Essay The Roles of Anglo-Saxon Women

A marriage proposal is an occasion where one person in a relationship asks for the other's hand in marriage. Overtime, marriage proposals have changed in virtually all cultures. In the 1800s, marriage was more for social gain or monetary gain. However, marriage for love wasn’t unknown. William Collins proposal to Elizabeth Bennet in Jane Austen’s novel, Pride and Prejudice and Bradley Headstone’s proposal to Lizzie Hexam in Charles Dickens's’ Our Mutual Friend are perfect examples of two different types of marriage proposals that may have been giving during the 1800s. Analyzing Mr. Headstones and Mr. Collins’ techniques and the language used in their proposals reveal the weaknesses and strengths of their proposals.

Dowries are extremely important to consider when it comes to arranged marriages. A dowry is a gift that could be goods, money, or land that a bride’s family will give to the groom to marry the bride. Dowries could be used to bring two powerful families together by having their children marry, for example, royal arranged marriages. In the Biblical sense, a girl who is still a virgin is more of prize than one who is not. In a way dowries make the daughter or son feel as property as told by Sara Smolinsky, “to [my father] I was nothing but his last unmarried daughter to be bought and sold” (205). Mr. Smolinsky stated, “It’s not enough to take my Bessie without a dowry. You must pay me yet” (47). Mr. Smolinsky, being the stubborn man he is, decided when Berel Bernstein asked for Bessie’s hand in marriage without the need of a dowry, that Mr. Smolinsky should get a bride price as well. A bride price

A woman had a busy domestic life. A woman played the role of wife, mother, teacher and manager. She had to please her husband, bear and raise children, educate her children, and manage all daily household activities. In the home, the woman was the jack of all trades. Part of the role of the female was to take raw goods, and turn them into useful items, such as food, candles, and clothing. Women had to clean, butcher and prepare all game brought home to the family. A woman was a household factory. Many items in the home were created by women. All clothing was made by spinning, weaving and stitching. All cloth was washed by hand without the aid of any machines. Candles were made at home by weaving a wick and pouring hot wax into a mold. A woman had to be educated enough to teach her sons and daughters the skills of life. Women spent the majority of their time performing daily tasks, but still were able to have leisure activities such as painting, embroidery, and charity work. Women had very few legal rights. In the majority of colonies, women had no legal control over their lives. It was the consensus among society that

This left women with a clear disadvantage. The system worked well in happy marriages, but if a situation such as a husband's death, desertion from his family, or divorce were to arise, it was usually the woman who suffered as a result. According to the Code, a contract was necessary for marriage. Also, when a man and woman were getting married, the most important item to be negotiated was the bride price. This, again, shows that men were superior to women when it came to the ownership of property. Regardless of the amount of this bride price, it was managed by the husband and it was used to support the wife and her children: "If a woman who lived in a man's house made an agreement with her husband, that no creditor can arrest her, and has given a document therefore; if that man, before he married that woman, had a debt, the creditor can not hold the woman for it" (Pritchard 155). The bride's father had the right to change his mind about the marriage, in which case he would have been required to refund the purchase price in full showing again how women were nothing more than a piece of property: "If a man bring chattels into the house of his father-in-law and pay the price; if then the father of the girl say "I will not give you my daughter," he shall give back all that he brought with him" (Pritchard 156). Another horrific example of how women were regarded as nothing more than mere possessions was that if a wife died before giving birth to

Even though women did not have a lot of social rights, they had two very important roles. They were to run the house and reproduce children. Even Euripides, a well known Greek playwright, stated , “Women run households and protect within their homes, and without a woman no home is clean or prosperous” (Neils 78). This shows that women were the ones who controlled the home. The wives would maintain the house and perform chores such as weaving, baking and cooking, cleaning, and fetching water. The women’s daily roles were simplified if they house had slaves. If there were slaves, they would do all of the chores and the wife would supervise

The male had to show the woman’s father his skills as a hunter or warrior. If the father was impressed and approved of the marriage, the man and woman would exchange gifts of horses and clothing and were considered married. The married couple would reside in their own tipi or with the husband’s family. Although the man was permitted more than one wife, typically he only chose one. In cases of more than one wife, quite often the male would choose a sister of the wife, believing that sisters would not argue as much as total strangers

In the sixteenth century the role of women in society was very limited. Women were generally stereotyped as housewives and mothers. They were to be married, living their life providing for her husband and children. The patriarchal values of the Elizabethan times regarded women as the weaker sex.’ Men were considered the dominant gender and were treated with the utmost respect by females. Women were mainly restricted within the confines of their homes and were not allowed to go school or to university, but they could be educated at home by private tutors. Men were said to be the ones to provide for their families financially. Women were often seen as not intelligent. Property could not be titled in the name of a female within the family. Legally everything the female had belonged to her husband. Poor and middle class wives were kept very busy but rich women were not idle either. In a big house they had to organize and supervise the servants.

