] I think the apparent lack of involvement from Elizabeth Shackleton's sons speaks to Vickery's point about the strength of patriarchy. In her later example of Ellen Weeton, she discusses how Ellen's brother was reluctant to step in and help his sister. Didn't she say this was because, although husbands were supposed to treat their wives well in general, it was really their perogative to treat them however they liked, and not for others to interfere? The husband was in charge, and it was not in a brother or son's place to challenge his authority when it came to how he wanted to treat his wife.

I think you are totally right but it still sounds strange and heartless to me that the laws of convention eclipsed the general laws of human kindness and love for another being for some people. It seems a rather cold and self-righteous way of a son's dealing with the plight of a mother to me. Elizabeth Shackleton's health problems and her premature death were IMO directly related to the severe beatings that she received repeatedly by her husband. How could a loving son close his eyes to that? I'm sure some sons, brothers and fathers didn't give a darn about propriety back then when a female relative was severly endangered like that. At least, I hope so or else I would believe my faith in the human race entirely :-(