening hierarchies (Scheidel 2017, 26–31). Close quarter fights with sticks and rocks favor strong men. Use of projectile weapons and changes in shoulder anatomy which made it possible to throw objects helped to keep our stronger ancestors at a distance from the weaker ones and limited the possibilities of their use against the weak. Other developments such as the controlled use of fire 800,000 years ago, cooking 160,000 years ago, darts and stone arrow tips 70,000 years ago, all favored skill over size and aggression, making ambushes and first

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

101

strikes possible. The improvements in cognitive skills complemented these developments. Strong men were also restrained by the coalitions of the weaker. Use of language which made more sophisticated alliances possible and reinforced morality was available hundred to three thousand years ago (Scheidel 2017, 27–31). We deduce the way of life of our hunter-gatherer ancestors mostly from the studies of extant present-day ones. According to the renowned anthropologist James Woodburn, with extant egalitarian societies, “equalities of power, equalities of wealth and equalities of prestige or rank are not merely sought but are, with certain limited exceptions, genuinely realized?” (Woodburn 1982, 432) When there is inequality, some members of the group have differential access to material resources and exert control over others (Classic definition by Fried 1960; cited in Wiessner et al. 2002). Woodburn studied the Hadza who live in the savannah to the east of Lake Eyasi in Tanzania’s Great Rift Valley. When James Woodburn studied the Hadza there were about 400 of them, living roughly equally divided up into four regions. Because of the continuous movement from one campsite to another, the camp was considered as the main social unit of the Hadza. Camps consisted of about eighteen persons but could be with as few as one hunter or as large as a hundred members (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 35). During part of the year the families lived in small camps. When cordia and salvadora bushes were ripe the groups would converge in the valleys where these plants were abundant. Camps became even larger during the dry season as this would be the time for hunting and everybody would want to be closer to the good hunters (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 35). Generosity and hospitality were respected and valued. Visitors were welcome. Visitors would often make themselves more acceptable by bringing with them some honey for their hosts. Honey and meat made up only twenty percent of the diet. Yet, the egalitarian sharing of the honey brought by visitors played a very important role in the strengthening of the social fabric (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 36). There were no exclusive territories. Everybody could hunt, harvest, and draw water everywhere. Big game was shared with all.

102

R. ERGENER

NOT “NOBLE SAVAGES”

Egalitarian hunter-gatherers were not “noble savages.” Like all humans, egalitarian hunter-gatherers too were born with both selfish and sharing tendencies. It is their culture that cultivated and reinforced the sharing tendencies while suppressing and controlling the selfish ones. Yet the acculturation was never completely successful. Anthropologist Richard Lee, who studied the !Kung, reports how on one occasion t-Toma//gwe, an elderly member of the group, “asked for a blanket and said, ‘All my life I’ve been giving, giving; today I am old and want something for myself.’ Similar sentiments have been expressed by other oldsters. Perhaps because they are old, their departures from the cultural norm were tolerated more than would those of younger adults” (Lee 1979, 461). It was not unusual for the elderly among the hunter-gatherers to have certain privileges. Indeed, egalitarian hunter-gatherers were not strictly undifferentiated (Flannery 2002, 1989). Most had “internal divisions based on age, sex, kinship, or ability in order to apportion tasks and to promote complementarity within families or groups” (Wiessner et al. 2002, 236). With the Australian aborigines “the elders enjoy special privileges with regard to food, men have similar privileges in opposition to women, or individuals are obligated to make gifts of food to kin”… Based on these facts one can make the argument that “some forms of exploitation may exist among nomadic hunter-gatherers. These forms of exploitation will, however, very limited” (Testart et al. 1982, 527).

Why Share? High degree of sharing among the Hadza and other hunter-gatherers was forced on them by the strong mutual dependencies which were necessitated by the impossibility of producing surpluses in the harsh environment of the savannah (Wiessner et al. 2002, 236). Food sharing and other egalitarian practices are observed not only on the savannah but also in other harsh environments, for example, with the Netsilik Eskimo, living in the Arctic, on the tundra. Egalitarian hunter-gatherers who lived in lush

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

103

forests also had a sharing attitude, regarding the forest as their parents (Bird-David 1990). Life of the egalitarian hunter-gatherers was not totally free of problems. Quite a bit of violence was committed, mainly because, in the absence of an authority to impose order, people were obliged to self-protect their claims. In this context, the sharing of the meat of the big game can be viewed as “tolerated theft”—tolerated partly because there is no authority to stop the scroungers and it would be difficult for the successful hunter to keep the meat of his trophy away from the failures, as the failures are likely to outnumber him (Blurton Jones 1987). It is also the case that there is not much to be gained by saving meat, as it deteriorates fast. By tolerating theft, the person who hunted the big game is paving the way for him to be tolerated, when he himself scrounges or “steals” from others, when others have a big hunt, and he does not.

Aggrandizers Biding Their Time There would be those among the egalitarian band members who would not be content with the social insurance egalitarianism provides and seek self-insurance, which would be provided by the possession of hoarded goods. After Hayden and Villeneuve, we shall call these “aggressive, accumulative, acquisitive” (Triple A) types as aggrandizers—who are likely to be present in every gene pool and were present with the egalitarian hunter-gatherers as well (Hayden 2001, 255). In order to attain self-insurance, aggrandizers needed to be able to keep in storage some of their own produce and also control the produce of some others. The absence of the infrastructure to hoard their riches, namely the absence of goods that can be stored and the facilities of storage, prevented those with aggrandizing tendencies from realizing their goals. Also, in egalitarian societies, “aggrandizing” tendencies were leveled off by a process which has been labeled as “reverse dominance,” with the weaker members of the group curbing the initiative of those who attempted to have more. Those who are greedy and who do not share are ridiculed and made fun of by the members of the “alliance of reverse dominance.” More serious violations such as adultery, incest, using others’ hunting grounds could be punished by ostracism, which would be equivalent to death as no other group would admit the ostracized individuals (Lips 1947;

104

R. ERGENER

cited in Fry 2006, 405). Respected individuals would be not the bullies but the generous, modest, and diplomatic. “Alliance of reverse dominance” would circumscribe bullying behavior and even murder the bullies if they persisted (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 59). There is the story of the Naskapi man who insisted on hunting in others’ grounds. The man and his family who were outcast from their group and rejected by other groups who were aware of their reputation ended up starving to death. Of the two obstacles the aggrandizers faced, absence of the infrastructure was more important, the true bottleneck. When the constraints were released and hoarding became a possibility, young or old, the aggrandizers would find a way to overcome the obstruction of the “alliance of reverse dominance” and embark on the path to achieve their goals, going beyond differentiation based on age, sex, kinship, or ability, to be better off (“more equal”) than others.

PATHS TO INEQUALITY

The key developments that were needed to take place in order to open the doors for the aggrandizers to achieve their goals were: (1) creation of surpluses, (2) storage facilities becoming available, (3) production of food items that last long under storage, and (4) the recognition of the right to refrain from general exchange and to engage in reciprocal exchange.

Creation of Surpluses Surpluses are necessary for aggrandizers to reach their goals because surpluses reduce the need for egalitarian sharing, thereby weakening the resolve of the reverse dominance coalition. With surpluses available, those who desired to have more could be tolerated to do so, without forcing others to have less. Inequality emerged with groups which produced surpluses and never with those who lacked surpluses—like for example, the aborigines of Australia (Hayden 2001, 241).

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

105

Surpluses became available for various reasons such as more efficient hunting or environmental changes. One activity which made a big difference is farming. Farming would contribute to the creation of inequality by enabling the more industrious individuals to produce food surpluses (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 67). (This does not mean that inequalities would not have been possible without agriculture). The narration in many histories of technology is that agriculture was “invented.” Yet, as Kent Flannery, who is one of the pioneers of archaeological studies on the emergence of farming, observed, “we know of no human group on earth so primitive that they are ignorant of the connection between plants and the seeds from which they grow” (Flannery 1968 cited in; Bowles and Choi 2013, 8834). Therefore, no invention was necessary. What was necessary for agriculture to take off were the development of storage facilities and the recognition of the choice not to participate in generalized exchange (Bowles and Choi 2013, 8834). Otherwise, the fate of farmers would be the same as the fate of the two Batek foragers from Malaysia, whose fellow group members simply harvested and shared with the entire group the rice which the two had planted. Similar cases of claims on would-be first farmers were observed among the !Kung in southern Africa and the Hiwi in Venezuela (Wiessner et al. 2002; cited in Bowles and Choi 2013, 8831). “There is little incentive to intensify production in … societies” with which “whatever is produced must be shared” (Flannery 2002, 421). Storage Facilities Becoming Available Wealth cannot be truly possessed and passed on to heirs unless it is stored. Members of egalitarian societies had no means to store anything other than skills, experience, knowledge and simple tools and the goodwill of fellow group members. In order for aggrandizers to realize their goals, storage facilities where the surpluses could be stored needed to be available. Three types of storage had evolved: (1) Storing in the self, by fattening during the abundant season and losing weight during the lean season. (2) Social storage, of obligations, which assures one access through debt relationships to resources other than their own. (3) Physical Storage, which could be of three kinds (Soffer 2015, 722).

106

R. ERGENER

First, beginning during the upper or middle Paleolithic, rather than using food simply to meet energy needs, humans started to convert food surpluses into labor or other demanded items, such as objects of prestige. Those commodities could be saved. This was a very revolutionary step because there is no limit to how much that can be transformed into usable forms employing this technique (Hayden 2001, 254). Secondly, with the domestication of animals, it was possible to store herds and fat in animal bodies (indirect intra-corporeal storage) (Hayden 2001, 254). Finally, there was material storage of either portable goods or of goods for long lasting storage in pits, storehouses, or other immovable facilities. Production of Food Items that Last Long Under Storage Sun dried, smoked or salted meat or fish were for portable storage. Smoked, salted or frozen meat or fish, roots, tubers, nuts, and cereals could be kept in permanent storage in immovable facilities (Soffer 2015, 723). Production of portable goods by drying, smoking, or salting can require more effort than the production of goods for storage in immovable facilities, such as the butchering of meat into segments to be thrown into pits to be frozen. Portable goods, however, allow for the continuation of residential mobility and the associated egalitarianism. Storage in permanent facilities, on the other hand, ties those who store to the locations where they store. This leads to a rise in the number of people who continuously stay in touch and cooperate. Storing allows for a lag time between production and consumption, and it is this basic feature of storing that enables manipulation, appropriation of surpluses, and the formation of hierarchies (Soffer 2015, 723). Here is how long various products would last under storage: fish oil, two to three months; roots/tubers, less than six months; frozen meat, three to nine months; dried fish, up to a year; unshelled nuts, nine months to two years; and cereals, three to five years (Labuza 1982 cited in; Soffer 2015, 723). (The long lasting nature of cereals and the lapse between the time they are produced and the time they are consumed allows the elite to tax and appropriate surpluses. Hierarchical societies have grown where cereals are produced and not where tubers are. If it is sufficiently productive, farmers prefer tuber production to cereal production [Mayshar et al. 2016]).

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

107

Some of the earliest known remains of permanent storage facilities are in the East European or the Russian Plain, in the Dnepr—Desna drainage system, with storage of frozen meat in pits going back to 18,000 BC. Permanent storage of harvested wild cereals is observed during the Natufian at Levant. At Natufian sites such as Ain Mallaha and Hayonim, storage was probably possible in caves, plastered pits, and stone lined huts built for the purpose or baskets (Soffer 2015, 728; Bar-Yosef 2001, 13; Hayden 1995, 152) Humans started to live in permanent home basis and cultivate food rather than hunt and gather food during the Neolithic, starting at about 10200 BCE. Prior to the Neolithic, before agriculture, the Natufian culture in the Levant in the Middle East was sedentary or semi sedentary. Early storage facilities were probably communal. As above developments made self-insurance possible, storage pits were removed from public to private locations (Flannery 1972). Private storage enabled the family to determine who to share with. Larger size of villages meant that not all residents were kin that one would be willing to share with. The lengthiness of the agricultural cycle made it difficult to control cheaters. Private storage contributed to the solution of these problems. With private storage, families were free to determine how much to produce (Flannery 2002, 421). These developments were taking place during Prepottery Neolithic B (PPNB), at villages such as those located at the upper levels of Beidha and Tell Mureybet, and Jarmo and Ali Kosh (Flannery 1972, 40–43). Because they could protect their produce from the demands of their neighbors, families who worked harder got ahead of their neighbors (Flannery 2002, 421). A few thousand years later, at about 5500 BCE, unit family homes were replaced by larger ones for 15–20 residents some of which had multiple hearths, kitchens, and storage facilities. Large families could go beyond simple food cultivation and undertake multiple tasks at the same time, such as herding goats and pigs and raising flax (Flannery 2002, 424). Reciprocal Rather Than Generalized Exchange In order to be able to store surpluses, the aggrandizers needed the recognition of the right not to share. This condition is often defined as the recognition of private property, which is wrong. For, it is not as if the egalitarian hunter-gatherers did not have property. Property probably always existed with humans. Natural objects could always be turned into property by

108

R. ERGENER

means of possession (or occupation), improvement, and exchange (Silver 1989, 32). Field studies by social psychologists give support to the proposal that humans feel in debt and under the obligation to reciprocate when they receive favors (Silver 1989, 58). Egalitarian hunter-gatherers, who practiced generalized exchange, gave almost all of their limited belongings when requested, with the expectation to be reciprocated by others (not necessarily by the recipients of their largesse) at an indefinite future. The crucial change which allowed aggrandizers to take off, was the recognition of the right not to participate in generalized exchange which egalitarian hunter-gatherers practiced. Reciprocal exchange, with the exchange partner deciding when to exchange and in return for what, had become a possibility instead. Reciprocal exchange would open the way to manipulation as one could always deceive the exchange partner to agree to an exchange rate which was unfavorable to him.

Appropriating by Consent Rather Than Force There are limits to what an individual or group can produce. In order to hoard surpluses, it is necessary to appropriate some of the produce of others. One of the ways to appropriate the produce of others’ is through the use of force. However, during the transformation from egalitarian social systems to unequal ones, the use of force may not really have been an option, as force can be used as a means to ensure the acceptance of social conventions only if there is “an administrative structure capable of wielding a certain amount of power.” Power has been defined as the mathematical product of men X (times) resources X (times) organization (Bierstedt 1950; cited in Drennan and Flannery 1976, 346). With the emerging unequal societies, the technology of force was simply not sufficiently advanced to render large numbers of men a truly effective coercive body (army, police), even if they could be mobilized (Drennan and Flannery 1976, 346). Even if the use of force were an option, consent was probably more useful than force in creating and sustaining stable relations of surplus extraction. As M. Godelier says, classes were created probably more by consent than by force (Godelier 2011, 12). Those from whom surpluses are extracted are more likely to give their consent if they are persuaded that they are being fairly compensated. Unequal relations of exploitation are likely to be more stable and last

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

109

longer if they are disguised as an equal exchange of services (Godelier 2011, 160). The trick is to create in those who are being exploited the illusion that they are receiving as much or even more in return for what is taken from them (the exploited). Another trick was to persuade the exploited that their misfortune is the will of a superior being whose wishes cannot be denied: “Lies have always been one of the means employed by the dominant to preserve their domination” (Godelier 2011, 154). Debt The magic tool that was employed to create unequal relations of exchange out of egalitarian ones and to create bonds of dependence was debt (Godelier 2011, 161). Resources were transferred to the aggrandizers through debt payments, with the donors receiving as payback more than what they loaned. If the other party could not pay, he would remain in debt and the aggrandizer could foreclose at the appropriate time. For instance, with the Nootka of the Northwest Canada, with whom there were small houses and large ones, the small houses which ceased to be economically viable between 800 and 1200, received support from larger ones, in return for which they became subservient (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 79). This is totally unlike the debt practice with egalitarian groups, with which givers of gifts would take care not to shame their recipients and make sure not to give more than what the exchange partner could reciprocate (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 66). With egalitarian groups, if the recipient is unable to reciprocate nevertheless, he is not regarded as having incurred debt. Help given to others would not be used to build position and to exploit (Wiessner et al. 2002, 235). The !Kung of the Kalahari Desert for example had a series of partners within a gift-giving system known as hxaro. One would give gifts to a partner with the expectation that it would be reciprocated within roughly two years. Gifts were exchanged with partners living up to 50 miles away. This allowed partners to visit each other during times of scarcity and stay up to several months, sharing food and water (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 33). Such behavior should be considered more as social insurance than altruism as it allows the hosting partner to accumulate social obligations which entitles them to enjoy the visiting party’s hospitality if the situation should be reversed in the future (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 34).

110

R. ERGENER

Divine Justification for Claims to Resources One of the paths taken by aggrandizers to build up wealth was by claiming the ownership of productive resources such as water sources, more productive land, fishing locations, and hunting territories. Egalitarian hunter-gatherers make claims to such resources based on being the first to arrive at a resource (Hayden 2001, 258). For example, the !Kung of the Kalahari had claims to a water hole around which a camp would be formed, the justification being their having arrived there first (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 32). One should note, however, that claims based on having arrived first did not necessarily mean ownership and were not recognized by all groups (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 55). For example, no Netsilik Eskimo group could claim exclusive rights to land, traps and weirs, regardless of whether they had arrived first (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 22). Claims to ownership of resources could also be based on the costs incurred in order to intensify production through for example land clearance, the construction of fishing weirs or platforms, hunting drive lines or dams or irrigation ditches (Hayden 2001, 258). The story of two peoples living in Assam, Northern India, illustrates the evolution of ownership rights based on costs incurred. Dafla Miri of Assam in Northern India did dry rice farming on hillsides. They could farm, but not own land, as they believed that land could not be owned—just like skies could not be owned. Apa Tami who lived in the same region cultivated rice in paddies. In order to do so, they had to convert unproductive swamps to productive paddies. They had to dig check dams and canals and contour terraces for the purpose. Land on which so much investment had been made could not be shared with others and became private property (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 251–59). Aggrandizers’ claims for ownership of productive resources were made on the basis of being the first to arrive. Belief in deceased ancestors and celestial beings is observed with egalitarian hunter-gatherers and it was these beings who were employed by aggrandizers to justify their claims of ownership of productive resources. Celestial beings were the creators who gave humans the divine laws of social behavior. Deceased ancestors possessed super powers which they could employ to intercede on behalf of their descendants (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 549). For example, with the Nootka of Pacific Northwest,

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

111

Canada, claims of prior occupancy to inlets, associated plank houses, fishing spots on the rivers and offshore waters, were reinforced with the claims that such property had been inherited through supernatural connections (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 75). Feasts Feasts, which were sharing events, would be converted by enterprising aggrandizers into mechanisms for creating among those who attended debt obligations toward the hosts (Hayden 2001, 258). Divine Justification for Claims to Leadership Remote ancestors and supernatural beings were employed not only to justify claims to resources but also to justify leadership positions and the material benefits which came with such positions. Egalitarian societies usually consist of kin groups or lineages. With lineages and kin groups, society is consensus based (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 36). Leadership is not coercive and amounts to no more than the advice of a few respected seniors. Authority is divided, temporary in application, lacking sanctions, and arising from personal leadership characteristics (Netting 1972, 220). With the !Kung of the Kalahari for example, the senior known as kxau was respected but had little authority. His main job was to make sure that only members of his group could use waters and the food of the camp (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 32). The absence with egalitarian societies of coercive leadership and the associated material benefits is rather strange in view of the fact that chimpanzee groups, with whom humans share ninety-eight percent of their genes, are strongly hierarchical. Alpha male chimpanzees dominate all, betas dominate all but alpha and so it goes down to the level of omega. The rank is changeable and determined through a series of continuous interactions and alliance formation. Flannery and Marcus propose that egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies seemed to be lacking hierarchy because the hierarchy was hidden. No living member of the group would be allowed to be more than a gamma. Alphas were the supernatural beings who cannot be overthrown and who are both the source of prosperity and cause of misfortune. The betas are the invisible but powerful ancestors who bid with alphas and provided

112

R. ERGENER

protection for their living descendants (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 58– 59). Ancestors made their presence felt as betas as they gave their support to the aggrandizers (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 59) who also claimed the possession of ritual knowledge and the ability to offer costly sacrifices (Hayden 2001, 261). Aggrandizers would claim to be in touch with betas through rituals and would eventually assume their role as betas. Ultimately, as divine kings, the most ambitious aggrandizers would assume the role even of the alpha, as with the Egyptian Pharaohs. Circumscription Aggrandizers had the opportunity to become coercive leaders with connections to ancestors and supernatural beings, as lineages and kin groups merged forming larger groups. Members of lineages and kin groups typically move away from social and economic problems when such problems emerge. Groups can lose their ability to move away from problems because of the attraction of concentrated resources (e.g., because they want to stay close to rich hunting grounds) or due to a rise in population in general (Aldenderfer 1993, 11). When they cannot move away from problems, individuals feel trapped, incapacitated, and afraid (Netting 1972, 220). There are disputes over productive property and hindrances to the local and regional exchange of goods. In response, lineages merge with other lineages forming larger groups, which can better deal with issues such as defense or amassing foodstuffs and or amassing valuables needed for rituals (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 17). Large groups made up of several lineages are known as clans. Anthropologists borrowed the term clan from Scottish Highlanders (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 16). Whereas egalitarian foragers can leave their group when the pressure builds up, clan members are trapped within the clan. Clan members stay within the group so long as the perceived net costs of group membership are lower than the perceived benefits. This state of being tied to membership in a group has been labeled as circumscription. Clan members are circumscribed. Circumscribed individuals will be more tolerant of social inequality because what they perceive as benefits of staying in the group can outweigh the costs of inequality (Betzig 1986, 101; cited in Aldenderfer 1993, 11). Circumscription, therefore, contributes to the emergence of

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

113

inequality (Proposed by Price and Brown 1985, 8; cited in Aldenderfer 1993, 11). Lineages forming clans can propose to be related, whether this is true or not, claiming descent from father’s or mother’s line or from mythical ancestors. Aspiring clan leaders can resort to connections with ancestors and other supernatural beings in order to bring different lineages together. A potential leader who wants to unite diverse groups cannot afford to be closely associated with any single one of them. Instead he will present himself as a messenger from ancestors or from a powerful god. Groups united under his leadership will be bonded with their allegiance to the god, whose messenger the new leader is. Associated with the new god, there will be a cosmology, symbols and rituals, all of which will contribute to bond the believers to each other. The leader can put his claim to leadership into practice by having visions and through divining, by importing alien cults, by maintaining the sacredness of markets, and by providing safe havens and the like (Netting 1972, 233). Leadership Benefits in Return for Imaginary Services A clan leader can use his position to create benefits for himself by claiming the “general and ultimate responsibility in the minds of his subjects for both their material and moral well-being” and then by demanding the returns for the well-being he provided (Netting 1972, 239). With the Kachin of Burma for example, hereditary rank could emerge if one lineage convinced others that the village nat is their ancestor, as the village territory is the domain of the nat. Since the nat ruled the lands, his descendants would have the right to control the lands and would be entitled to receive tribute because they (his human descendants) alone could intercede with the nat on behalf of society (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 199). The So, who are settled on the slopes of the Kadam and Moroto mountains in Uganda make a precarious living off sorghum, livestock, and a little hunting. Periodic droughts and various diseases attack their plants and threaten their agriculture. Karamojong shepherds who live on the plain regularly steal their cattle. The forest has been driven back by slash-andburn as a result of which there is no game. There are about five thousand So divided into patrilineal clans.

114

R. ERGENER

Among the seniors, there exists a small minority of about fifty men, each of whom represents his lineage and clan. As a group, these initiated men (kenisan) dominate the rest of society. The kenisan can communicate with the ancestors (emet ) and obtain from them all the good things of life, such as peace, health, good harvest, and so on. The ancestors themselves communicate with a remote god Belgen. The initiated elders bury the more important of the dead with threats to society such as severe droughts, epidemics, external enemies, or internal conflicts. Their witchcraft powers scare their enemies. They make the rain come when harvest is devastated by drought, insects, worms, or mildew. Their services entitle them to the highest prestige, and authority and a number of material benefits (Godelier 2011, 158). An interesting case in this context is the Alur With the Alur, “segmentary state” on the Uganda–Congo border, studied at the end of 1940s and beginning of 1950s (Southall 1956), the chief’s aura of supernatural effectiveness depended largely on his ability to make rain through the enactment of a complex of mysterious rituals that are in the domain of the chiefly line. Political power can never be assumed unless one has the powers to make rain (Southall 1956). In addition, the chief’s personal ancestor worship and service at ancient shrines were believed to play an important role in the management of weather and seasons. These powers invoked fear and reverence for the chief, who supposedly had the power to stop fighting among his followers simply by his presence (Netting 1972, 23). The chief received regular tribute in return for providing rain and good weather. He was entitled to allotments of meat. His followers provided labor on his farm. When he dispensed justice he would collect fines and court costs. The chief was also the node of a redistributive network. Salt, ivory, dried fish, ironwork, and basketry from different ecological areas were redistributed through the chief. The chief gave away some of the girls he had received as fine payments to singles and to his favorites. He gave feasts with the meat he was entitled to and with the grains cultivated on his farm employing voluntary labor (Netting 1972, 239). The priest-chief of the Kofyar people of the Jos Plateau in Nigeria was another leader who claimed the power to provide for the health and wellbeing of his people, through certain ritual sanctions and spiritual connections, which he claimed he possessed in his aspect of miskagam (Netting 1972, 221).

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

115

The Kofyar chief had neither much power nor authority. During the course of his tenure, he would need to make use of his ritual skills only on a limited number of occasions (Netting 1972, 223). His intervention would be necessary in case of draughts, sterility of domestic animals and of women, failure of the hunt, unrest or violence within the community and conflict with other villages (Netting 1972, 222). Yet in most religious assemblies, the chief did very little. The Kofyar religious meeting resembled a Quaker meeting, with no marked leadership or assignment of duties among the participants. A Kofyar chief was not particularly wealthy, but he had more wives, sons, cattle, horses, and goats than the average villager (Netting 1972, 225). In some villages he would be entitled to an annual tribute of grain, or salt, or an iron hoe. The ethnographic record provides numerous examples of this same strategy by which emerging elites use the control of ritual activities and the appropriation of sacred powers as a basis for economic and political centralization (Netting 1972, 233). To give an ethnographic example, the sheikh of the el Shabana tribe in modern southern Iraq reinforced his economic pre-eminence and political legitimacy through his control over the tribal mudhij (a combination of guest-house, community center, and administrative/judicial center). The sheikh controlled a large amount of land whose produce was theoretically allocated to the maintenance of the mudhij. In practice the sheikh contributed only a portion of the produce from this land to the communal mudhij, while keeping the remainder for his use (Fernea 1970, 91). The sheikh was able to mobilize tribal labor to construct and maintain the mudhij, along with food surplus animals and grain for periodic tribal feasts. In short, the sheikh of the el Shabana manipulated his sponsorship of the community mudhij to his own gain (Stein 1994, 43). An interesting case of the use of religion to justify material benefits for those in leadership positions is with the Enga of Papua New Guinea. A general rise in prosperity took place with the Enga of Papua, New Guinea, with the introduction of sweet potato.1 The chiefs benefited more than others from this development. The chiefs justified the disproportionate

1 Sweet potato, which was domesticated in Central America, may have come to Papua New Guinea from the Philippines where it was introduced by the Spaniards or it was moved from island to island by indigenous people.

116

R. ERGENER

rise in their wealth with a reference not to their own magical powers but to the powers of a cultic deity. In the West of the Enga region, big men employed cults to justify their newly earned wealth (Wiessner and Tumu 1999, 179–213). The Kepele cult, which was originally a boy’s initiation ceremony in which the initiates were revealed the secrets of the spiritual world, was totally transformed to suit the needs of big men (Aldenderfer 2010, 85). The main religious idea that was added to the cult was the association of agricultural fertility with a mythical wandering fertility woman, who had supposedly introduced the sweet potato to the Enga (Wiessner and Tumu 1999, 198). Sacred stones were created and accepted as the actual depictions of the wandering women. Eventually, a male figure was introduced to the cult. Male and female symbols mated “within specially erected cult houses, which over time became larger, more elaborate, and more central to the community... Activities within the cult houses, especially the mating of the male figure and the sacred stones, were closed and private. The cult house, where the mating took place, was often burned after the completion of the ceremony, while the other structures were abandoned and left to rot” (Aldenderfer 2010, 86). The transformations of the Kepele cult had mystified the newly acquired wealth of the big men and presented it as the creation of a goddess. Another producer of imaginary products, shamans have been known as the first politicians. The words for “shaman” and “leader” are very similar in Inuit language—angakok and angajkok. The first political leaders of the Buryat of Asia were shamans. Even when the shaman does not have explicit political powers, he can wield influence on critical issues which were of concern to the society (Wright 2009, 42). In exchange for treatment services which they also provided, shamans could charge on a per service basis. For payment, a shaman could charge yams in Micronesia, sleds and harnesses with Eastern Eskimo, beads and coconuts with Mentawai of Sumatra, tobacco with Ojibwa, buckskin with the Washo from Central Nevada, slaves with the Haida and the patient’s wife or daughter with the Eskimo. With the Nootka, the shaman would be offered blankets, furs, and canoes. If the offer was not sufficient, the sprit the shaman was addressing would reduce his power. The shaman would be allowed by the sprit to perform his singing and other rituals, only after the sprit had been satisfied with the gifts offered. A Gitskan shaman in western Canada would return the gifts if the patient died. Ojibwa shamans did not charge for their services but they could practice polygyny. Among

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

117

the Eskimo an erring woman could be atoned by having intercourse with the shaman (Wright 2009, 35–36). The shaman can persuade his followers that the “mystical means of production” are controlled by him and that he therefore deserves a share of the hunt. This is considered as exchange, since it is the shaman who transforms the animal nature of meat, which is dangerous, into a nutritious nature, like a vegetable (Granero 1986, 664). “Cult” and “cultivate” are from the same etymological root. In the Old Testament, the word ‘bd means both the “cultivation” of the soil (Genesis 2:25) and the performance of the cult (Exodus 3:12, Numbers 18:7, Deuteronomy 4:19) (Wyatt 1988, 119). With many societies, the priest or the imam who preys for rain is entitled to a portion of the crop. The Brahman priest has a recognized claim to a share of the harvest (Neale 1985, 955). The Pawnees of the Great Plains would pay their dues to the priests to whom they believed they owed the regulation of the seasons (White c1983, 176). Leadership Benefits in Return for Real Services The chiefs’, priests’, and other imposters’ claims that it was they themselves or the supernatural beings who they are in touch with, who were responsible for the well-being of the people, were obviously false. Nevertheless, the idea has persisted in many civilizations up to our times: Provision of first fruits (aparchai) and tithes (dekatai) to the temples was an essential part of ancient Greek religion (Jim 2014). The Pharaoh of Egypt reciprocated for the continuous flow of offerings by making the sun rise and the Nile flood. Prosperity gospel believers have no doubt that the gifts they offer to their ministers will be returned to them in multiples. Genze riyaku or the pursuit of this—worldly benefits in return for material gifts is still the most popular religious practice in Japan (Reader et al. 1993). Yet, even though they are susceptible to manipulation, people are not just manipulated tools. Ideologies can be used to legitimize private interests and material domination but they are unlikely to attain a hold over people if they are merely this (Mann 2012, 23). People have their doubts and ask questions, particularly at times of long-lasting hardships. It became obvious that religion had to come to terms with negative attitude of gods toward humans. Under such conditions it would feel useless

118

R. ERGENER

to insist on placating gods with gifts in order to gain their favors, particularly if one considered gods owned everything anyway (Smith 1927, 393). Therefore, in order for his position to be tenable, a prudent priest, a shaman, a chief would diversify and provide some “real” services, to supplement the “fake services” they supposedly provided. The shaman made a real contribution, as the ecstatic states he induced in himself and others strengthened social bonds (Hayden 1987, 86). One of the real services a priest chief could supply to his people was order in the market. This was the case with the leaders of Tiv, another Nigerian people who lived not too far from the Kofyar and who also lacked centralization. Tiv society was egalitarian and lacked anything resembling an office. Individuals had no recourse to wealth by exploiting the labor of others. Yet, there were mechanisms by which men did indeed attain influence and prestige (Bohannan 1955, 1958; Bohannan 1953; cited in Netting 1972, 228). In building up prestige, a man had to seek affluence at home and ultimately influence the economic activities of others by his control of a market (Bohannan and Bohannan 2017, 35–36; Bohannan 1958; cited in Netting 1972, 229). A man in control of an important market was in a very strong position. He was an arbitrator, he settled disputes and received gifts in return, which made him wealthy (Bohannan 1958, 63; cited in Netting 1972, 229). “Water Temples” of Bali An interesting case of the religious establishment providing real services is in Bali, where a network of “water temples” under the “Master Temple” Ulun Danu Batur, organized the whole ecosystem for rice cultivation, including the creation of new channels, tunnels, pest control the establishment of weirs and the resolution of water rights (Lansing 1987, 326). “Water temples” constituted an institutional system separate from the state. Earlier attempts to identify a discrete system of irrigation management had misconceived the problem. For most crops, irrigation simply provides water for the plant’s roots. But in a Balinese rice terrace, water was used to construct a complex, pulsed artificial ecosystem. Water temples manipulated the states of the system, at ascending levels in regional hierarchies. The permanence of water temple networks contrasts sharply with the instability of the traditional Balinese states (Lansing 1987, 326).

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

119

Mesopotamia: Organizing Irrigation and Labor Temples played a key role in controlling the irrigation system at an entirely different time period and region where irrigation provided the basis for chiefly power, namely Ubaid (Stein 1994). (“Ubaid” refers to both a time period and a material culture assemblage which originated in southern Mesopotamia and lasted for more than 1500 years, from the mid-sixth millennium to the early fourth millennium B.C.) Good farm land with access to water was scarce in Mesopotamia. The ownership of such land would determine who the elites were. Elites needed to control not only land and water but also labor as land was useless unless the labor necessary to maintain canals and for sowing and harvesting was mobilized. The ability to mobilize labor, more so than the ownership of land, put limits on the number of elites. Emergent elites can draw labor from their immediate kin group or from the social group they belong to (Stein 1994, 41). Immediate kin are the most reliable labor pool. Various studies have shown a persistent correlation between family size and household wealth (Bates 1973, 96– 97; Irons 1975, 161–63; Kramer 1982, 70). Such a correlation probably existed during Ubaid times as well. Rare and unusual goods which may indicate wealth, such as mace heads, tokens, ‘proto-tablets’, and highquality polished stone vessels, are found mostly in the largest excavated houses at Tell Abada (Stein 1994, 41). Ubaid chiefly elites probably grew out of large, geographically well-located families who consistently mobilized large farm labor through their kinship ties (Stein 1994, 41). Temples were the other and probably the more important source of surplus labor. Chiefs could enhance or extend their access to labor resources beyond the limits of kinship through the manipulation of community organizations such as temples (Stein 1994, 42). A cohesive, bonded community with formal institutions and ideologies that cut across kinship ties allows for the mobilization of labor beyond constraints of kinship. Ubaid must have been such a society. The widespread presence of temples in Ubaid communities shows the presence of a commonly accepted religious ideology. This environment made it possible for “Ubaid chiefs” to manage surplus food and labor on a larger scale while at the same time providing justification for their political power (Stein 1994, 42). In the case of Ubaid, the labor supply was provided by the populations displaced by the dramatic decline in climate conditions during the second

120

R. ERGENER

half of the sixth millennium. The administrative personnel to direct the labor was already present at the temples (Hole 1994, 139). A similar situation existed in south India, where Hindu temples “provided the institutional context for the social mobilization of both low ranked caste groups…and incipient political elites” (Appadurai and Breckenridge 1976, 189). Mesopotamia: Storage in Temples Temples in southern Mesopotamia stored surpluses and the disbursed them when necessary to the supporting population. By doing so, the temples provided a powerful buffer against the risk of subsistence failure, a very vital service. A relatively recent practice of wheat storage from northern Libya sheds light on what was happening with food storage in the temples of Mesopotamia (Hallaq 1994).

