“Porque no tengo el ánimo de casarme”:
el desistimiento al matrimonio en los juicios de disenso en la Nueva Galicia a
finales del siglo XVIII*
José Luis Cervantes Cortés[1]
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Reception: 20/05/2015
Evaluation: 18/08/2015
Approval: 26/09/2015
Research and Innovation Article.
Resumen
La aplicación de la Real Pragmática de Matrimonios de 1776,
en el mundo hispánico, dio origen a una gran cantidad de controversias
familiares, debido a la elección matrimonial que habían hecho los hijos de
familia. Por una parte, los padres defendían el linaje y la reputación de sus
familias, mientras que los hijos optaban por la capacidad que tenían para
manifestar su libre voluntad para contraer matrimonio; de esta manera se
presentaron varias demandas judiciales ante los tribunales ordinarios para
tratar de resolver estos conflictos. En este contexto se inscribe el siguiente
trabajo, en el cual se analizan ocho juicios de disenso que culminaron con la
presentación del desistimiento al matrimonio por parte de la pretensa, sin
tener que justificar cuáles fueron los motivos que le concernían para retraer
su decisión; sin embargo, mediante la lectura de estos casos se puede apreciar
la participación de diversas personas que influyeron en el discurso de las
jóvenes convenciéndolas de no verificar su casamiento; asimismo, también se
distinguen los recursos que utilizaron los padres, como el depósito femenino,
el desprestigio de los pretendientes o el refuerzo de su autoridad patriarcal,
para tratar de evitar que se llevaran a cabo dichos enlaces.
Palabras clave: Desistimiento, Juicios de disenso, Consentimiento
paterno, Consenso conyugal, Matrimonio.
“Why I do not
wish to marry”: withdrawal from agreements to marry in lawsuits in Nueva
Galicia in the late 18th century.
Abstract
In the Hispanic world, the
implementation of the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages, in 1776, caused a great
amount of family controversy, due to the matrimonial choice made by the
children from good families. On the one hand, parents defended the lineage and
reputation of their families, while the children chose to express their free
will to marry. Several lawsuits were filed before the courts in order to solve these
conflicts. This is the context in which the present research project is framed,
where eight lawsuits were analyzed, that ended with the rejection of the
marriage proposal by the female party, without having to justify the reasons
concerning to their decision. Nevertheless, in reading these cases, external
influences over the speech of the young ladies are evident, convincing them to
avoid the fulfillment of the weddings. We can also identify different
strategies used by the parents such as the “confinement of wives” in the homes
of honorable families or other places suggested by the jury, discrediting the
reputation of the fiancé or reinforcing patriarchal authority, in order to
dissuade them from engaging in these marital unions.
Key Words: Withdrawal, juicios de disenso (lawsuits by guardians
contesting the right of children to marry), parental consent, conjugal
consent, marriage.
Une stratégie
féminine: le refus du mariage dans les procès de désistement : Nouvelle Galice,
fin du XVIIIe siècle
Résumé
L’application dans le monde hispanique de la Pragmatique
Royale de Mariages (1776), a suscité une grande quantité de disputes
familiales, en raison des choix des conjoints. Tandis que les pères défendaient
le lignage et la réputation de leurs familles, les fils passaient à l’acte, en
mettaient en avant leur libre volonté, ce qui a entraîné nombre de procédures
devant les tribunaux ordinaires. Dans cet article nous analyserons huit procès
de désistement dans lesquels les femmes ont refusé le mariage, sans se voir
pressés de justifier les motifs de leur décision. Ces cas, permettent,
toutefois, d’apprécier l’ascendant de diverses personnes sur les jeunes et sur
leur décision de ne pas se marier. De même, on peut y distinguer les ressources
employées par les pères pour tenter d’éviter ces liaisons comme le dépôt
féminin, le discrédit des prétendants ou le renforcement de leur autorité
patriarcale.
Mots-clés: Renoncement, Procès de désistement,
Consentement paternel, Consensus conjugal, Mariage
1. Introduction
The objective of this work lies in
the analysis of the withdrawal from marriage by young women who were involved
in the lawsuits so as to argue that they did not wish or it was no longer their
will to proceed with said marriage. In order to carry out this analysis we have
aimed to make a review of the different strategies used in this type of family litigation,
as well as identifying the presence of several characters that participated in
these conflicts and that, in some way, motivated the betrothed to change their
minds and refuse to marry. It is true that in these eight cases we can
explicitly observe the decision of the betrothed to decline her promise to
marry, but the contrivances that the parents used to guide the decisions of
their daughters as a means of putting their interests first are also evident.
We will also find the participation of the judicial authorities in defending
the ideas of the parents in such circumstances and thus protecting the honor
and will of the intended wives in view of the presumed marriage.
In order to
support our work, we have used the study of the statements made by the women
involved in this type of civil litigation, for in these cases their word became
irrefutable proof to finalize the lawsuit. However, the strategies that were
used in these trials on several occasions did not consist of an original idea
coming from them, but they were frequently influenced by the decisions of the
parents, of some relative or other circumstance that forced them to change
their minds. In this way, the legal condition of the intended wives was used to
a certain end, in this case the invalidation of the marriage that these women
intended to enter into.
One of the main
questions that we will try to answer is the reasons why the testimony where the
fiancée claimed that it was no longer her will to get married became enough
proof to suspend the trial, without a justification for this decision, as in
none of the eight cases that will be presented below were the reasons for this sudden
change of heart given. It was different in the case of men, because if a man
refused to fulfill his matrimonial promise, he had to present the arguments
that concerned evading his nuptial responsibility and, in some occasions, he
could be forced to keep his word or remedy the situation in some way,
especially if the sexual act with the woman in question had been consummated.
The following
investigation derives from a more extensive work, where the general method of
application of the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages of 1776 in Nueva Galicia at the
end of the 18th century[2] was studied.
However, in this work we will exclusively dedicate ourselves to the study of
eight particular cases which correspond to a part of the lawsuits that we have
found in this jurisdiction and that concluded with the withdrawal from marriage
by the intended wife.
The eight cases
that we will analyze in this work took place in the Royal Audiencia of Guadalajara between
1790 and 1803, in the capital of the Intendency and
other neighboring towns. In this jurisdiction, we have found 90 lawsuits of
this type and more than 70 marriage licenses, of which we have selected eight
cases which share similar situations and results, and represent 9% of the
documental corpus studied[3]. At the same
time, it was a period when the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages was put into
practice in the Indies, legislated by Carlos III on 23rd March 1776,
and the main objective of which was to avoid that marriages of notorious
inequality due to racial, social and economic questions took place.
