Rites & Passages

Carnal pleasure was, in the opinion of the Church (that great progenitor of moralism), an invention of the Devil, linked as it was to man's fall from grace in the Garden of Eden. Women were of course to blame and, in vary degrees throughout the middle ages, they suffered as a result. Unfortunately sex was necessary for reproduction and so were women but, as the Church so righteously declared, to enjoy sex was wicked and to engage in sex just for pleasure rather than reproduction was tantamount to giving one's soul to Satan. Sex and the enjoyment of it were deemed mutually exclusive. Women, whether wives or daughters, were strictly supervised, instructed, inspected, suspected and in general reduced to such a level of subordination to the husband/father that the only way out was up. In the midst of all this, prostitution (surprise, surprise) flourished.

If a girl was capable of conceiving a child, she was ready for marriage. One of histories most famous child bride was Margaret Beaufort. She was thirteen when her only child was born (1457) - England's King Henry VII. Another example, although purely political - the marriage of Henry VIII's sister, Mary (age 17) to Louis XII, King of France (age 52). Fortunately for the strikingly beautiful Mary, the groom expired three months after their wedding, leaving her free to marry (in secret) her true love, Charles, Duke of Suffolk.

How binding was a betrothal? Try this - Isabella of Angouleme (1188-1246): Queen consort to King John. She was betrothed to Hugh de Lusignan, son and heir to the Count of La Marche when she caught John's eye. Her parents, seeing obvious advantages, connived with the Archbishop of Bordeaux, who quite happily set the betrothal aside and married the girl to the newly crowned King of England. No problem there except the bride was only twelve years old; the groom thirty-three!

Most marriages were arranged between families of the same social level and neither the bride nor her future husband were necessarily consulted until after the details were agreed upon by their respective parents. Contrary to popular belief, on her wedding day the bride received a third part of her husband's estate and if he died, it was hers. Jointure: Land owned jointly by husband and wife. If he died, the wife continue to hold it. Actually, a woman did better as a widow because married she had to, by law, obey her husband in all things and had no right to 'gainsay' him even to the disposition of her property.

Love was considered an insufficient basis for marriage and worse, could result in a 'disadvantageous alliance'. The best a wife could hope for was a kind husband who would inspire love. In 1393 the author of The Goodman of Paris, in his treatise on domestic management advised his young wife to emulate the behaviour of a faithful dog in order to please her husband! By modern stardards such a situation would seem intolerable but a surprising number of arranged marriages did succeed. Just as well since a divorce was viturally impossible to obtain; the social implications disastrous.

Heiresses were particularly sought-after. More of this another time.

Droit du Seigneur - In feudal times, the right of a lord to have sexual intercourse with a vassal's bride on her wedding night. [From French, literally: the right of the lord]. More Hollywood (Charlton Heston - The Warlord) than historical fact, this subject must be viewed from a feudal mind-set. If the mere mention of the phrase conjures up an image of a terrified virgin raped by a wicked lord, best stop now. That's where Hollywood and our modern, puritanical attitudes interfer with common-sense and objectivity.

1) In matters sexual, people were far less inhibited in those days, so it is doubtful if the bride reached the altar a virgin. 2) It is also doubtful if even a pig of a lord would risk alienating the very people from whom his power base derives. Assuming of course that the bride, groom, parents did not view the lord's interest as a compliment and an opportunity. That's worth dwelling on when one remembers that life was often a hand to mouth affair. 3) Chances are that the lord was married in which case we are talking adultery - frowned upon by the the church and not appreciated by the wife. 4) In canon law, rape was a serious offence unless of course the victim happens to be the wife. Raping one's own wife was by definition, inadmissible. An oxymoron like angelic fiend.

MEDIEVAL MYTHS DISPELLED

Everyone was short in those days … Edward I (1239-1307) [His nickname - Longshanks - says it all] Edward III (1312-1377) was well over six feet tall. Edward IV's (1442-1483) coffin was found and opened in 1789. His skeleton was measured at six feet, four inches! His grandson, Henry VIII topped six feet and in middle age was just about as wide! Mary Queen of Scots stood five feet, eleven inches tall. A remarkable feat (feet?) for a woman. Fortunately her second husband, Lord Darnley was six feet tall which may account for her initial attraction to him.

People died young … Eleanor of Aquitaine (82), Edward III (65), Cicely Neville (Duchess of York/Mother to Edward IV and Richard III) died age 80, Queen Elizabeth I (69)

Height and longevity were more a function of nutrition and good luck than anything else. Left to 'natural causes', individuals might expect to reach a great age, even by modern standards. Disease, malnutrition, war and civil disobedience, murder, execution, suicide, the elements; these were the killers, not a natural predisposition as might be supposed.

To illustrate the point regarding longevity, perhaps the most singular example would be 'Old Parr'. A farmer and commoner born in 1483, he lived through the reign of ten kings dying finally in 1635 at the ripe old age 152 years. Don't believe me? Check it out. He's buried in Westminster Abbey, compliments of King Charles I. Charles, as everyone knows, died well before his time, compliments of Oliver Cromwell and a marginal vote in the Commons!

London in the mid-15th century had 40,000 inhabitants, most of whom lived within the one square mile area known as the City of London. Personal hygiene as we know it today was totally unknown then. A bath was almost unheard of; Queen Elizabeth I bathed four times a year, whether she needed to or not! Chamber pots were emptied directly on to the streets from upper stories where the contents would often as not land on an unsuspecting pedestrian passing beneath. Dogs fought over kitchen scraps casually tossed or menaced the sick or dying lying unattended in the streets and alleyways. Rats were everywhere. Wooden clogs were worn which lifted the foot up and away from the debris but still it was necessary to walk with care around the bodies of dead animals and piles of refuse.

Efforts to eradicate the filth varied from district to district, depending upon the amount of money each locality was prepared to spend hiring carts and manpower to scoop up the refuse and deposit it in the Thames downriver from the Tower on an outgoing tide. Rainwater was used for drinking and most dwellings maintained a reliable catchment system.

Inland, a distance north of the Tower was a giant cesspool - The London Ditch - into which was delivered the city refuse. The bodies of suicides were said to have been thrown in too, a practice sanctioned by the Church who considered the taking of ones own life a heinous sin. Not surprising that family members ascribed cause of death to some form of accident rather than suicide. Nothing has changed in that department.

Pickpockets and scoundrels lurked in darkened corners and sidestreets and no one went abroad after dark. Brightly painted prostitutes plied their trade at all hours, often right outside the gates of churches where business was always especially brisk.

The moat surrounding the Tower of London is lovely green grass now, 100 feet wide but until Queen Victoria had it drained in 1843, it was a notorious cesspool filled with all manner of filth. And the smell! Diesel fumes today pale into insignificance against the odours which once pervaded all of London. In the absence of a reliable sanitation system, London during the Middle Ages was a giant open sewer and, although attempts were made at various times to remedy the situation, the truth was that the Great Fire of 1666 was probably a blessing in disguise.