turned inside out upon the other, and to hold, in the left hand, during
the nuptial benédiction, a small wooden cross.
4. To lay the new married couple naked upon the ground; to cause the
bridegroom to kiss the great toe of the bride's left foot, and the bride
the great toe of the bridegroom's right foot: after which they must make
the sign of the cross with the left hand and repeat the same with the
right or left hand.
5. To take the bridegroom's point-hose and pass it through the wedding
ring: knot the said point, holding the fingers in the ring, and
afterwards cut the knot saying, "God loosens what the Devil fastens."
6. When the new-married couple are about to retire for the night to
fasten upon the thigh of each a little slip of paper, inscribed with
these words, _Domine, quis similis tibi?_
7. To broach a cask of white wine from which none has yet been drawn,
and pour the first of the liquor which flows, through the wedding ring.
8. To rub with wolf's grease the door posts through which the married
couple pass on their way to the nuptial bed.
9. To write upon virgin parchment before sunrise, and for nine days
successively, the word _Arigazartor_.
10. To pronounce the word _Temon_ three times successively at sunrise,
provided the day promises to be fine.
But the mode of procedure in which the learned curate Thiers appears to
place the greatest confidence is that employed by a priest of his
acquaintance. This person's plan was to tie the bride and bridegroom to
a pillar and administer to them with his own hand the stimulus with
which the pedagogue awakens the genius of idle and sluggish pupils;
after this flagellation they are unbound and left together, amply
provided with such restorative and stimulants as are proper to maintain
the condition so favourable to Venus, in which he had placed them. The
result was in the highest degree satisfactory.
Bodin informs us that he knew at Bordeaux, a woman of middle age, but
still lively and fresh, who professed to cure radically all enchantments
of this description. Nothing could be more natural than her _modus
operandi_. She got into bed with her patients, and there by the
resources of her amatory powers succeeded so well in arousing their
flagged and sluggish desires that their domestic peace was never
afterwards disturbed by the reproaches of their disappointed spouses.
Upon her mother's death, the daughter embraced the same interesting
profession and in addition to acquiring considerable reputation by her
successful practise, realized a handsome fortune.
Ridiculous and contemptible as this quackery now appears, so great at
one time was its power, that persons every way qualified for the
generative act, have been seen suddenly reduced to a humiliating
nullity, in consequence of an impudent charlatan, a village sorcerer or
a fortune-teller having threatened them with point-tying. Saint André, a
French physician, gives an account of a poor weaver, who having
disappointed Madame André in not bringing home some work was threatened
by that lady with being point-tied by her husband the doctor. The poor
fellow was so alarmed that the charm had the same effect as a reality,
nor was it until the work he had in hand was finished, and the lady had
consented to restore him to his natural state, that he could resume the
exercises of his conjugal duties.
Venette gives the case of one Pierre Buriel. "This man," to use
Venette's own words, "was about thirty-five years of age, a cooper and
brandy manufacturer by trade. Being at work one day for my father in one
of his country houses, he offended me by some impertinent observations,
to punish which I told him the next day that I would point-tie him when
he married. It so happened that he had the intention of uniting himself
with a servant girl who lived in the neighbourhood, and although I had
threatened him merely in a jesting manner, it made so strong an
impression upon him that although, when married, he felt the most ardent
desire to enjoy his connubial rights, he found himself totally
incapacitated for the work of love. Sometimes when he flattered himself
with being on the point of accomplishing his wishes, the idea of the
witchcraft obtruded itself, and rendered him for the time completely
impotent. This incapacity alienated the affections of his wife, and
produced on her part towards him the most repulsive coldness. I need not
say what gain I felt on witnessing these effects, how I regretted
having, I may truly say, unintentionally caused so unpleasant a state of
things, and I did and said everything in my power to disabuse the man,
and prove to him the folly of his impressions. But the more I did so,
the more he testified his abhorrence of me, and his conviction that I
had really bewitched him. At length the curate of Notre Dame, who had
married them, interfered, and after some time succeeded, though with
considerable difficulty, in freeing him from his imaginary bonds. They
lived together for twenty-eight years, and several children, now
citizens of Rochelle, were the issue of their union."
