Keturah Gen. ch 25:1
(For the rabbinic commentaries cited below (and
others) see online Sefaria Gen. Ch 25 and also Gen. Ch. 16 re: Hagar.)
The exact identity of Keturah whom Abraham took as a
spouse (Gen.25:1) is hotly debated among rabbinic sources, and also whether she
was a ‘full wife’ or a ‘concubine’.
WHO WAS
KETURA?
Targum Onkelos (c. 110 CE)[i]
simply has Keturah as Abaham’s אִתְּתָא–
a word what means woman or wife. [ii]
KETURA IS HAGAR
Targum Jonathan and Targum Jerushalmi both elaborate
on verse 1 that Keturah was in fact Hagar.
Rashi, cites Bereshit Rabba, that she was Hagar. Abraham could reunite with her as she had
remained celibate and unwed in the intervening years. Rashi
explains the name change as ‘keturah’ means sweet smelling like incense:
for her piety and good deeds.
Chatam Sofer concurs and adds that originally –under
Sarah – the relationship between Abraham and Hagar was that of a concubine,
but now he took her again as a ‘full wife’.
Chatom Anak says she is Hagar based on Gematria as the
numeric sum of the Hebrew letters קְטוּרָֽה וּשְׁמָ֥הּ אִשָּׁ֖ה is the same as מצרית(ה)
הגר. [Note
the math does not actually match.]
Tur HaAroch agrees with Rashi that she was Hagar. The
new name reflects her return to virtue and monotheism for, as Rashi notes in
his commentary to Gen. 21:14, once she left Abraham’s home she reverted to her
ancestral idolatry. She repented, and as noted in Berashit Rabba 61, 4, Abraham took her back at God’s request.
NOT HAGAR
Ezra rejects all this. He states she was not Hagar.
Keturah was one of a number of Abraham’s concubines הַפִּֽילַגְשִׁים֙ as the Bible
notes in verse 6.
Radak also rejects Keturah is Hagar. He goes into a
long discussion that she must not have been Egyptian like Hagar nor a Canaanite
woman. He also goes on to read verse 6 as evidence that Abraham not only took
Keturah as a ‘full wife’ (verse 1) but also simultaneously had more than one
concubine who produced offspring as well (verse 6). Radak states the names of those offspring are
not mentioned in the Bible – nor the names of the concubines -- as they were not of the same legal status as
Keturah and her sons.
Rashbam states that the plain meaning of the text –
the peshat - makes Kerturah a
different woman.
Chikuni in his second commentary on this verse agrees with
and cites Rashbam: that the simple
meaning of the verse means Keturah is
not Hagar.
Chikuni also question’s Rashi’s logic and consistency.
Rashi in his commentary to Gen. 21:14 states Hagar reverted to the idolatry of
her ancestors. So, for Hagar be Keturah
the ‘sweet’ and virtuous, she would have had to do teshuvah and repent-- but there is no evidence in the Bible of
this.
Conclusion
So, the major commentaries (and others) are divided as
to whether Hagar and Keturah were one and the same woman.
Later on in this blog I will suggest a solution, but
only after a related question is addressed first.
Keturah: WIFE or CONCUBINE?
Abraham in Ch
25:1 takes a spouse named Keturah. Their relationship is long as she then bears him six (6) sons. The
names of all 6 sons are given as well, and so too their male descendants down to
the 3rd generation (Gen. 25: 2-4).
Verse 1 is as follows: (https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0125.ht)
|
א וַיֹּסֶף אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה, וּשְׁמָהּ קְטוּרָה. |
1 And Abraham took another wife, and her name was
Keturah. |
The key word in the Hebrew is אִשָּׁה .
All Jewish ancient, medieval and modern English
translations (from the 1917 JPS onward) translate this as “wife”.
So too all Christian English translations[iii].
Even the 405
CE Latin Vulgate did so as well:
|
1 |
Abraham vero aliam duxit uxorem nomine Cetthuram |
[The Latin
for concubine is “concubina”
as in the subsequent verse 6.[v]]
The Greek Septuagint
(3rd c. BCE) also translates the Hebrew re: Keturah as ‘wife’= γυναίκα, and differentiates her from the subsequent verse 6 spouses of Abraham which the Bible calls הַפִּילַגְשִׁים and which it translates as παλλακών[vi]
= concubines.
However, 1 Chronicles 1:32, in
listing all major descendants from Adam onward, states Keturah was a concubine.
(https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt25a01.htm)
|
לב וּבְנֵי קְטוּרָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ
אַבְרָהָם, יָלְדָה אֶת-זִמְרָן וְיָקְשָׁן וּמְדָן וּמִדְיָן--וְיִשְׁבָּק
וְשׁוּחַ; וּבְנֵי יָקְשָׁן, שְׁבָא וּדְדָן. {ס} |
32 And the sons of Keturah, Abraham's concubine: she bore
Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah. And the
sons of Jokshan: Sheba, and Dedan. {S} |
As the book of Chronicles is attributed to Ezra and
dates from the 5th c BCE[vii],
it is the oldest (and one would think an ‘official’) source on the issue. (But for some reason I Chronicles ch 1 and its identification of Keturah as a concubine is
only mentioned by Ramban but not any other major rabbinic commentary on
Genesis 25:1 or on the Hagar vs Keturah controversy in Genesis ch 16.)
