brutal
2006-11-15 13:50:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by bev 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There appeared to be many marriages taking place without witness or ceremony in the 1500's. The Council of Trent was so disturbed by this, that they decreed in 1563 that marriages should be celebrated in the presence of a priest and at least two witnesses. Marriage took on a new role of saving men and women from being sinful, and of procreation. Love wasn't a necessary ingredient for marriage during this era.
Years later, the Puritans viewed marriage as a very blessed relationship that gave marital partners an opportunity to not only love, but also to forgive.
Many people hold the view that regardless of how people enter into matrimony, marriage is a bond between two people that involves responsibility and legalities, as well as commitment and challenge. That concept of marriage hasn't changed through the ages. Hope this answers your question.....Flo
2006-11-15 21:58:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by flo 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pre-colonial it was pretty loose. Often you could just declare you're married and it was considered done.
2006-11-15 21:57:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kacky 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
1700-1800
"...young girls were often married by the age of 13 or 14 and if women weren’t married by the age of 25, it was socially humiliating. marriage was mostly for economic benefits, not romantic situations..."
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/HistoryGals/Chloe.html
"...in the early 1600s ministers were required to keep records of all burials, christenings, and marriages. by the mid-1600s persons wishing to be married by license had to go to the clerk of the county court. marriage consents had to be filed for persons under the age of 21..."
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/VALib/v48_n1/derrer.html
"...laws against interracial marriage had existed in some states since colonial times, but the number increased after the civil war..."
http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/topics_fs.pl?theme=16&search=&matches=
the founding fathers and gay marriage...
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200404/rauch
"...during colonial times and until the emancipation proclamation, slaves were not permitted to marry...."
"...a religious ceremony was secondary to a civil ceremony in many colonies...civil magistrates were given authority to perform marriage ceremonies...common law marriages were common..."
http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=461
marriage & it's customs in early america...
http://genealogymagazine.com/coloandma.html
"..during the early history of the united states, a man virtually owned his wife and children as he did his material possessions..."
http://www.wic.org/misc/history.htm
married women's property laws in the 1800s....
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/awhhtml/awlaw3/property_law.html
"...because the common law stripped women of their property rights when they married, wives became vulnerable when their husbands died...in colonial america the majority of husbands left no wills, leaving their wives unable to support themselves...
in these cases, courts granted widows a minimum of one-third of their husbands' real estate, called "widow's thirds".... however, a widow could not own the property in her own name; therefore, she could not sell or will it, but could only live off the rents during her lifetime...."
http://www.gale.com/free_resources/whm/trials/griffith.htm
2006-11-15 21:55:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You had to know how to spell.
2006-11-15 21:58:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by red baron 1
·
0⤊
0⤋