where do emmanuel todd’s family types come from?

from long-term mating patterns. there. i said it! (~_^)

just to remind everybody — emmanuel todd is a french historian/anthropologist/demographer/sociologist/political scientist who, amongst other things, has (more or less correctly, imho) noticed a connection between family types (nuclear, extended, clan, etc.) and ideology (capitalism, communism, christianity, islam, etc.). see his The Explanation of Ideology: Family Structures and Social Systems (and my previous post “l’explication de l’idéologie”).

here is a summary of todd’s family types, where he found them, and some of their fundamental characteristics and related ideologies (again, see previous post for more — see also this chart from craig willy):

absolute nuclear family
– no cohabitation of married children with their parents
– no marriage between the children of brothers
– anglo-saxons, netherlands, denmark
– christianity, capitalism, ‘libertarian’ liberalism, feminism

egalitarian nuclear family
– no cohabitation of married children with their parents
– no marriage between the children of brothers.
– northern france, northern italy, central and southern spain, central portugal, greece, romania, poland, latin america, ethiopia
– christianity (catholicism); the “liberte, egalite, fraternite” form of liberalism

authoritarian family
– cohabitation of the married heir with this parents
– little or no marriage between the children of two brothers
– germany, austria, sweden, norway, belgium, bohemia, scotland, ireland, peripheral regions of france, northern spain, northern portugal, japan, korea, jews, romany gypsies
– socialism/bureaucratic socialism or social democracy, catholicism. fascism sometimes, various separatist and autonomous (anti-universalist) movements (think german federalism)

exogamous community family
– cohabitation of married sons and their parents
– no marriage between the children of two brothers
– russia, yugoslavia, slovakia, bulgaria, hungary, finland, albania, central italy, china, vietnam, cuba, north india (note that many of these countries, the eastern european ones, also have a tradition of marrying young)
– communism

endogamous community family
– cohabitation of married sons with their parents
– frequent marriage between the children of brothers
– arab world, turkey, iran, afghanistan, pakistan, azerbaijan, turkmenistan, uzbekistan, tadzhikistan
– islam

asymmetrical community family
– cohabitation of married sons and their parents
– prohibition on marriages between the children of brothers, but a preference for marriages between the children of brothers and sisters
– southern India
– hinduism; a variety of communism unlike that found elsewhere

anomic family
– cohabitation of married children with their parents rejected in theory but accepted in practice
– consanguine marriage possible and sometimes frequent
– burma, cambodia, laos, thailand, malaysia, indonesia, philippines, madagascar, south-american indian cultures

african systems
– instability of the household
– polygyny
_____

the fundamental pattern here is that the family types run from small (and individualistic) to large (and communal) — from nuclear families through to community families. the underlying fundamental pattern — the causal factor — is that the long-term mating patterns run from outbreeding to greater and greater levels of inbreeding (to inbreeding+polygamy in many african societies).

as i said in a previous post where do clans come from?:

“the presence (or absence) of clans in societies is somehow connected to the mating patterns of societies. in fact, it seems to be that a whole range of kinship-based societal types is somehow connected to a whole range of mating patterns: the ‘closer’ the mating patterns in a society, the more ‘clannish’ it tends to be — the more distant the mating patterns, the less ‘clannish.’

“so we see a spectrum of ‘clannish’ societies ranging from the very individualistic western societies characterized by nuclear families and, crucially, very little inbreeding (cousin marriage, for instance) to very tribal arab or bedouin societies characterized by nested networks of extended families and clans and large tribal organizations and having *very high* levels of inbreeding (specifically a form of very close cousin marriage which increases the degree of inbreeding). falling somewhere in between these two extremes are groups like the chinese whose society is built mostly around the extended familiy but in some regions of china also clans — or the medieval scots (especially the highland scots) whose society for centuries was built around the clan (h*ck, they even coined the term!). these ‘in-betweener’ groups are, or were, characterized by mid-levels of inbreeding (typically avoiding the very close cousin marriage form of the arabs).”
_____

running through todd’s types:

– the absolute nuclear family found in anglo-saxons (the english), the netherlands, and denmark. todd notes that there is no marriage between the children of brothers in societies where this family type is found. in fact, there has been very little cousin marriage of ANY sort in these “core european” societies since the middle ages (see “mating patterns in europe series” below ↓ in left-hand column) — especially in (southern) england and (parts of) the netherlands (i don’t know about denmark). these are the areas of northwest europe — of probably the world — that have been outbreeding the most, since the early part of the medieval period — and they have the smallest families and are the greatest individualists (although i’m not so sure about the danes…).

– the egalitarian nuclear family found in northern france, northern italy, central and southern spain, central portugal, greece, romania, poland, latin america, and ethiopia. again, todd notes there there is no marriage between the children of brothers in these societies, but the key — at least as far as the european societies here go — is that they, too, have mostly been avoiding ALL forms of cousin marriage for a very long time — but NOT QUITE as long, or for as much, as the peoples of the low countries/southern england. The Outbreeding Project of the europeans (as i like to call it) really got going earliest amongst the franks (and the anglo-saxons in kent who had close ties to the franks), and it spread out in all directions across europe from there. so, the populations closest to the early medieval frankish heartland (other parts of northern france, northern italy, spain, portugal) are just one family type step away from the absolute nuclear family — and individualistic, but not as individualistic as the english or dutch. (for more details on these other european countries see “mating patterns in europe series” below ↓ in left-hand column.) i don’t yet know enough about the mating patterns of latin america or ethiopia.

– the authoritarian family, which is a type of stem family (nuclear family+grandparents), found in germany, austria, sweden, norway, belgium, bohemia, scotland, ireland, peripheral regions of france, northern spain, northern portugal, japan, korea, jews, and romany gypsies. todd notes that there is little or no marriage between the children of brothers in these populations, but again, most of the european countries/regions included here have avoided ALL cousin marriage for centuries. HOWEVER, they were mostly part a LATER — sometimes much later (e.g. ireland, highland scotland) — wave in The Outbreeding Project, just like the european egalitarian nuclear families above (for more details see “mating patterns in europe series” below ↓ in left-hand column). the japanese, too, began outbreeding quite latevery late, i believe (but i need to find out more). i don’t know enough about the koreans or jews (i assume todd means ashkenazi jews?) to say. in general, gypsies inbreed (marry their cousins) A LOT. so, as the extent of long-term inbreeding increases, the family size begins to increase.

– the exogamous community family found in russia, yugoslavia, slovakia, bulgaria, hungary, finland, albania, central italy, china, vietnam, cuba, and north india. todd notes that there is no marriage between the children of brothers in these groups, but in most of the eastern europeans populations here (not sure about finland or hungary), The Outbreeding Project arrived much later than in northwestern europe, and marriage between maternal cousins was not unusual in the medieval period (see “mating patterns in europe series” below ↓ in left-hand column). in some of these groups — like the albanians — maternal cousin marriage is probably still common today, or was until very recently. parts of italy, too, especially the farther south you go. maternal cousin marriage was common in china, especially in the south, for millennia (see “mating patterns in asia series” below ↓ in left-hand column). i don’t know enough about the vietnamese or cubans to say. the northern indians (the hindus) tend to avoid cousin marriage, but marry within castes, of course. so we see again that, the longer the history of cousin marriage, the larger the family size. most of these groups have been marrying cousins for several hundreds of years longer than northwestern europeans, and they have large “community” families.

– the endogamous community family found in the arab world, turkey, iran, afghanistan, pakistan, azerbaijan, turkmenistan, uzbekistan, and tajikistan. todd notes that there is frequent marriage between the children of brothers. that is absolutely correct — father’s brother’s daughter (fbd) marriage, which probably originated in the levant, was exported into the arabian peninsula, and spread out from there when the arabs conquered the middle east, north african, and many of the “-stans.” and it just so happens that fbd marriage leads to the greatest degrees of inbreeding possible — and, therefore, these populations have some of the largest family sizes possible (clans and tribes).