Furthermore, 1 Chronicles
ch 1 is totally silent as to the existence of any other concubine(s) and any ‘other
sons’ by ‘other concubines’ as per Genesis 25:6; i.e., it takes the position
that no such other sons existed except for those of Keturah who was
Abraham’s one and only “concubine”.
In fact, 1
Chronicles not only makes total sense but resolves the confusion created by
the wording of Genesis 25:6 and the inheritance section of ch 25:
Yes, verse 6 uses the plural for concubines הַפִּילַגְשִׁים but there are
three problems:
1.
No concubines are named in verse 6 or
anywhere else.
2.
No sons of such concubines are named
in verse 6 or anywhere else.
3.
And, most importantly, what
inheritance or gifts did Abraham’s six (6) sons by Keturah get? It would seem they get NOTHING. All else goes to Isaac!
Rashi on verse 6 notes that the Torah scroll he had
was missing the last YID (י): so the intent is singular (i.e., the extra final Mem (ﬦ) is possibly a scribal
error). Chizkuni repeats Rashi’s view as
valid. So too Gur Aryeh and Mizrachi who cite other texts were plurals mean
singular. Chatam Sofer also agrees there
was only one concubine and suggests the use of a plural reflects her two names
as Hagar and Keturah.
[The Radak has an unusual interpretation: namely, these concubines were
the spouses of Abraham’s servants and he generously gave them gifts before his
death.]
Conclusion
Consequently, there is strong support for 1 Chronicle’s statement that Keturah was Abraham’s sole mate
after Sarah, and her legal status was that of a concubine. It was her six sons
that received gifts as inheritance from Abraham (who then sent them off
eastward away from Canaan so Isaac’s
status as ‘sole’ heir would not be challenged).
‘WIFE’ vs CONCUBINE:
LEGAL STATUS
Rashi in his
commentary to Gen 25: 6 notes (as do some other commentaries) that according to
the Talmud Bavli (Sanhedrin 21a 18) the
distinction between a ‘wife’ and a ‘concubine’ is that a ‘wife’ has a higher
legal status as she gets a formal written contract (Ketubah) and ‘betrothal’ ceremony and gift (kidushin) for the marriage -- but a concubine does not.
The Talmud passage cited above is part of a discussion
focusing on King David whom, the Talmud concludes, had not only at least 7
wives but also many concubines from “beautiful women captured in war”. (10 of these were abused by Absalom and placed
in isolation thereafter by King David (2 Samuel 15:16 and 20:3)).
King Solomon, according to 1 Kings 11:1-3, had 700
wives as ‘royal’ alliances with adjoining kingdoms and in addition 300
concubines.
So, from the instances of King David and King Solomon,
‘wives’ are often the result of political’ alliances (a reality throughout the Ancient
and Medieval and even Modern times) while concubines are ‘chosen’ for their
beauty and for romantic pleasure.
The Ancient Laws of Patriach times
The above Talmudic definitions, however, did NOT apply
to the remote past of the Patriarchs and
ancient Mesopotamian law. Our Medieval
and even Talmudic rabbis and scholars did not have access as we do today –
thanks to archaeology – to ancient sources that give us a better understanding
of that remote past. In particular, the rediscovered
Code of Hammurabi [viii]
supplies us with a better, truer picture. The relevant laws of the Code of
Hammurabi will be quoted and discussed in greater detail later on.
Overview: the Bible, Mesopotamian Laws and
Keturah as a concubine
As already pointed out in the two preceding blogs: under
Mesopotamian Law, polygamy was limited to two (2) female spouses and only
if the first freeborn wife was unable to bear children.
Any concept of having a ‘concubine’ – let alone many ‘concubines’ – as sex objects, was anathema in Patriarchal times under Mesopotamian
law. (See Supplementary Note at end of Part 2: Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael.)
The harems of wives and concubines of King David and
King Solomon, and the mix of multiple wives and concubine(s) of Gideon in the
preceding era of the Judges was NOT allowed in the time of the Patriarchs.
As for the term ‘concubine’, it not only appears for
Keturah in the Bible but also for the 2nd wife of Abraham’s brother
Nahor.
I include the entire passage:
Gen. 22: 20 - 24 (https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0122.htm)
It is noteworthy:
·
that Nahor did not had more than two
spouses
·
that his ‘concubine’ has a name that
the text presents prominently: Reumah
·
that Reumah’s offspring (4) are each
listed by name -- just like the offspring of Nahor’s wife Milcah (8).
