Yup, it's economic
Submitted by Heather on April 14 1999 at 19:00:13
In reply to Re: A Question, please Submitted by F.O.D. on April 14 1999 at 16:26:30
|
At least, that was the reason in ancient and medieval times. The more interesting question is why the women's average age of marriage changed, while the men's remained virtually the same. The average age at which Roman men married was the mid-twenties. The average age at which pagan Roman women married was fifteen. The average at which Christian Roman women married was seventeen (interesting difference, that). As the Middle Ages progressed, there began to be less and less of a gap between the average female and male ages, and this was eventually - belatedly - recognized by changes in the age of consent and the age of marriagability. HeatherAt least, that was the reason in ancient and medieval times. The more interesting question is why the women's average age of marriage changed, while the men's remained virtually the same. The average age at which Roman men married was the mid-twenties. The average age at which pagan Roman women married was fifteen. The average at which Christian Roman women married was seventeen (interesting difference, that). As the Middle Ages progressed, there began to be less and less of a gap between the average female and male ages, and this was eventually - belatedly - recognized by changes in the age of consent and the age of marriagability. Heather |