Chapter 1
On the utility of such sources for studying the history of family, see Ingrid Baumgärtner, “Consilia–Quellen zur Familie in Krise, und Kontinuität, ,” in Die Familie als sozialer und historischer Verband: Untersuchungen zum Spätmittelalter und zur frühen Neuzeit, ed. Schuler, Peter-Johannes (Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 1987), 43–66; while Mario Sbriccoli, L’Interpretazione dello statuto: Contributo allo studio della funzione dei giuristi nell’età comunale (Milan: Giuffrè, 1969) addresses the patterns and tropes of statute interpretation.
Bellomo, Manlio, Problemi di diritto familiare nell’età dei comuni: Beni paterni e “pars filii” (Milan: Giuffrè, 1968) discusses the general issues of property relations between father and son while Thomas Kuehn, Emancipation in Late Medieval Florence (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1982), takes on the narrower issue of liability. Also useful is Thomas Kuehn, “Debt and Bankruptcy in Florence: Statutes and Cases,” Quaderni storici 137 (Aug. 2011): 355–90. On the use and liability of sureties, Julius Kirshner, “A Question of Trust: Suretyship in Trecento Florence,” in Renaissance Studies in Honor of Craig Hugh Smyth (Florence: Giunti Barbera, 1985), 129–45. Fascinating on the process of debt collection is Daniel Lord Smail, Legal Plunder: Households and Debt Collection in Late Medieval Europe (Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 2016).
A penetrating essay on law and family is Ago, Renata, “Ruoli familiari e statuto giuridico,” Quaderni storici 88 (April 1995): 111–33; followed closely by Maria Carla Zorzoli, “Una incursione nella pratica giurisprudenziale milanese del Seicento e qualche riflessione su temi che riguardano la famiglia,” in Ius mediolani, 617–57. They contrast with Giulio Vismara, “L’unità della famiglia nella storia del diritto in Italia,” Studia et documenta historiae et iuris 22 (1956): 228–65. Useful, though from a different context, is Laura Edwards, “The Peace: The Meaning and Production of Law in the Post-Revolutionary United States,” UC Irvine Law Review 1 (2011): 565–85.
For family history: Tamassia, Nino, La famiglia italiana nei secoli decimoquinto e decimosesto (Milan: Sandron, 1910); Philippe Ariès, Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life, trans. Robert Baldick (New York: Random House, 1962); Peter Laslett, The World We Have Lost, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971) and idem, ed., Household and Family in Past Time (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972) are representative of a household-centered line of research. David Reher, “Family Ties in Western Europe: Persistent Contrasts,” Population and Development Review 24 (1998): 203–34, offers the contrast between north and south in terms of weak and strong kinship ties; for which also see Igor Mineo, “Stati e lignaggi in Italia nel tardo medioevo: Qualche spunto comparativo,” Storica 2 (1995): 55–82; and directly from a legal point of view Andrea Romano, Famiglia, successioni e patrimonio familiare nell’Italia medievale e moderna (Turin: Giappichelli, 1994). See also Jack Goody, The European Family: An Historico-Anthropological Essay (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), for a functionalist anthropological perspective; and Mary Hartman, The Household and the Making of History: A Subversive View of the Western Past (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
Hajnal, John, “European Marriage Patterns in Perspective,” in Population in History, ed. Glass, D. V. and Eversley, D. E. C. (London: Arnold, 1965), 101–43, importantly offers the contrast of different marital patterns of northern and southern Europeans.
Mitterauer, Michael and Sieder, Reinhard, The European Family: Patriarchy to Partnership from the Middle Ages to the Present, trans. Oosterveen, Karla and Hörziner, Manfred (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); Jean-Louis Flandrin, Families in Former Times, trans. Richard Southern (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979); Raffaella Sarti, Europe at Home: Family and Material Culture 1500–1800, trans. Allan Cameron (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2002); Lawrence Stone, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500–1800, abridged ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1979). Also Beatrice Gottlieb, The Family in the Western World from the Black Death to the Industrial Age (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1993); Eviatar Zerubavel, Ancestors and Relatives: Genealogy, Identity, and Community (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2012).