ASHWAZ OF NORTHERN LIBYA

Inhabitants of Akhdar Mountains in present-day northern Libya (Jabal al-Akhdar, ancient Cyrenaica), stored cereals in communal store houses known as awshaz (single washz), literally meaning “places which are difficult to reach.” When stored in a single mass, grain is more resistant to damp which cannot reach the center of a large quantity. Digging individual storage is more difficult than the digging of a single, large one. Individual storage areas take more space than the communal. There may also be reasons of belief. Inhabitants of Akhdar Mountains believed that baraka (fertility) descends into communal food and not descend into divided things. Even today the local people of the region eat their meals from a large communal dish. Records of the cereals kept in awshaz were transcribed on stone or broken pottery registers known as khattatat (Single khattata). The storekeeper, a person worthy of trust, received a quantity of grain as payment.

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

121

The storekeeper “supervised the grain store, protected and defended it and kept those who had deposited the grain informed of any eventualities.” He had to watch for traces of damp, for ants and other insects. He also had to protect the khattatat from counterfeiting or alteration. The storekeeper had the right to prepare some khattatat for his own use where he recorded the withdrawals by each person. Those who withdrew their grain from storage would take their own khattatat with them. The khattatat found in the storehouses are probably those belonging to the storekeepers.

Beginning during the Neolithic or even earlier, there are cases of food being stored in sacred areas with the members of the religious establishment functioning as the trusted storekeepers. In Egypt, more than 7000 years ago, a wind-deflated desert basin Nabta Playa served as a ritual center and also had storage pits for wild sorghum, grass seeds, tubers, legumes, and fruits (Flannery and Marcus 2012, 396). In Mesopotamia, as early as the Neolithic, the sacral organization had assumed control of food storage facilities (granaries) built at a distance from the settlements. By the second half of the fourth millennium, these facilities had been incorporated within temple complexes. Religious rituals such as the annual cleaning of storerooms provided both symbolic and actual protection for stored goods (Makkay 1983). Granaries associated with temples were elevated which provided protection from flooding, which could be catastrophic for the stored grains. But, flooding was otherwise useful for the growth of the plants that could be used for early summer forage (Hole 1994, 138). The temple establishment did not own the food and other items stored in temple complexes but they managed it, setting some aside for trade and some for the temple. It is not clear whether at the beginning, the sacral organization kept for the temple only the amount necessary to meet the needs of the temple staff and the costs of temple maintenance or more. It is very likely that a considerable part of the surplus was used to finance the temple management which explains the presence of large temple economies during the second half of the Ubaid period. The remains

122

R. ERGENER

of Khirbet el-Kerak suggest that with the Ubaid period, some of the surpluses kept in storage was already being used for non-religious purposes (Makkay 1983). The surplus appropriated by the temple in return for providing adequate storage facilities, and other services was augmented by the surplus presented in the form of offerings. Offerings to Temples Offerings to supernatural beings are an ancient practice ubiquitous among many different peoples at different times. Exchange with gods can take the form of unilateral sacrifice on behalf of humans with no expectations of reciprocation. Such was the case of gift exchange labeled as potlatch which was practiced by the clans of Northwest America. The competitive exchange between clans would put the burden of reciprocation on the other party. Both with the Kwakiutl and the Papuan potlaches, the gifts are not given with the aim of trying to draw a counter-gift from the gods, in the form of good weather for crops, or some such similar benefit that only gods (supernatural beings) can provide by “controlling the uncontrollable.” There were also other forms of sacrifice, with which one dedicates wealth to the supernatural on the basis of a give and take relationship. Even if the supernatural is a fiction, it can still be considered an active agent by those who do believe in it. The supernatural is supposed to be appeased, or to favor those who are constant to their “obligations” and those who “invest” on it. In other words sacrifice can be seen as an “uncertainty buffering mechanism” (Kyriakidis 2001, 129).

KWAKIUTL AND THE PAPUAN POTLACHES

With the Kwakiutl, the hosts would go as far as bankrupting themselves by destroying and burning property in order to display their unselfishness, power and wealth (Mauss 1967, 12). As Mauss notes, property destroyed in potlatches can be considered as gifts to god. A man who puts his slaves to death, burns his precious oil, throws

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

123

coppers into the sea and sets his house on fire is not only displaying his indifference to loss but also sacrificing to the gods and spirits (Mauss 1967, 14). Motu clans of Papua New Guinea had a different sort of potlach. Rival clans would present each other progressively larger amounts of bananas, the giving party enjoying temporary superiority, until its gift was reciprocated. Ultimately, the competition would end with both parties mutually presenting each other equal but large quantities of bananas (Gregory 1980, 629). At the conclusion, leaders of both clans would say to each other “We are equals now” (Gregory 1980, 630). This was a “gifts-to-men system” different from the “gifts-to-god system” of the classic potlatch type, which the Kwakiutl potlach was. A locally trained pastor who was appointed as head of the Poreporena church, near Port Moresby in Papua New Guinea, converted the traditional “gifts-to-men” system of the Motu clans to “giftsto-god system” with the difference that the gifts took the form of money and were appropriated by the church instead of being destroyed (Gregory 1980, 630). Faced with the problem of raising money for his church the pastor had designed a flag called Boubou Kwalim Toana (collectionwinner-sign) and arranged for the deacons, who were clan leaders, to compete for it in an annual gift-giving competition. The clan (iduhu) that raised the most money was given the flag to fly. In I950, the church raised 38% of its money by this method. In I979, the ratio had risen to 95% (Gregory 1980, 630).

Amassing Wealth in Temples Tribute given in return for what was perceived as gifts from gods was one of the main sources of revenue of the temples of ancient Mesopotamia. The temple was the receiver of many gifts from the devout followers of the deity, whose house the temple was. Dues of wheat, sesame, oil, fruits, wool, animals, etc. were received in large quantities (Price 1916). The offerings augmented the large reserves which the temple had already received in exchange for storage and various other services. These

124

R. ERGENER

reserves were partly used for the benefit of the community (e.g., in periods of famine), but a large portion was undoubtedly mobilized, mainly through trade, adding to the riches of the temples (Makkay 1983, 5).

Spread of Inequality Inequality has spread very rapidly during the course of last 10,000 years, replacing the hundreds of thousand years old egalitarian way of living. James Woodburn, one of the leading experts on the hunter-gatherer way of life, had enjoyed the egalitarian life style of the Hadza he studied so much that, at the end of the first few years he spent studying the Hadza, his friends and colleagues had great difficulty persuading him to come back to Cambridge to complete his thesis. Other authors do not think as highly of the egalitarian hunter-gatherer way of life. For instance, Carles Boix points out that “in equal, stateless communities, life will be short, poor, and given the social mechanisms in place to exact compliance from every individual, oppressive” (Boix 2015, 8). With strictly egalitarian societies, life is likely to be stagnant as innovation is tolerated only if all can copy it or if the benefits can be divided. “Many theories about the spread of stratified society begin with the idea that inequality is somehow a beneficial cultural trait that imparts efficiencies, motivates innovation and increases the likelihood of survival” (Rogers 2012). For example, the distinguished archaeologist Marcella Frangipane says: “The seed of inequality is terribly destabilizing and victorious, because it produces more dynamic societies, able to absorb contradictions and ready for change” (Frangipane 2007, 172). On the other hand, based on demographic simulations conducted at Stanford, Deborah Rogers makes the interesting point, that, in stable environments, rather than imparting advantages to the group, unequal access to resources is inherently destabilizing and greatly raises the chance of group extinction. Yet, the groups which were put at a disadvantage by the destabilizing effects of inequality, rather than becoming extinct, spread, as they chose to migrate in search of resources (Rogers 2012). Inequality is with us to stay, partly through the contribution of religion. In the next chapter, we shall see how religion contributes to the perpetuation of inequalities by defining and reinforcing hierarchies of dominance.

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

125

References Aldenderfer, Mark. 1993. “Ritual, Hierarchy, and Change in Foraging Societies.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 12 (1): 1–40. https://doi.org/10. 1006/jaar.1993.1001. ———. 2010. “Gimme That Old Time Religion: Rethinking the Role of Religion in the Emergence of Social Inequality.” In Pathways to Power: New Perspectives on the Emergence of Social Inequality, edited by T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, 77–94. Fundamental Issues in Archaeology. New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6300-0_4. Appadurai, Arjun, and Carol Appadurai Breckenridge. 1976. “The South Indian Temple: Authority, Honour and Redistribution.” Contributions to Indian Sociology 10 (2): 187–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/006996677601000201. Bar-Yosef, Ofer. 2001. From Sedentary Foragers to Village Hierarchies: The Emergence of Social Institutions. In The Origin of Human Social Institutions. G. Runciman. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Proceedings of the British Academy 110: 1–38. Bates, Daniel G. 1973. Nomads and Farmers: A Study of the Yörük of Southeastern Turkey. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. https://trove.nla.gov. au/version/25951044. Betzig, Laura L. 1986. Despotism and Differential Reproduction: A Darwinian View of History. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine. Bierstedt, Robert. 1950. “An Analysis of Social Power.” American Sociological Review 15 (6): 730–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/2086605. Bird-David, Nurit. 1990. “The Giving Environment: Another Perspective on the Economic System of Gatherer-Hunters.” Current Anthropology 31 (2): 189– 96. Blurton Jones, N. G. 1987. “Tolerated Theft, Suggestions About the Ecology and Evolution of Sharing, Hoarding and Scrounging.” Social Science Information 26 (1): 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901887026001002. Bohannan, Laura. 1953. The Tiv of Central Nigeria. London: International African Institute. Bohannan, Laura, and Paul Bohannan. 2017. The Tiv of Central Nigeria: Western Africa. Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge. Bohannan, Paul. 1955. “Some Principles of Exchange and Investment Among the Tiv.” American Anthropologist 57 (1): 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1525/ aa.1955.57.1.02a00080. ———. 1958. “Extra-Processual Events in Tiv Political Institutions.” American Anthropologist 60 (1): 1–12. Boix, Carles. 2015. Political Order and Inequality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bowles, Samuel, and Jung-Kyoo Choi. 2013. “Coevolution of Farming and Private Property during the Early Holocene.” Proceedings of the National

126

R. ERGENER

Academy of Sciences 110 (22): 8830–35. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1212149110. Drennan, Robert D, and K. V. Flannery, ed. 1976. “Religion and Social Evolution in Formative Mesoamerica.” In The Early Mesoamerican Village, 345–68. New York: Academic Press. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, Irenäus. 1974. “The Myth of the Aggression-Free Hunter and Gatherer Society.” In Primate Aggression, Territoriality and Xenophobia: A Comparative Perspective, edited by R. L. Holloway, 435–57. New York: Academic Press. https://pure.mpg.de/pubman/faces/ViewItemOverviewPage. jsp?itemId=item_2224537. Fernea, Robert. 1970. Shaykh and Effendi: Changing Patterns of Authority Among the El Shabana of Southern Iraq. Harvard Middle Eastern Studies 14. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Flannery, Kent V. 1972. “The Cultural Evolution of Civilizations.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 3 (1): 399–426. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.es.03.110172.002151. ———. 1968. “Archeological Systems Theory and Early Mesoamerica.” In Anthropological Archeology in the Americas, edited by B. J. Meggers, 67–87. Anthropological Society of Washington: Washington, DC. ———. 2002. “The Origins of the Village Revisited: From Nuclear to Extended Households.” American Antiquity 67 (3): 417–33. Flannery, Kent, and Joyce Marcus. 2012. The Creation of Inequality: How Our Prehistoric Ancestors Set the Stage for Monarchy, Slavery, and Empire. Harvard University Press. Frangipane, Marcella. 2007. “Different Types of Egalitarian Societies and the Development of Inequality in Early Mesopotamia.” World Archaeology 39 (2): 151–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240701249504. Fried, Morton H. 1960. On the Evolution of Social Stratificiation and the State. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill. Fry, Douglas P. 2006. “Reciprocity: The Foundation Stone of Morality.” In Handbook of Moral Development, edited by M. Killen and J. G. Smetana, 399–422. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Godelier, Maurice. 2011. The Mental and the Material. London: Verso Books. Granero, Fernando Santos. 1986. “Power, Ideology and the Ritual of Production in Lowland South America.” Man 21 (4): 657–79. https://doi.org/10. 2307/2802902. Gregory, C. A. 1980. “Gifts to Men and Gifts to God: Gift Exchange and Capital Accumulation in Contemporary Papua.” Man 15 (4): 626–52. https://doi. org/10.2307/2801537. Hallaq, Daud. 1994. “The Stone Tablet Registers (Khattatat), Centro Internazionale.” In Archchives Before Writing, Proceedings of the International Colloquium Oriolo Romano, October 23–25, 1991, edited by Piera Ferioli, Enrica

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

127

Fiandra, Gian Giacom Fissore, and Marcella Frangipane. Roma: Di Ricerche Archeologiche Antropologiche e Striche. Hayden, Brian. 1987. “Alliances and Ritual Ecstasy: Human Responses to Resource Stress.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 26 (1): 81–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1385842. ———. 1995. “Pathways to Power.” In Foundations of Social Inequality, edited by T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, 15–86. New York: Springer. ———. 2001. “Richman, Poorman, Beggarman, Chief: The Dynamics of Social Inequality.” In Archaeology at the Millennium, edited by Gary M. Feinman and T. Douglas Price, 231–72. New York: Springer. Hole, Frank. 1994. “Environmental Instabilities and Urban Origins.” In Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East: The Organizational Dynamics of Complexity, edited by Gill Stein, 236. Madison, WI: Prehistory Press. Irons, W. 1975. “The Yomut Turkmen: A Study of Social Organization among a Central Asian Turkic Speaking Population.” Anthropological Paper No. 58, Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor. University of Michigan. Jim, Suk Fong Theodora. 2014. Sharing with the Gods: Aparhai and Dekatai in Ancient Greece. Classical Monographs. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Knauft, Bruce M., Thomas S. Abler, Laura Betzig, Christopher Boehm, Robert Knox Dentan, Thomas M. Kiefer, Keith F. Otterbein, John Paddock, and Lars Rodseth. 1991. “Violence and Sociality in Human Evolution [and Comments and Replies].” Current Anthropology 32 (4): 391–428. Kramer, Carol. 1982. Village Ethnoarchaeology: Rural Iran in Archaeological Perspective. New York: Academic Press. Kummer, Hans. 1971. Primate Societies: Group Techniques of Ecological Adaptation. 1st ed. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Kyriakidis, Evangelos. 2001. “The Economics of Potnia: Storage in ‘Temples’ of Prehistoric Greece.” Aegaeum 22: 123–30. Labuza, T. P. 1982. Shelf-Life Dating of Foods. Westport, CT: Food & Nutrition Press. Lansing, J. Stephen. 1987. “Balinese ‘Water Temples’ and the Management of Irrigation.” American Anthropologist 89 (2): 326–41. Lee, Richard Borshay. 1979. The !Kung San: Men, Women and Work in a Foraging Society. Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press. Lips, Julius. 1947. Naskapi Law (Lake St. John and Lake Mistassini Bands). American Philosophical Society. https://books.google.com/books/about/ Naskapi_Law_Lake_St_John_and_Lake_Mistas.html?id=woI6AQAAIAAJ. Makkay, J. 1983. “The Origins of the ‘Temple-Economy’ as Seen in the Light of Prehistoric Evidence.” Iraq 45 (1): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.2307/4200170. Mann, Michael. 2012. The Sources of Social Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139236751.

128

R. ERGENER

Mauss, Marcel. 1967. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. New York: Norton. Mayshar, Joram, Omer Moavz, Zvika Neeman, and Luigi Pascali. 2016. “Cereals, Appropriability and Hierarchy.” Warwick Economics Research Papers, August. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.269316. Neale, Walter C. 1985. “Property in Land as Cultural Imperialism: Or, Why Ethnocentric Ideas Won’t Work in India and Africa.” Journal of Economic Issues 19 (4): 951–58. Netting, Robert. 1972. “Sacred Power and Centralization: Aspects of Political Adaptation in Africa.” Population Growth: Anthropological Implications, 219– 44. Price, Ira M. 1916. “Some Observations on the Financial Importance of the Temple in the First Dynasty of Babylon.” The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 32 (4): 250–60. https://doi.org/10. 1086/369799. Price, T. D., and J. A. Brown. 1985. “Aspects of Hunter-Gatherer Complexity.” In Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers: The Emergence of Cultural Complexity, edited by T. D. Price and J. A. Brown, 3–20. Orlando: Academic Press. Price, T. D., and Gary M. Feinman. 2010. “Social Inequality and the Evolution of Human Social Organization.” In Pathways to Power New Perspectives on the Emergence of Social Inequality, edited by T. D. Price and Gary M. Feinman. New York: Springer. Reader, Ian, Esben Andreasen, and Finn Stefánsson. 1993. Japanese Religions: Past and Present. Sandgate, Folkestone, Kent [England]: Japan Library. Rogers, Deborah. 2012. “Inequality: Why Egalitarian Societies Died Out.” New Scientist 2875. Salter, Frank K. 1995. Emotions in Command: A Naturalistic Study of Institutional Dominance. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Scheidel, Walter. 2017. The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century (The Princeton Economic History of the Western World). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Silver, Morris. 1989. Foundations of Economic Justice. Oxford, UK and New York, NY: Basil Blackwell. Smith, W. Robertson (William Robertson). 1927. Lectures on the Religion of the Semites : The Fundamental Institutions. London: A & C Black. Soffer, Olga. 2015. “Storage, Sedentism and the Eurasian Palaeolithic Record.” Antiquity 63 (241): 719–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/ s0003598x00076857. Southall, Aidan William. 1956. Alur Society; A Study in Processes and Types of Domination. Cambridge, UK: W. Heffer.

6

RELIGION AND THE RISE OF INEQUALITY

129

Stein, Gill. 1994. “Economy, Ritual and Power in Ubaid Mesopotamia.” In Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East : The Organizational Dynamics of Complexity, edited by Gill Stein and Mitchell S. Rothman. Madison, WI: Prehistory Press. Testart, Alain, Richard G. Forbis, Brian Hayden, Tim Ingold, Stephen M. Perlman, David L. Pokotylo, Peter Rowley-Conwy, and David E. Stuart. 1982. “The Significance of Food Storage among Hunter-Gatherers: Residence Patterns, Population Densities, and Social Inequalities [and Comments and Reply].” Current Anthropology 23 (5): 523–37. Tiger, Lionel, and Robin Fox. 1971. The Imperial Animal. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. White, Richard. c1983. The Roots of Dependency: Subsistence, Environment, and Social Change Among the Choctaws, Pawnees, and Navajos. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Wiessner, Polly, and Akii Tumu. 1999. “A Collage of Cults.” Canberra Anthropology 22 (1): 34–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/03149099909508357. Wiessner, Polly, Shankar Aswani, Chris Ballard, Christopher Boehm, John E. Clark, Brian Hayden, Jrg Helbling, Mitsuo Ichikawa, Anton Ploeg, and Paul Roscoe. 2002. “The Vines of Complexity: Egalitarian Structures and the Institutionalization of Inequality among the Enga.” Current Anthropology 43 (2): 233–69. Woodburn, James. 1982. “Egalitarian Societies.” Man 17 (3): 431. https://doi. org/10.2307/2801707. Wright, Robert. 2009. The Birth and Growth of Gods. New York: Little, Brown and Company. Wyatt, Nicolas. 1988. “When Adam Delved: The Meaning of Genesis III 23.” Vetus Testamentum 38 (Fasc. 1): 117–122.

CHAPTER 7

Religion and Hierarchies of Dominance

PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER ON THE OPPRESSION OF WOMEN: The male interpretations of religious texts and the way they interact with, and reinforce, traditional practices justify some of the most pervasive, persistent, flagrant and damaging examples of human rights abuses. (Carter 2009)

Jimmy Carter, President of the United States 1977–1981, has been a sincere and active Christian throughout his life. He has been a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. In his words, his faith has been “a source of strength and comfort to” him “as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world” (Carter 2009). Yet, late in his life, the President took the painful and difficult step of severing his ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, which he had been a member of for six decades. Jimmy Carter thought that the decision to part with his Church had become unavoidable, when the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention, “ordained that women must be ‘subservient’ to their husbands and prohibited” them “from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.” The leaders of the © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_7

131

132

R. ERGENER

convention had based their decision on a few Bible verses according to which Eve is created after Adam and is accountable for the original sin. According to Carter, these verses were carefully selected and were in conflict with the Holy Scriptures which he believed confirmed “that we are all equal in the eyes of God” (Carter 2009). Later in his life, Carter would declare that from that point on, fighting against injustice against girls and women would be his “his highest priority” (Carter 2015).

Oppression and Discrimination “Injustice against girls and women” is one of the many different types of oppression and discrimination which humans are often subject to in various degrees in their everyday lives (Sidanius et al. 2004, 847). Oppression and discrimination tend to be group-based (Sidanius et al. 2004, 847). Members of dominant groups strive to make themselves better off at the expense of groups, which are rendered as subordinate, by securing access to resources and privileges for members of their (dominant) group and denying it to others (subordinates) (Pratto et al. 2006, 279). Members of the dominant groups get to enjoy more of the good food, housing, schooling, health care and political power and other benefits than what could be justified by their share of the population (Pratto et al. 2006, 272). Conversely, negative social value is disproportionately imposed on the subordinates in the form of poor quality housing, poor or no health care, unemployment, dangerous and difficult to enjoy jobs, excessive punishment, branding, and denigration (Brown 1991; Lenski 1984; for example, Tilly c1998 cited in Pratto et al. 2006, 272). There are three group-based dominance systems which are qualitatively distinct from each other. One is based on gender, the other on age and the third includes all those which are based on arbitrary features. Within the gender system, men control disproportionately more social, political, and military power as compared with women. Within the age system, elders possess unequal social power over youngsters. This type of dominance relation is cyclical as one experiences being both a subordinate youngster and a dominant elder during the course of the life cycle. Arbitrary-set groups are based on social distinctions such as nationality, race, ethnicity, class, estate, descent, clan, or religion (Pratto et al. 2006, 274).

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

133

Gender- and age-based dominance seem to be deep rooted and very widespread, if not universal. Even with Hadzas, who are egalitarian in every other way, males are dominant over women and elders over youngers (Marlowe 2010). Gender-based social dominance may be integral to understanding social hierarchy because it is at the core of both social and material wellbeing and of social reproduction. Meeting such basic needs is in the family domain. In meeting these needs, women in almost all societies do more work than man, cooking, cleaning the house and taking care of children (Pratto and Walker 2004). Women belonging to subordinate groups can be employed by the dominants to do housework, but not the other way around (Pratto et al. 2006, 295). The boundaries of arbitrary-set groups and what their distinctive features are, harder to define. Impact of arbitrary-set hierarchies can go beyond their own spheres and influence the relations between the dominant and the subjugated in gender- and age-based hierarchies. For example, as Carter points out, there are variations in gender-based systems of dominance under different religions. Psychological, socio-structural, ideological, institutional, and other forces jointly contribute to the creation and continuation of oppression. Coercion and violence are often used. The level of violence employed varies across different societies and over time (Pratto et al. 2006, 274). In general, the degree of violence observed with arbitrary-set systems is much more severe than the violence observed with the age or gender systems (Pratto et al. 2006, 274). For, arbitrary-set systems are often about the subjugation of coalitions of men by coalitions of other men, and this tends to be tougher and require more effort than the subjugation of women or children by men.

Myths: Attenuating and Enhancing Oppression Myths and institutions are employed to define arbitrary-set systems of dominance and to modify the relations between the dominant and dominated in both gender-based and arbitrary-based systems. Defined as “consensually held values, attitudes, beliefs, stereotypes, and cultural ideologies,” myths can be employed either to legitimize or to attenuate dominance hierarchies and the related oppression and inequality (Pratto et al. 2006, 275).

134

R. ERGENER

Justification for group-based oppression and inequality is provided by hierarchy-enhancing myths (Pratto et al. 2006, 275). Hierarchyattenuating myths on the other hand counter dominance. Socialist, social democrat and communist political teachings and religious ones based on the new testament, which are egalitarian and doctrines such as universal human rights, children’s rights and feminism, which are humanist, are all examples of hierarchy-attenuating myths (Pratto et al. 2006, 276).

Institutions: Attenuating and Enhancing Oppression Institutions, such as governments and corporations, rather than individuals are the major forces which create, maintain, and recreate systems of group-based dominance. Institutions are capable of allocating resources on larger scale, more systematically, and in a more stable manner than individuals generally can. Large institutions have a larger “reach” in terms of systematic influence over larger areas. Also, as institutions are perpetual, the discrimination they practice can be perpetuated over generations. When challenged, discrimination by an institution is often defended as defending the institution itself. Internal standards coordinate those who work for institutions and homogenize the personal dissimilarities among them. Finally, individuals working for many institutions, including the military and corporations, are likely not to be held accountable for their actions, as the institution they are working for is likely to be covered by legal immunity (Pratto et al. 2006, 277). Internal security organizations such as Gestapo, KGB, SAVAK, FBI, and criminal justice systems are examples of influential hierarchyenhancing institutions. Criminal justice systems contribute to enforce group dominance and control. Worldwide, as compared with dominants, members of subjugated groups are over-represented in prison and torture cells and in execution chambers. This is after taking into consideration the different criminality rates between groups.1 For example, in the United States, the incarceration rate for African Americans is six times more than what it is for whites (See Ch. 8 in Sidanius 1999).

1 See Sidanius and Pratto (1999, Ch. 8).

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

135

There are hierarchy-attenuating institutions as well. Hierarchyattenuating institutions, whether civic or religious, strive to improve civil rights, civil liberties, and welfare. These institutions provide relief and aid for members of discriminated against ethnic, racial, and religious minorities, which make up the subjugated groups, opening up for them access to resources, particularly public services. As compared with hierarchy-enhancing institutions, hierarchyattenuating ones are considerably weaker as they are likely to be missing a supporting legal framework and sizeable and permanent funds. Unlike the criminal justice and employment sectors, which can allocate negative social value such as prison terms and dangerous work to subordinates, hierarchy-attenuating institutions can seldom allocate negative social value of any sort to the dominants (Pratto et al. 2006, 277). Overall, one can say that it is easier to perform actions that maintain or enhance, rather than attenuate inequality and hierarchy. Members of more powerful groups tend to behave in their own interest more so than the members of subordinate groups (Sidanius et al. 2004, 848). Subordinates on the other hand are likely to engage in behavior which is against their own personal interest and against the interest of the group they belong to (Pratto et al. 2006, 279). This process is known as self-debilitation. Frequent criminal behavior, violence aimed at one’s own group, drug use, truancy, and school attrition are examples of selfdebilitating behavior (Ch. 8 in Sidanius 1999). Subordinate groups are looked down upon and disdained by dominant ones yet their existence is necessary for the dominant to dominate—“no subordinates” would mean that there are “no dominants.”

Religion and Oppression Jimmy Carter is a member of the very small but influential “Elders” group, made up of independent world leaders, who were brought together in 2007 by Nelson Mandela. Elders are committed to work for peace and human rights and are therefore a hierarchy-attenuating institution. Elders regard all religions as sources of hierarchy-attenuating myths and ask “leaders of all religions to have the courage to acknowledge and emphasize the positive messages of dignity and equality that” world’s major faiths all share (Carter 2009).

136

R. ERGENER

The role historically played by religion with regard to relations of dominance has been a lot more complicated than simply providing “positive messages of dignity and equality,” as the Elders claimed. Major faiths have provided some of the more powerful myths and institutions that define arbitrary-set groups. Furthermore, religion has provided the institutional framework and the myths which contribute to enhance or to attenuate dominance. Religious institutions and texts have served different purposes at different times and places. A religion that starts out as a hierarchy-attenuating institution can be transformed into a hierarchy-enhancing one over time. This being said, historically, religion has been mostly used to define and enhance dominance hierarchies. Religious legitimation makes unequal distribution of income look like a part of the cosmic order of things. Also, religious legitimation diverts attention away from the material to the spiritual or moral domain and devalues this-worldly existence in favor of the spiritual realm. This renders the hardships and suffering of the subordinates as unworthy of serious attention. Pharaohs of ancient Egypt claimed to be gods. Many other rulers claimed to be representatives of gods, in possession of the divine right to rule. The special relationships they had with gods would justify the inordinate share of everything these rulers enjoyed. In classical Greece and Rome (as in many other civilizations), the treasures stored in temples were regarded as a manifestation of the achievements of the city. Monuments and temples dedicated to gods confirmed the social order. Religious processions attended by the people processing according to their social rank, served the same purpose (Fox 1986, 80). Gifts to gods strengthened social order. As the senior partners in the distribution of wealth, Gods were the first to receive their share in any kind of distribution. Confirming the share of gods confirmed the share of others, large and small, as well (Burkert 1987, 47). Gifts honored the deities while at the same time allowing the donor to demonstrate his wealth and power. By giving lavish gifts to gods, high status individuals sought to prove the special relations they claimed they had with gods as well as their own prominence and superiority (Burkert 1987, 49). Physical force is often necessary to establish and solidify social hierarchy but not sufficient to maintain it in the long run, as use of force generates strong resentment and raises the threat of an uprising. Use of force is also

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

137

costly—costlier than the employment of an ideological system that persuades both the elites and the subordinates that the system of oppression is morally and intellectually legitimate. With the rise of capitalism and secularism, teaching of economics has been employed to legitimize inequality. It is the supposedly objective forces of supply and demand, which determine who are going to be rich and who poor. Previously, it was religion which performed this task— which it still does today, together with the teachings of economics. Inequality becomes more acceptable to the subordinates, if it is the status quo. Justifications make the subordinates accept their positions more comfortably (Haines and Jost 2000). And one of the strongest justifications for the visible superiority of the dominants with regard to outlook, housing, living—standards and level of sophistication has been, that this is the will of God—and not subject to change. As such, social institutions assume the stability and the inevitability which are characteristic of the ultimate spiritual and material truths. As Berger puts it, “Theodicies provide the poor with a meaning for their poverty, but may also provide the rich with a meaning for their wealth” (Berger 2011, 59). Religion is also a source of comfort for the poor. The hardships the believers are experiencing today will be made up by the greater power, later in their lives, and if not, in the other life. Believers also receive considerable support from religious organizations. For all these reasons, religiosity spreads among the poor with the rise of inequality. At the same time, as inequality rises, religion becomes more attractive not only to the poor but also to the rich. Social discontent and demands for redistribution spread with the rise of inequality. Under the circumstances, religion is a powerful tool to justify the existing social structure. According to a study conducted in the United States, the more religious are more likely to passively accept their place in society (Jacobson 1999). A study conducted simultaneously in Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish societies found that religiosity is correlated positively with values such as status quo and conformity and negatively with values like independent thinking and openness to change (Schwartz and Huismans 1995). As pointed out by Stark, “religion not only bids the deprived to accept their lot but maintains that it is the just outcome of rules that are the best possible, indeed, in some instances divinely inspired” (Stark 1964, 702). It would therefore be in the interests of the wealthy to be more religious themselves and to spread it using their economic power. Wealthy individuals respond to the rise of inequality by becoming more

138

R. ERGENER

religious and by spreading religiosity among the poorer members of society, rather than by allowing income redistribution to take place (Solt et al. 2011).

Religion and Subordination of Women First institutionalized form of hierarchy was slavery and first slaves were women and children—as women and children are easier to subdue than men. Initially, it was all men dominating all women and later it became some men dominating other men and all women. Rather than use of physical force, rape was sufficient to break in female slaves, who were expected to be attached to their captors once they were pregnant. What led to do demise of women was probably the long period of nourishment it takes to bring up the human infant. Women probably preferred to have less mobile lives, leaving mostly to men, tasks like the hunt and violent expeditions against other tribes, which enabled men to learn how to use violence to subdue others—a skill which they applied to capture and rule female slaves (Lerner 1987). The subordinate role of women continued through ages. Various religions have played an important role in the definition of gender-based inequalities. There are marked differences between religions and their subgroups with regard to the rights of women and to the roles women are permitted to play in society. These positions are subject to change over time and also in between different congregations of the same faith. Verses from the Bible have been used both to enhance and to attenuate the subordinate role of women. Paul invoked the creation myth to argue that women should cover their heads in church as a sign of their subordination to males, which is how the divine order was supposedly ordained. The proof is that a woman is created from and for man, not the other way around (I Corinthians II:3–16). 1 Timothy recalls Eve’s sin and commands that women must keep silent and never claim authority over man. After all, it was not Adam but Eve who was deceived. The only way out for women is to be modest, to have faith and to bear children (1 Timothy 2:11–15). Since Christ is the head of mankind and husband the head of wife (1 Corinthians 11:3), husband had to love his wife as if she were his own body and the wife had to accept the superior judgment of husband, as if he were her own head (Ephesians 5:28–33) (Pagels 1989, 54).

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

139

How he performed as a family patriarch, keeping his wife and children submissive and in line was an indication of the leadership abilities of a man (Pagels 1989, 25). How could a man that could not manage his house obviously could not manage a parish either? (1 Timothy 3:2–5). Yet, for Jimmy Carter and the Elders “the justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion or tradition,” was unacceptable (Carter 2009). They believed that the “carefully selected” Bible verses which are used to justify the superiority of men, are more the outcome of the efforts by male leaders to retain their influence—than eternal truths. Women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers, and prophets during the early Christian church. “It wasn’t until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy” (Carter 2009).

