Bibliographie
Bellavitis 1995 = A. Bellavitis, La famiglia «cittadina» veneziana nel XVI secolo: dote e successione. Le leggi e le fonti, in Studi veneziani, 30, 1995, p. 55-68.
Bellomo 1961 = M. Bellomo, Ricerche sui rapporti patrimoniali fra i coniugi: contributo alla storia della famiglia medievale, Milan, 1961.
Bezzina 2015 = D. Bezzina, Artigiani a Genova nei secoli XII-XIII, Florence, 2015.
Bezzina 2017 = D. Bezzina, The artisan family in twelfth- and thirteenth-century Genoa: a reappraisal, in Genesis, 16-2, 2017, p. 111-130.
Bezzina forthcoming = D. Bezzina, Charting the «extrados» (non-dotal goods) in Genoa and Liguria (mid-twelfth – thirteenth centuries), in Journal of medieval history, forthcoming.
Bosco Consilia = Consilia Bartholomei de Bosco, Loano, 1620.
Braccia 2001 = R. Braccia, «Uxor gaudet de morte mariti»: la donatio propter nuptias tra diritto comune e diritti locali, in Annali della Facoltà di Giurisprudenza di Genova, 30, 2000-2001, p. 84-94.
Braccia 2018 = R. Braccia, Law and society, in C. Beneš (ed.), A companion to medieval Genoa, Leiden, 2018.
Chabot 1998 = I. Chabot, La loi du lignage. Notes sur le système successoral florentin (XIVe-XVe, XVIIe siècles), in Clio. Histoire, femmes et sociétés, 7, 1998, p. 51-72.
Chabot 2001 = I. Chabot, La beneficenza dotale nei testamenti del tardo medioevo, in V. Zamagni (ed.), Povertà e innovazioni istituzionali in Italia, dal medioevo ad oggi, Bologna, 2000, p. 55-76.
Chabot 2006 = I. Chabot, Richesses des femmes et parenté dans l’Italie de la Renaissance. Une relecture, in I. Chabot, J. Hayez, D. Lett (eds.), La famille, les femmes et le quotidien (XIVe-XVIIIe siècles). Textes offerts à Christiane Klapisch-Zuber, Paris, 2006, p. 263-290.
Chabot 2011 = I. Chabot, La dette des familles. Femmes, lignage et patrimoine à Florence aux XIVe et XVe siècles, Rome, 2011 (Collection de l’École française de Rome, 445).
Epstein 1984 = S. Epstein, Wills and wealth in medieval Genoa, 1150-1250, Cambridge (Mass.)-London, 1984.
Faini 2014 = E. Faini, Società di torre e società cittadina. Sui «pacta turris» del XII secolo, in S. Dacciati, L. Tanzini (eds.), Società e poteri nell’Italia medievale. Studi degli allievi per Jean-Claude Maire Vigueur, Rome, 2014, p. 19-39.
Feci 2004 = S. Feci, Pesci fuor d’acqua. Donne a Roma in età moderna: diritti e patrimoni, Rome, 2004.
Gioffré 1966 = D. Gioffré, Il debito pubblico genovese. Inventario delle compere anteriori a San Giorgio o non consolidate nel banco (secoli XIV-XIX), in Atti della società ligure di storia patria, n.s. 6, 1966.
Giuliodori 2005 = Serena Giuliodori, «De rebus uxoris». Dote e successione negli statuti bolognesi (1250-1454), in Archivio storico italiano, 163, 2005, p. 651-679.
Grendi 1975 = E. Grendi, Profilo storico degli alberghi genovesi, in Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Moyen Âge, Temps modernes, 87-1, 1975, p. 241-302.
Guglielmotti 2017 = «Agnacio seu parentella». La genesi dell’albergo Squarciafico a Genova (1297), Genoa, 2017 (Quaderni della Società ligure di storia patria, 4), www.rmoa.unina.it/4682.
Guglielmotti forthcoming = P. Guglielmotti, Women, families and wealth in twelfth- and thirteenth-century Liguria: new perspectives and past approaches, in M.P. Mainoni, N.L. Barile (eds.), Two Italies compared. Civic tradition, trade networks, and family relationships between communal Italy and the Kingdom of Sicily, forthcoming.
