Raymond T. Smith
Copyright 2000: All Rights Reserved
Go To Site Map
THE
TIME
FACTOR IN
RELATION
TO THE
STRUCTURE
OF THE
HOUSEHOLD
GROUP
DEVELOPMENTAL
SEQUENCE
OF THE
HOUSEHOLD
GROUP
|
T |
HE
real
starting
point of
the
development
of all
household
groups is
the birth
of
children,
and it is
around
their care
and
protection
that
domestic
relations
tend to
crystallize.
Some
writers on
the West
Indies
have
tended to
place the
primary
emphasis
upon the
marital
relationship,
and to
classify
households
according
to the
type of
conjugal
union (or
absence of
it), on
which they
are ‘based’
(See
Henriques
1953 and
Simey
1946).
We
are
approaching
the
problem
from a
somewhat
different
point of
view in
that we
are
stressing
the
functions
which all
household
groups fulfil,
and
examining
the
various
constellations
of
relationships
which
exist
within
these
groups at
different
stages of
their
development.
Men
build
houses, or
sometimes
rent them,
and then
bring a
woman to
live there
as a wife
or
common-law
wife.
The
couple may
have
children
in common
already,
in which
case the
formation
of a
household
group had
in some
senses
been
anticipated
with the
birth of
their
first
child.
On
the other
hand, they
may have
no
children
when they
set up
house, but
the
assumption
is that
they will
have
children
eventually,
and from
an
analytical
point of
view one
might say
that a
household
group in
the real
sense of
the term
has not
come into
being
until this
condition
has been
met.
In
practice
we find
very few
couples
living
together
without
children
unless the
children
are grown
up and
have
dispersed,
and a
couple who
do not
produce
offspring
of their
own often
adopt
children.
It
is when a
household
group
becomes
differentiated
by moving
into a
house on
its own
that we
can see it
most
clearly,
and this
is
particularly
true in a
society
where it
is not
considered
normal for
a young
couple to
live with
their
in-laws.
From
another
point of
view,
households
come into
being when
sons and
daughters
break away
from their
family of
orientation,
and this
is a
matter of
some
importance
since we
do not get
the
development
of large
joint
families
which
include
the
spouses of
the
children
of the
founding
couple. There
is a
tendency
for
children
to be
borne by a
young
woman
whilst she
is still
in her
parents’
home, and
before she
has
established
a real
conjugal
relationship,
and this
must be
regarded
as an
important
feature of
the
system.
Some
of these
children
may be
fathered
by a man
with whom
the girl
will set
up a
household
later on,
but not
necessarily.
The
fact that
such
children
are not
sharply
differentiated
by any
stigma of
illegitimacy
involving
social
disabilities
is perhaps
a crucial
feature of
the
system.
We
shall deal
with these
two points
later.
Although
we have
said that
the real
starting
point of
the
development
of
household
groups is
the birth
of
children,
it is much
easier for
us to
observe
the point
at which a
household
group
actually
becomes
physically
differentiated
from other
groups by
establishing
itself in
a separate
house, and
in fact we
have taken
this as
our
working
definition
of what
constitutes
a
household.
If
we are at
pains to
point out
that this
event of
moving
into a new
house is
only one
stage in a
gradual
severance
of the
couple
from their
families
of
orientation,
and in
their
establishment
of a
definite
relationship
to each
other, it
is because
we wish to
dispel the
idea that
the event
is a
precipitous
one.
It
is quite
remarkable
that there
is no
ritual
connected
with a
couple’s
setting up
a new
household
together
by moving
into their
own
dwelling.
One
day they
are living
separately,
and the
next they
are living
together,
and unless
they got
married
immediately
prior to
setting up
house
together,
there is
no social
recognition
of the
fact.
In
the case
of a
couple
getting
married
the ritual
is
associated
only with
the fact
of their
getting
married,
and once
again it
is highly
significant
that there
is very
little
development
of the
idea of a
honeymoon
which
would
stress the
fact of
the newly
married
couple’s
exclusive
sexual
rights
over each
other, and
their new
social
relationship
as a
separate
unit.
Practically
all houses
are built
by men
prior to,
or soon
after they
enter a
conjugal
relationship
involving
common
residence.
We
have taken
common
residence
as our
criterion
of
marriage
and
common-law
marriage,
because it
almost
invariably
coincides
with
marriage
anyway,
unless the
couple are
separated
or one of
them is
temporarily
away, and
because it
is only in
the
context of
common
residence
of some
sort that
the mutual
rights and
obligations
of a
common-law
couple
become
explicit.
A
man and
woman who
do not
live
together
and yet
have
established
an
enduring
relationship
involving
the birth
of several
children
will have
very close
ties and
mutual
expectations,
but until
they begin
to live
together
these ties
will not
have the
stamp of
authenticity,
and it is
doubtful
if much is
to be
gained by
coining a
new word
for such a
relationship.
In
Perseverance
one hears
the term
‘frenning’
which is
common in
Trinidad
also (See
Braithwaite
1953:
122), but
in August
Town it is
customary
to use the
term ‘keeper’
to
indicate
both
common-law
unions
involving
common
residence
and those
few cases
where a
man and
woman have
a well
established
relationship
without
living
together.
The
dividing
line is
difficult
to draw
precisely,
because
the
building
up of such
relationships
is a
gradual
process,
and moving
into a
house
together
is just
one point
on the
line of
development.
Here
we are not
dealing
specifically
with
marriage
and mating
and so we
can ignore
these
considerations
for the
time being
and work
on our
original
assumption
that
common
residence
is a basic
criterion
of an
effective
conjugal
tie.
In
a sample
of
forty-four
houses in
August
Town,
selected
at random
using a
table of
random
numbers,
twenty-eight
had a male
head and
sixteen
had a
female
head at
the time
the survey
was made.
Of
the houses
occupied
by
household
groups
with a
male head,
all but
one had
been built
by the
head
himself.
In
the odd
case the
man had
inherited
the house
from his
father but
had
renovated
it himself
and this
involved
quite
extensive
work. All
but four
of the
houses had
been built
during the
past
twenty-five
years and
ten of the
twenty-eight
had been
built
since
1940.
The
value of
the
forty-four
houses in
the sample
varied
from 40
dollars to
1,800
dollars,
and the
money to
build them
had been
acquired
in the
following
ways in
the case
of those
households
with a
male head.
Method
of
acquisition
of capital
for house
building
Number
of cases
Working
in gold or
diamond
fields
6
Working
in balata
fields
1
Working
on
American
bases
during the
war
2
Working
at the
bauxite
mines
6
Working
on sugar
estates
5
By
farming
and
particularly
rice
cultivation
2
By
teaching
1
By
working as
a shop
assistant
1
By
working as
a railway
porter
1
By
working as
an
assistant
to a land
surveyor
1
By
burning
earth for
the Public
Works
Dept.
1
By
working
driving
cattle
from the
Rupununi
1
These
must not
be thought
of as
mutually
exclusive
categories
of income
sources,
and in
fact
informants
would
indicate
the main
source of
the
capital
for
building
their
house and
then
almost
invariably
add, ‘and
by working
all about’.
