Having explored the divorce proceedings, it is time to move on to an attempt at an assessment of their scale. As I already mentioned in the Introduction, the basic sources for this type of research, that is civil status records and court files, have survived to our times in a very fragmentary form. With the aid of Internet databases of the Head Office of State Archives1 I tried to select all the fonds that could contain divorce judgements and pronouncements of divorces. The query was supplemented with research in church archives.
Once I confirmed the divorces at source, I grouped them according to the courts2 that granted them. In the Duchy of Warsaw there were 10 civil tribunals of first instance (whose jurisdiction included divorce cases), and in the Congress Kingdom there were eight (in 1824, the Augustów tribunal was detached from the Łomża tribunal). Moreover, in the Free City of Kraków there was one court that adjudicated divorces in first instance. Below, I discuss the judgements of individual tribunals that I have confirmed in source materials, in an alphabetical order (seats of tribunals). In the brackets are years in which a given court could rule on dissolution of marriages based on the Napoleonic Code.
Bydgoszcz (1808–1817). The Bydgoszcz tribunal applied the Napoleonic Code from its introduction in the Duchy (1 May 1808) until Landrecht was reinstated in the Grand Duchy of Posen (Poznań) on 1st March 1817.3 Some sentence records of this tribunal have been preserved, but unfortunately they are not complete. Nevertheless, the preserved ones, as well as the surviving records of the New Town Lutheran commune in Toruń,4 have made it possible to ascertain 19 divorces granted by this court. The outcome of a few divorce cases brought
Kalisz (1808–1825). The Kalisz tribunal is the only court whose complete sentence records have been preserved from the entire period when the Napoleonic Code was in force. However, some sumariusze are not available due to their condition. Fortunately, in such cases sentencjonarze can be used instead. In total, the Civil Tribunal of First Instance in Kalisz recognized nearly 300 divorce cases. In 164 cases, the divorce was pronounced pursuant to the Napoleonic Code.
Kielce (1818–1825). The tribunal in Kielce was created for the part of the old Kraków department which remained in the Kingdom of Poland after the separation of Kraków and its district, and for the Kielce powiat, which was detached from the Radom department.5 The sentence records of this tribunal have not survived to our times. What has been preserved are divorce pronouncements issued on the basis of this court’s judgements by civil status registrars in Kielce and in Pilica. The president of Kielce announced 16 divorces and officiated the civil weddings and published banns concerning three more people with civil divorces,6 and the president of Pilica announced one divorce.7 Moreover, I have found an annotation on one of the divorce judgements of the Kielce tribunal in the Diocesan Archives in Łomża.8
Kraków (1810–1852). As per a royal decree dated 9 June 1810,9 civil tribunals of first instance were established in New Galicia in mid-August of the same year. While books of the Kraków tribunal from the period of the Duchy of Warsaw have not survived, the decrees from the times of the Republic of Kraków are all complete. We also have at our disposal civil status records (including divorce
Lublin (1810–1825). The preserved records of the Lublin tribunal are very sparse, and not helpful in research on divorces. Nevertheless, we know of six divorce judgements issued by the tribunal from records kept by the civil status registrars in Zamość (four cases)13 and in Radzyń Podlaski (two cases).14
Łomża (1808–1825). The records of the Łomża tribunal are not available either. Still, we know of eleven divorces granted by this tribunal from other sources: parish books from Łomża (three cases)15 and from Grajewo (one case),16 from the records of the Wigry diocesis consistory, which later became
Płock (1808–1825). 45 divorces were pronounced by civil status registrars in Płock based on the judgements of the tribunal in this city.19
Poznań (1808–1817). As regards Poznań, we have copies of two divorce judgements at our disposal. One has been preserved in the allegata to Warsaw civil status records,20 and the other in the files of the Consistory General of Poznań.21 The records of the aforementioned clerical court also contain remarks on 11 more couples who had obtained civil divorces.
