[MUSIC] Welcome to Understanding China, 1700 to 2000. A Data Analytic Approach. Part 2, section 15, Marriage and Socioeconomic Comparisons. Malthus had thought that while marriage was universal and early in China, it was selective and late in Western Europe, in particular England and that these differences in savings and consumption contributed much to the modern rise of the west over the east. However, in similarity in difference. The Eurasia population family history project discovered by comparing 50,000 first marriages in very different Eurasian communities, as well as 5,000 remarriages. That while it's true that there were some differences at the aggregate level, they were using individual calculations, there was also much similarity in marriage behavior in relation to socioeconomic context. These EAP comparative findings on marriage also challenge the neo-Malthusian Hajnal hypothesis of a neo-local nuclear Western European marriage pattern, contrasted against a patri-local joint East European, East Asian marriage pattern. Thus, while on the aggregate level, marriage may have been early, universally East at least for females and late and selective in the West. At the individual level in fact, because of the late starting of reproductive behavior within marriage. The gap between West European populations and Northeast Asian populations, which was interest of the Asian marriage a difference of ten years. Now to the age of first birth with a difference of only five years. In other words, while marriage in Western Europe was closely linked to biological reproduction to coital behavior within marriage. Marriage in these stages, surprisingly was not. Our findings based on Big Historical Data on individual marriage behavior further challenge previous understandings of the aggregate relationship of economic conditions and marriage. Now according to Malthus, marriage in Europe was supposed to be sensitive to fluctuations in the economy. Or marriage in rural Asia was supposed to be independent of economic conditions, because of the resources available from the extended family. However, in all male population, other study in the Eurasian population of the family history project. There was in fact, a general and strong positive association between socioeconomic status and the timing of marriage. And when times are hard, it was the high socioeconomic status group were the most likely to postpone marriage not the low socioeconomic status groups. Higher socioeconomic status was also associated with lower likelihood of remarriage in Europe, higher likelihood of remarriage in Asia. The results overall are again, consistent with the power-property binary reported in our studies of mortality and fertility. Household relationships were more important in the Asian context. Property ownership was more important in the European context. Overall, however and unexpectedly, while we can identify binary, there was still more similarities between East and West in marriage than they expected from the results on mortality and reproduction. Thus, while overall, there may have been difference. We look at marriage, we see similarly in difference. From a discussion on mortality, fertility and marriage, one message becomes rather clear. That especially in East Asia in general, China in particular, family strongly shapes individuals survive, reproduce and married. In other words, to define who we are, the questioned we posed at the beginning of part two. We need to understand better the most basic social organization of human beings, the family and the interactions between kin to understand how, who cares, strongly influences who survives? Who reproduces? Who marries? [MUSIC]