When
it is
considered
that the
process of
building a
house is
often
spread
over a
period of
more than
a year, it
will be
realized
that
income may
be
obtained
from
several
sources
during
this time.
In
one of the
above
cases a
man who
was
working at
the
bauxite
mines was
assisted
in
financing
the
building
of a new
house by
his wife
who worked
as a
dressmaker.
Of
the
sixteen
houses
with a
female
head of
the
household
group,
seven of
the women
inherited
the house
from their
husbands
or
common-law
husbands.
In
five cases
the house
had been
built by
the woman’s
sons, or
with the
help of
her sons. In
these
cases it
is quite
likely
that the
woman
inherited
a house
from her
deceased
spouse,
but that
it was
broken
down to
make way
for a new
house the
building
of which
was
financed
by a son,
or sons.
One
woman had
bought the
house she
was living
in when
she
returned
to her
natal
village
after
having
lived in
her
husband’s
village
until he
died.
One
woman was
blind and
lived
alone in a
small
house
given to
her by her
brother.
Two
women had
financed
the
building
of their
houses by
their own
efforts,
but in
both cases
the houses
were not
very
valuable,
one of
them being
estimated
as being
worth only
$20.00.
Of
all the
houses in
the whole
sample,
only two
were more
than fifty
years old
and one of
these was
the house
bought by
the woman
who had
returned
to her
natal
village on
the death
of her
husband.
The
picture
presented
by this
sample is
fairly
clear. The
building
of houses
is
financed
largely by
men, and
particularly
by men who
are taking
on the
role of
husband-father.
The
fact that
the
building
of some
houses is
financed
by men in
their
rôle as
sons tells
us
something
of the
strength
of the
mother-son
bond, and
we shall
have more
to say of
this
later.
What
we have
tried to
do so far
is
establish
the fact
that the
wage-earning
activities
of men are
of primary
importance
in the
establishment
of
household
groups
within a
separate
dwelling.
The
age at
which men
do
establish
these new
dwelling
groups is
usually
somewhere
in the 30+
age-range,
except for
Perseverance
where it
tends to
be earlier
(see
Chapter
2).
It
is in the
stage of
the early
development
of the
household
group that
we get the
greatest
incidence
of
occurrence
of the
nuclear
family as
the
dwelling
group.
Out
of 184
households
with a
male head
in August
Town,
sixty-two
consist
only of
the
nuclear
group of a
man, his
wife or
common-law
wife and
their own
children,
and these
couples
are mostly
in the 30–50
years
age-range.
If
we count
those
households
with
children
of one or
both of
the
conjugal
pair by
different
mates, and
those
where
there is
just a
couple
living
together
alone,
then the
total
comes up
to
eighty-four,
the
majority
of which
are again
in the 30–50
years
age-range.
This
pattern of
distribution
also holds
good for
the other
two
villages.
This
helps to
demonstrate
a
fundamentally
important
fact about
the family
system as
a whole,
namely
that at
some time
during her
life,
almost
every
woman is
in a
relationship
of
dependence
with a man
to whom
she is in
the status
of wife or
common-law
wife, and
it also
helps to
demonstrate
that
nearly
every
household
group goes
through
the stage
of being a
nuclear
family
group at
some time
during its
existence.
We
are
perfectly
aware of
the fact
that we
are in
some
senses
transforming
a pattern
of
synchronic
distribution
of types
of
household
group into
a pattern
of
distribution
along a
time axis,
but there
is some
justification
for this
in that
the age of
the
household
head is in
fact a
point on a
time
scale, and
our
observations
are backed
up by
individual
life
histories.
Under
actual
field
conditions
it proved
extremely
difficult
to get
detailed
histories
of
particular
households
as opposed
to
individuals,
and it has
been felt
to be more
satisfactory
to deal
with
distributions
which
could be
actually
observed
and did
not depend
on the
memories
of
informants,
particularly
relating
to their
childhood.
In
a system
such as
this,
where
there is a
fair
amount of
movement
from
household
to
household,
and
accretion
and
shedding
of members
of the
household
group,
there
tends to
be
selective
remembering
concerning
the exact
constellation
of
kinsfolk
who were
members of
the
household
group when
the
informant
was a
child. On
the other
hand, the
case
histories
of
individuals
and the
general
comments
of
informants
do not
suggest
that there
was any
great
difference
in the
general
pattern of
domestic
life say
fifty
years ago.
It
therefore
seems
justifiable
to regard
existing
households
as
representing
different
stages of
development
though it
is less
accurate
than
actually
observing
a
developmental
sequence
over a
period of
years.
We
have tried
to present
as clear a
picture as
possible
by
combining
observed
distributions
with a
case-history
approach.
To
return to
our
argument,
we can see
that it is
precisely
during
this
period of
the early
development
of the
household
group that
women are
tied to
the home,
bearing
children
and
rearing
them, and
this is
the period
when they
are most
dependent
on the
support of
their
spouse,
and most
subservient
to his
authority
in the
home.
On
the other
hand, this
is also
the period
during
which men
spend a
considerable
amount of
time
working
away from
home and
they do
not take
any
significant
part in
the daily
life of
the
household.
They
rarely
play with
their
children,
and they
spend a
considerable
portion of
their time
outside
the home
in the
company of
other men.
There
are no
tasks
allotted
to a man
in his
role as
husband-father
beyond
seeing
that the
house is
kept in
good
repair,
and
providing
food and
clothing
for his
spouse and
the
children.
Even
at this
early
stage of
development,
the
household
group may
begin to
accrete
members
who do not
belong to
the
nuclear
family.
One finds
juvenile
brothers
and
sisters of
the head’s
spouse,
some times
children
of a dead
sister,
and what
is more
significant
is that it
is usually
at this
stage that
collateral
kin of the
head
himself
are
incorporated
in the
group.
This
helps to
bear out
our
contention
that it is
at this
period of
development
that the
authority
of the
male head
is most
pronounced.
We
might also
mention
that the
relations
of spouses
at this
stage are
very
little
different
whether
the couple
are
married or
1iving in
a
common-law
union. Contrary
to reports
from other
parts of
the West
Indies,
where it
has been
reported
that
common-law
unions are
marked by
a greater
degree of
equality
between
spouses
than in a
marital
union, our
data would
indicate
that if
anything,
a woman in
the status
of
common-law
wife is
even more
subject to
the
authority
of her
partner
than in
the case
of a
married
woman.
This
is
particularly
true if
the woman
has small
children,
for if her
common-law
husband
deserts
her, she
will not
be able to
claim
maintenance
for
herself as
a married
woman
could and
since she
has small
children
it would
be
difficult
for her to
go out and
work.
Of
course, if
there are
no
children
to
consider,
then the
case would
be
different,
but there
are very
few
couples
living in
common-law
unions who
do not
have
children.
There
are
certain
cases
where a
woman who
owns her
own house
or even
1ives with
her
parents,
forms
liaisons
with men
who come
to live
with her,
and these
are
sometimes
very
unstable,
the woman
having a
high
degree of
independence.
This
type of
union
would
perhaps
correspond
to
Henriques
‘Keeper
family’
as opposed
to his ‘Faithful
Concubinage’
which
corresponds
more
closely to
our
common-law
marriage
(Henriques
1953:
105).
