If you are going to engage the services, then you have to be prepared to enter fiscally into the marriage contract.
Sexual exclusivity was regarded as a commodity. As such, it commanded a price, which could be haggled over in the marriage negotiations.
Today, there is still a tradition in Western society for the groom to ask his prospective bride's father for her hand in marriage. During the wedding ceremony, the father 'gives the bride away'.
Gold is symbolically exchanged in the form of wedding rings. There is an expectation that the bride's father will also pay for the costs of the service and reception.
These norms contain the remnants of what was once a firmly financial transaction. The two men meet, not to bless a marriage in words, but to discuss hard cash.
For sale! One daughter with her virginity intact! This will be proved on the night of the wedding, when sex causes the bride's hymen to break for the first time. A few spots of blood will be the visible result.
The bride's father will ensure that his daughter is at the altar, ready to swear an oath before God (a situation of great power in Medieval times). Those vows maintain sexual exclusivity during the marriage itself.
All of this is why marriages aren't seen to be legal until they've been consummated. The words in the church are pretty much a promise to enter into this contract. The sexual act itself was the contract. That was the moment when the groom committed 'marito', thus taking possession of what he'd paid for.
And the payment? That's largely out of fashion these days in the West. It was the bride price. As a wife, she would owe her loyalty and allegiance to her husband, not to her father. In many ways, and at its most crude, the bride price was compensation for the loss of her labor and loyalty within her birth family unit.
It was also the groom displaying his own wealth to the father. He was called the suitor. That comes from Old French again. It meant 'follower or attendant', but within a very specific sense. We'd think of it more as someone who looks after a baggage train now. Suitors provided suits. Think three piece suite - furniture; suit - clothing; penthouse suite - posh living quarters; or en suite - adjoining rooms.
The prospective groom would 'press his suit'. Today, as back then this means to ask for a marriage. But back then, he really did need to have a lovely suitcase full of goodies. This was the bride price that he was going to give away to her father.
If he could afford that much to marry her, then he could keep her and her children comfortably too. If the bride price wasn't big enough, then the father was within his rights to turn the man down in favor of a wealthier one.
Bride price may have largely gone away in the West, but the traces remain. There's still a vague expectation, fading now in post-Feminist society, that the husband will be the bread-winner. He has to pay maintenance after a divorce and for his children.
There's also the high cost of an engagement ring. It's usually the woman who wears it. It's traditionally the most expensive item of jewelry she will ever possess. It's the modern day equivalent of the bride price being paid.
Upon receipt, she has entered into a betrothal - a pledge to enter the contract. In short, her services have been engaged and payment made.
Comments
JoHarringtonMar 30, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 10, 2013
kateMar 10, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 8, 2013
MonisMasMar 8, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
It's an hilarious book. I really do recommend it. I just wish I knew the name of the pub!
Edit: Oh no! I've found the opening pages on-line. It was Budapest, not Bucharest. :( I'm so sorry!
MiraMar 7, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
Unfortunately I don't still have the book to check for you. It was so good! I sent it to my friend in Meath though. :(
MiraMar 7, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
I'm looking forward to your review; and I'm glad to have inspired something. :)
MiraMar 7, 2013
Elizabeth Gilbert makes some great points, too, about marriage, in her book Commitment. You've just inspired me to take another look at it and write some sort of review.
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
RalpapajanMar 7, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
However, don't write us Brits off just yet. The Europeans, as a whole, have survived two moments of near annihilation to my knowledge. Once when the last major Ice Age reduced our numbers to critical levels, and then again in the 14th century, while the Black Death did its worst. We've crawled back each time.
Plus if Britons did start breeding like rabbits, we'd soon be in trouble. Some of the nobility might have to give up their vast estates, because the cities and towns are already dangerously over-populated!
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
WiseFoolMar 7, 2013
It's odd that the transactional facet of marriage has changed from money changing hands from bridegroom to bride's father, to truck loads of cash greasing the palms of the 'wedding industry'. I will never understand why people who are about to embark on a life together, with all the financial burdens that's going to entail, would think it's a good idea to blow thousands on one day. So baffling!
JoHarringtonMar 7, 2013
And thank you for your insights here.
BrendaReevesMar 7, 2013
JoHarringtonMar 6, 2013
I've heard an argument to state that it's the rise of Capitalism which changed this. They wanted to monetize romantic love.
In what way would you say that marriage is a business proposition?
BrendaReevesMar 6, 2013