Attenuating Oppression: Early Christianity Christianity had indeed started out as being opposed to dominance hierarchies of any sort. Clement of Alexandria claimed that the statement that God had created humanity in his own image (Genesis 1, 26) meant that all humans were created equal. Centuries later, in 1776, these ideas would form the basis of the western ideals of freedom and equality expressed in the US Declaration of Independence and would transform the Western political institutions as well as ethics and law (Pagels 1989, xx). Based on this vision of human nature early Christians made the attempt to create a new society where, in the words of Tertullian, everything was voluntary among them. Rather than giving to the Caesar what is due to Caesar, early Christians preferred to use the money they would have paid as taxes to fund Emperor’s wars and palaces, to support the destitute, the needy and the sick, whether young or old or even dead, as Christians paid for burial expenses as well. The old, the orphans, and the widows were attracted to the movement by the generosity of Christians, who shared everything except their spouses, unlike the pagan Romans, who shared nothing but their spouses (Pagels 1989, 50). Following such teachings, pious individuals like Pinian and Melania, she at twenty and he at twenty-four and married for six years, put on the attire of peasants made of rough clothes, gave up their usual commitments and devoted themselves to fulfilling the injunctions of Christ,

140

R. ERGENER

hosting strangers, giving money to the poor, paying for the release of those held in mines and prisons for debt (Pagels 1989, 87). The “Sermon of the Mount” which according to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus delivered to his disciples and to multitudes in the desert, provided the guidance to Pinian and Melania and to those who were on the same path with them. The poor were blessed because the kingdom of heaven was theirs (Matthew 5:2–3). The treasures in the kingdom of heaven could not be stolen and could not be corrupted by moth or by rust whereas worldly treasures could always be corrupted or stolen. Jesus himself would live and die poor, setting an example for others to follow (Janes 1998, 61). As we are going to discuss in the remaining sections of this chapter, over the centuries, the Catholic Church has diverged from these initial aspirations. The definition of the role of the Catholic Church adopted at the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) called in 1962 by Pope John XXIII was more in line with the teachings of early Christians. The council was called to give a message to the modern world. According to the council resolutions, individuals of different means and abilities who made up the congregation of Christians were all equal in the eyes of God and shared the same destiny. They were to be known as the “People of God” (Christian S. Smith 1991, 96; cited in Williams 2000, 1). The church would actively take sides with the poor in their conflicts with their rich. In order to reach the poor, the church would adopt a more modest attitude (Berryman 1987, 7; cited in Williams 2000, 1). Association of the church with the powerful elites was refused (Christian S. Smith 1991, 97; cited in Williams 2000, 1), and it was confirmed that the world order was in need of being more just (McGovern 1989, 5; cited in Williams 2000, 1). The Latin American bishops, who did not play an active role in the formulation and the adoption of the council resolutions, were nevertheless keen to apply the resolutions back home, reconsidering the relations of the church with the oppressive social order prevailing in their dioceses (Williams 2000, 1).

Enhancing Oppression: Christianity After Constantine Despite egalitarian beginnings, throughout its long history, Christianity was to be associated not only with relieving the suffering of the poor, but perhaps even more so, with maintaining and justifying the power of

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

141

wealthy elites. The Church institution itself would be an instrument of wealth extraction. This transformation took place rather early in the history of the Church. By the fourth century, Bishop of Constantinople John Chrysostom (“Golden Mouth”) was complaining that (at least some) Church government had become corrupt and source of profits for office holders.2 Chrysostom’s vision of the church had been shaped by heroic fathers such as Justin,3 Athenagoras,4 Clement, and Origen.5 He was upset and angry that the standards of the churches of his day, which he knew in Antioch and Constantinople, fell far short of these earlier ones. Chrysostom was vocal in expressing his grief and anger: (Pagels 1989, 104) Plagues, teeming with untold mischiefs, have come upon the churches. The primary offices have become marketable. Hence innumerable evils are arising, and there is no one to redress, no one to reprove them. Indeed, the disorder has taken on a kind of method and consistency of its own. (Chrysostom, Homilae in Epistolam ad Ephesios, 6, 7)

Chrysostom claimed that the integrity of the churches was destroyed by too many riches, excessive power, and unashamed luxury. Bishops were appointed on the basis of wealth, family ties, or partisanship. Nobody sought for “excellence of character,” which should have been the only valid criterion (Pagels 1989, 104). All this made Christians subject of ridicule among the pagans (Pagels 1989, 104).

2 Archbishop of Constantinople, an important church father, known for his preaching and public speaking and his denunciation of abuse of authority by both ecclesiastical and political leaders, c. 349–407. 3 An early Christian apologist who was martyred in the second century and is considered as a saint in the Catholic Church. 4 Christian apologist who lived during the second half of the second century, a philosopher who converted to Christianity. 5 An early Christian theologian who was a scholar and ascetic c. 184/185–253/25.

142

R. ERGENER

“Becoming a bishop in the fourth century guaranteed a man tax exemptions, vastly increased income, social power, imperial gifts and possibly even influence at court?” (Pagels 1989, 105, xxv) Bishops were actually in alliance with the Emperors, giving support to the political hierarchy. Emperors had become patrons of Christianity, the implicit assumption being that the Christians they ruled were not capable of governing themselves. Christians who were martyred by the Romans as criminals would have been of the contrary opinion that humans were capable of governing themselves. Justification for this was in Genesis 1 which not only said that God had made man in his image but had given him “dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth” (Genesis 1, 27), thereby giving the power of earthly rule to Adam. Adam’s story which is given in Genesis 2 was interpreted by early Christians to mean that man had a divinely given capacity for free will. The story of Adam was a warning not to misuse that capacity (Pagels 1989, 108). As a young priest in Antioch, John Chrysostom would argue that because man was created in the image of God, the right government belonged not to the emperor but to the whole human race. Just like there was none greater than God in the firmaments, there was none greater on earth than humanity (Pagels 1989, 100). But, Genesis 2 could also be used to legitimize man’s need to be governed. After all, according to Genesis 2 man was created out of dust and Adam committed a major sin by giving in to the temptation to eat the forbidden fruit. Humankind was the product of that sin. The church was needed to guide humankind to stay away from sin. This was why St. Augustine endorsed the use of threats, commands, coercion, penalties, and even physical force by the church minister to discipline humanity which had been tainted with sin (Pagels 1989, 117). The approach to the Christian god of Constantine the Great, the emperor who legitimized Christianity, was different from the approach of early Christians and resembled the approach of the pagan emperors toward pagan deities. Christians had disdained the pagans who believed that success was accorded to them because of the piety, which they showed to their pagan gods, in the form of giving gifts. Constantine backed the Christian God by massive patronage. Previous Roman Emperors who were pagan “had always honored their favored gods with benefactions and buildings. Constantine’s patronage for the

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

143

Christian God was so lavish that he had to strip resources from temples to fund it. One of his early foundations in Rome was the church of St. John Lateran, whose the apse was to be coated in gold. Around 500 pounds’ weight of it were needed at a cost of some 36,000 solidi. This sum, which might be translated into approximately £60 million today, could have fed about 12,000 poor for a year (according to calculations from Dominic Janes’ God and Gold in Late Antiquity (1998). Another 22,200 solidi worth of silver (3700 lbs.) was required for light fittings and another 400 pounds of gold for fifty gold vessels. The costs of lighting were to be met by estates specifically granted for the purpose which brought in 4390 solidi a year. Everything in these new churches had to be of the highest quality. “While early Christian decoration, in the catacombs or house churches, for instance, had been painted walls, now nothing less than mosaic was appropriate. In order to make the effect more brilliant, the mosaics were made of gold, silver or precious stones set within glass” (Freeman 2001, 12). Under Constantine’s rule, “statues of pagan gods were brought out” of the dark recesses where they were kept in their respective temples to daylight. The valuable materials which adorned the images were stripped and melted down (Janes 1998, 53). The precious metal was used to decorate the churches, which were in contrast to pagan temples, adorned with splendors (Janes 1998, 53). The Church accepted its new buildings and new interpretation was given to the scriptures to justify the fortunes spent on these buildings. The horrified Jerome wrote “Parchments were dyed purple, gold is melted into lettering, manuscripts are dressed up in jewels, while Christ lies at the door naked and dying” (Freeman 2001, 13). Purple which was used to dye Church documents was very expensive as it would take twelve hundred Mediterranean mollusks (murex) to obtain 1.6 grams of purple dye. According to the Diocletian’s price edict issued in 301, one pound of best purple wool was worth one pound of gold (Janes 1998, 37). Gold, jewelry, and purple are elite markers which show social distinction. The bestowing of riches on to the churches by Constantine was part of his effort to gain and maintain the dominance of the church and of himself as the emperor, through the Church (Janes 1998, 13).

144

R. ERGENER

Christianity and War In 312 Constantine who was the senior Emperor at the time confronted the usurper Maxentius who was holding Rome and the provinces in Africa. Armies of the two went to war at the Milvian Bridge, just to the north of Rome. According to the account of Lactantius,6 the night before the battle Constantine had a dream instructing him to have his soldiers put on their shields the heavenly sign of God Chi-Ro.7 According to another version of the story narrated by Constantine to his biographer Eusebius, at some moment before the battle, a cross made of light appears in the sky with the inscription “By this conquer.” The message is confirmed by Christ who appears in a dream and instructs him to have the cross on his standards as a protection against enemies (Fox 1986, 616). After having his vision Constantine had craftsmen make a gilded spear with a crossbar (labarum 8 ). The wreath of gold and gems at the top had a chi-rho in its midst. A gem-embroidered cloth was suspended from the crossbar. A golden half size portrait of Constantine and his children was also made. It has been suggested that the chi-rho was a solar symbol. The cross could also be understood as a reference to the four points of the compass. But it was subsequently to be adopted as a Christian symbol. Constantine also had a crux gemmata (Latin for jeweled cross, a form of cross which is at least its front side, decorated with jewels.) on the golden ceiling of the imperial palace (Janes 1998, 53). Constantine had used Christianity to mobilize his soldiers and enhance his war effort as a means to assert his dominance. Previously, pagan Romans had also used their religion to mobilize the Roman war effort toward Roman dominance. Success, Romans believed, was a reward which they were entitled to in return for their consummate piety. It was because of their unique devotion to religion, Romans had been raised to such heights of power as to become masters of the world (Pagels 1989, 54). Early Christian apologists had attacked not only the pagan gods and the imperial cult, but also the myths which legitimized the origins of the Roman Empire. In its place, they had offered a condemning 6 An early Christian author (c. 250–c. 325) who became an advisor to Constantine the Great. 7 One of the earliest forms of christogram formed by superimposing the first two (capital) letters chi and rho (XP) of the Greek word “XPITO” = KHRistos = Christ. 8 Military standard that displayed the “Chi-Rho.”

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

145

and demythologizing view of Roman history. Tertullian, for example, challenged the myth that the gods had rewarded the Romans for their devotion with their empire. On the contrary, said Tertullian, “if I am not mistaken, kingdoms and empires are acquired by wars, and expanded by victories. Moreover, you cannot have wars and victories without taking and often destroying cities” (Pagels 1989, 54). In their wars of conquest, he continued, the Romans “have destroyed and despoiled temples indiscriminately with houses and palaces.” The Romans succeeded, he concluded not because of their piety, but by subordinating their supposed piety to their obsession for conquest (Pagels 1989, 54). Minucius Felix9 also argued that the founders of the Roman Empire were a coalition of criminals and murderers: “Did not (the Romans) in their origin, when gathered together and fortified by crime, grow by the terror of their own ferocity?” (Minucius Felix 1643; cited in Pagels 1989, 54). They initiated conflict against the peoples who bordered them, devastated their cities, raping and enslaving the residents and driving out the survivors (Pagels 1989, 54). According to Felix, “The Romans were not so great because they were religious, but because they were sacrilegious with impunity” (Minucius Felix 1643; cited in Pagels 1989, 54). One of the best-known fusions of religion and war is the Crusades. Throughout the Crusades the Catholic Church provided the myths and the institutions which contributed to enhance the dominance of Christian West over the Muslim East and of the Christian feudal—military aristocracy in general as well as of the church itself. At the outset, crusading armies were almost wholly raised, supported, and directed by the church. The First Crusade is unique because it was based on the premise that it was legitimate for the church to follow its aims through military means. Later crusades were sponsored and directed by national states. Yet, the Catholic Church continued to support the Crusades in various ways. The Church offered temporal (worldly) benefits to individual crusaders by providing them with immunity from secular prosecution, variety of tax privileges including amnesty from secular taxation for the duration of the crusade, exemption from secular control of their property, credit to buy weapons and finance knights and protection for their wives and children (Anderson et al. 1992). 9 One of the earliest of the Latin apologists for Christianity. Little is known about his

life.

146

R. ERGENER

Salvation (otherworldly) benefits were also provided. Those who joined the Crusades were promised “paradise and remission from their sins.” Crusaders were absolved from penance, an especially sacred ceremony (a sacrament), consisting of a confession of sin, made with sorrow and with the intention of amendment, followed by the forgiveness of the sin. Absolution from penance was the origin of the concept of “indulgence.” Eventually, awarding of indulgences would be commercialized. The proceeds of indulgences were meant to be spent on crusades, but no doubt some of it would be profits for the church (Anderson et al. 1992). This was one of the cases of the Church enjoying material benefits itself while providing support for the political and military establishment. The right to pillage and plunder without fear of secular or religious sanction was also rendered officially legitimate for the crusaders by the Church, so long as the victims were infidels. But such activities could be directed also against fellow Christians, as with the Fourth Crusade, which ended with the sacking of the Orthodox Christian Constantinople (Anderson et al. 1992). Crusades provided a powerful fiscal rationalization for new taxes. The Papacy sanctioned new taxes to pay for the expenses of the Crusader campaigns. According to the Lateran IV Council one twentieth of all ecclesiastical revenues would be given to the Papacy for three years and according to the Lyons II Council one tenth of all ecclesiastical revenues would be given to the Papacy for six years. The church introduced fortythree new levies between 1188 and 1326. A huge profit was made by the Papacy, as all of this revenue was not spent on war (Anderson et al. 1992). The church profited from the loans made to crusaders who were in need of cash to finance their effort. A Papal Bull (a formal Papal document having a bulla or seal attached) related to the Second Crusade had exempted crusaders from paying usury. Since lenders were under no obligation to lend at zero interest, this bull destroyed credit worthiness of crusaders, leaving them with no other recourse but to borrow from the church itself. The Church would exploit the situation for its own benefit. Of course, the church was not supposed to charge interest. But interest could easily be hidden as “intertemporal exchange” or as “gift exchange.” For example, a crusader who borrowed from a monastery would in effect pay interest by renting his land to the same monastery while at the same time remitting rent for a certain number of years (Anderson et al. 1992).

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

147

Profits were to be made for the Church from the buyback of crusader oaths. Revenues from such buybacks were meant to be spent on crusades, but in reality most of such revenues were spent on activities such as the travel expenses of clergy, which were supposedly related to crusades (Anderson et al. 1992). Securing of the pilgrimage routes to the Holy Land was one of the main aims of the Crusades. Pilgrimages, which had started during the fourth century, had become increasingly popular by the eleventh century. Pilgrims were an important source of income because of the donations they made to the monasteries on the route and at the destination and the donations they made to the church of Holy Sepulcher. Pilgrims were avid buyers of relics such as the bones of the Apostles and Saints, pieces of the true cross, the Holy Grail and so on. These were in demand because of the miraculous properties attributed to them (Anderson et al. 1992).

Islam: Holy Jihad Another well-known case of the fusion of religion and war is the military expansion of Islam following the mass conversion of Arabs to the religion. In order to understand how the mass conversions to Islam took place among Arab tribes, one needs to consider the pre-Islamic pagan background. In pre-Islamic Arabia, tribal gods were not embodiments of the definitive meanings concerning the various features and wisdoms of life, but they were definitely the sources of wonders observable in this world. “More precisely, they were ultimate sources of all those phenomena that are of great importance in human society, but beyond direct human control: rain, fertility, disease, the knowledge of soothsayers, the nature of social groups and so forth. They were worshipped for all (Crone 1987, 237) the practical services they could render in respect of these phenomena.” Gods were to be invoked and manipulated so that they would use their powers on behalf of their devotees (Wellhausen 1897, 213 cited in Crone 1987, 238). “Tribal gods” of prehistoric Arabs “did not request and did not receive emotional commitment, love or loyalty from their devotees.” There is the story of the members of the Banu Hanifa10 tribe eating an idol which

10 An ancient Arab tribe which inhabited the area of al-Yamama, which is in central modern Saudi Arabia.

148

R. ERGENER

they had made of dates and clarified butter—during a famine, after having worshipped the idol for a while (Crone 1987, 238). Much in the same sprit a modern Bedouin pledges to God half of an animal he will hunt. Having hunted, he takes away and eats his share, leaving the other half to God, as he had pledged. His hunger not fully eliminated, he sneaks back and successfully steals the half he had pledged to God and consumes it as well. His justification being that he had a right to God’s share, as God had failed to protect it (Ibn Qutayba, 1970 cited in Crone 1987, 238). There was no point in serving a god who did not use his powers in favor of his subjects. Gods who failed to perform were therefore abandoned with ease, as a pre-Islamic tribesman did with his idol Sa’d, when Sa’d dispersed his camels, rather than keeping them together (Ibn al Kalbi 1914 cited in Crone 1987, 238). Gods who performed on the other hand could be adopted with similar ease and speed. When a Christian monk cured their chief of childlessness, a whole tribe abandoned their pagan gods and adopted Christianity (Sozomen 1855 cited in Crone 1987, 238). If pre-Islamic Arabs were so practical and worldly with their religious choices, unless they had unexpectedly turned very spiritual for some reason, Allah must have had an attractive offer for them to become Muslims. Patricia Crone proposes that what Islam offered Arabs was a program for state formation, the creation of an umma, conquest and jihad (Crone 1987, 242). Arab tribes in pre-Islamic Arabia had been divided, each following their own ancestral deities. Muhammed united them under one ancestral deity, the God of Abraham, the ancestor of all Arabs (Crone 1987, 43). United under one banner, Arab tribes would channel outward the martial energies they had been wasting against each other and turn into conquerors. Tribal states need to conquer to survive and tribesmen were willing fighters. A God that asked them to conquer would raise their tribal militancy into supreme religious virtue. For example, on the eve of the Battle of Qadissiya,11 Arab soldiers were told with reference to Iraq, “if you hold out … then their property, their women, their children, and their country will be yours” (Crone 1987, 245–49). In other words, according to 11 A decisive battle fought between the Arab Muslim army and the Sassanid Persian army in 636 during the first period of Muslim expansion. It was the key to the Islamic conquest of Iraq and led to the Islamic conquest of Persia.

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

149

Islam, victorious Arabs not only had the right but also a duty to despoil the defeated. Why Islam emerged in the seventh century and not before may be because Arabs were under pressure both from Byzantium and from the Sassanids at the time. As Mughira b. Shu’ba12 explained to a Persian commander, before God sent his Prophet to them, Arabs were the victims. Other peoples crushed them under their feet while Arabs trampled no one. One of the promises of the Prophet was that they would conquer and overcome (Crone 1987, 245–49). Muslim Arab victors would be entitled to spoils of those they had defeated. But the defeated were not necessarily forcefully converted to Islam. Rather, Muslims had a system which made the perpetuation of the non-Muslim community under conquest, rather than its elimination, more beneficial for the Muslim conquerors.

Muslim Empires: Tolerance and Dominance Muslims regard Christians, Jews and also Sabians13 and Zoroastrians,14 as “people of the book” who were to be treated and judged accordingly (Qur’an V, 51.). Even though they were somewhat lesser people, there were no instructions in the Qur’an for the extermination or the forced conversion of the “people of the book” (Arnakis 1952, 238). They were to be left alone to run their own civic and religious affairs, provided that Muslims were not involved (Runciman 1968, 78). Following his conquest of Jerusalem, Caliph Omar had granted such rights to the Patriarch Sophronius. The monks of Mount Sinai claimed that their property and their right to worship was recognized and put into writing in 623 AD by the Prophet Mohamad. This document was probably fake but the Arab Muslim conquerors accepted it as authentic, and that is all that mattered (Arnakis 1952, 38). The practice of grouping peoples according to their faiths is a practice that has roots in the Middle East that go beyond Islam. Jews had been

12 One of the more prominent companions of Muhammad, one of the last to see the Prophet before his death, ruler of Kufa in Iraq in his old age. 13 A religious group mentioned three times in the Qur’an as a “People of the Book.” 14 One of the oldest religions ascribed to the teachings of the Iranian Prophet Zoroaster

or Zarathustra who exalted the deity of wisdom Ahura Mazda.

150

R. ERGENER

treated in a similar manner by the Persians and the Christians by the Sassanids (Runciman 1968, 78). In return, the religious leader assured the good conduct of the his people and their loyalty to the dominant group. In line with this religious, philosophical, and historical background, Muslim Arabs had a taxation system which made the persistence of nonMuslim communities not only tolerable but also economically beneficial for the Muslims. The main tax revenue of the Muslim Arab states was the poll tax jizyah 15 imposed on non-Muslims. In order to be taxed, it was necessary for the non-Muslims to be tolerated. Similar tolerant attitude would be pursued by the Muslim Turks toward members of non-Muslim communities. Seljuks, the Turkoman conquerors of present-day Turkey, allowed the Orthodox bishops of the territories they had conquered to retain their ties and relationships with the Byzantine Emperor and the Patriarch in Constantinople (Runciman 1968, 78). Following the collapse of the Seljuks, Ottoman State emerged as a tiny principality and grew rapidly to be a world empire. Ottoman rulers would also pursue tolerant policies toward their non-Muslim subjects. “‘Tolerant policies’ toward Muslim minorities had been pursued by certain Catholic rulers, when in a frontier environment. James I of AragoCatalonia (1208-76) did not attempt to convert Moors when he conquered Valencia. The French Crusader Kingdom in Jerusalem tolerated religious practices of the Muslims they ruled and discouraged missionary activities aimed toward them” (Halperin 1984, 444–49 and 455–59). “However, Catholic experiments in religious tolerance remain exceptional and were relatively short lived, whereas such policies seem to be the norm and were longer lasting with Muslim states. At the turn of the twentieth century, after nine hundred years of rule by Muslim Turks, more than half of the population of the land, which is now modern Turkey, was made up of non-Muslims” (Ergener 2004, 5). Implied in the term tolerance, however, are relations of dominance. Poll tax for non-Muslims (cizye) was one of the main sources of hard cash for the Ottoman State—the other being the proceeds from tax farms (mukata’a) on revenue producing enterprises.

15 The per capita yearly tax historically levied by Islamic states on sane male non-Muslim subjects permanently residing in Muslim lands under Islamic law. Those who did military service or who could not afford were exempted.

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

151

Tolerance in this context then is to be understood as the members of the dominant religion Islam putting up with the members of other (subordinate) religions, on the condition that the subordinates compensate the dominants for putting up with them. Members of other religions were subject to discrimination but not persecution. As late as the early twentieth century, Christians were regarded by the Ottomans “as no more than taxable assets (Arnakis 1952, 238). Ottomans taxed the revenues of the Orthodox churches, treating this institution as a tax farm (iltizam) and the patriarch as a tax farmer (multezim). This radical view of the Patriarchate has been proposed based on legal documents by Macit Kenano˘glu (2004) and put in a historical context by Tom Papademetriou (2015). Revenues of the Orthodox Church consisted of the revenues from the estates owned by the church, the revenues from services provided by the church, such as marriage and burials and alms and taxes collected from parishes and communities. The patriarch would be in charge of making these collections and deliver a significant portion of the collection to the Ottoman treasury. He would also make lump sum payments to get the appointment to the office. To Gennadius, the first patriarch he appointed following the conquest of Istanbul, Sultan “Mehmet the Conqueror had made a gift of one thousand florins” (Ergener 2004, 6). “But, he discontinued this practice when, in 1467, some members of the Church offered to pay him an equal amount for the appointment of their choice. From then on, it became an accepted practice for the Orthodox Patriarch to make money gifts to the Sultan, later to the Grand Vizier” (Ergener 2004, 6), equivalent of the Prime Minister. (“Patriarchs were confirmed by the Sultan until 1657 and by the Grand Vizier after this date” [Ergener 2004, 6].) The gifts made to get the appointment and the yearly tribute both “rose steadily over time. By the end of the seventeenth century, the usual price paid by a patriarch on his appointment was in the neighborhood of 3,000 gold pounds. In 1726 Callinicus III paid no less than 5,600 gold pounds. An annual tax of 3,000 gold pounds was also paid as well as minor taxes, such as the mutton for palace guards. As the Ottoman rulers exploited the opportunity to make earnings, as many as sixty-one” change “of patriarchs” took place between 1595–1695 (Runciman 1968, 201–202). Wealthier bishops would have higher chances of being elected, even if they were less holy than their rivals. Poor but ambitious bishops would borrow from guilds or moneylenders in order to pay for their office (Arnakis 1952, 247).

152

R. ERGENER

“After 1759 it was decided that the gift would be paid out of church funds” (Arnakis 1952, 248). It was often the case that the aspiring patriarch would be financed by the leading members of the Greek Orthodox community who would then make up for their contribution through the collections of the church. “By the time of Greek independence the church was 230,000 gold pounds in debt” (Runciman 1968, 202). Local bishops would also buy their sees and make their flock pay back what they had spent (Miller 1901, 469; cited in Ergener 2004, 7). The bishop and the local Ottoman government officials would often be allies. The bishop wanted the aid of the local Ottoman government to compel the peasants to pay their dues to the church and would in return perform diplomatic services to the Ottoman State. The Bulgarian wanted to get rid of the Greek who exploited him and the Rumanian regarded as enemy the Greek clergy, who owned one fifth of the land and lived comfortably in monasteries, while the Rumanian died of starvation in his wretched housing (Miller 1901, 469). Ottomans pursued similar policies not only toward their Greek subjects, but also “toward members of other religious groups as well. A Patriarchate was set up in Istanbul for the Armenian subjects of the Sultan. Jews expelled by Catholic kings from Spain and Portugal and those who fled the persecution in Central Europe were given refuge by the Ottoman rulers. Office of the ‘Chief Rabbi’ was set up to head the Jewish community. The Armenian Patriarch and the Chief Rabbi were empowered with powers similar to those of the Orthodox Patriarch” (Ergener 2004, 3) and put under similar obligations. A Protestant missionary reports in the nineteenth century that the Armenian patriarch paid an annual tribute (Smith and Dwight 1833, 56) as well as presents to the government to get the office (Smith and Dwight 1833, 58). “During fifty years in the seventeenth century, fourteen persons were raised to the office of the patriarch, one of whom was elected and deposed no less than nine times, the whole number of elections and depositions was nearly forty, and one priest held the office for six years, (including one in which he was supplanted by an individual raised directly from the humble employment of baker) before he was ordained bishop” (Smith and Dwight 1833, 58). It was not unusual for bidders for the office to offer to raise the tribute by 40% or even 400%, the burden ultimately falling on the laity (Smith and Dwight 1833, 59). Because the Jewish communities were mostly made up of new arrivals, the construction of an institutional structure similar to the Greek and

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

153

Armenian Patriarchates was more difficult. Nevertheless, the office of the chief rabbi was established and leading members of the community, if not the chief rabbi himself, would be employed to collect tributes from the Jewish members of the Ottoman community.

Pope vs. The Sultan Religious institutions are providers of goods, the quality and the reliability of which cannot be verified even after the purchase, but presumably only after death. These goods can be worldly (success, good health, wealth, victory) or otherworldly (salvation). Such goods are known as credence goods, credence meaning the mental attitude that something is believable and should be accepted as true (Emons 1997). The medieval church was like a monopoly selling a pure credence good—a system of belief leading to eternal salvation that cannot be externally verified. Credibility was of utmost importance for such a church. The claim that the Church was the sole institution representing God on earth was essential to protect its credibility. It was important therefore that the church retained a monopoly. “On the whole, the Catholic Church sought for monopoly in providing religious services and declaring as heretics and persecuting its rivals, whereas in Ottoman lands members of different faiths lived in what can be called” pluralist equilibrium (Ergener 2004, 5). “The Catholic Church provided religion as a private good, marketing and selling “a set of identifiable ‘products’ (salvation) in a rational, selfconscious, ‘profit’- maximizing manner” (Ekelund et al. 1996, 6). For the church, new members meant rise in revenues. The Church would therefore want more new members, and seek the conversion of conquered peoples belonging to different faiths (Ekelund et al. 1996, 135)” (Ergener 2004, 5). “Islam on the other hand was provided as a public good to the faithful. The equivalent of tithes, church dues, marriage fees, sale of relics or indulgences, had no place in the Islamic practice. More members for Islam meant more recipients of a public good and it was therefore in the interest of the Muslim establishment to limit the number of entrants to Islam – by allowing conquered religious groups to continue with their practice” (Ergener 2004, 5).

154

R. ERGENER

“In order to maintain the credibility of its product (salvation), the Catholic Church relied on ‘miracles’ and other manifestations of the efficacy of religion” (Ekelund et al. 1996, 27; cited in Ergener 2004, 6). “For the followers of Mohammad, that ‘Setting out from the remote east, he (Mohammed) came as far as the west, victorious,’ was proof of the power of Islam” (Arnakis 1951, 110). “To those who paid for its services, the Church promised salvation after death. Islam offered the fruits of victory to the faithful, here and now” (Ergener 2004, 6). Church decorations would remind one not “only of the joys of paradise, but also of the horrors of hell, which one would have to endure if he or she did not fulfill his or her obligations toward the Church” (Ergener 2004, 6). “The mosques had no images of hell and remained only as glorious reminders of the permanent state of bliss that the followers of Islam lived in” (Ergener 2004, 6). “The Church sought for monopoly power market place and did its best to eliminate all its rivals, employing all means, including war” (Ergener 2004, 6). “Islam relied on members of other faiths to continue to exist, to pay for the joys that the victorious faithful would enjoy” (Ergener 2004, 6). Islam also resorted to war, but not to eliminate, to subjugate rival religions. Non-Muslim religious establishments under the Ottomans would be allocated their market niches by their Muslim rulers who would also protect the niches for them. Catholics would have a hierarchy within the members of the faith, with the church selling the salvation good to the believers and deriving benefits from that. Ottomans on the other hand had a system of dominance delineated by religion. Moslems were on top of the hierarchy, leading “An effortless life as rulers of the earth as opposed to one as plodding as merchants or doing other work” (Crone 1987, 243), members of other faiths forming the lower ranks. Finally, we should mention if briefly, an extreme and effective form of legitimation of oppression using religion, the caste system of India. Imposed on the people of India in the second century by Arian conquerors, the caste system assures the legitimacy and superiority of the Brahman rulers and the obedience of the members of the lower castes. Everybody has been assigned to his caste because of his or her performance during his previous life. If his rank is low this time, never mind,

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

155

there are many more chances to do better: If one performs well in his present life, he will be reincarnated as a member of a higher caste next time. And, performing well means, being obedient and resigned toward the members of the upper classes. Very ingeniously, the order of things is both one’s own making (through various reincarnations) and divine at the same time. Past performance (in previous lives) and future bliss (as one is reincarnated) point to one course of action in present life: subservience to the dominant and the cherishing of one’s subordinate status. Whereas the subjects of Muslim empires were stratified according to which religion they belonged to, members of Indian society were stratified according to their membership in the levels of the same religion. Members of lower Indian castes could aspire to be members of higher level castes in their future lives, provided that they remained docile and obedient to members of the higher castes in their current lives. Non-Muslims subjects of the Muslim Empires were allowed to remain on the path their own religion prescribed to bliss, provided they remained docile and obedient to the dominant Muslim rulers. More recently, Sriya Iyer has demonstrated that in present-day India, religious establishments are moving in to fill the vacuum created by the failure of the secular authorities to adequately provide services such as education. The provision of religious education rather than the teaching of skills that contribute to productivity enhances the income inequality that exists between Muslims and Hindus (Iyer 2018).

References Anderson, G., R. B. Ekelund, R. F. Hebert, and R. D. Tollison. 1992. “An Economic Interpretation of the Medieval Crusades.” Journal of European Economic History; Rome 21 (2). https://search.proquest.com/docview/ 1292878061/citation/582A0E60820C49FCPQ/1. Arnakis, G. Georgiades. 1951. “Gregory Palamas Among the Turks and Documents of His Captivity as Historical Sources.” Speculum 26 (1): 104–18. https://doi.org/10.2307/2852085. ———. 1952. “The Greek Church of Constantinople and the Ottoman Empire.” The Journal of Modern History 24 (3): 235–50. https://doi.org/10.1086/ 237518. Berger, Peter L. 2011. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. New York: Open Road Media.

156

R. ERGENER

Berryman, Phillip. 1987. Liberation Theology: Essential Facts About the Revolutionary Movement in Latin America—And Beyond. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Brown, Donald E. 1991. Human Universals. New York: McGraw-Hill. Burkert, Walter. 1987. “Offerings in Perspective: Surrender, Distribution, Exchange.” In Gifts to Gods, edited by Tullia Linders and Gullög Nordquist. Uppsala: Uppsala Studies in Ancient Mediterranean. Carter, Jimmy. 2009. “The Words of God Do Not Justify Cruelty to Women.” Observer, July 12, 2009. https://www.cartercenter.org/news/ editorials_speeches/observer_071209.html. ———. 2015. Jimmy Carter: Women’s Rights the Fight of My Life Interview by Greg Botelho. TV. http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/13/world/carterwomen-rights/. Crone, Patricia. 1987. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Ekelund, Robert B., Robert D. Tollison, Gary M. Anderson, Robert F. Hébert, and Audrey B. Davidson. 1996. Sacred Trust: The Medieval Church as an Economic Firm, 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press. Emons, Winand. 1997. “Credence Goods and Fraudulent Experts.” The RAND Journal of Economics 28 (1): 107–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555942. Ergener, Resit. 2004. Economic rationale of religious tolerance: Policies of the Ottoman Sultan vs. the Pope. Paper presented at the Association for the Study of Religion, Economy and Culture (ASREC) annual conference, October 22– 24, in Kansas City. Fox, Robin Lane. 1986. Pagans and Christians. London: Viking. Freeman, Charles. 2001. “The Emperor’s State of Grace.” History Today 51 (1): 9–15. Haines, Elizabeth L., and John T. Jost. 2000. “Placating the Powerless: Effects of Legitimate and Illegitimate Explanation on Affect, Memory, and Stereotyping.” Social Justice Research 13 (3): 219–36. https://doi.org/10.1023/ A:1026481205719. Halperin, Charles J. 1984. “The Ideology of Silence: Prejudice and Pragmatism on the Medieval Religious Frontier.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 26 (3): 442–66. Ibn al Kalbi. 1914. Kitab Al-Asnam. Cairo. Ibn Qutayba. 1970. Maarif. Edited by M.I.A.al-Savi. ¸ Beirut. Iyer, Sriya. 2018. The Economics of Religion in India. World: Belknap Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674979642. Jacobson, Cardell K. 1999. “Denominational and Racial and Ethnic Differences in Fatalism.” Review of Religious Research 41 (1): 9–20. https://doi.org/10. 2307/3512424.

