IHEilYOLUTION
HR
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
PRESENTED BY
PROF. CHARLES A. KOFOID AND
MRS. PRUDENCE W. KOFOID
THE CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE SERIES.
Edited by HAVELOCK ELLIS.
EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive
in 2007witli funding from
IVIicrosoft Corporation
littp://www.arcliive.org/details/evolutionofmarriOOIetoricli
THE EVOLUTION
OF MARRIAGE
AND OF THE FAMILY
BY
CH. LETOURNEAU,
General Secretary to the Anthropological Society of Paris,
and Professor in the School of Anthropolo^.
LONDON
WALTER SCOTT, 24 WARWICK LANE
PATERNOSTER ROW
1891.
L5
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I.
PAGE
The Biological Origin of Marriage . . 1-19
I. The True Place of Man in the Animal Kingdom.
II. Reproduction.
III. Rut and Love.
IV. Love of Animals.
CHAPTER II.
Marriage and the Family amongst Animals . 20-36
I. The Preservation of Species.
II. Marriage and the Rearing of the Young among Animals.
III. The Family amongst Animals.
CHAPTER III.
Promiscuity .....*.. 37-55
I. Has there been a Stage of Promiscuity?
II. Cases of Human Promiscuity.
III. Hetairism.
CHAPTER IV.
Some Singular Forms of Sexual Association . 56-72
I. Primitive Sexual Immorality.
II. Some Strange Forms of Marriage.
CHAPTER V.
Polyandry. . 73-88
I. Sexual Proportion of Births : its Influence on
Marriage.
II. Ethnography of Polyandry.
HI. Polyandry in Ancient Arabia.
IV. Polyandry in General.
ivi36Ei3?0
vi CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VI.
PAGE
Marriage by Capture ..... 89-104
I. Rape.
II. Marriage by Capture.
III. Signification of the Ceremonial of Capture.
CHAPTER VII.
Marriage by Purchase and by Servitude . 105-121
I. The Power of Parents.
II. Marriage by Servitude.
III. Marriage by Purchase.
CHAPTER VIII.
Primitive Polygamy 122-137
I. Polygamy in Oceania, Africa, and America.
II. Polygamy in Asia and in Europe.
CHAPTER IX.
Polygamy of Civilised People . , . 138-153
I. The Stage of Polygamy.
IT. Arab Polygamy.
III. Polygamy in Egypt, Mexico, and Peru.
IV. Polygamy in Persia and India.
CHAPTER X.
Prostitution and Concubinage . . . 154-170
I. Concubinage in General.
II. Prostitution.
III. Various Forms of Concubinage.
CHAPTER XI.
Primitive Monogamy 171-187
I. The Monogamy of Inferior Kaces.
II. Monogamy in the Ancient States of Central America.
III. Monogamy in Ancient Egypt.
IV. Monogamy of the Touaregs and Abyssinians.
V. Monogamy among the Mongols of Asia.
VI. Monogamy and Civilisation.
CONTENTS. vii
CHAPTER XII.
PAGE
Hebrew and Aryan Monogamy . . . 188-206
I. Monogamy of the Races called Superior.
II. Hebrew Marriage.
III. Marriage in Persia and Ancient India.
IV. Marriage in Ancient Greece.
V. Marriage in Ancient Rome.
VI. Barbarous Marriage and Christian Marriage.
CHAPTER XIII.
Adultery 207-227
I. Adultery in General.
II. Adultery in Melanesia.
III. Adultery in Black Africa.
IV. Adultery in Polynesia.
V. Adultery in Savage America.
VI. Adultery in Barbarous America.
VII. Adultery among the Mongol Races and in Malaya.
VIII. Adultery among the Egyptians, the Berbers, and the Semites.
IX. Adultery in Persia and India.
X. Adultery in the Greco-Roman World.
XI. Adultery in Barbarous Europe.
XII. Adultery in the Past and in the Future.
CHAPTER XIV.
Repudiation and Divorce . . . . 228-248
I. In Savage Countries.
II. Divorce and Repudiation among Barbarous Peoples.
III. The Evolution of Divorce.
CHAPTER XV.
Widowhood and the Levirate . . . 249-266
I. Widowhood in Savage Countries.
II. Widowhood in Barbarous Countries.
III. The Levirate.
IV. Summary.
CHAPTER XVI.
The Familial Clan in Australia and
America ....... 267-284
I. The Family.
II. The Family in Melanesia.
III. The Family in America.
I*
viii CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XVII.
PAGE
The Familial Clan and its Evolution . 285-302
I. The Clan among the Redskins.
II. The Family among the Redskins.
III. The Family in Polynesia.
IV. The Family among the Mongols.
V. The Clan and the Family.
CHAPTER XVIII.
The Maternal Family 303-321
I. The Familial Clan and the Family properly so-
called.
II. The Family in Africa.
III. The Family in Malaya.
IV. The Family among the Nairs of Malabar.
V. The Family among the Aborigines of Bengal,
VI. The Couvade.
VII. The Primitive Family.
CHAPTER XIX.
The Family in Civilised Countries . . 322-340
I. The Family in China.
II. The Family among the Semitic Races.
III. The Family among the Berbers.
IV. The Family in Persia.
V. The Family in India.
VI. The Greco-Roman Family.
VII. The Family in Barbarous Europe.
CHAPTER XX.
Marriage and the Family in the Past, the
Present, and the Future . . . 341-360
I. The Past.
II. The Present.
III. The Future.
Index 36 ^
PREFACE.
A FEW preliminary observations in regard to the aim and
method of this work may be useful to the reader.
He will do well to begin by persuading himself, with
Montaigne, that the " hinges of custom " are not always
the " hinges of reason," and still less those of reality in all
times and places. He will do better still to steep himself
in the spirit of scientific evolution, and to bear in mind that
incessant change is the law of the social, quite as much as"^
of the physical and organic world, and that the most
splendid blossoms have sprung from very humble germs.
This is the supreme truth of science, and it is only when
such a point of view has become quite familiar to
us that we shall be neither troubled nor disconcerted
by the sociological history of humanity; and however
shocking or unnatural certain customs may appear, we
shall guard ourselves against any feeling of indignation
at them, and more especially against a thoughtless refusal
to give credence to them, simply because they run counter
to our own usages and morality.
All that social science has a right to ask of the facts "^
which it registers is that they should be authentic; this
X PREFACE,
duly proved, it only remains to accept, classify, and
interpret them. Faithful to this method, without which
there could be no science of sociology, I have here gathered
together as proofs a number of singular facts, which,
improbable as they may appear according to our pre-
conceived notions, and criminal according to our moral
sense, are nevertheless most instructive. Although in a
former work I have taken care to establish the relativity of
morality, the explanations that I am about to make are
not out of season ; for the subject of this book is closely
connected with vAidX, par excellence^ we call "morals."
On this point I must permit myself a short digression.
No one will pretend that our so-called civilised society
has a very strict practical morality, yet public opinion still
seems to attach a particular importance to sexual morality,
and this is the expression of a very real sentiment, the
origin of which scientific sociology has no difficulty in
retracing. This origin, far from being a lofty one, goes
back simply to the right of proprietorship in women similar
to that in goods and chattels — a proprietorship which we
find claimed in savage, and even in barbarous countries,
without any feeling of shame. During the lower stages of
social evolution, women are uniformly treated as domestic
animals ; but this female live-stock are difficult to guard ;
for, on the one hand, they are much coveted and are unskil-
ful in defending themselves, and on the other, they do not
bend willingly to the one-sided duty of fidelity that is im-
posed on them. The masters, therefore, protect their own
interests by a whole series of vexatious restraints, of rigorous
punishments, and of ferocious revenges, left at first to the
good pleasure of the marital proprietors, and afterwards
PREFACE, xi
regulated and codified. In the chapter on adultery,
especially, will be found a great number of examples of
this marital savagery. I have previously shown, in my
Evolution de la Morale^ that the unforeseen result of all this
jealous fury has been to endow humanity, and more par-
ticularly women, with the delicate sentiment of modesty,
unknown to the animal world and to primitive man.
From this evolution of thousands of years there has
finally resulted, in countries and races more or less civilised,
a certain sexual morality, which is half instinctive, and
varies according to time and place, but which it is im-
possible to transgress without the risk of offending gravely
against public opinion. Civilisations, however, whether
coarse or refined, differ from each other. Certain actions,
counted as blameworthy in one part of the world, are
elsewhere held as lawful and even praiseworthy. In order
to trace the origin of marriage and of the family, it is
therefore indispensable to relate a number of practices
which may be scandalous in our eyes. While submitting
to this necessity, I have done so unwillingly, and with all
the sobriety which befits the subject. I have striven never
to depart from the scientific spirit, which purifies everything,
and renders even indecency decent.
Like the savages of to-day, our distant ancestors were
very little removed from simple animal existence. A
knowledge of their physiology is nevertheless necessary
to enable us to understand our own; for, however culti-
vated the civilised man may be, he derives from the
humble progenitors of his race a number of instincts which
are energetic in proportion as they are of a low order.
More or less deadened, these gross tendencies are latent in
xii PREFACE.
the most highly developed individuals ; and when they
sometimes break out suddenly in the actions of a man's
life, or in the morals or literature of a people, they recall
to us our very humble origin, and even show a certain
mental and moral retrogression.
^ Now it is to this primitive man, still in such a rudi-
mentary state, that we must go back for enlightenment on
the genesis of all our social institutions. We must take him
at the most distant dawn of humanity, follow him step by
step in his slow metamorphoses, without either disparaging
or poetising him ; we must watch him rising and becoming
more refined through accumulated centuries, till he loses
by degrees his animal instincts, and at length acquires
aptitudes, inclinations, and faculties that are truly human.
Nothing is better adapted to exemplify the evolution
which binds our present to our past and to our future
, than the sociological history of marriage and of the family.
After having spoken of the aim of this book, it remains
for me to justify its method. This differs considerably
from what the mass of the public like far too well. But
a scientific treatise must not take purely literary works
for its models ; and I can say to my readers, with much
more reason than old Rabelais, that if they wish to taste
the marrow, they must take the trouble to break the bone.
My first and chief consideration is to assist in the founda-
tion of a new science — ethnographical sociology. Elegant
and vain dissertations, or vague generalities, have no place
here. It is by giving way to these, and in attempting to
reap the harvest before sowing the seed, that many authors
have lost themselves in a pseudo-sociology, having no
foundation, and consequently no value.
PREFACE, xiii
Social science, if it is to be seriously constituted, must
submit with docility to the method of natural science. The
first task, and the one which especially falls to the lot of the
sociologists of the present day, is to collect the facts which
will form materials for the future edifice. To their suc-
cessors will fall the pleasure of completing and adorning it.
The present work is, therefore, above all, a collection of
facts which, even if taken alone, are curious and suggestive.
These facts have been patiently gleaned from the writings
of ethnographers, travellers, legists, and historians. I have
classed them as well as I could, and naturally they have
inspired me here and there with glimpses of possible induc-
tions, and with some slight attempts at generalisation.
But whether the reader rejects or accepts my interpre-
tations, the groundwork of facts on which they rest is so
instructive of itself that a perusal of the following pages
cannot be quite fruitless.
CH. LETOURNEAU.
THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
AND OF THE FAMILY.
CHAPTER I.
THE BIOLOGICAL ORIGIN OF MARRIAGE.
I. The True Place of Man in the Animal Kingdom. — Man is a
mamniiferous, bimanous vertebrate — Biology the starling-point of
sociology — The origin of love.
II. Reproduction. — Nutrition and reproduction — Scissiparity —
Budding — Ovulation — Conjugation — Impregnation — Reproduction in
the invertebrates— The entity called Nature — Organic specialisation
and reproduction — A dithyramb by Haeckel.
III. Rut and Love. — Rut renders sociable — Rut is a short puberty
— Its organic adornment — The frenzy of rut — Physiological reason
of rut in mammals — Love and rut — Schopenhauer and the designs of
'Nature.
IV. Love of Animals. — Love and death — The law of coquetry — The
law of battle — Jealousy and esthetic considerations — Love amongst
birds — Effects of sexual selection — The loves of the skylark — The
males of the blue heron and their combats— Battles of male geese and
male gallinaceae — Courteous duels between males — ^^sthetic seduction
among certain birds — .Esthetic constructions — Musical seduction —
Predominance of the female among certain birds — Greater sensuality
of the male — Effect of sexual exaltation — A Cartesian paradox — ■
Individual choice amongst animals — Individual fancies of females —
General propositions.
J
THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
I. The True Place of Man.
We have too long been accustomed to study human
society as if man were a being apart in the universe. In
comparing human bipeds with animals it has seemed as if
we were disparaging these so-called demi-gods. It is to
this blind prejudice that we must attribute the tardy rise
of anthropological sociology. A deeper knowledge of
biological science and of inferior races has at last cured
us of this childish vanity. We have decided to assign to
man his true place in the organic world of our little globe.
Granted that the human biped is incontestably the most
intelligent of terrestial animals, yet, by his histological
texture, by his organs, and by the functions of these organs,
he is evidently only an animal, and easily classed in the
series : he is a bimanous, mammiferous vertebrate. Not that
by his most glorious representatives, by those whom we call
men of genius, man does not rise prodigiously above his
distant relations of the mammal class ; but, on the other
hand, by imperfectly developed specimens he descends far
below many species of animals ; for if the idiot is only an
exception, the man of genius is still more so. In fact, the
lowest human races, with whose anatomy, psychology, and
sociology we are to-day familiar, can only inspire us with
feelings of modesty. They furnish studies in ethnography
which have struck a mortal blow at the dreams of " the
kingdom of man."
When once it is established that man is a mammal like
any other, and only distinguished from the animals of his
class by a greater cerebral development, all study of human
sociology must logically be preceded by a corresponding
study of animal sociology. Moreover, as sociology finally
depends on biology, it will be necessary to seek in physio-
logical conditions themselves the origin of great sociological
manifestations. The first necessity of societies is that they
should endure, and they can only do so on the condition
of providing satisfaction for primordial needs, which are the
condition of life itself, and which imperatively dominate
and regulate great social institutions. Lastly, if man is a
sociable animal, he is not the only one ; many other species
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 3
have grouped themselves in societies, where, however
rudimentary they may be, we find in embryonic sketch the
principal traits of human agglomerations. There are even
species — as, for example, bees, ants, and termites — that have
created true republics, of complicated structure, in which
the social problem has been solved in an entirely original
manner. We may take from them more than one good
example, and more than one valuable hint.
My present task is to write the history of marriage and
of the family. The institution of marriage has had no
other object than the regulation of sexual unions. These
have for their aim the satisfaction of one of the most
imperious biological needs — the sexual appetite; but this
appetite is only a conscious impulse, a "snare," as Mon-
taigne calls it, which impels both man and animal to
provide, as far as concerns them, for the preservation of
their species — to "pay the ancestral debt," according
to the Brahmanical formula. Before studying the sexual
relations, and their more or less regulated form in human
societies, it will not be out of place to say a few words on
reproduction in general, to sketch briefly its physiology in
so far as this is fundamental, and to show how tyrannical
are the instincts whose formation has been determined by
physiological causes, and which render the fiercest animals
mild and tractable. This is what I shall attempt to do in
the following chapter.
II. Reproduction.
Stendhal has somewhere said that the beautiful is simply
the outcome of the useful ; changing the phrase, we
may say that generation is the outcome of nutrition. If
we examine the processes of generation in very simple
organisms, this great function seems to answer to a super-
abundance of nutritive materials, which, after having carried
the anatomic elements to their maximum volume, at length
overflows and provokes the formation of new elements. As
long as the new-born elements can remain aggregated with
those which already constitute the individual, as long as the
latter has not acquired all the development compatible with
4 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
the plan of its being, there is simply growth. When once
the limit is attained that the species cannot pass, the
organism (I mean a very rudimentary organism) repro-
duces itself commonly by a simple division in two halves.
It perishes in doubling itself and in producing two
beings, similar to itself, and having nothing to do but grow.
It is by means of this bi-partition that hydras, vorticellae,
algae, and the lowest mushrooms are generally propagated.
In the organisms that are slightly more complicated the
function of reproduction tends to be specialised. The
individual is no longer totally divided ; it produces a bud
which grows by degrees, and detaches itself from the parent
organism to run in its turn through the very limited adven-
tures of its meagre existence.
By a more advanced step in specialisation the function of
reproduction becomes locaHsed in a particular cell, an
ovule, and the latter, by a series of repeated bi-partitions,
develops a new individual ; but it is generally necessary that
the cellule destined to multiply itself by segmentation should
at first dissolve by union with another cell. Through
the action of various organic processes the two generating
cells arrive in contact. The element which is to undergo
segmentation — the female element — then absorbs the
element that is simply impulsive ; the element called male
becomes impregnated with it, and from that moment it is
fertilised, that is to say, capable of pursuing the course of
its formative work.
This phenomenon, so simple in itself, of the conjugation
of two cellules, is the foundation of reproduction in the two
organic kingdoms as soon as the two sexes are separated.
Whether the sexes are represented by distinct or united
individuals, whether the accessory organic apparatus is
more or less complicated, are matters of no consequence ;
the essential fact reappears always and everywhere of the
conjugation of two cellules, with absorption, in the case
of superior animals, of the male cellule by the female
cellule.
The process may be observed m its most elementary form
in the algse and the diatomaceae, said to be conjugated.
To form a reproductive cellule, or spore, two neighbouring
cellules each throw out, one towards the other, a prolongation.
ANb OF THE FAMILY, $
These prolongations meet, and their sides absorb each
other at the point of contact ; then the protoplasms of the
two elements mingle, and at length the two cellules melt
into a single reproductive cellule {Spirogyra longata).
Between this marriage of two lower vegetal cellules,
which realises to the letter the celebrated bibhcal words,
" they shall be one flesh," or rather one protoplasm, and
the fundamental phenomenon of fecundation in the superior
animals, including man, there is no essential dissimilarity.
The ovule of the female and the spermatozoon of the male
become fused in the same manner, with this difference only,
that the feminine cellule, the ovule, preserves its individu-
ality and absorbs the masculine cellule, or is impregnated
by it.
But, simple as it is, this phenomenon of fecundation
is the sole reason of the duration of bi-sexual species.
Thanks to it, organic individuals that are all more or less
ephemeral,
" Et, quasi cursores, vitai lampada tradunt."
{Lucretius, ii. 78.)
For many organised beings reproduction seems in reality
the supreme object of existence. Numbers of vegetables
and of animals, even of animals high in the series — as insects
— die as soon as they have accomplished this great duty.
Sometimes the male expires before having detached himself
from the female, and the latter herself survives just long
enough to effect the laying of eggs. Instead of laying eggs,
the female cochineal fills herself with eggs to such a degree
that she dies in consequence, and the tegument of her
body is transformed into a protecting envelope for the
eggs.
At the not very distant time when animism reigned
supreme, these facts were attributed to calculations of
design. Nature, it was believed, occupied herself chiefly
with perpetuating organised species ; as for individuals, she
disdained the care of them. We now know that Nature,
as an anthropomorphic being, does not exist ; that the great
forces called natural are unconscious ; that their blind action
results, however, in the world of life, in a choice, a selection,
6 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
a progressive evolution, or, to sum up, in the survival of the
individuals best adapted to the conditions of their existence.
Without any intention of Dame Nature, the preservation of
the species was necessarily, before anything else, the object
of selection ; and during the course of geological periods
primitive bi-partition gradually became transformed through
progressive differentiation into bi-sexual procreation, re-
quiring the concurrence of special and complicated apparatus
in order to be effected. But, at the same time as procreation,
other functions also became differentiated by the formation
of special organs ; the nervous system vegetated around
the chorda dorsalis; and, finally, conscious life awoke in
the nervous centres. Thenceforth the accomplishment of
the great function of procreation assumed an entirely
different aspect. In the lowest stages of the animal
kingdom reproduction is effected mechanically and un-
consciously. A paramoecium, observed by M. Balbiani,
produced in forty-two days, by a series of simple bi-
partitions, 1,384,116 individuals, who very certainly had
not the least notion of the phenomena by which they
transmitted existence. But with superior animals it is
very different; in their case the act of procreation is a
real efflorescence, not only physical, but psychical. For
the study that I am now undertaking it will not be without
use to recall the principal features of this amorous efflor-
escence, since it is, after all, the first cause of marriage and
of the family. At the same time, not to lose our stand-
point, it is important to bear in mind that at the bottom all
this expenditure of physical and psychical force has for
motive and for result, both in man and animal, the con-
jugation of two generative cellules. Haeckel has written
a dithyramb on this subject in his Anthropogenta, which
is in the main so true that I take pleasure in quoting
it — "Great effects are everywhere produced, in animated
nature, by minute causes. . . . Think of how many curious
phenomena sexual selection gives rise to in animal life;
think of the results of love in human life ; now, all this has
for its raison d'etre the union of two cellules. . . . There is
no organic act which approaches this one in power and in
the force of differentiation. The Semitic myth of Eve
seducing Adam for the love of knowledge, the old Greek
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 7
legend of Paris and Helen, and many other magnificent
poems, do they not simply express the enormous influence
that sexual love and sexual selection have exercised since
the separation of the sexes ? The influence of all the other
passions which agitate the human heart cannot weigh in the
balance with love, which inflames the senses and fascinates
the reason. On the one hand, we celebrate in love the
source of the most sublime works of art, and of the noblest
creations of poetry and of music ; we venerate it as the
most powerful factor in civilisation, as the prime cause of
family life, and consequently of social life. On the other
hand, we fear love as a destructive flame; it is love that
drives so many to ruin ; it is love that has caused more
misery, vice, and crime than all other calamities together.
Love is so prodigious, its influence is so enormous on
psychic life and the most diverse functions of the nervous
system, that in regard to it we are tempted to question the
supernatural effect of our natural explanation. Nevertheless,
comparative biology and the history of development conduct
us surely and incontestably to the simplest, most remote
source of love ; that is to say, the elective affinity of
two different cellules — the spermatic cell and the ovulary
cell."i
III. J^ul and Love.
In a former work, on the evolution of morality I have
described the manner in which the hereditary tendencies
and instincts arise from habit, induced in the nervous
cellules by a sufficient repetition of the same acts. The
instinct of procreation has, and can have, no other
origin. The animal species, during the long phases of
their evolution, have reproduced themselves unconsciously,
and by very simple processes, which we may still observe
in certain zoophytes. By degrees these mere sketches of
animals have become perfected and differentiated, and
have acquired special organs over which the biological
work has been distributed; thenceforth the play of life
has echoed in the nervous centres, and has awakened
in them impressions and desires, the energy of which
1 Anthropogenia, p. 577.
S THE E VOL VTION OF MARRIA GE
strictly corresponds to the importance of ihe functions.
Now, there is no more primordial function than procreation,
since on it depends the duration even of the species ; and
for this reason the need of reproduction, or the rut, breaks
out in many animals like a kind of madness. The psychic
faculties of the animal, whether great or small, are then
over-excited, and rise above their ordinary level ; but they
all tend to one supreme aim — the desire for reproduction.
At this period the wildest and most unsociable species
can no longer endure solitude ; both males and females
seek each other; sometimes, even, they are seen to form
themselves into groups, or small provisional societies, which
will dissolve again after the coupling time is over.
Each period of rut is for animals a sort of puberty.
The hair, the plumage, and the scales often assume rich
tints which afterwards disappear. Sometimes special epi-
dermic productions appear in the male, and serve him
for temporary weapons with which to fight his rivals, or
for ornaments to captivate the female. It is with a veritable
frenzy that the sexual union is accomplished among certain
species. Thus Dr. Giinther has several times found female
toads dead, smothered by the embrace of the males. ^
Spallanzani was able to amputate the thighs of male frogs
and toads during copulation, without diverting them from
their work.
In the animal class which more particularly interests
us, that of mammals, rut produces analogous, though
less violent, phenomena. Now, in this case, we know that
erotic fury is closely related to congestive phenomena,
having for their seat the procreative glands, which swell
in both male and female, and provoke in the latter a
veritable process of egg-laying. We must not forget that
man, in his quality of mammal, is subject to the common
law, that female menstruation is essentially identical with
the intimate phenomena of rut in the females of mammals,
and corresponds also to an ovarian congestion, or to
the swelling and bursting of one or more of the Graafian
follicles ; it is, in short, a production of eggs. I need not
lay stress on these facts, but it is right to recall them
by the way, since they are the raison d'etre of sexual
^ Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 384.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y, 9
attraction, without which there would be neither marriage
nor family.
If we are willing to descend to the foundation of things,
we find that human love is essentially rut in an intelligent
being. It exalts all the vital forces of the man just as rut
over-excites those of the animal. If it seems to differ
extremely from it, this is simply because in man the pro-
creative need, a primordial need beyond all others, in
radiating from highly developed nervous centres, awakens
and sets in commotion an entire psychic life unknown to
the animal.
There is nothing surprising to the naturalist in this pro-
creative explosion, which evolves altruism out of egotism.
We know too well, however, that it has not appeared so
simple a matter to many philosophers and celebrated
literary men, little familiar with biological sciences. A
belated metaphysician, Schopenhauer, who has lately
become fashionable, adopting the ancient stereotyped
doctrine which makes Nature an anthropomorphic person-
age, has gratuitously credited her with quite a profound
diplomatic design. According to him, it is a foregone con-
clusion that she should intoxicate individuals with love, and
thus urge them on, without their suspecting it, to sacrifice
themselves to the major interest of the preservation of the
species. The glance that we have just thrown on the
processes of reproduction, from the paramoecium up to man,
suffices to refute this dream. I will not, however, dwell on
this. What is here of great interest is to inquire how the
superior animals comport themselves when pricked by
desire, and to note the principal traits of their sexual
psychology ; for here again we shall have to recognise more
than one analogy to what happens in regard to man ; and
we shall also see later that there exists both in the animal
and the man some relation between the manner in which
sexual attraction is felt and the greater or less aptitude for
durable pairing, and consequently for marriage and the
family.
Without giving more time than is necessary to these
short excursions into animal psychology, it will be well to
pause on them for a moment. They throw a light on the
sources of human sociology ; they force us also to break
I o THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
once for all wiih the abstract and trite theories which have
inspired, on the subject of marriage and the family, so
much empty writing and so many satiating trivialities. It
is in animality that humanity has its root ; it is there,
consequently, that we must seek the origins of human
sociology.
IV. Loves of Attimals.
In a well-known mystic book occurs an aphorism which
has become celebrated — "Love is strong as death." The
expression is not exaggerated ; we may even say that love is
stronger than death, since it makes us despise it. This is
perhaps truer with animals than with man, and is all the
more evident in proportion as the rational will is weaker,
and prudential calculations furnish no check to the impetu-
osity of desire. For the majority of insects to love and to
die are almost synonymous, and yet they make no effort to
resist the amorous frenzy which urges them on. But how-
ever short may be their sexual career, one fact has been
so generally observed in regard to many of them, that it
may be considered as the expression of a law — the law of
coquetry. With the greater number of species that are
slightly intelligent, the female refuses at first to yield to
amorous caresses. This useful practice may well have
arisen from selection, for its result has invariably been to
excite the desire of the male, and arouse in him latent or
sleeping faculties. However brief, for example, may be the
life of butterflies, their pairing is not accomplished without
preliminaries; the males court the females durin.5 entire
hours, and for a butterfly hours are years.
We can easily imagine that the coquetry of females is
more common amongst vertebrates. When the season of
love arrives, many male fishes, who are then adorned with
extremely brilliant colours, make the most of their transient
beauty by spreading out their fins, and by executing leaps,
darts, and seductive manoeuvres around the females.
Among fishes we begin already to observe another
sexual law, at least as general as the law of coquetry,
which Darwin has called the law of battle. The males
dispute with each other for the females, and must triumph
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 1 1
over their rivals before obtaining them. Thus, whilst the
female sticklebacks are very pacific, their males are of war-
like humour, and engage in furious combats in their honour.
In the same way the male salmon, whose lower jaw
lengthens into a crook during the breeding season, are
constantly fighting amongst each other. ^
The higher we ascend in the animal kingdom the more
frequent and more violent become two desires in the
males — the desire of appearing beautiful, and that of
driving away rivals. In South America, the males of
the Analis cristellaius^ a fissilingual saurian, have terrible
battles in the breeding season, the vanquished habitually
losing his tail, which is bitten off by the victor. An old
observer also describes the amorous male alligator as
"swollen to bursting, the head and tail raised, spinning
round on the surface of the water, and appearing to assume
the manner of an Indian chief relating his exploits."^
But it is particularly among birds that the sentiment, or
rather the passion, of love breaks out with most force and
even poetry. It is especially to birds that the celebrated
Darwinian theory of sexual selection applies. It is difficult,
indeed, not to attribute to this influence the production
of the offensive and defensive arms, the armaments, the
organs of song, the glands of odoriferous secretion of many
male birds, also their courage, the warlike instinct of many
of them, and lastly, the coquetry of the females. Let us
listen to Audubon, as he relates the loves of the skylark: —
'' Each male is seen to advance with an imposing and
measured step, swinging his tail, spreading it out to its full
extent, then closing it again like a fan in the hands of a fine
lady. Their brilliant notes are more melodious than ever ;
they repeat them oftener than usual as they rest on the
branch or summit of some tall meadow reed. Woe to the
rival who dares to enter the lists, or to the male who simply
comes in sight of another male at this moment of veritable
delirium : he is suddenly attacked, and, if he is the weaker,
chased beyond the limits of the territory claimed by the
first occupant. Sometimes several birds are seen engaged
in these rude combats, which rarely last more than two or
1 Darwin, Descent of Man^ p. 365.
^ Bartram, Travels through Carolina^ p. 128 (i79l)'
1 2 THE E VOL UTiON OF MARkIA GE
three minutes : the appearance of a single female suffices
to put an instant end to their quarrel, and they all fly after
her as if mad. The female shows the natural reserve of her
sex, without which, even among larks, every female would
probably fail to find a male [this is a little too flattering for
larks, and even for men]. When the latter," continues
Audubon, "flies towards her, sighing forth his sweetest
notes, she retreats before her ardent admirer in such
a way that he knows not whether he is repulsed or
encouraged. "1
In this little picture the author has noted all the striking
traits of the love of birds — the courage and jealousy of the
male, his efforts to charm the female by his beauty and the
sweetness of his song, and finally, the coquetry of the
female, who retreats, and thus throws oil on the fire. The
combats of the amorous males among many species of birds
have been observed and described minutely. " The large
blue male herons," says Audubon, "attack each other
brutally, without courtesy ; they make passes with their long
beaks and parry them like fencing masters, often for half-
an-hour at a time, after which tlie vanquished one remains
on the ground, wounded or killed." ^
The male Canadian geese engage in combats which
last more than half-an-hour ; the vanquished sometimes
return to the charge, and the fight always takes place in an
enclosed field, in the middle of a circle formed by the band
or clan of which the rivals form part.
But it is especially among the gallinaceae that love
inspires the males with warlike fury. In this order of
birds nearly all the males are of bellicose temperament.
Our barn-door cock is the type of the gallinaceae — vain,
amorous, and courageous. Black cocks are also always
ready for a fight, and their females quietly look on at their
combats, and afterwards reward the conqueror. We may
observe analogous facts, only somewhat masked, in savage,
and even in civilised humanity. The conduct of certain
females of the Tetras urogallus is still more human. Accord-
ing to Kowalewsky, they take advantage of a moment when
the attention of the old cocks is entirely absorbed by
^ Audubon, Sdnes de la Nature dans les Etats Unis, vol. i. p. 383.
2 Jbid. vol. ii. p. 66.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 13
the anxiety of the combat, to run off with a younger
male.^
If we may believe certain authors, these amorous duels
must not always be taken seriously. They are often nothing
more than parades, tourneys, or courteous jousts, merely
giving the males an opportunity of showing their beauty,
address, or strength. This is the case, according to Blyth,
with the Tetras umbellusP' In the same way, the grouse of
Florida (Tetras cuspido) are said to assemble at night to
fight until the morning with measured grace, and then to
separate, having first exchanged formal courtesies.^
But among animals, as well as men, love has more than
one string to his bow. It is especially so with birds, who
are the most amorous of vertebrates. They use several
aesthetic means of attracting the female, such as beauty of
plumage and the art of showing it, and also sweetness of
song. Strength seems often to be quite set aside, and the
eye and ear are alone appealed to by the love-stricken
males.
Every one has seen our pigeons and doves courteously
salute their mates. Many male birds execute dances and
courting parades before their females. Thus, for example,
do the Tetras phasaniellus of North America, herons
{Cathartes Jota), vultures, etc. The male of the red-wing
struts about before his female, sweeping the ground with
his tail and acting the dandy. ^ The crested duck raises his
head gracefully, straightens his silky aigrette, or bows to his
female, while his throat swells and he utters a sort of
gutteral sound.^ The male chaffinch places himself in
front of the female, that she may admire at her ease his red
throat and blue head.^
All this aesthetic display is quite intentional and pre-
meditated; for while many pheasants and gallinaceous
birds parade before their females, two pheasants of dull
colour, the Crossoptilon auritmn and the Phasianus
Wallichii^ refrain from doing so,^ being apparently con-
scious of their modest livery.
1 V>2it'H'm^ Descent of Man, p. 399. ^ Ibid. p. 403.
^ Espinas, Societis Animates, p. 326.
* Audubon, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 305. ^ Ibid. vol. ii. p. 50.
^ Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 438. ^ Ibid. p. 438,
14 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
Birds often assemble in large numbers to compete in
beauty before pairing. The Tetras cuspido of Florida and
the little grouse of Germany and Scandinavia do this.
The latter have daily amorous assemblies, or cours d^amour^
of great length, which are renewed every year in the month
of May.i
Certain birds are not content with their natural orna-
ments, however brilliant these may be, but give the rein to
their aesthetic desire in a way that may be called human.
Mr. Gould assures us that some species of humming-birds
decorate the exterior of their nests with exquisite taste,
making use of lichens, feathers, etc. The bower-birds of
Australia {Chla7nydera fnaculata^ etc.) construct bowers on
the ground, ornamented with feathers, shells, bones, and
leaves. These bowers are intended to shelter the courting
parades, and both males and females join in building them,
though the former are more zealous in the work.^ But in
this erotic architecture the palm is carried off by a bird of
New Guinea, the Amblyornis inornata^ made known to us
by M. O. Beccari.2 This bird of rare beauty, for it is a bird
of Paradise, constructs a little conical hut to protect his
amours, and in front of this he arranges a lawn, carpeted
with moss, the greenness of which he relieves by scattering
on it various bright-coloured objects, such as berries, grains,
flowers, pebbles, and shells. More than this, when the
flowers are faded, he takes great care to replace them by
fresh ones, so that the eye may be always agreeably
flattered. These curious constructions are solid, lasting for
several years, and probably serving for several birds. What
we know of sexual unions among the lower human races
suffices to show how much these birds excel men in
sexual delicacy.
Every one is aware that the melodious voice of many male
birds furnishes them with a powerful means of seduction.
Every spring our nightingales figure in true lyric tourna-
ments. Magpies, who are ill-endowed from a musical point
of view, endeavour to make up for this organic imperfection
1 Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 433.— Espinas, Soc. Animales, p. 326.
2 Ibid. pp. 418, 453.
3 Annali del Museo civico di storia naturale di Geneva, t. ix. fase
3-4, ^^77-
AND OF THE FAMILY. 15
by rapping on a dry and sonorous branch, not only to call
the female, but also to charm her ; we may say, in fact, that
they perform instrumental music. Another bird, the male
of the weaver-bird, builds an abode of pleasure for himself,
where he goes to sing to his companion.^
Audubon has made one observation in regard to Cana-
dian geese which is in every point applicable to the human
species. The older the birds are, he says, the more they
abridge the preliminaries of their amours. Their poetic
and aesthetic sense has become blunted, and they go straight
to their object.
