a chartered brothel existed, for the bishop, in 1307, forbade the
inhabitants to receive any of the public prostitutes into their
houses, which supposes that some particular retreat was open to them.
There was one also at Lisbon; but it was not until 1394 that the
magistrates deliberated on the propriety of erecting a building at the
public expense, expressly as a brothel. Ten years later we find the
inhabitants lamenting that their wives and daughters were endangered
by the want of such a place, and in 1424 it was established. A tax was
levied on the women to assist in defraying the cost, and fines were
imposed for misconduct.
In Italy licensed brothels were very numerous. There was one at
Mantua, and Venice was the very sink of prostitution. In 1421 the
government enlisted women to this service to guard the virtue of the
other classes. A matron was placed over them, who governed them,
received their gains, and made a monthly division of profits. The names
of several women, the most notorious and beautiful of the Venetian
courtezans, are preserved by Nicolo Daglioni. A very small sum was paid
to them by their patrons.
In Valencia a public brothel, on a colossal scale, existed towards the
end of the fifteenth century. It resembled a little town surrounded
with walls, and had a single gate; in front of this stood a gibbet for
criminals. Near this was an office, where a man stood who addressed
all who entered, and said, that if they would deposit what valuables
they had with him, he would return them safely as they came out; but
if they refused and were robbed within, he was not responsible. The
wall inclosed four or five streets of little houses, inhabited by girls
dressed in brilliant habiliments of velvet and silk. Three or four
hundred of them were usually in attendance. They received only a small
sum for their favours. Whether this system was then general in Spain we
know not, but it is certain that common prostitutes abounded. Servants
appear to have been hired for this purpose, for Philippe II., in 1575,
in order to check the ravages of immorality, ordered that no female
domestics under forty years of age should be hired by men. A decree of
1623 required that in all cities throughout the kingdom public brothels
should be abolished.
In Geneva there was a “Queen of the Prostitutes,” elected by the civic
magistrates, who took an oath of office, and undertook to govern
all the women engaged in her occupation. At Schelstadt a man was
commissioned to a similar duty, and very strict rules were imposed on
the population.
We have seen that in many places prostitution became a source of
revenue, and might enlarge our details and multiply our examples; but
it would be tedious to cite the laws of France, Spain, Italy, and
Germany on the subject. They varied much in different times, but offer
little interest.
The legislator, however, has not contented himself at all times with
dividing the prostitute class from other classes of females, with
shutting them up in separate quarters, or even confining them in houses
of which he kept the key. In some cases he obliged them to assume a
peculiar costume, or at least a conspicuous badge of infamy. They
always endeavoured to resist or elude the restrictions laid upon them,
and, feeling deeply the humiliation of such compulsion, sought by all
means to evade it. The first regulation of this kind for the city of
Paris is mentioned by the chronicler Geoffrey. He says, that the Queen
of Louis VII. going one day to church, met a woman gorgeously attired,
and, deceived by her appearance, gave her, “according to custom,”
the kiss of peace. She was a court prostitute; and when the royal
lady heard this, she complained to her husband, who ordered that no
mantles should in future be worn by prostitutes. From time to time new
edicts on this subject appeared. One of 1360 forbade them to wear any
embroidery, any gold or silver buttons, any pearls, or any trimmings
of gray fur. In 1415 and 1419 golden and gilded zones were prohibited
to them, as well as silver buckles to their shoes. The very fashion
of their dress was afterwards regulated. These devices to distinguish
prostitutes from respectable females were speedily imitated. An
_aiguillette_ of a certain colour, hung from the shoulder, was most
generally adopted in France. In some towns silk was prohibited to them.
