Marriage Gifts and Social Change in Ancient Palestine.
Matthews, Victor H.
Marriage Gifts and Social Change in Ancient Palestine: 1200 BCE to
200 CE. By T. M. LEMOS. Cambridge: CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY Piss, 2010. Pp.
xii + 296. $80.
It is often easy to perpetuate an idea or an interpretation rather
than analyze it or question its validity. In the case of Lemos'
volume on marriage gifts, she rightly reminds scholars that citing a
source or making reference to a sociological theory does not mean it
actually applies to a particular culture and its practices. Her thorough
comparative examination of the marriage practices in the biblical text
are illuminated by the work of the anthropologist Jack Goody, and she
places her emphasis on social stratification as a central factor in the
distribution of bridewealth and dowry.
Structurally, Lemos first reviews the evidence in the biblical text
on marriage gifts, taking into account the current debates on source
dating of the biblical materials from which she draws her evidence. She
then turns to post-biblical evidence, especially emphasizing the
Hellenistic and Egyptian influences evident in the extra-biblical
Elephantine papyri. At this point Lemos then provides a review of
anthropological studies over the last several decades that deal with
marriage and marriage gifts. This review includes several case studies
(Nuer, Lovedu, North India, ancient Babylonia) as a way of demonstrating
that proximity in space does not necessary equate with similar cultural
practices. For biblical scholars who are interested in social scientific
methods and the relative usefulness of applying them to the biblical
text, this chapter is invaluable. However, placing the review of these
materials in the third chapter interrupts the flow of examining the
biblical and post-biblical textual evidence and I wonder if it might
have been better to place it at the beginning of the volume.
With her methodological and comparative presentation in place and
with Goody's research on social stratification as a guide, Lemos
then turns in chapters four and five to an examination of social
stratification in ancient Israel and Judah (from Iron I to 586 B.C.E.).
As might be expected as the Israelite culture became more complex, Lemos
concludes that the levels of stratification increase over this period of
time. Her conclusions are that the village-based, less socially complex
society of early Israel emphasized bridewealth ("property tendered
by the husband's grouping to the kin of his wife"), without
dowry ("gifts involving property which is brought to a union by the
bride's family") as central to its kinship and inheritance
system (see glossary, p. 245). However, as the society emerged as a
nation state, it grew more stratified and as a result bridewealth was
replaced by dowry in the later biblical and post-biblical periods.
Furthermore, Lemos rightly contends that this shift in social practice
is not solely the result of outside influences, but instead is a
function of the growing stratification of Israelite society (p. 230).
The primary evidence for marital gift-giving in pre-exilic Israel
and Judah is found in Pentateuchal texts (i.e., Gen. 29,34; Exod.
22:16-17) and in the Samuel-Kings narratives (see 1 Sam. 18; 1 Kings 9)
and there are indications here of both bridewealth and dowry.
Lemos' argument is that dowry is so little attested that it was of
much less importance in these early periods. She adds to this conclusion
by noting that legal texts, except for I Kings 9:16-17a, fail to include
the technical term silluhim 'dowry' despite its long history
back to the Ugaritic texts. Still, her treatment of the stories in Gen.
29 and 31 opens the door to the possibility that, at least when they
were in Mesopotamia, the early Israelites drew on customs associated
with that area. For instance, I do not agree with Westbrook (cited on p.
57) that the two maids given to Leah and Rachel constitute a dowry (Gen.
29:24,29). They are simply a wedding gift that insures that these women
have a servant and thus the level of social standing to which they have
been accustomed, since Jacob has no resources to provide one. The
sisters' complaint in Gen. 31:14-16 that they had been denied a
"portion or inheritance" is an indicator that a dowry or
settlement was due, but had never been paid while they remained in
Laban's household. As they prepared to depart, they felt shamed at
this "oversight" on the part of their greedy father.
I do agree that the payment of bridewealth fits a state-less
society, since it provides social linkages, a sense of reciprocity for
the transference of female labor from one household to another, and
could easily be paid in livestock in a culture that contains a large
pastoral component. The kinship ties created by marriage, which I would
contend seldom involved obtaining brides from villages at great
distances, also provide a concrete method of establishing an initial
framework upon which to base cooperative economic, political, and
military activities. Such links at the local level are then supplanted
or even suppressed when the monarchy is established, and it is at that
point, as Lemos shows in her study, that stratification becomes more
rigid and dowry would be a more logical marriage gift. As kinship is
replaced by status concerns, then the elite especially maintain their
power and social status through the ability to provide a dowry as a
measure of their wealth, an incentive for the establishment of marriage
alliances, a method of insuring the prosperity of the next generation,
and as a means of enhancing honor.
Lemos is to be applauded for her careful reexamination of these
materials and her judicious incorporation of comparative materials and
anthropological theory. The use of social scientific methods is a
growing field and such a clear presentation makes it easier for scholars
to judge their value and their limitations. While not every scholar will
necessarily agree with all of her interpretations, she has certainly
provided the impetus for seeing these texts in a new light. The
inclusion of extra-biblical materials is also very useful not only for
comparative purposes, but also as a further indication of social trends,
the continuance of social stratification as a factor, and the
development of marriage practices into the post-biblical era. Also
helpful is the brief glossary containing technical terms that may not be
familiar to all biblical scholars. Overall, this is a monograph that
should be included in any future study of ancient Israel's social
development and in particular its marriage practices.
VICTOR H. MATTHEWS
MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY
