Marriage Contracts from Chaucer to the Renaissance Stage by Kathryn Jacobs (review)

STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER able dictionary is listed in the bibliography, but Hunt’s ‘‘Index of Medical Conditions Treated’’ does not always draw on it. Although other resources should be called on in using this volume, especially for those who work with ME texts, Hunt has made a valuable contribution with this careful edition of three fourteenth-century recipe compendia. A taxonomy of medieval receptaria from England is surely a desideratum, and Hunt’s plans to work to that end should only be encouraged. Linda Ehrsam Voigts University of Missouri, Kansas City Kathryn Jacobs. Marriage Contracts from Chaucer to the Renaissance Stage. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2001. Pp. viii, 181. $59.95. Jacobs argues that between the early thirteenth century and the Hardwicke Act of 1753, marriage laws and their variations are reflected in a special way in the ‘‘popular literature’’ of the times, ranging from the Canterbury Tales to the mystery plays to secular Renaissance drama. Only in works such as these, she asserts, is it possible ‘‘to trace without disguise the literary effect of marriage as an institution’’ (p. viii). Paralleling her literary thesis is a legal one: Gratian’s law of 1140 (‘‘consent’’ plus ‘‘consummation’’ equals ‘‘marriage’’) gave way in the thirteenth century to precise laws governing spoken vows, where specific phrasing and verb tense became crucial and consummation and cohabitation ceased to be important. The relationships between Chaucer ’s characters reflect these concerns. Characters in the plays of Shakespeare and other Renaissance dramatists, however, took a still different turn: individuals are obsessed with every aspect of the marriage law, not just the spoken vows. Still later, by the seventeenth century, the old laws—medieval and Renaissance—had become ‘‘unjust or inadequate.’’ Marriage Contracts proposes to explain this shift in perception, ‘‘comparing and contrasting the very different literary reactions to a common stimulus’’ (p. vii). This method is uncommon, Jacobs argues, since critics rarely relate marriage law and literary presentation, and those who do are ‘‘usually content to compare marriage formation as it was drama386 ................. 10286$ CH15 11-01-10 13:55:09 PS REVIEWS tized onstage with the law on the books, note the correction, and then move on’’ (p. 156). In her section on the Canterbury Tales, Jacobs makes some challenging assertions. She suggests that Chaucer might have considered adultery as an alternative when a marriage contract was violated; that the delayed consummation between his illicit lovers is directly patterned on the formal marriage contract; and that he popularized the ‘‘nonmarital ‘accord ’’’ in literature. Jacobs claims that Chaucer initiated a new type of widow into the canon—disadvantaged, realistic—arguing against the lusty, conniving stereotype. In the section on Renaissance drama, Jacobs discusses the ‘‘trailing spouse’’ motif and the reintroduction of the ‘‘lusty widow myth’’ (p. 135) as a character born of wish fulfillment. Throughout the book she suggests insights into marriage not available through the history texts. Although at times provocative, Marriage Contracts presents some real difficulties for this reviewer. In the Preface Jacobs notes that, although most of the work centers on Chaucer and his marriage contracts, the project actually began as an investigation of marriage on the Renaissance stage. In other words, she worked backwards. Perhaps these facts account for the lack of unity in the book. In addition, Jacobs states that after noting the various treatments of marriage laws, she turned to ‘‘historians ’’ for an explanation, and she lists a number of important scholars . But with the exception of Pollock and Maitland (her bibliography lists The History of English Law Before the Time of Edward I—i.e., before 1239) these are not precisely legal historians, and that poses a problem. In adhering so closely to the ‘‘literary’’ text and only then seeking an historical explanation, Jacobs has ignored the very legal records that would illuminate that text (or provide a proper background for it). Documents from the Letter Books, the Memorials of London and London Life, the Munimenta Gildhallae Londoniensis, and the various volumes of the Selden Society, which contain a wealth of material on medieval married life and law, are nowhere to be found in her study. There are, in fact, no primary legal materials listed...