Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 11

Medival mentality familty and condition of women

Here Matt Richtel highlighted the difficulties facing American marriage and presents the Twenty-First
century as a crisis period for the conception of modern marriage, going so far as to propose the idea of a
time limited marriage: a marriage contract with an expiration date. Richtel examined the two
contrasting elements of, and the two major players in, modern American marriage: economic realities
mediated by lawyers and the romantic ideals mediated by churches, For some it is the legal recognition
of a relationship; for others, it is a spiritual union,or the only correct way to bear and raise children. For
a few it remains a religious institution for un-sinful sex. The ideas of family, marriage and children in the
Western world are altering and the law is following, or leading, these changes. The family shape – most
notably the centrality of a legal marriage – and the clashing sides both presented in Matt Richtel’s article
and encapsulated in the equal marriage debate are strikingly similar to those presented in the literature
of the period covered by this book. the family can be viewed as an important site of cultural change and
evolution, period AD 400-700 in Western Europe, it was a period of considerable cultural and political
change where the family was the locus for both changing discourses and apparent behaviours. As the
traditional power structures of the Roman political world declined during this period, and the Christian
Church and new political groups rose to 56ll that power vacuum, the family became a vitally important
locus for cultural struggles concerning morality, law and tradition. AD 400-700 – is one of enormous
change in the West. For a multitude of reasons, Roman Imperial power retreated swiftly from Gaul,
Hispania, and Italy – the places where it had previously held strong for 56ve centuries. Sometimes this
withdrawal was in the face of violence, whilst at others it was more peaceful. Cities shrank and
populations changed. In the place of the old Imperial Roman structures of proconsuls, Duumviri, taxes
and armies rose new power structures: new royal courts led by non-Roman families and Church
hierarchies in bishoprics and monasteries. At the centre of life sits the family, and the family was
inevitably affected by these changes to the world in which people lived. These changes are the focus of
this study. While accepting the current consensus regarding the general structure of the post-Imperial
family as a nuclear unit, two primary strands of scholarship concerning the post-Imperial family and also
attempts to tie these strands together. These two strands can broadly be seen as being typi56ed by
those who have attempted to identify a Roman/Germanic dichotomy, and those who have examined a
Christian/non-Christian dichotomy. the choices that are made and the identities that are formed within
families; its focus is how these shifted and changed throughout the period and across the geographic
landscape, reasons did parents give for having children and how did they perceive themselves as
mothers and fathers as their children grew up? How does this relate to abortion, infanticide, fosterage
and oblation? Did women use Christian consecration as a virgin to escape the horrors of marriage or was
the role of wife and mother desirable? What is the role of a father? How are husbands and wives
supposed to relate to one another? The focus,however, will remain always on the adults at the centre of
the family: the couple who were betrothed, who married, who became parents and raised children.
their legal and social obligations and the cultural pressures placed upon them. The family of the Late
Antique West has been the focus of a number of studies examining the e7fects that both an encroaching
Christian cultural hegemony and the ‘barbarian hordes’ had on the structure and expression of the
family. locating the beginning of the Early Medieval period around AD 800 and positioning the ‘dark
ages’ of the post-Roman,pre-Carolingian centuries as a de56ning moment in the creation of the
European family, locating the beginning of the Early Medieval period around AD 800 and positioning the
