Unmarried cohabitation is often seen as a radically 'new' phenomenon, originating in the 1960s, but in fact it has long historical antecedents. The question is, however, whether traditional and modern cohabitation are comparable and whether we can speak of persistence. This article offers a literature review on cohabitation in Europe, with the focus on persistence over time, integrating the results of a 2013 conference on this topic. What sources are available to confirm or reject such persistence? How should we understand persistence? In terms of the motivations of unmarried cohabitants? Or in terms of the acceptance of the community at large? And if no real persistence is found, does this mean that European cohabitation since the 1970s truly represents 'new' behaviour? We show that, on the regional level, the legacy of the past is still visible in factors affecting the timing and frequency of marriage of cohabiting couples. These factors are a mixture of regional socio-economic constraints, the relative cultural importance attached to marriage, the religious history, and the level of secularization.

No abstract

At the turn of the 20th century, many European countries paid increasing attention to the family as a social institution. The interest itself was closely related to the rise of nationalism in Europe, and consequently, the family was supposed to serve its goals. Similar to German, Italian or French nationalists, Lithuanian-speaking intelligentsia were aware of the importance of the family in developing a strong nation. Nevertheless, unlike Westerners, the Lithuanian nationalists did not connect the family ideology with pronatalistic discourse. Lithuanian family ideology was not focused on procreation as its main goal. Only a nationally conscious wife and children raised in the Lithuanian spirit were considered to be the most solid base for a strong nation.In 1795, Lithuania was occupied by Russia, and became the Northwestern province of the Tsarist Empire. However, in spite of severe Tsarist policy to prevent its spread, the Lithuanian national revival gradually evolved into a powerful cultural movement at the turn of the 20th century. The movement was lead by the Lithuanian-speaking intelligentsia whose main goals were to resist russification and to build a modern society. For the intelligentsia, the national revival was inseparable from the revival of the family. Accordingly, developing a nationalistic family ideology was one of the most important tasks for the awakening spirit.This essay explores the main principles of the Lithuanian family ideology at the turn of the 20th century. It argues that this ideology did not hold the same pronatalistic notions characteristic of German, French, Spanish or Italian concepts of that time. In other words, the Western family policies were focused on procreation as the way to inseminate the "best qualities" of a given nation and/or make it physically strong. Although, Lithuanian intelligentsia also desired to promote a nationally "pure" family, they did not treat it as an exclusively reproductive institution. Lithuanian ideology stressed interpersonal relationships within the family instead of reproduction. Lithuanian nationalists believed that the idea of a strong national family would succeed only if a wife and a husband treated each other as equal partners and comrades in arms. 1 History of the Family 11 (2006) 81 -92 E-mail address: Dalia.Marcinkeviciene@cr.vu.lt. 1 The idea of spousal comradeship could have evolved from socialist notes on women's liberation and could have been attractive to Lithuanian nationalists of that time. On the other hand, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and its historical heritage might have had an impact on the composition of gender roles in Lithuanian family ideology. The Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (1529-1795) was one of the most significant legal codes in Europe that implied the high position of a woman in the society, a fact that was attractive to Lithuanian nationalists.

No abstract

If the home remained a safe space for families during the Soviet occupation of Lithuania, why is it that the memories of women’s domestic lives in Soviet Lithuania are so fragmented? In Family and the State in Soviet Lithuania, Dalia Leinarte deftly challenges the commonplace ‘kitchen culture’ idea that the home was a site of silent resistance where traditional Lithuanian values continued to be nurtured. Instead, this fascinating book reveals how the totalitarian state gradually abolished the private lives of Lithuanian families altogether. Based on over 100 interviews and an array of archival sources, this book analyses how family policy formed the everyday life of men and women and considers how the internalisation of Soviet ideology took place in the private sphere. From a well-developed after-school activity program for children to strict rules regarding the working hours of men and women, ultimately the family could not remain isolated from the regime. Family and the State in Soviet Lithuania is the first book to explore family policy in the Soviet Baltic states and is therefore a vital resource for scholars of Soviet and gender history.