Most fruitful [and] learned co[m]mentaries of Doctor Peter Martyr Vermil Florentine, professor of divinity,…Most fruitfull [and] learned co[m]mentaries of Doctor Peter Martir Vermil Florentine, professor of deuinitie,…

But to speak of having of concubines, two things are to be considered. First what the Romaine laws ordained of it: Secondly,¹ in what sort it was among the Hebrews used, or what is to be understand, when we read that the fathers had concubines. As touching the first having of concubines, was by the civil law a certain kind of matrimony: for a concubine was not a harlot,² which was common to many, nor also a harlot, which was kept of a man together with his lawful wife. And how much it differeth from a wife, it shall appear by the definition of a concubine. For a concubine is she which hath the use of marriage with one that liveth sole. But for that she is not unseparable, (because they that are so joined may easily be separated) therefore a concubine differeth much from a very wife: Farther human rights are not communicated with her, for a Concubine goeth not into the family of him with whom she is conversant. Yea and their goods and faculties are not commune together, neither are the children borne of that conjunction, counted lawful and just heirs, unless they be made legitimate by the benefit of the prince. Howbeit it is by the Roman law forbidden that a man should have many Concubines at once, and it is prohibited to have a Concubine together with his wife. Moreover by the Roman laws, such can not be counted as Concubines, which may be used as harlots, as a free virgin, and a widow under .25. years of age: for if a man meddle with them, either it shall be matrimony, or else judged whoredom. Howbeit a widow may be a Concubine, if before witnesses it be declared, that she is taken not for a wife, but for a Concubine. And lastly there can be no Concubine, which may not become a wife, although not in that place where she dwelleth, yet at the least in an other place, which I therfore ad, because by the Romaine law it was not lawful for the President to marry a wife of that province where he governed, which yet he might have as a Concubine.

But to speake of hauing of concubines, two things ar to be considered. First what the Romaine lawes ordeyned of it: Secondly,¹ in what sort it was among the Hebrewes vsed, or what is to be vnderstand, when we reade that the fathers had concubines. As touching the first hauing of cōcubines, was by the ciuile law a certayne kind of matrimony: for a concubine was not a harlot,