Measure of Divorce Frequency in Simple Societies

Measures of Divorce Frequency in Simple Societies Author(s): J. A.
Barnes Source: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. 79, No. 1/2 (1949), pp. 37-62 Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2844502 . Accessed: 08/08/2013 05:37
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 192.134.152.160 on Thu, 8 Aug 2013 05:37:33 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
37
MEASURES OF DIVORCE FREQUENCY IN SIMPLE SOCIETIES

By J. A. BARNES, M.A. UniversityCollege London I. THE NEED FOR MEASURES 1940, P. 167 ; Wilson, 1942, pp. 64ff). In some it is fairly clearthat data are not available As the study of kinshipdevelops,so it becomes instances divorce while in othersit frequency, for estimating and possibleto give increasing necessary to precision have been enquired as the matter could seems though the descriptive terms used in thatstudy. Thus,such wordsas exogamy, family, and lineagehave intobut thatthiswas not done. In one studyin this kinsman, divorce acquiredin the last hundredyears precisereferents group (Culwick& Culwick,1935, pp. 329ff) publication. in a separate frequency is indicated which, if not always employed, can be stated to indicatedivorce have been content unambiguously when necessaryin any particular Manywriters somedescriptive phrase. Thus,divorce analysis. In this paper we shall considerone item frequency-by 1937,p. 401), or unusual in the study of kinship,divorcefrequency. After is said to be rare(Harrison, or (Powdermaker, 152), fairly frequent (Stayt, 1931, p. examining the degreeofprecision withwhichthishas or & Hutt, 1935, frequent (Brown 1933, p. 228), been reported in somerecent we shall outline studies, new methods of computation,illustratingthese p. 83 ; Elkin, 1940, p. 213 ; Nadel, 1947, pp. 125, methodswith previously unpublished data collected 226, 291, 339, 434; Opler, 1940, p. 198), or common (Bowers, 1950, p. 80; Landes, 1937, p. 80; 1938, among the Fort JamesonNgoni during1946-49.1 p. 85), or not uncommon (Spicer, 1949, p. 50). In manysocietiesmarriages can be terminated by divorce, and in any discussion of marriage it is clear Sometimes we may infer the frequency of divorce that one important is the presence factor or absence fromstatements that marriage is brittle (Joffe,1940, ofthepossibility ofdivorce. However, in a few recent p. 305; Opler, 1940, p. 151), or is rarely dissolved studiesin which marriageis discussed,thereis no (Firth, 1936, pp. 132, 571), or tends to be a lasting or that the majority 1949,pp. 440ff), specific of divorce(Childs,1949; Earthy, union(Wagner, discussion 1933; Green,1947; Kluckhohn and Leighton, 1946; of marriagesendure (Herskovits,1938, i, p. 349). Kuper, 1947). Fromsuchnegativeevidencewe may Williamson(1939, pp. 189ff)says that divorce is be temptedto inferthat divorcedoes not occur in easy and appears to implythat it is also frequent, the societiesconcerned, but this is an unsatisfactorywhile Hsu (1949, p. 105) says that barrenmarriage butdoesnotsay howfrequently leads to divorce, basisfor and in someinstances inference, theinference often Other writersindicate that are barren. marriages wouldbe false. Thereis,perhaps, greater justification divorceis less frequent in circumstances than certain fornot specifically statingthat divorceis impossible 1938, 54; Hulstaert, 1949, pp. 50, inwothers (Barton, when describing a Catholiccommunity Miner, (e.g., p. 379; Wagley,1949,p. 44), or thatthereis a lower 1939). of divorces(Hunter,1936, pp. 212, 220, In the nextgroupof studies, marriage and divorce proportion 484). but are discussed, we may infer from some although While it is difficultto arrange these descriptive of them that divorceis not very frequent, in none of them is there any explicitindicationof divorce phrasesin an ascendingorderof divorcefrequency, frequency (Elwin, 1939, p. 284; Fei, 1939, p. 49; it is clearthat forsomepurposestheyare adequate. between Field, 1940,pp. 40ff; Fiirer-Haimendorf, 1943, pp. Thus, if forexamplewe wishto distinguish of divorceamong the Zulu and the 140f; 1945, pp. 135f; Goodwin, 1942,p. 343; Krige & the frequency Krige, 1943, p. 158; La Barre, 1948, p. 132; Leach, Nyasaland Yao, or in the Irish Republic and the to say that 1940, p. 21; Mcllwraith, 1948, i, p. 418; Mair, State of Nevada, it may be sufficient in the 1934, pp. 97ff; Meek, 1937, pp. 276, 279ff; Nadel, divorceis rare in one societyand frequent 1942, pp. 152ff; Paulme, 1940, pp. 410ff; Smith, other. If, however,we wish to compare societies from whichare not in this respectso very different these terms is not enough description in one another, 1 These data were collected while I was on the staffof the whichare more Rhodes-LivingstoneInstitute. I am much indebted to my and we need measuresof frequency colleagues, Dr. J. C. Mitchell, ProfessorGluckman and Dr. preciseand more objective. Two societiesin both E. Colson, forstimulusand assistance in preparingthispaper. of whichdivorceis said to be common may,in fact,
(2499)
38
J. A.
BARNES
and the same In studyingsimple societiesthe field worker has frequencies, divorce have verydifferent ways by usuallyto collecthisowndata as wellas to analyseit. society may be describedin conflicting to devise techniques whichare observers. For example,the Fort Jameson Our task is therefore different in thefield as wellas beinganalytically Ngoni considerthat divorce is now rife in their easyto employ be possiblein a simplesocietyto considersthat it fruitful.It might society,while the Administration populationand record all the is not so very frequent. The Ngoni standard is observe a restricted it during within the and divorces its own past, whilethe Administration'smarriages taken from occurring a divorce and thusto construct matriliheal periodofobservation, standard is based on the neighbouring rate,but the smallsize of the population that can be tribes.2 to theiraccounts, handledin this way makes it an inefficient precision to givegreater In order way of and divorces can be actually a number of writers have published numerical working. Few marriages indications of divorce frequency. Unfortunately,observed in the field, and to overcomethis disabout variationin the way in advantage we need to collect information therehas been considerable and divorceswhich have taken place in whichthese indiceshave been calculated,so that it marriages thisprocedure to comparedata from differentthepast. In a rapidly changing society difficult is sometimes societies. The measures used are of four kinds. has its hazards,but at the same time it enables us ofthe magnitude ofthe changes to thepresent marital to give an indication there are thosereferring Firstly, can be used state of the populationand, in particular,to the takingplace. This kind of-information kind, as will be numberof people in a populationwho have been to calculate rates of a different in sectionVIII. and whohave not yetremarried. Secondly, demonstrated divorced In societieswhere divorce is impossibleor nonto the cumulativemarital we have those referring experienceof a population,indicatinghow many existent,a simple statementto that effectwould times persons have been married and divorced. seem to be all we need (e.g.,Wisdom,1940,p. 302). and yet does not divorceis a possibility These two kinds of measureare discussedbelow in If, however, sectionII. Measures in the third group indicate occur, an indicationof the size of the population of marriagesend in divorce,and withinwhich no divorcesare found enables us to what proportion of divorce(Levin, 1947,pp. 2, 5, 86; in section IV, whilethelast group judge the rarity theseare discussed comprisesdivorce rates, showing the number of Spicer, 1940, pp. 76ff). do not all deal withexactly Thesevariousmeasures divorcesgrantedwithina giventime. and theparticular measure Divorce rates are often the only indicationsof thesamesocialphenomena, work will divorce frequencyavailable for modern societies, we utilize in analyticaland comparative but have not been favouredby writerson simple dependon the purposewe have in mindand on the societies. The term " rate " has, however,often availability of the information.For instance, we with the stabilityof only first meant is ratio or may be concerned been used when what is correctly and need an indexwhichomitssecondand experience. Culwick(1935, marriages or cumulative incidence ordermarriages. We may be concerned with speaks of an annual rate for higher pp. 188, 195) correctly ofdeathand divorce is calculated therelative efficiency as methods he states, in court which, granted divorces and will thennot need an index per 1000 marriages. His data suggestthat his rates of endingmarriage from which the effectsof mortalityhave been may, perhaps,be based on 1000 marriedcouples. and divorces eliminated. However,in general,we cannot make all marriages In mostmodern societies and special enquiriesamonga varietyof peoples on the with some centralorganization, are registered in whichwe are interested and in any,comtools are designedto make the best matters demographic already collected. Hence the parativestudywe have to relyon such information use of information and general measuresare rates relatingthe number as is to be foundin tribalmonographs commonest that thereshould a year or a decade to the articles. It is therefore important of divorces during granted in the way in numberof marriages takingplace duringthe same be some degree of standardization of married couplesin whichauthorspresentdata on divorceand cognate period,or to the mean number can be made. It is to determine topicsso that valid comparisons thepopulation. Theseratesare difficult in simple societies where the total population is also importantthat certain basic material should of always be. publishedin any general account of a usually unknown and where the registration or not the authorhas any particular and divorces is at best onlypartial. Even societywhether marriages enquiryin mind. If, for example,we in modernsocietiesthese rates are not very satis- comparative Lamba society,it may not appear factory for detecting changes in divorce habits. are describing to be of any significance to know that 119 out of 194 marriages ended in divorce. Yet this-factcan 2 Cf. the discussion on whether or not divorce is rare becomeof interest whenwe discoverhow these 194 amongthe SouthernBantu in Gluckman(1950,pp. 204ff).
Mectsure8 ofDivorce Frequency in SimpleSocieties

marriageswere collected and what happened to those of them that did not end in divorce, for we can then compare this proportion with similar measures collected in the same way from other societies. We may then be able not only to make some general observations about all the societies compared but also to add to our understanding of Lamba society itself. The more precisely we measure divorce frequency, the more necessary it is to know exactly what we mean by marriage and divorce. If we vary our definitions, we are likely to vary our frequency. For example, Fortes (1949, p. 85) specifically excludes from his statistics short-lived marriages in which no bridewealthwas paid and no childrenborn. Had he not made this exclusion, his measures of Tallensi divorce frequency would have been much greater. Bridewealth is paid in only 4 per cent. of marriages among the Fort Jameson Ngoni, and had I restricted my divorce calculations to bridewealthmarriages,my measures of frequencywould be very different from those I have calculated on the basis of all marriages. In some-societies it may be difficult to distinguish divorce from separation The problem of deciding and important when a divorce takes place is a difficult theoretical problem, and to discuss it would take us far beyond the bounds of this paper. Nor can we discuss here in any systematicmannerthe sociological significance of the differencesbetween one society and another as shown by the various measures of divorce frequency. For purposes of this paper, we assume we know what is a divorce, and we shall in general confine ourselves to a consideration of the between one measure and another. differences One society varies -from another not only in frequency of divorce but also in the facility with which divorce can be obtained. Divorce is sometimes " or " frequent and said to be " rare and difficult easy," and in analysis it is important to keep these aspects separate, even though they are plainly inter" and " easy " describe the related. " Difficult obstacles, in particular the legal obstacles, in the way of divorce and do not automatically indicate its frequency. In some studies in which divorcefrequency is not explicitlyindicated, we are told that it is easy to obtain divorce and we may be tempted to infer that divorce is thereforefrequent. This inferenceis liable to be false, for Granqvist (1931, pp. 164ff; 1935, pp. 257ff) has described a society in which divorce is easy and yet infrequent. W& may expect to find occasionally a society in which divorce is difficult and yet frequent. It might be possible to construct some index of the facility with which divorce can be obtained in any society, but we are hiereconcernedonly with the measurementof divorce frequency.
(2499)
39
STATUS AND EXPERIENCE CUMULATIVE
II.
PRESENT
MARITAL MARITAL
The presentmarital status of a population indicates the proportion who at a particular moment are unwedded (i.e., have never been married), married, widowed, and divorced. Information of this kind is usually easy to obtain, but tells us little about the frequency of divorce. If divorce is followed swiftly by remarriage,then, however frequent divorce may be, at any one time there will be few divorced persons in the population. The status of divorced persons is a transitional one between one marriage and the next, and few, may be in it, though many pass through it. A second complication is that in a polygynous society a man who divorces his wife may never appear as divorced, for he may be still married to a second wife, although his firstwife will become a divorced woman. Since divorce is a possibility only after marriage, it seems preferableto relate the number of divorced persons to the wedded population (i.e., all those who have ever been married) rather than to the total population which includes unwedded people. Recent studies in which this proportion is indicated all distinguish between men and women, and there is sometimesan analysis by age as well. Some recently published figures are set out in Table I, togetherwith
TABLE I.
Present Mqrital Status: Percentage of Wedded Persons Whoare Divorced Number of Wedded Persons in
Sample
Society Society
_
Number of Pros Persons

