Textkit Logo

Ancient concept of "pre-marital sex"

Philosophers and rhetoricians, Welcome!

Ancient concept of "pre-marital sex"

Postby ndansmith » Wed Dec 20, 2006 2:47 am

User avatar
ndansmith
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:55 pm

Postby GlottalGreekGeek » Wed Dec 20, 2006 3:24 am

I seem to recall seeing somewhere something about ancient Hindu laws concerning what kind of sexual experiences people (both male and female) could have before marriage, and the associated penalties. The only specific example I remember is that if unmarried girls had a lesbian relationship, they would both have to increase the size of their dowries when they married. But I'm not the person to ask about ancient views of pre-marital sex.
User avatar
GlottalGreekGeek
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:37 am
Location: Mountain View

Postby ethopoeia » Wed Dec 20, 2006 4:38 pm

Well, Nathan, first of all we should discern among the so-called "Ancients" two different Mediterranean civilizations, i.e. the Greeks and the Romans. Despite the fact that they were contemporary to other peoples of Antiquity, such as the Egyptians, the Celts, the Jews, the Persian, the Incas, the Mayas, the Aztecs, the Chinese among a long list of peoples, when we say the "Ancients" we are specifically referring to the Greek and the Roman civilizations.

Now, relating to your question, marriage was indeed an important figure in Roman Law. The Latin term for marriage, matrimonium, is closely related to the term for wealth, patrimonium. This is due to the fact that, under Roman Law, matrimony was the legal figure through which patrimony was transferred to the offspring. Therefore the importance of marital faithfulness after matrimony in order to avoid bequeathing the patrimony to illegitimate children. The Defense of Euphiletos by the Athenian logographer Lysias is very clear in this respect, i.e. that adultery was an offence punishable with death in ancient Athens.

However, since before marriage there isn't yet a contractual relationship between both parts, casual sex is not only allowed, but encouraged. A clear example is Ovid's Ars Amandi (III, 611-616), where it is stressed that married women must abide by the laws of matrimony, whereas young girls are free from parental surveillance in their love affairs due to their condition of singles.

Nevertheless, if you like Roman theatre, you'll find that Latin comedies are full of hilarious examples showing how married women had their fun as well! :)
Last edited by ethopoeia on Wed Dec 20, 2006 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ethopoeia
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:33 pm

Postby ndansmith » Wed Dec 20, 2006 4:57 pm

ethopoeia wrote:Well, Nathan, first of all we should discern among the so-called "Ancients" two different Mediterranean civilizations, i.e. the Greeks and the Romans. Despite the fact that they were contemporary to other peoples of Antiquity, such as the Egyptians, the Celts, the Jews, the Persian, the Incas, the Mayas, the Aztecs, the Chinese among a long list of peoples, when we say the "Ancients" we are specifically referring to the Greek and the Roman civilizations.
Check.

Thanks for info.

On another front, someone tracked down Deuteronomy 22:13-21, which implicitly deals with sex before marriage. "She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house."

That seems pretty clear.
User avatar
ndansmith
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:55 pm

Postby quendidil » Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:15 pm

ndansmith wrote:
ethopoeia wrote:Well, Nathan, first of all we should discern among the so-called "Ancients" two different Mediterranean civilizations, i.e. the Greeks and the Romans. Despite the fact that they were contemporary to other peoples of Antiquity, such as the Egyptians, the Celts, the Jews, the Persian, the Incas, the Mayas, the Aztecs, the Chinese among a long list of peoples, when we say the "Ancients" we are specifically referring to the Greek and the Roman civilizations.
Check.

Thanks for info.

On another front, someone tracked down Deuteronomy 22:13-21, which implicitly deals with sex before marriage. "She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house."

That seems pretty clear.


ndansmith wrote:
ethopoeia wrote:Well, Nathan, first of all we should discern among the so-called "Ancients" two different Mediterranean civilizations, i.e. the Greeks and the Romans. Despite the fact that they were contemporary to other peoples of Antiquity, such as the Egyptians, the Celts, the Jews, the Persian, the Incas, the Mayas, the Aztecs, the Chinese among a long list of peoples, when we say the "Ancients" we are specifically referring to the Greek and the Roman civilizations.


You indirectly answered your own question. :) The ancient hebrews are not covered under this strict definition of "Ancients".
quendidil
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:39 am

Postby ndansmith » Wed Dec 20, 2006 6:18 pm

Well I do apologize for stumbling onto the technical term "The Ancients (R)."

Perhaps I should have phrased my question this way: "Does anyone have any references in literature contemporary to the writing of either testament of the Bible concerning the concept of 'pre-marital sex'?" :D

Anyhow, right now we are considering if cultural assumptions about marriage among the Hebrews contributed to the lack of references to premarital sex. In other words, was marriage assumed for all people? Also, did most people get married shortly after sexual maturity? The 'word on the street' is that both of those assumptions are true, but I am lacking real evidence for them.
User avatar
ndansmith
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:55 pm

Postby ethopoeia » Wed Dec 20, 2006 6:49 pm

User avatar
ethopoeia
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:33 pm

Postby ndansmith » Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:21 pm

User avatar
ndansmith
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:55 pm

Postby Matrix » Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:44 pm

i say why bother with the thing of the past. I believe we should concern ourselves more with the status quo of pre marital sex and it decreasing age awareness..
phpbb
User avatar
Matrix
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: USA, New York,NY

Postby ethopoeia » Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:11 am

Nice pecs and abs, but I'm sorry the avatar above is far too big :)

BTW it's nothing personal against Angelina Jolie but could anybody (Emma?) delete the porn ads posted in the Academy?

Thanks
User avatar
ethopoeia
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:33 pm


Return to The Academy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests