Houses, heirs, and non-heirs in the adour valley: Social and geographic mobility in the nineteenth-century

HOUSES, HEIRS, AND NON-HEIRS IN THE ADOUR VALLEY: Social and Geographic Mobility in the Nineteenth-Century ROLANDE BONNAIN

ABSTRACT: "Providing for the children's future" is a problem that parents should solve by the time children reach adulthood. In the case of a peasant family, the solution involved giving children part of the estate. In the Pyrenees, landownership as well as social status were bequathed to a single heir, while the other children had to leave the family house. What became of these others and where do they go? A small village from the Adour plain has been chosen to show how the system functioned during the nineteenth century, which was replete with economic crises. The study shows that roles and the duties connected with them changed during this century: internalization of local social norms was no longer going to be as successful as in the past. Also, the meaning of the family changed. Earlier, a simple domestic group working for the House, the family began to take on more autonomy as a production unit and started a long trend towards being a haven, a protector of the weak, old and unmarried members of the family.

INTRODUCTION Over the past two decades numerous studies have focused on localizing, describing and explaining systems of inheritance and succession and their role in family reproduction. 1 The question of "providing for the children's future" became acute when children reached adulthood, and there was also the question of their present and future access to at least a part of the family estate and/or goods. 2 In the case of a peasant family, answers to these Rolande Bonnain is a researcher and Maitre de Conferences at the Centre de Recherches historiques of the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en SciencesSociales, 54, boulevardRaspail, 75270 Paris, France. THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY An International Quarterly, Volume 1, N u m b e r 3, pages 273-295 Copyright © 1996 JAI Press Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 1081-602X

274

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

questions had to involve the continued pursuit of the parents' line of work. The solutions adopted were diverse, but fell into two categories: equal sharing among heirs with one or several successors taking the place of the father; and unequal sharing, in which a single heir took the place of the father. In most of the inheritance systems in Brittany, where strict equality was respected among siblings and where the objective was to provide for each child' s future, the farm was slowly but surely subdivided. This resulted in the development of multiple micro-property undertakings around which, because of tenant farming, agricultural units of variable dimensions, emanating directly from the larger holdings, were created to fulfill family needs. By contrast, in the Pyrenean systems, land ownership as well as social status were handed down to a single heir, and the other children had to leave the family dwelling and, in the best of cases, were provided with a sum of money to prevent them from making claims on their parents' estate. In these systems, the objective was to reproduce, not the family group, but the basic social unit, i.e. the House, an entity which included parents, heirs, and the estate, as well as symbolic value. This practice reflected a social logic that in each new generation broke up a group of blood relatives by excluding those who were not useful for the House. Only those were married (assisted by a marriage portion) who were indispensable to the establishment of alliances, or whose failure to marry would contribute to diminishing the House's prestige. In these mountainous regions and their peripheries, social organization of this type was based on a very fragile balance between population size and resources. The equilibrium had already been undermined by the demographic expansion of the second half of the eighteenth century, which had forced village communities to accept the creation of new Houses. The abolition of the succession laws of the Old Regime that had served as the framework for this kind of reproduction also destabilized the equilibrium, and became the source of apportioning the holding. The nineteenth century therefore inherited unfavorable conditions for the survival of the older systems. Demographic expansion continued until the middle of the century, creating vulnerability to poor harvests. One result was the disappearance of family craftsmanship. The application of the Civil Code---despite the continuing possibility of favoring one child--led to the multiplication of smaller properties. As a consequence, family units became much poorer, and a certain number disappeared altogether. Nonetheless, in spite of the exodus from the countryside, this inheritance system, and the social organization it reproduced, have survived until the present. To simply note this fact, however, is to observe only a phenomenon of social structure and not the transformations in family/House relations that occurred, nor the influence of various factors of change, local or global. Studies on family reproduction until recently have been concerned above all with showing how families attempted to remain in place while maintaining and improving their status through alliances. By focusing on structures, these studies have contributed to reinforcing the impression of stability----even rigidity--in the societies under scrutiny. In the present article we reverse this perspective, by addressing the question of the children who do not inherit, and by analyzing their social and geographical mobility. This analysis may contribute to studies on migration, which is defined here not as a flow or a function of financial resources, but rather as a process that emanates from a family logic. Two major reasons explain my choice to study Houses and their occupants in a small village--Marsac--situated in the upper Adour plains. The small size of the commune 3 allowed for a single researcher to explore the necessary resources; and, even more impor-

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

-2122:2122212:2111221::121~

• . ' , . -

",-

"

".."

275

-."

-

•

• .-,"

*-."

.(

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. - 2 - . . -..-:- - -22- -:-:,e

i~.i:. :.:-i.:-:.:-2.2.:.22.2.i.i.:.2.:-:.2.2.i ....

:

.-...

_.:.:.-:.-.

-...-.-...-..

,,,

I<.,.

~,,,.,\ . . -

-.-~

-..Z.,,:-../

"i-::. . . . . . . . .

,

.

...........

.,,,,~.....\

----.-.--'---1 l,- - - ) :::::::::::::C/: :/'-' •~ . . .

:

.

.'../~.....!

,';: :L

_

:.4~..k-.-.-.-. , =====================

\.'l

*i"""/::""""""" "~c u.------~---~

;

~" ~ - r

"~- <.~.. : ~ . . - . .

.

. . . . .

"

.

.

.

.

.

.

./"

1.7- " /.'."

:-:-2-2-:-1":! .

.

"

~,'~'.'."

".*+-."

f * ' . ' *

".'."

..*

*

•

"°" ".~ *'

8agn~res de

A

I"'"

I~P"

~Arreau I;ru'-

i

"

- ~ v . /

::)J-'

'

I." -"

"

•• - . .:. . . .... ;-:-:----:-., ,,..../?.,---.-....-~-,. /,,, I.'.'.',..,.....~*.*.';,;,~.'.'..Lk.:.." /---~_ ~,-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-1 ..-.. ..... .-,.......,......-.-.-.-.. -...-. ..............:...-.-...:..-.-...:..... ...X..~.-.-......... ........":,~ m

"-'10K,,'- • ~.:- .~. E: ~ : ~. . :. .~ : ~ :S~ : .~. .:. ~ : ~ : ~P:-~. -: -~ : ~ : ~A:.~. .: .~ : ~ :G~-:-~. :Nj . . . . . . .

.

.,,,,#

1

•

J" -

f j°°"

Tarbes

"--E-.----.

FIGURE 1 T h e Hautes-Pyrdn~es Showing Investigated Villges

276

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

tantly, it was possible to highlight the effects of a maximum number of variables, and thus to improve the chances of identifying patterns of behavior and of attitude for re-creating "the conditions of the social experience in all their complexity." (Revel 1994, pp. 305-327). With respect to representativeness, Marsac does not differ greatly from the more populous surrounding villages. They all share the same economy and socio-professional composition. The fact of Marsac's small population is therefore not a handicap for this study. At the turn of the nineteenth century the community was cultivating wheat, corn, and vines, which covered approximately one-third of the land. Outsiders owned half of the village, and, among them, one-third monopolized 39 percent of the territory, especially the vineyards. This pattern of land cultivation meant the existence of temporary workers, who worked as day laborers. When work was plentiful, seasonal laborers (otherwise known as estivandiers) were employed. Several outside owners rented their homes, which explains the relatively high number of ~tat-civil (French State Registry Office) references to renters. The renters would settle in, have a child or two, and then leave. The presence of seasonal laborers, who sometimes were married in the village; the fact that some agricultural employees sometimes married a young girl from the village; and the comings and goings of renters gave an aura of openness to the community. This was accentuated by the fact that Marsac was not far from an important transportation route. Hence the village was different from other more isolated Piedmont villages, for example, Laborde or Esparros in the Baronnies region, where there existed a similar structuring of social space, with the House containing the stem family. (Fauve-Chamoux 1984, pp. 513-528, 1994, pp. 181-194; Bonnain 1986, Vol. 2, pp. 87-121). Comparing two variants of a similar social organization should permit better understanding of differences due to the environment and to proximity to centers of decision-making.

