Concubinage has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Life. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Sociology (Rated C-class, Mid-importance) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sociologypopflock.com Resource: WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.   WikiProject Women's History (Rated C-class, Mid-importance) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's Historypopflock.com Resource: WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.   WikiProject Women (Rated C-class) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Womenpopflock.com Resource: WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.   WikiProject Anthropology (Rated C-class) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anthropologypopflock.com Resource: WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.    This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.   WikiProject Family and relationships  (Defunct) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Family and relationships, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Family and relationshipspopflock.com Resource: WikiProject Family and relationshipsTemplate:WikiProject Family and relationshipsFamily and relationships articles   WikiProject Psychology (Rated C-class) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Psychologypopflock.com Resource: WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.    This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.   WikiProject Religion (Rated C-class, Low-importance) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.Religionpopflock.com Resource: WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.  Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.   WikiProject Sexology and sexuality (Rated C-class, Mid-importance) v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualitypopflock.com Resource: WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
v t e A version of this article was copy edited by Dthomsen8, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 1 May 2014. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.Guild of Copy Editorspopflock.com Resource: WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

This talk page is automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2

Reservations regarding article content

I have some serious reservations about this entry as it stands.

1) AFAIK, in many societies that practiced concubinage, it was a specific legal status and concubines had specific rights, though not equal to those of a spouse.

2) Therefore, the "concubinal relationship" is not similar to modern Common law marriage or de facto marriage.

Comments?

If you have some concrete information, add it. Be bold! :) —Frecklefoot 16:57, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Added the reference starting with "In ancient times..." to the first section. Prof Philip Daileader mentions this in his series of lecture on the Early Middle Ages, produced by The Teaching Company. I have been unable to find a print source for the same material.

Article name

Is "Concubinage" the best name for this article? It makes the writing and reading awkward and obscures the meaning. Wouldn't it be more correct to name the article "Concubine" and re-write the article for that reference? —Frecklefoot 16:57, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Voluntary / Forced

This article makes it sound like concubinage is voluntary. There is the statement: "concubinage was frequently voluntary." That statement implies that sometimes concubinage was not voluntary; forced concubinage would involve repeated rape and should be discussed. It's also questionable how voluntary the "voluntary" concubinage really was.

The article states: "legitimate wives often gave their maids to their husbands to atone, at least in part, if they were barren, as in the cases of Sarah and Hagar, Rachel and Bilhah." How can a wife give a maid to a husband? What is going on there should be made explicit. It sounds like the husband and wife had a slave or semi-slave maid who was regarded as property. As the wife was barren, the wife tolerated the husband repeatedly raping the slave maid.

Concubinage is allowed in Islam

To fellow Muslims: Please do not make up that concubinage is forbidden in Islam. It is allowed, under many conditions. If you are a Muslim, you have no reason to feel ashamed and try to legislate otherwise. There is no reason to lie in order to please non-Muslims subjective view of morality. It is perfectly allowed , just like it is in Judaism and Jesus never prohibits it in the Bible. For Islamic legislation matters, please refer only to learned religious scholars, instead of some bookwriter's own personal opinion. almoravid (talk) 14:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a proper forum for personal religious debates. Please only contribute NEUTRAL, HISTORICAL, FACTUALLY ACCURATE edits to this section. The encyclopedia does not benefit from religious interpretation, which is not appropriate here. Aroundthewayboy (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Today, when referring to a contemporary Civil union - failed verification

@Bonadea: I do not see how the source supports the underlined parts of either version of the following text:

1. 12:35, 18 October 2020 In the past, the woman involved in a concubinage was referred to as a concubine ( KONG-kyoo-bine), while the man simply as "lover" or "patron" (depending on the asymmetry of the couple). Especially among royalty and nobility, the woman in such relationships was commonly described as a mistress. Today, when referring to a contemporary Civil union (e.g. in the context of LGBT rights), the term "concubinage" is used, but the term "concubine" is normally dropped.^[1]
2. 12:45, 18 October 2020 "In present-day English, the term "concubinage" is not used about civil unions where there is the same equality of status as in a marriage, and the term "concubine" typically refers to women whose status is connected to their sexual or reproductive capabilities.^[2]

-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Toddy1: I agree that the first version is not clearly supported. I made a mistake in my first edit because I read the "failed verification" as meaning that the quote in the ref marker was not in the source, which it clearly is. My rewritten version is, to my eyes, a paraphrase of what the source says: the terms "concubinage" and "concubine" are used in contemporary language but not about "regular" everyday civil unions (between people of the same or different genders), rather, it refers to a specific kind of civil union "in societies in which women [...] can legitimately be viewed as sexual or reproductive servants" (that's also from p468 of the source). How would you suggest rephrasing that, as well as the quote in the reference, in a way that better reflects the source? --bonadea contributions talk 13:13, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Actually, the best thing to do might be to simply remove the quoted text from the citation. It is just a small part of all that's said about how 'concubinage' and 'concubine' are used on pp467-468, and I don't really see why that specific phrase should be quoted. --bonadea contributions talk 13:15, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

The source is a good source, but I think the article uses it badly - missing out key elements.

• The first sentence of the lead says:

• Concubinage (/k?n'kju:b?n?d?/ k?ng-KYOO-bih-nij) is an interpersonal and sexual relationship between a man and a woman in which the couple does not want or cannot enter into a full marriage.^[1]

Page 467 of the cited source says:

• "The term 'concubinage' is used to describe a range of relationships. Historically, some form of concubinage can be found in most societies, and it is still widely practiced today. The essential characteristic of concubinage... is the cohabitation of a man and a woman in a long-term sexual relationship without the promise of legal marriage."

In my opinion it would be an improvement to put that quotation as the first sentences of the lead. The quotation from page 468 is also worth putting into the article: "In twenty-first-century parlance, 'concubine' refers either to a mistress or a to sex slave." These two statements are to some extent contradictory - so it is probably best to have them next to each other in the lead.

I think the bit that you were trying to correct is best returned to what it was,[1] and have a FACT tag added to it.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)