Wednesday, 11 April 2012

Gender Roles

This week in Medieval Europe we will look at the establishment of women within Canon Law, as well as women's place in society. Juxtaposing women such as; Eve, Mother Mary, Mary Magdalene and Joan of Arc are all important figures during this period. 

The role of women in Christianity is emphasised through Mary, mother of Jesus and how she - virginal - gave birth to not only the saviour but to a new age of believers and life.

What other female figures outside of the readings can you identify as being important in Medieval Culture? And what were your thoughts on the roles of such women aforementioned before? Were women in Christianity simultaneously revered and considered subordinate?
--Lauren

These readings cover medieval attitudes to women by revealing attitudes towards important women in Christian theology. Women were defined by their gender and sexual status – as maiden, wife or widow.  The power, sexuality and worth of women was both treated with suspicion and suppressed, and the authority of men emphasised. However, some women did manage to overcome these conditions. 

Bible:
  • Woman (Eve) created for man, out of man, to be a helper to man…before ‘betraying’ him and getting them both kicked out of Eden
  • Mary as the Mother of Jesus, worked with God and was ‘giver of life’ – opposite to Eve, who defied God and became the ‘giver of death’ (st Jerome). Virginity and purity emphasised
  • Mary Magdalene a sinner who reformed, became a leader amongst her Christian community in Marseilles, converting the local governor and performing miracles. Later lived in wilderness, saw angels etc.
Sexuality:
  • Abelard unsurprisingly is pro-sex…shows that the ideas he counters were common at the time of his writing the  letter (eg sex is not sinful just because it is enjoyable).
  • Augustine of Hippo very negative towards sex – marriage and procreation ‘makes something good out of the evil of lust’, defending marriage: good for creating children and companionship, lust, fornication, infidelity and adultery are all temptations of Satan.
  • St Jerome prizes virginity very highly – equates loss of virginity with Adam and Eve being expelled from Eden. Only acceptable states for women (makes no mention of men) are to be virgins or to be married.
Power of women/women in power:
  • Ancien Riwel demands nuns essentially hear no evil, speak no evil – modesty and demureness required.
  • Saint Scholastica apparently had the power of influencing nature – but used it for a petty purpose (to force her brother stay with her), a very negative portrayal. Her brother Benedict was nevertheless a good person, and gave her a good Christian burial.
  • Radegund may have established a convent, but was reliant on help and support of men to finance her convent, and for protection; women must be ‘taken under ward’
  • St Clare writes that women are weak and fragile of body, but willing to take on the same hardships as her male counterparts.
  • Joan of Arc first thought to be ‘deranged and deluded’ for boasting she could accomplish what the princes could not. Had to fight to be heard and taken seriously. Wore men’s clothing, suit of armour and rode with the men.
  • Christine de Pisan clearly outlines dominant thought at the time: that women were subordinate to men, and prevented men from being all they could. The minds of women were thought to be inferior, and not worth an education. Nevertheless challenges all these notions by use of reason.
--Sian

Women and the family 
In the Medieval era gender roles played a major role in society.  The Klapisch article is divided into four main categories the role of women, marriage, children and the church. 

1. Women:
Society granted no specific place for them in the hierarchy. As they were not knights or could they be religious leaders. Women were defined by their body, gender and her relationships with family groups.
The role of women:
  • Be obedient to their husband, father or care giver.
  • Used to reconcile families and groups in society.
  • Responsible for maintaining the alliance between the two clans.
  • Husband comes first and her choices and opinions come second.
  • To produce children and start the family line.
  • Order and punish servants if they could be afforded.
Women had little rights:
  • A widow a right to one third of her husband’s estate.
  • Loss of rights and possessions when their husband died.
  • Less control over their wealth as they were under the control of their husband.
  • They must be obedient to their husband.
  • Women could be kidnapped or forced into marriage or the convent.
2. Marriage:
Marriage was used as a way to end rivalry as two families joined together, forming a peace pact. A woman may be given to a man as a way to offer reconciliation. An example of marriage being used as a peace treaty, is in the eleventh century when the king of France Henry I married a bride in Kiev to form an alliance.  In Florence in 1300 the party of whites formed an alliance with the blacks as a man of the Cerchi family married to an Adimari bride. 
It was not uncommon for marriage to occur between blood relatives. At times brothers and sisters would marry if fortunes required it.
When women got married it involved two transfers the transfer of the bride to the new family and the transfer of wealth. Goods or money were given by the husband or his family to the family of the bride in exchange for the loss of their daughter. Later these gifts were given to the bride herself to assure she was maintained after her husband’s death.
By the twelfth century the dowry value from the wife’s family overcame the value of the husbands.  Women after their husband’s death would often loose what she had bought and what her husband had given her.
The age of marriage varied between social classes.  In 1200 the aristocracy tended to marry their girls young at 12 and 13 at which Cannon law permitted. Rural classes tended to marry their daughters of at 17 or 18. In Florentine bourgeoisie between 1340 and 1530 136 brides were married at the average age of 17.2.  Whereas young men tended to get married even later with an average age of 27.
3. Children:
Children were necessary in marriage in order to establish the male line. After the birth of their first child other children would follow at a rapid place. In 1461 one wife become a widow at 29 after having 12 children in her 13 years of marriage. Pregnancies occupied more than half a woman’s life before 40. Families would have between 10-12 children. However not many of them lived long, a child had a 1 in 2 chance of making it to adulthood.
4. The Church:
The Church had a great influence on marriage and the role of women in the Medieval era. The Church was against blood relation marriage however in 1215 the fourth Lateran Council lowered the requirement for marriage in the family from seven degree to four. The church also forbids the use of contraception as it would prevent new life.
Duties of the wives in the Medieval era range from forming alliances, to keeping the peace to raising the family to obeying the husband. Although women from different classes have different roles and needs they have one thing in common they are both seen as below men.
-- Steph D. & Erika

