This study explores the legal aspects of dowry provision in the Romanian Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia in the period 1750—1830. Drawing on the period's law codes, dowry papers, testaments, and court records, it highlights the legal and emotional difficulties created by the affective/patrimonial nexus within couples, families, and stepfamilies in a society where divorce and up to three remarriages were allowed by both church and state. A growing body of research into the history of the Romanian family is suggesting that the prescriptions governing dowry provision in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries and the consequent exclusion of dowered girls from the family inheritance led to increased cohesion within the nuclear family and to the legal empowerment of women, while providing economic security to divorced women, widows, and children.
This article draws on material from my unpublished PhD thesis, "Women and Society in the Romanian Principalities, 1750-1850," The University of York (UK), 2004. In the course of this study, the designations "Romania" and "Romanian Principalities" (Wallachia and Moldavia) are used interchangeably. "Romania" is used anachronistically for ease of reference, as the name was not actually used before 1862. The names used in the period studied (1750-1830) were "Valahia" and "Muntenia" for Wallachia and "Moldova" for Moldavia. The term "Moldo-Wallachia" was used as well, especially by French speakers. Throughout this period, both Principalities were tribute-paying dominions under Ottoman suzerainty, and, from 1774 onward, under a Russian protectorate. The names of ruling princes are given in their Romanian variants, as used in the period: e.g., Rom. Ipsilanti rather than Gk. Ypsilantis.
2.
Violeta Barbu, "De la comunitatea patrimonială la comuniunea de destin: Zestrea în Ţara Românească în secolul al XVII-lea" [From Patrimonial Community to Destined Communion: The Dowry in Seventeenth-Century Wallachia] , in De la comunitate la societate-Studii de istoria familiei din Ţara Românească sub Vechiul Regim [From Community to Society-Studies in the History of the Family in Ancien Régime Wallachia], ed. V. Barbu (Bucharest: Institutul Cultural Român, 2007), 22.
3.
The Ipsilanti Code, chap. "Pentru zestre," par. 5; the Donici Manual, chap. 33, par. 1. For the modern editions used in this study, see below, note 12.
4.
For legislative attempts to curb "ill-matched" marriages-for instance between native boyars and Greek merchants seeking upward mobility, or between boyars and nonboyars- see Constanţa Vintilă-Ghiţulescu, "Ordinea domestică" şi "ordinea publică" între Stat şi Biserică (1710-1834) ["Domestic Order" and "Public Order" between State and Church, 1710-1834], in De la comunitate, ed. V. Barbu, (Bucharest: Institutul Cultural Român, 2007), 174-244, 188-91.
5.
In Moldavia, dowries could be given not only to daughters but also to sons. Out of the forty dowry documents listed by L. T. Boga for Bessarabia (the Moldavian area between the rivers Prut and Dniester, secured by Russia in 1812 and part of the future Soviet Moldavia) for the years 1734 to 1844, four were dowries given to sons, a feature that Boga considers as originating in Moldavian unwritten customary law. See Documente basarabene, ed. L. T. Boga, Chişinău: Extras din Buletinul comisiei monumentelor istorice, 1928), vol. 1, Prefaţă, II. For dowries given to sons, see also Doc. 7/1839 in Documente botoşănene, ed. N. Iorga, (Bucharest: Buletinul Comisiei istorice a României, 1927), 6:31-34; and Iorga, Anciens documents de droit roumains (Paris-Bucharest: Imprimerie "Datina Românească", 1930), 2:295. There is evidence for dowries given to grooms in seventeenth-century Wallachia, but these may have been simply counter-dowries or prenuptial gifts-a practice possibly imported from Transylvania. Cf. Barbu, "De la comunitatea patrimonială," 70-71.
6.
The format that gradually imposed itself for dowries in Wallachia was created by Metropolitan Antim Ivireanu [Antim of Iviria] around 1700. Cf. Constanţa Ghiţulescu, "Zestrea între normă şi practică. Ţara Românească în secolul al XVII-lea" (I) [Dowries between Legal Norm and Practice. Seventeenth-Century Wallachia], Studii şi materiale de istorie medie, XVIII (2000): 213.
7.
Boga, ed., Documente basarabene, 1:13. For other dowries listing "items not given" see, ibid., 13, 17-18.
8.
Ibid., 21-22.
9.
For a short study on the use of malediction in governmental and ecclesiastical documents from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century-in a Wallachian context-see Cristina Codarcea, "La malédiction dans les anciens documents de la Valachie (XIVe-XVIe siècles)," Revue des études sud-est-européennes, XXXII, 1-2 (1994): 53-61. More recently, Andreea Iancu has analyzed the legal and symbolic value of malediction in testaments. See her study "Binecuvântarea şi blestemul părinţilor în discursul testamentar (Bucureşti, sfârşit de secol XVIII-început de secol XIX) [Parental Blessing and Malediction in Testaments-Bucharest, Late Eighteenth-Early Nineteenth Centuries], Studii şi materiale de istorie medie, XXI (2003): 57-70.
10.
Studii şi documente, ed. N. Iorga (Bucharest: Editura Ministerului de Instrucţie Publică, 1904), 7:152-53.
11.
Uricarul, ed. Theodor Codrescu , (Iaşi: Tipografia Buciumului Român, 1889), 11:249-50.
12.
For the link between modernization and shifts in dress codes in nineteenth-century Romania, see my study "Women, Fashion, and Europeanisation in the Romanian Principalities-1750-1830," in Women in the Ottoman Balkans-Gender, Culture, and History, ed. Amila Buturović and Irvin C. Schick (London: I. B. Tauris, 2007), 201-30.