Casey, James, The History of the Family (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1989) vitally distinguishes family as moral or conceptual entity from lived experiences, as does John R. Gillis, A World of Their Own Making: Myth, Ritual, and the Quest for Family Values (New York: Basic Books, 1996). A fine general evocation of Italian family history is Franca Leverotti, Famiglie e istituzioni nel medioevo italiano: dal tardo antico al rinascimento (Rome: Carocci, 2005). Gianna Pomata, “Family and Gender,” in Early Modern Italy, ed. John A. Marino (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 69–86. Her concern with the relative balance between the two coexisting modes of thinking about family, as vertical lineage or horizontal cognate group, stands in interesting contrast to that of the corresponding essay in the chronologically previous volume in the Short Oxford History of Italy, namely, Julius Kirshner, “Family and Marriage: A Socio-Legal Perspective,” in Italy in the Age of the Renaissance, ed. John M. Najemy (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 82–102. Also David Herlihy, “Family,” in his Women, Family and Society in Medieval Europe (Providence and Oxford: Barghahn, 1995), 113–34.
Anthropological works, beyond that of Goody, include Ellickson, Robert C., The Household: Informal Order around the Hearth (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008); Marshall Sahlins, What Kinship Is and Is Not (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013); James Leach, “Knowledge as Kinship: Mutable Essence and the Significance of Transmission on the Rai Coast of Papua, New Guinea,” in Kinship and Beyond: The Genealogical Model Reconsidered, ed. Sandra Bamford and James Leach (New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2009), 175–92; Tim Ingold, “Stories against Classification: Transport, Wayfaring and the Integration of Knowledge,” in ibid., 193–213; Janet Carsten, After Kinship (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
The classic study of Florentine households is Herlihy, David and Klapisch-Zuber, Christiane, Tuscans and Their Families: A Study of the Florentine Catasto of 1427 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1985). See also a review of their book by R. M. Smith, “The People of Tuscany and Their Families in the Fifteenth Century: Medieval or Mediterranean?” Journal of Family History 6 (1981): 107–28.
For Florence otherwise, Goldthwaite, Richard, Private Wealth in Renaissance Florence (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968); F. W. Kent, Household and Lineage in Renaissance Florence: The Family Life of the Capponi, Ginori, and Rucellai (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977); Christiane Klapisch-Zuber, “‘A uno pane e uno vino’: The Rural Tuscan Family at the Beginning of the Fifteenth Century,” in her Women, Family, and Ritual in Renaissance Italy, trans. Lydia G. Cochrane (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985), 36–67; Sergio Tognetti, Da Figline a Firenze: Ascesa economica e politica della famiglia Serristori (secoli xiv-xvi) (Florence: Opus Libri, 2003); Alessandro Valori, “Famiglia e memoria: Luca di Panzano dal suo ‘Libro di Ricordi’: uno studio sulle relazioni familiari nello specchio della scrittura,” Archivio storico italiano 152 (1994): 261–97.
On families in other places, Grubb, James S., “House and Household: Evidence from Family Memoirs,” in Edilizia privata nella Verona rinascimentale, ed. Lanaro, Paola, Marini, Paola, and Varanini, Gian Maria (Milan: Electa, 2000), 118–33, and his Provincial Families of the Renaissance: Private and Public Life in the Veneto (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996); Cristina Cenedella, “Proprietà ed imprenditorialità a Milano nel secondo Quattrocento: la famiglia del patrizio Ambrogio Alciati,” Studi di storia medioevale e di diplomatica 11 (1990); 199–255; Franca Leverotti, “Strutture familiari nel tardo medioevo italiano,” Revista d’historia medieval 10 (1999): 233–68; Anna Bellavitis, Famille, genre, transmission à Venise au xvie siècle (Rome: École Française de Rome, 2008); Chiara Porqueddu, Il patriziato pavese in età spagnola: Ruoli familiari, stile di vita, economia (Milan: Unicopli, 2012); David Rheubottom, Age, Marriage, and Politics in Fifteenth-Century Ragusa (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), makes important points about the dynamics of a lineage in contrast to the fixity of name, coat of arms, and so forth.