We
have not
felt it
necessary
to
designate
this kind
of union
by a
separate
term, as
it is not
of very
frequent
occurrence,
nor does
it seem to
constitute
a
generically
different
type of
family.
It
is really
a marginal
case of
the normal
development
of
household
groups and
will be
treated as
such.
It
may be
that in
Jamaica or
in urban
areas of
the West
Indies
generally,
it occurs
with much
greater
regularity
but there
are not
enough
adequate
data to
assess
this,
though if
it could
be
established
that the
regularity
of its
occurrence
under
urban
conditions
is very
high it
would
perhaps
throw
interesting
light on
the whole
problem of
the
relation
between
development
of
household
groups and
other
factors.
We
can only
work in
terms of
the
material
from our
three
villages
in view of
the
inadequacy
of
comparative
data.
The
incidence
of
infidelity
on the
part of
women in
this early
period of
their
conjugal
careers
seems to
be
extremely
low, even
when their
spouses
are
working
away.
Once
a woman
has gone
to live
with a man
she will
tend to be
faithful
to him,
and this
is
particularly
true if
she has
small
children.
His
rights
over her
sexuality
in return
for
supporting
her are
socially
recognized,
though if
no
children
are born
the
likelihood
of
infidelity
is
considerably
increased.
Men
on the
other hand
are
frequently
unfaithful,
even at
this early
stage, and
if they
are
working
away they
will often
have
another
woman and
may father
a series
of ‘outside’
children,
mainly
with
single
girls.
Even
within the
village
they may
have
affairs
with other
women, and
the
jealousy
of wives
and
common-law
wives
often
results in
their
consulting
an Obeah
man for
the
purpose of
working
sorcery
against
the other
woman, or
using
magical
means to
recover
the
undivided
attention
of their
spouse.
In
the case
histories,
one rarely
comes
across a
man who
has left a
wife or
common-law
wife on
account of
her
infidelity,
but there
are many
cases of
women
leaving
their
husbands
or
common-law
husbands
because
they have
too many
other
women.
However,
it must be
remembered
that this
may be a
rationalization
resorted
to when
other
factors
have
predisposed
a couple
to break
up their
union.
Infidelity
on the
part of
men tends
to be
tolerated
or not
tolerated
by the
woman
according
to whether
she can
afford to
dispense
with the
man’s
support.
A
man’s
infidelity
does not
break up
the
important
unit of
the
family,
which is
the woman
and her
children.
On
the other
hand, a
woman who
is
unfaithful
to her
husband or
common-law
husband
runs the
risk o
losing her
claim to
his
support
and of
breaking
up her
relations
to her
children.
In
a few
cases
observed
in the
field
where a
woman has
had an
open
affair
with
another
man, her
husband or
common-law
husband
has kept
the
children,
perhaps
taking
them back
to his
mother’s
home if
they are
very
small.
From
this point
of view it
is quite
clear that
a woman
has far
more to
lose than
a man if
she has
‘outside’
affairs,
and
consideration
for her
children
militates
against
her being
unfaithful.
As
the
household
endures
through
time and
the
children
get older,
the woman
becomes
more and
more the
focus of
the group,
and she
acquires
more and
more
authority
in the
home.
She
becomes
the
mistress
of a
household
group in a
much more
real sense
than she
was when
her
children
were
small, and
her
authority
derives
largely
from her
status as
a mother.
When
her adult
children
begin to
work it is
to her
that they
give
money, not
to their
father,
though
they will
begin to
help with
the farm
and the
rice work,
particularly
in the
period
when they
are too
young to
go off to
the
bauxite
mines or
work on
the sugar
estates,
or in
other
wage-earning
occupations.
Women
who are
approaching
the
menopause
(and very
few women
have
children
after they
are 40
years old)
quite
often
begin to
embark on
minor
economic
enterprises
of their
own.
Quite
frequently
their
spouses
disapprove
of this
but unless
the family
is
particularly
well-off,
in a
comparative
sense, it
is
unlikely
that their
disapproval
will carry
much
weight.
Households
with heads
in the age
range over
45 years
begin to
take on a
more
complex
character
in terms
of
composition.
Daughters’
children
begin to
appear and
less
frequently,
sons’
children.
Also
from now
on the
number of
households
with
female
heads
begins to
increase,
as does
the number
of widows
and
common-law
widows.
This
is clearly
shown in
Tables X
to XV,
where the
distribution
of the
population
of all
three
villages
by age and
conjugal
condition
is shown.
(In
the case
of Better
Hope the
figures
refer to a
random
sample of
eighty-four
households.)* The
discrepancy
between
the number
of widows
and the
number of
widowers
is
striking,
but this
is
accounted
for by two
facts.
In
the first
place the
survival
rate of
women to
old age is
higher
than that
for men,
as can be
seen if
the number
of persons
of either
sex over
60 years
of age is
compared.
In
August
Town there
are
forty-two
males over
60 years
compared
with 60
years of
age is
compared.
In
August
Town there
are
forty-two
males over
60 years
as
compared
with one
hundred
and one
females.
In
the Better
Hope
sample
there are
fourteen
males
compared
with
nineteen
females,
whilst in
Perseverance
there are
seventeen
males to
twenty-two
females.
This
higher
survival
rate of
women as
compared
*Explanatory
note.—These
tables
include
several
cases
which have
been
rejected
from other
calculations
but this
does not
affect the
distribution
significantly.
It
should
also be
noted that
there is a
possibility
of error
in the
case of
males in
the
category
of single
father,
since some
men will
not
acknowledge
paternity
of their
children.
However
it is
doubtful
whether
this error
is very
great, and
it would
only
involve a
transfer
from the
category
of ‘single’
to that of
‘single
father’.
In
the tables
referring
to
females,
it is
possible
that some
of the
women
listed as
single
have had
abortions,
but where
a child
has
actually
been born,
even if it
was a
still-birth,
they have
been
listed as
mothers.
Here
again it
is in the
two
categories
of ‘single’
and ‘single
mother’
that the
greatest
possibility
of error
arises.
with
men is a
feature of
the whole
colony,
and has
been
clearly
worked out
in the
1946
Census
Report (Census
of the
Colony of
British
Guiana, 9th
April 1946.
Government
Printer,
Kingston,
Jamaica
1949). The
other fact
to be
considered
is that a
widower is
more
likely to
enter a
new
conjugal
union than
is a
widow, who
usually
continues
to run her
household
alone,
having no
more than
odd
affairs
with other
men after
her
husband
dies.
Abbreviations
used in
these
tables are
as
follows:—
S
= single;
S.F.
or
S.M. =
Single
Father or
Mother;
Mar.
=
Legally
married.
C.L.M.
=
Common-law
married,
W.
=
Widower or
Widow,
C.L.W.
=
Common-law
widow or
widower;
Sep =
Separated
from legal
spouse,
C.L.S.
=
Separated
from
common-law
spouse;
Div.
=
legally
divorced.
A
woman’s
elevation
in status
to titular
headship
of a
household
usually
comes
about
through
the death
of her
husband or
common-law
husband,
and from
the age of
60 years
onwards
there are
forty-nine
female
heads of
households
in August
Town as
compared
with
forty-eight
male
heads.