‘dark ages’ of the post-Roman, pre-Carolingian centuries as a defining moment in the creation of the
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
European family, same time periods and even the same geographical locations, they tend to present
drastically different versions of the family. the perceived decline of Roman cultural values and the rise of
Christianity in the West, Imperial period and emphasising concepts of ‘fall’ and ‘decline,while the latter
looks backwards from the high Medieval period, and tends to be interested in the new ‘Germanic
barbarian’ cultures, viewed primarily through their law codes, and on the developing feudal system,
Merovingian royal family,primarily due to the seductive details of Gregory of Tours’s Ten Books of
History. considered the period AD400-700 as a discreet or individually important period in the
development of the cultural concepts that – as Richtel noted – still underpin the Western concepts and
ideals of the family. corresponding rise of the Church as a power structure in itself and the dramatic
dfferences that are found in the way the family is presented in AD400 and AD700 in the same places
makes the post-Imperial period avitally important period of history in understanding how the Medieval
–and modern – idea of the family came to be.This book looks at the post-Imperial Western families by
developing Christian tradition and by the new political power structures arising in the post-Imperial
kingdoms. Signi56cantly, this book will not consider the Merovingian royal family in any great detail.
There are two key reasons for this: first,that the familial behaviours of the Merovingians as documented
by Gregory of Tours have already been studied in considerable depth. The bibliography on the
Merovingians as both monarchs and as a family is vast and ever-growing. Secondly, there is also an
argument to be made, albeit on somewhat contentious grounds, that the Merovingian royal family offer
an atypical set of examples which could derail the discussion of cultural norms. debunked theory that
the Merovingians practised polygyny/gamy, or that they engaged in any particularly weird or wonderful
practices (despite Gregory’s attempts to suggest otherwise). as E.T. Dailey puts it, acted ‘without the
same concerns that weighed down upon the aristocracy’. Here, Dailey is referring to the kings’ legal right
to marry slaves or women of low birth, as they were not bound by the same social conventions that
controlled the behaviour of non-royal, aristocratic communities. non-royal behaviour where family
strategies were concerned. Ian Wood has pointed out another, noting that legal provisions regarding the
status of children born to free men and slave women did not apply to kings, queenship has
demonstrated that the role of queen was a speci56c one, which brought with it special powers and
functions that were not available to women and wives outside of the royal family, is, therefore, a
contributing factor in the decision to mostly exclude the Merovingian royals from this analysis.the
demotion of the Merovingian royals from the centre of analysis allows for a wider geographical area to
be more comprehensively examined. Although Gaul remains geographically core to this book, due to the
survival of sources, the relegation of the Merovingian royal family allows much wider questions to be
asked of the family and its significance as a locus and marker of change in Western Europe ,merovingian
family allows me to give considerably more space to other families, albeit families of the post-Imperial
elite, without being forced to tread well-worn paths anew without offering much of interest or novelty
to the reader. However, this can also be a detriment to a work that attempts to tread new paths. this
study is also di7ferentiated from the work of, for example, Regine le Jan and Julia M Smith who have
focused on families as loci of power and property and explored kinship networks, rituals and ideologies
around aristocratic families and gender roles in the early Middle Ages.Instead, this work focuses on
individuals, emotions and discourses and on uncovering cultural, rather than social or anthropological,
norms and practices.
Medival mentality familty and condition of women

