It is not uncommon for modern people to imagine women in early modern Europe as weak, vulnerable helpmates in the rigid patriarchy of the time. Both strict governing bodies plus the laws of the church seemed to limit women’s roles and their expression. While this was the framework in which these women found themselves, many women expressed discontent with the systemic misogyny. These educated few produced many pamphlets, essays, and social commentaries as a way to press against the constraints placed on their sex. Overall, these women did not see themselves as equal to men across all facets of life. Some saw themselves as inferior in certain aspects, equal in others, and even superior to men in some. During the early modern period, some European women used their behavior—including both unruly and submissive actions—along with new religious evidence, and their community’s support as means to develop autonomy and shift the power balance away from the patriarchal structure.
A woman’s personality was the major factor in determining how she would accept the rules of her role. Those who expressed behavioral traits traditionally assigned to men found unexpected results. While more submissive and demure women seemed the most likely to endure being a wife, brass and outspoken women were married just as often, but more likely to make a stir. “Mannish women,” like Poland’s Marina Mniszech, with strong personalities were more prone than their passive counterparts to escape the diminutive roles presented to women of the time (Bogucka, 120). Mniszech married not one, but two men who claimed to be Ivan the Terrible’s son Dimitri. During her first marriage, she was crowned, but after Dimitri was murdered, she soon married another impersonator. Even after her second husband died, Marina attempted to remain in power. While she was ultimately unsuccessful, she showed tremendous gall even in her effort.
Women who were considered bullies or gruff were construed as undesirable or cartoonish in entertainment, but in actuality were usually respected by their husbands (Chudleigh, 23). Many found the servile nature of marriage at best antiquated and at worst akin to slavery. In response to a sermon she witnessed, the poet Lady Mary Leigh Chudleigh pleaded that husbands view their wives as companions, instead of slaves, in order to benefit both parties. “Now I own ‘tis true that Woman was made for the Comfort and Benefit of Man: but I think it a much nobler Comfort to have a Companion, a Person in whom a Man can confide, to whom he can communicate his very soul…than to have a Slave sitting at his footstool, and trembling at every word that comes like Thunder and Lightning from the mouth of the Pharaoh” (20). She argues that God created women to be equal companions, a “social help, not a servile one.” With this argument, all women, from those who were traditionally feminine to those more masculine, could find happiness in their marriages.
Additionally, in spite of demureness being the most appealing quality of a woman, it was used to prove that women were the weaker sex. Many women found issue with this, realizing that not every woman was blessed with this personality trait (Peterson, 134). Sardonic women attempted to find loopholes in public opinion and misogynistic sermons. “I shall take notice by the way, that the Subjection which he thinks belongs to a Woman is a very hard and difficult thing, and therefore the Women are the more excusable if they are not always so very much under the Hatches, since he owns they are but of very weak abilities to learn” (Chudleigh, 12). While grateful to the ministers for their understanding of the plights of femininity, writers hoped that they would take into account how small women’s minds and abilities were.
Another surprising channel for women’s expressed discontent was religion. Historically, the Christian church has been seen as a tool for spreading male dominance in its jurisdiction. However, instead of blindly accepting the Church’s commands, these clever women drew up new, biblically supported constructs of women and femininity. By “successfully articulating a feminist defence within the framework of a distinctively Anglican theological and system,” women like Mary Astell in England presented arguments of female equality, and in some cases superiority, that could not be easily refuted (Apetrei, 50). Women used specific female characters in the Bible to disprove female inferiority. Eve and Mary were the most commonly used, but most females mentioned were more obedient to God than the male individuals on average.
Eve was God’s original woman and the church’s original villain. She committed the first sin then convinced Adam to disobey God. She was not only tempted, but tempted Adam in turn, and the contemporary clergy felt she bore a greater responsibility for the Fall of Man. According to the religious leaders, Eve’s sin trickled down to all women as they continued to tempt men and lure them away from religious teachings. Yet European women began to question the blame. Some began to study the Bible and come up with different conclusions. One woman argued that Adam’s sin was actually greater than Eve’s since God explicitly told Adam to not eat the fruit, while Eve was told second-hand (Apetrei, 68). Moreover, by the Church’s same standard, “Adam was guilty of a very great Crime, to hearken to a Woman more than his God” (Chudleigh, 23). Women latched onto the Church’s apparent hypocrisy. If women were truly lesser beings than men, then Adam’s obedience to Eve was an enormous affront to God. Furthermore, other female scholars posited that women were holier and more resilient than their brothers. “By ye Devils assaulting Eve and not Adam, it seems clear to me yt [sic] she had ye most high and strong soul, and so hardest to be overcome” (Apetrei, 68). Another woman, when a man recited a riddle implying that women were not “human beings” spat, “Thank God that woman is not a human being for the human being as well as the devil are both God’s enemies” insinuating instead that women were holier and superior to men (Bogucka, 103). Many women scholars believed that Eve’s transgression, since lesser than Adam’s, was vindicated by the Virgin Mary. Men may have been saved by Christ’s death and resurrection, but women were saved by Mary’s obedience and virtue.
