The Socio Economic Context During The Text

Women had to be obedient and submissive towards all the men they knew; fathers, uncles, brothers, cousins. If a woman failed to conform to the orders of a man, she could risk severe punishment, such as being disowned by her father or thrown out of the house by her husband. If a man did that to his wife, it would be hard for her as all of her belongings are

This left women with a clear disadvantage. The system worked well in happy marriages, but if a situation such as a husband's death, desertion from his family, or divorce were to arise, it was usually the woman who suffered as a result. According to the Code, a contract was necessary for marriage. Also, when a man and woman were getting married, the most important item to be negotiated was the bride price. This, again, shows that men were superior to women when it came to the ownership of property. Regardless of the amount of this bride price, it was managed by the husband and it was used to support the wife and her children: "If a woman who lived in a man's house made an agreement with her husband, that no creditor can arrest her, and has given a document therefore; if that man, before he married that woman, had a debt, the creditor can not hold the woman for it" (Pritchard 155). The bride's father had the right to change his mind about the marriage, in which case he would have been required to refund the purchase price in full showing again how women were nothing more than a piece of property: "If a man bring chattels into the house of his father-in-law and pay the price; if then the father of the girl say "I will not give you my daughter," he shall give back all that he brought with him" (Pritchard 156). Another horrific example of how women were regarded as nothing more than mere possessions was that if a wife died before giving birth to

In fact, women were victims of the Hammurabi Code. They had to be respectable (under protection and sexual control of a man) and always obey to their husband otherwise, I believe they would be considered as a prostitute or a slave. What kind of life is that?

In the Middle Ages from 476 CE- 14th century almost all of the power of women was determined by biblical references. The average woman in a rural area had the duty of making clothes from wool, cleaning, cooking, and taking care of children. The women in town often were tasked in purchasing and trading goods and the normal housekeeping. In extreme cases women were known as witches. Other women became nuns and got involved in spiritual matters. In the year 1000 traditional marriage that involved getting married for financial reasons became less common. Although the parents still assisted in choosing the spouse it was becoming freer to choose who to marry. The woman was essentially owned by a male guardian almost like a child. However, if a rich widowed woman decided she did not want or have another guardian available, she was able to have her own name. During the Middle Ages many rich women were able to participate in things such as art, music or writing. It was rare for a woman not that well off to be able to purchase the tools or have the education to do art, music, or writing. All the rules developed depended on how

They rejected the anti-woman and anti-marriage writings, written during medieval times. They praised women in her own way, especially in biblical ways such as housewife and mother. This did not put women above men, as they were still subject to them, but it did give them new rights. Women were allowed to divorce and remarry with the same respect to men. The sense of equality in the household was brought upon by the fact that it was a God ordained community.

They had the right to own land, inherit and divorce. A woman could divorce her husband if he mistreated her or the children or did not provide for the family. Anything she brought into the marriage remained her property.

I understand that people were treated unfairly back in the days, but this “rule” was unreasonable. It was basically the practice of coverture, which takes away all the wife's power over her property. As I was reading “Argument Against Coverture” by Thomas Hertel it stated that “ the wife’s personal property...becomes vested in her husband, and she is fully deprived of her title to it, and her right to use and dispose of it,...as if she instead of being married, had been sold as a slave to a master...” This shows us that they were basically treated like objects and not human beings. However, married women were allowed to keep a gift that was given to them. I found that dumb because women weren't allowed to keep what rightfully belongs to them, but a gift from someone else. I wonder how many men voiced their opinions about them being against coverture and I wonder how man would have tried to stop it by supporting the women's suffrage

Before the 1840s women were deemed completely dependant throughout her life on men, first as daughters then as wives. They were known as the property of their husbands and

The church’s interpretation of the women is that the husband is the head of her and she should be subjected to him (The New American Bible, Ephesians 5: 22-24). In the wife of bath, her fifth husband was questioning his wife, because of all what was written of bad wives by men (Wife of Bath, pg 699). The Thousand and One Nights is centered on a good king who was deceived and hurt by his wife, which twisted his morality. He vowed to marry a woman each night and in the morning he would kill her. The king’s daughter, Shahrazad, decided to take a stand and marry the king. With her intelligence and storytelling, she was able not only to save her own life, but her kingdom as well (The Thousand and One Nights, pg 554). Shahrazad was a good wife even if it meant risking her life. Men has an impact on his wife. Yes, he is superior to her, but he needs to bring her to holiness and reciprocate her love. Husbands love your wife as much as you love your own bodies (The New American Bible, Ephesians 5:28). Make sure your wife lacks blemish and bring her to holiness and without blame