On the law in Venice, Cozzi, Gaetano, “Authority and the Law in Renaissance Venice,” in Renaissance Venice, ed. Hale, J. R. (London: Faber & Faber, 1973), 293–345; James E. Shaw, The Justice of Venice: Authorities and Liberties in the Urban Economy, 1550–1700 (Oxford: British Academy, 2006); Umberto Santarelli, “La riflessione sugli statuti di Bartolomeo Cipolla,” in Bartolomeo Cipolla: Un giurista veronese del Quattrocento tra cattedra, foro e luoghi del potere, ed. Giovanni Rossi (Padua: CEDAM, 2009), 161–74.
On the relative difference in the legal and social situation of women in Florence and Venice, Cohn, Samuel K. Jr., “Donne in piazza e donne in tribunale a Firenze nel Rinascimento,” Studi storici 22 (1981): 515–33, reprinted in his Women in the Streets: Essays on Sex and Power in Renaissance Italy (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), 16–38; Stanley Chojnacki, Women and Men in Renaissance Venice: Twelve Essays on Patrician Society (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 27–52; but see also Isabelle Chabot and Anna Bellavitis, “A proposito di ‘Men and Women in Renaissance Venice’ di Stanley Chojnacki,” Quaderni storici 118 (April 2005): 203–38.
Concerning genealogical trees and related diagrammatic conceptions of kinship: Klapisch-Zuber, Christiane, “The Genesis of the Family Tree,” I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance 4 (1991): 105–29; eadem, “Family Trees and the Construction of Kinship in Renaissance Italy,” in Gender, Kinship, Power: A Comparative and Interdisciplinary History, ed. Mary Jo Maynes, Ann Waltner, Brigitte Soland, and Ulrike Strasser (London and New York: Routledge, 1996), 101–13 (reprint of a 1994 article from Quaderni storici 86, 405–20), and the more thorough and handsomely illustrated L’Arbre des familles (Paris: La Martinière, 2003). See also Simon Teuscher, “Flesh and Blood in the Treatises on the Arbor Consanguinitatis (Thirteenth to Sixteenth Centuries),” in Blood and Kinship: Matter for Metaphor from Ancient Rome to the Present, ed. Christopher H. Johnson, Bernhard Jussen, David Warren Sabean, and Simon Teuscher (New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2013), 83–104; Anthony Molho, Roberto Barducci, Gabriella Battista, and Francesco Donnini, “Genealogy and Marriage Alliance: Memories of Power in Late Medieval Florence,” in Portraits of Medieval and Renaissance Living: Essays in Honor of David Herlihy, ed. Samuel K. Cohn, Jr., and Steven A. Epstein (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996), 39–70.
Cavallo, Sandra’s works include, “L’importanza della ‘famiglia orizzontale’ nella storia della famiglia italiana,” in Generazioni: Legami di parentela tra passato e presente, ed. Fazio, Ida and Lombardi, Daniela (Rome: Viella, 2006), her “Family Relationships,” in A Cultural History of Childhood and Family in the Early Modern Age, ed. Sandra Cavallo and Silvia Evangelisti (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2010), 15–32 and her Artisans of the Body in Early Modern Italy: Identities, Families and Masculinities (Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 2007),
For readings of Alberti, see Najemy, John M., “Giannozzo and His Elders: Alberti’s Critique of Renaissance Patriarchy,” in Society and Individual in Renaissance Florence, ed. Connell, William J. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 51–78; Thomas Kuehn, “Leon Battista Alberti come illegitimo fiorentino,” in La vita e il mondo di Leon Battista Alberti: Atti di convegni internazionali del Comitato Nazionale VI centenario della nascita di Leon Battista Alberti, Genova, 19–21 febbraio 2004, 2 vols. (Florence: Olschki, 2008), 1: 147–71.