Radom (1810–1825). I have been able to find only one divorce decree based on the resolution of the Radom tribunal.22
Siedlce (1810–1825). There are five available divorce judgements issued by the Siedlce tribunal. Mentions of four more have been found in the civil status records from Radzyń Podlaski,23 and of one more in the records of the Podlasie dioceses consistory.24
Warsaw (1808–1825). The files of the Warsaw tribunal were burned by the Germans during World War ii. Fortunately, however, relatively numerous copies of judgements, as well as procedural writs, are preserved in the allegata of the civil status records of the Warsaw communes.26 Yet, for the purposes of statistical calculations, the civil status records themselves (divorce decrees) are of first-rate importance, and these are not complete. Besides the deficiencies in the fond, the query was made more difficult by the fact that the divorce certificates were drawn up differently in different time periods in particular communes of the capital. Sometimes divorces were recorded in separate books, and other times together with the marriages. Much suggests that the majority of the former type of books has not survived to our time. One of the reasons for this may be the fact that divorce books were very thin, sometimes comprising just a few pages, so they were more prone to damage or being lost than thick volumes containing other types of records.
When divorce records were kept together with marriage records, the former were sometimes listed at the end of the volume, but other times they were not marked in any way, which makes finding them very difficult. The numbers of divorces pronounced in the individual communes are listed in table 1.
Number of divorces pronounced in the individual cyrkuły (communes) of Warsaw
i |
ii |
iii |
iv |
v |
vi |
vii |
viii |
Total |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1808 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0 |
|||
1809 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
2 |
2 |
||
1810 |
2 |
1 |
n.u. |
1 |
0 |
4 |
8 |
||
1811 |
1 |
3 |
n.u. |
1 |
0 |
2 |
7 |
||
1812 |
8 |
1 |
n.u. |
2 |
[1] |
7 |
19 |
||
1813 |
n.u. [1] |
0 |
n.u. |
n.u. |
1 |
n.u. |
1 |
||
1814 |
- |
2 |
4 |
5 |
0 |
n.u. |
11 |
||
1815 |
- |
3 |
2 |
10 |
0 |
n.u. |
15 |
||
1816 |
- |
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
7 |
22 |
|
1817 |
- |
5 |
2 |
11 |
n.u. |
[1] |
6 |
25 |
|
1818 |
- |
6 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
16 |
||
1819 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
0 |
6 |
23 |
||
1820 |
5 |
1 |
6 |
3 |
0 |
[2] |
8 |
25 |
|
1821 |
7 |
2 |
- |
9 |
3 |
10 |
31 |
||
1822 |
8 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
[1] |
5 |
32 |
|
1823 |
7 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
0 |
8 |
1 |
32 |
|
1824 |
n.u. |
5 |
2 |
9 |
3 |
7 |
1 |
27 |
|
1825 |
14 |
6 |
4 |
n.u. |
5 |
[1] |
10 |
1 |
41 |
Total |
57 |
52 |
39 |
70 |
19 |
12 |
84 |
3 |
337 |
Years from which records have survived |
9 |
16 |
11 |
14 |
15 |
0 |
14 |
3 |
82 |
“n.u.” –a unit containing information from a particular year was not preserved or it is unavailable (mentions of it in the source material prove that such a unit originally existed).
“-” –a unit containing information from a particular year was most probably not preserved (there is a high likelihood that such a unit existed, however, attempts to find any mention of it in the source material which would directly corroborate their existence were unsuccessful),
“[x]”– the proper unit which contains information from a particular year was most probably not preserved or it is unavailable; however, a certain number of divorces (indicated in the brackets) were found on the basis of data from other units. By their very nature, these numbers are rather incomplete.
Generally, the state of preservation of materials from commune i, ii, iii, iv, v and vii makes it possible to attempt an estimation of the total number of divorces pronounced in Warsaw. Cyrkuł vi is excluded from this estimation, as its divorce records, kept separately from marriage books, have not survived.27 Even though I encountered information about a dozen or so divorces in this commune from allegata, it is impossible to tell what percentage of total divorces they represent. As for commune vii, it is excluded because I have been able to find only three divorces pronounced there. I don’t have clear proof that separate divorce books were kept there, but if we were to assume that indeed
As for the remaining six communes, the available data does not cover the entire research period in most cases. The estimation does not include 1808, as probably no divorces were pronounced in this year. The Napoleonic Code was implemented in May, but divorce proceedings are relatively lengthy and it is unlikely that any of them reached the stage of a final judgement by the end of the year. This informed guess is additionally corroborated by the fact that materials from the first years of operation of civil status registrars in communes i, ii, iv and vii seem to be complete, and yet they contain no records of divorces from 1808 (moreover, in 1809 divorces were pronounced only in commune vii).
