One of the most famous stories
in the Old Testament and certainly the most famous one among lawyers is that of
Solomon and the baby. I am reflecting on
this text tonight, as tomorrow I begin a class on judicial politics. Here is the passage from
1st Kings 3. 16-28.
16 Then came there two
women, that were harlots, unto the king, and stood before him.
17 And the one woman said,
O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child
with her in the house.
18 And it came to pass the
third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and
we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in
the house.
19 And this woman's child
died in the night; because she overlaid it.
20 And she arose at
midnight, and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid
it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom.
21 And when I rose in the
morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead: but when I had considered
it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, which I did bear.
22 And the other woman
said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And this said,
No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they spake before
the king.
23 Then said the king, The
one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other
saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living.
24 And the king said, Bring
me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king.
25 And the king said,
Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the
other.
26 Then spake the woman
whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son,
and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But
the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
27 Then the king answered
and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother
thereof.
28 And all Israel heard of
the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw
that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment.
You can see why this story is
of interest to lawyers. It is a classic
metaphor for “splitting the difference.”
It is not, of course, about that at all.
No one, let alone Solomon, thinks that splitting the baby is an
acceptable compromise. Well, no one
except the false claimant. The story is
in fact much richer than that.
I note first of all that two
harlots have standing to bring a case before the King himself. That suggests a recognition of the lowest
status under the law.
The second thing I would note
is that this might count as the first detective story in the history of
literature. The story (18-21) is not
murky. Two women deliver babies in the
same house at roughly the same time. One
woman’s child dies. That woman “arose at
midnight” and switches her dead child with the other woman’s living child while
she is asleep. This we learn from the
testimony of the woman who claims her child was stolen. Bear in mind that she couldn’t really know
that midnight was the hour of the crime, since she was sleeping. That “midnight” bit is poetic license, either
on the part of the woman or the storyteller.
The account of the crime is speculation on her part; but it is certainly
a plausible theory, as the lawyers say.
Now consider the words from
verse 18.
there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in
the house
This testimony intends to
eliminate any third party mischief and focus responsibility on the two women
alone. This much the woman claiming the
theft of her living child can testify to.
Again, a good detective story.
The story is plausible both
from the perspective of common sense memory and modern sociobiology. It is not unprecedented for a woman whose
maternal instincts are frustrated to attempt to steal someone else’s baby. It is Solomon’s job to shift the evidence
with his little grey cells in order to uncover the nuggets of truth.
This he does with his brilliant
device. If both women claim the same
baby, cut the baby in half. The reaction
of the two women exposes the truth. The
question is why it works so well. The usual
interpretation is that it is simply a test of who loves the baby more. The true claimant is willing to surrender her
claim if that is what is necessary to save her child. The false claimant is willing to split the
difference because it isn’t really her baby.
That doesn’t wash. If the primary motive of the false claimant
was frustrated maternal instinct, she would scarcely have been so satisfied
with half a son. Solomon, however, being
not only a wise king and judge, but also a good detective, was attentive to
detail.
What exactly happened to the
false claimant’s child? Verse 19 tells
us:
And this woman's child died in the night; because she
overlaid it.
This is what the true claimant
tells us. He rival’s child perished not
of natural causes but of carelessness.
It is likely that she expressed the same opinion to the other woman at
the time. At any rate, the other woman
guessed that she was being judged. That is what identifies the false
claimant’s motive. She despised the true
claimant, perhaps for recognizing her own terrible error. She took the living child as an act of
revenge. That is why she is later willing to accept the King’s dreadful
proposal. She won’t win a son but at
least her rival will lose one. Such is
the calculus of guilt and revenge.
Solomon deserves a place as the
father of all sleuths. His famous stratagem
probed not for genuine love but for a more sinister motive and found it. Solomon knew what he was looking for because
he was wise enough to understand that human beings act simultaneously of out
opposing motives and because he paid attention.
Such a man is a man to be feared, at least by those of us who have
something to hide. That would be all of
us.
No comments:
Post a Comment