...Back in the day you would think it would be the other way around. The man offering a big expensive ceremony for his new wife... So how did this tradition start?
2007-06-28 01:20:19 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Family & Relationships ➔ Weddings
This is a widespread tradition across the cultures.
Women had outnumber men population wise, so having a boy was better than having girls. Men have held position of power throught the centuries, whereas women had traditionally stayed at home and bear children but had little or no control over her own finances or life, who was taken over by her husband. In medieval times in Europe, for example, a family would "marry off" their girls. A men would consider what woman was better according to what the family offer. Some offer nobilary titles, land and money, so women will come with a "drowry" which was capital to be given to the prospective husvband in excahnge to marry her. In other countries families would give the man a goat, a cow or a horse. Families would relally have to build up the value of their capital if they wanted their girls to get married. In India, gifts are traditionally given to the groom nowadays.
In our times, the tradition has mutated in to "Brides family" pays for the reception, but it's roots come from centuries ago.
I'm sure that you will find more detailed info on the internet, but this is what I know.
Good luck
2007-06-28 02:11:08 · answer #1 · answered by Blunt 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
it's not the bride, it's the brides family. The tradition comes from other country's when the bride's family offered a dowry (chickens, a cow, some seed) to man to marry their daughter and un-burden then from having to take care of her. I KNOW it sounds awful, but this goes way back when most people were poor as dirt and feeding that extra mouth was a burden sometimes. They say the better the dowry, the richer the woman's family was. (say two cows instead of one), so it wasn't always about passing on a burden, but most of the time it was.
This got translated into different customs as time went on, but the tradition still holds true that the bride's family "traditionally" and "historically" pay for their daughter's wedding.
2007-06-28 10:09:44 · answer #2 · answered by ♥Mommy to 3 year old Jacob and baby on the way♥ 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It isn't tradition for the bride to pay for the wedding, but the brides father or family. I think this tradition came to be because back then having a daughter be married off was some sort of great honor. Girls were raised to be wives...of course back then weddings weren't nearly as expensive as they are today. Now I think the bride and groom should pay for it themselves.
2007-06-28 08:37:59 · answer #3 · answered by T L 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Back when the title and castle/grounds went to the eldest son etc. daughters were considered property. In fact, the statement "Who gives this woman...." is a throwback to those times, too.
Face it. Not every bride is a beauty - and back in the days of poor hygiene (and especially poor dental hygiene), there were a lot more "ugly" brides than there are today. So, to enhance the chances of a not-so-pretty bride getting married, you had to add more and more to her dowery (another throwback) and "hope chest" (still another throwback). The lavish affair was to show that the bride's parents could back up her dowery - which, of course, became the property of her husband - not the bride.
A good example of this is found in Shakespeare's "Taming of the Shrew" where Petruchio was offered some huge amount of money to marry Katherine, the shrew. Petruchio was penniless and had vowed to marry the first rich woman he could - regardless of what she looked like.
Now then, it was the custom for the MONEY AND PROPERTY to belong to the husband - but the household goods to belong to the wife. As can be seen in John Wayne movie, "The Quiet Man" (one of his very best). That's because household goods were considered part of her "hope chest" - usually a chest or trunk filled with dishes, bedding, linnens etc. Those belonged to the bride - for her entire life. Of course, she herself was property - so what's a few more sticks of furniture?
But money, lands, cattle, etc. those became the property of the husband - along with the woman herself.
We've come a long way, baby...
2007-06-28 09:30:12 · answer #4 · answered by Barbara B 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually I think it has something to do with the old practice of the dowry that came along with a new bride. The bride's family would pay the groom or give him gifts, I think this is the modern tradition that has developed from that old one.
You could wikipedia it though.
2007-06-28 08:39:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Personally, I believe that it stems from the fact that brides used to come with a dowry paid to the future husband. As part of the dowry, the parents of the bride paid for the wedding.
2007-06-28 09:02:34 · answer #6 · answered by Ari 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Have never heard of this tradition. But I guess it would be the negative side of the women's equal rights movement. Women wanting to be treated as an equal or earning more money then husband. I still believe in old fashion values that a man should look after a woman, open doors and treat her with respect, but hey that's just me.
2007-06-28 08:25:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
some sense of the women's family being so relieved to get an offer and have a girl married off.
2007-06-28 08:24:15 · answer #8 · answered by Sciencemom 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I personally think it should be up to the bride and groom to pay for their own weddings -
2007-06-28 08:25:35 · answer #9 · answered by ★★★ Katharine ♥♥♥♥ 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
because the WOMEN are the ones who REALLY want it to happen...so they're willing to pay to chain their guys down. haha.
2007-06-28 08:30:03 · answer #10 · answered by Pyromaniac 4 · 0⤊ 5⤋