scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "Journal of Social History in 1994"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The mutilation of the genitals among the various savage tribes of the world presents a strange and unaccountable practice of human ideas, which one is not able to reconcile with any reasoning power as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The mutilation of the genitals among the various savage tribes of the world presents a strange and unaccountable practice of human ideas, which one is not able to reconcile with any reasoning power. Why such customs should be in vogue none can tell at the present time; but we must suppose that at some period they had their significance, which in the course of ages has been lost, and the practice has been handed down from generation to generation.

80 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the history of violence, there are two prominent approaches: the statistical, concentrating on long-term trends in homicide rates, and the cultural, focusing on themes as ritual and honor as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In the historiography of violence there are two prominent approaches: the statistical, concentrating on long-term trends in homicide rates, and the cultural, focusing on themes as ritual and honor These approaches, largely separate until now, can be integrated through a diachronic analysis of contextual evidence relating to violence and, in particular, homicide Theories by Elias about the 'civilizing process' and the Stearns' about trends in anger serve as guides It is hypothesized that, in the long run, (1) homicidal violence became less impulsive, on the average, and more rational; (2) ritual aspects declined in favor of instrumental aspects; (3) killings of intimates gradually made up a larger share of the total number of killings Evidence from Amsterdam court records, 1650-1810, lends support to these hypotheses The actual homicide rates in Amsterdam were calculated from body inspection reports, a source which ought to be preferred by historians everywhere The rates underwent a steep decline from the middle of the fifteenth century until the beginning of the nineteenth

54 citations












Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Families in early modern England were more than twice as likely to be headed by a woman as were white households in late eighteenth-century America as discussed by the authors, and women headed between one-sixth and one-fifth of all households.
Abstract: Families in early modern England were more than twice as likely to be headed by a woman as were white households in late eighteenth-century America. On average, in a preindustrial English community, women headed between one-sixth and one-fifth of all households. In the United States in 1790, by contrast, less than one-thirteenth had female household heads or householders.1 The incidence of female householding provides an important window on preindustrial American society. Its magnitude and ramiScations deserve analysis and discussion for at least four reasons. First, householder was a significant status, particularly because households were very important units of social and economic life in the preindustrial era. Householders served as the directors of the predominant institution of economic production. While not a primary category in thinking about the family, householding nevertheless was a consequence of other statuses that mattered more centrally, at least for men. Since newlywed couples established households, becoming a head (and wives were considered co-heads, especially with respect to matters that were internal to the household) conveyed independence from the control of parents. Indeed, the contrast between autonomy and dependence was at the heart of legal definitions and other perceptions of social roles in early modern Anglo-America. The category of female household heads thus is crucial for assessing one critical arena of social autonomy for women.2 Second, like their current counterparts, women who were particularly likely to head households in preindustrial England and America also were disproportionately prone to be impoverished. Consequently they were subjects for support from and intervention by agents beyond the household: informal aid from kin, charity from private individuals or voluntary groups, and poor relief from public authorities. As the wages and assets of these female household heads were lower than those enjoyed by male family heads, on average they were closer to poverty. Additionally, as women householders frequently had responsibility for the support of minor children, they shared their meager incomes with others, increasing the numbers facing poverty. A heterogeneous group, women who headed households had some stability of residence and thus status in the community. Some were even "widows of means," who had the inherited resources and practical skills to support themselves and their families comfortably. But for many women familially unattached to the households of husbands or fathers, private troubles became, in many instances, public problems. The study of the incidence of female-headed households proS vides an indirect entry into the analysis of one large segment of the population of the poor of preindustrial society, a portion that was relatively larger in England than in America.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: One casualty of the professionalism of social welfare is the African-American self-help tradition in caring for dependent children in Chicago as mentioned in this paper, which led to the demise of some important service principles.
Abstract: During the Progressive and post World War I eras, social welfare provisions became both more organized and more professional. These developments significantly shaped modem day government programs and private philanthropy. Among the Progressive contributions to social welfare organization were licensing and standard setting practices for agencies, the establishment of a policy preference for family-based care and an aversion to institutions, federated planning and fundraising for private charities, the idea that govemment's role in promoting social welfare is a residual one when private philanthropy proves inadequate, and the transition of the charity organization from a loose group of well-meaning volunteers to a business-like nonprofit corporation.l Underpinning all these contributions was the idea of professionalismthat charity should be "scientific," led by skilled professionals rather than by volunteers. As Kathleen McCarthy notes, Progressive social welfare reforms "were also the epitaph for the . . . volunteer,"2 as well as for local initiative.3 Although these developments brought inarguable improvements in social welfare provisions for poor and troubled people, they also set in motion a problem that persists to this day the discouragement and resultant disengagement of communities in battling their social problems. This paper describes one casualty of the professionalism of social welfarethe African-American self-help tradition in caring for dependent children in Chicago. The beliefs by white social welfare professionals that blacks held outmoded policy preferences, that they could not manage programs, and that they could not manage money thwarted efforts from the black community for legitimation and public support of their services. The subsequent loss of AfricanAmerican agencies left black children entirely dependent on poorly funded and understaffed public facilities. Although the development of public responsibility was in some ways a gain for black children, as it was for others, black children uniquely lacked access to private, not-for-profit services once the public institution was established. Moreover, the demise of African-American agencies also meant the demise of some important service principles in caring for AfricanAmerican children that were not to be rediscovered until much later.












Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The first subway train to make a successful run along the whole length of the Broadway line was one manned entirely by Columbia University students as mentioned in this paper, who volunteered their services as motormen, conductors, ticket sellers and ticket choppers.
Abstract: In March 1905, Columbia University students deserted their classes en masse to help break a strike of subway workers against the Interborough Rapid Transit Company (IRT), the biggest strike New York had ever experienced. Almost immediately after the walkout began, 300 Columbia students volunteered their services to the IRT as motormen, conductors, ticket sellers, and ticket choppers. Marching in squads from the subway exit at City Hall park to the IRT employment office on Dey Street, they gave the Columbia cheer and sang their college songs. The contingent included many of Columbia's top athletes, with the football "eleven," basketball and baseball players, crewmen, and bicycle racers all well represented. The college boys"'joyous exuberance" and "husky appearance" attracted considerable attention. Cries of "Scabs!" hurled at them by newsboys only put "ginger into their enthusiasm." One newspaper remarked that the students were "sublimely confident in their own strength," and "would have been more than pleased to start a rough house.''l By the afternoon, Columbia's lecture rooms and laboratories were completely deserted. At day's end, the collegians had already achieved renown: the first subway train to make a successful run along the whole length of the Broadway line was one manned entirely by Columbia