The Right of Married American Women to be More than "And Wife" on a Passport

Let's never forget how far women actually have come. Less than 100 years ago, women didn't even have the right to see their first name with their husband's last name on a passport, much less their birth name. It's a little depressing that such advances are so recent.

Us modern women are incredibly lucky to live when we do- we have more freedom and more rights than almost any women have throughout history. That doesn't mean we should stop addressing sexism wherever we see it, but it is something to think about. 

"U.S. passports predate the Declaration of Independence, but the documents were issued on an ad hoc basis until the late 1800s, when the process began to standardize. By then, a single woman was issued a passport in her own name, but a married woman was only listed as an anonymous add-on to her husband’s document: 'Mr. John Doe and wife.'

'Restrictions on travel rarely took the form of government policy or officials actively preventing women traveling abroad. Rather, restrictions came in the form of accepted social ideas,' says Craig Robertson, author of Passport in America: History of a Document. 'Put simply, it was not acceptable for a married woman to travel outside of the country without her husband; he, of course, could travel without her. More generally, a married woman’s public identity was tied to her husband, and passports reflected that in being issued to the husband, with his wife being a literal notation.'..

[Doris E.] Fleischman’s passport was the first legal document issued by a federal agency to a woman under the name she preferred and the first U.S. passport issued to a married woman that didn’t designate her as the “wife of” her husband. However, though other women could request passports with similar wording as Fleischman’s, the State Department continued to issue passports referring to most women as 'the wife of Mr. John Doe' until the late 1930s."

The 1920s Women Who Fought for the Right to Travel Under Their Own Names - By Sandra Knisely, March 27, 2017  http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/us-passport-history-women?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=atlas-page

Picture credit: Doris E. Fleischman's passport application (National Archives and Records Administration - public domain)

Podcast Review: Renaissance English History

Aside from marriage and wedding culture and history, I'm fairly obsessed with the English renaissance. I have a Henry VIII teddy bear (purchased at the Tower of London!) and a Henry VIII coffee mug (featuring 6 disappearing wives when you put a hot beverage in it!) hanging out in my office. My friends know me so well that they regularly send me texts such as "Henry VIII and Charles Brandon = OTP" and pictures of tapestries featuring a cat Henry VIII.  

My obsession has recently moved to podcasts! Particularly the Renaissance English History Podcast, hosted by the charming Heather Teysko since 2009. She's covered a huge range of topics, from cosmetics and makeup to the iron industry, to music, theater, and witchcraft, along with the more typical biographies of monarchs and the people around them. I'm still combing through her archives and imagine it will take me a while longer to really be caught up.

Most relevantly to this blog, she did an episode several years ago on Love and Betrothal that can be found under Episode 20 in the social history archive, or can be downloaded wherever you find podcasts (for me, it's the podcasts app on my iPhone). She also recently did a fantastic Women's History Month themed mini series on several inspiring women from the time. This particular project included a fun Facebook page for discussions! The topic of marriage and its various intricacies also come up often in other episodes, particularly in biographies of women.

Basically, if you like history or want to learn more about it, go listen to her podcast! It's amazing. 

Book Review: A Short History of Marriage (from 1913!)

What is this book about? 

This book is a survey of marriage customs from a variety of cultures and countries around the world. It does have one historical chapter on "Marriage Among the Ancients." Most of these chapters are just little snippets discussing each tradition in turn and then moving briskly on to the next one. 

Warning: Because this book was originally published in 1913, it uses some language and viewpoints that are pretty offensive to modern society. For example - the entire first chapter is titled "Primitive Marriage" and reviews customs among Native American tribes (referred to as "Red Indians"),  African cultures and various other groups that somehow fall under "primitive" for no discernible reason I can tell (Hindu people? Aborigines? Scandinavians? What?)

There are also some occasional references to people that were probably experts and very well known in 1913 but are.....less known today. I was a little confused when page 5 of the book started waxing poetic on what "Lord Avebury" thinks about the nature of early marriage. Fortunately, Lord Avebury has his own Wikipedia page so I was able to learn a little about him. He apparently invented the terms Paleolithic and Neolithic. Sidenote: Lord Avebury would be an excellent name for a cat.

