OpenTube

The Myth Of “Prima Nocta” (And Why Do People Believe In It?)

Studium Historiae

65,896 views

In 1995, Braveheart reintroduced a large number of people to the concept of Ius Primae Noctis, "the right of the first night" where a lord would have the right to sleep with a woman living on his lands on her wedding night. As with many things about Braveheart, though, historians have been quick to tear this apart.
Most historians today believe that "the right of the first night" was a myth. But is there any grain of truth to it? Was it fabricated out of thin air by later writers, or is there any reason to suspect it could have been real? In this video we look into why this idea became so closely tied to the Middle Ages as well as the sources that have been used to argue for its reality.

Support me on Patreon: Patreon: StudiumHistoriae1215

Follow me on Instagram: Instagram: studium.historiae

Sources and Recommendations for further reading:
Boureau, Alain. The Lord’s First Night: The Myth of the Droit de Cuissage. Translated by Lydia G. Cochraine (University of Chicago Press, 1998).
Howarth, W. D. “‘Droit Du Seigneur’: Fact or Fantasy.” Journal of European Studies 1, no. 1 (1971): 291–312.
Lyons, Andrew P., Harriet Lyons. Irregular Connections: A History of Anthropology and Sexuality. (University of Nebraska Press, 2004).

Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
1:56 - Latin side tangent
4:15 - Origins
7:39 - Marriage fees
10:16 - Modern debates
14:47 - The evidence
24:31 - Anthropological arguments
28:34 - Conclusion

All images used in this video are either my own, in the public domain, under fair use, or under creative commons. No AI was used in the making of this video.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...

Outro music: Laid Back Guitars by Kevin MacLeod, CC BY-SA 4.0
http://incompetech.com/music/royalty-...

#medievalhistory #medieval #middleages #history #educational #braveheart #historymyths #scotland #myths

20 Comments

@TheManFromWaco 4 days ago

There's also the small matter than any secular lord attempting to claim he legally had sexual rights to the wives of his serfs would've received the medieval equivalent of being nuked from orbit by the Roman Catholic Church. Even a thoroughly corrupt and godless bishop would never have gone along with something that so openly defied and undermined Church authority.

@florinivan6907 3 days ago

They believe in it because it ties into the basic assumption that before modern democracies the common man had close to zero rights. That the 'boss' could do as he pleased no questions asked. The concept that people had rights just not the way we understand them is too complicated.

@benoitdore-coulombe1963 5 days ago

At LONG LAST someone tackles that specific instance of bad Latin in movies

@Tupadre97 2 days ago

Crazy this idea goes all the way back to Gilgamesh of all things

@confusedowl445 5 days ago

I assume that if this thing has any actual real origin it was some 5000 BC Mesopotamian village chief who tried this and was quicky disposed of, but the people were so outraged by what he tried, it got passed down through word of mouth until it ended up as a sort of cautionary tale

@courtlyskeleton 5 days ago

Machiavelli already said that one way to ensure you will not rule for a long time is to frequently assault the women in the population. It's also just plain stupidity from the standpoint of a ruler to not just violate your subjects, but to habitually sour a time of celebration for no reason whatsoever: what possible political effect will this serve other than ensuring everyone hates you forever? If this was real, who in their right minds would still openly marry anyone? Do people think that medieval humans were an alien species immune to outrage caused by injustice? You can't rule over people who despise you with every fibre of their being.

@mcbrackens 4 days ago (edited)

My nerdy Latin scholar self feels so validated seeing “Prima Nocta” on the thumbnail and thinking “yknow I never thought about it, but prima nocta seems grammatically incorrect. But maybe it’s some weird Ablative of time I’ve never seen.” Appreciate you doing it first and making me feel wicked smart despite not having taken college-level Latin since 2011.

@wolfengod8277 1 day ago

Yeah I don’t care how oppressed a group of people are, if you marry and some guy shows up demanding to rape your wife you would revolt. It’s conditions that wouldn’t be worth living in and everyone would always be looking for any opportunity to get vengeance for that injustice.

@michaelniederer2831 4 days ago

Like the eating of babies, this supposed right seems to be just a straw-man argument to illustrate the evil of "the other". Thanks for another scholarly romp.

@emho5135 2 days ago

You have to love how the historical inaccuracy starts with the name of the film. It's the equivalent of making a film about Robert E. Lee called Stonewall.

@danic9304 5 days ago

'A movie that came out 32 years ago'

No! Absolutely not. Goddamnit. I need to go sit somewhere quiet and think this over.

@TheDeadmanstrolling 17 hours ago

People want to believe this was commonplace for the same reason they want to believe medieval people were constantly covered in mud, never wore bright colors, burned anyone who knew math at the stake, and were just constantly miserable wretched creatures. There is a, idk, pathological desire in a lot of modern people to believe the past was awful awful awful, so that the now seems better by comparison.

@professorhaystacks6606 2 days ago

While probably not true, the idea I find the most interesting is that Gilgamesh/Bilgames really did institute this, no one ever did since then, and for the last 4500 years the notion has derived from that one incident.

@pavelslama5543 10 hours ago (edited)

When I first saw it, the first thing that came to my mind was "Yeah if that was the case, the catholic church would really want a "ius prima castratio" to use it against said lord, as marriage was sacred back then.

@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts 11 hours ago

Another good example of how Voltaire didn't know what he was talking about. So much modern culture is based on the teachings of people who didn't care about intellectual integrity and didn't or couldn't do the research about what they spoke confidently about.

@rellek4053 18 hours ago

People refusing to do research and simply dismissing each other on ideological grounds? I’m so glad we live in enlightened times where no one would do that!

@foreverdirt1615 5 days ago

Never liked this idea and always thought it was stupid. There's also an idea that the origin of the F word was an acronym for this concept, which is an even dumber claim that I remember my stepfather telling me about when I was a kid and I never believed that shit.

@adambadam4870 5 days ago

Mel Gibson and his conseqences were disastrous for popular historical literacy.

@ochre379 4 days ago

I think the French lord who listed it as one of his claimed rights added it on to draw attention away from something else he wanted. People do this to get around censorship all the time. The director of the film The Diamond Hand famously had footage of a nuclear bomb put at the end of the film to get the Soviet censors to focus on that rather than a seduction scene earlier in the film.

@LuukvdHoogen 4 days ago (edited)

This is such a unexpected relieve! I have always assumed it was a common practice, and it has always been an especially strong piece of sadness-inducing and history-depraving thought!! It also makes perfect sense to me, right away, that the prudisch exitable victorians would find this a pefect trope to be morally disgusted by. edit; amost forgot to subscribe, im humbled that an american knows so much about european history