This is an interesting post about misconceptions about historical marriages and the age that women were wed. I really do hope that the idea the media has fed us that most women in earlier ages were married and mothers in their early teens is a myth. Because that is gross.
(via: Premium Internet Curation)
In the vast majority of “child marriages” among the nobility, the children had entirely separate households for _years_ after the legal union occurred. Usually, the adults made very sure the couple had not one second of time alone until at least a year after the girl’s menstrual period stabilized and the boy’s voice finished deepening. Often, he also had to have started growing obvious facial hair.
Noble children were _livestock_. Their purpose was to breed offspring. Their parents knew perfectly well what happens if a stud got at a filly, heifer, gilt, or lamb. They had no intention of risking those outcomes with a daughter. (They also had the completely unfounded belief that a post-pubescent boy would be “enervated” or “drained of vigor” by sexual congress. Which was at least harmless, unlike many other medical beliefs of the time.)
Oft skipped detail about Catherine of Aragon, Henry VIII was her second husband. Originally she married Henry’s older brother, Arthur, when they were both 15. Arthur unfortunately died soon after.
The reference to people reading fiction/stories of the past as if it was a documentary (so to speak) reminds me of the recent tweet I saw that was something like “I am concerned that the Duke to commoner ratio in these historical british romances is not a sustainable economic system”. Ha! Right on.
I just want to ask about one person..
Aisha bint Abi Bakr