7

RELIGION AND HIERARCHIES OF DOMINANCE

157

Janes, Dominic. 1998. God and Gold in Late Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kenano˘glu, Macit. 2004. Osmanlı Millet Sistemi: Mit ve Gerçek /. Aksaray, ˙ Istanbul: Klasik. Lenski, Gerhard E. 1984. Power and Privilege: A Theory of Social Stratification. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. Lerner, Gerda. 1987. The Creation of Patriarchy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Marlowe, Frank W. 2010. Hadza: Hunter-Gatherers of Tanzania. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bogaziciebooks/detail.action?docID=547595. McGovern, Arthur F. 1989. Liberation Theology and Its Critics: Toward an Assessment. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Miller, W. 1901. “Europe and the Ottoman Power Before the Nineteenth Century.” The English Historical Review 16 (63): 452–71. Minucius Felix, Marcus. 1643. M. Minucii Felicis Octavius. Cantabrigæ: Ex officina R.D. http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2003&res_ id=xri:eebo&rft_val_fmt=&rft_id=xri:eebo:image:99221. Pagels, Elaine. 1989. Adam, Eve, and the Serpent. New York: Vintage Books. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/126044/adam-eveand-the-serpent-by-elaine-pagels/. Papademetriou, Tom. 2015. Render unto the Sultan: Power, Authority, and the Greek Orthodox Church in the Early Ottoman Centuries, 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pratto, Felicia, and Angela Walker. 2004. “The Bases of Gendered Power.” In The Psychology of the Gender, edited by A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall, and R. J. Sternberg. 242–68. New York: Guilford Press. Pratto, Felicia, Jim Sidanius, and Shana Levin. 2006. “Social Dominance Theory and the Dynamics of Intergroup Relations: Taking Stock and Looking Forward.” European Review of Social Psychology 17 (1): 271–320. https://doi. org/10.1080/10463280601055772. Runciman, Steven. 1968. The Great Church in Captivity: A Study of the Patriarchate of Constantinople from the Eve of the Turkishconquest to the Greek War of Independence. London: Cambridge University Press. Schwartz, Shalom H., and Sipke Huismans. 1995. “Value Priorities and Religiosity in Four Western Religions.” Social Psychology Quarterly 58: 88–107. Sidanius, Jim. 1999. Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press. Sidanius, Jim, Felicia Pratto, Colette Van Laar, and Shana Levin. 2004. “Social Dominance Theory: Its Agenda and Method.” Political Psychology 25 (6): 845–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00401.x.

158

R. ERGENER

Smith, Christian (Christian Stephen). 1991. The Emergence of Liberation Theology: Radical Religion and Social Movement Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, Eli, and H. G. O. Dwight. 1833. Researches of the Rev. E. Smith and Rev. H.G.O. Dwight in Armenia: Including a Journey Through Asia Minor, and into Georgia and Persia, with a Visit to the Nestorian and Chaldean Christians of Oormiah and Salmas. Boston: Crocker and Brewster [etc.]. Solt, Frederick, Philip Habel, and J. Tobin Grant. 2011. “Economic Inequality, Relative Power, and Religiosity*.” Social Science Quarterly 92 (2): 447–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00777.x. Sozomen, ca 400–ca 450. 1855. The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen: Comprising a History of the Church from A.D. 324 to A.D. 440. London: H.G. Bohn. Stark, Rodney. 1964. “Class, Radicalism, and Religious Involvement in Great Britain.” American Sociological Review 29 (5): 698–706. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/2091420. Tilly, Charles. c1998. Durable Inequality. Berkeley: University of California Press. Wellhausen, Julius. 1897. Reste Arabischen Heidentums. Berlin: G. Reimer. Williams, Elisabeth Erin. 2000. “Liberation Theology and Its Role in Latin America.” The Monitor: Journal of International Studies: 7 (1).

CHAPTER 8

Religion and Charity

“THANKS TO GOD!”

“Let the rich support the poor; and let the poor give thanks to God, because he has given him someone through whom his needs may be met” Clement of Rome (Mason and Robinson 2004, 708; cited in Kim 2010, 17).

It is expected of individuals to seek profit when engaged in exchange—or reciprocity at the least, if profit is not possible. Quite often, however, humans intentionally engage in exchange that brings them seemingly no returns—in other words, they give and are not reciprocated. Such behavior is often directed at the poor, weak, and the needy and it is known as altruism—or as charity or philanthropy, with slight variations in meaning, charity having more religious connotations and philanthropy more secular ones. It is to be expected of an individual to have concern for her own wellbeing and undertake actions that benefit her. It requires some explanation as to why one should practice altruism, with more concern for the wellbeing of others at her expense. © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_8

159

160

R. ERGENER

Gaining Prestige and Status It is possible is that what looks like altruism is not really so, as it involves returns for the altruist, which may or may not be visible at first sight. One common case is when the altruist is compensated by the status and prestige he will have gained through the act of altruism. Amotz Zahavi, a Tel Aviv University biologist, suggested that altruism involves no sacrifice as altruistic giving enables the altruist to signal and claim status and prestige (Zahavi and Zahavi 1999, xv–xvi). Zahavi’s conclusions are based on the behavior not of humans but of animals. Based on decades long observations of babblers, a bird that lives in groups in the Arava desert, Zahavi proposed that altruism offers a reliable, concrete index of the altruist’s capabilities. Altruistic act proves the giver’s interest in the receiver, while at the same time proclaiming the giver’s dominance. Group members have good reason to pay attention when an individual acts not in his, but for the group’s benefit. The message displayed by this act is that the altruist is so strong, that he can afford to care for others. Subordinates will avoid a fight against this stronger rival. Each member of the group is constantly assessing whether to stay on in the group as a subordinate, or to leave and try its luck elsewhere, or risk everything in a fight for the top position. Support by the dominant male makes some of the subordinates choose to stay rather than leave the group, which enables the dominant bird to lead a large, strong group (Zahavi and Zahavi 1999, xv–xvi). Along these lines, many cases of what appears to be altruism, may actually be selfish efforts in disguise, undertaken to attain a favorable social reputation within a group or to project a pro-social image (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008, 62). It has been argued for example that much of what looked like altruism in ancient Greece and Rome was actually motivated by such concerns. Some classical philosophers taught that rational individuals should avoid emotions such as mercy and pity. Mercy was against justice because it led one to support that had not been earned (Kim 2010, 14). The object of Greek and Roman philanthropy was not the poor. Even with food distributions by city officials, which was the main philanthropic activity that the poor benefited from, the primary target was the rich rather the poor, as only the rich had the capability to return the largesse

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

161

(Hamel, n.d.; Hands 1968; cited in Loewenberg 1995, 308). When patrician families donated food at festivals, it was primarily to gain the loyalty of the poor crowds, not necessarily to satisfy their needs (Kim 2010, 4). Present-day altruists who ostentatiously display their charitable acts are likely to be after prestige and recognition rather than or in addition to providing genuine support.

Creating Obligations Even a selfish individual will support another person if the chances are sufficiently high that he will be reciprocated in the future (Gintis et al. 2005, 3). It is possible that the seemingly altruist individual may not really be giving away with no returns but, simply expecting to be reciprocated in the long run. What looks like selfless giving may be a way to earn future benefits by the donor (Hamilton 1964; Williams 1966; Trivers 1971). French sociologist Mauss proposed that true altruism does not exist and that all giving is compulsory and reciprocal (Mauss 1967). Mauss based his opinions on his observations in the Pacific islands and in the Pacific Northwest. Pre-Islamic Arabia had similar concepts and practices. Pre-Islamic Arabs believed that belongings had an excess that had to be given away because it was others’ right. When the excess was given to someone, the recipient would be in possession of more belongings but his status would be reduced, becoming or remaining more strongly a dependent of the donor, as a protégé, client, or ally. And, the recipient of the gift would be under the obligation to reciprocate with a larger gift. The dependency relationship between the donor and the recipient would be reversed, when the former recipient reciprocated with a larger gift. In pre-Islamic Arabia then, the circulation as gifts of the excess hidden in belongings was a perpetual process, which created more unhappiness than joy, putting ever more burdens on both the recipients and the donors (Bravmann 1963; Kister 1965). Islamic teachings would replace the returning cycles of claims and duties of pre-Islamic Arabia with a virtuous cycle of generosity and solidarity (Cohen 2005, 351).

162

R. ERGENER

Benefiting the Donor The altruist may be giving with the awareness that the benefits he will create will spill over on to him as well. More specifically, altruism in areas, such as education, health, and poor relief, contributes to reinforce social stability and to raise the general level of happiness. The reinforcement of social stability and the rise in the general level happiness will raise the well-being of the altruist, together with the recipients of his donations. The altruist in this case would be giving in an indirect manner, for selfish reasons.

ADAM SMITH AND ALTRUISM

Adam Smith, who is commonly known for his opinion of human nature as being selfish and materialistic, was aware of the possibility of selfless giving with no return, which we can call as pure altruism. In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith advocates that prosperity is created by market competition. One of the virtues of competition is that its wonders are manifested (sometimes even better) when the buyers and sellers are entirely in pursuit of their own interests. “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner,” wrote Smith, “but from their regard to their own interest” (Smith 1970). Yet, Adam Smith recognized the existence of genuine altruism. In another book, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, he writes: “How selfish so ever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortunes of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it” (Smith 2002).

Selfless Giving There seems to be a different sort of giving which is selfless—of money, food, resources, one’s own well-being and even life, for little known people, or in many cases for total strangers, with no visible returns. A European can donate to charity in Africa. A fireman risks his life for a person trapped in fire.

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

163

This is the kind of altruism preached by Christ who reminded his followers that they would be blessed if they gave to the poor and to the physically tainted, who will not be able to reciprocate (Luke 14: 13–14). With pure altruism, a monetary donation or volunteer work for a charity is equivalent to the purchase of a “charity good,” charity good being the happiness of the recipient of altruistic giving. The utility which the sincere altruist gains from the consumption of the charity good has been labeled as “warm glow” (Andreoni 1989). Various studies conducted mainly in the United States show that religious persons’ demand for the “warm glow” tends to be higher than those of who are not religious (Monsma 2007, 6). As compared with those who pray less, those who pray more show a greater affinity to share with those who are weak and in need (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008, 60). Why are the more religious more inclined to give to the needy and to do volunteer work, more so than the less religious do? Does religion cultivate the warm glow or are the religious blessed with the warm glow at the same time. Those who come together in a church may be “charitable” not because they go to church but by disposition. There may be an unidentified factor which motivates individuals to be religious and charitable simultaneously. Or, religious individuals may be giving more to charity simply because they belong to groups (congregations) that go beyond their family and immediate friends. As members of such groups, they have more exposure both to those who are in need and also to those who solicit charitable collections. Such simultaneous exposure could explain why those who belong to religious congregations give more than those who don’t (Becker and Dhingra 2001, 316; Wilson and Janoski 1995, 138; Putnam 2000, 120). Not surprisingly, “active members of modern secular organizations are at least as likely to report donating to charity as active members of religious ones” (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008, 62). Members of some secular groups give more than those who are members of religious groups (Campbell and Yonish 2003, 105). Highest givers seem to be those who belong both to religious and secular groups. People who belong to neither group type give the least (Monsma 2007, 6). Individuals, who lack the penchant for the “warm glow” then, are encouraged groups to be altruistic. Various religions have had a key role to play in encouraging altruism, reconciling the selfish and selfless in human nature by,

164

• • • • • • •

R. ERGENER

punishing lack of altruism, rewarding its presence, sanctifying the practice, defining the groups within which altruism is practiced, providing the leadership gifts that motivate the lesser donors, constantly asking prospective givers to donate, reminding them of the existence of the poor.

Punishes In daily life and under experimental conditions people display a disposition to be generous toward their kin as well as toward strangers. Humans also tend to have a tendency to punish those who treat others unfairly. Punishment is accorded not only to fellow group members but also to total strangers. Punishment of those with whom one will have no relationship with in the future may be explained as applying a rule of thumb. But, it is hard to justify anonymous punishment of those who have hurt others with any self-interested motivation (Gintis et al. 2008, 250). This kind of altruistic behavior which will bring no benefits to the donor has been labeled as “strong reciprocity” (Gintis et al. 2008, 249). The problem would be solved if there were sufficient number of human volunteers who are willing to exercise altruistic punishment, that is, who are motivated “to punish free riders even though it is costly and yields no material benefits for” them (Fehr and Gächter 2002, 137). Another solution would be to solicit the support of supernatural beings or humans who are acting on their behalf in the punishment of the free riders (Fehr and Gächter 2002). The early humans, who became our ancestors, were the survivors. Knowledge of things probably contributed to the survival of our ancestors. Yet, other mental tool kits would also have contributed to the survival of our ancestors. One of those would be the distortion of reality. False beliefs can be useful for survival, just like knowledge, if they lead to useful behavior. Along these lines, belief in supernatural agents, rather than narrow reasoning, could have been more effective in justifying altruism in the eyes of our selfish ancestors (Wilson 2002, 40). Belief in the presence of supernatural beings reduces the need for the worldly policing of believers, as supernatural beings are present when no humans are. If, genuinely believed and taken seriously, supernatural

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

165

monitoring can therefore make the monitoring of cooperative interactions possible even when worldly monitoring is absent or insufficient (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008, 59). The larger the size of a group, the more likely it is that gods worshipped by group members will be concerned with human morality as, the larger the group size, the higher the need will be for moralizing gods either to supplement or to make up for the absence of worldly monitoring (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008, 61). Supernatural rewards and punishments which supplement the worldly ones can make the difference in determining how the individual behaves (Atran and Henrich 2010, 24). It is also the case that supernatural beliefs can actually be more powerful than secular ones in enabling altruism (Atran and Henrich 2010, 24). Tortures of hell as punishments for the lack of, and joys of paradise as rewards for the presence of altruism, may be more effective than worldly rewards and punishments (Johnson 2005). Supernatural monitoring of altruism is powerful also because supernatural punishment and rewards tend to be indiscriminate or collective, which makes all members of a community to be concerned about the behavior of each individual. If lack of altruism by one will lead to the punishment of the whole community, say with a natural disaster, all members of the community will be watching that each individual performs his duties (Atran and Henrich 2010, 24). Below are some examples of supernatural monitoring of altruism: In ancient Greece, “it was believed that when a poor person was expelled from the table of the rich or even rudely handled, the vengeance of the Furies would be visited upon the heartless miscreant, for ‘gods and Furies exist for beggars’” (Eliade 1993, 3:223). According to the Proverbs, the punishment for those who do not respond to the call for help by others is not to be heard when they themselves are in need: “He that stopped his ear against the cry of the poor, shall also cry himself, and shall not be heard” (Proverbs 21:13). God would punish Christians who refused to be charitable by denying them eternal life (Bird 1982, 163).

166

R. ERGENER

In Islam, rejecting the orphans and neglecting the feeding of the poor was equivalent to denying the Day of Judgment (Koran 7:1– 3). Those who do not have faith in God and do not feed the needy (Koran 69:34). Divine punishment for failure to practice charity can be supplemented by earthly punishments dealt by religious specialists. One example is with regard to the ancient Jewish practice of leaving harvest portions on the field to be gathered by the poor at harvest time (Loewenberg 1995, 312). In the Bible, there are no mechanisms to enforce this practice. Whether the farmer complied would depend on his goodwill and on social pressure. During later times, punishments such as flogging were introduced for those who did not comply (Loewenberg 1995, 312). Still later, charity wardens and rabbinical courts were given the authority to seize the property of the farmers who did not give sufficient amount as charity (Loewenberg 1995, 317).

A MALADAPTATION OR AN ADAPTATION

Altruism in a small group made up of kin, would not create any disadvantages for the altruist, as the chances are high that altruistic giving would be reciprocated within the small group. Also, the recipients of altruistic giving are likely to be the donor’s close kin and altruism would therefore strengthen the genes of the altruist. Yet, much modern altruism is aimed at total strangers. Evolutionary psychologist Price believes that altruism toward strangers is a maladaptation, a relic of altruism toward close kin (Price 2008). Our brains evolved over 2.6 million years during the geological epoch known as the Pleistocene. During most of this era, our ancestors lived in small groups, in the company of close kin. During the Holocene, which started about 11,700 years ago, humans started to live in larger communities made up mostly of those who were not relatives. Under the circumstances, selfless giving became a maladaptation from the point of view of the donor. Nevertheless, humans continued to help others because existence in small kin groups for millions of years had rendered it unnecessary for the human brain to

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

167

develop the faculties to separate the stranger from kin (Tooby and Cosmides, n.d.). But the truth is that we do accord varying degrees of relatedness and closeness to fellow humans (Gintis et al. 2005, 25). Also, modern humans are capable of distinguishing between long-lasting relationships and one time only encounters. All of this may be because our prehistoric ancestors did not really live in isolated small groups made up largely of kin. Archaeological and anthropological evidence shows that, especially during migrations, they had repeated contacts of all sorts with members of other groups. In eastern and southern Africa people covered hundreds of kilometers long distances in order to trade, to maintain networks of mutual support, to enhance their living, and to find mating partners (Fehr and Henrich 2003). Group conflict would be frequent. Under the circumstances, it is inconceivable that people would be incapable of recognizing the difference between long- and short-term relationships (Gintis et al. 2008, 251). Genetic differentiation observed with present-day hunter—gatherer groups provide additional evidence that our ancestors had frequent contact with those who were not in their immediate group. Modern altruism then cannot be a maladaptation but an adaptation that would have evolved for the obvious reason that groups with higher rates of altruism would be more prosperous and have higher chances of survival as compared with those with lower rates of altruism (Gintis et al. 2008, 248).

Rewards If fear of punishment is one of two motivators of behavior, the other is the promise of reward. Religion encourages altruistic behavior with the promise of rewards, which are not only otherworldly, but also worldly. Here are some examples. Ancient Jews believed that those who helped the poor would be rewarded directly by God (Loewenberg 1995, 309). In the Deuteronomy, all are expected to be charitable, as the Lord will bless those who are charitable (Deuteronomy 13:7–10). Proverbs says, that showing mercy to

168

R. ERGENER

do poor is in effect lending to God and that the merciful will be blessed and repaid (19:17, 21). “The disciples assumed that how persons would fare at the time of judgment could not be predetermined by strict observance of either ritual or moral codes but rather by unswerving devotion to the community and God’s purpose (cf. Luke 10:38-42) … Acts of hospitality and charity, especially when they included some element of self-sacrifice, were viewed as indications of such devotion” (Matthew 25:31–46; Luke 18:18–30; John 13:34, 35) (Bird 1982, 156). “Disciples were promised that God would reward their charitable gifts by forgiving their sins after death … In relation to the ultimate end or telos of the Christian life, namely, seeking God’s good favor, whether or not one was charitable was a matter of great import” (Bird 1982, 163). With the Catholics, acts of mercy which entailed giving by the rich and the strong to the poor and the weak strengthened one’s defense at the last judgment day. The deeds could be directed to unworthy persons, so long as they were poor. That led to dependence, palliated poverty and led to the emergence of groups of professional beggars (Cohen 2005, 305). In Islam, there are two kinds of almsgiving: the obligatory zakat and the voluntary sadaqa. The believer has no choice but give the zakat. Giving the zakat brings no extra benefits yet not giving it, brings serious penalties. Giver of the sadaqa, on the other hand, accumulates extra credits which he can use against sins at the judgment day. “Take alms (sadaqa) from their possessions so as to cleanse and purify them with (the alms), and pray on their behalf’ (Koran 9:103)” (Bonner 2005, 309). For a Muslim, one of the ways to expiate a sin is feeding the poor. Feeding an unspecified number of poor or making a gift of a domestic animal at the Ka’ba, or performing the equivalent in fasting would atone for deliberately hunting while in a state of sanctification (ihram) and/or in the sacred grounds (Koran 5:95). Giving food to ten persons in need would be sufficient to expiate the sin committed by breaking an oath. The amount of food to be shared was to be calculated according to the consumption standards of the donor’s family. The repentant also had the other options of dressing up the poor, releasing a slave, or, if he could not afford any of these, fasting for three days (Koran 5:89). It was necessary to feed sixty poor to retract an oath (zihar) one had made to repudiate his wife (Koran 58:4) (Bonner 2005, 397).

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

169

Defines Groups People tend to think of themselves as members of groups, which are in rivalry with other groups (Wilson 2002, 27). Altruism is practiced with group members, not with members of rival groups. Communities larger than a few hundred individuals with moral behavior never existed before the advent of agriculture and are therefore not natural as such (Wilson 2002, 119–120). Religious imagery and symbolism provide a suitable medium to represent and to activate a moral system that is essential for such groups to exist and operate (Sosis and Alcorta 2003, 266). Religion can reinforce altruistic behavior by having divine laws validate society as an entity, which is more than the sum of the persons and organizations, which make it up (Durkheim 1965). This can stimulate charitable behavior and attitudes by the stronger individuals toward the weaker ones, as part of the effort to maintain the group (Rappaport 1999). “In response to the broader society’s hostility toward them, early Christians generally intensified their in - group fellowship and solidarity (Schnabel 2004; cited in Kim, 14). This is precisely how the Apostle Paul exhorted Christians to respond in Romans 12:12–16 (Kim 2010, 14).”

Provides the Leadership Gift One of the most consistent stylized facts on fund-raising strategies is the importance of leadership gifts, which are the largest gift of the drive which stimulate others to donate. “When a big (leadership giver) comes in, the smaller donors pay attention. It legitimizes a fund-raising project and puts the institution on a much faster track” (Firestone 1998; cited in Andreoni 2006). Possibly, no other “leadership gift” can be as powerful as a model and as a source of inspiration for potential altruists, as what Christian religion provides: the image of the dying and suffering God, who has sacrificed himself for the good of humankind. The Hebrew root aheb, which refers to male–female love, also means God’s love for humankind and the love of humankind for God, as well as the feelings of love humans nurture toward each other. God’s love for humankind stems from his inherent features (Deuteronomy 10:13– 17, Psalms 145:15–16). Love of God and of other humans is a person’s response to God’s love and her expression of her gratitude for it (Eliade 1993, 3:223).

170

R. ERGENER

With Christianity, “to be charitable was to show mercy like God himself” (Bird 1982, 163). Acts like martyrdom or taking care of inflicted Christians as well as non-Christians during epidemics, at the risk of getting sick or dying themselves, were leadership gifts which made great contribution to the spread of Christianity (Stark 1996). God provides the model for altruism for Muslims. Moslem donors are to give to the needy generously and continuously and with no expectation of reciprocity. Giving in this manner would be imitating God, who gave gifts to humankind that cannot be reciprocated (Bonner 2005, 392). The pious person remembered the kin and the non-kin, who were poor and in need. Rather than wishing these persons never existed, he warmed their hearts with kind words and filled their empty stomachs (Koran 4.36, 86) (Brown 2005, 520). Families also provide new generations with models of charity. Children remain skeptical of supernatural agents except for those which their parents and other adults they respect, endorse through their actions (Harris et al. 2006). Interviews conducted with highly religious parents from diverse backgrounds and different faiths (Christian, Jewish, Mormon, and Muslim) show that families believe that in order for religion to be effective in holding their children on a righteous path, it is necessary for the parents to make costly investments in “practicing (and parenting) what they preach” (Marks 2004; cited in Atran and Henrich 2010, 22). Leadership gifts are also provided by religious leaders by fulfilling costly obligations required by their respective religions. Costly religious traditions in the form of gift-giving ceremonies and other holy rites, are likely to generate more commitment. Successful groups and institutions will have costly displays of faith and also the values which glorify these costs. For example, the Navajo males allocate one-third and Navajo women one-fifth, of their productive time to the performance of “priestly rites” (Kluckhohn and Leighton 1946). Among the Native American groups, Navajos are the most successful in terms of cooperation and being survivors (Kluckhohn and Leighton 1946).

Asks Feelings of empathy and pro-social behavior are greatly influenced by communication, especially by the power of asking. Social cues can be employed to activate the capacity for altruism. Requests by potential

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

171

recipients and others are one of the ways to have tendencies of compassion to overcome the feelings of self-defense and asking repeatedly is one of the ways religions promote altruism (Andreoni and Rao 2011, 519).

Sanctifies Much more so than animals, humans learn behavior patterns, beliefs, motivations, and strategies from other members of their species, and mostly from those who are in their own group, through cultural mechanisms (Henrich and Gil-White 2001; Richerson and Boyd 2005; cited in Atran and Henrich 2010). Natural selection may have cultivated in our psyches a willingness to prefer culturally acquired information to information we obtain through direct experience or intuition (Atran and Henrich 2010, 22). For example, a frequently observed behavior among foragers is to remove the toxins in the plants they consume, even though they have no information on what would happen if they did not process the plant (Beck 1992; cited in Atran and Henrich 2010, 21). The toxins removed are usually present in the plants consumed in small quantities. The amount of toxins present would not alter the taste of the plant and cause limited harm over a period of weeks or even months. However, if consumed continuously, such toxins can build up in the body and cause major health complications, including loss of life. A forager who prefers to rely on his own judgment and intuition rather than doing what everybody else does can choose not to process the plant. This will save him some effort, but kill him in the long run. To trust customary rules may therefore be an adaptive attitude that would raise one’s chances of survival (Atran and Henrich 2010, 21). One of the cultural mechanisms employed to cultivate altruism is sanctifying such behavior, which religion does. As Rappaport says, “People are more willing to accept sanctified than un-sanctified messages as true; to the extent that they do, their responses to sanctified messages will tend to be predictable and the operation of the society orderly” (Rappaport 1971, 30).

Reminds Results of various experiments illustrate that the faithful are likely to give more help to those in need and cheat less when they are reminded of

172

R. ERGENER

religion. Temples are among the reminders of religion which would stimulate altruistic behavior. It has been proposed that beginning with early civilizations, societies that exploited this aspect of human psychology, for example, by building monumental temples, such as ziggurats and pyramids, did better than others (Atran and Henrich 2010, 26). Religious rituals and religious surroundings, related to morally concerned deities, would remind one of the moral attitudes of these deities and by default facilitate concern for the well-being of others (Norenzayan and Shariff 2008, 59). Peter Brown makes the interesting point that more so than material support, or in order to be identified as recipients of material support, the poor need above all to be remembered. For, the poor are unsettling and ambiguous and they are often alone, outside of family and other networks that provide support (Brown 2005, 520). As it is said in the Proverbs, “The poor man shall be hateful even to his own neighbor: but the friends of the rich are many” (14:20). At the farther ends of the spectrum of the forgotten, there are the dead and god himself. It is easy to forget the dead and religions teach that it is both shameful and inhuman to do so. God Himself is liable to be forgotten by the well off and the worldly, as he is invisible (Brown 2005, 520). With the three Abrahamic religions, good deeds, aimed at the easily overlooked deprived, are intertwined with teachings that remind the believers of a God, who too can be easily forgotten (Brown 2005, 520). Interestingly, the most enthusiastic defenders of the poor, the religious personalities who are the rabbis, the clergy, the monks, and the ulema (Muslim scholars) are themselves often in danger of being forgotten, as what they do can be regarded not worthy of being remembered by the rest of society (Brown 2005, 520). Despite the prestige accorded to religious experts in their own environments, the rich were not always impressed by the otherworldly benefits these experts supplied (Brown 2005, 522). And those who exercise real power, can consider the contribution of religious leaders to society as unimportant and “forget” them (Brown 2005, 520). In the early medieval period, clergy, monks, and nuns were banned from carrying arms and having children. This debarment rendered clergy, monks, and nuns marginal to the needs of a community, the livelihood of which was based on warfare and kin support. But the saving of the

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

173

souls would be possible only through these marginal individuals. And the survival of these strictly unnecessary persons depended on their being remembered. And, these unnecessary persons would indeed make the effort to be remembered by the laity. All through the early centuries of the Christian church, the clergy expected to be supported by the faithful and demanded tax exemptions (Brown 2002, 23–31). While organizing the relief for the poor, the Christian clergy would make persistent claims for themselves. Christians were preached to give gifts not only to the poor but also to the Church. Perhaps the priests preached the remembrance of the poor with urgency because if one forgot the poor, he could forget his priest as well (Brown 2005, 521). Ignoring the needs of the clergy, monks, and nuns was no different from neglecting the “poor.” Indeed, whether the references to the “poor” in Medieval Europe were in reference to the clergy, monks, and nuns or to the lay poor, is hard to decide. Both groups could be considered as being “‘poor’ in that they had reason to fear being forgotten” (Brown 2005, 521). There was a similar situation in the Ottoman Empire, where the ulema (scholars) were valued as Islamic judges, legal experts, teachers, and preachers. But their position in the social network was fragile as their employment was controlled by a patronage system which involved many uncertainties. At any time, they could find themselves out of a job and with no means of income. They were remembered within the context of the large public soup kitchens of the Ottoman Empire, known as the imarets. The imarets were large complexes which often included not only soup kitchens but also mosques, schools, and public baths. The right to eat at an imaret was granted not so much to those who were in genuine need but to scholars and students, providing them with social security (Brown 2005, 522).

Teachings and Practice of Charity in Abrahamic Religions Ancient Greek and Roman religion was not charitable as such. Believers could make any wishes from gods including amoral ones provided that they made the appropriate offerings—and provided that the gods lent an ear and cared to respond. Charity was preached by philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. The pre-Socratic philosophers proposed that principles of justice and equality were of divine origin. Pythagoras

174

R. ERGENER

emphasized the importance of equality and harmony in social relations. The Stoics perceived charity as a social and economic need, as an obligation that was moral and religious and as a duty toward all “broken and destitute humanity wherever found (Eliade 1981, 223). Jewish, Christian and Muslim scriptures enjoined compassion for the poor (Brown 2005, 518). Yahweh was at the beginning a national god who was interested primarily with the defense and material prosperity of his people. “Threats of punishment and doom directed at this people arise only for the worship of foreign gods whose exemplars are the Baalim. All this changes in the eighth and seventh centuries B.C.E. with the classical prophets” (Silver c1983, 123). Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, Zephaniah, and Ezekiel, teach that Yahweh foreshadows personal and national devastation above all because some of his people are left to be poor and oppressed. Prophet Amos (5:21–24) tells openly that he hates offerings, festivals, hymns, and ceremonies. What God wants from well-off Israelites is goodness, not offerings (Hosea 6:6). Two types of poor relief were preached in the Bible during early periods: measures aiming at preventing the working poor from sinking to poverty and measures designed to provide basic support for those who were already poor and dependent on others. First kind of measures included the provision of loans without interest (Exodus 22.24) and their cancelation in the Sabbatical Year (Deuteronomy 15.1–2), payment of wages promptly (Deuteronomy 24.15), relatives’ claiming (Leviticus 25.23–28), and the restoration in the Jubilee Year to the original owner of land (Leviticus 25.13) that had been sold (Loewenberg 1995, 311). “Poor relief institutions of the second category which were aimed at providing for those who were already poor included the assignment of various agricultural harvest portions to the poor, such as the corner of every field (Lev. 19.9), gleanings (Lev. 19.9), forgotten sheaves (Deut. 24.19), grape droppings, and defective grape clusters (Lev. 19.9–10). These annual provisions were supplemented twice in every seven-year cycle by the poor person’s tithe (Deut. 14.28). The institution of contractual slavery (by which a poor Jew sold his services for six years) should also be included in the second category of poor relief schemes (Exodus 21.1–6).” (Loewenberg 1995, 311). Spread of Christianity was rapid. 350 years after Christ, the total number of Christians had risen to 33.8 million or half the population

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

175

of the Roman Empire (Stark 1996, 7). Several scholars have proposed that the most important reason for the rapid spread of Christianity was the widespread practice of charity by the early Christians. (Brown 2002; Harnack 1962; Schnabel 2004). In the following statement taken from a letter, the fourth-century Roman emperor Julian (the Apostate, 361–363 C.E.), who tried to revive paganism, admitted how the practice of charity among the Jews and the Christians was much stronger than the practice among the pagans: “It is disgraceful when no Jew ever has to beg and the impious Galileans (Christians) support not only their own poor but ours as well, all men see that our people lack aid from us” (Epistle 22; cited in Sperber, Roman Palestine, 200-400, the Land, 263). Early Christians put greater emphasis on the well-being of the community and of others than their own. “The apologist Aristides, writing in the second century, reports that if there is among them (Christians) any that is poor and needy, and if they have no spare food, they fast for two or three days in order to supply to the needy their lack of food” (Aristides 1896, 277; cited in Kim 2010, 5). Christians would even have themselves imprisoned to ransom others and sell themselves to slavery to buy food for the hungry with the proceeds (Clement of Rome [Bishop of Rome, 88–99], the first Apostolic Father, quoted in Mason and Robinson 2004, 697; cited in Kim 2010, 5). Even in the giving of alms, Christians probably went beyond the tithe that was instituted later, in perhaps the fourth century (Bird 1982). The transfer of resources from the rich to the poor was, after all, large enough to meet the basic needs of everyone in the community. There was not a single Christian who was in need as the property owners would sell their houses and land and lay the proceeds at the apostles’ feet (Acts 4:34–36). The Didache, an extensively circulated ancient guide for the early church, urged a uniting charity with an emphasis on eternity: “Share all your possessions with your brother, and call nothing your own. If you and he share what is immortal in common, how much more should you share what is mortal!” (Kim 2010, 17). Similarly, “The Koran provides a blueprint for a new order in society, in which the poor will be treated more fairly than before” (Bonner 2005, 391). Refusal to feed the deprived is a reflection of the excessive attachment to worldly riches (Koran 89:17–20). “And all of you should serve God and associate none with Him; and show kindness and affection to your parents, and be kind to near relatives,

176

R. ERGENER

and to orphans, and to the needy; and be considerate to your neighbor’s kinsmen and strangers and to the companions at your side and to the wayfarer and to the slaves in your possession. Believe it that Allah does not like such persons as are self-conceited and are niggardly and bid others to be niggardly, and conceal the bounty of Allah that He has bestowed upon them” (Koran 4:36–38). “Piety (al - birr) does not consist in turning your faces toward East and West. It consists rather in a person’s believing in God, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book and the Prophets; and in his giving his property/money, despite his love for it, to his relatives (dhawi l - qurba), the orphans, the poor, the traveler, the beggars (al - sa’ilin), and to the slaves, and in his per-forming the prayer and in giving zakat ” (Koran 2:177) (Bonner 2005, 400). Members of the community who first gathered around Muhammad when he began to receive revelations, came from varied tribal and social backgrounds, many of whom were in poverty. The revelations of Muhammad from this time, which are known as the early Meccan suras, or “chapters” of the Koran, probably put greater emphasis on generosity and almsgiving than on any other kind of action (Bonner 2005, 394). In the Meccan or early suras, giving food to those who could not afford it themselves was a sign of being one of the “Com-panions of the Right Hand” (Koran 90:13–20). There are frequent referrals to the poor again in the suras which descended during Muhammad’s final years. Many members of the Moslem community could not afford the camels, martial equipment, and provisions necessary to join Muhammad’s final military campaigns. There were particular difficulties with the preparations for the campaign for Tabuk in 630 C.E. Various people gave weapons, riding animals, and other necessities to those who could not afford them. The eighth (Al-Anfãl or “The Spoils of War”) and ninth (Al-Tawbah or “The Repentance”) suras put emphasis on the themes of joining the war effort and giving support to other Moslems to fight. We shall finish this chapter with a story from the Babylonian Talmud, Baba Batra, 10a (Epstein, I. (ed.) 1935; cited in Loewenberg 1995, 311). Tineius Rufus, the Roman governor of Judea, asks Rabbi Akiva, an outstanding scholar of second century C.E., the provocative question: “If your God loves the poor, why does he not support them?” In his answer, Rabbi Akiva points out that it was God’s desire for both the rich

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

177

and the poor to have a chance to help each other, rather than rely on heavenly support.