DISTURBANCES IN THE FAMILY SYSTEM The Pyrenean world has fascinated generations of jurists and social scientists because of the exceptionally important role played in social life by the House. Indeed, the House is not a simple dwelling nor an object of everyday use. Serving as a point of convergence for both ancestry/lineage and patrimony, "the House simultaneously represents for the village a place of reference for individuals who inhabit it, and a social and economic unit which, as such, refers to a position and a status within the community" (Bonnain 1986, Vol. 1, p. 124). The House has a name, which identifies its occupants. Indeed, each person living there, even temporarily, bore this name. The rule applied not only to newly-arrived spouses but also to servants and employees. Social relations within the village linked Houses--not individuals--to each other. Neighborly relations existed among Houses, and during the Ancien Regime (before the Revolution of 1789), only the head of the household attended town meetings and had the right to elect representatives. An estate consisting of farmland and rights to common land were linked to the House, and were directly handed down from one generation to the next and to only one child. Along with his spouse, this heir-successor (Augustins 1986, Vol. 2, p. 205) would create an alliance between heirs and non-heirs, enacting the ideal of permanence. The marriage portion accompanying the incoming spouse allowed for non-heirs to to receive dowries. Indeed, for non-heirs, only three possibilities existed when they reached adulthood. First,

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

277

they could remain single and live in the home of their married sibling while working for the benefit of the House (if this opportunity was granted to them). They could leave and marry into another House, contributing a sum of money to it which corresponded to their portion of the inheritance. This was a very difficult condition to fulfill when there were more than two surviving children, because of the almost unchanging unfavorable economic conditions. Finally, they could leave the village and find employment elsewhere, acquire a dowry and marry far away. During the Ancien Regime, the plains of the regions adopted a written inheritance code. This was not the case in the upper Pyrenean western valleys, however, where the first-born (girl or boy) was designated as heir according to custom. In the plains, the father was free, in principle, to choose his successor among all his children, but in fact the heir was usually the first-born boy. Roles were defined early and distributed among the siblings. The eldest sibling was required to be submissive, obedient, and responsible. He or she underwent training in his or her rights and duties, as can be observed in the manner in which tasks were distributed and at the moment of his or her marriage. Younger children were given a different sort of education, and they knew that they would eventually have to leave or give up the thought of having a family if they wanted to stay in the House. Indeed, the household had to be able to take care of their needs. Here, Piedmont can be distinguished from the plains. The existence of large communal and intercommunal pastures allowed for more extensive breeding and raising of animals. Younger boys would thus become shepherds for life, which held a double advantage for the household since it did not have to hire a laborer nor provide a dowry for a non-heir. These younger boys were freer to emigrate temporarily. In the plains where extensive breeding and raising of animals was more difficult, very few unmarried individuals lived in household groups. Leaving the House occurred at a young age and was generally final. Here, daughters had a relatively higher chance than in Piedmont to find a husband and become daughters-in-law, since the first son was designated as the heir. Thus young women were possible candidates for forging alliances with other households. However, in the upper valleys, Piedmont, or the plains, the House was governed by the principle of generational hierarchy and a strict division of tasks between the sexes. During the nineteenth century, ideal-type relationships were no longer dominant in Marsac, and identical reproduction of arrangements was not observed as strictly. One could observe the apportioning of property and even the House portioning. 4 There were increasingly delayed marriages, even for the eldest children, especially the oldest boys who went to other villages to marry or who did not marry at all. Comfortable, well-endowed Houses began to disappear. Did these dysfunctional phenomena continue to exist throughout the century, despite the exodus of the rural population that ostensibly affected only the poorest? Did these changes have a significant effect on the community, or were they byproducts of the economic crises of a particular moment? In other words, what was the level of resistance within these kinds of inheritance systems? Since marriage represented simultanously a form of becoming established, the possibility of gaining access to land, and the most important rite of passage because of the involvement in it of the family and the local society, I have decided to examine the fates of children born in Marsac between 1800 and 1899, according to dtat-civil sources. The results are presented separately for girls and for boys since the probability of staying in Marsac was not the same for both categories (Tables 1 and 2).

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

278

Vol. l / N o . 3/1996

TABLE 1 Boys in M a r s a c From 1800 to 1899

Years

Births

Survivors

Departures

Married

Single

1800-1809 1810-1819 1820-1829 1830-1839 1840-1849 1850-1859 1860-1869 1870-1879 1880-1889 1890-1899 Total

39 40 35 40 27 30 26 27 16 17 297

26 29 27 26 18 26 19 19 14 17 221

11 16 13 17 9 17 13 12 8 9 125

9 9 11 4 7 7 5 6 2 3 63

6 4 3 5 2 2 1 1 4 5 33

TABLE 2 Girls in M a r s a c from 1800 to 1899

Years

Births

Survivors

Departures

Married

Single

1800-1809 1810-1819 1829-1829 1830-1839 1840-1849 1850-1859 1860-1869 1870-1879 1880-1889 1890-1899 Total

23 34 25 31 38 33 20 33 19 15 271

15 24 22 27 29 25 15 25 18 15 215

9 9 11 18 18 15 9 14 14 12 129

5 8 7 5 6 10 6 10 1 3 61

1 7 4 4 5 0 0 1 3 0 25

IDENTIFIABLE

FATES

Out of 221 young men still alive at twenty years of age, 63 lived in the community following their marriage, that is, approximately one young man out of four. According to custom, only heir/younger female or heiress/younger child alliances could be formed, which prevented the creation of younger male child/younger female child Houses. But this rule was not scrupulously respected. In addition to the 51 young people who made virilocal marriages and two who made uxorilocal marriages, nine made neolocal marriages by purchasing a House that had become vacant because of the owner's departure or because of his death with no surviving heir-children; or even by building a new House. Further, the 51 young persons who made virilocal marriages were not always the eldest sons. Since the social norm tended to create somewhat hypergamic alliances of heirs/heiresses within groups clearly defined according to the size and value of property, certain elders took advantage of favorable circumstances and married their heirs into a neighboring village, which could be a more lucrative alliance than one formed with the non-heir young woman from the native village. These young people had to give up their status as heirs. Such was the case of Nicolas L. who married in Samiguet. The third son, Pascal L.,

