While the post-Imperial legal codes are not interested in marriage or betrothal in processes or life course stages in and of themselves, but in the property ownership matters which arise as a result of their occurrence, the literary texts have different foci. One aspect which seems universal to the literature is that the bride and groom themselves are perceived and presented as having very little agency in the process. It is a process controlled by the parents. However, during this period, the themes of mutual consent and desire for marriage that later become so dominant in Christian thought are beginning to emerge. Furthermore, it is clear that often the concept of non-consensual, forced betrothal, or betrothal for familial advantage, is used for ideological and theological purposes by religious writers, using it as a motif to demonstrate spiritual strength and perfection. These ideas, that marriage should have a consensual element, and that the consent should be that of the individual man and woman, not their fathers, develop throughout the Middle Ages and Medieval period, and become fundamental to Christian ideals of marriage. In 1994 Philip Reynolds argued that during the post-Imperial, post-Patristic period, Christian theologians worked to explicitly differentiate Christian marriage from pre-Christian marriage. These texts demonstrate that this attempt began early in the post-Imperial period. Moreover, this analysis highlights an important facet of the post-Imperial world: the fundamental importance of the Christian/non-Christian dichotomy over the more traditional Roman/’Germanic’ dichotomy. It is the rising power of Christian thought which changes the conceptualisation (and eventually practice) of betrothal, not the ‘barbarisation’ of the Roman world.

The cultural idea that marriage is a contract which exists purely for the licit production of children remains core to post-Imperial conceptions of betrothal and marriage. Although the emphasis shifts away from a children/heirs dichotomy, marriage existed within all strands of thought as a means to produce and protect children. However, as we have seen, there are other ways to think about the creation of children, and of family planning. These are emotive ways, that undermine the image of the ‘barbarian’ post-Imperial world as a heartless or cruel place, where child care and family planning is characterised as the ‘the ghastly slaughter of innocents’.