The family in early modern period
- Created by: Alasdair
- Created on: 22-05-18 16:19
View mindmap
- The family in early modern period (according to Bernard Capp)
- Early modern family displays both parallels with and significant differences from family today
- Bennett and Froide
- Not everyone married
- in Europe, 20% of women remained single throughout their lives, probably similar for men
- Not everyone married
- Bennett and Froide
- Those who didn't marry
- For some it was a matter of choice
- In Catholic countries
- a religious vocation might lead men into priesthood or a monastery
- women might enter a convent
- either from choice or because their families were unable to raise a dowry to secure a husband
- For others, poverty, physical disability or ravages of illness left them unable to find a partner
- In Germany, many craftsmen remained bachelor journeymen, living in male hostels, lacking the resources to set up their own shops or marry
- Unmarried women might spend a lifetime in domestic service, with others working 'at their own hands' to earn a living by spinning, knitting, laundering or similar occupations
- Size of family according to Flandrin
- In most of Northern Europe
- Nuclear family was the norm
- comprising a married couple and children
- Average size 4 to 6
- Nuclear family was the norm
- In Mediterranean
- Common to find larger families than in N Europe
- Extended or multiple families
- Extended or multiple families contained more than two generations and/or brothers and sisters of main householder
- In most of Northern Europe
- In Italy, teenage bride might marry much older man and begin married life living in his parents' home, in a very subordinate position
- Families containing people not biologically related to householders
- Farmers might have live-in farm servants
- Many modest urban households contained at least one maidservant, often one or two apprentices and perhaps an older journeyman
- Reasons for this:
- Firstly
- home was frequently also work-place
- Household contained employees as well as parents and children
- Secondly
- Domestic chores such as washing and cleaning were arduous and time-consuming
- help essential, especially if wife had children to care for and was helping with her husband's farm or trade (or supplementing their income through part-time work)
- Domestic chores such as washing and cleaning were arduous and time-consuming
- Thirdly
- Hiring a young maidservant made good economic sense, for domestic labour was cheap
- An English maidservant in 1600 might expect no more than £2 a year, plus board and lodging
- In poorest families, even children as young as five or six were pressed into assisting with simple tasks that helped to boost the family income
- By early teens, poor children might be sent out as live-in servants, which guaranteed them food and shelter and created space in a cramped cottage for the younger siblings
- Poor households were generally small; only well-to-do, able to keep their children at home and employ servants, presided over large households
- Hiring a young maidservant made good economic sense, for domestic labour was cheap
- Firstly
- Role of husband and wife in marriage
- Generally accepted husband and wife should play different but complementary roles within marriage
- husband's role
- provide for and govern household
- wife's role
- Managed home and took primary charge of young children
- Couple straying too far from set pattern would face strong disapproval and/or ridicule
- Marriage in landed elites
- Dynastic and financial concerns outweighed interests and wishes of individual
- Marriage formation was usually a family matter, arranged by parents who bargained hard over dowry (bride's contribution) and jointure (what she would receive, if left a widow)
- Young couple, especially the bride, often had little choice over the arrangement
- Lower levels of society and marriage
- Merchants
- Would often wait years until his business was securely established and then choose a much younger bride, who would be guided by her parents
- Far greater freedom of choice in lower levels of society, where there was little property at stake
- Bride and groom often in late-20s
- Might well have left family home over ten years earlier by the time they wed
- reduced paternal control
- Might well have left family home over ten years earlier by the time they wed
- Merchants
- Marriage and the poor
- usually looked for parental approval and support
- Took years for young folk on low wages to accumulate modest savings needed to set up a home, and material help from parents or employers (or both) was often essential to give their marriage a secure foundation
- Birth-rate, life-expectancy and age
- No effective means of birth-control
- fertile women often became pregnant every two or three years
- High birth-rate did not lead to large families
- Many children died in infancy, with over a quarter dying before the age of 10
- Very rare, both husband and wife survive into old age
- Repeated pregnancies inevitably threatened a woman's life and health
- Male mortality surprisingly higher than woman's
- Dangerous occupations, e.g. mining or seafaring, almost guaranteed an early death
- Strenuous farm labour took heavy toll, and plague and other diseases swept away thousands while still young
- Widowers (and to lesser extent widows) often remarried quickly, for practically reasons
- It usually took two adults to earn an adequate income, run a home and look after children
- If you got to middle age
- Failing strength resulted in lower wages
- Old age
- spelt poverty, especially for widows living alone
- No retirement age
- Norwich Consensus of the Poor (1570) records many men and women in their 70s and 80s still working to earn a few pence
- Lawrence Stone argued
- married couples felt little affection or warmth for each other or their children
- no longer supported
- married couples felt little affection or warmth for each other or their children
- Philippe Aries
- argues childhood was not recognised
- no longer supported
- argues childhood was not recognised
- Houlbrooke
- apart from royal or aristocratic marriages arranged for political and dynastic reasons, most couples cherished ideal of relationship based on affection, trust and partnership
- reflected in popular songs and ballads and reinforced by fact husbands and wives usually depended on one another for economic survival, making cooperation a necessity
- apart from royal or aristocratic marriages arranged for political and dynastic reasons, most couples cherished ideal of relationship based on affection, trust and partnership
- Many couples lived unhappily
- With poverty and drink breeding bitterness and domestic violence
- one partner, usually man, simply deserted and some married again, bigamouly
- We can find many letters and diaries that record deep love and affection between couples, pride in their children's progress, and devastating grief when a child died
- Early modern family displays both parallels with and significant differences from family today
Comments
No comments have yet been made