They had no rights. A woman could own her own land, and earn her own money, but as soon as she gets married everything she has is now the husbands property. Women had no say in what happens, they worked in the house. When a women got married, the husband indirectly owned her

Generally, in ancient Israel, full wives and concubines, in early puberty around eleven and twelve, conceived and produced children with their husbands for agricultural needs for the families’ survival. Women who were married were protected of polygamy practice, known practice of a husband possessing more than one wife; whereas, women living alone, were unprotected members of society. In ancient Israel, two types of wives existed, the full wives and the concubines. Future husbands or their families purchased wives from the father of landowners; this purchase, known as a “bride price”, displayed a common practice of ancient Israel. However, concubines, the significantly lower status women, exist from the fathers of none landowners. Divorced, sexually assaulted, or orphan women often defined the concubines; no bride price paid for the concubines. Marrying concubines increased the husbands’ chances of producing sons (Carvalho pp. 36-38).

It was common for "priests of the Old Law abstain from their wives during their period of service in the temple coupled with, for example, the expectation that the same demand was made of participants in a holy war, lent weight to the assertion that there was a link between sacred function, the encounter with the divine, and moral purity." Men were thought to be more clean if they refrained from seeing their wives during holy events. For instance, in Exodus Chapter nineteen, "and he said unto the people, Be ready against the third day: come not at your wives." This passage comes after Moses came down from the mountain, when he prepared the people to meet God after he sanctified them. A similar passage occurs in first Samuel when "David answered the priest, and said unto him, Of a truth women have been kept from us about these three days, since I came out, and the vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in a manner common, yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel." In order to receive the sanctified bread, the men again would have had to abandon their women for three days. One can see that men were allowed to marry, but sacred rites had them abstain from their wives. However, there were limitations on the Levites with whom they could marry, as "it was forbidden for a priest to marry a woman who had been divorced, or who had been a prostitute, 'for he is

Since ladies were considered legitimately skilled, they did not require the supervision or endorsement of a man in order to seek after lawful activity. Marriages were not arranged by the men of the household. If a woman chose to get a divorce, society would not look down on her. However, life-long marriages were preferable in the eyes of society. Brier and Hobbs comment on this: “Whether rich or poor, any free person had the right to the joys of marriage. Marriage was not a religious issue in Egypt - no function including a minister occurred - however just a social tradition that required an understanding, which is to state an agreement, consulted by the suitor on the group of his planned spouse. The agreement involved an exchange of objects of value on both sides. The suitor offered a sum called the "virginity gift" when appropriate, to compensate the bride for what she would lose, indicating that in ancient times virginity was prized in female brides. The gift did not apply in the case of second marriages, of course, but a "gift to the bride" would be made even in that case. In return, the family of the bride-to-be offered a "gift in order to become a wife." In many cases,

Women were important factor of the Old Testament. Their stories are still relevant today and can be learned from. Women were minorities in the Old Testament. They were perceived as only good for creating a first son and doing the hard household labor. After their husbands would come home from battle, they were only worried about one thing, lust and sex. In some cases that will be later mentioned, men would lust over women that they do not even know. The men’s argument is that they were fighting wars trying to gain independence and want to come home to something important and know that they are still head of the household. Men just wanted to show their dominance over their wife(s) or lovers.

“...I thought a woman was a free agent, as well as a man, and was born free, and cou’d she manage herself suitably, might enjoy that liberty to as much otherwise as the men do; that the laws of matrimony were indeed, otherwise, and mankind at this time, acted quite upon other principles; and those such, that a woman gave herslef entirely away from herself, in marriage, and capitulated only to be, at best, but an upper-servant, and from the time she took the man, she was no better or worse than the servant among the Israelities who had his ears bor’d, that is, nail’d to the door-post...” (p. 187).