Wedding in the Middle Ages

30
Marriage of Bohemond I and Constance. End of the 15th century
Marriage of Bohemond I and Constance. End of the 15th century


Marriages were rarely concluded for love, so there was little happiness in them. At least human. But the economic one was enough. Economic interests played an important role in marriage negotiations. Whether it was ruling kings or peasants, marriage solved a number of problems - increased family wealth, provided for offspring and resolved conflicts, including wars.



This does not mean that the couple lacked affection, passion or sexual attraction. Often this all arose later, but love rarely came. And the couple certainly did not live happily ever after. Both kings and nobles and peasants had low life expectancy back then.

Marriage


Generally speaking, throughout most of the medieval period, the legal age of marriage was 12 for a girl and 14 for a boy. As you understand, this is primarily due to the physiology of the reproductive systems. Although some boys got married only after the death of their father. Pure pragmatism - the father dies, the inheritance goes to the son, with his wealth more girls will agree to marry him.

Noble women sometimes had the option of not marrying until age 24, but this was rare. Wealthy orphans, heiresses and widows often became wards of the king. And these women or girls could marry court men who wanted to increase their wealth and lands. A lord or king could sell his ward's marriage to the most suitable candidate.

Peasants tended to marry according to their age and status, preferring to choose healthy women who were good at bearing children and healthy enough to work alongside them. Before marriage could take place, it was necessary to obtain the lord's permission. If peasants married outside the lord's domain, they paid a fine.

By the way, as now, then wives took their husbands' surnames. But the opposite also happened. For example, when the bride's family was more influential and famous.

Before marriage, one more mandatory procedure had to be followed - a virginity test. If the bride remained chaste until the wedding night, then the groom could receive more gifts, and his family would treat the girl better. Virginity testing was very different. And a physiological examination, and drinking water with amber, and all sorts of fortune tellers, etc. The lady could cheat, go to the doctor, who would put leeches in her private parts, which allegedly somehow masked her loss of virginity.

The couple could not always marry. And there could be reasons for that. You know, the priest asks the guests if any of them know the reason why these two cannot be together. And at the last moment someone bursts into the church and shouts: “I know the reason!” Like in the movies. Or he could simply write this reason on a piece of paper that was hung before the wedding. If the argument was suitable, then the marriage was prohibited.

These reasons could include:

• blood relations;
• monastic vow of one of the spouses;
• treason;
• violence;
• serious crime;
• fasting – at this time the church did not enter into marriages.

Clothing and jewelry


Until the 16th century, wedding rings in medieval Europe were worn on the ring finger of the right hand. Then they changed it to the left one. Usually, an oath, words of love and fidelity were engraved on the rings inside or outside.

Rarely did peasants buy a new outfit specifically for a wedding. It was expensive. Usually, wedding clothes were the best clothes that the bride and groom had.

The bride's veil was often worn, but it was part of her everyday wardrobe, and not something special. White dresses, associated with mourning, were almost never worn. They preferred green - the color of young love, and blue - a symbol of purity. Material: cotton or linen. Rich brides could afford dresses made of velvet, satin and silk.

The men didn't have much choice. No three-piece suits, as we are used to now. Clean trousers, camisole, shirt.

Portrait of the Arnolfini couple, Jan van Eyck. 1434 London National Gallery
Portrait of the Arnolfini couple, Jan van Eyck. 1434 London National Gallery

Garters were worn by all women as part of their everyday clothing, securing the stockings just below the knee. The garter has become a mandatory element of the wedding. It was this that the guests tried to snatch before the young couple went to their bedroom.

And yes, guests and priests followed them. And they looked. “Oh times, oh morals!”, as Cicero would put it. Although in Ancient Rome they did not see this.

Wedding traditions


When the newlyweds left the church, the guests showered them with money. After the wedding ceremony, the bride received a ring, and the groom received a stocking or dress sleeve. These gifts were considered intimate and hinted at the upcoming wedding night.

They gave the bride a child in her arms, wanting her to give birth to more children. At some weddings, children were replaced with rabbits, which could then be eaten. But it is not exactly.

More often than not, the choice of best man or witness at a wedding was not a relative or friend, but the best fencer. Allegedly, he guaranteed that the wedding would take place. And he could stab someone who was against her. But this is my version.

During the early Middle Ages, priests did not conduct the ceremony. The couple simply said their vows in front of the altar. The man stood on the right, the woman on the left. Sometimes it’s the other way around, if the bride’s family had a strong advantage over the groom’s side.

All sorts of different things


Briefly about what you can’t imagine a wedding without.

No expense was spared on the wedding feast. For example, the wedding feast of the Italian merchant Francesco Datini and Margherita included: 406 loaves, 250 eggs, 100 pounds of cheese, two quarters of ox and 16 mutton, 37 capons, 11 chickens, 2 boar's heads, an unspecified number of pigeons and game, local provincial wines. But it was quite modest compared to the feasts of the royal families.

If the couple was poor, their families and friends brought food for the feast itself, and helped with things and money to equip the house for the feast and a new life. Now they don’t bring food, but they give gifts.

Wedding in the Middle Ages
Peasant wedding, Pieter Bruegel. 1568 Vienna Museum stories arts

The bride's dowry was provided by the parents and guardians. A large dowry made a woman more attractive as a potential wife if she was otherwise not so pretty. A commoner's dowry included household utensils, tools, furniture, clothing and livestock. If the husband died or the marriage was annulled, the dowry was returned to the bride. Then it passed to her sons. If the widow remarried, the dowry was returned to the remaining family of the first husband.

The husband gave a gift to his wife after marriage. Most often these were women's jewelry and furniture.

Guests and priests at some weddings were also given gifts that emphasized their status.

Well, where would we be without flowers?

Roses and lilies are the main choice. The petals of these flowers were scattered at the wedding ceremony. To make the smell stronger, guests specially trampled the petals. Wedding wreaths were made from rosemary, a flower that symbolized fidelity and memory.

In general, a lot remains from those times, not only in Europe, but also here. Something, of course, like witnesses to a wedding night, seems out of the ordinary to us.

Medieval marriages were not without problems - there was a possible large age difference, and there were economic reasons. But still, the weddings of those times continue to fascinate and intrigue us, as did the era of the Middle Ages as a whole.
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -5
    12 March 2024 06: 44
    Marriages were rarely concluded for love, so there was little happiness in them. At least human.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqvaQqyd3-Y
  2. +1
    12 March 2024 07: 51
    “This does not mean that the spouses lacked affection, passion or sexual attraction. Often this all arose later, but love rarely came.”

    As far as I understand, the very concept of “love” in the modern sense appeared later than the Middle Ages, so, IMHO, it is not applicable in this case.
  3. +9
    12 March 2024 08: 17
    As for this list of reasons for banning marriage, it was for commoners and for the “middle class”.
    For example, incestuous marriages were prohibited for them in the Middle Ages. And for the most chosen ones there were dynastic and intra-dynastic marriages. And they took an example from ancient times, explaining everything about that same Jupiter and the bull, what is allowed for who and who is not allowed. In place of Jupiter, Cleopatra and her marriage to Ptolemy XIII were taken as an example.
    But soon all European dynasties quickly turned out to be relatives who “had” each other and from such blood marriages arose, for example, the “Habsburg Lip”
    By the way, for example, Bach married his second cousin, she gave birth to a bunch of children and they all grew up without any deviations. Well, it's like who's lucky. If we move on to today's Europe, we can notice the trend of a growing number of dramatic feature films about incest between sister and brother. Will the anomalies return voluntarily? Likewise, the Catholic Church will soon approve of this if it has approved marriages to homosexuals.
    1. +7
      12 March 2024 08: 27
      Quote: north 2
      So the Catholic Church will soon approve of this, if it approved marriages to homosexuals
      The Catholic Church will approve the coming of the devil, just to preserve the flock and the income it brings them
      1. +2
        13 March 2024 09: 42
        It always makes me laugh that no matter what we talk about, some colleagues always bring the Catholic Church into it. We're talking French fries and we're throwing the Catholic Church into the mix. We are discussing travel to the stars, and there is probably some fault in this on the part of the Catholic Church. Now, if I realized that these are always the same people, I could draw some conclusions. laughing
        1. +1
          13 March 2024 10: 51
          Quote: Decimalegio
          We are discussing travel to the stars, and there is probably some fault in this on the part of the Catholic Church
          Journey to the stars is not at all for the Catholic Church. And these flights are in spite of her, and not thanks to her
          1. 0
            13 March 2024 13: 57
            I see it's always you. So my conclusions turned out to be correct. I'm sorry. Did some priest try to molest you? laughing
            1. +1
              13 March 2024 13: 59
              Quote: Decimalegio
              . Did some priest try to molest you?

              For now you're pestering me with stupid questions and comments.
      2. +2
        13 March 2024 15: 07
        It is interesting that politics in the colonies was soft precisely where the metropolis was a Catholic country (France, Spain, Portugal), in contrast to Protestant England.
        Well, we must not forget that Russians from the Moscow principality/kingdom, and Lithuania and Poland, who managed to escape or rebel on Turkish ships and get to Catholic states, received help in returning home.
    2. +4
      12 March 2024 20: 58
      Comrade, North, there were excesses with dynastic marriages. From a complete ban, remember when Yaroslav’s daughter became the French queen? And then almost encouragement.
      Complete madhouse.
      I didn't know about Bach.
      Actually, incest is a topic for specialists.
      Anecdote to the topic
      - Dad, I decided to get married
      - It’s a matter of who?
      Anna through the house.
      You, a man, will understand me. By chance I met Ankina's mother and...
      And Lenka?
      Is she your sister
      Okay, but is Katya from the neighboring village?
      I met the whole street there.
      The son, upset, went to his mother.
      - I can’t get married. Father, before me, I met the mothers of all the girls I knew.
      -Marry whoever you want. Father is not a hindrance: he is not your father
  4. +8
    12 March 2024 11: 04
    Wedding in the Middle Ages

    Wedding in the Middle Ages where? Obviously, the author believes that from 500 to 1500 throughout Europe, the institution of marriage was unchanged and wedding rituals were identical. Meanwhile, for example, in medieval France there was no single marriage ceremony; each region had its own traditions.
    If peasants married outside the lord's domain, they paid a fine.

    For some reason the author missed another point - Droit du seigneur.
    1. +7
      12 March 2024 11: 36
      Quote: Dekabrist
      Droit du seigneur.

      Did it even exist?
      Quote: Dekabrist
      Obviously the author

      will “delight” us with his research for a long time to come fellow
      1. +6
        12 March 2024 14: 50
        Did it even exist?

        This is a debatable issue. More likely no than yes. But if the author has undertaken to cover “a wedding in the Middle Ages,” then the topic must be covered in full, and not at the elementary school level. Moreover, the author mentions the merchet tax in the text. According to some versions, this is just compensation to the lord for Droit du seigneur.
        1. +1
          13 March 2024 08: 47
          Fuente Ovejuna, of course, is not the primary source, but it can be assumed that arbitrariness in this area existed, perhaps not in some legal form, but simply as the right of the strong.
          1. 0
            13 March 2024 09: 10
            Fuente Ovejuna, of course, is not the primary source, but it can be assumed that arbitrariness in this area existed, perhaps not in some legal form, but simply as the right of the strong.

            A similar “plot twist” is found in the biography of Geraud d'Aurillac, written in the 10th century and in later works.
            1. +2
              13 March 2024 09: 16
              Fiction, as you noted, is a shaky source. However, King Ferdinand II of Aragon in the Sentencia Arbitral de Guadalupe (Article 9) abolishes the right of lord quite officially.
              1. +1
                13 March 2024 10: 35
                “Fiction, as you noted, is a shaky source. However, King Ferdinand II of Aragon in the Sentencia Arbitral de Guadalupe (Article 9) abolishes the right of lord quite officially.”

                Is its official abolition proof of the existence of a right :)

                It turns out that it was.
  5. +3
    12 March 2024 12: 25
    Without more or less examples, the article looks like a movie storyboard, instead of a movie.
    I would have preferred a few colorful fragments from historical sources, or even illustrations in the form of pieces from fiction, such as the "legend of Ulenspiegel", than a dry listing of everything that could be described on the topic, but was not described.
    1. +7
      12 March 2024 14: 56
      the article is like a movie storyboard

      The article is an obvious rewrite of some foreign language article for blondes from the Internet. There are a lot of resources like Maui Wedding Blog. So the author chose according to his level.
      1. +6
        12 March 2024 15: 07
        Quote: Dekabrist

        The article is an obvious rewrite of some foreign language article.

        Yes, it seems that then it’s clear why there are so few illustrations. In the original source they could be specific, right down to the photo bank.
        1. +6
          12 March 2024 15: 22
          Yes, it seems that then it’s clear why there are so few illustrations. In the original source they could have been specific

          They may not be present at all in the original source. And independently selecting illustrations already requires knowledge that the author does not have. If he had even basic knowledge on the issue, he would not have included Van Eyck’s Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Wife in the article.
          1. +2
            12 March 2024 15: 49
            Quote: Dekabrist

            They may not be present at all in the original source. .

            Well.. for blondes this is not an option. There should have been ring flowers.
            1. +5
              12 March 2024 15: 59
              Well.. for blondes this is not an option. There should have been ring flowers.

              This is if an article for blondes is written by a brunette. What if the author is also blonde?
              1. +5
                12 March 2024 16: 13
                Quote: Dekabrist
                What if the author is also blonde?

                wassat I can’t even imagine such horror belay
  6. -1
    12 March 2024 16: 55
    Good afternoon, author, for minty reasons, I swallowed the material
  7. +1
    12 March 2024 16: 57
    Good afternoon. Everything is very interesting, but I doubt that the veil was everyday wear
    1. +2
      12 March 2024 18: 14
      Quote: Astra wild2
      so that the veil is casual wear

      Hmm. What about the veil? laughing The difference between them is very relative. Rumor has it that even the ancient Romans wore it. Of corresponding origin. bully
      1. +1
        12 March 2024 21: 52
        Has eco led us to Van Dyck? And the topic is so interesting, with gender issues and the topic of the day. The brunette feels good, everything suits him, the scoundrel, but variations with white do not suit the unfortunate blondes at all. Have you ever seen a blonde in a wedding dress on the catwalk or in a fashion catalog? - That’s it, it’s easier to work in contrasts, and in the light of the latest trends, dark-skinned models successfully parade in snow-white dresses. How can we not recall here the extreme duchess in the role of the bride, she was very convincing, although this is more likely to be done by the house of Dior and Elizabeth’s grandmother. The choice of tiara, contrary to the wishes of the bride (I really wanted ours), is impeccable, no one will ever be able to do that. In the Middle Ages, the symbol of wedding decoration was the headdress, not the dress, apparently due to the high cost and small choice, and the first illustration is very appropriate here. In the northern countries: Sweden, Denmark, it was precisely the crown, very elegant, made of a silver alloy, further, if possible, and crowning the maiden head, regardless of origin. To the south, of course, there is a wreath, most often orange blossom, mother orange tree, or neroli, you can call it whatever you want, which in no way will spoil the delightful aroma, comprehensively revealed and played up by everyone and everything, including Dolce and Habana (they will not be mentioned at night) , and let us finally dwell on the myrtle tree as a symbol of marriage. Now everything is much simpler, the latest trends even offer a classic suit with a pencil skirt and a veil that covers the bride right up to the floor, the cute orange blossom wreath remains; why not, very pragmatic. Everyone chooses for themselves, the main thing is that the process and the result bring joy, we can safely leave Van Dyke or Eyck, it will do just fine, just go for a walk.
        1. 0
          12 March 2024 21: 58
          Sorry, change the mark at the end to an exclamation point! The comment is very long and does not provide any information!
  8. +5
    12 March 2024 19: 34
    But rich brides all seem beautiful to me. laughing