Abstract
This article explores the changing landscape of consanguineous marriages among Germany's ar-Rashidiyya community, originally from Turkey's Mardin province. The study employs ethnographic methods to understand how younger members are questioning entrenched marital norms, influenced by factors like migration, education, familial conflicts, individualism, and health concerns. Challenging misconceptions linking these practices to ‘clan crime,’ the article delves into the nuanced relationship between cultural tradition and individual agency. It concludes that consanguineous marriages within the community are no longer rigid practices, but are becoming increasingly adaptable due to both internal community dynamics and wider societal influences.
Keywords
Introduction
Consanguineous unions, frequently regarded as a specific type of marital arrangement, are a complex social institution intricately interwoven with cultural norms, religious principles, and collective identities. 1 While this subject has been examined by scholars across various disciplines, 2 its significance is not uniform across different cultural, religious, and regional landscapes. In particular, in the Middle East, Northern Africa, and South Asia, such unions are remarkably common. 3 Research indicates that 20% to 50% of marriages in Arab countries are between close relatives. 4 This widespread practice is not confined to minority communities like the Yezidis and Christian Armenians but also encompasses the broader Muslim community, including both Sunni and Shia sects. 5
In the context of Arab kinship systems, consanguineous unions are often more than a matter of individual preference; they are shaped by a confluence of traditional belief systems and socioeconomic factors. 6 These unions generally involve first or second cousins or other relatives within the extended family structure. Such arrangements are thought to fortify familial bonds and confer a variety of social, economic, and cultural advantages. 7 Yet, the practice is neither universally accepted nor without its complications. On the one hand, consanguineous unions serve to cultivate closely-knit communities and enhance collective identity. On the other, they may perpetuate archaic cultural norms and pose health risks, including a heightened likelihood of hereditary illnesses. 8
In diasporic settings, the approach to consanguineous unions varies widely. Some communities within the diaspora are experiencing a resurgence in such unions 9 , while others are witnessing a noticeable move away from this age-old tradition, especially among the younger, urban demographics. 10 This divergence in marital choices is influenced by various elements, from globalization and higher educational achievements to evolving socio-cultural paradigms. 11 Scientific advancements, such as genetic counseling, further complicate the landscape by introducing a medical perspective to what has primarily been a culturally rooted custom, adding layers of comprehensive analysis and enlightened decision-making. 12
Within the discourse on Muslim immigrant communities, a discernible evolution in matrimonial practices emerges, mirroring a wider intercultural exchange and adaptation. Haiffa Jawad and Ayse Elmali-Karakaya explore the increasing trend of interfaith marital unions within the Muslim diaspora, focusing on individuals of Turkish descent in the United Kingdom. Their analysis reveals the processes by which Muslim women, while navigating the complexities of their kinship networks, engage in a critical reevaluation of entrenched cultural narratives. This investigation into interreligious marriages exposes a dynamic reinterpretation of Islamic jurisprudence, challenging and transforming traditional interpretations regarding marriage and divorce. 13 Through this exploration, the negotiation and reconstitution of religious and cultural identities in the diaspora are illuminated, highlighting the pivotal role of Muslim women in mediating between inherited traditions and the demands of their transnational contexts.
In a related vein, Mouez Khalfaoui presents a thesis that, within the German context, Muslims are merging Western and Islamic matrimonial ideologies, thus forging a hybrid paradigm. 14 This development is indicative of a larger interstitial domain within the European sociocultural landscape, wherein the melding of disparate civilizational values gives rise to an integrative framework for understanding marriage. This viewpoint emphasizes the fluidity and permeability of cultural demarcations, suggesting that the diasporic experience acts as a catalyst for the reconfiguration of identity and praxis, especially in the realms of marriage and divorce.
Shifting from a broad analysis of diasporic contexts, the discussion often narrows to a more focused examination of consanguineous marriages within specific ethnic groups. In Germany, the practice of consanguineous marriages has become a significant point of interest, particularly among kinship groups that migrated from Lebanon and Turkey as refugees during the 1980s and 1990s (see below). These communities have often been somewhat isolated from broader German society, limiting their opportunities for integration. This isolation has perpetuated the practice of consanguineous marriages within these groups. 15 Ralph Ghadban has been a key figure in shaping this discourse, contending that such marriages bolster intra-group solidarity and loyalty. 16 Ghadban's research from the 1990s indicated that within one Berlin-based ethnic group, which has its roots in Mardin, a majority of marriages—specifically, two-thirds—were endogamous, involving individuals from the same extended family or ‘clan.’ 17 The remaining one-third were marriages between different ‘clans’ but within the same ethnic group. Remarkably, there were no instances of marriages with individuals outside of these particular communities, reinforcing their isolation and the continuance of consanguineous unions. 18
Despite the limitations of Ghadban's research, such as its small sample size of 42 questionnaires, his findings have had a lasting impact on public discourse. This has perpetuated the idea that consanguineous practices within ar-Rashidiyya kinship groups contribute to their alleged involvement in organized crime. 19 Alarmingly, these outdated conclusions continue to be accepted uncritically by the media, politicians, and law enforcement, gaining broad circulation without rigorous validation. 20 Proponents of this view argue that consanguineous marriages strengthen ‘clan’ solidarity and loyalty, thereby fostering an accumulation of power and resources that can be leveraged in criminal activities. 21 They also contend that such unions, often arranged with patrilineal parallel cousins, intensify intra-family bonds and limit social interactions to within the ‘clan’. 22
This article employs ethnographic fieldwork to explore the changing dynamics of consanguineous marriages in Germany's ar-Rashidiyya kinship communities. It centers on the younger generation—those born or raised in Germany, influenced by new cultural and societal forces, including social media—and their critical reassessment of traditional marital customs due to factors like migration, education, familial conflict, individualism, and health concerns. The article argues that increasing autonomy in partner choice signifies a shift from traditional consanguineous unions to more flexible arrangements. This adaptability, the article contends, is influenced by the diasporic experiences that are reshaping the community's cultural, religious, and marital norms. Importantly, the article challenges prevailing public misconceptions that portray these practices among ar-Rashidiyya as rigid and unchanging, aiming to provide a nuanced understanding of the internal dynamics facilitating these intergenerational shifts.
