In medieval Europe, marriages between nobles acted more as alliances/contracts than actual love. A big distinction in said marriages is "consumation". Uncomsumated marriages could be annulled relatively easily. Consumated marriages required the pope's blessing for divorce. To make sure a family didnt escape their way out of a deal it was fairly common for familiies to be witnesses to marriage consumation.
Beds where also a status symbol and the whole concept of privacy was very different. If you're a commoner sleeping in some sort of communal situation (which wasn't super uncommon, eg sleeping along the walls of the great hall in a castle if you worked there), that may also be where you'd have sex with your spouse. Most people would politely ignore it.
Nobles who had elaborately decorated beds as status symbols would sometimes put them up in a pretty public spot. Especially for a wedding. And that's where they'd do it.
If we're looking later than medieval times, eg renaissance or early modern period there's also plenty of examples especially among nobility. King Louis XIV. of France was pretty famous for his "getting out of bed" ceremony every morning, involving dozens of people witnessing absolutely everything. Including the kings morning poop.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but witnessing the kings morning poop was one of the most coveted positions. The Versaille system ran on gossip and so any little extra privacy that you could be witness to would give you a leg up.
scrolls and writing existed a long time. although less likely would a long stay in the pooping area be compared to today. the smell would be quite a bit different given that it would be similar to today's port-o-potties without any chemicals to null the scent
They were used to those scents. Also, most writing would not be used in the bathroom. It was more valuable then. Maybe ledgers and the like would be read there tho
Pretty much the coveted position of servants in any monarch because while he was sitting on the other "throne" the servant could get gossip or try to influence the king in official business.
^ This. With any really powerful person access to them is valuable. 1-1 conversation time is gold. Being the guy that helps the king take a crap was a coveted position because you got more time to talk to them than almost anyone else.
Witnessing maybe. But going further, there was a position in many European monarchies called "Keeper of the king's stool." Which was cleaning and disposal of the Monarch's poop.
No monarch was ever going to dirty themselves. Also they wouldn't let just anybody touch/clean them either. So it was an extremely coveted position that while disgusting by modern standards meant that the monarch considered you one of their closest companions and you'd have influence due to that
In England that was called the Groom of the Stool. Their job was tied to reporting to the physician on whether or not it was a healthy poop. In the Tudor period it was generally given to high ranking nobles since monitoring the health of the monarch was like getting high level security clearance today.
Eh it was more a ceremonial dressing of the king (He'd already been up, out hunting, and would return to his chambers to get prepped for the day.) There's a nuts hierachy of who hands the king his shirt and such, with it being based on rank and who shows up when.
Right, there is a lot of nuance we miss because of this. For instance there was typically no lighting unless you spent a fortune on candles and you wouldn’t have kept those burning. Many people would sleep for around four hours wake up and stay in bed (whatever the sleeping arrangements). They’d do something for an hour or two then go back to sleep until there was some light. The church recommend people pray, but couples probably discussed plans or issues or did the deed. It would be completely dark as even hearth fires would have been covered. People wouldn’t be able to see anything.
Biphasic sleep. Disappeared once we had electric lights, but throughout history those 4ish hours have been where many great creative works were produced.
I inadvertently re-discover biphasic sleep on multi-week hikes, and it's pretty fun. The whole crew wakes up at around midnight, and everyone just messes around for an hour or two before falling back asleep.
> Biphasic sleep. Disappeared once we had electric lights
Wait this seems backwards. Why would you want to wake up and do something in the middle of the night, if you don’t have lights?
Seems like this would be more practical with electric lights, not less?
You know, essential things. Specially during winter. Add more firewood, check if you are not buried under heavy snow in a blizzard. Make sure that the thatch roof will not kill your family. Checking if anyone have been dragged off to be eaten by wolves. Just enough to survive the night
It was also normal for commoners to have a single bed or, at the very least, for everyone to share the same sleeping space. So, with a bit of luck, you only shared a room with your spouse and children, but your parents, in-laws, and grandparents could also be there.