Hughes 1975 = D.O. Hughes, Ideali domestici e comportamento sociale: testimonianze dalla Genova medievale, in C. Rosenberg (ed.), La famiglia nella storia, Turin, 1975, p. 147-183.
Hughes 1977 = D.O. Hughes, Kinsmen and neighbors in medieval Genoa, in H. Miskimin, D. Herlihy, A.L. Udovitch (eds.), The medieval city, New Haven, 1977, p. 95-111.
Hughes 1983 = D.O. Hughes, Sviluppo urbano e struttura familiare a Genova nel medioevo, in P. Abrams, E.A. Wrigley (eds.), Città, storia, società, Bologna, 1983, p. 109-138.
Kamenaga Anzai 2003 = Y. Kamenaga Anzai, Attitudes towards public debt in medieval Genoa: the Lomellini family, in Journal of medieval history, 29, 2003, p. 239-263.
Kirshner 2015 = J. Kirshner, Marriage, dowry, citizenship in late medieval and renaissance Italy, Toronto, 2015, p. 74-93.
Kuehn 1991 = T. Kuehn, Law, family and women, towards a legal anthropology of renaissance Florence, Chicago-London, 1991.
Kuehn 2008 = T. Kuehn, Heirs, kin and creditors in renaissance Florence, New York-Cambridge, 2008.
Kuehn 2015 = T. Kuehn, Gender and law in Milan, in A. Gamberini (ed.), A companion to late medieval and early modern Milan. The distinctive features of an Italian state, Leiden, 2015, p. 406-431.
Kuehn 2017 = T. Kuehn, Family and gender in renaissance Italy, 1300-1600, Cambridge-New York, 2017.
Libri Iurium = M. Lorenzetti, F. Mambrini (eds.), I «libri iurium» della repubblica di Genova, vol. 2/2, Genoa, 2007 (Fonti per la storia della Liguria, 21).
Lumia-Ostinelli 2003 = G. Lumia-Ostinelli, «Ut cippus domus magis conservetur». La successione a Siena tra statuti e testamenti (secoli XII-XVII), in Archivio storico italiano, 161-1 (595), 2003, p. 3-51.
Madden – Queller 1993 = D.E. Madden, T.F. Queller, Father of the bride: fathers, daughters, and dowries in late medieval and early renaissance Venice, in Renaissance Quarterly, 46, 1993, p. 685-711.
Maiononi 2015 = P. Mainoni, I mundualdi nella Puglia medievale: alcuni quesiti dalla lettura dei documenti (secc. XII-XIV), in L. Catalioto (ed.), Medioevo per Enrico Pispisa, Messina, 2015 (Percorsi medievali, 5), p. 211-242.
Mayali 1987 = L. Mayali, Droit savant et coutumes : l’exclusion des filles dotées, XIIe-XVe siècles, Frankfurt am Main, 1987.
Niccolai 1940 = F. Niccolai, La formazione del diritto successorio negli statuti comunali del territorio lombardo-tosco, Milan, 1940.
Petti Balbi 1995 = G. Petti Balbi, Simon Boccanegra e la Genova del ’300, Naples, 1995.
Petti Balbi 2007 = G. Petti Balbi, L’assedio di Genova degli anni 1317-1331: «maligna et durans discordia inter gibellinos et guelfos de Ianua», in Reti Medievali Rivista, 8, 2007, www.rmojs.unina.it/index.php/rm/article/view/4621.
Petti Balbi 2010 = G. Petti Balbi, «Donna et domina»: pratiche testamentarie e condizione femminile a Genova nel secolo XIV, in M.C. Rossi (ed.), Margini di libertà: testamenti femminili nel medioevo, Caselle di Sommacampagna, 2010, p. 153-182.
Savelli 2003 = R. Savelli, Repertorio degli statuti della Liguria (secc. XII-XVIII), Genoa, 2003.
Shaw 2008 = C. Shaw, Bartolomea Campofregoso: a woman’s claim to power in fifteenth-century Genoa, in L. Arcangeli, S. Peyronel (eds.), Donne di potere nel Rinascimento, Rome, 2008, p. 465-479.
Smith 2012 = J. Smith, Women as legal agents in late medieval Genoa, in C. Newman Goldy, A. Livingstone (eds.), Writing Medieval women’s lives, New York, 2012, p. 113-129.
Soldberg 2010 = G.E. Soldberg, The painter and the widow: Taddeo di Bartolo, Datuccia Sardi Da Campiglia, and the Sacristy Chapel in S. Francesco, Pisa, in Gesta, 49-1, 2010, p. 53-74.
Statuti 1375 = Giustina Olgiati, Gli statuti trecenteschi di Genova, unpublished LLM dissertation, University of Genoa, 2005.
Statuta antiquissima Saone = Statuta antiquissima Saone (1345), vol. 2, L. Balletto (ed.), Savona, 1971.
Statuti Pera = Statuti della colonia genovese di Pera, V. Promis (ed.), Turin, 1871.
Storti Storchi 1998 = C. Storti Storchi, Intorno ai Costituti pisani della legge e dell’uso (secolo XII), Naples, 1998.
Taviani 2018 = C. Taviani, Companies, credit and commerce, in C. Beneš (ed.), A companion to Medieval Genoa, Leiden, 2018.
Haut de page
Notes
I have chosen to focus on married women and exclude widows because upon reaching widowhood women no longer needed to differentiate between their dowry and non-dotal assets. By contrast, since during marriage the dowry was administered by the husband, it is obvious that whenever a married woman is registered as a stipulating party, it is her non-dotal property which is at stake.
On the gradual restriction of female rights in north-central communes see Bellomo 1961, p. 5 ff.; 163 ff. Among the studies which address the issue of the restriction of female rights Kuehn 1991, 2017; Chabot 1998, 2006; Feci 2004.
On this specific matter, Kirshner 2015.
The widow’s right to a third part of her late husband’s belongings; see n. 2.
Inserting the term extrados in documents could prove essential in case of a post-mortem litigation, for example, for widows to recover property that was rightfully theirs, see Bezzina forthcoming.
Bezzina forthcoming.
The only study which addresses specifically the establishment and development of the alberghi is still Grendi 1975. A recent study focuses on one of the first alberghi, that of the Squarciafico, providing insights on the family dynamics underpinning this particular confederacy, Guglielmotti 2017. In her studies on Genoese society, Diane Owen Hughes has also tackled the issue, at least to a certain extent, Hughes 1975; 1977; 1983. More in general on 14th-century Genoese society see Petti Balbi 1995.
A comparison with Florence is befitting, here scholars have long established that the Black Death of 1348 and subsequent plagues favoured the passage of assets to females, see Chabot 2011, p. 24-27; Kirshner 2015, p. 80.
Two legal codes cover the period under scrutiny: the so-called Statutes of Pera, dates from the period spanning 1270 to 1318 (but contains provisions from earlier statutes). Though parts of the legal code concern exclusively the Genoese colony on the Bosphorus, the section regulating civil law coincides with the municipal code in force in Genoa. The second is the redaction of 1375, the outcome of a reform of municipal law at the initiative of doge Domenico Fregoso. Statuti Pera; Statuti 1375. On the development of Genoese legislation see Braccia 2018 and Savelli 2003.
I have analysed the deeds of 33 different notaries gathered in 25 different cartularies preserved in the Notai Antichi section of the Archivio di Stato di Genova [henceforth, ASG], a sample of public debt ledgers (Mutui e Compere, dating from 1349, 1350, 1351, 1389, 1391), the few extant fragments of the 14th-century cadastres (Antico Comune, Avariorum and Avariorum, Capitis et Posse, dating from 1356-59, 1371, 1372, 1392), as well as public documents collected in the Libri Iurium.
On the matter, Chabot 2001.
Specifically 50% of the cases in Renaissance Florence in which someone repudiated an inheritance involved an intestate estate, Kuehn 2008, p. 132-133. On intestacy in Florence see also Kuehn 2017, p. 167.
On the prescriptions of the ius commune see Kuehn 2017, p. 168-169.
See Bellomo 1961, p. 5 ff., and Niccolai 1940, p. 109 ff. More recent studies have explored legal developments in single cities. For Florence see Chabot 1998, 2011; Siena: Lumia-Ostinelli 2003; Bologna: Guiliodori 2005; Milan: Kuehn 2015; Venice: Bellavitis 1995; finally Pisa: S. Duval, and Turin: M. Gravela, both in this monographic issue.