The Bishop of Rhodes, in 1307, forbade them to wear mantles, veils,
amber necklaces, or rings of gold, while the popes of Rome followed
the example. The laws of Mantua obliged prostitutes when they appeared
in the streets to cover the rest of their clothes with a short white
cloak, and wear a badge on their breasts. At Bergamo the cloak was
yellow; in Parma, white; in Milan, at first, black woollen, and then
black silk. If disobedient, they might be fined, and, in case of a
second offence, publicly exposed, and whipped. Any one might strip
the garments off any girl he met in the streets illegally attired. In
London a similar distinction was imposed on them, and at Strasburgh
a sugar-loaf bonnet was invented for their use. In Spain, besides
prohibitions concerning dress, they were forbidden the use of coaches
and litters, as well as prayer-carpets or cushions in the churches;
even a hackney-carriage was not allowed to be hired by them.
The acts of legislation in France were almost exclusively police
regulations. Forced to tolerate the prostitute class, the law
endeavoured, by watching, restraining, shaming, and insulting it, to
render its occupation so infamous as to terrify persons from seeking
it as a means of livelihood. It does not seem that in France, during
the middle ages, legislation ever passed this limit or went beyond
the action of police. In Italy, however, and in Spain, this was not
the case. The Roman law had left many vestiges, which have never, in
reality, disappeared; the ecclesiastical prerogative was powerful,
and disposed to be active. Local statutes existed in great abundance,
and the combination of these authorities gave rise to a jurisdiction
full of details: profuse, sometimes strange, always subtle, in parts
inconsistent, and laboriously commented upon by a numerous school of
jurists--a jurisprudence which elevated itself above simple measures of
security and municipal rules, and instituted for prostitutes a civil
and social statute of their own.
Ulpian says that a woman is a prostitute not only when she frequents
regular brothels, but when she visits cabarets, or any other places,
where she is careless of her honour. She is a prostitute who yields
herself for base purposes to all men; but she who has connection only
with one or two is not. Octavenus, however, thinks, more justly, that
she is a prostitute who gives up her person in common, whether she
receive money or not.
The lawgivers of the middle ages were not accustomed to insist on
perfect or precise definitions. They liked to subtilize over terms.
Some held Ulpian’s limited view to be correct; others, with Octavenus,
declared that any woman yielding to the solicitations of several men,
even without being paid, was a prostitute. The Roman law defined
prostitution to be the reception of numerous libertines. But how many?
inquired St. Jerome. This threw divisions among the theorists. Some
declared 40 men to be enough, some insisted on 60, others on 70; while
a few, carrying extravagance to its utmost limits, asserted that no
woman was a prostitute who had not delivered up her person to at least
3000 persons. While these ridiculous disputes engaged attention, the
corruption of manners went on.
It is just to the wisdom of that age, however, to remark, that these
discussions of the casuists appeared no less ridiculous to contemporary
statesmen than to us; while the general public idea of prostitution was
habitual debauch for vile purposes, whether mercenary or otherwise.
Some theorists, nevertheless, insisted that the nature of a hireling
was inseparable from that of a prostitute. On this account the name
_meretrix_ had by the Latins been given to a woman of this class; but
this view led to consequences which the wise legislator would not
accept. If any female accepting a reward for her dishonour was to be
publicly enumerated among professional harlots, many, from a single
offence, must, under compulsion, follow a life of systematic vice.
Others argued that two or three repetitions of this infamous sale would
justify the title being applied; but this is a point on which writers
have never agreed. Consequently, a long controversy arose upon the
three conditions in dispute: what amount of publicity--what number of
vicious connections--what kind of venality--was sufficient to stamp a
woman with the name and character of a common prostitute.
Rabuteaux describes her as one who, under constraint, or by her own
will, abandons herself, without choice, without passion, without even
the impulse of the grossest lust, to an unchaste course of life. By
want of choice he means the absence of a preference for the individual,
by which, he adds, a forbearing judgment extenuates the offence of
immorality. If, he insists, there be any choice of persons, there may
be libertinism, there may be debauch, there may be scandal, there may
be vice, but there is not prostitution in the true sense of the word.
