Consanguinity and Noble Marriages in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries
Constance B. Bouchard
Previous articleNext article No AccessConsanguinity and Noble Marriages in the Tenth Eleventh CenturiesConstance B. BouchardConstance Bouchard Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited Speculum Volume 56, Number 2Apr., 1981 The journal of Medieval Academy America Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2307/2846935 Views: 66Total views on site Citations: 27Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright AmericaPDF download reports following citing article:Jonathan F Schulz Kin Networks Institutional Development, Economic Journal 132, no.647647 (Apr 2022): 2578–2613.https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueac027Konstantin S. Sharov Reception EU’s Ideology Gender Equality Chinese Diaspora Europe: Confucianism, (Mar 149–174.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0695-4_10Èric Roca Fernández IN THE NAME OF FATHER: INHERITANCE SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS STATE CAPACITY, Macroeconomic Dynamics 25, no.44 (Jun 2019): 896–923.https://doi.org/10.1017/S1365100519000476Mathew Kuefler , ( 2020): 40.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119315049.ch3Linda Marie Rouillard Kinship Matters: An Immodest Proposal, (Jan 13–76.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35602-6_2Linda Marriage, Misogamy, Misogyny, 107–167.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35602-6_4Robert Bartlett 2020).https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108854559, Konstantin Sharov, Meifeng Ng, Henry Chen Lim, Social Roles Statuses Women Imperial China: Confucianism as Opposition Neoliberalism, Beacon: Studying Ideologies Mental Dimensions 1, no.22 (Dec 2018): 020310207.https://doi.org/10.55269/thebeacon.1.020310207Jonathan Churches' Bans Consanguineous Marriages, Kin-Networks Democracy, SSRN Electronic 2016).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2877828Clare A. Lees Cambridge History Early English Literature, 2 (Feb 2013).https://doi.org/10.1017/CHO9781139035637Sam Worby Kinship: canon law common thirteenth-century England, Historical Research 80, no.210210 (Nov 2007): 443–468.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2281.2006.00405.xChristof Rolker Kings, Bishops Incest: Extension Subversion Ecclesiastical Marriage Jurisdiction around 1100, Studies Church 43 2016): 159–168.https://doi.org/10.1017/S042420840000317XJames Muldoon European Family Law People Frontier, 251–264.https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230604292_12A. Gingrich Konsanguinit�t?Alte Griechen, Habsburger und Muslime, Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde 153, no.11 2005): 29–33.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00112-004-1071-4Daniel Power Norman Frontier Twelfth Thirteenth Centuries, lvii (Sep 2009).https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511470561Jean Flori Knightly Society, (Oct 2004): 148–184.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521414104.007Constance Brittain kingdom Franks 1108, 120–153.https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521414111.007Elisabeth van Houts Ancestors, Reputation Female Traditions, 1999): 65–92.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27515-1_4Elisabeth Conclusion, 143–150.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27515-1_7Laura Betzig Monogamy, 20, 1995): 181–216.https://doi.org/10.1177/036319909602000204MARCUS BULL Roots Lay Enthusiasm First Crusade, 78, no.254254 1993): 353–372.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-229X.1993.tb02249.xMichael M. Sheehan family Law, Continuity Change 6, no.33 2009): 347–360.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0268416000004094Joel T. Rosenthal Aristocratic marriage peerage, 1350–1500: social institution personal bond, 10, 2012): 181–194.https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4181(84)90034-4Linda Seidel Salome canons, Women's 11, no.1-21-2 (Jul 2010): 29–66.https://doi.org/10.1080/00497878.1984.9978603David Herlihy Making Family: Symmetry, Structure, Sentiment, 8, 116–130.https://doi.org/10.1177/036319908300800202Elizabeth Hallam Monasteries ‘War Memorials’: Battle Abbey La Victoire, 20 47–57.https://doi.org/10.1017/S042420840000718X Bibliography, (): 386–400.https://doi.org/10.7765/MMSO.49262.12.386
Speculum|PubMed