According to Apetrei, “Mary’s redemptive role is exemplary of female piety in general, and provides the background for the…more general argument that ‘in zealous devotion, and piety towards God [women] doe farre excell even the best men’” (Apetrei, 57). These women argued that women throughout the Bible were consistently more obedient to God than men, proving that women were spiritually superior to men. Mary was blessed among all women and was the only terrestrial being that God used to bring Jesus to Earth. Female biblical scholars note that no men were used in the Nativity, seemingly indicating women’s higher standing in the eyes of God. In the biblical passage 1 Timothy 2:15, Paul tells his audience that women were “saved through childbirth,” which women scholars of the time took to reference Mary’s birthing of Jesus. While mankind was saved through Jesus’s resurrection—due to the greater extent of Adam’s sin—Eve’s offense was light enough that just the birth of the savior could sanctify women.
Women used more than just biblical allegories and characters to justify their rightful place in society. They used Christian mythology, theology, and biblical commandments as a sweeping force to support their claims. These women believed that the patriarchal system that was crushing them was due, not to the wickedness of men, but to men’s ignorance of Scripture, and with proper study, the power balance could shift towards equality. Those women who were writing at this time were hesitant to give into more male dominance than they had to. The “mistake of mens pretending a Power over their wives, that neither God nor nature doe allow” was a major source of tension that many women felt and shared with their neighbors and daughters (Apetrei, 61). Many believed that this power imbalance came not from God or from Scripture, but in fact from men misunderstanding what the Bible actually said. “Mary More, though happily married herself, experienced ‘a trouble in me observing ye sad consequences and events that have fallen on men and their wives’ because of ‘the Ill Carriage of men to their wives’ caused by irreligion and ignorance of the Scriptures” (73). Women were attempting to rectify their disservice through the same venue that men used to justify it. “Says he, ‘will acknowledge that Men can learn to command and rule fast enough.’ Insolent Man! To preach us gravely into Slavery and Chains, and then deride and banter us, as the Babylonians did the Captive Jews when they had ‘em fast in their power” (Chudleigh, 13). The women studying the Bible found the treatment they were receiving wicked and unbiblical.
Finally, women in early modern Europe used their network of neighbors, friends, and families to gauge their power and to act as an audience to air their grievances. Educated mothers imparted their beliefs and experiences to their daughters and nieces, who passed it on in turn to their daughters. Especially in places where education was a rarity and female students even more rare, mother-to-daughter teachings were of endless importance. These early feminist mothers entrenched theories of biblically based equality of the sexes, the importance of female friendships, and how to maintain happiness in marriages, among other things (Peterson, 19). In this way, the role of mother or other female guardian acted as an important position for women to inhabit. As keepers of the home, women had more power than one would assume—particularly in wealthy regions, where large land expanses made socialization more important. If a husband abused his wife, her friends would bar him from their homes, or insinuate that they knew of the abuse she suffered. In these cases, even if the mistreatment did not stop, the wives were comforted knowing that his evil deeds were not going unnoticed or unpunished (Mendelson, 157). Gossip, usually considered a female vice, actually served women’s purposes to keep their husbands’ responsible for their actions. Even if a husband was not physically or emotionally abusive, if his wife did not feel properly appreciated, he ran the risk of her exposing his faults to their extended network.
In conclusion, while historians have often ignored women and their accomplishments, throughout the ages, women have used various means to wield as much power as they possibly could. These women did not accept the sexist regulations of the governing bodies and the church as ironclad and used clever methods to extract as many benefits for themselves and their daughters as possible. By reading the Bible for themselves and coming up with their own arguments, female scholars made it harder for ministers and clergymen to justify female subjugation. Women who embraced their louder personalities were sometimes rewarded with power or infamy. Finally, even women who were less educated could participate in early modern European feminism by enlisting the help of their fellow sisters, daughters, and female neighbors in order to band together for strength.
Women in European History 