It applies to “sacred prostitution,” whether gratuitous or venal,
which was an unblushing and indiscriminate sacrifice of chastity; to
that which the barbarous hospitality of savages, whether on the rivers
of Lapland or in the deserts of Africa, gave up a woman to every
guest; and to that legal kind in civilized countries which sold itself
promiscuously for hire.
Such is M. Rabuteaux’s idea. We differ from him. Prostitution appears
to us the application to a vile purpose of that which was designed for
honourable uses; and the mere satisfaction of animal lust is in itself
the vilest object. There may exist in a woman’s mind, even when most
debauched, a preference for some, an aversion to others; but she is no
less a prostitute, if she abandon herself viciously, whether to one or
many.
While these theories divided the opinions of lawgivers, legislation on
the subject was extremely difficult. They were forced to be contented
with what they thought imperfect proof; and, to fix the infamy of a
woman, accepted evidence from witnesses, even those accomplices in sin
who, of all others, have lost the right to accuse. A female who chose
the night for the period of her orgies; who, as a wanderer, without
a companion to protect her, entered house after house; who waited
on revellers in a place of entertainment; might be registered among
common prostitutes. A legitimate suspicion, also, attached to her who
received the visits of many young men; and, above all, who, in light or
darkness, frequented a public school.
These women, when once consigned legally to the prostitute class,
gained, in the middle ages, a right which they could not otherwise
assert. The Roman laws adopted by the jurisprudence of that period
allowed her to have a legal claim to payment when she prostituted her
body, and the reason assigned was founded on a strange and subtle
distinction of terms. “The courtesan’s vocation,” said Ulpian, “is
infamous, but the wages of it are not; the act is shameful, but not the
reward which is in prospect when the act is committed.”
The Spanish law was still more favourable to her. When a man paid in
advance, and she refused to submit according to her promise, he could
not demand his money back. On one side she received a legitimate
emolument; on the other, he was guilty of immoral turpitude which the
law would not recognise. The code of Alphonso also permitted this
interpretation; some commentators, however, allowing that the woman had
a right to revoke the promise of yielding her person, but was bound
to restore the amount of hire she had received. Long and vigorous
controversies arose among the theologians when this was referred to
them. It was also disputed in France, whether the prostitute could
enforce payment when she had sold herself and an avaricious person
refused to reward her. An imposing list of authorities is arrayed on
either side.
Another question long debated was the use to which such gains could
lawfully be applied. Alphonso the Wise, on the authority of Isaiah,
forbade priests to receive offerings from such a source. Baldæus and
others insisted that the church could not accept taxes from public
women; but this by many was repudiated, as contrary to the principle
that the wages of prostitution were lawfully acquired. The Spanish
law allowed money of this kind to be given in alms, and the public
opinion recognised the right to dispose of it by testament, though
several popes attempted to decree a contrary usage. If, then, they
could dispose of their gains as they pleased, could they inherit
property? They could, but under limitations. In Savoy it appears that
legacies to prostitutes made by soldiers who had not quitted service
more than a year were null and void. In Spain no woman of this class
could inherit to the disadvantage of the testator’s relatives in a
direct or collateral line. Many authorities only admitted the brother
of the deceased to this right; but an exception was made when it was a
daughter who succeeded to such property, or when the woman was herself
married. A mother, however, could disinherit her daughter for leading
a vicious life, but lost this privilege if she had been the accomplice
of her immorality. The father had equal authority, but with one
curious limitation. When, said the law, a father has sought to marry
his daughter, and endowed her sufficiently, if she, against his will,
refuses to marry and becomes a prostitute, he may cut her off; but
if he have opposed her marriage until she reached the age of 25, and
become a libertine, he cannot refuse to bequeath her his property. In
the duchy of Asota, in Piedmont, a similar regulation was established;
but the age was fixed at 29, and the woman, on every opportunity to
marry, was bound to present herself before her father and demand his
consent. If he refused it, he was not allowed to punish her when, at
30, she became a harlot.