Divorced
Percentage Pretg Divorced
Men Fort Jameson ... Ngoni (a) Lamba (b) ... Palestinian Arabs (d) ... Women Fort Jameson ... Ngoni (a) Lamba (b) ... ... Nuer (c) ... Palestinian
Yao
116 133 105
7 3 0
6*0 2-3 0
223 195 32
219
15 22 2 0
29
6*4 11.3 6-25

13 3
Arabs (d)
(e)
...
. .. ...
148
Sources (a) Barnes, 1951b, Tables III and IV. (b) Mitchell& Barnes, 1950, p. 46, Table XIX. (c) Extracted fromEvans-Pritchard, 1945, pp. 31ff. (d) Extracted from Granqvist, 1931, pp. 157ff; 1935, p. 269. Betrothed persons excluded. (e) Mitchell, 1949, p. 297, Table III.
c 4
40
J. A. BARNES
material derived fromraw data published by EvansPritchard (1945, pp. 31ff) and Granqvist (1931, pp. 164ff). Culwick & Culwick (1938, p. 377,
(1943, p. 102, Table I) give information about present marital status formen, but do not distinguish between widowers and those whose wives have been divorced. Redfield (1941, p. 382), using officially collected data, relates the number of divorced persons to the total population. The cumulative marital experience of a population indicates the number of times to date that the members of the population have been married, divorced, and left as widowers and widows. The
TABLE
Table IV), Forde (1941, p. 78, Table 6), and Fortes
experiences of men and womenare likelyto differ in thismatter in an open community, and everywhere thereare differences withrespect to age. Alterations in the age composition of a samplepopulationaffect the average number of marriages and divorces experienced by each sex. We may sometimesbe from an age-specific able to infer analysisthat change musthave takenplace. For example, ifwe find that men now in their thirtieshave on the average twice as many divorcesas men now in experienced theirforties, then,otherthingsbeingequal, we can inferthat the expectationof divorceat ages below has risenin the last twenty forty yearsor so. have indicatedthe mean numberof Some -writers
II.
Cumnulative Marital Experience: Divorce8per head of WeddedPopulation and Percentage of WeddedPopulation Divorcedat least Once Number of wedded persons in sample Number of divorces experienced by them them Mean number of divorces per head of wedded population Number of personsdivorced at least once - _
Society
Percentage of wedded population divorcedat least once
Weddedmen,all ages
Bemba (a) Bemba (b) ... ... ...
Fort JamesonNgoni (g) Palestinian Airabs(k)

Lamba (h) ...
... ...
. ..
...
... ...
104 105 48
125
51
51
0 2 0 53 0*41
0-49
41
6
19 35
39*4 5*7 44
0*06 0*60
Wedded men,over45 yearsold Fort JamesonNgoni (g) ...

Lamba (h) ... Tallensi (m) ... ... ... ... ...
53 20
29
32 5
0* 60 0-25
21
Weddedwomen,all ages ... Bemba (e) *...

Bemba (d) Bemba (e) Bemba (f) ...
...
... ...
Fort JamesonNgoni (g)