·
And, although this passage is
primarily a foreshadowing and ‘tease’: to let Abraham and us know that
a girl (relative) named Rebecca has been born (first half of verse 23) – and is
available in future for Isaac, the length genealogy and listing of names – including
those of a concubine’s offspring, says much about how these children and
their concubine mother were perceived in ancient Mesopotamia. No sex toy here!
By paying attention to this piece of evidence and that
of Keturah and other instances where ‘concubine’ is used in the Tanach, I believe we can uncover and better
understand what ‘concubine’ meant in those ancient days.
The facts are as follows re: Keturah from Gen. 25:1-6
·
Keturah is, as argued above,
Abraham’s sole ‘concubine’
·
She was his sole spouse taken after
Sarah’s death.
·
Abraham took Keturah soon after Isaac wed Rachel and
set up his own ‘home’ – just over 3 years after Sarah’s death[ix].
·
Their union is described as:
|
א וַיֹּסֶף אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה, וּשְׁמָהּ קְטוּרָה. |
1 Again
Abraham took a woman (as wife) and her name was Keturah.
[My literal translation.] |
·
Keturah over the ensuing years gave
birth to six (6) sons.
·
All six sons are mentioned by name by
the Bible and down to the 3rd generation of descendants.
·
Abraham before his death gives each
of these sons ‘gifts’ and sends them off eastward, leaving Isaac as the sole
inheritor of his estate.
ANALYSIS
The Bible treats Reumah and Keturah and their
offspring similarly: with respect. In
Reumah’s case, she and all her sons are named equally with Nahor’s full wife
and her children: in a paragraph covering the entire ‘family’.
The Bible acts similarly In the case of Keturah
and her sons.
Moreover, for Keturah, two important additions are
given.
1. Marital Status
The Bible, for Keturah’s union with Abraham, uses the
formula:
וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה, וּשְׁמָהּ
קְטוּרָה. He took a woman named Keturah.
This is the Bible’s Formula #2, as explained in Part 1; the Terminology of Marriage.
Formula #2 is
used:
·
For unions that are intermarriages
between two full freeborn adults. I.e.,
when the man marries a woman outside the circle of blood kinship. It is used for Esau’s marriages to his two
Canaanite wives, but the higher, Formula
#1 for his union with a descendent of Ishmael, Abraham’s son.
Judah’s union with Canaanite Sur and
Canaanite Tamar’s union with his son(s) are all Formula #2.
So too Samson’s union with Delilah.
Even the royal marriage of King Ahab
of Israel to his queen and sole spouse, Princess Jezebel of Phoenicia, gets Formula
#2.
·
The only other time formula #2
appears is when the bride is legally a slave.
a.
She may be an under-age Israelite
sold to a “master” אֲדֹנֶיהָ as a slave with the intent he – or his
son – will marry her once she passes puberty as stated in the Bible law, Exodus
21: 7-11.
This scenario, I have argued in Part
1, underlies the Judges 19-21 account of the Judean concubine wed to a Levite and how her brutal death resulted in a
war between the 11 tribes and the tribe of Benjamin.
b.
Keturah’s is the only other union
with Formula #2.
As
argued in Part 1, the key to her slave status is verse 6 of the above chapter
25 text.
Her sons, the sons of the ‘concubine’,
were sent away by Abraham before his death so Isaac alone would be his legal
heir and inheritor of all he had.
2. Keturah’s sons get ‘gifts’ and leave
This would
have been ILLEGAL under Torah law as per Deut. 21:15-17. All sons by ‘full wives’ (Formula #1) share
in their father’s inheritance: with the firstborn merely getting a double portion.
Abraham,
under Torah law, would not have been allowed to give the bulk of his
wealth and all his land to Isaac if Keturah’s offspring were counted as ‘full
sons’.
Moreover,
under Mesopotamian law of the period, he could not do so either. Under its laws, all ‘full sons‘ share equally.
(Code of Hammurabi #170[x]).
Only
if Keturah’s sons were legally of slave status; i.e., born to a slave
wife, and the father never formally and publically declared them “my sons”
would what Abraham did be legal. (Code #171)
So,
put simply, if these six sons of Keturah the ‘concubine’ are of slave status, so
too must be their mother – Keturah.
It appears that Abraham: a widower still vigorous but
lonely, took a young female slave ‘spouse’
to his bed = Keturah.
She is called a ‘concubine’
because she is of slave status.
Abraham could have taken another free born woman of
his kinship circle as a full wife (Formula #1) but any son -- or sons -- would
have jeopardized Isaac as sole heir.
Sarah fought long and hard to protect Isaac as sole
heir in her interactions with Hagar and Ishmael. (See Part 2: Sarah, Hagar and
Ishmael.)
And Abraham honored this as well.
Keturah is
NOT Hagar
If Keturah is
a concubine slave, she cannot be
identical with Hagar.
Yes, while living with Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael, as
per Mesopotamian law, continued in slave
status: until Abraham sent them away and thereby made them free.
This is in line with Code #171.
