Battle Brides
We went against
Thebe, the sacred city of Eëtion,
and the city we
sacked, and carried everything back to this place,
and the sons of the
Achaians made a fair distribution
and for Atreus’ son they chose out Chryseis of
the fair cheeks.
Then Chryses, priest of him who strikes from
afar, Apollo,
Came beside the fast ships of the bronze-armoured
Achaians to ransom
back
his daughter...
Then all the rest of the Achaians cried out in
favour
that the
priest be respected and the shining ransom be taken;
yet this pleased not the heart of Atreus’ son Agamemnon,
but harshly he sent him away with a strong order
upon him.
The old man went back again in anger, but Apollo
listened to his prayer, since he was very dear to
him, and let go
the
wicked arrow against the Argives…
It was I first of all urged then the god’s
appeasement;
and the anger took hold of Atreus’ son, and in
speed standing
he uttered
his threat against me, and now it is a thing accomplished.
For the girl the glancing-eyed Achaians are
taking to Chryse
in a fast ship, also carrying to the king
presents. But even
now the heralds went away from my shelter
leading
Briseus’
daughter, whom the sons of the Achaians gave me.
-Homer, The Iliad (tr. Richmond Lattimore),
I.366-393
Homer’s Iliad opens with something of a
Bronze-Age domestic drama. The basic facts, related by Achilleus to his mother
in the passage quoted above, are as follows: The Achaian army, camped at Troy,
sacked Thebe; the captive women were distributed to the various heroes as a
prize, but the girl given to Agamemnon, leader of the Achaian army, was the
daughter of the priest in a temple dedicated to Apollo. Her father came to
ransom her, and when Agamemnon refused, Apollo sent a plague against the
Achaians. In order to stop the plague, Achilleus urges Agamemnon to return the
girl to her father. Agamemnon reluctantly assents, but demands Briseis –
Achilleus’ prize – as compensation.
The practice
of taking women captive in war and treating them as prizes to be distributed
among the victors was common in the ancient world – and even to this day in
some parts of the world – and it lies in the background of our parshah’s opening verses:
When you take the field against your
enemies, and the Lord your God
delivers them into your power and you take some of them captive, and you see
among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her and would take her to
wife, you shall bring her into your house, and she shall trim her hair, pare
her nails, and discard her captive’s garb. She shall spend a month’s time in your
house lamenting her father and mother; after that you may come to her and
possess her, and she shall be your wife. Then, should you no longer want her,
you must release her outright. You must not sell her for money: since you had
your will of her, you must not enslave her. (Deut. 21:10-14)
The Torah’s
prescription offers several correctives to the situation that appears in the Iliad: the captive woman is given time
to mourn her losses; she becomes a wife, rather than a concubine or some other
lower status of relationship; and she cannot be traded away as property, the
way that Agamemnon and Achilleus argue over Briseis.
As students
of history, we can appreciate how the Torah’s approach to women captured in war
substantially improves upon the status quo times of war. But is it objectively
good? Even with the limitations in place, the Torah still allows men to seize
women in battle and take them home against their will. The captor needs to
treat this woman as a wife, but she has no right of refusal. Perhaps in the
ancient world this parshah would have
seemed like a progressive support for women, but it falls far short of what we
today would accept as moral.
As
Conservative Jews, our teachers respond very directly to this challenge. Our
movement has long maintained that “The single greatest event in the history of
God’s revelation took place at Sinai, but was not limited to it… The process of
revelation… remains alive in the Codes and Responsa to the present day… Since each
age requires new interpretations and applications of the received norms,
Halakhah [Jewish Law] is an ongoing process” (Emet ve-Emunah: A Statement of Principles of Conservative Judaism,
20-21). God’s moral teachings for the Jewish people were first revealed at Mount
Sinai, but they continue to be refined by rabbis and leaders in each
generation.
We see this
process of ongoing revelation not only with respect to the treatment of
civilians in wartime, but in how our community relates to women, gays and lesbians,
and many other diversity issues. When you look around Anshe Emet on Shabbat,
you see a diversity of community that our grandparents could not have imagined,
but which has become a source of strength and pride for our community. The “new
interpretations and applications of the received norms” allow for this
evolution, and it gives us good reason to be proud to say we are Conservative
Jews.
Shabbat
Shalom,
Rabbi Abe
Friedman