Lamba (h) Ntier (j) Yak6 (n) Yao (p) ...
...
...
...
... ...
...
048
43
48 57 16
...
...
...
... ...
...
210
177 32 313 219
...
... ...
...
64 3
62
0*30
0-36 0-09 053
48
2 121
23
6-25 39
116
Sources Brelsford, cited in Richards, 1940,p. 120, as Sample A. Richards, loc. cit.,Sample B. Ibid, Sample C. Ibid, modernvillage (1). Ibid, moderni village (2). Ibid, old-fashioned village (3). Barnes, 1951b,Tables IX and X. Mitchell& Barnes, 1950,p. 48, Table XX. Extracted fromEvans-Pritchard,1945,pp. 31ff. Extracted fromGranqvist,1931, pp. 157ff. Betrothedmen excluded. (n) Fortes, 1949, p. 85. Bridewealthmarriagesonly. (n) Forde, 1941, pp. 75f,Table 5. (p) Mitchell. 1949, pp. 297f,Tables III and IV. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (j) (k)
Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies
41
and divorces marriages per head, but it is preferable divorce by the genealogical method among the to indicate the number of persons who have Tswana, wheredivorceis rare. An alternativemethod is to examine all the experienced 0, 1, 2, . . . marriages and divorces, so by a selected body of that standard deviations can be calculated and marriagesever experienced theseby the way in whichthey median and modalvaluesusedas a checkon themean. men and to classify how long theylasted,and whether measures of cumulative Recently published divorce wereterminated, withmaterial derivedfrom data or not they are still extant. The most serious experience, together and Granqvist, are set out objection to this procedureis that the universe givenby Evans-Pritchard in Table II. Material given by Richards (1940, sampledis not relatedin any simpleway to the total withina to relateto theproportion whichhave occurred pp. 99, 101,120)appears of numberof marriages in divorce rather thanto cumulative given time in a society. In modernsocieties we marriages ending that have takenplace and divorce experience. Siegel (1942, p. 61) presents examineall the marriages cumulativedata, but does not distinguish -between divide up this universeby isolatingthe marriages divorced. Du Bois takingplace in each year. Mostof the meninvolved wiveswhodiedandthosewhowere in recentyearsare stillalive, but (1944, p. 97) gives data referring partlyto present in thesemarriages and larger proportion marital state and partly to cumulative divorce as we go back in timeso a larger so that, unfortunately, we cannotarrive of the men marrying in each year has died. In a experience, at a clear pictureof either. Harris (1940, pp. 98f) closed simple society,if we could examine all the provides figures for the number of marriages marriages by all the men we would be experienced whichhad taken but not the number dealing withalmostall themarriages experienced by menand women, of divorces. place in the societyin recentyears; but owingto proportion we wouldonlyincludea smaller mortality MARRIAGE SAMPLES III. from each ofthe earlier years. Without ofmarriages and on the ages on male mortality In these firsttwo computations, presentmarital fullinformation our sample at which men have marriedwe cannot accurately state and cumulative maritalexperience, to those frommodernsociety. consistsof individualsof varyingexperience. It is relate our findings that our closed simple in a manner relatively easyto selectindividuals which, If we make the assumption in any strict whilenot random sense,does standsome societyis also static,withno changestakingplace, of our samplethrough as muchbias in sampling thisdispersal chanceof eliminating as is we can overlook but in primitive possibleunderfieldconditions societies. the years and then make a directcomparison, to defend. We may is often difficult The rest of the measuresdiscussedin this paper are thisassumption constructedfrom samples of marriages, not of abandonthe assumption and stillclaimfairly enough and marriages what has been happening are harder to selectwithout that our sample reflects individuals, it with or so and compare bias than people. One commonly used methodis within the last generation the collection of genealogies. The effective-othersamplesderived in the same way, but we must through may be due solely to ness of this methodappears to vary, for in some realise that some differences societieswhere marriagesare not very stable, the different in age ofmarriage. orto differences mortality willbe remembered chancethat a marriage is greater A further objectionis that if our societyis not if it lasted a long time and gave rise to many live closed our sample includes some marriageswhich children thanifit was childless modern and ofshortduration. would not be includedin the corresponding into the unrecorded Hence, any probing past by this sample. Our informants may have marriedwhile methodwill tend to give a sample which,at least theywerein other as migrant orwhileworking regions in the earlieryears,is biased in favourof long and labourers. Their marriagesdid not occur within fertile associatedwiththe societystudied,yet to have ended the territory marriages. These are less likely in divorce than are short,infertile of ones, and the theydo -form part of the total maritalexperience of divorce,therefore, frequency appears to be lower the men in the society. than it actuallywas. This phenomenon of selective This method of examining all the marriages forone aspect of whichI have suggested experienced forgetting, not by all the men in a societybut by the name " structural amnesia" (Barnes, 1947, a selectedbody of themis, however, the commonest pp. 52-53),is of widespread to mostlikely occurrence and can have method adoptedand is also the method importantsociological significance fromunbiased,raw data; (cf. Kuczynski, yieldaccurate, as distinct 1944, pp. 25-26). In this context,however,it is we must therefore examine its implications. Any merelya hazard. On the otherhand, if divorceis sample drawnfrommen should be checkedagainst rare, it is quite possible that marriages ending in a sample drawn froma similarly selected body of divorce are rememberedfor their very rarity. women. Womenmaybe more, or less,reticent about Schapera (1940, p. 294) has made enquiries into theirmaritalhistories than men and theremay be
42
J. A. BARNES veniently combined with a large number of other enquiries into such topics as kinship, co-residence, economic co-operation, and the like. Using this method, a marriage in which, at the time of the enquiry, the partners are living in different villages is twice as likely to be included in the sample as a marriagein which they are living in the same village. Suppose, for example, there are 300 villages in the society we are studying and we decide to make our enquiry in one of these villages selected arbitrarily. If a man X and his wife, or formerwife, Y are both living in P village, then if we select P village we include the X-Y marriage in our sample, and if we select any other village we exclude it. Hence, there is one chance in three hundred that their marriage be chosen. On the other hand, suppose that Z lives in P village, and his wife, or formerwife, T, lives in Q village. Their marriage will be included in our sample if we choose either P or Q village, and hence they have two chances in three hundred of being selected. In this way our sample, whichever village we select, contains a higher proportion of marriages like Z-T than it would had we drawn our sample fromthe whole of the society studied. Hence our calculations derived fromthe sample are biased in favour of marriages like Z-T and against those like X-Y. If there was no significant difference between these two kinds of marriage this would not matter. If men and women take spouses indiscriminatelyfrom within and from outside their own villages and also maintain separate households after marriage, then there may be no bias in the sample. But in most societies this is not so. Most of the marriages in which both spouses are to be found in the same village are extant, although we may occasionally finda woman living in the same village as a man from whom she has been divorced. Most of the marriages in which spouses are found in different villages have been terminated in divorce, although we may also find a few marriagesin which, for some reason or other, such as the demands of co-wives, or the exigencies of employment,husband and wife are living apart. In general, then, the bias in our sample in favour of marriages with spatially separated spouses is a bias in favour of marriages ending in divorce.Bias of this kind is greatestwhen the sampling unit is completelyexogamous. If thereis village exogamy and husband and wife live together,there is only a small chance that a woman will be living in the same village as her divorced husband. If she has subsequently married another man in her former husband's village, or if he has marriedanotherwoman in hers, the former couple may be found in one village. Most divorced couples are found living apart, and under these conditions almost all extant
in their histories as actually experienced. differences Thus, if men move about the country more than women and contract marriages while woiking in the towns, their marital histories may show a larger average number of marriagesand divorces than those of women. In an increasingor decreasingpopulation, with men ma.kingtheir firstmarriage at a later age than women, the number of marriages,and hence the number of divorces, per head in each age group will differfor men and women (Hajnal, 1950b, p. 317). Women may conceal their divorces more carefully than men, as among the Tallensi and Plateau Tonga. If men and women can both be interviewedand all their marriages collected, then in general some of the marriages experienced by the men will also have been experienced by some of the women. Thus, if we take all the men and women in some residential unit, forexample, a village, we shall learn about those marriages linking each married couple living in the village fromthe women as well as fromtheirhusbands. The testimonyof a woman may not be identical with that of her husband, and in general the histories of man and wife will overlap in only one of their several marriages. It is not often that a man marries the same woman twice. The simplest way of indicating this overlap between the experiences of male and female informantsis to divide the material collected into three parts, as follows (1) Marriages for which both partners were informants. (2) Marriages for which the only informants were men. (3) Marriages for which the only informants were women. By comparing the accounts of part 1 given by men and by women we can gain some idea of the relative reliability of their information, and by carefulenquiry we can hope to guess at what actually happened in these marriages. Armed with this estimate of the reliability of men as informants,we can look at part 2, and can estimate the reliability and possible bias of the informationthere. After similarlyweighingthe evidence of part 3, we are in a better position to decide whether or not any there may be between parts 2 and 3 are differences due to differences in actual experience or merely to in reportingthat experience. differences Even with completely reliable. informantsand a completelyclosed and homogenouscommunity, part 1 is likely to differfrom the other two parts. This arises from the kind of way in which we choose our group of informants. Often the most convenient method of samplingis to use all the wedded (i.e., evermarried) inhabitants of a village as informants. In this way an enquiry into divorce can be con-
Measures of Divorce,Frequencyin Sl,mpleSocieties marriages have a single chance of selection and almost all marriages ending in divorce a double chance. Bias will be least when the sampling unit is endogamous, for all marriages in which both partnersare alive then have equal chances of selection, whether they are extant or have ended in divorce. It seems probable that in general the smaller the residentialunit the greaterthe proportionof marriages contractedwith spouses outside the unit, so that the smaller our sample the greater the danger of this kind of bias. This bias applies to the whole sample of all marriagesexperiencedby one or two ofthe inhabitants of a residential unit such as a village. It does not apply equally to the three parts of this sample, as definedabove. Part 1 consists of marriagesin which both partnerslive in the village and therefore consists largely of extant marriages. Marriages ended in divorce appear in part 1 only if former spouses continue to live in the same village after divorce or if they happen to have moved independentlyto some other one. The bulk of marriages ending in divorce fall in parts 2 and 3. A simple correction for this bias which suggests itself is to weight the parts of the sample so that marriages in part 1 have twice the weight of those in parts 2 and 3. Unfortunately, there are objections to this. In the firstplace, some of the marriages in parts 2 and 3 may involve spouses or formerspouses who live outside the area being studied. For example, if T lives not in Q village but in some other society, the chance that her marriage with Z is in the sample is reduced to one in three hundred, for she herself cannot be an informantwhatever village we select. Therefore,her marriage ought to receive the same weight as those in part 1. The same argument applies if X or Z is a labour migrant. If the society concerned is relatively isolated, we may, perhaps, ignore this complication. If it lacks clear social boundaries, either because it is stateless or because many of its members are temporary migrants, or if it is one in which there is frequent marriage with foreigners, we must take this complication into account. A second objection is that this suggested weighting overlooks the effectof mortality. In general, part 1 does not contain any marriages ended by death. Yet in our example, even if T did live in a village which we can select, she cannot be an informantif she is now dead. By this reckoningall marriagesin which one spouse is dead ought to be weighted as if they were in part 1. If only marriages ended by death were involved, we could easily isolate them in parts 2 and 3 and weightthem accordingly. Even if our attention is restrictedto divorce and we are
43
not directly interested in mortality,we still cannot neglect marriagesended by death for,as will be shown estimates of divorce later, we need to correctour first rates by allowing for mortality. We have also to consider the effectof death for another reason. In some marriages ended in divorce one spouse is alive and the other dead. These marriages appear in parts 2 and 3 but, like marriages ended by death, they have only a single chance of selection and should be weightedas thoughthey were in part 1. therefore Ouj revised weightingprocedure is then as follows. We subdivide part 2 of our sample into parts 2a and 2b. spouse is dead Marriages in which the non-informing or living outside the society studied fall into part 2a, spouse is alive and those in which the non-informing would have been interviewedif we had selected some other village fall into part 2b. Part 3 is subdivided in the same way. We then give parts 1, 2a and 3a a double weight in our final sample and parts 2b and 3b a single weight. It will be seen that correctionby weightingis not a simple matter. To apply this correctionwe must enquire about the whereabouts of our informants' formerspouses and ascertain whether they are alive or dead. If this can be done easily and accurately, the way is open for applying this correction. If it about former is impossible to get reliable information spouses it is, perhaps, safer to use an unweighted sample, giving details of how it is divided among its three parts, rather than to attempt a correctionon an unsatisfactorybasis. Samples based on the experience of men alone contain the equivalent of parts 1 and 2, and those based on women's experiences of parts 1 and 3. For convenience we may referto samples of this kind as men's and women's samples. If we add together men's and women's samples drawn from the same residential unit without making any allowance for overlap, we then have a sample made up of part 1 twice and parts 2 and 3 once. This is merely our original sample corrected by giving part 1 double weight. An illustrationof the different values obtained for divorce ratios by changing the basis of sampling is given in section V. The sample village should be selected carefullyso that it may be representative of the society being studied. Since usually among simple societies very little is known in advance about the population, and since it is usually quite impracticableto select villages at random, this is not easy. What can be done is to compare the village selected with a large number of other villages in respect of criteria which do not require lengthyinvestigation. Thus, we may not be able to repeat a divorce enquiry in many villages in order to see if our firstenquiry was typical. But we
44
J. A. BARNES
can compare the village in which, forbetter or worse, the detailed enquiry was made with many others for size, history, kinship structure, apparent wealth, and the like, and so verifythat in those respects our sample village is typical of its area. In the absence of any better information we then make the assumption that our divorce data are also typical fora larger population. We can increase the size of our sample by adding together data from several villages, selecting these so as to cover any variation in type that we may be aware of. Even if the sample village is found not to be typical it seems worth while pursuing enquiries, provided *that the fact of atypicality is always emphasized. If enquiries have reached an advanced froma wellstage it may not be worth while shifting tried and, well-known set of informants, however atypical they may be, to a typical but untried and unknown set elsewhere. It is surely better in our present state of knowledge to have good information about atypical communitiesthan meagre information about typical ones. IV. DIVORCE RATIOS Marriages can' be classified by age and status of spouses, year of commencement,duration, termination, and so on. The simplest measures of divorce related to marriages,and not to individuals, frequency take into account only method of termination and ignoreall other factors. The usual kind of statement met with is that such-and-such a percentage of marriages ended in divorce. It has been pointed out elsewhere (Mitchell & Barnes, 1950, p. 16) that there is often;some ambiguity in these statements and it is not always clear which of the following three ratios are intended. A. The number of marriages ended in divorce expressed as a percentage of all marriages. B. The number of marriages ended in divorce expressed as a percentage of all completed marriages. C. The number of marriages ended in divorce expressed as a percentage of all marriages except those that have ended by death. Ratio B is a simple measure of the relative effect of divorce and mortality in terminating marriage. in the value of this index may be Hence differences due solely to differences in mortality between two societies and not at all to differencesin divorce habits. The other two indices, A azid C, have meaning only in relation to a sample drawn from a live population, forit is only fromthem that we collect extant marriages. Therefore, these ratios are affected by mortalityand migrationas they show themselves in the age composition of the population, the sex
ratio, and so on. Hence, in A and C we are comparing terminations by divorce with a rather complicated set of data. If we turnfromA and C and concentrate our attention on B, using only completed marriages, our sample contains marriagesthat on the whole are less recent than those involved in A and C. In addition, if our marriages have been collected from living people in the manner discussed in section III, ratio B will be biased in favour of short-lived marriages. The longer a marriage has persisted, the shorterthe period which will remain after it has been terminated during which one or both of the spouses will be still alive and able to give us information. To give an extreme case, suppose, hypothetically, that in a certain society most couples live together to a ripe old age and then die of grief within a few days of each other. Any analysis of marriage in this society based-only on the completed marriagesexperienced by living people would exclude the bulk of these long-livedmarriagesand would deal mainly with the marriages of couples who had deviated from the common pattern. Yet, if we attempt to overcome these shortcomings by including marriages experienced by dead people we encounter the bias due to selective forgetting mentionedearlier. In modem societies where calculations are based on all registeredmarriages,deaths and divorces and are not restricted to marriages experienced by living people, these objections to ratio B do not apply. Ratio C is less directlyaffectedby mortalitythan A and it seems likely that C will prove to be the most satisfactory of these indices for frequency comformodernsocietiesare usually parisons. Since figures given in the formof ratio B, it is desirable that data should be published for different societies sufficient for calculating both B and C. Ratio A can be derived from B and C by the formula 1/B + 1/C =1 -+ 1/A Divorce ratios are available forseveral societies and are set out in Table III. set out in Tables I, II and Given the information III, we are in a position to determinewhether divorce is, in some unqualified sense, more frequent in one society than in another. Thus, in terms of each of the measures used, divorce is less frequent among the Palestinian Arabs than among the Fort Jameson Ngoni. Where the differencebetween societies is not so marked, we cannot easily arrive at any conclusion. Thus, for example, Ratios A, B and C of Table III are all lower forthe Fort Jameson Ngoni than for -the Lamba. Can we thereforesay that divorce is less frequent amnongthe Fort Jameson Ngoni than among the Lamba ? The information available from Tables I and -II suggests that this unqualified question cannot be answered, for we observe that as compared with the Fort Jameson
MeasuresofDivorce Frequency in SimpleSocieties

TABLE
45
III.
DivorceRatio8: Pereentage8 ofMarriage8endingin Divorce Percentage of marriagesendingin divorce calculated by various methods A B C Method not stated 20-5 35 0 44 0 36 *9 41 8 3 0 295 43 33 43 115 9 14 119 59 17 61 3 11 8 66 11,6
Society
Number of divorces
in sample
Bemba (a) ... ... Bemba (b) ... Bemba (c) ... ... ... England and Wales, 1938-39 (d) Fort JamesonNgoni (e) ... ... Kgatla (f) ... ... ... . .. Kgatla (g) . Lamba (h) ... ... Muria (j) ... 2... ... ... Ngwaketse (g) Ngwato (g) ... ... ... Nuer (k) ... ... ... Palestinian Arabs (in) ... Tlokwa (g) ... ... ... United States, 1926 (p) ... United States, 1928 (q) ... Yako (r) ... ... ... Yao (s) .... ... ...
... ... ... ... ... ... ...
... . ... ... ...

