深晨S / 上层社会 / 欧洲各级封建领主是否曾拥有「初夜权」?

0 0

   

欧洲各级封建领主是否曾拥有「初夜权」?

2018-01-15  深晨S

这个答案下

的答案援引了《欧洲中世纪史》的记载,虽然体现了学界的普遍共识,但是还不够详细。我这里有一篇外网的学术论文,较为详细的介绍了欧洲和世界各地的初夜权,由于全文较长,只在文末给出链接,本人翻译文章部分核心内容(渣翻勿怪),权作该问题的回答和补充。

论文标题是The jus primae noctis as a male power display: A review of historic sources with evolutionary interpretation(作为男性力量展示的初夜权:回顾历史的来源和进化的解读),载于Evolution and Human Behavior, Vol 21, Nr. 2 (2000): 111-123。

Abstract:The jus primae noctis was, in the European late medieval context, a widespread popular belief in an ancient privilege of the lord of the manor to share the wedding bed with his peasants' brides. Symbolic gestures, reflecting this belief, were developed by the lords and used as humiliating signs of superiority over the dependent peasants in the 15th century, a time of diminishing status differences. Actual intercourse in the exercise of the alleged right is difficult to prove, and there is no hard evidence to suggest that it ever actually happened. However, the symbolic gestures can be best interpreted as a male power display with a basis in the psychology of coercive social dominance, male competition, and male desire for sexual variety.……

翻译:摘要:在欧洲中世纪晚期的语境中,人们普遍相信庄园领主享有初夜权,即领主可在新婚之夜与他治下的农民的新娘共度一宿。在地位差异缩小的十五世纪,领主们发展了反映这种信念的象征性姿态,并作为一种对依赖他的农民的羞辱性符号,来显示他的优越地位。在行使这种所谓的权利的实际交流中,没有确凿的证据显示这种行为实际上曾经真实发生过。然而这种象征性的姿态可以被作为一种男性权力展示的最佳诠释,其基础是心理学上的强制性社会支配、男性之间的竞争和男性对性的渴望。


The existence of a jus primae noctis in the Middle Ages was an eagerly disputed topic in the nineteenth century (Schmidt 1881, 1884; Pfannenschmid 1883; Hanauer 1893; cf. Schmidt-Bleibtreu 1988). Although most historians would agree today that there is no authentic proof of the actual exercise of the custom in the Middle Ages, disagreements persist concerning the origin, meaning and development of a widespread popular belief in this alleged 'right' and the existence of symbolic gestures associated with it (Barros 1993; Boureau 1995; Sorlin 1987; Wettlaufer 1994, 1999).These symbolic gestures have not yet been discussed in the light of evolutionary studies of sexual psychology, although they seem to be of relevance to the reproductive prospects of dominant males, at least indirectly through the display of status.


翻译:中世纪时期是否存在初夜权在十九世纪是一个引发激烈争论的问题。尽管现在大多数历史学家会同意没有真正可以证明这项习俗在实际交流中真实存在的证据,但关于这个广为人知的习俗的起源、含义及发展,以及其与存在的象征性姿态的关系,仍然是一个存在分歧的事情。这些象征性的姿态在性心理学的进化研究中还没有被讨论过,尽管它们似乎与占统治地位的男性的生殖前景有关,至少是间接地通过其显示地位。

ps:在文中第二对括号里我们可以发现朱迪斯本内特在《欧洲中世纪史》里面提到的布若的名字,与括号里的其他几位学者一起都是反对初夜权的行使实际存在的。

In this paper, I argue that: (1) the right of the first night is a very old theme (topos) in Eurasian literature, reflecting the relationship between status and mating success; (2) in the later Middle Ages, a popular belief in the sexual privilege of a lord of the manor on the wedding night was used by some lords to display their superiority over their dependent peasants in a time of diminishing status differences; (3) ritual defloration, as seen in other cultures, was very often performed by persons of high status (chiefs, priests) and therefore fits into the picture of a strong and widespread relationship between despotism and differential reproduction in traditional societies; and (4) Jus primae noctis and ritual defloration reflect a common underlying adaptive psychology that gave rise to these customs in human cultures.