Wherever amongst the animal species supremacy in love
is obtained by force, the male, nearly always the more
ardent, has necessarily become, through the action of selec-
tion, larger, stronger, and better armed than the female.
Such is in reality the case in regard to the greater number
of vertebrates; certain exceptions, however, exist, and
naturally these are chiefly found among birds, as they are
more inclined than other types to put a certain delicacy in
their sexual unions. With many species of birds, indeed,
the female is larger and stronger than the male. It is
well known to be the same with certain articulates, and
these facts authorise us to admit that there is no necessary
correlation between relative weakness and the female sex.
Must we therefore conclude, with Darwin, that the females
of certain birds owe their excess of size and height to the
fact that they have formerly contested also for the possession
of the males ? We may be allowed to doubt it. Almost
universally, whether she is large or small, the female is less
ardent than the male, and in the amorous tragi-comedy she
generally plays, from beginning to end, a passive role ; in
the animal kingdom, as well as with mankind, amazons are
rare.
Among birds and vertebrates generally the male is much
more impetuous than the female, and therefore he has no
difficulty in accepting for the moment any companion
whatever.2 This uncontrollable ardour sometimes even
urges the males to commit actual attempts on the safety of
the family. Thus it happens that the male canary {Fringilla
^ Espinas, loc. city pp. 299, 438.
- Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 460.
i6 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
canaria) persecutes his female while she is sitting, tears her
nest, throws out the eggs, and, in short, tries to excite his
mate to become again a lover, forgetting that she is a
mother. In the same way our domestic cock pursues the
sitting hen when she leaves her eggs in order to feed.^
With the cousins-german of man, the mammals, sexual
psychology has a general resemblance to that of birds, but
more often it is far less delicate. And besides this, the
sexual customs are naturally less refined in proportion as
the nervous centres of the species are less perfected. Thus
the stupid tatoways meet by chance, smell each other,
copulate and separate with the greatest indifference. Our
domestic dog himself, although so civilised and affectionate,
is generally as gross in his amours as the tatoway.
With birds, as we have seen, the law of battle plays an
important part in sexual selection ; but it is often counter-
balanced by other less brutal influences. This is rarely the
case in regard to mammals, with whom especially the right
of the strongest regulates the unions. The law of battle
prevails among aquatic as well as land mammals. The
combats of the male stags, in the rutting season, are
celebrated. The combatants have been known to succumb
without being able to disentangle their interlocked antlers ;
but seals and male sperm-whales fight with equal fury, and
so also do the males of the Greenland whale.^
In mammals, as in birds, and as in man, sexual desire
raises and intensifies all the faculties, and seems to elevate
the individual above the level of normal life. Animals in a
state of rut become bolder, more ferocious, and more danger-
ous. The elephant, pacific enough by nature, assumes a
terrible fury in the rutting season. The Sanskrit poems
constantly recur to the simile of the elephant in rut to
express the highest degree of strength, nobility, grandeur,
and even beauty.
But obviously I must not linger very long over the loves
of the animals. My chief object is to study sexual union
and marriage amongst human beings. The rut of animals
and their sexual passions merely interest us here as pre-
liminary studies, which throw light on the origin of analogous
^ Houzeau, Facultis mentales des animaux^ t. i^r. p. 292.
2 Darwin, Descent of Man^ pp. 550, 556.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 17
sentiments in mankind. Before leaving this subject, how-
ever, it will be useful to note a few more facts which, from
the point of view of sexual psychology, bring animals and
men near to each other.
The old Cartesian paradox, which makes the animal an
unconscious machine, has still many partisans. A widely-
prevailing prejudice insists that animals always obey blind
instincts, while man alone, homo sapiens^ made after the
image of God, weighs motives, deliberates and chooses.
Now, as procreation constitutes one of the great necessities
of organised beings, and is an imperious law which no
species can elude without disappearing, surely we ought to
find amongst animals the most exact regularity in the acts
connected with it. Man alone ought to have the privilege
of introducing caprice and free choice into love. It is not
so, however. On this side of his nature, as on all the others,
man and animal approach, resemble, and copy each other.
In his celebrated invocation to Venus, Lucretius has truly
said, proclaiming the universal empire of the instinct of
reproduction —
*' Per te quoniam genus omne animantum
Concipitur, visitque exortum lumine solis."
The animal, as well as the morally developed man, is
capable of preference and individual passion ; he does not
yield blindly and passively to sexual love.
According to observers and breeders, it is the female
who is specially susceptible of sentimental selection.
The male, even the male of birds, is more ardent than
the female, that is to say, more intoxicated and more
sharply pricked by instinct, and thus generally accepts any
female whatever : all are alike to him. This is the rule, but
it is not without exceptions ; thus, the male pheasant shows
a singular aversion to certain hens. Amongst the long-
tailed ducks some females have evidently a particular charm
for the males, and are courted more than the others.^ The
pigeon of the dovecot shows a strong aversion to the species
modified by breeders, which he regards as deteriorated.^
Stallions are often capricious. It was necessary, for example,
^ Darwin, Descent of Man, pp. 460, 461. ^ Ibid. p. 457.
2
i8 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
to use stratagem in order to induce the famous stallion
Monarch to beget Gladiateur, who became still more
famous.^ Analogous facts have been observed in regard
to bulls.2
But it is more especially the females who introduce in-
dividual fancy into sexual love. They are subject to singular
and inexplicable aversions. Mares sometimes resist, and it
is necessary to deceive them.^ Female pigeons occasionally
show a strong dislike to certain males without apparent
cause, and refuse to yield to their caresses. At other times
a female pigeon, suddenly forgetting the constancy of her
species, abandons her old mate or legitimate spouse to fall
violently in love with another male. In the same way
peahens sometimes show a lively attachment to a particular
peacoclc* High-bred bitches, led astray by passion, trample
under foot their dignity, honour, and all care for nobility
of blood, to yield themselves to pug-dogs of low breed or
mongrel males. We are told of some who have persisted
for entire weeks in these degrading passions, repulsing
between times the most distinguished of their own race.^
Even among species noted for their fidelity it sometimes
happens that acts of sexual looseness are committed.
The female pigeon often abandons her mate if the latter is
wounded or becomes weak.^ Misfortune is not attractive,
and love does not always inspire heroism.
In concluding this short study of sexual union in the
animal kingdom, I will attempt to formulate the general
propositions which may be drawn from it.
AH organic species undergo the tyranny of the procreative
function, which is a guarantee of the duration of the type.
The phenomenon of reproduction, when detached from
all the complicated accessories which often conceal it in
bi-sexual species, goes back essentially to the conjugation of
two cellules.
With intelligent animals the procreative function echoes
in the nervous centres under the form of violent desires,
which intensify all the psychic and physical faculties in
awakening what we call love.
1 Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 575. ^ Ibid. pp. 458, 459.
2 Ibid, p 576. ^ Ibid. p. 574.
3 Ibid. p. 576. ^ Ibid. p. 234.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 19
At its base, the love of animals does not differ from that
of man. Doubtless it is never such a quintessence as the
love of Petrarch, but it is often more delicate than that
of inferior races, and of ill-conditioned individuals, who,
though belonging to the human race, seek for nothing in
love but, to use an energetic expression of Amyot's
Plutarch, to "get drunk."
But among many of the animal species the sexual union
induces a durable association, having for its object the
rearing of young. In nobility, delicacy, and devotion these
unions do not yield precedence to many human unions.
They deserve attentive study.
I have now, therefore, to consider marriage and the
family amongst the animals.
CHAPTER II.
MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY AMONGST ANIMALS.
I. Tlie preset vation of species. — Two great processes of preservation
— Different rdles of the male and the female in the animal family.
II. Marriage and the rearing of the young among animals. —
Abandonment of the young in the inferior species — The superior
molluscs guard their eggs — Solicitude of spiders for their eggs and
their young — Instinctive foresight of insects — Its origin — Larvae are
ancestral forms — The familial instinct amongst birds — Frequency of
monogamy amongst birds.
III. The family amongst animals. — Intoxication of egg-laying with
birds — Absence of paternal love in certain birds — The familial instinct
very developed in certain species — Transient nature of their love for
the young — Promiscuity, polygamy, and monogamy among mammals
— Hordes of sociable animals — Polygamous monkeys — Monogamous
monkeys — General observations.
I. The Preservatiott of Species.
Two great processes are employed in the animal kingdom
to assure the preservation of the species : either the parents
do not concern themselves at all with their progeny, in
which case the females give birth to an enormous number
of young ; or, on the other hand, they are full of solicitude
for their offspring, cherishing and protecting them against
the numerous dangers that menace them ; and, in this last
case, the young are few in number. Nature (since the
expression is consecrated) proceeds sometimes by a lavish
and lawless production, and sometimes by a sort of
Malthusianism. Thus a cod lays every year about a million
THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE. 2 1
eggs, on which she bestows no care, and of which only the
thousandth, or perhaps even the hundred thousandth part,
escapes destruction ; turtle-doves, on the contrary, only lay
two eggs, but nearly all their young attain maturity. In
short, the species is maintained sometimes by prodigality of
births and sometimes by a great expenditure of care and
affection on the part of the parents, especially of the female.
It is almost superfluous to remark that analogous facts are
observed in human natality, according as it is savage or
civilised.
With animals, as with men, sexual association, when it
endures, becomes marriage, and results in the family, that is
to say, a union of parents for the purpose of protecting their
young. The care of the male for his progeny is more
rare and tardy than that of the female. Among animals, as
among men, the family is at first matriarchal, and it is only
in the higher stages of the animal kingdom that the male
becomes a truly constituent part of the family group ; but
even then, except among certain species of birds, his chief
care is less to rear the young than to govern in order to
protect them. He plays the role of a despotic chief, guiding
the family when it remains undivided after the rearing of
the young, and most frequently acting like a polygamous
sultan, without the purely human scruple in regard to
incest.
Just as we find amongst animals the two principal types
of the human family, the matriarchate and the patriarchate,
or rather the maternal and paternal family, so we may
observe equally among them all the forms of sexual union
from promiscuity up to monogamy ; but for enlightenment
on these interesting points of sociology, a rapid examination
of the animal kingdom is worth far more than all gener-
alities.
II. Marriage and the Rearing of Young amongst Animals,
We shall leave entirely unnoticed the inferior kingdom of
zoophytes, which are devoid of coalescing nervous centres,
and consequently of conscious life. Even the lower types
of molluscs do not begin to think of their progeny; they
scatter their eggs as plants do their seeds, and leave them
22 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
exposed to all chances. We must go to the superior
molluscs to see any care of offspring awakening. In this
order, indeed, the most highly developed species watch
more or less over their eggs. The taredos carry them
stuck together in rings round their bodies ; snails often
deposit them in damp ground, or in the trunk of a tree ;
cephalopods fix them in clusters round algae, and some-
times watch them till they open, after which they leave
them to get on as they can in the great world.
With spiders and insects the eggs are often the object of
a solicitude and even prolonged forethought, which rejoice
greatly the lovers of design. We must observe, however,
that the males of spiders and that of the greater number
of insects entirely neglect their young \ it is again in the
female that the care for offspring first awakens. And this
is natural, for the eggs have been formed in her body ; she
has laid them, and has been conscious of them ; they form,
in a way, an integral part of her individuality.
The females of spiders also take care of their eggs after
laying them, enclose them in a ball ot thread arranged in
cocoons, carry them about with them, and at the moment
of hatching set them free, one by one, from the envelope.
Amongst some species there is even a certain rearing of the
young. Thus the Nemesia Eleonora lives for some time in
her trapped nest with her young, numbering from twenty to
forty. 1
With insects maternal forethought sometimes amounts to
a sort of divining prescience, which the doctrine of evolution
alone can explain. There is really something wonderful in
the actions of a female insect, as she prepares for her
descendants, whom she will never see any more than she
has seen her own parents, a special nourishment which
differs from her own. It is thus that the sphinx, the
pompilus, the sand-wasp, and the philanthus dig holes in
the sand, in which they deposit with the eggs a suitable
food for the future larvae.^
In order to understand these facts, apparently so
inexplicable, we must look not only to the powerful
influence of selection, but also to the zoogenic past of the
species. With the insect the perfect form is always the
1 Espinas, Sq(. Animales, pp. 343, 344. ^ jbid. pp. 344, 345.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 23
last which it assumes, the outcome of all the previous
metamorphoses. But the larval form, though actually
transitory, must have been for a long time the permanent
form, and it had different tastes and needs. At the present
time there are still numbers of insects whose larval
existence has a much longer duration than that of the
so-called perfect insect (May-flies, cockchafers). There
are even larvae which reproduce themselves. Certain
others, even though sterile, have not lost the maternal
instinct. Thus at the time of the hatching of the nymphs
the larvae of the termites assist the latter to get rid of their
envelope. It is therefore probable that, though now
transitory, the larval forms of insects have formerly been
permanent ; they represent ancestral types, which evolution
has by degrees metamorphosed into insects that we call
perfect. The larvae, now actually sterile, descend from
ancestors which were not so, and in the larvae of certain
species the maternal instinct has survived the reproductive
function.^
This is doubtless the case with bees and ants ; their
workers must represent an ancestral form, having preserved
the maternal fervour of its anterior state ; the winged form,
on the contrary, must be relatively recent. It even appears
probable that in the republics of ants and bees the
laborious workers may have succeeded, in a certain way,
in getting rid of sexual needs which cause animals and
even men to commit so many mad actions. With them the
old maternal instinct has taken the place ceded to it by
sexual instinct, and has become enlarged and ennobled.
Their affection is no longer exclusively confined to a few
individuals produced from their own bowels, but is shared
by all the young of the association. In their sub-oesophagian
ganglion one care takes precedence of all others — the care
of rearing the young. This is their constant occupation
and the great duty to which they sacrifice their lives.
Maternal love, usually so selfish, expands with them into
an all-embracing social affection. It is not impossible that
a psychic metamorphosis of the same kind may one day
take place in future human societies.
It would even seem that the workers appreciate the
^ Pspinas, ^oc. Animales, pp. 336-396.
24 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
faculty of reproduction all the more for being deprived of
it. The queen bee, or rather the fertile female, who is the
common mother of all the tribe, has every possible care
lavished on her, and is publicly mourned when she dies.
If she happens to perish before having young, and then
cannot be replaced, the virgin workers despair of the
republic; losing for ever "les longs espoirs et les vastes
pens^es," they give way to an incurable and mortal
pessimism.
One primitive form of the family, the matriarchate, which
we shall study later, is realised, even in an exaggerated form,
by ants and bees. In human societies we shall only find
very faint imitations of this system, which has been so
strictly carried out by the primates of the invertebrates, and
which seems to have inspired the ancients with their fables
about the amazons.
The vertebrated species, with the exception ot mankind,
have founded no society that can be even distantly com-
pared to that of hymenoptera and of ants. With nearly
all fishes and amphibia the parents are very poorly
developed as regards consciousness, and take no care of
their eggs after fecundation. Some species of fishes are,
however, endowed with a certain familial instinct, and
strange to say, here it is the male who tends his offspring.
So true is it, that the imaginary being called Nature has no
preference for any special methods, and that in her eyes all
processes are good on the one condition that they succeed !
Thus the Chinese Macropus gathers the fecundated eggs
into his jaws, deposits them in the midst of the froth and
mucous exuding from his mouth, and watches over the young
when they are hatched.^ The male of synagnathous fishes
and the sea-horses carry their eggs in an incubating pouch ;
the Chromis paterfamilias^ of the lake of Tiberias, protects
and nourishes in his mouth and bronchial cavity hundreds
of small fishes.2
Other fishes also have more or less care for their young.
Salmon and trout deposit their eggs in a depression which
they have hollowed out in the sand for the purpose.
Fishes, belonging to various families, construct nests and
^ Darwin, Descefii of Man, p. 375.
2 Jyortet, Cojnptes rendus de fAcadhnie des Sciences. 1878-
AND OF THE FAMIL K 25
watch over the young when hatched (Cranilabrus massa^
Cranilabrus melops). Often again it is the male who
undertakes all the work. Thus the male of the Gasterosteus
leiurus is incessantly occupied in fetching the young ones
home, and driving away all enemies, including the mother.^
The male stickleback, who is polygamous, builds a nest and
watches with solicitude over the safety and rearing of the
young. 2
Many reptiles are unnatural parents ; some, however,
already possess some degree of familial instinct. Thus
several males of the batrachians assist the female to eject
her eggs. The male accoucheur toad rolls the eggs round
his feet, and carefully carries them thus. The Surinam
toad, the Pipa Americana^ after having aided the female in
the operation of laying the eggs, places them on the back of
his companion, in little cutaneous cavities formed for their
reception.2
The Cobra capella bravely defends its eggs. The
saurians often live in couples, and the females of crocodiles
escort their new-born little ones. Female tortoises go so
far as to shelter their young in a sort of nest.*
But it is especially among birds and mammals that we
find forms of union or association very similar to marriage
and the family in the human species. Nothing is more
natural ; for anatomical and physiological analogy must of
necessity lead in its train the analogy of sociology. There
is no more uniformity either amongst mammals than
amongst men ; the needs, the habitat, and the necessities
of existence dominate everything, and in order to secure
adjustment to these, recourse is had to various processes.
Like men, birds Hve sometimes in promiscuity, and
sometimes in monogamy or polygamy ; the familial instinct
is also very unequally developed among them. Sometimes
even we find their conjugal customs modified by the kind
of life they lead. Thus the wild duck, which is strictly
monogamous in a wild state, becomes very polygamous
when domesticated, and it is the same with the guinea fowl.
Civilisation depraves these birds, as it does some men.
As may be supposed, it is generally the animals living in
^ Darwin, Descent of Man^^. 379. ^ Espinas, Soc. Animales, p. 415,
2 Jbid. p. 244. 4 y^/^_ pp ^i5^ ^17^
26 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
troops who are degraded most easily by habitual pro-
miscuity. But this is not always the case; the character
of the animal, his mode of life, and the degree of morality
previously acquired, determine his manner of acting. It is
probable also that certain animals, living in troops during
the breeding season, have formerly been less sociable than
at present, for they leave the troop and retire apart in
couples as soon as they have paired. Social life is burden-
some to them.
It is especially interesting to study the various modes of
conjugal and familial association amongst birds. This may
easily be inferred from the ardour, the variety, and the
delicacy they bring to their amours ; the moral level among
them, to borrow a human expression, is very diverse,
according to the species. There are some birds absolutely
fickle and even debauched — as, for example, the little
American starling {Icterus pecoris), which changes its female
from day to day ; that is to say, it is in the lowest stage
of sexual union, a debauched promiscuity, which we only
exceptionally find in some hardly civilised human societies.^
The starling, nevertheless, is not ferocious, like the
asturides, to whom, according to Brehm, love seems
unknown, and amongst whom the female devours her male,
the father and the mother feast on their own young, and the
latter, when full grown, willingly eat their parents. These
ferocious habits denote a very feeble moral development.
But if we may believe a French missionary, Mgr. Farand,
bishop of the Mackenzie territory, similar customs still
prevail among the Redskins of the extreme north.^ We
shall not, therefore, be too much scandalised at the birds.
These cases of moral grossness are, besides, rare enough
with them.
Other species, while they have renounced promiscuity,
are still determined polygamists. The gallinaceae are par-
ticularly addicted to this form of conjugal union, which is
so common, in fact, with mankind, even when highly
civilised and boasting of their practice of monogamy. Our
barn-door cock, vain and sensual, courageous and jealous, is
a perfect type of the polygamous bird. But the polygamous
^ Houzeau, Fac. nientales des animaux, t. ii. p. 380.
2 Pix-huit atts chez les sauva^es^ etc., p. 374.
AND OF THE FAMILY, a7
habits of the gallinaceae do not prevent them from experi-
encing very strong sexual passion. When seized by this
frenzy of desire, some of them appear to be senseless of all
danger. The firing of a gun, for example, does not alarm a
male grouse when swinging his head and whistling to charm
his female -^ but this ardour does not hinder him from
being a fickle animal, always in search of new adventures,
and always seeking fresh mates. ^
These examples of wandering fancy are for the most part
rare among birds, the majority of whom are monogamous,
and even far superior to most men in the matter of conjugal
fidelity.
Nearly all the rapacious animals, even the stupid vultures,
are monogamous. The conjugal union of the bald-headed
eagle appears even to last till the death of one of the
partners. This is indeed monogamic and indissoluble
marriage, though without legal constraint. ^ Golden eagles
live in couples, and remain attached to each other for years
without even changing their domicile.* But these instances,
honourable as they are, have nothing exceptional in them ;
strong conjugal attachment is a sentiment common to many
birds.
With the female Illinois parrot {Psittacus pertinax) widow-
hood and death are synonymous, a circumstance rare enough
in the human species, yet of which birds give us more than
one example. When, after some years of conjugal life, a
wheatear happens to die, his companion hardly survives him
a month. The male and female of \\\^ panurus are always
perched side by side. When they fall asleep, one of them,
generally the male, tenderly spreads its wing over the other.
The death of one, says Brehm, is fatal to its companion.
The couples of golden wood-peckers, of doves, etc., live in
a perfect union, and in case of widowhood experience a
violent and lasting grief The male of a climbing wood-
pecker, having seen his mate die, tapped day and night
with his beak to recall the absent one; then at length,
discouraged and hopeless, he became silent, but never
recovered his gaiety (Brehm). These examples of a fidelity
that stands every test, and of the religion of memory,
^ Espinas, Soc. anim.y p. 427. ' Audubon, loc cit.^ vol. i. p. 83,
2 Ibid. p. 421. ■* Jbid. t- i®^* p- 292.
28 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
although much more frequent in the unions of birds than in
those of human beings, are not, however, the unfaihng rule.
With birds, as with men, there seems to be a good number
of irregular cases — individuals of imperfect moral develop-
ment and of fickle disposition. This may be inferred from
the facihty with which, among certain species of mono-
gamous birds, the dead partner is replaced. Jenner, who
introduced vaccination, relates that in Wiltshire he has seen
one of a couple of magpies killed seven days in succession,
and seven times over immediately replaced. Analogous
facts have been observed of jays, falcons, and starlings.
Now, when it concerns animals that are paired, each substi-
tution must correspond to a desertion, the more so as the
observations were made in the same locality and in the
height of the breeding season. ^
Very peculiar fancies sometimes arise in the brains of
certain birds. Thus we see birds of distinct species pairing,
and this even in a wild state. These illegitimate unions
have been observed between geese and barnacle geese, and
between black grouse and pheasants.
Darwin relates a case of this kind of passion suddenly
appearing in a wild duck. The fact is related by Mr. Hewitt
as follows: — "After breeding a couple of seasons with her
own mallard, she at once shook him off on my placing a male
pintail in the water. It was evidently a case of love at first
sight, for she swam about the new-comer caressingly, though
he appeared evidently alarmed and averse to her overtures
of affection. From that hour she forgot her old partner.
Winter passed by, and the next spring the pintail seemed
to have become a convert to her blandishments, for they
nested and produced seven or eight young ones."^ It is
difficult not to attribute such deviations as these to motives
similar to those by which we are ourselves actuated — to
passion, caprice, or depravity. They certainly cannot be
accounted for by the theory of mechanical and immutable
instinct. Such facts clearly prove that animal psychology,
although less complicated than our own, does not differ
essentially from it, and consequently throws much light on
our present investigation. The adventure of the wild duck,
for example, may, without any alteration, be read as a
^ Darwin, Descent of Man, pp. 446, 449. "^ Ibid. p. 455.
AND OF THE FAMlL Y. 29
human adventure, proving for the hundred-thousandth time
that the heart, or what we call by that name, is versatile ;
that conjugal fidelity does not always resist a strong impres-
sion arising from a chance encounter ; that novelty has a
disturbing effect; and, finally, that indifference and cold-
ness can rarely hold out against the persistent advances
of one who loves ardently enough not to yield to discour-
agement. Dante has already made this last reflection in
his celebrated line —
" Amor ch'a null' amato amar perdona."
To quote Dante a propos of the illicit amours of a pintail
and a wild duck may shock the learned, but the aptness of
the quotation proves once more the essential identity of the
animal and human organisms.
III. The Family amongst Animals.
If the study of the modes of sexual union amongst
animals is not useless to the sociologist, that of the
animal family is at least quite as interesting. This latter
confirms the inductions of theorists relative to the primitive
form of the human family. The animal family is especially
maternal. The female of birds, immediately she has laid
her eggs, experiences a sort of intoxication ; to sit becomes
for her an imperious need, which completely transforms
her moral nature. In January 1871, during the bombard-
ment of Paris, a German shell, bursting in the loft of a
house inhabited by one of my friends, was powerless to
disturb a female pigeon absolutely enchained by the passion
of incubation.
It is amongst birds that the animal family is best con-
stituted; this, however, differs much according to the
species, especially as regards the participation of the male
in the rearing of the young.
Amongst ducks, the male has no care for his progeny.
The male eider resembles the duck in this respect
(Audubon). Male turkeys do much worse : they often
devour the eggs of their females, and thus oblige the latter
30 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
to hide them.^ Female turkeys join each other with their
young ones for greater security, and thus form troops of from
sixty to eighty individuals, led by the mothers, and carefully
avoiding the old males, who rush on the young ones and kill
them by violent blows on the head with their beaks.^
Among certain species of gallinacese the male leaves
to the female the care of incubation and of rearing the
young. During this time he is running after adventures,
but returns when the young are old enough to follow him
and form a docile band under his government.^ It is
important to notice that, amongst birds, the fathers devoid
of affection generally belong to the less intelligent species,
and are most often polygamous. It seems, therefore, that
polygamy is not very favourable to the development of
paternal love.*
But bad fathers are rare amongst birds. Often, on the
contrary, the male rivals the female in love for the young ;
he guards and feeds her during incubation, and sometimes
even sits on the eggs with her. The carrier pigeon feeds
his female while she is sitting;^ the Canadian goose ^ and
the crow do the same; more than that, the latter takes
his companion's place at times, to give her some relaxation.
The blue marten behaves in the same manner.''' Among
many species, male and female combine their efforts with-
out distinction of sex ; they sit in turn, and the one who
is free takes the duty of feeding the one who is occupied.
This is the custom of the black-coated gull,^ the booby
of Bassan,^ the great blue heron,i^ and of the black vulture. ^^
According to Audubon, the blue bird of America works
so ardently at the propagation of its species that a single
brood does not satisfy him; each couple, therefore, exerts
itself zealously, rearing two or three broods at the same
time, the female sitting on one, while the male feeds the
little ones of the preceding brood.^^
^ Espinas, Soc. Animales, p. 422.
* Audubon, Schnes de la Nature^ t. ler. p. 29.
' Espinas, loc. cit. pp. 421-423. 8 jj^id^ t. ii. p. 199.
* Audubon, loc. cit. t. ler. p. 209. ^ Ibid. t. ii. p. 476.
5 Ibid. t. ii. p. 13. 10 Ibid. t. ii. p. 70.
" Ibid. 11 Ibid. t. ler. p. 347.
' Ibid. t. ler. p, 167.
^ Audubon, Scenes dc la Nature^ t. ler. p. 317.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 31
But however violent the love of birds for their progeny
may be, it lasts only a short time, and is suddenly extin-
guished when the young can manage for themselves. It is
then quite surprising to see the parents drive away by
strokes of the beak the little ones they had been nursing
with such devoted tenderness a few days before. The birds
of several species, however, teach their young to fly before
separating from them. The white-headed sea-eagle carries
them on its back to give them lessons in flying ; grebes,
swans, and eiders teach their young to swim, etc. But the
family is only of short duration among birds and animals
generally, unless, as is the case with some gallinaceae, the
male keeps a few of his daughters to enrich his harem. As
a matter of fact, both with birds and other animals, the
paternal or maternal sentiment hardly lasts longer than the
rearing time. When once the young are full grown, the
parents no longer distinguish them from strangers of their
species, and it is thus even with monogamic species when
the conjugal tie is lifelong ; the marriage alone endures, but
the family is intermittent and renewed with every brood.
We may remark that it is almost the same with certain
human races of low development. But, before speaking of
man, it will be well to investigate conjugal union and the
family amongst the animals nearest to man — the mammals.
From the point of view of duration and strength of the
affections, or that which we as men should call their morality,
the mammals are far from occupying the first rank in the
animal hierarchy; many birds are very superior to them.
We find, however, great differences in the morals, according
to the species. Many mammals have stopped at the most
brutal promiscuity ; males and females unite and separate at
chance meetings, without any care for the family arising in
the mind of the male. The females of mammals being
always weaker than the males, no sexual association com-
parable to polyandry is possible in this class, since, even if
she wished it, the female could not succeed in collecting a
seraglio of males. But as to polygamy, it is quite different,
and this is very common with mammals, especially with
the sociable kinds, living in flocks. It is even a necessity of
the struggle for existence. Sociability generally proceeds
from weakness. The species that are badly armed for fierce
S2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
combats, and that have besides some difficulty in finding
food, are glad to hve in association. Union is strength.
The ruminants, for example, do this. Certain carnivorous
animals, ill-furnished with teeth and claws, dogs also, and
jackals, live in troops for the same reason— that of opposing
a respectable front to the enemy. This life in common is
certainly favourable to the development of social virtues ;
it cannot but soften primitive cruelty, and develop altruistic
qualities ; but it is little conducive to sexual restraint and
monogamy. Thus the greater number of sociable mammals
are polygamous. The ruminants live in hordes composed of
females and young, grouped around a male who protects
them, but who expels his rivals and becomes a veritable chief
of a band. Very various species compose familial societies
in the same manner, and strongly resembling each other.
When the Indian adult elephant renounces the solitary
life which strong animals generally adopt, it is in order to
found a little polygamous society, from which he expels all
the males weaker than himself.^
The moufflons of Europe and of the Atlas also form
little societies of the same kind in the breeding season. 2
Among the walrus, says Brehm, the male, who is of very
jealous temperament, collects around him from thirty to
forty females, without counting young, making altogether a
polygamous family sometimes amounting to a hundred and
twenty individuals.
The male of the Asaitic antilope saiga is inordinately
polygamous ; he expels all his rivals, and forms a harem
numbering sometimes a hundred females. ^
The polygamic r'egime of animals is far from extinguishing
affectionate sentiments in the females towards their husband
and master. The females of the guanaco lamas, for example,
are very faithful to their male. If the latter happens to be
wounded or killed, instead of running away, they hasten to
his side, bleating and offering themselves to the shots of the
hunter in order to shield him, while, on the contrary, if a
female is killed, the male makes off with all his troop j he
only thinks of himself.
1 Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 238.
2 Espinas, Soc. Animales, p. 448.
3 Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 238.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 33
In regard to mammals, there is no strict relation between
the degree of intellectual development and the form of
sexual union. The carnivorous animals often live in
couples for the reason previously given ; but this is not an
absolute rule, for the South African lion is frequently
accompanied by four or five females. ^ Bears, weasels,
whales, etc., on the contrary, generally go in couples.
Sometimes species that are very nearly allied have different
conjugal customs ; thus the white-cheeked peccary lives in
troops, whilst the white-ringed peccary lives in couples.^
There is the same diversity in the habits of monkeys.
Some are polygamous and others monogamous. The
wanderoo {Macacus stlenus) of India has only one female,
and is faithful to her until death.^ The Cebus capucinus^ on
the contrary, is polygamous.*
Those cousins -german of man, the anthropoid apes,
have sometimes adopted polygamy and sometimes mono-
gamy. Savage tells us that the Gorilla gina forms small
hordes, consisting of a single adult male, who is the
despotic chief of many females and a certain number of
young.
Chimpanzees are sometimes polygamous and sometimes
monogamous. The polygamous family of monkeys is
always subject to the monarchic regime. The male, who
is at the same time the chief, is despotic ; he exacts a
passive obedience from his subordinates, and he expels the
young males as soon as they are old enough to give
umbrage to him. To sum up, he is at once the father, the
protector, and the tyrant of the band. Nevertheless, the
females are affectionate to him, and the most zealous
among them prove it by assiduously picking the lice from
him, which, with monkeys, is a mark of great tenderness.^
But the master who has been thus flattered and cringed to
sometimes comes to a bad end. One fine day, when old
age has rendered him less formidable, when he is no longer
capable of proving at every instant that right must yield to
^ Darwin, Descent of Man ^ p. 443.
"^ Espinas, loc. cit. p. 443.
^ Houzeau, Facultes mentales des animaux, t. ii. p. 394.
* Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 238
^ Espinas, loc, cit. p. 453.
3
34 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
might, the young ones, so long oppressed, rebel, and
assassinate this tyrannous father. We must here remark,
that whatever the form of sexual association among
mammals, the male has always much less affection for the
young than the female. Even in monogamous species,
when the male keeps with the female, he does so more as
chief than as father. At times he is much inclined to
commit infanticides and to destroy the offspring, which, by
absorbing all the attention of his female, thwart his amours.
Thus, among the large felines, the mother is obliged to hide
her young ones from the male during the first few days
after birth, to prevent his devouring them.
I shall here conclude this very condensed study of sexual
association and the family in the animal kingdom. My
object is not so much to exhaust the subject, as to bring
into relief the analogies existing between man and the other
species. The facts which have been cited are amply
sufficient for this purpose, and we may draw the following
general conclusions from them : —
In the first place there is no premeditated design in
nature ; any mode of reproduction of sexual association and
of rearing of young that is compatible with the duration of
the species may be adopted. But in a general manner it
may be said that a sort of antagonism exists between the
multiplicity of births and the degree of protection bestowed
on the young by the parents.
A rough outline of the family is already found in the
animal kingdom ; it is sometimes patriarchal, as with stickle-
backs, etc., but most often it is matriarchal. In the latter
case the female is the centre of it, and her love for the
young is infinitely stronger and more devoted than that of
the male. This is especially true of mammals, with whom
the male is generally an egoist, merely protecting the family
in his own personal interest.
The familial instinct, more or less developed, exists in the
greater number of vertebrates, and in many invertebrates.
From an early period it must have been an object of
selection, since it adds considerably to the chances of
the duration of the species. With some species (ants,
bees, termites) this instinct has expanded into a wide
social love, resulting in the production of large societies of
AND OF THE FAMILY, 35
complex structure, in which the family, as we understand it,
is unknown. I lay stress on this fact, for it is of great
importance in theoretical sociology ; it proves, in fact, that
large and complicated societies, with division of social
labour, can be maintained without the institution of the
family. We are not, therefore, warranted in pretending, as
is usually done, that the family is absolutely indispensable,
and that it is the " cellule " of the social organism. Let us
observe, by the way, that the expression " social organism "
is simply metaphorical, and we must beware of taking it
literally, as Herbert Spencer, with a strange naivetd, seems
to have done. Societies are agglomerations of individuals
in which a certain order is necessarily established; but it is
almost puerile to seek for, and to pretend to find in them,
an actual organisation, comparable, for example, to the
anatomic and physiologic plan of a mammal.
Terminating this short digression, I revert to my subject
by summing up the results of our examination of sexual
associations among the animals.
In regard to marriage, as well as to the family, nature has
no preference ; all means are welcome to her, provided the
species profits by them, or, at least, does not suffer too much
from them.
We find amongst animals temporary unions, at the close
of which the male ceases absolutely to care for the female ;
but we also find, especially among birds, numbers of lasting
unions, for which the word marriage is not too exalted. It
does not appear that polyandry — that is, a durable society
between one female and many males — has been practised by
animals. The female, nearly always weaker than the male,
could not reduce a number of them to sexual servitude,
and the latter have never been tempted to share one female
systematically. On the contrary, they are often polygamous.