Whether
her
husband or
common-law
husband
dies or
not, a
woman with
her
children,
some of
whom are
adult or
adolescent,
and
established
in her own
household,
is in a
very
secure
position
and this
seems to
be quite
irrespective
of the
type of
conjugal
union she
enjoys.
The
composition
of the
household
group at
this stage
of its
development
is not so
complex as
has been
sometimes
suggested,
and a
careful
examination
shows that
there are
quite
definite
processes
of
selection
involved.
[1]
Daughters’
children
constitute
the
largest
single
addition
to the
nuclear
family,
and in
many cases
they are
assimilated
to a
filial
relationship
to their
maternal
grandmother.
These
daughters
will
normally
live at
home with
their
mothers,
particularly
if they
are young,
and during
the birth
of their
first few
children.
They
may go
away to
work in
town or
near to
one of the
larger
estates,
and in
villages
such as
Queenstown
on the
Essequibo
Coast we
find that
this
migration
of young
women is
the normal
thing.
In
the three
villages
with which
we are
dealing,
it is not
normal and
most young
women will
only leave
the
village to
enter into
a conjugal
relationship.
A
girl’s
first
child is
often the
result of
a rather
casual
affair and
if later
on she
enters a
more
permanent
liaison
with a man
with whom
she
eventually
goes to
live, she
may leave
her first,
or first
two or
three,
children
with her
mother,
who then
rears them
as if they
were her
own.
In
this way
many women
effectively
extend
their
period of
functioning
motherhood
beyond the
point
where they
are
biologically
capable of
bearing
children.
If
the
daughter
should
die, even
if she has
gone to
live with
a man, her
children
will
usually be
taken over
by her
mother, or
in later
life by
the dead
woman’s
sister,
particularly
if the
mother is
dead.
A
woman will
also take
in her
sons’
children
especially
if their
own mother
has gone
to live
with
another
man or has
died.
However
it must
not be
thought
that a
woman who
goes to
live with
a man will
not take
her
children
by
previous
lovers to
live with
her, for
in fact
she often
does.
Unmarried
sons stay
on as
nominal
members of
their
family of
orientation
even when
they begin
to go to
work away
from the
village,
but
although
they
usually
send money
home to
their
mothers or
otherwise
assist in
the
maintenance
of the
household,
there is
no
well-defined
place for
them in
the family
group
except as
sons who
are
obliged to
show
deference
to their
mother.
It
is mothers
who often
show
jealousy
when their
sons
contemplate
breaking
away and
getting
married,
and cases
occur of
women
resorting
to some
form of
Obeah
practice
to try to
prevent
their sons
leaving
their
home.
On
the other
hand, sons
will
rarely
have an
open
breach
with their
mothers
and even
after they
do set up
their own
household
they
continue
to send
money and
gifts to
them if
they can
afford it.
The
tie
between
mothers
and adult
daughters
is
effected
more
through
their
common
interest
in their
children
and their
solidarity
as
mothers,
whereas
the
mother-son
bond finds
maximum
expression
in
economic
co-operation
of some
kind. We
saw
earlier
that sons
help to
build
houses for
their
mothers,
and they
may also
take on
the
responsibility
for the
payment of
rates on
their
mother’s
land if
she is
left alone
without a
spouse.
Not
all adult
daughters
bear
children
whilst
they are
in their
mothers’
home, and
some are
married
off quite
young,
sometimes
by means
of
arranged
marriages.
Some
daughters
have only
one or two
children
whilst
they are
living
with their
mothers,
but a few
stay on,
bearing
their
children
and
eventually
inheriting
their
parents’
house
without
ever
entering a
conjugal
relationship
involving
common
residence
at all.
In
August
Town there
are
sixteen
female
household
heads who
had never
been in a
conjugal
relationship
involving
common
residence
with a
man.
In
Perseverance
there were
none.
Not
all women
who attain
old age
manage to
gather
around
them a
household
unit
consisting
of their
children’s
children
and other
kin, and
some are
left
alone, but
if they
have had
children
at all,
they will
probably
be
supported
by them.
In
August
Town there
are more
men living
alone than
there are
women, and
this is a
reflection
of the
difficulty
men
experience
in holding
a
household
together
on the
death of
their
spouse, or
after they
separate.
As
a matter
of fact
the
majority
of them
are men
who are
left alone
because
they are
separated,
and they
may pay a
woman to
wash for
them, and
eat with a
relative.
One
or two
widowers
do manage
to keep
their
household
together
particularly
if one of
the
daughters
is old
enough to
take care
of the
smaller
children,
and in
these
cases one
often
finds that
the old
man is
well-loved
both by
his
children,
and by his
grandchildren
when they
come
along.
The
tension in
the
husband-wife
relationship
has been
removed,
and the
old man
becomes
the centre
of
affective
ties in a
way he
would
rarely be
were his
spouse
alive.
If
he lives
on until
his
great-grandchildren
are born
into the
household
(which is
rare), he
not only
comes to
occupy a
place of
affection,
but in
many ways
he is
himself
treated as
a child,
being
chided by
his
grand-daughters
as they
would
speak to a
child.
He
is also
careful
not to
annoy them
by doing
anything
wrong, but
of course
his
It
is clear
that as
soon as a
daughter
in a
nuclear
family
type
household
begins to
have
children
she is the
potential
focus of a
new
household
group,
though its
emergence
as a
separate
unit may
be
considerably
delayed,
and the
fact that
some of
her
children
may be
left
behind in
her
parents’
home means
that that
household
unit gets
an
extension
of life as
an
effective
child-rearing
group.
The
functions
of
motherhood
are
prolonged
for older
women,
though
their
sexual
functions
as wives
tend to
cease from
the
menopause
onwards.
If
women are
the
potential
foci of
household
groups,
men are
the
potential
originators
of such
groups by
virtue of
their
functions
as
providers,
and
builders
of new
houses.
(It
should be
noted that
when we
refer to
men ‘building’
new
houses, in
the
majority
of cases
we mean
that they
finance
the
building
of new
houses,
and they
will
almost
always
have to
pay for
labour.)
At
this stage
of the
discussion
it will be
useful to
examine a
few
specific
cases of
households
at
different
stages of
the
developmental
cycle in
order to
see how
the
processes
we have
described
work out
in
practice.
Case
No. 1
John
Richmond
is 33
years old,
his wife
Emily is
28 years
and they
live in a
two-roomed
mud-thatched
house with
their
three
children
aged 13
years, 11
years, and
7 years.
He
divides
his time
between
fishing
and
working as
a
cane-cutter
on an
estate,
where he
spends the
whole week
during the
cutting
season,
only
coming
home at
week-ends.
He
would
spend more
of his
time
operating
his
fishing
boat, but
he never
has enough
capital to
see him
through
the
periods
when his
fishing
net gets
damaged by
large fish
such a
sharks,
and he is
forced to
go to work
on the
estates in
order to
accumulate
enough
capital to
enable him
to repair
the nets
and begin
operating
again.
He
and Emily
began
their
relationship
in 1935
(it is now
1952) and
at that
time they
were both
living in
the homes
of their
respective
parents.
