Montesquieu had once discussed dowries and marital benefits under different systems in The Spirit of the Laws.
Gaston Martin said that a dowry had to be substantial to maintain a husband's status and established splendor under a monarchy. Under a republic, Luxury should not become widespread, so there was no need for a large dowry.
At first glance, it seemed that a republic was quite advantageous for women. Under a monarchy, a dowry belonged to the woman herself, and regardless of its amount, her husband could not manage it. Under a republic, however, women's personal property would lead to Luxury, while under a despotic system, a dowry could at most help them scrape by and would serve no other purpose.
Commercial activity in medieval France was far less developed than in the Republic of Venice. Even if a woman had money, she would have nowhere to spend it.
Even if France entered a republican system, under Montesquieu's ideas, women's personal property would be kept under the strict supervision of their husbands or guardians, preventing their lives from becoming as extravagant as those at the end of the Bourbon dynasty.
Naturally, being unable to spend money freely was unpleasant, but that was not even the worst part.
If a husband and wife had made no agreement before marriage, then all property belonged to the marital community. Women had no right to freely dispose of communal property either. Without the husband's signature, they could not make gifts or transfer property, whether for payment or without compensation. If a wife ran a business, whether outside the community-property system or under separate-property arrangements, she could not bring a lawsuit without her husband's consent.
Divorce was impossible as well. Incompatibility was not grounds for divorce. The only benefit of marriage law was the "punishment of