Click here for some other book reviews :)
(Image taken from: http://www.amazon.com/Marriage-Renaissance-Studies-History-Sexuality/dp/0195144961)
My history teacher made us read "Marriage wars in Late Renaissance Venice” written by Joanne Ferraro , and I had to write a paper about it. Here is what it says;
Joanne Ferraro’s, “Marriage wars in Late Renaissance Venice” provides thoughtful insight into marriage drama of late renaissance. Marriages in renaissance Venice were a political contract. The disputes arising from such marriages were also somewhat political in nature. Although the cases and testimonies were scarcely honest, still they represented the courage and consolidation of the petitioners. On one hand, these cases represent an individual’s quest for gaining power, independence, honor, property, dowry and respect in society, but on the other, these disputes are an unmistakable exhibition of rebellion from the arranged marriage system in the hope of finding a better and more intimate marital relationship.
Because of its central geographic setting, Venice boasted a dense and diverse population and a constantly flourishing economy. The society was divided into many classes. Marriage was only for those who could afford it. This meant that only nobles and higher middle class were allowed to marry. Marriages took place only among the families belonging to the same social class. For noble class the restriction for endogamy was even stricter. The major motive behind endogamy was retention of power and property. Noble families often tried to make relationships with other families of power for expanding property. Bride often brought dowry with her.
State and ecclesiastical authorities both played a crucial role in marital arrangements. Venice was an increasingly secular society, in which state was an important institution. Whenever the petitions for separation or annulment were filed, both ecclesiastical and secular courts always tried their best to save the marriage. They did so for two different reasons. For secular authorities, the institution of marriage was an important means of retaining and enhancing power and position. For church, marriage was an unbreakable Holy union. The arranged marriage system was especially beneficial to the noble class as it helped them keep their property and political position secure. This is why the secular authorities always held a strong opposition against clandestine marriages. A Clandestine marriage was a marriage of choice undertaken mostly by a young nobleman, in order to save him from the trauma of a forced arranged union.
Earlier the church was more resistant to appeals for separation and annulment, but Tridentine reforms, council of Trent (Council of Trent that decreed a priest was required to perform the betrothal ceremony) provided Venetians with an opportunity of freeing themselves from undesirable marriages. Canon law itself stated the marriage was acceptable only when both parties extended mutual consent to say their vows. In spite of the reformations, both ecclesiastical and secular courts tried their best to save the marriage in each case in order to preserve their respective interests. While explaining their efforts for saving marriages, Ferraro writes, “Stability of marriage as an institution was vital to their social and political equilibrium” (21). This implies that protection of marriage was useful to both ecclesiastical and secular courts. The petitions went through easily and were more successful for ordinary people; noblemen had greater problems severing marriage ties.
The Petitioners presented numerous grounds on which they demanded separation or annulment. Stories of Forced union, sexual impotence, relationships with courtesans and concubine and violence were common for demanding separation. The petitions were filed by both men and women, but mostly women started the process to protect their marital rights. Ferraro writes, “Women initiated 75% petitions for annulment” (25). Most applications came from middle to low class. In demands of separation on the basis of forced union, the forcing parties were usually the parents of bride to be. However, it is important to note that women filed these petitions in their 30’s or 40’s long after the death of the transgressors. Marriages were supposed be conducted under Tametsi decree, which stated that a priest from bride’s Parish must conduct ceremony. If a woman could prove in court that these rules were not followed during her marriage, then the marriage was declared null and void. Women also petitioned for separation from impotent and violent husbands and those with sexual disease. According to canon law, unconsummated marriage was invalid. Men petitioned mostly to save their honor, or property. For a man, being declared impotent was worse than being recognized as someone having an affair with a prostitute. Men under some circumstances, filed petitions to save the dowry they had received from their wives. In such cases, secular courts were partial towards women. Ferraro writes,” The Patriarchal court was a Woman’s court because the formal judgment from the church gave women leverage to recover their dowries, sometimes the only financial resource available to them.” (30) Men were less favored by the courts because they could leave their wives at choice, and find a new partner. They were independent; they could work and earn their living. Women, on the other hand, were completely dependent. This is one of the main reason for which the Court favored women. A woman had to rely on her husband for her survival. Husband was responsible for taking care of wife. A woman without male financial helper often ended becoming a prostitute. Prostitution was considered the worst fate that could fall on a woman.
“Marriage Wars in Late renaissance Venice,” tends to refute the old ideology of women being a helpless object. The Venetian women described in Ferraro’s book were courageous in speaking of and for their rights. They were far from being powerful, but they were strong, willful and well aware of their interests. Mothers were often behind the annulment petitions. The mothers depicted in the book were strong willed and determined which suggests that they enjoyed a certain high degree of power in their social circles. Women also had to be careful about their welfare because they did not have an independent means of survival. The petitioner or the affected women also showed an unusual change of attitude during their life cycle. They waited until they reached a mature age for filing the petition. It was easier for them to pursue the case, because old things were easily forgotten, and they could conveniently preserve personal interest by purposely changing stories. Venetian society was also a much closed society. Anyone could know about even the most intimate relationships between a husband and wife. Women could ask for separation from an impotent Husband, which implies that women were entitled to sexual satisfaction. Ferraro explains this by saying, “Women in these church investigations exercised a sense of enlightenment – to a satisfying marriage, to a satisfying sex life, to having children. Disclosing a man impotent was an important weapon for women.” (135)
Renaissance Society was an intellectually well developed society, but at the same time, it was a society of individuals looking to save their personal interests. In majority of cases, the petitioners tried to protect their property. The society was closed; people knew each other so there was frequent drama and gossip. Women were not the helpless figures in the marriage business. They did not accept an impotent man, or a less noble husband in marriage. While writing about the courage of these women, Ferraro says, “Some of them were adventurous willing to rebel against the arranged marriage system.” (102). Marriage was a business for both men and women. An element of preserving interest was always present in all the court petitions. However, at some places, it is also apparent that women wanted justice for the emotional injuries they had suffered from. Although Venetians widely accepted the arranged marriages, at times, they were willing to rebel. The marital disputes and court petitions are an example of this rebellion. As Ferraro writes, “Physical attraction and emotional love were not prerequisites for arranged unions, but couples desired them” (189). Sometimes such desires served as the most prominent precursor for filling a separation petition. There were many regulations in the society on the whole, but also there were many flexible loop holes through which people could find a life of their own choice and enjoy it in their own way.
If you enjoyed reading this post click here for similar posts
******************************************************************
