Ger-marriage-msg - 4/2/99
Period Germanic marriage customs.
NOTE: See also the files: p-marriage-msg, p-customs-msg, religion-msg, p-sex-msg, birth-control-msg.
************************************************************************
NOTICE -
This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.
This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org
I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.
The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.
Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).
Thank you,
Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous
Stefan at florilegium.org
************************************************************************
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: "JoAnn Abbott" <josco at theriver.com>
To: <perrel at egroups.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 08:18:00 -0700
Subject: [PerRel] Re: German Marriage customs
I have been digging through books I have not looked at in a long
time....
The "mund" marriage; this was the most usual mode of marriage. The
bridegroom was responsible for concluding the contract, while the bride
was just an object of the contract between the groom and her family. Her
consent carried no legal weight, although not infrequently her wishes
were taken into consideration. The contract between the bridegroom and
the brides family, for which the term "Verlobung" (betrothal) is used in
later folk laws, committed the brides family to hand the woman over to
the bridegroom and gave him marital authority (mund) over her. The
bridegroom was committed to take the bride home and set up a marital
community with her.
At the betrothal the groom had to pay a "bride-price" or at least a down
payment to the brides family. This bride price later became the dowery,
and was later given by the bride herself, and served as the foundation
for her widows subsistance, which was not provided for in the law of
succession. Breaking of the betrothal had legal consequences.
Infidelity of the bride during the betrothal period was considered as
adultery. If the bridegroom or bride married another person, a fine was
payable.
The wedding ceremony gave the groom authority over the bride.. It took
place in ceremonial form, the bride being handed over to the husband by
symbolic actions such as setting her on his knee and other rites
customary at an adoption. The marriage was consumated by the bride being
led to the grooms home, which was followed by the marriage repast and by
the couples repairing to the marriage bed in the presence of the
relatives (cohabitation). The leading home and cohabitation made the
bride a wife with all that involved with respect to the family, house and
personal status. On the morning following the first night, the husband
handed the wife the morning gift in recognition of her status as mistress
of the house; the morning gift mostly comprised cattle, a harnessed horse
and weapons. In later times, it often consisted of other objects, which
again became part of her widows fund.
There was also marriage by capture, by consent and by unilateral
disposition, if anyone is interested?
Lady JoAnna S.T.
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: Laura C Minnick <lainie at gladstone.uoregon.edu>
To: perrel at egroups.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 02:51:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [PerRel] Re: German Marriage customs
I just wanted to point out that the Germanic marriage customs are by and
large pre-Christian, or in the post-conversion period where the Church
was still negotiating some concord with local customs.
It is interesting to see some of the carry-over in customs. Dowries are
pretty universal, though in most of the cases in Western Europe, the
dowry goes right to the groom's family- most likely not refundable if the
marriage sours. It is a different payment, called the _dower_ (or _dos_
in much of feudal France) that is set aside for widowhood. This payment
is made by the groom (or his parents) and while he lives he may manage
the properties and monies for his wife, but he may not sell them or
otherwise alienate them from her. And her name is on the title. It is
considered separate from a bbride-price, which goes to he father and is
not her.
Interestingly, the _morgengaube_ is still as custom in some places (one
might argue that the honeymoon serves this purpose in the modern world-
Laura), and is generally held as the groom's acknowledgement that the
bride was sufficiently virginal to suit him. Quaint custom.
Pace,
Father Abelard
-
Laura C. Minnick
University of Oregon
Department of English
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: Janna G Spanne <janna.spanne at kansli.lth.se>
To: perrel at egroups.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 17:33:37 +0200
Subject: [PerRel] Re: German Marriage customs
> Interestingly, the _morgengaube_ is still as custom in some places
>(one might argue that the honeymoon serves this purpose in the modern
>world- Laura), and is generally held as the groom's acknowledgement that
>the bride was sufficiently virginal to suit him. Quaint custom.
Sweden is one such place.
In the modern world, of course, it has nothing to do with virginity:
couples here frequently marry when they are about to have their second
child and figure that being unmarried parents is too much of a
bureaucratic hassle. Basically, the "morning gift" today is a romantic
(and often quite expensive) way of saying "I'm glad I'm married to you",
and, of course, a nice marketing stunt for the jewelers.
/Janna
(since Catrin has no concept of 20th century Sweden)
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: "JoAnn Abbott" <josco at theriver.com>
To: <perrel at egroups.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 17:28:01 -0700
Subject: [PerRel] German Marriage customs
Marriage By Capture
The match-making effect of the capture of women can be explained as
follows: the folk laws made no distinction between capture and abduction.
According to the Lex Salica (486 A.D.to 506 A.D. estimated as being
written, the law of the Salian Franks), capture was any removal of a girl
from the power of her guardian (holder of authority) against his will,
without any importance being attached to the will of the captured girl.
