Between Constraints and Coercion: Marriage and Social Reproduction in Northern and Central Italy, 18th-19th Centuries

Abstract

In this paper we review the main theories of household and marriage systems, highlighting their inability to account for the astonishing variety of family and marriage patterns that characterized modern Italy. We propose a new interpretative framework, where social reproduction is given pride of place as the main factor shaping marital behavior and household formation in the past. We test our theory analyzing five populations in northern and central Italy, characterized by different ecological, economic, and social conditions. We use an event history analysis approach to model the timing of marriage in the populations under study. The results confirm that coercion mattered much more than Malthusian economic constraints. We conclude suggesting a more general application of our approach to the study of marital behavior, family formation, and residential patterns in the past. Keywords

An Agro-Town Bias? Re-examining the Micro-Demographic Model for Southern Italy in the Eighteenth Century

“…Yet quite frequently high proportions of singles in Southern Italy were working in religious orders, physically or mentally disabled, or in many cases women were actually forced by the family to not marry for fear of splitting up and endangering the family patrimony and estates. Just as who was to marry whom, when, and how was not just left to individual choice, 89 the same applied for the decision not to marry. The phenomenon of horizontal marriages (marriage in a restricted circle, sometimes to a distant relative) and delayed marriages has been discussed for many elite aristocratic families, 90 but there is no reason why it was not also a consideration for those property-owning small peasant farmers seen outside the agro-town areas of the South.…”

Testing the conditional resource-dilution hypothesis: the impact of sibship size and composition on infant and child mortality in the Netherlands, 1863–1910

“…Additionally, these systems are intertwined with gender regimes and may promote a certain gender order, causing gender inequalities within the household (Das Gupta, 1997;Hilevych, 2016). The most common elements to distinguish between principles of family organisation and structure are marriage, household and inheritance practices (Das Gupta, 1999;Goody, 1996;Reher, 1998), while others have also emphasised the importance of parental power (Klep, 2005;Wolf, 2005) and kinship power (Derosas, Breschi, Fornasin, Manfredini, & Munno, 2014). Thus, there are many reasons to believe that family systems, as part of the contextual factors, frame people's demographic behaviours by structuring people's social relationships and their family experience.…”

Internal Borders and Population Geography in the Unification of Italy

“…Faster population growth in municipalities with improved market access could occur via natural increase or in-migration; both are plausible channels in our context. Birth and death rates were certainly sensitive to grain price shocks in nineteenth-century Italy (Breschi, Derosas, and Manfredini 2004;Bengtsson and Dribe 2010;Breschi et al 2014;Derosas et al 2014). Yet this evidence is of dubious relevance, for harvest fluctuations-narrow in time and broad in space-are very different from the changes induced by eliminating borders, which are broad in time (i.e., enduring) and narrow in space (local to border areas).…”