2. Paternal consent and conjugal
consensus
Towards the18th century, a
sociocultural debate started between the Crown and the Church in the Hispanic
monarchy, regarding the authority the parents had to intervene in the
matrimonial decisions of their children before the free will if the
spouses-to-be.
Spanish
legislation, from Siete Partidas,
gave the parents the faculties and the authority to have a vigilant attitude as
regards the matrimonial choice of their children, under the legal condition of parental
responsibility[4]. However, it
was supposed that the ecclesiastic authorities constantly favored the choices
of children over paternal objections. This situation caused endless tensions in
society, for while some defended the acknowledgement of the paternal authority
and the need for the parents to give their consent for their children to marry,
others had the idea of the freedom of the children, to follow their free will
and choose a partner for purely affective reasons[5].
This debate
implied a discussion with the precepts that had been ratified in the Council of
Trent, for one the achievements of the counter-reform, as regards marriage, was
the reiteration of the existence of free will for the spouses-to-be to get
married[6]. While this
reflection was not a novelty at the time, the phrase Consensus facit nuptias
was revived, and with this expression the true nature of marriage was
announced, this is, mutual consent of the spouses. In this way, canonists and
theologists of the time reflected upon the idea of marriage under this
assumption, given that conjugal consent was the first element that could
construct the sacrament of marriage[7].
On the other
hand, in the same council, it was established that the will of the spouses had
to be expressed orally and through external signs that ruled out any doubt,
this action was used make the word of marriage more valid, “for no contract
takes effect if the contracting parties do not express their will to one
another[8].” In addition,
marital consent had to be expressed in the present tense; this means that they
had to express their will to get married at the moment they made the statement[9].
At the same
time, the doctrine on free will established the limits of the paternal
authority, for the heads of the family had the chance to participate in the
matrimonial choice, but they could not assign the future spouse of their
children, nor try to change their wishes, even less cast doubt upon their
choice or impose a decision. Canonic law condemned the use of force, coaction
and violence in the choice of a spouse, except in the case that the condition
was contrary to the interests of marriage or that there was any impediment between
the spouses-to-be to carry out the wedding[10].
However, the
practice of expressing the free will to get married was not very frequent in
most cases, because the tradition of the father’s supervision was more
relevant. In this way, the choice of the future spouse became a decision that
was not exclusively made by the couple, but it was of the utmost interest to
the families of the spouses-to-be[11].
In this context
the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages arose, which was enacted on 23 March 1776 by
Carlos III, and spread in the Indies through a royal document as from 7 April
1778[12]. The main
objective of this legal order was to “avoid the indecency of unequal marriages[13].” The main
reasons that motivated the Crown to write this Royal Pragmatic were: the change
in the economic conditions of the population and the growth of social mobility,
the expansion and reinforcing of the normative patriarchy and the concern of the
aristocratic families regarding unequal marriages or the fear of “racial
contamination” through marriage[14].
In this sense,
the enforcement of such a law constitutes a paradigmatic example of the effort
made by the Spanish Crown to control social and political conflicts, which had
triggered the phenomenon of the “darkening” the population as a consequence of
interracial marriages, as the Royal Pragmatic referred to the inconvenience of
unions with people of mixed blood, that is to say, mulattos and other
afro-mixes[15].
Through this
Royal Pragmatic, the heads of the family were given the faculty to have active participation
in the election of their children’s spouses. This law specified that the sons
and daughters under 25 years of age had to ask for and obtain parental consent
in order to marry. Additionally, through this norm, parents were transferred
attributions over their children’s marriage, subjecting them to a forced
parental authority, as they needed their explicit consent as a formal requisite
to get married. This was justified by the authorities saying that respect for
paternal authority would lead to a basis of social stability[16].
The fact of studying the Royal Pragmatic
within a certain jurisdiction, that of Nueva Galicia in this case, is not
because it had a different application there than that specified in its
content, but because through its application it is possible to observe its
exercise and invocation in the pre-nuptial conflicts that took place in the area,
for through the study of these cases it is possible to detect different
elements that allow us to make a more thorough analysis of the family
relationships and the conflicts between parents and children in Nueva Galicia
at the end of the 18th century. At the same time, in this work we
can determine the participation of the justice boards regarding the regulation
of the individual conducts, through the resolution of lawsuits.
3. The lawsuits
The conflicts that arose as a
consequence of the enactment of the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages have a diverse
nature. Even when the aim of this regulation was to avoid marriages between
people of unequal racial quality, in the case of Indies, we can also observe
that there were circumstances or factors that had an incidence in the
justification of the parents to take the issue to court.
In general
terms, the reasons that the parents put forward in order to start a lawsuit
have been divided into seven categories. First, we have cases where the
justification was the ethnic differences between the spouses-to-be; there are
also the cases about lineage, in this case we refer to situations where the
parents mentioned that one of the future spouses was of inferior quality,
although they were referring to people who belonged to the same ethnic group.
There was also opposition over moral disparity, which refers to people’s
attitudes. At the same time, there were age oppositions that could be of two
kinds: when the spouses-to-be were too young for marriage or when there was a
great age difference between them. On the other hand, there were also cases of
different social conditions, for example, that one of the two was a slave, an
abandoned child or that the trade of the husband-to-be parents was not
considered decent enough so as to marry their daughter. There was also
opposition due to the economic situation of the young, for social status was
also measured by their wealth and social position. And finally, a group called
“for no reason,” as during the whole process of the trial the reasons of the
parents to oppose the marriage were never mentioned, the only argument is that
the person chosen by their children was not to their liking[17].
From the cases
that were dealt with in the Royal Audiencia of Guadalajara, only 25% of the total correspond
to the processes where the ethnic quality of the spouses-to-be was involved,
which was the main reason why the Royal Pragmatic was enacted, while most of
the cases correspond to requests to start legal actions for various different
reasons; lineage and moral conditions of the young were the most common.
The eight cases
that we have selected to carry out this work are very different from one
another, but they have some common ground. In general, the procedure can be the
same, there is a negative response from the parents who do not want to give
their consent for their children to get married. However, after several
statements and testimonials, of both parties, finally the woman desisted from
their promise of marriage and in the face of this situation, the trial was
concluded, for the presentation of the statement was considered justification
enough to put an end the lawsuit. Now it was no longer necessary to review the
evidence presented or that the judge declare the parental dissent rational and
fair.
