Posts
Medievalists.net » Kin and the Courts: Testimony of Kinship in Lawsuits of Angevin England
Posted By Peter Konieczny on April 14, 2009
By Nathaniel L. Taylor
Haskins Society Journal, Vol. 15 (2005)
Synopsis: In the secular and ecclesiastical courts of Angevin England one finds, for the first time anywhere in Western Europe, genealogical narrative expressed within an increasingly formalized framework of judicial testimoney. In reviewing the variety of cases and proceedings from the era, one can discern three broard categories of lawsuit which hinge on genealogical testimony: marriage litigation, suits involving the inheritance of property, and suits challenging the inherited legal status of villeins. The present paper is limited to a review of the two more clearly defined types of litigation: marriage and villeinage. This preliminary qualitative study is based on a small sample of published cases from the Curia Regis Rolls in the regin of King John (for suits involving villeinage) and from the Select Please of the Court of Canterbury covering the whole thirteenth century (for marriage litigation), with additional reference to comparative material from other sources. After reviewing each type of case in turn, we will suggest common and divergent elements and note questions and directions for future research.
Read or download PDF of article.
Showing posts with label Marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marriage. Show all posts
07 April 2009
Kinship and Family Relations [in Ancient Egypt]
By Marcelo Campagno
Source: UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology [via California eScholarship repository]
Full Citation:
Campagno, Marcelo, 2009, Kinship and Family Relations. In Elizabeth Frood, Willeke Wendrich (eds.), UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Los Angeles. http://repositories.cdlib.org/nelc/uee/1043
Entry link to PDF article
Excerpt from article:
The existence of terms like these that refer to larger kin groups is significant because it points toward the prominence of kinship in ancient Egyptian social organization (Campagno 2006). Kinship links were likely of great importance in the articulation of social ties both before and after the emergence of the state in the Nile Valley. In accordance with anthropological models of non-state societies, it can be hypothesized that, during Predynastic times, kinship constituted the main axis of social organization in village communities. Archaeological evidence seems to support this assumption: the grouping of tombs in clusters in cemeteries at various sites, such as Badari, Armant, Naqada, and Hierakonpolis, is similar to funerary practices known through ethnographic evidence, where such a distribution of burials reflects contemporaneous descent groups; the parallelism in the shapes of Predynastic tombs and houses (both were oval or rounded from the earliest times but included rectangular shapes from Naqada I on) may reflect a perception of continuity between the two domains, which in turn may suggest the perceived symbolic survival of the dead kin as members of the community; and indeed, the disposition of grave goods around the deceased could reflect notions of reciprocity, which are at the heart of kinship relations (Campagno 2000, 2002, 2003).
In Dynastic times, the state introduced a new mode of social organization based on the monopoly of coercion, but kinship continued to be a decisive factor in many social realms. Some pointers hint at its importance among the peasantry: the organization of agricultural tasks in family units (Eyre 1999: 52), practices involving cooperation (that is reciprocity) in the field labor, such as we see in tomb representations (discussed, for example, by Caminos 1990) or in the management of irrigation (Butzer 1976: 109 - 110), the (likely) prominent role of village elders in local decision-making (Moreno García 2001), the scant interference of the state in intra-community matters—all these suggest the importance of kinship logic in the articulation of social dynamics in peasant villages.
Source: UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology [via California eScholarship repository]
Full Citation:
Campagno, Marcelo, 2009, Kinship and Family Relations. In Elizabeth Frood, Willeke Wendrich (eds.), UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Los Angeles. http://repositories.cdlib.org/nelc/uee/1043
Entry link to PDF article
Excerpt from article:
The existence of terms like these that refer to larger kin groups is significant because it points toward the prominence of kinship in ancient Egyptian social organization (Campagno 2006). Kinship links were likely of great importance in the articulation of social ties both before and after the emergence of the state in the Nile Valley. In accordance with anthropological models of non-state societies, it can be hypothesized that, during Predynastic times, kinship constituted the main axis of social organization in village communities. Archaeological evidence seems to support this assumption: the grouping of tombs in clusters in cemeteries at various sites, such as Badari, Armant, Naqada, and Hierakonpolis, is similar to funerary practices known through ethnographic evidence, where such a distribution of burials reflects contemporaneous descent groups; the parallelism in the shapes of Predynastic tombs and houses (both were oval or rounded from the earliest times but included rectangular shapes from Naqada I on) may reflect a perception of continuity between the two domains, which in turn may suggest the perceived symbolic survival of the dead kin as members of the community; and indeed, the disposition of grave goods around the deceased could reflect notions of reciprocity, which are at the heart of kinship relations (Campagno 2000, 2002, 2003).