First, the article outlines the methodology employed to gain access to ar-Rashidiyya community in Germany, providing a framework for the subsequent investigation. This is followed by an in-depth analysis of the long-standing tradition of consanguineous marriages within this community, laying the groundwork for a nuanced understanding of its current status. Subsequently, the focus shifts to the evolving perspectives of the younger generation on consanguineous marriages, with a special emphasis on the internal dynamics propelling this transformation. By shedding light on these shifts, the article aims to contribute to a more nuanced and accurate public discourse surrounding the practice of consanguineous marriages within migrant communities.
Research Methods
I commenced my fieldwork with the ar-Rashidiyya diasporic communities in Germany in 2015, focusing primarily on topics related to Alternative Dispute Resolutions (ADRs) and so-called ‘clan crime.’ Throughout this period, I have interviewed hundreds of individuals, with findings from these interactions published in various works. This article specifically draws on a curated selection of 56 interviews—comprising 38 men and 18 women from diverse generational backgrounds, including first-generation migrants from the 1980s and 1990s as well as the younger generation born and raised in Germany. These interviews have been chosen for their significant insights into the practices of marriage within the community. Additionally, I conducted six group interviews exclusively with male participants. Only seven interviews were audio-recorded; extensive notes were taken for the remainder. The interviews varied in duration, ranging from brief one-to-two-hour sessions to more extended conversations lasting up to four hours, with many conducted multiple times over long periods. Geographically, most interviews were conducted in Berlin and North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), with a smaller subset taking place in Bayern and other regions of Germany. All interviews were carried out in urban settings. I conducted the interviews in either Arabic or German: Arabic for first-generation participants who are generally not proficient in German, and German for younger participants, many of whom have limited Arabic skills. No translations were necessary as I am fluent in both languages. The data were analyzed using MAXQDA software, and the interviews were enriched by participant observations —primarily in mosques, cafes, and at local gatherings for religious or social events— to gain a fuller socio-cultural context. 23 I discussed the findings in depth with three key informants—two from the younger generation and an Imam from the first generation—ensuring a multilayered validation process.
Navigating the complexities of fieldwork in ar-Rashidiyya diasporic communities as an outsider, I utilized three key strategies to build rapport and gain access to community activities. First, my fluency in Arabic served as an invaluable asset in establishing initial trust and fostering closer relationships with first-generation members. This linguistic capability functioned as a cultural bridge and was crucial for rapport-building. 24 Second, the extended duration of my fieldwork afforded me the opportunity to build meaningful relationships with key informants, who became invaluable gatekeepers. 25 They invited me to private activities, their homes, and exclusive community events like ceremonies and family gatherings. These informants not only expanded my social network within the community but also acted as cultural interpreters, helping me understand complex customs and expressions. 26 Their support was instrumental in facilitating most of my interviews. Third, I adhered to a rigorous ethical code, which included anonymizing my interviewees and transparently communicating how their contributions would be used. This ethical stance nurtured a mutually respectful and trusting environment, and it opened doors for me within the community. This was evident as many community members proactively reached out to me after becoming aware of my research through my publications or media interviews.
Until 2021, my research had largely bypassed the female perspective, partly because gender issues made it difficult for me as a male researcher to access their viewpoints. However, a watershed moment occurred when a woman proactively contacted me after reading an article I had published that year . 27 Her involvement was invaluable, serving as a gatekeeper that facilitated my entry into a network of women willing to share their stories. Her introduction also encouraged me to implement the snowball method in my research, where each interviewee recommends additional contacts from their circles. This expanded access considerably enriched my understanding of the evolving roles and aspirations of women in these traditionally male-centric settings. Spurred by this revelation, I refocused my research to emphasize the views and experiences of women. 28 When delving into the subject of consanguineous marriages, it became crystal clear that traditional gender roles severely curtailed women's personal freedom and agency. Although of consanguineous marriages are often believed to elevate a family's social and economic standing, women found their roles largely confined to domestic duties and child-rearing. However, this archaic framework is showing signs of transformation as more and more women are seeking education and professional advancement, marking a significant shift in the community.
