I have been doing some research on the concept of "Concubine".
Kind of interesting.
A concubine was nothing more than a lover. The early kings of Isreal (David, Solomon, etc) had concubines. Concubines were lovers. That is the direct translation as I understand it.
But when you were very rich, and you could afford to feed and house them, they became more like our concept of mistresses, i.e. supported, or live in lovers.
Anyone ever been a concubine? Sounds kind of sexy to me . . . ..
Posts
Followers
About Me
- Deni
- Tom boy, short little shapely gal, 98 pounds, 5 foot tall, 34C-22-32, love sex, bisexual, tend to be submissive, but also switch with many people, enjoy sexual banter, intelligent, perceptive, gentle, humorous
1 comment:
Although many concubines were expressly made available to the monarch in question, some of them were not treated as such. Of course, at the start of a relationship, yes. But an enterprising and shrewd woman could rise to power such as the case of Empress Dowager Bo and other Chinese royals. There is also a male form of concubinage. The male was known as concubini. Most concubinages were voluntary because money would be set aside to provide for the family of the girl. But some concubinages were sexual in nature and contrary to the Western ideations of concubines being "lovers" in the common Western use, libertine women were not desired. Concubines were often distractions who had lower social rankings than the primary wives. Children born from concubines were often consigned to such a lower ranking also.
Post a Comment