Love and Courtship in Federalist America Essay

The courtships and marriages of Theodore Sedgwick and of his seven children span the American Revolution and the early republic, with Theodore first marrying in 1767/68, his children world born between 1775 and 1791, and completely except Catharine marrying by their thirties. In some ways, Kensleas findings are unsurprising, as arranged marriages gave way to individual choice Sedgwick arranged his eldest daughters marriages in 1797 and 1801, while his sons enjoyed love matches in spite of appearance a decade. But Kensleas focus on the family adds a new dimension male exploit in arranging young womens marriages apparently extended beyond fathers to brothers. Professing so much pride and pleasure in contemplating her worth, that I want the world to know what a sister I possess (45), Theodore II insisted Frances marry Ebenezer Watson, whom she did not love. When Watson turned out to be physically abusive, Francess brothers over again played a significant role by using their influ ence on her husbands business as a way to control him and offering their homes as a refuge.Just as brothers influenced their sisters marriages, peers played a significant role in love matches in both cases, courtship took role in a group context. Even when love superseded paternal choice, siblings made clear that marriage to soulfulness was necessary as Catharine Sedgwick asked her equivocating brother, What are you doing? Sucking your thumbs, and structure castles while all the birds of the air are building their nests (110). Friends were equally important in shaping courtship. The wonderfully named Friendliesa group of single and married capital of Massachusetts women in their twentiesnot only if provided the younger Sedgwicks with potential wives, scarcely advised them on how to rent well.Kenslea demonstrates that marrying for love by no means simplified choice instead, both men and women employed banter as a way of ascertaining intent without committing themselves, and all iances shifted so quickly that the Sedgwick men seem to have courted all the Friendlies at once. Such dizzingly complex male/female relations (119)replete with wit, romantic potential, and power plays betoken parallels to the mixed groups Catharine Allgor discovered in the early republics political salons (103). At least during courtship, male/female spheres had remarkably porous boundaries, and Kenslea finds the beginnings of the domestication of virtue (169) in the early republic, as personal mirth succeeded public good.As couples became engaged, they retreated from friends and family and developed relationships Kenslea finds similar to those Karen Lystra discovered among Victorians two decades later. In Harry Sedgwick and Jane Minots engagement of 1816-17, they quit badinage for candor, tested their relationship with a year long separation as Sedgwick established himself financially, and created new selves by employing letters as a form of physical contact and ritual celebration of their love (131). Like Lystra, Kenslea finds fluidity of sexuality roles (155), with Jane complimenting Harry, you are the nearest to a woman in your feelings of any man I know (144). The Sedgwick manuscripts, however, allow Kenslea to examine such courtships through siblings and parents eyes, rather than only from the couples perspective.If the Sedgwicks provide much evidence of family and friends roles in court- ship and the erosion of distinct gender roles, they also suggest the limits of change. The Sedgwicks occupied a narrow cut of societyFederalist, Unitarian, and upper classbut male privilege framed their lives.