of the father. In a society as masculine as the Roman, such a matter could have played a role that historians who tend to idealise ancient Rome have perhaps not fully appreciated.14 Judaism established equally complicated patterns of inheritance law and legal practice, as did the Romans. Though Jewish men were obliged to raise children in formal marriage, concubinage was permitted and concubines were entitled to certain rights including maintenance and probably also a share of the husband’s property. The concubine’s portion was smaller than that of the wedded wife. A similar pattern applied to children. The concubine child was entitled to maintenance and a portion of the paternal property after the death of the father. Not surprisingly, this portion could be smaller.15 The opposite was the case when the child was begotten in adultery, which was a serious offence according to Jewish law, meriting the lapidation of both parents.16 As the progeny of an illicit act, the adulterine child was harshly treated in Jewish legal practice as well as deprived of inheritance rights and of most civil and juridical privileges. The illicitly begotten child became a bastard, an inferior person marked with the stigma of its parents’ sin.17 121 14 For a general survey, cf. M. C. Grosse, Freie römische Ehe und nichteheliche Lebensgemeinschaft. (Pfaffenweiler 1991: Centaurus.) 15 Cf. Genesis 25: 5-6: Abraham’s legitimate son Isaac was entitled to inherit his father’s property while Abraham's many concubine children were allotted but limited portions thereof. 16 Cf. Deutronomy 22: 22. 17 For general survey, see L. M. Epstein, Marriage Laws in the Bible and the Talmud. (Cambridge, Mass. 1942: Harvard Univ. Press.) - L. M. Epstein, Sex Laws and Customs in Judaism. (New York 1948: Bloch.)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=