| Medieval
Domesticity: Home, Housing and Household 25th Annual Medieval Studies Conference Saturday March 12-Sunday March 13, 2005 |
![]() |
| Abstracts |
| “All
Those Goods Which She Brought to Me”: What
Might a Wife Get Back at the End of the Marriage? Janet Loengard, Moravian College In
a typical early 21st century English –
or American – household, a couple would
be hard put to name the “owner”
of most of the material goods in their home.
His? Hers? Ours? It would have been easier in
medieval or early modern England: His, his,
and his. The common-law rule is well-enough
known: when a woman married, all her chattels
and money became the absolute property of her
husband. Nor did they return to her if he died
during her lifetime. However, existence of a rule does not mean
that affairs were always arranged to conform
to it. I have elsewhere examined the question
of how husbands regarded the chattels in their
homes. In their wills, only a few men referred
to household objects acquired over the course
of a marriage as “ours”, and, except
where restrained by custom or pre-marital arrangement,
most men felt free to dictate the devolution
of such items. But yet there was ambivalence
about things perceived in some way to have been
a wife’s; it was not uncommon for a man’s
will to provide that his widow was to receive
“all those goods which she brought to
me” at marriage and it was even more common
for a testator to ensure that the widow retained
her paraphernalia; the two categories could
overlap. Building on that material, this paper asks
what a widow might expect to receive or retain
at the end of a marriage because she had contributed
it or because it was seen as uniquely hers.
As to the first category, I know of no rule
of law or custom requiring or even suggesting
that women’s goods be returned to them
if they survived their husbands (even in the
Northern Province, where a woman received one-third
of her late husband’s chattels, she could
not choose what to take.) Provisions for return,
then, seem to have been either simply an individual
testator’s choice or an arrangement included
in a private antenuptial agreement. In attempting
to identify such goods, wills – both men’s
and women’s – are important sources
of evidence. While it is true that married women
rarely made wills, those that exist are significant
since bequeathing an object necessarily implies
the belief that one’s husband will consent
to the bequest, a consent necessary for its
validity. One reason for the belief may well
be that the object belonged to the testatrix
before her marriage and that at the time of
the marriage she had reserved the right to devise
it, although only a few wills identify bequests
in that way. Even more important are the men’s
wills providing for the return of goods to their
widows – sometimes naming chattels quite
specifically but all too often only categorically,
obviously referring to a no-longer-extant inventory
or schedule again probably drawn up at the time
of the marriage. The issue is complicated by the existence of the second category of chattels, paraphernalia. A named sometimes went to a widow because it was considered paraphernalia, an article so personal to a woman that it remained to her at her husband’s death rather than going to his executors. While the common lawyers would have limited paraphernalia to a woman’s necessary garments, it is clear that neither the church courts nor most husbands accepted that position; for example, rosary beads and girdles – even those made of precious metal – were defined as paraphernalia by testators and church courts alike. But other possessions were not as easy to pigeonhole. Jewelry was probably not included. What of two important pieces of furniture: the bed and the chest, or coffer? A long tradition, particularly in the Province of York, held that a widow was entitled to her bed and her chest as part of her paraphernalia, but there was considerable opposition on the part of common law judges and treatise writers. When a will left a bed to a widow – and many wills did – what was the theory behind the bequest? Was it seen as hers by right, or because she had once owned it? Or was it simply a recognition that a woman needed a place to sleep? Was a chest paraphernalia or had it been hers as a girl, brought to her new home when she married? At least one will refers to the chest a woman had “as a maiden”, but unless the will specifies, there is no definite answer. Nonetheless, the categories of paraphernalia and goods owned before marriage, taken together, do form a core of the personal property a women was most likely to receive at a husband’s death, perhaps in accordance with a prenuptial agreement – most common among women entering a second marriage. The chattels might be supplemented by additional bequests in many cases, offered as a choice in others, or given grudgingly by clearly unloving husbands whose wills left their widows nothing else.
|
· Home · Conference Program · Registration · Hotel and Travel Information · Acknowledgements |