Male Obstetric Competence in Ancient Israel
A Response to Two Recent Proposals
In: Vetus TestamentumSearch for other papers by John Makujina in
Current site
Google Scholar
According to two recent sociological studies on childbirth in the OT, the (androcentric) OT displays both insensitivity to the parturient and ignorance of the basics of parturition. One of the studies specifies that the biblical authors were unaware of the normally presenting fetal member, the head. The present article, however, comes to decidedly different conclusions: 1) the position that the Israelite male was insensitive to women experiencing childbirth either goes beyond the available evidence or is a distortion thereof; 2) both studies overlook information that undermines their conclusions; and 3) the OT authors were sufficiently aware of the fundamentals of childbirth.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
4
Viezel, “Realia,” p. 688. So Philip, Menstruation, pp. 81, 97-98, 103.
-
6
Viezel, “Realia,” p. 688. See also Isa 13:8; 21:3; 26:17; Jer 6:24; 13:21; 22:23; 49:22, 24; 50:43; Mic 4:9-10; Ps 48:7 (Eng. 48:6).
-
9
Cf. R. Melzack et al., “Labour is Still Painful After Prepared Childbirth,” Canadian Medical Association Journal 125 (August 1981), pp. 357-363.
-
14
Viezel, “Realia,” p. 688. It should be noted that for a biblical author to ridicule men by attributing female characteristics to them (Isa 19:16; Jer 51:30; Nah 3:13) falls short of him ridiculing women, for whom the same behavior is natural.
-
26
Philip, Menstruation, p. 92. With respect to the twin births in Genesis (25:24-26; 38:27-30), Philip likewise points out the texts’ failure to provide “details on any possible difficulties in giving birth to twins” (p. 89). But what of Rebecca’s disclosure that her sons “hit and kicked one another [ yitrōṣăṣû] inside her” (Gen 25:22)? Moreover, if the risks of twin deliveries were presupposed—as they probably were—Philip has no case. Finally, both deliveries come across as anything but routine. See J. Makujina, “The Semantics of יצא in Exodus 21:22: Reassessing the Variables that Determine Meaning,” bbr 23 (2013), p. 311.
-
27
See Makujina, “The Semantics of יצא,” p. 312; R. W. Klein, 1 Samuel (2d ed.; wbc 10; Nashville, 2008), p. 44; P. K. McCarter Jr., i Samuel (ab 8; New York, 1980), p. 115. The motif of bad news triggering death occurs elsewhere in 1 Samuel (4:18; 25:37-38).
-
30
Philip, Menstruation, pp. 82-87. On the vocabulary of birth see also Makujina, “The Semantics of יצא,” pp. 305-321.
-
38
Stol, Birth in Babylonia, p. 120; Philip, Menstruation, pp. 93-94; P. J. King and L. E. Stager, Life in Biblical Israel (Library of Ancient Israel; Louisville, 2001), p. 52. Contra D. K. Stuart, who demonstrates no familiarity with Stol’s or Beckman’s research. D. K. Stuart, Exodus (nac 2; Nashville, 2006), pp. 77-78.
-
39
Philip, Menstruation, p. 86; Klein, 1 Samuel, p. 44; McCarter, 1 Samuel, p. 115.
-
40
Cf. King and Stager, Life in Biblical Israel, pp. 52-53. See also Wis 7:3-4, “And when I was born, I drew in the common air and fell upon the kindred earth, crying out the same first sound like everyone else. I was nursed in swaddling cloths and cared for.”
-
41
Stol, Birth in Babylonia, p. 177; so Philip, Menstruation, p. 95. The ancient gynecologist Soranus of Ephesus (early 2nd cent. ad) provides a detailed description of the procedures in Gynecology 2.11-15; these practices persisted in Palestine into the twentieth century. E. W. G. Masterman, “Hygiene and Disease in Palestine in Modern and in Biblical Times. (Part iii),” pefqs 50 (1918), pp. 118-119.
-
49
Beckman, Hittite Birth Rituals, p. 86. For intrapartum flatulence in Akkadian texts see Stol, Birth in Babylonia, pp. 203-204. Also, Soranus mentions the presence of flatulence during labor (Gyn. 4.5) and the disorder of air in the uterus (Gyn. 3.31-33).
-
51
Cunningham et al., Williams Obstetrics, p. 496; Gibbs et al., Danforth’s Obstetrics, p. 431. See Soranus’ extended discussion of dystocia and its remedies in Gyn. 4.
-
53
Gibbs et al., Danforth’s Obstetrics, pp. 434-435, 438-439; Cunningham et al., Williams Obstetrics, pp. 496, 498-500.
-
65
Cunningham et al., Williams Obstetrics, pp. 37, 500; Gibbs et al., Danforth’s Obstetrics, pp. 436-437, 439-440. D. A. Garrett, evidently unaware of this type of complication, suggests a breech presentation instead. D. A. Garrett, Hosea, Joel (nac 19A; Nashville, 1997), pp. 263-264.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 212 | 30 | 0 |
| Full Text Views | 165 | 3 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 83 | 8 | 2 |
Male Obstetric Competence in Ancient Israel
A Response to Two Recent Proposals
In: Vetus TestamentumSearch for other papers by John Makujina in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
According to two recent sociological studies on childbirth in the OT, the (androcentric) OT displays both insensitivity to the parturient and ignorance of the basics of parturition. One of the studies specifies that the biblical authors were unaware of the normally presenting fetal member, the head. The present article, however, comes to decidedly different conclusions: 1) the position that the Israelite male was insensitive to women experiencing childbirth either goes beyond the available evidence or is a distortion thereof; 2) both studies overlook information that undermines their conclusions; and 3) the OT authors were sufficiently aware of the fundamentals of childbirth.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 212 | 30 | 0 |
| Full Text Views | 165 | 3 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 83 | 8 | 2 |