And it is consistent with Torah law: Exod. 21:11 re: under age Israelite slave bride if she
is rejected and Deut. 21:14 re: rejected captured war bride.
Consequently a freed Hagar cannot return to Abraham
and bear him six (6) more sons. They
alone, if born of a ‘free’ mother Hagar -- let alone Ishmael who is still alive
somewhere -- would have been equal heirs with Isaac.
No. To protect
Isaac as his sole legal heir, Abraham in his old age (at least age 140) chose a
young female slave to be his bedmate and companion.
Any offspring they would have in future: a surprising
6 sons (and maybe more girls), under law, would be of slave status. If Abraham wished, he could declare them “my
sons’ so they would be equal heirs with Isaac, but he did not do so. He sent
them off as freedmen and with
‘gifts’ before his death. That ensured they could not -- after his death -- challenge Isaac’s sole
ownership of Abrahams flocks, wealth and lands.
Abraham, put simply, knew his Mesopotamian law.
He ensured any conjugal new relationship and any
surprise offspring from such a union -- with a new female slave -- would
not defeat Sarah’s efforts and Isaac’s destiny
So, Keturah is not Hagar on legal grounds.
Finally, the math also makes it unviable.
Abraham married Keturah after Isaac, age 40 wed
Rebecca; i.e. Abraham was now at least 140 years old (as Abraham was 100 when
Isaac was born). Abraham was 85 years old when he united with Hagar = at least 55 years beforehand. If Hagar had even been as young as age 15 when
they cohabited and she conceived Ishmael, she would now be at least 70 years
old. To image she would still be so fertile as to produce 6 more sons (and
possibly unnamed daughters as well) would be truly remarkable: especially as
she gave Abraham only one offspring, Ishmael, over 17 years.
No, Keturah is not Hagar.
Meaning of Concubine in ancient times
(See Part 1: Terminology f Marriage and Part 2: Sarah,
Hagar and Ishmael Supplementary Note.)
As argued previously, in ancient times and in line
with Mesopotamian law, monogamy was the rule.
Only if a freeborn wife is barren may the husband add
a second spouse in order to father offspring and a male heir.
Hence Hagar as surrogate womb for Sarah, Bilhah for
the barren Rachel and Zilpah for Leah.
In all three instances, the surrogate maidservants
were:
·
legally slaves
·
the unions received the Bible’s
preferred Formula #1 marriage formula. לְאִשָּׁה לוֹ
·
they are NOT referred to as
‘concubines’ (with
one exception when Reuben slept with Bilhah by mistake[xi].)
Who gets the label ‘concubine’ in the Bible?
·
Keturah
was labelled a ‘concubine’
·
so too Abraham’s brother’s second
mate, Reumah.
·
Amalek is descended from Esua’s
firstborn son, Eliphaz via his ‘concubine’ Timna. Amalek is her only offspring. However, Eliphaz had 5 other sons by some
unnamed wife.
·
Gideon fathered 70 sons with “many
wives” and had one son, Avimelech, from an unnamed
Israelite concubine who lived with her kin in Shechem. In ch 9:18 she is identified as Gideon’s
maidservant slave. (She is left unnamed probably to prevent
embarrassment: as her son murdered 69
of his half-brothers!)
Judges ch 8
Judges ch 9
|
יח וְאַתֶּם קַמְתֶּם עַל-בֵּית אָבִי, הַיּוֹם,
וַתַּהַרְגוּ אֶת-בָּנָיו שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ, עַל-אֶבֶן אֶחָת; וַתַּמְלִיכוּ
אֶת-אֲבִימֶלֶךְ בֶּן-אֲמָתוֹ,
עַל-בַּעֲלֵי שְׁכֶם, כִּי אֲחִיכֶם, הוּא. |
18 and ye are risen up against my
father's house this day, and have slain his sons, threescore and ten persons,
upon one stone, and have made Abimelech, the son of his maid-servant, king over
the men of Shechem, because he is your brother— |
·
The unnamed
‘concubine’ who was brutally murdered (Judges 19) and whose death led to
a civil
war among the tribes of Israel (Judges ch 20-21). She was an Israelite
from the tribe of Judah. As argued in
Part 1, she would have been an under-age Israelite slave as per Exodus
21: 7-11.
·
The next occurrence of the term
‘concubine’ is with regard to Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah who was King Saul’s mate.
She bore Saul 2
sons: Armoni and Mephibosheth (2 Samuel 21:8).
Saul also had
offspring from his wife (and later queen) Ahinoam:
4 sons and 2
daughters (1 Samuel 14:50 and 2 Samuel 2:8; 1 Chronicle 9:39).
Rizpah
becomes especially prominent as after Saul’s death.
General
Abner is accused of have sex with her (2 Samuel 3:7): an ancient custom to
assert one is the next ‘heir’ to the throne: e.g., Absalom’s rape of King
David’s 10 concubines (2 Samuel 16:21-22) and also Reuben with Bilhah to
confirm his status as firstborn heir (Gen. 35:22)[xii].