..
285 35 331
2* 6 558 61P3
. ... ...
...
... ... . ...
...
... .
...'
9.3
3-8
5*7 25 7 7 26 18 57 1;8 2 13-0 87
43
9-4
34 6
41 3
Sources (a) Brelsford, cited in Richards, 1940, p. 120, as Sample A, male informants. The numberof divorces in all the samples of Brelsford and Richards has been inferred fromthe size of the sample. (b) Richards, loc. cit., Sample B, male informants. (e) Ibid, Sample C, female informants. (d) Hajnal, 1950a, p. 181. (e) Barnes, 1951b,Table XI. (f) Schapera, 1940, p. 294. (g) Schapera, cited by Gluckmanin Mitchell& Barnes, 1950, p. 16. Method communicatedorally. (h) Mitchell& Barnes, 1950,p. 47. various categoriesof marriage,the percentagesendingin divorcerarnging (j) Elwin, 1947, pp. 616f,634f. He distinguishes from0 3 to 11L7. (k) Extracted fromEvans-Pritchard,1945, pp. 31ff. Leviritic marriage treated as merelya continuationof earlier legal marriage. (in) Extracted fromGranqvist,1931, pp. 157ff, using live male informants only. Betrothalsexcluded. (p) Willcox, 1940,p. 348, Table 176. (q) Cahen, 1932,p. 18. Cahen and Willcox use different methodsand neitheris identicalwith that describedin this paper. (r) Forde, 1941, as cited by Gluckmanin Mitchell& Barnes, 1950, p. 15. (8) Mitchell,1949,p. 298, Table IV, femaleinformants.
TABLE
IV.
Fort JamesonNgoni and Lamba DivorceRatios
Ratio
_____________________ __ Society
-2
P Fort JamesonNgoni 28.5% (115/403) 55 8% (115/206) 36.9% (115/312) I 183 1 79 1P50 -1<P< 1 <P< 2<P< *2 2 -3
Lamba A33-1% (119/360) 61P3% (119/194) 41*08% (119/285)
B C
J. A.
BARNES
Ngoni, the Lamba have a lower percentage of bours and kinsfolk. Whenever possible, I returned divorced men, but a higher percentage of divorced to the informants concerned and checked the women; their men have fewer divorces per head, emendations with them. Even after this process on one or more but theirwomen have more. Further,we can examine I occasionallyhad reliable information but inadequate in the usual way the possibility that the differences marriagesexperiencedby an informant on othersknown or thoughtto have been between Fort Jameson Ngoni and Lamba in Table III information may have arisen by chance, in a statistical sense. experiencedby him (or her). In these circumstances I rejected his entire history, excluding from my The calculations forthis are set out in Table IV. From Table IV it is clearthat the differences between sample even his adequately recorded marriages the Fort Jameson Ngoni and Lamba divorce ratios, except where his spouses were also informants. as shown by these samples are not statistically Some of these rejected informantstold me of their significant. We would require furtherinformation more respectable marriages and concealed marriages before we could attach any importance to the fact that had ended unhappily. Had I included, their that the Lamba ratios are slightlyhigher than the partial histories I would have introduced bias in favour of long and happy marriages. Ngoni. In all 117 men and 222 women were interviewed and theirmaritalhistoriesutilized to formthe sample. V. SAMPLESDRAWNFROMTHE EXPERIENCE They constituted86 per cent. of the wedded men and OF ONE SEX: AN ILLUSTRATION 88 per cent. of the wedded women who were normally We can use ratios B and C to illustrate the arguresident in these six villages during 1946-49. The ments put forward in section III for separating preponderance of women over men is due to the marriages for which both partners are informants absence of more men than women as migrant fromthose forwhichonly one partneris an informant. labourers in the towns. The men and women in the Our data referto the Fort Jameson Ngoni. had experienced 403 marriages. Both man Information was collected concerning all the sample and wife were interviewedin 111 marriages,while in marriagesexperienced by wedded (i.e., ever-married) the remaining 292 marriages only one partner was men and women in six villages. One village, yielding interviewed. In the course of this and other 107 informants, was twenty-five miles away and in a was acquired about many other enquiriesinformation differentcounty3 from another village yielding 55 marriages, of both living and dead people. For informants. The remaining four villages, yielding reasons discussed in section III, this additional 173 informantsbetween them, were close together was not used at all in makingcalculations. information but in a third county and twenty miles away from All marriages collected in this way were divided the other two. These four villages were those most into four categories, E, D, H and W, as follows:accessible frommy base camp, built at a site chosen by the Administration. The other two villages were E. Marriages extant at the end of the enquiry selected for me to live in by the county chiefs con(1948 in one village and 1949 in the other cerned. I was able to compare these six villages five, including marriages in which the with many others and in so far as size, ethnic comspouses were separated but not divorced). position, wealth, history and kinship structure are D. Marriages ended in divorce. concerned, they are fairly typical Ngoni villages. H. Marriages ended by death of the man. These six villages constitute about one per cent. of W. Marriages ended by death of the woman. the total Fort Jameson Ngoni population. I endeavoured to include all wedded people as The sample was also divided into three parts, as informantsbut failed to do so. A few people were described above in section III. Divorce ratios were always away fromhome when I called on them, as, calculated for each part separately and for the whole for example, a brickmaker who worked long hours (unweighted) sample. every day at a Mission and who went off drinking Had I conducted my enquiries through men only, every week-end. 'A few other people who were would have collected only parts 1 and 2 of this I interviewedwere excluded fromthe sample since their Divorce ratios were calculated for these sample. historiesas given to me were eithergrosslytruncated, and forthe similarwomen's two taken together, parts or patentlyuntrue. I amended internally inconsistent, formed adding parts 1 and 3. The disby sample the histories related by yet a few other inforniants of marriages in four categories and three tribution in the light of information received fromtheir neighparts, and divorce ratios B and C for these different samples, are set out in Table V. The distributionof marriagesin the three parts is 3The area controlled by a minor chief I have called a much as might have been anticipated. The large county. See Barnes (1950a, p. 199.)
in SimpleSocieties MIeasures ofDivorce Frequency

TABLE
47
V.
between Male and Female Experience Fort JamesonNgoni DivorceRatios, distinguishing Marriagesin each category Divorce ratios
_ _
Basis of calculation
__
Total1
1. Marriagesforwhich both partnerswereinformants

2. Marriages for which men
103 22 72
197
7 42 | 66
115
1 (a) 0 63
64
0 26 1 (b)
27
111 90 202
403
87-5% (
7/8 )
6 4% (
7/110)
weretheonlyinformants...
61 8 % ( 42/68 ) 50-8% ( 66/130)

55.8% (115/206)
65 6% ( 42/64 47 8% ( 66/138)
36.9% (115/312)
3. Marriagesforwhichwomen werethe onlyinformants ...

Total
...
...
...
All marriagesforwhich men were informants ... ... All marriages for which womenwere informants...
125 175
49 73
1 64
26 1
201 313
64.5% ( 49/ 76) 53O0% ( 73/138)
28 2% ( 49/174) 25-8% ( 73/248)
I had collectedthe maritalhistoriesofman and wifein thismarriage,and beforeI had finishedthe enquiry, Notes.-(a) After the man died. this woman beforeshe-died. I also interviewed her husband, but since I could not get adequate (b) I interviewed in this sample. information on some of his othermarriageshe was not used as an informant
number of extant mnarriages for which women were the only informantswas due to labour migration, wheremen had gone away and lefttheirwives behind. Some of the extant marriages for which men were the only informantswere polygynous marriages in which the couples lived in separate villages. The divorce ratios for part 1 differwidely from the rest, as could be expected. Ratio B, the simple measure of the relative frequency of death and divorce as a method of terminatingmarriage, does not vary widely between the other five possible samples, with a minimumvalue of 5(0 8 per cent. for part 3 and a maximumof 64 5 per cent. forthe men's sample. Since part 3 contains all, except one, of the marriagesterminatedby death of the man, the lower value of B for part 3 is a reflection of the fact that marriagesare more likelyto end by death of the man than,of the woman. Ratio C shows a greaterrange of variation, from 25 8 per cent. for the women's sample to 65 6 per cent. forpart 2. The unweighted sample gives a higherC than eitherthe men's or the women's sample for, as we have discussed earlier, an unweightedsample is likelyto be biased in favour of marriages ended in divorce. We may, perhaps, regard the figureof 36 9 per cent. forthe unweighted sample as an upper limit of the true value of C.
Unfortunately, I did not systematically collect information about the whereaboutsof former spouses, although I did ascertain that in many instances informantsknew neitherwhere their formerspouses were living nor whether they were alive or dead. A division of parts 2 and 3 into 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b, thereforecannot be undertaken. I have used the unweighted sample, with a certain amount of misgiving, in all the subsequent calculations in this paper. VI. MARRIAGE DURATIONTABLE A more elaborate method of analysis depends on knowing how long each marriage lasts. With this additional informationwe can calculate the probability that a marriage will end in divorce or death within a given time and hence compute the mean expectation of married life at the beginning of marriage. We can providea fuller pictureof marriage and divorce than is possible by means of a simple ratio. Calculations of this general kind have been made forthe United States (Cahen, 1932; Jacobson, 1950) and England and Wales (Hajnal, 1950a), but I do not know of any previousdata forsimplesocieties. The methods of calculation used in modern societies are not applicable to simple societies lacking divorce
48
J. A. BARNES
registration, but comparable calculations can be made using a sample of marriages arrived at by one of the procedures discussed in section III. The criticisms levelled in that section at this kind of sample continue to apply, but there does not appear to be any better basis available. The method of calculation is explained in detail as it does not seem to have been applied to this kind of material before. Using the sample of marriages from the Fort Jameson Ngoni described in section V, I estimated the year in which each marriagebegan and, for completed marriages,the year in which it ended. A few informantscould state the year themselves and for a fewothersit was possible to get accurate information from Mission records. For the rest, estimates were based on the number of years elapsed since the event; its relationin time to the lifeof the informant and to dateable historical events; and by reference to the present age of childrenborn of the marriage. In this way marriages were classified in terms of their duration,that is, how long they lasted or, with extant marriages, how long they had lasted so far. The longest duration encounteredwas 53 years, the shortestone week. These marriages were already divided into four categories,E, D, H and W, definedearlierin connection with divorce ratios. The number of marriages with the same duration and in -the same category was computed for each year from 0 to 53, and for each of the four categories. The resultingdistribution is set out in coluimns 3, 5, 8 and 11 of Table VI. In this table the duration of the marriages in any particular cell is referredto in column 1 as the nominal value of the cell. Estimates of the beginning and end of marriages were made only in years and not all the marriages grouped togetherin one cell of the table lasted for exactly the same length of time. For example, we may consider the cell with nominal value 10 years in column 3, in which we have 6 marriages. These include marriageswhose lengthshave been estimated in two different ways, directly and indirectly. In some instances I was able to ascertain directlythat the marriage lasted ten years, to the nearest year, and I then made an estimate as best I could of the calendar yearsin whichthe marriagebegan and ended. In otherinstances I proceeded indirectly. I was able to establish that a marriage began in such and such a year, and ended in such and such anotheryear, but I could not tell whether these events had occurred at the beginning, middle or end ofthe years concerned. The arithmetical difference between the dates was ten years and thereforeI included the marriage in the 10-yearcell. In fact,thelengthof such a marriage may have been anything between just over nine years to just under eleven:years. This variation in
possible actual length applies at every year in the table, so that those marriagesincluded in the 11-year cells may have lasted anything between just over ten years and just under twelve years. Each cell has thus a coverage in reality of two years, one year on either side of its nominal value, and there is an overlap of a year on either side in the coverage of successive cells. For purposes of calculation we make the assumption that the coverage of each cell is only one year, half a year onteither side of its nominal value, thereby eliminating overlap. Thus, for example, we assume that all marriages in the 10-year cells lasted for between nine years and a half and ten years and a half. This assumption is justified for those marriages whose lengths were estimated directly and does not introduce any great error when applied to indirectly derived durations. We make the furtherassumption that in each cell throughuniformly marriagedurationsare distributed out the period of a year covered by the cell. With these assumptions made, the 1-year cells include all marriages which lasted between six and eighteen months. The 0-year cells have a span of only six months as they include all marriages whose durations lie between nothingand six months. The durations of all marriages in the 0-year cells were estimated directly. Columns 3, 5, 8 and 11 of Table VI contain the raw data of the sample. All subsequent operations described in this paper consist in manipulating the in these columns. figures Although all the extant marriages will eventually end in divorce or death, we cannot say of any particular marriage which way it will end. If we use only completed marriages we introduce the bias in favour of short-livedmarriages mentionedearlier. Therefore,we utilize at each stage of calculation the fact that after a given number of years such and such a number of marriageshave not yet ended. To facilitate this, we abandon the customaryprocedure by which we would begin by examining successive years of marriage duration and considering what events take place during each year. Instead, we begin by taking points of time so many years after the beginning of marriage and consider what is the end resulton our sample of marriagesof all the events that have occurredbetween the beginningof marriage and the given point of time. Ini other words we examine what is the end result of so many years' exposure to the risk of divorce and death. We can best explain this process by considering forexample, what happens to our sample during the firstten years and a half since the beginning of marriage. We divide all the marriagesin our sample into five classes, as follows:
Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies Marriageswhich lasted at least ten years and a half. Q. Marriageswhich ended in divorce withinten years and a half. R. Marriages which ended in death of the man within ten years and a half. S. Marriages which ended in death of the woman withinten years and a half. T. Extant marriageswhich have not yet lasted ten years and a half. If we could return to the field several years hence we would then be able to reclassifyall the marriages now in class T and distributethem among the first four classes. For purposes of calculation we make the assumption that these marriages in class T will eventually be distributedamong the firstfour classes P.
TABLE
49
so as to preserve their relative size. Such an assumption ignores any trend there may be, for the class T marriages are, on the whole, more recent than those in other classes. It also overl6oks any unevenness in the distributionof extant marriages year cells, for ideally this disamong the different tributionshould be the same as the marriagesurvival table that we shall eventually derive fromthe table. This assumption,however,provides us with a simple a first approximationto a marriage way of constructing duration table. Applying this assumption to the point of time, ten years and, a half after the beginningof marriage we have that the proportionof marriageswhich end in divorce by this time is given by the ratio of the number of marriages in class Q to the sum of the numbers in classes P, Q, R and S.
VI.
Marriage Duration Table