For the purpose of my calculations I assume absence of divorces in a given year whenever the source materials seem complete and the book of marriages (or of marriages and divorces) does not contain entries on divorces. The table cells marked as “n.u.” and “-” are not included at all in the calculations of average annual number of divorces, because they mean that materials from a given period have not survived (or, at least, that it is very unlikely that they have).29
And so, in six communes, in those years that seem to be complete in terms of materials (82 yearbooks), 320 divorces were pronounced. This means that in each of those communes, 3.9 divorces were pronounced on average every year. I have assumed that divorces were granted for a period of 16 years. In 1808 probably none were pronounced, and in 1809 there were likely very few. Now, if we multiply 3.9 by 16, we arrive at a number of over 62.4 divorces granted on average in each commune. In order to calculate the total hypothetical number of divorces in Warsaw, this number must be multiplied by the number of communes, although with account for the fact that communes vi and viii were the least populous. Since more precise data is not available, I have availed myself of the number of councillors elected in the individual communes: three were elected in communes vi and viii, and four in all the other communes.30 With
However, divorce decrees of the Warsaw tribunal were also delivered outside the capital (4 instances in Rawa Mazowiecka,32 2 in Mszczonów,33 and 1 each in Wilanów – a village near Warsaw at the time,34 Skuły,35 Jastrzębie36 and Łowicz).37
∵
The available data does not leave any room for doubt. Divorces were granted all over the territories of the Duchy of Warsaw and later in the Kingdom of Poland and in the Free City of Kraków. Before moving on to an attempt at estimating the global number of divorces pronounced pursuant to the Napoleonic Code in the Polish territories, let us summarize the divorces confirmed in the sources. They are illustrated in Table 2.
Number of divorces granted by individual courts, confirmed in the sources
Tribunal’s seat |
Number of granted divorces |
|---|---|
Bydgoszcz |
19 |
Kalisz |
164 |
Kielce |
20 |
Kraków |
282 |
Lublin |
6 |
Łomża |
11 |
Płock |
46 |
Poznań |
13 |
Radom |
1 |
Siedlce |
5 |
Suwałki |
0 |
Warsaw |
341 |
Total |
908 |
Even so, it is safe to assume that the number of divorce judgements issued in first instance was close to the number of divorces pronounced by civil status registrars. For example: out of the 16 divorces pronounced by the president of Kielce, 14 were a result of judgements delivered by the local civil tribunal and 2 of the appeal court.38 In Płock, this proportion was 40 to 6.39
One other issue that remains are the divorce judgements that were never pronounced by a civil status registrar. It seems unlikely that petitioners, having gone through time-consuming and burdensome proceedings, would give up just before this relatively simple formality, especially since divorce judgements always contained specific instructions on the need to fulfil it. Such situations, although possible, may have occurred on an incidental basis only.40
It is then safe to assume that the number of 164 divorce judgements issued by the Kalisz tribunal is more or less the same as the actual number of divorces pronounced in what was first Kalisz department and then voivodeship. In order to put this number in a context, we must know how many people lived in the department (voivodeship). In 1810 its population stood at about 513,000,41 and by 1820 it reached ca. 518,000 residents.42
Calculations concerning the numbers of divorces pronounced in Warsaw and Kraków (along with its district) also must be deemed reliable. As for the other Polish territories where the Napoleonic Code was in effect, there is not enough data to estimate how many divorces were granted. It is likely that divorce records maintained for example by civil status registrars in Płock, Kielce and Zamość are complete, or nearly complete. The problem, however, is establishing the territorial jurisdiction of these registrars, and consequently, the size of the population for which they kept records.
