Just occasionally I get irritated. At 72 my irritation levels are trended downwards, mostly because of the futility of it. And with life shortening by the day there are better things to do with my underworked brain. But there are some things that are persistent, and they tick along with the status of ‘a bit of a niggle’ without ever actually turning the corner into full-blown irritation. One of them is the use of the word ‘martyr’ in the Pakistan media and right now it is irritating the pants off me, mostly because of its abundant use in the context of recent terrorist acts in Quetta and on the Makran highway. Right, time for a little context, a few definitions and some history.
My thanks to Wikipedia for this concise but serviceable definition.
‘A martyr (Greek: μάρτυς, mártys, “witness”; stem μάρτυρ-, mártyr-) is someone who suffers persecution and death for advocating, renouncing, refusing to renounce, or refusing to advocate a belief or cause as demanded by an external party. This refusal to comply with the presented demands results in the punishment or execution of the martyr by the oppressor. Originally applied only to those who suffered for their religious beliefs, the term has come to be used in connection with people killed for a political cause.
Most martyrs are considered holy or are respected by their followers, becoming symbols of exceptional leadership and heroism in the face of difficult circumstances. Martyrs play significant roles in religions. Similarly, martyrs have had notable effects in secular life, including such figures as Socrates, among other political and cultural examples.’
Well that seems pretty clear, so how about some standard dictionaries…Merriam Webster first…
martyr
1: a person who voluntarily suffers death as the penalty of witnessing to and refusing to renounce a religion
2: a person who sacrifices something of great value and especially life itself for the sake of principle a martyr to the cause of freedom
3: VICTIM especially : a great or constant sufferer a martyr to asthma all his life— A. J. Cronin
And now Oxford Living Dictionary…
A person who is killed because of their religious or other beliefs.
‘the first Christian martyr’
- 1.1 A person who displays or exaggerates their discomfort or distress in order to obtain sympathy.
‘she wanted to play the martyr’
- 1.2 martyr to A constant sufferer from (an ailment)
‘I’m a martyr to migraine!’
And lastly the Cambridge Dictionary…
a person who suffers very much or is killed because of their religious or political beliefs, and is often admired because of it:
a Christian/Islamic/religious martyr
She fought against racism all her life and died a martyr to the cause.
disapproving someone who tries to get sympathy from others when he or she has aproblem or too much work, usually when that person caused the problem or chose to do the work himself or herself:
She offers to do extra work, then plays the martyr!
Well that all seems pretty consistent does it not? A rootle in the etymology suggests…
martyr n. Old English martyr (before 899); borrowed from Late Latin martyr, from Greek màrtyr, late form
of mártys (genitive mártyros) martyr, witness,
probably related to mémēra care, trouble, mermaírein be
anxious or thoughtful. In Middle English the term was reinforced by borrowing
(probably before 1200) from Old French matir, rom Late Latin martyr.
v. Probably
before 1200 martern; later martiren (about
1200); developed from Old English gemartyrian (before 899);
from martyr, n. In Middle English , the verb was also reinforced by
borrowing from Old French martirier, martirer, and Medieval
Latin martyriare. — martyrdom n. About
1175, martirdom, developed from Old English martyrdōm (before
899); formed form Old English martyr, n. + -dōm -dom.
Which also seems to hang together pretty well.
Christianity has been big on martyrs pretty much from the outset, reams have been written on the lives of martyrs, and I recall the fascinated horror I felt leafing through a copy of ‘Foxe’s Martyrs’ that was lavishly illustrated with detailed pictures of the demise of hundreds of the aforesaid martyrs. It dates from 1563, is written by John Day and focuses on the persecution of Protestants in England and Scotland. It remains a key text for many academic theologians.
Then there is art. Art loves a martyrdom. A quick Google reveals tens of thousands of depictions of martyrdom from paintings to sculptures in stone and wood and you will find at least one image or representation of martyrdom in virtually every Christian church aside from the crucifixion that is. There are however ‘undecorated’ Christian sects that have no adornments in their places of worship. Do your own research on this one.
It should by now be clear where I am going with this. The 14 butchered by the side of the road after being taken from a bus were not martyrs. They were victims of terrorism. So were those that died in Quetta. None of them came anywhere close to the definition of ‘martyr’ but the term has been appropriated in a fallacious elevation to a realm of faith that somehow makes their deaths different. Not run of the mill murders which are what they are. Workaday killings for terrorist groups for whom this is all part of the day job. Victims are not selected for their piety or the sacrifices they have made in life, but for their ease of access, vulnerability and generally an inability to mount resistance to their coming fate. And their value as levers of fear and terror.
One of Pakistan’s frequently cited martyrs of recent years is Benazir Bhutto, murdered in the line of duty. Whatever else she was it was not a martyr. She was a damn fool. She was travelling in a vehicle that had an armoured capsule in which she sat. The ‘sunroof’ that she opened to stand and present a target to her killer was in fact an armoured hatch. Had she kept her head down she may well be alive today – and would have survived any bomb blast short of a direct hit by an armour-piercing round. But no. The Bhutto death-wish was strong in her, and it is no stretch of the imagination that ‘martyrdom’ was a part of her personal playbook. Kismet. It is written. Now that is not martyrdom, but that iconic label was quickly attached and is now a permanent feature of the Bhutto legacy.
And today we find the pages of the print media and their online iterations liberally scattered with martyrs. Virtually anybody that dies at the hands of a terrorist achieves instant martyr-hood. Elevated from the mundane to the quasi mystical, and challenging that can be a risky business. I have been warned off discussing it in the past as there are those that might see my argument against this phony martyr-hood as in some sense blasphemous, and we are all aware of the risks attached to a trip down that road.
So what do you think?
Thunksforthinkers 