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

279

then became his father's successor. Some elders never married, as, for example, Pierre D., a third sibling, who lived under the same roof as his eldest (and likewise single) brother while Dominique, the second sibling, settled in the House of his wife's parents. Bertrand B., the second of several brothers, left to get married in Lafitole where he became a surveyor. Following the death of his wife and being childless, he returned to Marsac to live with his eldest single brother. Pascal, the third son, became the heir, but only a long time after settling down in a House purchased from the heirs of a surgeon. To the 63 young persons who were established in Marsac, one must add those who married in the village before leaving it (five cases), or those who settled in the homes of their betrothed (seventeen cases) and whose marriages are registered in the (tat-civil. These 22 non-heirs were and remained farmers, at least for a while. These types of marriages were systematically defined in a contract, which listed all contributions by each partner and constituted a material record of the alliance according to community standards. These alliances, as well as those of heirs, were important for both the present and the future of their original Houses because, apart from the persons involved, they represented a bond between two entities. Late ages at marriage underlined the difficulty in finding a suitable partner. For young men in Marsac, the average age of a first marriage was 32.2 years, which is almost 4.5 years more than the general average of rural France during the first quarter of the century (Henry and Houdaille 1979, pp. 403-442), and is identical to the figure found for Laborde (Bonnain 1986, Table 6). On the other hand, the average age at marriage for heirs (32.5 years-old) was higher than that of non-heirs (31.7 years-old). Two explanations can be offered for this. In Marsac, small Houses, the eldest offspring usually worked outside of the House as a servant and returned only after having accumulated some savings, whereas in Laborde, it was the younger child who left, returing only after accumulating the dowry which would allow marriage to an heir. During the first part of the nineteenth century, the high number of departures among young people created an imbalance in the sex ratio, making parents of young women less demanding. Another lesson to be learned from the delayed age in marriage is the following: if one accepts the idea that the potential heir was designated and recognized as such only at the moment of his marriage, and that young women remained "minors" longer than young men, then fathers in the plains maintained control over their farm for a much longer time than their Piedmont counterparts, whose paternal authority was reputed as being more severe. Among these young people, a third married in the village and only sixteen among them found a spouse living more than ten kilometers away. The maximum distance of such marriages was 30 kilometers (except for the birthplaces of two Spanish women living in the village and marrying there). All brides came from villages within the department. This speaks to the open atmosphere of the village, already observed in the exchange of laborers and land. As time went on, distances traversed in order to find a spouse became longer, but the general tendency was to remain within the rural communities located, for the most part, in the plains. If one adds to the number of truly endogamous marriages those between spouses coming from surrounding communities, for more than half of these alliances marrying someone from the surroundings not only maximized chances for the newly married couple establishing a solid alliance based on commonly shared values and tasks,

280

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

but also created for them the possibility of receiving or inheriting one or two parcels of land to add to the farm. For the three married individuals out of four who died in Marsac, the wedding party was celebrated in the village; whereas in Laborde, which was a more isolated community, in ninety percent of the cases the ceremony took place at the House of the heir or heiress. This symbolized for the receiving community the rupture with the original House while signifying through a public ceremony the introduction of a new member. Of the 221 survivors at twenty years of age and born between 1800-1899, 33 remained single. This was a very high figure indeed, but becomes less significant when compared to the number of those who did not live to the age of 30 (including those who died in combat) and who could have married or departed. The 12.9 percent celibacy rate corresponded to that of France in general, and was much lower to the mountain and Piedmont rates. One should not conclude, however, that pressure towards family reproduction was less demanding for children of the Adurean plain than for those in the upper valleys. The absence of large-scale cattle and sheep raising created a situation in which younger children were not required to be kept on to look after the animals grazing in the upper pastures, and the Houses in the plains could not look after the needs of surplus younger children when land holdings were small. The number of younger children was still relatively high among those born between 1800 and 1839. It then decreased because of their decisions to leave rather than living the lives of celibates in the village. This result required certain families to hire temporary laborers over a period of years. There is a method for verifying whether or not the system functioned correctly: were the unmarried individuals who died in Marsac all "younger children," that is, siblings born after the first son, since in principle it was he who inherited? The response is negative. Seven among them were the oldest children of a sibling group, or the oldest of sons. They had decided not to take on the responsibility of a marriage or could not take it on, thus turning over their role of successor to a male child born after them, or to a daughter. The relinquishing of the heir role invites two comments: doing one's duty to ensure the continuity of the House seemed to be less constraining for plains inhabitants than for those living in the mountains and in Piedmont; and the oldest child's apprenticeship in his duties did not always succeed. This could be observed in all social classes. Girls who were born in Marsac between 1800 and 1899 and who settled and died there were as numerous (both in absolute numbers and percentages) as boys with the same future. However, they married much younger--around 27.2 years--which was later than in the rest of rural France and in Piedmont. Nevertheless, if one calculates the ages of heiresses at their first marriage (36 cases) and non-heiresses (25 cases), one may observe the same differences as in the case of Laborde. Female heirs married younger, at around 25.1 years of age, suggesting that parents were compensating with these early marriages for the lack of an heir who could be useful to the farm. Non-heiresses married later than heiresses, at around 30.5 years of age. It was difficult to settle down in the same place when the dowry was paltry, and Marsac was certainly not the richest village in the plains. Nevertheless, there are cases in which poor families were able to provide for their daughters at a rather young age, and where heiresses of richer families married much later. In these cases, it was more the family model than economic imperatives that played a role, even if rich families could hire a servant while they awaited the arrival of a son-in-law who was trying to decide between several families.

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

281

Because of the difficulties of settling down, age differences were very high between the spouses, and it was relatively easy for a widower to remarry. 5 Germain B., born in Louit and coming into the village as a son-in-law, married there three times; Pierre C., born in Laslades, married there twice; Guillaume C., Jean L., Baptiste B., also married twice without creating a scandal, thus confirming my hypothesis that the community's approval or disapproval in overseeing the marriage "market" during the nineteenth century was linked largely to local political events (Bonnain 1977, pp. 381-398). The geographical choice of the spouse corresponded to what was observed in the plains: nineteen marriages out of 61 were endogamous; sixteen spouses came from localities situated less than five kilometers away, nine from more distant localities (between five and ten kilometers), and seventeen from villages located more than ten kilometers away. However, some of the spouses came from cities like Tarbes and Bagn~res, and three even came from another departement. All were men from very modest backgrounds--previously abandoned or illegitimate children and widowers without children--for whom marrying in Marsac was an opportunity to settle. Once again, their presence underlines the difficulties girls who had become heiresses because of a brother's departure had in marrying. As in the case with boys, according to (tat-civil figures, a certain number of non-heiresses were able to establish themselves and marry, but they did not settle down in the village: 34 celebrated their marriage in Marsac, and twenty elsewhere. It can reasonably be said that those who left to settle down with a farmer within a perimeter of twenty kilometers in a rural community, or in another village with a craftsman, lived there for the rest of their lives; especially when the marriage was consolidated by a contract, an indicator of the alliance's permanence (35 cases). Indeed, the place where the marriage was celebrated always coincided with the subsequent place of death: Domengea L., born in 1816, married Bernard G. from Villenave in 1837 and died there. Marie-Rose D., born in 1844, married Guillaume B. from Rabastens in 1864, brought into the alliance her own marriage portion (r(gime dotal), and also died in the same locality. As the century advanced, destinations became more distant in the case of non-heiresses celebrating the wedding in Marsac. Seven couples out of eight settled in Bordeaux, by far the preferred large city. Victorine F., born in 1858 as the daughter of the local grocer, married Eus~be L., her former neighbor just back from South America, and left with him to Bordeaux, where he had chosen to work as a transporter. Albina D. married in 1918, divorced, remarried, and died in Bordeaux. Out of twenty marriages celebrated elsewhere than Marsac, fifteen involved men living within a perimeter of twenty kilometers. However, all these young women, whether they married in Marsac or at the House of their future spouse, had no professions and did not choose adventure in the fullest sense of the term, since they moved where their husbands were already established professionally. In addition, whether they settled down close to or far away from their original home, they lived out the rest of their lives in their new House, since no mention is made of a move to another departement or even a move abroad. 6 A celebration in the village or the establishment of a marriage contract demonstrated the family's desire to have these alliances resemble the village model of alliance, no matter what the husband's profession was. The five marriages celebrated at more than 150 kilometers from Marsac were very different. The couples were more mobile geographically, as in the case of Justine L., who was born in 1879, married in 1906 in Bordeaux, and died in La Fl~che in 1966. Her sister,