Montaigne gives us a curious story upon this subject, which he
introduces thus: "I am not satisfied and make a very great question,
whether those pleasant ligatures with which the age of ours is so
fettered--and there is almost no other talk--are not mere voluntary
impressions of apprehension and fear; for I know by experience, in the
case of a particular friend of mine, one for whom I can be as
responsible as for myself, and a man that cannot possibly fall under any
manner of suspicion of sufficiency, and as little of being enchanted,
who having heard a companion of his make a relation of an unusual
frigidity that surprised him at a very unseasonable time, being
afterwards himself engaged upon the same account, the horror of the
former story so strangely possessed his imagination that he ran the same
fortune the other had done; he from that time forward (the scurvy
remembrance of his disaster running in his mind and tyrannizing over
him) was extremely subject to relapse into the same misfortune. He found
some remedy, however, for this inconvenience by himself frankly
confessing and declaring beforehand to the party with whom he was to
have to do, the subjection he lay under, and the infirmity he was
subject to; by which means the contention of his soul was, in some sort,
appeased; and knowing that now some such misbehaviour was expected from
him, the restraint upon those faculties grew less, and he less suffered
by it, and afterwards, at such times as he could be in no such
apprehension as not being about any such act (his thoughts being then
disengaged and free, and his body being in its true and natural state)
by causing those parts to be handled and communicated to the knowledge
of others, he was at last totally freed from that vexatious infirmity.
After man has once done a woman right, he is never after in danger of
misbehaving himself with that person, unless upon the account of a
manifest and inexcusable weakness. Neither is this disaster to be feared
but in adventures where the soul is over-extended with desire or
respect, and especially where we meet with an unexpected opportunity
that requires a sudden and quick despatch; and in these cases, there is
no possible means for a man always to defend himself from such a
surprise as shall put him damnably out of countenance. And yet I have
known some who have secured themselves for this misfortune by coming
half-sated elsewhere, purposely to abate the ardour of their fury, and
others who being grown old, find themselves less impotent by being less
able; and particularly one who found an advantage by being assured by a
friend of his that had a countercharm against certain enchantments that
would defend him from this disgrace. The story itself is not much amiss,
and therefore you shall have it.--A count of a very great family, and
with whom I had the honour to be familiarly intimate, being married to a
very fair lady, who had formerly been pretended to and importunately
courted by one who was invited to and present at the wedding. All his
friends were in very great fear, but especially an old lady, his
kinswoman, who had the ordering of the solemnity, and in whose house it
was kept, suspecting his rival would, in revenge, offer foul play, and
procure some of these kinds of sorceries to put a trick upon him, which
fear she also communicated to me, who, to comfort her, bade her not
trouble herself, but rely upon my care to prevent or frustrate any such
designs. Now, I had, by chance, about me, a certain flat piece of gold,
whereon were graven some celestial figures good to prevent frenzy
occasioned by the heat of the sun, or for any pains of the head, being
applied to the suture; where, that it might the better remain firm, it
was sewed to a ribbon, to be tied under the chin. A foppery
cousin-german to this of which I am speaking was Jacques Pelletier who
lived in the house, presented to me for a singular rarity and a thing of
sovereign virtue. I had a fancy to make some use of this quack, and
therefore privately told the count that he might probably run the same
fortune other bridegrooms had sometimes done, especially some persons
being in the house who, no doubt, would be glad to do him such a
courtesy; but let him boldly go to rest, for I would do him the office
of a friend, and if need were, would not spare a miracle that it was in
my power to do, provided he could engage to me, upon his honour, to keep
it to himself, and only when they came to bring him his candle (a custom
in France being to bring the bridegroom a candle in the middle of the
night, on his wedding night) if matters had not gone well with him, to
give such a sign, and leave the rest to me. Now, he had his ears so
battered and his mind so prepossessed with the eternal tattle of this
business, that when he came to it, he did really find himself tired with
the trouble of his imagination, and accordingly, at the time appointed,
gave me the sign. Whereupon I whispered him in the ear, that he should
rise under pretence of putting us out of the room, and after a jesting
manner, pull my night-gown from my shoulders, throw it over his own, and
keep it there till he had performed what I appointed him to do, which
was that when we were all gone out of the chamber, he should withdraw to
make water, should three times repeat such and such words and as often
do such and such actions; that at every of the three times be should tie
the ribbon I put into his hand about his middle, and be sure to place
the medal that was fastened to it (the figures in such a posture)
exactly upon his reins; which being done, and having the last of the
three times so well girt and fastened the ribbon that it could neither
untie nor slip from its place, let him confidently return to his
business, and withal not to forget to spread my gown upon the bed so
that it might be sure to cover them both. These ridiculous circumstances
are the main of the effect, our fancy being so far seduced as to believe
that so strange and uncouth formalities must of necessity proceed from
some abstruse science. Their inanity gives them reverence and weight.
