KINSHIP IS PERHAPS THE MOST INTRIGUING AND LEAST TRACTABLE of the many new subjects social historians have explored in recent years. What did kinship mean to people in their everyday lives? The answer has to be, we do not yet really know. Although much has been done to clarify what is at stake in historical kinship research, a general answer remains elusive.' After several decades of intensive research, social historians would like to have demonstrated convincingly that individuals' perceptions of each other as relatives did or did not affect general social life or at least that, while the importance of kinship may have waxed and waned over short periods of time, a distinguishable long-term pattern existed that related to other developing social changes. Standard historical sources are not easily turned to these purposes. Although sources for the European continent are potentially more promising than those for other regions of the world, the information they contain is so diverse and pertains to so many different aspects of the subject that no single conceptual or methodological paradigm for studying kinship has yet emerged. Progress toward a fuller understanding of kinship has been slow for reasons other than the intractability of sources. The quantitative methods often necessary to analyze kinship have constrained generalization because the profession's experience with them has produced a climate of opinion which demands that historians make specific statements about significance in terms of the size of the social aggregates involved and advance propositions about cause and effect as
Read full abstract