Huwelijk en gezin in Holland in de 17de en 18de eeuw

[p. 296]

Summary^*

In Marriage and Family in Holland in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries: Case Records and Moralists on Aspects of Late Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Family Life, the author seeks to relate to current international discussion regarding such subjects as kinship, marriage, family and sex in the past. More particularly the author examines what is sometimes referred to as the ‘modern’ family, and which, to avoid evolutionism and chronological limitations, is in this study termed the ‘conjugal family’. The term ‘conjugal family’ is defined as a family with little contact with relatives, a free choice of partner based on affection, and a certain degree of equality and intimacy between partners and between parents and children. Whether such a family existed in seventeenth and eighteenth century Holland is the focal question of this study.

The study is limited to Holland, the most western province of the Dutch Republic. As regards economic and social structure, and consequently also as regards degree of urbanization, Holland was the most ‘modern’ province of the Republic. Chronologically, the study is limited to the end of the seventeenth century and the eighteenth century. This is a consequence of the choice of sources which in that period were particularly significant both quantitatively and qualitatively. A large part of the text is based on local jurisdiction regarding matters which relate to marriage and family, such as: the enforcement of promises of marriage, permission from parents to marry, separation, divorce, paternity suits and suits between employers and resident employees. These suits provide data of a quantitative and qualitative nature. Legislation and jurisdiction on these matters rested (for marital affairs since the Dutch Revolt) with the secular authorities.

Chapter I gives an overview of international literature on marriage and family during the Ancien Régime. Attention is devoted particularly to the situation in France and England, and to a lesser degree in colonial New England. The views put forward by Ariès in his pioneer work dating from 1960 and by the later historians Shorter, Stone and Flandrin occupy a central position in the discussion. It is concluded that though during the Ancien Régime the conjugal family did not as yet exist, certain characteristics of this type of famïly were nonetheless already present. The conjugal

* Vertaald door mw. C.N. ter Heide-Lopey.

[p. 297]

family, in as far as it existed, was to be encountered especially in north-west Europe (England, northern France) and among the middle classes as well as the lower social groups involved in trade and crafts.

Chapters II to VI are devoted exclusively to the situation in Holland. Chapter II deals with relatives and neighbours. The circle of persons who were recognized as relatives and with whom contacts were maintained has been deduced from legislation and jurisdiction regarding degrees of kinship within which marriage is prohibited, comments of moralistic authors on relations with relatives and neighbours, published personal documents of some highly placed and well-to-do citizens, and commentry in law-suit documents regarding relations with relatives. Each of these sources shows that the circle of relatives with whom contacts were maintained (in the case of a married couple) consisted mainly of parents, brothers and sisters with their children, and uncles and aunts with their children, both consanguineous kin and relatives of the marriage partner. It would however not appear that these contacts constituted obligations of a penetrating nature. The sources used indicate that contacts were limited to help in the case of births, and advice regarding the choice of a partner and with respect to marital problems. The same applies as regards neighbourhood life in the city and in the country. The social control exerted by the community assumed the form of ‘scandal’, to which by no means everyone responded as desired, rather than ‘skimmingtons’ as was the case in France and England.

Chapter III deals with pre-marital sexual behaviour. Moralists charged young people to abstain from sex till marriage. A still small number of demographic studies however shows that in between 10 and 25% of cases the first child was born within seven to eight months of marriage. However in most cases where conception preceded marriage, marriage did follow. This is evident from the low percentage of illegitimate births which was less than 5%. The small group of unmarried mothers reacted to their position in various ways. These reactions included abortion attempts, concealment of pregnancy and birth, abandonment of the child, infanticide, or the bringing of a case against a man who was hailed before the judge with the demand to meet his obligations as father of the child. The unmarried mother demanded financial compensation for loss of virginity, as well as payment of lying-in costs and alimentation. Case documents provide some insight into the circumstances surrounding pre-marital sex. In nearly all cases the unmarried mother lost a case against a man from a higher social class, while in cases where the man derived from approximately the same social class, the verdict was mostly in favour of the woman. At the end of the eighteenth century the percentage of illegitimate births and the number of paternity suits increased. The cause of this may be sought in the deteriorating economy which lessened marital chances, and in an altered values pattern in which the norm which dictated a man's obligation to marry a

[p. 298]

woman whom he had impregnated was felt less strongly.

