The Historical Child: Paidology; The Science of the ChildChrisman, Oscar
History
The Historical Child: Paidology; The Science of the Child
Chrisman, Oscar
Children; Manners and customs
of the bridegroom became surety for his conduct and those of the bride
for hers. A priest--when Christianity was introduced--blessed the union;
and after many points of law had been settled for the protection of the
wife under all circumstances, 'her relations wedded her to him.' But in
all these instances no mention is made of the wedding-ring, which came
later. The English, regarding the wife in her capacity of ruler of the
household, placed a ring upon her finger as a badge, not of servitude,
but of authority, as in the case of the consort of Ethelred the Second,
who before receiving the crown was anointed and distinguished by this
symbolic act of adornment."[207]
There was a time during the Middle Ages when betrothal and even marriage
took place at a very early age, even between quite young children. In
England boys could be married at fourteen and girls at twelve, but these
ages were sometimes disregarded and children were married at even
younger ages. Betrothals were made by parents or guardians for children
of very young age, one such case is on record as having been entered
into when the little girl was but four years of age, the child having
been given in charge to her future father-in-law. This custom was by far
most common among the upper classes, for, as a rule, the men and women
of the middle classes did not enter upon marriage till of more mature
age. These early marriages or betrothals were probably the result of
guardians having under their charge children who were heirs and so they
arranged the marriage to their own advantage or sold their rights for a
sum of money, and even parents were known to have sold the marriage of
their children to gain money.
The idea of the early Christians that marriage should not be civil but
religious gradually prevailed till not only was the ceremony performed
by the church alone, but also breaches of marriage vows were punished
not by the state but by the church. But this did not prevent marriage
from becoming a business affair, where the material advantages to be
gained were closely looked into and the amount of property or money to
be gained on either or both sides was the most important and chief
consideration. Nor did this prevent informal marriages, for men and
women did join themselves together without priest or religious ceremony
by a simple declaration that they would take each other as husband and
wife. This was not accepted by the church nor always recognized by the
state, but such unions did take place nevertheless.
"It is sometimes thought that in the Middle Ages men were always obliged
to hold to their wives for better or worse to their lives' end. There
are some grounds for this opinion, but it is not quite correct. The
Church did not allow divorce in the modern sense of the word; that is to
say, she taught that a valid marriage could not be dissolved; but
marriages could be, and often were, annulled on the ground that some
impediment existed which rendered them invalid."[208]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account