References Andreoni, James. 1989. “Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence.” Journal of Political Economy 97 (6): 1447–58. ———. 2006. “Leadership Giving in Charitable Fund-Raising.” Journal of Public Economic Theory 8 (1): 1–22. Andreoni, James, and Justin M. Rao. 2011. “The Power of Asking: How Communication Affects Selfishness, Empathy, and Altruism.” Journal of Public Economics 95 (7–8): 513–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco. 2010.12.008. Aristides. 1896. “The Apology of Aristides.” In Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Allan Menzies, translated by D. M. Kay, 259–80. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1012.htm. Atran, Scott, and Joseph Henrich. 2010. “The Evolution of Religion: How Cognitive By-Products, Adaptive Learning Heuristics, Ritual Displays, and Group Competition Generate Deep Commitments to Prosocial Religions.” Biological Theory 5 (1): 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_a_00018. Beck, Wendy. 1992. “Aboriginal Preparation of Cycas Seeds in Australia1.” Economic Botany 46 (2): 133–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02930628. Becker, Penny Edgell, and Pawan H. Dhingra. 2001. “Religious Involvement and Volunteering: Implications for Civil Society.” Sociology of Religion 62 (3): 315–35. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712353. Bird, Frederick B. 1982. “A Comparative Study of the Work of Charity in Christianity and Judaism.” The Journal of Religious Ethics 10 (1): 144–69. Bonner, Michael. 2005. “Poverty and Economics in the Qur’an.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 35 (3): 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1162/002 2195052564270. Bravmann, Meir M. 1963. “‘The Surplus of Property’: An Early Arab Social Concept.” Der Islam 38 (1): 28–50. Brown, Peter. 2002. Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire. Hanover, NH: Brandeis University Press. ———. 2005. “Remembering the Poor and the Aesthetic of Society.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 3 (3): 513–22. Campbell, David E., and Steven J. Yonish. 2003. “Religion and Volunteering in America.” Religion as Social Capital: Producing the Common Good 87: 106. Cohen, Mark R. 2005. “Introduction: Poverty and Charity in Past Times.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 35 (3): 347–60. Durkheim, Emile. 1965. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life [1912]. New York: Free Press.

178

R. ERGENER

Eliade, Mircea. 1981. History of Religious Ideas, Volume 1: From the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries. Translated by Willard R. Trask. New Edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. ———, ed. 1993. The Encyclopedia of Religion. Vol. 3. New York and London: Macmillan and Collier Macmillan. Epstein, I., ed. 1935. The Babylonian Talmud. 35 vols. London: Soncino. Fehr, E., and Simon Gächter. 2002. “Altruistic Punishment in Humans.” Nature 415 (6868): 137. Fehr, E., and J. Henrich. 2003. “Is Strong Reciprocity a Maladaptation? On the Evolutionary Foundations of Human Altruism.” In Genetic and Cultural Origins of Cooperation, edited by P. Hammerstein, 55–82. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Firestone, David. 1998. “Got a Match? If Not, You Lose the Grant.” New York Times, November 18. Gintis, Herbert, Samuel Bowles, Robert Boyd, and Ernst Fehr. 2005. “Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: Origins, Evidence, and Consequences.” In Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life (Economic Learning and Social Evolution), edited by Herbert Gintis, Samuel Bowles, Robert Boyd, and Ernst Fehr. Cambridge: MIT Press. Gintis, Herbert, Joseph Henrich, Samuel Bowles, Robert Boyd, and Ernst Fehr. 2008. “Strong Reciprocity and the Roots of Human Morality.” Social Justice Research 21 (2): 241–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0067-y. Hamel, Gildas H. n.d. Poverty and Charity in Roman Palestine. Berkeley: University of California. Hamilton, W. D. 1964. “The Genetical Evolution of Social Behaviour: II.” Journal of Theoretical Biology 7 (1): 17–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/00225193(64)90039-6. Hands, Arthur R. 1968. Charities and Social in Ancient Greece and Rome. London: Camelot Press. Harnack, Adolf von. 1962. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. New York: Harper. Harris, Paul L., Elisabeth S. Pasquini, Suzanne Duke, Jessica J. Asscher, and Francisco Pons. 2006. “Germs and Angels: The Role of Testimony in Young Children’s Ontology.” Developmental Science 9 (1): 76–96. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00465.x. Henrich, Joseph, and Francisco J. Gil-White. 2001. “The Evolution of Prestige: Freely Conferred Deference as a Mechanism for Enhancing the Benefits of Cultural Transmission.” Evolution and Human Behavior 22 (3): 165–96. Johnson, Dominic D. P. 2005. “God’s Punishment and Public Goods.” Human Nature 16 (4): 410–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-005-1017-0. Kim, Daniel. 2010. “Explaining Early Christian Charity: A Psychosocial Theories Approach.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 6: 21.

8

RELIGION AND CHARITY

179

Kister, Jim. 1965. “‘God Will Never Disgrace Thee’: The Interpretation of an Early H . ad¯ıth.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 1 (2): 27–32. Kluckhohn, Clyde, and Dorothea Leighton. 1946. The Navaho. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Loewenberg, Frank M. 1995. “Financing Philanthropic Institutions in Biblical and Talmudic Times.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 24 (4): 307– 20. https://doi.org/10.1177/089976409502400404. Mason, Steve, and Tom Robinson, eds. 2004. “Clement of Rome.” In Early Christian Reader, translated by Michael W. Holmes, 697–715. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson. https://abdn.pure.elsevier.com/en/publicati ons/early-christian-reader. Mauss, Marcel. 1967. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. New York: Norton. Monsma, Stephen V. 2007. “Religion and Philanthropic Giving and Volunteering: Building Blocks for Civic Responsibility.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 3: 2–28. Norenzayan, A., and A. F. Shariff. 2008. “The Origin and Evolution of Religious Prosociality.” Science 322 (5898): 58–62. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. 1158757. Price, Michael E. 2008. “The Resurrection of Group Selection as a Theory of Human Cooperation.” Social Justice Research 21 (2): 228–40. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11211-008-0064-1. Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster. Rappaport, Roy A. 1971. “The Sacred in Human Evolution.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 2: 23–44. ———. 1999. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press. Richerson, Peter J., and Robert Boyd. 2005. Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Schnabel, Eckhard J. 2004. Early Christian Mission—Intervarsity Press. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press. https://www.ivpress.com/early-christian-mis sion. Silver, Morris. c1983. Prophets and Markets: The Political Economy of Ancient Israel. Boston: Hingham, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publication; Distributors for North America Kluwer Boston. Smith, Adam. 1970. The Wealth of Nations. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. ———. 2002. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press. Sosis, Richard, and Candace Alcorta. 2003. “Signaling, Solidarity, and the Sacred: The Evolution of Religious Behavior.” Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 12 (6): 264–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.10120.

180

R. ERGENER

Sperber, Daniel. 1978. Roman Palestine, 200-400, the Land: Crisis and Change in Agrarian Society as Reflected in Rabbinic Sources. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University. Stark, Rodney. 1996. The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Tooby, John, and Leda Cosmides. n.d. “Evolutionary Psychology: A Primer.” Accessed December 11, 2019. https://www.cep.ucsb.edu/primer.html. Trivers, Robert L. 1971. “The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism.” The Quarterly Review of Biology 46 (1): 35–57. Williams, George C. (George Christopher). 1966. Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Wilson, David Sloan. 2002. Darwin’s Cathedral: Religion and Nature of Society. Chicago: Chicago University of Chicago Press. Wilson, John, and Thomas Janoski. 1995. “The Contribution of Religion to Volunteer Work.” Sociology of Religion 56 (2): 137–52. https://doi.org/10. 2307/3711760. Zahavi, Amotz, and Avishag Zahavi. 1999. The Handicap Principle: A Missing Piece of Darwin’s Puzzle. New York: Oxford University Press.

CHAPTER 9

Religion and Economic Performance

… Of Individuals Paul Gifford, a scholar from School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London, who made an extensive study of the spread of Christianity in Africa, observed in 2007 that all forms of Christianity were growing in an explosive manner in Africa but the churches growing fastest were the ones which concentrated on “success.” Members of these churches, which Gifford labeled as “neo-Pentecostal” or “Pentecostal-like,” are expected to be “successful; if not, something is very wrong” (Gifford 2007, 20). The success promised by these churches for their members embraces all areas of life; material success, however, was paramount (Gifford 2007, 21). The testimonies of successful ones are almost all not about spiritual conquests, but material accomplishments, such as “scholarships, jobs, cars and promotions” (Gifford 2007, 21). Pastors of these churches are often called with grand titles such as “Man of God” or “Prophet” or “Mega Bishop,” and they have great powers over their congregations. Some churches have a seating capacity of 50,000 (Gifford 2007, 21). Prophets are persons of a totally different order from these massive congregations. They are totally unchallengeable: Going against a prophet is equivalent to rising against the word of God (Gifford 2007, 22). African prophets claim that they were commanded by God to make “His people rich,” just like Moses was commanded to go and set “His people free” (Gifford 2007, 21).

© The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_9

181

182

R. ERGENER

Sermons preach that motivation and positive mental attitude bring material success. If one is not successful and rich, it is his fault. One can become anything he wants—one’s own self is the only thing that can stop him. Africans should expect and demand the success which is their right and inheritance. Individual self-esteem, ambition, and confidence are emphasized. Being African does not mean subservience and poverty, Africans can succeed just like the whites do (Gifford 2007, 22). The focus is above all on entrepreneurship. Well-known entrepreneurs are presented as models to emulate. At least once during every service, worshippers at several churches are told to ask other worshippers if they have started their own businesses (Gifford 2007, 20). Gifford reports that Bill Gates can be mentioned twice in a sermon in which Christ is not mentioned at all (Gifford 2007, 21). Teachings such as “you matter,” “you belong to the top,” and “you will get what you want” motivate the churchgoers in a manner which is very much missing in African societies, where success is very rare. The churches that survived must have had a sufficient number of successful members which vindicated the veracity of their teachings (Gifford 2007, 24). Divine energy and miraculous provision were also important if not more so in achieving success, than human energy and motivation (Gifford 2007, 21). The amount of motivation and miracle needed to enable changes would be determined case by case. Miracles do not happen unless “seeds are sown”—meaning “tithes are paid” to the church. Whether and how “giving” (to the church) contributes to the material success of (the giving) individuals, are questions that beg explanation. There is no doubt however that such theology has proved extremely useful for gifted religious entrepreneurs to amass wealth (Gifford 2007, 22). Similar messages are given by the churches preaching the “prosperity gospel” in North America. Indeed, it was the “prosperity gospel” churches which most likely provided the models for the African churches which preach success. “God knows where the money is, and he knows how to get the money to you,” preaches Mrs. Copeland of the Kenneth Copeland Ministries (Goodstein 2009). “God is the Presence of Infinite Good within you here and now … and this presence is within everyone … You unlearn sickness and learn health. You unlearn poverty and know prosperity…You solve

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

183

every problem yourself!” preached His (Late) Divine Eminence, Dr. Frederick J. Eikerenkoetter II, the self-proclaimed “Apostle of Green Power, who was known affectionately as “Rev. Ike” to his followers (Schroeder 1981). “I like money. I need money. I want money. I love money in its right place. The lack of money is the root of all evil! Money is good! I bless the idea of money in my mind…” preached Rev. Ike and money came to him (and to other preachers of the prosperity gospel) through outright gifts, solicited gifts, copyright revenues, lecture fees, and the fees received for faith healing and for prayers conducted on behalf of members. Rev. Copeland created from among the members of his ministry an “Elite CX Team” whose duty it was to raise money to purchase the ministry a Citation X airplane (Goodstein 2009). Another source of revenue would be the sale of various items. Rev. Ike sold plastic “money rakes” to symbolically and magically rake prosperity. Prayer cloth which could be used for healing was available through various ministries. The prayer cloth sold by preacher Oral Roberts came with the print of the preacher’s right hand. The cloth sold by Rev. Ike was so powerful that if a single thread of one of those bargains fell by chance through the newly slit throat of one of New York’s crime victims, instant and total healing would be provided (Schroeder 1981). The altar call was a major source of revenue for all prosperity gospel preachers. “Give and God will give to you! The more you give, the more you get!” preached Reverend Ike. During his altar call, members were invited to the altar in an order based on how much they are going to donate. First, those who are going to give 100 dollars, then those who are going to give 75, then 50 and so on all the way down to those who will give 5 dollars or even 1, because of the weakness of either their faith or their purse or both. They would flock to the altar as Ike read his version of the prayer of Abraham, with the fleecing of sheep and goats and everything that happens. The hallelujahs would rise from the ranks to the gold-gilded ceiling, Ike would chant “Hold those bills high! I want everyone to see your faith! I want to hear the rustle, not the jingle!” and the ushers would collect the donations in plastic buckets, as the conventional collection baskets would be inadequate in this case (Schroeder 1981). Prosperity gospel then provides very well for its preachers, just like the Pentecostal churches of Africa provide for theirs. Again, as in Africa, it is questionable whether the members who make regular contributions to merit special prayers, who purchase various products marketed by the

184

R. ERGENER

ministries and who respond to “altar calls,” dropping or “sowing” money, like seeds, get much if anything in return for their investments. Even though such religious practices, which are undertaken explicitly with the intention of raising one’s earnings, probably fail to do so, it has been well established that various other religious practices, do indeed positively impact economic performance. Religious Attendance and Personal Income An interesting quantitative study on the impact of church attendance on the economic performance of individuals was made by Jonathan Gruber. Using data obtained from white Americans who did not have Hispanic roots and who belonged to various Christian churches, to other religions or who had no faith, Gruber reached the conclusion that if a person doubles his church attendance, his income rises by 10% (Gruber 2005). People are expected to go to church more frequently, if they are of the same faith with their neighbors. For example, Irish Catholics, who share the same neighborhood in Boston with Polish and Italian Catholics, are more likely to attend church weekly, as compared with the Irish Catholics in Minneapolis, who live in an area populated predominantly by Scandinavian Protestants. Therefore, Gruber reasoned that the density of members of same faith but of different ethnicities (or nationalities) in a city in the United States would be a good forecaster of church attendance. Since his goal was to identify the impact of religion and not of ethnicity on income, Gruber focused on the “density of co-religionists” (individuals who shared one’s religion but not ethnicity) and not on the density of the members of an ethnic group. Studies have shown that people who live in “ghettos” with others who share their ethnic roots are likely to be less well off as compared with those who do not (Economist Economic Focus 2005). After taking into consideration other differences between cities, Gruber’s findings showed that a 10% higher concentration of those who share the same religion in a neighborhood would lead to a 0.9% increase in earnings. He also estimated that a 10% rise in the concentration of those who share the same religion in an area brings about an 8.5% increase in church attendance (Economist Economic Focus 2005). In other words, Catholic Poles in Boston will both go to church more often and will be materially better off relative to Poles in Minneapolis, because in Boston

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

185

there are large numbers of non-Polish Catholics and relatively few Scandinavian Protestants, whereas there are more Scandinavian Protestants in Minnesota relative to non-Polish Catholics (Economist Economic Focus 2005). Residing in areas with different ethnic groups who share the same religion has no influence on participation in other civic activities. There are no differences between the Poles in Boston and the Poles in Minnesota with regard to joining secular organizations. After taking into consideration the general differences between cities, Gruber concludes that differences in income are caused by religious attendance (Economist Economic Focus 2005). Is Gruber right? Does a causal link between religious attendance and prosperity truly exist? And if so, how is it that going to church makes one richer? (Economist Economic Focus 2005). It is possible of course that rather than high earners earning more because they go to church frequently, high earners are also frequent churchgoers. Rather than religious behavior having an impact on other behavior, both religious behavior and other behavior can be shaped by underlying reasons. Being highly motivated and having high degree of self-control could make a person both a high achiever at work and also a frequent churchgoer (Economist Economic Focus 2005). It may therefore be more appropriate to interpret what seems like the positive impact of religious attendance on individual economic performance as a partial correlation (Guiso et al. 2003, 232). With this qualification in mind, let us look for the ways in which religious attendance can enhance economic performance of believers. Religious Attendance, Non-economic Behavior, and Economic Performance One approach is that religious attendance can positively impact certain non-economic behavior such as obeying the law, substance use, school attendance, and health and marriage, which can then have positive impact on economic performance. One should keep in mind that reservations, similar to those which apply to the studies on the relation between religion and high earnings, also apply to the studies which relate various positive behavioral outcomes to religiosity.

186

R. ERGENER

First, that the correlation between religion and good behavior is causal is far from being clear. The results may be endogenous. In other words, it is possible that “good kids … avoid drugs, stay in school, and (not because) they go to church” (Freeman 1986). Religiously brought up people may be behaving in a certain way not because of their religious upbringing but because another variable has been passed on to them through their families either through genes or training. Second, what seems like a relationship between religion and outcomes is actually to a large extent shaped by other factors as well. For example, on the average, the Catholics in the United States tend to be wealthier than the members of all other religions, with the exception of Jews. This success is generally attributed not to Catholicism as such but to the quality of the Catholic educational system (and to other reasons which we shall discuss later in this chapter). Therefore, what makes American Catholics successful is not religion as such, but the influence of the Catholic education system and church institutions. It would be wrong therefore to propose on the basis of wages received by Catholics being high in the United States that Catholicism would raise the standard of living in Latin America (Guiso et al. 2003, 231). Finally, these studies are mostly based on the United States and cannot necessarily be generalized to other countries. Once more, with above reservations in mind, let us look at some of the studies, which trace the positive impact of religiosity on income through the positive impact of religiosity on certain non-economic outcomes. Gruber claimed that regular religious participation is correlated with better education. Gruber’s claims were confirmed by Freeman (1986), who argued, based on NBER and NLS surveys, that there was a positive correlation between church attendance and school attendance. Data gathered by Sherkat and Ellison also show that high school students that attend church services regularly are more likely to attend school regularly and do their homework and graduate as compared with those who do not attend church regularly (Sherkat and Ellison 1999). Freeman also showed that among black males in the United States, church attendance had a positive correlation with employment rates and negative correlation with crime, alcohol consumption, and drug use (Freeman 1986). According to Freeman, at least some of the positive effects of church attendance can be attributable to causal impact (Freeman 1986).

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

187

Other studies also reveal a negative relationship between frequent religious participation and levels of adult crime behavior, at both the individual (Evans et al. 1995) and at the area levels (Lipford et al. 1993; Hull and Bold 1995). Violent and nonviolent crime rates were found to be lower in the United States, in states and counties with higher rates of religious membership. These results would be valid after taking into consideration other factors which can have an impact on crime rates such as police expenditures (Iannaccone 1998, 1476). High level of religious attendance is correlated with lower levels of substance abuse (Cochran and Akers 1989). Frequent religious participation is also associated with the retarding of deviant behavior of many types among youths (Bachman et al. 2014; cited in Wallace and William 1997, 4; Gruber and Mullaainathan 2006, 4). In the United States, lower levels of most “deviant” behaviors including drug use, smoking, drinking, and criminal activity are observed among youth who are raised in sectarian denominations (Bock et al. 1987; Stark and Bainbridge 1987). Being religious seems to have a positive influence on health as well. Strict religious rules with regard to smoking and alcohol make a difference (Levin 1994). Members of strict religions such as Mormons and SeventhDay Adventists who do not tolerate smoking, drinking, drug use, and other types of behavior have lower rates of cancer, stroke, hypertension, and heart disease, and they live longer, as compared with the rest of the population who do not follow such strict rules (Iannaccone 1998, 1477). Non-marital sex is less common among those who are more religious (Green 2003). AIDS among Muslims in Central Africa and Christians in Uganda is reduced, and this may be because of the restraints imposed on sexual activity by religion (Green 2003). Religiosity is correlated with marital stability (Lehrer and Chiswick 1993) and lower divorce rates (Heaton and Pratt 1990). This can be explained by religious teachings and rules and also by the strengthening of religious bonds by the couple being of same religion and of same denomination (Becker et al. 1977). Rate of divorce is significantly lower among those sect members who are married with members of the same sect as compared with those who are married with members of different sects or those who are of less sectarian religious backgrounds (Lehrer and Chiswick 1993). Religious believers may be better equipped for success in life, because they are less concerned with daily problems—the assumption being that

188

R. ERGENER

those who are less concerned with daily problems tend to be more successful (Economist Economic Focus 2005). Various studies point to a correlation between religiosity and self-reported measures of well-being (Ellison 1991; Hout and Greeley 2003). The change that takes place in self-reported happiness as one moves from never-attending church service to attending weekly is comparable to a move from the bottom to top income quartile (Gruber and Mullaainathan 2006). This may be because religion can relieve the effects of upsetting events on subjective well-being (Levin 1994). One of the ways religion can reduce the distress caused by a decline in self-perceived well-being is by reducing the value associated with such changes. Cross-sectional data from Europe show that divorce has less of a drop in the happiness of Catholics than it does in that of the nonreligious. Along the same lines, well-being of members of religious organizations is less affected by unemployment as compared with those who are not members of such organizations (Clark and Lelkes 2005). Various empirical studies show that levels of religious commitment and activity are positively associated with mental health, lower stress, and contentment of life (Ellison 1991). These results are valid when other factors that can have an impact on mental health, such as stress and life satisfaction, age, income, education, gender, race, marital status, place of residence, social ties, and the traumatic events one has had to live through, are also taken into account (Ellison 1991). Empirical evidence seems to show that the tendency to commit suicide is lower with religious individuals, another sign of mental health (Bainbridge 1989; Pescosolido and Georgianna 1989). In his 1897 study on the impact of religiosity on suicide rates, Durkheim had found that suicide rates were lower in the more Catholic communities than in Protestant ones. Durkheim had attributed this difference not to Catholic teachings on suicide, but rather to the Catholic communities being more integrated than Protestant ones as Catholicism tends to promote integration and regulate standards of faith, piety, and moral conduct through ritual and community action (Ellison et al. 1997). Religion and Social Support One of the explanations for the positive correlation between mental health and religiosity can be the positive correlation between church involvement and social solidarity and support. (Levin 1994)

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

189

Church attendance can provide a sort of happiness insurance. In a study conducted in the United States, this finding was found to be true mainly for the blacks. Regularly attending church service provides blacks with significant happiness insurance. Income shocks on happiness are almost fully offset if attendance is weekly rather than once a year. For whites, religious attendance has no statistically significant happiness insurance effect. However, weekly rather than once a year attendance offsets about one-third of the effect of income shocks on happiness for the whites as well (Dehejia et al. 2007, 261). Religious networks are one of the social networks which, together with families and the local community, make up for the failure of private and government to remedy individual income shocks. Churchgoers provide for each other not only mutual emotional but also financial insurance which allows them to recover more quickly from setbacks (Economist Economic Focus 2005). If capital markets were perfect, the optimal consumption of consumers would be insensitive to transitory changes in income: They would borrow in the formal capital market against expected income and maintain their level of consumption (Dehejia et al. 2007, 260). In reality, people have only limited opportunities to make such borrowing. Private companies do not offer insurance against income risk, and the government insures income risk only partially, mainly through the taxation system, transfer payments, unemployment insurance, and similar programs (Dehejia et al. 2007, 260). Consequently, substitute instruments have been developed to shelter consumption from income shocks. In response to a fall in income, individuals can protect their consumption by using savings (Leland 1968) or by having more family members join the labor force (Cullen and Gruber 2000). In this context, religious organizations can play an important role in the provision of social capital and in the fostering of norms of mutual aid and reciprocity (Putnam 2000). Membership in such groups is costly, which limits the number of potential beneficiaries and makes it easier to correctly identify and meet needs (Iannaccone 1992; Berman 2000). The monitoring of fellow members within the group reduces the possibility of moral wrongdoing and deception. One of the hypotheses Dhejia et al. investigate in their 2007 paper is whether religious organizations provide consumption insurance against income shocks (Dehejia et al. 2007, 260). Their findings show that being

190

R. ERGENER

involved in religious organizations eliminates 40% of the decline in consumption caused by a fall in income. “Being involved in religious organizations” is measured in the Consumer Expenditure Survey, CEX,1 as making any contribution to a religious organization (Dehejia et al. 2007, 261). These findings are correct primarily for white households, who make up the larger share of the sample. It is not clear whether the same outcomes would be true for blacks as well (Dehejia et al. 2007, 261). Another interesting case of religious establishment functioning as a provider of social (and financial and moral) insurance against income shocks is provided by Chen in Indonesia (Chen 2010). In Indonesia, households experiencing decline in their income are more likely to join Qur’an study groups and switch their children to Islamic schools. Those who did so would find it easier to receive alms and credit to meet their basic income needs within four months, as compared with those who did not (Chen 2010, 343). When credit is easily available, there is no marked tendency for families to spend more time studying Islam. Those who benefit most from the alms and credit following an increase in religious studies are households who were not religious previously (Chen 2010, 343). Social insurance is likely to be less significant for those who are at least partially insured through religion against changes in consumption and happiness, brought about by oscillations in income. Conversely, the availability of social insurance can lead to a reduction of the demand for insurance provided by religion (Hungerman 2005; Gruber and Hungerman 2007). A reduction in social insurance will lead to a rise in the demand for insurance provided by religious organizations and to a rise in their influence, even if the country remains secular with the separation of church and state (Dehejia et al. 2007, 277). Indeed, demand for social insurance is likely to be relatively lower in areas and among individuals that are more religious (Stasavage and Scheve 2005, 2006). Sectarian denominations practice strong mutual community support (Iannaccone and Berman 2006b, 118). In the United States, members of Christian sects donate a high share of their income to the members of their own communities (Iannaccone 1998). The same is true for Judaism

1 “The CEX is a nationally representative survey of roughly 5000 households per year, is the basic source of data for the construction of the items and weights in the market basket of consumer purchases to be priced for the Consumer Price Index, and is widely regarded as the best source of U.S. consumption expenditure data” (Dehejia et al. 2007, 261).

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

191

and Islam. Ultra-Orthodox Jews both in Israel and the rest of the world have more extensive networks of mutual support than (Iannaccone and Berman 2006a, 118) the less observant Judaic denominations (Berman 2000). When the secular provision of basic services such as schooling, health care, poverty programs, property rights, financial services, and police protection are negatively affected by poor government or civil disorder, sects can step into fill the vacuum (Iannaccone and Berman 2006a, b). The main reason why radical Islamist groups enjoy broad support, especially among the poorer segments of society, is because they supply mutual aid and social services (Iannaccone and Berman 2006a, 118). So far, we have considered the impact of religiosity on family income in general—with no focus on the possible differences between different religions. We will now review some of the studies (mainly of Lisa A. Keister) on the different influences different religions in the United States have— not on household income, but on another indicator of well-being, household wealth (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; Featherman 1971; Greeley 1969; Lenski 1963b; Glenn and Hyland 1967; Roof 1989; Keister 2003, 2008). Religion and Wealth Wealth of a household is its net worth—value of the total assets minus the value of total obligations (Keister 2008, 1238). Religion is likely to impact wealth ownership as religion is likely to impact the timing and ordering of marriage (and divorce), the timing and number of children, educational aspirations and attainment, gender roles with regard to labor force participation (Keister 2008, 1251). Religion also directly affects wealth accumulation by defining the socially important goals, by forming a reservoir of expertise and info that one can resort to when making financial choices and by playing a role in determining who one’s social contacts are (Keister 2003, 199). Indeed, Lisa Keister finds sharp differences in the United States among religious groups, namely Jews, Catholics, mainline Protestants, and Conservative Protestants (CPs), with regard to wealth ownership. The faith of CPs is relatively old-style. They take the Bible as the undisputable word of God. They attach importance to personal transformative experiences and believe that Christian faith can be applied to the solution of public issues (Sherkat and Ellison 1999; Woodberry and Smith

192

R. ERGENER

1998). Assembly of God, Baptist, Churches of Christ, Church of God in Christ, Nazarene, and Pentecostal are among the best-known and more sizeable CP churches (“Conservative Protestant denominations are sometimes called ‘Evangelical,’” but as explained in Smith c2000; Woodberry and Smith 1998 “in reality Evangelicals are a subset of CPs”; cited in Keister 2008, 1238, footnote 3). Roughly 25% of all Americans belong to a CP denomination (1998 General Social Survey, cited in Keister 2008, 1238). Mainline Protestants belong to high-status families and are relatively wealthy (Keister 2003, 2005; Sherkat and Ellison 1999). Mainline Protestant churches include Episcopalians, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Unitarians. These churches have more liberal theologies and are more open to social change (Keister 2007, 7). Jews and Conservative Protestants are at the opposite tails of wealth distribution. Whereas the Jews are the wealthiest, CPs are the poorest in terms of wealth ownership. (In 1998, the mean net worth of Jewish families was twice as high as the average for a sample of adult Americans. The median net worth was three times as high [Keister 2003, 187].) With regard to wealth ownership, mainline Protestants and Catholics are similar to each other and to the national median (Keister 2003, 173). Religion seems to be a determinant of wealth, independent of race. Both black and white CPs have low wealth (Keister 2008, 1254). More specifically, with regard to financial asset ownership, CPs are the least well off as compared with members of other faiths (Keister 2003, 2005). In 2000, the median and the mean net worth of the CPs in the NLSY (National Longitudinal Survey of Youth) were equal to roughly to 40% of what it was for the full sample (Keister 2008, 1250). Until about a generation ago, Roman Catholic families used to be behind particularly the mainline Protestants families on a number of measures of well-being (Glenn and Hyland 1967; Lenski 1963b; Sherkat and Ellison 1999). This has changed as significant changes took place in certain demographic behaviors of non-Hispanic whites raised in Catholic families that affect wealth ownership, including fertility, education, and income (Keister 2007, 2). Let us now discuss how differences observed between religious groups with regard to marriage, fertility, and education impact wealth accumulation.

