By Giselle Acosta
Relationships are complicated in any era. In the Mediterranean region of late medieval Europe, they took on a uniquely legal nuance. The rights of women in domestic situations varied widely depending on the woman’s and the relationship’s legal status. Nevertheless, it seems to have been a universal truth that women’s well-being depended on the favor of the men in their lives.
Within the medieval hierarchy, married women undoubtedly had it best. Their legally recognized relationship somewhat balanced power between the two parties. This relative equality is evident in the statement of Alayseta Paul. Paul wrote that after her father became terminally ill with the plague, he wrote a will that named his wife as his “universal heir” and divided his fortune between his two daughters, including Alayseta, in the event his wife died.
This testimony suggests intimate relationships between men and women who were legally bound by birth or marriage. They were equal enough that at least some men would recognize female family members as full and worthy heirs. Alayseta’s father designating her mother, her sister, and herself instead of male relatives as heirs implies he respected them as near equals.
Even so, recognition like that was only received after the death of the male head of the household. During a man’s lifetime, every object used by the women in his household legally belonged to him. For example, one posthumous inventory stated that the deceased had owned a corset worn by his widow, Laurencia. Laurencia’s husband never wore a women’s garment, but in the eyes of medieval law it had legally been his.
Situations like this tell modern viewers that women in traditional family arrangements had power and financial independence, but only after the death of the nearest man. While their father, husband, etc. was still alive, women legally had nothing of their own.
Although married women and daughters of married couples were ensured financial independence after a man’s death, unmarried women in intimate relationships were ensured nothing at all. Many women lived under that threat, since concubines were fairly common in late medieval Europe.
One contract from 1390 details the existence of a concubine named Alasacia Raymbaude, who received a donation from her lover, Anthonius Auctor. The official purpose of the document was to thank Raymbaude for the “many services and benefits” she regularly provided, which probably included a child. However, Auctor reserved the right to take back his donation at any time if she didn’t “do good” (bonum aget).
This phrasing reflects the instability many medieval women in unofficial intimate relationships faced. Though they were often accorded possessions on a case-by-case basis, they had no legal protections like married women. They had no claim to their paramours’ estates after their deaths, which meant they had to constantly submit to their male lovers. If they did not, their lovers could write them out of the will and plunge the women and whatever children they had into poverty.
Unsurprisingly, the women with the least rights in medieval intimate relationships were slaves. Chattel slavery was common in the late medieval Mediterranean. Most slaves were women who were captured in Eastern Europe and forced to perform domestic and sexual labor. Their status was perfectly legal and religiously acceptable at the time, as the pope decreed that pagans could be enslaved and forcibly converted without sin.
One record of a slave named Anna provides insight into the value placed on female slaves. In the inventory, Anna is listed alongside real estate instead of domestic objects. This suggests that her monetary value was deemed greater than everyday objects and more comparable to vast parcels of land.
Two lessons can be learned from this information. For one thing, female slaves typically performed the same labor – domestic and sexual – as free wives and concubines. For another, their labor was believed to have significant value, as Anna’s placement in the inventory implies.
However, that value did not override the subhuman status they possessed or the inhuman treatment they received. Slavery automatically created an imbalanced power dynamic where the male owner had complete control over the female slave. As a result, female slaves completely lacked the interpersonal power and monetary returns married women and even concubines enjoyed.
According to most Americans’ understanding of the Middle Ages, all women back then had no rights and were completely subjugated by the men in their lives. Though that is partially true, the reality was more complicated. Women’s domestic rights varied dramatically depending on their legal status. The wife and slave of a wealthy aristocrat led very different lives, after all. Nevertheless, in every situation women lacked legal recognition as independent entities for decades at a time, if not their whole lives. Perhaps instead of perseverating on that bleakness, we should celebrate the accomplished women who made the most of it.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment