This, however, involves no difference of relationship, though
ibly some difference of status on the part of the half-brother.
t is unfortunate that the most satisfactory explanation which
connects v.11 with the stepmother’s daughter by another hus- band requires alteration of the text.
@ A second difficulty arises from a group of three ambiguous prohibitions which might be rded as referring either to
olygamous Or monogamous marriages. Marriage is prohibited ἴω) with a stepdaughter (v.17), (Ὁ) with the daughter of a step- son or stepdaughter (ἐὁ.), and (c) with a wife’s sister (v.15); but is the decease presupposed in (a) of the wife who is the girl's mother, in (Ὁ) of the wife who is the girl's grandmother, in (6) of the wife whose sister is mentioned? In case (δ) it is possible that the original wife is dead, and the same may fairly be held in case (a); but in case (c) it is certain that the wife is alive, and that what is forbidden is a special type of bigamy. The discussion of this brings us to the more famous problem.
(8) Marriage with a deceased wife's sister is certainly not directly forbidden. The actual words are, ‘thou shalt not take a woman to her sister, to be a rival to her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her lifetime’ (τ. 15. The AVm suggests translating ‘one wife to (Le. in addition to) another’ instead of ‘ to her sister’—in which case we should have a direct
--5.....}
MARRIAGE
prohibition of bigamy ; but modern scholarship has not been able to sustain this. The Mosaic law was not anciently under- stood to preclude marriage with the sister of a deceased wife. It was declared lawful by the Talmudists, and it was even encouraged by removing or ee ea in this special case the conditions governing the remarriage of a widower. The oe tion to it began among the Jewish sect of the Karaites, whose origin is traced to the 8th cent. of our era, and whose leading pone was the Protestant one of fing behind the accumu- ated traditions and decisions of the Rabbis to the written word, with the accompanying proviso that Scripture was to be inter- — by Scripture. In the case before us the plain sense of
ripture is that no objection is raised to marriage with a wife's sister if the former is deceased, and the argument against it is consequently constructive. The argument may be summarized as follows : τ Marriage is interdicted with those that are near of kin (Ly 18°); (2) ‘near of kin’ are shown in the legislation to include, along with mother, daughter, etc., sisters and half- sisters ; (3) the wife's ‘ near of kin’ are to be regarded as standing in the same relationship to the husband, and that because (a) it was declared in the primordial decree that the twain shall be one flesh (Gn 2%), and (Ὁ) the principle is conceded and exempli- fied in other instances—e.g. in the prohibition of marriage with a deceased wife’s granddaughter (v.17) (Selden, Ux. Heb. i. 3ff., where are set forth the various arguments of the different Karaite teachers, who, however, agreed in the conclusion, ‘Uxoris soror, tam ea demortua quam superstite, in vetitis habenda’). But the πὸ ye is unsound. If the question be to determine whether the Mosaic law sanctions marriage with a deceased wife's sister, we must adhere as closely as possible to the statute, and, as we have seen, the object of the relevant clause is something quite different—the regulation of bigamy. If we fall back on the principle underlying the prohibitions we do not settle the matter, for it is not clear that the principle is theoretically adopted of treating the wife’s near of kin as if they were the Teabanie ; rather it would seem that this guidance is followed only in so far as it was necessary on grounds of ex- pediency—e.g. in the case of the stepdaughter or granddaughter who would be living (unlike the sister) in the man’s family, and who would thus, as a possible wife, be in an obnoxious position. Various other extensions of the forbidden degrees specified in Ly have been made—notably in barring marriage of an uncle with a niece, and of the nephew with the widow of his maternal uncle ; and, as in these instances, the problem of the deceased’s wife's sister falls to be settled in accordance with the circum- stances of a given age and the teaching of experience.
(4) The rationale of the forbidden degrees has been variously interpreted. The following isa summary of the older explana- tions (cf. J. D. Michaelis, Mos. Recht (Eng. tr.) ii. p. 53 ff.). The cases in which marriage is disallowed in the Mosaic law have been supposed to be proscribed as those (a) which are repugnant to the natnral sentiments of mankind (horror naturalis), or (Ὁ) which .-ad to the physical degeneration of a stock, or (c) which tend to the agprandizsment of particular families by the concentration of wealth and power, or (61) which are subversive of natural rights—e.g. degrading an aunt from her due rank, and elevating a stepdaughter above her proper position. Without denying a certain influence from these con- siderations, Michaelis himself argues with great force that the real reason of the prohibition of marriages among near of kin is, that, ‘ considering the free intercourse that such persons have with one another, some of whom, besides, live from their infancy in the same house, it would be impossible to prevent the presence of whoredom in families, or to guard against the effects of very early cormuppion among young persons if they could entertain the least hope of throwing a veil over st impurity by subsequent marriage’ (ii. p. 68). In recent times the whole subject has been re-examined from the evolutionary point of view, with the result of showing that every system of forbidden degrees has been a growth to which something has been contributed by successive forms of social organization, and which has been dominated at different periods by different ideas. Of the Levitical system we may say that it has as its nucleus a list of prohibitions inherited from the maternal type of family organization, and that it has extended these in general (though not doctrinaire) accordance with the demands of the patriarchal system, and with a keen instinct for the interests of domestic and social purity.