Homogamy in a Society Orientated towards Stability: A Micro-study of a South Tyrolean Market Town, 1700–1900

Abstract

In the German-speaking areas of Habsburg Tyrol, investigated here, the aim of regional politicians and communal representatives was to perpetuate the status quo of ownership and social structure. The most important instruments for realizing that aim were policies on marriage and settlement. In addition, inheritance was based on male primogeniture, which supported a tendency for the sizes of property to remain stable. Throughout the region there was an attitude generally hostile to industry, so when, in the nineteenth century, branches of the crafts producing wares for translocal markets became unprofitable, industrialization offered no alternative. In those circumstances, marriage can be regarded as practically a privilege. Does that relativize or augment the consideration of homogamy? It seems both cases are possible: slight tendencies to socially downward marriage support the first assumption; the second appears to be supported by the various shifts in marriage habits – reactions to changed social positions – among the most important groups over the course of the nineteenth century.

Marriage patterns among Lutherans from the parish of Trzebosz in the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century

“…Arrizabalaga, 2005;Atkinson & Glass, 1985;Bull, 2005;Dribe & Lundh, 2005;Lanzinger, 2005;van Leeuwen & Maas, 2005;Maas, Leeuwen and Pélissier, 2011;van de Putte et al, 2009). This study examined endogamy (and its opposite -exogamy) by place of origin of the spouses.…”

Spouse Selection and Marital Mobility in the Ottoman Empire: Observations from Eighteenth-Century Kastamonu

“…The literature on this topic is extensive. For a recent, representative sample that largely focuses on historical contexts, see the following works: Dribe and Lundh (2005, 2009a, 2009, 2010; Kalmijn (1991Kalmijn ( , 1998van Leeuwen and Maas (2005a;, 2002; Schoen and Woolredge (1989); Stone and Fawtier (1984);van Bavel, Peeters, and Matthijs (1998);Bull (2005);Lanzinger (2005); and Bras and Kok (2005).…”