My background in a culturally similar family setting presented both benefits and drawbacks. While it provided me with insights that might be elusive for an outsider, my non-kinship status occasionally impeded full access to specific kin groups. To counteract this limitation, I strategically situated myself within the group without formally becoming a kin member. 29 My objective was to eliminate any potential bias or assumptions that could color my research, while maintaining ethical standards and respecting participants’ autonomy. 30 Straddling the roles of both stranger and friend allowed me to build rapport with participants while adhering to professional and ethical guidelines. 31
In exploring consanguineous marriages among ar-Rashidiyya kinship in a diasporic setting, I harness the grounded theory approach, originally crafted by Barney Glaser, and Anselm Strauss 32 and further elaborated by Kathy Charmaz. 33 Rooted deeply in sociology, this approach offers invaluable tools for decoding the intricate dynamics of human behavior, specifically through inductive reasoning. 34 This methodology empowers researchers to amass a comprehensive suite of data directly from individuals and communities, rendering it indispensable for delving into the social and cultural intricacies of consanguineous marriages among the diasporic ar-Rashidiyya. With a diverse toolkit, including interviews, observations, and the examination of pertinent documents, grounded theory provides firsthand narratives and contextual depth, shedding light on multifaceted phenomena. 35 Significantly, this approach is characterized by its adaptability; eschewing a dependence on pre-established frameworks or theories, it champions an organic and inductive method of data collation and analysis. 36
Achieving objectivity, however, comes with its inherent challenges, particularly the influence of pre-existing knowledge. My approach involved a reflective engagement with the literature, aligning with grounded theory's emphasis on emergent analysis. This stance did not mean sidelining existing scholarship; rather, it involved integrating scholarly debates and insights at a later stage to ensure a grounded, empirical exploration. Drawing from contemporary research, such as studies on mafia dynamics 37 , enriched the analysis, enhancing the validity and contribution of my findings to the academic discourse. This methodological journey underscores the dynamic interplay between theory and data, highlighting the depth and breadth of exploring consanguineous marriages in a diasporic context.
Ar-Rashidiyya: Who Are They?
Located in Turkey's Savur district within Mardin Province, the village of ar-Rashidiyya (Turkish: Üçkavak) stands as a multifaceted sociocultural epicenter. This position ties it closely to broader geopolitical and migratory patterns across the Middle East and Europe. Home to approximately 1,800 Muslim residents who converse in a unique Arabic dialect 38 , the village's influence stretches far beyond its geographical boundaries. This is evidenced by its expansive diasporic population, estimated to number between 50,000 to 100,000 individuals by many of my informants. These diasporic communities have settled predominantly in areas such as Berlin, Bremen, North Rhine-Westphalia, and Lower Saxony in Germany, but also in Lebanon, Syrian and Sweden. Notably, despite its rich heritage, the community has been inaccurately labeled as ‘Muhallami’. 39 As I found in my fieldwork, the inhabitants resist this label, preferring identification with their village or kinship. Recently, members from the village have come under increased public and security scrutiny in Germany because of alleged ties to ‘clan crime’—unlawful activities and antisocial behavior associated with family networks. This scrutiny has fueled an intense public debate, often leading to the unjust stigmatization and generalization of the entire community. 40
To grasp the depth of ar-Rashidiyya's societal fabric, it's pivotal to delve into its kinship structures. While standard Arab kinship systems, as depicted by Halim Barakat, often span six or seven tiers 41 , ar-Rashidiyya delineates just four. Drawing from Salzman's emphasis on the value of native viewpoints 42 , the base tier of this system consists of 18 ʿashāʾir (singular: ʿashīra). In English academia, these entities are alternately translated as ‘tribes’ 43 or ‘clans’. 44 The ʿashīra transcend mere genealogical categories, embodying dynamic sociocultural constructs. Encapsulated within each ʿashīra are several afkhāẓ (singular: fakhḏ), or patrilineages. These don’t merely signify genetic offshoots but stand as integral threads interwoven into the societal tapestry, encapsulating the rich affiliations and histories of ar-Rashidiyya kinship. Delving deeper, every fakhḏ encompasses multiple buyūt (singular: bayt), smaller entities varying in size from just tens of individuals to over 200 members. Each bayt spans three to four generations and contains several usr (singular: usrah), denoting the most compact social units, typically resembling a nuclear family.
The question of ar-Rashidiyya's origins and the identity of its inhabitants remains fraught with complexities. My interviews regarding the village's provenance abound, presenting at least five distinct narratives. Some residents trace their roots to Arab tribes predating Islam, suggesting that inter-tribal warfare led to their ancestors’ migration. Another prevalent theory ascribes the community's formation to the Islamic conquests circa 654 CE. Yet another narrative points to settlement during the Ottoman era (1299–1923), an epoch marked by permeable borders within Islamic domains. Furthermore, theories espousing Aramaic origins argue for conversions to Islam taking place in the sixteenth century.
Arguably, the most contentious issue centers on the village's polarized Kurdish-Arabic identity. This schism transcends collective affiliations to manifest on an individual basis, adding layers of complexity to both personal self-identification and broader communal dynamics. For example, during my fieldwork, I interviewed a woman who identifies as Kurdish, while her daughter claims an Arab identity. Similarly, in Berlin, I encountered two brothers—each adhering to divergent ethnic categorizations; one identifies as Arab and the other as Kurd. These conflicting narratives not only offer a rich tableau for academic investigation but also serve as catalysts for internal discord, frequently culminating in confrontations and conflicts within the community. Therefore, ar-Rashidiyya presents a compelling locus for anthropological inquiry, particularly in scrutinizing how historical and social narratives are navigated, contested, and reappropriated in the shaping of both individual and collective identities.
The narrative of marginalization ar-Rashidiyya is a recurring theme that spans multiple countries—starting in Turkey, moving to Lebanon, and eventually reaching Germany. In Turkey, following the establishment of the Turkish Republic in 1923, the community was systematically marginalized. Various minority groups, including ar-Rashidiyya, found themselves excluded from the spheres of political and social participation. Facing dire living conditions, inadequate healthcare, and high illiteracy rates, many felt compelled to migrate, initially finding refuge in Syria and Lebanon. 45
Upon their arrival in Lebanon, they primarily took up low-wage roles in agriculture and industry, while many of their women engaged in domestic work. They weren’t granted citizenship, which also excluded them from receiving essential social benefits and healthcare. Their absence of citizenship has not only deprived them of certain social and political rights but has also mired them in poverty and curtailed their access to education. 46 Their plight was exacerbated by the Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990), resulting in significant casualties and many unresolved disappearances. These painful events still resonate deeply within the community's collective consciousness.