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

193

Religion, Marriage, Child Ownership, Education, and Wealth Marriage makes two individuals combine their assets within a single household, thereby leading to an increase in wealth. Marriage also encourages couples to save, as it creates common goals with regard to areas such as homeownership and retirement (Keister 2007, 4). Divorce on the other hand tends to reduce wealth as it leads to the division of assets, with the former partners maintaining two households rather than one and each partner making payments that she did not have to do before, like payments for legal fees that reduce the total sum of the assets which previously belonged to the family unit (Keister 2007, 4). Religious affiliation has an indirect impact on wealth ownership, for, the religion one belongs to affects the choice of a spouse (Lehrer 1998; Sherkat 2004), the likelihood of marriage (Hammond et al. 1993; Mosher et al. 1992; cited in Keister 2007, 4), marital stability (Lehrer and Chiswick 1993; cited in Keister 2007, 4), and the likelihood of divorce (Call and Heaton 1997; Filsinger and Wilson 1984; cited in Keister 2007, 4). CP couples tend to marry early. Getting married at a young age can put off professional self-advancement plans and those for schooling and, thus, have a negative impact on wealth accumulation. However, early marriage also makes it possible for married couples to combine their assets, buy a house, and make other joint savings for a longer period. Therefore, the negative impact of early marriage on wealth is slight: Strong positive influence of current marital status on wealth makes up for the negative influence of early marriage (Keister 2008, 1251). Catholic marriage and marital stability rates are high (Lehrer 1998; Sherkat 2004; Sherkat and Ellison 1999; cited in Keister 2007, 4). Marriages between persons with similar propensities (known as homogamy) are exceptionally high with Catholics. The marriage partners being of the same religion raises the likelihood of their having same attitudes and practices with regard to finance. If these attitudes and practices are favorable to savings, as it is with Catholics, marriage will have a positive impact on savings and wealth. Homogamy is high also among Jews, reinforcing the traits that favor wealth accumulation (Kalmijn 1991; Lehrer 1998; Lazerwitz 1995; Thornton 1985). Families with one or two children tend to be wealthier than families who don’t have any children, as having children prompts mothers and

194

R. ERGENER

fathers to raise their savings and to buy homes (Keister 2008, 1240). However, as the number of children rises above two, wealth declines significantly, because of the rise in expenses (Keister 2008, 1240). If the parents are young, child ownership puts limits on the schooling and career development opportunities for the young parents and limits their initial savings and investments that could lead to lifelong asset appreciation (Keister 2008, 1240). Members of religions with low fertility rates are likely to accumulate more wealth over their lives (Keister 2003, 175). Low fertility means less strain on the financial resources of the family and that family wealth is not as much diluted through inheritance. High fertility is likely to have a negative impact on wealth accumulation for an individual over a lifetime, as more siblings one has, the less the family resources available per child is going to be, both in moral and material terms (Lehrer 1999; Thornton 1985; cited in Keister 2003, 178). One of the trends observed in the United States with regard to religious affiliation and fertility is that fertility rates are relatively low in Jewish families (Chiswick 1986; DellaPergola 1980; cited in Keister 2003, 177). With the CPs, traditional attitudes have led to relatively high fertility. CP couples tend to have children when they are relatively younger (Pearce 2002; Keister 2008, 1240) and they have large families (Lehrer 1996; Marcum 1981; Keister 2008, 1240). In the past, Catholic families used to be larger than mainline Protestant families (Alwin 1986; Lenski 1963a; Sherkat and Ellison 1999). Nowadays, with regard to the likelihood of their remaining childless and with regard to the age at which they have their first baby, US Catholics are similar to mainline Protestants (Lehrer 1996; Marcum 1981, 1986; cited in Keister 2008, 1240). Parenting styles and parent–children relations are influenced by religion (Bartkowski and Ellison 1995; Ellison et al. 1996; Ellison and Sherkat 1993; cited in Keister 2008, 1239). One area in which the influence of religion on the parenting style is most pronounced is through education (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; Lehrer 1999; Glenn and Hyland 1967; Greeley 1969; Lenski 1963a). Education by itself is one of the strongest determinants of wealth, and it also has an impact on other determinants of wealth such as family size, female labor force participation, and income. Religion plays a role in determining both the quality of education and the years of schooling

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

195

one receives (Keister 2007, 5). Members of religions that favor education are likely to receive better quality and more years of education (Keister 2003, 175). History has led Jewish culture to put heavy emphasis on the development of human capital, hence education (Brenner and Kiefer 1981; cited in Keister 2003, 177). Jewish mothers are more likely to stay home when their children are young (Chiswick 1988; DellaPergola 1980). The net outcome is higher child quality with Jewish children, which leads to higher educational attainment and to the associated returns (Chiswick 1986; Lehrer 1999; Wilder 1996; Wilder and Walters 1998; cited in Keister 2003, 177). CPs have relatively low level of schooling (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; Sherkat and Ellison 1999; cited in Keister 2008, 1240). Their educational attainment is significantly lower than the attainment of members of other faiths (Keister 2008, 1040). The reasons for the poor educational attainment of the CPs are their literal interpretation of the Bible and their opposition to formal schooling and science, which stems from their approach to the sacred texts (Sikkink 1999; Darnell and Sherkat 1997; cited in Keister 2008, 1240). Accepting all that is written in the Bible as true does not go well with science and formal education, the goals of which are the pursuit of truth. Also, the large number of children in the typical CP family reduces the resources available per child (Lehrer 1999). Typically, CP children are home educated or they attend Christian schools (Keister 2008, 1240). Educational attainment drops drastically after high school as they follow the advice of the church leaders not to send their children to secular colleges (Lehrer 1999). US Catholics were known for moderate educational attainment, lower than those of mainline Protestants (Keister 2007, 5). In recent decades however, there has been a major improvement in the education performance of both male and female Catholics (Keister 2007, 5). This may be partly because the Catholics are no longer immigrants (Borjas 2000). Also, Catholic schools lead their students to success in every way, including higher test scores (Bryk et al. n.d.; Hoffer et al. 1985; Sander c1995), higher probability of completing high school and attending college (Evans and Schwab 1995; Neal 1997; cited in Keister 2005, 2007), higher rates of college graduation (Neal 1997; cited in Keister 2007, 5), and higher salaries and wages as graduates (Neal 1997; cited in Keister 2007, 5). The reason for the success of Catholic school students may be

196

R. ERGENER

due to tight discipline, increased social capital (Keister 2007, 4–5) created by parents’ networks, and administration that takes into consideration parents’ choices and consensus more so than what is possible in public schools (Coleman et al. 1982a, b; cited in Keister 2007, 5). Roughly two-thirds of all Catholics attend Catholic schools for at least a few years and about one-third for at least seven years (D’antonio et al. 2001; cited in Keister 2005, 2007). Catholic orders are well known for the support they give to schools both with social and religious and also secular goals (Samuelsson and Coleman 1993; Greeley c2004; cited in Keister 2005, 2007). Franciscan and Jesuits stand out in this respect (Keister 2007, 5). Religion, Strategies, Values, and Wealth Religion plays a role in the teaching of the strategies and behaviors that lead to savings and wealth, by raising the value attached to such strategies and behaviors. Strategies and tactics that keep one out of debt and work manners that stimulate savings are mostly acquired. Those who do not have an opportunity to learn such strategies, tactics, and manners when they are growing up are likely to experience difficulties in amassing wealth as adults. One learns savings behavior from family members and from close acquaintances as well as in school and at church, during religious ceremonies and activities (Chiteji and Stafford 1999, 2000; cited in Keister 2008, 1241). Because almost all religious teachings encourage savings and rightful and straight living, those who attend church are likely to live modestly which will open up the way to savings and wealth accumulation (Keister 2003, 178). Decisions related to work and finance are based partly on values (Keister 2003; Swidler 1986; cited in Keister 2007, 3). Values are expressions of how worthy actions and outcomes are. Defining and distinguishing desirable behavior which is valued and undesirable behavior that is not, is one of the primary goals of religion. Rituals, symbols, beliefs, and expectations that one is exposed to through her religious affiliation and the associated religious ceremonies lead her to identify what objectives are worthwhile. Most American religions value hard work, saving, and investment (Keister 2003, 179). Working for certain organizations and in certain professions is valued by religion. All faiths agree that money is meaningful and that finances are intimately related to values (Wuthnow 1998;

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

197

Zelizer 1978; cited in Keister 2007, 5). But, what types of work and what types of financial behavior are valued, vary according to one’s faith. For historical reasons, Jews are more inclined to invest in financial and more liquid assets rather than real estate and other fixed assets (Keister 2003, 178). Jewish culture regards wealth as a sign of accomplishment (Stryker 1981; cited in Keister 2003, 177). Rather than emphasizing the other world and downgrading worldly rewards, Jewish families inspire and support the pursuit of worldly goals including wealth accumulation and the routes leading to wealth, such as high-income careers and wise investments. Jewish families have a strong cultural disposition toward education and professional status. Jewish children grow up with the awareness that they are expected to be successful in this world. Observing the behavior of the parents which has led to their (the parents’) worldly success enhances the development of such skills with children and contributes to their eventual fulfilling of their parents’ expectations of them (Keister 2003, 177). Conservative Protestants do not object to worldly pursuits, so long as such pursuits do not endanger their souls (Darnell and Sherkat 1997; cited in Keister 2003, 179). CP values regarding money, finances, and work are rather unique and quite the opposite of Jewish ones. Unlike the Jews, CPs prefer to invest in real estate rather than financial assets (Keister 2003, 179). But, there is more. For the CPs, too much accumulation is not desirable. There are three reasons as to why this is so (Keister 2008, 1243). First, too much accumulation may lead one to become too obsessed with worldly riches rather than the spiritual ones. “No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money” (Luke 16:10–13). The Bible also points out that the “love of money is the root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tim. 6:10) People “who want to get rich fall into temptation” (1 Tim. 6:9), and that “a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15). That is, savings can distract one from the true object of value. Where one gives her tithes and offerings shows what she values (Kreider 2002, 29). Because they are concerned primarily about their finances, first thing those who invest in stocks look at, in their daily newspaper, is the stock market.

198

R. ERGENER

Secondly, even if it were morally acceptable, accumulation of material things is a poor investment, as worldly belongings will not survive the fire that will consume the material world (Alcorn 2003, 18–19). Finally, accumulating too many worldly goods is not necessary because our stay on earth is short and once it is over, it is God who will take care of us during afterlife, which will last forever. It would be more prudent to invest in the other world by giving money away to support charities and as tithes directly to god (or to his church and to his ministers), rather than accumulating wealth (Alcorn 2003, 21; cited in Keister 2008, 1243). All this is related to the key CP belief that money belongs to God (Keister 2008, 1264). It is primarily because god owns all, it is required to return some wealth back to God and to use remainder to do God’s works (Keister 2008, 1242). Many references in the Bible indicate that God is the one and only owner of worldly riches (Lev. 25:23; Deut. 10:14; Ps. 24:1; Ps. 50:10–12). CPs are not likely to change the savings behavior that they learn from their parents and their environment, because large majority of CPs never leave their faith (Roof 1989; cited in Keister 2008, 1241). Also, CPs are unlikely to marry those who are members of other religions, which block one of the possible routes to the development and expansion of their abilities and strat-egies to save and accumulate (Kalmijn 1991; Thornton 1985; cited in Keister 2003, 180). Consequently, low-savings patterns tend to accumulate through generations, reducing savings and asset inheritance in each generation. Compared with other religious groups, Catholic attitude toward work tends to be more instrumental. That is, for the Catholics, work is undertaken to attain certain outcomes, but not necessarily to enjoy in and of itself (Tropman c1995, c2002; cited in Keister 2007, 6). Work is a way to earn money to buy necessities. Catholics also tend to have a strong family orientation. Their motivation to work is extrinsic and usually oriented toward the family (Tropman c2002; cited in Keister 2007, 6). The roots of the family orientation are based on the recent immigrant experience and the strong ethnic ties involved in immigration (Borjas 2000, 2001; Keister 2007, 6). Even though they have largely assimilated, evidence shows that the strong family focus has persisted with white non-Hispanic Catholics (Tropman c2002; cited in Keister 2007, 6). Although an instrumental attitude can reduce the incentive to work, the strong family orientation makes Catholics relatively hard workers (D’antonio et al. 2001; Greeley 1979; cited in Keister 2007, 6). They work hard even if they work

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

199

only as much as necessary to provide for their families. Catholic households with two adults are likely to have two earners, as gender roles tend to be egalitarian (Oats 1989; Keister 2007, 6). Wealth research shows that having two earners in a family has an important positive impact on asset accumulation (Keister 2007, 6). Having two hardworking earners suggests that the Catholic family will have enough to save and to accumulate assets (Keister 2007, 6). Like their attitude to work, Catholic attitude toward money is instrumental. Money is a tool used to buy necessities (Tropman c1995, c2002; Keister 2007, 6). Otherwise, money has no intrinsic value (DeBerri et al. 2003; Thibodeau et al. 1997; cited in Keister 2007, 6). Their strong family orientation however leads Catholics to save and invest in ways that will ensure their families are secure (Tropman c2002; cited in Keister 2007, 6). With the Catholics then, the strong extrinsic motivation provided by the desire to take care of the family makes up for the reduction in saving that an instrumental view of money can lead to. Overall, for Catholics, religious affiliation should have a direct positive effect on wealth (Keister 2007, 6). In addition, the tradition of tithing with the Catholic church is not strong enough to dilute the amount of income available for Catholic families to save (Chaves and Miller 1998; D’antonio et al. 2001; Keister 2007, 6). There is some evidence that Catholics are community-oriented (Greeley 1989; Tropman c2002; cited in Keister 2007, 6), and they may be relatively more likely to volunteer and otherwise be generous (Regnerus et al. 1998; Nelson c2003; cited in Keister 2007, 6). Yet there is little evidence that tithing reduces their disposable income in a way that would slow wealth accumulation (Steen 1996; cited in Keister 2007, 6). Religious affiliation and participation can affect wealth accumulation also by contributing to the building of social contacts. Social contacts are valuable in obtaining information that facilitates wealth ownership such as information about business opportunities or capital for investing. Again, social contacts cultivate values and norms that encourage positive behaviors and long-term investment in relationships (Sherkat and Ellison 1999; cited in Keister 2003, 181). One can obtain capital to start a business or to make a down payment on a home through social contacts (Keister 2003, 176). The value of the information that contacts will have and their ability to assist coreligionists will vary by religion (Keister 2003, 176). Such

200

R. ERGENER

opportunities were found to be relatively high in American Jewish families (Sherkat and Ellison 1999; cited in Keister 2003, 178). Information about investment tactics and prospects and access to funds to finance investments, which make investing feasible for young people, can be reached through family links and through one’s immediate Jewish circles and through social connections nurtured at schools and universities. No matter the quality of contacts provided, simple church attendance can contribute to the building of networks of trust and therefore to the economic prosperity of the attendees and of the community. “Virtually every commercial transaction has within itself an element of trust, certainly any transaction conducted over a period of time” (Arrow 1972, 357). Empirical papers show that economic performance of a community is positively affected by the prevailing level of trust (Knack and Keefer 1997; Zak and Knack 2001; cited in Guiso et al. 2006, 34). Being near those with whom one shares the same religion can lead to an increase in the total number of social interactions and of trust. Temples can therefore function as civic organizations which help to build a web of relationships that cultivates trust. Such webs of relationships are labeled as “social capital.” Social capital helps to smooth out business dealings and reduces transactions costs (Sacerdote and Glaeser 2001; Putnam 2000; cited in Gruber 2005, 27). Yet, being close-knit does not necessarily lead a group to prosperity. Gypsies or Roma are a close-knit minority but they do not prosper in business like some other religious groups do (McClelland 1976; cited in Noland 2003, 2).

… Of Nations It has been argued that the network approach trivializes religion by reducing it to one of the many paths leading to the creation of social capital. Yes, religious organizations are one of the many different types of social organizations. Yet (as Weber pointed out), temples are more than social clubs. The cultural facets of religion such as community support, prayers, and academic institutions are significant not only because they help to build up social capital, but also and primarily because they influence beliefs and, through beliefs, behavior—which impacts productivity and economic growth (McCleary 2007, 50).

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

201

It being the only social organization with the capability to provide otherworldly rewards and punishments such as salvation, damnation, and nirvana makes religion a particularly powerful motivator of worldly behavior. Fear of otherworldly punishment and hope for heavenly rewards can raise productivity and spur investment and economic growth by reinforcing desirable personality traits such as honesty, trust, work ethic, thrift, hospitality to strangers, and so on. It is possible of course that beliefs about afterlife can promote violence. This is the “dark side of religion” (McCleary and Barro 2006, 51). Religion also has costs. Such costs consist of time spent on worship by congregants and religious officials, cost of temples, and precious sacraments. It is economically desirable or more cost-efficient to minimize the costs of religion per amount of belief. Beliefs, Participation, and Economic Growth Barro and McCleary consider beliefs among the outputs of the religion sector and attending or performance of religious services as the inputs. “Believing relative to belonging (or attending) is the main channel through which religion matters for economic and other outcomes” (McCleary and Barro 2006, 51). “Church attendance affects religious beliefs, which affect individual traits, which in turn affect individual and aggregate economic outcomes” (Barro and McCleary 2003a, 779). For example, beliefs in heaven and hell might affect individual traits by creating perceived rewards and punishments that relate to “good” and “bad” lifetime behavior. A religion which requires more attendance for a given amount of beliefs is less efficient than a religion which requires less attendance for the same amount of beliefs. Higher church attendance should therefore be expected to have a negative influence on economic performance. Using the framework described in Barro and Sala-i-Martin (Barro and Sala-i-Martin 2003, Chapter 12), Barro and McCleary inquired about the relationship between certain variables and the growth rate of per capita GDP over three 10-year periods—1965–1975, 1975–1985, and 1985–1995. Among the variables considered are “per capita GDP, life expectancy, years of school attainment, the total fertility rate, average ratios of investment and government consumption to GDP, an international openness measure, based on the ratio of exports plus imports

202

R. ERGENER

to GDP, changes in the terms of trade, subjective measures of maintenance of the rule of law and democracy, and the inflation rate” (Barro and McCleary 2003a, 772). To this list of explanatory variables, Barro and McCleary added measures of religiosity, measured as attendance in religious services (Barro and McCleary 2003a, 772). Barro and McCleary found that religion-based dogmas, particularly beliefs in afterlife, boosted economic growth. Even though the fear of the stick from hell seemed to be more effective in stimulating positive economic behavior than the carrot from heaven, the difference was not very strong (McCleary and Barro 2006, 66–67). With beliefs as given, growth rate dropped in response to a rise in participation at formal religious services (McCleary 2007, 50). “Higher levels of church attendance depress economic growth because greater attendance signifies a larger use of resources by the religion sector, and the main output of this sector (the religious beliefs) has already been held constant. The results do not mean that greater church attendance has a net negative influence on economic growth - this net effect depends on the extent to which an increase in attendance leads to stronger beliefs, which in turn encourage growth” (Barro and McCleary 2003b, 779). Attendance at religious services can also be a sign of the power the church has on the legal system, which has an influence on economic incentives. General discouragement of the profit motive, restrictions on credit and insurance would adversely affect economic incentives. Legislation and regulation aimed at curtailing fraud and corruption would have a positive impact (Barro and McCleary 2003b, 772). Overall, Muslims have strong religious beliefs and their religious beliefs are stronger than their religiosity, as measured by attendance. This is very impressive when one considers that Muslims have the highest attendance at religious services, followed by Catholics (Barro and McCleary 2003a, 36). Again, belief in paradise and netherworld is the highest for Muslims, followed by Catholics (Barro and McCleary 2003a, 36). With strong beliefs and strong attendance, Muslim economies should be growing at unusually high rates. Yet this has not been the case. Muslim economies may not be growing as fast as they could because Muslim legal and regulatory systems discourage economic activity (Kuran emphasizes that Muslim legal structures restrict contracts, credit, insurance, and corporate ownership. We shall discuss these in more detail in the following chapter [Kuran 2004]). Barro and McCleary tested this proposal using a dummy variable for whether religion does have an effect on a country’s

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

203

laws and regulations. The results failed to confirm that Muslim legal and regulatory practices had negative effect on economic growth (McCleary and Barro 2006, 69). Based on these results, special aspect of religion with regard to economic performance seems to be belief formation (McCleary and Barro 2006, 68). “Religion does not seem to operate as a social organization that enhances productive social capital and networking. If that were true, there would be a positive relation between growth and participation in formal services, rather than the negative relation found in the data.” Durlauf and colleagues propose that the studies which show that religiosity and religious beliefs are good for growth are an artifice of ad hoc modeling choices and that there is no compelling case that such relationships exist (Durlauf et al. 2012, 1068). Durlauf and colleagues place Barro and McCleary’s model within a larger one. They retain the set of variables by Barro and McCleary, and they supplement them with the canonical Neoclassical Growth variables and other variables which are believed to impact growth rate. More recent growth literature suggests that a set of basic determinants such as geography, institutions, and fractionalization can make a difference in the growth rate of an economy. Durlauf and colleagues include a climate variable which is the share of a country that is tropical and subtropical and a measure of geographic isolation which is the share of a country that is within 100 km of an ice-free coast (Durlauf et al. 2012, 1067). As an approximation of ethnic fractionalization, Durlauf and colleagues use linguistic fractionalization (Alesina et al. 2003; cited in Durlauf et al. 2012, 1068), which is a measure of the likelihood that two persons arbitrarily picked from a population would not have the same mother tongue (Durlauf et al. 2012, 1068). Following Acemoglu and Johnson (Acemoglu and Johnson 2005), Durlauf and colleagues (2012) include in their analysis two measures of economic institutions. The first is a measure of property rights protections, which is the average value of expropriation risk of private investments. The other is a measure of the enforcement of economic contracts, based on the number of steps necessary to take a bounced check (Durlauf et al. 2012, 1968). In contrast to the research of Barro and McCleary (2003b), Durlauf and colleagues fail to find persuasive proof that religious beliefs, for example beliefs in the punishments of hell or the rewards of paradise, have a vigorous correlation with growth. The findings of Durlauf and colleagues

204

R. ERGENER

bring limited support to the idea that monthly church attendance can have a negative impact on growth (Durlauf et al. 2012, 68). Beliefs, Attitudes, and Economic Growth Guiso, Sapienza, and Zingales also studied the relation between religion and economic growth and reached the conclusion “that religious belief is positively associated with attitudes which contribute to economic growth”. (Dehejia et al. 2007, 260)

Religion is an important cultural institution. Culture consists of “customary beliefs and values that ethnic, religious, and social groups transmit fairly unchanged from generation to generation” (Guiso et al. 2006, 23). Based on this definition, if religion is to have an impact on the economy, it will be through beliefs and values (or preferences). Beliefs and values have a direct impact on expectations and preferences, and expectations have an impact on economic outcomes. In order to establish a causal link, one should concentrate on inherited rather than voluntarily accumulated culture (Guiso et al. 2006, 24). Even though cultural traditions can be changing to optimize economic efficiency, these changes are likely to lag behind the changes in economic life (Guiso et al. 2006, 25). There are a number of reasons for this. First, culture changes slowly because parents have a tendency to bring up their children as their parents brought them up, regardless of whether the old ways are optimal under new conditions. A striking example is the wearing by Mursi women of Ethiopia of large lip ornaments made of clay which disfigure the lips and force the removal of some of the front teeth. This practice was introduced among the Mursi women to make them less interesting as commodities for the slave traders (Carillet and Gordon 2003; cited in Guiso et al. 2003). Even though the reason for this tradition is lost today, some Mursi women still wear such lip ornaments (Guiso et al. 2006, 25). Second, organizations like the state and the church and academia which play a role in promoting culture might have a vested interest in promoting the continuation of certain beliefs as those beliefs can be providing them with rents (Guiso et al. 2006, 25). Finally, some cultural norms which negatively affect economic output can at the same time be raising fertility which will enable such norms to

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

205

spread in a population even though they are inefficient (Guiso et al. 2006, 25). Religious beliefs are not necessarily based on sacred texts. Rather, beliefs are distilled over time and passed on to future generations. Therefore, the negative or positive correlation between attitudes and economic outcomes cannot be attributed to sacred texts as such but to the religiouscultural traditions and the way they have evolved as a consequence of historical developments (Guiso et al. 2003, 230). Guiso, Sapienza, and Zingales studied the religion-related attitudes with regard to following areas that might have an impact on the economy: “(1) trust and cooperation, (2) working women, (3) the government, (4) the law, (5) the market and its fairness, (6) thriftiness and (7) tolerance” (Guiso et al. 2003, 225). They found that religious beliefs were correlated positively with attitudes that were associated with higher income and growth. The correlation was stronger with Christian beliefs. Trust and cooperation have positive impact on growth (Zak and Knack 2001; Knack and Keefer 1997; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232). Intolerance has negative impact (Landes 1999; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232). Attitudes toward women can enlarge or limit the size of the labor pool (Guiso et al. 2003, 232). Attitudes toward the government are important because political instability has a negative impact on investments (Alesina and Perotti 1995; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232) and economic growth (Barro 1991; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232). Attitudes toward the law affect a country’s law-and-order tradition, which in turn affects financial development (LaPorta et al. 1997; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232) and growth. Corruption has a strong negative impact on growth (Mauro 1995; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232). Pro-market policies favor growth (Easton and Walker 1997; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 232). Weber attributed the success of Protestants’ being superior to their being thrifty. Thrift is important also in the modern theory of growth (Guiso et al. 2003, 227). As compared with those who are not religious, religious people have more trust in others, in the government, in the legal system, and in market outcomes and they are less willing to break the law. Whether religiosity leads to the strengthening of market implements such as “incentives, competition, and private property” is not as clear (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Religious participation and religious upbringing both play a role in shaping attitudes. “Trust toward others is associated mostly with religious

206

R. ERGENER

participation, not religious upbringing” (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Intolerance toward immigrants is correlated with having been brought up religious. As compared with the rest of the population, active churchgoers are as tolerant toward immigrants but less favorable toward women’s rights (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Both religious participation and upbringing raise trust toward government institutions (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Guiso, Sapienza and Zingales find that there are differences between members of different religions with regard to attitudes related to economic growth. It is not clear with certainty which religion has a stronger positive impact on growth. In order to establish this with more accuracy, one needs to know the relative importance of various attitudes on economic growth. Also stronger evidence is needed to prove that the statistical relations are causal (Guiso et al. 2003, 280). Despite the uncertainties, there are some findings which point to differences between religions with regard to economic growth. Active members of all religions have more trust in government than the non-religious do, with the Buddhists being the exception. Hindus and Muslims have more trust in the government than the Catholics and Protestant (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Increase in trust with an increase in religious services is true only for Christians and stronger for Protestants than for Catholics, as Putnam proposed (Putnam 1993; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Members of all religious denominations are less tolerant as compared with the non-religious, the Buddhists being the only exception. Hindus and Muslims, followed by Jews, Catholics, and Protestants, are less tolerant towards immigrants and other races (Landes 1999; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Religious people belonging to all faiths, with the exception of Buddhists, are likely to believe that the poor are lazy and devoid of willpower. Protestants are more likely to have this opinion than Catholics (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Members of all religious denominations have a less positive approach toward women’s rights, as compared with the non-religious. Least positive are the Muslims (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). “Judaism has the strongest negative impact on the willingness to cheat on taxes, followed by Protestantism (second), Catholicism and Hinduism (third), and Islam (fourth)” (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). The strongest negative attitude toward accepting bribes is with Buddhists, followed by Protestants and Muslims, with the Catholics being the last (Guiso et al. 2003, 228) Muslims and Hindus are strongly opposed to competition (Guiso et al. 2003, 228).

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

207

Overall findings of Guiso, Sapienza, and Zingales show that Christian denominations are the most favorable toward markets and Muslims the most anti-market. The differences between the members of Christian churches are not as pronounced. Catholics are thriftier and favor private property and competition (Guiso et al. 2003, 228). Protestants have more trust in others and the law than the Catholics do and they are less likely to cheat on taxes and to take bribes. Protestants are more pro-market than Catholics with regard to incentives. Again, Protestants and Hindus are the only two religious groups who are willing to put up with more income inequality for the sake of providing incentives (Guiso et al. 2003, 280). Classical Economists, Marx, and Weber In this chapter, we considered the impact of various religion-based beliefs, values, behaviors, and attitudes on economic performance. Classical economists were comfortable with the use cultural variables to explain economic occurrences. Adam Smith’s arguments in A Theory of Moral Sentiments and those in The Wealth of Nations complement each other. John Stuart Mill agreed that cultural determinants could at times be more important than economic ones (more important than even the pursuit even of self-interest), in shaping economic behavior (Mill 1843, 484; cited in Guiso et al. 2006, 26). Feuerbach and Marx believed that the causality was the other way around and that man, made religion, rather than religion making man (Marx 1970; cited in Guiso et al. 2003, 229). “The mode of production of material life conditions the social, political and intellectual life processes in general” (Marx 1965; cited in Guiso et al. 2006, 26). Weber’s views were the exact opposite. In his definitive work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber explores the role played by the Protestant ethic in the emergence of capitalism. We will consider Weber’s ideas in more detail in the following chapter.

208

R. ERGENER

References Acemoglu, Daron, and Simon Johnson. 2005. “Unbundling Institutions.” Journal of Political Economy 113 (5): 949–95. Alcorn, Randy. 2003. The Purity Principle: God’s Safeguards for Life’s Dangerous Trails. Sisters, OR: Multnomah. Alesina, Alberto, and Roberto Perotti. 1995. “Taxation and Redistribution in an Open Economy.” European Economic Review 39 (5): 961–79. https://doi. org/10.1016/0014-2921(94)00111-C. Alesina, Alberto, Arnaud Devleeschauwer, William Easterly, Sergio Kurlat, and Romain Wacziarg. 2003. “Fractionalization.” Journal of Economic Growth 8 (2): 155–94. Alwin, Duane F. 1986. “Religion and Parental Child-Rearing Orientations: Evidence of a Catholic-Protestant Convergence.” American Journal of Sociology 92 (2): 412–40. https://doi.org/10.1086/228506. Arrow, Kenneth J. 1972. “Gifts and Exchanges.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 1 (4): 343–62. Bachman, Jerald G., Patrick M. O’Malley, John E. Schulenberg, Lloyd D. Johnston, Alison L. Bryant, and Alicia C. Merline. 2014. The Decline of Substance Use in Young Adulthood: Changes in Social Activities, Roles, and Beliefs. East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press. Bainbridge, William Sims. 1989. “The Religious Ecology of Deviance.” American Sociological Review 54 (2): 288–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095796. Barro, Robert J. 1991. “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 106 (2): 407–43. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 2937943. Barro, Robert J, and Rachel McCleary. 2003a. “Religion and Economic Growth NBER.” Working Paper 9682. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w9682. ———. 2003b. “Religion and Economic Growth across Countries.” American Sociological Review 68 (5): 760–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519761. Barro, Robert J., and Xavier I. Sala-i-Martin. 2003. Economic Growth. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bartkowski, John P., and Christopher G. Ellison. 1995. “Divergent Models of Childrearing in Popular Manuals: Conservative Protestants vs. the Mainstream Experts.” Sociology of Religion 56 (1): 21. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3712036. Becker, Gary S., Elisabeth M. Landes, and Robert T. Michael. 1977. “An Economic Analysis of Marital Instability.” Journal of Political Economy 85 (6): 1141–87. https://doi.org/10.1086/260631. Berman, Eli. 2000. “Sect, Subsidy, and Sacrifice: An Economist’s View of UltraOrthodox Jews.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 115 (3): 905–53. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300554944.

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

209

Bock, E. Wilbur, John K. Cochran, and Leonard Beeghley. 1987. “Moral Messages: The Relative Influence of Denomination on the Religiosity-Alcohol Relationship.” The Sociological Quarterly 28 (1): 89–103. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1987.tb00284.x. Borjas, George J., ed. 2000. Issues in the Economics of Immigration. A National Bureau of Economic Research Conference Report. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ———. 2001. Heaven’s Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy. Princeton University Press. Brenner, Reuven, and Nicholas M Kiefer. 1981. “The Economics of the Diaspora: Discrimination and Occupational Structure.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 29 (3): 517–34. Bryk, Anthony S., Valerie E. Lee, and Peter B. Holland. n.d. Catholic Schools and the Common Good. Harvard University Press. Accessed December 5, 2019. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674103115. Call, Vaughn R. A., and Tim B. Heaton. 1997. “Religious Influence on Marital Stability.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 36: 382–92. Carillet, Jean-Bernard, and Frances Linzee Gordon. 2003. Lonely Planet Ethiopia & Eritrea. 2nd ed. Melbourne, VIC and London: Lonely Planet Publications. Chaves, Mark, and Sharon L. Miller, eds. 1998. Financing American Religion. 1st ed. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Chen, Daniel L. 2010. “Club Goods and Group Identity: Evidence from Islamic Resurgence During the Indonesian Financial Crisis.” Journal of Political Economy 118 (2): 300–54. Chiswick, Barry R. 1986. “Labor Supply and Investment in Child Quality: A Study of Jewish and Non-Jewish Women.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 68 (4): 700–3. ———. 1988. “Differences in Education and Earnings Across Racial and Ethnic Groups: Tastes, Discrimination, and Investments in Child Quality.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 103 (3): 571–97. Chiteji, Ngina S., and Frank P. Stafford. 1999. “Portfolio Choices of Parents and Their Children as Young Adults: Asset Accumulation by African-American Families.” The American Economic Review 89 (2): 377–80. ———. 2000. “Asset Ownership Across Generations.” Working paper. Clark, Andrew E, and Orsolya Lelkes. 2005. “Deliver Us from Evil: Religion as Insurance.”. Cochran, John K., and Ronald L. Akers. 1989. “Beyond Hellfire: An Exploration of the Variable Effects of Religiosity on Adolescent Marijuana and Alcohol Use.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 26 (3): 198–225. Coleman, James, Thomas Hoffer, and Sally Kilgore. 1982a. “Achievement and Segregation in Secondary Schools: A Further Look at Public and Private School Differences.” Sociology of Education 55 (2): 162–82.

210

R. ERGENER

———. 1982b. “Cognitive Outcomes in Public and Private Schools.” Sociology of Education 55: 65–76. Cullen, Julie Berry, and Jonathan Gruber. 2000. “Does Unemployment Insurance Crowd out Spousal Labor Supply?” Journal of Labor Economics 18 (3): 546–72. D’antonio, William V., James D.. Davidson, Dean R.. Hoge, Katherine Meyer, and William B. Friend. 2001. American Catholics: Gender, Generation, and Commitment. Lanham, MD: Rowman AltaMira. Darnell, Alfred, and Darren E. Sherkat. 1997. “The Impact of Protestant Fundamentalism on Educational Attainment.” American Sociological Review 62: 306–15. DeBerri, Edward P., James E. Hug, and Michael J. Schultheis. 2003. Catholic Social Teaching: Our Best Kept Secret. 4 Rev Exp ed. New York: Orbis Books. Dehejia, Rajeev, Thomas DeLeire, and Erzo F. P. Luttmer. 2007. “Insuring Consumption and Happiness through Religious Organizations.” Journal of Public Economics 91 (1–2): 259–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006. 05.004. DellaPergola, Sergio. 1980. “Patterns of American Jewish Fertility.” Demography 17 (3): 261–73. Durlauf, Steven N., Andros Kourtellos, and Chih Ming Tan. 2012. “Is God in the Details? A Reexamination of the Role of Religion in Economic Growth.” Journal of Applied Econometrics 27 (7): 1059–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/ jae.1245. Easton, Stephen T, and Michael A Walker. 1997. “Income, Growth, and Economic Freedom.” The American Economic Review 87 (2): 328–32. Economist Economic Focus. 2005. “Wealth from Worship.” Economist Print Edition, December 20. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/ 2005/12/20/wealth-from-worship. Ellison, Christopher G. 1991. “Religious Involvement and Subjective WellBeing.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 32 (1): 80–99. https://doi. org/10.2307/2136801. Ellison, Christopher G., and Darren E. Sherkat. 1993. “Conservative Protestantism and Support for Corporal Punishment.” American Sociological Review 58 (1): 131. Ellison, Christopher G., John P. Bartkowski, and Michelle L. Segal. 1996. “Conservative Protestantism and the Parental Use of Corporal Punishment.” Social Forces 74 (3): 1003–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/74.3.1003. Ellison, Christopher G., Jeffrey A. Burr, and Patricia L. McCall. 1997. “Religious Homogeneity and Metropolitan Suicide Rates.” Social Forces 76 (1): 273–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/76.1.273.

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

211

Evans, William N., and Robert M. Schwab. 1995. “Finishing High School and Starting College: Do Catholic Schools Make a Difference?” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110 (4): 941–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/2946645. Evans, T. David, Francis T. Cullen, R. Gregory Dunaway, and Velmer S. Burton. 1995. “Religion and Crime Reexamined: The Impact of Religion, Secular Controls, and Social Ecology on Adult Criminality*.” Criminology 33 (2): 195–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1995.tb01176.x. Featherman, David L. 1971. “The Socioeconomic Achievement of White ReligioEthnic Subgroups: Social and Psychological Explanations.” American Sociological Review 36 (2): 207–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094039. Filsinger, Erik E., and Margaret R. Wilson. 1984. “Religiosity, Socioeconomic Rewards, and Family Development: Predictors of Marital Adjustment.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 46: 663–70. Freeman, Richard B. 1986. “Who Escapes? The Relation of Churchgoing and Other Background Factors to the Socioeconomic Performance of Black Male Youths from Inner-City Tracts.” In The Black Youth Employment Crisis, edited by Richard B. Freeman and Jerry E. Holzer, 353–76. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gifford, Paul. 2007. “Expecting Miracles: The Prosperity Gospel in Africa.” Christian Century 124 (14): 20–24. Glenn, Norval D., and Ruth Hyland. 1967. “Religious Preference and Worldly Success: Some Evidence from National Surveys.” American Sociological Review 32: 73–85. Goodstein, Laurie. 2009. “Believers Invest in the Gospel of Getting Rich.” The New York Times, August 15, sec. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/ 16/us/16gospel.html. Greeley, Andrew. 1969. “Continuities in Research on the ‘Religious Factor’.” American Journal of Sociology 75 (3): 355–59. https://doi.org/10.1086/ 224788. ———. 1979. “The Sociology of American Catholics.” Annual Review of Sociology 5 (1): 91–111. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.05.080179.000515. ———. 1989. “Protestant and Catholic: Is the Analogical Imagination Extinct?” American Sociological Review 54 (4): 485–502. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 2095873. ———. c2004. The Catholic Revolution : New Wine, Old Wineskins, and the Second Vatican Council. Berkeley: University of California Press. Green, E. C. 2003. Rethinking AIDS Prevention: Learning from Successes in Developing Countries. Vol. 42. Wesport, CT: Praeger. http://choicereviews. org/review/10.5860/CHOICE.42-0334.