翻译:本文将讨论以下内容:(1)初夜权是欧亚文献中一个非常古老的话题,反映了地位和成功交配之间的关系。(2)在中世纪晚期,在庄严的婚礼之夜,人们普遍相信庄园主的性特权被一些庄园主用来在地位差异缩小的时代向他的隶农显示自己的优越地位。(3)在其他文化中可以看到的破chu仪式往往是由地位较高的人(首领,祭司)进行的,这与传统社会中专制主义与差别繁殖之间的密切关系相吻合。(4)在人类文化中产生了初夜权与破chu仪式这些习俗,反映的是一种共同的潜在的适应性心理学。

由于原文过长,以下只介绍各段大意,有英语阅读能力的人还是自己看原文吧23333.

I. The theme of the jus primae noctis in archaic and ancient literature
The jus primae noctis appears to be a very old cultural invention in Eurasia. The first explicit evidence can be found in the Gilgamesh Epic from the old Babylonian period (about 1900 BC). In this text, Gilgamesh, the tyrannical hero and ruler of Uruk, capital of Babylonia, is said to have enjoyed several privileges because of his outstanding position in the society of Uruk: 'He cohabits with the betrothed bride – He first, The husband afterwards' (Tigay 1982: 182. cf. von Soden 1981: 104; Schott 1988: 13-14, 27-28). This early literary text already contains the central idea of the jus primae noctis: one man’s privilege of sexual access to a woman before another man’s. Classical writers mention the right of the first night in the same context, describing it as a tyrannical privilege of despotic rulers. In his 'Historiae' (4. book, § 168), Herodotus (450 BC) reports about the Lybian tribe of the Adyrmachidae, who are said to have the custom that all virgins who wanted to marry had to be brought to the king, who had the right to deflower them, first. A later scholar, Herakleides Pontikos (400 BC) gives an account of a tyrannical ruler of the island Kepahlonia who claimed the first intercourse with brides on the island before they could marry (Herakleides Pontikos, parag. 32). Valerius Maximus (20 AD) mentions a similar custom that arose during the revolt of the slaves of Volsinii: no free man could marry a virgin who had not previously been deflowered by a slave (9. book, cap. 1, de luxuria et libidine, Exempla Externa, parag. 2.). Lactantius (300 AD) wrote about a very similar sexual privilege exercised by the emperor Maximin (†313 AD; cf. Moreau 1954: 121). Furthermore, there is a Semitic literary tradition of the tyrannical right of the first night which spread in Middle Eastern cultures. For example, in Talmudic and later in Midrashic sources, the Roman and Greek occupiers are said to have claimed this privilege (Patai 1974: 177f.). The use of the theme in literature to describe tyrannical and despotic rulers is persistent from classical times to the early Middle Ages. In the eighth century in the Annals of the monastery Clonmacnosie (Ireland), the Vikings are accused of demanding the right of the first night from Christian brides: 'the cheefe Gouvernour of them should have the bestowinge of any woman in the k'dom the first night after her marriage, so before her own husband should have carnal knowledge of her, to whom he pleased or keep her ... (Indecipherable. Part of page-end frayed) to himself by night, to satisfy his lust' (MacPhilib 1988: 103, n. 29: Trinity College, Dublin, Ms. 637). However, the same literary theme could also be used with no negative connotations to describe a hero. This is particularly the case in the Irish traditional epics of the high Middle Ages, which are related to early medieval Celtic customs. The Irish heroes of these epics are said to have enjoyed the privilege of the first night with the brides of their inferiors. These epics even speak of a kind of duty, which would point to a custom like ritual defloration in Celtic society, but our sources are too scarce to prove the true nature of these customs (Taín Bo Cuailnge 1976: 26, note p. 292, cf. Arbois de Jubainville 1905: 125-139; Hull 1953: 128-131; Westermarck 1921: 179-180; MacPhilib 1988; Wettlaufer 1999: 67-73).