Capture resulted in initiation of a feud by the womans family. The folk
laws imposed a fine on the abductor, but initially did not require the
return of the woman to her family; this could only be impelled by the
feud.
If avenging action was not taken or was unsuccessful, the "marital
community" persisted because it was not the capture, but the manifestly
established conjugal community which created the marriage. In the case of
marriage by capture or abduction, the wife lost her right to inherit from
relatives. The husband had no "mund" (Latin: manus) over her unless he
acquired it subsequently from the holder of authority. The marriage
resulting from abduction was more or less a marriage by consent.
Marriage By Consent
The marriage by consent (Friedlehe) was based on the free will and consent
of the man and woman. In this case, in contrast to concubinage, the
marital community was established by publicly leading the bride home and
co-habitation. There was no wedding ceremony, because the woman was not
under the mans control, nor was a bride-price paid. But on the morning
following the first night, the wife received the morning gift. The wife's
legal position relative to her husband was much stronger than in the "mund"
marriage. For instance, she had the right to take unilateral action for
divorce. Marriage by consent appears to have been chosen primarily by
women of rank who did not want to place themselves under the control of a
man who was possibly of lower rank, and when a man "married into" the house
of the womans father. This marriage by consent permitted the practice of
polygyny by the nobles, since in addition to a mund marriage the man could
have any number of "free consorts" (Friedel). A marriage by consent could
be transformed into a mund marriage if the hsband subsequntly paid the
mund-dowery. This form of marriage by consent resembles the "morganatic
marriage" (:left-handed marriage") which made it possible well up into the
18th century to conclude marriages with a woman of different rank without
her being raised to the husbands rank or acquiring the right to inherit
from the husband.
Whew! Marriage by unilateral disposition and more commentaries later,
gotta cool my fingers!
JoAnna of the Singing Threads (S.T., get it?)
PS- the teasers were because no one seemed to react to my missive about
blasphemy laws, so I wanted to be sure.
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: "JoAnn Abbott" <josco at theriver.com>
To: <perrel at egroups.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 22:09:19 -0700
Subject: [PerRel] Re: German Marriage customs
And now the continuing saga of How Grandma Got Married.....
Unilateral Disposition!
(sounds exciting, no?)
Marriage by unilateral disposition was made possible by the fact that the
freeman was given control over the unfree woman by the law of property.
(See Laura, I found some more by myself!) This gave the lord control over
the conjugal relationships among his bondmen and bondwomen, which at
least in the Frankish era was regarded as marriage. Moreover, the
freeman could also take his own bondwoman, who was subject to his
authority also in sexual respects, as his consort. This gave rise to
concubinage. Originally it was certainly not a marriage, but where there
was suitable possibility of termination it could take on marriage-like
features. Such marriages were based on the command of the man.
There was an earlier belief that the mund marriage was the only one
considered legitimate by the scholarly community, but this has been
recently disproved. However, the mund marriage was the most important
legally. The husband had full control over the wife. He also had the
rights of punishment, including death, repudiation or sale in the case of
genuine need. Only the wife was committed to monogamy and marital
fidelity and generally she also had no dispositive authority over the
children, had no legal capacity, and the husband took her property under
his control, administered it and enjoyed the benefits. He was also
liable for any offence committed by his wife.
The rights that were vested in the husband, above all the right of
polygamy, were challenges to the church to intervene. In point of fact,
the church should have recognized marriage by consent, which required the
consent of the woman to marriage, as the only legitimate type of
marriage. But the church's degradation of marriage by consent to
concubinage and fornication had its origin in the structure of this form
of marriage, which was in contradiction to the Christian notion of
marriage. Christ had raised monogamous marriage to the dignity of a
sacrament, i.e., an unbreakable bond between a man and a woman in a
physical and spiritual community. Marriage by consent, on the other
hand, favored polygamy because in addition to his mund marriage the
husband could have any number of "free consorts" (like Charles the Great
and Himiltrude). Also the ease with which it could be dissolved, the
frequent abstention in Frankish times from public conclusion of a
marriage, and the equal status of man and wife brought about by marriage
by consent were contrary to the Holy Scriptures according to the then
prevailing view. All this explains the influence exerted by the church
on the recognition of the mund marriage as the only "right marriage"
Impediments to marriage
There were few impediments to marriage, among these were sexual
immaturity, peacelessness which made it impossible to take the bride home
in public; marriage among very close relatives (with a persons own
issue), and polygamy on the part of the woman.
Over and above this, there were a number of countermeasures to
hinder marriages regarded as contraventions of the law or a disturbance
of community order. The latter included marriage of the wife or bride to
another during his lifetime, marriage of a free woman and an unfree man
(only the freeman could take his bondwoman as consort), and occasionally
marriage between members of different tribes.
In Frankish times there was a law introduced into the secular law
that forbade marriage of a woman without her consent. (I guess it wasn't
too bad after a while) Marriage over time gradually became more of a
mutual desire, and women were given the right of self-betrothal.