 Terminology and time frame.


The period under consideration here, AD 400-700, is a difficult and contentious one that has been
considered from a great many angles by a great many studies. Many aspects of the period therefore
suffer from confused terminology, with the same words often used to describe entirely different
concepts, and the same concepts described using very different words, I hope to distinguish the period
from Late Antiquity,a term which tends to be extended to anywhere between AD 600 and AD800, and
the Early Middle Ages, which is often used to describe the period from between AD 600 to AD 800
onwards. the political upheavals were the greatest and the most signi56cant changes were taking place.
It is during this time that both the central and provincial Imperial power structures were losing their
signi56cance and the church was rapidly developing as a ‘replacement’ power structure in the West,
leading to the church’s growing cultural influence.post-imperial This term also avoids the problems that
could be raised by the sometimes used ‘post-Roman’. primary issue with this term is that the world of
the West between AD 400 and 700 is very obviously not post-Roman, but retained a considerable
degree of Roman in!"uence, with many people of this world still identifying and styling themselves as
Roman. This term both accurately describes the withdrawal of direct Imperial power from much of the
West, and also avoids the academic baggage of the other possible terms. AD 700 has been chosen as an
approximate end point. The cultural landscape of AD 450 looks di7ferent to that of AD 350, and cannot
be seen as Roman, and the landscape of AD 700 looks notably di7ferent from that of AD 400, but cannot
yet be considered Medieval; Nonetheless, the great political and religious changes which accompanied
the withdrawal of the Imperial structures and the fragmentation of the West had mostly passed.
centuries immediately following the withdrawal of explicit Imperial power, and not in the entire Early
Middle Ages as a whole. Between AD 400 and 700 interesting things happened to the cultures and
families of the post-Imperial West.majority of text texts and authors considered in this book were active
during the period AD 400-600, AD 730 have been employed in order to examine the continuity and
development of identified themes, number of terms which have, in the past, been used as racial
epithets, and which therefore require clari56cation. Here only one will appear: where the term
‘Germanic’ is used, it denotes a linguistic group, and not an ethnic or cultural group or a race of people.
The ethnic group terms found within this book are used to differentiate each relatively distinct political
group which are primarily defined according to territory and allegiance to a ruler. Thus, the Franks are a
political group, differentiated from the Visigoths by their territory and their allegiance to the Frankish
kings. Where terms such as Frank, Lombard, or Goth are used I mean them to have the same meaning as
those above. who de56ned themselves, for multi-layered reasons of birth, territory, political allegiance,
military allegiance, cultural similarity, religious practice and belief as members of the group in question.
political and territorial changes that may have affected personal ethnic identification,generalised terms
‘classical Roman law’ and ‘late Roman law’. These are broad terms meant to distinguish law whichwas
codi56ed and used within the classical Roman Empire (up to AD 300)and that which was codified and
promulgated during and after the reign of Constantine. majority of the latter is called ‘late Roman law’
throughout this book and is drawn from the Theodosian Code (c. AD 429-438) and the Justinian Code
(AD 529) and Institutes (AD 534). The former is called ‘classiCal Roman law’ and is drawn primarily from
Ulpian’s Digest (c. AD 211-222), and Gaius’ Institutes (c. AD 161), as well as the jurists Paulus,
Modestinus and Papian.19 Finally, the non-Roman, post-imperial (sometimes called ‘barbarian’)law
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
codes of the post-Imperial western states, as they are to any examination of the period, are these post-
Imperial legal codes. These legal codes can be exceptionally useful in describing normative practice and
proscriptive decisions made concerning the family,

