What Does the Bible Mean by "Concubine?"

If you search “concubine” you’ll get the dictionary definition… “a woman with whom a man cohabits without being married: such as
a: one having a recognized social status in a household below that of a wife
b: mistress”
…and explanations like this from vocabulary.com - “The word concubine comes from the Latin verb, cubare, which means "to lie down." The word developed in Middle English in the 13th Century, and is another name for a woman taken as a mistress. The practice was common throughout history.”

Is that what was going on in the Bible? I don’t think so. Sure, the practice of the Middle Ages was that a rich man would have an official “wife” and one or more mistresses/concubines on the side but the “concubines” of the scripture seem to be less illicit in nature and more like women in an official relationship. In Hebrew a woman of this status was called a “pilegesh,” a word with uncertain roots. “Some say that the word ‘pilegesh’ is from the Aramaic ‘palgah isha,’ meaning ‘half-wife.’ Others feel that it comes from the Greek ‘pallakis’ [also of unknown roots.]” - Rabbi Jack Abramowitz

Not knowing what “pilegesh” meant exactly, when the Bible was translated into English, “concubine” seemed like the closest equivalent. But was this ancient, eastern custom just men taking mistresses? Was the Hebrew “pilegesh” a woman that a man desired, but could not legally marry because he already had a wife?

In “Women of the Ancient Near East” many old types of male-female relationships are explored. Records are vague and the labels extinct, making the different statuses hard for historians to categorize.
“In our discussion on the second wife (Chapter 5) we saw that a slave-girl could be introduced into a childless marriage as a second wife. According to the terminology of Old Babylonian laws for marriage contracts, in contracts formulated to favour the first wife, she became, the ‘wife’ of the man and the ‘slave-girl’ of his wife.” - Women in the Ancient Near East, Chapter 8

This seems like the case with Abram, Sarai and Hagar. (Gen. 16)

Clay tablets sometimes mentioned a “little wife” (as opposed to the “great wife” in the laws of Hammurabi) while others just call such a woman “slave-girl” even though she evidently had wifely duties and treatment. The “Women in the Ancient Near East” book details a marriage contract that said a slave-girl was given to a free man in marriage and that he provided her with clothing and a covering for the head. A bride-price was paid and divorce arrangements stipulated, just as was done for marriage between free people.

So the modern usage of “concubine” denotes more illegitimacy than I think was true of the Bible time relationship. Certainly the story of Sarai giving Hagar to Abram matches the Babylonian style of a wife giving her slave to her husband to produce children by. Jacob’s wives, Rachel and Leah, do the same with their hand-maids who were called “concubines.” The biblical version sounds more like what was described in ancient tablets, a case of a man taking a “lesser” wife, not a mistress.

But to try to determine what exactly was the status of a pilegesh, let’s look at what an ordinary “wife” was and how that compares to “concubine.” In Hebrew the denotation for a wife is simply to say a “woman,” (isha,) that is “his.” Everytime it says “wife” in English the Hebrew simply says so-and-so’s woman. The Biblical definition of a wife is a woman who has been claimed, so to speak, by a man. No other man can have her. In that regard, in scripture a concubine qualifies as a wife. As we find in the case of Keturah and David’s wives* the same woman will be called “wife” and other times “concubine.” Sarai gave Hagar to Abram to be his “isha.” Yet at the same time Hagar remained Sarai’s hand-maid, the same situation as Jacob’s concubines. It seems possible that a woman who was taken as a wife but was not a free woman was labeled a “pilegesh” (concubine.) If this “slave-wife” theory is true, then the betrothed slave woman mentioned in Lev. 19:20 and Exo. 21:7-11 and the captive wife in Deut. 21:10-14 may be alternatively labeled a concubine/pilegesh. The father of the concubine in Judges 19 is called a father-in-law the same as a wife’s father was.

Given these clues my answer to the concubine mystery is that the Hebrew “pilegesh” was a wife (an “isha” belonging to a man,) AND was one who was also in servitude, (not free.) She would differ from a free wife only in the ways any servant woman differed from free women. Her time was not her own and she would not be able to make commitments since she was restricted to doing the will of her mistress. A pilegesh would not have the luxury of a dowry and resources that a free woman had to use as she pleased.

Why would a wife give her husband a pilegesh? As we can see from the stories in Genesis, children were that prized. And no doubt some wives did it to try to keep her husband from selecting a woman for himself. By being the one in control she can try to make sure it’s an arrangement that will be less to her detriment.

The Torah says that a betrothed servant-girl could be given her freedom, so why keep her position that of a slave-wife? A household was a delicate ecosystem. The first wife (or in Babylonian “the chosen one”) wanted her husband to have lots of status, but she didn’t want to lose her own! If a man ordered his “great wife” to free the “pilegesh” that could drive a wedge between them. A wife wanted to remain unchallenged in her primary position. It seems like it would be a miserable existence to be a "pilegesh," but in that time a maid-servant could be married off to whoever her master/mistress chose such as to another servant, or just kept as a lowly grain-grinder. So it was probably considered an honor to be elevated to being the master’s pilegesh with better clothes and provision and children. Depending on the situation, her life might actually be better than the existence of some free wives!

None of it makes much sense to our modern way of life where we do not have homes staffed with servant girls or villages full of wives competing to give their husbands the most children. It was a different culture, for sure! When reading scripture it’s good to try to understand their lifestyle and that Abraham, Caleb, David, etc. were NOT just cohabiting with various women.

*Gen. 25:1 and 1 Chro. 1:32, 2 Sam. 12:11 and 2 Sam. 16:22