282

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

Marie-Marthe, born in 1881, married in 1905 (likewise in Bordeaux), returned to die in Tarbes in 1961. Another case was that of Marie T., who was born in 1883, married in Lyon in 1907 and died in Neuilly-sur-Seine in 1963. Unfortunately, their spouses' professions are unknown. The fact that the marriages took place far away, as well as the absence of a marriage contract, indicates how far these marriages had moved from the village models that had excluded these women from family reproduction from their births. During the whole period, 25 women remained single. This is a small figure considering the fact that six of these young women died before reaching 30 years of age. Hence, the rate of unmarried persons is 17.4 percent. This figure, which is five points less than that of the departement (Etchelecou, 1991, pp. 78-85, 121-112) and six points higher than that of Piedmont, does not mean that young women married and settled down more easily in the upper Pyrenean region than elsewhere, but rather that they left, thus increasing the number of Marsac children who died far away from their home village. Who were the women who never married and who stayed in Marsac? This varied according to their position in the sibling group and to the status of the House within the landed hierarchy. Of course, non-heiresses having an insufficient dowry, due to their family's poverty or large size (which made it necessary for the the family to rely on more than just one person to improve the House's status) did not marry. The grandfather of Marguerite, Catherine, and Madeleine C. was a weaver, and their father was a small land owner, who often added to his income by working for others. Their younger brother, Guillaume, was sent away to work as a servant in a neighboring village in order to reduce the number of mouths to feed. He returned at the death of his parents in 1854, handled the details of the inheritance in 1856, and two years later married the younger child of a smaller House. Marguerite, born in 1811 married a widower in 1861 and had her two single sisters move in with her. The situation for young women from poorer families became even worse when they had an illegitimate child. Marie-Denise D., daughter of a native-born man from Gers and the younger female child of a smaller House, was one of seven children. She died in the village in utter poverty, "taken care of by charity" (according to official sources), and totally alone despite the two sons she had given birth to outside of marriage. However, among these women there were others who were not impecunious younger children. Rose L., born in 1848, was the fourth child from a well-to-do House that had earlier suffered from apportionment despite a testament that had been very generous towards Rose's father. A sister, Marie, married and insisted on a dowry, which was finally given to her by her unwilling parents under threats by Marie to break off all relations with her family. After failing to leave, Rose spent the rest of her life working for her older sister, taking care of her nieces and nephews, and giving her part of the inheritance to her sister, the heiress. Among the single women who died in Marsac, there were also a certain number of first-born children and even an only child. In all these cases, it was not the economic situation due to the absence of an acceptable dowry that played a role, but rather the parents' desire to keep a daughter at home to take care of them, especially when all the sons had left. Nevertheless, because of departures, the number of one-member households was twice as important in Marsac than in Laborde in 1872 (see Table 3), since there the size of the families was smaller. 7 Because of a longer life span than that of men, it was almost always the

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

283

TABLE 3 Family Types in Marsac and Laborde in 1872

Marsac Domestic Number of Population Households Group

Laborde Domestic Number of Population Households Group

Single

10

11

10

10

Families w/out Apparent Structure Nuclear Families Enlarged Families Total

2 44 17 73

5 146 83 245

7 86 35 138

18 358 216 602

women who finished their lives alone, unless a sympathetic neighbor took them into their home to care for them, as Adolphe A. did with Marguerite C. As previous studies have shown (Chiva and Goy 1986, Vol. 2), the proper functioning of custom required that almost all non-heir siblings be excluded from the family group. We have seen how a certain number of them were provided with a dowry by the family to allow them to marry. What happened to the others, those about whom the ~tat-civil makes almost no mention? What were the conditions surrounding, and how did one prepare for a departure?

THOSE WHO LEFT Out of 215 surviving children aged twenty, six out of ten females born between 1800 and 1899 left the village permanently. I was able to trace the geographic itinerary and review the matrimonial status of several dozens of them. One hundred and fifteen young women, more than one out of two, married either in Marsac or elsewhere. Seven other young women, originally from the village but among those who left, remained single. In six cases, at death they were living in a locality less than twenty kilometers away from Marsac, and in one case, in Paris. This sample is very small, but it confirms the destinations chosen by those who left Marsac after their wedding. Approximately seventy young women remained about whom nothing is known, neither about their eventual marriage nor about the location of their House. 8 The departures of young men are fewer in number: one surviving child in two did not live in the village as an adult and the ~tat-civil gives no clues about the social and professional careers of more than one hundred young persons. However, departure rates may be compared. In examining the two curves describing those who left as compared to the number of survivors for each birth decade----one for boys and the other for girls--the rates of departure are not the same throughout the century. They vary from 42.3 percent to 68.4 percent for boys, and from 37.5 percent to eighty percent for girls and their progression is not regular. It is therefore necessary to analyze the role played by economic conditions. Furthermore, in explaining why the two curves are not independent one does not have to refer only to the imbalance in the sex ratio caused by a significant deficit of males. Indeed, this phenomenon exists, but it is not the only influential one. Comparison with the figures

284

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

for the unmarried for each age group sheds light on the existence of motives for young women deciding to leave or to stay. Within the group born between 1800-1809, three distinct periods stand out. One can use this age group as a point of reference because it contains the fundamental characteristics of family reproduction in this region (designation of a boy as heir, departure of younger female and male children, females more frequently provided for than males who can stay within the family House). In the next age group, departures increased in number and accelerated, reflecting directly the increase in population. First of all, the departures of boys were decidedly more important than that of girls, and the celibacy indicator of young men decreased while that of young women increased. This is the effect of the 1827-1832 economic crisis which was one of the most severe the Pyrenean region experienced (Soulet 1987, p. 15, observation of P. Gonnet). Without any doubt, custom reacted to severe demographic pressure. The village's population grew from 240 inhabitants at the outset of the Revolution of 1789 to 316 in 1841, when it reached its maximum. 9 For the following age groups (1820-1849), the importance of departures of both sexes is inverted: universally, girls leave more frequently than boys. The difference, which at first seems small, increased dramatically for the 1840-1849 age group. However, this is not the main characteristic of this period, when departures generally reach a very high level. For the 1830-1839 age group, two young Marsac people out of three left the village. Their going is linked to the numerous subsistence crises that the departement underwent at the beginning and the end of the July Monarchy (1830-1848), as well as another crises occurring at the beginning of the Second Empire (1851). Even though the 1852-1853 murrain (an epidemic affecting domestic plants and animals) did not directly affect the village, the same cannot be said of the disease that affected the vineyards covering a large part of Marsac' s land. It thus became very difficult for very small property owners to find work as temporary laborers. The relative prosperity which occurred at the beginning of the 1860s explains the decrease in departures, and other new opportunities were appearing for young people at that time. Cities were developing and the region was opening up due to the arrival of the railroad in 1859 (the Morcenx-Tarbes line) and in 1867 (the Toulouse-Bordeaux line). From the 1870s to World War I, a new period--that of heiresses--began. Never had the departure of boys been so pronounced, and household heads were no longer able to designate an heir among the children, as the small number of male celibates remaining in the village confirms. The drop in wheat prices and in the sale of horses to the army, and the destruction of vineyards by phylloxera, increased difficulties for small farmers. Parents thus turned to their daughters and found them husbands in the village despite the difficulties. Unlike in preceding generations, fewer hypergamic marriages were formed, and those that took place sometimes did not even unite persons from the same social level, as noted in examining the professional and family origins of the spouses. To some extent these types of marriages served to impoverish the village. The final period---involving the 1880-1899 age group---contained a return to normal custom. Boys now left less frequently than girls, four out of five of the latter departing and thus avoiding a celibate future in the village. As a matter of fact, the girls were better prepared to leave because of an improved educational level and more numerous work opportunities in cities. The rate of male celibacy also returned to the figure observed at the beginning of the century: the only remaining individuals were those who could not or did

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

285

TABLE 4 Marsac in 1810 and 1911

No of Inhabitants No of Resident Properties No of Outsider Properties No of Houses No of Families