But it is especially amongst mammals that polygamy is
common, and it must often have had its raison d^itre either
in the sexual proportion of births, or in a greater mortality
of males. These are reasons I shall have to refer to later,
in speaking of human polygamy.
But if polygamy is frequent with mammals, it is far
from being the conjugal r'egime universally adopted ; mono-
gamy is common, and is sometimes accompanied by so
36 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
much devotion, that it would serve as an example to human
monogamists.
It is important also to notice that, in regard to animals,
the mode of sexual association may vary without much
difficulty. No species is of necessity and always restricted
to such or such a form of sexual union. An animal
belonging to a species habitually monogamous may very
easily become polygamous. In short, there does not seem
to be any relation between the degree of intelligence in a
species and its conjugal customs.
In the following chapters it will be seen that, in great
measure, these observations do not apply exclusively to
animals.
CHAPTER III.
PROMISCUITY.
I. Has there been a Stage of Promiscuity ? — Promiscuity rare among
the superior vertebrates — It has been exceptional in mankind.
II. Cases of Human Promiscuity. — Promiscuity among the Troglo-
dytes, the ancient Arabs, the Agathyrses, the Anses, the Garamantes,
the ancient Greeks, in the Timcsus, in China, in India, among the
Andamanites, in California, among the aborigines of India, among the
Zaporogs, and the Ansarians — Insufficience of these proofs.
III. Hetairism.—Jus primcB noctis — Religious hetairism at Babylon,
in Armenia — Religious prostitution — Religious defloration — The jus
prima noctis with the Nasamons, in the Balearic Isles, in ancient
Peru, in Asia, etc. — The right of the chief with the Kaffirs, in New
Zealand, in New Mexico, in Cochin- China, in feudal Europe — The
right of religious prelibation — Religious defloration in Cambodia — The
reason of the right of prelibation — The Jus prima noctis confounded
with the simple licence of unmarried women — Shamelessness of girls in
Australia, Polynesia, America, Malaya, Abyssinia, etc. — The indotata
in primitive Rome — Loan and barter of women in America and else-
where, and among the ancient Arabs — Actual promiscuity has been
rare in humanity.
I. Has there been a Stage of Fromiscuiiy ?
Having made our preliminary investigation of love, sexual
unions, marriage, or what corresponds to it, and the family
in the animal kingdom, we are now in a position to
approach the examination of corresponding social facts in
regard to man. The method of evolution requires us to
begin our inquiry with the lowest forms of sexual associa-
tion, and there is none lower, morally and intellectually,
than promiscuity ; that is to say, a social condition so gross
38 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
that within a group, a horde, or a tribe, all the women
belong, without rule or distinction, to all the men. In a
society so bestial there is surely no room for what we call
love, however grossly we may understand this sentiment.
There is no choice, no preference; the sexual need is
reduced to its simplest expression, and absolutely debased
to the level of the nutritive needs ; love is no more than a
hunger or thirst of another kind ; there is no longer any
distinction between the man and the tatoway.
Some sociologists have affirmed, without hesitation, that
community of women represented a primitive and necessary
stage of the sexual associations of mankind. Surely they
would have been less dogmatic on this point if, before
approaching human sociology, they had first consulted
animal sociology, as we have done. We have seen that
many vertebrated animals are capable of a really exclusive
and jealous passion, even when they are determined poly-
gamists. As a matter of fact, the vertebrates with whom
love is merely a need, like any other, seem to be a very
small minority. Some among them, especially birds, are
models of fidelity, constancy, and devoted attachment,
which may well inspire man with feelings of modesty.
Mammals, while less delicate in their love than many
birds, are, however, for the most part, already on a moral
level incompatible with promiscuity. The mammals
nearest to man, those whom we may consider as the
effigies of our nearest animal ancestors, the anthropoid
apes, are sometimes monogamous and sometimes poly-
gamous, but, as a rule, they cannot endure promiscuity.
Now, this fact manifestly constitutes a very strong pre-
sumption against the basis of the theory according to
which promiscuity has been, with the human species, the
primitive and necessary stage of sexual unions. Do we
thus mean to say that there is no example of promiscuity
in human societies, primitive or not? Far from it. It
would be impossible to affirm this without neglecting a
large number of facts observed in antiquity or observable
in our own day. But we are warranted in believing that
the very inferior stage of promiscuity has never been other
than exceptional in humanity. If it has existed here and
there, it is that by the very reason of the relative superiority
AND OF THE FAMILY, 39
of his intelligence, man is less rigorously subject to general
laws, and that he knows sometimes how to modify or
infringe them; there is more room for caprice in his
existence than in the life of the animals.
II. Some Cases of Human Promiscuity.
Human groups have, then, practised promiscuity, and
it is not quite impossible that some of them practise it
still. Exceptional as these facts may be, they are interest-
ing to sociologists, and it is important to mention and to
criticise them also. We are indebted for our knowledge
of a certain number of them to the writers of Greco- Latin
antiquity. I will give them in full, at least those that
deserve or have obtained more or less credit.
" Throughout the Troglodyte country," relates Strabo,
" the people lead a nomad life. Each tribe has its chief,
or tyrant. The women and the children are possessed in
common, with the exception of the wives and children
of the chief, and whoever is guilty of adultery with one
of the wives of the chief is punished by a fine consisting
of the payment of a sheep." ^
Another passage of Strabo's, which is better known, is
often quoted as proving a primitive epoch of promiscuity
among the ancient Arabs also. This passage is curious
and interesting, but it has not in the least the extent of
signification that is attributed to it. Concerning the con-
jugal customs of the peoples of Arabia Felix, Strabo speaks
as follows : — *' Community of goods exists between all the
members of the same family, but there is only one master,
who is always the eldest of the family. They have only one
wife between them all, and he who can forestall the others
enters her apartment the first, and enjoys her, after having
taken the precaution of placing his staff across the door (it is
the custom for every man to carry a staif). She never spends
the night with any but the eldest, the chief. This promis-
cuity makes them all brothers. We must add that they have
commerce with their own mothers. On the other hand,
adultery, which means for them commerce with a lover who
is not of the family, is pitilessly punished with death. The
1 Herodotus, Book xvi. p. 17.
40 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
daughter of one of the kings of the country, who was
marvellously beautiful, had fifteen brothers, all desperately
in love with her, and who, for this reason, took turns in
enjoying her without intermission. Fatigued with their
assiduity, she invented the following stratagem. She pro-
cured staffs exactly similar to those of her brothers, and
when one of them left her, she quickly placed across the
door the staff similar to that of the brother who had just
quitted her, then replaced it shortly after by another,
and so on, taking care not to place there the staff like
the brother's whose visit she was expecting. Now, one
day, when all the brothers were together in the public
place, one of them went to her door, and concluded, at the
sight of the staff, that some one was with her ; but, as he
had left all his brothers together, he believed in a flagrant
act of adultery, hastened to seek their father, and led him
to the spot. He was, however, forced to acknowledge in
his presence that he had slandered his sister."^
Even admitting the perfect accuracy of the fact related
by Strabo (and there is nothing in it to surprise an ethno-
graphical sociologist), the word promiscuity is here quite
inappropriate. The custom of maternal incest, which is
not without example, perhaps warrants the supposition of
ancient familial promiscuity; but in reality the Arabs of
whom Strabo speaks were simply polyandrous, and they
were so precisely in the manner of the Thibetans of the
present day ; they practised fraternal polyandry — a conjugal
form to which we shall presently return.
The other examples of so-called promiscuity related by
the writers of antiquity are, unfortunately, so briefly given
that it is difficult to judge of their value.
"The Agathyrses" (Scythians), says Herodotus, "are
the most delicate of men ; their ornaments are chiefly of
gold. They have their women in common in order that
they may all be brothers, and that, being so nearly related,
they may feel neither hatred nor envy against each other." ^
In another passage Herodotus says of the Massagetes
(Scythians), " Each man marries a wife, but they use them
all in common." The assertion is grossly contradictory, and
can only relate to the extremely loose manners of the
* Strabo, vol. xvi. ch. iv. p. 25. ^ Herodotus, Book i. p. 216.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 41
unmarried women. As a matter of fact, amongst many
savage or barbarous peoples chastity is not imposed on
the women, as long as they have no proprietors. " When
one of them desires a woman," continues Herodotus, " he
suspends his quiver in front of his chariot, and tranquilly
unites with her."^
This is merely a trait of very free manners, which may be
placed by the side of many others, proving that modesty
has been slow of growth in the human brain. The
Tahitians were still more cynical than the Massagetes.
Herodotus himself speaks of black Indians (Tamils)
"who coupled as publicly as beasts" (iii. loi), and V.
Jacquemont has related that Runjeet Singh would ride
with one of his wives on the back of an elephant and take
his pleasure publicly with his companion, careless of censure
(V. Jacquemont, Corres.^ i6th March 1831). It would be
very easy, by searching into ethnography, to accumulate
facts of this kind; but for the moment I have only to
continue my examination of old Greco-Roman texts re-
lating more or less to promiscuity. I therefore return to
them. Herodotus again relates, in speaking of the Anses,
an Ethiopian tribe : " Their women are common ; they do
not live with them, but couple after the manner of beasts.
When a vigorous child is born to a woman, all the men go
to see it at the third month, and he whom it most resembles
acknowledges it for his."^ And here we have Pliny say-
ing also of the Garamantes : Garafnantes matrimoniorum
exsories, passim cumfeminis degunt?
Strabo^ too, affirms of the Celtic population of lerne
(Ireland), " the men have public commerce with all kinds of
women, even with their mothers and sisters."*
The passages that I have just quoted are those which are
most frequently used to support the pretension that human
societies have begun with promiscuity ; they are at once the
most ancient, most authentic, and most explicit. We may
add to them the assertion of Varro, quoted by Saint
Augustine,^ according to which the Greeks, prior to the
time of Cecrops, lived in promiscuity. But how is it possible
^ Herodotus, iv. 104. ^ Pliny, v. 8.
2 Ibid. iv. 180. 4 Strabo, iv. 4.
^ Varro, Apttd. August, de Civit. Dei. xviii. 9.
42 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
not to be struck with the weakness of these historical
proofs ? Some of them are mere general assertions, while
others plainly relate either to social anomalies or to cases
of polyandry. There is no doubt as to this in regard to the
ancient Arabs of whom Strabo speaks, and also to the
Protohellenes of Varro. This last instance certainly relates
to the matriarchal family, of which I shall have to speak
again at some length. In fact, after having stated that
the Protohellenes had no marriage, Varro adds that the
children only knew their mother and bore her name. The
proof is decisive, for the matriarchate does not in the least
exclude marriage, as we shall see later, and in the case of
the Lydians it lasted until the time of Herodotus.
In order to complete this review of ancient texts, I will
mention further the passage of the Timceus in which
Socrates speaks of the community of wives: — "On the
subject of the procreation of children we established a
community of wives and children ; and we devised means
that no one should ever know his own child. They were to
imagine that they were of one family, and to regard those
who were within a certain limit of age as brothers and
sisters ; and again, those who were of an elder generation as
parents and grandparents, and those who were of a younger
generation as children and grandchildren."
But Plato had a lively imagination. He was a "great
dreamer," as Voltaire said of him, and this passage
evidently describes a purely Utopian society.
Traditions relative to a very ancient epoch of promiscuity
are found here and there outside the Greco-Roman
world. In China, for example, the women are said to have
been common until the reign of Fouhi.^ A tradition of the
same kind, but more explicitly stated, is mentioned in the
Mahabharata (i. 503): ** Formerly it was not a crime to
be faithless to a husband ; it was even a duty. . . . This
custom is observed in our own days among the Kourous
of the north. . . . The females of all classes are common
on the earth ; as are the cows, so are the women ; each one
has her caste. ... It is Civdta-Ketou who has established
a limit for the men and women on the earth." 2 This
^ Goguet, Orig. des lots, t. iii. p. 388.
^ Quoted by Giraud Teulon, Orig. de la Famille, p. 66.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 43
assertion is vague, and has not the least proof to support
it.
If, continuing our inquiry, we attempt to correct these
historical documents by ethnographical information, we
shall hardly find, on this side of the subject more than
on the other, anything but simple assertions, which are
either too vague or too brief, or evidently open to dispute.
In the Andaman Islands, or at least in certain of them,
the women are said to have been held in common till
quite recently. Every woman belonged to all the men of
the tribe, and resistance to any of them was a crime
severely punished.^ This time we seem to have found, at
length, a case of actual legal promiscuity. But, according
to other accounts, the Andamanite man and woman contract,
on the contrary, a monogamic and temporary union, and
remain together, in case of pregnancy and maternity, until the
child is weaned, as do many animals.^ Now, however short
a conjugal union may be, it is incompatible with promiscuity.
The indigenous Indians of California, who are among
the lowest of human races, couple after the manner of
inferior mammals, without the least formality, and accord-
ing to the caprice of the moment.^ They are said even to
celebrate feasts and propitiatory dances, which are followed
by a general promiscuity.'*
According to Major Ross King, some aboriginal tribes
of India, notably the Kouroumbas and the Iroulas, have
no idea of marriage, and live in promiscuity.'* The only
prohibitory rule consists in not having intimate commerce
with a person belonging to another class or caste ; but there
seem only to be two classes in the tribe.
Barbarous tribes belonging to white races are said also
to have practised promiscuity in modern times. Among
certain tribes of the Zaporog Cossacks the women are
said to be common, and are confined in separate camps.^
Besides these, the Ansarians, mountaineers of Syria, are
* Trans. Ethn, Soc, New Series, vol. ii. p. 35.
* Ibid. vol. V. p. 45.
^ Bagaert, Smithsonian Report^ p. 368, 1863.
* Bancroft, Native Races of Pacific ^ vol. i. p. 352.
* Wake, Evolution of Morality^ vol. i. p. 1 10.
® Campenbausen, Bemark. iiber Russland.
44 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
said to practise, not promiscuity pure and simple, or civil
promiscuity, but a religious promiscuity, analogous to that
of the ancient Gnostics ^ and the Areois of Tahiti. These
Ansarians must doubtless have been confounded with the
Yazidies, a sect of Arabs, also Syrians, practising a sort of
manich3eism, and who, it is said, assemble periodically
every month, or every three months, in fraternal agapae,
at the conclusion of which they unite in the darkness with-
out heed as to adultery or incest. Throughout the Syrian
Orient the erotic festival of the Yazidies is called by a
significant name, Daour-el-Cachfeh — the game of catching.^
But even if the fact were true, what does it show ? Only
one more aberration to the score of the phallic religions.
Here I end my enumeration. Evidently nothing very
convincing results from it. The greater number of the
facts that I have just quoted have either been carelessly
observed, or contested, or affirmed by a single witness, or
depend merely on hearsay evidence. It is prudent, there-
fore, to regard them with lawful suspicion, and even if
certain of them are exact, we must be careful not to draw
general conclusions from them. Promiscuity may have
been adopted by certain small human groups, more probably
by certain associations or brotherhoods. Thus the chiefs
of the Namaquoi Hottentots willingly held their wives in
common.
When we come to study the family we shall find that
among the Kamilaroi of Australia all the women of one
clan are reputed to be the wives of all the men of another.
But this community is often only fictitious, and, besides, it
is already regulated; it is not promiscuity pure and simple.
So far, nothing proves sufficiently that there has been a
universal stage of promiscuity among mankind. Some
theorists have been so hasty to come to a conclusion on
this point that they have gone beyond actual experience.
Moreover, as I have been careful to remark, the simple fact
that man is a mammalian primate weakens this hypothesis
in advance, since the nearest relations of man in the animal
kingdom are in general polygamous, and even sometimes
monogamous.
^ Volney, Syria, ch. iii.
" Mayeux, Les Bedouins ou Arahes du Desert { i8i6), t. i^r. pp. 187, 189.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 45
III. Hetdirism.^Jus primcR noctis.
Not only is it impossible to admit that mankind has, in
all times and places, passed through a necessary stage of
promiscuity, but we must go further, and also renounce a
theory which has had some degree of success lately — the
theory of obligatory primitive hetairism. According to this
theory, when the instinct of holding feminine property arose
in man, some individuals arrogated the right to keep for
themselves one or more of the women hitherto common.
The community then protested, and while tolerating this
derogation from ancient usage, exacted that the bride, or
purchased woman, should make an act of hetairism, or
prostitution, before belonging to one man only.
It is Herodotus who has transmitted to us the most
striking example of this kind, the one invoked by all the
theorists of hetairism. I shall, therefore, quote it at length :
"The most disgraceful of t^e Babylonian customs is the
following. Every native woman is obliged, once in her life,
to sit in the temple of Venus and have intercourse with
some stranger. And many, disdaining to sit with the rest,
being proud on account of their wealth, come in covered
carriages, and take up their station at the temple with a
numerous train of servants attending them. But the far
greater part do this : many sit down in the temple of Venus,
wearing a crown of cord round their heads; some are
continually coming and others are going out. Passages
marked out in a straight line lead in every direction through
the women, along which strangers pass and make their
choice. When a woman has once seated herself, she must
not return home till some stranger has thrown a piece of
silver into her lap and lain with her outside the temple.
He who throws the silver must say thus : ' I beseech the
goddess Mylitta to favour thee;' for the Assyrians call
Venus Mylitta. The silver may be ever so small, for she
will not reject it, inasmuch as it is not lawful for her to do
so, for such silver is accounted sacred. The woman follows
the first man that throws, and refuses no one. But when
she has had intercourse, and has absolved herself from her
obligations to the goddess, she returns home ; and after that
46 THE E VOL UTION OF MARK I A GE
time, however great a sum you may give her, you will not
gain possession of her. Those that are endowed with
beauty and symmetry of shape are soon set free ; but the
deformed are detained a long time, from inabiHty to satisfy
the law, for some wait for a space of three or four years.
In some parts of Cyprus there is a custom very similar." ^
After having read this passage, we are surprised at the
import that has been attributed to it. Even admitting the
obligation and universality of the custom in ancient
Babylon, it is only an example of religious prostitution,
with traces of exogamy. The Babylonians honoured
Mylitta, just as the Armenians, according to Strabo,^ ven-
erated the goddess Anaitis. " They have erected temples
to Anaitis in various places, especially in the Akilisenus,
and have attached to these temples a good number of
hierodules, or sacred slaves, of both sexes. So far, indeed,
there is no ground for astonishment; but their devotion
goes further, and it is the custom for the most illustrious
personages to consecrate their virgin daughters to the
goddess. This in no way prevents the latter from easily
finding husbands, even after they have prostituted them-
selves for a long time in the temples of Anaitis. No man
feels on this account any repugnance to take them as
wives."
I quote in full these venerable passages, which have been
so much used and abused, in order that it may not be
possible to mistake their signification. Once more we
repeat that they merely relate to erotico-religious aberra-
tions. The procreative need, or delirium, has inspired men
with many foolish ideas, and probably will continue to do
so. A very slight knowledge of mythology is enough to
show us that numerous cults have been founded on the
sexual instinct, and these cults are naturally accompanied
by special practices, little in accordance with our European
morality. Religious prostitution, which was widely spread
in Greek antiquity, has been also found in India, where
every temple of renown had its bayaderes, the only women
in India to whom, until quite recently, any instruction was
given.
The far more peculiar custom of Tchin-than, or religious
1 Herodotus, Book i. 199. ^ Strabo, vol. xi. 14.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 47
defloration, formerly in use in Cambodia ^ and in Malabar,
is evidently akin to religious prostitution. But this custom
is nothing else than a mystic transformation of what was
called the jus primes noclis, of which I must first speak. It
is important to distinguish several varieties of it. The first
and most simple was the custom by which every newly-
married woman, before belonging to her husband, was
obHged to give herself, or be given, to a certain number of
men, either relatives, friends, or fellow-citizens. This was
the custom among the Nasamons, according to Herodotus :
" When a Nasamon marries, custom requires that his bride
should yield herself on the first night to all his guests in
turn ; each one who has had commerce with her makes her
a present, which he has been mindful to bring with him." 2
A similar custom is said to have existed in various
countries of the globe, in ancient times in the Balearic
Isles, more recently among the ancient Peruvians, in
our own times among several aboriginal tribes of India ;
in Burmah, in Cashmere, in the south of Arabia, in
Madagascar, and in New Zealand;^ but always as an
exceptional practice, in use only in a small group or tribe.
It is not impossible that here and there this usage, which
is rare enough, may have been derived traditionally from an
ancient marriage by classes, analogous to that still found
among the Kamilaroi of Australia; but it may have been
simply a mark of good-fellowship, or of conjugal generosity
on the part of the bridegroom.
The seignorial jus primes noctis^ the right of the lord, is
much more widely spread, and its existence cannot be con-
tested. Among the Kaffirs, says Hamilton,* the chiefs
have the choice of the women for several leagues round.
So also, until lately, in New Zealand, every pretty girl was
taboo for the vulgar, and had to be first reserved for the
chief.^ In New Mexico, with the Tahous, as Castaiieda
informs us, it is necessary, after having purchased the girl
from her parents, to submit her to the seignorial right of
^ Abel de Remusat, Nouv. mil. Asiatiques^ p. 116.
^ Herodotus, iv. 172.
• Giraud Teulon, Orig, de la Families p. 69.
* Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 651.
» Ibid. p. 651.
48 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
the cacique, or to a priest of high rank. Reh'gion already
begins to insinuate itself into this singular right.^
According to Marco Polo, the same custom existed in
the thirteenth century in Cochin-China. " Know," says the
old chronicler, "no woman can marry without the king
first seeing her. If she pleases him, he takes her to wife ;
if she does not please him, he gives her enough from his
own property to enable her to marry.
"In the year 1280 of Christ, when Messire Marco Polo
was in that country, the king had three hundred and
eighty-six children, male and female. "^
Under the feudal system in Europe this right of pre-
libation, or marquette (designated in old French by the
expressive term droit de culage\ has been in use in many
fiefs, and until a very recent epoch. Almost in our own
days certain lords of the Netherlands, of Prussia, and of
Germany, still claimed it. In a French title-deed of 1507
we read that the Count d'Eu has the right of prelibation in
the said place when any one marries.^ More than this,
ecclesiastics, and even bishops, have been known to claim
this right in their quality of feudal lords. " I have seen,"
says Boetius, "in the court at Bourges, before the metro-
politan, an appeal by a certain parish priest, who pretended
to claim the first night of young brides, according to the
received usage. The demand was rejected with indignation,
the custom unanimously proscribed, and the scandalous
priest condemned to pay a fine."
" In a kingdom of Malabar," says J. Forbes, " the ecclesias-
tical power took precedence of the civil on this particular
point, and the sovereign himself passed under the yoke.
Like the other women, the queen had to submit to the right
of prelibation exercised by the high priest, who had a right
to the first three nights, and who was paid fifty pieces of
gold besides for his trouble."* In Cambodia, according
to an ancient Chinese traveller, religious prelibation was
obligatory on all the young girls, and was performed every
year with great ceremony. The parents who had daughters
^ Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol. i. p. 584.
2 Marco Polo, Edition Populaire, p. 187.
^ Lauri^re, Close du droit Franfais, at the word Culage ou Culiage.
* James Forbes, Oriental Memoirs, vol. i. p. 446; vol. iv. 18 13.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 49
to marry made a declaration of it, and a public functionary
fixed the day for the celebration of Tchin-than^ or the legal
and religious defloration. For this the intervention of a
Buddhist priest, or a tao-sse priest, was indispensable. The
parents entreated his service, which was very costly, and for
this reason girls who were poor retained their virginity
longer than the rich. It even sometimes happened that
pious persons, moved by a sentiment of charity, took on
themselves the payment of the costs of the ceremony for
those who had been waiting a long time. Great display
attended it. On the appointed day the officiating priest
was carried in the evening with much pomp to the festive
house, and the next morning he was reconducted home in a
palanquin with parasol, drum, and music, and not without
being offered fresh presents. A. de R^musat has given, in
Latin, some curious particulars of the intimate details of the
ceremony, which I cannot relate here.^
These few examples suffice to show how very much
morality is a relative thing, but they cannot serve as a basis
to a general theory of hetairism.
The seignorial right of prelibation is simply an abuse
of force and good pleasure ; only, viewed in the light of our
morality, it shocks us more than the others. One might
justify it, however, by reasons which Bossuet considered
sufficient to render slavery lawful. The right of conquest
has given, or still gives, all over the world, every sort of
right over the vanquished, even the right of life and death.
The conqueror, "in a just war," says the sage of Meaux,
may legitimately kill the vanquished and, a fortiori^ enslave
him; and one may add, following out a logical conclusion,
that it is lawful for him to dispose as he pleases of his wife
and daughter. As a matter of course, the priest, in his
quahty of lord, can claim the same privileges as the
layman; but besides this, if it should happen that his
particular religion lends itself to the idea by being founded
in some manner on the worship of the principle of procrea-
tion, as is so frequently the case with oriental religions, a
sort of superstitious prestige will come to adorn and clothe
this sacerdotal shamelessness.
In all this there is hardly any room for hetairism con-
^ A. Remusat, Nouv. md, AsiaMqueSf t. 1^' p. Il8.
4
50 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
sidered as a compensation to the community for damage to
its ancient rights.
Admitting that th.Q Jus pri?iicB noctis of relatives and friends
does not imply simple polyandry, it may very naturally be
explained by primitive laxity of morals. Among the
greater number of peoples who are very slightly or not at
all civilised, the women are free to give or sell themselves
before marriage as they please, and as it does not entail any
disgrace, they use the liberty largely. Besides, in many
countries the husband had, or still has, over his wife or
wives all the rights of a proprietor over the thing possessed.
Now, considering he is a stranger to all modesty and sexual
restraint, nothing seems more natural, if he has some
instinct of sociability, than to lend his wife to his friends,
just as he would do them an act of politeness, make them a
present, or invite them to a feast, all without thinking any
evil. This view of the practice is supported by many facts.
Doubtless it is the great sexual licence accorded to
young girls in so many countries which has led many
observers and travellers to conclude that promiscuity has
been systematically established. In Australia the girls
cohabit from the age of ten with young boys of fourteen or
fifteen, without rebuke from any one, and there are even
great sexual orgies in which the signal is given to the young
people for liberty to unite freely in open day.^
In the greater number of savage countries these customs
are common. At Nouka-Hiva, or more generally all over
Polynesia, the young girls did not marry, that is to say, did
not become the chattel of a man, before the age of nineteen
or twenty, and until then they contracted a great number
of capricious unions, which became lasting only in case of
the birth of children. ^
In all these islands, moreover, modesty was unknown,
and the members of each family passed the night side by
side on mats, and entirely naked. The place of honour, in
the centre, was occupied by the master of the house,
flanked by his wife or wives.^
^ Eyre, Discoveries, vol. ii. p. 320.
2 Porter, Hist. Univ. des Voy., vol. xvi. p. 323.
^ Cook, First Voy. (Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. v. p. 252). Moerenhout,
Voy. atix iles du Grand Ocean, t. i^'^' p. 263.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 51
Analogous customs, extremely licentious in our eyes, but
perfectly natural for primitive peoples, were in full force
among all the indigenous races of America.
The Chinouk girls give or hire themselves out as they
please. In the latter case the parents often take the
payment.^
The Aymaras, who have no word for marriage, and who
are such a simple folk that, in- their opinion, any crime can
be committed with impunity on Good Friday, since God is
dead on that day, contract without scruple free unions
merely for the duration of the evening of a feast. The
contract is made in mimic language, and in settling it the
man and woman exchange head-gear only.^
Similar manners prevail among the Esquimaux, the
Kaffirs, and the Dyaks of Borneo. In Japan the parents
willingly hire out their daughters, either to private
individuals or to houses of prostitution, for a period of
several years, and the girls are in no way dishonoured
thereby. In Abyssinia, says Bruce, outside of the conjugal
bond, which is easily tied or untied, the women dispose of
their person as they please.
In primitive Rome, as with us, the young girl without
dowry, the indotata^ was held in moderate esteem ; and
therefore many young girls procured themselves a dowry by
trafficking their persons. An old Latin proverb has handed
down the souvenir of this ancient fashion of procuring a
dowry: Tusco more^ tuie iibi dotem quceris corpore,^
Now, in all these customs, at once so simple and so
gross, it is impossible to see the traces of an enforced
hetairism, derived from an antique period of promiscuity,
which was also equally obligatory. They are simply traits
of animal laxity. Men were still almost devoid of moral
training, and the care for decency and modesty was of the
slightest.
If in a primitive country a certain amount of restraint is
imposed on a woman who is married, or rather owned by a
man, it is solely because she is considered as property, held
by the same title as a field or a domestic animal. For her
^ Bancroft, Native Races, etc.
* Wake, Evolution of Morality, vol. i. p. 219.
' Giraud Teulon, Orig, de la Famille, p. 83.
52 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
to dispose of her person without authorisation is often a
capital crime ; but the husband, on the contrary, has in
many countries the undisputed right to lend, let out, or
barter his wife or wives : jus utendi et abutendi. I will
mention a few of these marital customs.
In America, from the land of the Esquimaux to
Patagonia, the loan of the wife is not only lawful, but
praiseworthy. Egidius says of the Esquimaux, " that those
who lend their wives to their friends without the least
hesitation are reputed in the tribe as having the best and
noblest character." ^ The English traveller, Captain Ross,
relates that one of the Esquimaux prowling around his ship
was accompanied by the wives and children of one of his
intimate friends, to whom he had, in the preceding autumn,
confided, on his side, his own two wives. The exchange
was to terminate at a fixed time, and the Esquimaux of
whom Captain Ross speaks was very indignant with his
friend because the latter, having forgotten himself while
chasing the deer in distant regions, was not exact in keeping
the engagement.2
On this point the Redskins are not more delicate than
the Esquimaux. Thus the Natchez make no difficulty of
lending their wives to their friends.^ In New Mexico the
Yuma husbands willingly hire out their wives and their
slaves, without making any difference. And, besides, with
them, as in many other countries, to furnish a guest with a
temporary wife is simply one of the duties of hospitality.*
The chiefs of the Noutka Columbians barter their wives
among each other as a sign of friendship.^ Nothing would
be easier than to enumerate a great number of facts of
the same kind observed in Australia, Africa, Polynesia,
Mongolia, and almost everywhere. But it is more remark-
able to meet with the same custom in a Mussulman country.
Nevertheless, Burckhardt relates that the Merekedeh, a
branch of the great tribe of Asyr, understood hospitality in
this primitive manner. To every stranger received under
^ History of Greenland ^ p. 142.
^ Ross, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xl. p. 158.
^ Lettres Edifiantes^ t. xx. p. 116.
* Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol. i. p. 514.
' Meares, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xiii. p. 375.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 53
their tents or in their houses, they offered a woman of the
family, and most often a wife of the host himself. The
young girls alone were exempt from this strange service.
It was considered the duty of the traveller to conform with
a good grace to the custom, otherwise he was hooted and
chased from the village or camp by the women and
children. This extreme manner of understanding hospitality
was very ancient and deeply rooted, and it was not without
difficulty that the conquering Wahabites brought the Asyrs
to renounce it.^ But these customs were not specially con-
fined to the Asyrs; they were in force throughout prehistoric
Arabia. An old Arab writer, Ibn al Moghawir, mentions
them. "Sometimes," he says, "the wife was actually
placed at the disposition of the guest \ at other times, the
offer was only symbolic. The guests were invited to press
the wife in their arms, and to give her kisses, but the
poignard would have revenged any further liberties." 2 It
is not very long since the same practice prevailed in
Kordofan and Djebel-Taggale.^ Certain traits of morals
related by the Greco-Latin writers show that in Rome, and
Greece also, if it was not the husband's duty to lend his
wife to his friends, he had at least the right to do so. At
Sparta, Lycurgus authorised husbands to be thus liberal
with their wives whenever they judged their friends worthy
of this honour. And, further, the public opinion of Sparta
strongly approved the conduct of an aged husband who
took care to procure for his wife a young, handsome, and
virtuous substitute.*
The same customs prevailed at Athens, where Socrates,
it is said, lent his wife Xantippe to his friend Alcibiades ;
and at Rome,*^ where the austere Cato the elder gave up his
wife Marcia to his friend Hortensius, and afterwards took
her back, much enriched, it is true, at the death of this
friend.
All these facts relate, therefore, to a very widely-spread
and almost universal custom, which is in perfect accord
1 Burckhardt, Hist. Univ. des Voy,^ t xxxii. p, 380.
3 R. Smith, Kinship, etc., p. 276.
* Les Abyssiniennes et les Femmes du Soudan Oriental^ p. 97.
* Plutarch, Lycurgtis.
5 Ibid.^ Cato,
54 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
with the extremely low position that has been granted to
women in the greater number of savage and barbarous
societies. The married woman, being exactly assimilated
to a slave or a thing possessed, might thenceforth be treated
as such ; and tlie right of property, soon becoming sacred,
easily stood before any scruples of decency which were still
rare and weak.
After the preceding investigation, there appears to be no
difficulty in refuting the sociological theory, far too pre-
valent, according to which the entire human race has passed
through a primitive period of promiscuity followed by
hetairism. Our first ancestors, the precursors of man, were
surely very analogous to the other primates. We may,
therefore, conclude that, like them, they generally lived in
polygamous families. When these almost human little
groups were associated in hordes or tribes, it is quite possible
that great laxity of morals may have prevailed amongst
them, but not a legal or obligatory promiscuity. In a
society sufficiently numerous and savage it is no easy task
for a man to guard his feminine property, for the women
are not by any means averse to adventures. Their modesty
is still very slight, and before belonging specially to one
man they have generally been given or sold to many
others. At that period of the social evolution public
opinion saw no harm in all this. And, besides, the husband
or the proprietor of the woman considered her absolutely
as his thing, and did not scruple to lend her to his friends,
to barter her, or to hire her out.
These primitive customs, combined with polyandrous
or collective marriage and the matriarchate, have deceived
many observers, both ancient and modern.
AVhen we come to scrutinise these facts, and to view them
in the light of animal sociology, we arrive at the conclusion
that human promiscuity can only have been rare and
exceptional, and that the theory of the community of wives
and of obligatory hetairism will not bear examination.
The procreative need is one of the most tyrannical, and
primitive man has satisfied it as he best could, without the
least delicate refinement ; but the egotism of individuals has
had for its result, from the origin of human societies, the
formation of unions based on force, and, correlatively, a
AND OF THE FAMILY. 55
right of property which fettered more or less rigorously the
liberty of the women who were thus possessed.
These primitive unions were concluded according to the
chance caprices or needs of extremely gross societies, who
cared httle to submit to a uniform conjugal type. There
are some very singular ones among them, which differ
essentially from the legal forms of marriage finally and very
tardily adopted by the majority of mankind. It is these
isolated conjugal unions, extravagant and immoral in our
eyes, that we now have to consider.
CHAPTER IV.
SOME SINGULAR FORMS OF SEXUAL ASSOCIATION.
I. Primitive Sexual Immorality. — Origin of modesty — Absence of
modesty in the savage — Loan of wives in Melanesia and among the
Bochimans — Absence of modesty in the Esquimaux, the Redskins, and
Polynesians — Right of the husband in Polynesia — Loan or barter of
wives — Erotic training of little girls in Polynesia — Society of the
Areois — Man in a state of nature — Unnatural love in New Caledonia,
in the two Americas, among Asiatic peoples, and in Greco-Roman
antiquity — The erastes of Crete.
II. Some Strange Forms of Marriage. — Coarseness of primitive
marriage — Horror of incest artificially created — Incest among various
peoples — Artificial defloration — Experimental marriages among the
Redskins, the Otomies, the Sonthals, the Tartars, and in Ceylon —
Temporary marriages among the Jews of Morocco and the Tapyres —
Free unions — Partial marriages and marriages for a term among the
Arabs — Marriage and the right of the strongest in savage countries —
Savage coarseness and civilised depravity.
