FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2012604658> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2012604658 endingPage "592" @default.
• W2012604658 startingPage "591" @default.
• W2012604658 abstract "Bianca Premo’s engaging and important study of childhood “as it was both lived and imagined” in colonial Lima (p. 2) operates on two levels: it is both a history of actual children and childhood, and it is about generational relations as a metaphor of colonial rule. According to Premo, these two threads of inquiry are entangled, for “the social history of children . . . cannot be separated from . . . the overarching political ideology that bound colonial subjects to the Spanish Father King” (p. 15).Premo’s study yields a number of interesting empirical findings. Amid ideologies of racial and corporate separateness, households were characterized by striking “caste diversity” (p. 50). Indeed, domestic realities diverged widely from the “ideal typical patriarchal family” insofar as nonpatriarchs — including widows, wet nurses, and artisans — routinely performed the everyday work of rearing the city’s children. Premo suggests that families who did not conform to the prescriptive model tended to experience the brunt of legal intervention into domestic matters. She also describes how the city’s nunneries and foundling home were important sites of social reproduction, marked by many of the same dynamics of race and gender as households themselves.A temporal window of 170 years (1650 to 1820) allows Premo to discern changes in legal discourse and practice over time. By the late eighteenth century, the courts were taking a greater interest in unpropertied children, and the reach of secular judicial authority was growing. The terms of legal disputes concerning children also changed, as arguments about emotion, education, economic investment, and social control eclipsed older invocations of patriarchal right. This welter of change adds up to what Premo terms “the new politics of the child.” Ultimately, it heralded a growing valorization of childhood such that by the end of the century, even slave children were considered children first and foremost, and only secondarily slaves. How these legal changes reflected or catalyzed changes in social practice is less clear.Minority is a concept key to the analysis. Premo argues that minority in the colonial context was a “multivalent legal category” that was “tightly bound up with other categories that had little to do with actual biological age, such as ‘miserables,’ ‘orphans,’ and the ‘unprotected’ ” (p. 20, 6). It included not only children, but also Amerindians, who were perpetual legal minors. Thus, “age . . . combined with other social markers to form a complex of statuses and identities for colonial adults and children alike” (p. 6). Another category that is scrutinized is patriarchy. Premo makes a compelling case that patriarchy is best treated as contemporaries understood it, in the aggregate, as a concept capturing “the ideological affinity between the social and legal infantilization of slave adults and the subordination of children to elders, of wives to husbands, and of colonized to colonizer” (p. 10). In this analysis, patriarchy transcends gender even as it captures how gender was bound up with other social and legal relations of power, including those between generations.Part of Premo’s analytic project is to show how poor and relatively powerless colonials were agents, rather than mere objects, of law and politics. Ordinary litigants appropriated philosophical discourse to their own ends, and new ideas introduced from on high created opportunities for claims-making among subalterns. The argument is well taken, but given that much recent legal and political history has focused on discursive interchanges between elite and popular sectors, it is not altogether unexpected. The argument also rests on a key methodological assumption: that court declarations and their conceptual frameworks may be attributed primarily to litigants, rather than to lawyers and scribes. Premo makes this assumption explicit, and indeed her sources suggest it may sometimes be warranted (as one anecdote on pp. 7 – 8 suggests). But one wonders whether it is always or even consistently the discursive universe of litigants that is conveyed in the judicial record; if it is not, then the extent to which everyday Limeños exercised agency through legal argumentation is perhaps overstated.These objections notwithstanding, this book has many strengths. Chief among them is the formidable amount of archival research that undergirds it. An indefatigable researcher, Premo draws on census, notarial, and institutional records, and above all on judicial cases from civil and ecclesiastical courts. Historians of childhood frequently lament the patchy presence of young people in the archives. Premo’s tireless archival pursuit suggests that information is abundant, but locating it may require methodological resourcefulness. An example is the invocation of “reverential fear” by individuals seeking to annul marriage and ecclesiastical vows. Petitioners sometimes claimed they had been pressured by fear of their elders, a scenario that according to canon law impeded free will and abrogated sacramental vows. Premo examines how litigants couched claims of reverential fear, and what the courts made of them, to reconstruct social and legal attitudes toward generational and gender authority (some of the elders whom petitioners claimed to fear were female). Finally, underlying the prodigious research is a keen historical imagination. The author clearly became absorbed in the world narrated in her sources, and the account is leavened by her empathy for the individuals she encountered there.This book is of great interest to historians of children and family. The author has elucidated practices surrounding childrearing and the meanings that accrued to childhood in a colonial context. But its relevance extends beyond this specialized readership. Premo has made a compelling case for what parents and children, childhood, minority, and generation have to do with the operation of power in a colonial society in general. In this sense, Children of the Father King is an original interpretation of colonialism and its social and political dynamics." @default.
• W2012604658 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2012604658 creator A5066861188 @default.
• W2012604658 date "2007-08-01" @default.
• W2012604658 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2012604658 title "Children of the Father King: Youth, Authority, and Legal Minority in Colonial Lima" @default.
• W2012604658 doi "https://doi.org/10.1215/00182168-2007-016" @default.
• W2012604658 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W2012604658 type Work @default.
• W2012604658 sameAs 2012604658 @default.
• W2012604658 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2012604658 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2012604658 hasAuthorship W2012604658A5066861188 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C107993555 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C158071213 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C2776639384 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C2778311575 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C2779509574 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C531593650 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C107993555 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C138885662 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C144024400 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C158071213 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C17744445 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C199539241 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C2776639384 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C2778311575 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C2779509574 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C41895202 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C531593650 @default.
• W2012604658 hasConceptScore W2012604658C94625758 @default.
• W2012604658 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2012604658 hasLocation W20126046581 @default.
• W2012604658 hasOpenAccess W2012604658 @default.
• W2012604658 hasPrimaryLocation W20126046581 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W1597265668 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W1994516721 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W2062437164 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W2560072980 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W2940842600 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W4242346868 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W4282823060 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W4324142899 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W4372360792 @default.
• W2012604658 hasRelatedWork W643243575 @default.
• W2012604658 hasVolume "87" @default.
• W2012604658 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2012604658 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2012604658 magId "2012604658" @default.
• W2012604658 workType "article" @default.