The Pulpit Commentary — Leviticus — Section 311

the difficulty? Let us examine each word capital crime. The imperial code and the of the Law. Neither shalt thou take one wife canon law were framed upon the Mosaio to another, to 11n, to uncooer her nakedne111 and the Roman tables, and under them no upon her in her life time. The two words, to question arose, except as to the marriage of 11ez, have not been sufficiently dwelt on. the niece, the decc11Bed wife's sister, and The Hebrew, tsarar, means to distress by the first cousin. Marriage with the niece packing closely together, and so, to vex, was forbidden by Constantine, as we have or to annoy in any way. Here is to be said, in the year 355, on penalty of capita.I found the ground of the prohibition con- punishment for committing the offence, tained in the law before us. A man is not and marriage with a deceased wife's sister to take for e. second wife a woman who is was declared by the same emperor to be likely, from spiteful temper or for other null. The canons of Councils and the reasons, to vex the fust wife. Rachel vexed decl~tions of the chief Ch n;ch teachers Leah; Peninnah vexed Hannah ; the first cue m fnll accordance with the imperial pair were blood relations, the second were legislation, condemning these marriages not; but under the present law the second without e. di.ssentient voice. The only case- marriage would in both cases have been in which no consensus is found is that of" equally forbidden, if the probability of the the marriage of first cousins. By the earliest. provocation had been foreseen. lt follows Roman law these marriages had been dis- that polygamy is not prohibited by the text allowed (Tacitus, 'Anne.I.,' xii. 6), bnt in before us, but that the liberty of the poly- the second century B.O. they had become gamist is somewhat circumscribed by the common (Livy, xlii. 34), and they continued application of the law of charity. It to be lawful till the year A.D. 384 or 385, follows, too, that the law has no bearing when Theodosius condemned them, and on the question of marriage with a deceased mode them punishable by the severest wife's sister, which is neither forbidden nor penalties possible. This enactment lasted allowed by it. Are we then to conclude only twenty years, when it was repealed by that the Law of Moses leaves the case of Arce.dins, A.D. 40-l: or 405. No adverse the wife's sister untouched? Not so, for the judgment respecting the marriage of first general principle has been le.id down, None cousins was pronounced by the Church of you shall approach to any, that is near until after the legislation of Theodosins•. of kin to him, to u11C011er hia nakedness, and, but it appears that thot legislation wee pro- as we have seen, the expression, near of kin, moted at her instance, and from that time· includes relations by affinity equally with forward the tendency to condemn these mar- blood relations; as therefore the wife's sister riages became more and more pronounced.. is in the canonists' first degree of affinity See the canons of the Councils of Agde, (~din the second according to the civilians), Epe.one, Auvergne, Orleans, Tours, Anxerre, it is reasonably inferred thnt marriage in the sixth century, and of the Council in with her is forbidden under the above law, Trullo in the seventh century. The reformers and this inference is confirmed by marriage of the sixteenth century in England, en- with the other sister-in-law-the brother's trenching thcmsehes, as usual, behind the wife-being, 118 the rule, prohibited. It letter of Scripture and the practice of the can hardly be doubted that marriage with primitive Church, forbade ma.rriages of con- the grandmother and with the niece-both sanguinity and affinity in the first, second. in the second degreo of consanguinity ac- and third degrees o.ccording to the reckoning cording to the canonists, and the third de- of the civil lo.w, o.nd in the first a.nil second gree according to the civilians-and incest degrees according to the reckoning of the with a dnughter are forbidden under the canon low, excepting those of first cousins, 1161Ile clause. on which the oorly Christians pronounced The present verse completes the Levitioal no decisive judgment. code of prohibited degrees. The Roman code of Ver. 19.-The mo.rriage restrictions ho.viag restrictions on marriage was almost identical been lo.id down, there follows in the five with the Mosaio tables. It only duJered from next verses the prohibition of five sexual them by specifically naming the grandmother impurities unconnected with marriage except and the niece among the blood relations with by their :subject-matter. The first is to whom e. marriage might not be contracted, approaoh unto a woman to unoover her and omitting the brother's wife among rela- nakedness, as long as she is put aplU't for tives by affinity. In the time of Claudius, her u.noleannesa, that is, either for sovcn de.ye a change was introduced into it, for the pur- at the time of her ordinnry illnesses (eh. xv. pose of gratifying the emperor's passion for 19), or any longer time that her illnose Agrippina, which legalized marriage with a might last (oh. xv. 25), or for forty do.ye after brother's daughter. This legalization con- the birth of a man child (oh. xii. 2-4), or for tinued in force until the time of Consto.n- eighty dl\ys after the birth of II girl (eh. xii. tius, who me.de mnrriuge with a niece e. 5). The peno.lt6 for the offence within tho 276 THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS. [cH, XVIII, 1-30.