Lord Avebury (John Lubbock, 1st Baron Avebury) and his excellent beard.

Further sidenote: If you google Lord Avebury and marriage you'll find that he's quoted in a ton of pre-1920 texts on the subject, including a six volume set on the history of marriage published in 1891. I must investigate further and write more blog posts. ALL THE AVEBURY.

Who would love this book?

A lot of people might enjoy reading this book! It does seem to concentrate on more of the less traditional and more unusual traditions from around the world, so it's really amusing if you're into that sort of thing or get a kick out of old-school books. However, because it's old, it looks like copies of this are going to be pretty expensive to find. Even reprints are running $30 +. I honestly don't think I'd pay that, but if you can find it at a library, I highly suggest it. It's really entertaining.

My Favorite Parts

There are like four whole pages dedicated to the custom of giving "a flitch of bacon [half a pig] to any pair who could come forward and state on oath, after a year of marriage, that they had never once quarrelled or regretted their marriage during the year," celebrated in Dunmow and Whichnoure in England. There's an entire account of a parade held in honor of the ceremony of the awarding of the Dunnmow flitch of bacon. It's glorious. This tradition is apparently still going on. This blog post talks about it and includes PICTURES, so you should go check it out.  

There are also several pages in the "Marriage Superstitions and Omens" chapter dedicated to the best and worst days and months to get married among various cultures. Apparently, February 11, June 2, November 2, and December 1 "are considered the most unpropitious days of the year on which to get married" (according to either English custom, ancient Roman tradition, or the Roman Catholic Church? This book doesn't cite its sources very clearly). This amuses me, as my wedding day is June 2, 2018. I must tell John that our date is unpropitious. 

Some other superstition jewels:

"A woman should not marry on the day of the week of her birth." 

"If there is a cat in the house, the bride must feed it herself on the wedding day, otherwise the day may prove rainy." 

"If you cut your nails on a Saturday your lover will call on Sunday." 

"The bride should always buy something as soon as she is married, and before the bridegroom can make a purchase. 'Then she'll be master for life!' say the old women. It is customary for brides to buy a pin from their bridesmaids in order to retain the mastery of their husbands."

"Hindoos believe that anyone who kills a frog will never be married." 

Also, apparently in certain parts of Germany, it used to be customary on the wedding eve ("polterabend") to throw out of the window every article of crockery or glass which is cracked or broken.  

Also also, if you want to say no to someone's offer of marriage in certain parts of Thuringia, a sausage is placed on the table at meal-time when the suitor arrives. 

Karen weddings in Burmah are conducted at funerals!

Basically I could include fun trivia from this book all day, but I have to return it the library at some point.

Does it talk about marital surname changes at all? 

Only very briefly in passing. For example: "Among the Ainus a married woman does not take her husband's name. She either uses her maiden name or is designated as 'the wife of So-and-so.'" (the Ainu are an indigenous people of Japan)

Amazon Link: https://www.amazon.com/Short-History-Marriage-Folklore-Countries/dp/1447456130

Book Review: The Meaning of Wife - A Provocative Look at Women and Marriage in the Twenty-First Century

The Meaning of Wife - A Provocative Look at Women and Marriage in the Twenty-First Century, By Anne Kingston

What is this book about? 

This book takes a particular look at the many ways of being a wife. I was a little worried that it would be a bit of a repeat of One Perfect Day when I read the chapter "The Heart of Whiteness" on the wedding industry (which was hilarious on its own, I just didn't want to read the same book over again), but it quickly distinguished itself with its incredibly well researched and pop culture reference stuffed chapters on the revival of "traditional" housewife roles in the 90s, married sex, domestic violence, revengeful wives, and the simultaneous glamorization and yet stigmatization of single women ("unwifes"). 

Who would love this book?

I think most women getting married would enjoy this book, as it takes a broad look at a wide range of cultural phenomena related to American marriage of the past 40 or so years instead. It has a lot of 90s pop culture references (It was published in 2005, so that makes sense, you know!). One chapter in particular references Sex and the City about a bazillion times, so I feel it would really appeal to a lot of people of my generation and older.

My Favorite Parts

There's a running theme involving the seeming "fairy tale" marriage of Princess Diana to Prince Charles that starts in the intro and keeps circling back throughout the book wherever relevant. I wasn't sure where the author was going with it at first, but it became a really illustrative example of the fairy tale bubble bursting for a lot of her points.

The chapter chronicling the very very different beliefs between generations about the role sex should play in a marriage is pretty intriguing. The immediate back to back juxtaposition of chapters on domestic violence/the pop culture obsession with the "abused wife" trope  and the laudatory manner in which society greets women who "screw their husbands over but good," either economically or physically (a few pages are dedicated to Lorena Bobbit's story) is really thought provoking and simultaneously disturbing. 

Does it talk about marital surname changes at all? 

Yes! I can finally say yes! Not a ton - it's definitely around the edges - but they are mentioned! Lucy Stone's marriage to Henry Blackwell and her decision to keep her name is mentioned; the National Organization for Women's campaign to use "Ms." as the standard salutation for women.

Amazon Link: https://www.amazon.com/Meaning-Wife-Provocative-Marriage-Twenty-first/dp/0312425007

144 Years of U.S. Marriage and Divorce Statistics in One Chart

This is very interesting and you should go check it out. The dive in both marriages and divorces during the Great Depression (presumably because both of those things cost money, which people were somewhat lacking), the huge spike in marriage and almost concurrent spike in divorces around the end of WWII, and the steadily declining rates of both marriage and divorce in more recent years all stand out.

Used under a Creative Commons License. By DrJohnBullas on Flickr. Available online here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbullas/4080600067

In fact, the author even points out, "Looking to more recent history, there has been a steady decline in marriage rates (and consequently, divorce rates) since the 1980s, with no sign of slowing down. In fact, when taking population into account, marriage rates in the U.S. are now at the lowest they’ve ever been in recorded U.S. history — even lower than during The Great Depression!"

Basically just go read it.

Podcast: Stuff You Missed in History Class - History of the White Wedding

Stuff You Missed in History Class, "A Brief History of the 'White Wedding,'" April 25, 2016. Hosts: Tracy V. Wilson and Holly Frey.  

Queen Victoria's Wedding Portrait

Again from the cultural and historical side of things - this is an episode from one of my very favorite podcasts. The hosts of Stuff You Missed in History Class are super organized and hilarious (just the way I like my podcasts to be), with just the right touch of witty back and forth mixed in. 

This podcast addresses numerous "white wedding" traditions. Here are just a few tidbits from it! 

• White wedding dresses were a fashion started by Queen Victoria, who loved her husband Albert in the most passionate and adorable way ever (seriously, I ship them). After his death, she built him a magnificent memorial and wore black the rest of her life.
• Wedding rings date back to Ancient Greece and Rome and may have derived from the tradition of breaking a coin apart at the wedding and giving a half to the bride and a half to the groom. 
• Cakes have been part of weddings for a very long time, but only recently did those actually come to resemble what we actually consider cake today. For a long time, "cake" referred to almost any type of bread good. 
  • Queen Victoria's cake was 10 FEET in diameter and weighed 300 pounds. 
  • Tiered wedding cakes really started in 1851 and piped decorations on cakes weren't really a thing until the 1890s.

 Bonus Material: "How the Women Behind Stuff You Missed in History Class Became Unlikely Celebrities," By Josh Green, Atlanta Magazine (August 2016) - I love this profile of podcast hosts Tracy V. Wilson and Holly Frey and their work and I exceptionally enjoy the accompanying photographs of them in fancy dresses and feathery headpieces.

And of course, this blog post wouldn't be complete without this: 

"Conjugal Rights" and the Right to Refuse to Have Sex

As yet another reminder of "Dear God am I happy I was born when I was and not a few hundred years ago," married women in England only gained the right to refuse to have sex with their husbands fairly recently. These excerpts outline how that situation evolved.