Rizpah again – always with the label
‘concubine’ – appears when King David agrees to appease the Gibeonite’s quest
for revenge against King Saul and to end a 3 year long Divine famine. David hands over Rizpah’s two sons along with
the 5 sons from Saul’s daughter to be executed and their bodies left hanging outside
the Gibeonite’s city (2 Samuel 21:1-9).
Rizpah then –
for five month’s – stood day and night by their hanging bodies so that
they could not be devoured by wild animals and birds (2 Samuel 21: 10). On hearing of this noble act, David had the bodes
taken down and properly buried (2 Samuel 21:11-13).
Rizpah the
‘concubine’ became emblematic of the good, loving and faithful mother.
Her devotion
and courage have been immortalized by Gustov Dore[xiii]
and George Becker[xiv]
and others[xv] in
art and Bible illustrations.
A devoted
mother figure precursor to the Christian imagery of Michelangelo’s Pieta.
·
King David after capturing Jerusalem
took more wives and many ‘concubines’.
2 Samuel 5:13
|
יג וַיִּקַּח דָּוִד עוֹד פִּלַגְשִׁים וְנָשִׁים, מִירוּשָׁלִַם, אַחֲרֵי,
בֹּאוֹ מֵחֶבְרוֹן . |
13 And David took him more concubines and wives out of
Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron. |
The Torah in Deut. 21:10-14 states as
Divine law that any desirable captive female is to be become a ‘full wife’ with Formula #1. She cannot be treated and sold as a slave.
If the man decides not to marry her, her
(temporary) captivity/slave status ends and she goes free.
|
י כִּי-תֵצֵא
לַמִּלְחָמָה, עַל-אֹיְבֶיךָ; וּנְתָנוֹ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ,
בְּיָדֶךָ--וְשָׁבִיתָ שִׁבְיוֹ. |
10 When thou goest forth to battle against
thine enemies, and the LORD thy God delivereth them into thy hands, and thou
carriest them away captive, |
|
יא וְרָאִיתָ,
בַּשִּׁבְיָה, אֵשֶׁת, יְפַת-תֹּאַר; וְחָשַׁקְתָּ בָהּ, וְלָקַחְתָּ לְךָ לְאִשָּׁה. |
11 and seest among the captives a woman of
goodly form, and thou hast a desire unto her, and wouldest take her to thee to wife; |
|
יב וַהֲבֵאתָהּ,
אֶל-תּוֹךְ בֵּיתֶךָ; וְגִלְּחָה, אֶת-רֹאשָׁהּ, וְעָשְׂתָה, אֶת-צִפָּרְנֶיהָ. |
12 then thou shalt bring her home to thy
house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; |
|
יג וְהֵסִירָה
אֶת-שִׂמְלַת שִׁבְיָהּ מֵעָלֶיהָ, וְיָשְׁבָה בְּבֵיתֶךָ, וּבָכְתָה
אֶת-אָבִיהָ וְאֶת-אִמָּהּ, יֶרַח יָמִים; וְאַחַר כֵּן תָּבוֹא אֵלֶיהָ,
וּבְעַלְתָּהּ, וְהָיְתָה לְךָ, לְאִשָּׁה. |
13 and she shall put the raiment of her
captivity from off her, and shall remain in thy house, and bewail her father
and her mother a full month; and after that thou mayest go in unto her, and
be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. |
|
יד וְהָיָה
אִם-לֹא חָפַצְתָּ בָּהּ, וְשִׁלַּחְתָּהּ לְנַפְשָׁהּ, וּמָכֹר לֹא-תִמְכְּרֶנָּה, בַּכָּסֶף;
לֹא-תִתְעַמֵּר בָּהּ, תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִנִּיתָהּ. {ס} |
14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in
her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money,
thou shalt not deal with
her as a slave, because thou hast humbled her. {S} |
So King David, in adding ‘many’
beautiful captive women as ‘concubines’
to his already multiple wives, is not acting consistent with the Bible
law of Deut. 21:10-14.
But it is noteworthy that his 10
concubines were in positions of power and authority. Throughout the Absalom episode, three times,
they are described as the people he left in charge of his home – his palace!