However, certain it is that my figures proved themselves more _Veneran_
than _Solar_, and the fair bride had no reason to complain."
Upon a due consideration of this singular superstition, it must be
obvious to any person of sense that these pretended ligatures are, in
fact, the consequence of an enfeebled constitution, weak intellects, and
sometimes of an ardent imagination, an over-excited desire which carries
the vitality to the head, and diverts it from its principal direction.
Do away with these circumstances and imagine a man in full health, and
gifted with a young and vigorous constitution, alike incapable of
allowing himself to be acted upon by vain terrors, and of permitting his
passions an uncontrolable course; and all the charms and incantation of
these redoubted point-tiers would immediately cease. Who, for instance,
could pretend to point-tie that hero of ancient Greece so famous for his
twelve labours, of which by far the most brilliant was the transforming,
in the course of one night, fifty young virgins into as many women![67]
The most singular circumstance, however, connected with impotency is,
that for a long time there existed exclusively in France a particular
kind of proof called--The Judicial Congress. In the old jurisprudence of
that country but little value was attached to moral proofs; all was made
to depend upon material ones, which were made by witnesses. The whole
enquiry after truth was made to depend upon the establishment of the
fact, and, too frequently, the administrators of the law were not
over-scrupulous as to the nature of the testimony by which it was to be
proved. Provided there were such testimony, no matter of whatever kind,
no matter how contradictory to common sense, justice pronounced itself
satisfied, for, relying upon this testimony it was enabled to pronounce
its decision, and this was all it required. Hence all those personal
examinations of litigants, so often practised formerly, and hence the
judge, whatever might be the nature of the suit or complaint, ordered a
report to be made by parties chosen to that effect, and who were called
_experts_ or examiners. This mode of procedure was employed in cases in
which a woman applied for a divorce from her husband on the ground of
impotency: hence arose the _Congrés_, in which the justice of the
application was to be proved in the presence of examiners appointed to
give in a report upon the case to the court. "Ce qui est encore plus
honteux," says a writer of the 17th century, "c'est qu'un quelques
procés, les hommes ont visité la femme, et au contraire, les femmes ont
été admises à visiter l'homme, qui a été cause d'une grande irrison et
moquerie, que telles procédures ont servi de contes joyeux et plaisans
discours en beaucoup d'endroits."[68] The whole was a most disgusting
procedure, which, although greatly abused, was for a long time
encouraged as offering a legal mode of dissolving a marriage which was
incompatible with the happiness of both the parties, but which the law
declared to be indissoluble. The judges who introduced or maintained the
Congress, who, in fact, protected it, only contemplated it, but
certainly most erroneously as a proper means of legalizing divorces.