Gradually the position of the holder of authority was taken over by a
chosen guardian, the "Trauvormund", who gave the couple to each other.
He became the one who asked if both parties consented. He could be
either a layman or a member of the clergy. In the 12th century church
regulations forbade marriage by a layman and made participation by a
priest and posting of banns obligatory. The introduction of the consent
of the woman to marriage and the lack of any public form of concluding
marriage however, then resulted in declarations of consent to marriage
made informally and without witnesses being regarded as valid, which led
to considerable abuses despite threat of temporal and spiritual
punishment.
The Tridentine Council of 1562, instigated by the Emperor Charles made
the validity of a marriage dependant on its publication by the church.
Braking a betrothal could only be done by act of council, and fines had
to be paid.
The couple had to wed within 3 months of the third posting of the banns,
and it had to be done in the church. The couple was to remain celibate
before the marriage as well, and there are documents that show fines
being paid for having a child too soon after marriage (seven months or
less).
Tomorrow- straw paiats for women and straw vests for men- find out what
they mean!
Lady JoAnna of the Singing Threads
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: "JoAnn Abbott" <josco at theriver.com>
To: <perrel at egroups.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 14:27:47 -0700
Subject: [PerRel] Re: German Marriage customs
Shame, shame, shame!
It is the time of the thirty years war, and depite the repeated reading
of the marriage laws from the pulpit of the cathedral, and the
encouragement of the local priest to follow these laws and not fall into
licentiousness and fornication, you have been CAUGHT!. If you are a
servent whose master has failed to provide seperate sleeping areas for
his male and female servants, he has to pay a hefty fine. But what are
we going to do with you? First , the local tipstaff or nightwatchman who
was charged to seek out all dark corners which might be a source of sin
drags you before the council with your lover. The permissive maiden then
had to stand before the church door wearing straw plaits on her head to
show her shame. Her seducer has to come to service on three successive
Sundays wearing a straw coat. Furthermore, the seducer has to push his
beloved through the streets of the town in a wheelbarrow while the
citizens throw garbage. Next, accompanied by the jeers of the watchers,
you have to plow a certain area of farmland.
Couples who had not practiced abstinence invariably landed in
prison. If they were willing to marry, the additional church penance was
milder. Instead of the traditional myrtle wreath, the bride had to wear
a wreath of straw, or, if the child was already born, it had to be held
in her arms during the ceremony. If the wedding was held during
imprisonment, the tipstaff accompanied the couple to the church. If the
bride had been convicted of several sexual offences, the wedding took
place in an inn or in prison. If the couple wanted to avoid the shame of
"being coupled at an inn", the wedding could take place in the church,
but only as a "Whore's wedding". Then, after the prison sentence had
been served, two tipstaff "wives" had to escort the harlot, adorned with
a straw wreath and straw plaits, to the marriage altar, not through the
bridal gate but through the side entrance (black gate). Under the
Prussian code of 1640, brides who unlawfully wore the bridal wreath had
their plaits cut off and nailed to the pillory
Ain't true love grand?
Lady JoAnna S.T.
[Submitted by: Hank Harwell <cleireac at juno.com>]
From: Maryann Olson <maryann.olson at csun.edu>
To: perrel at egroups.com
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:54:36 -0800
Subject: [PerRel] Re: German Marriage customs
Greetings until all from Lady Gertraud von Wuerzburg.
These discussions of German marriage customs and marriage customs in
general have been very interesting to me. May I add some information I
found some years back.
Source: Erika Uitz, _The Legend of Good Women: Medieval Women in Towns
& Cities_, 1988, pages 14-15
During the early Middle Ages, marriage was recognized only for the
nobility and freemen:
Raubehe: Robber Marriage or elopement if
the bride cooperated.
Friedelehe: No contract. The husband was not the
guardian of the woman. Voluntary for both
partners. Dissolvable. No dowry. Worked
well for traveling merchants.
Muntehe: Marriage contract. Allowed wives of
nobility to be entrusted with ruling when
the men were at war or carrying out
official duties. Husband assumed
guardianship of wife and administration
of her immobile property. Wife received
the dowry. Morning gift after first night
together was mandatory.
Common Law: Governed dependent peasant populations.
Required consent from the landowner/lord
to get married. If from different land
areas, arrangements had to be made with
both lords so loss of service was not
experienced by either -- and disposition
of children had to be determined.
Uitz comments that early tribal laws excluded free women from public
office, as well as from representing themselves or appearing in court,
and administering their property.
Munt: Guardianship, including protection, representation,
and authority over.
Muntwalt: The guardian, either father or husband, or the
closest male relative in the line assuming
guardianship. Represented guardian in court,
administered and disposed of property, determined
punishments, give in marriage, and could even sell.
Uitz discusses the life of these women, especially within the towns and
the changes when "Stadtluft macht frei," town air makes free.
Mary Ann (Gertraud)
<the end>