1810

1911

268 66 44 57 73

192 50 46 53 53

not want to try their luck at industrial work or in service. However, the numerous departures of preceding generations did not constitute the only parameter responsible for this return to normality: the impact of World War I was decisive. Insofar as land was concerned, the local community benefitted from these departures. In one hundred years (1810-1911), the population decreased by 28.3 percent without the village appearance changing greatly. Only four Houses out of 57 disappeared. However, between these two dates, the number of resident families decreased from 73 to 53 while their mean size remained the same (3.65 persons per domestic group). The Houses which had been divided up at the very beginning of the century were restored as entities, and Marsac's inhabitants lived further away from the village--and above all, in their own places behind walls built with Adour's stones and boulders. There were also changes in the number of owners who cultivated their own land as well as in property size. In 1810, there were 66 resident properties and 44 outside properties. In 1911, these numbers were, respectively, 50 and 46 and the general features of these two groups had not changed much (See Table 4). However, two important comments should be made regarding this apparent stability suggested by the numbers. Direct faire-valoir became a general practice since seasonal laborers and servants were becoming fewer, though they did not completely disappearing. The 46 outside owners all lived in the surrounding villages and were mostly farmers: sixteen among them were heirs of Marsac inhabitants. There was no longer any land speculation and the market for land was almost entirely in the hands of the plains farmers. Resident owners saw the size of their properties increasing. Properties of less than one hectare became scarce, and two families possessed more than seven hectares each. A general improvement was underway and did not only benefit the bonnes maisons (well-off and/or prestigious Houses). As in Laborde, staying in place was a beneficial decision for the village inhabitants.

LEAVING THE HOUSE The central Pyrenean mountains had a persistent reputation of being a supplier of manpower. Were migrations originating from there geographically determined as in the case of Oisans (Fontaine 1990, pp. 1433-1450) and Cantal (Duroux 1992; 1994, pp. 261-276)? Were migrations occasioned more by commercial objectives or were they survival migrations, which, of course, does not exclude family organizations or strategies. At what point in the migrants' lives was the decision to migrate made, and what were the destinations? Did migration only involve those excluded from the inheritance system, and did it have the same form, length, and destinations for all, regardless of sex and position

286

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

within the sibling group? Insofar as the decision to migrate is concerned, what were the roles played by the potential migrant's age and by the family group, and did these parameters accentuate the role played by the economic situation? l° Another question involves the Houses and not the age groups: did families benefit from departures passively, with the decrease in the number of mouths to feed; or did they benefit actively through the fact that those who were excluded from inheriting and who left did not later claim their portion of inheritance and created solidarity networks for the others? Or, on the contrary, were families weakened by these numerous departures that diminished their defense mechanisms in the face of economic and demographic crises? Regarding the 68 young women for whom no information can be found with respect to marriage or future place of habitation, only the conditions surrounding their departures are known, familially and individually. By grouping them by House of origin, three categories can be defined, and two of them are particularly distinct: the daughters from the most well-off families and the daughters from the most underprivileged families. Catherine and Elisabeth Bouilh-Clarac, born respectively in 1812 and 1815 as daughters of a landlord, followed their father when he sold his land and moved to Tarbes. Girls from poorer families and illegitimately-born girls also left, but under different circumstances because they had no possibility of being housed and nourished without working. These young women left very early on, long before their twentieth birthdays. Situated between these two categories (those who did not leave the family group and those who were excluded from it), another group existed. Certain poorer families tried to find employment for their daughters as servants in the village, so that they could maintain control over them as long as possible until they became adults. This was the case of the R. family. In families with too many daughters, the daughters left one after the other. Did the first to leave then tell the others to follow her? Three daughters from the T. family, born between 1847 to 1861, and four of the L.family's daughters born between 1877 and 1885 fit into this model. At what age did they leave? From among those young women born between 1852 and 1891 (unless they had illegitimate children), departure took place at around 24 years of age. Sometimes they left a parent to fend on his/her own, with perhaps the hope of returning for short periods. But they never ended their lives in Marsac, and, indeed, lived them out elsewhere. What is known of the approximately one hundred young men and their lives who left and for whom there is no trace of any effort to establish themselves? They all left Marsac before their thirtieth birthday, at a later age than their female counterparts. Sometimes they left even later than that because they had been helping out a solitary parent or waiting for the marriage of a brother or sister, with the new couple then being able to help out on the farm. The number of those who celebrated their twentieth birthday in the House of their birth (53 out of 125) greatly increased following the establishment of required military service. Since young men knew they would soon have to leave the community, they decided to wait for that moment in order to make a decision about their destination after having explored new horizons. Indeed, research carried out in the archives of the conseil de revision I 1 allowed me to accumulate very precise information concerning departure ages as well as destinations. Minutes from reunions preceding the drawing of lots have been preserved for the 1800-1860 age groups. Out of the 152 surviving individuals aged 20 years old in the period 1800-1860, only 115 were registered in the town hall list. This list included only those people who worked in

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

287

Marsac and/or whose parents lived there. It was noted that 37 boys, or one out of four, were missing. The gtat-civil suggests that four cases involved children of seasonal or temporary laborers whose parents traveled from job to job. Four other cases involved children who were sent away at a very young age to other Houses to work as servants, and whose families did not want them to return. There were also boys whose parents had settled down in another community, and finally seven cases probably involved cases of insubordination, which were numerous in the upper Pyrenean region.12 In all these cases, the position in the sibling group can not serve as an explanatory variable. Nothing is known of chosen destinations except in four cases: Jean P., son of a temporary laborer married to a young woman from Marsac, died in Tarbes aged 30 after years of wandering about in the Gers as his father had done; Jacques F., returning to the village in 1872, left again around 1876 and finally settled down in Caixonl3; Franqois A. became a milkman in New Orleans 14 and according to his 1873 passport request, Dominique B. evidently left for Buenos Aires.15 The appearance of the names of the community's young men in the military service list did not necessarily mean they were present at the drawing of lots (for military service), nor that they belonged to a House in the village. Only 74 persons met these two criteria. Since it is known that 62 of these young men died in the village, one may conclude that one young man out of four had not yet decided to leave, or had not yet been encouraged to leave when he reached the age of 20. The vast majority of draftees knew what was awaiting them, including the fact that the village could not offer them a future. However, leaving the village did not mean cutting off all ties with one's family and peers. Out of the 115 draftees on the list, 41 were not living in Marsac already, though 21 were physically present at the drawing of lots because of the fact that they were living in Houses located in nearby villages. 16 In this group, two young men were exempted from military service because they were students: the only children from Marsac who went to the Ecole Normale in Tarbes. 17 The first was Jean-Marie D., the only surviving child of Martin D., who came from a reputable House that had been divided in the previous generation. Jean-Marie entered the Ecole Normale in 1834, and was designated a primary school teacher at the Ecole supgrieure in Vic-en-Bigorre in 1838. He resigned in 1841 and left the area two years before his widowed mother's death, and then died in Nice in 1862 where he had been sent to be a primary school inspector. Thus, his death at a young age does not allow one to conclude that he was planning to retum home. One can even doubt such a hypothesis in light of the fact that his mother died alone in 1843. The second young man exempted from military service was Jean-Franqois D., born in 1833 as the oldest child of three children. He was probably very bright since he was the department's scholarship winner. He received his diploma in 1855 but did not become a teacher. Following a series of assignments in the Bouches-du-Rhone and Corsican regions, he was named as head postman in Vic-en-Bigorre, and then as general postmaster. He also never returned to the village. In the plains one did not really pursue intellectual-professional goals, in contrast with the Piedmont and the mountains, where teaching played a very important role in providing employment for younger male children and younger daughters were not heiresses. However, the case of Jean-Ulysse S., born in 1836, is a bit different. He was the third son of Jean-Pierre, a surveyor and one of the most well-off owners in the village. Jean-Ulysse was declared as a "student of medicine" in 1856, but, in reality, he had become an apprentice to a doctor and then a public health officer, following the family example (his paternal uncle was in the medical field). He died at 27 years of age. If he had obtained his diploma