I. Primitive Sexual Immorality.
In a former work^ I have attempted to trace the genesis
of a sentiment peculiar to humanity — the sentiment of
modesty. It would be inexpedient here to treat the subject
afresh in detail, but I will recall the conclusions arrived at
by that investigation. Modesty is par excellence a human
sentiment, and is totally unknown to the animals, although
the procreative need inspires them with desires and passions
essentially identical with what in man we call love; it is
therefore certainly an artificial sentiment, and comparative
ethnology proves that it must have resulted from the
1 U Evolution de la Morale*
THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE. 5 7
enforced chastity imposed on women under the most
terrible penalties. In reality, primitive marriage hardly
merits the name ; it is simply the taking possession of one
or several women by one man, who holds them by the
same title as all other property, and who treats adultery,
when unauthorised by himself, strictly as robbery. This
ferocious restraint has resulted, especially in the woman, in
the formation of particular mental impressions, correspond-
ing psychically to the sentiment of modesty, and inducing a
certain sexual reserve which has become instinctive. But
this moral inhibition is still very weak in races of low
development, and, taking the whole human species, it exists
chiefly in the woman ; it is a sexual peculiarity of character,
and is of relatively recent origin.
If we keep well in mind these preliminary considerations,
we shall not be much surprised at the forms of sexual
association which we are about to consider, although they
are singularly repulsive to our ideas of morality. We shall
be still less surprised at them when we are acquainted with
the extreme licence permitted in many savage and barbarous
societies.
There is nothing more difficult for us to realise, civilised
as we are, than the mental state of the man far behind us in
cultivation as regards what we ca.\\J>ar excellence "morality."
It is not indecency ; it is simply an animal absence of
modesty. Acts which are undeniably quite natural, since
they are the expression of a primordial need, essential to
the duration of the species, but which a long ancestral and
individual education has trained us to subject to a rigorous
restraint, and to the accomplishment of which, consequently,
we cannot help attaching a certain shame, do not in the
least shock the still imperfect conscience of the primitive
man. On this point facts are eloquent and abundant ; I
will quote a few of them.
In Tasmania it was' thought an honour for women to
prostitute themselves to Europeans, who were ennobled in
the eyes of the natives by the prestige of their superiority. ^
The Australians, who were a little more developed than the
Tasmanians, willingly lent or hired out their women — at
least those that were their own property — to their friends.^
^ Wake, vol. i. p. 77. ^ Id, vol. i. p. 71.
58 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
The women were not less bestial than their males. They
often engaged, says Peltier, in furious combats, fighting
with spears, for the possession of a man. This is a peculiar
case, and is an entirely human instance of that law of battle
of which I have spoken in regard to animals. Like the
females of animals also the Australian women adored
strength, and when the men of their own horde were
beaten in battle they sometimes went over to the camp of
the conquerors of their own accord (Mitchell).^ In these
facts there is nothing exceptional, and we may change the
country without changing the customs. Thus the Bochi-
mans treat their wives as simple domestic animals, and offer
them willingly to strangers,^ as do also the Australians.
In the Andaman Islands and elsewhere the women give
themselves up before marriage — that is, before becoming
the property of one man — to the most unbridled prostitu-
tion, ^ and yet the most innocent, according to the morality
of the country.
Among the Esquimaux the laxity of sexual customs, both
for men and women, is extreme. The husbands feel no
shame in selling, or rather hiring out, their wives ; and the
latter, as soon as their proprietors are gone to the chase or
to fish, abandon themselves to an uncontrolled debauch,
taking care to post their children outside the hut to warn
them in case of the unexpected return of the master.'*
Sexual morality does not yet exist among the Esquimaux,
and an Aleout said quite simply to the missionary Langs-
dorff, "When my people couple they do it like the sea-
otters."^ In fact, if the cold permitted, the Esquimaux
would not be any more clothed than the sea-otters. In
their common houses, where two or three hundred people
are crowded together, and a high degree of temperature is
maintained, they throw off their clothing without distinction
of age or sex.^ They go further still, and, like many
savages, practise what is called Socratic love openly and
without shame. Thus, among the Inoits, well-favoured boys
1 H. Spencer, Sociology ^ vol. ii. p. 213. ^ Wake, vol. i. p. 205.
' Giraud Teulon, Orig. de la Famille^ p. 68.
* Parry ( Third Voyage), Hist. Univ. des Voyages, t. xl. p. 456.
^ Giraud Teulon, loc. cit., p. 96.
^ l^lie Reclus, Les Primitifs, p. 70.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 59
are brought up with care, dressed as girls, and sold at a
high price towards the age of fifteen/ without any harm
being seen in it.
Tlie Redskins of the extreme north are scarcely more
modest than the Esquimaux. Carver relates that among
the Nandowessics a woman was particularly honoured
because she had first entertained and then treated as
husbands the forty chief warriors of the tribe.^
But it is especially in Polynesia that the naive immodesty
of primitive peoples was displayed with the greatest indiffer-
ence to the opinions of others.
" The principal difficulty of the missionaries in the Sand-
wich Isles,'' says M. de Varigny, " consisted in teaching the
women chastity; they were ignorant of the name and of the
thing. Adultery, incest, and fornication were common
things, approved by public opinion, and even consecrated
by religion." 3
These customs are of ancient date in Polynesia. The
travellers of last century had observed them still the same.
The Tahitian women, if they were free, openly bartered
their persons, and the fathers, mothers, brothers, and some-
times the husbands, often brought them to the European
sailors and hired them out, after a lively bargaining, for
nails, red feathers, etc. ^
At Noukahiva "the young girls of the island," says
Porter, *'are the wives of all those who can buy their
favours, and a beautiful daughter is considered by her
parents as a means of procuring them for a time riches
and plenty. However, when they are older, they form
more lasting connections, and seem then as firmly attached
to their husbands as women of any other country."^
In the same archipelago, the surgeon Roblet says that
the French sailors were frequently offered girls of eight
years ; " and," he adds, " they were not virgins."^
1 filie Reclus, Les Primitifs, p. 80.
2 Carver, Travels in North America, p. 245.
* De Varigny, Quatorze ans aux ties Sandwich^ p. 159.
* Wallis, Hist. Univ. des Vby., t. xviii. p. 364. — Edwards, ih'd. t.
xiii. p. 426.
^ Porter, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xvi. p. 232.
^ Marchand, ibid. t. xv. p. 406. — Moerenhout, Voy. aux iles^ t,
ler. p. 313.
6o THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
"Virtue," says Porter, "such as we understand it, was
unknown among them, and they attached no shame to
acts which they regarded not only as natural, but as an
inoffensive amusement. Many parents thought themselves
honoured by the preference given to their daughters, and
showed their satisfaction by presents of pigs and fruits,
which, on their part, was an extreme of munificence."^
In Polynesia public opinion forbade married women to
yield themselves without the authorisation of their owners,
and this was almost the only strict rule of morals existing ;
but the husbands trafficked in their wives without scruple.
" Tawee," says Porter, " was one of the handsomest men of
the island, and loved to adorn his person ; a bit of red stuff,
some morsels of glass, or a whale's tooth, had irresistible
charms for him, and in order to procure these objects he
would offer any of the most precious things he possessed.
Thus, though his wife was of remarkable beauty, and he
was the tenderest of husbands, Tawee offered his wife more
than once for a necklace." ^
To offer a woman to a visitor to whom one would do
honour was, for that matter, a simple act of courtesy in
Polynesia, and the same courtesy prescribed the immediate
acceptance of the offer, coram populo (Bougainville). It
was frequently his own wife that the husband thus gave up
to his guest, and the case of Porter, which I have just
quoted, had nothing exceptional in it. A similar thing
happened to Captain Beechey,^ and to many other
travellers. This conjugal liberality was one of the customs
of the country ; the friend, or iayo^ acquired conjugal rights
over the wife or wives of his friend. Between brothers and
relations the exchange of wives was frequent,* to such a
degree that at Toubouai, etc., Moerenhout tells us the
women were nearly held in common, and that in the
Marquesas a woman had sometimes as many as twenty
lovers.*
For the Polynesians the pleasures of sensual love were
the chief business of life ; they neither saw evil nor practised
1 Porter, Hist. Univ. des Vby., t. xvi. p. 229.
2 M, loc. cit., t. xvi. p. 245. ' Ibid. t. xix. p. 213.
* Wake, Evolution of Morality ^ vol. i. p. 79.
5 Moerenhout, Voy. aux ties, etc. , t. ii. p. 56.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y, 6l
restraint in them. The women were trained with a view to
amorous sports;^ they were fattened on a soup of bread
fruit, and from earhest infancy taught by their mothers to
dance the timorodte, a very lewd dance, accompanied by
appropriate words.^ The conversation also was in keeping
with the morals. "One thing which particularly struck
me," says Moerenhout, ** as soon as I began to understand
their language, was the extreme licence in conversation — a
hcence pushed to the limit of most shameless cynicism, and
which is the same even with the women ; for these people
think and talk of nothing but sensual pleasure, and speak
openly of everything, having no idea of the euphemisms of
our civilised societies, where we use double meanings and
veiled words, or terms that are permitted in mentioning
things which would appear revolting and cause scandal if
plainly expressed ; but these islanders could not understand
this, and the missionaries have never been able to make
them do so."^
Lastly, the existence of the religious and aristocratic
society of the Areo'is, in Tahiti and other archipelagoes,
finishes the picture of the mental condition of the Poly-
nesians as regards morals. Without describing afresh this
curious association, I shall only remind my readers that it
had for its object an unrestrained and public abandonment
to amorous pleasures, and that, for this reason, the com-
munity of women and the obligation of infanticide were
decreed.
During the last century sentimentality invaded the brains
of thinkers and writers like an epidemic, and gave rise to
the belief that primitive man, or "man in a state of nature,"
as the phrase went, was the model of all virtues. But we
must discount much of this. As we might naturally expect,
the uncultivated man is a mammal of the grossest kind.
We have already seen that his sexual morality is extremely
loose, and necessarily so ; we are, however, surprised to find
him addicted to certain aberrations from nature which the
chroniclers of the Greco-Latin world have accustomed us to-
regard as the result of a refined and depraved civilisation, —
1 Moerenhout, Voy. aux tlesy etc., t. i^^- p. 206.
* Cook, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. v. p. 268,
* Moerenhout, /oc. cit., t. i^r. p. 229.
62 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
an opinion which is quite erroneous, as comparative ethno-
graphy irrefutably proves. Nothing is more common among
primitive races than what is called Socratic love, and on
this point I will briefly quote a few facts, without pausing
longer on them than my subject requires. In the vast
sociological investigation which I am undertaking, moral
bestiality must not discourage scientific analysis any more
than putrefaction arrests the scalpel of the anatomist; it
does not therefore follow that we take delight in it.
As a matter of fact, many human races have practised,
from the first, vices contrary to nature. The Kanaks of
New Caledonia frequently assemble at night in a cabin to
give themselves up to this kind of debauchery.^ The New
Zealanders practised it even among their women.^ It was
also a widely-spread custom throughout Polynesia, and even
a special deity presided over it. In the whole of America,
from north to south, similar customs have existed or still
exist. We have previously seen that the Esquimaux reared
young boys for this purpose. The Southern Californians did
the same, and the Spanish missionaries, on their arrival in
the country, found men dressed as women and assuming
their part. They were trained to this from youth, and often
publicly married to the chiefs.^ Nero was evidently a mere
plagiarist. The existence of analogous customs has been
proved amongst the Guyacurus of La Plata, the natives of
the Isthmus of Darien, the tribes of Louisiana, and the
ancient Illinois, etc*
The two chief forms of sexual excess of which I have
been speaking, unnatural vice and the debauchery of girls
or free women, are habitual in savage countries ; and later,
when civilisation and morality have evolved, the same
inveterate inclinations still persist for a long time, in spite
of public opinion and even of legal repression.
The Incas, according to the chronicler Garcilaso, were
merciless in regard to these sexual aberrations, and the
^ Bourgarelj Des Races de V Ocianie fran^aise^ in Mim. Soc. cTAnthro-
pologie, t. ii. p. 390. — De Rochas, Nouvelle Caledonte, p. 235.
2 Moerenhout, Voy. aux. ileSy etc., t. ii. p. 167. — Marion, Hist.
Univ. des Voy., t. iii. p. 487.
3 Wake, Evolution of Morality , vol. i. p. 241,
* Peschel, Races of Man ^ p. 408,
AND OF THE FAMlL Y. 63
Mexican law was equally severe, but all without much effect,
if we may believe the accounts of Garcilaso himself, Gomara,
Bernal Diaz, etc. I have elsewhere related how the ancient
legislations of the great Asiatic states repressed these base
aberrations of the procreative sense, and nevertheless, at
the present day, the Arabs frequently give way to them,
even in the holy Mosque at Mecca ;^ and other Eastern
peoples, Hindoos, Persians, and Chinese, are also very
imperfectly reformed on this point.
When we remember that morality is essentially relative,
and that ancestral impressions are extremely tenacious in
the human brain, we shall not be much surprised to see
these low tendencies persist as survivals in the midst
of civilisations already far advanced. Nevertheless, the
theoretic morality of all the great nations of the East has
for centuries condemned these repugnant excesses, which
our European ancestors, both Celts and Teutons, have
early reproved and repressed. It is all the more singular
to find the most intelligent race of antiquity, the ancient
Greeks, practising the greatest tolerance on this subject,
«o much so that the names of Socrates and Plato, those
fathers of ethereal spiritualism, are attached to amours the
mere thought of which now excites disgust in a civilised
European.
A very slight acquaintance with Greco-Roman literature
furnishes abundant information on this matter. I have no
need, therefore, to dwell on it, but I must quote a curious
passage of Strabo, from which we learn that the ancient
Cretans associated with so-called Socratic amours the
ceremonial of marriage by capture, of which I shall soon
have to speak. This strange passage is as follows : — "It is
not by persuasion, but by capture, that they obtain posses-
sion of the beloved object. Three days or more in advance
the erasies apprises the friends of the young boy of his
project of abduction. It would be considered the greatest
disgrace for them to conceal the child, or prevent him from
passing by the road indicated. By so doing they would
appear to confess that he did not merit the favours of such
a distinguished erastes. What do they do therefore ? They
meet together, and if the ravisher is equal or superior in
^ Burckhardt, Hist, Univ. des Voy.t t. xxxii. p. 155.
64 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
rank and all other respects to the family of the child, they
are content in their pursuit to comply with the idea of the
law, and to make a semblance of attack only, allowing the
child to be carried off, and even testifying their satisfaction;
but if, on the contrary, the ravisher should be of greatly
inferior rank, they invariably rescue the child from his
hands. In any case the pursuit comes to an end when
the child has crossed the threshold of the andrion of his
captor." We may doubtless presume, from this passage,
that the ancient Cretans were no longer in the state of
bestial coarseness of the New Caledonians. With them the
capture was a symbol or comedy. It was a mark of esteem,
paid less to the beauty of the child than to his valour and
propriety of manners. In fact, the boy had the legal right
to revenge himself, if he had suffered any violence in his
capture ; and in restoring him to liberty his ravisher loaded
him with presents, some of which were obligatory and legal,
namely, a warrior's cloak, an ox, and a goblet ; it was a kind
of initiation in virility, and it was considered a disgrace for
a young boy not to obtain an erastes?-
But even if we admit that all the ceremonial of this
singular platonic marriage among the Cretans was perfectly
innocent, it arose, none the less, from a moral laxity,
plainly showing that ancient morals were gross in the
extreme.
I here conclude my enumeration. Short as it has been,
for I have purposely limited my facts to a small number,
it is sufficient to prove that for an immense period man
has been a very coarse animal. We may, therefore, expect
to find him adapting without scruple forms of marriage
or sexual association quite unusual among Europeans, and
which it now remains for me to describe briefly.
II. Some Strange Forms of Marriage.
In savage societies, where no delicacy yet exists in regard
to sexual union, and where, on the other hand, woman
is strictly assimilated to things and domestic animals,
marriage, or what we please to call so, is an affair of small
^ Strabo, x. 21.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. (i<,
importance, which is regulated according to individual
caprice. More generally the parents, and sometimes the
friends or the chiefs, pair the young people as they think
fit, and quite naturally they have little regard for mono-
gamic marriage, to the strictness of which, even in civilised
societies, man finds it so difficult to bend.
The young people, on their part, have hardly any
individual preferences. The young boys of the Redskins,
as Lafitau tells us, never even troubled to see, before
marriage, the wife chosen for them by their parents. ^
In Bargo, according to R. and J. Lander, they marry
with perfect indifierence ; " a man does not care any more
about choosing a wife than about which ear of corn he
shall pick." There is never any question as to the
sentiments of the contracting parties.^
It is quite certain, also, that during the first ages of the
evolution of societies, the ties of kinship, even those we are
accustomed to regard as sacred, and respect for which
seems to be incarnate in us, have not been any impediment
to sexual unions. Like the sentiment of modesty, the
horror of incest has only been engraved on the human con-
science with great difficulty and by long culture. Scruples
of this kind are unknown to the animal, and before they
could arise in the human brain it was first necessary that
the family should be constituted, and then that, from some
motive or other, the custom of exogamous marriage should
be adopted. Now, as we shall see later, the family has at
first been matriarchal or rather maternal, and with such
a familial system, the children have no legal father; the
prohibitions relative to incest could therefore, at the most,
only exist in regard to the female line, and, in fact, we find
it to be so in many countries where this system of filiation
prevails. But primitive morals, existing before the forma-
tion of a morality condemning incest, have left many traces
in the past, and even in the present. " The Chippeways,"
says Hearne, " frequently cohabit with their mother, and
oftener still with their sisters and daughters."^ And yet
he is speaking here of Redskins, a people reputed to be
^ Demeunier, Esprit des Diff^rents Peuples^ t. I^^^' p. 153
- Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxx. p. 94.
3 H. Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 218.
5
66 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
fanatical on the matter of exogamy. Langsdorff says the
same of the Kadiaks, who unite indiscriminately, brothers
with sisters, and parents with children.^ It is well known,
besides, that in the matter of sexual unions no race has
fewer prejudices than the Esquimaux. The Coucous of
Chili, and the Caribs also, willingly married at the same
time a mother and daughter. With the Karens, too, of
Tenasserim, marriages between brother and sister, or father
and daughter, are frequent enough, even in our own day.^
But these unions, though incestuous for us, have not
been practised amongst savages and inferior races only.
According to Strabo, the ancient Irish married, without
distinction, their mothers and sisters.^
We are told by Justin and Tertullian* that the Parthians
and Persians married their own mothers without scruple.
In ancient Persia, religion went so far even as to sanctify
the union of a son with his mother.^ Priscus relates that
these marriages were also permitted among the Tartars and
Scythians, and it is reported, too, that Attila married his
daughter Esca.®
Whether from a survival of ancient morals, or the care to
preserve purity of race, conjugal unions between brother
and sister were authorised, or even prescribed, in various
countries, for the royal families. The kings of ancient
Egypt were obliged to marry their sisters, and Cleopatra thus
became the wife of her brother Ptolemy Dionysius. The
Incas of Peru were subject to a similar law ; and at Siam
also, when the traveller La Loubbre visited it, the king had
married his sister.'' But I shall have to return to the
subject of marriage between relations in treating of the
endogamic regime which has been, or is, in force among
many peoples.
These incestuous marriages astonish us, and certain of
them are even revolting to our ideas, as, for example, the
union of the mother with the son. Another custom
1 Langsdorff, Voyages, t. ii. p. 64.
2 Heber, quoted by H. Spencer, Sociology^ vol. ii. p. 248.
* Geov'aphy, Lib. iv. par. 4.
^ Justin, Agatha, vol. ii. Tertullian, in Apologet.
5 A. Hovelacque, L'Avesta, pp. 465, 466.
^ Demeunier, t. ler. pp. 465, 466. ' Ibid. p. 166.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 67
will probably surprise, if not shock us quite as much.
I allude to experimental marriages, which are far from
being rare. They will appear, however, less singular, if
we remember that in societies of low order little value
is set on the chastity of young girls ; virginal purity is
not at all prized, and there are even some peoples,
as the Saccalaves of Madagascar, ^ for instance, and also
certain indigenous peoples of India,^ among whom it is
regarded as a duty for the mothers themselves to deflour
their daughters before marrying them.
With such morals prevailing, experimental marriages seem
natural enough. De Champlain, an ancient French traveller
in North America, relates that the Redskins of Canada
always lived a few days together, and then quitted each
other if the trial had not been satisfactory to either of
them.^
A Spanish chronicler, Herrara, reports that the Otomies
of Mexico spent a night of trial with the woman that they
desired to marry ; they could quit her afterwards, but only
on condition of not retaining her during the following day.^
Among the Sonthals also, an aboriginal tribe of India,
whose marriages are celebrated simultaneously once a year,
the candidates for marriage must first live six days together,
and it is only after this trial that it is lawful for them to
marry.^ With certain Tartar tribes of Russia in Europe
and of Siberia there existed an institution of experimental
marriages lasting for a year, if the woman did not become
a mother during that period.^ In the island of Ceylon,
according to Davy, there are also provisional marriages,
confirmed or annulled at the end of a fortnight.''
Among the Jews in Morocco the Rabbis consecrate
temporary marriages, for three or six months, according to
agreement. The man only engages to acknowledge the
child if needful, and to make a certain donation to the
mo' her. ^
1 Noel, Bull, de la Soc. de Giog., Paris, 1843.
^ Collection Ramusio, t. i^r. Ubro di Odoardo Barbosa, portoghese.
* Demeunier, t. i^r. p. 155. * /bid.
^ The People of India, vol. i. p. 2.
^ Travels through the Russian Emp're and Tartary^ by D. J. Cook,
vol. i. '' Davy, Ceylon, p. 2S6.
^ Dr. Decugis, Bull, de la Soc. de G4og., Paris.
68 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
Strabo tells us of an analogous custom prevailing in
antiquity among the Tapyres (Parthians), according to
which a woman, after having had two or three children by
a man, was forced by law to change her husband.^ This is
almost exactly what Marshal Saxe demanded for French-
women in the last century.
We must not confound these experimental marriages,
which are regulated, and in some sort legal, with free and
easily cancelled unions still more common, as, for example,
those of the Nouka-Hivians, that are broken at will, pro-
vided there are no children ;2 those of the Hottentots \^
those of the Abyssinians, who marry, part, and re-marry at
will.'* These last unions, founded merely on individual
caprice, have nothing extraordinary about them, and we
know that they are not rare in civilised countries.
Much more curious, from a point of view of sexual and
conjugal morality, are the partial marriages, which only bind
the parties for certain days of the week. This is a rare kind
of marriage that seems improbable to us, yet it has been
proved to have existed among the Hassinyehs of the White
Nile, of Arab or perhaps Berber race.
By an agreement, which is sharply discussed beforehand,
the Hassinyeh woman engages to be a faithful wife for a
fixed number of days in the week, generally three or four,
but this is in proportion to the number of heads of cattle
given to the parents by the bridegroom as the price of their
daughter, and it is the mother herself who makes the
bargain. Naturally, on the days that are not reserved the
woman is free, and she has a right to use her liberty as she
pleases. ^
These strange customs amongst the Arabs must surely
date from old pre-Islamite ages, and we may class them
with other antique customs, as, for example, marriage for a
term, called mof a marriage, which was in use with the
Arabs until the time of Mahomet, and which doubtless they
imported later into Persia, where it exists in our own day.
1 Strabo, vol. ii. p. 514.
2 Porter, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t, xvi. p, 323.
^ Levaillant, ibid. t. xxi. p. 164.
* Bruce, Travels^ vol. ix. p. 187 ; vol. v. p. I.
^ Ausland, Jan. 1867, p. 114.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 69
And again, in the kingdom of Oman, in the fourteenth
century, the Sultan could still grant to a woman, indeed to
any woman he pleased, the permission to have lovers
according to her fancy, and her relations had no right to
interfere. 1
The partial marriage of the Hassinyeh Arabs is there-
fore not so surprising as it seems at first sight when isolated
from other practices of the same kind. And it must be
confessed that, immoral as it may appear to us, it is
superior to the other modes of primitive conjugal associa-
tion in use among the greater number of savage peoples.
Doubtless it denotes an extreme of moral grossness, but at
the same time it shows a certain respect for feminine
independence, contrasting strongly with the animal subjec-
tion imposed on women in the greater number of societies
of little or no civilisation. The situation of the woman who
is owned and treated as a simple domestic animal, hired out
or lent to strangers or to friends, according to the caprice of
her master, but not allowed, at the peril of her life, to be
unfaithful to her owner without his leave, is surely far more
abject still.
I shall not dwell any more on these mere sketches of
marriage, free and transient unions broken as soon as
made, experimental marriages, three-quarter marriages, and
marriages for a term, all of which show the very slight
importance attached to sexual union by man in a low stage
of development. And yet we must not refuse the name of
marriage to these ephemeral and incomplete unions, since
they are arranged by means of serious contracts which have
been well discussed beforehand, and by agreements entered
into at least between the husband and the relatives of the
wife. The men of the horde or tribe do not, however,
profess a very strict respect for these marriages; the husband
is often uneasy in the enjoyment of his feminine property,
and although legally obtained, he must always be ready to
defend it.
Among the Bochimans, says Liechtenstein, with whom
marriage is reduced to its most simple expression, "the
strongest man often carries off the wife of the weakest,"
1 Ibn Batiita, vol. ii. p. 230 (quoted by R. Smith in Kinship and
Marriage in Early Arabia).
70 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
because it is the proper thing for him to do, since he is
called "the lion."
In fact, these abuses of strength exist, more or less, in
all countries and all races; but among the Redskins of
America and the Esquimaux it seems that public opinion
ratifies them, and that might has morally become right.
"When a Toski," says Hooper, "desires the wife of
another man, he simply fights with her husband."
" A very ancient custom," says Hearne, " obliges the men
to wrestle for any woman to whom they are attached ; and
of course the strongest party always carries off the prize.
A weak man, unless he be a good hunter and well beloved,
is seldom permitted to keep a wife that a stronger man
thinks worth his notice. This custom prevails throughout
all the tribes."!
In the same way, among the Copper and Chippeway
Indians woman is a property which is little respected, and
which the strong may always take from the weak.^
Richardson also says that among the Redskins every
man has the right to challenge another to fight, and if he
is victor, to carry oif his wife.^
The same customs prevail among the Indians of South
America — at least among certain of them. Thus Azara
relates that the Guanas never marry before they are over
twenty, for earlier than this they would be beaten by their
rivals.*
It has been attempted to show that these conflicts are the
equivalent of what is called in regard to animals " the law
of battle," but the comparison is not exact, for animals
seem in this respect much more delicate than men. If
they fight it is before pairing, and besides, as we have seen,
their combats are often courteous, like the tournaments of
our ancestors ; frequently, too, the object of these assaults
is much less to capture the female than to seduce her by
displaying before her eyes the qualities with which they
are endowed — courage, force, address, and beauty. On her
part, the female for whom they are competing is so little
1 Hearne, A Journey from Prince of Wales Fori, p. 104 (1796).
^ Franklin, y<?z^/-«0/ fo the Shores of the Polar Sea, vol. viii. p. 43.
' Richardson, Boat Journey, vol. ii. p. 21.
* Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 614.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 71
alarmed at their violence that, in general, she tranquilly
looks on at the duels, and afterwards gives herself, one may
say, freely to the victor. With certain species of birds a
lyric tourney is substituted for the fight, and so ardently do
the birds engage in it that a competitor will often die of
exhaustion.
Lastly, when the tourney is over, the couples paired,
and the marriage concluded, all rivalry ceases, the newly-
mated birds isolate themselves more or less, and devote
all their energies to the production of a family. Now
these are delicate refinements unknown to primitive man,
whose rivalries on the subject of the possession of women
resemble far more the struggles of the old males with the
young in the hordes of the gorillas or chimpanzees. We
are forced to acknowledge that the sexual morality of
primitive man does not much differ from that of anthropoid
apes, and it is quite a stranger to the aesthetic and poetic
refinements of certain birds.
I here end my short inquiry into the morals of primi-
tive man and the eccentric modes of conjugal union
which have preceded the institution of a more durable,
exclusive, and solemn marriage.
We are filled with astonishment when we find such
complete animal laxity in our undeveloped ancestors, and
we can hardly understand the total absence of scruples
which are now profoundly incarnate in us.
Those anthropologists who insist on making man a being
apart in the universe shut their eyes to these gross aber-
rations. Evolutionists are not so timid, and do not fear
to face the truth.
If, as it is impossible to deny, man is subject to the
laws of evolution like all other beings, we are forced to
admit that he must have passed through very inferior
phases of physical and moral development. Homo sapiens
surely descends from an ancient pithecoid ancestor, and
this original blot has necessarily been a drawback to his
moral evolution.
But here it is important to make a distinction. The
resemblance between the moral coarseness of the savage
and the depravation of the civilised man is quite super-
ficial. Who thinks of being shocked at the morals of
72 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE,
animals ? Now those of primitive man are quite as inno-
cent, and the brutahly of the savage has nothing in common
with the moral retrogression of the civilised man struck
with decay.
How unlike is the Aleout, imitating the sea-otter, without
thinking any evil, to the European degraded by the vices
of our civilisation ! For the latter the future is closed ;
there are some declivities that can never be remounted.
The posterity of the savage, on the contrary, may, with
the aid of time and culture, attain to great moral elevation,
for there are vital forces within him which are fresh and
intact. The primitive man is still young, and he possesses
many latent energies susceptible of development. In
short, the savage is a child, while the civilised man, whose
moral nature is corrupt, presents to us rather the picture
of decrepid old age.
CHAPTER V.
POLYANDRY.
I. Sexual Ptoportion of Births : its Influence on Marriage. — Sexual
proportion amongst animals — The state of this in Europe — Its variations
according to race and profession — Its oscillations — Proportion of the
sexes disturbed by war, by infanticide, and by the sale of daughters
— Polyandry has not been general.
II. Ethnography of Polyandry. — Examples of polyandry — Great
polyandrous centres — The polyandry of Thibet — The polyandry of the
Nairs.
III. Polyandry in Ancient Arabia. — Its causes — Infanticide in
Arabia — The legend of Cais, the infanticide — Evolution of polyandry in
Arabia — Mof a marriage — Ba^al marriage.
IV. Polyandry in General. — Matriarchal polyandry and patriarchal
polyandry.
I. Sexual Proportion of Births^ and its Influence on
Marriage.
With the exception of the rare and singular forms of
sexual or conjugal association which we have just passed in
review, matrimonial types are not numerous among the
peoples more or less civilised who have ah-eady instituted a
marriage— that is to say, a sexual association regulated by
generally admitted convention. The forms of marriage most
universally practised, those which the majority of mankind
has reached and stopped at, are polygamy and monogamy,
or monandry. I shall have much to say of these. For
the moment I shall treat of another kind of marriage,
far less widely spread without doubt, but which, however,
exists or has existed at divers points of the globe ; I allude
to polyandry.
I have no longer to prove that morality is variable and
74 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
perfectible, that it results from social life, and is only to be
taken together with the other needs, desires, and necessities
of the struggle for existence. Our moral sentiments are
simply habits incarnate in our brain, or instincts artificially
created; and thus an act reputed culpable at Paris or at
London may be and frequently is held innocent at Calcutta
or at Pekin. In order to judge impartially of polyandric
marriage we must remember these elementary truths. Not,
certainly, that polyandry is rare amongst us, but it is
censured, counted as criminal, and obliged to hide itself.
The legal and regulated possession, publicly acknowledged,
of one woman by several men, who are all husbands by the
same title, shocks our feelings and morality extremely in the
present day.
Nevertheless, human societies, small or large, must and
will live, and it is an imperious condition which imposes the
polyandric regime^ namely, a considerable inequality between
the number of men and that of women. Now. this dispro-
portion may result from divers causes. In the first place,
it may be natural, as it is among certain animal species.
Among the lepidoptera, for example, nine hundred and
thirty-four males have been counted as against seven
hundred and sixty-one females.^ Although smaller,
the disproportion is not less real amongst mankind.
As a general rule, and in nearly all countries where
it has been possible to ascertain it, the relation between
masculine and feminine births gives a certain excess
of boys. This relation has been found in Europe to be
1 06 for 70 million of births ; but our great masculine
mortality re-establishes the equilibrium in the early years of
life. The proportion of births, besides, is far from being
identical in all the countries of Europe, and we even find
oscillations in a given country. In England it is generally
104.5, ^^ France 106.3, i^ Russia 108.9, ^t Philadelphia
1 10.5. In certain ethnic or social categories the pro-
portion of masculine births notably augments. It rises
to 113 for the Jews of Russia, to 114 for those of Breslau,
to 120 for the Jews of Livonia. More singular still, the
proportion of masculine to feminine births augments for
certain professions; it is, for example, higher amongst the
^ Darwin, Descent of Man^ p. 278.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 75
English clergy.^ It is even seen to vary spontaneously.
In the year 1886, during several months, the proportion of
feminine births rose at Paris. In France, for a period of
forty-four years, it has happened five times in one department,
and six times in another, that the female births have been
in excess. At the Cape of Good Hope, among the whites,
for several years there have been ninety to ninety-nine
mascuhne births. The reason or reasons of these spon-
taneous oscillations in the proportion of the sexes still
escapes us. We verify it only, and we are warranted in
concluding that the production of sex in the embryo
depends on some relatively second causes. It is sure, for
example, that the clergy of England are not of a special
race. If, however, they have more male children than
the other inhabitants of England, the fact can only depend
on intimate particulars of their kind of life. This reminds
us of certain biblical precepts relative to conjugal life, and
the too neglected theory of M. Thury (of Geneva) on the
influence of the degree of ovular maturity on the production
of the sexes.
But spontaneous oscillations in the proportion of the
sexes are always feeble; even the matrimonial type
does not seem to influence them, for in the harems of
Siam the sexual relation of births is the same as in
Europe.^ On the other hand, it is proved that race-horses,
which are very polygamous, since they serve as stallions,
have male and female descendants in exactly equal
proportions.^
It is the social actions of men which produce the most
profound disturbances in the proportion of the sexes. To
begin with, in savage or barbarous countries, where violent
death has become an ordinary occurrence for men, the
number of adult females much exceeds that of adult males.
Thus, at Bantou, when the Dutch established themselves
there, they found ten women to one man.* In La Sonera,
at the end of a civil war, there were seven women to one
man. In spite of all moral and legal precepts, such
conditions unfailingly result in polygamy, disguised or not.
On the contrary, a custom very widely spread in savage
* A. Bertillon. ^ Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 270. ' Id.^ ibid.
* Houzeau, Factdtes mentaks des animauXy t. i^r- p. 282.
76 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
countries, that of the infanticide of girls, not less necessarily
engenders polyandry, if the equilibrium in the numerical
proportion of the sexes is not re-established in another
manner. In reality, the infanticide of girls has been largely
practised in nearly all polyandrous countries. It seems
also that the custom of sacrificing the female children
influences in the long run the natural production of the
sexes. Thus the polyandrous Todas, who formerly killed
their girls, have actually a sexual proportion of 133.3 ^o^"
adults, and of 124 for the children.^
In Polynesia, where the infanticide of girls was so largely
practised, the sexual relation to-day is altogether in favour
of male births.
In New Zealand the proportion of the sexes in 1858 was
130.3 for adults, and 122.2 for non-adults.^
In 1839, in the Sandwich Islands, the numerical propor-
tion was 125.08 for adults, and 125.75 for non-adults.
In 1872 a general census of all the Sandwich Islands
gave for the numerical proportion of the sexes 125.36.
But there is more than one way of falsifying the propor-
tion of the sexes. It is not necessary to kill nearly all the
female children, as was the custom among the Gonds of
Bengal, where in many villages Macpherson did not see a
single girl \^ it suffices to sell them. It is even the sale of
girls which in many countries has at first restrained the
savage practice of feminine infanticide. Girls became a
merchandise negotiated by the parents, and afterwards
redeemed by the men, because they could not do without
them; but then it happened, in various countries and
among various races, that men joined together to lighten
the expense, and that several of them contented themselves
with one wife in common, became polyandrous.
But we must not believe, with certain sociologists, that
polyandry has ever been a universal and necessary matri-
monial phase. The enormous consumption of men, necessi-
tated by a savage or barbarous life, has often given an
impulse to polygamy. It is only in certain societies where
the practice of female infanticide exceeded all measure,
or in certain islands, or certain regions with little or no
^ Darwin, Descent of Man, p. 270. ^ /^.^ /^/^. p. 282
3 Dallon, Elhn. Bengal^ p. 289
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 77
population, where conquerors badly oif for wives came to
settle, that polyandry has become general and enduring. It
is surely only an exceptional form of marriage, and we can
enumerate the countries where it has been or is still in use.
II. Ethnography of Polyandry.
Caesar speaks thus of the polyandry of the ancient
Britons : — " By tens and twelves the husbands have their
wives in common, especially brothers with brothers, and
parents with children." ^
I have previously quoted Strabo on the polyandry of the
primitive Arabs, which was also fraternal.
In the sixteenth century the Guanches of two of the
Canary Isles, Lance rote and Tortaventura, were still poly-
androus, but amongst them the husbands did not number
more than three. ^
Polyandry also existed in New Zealand and in the
Marquesas, but restricted to certain women only.^
In America, amongst the Avaroes and the Maypures,
according to Humboldt, brothers had often only one wife.
But the great polyandric centres exist or have existed in
Asia, in India, Ceylon, and Thibet. Various aboriginal
tribes of India, nearly always much addicted to female
infanticide, have practised polyandry. The Miris and
Dophlas of Bengal are still polyandrous.* Among the
Todas of Nilgherry polyandry was fraternal. When a man
married a girl, she became on that account the wife of all
his brothers, and inversely these became the husbands of
all the sisters of the wife. The first child born of these
marriages was attributed to the eldest brother, the second
to the next brother, and so forth. ^
But polyandry has not flourished only among the
primitive races of India. The Hindoo populations had
also adopted it, and traces of it are found in their sacred
^ De bello Gallico, v, p. 14.
2 Berthelot, Mem. Soc. Ethn.^ pp. 121, 125, 155, 186, 210.
^ Radiguet, Derniers Sauva^eSy p. 180.
'^ Dalton, loc. a't., pp. 33-36.
^ Schortt, Trans. Ethno. Soc. (New Series), vol. viii. p. 240.
78 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
literature. Thus in the Mahabharata the five Pandou
brothers marry all together the charming Draaupadi, with
eyes of lotus blue.^ But in Brahmanic India polyandry is
more than a mere memory. Skinner has proved that near
the sources of the Djemmah, amongst a very fine race of
Hindoo mountaineers, fraternal polyandry still prevailed.
"Having asked one of these women," says the traveller,
" how many husbands she had — * Only four,' she replied.
' And all living ? ' * Why not ?' "
These customs, according to the traveller, did not hinder
these mountaineers from being, on other points, very moral
men. Thus they held lying in horror, and in their eyes to
deviate from the truth, even quite innocently, was almost a
sacrilege.2
At the other extremity of India, in Ceylon, the polyandric
regime is still very flourishing, especially in the interior
of the island, and among the leisured classes. The
number of husbands, generally brothers or relatives, is
variable ; it varies from three to eight. According to
Emerson Tennent, polyandry was formerly general in the
island, and it is owing to the efforts of the Dutch and
Portuguese that it has disappeared from the coast.^
It is particularly in lamaic Thibet that the polyandric
regime is in full vigour ; and in this country religion
strengthens it, for the most distinguished men, the ruling
classes, the chiefs or officers of the State, a fortiori the
lamas, have the same disdain for marriage so loudly pro-
fessed by the saints of Catholicism. The greater number
exempt themselves from it, and leave to the common
people the gross care of producing children. Now, the
latter, by reason of their poverty, associate together to
lighten the burden of the family. It is, again, fraternal
polyandry which is the rule in Thibet. It is in this
country that sociologists have sought the classic type of this
kind of polyandry.
In Thibet the right of primogeniture is combined with
the right of marriage, and the younger brothers follow the
fate of their chief It is this last who marries for all of
^ Mahabharata, trad. Fauche, t. ii. p. 148.
* Hist. Univ. des Voy., vol. xxxi. pp. 458-468.
^ Davy, Ceylon, p. 286. — O. Sachot, L'liede Ceylon^ p. 25.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 79
them, and chooses the common wife.^ However, if we
may beheve other accounts, a certain liberty is allowed to
younger brothers. The pressure on them is chiefly
economic. When the eldest son marries, the property is
transmitted to him in advance of his inheritance, with the
charge of maintaining his parents, who, however, can live
in a separate house. The youngest brother takes orders,
and becomes a lama. The others, if they choose, become
inferior husbands of the wife, who with us would be their
sister-in-law, and they are almost forced to do this, since
their eldest brother is sole inheritor. Once within the
polyandric regime, the younger brothers have a subordinate
position. The eldest, the husband-in-chief, considers them
as his servants, and has even the right to send them
away without any resource, if he pleases. If the principal
husband dies, then his widow, his property, and his
authority pass to the younger brother next in age. In
the case of the brother not being one of the co-husbands,
he cannot inherit the property without the wife, nor
the wife without the property. We have here, then, a sort
of polyandrian levirate.^
The children springing from these unions give the name
of father sometimes to the eldest of the husbands, and
sometimes to all.^ Travellers tell us that these polyan-
drous households are not more troubled than our mono-
gamous ones. Some Thibetans, living thus in conjugal
association, could not understand V. Jacquemont when
he asked them if the preference of their single wife for
one or other of them did not cause quarrels between the
husbands. But if jealousy is unknown to the husbands,
it is, on the contrary, frequent with the wife. '* A Thibetan
woman," says Turner, "united to several husbands, is as
jealous of her conjugal rights as an Indian despot could
be of the beauties who people his zenana or harem."*
As to the manner in which the intimate relations between
1 Turner, Thidef, p. 348, and Ifisi. Univ. des. Voy., vol. xxxi.
P- 434-
2 Moorcroft and Trebeck's Travels, vol. i. p. 320.
8 Rousselet, Ethnographie de V Himalaya occidental, in Revue
d'anthrop., 1878.
*• Turner, Hist. Univ. des Voy., vol. xxxi. p. 434.
8o THE E VOL UTIO N OF MARRIA GE
husbands and wife are regulated in the polyandric house-
holds of Thibet, we have scarcely any information. Among
the Todas the wife never had conjugal commerce with
more than one husband at a time, but she changed every
month; sometimes also the associated husbands add
to their number temporarily some young man belong-
ing to the tribe, but not yet engaged in the bonds of
wedlock.^
There is another form of polyandry besides the fraternal,
but quite as curious, and which has been made to play
a great rble in various sociological theories. It is the
polyandry of the Nairs, an indigenous high caste of
Malabar.
However extraordinary the fraternal polyandry called
Thibetan may seem in our eyes, that of the Nairs of
Malabar is far more so. Here the reality exceeds all that
we could have imagined in the way of conjugal customs.
The Nair parents married their daughters early. The bride
was rarely more than twelve years old. The proceedings
began with an ephemeral union, a sort of fictitious marriage,
but celebrated nevertheless with great rejoicings in presence
of parents and friends. The initiative and provisional
husband passed round the neck of the bride the conjugal
collar, the tali^ and henceforth the marriage was concluded
and had to be consummated ; only at the end of four or
five days the new husband was obliged to quit the house
of the wife for ever. On the contrary, the young bride
remained in the family, and from this period contracted a
series of partial but durable marriages. The first marriage
of the young Nair girl had evidently no other object than
defloration ; it was a service demanded of a fictitious hus-
band, and for which he was often paid. A traveller relates
that for this preliminary marriage a porter or a workman
was employed and paid. If his pretensions were too high,
recourse was had to an Arab or a stranger ; and, says the
narrator, the gratuitous services of these last were always
preferred if, when the ceremony was over, they withdrew in
time and with good grace. When once well and duly
prepared for marriage, the young Nair girl might take for
husband whomsoever she liked, except the provisional
1 Major Ross Y^mg^Journ. of Anlhrop. (1870), p. 32.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 81
husband of the first few days.^ The number of her hus-
bands varied from four to twelve.'^ Each one of them was
at first presented to her either by her mother or by her
maternal uncle, an important personage in the family.
Each co-partner was in his turn husband in reality during
a very short time, varying from one day to ten, and he was
free, on his side, to participate in divers polyandric conjugal
societies. We are assured that in these curious menages all
the associated husbands lived in very good understanding
with each other.^
Generally the Nair husbands were neither brothers nor
relatives, for these polyandrous people seemed to have ideas
about incest analogous to our own. But the unions outside
the caste were the only ones reputed culpable ; they consti-
tuted a sort of social adultery. The conjugal prerogatives
of the husbands were not unaccompanied by certain duties.
They had to maintain the common wife, and they agreed
together to share the expense. One took on himself to
furnish the clothes, another to give the rice.* On these
conditions each one could in his turn enjoy the common
property, and, in order not to be troubled in the use of his
rights, it sufficed the husband on duty to hang on the door
of the house and on the wife's door his shield and his sword
or knife.
The Brahmins were obliged to tolerate these polyandric
marriages, so contrary, however, to their laws ; they finished
by even deriving a profit from them. In the Brahmanic
families in contact with the Nairs the eldest son alone
married, so as not to scatter the patrimony ; the others
entered the matrimonial combinations of the Nairs, and thus
their children did not inherit.®
On their side, the Nairs were naturally only acquainted
with matriarchal heredity. No Nair, says Buchanan, knows
his father, and every man has for heirs the children of his
sister. He loves them as if they were his own, and unless
he is reputed a monster, he must show much more grief at
^ Elie Reclus, Les Primiiifs, p. 191.
* Hamilton, Account of the East Indies, vol. i. p. 308.
' Forbes, Oriental Memoirs^ vol. i. p. 385.
* Let Ires Edifiantes, vol. x. p. 22.
^ Robertson Smith, Kinship^ etc, p. 313.
6
82 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
their death than he would for his own possible children—
namely, those of his own wife.^
In comparing the two kinds of polyandry that I have just
described, the patriarchal polyandry of the Thibetans, and
the matriarchal polyandry of the Nairs, the majority of
sociologists consider the first as superior to the other. In
so doing they seem to me not to be able to shake off
sufficiently our European ideas. Doubtless the fraternal
Thibetan polyandry, while leaving undecided the paternal
filiation of the children, assures them a sort of collective
paternal parenthood, since the fathers are of the same
blood. This polyandrian family consequently differs less
than the Nair family from our own system of patriarchal
kinship, which is reputed superior ; but surely the liberty,
and even the dignity of the woman, which must count for
something, are more respected under the Nair system, which
not only does not reduce the woman to a thing possessed,
that one lends to one's friends, but gives her the power of
choosing her husbands.
Fraternal polyandry being declared superior to polyandry
of the Nair type, it has been concluded that in virtue of the
law of progress it must have been preceded in all times and
places by the latter. As regards the greater number of
cases of Thibetan polyandry, the supposition is gratuitous ;
it seems, however, established as far as ancient Arabia is
concerned, where, thanks to a very learned treatise recently
published by Mr. W. Robertson Smith, professor of Arabic
at the University of Cambridge,^ we may note the causes of
polyandry and follow its evolution.
III. Polyandry in Ancient Arabia.
The chief cause of ancient Arabian polyandry was the
one we find in nearly all the polyandric countries — that is to
say, the infanticide of daughters.
The primitive Arabs, extremely savage and even anthro-
pophagous, were led to adopt the custom of female
infanticide by the difficulty of living in their arid country,
1 Buchanan, /i7«r«^j^, vol. ii. p. 41 1, etc.
- Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, 1885.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 83
where famines were very common. Down to the present
time the nomads of Arabia suffer constantly from hunger
during a great part of the year.^
The custom of infanticide was inveterate among the
Arabs, and Mahomet was obliged to condemn it over and
over again in the Koran : — " They who from folly or
ignorance kill their children shall perish.^ Kill not your
children on account of poverty.^ Kill not your children
for fear of poverty; we will feed them, and you also.* When
it shall be asked of the girl buried alive for what crime she
is put to death . . . every soul will then acknowledge the
work that she had done."^
In this last verse the Koran bears witness to the custom
of killing the girls, and it indicates the process in use,
which actually consisted in burying them alive. This was
done openly, and often the grave of the newly-born infant
was dug by the side even of the couch of the mother
who had just given birth to it. According to the morality
of the primitive Arabs, these acts were not only very simple,
but even virtuous and generous,^ which seems to indicate
that they were indeed only precautions against famine. An
Arab legend, quoted by Mr. R. Smith, paints in lively
colours these atrocious customs. It relates to a chief of
Tamin, who became a constant practitioner of infanticide
in consequence of a wound given to his pride. He was
called Cais, and was contemporary with Mahomet. The
daughter of his sister was carried off in a razzia and given
to the son of her captor, as was the usage in Arabia, where
the captured women made part of the booty and were
divided with it. This time, when Cais came to reclaim
his niece by offering to pay her ransom, the latter, being
well pleased with the adventure, refused to quit her husband.
Cais, the uncle, was mortally offended, and from that moment
he interred alive all his daughters, according to the ancient
custom. But one day, during his absence, a daughter was
born to him, whom the mother secretly sent to a relative
to save her, and then declared to her husband that she
^ Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia^ p. 283.
* Sourate, vi. p. 141. * Ibid. xvii. p. 33.
* Ibid. 152. ^ Ibid. Ixxxi. pp. 8-14.
^ R. Smith, Kinships p. 282.
84 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
had been delivered of a still-born child. Some years later,
the girl, grown tall, came to pay a visit to her mother.
Cais discovered her, while her mother was plaiting her hair
and ornamenting it with cowries. " I arrived," the father
is made to say, speaking to Mahomet, " and I said, ' Who is
this young girl ? ' ' She is yours,' replied the mother, weeping,
and she related how she had formerly saved her. I waited
till the emotion of the mother was calmed ; then one day I
led away the girl; I dug a grave and I made her lie down
in it. She cried, ' Father, what do you intend to do with
me?' Then I covered her with earth. She cried again,
' Father, do you wish to bury me ? Are you going away,
and will you abandon me ? ' But I continued to heap earth
on her until her cries were stifled. That was the only time
it has happened to me to feel pity in burying a daughter." ^
Such customs, combined with the sale to strangers of
girls carried off in razzias, and the polygamy of the rich
men, must assuredly have profoundly disturbed the numerical
proportion of the sexes, and have rendered polyandry almost
a necessity, which, besides, could not excite any scruple
with the ancient Arabs, whose morals were very licentious.
Thus the captured women often remained common to a
group of relatives.2 In the fifth century the Syrio-Roman
law had even to forbid the contracts of fraternity, by which
all was held in common, including the wives and children.^
That fraternal polyandry, called Thibetan, may have
existed in Arabia, the passage of Strabo, which I have
previously quoted in regard to promiscuity, would suffice
to establish \ but Arab writers expressly attest it, and notably
Bokhari (vi. 127), according to whom the number of poly-
androus husbands was not allowed to exceed ten ; besides
this, various customs of more modern date, as, for example,
the passing of the widow, by heritage, to the relatives of
the husband, seem to arise from it. Moreover, even at the
present day in Arabia, the father cannot give his daughter
to another if the son of his brother demands her, and the
latter has the right to obtain her at a lower price ;* this is
the right of pre-emption applied to the woman.
It seems, indeed, as if these were the vestiges of an
^ R. Smith, Kinship, etc., pp. 279, 280. * A/., ibid, p. 135.
2 Id.^ ibid. pp. 131-134. * Id.f ibid. p. 137.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 85
antique fraternal polyandry, and it is in fact of fraternal or
Thibetan polyandry that Strabo speaks. Has this fraternal
patriarchal polyandry been preceded by a matriarchal
polyandry, after the mode of the Nairs — a polyandry which
did not make the woman the property of the husbands ?
Without being able to give a direct proof of this, we may,
however, consider it as very probable. In the present
day the partial marriages, by which the women of the
Hassinyeh Arabs engage themselves for some days of the
week only, strongly resemble the matriarchal polyandry of
the Nairs, and temporary marriage, or mof a, of the ancient
Arabs approaches nearly to it also.
It is this kind of marriage, in all probability, that the
prophet means when he inveighs against " fornication."
By the mof a marriage the woman does not leave her
home ; her tribe preserves the rights it has over her, and
her children do not belong to the husband. In short, the
conjugal union is only contracted for a fixed time. These
?nof a marriages had nothing dishonourable in them, and
did not in the least prevent the women from finding fresh
husbands when, at the expiration of the lease, they became
once more free.^
The custom of mof a marriage was long prevalent in
Arabia. Ammianus speaks of it,^ saying that the wife
received a price or indemnity from her temporary husband,
and that, if it happened to the contracting parties to wish
to continue to live together at the expiration of the time
fixed, they inaugurated a fresh and more durable union by
a symbolic ceremony, during which the wife offered to her
husband a javelin and a tent.
The prophet himself decided with great hesitation to
condemn the mof a marriage. A tradition makes him say
that " if a man and a woman agree together, their union
should last for three nights, after which they may separate
or live together, as they please." *
In fact, the mof a marriage was only abolished in the
time of Omar; and it is important to remark with regard to
it, that this mode of marriage, singular as it may appear to
us, was, for the woman, very superior to the servitude of the
1 R. Smith, Kinship, etc., pp. 69, 141 -143.
2 /i/., ibid. vol. xiv. p. 4. ■' Id., ibid. p. 67.
86 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
Mussulman harem. It was a personal contract, in which
her parents did not interfere, and which did not degrade
her from the rank of an independent person to the
humiliation of merely being a thing possessed. The mof a
marriage indicates, besides, very free manners, as is attested
by a number of facts and traditions, particularly certain
religious rites of the Canaanites, the Aramites, and the
pagan Hebrews, and also the licentious practices of women
and girls in the temple of Baalbek.
By degrees the mof a marriage gave place to a definite
marriage, the ba^al marriage, by which the young girl went
to live with her husband and owed him fidelity. Marriages
of this kind were sought at first by the chiefs, to whom they
assured alliances. As a consequence these unions became
honourable, and dethroned the ancient matrimonial custom.^
Henceforth the women who continued to live in the ancient
mode were dishonoured, and treated as prostitutes, whose
dwelling was indicated by a special flag. At the same time
the taste for paternity was born in men, and, in case of
doubt on this matter, sages whose profession it was, declared
the signs by which a man could recognise his own offspring.^
IV. Polyandry in General.
I have quoted or made a summary of nearly all the
information that has reached us on the subject of ancient
and modern polyandry. From thence we may conclude
that in no way are we authorised to consider this form of
conjugal union as having been general. Still it has become
a necessity in a good number of gross societies. It has
specially prevailed in countries badly supplied with food,
where the struggle for existence was severe, where warlike
conflicts with neighbouring tribes were incessant, and where,
in order to endure, the community was forced to diminish
the impedimenta and the useless mouths. In such con-
ditions, men still savage or barbarous have recourse without
hesitation all over the world to female infanticide ; and as,
on the other side, the chiefs and strong men monopolise
as many women as possible, the debauchery of unmarried
1 R. Smith, Kinship, etc., pp. 14 1 -143. ^ Id.^ ibid. p. 143.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 87
women and polyandrian households become necessary
palliatives.
We have seen that there are two principal kindj of
polyandry — the matriarchal and patriarchal. In the first,
the woman or girl does not quit her family or her gens ;
sometimes even she is permitted the right of choosing her
husbands, who are not related to each other, and upon
whom the woman scarcely depends at all, since she remains
with her own relations, and bears children for them.
On the contrary, in the patriarchal polyandry, the
woman, captured or bought, is almost entirely uprooted ;
she leaves her natural protectors to go and live with her
husbands, to whom she belongs, who are limited in number,
are nearly always brothers or relations, and to whom she
cannot be unfaithful without authorisation.
Both forms of polyandric marriage suppose a complete
absence of modesty, of sexual reserve and moral delicacy.
But we know that these qualities can only be the fruit of
long culture. In this respect both matriarchal and patri-
archal polygamy are equal. But it is important to observe
that the first enslaves woman much less. On the other
hand, the second already permits the establishment of a
sort of paternal filiation, since the husbands are generally of
the same blood. For this reason it is reputed superior.
In reality matriarchal polyandry always coincides with
the primitive family form, the matriarchate — that is to say,
with a system that takes no account of paternal filiation, and
leaves the children to the tribe of the mother.
Patriarchal polyandry, on the contrary, already presents
the outline of a sort of paternal family, with the right of
primogeniture attributed to the first-born.
We shall have to study in detail both the patriarchate
and the matriarchate. Polyandry, in its reputedly highest
form, the Thibetan, only constitutes a patriarchate of the
most imperfect kind, since there is still a confusion of
fatherhood.
Proof is still wanting to force us to conclude that matri-
archal polyandry must always have preceded the other.
This appears to be true for ancient Arabia only. In all
other places we can merely suppose it to have been so.
We should be equally mistaken if we admitted a priori
88 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
that patriarchal polyandry implies a degree of civilisation
superior to that of the countries where matriarchal poly-
andry prevails. The ancient Arabs, of whom Strabo speaks,
practised fraternal polyandry, and yet we know that they
were scarcely civilised, they were cannibals, and so
ferocious that their wives accompanied them in combats
in order to despatch and mutilate the wounded enemies.
These furies made themselves necklaces and bracelets for
their ankles with the noses and ears of a dead enemy,i and
sometimes even they ate his liver.
In conclusion, polyandry is an exceptional conjugal form,
as rare as polygamy is common. It must be classed with
experimental and term marriages. With our European
ideas on conjugal fidelity, obligatory by the right of pro-
prietorship, we can scarcely conceive even of the possibility
of this perfect absence of jealousy, this placidity of the
co-husbands. It is indelicate, doubtless. But how shall
we describe our morality and the laws that give to the
deceived husband the right of life and death over his
faithless companion, and in this respect bring us down
to the level of the savage ? Do indelicate manners rank
lower than ferocious manners ? They are both those of
the animal.
1 R. Smith, Kinships etc., p. 284.
CHAPTER VI.
MARRIAGE BY CAPTURE.
I. Rape. — Rape and marriage — Rape in Tasmania, Australia, New
Guinea, Africa, America, among the Tartars, the Hindoos, the
Hebrews, and the Celts — The rape of concubines in ancient Greece.
II. Marriage by Capture, — The ceremonial of capture in marriage —
Symbolic capture among the Esquimaux, the Indians of Canada, in
Guatemala, among the Mongols, the aborigines of Bengal, in New
Zealand, among the Arabs, the ancient Greeks, in ancient Rome, in
Circassia, among the modern Celts, and in Livonia.
III. Signification of the Ceremonial of Capture. — Violent exogamy
has not been universal — Rape and marriage by purchase — What the
ceremonial of capture means.
I. Rape.
The marriage by capture, which we have now to consider,
is not actually a form of marriage ; it is only a manner of
procuring one or more wives, whatever at the same time
may be the prevailing matrimonial regime. If, however, we
cannot dispense with the special study of marriage by
capture, it is because it has been made to play a chief role
in sociology. According to some authors, it has been a
universal necessity, and must have preceded exogamy in all
times and places.
Surely this too general theory may be contested ; but it is
beyond doubt that the rape of women has been widely
practised all over the world, that very often it has been
considered glorious, and that in many countries it has been
attenuated into pacific marriage.
Nothing is more natural and simple than rape among
savage or barbarous tribes, who hold violence in esteem and
90 THE EVOLUTIOK OF MARRIAGE
use it largely, and who, as we have previously seen, are
almost always addicted to female infanticide. But has the
widely-spread custom of rape the great importance in
sociological theory that has been attributed to it ? This
is a question to which we can only reply after having
consulted the facts.
Throughout Melanesia capture has been the primitive
means of procuring wives, or rather slaves-of-all-\vork,
absolutely at the discretion of the ravisher. Bonwick,
indeed, tells us that in Tasmania, and consequently
in Australia, capture was more often simulated only,
and resulted from a previous agreement between the man
and woman ;i but the savage manner in which the rape
was effected abundantly proves that amiable agreement was
exceptional. The Australian who desires to carry off a
woman belonging to another tribe prowls traitorously
around the camp. If he happens to discover a woman
without a protector he rushes on her, stuns her with a blow
of his club {douak\ seizes her by her thick hair, drags her
thus into the neighbouring wood ; then, when she has
recovered her senses, he obliges her to follow him into the
midst of his own people, and there he violates her in their
presence, for she has become his property — his domestic
animal. 2 The captured woman generally resigns herself
without difficulty ;2 in truth, she has, generally, changed her
master, but not in the least changed her condition.
Sometimes two men unite to commit one of these rapes.
They glide noiselessly into a neighbouring camp in the
night ; one of them winds round his barbed spear the hair
of a sleeping luhra, the other points his spear at her bosom.
She awakes, and dares not cry out ; they take her off, bind
her to a tree, and then return in the same manner to make
a second capture ; after that they return in triumph to their
own people.^ The captives rarely revolt, for they are, in a
way, accustomed to the capture. From infancy they have
been familiarised with the fate that awaits them, for the
simulation of the rape is one of the games of the Australian
1 Daily Life and Origin of the TasmanianSy p. 65.
* Dumont d'Urville, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ vol. xviii. p. 225.— Old-
field, Trans. Ethn. Soc, vol. iii. p. 250.
^ Chambers's Journal, p. 22 (October 1861).
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 91
children.^ Later the life of a pretty Australian girl is
marked by a series of plots to carry her off, and of succes-
sive rapes, which force her to pass from hand to hand, and
expose her to wounds received in conflicts, and to bad
treatment inflicted by the other women amongst whom she
is introduced. Sometimes she is dragged very far, even
hundreds of miles from the place of her birth.^
It is the duty of the tribe to which the ravished woman
belongs to avenge her, and the Australian has, after his
own manner, a strong sentiment of certain obligations,
which for him are moral; but more frequently, to escape
too great damages, the tribes hold a meeting, and the
ravisher submits to a symbolic retaliation agreed on before-
hand. Armed with his little shield of bark, he takes his
place at about forty yards from a group of ten warriors
belonging to the aggrieved tribe, and each one of these
throws two or three darts at him, which are nearly always
avoided or parried. Thenceforth the offence is effaced,
and peace re-established.^
The same customs prevail among the Papuans of New
Guinea. At Bali the men carry off and violate brutally
the solitary women they may meet; and afterwards they
agree with the tribe as to compensation.'* In like manner,
in the Fiji Isles, rape, real or simulated, was general and
even glorious. A particular divinity presided over it. The
ravished woman either fled to a protector or resigned
herself, and then a feast given to the parents terminated
the affair.*^
To be able to see in these bestial customs anything
resembling marriage, one must be a prey to a fixed idea
— a positive matrimonial monomania. There is here no
marriage by capture, but rather slavery by capture. This
is not the only method of procuring wives practised
by the Australians. They often proceed pacifically by
traffic, and a man acquires a wife by giving in exchange
another woman of whom he has power to dispose — a sister
^ Collins, English Colony in Netv South Wales^ p. 362.
* G. Grey, Travels in North- Western Australia, vol. ii. p. 249.
^ Chambers's Journal, 1864.
* Notices on the Indian Archipelago, p. 90.
^ Williams, Fiji and the Fijians, vol. i. p. 174.
92 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
or relative.^ Certain tribes had also instituted a sort of
regulated promiscuity — a collective marriage between all
the men of one clan and all the women of another. I
shall have to return to the consideration of this singular
form of sexual association. For the moment I confine
myself to noticing that rape is not always obligatory in
Australia.
Neither is it so among the negroes of Africa; it is even
more rare there than in Melanesia, but there also it does
not constitute a marriage. Women are carried off just in
the same way as other things are carried off. Thus the
Damara Hottentots often steal wives from the Namaquois
Hottentots.2 Among the Mandingos and the Timanis
there is no marriage by capture, properly speaking ; already
they purchase the daughter from her parents, without, of
course, consulting her ; then the intending purchaser, aided
by his friends, carries off his acquisition in a brutal manner,
whether she will or not. It is a simple commercial affair ;
the daughter is an exchange value representing a certain
number of jars of palm wine, of stuffs, etc.
Amongst the natives of America brutal rape was, or still
is, very common. In Terra del Fuego, the young Fuegians
carry off a woman as soon as they are able to construct or
procure a canoe. ^ From tribe to tribe the Patagonians
at war exterminate the men and carry off the women. The
Oen Patagonians make incursions every year at the time
of "the red leaf" on the Fuegians to seize their women,
their dogs, and their weapons.^ The Indians on the banks
of the Amazon and Orinoco continually capture women,
and thus every tribe is sometimes nearly without women
and sometimes overflowing with them.^ The Caribs so
frequently procured wives in this way that their women
did not often speak the language of the men.^ In the
Redskin tribe of the Mandans the rape of young women
was a perpetual cause of trouble, of disorder, and of
* McLennan, Primitive Marriage^ p. 321.
2 Campbell, Hist. Univ. des Voy., vol. xxix. p. 343.
* Laing, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ vol. xxviii. p. 31.
* Fitzroy, Vuy. Beagle, vol. ii. p. 182.
" Fitzroy, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 205.
* McLennan, loc. cit.y p. 48.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 93
vengeance, proportioned to the power and to the anger of
the relations of the ravished woman.^
We find similar customs among savage or barbarous
peoples nearly everywhere. The Tartars, says Barnes, make
their wives of the prisoners that they capture in battles.^
The Code of Manu also mentions this primitive mode
of union more or less conjugal : — " When a young girl is
carried off by force from the parental house, weeping and
crying for succour, and those who oppose this violence
are killed or wounded, and a breach is made in the walls,
this mode (of marriage) is called that of the giants."^
The Bible relates several facts of the same kind. Thus
the tribe of Benjamin procured themselves wives by
massacring the inhabitants of Jabez-Gilead and capturing
four hundred of their virgins. Another time the Benjamites
practised a Sabine rape in carrying off the women during
a feast near Bethel.
The Israelites, having vanquished the Midianites, killed
all the men, according to the Semitic custom, and took
away the cattle, the children, and the women.* IBut Moses,
always directly inspired by the Lord, ordered them to put
to death the women and even the male children, and to
keep the young girls and virgins.^ There were sixteen
thousand maidens, of whom thirty-two were reserved for
the Lord's share, which doubtless means for the priests.
Of the sheep, oxen, asses, and maidens that remained,
Moses further deducted the fiftieth part, which he gave
to the Levites of the tabernacle.^
This ferocity and this coarse assimilation of captured
women to cattle are not peculiar to the people of God,
but prevailed amongst the primitive Arabs, '^ or rather
amongst all the Semites, who were still savage or barbarous.
Capture in war has, besides, been largely practised by all
races and throughout the world. An old Irish poem, the
" Duan Eiranash," speaks of three hundred women carried
•^ McLennsiTi, Prtmt^we Marriaget p. 71. — Lewis and Clarke, Travels
to the Source of the Missouri River ^ vol. i. p. 231.
2 Hist. Univ. des Voy., vol. xxvii. p. 130.
* Code of Manu^ book iii. p. 33.
* Numbers, ch. xxxi. ver. 7-9. * Ibid. ver. 40-47.
* Ibid. ver. 15-18. ^ R. Smith, Kinships etc.
94 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
off by the Picts from the Gaels, who, finding themselves
thus deprived of their women by a single blow, allied
themselves then with the Irish.
I will confine myself to these examples, gleaned from
all parts, and which it would be easy to multiply. They
amply suffice to establish that in primitive societies woman,
being held in very low esteem, is absolutely reduced to
the level of chattels and of domestic animals ; that she
represents a booty like any other ; that her master can use
and abuse her without fear. But in these bestial practices
there is nothing which approaches, even distantly, to marriage,
and we are not in the least warranted to call these brutal
rapes marriages. Even in the countries where a true
marriage exists, the customs and the laws tolerate for a long
time the introduction into the house of the husband cap-
tured slaves, who are treated by the master as concubines
by the side of the legitimate wife or wives. The heroes of
Homer profit largely by this legal tolerance, and when
the Clytemnestra of ^schylus justifies herself for having
killed her husband, she alleges, among other extenuating
circumstances, the intimacy of Agamemnon with his slave
Cassandra.
Assuredly in all this there is no marriage. We shall
presently see that in many countries the concubinate, legal
and patent, has co-existed, or co-exists, by the side of
marriage without being confounded with it. It is important
to reserve the name of marriage by capture to legal and
pacific marriage, in the ceremonial of which we find prac-
tices recalling or simulating by survival the primitive rape
of woman.
II. Marriage by Capture.
It is to be observed that this symbolic rape does not
always signify that the capture of the woman has preceded
pacific conjugal union. It represents especially a mental
survival, the tradition of an epoch, more or less distant,
when violence was held in high esteem, and when it was
glorious to procure slaves for all sorts of labour by force of
arms. In the countries where the ceremonial of capture
exists, the fine times of rape are generally somewhat gone
AND OF THE FAMILY, 95
by, but the mind is still haunted by it, and even in peaceful
marriages, after the contract or bargain is concluded, men
like to symbolise in the ceremonial the rapes of former
days, which they cannot and dare not any longer commit.
These practices have aiso another bearing : they signify
that the bride, then nearly always purchased from her
parents, must be in complete subjection to the master that
has been given her, and occupy the humblest place in the
conjugal house.
For all these reasons the symbolic ceremonial of capture
has been, or is still, in use with many races at the celebra-
tion of their marriages. In some degree it is found all over
the world. Among the Esquimaux of Cape York the
marriages are arranged in a friendly way by the parents of
the future couple, and nevertheless, from the infancy of the
la'iter, the conjugal ceremony must simulate a capture. The
future bride must fly, must defend herself with her feet and
hands, scream at the height of her voice, until her new
master has succeeded in taking her to his hut, where she at
once settles happily.^
In the same way, in Greenland the bridegroom captures
his bride, or has her captured for him ; and in the latter
case he has recourse to the help of two or three old women.^
With the Indians of Canada, where sometimes a true
marriage is concluded in presence of the chief of the tribe,
when he has pronounced the matrimonial formula, "the
husband turns round, stoops down, takes his wife on his
back, and carries her to his tent, amid the acclamations
of the spectators." 3
Some Redskin tribes, observed by Lafitau, symbolised
rape even in the intimate relations between young couples.
The husband was obliged to enter the wigwam of his wife
in the night; it would be a grave impropriety for him to
approach it in the day-time.*
In ancient Guatemala, where marriages were celebrated
with a certain pomp, the father of the bridegroom sent
a deputation of friends to seek the bride, and one of these
^ T. Hayes, The Open Sea at the Pole, pp. 448, 449.
^ Egede, History of Greenlaitd, p. 143.
^ Carver, Travels, p. 374.
* Lafitau, Mcetirs des Sauvages Anitficains, t. i^r. p. 576.
96 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
messengers had to take the girl on his shoulders and
carry her to an appointed spot, near the house of the
bridegroom.^
In Asia, over the vast Mongol region extending from
Kamtschatka to the country of the Turcomans, the cere-
monial of capture is always held in honour.
This symboHsm of capture is especially curious with the
Kamtschatdales. There it is not as a conqueror that the
husband enters the family of the wife, since he must first
do an act of servitude, find the parents of the girl he
desires, put himself at their service, and take his part in
the domestic labour. This period of probation may last
a long time, even years,^ and surely it is a singular prelude
to a marriage by violent capture. However, when the time
of the novitiate is over, the future husband is allowed to
triumph violently and publicly over the resistance of his
bride. She is armed with thick garments, one over the
other, and with straps and cords. Besides this she is
guarded and defended by the women of the iourte. How-
ever, the marriage is not definitely concluded until the
bridegroom, surmounting all these obstacles, succeeds in
effecting on his well-defended bride a sort of outrage on
modesty, that she herself must acknowledge by crying ni ni
in a plaintive tone. But the girls and women of the guard
fall on the assailant with great cries and blows, tear his
hair, scratch his face, and sometimes throw him. Victory
often necessitates repeated assaults and many days of com-
bat. When at last it is gained, and the bride has herself
acknowledged it, the marriage is settled, and is consummated
the same evening in the iourte of the bride, who is not
taken to her husband's house till the next day.^
The ceremonial of capture still continues in the marriages
of the Kalmucks, the Tungouses, and the Turcomans, but
has become less coarse.
With the Kalmucks the girl is first bought from her
father, and then, after a pretended resistance, is carried
away on a horse ready saddled.* The custom varies :
* Bancroft, Native Races ^ etc., vol. ii. p. 668.
2 Kotzebue {Deuxihne Voyage), Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xvii. p. 392.
^ Beniouski, Hist Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi. p. 408.
^ H. de Hell, Travels in the Steppes of the Caspian Sea, p. 289.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 97
sometimes it is enough to place the bride, by force, on a
horse; sometimes she flees, always on horseback, but is
pursued and caught by the bridegroom, who consummates
the marriage on the spot, and then conducts his prize to his
tent.i
The Tungouses, coarser still, proceed by an attempt on
modesty, as with the Kamtschatdales ; the bridegroom must
attack his bride and tear her clothes. ^
With the Turcomans, marriage can be concluded with or
without the consent of the parents. In the latter case,
the young people fly and seek refuge in a neighbouring
ol^aA. They are always well received there, and remain a
month or six weeks. During this time the elders of the two
oda/is negotiate an arrangement with the parents; they
agree on the price ot the girl, who afterwards returns to the
paternal domicile ; she must remain six months or a year,
or even longer, before living with her husband, and during
all this time he may only see her secretly. Sometimes the
flight is executed with the previous consent of the parents,
and then it is no more than a symbolic capture,^ a comedy.
In reality rape, more or less real, is often replaced by a
simple ceremonial with the greater part of the nomads of
Central Asia, and notably the Turcomans. Then the young
girl, clothed in her bridal costume, bestrides a fiery horse,
which she puts to a gallop, having at the saddle a kid or a
lamb freshly killed. The bridegroom and all the wedding
guests, also on horseback, pursue the future wife, who, by
clever turns and evolutions, hides herself, and hinders them
from seizing the animal she has carried off.* All this is
plainly the mere mimic of rape, and there is in these divers
customs a designed gradation : at first the actual stealing of
the girl, with the understanding that the affair will not end
tragically ; then a stealing that may be called legal, as it is
authorised by the parents ; at length the simple ceremony
symbolic of rape by violence.
Customs very similar to these are found with a certain
number of the aborigines of Bengal.
^ Clarke, Travels, etc., vol. i, p. 433.
• 2 Erman, Travels in Siberia^ vol. ii. p. 372.
^ Yia.sQx'% Journey, vol. ii. pp. 372-375.
* A. Vambery, Voy. dun faux Derviche, p. 295.
98 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
The Kurmis and other sudras celebrate marriage by a
pretended combat. Sometimes the bridegrooms mark their
foreheads with blood, which seems, indeed, to be the
origin of the singular and nearly universal custom in India
of the sindradan} consisting of marking the forehead of
the bride with vermilion. The vermilion has apparently
replaced the blood, and the blood may, and doubtless
does, symbolise a violent rape.
With the Mecks and the Kacharis, the bridegroom, accom-
panied by his friends, goes to the house of his future bride ;
he there meets the friends of the latter, and the two troupes
simulate a combat, in which the future husband is always
victor; the bride finishes by being carried off, and her
husband has only to feast the friends of both parties, and
pay the father the price of the girl.^
"V^'ith the Soligas, the man carries away the young girl
with her consent, and goes, like the Mongols, to a neigh-
bouring village to pass the time of the honeymoon, after
which the couple return home and give a feast. ^
The custom of simulated capture still exists among other
aboriginal tribes of India, the Khonds, Badagas, etc.
It is evident that in primitive humanity, to carry off a
woman with armed violence was considered a glorious
exploit, since in the most diverse races pacific marriage
assumes, with such good will, the pretence of violent
conquest.
In New Zealand, in order to marry a girl, a man applied
either to her father or nearest relation; then, consent being
obtained, he ravished his future bride, who was bound to
resist energetically. As the New Zealand women were
robtst, the contest, however courteous it might be, was
sevee; the clothes of the girl were generally torn to
shreds, and it sometimes took hours to drag her a hundred
yards.*
Sometimes the mother of the bride interfered. Mr.
Yate mentions a case of this kind. It relates to a mother
quite content with the marriage of her daughter, but
obliged by custom to make a show of violent opposition.
1 Dalton, Ethn. Bengal, p. 319. ' Id., ibid, p 86.
3 Buchanan, Journey from Madras, vol. ii. p. 178.
^ Earle, Residence in New Zealand^ p. 244.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 99
The newly-married couple, on coming out of the church,
for they were converted, met the old woman, vociferating
and tearing her hair, and abusing the missionary, but
telling him at the same time in a low voice not to mind,
for she was not serious.^
In certain districts of New Zealand the future husband
was obliged literally to carry off the girl. When the
marriage was negotiated and, in principle, concluded, all the
relatives watched the fiancee with the greatest care, and
held themselves in readiness to defend her. The young
man had to seize his bride at all costs by force of arms ; his
honour depended on it, and often he suffered severely in
conducting his glorious enterprise to a successful end.^
The ceremonial of capture evidently springs from
customs of rape, whether ancient or not; it is, there-
fore, quite natural to meet with razzias among the
Bedouins, as among all of their race. With the Bedouins
of Sinai, the comedy is played to the life. The bridegroom,
accompanied by a couple of friends, attacks the girl when
she is leading the flocks home. She defends herself
vigorously by throwing stones, and is esteemed according to
the amount of energy she shows. At length they finish by
taking her to the tent of her father, where the name of her
future husband is proclaimed. After this the girl is dressed
as a bride, placed on a camel, all the time feigning re-
sistance, and conducted to the encampment. A feast and
presents terminate the ceremony.^
With the Mezeyn Arabs things are pushed further. The
girl, in the so-called capture, evades pursuit and takes
refuge in the mountains, where her friends have prepared
provisions for her beforehand. The bridegroom rejoins his
future wife in her retreat, and it is there that the marriage
is consummated. After this the couple return to the
paternal domicile, which the woman, unless she is with
child, does not quit for a year.
The matrimonial comedy is not always so complicated.
With the Amezas the bride only runs from tent to tent, and
is at last conducted by several women to a tent prepared at
^ Yate, New Zealand^ p. 96.
* Moerenhout, Voy^ aux iles du Grand Ocian^ t. ii. p. 68.
• Burckhardt, Notes, vol. i. p. 263.
loo THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
some distance ; her bridegroom awaits her there, but he has
to force her to enter it ; that done, the women retire.^
With the Moors of Java, relates Schouten, the father of
the bride carries her, all swathed up, to the bridegroom.
The latter, aided by two of his paranymphs, lifts her on a
horse and rides away with her. Once arrived at his house
he hides his wife there and goes off, without thanking his
assistants and friends.
Many European races have also practised the ceremonial
of marriage by capture. The Boeotians, says Pausanias,
conducted the wives to the house of the husband in a
chariot, of which they afterwards solemnly burnt the pole,
to indicate that the woman was henceforth the property of
her master, and was never to think of quitting his abode.
But in ancient Greece it was at Sparta especially that the
nuptial ceremony of capture was practised.^ A frequently
quoted passage from Plutarch's Life of Lycurgus gives us
details on this point. " In their marriages the bridegroom
carried off the bride by violence ; and she was never chosen
in a tender age, but when she had arrived at full maturity.
Then the woman that had the direction of the wedding cut
the bride's hair close to the skin, dressed her in a man's
clothes, laid her upon a mattress, and left her in the dark.
The bridegroom, neither oppressed with wine nor enervated
with luxury, but perfectly sober, as having always supped at
the common table, went in privately, untied her girdle, and
carried her to another bed. Having stayed there a short
time, he modestly retired to his usual apartment to sleep
with the other young men, and observed the same conduct
afterwards, spending the day with his companions and
reposing himself with them in the night, nor even visiting
his bride but with great caution and apprehensions of being
discovered by the rest of the family; the bride at the same
time exerted all her art to contrive convenient opportunities
for their private meetings," etc.^
At Rome the ceremonial of capture was kept up for a
long time in the plebeian marriages, without confarrearation
or coemption. As in so many other countries, they played
1 Burckhardt, Notes, vol. i. p. 107.
* Demeunier, Esprit des Different s Peuples, t. ler. p. 296.
8 Plutarch, Life of Lycurgus.
AND OF THE FAMILY. loi
the comedy of the carrying off of the bride by the bridegroom
with the pretended resistance of the mother and the rela-
tions.^ In the more respectable marriages the ceremonial of
capture was simplified, but still very significant. The hair
of the bride was separated with the point of a javelin (hasia
celibaris\^ and for this symbolic ceremony a javelin that had
pierced the body of a gladiator was preferred. Then the
bride, conducted to the house of her husband, was to enter
it without touching the threshold ; she was lifted over it.^
It is curious to find this same custom in China now in our
own day, and we can hardly help recognising in it the
symbolic embodiment of capture.
A similar ceremonial is always practised in Circassia. In
the midst of a feast the bridegroom enters, escorted by his
friends, and carries off his bride, who henceforth becomes
his wife.*
Moreover, as at Sparta, the newly-married Circassian must
not visit the wife, except in secret, for a whole year — a term
evidently fixed, as at Sparta, for the period of probable
pregnancy.^
It is not very long ago that a ceremonial of the same kind
was observed quite near us, in Wales. On the day fixed,
the bridegroom and his friends, all on horseback, came to
take the bride ; but they found themselves in the presence
of the friends of the young girl, also on horseback, and a
mock fight ensued, during which the future wife fled on the
crupper of the horse of her nearest relative. But instantly
the squadron of the bridegroom, counting sometimes two
or three hundred horse, galloped in pursuit. Finally they
rejoined the fugitive, and all was terminated by a feast and
common rejoicings.^
In Livonia every marriage was also the occasion of a simu-
lated combat of cavalry, as with the Welsh, but it took place
before the marriage.'' In Poland also, and in Lithuania and
Russia, the seizure of the girl often preceded marriage.
^ Apuleius, Golden Ass, iv. ^ Plutarch, Romulus. — Ovid, Pastes, ii.
3 Lucan, ii. — Virgil, ^neid, iv.
^ Louis Moser, The Caucasus and its PeopUy p. 31.
<* Wake, Evolution of Morality, vol. i. p. 401.
^ Lord Karnes, Sketches of the Hist, of Man ^ book i., sec. 6.
' Historia de gefttibtts septentrionalibus {1$$$), lib. xiv. cap. 2.
I02 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
I shall here end the enumeration of these customs, which
are all manifestly symbolical of capture. We still find the
trace of it even in the Brittany of to-day, where the repre-
sentative of the husband, the bazvalan^ and the parents of
the fiande sing, alternately, strophes of a marriage song, in
which the one asks and the others refuse the bride, offering
in her stead either a younger sister, or the mother or grand-
mother.i Our inquiry is terminated ; it remains now to ask
what is the meaning of this ceremonial so widely spread
in all ages and in all countries.
III. Signification of the Ceremonial of Capture.
The author of an interesting book on primitive marriage,
Mr. McLennan, and after him a great number of socio-
logists, have concluded that in savage societies sexual unions
or associations have been generally effected by the violent
capture of the woman, that by degrees these captures have
become friendly ones, and have at length ended in a peace-
ful exogamy, retaining the ancient custom only in the
ceremonial form.
It is quite possible to have been thus in a certain number
of countries ; but we must beware of seeing in this a
necessary and general evolution. Surely savage hordes
and tribes naturally carry off the women and girls of their
neighbours and enemies, the little groups with whom they
are incessantly struggling for existence. They seize their
women as they do everything else, and impose on the
captives the unenviable role of slaves-of-all-work. Given
the brutality of primitive man, the fate of the captured
woman is necessarily of the hardest, and it is natural that
the woman of the tribe should not solicit it. Thus, with
or without reason, the Australian fells to the ground his
captured wife, pierces her limbs with his javeHn, etc. A
stranger, a prisoner, violently brought into a society where
she cannot count on a single friend, will evidently be more
resigned to this bad treatment, and can nearly always be
made to submit to it without resistance. But we must not
accept this as a sufficient explanation of exogamy. We have
^ La Villemarqu^, Barzas Breis,
AND OF THE FAMIL K 103
seen that the Australian, accustomed to primitive rape in all
its brutality, only has recourse to it when he cannot pro-
cure by simple barter the woman he covets.
There is certainly great temptation to capture a woman.
A man thereby escapes paying a price for her to her parents,
which is the rule in nearly all savage countries, but the
operation is not effected without risk and reprisals more
or less dangerous, so that before undertaking it he thinks
twice.
We must be careful not to confound rape with marriage ;
nothing is more distinct with savage and even with civilised
men. Perhaps even the dangers and the inconveniences of
brutal capture have given rise to the idea of primitive
conjugal barter, of a peaceful agreement by which a girl
was ceded to a man for a compensation agreed upon. In
principle this commercial transaction left to the husband
the greater part of the rights he would have acquired by
violent capture ; but, in reality, these rights were necessarily
mitigated, for the woman, being thus ceded in a friendly
manner, was not completely abandoned by her own people.
Thus in Polynesia, or at least in New Zealand, the
husband who murdered his wife, although he had purchased
her, incurred the revenge of her relations, unless she was
guilty of adultery.^ It was often thus, but not always,
however; for with the Fijians, in delivering a daughter
to the purchaser, the father or the brother said to the
future husband, "If you become discontented with her,
sell her, kill her, eat her; you are her absolute master. "^
Much nearer home, in ancient Russia, the father at the
moment of marriage gave his daughter some strokes with a
whip, saying, " Henceforth, if you are not obedient, your
husband will beat you."^
Such customs show us plainly why, in so many countries,
symbolic practices recalling violent capture are kept up in
the ceremony of marriage. In the first place, by reason
even of the dangers to which it exposed the ravisher, rape
was considered a brilliant action, and pleasure was felt in
simulating it. But besides and beyond all, the ceremonial
of capture symbolised also the subjection of the woman sold
^ Voyage de V Astrolabe. ' Moerenhout, Voy. aux ties, t. ii. p. 62.
» D^meunier, t. i^r. p. 191.
I04 THE EVOL UTION OF MARRIAGE.
or ceded by her parents ; it sanctioned the very excessive
rights that the husband acquired over the wife. As a rule,
the ceremonial of capture coincides with a very great
subjection of the woman, even where it is only a very
distant survival. At Sparta, for example, the wife might
still be lent by the husband, and it was the same in ancient
Rome, where she was, according to the legal expression,
in manUj assimilated to slaves, and where the pater familias
had the right of life and death over her.
We are, therefore, warranted in believing that in civilised
countries where conjugal legislation is still derived from
the Roman law, the subordinate position assigned to woman
is the last vestige of primitive marriage by capture or by
rape, attenuated to a purchase, as practised in the earliest
times of the Romans.
CHAPTER VII.
MARRIAGE BY PURCHASE AND BY SERVITUDE.
I. The Power of Parents. — The hypothesis of a primitive matriarchate
— Maternal filiation and the condition of the woman — Parental right
of property in children — Conjugal sales of little girls in Africa,
Polynesia, America, and India.
II. Marriage by Servitude. — Labour and exchange value — Marriage
by servitude with the Redskins, in Central America, in India, with
the Hebrews — Influence of marriage by servitude on the condition of
the woman.
III. Marriage by Purchase. — With the Hottentots and the Kaffirs in
Middle Africa, in Polynesia, in America, with the Mongols in China,
with the aborigines of India, with the Berbers, the Hindoos in
Malasia, and in Greco-Roman antiquity — Dowry marriage — Moral
signification of marriage by purchase.
I. The Power of Parents.
Marriage by capture, that is to say, the custom of rape,
necessarily supposes a profound disdain for the ravished
woman, and the antipathies or sympathies she may feel. It
is indeed the truth that, as far back as we can carry our
historical and ethnographical investigations, we find, with
very rare exceptions, the subjection of woman is the rule in
all human societies, and that the more backward the
civilisation the harder was the subjection. Some socio-
logists have pretended that maternal filiation implied for the
woman a sort of golden age — a reign of Amazons — during
which the woman, as centre of the family, must have been
honoured as its chief. All we know of ethnography gives the
lie to this hjrpothesis. In the present day the matriarchate
io6 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
does not anywhere exist, but maternal kinship does, and
we do not find that it involves a milder condition for
the woman. This system of filiation necessarily indicates a
gross state of society, in which paternity is still uncertain.
Now, as a rule, the subjection of woman is in inverse ratio
to the development of man. In primitive societies, where
might is the only right, the woman, on account of her
relative weakness, is always treated with extreme brutality.
It would be difficult, without losing all human quality what-
ever, to be less intelligent than the Australian, and equally
difficult to imagine a more cruel servitude than that of the
Australian woman, always beaten, often wounded, some-
times killed and eaten, according to the convenience of her
owner. The Fijians, much more intelligent than the
Australians, amused themselves with beating their mother,
and with binding their wives to trees in order to whip
them.^ A Fijian named Loti, simply to make himself
notorious, devoured his wife, after having cooked her on a
fire that he had forced her to light herself. ^ No kind of
ferocious caprice was condemned by the morality of the
country. But such manners are as far as possible from
being consistent with the idea of a matriarchal society, in
which a place of honour is accorded to the wife.
In primitive societies the condition of children is, if
possible, still more subordinate than that of woman.
Infanticide at the moment of birth is not even a venial
fault. And later, the parents exercise the undisputed right
of life and death over their progeny; and when slavery
is instituted, the children become a veritable article of
merchandise. In short, the rights of a father of a family are
unlimited.
From this primitive right of property accorded to the
parents over their children has resulted quite naturally all
over the world the right of marrying them without con-
sulting them at all. Moreover, as it had long been the
custom to sell them, marriage was naturally considered as a
commercial bargain, and by degrees marriage by purchase
even took the place of marriage by capture, but after having
long co-existed with it. Capture and purchase had each
* Williams, Fiji and the Fijians^ vol. i. p. 156.
* Pritchard, Polynesian Reminiscences^ etc., p. 371.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 107
their advantages and disadvantages. Capture cost nothing,
and it procured wives and concubines over whom the
husband had every possible right; but, in practice, it was
not exempt from danger, and once accomplished, it exposed
him still to revenge and retaliation. Men became resigned,
therefore, to the purchase of the wife, as soon as they could
dispose of some exchange-values; and as nothing, absolutely
nothing, was any obstacle to the caprice or avidity of the
parents, the most unreasonable marriages were often nego-
tiated, and notably the marriages of children.
This custom of selling children, especially girls, for a
future conjugal association is very common all over the
world.
In New Caledonia the children are be'.rothed by the
parents almost from the moment of birth.^ In Africa,
among the black races, and notably the Hottentots,
whose women age fast, the prudent men retain, years in
advance, the little girls destined to succeed their actual
wives.2 In Ashantee little girls of ten and twelve thus sold
are already legally considered the wives of the acquirer,
although they have not yet left their mothers, and any
familiarity taken with them by another man is punished by
a fine paid to the future owner.^
In Polynesia, also, the fathers, mothers, and relatives
arranged the conjugal unions of the children years before
these unions were actually possible.*
With the Moxos and the Chiquitos of South America
premature marriages were such a settled order of things
that there were no celibates above the age of fourteen for the
men and twelve for the women. The Jesuit missionaries
in America had completely adopted this native custom, and
they often married young girls of ten to boys of twelve
years. Naturally these child marriages entailed sometimes
equally precocious widowhood. D'Orbigny states that he
has seen among these tribes a widower of twelve and a
widow of ten years. *
^ De Rochas, Nouv. CaUdoniey p. 231.
^ Burchell, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxvi. p. 330.
* Bowdich, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xxviii. p. 450.
* Moerenhout, Voy. aux tles^ etc., t. ii. p. 67.
° Homme Am4ricain, t. ler- p. 40.
io8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIAGE
In the time of Marco Polo the Tartars of Asia celebrated
marriages that were more singular still — the marriages of
deceased children. The families drew up the contract as if
their children had been living, solemnly celebrated a sym-
bolic wedding, then burned not less solemnly the fictitious
contract, which would be, they thought, the means of
holding it good in the other world for the vanished young
couple. Thenceforward an alliance existed between the
contracting families as if the marriage had been real.^
Among the Reddies of India a young woman from
sixteen to twenty years old is frequently married to a little
boy of five or six. The wife then goes to live either with
the father, or with an uncle, or a maternal cousin of her
future husband. The children resulting from these extra-
conjugal unions are attributed to the boy, who is reputed to
be the legal husband. When once this boy has reached
manhood his legitimate wife is old, and then he in his turn
unites himself to the wife of another boy, for whom he
also raises up pseudo-legitimate children.^
Child-marriages, at least of little girls, are still very
common in India amongst the Brahmins, and it is not
unusual to see sexagenarian Brahmins marry little girls of
six or seven years, for whom they pay money. ^
On this point, as on most others, our European ancestors
have not been more delicate than the savage or barbarous
races of other countries. Thus Plutarch tells us that in
ancient Italy the girls were often married before the age
of twelve years, but that they did not become wives before
that age.'*
At the present day the Russian peasants still frequently
act like the Reddies of India, and it is not rare to see,
under the Mir system, young boys of eight or ten years
married to women of twenty-five or thirty. Very often, in
this case, the chief of the family becomes the effective hus-
band of the woman while the legal husband is growing up. "
1 Marco Polo (Edition Populaire), p. 6l.
2 Schortt, Trans. Ethn. Soc. (New Series), vol. vii. p. 194.
' Sonnerat, HisL Univ^ des Voy.y t. xxxi. p. 350. — Let ires EdifianteSy
t. X. p. 23.
^ Plutarch, Numa and Lycurgus compared,
^ E. de Lavelaye, De la Pi oprlk^y ?• 35«
AND OF THE FAMILY. 109
II. Marriage by Servitude.
From all these facts we may evidently conclude that
in societies of little or no cultivation the children are left
absolutely to the discretion of the parents. The latter,
having every possible right over their progeny,, consider
them as a property, and think it no crime to sell their
daughters, pubescent or not, as soon as they constitute a
negotiable value. This sale of daughters is even the most
widely spread form of primitive marriage, or of what it
is convenient to call so. In societies of some degree
of civilisation, where exchange-values exist, as domestic
animals, stores of provisions, or slaves, the sale of a daughter
is argued and debated like any other transaction, and the
merchandise is delivered for the price agreed on. In a
more primitive state of civiHsation, when man subsists
chiefly by the chase, or fishing from day to day, and is not
always rich enough to buy a wife, the exchange-values
considered equivalent of the required daughter are often
replaced by a certain amount of labour or services rendered
to the parents, and hence results a special form of marriage
— marriage by servitude.
This mode of marriage was not uncommon with the
Indians of North America. Sometimes the future husband
engaged to serve the parents of the girl for a fixed period of
time. He hunted for them, hollowed out or constructed
canoes, or where agriculture was practised he cultivated the
land.^ Sometimes the husband was not entirely enslaved ;
he had only to give to his wife's parents a part of the
produce of the chase, and he was not exempt from this
tribute till a daughter was born to him, who became, by way
of indemnity, the property of the maternal uncle of his wife.^
Often during the time of his voluntary servitude the
husband remained in the family of his wife, and he actually
took the position there of a sort of slave.^
In the more civilised societies of Central America the
custom of marriage by servitude was nevertheless preserved.
Among the Kenai, the future husband went every morning
1 Lafitau, t. ler. pp. 557-560. ' Lafitau, t. ler. pp. 557-560.
* Domenech, Voy. pittoresque^ etc., p. 508.
I lo THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
for a whole year to the house of the parents of his
betrothed to prepare the food, carry the water, or heat
the bath-chamber ; then, when his year of service was over,
he took away the daughter.^ In Yucatan the son-in-law was
obliged to serve his father-in-law for two or three years.
This manner of acting even became a general custom which
it was considered immoral not to follow.^ With the Mayas,
the bridegroom was required to build himself a house
opposite that of his future father-in-law, and he lived there
five or six years, giving his labour during all that period. ^
Although more common in America than elsewhere, the
custom of marriage by servitude is not confined to that
continent. The Limboos and the Kirantis of Bengal often
buy their wives by giving a certain term of labour to the
father, in whose house they remain until the payment is
finished.* We know also that marriage by servitude is not
peculiar to savages of inferior races, since the Bible informs
us that Jacob only espoused Leah and Rachel at the price of
fourteen years' service. Without dilating further on marriage
by servitude, I shall remark by the way that it had for its
result the placing of the husband in a subordinate position
towards the woman, or at least towards the family of the
woman, in which he had so long been treated as a
servant. A certain independence was gained by the wife
who had been acquired in this manner. Thus, with the
Kenai, of whom I was speaking just now, the woman had
the right to return to her father if she was not well treated
by her husband.*^ Marriage by servitude had therefore, in
fact, a moral side ; it lessened the subjection, always hard
and sometimes cruel, to which woman is liable in nearly all
savage or barbarous societies.
* III. Marriage by Purchase.
Marriage by purchase is much more widely spread than
marriage by servitude or service. All over the world, in all
races and in all times, wherever history can inform us, we
find well-authenticated examples permitting us to affirm that
^ H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States, etc., vol. i. p. 134.
^ /</., loc, cit.^voX, ii. p. 606. * Id. J ibid. vol. i. p. 104.
* Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 662. ** Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 134.
AND OF THE FAMILY, iii
during the middle age of civilisation the right of parents
over children, and especially over daughters, included in
all countries the power to sell them. I purpose to consult
on this subject all the great races of mankind, and con-
firmatory facts will not be wanting ; I shall, indeed, have to
limit myself in giving them.
Among the Hottentots and the Kaffirs, the exchange
value of the country being cattle, the daughters are paid for
in cows or oxen, and the price of the merchandise varies
according to the fluctuations of demand and supply.
Among the Great Namaquois Levaillant saw a conjugal
affair concluded very cheaply, for a single cow;^ but this
price may be increased ten fold. ^ With the Corannas, the
man makes his request leading an ox to the door of the
girl. If he is allowed to kill the animal, it means that his
demand is granted. In the contrary case, the suitor is
sent away and sometimes stoned.^ Hottentot girls are
sometimes sold in their own tribe, and sometimes in a
neighbouring one. At the time of Burchell's travels there
was a lively traffic in girls between the Bachapin Hottentots
and the Kora Hottentots.*
According to Livingstone, among the Makalolo Kaffirs the
price paid to the father had also for its object the redemption
of the right of ownership which he would otherwise have in
the children of his daughter.
In Central Africa, in Senegambia, in the valley of the
Niger, with the Mandingoes, the Peuls, etc., marriages are
reduced to the sale of the girl by those having the right."
With the Timannis, says Laing, the pretendant first brings
a jar oi palm wine, or a little rum, to the parents. If his
demand is favourably received the presents are accepted,
and the giver is invited to return, which he does, bringing a
second jar of wine, some kolas, some measures of stuff, and
some chaplets. All is then definitely concluded, and they
announce to the girl that she is married.®
1 Levaillant, Hist, Univ. des Voy.^ t. xxiv. p. 348.
* Burchell, Bist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xxvi. p. 486.
' Campbell, Hist. Univ. des Foy.^ t. xxix. p. 363.
* Burchell, ibid. t. xxvi. p. 486.
" Neue Missionsreise in Sud-A/tika, vol. i. p. 317.
^ Laing, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxviii. p. 31.
1 1 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
With the Moors of Senegambia conjugal sales are effected
in nearly the same manner ; however, the girl has a right to
refuse, but on condition of renouncing marriage for ever, on
pain of becoming the slave of her first suitor in the case of
an attempt to marry her to another. ^ This right of refusal,
limited as it is, already constitutes a notable degree of
progress which does not always exist in much more civilised
countries. We must place by the side of this some other
customs in force here and there in this region of Central
Africa, confining ourselves to the Sahara and to where the
population is strongly mixed with Berber blood. It is to
be remembered that in nearly all Berber countries the
subjection of women is or has been a little less severe.
At Sackatoo the daughter is generally consulted by her
parents as a matter of form only, for she never refuses.
In the same district the young people first obtain a
mutual consent, and then that of their parents. Among
rich people the husband settles on his future wife a dowry
consisting of female slaves, sculptured calabashes filled with
millet, dourra, and rice, of cloth, bracelets, toilet articles, of
stones for grinding the grain, mortars for pounding it, etc.
All these presents are borne in great pomp, on the heads of
female slaves, to the husband's house when the wife enters
it for the first time.
At Kouranko the young girls are often sold by their
parents as dearly as possible to rich old men. They are
forced to submit, but, once widows, they resume their
liberty and recoup themselves by choosing at will a young
husband, on whom they lavish their care and attentions.^
Now we shall find that in many civilisations relatively
advanced, widowhood even does not gratify the woman
with a hberty of which she is never thought worthy.
At Wowow and at Boussa the emancipation of woman
is markedly greater. It is no longer the father, it is the
grandmother who gives or refuses her grand-daughter, and
if the grandmother is dead, the girl is free to act as she
likes.^ This fact, if correct, is infinitely more curious than
all the others, and it ought to rejoice the sociologists full
^ Clapperton, Second Voyas^e, vol. ii. p. 86.
2 Laing, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxviii. p. 71.
• R. J. Lauder, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxx. p. 244.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 113
of faith, who admit in a distant antiquity the existence of a
matriarchal regime assigning to woman the chief place in
the family. But let us continue our inquiry.
In Polynesia marriage by purchase was habitual. In
New Zealand the man bought the girl, and offered presents
to her parents.^
Generally in Polynesia the suitor offered pigs, stuffs, etc.
If his demand was granted, the bargain was quickly
concluded; the girl was there and then delivered to the
husband ; a Polynesian bed was arranged in the house
of the bride's father, and the newly-married couple passed
the night there. The next day a feast was celebrated, to
which friends were invited, and which consisted of several
pigs.2
At Tahiti temporary marriages were also concluded, and
in this case the presents of pigs, stuffs, pigeons, etc., varied
in amount according to the length of the union.^
But, in spite of the sale, the Polynesian father always
retained over his daughter the prior right of ownership, and
when the presents seemed to him to be insufHcient, he took
back the merchandise to let or sell it to a more generous
lover. If a child was born, the husband was free to kill the
infant, which was done by applying a piece of wet stuff to
the mouth and nose, or to let it live, but in the latter case
he generally kept the wife for the whole of her life. If the
union was sterile, or the children put to death, the man had
always the right to abandon the woman when and how it
seemed good to him.^ She was a slave that he had bought,
and that he could get rid of at will.^
On the great American continent, from north to south
the custom of the sale of the daughter is common to a
great number of peoples. With the Redskins female
merchandise is generally paid for in horses and blankets.
When the daughter had been sold to a white man and then
abandoned, as frequently happened, the parents resumed
possession of her, and sold her a second time.
^ Duperrey, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xviii. p. 157.
'■^ Moerenhout, Voy. aux tiesy etc., t. ii. p. 62.
^ Cook {Third Voyage), Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. x. p. 232.
* /(/., ibid. t. X. p. 232.
* Domenech, Voy. pzttoresque, etc., p. 511.
8
1 14 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
In Columbia what was most prized was the aptitude of
the woman for labour, and her qualities as a beast of
burden were worth to her parents a greater or less number
of horses.^
Among the Redskins of northern California the girls
were bought and sold like any other articles, and there was
no thought of consulting them in the matter. The price
was paid to the father, and the girl was led off simply as if
it were a horse-sale. Poor suitors naturally had to give way
to rich ones, and hence all the opulent old men obtained
all the beautiful young women. ^ There was no nuptial
ceremony. However, with the Modocs, the conclusion of
the business is marked by a feast, but the newly-married
couple take no part in it.
The Redskin parents do not always entirely abandon
their married daughter, and if she is too ill-treated by
her owner, they have the right to take her back, and then
of course to sell her to some one else.^ Socialist customs
sometimes co-exist with these gross conjugal ones. The
nuptial abode is often prepared by the tribe, or, as in
Columbia, the friends join in paying to the father the
price of the daughter.'* The Californian suitors sometimes
obtain a wife on credit; but then the man is called
"half-married," and is forced to live as a slave with the
parents of the girl until he has concluded the payment,
for there is no essential difference between marriage by
servitude and marriage by purchase. In America, as else-
where, morality is simply the expression of habits and
needs, and thus the purchase of the wife has ended by
becoming an honourable thing ; and among the Californian
Redskins the children of a wife who has cost nothing to
her husband are looked down on.*'
The Papayos of New Mexico are not content with
selling their daughters by private contract ; they put them
up to auction.^ As for the inhabitants of those curious
Neo-Mexican phalansteries called pueblos, as they are much
more advanced than the greater part of their American
^ Bancroft, Native Races of Pacific, etc., vol. i. p. 276.
2 Id., ibid, vol. i. p. 349. * Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 412.
* Id., ibid. vol. i. pp. 276-349.
^ Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 349. ^ Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 549.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 115
congeners, their matrimonial customs are less gross ; and
the suitor, when accepted by the parents, tries to charm
his bride by daily serenades lasting for hours — a rare thing
in savage countries.^
With the half-civilised tribes of Guatemala and Nicaragua
conjugal unions were also determined according to the
presents made to the parents, and in Guatemala the
young people were both kept in ignorance of the affair
until the last moment.^ In Nicaragua, however, there
existed a curious exception in certain towns, where at
a particular festival the young girls had the right to
choose their husbands freely from among the young men
present. 3
With the Moxos and the Guaranis the price paid to the
parents is still the decisive reason of the marriage.'* How-
ever, the Guaranis also exact from the husband proofs of
virile qualities in the chase and in war.^ The struggle for
existence is still severe, and in order to keep one or more
wives a man must be able not only to feed but to defend
them.
The Mongols of Asia buy their wives exactly like the
Mongoloids of America, of whom I have just spoken.
Among the nomad Mongols, the Tartars of northern
Asia, the parents arrange the marriages with absolute
authority, and without consulting the parties more especially
interested. The bargain is sharply debated between the
parents, and the price to be paid by the husband or his
family is very precisely settled; the future couple are
not even informed of it, their sentiments, their desires,
or dislikes, are not considered in the least. The price of
the girl is paid in cattle, sheep, oxen, or horses ; in pieces
of stuff, in brandy, in butter, in flour, etc. Everything
being agreed on, the contract of sale is drawn up before
witnesses, but the girl is only delivered to the purchaser
after the ceremony of marriage, which, as we have previously
seen, takes the form of capture.^
^ Bancroft, Native Races, vol. i. p. 549.
