Over the next weeks, Dr. Schrader will examine the status and opportunities for women in medieval society in more detail. She
opens this series debunking common misconceptions about the Middle
Ages with a look at the notion that women, particularly wives, were mere
"chattels" in the Middle Ages. It is a topic she has written about frequently and revisits here.
It
is still common today to find people (even novelists writing about the
Middle Ages!) claim that "women were mere chattels in the Middle Ages."
The persistence of this notion is incomprehensible to me as it was very
patently NOT true. Indeed, as the noted French historian Regine Pernoud
makes exquisitely clear in her comprehensive book on the subject, Women in the Days of the Cathedrals
(Ignatius, 1969) women in the Middle Ages enjoyed substantially more
status and legal rights than women in the so-called Renaissance and
Early Modern periods -- indeed until the 20th century.
It
is true that they did not enjoy the same rights and privileges as
21st-century women in advanced, post-industrial, Western societies, but
they were not at any time in medieval Europe (400 – 1500 AD) “chattels.”
Let me start by reminding you what the word chattel means. Webster’s Dictionary, Second College Edition, states that a chattel is: “a movable item of personal property, as a piece of furniture, an automobile, a head of livestock.” In short, a chattel is by definition property, an object without rights. It is something that can be disposed of, sold, or destroyed by the owner. Humans who are property are called slaves. Women in Medieval Europe were not slaves—of their husbands or anyone else. Period.
These women -- sold at auction by ISIS -- are "chattels." This was unimaginable in the Christian Middle Ages! |
I could end this essay here, but the persistence of the misconception induces me to go a little farther.
Nothing increased the status of women in any period and anywhere in the world so much as the spread of Christianity. In fact, it can be argued that Christianity
itself was the single most important factor in increasing the status of
women in Europe and around the world to this day.
I'm not talking here about “equal rights,” but about the fundamental fact that nothing degrades or devalues women more than polygamy. Fatima Mernisse (a Muslim Professor of Sociology)
notes: “Polygamy…enhances men’s perception of themselves as primarily
sexual beings and emphasizes the sexual nature of the conjugal unit.
Moreover, polygamy is a way for the man to humiliate the woman…. ‘Debase
a woman by bringing in another one in [to the house].’”
(Mernissi, p. 48) The Christian Church diligently opposed polygamy and
succeeded in eliminating it from Christian society before the start of
the Middle Ages.
Divorce in pre-industrial societies disproportionately benefits men and harms women. I understand that modern (Western) women want the right to divorce, but modern women in advanced, western societies have the benefit of birth control, education, equal opportunity, and many other hard-won rights. In the Middle Ages, when women did not enjoy all those privileges/rights, divorce was (and
in many non-Christian societies still IS) used overwhelmingly by men,
almost never by women. Divorce enables men (but not women) to discard
partners who have grown old, fat, less attractive or simply fail to
produce children. In the absence of polygamy, which allows men to simply
add another wife to replace the one they’ve grown tired of, divorce is
the best way for men to ensure their personal satisfaction with their
sexual partner at little personal cost. The fate of most repudiated wives, on the other hand, was (and is) dismal.
Thus the Christian Church’s insistence on marriage as a life bond was a truly revolutionary innovation that dramatically increased the status and financial security of women. If a man could not simply toss a woman out and get a new wife, he had no choice but to try to come to terms with the wife he had. His wife was elevated from interchangeable sexual object to life-time partner.
Yes, men, particularly wealthy and powerful men, in Christian kingdoms in the Middle Ages still found ways to set aside their wives, but the Church’s stance made it more difficult, time-consuming and expensive. The system wasn’t perfect, but it was a whole lot better than what had gone before—and still prevails in many parts of the non-Christian world.
3
Last but not least, contrary to what you have heard people say, the Roman Catholic Church was not unremittingly misogynous.
Let's
start with the fact that the mother of Christ was venerated above all
other saints in the Middle Ages. The rosary evolved, and Mary’s status
as an intermediary between man and God was propagated. Medieval
Catholicism thus gave to women a status unknown in any other religion:
Mary was revered not for her fertility or her ability to satisfy man’s
lust, but for her virtues: love, generosity, kindness, forgiveness, etc.
Furthermore, the Virgin Mary inspired imitation, and soon there were a
host of other female saints revered for their piety and devotion to God
even onto martyrdom.
Christ holds his arm around his mother's shoulders in this lovely mosaic from Santa Maria de Trastevere, Rome |
On
a more mundane level, the Medieval Church offered women places of
refuge from the violent world around them. Convents offered women an
opportunity to pursue scholarship and avoid the often wretched life of
wife and mother. Abbesses were usually aristocratic women with excellent
connections to the powerful families of their society. As such they
could be politically influential and carried on correspondence with
everyone from the pope to kings and emperors. Some
transcended their roles in exceptional ways, such as Hildegard von
Bingen, who is revered to this day as a composer, writer, and
philosopher. But even less exalted and less well-connected women in
religious orders could do things like run orphanages and hospices that
were above and beyond the purely domestic or commercial activities of
their secular sisters.
The women in Dr Schrader's novels are medieval women in all their complexity,
power, and independence without ever stepping outside the roles and
societal norms of the period.
For readers tired of clichés and cartoons, award-winning novelist Helena P. Schrader offers nuanced insight into historical events and figures based on sound research and an understanding of human nature. Her complex and engaging characters bring history back to life as a means to better understand ourselves.
Find out more at: https://www.helenapschrader.com/crusades.html
I wonder if you could do a series on the status of slaves in muslim Outremer, or even in like Turkey and the Ottomans and such since they also come under the Medieval period. I only ask because what I have read seems to be very sympathetic to the muslim slave trade. I get that great power could be achieved by some slaves but this was rare, most remained slaves. Of course we should not forget the child slave soldiers of the mamluks and the Ottomans. Please elucidate on this matter and link it to the Christian responses, Christians would shirk former slaves because of the shame attributed to it.
ReplyDeleteI'm distressed that you could interpret my comments as sympathetic to the slave trade. It is, in my opinion, one of the most abhorrent features of human history. It continues to this day, and it makes me physically ill to think about it. I would find it very hard to talk about the slave trade because it agitates me so much. I would also note that the Italian states massive involvement in the slave trade is one of the major reasons I remain hostile to these states focused exclusively on profit. I have consistently attempted to point out that the Arab states were slave economies, which I see as evidence of how debased they actually were. All the alleged achievements of the Muslim "Golden Age" were carried out on the backs of slaves. I'm really cable of being calm and "academic" when I write about this, which is why I would rather not write about it.
Delete