Detail from The Courtship by John Collet (1766)

"A husband's right to sexual intercourse was assured by law in several ways. Firstly, by the law and custom of marriage. Sir Matthew Hale commented in 1736 that it was impossible for a husband to be tried for rape, because by marrying the wife had 'given herself up' sexually to her husband and could never retract that consent.

Secondly, an ancient right under canon law allowed either party to claim restoration of 'conjugal rights' (i.e. cohabitation). Under the 1857 Divorce Act, refusal to cohabit after being ordered to do so by a judge was contempt of court and could entail a prison sentence. Once a woman was cohabiting with her husband he could rape her with impunity. As Oswald Dawson put it in 1895, a wife was 'at the mercy of the carnal appetite of the man ... at all times and without regard to the state of her health, or any other considerations', he continued, 'This slavery of compulsory cohabitation is surely chattel-like'. He concluded, 'until a woman who is a wife can say, at least at certain times....'I wish to sleep alone'... she can never consider herself free'.

The Matrimonial Causes Act 1884 reformed the law so that a refusal to restore conjugal rights no longer led to imprisonment but was deemed to be desertion, which was then grounds for divorce. From then, wives are found applying to court for 'the restitution of conjugal rights', not because they wanted their husbands to move back in, but as the first step towards getting a divorce." Excerpt from  History of Women: Marriage, by Helena Wojtczak (an excellent website that you should go read!) 

The Court of Chancery in the early 19th century (1808) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_Chancery#/media/File:Court_of_Chancery_edited.jpg

"The 1884 Act thus gave effect to the policy that it was oppressive and unnecessary to imprison those who preferred to live apart from their spouses. But the extent to which the courts were prepared to recognise the existence of legally enforceable ‘rights’ in the family context remained unclear. Only a few years later, a sensational case illustrated the difficulty:

In R v. Jackson a husband applied for and obtained a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against his newly married wife, and set about enforcing it. Assisted by two young men (one a solicitor’s articled clerk) he seized her as she was leaving church in the Lancashire town of Clitheroe and forced her into a carriage, claiming to have used no more force than was absolutely necessary to separate her from the sister he believed to be responsible for what had happened. Mrs Jackson was kept in the husband’s house in Blackburn in charge of her sister and a nurse and she was visited by a doctor. The husband claimed that he showed her every kindness and consideration and that she had the free run of the house,  ‘doing just as she pleased, save leaving the house’; and that he ‘had offered several times to take her for a drive, but she had declined to go’. The wife’s relatives instituted habeas corpus proceedings; and the Court of Appeals rejected the husband’s argument that a husband had the right to enforce the ‘general dominion’ he had over his wife by imprisoning her if she refused him the conjugal rights to which a court had declared him entitled. Lord Esher MR regarded the 1884 Act as the ‘strongest possible evidence to shew that the legislature had no idea that a power would remain in the husband to imprison the wife for himself, not least because to accept this view would result in his being allowed to act as party judge and executioner.

The Jackson decision was at the time unpopular in some quarters, and it was certainly widely misunderstood. But it is a landmark in family law: the decision recognises that the ‘rights’ which exist between husband and wife are of a different order than (say) the rights of the parties to a commercial contract. But the question of ‘how different’ remained difficult." 

Legal Consequences of marriage: Conjugal Rights and Remedies (an excerpt from Stephen Cretney, Family Law in the Twentieth Century: A History, Oxford University Press (2003))

Fun fact: Under English law, women only gained the right to divorce her husband on the grounds of adultery alone in 1923. Men previously were the only ones to have that right.

The action of restitution of conjugal rights was only abolished in 1970, though at that point it was rarely used. The equivalent legal actions in Scotland and Ireland were abolished in 1984 and 1988, respectively. 

Review: Marriage, A History, By Stephanie Coontz

Although my primary research interest is in the history and culture of surname changes at marriage around the world, I will be reading and writing about other books, articles, and other forms of media more focused on marriage culture and history generally as well. This is partly because I have yet to find any books actually focused on name changes specifically and partly because the subject is super interesting in its own right.