In the late twentieth century, members of ar-Rashidiyya migrated to Germany and other European countries, arriving during a period marked by stringent asylum and immigration regulations. These policies limited their access to essential pathways for integration, such as residence permits, work authorizations, naturalization, and educational opportunities, thereby reinforcing a new cycle of marginalization and exclusion. 47 In the mid-1990s, there was a significant shift in German asylum laws, which relaxed certain restrictions and granted German citizenship to a substantial portion of these communities. Internal estimates from my informants suggest that between 70 to 90 percent have since regularized their status. However, it remains 10 to 30 percent still live under ‘Duldung’ status, a temporary suspension of deportation, a situation affecting even individuals from third and fourth generations. Consequently, the options for many ar-Rashidiyya kinship groups were circumscribed, pushing some towards social welfare, informal labor markets, or, in some cases, criminal activities. 48 This ongoing marginalization has contributed to their status as one of the most stigmatized groups in contemporary Germany, with frequent and often unwarranted associations with organized crime in both public discourse and scholarly publications. 49
The Continuity of Tradition
Historically, ar-Rashidiyya kinship groups in Turkey and Lebanon have predominantly engaged in consanguineous marriages as a means to uphold their traditions and safeguard their cultural legacy. While comprehensive statistical data might be elusive, anecdotal evidence from family elders suggests that a mere fraction, less than 5%, of such unions deviate from this customary practice. Their migratory journey to Germany didn’t alter this practice; rather, it was sustained. Layla van den Berg, and Dimitri Mortelmans contend that consanguineous marriages are predominantly observed within social milieus largely restricted to one's immediate community. 50 This assertion finds resonance with the experiences of first-generation ar-Rashidiyya migrants in Germany. As evinced by 13 interviews, these migrants tend to maintain limited social interactions outside their kinship and village circles. Resultantly, matrimonial alliances are primarily established among close relatives. Anas, a Berlin-based family elder, revealed to me in October 2019 that those diverging from this norm, opting to marry beyond the kinship boundaries, often confront familial resistance, and in some instances, are even ostracized or disowned. In the diasporic landscape, the unwavering commitment to organize consanguineous unions and facilitate their subsequent migration manifests the migrants’ undying allegiance to their kin, a fidelity with substantial social and economic implications. 51
Patrilineal parallel cousin marriage, commonly referred to as zawāj bint al-ʿam, stands as the preferred matrimonial practice among ar-Rashidiyya kinship groups. This type of union fulfills a twofold objective: it ensures that property remains within the family fold and emphasizes lineage-based consanguinity, which in turn strengthens patriarchal ties and tribal unity. 52 The predilection for such marriages has historical antecedents, especially within closely bonded communities, Arab tribal systems, and village frameworks. 53 In the absence of fitting parallel or cross-cousin partners, the matrimonial search might expand to daughters of maternal aunts. If that proves unfruitful, individuals might consider potential spouses from other kinship factions within the same village. However, marriages reaching outside the village perimeter remain an infrequent occurrence.
To preserve the tradition of consanguineous marriages, family members of the prospective bride and groom typically lead the marriage negotiations. The choice of marital partners largely rests with parents or other senior relatives. In some instances, future spouses are promised to one another during childhood through a practice termed tasmiyah. This act of ‘naming’ or ‘designating’ is a form of pre-arranged marriage wherein both families come to an agreement about their children's future marital union long before the individuals reach marital age. In such situations, families often prioritize consanguineous unions over the personal desires of those entering the marriage, especially concerning young women. Asma, whom I interviewed in early 2022, originates from such a family setting and emphasized that marriages often take place at a young age. Young women might feel pressured into these arranged familial marriages, leading them to experience feelings of emotional desolation and vulnerability.
Additionally, some families employ either direct or indirect forms of violence to enforce consanguineous unions. For instance, Subhi shared that his family threatened to ostracize his brother if he continued with his intention to marry a woman from outside their kinship group. Such situations are not uncommon; kin members typically face pressure to prioritize familial traditions and expectations over individual desires. While some may perceive these practices as stemming from racial or ethnic biases, Subhi believes they primarily arise from a dedication to preserving family traditions and ensuring group cohesion. Despite the potential personal sacrifices, many individuals eventually succumb to familial pressures, choosing marriage within their kin group.
Most of the first-generation interviewees I spoke with favored marital unions within their own kin group. However, some were open to the possibility of marrying from other branches of ar-Rashidiyya lineage or even outside of it, though they viewed this as a last resort. Multiple factors influence the enduring preference for consanguineous marital unions within these families:
Preserving Family Lineage
According to Van Bruinessen, augmenting blood ties among family members through consanguineous marriages fortifies the larger group's solidarity and coherence. 54 In a similar vein, Halim Barakat contends that such marriages bolster kinship and blood relationships 55 , while Thomas Eriksen posits that they also serve to amplify and preserve ethnic identities, aligning with myths of one's origins. 56 These views find resonance in my conversations with first-generation members of the community. Anas, for instance, believes that marrying outside the kin group might erode its cultural and traditional essence, potentially undermining its societal esteem. He cautioned, ‘If we let our children marry indiscriminately, our cultural identity will fade.’ Likewise, Ali, during a discussion in October 2019, voiced a fervent wish for his offspring to wed within the family, or, if not, then within another kin group of ar-Rashidiyya. He was unequivocal in stating his intention to sever ties with any child who opted for a marital partner outside the family, underscoring his aspiration to retain the family's lineage unblemished. ‘I yearn for my descendants to perpetuate my legacy,’ he declared. For these individuals, consanguineous marriages stand as a linchpin in safeguarding their cultural and ethnic legacy; to wed beyond the familial or kin boundaries, they reckon, would jeopardize their cultural identity.