The church, in those ages, made it a pious act to marry a prostitute,
and absolved from their sins all who did so. In France a woman of this
class might, at a very ancient period, save a criminal from death, by
inducing him to espouse her, and Farnacius relates an anecdote which
shows this custom to have existed in Spain. In a city, which he does
not name, a young man mounted on an ass was being conducted to the
scaffold. A courtezan was struck by his beauty, offered him his life if
he would become her husband. He refused. The temptation was not strong
enough to induce him to accept such a wife. He merely answered, “Let
us move on,” and reached the place of execution. Meanwhile, however,
an account of the incident had reached the king, and he, admiring the
youth’s courage, pardoned him. From this we may learn that though the
church consecrated such a marriage with peculiar grace, public opinion
considered it infamous.
The jurisprudence of the middle ages introduced new principles, and
these unions became more rare. Many doctors of law announced that they
were contrary to the sacred code.
In Spain, where concubinage was legally recognised, men of rank
were forbidden to take as concubines slaves, whether born in actual
bondage or emancipated, dancers, servants of taverns, go-betweens,
or prostitutes. It was disputed whether the children of these women
could be legitimatized by subsequent marriage. It was decided that
they could, though with more difficulty than others, and their mothers
became amenable to the laws against adultery.
Persecution in all barbarous ages and countries has endeavoured to
perform the task of teaching and reclaiming mankind. The members of
the venal sisterhood have, more than any others, experienced the harsh
effects of this species of legislation. The law sought to withdraw
them from vice by shutting from them every approach to virtue, to
reform their minds by forbidding them the society of honest persons,
to elevate them from their degradation by adding to their infamy. It
refused to receive them as witnesses, even when violence was done upon
their persons; though more liberal jurists cried out amid the clamour
of intolerant bigotry, that the protection of justice should attend
even the vilest prostitutes in the vilest dens of her resort; but the
spirit of the times was vindictive, and because society was corrupt
and base, it was most unsparing in its cruelty towards the victims of
debasement and corruption.
In spite of every one of these rude devices of a rude society to banish
immorality to habitations of its own, by badges, quarters, distinct
costumes, and even separate laws, prostitutes swarmed in every city
of Europe, and still more in its innumerable camps. Armies were then
undisciplined bands of adventurers, and pillage was the soldier’s
chief purpose. Xenophon tells that the nations of Persia, Asia Minor,
and India, were accompanied on their marches by their women and their
children, to defend whom they fought with more courage; and Athenæus
describes Chareas, causing a band of beautiful courtezans to dance
before his phalanxes to the tune of flutes and psalteries. Two thousand
prostitutes were driven from the camp of Scipio Africanus; and so, in
the middle ages, every army drew in its train numbers of public women.
Three hundred were with the army which laid siege to St. Jean d’Acre
in 1189, and during the whole of the crusades the Christian armies
were followed by them. Many times the leaders endeavoured to check
this debauchery. Some of the girls were flogged. Sometimes the man who
was found with one of them was obliged to allow her to strip him to
his shirt, and lead him with a rope through the camp. On the plains
of Perretola, after the defeat of the Florentines, in 1325, public
dances were executed by prostitutes for the amusement of the army. In
all parts of Europe similar profligacy distinguished the camp; and
long after we find Jeanne d’Arc, when reviewing the army, chastised
with her sword several prostitutes whom she detected among the ranks.
Marshal Strozzi, with a ferocity worthy of that period, drowned 800
of them in the Loire. When the Duke of Alva invaded Flanders, there
accompanied his army “400 courtezans on horseback, beautiful and grand
as princesses, and 800 others on foot.” These were for the pleasure of
10,000 men, all veterans.
Prostitution was authorized and disciplined, not only in the camps but
in the palaces of those days. From the eleventh century to that of
Francis I., a regular community of public women was attached to the
court.
