Robert McCune Kingdon (1927–2010)

“What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder:â€?
A Review of Robert M. Kingdon’s Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva

In twenty-first century American society, divorce is no big deal. For almost every marriage that lasts until death, one ends in divorce court. From where did this modern concept of divorce come? In Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva, Robert Kingdon seeks to answer such a question, arguing that the cases he has selected from the records of the Consistory of Geneva illustrate how this institution provided a level of social control over Geneva’s population, regardless of class and gender. Consequently, he clearly demonstrates that its members not only condemned adultery, but also gradually introduced a modern notion of divorce. He ultimately fails to persuade for several reasons, namely, he makes distracting contradictory claims, he constructs portions of his argument on speculation, and, most importantly, he uses evidence that seemingly conflicts with his assertions of the Consistory’s goals of social and gender equality.
In a “microhistoryâ€? analysis of selected divorce proceedings in Geneva, Switzerland during the period of John Calvin’s leadership, Kingdon aims to accomplish two goals. First, he proposes to make a contribution to the history of divorce by examining in varying detail nine adultery cases, most of which culminated with the marriage being resolved by a divorce. His strength is demonstrating how these experiences affected the men and women involved. Second, he hopes to show the importance of early modern institutions of social discipline, in this case, the Consistory of Geneva. To do this, Kingdon relies on a recent transcription of the registers of the Consistory, a project that he has supervised. He hopes his work, which relies almost entirely on these sources, will exhibit the importance of such projects. To that end, he seeks to illuminate the history of divorce and to provide a glimpse at the various ways such bodies of social control operated in this period.
To accomplish these two purposes, Kingdon first provides a brief glimpse at the structure of Genevan society during the Protestant Reformation. A prominent city in Switzerland, Geneva was the home of one of early Protestantism’s most influential leaders, John Calvin. This was almost not the case, though. After a brief stint in Geneva, Calvin was run out of town in 1538 “for pushing for changes that went beyond those acceptable to the faction then in power.â€? As often happens, however, this leadership bloc failed to hold on to their control. Thus, three years later, Calvin was accepted an invitation to return to Geneva with the provision that “he must be permitted to do something to establish ‘discipline,’ to control behavior throughout the city, to see to it that Genevans lived a truly Christian life.â€? He planned on securing this social discipline by instituting a hierarchical system of local councils. Moving from the bottom to the top, this hierarchy consisted of the General Council, the Council of Two Hundred, the Council of Sixty, and the Small Council. The Small Council had several groups that facilitated their operation. One such group, selected by the Small Council, was the Consistory of Geneva, which included pastors from the city’s different parishes and citizen elders. Ideally, such a membership allowed the Consistory not only to provide social discipline over a variety of issues, including those of adultery and divorce, but also to represent all of Geneva’s social classes.
In cases involving marital differences, especially adultery or requests for divorce, the Consistory conducted an initial inquiry and then made a formal report to the Small Council, which had the final say in such matters. It is to these investigations, recorded in the registries of the Consistory, that Kingdon turns after establishing the context of social discipline in Geneva. He chooses nine specific instances in which adultery was the primary crime of the accused. Though the offense was technically the same, the circumstances in each case varied drastically. Some of the defendants, to use a modern term, were accused of blasphemy or prostitution in addition to adultery. In a few instances, the Small Council surprisingly did not heed the wishes of the town’s most prestigious citizen, namely, Calvin. In many of the suits, the requested divorce was granted, though only for reasons of adultery or desertion. Other times, the request was denied and marital reconciliation was the verdict. Moreover, Kingdon illustrates the various sentences that could be imposed on the guilty—from public humiliations to imprisonment to death. Based on these nine lawsuits, he makes it clear that the Consistory always had one goal in mind, that is, to provide social discipline for the entire community. In so doing, they condemned adultery and gradually introduced a modern conception of divorce. In short, Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva compellingly traces the history of divorce in this Protestant city, while also showing the usefulness of sources such as the registries of the Consistory of Geneva.
As interesting as his study is, Kingdon fails to argue his thesis persuasively for several reasons. First, he makes several seemingly contradictory claims. For example, while explaining the institutional matrices of Geneva, he introduces the “children of Geneva,â€? a group of citizens that opposed much of Calvin’s leadership. After being driven from Geneva in 1555, many of these “children of Genevaâ€? moved to the nearby city of Bern, where they complained about two specific issues. One of these was the power of excommunication wielded by the Consistory—a political issue. Their other grievance, the brand of predestination proclaimed by the Calvinist ministers in Geneva, was theological in nature. Later, however, Kingdon claims that they were not concerned with religious convictions: “His [Pierre Ameaux—a member of this faction] attack on Calvin on religious grounds would not have been shared by most of its members. The main reasons they opposed with increasing vehemence the Reformer’s growing influence had nothing to do with religion.â€? Kingdon continues, “Most of them were willing to accept without qualification the theology that Calvin had developed.â€? It seems as if the theological concept of predestination, the doctrine by which Calvin’s religious system is most often remembered, is overlooked in this later discussion of the “children of Geneva.â€? One wonders how “the American expert of Calvin’s Genevaâ€? could make such a mistake.