Their
first
child was
born in
1937 but
it died
when it
was only
one month
old.
In
1938 John
bought a
piece of
land which
had
belonged
to his
mother and
her
siblings
jointly,
and he
built the
present
house at a
total cost
of $45.00.
In
1939
Gertrude
the eldest
daughter
was born
and in
1940 John
and Emily
began to
live
together
in this
house with
their
daughter
Gertrude.
In
1941 their
son Robert
who is now
11 years
old was
born, and
in 1943
and 1945
two more
children
were born
but
neither
survived
infancy.
In
1946
Gwendoline
who is now
6 years
was born,
and then
followed
two
still-births
in 1949
and 1951.
John
and Emily
lived
together
in a
common-law
union from
1940-4 and
then they
got
married in
church.
This
case
illustrates
the way in
which a
new
household
may be set
up after a
couple
have begun
to have
children
in common
whilst
living
separately.
Both
John and
Emily were
unusually
young when
they set
up house
together,
and Emily
in
particular
began her
period of
childbearing
at a very
early age
compared
to most
women.
Case
No.
2
Stella
Parris is
21 years
old and
she is
living
alone 1n a
one-roomed
house
whilst her
husband is
away
working at
McKenzie
City.
She
has only
been
married
for a few
months and
the
marriage
was
arranged
between
her
husband
and her
parents,
she only
having
seen him
twice
before she
married.
Her
parents
are alive
and living
in the
village
but she
has moved
into this
small
house lent
by her
mother’s
mother’s
brother.
This
is a
potential
nuclear
family and
represents
what is
considered
to be the
ideal form
of
starting a
new
household
group.
The
girl was a
virgin
when she
was
married
and much
was made
of this
during the
wedding
ceremonies.
Case
No.
3
Sybil
Brown
lives
alone in a
two-roomed
house.
She
is 24
years old
and has
been
married
for 6
years,
though her
husband
works away
at Bartica
as an
electrician
at the
moment.
Her
first
child was
born
whilst she
was still
living
with her
mother but
she
married
the child’s
father
James
Brown the
following
year and
went to
live with
him.
A
second
child was
born the
following
year but
it died
when it
was 4
years old.
James
Brown’s
mother
asked that
the first
child be
allowed to
go and
live with
her
because
she wanted
a
companion
and help
around the
house and
so the
child is
now being
reared by
its
paternal
grandmother.
A
third
child was
born to
Sybil
before the
second one
had died,
but this
last child
was a very
sickly
infant and
it was
cared for
by Sybil’s
mother who
has kept
the child
since
then.
After
the second
child
died,
Sybil was
left alone
whilst her
husband
was away
but she is
expecting
another
child
soon.
Case
No.
4
William
Jones and
Mary
Johnson
live in a
two-roomed
thatched
house in a
common-law
union.
He
is 42
years old
and she is
38 and
living
with them
are Ronald
Thompson,
Mary’s
first
child by
another
man, who
is 25
years old,
John,
Eunice and
James
Jones the
last three
children
of William
and Mary,
who are
17, 15,
and 12
years old
respectively.
Mary
Johnson
had her
first
child when
she was
only 13
years old
and she
was living
in her
mother’s
home at
the time.
Her
mother
didn’t
approve of
Thompson,
the father
of the
child, and
so Mary
broke off
her
friendship
with him.
The
following
year she
became
friendly
with
William
Jones and
when she
became
pregnant
for him,
William
moved in
to live
with Mary
and her
parents.
This
was
because he
had no
home of
his own,
but two
years
later he
managed to
build a
little
house and
they moved
into it.
Besides
the four
children
who now
live with
them, they
have three
other
daughters,
the eldest
of whom is
married
and the
other two
are living
in
common-law
unions.
This
case is in
Perseverance
and we
shall have
more to
say about
Perseverance
later on,
but it is
included
here to
show how a
woman will
take her
children
by
previous
lovers
with her
when she
moves into
her own
household.
Case
No.
5
Agnes
and
Matthew
Jackson
are 51 and
56 years
old
respectively. Agnes
grew with
her mother
and
maternal
grandmother
as a child
but when
she was 15
years old
she ran
away from
home and
came to
the
village
with
Matthew.
She
did not
live with
him at
first but
stayed
with an
older
woman who
she used
to help in
the house.
She
didn’t
get her
first
child
until she
was 20
years old
and when
she became
pregnant
she went
to live
with
Matthew in
their own
house.
They
lived
together
for nearly
four years
before he
married
her.
She
has had
nineteen
children
for her
husband in
all, but
nine of
them died
and she
has
difficulty
in
remembering
the order
of birth.
Her
husband
has had
several
‘outside’
children.
The
first one
was born
before he
took up
with
Agnes.
He
never
recognized
it as his
own and it
grew up
with the
name of
its mother’s
husband.
After
he began
to live
with Agnes
he was
still
carrying
on an
affair
with a
village
girl and
he had
three
children
by her in
all, one
of which
died.
He
had
another
child by a
woman in
another
village
where he
worked and
he
contributed
to the
support of
that
child.
Agnes
raised all
her own
children
herself
and, as
she says,
she never
had time
for much
else
because
sometimes
she would
have two
children
within one
year, so
rapidly
did
pregnancies
follow
each
other.
Her
eldest
daughter
who is now
31 years
old, got
her first
child when
she was 17
years old
and at
this time
her own
mother was
still
bearing
children.
The
child
lived with
its mother
and
maternal
grandmother
for the
first two
years of
its life
and was
treated
exactly as
a child of
the older
woman.
It
called her
‘Mama’
and its
own mother
by her
christian
name, ‘Julie’.
When
the child
was 2
years old
it was
sent away
to live
with its
paternal
grandparents,
but it has
always
been a
frequent
visitor in
the home
of its
maternal
grandparents
and still
continues
to use the
terminology
it used
during the
first two
years. It
calls its
paternal
grandparents
‘Auntie’
and ‘Uncle’
which
happen to
be the
terms by
which they
are
generally
known in
the
village as
a whole.
This
elder
daughter
later went
to live
with
another
man and
they
eventually
married
and now
have five
children.
They
live in a
house
which is
quite
close to
the house
of Agnes
and
Matthew
and these
children
are very
frequent
visitors
in the
home of
their
maternal
grandparents,
and they
play with
and mix on
terms of
absolute
equality
with Agnes’
own
younger
children.
They
all call
Agnes by
the term
‘Ma’
and call
their own
mother ‘Julie’.
Agnes’
second
daughter
also got
her first
child
whilst she
was living
at her
parents’
house and
it too was
assimilated
to a
filial
relationship
with its
maternal
grandmother.
This
daughter
then went
away to
live in
Georgetown
for about
four years
and during
this time
she had
two
children
for
another
man, but
they both
died. On
her return
to the
village
she went
to live
with the
father of
her first
child and
they now
have five
children
including
the first
one who is
now living
with them.
These
children
now call
their own
mother ‘Mother’
and call
their
maternal
grandmother
‘grandma’,
including
the first
one which
grew with
Agnes.
Case
No.