Chabot 1998; 2011, p. 13-15.
On the exclusion in wills Mayali 1987; on wills in Genoa see Epstein 1984.
Provisions written in the first person date from an earlier period, see Braccia 2018.
See n. 10.
See Braccia 2018.
This is evident from an inventory, written in 1359, in which Antonio Cancelliere, miles et legum doctor, declared that he was to obtain his nephew’s intestate inheritance, since it had to be transmitted ad proximiorem agnatum masculum, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 375, notary Nicolò di Bellignano, f. 81rv, 11 December 1359. Another document dated 1362 in the same register makes specific reference to a rubrica De successionibus ab intestato in force in Genoa, f. 122v, 5 January 1362.
Statuti Pera, cap. CXXXVI, p.132-134; Bezzina forthcoming. Commonly, the dowry was an obligation of fathers, which means that most daughters were excluded from the paternal inheritance. Notarial sources however, suggest that many mothers contributed to their daughters’ dotal fund.
si quis intestatus decesserit masculus vel femina: Statuti 1375, p. 161-164. In this sense, commenting on a general tendency in north-central Italian cities, also on the basis of Niccolai’s transcription of the early 15th-century Genoese statutes, Isabelle Chabot, was right in affirming that the Genoese rule of intestacy excluded girls from their mother’s inheritance, Chabot 2006, p. 283. Niccolai’s first part of the transcription, however, does not completely match the one in the Genoese statutes: he failed to report the lines which mention the chapter De femina tradita which is essential to understanding the breath of the exclusion, and that it applied only to the inheritance of the parent who provided the dowry, Niccolai 1940, p. 113-114.
As in Florence, Chabot 2011, p. 14-24.
Et eodem modo ille que maritate non sunt petere non possint nisi quantum relinquerint sibi pater vel mater, avus vel avia paterna vel materna aut eisdem donaverit inter vivos vel in ultima voluntate. This seemingly clashes with the norm stating that married girls were excluded from inheriting from whoever provided the dowry. The section that follows specifies that dowries of unmarried girls had to be funded from their father’s patrimony, as if to acknowledge that it was up to fathers to dower their daughters.
In Bologna, the exclusio propter masculos was stipulated by virtue of the Statutes of 1335, with the subsequent compilations introducing tighter norms, Giuliodori 2005, p. 663-665. For comparison with Chabot 2011, p. 13-15.
See n. 22. Surviving ascendants retained right to usufruct. In compliance with Roman law, in order to leave all heirs even, married women were required to collate their dowries before obtaining their share of inheritance.
Statuti 1375, p. 158.
Interspousal gifts, which could easily be a way by which men could transmit (also informally) wealth to their wives (and of course vice versa, women to their husbands), were not prohibited by statute, though such prohibition was enforced by Roman civil law. Notarial sources have so far yielded no reference to this practice. It should be also noted that prohibitions of interspousal gifts are common in fifteenth-century municipal statutes. A consilium by Baldus de Ubaldis concerns precisely this prohibition in the Justineanean legal code; the text will be published in a forthcoming two-volume transcription and translation of consilia provisionally-entitled Jurists and jurisprudence in medieval Italy: texts and contexts edited by Julius Kirshner and Osvaldo Cavallar.
Statuti 1375, p. 141. The same applied to rented property: De locacionibus in agnatos et in confines faciendis, p. 144-146.
For example, in Bergamo the statutes of 1331 stated that aside from inheritances or gifts, whatever a woman obtained during marriage became her husband’s; in Milan, the 1498 statutes stipulated that unless part of an inheritance or the personal property a woman brought into marriage, any possession which a wife, mother or grandmother gained thereafter would go to their husbands, sons or grandsons respectively, Kuehn 2017, p. 132. In Florence, the 1325 statutes established that husbands had the right to use any income from property acquired by women during marriage, Kirshner 2015, p. 80-81.
For the 13th century, Bezzina forthcoming. Here regional differences are evident. In Savona, non-dotal assets fell under the husband’s control by virtue of the rubric pro aliquis non possit petere ultra sortem pro extradotibus, see Statuta antiquissima Saone, p. 183-184; Kirshner 2015, p. 280.
