A spirit of protest against the whole system, and the promise of more drastic reforms, is dis- coverable within the prophetic school. In opposi- tion to existing practice, J sounds the significant note that in the beginning it was not so. Accord- ing to the antique mode of thought, to say that the first man had one wife only, was as much as to say that ΤΛΟΠΟΡΈΧΟΥ, was the ideal system ; and it is no accident that according to the same narra- tive, which is deeply conscious of the disturbance and corruption introduced by the Fall, polygyny first makes its appearance in the lawless ine of the Cainites (Gn 4%). It is, further, not without significance that Noah, the second father of the human race, also represents monogamy (Gn 77). And it is noticeable that there is an apologetic strain in the references to patriarchal olygyny : the bigamy of Abraham is explained Ὁ Baek 8. de- sire for children (Gn 16%), of Jacob by the deceit of Laban (29%). Of still greater importance than this class of incidents is the circumstance that monogamous marriage was extensively used in the prophetic teaching as the symbol of the union of God with Israel (Hos 2, Is 50 etc., see below), while polygyny had its counterpart in idolatry. The imagery shows that monogamous marriage was felt to be the highest form, and on the other hand the detestation of idolatry naturally strengthened the dislike of the form of marriage by which it was so eloquently typified (Hamburger, art. ‘ Vielweiberei’).
(2) The Wifely Status and Conjugal Duties.— In OT times various circumstances tended to depress the status of the wife—the logic of the patriarchal system, the custom of the ‘dowry,’ which suggested property, and the institution of polygyny, which divided her legitimate influence among several claimants. In theory she was the “owned one’ (adiy3), while the husband was the ‘owner’ (5x2, ]7x, see FAMILY), and in the Deca- logue she is numbered with his possessions (Ex 20"), And in certain strata of the population the practice doubtless largely corresponded to the theory— the wife being httle more than chattel and over- driven drudge. But among the wealthier classes the wife had no small liberty of action (1S 9518, 2 K 453). And where a woman possessed exceptional capacity,
* Favouritism was also discouraged by historical examples,
which suggested that childlessness was ordinarily the judgment upcn the preferred wife (Gn 801,1 5. 1%).
MARRIAGE
or knew how to increase her husband’s affection, she asserted her title to a very different status The wives of the patriarchs are not only consulted in matters of importance, but often impress us as accomplishing their purpose by their superior force of character (Gn 21° 2718. 46), In the period of the Judges the interest centres more than once in a strong woman (4.17); and in the history of the monarchy there are times when the queen or the dusty oper is the real power behind the throne.
rom the description of the virtuous woman in Pr 31 we learn how much influence could be acquired by a wise and energetic wife of the middle rank, and how much she might do to advance her husband's fortunes and to enhance his reputation.
Reference has already been made to the sympa- thetic attitude of the Law towards the wife, and we have to note in addition the bearing of the J narrative of Creation on the wifely status. It acknowledges that the subject and even servile position actually occupied by the wife is the appropriate one, but suggests that it is the punishment of her initiative in the original transgression (Gn 31°), and thus con- trasts it with the position of a ‘helpmeet’ which was designed by God in creation (2"*).
The duties ot the husband were generally recog- nized to include all that is involved in the support of the home. Incidentally Ex 21'° enumerates as the minimum of obligation the provision of food and raiment, and cohabitation. As regards sexual morality the OT theory as well as frequent practice fell far short of the standard of equality of treat- ment. The chastity of the wife was jealously
arded by the heaviest penalties, but custom and aw recognized no parallel obligation of conjugal fidelity as resting on the husband—provided always he respected the rights of other men. At the same time conjugal fidelity was naturally involved in the loving relations of the husband towards his wife, depicted in more than one touching instance (2S 3). And there is evidence that the Hebrew intelligence, as tutored by experience, came to realize the folly, and through it the iniquity, of all sexual licence (Pr 2). Still more clear is it that the prophetic conscience was possessed by a deep sense of the abomination of whoredom; and finally a principle which claimed absolute marital fidelity was laid down by Malachi when he taught that neglect and inconstancy have God for their witness and avenger (2-15), The duties of the wife are not so specifically stated. The fundamental ones were chastity and submission (Gn 3.5), with devo- tion to the husband’s family and interests. And by general consent the standard maintained by the Hebrew wives was high. Many daughters have done virtuously (Pr 31*), and the invectives of Amos and Isaiah only illustrate the principle— ‘corruptio optimi pessima.’
8. THE LEAVENING BY CHRISTIANITY.—With Christianity begins a new epoch in the history of marriage. The changes which it introduced were due, partly to express enactment of Christ and His apostles, partly to the obvious implications of fundamental Christian principles.