• Fathers gave sons acreage so they could get married and daughters had to have a dowry to get married. The better the land or dowry the better the social standing in the community.

In John Osborne 's 1956 piece, Look Back in Anger, housewife Alison Porter is faced with the difficult decision of remaining in a toxic marriage or returning to live with her parents. Indeed, Alison is the archetype of the 1950s British woman, as depicted in both academic and popular discourse—meek, miserable and resigned to her fate as mother and housewife. While such a paradigm of the 1950s woman has long remained unchallenged, historians have begun to suggest that this stereotype is inaccurate and misleading, and overlooks the complexity of female gender roles during Britain of this era. When reviewing the literature on this topic, what emerges as a clear point of tension between academics is whether the 1950s was a static or a dynamic

"Upon marriage, woman became the legal wards of their husbands, as they previously had been of their fathers while still unmarried" (Martin, 68). It was common for a father to sell his young daughter into marriage and the young women had no say in her preference of her suitors (Mahaffy, 48). This was done while the girl was in her young teens while the groom was ten to fifteen years older (Martin, WEB2). As the father, or guardian, gave the young girl away he would repeat the phrase that expressed the primary aim of marriage: "I give you this women for the plowing [procreation] of legitimate children" (Martin, WEB2). The woman’s role was primarily in the home. "Households thus depended on women, whose wok permitted the family to economically self-reliant and the male citizens to participate in the public life of the polis" (Martin, WEB2).

Even though British America was constantly growing and developing for almost two hundred years, the role that men and women played in society remained consistent. As patriarch of the house, the man was responsible for earning the money, working to support his family, sitting in on town meetings, and holding overall power above the household. The woman was a household benefactor, in charge of keeping the house clean, preparing meals, and bearing children. It seemed that each person had their place: a man was meant to be tough, strong leaders, while the women were simply meant to be domestic housewives. However, change in the colonies began not only in the economy and settlements, but also in gender roles. Women were the only ones who had quiet

In the Middle Ages from 476 CE- 14th century almost all of the power of women was determined by biblical references. The average woman in a rural area had the duty of making clothes from wool, cleaning, cooking, and taking care of children. The women in town often were tasked in purchasing and trading goods and the normal housekeeping. In extreme cases women were known as witches. Other women became nuns and got involved in spiritual matters. In the year 1000 traditional marriage that involved getting married for financial reasons became less common. Although the parents still assisted in choosing the spouse it was becoming freer to choose who to marry. The woman was essentially owned by a male guardian almost like a child. However, if a rich widowed woman decided she did not want or have another guardian available, she was able to have her own name. During the Middle Ages many rich women were able to participate in things such as art, music or writing. It was rare for a woman not that well off to be able to purchase the tools or have the education to do art, music, or writing. All the rules developed depended on how

After marriage, women were to take the husband's ancestors as hers. Thus, a marriage had a purpose of continuing the ancestral line and raising the status of the family.

“Most girls were trained from childhood for the traditional roles of wife, mother, and housekeeper. They learned how to grind grain, how to cook and make beverages, especially beer, and how to spin and weave cloth for clothing. If a woman worked outside of her home, her job usually grew out of her household

After her father died, Mary Astell was left without a dowry, resulting in her being considered incompatible for marriage. In her book, Some Reflections Upon Marriage, Astell pointed out that there were only few lively marriages in England because of the way the English institution worked. Marriages in England were determined by income, and no thought went into the emotional harmony and compatibility of husband and wife. This was so rendering to Astell’s life because she didn’t have the money to marry someone with the same viewpoints as her or even respectable enough to take her hand in marriage. Mary Astell proclaimed that “[marriage] for Love, an Heroick Action, which makes a mighty noise in the World, partly because of its rarity, and partly in regard of its extravagancy” (Astell 41). In this quote, Mary Astell is saying that men and women rarely marry for love because it was more common for them to be bounded together for financial benefits and an increase of social status. But, when a couple married for love, they made a larger mark on the world this is because it showed that there was a step closer in the direction of women marrying a man that will love her and had no need to support her financially. Astell believed that women should not be viewed as a slave or property, and that they should have the ability to chose their own destiny. She showed that men rarely married for love because if a man admired a woman for her wit, than an unsuccessful marriage would