Does anyone know when having more than one wife became taboo? Is it just Western culture? Is it practiced in the Mid-East?
Must have been after the first Macy’s opened!
The scary thing is that 90% of the people think they’re above average! - unknown
I would imagine that it would have started once Christianity began really spreading around the known world. Can anyone confirm or deny this. I’m sorry I don’t have any references to back this up.
-Dragwyr
“If God had meant for man to eat waffles,
he would have given him lips like snowshoes”
-Rev. Billy C. Wirtz
There were a number of monogamous cultures prior to Christianity (not least, mainstream Judaism, although a few groups practiced polygyny into the middle ages). Rome and Greece were both basically monogamous. I believe that most (not all) Celtic cultures were monogamous, as well. Hinduism also tends toward monogamy (although there may be sects where this is not prescribed).
I don’t actually know when polygyny began to disappear, but the trend started before Christianity.
Polyandry has always been rare (trust the Celts to dabble in variations on that theme!).
Tom~
The Bible itself mentions people who have several wives in them, so presumably, even early Catholicism was not immune either.
All are in the Old Testament, IIRC.
Yer pal,
Satan
First Place
Most Popular Poster of the 20th Century Competition
As overseen by Coldfire
Not to pick nits on the “Most Popular Poster ™” but of course the OT doesn’t represent “Early Catholicism” but rather Judaism. Catholicism is a subset of Christianity and therefore relies on Jesus, who didn’t join the party 'till the NT.
I beg your pardon, dark lord, but it seems that you’re just the person who should know these things! 
In Bhutan, Tibet and Sikkim, polyandry is practiced today. It is often with several brothers and one woman. Occassional polygamy, but it dilutes the land holdings.
Common marriage - all living in the same log hut were fair game - was reported by Herodotus of the “barbarians” of Thrace. Just hold the baby up and see which man he looks like was the supposed custom for determining paternity.
Polygamy was practiced by OT Jews, Ancient Egyptians, in ancient Mesopotamia (for royals at least) and the adherents of Islam to this day. Under Islam it depends on the country. Definately allowed in Saudi Arabia, although I understand there are limits (2-3 or so - and the women seem to really frown on it).
Chinese Imperial culture practiced polygamy with strict pecking order for wives, done away with under the PRC. Not just nobles, but anyone who could afford it.
Mormons in the US for a while before they got busted. Apparently it still occurs, not legally, and unofficially in that church.
Polygamy and polyandry are practiced in some areas of non-Islamic Africa as well.
Actually, “in that church” it doesn’t happen at all (see last sentence, also). There are, however, “splinter” groups which purport to be the actual and authoritative heirs to Joseph Smith’s legacy. Some of those splinter groups do practice polygamy. As it’s illegal by both civil law and the LDS church law, any member of the LDS church who practices polygamy is excommunicated by the LDS.
By Jewish law, polygamy is perfectly well allowed. It was discouraged because the average man cannot pay proper attention to more than one wife at a time, but permitted.
Around the year 1000, under pressure from Catholics who viewed polygamy as sinful, Rabbeinu Gershom, the chief Rabbi of France/Germany, pronounced a “thousand-year ban” on polygamy. European Jewish communities complied and have not allowed a man to take more than one wife at a time ever since. The Middle Eastern Jewish communities had not taken on Rabbeinu Gershom’s custom and continued to allow polygamy until the founding of the State of Israel, when Jews from many Middle Eastern countries emigrated to Israel, which beforehand had been populated primarily by Jews of European descent. The Middle Eastern rabbis, in order to maintain harmony between the two populations, declared Rabbeinu Gershom’s ban binding on their followers.
I can see you’re already thinking, “Year 1000…thousand year ban…Hmm.” Don’t believe it. A few decades ago, the leading Rabbis of modern times took up this very issue and declared that Rabbeinu Gershom’s ban should remain in effect in perpetuity (or at least until the coming of the Messiah).
Chaim Mattis Keller
cmkeller@compuserve.com
“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
Can someone list a good reason why we shouldn’t have polygamy or polyandry? Apart from cultural reasons.
A few comments on clean-up:
-
While it is true that the Old Testament describes situations of polygamy, the family life is always pretty screwed up. Abraham and the horribly rivalry between Sarah and Hagar; Jacob, and the terrible sibling rivalry; David and Solomon, whose multiple wives were for political purposes, but whose family lives were a mess… So, the Old Testament text does not prohibit polygamy, but does make it pretty clear that monogamy is a much better life style. Hence, cmkeller’s comments.