Statuti Pera, cap. CIX, p. 115-117 and Bezzina forthcoming.
Kuehn 2015, p. 423-424.
Guglielmotti forthcoming.
In Pisa, this practice was abolished in the 12th century, Storti Storchi 1998, p. 72. The matter needs to be addressed for other cities. For comparisons with Florence see Kuehn 1991, p. 212-237 and with southern Italy, Mainoni 2015.
Guglielmotti forthcoming; Bezzina forthcoming.
Statuti 1375, p. 134-138.
I have collected a sample of 108 wills (48 made by females) dating from the 14-th century, which are insufficient to determine discontinuities in the more general picture. In her study on 14th-century Genoese wills, Petti Balbi has analysed about 300 examples, providing a general overview of testamentary practices, but here again developments and regressions are not clearly evident, Petti Balbi 2010.
This could also have been a dowry increase. It is obviously impossible to ascertain whether Violante’s husband added the sum to his wife’s dotal fund, or if he allowed her a degree of freedom in administering it, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 192, notary Leonardo Osbergario, f. 93rv, 27 November 1330.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 255, notary Raffaele Beffignano, ff. 162v-163r, 12 November 1277.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 229, notary Tommaso Casanova, f. 40r, 10 February 1343.
I have only found an exception, a certain Clara, a woman from the lower social classes expressly declared: item dico quod maritus meus dedit mihi licentiam legandi et testandi ad meum beneplacitum, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 332/I, notary Guidotto de Bracelli, f. 166v, 24 February 1338.
Also noted by Petti Balbi 2010, p. 155, who comments on how this aligns Genoa with Venice, where a similar trend has been registered.
This form of charity was one of the ways through which poorer girls could set aside enough money for a dowry, see Chabot 2001. As put by Madden – Queller 1993, p. 696: «The tendency of women to favor other women in their wills seems to be an anthropological constant».
The fact that these doma feneratoris were scattered in Genoa’s suburban territory and referred to by the place-name/area in which they were located (ex. domus feneratoris de Predono; domus feneratoris de Suxilia) suggests that these were probably official establishments, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 332/I, notary Guidotto de Bracelli, f. 155r, 2 February 1338; f. 162r, 12 February 1338.
The minimum share due to direct heirs by statute.
The Grimaldi was one of the first families to gather into an albergo in the late 13th century, Grendi 1975, p. 271.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 313, notary Andreolo Caiti, ff. 14v-15r, 11 April 1393.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 221, notary Tommaso Casanova, f. 124rv, 27 January 1339.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 221, notary Tommaso Casanova, f. 118r, 14 April 1338.
Ibid.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 225, notary Tommaso Casanova, f. 69rv, 12 July 1336.
Again, we can draw a parallel with Florence: Kirshner 2015, p. 85-86.
For a general overview see Taviani 2018 and Kamenaga Anzai 2003, p. 241-245.
Kamenaga Anzai 2003, p. 259; Petti Balbi 2010, p. 166.
Inventorized by Gioffré 1966.
ASG, Compere e mutui, R. 417, c. 105v.
For example, in a sale of credits, a certain Preciosa acknowledged that the shares written upon her in the public debt ledgers, were actually her husband’s, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 409, notary Girardo Parrizollo, ff. 148v-149r, 6 May 1383.
Obviously, the 10 lire rule must have hindered women from alienating their credits. For example, a certain Anna, needed her husband’s consent to sell her shares in the Compera Veterorum valued at 608 lire, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 276, notary Giovanni Gallo, c. 6r, 11 December 1325.
For example, in 1360, Antonina wife of Guglielmo de Ragio de Clavaro lanerius, sold a house she had in the Val Polcevera, an area close to Genoa, in her husband’s presencia, auctoritate, voluntate et mandato, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 255, notary Antonio de Capale, ff. 43v-44r, April 1360. Vice versa, men needed their wives’ consent in order to sell immovable property.
Namely: ASG, Antico Comune, Avariorum, R. 517, 518, 531; Avariorum, Capitis et Posse, R. 521.