As it had been
expressed before, the eight cases that we have analyzed in this work took place
between 1790 and 1803, in the city of Guadalajara and in the villages of Mascota and Tala. Additionally,
these cases share some characteristics: all of them were started by the men who
wanted to get married, in seven of the opposing the cases of marriage, it was
the parents of the wives-to-be. And finally, the reasons the parents used to
justify not giving their consent, obey the following causes: in four of them
the opposition lay in the ethnic component, in two the social conditions
prevailed, in one of them moral conduct and in the other the crime of having
kidnapped the fiancée.
4. Withdrawal from marriage
In Hispanic
legislation, when a woman presented a lawsuit before the civil justice due to
marital non-fulfillment, it proceeded to the investigation of the matter and
the man had the obligation to argue the reasons to evade his responsibility. If
after his testimony his acts were not justified or supported, according to
canonic and civil laws, he could be penalized for failing to fulfill his word.
However, a totally contrary attitude can be observed when it was women who made
the decision to not get married, although engagement with her fiancé had
already been celebrated. This reality will be reflected in lawsuits where, on
some occasions, the young women expressed that they no longer desired to get
married and, after their testimonial, the trial was concluded without the need
to justify the cause of this decision.
For this
reason, we wonder about the opposite situation, which supposed the resolution
of both cases, if the cause was the same for both: the engagements’
non-fulfillment, although it is evident that the legal effects were different
because if men refused to fulfill his promise he had to present the pertinent
justification for failing to comply with his word, while for women, dissent was
argument enough to put an end to the conflict. The explanation for this
situation is argued in the legislation of the time as well as in the
representation of honor in the society of the Old Regime.
In the Hispanic
world, the honor system was the underlying structure that led and organized the
way in which people interacted with each other. However, despite the simplicity
of the scheme, honor had a very complex system and multiple ways of being
appreciated, for it consisted to a great extent of social relations in which
the elite of the town stood out and, in addition, it highlighted the family
structures of the time[18]. One of the
characteristics of honor refers to the sexual identity of the individual. Schwaller mentions that the roles that the sexes had were
clearly defined and, additionally, there was a marked distinction of gender
regarding the activities that men and women carried out, and within the female
circle there was a marked unity regarding their roles[19].
During the new
Hispanic period, honor was based on maintaining a reputation, prestige and the
good name of families. At the same time, honor constituted the structure of the
“must be,” although this scheme was not necessarily generalized nor static, for
this model was not always fulfilled and not the whole of society could aspire
to the same levels of prestige and social recognition[20].
The main
dimension of honor can be observed in the lawsuits, and more precisely in the
ones analyzed in this work, which correspond to the sexual honor of women. In
the Old Regime, women had the general honor of the family, for that matter, fathers
protected the reputation of their wives and daughters. For example, if a young
woman had been dishonored by having lost her virginity, the parents tried to
remedy the loss of the young woman’s virtue, and one of the solutions was that
she married he who had dishonored her. Nevertheless, in several occasions the
women had lost their virginity, but the parents refused that they marry because
of considering the suitor to be inferior, although this situation could cause them
to lose their honor, and bring shame and public humiliation upon the whole
family, but they considered that to be preferable to seeing their daughters
marry a mulatto or someone inferior to them[21].
This same
approach was recurrently used by the civil authorities in the lawsuits, where
the judges always tried to defend the honor of the women involved, mainly when
the case involved the loss of virginity with a promise of future marriage[22]. When this
type of situation took place, women were considerably supported, as in general
the authorities solved these conflicts and always cared for the restitution of
sexual honor. Likewise, when they presented marital withdrawal, this proof
became testimonial enough to put an end to the conflict, for it was taken for
granted that putting that decision forward had the objective of keeping their
honor, so it was respected without question. For this reason, the resolution of
the cases for marriage non-fulfillment had different conclusions whether the
litigant was a man or a woman, as the dishonor to the fiancée would be punished
and the restitution of the young woman’s virtue would be privileged.
This situation
was taken advantage of by the parents who denied their consent for their
daughters to get married, for they used the before mentioned argument to serve
their purpose. On some occasions withdrawing was the young woman’s own decision,
which can be inferred from the statements made before the authorities, where
they expressed their unwillingness to marry. However, this fact could be really
ambiguous and many times the different circumstances around this decision
cannot be determined, for it was not frequent that the reasons for this sudden
change of heart were put forward, although in some cases the young women were
pregnant, which meant public dishonor. Below, we will approach the matter of marriage
withdrawal in the lawsuits, on the basis of the detailed study of the cases
reviewed.
5. The strategies for withdrawing
In the town hall of Mascota, on the 10th of May 1791, appeared Don Juan María Celis before the ordinary
justice of said place to denounce the fact that the father of his fiancé, Don
Nicolás Perez, refused to give consent to his daughter, Doña Leonarda, to marry
Juan María. The spouses-to-be had already celebrated their engagement and they
had already kept an “illicit friendship” for some time. For that matter, Juan
María appeared before the local authorities so that Don Nicolas would express
the reasons for disagreeing with their marriage.
Thus, Don Nicolás appeared in court to mention that his daughter’s
suitor was: “a mulatto with a bad reputation” and he also added that he was a
person with bad customs, for he had “the vice for gambling,” as Juan María was
a gambling operator in a gambling den of the town and he related with “the most
insignificant people who are commonly called rogues”; in addition, Don Nicolás
pointed out that the suitor had been involved in scandals and criminal conduct
in said locality, and for that reason he would not give his consent for his
daughter to get married.
On the other
hand, Doña Leonarda expressed that she was aware of the arguments presented by
her father against her marriage with Juan Maria, and she also expressed that
“although there were more arguments, she would marry him anyway” and that she
would not change her mind. However, after several statements, presentations of
evidence, and testimonials on both sides and a full year of litigation, Doña
Leonarda presented a written document where she expressed the following: “My
beloved father, this document is to be presented to whom it may concern, I
hereby declare that it is not my desire to marry[23].”