No ancient source is ever simple to use or understand, and there is always debate and opinion regarding
motivation, genre and authorial intention. The on-going debate between those who argue for a theory
of ethnogenesis (the Traditionskern theory derived from Reinhard Wenskus) and those who subscribe to
anthropological theories remains lively and has supplanted arguments of an immutable biological basis
for ethnicity, those who view all barbarian identity as being essentially Roman inventions and those with
more nuanced views. whether the laws are derived mainly from ancient ‘Germanic’ custom or from
Roman vulgar law. These debates have more recently developed into questioning whether the codes are
personal or territorial. Early Medieval West as being governed by laws which are dependent on their
ethnic origin, so the Roman is subject to Roman law while a Burgundian is subject to Burgundian law.
such as the Liber Constitutionum and the Lex Romana Burgundionum in Burgundy and the Lex Romana
Visigothorum (Breviary of Alaric) and the Liber Iudiciorum Forum Iudicum in Visigothic Spain, supported
by the apparently un-Roman nature of laws on wergeld, morgangabe, and chrenecruda have given great
weight to the argument for personality of law. These scholars haverefuted the notion of a pre-migratory
tribal law and have emphasised the Roman elements of the post-Imperial codes, beginning with the
language in which they were recorded. The in!"uence of Roman culture (particularly legal culture) on the
post- Imperial codes cannot be underestimated. The very nature of the codes in their composition as
primarily royal edicts which are recorded in Latin, automatically frames them as Romanised texts, and
there is strong argument for these codes being a signi56cant part of the kings’ continual attempts to
demonstrate their power in Roman terms, to emulate the emperors of their present and the classical
past. if their rule were the product of Imperial favour, and many adopted and used Imperial titles,
framing their kingship as a form of Roman power. Since Constantine, the practice of releasing regular
edicts on specific matters was a common and de56ning facet of Imperial power. often been cited as
being a result of the strong in!"uence of Roman vulgar law, while the notion that these parallels result
exclusively from a common ‘Germanic’ oral law has been largely dismantled in recent scholarship.Each
of these has been seriously questioned in recent scholarship. There are clearly instances where Romans
and non-Romans were treated di7ferently in law. A particularly clear example is seen in the Lombard
provision of AD 731 that women who marry Roman men are released from the mundium system that
was apparently practised and become ‘Roman’ instead.28 Laws such as these demonstrate that groups
in western Europe identi56ed themselves as Roman and non-Roman, and that these identities could be
summoned when necessary. They do not however describe how ‘Romans’ and ‘Lombards’ were
identi56ed and historians have debated this point for a long time, raising the possibilities that the two
were defined by religion (Arian/Catholic) or by profession (political/ non-political) or by social role and
status. Thomas Faulkner’s argument that the post-Imperial codes may be more interested in issues of
status than ethnicity has been highly useful here.30 This does not provide strong sopport for the idea
that law was personal, but rather that ethnicity was a part of personal identity. Indeed, the prevailing
current view is that the distinction drawn between Roman and non-Roman in laws such as this one does
not define individuals by any biological ethnicity, but by class and profession.31 Personality of law does
not apply well in the case of the ‘Germanic’ kingdoms and so this book prefers to regard the post-
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
Imperial as principally (but not necessarily consistently) territorial codes, which primarily consist of royal
edicts based on vulgar law, common practice and custom 56ltered through the lens of Roman law. Who
was responsible for the writing and promulgating , The Breviary of the Visigoths and the Lex Romana of
the Burgundians are now accepted to be abridged versions of the Theodosian Code which includes
vulgar law. Whether these collections were meant for private use, like the third-century Codex
Gregorianus and Codex Hermogenianus collections, or for public use by those who were either
compelled or who chose to use it is still debated, although the Breviary is commonly accepted to have
been in use in some form in the Frankish and Visigothic kingdoms. The legal codes promulgated by the
non-Roman rulers fall into two categories: those which appear to have been written and disseminated
as a whole, and those which appear to be the collected edicts of different kings released over a period of
time, many of which modify, reassert or nullify earlier edicts. the texts within the categories will di7fer
from one another. It is common to see the post-Imperial codes now as combinations of Roman
law,ancient law and newly created law, written and promulgated in order to fill a void left by the
withdrawal of the Roman legal system. Lex Visigothorum demonstrates udef in genuine judicial
proceedings. rest of the codes give little indication that they genuinely existed as practical law codes,
rather than as ideological tools of ‘Romanised’ or – in later periods – ’Christianised’ leadership,
conclusions of Matthew Innes and Guy Halsall. To view them this way certainly undermines their use as
sources for social history – if they do not represent issues that are lived realities then they are limited as
social sources.33 However, they retain their use as cultural documents, enshrining the interests of the
law-makers as part of identity creation, a use that is reinforced by the continued fascination with them
in the Carolingian period. they are important as theoretical and intellectual tools in revealing what each
of the post-Imperial rulers wished to codify and memorialise about their perceived culture, particularly
with regards to family law. very particular framework; to provide coherent legal framework for the
subjects of the king; and occasionally out of perceived necessity – in reaction to issues arising within a
ruler’s jurisdiction. It is through this lens that the post-Imperial codes will be examined throughout this
book: as another genre of writing in the post-Imperial world. we come to a signi56cant issue at the core
of any study of families:the question of how far conclusions drawn from esoteric and legal texts can be
applied to the realities of family life. This work is not a social history; it is a cultural history define culture
as a web of meanings and discourses (used in the post-structural sense) that bind a society togther.