Column
1
Nominal value of cell in years 0
2
2 Assumed coverage of cell in years 0 - j -1

1 21
10
11
12
13
U-2,E
ED
6/04x 100
LH
100 x 9/4
W W
2W W
100 x 12/4
16
19
387 378
359
9 10 11
13 13 10 2 10 2 5 4 5 1 2 0 3 8
9
27
2-3 5.0 11*0

15*3 19*8 23*3' 24*4 27*9 29*7 32*0 33.9 36*0 37*1 38*4 39*0 40*3 7-5
0 0
1
0 0
1
0 0
0-3
0
4
0
5
0 0*3 1-4
1-5 1.9 2-5 3*2 316 3-7 4-8 4*9 4-9 5-4 6*2 7 4 7-4 1-4
19
3
1 5 6 7 8 9
2j-31
31451 617 8141 51 61 7 81 9
13
12 11 5 5 5 11 6 4 4 5 4 4 1
346
334 323 318 313 308 297 291 287 283 278 274 270 269
38
2
6 2 2 5 7 4 4 2 2 3 0 0 2
3
9 11 13 18 25 29 33 35 37 40 40 40 42
0?9
2-7 3*4 4*1 5*8 8*1 9-8 11*3 12*2 13'1 14*4 14*6 14 8 15*6
0
0 1 2 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 3 0
51 64 74 76 86 88 93 97 1UF2 103 105 105 108
5 6 8 10 11 11 14 14 14 15 17 20 20
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
91-10 lO -llj 11f-121 12J-131 13j-141 144-15J 15j-161
17
18 19
16j-171
174-181 18j-191
0 2
262 260
262
0 1
110 111
110
42*0 42*8
42-0
2 0
42
44 44
16-8 16*9
16*1
0 1
20
20 21
7 6
7*6 8 1
20 21
22 23
19j20j 20Q-221i J
21j-22i4 22J-23,1
4 2
3 3
256
251 248
0 0
0 1
111
111 112
43*2
44*1 45*2
4 0
2 0
48
50 50
18*8
19*9 20*2
0
0 0
21 22
22 22
8*2
8*8 8'9
254
111
43*8
48
18-9
8*7
(2499)
50
TABLE
J. A. BARNES
VI. Marriage Duration Table-contd. Column
1 2 Assumed 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
11
12
13
Nominal
value of cell in years 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Total
coverage of cell in years 231-24 241-251 251-261 26J-27 1 271-28 1 281-291 29-1301 30j-1j 1 31i-321 32J-331 331-34j 341-35j 35j-36j 361-371 371-381 381 391 399-401 401-41 411 421 421-431 431 441 44F-451 451 461 46j-471 47j-48j1 481 491 49-1-50 501511 511 521 52j-531
I
EE E
UOZE -~
D
- _
I I 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D D
100 XI 6/4
-
H H
ZH H
I_
100 9/4
W WW
100 X 12/4
_ _
5 3 2 3 1 4 0 2 2 0 0 3 3 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 197
243 240 238 235 234 230 230 228 226 226 226 223 220 219 217 215 215 214 213 212 209 209 209 209 209 207 206 206 206 206
112 112 112 113 114 114 114 114 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 5456
46*2 46*8 47*1 48-2 48*8 49 6 49 6 50*0 51-0 51*0 51*0 51*7 52-4. 52*6 53-1 53*6 53*6 53*8 54*0 54 3 55.1 55*1 551 55.1 5511 55-6 5581 55*8 55-8 55*8 2298 3
3 0 0 0 1 2 1 3 0 0 0 0. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 64 I
53 53 53 53 54 56 57 60 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 64 2498
21*8 22*1 22*3 22*6 2311 24 4 24*8 26*4 26-6 26*6 26*6 27*0 27*8 27*9 28-2 28*4 28*4
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
22 22 22 22 23 23 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 25 25 26 26 26 26 26 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 1076
9.1 9 2 9-3 9*4 9-8 10 0 10*4 105 10-6 10 6 10*6 10*8 10.9 11*4 11-5 12*1 12*1 12-2 12-2 12-3 12-9 12*9 12*9 12*9 12*9 13-1 13*1 13*1 13d1 13*1 463 4
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 287
28-5 28:8
29*2 29*2 30*2 30*2 30*2 30*4 30*6 30*6 30 6 31*1 1082 0
115
E D H W U
(Extant) (Divorce) (Husband) (Wife) (Universe)
Legend Marriagesstill extant. Marriagesended in divorce. Marriagesended by death of husband. Marriagesended by death of wife. Total numberof marriagesin sample (403).
51
The numbers of marriages in classes Q, R and S not reflect any social fact but is merely artificial. are obtained for each year by adding successive As we deal with successively longer periods of time terms of columns 5, 8 and 11 of Table VI, and the elapsed since marriage, so the completed marriages results are set out in columns 6, 9 and 12. The sum in our effective sample begin to outnumber the of classes P, Q, R and S is obtained by subtracting extant ones. Hence our basis of calculation becomes those in class T fromthe total number of marriages more and more like that used earlier in calculating in the sample. These sums are obtained for each divorce ratio B, consisting of only completed year by subtracting successive terms of column 3 marriages. We have observed that ratio B is biased fromthe total, and the resultsare set out in column 4. in favour of short-livedmarriagesand indicates more The proportion of marriages which end in divorce frequent divorce than do other indices. This same by a given time after the beginning of marriage is bias is gradually introduced into Table VI until in found by dividing the appropriate term in column 6 the last line of the table a result is presented which term in column 4. The result is identical with that given by ratio B. Both from by the corresponding is shown as a percentage in column 7. Thus, for ratio B in Table V (total sample) and from the last example,in the 10-yearcells we have that 93 marriages line of Table VI, column 7, we have that the out of 291, or 32 per cent., end in divorce withinten probability that a marriage will eventually end in years and a half of the beginningof marriage. Corre- divorce is 55 8 per cent. Yet we have also from sponding percentagesfor terminationof marriage by Table VI, column 7, that the probability that a death of man or of woman withinthe same time are marriage will end in divorce in 321 years is only provided in columns 10 and 13. These percentages 51 per cent. This adds weight to our criticism of indicate what, in fact, happened in our sample. ratio B as a measure of divorce frequency when Making the assumption as to typicality discussed it is based only on marriages experienced by living earlier,we may regard them as indicatingthe proba- people. of marriagethat any particular bilityat the beginning marriage would end in a certain way within a given VII. PROBABILITY o0 DIVORCE WITHIN A time. GIVEN TIME this method we By ignore any changes that may The figures of Table VI provide a basis formaking have taken place in the last fifty years or so, for we times a variety of further calculations. First we may mix togethermarriageswhich began at different within that period. Our probabilities are specific compare the probability in differentsocieties of for duration only. Thus, a divorce in 1915 in a divorce within a given number of years elapsed since on marriage begun in 1910 is treated identically with a the beginningof marriage. There is information divorce in 1947 in a marriage begun in 1942. We thisforthe United States in 1928 (Cahen, 1932,p. 118; ignore the possibility that divorce was in any case Nimkoff,1947, p. 633) and for England and Wales more,likelyin 1947 than in 1915, whatever was the (Hajnal, 1950a, p. 181). Probabilities in these duration of marriage. We also ignore the possibility countries have been calculated for integral numbers that one marriage was childless and the other not, of years after marriage,while the probabilitiesgiven that one was a firstmarriage and the other a third, in Table VI, column 7, relate to mid-pointsof years. to calculate the that one concerneda headman and the other a school As a preliminarywe have therefore teacher, and so on. If our sample were larger it probabilities at integral numbers of years for the would, however, be relatively easy to isolate these Ngoni. We assume that these are the arithmetic different categories of marriage and then to proceed means of successivepairs ofprobabilitiesat mid-points with each categoryin the same way as we have done of years. Thus, at the 9- and 10-yQarcells we have for the whole sample. Thus, for example, we could that the probability of divorce taking place within prepare separate tables for all the marriages entered 91 years is 29 7 per cent. and within 10- years 32 0 into in each decade, for the year in which each per cent. The arithmeticmean of these is 30 85 per marriage began is known. With only 403 marriages cent., taken to be the probability of divorce within to manipulate these refinements are, unfortunately, 10 years of marriage. The calculation of these means is set out in columns 1, 2 and 3 of Table VII. This not practicable. In column 5 of Table VI it will be seen that no averagingprocess has the desirableeffect of smoothing marriage ended in divorce after more than 32 years our probabilitycurve. In view of the bias introduced of married life. Yet in column 7 the probability into the later years of Table VI, the calculation has that a marriagewill end in divorcewithina given time not been carried beyond the thirty-first year. continuesto increase slowly but steadily beyond the The resultantprobabilitiesfromTable VII, column thirty-third year. Here the limitationsof our method 3, are repeated in Table VIII, together with comof calculation become apparent, since this rise does parable figures relating to the United States and
(2499)
D
52
TABLE
J. A. BARNES
VII. Datum Point8 Co&putationTable forShifting
3 4 5 6
Column
of marriage
since beginning
Years elapsed
Probability of divorce within a given time
_
-
_
-
Rate of divorceper annum at a given time Differences between successive probabilities (2.3 x 2=) 4-6 2-7 2-5 3-5 4-3 4-5 3-5
1.1
Data from Table VI, col. 7 0 2-3 5-0 7-5 11.0 15-3 19-8 23-3 24-4 27 9 29-7 32-0 33.9 36 0 37 1 38-4 39-0 40 3 42 0 42*0 42-8 43*2 43*8 49-6 |
49|6
Sumsof
I puirs of paterms NeW rates
Ofmarriage
since beginning
Years elapsed
pairs of termS 0
New data
0 4-0 5-2 6-0 7-8 8-8 , 8-0 4-6 4-6 5-3 4 1 4-2 4-0 3-2 2 4 1-9 1-9 3 0 1*7 0-8 1'2 1.0 2-6 3-0 3.9 4.4 4-0 2-3 2-3 2 65 205 2 1 2-0 16 12 0-95 0 95 1-5 0*85 0 4 0-6 0-5
1
1 2 21 3 3j 4 41 5 5j 6 6j 7j 8 81 9 9j 10 10 11 III 12 12j 13 131