Number of residents per one divorce annually in the Kalisz department/voivodeship in thousands
Period |
Population of the Kalisz department/voivodeship |
Years |
Divorces |
Number of residents per one divorce annually in thousands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1809–1816 |
513 |
8 |
70 |
58.63 |
1817–1825 |
518 |
9 |
94 |
49.60 |
As for the population sizes in individual provinces: to simplify the matter, I have assumed that the Duchy of Warsaw had, throughout the period of its existence within the original boundaries, 2,500,000 inhabitants,43 and following the attachment of New Galicia 4,334,000,44 while Congress Poland consistently maintained a population of 3,520,000.45 Let’s assume that Warsaw had 79,000 inhabitants46 in the period of the Duchy of Warsaw and 100,00047 in the times of Congress Poland, while Kraków and its district was inhabited, prior to 1816, by 88,000 people, and by 146,00048 people after this year. I have omitted the years in which the Napoleonic Code was implemented in a given region, because, as already mentioned, the number of granted divorces must have been very insignificant in those years due to the lengthiness of the proceedings.
The calculations bring us to a total of just under 2,000 divorces granted in the Polish territories pursuant to the Napoleonic Code, which gives one divorce per 35,000–40,000 inhabitants. After accounting for the different population sizes, the conclusion is that Polish courts granted divorces somewhat more frequently than their French equivalents. Throughout the entire period in which the Napoleonic divorce law was effective in France, only about 2,000–2,500 divorces were granted there, in comparison to 30,000 pronounced under the law of 20 September 1792.49
The archive queries of Paola Mastrolia, a researcher of the reception of the Napoleonic Code in the Kingdom of Naples, which at the time had about 5 million inhabitants,50 rendered only 29 divorce cases brought to court in the period of 1809–1815 (although this data is likely incomplete due to the limits in access to the archives in Naples). Three cases were initiated at joint petition, 7 due to adultery, and 19 on the basis of Art. 231 of the cc. In 8 cases the divorce was granted, and in another 8 the petition was dismissed. The outcome of 13 cases is unknown.51 This research suggests that the reception of Napoleonic family law was a lot more modest in Southern Italy than in Poland.
Number of divorces pronounced in Warsaw, Kraków and in the province
Population in thousands |
Years in which the Napoleonic Code divorce law was in effect |
Number of residents per one divorce annually in thousands |
Number of divorces |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
Kraków [1810–1816] |
88 |
7 |
19.02 |
301 |
Kraków [1817–1852] |
146 |
35 |
||
Warsaw [1809–1816] |
79 |
8 |
3.24 |
473 |
Warsaw [1817–1825] |
100 |
9 |
||
Provincea [1809–1810] |
2333 |
2 |
58.63b |
80 |
Provincec [1811–1816] |
4167 |
6 |
58.63d |
433 |
Provincee [1817–1825] |
3420 |
9 |
49.6f |
621 |
Total |
1901 |
The table employs the estimations for Kraków and Warsaw which are discussed above. As for all the remaining Polish lands under Napoleonic Code, it was assumed that the number of inhabitants per 1 divorce was equal to the number in the Kalisz department/voivodeship. The time periods (1809–1810; 1811–1816; 1817–1825) correspond to the successive changes of political affiliation of the central Polish lands, which were accompanied by the expansion or shrinking of the area where Napoleonic Code was in force (in 1808 it was introduced in the Duchy of Warsaw in its original borders, in 1810 in the part of Galicia which was incorporated into the Duchy after the Treaty of Schonbrunn; and on 1 March 1817 Landrecht was reintroduced in the part of the Duchy which was given to Prussia after the Congress of Vienna). The estimations only include the years when the Napoleonic Code was in force for the entire year.
c The province of the Duchy of Warsaw in its broadest boundaries, that is after the attachment of parts of Galicia and before the detachment of Wielkopolska (without Warsaw and Krakow). 1816 has been included in this time interval, because Landrecht was not reinstated in Wielkopolska until 1 March 1817.
