II. Historical background

The following are a few family systems from the past that are representative of Western patterns: the patriar­chal pattern from the Bible, the old Roman family, Taci­tus' picture of the Teuton family, the medieval family, the European peasant family pattern, and modern va­rieties.

Premodern western families

The family pattern of the patriarchs, as described in the Bible, still influences present practices. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are described as nomad chieftains, owning great herds, married to several wives, allowed to take concubines and to get rid of them. The Old Testament accorded women a lower status than men and, in some respects, so did Christianity.

The old Roman family gave extreme power to the fa­ther (patria potestas), who represented the community and had the right even to kill his own sons. He was his sons' guardian as long as he lived; and after marriage, they lived with their families in his household, forming a very extended family. The family was proud of its lineage and anxious to obtain for the sons brides of equally good family who would bring substantial dowries to increase the family fortune. But men were not allowed more than one wife and so officially remained monogamous. In practice the wife had considerable influence; and later, in imperial Rome, the power of the clan and of the father were reduced. Women, however, still had lower status and in fact were not permitted to manage their own affairs. Roman family law influenced all parts of the Roman Empire and lasted far longer than the empire itself, for it was taken over by many of the new nations and, up to a point, by the Roman Catholic Church as well.

The family in the Teuton tribes was described by Taci­tus as a contrast to Roman decadence in the 1st century AD.

The marriage tie with them is strict: you will find nothing in their character to praise more highly. They are almost the only barbarians who are content with a wife apiece: the very few exceptions have nothing to do with passion, but consist of those with whom polygamous marriage is eagerly sought for the sake of their high birth. As for dower, it is not the wife who brings it to the husband, but the husband to the wife.

These tribes thus seem to have been monogamous and to have accorded women high regard, inheritance rights, and so forth; among the Heruli, brother and sister shared alike.

The medieval family in the Mediterranean countries tended to retain traits characteristic of Roman family law - representing the power of the father, a dowry, the lower status of women, and the extended family - but it was, of course, also influenced by the Roman Catholic Church and the feudal system. In the northern half of Europe, which was little urbanized and was dominated by the victorious Teuton tribes, the peasant families tended to follow their old family patterns but had to seek protection from the local lord, who was a member of the military aristocracy. Only the church could op­pose the feudal lords, but the oath of celibacy prevented the clergy from forming a hereditary class. The concept of celibacy by implication painted women as sinful and unclean, a picture that was counteracted by the sublime idealization of the Holy Virgin and female saints and by the slightly less highly idealized concept of women in the ________________

to represent it in the village, and to be the head of the immediate family to whom members could turn if they got into difficulties. It was his duty to look after them and to provide a bed and food for them. He had far-reaching powers over his children and his farmhands. The pattern was that of a patriarchal, monogamous fam­ily concentrating all resources in the hands of the father but also laying all the duties on him. His younger broth­ers could stay on the farm, but often they did not marry, unless they were able to establish themselves at least on a small scale. The housewife was responsible not only for the household but also for the cattle, sheep, goats, poul­try, and kitchen gardens, which were the source of food, leather, cloth, and homemade utensils. This, however, did not give the housewife a strong economic position, because meat, milk, butter, cheese, and eggs in those days were not paid for in cash. Almost the only thing that brought in ready money was the sale of grain, and grain was produced by the men - farmhands working with ox­en and horses. When the economy changed and the farms started to sell animal products, milk, and other items, the transports to and the contacts with the dairy-marketing organization were taken over by the men.

The members of the peasant families, it seems, had se­curity but little freedom, and there may have been far more tyranny and restriction than might be imagined.

The families of the craftsmen and merchants in the towns had a similar division of labour, since they too produced crops and raised animals. As a rule, the house­holds also included journeymen, apprentices, and ser­vants.

The onset of industrialization and urbanization

The peasant family pattern in England, which stressed the need to keep the family farm in the hands of the el­dest brother, seems to have stimulated the migration of the younger ones to the growing industrial centres; and, according to Habakkuk, the same tendency was evident in Germany, where the younger children of peasant fami­lies did inherit but got their share in cash and then tried to establish themselves elsewhere. If the children had equal rights, however (as in the regions under the Code Napoleon, they tended to marry and remain in the vil­lage, though they might work elsewhere for seasons or short periods to supplement the meagre family income or even to buy land to enlarge their holdings.

Industrialization often started as domestic industry or small workshops in areas where equal inheritance rights had divided the farms and forced the peasants to look for extra incomes. But large-scale industries had to be located in areas to which a reserve of farm hands could be induced to migrate permanently. Low-wage, large-scale industries would obviously have little chance against domestic industries in such countries as Russia, where the extended family was strong enough to keep its members together.

It is evident that industrial centres and towns mainly at­tracted unmarried and comparatively poor youngsters as permanent residents. These people did not necessarily break off communication with their families, but the family lost its grip on them; and if they managed to adapt themselves to working in town, they had little benefit from their family there. The family's claims and its lack of understanding of their new situation were a disad­vantage no longer balanced by any advantages. More­ over, the new class of industrial workers felt freer to marry and have children, and their high rate of fertility ________________

from the villages less vital for the the New World added new elements. Women, being fewer in number, achieved comparatively high status (though, as elsewhere, they were excluded from the right to vote). Religious social control was strict in Eastern areas, but on the frontier compromise became necessary.

Modern society and family

Sociologists, comparing the preindustrial family pattern with the modern Western one, point out that men now work in factories or offices, not at home, that they receive their wages in cash, and that the family is no longer a producing but only a consuming unit. (There is even a trend toward letting industry take over much of the prep­aration of food.) Nor is it possible for the family to pro­vide adequate care for the old and the sick; society has stepped in, providing hospitals, medical care, and special homes. The difficult task of socializing children is taken over by day nurseries, which are becoming more com­mon as more mothers take work outside the home, and by the school system, which even provides school meals. Finally, recreation has been largely removed from the home by the entertainment industry.

The family has a number of functions left, however; it provides its members with a place where they are met with affection, where, in theory, they are protected from the stress to which they are subjected in their work and in the community, where the devotion between husband and wife can be expressed, and where they can have children and care for them. These functions are becoming more important as the family gives less attention to other things.

Sociological reasoning of this kind is based upon the fact that certain types of behaviour within the family are becoming less common, and others are becoming more common. In other words, there is a change in the func­tions of the family. But the emotional ties between hus­band and wife remain, as does their sexual behaviour. Children are still born within the framework of the fam­ily and receive within it care and security, something that seems to indicate the survival of the family and its emo­tional, sexual, and nurturing functions in the future.

This picture is simple only because all complicated data have been excluded. The Western rural family has been regarded as patriarchal and self-supporting, firmly an­chored in its kin and its community, taking care of its members and representing the "good old times." Reality must have been considerably more varied and often dif­ficult to stand, even if people did not have the schooling required to verbalize their sense of deprivation as far as consideration, comfort, and privacy were concerned.

Дата добавления: 2015-10-31