Based on the given viewpoints, it's clear that consanguineous marriages transcend simple traditions; they act as mechanisms for safeguarding cultural heritage and asserting one's identity. These marriages, more than just strengthening family bonds and resources, symbolize a stand against cultural assimilation and highlight the enduring nature of ancient customs. The strong feelings expressed by individuals such as Anas and Ali highlight a shared concern about losing their cultural distinctiveness in a rapidly globalizing environment. Therefore, these marital decisions reflect a larger story, addressing the dilemma of upholding ethnic uniqueness and honor in changing social contexts.
Increasing Family Solidarity
Ladislav Holý suggests that cousin marriages on the father's side reinforce male solidarity, a beneficial trait in environments characterized by intertribal competition. Such consanguineous unions solidify intra-kin alliances, bolstering the group's capacity to counter external threats. Through matrimony within the family, individuals not only enhance their allegiance to their kin but also preserve the integrity of their lineage. 57 M.S.M, a prominent elder of ar-Rashidiyya community, underscored this notion in a video that gained significant attention, released on November 15, 2019 and was circulated in different social media platforms. He warned that daughters marrying beyond the family boundaries risk becoming ‘outsiders,’ and sons might grow distant, overlooking family gatherings. This viewpoint is consistently echoed by my first-generation interviewees.
Discussions with elder family members converge on a shared belief: marriages outside the kin group undermine a family's honor, cohesion, and identity. Such a union might be perceived as a dismissal of age-old customs and traditions, potentially introducing discord or divided loyalties, as members might grapple with dual allegiances to both their birth family and their in-laws. For example, Ayman from NRW detailed in June 2018 how his son grew distant after marrying someone from outside their kin. Ayman attributes this behavioral shift to the sway of his son's wife and her family, who aren’t part of their lineage. From Ayman's perspective, this disrupts the familial harmony nurtured over many generations.
Ayman's narration serves as a warning within ar-Rashidiyya community. While the root cause of the estrangement is not conclusively tied to his son's marriage choice, this narrative is recurrently referenced in discussions as corroborative evidence. Ar-Rashidiyya community members deeply value extensive families for various reasons: they guarantee lineage continuity, enhance the family's societal reputation among their kin, and assure social protection for older members. Thus, the departure of a significant member due to an external marriage is perceived as endangering these essential components of kinship existence.
Within the ar-Rashidiyya community, male members shoulder significant responsibilities, both in upholding cultural traditions and fortifying the community's economic structure. Their historical experience of social exclusion and marginalization has necessitated self-reliance, leading many to forge their own business ventures. Males have consistently been at the forefront of these endeavors, whether it's helming family businesses or participating in broader community projects. Their dual role as economic pillars and keepers of tradition underscores their critical significance. Choosing a spouse outside of the kinship, therefore, raises concerns over divided loyalties and the subsequent redistribution of resources. Such marital decisions are perceived not only as potential threats to cultural continuity but also as economic vulnerabilities, with fears that external familial influences might divert resources and attention from communal projects. This complex dance between cultural preservation and economic considerations reflects the depth and breadth of implications that marital decisions hold in the ar-Rashidiyya community, emphasizing the intertwined nature of cultural and economic priorities.
The Preservation of Family Capital
Consanguineous marriages are often viewed as a strategy to retain family resources.
58
These unions curtail the dispersal of assets beyond the kin group, thereby securing the family's socio-economic stature. M.S.M, the aforementioned family elder of a prosperous family that has lived in Berlin for over four decades, expressed this viewpoint in his video message: I have advised my brothers and sisters to see one of my daughters as a potential spouse for their sons. I desire for the daughters of my siblings to benefit from the abundance and wealth I’ve amassed. I wouldn’t want an outsider causing strife among my children, enjoying my wealth, and creating a rift between my children and me. If the woman is a daughter of my brother, sister, or another family member, then harmony prevails. The wealth remains within the family. Such is life; it's a common practice.
59
This belief is especially pronounced among affluent families who uphold familial traditions and principles. For instance, during an April 2019 interview, Ehab, a respondent in NRW, conveyed pleasure in the fact that all his sons had wedded first cousins. He was of the opinion that these marriages would bolster familial cohesion and reduce potential disputes among future generations.
The rationale behind consanguineous marriages, as articulated by Mihri Inal Çakir, transcends simple romantic or societal motivations; it's fundamentally anchored in the practical objective of safeguarding and prolonging family wealth. 60 M.S.M's advocacy for retaining affluence within kin aligns with a broader aim of conserving family assets and sidestepping potential external disputes. This perspective aligns with economic models highlighting the significance of family capital in determining socio-economic standing. 61 Such matrimonial practices are not mere defensive actions; they symbolize assertions of control, prestige, and economic ascendancy. They represent calculated endeavors to guarantee that affluence, and by extension influence, stays focused and unchallenged. Ehab's contentment regarding his sons’ spousal selections exemplifies this mindset, emphasizing deeply ingrained values that elevate kinship bonds, not solely for sentimental or cultural perpetuation, but as tactical decisions for continuous economic flourishing and conflict minimization. These accounts underscore a conscious merger of cultural norms and economic wisdom, indicating that family decisions are driven both by a desire to honor their heritage and a vision for a prosperous tomorrow.