The stories
that we will retell below shared similar situations and ended up with the women
desisting from carrying out said marriage. In some cases, the mechanisms used
to achieve this goal tended to be visible, whereas in others it is more complex
to determine what the reasons were for withdrawing from marriage. The previous
case can be peculiar as much conflict was caused by Doña Leonarda’s intention
to marry. In addition, it is evident that the young woman is determined to
marry her fiancé. However, this wish changed due to several circumstances that
finally convinced the young woman to desist from her intentions to marry Juan
María.
The fundamental
part of this case is the letter presented by Doña Leonarda, where she expressed
that she no longer wanted to get married. Nevertheless, this decision was the
result of different resources applied by her father to discourage his daughter
and make her realize that the marriage she intended was not convenient. First,
he tried to discredit the suitor by stating that he was of inferior quality and
moral conduct. However, this strategy did not work as the accusations were not
proved. Juan María also proved his blood purity by presenting five witnesses
who corroborated that he was Spanish and of a good reputation. At the same time,Don Nicolás
managed to hide his daughter to avoid that she be kidnapped or that the
marriage took place in secret and, finally, when the documents of this trial
were sent to the Royal Audiencia
of Guadalajara for review, a situation took place that convinced Doña Leonarda
to decide not to marry and then she presented the previously mentioned letter,
which will be dealt with later on.
Another lawsuit where the proof of withdrawal was presented
took place in Tala, around 1790. In this case the father of the young woman, Don
Miguel Balcázar, denounced, before the ordinary
justice, the kidnapping of his daughter, Doña Juana María, perpetrated by José
María Naranjo, an aboriginal servant who used to work in their house. In his
statement, Don Balcázar expressed that José María had
kidnapped his daughter, with her full consent, and that he had taken her to Cocula with the objective of getting married. In this way, Don
Miguel begged that the judge “prevented the marriage from taking place, as he,
under no circumstances, would give his consent[24].” Later on, the judge ordered the search for the
couple, who were found in the ranch of Higuera and it
was determined that Doña Juana María was confined in Don Francisco Delgadillo’s
house and José María was imprisoned with the charge of kidnapping.
When Doña Juana was in confinement, she had a statement
taken and she expressed that, at first she did intend to marry José María, because
“she had done wrong, having carnal relations with José María Naranjo, and that
she was now pregnant, and that being in such a shameful and fearful situation,
leaving her house and going into hiding was the right thing to do[25].” However, given the situation of the young woman and
her condition, she said: “I no longer wish to get married […] because I know
that my parents disagree, and I just want to make them happy[26].” In that way, the trial was concluded, not without
previously confirming that the suitor had escaped from prison.
In this case, the situation that triggered Doña
Juana’s change of heart was the confinement she was in. Even when Doña Juana
expressed that this decision was made out of respect for her father as she knew
that he did not agree with it, it can be corroborated that father and daughter
had no contact during the trial until she was taken from the house of Don
Francisco Delgadillo, so the temporary confinement could have influenced her
decision to desist from marriage.
The confinement of women had diverse objectives,
first, this legal resource was useful for the custody and safeguard the young
women, so they were not bothered or assaulted, but confinement was also thought
as an opportunity for the women not to have contact with the litigant parties
and, thus, could give their statement without family or affective pressures. In
general, confinement was compulsory if determined by a judge and, in other
occasions, the same suitors or the parents of the young women solicited their
reclusion so as to obtain a certain result. The most common places to carry out
the confinement were the houses of clergymen, honorable families and
institutions, such as schools, convents or seclusion retreats for women[27].
Another case where feminine confinement also had an
influence on the decision of not getting married took place in Guadalajara around
1791. Doña Inés de la Loza, mother of Doña María
Dolores, refused to give consent for her daughter to marry José Gerónimo Aguilar, for she expressed that the suitor was not
of pure blood “for his simple appearance.” In this way, the mayor, Don Patricio
de Soto, determined the confinement of the young woman in the house of Don José
Zapata, while the investigation on the case was carried out. Afterwards, Doña
María Dolores said under oath that “it was no longer her intention to get
married and that she only wanted to make her mother happy, the reason why she
asked to be taken to her family home,” and the trial concluded in that way[28]. This case was rapidly solved and no proof was needed
on the kind of person José Gerónimo was, who
afterwards ratified that he was a legitimate Spaniard. Before this situation,
it cannot be determined if the young woman had any contact with her mother, but
it is evident that her respect for her mother’s will was stronger than for her
own. Once again, confinement was useful for the young woman to change her mind
as regards marriage.
Another strategy used by many relatives of young women
to justify their not giving consent for them to get married was to prove that
one of the two had already been promised in marriage to someone else. One of
these cases took place in 1798, when Doña María Gertrudis Sandoval tried to
marry José Manuel Pérez Fernández. The uncle of the young woman, Don José
Antonio Calvillo, refused to give consent for his
niece to marry, for he explained that the suitor had already married María
González, information which was in the church of Mexicaltzingo[29]. On the other hand, Don José Antonio asked that his
niece take an oath to express if she intended to marry José Manuel, in this
way, María Gertrudis was summoned and she stated that “it was not her intention
to marry José Manuel as she had already given her word of marriage to Antonio
Cabrera[30],” this testimony was enough proof to conclude the
trial.
A similar case took place in 1803 in Guadalajara, with
the intended matrimonial union of Don José Barbosa Camarena
and Doña Rosa Septién, both Spanish and from the same
city. However, the mother of the young woman, Doña Micaela Patrón,
refused to give her consent because her daughter had already been promised to Don
José Manso. When this Don José was informed of this,
he made the decision that his fiancée be confined in a place of the judge’s
choice, so she would make a statement under oath and express who she had given
her word of marriage to[31].
It was not necessary to confine Doña Rosa, for Don José
Barbosa found out that in the church of Sagrario
there were records of the promised marriage of his fiancée and Don José Manso, so Don José went to see the mayor to send the young
woman into confinement, so that she decide who she wanted to marry, for she was
intended to marry both her suitors. However, the sentence was given by Don José
Miguel Cervantes Negrete, who stated:
The confinement of the young women of good family is
proof of the oppression they suffer from their parents, going against their
will to express freely their wish to marry. The only person this should concern
is the person who is being deprived or oppressed. It is, therefore, necessary
to say that, as Doña Rosa is not suffering any kind of violence while living
with her mother, nor had she asked for her daughter’s seclusion, Don Barbosa’s
request is not legitimate[32].