– the asymmetrical community family found in southern india. todd notes that maternal cousin marriage is preferred here, and the rates of cousin marriage in southern india — and uncle-niece marriage — are very high. so again, lots of close marriages leads to large, community families.

– the anomic family found in burma, cambodia, laos, thailand, malaysia, indonesia, philippines, madagascar, and south-american indian cultures. todd says that consanguineous marriages are permitted and “sometimes frequent” in these populations — and that adult children often live with their parents (so these families are larger than nuclear families). i don’t know much about the mating patterns in any of these groups, but if consanguineous marriages are frequent in them, it’s not surprising to find large family sizes.

african family systems found in sub-saharan africa. todd describes them as unstable and polygynous. i know that cousin marriage is common in some but not in others, but i don’t know many details. we shall have to wait and see on sub-saharan africa.
_____

but hbd chick — maybe populations with large family sizes simply favor close marriages? perhaps it’s all just a coincidence!

no, it’s definitely NOT a coincidence, and we can know that the causal direction is from long-term mating patterns to family size (and various ideologies), because we have the example of europe to show us that.

BEFORE northwest europeans started outbreeding (avoiding cousin marriage) on a regular basis — in the pre-christian era — they had large families — kindreds and clans and tribes (for more details see “general” section and “mating patterns in europe series” below ↓ in left-hand column). and the groups that have been OUTBREEDING THE LONGEST — the english and the dutch (and the danes?) — have the smallest family sizes — and are the most individualistic. and the groups that started outbreeding later — for example the irish and the highland scots — they had larger families and even clans until well into the medieval period. same for eastern europe. and in the balkans, many of those groups are still marrying cousins today (or up until very recently), and they still have extended families and clans.

it’s not clear exactly what the mechanism is, but it must be biological and is, no doubt, related to the concept of inclusive fitness. the natural analogy (heh – see what i did there?) to draw would be to ants and the other eusocial insects (although i know many myrmecologists/entymologists don’t like to connect eusociality and inclusive fitness) — many of the individuals in these insect populations are very closely related, and, so (probably), they come together in very large family groups. other parallels might be to naked mole rats versus other mole rats or to meerkats, but i don’t know the mating patterns/genetic relatedness in those species.

however it actually works, the general pattern is clear: the closer the long-term mating patterns, the larger the family size (and the more family-oriented the populace) — the more distant the long-term mating patterns, the smaller the family size (and the more individualistic the populace — and, yet, more commonweal oriented — at least in europe…).

see also: craig willy’s Emmanuel Todd’s L’invention de l’Europe: A critical summary

previously: “l’explication de l’idéologie” and where do clans come from? and whatever happened to european tribes?

(note: comments do not require an email. nekked mole rat!)

18 Comments

  1. When it comes to Slovakia, you should split it to western and eastern part. I am not expert at family types (up to recently I thought authoritarian family was the model for most of the Europe – shame on me) but east and west differ culturally. And of course, hungarians still reside in south.

    Reply

  2. Footnote: I would call sub-saharan mating patterns fuzzy. Promiscuity is important factor there.

    Reply

  3. You put China in the “exogamous community family”. Have you done any detailed posts on that nation? I’m sure we’d all like to know more about the possible character traits of our new overlords :)

    Even as Mao enforced extreme communism on the mainland, expat communities were trying extreme capitalism in Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan. Under Deng, post-Mao China moved 180º to embrace a non-liberal version of Capitalism, partly inspired by those expat examples.

    The shocks China has experienced in the last 200 years have been as extreme as any society has ever been through (British drug dealing, Japanese invasion, civil war, Maoist famine and Cultural Revolution, one child policy, sudden uprooting from the country to the city, sudden rapid growth and affluence). There seems to be some inbuilt resilience there. Is it really the family, considering how the state has previously intervened aggressively in family life and fertility issues?

    Reply

  4. @krakonos – “When it comes to Slovakia, you should split it to western and eastern part.”

    yes! todd actually has a map of europe in the book, and slovakia is split west to east between the authoritarian family and the exogamous community family. (^_^)

    @krakonos – “I would call sub-saharan mating patterns fuzzy. Promiscuity is important factor there.”

    fuzzy. that’s good! polygamy is important, promiscuity is important, and there’s cousin marriage in some societies (mostly maternal cousin marriage except in areas where islam has been adopted — then there might be fbd marriage).

    Reply

  5. @georges – “You put China in the ‘exogamous community family’.”

    I didn’t put china in the exogamous community family category. emmanuel todd did! (^_^)

    my impression — and it’s still rather vague at this point — is that, while the extended family is important throughout china, it’s more important in the south — to the point where there are more actual clans in the south — than in the north. i could be wrong about that, though.

    @georges – “Have you done any detailed posts on that nation?”

    not really, yet, no. i’ve done a couple, but they just amount to a very superficial look so far. you can find links to them toward the bottom of the page in the left-hand column under “mating patterns in asia series.” (^_^) the upshot is: a long tradition of maternal cousin marriage, with possibly some occasional breaks for a couple hundred years or so here and there.

    Reply

  6. @georges – “Is it really the family, considering how the state has previously intervened aggressively in family life and fertility issues?”

    no, i don’t think that it is ultimately the family, although the type of family structures in a society probably affects the selection pressures in a society.

    i think it’s innate behavioral traits. (^_^) but, since long-term mating patterns and social structures (like family types) probably affect the selection pressures on societies, we can maybe discover patterns and deduce likely behavioral traits from the mating patterns/family types we see. maybe.

    Reply

  7. Thanks for those thoughtful replies. I guess what I’m wondering is, have traditional Chinese marriage patterns survived the Mao and post-Mao transformations? How clannish can you be if your clan’s only allowed one child per family, the government’s concreting over your pig farm and building new high-rise cities, and your only child has to move 1,000 miles to get a job?

    I was listening to a Sinica podcast, and the issue of China’s sex ratio disparity came up. It turns out that it’s only very poor males who aren’t finding partners. I immediately thought of Gregory Clark, and realised that, on balance, the effect of the “missing females” is probably eugenic rather than dysgenic. Educated middle class men in the boom towns of China’s east coast seem to be finding partners easily enough, even when they have very bad game.

    Reply

  8. @grey – “awesome sauce :)”

    thanks! (^_^)

    (awesome sauce is … awesome! … but it’s not as good as brown sauce. (~_^) the original formula, of course! not this low salt cr*p they’re trying to sell us. =/ )

    Reply

  9. […] but i know it when i see it: – clannishness defined – clannishness – where do clans come from? – where do emmanuel todd’s family types come from? – mating patterns, family types, social structures, and selection […]

    Reply

  10. “Yugoslavia” was a construct in December 1918 that disintegrated for the first time already in 1941 and resulted in a holocaust of over half a million Serbs who had been living in areas claimed in Hitler’s puppet state of “Independent Croatia” by the Croats.

    There is nothing these two groups have in common, not even that the ban of marriage between distant cousins was strictly enforced in Roman-Catholic Croatia in line with the Roman Catholic rules only to the fourth degree (fourth cousins, still much more than “children of siblings”), and in Serbia according to Serbia Orthodox Church (every Ortrhodox church has its own peculiarities) all the way to the seventh degree (seventh cousins, to wit: the children of the same great-great-great-great-great-grandparent) since the Mediaeval times, e.g. the 14th century Code of Emperor Dusan.

    So when it comes to “Yugoslavia”, this purported argument is completely wrong.

    Reply

Leave a comment