did not have its own rules on marriage but tolerated the marriages entered into according to the secular law of the spouses(Roman law, Jewish law or Barbarian customary law) Although different in many aspects, Roman and customary law had at that time as a common feature the absence of any obligatory civil or religious formalities for the conclusion of marriage. Marriage was a matter for the family and did not fall under the competence of the state or of religious authorities. In Roman law, legal marriage was created by the mutual consent of the spouses(in the absence of marriage impediments ).8 As Christianity originating as the religion of a small group of dissidents, eventually became the state religion of the roman Empire, the ascetic disapproval of marriage gradually diminished. 9 The ascetic attitude came into conflict with a more worldly trend that strived towards the sacralisation of marriage,and this finally became the predominant attitude The contradiction between these two approaches may explain the slow pace with which ecclesiastical marriage law came to be formulated In the 4 th century, the trad ition of blessing perfect marriages by a priest came into existence. 10 Initially, that rite was of no significance for the lawfulness of the marriage. Later, it became one of the possible forms of the formation of a marriage. In Byzantium, Church solemnisation became obligatory in 893 by an Act of Emperor Leo VI Around the 12th century, this rule was accepted in the whole Orthodox region. 11 The Roman principle of consensus facit nuptials was maintained, but Church solemnisation was added as a second constitutive element of a valid marriage. At the same time, the Orthodox Church proclaimed marriage to be a sacrament. Consensus and Church solemnisation together made marriage a sacrament. 12 In the Catholic part of Europe this process took even longer. In post-Roman times and even in Carolingian times(8 th to 10th century ) the Church blessing was unusual and marriages were celebrated accord ing to local customs. 13 At the time of Pope gregory VIl, the development of the concept of marriage as a sacrament was completed 14 and the Church ceremony was prescribed, but it was only after the Council of Trent that Church solemnisation actually became a prerequisite for the legal valid ity of a marriage. The difference with the Orthodox doctrine was that it was not blessing and consensus together. but rather consensus alone which made marriage sacred. The priest was more a witness than a main actor in the ceremony. I5 The same picture arises if we look at the changes in the attitude towards concubinage 7Troitskii(1995), p. 186 Grubbs(1995), p. 142 9However, such disapprovalstill manifested itself until deep into the Middle Ages. Even in 1146, when the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, Henry Il, was canonised, he was praised for his exceptionally chaste marriage life. He completely absta ined from physicalrelations with his wife Kunigunde so that both rema ined virgins until their death; Duby(1985), pp. 73-74 ioGrubbs (1995), p. 148 IITroitskii(1995), p. 192 2Neuhaus(1983), pp 16-17 3Duby(1985)pp.47-48 14Duby(1985)p.197 Duby(1985),p.197, Glendon(1989)p.25did not have its own rules on marriage but tolerated the marriages entered into according to the secular law of the spouses (Roman law, Jewish law or Barbarian customary law).7 Although different in many aspects, Roman and customary law had at that time as a common feature the absence of any obligatory civil or religious formalities for the conclusion of a marriage. Marriage was a matter for the family and did not fall under the competence of the state or of religious authorities. In Roman law, legal marriage was created by the mutual consent of the spouses (in the absence of marriage impediments).8 As Christianity, originating as the religion of a small group of dissidents, eventually became the state religion of the Roman Empire, the ascetic disapproval of marriage gradually diminished.9 The ascetic attitude came into conflict with a more worldly trend that strived towards the sacralisation of marriage, and this finally became the predominant attitude. The contradiction between these two approaches may explain the slow pace with which ecclesiastical marriage law came to be formulated. In the 4th century, the tradition of blessing ‘perfect’ marriages by a priest came into existence.10 Initially, that rite was of no significance for the lawfulness of the marriage. Later, it became one of the possible forms of the formation of a marriage. In Byzantium, Church solemnisation became obligatory in 893 by an Act of Emperor Leo VI. Around the 12th century, this rule was accepted in the whole Orthodox region.11 The Roman principle of consensus facit nuptias was maintained, but Church solemnisation was added as a second constitutive element of a valid marriage. At the same time, the Orthodox Church proclaimed marriage to be a sacrament. Consensus and Church solemnisation together made marriage a sacrament.12 In the Catholic part of Europe this process took even longer. In post-Roman times and even in Carolingian times (8th to 10th century), the Church blessing was unusual and marriages were celebrated according to local customs.13 At the time of Pope Gregory VII, the development of the concept of marriage as a sacrament was completed14 and the Church ceremony was prescribed, but it was only after the Council of Trent that Church solemnisation actually became a prerequisite for the legal validity of a marriage. The difference with the Orthodox doctrine was that it was not blessing and consensus together, but rather consensus alone which made marriage sacred. The priest was more a witness than a main actor in the ceremony.15 The same picture arises if we look at the changes in the attitude towards concubinage. 7Troitskii (1995), p. 186. 8Grubbs (1995), p. 142. 9However, such disapproval still manifested itself until deep into the Middle Ages. Even in 1146, when the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, Henry II, was canonised, he was praised for his exceptionally chaste marriage life. He completely abstained from physical relations with his wife Kunigunde so that both rema ined virgins until their death; Duby (1985), pp. 73-74. 10Grubbs (1995), p. 148. 11Troitskii (1995), p. 192. 12Neuhaus (1983), pp. 16-17. 13Duby (1985), pp. 47-48. 14Duby (1985), p. 197. 15Duby (1985), p. 197, Glendon (1989), p. 25