本段举了几个古代欧亚文献中记载的类似于初夜权的案例,我大体将其分为两类,第一类是外人(对手)对其控诉对象的指控,文章作者认为体现了(民主斗士们,雾)对专制统治者残暴特权的指控,例如出生自以民主为傲的希腊世界的希罗多德对利比亚的部落Adyrmachidae习俗的记载,认为国王有权对想要结婚的chu女破chu,又比如基督教学者拉克坦提乌斯对异教皇帝、参与迫害基督徒的马克西米努斯二世的指控,认为他也有行使类似的初夜权(但是罗马帝国那么多人口。。。。)。这种类型本段还举了几例,总结起来都或多或少有攻击污蔑、煽动恐惧仇恨之嫌,有没有具体实施证明起来都相对困难,更别说上升到权力规定乃至法律规定的层面。另一种类型是远古史诗传说中的记载,如吉尔伽美什史诗,凯尔特人古老传说,认为英雄人物享有对少女的破chu权,然而本段也提到,由于资料稀缺,无法证明该习俗是否真正落实(毕竟多停留在神话传说层面)

In the later Middle Ages, from the fourteenth century onwards, the idea of the right of the first night became very popular in literature. In a French epic named 'Baudouin de Sebourc' of the so-called Second Crusaders Cycle (14th century), written in Northern France, a tyrannical lord claims the jus primae noctis unless the bride gives him a substantial part of her dowry (BNF [Bibliothèque Nationale de France], ms. fr. 12552, fol. 31v.; 38r-39r.; 39v-40r. Wettlaufer 1999: 126-140). Female dowry had become the most important financial transaction associated with marriage in later medieval times because the European marriage customs had changed from brideprice to dowry (cf. Hughes 1978). Furthermore it became related to female honor. A large dowry was seen as a sign of chastity. The partial deduction of this dowry by a despotic lord was thus perceived as an indirect attack on the bride’s chastity.

The epic of 'Baudouin de Sebourc' seems to be the prototype for the later use of the theme in Western European literature. But it is not the first testimony of a relationship between a lord’s privilege and customary marriage payments. A hundred years earlier, in a poem written at the monastery of Mt. Saint Michel (Normandy, France), the right of the first night is connected with marriage payments related to the bride’s dowry (Boureau 1995: 216-226; Hunger 1908, Appendix between p. 32/33 [Facsimile]; Wettlaufer 1999: 111-126). This poem reports a popular belief that, in ancient times, the lord had the right to share the newlywed bride’s bed, a right the lord would forfeit upon receipt of a specific payment. We have good reason to assume that the relationship between European marriage payments of unfree people and the theme of the jus primae noctis goes back to the early medieval period and has its roots in the legal condition of unfree people in relation to Germanic marriage customs.

The Germanic 'mundium' payment of the free bridegroom to his bride or her family implied the right to take possession of the bride by means of taking her home and having the first sexual intercourse with her. If an unfree man in the early Middle Ages wanted to marry a free woman, he not only had to ask his lord’s permission; it was also the lord who paid the mundium for the servant's bride as a loan. The unfree man was not legally entitled (position)???to act independently from his lord, and by paying the mundium, the lord acquired not only a new subject and wife for his servant but also (in a very formal sense) the right to take the woman home and to perform the 'Beilager', a symbolic custom representing the first sexual intercourse with the bride. The Germanic 'Beilager' was an important part of the Germanic marriage ritual that was later integrated into the ecclesiastical ritual of marriage (Wettlaufer 1998: 81-127; See Figure 1).