14 7
7-3 12-5 18-5 26-3 35-1 43 1

47.7
3-65 6-25 9-25 13-15 17-55 21 55

23 85
52-3 57-6 61 7 65-9 69 9 73-1

75.5
26 15 28-8 30 85 32-95 34.95 36 55

37.75
3-5 1-8 2 3 1.9 2-1 1-1

1 3
2 2I 3 31 4 4I 5 51 6 6 7 7 8 81 9 91 10 101 11 11I 12 124 13 13i 141 15 15 16 161 17 171 18 181 19 19j 20 201 21 211 292 30
30i 14
14j 15 15 16 161 17 17j 18 18 19 19j 20 201 21 21j 29j 30
77.4 79.3 82-3 84-0 84-8 86 0
38-7 39-65 41 15 42-0 42:4 43 0
0-6 13 1*7 0 08 0 4 0*6
830
99-2
49-6
Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies England and Wales.4 The same resultsare presented graphically in Diagram I.
53
VIII. DURATION-SPECIFIC DIVORCE RATES A further computationbringsout other differences. Instead of consideringthe cumulative effectof years TABLE VIII. Probability at Beginning of Marriage that of exposure to divorce risk, we can examine the withina given Time a Marriage will have ended in Divorce probabilitythat divorce will occur in any given year of married life. We begin by subtractingsuccessive Society terms in Table VI, column 7. This gives us the Time in years number of divorces which take place during the elapsed since period covered by each cell per original cohort of England Fort United beginningof 100 marriages, Thus, for example, we have from and Wales, Jameson States Marriage 1928 1938-39 Ngoni column 7 that out oT 100 marriages 29*7 will have ended in divorce within 91 years and 32-0 within 10 years. Therefore2*3 marriages (the difference 0 0 0 0 between these two figures)will end in divorce during the period 91l-10- years after the beginning of 1 3 65 0-7 0o01 2 6 25 2-0 0*02 marriage. Since the coverage -of each cell is 'one
3 9*25 3*4 4 5
6
21 55
13*15 17 55
7.7
5 0 6*4
TABLE
0-2
IX. DivorceRates Specific for Duration of Marriage, as Divorcesper annum per 100 OriginalMarriages expressed
Society
7 8 9
10 11 12 13 1415 16 17 19
23 85 26-15 28-8
30 85 32 95 34 95 36 * 55 37 75 38 7 39 65 41 15
8.8 9.9 10*8

11-6 0 9
Marriage Duration in Years
Fort Jameson Ngoni 4 0
United States, 1928 0-7

1*4 1-6 1*4 1*3 1*1 1.1 0*9 0.8
England and Wales, 1938-39 0.01 0.01

0*06
14-5
21 31 4-1 51. 61
3*0 3.9 4.4 4 0 2*3 2.3 2X65 2.05 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.95
2.6
1.3
18
42-0
42*4
20 30
43 0 49 6
16 1 17-9
2 0 2 6
71 8I 91 101 11L 121 13i 141 15 15' 161 171 181 191 201 25 102
0.14
From this diagram it will readily be seen that, although we are accustomed to think of divorce in the United States as " common " or " frequent," it is comparatively rare as compared with divorce among the Ngoni. This is so despite the lower mortalityin the States by which couples are exposed to the risk of divorce for longer than they would be were they to die as quickly as do the Ngoni.
4 I do not discuss the manner in which I have adapted the data on these modernsocieties to suit my purpose, since this does not seem relevant to the theme of this paper. I have merely chosen the most easily accessible sources and to obtain measuresI could manipulatedtheirdata arbitrarily use for comparison.
0 6
0 11 0.95 1.5 0.85 0.4 0 6 0.5 0!06

D3
0*3
(2499)
54
J. A. BARNES
year, we may regard these figuresas indicating rates per annum per 100 original marriages at which divorces occur at differentdurations of marriage. The 0-year cell covers only six months, so we have to double the figure obtained by subtractionto obtain a rate per annum. We can compare the annual rates so obtained with those relating to the United States and England and Wales, but firstthe same averaging procedure must be carried out as with the probabilities of divorce. We may regard our rates as operating at the mid-points of cells, that is, at 1, 1, 2, 3, . . . years after marriage. For example, since 2-3 marriages end in divorce between 91 and 101 years afterthe beginningof marriage,we assume that the rate per annum at 10 years' duration is 2 3 divorces per 100 originalmarriages. For direct comparison we need to know the rates at 1, 1, 2.1 years. We make a similar assumption as beforethat these new rates are the arithmetic means of successive
TABLE X.
pairs of old rates and calculate accordingly. This calculation is set -out in columns 4, 5 and 6 of Table VII. The rate at half a year after marriage is calculated by adding two-thirdsof the rate at a of the rate at one year. quarterof a year and one-third The rates of Table VII, column 6, are repeated in Table IX, together with the United States and is England and Wales rates. The same information shown graphically in Diagram II. The similarity between the Ngoni and United States curves is noticeable. In both the rate rises to a maximum round about the fifth year of marriage and thereafterslowly declines. The modal year is the fifth for the Ngoni and the fourthforthe United States. In England and Wales the second quinquennium is modal. These curves do not indicate at what duration the risk of divorce is greatest. They merely indicate at what durations most divorces occur. This is so
Calculation of Divorce Rates related to Surviving Marriages 1 2 3 Rate of divorce related to 100 original marriages 4 0 4 2-6 3*0 3.9 4-4 4*0 2-3 2-3 2 65 2-05 2-1 2-0 1-6 1 2 0 95 0 95 1*5 0-85 04 142 0-6 0*5 157 4 Rate of divorce related to 100 surviving marriages
Colunn
Years elapsed sie beginning of of marriage marriage
Percentage of marriages terminated by divorce or death 3 5-3 9f92 13-3 19*5 25*1 29-9 33-4 39-6 43-2 4811 1
.4 515 54 0 56 9
Percentage of marriages surviving
22
97 7 94-7 90*8 86-7 80-5 74.9 70-1 66-6 60 4 56-8 51-9 49 0 46-0 43 1 40-8 38 8 36-7 34*3 33-6 32-2 29-8
4*1 2-75 3-3 4.5 5.5 5-35 3-3 3-5 4.4 3.5 4-05 4-1 3-5 2 8 2.3 2-45 4-1 2-5 19
21 31 41 5161
1i
gi
10
8-iff
71
11 121 13 142 151 161 172 18119i 20i
59*2 61*2 63-3 65-7 66-4 67-8 70-2
55
for Duration of Marriage, because the rates we have calculated are related to TABLE XI. DivorceRates Specific 100 Marriages surviving per per Divorces as annum expressed an original cohort of so many marriages. The to thatDuration between these two kinds of measurement difference m&y be illustrated by a hypothetical example. Society year of marriageis the most Suppose that the fiftieth hazardous of all, so that very few couples entering Marriage year of married life togethermanage to their fiftieth England United Fort Duration surviveto the end of the year withoutseekingdivorce. and Wales, States, Jameson in Years 1938-39 1928 Ngoni Even under these conditionsit is unlikelythat most of the divorces granted would be to couples in their year, for the hazards of death and divorce fiftieth 0*01 0-71 4-1 years of married life that lie in the firstforty-nine would ensurethat fewcouples ever reach the beginning 0.01 1'23 2*75 3137 year. Therefore,at any particular 3*3 of their fiftieth 21 0-06 1P38 4- 5 year would time couples passing throughtheirfiftieth 31 constitute only a small part of the total wedded *135 5*5 41 population, and the divorces granted to them, even 5 -35 1P18 51 if they were all divorced, would account for only a 1.09 3*3 6j small part of all the divorces granted. To gain an 0.15 1P07 3 -35 7i idea of the rate at which marriagesthat have reached 0*94 444 81 any particular duration are then terminated by 0 76 3 -5 91 divorce, we must referthe divorces taking place in 0 83 each year of duration to the number of marriages 4*05 101 survivingto that duration. 0*64 441 1i This can be done by dividing the number of 0 56 3 5 121 the in each of a by year period occurring divorces 0*51 2 8 131 number of marriages surviving to the mid-point of 0-52 2*3 14j that period. This calculation is set out in Table X. Column 1 is formedby adding togethercorresponding 0.13 15 terms from columns 7, 10 and 13 of Table VI and gives the percentage of marriages terminated by 0 *50 2*45 15j 0*44 divorce or death within a given time fromthe begin41 161 ning of marriage. These percentages are subtracted 0 43 2*5 17j from 100 to give, in column 2, the percentage of 0 41 1.2 18j marriages surviving. Column 3 repeats the divorce 0-36 1;9 191 rates per annum already obtained in Table VII, 0*37 1*7 20j column 6. In Table X, column 3 divided by column 2 and multiplied by 100 gives column 4, which is 0*08 25 then the required rate of divorce related to surviving marriages. similarlycom- The general effectof relating divorces to surviving These rates may be compared w-ith puted rates for the United States (Cahen, 1932, rather than original marriagesis to increase the rate p. 120) and England and Wales (Hajnal, 1950a, of divorce at later years of marriage.6 pp. 181, 185). The comparative rates are set out in The general similarityin shape between the Ngoni Table XI and shown graphicallyin Diagram III. 5 and United States curves is maintained with a peak Unlike all the preceding measures of divorce around about the fifth year. The fifth year of frequencywe have discussed, this one is free from marriageamong the Ngoni (the fourthin the United of mortality,except in so far as mortality the effects affectsthe composition of our sample of marriages. 6 The United States rates in Table XI are not all higher It is therefore well suited for comparing divorce ratesin Table IX. Those in Table XI than the corresponding frequency in societies with different mortality are taken directlyfromCahen. For Table IX I have pieced rMore recent data indicate that in 1948 the rates forthe United States were considerably closer the Fort Jameson Ngoni than in 1928. Cf. Jacobson (1950, pp. 238, 240, 243, Charts 2, 3 and 5). (2499)
Cahen and Nimkoff. from as best I could information together Cahen makes allowance for the effectof migration. This makes the basis of comparisonbetweenthe two sets offigures when draftingthis paper, rather exiguous. Unfortunately, I overlooked the work of Monahan (1940).
D 4
56
J. A. BARNES
States) is seen to be the time when the risk of divorce by inspection of the totals of columns 7, 10 and 13 is greatestas well as the time at which most divorces of Table VI to be occur. The Ngoni curve behaves differently from [100 + 100 - (2.3 + 0 + 0)]/4 the othertwo duringthe firstyear of marriage. The + 0) + 100 - (5.0 + 0 + + [100 - (2.3 + 0F divorce rate is higher during the first year than 0 3)]/2 + ... during the second. This reflectsa real difference in ...+ [100 -(55.8 + 30.6 + 13.1) + 100-(558 divorce procedure in the three societies. In occi+ 31- 1 + 13.1)]/2 dental societies divorce is usually sought only 54 terms after considerable deliberation and the legal process lasts a long time. Most people enter into marriage 100 X 54 + (2 *3)/4 - (2298 . 3 + 1082. 0 hoping that it will last for life and relinquish this + 463 . 6) hope only gradually. The divorce rate during the first year of marriage is thereforerelatively low. 100 x 15-549 Among the Fort JamesonNgoni a bride, even though This is the aggregate number of years of marriedlife marriage payments may have been made for her, lived by couples in 100 marriages. The mean may run away from her husband after only a few expectation of married life at the beginning of days and within a short while will be divorced: 15 5 years. It should be noted, marriageis therefore Despite its short duration, this is a proper marriage for it however, that this figureis an under-estimate, and is quite distinct.from temporary concubinage. does not allow for the fact that the couples in the Hence the divorcerate duringthe first year ofmarriage extant marriages of our sample will live additional is relautively high among the Ngoni. The graphical years pf marriedlifebeforetheirmarriagesare ended, method of presentation adopted here gives a clear It might be thoughtthat we could correctfor this indication of the numerical importance of these only completedmarriages. This errorby considering short-livedmarriages. we do by using the totals of columns 6, 9 and 11 of This difference between the Ngoni and occidental survival Table VI. The area under the corresponding societies demonstratesthe point made earlier of how curve is found to be importantit is to state clearly what is meant in any 206 X 54 + 9/4 - (5456 + 2498 + 1076) particularsocietyby marriageand divorce; Apparent differences may be due as much to varyingdefinitions i.e., 206 x 10X28 of these terms as to real differences in habit. The mean expectation of marriedlifeat the beginning of marriage, considering only completed marriages IX. MEAN EXPECTATIONS AND MEDIAN in our sample, is therefore10-3 years. This figure DURATIONS calculated expectation. is less, not more,than our first Some of the,information contained in the foregoing The difference of over five years between these two tables -can be summarized by calculating the mean mean expectations is a good illustrationof the extent expectation of married life at the beginning of to which calculations based only on completed marriage. We can consider various categories of marriages experienced by living people are biased marriage and obtain a mean expectation for each in favour of short-livedmarriages. category. Next we consider only those marriages which end Our first calculation is based on the figures in in divorce. Using column 6 alone, the area under columns 7, 10 and -13 of Table VI, utilizing all the the corresponding survival curve is found to be marriages in our sample, including those that are 115 x 54 + 9/4 - 5456 extant. The sums of correspondingterms of these three columns, some of which have been worked out 115 x 6 58 in Table IX, column 1, are the percentages of marriageswhich will have been terminatedby death Thus, if we knew at the beginningof a marriagethat or divorce within a given time. Subtracted from it was destinedto end in divorce,the mean expectation 100, they generate a marriage survival curve, the of marriedlife would be 6*6 years. Similar expectations, consideringonly those marfirst termsof which are set out in Table IX, column 2. By integratingunder this curve we can deduce the riages ending by death, are 15*0 years for those mean number of years of married life expected at ending by death of the man, 14 1 years for those ending by death of the woman, and 14*7 years for the beginningof marriage. The area under this curve, allowing for the fact these two categories taken together. These results are compared in Table XII with that the coverage of the 0-yearcell is only six months, whereas subsequent cells each cover a year, is found similar expectations for the United States (Cahen,
Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies 1932, pp. 124f) and England and Wales (Hajnal, 1950a, pp. 181f, 185).
TABLE TABLE
57
XIII.
Median Duration of Marriage