Finally, Doña Rosa appeared before the mayor and in
her statement she declared that it was true that she was promised to be wed to
Barbosa, but that it was no longer her wish to do so, as she was now in the
process of marrying Don José Manso. In this way, the
lawsuit was concluded and Doña Rosa finally married Manso
on 25 January, 1803 in the parish of Sagrario de
Guadalajara[33]. In this case, it can be observed with precision that
there were no legal effects for not fulfilling her matrimonial promise to
Barbosa, it was enough for her to express her will to marry someone else.
There is also a case that can be quite peculiar, for
it is about defending the will and sexual honor of a mulatta. In 1793, Don Anastasio Fernández appeared in
front of the mayor of Guadalajara to express that he intended to marry Ana María Lizaola, who was a servant
in his house and with whom he had had an “illicit friendship” and, as a
consequence, she was pregnant. For this
reason, Don Anastacio wanted to get married. However,
the father of the suitor, Don Nicolás Fernández refused to give authorization
for that marriage to take place “as the woman was dark-skinned” and said union
could mean the end of his son’s lineage. In addition, Ana María already had two
children, but the identity of the father was unknown[34].
Despite the intentions of Don Nicolás to put obstacles
before the marriage of his son, Don Anastasio proved
that his father’s allegations were unfair and that he was within his due rights
to marry his fiancée. In this way, he once again showed his will to marry Ana
María. As a last resort, Don Nicolás tried to stop the marriage from taking
place by using as a strategy the defamation of the woman, by mentioning that
she had a doubtful reputation and that she was a prostitute. This reaction of Don
Nicolás had no grounds at all, for he had no proof to corroborate his
affirmations against his son’s fiancée. In these types of trials, it was very
common that violent reactions and attacks took place between the litigants,
which many times were fallacies to disqualify the suitors or show that the
opposing party did not have the social status expressed in their statement[35].
When this statement was made known to Ana María, it
was evident that she was hurt by the lies Don Nicolás had said about her, so she
presented a letter to the mayor where she expressed the following: “I do not
want and it is not my desire to marry Anastasio[36].” After this written statement reached the mayor, he
suspended the trial, not before proving that the comments made by Don Nicolás
about Ana María were false as he had no evidence to prove the excuse Don
Nicolás had presented.
The strategies used by the parents or the young women
are varied, each case may present characteristics of its own and employ diverse
resources to try to justify the causes. However, in what refers to withdrawing
from marriage, these are the main strategies that we could spot in the files:
the request of the young women to be confined, the argument that the person had
been promised to wed someone else, and the use of lies to discredit the honor
of one of the spouses-to-be. Below, we will relate the application of these
mechanisms in the observation of different people who had an influence on the
speech of the young women involved in these trials to change their decision and
desist from their matrimonial commitment.
6. A will with different voices
In the Catholic tradition, free consent was essential
to get married. The spouses had to express their will to marry the person they
had chosen. However, this situation is very subjective, as it is not possible
to corroborate the individual will of the people who want to get married, nor
if the person was influenced in his/her decision by others[37]. In an attempt to acknowledge the problem that this
situation generated in the trials, we now intend to analyze the marriage lawsuits
where the influence of others on the will of the women who finally refused to
get married can be corroborated.
To begin with, there is a case that was analyzed in
the previous section, regarding the marriage of Leonarda Pérez and Juan María Celis, where the young
woman wrote a letter to her father in which she expressed that she no longer
wanted to marry. It seems complicated to determine which were the circumstances
that had an incidence on the decision of the young women who had a change of
heart, as the causes do not appear in the files, nor does the background of the
situation. However, in the case of Doña María Leonarda, the person who had an
influence on her decision not to get married was the priest of her locality,
Juan José Aguirre, because through this trial the communication between these
two people has come to our attention.
In a letter written by the priest to María Leonarda,
he told her about her father’s uneasiness due to her intention to marry Juan
María, who had a bad reputation in the town of Mascota.
In this way, the priest convinced the young woman not to fulfill her promise to
be wed. For this reason, María Leonarda wrote a letter to her father where she
informed him that she had changed her mind and showed how repentant she was
about having wanted to marry Celis: “My beloved papa […] it is my will not to marry Juan María, kneeling
at your feet I beg you by the blood of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, and the Most
Holy Mary to forgive me, I know you will because you are such a good father[38].”
The fear of the father’s discontentment was the main
factor for the young woman to desist from getting married, apart from the
advice of Aguirre, who managed to convince the girl to obey her father. This
behavior receives the name of reverential fear, which is based on the authority
a person exerts upon his subordinates, in this case the father’s authority
exerted upon his children; that is to say, the children had to recognize the
father as an authoritative figure, therefore, they had to accept the father’s
decisions[39]. On some occasions, reverential fear was linked to
significant expressions of great gloom and offense, and there were even
punishments and repression towards the children for them to renounce their
wishes and respect the father’s will[40].
In another trial, which took place in Guadalajara, the
confinement of the young woman had an incidence on her decision to not get
married, but not due to the parents’ pressure, but because of the advice of the
people of the place where she was confined. In1797, Don José Dávalos expressed that he had been promised to wed Doña Gertrudis
Vallejo, who was confined in the house of the parish priest of Mexicaltzingo with the intention of celebrating her
marriage. However, the father of the young woman, Don José Vallejo did not
allow for said union to take place, although he did not have grounds to not
give his consent. Thus, Don José Dávalos presented
his information of legitimacy and purity of blood to confirm that he was an
equal to his betrothed. Immediately, the father of the intended appeared before
the ordinary court to express that he accepted the information presented by Dávalos, but he requested that his daughter be removed from
the house of the priest of Mexicaltzingo and be sent
to another house of the judge’s choice, so Doña Gertrudis was sent to Don Villán Carbajal’s house.
Finally, Don José Vallejo asked the mayor that his
daughter was taken oath, so she could express her will to marry her fiancée and
thus, Doña Gertrudis expressed that “due to the advice provided by the
daughters of Don Carbajal she had left her house” with the objective of
marrying Don José Dávalos, but that the same women
had explained to her, when she was confined in their house, the uneasinesss that this union was causing her father, and for
said reason she expressed that she no longer wished to get married[41]. Once again, it is possible to observe the influence
of other people on the decision of the intended, who persuaded her to withdraw
from marriage. What cannot be determined is if this action was a strategy of Doña
Gertrudis’ father or if there were other circumstances that caused the young
woman to change her mind.