 Families and Emma Southon views;

about the family and the family’s life course. While occasionally ‘actual’ events are discussed – for
example in the letter collections of Ruricius and Sidonius Apollinaris, and in some specific legal
provisions, such as those regarding infanticide – the interest is not in ‘what actually happened’ but in the
discourses which underpin the presentation and experience of these events in the texts that have
survived.in this way my approach is in!"uenced by the ‘Texts and Identities’ project led by Mayke de
Jong, Ian Wood, Rosamund McKitterick and Regine le Jan, which produced a volume in 2006 as well as
shaping their work and the work of their students and collaborators. Their approach emphasises the
multiplicity of voices, perspectives and interpretations that emerge from the post-Imperial period,
rather than a grand narrative or singular ‘what really happened’, approach methodologically emphasises
texts as being living, active components of a culture To quote them directly, and with full agreement
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
project additionally focused on the notion of ethnic identities, specifically identities as being socially
constructed, complex and multifaceted,differentiated themselves through textual discourse from others
– was central to this project, and has been broadly influential here in that texts – be they laws, poems,
letters or sermons – are viewed as being part of a continuous and dynamic effort to construct and
maintain selves.

 Structure of emma,s book.

It begins with betrothal, viewed (albeit simplistically) as the beginning of a new household and therefore
family unit. Here we explore the legal and cultural purposes and meanings of a new marriage, and
within that consider the meanings and purposes of having children. Alongside this discussion comes the
related issues of not having children, and the multifarious ways in which individuals could plan, limit and
control the size of their household.

Part 2 focuses on marriage as an institution and as a cultural idea (or ideal). with particular focus on the
issue of correct sexual behaviour. including divorce, adultery and widowhood, Part 2 focuses strongly on
couple within a legal marriage and their social roles as husband and wife.

Part-3 couple arrival and growth of children affect a family, the roles of men and women as mothers and
fathers rather than looking at the experience of children themselves, expected functions and behaviours
of mothers and fathers, and the discourses that shaped these ideals and expectations both legally and
socially. parents arranging the betrothal of their adult children.

Now I would like to continue with Christiane Klapisch-Zuber and let try to search the point’s so we could
easily create a picture of mediaeval women and reasons for her up-and down in the society.

As we know Christian society granted no specific place to women ,it placed orders or conditions –
knights,clerics,and villenins,women often defined by her body,her gender,and her relations with families
group last her wealth in mediaeval society wife,maid,widow her juridical persona and her ethic by which
she lived her daily life were portrayed in relation to a man or a group of man.women played as a pawns
on the social chess board during the course of half a millennium.framework that contemporaries
automatically assigned to them and withinthe sets of constraints that kinship and families imposed opon
the emergence of women as indevidual possessing full enjoyment of juridical,moral,and economic
personality

That inelutable imposiomed women within domestic rutine,stifling them in a lackluster round of humble
antivities,refusing to base by the examole of some women,s also indulge in monastic culture,inherited
fedal functions,royal birth,or a rich spiritual or mysthical life,relegating the women to a place on the side
of body and of nature;to condemning her all over again to a colorless routine of housekeeping and
maternal preoccupations that brought no glory and was not even a profession totally we are going to
get reductionist view of the femine condition.bnds were founded on friendship ,economy
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
cooperation,or political aims,as well as blood and marriage,social anthropology has made important
contribution [ need not to be listen here]to the full range of problem,tools and ideas at the disposal of
historian of the femine condition whose traditional grounding was in the history of the law.