-
In Saudi Arabia, the limit is set at four wives. In other Moslem countries where polygamy is permitted, American companies have to be careful about employee benefits (such as surviving spouse pension payments)… otherwise, the retiring employee marries a 12-year old cousin, and the family gets pension payments for the next 70 years.
No doubt true, but as another poster mentioned, it is a religious limitation, not a political/societal one. The Qur’an suggests that a man have only one wife (at a time), but if he can afford it, and if he can treat them all equally, he can have up to four.
from stolichnaya:
You forget - he is the Lord of Lies.
from Major Feelgud:
Cultural reasons don’t count as good reasons? Oh, you’re looking for a logical reason, not just a preference or morality judgment. Depends on the point of marriage (maybe?). If marriage is about love, why is it felt love only happens between 2 people? Maybe because it’s hard enough to get 2 people to love each other and live together, much less 3? Throughout history and all cultures, marriage has had one primal goal - the provision and welfare of children. Political marriages, arranged social marriages, economic marriages, marriages for love - all have at the core a basis for providing for children. Give a stable, supportive, providing home so they can live and grow up healthy, blah blah blah. Sure, some people marry out of love with no goal of having children. Some people marry for money or gain or whatever and don’t want children. That’s all based on cultural interpretations and legal allowances. And of course there’s same-sex partnerships that qualify for any of the above reasons.
So why not polygamy, polygyny, and polyandry et al? Because it’s “bad”.
Raza, a religious limitation is not a societal one?
Ok, someone has to say this.
Multiple wive, schmultival wives. I want multiple husbands, dang it! You guys are going on (in a well-informed way of course ) about this as if there is only one side. Skipped right over that comment RobRoy made.
Well, I’m not sure I’d want mine to be all brothers. But think about it! One to fix the car, another that plumbs, …well you get my point. And think of the variety (sex!)!
I could keep fantasizing, but I’ll go away now.
ambles away mumbling to herself
I get your point, but I was using “societal” in the sense of “cultural.” Arab (or even Saudi, to be more precise) culture differs significantly from Persian, which differs significantly from Punjabi, which differs from my “American” culture.
My point, on which in hindsight I should have elaborated more, was that a given culture with a predominant religion has certain rules of its society, but the rules are not always religious but rather may be cultural. In America on Easter, many parents give their children Easter baskets; this is obviously not a tenet of the Christian religion, but rather a custom we have in our society (I remember putting my chocolate bunny under my pillow so I could nibble at night; imagine my surprise the next morning).
All this long-windedness to say that, especially with religions and cultures with which we are not familiar, it is often difficult to separate truly religiously-mandated practices from those that are societal/cultural. A few years ago there was a big, well-publicized conflict in Saudi Arabia over women getting drivers licenses. The conflict wasn’t because of religion, but of Saudi tradition.
Another problem with trying to separate religion from society in Saudi Arabia is that it is a one religion-governed society.
Um…part of the reason for a shortage of wives may be (how do I say this) lack of necessary attention to sustain female infants…not infanticide per se, but food goes first to little boys and men, women do have a higher mortality rate. I gues the pay off is in marriage, although it might get taxing for a woman.
>>>Um…part of the reason for a shortage of wives may be (how do I say this) lack of necessary attention to sustain female infants…not infanticide per se, but food goes first to little boys and men, women do have a higher mortality rate. I gues the pay off is in marriage, although it might get taxing for a woman.<<<
I recall reading that female infanticide was practiced in Tibet. The men in the family would decide whether or not a newly born girl would be allowed to live, and an elderly woman not of the family was generally paid to do away with the infant. I’m just guessing, but since Tibet is a pretty harsh environment, this looks like a means of population control - the female population is kept down to keep the birth rate down. Does anybody know if this custom has been suppressed since the Red Chinese took over?
Maybe the Red Chinese would cheer for this one ((just kidding) since they strictly limit the number of children in a family to two.
The Non Celtic population of early Britian was suppposed to feature sharing a wife between brothers but her children were called the children of the first man with whom she was intimate. I have noidea what that is called.
Oh, I’m gonna keep using these #%@&* codes 'til I get 'em right.
I can’t believe I get to use one of my favorite quotes. :::::Ahem::::
Bigamy is having one wife too many.
Monogamy is also the same.
-Oscar Wilde.
PS - I always thought Polly Andry would be a great screen name.