Breaking Tradition: The New Generation
The tradition of consanguineous marriages within ar-Rashidiyya kinship is currently experiencing a significant transformation, a trend that contrasts with certain diasporic minorities, like second-generation British Pakistanis, who sometimes intensify traditional practices to preserve cultural identity. 62 However, within ar-Rashidiyya community, this change is most pronounced among the younger generation, signaling a progressive departure from long-standing practices. As this evolution unfolds, it's anticipated to be a prolonged transition. In the sections that follow, I will expound upon the motivations and reasons why young individuals are increasingly challenging this tradition. Notably, several of my informants have estimated that roughly 30–35% of marriages formalized in the past two decades were outside the kinship, and this trend appears to be on the rise. This starkly contrasts with the less than 5% observed among older generations. Of the more than seventy weddings I’ve witnessed over the past eight years, approximately 20% were between partners from outside the community. The underlying motivations for this transformative shift will be further explored in subsequent sections, informed by my in-depth interviews and keen observations.
Education
The literature solidly affirms a positive relationship between education and marriages outside of one's immediate kinship or community. 63 Being educated exposes individuals to a myriad of cultures, perspectives, and overarching values, which often results in such individuals preferring partners outside their ethnic or kinship groups. Additionally, education equips individuals with capabilities and resources—like linguistic proficiency and wider social networks—that allow them to form connections with people from diverse backgrounds. Hence, education acts as a powerful agent in dissolving cultural boundaries and promoting intercultural marriages. 64
The first generation of ar-Rashidiyya community had notably minimal education, characterized by significant illiteracy rates and a scarce progression past primary schooling. The 1980s asylum laws in Berlin added to the educational constraints for ar-Rashidiyya children, adversely affecting the second generation's academic and socio-economic progression. 65 Internal unpublished data from 2009 unveiled that only 4% of ar-Rashidiyya children concluded their schooling successfully. However, there's a visible positive shift in the younger generation's educational pursuits. Even though specific statistics are not available, my observations validate a budding emphasis among ar-Rashidiyya youth on educational milestones.
The younger generation's shifting mindset is notably impacting their perspectives on marriage. A growing number are delaying marital commitments and avoiding consanguineous unions. As a case in point, Belal, a university-educated member of ar-Rashidiyya community in Berlin, exemplifies this shift. He emphasizes the importance of his academic and professional pursuits over marital choices and is open to marrying beyond his kinship. This sentiment was consistently echoed in various other interviews, group discussions, and during my participant observations. Brief conversations with young individuals further revealed a preference for prioritizing education and personal growth over marrying within the kin.
Interestingly, young women from the community show a stronger inclination than their male counterparts to move beyond traditional practices in favor of education. As a result, well-educated women tend to have greater agency in their choice of marital partners. 66 Journalist Beate Krafft-Schöning noted a rise in young ar-Rashidiyya women pursuing higher education and apprenticeships, veering away from the long-standing customs of consanguineous marriages and having extensive families. 67 A testament to this is Reem, a young ar-Rashidiyya woman I spoke with in early 2023. Amid pressures from her family to conform to arranged marriages and conventional gender roles, Reem is steadfast in her pursuit of higher education and a marketing career. She's currently enrolled in a local college, challenging her family's, especially her father's, expectations.
Delving deeper into the matter, I discovered during my research that as education diminishes parental control, families sometimes resist their children's choices in education and marriage. A clear demonstration of this tension was during an NRW meeting in October 2021. Both Said and Khalid expressed apprehensions about Western culture influencing their offspring to prioritize personal aspirations over collective family values. For instance, Khalid's son decided to marry a German classmate. While Khalid initially opposed, he eventually conceded but persuaded his future daughter-in-law to embrace Islam. Nonetheless, he abstained from offering financial assistance and declined to organize a wedding festivity, marking the ongoing friction between evolving perspectives and traditional mores.
Avoiding Family Conflict
While consanguineous marriages can fortify bonds and sustain tradition within a kin group 68 , they also have the potential to trigger family tensions and instability. The multifaceted relationships created through consanguineous unions mean that individuals often inhabit several roles within the family framework, complicating interpersonal dynamics and heightening the potential for conflicts. Issues such as inheritance disputes or intergenerational disagreements become more complex within the dense interconnections of these marital relationships.
These intricate family dynamics become even more palpable in instances of marital failures, especially within the framework of consanguineous marriages. Such unions inherently weave a complex internal network of relationships, with individuals often interlinked in multiple roles as both immediate and extended family members. Consider the case of Layla and Ahmed, both cousins who married young. Their union not only fused two families but also brought together a myriad of interconnected relationships given that Layla's siblings were married to Ahmed's siblings. When Layla and Ahmed faced marital issues and contemplated divorce, the tension did not remain confined to their immediate household. The strain extended to Layla's sister, married to Ahmed's brother. Observing the discord between Layla and Ahmed, doubts and anxieties emerged in their own relationship, leading them to question the viability of their marriage.
Such examples are not isolated. Throughout my research, I collected numerous cases where the divorce of one woman inadvertently influenced other women within the same interconnected family network to reconsider their marital situations. This domino effect becomes even more concerning when considering the offspring of these unions. Many consanguineous marriages result in several children, and when marital disputes arise, especially those that escalate to brutal confrontations over custody and children's welfare, it not only complicates the situation but also prolongs the conflict. With multiple children entangled in the dispute, the repercussions can span generations, cementing the discord and perpetuating animosities.
This prevailing atmosphere leads many in the younger generation to view consanguineous marriages with increasing skepticism, associating them with internal family disputes. My fieldwork provided up-close encounters with the tensions and divisions, including divorces, spurred by these involved familial ties. For instance, Amin's narrative from June 2021 detailed how one divorce within his extended family ignited a cascade of subsequent separations, perpetuating a seemingly unending cycle.
Such apprehensions are swaying the romantic decisions of the younger generation. In multiple interviews conducted in NRW in June and July of 2022, individuals like Fatima vocalized fears that entering a consanguineous marriage would entangle them in a maze of family relationships rife with potential disputes. These young members worry that the intricacies inherent to such unions might jeopardize their marital stability. In communities where societal standing and reputation bear immense weight, these intertwined relationships often pressure young individuals to prioritize collective expectations over personal desires. Fatima's stance was especially poignant; she confided her preference to remain unwed rather than succumb to the pressure of marrying within her kin, a decision influenced by the daily family conflicts and high divorce rates she observed. Notably, elder members from a family in NRW divulged that they routinely mediate or learn of at least five family disputes daily, many culminating in divorce or escalating into more profound community rifts.
High Marriage Costs
The financial burden of marriage has evolved beyond traditional expenses such as bridal gifts and gold, delving into a plethora of additional costs that are steadily becoming untenable for young men and their families. In ar-Rashidiyya community, weddings now fetch a price between €50,000 and €80,000, and sometimes even more. Such inflated expenditures often compel economically disadvantaged families to plunge into debt, which could require years for repayment. This financial strain and its implications have been a recurrent topic of criticism on social media platforms, including internal messaging groups like WhatsApp, where community members frequently lament and critique the rising costs.
Three primary factors are driving the rise in wedding costs. Firstly, the adherence to traditional practices, such as the provision of dowries—often comprising significant gold purchases—substantially influences expenses. I have observed dowries in marriages ranging from 10 to 20 thousand Euros, occasionally even surpassing this amount. For instance, one woman shared that her dowry in 2015 amounted to 30 thousand Euros. Secondly, societal pressures and expectations heavily influence these costs. The aspiration to maintain social status or align with community norms often prompts families to arrange lavish ceremonies and receptions, substantially raising the overall expenses. These events serve to publicly affirm the families’ social standing and may feature extensive guest lists, with some weddings hosting around a thousand participants, alongside luxurious venues and expensive attire, further increasing the costs. Lastly, economic factors also play a crucial role in escalating wedding expenses. Issues such as inflation, the rising cost of living, and the commercialization of wedding services have resulted in increased charges for venue bookings, catering, and other wedding necessities.
The escalating costs associated with marriage are significantly altering the traditions of consanguineous marriages within the ar-Rashidiyya community. More and more, youthful couples are opting to defer their nuptials until they establish a stable financial footing, often extending the wait into their late twenties or even the thirties. This observed trend resonates with patterns seen in Yazidi communities in Europe, where analogous postponements often act as precursors to familial disputes, even driving some youngsters to distance themselves from their homes. 69 The delay in marital commitments bears extensive socio-economic implications. This spans from dwindling birth rates, transformative family configurations, to tectonic shifts in societal norms and values. Of significant note is how this interlude allows the younger generations within ar-Rashidiyya community to more assertively contest and redefine traditional norms, granting them a broader canvas to articulate their independence, particularly in marital partner selections.
As marital financial landscapes shift, the societal underpinnings of marriage undergo transformation as well. Younger individuals’ choice to place financial security above hasty marital engagements reflects their expanding ambitions and cognizance. This financial-driven postponement inadvertently offers room for reflection and individual development. Within ar-Rashidiyya community, the interval from youth to wedlock evolves into a period of discovery and self-awareness. The youth are introduced to a variety of experiences, insights, and philosophies that contest the conventional norms they were raised with. Such exposures influence not just their views on matrimonial alliances but also wider life choices. Hence, the interim becomes more about personal and emotional maturation rather than just financial capability. Even though driven by monetary considerations, this pattern is nurturing a cohort that possesses emotional acuity, adaptability, and a comprehensive outlook on life and its relationships.
Rising Individualism Among Ar-Rashidiyya
For generations, ar-Rashidiyya community has been rooted in a collectivist ethos, underscoring group identity and societal cohesion. Every aspect of life, from decision-making to interpersonal dynamics, was influenced by this collective mindset. The doctrine of communal support was deeply entrenched, with individual desires often taking a backseat to the broader needs of the community. In times of adversity, the community would rally together, epitomizing the saying, ‘yourself and your brother before your cousin; yourself and your cousin before a stranger’. 70
Yet, current observations suggest a paradigmatic shift among the younger members of ar-Rashidiyya community, leaning more towards individualism. Mariam, representing this new generation, has chosen to sidestep consanguineous marriages, preferring a partner in sync with her personal beliefs and aspirations. This inclination towards personal compatibility over traditional matrimonial norms resonates with numerous young individuals I’ve interacted with. This pivot from collectivism to individualism, while noticeable in ar-Rashidiyya community, mirrors a broader global evolution. 71
This was further underscored during my dialogues with four young men from NRW in October 2022. Placing their personal contentment above the age-old family constructs, they are increasingly exploring partnerships outside their immediate community, taking a strong stance against consanguineous marriages. Even when confronted with challenges in advancing their education or careers, their commitment to personal milestones, encompassing marriage and family considerations, remains unwavering.
Modern technology, particularly the ubiquity of social media platforms, plays an instrumental role in this transition. Gone are the days when matrimonial prospects were predominantly determined through familial networks. Traditionally, it was not uncommon for the mother to handpick a bride for her son, or for a young man to spot a potential bride at a family wedding and relay his interest to his family. Such practices, while deeply embedded in the cultural fabric, often limited one's choices to familiar circles. Today, social media widens the horizon, enabling individuals to explore diverse partner profiles and relationship paradigms, thereby democratizing the partner selection process.
Concerns Over Genetic Disorders
Studies indicate that societies practicing widespread consanguineous marriages are more susceptible to a higher prevalence of genetic disorders. 72 Consanguineous marriages increase the risk of closely related couples carrying identical genetic mutations, thereby elevating the probability of passing these genetic issues to their offspring. In communities where such marriages are culturally or religiously mandated, genetic disorders can become increasingly common as genetic anomalies become concentrated within specific families or subgroups. 73
In several families I visited, a noticeable number of children suffered from hereditary diseases and disabilities due to their parents’ consanguineous unions. Omar, an ar-Rashidiyya member in NRW interviewed in May 2019, disclosed that his family was intensely debating the health risks linked to consanguineous marriages, which have caused substantial anxiety. Some children in Omar's family already suffer from severe health issues, and a few have died at young ages. Although traditionally inclined to favor consanguineous marriages for his children, Omar conceded the younger generation's concerns over potential health risks warranted serious consideration.
During my fieldwork, it became clear that an increasing number of young ar-Rashidiyya members are growing aware of the risks associated with consanguineous marriages and genetic disorders. Sawsan, for instance, has resolved not to marry a first cousin or anyone with a similar genetic profile, despite her family's long-standing tradition of consanguinity. Her conviction stems from witnessing an unusually high incidence of hereditary diseases and disabilities among her relatives. Even when her father attempted to persuade her to marry her cousin, Sawsan remained resolute in her decision to mitigate potential health risks.
Conclusion
This article has illuminated the evolving dynamics within the ar-Rashidiyya community in Germany, with a particular focus on the younger generation's changing perspectives towards consanguineous marriages. As societal norms and individual aspirations undergo transformation, a significant trend has emerged: an increase in autonomy regarding marital decisions, thereby challenging the long-standing norms of kin-based unions. The assertion that consanguineous marriages among ar-Rashidiyya community are predominantly orchestrated to fortify criminal networks not only perpetuates stereotypes but also conflates ethnicity and cultural values with criminal behavior, exemplifying cultural racism. While instances of marriages being strategically planned within certain criminal factions exist, they represent a minority and do not characterize the entire community or its evolution. Moreover, a discernible shift in marriage practices is observed even among families with criminal connections, with the newer generation increasingly opting for partners outside their criminal circles. However, this transition is more gradual and fraught compared to the wider community.
Upon closer examination, underpinned by ethnographic investigations, significant transformations within the ar-Rashidiyya community become apparent. Factors such as migration, education, and personal ambitions, intertwined with diasporic experiences, are reshaping cultural and marital norms. Thus, the portrayal of the ar-Rashidiyya community's marital practices as static and unyielding is challenged. This article emphasizes the need to recognize these nuanced shifts, propelled by individual agency, in challenging stereotypes and recontextualizing the narrative of intergenerational transitions within the community.
A comprehensive analysis of the broader community unveils a complex landscape of change, with individuals navigating the cultural fabric of their adopted environments with dexterity. This delicate equilibrium between preserving ancestral traditions and assimilating new societal norms mirrors patterns observed in other diaspora communities. For example, the dynamic between maintaining specific cultural practices versus embracing change among Italian-Australians is known to influence organized crime activities, notably within closely-knit entities such as the Calabrian mafia. 74
The findings of this article corroborate a wider trend of cultural adaptation and negotiation, reflecting the experiences of diasporas worldwide. These insights underscore the imperative for ongoing, in-depth research aimed at unraveling the intricacies of diasporic existence beyond simplistic or pejorative portrayals. As societies grow increasingly heterogeneous, the dialectic between tradition and modernity within diaspora communities surfaces as a crucial area of inquiry, unveiling the human capacity for cultural resilience and innovation. This research is instrumental in elucidating how cultural practices persist, evolve, or become obsolete within diasporas, and in comprehending their impact on individual identities and collective frameworks. It advocates for augmented engagement from both the community and academic spheres to enrich our understanding of the intricate mosaic that constitutes the lived experiences of diasporic groups.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
My sincere thanks to Prof. Dr. Mathias Rohe and Dr. Jörn Thielmann for their support and invaluable advice during my project. I am also grateful to the reviewers for their constructive critiques and feedback.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung BMBF, (grant number Fkz. 13N15302).
Informed Consent
Given the sensitive nature of the research topic and the presence of ‘criminal offenders’ within the community under study, traditional written informed consent was neither appropriate nor feasible. Instead, all participants were orally informed about the purpose, methodology, potential risks, and benefits of the research. They were assured of their right to withdraw at any time and given the opportunity to ask questions. Every participant verbally agreed to take part in the study. This chosen approach was guided by the principles of ensuring the participants’ safety and confidentiality and was conducted in line with the ethical guidelines of the American Anthropological Association and the German Association of Social and Cultural Anthropology.
The collected data was coded and pseudonymized in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to safeguard individual identities (
). Pseudonymization involves replacing identifiable information with unique codes, thereby maintaining the necessary context for analysis while ensuring privacy.