What is this book about? 

This book traces the history and evolution of marriage throughout the world, with a bit more of an emphasis on Western societies in Europe and America, particularly toward the later chapters. It's incredibly well researched and takes a very in-depth, mostly chronological look at the purpose, laws, cultural significance, economic place, and religious status of marriage in the environment of each time period while weaving in quotes, anecdotes, and snippets about related topics from primary sources and literature. This style of weaving in an impressive amount of facts into each page works well for me, but I could see that this might become overwhelming to someone less incredibly nerdy. 

Who would love this book?

If you're a history, trivia, or sociology lover, you will love this book. If you're someone who's engaged and wants to learn a ton about the institution into which you're entering, you may want to read this book. If you're engaged and you really don't want your starry eyed balloon dreams of marriage to be punctured by reality, don't read this. :)

Warning: this book is very academic in nature and quite dense. Though it does generally use colloquial language and you by no means need to be a college graduate to read it, we are talking 315 pages of probably size 10 font text. I really loved this book and it still took me a few weeks to get through. That being said, it really has informed my understanding of marriage thoroughly. I could write hundreds of posts using this book as a resource. I'm resisting the urge to do so (although you may get "tens" of posts instead).

My Favorite Parts

Is it possible to say that the entire book is my favorite? I've only had my copy for about a month and it's already lovingly bedraggled, filled with folded pages and highlights. Even writing this brief review has taken far longer than it should because in flipping back and forth trying to find my favorite parts, I've become reabsorbed in its pages and taken a few detours to write more blog posts on its contents and schedule them for the future. To be fair, I do have ADD and am very good at losing my train of thought and getting distracted by shiny things (thus, why I'm currently working in a Starbucks to try to get away from all the distractions at home), but this book is still insanely fascinating.

I do think the part of the book that has had the most impact on me is the emphasis on the economic nature of marriage. In the middle ages and Renaissance it wasn't seen so much as the entree into adulthood as something you entered in only after you had some economic steadiness. Some women even had to work to fund their own dowries. As a result, it was common for peasants to get married fairly late in life. Sometimes these marriages were even put off until after the female partner bore a child, so that her fertility and ability to provide future employees in the form of children was assured. Once married, the couple worked as partners together to make their household and prosper; women did tend to work out of the home (although honestly, the majority of men did too, until the industrial revolution), but the amount of work needed to run a household and perform necessary economic tasks like spinning, sewing, cooking, etc. meant that these contributions were quite valued. It was only in the Victorian ages and after that the concept of the "traditional male breadwinner" marriage really came about and women's work at home became devalued (Sidenote: SO much of what we consider "traditional" about marriage has existed for less than 200 years. SOOO MUCH. Honestly if you think it's a very old tradition, it's almost certainly not.). 

The two entirely different chapters on marriage in medieval times - among nobility and among "the other 95 percent" - really offer an interesting look at how different these groups' goals and priorities were. It's also very enjoyable to read some of the discussion of the place of same-sex marriage in America at the time of this book's publication in 2005 and realize how far we've come now that it's legal nationwide. :)

Does it talk about marital surname changes at all? 

Aside from a brief mention of Lucy Stone and her husband Henry Blackwell which doesn't even discuss her decision to keep her own name, no. 

Amazon Link: https://www.amazon.com/Marriage-History-How-Love-Conquered/dp/014303667X

The Only Society in World History Without Marriage

"We know of only one society in world history that did not make marriage a central way of organizing social and personal life, the Na people of China. With that exception, marriage has been, in one form or another, a universal social institution throughout recorded history."  

From Marriage: A History, by Stephanie Coontz

I'm becoming incredibly obsessed with this book. It's simply fascinating. 

Medieval Naming Conventions 101

I dare you to say Clovis Clothild Chlodomer Chlothar Childebert three times fast.

Excerpted from page 92 of Stephanie Coontz's brilliant "Marriage, A History."