How can it be assumed that an individual is incapable of giving consent or does not give it freely? This article analyses three cases handled by the Tribunal of the Roman Rota between 1579 and 1619: the case of a nun from the monastery of Odivelas (Portugal) suffering from mental disorders, and two demands for nullification of marriage based on the grounds of duress exerted by immediate family; the case of Dona Antonia Portocarrero y Cardenas, of the diocese of Seville, married to Don Felipe de Guzman y Aragon; and the case of Manuel de Meneses and Branca de Baredo of the diocese of Coimbra. The testimonies on file relate the words and actions of the main parties involved, revealing affects and intentions. Auditors embarked on a complex operation to translate this information into the language of the law, in the light of legal experts’ theories on individual responsibility and the nature of violence or constraints that may alter freedom of consent. Yet this also encompassed social practices and representations in which individual behaviours exist. This study illustrates the contrast between judges’ know-how in assessing the absence of consent regarding marriage or religious profession and the fact that these notions were not taken into account regarding consent to baptism.

中文翻译：

---

通过外部标志评估同意。罗马罗塔法庭上的三个疯狂、排斥和爱的案例（1579-1619）

怎么能假设个人没有能力给予同意或不自由给予同意？本文分析了罗马罗塔法庭在 1579 年至 1619 年间处理的三个案件：Odivelas（葡萄牙）修道院的一名修女患有精神疾病，以及以施加胁迫为由要求取消婚姻的两起案件。直系亲属；塞维利亚教区的 Dona Antonia Portocarrero y Cardenas 与 Don Felipe de Guzman y Aragon 结婚；以及科英布拉教区的曼努埃尔·德·梅内塞斯 (Manuel de Meneses) 和布兰卡·德·巴雷多 (Branca de Baredo) 的案件。档案中的证词涉及主要当事人的言行，揭示了影响和意图。审计师开始了一项复杂的操作，将这些信息翻译成法律语言，根据法律专家关于个人责任和可能改变同意自由的暴力或约束的性质的理论。然而，这也包括存在个体行为的社会实践和表征。这项研究说明了法官在评估关于婚姻或宗教职业没有同意的专业知识与在同意洗礼时没有考虑这些概念的事实之间的对比。