| Search | Statistics | User Listing | DHF Guild Officers | Forums | Calendars | Albums | Skins |
| Das Heiligesturm Fahnlein Guild Forums -> Public Forums -> DHF Re-enactors Community Forum -> View Thread |
|
| You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register ) |
 Women's hair styles as related to marital statusModerators: Chad Volpe Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Public Forums -> DHF Re-enactors Community Forum | Message format |
Rebecca Fearn |
| ||
| |||
| Cherylyn Crill |
| ||
DHF Guild Member Posts: 7140     Location: Fresno, CA | Once married = Still a wife. Your husband being alive or dead is really incidental (since as a widow, the dead man is still considered your husband). This was LITTERAL in the religion of the time: The marriage was not just a financial arrangement between two families - it was the binding of two souls both in this world and the next. Hair style = marital status (more so early in the period than in the 2nd 1/2 of the 16th C.). Marital rights were not something that a woman would willingly give up. Marriage was basically the only way that a woman could have any "power" in her life*. Unmarried women were basically the chattel of their families - subserviant/obiedient to both mother and father (aunts, uncles, brothers, etc.) and having no control over the house they lived in. Married women were still expected to treat their husband as their lord and master (to varying degrees - this didn't mean that women didn't have any rights to opinions, just that their opinions strength depended on their husbands good will).** Marriage was more commonly a balance of power - the Husband taking many of his cues regarding the house from his wife, the wife taking her cues regarding the business/money/spirituality/etc. from her husband. However, the husband did have final say in all matters - although many were thought foolish for not listening to the advice of their wives. So, as a widow, you would still dress in the same fashions as a wife. This included hair dressing/hats, key rings, aprons (commonly worn by all women but ESPECIALLY by wives), needle cases, etc. Only VERY young girls/babies (4 year old and younger) would ever be seen with their hair completely undressed. Even then the head was commonly covered in some sort of cap. The paintings that commonly depict young "princesses" with their hair flowing free are not examples of how common women (or even princesses in their normal lives) would wear their hair. These are portraits of these women either as A: Allegorical religious figures or B: Painted to capture "the image of beauty". All women's hair was dressed in some fashion, generally with ribbons and braids, and all adult women commonly covered their hair in some way (even if unmarried). Kampfrau are also commonly depicted with their hair braided and covered with AT LEAST a Barrett. IMHO, any woman who had been even "claimed" by a man - such as women in a 'soldier’s marriage' in the fahnlein - would dress and act as wives if they could manage it. Being a wife gives you social status, just being a fraulien (unmarried/unattached woman) means that you are at the bottom of the pecking order in the social group. Notes: * During the early part of the 16th C. (before Protestantism truly took hold) women could also find some power in religious service. Nunnery's provided for education and protection of women's power. On the other hand, nunneries were ultimately in the control of the male dominated Catholic Church, and were increasingly put under the Churches Thumb from the middle of the 15th C. onward. In Protestant parts of Germany Nunnery's (and Monasteries) were quickly abolished - their lands and monies given over to the State and the women in them either married off or allowed to remain in their fading chapels until old age overcame them. **For a good example of this see "The Taming of the Shrew" by Shakespeare (a little after our time since Master Shakespeare was born in 1564). In this play Kate discovers that she has true power over Petruchio once she submits to him as her husband. If anyone is interested in some reading suggestions for exploring the dynamic of marriage and the interaction between men and women, let me know - I have several titles I can recommend! ~Cherylyn  | ||
| |||
| Stacie Kortkamp |
| ||
DHF Guild Member Posts: 840  Location: San Pedro, Ca. | |||
| |||
| Cherylyn Crill |
| ||
DHF Guild Member Posts: 7140 Location: Fresno, CA | *chuckle* Stacie, you just hit most of my list! I especially recommend "When Father's Ruled" for those who would like more insights into the family dynamic of the period. Far from supporting the usual - "Men controlled all family aspects with an iron fist", Ozment discusses information that peeks behind the drapery of common laws and religious traditions at the way that real familys actually survived and prospered through male/female cooperation. I am currently reading a book called "Working Women in Renaissance Germany" that I am really enjoying. The book discusses the overall marginalization of women's work in both cottage industry and guilds during the Early Modern era. The author (sorry, name escapes me currently) approaches her research via common laws, court documents, statistical analysis, religious traditions, economic and political perspectives. Her rounded viewpoint gives a good window into the shrinking economic power of women in the Early Modern time period. I also really enjoyed "The Crimes of Women in Early Modern Germany" by Ulinka Black. It explores the dynamics of power between women and the State/political/theological authorities. It also shows how women caught between a rock and a hard place tried to find ways out that let them retain their place in society. Loosing the respect of your neighbors by being caught in a crime was HIGHLY undesirable, especially since you probably grew up with the same small group of people around you your whole life. Anyone who ever lived in a small town can tell you, those little secrets never stay secret long and they NEVER go away...  Edited by Cherylyn Crill 3/29/2004 10:05 AM | ||
| |||
| Rebecca |
| ||
| |||
| Rebecca Fearn |
| ||
| |||
| Cherylyn Crill |
| ||
DHF Guild Member Posts: 7140 Location: Fresno, CA | Another brief note on widow's in mercenary companies, commonly speaking, women remarried very quickly and 'unattached women' appear to be quite rare in mercenary baggage trains. There are many reasons for women to be attached: #1: Having a man gave you some status (as previously mentioned). #2: Having a man afforded you some protection - both from other men and other women. #3: Unattached women were seen as trouble waiting to happen. While sisters and mothers had a place in the baggage trains, unattached girls, women and widows didn't. Single ladies played havoc with the morale of the 'honorable' women of the camp since they represented a hazard to family stability. Plus, Boys-Will-Be-Boys and 'single' women would have been the common targets for harrasment and abuse. This leads to more trouble in the camp then they are worth to the fahnlein. #4: Finally, without a man to 'take care of you', you become the responsibility of the company/fahnlein. Frankly they didn't need or want another mouth to feed, bed to make or back to watch. Were their widows? Heck yeah! It's war after all...*grin* Did they WANT to stay that way? Nope! Later documents (via the Thirty Years War) specifically describe that widows were commonly "let off at the next stop" once the army reached a 'safe city' unless they had managed to bag another husband. Considering the status of the common camp follower, good luck finding a warm reception at a local burg if you can't get yourself another man...  This by no means is meant to say that no one would/should be a widow - it is only some food for thought as to what your character could face without a husband or guardian. | ||
| |||
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
| (Delete all cookies set by this site) | |