Numbers of divorces in larger French cities in the years 1808–1815a
City |
Population |
1808 |
1809 |
1810 |
1811 |
1812 |
1813 |
1814 |
1815 |
Total |
Annual average |
Divorces per population |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
Paris |
620,000 |
85 |
7294 |
|||||||||
2 |
Marseille |
100,000 |
6 |
7 |
10 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
35 |
4 |
22,857 |
3 |
Rouen |
85,000 |
7 |
10 |
8 |
6 |
5 |
12 |
4 |
10 |
62 |
8 |
10,968 |
4 |
Nantes |
80,000 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
10 |
1 |
64,000 |
||
5 |
Lille |
60,000 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
20 |
3 |
24,000 |
6 |
Strasbourg |
52,000 |
10 |
4 |
21 |
16 |
14 |
14 |
13 |
4 |
96 |
12 |
4333 |
7 |
Toulouse |
52,000 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
8 |
1 |
52,000 |
8 |
Amiens |
40,000 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
7 |
1 |
45,714 |
9 |
Metz |
40,000 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
14 |
2 |
22,857 |
10 |
Nimes |
37,000 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
148,000 |
11 |
Caen |
35,000 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
10 |
1 |
28,000 |
12 |
Montpellier |
33,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
13 |
Reims |
31,000 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
49,600 |
14 |
Clermont-Ferrand |
310,00 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
82,667 |
15 |
Angers |
30,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
16 |
Besançon |
30,000 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
48,000 |
Toulon |
28,000 |
4 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
5 |
7 |
6 |
7 |
43 |
5 |
5209 |
|
18 |
Versailles |
26,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
69,333 |
19 |
Troyes |
25,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
200,000 |
20 |
Montauban |
25,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
66,667 |
21 |
Grenoble |
23,000 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
46,000 |
22 |
Avignon |
23,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
23 |
Bourges |
17,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
24 |
Boulogne-s-Mer |
13,000 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
20,800 |
25 |
Calais |
10,000 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
80,000 |
26 |
Pau |
8000 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
11 |
1 |
5818 |
27 |
Rodez |
6500 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
28 |
Mende |
5500 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
14,667 |
156 6000 |
1736 |
a (G. Thibault-Laurent, La premiere introduction du divorce en France sous la Révolution et l’Empire (1792–1816), Clermont-Ferrand 1938, p. 190)
As for the Grand Duchy of Baden, at the time populated by slightly less than 1,500,000 inhabitants, where the German version of the Napoleonic Code (Badische Landrecht)52 was in effect, the incidence of divorces was probably just a bit lower than in Poland. This is at least what the statistics from the
∵
The Napoleonic divorce law remained in effect for a relatively short time (a dozen or so years) in most Polish territories where it had been implemented. As shown in Diagram 8, in Kalisz and in Warsaw the number of divorces pronounced every year was relatively stable. The decrease in the period of 1813–1814 probably results from disruptions in the functioning of courts caused by the Franco-Russian War, and as regards Warsaw, also from missing parts of source material. The situation was different in Kraków, where Book i of the Napoleonic Code remained in effect until the ‘50s of the 19th century, that is for over 40 years.
If we divide this period into four intervals (the first one of ten years, and three others of eleven years), then we arrive at the following numbers: in the years 1810–1819 there were 140 divorces (50.2% of the total), in 1820–1830 there were 60 divorces (21.5%), in 1831–1841 there were 52 divorces (18.6%) and in 1842–1852 there were 27 divorces (9.7%).
Divorces in time (Kraków, Kalisz and Warsaw)
The initial high number was caused by the introduction into the legal order of a new institution allowing for the dissolution of those marriages, whose breakdown had occurred much earlier, as well as by the fact that the dusk of the Napoleonic era was a very tumultuous time in the Polish territories. This contributed to the disintegration of human, including marital, relations. The downward trend that continued in the third and fourth intervals (1831–1852) turns out much harder to account for; it may have resulted, for example, from the courts’ more restrictive approach to divorce petitions. In order to verify this hypothesis, I included in my query the judgement books of the Kraków civil tribunal of first instance for the years 1844–1845.54 The search rendered three sets of records concerning divorces. One of them ended with a divorce, one with a separation (at the wife’s request; her husband demanded divorce), and the outcome of the third one is unknown. This suggests that the decrease of the number of divorces resulted from a lower number of petitions rather than from a change of attitude of the court.55
The number of concluded marriages is a fairly obvious point of reference for the number of divorces. Unfortunately, the nature of the available data allows for the presentation of this proportion for a larger population only in regard of the Warsaw communes. For example, in cyrkuł ii, there were 2.6 divorces per 100 marriages. The proportions in individual years are illustrated in Diagram 10.