Another case, where it can be found that a person that
was not a member of the family of the young fiancée had an influence on her, is that of the
presumed marriage of José Manuel Pérez and María Gertrudis Sandoval, which we
have mentioned previously, where the
intended was said to have been promised to be wed twice. When Doña Gertrudis’
uncle requested that his niece was taken oath, she stated that she had already
been promised to wed Don Antonio Cabrera. In the same statement, the young
woman mentioned that she was also promised to wed José Manuel, “it was not for
herself but for fear of a woman called Ignacia, whose last name is unknown to
her[42].” At no time was it
explained what Doña Gertrudis actually referred to when she talked about the
woman she feared, for throughout the trial there was no word of her, and after
this testimony the trial was concluded. On this matter we could make several
suppositions, but as we lack trustworthy evidence, we can only say that this
woman had an influence on Gertrudis, and perhaps had her threatened to marry
José Manuel. However, we do not know the reasons that led to this situation,
but this woman could have been a relative of the suitor.
Finally, there is the case of María
Gervasia who, in 1803, intended to marry Venancio Zárate. However, the
mother of the intended, Doña María Andrade, refused to give her consent to legitimize
said union, for she argued for the blatant inequality that existed between the
spouses-to-be; Venancio had mixed-blood[43]. Afterwards, the mother of Doña María
Gervasia proved her purity of blood through the
statements of three witnesses, who ratified that Doña María Andrade “was
obviously of pure blood and so were her parents and relatives from both lines[44].” Consequently, the intended was taken oath and she
expressed that she had realized that:
[…] the
inequality that my mother had seen in him and his family, and that I am aware
of the suffering she had caused her mother and the fatal consequences that would
come upon me if said union took place, so I have spontaneously resolved not to
marry the before mentioned, not now, nor ever[45].
To conclude, Venancio was
informed of Doña María Gervasia’s
decision and, thus, the trial came to an end[46], In this case, it is evident that the mother exerted
an influence on her daughter for her to withdraw from marriage, for the reason
expressed by the young woman not to go on with her plans of marriage was that
the ethnic inequality that existed between her and her suitor was not to her
mother’s liking. It is noticeable that the ethnic condition could be a very
relevant element and, in the context of the Royal Pragmatic, an infallible
argument to use in the decision of not getting married.
7. Conclusions
In the Hispanic world, marriage constituted a moment of fundamental
interest for the families, given that it represented the construction of a bond
or alliance between two groups and also implied a social and economic exchange.
For this reason, the parents of the betrothed made an effort to lead their
children towards an advantageous marriage, whose mechanism would contribute to
guaranteeing the route towards social preeminence. In this way, marriage became
a decision to be taken as a group, for said bond not only affected the people
who actually got married, but also all the people who were close to the family
group and, as a consequence, the moment of making such big decisions became of
interest to many individuals, especially the parents of the couple.
Due to these circumstances many times conflict arose
in the family bosom as a consequence of the matrimonial choice that their children
had made, and so the parents tried to stop these unions using various
strategies. In this work, some of those mechanisms can be observed, such as the
confinement of the intended wife and the influence that the parents could exert
over their children. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to realize the
main reasons that motivated some parents to disagree with a marriage or in
other situations to learn the reasons for the couple to desist from getting
married.
What can be proved, through the reading of the lawsuits,
is that there are a number of factors that had an incidence on many women so
that they made the decision of not getting married, the main one could be the
respect and affection towards their parents or other reasons like the blatant
inequality that existed between the spouses-to-be as a result of their
ethnicity and even their economic situation or their social reputation. An
emphasis has also been made on the woman’s confinement, as one of the most
feasible strategies to succeed in convincing the young women to desist from
their matrimonial promise; making the decision of not getting married had its
costs, perhaps the situation of confinement they were in or the influence
exerted by the parents were the cause.
Confinement had diverse objectives and it was a
recurrent mechanism in these types of cases, and employed by both parties.
However, when the cases of withdrawal from marriage were presented, the
resource was more commonly used by the parents of the brides-to-be in order to
prevent their daughters from marrying an inconvenient suitor, even legal
authorities took advantage of the situation to defend the position of the
parents, for example when there was a request to withdraw the confinement from
the house of a priest in order to avoid the marriage that one of these young
women was about to contract. In this sense, female confinement constituted a
potential reason against marriage.
At the same time, in this research article it has been
corroborated that the withdrawal from marriage in the lawsuits, when it came
from the women’s side did not generate much conflict, because after the
intended wives had expressed their will and negative answer to marriage, the
trials concluded without further justification or explanation of the reasons
for not fulfilling their marriage promise.
Finally, it can be established that from the review of
the pre-nuptial conflicts we could corroborate the invocation and the uses of
the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages, as well as observe the diverse strategies
used by the parties involved to settle the family inconveniences and to try to
defend their will or their power to decide on the matrimonial choice.
Documental sources
Archivo General de la Nación (AGN).
México. Reales cédulas originales, volumen 113, expediente 209.
Archivo de la Real Audiencia de
Guadalajara (ARAG). Guadalajara-Jalisco. Ramo Civil y Criminal, varios expedientes.
Bibliography
Candau
Chacón, María Luisa. “El matrimonio presunto, los amores torpes y el
incumplimiento de la palabra: Archidiócesis de Sevilla, siglos XVII y XVIII”.
En Padres e hijos
en España y el mundo hispánico: siglos XVI y XVIII. Madrid: Visor, 2008, 35-51.
Carballeda,
Ángela. “Género y matrimonio en Nueva España: las mujeres de la élite ante la
aplicación de la pragmática de 1776”. En Las
mujeres en la construcción de las sociedades iberoamericanas. México:
CSIC/El Colegio de México, 2004, 219-259.
Cervantes Cortés, José Luis. “Familia,
honor y elección de pareja: aplicación de la Real Pragmática de Matrimonios en
la Nueva Galicia, 1778-1806”. (Tesis de maestría, Universidad de Guadalajara;
2014).
Gálvez
Ruiz, María Ángeles. La conciencia
regional en Guadalajara y el gobierno de los intendentes (1786-1800).
Guadalajara: Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco, 1996.
Gaudemet, Jean. El matrimonio en Occidente. Madrid: Taurus, 1993.
Ghirardi,
Mónica. “Experiencias de desigualdad. El régimen matrimonial homogámico y sus
tensiones en Córdoba en la transición del Orden Monárquico al Republicano”. En Mestizaje, sangre y matrimonio en
territorios de la actual Argentina y Uruguay, siglos XVII-XX. Córdoba:
Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2008, 41-72.
