Marriage was a contract. There had to be a marriage deed drawn up, sealed, and witnessed. Without such r2ksatz, ‘ bonds’ or ‘ marriage lines,’ a woman was not a wife (§ 128). The marriage deed might contain some peculiar stipulations. Thus aman married a‘sister of his first wife, on condi- tion that she was to be his wife, but wait on her sister, care for her, and carry her stool when she went to the temple of Marduk (B! 21, B? 2176 A). The children were to be reckoned children of the first wife, probably to inherit her property. Two contracts were drawn up—one between the husband and wife, one between the sisters. If the wife repudiated her husband, she was to be branded and sold as a slave. If the husband repudiated her, he was to pay her a mina of silver. In an- other case, a man marries a wife on condition that she treat his mother as mistress of the house, or be branded and sold for a slave. The mother then contracts to leave all her property to the pair, if they keep her as long as she lives (B? 707).
2. Divorce was allowed. The husband had it in his power to divorce his wife with the words, ‘Thou art not my wife’; but he could not do so without a cause. He had to return what she brought with her, and either pay her a compensa- tion or forfeit the bride-price he paid for her (§§ 137, 138; ef. Dt 24! 2219-29, Hos 2%, Mt 5%! 197). She retained custody of the children until they were of age, and he had to make them and her an allowance. But, if the wife had so mis- conducted herself as to merit divorce, she lost her property, or the husband could degrade her to slavery. In the former case she was homeless, unless her family would take her back, and also
enniless. In the latter case she had at least
ome, food, and clothing. If the wife sought the divorce herself, she could get it if she could prove cruelty (§ 142). She then took her marriage por- tion and went back to her family, but forfeited her bride-price. On the other hand, if in this case the fault was on her side, she lost her life (§ 143). The wife who was childless could not oppose her husband’s taking a concubine, unless she chose to give him a maid to bear him children. If she was seized with incurable disease, her husband could not divorce her on that ground, but might marry again (§ 148). He was bound to let her stay in
his house, and to maintain her as long as she lived ($148), But she was not bound to stay ; she might
CODE OF HAMMURABI
CODE OF HAMMURABI 599
a EEE EEE
take back her marriage portion and go back to her father’s house (§ 149). Desertion on the man’s part dissolved marriage (§ 136); but mere absence did not, if the wife was provided for (§§ 133, 134). Otherwise, she might remarry to get maintenance, but she was then bound to return to her husband if he came back (§ 135).
3. It is clear that the Babylonian was a mono- gamist : he could have only one proper wife. But he could have a concubine, if his wife were child- less (§ 145). The children by a concubine were legitimate, the concubine a real wife. He could not put her away except on the same terms as the first wife (§ 137).
4, It was not forbidden to votaries to marry (§§ 144-146). As the contemporary documents show, they frequently did so. But it was evidently contemplated that they would not have children.
5. Bars to marriage are enacted: when a comrade slanders a suitor so that he is rejected, he may not marry the girl himself (§ 137); when a widow has young children, she may not marry except by the judge’s permission (§ 177). This was granted only when the first husband’s goods had been inven- toried, and given in trust for the children to the widow and her new husband.
6. Connexion with a maid was not marriage. But the children were free, and so was the maid at her master’s death. He could acknowledge the children as his (§ 170); then they shared equally with the other children. A maid given by her mistress to her master to bear him children was still in the power of her mistress, who could de- grade her to slavery again for insolence ; but, if she had fulfilled her function, she could not be sold.
7. Special cases arose when a free woman married a slave. The wife kept her marriage portion, if any; and she, with her children, had a right to half what her husband left (§ 176).
g. A girl might be vowed to a temple. In this case she became the bride of a god, and, as such, might have a marriage portion given her. Of this she had the enjoyment for life. But her brothers had the reversion of it on her death. She could alienate nothing from it. If she did not receive this marriage portion from her father, she had the right to receive one-third of a son’s share at his death (S$ 180-182). The votaries of Marduk had, further, the free disposal of their property at death, and exemption from duty (§ 182). The ladies might hand over their property at once to their brothers to administer and maintain them, or they could appoint a steward to do so.