Of course, in the province the number of divorces per 100 marriages was lower. However, if we compare the data from the above diagram with the information that in Lyon, the second largest French city, this ratio was only 0.7 of divorces,56 we can see all the more clearly that in our country divorces were relatively frequent, although obviously much rarer than in France of the 1890s (in Paris this ratio reached then 23.9 and in Lyon 8.75)57 or in Poland of our times.58
The proportion between the number of divorces and of marriages in the second Warsaw commune
These are the following databases:
Some cases, however, are difficult to assign to a given court – for example, the divorce of Agnieszka and Rajmund Rembieliński (Z. Gloger, “Agnieszka z Opackich Bechonowa”, Kłosy 1883, no. 915, fasc. 11, p. 30) or that of Wincenty and Agnieszka Karniewski (Dziennik Dekretów Sądu Kasacyjnego Księstwa Warszawskiego, vol. 2, p. 379 et seq.).
Historia państwa i prawa Polski, vol. 3: Od rozbiorów do uwłaszczenia, eds. J. Bardach, M. Senkowska-Gluck, Warszawa 1981, p. 592.
State Archives in Lublin: Gmina ewangelicka Nowe Miasto Toruń [fond: 69/227/0], vol. 99, p. 109 et seq.
Postanowienie namiestnika z 6 sierpnia 1816 r. przenoszące stolicę województwa krakowskiego z miasta Miechowa, z powodu niedogodności, do miasta Kielc do dóbr narodowych należącego, Dziennik Praw, vol. 1, pp. 429–430. Voivodeship authorities actually moved to Kielce in 1818 (B. Markowski, Z dziejów gospodarki miejskiej w Kielcach, Warszawa 1930, p. 20). An earlier plan involved moving one of the departments of the Kraków tribunal do Miechów (W. Witkowski, Komisja Rządowa Sprawiedliwości w Królestwie Polskim 1815–1876, Lublin 1986, pp. 199–200).
State Archives in Kielce: Akta Urzędnika Stanu Cywilnego Powiatu Kieleckiego [fond: 2111430], vol. 1–6.
State Archives in Katowice: Akta stanu cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej Pilica 1808–1938 [fond: 12/1110/0], vol. 72.
Diocesan Archives in Łomża: Fond ii – Akta ogólne, ref. no. 166, fol. 50.
Dziennik Praw, vol. 2, p. 221.
B. Fidelus, Rozwód w orzecznictwie sądów Wolnego Miasta Krakowa w latach 1815–1833 na tle przepisów prawa małżeńskiego osobowego (Ph.D. thesis: Archives of the Jagiellonian University), Kraków 1982, pp. 399 and 420–439.
Let us assume that “x” is the number of divorces pronounced in Krakow. The “Christian” books contain two Jewish divorces, which I subtract from the total number of 279. And so: x = 277 + 8% * x; 92% * x = 277; x = 277/0.92; x = 301.
It can be deduced from the titles of divorce decree books from the period of the Free City of Kraków that the data pertains to the city only. However, in the years 1816–1833 a Kraków civil status registrar pronounced 122 divorces between 1816 and 1833, while the tribunal granted 120 divorces in that time period, according to B. Fidelus’ calculations based on the tribunal records. Consequently, it should be concluded that there was only one civil status registrar who proclaimed divorces in the whole territory of the Free City of Kraków and its district.
State Archives in Lublin: Akta stanu cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej w Zamościu [fond: 35/1954/0], vol. 40.
Ibid, vol. 40 and 42.
State Archives in Białystok (Łomża Branch) Akta stanu cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej w Łomży [fond: 5/514/0], vol. 58, entries no. 6 and 53, vol. 60, entry no. 11.
Parish Archives of the Holy Trinity Roman Catholic Church Parish in Grajewo: Akta Zaślubienia Gminy Grajewskiej Powiatu Biebrzańskiego w Województwie Augustowskiem na rok 1821, entry no. 3.
Diocesan Archives in Łomża: Fond ii – Akta ogólne, ref. no. 5, fol. 147, file ref. no.: 400, file ref. no.: 407.
