Kinship was an ever changing thing. For nobles it defined your right to inherit titles, and primogeniture was not the norm for a long time. Also, people invented kinships and genealogies.
-
Show this thread
-
But the fact that their data cannot account for peasantry of which we have very spotty demographic marriage data, then this whole study is ridiculous.
2 replies 2 retweets 57 likesShow this thread -
And also, it totally ignores the fact that cousin marriages were in fact very common in the post-medieval period. Like please explain to me how this works when 18th and 19th c England and Ireland have many examples of cousin marriage.
2 replies 3 retweets 49 likesShow this thread -
You know what’s worse than not citing historians? Is citing historians and not actually considering what they wrote, and having a lack of engagement with the wider discourse. It means that you looked, stopped when you found what you thought you needed, and didn’t go further.
3 replies 6 retweets 59 likesShow this thread -
So their map: premise is regarding the early Church contact with the world and the impact on kin structures. Okay so not only is the premise here that the early medieval Church was a Western European thing, it ignores the origins and impact of Christianity in the following places
1 reply 2 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
Ethiopia being the biggest one, but in general it oversimplifies the Church in N Africa and the Middle East quite significantly.
1 reply 1 retweet 32 likesShow this thread -
Also re: data sets. They are comparing modern evidence (presumably of regular people but I have no idea) with the aforementioned spotty kinship data of the medieval period and just mashing it all up together and presenting that as a model.
1 reply 1 retweet 31 likesShow this thread -
Did no one see the problems inherent in that?
1 reply 0 retweets 25 likesShow this thread -
Also if someone could point out their primary sources/data sets to me in this, I would love that. Because I cannot for the love of me find them in the paper. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/366/6466/eaau5141 …
4 replies 1 retweet 34 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @AdmiralHip
One problem is that your perspective is blind to comparative history, uninterested in European kinship patterns compared to those of elsewhere. That's the core of this paper. You have said nothing about it. Michael Mitterauer was aware of it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The paper is very Eurocentric. My focus is medieval European history, I am not an expert on outside of Europe. The article however ignores not only the Early Church in the ME and North Africa but completely flattens the experience of medieval Europe very badly.
-
-
Replying to @AdmiralHip @whyvert
It assumes certain things through the context of medieval Christianity poorly. How can they possibly make comparisons when they don’t have an understanding of the period? They cannot even have accurate data sets.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @whyvert
So, if they are going to compare kinship structures across a broad period, then they need to have comparable data sets. Demographic data for all of medieval history ranges from non-existent to sparse.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.