Irigoyen López, Antonio. “Estado,
Iglesia y familia: la complejidad de los cambios legislativos y
socioculturales”. En Familias. Historia
de la sociedad española (del final de la Edad Media a nuestros días).
Madrid: Cátedra, 2011, 515-604.
Lavallé, Bernard. “Los colores y el
amor: realidades y engañifas de las tensiones étnicas”. En Amor e historia. La expresión de los afectos en el mundo de ayer. México: El
Colegio de México, 2013, 171-186.
Lipsett-Rivera,
Sonya. Gender and the Negotiation of
Daily Life in Mexico, 1750-1856. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press,
2012.
Lorenzo Pinar, Francisco Javier.
“Actitudes violentas en torno a la formación y disolución del matrimonio en
Castilla durante la Edad Moderna”. En Furor
et rabies: violencia, conflicto y marginación en la Edad Moderna.
Santander: Universidad de Cantabria, 2002, 159-182.
Marín Tello, María Isabel. “‘Yo y mi hija gozamos de
distinción en nuestra clase…’. La oposición de los padres al matrimonio de sus
hijos en Valladolid de Michoacán, 1779-1804”. En Estudios michoacanos VIII. Zamora: El Colegio de Michoacán, 1999,
201-220.
Ortega
Noriega, Sergio. “El discurso teológico de santo Tomás de Aquino sobre el
matrimonio, la familia y los comportamientos sexuales”. En El placer de pecar y el afán de normar. México: INAH/Joaquín
Mortiz, 1988, 15-78.
Pellicer,
Luis Felipe. “Entre el honor y la pasión. Familia y matrimonio en Venezuela
1778-1821”. En Dimensiones al diálogo
americano contemporáneo sobre la familia en la época colonial. Murcia:
Universidad de Murcia, 2010, 127-156.
Penyak,
Lee M. “Safe Harbors and Compulsory Custody: Casas de Depósito in Mexico,
1750-1865”. Hispanic American Historical Review 79, No. 1 (febrero 1999): pp. 83-99.
Premo, Bianca. Children
of the Father King: Youth, Authority, and Legal Minority in Colonial Lima. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005.
Rípodas
Ardanaz, Daisy. El matrimonio en
Indias. Realidad social y regulación jurídica. Buenos Aires: Fundación para la Educación, la Ciencia y la
Cultura, 1977.
Rodríguez
Jiménez, Pablo. “Sangre y mestizaje en la América colonial”. En Familia y organización familiar en Europa y
América, (siglos XV-XX). Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, 2007, 255-274.
Rodríguez Sánchez, Ángel. “El poder
familiar: la patria potestad en el Antiguo Régimen”. En Estructuras y formas
del poder en la historia. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1994,
105-116.
Schwaller, John Frederick. “‘La
identidad sexual’: familia y mentalidades a fines del siglo XVI”. En Familias novohispanas. Siglo XVI al XIX.
México: El Colegio de México, 1991, 59-72.
Seed, Patricia. Amar, honrar y obedecer en el México colonial: conflictos en torno a la
elección matrimonial, 1574-1821. México: Conaculta/Alianza, 1991.
Serrera Contreras, Ramón María. Guadalajara ganadera. Estudio regional
novohispano (1760-1805). Guadalajara: Ayuntamiento de Guadalajara, 1991.
Socolow, Susan. “Cónyuges aceptables: la elección de
consorte en la Argentina colonial, 1778-1810”. En Sexualidad y matrimonio en
la América hispánica, siglos XVI-XVIII. México: Conaculta/Grijalbo, 1991,
229-270.
Saether, Steinar. “Bourbon Absolutism and Marriage
Reform in Late Colonial Spanish America” The
Americas 59, no. 4 (abril 2003): 475-509.
Van
Young, Eric. La ciudad y el campo en el
México del siglo XVIII. La economía rural de la región de Guadalajara,
1675-1820. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1989.
Villafuerte
García, Lourdes. “Casar y compadrar cada uno con su igual: casos de oposición
al matrimonio en la ciudad de México, 1628-1634”. En Del dicho al hecho. Transgresiones y pautas culturales en la Nueva
España. México: INAH, 1989, 59-76.
* This article is the product of the Master’s thesis,
read in June 2014 called: “Family, honor, and choice of partner: application of
the Royal Pragmatic on Marriages in Nueva Galicia, 1778-1806", in the Universidad
de Guadalajara.
[1] Master’s in Mexican history. University Center of
Social Science and Humanities - Universidad de Guadalajara. Doctorate student in History at Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México. jlcervantesc@gmail.com.
[2] José Luis Cervantes Cortés, “Family, honor, and
partner choice: application of the Royal Pragmatics of Marriage in Nueva
Galicia, 1778-1806" (Thesis for Master’s in Mexican history, Universidad
de Guadalajara, 2014).
[3] Towards the second half of the 18th century, the city
of Guadalajara experienced rapid population growth and, at the same time,
consolidated as a very important economic center. In the Census of Revillagigedo of
1793 28,250 inhabitants were reported in this city, which positioned it as the
fourth most populated city of Nueva España, of which
35% of the population was aboriginal or mixed, 32% was Spanish, and 33% was
formed by mulattos and different afro-mixes. It is also worth mentioning that
most of the lawsuits reported in the Royal Audiencia of Guadalajara
originated from Spanish families, constituting 64% of the cases studied, and so
the conclusion of most of them led the judges to consider the dissent of the
parents to be irrational and unfair. María Ángeles Gálvez Ruiz, La conciencia regional en Guadalajara y el
gobierno de los intendentes (1786-1800) (Guadalajara: Gobierno del Estado
de Jalisco, 1996), p. 96; Ramón María Serrera, Guadalajara ganadera. Estudio regional
novohispano (1760-1805) (Guadalajara: Ayuntamiento de Guadalajara, 1991),
p. 23; Eric Van Young, La ciudad y el
campo en el México del siglo XVIII. La economía rural de la región de
Guadalajara, 1675-1820 (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1989), p. 43.
[4] Ángel Rodríguez Sánchez, “El poder
familiar: la patria potestad en el Antiguo Régimen”, in Estructuras y formas
del poder en la historia (Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1994),
107-108.
[5] Patricia
Seed, Amar,
honrar y obedecer en el México colonial. Conflictos en torno a la elección
matrimonial, 1574-1821 (México: Conaculta, 1991),
17.