Marriage Making
In the high Middle Ages, marriage was matter of diplomacy and wealth, not love or mutual attraction. Marriage forged an alliance between two lineages, reinforced by the exchange of money, goods and property and the creation of offspring. The wife's job was to maintain peace between the two families and have as many children as possible.
Women often married into families of a lower social status, bringing with them a dowry for their new husband’s family. Women became a burden on the men of their family, who had to come up with a dowry in order to marry them off. Boys brought money into the family by way of marriage and girls took money away from it.
In addition, the control of any property a women inherited was transferred by default to the closest male relative, then to their husband when they married. Women were financially worth less than their husbands, in spite of any superiority of lineage and the inheritance they brought into the marriage. Their lack of financial worth could be equated with their lack of personal worth at the time, except for when it came to procreation. IN contrast, men could run businesses, own land and be self-sufficient.
Due to this dependency on men, girls were known to be married off, at the guidance of their fathers or brothers, as early as twelve. Men got married later, at an average age of twenty seven, when they had reached a certain social standing and level of power. Girls in lower classes got married an average of five years later than those coming from wealthy families or the aristocracy.
Marrying earlier meant that a women could have more children which, at a time where child mortality was very high, was very important, especially in ensuring that the lineage carried on.
Source: Christiane Klapisch-Zuber, 'Women and the Family', in Jacques Le Goff, ed. The Medieval World, (London: Parkgate, 1990), pp. 285-312.
--Jenn

Some questions to think about :
  1. Do you think sexuality was understood in a positive or negative way?
  2. What impediments does Klapisch-Zuber see to studying the lives and experiences of medieval women?
  3. How does Klapisch-Zuber describe the duties of the wives in the Middle Ages?

22 comments:

Unknown said...

Heya, Chelsea here, sorry if I'm not signed in...Google and I aren't friends this week.. I think that sexuality was mostly viewed in a negative light during the Middle Ages. The church definitely played a massive role in establishing this attitude, it seems like they deemed it as a sort of necessary evil. In holding virginity in higher esteem than marriage or otherwise, the church probably entrenched the notion that sex should not be enjoyed or practised often, and should be purely a means of procreation. It seems like sex was regarded as a selfish indulgence, Augustine's quote, that 'If they do not have self control, let them marry', demonstrates that sex was regarded as an altogether unholy experience, and that the most diligent and pure Christians should resist their desires and all sexual temptation. His comment seems to deride women in general, scorning those who chose the path of marriage and hence, sex. That said though, the churches later actions seem to be slightly at odds with the notion that marriage and sex are bad or unholy. The later decrees in regards to the rights of women in marriage show the change in the churches position on the issue. The introduction of laws to prevent young women being married off without consent, or giving 'consent' at an inappropriate age were definitely a step in a more liberal direction. Whether these legislations were adhered to or not, they probably do show the slow change in the churches attitudes towards sexuality and marriage.

Levi King said...

Hi all,
Chelsea made some interesting comments above. In regards to the belief that 'pure' Christians were ones who resisted their desires and sexual temptation, it seems that this is an overwhelming belief that runs through the readings.
However, it must be noted that one of the most powerful women seen in the Christian faith is Mary Magdalene - as Anderson and Bellenger put it - she was a "repentant sinner...seen as 'everywoman'" It appears that despite the powerful message of redemption which is embodied in Mary's life, sexual desires are still seen as 'unclean.'