2 Id., ibid. vol. ii. pp. 666, 667. » /</., ibid. ii. p. 667.
^ Lettres Edifiantes, t. x. p. 202.
^ A. d'Orbigny, Vhotnme Americain, t. ii. p. 307.
^ Timkowski, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxii. p. 332. — Hue, Travels
in Tartary^ vol. i. pp. 298, 299.
1 16 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
The Turcomans have customs very similar to those of
the Tartars. With them the price of the girl is chiefly
reckoned in camels, and it generally takes five to pay for a
girl; but as in their eyes the woman is not an object of
luxury, as she not only has to manage the housekeeping but
to manufacture articles which have an exchange value, and
which are profitable to the family, experienced women
and widows, provided they are passable, are much more
sought for in the conjugal market than young girls. It is
no longer five camels, but fifty, or even a hundred, that
must be paid for a widow still in good condition.^ If
the suitor cannot immediately get together the price of
the woman he covets, he has recourse to marriage by cap-
ture, and takes refuge with his bride in a neighbouring
camp.
A settlement is always effected, matters are compounded,
and the ravisher engages to pay a certain number of camels
and horses, which he generally procures by marauding on
the frontiers of Persia. It is a veritable debt of honour for
him, and he must pay it with the least possible delay.^
These barbarous customs of Mongolia are naturally
softened in China, but without any essential change in
their main features. There, as well as in Tartary, the
young girl is considered as the property of her parents, and
her training is so perfect that she has not the slightest
desire to be consulted before being married, or rather sold,
for ready money.^ In the Chinese family, daughters count
for so little value that they are only called by ordinal num-
bers — first-born, second-born, etc. — to which is added a
surname.* The price of the daughter when purchased is
paid to the parents in two separate portions — the first on
the conclusion of the agreement and the signing of the
contract, and the other on the wedding-day. » Marriage by
capture has naturally gone out of use in the old civilisation
of China, but the trace of it still remains in the ceremonial,
* Fraser, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxxv. p. ii8.
^ Burnes, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxvii. p. 270.
^ Lettres Edi^antes, t. x. p. 138. — Hue, Chinese Empire^ vol. ii.
p. 255-
** Comte d'Herisson, Journal dun mtefprUe en Chinas p. 7'
^ Hue, Chinese Empire^ vol. ii. p. 256.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 117
for the bride is lifted over the threshold of the conjugal
dwelling, as was the custom in ancient Rome.
It has appeared so natural to parents all over the world
to dispose of their daughters as they chose, that many of
the aborigines of India do nearly the same as the Mongols.
The daughters are sold by the parents among the Kolhans,
the Bendkars, the Limboos, the Kirantis, the Moundas,
the Santals, the Oraons, the Muasis, the Birhors, the Hos,
the Boyars, the Nagas, the Gonds, etc.^ The price of the
girl varies from three to fourteen rupees, or is reckoned in
head of cattle or measures of rice. Sometimes female mer-
chandise is rare and dear, for in some countries female
infanticide has long prevailed; it may happen, too, that
daughters are condemned to celibacy, as with the Hos,^ or,
as with the Nagas, that marriages are delayed, and that the
bridegroom must often submit to marriage by servitude.^
Sometimes, again, the girls are carried off, as happens
among the Kolhans, by the impatient bridegrooms, and,
after the rape, arbitrators negotiate a settlement.* It should
be remarked, by the way, that with the Nagas marriage by
servitude has its ordinary effect, that of abasing the hus-
band and raising the wife ; and, in fact, among these races,
although the wife performs severe labour, she is treated as
the equal of her husband.*
In some aboriginal tribes of India we even find matri-
archal customs. Thus with the Pani-Koechs the husbands
leave to their very industrious wives the care of their pro-
perty. In marrying, a man goes to live with his mother-in-
law, and obeys her as well as his wife. Moreover, in this
tribe the mothers negotiate the marriages ; the fathers have
nothing to do with them.^
Among the Yerkalas the maternal uncle has the right to
claim for his sons the two eldest daughters of his sister, or
to renounce them for an indemnity of eight images of idols.^
Money, always money! With all peoples and races
marriage is often reduced to a pecuniary question. In this
^ Dalton, Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal, passim.
2 Id., ibid. p. 190. * Dalton, loc. cit. p. 192.
* Id., ibid. p. 41. ^ Id., loc, cit, p. 41.
^ Id., ibid. p. 91.
' Schortt, Trans. Ethn. Soc. (New Series), vol. vii. p. 187.
1 1 8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
respect the Berbers, the Semites, and the Aryans are not
distinguished from other human types. With certain
Touaregs of the Sahara, says Duveyrier, it is the daughter
herself who indemnifies the father, and it is after the old
Italian manner, more tusco^ that she gains the price of
enfranchisement which is necessary for her marriage.
"The father, before the marriage of his daughter, exacts
from her the reimbursement, levied on her body, of
what she has cost her family . . . and the girl, dishonoured
according to our ideas, but ransomed according to local
ideas, is all the more sought after, the greater her success
in the commerce of her attractions."^
In contrast to the Touaregs, the Semites, Hebrews, and
Arabs, attached and still attach an enormous value to the
virginity of the bride; but marriage was not and is not
any the less for them a simple sale. The history of Jacob's
marriage has already shown us that marriage by servitude
was practised by the ancient Hebrews. In later times the
consent of the woman became necessary, which is a great
step in advance, but the husband none the less bought his
wife in some way or other,^
With contemporary Arabs marriage is a simple sale, with-
out any disguise. An Arab jurist gives us the formula of
it, which is very clear. It is as follows : " I sell you my
daughter for such a sum." " I accept." The same author
says elsewhere: "The woman sells in marriage a part of
her person. In a purchase men buy an article of mer-
chandise; in a marriage they buy the field of procreation."^
It would be impossible to speak more plainly. Nevertheless,
the consent of the woman is necessary; it is she who
is supposed to sell herself, and the price of the bar-
gain constitutes her dowry. It was the same with the
Hebrews.
Whatever may have been their religion, the greater
number of the Aryan peoples have also considered marriage
as a commercial transaction. The Afghan Mussulmans buy
their wives, and these are regarded as a property, so much
^ Duveyrier, Touaregs du Nord, p. 340.
2 Wake, Evolution of Morality , vol. ii. p. 68.
* Sidi Khelil, FrMs de jurisprudence musulmane, trad. Perron
(quoted by E. Meynier) in Jttudes sur TIslamisme, pp. 152, 156.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 119
so that in case of widowhood they cannot re-marry, unless
the second husband indemnifies the family of the first.^
In Brahmanic India the daughter is also bought from
the parents. A curious verse of the Code of Manu tells us
how the purchaser was indemnified in the case of substitu-
tion of another person : "If, after having shown a suitor a
young girl, whose hand is granted to him, another is given
him to wife, and secretly brought to him, he becomes the
husband of both for the same price ; such is the decision of
Manu." 2 Things have not much changed at present.
" When they wish to signify that they are going to be
married," says an editor of Le tires edifiantes^ in speaking
of the Hindoos, "they generally say that they are going to
buy a wife." However, the parents do not appropriate the
entire sum paid by the purchaser ; a great part of it goes to
buy jewels for the bride. ^ The ancient Malays of Sumatra
had solved the conjugal problem in three different ways.
Sometimes the man bought and led away the woman,
according to the universal custom ; sometimes the woman
bought the man, who then came to live with her family ;
sometimes the two were married on a footing of equality.'*
We must note in passing that this last matrimonial form is
very exceptional.
Throughout Europe, as well in Greco-Latin antiquity as
among barbarians, the young girl has formerly been con-
sidered as a negotiable property, and marriage as a sale.
The Sagas tell us that the Scandinavian fathers married
their daughters without consulting them — after the manner
of savages — and received an indemnity from the son-in-
law. ^
With the Germans the daughter could not marry without
the authorisation of her father or of her nearest relative,
who first received the earnest money from the bridegroom f
as for the bride, she received the osde^ or price of the first
kiss, and then the morgefigabe^ which constituted her dowry.
1 Elphinstone, Picture of the Kingdom of Cabul, vol. i. p. 168.
2 Code of Manu ^ book viii. p. 204.
^ Lettres edifiantes, t. xiv. p. 382.
* Marsden, Hist, of Sumatra, p. 262.
^ Nials, Saga, vol. i. pp. 9, 10.
^ Rambaud, Hist, civil fran^aise, p. 107,
1 20 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
In return, the German widow, like the Afghan widow, was
the property of the parents of her husband, and could not
re-marry without their authorisation.^
In primitive Greece the daughter was purchased either
by presents to the father or by services rendered to him.^
The father could marry his daughter as he thought well,
and in default of a son could leave her by will, with the
heritage of which she formed a part, to a stranger.^
At Rome also the daughter was the property of her
father, and until the time of Antoninus the father had the
right to re-marry her when the husband had been absent
three years.* Marriage by purchase had certainly been the
primitive form of the conjugal contract. In reality the
confarreatio^ a solemn and religious union in the presence
of ten witnesses, was a patrician marriage. The usus^ or
the consecration of a free union after a year of cohabitation,
strongly resembles the Polynesian marriage. But the most
common conjugal form, the one which succeeded the usuSy
and surely preceded the confarreatio, was marriage by pur-
chase, the coempiio.
Coemption ended in time by becoming purely symbolic ;
the wife was delivered to the husband, who, as a formality,
gave her a few pieces of money ; but the ceremony is none
the less eloquent, and it proves clearly that in principle the
woman had been, at Rome as elsewhere, assimilated by the
parents to a thing, to a venal property. When at Athens
and at Rome an effort was made to give the married
woman a less subordinate position, nothing more was done
than opposing money to money by inventing the dowry
marriage ; and hence resulted other inconveniences, on
which Latin writers have largely dilated, and which we can
easily study to-day from life. But for the present I must
not speak of them. It suffices to have proved that all over
the earth, in all times and among all races, marriage by
purchase has been widely practised.
Now, the custom of marriage by purchase has a very clear
and very important signification from a moral and social
^ Hist. Succes. des Femmes.
2 Aristotle, Politics^ vol. ii, p. 8.
^ Legouv^, Hist. Mor. des Femmes, p. 86.
^ Plautus, Stichus. — Laboulaye, Droit remain.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 121
point of view. It implies a profound contempt for woman,
and her complete assimilation to chattels, to cattle, and to
things in general. On this point the Roman law leaves no
room for ambiguity, since it makes no essential difference
between the marital law and the law of property. In regard
to the woman, as in regard to goods, possession or use,
continued for a year, gave a right of ownership. When
applied to things, this possession is called usucapion;
applied to the woman, it is called usus?- The difference
between the terms is shght ; between the facts there is
none. In reality the wife and the child, especially the
female child, have been the first property possessed by man,
which has even implanted in the savage mind the taste for
possession, and the pretension to use and abuse the things
left entirely to his mercy. At Rome this became by \k\QJus
quiritium^ for the woman the manus of the husband, and
for property the jus utendi et abuiendi of the proprietor.
But this abuse, and this use, nearly always equally an abuse
also, have contributed not a little to deprave man and to
render him, from the origin of societies until our own day,
refractory to ideas of equity and justice, especially in what
relates to the condition of woman.
^ R. Cubain, Lois civiles de Romey p. 181.
CHAPTER VIII.
PRIMITIVE POLYGAMY.
I. Polygamy in Oceania, Africa, and America. — Polygamy and
sociability — Polygamy in Australia, in New Caledonia, and at Fiji —
The legitimate wife and concubines at Fiji — Polygamy among the
Hottentots and Kaffirs — Economic reasons of polygamy in Africa —
Brutality of husbands on the Gaboon — Polygamy limited by the law
of supply and demand — Its effects on the morality of women — Com-
mercial fidelity — Mumbo Jumbo— Love unknown in black Africa— Legal
marriage with the Bongos at Madagascar — Hierarchical polygamy at
Madagascar — Polygamy in Polynesia, in America — ^Jealousy unknown
to the female savage — The sister-wives among the Redskins — Religion
sanctifies polygamy — Monogamic tendencies in America.
II. Polygamy in Asia and in Europe. — Polygamy among the
aborigines of India, in Bootan, among the Ostiaks and the Battas —
Universality of primitive polygamy — Polygamy of the ancient Peru-
vians, Chinese, and Vedic Aryans — Polygamy among the Gauls and
the Germans — Causes of primitive polygamy — Its evolution.
I. Polygafny in Oceania^ Africa., and America.
We have seen that in the animal kingdom species are
sometimes monogamous, sometimes polygamous, but that
in general a gregarious life, a life in association, favours
polygamy. Now, man is surely the most sociable of
amimals, therefore he is much inclined to polygamy, like
the great anthropoid apes, with whom our primitive
ancestors must have had more than one analogy. We have
already spoken of the causes which in human societies of
the earliest ages disturbed the normal relation of the sexes,
or the approximate equilibrium between the number of men
and that of women. We have seen how savage life rapidly
THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE. 123
uses up the men to such a degree that often, in spite of the
custom of female infanticide, there is still an excess of
women sufficient to impose polygamy. Although primitive
morality may not think in the least of blaming the plurality
of wives, it yet happens that this polygamy, to which all men
aspire in a savage country, is spontaneously restricted ; and,
as with chimpanzees, and for the same reasons, it becomes,
in fact, the privilege of a small number of the strongest and
the most feared, the chiefs, the sorcerers, or the priests,
when there are any.
In Australia, for example, the adult men take possession
of the women of all ages, and in consequence the greater
number of young men cannot become proprietors of a
woman before the age of about thirty years. ^
Enforced celibacy is, besides, softened by the complais-
ance of the men already provided for, the husbands, if we
may so call them, who are generous to the other men, and
much more jealous of their rights of property than of their
conjugal rights. It is easy to have an understanding with
them, and, with the aid of a suitable present, to induce them
to lend their wives. In New Caledonia the chiefs and rich
men only can indulge in the luxury of polygamy, and in
this archipelago the plurality of wives has already the char-
acter that it nearly always assumes in a primitive country.
If the New Caledonians ardently desire to have several
wives it is not generally with a sensual aim, for among the
Canaks the genetic appetite is little developed; their
reasons are of quite another kind. Neither slavery nor
domesticity yet exist in New Caledonia. However, agri-
culture is already practised there, and this requires hard
labour, from which the men, especially the chief men, like
to exonerate themselves. Now, it is polygamy that furnishes
the Canaks with servile labour, which they cannot do with-
out; it exactly replaces slavery. Therefore, every man,
of however little importance he may be, procures a number
of women in proportion to the extent of the land he has
in cultivation, and also to the figure he must make in the
world. We shall find this servile polygamy in many other
countries, notably among the Fijians, who resemble the
New Caledonians, but at Fiji polygamy had already
^ Baudin, Hist. Univ. des Foy.y t. xviii. p. 34.
1 24 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
evolved and become complicated. It was accompanied by
concubinage. As we shall see later, this is generally the
case. Nowhere do we find men passing abruptly from
polygamy to monogamy, and long before arriving at the
latter, when first custom and then law restrains and
regulates the loose polygamy of the earlier ages, the change
is only at first effected in the form; a man has a small
number of wives, who, with their children, enjoy certain
privileges, but by the side of these titular wives he
possesses concubines in greater or less number. In this
manner everything is reconciled — morality with sensuality,
and the family with the interests of property.
This rtgiine was already in force among the Melanesians
of the Fiji Isles, where the chiefs, living in great state,
acquired in one way or another three or four hundred
women, of whom the greater number filled only the position
of servants to the master, and at the same time of con-
cubines, who were at the disposition of the warriors or of
the guests. The wives whose children inherited were very
few in number. They were daughters of chiefs, and their
situation, although less degraded than that of the concu-
bines, was still very humble. Not only did they resign
themselves without difficulty to polygamy, but they were
subjected to a singular duty — that of rearing for their
husband a chosen concubine. The fact is curious, and
worth the trouble of narrating. "The bride takes with her
a young girl who is still a child, but who promises to be
beautiful, and who has been carefully selected from the
lower class of the people. It is a virgin destined for her
husband. She brings her up with the tenderest solicitude,
and when the girl is marriageable, the queen, on an
appointed day, undresses her, washes her carefully, and even
pours perfumed oil on her hair, crowns her with flowers,
conducts her thus naked to her husband, presents her to
him, and retires in silence."^ Excessive as it seems to us,
this absolute resignation is quite natural among savages.
In primitive countries the married woman — that is to say,
the woman belonging to a man — has herself the conscience
of being a thing, a property (it is proved to her often and
severely enough), but she does not think of retaliating,
1 Moerenhout, Voy. aux ilesy etc., t. ii. p. 235.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 125
especially in what concerns the conjugal relations. More-
over, as her condition is oftenest that of a slave over-
burdened with work, not only does she not resent the
introduction of other women in the house of the master,
but she desires it, for the work will be so much the less for
herself. Thus among the Zulus the wife first purchased
strives and works with ardour in the hope of furnishing her
husband with means to acquire a second wife — a companion
in misery over whom, by right of seniority, she will have
the upper hand.^
In consequence of this the greater number of the men
in Kafifirland have two or three wives, and hence a certain
scarcity of feminine merchandise in the country ; the young
men have difficulty in providing for themselves, and many
girls are sold from infancy.^ The same customs prevail with
the Hottentots; and both Kaffirs and Hottentots esteem
the monogamic preaching of the Christian missionaries as
very impertinent, and on this point both men and women
are agreed.^
Along the whole course of the Zambesi, says Living-
stone, the number of wives are the measure of a man's riches,
and the women are the first to find this quite natural.
It is important to observe that in savage societies the
woman could not live independently ; for her, celibacy is
synonymous with desertion, and desertion would mean a
speedy death. This is even the reason of the levirate, of
which I shall have to speak later.
As for all the negroes of Africa, whatever the degree of
their civilisation or savagery, they have not even a suspicion
of the monogamic regime. But, in Africa also, sensuality is
only one of the secondary causes of the plurality of wives
so strongly desired by all the blacks. Their polygamy is
chiefly founded on economic motives. At the Gaboon,* says
Du Chaillu, the supreme ambition of a man is to possess
a great number of wives. Nothing is of more value to him,
for they cultivate the ground, and their strict duty is to
^ Waitz, Anthropology i vol. i. p. 299. — Steedman, Wanderings, etc.y
in South Africa, vol. i. p. 240. — Delegorgue, t. ler. p. 154 ; t. ii. p. 231.
2 Campbell, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxix. p. 357.
^ Burchell, ibid. t. xxvi. p. 204.
* Du Chaillu, Vby. dans I'Afriqtie equatoriaky pp. 376, 377.
1 26 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
serve him and furnish him with food. The wife is always
purchased from her father at a price agreed on, and often
from her earhest infancy. In this case she is placed under
the care of the husband's chief wife. The husband-
proprietor does not interfere at all with the agricultural
labour executed by the wives ; he only requires them to
supply him with food. If he has bought them, it is merely
as a profitable investment. He consequently treats them
as slaves, or as domestic animals, and has no scruple in
lashing them with a whip for nothing at all, and thus
causing ineffaceable scars. " I have seen very few women,"
says Du Chaillu, '' who had not traces of this kind on their
bodies."
The whip which serves for these conjugal corrections has
a double thong, made of hippopotamus or sea-cow hide.
"You should hear," says the traveller, "the worthy husband
cry out — ' Ah, wretch ! do you think I have bought you
for nothing ?'"! The Gaboon tribes, of whom Du Chaillu
speaks, are reckoned the least civilised of negroes; but
even among the least gross of African races the conjugal
regime and the degree of subjection imposed on women are
scarcely lessened.
At Tchaki, and at Badagry, etc., when Clapperton spoke
of English monogamy to the natives, all his auditors,
without distinction of sex, burst into a laugh,^ so absurd
did the thing appear to them. Throughout Africa the
number of a man's wives is only limited by his resources.
If, as Schweinfurth tells us, among the Bongos of the upper
Nile, a man rarely has more than three wives, it is simply
on account of the strict law of supply and demand; for
a woman costs no less than ten iron plates, each weighing
about two pounds, to which must be added twenty iron
spear heads, all precious articles and not easily procured.^
At Bornou also men in easy circumstances have seldom
more than three wives; and the poor have to content
themselves, whether they will or not, with monogamy.^
But among the negroes of Kaarta and the Fantis of the
coast of Guinea polygamy is excessive. In Kaarta a private
^ Du Chaillu, loc. cit. p. 377. ^ Second Voyage, etc., pp. 18-48.
^ The Heart of Africa, vol. i. p. 301.
* Denham and Clapperton, Hist. Univ. des Vby., t. xxvii. p 437.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 127
individual often has ten wives and as many concubines;
but princes or knights often have threefold or even tenfold
that number.^ In consequence of this, about a third of
the inhabitants are of princely or royal blood. As for
the Fantis, polygamy is a source of riches, not only
through the labour of the women, but also through the
sale of the children, of whom a large and profitable trade
is made.2 This trait of morals is not in the least peculiar
to them ; throughout black Africa the right of the father of a
family includes that of selling the children, and he exercises
it without scruple.
Naturally the last sentiments we may expect to find in
African households are those of delicacy or moral nobility.
Humble to servility in presence of the master, the women
give the rein to their shameless excesses as soon as they
can do it without danger.
In Bornou a wife never approaches her husband without
kneeling. 3 When a Poul orders one of his wives to prepare
his supper, which implies that the master desires her com-
pany for the night, this signal favour is received with trans-
ports of joy. The chosen wife hastens to obey, and when
the repast is ready she proudly goes to seek the master,
thus humiliating her female colleagues, who retreat in con-
fusion to their cabins to await their turn.* But all this
abject behaviour is merely by compulsion, and the women
recoup themselves well for it whenever they have the
chance.
The poor women of the Gaboon, who are lacerated by
whips for no offence, do not understand chastity, and their
intrigues constantly provoke conflicts and palavers between
the men of the villages.^ The obscenity of the Monboottoo
women astonished Schweinfurth, well acquainted as he was
with negro customs.^ The Bambarra women easily forget
conjugal fidelity for a bead necklace, a fine waist-cloth, etc. ;
and, as in so many other countries, the husband-proprietors
1 Gray and Dockard, ibid. t. xviii. p. 373.
^ Brodie Cruikshank, Sojourn of Eight Years on the Gold Coast.
3 Denham and Clapperton, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxvii. p. 437.
* Mollien, ibid. t. xxviii. p. 439.
^ Du Chaillu, loc. cit., pp. 378-435.
^ The Heart of Africuy vol. ii. p. 91.
128 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
have no scruple in hiring out their wives for a sufficient
price.^
Nevertheless, unauthorised adultery is cruelly punished
throughout Africa ; but fear is powerless to ensure to the
negro husbands the purely commercial fidelity they exact
from their wives, and therefore, in order to correct
feminine morals, they have recourse in certain parts to
fantastic methods — to the Mumdo Ju?nbo which Mungo
Park describes.^ Strangely attired and unrecognisable, a
singular personage, doubtless a sorcerer, appears in the
evening after being called for by frightful bowlings in the
woods, and first goes to the spot where the inhabitants
are accustomed to assemble to talk at their ease. This
coming is the signal for songs and dances, which last
into the middle of the night. Then the Miunbo Jumbo
designates the guilty or indocile woman. The latter is
immediately seized, stripped, bound to a stake, and vigor-
ously beaten by the Munibo himself, amid the acclama-
tions and laughter of the assembly, and especially of the
other women.
In all negro Africa the husbands are generally strangers
to the jealousy of honour which exists among the intelli-
gent husbands of civilised countries. They do not care
for moral fidelity, based on affection and free choice.
The Kaffir woman, Schouter tells us, is the ox of
her husband. A Kaffir said one day, speaking of his
wife, " I have bought her, therefore it is her duty to
work."
" The negro," relates another traveller (Monteiro), " knows
neither love, affection, nor jealousy. During the many
years that I have spent in Africa I have never seen a negro
manifest the least tenderness for a woman — put his arms
around her, give or receive a caress, denoting some degree
of affection or love on one side or the other. . . . They
have no word in their language to signify love or
affection. "3
A French traveller says also of the Malagasies, *' Modesty
and jealousy are two sentiments very little developed
^ Raffenel, Nouv. Voy. aux Pays des N^greSy t i^- ^, 402.
2 Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxv, p. 58.
^ Herbert Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. pp. 284-293.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 129
among the Malagasies of both sexes and all ranks. They
push licence very far in their manners, but quite uncon-
sciously. "^
Throughout black Africa, indeed, marriage does not
exist, at least in the sense we attach to the word. It is not
a civil institution, much less a sacrament ; it is a bargain,
delivering the woman to the mercy of the buyer. Here and
there, however, we see dawnings of legal marriage — that is to
say, a contract sanctioned by civil authority. Among the
Bongos of the upper Nile, for example, a man who wishes
to procure a certain woman generally applies to the chief or
to some dignitary, who enforces his demand. ^
With the Malagasies, where the social organisation is
much more complex and quasi feudal, there is already a
veritable civil marriage. The future pair, accompanied by
their parents, go before the judge or the chief of the village,
declare their intentions, pay the Hasifta, or matrimonial
tax, and the union is concluded. As is the case in many
countries, Malagasian polygamy already tends towards
monogamy. At Madagascar, as in China, rich men have
one chief wife, who has a house to herself and other
privileges ; but by the side of the titular wife there are
lesser wives.^ I shall have to return to this hierarchical
polygamy, which forms a sort of evolutionary connecting
link between primitive polygamy, subjecting all the wives
equally before their owner, and monogamic marriage. But
for the present I must pursue my summary inquiry through
the lands of primitive polygamy.
In the whole of Polynesia polygamy was general and
unlimited. There, again, the number of wives was strictly
in proportion to rank and riches.* There were, however,
examples of voluntary monogamy^ among the chiefs, and
a much larger number of monogamists, in spite of them-
selves, in the lower classes.^ In several Polynesian islands
polygamy was already evolving towards monogamy; thus,
^ Dupre, Trois Mois h Mada^ascar^ p. 153.
2 Schweinfurth, The Heart of Africa, vol. i. p. 27.
' Dupre, Trois Mois ^ Madagascar, p. 153.
^ Pritchard, Polynesian Reminiscences, etc., p. 270.
' Th. West, Ten Years in South Central Polynesia, p. 270.
^ Bougainville, Voyages, p. 244.
I30 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
at Samoa,! at Tonga,^ in New Zealand,^ there existed a
chief wife, exempted from hard work, and having pre-emin-
ence over the other wives.
Over all the great American continent polygamy is or
has been in force. The Ancas or Araiicanos of South
America — nomads and robbers — buy very dear wives
when they can, and make concubines of all the prisoners
procured in their razzias, exactly after the manner of the
ancient Arabs. The poor or the feeble among them, as
elsewhere, are badly provided, and are frequently reduced
to remain celibate,* or to have only one wife. For
the same reasons, the young men among the Otomacs
were often obliged to be contented with an old woman,^
and the Charruas waited till their first wife grew old before
procuring a younger one.*^ Herrero tells us also, that in
Honduras forced monogamy was general enough, except,
indeed, for the chiefs, who appropriated the women by the
right of the strongest.'' In South America, as in Africa,
the women were very far from rebelling against polygamy ;
for there, also, all the hard work fell to them, and the
burden of it was lightened in proportion to the number of
labourers. In the tribes that were already agricultural, the
Guaranis, for example, the men did nothing to the land
but clear off the brushwood and timber ; then came the
women, who did all the sowing, harvesting, prepared the
fermented drink for guests,^ without mentioning other
domestic cares. Such a kind of life is necessarily un-
favourable to delicacy, and even amongst civilised people
habitual overwork is hardly compatible with refined
sentiments. In all countries exclusive love and jealousy
suppose not only some moral development, but also a
certain amount of leisure and of time and capacity, to
think. It is therefore quite natural that the savage woman
should seldom pretend to possess a man for herself alone,
1 Pritchard, loc. cit., p. 372.
2 Cook (Third Voyage), Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. ix. p. 70.
^ Dumont d'Urville.
* A. d'Orbigny, Uhomme Aniericain, t. ler. p. 403.
^ Voyage h la Terre Ferme, etc., t. ler. p. 304.
^ A. d'Orbigny, loc. cit,, t. ii. p. 89.
^ H. Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 282.
8 A. d'Orbigny, loc. cit.y t. ii. p. 308.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 131
and on this point the women of the Redskins of North
America think and feel hke the Guarani women of Brazil.
Thus, with the Omahas, the man hardly ever takes a
second wife but with the consent of the first. ^ Often the
initiative even comes from her ; she goes to find her
husband, and says to him, '' Marry the daughter of my
brother. She and I are of the same flesh." It must be
admitted that America is the promised land of the
matriarchate, or rather, of maternal filiation ; polygamy
easily takes an incestuous colour there ; the wives of
the same man are often relatives, habitually sisters.
In about forty of the Redskin tribes, and surely they are
not the only ones, when a man marries the eldest daughter
of a family, he acquires, by express privilege, the right of
taking afterwards for wives all the sisters of the first as soon
as they become marriageable. ^ This was the custom of
the Omahas, the Cheyennes, the Crees, the Osages, the
Black-feet, the Crows, the Spokans of Columbia, ^ the
Chawanons of Louisiana, etc.
The custom was not, however, obHgatory. The wives
were not necessarily relatives, or, at least, not necessarily
sisters. Thus, with the Omahas, a man sometimes took as
wives an aunt and a niece of his first wife.^ Among the
Californians a man sometimes married not only a group of
sisters, but also their mother,^ and in this respect the
Greenlanders imitated their hereditary enemies, the Red-
skins.^ But, consanguine "or not, polygamy was general
among the savage tribes of North America. The possession
of a numerous flock of wives placed a man above the
common as surely as that of a large fortune does in
Europe ; '' religion even sanctified this polygamy, for in
all countries it can accommodate itself to the dominant
morals. Thus, the Chippeways believe that polygamy is
agreeable to the Great Spirit ; for it is a means of having a
numerous posterity.^
^ J. Owen Dorsey, Omaha Sociology^ p. 260 {Smithsonian Institution^
1885). 2 L^ Morgan, Ancient Societies^ p. 432.
^ Bancroft, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 277.
^ J. Owen Dorsey, loc. cit. , p. 260.
^ Bancroft, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 388.
^ Wake, Evolution of Morality ^ vol. i. p. 255.
^ H. Spencer, Sociology^ vol. i. p. 283. ^ /</., ibid, vol. ii. p. 285.
132 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
Except the habitual consanguinity of the wives, the
polygamy of the Redskins has nothing original in it ; it is,
as elsewhere, the privilege of the rich men.^ Sometimes
also the girls are retained from infancy, and then, as
happens with the Noutka-Columbians, the buyer deposits
certain valuable articles as security.^ In these polygamous
families of Redskins the harmony is rarely disturbed ; and
the man, always having the power to repudiate any wife as
he may please, only has to command very submissive ones.^
Here and there certain customs appear which have a
shade of monogamy about them ; for instance, among the
Columbians every wife has her separate habitation, or, at
the least, her special fireside."* Sometimes there is a chief
wife having authority over the other wives.^ But every-
where the subjection of women in regard to man is extreme.
Among the Indians of New Mexico — and these are not by
any means the most savage — the women have to prepare
the food, tan the skins, cultivate the ground, fabricate the
clothes, build the houses, and groom the horses. In return
for this, the men, whose sole occupations are hunting and
war, beat their wives without pity, and often mutilate and
kill them.6
II. Polygamy in Asia and Europe,
We might already deduce some general ideas from our
rapid survey of savage polygamy in Oceania, Africa, and
America; but it will be convenient, before we do so, to
interrogate the primitive races of Asia and Europe. Doubt-
less, the description of their conjugal manners and customs,
after all that precedes, may seem monotonous ; nevertheless,
this monotony even is instructive; it proves that in all
times and places, in despite of differences of race, climate
and environment, the evolution of human groups is subject
to certain laws, that the family, marriage, the constitution of
property, and social organisation pass through a series of
^ Domenech, Voy. pitt., p. 509. — Bancroft, vol. i. pp. 168-195.
2 Bancroft, ioc. cit.^ P- 5ii. * Domenech, loc. cii.y p. 51 1.
^ Bancroft, loc, cit., vol. i. p. 277.
^ Ibt'd, vol. i. p. 511. ^ Ibid. vol. i. p. 511.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 133
necessary phases ; in short, that in attempting to construct
a science of sociology we are not pursuing a chimera.
I resume, therefore, my enumeration. Among the
indigenous tribes of India polygamy is widely spread,
without, however, being universal; for each one of these
small peoples has evolved, as it has been able, more or
less rapidly. Some among them are polyandrous, and
even monogamous. Often enough polyandry co-exists with
polygamy, the one appearing as moral as the other.
With all these aborigines, marriage, or what we are
pleased to call so, is generally concluded by purchase, and
the price of the woman naturally oscillates according to the
law of supply and demand. Most often it is represented by
poultry, pigs, oxen, or cows, given to the parents. From
this manner of procuring wives it seems that, there also,
polygamy is the luxury of the rich or of chiefs. Among the
Mishmis these privileged individuals sometimes possess
sixty wives. The Mishmi husbands form a rare exception
on one point — they are not at all exacting about the fidelity
of their wives ; they consider them as slaves or servants, and
provided they continue to benefit their masters by their
work, the latter willingly shut their eyes to their intrigues.^
Among these polygamous tribes, which it would take too
long to enumerate, may be counted the Miris, the Dophlas,
the Juangs, the Khamtis, the Singphos, etc.
We must again note in certain tribes, the Khamtis, for
example, the monogamic pre-eminence of the first wife.^ It
is one of those sociological analogies of which I have
already spoken, and it is important to point it out.
Polygamy still prevails with the mountaineers of Bootan,
concurrently with polyandry. It is often incestuous ; a
man willingly marries two sisters, the one an adult, the other
younger. But no other incest is recognised or punished
except that committed between son and mother.^
Farther north, among the Ostiaks, a man feels no
repugnance to marrying several sisters,* and, in general,
polygamy is very widely spread among the nomad Mongols.
A Yakout, for example, if obliged to make frequent
^ Dalton, DescHptive Eth^to. of Bengal^ pp. 12, 16, 19. - Ibid. p. 8.
* Voy. au Bootan, by a Hindoo author, in Revue Britannique, 182^.
* Wake, /oc ctt, vol. i. p. 269.
1 34 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
journeys, takes care to have a wife in every place at which
he stops. ^
The polygamic regime is also in great honour in the
Mongolian archipelagoes of Asia, in the Palos Islands, in
the Caroline Islands, etc. Among the Battas of Sumatra
it evidently begins to be distasteful to the women, since the
polygamous husband is obliged to assign to each of his
wives a special hearth, and kitchen utensils of her own, with
which she prepares her food apart, or with that of her
husband, when she is on duty, and required by the
master.2
In this chapter I confine myself to primitive polygamy, to
that of the grossest savages or barbarians ; but there are
barbarians of every race and colour, and the roots of all
superior civilisations necessarily go far down into primitive
savagery. Now we have seen that the polygamic regime is
prevalent throughout the world among races that are little
cultivated ; we may hence conclude that the most civilised
nations must have begun with polygamy, and, in reality, it
has been thus everywhere and always. In the various
civilised societies, living or dead, marriage has com-
menced by being polygamous. It is a law which has few
exceptions.
In ancient Peru, the Incas decreed monogamy to be
obligatory for the lower classes. The Chinese attribute to
Fo-Hi, their first sovereign, the institution of marriage.