288

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

and had lived longer, he would have probably left the village like the two young men mentioned earlier. Indeed, in the nineteenth century, the higher the diploma (which, of course, could not be obtained in the vicinity), the less frequently one returned to the village in the hopes of being compensated for one's efforts, especially in view of the village's small size and poverty. In addition, the change of life style was less difficult when it had been preceded by a training period elsewhere (Hoyois 1968, p. 349). In the group of 21 young men registered for military service and present at the drawing ( apart from the three students), eight described themselves as laborers or shepherds, seven as craftsmen, and three as being in diverse trades. Comparing this distribution to that of the persons who had to leave either permanently or temporarily, we note that departure from Marsac was not linked only to the need to reduce family size. Indeed, two boys left to extend their apprenticeships, and all of them did not leave the village permanently. Five farmers and three craftsmen pursued the farming and/or trades of their fathers. Their position with respect to inheritance explains both the departure from and return to the village. Several of their younger brothers and sisters had been placed as servants in other families, which made for a less difficult life for those remaining in the household. As a consequence, they all married at a late age, like Guillaume D., for example. His father was originally from Sauveterre and had become an innkeeper, and his mother was a young woman from the village. Guillaume was a baker in 1838; his two brothers and two sisters were younger than he. One of his brothers was sent to Tarbes to work as a servant. In this case, migration was part of a family strategy; as a matter of fact, it was only when the sisters found husbands (one at 41 years of age, the other at 42--the young brother having died in 1856) that Guillaume married a woman twenty years younger than himself. At that time, he described himself a merchant/grocer. His business was most probably a success since he subsequently hired a servant to take care of his children. Even though his daughter then stayed on to run the grocery, Guillaume never invested in any land in the village. A certain number (23) of young people from Marsac who were on the military service registration list were no longer living in the village when the consei! de revision was held, and were also absent during the drawing of lots. In three cases out of four, the mayor drew for them, as the law stipulated he should, which legitimized their absence. For the others, either the father or a brother represented the absent person. From the 1842 age group and after, the absent person's supposed living place was indicated. Here, the cities of Montevideo and Buenos Aires 18 were mentioned 13 times, New Orleans twice, Touraine and Tarbes once each. Information regarding draftees from only these last two destinations can be found in the archives, namely, about the son of the carpenter-blacksmith living in Jour-en-Touraine who, at 20 years of age, became a mechanic/metal worker and settled down in Tarbes. As historians know well, many people from the upper Pyrenean region left for America (Poussou 1968, pp. 133-162; Pinede 1957, pp. 237-251). During the eighteenth century, younger children of minor nobles and the bourgeois left for Saint-Domingue (Massio 1954, pp. 20-46), heading for the plantations and commerce centers. Craftsmen and surgeons hired to tend to the cargo of "black gold" (slaves) accompanied them. At the beginning of the nineteenth century destinations included the West Indies and Louisiana. In the 1840s, South America offered opportunities that Doctor Brougnes of Maubourget lauded in such an "altruistic" manner (Brougnes 1854), as was done in a more commercial way by maritime company recruiting agents. Can this chronology be verified for Marsac? Despite the

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

289

(surprising) comments of a primary school teacher in 1887,19 both single and married men from the village who left for South America did so between 1846 and 1856, as indicated by the obvious sex-ratio imbalance for 1851 and 18562° compared to the 1846 figure. 21 The 1847-1849 economic crisis therefore had a very severe impact at the local level. The drop in population revealed other factors that the mayor, Jean-Pierre Sarthou, enumerated in his response to a study by the Prefecture concerning the decrease in the number of the inhabitants between 1856 and 1861: "The main causes ... stem from a surplus of 18 deaths as compared to births, 4 migrations, and the excess of renters or employees/servants who moved away without being replaced. ''22 Thus more than departures to far- away destinations, it was the effect of mortality in 1856 and the ravages of the o~dium that destroyed vineyards that caused the drop in population during this period. The minutes from the conseil de revision confirm this hypothesis: after 1865, departures across the Atlantic became fewer in number though they did not completely cease. Paule B. left for Montevideo with her husband, Jean-Marie R. from Rabastens, in 1874, and the sons of Adrien D. left Marsac for Argentina sometime between 1900 and 1905. Are the indications in the minutes about departures complete? It appears that other young people left for South America after their 20th birthday. This was the case of three of them. Though migration essentially involved young people who were single (Soulet 1981, pp. 441-442), others not in this category left also. Bertrand D., born in Tostat and married to a young woman from Marsac, "disappeared" to Peru in 1852, leaving his wife on her own to raise two children. Jean L. left in 1850 for Buenos Aires following an inheritance apportionment carried out in strict observance of the law, and entrusted his wife (pregnant with their fifth child) to his brother-in-law. He returned ten years later. Jean-Marie B. left following the death of his wife when he was more than fifty years of age. Can the hypothesis that migration was a family project be verified in the experience of those registered for military service? It can be for younger siblings, since the departure of an older brother created hopes for success abroad by creating a family-based solidarity network, even if migration was not as organized as in the Ubaye valley (Gouy 1980) or in Oisans (Fontaine 1990; 1993). In comparing family names of draftees with those of their parents, it appears that the older brothers sent for the younger ones. This was the case of the D. family (three brothers in South America), the B. family (five in America), and the F. family (four in America). None returned to the village to relate their successes or failures. There were no Houses in Marsac, as in certain other villages, called Rio or The Americans, names given to indicate the origin of their wealth (Bonnain 1986, p. 186). The absence of qualification and capital at departure undoubtedly explain this lack of representation. 23 In only one case of a return to the village, it was possible to verify in the cadastre that the sifter filled with louis d'or pieces (from the labor of a forefather employed in a small company in Buenos Aires, according to tradition) had been used to restore the House and to purchase land (Bonnain 1996). Indeed, the money had served to enlarge the stables, but above all to pay back debts incurred before and during the absence of the migrant. Marie B., who left as a young bride to Montevideo in 1874, had to work for passage on the boat that brought her back to France. She was now widowed and with three children. Thus, the departures of young people benefitted the Houses indirectly by postponing the payment of inheritance portions, on the condition, however, that fathers did not have to pay for the trip. Pierre B., an example of many, sold his lands in 1873 when two of his sons were about to leave (ADHP 3Q 4562). In addition,