However, actual intercourse between lord and bride was never part of the (legal) marriage procedure. The lord obtained no marital rights from his role as procurator for the unfree servant bridegroom, but simply the right to have his loan for the mundium repaid. This repayment was due when the couple’s own daughters married. Later, different marriage payments were merged and fused together and changed their function, but the idea of a lord's privilege on the first night apparently remained connected to these payments. This new explanation of the relation between medieval marriage-payments and the literary theme of the right of the first night sheds some light on the obscure origin of a widespread popular belief during the European Middle Ages that such a right had formerly existed and was strongly connected to customary payments or fines like merchet, amobr, cullage, vadimonium, etc. (Cf. Wettlaufer 1999: 105-195).

这几段援引了法国叙事诗Baudouin de Sebourc中的一个片段,说14世纪一个领主企图索取新娘的嫁妆,不然就威胁行使初夜权,并提到这应该就是后来这一文学主题创作的原型,还提到更早的类似记载是一百年前圣米歇尔山修道院的一首诗中提到初夜权与新娘的嫁妆有关。文章由此推测该习俗很可能源于日耳曼人的古习俗,这个古习俗认为如果一个法律上属于领主的男人想要跟一个身为自由民的女子结婚,领主会借给他一笔钱,也就是mundium来赎身成为自由人,作为报答领主可以将新娘带回家并行使一种象征性的X交仪式“Beilager”,这个习俗后来延续到基督教婚礼上。我上wiki查了一下这个文中提到的象征性仪式Beilager,wiki上显示这是一种类似于从监护人处领走新娘的习俗,一般由当地德高望重的人或者亲属担任监护人,现存最早的萨克森法Saxony Mirror in 1220提到:Er ist ihr Vormund und sie ist seine Genossin, und tritt in sein recht, wann si in sein Bett tritt(He is her guardian and she is his companion, and enters his right, when shi occurs to bed,翻译成中文是:他是她的监护人,而她是他的同伴,当他走上床时他是对的)。现在大部分人认为这种仪式不包含性行为,当新婚夫妇交合时其他人应该也并不在场,有作家认为14世纪这种行为可能存在性行为(这里是我看wiki时看错了,这种观点应该是认为14世纪可能存在见证人在现场见证新娘新郎啪啪啪,相当于看一场活春宫,谢谢评论区

的指正 ),但考虑到14、15世纪描写这种仪式的场合一般是王室婚礼上,我想存在性行为的可能性微乎其微,并且没有任何记载显示这种仪式存在性行为


所以文章里这几段中最后一段也提到,领主和新娘之间的实际性行为在法律上从来不是合法的,领主从来不能从他的地位中获取这种夫妻间的婚姻的权力,这最多只能作为领主借款赎身的回应。这种对初夜权新的解释喻示着在中世纪,婚前习惯性的付款或罚款行为是普遍存在的。

II. The jus primae noctis as a power display in the late Middle Ages
We have quite a few examples showing how the popular belief in a former jus primae noctis influenced social relations between lords and peasants in Switzerland, France and Catalonia in the 15th and 16th centuries. One of these stems from a Swiss village in the vicinity of Zurich. In a customal from about 1400 A.D., the rights of the inhabitants of Maur were itemised by the local 'Meier', a representative of the lord of Maur, which at that time was the convent of Zurich. 'Item, who wants to enter the holy state of marriage in the village and court of Maur, whoever he may be, shall hand over the woman to Us for the first night or he may buy her out, as it is custom and tradition and written in the old customals. If he doesn't do so, he must pay a fine of 30 pennies.' (STAZ [Staatsarchiv des Kantons Zürich]. Urkunden Stadt und Land Nr. 2563; copy of the 15th century, cf. Wettlaufer 1999: 251). One hundred and fifty years later, the text had been slightly altered: in the 1543 version, written by a successor of the first editor, one reads '... and when the wedding starts, the bridegroom shall allow the sergeant to lie with his bride for the first night, or he shall buy her off with 5 pounds and 4 pennies.' (STAZ C. I 2562, [1543 AD] cf. Wettlaufer 1999: 255).
The amount of money mentioned in both texts was affordable for a peasant, and although customals generally reflect the lords’ claims about their rights over the people under their jurisdiction, these rights must nevertheless have been accepted by the peasants. Such texts were read aloud in front of the assembled village and everybody had to agree with them. In a recent work on the subject, Boureau (1995: 174) explains the medieval evidence for the jus primae noctis as a kind of popular joke that originated in the late Middle Ages from a complex rhetorical role inversion in the medieval village community. However, this interpretation is not supported by the historical sources (Wettlaufer 1996: 42-46).; the customals instead demonstrate a shared belief in the authenticity of the jus primae noctis for the 15th and 16th century, and are not consistent with the lords’ joking about certain taxes, as Boureau argued on the basis of some French examples (Boureau 1995: 123). Another argument favoring my interpretation is that, during that period, the popular belief in the right of the first night led to remarkable symbolic gestures connected to the marriage of unfree people. These gestures can be derived from the wedding customs of the late medieval period which were symbolically very rich.