Median duration in years
XII.
Mean Expectation of Married Life at Beginning ofMarriage

Basis of calculation
Mean expectation in years Basis of calculation Fort Jameson Ngoni 15-5 United States, 1928 20-4 England and Wales, 1938-39 35 4
Fort Jameson Ngoni

... ... 11 7
England and Wales, 1938-39

30-39
All marriages ... Completed marriages
All marriages ... ... Completed marriages ... only ... ... Marriages ended in ... divorce ... Marriages ended by man's death ... ... Marriages ended by woman's death ... All marriagesended by death ... ... ...
Marriages ended in divorce ... Marriages ended by man's

death ... All marriages
... only
10-19
10*3
66 15*0 7 14 3
Marriages
death
...
ended by woman's
... ... ended by death
...
...
...
10 10 10
...
...
38
expectations of married life are greater than they would otherwise be because of a few couples whose marriageslast a long time. For England and Wales 23 360 147 the only clear comparison of means vnd medians which the data permit is of marriages ending by From this table we see that, although divorce is death. Here the mean is less than the median, much more frequent among the Ngoni, the mean indicating that the mean expectation of married life duration of marriages ending in divorce is much the is less than it would otherwisebe due to a few couples same as in the United States. The mean expectation whose marriages are ended by death comparatively for each category of marriage is lower among the early. Ngoni than in the United States and lower there X. COLLECTING INFORMATION than in England and Wales. In all three societies marriages ending in divorce are, on the average, Our discussion so far has been mainly about how shorter than marriages ended by death. Termina- we can manipulate our data. We may now outline tions in divorce are characteristic of the early years of the procedure to be followed in the field which marriage and terminations by death of the later should ensure that we obtain the right kind of data. years. This contrast is less marked among the We assume that we sample by as might be Ngoni than in the other two societies,(1) delimitinga segment of the society studied, expected fromthe highermortalityamong the Ngoni. such as a village or clan or political sector,,andthen A further summary of some of the foregoing (2) examiningthe lifehistoriesof all the relevant informationcan be made by calculating the median individuals belonging to the chosen segment. duration of differentcategories of marriage. We consider the same marriage categories as used for We should indicate how the segment was chosen, means. Table X, column 2, shows the percentage how it was delimited, and its size, both absolutely of all marriages surviving after a given time, while and in relation to the whole society. It is desirable sums of corresponding terms of columhs 6, 9 and 12 that the kind of segmentselected should be such that of Table VI give the number of marriagesnow com- each individual in the society belongs to one, and pleted, out of a total of 206, that were terminated only to one, segment,but this is not always possible. -withina given time. Taken separately, these three It is also desirable that the segmentsshould not vary columnsindicate the numberof marriagesterminated widely in size; if they do, two (or more) samples withina given time in each smallermarriagecategory. should be made, one from a large segment and one The resulting median durations are set out in froma small. Table XIII, together with comparable median Often we lack informationon individuals who, in durations for England and Wales (Hajnal, 1950a, these terms, should formpart of the sample. Even pp. 181f, 185). if we can find nothing else about them, we should For the Ngoni the mean exceeds the median in endeavour to find out how many there are of these. of individuals each category of marriage,indicating that the mean In tabulations showingthe distribution
14*1
58
J. A.
BARNES
into different categories,as in a marital status table, we can then include these individuals in an "unknown " category. Where our units of tabulation are not individuals but events they have experienced,such as marriageand divorce,we cannot do this. We can, howeVer,indicate the completeness of our sample by showing how many informants we used out of the total number possible, as well as providing an " unknown" category for those events known to have been experienced by our informants but for which-further is lacking. information The minimumamount of information needed from each individual, man or woman, adult or child, in the sample to enable us to make the computations discussed in this paper is as follows 1. Name. 2. Sex. 3. Date of birth. 4. Marital historyshowing for each marriage: (a) date of commencement, if not still extant, (b) date of termina-tion, (c) whetherterminatedby death or divorce, and (d) name of spouse. In some societies we may be able to determinethese dates accuratelv while, in others, we may have to estimate in decades. The more precise our raw data the greater the' precision of our measures, but the method employed remains essentially the same whether we are working to the nearest year or the nearest five years. It will be seen that the amount of information required is not great. The collection of these data can be easily combined with other systematic enquiries into marriage and fertility, kinship affiliation, labour migrationand the like. XI. CONCLUSION We are not hereconcernedwitb the fulldemographic analysis of marriage termination by death, but it should be noted that Table VI can be used in this connectionas well. For example, columns 10 and 12 of that table give theprobabilitythat a marriagewill end by the death of one spouse or the other within a given time. At every year beyond 31 years terminationis morelikelyto have taken place by the death of the man than of the woman. Among the Fort Jameson Ngoni, as in most societies, men are usually older than their wives and this may be part of the explanation. There are nearly twice as many women as men in the sample and whereas some of the men who used to live in the sample villages and whose wives have died are now labour migrantsin the towns, comparatively few widows have become migrants. The figuresas they stand appear to show that the
additional hazards of childbearing do not make terminationby death of the woman as likelyas might be expected. Any investigationof this point would have to allow for the unusual sex ratio and for rates of migrationfor men and women. differential 13y calling upon furtherraw data, such as age of spouses at marriage, whether they were related to one another,whetherthey were marriedas Christians or pagans, how many children they had, what relatives they lived with, and the likp,it is possible to analyse divorce frequency further. In our own society we often emphasize, and probably over-emphasize (cf. Jacobson, 1950, pp. 242ff),how divorce is more likelyin a barrenthan in a fertile marriage. It would be well to know to what extent this is true of other societies where the rearing of children, and their from our social importance, is regarded differently own (cf. Hsu, 1949, p. 105). Frequencies and rates can be calculated specificnot only for duration but also for man's age,-or for religion, or social status. The particular line of enquiry followed will depend on the problemin hand. Divorce is not one " thing " and cannot be described by a single index or a single adjective. It is a social process which has many aspects, some of which we can measure and some we cannot. Divorce in two societies may be similar in one respect and different the United in another,as we have seen by contrasting States and the Fort Jameson-Ngoni. Some aspects are related to each other logically and we can define in advance the logical connectionbetweentheirvarious measures, as, for example, we have noted ratio B as the end-point of the probability curve shown in We may part in Table VII, columns 1 and 3. assume a priori that there are other connections in reality betwecn aspects of divorce which may now appear independent. These connectionsare properties not of our analytical tools but rather of the human societies we examine, and we may hope to discover bhemby further enquiry in the field. For example, is it true that as divorce becomes more frequentthe time of greatest risk shifts from the second to the first quinquennium of marriage, as is suggested by the data from our three societies ? In other words, if divorce is more likely does it come sooner? This kind of question can best be answered for simple societieswith the help of tools such as those described in thispaper. We may thengo on to considerwhether in treatingas similarphenomena or notwe are justified the comparatively rare terminationsof marriage in, say, Zulu and Nuer societies, arising fromconditions of extreme marital stress, and the comparatively frequentterminations in, say, Yao and Lozi societies, which appear to arise oftenfromtrivial precipitating causes and which may have quite differentsocial functions.
59
I am well aware I have constructed a rather if we draw attention to the uses to which data of pretentious superstructureon raw data which are this kind can be put, workers in the field may be quite unsuited to uphold it. My plea must be that, encouraged to collect more, and to collect better.
DIAGRAM
1.
of marriagethatwithina giventimea marriagewill have endedin divorce Probabilityat beginning
..r
-U
O <a = -r :
. 1 2 3
4
__
N17D |/5V8f
7
|JetATESj
f92 9.4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__3 ~
=
20 SO3
9 smnce
Time in years elapsed
of makrria&g belnrmncy
DIAGRAM 2.
as divorces expressed per annum. per I 00 original Divorce rates,specific for durationofmarriage,
marrivages
_
iC-
-7
__
__
1\1
11
72wsct Noovlv/ ~ ~~~~foer
AS
1928
to
15
20
aygr n JAarria5mduration
60
DiAGRAM
J. A. BARNES
to that 3. Divorcerates,specific for durationofmarriage, expressed as divorces per annumper 100 marriages surviving duration
lsa
0 0
-
Foer
JA
ONI o-
P.5
UN)TE'D
JTiEs
/928
Mari-ia?ge
durabion
in
yeare.
References
BRNss,
J. A.
...
...
...
... ...
...
... ...
...
... ...
...
1951a 1951b 1950

1932
1947
"The Fort Jameson Ngoni," in Colson, E., & Gluckman,H. M., eds., Seven Tribes of British CentralAfrica. London: Oxford University Marriage in a Changing Society. Capetown: OxfordUniversityPress. Mandan Social and CeremonialOrganization. Chicago: Universityof in Action. London: Anthropology
Statistical Analysis Chicago Press. of American Divorce. London: The Kalingas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Press.
" The Collection of Genealogies."
Rhodes-Livingstone J., 5.
BARTON, R. F. BOWERS, A. W
- --
...
...
... ...
... ...
1949
BROWN, G., G., and HUTT, A. McD. B. CAHEN, A . ... ... ... CHILDS, G. M. CULWICK, A. T ...
...
1935
1949
Oxford University Press.

New York:
...
...
...
...
UniversityPress.
Columbia
1935
1935 A. T., and CuLWIcK, G. M. CULWICK, ... ... ... 1938-39 ...
Du Bois, C. EARTHY, E. D
ELKIN,
...
H.
V.
...
...
... ...
...
... ... ...