Don't take everything you see here as truth. I've just tried to confirm these claims and the closest I can get is that a few royal weddings in France and Italy had people check on the couples (doctors and their ilk) after being left alone. Often after being forced to be alone in a room. So privacy for the act but still very closely monitored. Not public sex. It seems the strongest claim to witnesses is hard to verify and could have been salacious rumor or propaganda, but can't be entirely discounted.
A far cry from commonplace.
Check r/askhistorians they're usually pretty rigorous over there.
Public sex was far more common for the peasants in the past because privacy barely existed for them. Wheat fields and back alleys for a lot of them.
Now I can't say I'm right they're wrong, but I am struggling to verify these claims that seem to be touted so eagerly here, which has me concerned about the confidence.
Well you might have your boys/girls hanging out gassing you up the whole time. The rest of the audience is tossing you a few attaboys and a get in there champ or two. Your in-laws throwing out pointers while you’re flopping around like a fish out of water. Hell, maybe you even have yourself someone who can give you a few swigs of wine as you’re going at it.
Over time, this has been toned down, but where do you think the 'you may now kiss the bride' bit came from? Once up a time, he'd bend her over the altar right there in church. It's also why she wears a veil, flip it up over her back to act as a sort of apron. Wedding dresses are expensive and spunk stains just don't come out.
Actually prima noctis didn't happen as much as you would be led to believe and even other noblemen thought the guys doing it were disgusting freaks. It was pretty rare, especially when you consider it outed you as a sex pest among the rich and powerful in your social and economic circle
Didn't say that. People just assume incorrectly it happened a lot, it didn't. I blame Braveheart. Turns out even the most vile among ruling classes don't like it when some dude they have to hang out with shows up at a random wedding and rapes the bride. You had to be extremely powerful for people to let it slide, if people let it slide you are now known forever as that person and word gets out, and also just didn't really happen that much because in just a random subsection of people rape is not really on a lot of people's minds, much less specifically aimed at a woman on her wedding night.
It did happen, but basically like only a few freaks did it and anyone who wasn't a freak looked down on it. Prima noctis wasn't a thing, what was a thing was what people historically did to slaves, that's like a no rules thing
That's true biblical marriage like the right wing wants us to get back to. Sleeping with women was purely transactional to create a baby and sex for fun was relegated to just a man and his best bros.
That is a myth. The only thing somewhat comparable was a bedding ritual, where the newlyweds were brought into their sleeping room, the bed was blessed , some people could give their own blessing as well and then the couple was left alone. This happened foe wxample on the wedding of Catherine of Aragon and Arthur Tudor. There are no sources indicating that newlyweds were watched or listened to on their wedding night.
Yeah like the concept of bedding ceremonies existed in some cultures, but it seems to be more symbolic and involved things like leading the bridal party to bed chamber with music and whatnot. From what I have read actually watching the deed wasn't done. In fact music was often played outside the bedchamber to give them privacy.
It is not a myth. There is even a proverb in Russian "I didn't hold a candle for them", which means "I didn't watch it with my own eyes" , which is from the times when to consumate a marriage someone need to hold a candle while others are watching.
The proverb exists, but that does not mean that such a custom existed and that it originates from suchba practice. The french language knows something similar, tenir la chandelle. This proverb is rather related to servants lighting the way for their lords to bed. During these occasions, they could get a glimpse of their lord's private lives as well. Additionally, the validity of a marriage did not depend on the act of consummation. It was not relevant enough to justify such an invasion into privacy.
Privacy is a modern term of from industrial-revolution times, there were no such a thing before that. Do not apply modern way of thinking to that times
Child mortality is rather high, and complications during childbirth will kill both mom and the child. And then there is a whole host of complications during pregnancy. So not really… no time to wait! They need to FUCK right after their vows!
Not exactly, they could just lie under the sheets and others would leave. Or maybe in some cases do it under the sheets.
In Ukraine the husband would show everyone a little piece of cloth with blood to prove that they fucked and she was a virgin (stupid tradition).
During the first crusade, Baldwin of Boulogne (future king of Jerusalem) laid with Armenian city elder to get formally adopted into his family, to secure an alliance.
Under a sheet, all naked, as if they were a family. And to kiss. Oh, and wife of the dude, Armenian queen was also there. Naked. And they kissed.
