A rejoinder to S. K. Datta and J. B. Nugent

Abstract Extract The question of old-age security as a motivation for fertility in less-developed rural areas can be put in clearer perspective by pausing to consider the changing roles of land and offspring under the influence of fundamental demographic upheaval. Under the pre-transition regime, one generation approximately replaced the preceding one, particularly once unused but usable land became scarce and the possibility of expanding farm operations became remote. Judging from the settlement patterns and the history of the Maharashtrian study area, such a circumstance probably obtained long before the secular drop in mortality began. During this period, a single son, typically, would survive to adulthood, gradually assuming control of the father's land (or the father's trade, among non-agriculturalists) and, if the father lived long enough, would eventually be a source of security in the father's old age. It is not inappropriate to mention that this generational cycle no doubt fostered a strong urge to leave the family land to a son, so that a sonless farmer would keenly feel a lack of fulfilment. In fact, responses to certain survey questions suggest that ancestral land and male progeny are still somehow connected, according to the way village men think, to their sense of immortality. It would be hard, consequently, to separate old-age security, the idea of 'continuing a lineage', and the sense of immortality conferred by owning land into distinct motives for conceiving children.