13.
Boga, ed., Documente basarabene: Foi de zestre 1734-1844, 1:29.
14.
The term "Phanariot régimes" refers to the period (1711/4-1821) when the Romanian Principalities were ruled by Ottoman-appointed Princes (Hospodars) selected from members of wealthy Greek and Levantine families living in the Phanar quarter of Constantinople.
15.
I have used the modern editions of the legal codes, as follows: Îndreptarea legii (1652), (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1962); Pravilniceasca condică (1780)-ediţie critică (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1957); Sobornicescul hrisov (1785)-ediţie critică (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1958); Codul Callimachi (1817)-ediţie critică (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1958); Legiuirea Caragea (1818)-ediţie critică (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1955); Manualul juridic al lui Andronache Donici (1814)-ediţie critică (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1959). They were all edited by collectives under Andrei Rădulescu.
16.
Departamentul de cremenalion. Din activitatea unei instanţe penale muntene (1794-1795) [The Criminal Department. The Activity of a Wallachian Penal Court 1794-1795], ed. Ligia Livadă-Cadeschi and Laurenţiu Vlad (Bucharest: Nemira, 2002), 10.
17.
Ibid., 12.
18.
Cf. Vintilă-Ghiţulescu, "Ordinea domestică," 197.
19.
Ibid., 225-26.
20.
For the various names used in the period to designate the "ecclesiastic tribunal" in Wallachia and for bibliographic references relevant to its operation, see Vintilă-Ghiţulescu, "Ordinea domestică," 180, note 16. The registers of the Wallachian Metropolitanate are a uniquely rich archival source for the study of the family in Romania.
21.
Surete şi izvoade [Documents and Records], ed. Gh. Ghibănescu (Iaşi: Editura Viaţa Românească, 1914), Doc. LIX, 8:68-69.
22.
Acte judiciare din Ţara Românească, 1775-1781 [Legal Documents from Wallachia, 1775-1781], ed. Gh. Cronţ, Al. Constantinescu, A. Popescu, Th. Rădulescu, Ctin. Ţegăneanu, Bucureşti, Ed. Academiei (Bucharest: Ed. Academiei Republicii Socialiste România, 1975), Doc. 693, 749.
23.
Ibid., Doc. 744, 799.
24.
Ibid., Doc. 302, 330-31.
25.
Ibid., Doc. 454, 502-03.
26.
Ibid., Doc. 816, 880-81.
27.
Boga, ed., Documente basarabene: Hrisoave şi cărţi domneşti 1607-1806, 14:92-96.
28.
Cronţ et al., eds., Acte judiciare, Doc. 250, 273-74.
29.
Ibid., Doc. 251, 275, and Regeste şi documente, ed. I. Filitti (Bucharest: Lupta, 1938), 2:7.
30.
Iorga, ed., Studii şi documente, 16:79-82.
31.
Filitti, ed., Regeste şi documente, "Familia Slătineanu (1712-1862)," 2:21. Cf. also Catinca's dowry of 1835 quoted in the same collection.
32.
Cronţ et al., eds., Acte judiciare, Doc. 922, 981-82.
33.
Ibid., Doc. 458, 507-08 and Doc. 461, 511-12.
34.
For a study of testaments in the Romanian ancien régime, see Andreea-Roxana Iancu, "Moştenirea prin testament: Între voinţa individuală şi solidaritatea de familie (Bucureşti, sfârşit secol XVIII-început de secol XIX") [Inheritance by Testament: Between Individual Will and Family Solidarity, Bucharest, Late Eighteenth-Early Nineteenth Centuries], in De la comunitate, ed. V. Barbu (Bucharest: Institutul Cultural Român, 2007), 245-94.
35.
More on attitudes to death in Violeta Barbu, "Sic moriemur": The Discourse upon Death in Wallachia during the Ancien Régime," Revue roumaine d'histoire, XXXIII, 1-2 (1994): 101-21.
36.
There were three classes of boyars.
37.
Boga, ed., Documente basarabene, Testamente şi danii 1672-1858, 3:15-19. For the use of the "curse" as legal procedure, see above, note 9.
38.
For dowries given to sons, see above, note 4.
39.
Boga, ed., Documente basarabene, 3:20-2.
40.
Ibid., 82-85.
41.
For the entire text and analysis of a similar document, see Gheorghe Lazăr, "Familie şi sentiment în Vechiul Regim românesc. Note pe marginea testamentului lui Radu Goran Olănescu" [Family and Sensibility in the Romanian Ancien Régime. Observations on the Last Will and Testament of Radu Goran Olănescu], Studii şi materiale de istorie medie, XXI (2003): 47-56.
42.
From a growing body of research, here is a selective list. For the seventeenth century, see Violeta Barbu, De bono coniugali-O istorie a familiei din Ţara Românească în secolul al XVII-lea (Bucharest: Meridiane, 2003. For the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, see Bonnes et mauvaises moeurs dans la société roumaine d'hier et d'aujourd'hui, ed. Ionela Băluţă and Constanţa Vintilă-Ghiţulescu (Bucharest: New Europe College, 2005; Constanţa Vintilă-Ghiţulescu, "Divorce and Divortiality in Eighteenth Century Romanian Society," Sűdost-Forschungen (Munich) 63-64 (2004-2005): 188-210; Idem, "Marriage without Contract in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries)," Romanian Journal of Population Studies (Cluj), 1 (2008): 5-18.
43.
Daniel Barbu's term, cited in Vintilă-Ghiţulescu, "Ordinea domestică," 227.