In Dynastic times, the state introduced a new mode of social organization based on the monopoly of coercion, but kinship continued to be a decisive factor in many social realms. Some pointers hint at its importance among the peasantry: the organization of agricultural tasks in family units (Eyre 1999: 52), practices involving cooperation (that is reciprocity) in the field labor, such as we see in tomb representations (discussed, for example, by Caminos 1990) or in the management of irrigation (Butzer 1976: 109 - 110), the (likely) prominent role of village elders in local decision-making (Moreno García 2001), the scant interference of the state in intra-community matters—all these suggest the importance of kinship logic in the articulation of social dynamics in peasant villages.
14 July 2008
angels in marble: Marriage and its Purposes
angels in marble: Marriage and its Purposes
Monday, 14 July 2008 by Hatfield Girl
Marriage and its Purposes
Contrary to romanticist vulgarisation, marriage does not either yield lifelong love and partnership, nor does it exclude such a relationship. Marriage is a contractual, social mechanism that povides the weft to the warp of kinship systems.
Italians, which really means Roman law, say always that we know who our mother is. Fathers are socially determined. Whatever web of kinship used to shape a society, men are invariably associated within it by social categorisation. Supposed to marry your mother's brother's son? Then that is where your husband (in the sense of recognized father of the familial descendant generation) will be located. Sometimes he might even be that, but more usually that is just a part of his socially ascribed role.
Essentially, groups of men exchange women (and, variously, associated property), in the interest of maintaining their command of that most fundamental economic good, human reproduction. The next generation is ultimate wealth.
Women resent this. Well, you would, wouldn't you? Dress it up any way you like, kinship groups, dominated by males, exchange women. They do so because exchange generates society, and from social order springs power that is institutionally embedded, rather than constantly reasserted by force of arms. . . . [Click link for remainder of blog entry]
Monday, 14 July 2008 by Hatfield Girl
Marriage and its Purposes
Contrary to romanticist vulgarisation, marriage does not either yield lifelong love and partnership, nor does it exclude such a relationship. Marriage is a contractual, social mechanism that povides the weft to the warp of kinship systems.
Italians, which really means Roman law, say always that we know who our mother is. Fathers are socially determined. Whatever web of kinship used to shape a society, men are invariably associated within it by social categorisation. Supposed to marry your mother's brother's son? Then that is where your husband (in the sense of recognized father of the familial descendant generation) will be located. Sometimes he might even be that, but more usually that is just a part of his socially ascribed role.
Essentially, groups of men exchange women (and, variously, associated property), in the interest of maintaining their command of that most fundamental economic good, human reproduction. The next generation is ultimate wealth.
Women resent this. Well, you would, wouldn't you? Dress it up any way you like, kinship groups, dominated by males, exchange women. They do so because exchange generates society, and from social order springs power that is institutionally embedded, rather than constantly reasserted by force of arms. . . . [Click link for remainder of blog entry]
02 July 2008
Kinship and Human Society
Research and Markets: Discover the Fundamental Questions About the Emergence of Human Society; DUBLIN, Ireland--(BUSINESS WIRE)
Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/b08325/early_human_kinshi) has announced the addition of the "Early Human Kinship" report to their offering.
Questions of 'kinship' have always been at the center of anthropology. Was there a connection between the beginnings of language and the beginnings of organized 'kinship and marriage'? How far did evolutionary selection favor gender and age as abstract principles for regulating social relations within and between ancient bands of our early ancestors? This book debates these and other fundamental questions about the emergence of human society.
Early Human Kinship brings together original studies from leading figures in the biological sciences, social anthropology, archaeology, and linguistics. The volume takes as its starting point the evolutionary link between enlarged brain capacity and the ability of human ancestors to support increasingly large population groups. It then moves beyond traditional Darwinian questions to ask how far early humans might have organized these groups according to rules about mating and social reproduction that we would recognize today.