2 Samuel 15:16
|
טז וַיֵּצֵא הַמֶּלֶךְ וְכָל-בֵּיתוֹ, בְּרַגְלָיו; וַיַּעֲזֹב הַמֶּלֶךְ, אֵת עֶשֶׂר נָשִׁים
פִּלַגְשִׁים--לִשְׁמֹר הַבָּיִת. |
16 And
the king went forth, and all his household after him. And the king left ten women, that were
concubines, to keep the house. |
2 Samuel 16:
|
כא וַיֹּאמֶר אֲחִיתֹפֶל, אֶל-אַבְשָׁלֹם, בּוֹא אֶל-פִּלַגְשֵׁי אָבִיךָ, אֲשֶׁר הִנִּיחַ לִשְׁמוֹר
הַבָּיִת; וְשָׁמַע כָּל-יִשְׂרָאֵל, כִּי-נִבְאַשְׁתָּ אֶת-אָבִיךָ,
וְחָזְקוּ, יְדֵי כָּל-אֲשֶׁר אִתָּךְ. |
21 And
Ahithophel said unto Absalom: 'Go in unto thy father's concubines, that he hath left to keep the house;
and all Israel will hear that thou art abhorred of thy father; then will the
hands of all that are with thee be strong.' |
2 Samuel 20: 3
|
ג וַיָּבֹא דָוִד אֶל-בֵּיתוֹ, יְרוּשָׁלִַם, וַיִּקַּח הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵת עֶשֶׂר-נָשִׁים פִּלַגְשִׁים
אֲשֶׁר הִנִּיחַ לִשְׁמֹר הַבַּיִת וַיִּתְּנֵם בֵּית-מִשְׁמֶרֶת
וַיְכַלְכְּלֵם, וַאֲלֵיהֶם לֹא-בָא; וַתִּהְיֶינָה צְרֻרוֹת עַד-יוֹם מֻתָן,
אַלְמְנוּת חַיּוּת. {ס} |
3 And David came to his house at Jerusalem;
and the king took the ten
women his concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and put them
in ward, and provided them with sustenance, but went not in unto them. So
they were shut up unto the day of their death, in widowhood, with their
husband alive. {S} |
So these 10 women were not merely – maybe never – treated as ‘sex object
toys.’
(One is reminded of Eliezer,
Abraham’s trusted major domo and
household supervisor, who was also a slave. (Gen. 15:2 and ch. 24))
·
King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.
1 Kings 11:3
|
ג וַיְהִי-לוֹ
נָשִׁים, שָׂרוֹת שְׁבַע מֵאוֹת, וּפִלַגְשִׁים, שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת; וַיַּטּוּ נָשָׁיו, אֶת-לִבּוֹ. |
3 And
he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned
away his heart. |
As King Solomon’s reign was peaceful and
therefore he was allowed by God to build the Holy Temple(1Chronicles 28;1-6)
one can only conclude these 300
attractive and sexy ‘concubines’ were slaves purchased at the regular slave
auctions; a standard feature of the Ancient
and Medieval worlds.
Analysis
All the Bible passages that mention the word ‘concubine’
are listed above and show the following:
·
Prior to King David and King Solomon,
a man had at most ONE concubine. No (royal) harems.
·
Concubines often have very few
offspring compared to the ‘full wives’ (Rizpah, Timna)
·
Concubines are of ‘slave status’ before the martial union
and this does not change during the marriage.
·
A concubine can be born
Jewish/Israelites but somehow becomes of slave status (Rizpah, Gideon’s
concubine, murdered concubine)
·
She and her offspring are treated
with respect and have their names recorded unless the situation is
embarrassing.
·
She can be a war captive/slave (King
David).
·
She can be a slave bought at a local
regular slave auction (King Solomon’s 300)
Finally,
the only evidence as to when a
concubine wife was normally – pre-King David - taken into a conjugal union, is
from Keturah.
The
Bible makes clear she only became Abraham’s spouse and companion once he was a
widower and single.
Consequently, it seems possible to me that the same
scenario: ‘widower looks for
companionship and sex’, may well have applied to other women labelled
‘concubine’ and who were of slave status.
·
Abraham’s brother Nahor’s second
spouse/concubine Reumah
·
Timna, the mother of Amalek and the
second wife/concubine of Esau’s son, Elphaz
·
Gideon’s sole concubine, the mother
of Avimelech
·
Saul’s second spouse/concubine,
Rizpah
As argued
above re: inheritance and protecting the rights of ‘full wife’ sons (e.g.,
Isaac), such a concubine/slave conjugal arrangement would be highly suitable
for a single man and widower with a pre-existing ‘full son’ heir or heirs.
At best, ‘surprise’
offspring of such unions would only be entitled to ‘gifts’.
But with King
David and King Solomon, this approach and ‘moderation’ collapsed.
Multiple
wives and simultaneous large concubine harems now ruled!
At least for
royalty.
The lengthy analysis version
The Chumash does not address the issue of inheritance re:
a concubine’s son.
It only deals with two situations:
1.
If a man has no son but only daughters,
what happens to his lands, etc.?
The ruling in Numbers 27 -- ordered
by God himself -- re: the 5 daughters of of Zelophehad, is that they get it all in equal shares.
If childless, a man’s lands and wealth go to his nearest male kin
in a sequence prescribed in verse 8.
8“Say to the Israelites, ‘If a man dies and leaves no son,
give his inheritance to his daughter. 9 If he has
no daughter, give his inheritance to his brothers. 10 If
he has no brothers, give his inheritance to his father’s brothers. 11 If
his father had no brothers, give his inheritance to the nearest relative in his
clan, that he may possess it. This is to have the force of law for the
Israelites, as the Lord commanded Moses.’”
