Ketubot 45: Stoning or Strangulation for Adultery during Betrothal?

How are women punished if they commit adultery?  In ordinary circumstances, a woman is strangled if she has intercourse with a man who is not her husband.  But if she is a minor, if she is betrothed and not yet married at the time of the offence, if there are witnesses that come forward immediately, is she strangled, or is she stoned to death in front of her father's home?  Or if she is an orphan, at the city gates?  Or if hers is a city populated by gentiles, at the entrance to the court?

Today's daf questions how the punishment for adultery is meted out.  One of the larger questions that the rabbis explore is how an adult is punished for a crime that s/he committed as a minor.  Other circumstances are contrasted: those of a priest, or a king, whose sins are committed before they were anointed.  Different rules seem to apply, for their change in status is different from the bodily changes that demonstrate the change in status from a girl to a woman.  

It is obvious that stoning is perceived to be a particularly horrible execution.  The combination of that painful, slow death at the hands of the community combined with the humiliation inspired by such a public act is telling. Were women frequently stoned to death?  Or was this threat of public stoning used as an effective measure of social control?  And when young women were at the mercy of the men who might rape them, were young women really in need of this excessive threat?  Were girls particularly open about their sexual desire at the time?  or, more likely, were the men in power so afraid of the potential power of women's sexuality that they created laws specifically to intimidate?

The rabbis share proof texts to better understand why women must be stoned at the entrance to the gates of the city.  They determine that women who commit adultery while betrothed are similar to those who worship idols.  Of course, this is one of the worst things that one could do.

What is the appropriate punishment for a man who defames his wife when she is found to be innocent?  Flogging and and fine are the two punishments suggested by a baraita.  The rabbis disagree about how those consequences are assigned.  Most of the rabbis agree that flogging is required regardless of whether or not her husband had intercourse with her.  Some of the rabbis believe that whether or not he pays the fine is dependent upon whether or not she has had intercourse with him.  Some rabbis assert that the intercourse should have been ordinary intercourse, as well.  

It is striking how often the rabbis mention anal intercourse in their discussions that refer to sexual activity.  Were they offering warnings?  Or was anal intercourse a common occurrence in ancient communities?  One might assume that it was used to avoid pregnancy; however, women's experiences of pleasure would be almost completely overlooked if anal intercourse were the alternative option to vaginal intercourse and no other sexual activity was discussed.

Again, today's daf leads me to question how much we learn is an accurate description of our ancestors' lives, how much is an idealized portrayal, and what other information is missing.