290

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

not all of the children who had emigrated gave up their portion of inheritance: Jean L. Junior, born in 1843 and living in Tandil (Argentina) sold his successoral rights to his parents in 1902 (Family archives); Jean L., born in 1824, and working as a cook in Montevideo, received 2.2 hectares of land and an extra 160 franks at the death of his parents (ADHP 3Q 4616); Jean-Marie C., born in 1824 and running a caf6 in Buenos Aires, gave up his portion to his brother, Jean-Baptiste, in 1885 for the sum of 2738.42 francs (ADHP 3Q 4567). Departures to far-away places did not always turn out to be success stories. With some individuals dying abroad, co-heirs would receive a larger portion of inherited goods. Franqois B., born in 1827 and a House heir, did not immediately control the very modest inheritance from his parents, who died in 1866 and 1868, and remained in dispute with his two brothers, the oldest one, Antoine, having left for South America. Only in 1877, when Antoine died, did Franqois proceed with the apportionment. Other migrants to America returned but did not settle in Marsac. This was the case for Eus~be L. who lived in Bordeaux. When they did return to France, they settled in cities. Their absence at the drawing as well as their choice to travel as far as possible when they were twenty years old confirmed the impression that they no longer belonged to the community: indeed, they would never return to the village to settle down permanently. Were all these persons migrating at young ages younger siblings excluded from inheriting, and were they being prepared for leaving from their childhood on? They would have been very sensitive to stories about overseas fortunes that had been circulating around the country since the eighteenth century, especially when these stories were told by people close to them. 24 The examination of genealogies demonstrates, however, that only half of the boys were the younger children of a sibling group. The other half was made up of the eldest children of a sibling group or by first sons. This failure of the oldest to accept his proper place--that of household head--occurred not only in smaller Houses where living conditions were very difficult, but also among children from much wealthier families, as, for example, among the sons of Simon C., Franqois L., or Jean C., who were observers more than victims of this phenomenon. One may wonder if the reason given for departing, i.e. difficult economic times, was simply a pretext to escape from paternal authority and family restraints. Examining the professions of these young people demonstrates that only a third among them had been trained as bakers or blacksmiths and that all the oldest declared themselves to be laborers. Only Pascal C., an employee in Tarbes, returned to take care of the property of his prematurely widowed sister Bernarde, their parents having died long before. Thus eventual father-son conflicts could not exist here. In these cases, the findings of American studies focusing on the second and last third of the twentieth century seem to be confirmed, namely, that the transmission of the rural way of life by a family's sons depended as much on economic opportunities as on the quality of the father-son relationship. 25

ANOTHER FAMILY From approximately the middle of the century, young people began to refuse to submit to the needs of the House, as their parents had done in the past. The relationship between generations in the same residential group also changed. The objective of preserving the House in all circumstances by guaranteeing its transmission to the next generation began to

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

291

wane. One may also note that a certain number of unmarried individuals who were younger children could have married now because their family was capable of providing them with an acceptable dowry. The absence of marriage thus often coincided with the presence within the residential group of an older married sister living at home. Conflicts between married relatives were thus minimized. One can clearly see that this involved a family project, with the parents wanting to keep a daughter to take care of them in their old age, rather than a son to help with tending the land of the family estate. The transformation in the relationships between household members, which would eventually lead to more affectionate links between parents and children, was also illustrated by circumstances surrounding the departure of young people. Following the death of a direct ascendant, the entire surviving family sometimes decided to move. This was the case of the G. family who left for Sarniguet following the death of their widowed mother in 1846. It was also the case of Jean B., who left Marsac for Ugnouas with his three daughters and two unmarried sons. Finally, it also involved the blacksmith, Etienne A., who moved to Tostat with his four daughters and two sons. In these cases, the families settled down in a nearby community and benefit from a collateral inheritance. Sometimes parents joined their children. In 1863, Pascalette C., married a carpenter, originally from Spain, who had been born in the Landes. They left Marsac in 1882 for another lumbering site, but returned towards the end of the century. When the carpenter died in 1907, Pascalette, now alone, moved in with one of her children who was living elsewhere. Four other women made the same decision, and all were women originally from modest Houses which had not been maintained by a descendant. This was not to be the case of Simon C. Born in 1794 in one of those rare Marsac families possessing more than two hectares, he married in 1814 at the death of his father. The death had occurred too early for the father to have imposed his choices on the sons insofar as the inheritance was concerned, nor to have accumulated capital for his younger son. The father's age at his death was indeed an important variable for the future of the family, but not so much his absolute age than the age difference between his eventual heir and himself. Hence, in 1822 Simon C. divided the family inheritance (except for the actual House, garden, and adjoining vineyards) into equal portions with his brother Jean-Bernard when the latter reached his majority. In 1830, he enlarged his farm by buying 1.93 hectares of plowing land from J. Denis, the president of the Civil Tribunal in Tarbes, shortly before his nomination as the village's mayor. He had seven children: his second son left for Montevideo in 1842 and the third for Tarbes in 1843. Simon himself left the village in 1851 for Tarbes and sold of all his goods in 1853. He sold the home where he was born, his garden, and his vineyard to an inhabitant of Marsac, because his younger brother (married since 1828) had already built himself a new home on a parcel of land belonging to his wife's dowry. Neither Simon, his wife, nor any of their seven children died in Marsac. Family ties took precedence over traditional duties towards the family estate. The family became the stabilizing element in a context of economic and cultural crisis, a role that was to be accentuated over the years. Pyrenean society had been built around the reproduction, in identical form, of its Houses/ farms, and their stability guaranteed continuity. Within these complex units, roles were clearly defined and duties were fully accepted. However, in the beginning of the nineteenth century, things began to change. The swelling population and the lack of a proportional increase in agricultural production was accompanied by the abolition of customs and writ-

292

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

ten codes, as well as their effects that had thus far authorized inequality in inheritance matters. Apportionment and massive emigration were to result from this, and within the Houses themselves the internalization of social norms would no longer be as successful. As soon as the demographic pressure let up during the third quarter of the eighteenth century, the House system began to function again with responsible and obedient oldest children, and with younger children accepting the choices made for them in the interest of the family group. This situation lasted approximately a half-century until agriculture ceased to be an attractive occupation, thus diminishing the number of children who were willing to take over their parents' farms. During the nineteenth century, the meaning of the family changed. Earlier, it had simply been the domestic group working towards the good of the residence that housed it. Then, the family began to take on more autonomy relative to the production unit, and started a long trend towards being the family haven, a protector of the weak, old, and unmarried. Slowly but surely, social organization in terms of Houses moved away from that of the highly hierarchical and almost tyrannical past, which involved almost total devotion to the estate and the rejection of blood relatives who were not useful to it. The family slowly became a place where solidarity among members was played out from one generation to the next. However, the structures of the House continued to play an important role from one end of the century to the other. Solidarity among blood relatives existed, especially when family members were not far from each other. When one left the village, however, these ties often became diluted very quickly. Younger children preferred to forget the home that had rejected them: a very powerful forgetfulness in light of the fact that they had to go far away often without any funds/money. Likewise, those remaining in the House also forgot the departed member from the moment he/she was no longer contributing to the House. As a result, and in the case of survival migration which was perceived of as being permanent once the departure took place, the role of other siblings became exceptionally significant. They created the welcoming networks which would allow for the insertion of new arrivals. This study has also offered another lesson. It has underlined the role played by generations. Events structuring the social experience (in this case, economic crises) make up the same referential space for young people of the same age group. Thus, one can explain why, beyond social differences and distinctions based on family origins, a certain number of young people preferred taking the risk of leaving the village and its lifestyle. Finally, and quite paradoxically, in a society that privileged males insofar as inheritance was concerned, one can nevertheless observe the very important role of females. It was they who, in handing down the estate and in assuming authority within the home, guaranteed family continuity.