Libri Iurium, doc. 3, 3 March 1384, p. 11-17. Rules on the alienation of towers in north-central Italy were typically harsh towards women, but variations existed: in Florence women were allowed to possess shares of towers in absence of male heirs in the extant 12th-century pacta turris, Faini 2014, p. 30-31. In Siena, as of 1262, women were barred from inheriting these properties, Lumia-Ostinelli 2003, p. 15.
See Smith 2012 and Petti Balbi 2007, p 12.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 255, notary Antonio de Capale, f. 42rv, 2 April 1260.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 332/I, notary Guidotto de Bracellis, f. 162r, 13 February 1338.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 332/I, notary Guidotto de Bracellis, f. 37v, 30 August 1345.
By using the expression adveniente condicione restituendarum docium seu extradocium, Bezzina forthcoming.
Apart from the contract mentioned in n. 35, I have found only one other direct attestation of such practice in an inventory of a deceased woman which lists both an instrumentum docium et antefacti, and an instrumentum extradocium, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 183, notary Benedetto di Vivalda, ff. 77r-78v, 5-9 December 1359.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 375, notary Nicolò di Bellignano, f. 15r, 16 January 1330.
ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 409, notary Girardo Parrizollo, ff. 44v-45r, 18 February 1383.
Evidence for the period spanning the mid-12th to the end of the 13th century has underscored this trend, but in the 14th century the tendency of females to convey their personal belongings to their husbands seems to have escalated. On the earlier period, again: Bezzina forthcoming.
Kirshner 2015, p. 75; Bellomo 1961, p. 132-135.
Kirshner 2015, p. 75.
The first reference which has been found so far is in a will dated 1293. In the document, a certain Vegnuto di Montemillio established that his daughter was to receive 100 lire as dowry and 200 lire pro suo furnimento. ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 132, notary Corrado di Castello da Rapallo, f. 244v, 1293. I am thankful to Paola Guglielmotti who gave me the transcription of this document.
As noted also by Petti Balbi 2010, p. 164; Hughes 1975, p. 176.
In the early 15th century limits were established to the amounts that could be provided as guarnimenta, Petti Balbi 2010, p. 165.
Madden – Queller 1993, p. 691-692, provide a concise summary of the main views and a different interpretation. According to the scholars, in Renaissance Venice the phenomenon was linked to the fact that dowries comprised also legacies from acquaintances.
During the 14th century dowries of aristocratic girls averaged between 800-1300 lire, some reaching 2000 and 3000 lire (including furnimenta). Petti Balbi 2010, p. 163 provides a few examples. On the threshold of the 13th century instead, aristocratic dowries averaged between 200-600 lire.
Again, Bezzina forthcoming.
A clear example is a deed in which a woman used her confessio dotis to reclaim her dos, extrados, and antefactum. The notary used the word extrados instead of guarnimentum or furnimentum to indicate the sum granted to the bride for her personal items, ASG, Notai Antichi, Cart. 313, notary Andriolo Caiti, c. 127r, 21 June 1393.
Of course, from the legal standpoint, jurists continued to distinguish between dowry and non-dotal assets. For example, one of the consilia of the noted Genoese jurist Bartolomeo Bosco, who was active between the late 14th and 15th centuries, concerned precisley the non-delivery of a promised extrados, Bosco Consilia, cons. 12, p. 14-15. I am thankful to Julius Kirshner for this reference.
Bezzina forthcoming.
One of the ways through which women typically expressed their wealth and agency is artistic patronage, which is not evident in the sources that have been considered in this study. For example, see the case of the Pisan Datuccia Sardi Da Campiglia discussed in Soldberg 2010.
Since dowries of artisan women were more reflective of the global wealth of their natal families, and due to their status as their husbands’ «unpaid partners», Hughes 1975, p. 174. For a critique of this view see also Bezzina 2017; 2015, p. 137 ff.
Apart from these general considerations related to peculiar historical contingencies, we cannot overlook peculiar stories of individual women who managed to play a significant role both in managing their own and their families’ patrimonies and in the public sphere, influencing political decisions. Such is the case, dating from the mid-15th century, of Bartholomea, a Grimaldi, and wife of doge Pietro Campofregoso, and of her mother Pomellina, herself a Campofregoso, who retained considerable power in Monaco, see Shaw 2008.
Haut de page