With hetrogeneous and biguous raw material we can try to make the contion of mediaevel women
clear,but before we go in depth of sources we need to know that our vition not our but even historians
vitions is based on the infinitely richeer choice of administrative,judicial,or familial documents.evn we
need more sources or earlear age than later we have to go on conclution or find reality but
unfortunately it was not that easy like it looks from outside.women voice and echoes of daily pleasure
and pains and domestic joys or shirmishes come to us tinged with condescension,malice,or frank
hostility-much more often from men than from wome.first capital limitation and secound one appllied
innvestigation of the family and of women roles.predominance of sources from the upper level of
society the knight class for the earlier period and the urban burgher class for the latermiddle ages,so at
the end the picture we get is not reliable and faitull because of the indulgense of churchmen,s and
upper class.

One thing we even going to trace in that period is that people conseption toward women people thing
womenas peace instrument and it is destiny of women predetermined by god to fullfilled by her,for end
of an rivelry and for belive people oftenuse women as instrument giving women to the lineage with
which a family was becoming reconciled placed the bride at the center of the entente and even the
mantaining the alliance which is just bega n by marrige responsibility of women,some time very
profound economic and social upheavel needed to take place before the couple began to take
shape,sometime king and aristocrates exchange women,s wo restore peace,marrige as an instrument of
alliance and king[ Henry-1 of france] bride from rusian small state [Kiev] show 12th cen territorial
ambition and political goals,

13th to 15th century many relations like that stop many massacare and war,s soon urban patriciate
among other start following such relation.In florence around 1300 the party of the whites coalesced
thank to an alliance concluded in 1288 to join a man of Cerchi family to an Admari Bride thus ending
ttheir long enimity ,while unhappy maritial relations between the leader of the black and his wife [as
happen a cerchi] followed by devoce and remarriage with a cousin],1312 another florintine [Giotto
Peruzzi] in his[Libro segreto] talk about contribution of male member of her leange for enormous
dowry.[Piazza de priori] women as respect of pact.we can even find intestified exagogy in 8th to 13 cen
and it is an exception in that social structure,[St.Augustine and verdict on exogomy and chrity and love
and for peace tied up].the [Laity]was prepared to wink at kinship bond to marry their sons and
daughters to one another rwhen the family fortune required it,even if the churchmen declared the
projected marriage incestuous,so such practices were there to tied the bond and vlood reations ships,a
verdict came in 1215 fourth leteran council allowed exagomy of greate-greate grand father son,s
daughters to marry.the legitimacy of unions by institution the publication of marriage banns preceding
the wedding in order to make sure that engaged couples poorly informed of their cousinship could avoid
incest.\
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
Women moved in two direction first up and secound is dound some merchant and burgler for uplishing
herself marry upper class women,s but problem is many woen found them selves degraded socially by
their marriages given to husbands of inferior blood or rank to whom they nonetheless owned
obedience.many themes were their any many stories about men fearing to face women pf higher kin in
such cases one thing is clear that women role is dominating.[contemporary of boccaccio,polo da
certaldo and discourage to take secound wife better born tha the first.[Widow remarried of his
corbaccio who constantly vaunts ,the nobality and the magnificence of her family]

One important aspect of such medival marrige is that high dowry and women status depend on dowry
as a compensation what men give women might return with less or more than that or not even
anything.but one thing is concern that transfer of women with wealth ,with the amount of wealt he
comes the higher respect he get in family and harder to devource.method of gift and counter gift might
be a method of social posiitions and friendship between two families.

Later because of higher dowrey women respect in society [Genoese teritia]pf frankish origin abolished in
1143 which gave women 1/3 right of property over men wealth.14th and 15th cen france and itly women
henceforth the husband administered her holding and discosed of the revenue during her lifetime ;at his
death his widow had little more than lifetime interest on her properties and could not transmit them by
testament to person of her choice. clerly respected by their amont of dowrey she came with,soon hight
dowrey became social status symbol and difficulties were created for poors and medal class and
demand of hight dowrey in marriage became common.the sort of dispossession of women are complex
one that is often suggested is that the fedalization of landholding excluded women from the
transmission of goods,castles,and fiefs in urban circles dependent upon commerce and crafts.dowering
permitted the elimination of women from he inheritance they renounced their right in their brother
favour

The deterioration in both women,s economic role and their ability to administer their own wealth led
inelutable to a decline in their worth the misogyny imbues many sources,other sources than women
shrinking financial wortha dn huridica right and churchmen regarding rearding fair but for forbidden sex
nevertheless ulitmetly became reason for women refusal . women were again misstrusted and negative
attitudes.

