Family reproduction and stem-family system: From Pyrenean valleys to Norwegian farms

The article examines marriage behaviours, household patterns and household formation rules prevailing among the population of the Upper Silesian parish of Bujakow during the late 18th and the first part of the 19th century. Their character, it is argued, is crucial not only for the proper understanding of European family systems in the past, but also for accurate comparisons of family systems in Europe and Asia. The family pattern prevailing in this part of central Europe exhibited a 'hybrid' nature in many respects. The pattern's chief characteristics were a moderate age at marriage, the dominance of simple family households and the high incidence of lifecycle servants. Serial household lists revealed, however, the significant diversity in proportions of household types between censuses and between villages. Despite the strong indication of a stem family pattern in the parish, the analysis of headship transmission revealed the concurrent co-existence of various modes of household formation among families. Some of these formation processes did not vary much from neo-local principles or followed exactly this type of pattern. This study also made it possible to reconsider the supposed relationship between the seigneurial authority and family behaviours in the parish pointing out the considerable degree of autonomy of the peasant subjects.

Section: And 4)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Central European household and family systems, and the ‘Hajnal–Mitterauer’ line: The parish of Bujakow (18th–19th centuries)

Szołtysek

2007

“…Studies of marriage behaviour have suggested that an explanation for these local disparities can be found in community characteristics, showing that cultural norms, economic opportunities, History of the Family 15 (2010) 316 -332 availability of partners, and the degree to which young adults faced parental or social control were crucial factors determining marital behaviour (Engelen & Hillebrand, 1986;Engelen & Kok, 2003;Fauvre-Chamoux, 2006;Gjerde & McCants, 1995;Lloyd & South, 1996;South & Baumer, 2000;Van Poppel, 1992). So far, however few studies have investigated the effects of community context on marriage behaviour systematically, on the basis of a wide range of characteristics, a large number of communities, and over a very long period of time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of the wedding place. Community context and marital timing in nineteenth and early twentieth century Netherlands

Suanet

Bras

2010

This study investigates how community characteristics influenced the timing of marriage of men and women in nineteenth and early twentieth century Netherlands on the basis of a large scale database consisting of marriage certificates covering five provinces of the Netherlands between 1840 and 1922. The results show the significance of religious context for understanding marriage timing in the nineteenth century. Living in a predominantly Catholic community resulted in a later marriage for both men and women, while living in a community that was dominated by Orthodox Protestants resulted in an earlier marriage, particularly for men. In addition, residence in a municipality with a high mobility, a large population size and a high birth rate speeded up marriage timing among both men and women. The results indicate that religious restraint and the urbanization and openness of places are, next to parental social class, of vast importance for understanding marriage timing. As our study only addressed those who married, future research will have to show whether the same mechanisms were at work for those that experienced permanent celibacy.

“…Thus, we could also guess that illegitimacy was something like a concession to the landless, a social option, cushioning the consequences of a niche system [for such strategies cf. Fauve-Chamoux (1995, 2006]. In that sense, theses claiming a higher degree of sexual promiscuity for the servants and theses underlining the demand for more labour force during the times of agrarian reform to explain the increase in illegitimacy since about 1770 seem to be combinable.…”

Section: Final Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…all over western, northern and central Europe, especially, but not exclusively, associated with mountainous environments (cf. Berkner, 1977Berkner, , 1990Berkner & Mendels, 1978;Fauve-Chamoux, 1995, 2006Mitterauer, 1995;Ortmayr, 1995;Devos & Kennedy, 1999). Concerning the Alpine regions, we should discuss Ausgedinge households (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural population movement and marriage restrictions and hindrances in Styria in the 17th to 19th centuries

Teibenbacher

2009

To marry has never been an egalitarian option or everybody's wish. There have always been calculations or considerations, structural or individual hindrances and even societal restrictions for individuals to get married despite wishing to do so. Without any doubt and apart from the debate on determination or love and free choice in former times, to marry has always been a societal event, a mutual relationship between personal wishes and societal environmental expectations.And apart from all the debates on paradoxes in modernization processes, it is clear that in pre-modern times societal marriage restrictions were widespread.It is very unlikely that people should have been forbidden to marry because they should not have sexual contacts, just for morality reasons. The keys have been considerations and calculations on reproductivity, economic and social resources, social and human capital. This paper deals with aggregated vital data from four parishes in Styria, Austria, covering the outgoing 17th century until the end of the 19th century, in order to detect hints of marriage restrictions.The paper proves the well-known variety of marriage systems in pre-industrial and pre-modern times. It supports the idea that the presence of marriage restrictions hindered population growth, but the absence of such restrictions did not automatically foster more societal transparency and developmental chances in a modern sense, as mortality and inequality were very strong factors in pre-modern agrarian societies. In the end, the question of marriage restrictions was apparently posed and answered by privileged groups.