Cyrkuł i, vol. 63, entry no.67; Cyrkuł v, vol. 27, entry no.149; Cyrkuł vii, vol. 37, entry no. 127.
State Archives in Płock: Akta stanu cywilnego gminy Płock, powiat płocki [fond: 50/375], vol. 13, 40, 47, 80 and 82. Moreover, we know of one case from the records of the Kraków bishop’s court (Metropolitan Curia Archives in Kraków: Akta sądowe małżeńskie, file xxv, the Tarnowski spouses case).
Cyrkuł vi, vol. 100, fol. 8 et seq.
Archdiocesan Archives in Poznań: Konsystorz Generalny w Poznaniu – Acta Causarum 0252, Acta viccari gen. et offic. Posn. Clementis Wierusz Walknowski custodis Posn., fols. 88 et seq.
State Archives in Radom: Akta stanu cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej Szydłowiec [fond: 58/166/0], vol. 10, p. 69.
State Archives in Lublin: Akta stanu cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej w Radzyniu [fond: 35/1908/0], vol. 40, pp. 1–2, vol. 42, pp. 1–8.
Diocesan Archives in Siedlce: Akta Konsystorza Generalnego Diecezji Siedleckiej, ref. no. 7, fol. 60–63. Although the source does not explicitly state that the tribunal in question is the civil tribunal of first instance with its seat in Siedlce, the territorial jurisdiction of the consistory and of this tribunal make it very likely that this was the court that issued the judgement.
Historia państwa i prawa Polski, vol. 3: Od rozbiorów …, p. 472; A. Heylman, O sądownictwie w Królestwie Polskim, Warszawa 1934, p. 41; W. Witkowski, Komisja Rządowa Sprawiedliwości w Królestwie Polskim 1815–1876, Lublin 1986, p. 200.
Moreover, many documents concerning the divorce proceedings of Karolina and Aleksander Chodkiewicz are in Archiwum Młynowskie Chodkiewiczów.
They are mentioned, among others, in a copy of a divorce decree found in allegata: Cyrkuł vi, vol. 113, allegat no. 42.
A. Sołtan, Praga w ciągu wieków, [in:] Warszawskiej Pragi dzieje dawne i nowsze, Warszawa 2006, p. 18.
For example, in commune iii, the numbering of books of divorces starts with the number 2. In commune i, in turn, the book of marriages from 1824 is missing (in the ‘20s divorces were usually recorded in the same books as marriages). The book of divorces pronounced in commune i in the year 1813 has not been preserved either (although a copy of one of them has been found in the allegata of commune iv, vol. 53 [s.l.]).
A. Szczypiorski, Ćwierć wieku Warszawy (1806–1830), Wrocław 1964, p. 21.
62.4 × 7.5 = 468.29. Multiplying 62.4 by 7.5 seems to be more appropriate than multiplying it by 8, as two communes from which the data is missing were the least populated ones, and so assuming that the same number of divorces was granted there as in the remaining 6 communes to lead to overestimated results. Since no precise data on the population numbers of each commune exists, I used the proportion resulting from comparing the numbers of councillors elected in each commune (and so, I assumed “1” for communes i, ii, iii, iv, v and vii and “0,75” for communes vi and viii). Unfortunately, it was not possible to establish the population of each commune in the period of interest. However, according to the published property tax list, the number of houses in each commune was similar. For instance, in 1808 there were between 305 (the Praga district) and 537 houses in individual communes. The population numbers were certainly correlated with the number of houses. This means that there were no enormous disproportions that could significantly distort the proposed estimations. Taryffa domów miasta Warszawy: dla wygody publiczney wydana w roku 1807 w miesiącu wrześniu a poprawiona stosownie do nowego podziału na Cyrkułów osiem w miesiącu lipcu 1808 roku, [Warszawa] 1808, p. 1.
State Archives in Łódź: Urząd Stanu Cywilnego Rawy Mazowieckiej [fond: 39/1641/0], vol. 2, fol. 122–122v, vol. 5, pp. 134–135v, vol. 6, 188–188v.