2.
Deut. 21:15-17 states as God’s ruling
that if a man has two sons and the one born first is from a ‘hated’ wife and
the second one born is from a ‘beloved’ wife, primogenitor still rules. The first born son gets a double share of the
inheritance – no matter what the father would wish.
The
Deuteronomy text quickly brings to mind the rivalry between Jacob’s beloved
Rachel and Leah, the sister whom he was tricked into marriage by Laban – and
whose son Reuben was the first born.
Whether
absolute primogenitor applied if the son was from an added ‘second surrogate
wife’, e.g., Hagar and Ishmael, is unclear from the Chumash.
The
Medieval commentaries do not raise such a situation, though Ibn Ezra notes the
rule applies to twin sons as well.
(That
would mean that Esau should inherit double the share that his twin brother
Jacob was to receive, as Esau emerged first from the womb. It would also explain -- as a practical
matter -- why Jacob cared to be recognized as ‘the firstborn’ and the trickery
that he and Rachel -- who preferred Jacob -- pursued.)
Now
the above two Divine laws given after the Exodus may not have applied
beforehand, i.e., during Patriarch times.
After
all, Leviticus ch. 18 in verses 2-5 orders the children of Israel NOT to follow
the laws and customs of either Egypt or Canaan.
|
ב דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם: אֲנִי, יְהוָה
אֱלֹהֵיכֶם. |
2 Speak
unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: I am the LORD your God. |
|
ג כְּמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ-מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר יְשַׁבְתֶּם-בָּהּ, לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ;
וּכְמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ-כְּנַעַן אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה, לֹא
תַעֲשׂוּ, וּבְחֻקֹּתֵיהֶם, לֹא תֵלֵכוּ. |
3 After the doings of the land
of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do; and after the doings of the land
of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do; neither shall ye walk in
their statutes. |
|
ד אֶת-מִשְׁפָּטַי תַּעֲשׂוּ וְאֶת-חֻקֹּתַי תִּשְׁמְרוּ, לָלֶכֶת
בָּהֶם: אֲנִי, יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם. |
4 Mine ordinances shall ye do,
and My statutes shall ye keep, to walk therein: I am the LORD your God. |
|
ה וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת-חֻקֹּתַי וְאֶת-מִשְׁפָּטַי, אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָם
הָאָדָם וָחַי בָּהֶם: אֲנִי, יְהוָה. {ס} |
5 Ye
shall therefore keep My statutes, and Mine ordinances, which if a man do, he
shall live by them: I am the LORD. {S} |
So,
there were set laws and established customs not only in Egypt but also Canaan.
What
they were in Canaan’s 7 nations was in all
likelihood identical to Mesopotamian law. For all 7 nations were of
Mesopotamian ancestry.
In
fact, so too were Abraham and Sarah, their offspring, and even Leah and Rachel
(and of course Laban) who lived north of the Euphrates.
That
is why Abraham and all the patriarchs and their descendants are called HEBREWS
in the Bible: literary, “they come from over the river (Euphrates)” – the
official southern boundary of ancient Mesopotamia.
See
Gen. 14:13, 39:14 and 17, Exod. 41:12; Exod. 1:15-16, 19, 21, Exod. 2:6-7, 11,
13; Exod. 21:2; Deut. 15:12 and nine other times in the ensuing Tanach as tracked by Bible Hub[xvi]
So
what was Mesopotamian law regarding inheritance?
Two
codes have been uncovered from that ancient land.
The
Code of Ur-Numma dates from the 22nd century BCE. But only 30 of its apparent 57 laws have
survived in legible form and none deal with inheritance.[xvii]
But
the Code of Hammurabi, the great Mesopotamian king who lived just before or was
a contemporary of Abraham at the start of the 18th century BCE[xviii]
has his entire law code extent with 282 laws.
A
number deal with marriage, divorce, widowhood, adultery, annulment, adoption,
etc. but only the following are relevant here:
144. If a man take a wife
and this woman give her husband a maid-servant, and she bear him children, but
this man wishes to take another wife, this shall not be permitted to him; he
shall not take a second wife.
145. If a man take a
wife, and she bear him no children, and he intend to take another wife: if he
take this second wife, and bring her into the house, this second wife shall not
be allowed equality with his wife.
146. If a man take a wife and she give this
man a maid-servant as wife and she bear him children, and then this maid assume equality with
the wife: because she has borne him children her master shall not sell
her for money, but he may keep her as a slave, reckoning her among the
maid-servants.
147. If she have not borne him
children, then her mistress may sell her for money.
170. If his wife bear
sons to a man, or his
maid-servant have borne sons, and the father while still living says to the
children whom his maid-servant has borne: "My sons," and he count
them with the sons of his wife; if then the father die, then the sons of the
wife and of the maid-servant shall divide the paternal property in common.
The son of the wife is to partition and choose.