Chapter IV deals with the choice of a partner. In the choice of a marriage partner the initiative would appear to have rested mainly with the young people, while the role played by parents was no more than to approve of the choice or to make attempts to hinder marriage. Among the higher social groups parental pressure was probably greatest; for example precisely in these circles elopement was not uncommon. The market for potential marriage partners was limited since not seldom meetings between young people took place on an organized basis: among the upper classes at balls, and among the lower social groups at gatherings for the town or village youth. This channelling of the choice of a partner contributed to endogamy with respect to age, social group and especially religion. Though in Holland more than 30% of the population was Catholic as against nearly 70% Protestant, denominationally mixed marriages seldom took place. The sources consulted show that ‘affection’ and ‘love’ played a considerable and increasingly significant role in the choice of a partner. This would confirm the impression that in Holland the choice of a marriage partner was in the first place left to the individual.

In chapter V we take a look at relations within the household. We seek an answer to the question in how far these relations were characterized by patriarchism. By comparison with households in other parts of the Dutch Republic and in France and England, the household in Holland was limited in size (an average of four persons) and simple in composition (few resident relatives or personnel). There is no indication that relationships were of a patriarchal nature. Though the legal position of the married woman was weak, her social status was considerable. Illustrative of this is that a husband's right to chastise his wife was never recognized in Holland. It is not unlikely that among the lower social classes the part played by the married woman in attaining the family income contributed considerably to her social position. The study devotes relatively little attention to the relationship between parents and children. It is however clear that the education of children was very much linked to the family. Otherwise than was for example the case in England, young people remained at home till marriage. Seldom did they go to live elsewhere as apprentices or servants (except in the case of maids). The relationship between employers and their resident (mainly female) employees was on a very businesslike basis. The rights and duties of employers and employees were laid down in detailed local regulations. The employee was accorded a weak legal position (for example in the case of dismissal). There was frequent turn-over of employees and wage conflicts were far from unusual.

Chapter VI deals with the two possibilities which the law offered a couple who no longer desired to cohabit. These possibilities were separation or divorce. The judge granted separation on the request of a couple or one of the partners without the necessity of extensive substantiation of

[p. 299]

arguments. In accordance with protestant views divorce was allowed on grounds of adultery and desertion. In the course of the eighteenth century infiltration of ideas on natural law by foreign authors led to the plea to broaden the grounds for divorce. Separation and divorce were phenomena predominantly associated with the lower social groups. Especially in the case of separation the wife usually took the initiative. The motive for separation - according to case documents - was usually ill-treatment by the husband. Sometimes the absence of conjugal happiness was quoted as a motive for separation. In the case of divorce these motives often preceded adultery and desertion. Local records show that in the second half of the eighteenth century separation in particular was considerably more prevalent than earlier in the century. This quantitative development may have been accounted for by a socio-cultural shift whereby greater value was attached to conjugal happiness than in the preceding period. But the sharp increase in the number of separations in the last decades of the eighteenth century will undoubtedly have been the consequence of the pauperization which engulfed the lower social classes and contributed much to a disintegration of family life.

In the concluding chapter it is argued that the conjugal family was dominantly present among broad segments of the population in Holland in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The Dutch family fitted into a north-west European family type, though it was perhaps more ‘modern’ than elsewhere in Europe. A number of possible explanations of an economic, social and religious nature are put forward for the prevailing presence of the conjugal family in Holland. In this context the views of Shorter, Stone and Flandrin are critically discussed.

In the appendix which concludes the book the sources which have formed the basis for this study on marriage and family in Holland in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries are explained.