The practice of polygyny, where one man is married to multiple women, appears throughout the ancient religious texts, particularly the Hebrew Bible, which is often confusing for modern readers. The allowance for this marital structure among revered figures stands in contrast to the later emphasis on exclusive, two-person marriage. Understanding why this arrangement was permitted requires an examination of the historical context, the legal framework established, and the theological purpose it served in the unfolding narrative. The presence of polygyny in these foundational narratives prompts the question of its acceptance.
The Societal and Economic Function
Polygyny was a widely accepted social reality across the Ancient Near East, serving practical functions rooted in the demanding environment of agrarian societies. A large family unit was considered a form of wealth, providing the necessary labor for farming, herding, and basic household maintenance. More children meant more hands to work the fields and secure the family’s economic future. Taking multiple wives also functioned as a type of social security and a tool for establishing robust kinship ties. A man with several wives could forge alliances with multiple families or tribes, expanding his network of support and protection in a world where tribal strength was paramount. Furthermore, in an era of high infant mortality and frequent warfare, the practice helped ensure the continuity and rapid growth of a lineage. If a first wife was unable to conceive, a second wife or concubine was often acquired specifically to produce an heir.
Regulation and Limitation in Religious Law
Despite its allowance, the practice of polygyny was never unbounded but was subject to specific legal restrictions designed to mitigate the inherent strife and protect the vulnerable within the family structure. Religious law introduced regulations that provided protection for women and children who were part of a plural marriage. For instance, Exodus 21:10 specifies that if a man takes a second wife, he must not diminish the first wife’s food, clothing, or conjugal rights. The law also addressed the sensitive issue of inheritance, ensuring a father could not disinherit the firstborn son in favor of a son born to a wife he loved more. Deuteronomy 21:15–17 mandates that the right of the firstborn must be legally recognized and granted the double portion of the inheritance, irrespective of the father’s affections. Furthermore, limitations were placed on leadership: Deuteronomy 17:17 instructed that a king should not acquire “many wives,” preventing foreign influences and limiting the accumulation of power.
Theological Justifications for Lineage
The deepest reason for the allowance of polygyny is often found in the context of the covenant and the necessity of establishing a divinely promised lineage. Marriage was understood as a contractual arrangement intended to produce the “seed” through which the promises made to the patriarchs would be fulfilled. In cases where the primary wife was barren, such as Sarah and Rachel, an additional wife or handmaiden was taken to ensure the continuation of the promised family line. This allowance was frequently tied to overcoming the biological obstacle of infertility to ensure the survival of the covenant people. The narrative suggests that the allowance was not an endorsement of the ideal but a concession to the practical realities of a world where the divine plan had to proceed through flawed human arrangements. The focus remained fixed on the continuity of the covenant lineage, demonstrating how the practice functioned as a temporary means to secure a greater, long-term theological purpose and guarantee the fulfillment of the divine promise.
The Shift to Monogamy
The allowance for multiple wives eventually gave way to the standard of monogamy, a shift often rooted in the foundational creation narrative. The account of Adam and Eve emphasizes the original design of marriage as a union between one man and one woman who become “one flesh.” This narrative framework suggests that the ideal from the beginning was a singular, exclusive partnership. Later religious tradition and teachings reinforced this singular ideal, moving away from the temporary allowance of polygyny. In the New Testament, Jesus pointed directly back to the creation account when discussing marriage, reaffirming the standard of one man and one woman. Furthermore, the letters of the Apostles set a clear expectation for spiritual leadership, requiring an overseer to be “the husband of one wife.” This ultimate return to the singular union suggests that polygyny was viewed as a tolerated practice under specific historical and societal conditions, rather than an enduring divine intention.