Of special interest are the laws which relate to the position of
women. In this connection reference may first be made to the
marriage-by-auction custom, which Herodotus described as follows:
"Once a year in each village the maidens of age to marry were
collected all together into one place, while the men stood round them
in a circle. Then a herald called up the damsels one by one, and
offered them for sale. He began with the most beautiful. When she was
sold for no small sum of money, he offered for sale the one who came
next to her in beauty. All of them were sold to be wives. The richest
of the Babylonians who wished to wed bid against each other for the
loveliest maidens, while the humbler wife-seekers, who were
indifferent about beauty, took the more homely damsels with marriage
portions. For the custom was that when the herald had gone through the
whole number of the beautiful damsels, he should then call up the
ugliest--a cripple, if there chanced to be one--and offer her to the
men, asking who would agree to take her with the smallest marriage
portion. And the man who offered to take the smallest sum had her
assigned to him. The marriage portions were furnished by the money
paid for the beautiful damsels, and thus the fairer maidens portioned
out the uglier. No one was allowed to give his daughter in marriage to
the man of his choice, nor might anyone carry away the damsel whom he
had purchased without finding bail really and truly to make her his
wife; if, however, it turned out that they did not agree, the money
might be paid back. All who liked might come, even from distant
villages, and bid for the women."[268]
This custom is mentioned by other writers, but it is impossible to
ascertain at what period it became prevalent in Babylonia and by whom
it was introduced. Herodotus understood that it obtained also in "the
Illyrian tribe of the Eneti", which was reputed to have entered Italy
with Antenor after the fall of Troy, and has been identified with the
Venetians of later times. But the ethnic clue thus afforded is
exceedingly vague. There is no direct reference to the custom in the
Hammurabi Code, which reveals a curious blending of the principles of
"Father right" and "Mother right". A girl was subject to her father's
will; he could dispose of her as he thought best, and she always
remained a member of his family; after marriage she was known as the
daughter of so and so rather than the wife of so and so. But marriage
brought her freedom and the rights of citizenship. The power vested in
her father was never transferred to her husband.
A father had the right to select a suitable spouse for his daughter,
and she could not marry without his consent. That this law did not
prevent "love matches" is made evident by the fact that provision was
made in the Code for the marriage of a free woman with a male slave,
part of whose estate in the event of his wife's death could be claimed
by his master.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account