Hardwick, Julie, “The State,” in A Cultural History of Childhood and Family in the Early Modern Age, ed. Cavallo, Sandra and Evangelisti, Silvia (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 135–51, notes the importance of political connections for family. Daniela Frigo, Il padre di famiglia: Governo della casa e governo civile nella tradizione dell’“economica” tra cinque e seicento (Rome: Bulzoni, 1985) surveys the advice literature of the sixteenth century. Elizabeth W. Mellyn, Mad Tuscans and Their Families: A History of Mental Disorder in Early Modern Italy (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014) has noted the presumption of patrimonial competence as a mark of sanity.
Discussion of the Ciuranni relies on Chabot, Isabelle, Ricostruzione di una famiglia: i Ciurianni di Firenze tra xii e xv secolo (Florence: Le Lettere, 2012). Maria Pia Contessa, “La costruzione di un’identità familiare e sociale: un immigrato cipriota nella Firenze del secondo Quattrocento,” Annali di storia di Firenze 4 (2009): 151–92, is our source for Giorgio di Baliano. Tim Carter and Richard A. Goldthwaite, Orpheus in the Marketplace: Jacopo Peri and the Economy of Late Renaissance Florence (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013).
For discussion of the precedents left in Roman law, Laurent L. J. M. Waelkens, “Medieval Family and Marriage Law: From Actions of Status to Legal Doctrine,” in The Creation of the “Ius Commune”, 103–25; Thomas, Yan, “Il padre, la famiglia e le città: Figli e figlie davanti alla giurisdizione domestica a Roma,” in Pater familias, ed. Arru, Angiolina (Rome: Biblink, 2002), 23–57; Peter Birks, “The Roman Law Concept of Dominium and the Idea of Absolute Ownership,” Acta juridica (1985): 1–37; Alain Pottage, “Introduction: The Fabrication of Persons and Things,” in Law, Anthropology, and the Constitution of the Social: Making Persons and Things, ed. Alain Pottage and Martha Mundy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 1–39; Philippe Moreau, “The Bilineal Transmission of Blood in Ancient Rome,” in Blood and Kinship: Matter for Metaphor from Ancient Rome to the Present, ed. Christopher H. Johnson, Bernhard Jussen, David Warren Sabean, and Simon Teuscher (New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2013), 40–60 and Anita Guerreau-Jalabert, “Flesh and Blood in Medieval Language about Kinship,” in Blood and Kinship, 61–82; Carlos Amunátegui Perelló, “Problems Concerning Familia in Early Rome,” Roman Legal Tradition 4 (2008): 37–45.
On paternal power for later periods, see Cavina, Marco, Il padre spodestato: l’autorità paterna dall’antichità a oggi (Bari: Laterza, 2007); Manlio Bellomo, “La struttura patrimoniale della famiglia italiana nel tardo medioevo,” in Marriage, Property, and Succession, ed. Lloyd Bonfield (Berlin: Dunckler and Humblot, 1992), 53–69.
Bartolo’s views of nobility are discussed by Castelnuovo, Guido, “Revisiter un classique: noblesse, hérédité et vertu d’Aristote à Dante et à Bartole (Italie communale, début xiiie-milieu xive siècle),” in L’hérédité entre Moyen Âge et Époque moderne: perspectives historiques, ed. ver der Lugt, Maaike and de Miramon, Charles (Florence: SISMEL-Edizioni del Galluzzo, 2008), 105–55. For a discussion of the legal features of his argument in a different context, see my “Bartolus’s Definition of Family: An Aspect of Juridical Thought in Petrarch’s Time,” in Studi petrarcheschi, forthcoming.
The final quotation is from Misericordia, Massimo della, “Founding a Social Cosmos: Perspectives for a Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Lombardy,” in A Companion to Late Medieval and Early Modern Milan, ed. Gamberini, Andrea (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015), 356–79.