212

R. ERGENER

Gruber, Jonathan. 2005. “Religious Market Structure, Religious Participation, and Outcomes: Is Religion Good for You?” The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy 5 (1). https://doi.org/10.1515/1538-0637.1454. Gruber, Jonathan, and S. Mullaainathan. 2006. “Do Cigarette Taxes Make Smokers Happier?” In Happiness and Public Policy, edited by Y. K. Ng and L. S. Ho, 109–46. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Gruber, Jonathan, and Daniel M. Hungerman. 2007. “Faith-Based Charity and Crowd-Out During the Great Depression.” Journal of Public Economics 91 (5–6): 1043–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.11.004. Guiso, Luigi, Paola Sapienza, and Luigi Zingales. 2003. “People’s Opium? Religion and Economic Attitudes.” Journal of Monetary Economics 50 (1): 225– 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3932(02)00202-7. ———. 2006. “Does Culture Affect Economic Outcomes?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20 (2): 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.20.2.23. Hammond, Judith A., Bettie S. Cole, and Scott H. Beck. 1993. “Religious Heritage and Teenage Marriage.” Review of Religious Research 35 (2): 117–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/3511779. Heaton, Tim B., and Edith L. Pratt. 1990. “The Effects of Religious Homogamy on Marital Satisfaction and Stability.” Journal of Family Issues 11 (2): 191– 207. Hoffer, Thomas, Andrew M. Greeley, and James S. Coleman. 1985. “Achievement Growth in Public and Catholic Schools.” Sociology of Education 58 (2): 74–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112249. Hout, Michael, and Andrew M. Greeley. 2003. “Religion and Happiness.” Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association. Hull, Brooks B., and Frederick Bold. 1995. “Preaching Matters: Replication and Extension.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 27 (1): 143–49. Hungerman, Daniel M. 2005. “Are Church and State Substitutes? Evidence from the 1996 Welfare Reform.” Journal of Public Economics 89 (11–12): 2245– 67. Iannaccone, Laurence R. 1992. “Sacrifice and Stigma: Reducing Free-Riding in Cults, Communes, and Other Collectives.” Journal of Political Economy 100 (2): 271–91. ———. 1998. “Introduction to the Economics of Religion.” Journal of Economic Literature 36 (3): 1465–95. Iannaccone, Laurence R., and Eli Berman. 2006a. “Religious Extremism: The Good, the Bad, and the Deadly.” Public Choice 128 (1–2): 109–29. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11127-006-9047-7. ———. 2006b. “Religious Extremism: The Good, the Bad, and the Deadly.” Public Choice 128 (1): 109–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-0069047-7.

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

213

Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1991. “Shifting Boundaries: Trends in Religious and Educational Homogamy.” American Sociological Review 56 (6): 786–800. Keister, Lisa A. 2003. “Religion and Wealth: The Role of Religious Affiliation and Participation in Early Adult Asset Accumulation.” Social Forces 82 (1): 175–207. ———. 2005. Getting Rich: America’s New Rich and How They Got That Way. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511807589. ———. 2007. “Upward Wealth Mobility: Exploring the Roman Catholic Advantage.” Social Forces 85 (3): 1195–225. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2007. 0044. ———. 2008. “Conservative Protestants and Wealth: How Religion Perpetuates Asset Poverty.” American Journal of Sociology 113 (5): 1237–71. Knack, S., and P. Keefer. 1997. “Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (4): 1251–88. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300555475. Kreider, Larry. 2002. God s Perspective on Finances By. Lititz, PA: House to House. Kuran, Timur. 2004. “Why the Middle East Is Economically Underdeveloped: Historical Mechanisms of Institutional Stagnation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (3): 71–90. Landes, David S. 1999. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor. New York: W. W. Norton. LaPorta, Rafael, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert Vishny. 1997. “Trust in Large Organizations.” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 87 (2): 333–38. Lazerwitz, Bernard. 1995. “Jewish-Christian Marriages and Conversions, 1971 and 1990.” Sociology of Religion 56 (4): 433–43. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 3712199. Lehrer, Evelyn L. 1996. “Religion as a Determinant of Marital Fertility.” Journal of Population Economics 9 (2): 173–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s001480050013. ———. 1998. “Religious Intermarriage in the United States: Determinants and Trends.” Social Science Research 27 (3): 245–63. https://doi.org/10.1006/ ssre.1998.0626. ———. 1999. “Religion as a Determinant of Educational Attainment: An Economic Perspective.” Social Science Research 28 (4): 358–79. Lehrer, Evelyn L., and Carmel U. Chiswick. 1993. “Religion as a Determinant of Marital Stability.” Demography 30 (3): 385. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 2061647.

214

R. ERGENER

Leland, Hayne E. 1968. “Saving and Uncertainty: The Precautionary Demand for Saving.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 82 (3): 465–73. https://doi. org/10.2307/1879518. Lenski, Gerhard. 1963a. The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study of Religion’s Impact on Politics, Economics, and Family Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. ———. 1963b. The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study of Religion’s Impact on Politics, Economics, and Family Life. Revised Edition. New York: Anchor Books. Levin, Jeffrey S. 1994. “Religion and Health: Is There an Association, Is It Valid, and Is It Causal?” Social Science & Medicine 38 (11): 1475–82. https://doi. org/10.1016/0277-9536(94)90109-0. Lipford, Jody, Robert E. McCormick, and Robert D. Tollison. 1993. “Preaching Matters.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 21 (3): 235–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(93)90051-P. Marcum, John P. 1981. “Explaining Fertility Differences Among U.S. Protestants.” Social Forces 60 (2): 532–43. https://doi.org/10.2307/2578449. ———. 1986. “Explaining Protestant Fertility: Belief, Commitment, and Homogamy.” The Sociological Quarterly 27 (4): 547–58. Marx, Karl. 1965. Pre-capitalist Economic Formations. Edited by Eric Hobsbawm. Translated by Jack Cohen. New York: International Publishers. ———. 1970. Marx’s Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843–4. Edited by Joseph O’Malley. Translated by Annette Jolin and Joseph O’Malley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://www.marxists.org/archive/ marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/. Mauro, Paolo. 1995. “Corruption and Growth.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110 (3): 681–712. McCleary, Rachel M. 2007. “Salvation, Damnation, and Economic Incentives.” Journal of Contemporary Religion 22 (1): 49–74. McCleary, Rachel M., and Robert J. Barro. 2006. “Religion and Economy.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20 (2): 49–72. McClelland, David C. 1976. The Achieving Society. New York: Irvington Publishers. Mill, John Suart. 1843. A System of Logic. London: Longmans, Green and Co. Mosher, William D., Linda B. Williams, and David P. Johnson. 1992. “Religion and Fertility in the United States: New Patterns.” Demography 29 (2): 199. https://doi.org/10.2307/2061727. Neal, Derek. 1997. “The Effects of Catholic Secondary Schooling on Educational Achievement.” Journal of Labor Economics 15 (1, Part 1): 98–123. https://doi.org/10.1086/209848. Nelson, Phillip J. c2003. Signaling Goodness Social Rules and Public Choice. Ann Arbor and Baltimore, MD: University of Michigan Press, Project MUSE.

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

215

Noland, Marcus. 2003. “Religion, Culture, and Economic Performance.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 472484. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=472484. Oats, Mary. 1989. “Catholic Laywomen in the Labor Force, 1850–1950.” In American Catholic Women, edited by K Kennely, 81–124. New York: Macmillan. Pearce, Lisa D. 2002. “The Influence of Early Life Course Religious Exposure on Young Adults’ Dispositions Toward Childbearing.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41 (2): 325–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5906. 00120. Pescosolido, Bernice A., and Sharon Georgianna. 1989. “Durkheim, Suicide, and Religion: Toward a Network Theory of Suicide.” American Sociological Review 54 (1): 33–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095660. Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making Democracy Work : Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ———. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster. Regnerus, Mark D., Christian Smith, and David Sikkink. 1998. “Who Gives to the Poor? The Influence of Religious Tradition and Political Location on the Personal Generosity of Americans toward the Poor.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 37 (3): 481–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388055. Roof, Wade Clark. 1989. “Multiple Religious Switching: A Research Note.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 28 (4): 530–35. https://doi.org/10. 2307/1386582. Sacerdote, Bruce, and Edward L. Glaeser. 2001. “Education and Religion, NBER Working Paper No. 8080.” Working Paper. Samuelsson, Kurt, and D. C. Coleman. 1993. Religion and Economic Action: The Protestant Ethic, the Rise of Capitalism, and the Abuses of Scholarship. Renaissance Society of America Reprint Texts 3. Toronto and Buffalo: University of Toronto Press in association with the Renaissance Society of America. Sander, William. c1995. The Catholic Family : Marriage, Children, and Human Capital. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Schroeder, Neal D. 1981. “TV Evangelism.” First Lutheran, La Crosse, WI. Sherkat, Darren E. 2004. “Religious Intermarriage in the United States: Trends, Patterns, and Predictors.” Social Science Research 33 (4): 606–25. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2003.11.001. Sherkat, Darren E., and Christopher G. Ellison. 1999. “Recent Developments and Current Controversies in the Sociology of Religion.” Annual Review of Sociology 25: 363–94. Sikkink, David. 1999. “The Social Sources of Alienation from Public Schools.” Social Forces 78 (1): 51–86.

216

R. ERGENER

Smith, Christian (Christian Stephen). c2000. Christian America? What Evangelicals Really Want. Berkeley: University of California Press. Stark, Rodney, and William Sims Bainbridge. 1987. A Theory of Religion. Toronto Studies in Religion. Vol. 2. New York: Peter Lang. Stasavage, David, and Ken Scheve. 2005. Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance. London: London School of Economics. ———. 2006. The Political Economy of Religion and Social Insurance in the United States. London: London School of Economics. Steen, Todd P. 1996. “Religion and Earnings: Evidence from the NLS Youth Cohort.” International Journal of Social Economics 23 (1): 47–58. Stryker, Robin. 1981. “Religio-Ethnic Effects on Attainments in the Early Career.” American Sociological Review 46 (2): 212–31. https://doi.org/10. 2307/2094980. Swidler, Ann. 1986. “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.” American Sociological Review 51 (2): 273–86. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095521. Thibodeau, Richard, John O’Connor, and Edward O’Donnell. 1997. The Essential Catholic Handbook: A Summary of Beliefs, Practices, and Prayers. Revision and Expand edition. Liguori, MO: Liguori Publications. Thornton, Arland. 1985. “Changing Attitudes Toward Separation and Divorce: Causes and Consequences.” American Journal of Sociology 90 (4): 856–72. Tropman, John E. c1995. The Catholic Ethic in American Society : An Exploration of Values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ———. c2002. The Catholic Ethic and the Spirit of Community. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Wallace, John, and David William. 1997. “Religion and Adolescent HealthCompromising Behavior.” In Health Risks and Developmental Transitions During Adolescence, edited by John Schulenberg, Jennifer L. Maggs, and Klaus Hurrelmann, 444–68. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Wilder, Esther I. 1996. “Socioeconomic Attainment and Expressions of Jewish Identification, 1970 and 1990.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35 (2): 109–27. Wilder, Esther I., and William H. Walters. 1998. “Ethnic and Religious Components of the Jewish Income Advantage, 1969 and 1989.” Sociological Inquiry 68 (3): 426–36. Woodberry, Robert D., and Christian S. Smith. 1998. “Fundamentalism et al: Conservative Protestants in America.” Annual Review of Sociology 24: 25–56. Wuthnow, Robert. 1998. God and Mammon in America. New York and Toronto: Free Press.

9

RELIGION AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

217

Zak, Paul J., and Stephen Knack. 2001. “Trust and Growth.” The Economic Journal 111 (470): 295–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00609. Zelizer, Viviana A. 1978. “Human Values and the Market: The Case of Life Insurance and Death in 19th-Century America.” American Journal of Sociology 84 (3): 591–610.

CHAPTER 10

Religion and Historical Divergences in Economic Performance

One of the sharpest and best-known divergences along religious lines in terms of economic performance is observed between the Muslim economies of the Middle East and the Christian nations of the West. In 1995, Muslim share of global income was 5.98%, whereas the Muslim share of world population was 19.22% (Kuran 1997). In 2010, Muslims made up roughly 23% of the world population, occupied 21.7% of the world’s landmass, and produced 8.1% of the world total income. Excluding the contribution of oil, the GDP of the Islamic world would be 4% of the total world GDP. The combined per capita income of Muslim countries in 2010 was $4185, which was approximately 40% of the world average (Sherani 2013). The situation was pretty much the same by 2014, when average per capita income in terms of purchasing power was $17,500 for all other countries and $10,015 for the Muslim ones (Kuran 2018, 1). In this final chapter, we will explore whether there are religion-related reasons which put breaks on the development of Muslim economies and accelerated the development of those of the West. While doing so, we shall also be exploring the possible religion-related causes for the emergence of capitalism. The divergence between Muslim and Christian economies did not come about instantaneously, but evolved through time. Early Muslim countries of the Middle East were wealthier than their Western contemporaries. According to Timur Kuran, one of the most eminent scholars in the field, by the tenth-century Middle Eastern economies, were the most © The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_10

219

220

R. ERGENER

advanced in the world with the possible exception of China, according to all generally accepted criteria such as living standards, technical prowess, farm yield, literacy, and organizational innovation (Kuran 2004, 71). Noting the economic achievements of the first Islamic communities and that enrichment is encouraged in many verses of the Qur’an, Muslim economists have proposed “that the economic prescriptions of Islam -its financial regulations, contracting guidelines, distributional instruments, and behavioral norms - provide an ideal framework for economic development” (Kuran 1997, 48). The remarkable economic performance of the initial Islamic society in seventh-century Arabia being the evidence (Kuran 1997, 48). As Kuran (1997, 48) points out, “there is no inherent conflict between the economic successes of early Islamic civilization and the proposition that Islam itself discourages economic development.” Islam may have provided growth for a while but not later. The early successes could have taken place despite the growth-inhibiting features of the religion. Rather than economic factors, non-economic ones, such as the blending and assimilation of peoples in the aftermath of military campaigns and political restructuring, may have provided the primary source of development. Later unfolding of the economies of Muslim states showed that the early successes had not laid down the foundations for continued growth—as was the case with Western economies. Some of the better-known practices particular to Islam which have been proposed as the possible causes of the relative backwardness of Muslim economies vis-a-vis the West are discussed below (for a comprehensive and up to date survey of the topic, see Kuran 2018). After going over these proposals, we shall consider the absence of a practice, monasticism as a possible cause of the underdevelopment of Islamic economies.

Possible Explanations for the Relative Backwardness of Muslim Economies One major issue was the Islamic prohibition on interest and on speculative contracts such as sale by auction or insurance. The ban on interest was actually on riba, which can be defined as unjustified increment in borrowing or lending money, an increase in a particular item, non-equality in an exchange or interest or usurious interest. The ban may have its roots in the practice in ancient Arabia of the doubling of debt when defaulted, which eventually led to the enslavement of the debtor (Esposito, n.d.).

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

221

Such restrictions inhibited commercial activity even though they were to a large extent circumvented by Muslim legalists through ruses or legal tricks known as hiyal. A trick widely employed to avoid the prohibition on usury was the practice of “dual purchase,” which entailed the making of two contracts, one for purchase and the other for re-purchase, at a higher price. For example, the lender could buy a watch from the borrower for one hundred gold coins with a promise by the borrower to buy the watch back for hundred and ten coins at a specified date. Use of such ruses to circumvent restrictions on interest would not totally block economic development but would put breaks on it (Jones 1988). Christianity was also opposed to interest. This opposition had its roots in Plato and Aristotle and other Roman thinkers such as Cicero, Seneca, and Cato who regarded it unnatural for money to bear fruit as money is sterile. In the Old Testament, there is a ban on taking advantage of the poor members of the community through interest charges (Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:35, and Deuteronomy 20:19) and permission to charge interest on outsiders only (Deuteronomy 20:19). And the following statement by Christ was also taken as justification of a ban on interest: “… lend, expecting nothing in return” (Luke 6:35). Yet, in the West, that lending had a cost to the lender as foregone income was eventually recognized and a distinction was made between interest as foregone income and usury as exorbitant interest. Banking which enabled the pooling of resources of a large number of depositors evolved in the West beginning in the twelfth century. In Islamic economies, finance was provided on an individual basis through personal contacts. The conduct of business by individuals and not by corporations was a problem in general with Muslim economies (Kuran 2005). Corporations are joint ventures which possess legal entities distinct from their owners and their employees. Corporation has many advantages as compared with individually owned enterprises. Corporation makes litigation simpler and shields jointly held assets from the liabilities of individual shareholders. The liabilities of both the shareholders and of the company itself are limited (Kuran 2005, 2). Corporation can change its guidelines of action and its goals and can reassign its assets (Kuran 2004, 14). The decisions of the corporation do not need to be approved by each and every member. It continues to exist after the founders die or retire (Kuran 2004, 3). Corporations can pool larger resources as compared with individually

222

R. ERGENER

owned enterprises, make use of economies of scale, and consider longer time horizons when undertaking projects (Kuran 2004, 9). Business corporations began to evolve in the West beginning in the sixteenth century and matured in the seventeenth. The waqf, which was Islam’s distinct form of trust and the Islamic alternative to the corporation, lacked several of the favorable features of the corporation. For one, waqf was to be managed forever according to the will of the founder and therefore trapped resources into an organization which was most likely to become dysfunctional over time (Kuran 2004, 71). One of the reasons for the absence of corporations in Islam is the fragmentation of estates after death according to Muslim law. This practice had a negative impact on economic growth not only because it curtailed the formation of corporations but also because it impeded the accumulation of capital. Laid out in detail in the Qur’an, Muslim inheritance law stipulated that two-thirds of inheritance would go to extended relatives of both sexes, “including children, parents, spouse(s), siblings, and under certain circumstances also more distant relatives. The individual’s testamentary powers” were “limited to one-third of his or her estate. In addition, at least in the Sunni interpretation, no mandated heir may also be included in a will. This inheritance system limited the concentration of wealth. By the same token, it hindered the preservation of successful enterprises, or other assets, across generations” (Kuran 2004, 5). Because the Bible does not prescribe rules for inheritance, Christians were free to alter inheritance practices in response to changing needs. Some adopted primogeniture or the practice of leaving all incomeproducing wealth, if not the entire estate, to the oldest son, a practice which favored the concentration of wealth (Kuran 2004, 11). More recently, another interesting explanation for the historical underdevelopment of Muslim economies has been proposed by Jared Rubin (2017). Rubin points out that in Muslim countries, as compared with the west, the rulers had greater reliance on the clergy to justify their rule. Muslim rulers would therefore be more likely to block developments (like the printing press), which would have supported economic growth, if such developments were deemed likely to reduce the power of the clergy. Another problem with Muslim economies was the inadequate development of personal rights and liberties and of property rights (Facchini 2009). The status of land, which was defined during the first caliphates, was the main obstacle to the full development of property rights. In

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

223

Islamic states, the status of land protected public ownership over the private, with the private always under the threat of being confiscated by the state. Such rights were extended to cover even the claims for water. Consequently, economic gains were sought not through the rational and optimal use of resources (the ownership of which was never certain) but through securing good connections and a good position within the ruling elite. Profits were created not through economic calculation but artificially through the rents seized by the ruling class (Facchini 2007). Weak property rights are typical of what sociologist Randall Collins calls “agrarian-coercive societies.”

Kinship-Based, Agrarian Coercive, and Market Economies According to Randall Collins, agrarian coercive societies are one of the three types of economic structures which have existed in history. Agrarian coercive structures were preceded by “kinship - organized networks” and succeeded by “capitalist market economies” (Collins 1997, 843). With “kinship - organized networks,” there is no separate state organization and economic exchange is shaped by marital alliances and ceremonial gift exchange. With agrarian coercive structures, a specialized military class appropriates the land and coercively extracts most of the surplus produce (Collins 1997, 843). Of the three types of economic structures, only the capitalist market economies have had the rational use and the optimization of resources with the aim of long-term gain. It is not surprising therefore, of the three types of economic structures that have existed in history, it was only capitalism that allowed for self-sustaining growth. It is not as if the Christian West did not go through the agrarian coercive stage—it did, just like the Muslim Middle East did. But the West came out of the agrarian coercive to the capitalist stage while the Muslim Middle East did not until the end of the nineteenth century and beyond. In the West, the rational and optimal use of resources in capitalist market economies led to self-sustained growth, which did not happen in the Muslim Middle East where agrarian coercive structures prevailed. Therefore, in order to understand why the economic performances of Western and Muslim economies diverged, the fundamental question we

224

R. ERGENER

need to address is why capitalist market economies evolved in the Christian West—and not in the Muslim Middle East. Rodinson (1974), who made one of the better-known studies on the subject, inquired whether the reason for capitalism to have an indigenous growth in Muslim countries was Muslim teachings and whether Islam disapproved of capitalism. He claimed that the answer to both questions was “no.” Rodinson points out there are no statements in the Kuran that oppose private ownership or inequality. Private ownership of the means of production and wage labor are accepted. Trade is approved. Like the Qur’an, the traditional portion of Muslim law, based on the words and acts of Muhammad, and preserved in the traditional literature known as Sunnah, also defends the claims to private property, the quest for profit, trade and output for the market with the goal of profit. The legal system of early Islam was prolific in producing a large number of doctrines, rules, and methods which regulated contractual relationships (Based on Udovitch 1970; Çizakça 1996). Rules were designed to regulate the problems arising from the joint ownership of property and from the combining of means for trade ventures. Under Islamic law, such partnerships had their limitations. The number of partners and the duration of the partnerships were limited. Even though there was no legal limit to the number of partners, their number rarely exceeded six. Typically, commercial partnerships had one home-based financier who would underwrite the trading mission of a single itinerant merchant and their joint venture would last no more than a single voyage. Nevertheless, compared with other legal systems of the time, the Islamic legal structure allowed traders and investors plenty of flexibility in circumscribing trade missions and sharing profits. Islamic practice was one of the sources of the practice of commenda1 which has played an important role in Mediterranean trade (Udovitch 1962; Pryor 1977).

1 “The simplest form, the unilateral commenda, is an arrangement whereby an investor or group of investors entrusts capital or merchandise to an agent-manager, who is to trade with it, and then return to the investors the principal and a previously agreed upon share of the profits. The remaining share of the profits goes to the agent as a reward for his labor. Further, the agent is in no way liable for any loss resulting from the exigencies of sea-travel or from an unsuccessful business venture. This is borne exclusively by the investor(s), the agent losing only his expended time and effort” (Udovitch 1962).

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

225

Having ruled out the factors which he thought would have hindered the emergence of capitalism, Rodinson (1974) singled out external factors, namely imperialism as the main obstacle to the indigenous growth of capitalism in Islamic countries. There may be truth in this argument. It has been argued that imperialist Western powers cultivated and reinforced extractive agrarian coercive economies in the prosperous countries they dominated (Acemoglu et al. 2001). Yet, it is not possible to prove that agrarian coercive Moslem structures would have evolved into capitalist market economies, if there was no imperialism (Jomo 1977). What Islam lacked was a social group that could have led the transformation of agrarian coercive economic structure to a capitalist market economy. For, the presence of a group that can play the leadership role is essential for an economic structure to be transformed: With agrarian coercive structures, farmworker labor was tied up in innumerable tenancy agreements and was in no position to be the driving force of such a change. Military landowning classes (who were, with the Islamic case, very much dependent on the favors of the ruler) enjoyed the benefits of the agrarian coercive structures and therefore had no interest in change. Also, military landowners lacked the prudent, optimizing mentality which is a prerequisite of capitalism-status among the aristocrats was gained through gift exchange and consumption—not through prudence and production. Merchants were likely to possess the economic approach (motivation for hard work, prudence, and optimizing mentality) necessary for capitalism but they were held under control by the aristocrats and therefore lacked the power to lead the transformation to a capitalist market economy. According to sociologist Max Weber, it was a group defined along religious lines, the Protestant Puritans who ended up being the vanguards of capitalism in Western Europe and North America.

Weber and the Rise of Capitalism Among Puritans Puritans had an ascetic (or prudent) lifestyle and were a minority. But, the emergence of capitalism among Puritans was neither because they were ascetic, nor because they were a minority. After all, Puritans were not the only religious group that preached asceticism, and there were other religious minorities living in Western Europe and in North America (Noland 2003, 5–6).

226

R. ERGENER

Max Weber proposed that modern capitalism was made possible by the mental revolution which the Protestant Reformation triggered through its impact on belief systems (Weber 1946). That the pursuit of wealth was not an advantage but a duty, was one of the key teachings of the Protestant Reformation. It was this religious anointment that would give the capitalists the moral power to replace the previous order with a new one (Guiso et al. 2006, 26). With the Puritans, it was the Calvinist principle of predestination and the associated notion of the “calling,” which played a role in the conversion of the approaches toward economic activity and wealth accumulation. Reformer John Calvin preached that every individual was predestined to either salvation or damnation. “Good works” assured the individual and demonstrated one’s fate to others. Everyone had a “calling.” The daily performance of his religious mission pleased God and served as a mark of His blessing. Calvin conceived a persistently moral life rather than the Catholic cycle of sin, repentance, atonement, and sinning again. As a result, the believer would pursue “this - worldly asceticism,” which required one to be thrifty, diligent, and efficient in his economic activities and non-ostentatious in the accumulation of wealth. Weber regarded Calvinist “this-worldly asceticism” as the bedrock of modern capitalism (Noland 2003, 2). Weber also proposed explanations as to why capitalism did not emerge in lands populated by members of other religions. The key non-Christian religion that was most closely related to Protestantism in theological terms was Judaism (Sombart proposed that capitalism and Judaism had the same ideas and the same basic entrepreneurial sprit. Sombart 1911; cited in Wagner-Tsukamoto 2012). Jews were successful because they were a marginal minority group of outsiders, which status forced them to be rational and worldly. Unlike the Protestants, for the Jews, success was not a sign of devotion. Weber points out that capitalism did not develop in areas where Jewish presence was most intense, namely Southern and Eastern Europe and in the “Orient” (Weber 1920a; cited in Noland 2003, 6). In Weber’s view, Confucianism was “this-worldly” but it was antithetical to the “creative destruction” of capitalism as it promoted harmonious relations along prescribed patterns. Confucianism hampered the evolution of capitalist market relations because it put emphasis on ethical rather than formal legal measures. In Weber’s words, “Confucian rationalism

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

227

meant rational adjustment to the world; Puritan rationalism meant rational mastery of the world” (Weber 1920b, 248; cited in Noland 2003, 6). Whereas a Puritan could live “in the world and not be part of it,” the Confucians desired to live in the world and be a happy part of it (Weber 1920b; cited in Noland 2003, 6). Weber argued that Hinduism and Buddhism promoted “otherworldly” or “world-rejecting” abstinence that led to a retreat from, not the assertion over the physical world. Hinduism had emphasis on ritual law which impeded technical and social innovation from within and even blocked local adaptations of foreign innovations (Weber 1920c; cited in Noland 2003, 69). With Islam, at the level of the individual, a warrior ethic that considered war loot as an acceptable means of procurement was not in line with the “spirit of capitalism.” Many authors have observed that facts did not support Weber on this issue (cf. Turner 1974; Kuran 1997; Lapidus 1999; Levtzion 1999; cited in Noland 2003, 7). Capitalism did not evolve with Muslims when there were no war spoils to enjoy, as in South Asia. Dissenting Muslim movements did not encourage rational mastery of the world, like the Calvinists did. There are studies which support Weber’s arguments with regard to the role played by Protestant Reformation in the emergence of capitalism. Let’s cite a few. In his study of economic development in Italy, Putnam (1993) identifies less trust toward others in the south as compared in the North. Putnam explains this with the existence of a stronger Catholic tradition in the south which puts more emphasis on the vertical bonds with the Church. Existence of vertical bonds with the church tends to undermine the horizontal bonds with one’s fellow citizens. Evidence of supporting this theory was found in cross-country studies (LaPorta et al. 1997; Inglehart 1999). A sophisticated version of the Weber thesis is provided by Blum and Dudley (Blum and Dudley 2001) who argue that costs of contractual defection are higher according to the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, as compared with the Catholic practice of ritual atonement. Breaking contracts was therefore a more serious affair for Protestants. Because they themselves were unwilling to breach contracts, Protestants assumed others were likely to behave the way as they did and they therefore had greater trust with strangers. Consequently, they were more willing to make contracts with and more willing to honor the contracts they made

228

R. ERGENER

with strangers. The net outcome was the creation of more wide-ranging info webs in the Protestant countries of Northern Europe. The externalities created by these networks promoted economic growth and the rise of industrial capitalism (Noland 2003, 3). Blum and Dudley use this theory to explain why in Protestant cities wages rose between 1500 and 1750, while the wages in Catholic cities fell during the same time period (Guiso et al. 2003, 230). Other studies have vigorously challenged the empirical validity of Weber’s argument (Anderson et al. 1992; Delacroix 1992; Tawney c1998; Samuelsson and Coleman 1993). It has been shown that nearly all institutions of capitalism had already come into being before the Protestant Reformation, which Weber argued was their cause (Stark c2005; Tawney c1998). Early Protestant religious leaders did not have much interest in economic issues (Iannaccone 1998, 1474). Nor did they seem to understand markets. And, like their Catholic colleagues, most had an unfavorable opinion about credit and interest (Samuelsson and Coleman 1993). Finally, Weber’s stylized account of European economic history was refuted. It was shown that in the regions mentioned by Weber, there was either no correlation between religion and economic changes, or if there was, the pattern was not as it was claimed by Weber (Samuelsson and Coleman 1993; Delacroix and Nielsen 2001). Jacques Delacroix and Francois Nielsen (Delacroix and Nielsen 2001) explored the validity of the argument that Protestantism had a determining influence on the rise of industrial capitalism. They looked to see if there was a correlation between the percentage of Protestants in European countries and the growth of capitalism during mid-to-late nineteenth century. Five sets of variables, namely “measures of wealth and savings, the founding date of the principal stock exchange, extension of the railroads network, distribution of the male labor force in agriculture and in industry, and infant mortality” were considered (Delacroix and Nielsen 2001, 509). According to Weberian analysis, as compared with those living in Catholic countries, Protestants should have saved more, be wealthier, had a stock market established at older dates, a more extensive rail system, larger percentage of labor in industry and better health. None of these predictions were correct, except for the finding that Protestants saved more. These outcomes provide weak support, if any, to the idea that the strength of Protestantism in a country raises the likelihood of the early advancement of industrial capitalism.

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

229

Delacroix observes, “Amsterdam’s wealth was centered on Catholic families; the economically advanced German Rhineland was more Catholic than Protestant; all-Catholic Belgium was the second country to industrialize, ahead of a good half-dozen Protestant entities” (Delacroix 1992, 126). Even though it is often treated as his distinctive contribution, that the psychological impetus for rationalized, entrepreneurial capitalism was provided by the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, is only a fragment of Weber’s full theory (Collins 1980, 925). It took more than the religious beliefs of a minority group to spearhead such a transformation. A widespread religious practice and institution played a role as well. This practice and institution was monasticism. Weber emphasized that the Protestant work ethic and prudence played an important role in the rise of capitalism. Before Protestant puritans, however, it was the Catholic monks, who regarded work and asceticism as virtuous. In other words, Catholic monks “had Protestant ethic without Protestantism” (Collins 1986, 54).

