144 LaCitadeSancta
tice. Dowry in the Roman manner replaced it. Dowry was given for the sake
of a marriage, and fathers expected that it be so used. When the widowed
Umiliana dei Cerchi chose not to remarry, her father demanded her dowry
back. In theory, he had no claim. She did return it to him, although she
refused to sign a notarial instrument forfeiting her legal claim to it. She
considered oaths about temporal matters unsuitable to one who had become
a Sister of Penance. Her father seems to have been satisfied with the cash;
he let her move back into the family tower, where the conversa refitted her
room as an ‘‘oratory,’’ a quasi-monastic cell.^13 After marriage, use of the
dowry passed to the husband, but it remained the woman’s property (iure
peculii); she could sue to get it back from creditors if her husband had disap-
peared for ten years.^14
A woman of good character and repute, provided with a suitable dowry,
was what the father of a potential groom sought for his son’s marriage. When
two fathers had determined on a match, arrangement of espousals could
begin. Elaborate regulations of canon law governed unions. These included
times when contracting was forbidden, permissible degrees of affinity and
consanguinity, and prohibitions against marrying godparents and even the
children or parents of godparents.^15 After Lateran Counciliv( 1215 ), the par-
ish priest had to announce upcoming espousals in the parish church to en-
sure the absence of impediments. Nearly everyone (except priests, monks,
and nuns) got married, and this had to be done in conformity with Church
requirements. Even the illiterate knew, at least in general outline, the
Church’s marriage regulations. Fra Salveto of Cesena reported that Don
Leto, a canon of Cesena with a degree in canon law, used to visit the penitent
Giovanni Buono of Mantua at his hermitage. Giovanni was a former min-
strel with no Latin to speak of. The two men liked to argue marriage law,
and the canon brought a codex of papal decretals to prove his points. Try as
he might, he could not find the text he wanted to cite. After some page
flipping, Giovanni found the right section for him—it turned out the pious
layman had the marriage law right; the learned canonist was wrong.^16 Ordi-
nary parish priests felt themselves competent to judge marriage cases, a prac-
tice both synods and cities tried to prohibit.^17 Cities were as concerned as
the Church about the sanctity of marriage, touching as it did the honor
of citizens and their families. They punished adultery, bigamy, and incest,
- Vito of Cortona,Vita [B. Humilianae], 1. 8 ,p. 387.
- ‘‘Capitoli inediti di una redazione statutaria pavese del secoloxiii,’’ 1. 396 , pp. 18 – 19 ; for more
on dowries, see the extensive treatment in Pisa Stat.ii( 1233 ), Leges 25 – 30 , pp. 750 – 56 ; on women’s
dowry rights, see also Airaldi, ‘‘Matrimonio,’’ 230. - Gratian,Decretum,CC. 23 – 34 , and inX 4. For local canons, see Novara Synodii( 1298 ), 1. 2 – 7 , pp.
190 – 92 ; Ravenna Council ( 1311 ), 19 , pp. 459 – 60 ; and Grado Council ( 1296 ), 29 ,p. 1170. On the marriage
canons, see Brooke,Medieval Idea, 128 – 43.
16 .Processus Apostolici Auctoritate Innocentii Papae IV Annis 1251 , 1253 ,et 1254 Constructi de Vita, Viritutibus et
Miraculis B. Joannis Boni Mantuani, 1. 1. 14 ,AS 57 (Oct.ix), 779. - Lucca Synod ( 1308 ), 61 ,p. 191 ; Padua Stat. (pre- 1238 ), 2. 16 ,p. 190 , no. 588.