State Archives in Warsaw: Akta stanu cywilnego Miasta Mszczonowa, vol. 4, fol. 31–32, vol. 7, fol. 58–58v.
State Archives in Warsaw: Akta stanu cywilnego gminy Wilanów [fond: 72/176/0], vol. 21, fol. 24–24v.
State Archives in Warsaw: Akta stanu cywilnego gminy Skuły [fond: 733/193/0], vol. 12, fol. 15–15v.
State Archives in Radom: Akta stanu cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej Jastrząb [fond: 58/137/0], series 1, vol. 4, unnumbered extra fol. between fols. 68 and 69.
State Archives in Łódź: Urząd Stanu Cywilnego Parafii Rzymskokatolickiej w Łowiczu – Kolegiata [fond: 39/1571], ref. no. 12 [s.l.], divorce judgements of the Bohm spouses.
State Archives in Kielce: Akta Urzędnika Stanu Cywilnego Powiatu Kieleckiego [fond: 21/11430], vol. 1–6.
State Archives in Płock: Akta stanu cywilnego gminy Płock, powiat płocki [fond: 50/375], vol. 40, 47, 80 and 82.
Akta rozwodowe z terenu gmin, powiatu i miasta Krakowa, vol. 19, p. 18. Perhaps this was also what happened in the case referred to in an annotation from Płock: State Archives in Płock: Akta stanu cywilnego gminy Płock, powiat płocki [fond: 50/375], vol. 82, p. 19v.
H. Grossman, “Struktura społeczna i gospodarcza Księstwa Warszawskiego”, Kwartalnik Statystyczny 1925, vol. 2, fasc. 1, p. 47.
J. Janczak, “Statystyka ludności Królestwa Polskiego (1815–1830)”, [in:] Przeszłość Demograficzna Polski. Materiały i Studia 1983, vol. 14, p. 20. The boundaries of the department (voivodeship) changed a few times. By virtue of a decree dated 17 April 1810, the Lelów and Pilica powiats were attached to the Kraków department (Dziennik Praw, vol. 2, p. 143) and, following the Congress of Vienna, the western extremes of the Kalisz department were ceded to West Prussia (the powiat cities of Odolanów and Ostrzeszów were detached).
W. Sobociński, Historia ustroju i prawa Księstwa Warszawskiego, Toruń 1964, p. 18.
H. Grossman, Struktura społeczna …, pp. 9 and 46.
J. Janczak, Statystyka ludności …, p. 20, data for 1820.
S. Dziewulski, Warszawa, Warszawa 1913, vol. 1, p. 420.
Ibid, p. 421.
Historia państwa i prawa Polski, vol. 3…, p. 793, data for the years 1815 and 1843.
G. Thibault-Laurent, La premiere introduction du divorce en France sous la Révolution et l’Empire (1792–1816), Clermont-Ferrand 1938, p. 189.
J. A. Marino, Kingdom of Naples, [in:] Europe 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World, ed. J. Dewald, New York 2004, vol. 4, p. 238.
P. Mastrolia, La scheggia dello specchio. Cultura giuridica e prassi nel Regno di Napoli (1809–1815) (Ph.D. thesis: Universita degli Studi di Macerata; available in the digital repository), Macerata 2014, fols. 102–103.
A. Rabaa, Die Ehe als Rechtsinstitut im Badischen Landrecht von 1810, Frankfurt am Main 2011, pp. 215–375.
Statistisches Jahrbuch für das Großherzogtum Baden, vol. 1, Jahrgang 1868, p. 75; E. Wolf, G. Luke, H. Hax, Scheidung und Scheidungsrecht: Grundfragen der Ehescheidung in Deutschland, Tubigen 1959, p. 385.
TCKrak, vol. 246–256, vol. 361–372, vol. 426, vol. 427–431, vol. 433–434.
Out of 34 books pertaining to the period of 1844–1845, two are missing.
D. Dessertine, Divorcer a Lyon, Lyon 1981, p. 107.
G. Thibault-Laurent, La premiere introduction …, pp. 156–157.
In 2014 there were 35 divorces per 100 marriages in Poland (Central Statistical Office, Rocznik Demograficzny 2015, Warszawa 2015, p. 30).