NOTES 1. Numerous studies on inheritance systems exist and it is impossible to list them all here. In his article "Transmettre la terre. Origines et inflexions r6centes d'une problrmatique de la diffrrence" (Histoire et socidtds rurales, 2, 1994, p. 33-67), Bernard Derouet lists the most important studies, becoming an especially good source as far as France is concerned. The C33 workshop directed by Joseph Goy and Grrard Bouchard, "Nrcessitrs 6conomiques et pratiques juridiques:

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

293

probltme de la transmission des exploitations agricoles, XVIIIe-XXe sitcles" from the XI Congrts de l'Association Internationale d'Histoire 6conomique, Milan 11-16 September 1994 (soon to be published), gathered together European researchers and contributed to updating research progress in this field. 2. "Providing for a child's future" meant ensuring that he or she acquired a matrimonial, religious and/or employment status. 3. Marsac had 240 inhabitants in 1806,316in 1841,252in 1891, and 171 in 1911 ( A D H P 6 M 29 to 47). 4. Around 1820, following an initial wave of apportionment, the village's population grew from 48 to 57 Houses and even more during the July Monarchy (1830-1848). Some were divided vertically. As elsewhere, smaller Houses were required to share/apportion the most since they could not provide the means necessary to compensate their younger children. 5. In the opposite case, only two widows born in the nineteenth century were able to remarry. 6. With one exception: Dominiquette Fontan married a farm laborer in 1855. The couple was then registered at the Montevideo consulate in 1856 when she gave birth to a daughter. They had joined an uncle of the bride and one of her brothers (Archives des Affaires 6trangtres, Montevideo consulate, dtat-civil). 7. The average was 3.3 persons per family group in Marsac as compared to 4.2 in Laborde per nuclear family, and 4.9 persons per family group in the case of large families groups in Marsac as compared to 6.2 persons in Laborde. 8. Five cases must be subtracted from this figure of young women who were born, according to custom, in the home of their maternal grandmother. 9. In the Baronnies, maximum population size was already reached in 1836, since work opportunities in the immediate proximity did not exist. 10. With regards to Pyrenean economic crises, one must include the organization of migrations which was considered to be a solution to the problems engendered by the crisis. 11. A committee made up of the mayor, town council members, and a doctor, the objective of which was to determine the aptitude of a candidate for military service. 12. With 1766 insubordinates between 1841 and 1868, the upper Pyrenean region took second place nationally, representing 0.07 percent of the population in 1851. 13. ADHP series E, 1820 cadastre. 14. ADHP series E, 1820 cadastre 15. A D H P 4 M 289. 16. Villecomtal, on the border of Gers 25 kilometers away, was the farthest place. 17. A D H P T 5 7 . 18. In reality, many more young people went there, as demonstrated by the 3Q series of the Registry Office Archives of the Uruguay and Argentinean Consulates (Foreign Affairs Archives). 19. "According to the 1886 census, the Marsac community only has 243 inhabitants. This figure, which is 17 less than the 1881 figure, is decreasing. Approximately 20 years ago, when Marsac numbered 300 inhabitants, the figure suddenly fell because of emigration to South America of around 40 people. Today, unfortunately young people not seem to be attached to the soil. Preferring this adventurous mentality which appears to favor the development of education, they thus emigrate to large cities, soon to find their dreams and ambitions shattered by reality." ADHP T385. 20. ADHP 6M 32 and 33. 21. ADHP 6M 31. 22. ADHP 6M 31. 23. Two examples among others: Doctor Dupierris, living in Havana, bought a home in Vic-en-Bigorre, accumulated credits and finally died abroad in 1878 (ADHP 3Q 4356) whereas Franqois Clarac died in 1855 at the age of 78 at the French Hospital in Montevideo, without family, neighbors or friends to help him.

294

THE HISTORY OF THE FAMILY

Vol. 1/No. 3/1996

24. A rich landlord was living in Marsac, and part of his fortune consisted in lands located in New Orleans. 25. Missing note.

REFERENCES

Primary Sources The appreviation ADHP throughout the text, notes, and references, refers to the collections of the Archiv d~partmentales des Hautes PyrEnnEes.

Secondary Sources Augustins, Georges. 1986. "Un point de vue comparatif sur les Pyr6n6es." Pp. 199-238 in Les Baronnies des PyrEnEes, Vols. 1 and 2, edited by Isac Chiva and Joseph Goy. Paris: EHESS. Bonnain, Rolande. 1977. "Apropos du charivari." Annales ESC 32 (2): 381-398. . 1986. "Nuptialit6, f6condit6 et pression d6mographique dans les Pyr6n6es 1769-1836," Vol 2., pp. 87-121; "Les noms de maison dans les Baronnies 1773-1980," Vol.2, pp. 186, and "Les bonnes maisons: perception expression et r6alit6 de la stratification sociale d'un groupe villageois," Vol. 1, p. 124 in Les Baronnies des Pyrenees, Vols. 1 and 2, edited by Isac Chiva and Joseph Goy. Paris: EHESS. . 1996. "Le crible aux louis d'or et le canevas. L'histoire familiale comme repr6sentation." Annales de dEmographie historique. Pp. 97-104. Brougnes, Dr. Auguste. 1854. Extinction du paup~risme agricole par la colonisation dans les provinces de La Plata (Am~rique du Sud). Bagn~res-de-Bigorre, imp. Dossun, 208 p. Syst~me de colonisation clans les provinces conf~d(rEes par des families agricoles europEennes. Contrat passE entre M. Brougnes et le gouvernement de Corrientes. Bagn~res-de-Bigorre, imp. Dossun, 39 p. and ADHP 3Q 4261. Chiva, Isac and Joseph Goy, eds. 1986. Les Baronnies des Pyrenees, Vols. 1 and 2. Paris: EHESS. Duroux, Rose. 1992. Les Auvergnats de Castille. Renaissance et mort d'une migration au XIXe si~cle. Clermont Ferrand: Association des Publications de l'Universit6 Blaise Pascal. • 1994. "Le voyageur et l'h6pital. Du massif Central h l'h6pital Saint-Louis-des-Franqais de Madrid 1617-1935." Annales de DEmographie historique. Pp. 261-276. Etchelecou, Andr6. 1991. Transition d~mographique et systOme coutumier dans les PyrEnEes occidentales. Paris: PUF (Coll. Travaux et documents de I'INED, 29). Fauve-Chamoux, Antoinette. 1984. "Les structures familiales au royaume des familles-souche: Esparros." Annales ESC 39(3):513-528. . 1994. "Mariages sauvages contre mariages-souche: la guerre des cadets." Pp. 181-194 in Les cadets, edited by Martine Segalen and Georges Ravis-Giordani. Paris: CNRS Editions• Fontaine, Laurence. 1990. "Solidarit6s familiales et logiques migratoires en pays de montagne l'6poque moderne." Annales ESC 45 (6): 1433-1450. . 1993. Histoire du colportage en Europe: XVe-X1Xe. Pads: Albin Michel. Gouy, Patrice. 1980. P~r~grinations des Barcelonettes au Mexique. Grenoble: PUG. Henry, Louis and Houdaille Jacques. 1979. "C61ibat et ~ge au mariage aux XVIIIe et XIXe si~cles II: Age au premier mariage." Population 34 (2): 403-442. Hoyois, Giovanni. 1968. Sociologie rurale. Paris: Editions universitaires. Massio, Ren6. 1954. "La Bigorre et Saint-Domingue au XVIIIe si~cle." Annales du Midi 66: 20-46. Pin6de, Christiane. 1957. "L'6migration dans le Sud-Ouest vers le milieu du XIX6 si6cle." Annales du Midi 69:237-251.

Houses, Heirs, and Non-Heirs in the Adour Valley

295

Poussou, Jean-Pierre. 1968. "Les d6parts des passagers pyr6n6ens par Bordeaux au XVIIIe si~cle (1713-1787)." Bulletin de la Soci~M des Sciences, Lettres et Arts de Pau. Pp. 133-162. Revel, Jacques. 1994. "Micro-analyse et reconstruction du social." Pp. 305-327 in L'art de la recherche. Essais en l'honneur de Raymonde Moulin. Paris: La Documentation Fran~aise. Soulet, Jean-Franqois. 1981. "La fuite." Pp. 441-442 in Bigorre et Quatre ValMes, edited by Jean-Franqois Le Nail and Jean-Francois Soulet. Editions Pau: SNERD. . 1987. Les Pyrenees au XIXe sibcle, 1. Toulouse: Etch6. P. 15, quoting P. Gonnet.