MARMOTH

' phylacteries,' which took the place of the actual cuttings In hand and forehead (Dt 6' ll" etc.). Reference to an early custom is perhaps (but cf. EV) contained in the words : 'Lo, here is my mark, let the Almighty answer me ' ; the word used for 'mark' comes from a root meaning 'to wound,' and it is the same as that used in Ezk 9*- '; the reference is to those who are true to God.

W. O. E. Oestehley.

6. 'Stigmata.'— The rendering of St. Paul's strongly figurative words in Gal 6" adopted by RV reads thus: 'From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear branded on my body the marks {siigmaia) of Jesus.' This rendering accords with the interpretation of this difficult passage adopted by most recent scholars. The Apostle warns his Galatian converts against further attempts to 'trouble' him, for he is under the special protection of Jesus, whose * marks ' he bears in the scars and other evidence of the scourgings and other ills he has borne for His sake (see 2 Co IV^-). St. Paul here emphasizes his consecration of himself to his Lord by using a figure, familiar to his readers, taken from the practice of branding a slave with the name or symbol of the deity to whose service he was devoted. Thus Herodotus (ii. 1 13) tells of a temple of Heracles, ' in which if any man's slave take refuge and have the sacred marks isHgmata as here) set upon him, giving himself over to the god, it is not lawful to lay hands upon him.' A still more apposite illustration is afforded by the branding of certain Jews of Alexandria with an ivy leaf — the symbol of Dionysus — by Ptolemy Philopator (3 Mac 22S). A. R. S. Kennedy.

MARMOTH (1 Es 8<'^)=Meremoth, Ezr S».

MAROTH.— An unknown town (Mic l'^ only). There is a play upon the name, which means ' bitternesses.'

MARRIAGE.— 1. Forms of Marriage.— There are two forms of marriage among primitive races: (1) where the husband becomes part of his wife's tribe, (2) where the wife becomes part of her husband's tribe.

(1) W. R. Smith (Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia) gives to this form the name sadika, from the sadac or ' gift ' given to the wife, (a) The union may be con-fined to an occasional visit to the wife in her home imota marriage). This is distinguished frorh mere prostitution, in that no disgrace is attached, and the children are recognized by the tribe; cf. Samson's mar-riage. (6) The husband may be definitely incorporated into his wife's tribe (fieena marriage). The wife meets her husband on equal terms; children belong to her tribe, and descent is reckoned on the mother's side. Women could inherit in Arabia under this system (op. dt. p. 94). Possible traces in OT are the marriages of Jacob (Laban claims wives and children as his own, Gn 31M- «), Moses (Ex 2^ 4i8), Samson (Jg 14. IS. 16«; there is no hint that he meant to take his wife home; his kid seems to be the sadac or customary present). So the Shechemites must be circumcised (Gn 34"); Joseph's sons born in Egypt are adopted by Jacob (48=) ; Abimelech, the son of Gideon's Sheche-mite concubine (Jg S^i), is a Shechemite (.9^-^). The words of Gn 2?* may have originally referred to this custom, though they are evidently not intended to do so by the narrator, since beena marriages were already out of date when they were written. Many of the instances quoted can be explained as due to special circumstances, but the admitted existence of such marriages in Arabia makes it probable that we should find traces of them among the Semites in general. They make it easier to understand the existence of the primitive custom of the ' matriarchate,' or reckoning of descent through females. In addition to the cases already quoted, we may add the closeness of maternal as compared with paternal relationships, evidenced in bars of marriage (see below, § 3), and the special responsibility of the maternal uncle or brother (Gn 242» 3425, 2 S 1322). It la evident that the influence of

MARRIAGE

polygamy would be in the same direction, subdividing the family into smaller groups connected with each wife.

(2) The normal type is where the wife becomes the property of her husband, who is her ' Baal' or possessor (Hos 218), she herself being 'Beulah' (Is 62<). She and her children belong to his tribe, and he alone has right of divorce, (o) In unsettled times the wife will be acquired by war (Jg 5"). She is not merely a tem-porary means of pleasure, or even a future mother, but a slave and an addition to a man's wealth. Dt 211"-" regulates the procedure in cases of capture; in Jg 19-21 we have an instance of the custom. Traces may remain in later marriage procedure, e.g. in the band of the bridegroom's friends escorting, i.e. 'capturing,' the bride, and in her feigned resistance, as among the Bedouin (W. R. Smith, op. dt. p. 81). (6) Capture gives place to purchase and ultimately to contract. The daughter is valuable to the clan as a possible mother of warriors, and cannot be parted with except for a consideration. Hence the 'dowry' (see below, § 6) paid to the bride's parents.

2. Polygamy among the Hebrews was confined to a pluraUty of wives (polygyny). There is no certain trace in OT of a plurality of husbands (polyandry), though the Levirate marriage is sometimes supposed to be a survival. The chief causes of polygyny were — (a) the desire for a numerous offspring, or the barren-ness of first wife (Abraham's case is directly ascribed to tills, and among many peoples it is permitted on this ground alone) ; (6) the position and importance offered by numerous alliances (e.g. Solomon) ; (c) the existence of slavery, which almost implies it. It can obviously be prevalent only where there is a disproportionate number of females, and, except in a state of war, is possible only to those wealthy enough to provide the necessary 'dowry.' A further limitation is implied in the fact that in more advanced stages, when the harem is estabUshed, the wife when secured is a source, not of wealth, but of expense.

Polygamy meets us as a fact: e.g. Abraham, Jacob, the Judges, David, Solomon; 1 Ch 7^ is evidence of its prevalence in Issachar; Elkanah (1 S 1") is significant as belonging to the middle class; Jehoiada (2 Ch 24*) as a priest. But it is always treated with suspicion; it is incompatible with the ideal of Gn 2?*, and its origin is ascribed to Lamech, the Cainite (4"). In Dt 17" the king is warned not to multiply wives; later regula-tions fixed the number at eighteen for a king and four for an ordinary man. The quarrels and jealousies of such a narrative as Gn 298'-3() are clearly intended to illus-trate its evils, and it is in part the cause of the troubles of the reigns of David and Solomon. Legislation (see below, § 6) safeguarded the rights of various wives, slave or free; and according to the Rabbinic interpreta-tion of Lv 21" the high priest was not allowed to be a bigamist. Noah, Isaac, and Joseph had only one wife, and domestic happiness in the Bible is always connected with monogamy (2 K 4, Ps 128, Pr 31, Sir 25i- ' 26i- '3). The marriage figure applied to the union of God and Israel (§ 10) impUed monogamy as the ideal state. Polygamy is, in fact, always an unnatural development from the point of view both of reUgion and of anthro-pology; 'monogamy is by tar the most common form of human marriage; it was so also amongst the ancient peoples of whom we have any direct knowledge ' (Wester-marck. Hum. Marr. p. 459). Being, however, apparently legalized, and having the advantage of precedent, it was long before polygamy was formally forbidden in Hebrew society, though practically it fell into disuse; the feeUng of the Rabbis was strongly against it. Herod had nine wives at once (Jos. Ant. xvii. i. 3, cf. 2). Its possi-bility is implied by the technical continuance of the ' Levirate law, and is proved by the early interpretation of 1 Ti 32, whether correct or not (§ 8). Justin (Dial. 134, 141) reproaches the Jews of his day with having

683