Mathew Gashi said...

Hi everyone
I found the question about whether women were both subordinate and revered at the same time very interesting. The Genesis story makes women responcible for the original sin but through Instiuttions of marriage and veneration of Mary (mther of God) there seems to be some kind of balance. I found Abelard's comments on pleasure interesting and I would probably tend to agree with him. What do other people think

rosslyn said...

Hi all, to answer the question on other women, Eleanor of Aquitaine seemed to have a strong presence became queen of France and England collected lands and power no problems in divorce, jump from one king to move on and up. Lead her two sons to fight against their father king Henry II. And another who survived the male arena hildegard of bingen, she wrote medical texts ,healed people, had visions was a mystic and she called herself a theologian these gifts would have made a few men wary?
Two very different women, one using her beauty and sexuality and the other her core religious beliefs. Both successful in a time when women were completely dominated by men and to disobey was a crime. Following laws from st Jerome and augustine with thoughts of virtues only found in men and then the under estimated Mary Magdalen her following was huge even to this day in france. Klapisch talks of the christian society having no specific place for women which she calls feminine condition. Here women are which but home makers a wife or a maid.
a home maker wife maid

Nathaniel Shirley said...

I find it interesting that despite the patriarchal structure of the Church and the apparent prevalence of the belief that women are spiritually as well as physically inferior to men that St. Clare referred to the Church as being a sort of 'Holy Mother', a temporal counterpart to God, the 'Holy Father' of Heaven. This makes me believe that as the Church was personified as a woman that the relationship that existed between the reigning Pope and the Church was supposed to symbolically resemble that which was supposed to exist between a man and his wife, with the man acting as the woman's 'head', through which she may attain salvation, just as a man may attain salvation through Christ. So it may be that what at first appears to be a rare view of women being portrayed as something grand and holy in fact further perpetuates the belief that women are subordinate to men.

Nathaniel Shirley

rosslyn said...

Hi all, sorry about the gibberish in my blog having problems with the Internet service where i am, I keep losing bits cheers Ross

Kellie Youngs said...

Hello everyone from Kellie,
Hope you all had a lovely Easter break. I have to say mine was not made joyful by this weeks reading. Every day I give thanks for the enormous freedoms granted to me in this life. I don’t think I would feel that way if I had been born an aristocratic, or wealthy medieval women. They seem to have had no control over their own bodies. Marriage, sex, conception, even their daily routine was all controlled by their family, husband and the Church. Even the right to consent to marriage seems a rather illusory one as they were made to marry when they were still children. Maybe it was better to be born a peasant farmer if you were a woman.

medievaleurope said...

Don't despair Kellie - aristocratic medieval women knew how to make the most of the power they were given. And I think the second reading somewhat misrepresents the issue of - for example - dower, by trying to sum up the whole of medieval Europe. It wasn't always gloomy, and it wasn't a direct race to the bottom as some parts of the article seem to suggest. In mid-late 13th C England, which I happen to know lots about, women were actually in direct control of an enormous amount of land and several of the key earldoms because of inheritance and/or widowhood. I recommend the works of Louise Wilkinson on 13th C English countesses as a starting point for broadening your reading on this. She has written a great book called Women in Thirteenth Century Lincolnshire (available in the library); it has been reviewed in the Journal of British Studies by my friend Emma Cavell, who did her DPhil at Oxford on women of the Welsh borders at this time, and her review is available on JSTOR if you're interested.

medievaleurope said...

I think Nathaniel might have hit on something with his interpretation of the allegorical figure of Holy Church...

Lauren Joyce said...

Matthew:
The dichotomy between women being revered and suppressed is indeed interesting. I found that the line between "acceptable" female stereotypes and "unacceptable" is very blurry, not only for the appraisal of Mary Magdalene as Levi pointed out, but for the VIrgin Mary/Eve contrast. One must question as to whether the Bible's authors and/or analysts have been to harsh on Eve given the course of history. But the evolution and growth of the Cult of Mary (Mother of God) I think is important to emphasise how the "ideal woman" is to be portrayed in Medieval Society.
In a sense, what Nathaniel touched on in his post was fantastic!

ErikaNic said...

Here are some other points to think about for the tutorial. What Klapisch-Zuber said at the beginning of her piece about the risk of writing such an article from a certain perspective. That one might come across as prejudice and biased, even more so if the person making the argument is a woman herself.So is there a way for a woman to put her ideas forward about how bad the time was for women without sounding like a woman scorned?
Another good point which is made is that no matter how much information is gathered, our view of women throughout this period can never be exact. This is because the evidence we may find could have a biased nature of their own.

Anonymous said...

Did the role of women ordering and punishing servants extend to both male and female servants?

Tom said...

Ablard being the sexual deviant that he was did not surprise me with his thoughts on sex but I too think that sex or lust was viewed in a negative light for the most part. The inferiority of womens status was a little shocking but I found it interesting how fierce, strong and powerful Mary Magdalene is portrayed in the first half of the reading. I suppose its a small consolation that at least one powerful and intelligent women was documented and able t be revered.
-tom

Roman said...

Its interesting kathleen how you spoke of women making the best of their position. I think that making the best of where you are and working situations to your advantage is the best way to get your ideas across without sounding like a woman scourned. By doing so you take your power back without relying on others to give it to you.

Its also interesting how erika spoke about no matter how much evidence we have, we can never get a complete picture. It sort of reflects the bias involved when we superimpose our life experiences over another. At first glance it seems like a womans life was all gloom and doom, but the world has changed so much that we are aware of possibilities today that people of medieval times may have never imagined! Its kind of like me living the lifestyle if a millionaire. I can imagine but i dont really know what its like so not being a millionaire isnt a loss to me and i go on making the best of my life. But if i did know what a millionaires lifestyle felt like, then reflect on the way i live now, then it feels kind of crappy. This sort of ties into the idea of women making the best of their situation. Perhaps a womans life wasnt as bad as we may think? I can just imAgine hundreds of years from now, people looking back at the hard life we are living today by future standards.

I also enjoyed abelards more liberal view. It kind of seems like at times, any thing that brings pleasure or happiness is sin which to me sounds a bit screwy. I like how abelard takes a broader view on the subject of sex. I also admired the story of mary magdalene as a woman who is so sure in who she is and her relationship with god that she marches to the beat of her own drum. Her strength comes from within which is very powerful i think. We definitely get a sense of that in the reading

ErikaNic said...

Hey Nathan, according to Klapisch-Zuber the women did punish and order around both the male and female servants. This would be allowed as the only families that had servants were wealthy, meaning that these particular women had power over the male servants.

Perin said...

I found it interesting to see how women were depicted to have a superior connection with Christ by suggesting that women are more closely tied with the earth, unlike men’s closer connection to the spiritual. Hence women have a more difficult time living a virtuous life than men because they are less spiritual in nature.

Gian Tymms said...

I found Nathaniel's post very interesting in terms of it giving a very different perspective on the Church, (I had always understood it to be simply the continuing presence of Christ on earth: defined in "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church").

I agree with Roman's perceptions of superimposing a view based on incomplete evidence and of relativity in evaluating the lives of women, in the middle-ages. It is important to note that gender roles were in no way uniform across the class, region and the middle-ages for that matter.

medievaleurope said...

Georgia says:
'I think it is very unsurprising to read that a woman's worth at this point in time was defined by the male's in her life (e.g. father, husband, etc.) as this idea has been prevalent throughout most of history. It is interesting to note that most of the women who managed to break away from the authority of a male and specific gender roles are still somewhat 'controlled' through religion. Women were viewed as property, with their sole purpose being to produce and assist in the raising of their children.'

medievaleurope said...

If you are interested in following up readings on medieval or renaissance women now or in the future, you may like to note Feminae, a useful site which can be searched for relevant publications. It's an initiative of the Society for Medieval Feminist Scholarship.

Bronwyn said...

i just wrote out a really long detailed post and it didn't submit it.

i can't write it all out again, it was really really long and detailed. *sad face* basically i really liked what Roman said and i think we were looking for the bad aspects of being a woman compared to the good aspects of being a man.

I would have liked to see then, to balance that out, the bad aspects of being a man and the good aspects of being a women. Our discussion and interpretation of the text felt really one sided and thus i found it was really not a very reliable or truthful representation of life for both genders during that time as a whole. We looked for the bad, and that's what we found, and if we left it there, and drew our conclusions from that alone, then I feel what we found would be worthless.

ps, It's Bronwyn here :)

medievaleurope said...

Really great comments from both of you. It would have been excellent to get to this stage of the discussion - although I think it's understandable not to do so when trying to discuss these particular readings, which tend to follow exactly the line you've set out. In fact, this is one of my issues with the readings for this week in general...! If there's anyone interested in putting forth some ideas in this vein, please feel free to continue on this thread!

medievaleurope said...

If you are looking for primary sources on women's lives, you might be interested in Epistolae, an online database of medieval women's Latin letters (normally with English translation).