We have already noticed the Queen of Louis VII. kissing one of them on
her way to church; and we find Charlemagne ordering his palace to be
cleared of them. At the Council of Nantes, in 660, it was complained
that the concubines of the nobility, instead of remaining at home,
thronged to public assemblies; but the seraglios of these lords, in
the ninth century, were places of prostitution. The German law imposed
a fine of six sous on a man who committed violence on a female in the
principal or royal “gynecées,” but only three in any other. It was
formerly the custom to send to one of these retreats a woman convicted
of adultery; but this was at length forbidden, lest it should simply
allow her an opportunity to repeat the offence. Sometimes they were
only the harems of the proprietor, sometimes brothels. William IX., of
Poitou, established in the eleventh century an abbey for prostitutes,
where he added to his profligacy the crime of sacrilege, giving the
harlots the titles of abbess and prioress, and parodying every sacred
rite. The orgies of his palace, and indeed of all others of that age,
are indescribable.
The title of King of the Prostitutes was given to the officer who
presided over the royal brothels. In Paris, in Normandy, and in
Burgundy, we find this functionary. Under the kings of France he
enjoyed a high rank and many privileges; and associated with him was
a woman who governed the prostitutes, and punished them with whipping
when they offended. In England, also, the palace and the mansions
of the nobles contained small brothels. In Henry VIII.’s palace was
a room, with an inscription over the door, “Chamber of the King’s
Prostitutes.”
Thus, throughout the world, there was, in the middle ages, profligacy
and corruption, which rose to its height at the period which preceded
the Reformation. From their chief places of resort in royal palaces
prostitutes spread over the whole of society, invading the church,
the hearth, following the camp, dividing the privileges of the wife,
and ever debauching both sexes by their companionship. Rods, prisons,
gallows, chains, pillories, tortures, served in no way to prevent
or even to discourage them; badges and restrictions proved equally
futile; but it is agreeable to find some relief to this dark spectacle
of demoralization. In the age of primitive Christianity religious
men endeavoured to reclaim from vice those whom they found making a
trade of it. We cannot stay to dwell on the sincere apostleship which
laboured, especially in the East, and was followed by fathers and
hermits from the desert. Stories of conversions of this kind fill
the legends of the time, and earnest attempts were made to offer an
asylum to the unhappy women who had abandoned themselves to profligacy.
We have noticed Theodora, the imperial harlot of Rome, collecting
500 prostitutes in a palace on the Bosphorus; but her impure hand
could not perform well the offices of charity, and she applied force
to fill her asylum. Many of the girls, therefore, who were shut up
in her magnificent and luxurious prison, found their confinement
insupportable, and committed suicide to escape it. In 1198 two Parisian
priests established a nunnery for repentant women, and thirty years
afterwards the House of the “Daughters of God” was instituted, and
these efforts were rewarded with much genuine success. Two centuries
passed without many enterprises of the sort being undertaken; but in
the fifteenth century an association of public women was formed to
exchange their base gains for those of piety and virtue.
In 1489 all the prostitutes of Amiens, animated by a sudden awaking of
remorse, applied for a place of retreat, where they might bury their
shame, and renew their honesty. This was granted, and several others
were established, the inmates of which wore white garments.
In several other parts of France, and generally in Europe, the
religious orders made attempts to recall some of the abandoned class
of females, to redeem the virtue of their sex, and, as they laboured
with sincerity, many of their enterprises were successful. But, on the
whole, prostitution still increased, and, the Reformation broke over a
state of society demoralized to the very core[90].
OF PROSTITUTION IN SPAIN.
Few nations have been described in more various ways and in more
contradictory terms than the Spaniards. In the pages of one writer,
we find them represented as in all things a great example of virtue,
morality, and uncorrupted manners; in another, they are pictured as the
very embodiment of vice and degradation. We have been at much pains to
deduce from the history, from the achievements, and from the actual
state of Spain, as these are set forth by innumerable authorities, a
just opinion of its national characteristics, and the sketch we shall
offer is the result.