Personal Disclosures

An Anthology of Self-Writings from the Seventeenth Century

David Booy

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351911924
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Littérature
• Subtopic: Critique littéraire pour la littérature comparée

The seventeenth century saw a dramatic increase in self-writing-from the private jotting down of personal thoughts in an irregular and spontaneous way, to the carefully considered composition of extended autobiographical narrative and deliberate self-fashioning for public consumption. Recent anthologies of women's writing, drawing to some extent on this rich but relatively little-known archive, have demonstrated the importance of studying such material to gain insight into female lives in that era. Personal Disclosures is innovative in that it stimulates and facilitates comparative analysis of female and male representations of the self, and of gendered constructions of identity and experience, by presenting a broad range of extracts from both women's and men's autobiographical writings. The majority of the extracts have been freshly edited from original seventeenth-century manuscripts and books. Exploiting all kinds of text-diaries, journals, logs, testimonies, memoirs, letters, autobiographies-the anthology also encourages consideration of topics central to current scholarly interest: religious experience, the body, communities, the family, encounters with new lands and peoples, and the conceptualization and writing of the self. A General Introduction discusses early modern autobiographical writing, and there are substantial introductions to each of the six sections, together with detailed suggestions for further reading.

Section 1
Marriage

Introduction

Marriage, ordained by God, was seen in the early modern period as a natural and desirable state. It was regarded as an essential ingredient of social and moral order, and generally understood to make sound emotional sense, though, obviously, there was much variation in the degree of contentment found in particular partnerships. Writers on marriage agreed that it should be undertaken for three main reasons: procreation, the satisfaction of sexual desire in a morally acceptable way, and to provide mutual comfort and support. For those in the middle and upper ranges of society, it was also a way of consolidating or enhancing one's social and economic position. For the devout, marriage with another member of the godly community brought close companionship for the arduous spiritual journey, and meant that one's children could be raised within a truly Christian household. Over 80 per cent of adults got married. For women, the mean age for first marriage was about 26; for men, about 28 - the relative lateness being an economic necessity for most, though many young people would not have been eager to take on the constraints and responsibilities of marriage at too early an age (Ben-Amos 1994: 230-31; figures in Cressy 1997: 285). Comparatively high rates of mortality often resulted in the premature loss of one's partner and - for practical as well as emotional reasons - in remarriage.

A substantial percentage of the population, then, grew up expecting to get married, and were no doubt aware that this would radically alter their lives. For those given to self-reflection, taking such an important step in the life cycle would very likely have generated thoughts about the new private and public roles that the married state brought with it, about the self and personal identity, and about the modifications that these might now undergo. The whole framework of an individual's life would probably change, and what gave meaning to that life would be understood in new terms. Many of the extracts in this section have been chosen partly to demonstrate the ways in which and the extent to which their authors construct written identities specifically in terms of their marital relationships.

How far those identities corresponded with the actuality of the writers' lives is another matter; as the General Introduction made clear, the written and the actual selves are not the same, and the construction of identity in written words is in varying degrees 'artificial'. We are made particularly aware of this when reading Moulsworth [1: 5] because she writes in verse; but the styles of writing used in the love letters of D'Ewes [1: 3] and Hey wood [1: 9] also prompt us to ask questions about the extent of self-fashioning taking place, as does Fanshawe's novelistic presentation of marital tension [1: 8]. That the construction of the written self is less obviously artful in some of the other extracts does not mean that the authors are presenting an unmediated version of their experiences and thoughts.

Inextricably linked to questions of identity are those of gender. Given early modern views on the nature and roles of men and women, we might well anticipate that, within seventeenth-century marriages, gender differences would be particularly marked, and that wives and husbands would have a firm understanding of what their gender roles should be. To a considerable degree this was so, but, as always, theory and practice were not fully in accord, and generalizations are sometimes hard to sustain in the face of the variety of individual examples. Actual marriages usually had their own distinct dynamic, created by the characters, personalities, temperaments and convictions of the wife and husband, by their social and economic circumstances, and occasionally by the type and intensity of their religious beliefs. Such factors could mean, for example, that conventional gender boundaries were observed and even enforced in some households while being viewed as irrelevant or impracticable in others, or could result in some spouses, especially wives, disregarding or resisting prescribed gender roles. There is plenty of evidence in the extracts that follow to demonstrate such variation, and also to prevent our making ascriptions of masculinity and femininity in a simplistic way.

For example, Anthony Walker [1: 10], apparently spent long hours in the tranquility of his study, while his wife, Elizabeth, got through a large and diverse range of familial and household duties, as well as sustaining her own spiritual life - chiefly by rising at 4 a.m. or even earlier: she seems to have accepted that, if she wanted time alone, it had to be stolen from sleep. Elizabeth is presented as finding great fulfdment in her duties as wife and mother, in large part because she is doing the work God has called her to do; her spiritual and domestic identities are one, and her gender role is embraced as a means of expressing a large part of her self.

In contrast, Maria Thynne [1:1] complains to her husband about being confined to the domestic sphere, while he is out and about, and, further, that he will not entrust her with estate management tasks she is perfectly competent to undertake. Her frustration causes her to examine her role as a wife and her status as a woman. She seems to have a sharp sense of her own individual identity, growing out of her knowledge of what she is capable of and what she desires. Yet she is willing to work in a supportive role in the marriage. Practically speaking, she can do nothing to alter her situation beyond putting pressure on Thomas through her letters and presumably when they are together. In this case we can see that an individual sense of self and personality comes strongly into play, but that this is controlled by the gender norms of the time.

Elizabeth Freke [1: 12] spends much of her married life waiting for her husband to return, press her for money, and sometimes move her to another location. She can do little to resist this; however, she imparts a powerful sense of self, and comes across as indignant and combative where her own rights as a wife and a woman are concerned.

Thus we need to think carefully about how the writers featured in this section construct and assess themselves and others according to conventional notions about the roles of wife and husband. Do they embrace or resist these roles, or find themselves under some strain in trying to fulfil them? In particular, do the extracts bear out the common view that, in the past, a wife's sense of identity was fashioned primarily through her relation to her husband, while his was developed in response to a much wider range of stimuli? And, where many of the extracts are concerned, we should ask how far both personal identity and gender roles, and their degree of acceptance, were determined by such factors as social status and religious commitment. Finally, what assumptions do the writers make about their original readers' attitudes to marriage and gender, and do we as twenty-first-century readers find ourselves sympathetic or antagonistic to those assumptions?

Choosing a Partner

Religious law prohibited marriage between immediate blood and closer affinal relatives, and within the godparent-godchild relationship. Advice books urged the choice of a partner of good character, of the same religion, and of a similar age (though personal, social, political, and economic considerations sometimes overrode these criteria). People were counselled by moralists to marry within their own social and economic bracket, and, indeed, social assumptions and circumstances usually ruled out both the desire and the chance to do otherwise.

There was generally plenty of opportunity to meet members of the opposite sex at one's own social level, though young people of the 'better sort', especially young women, were more restricted. For the devout, such as Hey wood [1:9] and Johnston [1: 6], it was of course essential to limit one's choice to someone who was godly. Practically speaking, the social status of the intending partners was a key factor, not only in the choice of a husband or wife but also in the degree of financial security on which the marriage was founded. Children were helped by parents according to their means, contributions ranging from thousands of pounds down to a few household implements. Both bride and groom brought money and/or property to a marriage where they could, though gender difference was especially marked here, and it was what the woman brought that was thought of specifically as a dowry or a marriage portion; this legally became part of her husband's wealth (Erickson 1993: 86-9, 91; Houlbrooke 1984: 84-5).

Where there was a lot at stake financially and socially, parents were more likely, and able, to exert pressure on their children over the choice of a partner, and the parental word could be final. D'Ewes [1:3] tells of the difficulties and frustrations caused when his intended wife's grandmother and his own father, motivated by financial and social considerations, thwarted his plans by withholding their consent and investigating other possible partners for their charges. However, arranged marriages in which the children of the noble and affluent were forced into resented alliances were uncommon by the seventeenth century in England; parents took their children's feelings seriously (see Wrightson 1982: 71-9). Naturally, the period provides many instances of the emotional attachments of a daughter or son coming into conflict with parental wishes, as extracts in Sections 2 and ³ make clear, but the majority of young people, having internalized the values and mores of their class, were likely to share their parents' or guardians' perceptions of what constituted a sound marriage. The 24-year-old D'Ewes is himself a very good example of this, as he coolly appraises his future wife's appearance, her family and social connections, her education, upbringing and financial prospects, and considers the great advantages that will accrue with marrying her. He does not consider what she might gain from the marriage; his account is written from a masculine perspective, and alerts us to the ways in which some young women at the upper end of society were valued not just for themselves but for the monetary and social advantages they brought with them. Love and affection between married couples were thought to be important, and D'Ewes does express quite strong feelings for Anne, but, among the propertied classes, marrying on the basis of emotion alone, as Elizabeth Freke [1:12] and Maria Touchet and Thomas Thynne [1:1] seem to have done, was regarded as irresponsible and foolish.

In the extensive lower reaches of society, to which most of the population belonged, social and financial considerations were less significant, and consequently the young had greater freedom over their choice of partners, though parental advice and approval were often sought. Only in cases where familial relations had deteriorated badly is there evidence of decisive and sometimes harsh parental intervention at the courtship stage when the match was considered to be unacceptable, with children being put under severe moral and emotional pressure, being threatened with disinheritance, and even being beaten (Ingram 1987: 202, Mendelson and Crawford 1998: 114-15).¹

Formalities

The steps and procedures of courtship were widely understood and observed, and progress towards marriage was regarded as a serious business, when people made binding commitments to each other (Cressy 1997: 233-4).² Each stage and aspect of courtship was markedly gendered: 'Men offered words and gifts with implications; women refu...