![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
While earlier hypotheses concerning the household formation patterns of Greek populations were proved mistaken, further hypotheses have been proposed. Though the small number of existing studies prevents us from conclusively describing the household formation patterns in nineteenth century Greece, no studies exist referring to eighteenth century. This paper examines the household formation patterns on eighteenth century Kythera using nominal census and notarial sources. It demonstrates that Kythera did not belong either to the West or to the East, as these were described by Hajnal; neither did its household formation system conform to Laslett's Mediterranean tendency in quotation marks. The widespread prevalence of nuclear households in Kythera disguised the strong economic links between the paternal household and those of his sons. Thus, the residential independence, as demonstrated in the quantitative analysis of the census, contrasts the economic inter-dependence between the paternal and the son's households, as depicted in the qualitative notarial sources.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to acknowledge Emma Brocklebank's contribution in inputting all the census data. Her patience and accuracy were extraordinary. The author would also like to acknowledge the financial support received from the Faculty Research Fund, Newcastle University which provided funding for the project. Without its support it would have been impossible to undertake this study. I would also like to thank Karolina Aslane, Kostas Tsaltas and Eleni Harou-Koronaiou for guiding me through the Kythera archives, for answering my numerous questions and for offering me their warm hospitality.
Notes
1 For the transliteration of Greek characters the following was used:
1 http://www.libraries.psu.edu/psul/cataloging/rare/docs/greek.html (access date: 24 September 2010).
2 Though a time reference is not provided I assume that this assertion refers to the early twentieth century.
3 Apart from the folders cited among the primary sources and which were examined in their entirety, the following folders were also consulted in the Local Historical Archives at Kythera: Kalonas Ioannes, Folder 36; Mormores Ioulios, folder 46; Trifules, papa-Manoles, Folder 48, book 2; Kastrisos, papa-Demetres, folder 49, book 1; Sklavos, folder 53, book 1; Kasimates Tzortzes, folder 76, book 3; Kasimates Demetrios, Folder 79. Each folder contains approximately between 50 and 100 contracts and at times many more. Also, the 290 contracts included in Drakakes, 1999 and the 346 contracts in Harou-Koronaiou & Drakakes, 2010 were also consulted.
4 According to the estimates of the local administration, if all migrants had returned to Kythera a three-fold increase of the Venetian revenue from the island would have occurred.
5 The importance of the fourteenth century manual of Laws, Armenopoulos' Hexabiblos, has been emphasised as an attempt of codification of the legal system. According to Kasdagli ‘Exabiblos served as the basis and source of law for nearly six centuries throughout the Balkans' (2004, p.262). Whether that was the case for Kythera we cannot yet ascertain.
6 Nevertheless, in some cases all was clearly given to the bride at the time of the marriage, as in the case of two brothers who gave their sister ‘all clear, one by one, all to be hers, in her authority, to do these as she wishes’ (Mpeleses, 17 October 1785). Similarly, as part of the dowry contract the father and mother passed the legal ownership to the son in the contract of October 1789 (Mpeleses).
7 If alive, then the entry reads ‘Manoli Coroneo [son] of Jani’. If dead the entry reads ‘Manoli Coroneo [son] of the late Jani’. For women the equivalent reference is to her husband, thus preventing us from undertaking a similar analysis.
8 Their coverage is not complete and the eighteenth-century entries do not mention age at marriage, although the information provided improves gradually during the nineteenth century (see for example Papadake, 2001; Aslane, 2010).
9 The age at marriage usually becomes apparent, if only approximately, by the presence of children and their reported age. What seems interesting is that in the 1784 census the ages reported for these young bridegrooms are inconsistent with their ages reported in 1788, usually significantly higher on the first date in relation to the second, suggesting that there was either a legal or cultural impediment to the early marriage of men. This was not the case for women, for whom the reported age between the two censuses was consistent, no matter how young they were.
10 The existence of such a relationship was established through the information provided, that is the surname, father's name, or husband's name. Residential proximity is indicated by the fact that they belonged in the same parish, and by the fact that the households were listed near to each other in the census.
11 The prohibition of very early marriage was legally codified in the 1800s through the Ionios Codix, which specified that men could not get married before their sixteenth birthday and that they needed parental approval to do so prior to reaching 21 (Progoulakes, 2003, pp.253, 285).
12 In one case the complex household, consisting of a parental couple and the son's family, remained complex because the household enjoyed the usufruct of the fields of the head's brother Micali, who had been away from the island and single. On Micali's return, his brother Nicolo refused to divide the property and instead incorporated Micali into the complex household, assigning him its headship (Household number 481 in 1784; Kondoleos, 10 November 1784). By November 1784, however, Micali was ill and being looked after by a distant relative whom he made heir to his entitlement. In 1788, when Micali was no longer present in the census and presumably dead, his brother's household continued to remain complex and the estate, in all probability, undivided (Household number 675 in 1788).
13 Occasionally in a will a specific piece of land would be assigned a special status by the testator, whereby from that point onwards it could not be sold or given as gift to anyone outside the family. It could only be inherited through the male line or through a daughter, if there were no sons. Such pieces of land made up only a very small part of the father's estate (Malanos, 19 July 1784).
14 Younger childless individuals or couples would adopt a child earlier on stipulating in the contract that the child, when it was time to marry, would be entitled to a share of their estate (see for example Morizos, 4 February 1778).
15 In all contracts when part of the estate was given to anyone who were not the testator's natural child, a justification was given for such a ‘gift’. If cases existed where help was offered to individuals in need but no estate was owned by such individuals – neither moveable nor immovable goods- then there would be no need for a legal contract to be drawn. Whether such cases existed or not is impossible to ascertain with the existing sources. Such absence cannot be interpreted as an indication of lack of support to poorer, childless members of the community. Equally, it cannot be taken as evidence of existence of support to such members of the society.