Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Deut. 22:28; "they are discovered"

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Xsmkandelx AT aol.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: Deut. 22:28; "they are discovered"
  • Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 01:20:31 EDT



ark Wilson writes:

<<
Finally, if there were no "witnesses" to an actual rape, what recourse did
the victim have? >>

If there were no "witnesses" to the rape, the victim had little recourse
except through her male relatives. As is illustrated by Deut. 22:29, rape was
considered an act which violated the male's property rights rather than an
act of violence committed against a woman. As such, the male relatives of the
victim sought revenge or recourse, through either receiving a sum of money
from the rapist or by marrying the victim to her attacker in order to
mitigate the financial loss they would endure by not being able to marry her
off for a significant bride-price (since she's now "damaged goods").

Your impression that "witnesses" must be present in order to define a rape is
close, though not wholly accurate. For instance, in the story of Dinah in
Gen. 34 we're told that Dinah is wandering through the fields of the land
when Shechem forces himself upon her. Although there are no witnesses during
the actual act (aside from the parties involved) it is clear from her
brothers' reactions that the rape was considered rape. (Of course some
scholars, such as Lyn Bechtel, would argue that Dinah wasn't raped... but I
won't go into what I think of that).

I don't know if that answers your questions, or raises more, but just thought
I'd share my $.02.

~susi








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page