Second, portions of Kingdon’s thesis are constructed on speculation. One example of such speculation occurs in his treatment of the Pierre Ameaux case. Imagining why the marriage of Pierre and Benoite “turned sour,â€? he devotes nearly a page to speculative reconstructing, such as the following: “The very real affection that often develops between a husband and a wife after an arranged marriage simply did not develop between Pierre and Benoite. He found her mad. He was deeply hurt that her madness took the form of expressions of affection for other men.â€? In the next paragraph, he supposes, “Benoite, to be sure, did not decide as quickly and decisively as Pierre that their marriage must end. But in the end it became intolerable to her as well….In addition she must have wondered whether he had developed any attachment for her children. She clearly felt he could not be trusted to administer for their benefit the substantial properties from her first marriage that he now managed on their behalf.â€? While all these claims might be true, Kingdon’s use of the sources does not prove they are. On the contrary, this section appears to be complete speculation. It seems almost as likely that Pierre’s penchant to abuse his wife, also noted in the registry, forced her to look elsewhere for affection. Perhaps he so tormented her mentally that she began to make the blasphemous claims recorded by the Consistory. As the evidence is presented, however, it is difficult, if not impossible, to tell.
Another example of his tendency toward speculation is seen in his examination of the Antoine Calvin and Anne Le Fert case. After the divorce is finalized, Antoine seems to have had trouble with some of their children. “But they were so young,â€? Kingdon explains, “that they must inevitably have been upset and bewildered by the divorce and the abrupt departure of their mother. As they grew older they may well have resented the forceful steps that had been taken to drive their mother away. This is the most obvious explanation for the “disobedienceâ€? of his two sons from his first marriage.â€? Armed with this “obvious explanation,â€? Kingdon decries the devastating effects divorce has on children, especially young children. While such claims are likely true, the problem again is that Kingdon does not demonstrate with the evidence that they are true. Instead, he makes a logical leap based on speculation and presentism. While this leap may tend to make his argument seem more convincing, it also shows the limitations of his official sources, which seem to lack a personal quality.
The third flaw in Kingdon’s study is also the most serious one. His evidence seemingly conflicts with his assertion that the Consistory’s goal was social and gender equality. Even though he argues that the Consistory “consistently worked toward social equality,â€? his examples only consist of men and women from Geneva’s upper classes. One could reasonably assume that members of the lower classes were also committing adultery. Were they being brought before the Consistory? Were they requesting divorces? If so, where are they in the Consistory records? It is certainly plausible that Kingdon simply chose not to look at cases that primarily involved lower class citizens, though such instances could only strengthen his argument. It seems more likely, however, to surmise that such records do not exist for at least two reasons. On the one hand, lower class citizens were likely unable to afford such litigation. The Consistory, on the other hand, was likely more concerned about the upper classes. Additionally, Kingdon demonstrates that the severity of the crime of adultery was worse when the alleged sexual partner was of a lower social standing than the accused woman, which brings the second weakness of his argument into focus for he also claims that the Consistory “worked toward equality between the sexes.â€? Again, nearly every case he studies betrays this conclusion. In all but one instance, the trial of Jacques Lenepveux, the person accused of adultery is the wife. Under closer investigation, even this case does not really demonstrate equality across gender lines. Lenepveux is accused of adultery, but not by his wife—or any other woman for that matter. From the evidence Kingdon presents, it appears that Lenepveux is accused by other men in town. Granted, he does receive the death penalty, illustrating that perhaps the penalties for such offenses crossed gender boundaries. Even this is not clear, though. Lenepveux was a newcomer to Genevan society. The accusations against him arose within a week of his arrival in the city. Did the citizenry, especially the bourgeoisie of which Lenepveux sought to be a part, consider this outsider one of them? If gender is socially constructed, then was he really a “manâ€? in their eyes? Perhaps Kingdon would have been less likely to run to this isolated case as an example of gender equality if he had asked such questions.
In conclusion, Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva seems to fulfill the author’s two purposes of writing. It does contribute to a fuller comprehension of the historical development of a modern conception of divorce. It also demonstrates the usefulness of such records as the recently transcribed registries of the Consistory of Geneva. Moreover, it includes several intriguing accounts of life experiences in sixteenth-century Europe. In the end, however, Kingdon fails to argue convincingly that the Consistory of Geneva aimed at social and gender equality as it provided social discipline to Geneva’s population.
… (mer)