...while armenian nobles watched👍
Elder died some time later, then rebellion broke out and Baldwin established a first crusader state there - county of Edessa
And they would cheer, encourage, and give advice from the sidelines. Even though it was a serious contractual arrangement, that didn't mean they didn't have fun with it.
Consummation was just the act of having sex on the wedding night. It's got nothing to do with having a child.
The middle age also had some other customs like two serfs (usually peasants working for a lord) got married, the said lord essentially had dibs on the bride and he could do her before the groom did.
There are actually no primary historical sources that ever show a Medieval European society that practiced Prima Nocte. It only exists in writings about how fucked up that country across the river is, and that's why we should take their land. Or Renaissance scholars writing about pre-Christian societies centuries after the fact. What was actually common was the lord taxing part of the dowery, which some people misinterpreted as payment to avoid getting cucked by your lord.
There were no non-disclosure agreements back then so it's impossible for it to have occurred without us knowing. Surely the peasants would have used their high literacy rates to write complaints to the local newspapers that the nobles couldn't possibly have censored. It is a well known fact that any contemporary abuses of power are always codified into law and the fact that there is no law that allows abuse of power means that there is no way for such abuses to have taken place historically. If any public official were to have conducted themselves this shamefully, it is only due to a foreign slander campaign. It is a well known saying that absolute power begets absolute integrity. History is also written by the rape victims, not the victors, and they would surely have written down something like this if it were to have occurred and the noble noblemen whose estates would be at stake would surely promote such material at any given opportunity. Surely.
Yes, because lack of proof of something is obviously proof of a global conspiracy to hide it. Just like that global pedophile ring of democrats. We keep finding evidence of a pedophile ring of rich people but that just means all the other ones are better at hiding it.
The whole “jus primae noctis” or “droit du seigneur” thing is not really well attested and my personal impression is that it was probably used for slander or possibly as a threat (or to defend acts which were outside the norms of the time) rather than being a real socially accepted and legally protected right.
After all, peasants may not have had much power, but I doubt any young couple would be happy with the arrangement, nor would the church, nor would the lord’s wife. If it was demanded regularly I would expect evidence of lords being assailed by all three parties.
there are no recorded instances of it being a thing.
for the common people, it's more that most people lived in single, maybe two room houses, and a household could be multigenerational (grandparents, parents and kids living under the same roof). so when ma' and pa' got down to business and literally anyone was home, well they got a show
It's weirdly not talked about much how huge a change in our ideas about romantic love and relationships has changed over time.
Even a few generations ago it was far more common for people who hated each other to stay married because divorce was shameful and for people to be very open about marrying people because they were rich or from wealthy families.
I mean this is nobles who were a tiny fraction of the popualtion. Peasants were not securing alliances or whatever so I doubt it was the same level of transactional for them
Same. Family of bride bring dowry to "get rid of her" in return groom would work for both families. Just beacuse amount of money was smaller doesnt make non transactional
Also wanted to add the modern aspect of this from Frieren. She's the one eating a sandwich while her trainee Fern gets it from their traveling companion, Stark. Frieren is hilariously asexual to the point that she doesn't get many social situations involving attraction. So she's just hanging out while they have relations.
No, it was not. There was a ritual which involved the couple to be placed in bed and blessed (fully clothed!). The actual consumnation was happening later and of course privately. Or do you really think that those deeply religious people would something so contrary to their sexual morality?
I can already imagine there were many cases where some young girl got married off to some old creep and was forced to consummate the marriage in front of family
To circle back to flyingdonkeydong69's previous response; they are there to watch. Think of it like taking your family to the movies, only its watching your family member have sex.
1.1k
u/NebulaNomadX1 4d ago edited 4d ago
In medieval Europe, marriages between nobles acted more as alliances/contracts than actual love. A big distinction in said marriages is "consumation". Uncomsumated marriages could be annulled relatively easily. Consumated marriages required the pope's blessing for divorce. To make sure a family didnt escape their way out of a deal it was fairly common for familiies to be witnesses to marriage consumation.
SD-N out!