Sponsored by the Royal Anthropological Institute, in conjunction with the British Academy, Early Human Kinship provides a major breakthrough in the debate over human evolution and the nature of society.
Key Topics Covered:
- Kinship and Material Culture: Archaeological Implications of the Human Global Diaspora: Clive Gamble (Royal Holloway College, University of London).
- Deep Roots of Kin - Developing the Evolutionary Perspective from Prehistory: John A. J. Gowlett (University of Liverpool).
- Early Human Kinship was Matrilineal: Chris Knight (University of East London).
- Alternating Birth Classes: A Note from Eastern Africa: Wendy James (University of Oxford).
- Tetradic Theory and the Origin of Human Kinship Systems: Nicholas J. Allen (University of Oxford).
- What Can Ethnography Tell us about Human Social Evolution: Bob Layton (University of Durham).
- Kinship in Biological Perspective: Robin Dunbar (University of Oxford).
- The Importance of Kinship in Monkey Society: Mandy Korstjens (University of Bournemouth).
- The Meaning and Relevance of Kinship in Great Apes: Julia Lehmann (University of Oxford).
- Grandmothering and Female Coalitions: A Basis for Matrilineal Priority?: Kit Opie and Camilla Power (both University of East London).
- A Phylogenetic Approach to the History of Cultural Practices: Laura Fortunato (University College London).
- Reconstructing Ancient Kinship in Africa: Christ Ehret (University of California at Los Angeles).
- The Co-evolution of Language and Kinship: Alan Barnard (University of Edinburgh).
- Epilogue: Reaching Across the Gaps: Hilary Callan (Royal Anthropological Institute, London).
For more information visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/b08325/early_human_kinshi.
Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/b08325/early_human_kinshi) has announced the addition of the "Early Human Kinship" report to their offering.
Questions of 'kinship' have always been at the center of anthropology. Was there a connection between the beginnings of language and the beginnings of organized 'kinship and marriage'? How far did evolutionary selection favor gender and age as abstract principles for regulating social relations within and between ancient bands of our early ancestors? This book debates these and other fundamental questions about the emergence of human society.
Early Human Kinship brings together original studies from leading figures in the biological sciences, social anthropology, archaeology, and linguistics. The volume takes as its starting point the evolutionary link between enlarged brain capacity and the ability of human ancestors to support increasingly large population groups. It then moves beyond traditional Darwinian questions to ask how far early humans might have organized these groups according to rules about mating and social reproduction that we would recognize today.
Sponsored by the Royal Anthropological Institute, in conjunction with the British Academy, Early Human Kinship provides a major breakthrough in the debate over human evolution and the nature of society.
Key Topics Covered:
- Kinship and Material Culture: Archaeological Implications of the Human Global Diaspora: Clive Gamble (Royal Holloway College, University of London).
- Deep Roots of Kin - Developing the Evolutionary Perspective from Prehistory: John A. J. Gowlett (University of Liverpool).
- Early Human Kinship was Matrilineal: Chris Knight (University of East London).
- Alternating Birth Classes: A Note from Eastern Africa: Wendy James (University of Oxford).
- Tetradic Theory and the Origin of Human Kinship Systems: Nicholas J. Allen (University of Oxford).
- What Can Ethnography Tell us about Human Social Evolution: Bob Layton (University of Durham).
- Kinship in Biological Perspective: Robin Dunbar (University of Oxford).
- The Importance of Kinship in Monkey Society: Mandy Korstjens (University of Bournemouth).
- The Meaning and Relevance of Kinship in Great Apes: Julia Lehmann (University of Oxford).
- Grandmothering and Female Coalitions: A Basis for Matrilineal Priority?: Kit Opie and Camilla Power (both University of East London).
- A Phylogenetic Approach to the History of Cultural Practices: Laura Fortunato (University College London).
- Reconstructing Ancient Kinship in Africa: Christ Ehret (University of California at Los Angeles).
- The Co-evolution of Language and Kinship: Alan Barnard (University of Edinburgh).
- Epilogue: Reaching Across the Gaps: Hilary Callan (Royal Anthropological Institute, London).
For more information visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/b08325/early_human_kinshi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)