这里文章作者开始切实深入到中世纪晚期的实例之中,他举了一个苏黎世附近的瑞士村庄莫尔的例子,莫尔领主的代表列了一份莫尔村民的权利:“凡是想在莫尔的村庄或宫廷里进入神圣婚姻殿堂的人,无论是谁,都需要把他的女人交给我们,或者他可以把她买走,这是这里的习俗和传统,如果不这么做,他必须缴纳三十便士。”还记载了莫尔村庄这项条款在1543年的改动,上面写道:当婚礼进行时,新郎应该允许the sergeant在第一晚睡在新娘旁边,除非他用5磅4便士将其买下。注意,这里提到的是“the rights of the inhabitants of Maur”,是莫尔居民们的权利,而不是莫尔领主的权利,后面也写到“shall hand over the woman to Us”,是交给我们而不是交给领主,并且没有提到性行为。The sergeant也没有领主的意思,也许应该翻译成军士、中士、警长或者律师,在我看来这貌似更接近于闹洞房或者捉弄新郎。下面的布若,也就是朱迪斯本内特提到和支持的、被认为雄辩的证明了初夜权不存在的那位学者,也认为这种仪式更接近一种中世纪复杂乡村社会关系开的玩笑,但遭到了Wettlaufer的反对,认为没有历史资料支持。让-韦尔东应该同样支持布若的看法,从他的名著《中世纪之夜》他援引了几个例子,证明这种权利不是领主所独有的,反而更像是一种乡村里乡亲之间闹洞房的习俗,韦尔东同样描写了14世纪末期乡村里常见的婚前付账行为,跟我国农村里用红包打发闹洞房的亲友的行为十分接近。更多的《中世纪之夜》的截图,我的好友

童鞋在之前的回答中已经给出了,我就不多贴了,有兴趣可以去他的回答下看。

论文作者并不倾向于支持布若的说法,但他同样表示,这种婚礼习俗应该是象征性的,而且这笔婚前付款是当地农民支付的起的。(看着是不是越看越像我国农村的闹洞房)