6
Richard
and Amelia
Edwards
are 58 and
52 years
old
respectively
and live
together
in a
two-roomed
wooden
house with
twelve of
their
children
and
grandchildren.
He
works for
the local
authority
and
sometimes
on the
sugar
estates as
a
shovel-man
and also
plants
rice of
which he
has
fourteen
acres
under
cultivation
this year
(1952).
Amelia
had one
child for
another
man before
she became
friendly
with
Richard,
and this
daughter,
who was
born when
Amelia was
18 years
old, is
now
married
and living
at
McKenzie
City.
She
was reared
by Amelia’s
mother and
never
lived with
Richard
Edwards. Richard
himself
had two
children
with two
women he
met whilst
he was
working in
other
parts of
the
country in
his youth
but they
both died
in
infancy.
Richard
and Amelia
became
friendly
in 1919
and in
1920 their
first
child was
born.
At
this time
Amelia was
living
with her
mother,
her father
being
dead, and
Richard
was
nominally
living
with his
mother and
her
husband,
he being
his mother’s
first
child by
another
man.
They
continued
to live
separately
until 1927
and during
this time
Amelia had
three more
children
for
Richard
and then
they moved
into a
partially
completed
house
where they
are now
living.
The
house was
finally
completed
in 1930,
but
meanwhile
they got
married,
in 1928.
They
were
neighbours
even
before
they
became
friendly
and they
built
their
house
close to
Amelia’s
mother’s
house and
to Richard’s
sister’s
house, his
mother
having
died by
this time.
There
are five
of their
daughters
living
with them
at the
present
time
(Amelia
having
borne
fifteen
children
in all for
Richard,
of which
eleven are
still
alive),
the
youngest
being 8
and the
eldest 22
years old. All
their sons
have
dispersed,
one being
common-law
married in
the
village
and the
other two
are
working at
McKenzie
City.
Amy
is the
eldest
daughter
living at
home and
she has
four
children
all living
with her,
and she
got these
children
by three
different
men.
Her
last two
children
are by the
same man,
and it
looks as
though
there is a
good
chance of
her
settling
down with
him as
soon as he
can
provide a
home for
her.
Joyce,
the second
daughter
living at
home, is
only 16
and she
hasn’t
had any
children
yet. However,
she has
been
carrying
on a
surreptitious
affair
with a
married
man and
her
parents
are
thinking
of sending
her to
live with
an older
sister at
McKenzie
City to
preclude
the
possibility
of her
getting a
child for
this man.
The
next
younger
sister,
Winifred,
is only 15
but she
already
has two
children
for a
young man
in the
village.
The
first time
she became
pregnant
her mother
gave her a
good
beating,
but it
didn’t
prevent
her doing
the same
thing
again and
when she
gets older
she may go
and live
with this
young man,
or marry
him, if
they are
still
friendly
by that
time.
The
two
youngest
daughters
are 12 and
8 years
old and
they are
both going
to school.
In
addition
to the
grandchildren
we have
already
mentioned,
there is
another
child of
one of
Amelia’s
and
Richard’s
married
daughters.
This
daughter
left home
when she
was quite
young to
go to live
in New
Amsterdam
and she
had three
children
by
different
fathers
before she
married.
She
has kept
her first
two
children
with her
and Amelia
is looking
after the
third,
though the
child’s
mother
sends
money for
its
support.
There
is no
doubt that
in this
household
Amelia is
the real
power
centre.
Richard
earns
money only
sporadically
and when
he does he
spends a
great deal
of it on
rum. He
is
responsible
for the
rice
cultivation,
but when
it comes
to harvest
time, the
daughters
on their
own
initiative
set out to
do the
cutting
when he is
negligent
and
spending
his time
with his
friends.
Amelia
sometimes
goes
herself to
collect
provisions
from the
farm and
she earns
money of
her own by
making and
selling
cassava
bread.
She
also has
her own
fowls and
ducks.
Her
sons send
her money
now and
then, and
the
daughters
whose
children
are living
with
Amelia all
give her
money
which they
receive
from the
fathers of
their
children.
Amelia
is a
competent
resourceful
woman and
she shows
no signs
of
deference
or
subservience
to her
husband
and quite
often
berates
him for
his
laziness
and
shiftless
habits.
This
case
illustrates
quite
clearly
the type
of
situation
one often
finds in
households
where the
woman has
passed her
child-bearing
period and
consolidated
her
position
as
authoritarian
mistress
of the
household. She
could get
on quite
well
without
her
husband,
but they
maintain a
reasonably
amicable
relationship
and don’t
interfere
unduly
with each
other’s
sphere of
activity
and
interests.
It
is
unlikely
that they
would ever
separate
now, for
they have
achieved a
working
relationship
where each
knows what
is
expected
of the
other and
makes the
best of
it.
The
man is
undoubtedly
in a
marginal
position,
but if on
an odd
occasion
he were to
take any
of his
friends
home with
him, his
wife would
keep out
of the way
and not
obtrude on
his party.
Actually
I never
knew him
to do this
during the
year I was
in the
village.
Case
No.
7
Florence
Chester is
a
52-years-old
widow
living in
her own
home with
two of her
daughters,
two
grandchildren,
three of
her sister’s
sons’
children
and one
adopted
boy who
she refers
to as a
‘distant
relative’s
child’.
Florence
was
married
when she
was 21
years old
and her
husband
had three
children
by three
different
women, two
of them
after he
had
married
Florence,
but when
he was
working
away in
other
parts of
the
country. Florence’s
first
three
pregnancies
resulted
in
abortions
and it was
not until
she was 24
years old
that her
first
child was
born.
She
subsequently
had three
more
children,
her last
being born
when she
was 30
years old.
Her
husband
died in
1939 when
she was 39
years old.
Florence’s
sister
Ermiline
died
leaving
three boys
and
Florence
took them
over and
reared
them
alongside
her own.
They
are all
grown up
now and
have left
home but
one of
them has
sent his
three
children
to
Florence
since his
wife is
dead.
Florence’s
own two
daughters
who are
living
with her
are both
adult and
the elder
of the two
has two
children
for a man
who was
working
close to
the
village
for some
time.
The
younger
daughter
has a
steady job
as a
servant in
a
neighbouring
village.
In
this case
we can see
how a
woman will
take over
her dead
sister’s
children
and rear
them as
her own,
and how
they in
turn will
send their
children
to her
when
misfortunes
occur.
This
is also a
fairly
typical
pattern
for a
female
household
head at
this stage
of her
life.
The
next case
shows a
household
that is
almost
completely
at the end
of its
developmental
sequence.
Case
No. 8
Margaret
McDougall
is an
84-years-old
widow
drawing a
government
old age
pension of
$3.00 per
month.
Her
daughter
Jane and
Jane’s
son
Norman,
live with
Margaret
in her
two-roomed
cottage.
Margaret
was born
in 1868 in
August
Town and
she says
that her
mother was
the
daughter
of a pure
Ibo, her
father’s
father was
a Congo,
and her
husband
was a
Cromanti.
Her
father’s
father
came
direct to
British
Guiana
from
Africa,
though she
never
actually
knew him.
