At 09:42 06/10/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>One would wonder therefore at the reasons if anyone insisted on using
>categorisations like 'bastard' or 'illegitimacy' on the Radstats list.
This is NOT intended to justify any of the previous uses of "race", but one
very obvious reason for wanting to use the term "illegitimate" is precisely
that it appears in the historical statistics that some of us work
with. Come to that, I have colleagues who would describe their research
focus as "bastard bearing" (e.g. in north east Scotland in the 19th
century), precisely because understanding the social stigma associated with
the words is a major aspect of the research. I am a little worried that
Ray is constructing a notion of statistics without history!
Maybe worth noting that while historical vital registration and poor law
statistics place quite a bit of emphasis on legitimacy, I cannot think of
direct use of "race", as distinct from birthplace, until you get into
recent census data on ethnicity.
Humphrey Southall
PS my first attempt to send this message led to my e-mail software telling
me that "your message ... is likely to offend the average reader. You might
consider toning it down."
====================================
Humphrey Southall
Reader in Geography/Director,
Great Britain Historical GIS Project
Department of Geography, University of Portsmouth
Buckingham Building, Lion Terrace, Portsmouth PO1 3HE
GIS Project Office: (023) 9284 2500
Home office: (020) 8853 0396
Mobile: (07736) 727928
Web site: http://www.gbhgis.org
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
|