How expensive?
An excellent well researched book on another topic entirely (Des Ekin: The Stolen Village – Baltimore and The Barbary Pirates) carried an extract from legislation passed in Youghall in Ireland in the 1630’s:
“Lewd and incontinent persons do … through their flatteries and wicked practices, labour and endeavour to abuse and overthrow young and silly virgin maids, to the great grief and discontent of the parents, and to the said maid’s often utter undoing … whosoever from henceforth so abuses and deflowers any such maiden shall forfeit
Mayor’s daughter £40
Alderman’s daughter £30
Bailiff’s daughter £20
Freeman’s daughter £10
In modern money
Elsewhere in the book £4,200 is expressed as being worth £390,000 in “today’s money” (2006). The multiple is 92.86. The £10 fine is therefore roughly worth £928.60. Given the poverty of the time, the £10 fine was significant. It was the equivalent of a year’s earnings for a labourer.
Why such a fine?
At that time, there was no “age of consent”. Girls were frequently married in their mid teens, essentially to get them married before they strayed, and because younger mothers were thought to do better in childbirth than older women.
Given the hard life so many people led, a girl at 15 was very likely the prettiest she would ever be. By 20 she would be “on the shelf”, and at 25 “an old maid”.
Amongst those with money, even a little money, marriage was an economic decision. In those days, with no state aid, people who married poorly quite often did end up starving. A sensible parent would want their daughter to marry someone from a steady family, or a wealthy family, who would and could maintain their daughter and the eventual children. The girl rarely had much formal education, but she should have the skills required to run a small household.
A young man who could support a wife had no difficulty finding one. There were lots of girls who needed to marry, but relatively few men who could afford to marry. One requirement of society was that the young woman should be “respectable”. There was also an expectation that she should reserve her sexuality for her husband – whatever he did.
A young woman who was not a virgin had shown she was not respectable, and that she could not be trusted to bestow her favours responsibly. If she had a child as well – no man would take on this constant reminder of his wife’s earlier sin and degradation.
A family who found their daughter had been deflowered were now faced with a female who was not easily marriageable. They would have difficulty finding anyone who would take their daughter as a wife. They could abandon any hopes of “a good marriage” and either were landed with their daughter for the rest of their lives, or arranged the best marriage they could for their fallen daughter. The financial consequences for the family were immense. Instead of someone who would keep their daughter, they were very likely having to fund the couple forever.
Given the financial consequences for the girl’s family, the fine was really not that heavy. It was graded according to social class because that reflected the realities of the marriage market. The virgin daughter of a Mayor was an attractive proposition for an able young man on his way up or further up in society. Such a young man had the pick of marriage prospects, and would not be interested in the Mayor’s daughter if she were not virgin.
If he only discovered the truth on his wedding night – that in itself would justify him in casting his wife off – and keeping her marriage portion. The scandal would rock the town!
From the point of view of a young man, deflowering the Mayor’s daughter might lead the family to accept him as a husband when they had hoped to do better. It could be a meal ticket for life. Getting her pregnant increased his bargaining power.
(Please be aware that I am expressing the commonly accepted views of society at that time rather than my own views!)
Recent Comments