Her
first
child was
born when
she was 18
years old
and was
still
living
with her
mother,
but after
the birth
of their
second
child,
George
McDougall,
the
children’s
father,
married
her and
they came
to live in
their
first
mud-thatched
house on
this same
lot.
The
land did
not belong
to them,
and to
this day
she has to
pay 25
cents per
month rent
to the
owner, who
lives in
the
village.
This
absolves
her from
having to
pay the
rates,
however.
They
subsequently
had five
different
houses on
this same
lot, each
old one
being
broken
down as
the new
one was
built,
until
finally
this board
house was
built in
1918 at a
cost of
$200.
Margaret
had twelve
children
in all and
she now
has
forty-six
grandchildren
and at
least
thirty-two
great-grandchildren,
many of
whom live
in the
village.
However,
she doesn’t
see a
great deal
of them
and she
can’t by
any means
remember
them all
and even
has
difficulty
in
recalling
all her
grandchildren.
Many
of her
great-grandchildren
are the
children
of
grandsons
and
therefore
they have
no real
tie with
her, being
bound up
in their
mothers’
families
rather
than their
fathers’.
Her
daughter
Jane, who
lives with
her, is 44
years old
and she
lived for
some years
in a
common-law
union with
a man,
bearing
three
children
for him
before
they
separated,
and he
subsequently
married
another
woman. The
eldest of
Jane’s
children
works away
at
Kwakwani
and the
youngest
was taken
by its
father.
Jane’s
middle
child
lives with
her and he
is 15
years old
and
already
helps her
with the
farm.
Jane
herself is
a hard
worker and
besides
running a
farm she
works on
the sugar
estates as
a
labourer.
When
her mother
dies she
will
become
head of
the
household
in her own
right and
will
probably
build up
her own
group
around
her.
During
her
lifetime
Margaret
McDougall
has reared
many
children
both her
own and
those of
her
daughters
but they
are all
grown up
and
dispersed
now except
Jane her
youngest
daughter,
and the
household
is really
at the end
of its
cycle of
growth and
decay, it
being only
a matter
of time
before its
final
dissolution
with the
death of
Margaret.
The
new
household
with Jane
as head
will have
grown out
of the old
one in a
sense, but
Jane has
had her
own
history as
a mother
and it is
really
more
correct to
think of
the two as
overlapping
in time
than as
being
continuous.
In
these
eight
cases
selected
from the
field-records
we have
been able
to see
some of
the ways
in which
actual
households
are
constituted
and some
of the
life
experiences
of their
members
and it
would be
possible
to include
all kinds
of
variations
from the
general
pattern to
illustrate
special
points,
but this
would fill
several
volumes.
What
we have
done is to
pick some
key stages
in the
developmental
cycle to
show that
our
abstract
principles
do work
out
empirically
in a very
clear way.
THE
LIFE-CYCLE
OF THE
INDIVIDUAL
In
order to
round out
our
description
of the
family
system and
the
developmental
sequence
of the
household
group, we
may now
consider
the
development
and life
experiences
of the
individuals
who go to
make up
the
household
group.
This
is merely
introducing
a new
perspective,
and it
must be
emphasized
that we
are
primarily
interested
in the way
in which
individuals
fit into
the social
structure
rather
than in
their
development
as
personalities
in the
psychological
sense.
We
shall
therefore
concentrate
on the way
in which
individuals
come to
exercise
claims and
responsibilities,
and have
these
exercised
against
them.
It
should
also be
mentioned
that our
neglect of
the
extremely
interesting
aspects of
customs
connected
with
childbirth,
and the
various
rituals
involved
in rites-de-passage,
is
deliberate,
and we
shall only
have space
to outline
those
which seem
most
relevant
to our
field of
interest
in this
book.
Birth
In
days gone
by
childbirth
was
exclusively
a village
affair,
and older
women
acted as
midwives (‘Nanas’
or ‘grannies’),
practicing
with a
moderate
degree of
skill, a
good deal
of
empirical
knowledge,
and using
a great
many
magical
and
supernatural
aids.
Today,
the
villages
are served
by trained
midwives,
and infant
welfare
and
maternity
clinics
offer both
ante-natal
and
post-natal
care.
A
government
health
visitor
pays
periodic
visits to
expectant
mothers,
and to
mothers
with
infants.
Many
village
women go
into
hospital
to have
their
babies but
the
majority
still bear
them in
their own
homes.
Under
normal
circumstances
a woman
bears her
child in
the house
in which
she is
living,
though a
few
married or
common-law
married
women go
back to
their
mother’s
home for
the actual
birth.
More
usually
the woman’s
mother
comes to
her house
to take
over the
responsibility
for the
running of
the
household
during the
confinement.
Women
carry on
with their
normal
work right
up to the
onset of
labour
pains, and
I have
seen women
in an
advanced
stage of
pregnancy
going off
to cut
firewood
in the
bush as
usual.
As
soon as
the labour
pains
start, the
woman is
confined
in the
bedroom,
and she
usually
lies on
the floor
where rice
bags,
covered
with a
sheet or
with clean
flour
bags, have
been
spread.
The
older
women who
are
present
quite
often
sprinkle
rum around
the room
as an
offering
to the
spirits of
the dead
‘house-people’,
and this
is done
even in
the
presence
of the
government
midwife
who always
refers to
such
practices
as ‘superstitious
nonsense’.
No
men are
allowed in
the room
during the
confinement,
and most
of the
women
present
will be
close
consanguineous
kin of the
woman, or
neighbours. If
the woman
is married
and on
good terms
with her
mother-in-law,
then she
will
probably
be present
to help.
During
labour the
woman is
given
thyme-leaf
tea to
drink and
the ‘grannies’
would
assist the
birth by
manipulation,
and by
pressing
the
abdomen.
Oil
was also
introduced
into the
vagina,
but these
practices
have
diminished
considerably
under the
influence
of the
trained
midwives.
During
one
account of
childbirth
given by a
woman, the
informant
said that
the woman
in labour
often
shouts and
struggles
and calls
for her
mother, or
her
husband. If
she calls
for her
husband
the older
women tell
her to
call on
God, and
don’t
bother
with her
husband.
This
statement
is an
interesting
example of
the
differential
attitude
to male
spouses on
the part
of younger
and older
women.
[2]
The
importance
of the
father of
the child
in the
whole
affair is
clearly
shown in
the custom
of giving
the woman
a piece of
his sweaty
clothing
to smell
if the
delivery
becomes
very
difficult.
This
symbolizes
very
clearly
the
recognition
of the
father in
relation
both to
the mother
and child,
despite
the
maternal
bias, and
it should
be noted
that this
recognition
is quite
independent
of whether
the couple
are
married or
not.
After
delivery
both the
child and
the mother
are bathed
in warm
water in
which both
rum and
silver
money have
been
placed.
The
cord is
severed
and the placenta
is buried
in the
house-yard
with the
cord
uppermost.
Salt
may be
sprinkled
on it,
supposedly
to prevent
the mother
becoming
pregnant
again too
quickly.
Very
often a
coconut
tree is
planted
over the
spot where
the cord
is buried
and this
gives the
new born
individual
a point of
territorial
reference.