171. If, however, the father while
still living did not say to the sons of the maid-servant: "My sons,"
and then the father dies, then the sons of the maid-servant shall not share
with the sons of the wife, but the freedom of the maid and her sons shall be
granted. The sons of the wife shall have no right to enslave the sons of
the maid; the wife shall take her dowry (from her father), and the gift that her
husband gave her and deeded to her (separate from dowry, or the purchase-money
paid her father), and live in the home of her husband: so long as she lives she
shall use it, it shall not be sold for money. Whatever she leaves shall belong
to her children.
From
the above laws, it is clear having a full wife plus a maid-servant as a
sexual/procreation partner was normal.
Also,
if a ‘full wife’ is barren, she cannot be expelled nor lose her status as
‘mistress of the home’ to any second ‘full wife’ or ‘maidservant concubine.
(#144, #145 and #146)
In
fact, if a barren wife gives her husband a maidservant who produces offspring,
that man cannot ever add a second full wife to the group. The act of having a
fruitful maidservant protects the role and status of the barren wife. (#144)
If,
however, the barren wife does not supply a fruitful maidservant, the husband is
free to contract a second full marriage and add a second wife to the home – but
the second wife does not supplant the first full wife as ‘mistress of the home’.
(#145)
A maidservant who bears her master/husband
offspring rises in status to almost equal to that of the full wife. He
may still count her as property among his slaves but he cannot sell her. (#146)
But
if the maidservant is unable to bear children, she remains the property of the
full wife who is free to sell her. (#147)
#170
states that the sons of a maidservant whom the father claims as “my sons”, get an equal share of the inheritance with
any sons from the man’s ‘full wife’.
#171
covers the opposite. If he never acknowledges them officially as his sons, they
have no claim to share the estate. BUT they and their servile mother are to be set
free on the husband’s death.
IMPLICATIONS re: Keturah
The implications of the above laws for Abraham – Sarah—Hagar
-- Ishmael have already been discussed in Part 2.
How they apply to the case of Keturah and her six sons
also seems clear.
1.
The Code of Hammurabi does not
recognize any relationship that we or later history would call a ‘concubine’: a
woman one takes for sexual pleasure and who does not have the legal
status of ‘full wife’.
In fact, it prefers monogamy.
Only if the first ‘full wife’ is barren can a
man add a second ‘full wife’. (#145)
If a man’s first ‘full wife’ is
barren and gives him her maidservant to bear offspring, that too becomes the
marital limit of two spouses (#144)
So, under Mesopotamian law, polygamy is limited to barren
situations and has a very short breadth of two.
Finally, there is nothing remotely
like the concept of a concubine: an extra spouse chosen for her beauty and
sexual pleasure as with King David and Solomon.
2.
The union with Keturah is only possible
and legal under Mesopotamian law once Sarah is dead.
As Sarah gave
Abraham her maidservant, Hagar, to produce a child and Ishmael was born, that
precluded Abraham from simultaneously marrying another woman while Sarah was
alive.(#144)
And as Sarah finally gave birth to
Isaac before Ishmael was expelled, Mesopotamian law prohibits Abraham from
adding any second wife or even maidservant ‘spouse’ while Sarah lived, ie.
until she passed away at age 127.
3.
Keturah, who was of slave status,
cannot be Hagar under another name.
Hagar, although a slave when she served
Sarah and even when she cohabitated with Abraham and gave birth to Ishmael as Sarah’s
surrogate, became FREE when Abraham sent her and her son away. (as per Code 171).
Thereafter, she cannot return
some 55 to 60 years later to become Abraham’s slave spouse, i.e.,
Keturah, his new slave concubine.
[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkelos
[ii]
See translation at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%AA%D7%90
[iii] https://biblehub.com/genesis/25-1.htm
[iv] https://vulgate.org/ot/genesis_25.htm
[v] Ibid.
[vi] https://biblehub.com/interlinear/apostolic/genesis/25.htm
[vii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_Chronicles
[viii]
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
[ix] Sarah gave birth to Isaac when she
was age 90. She died at age 127 – when Isaac was 37 years old. Isaac married
Rebecca at age 40 = 3 years after Sarah’s death.
[x] https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
[xi] See the full discussion of Gen.35:22
in Part 1: Terminology of Marriage.
Bilhah was NOT a concubine as Radak and Chatam Sofer point out but a
Formula#1 ‘wife’.
[xii]
See the full discussion of the event – including later non-Canonical
traditions, at https://www.thetorah.com/article/did-reuben-lie-with-bilhah-yes-no-we-dont-talk-about-it
[xiii]
https://www.wikiart.org/en/gustave-dore/rizpah-s-kindness-toward-the-dead
[xiv] https://images.nypl.org/index.php?id=1622909&t=w
[xv] See images at https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Rizpah+From+the+Bible&first=1&scenario=ImageHoverTitle
[xvi] https://biblehub.com/topical/h/hebrew.htm
[xvii]
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Ur-Nammu
[xviii]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammurabi
No comments:
Post a Comment