Looking at life without prejudice to promote evolution of civilized human thought. In the next 1000 years, all erstwhile scientific, social, moral, economic and other theories and beliefs are going to be challenged and improved. Join me and take the torch forward.
Saturday, May 08, 2021
Sunday, May 02, 2021
Jus Primae Noctis
I first heard about the law of Prima Noctis when watching a BBC television program in Manchester, UK around 1970.
The TV presenter explained that it meant that the members of the house of lords
had the legal right to commandeer any newly married woman in their respective
realms and spend the first night after her marriage with her as they wished. He
claimed that the law was, until then, on the English statute books.
Wikipedia has a lengthy article on
the subject with 56 references that suggest the law had existed and been
practiced in Europe and elsewhere from as early as the third century BC until
abolished in certain countries as late as the 18th century CE and
made covert or voluntarily abandoned in other places.
Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_du_seigneur.s
Recently, I came across the
following passage from the King James version of the holy Bible:
Luke
1
a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
1.27 to a
virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house
of David ; and the virgin’s name was
Mary.
1.28 And
the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly
favored, the Lord is with
thee : blessed art thou among women.
1.29 And
when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast
in
her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
1.30 And
the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary : for thou hast found
favor with God.
1.31 And,
behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a
son, and shalt call his name Jesus.
1.32 He
shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest ; and
the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his
father David :
1.33 and he
shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever ; and of his
kingdom there shall be no end.
1.34 Then
said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know
not a man ?
1.35 And
the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall
come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall
overshadow
thee : therefore also that holy thing which shall be
born of thee
shall be called the Son of God.
Could it be that the incident was
phrased by the scribes of King James intentionally in this way to provide
religious justification for a practice that would seem immoral in the light of
commonly understood Christian values?