Dante good old day,s ; the merriageable age was not too low,the dowry not too high.we have to admire
that because of dowry women again occupied their status in society ,it had a strong gender
component,also depending upon the actions of the women who were the agents of alliance,the
principle of succession in the male line was becoming firmly established,

Women social status is not good in that time not abour childs ,it was suggested in that time,the
adulterous children of a wife were more dangerous,since their mother had a better chance of concealing
her crime.they were bore of fraud and when they servived reprobation of mothe rsin and flash and
betrayal mother.even it was suggested to men to servilance his women to guard against sexual
desire.married women loyality toward both allied through her ,notion of obedent girl first with father-
brother later with husband.one thing we have to take in mind that the contract of marriage of
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
sacrament say women equal to men but it was not applied in practicl.we even have many examples
from that period about force marriage by kidnapping girls, to pressurized families to come to an
aggrement. [height of renaissance,text abound with sinister stories of girls given to husband or sent to
convent against their will.

Exchange of statement of consent and completion of marriage,public nature of the place,the presence
of reatives family members,priest certainly gave unusual weight to the womans.marriage get legitimate
power and as st.paul say it is better to marry than to burn,accourding to himm marriage is lesser evil.

Even church try to estaablished marriage,ritual form of the marriage imposed by church
include,promises of marriage publicaly ,sealtd the sharing of a glass of wine or a piece of fruit or by
exchange of small presentbetween the young couplevows,and ceremonies church was doing best
establish,condemination of motive of marriage but support to marry church , doublestanderded,families
positions and putting an end to the relatitive liberality that characterixed the use of ritual in the late
middle age.

Rene Nelli has insisted however even thought young people sufficiently audacatious to take the
initiative forced recognition of their personal aspiration by their conscious recourse to ritual gesture and
words their mistrust of sexualityprevented the churchmen from accepting all the implications of their
doctrine of the bases of the sacramen of marriage. Jack Goody anthropologist viewing marriage as a
lesser evil justified by assuring the survival of humanity to the end of time even increase the chances of
wealth devolving to the church?these somewhat machiavellian aims reinforced the churchmen,s fear of
sexuality and of the female body and led them to accumulate abstacles to conjugal life.set themselves
up as judges of sexual practices even within the bonds of marriage and claimed that only they could
pronounce on the legitimacy of sexuality .were the laity so easily persuaded?

Jean-Louis-Flandrir has shown,churchmen established a calender,in theory very limited of the times
when a couple could have sexual relations withour effect of these prohabitations ,repressive literature
of the penitentials stripulating the punishment appropriate for each possible infraction,is quite another
affair,even it was belived by church and a duty of men who is faitfull to confess her guilty once in a year
at least,laterGregorian Reformer of his vows of chastity and of her sexual purity – a man who had
renouncced founding a family and given up all sensual pleasures,nenetheless,a number of priest still
kept concubines and maintained their progency in 13th cen.

[Lamentation de Mahieu] priest work from [Boulogne] forced by council of lyons 1274 to decide
between his women and his sineecure,speck to the difficulty of choosing between secular aspiration
and the obligation of the ecclestical stage.there is no doubt that-the presenc eof so many clerics living in
a pseudonarital state[without mentioning the priest skilled at seducing their beactiful
parishioners,Montaillou led the laity to judge priestly incursions into the quck sand of sexual and
conjugal morality[cum grano salis] or even,like the [fabliaux]and the tales,to salute them with joyfull
mockery.

Laity family order adjusted to a sexual apprenticeship and the trial sex but to later generations of
churchmen and more scientific observers they seemed rather much to ask of the young [self-
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
restraint]how can we reconcile the severity that families establishment of their children was concern
with the permissiveness of certain forms of amorous courtship?how was it admissible that the young
vassal learning the exercise of arine with his lord also be initiated inti the delight and torment of love by
lady of castle?or maid and knight in forest,admtting him into her bed offering her body for all the game
of love except one[Fors un preganncies],it was the women who guided the proceedings and set the
uncrossable threshold between dream,desire,and possession,the fact remains that their families
tolerated adventure of the sort ,this obligate us to look closely at our evalution of familial matrimonial
strategies they did not exclude inclination,nor apprenticeship and sexual play,as long as the group kept
ultimate control when the body and the wealth of the weomen was invested in another families rest
were affair of church and poets.

At the heart of the medieval house was the bedchamber it was there that the women lived-where she
worked,conceived,gave birth,and died,we still know little about the biological life of the married women
or about the effect on her body and her behavior of functions assigned to her.

First marriage [outside the aristocracy] where girls were married at a very early age ,married at roughly
the same age at a relatively mature age.central middle age and changes took place 1200 france
aristocracyand the urban patriciate married their own daughters when they are barely
pubescent.cannon law avarage 12 or 13 permitted engagement,even femails saints[14th cen upper class]
rarely informed before they were on large scale.

Avarage age of merrige is not unified even since an average of 17 or 18 can be seen even after
demographic pressure for somewhat deferred marriage.[Fabliaux] widely explits the theme of unequal
ages in marriage between a graybeard and a tender young thing.even after black death homogeneity of
[florentine catasti] avarage of 18 year in girls urban might delay for one or two years,and rich in advance
15year,from 1340 to 1530AD 136 brides min age of 17.2 year 1500 florentine one year later in
comparison of 1400.wher eon the other side merchant bourgeoisie an avarage of 27 year for men,
important point is that 10 year of separation in age of male and female.at last totally unsymmetrical
situation.

Aristotle and morelli thought,s influnce masses [Giovanni Morelli] man need to wait till he not get
maturity but women on the contrary need to be given to a husband young,some contemporeries give
there daughters at very early age order to established his authority over household and to engender the
handsomest children.

In florentine families 1st child bore before the ei ght month after the marriage is good indication of
rigorous serveillance that their families excercised over these young womens because before the
exchange of neptial ring husband can,t meet with bride.some marrage even take long gap in marrage
and 1st child birth because of non-phsiological maturity of women,and some in very early age give too
many births few french and italian among those very hight fertility rate,1462 burgher,s wife from aris 29
year old gave birth of 12 children,s in before being widow his 13 yea r of matrimonial relationship show
less gapes and rapid pace,on the other hand a florentine women of 17 year married want minumim 10
children,s and she reached 37 year of age one more than french peasent women of modern era,
Medival mentality familty and condition of women
marrying off daughters very young thus had a noticeable effect on the overall fertility rate and on the
total number of births by lowering female age at marriage,femilies sought,with varying degrees of
awareness t fill the terrible gaps made by the age fearful death rate.a minimum at of 40 for women we
get from that period.

An avarage of 7 childrens were produced by florentine couples whether their life together was
interrupted by the pre-mature death of one of the spouces.french limousin avarage intergenetic interval
is close to 21 month avarage of 700 florenntine birth,the period even fall to 18 if we eliminate
exceptional intervals evidently due to the husband absence on business.or unification till fertility
period,limoges conceptions followed one another more rapidly than two or three centuries later.in
practical terms,this meant that a woman was prenant or had just given birth was newly churched for
nine month out of every eighteen.

Ancient prohabitation fear of spoiling the fetus,in particular after quickening, only a venial sin after the
time of [Albertus Magnus] toward middle of 13th cen but it was a sin all the time ,even if the mother
brest-fed her infant for the birth of a younger child risked shortening the nursing period ,hence the life
of its elder sibling.

Вам также может понравиться