All historians, and other writers who have treated of this disgraceful
institution, pretty generally agree in giving it an origin not further
back than the commencement of the 16th century; it is, however, but the
extension of a custom almost as obscene which prevailed in the first
ages of Christianity. This was nothing less than the subjecting a young
girl, whether nun or otherwise, accused of fornication, to a rigorous
personal examination, whence was to result the proof of her innocence or
guilt. Siagrius, Bishop of Verona, and who lived towards the close of
the fourth century, condemned a nun to undergo this disgusting and
insulting examination. St. Ambroise, his metropolitan, disapproved of
the Bishop's sentence, declared the examination as indecent, thus
attesting its existence. The opinion, however of this prelate, supposed
as it was by that of several others, did not prevent the continuance of
this custom for a very long time. The ecclesiastical and civil tribunals
frequently directed this proof to be made; and Venette[69] cites the
procès-verbal of a similar examination made by order of the Mayor of
Paris in 1672, in the case of a woman who complained of violence
committed on her by a man of dissolute habits.
We prefer giving the following curious description of the manner of
conducting the Congress in the original quaint and antiquated French:
"La forme duquel Congrez est, qui le iour et heure prins, et
les Expers connenus ou nommez (qui sont ordinairement ceux
mêmes qui ont fait la visitation lesquels partant n'ont
garde de se contrarier ny de rapporte que l'homme y a fait
l'intromission ayant desia (déjà) rapporté sa partie vierge
et non corrompüe) le juge prend le serment des parties,
qu'elles tascheront de bonne foy et sans dissimulation
d'accōplir l'œuvre de mariage sans y apporter
empeschement de part ny d'autre: des Expers qu'ils ferōt
fidelle rapport de ce qui se passera au Congrez; cela fait
les parties et les expers se retirent en une chābre pour ce
préparée, où l'homme et la femme sont de rechef visités,
l'homme, afin de sçavoir s'il a point de mal, s'en estans
trouué à aucuns l'ayans gaigné depuis avoir esté visité qui
n'ont laissé d'estre séparés encore, qu'il parust assez par
là qu'ils n'estoient impuissans, la femme pour considérer
l'estat de se partie honteuse et, par ce moyen cognoistre la
difference de son ouverture et dilatation, auant et après le
Congrez, et si l'intromission y aura esté faicte, ou non:
sans, toutefois, parler en leur rapport de la virginité ou
corruption de la femme, reputée vierge, ayant vne fois
esté rapportée telle, sans qu'on la visite plus pour cela.
En quelques procès (comme en celuy de Bray, 1578) les
parties sont visités nues depuis le sommet de la teste
iusques à la plante des pieds, en toutes les parties des
leurs corps, _etiam in podice_, pour sçavior s'il n y a rien
sur elles qui puissent auancer ou empescher le congrez, les
parties honteuses de l'homme lavées d'eau tiéde (c'est a
sçavoir à quelle fin) et la femme mise en demy bain, où
elle demeure quelque temps. Cela fait, l'homme et la
femme se couchent en plein iour en un lict, Expers
présens, qui demeurent en la chambre, ou se retirent (si les
parties le requièrent on l'vne d'elles, en quelque
garde-robe ou gallerie prochaine, l'huis (la porte)
entreouvert toutefois, et quand aux matrones se tiennent
proche du lict, et les rideaux estant tirez, c'est à l'homme
à se mettre en devoir de faire preuve de sa puissance
habitant charnellement avec sa partie et faisant
intromission: ou souvent aduiennent des altercations
honteuses et ridicules, l'homme se plaignant que sa partie
ne le veut laisser faire et empesche l'intromission; elle le
niant et disant qu'il veut mettre le doigt et la dilater, et
ouvrir par ce moyen; de sorte qu'il faudroit qu'un homme
fust sans apprehension et pire qu'aucunes bêstes, ou que
_mentula velut digito uteretur_, s'il ne desbandsit
cependant au cas qu'il fust en estat, et si nō obstant ces
indignitez il passait autre iusques à faire intromission;
encore ne sçauroit il, quelque érection qu'il face (fasse),
si la partie veut l'empescher si on ne lui tenoit les mains
et les genoux ce qui ne se fait pas. En fin, les parties
ayās esté quelque tēps au lict, comme une heure ou deux, les
Espers appellex, ou de leur propre mouvement, quand ils
s'ennuyent en ayant de subject, _si sint viri_,
s'approchent, et ouvrans les rideaux, s'informent de ce qui
s'est passé entre elles, et visitent la femme derechef,
pour sçavoir si elle est plus ouverte et dilatée que lorsqu'
elle s'est mise au lict, et si intromission a été faicte
aussi, _an facta sit emission, ubi, quid et quale emissio_.
Ce qui ne se fait pas sans bougie et lunettes à gens qui
s'en seruent pour leur vieil age, ni sans des recherches
fort sales et odieuses: et font leur procès verbal de ce qui
s'est passé au Congrez (ou pour mieux dire) de ce qu'ils
veulent, qu'ils baillent au juge, estant au mesme logis vne
salle, ou chambre à part, avec les procureurs et patriciens,
en cour d'Eglise, attendant la fin de cet acte lequel
rapporte est tousiours (toujours) au desaduantage des hommes
à faute d'auoir fait intromission, sans laquelle, l'érection
_etiam sufficiens ad coeundem_, ny l'émission n'empeschent
la séparation, comme il se voit par les procès verbaux des
Congrez de De Bray des onziesme et vingt unsiesme d'Apuril,
1578. Auxquels Congrez, principalement au premier, il fit
érection rapportée suffisante _ad copulem carnalem, et
emisit extra vas, sed non intromisit_, et pour cela fut
séparé; laquelle intromission ne peust aussi estre faite au
Congrez par quelque homme que ce fut, si la femme n'y
preste consentement, et empesche, comme il est tout
notaire."
The first judicial sentence which ordered a Congress is said to have
been caused by the shameless effrontery of a young man who, being
accused of impotency, demanded permission to exhibit proof of his powers
before witnesses, which demand being complied with, the practice was
introduced into the jurisprudence of the country. But, as we have
already shown, the custom of the Judicial Congress may be referred to a
far earlier period, in fact, to the remotest times of the middle ages,
and that it originated with the Church, when the public morals were far
from being well ascertained, as is proved by many well-known privileges
belonging to the Seigneur or Lord of the Manor. Pope Gregory the Great,
who was raised to the Pontificate in 590, appears to have been the first
who conferred upon bishops the right of deciding this description of
questions. It was, doubtless, from considerations of tender regard for
female modesty that the Church took upon itself the painful duty of
investigating and deciding upon questions of this nature. Numerous
instances prove this, especially the dissolution of the marriage of
Alphonso VI. of Portugal and his Consort, pronounced in 1688, and
mentioned by Bayle.[70] The great antiquity of this custom is proved by
the 17th Art. of the Capitulars of Pepin, in the year 752, which bears a
direct allusion to it: inasmuch as that article established as a
principle that the impotency of a husband should be considered as a
lawful cause for divorce, and that the proof of such impotency should be
given, and the fact verified at the foot of the Cross--_exeant ad
crucem, et si verum fuerit, separantur_.
That the Congress originated with the Church, who considered it as an
efficacious means for deciding questions of impotency, is still further
proved by the President Boutrier and by other writers, who assert that
the ecclesiastical judges of other times were alone empowered (to the
exclusion of all secular ones) to take cognizance of cases of impotency.
It is well attested that during the 16th and 17th centuries all the
courts of law in France held the opinion that a marriage be anulled on
the demand of a wife who claimed the Congress.
The fatal blow to this disgusting custom was given by a decree of the
Parliament of Paris, under the presidency of the celebrated Lamoignon,
dated Feb. 18, 1677, which decree forbids the practice by any other
court whatsoever, ecclesiastical or civil. It is supposed that the
ridicule cast upon it by the following lines of Boileau had no small
share in causing its suppression.
"Jamais la biche en rut, n'a pour fait d'impuissance
Trainé du fond des bois, un cerf à l'audience;
Et jamais juge, entre eux ordonnant le congrès,
De ce burlesque mot n'a sali ses arrêts."[71]