U. Porimgal, — A concordat with Portugal was con- cluded in 1857, and ratified by the Portuguese Legisla- t'tte in 1859— almost unanimously by the Chamber of
Peers, but only by a majority of fifteen (66 rotes against 51) in the Chamber of Deputies. This concordat con- cerns only the present and former Portuguese posses- sions in India. It places again nearly the whole of British India under the jurisdiction of bishops appoint- ed by the Portuguese government. — Pierer, Umoersal' Lexikon, s. v. ; Herzog, Rtal-Encyhl, iH, 60-87 ; Wet- zer u. Welte, KircL-Lex, ii, 741-,760; the Manuals of Church Law {Kirckmrec^j by Richter and Walter; MOnch, VoUstdmdige SamnUtmg aJUer dltem u. neuem Concordate (Leipz. 1830, 2 vols.); Hevue des deux Mondes, May 1, 1865 ; Sept 15, 1866.
Cononbliiage, the sexual connection of two per- sons of different sexes who are not united by the bond of matrimony. Externally, marriage and concubinage were equal according to Roman law, as even for mar- riage nothing was required but the agreement of the contracting parties. But they were diflerent with re- gard to the legal effect of the union. In a regular marriage the wife obtained the rank of the husband (diffmias mariti), and her children were legitimate and in the power of the father. None of these results took place in case of concubinage. The Church distln- g^hed between temporary and life-long concubinage. The former was always forbidden ; the latter, though not approved, was long tolerated. The Council of To- ledo (A.D. 400), by its Canon 17, excommunicates a married man keeping a concubine, but permits unmar- ried men to do so ; and allows either a wife or a concu- bine. In the Latin Church, it was not until the Coun- cil of Trent, which made the validity of a marriage dependent upon a declaration of consent before the parish priest and two witnesses, that life-long concu- binage was declared to be criminal, and subjected to punishment. The punishment for ministeriid con" cubmarU was withholding of income, suspension, im- prisonment, and, ultimately, excommunication. The evangelical churches have never recognised concubi- nage.—Herzog, Reod-Enc^ldop, iii, 105; Lea, JSacerdo- kU CeUhcu^, chap. xii. See Comoubizob.
Cononbine 02?^^*^p, pUe^gesh, deriv. uncertain, but apparently connected with the 6r. vSiXXa^ [fully in the plur. Q'^ttJai'^D D*^J, 2 Sam. xv, 16; xx, 8] ; Chald. nsn^, lechenah'j Dan. v, 2, 8, 23), denotes hi the Bible not a paramour (Gr. woXXoic^), but only a female conjugally united to a man in a relation ini^ rior to that of the regular wife (n\^'K). See Wife. The positions of these two among the early Jews can- not be referred to the standard of our own age and country; that of concubine being less degraded, as that of wife was, especially owing to the sanction of polygamy, less honorable than among ourselves. The natural desire of oflfspring was, in the Jew, consecrated into a religious hope, which tended to redeem concu- binage from the debasement into which the grosser motives for its adoption might have brou^t it The whole question must be viewed from the point which touches the interest of propagation, in virtue of which even a slave concubine who had many children would become a most important person in a family, especially where a'wife was barren. Such was the true source of the concubinage of Nahor, Abraham, and Jacob, which indeed, in the two latter cases, lost the nature which it has in our eyes, through the process, analo- gous to adoption, by wliich the offspring was regarded as that of tiie wife herself. From all this it follows that, save in so far as the latter was generally a slave, the difference between wife and concubine was less marked, owing to the absence of moral stigma, than among us. We must therefore beware of regarding as essential to the relation of concubinage what really pertained to that of bondage.
The concubine's condition was a definite one, and quite independent of the fact of there being another woman having the rights of wife towards the same
CONCUBINE
460
CONCUBINE
man. The «tate of concabinage ii atsnined and pro- Tided for by the law of Moees. A concabine would generally be either (1) a Hebrew girl bought of her fiitber, L e. a slave, which alone the rabbins regard as a. lawful connection (Maimonides, HahcK-Meiaiskn, iv), at least for a priyate person ; (2), a gentile cap- tive taken in war; (8), a foreign slave bought, or (4), a Canaanitish woman, bond or free. The rights of (1) and (2) were protected by law (Ezod. xzi, 7 ; Dent, xxi, 10), but (8) was unrecog^iued, and (4) prohibited. Free Hebrew women also might become concubines. So Gideon's concubine seems to have been of a family of rank and influence in Shechem, and such was prob- ably the state of the Levite's concubine (Judg. xx). The ravages of war among the male sex, or the impov- erishment of families, might often induce this condi- tion. The case (1) was not a hard lot. The passage in Exod. xxi is somewhat obscure, and seems to mean, in brief, as follows : A man who bought a Hebrew girl as concabine for himself might not treat her as a mere Hebrew slave, to be sent "out" (i. e. in the seventh year, v, 2), but might, if she displeased him, dismiss her to her fatber on redemption, i. e. repayment probably of a part of what he paid for her. If he had taken her for a concubine for his son, and the son then married another woman, the concubine's position and rights were secured, or, if she were refVued these, she became free without redemption. Further, from the provision in the case of such a concubine given by a man to his son, that she should be dealt with " after the manner of daughters," we see that the servile merged in the connubial relation, and that her children must have been free. Yet some degree of contempt attached to the '* handmaid's son*' (n^OK**)^), used reproachfriUy to the son of a concubine merely in Judg. ix, 18 ; see also Psa. cxvi, 16. The provisions relating to (2) are merciful and considerate to a rare degree, but overlaid by the rabbis with distorting comments.