[6] Jean Gaudemet, El
matrimonio en Occidente (Madrid: Taurus, 1993), p.73.
[7] Lourdes
Villafuerte García, “Casar y compadrar cada uno con su igual: casos de oposición
al matrimonio en la ciudad de México, 1628-1634”, in Del dicho al hecho. Transgresiones y pautas culturales en la Nueva
España (México: INAH, 1989), p. 59.
[8] Sergio
Ortega Noriega, “El discurso teológico de santo Tomás de Aquino sobre el
matrimonio, la familia y los comportamientos sexuales”, in El placer de pecar y el afán de normar (México: INAH-Editorial
Joaquín Mortiz, 1988), p. 39.
[9] Antonio Irigoyen López, “Estado, Iglesia y
familia: la complejidad de los cambios legislativos y socioculturales”, en Familias. Historia de la sociedad española
(del final de la Edad Media a nuestros días) (Madrid: Cátedra, 2011), p. 518.
[10] Patricia
Seed, Amar, honrar
y obedecer... p. 50.
[11] Susan Socolow, “Cónyuges aceptables: la
elección de consorte en la Argentina colonial, 1778-1810”, in Sexualidad y
matrimonio en la América hispánica, siglos XVI-XVIII (México, Conaculta-Grijalbo, 1991), p. 229.
[12] Daisy Rípodas Ardanaz, El matrimonio en
Indias. Realidad social y regulación jurídica (Buenos Aires, Fundación para
la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura, 1977), 263.
[13] General Archive of the Nation (AGN). México. Reales Cédulas Originales, vol.
113, file 209, f. 297v.
[14] Pablo
Rodríguez, “Sangre y mestizaje en la América colonial”, in Familia y organización familiar en Europa y América, (siglos XV-XX)
(Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, 2007), 264; María Isabel Marín Tello, “‘Yo y mi
hija gozamos de distinción en nuestra clase…’. La oposición de los padres al
matrimonio de sus hijos en Valladolid de Michoacán, 1779-1804”, in Estudios michoacanos VIII (Zamora: El
Colegio de Michoacán, 1999), 202-203.
[15] Mónica Ghirardi, “Experiencias de desigualdad. El régimen
matrimonial homogámico y sus tensiones en Córdoba en la transición del Orden
Monárquico al Republicano”, in Mestizaje,
sangre y matrimonio en territorios de la actual Argentina y Uruguay, siglos
XVII-XX (Córdoba: Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 2008), 56.
[16] Ángela Carballeda, “Género y matrimonio en Nueva España: las
mujeres de la élite ante la aplicación de la pragmática de 1776”, in Las mujeres en la construcción de las
sociedades iberoamericanas (México: CSIC-El Colegio de México, 2004), 220.
[17] José Luis Cervantes Cortés, “Familia,
honor… 193.
[18] Sonya Lipsett-Rivera, Gender and the Negotiation of Daily Life, 1750-1856 (Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press, 2012), 11-12.
[19] John Frederick Schwaller,
“‘La identidad sexual’: familia y mentalidades a fines del siglo XVI”, in Familias novohispanas. Siglo XVI al XIX
(México: El Colegio de México, 1991), 59.
[20] Patricia
Seed, Amar,
honrar y obedecer… 256.
[21] María
Luisa Candau Chacón, “El matrimonio presunto, los
amores torpes y el incumplimiento de la palabra: Archidiócesis de Sevilla,
siglos XVII y XVIII”, in Padres e hijos en España y el mundo hispánico: siglos XVI y XVIII
(Madrid: Visor, 2008), 47-48.
[22] Luis
Felipe Pellicer, “Entre el honor y la pasión. Familia y matrimonio en Venezuela
1778-1821”, in Dimensiones al diálogo
americano contemporáneo sobre la familia en la época colonial (Murcia,
Universidad de Murcia, 2010), 135-136.
[23] Royal Archive of the Audiencia of Guadalajara (ARAG,
by its acronym in Spanish). Guadalajara, Jalisco. Civil branch, box, 167, file
17.
[24] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 176,
file 9, fs. 2-2v.
[25] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 176,
file 9, f. 3v.
[26] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 176, file
9, f. 4.
[27] Lee M. Penyak, “Safe
Harbors and Compulsory Custody: Casas de Depósito in
Mexico, 1750-1865”, Hispanic American
Historical Review 79: No. 1 (February 1999): pp. 87-89.
[28] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box
290, file 6, f. 3v.
[29] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch,
box 375, file 5, fs. 4-4v.
[30] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco.
Civil branch, box 375, file 5,
f. 5.
[31] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 383, file 22,
f. 2.
[32] ARAG. Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 383, file 22, f. 5v-6.
[33] The confirmation of the marriage between Doña Rosa Septién and Don José Manso was
obtained from the Family Search
database (https: //familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/JCDV-4JC, retrieved on 12
November 2013.)
[34] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Criminal branch, box 43, file
12, f. 4.
[35] Bernard Lavallé, “Los
colores y el amor: realidades y engañifas de las tensiones étnicas”, in Amor e historia. La expresión de los afectos
en el mundo de ayer (México: El Colegio de México, 2013), 192.
[36] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Criminal branch, box 43, file
12, f. 6.
[37] Patricia
Seed, Amar,
honrar y obedecer... 50-52.
[38] ARAG.
Guadalajara, Jalisco. Civil branch,
box, 167, file 17, f. 84.
[39] Bianca Premo, “‘Estado de miedo: edad, género y autoridad en las
cortes eclesiásticas de Lima, siglo XVII”, in Historia de la infancia en América Latina (Bogotá: Universidad
Externado de Colombia, 2007), 196.
[40]
Francisco Javier Lorenzo Pinar, “Actitudes en torno a la formación y disolución
del matrimonio en Castilla durante la Edad Moderna”, in Furor et rabies: violencia, conflicto y marginación en la Edad Moderna (Santander,
Universidad de Cantabria, 2002), 168-169.
[41] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch,
box 373, file 16, fs. 3-3v.
[42] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 375, file 5,
f. 5.
[43] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch,
box 385, file 7, f. 4.
[44] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 385, file 7,
fs. 5-6v.
[45] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 385, file
7, f. 8.
[46] ARAG.
Guadalajara-Jalisco. Civil branch, box 385, file 7,
f. 9.