The
symbolism
of
umbilical-cord
burial is
freely
used, and
I have
heard a
woman
refer to
her
husband’s
fondness
for
drinking
and
staying
out of the
home by
saying,
‘His
navel-string
is buried
on the
public
road’.
Hot
stout
mixed with
ground
black
pepper, or
ginger
tea, is
often
given to
the mother
after she
has given
birth, and
this
potion may
be drunk
every
morning
for nine
days.
For
nine days
after
delivery
both
mother and
child are
confined
to the
bedroom in
which
birth took
place.
The
windows
and all
cracks
etc. are
blocked
up, and
visitors
are
strictly
limited.
It
is
increasingly
common for
mothers to
come out
of the
room after
only one
or two
days, but
under no
circumstances
is the
child
brought
out before
the ninth
day, lest
it catch
‘cold’
and die.
On
the ninth
day the
child is
dressed in
its very
best
clothes,
brought
out into
the sun
and
carried
around the
village to
all
friends
and
relatives
of the
parents.
It
is the
mother’s
duty to
carry the
child to
its
paternal
grandparents
first.
As
the child
is
presented
to its
kinsfolk
and
neighbours
they
customarily
place a
silver
coin in
its hand
(see
Rattray
1927: 59–62).
The
custom of
giving ‘day-names’
to
children
has
practically
died out,
but an old
woman in
August
Town gave
the
following
as the
customary
names
given to
children
according
to the day
of the
week on
which they
are born. The
Ashanti
day-names
as given
by the Dictionary
of the
Asante and
Fante
Language
are added
for
comparison
(Christaller
1933:
599).
The
August
Town names
are
spelled as
my
informant
spelled
them.
AUGUST
TOWN
DAY-NAMES
ASHANTI
DAY-NAMES
Day
of birth
Male
Female
Male
Female
Sunday
..
Quashie
Quashba
Kwasi
Akosuwa
(=
Akwasiba)
Monday
..
Juba
Koto
Kwadwo
A’dwowa
Tuesday
..
Kwamna
Bani
Kwabena
Abenaa
Wednesday
Kwakoo
Kuba
Kwaku
Akuwa
Thursday
..
Yao
Yabba
Yaw
Yaa
(Yawa)
Friday
..
Cuffy
Feba
Kofi
Afuwa
Saturday
..
Hamba Kwami Kwame
Amma
All
village
children
are
christened
in church
irrespective
of the
marital
status of
the
parents,
or whether
they are
church
members or
not.
A
woman who
is
unmarried
will
usually
ask a
friend who
is a
church
member to
take her
child to
church for
her, but
this is
the only
difference
to be
detected
in the
baptism of
legitimate
and
illegitimate
children.
Two
persons,
one of
either
sex, are
asked to
stand as
god-parents
and one
always
endeavours
to choose
god-parents
who are
slightly
better off
than the
child’s
own
parents.
[3]
To
this end,
school
teachers
are often
in great
demand as
god-parents.
After
the
baptismal
ceremony,
a party
may be
held
(known
locally as
a Condel)
to which
friends
and
relatives
of the
parents
are
invited.
This
follows
the
traditional
pattern of
village
parties,
but the
child
takes no
particular
part in
the
proceedings,
and may
not even
be
mentioned
unless
speeches
are made
congratulating
the
parents on
the
christening
of their
child.
Breast feeding is the general rule with all rural mothers and the child is fed whenever it cries or is thought to be hungry, though a few mothers have now adopted the feeding schedules recommended by the Infant Welfare Clinics. Almost from birth, the infant’s diet is supplemented with thin gruels and various infusions known as ‘tea’. Starches such as arrowroot starch, or finely mashed potato, are mixed with warm water and fed to the infant from a bottle. Bottle feeding is not widely used as a substitute for breast feeding, but merely as a supplement when the infant seems hungry. Children are weaned at 9 to 12 months as in other parts of the West Indies, and the process is a fairly abrupt one. The nipples may be smeared with bitter aloes or animal dung to make them distasteful to the child, or alternatively the child may be sent away from the mother for a few days (see Kerr 1952: 35). To stop the flow of milk women resort to various forms of sympathetic magic such as dropping a little of the milk into an ants’ nest, or hanging a piece of cork on a string around the neck.
Let
us now go
back and
consider
more
carefully
the
significant
events in
the first
year of
life.
Even
before the
child is
born
difficulties
may have
arisen
over the
question
of its
paternity,
and if it
is a girl’s
first
pregnancy
then she
may quite
easily
have had
trouble in
effecting
her change
of status
to that of
a mother.
The
question
of
recognition
of
paternity
is an
important
one, not
because it
will
affect the
jural
status of
the
new-born
in any
major way,
but
because it
is a
social
norm of
great
importance
that every
individual
must have
both a
mother and
father.
There
is always
recognition
of a genitor,
and no
individual
was ever
encountered
during the
whole of
the
field-work
who could
not name a
father.
Even
the most
promiscuous
young
woman has
a pretty
good idea
of the
person who
is most
likely to
be the
father of
her child,
and even
if the man
refuses to
recognize
paternity,
and the
girl does
not ask
the court
to
establish
it, there
is still
an
overwhelming
tendency
for a
father to
be
assigned
to the
child by
public
gossip.
In
any case,
where a
child is
born to an
unmarried
woman, the
name of
the father
is omitted
from the
official
register
of births
even where
the man
clearly
recognizes
paternity.
In
a few
marginal
cases, the
father
himself
may go to
register
the birth
of the
child and
insist
that his
name is
entered,
but this
is
extremely
rare.
[4]
Where
paternity
is
recognized
then the
child is
almost
always
known by
the father’s
surname. In
a few
cases the
child
takes the
mother’s
surname,
but even
in these
cases when
the child
gets older
it will
have a
father
assigned
to it even
if it
never sees
him, or
knows very
little
about him,
or is not
even sure
of his
name.
In
short, it
is
inconceivable
that a
child
should be
fatherless,
no matter
how vague
the
father-figure
may be,
and in the
overwhelming
majority
of cases
the father
is known
and
recognized
by the
whole
community,
even if he
does not
support
the child
and does
not live
in the
village.
By
the time
the child
has
reached
school
age, its
father has
generally
been
established,
and his
name, in
the form
of the
child’s
surname,
is entered
in the
school
register
in all but
a very few
cases. The
importance
of this
cannot be
stressed
too much,
for we
must never
lose sight
of the
emphasis
which is
placed on
paternity,
and the
fact that
the social
norm is
for every
individual
to have a
father-figure.
The parturient woman is normally surrounded by her own family particularly her mother, maternal aunts, sisters, etc., as well as neighbours, but if she is married or living in a common-law union she generally gives birth in her own home, and only in a minority of cases does she actually go back to her mother’s home. None the less, it is significant that the child is born into a situation where the principal actors are his maternal kinsfolk. The importance of the paternal interest in birth is clearly shown by the various customs which assign the father a definite place in the proceedings. His mother may be present to help, particularly if the conjugal bond is well established. A piece of his sweaty clothing is used if the delivery is a difficult one. He should be the first to be told of the birth and the sex of the child, etc., and it is to his parents that the child should first be carried when it is brought out for the ninth-day ceremonies. Even elements of the complex generally known as the couvade are not e