...
1944 1933 1940 1939 ...1947 1945
" A Method of studying Changes in Primitive Marriage," J. Roy. anthrop.Inst., 65. Ubena of theRivers. London: Allen and Unwin. "A Study of Population in Ulanga, Tanganyika Territory." Sociol. Rev., 30, 31.
The People of Alor. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Valenge Women. London: Oxford University Press. "The Northern Arapaho of Wyoming, "pp. 207-258, in Linton, R.,
Umbundu Kinship and Character.
ELWIN,
...
...
EVANS-PRITCHARD, E. E.
-...
...
...
...
The Balsga. London: Murray. The Muria and their Ghotul. Bombay:
ed., 1940.
Some AspectsofMarriageand theFamily amongtheNuer. Livingstone: Rhodes-Livingstone Institute.
Measures of Divorce Frequency in Simple Societies References

FBI, H-T. FIELD, M. J. FIRTH, R.... FORDE, C. D. FORTES, M. ...
...
61
...
...
..
...
...
1940
1936 1941 1943
1939
...
...
...
...
...
...
... ... ...
Social Organization of theGa People. London: CrownAgents forthe Colonies.

We, the Tikopia. London: Allen and Unwin. Marriage and the Family among the 'Yako in South-Eastern Nigeria.
Peasant Life in China.
London:
Kegan Paul.
...
...
...
London: Lund Humphries.
--
...
... -...I
...
... ...
...
...
1949 1943 1945 1950
FURER-HAIMENDORF, C. VON ...

GLUCKMAN,
H. M.
...
...
. .
Rev., 35. The Web ofKinship amongtheTallensi. London: OxfordUniversity Press. The Chenchus. London: Macmillan. The Reddis of the Bison Hills. London: Macmillan. " Kinship and Marriageamong the Lozi of NorthernRhodesia and the Press.
Zulu of Natal." In A. R. Radcliffe-Brown and D. Forde, eds., African Oxford University Systems of Kinship and Marriage. London: The Social Organization of the Western,Apache. of Chicago Press. " Marriage- Conditions in a Palestine Village." Chicago:
" A Note on Fertility among the Tallensi of the Gold Coast."
Sociol.
GOODWIN, G.
GRANQVIST,
...
...
...
... ...
1942 1931 and 1947 1950a
University
H.
... ...
HAJNAL, J.
GREEN, M. M.
...
...
... ...
...
...
1935
Humanarum Litterarum, 3, 6. Fennica, Commentationes
Societas Scientiarum
Ibo Village Affairs. London: Sidgwick and Jackson. " Rates of Dissolution of Marriages in England and Wales, 1938-39." the Royal Commission on Population.)
Helsingfors.
In Reportsand SelectedPapers of theStatisticsCommittee. (Papers of " Births, Marriages and 1938-1947." Ibid. Reproductivity, England and
London: H.M.S.O.
...
... HARRIS, J. S. ... HARRISON, T. HERSKOVITS, M. J. Hsu, F. L. K. ... HULSTAERT, P. G. ... HUNTER, M. JACOBSON, P. H.
...
... ...
... ... ...
...
... ... ... ...
... ...
...
...
1950b
1940 1937 1938 1949 1938 1936 1950
Wales
... ...
...
...
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
...
...
...
...
" The White Knife Shoshoni of Nevada." In Linton, R., 1940. Savage Civilization. London: Gollanez. Dahomey. New York: Augustin. (2 vols.) Under the Ancestor's Shadow. London: Routledge. Le Marnage des Nkundo. Bruxelles: van Campenhout. Oxford University Press. Reaction to Conquest. London: " Differentials in Divorce by Duration of Marriage and Size of Family."
... ... JOFFE, N. F. KLuciKHOHN, C., and LEIGHTON, D. KRIGE, E. J., and KRIGE, J. D. ... ... KucZYNSKI, R. R. KUPER, H. LA BARRE, W. LANDES, R.
LEACH,
1946
1943 1944 1947 1948 1937 1938 1940 1947 1940 1948 1934 1937
1940
The Navaho. Cambridge, Mass.:
...
...
...
...
... ... ... ... ... ... ...
E. R.
... ...
...
... ... ... ...

... ...
in Linton, R., ed., 1940. Harvard University Press. The Realm of a Rain-Queen. London: Oxford University Press. the Contribution of Demography to the "Population Movements: Rhodes-Livingstone J., 2. Study of Social Problems." An African Aristocracy. London: Oxford University Press. Amer. Anthrop., "The Aymara Indians of the Lake Titicaca Plateau." 1, 1, 2 (Mem. No. 68). Ojibwa Sociology. New York: Columbia University Press. The Ojibwa Woman. New York: Columbia University Press. Social and Economic Organization of the Rowanduz Kurds. London: Marriage in Langa Native Location.
Amer. sociol. Rev., 15.

" The Fox of Iowa."
LEVIN, R.
...
Lund Humphries. Town.
Capetown:
University of Cape New York: Appleton
LINTON, R., ed......

MCILWRAITH, MAIR, L. P.
Acculturation in Seven American Indian Tribes.
MEEK, C. K.
T. T. ...
...
... ...
...
...
....
...
Toronto: University of Toronto Press. The Bella Coola Indians. An African People in the Twentieth Century. London: Routledge. Law and Authority in a Nigerian Tribe. London: Oxford University St. Denis.
Century.
... MINER, H. MITCHELL, J. C.

MITCIELL,
...
...
...
...
1949
1940 1942 1947 1947 1940 1940 1933
1939
Press.
J. C., and BARNES, J. A. ... ... MONAHAN, T. P.... ... ... ... NADEL, S. F. ...... ... ... ... ... ... NIMKOFF, M. F.... ... ... ... OPLER, M. K. ... ... ... PAuLME, D. ... ... POWDERMAKER, H.
REDFIELD,
R.
...
...
... ... ... ... ... ...
1950
...
...
...
1941
Africa, 19. University of Cape Town. " The Changing Probability of Divorce." Amer. sociol. Rev., 5. A Black Byzantium. London: Oxford University Press. The Nuba. London: Oxford University Press. Marriage and the Family. Boston: Houghton Miffin. in Linton, R., ed., 1940. " The Southern Ute of Colorado." Organization Soocale des Dogon. Paris: Domat-Montchrestien. Williams and Norgate. Life in Lesu. London: The Folk Cuxlture of Yuhcatan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
The Lamba Village. Capetown:
of Southern Nyasaland."
"An Estimate of Fertilityin some Yao Hamlets in Liwonde District
Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
62
J. A. BARNES
References
RIcHARDS,
SCHAPERA, SIEGEL,
A. I.
I.
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
...
...
,..
... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ...
... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ...
1940 1940 1942

1940 1940 1949 1931 1949
Bemba Marriage and Present Economic Conditions. Livingstone. Married Life in an African Tribe. London: Faber. " EffectsofCultureContacton theForm oftheFamily in a Guatemalan Village." J. Roy. anthrop.Inst., 72.
The Puyallup-Nisqually. New York: Columbia University Press. Pascua, a Yaqui village in Arizona. Chicago University of Chicago Press. "People on the Desert." Part I, in A. Joseph, R. B. Spicer, and The Bavenda. London: Oxford University Press. "The Social and Religious Life of a Guatemalan Village." Rhodes-Livingstone Inst.
M.
SMITH, M. W. SPICER, E. H.
SPICER,
...
...
R. B.
...
... ... ... ... ... ...
STAYT, H. U. WAGLEY, C. WAGNER, G.

WILLCOX,
J. Chesky,The DesertPeople. Chicago; Universityof Chicago Press. Anthrop.,51 (Mem. 71). The Bantu of North Kavirondo. London: Oxford UniversityPress. (Vol. 1). Becominga Kwoma. New Haven: Yale UniversityPress. Studies in AmericanDemography. Ithaca: CornellUniversityPress.
Amer.
1949 1941 1940
WHITING, J. W. M.
WILLIAMSON, R. W.
WILSON,
W. F.... ...
...
...
...
... ...
...
...
... ...
...
1939 1942 1940
G.
WISDOM, C.
...
...
Press.
Essays in Polynesian Ethnology. Ed. R. Piddington. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. An Essay on the Economics of Detribalization in Northern Rhodesia. Livingstone: Rhodes-Livingstone Inst. (Vol. 2.) The Chorti Indians of Guatemala. Chicago: University of Chicago

Measure of Divorce Frequency in Simple Societies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Measure of Divorce Frequency in Simple Societies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Measures of Divorce Frequency in Simple Societies Author(s): J. A.

MEASURES OF DIVORCE FREQUENCY IN SIMPLE SOCIETIES

Mectsure8 ofDivorce Frequency in SimpleSocieties

Number of Pros Persons

Percentage Pretg Divorced

116 133 105

6*4 11.3 6-25

Table IV), Forde (1941, p. 78, Table 6), and Fortes

Percentage of wedded population divorcedat least once

Fort JamesonNgoni (g) Palestinian Airabs(k)

Wedded men,over45 yearsold Fort JamesonNgoni (g) ...

Weddedwomen,all ages ... Bemba (e) *...

Fort JamesonNgoni (g)

Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies

MeasuresofDivorce Frequency in SimpleSocieties

... ... ... ... ... ... ...

... . ... ... ...

... ... . ...

5*7 25 7 7 26 18 57 1;8 2 13-0 87

Fort JamesonNgoni and Lamba DivorceRatios

Lamba A33-1% (119/360) 61P3% (119/194) 41*08% (119/285)

in SimpleSocieties MIeasures ofDivorce Frequency

1. Marriagesforwhich both partnerswereinformants

61 8 % ( 42/68 ) 50-8% ( 66/130)

3. Marriagesforwhichwomen werethe onlyinformants ...

64.5% ( 49/ 76) 53O0% ( 73/138)

28 2% ( 49/174) 25-8% ( 73/248)

Marriage Duration Table

2 Assumed coverage of cell in years 0 - j -1

2-3 5.0 11*0

51 64 74 76 86 88 93 97 1UF2 103 105 105 108

91-10 lO -llj 11f-121 12J-131 13j-141 144-15J 15j-161

value of cell in years 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Total

(Extant) (Divorce) (Husband) (Wife) (Universe)

Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies

Probability of divorce within a given time

I puirs of paterms NeW rates

1 2 21 3 3j 4 41 5 5j 6 6j 7j 8 81 9 9j 10 10 11 III 12 12j 13 131

7-3 12-5 18-5 26-3 35-1 43 1

3-65 6-25 9-25 13-15 17-55 21 55

52-3 57-6 61 7 65-9 69 9 73-1

26 15 28-8 30 85 32-95 34.95 36 55

3-5 1-8 2 3 1.9 2-1 1-1

14j 15 15 16 161 17 17j 18 18 19 19j 20 201 21 21j 29j 30

77.4 79.3 82-3 84-0 84-8 86 0

38-7 39-65 41 15 42-0 42:4 43 0

0-6 13 1*7 0 08 0 4 0*6

8.8 9.9 10*8

Marriage Duration in Years

Fort Jameson Ngoni 4 0

United States, 1928 0-7

England and Wales, 1938-39 0.01 0.01

0 11 0.95 1.5 0.85 0.4 0 6 0.5 0!06

Years elapsed sie beginning of of marriage marriage

Percentage of marriages surviving

11 121 13 142 151 161 172 18119i 20i

59*2 61*2 63-3 65-7 66-4 67-8 70-2

Measures of Divorce Frequencyin Simple Societies

Median Duration of Marriage

Mean Expectation of Married Life at Beginning ofMarriage

Fort Jameson Ngoni

England and Wales, 1938-39

All marriages ... Completed marriages

0-6 13 17 0 08 0 4 06

592 612 63-3 65-7 66-4 67-8 70-2