Monasticism and the Rise of Capitalism Monasticism has its roots in Christianity going back to stoicism and to the Love Community of Jerusalem under James. The message of Paul’s gospel is self-sufficiency. Teachings which regard hard work and restraining one’s consumption as practices which contribute to the effort to attain salvation go back to the beginning of Christianity (Dodd and Gotsis 2007, 137). Beginning of monasticism is attributed to St. Anthony of Egypt (251– 356). Yet, the practice was probably started independently by many, as according to St. Athanasius’s Life of St. Anthony (2013), Anthony himself had received instruction in monastic life from others. Early monks practiced in solitude near their own villages. Anthony’s contribution was to take the practice to the desert where he guided his disciples and acted as a spiritual father to them. Anthony’s followers lived alone in cells and conducted their spiritual fight against devils in isolation. (The term “hermit” is from Latin er¯em¯ıta and Greek er¯em¯ıt¯e´s meaning “living in the desert” and the term monk is from the Greek monos meaning “alone.” ) Monastic community life emerged under St. Pachomius (292–346), a younger contemporary of Anthony. Pachomius was the leader of a large monastery, with a thousand monks or nuns, who were obedient to him as abbot and

230

R. ERGENER

to a Rule. After Pachomius’s rule, there was the rule of St Basil and that of St. Benedict of Nursia (480–547) (Smith 2009, 10–11). Upset by the immorality of life in Rome, Benedict had given up his studies there at age fourteen and become an ascetic monk. He lived as a hermit, setting an example with his zeal and attracting disciples. He wrote his Rule near the end of his life at the monastery of Monte Cassino, which he founded in 529. Some rules of Benedict would be labeled as socialist today. He banned private property for the monks. All things were to be common. Based on Acts 4:35 (“Distribution was made to everyone according to as he had need”), distribution was to be made according to need. Some of the other rules of Benedict would paradoxically lead to the material enrichment of the monasteries. In addition to asceticism, which had been part of monastic practice from the very beginning, Benedict prescribed hard labor for the monks: “Idleness is the enemy of the soul. Therefore, the brothers should have specified periods for manual labor as well as prayerful reading … When they live by the labor of their hands as our fathers and the apostles did then they are real bonds” (Stark 2006, 62). Indeed, together with “peace” (pax), “pray and work” (ora et labora) is one of the two mottos which best express the Benedictine spirit. Benedict was not a bishop or pope and was in no position to impose his rule on other monasteries. But his rule was widely adopted because it was useful and provided a near normative framework for Western monasticism. Weber and others had noted how the ban on the free consumption of the rewards of their disciplined labor had led ascetic Protestants to prosperity. The process was all the more noticeable with monasteries, where the monks invested the savings created by religious restraint. Monks could not siphon the wealth they created neither for their own consumption, as they were ascetics, nor for family consumption, because they were celibate. Consequently, it was the monastery that grew rich (Collins 1997, 848). By putting aside attachment to worldly things, Catholic monks had ensured the economic security of their monastic estates (Stark 2006, 56). “Throughout the medieval era the Catholic Church was the biggest landowner in Europe – and its wealth surpassed the wealth of all nobility in Europe” (Stark 2006, 58). Monastic corporations also fronted advances in production techniques which elevated efficiency. Plowing with horses rather than cows, the introduction of the heavy mouldboard plow, and the

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

231

three-field system raised productivity immensely. Cistercians amalgamated previously uncultivated land, cleared forests, and drained flooded areas (Stark 2006, 59). As a result of these changes, monasteries ceased to be subsistence economies and started to produce the items they specialized in for-profit (Stark 2006, 58). Organizational growth of the monasteries was accompanied or followed by proselytizing among the common people by monastic preachers, such as Augustinian, Franciscan, and Dominican friars. It was through the efforts of these preachers that asceticism was brought out of the cells and halls of monasteries into daily life, as religious asceticism was now demanded not just from the members of small and secluded spiritual elites, but from members of the religious community as a whole. The outcome in the religious sphere was the emergence of self-styled ascetic religiosity among the uninitiated (Weber 1961, 268). One of the significant outcomes of the proselytizing activities of the friars was the spillover of monastic values and practices to the secular economy. Consequently, there was the spread in lay society of market relations and disciplined economic practices. Ultimately, during the reformation, monastic wealth would be confiscated by secular authorities. But, at that point, economic activities such as hard work and abstention from excessive spending had already been recognized as means through which one could obtain religious salvation (Collins 1997, 849). “Such developments did not take place in Islam. The Muslim ascetic was not committed to hard work. Ahis and Bektashis in Ottoman lands for example did valuable work in legitimizing central authority, in building up the fabric of new society in lands newly conquered by the Ottomans and in making conversions to Islam. But, members of such orders were not devoted to abstention and hard work as such, as Catholic monks were” (Barkan 1942 cited in; Ergener 2010, 7). “Why Catholic style monasticism which demanded both asceticism and hard work did not take roots in the Muslim world is a subject which needs exploration. There are statements in the Qur’an and by Muhammad himself which are explicitly against monasticism” (Ergener 2010). “But monasticism they invented. We ordained it not for them-only seeking Allah’s pleasure, and they observed it not with right observance. So we give those of them who believe their reward, but many of them are evil-livers” (Koran, 57:27). “When Muhammad himself found out that some of his followers had taken a vow to fast during the day, pass the night in worship, abstain from

232

R. ERGENER

meat and fat and renounce intercourse with women, he warned that what they were doing was not his creed, that their body had rights over them, that they should fast, but also eat and drink, that people who renounced women, good food, perfume, sleep and worldly pleasure would come to ruins, the remnants of whom would be seen in monasteries and convents” (Chaudhry 1999; cited in Ergener 2010, 7). Can the absence of Catholic style monasticism with its emphasis on hard work and labor be one of the reasons for the failure of capitalism to evolve in Muslim lands? One is tempted to answer “yes.” Yet, as pointed out by Ilona Silber, the image of monasteries staffed with hardworking ascetic monks may not be so accurate. Monasteries were not uniform in terms of economic achievement. There were huge differences in the economic methods employed and in the resulting achievements. Examples of bad management were as many as of good management (Silber 1993, 110). Many monasteries barely survived, and the surplus they produced was so minimal that it would have made little difference whether they reinvested it “rationally” or “irrationally” (Silber 1993, 109). The successes were facilitated more by tax-exemptions and trading privileges than by the efficient management of resources (Silber 1993, 112). Work was not valued by all monasteries as an ascetic instrument. Monastic ideology had been ambiguous on that issue from the very start. Even though St. Benedict encouraged economic self-sufficiency and emphasized the therapeutic and ascetic value of work, physical labor was perceived, at all times, as a low and servile activity not quite suited to a spiritual aristocracy of monks—many members of whom did actually came from the upper social strata. This attitude culminated in the displacement of physical with liturgical labor. Indeed, at the origin of numerous monastic achievements there was not the valuation of labor but rather its derogation (Silber 1993, 110). The derogation rather than the valuation of labor may well have stimulated the numerous monastic achievements in technology as well (Silber 1993, 110). Monks may have introduced mechanical sources of power and invented labor-saving devices in order to have more time for study, meditation and prayer (Silber 1993, 110). Monastic life was disrupted by Viking, Magyar, and Saracen raids as well as by the violent internal disorders of the Carolingian Empire in the late ninth century, and it had to be rebuilt all over. The renewed orders were based on a combination of the Rules of Benedict of Nursia, on the

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

233

view that monasteries were centers of erudition, on German notions of authority in which monastic powers were linked to the princely ones, and on a hierocratic vision of the monks. According to the hierocratic view, monks would be above the peasants who worked the monastery lands and the liturgical role of the monks would be exulted. In the hierocratic society, there would be those who pray (oratores ), who fought (bellatores ), and who worked (laboratores ). Monasteries, delegated economic management tasks to a small number of monks, each responsible for a specific office, or, if they could afford, employ lay personnel to undertake most economic and menial duties. Thereby, the higher monks could fully devote themselves to the spiritual vocation. It was with the same logic that Cistercians developed the systematic use of illiterate lay brothers, who were following a simplified monastic regime, to handle all physical and economic tasks (Silber 1993, 110). Much of monastic wealth was not the produce of hard work and asceticism but was donated. Monastic communities lived mainly off the land endowments which had been donated by members of the land-controlling class (Little 1994, 62). Those who gave to the Catholic Church would add divine legitimization to the aristocratic legitimization they already had of their rank, political authority, and property, not only for themselves, but also for their heirs as well (Weiner c1992, 34, 15; cited in Silber 1995, 223). Monastic houses provided the continuous connection to the otherworld. The land endowments which were donated to monasteries at their founding or at later dates were to be used for the upkeep of monks and nuns, who would in return provide services such as prayers and masses that would improve the chances of salvation of the souls of the donors and their relatives. In Catholic Europe in the eighteenth century, substantial fraction of the sizeable amounts willed by the faithful was to be spent on prayers and Masses, in order to gain God’s mercy (Beales and Beales 2003, 316). The donor could be buried within the monastery’s cemetery, or allowed to join the monastery and don the monastic habit ad succurendum, i.e., just before death. Laymen seem to have been especially inclined to making donations at important turning points in their life cycles, particularly when they were close to the final turning point before passing away, when one’s awareness of his sinfulness and fear of pending punishment tends to be most acute, and would therefore look

234

R. ERGENER

up to a donation to a monastery as a possible quick remedy (Epstein 1984; Cohn 1988; Rosenwein 1989; cited in Silber 1995, 218). “Consumers” other than the initial benefactors could buy such services on a regular or impromptu basis from monasteries and convents. Instruments such as prayers, hymns, masses, lighting of candles or of incense were employed to take care of the spiritual welfare of not only the residents of monasteries and convents, but also of the community at large. Beyond these legitimizing, spiritual, and mortuary services, however, monasteries were often expected to reciprocate their benefactors’ generosity in a very practical and material manner. Kings could be very generous benefactors but also expected, especially in time of war, to be provided with financial and other resources if need be, including even military contingents recruited from the population on monastic territory. Monasteries, moreover, owed hospitality to their benefactors and in the case of noble or royal benefactors, to their whole entourage—a duty which could become a very heavy economic burden. Frequently enough, an endowment would be made against the monastery’s explicit commitment to provide the donor with food, clothing or even lodging for the rest of his life. What was permanently donated to a monastery could be claimed at a later date by the heirs of the donor or by laymen or even by another monastery, claiming to be in possession of usually fake documents supporting their right to the property. It was possible that the Lord who had made a donation to a monastery would choose to confiscate it at a later date (Baker and Mason 1978; Silber 1995, 222). It was not unusual for donors to remain attached to what used to be their personal property. Those who had founded monasteries sometimes continued to consider these still being as their own and continued to dispose of their resources as they wished (Silber 1995, 222–23). So, monastic wealth was not all based on the hard work and prudence of monks, but on the labor of lay monks, on technological change, on donations, on privileges accorded and on the sale of dreams (salvation in afterlife). All this makes monasticism in a different way a model for and a forerunner of capitalist enterprises. Prudence and hard work may have been essential for the petty capitalists. But employment of labor, technological change, various privileges (like tariff protection), and the sale of dreams are essential features of the capitalist practice.

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

235

Autonomization of the Economic Sphere and Canon Law An important contribution of monasticism to the rise of capitalism was the autonomization of the economic sphere and the reinforcement of the property rights against the state, both essential to the growth of capitalism. Monastic wealth rested on the strictly maintained theoretical claim that personal and collective or corporate wealth was distinct. It was this principle that allowed the monastery to accumulate and manage wealth as a corporation while the individual monk remained personally poor, in accordance with his ideal. There would be a similar distinction between the property of the private entrepreneur and the assets of the enterprise. Weber emphasized that this distinction carried with it a de-personification and the autonomization of economic activity, which is essential to the operation of a capitalist market economy. The monastic de-personification of wealth, together with the high degree of institutional autonomy which monasteries had, may be an early case of the autonomization of the economic sphere of activity, at least on a purely organizational-institutional level. The autonomous monastery preceded the medieval autonomous city which, according to Weber and many others played an important role in the unique development of Western capitalism (Silber 1993, 116). During the tenth century, a considerable portion of monastic property was confiscated by the worldly establishment. In response to these seizures and for other reasons, during the second half of the eleventh century, the Church initiated reforms that recognized the Pope’s supremacy over both the Church and the earthly leaders. One of the outcomes of the eleventhcentury reforms instigated by the Pope was the advent of ecclesiastical courts which had the authority both to create and to exegete the Church canon. The ecclesiastical would shield the Church properties from confiscation by the state. Several of the canon law doctrines that protected the Church from the arbitrary appropriation of its property by the state are still part of the modern Western law, assuring the rights to own property and to make contract with individuals vis-à-vis the state. Similar developments did not take place in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, China, and India, where unlike Western Europe, the central government was strong and the religious authorities were missing the clout and the superiority

236

R. ERGENER

which the Medieval Church had on the secular rulers (North and Gwin 2010, 1–2). A society that provides incentives and opportunities for investment will be richer than a society that doesn’t (North and Thomas 1973; North and Weingast 1989; Olson 2000; Acemoglu et al. 2001, 1). This view dates at least back to Adam Smith, who stressed the role of “peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice” in generating prosperity (Acemoglu et al. 2001, 1). Also essential for economic growth is the protection of property rights against the state. John Locke argued for the necessity of securing property rights against the state, in order for individuals to undertake productive activities. The efforts of the medieval Church to protect itself from the arbitrary whims of the princes and rulers led to the evolution of the legal principles that restricted the power of the state against property holders (including the Church itself). These principles were eventually put into the law of most countries of Western Europe, an innovation, which would be one of the key developments that opened the way to the economic ascendance of Western Europe (North and Gwin 2010, 18). Canon law, however, ultimately failed to protect the monastery land, and most monastery property was confiscated with the reformation. In Tudor England and at the end of the eighteenth century in France, Austria, and Bavaria, all monastery properties were taken over by the state and then sold in the market—at cheap prices. Similar developments took place in Japan and China where monasteries were supported by donations from the aristocrats, enjoyed tax incentives, employed lay workers, ran business establishments like mills lent money and were ultimately taken over by the state. In Muslim countries, property rights were secured against the state within the framework of pious endowments known as the waqf. Waqf could be set up for pious purposes like to support a religious order, to maintain the upkeep and the clergy of a mosque, to provide public services, or to maintain descendants of the family members of the founder. In economic terms, waqf lacked the flexibility of the business corporation as resources endowed had to be used in accordance with the wishes of the founder. The institution of waqf never evolved into a legal system which would lead to the protection of property rights in general. As the Middle East came under the domination of the west, Middle Eastern economies became more extractive and arbitrary.

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

237

But the property rights of waqfs were never disputed, which is not necessarily true for monasteries.

Final Words on the Great Divergence It is the optimal and rational use of resources with a long-term view and savings and technological change that made sustained growth possible under capitalism. Weber argued that what made capitalism possible was a change of mentality which started with Puritans, according to which both pursuit of gain and asceticism became duties. Monks were puritanical before there were puritans. They worked hard, innovated and saved. Monastic ideals penetrated the society through friars. Monastery also introduced the autonomization of the economic sphere with the institution getting richer as the monks themselves remained poor, in accordance with their vow. Canon law protected the monastery property against the state, and this was incorporated in the legal system. So, can we say that monastic teachings of hard work and asceticism as well as the legal framework associated with monasticism contributed to the rise of capitalism? The answer may not be so clear. Not all monasteries were efficient and not all monks were hardworking and poor. Many employed peasants to do the menial tasks. Much of the monastic wealth was based on donations and from the sale of irrational goods such as prayers for the well-being of the community or of the donor to the monastery or of his soul. The legal immunity was not complete. Donors or their heirs or strangers with fake claims could always go to court to reclaim the land. Ultimately, most monastic properties were confiscated during the reformation. Islam did not preach hard work and asceticism as paths to salvation. This may be why there were no monasteries as such, which is possibly one of the reasons why the indigenous breakout from military coercive society to capitalist markets did not take place in Muslim countries. Interestingly however, the waqfs, which were Muslim havens of sheltering private property from confiscation, were never confiscated, whereas most of monastic property ultimately was.

238

R. ERGENER

References Acemoglu, Daron, Simon Johnson, and J. Robinson. 2001. “Reversal of Fortune: Long-Run Changes in the Distribution of Prosperity.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 117: 1231–94. Anderson, G., R. B. Ekelund, R. F. Hebert, and R. D. Tollison. 1992. “An Economic Interpretation of the Medieval Crusades.” Journal of European Economic History; Rome 21 (2). https://search.proquest.com/docview/ 1292878061/citation/582A0E60820C49FCPQ/1. Athanasius. 2013. St. Athanasius: The Life of St. Anthony. Translated by Robert T. Meyer. Mansfield Centre, CT: Martino Fine Books. Baker, Derek, and E. Mason, eds. 1978. “Timeo Barones et Donas Ferentes.” In Religious Motivation: Biographical and Sociological Problems for the Church Historian, 61–75. Oxford: Blackwell. ˙ ˙ Barkan, Ömer Lütfi. 1942. “Osmanlı Imparatorlu˘ gunda Bir Iskan ve Kolonizasy˙ onMetodu Olarak Vakıflar ve Temlikler I Istila Devirlerinin Kolonizatör Türk Dervi¸sleri ve Zaviyeler.” Vakıflar Dergisi (2): 281–365. Beales, Derek, and Derek Edward Dawson Beales. 2003. Prosperity and Plunder: European Catholic Monasteries in the Age of Revolution, 1650–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Blum, Ulrich, and Leonard Dudley. 2001. “Religion and Economic Growth: Was Weber Right?” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 11 (2): 207–30. https:// doi.org/10.1007/PL00003862. Chaudhry, Muhammad Sharif. 1999. Fundamentals of Islamic Economic System. Lahore: Burhan Education and Welfare Trust, 198-N Samanabad, Lahore, Pakistan. Çizakça, Murat. 1996. A Comparative Evolution of Business Partnerships: The Islamic World and Europe, with Specific Reference to the Ottoman Archives. Leiden: BRILL. Cohn Jr., Samuel K. 1988. Death and Property in Siena, 1205–1800: Strategies for the Afterlife. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Collins, Randall. 1980. “Weber’s Last Theory of Capitalism: A Systematization.” American Sociological Review 45 (6): 925–42. ———. 1986. Weberian Sociological Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 1997. “An Asian Route to Capitalism: Religious Economy and the Origins of Self-Transforming Growth in Japan.” American Sociological Review 62: 843–65. Delacroix, Jacques. 1992. “A Critical Empirical Test of the Common Interpretation of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.” Leuven, Belgium. Delacroix, Jacques, and Francois Nielsen. 2001. “The Beloved Myth: Protestantism and the Rise of Industrial Capitalism in Nineteenth-Century Europe.” Social Forces 80 (2): 509–53.

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

239

Dodd, Sarah Drakopoulou, and George Gotsis. 2007. “Labour Is Holy But Business Is Dangerous: Enterprise Values from the Church Fathers to the Reformation.” Journal of Enterprising Culture 15 (2): 133–63. Epstein, S. 1984. Wills and Wealth in Medieval Genoa, 1150–1250. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ergener, Resit. 2010. “Absence of Monasticism as One of the Causes of the Underdevelopment of Moslem Countries.” Portland, Oregon. Esposito, John L. n.d. In The Oxford Dictionary of Islam, edited by John L. Esposito, 265–66. Oxford University Press. Accessed December 6, 2019. https://global.oup.com/ushe/product/the-oxford-dictionaryof-islam-9780195125597?cc=tr&lang=en&. Facchini, Francois. 2007. “Islam and Private Property.” Granada, Spain. ———. 2009. “Religion, Law and Development: Islam and Christianity—Why Is It in Occident and Not in the Orient That Man Invented the Institutions of Freedom?” European Journal of Law and Economics 29 (1): 103–29. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10657-009-9113-y. Guiso, Luigi, Paola Sapienza, and Luigi Zingales. 2003. “People’s Opium? Religion and Economic Attitudes.” Journal of Monetary Economics 50 (1): 225– 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3932(02)00202-7. ———. 2006. “Does Culture Affect Economic Outcomes?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20 (2): 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.20.2.23. Iannaccone, Laurence R. 1998. “Introduction to the Economics of Religion.” Journal of Economic Literature 36 (3): 1465–95. Inglehart, Ronald. 1999. “Trust, Well-Being and Democracy.” In Democracy and Trust, vol. 88, edited by M. Warren, 88–120. New York, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jomo, K. S. 1977. “Islam and Weber: Rodinson on the Implications of Religion for Capitalist Development.” The Developing Economies 15 (2): 240–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1049.1977.tb00380.x. Jones, E. L. (Eric Lionel). 1988. Growth Recurring: Economic Change in World History. Oxford [Oxfordshire] and New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press. Kuran, Timur. 1997. “Islam and Underdevelopment: An Old Puzzle Revisited.” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft 153 (1): 41–71. ———. 2004. “Why the Middle East Is Economically Underdeveloped: Historical Mechanisms of Institutional Stagnation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (3): 71–90. ———. 2005. “The Absence of the Corporation in Islamic Law: Origins and Persistence.” The American Journal of Comparative Law 53 (4): 785–834. ———. 2018. “Islam and Economic Performance: Historical and Contemporary Links.” https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20171243.

240

R. ERGENER

Lapidus, Ira M. 1999. “The Institutionalization of Early Islamic States.” In Max Weber and Islam, 1st ed., edited by Toby E. Huff and Wolfgang Schluchter. London: Routledge. LaPorta, Rafael, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert Vishny. 1997. “Trust in Large Organizations.” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 87 (2): 333–38. Levtzion, Nehemia. 1999. “Aspects of Islamization: Weber’s Observations on Islam Reconsidered.” In Max Weber and Islam, edited by Toby E. Huff and Wolfgang Schluchter, 153–61. London: Transaction Publishers. Little, Lester K. 1994. Religious Poverty and the Profit Economy in Medieval Europe. New York: Oxford University Press. Noland, Marcus. 2003. “Religion, Culture, and Economic Performance.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 472484. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=472484. North, Charles, and Carl R. Gwin. 2010. “Religion and the Emergence of the Rule of Law the Origins of Economic Growth.” In Religion, Economy, and Cooperation, edited by Ilkka Pyysiäinen. Religion and Reason, vol. 49. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. North, Douglass C., and Barry R. Weingast. 1989. “Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in SeventeenthCentury England.” The Journal of Economic History 49 (4): 803–32. North, Douglass Cecil, and Robert Paul Thomas. 1973. The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History. Cambridge [Eng.]: University Press. Olson, Mancur. 2000. Power and Prosperity: Outgrowing Communist and Capitalist Dictatorships. New York: Basic Books. Pryor, John H. 1977. “The Origins of the Commenda Contract.” Speculum 52 (1): 5–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/2856894. Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rodinson, Maxime. 1974. Islam and Capitalism. London: Allen Lane. Rosenwein, Barbara H. 1989. To Be the Neighbor of Saint Peter: The Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909–1049. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Rubin, Jared T. 2017. Rulers, Religion, and Riches: Why the West Got Rich and the Middle East Did Not. Cambridge Studies in Economics, Choice, and Society. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Samuelsson, Kurt, and D. C. Coleman. 1993. Religion and Economic Action: The Protestant Ethic, the Rise of Capitalism, and the Abuses of Scholarship. Renaissance Society of America Reprint Texts 3. Toronto; Buffalo: Published by University of Toronto Press in association with the Renaissance Society of America. Sherani, Sakib. 2013. “Economies of the Ummah.” DAWN.COM, August 12, 2013. http://www.dawn.com/news/1035026.

10

RELIGION AND HISTORICAL DIVERGENCES ...

241

Silber, Ilana Friedrich. 1993. “Monasticism and the ‘Protestant Ethic’: Asceticism, Rationality and Wealth in the Medieval West.” The British Journal of Sociology 44 (1): 103–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/591683. ———. 1995. “Gift-Giving in the Great Traditions: The Case of Donations to Monasteries in the Medieval West.” European Journal of Sociology 36 (2): 209–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975600007542. Smith, Nathan. 2009. “The Economics of Monasticism.” The Association of Religion Data Archives. Sombart, W. 1911. “The Jews and Modern Capitalism (Reprinted in 2001).” Stark, Rodney. c2005. The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success. New York: Random House. ———. 2006. The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success. Annotated edition. New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks. Tawney, R. H. (Richard Henry). c1998. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction Publishers. Turner, Bryan S. 1974. Weber and Islam: A Critical Study. London and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Udovitch, Abraham L. 1962. “At the Origins of the Western Commenda: Islam, Israel, Byzantium?” Speculum 37 (2): 198–207. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 2849948. ———. 1970. Partnership and Profit in Medieval Islam. Princeton, NJ and Baltimore, MD: Princeton University Press, Project MUSE. Wagner-Tsukamoto, Sigmund. 2012. “Questioning the Weber Thesis: Capitalist Ethics and the Hebrew Bible?” Sociology Mind 2 (1): 1. Weber, Max. 1920a. Ancient Judaism. New York: Free Press. ———. 1920b. The Religion of China. New York: Free Press. ———. 1920c. The Religion of India. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. ———. 1946. “The Protestant Sects and the Spirit of Capitalism.” In From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, edited by Mills Gerth and Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 1961. General Economic History. Translated by F. H. Knight. New York: Collier-Macmillan. Weiner, Annette B. c1992. Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping-WhileGiving. Berkeley: University of California Press.

CHAPTER 11

Concluding Remarks

We have covered long distances, stretching from Africa to the Arctic, from faraway China to the US West, across the mountains, through the deserts and over the oceans, tracing the remains of the religious and the economic which have been coevolving ever since a population of about 2000 Homo Sapiens, ancestors of us modern humans, embarked on a long journey out of Africa, beginning roughly 70,000 to 130,000 years ago, spreading very rapidly all around the world—a journey with its roots hidden deep in the ancient past and heading yet to an unknown future (Chan et al. 2019; Zhivotovsky et al. 2003). What did we find? Are there any patterns? Any trends? The task of uncovering any trends or patterns is quite challenging because of the very uneven distribution of information over time. We happen to know the least about what we have been the longest: huntergatherers. Yet, some trends are discernable nevertheless. Today, there are few hunter-gatherers, but until about ten thousand years ago, that is what we all were.

TRANSITION FROM TRADITIONAL TO BOOK RELIGIONS

The changes that took place in the religion of hunter-gatherers’ ancestors, as the elites inserted themselves as intermediaries between

© The Author(s) 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6_11

243

244

R. ERGENER

gods and humans, have been labeled as being the transition from the “traditional” to the “book” (Howells 1948), or from the “ancestral” to “modern” (Hayden 2003) or from “imagistic” to “doctrinal” (Whitehouse 2002) religions. Traditional practitioners sought favors from everything: animals, plants, people, rocks, the ocean, mountains, and the sky and celestial bodies (Hayden 2003, 5). Believers of book religions asked for things from gods. Traditional practitioners had no priests or churches. The congregation was the whole community. Rituals were improvised. In book religions, there is a separation of the priest and laity. The priests provided the contact with gods and also fixed and supervised the rituals. Members of traditional religions participated in rituals whereas members of book religions mostly observed them (Hayden 2003, 8). Traditional religions celebrated this world and provided worldly rewards. Food, drink, and dance rituals are part of the traditional religious practice and are mediums of contacting presumed higher powers. Book religions consider this world as a somber place (Hayden 2003, 8) and they advise the giving up of pleasures of this world for the sake of the other world (Hayden 2003, 7). The benefits due to followers of book religions are mostly deferred until afterlife. Ecstasy, which is attained through rituals, is the religious experience in traditional religions. In book religions, ecstasy is mostly looked down upon, discouraged, or hidden (Hayden 2003, 7).

As hunter-gatherers we lived in small groups, foraging, hunting, gathering, and fishing in habitats that allowed for immediate returns, immediately consuming the fruits of our labor. There was no or very little storage, no wealth accumulation, no inequality, and no social stratification. There was no central authority. Individuals shared (Woodburn 1998) all their meager belongings or tolerated their belongings’ being robbed, to make sure that they themselves will be looked over when they are in need and steal from others. Free riders who did not share or did not

11

CONCLUDING REMARKS

245

tolerate theft from them would be dealt with, by the individuals involved. When friction became too intense, the weaker party would leave. There was this world only. Punishments and rewards were this worldly and therefore bearable to endure and affordable to lose. There was no risk of missing eternal bliss or enduring fires of hell forever. There were no big gods, who could rule over the forces of nature and who knew all, including thoughts and desires, and who could punish all. There were no big gods but everything was imbued with sacredness. Everyone could set up her own communication channels with animated non-humans. Religious actions were impromptu and spontaneous. There were no temples with priests mediating with gods. All this changed, as… … the mode of production shifted from hunting and gathering to horticulture, pastoralism to farming (and eventually to industry), … people started to live in permanent home bases, in larger groups, … volume of exchange expanded, rendering self-protection of rights more difficult … humans started to live in harsher habitats, (Botero et al. 2014) … storage and the production of surpluses became possible, … accumulation and inequality were tolerated, With the recognition in the religious sphere … … of powerful gods and otherworldly punishments and rewards … first of dead ancestors and later of powerful big gods (Moralizing high gods are observed more frequently among those human groups that habit poor habitats. This is because, moralizing high gods both stimulate and deepen cooperation, which is much needed and very useful to cope with harsh environments (Botero et al. 2014, 16787). Intensificatıon of rituals and of the tendency to cooperate are all human reactions to threats in unpredictable environments). (Botero et al. 2014, 16787) … the monopolization of connections with gods by the elites, depriving the ordinary individuals from direct access to gods, Elites were empowered to… … impose and justify inequality. (Peoples and Marlowe 2012)

Inequality spread, bringing to an end the stagnation which had lasted with human societies for hundreds of thousands of years, and unleashing forces of innovation and other dynamics. The positive and negative outcomes have been revealing themselves.

246

R. ERGENER

The entanglement of religion and economics continues. Ever since the sharp turn away from hunting gathering to agriculture, religion has played a key role in the spreading of trade, reducing contract uncertainty, promoting charity, attenuating and enhancing dominance, and promoting attitudes, beliefs and behaviors that are good for growth. The successful combinations of religion, ecology, and social structure will prevail. The loser combinations will be wiped out. (Yet, the loser combinations may be encouraged by the successful who may wish to weaken rivals.) Stark and Bainbridge argue in a Theory of Religion (Stark and Bainbridge 1987), that humans resort to gods to access what they cannot get from each other. Religion may not provide but it can expand the scope of what humans can provide for each other, because it is one of the rare institutions that can issue the “Because…”, statement that cannot be disputed. Rather than concentrating on how it is outdated, irrational and dying, it may be wiser to understand religion, its rational uses and to acknowledge that it is here with us to stay. Because …

References Botero, C. A., B. Gardner, K. R. Kirby, J. Bulbulia, M. C. Gavin, and R. D. Gray. 2014. “The Ecology of Religious Beliefs.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111 (47): 16784–89. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1408701111. Chan, Eva K. F., Axel Timmermann, Benedetta F. Baldi, Andy E. Moore, Ruth J. Lyons, Sun-Seon Lee, Anton M. F. Kalsbeek, Desiree C. Petersen, Hannes Rautenbach, and Hagen E. A. Förtsch. 2019. “Human Origins in a Southern African Palaeo-Wetland and First Migrations.” Nature 575 (7781): 185–89. Hayden, Brian. 2003. A Prehistory of Religion: Shamans, Sorcerers, and Saints. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Books. Howells, William. 1948. The Heathens: Primitive Man and His Religions. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co. Peoples, Hervey C., and Frank W. Marlowe. 2012. “Subsistence and the Evolution of Religion.” Human Nature 23 (3): 253–69. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s12110-012-9148-6. Stark, Rodney, and William Sims Bainbridge. 1987. A Theory of Religion. Toronto Studies in Religion, Vol. 2. New York: P. Lang. Whitehouse, Harvey. 2002. “Modes of Religiosity: Towards a Cognitive Explanation of the Sociopolitical Dynamics of Religion.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 14 (3/4): 293–315.

11

CONCLUDING REMARKS

247

Woodburn, J. 1998. “Sharing Is Not a Form of Exchange: An Analysis of Property Sharing in Immediate-Return Hunter-Gatherer Societies.” In Property Relations: Renewing the Anthropological Tradition, edited by C. M. Hann, 48–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://ls-tlss.ucl.ac. uk/course-materials/ARCL1008_70065.pdf. Zhivotovsky, Lev A., Noah A. Rosenberg, and Marcus W. Feldman. 2003. “Features of Evolution and Expansion of Modern Humans, Inferred from Genomewide Microsatellite Markers.” The American Journal of Human Genetics 72 (5): 1171–86. https://doi.org/10.1086/375120.

Index

A Abrahamic, 9, 46, 172, 173 Aggrandizer, 103–105, 107–112 Al-Arabi, 43 Alawi, 42, 43 Ancestor worship, 8, 114 Animism, 4, 8–10, 46 Apocalypse, 46 Armenian, 88, 152, 153

B Bainbridge, William Sims, 38, 187, 188, 246 Band, 55, 56, 103 Baptist, 74, 77, 83, 131, 192 Bartholomew, Ecumenical Patriarch, 48–50 Bear cult, 40 Big gods, 4, 18, 245 Boundary loss, 12, 17 Buddhism, 44, 70, 93, 94, 227 Bushmen, 4, 22

C Calvin, John, 226 Carter, Jimmy, 131, 135, 139 Çatal Höyük, 1 Catholic, 50, 51, 94, 137, 140, 141, 145, 150, 152–154, 168, 184–186, 188, 191–196, 198, 199, 202, 206, 207, 226–233 Chief, 41, 55–58, 61, 114, 115, 117–119, 148 Chiefdom, 55, 56, 60 Chimpanzee, 11, 13, 14, 29, 111 Christianity, 46, 47, 70, 139–142, 144, 145, 148, 170, 174, 175, 181, 221, 229 Circumscription, 112 Clan, 72, 75, 112–114, 122, 123, 132 Collins, Randall, 223, 229–231 Community dance, 8, 10–12, 14, 17, 19–21 Conservative Protestant (CP), 191–195, 197, 198 Contract uncertainty, 70–72, 246

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 R. Ergener, Religion and Economics, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44455-6

249

250

INDEX

Conversion, 90, 91, 147, 149, 153, 226, 231 Cult, 61, 78, 113, 116, 117, 144

D Delos, 61 Diamond Dealers’ Club (DDC), 82, 83 Diaspora, 87, 88, 93 Divorce, 187, 191, 193 Dualist, 46

E Ecstasy, 12, 15, 16, 19, 244 Education, 76, 155, 162, 186, 192, 194, 195, 197 Emporia, 60 Emre, Yunus, 43

F Feasting, 59, 60 Fertility, 12, 13, 17, 116, 120, 147, 192, 194, 201, 204 Francis, Pope, 48 Free rider, 8, 16, 17, 37, 56, 57, 164, 244

G Genesis, 46, 50, 64, 117, 139, 142 Gift, 2, 4, 8–10, 22, 29–31, 37–41, 47, 50, 70, 76, 80, 102, 109, 116–118, 122, 123, 136, 142, 151, 152, 161, 168–170, 173, 183, 223, 225 Göbekli Tepe, 58–60 Greek Orthodox, 152 Greif, Avner, 88, 89, 93 Gypsies, 200

H Hadza, 3, 56, 101, 102, 124, 133 Haeckel, Ernest, 44 Hasidic, 83 Henge monuments, 60 Hinduism, 44, 45, 206, 227 Hobbes, Thomas, 7 Holy War, 90 Homogamy, 193 Hunter-gatherer, 8, 20, 26, 102 Hxaro, 109

I Iannaccone, Larry, 17, 78, 79, 187, 189–191, 228 Islam, 21, 42, 46, 62, 70, 90, 91, 94, 147–149, 151, 153, 154, 166, 168, 190, 206, 220, 222, 224, 225, 227, 231, 237

J Jain, 45, 84 Jewish, 64, 76, 78, 85, 88, 89, 93, 137, 152, 153, 166, 170, 174, 192, 194, 195, 197, 200, 226 Jihad, 90, 148

K Kalahari, 4, 17, 109–111 Kami, 46 !Kung, 4, 102, 105, 109–111

M Maghreb, 88 Mainstream Protestant, 191, 192, 194, 195 Mbuti, 28, 44, 55 Monism, 43, 44

INDEX

N Naskapi, 40, 104 Netsilik, 39, 102, 110 Norenzayan, Ara, 4, 9, 16, 57, 73, 160, 163, 165, 172 Nuer, 22, 41 O Oaxaca, 20 Ojibwa, 8, 116 Orthodox, 49, 50, 78, 137, 146, 150–152 P Pantheism, 43 Peddler, 85–87, 89 Pentecostal, 183, 192 People of the Book, 149 Peoples, Hervey C., 8, 10, 245 Poverty Point, 60 Prayer, 4, 10, 41, 50, 176, 183, 200, 232–234, 237 Pygmy, 28, 44, 55 Q Quaker, 77, 115 R Reciprocity, 23, 25, 27–29, 38, 40, 56, 159, 170, 189 Ritual, 1, 2, 4, 10, 12–14, 16–21, 37, 39, 40, 42, 43, 47, 50, 51, 56, 58, 60, 90, 112–116, 121, 168, 172, 188, 196, 227, 244, 245 S Sahlins, Marshall David, 21–23, 28 Saint Francis, 48 Saint Irenaeus, 47 Sect, 78, 79, 84, 94, 187 Sharia, 91

251

Shibboleth, 75 Shinto, 46 Sikh, 78, 80, 81, 83 Silk Road, 69, 70, 88 Smith, Adam, 25, 74, 162, 207, 236 Stark, Rodney, 38, 137, 170, 175, 187, 228, 230, 231, 246 Stonehenge, 60 Storage, 19, 20, 61, 103–107, 120–123, 244 Sufi, 42, 43 T Tahtacı, 42, 43 Tit-for-tat, 23, 24, 26, 29 Tithe, 92, 117, 153, 174, 175, 197, 198 Transaction costs, 61 U Ultra-conservative Jews, 84 V Vatican II, 140 W Warm glow, 163 Wealth, 77, 90, 101, 105, 110, 116, 118, 119, 122, 136, 141, 153, 182, 191–194, 196–199, 222, 226, 229–231, 233–235, 237, 244 Weber, Max, 74, 93, 200, 205, 207, 225–231, 235, 237 Wexler, Jay, 51 White, Lynn, 47, 48 Z Zahavi, Amotz, 77, 78, 160 Zoroaster, 44, 45, 69, 149