论文此处的配图Figure 1: Nuptial blessing of the wedding bed in the 15th century. Bringéus, N.A. Livets Högtider, Stockholm 1987, p. 153.
The best example of these symbolic gestures stems from the Catalonian Pyrenees. At the end of the 15th century, Catalonia witnessed the only successful peasant revolt of the Middle Ages. The background of this struggle for freedom was a conflict between the lords and the 'pagesos del remensas' (Freedman 1993: 39-54). This was a class of unfree peasants forced to pay certain humiliating taxes to their lords. In a text of mediation between the two parties, the peasants accused the lords of practising symbolic acts on the wedding night to demonstrate their power and lordship. It is said that they climbed on the bed with the bride and passed over her. Furthermore the lords were accused of having abused these symbolic acts for purpose of sexual harassment. The lords, on the other hand, denied all this, but at the same time promised to abolish all such coercive customs. (Hinojosa 1905: 367 with reference to Bibliotheca del Escorial. Mss. ij d 15, fol. 27-31v° [1]. cf. Schmidt-Bleibtreu 1988: 170, n. 52; Freedman 1991: 178-253). The central idea of this text is further supported by several other texts from this region (Wettlaufer 1994: 284-285; 1999: 281-292). This is the only medieval testimony indicating anything like actual sexual relations between the lords and the peasant brides in the context of the right of the first night, and the evidence concerns only sexual harassment, not sexual intercourse. We can infer from this example that in the late medieval period, a time when socioeconomic status differences were diminishing, the lords used the jus primae noctis as a sign (display) of superiority over their dependent and unfree peasants. In this context, the function of rape as a means of humiliating the husband or male relatives of a raped women should not be underestimated (Cf. Devereux 1978: 185ff. Duerr 1993: 428f.). The symbolic use of the 'right' was known in several European regions; in France, for example, the lord could put a naked leg onto the bride's bed (droit de cuissage). In this respect the jus primae noctis in the later Middle Ages was 'real', even though there is not a single proven case of actual sexual relations between bride and lord in the name of this 'right'.

文章的这一部分是对我们传统观念中认为初夜权会发生性行为的最有力的反对。这里列举了十五世纪末一次加泰罗尼亚地区的农民反抗初夜权的法庭记录,记录显示加泰罗尼亚农民被迫缴纳了这项侮辱性税收,农民指责领主为了展示自己的身份和权力在新婚之夜进行了象征性行为,这种象征性行为是什么呢?“It is said that they climbed on the bed with the bride and passed over her”仅仅只是爬上床并跨过了新娘而已。而领主同样被指控过分滥用这种象征性行为进行sexual harassment(也就是性骚扰,而非X交)。领主否认了指控,但承诺会废除这种强制性的习俗。


这是中世纪唯一确实涉及到初夜权的法律文件,文件表明初夜权最多涉及到性骚扰而非现代人臆测的X交。作者由此推断初夜权应该是领主用于展现自己优越地位的一种手段,以及对隶农的一种侮辱,但不涉及到真正的性行为。文章作者同时也提到,不能忽视的一点是,领主可能会趁机强奸新娘,但这并不属于初夜权的范畴。文章还提到法国有一种初夜权的形式是领主把裸露的腿放到新娘呆着的床上,其实是这样的:

论文后面还有两个主题,分别从欧洲以外文化里的初夜权现象和心理学方面分析了初夜权问题,与本文关系不大,便不转载了, 有兴趣可以选择阅读原文。总的来说我们可以发现,初夜权是有的,但是最多停留在性骚扰阶段,更多的是一种类似于闹洞房或者从监护人手中带走新娘的习俗,也有一定可能性是一种收税的名目。但基本上是不存在现代人想象中的直接性行为的,the jus primae noctis直译过来是第一夜的权利,并没有说到涉及性行为的部分。不过具有性行为的初夜权的说法具有极大蛊惑性和煽动性,所以近代以来,由于中世纪的污名化,所以很多以生活在“文明的时代”而自豪的人将“黑暗的”中世纪的初夜权臆测成了具有性行为的封建权力,一如以生活在民主希腊为傲的希罗多德对专制独裁的利比亚部落主的初夜权指控一样(当然这个并不排除具有一定可能性,毕竟当时利比亚部落文明水平是未知的)。


原文地址:A review of historic sources with evolutionary interpretation.

特别鸣谢:

提供了本篇论文的来源。

    本站是提供个人知识管理的网络存储空间,所有内容均由用户发布,不代表本站观点。如发现有害或侵权内容,请点击这里 或 拨打24小时举报电话:4000070609 与我们联系。

    猜你喜欢

    0条评论

    发表

    请遵守用户 评论公约

    类似文章
    喜欢该文的人也喜欢 更多