This legendary king is said to have raised them out of
promiscuity. Such also was the role of Cecrops, in Greece,
and the same thing happened in primitive India. About
thirty years ago a number of erudite Europeans, especially
the mythologists and linguists, were smitten with a blind
love for the Indian hymns of the Rig- Veda. They set to
work to torture these old Sanscrit texts, naturally obscure,
and by subjecting them to a sort of linguistic examination,
they wrung from them imaginary revelations. It was
decided that a unique and marvellous race, primitively
endowed with every virtue and capacity, had sprung up
one fine day on some plateau or other of Central Asia.
The most enthusiastic of them generously endowed these
^ H. Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 280.
2 /</., ibid. vol. ii, p. 292.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 135
hypothetical Aryans with superhuman faculties. A French
academician beUeved and declared that from the high
plateaus of Pamir they perceived the sea, distant, however,
some hundreds of leagues ; he affirms that they understood
the " circles of the stars," and were omniscient. It is to be
presumed that this model race was of necessity mono-
gamous, since it was perfect. To-day, however, we must
demolish all these castles in the air, too lightly built in
primitive and chimerical Arya. The antiquity of the Vedic
hymns has had to be much shortened, and, if we consent to
read them without prejudice, we shall have httle admiration
for the authors, those gross Aryans, who tried to make their
gods drunk in order to obtain cows, and who sacrificed and
cut to pieces animals, and perhaps men, on their altars.
There is surely room to suppose that their social condition
was not more refined than their religion. On this point
the information that may be drawn from the Vedic hymns
is vague and drowned in the waves of religious effusion.
Nevertheless the Rig- Veda speaks of spouses of the gods,
and of princes surrounded by their wives, etc. In fact, a
document much more precise and more recent, the Code of
Manu, abundantly proves that the Hindoos, like all other
peoples, have begun by being polygamous.
I do not now insist on this point, as I shall return to it
later. In every country the primitive races have practised
polygamy, when that has been possible for them. Our
European ancestors have not been more scrupulous on this
point than our hypothetical Aryan cousins of Central Asia.
Caesar tells us that the Gauls were polygamous, and had the
right of life and death over their wives.^ Tacitus vaunts
much the monogamy of the Germans ; this moral feature,
says he, distinguishes them from other barbarians, but he
confesses that certain German chiefs had several wives, and
that, as it happens in all barbarous countries, the wife was
sold by the parents for presents consisting of oxen, horses,
and arms. 2
Polygamy was so natural to German morals that, long
after Tacitus, the Merovingian kings, Clotaire and his sons,
for example, still practised it, that Dagobert had three
wives, and that Charlemagne himself was bigamous. We
* Pe bello Galh'co, vi. 19. ^ Gerniania^ xviii.
136 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
know, too, that Saint Columban was banished from Gaul
only for having blamed the polygamy of King Thierry.
Let us resign ourselves, therefore, to confess the truth.
The white race has no divine investiture. Like all the
others, it has sprung from animality ; like all the others, it
has been polygamous, and we have only to open our eyes
to perceive that, in the present day, in countries reputed to
be the most civilised, and even in the classes reputed to be
the most distinguished, the majority of individuals have
polygamic instincts which they find it difficult to resist.
We are now in a position to form a just opinion of
primitive polygamy. Its causes are manifold. The prin-
cipal one is often the disproportion of the sexes, resulting
from the enormous mortality of men which savage life
necessitates. The desire of giving the rein to a sensuality
that there is, as yet, no thought of repressing, may have
a certain share in the matter; but this motive, which is
perhaps dominant in the polygamous anthropoid apes,
quickly becomes secondary in man.
Even the lowest savage is more calculating, and has
more forethought, than the monkey. His first slave, one
may say his first domestic animal, is his wife. Even when
he is still a simple hunter and nomadj he has always game
to be carried, fire to be lighted, a shelter to be erected,
without reckoning that wives are very apt at gathering
edible fruits and shell-fish, and rendering a thousand
services. Besides, they give birth to offspring that can be
bartered, sold, or even eaten at need.
It is, therefore, very desirable to possess as many as
possible of these beings, fitted for such various ends. If
a man is an agriculturist, the wife is then of still greater
utility; he puts upon her all the hard work; she digs,
plants, sows, reaps even, and all for the profit of her master.
She is, besides, a subjected and feeble creature, whom he
can treat just as he will, and on whom he can let loose his
instincts of brutal domination. By force or by ruse, by
capture or by purchase, he therefore procures himself as
many wives as possible. He often buys them in the lump;
for example, a lot of sisters, or of relations of different ages.
This diversity of age has its value ; for, in all the numerous
uses to which a wife can be put, the younger ones can take
AND OF THE FAMILY. 137
at need the place of the elder when the latter are worn out
or broken down.
Polygamy begins with equality — that is to say, that the
man subjects his little feminine flock to an equal servitude,
against which the wives do not think of rebelling, as they
find it quite natural, for they are not of a more refined
nature than their proprietor. By degrees, however, a
certain hierarchy is established among the wives of the same
man. This comes to pass when the social structure is
already more complex, when there are chiefs, nobles, and
priests. Polygamy, in this case, is restrained. Though it
continues to be the taste of nearly all men, it becomes the
privilege of the rich and powerful. The latter sometimes
even indulge in an excessive polygamy, and it becomes
difficult for them to maintain order and servile submission
among their feminine flock. From this time they have one
or more titular wives, who rule over their companions, and
are sometimes exempt from hard labour. These chief
wives are often daughters, sisters, or relatives of noted
warriors, or of important men, with whom the husband is
allied, and whose prestige somewhat protects the wives that
they have given, or more often sold. In consequence of
this, a certain tendency to become a distinct personality
awakens in the wives themselves; they insist on having their
separate hearth, and even their distinct apartment \ life in
the flock weighs on them.
Polygamy then puts on monogamic tendencies. The
greater number of superior races have adopted this hier-
archical polygamy before reaching the legal monogamy, in
a mitigated form, of which I shall treat later. It is im-
portant now to describe with some details this polygamy
of superior races.
CHAPTER IX.
POLYGAMY OF CIVILISED PEOPLE.
I. The Stage of Polygamy. — Primitive polygamy — Man resigns
himself to monogamy.
II. Arab Folygamy. — Why the Mussulmans have remained poly-
gamous — The inferiority of woman proclaimed by the Koran —
Polygamic restrictions in the Koran — Religion sanctions the right
of conjugal property — The purchased woman — The conjugal prero-
gatives of the prophet — Duties of the polygamous husband — Celestial
polygamy — The Mussulman marriage is laic — Female merchandise —
The preliminaries of marriage — Duties and obligations of the Mussul-
man husband ; his rights — Marriage in Kabyle — Cruel subjection of
the Kabyle wife — Sale and purchase of the wife — Excessive rights of
the Kabyle husband — The Kabyle marriage is inferior to the Arab
marriage — Polygamy and the subjection of women.
III. Polygamy in Egypt, Mexico, and Peru. — Monogamy of the
priests in Egypt — Polygamy of the Incas and of the nobles in Peru
— Polygamy of the nobles in Mexico — Polygamy with monogamic
tendency.
IV. Polygamy in Persia and India. — Polygamy and concubinage
of princes in Persia — Severity of sexual morality in the Avesta —
Polygamy according to the Rig- Veda — Polygamy in the Code of
Manu — Evolution of polygamy in India — How monogamy became
established.
I. The Stage of Folygamy.
Our inquiry is already sufficiently advanced to give us
an idea of the first phases of the evolution of marriage.
To begin with, both in the case of human beings
and of anthropoid apes, sexual unions have not been
reduced to any rule; promiscuity has been rare and
THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE. 139
exceptional, but polygamy has been very common, at least
a gross polygamy, not regulated in any way, and merely
resulting from the monopoly of the women by the strongest
or the richest men. It has been a sort of conjugal anarchy,
admitting simultaneously of various matrimonial forms,
as polyandry, term marriage, experimental marriage, etc.,
during periods of more or less length.
Besides their primordial role as child-bearers, wives were
found very useful in other ways — either for the satisfaction
of sensual desires, or for the execution of a number of
painful labours ; and therefore men endeavoured to pro-
cure as many of them as possible, first by capture, and then
by purchase, or by giving a certain amount of work in
submitting to a temporary servitude. In the preceding
chapter I have given the history of this primitive, savage
polygamy which as yet no law regulated.
During the first phases of their social evolution, all the
human races have practised, with more or less brutality,
this gross polygamy. We have seen — and it is a subject to
which I shall have to return — how, in the bosom of the
polygamic regi?nej monogamic tendencies have appeared,
which by degrees have ended by prevailing amongst all
the more civilised races. These races have resigned
themselves to adopt monogamy, or at least legal monogamy.
I say " resigned," for it seems that monogamy costs much
to man ; in reality laws and customs have everywhere
attenuated the severity of it for him by various compromises
of which I shall soon have to speak.
II. Arab Polygamy.
However, among the superior races, there is one, the
Arab race, which, up to our own time, has maintained and
legalised the polygamic regime, while propagating and
regulating it among the various peoples that have come
under its domination. If, in this respect, the Arab race
has been an exception to the general evolution, it is not
because it is less gifted than the others ; it has sufficiently
proved this. According to the ancients, a fantastic fish,
I40 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
the remora^ had the power of suddenly stopping the
passage of ships at sea; rehgion has played this part for the
Arabs. Theoretically, all the great and solidly constituted
religions are incompatible with progress. Although rela-
tively they may appear innovations at the moment of their
birth, yet ihey bar the route of the future, and, as much as
is in their power, oppose all ulterior evolution. This is
imperative, since they pretend to declare the immutable
will of divine personages, who are omnipotent, omniscient,
and perfectly wise, and who cannot consequently either
re-touch or amend the laws that they make, and the com-
mands they give to poor human creatures. Now, Islamism
arose amidst the full polygamic regime; its founder could
not even dream of establishing any other. Polygamy was
therefore established by divine right among the faithful,
and as at the bottom it is in accord with the primitive
instincts of man, it has maintained itself in Mussulman
countries from the time of Mahomet to our own days.
From the sociological point of view this is a most inter-
esting fact, for it gives us the opportunity of studying
and estimating the polygamic regime in its full develop-
ment.
Let us listen at first to the Koran ; we will then con-
sult the Arabian jurists and the customs of contemporary
Arabs.
To begin with, the holy book loudly proclaims the
inferiority of women, which naturally justifies their sub-
jection, and this subjection is great in all polygamous
countries. There is no ambiguity on this point in the
words of the prophet : " Men are superior to women by
reason of the qualities God has given them to place them
above women, and because men employ their 7vealth in giving
dowries to women. Virtuous women are obedient and
submissive; they carefully guard, during their husband's
absence, that which God has ordered them to preserve
intact. Thou shalt correct those whom thou fearest may
be disobedient : thou shalt put them in beds apart : thou
shalt beat them: but as soon as they obey thee again, do not
seek cause for quarrel with them. God is merciful and
great"!
^ Koran, Sourate, iv. 38.
AND OF THE PAMILY, 14!
This text is eloquent. It first of all consecrates masculine
superiority by divine right, then marriage by purchase,
and lastly, the liberty of the husband to treat his wives
with brutality.
The restrictions on polygamy found in the Koran are
very slight : " Marry not the women whom your fathers
had to wife : it is a sin, and abomination : except what is
already past."^
No retrospective effect here ! We may conclude from
this that, up to the time of Mahomet, the sons inherited
the harem of their father, as is still the case in a number of
little despotic states of negro Africa.
The holy book also commands respect for the feminine
property of others, save in the case of capture by war or of
religious infidelity of the husband. " You are forbidden to
take to wife free women who are married, except those
women whom your right hand shall possess as slaves : such
is the law of God."^ "O believers! when believing
women come unto you as refugees, try them. And if you
know them to be true believers, send them not back to
their infidel husbands ; but give their husbands back what
they have expended for their dower." ^ In the Koran the
respect for money is already much greater than for females.
The wife must be purchased. " It is permitted unto you to
procure wives with money, and you shall keep them in
virtuous ways, avoiding debauchery. Give unto her with
whom thou dost cohabit the dower thou hast pro-
mised."*
The prophet counsels the faithful, without however
commanding it, to have a small number of wives : " But
if ye fear that ye cannot act equitably towards the orphans,
take in marriage of such other women as please you, two, or
three, or four, and not more."
The text ends with a permission to the man merely to
pay a fictitious dowry to the wives : ** Assign dowries freely
to your wives, and if it pleases them to give you back a
part, enjoy it conveniently at your ease."^
As for the prophet himself, he was to be above most of
the restrictions which he imposed on others : " O prophet,
^ Koran, Sourate, iv. 26. * Ibid. Ix. 10. ^ Ibid, iv. 3.
2 Ibid. iv. 28. * Ibid. iv. 18.
i42 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
we have allowed thee ihy wives unto whom thou hast given
their dower, and also the slaves which thy right hand
possesseth of the booty which God hath granted thee, and
the daughters of thy uncle, and the daughters of thy aunts,
both on thy father's side and on thy mother's side, who have
fled with thee from Mecca, and any other believing woman,
if she give herself unto the prophet." ^ "O prophet, if
believing women come to thee for an asylum, having
promised thee that they will flee idolatry, that they will not
steal, nor commit fornication, nor kill their children, and
will not disobey thee in anything that is just : believe them
and pray for them : God is indulgent and merciful. "^ This
last text gives a sad enough idea of the morality of the
Arab women before the time of Mahomet ; but taken
together with the preceding one, it shows how convenient
and even agreeable it is to be the interpreter of the Divine
will.
With such facilities for recruiting, the harem of the
prophet must have been richly furnished ; therefore he has
taken care to free himself from one duty which he recom-
mends to others, of debitum conjugate: " Thou mayest," he
says to himself, "either grant or refuse thy embraces to
thy wives."^
On the contrary, he says to vulgar believers : " Ye can by
no means carry yourselves equally between wives in all
respects, though you study to do it ; therefore turn not from
a wife with all manner of aversion, nor leave her like one in
suspense ; if ye agree and fear to abuse your wives, God is
gracious and merciful."*
Polygamy is not rare in the world. We have seen it and
shall see it again in the course of our inquiries; but the
polygamy of the Koran has an advantage over most of the
others ; it is at once celestial and terrestrial, for the paradise
of true believers is only an ideal harem : " Say, O believer,
what shall I declare of greater benefit for those who fear
God, than gardens through which flow rivers of water, where
they shall dwell for ever, and there shall be women, who
are pure virgins, etc.^ . . . Damsels having large black
eyes. Therein shall be agreeable damsels, whom no man
1 Koran, xxxiii. 47. ^ Ibid, xxxiii. 49. ^ Ibid, iii. 13.
2 Ibid, Ix. 12. -* Ibid. iv. 128.
And of tjie family, 143
or genius hath deflowered.^ There shall be young and
beautiful virgins.^ . . . And near them (the elect) shall be
houris with large black eyes, having complexions like rubies
and pearls.^ Verily we have created the damsels of Paradise
by a peculiar creation."*
The whole of this sacred code sanctifies the inferiority of
the woman, and this inferiority has not been at all mitigated
in practice; for iniquity, always tenacious, is far more so
when it is authorised by religion.
We must notice, however, in regard to Mussulman
marriage, a circumstance which at first sight is singular : it
is that Mahometanism intervenes in nothing, as religion, in
all that that concerns marriage; all conjugal matters are
absolutely private, and even the civil power does not appear
any more than the religious power in the celebration of
marriage.
As a general rule, the future husband goes to declare his
union to the sheik or cadi, who then remits the minute
of it to the interested party, without keeping a copy of it.
This formality is, besides, in no way obligatory ; the marriage
is considered as a private act, and if afterwards any disputes
should arise in relation to it, the parties concerned arrange
them as well as they can, by appealing to the testimonial
proof. ®
It all amounts to this, that for Mussulmans the wife is a
thing, and the marriage a simple bargain. The wife is
always sold to the husband, and the price is discussed either
by her legal representative or by her conventional agent.
The nuptial gift is even essential to marriage, and if it has
not been paid the wife has the right to refuse all intimate
commerce. "The wife sells herself," says Sidi Khelil ;
" and every vendor has the right to retain the merchandise
sold until after taking the payment."^ Before buying, the
suitor is allowed to see the face and the hands of the bride ;
for the hands of the women are reputed to give an idea of
her personal beauty."^
A man ought, whenever possible, to marry a virgin, and
1 Koran, Hi. 20. 2 /^/^^ i^^ 56-70. ^ /^/^^ \^i 22.
* Ibid. Ivi. 35. s E. Meynxex, Etudes surrislaftu'sme,^. 148.
* Sidi Khelil, t. ii. p. 434 (quoted by Meynier).
'' E. Meynier, loc. cit. p. 159.
f44 '^HJ^ EVOLUTION OF MARRIACE
the bargain may be concluded several years before the
delivery of the merchandise.^ If the girl is still a virgin,
not emancipated, but beyond the age when it is considered
necessary to commence the special rble reserved to her sex,
the father has the right to impose marriage on her.^
The orphan girl can also be married by the authority of
the Cadi, if she is more than ten years old, and if there
is reason to fear that she may lead an irregular life.^
In all other cases the consent of the girl is necessary.
This circumstance, let us especially note, constitutes a
real moral progress beyond savage polygamy, and we
shall presently see that it is not yet realised in Kabyle.
The consent of the girl is given in two ways, according to
whether she is a virgin or not. This interesting particular
must be frankly declared during the negotiation ; the Koran
commands it. If the girl is a virgin, it is understood that
modesty should deprive her of speech, and in order to
signify yes or no, she must have recourse to the language
of signs. She can, for example, show her repugnance by
covering her face, and her content by smiling. But if
she is no longer virgo intacta she is allowed to speak
freely.*
We have seen that, according to the Koran, the woman
owes her master an absolute submission; and he, in return,
whatever may be the number of his wives, binds himself
morally not to leave any one of them "as in suspense."
This precept of the sacred code is specifically carried out.
Every Mussulman owes to his wives an equal share of his
nights, and she who has had the favour of the night has a
right to the following day also.
When the husband buys a fresh wife he is indebted to
her seven successive nights if she is a virgin ; for three
only, in a contrary case. He has the right to refuse greater
exactions than this.*^
But the husband has other obligations. He must supply
food to his wife, even if she is afflicted with a voracious
appetite. This last case is considered as a calamity, but
^ E. Meynier, loc. cit. pp. 158-160.
2 Sidi Khelil, t. ii. pp. 326, 327 (quoted by Meynier).
» Ibid. p. 157.
* E. Meynier, loc. cit. p. 158. " Sidi Khelil, t. ii. p. 505.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 145
the husband must resign himself to it, or repudiate the
glutton.!
The husband owes, besides, to his wife or wives water to
drink, water for ablutions and purifications, oil to eat, oil to
burn, oil for cosmetic unctions, wood for cooking and for
the oven, salt, vinegar, meat every other day or otherwise,
according to the custom in various countries. He must
supply them with a mat or a bed — that is to say, a mattress
— and a cover to put on the mat. These duties have cor-
relative rights. The husband has the right to forbid his wife
to eat garlic, or to eat or drink any other thing which may
leave a disagreeable odour. He may interdict any occupa-
tion likely to weaken her, or impair her beauty.^ Finally,
if she refuses her conjugal obligations without reasonable
motives, the husband can at will deprive her of salt, pepper,
vinegar, etc.^ The sum total of these restrictions renders
an Arab woman's position a very subordinate one, both
before and after marriage. But the fate of the Kabyle
woman is much more miserable.
We are always hearing it repeated in France that the
Kabyle man is monogamous, and consequently not so
different from ourselves in this respect as the Arab ; but
among the Kabyles, as among the Arabs, it is polygamy
which is legal; and if the greater number of the Kabyles
are monogamous in practice, it is chiefly from economy.
In spite of their repubhcan customs, of their respect for
individual liberty, of the rights they accord to the mother,
and of certain safeguards with which they protect the
women in time of war, contrary also to the liberal
tendencies of the Berbers in relation to women, the
Kabyles of Algeria treat their married women and their
daughters as actual slaves, and they are in this respect
inferior to the Arabs themselves.* In all matters that refer
to sexual relations the Kabyle customs are ferocious.
Outside of marriage all union of the sexes is severely
interdicted in Kabyle, and the married woman has no
personality \ she is literally a thing possessed.^
1 E. Meynier, loc, cit. p. 165. ^ Ibid. p. 166. ^ Ibid. p. 167.
* E. Sabatier, Essai sur Vorigine, etc^ des Berhhres s^dentaires, in
Revue d^ anthropologies 1882.
^ Hanoteau et Letourneux, La Kabylie, t. ii. p. 148.
10
146 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
The young Kabyle girl is sold by her father, her brother,
her uncle, or some relation {a^eb^ ; in short, by her legal
owner. In announcing his marriage, a man says quite
bluntly — "I have bought a wife." When a father has
married his daughter, the phrase in ordinary use is — " He
has eaten his daughter." ^
Among the Cheurfas, but it is an exceptional case, the
girl is consulted on the choice of a husband when she has
attained the age of reason ; everywhere else the virgin
daughter is never consulted, and even the widow and
repudiated wife, to whom the Mussulman law accords
liberty, cannot dispose of themselves in Kabyle countries.^
In many tribes, however, the daughter can twice refuse
the man that is proposed to her ; but after that she has
exhausted her right, and is forced to submit.^
The legal owner of the Kabyle woman generally gives
her, at her wedding, garments and jewels ; or rather, he
lends them to her, for it is forbidden to the woman to
dispose of them, and at her death these precious articles
must be returned to her relatives.*
An essential condition of the Kabyle marriage, as of the
Arab, is the payment of a certain price, generally debated,
but which certain tribes of southern Jurjura have fixed once
for all. This price is called the " turban " {thdmanth)^ as
with us "pin-money" is spoken of. A penal sanction
guarantees the payment of the thdmanth and the delivery
of the person sold.^
In principle the woman has no right over the
thdmanfh.^
Besides the purchase money, or thamanthy the Kabyle
further stipulates in addition that he shall receive a certain
quantity of provisions (cattle, or food, flour, oil, butter) to be
consumed during the marriage festivities.
The villages which have tariffed the thdmanth have also
fixed the amount of these presents.
The father likewise stipulates, for the benefit of the
daughter who is sold, a gift of garments and of jewels ; but
this gift dispenses the husband from providing in this
1 Hanoteau et Letourneux, La Kabylie^ t. ii. p. 148.
2 Id.^ ibid. p. 149. ^ Id., ibid. p. 162. * /</., ibid,
3 Id., ibid. p. 150. ^ Id., ibid. pp. 152, 153.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 147
respect for the maintenance of the wife during one year.
This is particularly necessary, because the bride, in quitting
her parents, leaves them all that she has received,^ and
takes away nothing but her body.
It is sometimes the mother who thus makes the conjugal
sale of her daughter, but on condition of being recognised
as guardian ; and even then she does not enjoy, like the
father, an unrestrained power, and she has to consult her
daughter. 2
Once purchased, the Kabyle wife is entirely at the mercy
of the husband-proprietor. She must follow him wherever
it suits him to settle ; her only actual possession is the
raiment which covers her. Her husband has the right to
chastise her with his fist, with a stick, with a stone, or even
with a poignard. He is only forbidden to kill her without a
reasonably serious motive.^
If, however, when she has become a mother, she is
unable to suckle her child, the law decides that the husband
is obliged to provide a wet nurse \^ though this is more for
the child's sake than the mother's, as she cares little enough
about the infant.
The married woman is considered so entirely as property
in Kabyle that the prolonged absence of the master is
allowed to set her free. In this case she belongs, after four
years, to her maternal relations, who have the right to re-marry
her — that is to say, to re-sell her — unless the absent husband
has left her a sufficient provision. However, the husband's
parents can delay the dissolution of the first marriage,
sometimes for seven years, sometimes for ten years, but on
condition of taking the place of the absent husband in
furnishing the deserted wife with food and clothes.^
The Kabyle woman, therefore, married or not, is always
a thing possessed. We shall see later that even widowhood
does not enfranchise her. The right of correcting the
woman who is not under the power of a husband ceases
only when she has reached an age when marriage would be
sterile, and especially if she has in a way abjured her sex by
mixing with men in the markets.^
^ Hanoteau et Letourneux, La JCabylie, t. ii. p. 161.
2 Id,, ibid. p. 151. ^ Id.y ibid. p. 169. « Id., ibid. p. 151.
3 Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 165. ^ /^^^ ^-^/^^ t. ii. p. 146.
148 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
Very often the assimilation of the Kabyle people to the
French is spoken of as a thing relatively ea»sy. It appears to
me that the servile subjection of the Kabyle woman is an
almost insurmountable obstacle to this dream of fusion.
Without doubt the married woman in France is only a
minor; but in Kabyle she is still in the lowest stage of
slavery. In this respect the Berbers of Kabyle are on a
level with the coarsest savages; they are even inferior to
the Arabs, although the latter have preserved almost
unchanged the polygamic regime of the old Islamite, and
even pre-Islamite ages. But in all times and all countries
the condition of woman is the measure of the moral
development of the whole people. Now, in regard to this
there is a gulf between Kabyle and civilised Europe.
The polygamic regime has, besides, in every country an
almost necessary result — the slavery of women. This is
natural. As in the hordes of chimpanzees, the male, the
anthropomorphous paterfamilias, only maintains his authority
by force and by expelling his rivals, so, in human societies,
the polygamous husband can hardly be anything but the
proprietor of subjugated beings, not daring to aspire to
freedom. It may be remarked also that the polygamic
appetite, so habitual to man, cannot be strange to
woman. Both have the same blood and share the same
heredity. The polygamous husband, therefore, has always
to prevent or repress the straying of his feminine flock
by close confinement or by terror. Under a polygamic
regime the wife has scarcely any rights; she has chiefly
duties.
III. Polygamy in Egypt ^ Mexico^ and Peru.
I have dwelt long enough on Mussulman polygamy.
From a sociological point of view it is extremely interesting.
It affords us the opportunity of studying from life customs
which, with differences of detail, must have been those of
all civilised peoples at a certain period of their evolution,
and which probably have only been kept up among the
Islamites on account of the confusion of civil and religious
laws, these last giving to polygamy a sort of consecration.
In all the great primitive barbarous monarchies the
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 149
polygamy of the first ages has been by degrees restrained
or abolished, according to the measure of social progress.
In ancient Egypt polygamy was still in force; but
already it was interdicted to the priests/ contrary to what
has happened nearly everywhere. As a matter of fact, and
by the simple necessity resulting from the proportion of the
sexes, even when polygamy is authorised and legal, it is
especially the luxury of rich and powerful men ; the com-
mon people have everywhere been reduced to monogamy,
whether they wished it or not. Under most of the great
early despotic monarchies which had emerged from primi-
tive savagery this fact became legalised, and plurality of
wives constituted a privilege reserved to the great ones
of the land.
In ancient Peru monogamy was obligatory for men who
possessed nothing, but not for the Inca and the nobles of
the kingdom. Thus the last Inca, Atahualpa, had three
thousand wives or concubines. As generally happens when
polygamy is restrained, there was already a hierarchy among
the wives of the Inca ; one of them, who was obliged to
be his sister, the coya, was reputed superior to the others,
and her eldest son succeeded his father.^ On this point, as
on many others, ancient Peru had unconsciously copied
Egypt.
In Mexico also, monogamy was habitual for the poor,
but the powerful and the nobles had a number of wives
proportioned to their rank and to their riches.^ In Mexico,
as in Peru, polygamy was monogamic in the sense that
one wife had pre-eminence over the others, and that her
children alone inherited the paternal title and wealth.
This polygamy of princes and potentates, who by right of
birth soar above the common rule, is found also in the
great Aryan empires of Asia.^
^ Diodorus, book i. 80.
^ W. Prescott, H/s^. of the Conquest of Pent y vol. i. p. 46.
* W. Prescott, Hist, of the Conquest of Mexico^ vol. i. p. 12 1. —
Herbert Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 283.
* F. Miiller, Allgem. Ethnogr,^ p. 263.
1 50 THE E VOL VTlON OF iMARRiA GM
IV. Polygamy in Persia and India.
The polygamy of the monarchs of ancient Persia seems
to have been copied from that of the kings of Egypt, or of
the Incas of Peru. They had numerous concubines and
three or four wives, of whom one was especially considered
as queen, or privileged wife.^
As for the Persians of more ancient times still, the
Mazdeans who drew up the sacred code of the Avesta, if
we refer to the Zend text, we find they had a most severe
sexual morality. The Avestic code condemns and punishes
resort to prostitutes, seduction, sexual extravagances, abor-
tion, etc. Throughout that portion of the Avesta which
has come down to us there is no recognition of polygamy,
and the verses which mention marriage have quite a
monogaraic meaning. It seems, however, says one of the
translators of the Avesta, that among the ancient Persians
polygamy may have been authorised in case of sterility
of the first wife.^ Like anthropophagy, polygamy is an
original sin with human societies. But writings so ex-
clusively religious and even liturgic as the Avesta constitute
very incomplete sources of information in regard to civil
institutions. To study the marriage of the ancient Persians
in the Avesta seems about as illusory as it would be to
study ours in a Catholic prayer-book.
We know also, from the Code of Manu and historical
and ethnographical documents, that polygamy is and has
been far from being unknown in India, and yet it is
difficult to prove from the text of the Vedic hymns that the
writers of these chants have practised it.
This may be inferred, however, from several verses. In
the beginning the morals were coarse enough for abortion
to be common. "Let Agni," we read in a hymn, ''kill
the rakchasa who, under the form of a brother, a husband,
or a lover, approaches thee to destroy thy fruit."^ On
the other hand, woman is held in slight esteem by the
sacred chants. She is a being "of incapable mind and
^ Herbert Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 295.
2 C. de Harlez, Avesta, Introd. clxxi.
* Rig-Veda^ sec. viii., lect. viii., H. xx., ver. 45.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 151
unfit for serious employment." ^ In one hymn, Satchi, the
daughter of Buloman, boasts of having ecHpsed her rivals
in the eyes of her husband.^ A certain number of verses
speak of the wives of the gods : *' The praying cows, these
wives of Agni, wish to obtain a proof of the virility of the
god."3
In Sanskrit the word "finger" is feminine, and thus very
often the fingers which handle the sacred mortar are called
the ten wives of Agni.*
In short, other accounts leave us no room to doubt that
in primitive India, as elsewhere, the great and the powerful
have largely practised polygamy from Vedic times. ^
That these customs have been those of Brahmanic India,
the text of Manu in antiquity, and the reports of travellers
in modern times, attest loudly enough. One verse of Manu
regulates the right of succession of sons that a Brahmin
may have by four wives belonging to different castes. " If
a Brahmin has four wives belonging to four classes, in the
direct order, and if they all have sons, this is the rule of
inheritance. Let the son of the Brahmin (after having
deducted the bull, the chariot, and the jewels) take three
parts of the rest ; let the son of the Kchatriya wife take
two parts; that of the Vaisy^ one part and a half; that of
the Soudra, one part only."^
Another verse, much more singular, declares that the
children of a second wife belong to the person who has lent
the money to buy her :
" He who has a wife, and who, after having borrowed
money from some one, marries another with it, derives no
other advantage than the sensual pleasure; the children
belong to the man who has given the money." '^ As for the
king, the Code of Manu permits polygamy to him in the
largest measure, at least under the form of concubinage. He
ought to have a troop of wives, whose duty it is to fan him,
and to pour water and perfumes over his august person.
^ Rig-Veda, sec. iii., H. ii., ver. 17.
^ Ibid. sec. viii., H. xvii., ver. 5, 6.
* Ibid. sec. iii., lect. iv., ver. 3.
* Ibid. sec. vii., lect. viii., H. xxvi., ver. 2.
^ E. Burnouf, Essai sur le Vida, p. 213.
^ Code of Manu, ix. ver. 149- 151.
' Ibid. xi. ver. 5.
152 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
He refreshes himself with them from the cares of govern-
ment, and passes the night in their agreeable company.^
We must not forget, besides, that, as the Mahabharata has
informed us, the Kchatriyas practised marriage by capture
and polygamy.2
To sum up, in India, as everywhere else, polygamy has
evolved ; it has at first been common ; then, when power
and riches have been concentrated in the hands of a small
number, it has become the privilege of the great. The
polygamy of the princes and of the rich Brahmins was even
the first obstacle encountered in the seventeenth century
by the preaching of the Jesuits in India.^
In the present time it is the same for the great, and
custom tolerates a second wife, even to common husbands,
in case of sterility of the first. ■* I shall have to speak again
of these customs in treating of concubinage.
If we now sum up the general sense of the numerous
facts which I have just passed in review, we see that with
the entire human race polygamy has succeeded to the sexual
and conjugal anarchy of the first ages. Like all other
institutions, primitive polygamy has gradually become
regulated, but always while keeping the woman in a very
humiliating position. One fact of great importance, and
which has by degrees ruined the regime of a plurality of
wives, even when custom, law, and religion authorised it, is
that polygamy became a luxury within the reach only of
rulers, as soon as a tolerable social condition restrained the
too rapid mortality of males. Indeed, from this moment
the sexual equilibrium of births compelled the greater
number of men to practical monogamy, and thenceforth,
as Herbert Spencer justly remarks, a public opinion was
necessarily formed in favour of monogamy. Often, there-
fore, polygamy constituted a legal privilege ; it was expressly
limited to kings, great men, and priests.
Besides this a hierarchy became established among the
numerous wives, and one qf them had precedence of her
companions.
^ Code of Manu, vii. ver. 219, 221, and 224.
2 Wake, Evolution of Morality, vol. ii. p. 241.
3 Lettres Mif, t. vi. p. 26 ; t. xv. p. 286 ; t. xii. p. 416.
* Wake, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 230.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 153
Finally, legal monogamy was decreed, but this monogamy
was in appearance only. In practice the pain of it was
softened by compromises, notably by prostitution, which
was at least tolerated, and by concubinage, which received
the consecration of law.
CHAPTER X.
PROSTITUTION AND CONCUBINAGE.
I. Concubinage in General. — Frequency and reason of polygamic
instincts — Palliatives of monogamy.
II. Prostitution. — Primitive prostitution — Slow rise of scruples —
Specialisation of prostitution in civilised societies — Prostitution in the
ancient States of Central America, in China and Japan — The right of
the father, and prostitution in Japan — Prostitution in India — Religious
prostitution — Prostitution in Europe.
III. Various Forms of Concubinage. — The concubinate — Concubine
captives in Judaea and Homeric Greece — Some modern facts of the same
kind — Slave concubines in Africa, in Abyssinia, and Madagascar —
Legal concubinate in Central America — Categories of the concubinate
in Mexico — The "lesser wives" in Tartary and China — Concubines in
Assyria, among the Arabs, and in India — Greek hetairism — The con-
cubinate in ancient Rome — The concubinate of the primitive catholic
clergy — Concubines "by precaution" — Contemporary concubinage
—Why it does not exist in Kabyle — The evolution of concubinage.
I. Concubinage in General.
As a connecting link between polygamy and monogamy,
concubinage deserves special study.
Between institutions, as between organised beings, there
is no sudden leap. Societies evolve slowly ; it is by degrees
that customs become refined, and that laws are formulated
of a less and less brutal kind. It has been with marriage
as with everything else. To the confusion of primitive
bestial unions, when polygamy after the manner of chim-
panzees prevailed, have succeeded sexual associations
regulated by laws and customs. I have successively
THE E VOL UTION OP MARRIA GE, 155
described these outlines or primitive forms of marriage,
ending with polygamy, which itself is not incompatible
with a somewhat advanced civiHsation, but which gener-
ally, by its restrictions, soon develops a tendency towards
monogamy.
The abyss is not so very great that separates polygamic
from monogamic marriage.
As we have seen, primitive man, besides having a purely
animal absence of modesty, has generally polygamic
instincts, and nothing can be more natural, since he
descends from anthropoid precursors, and the great
monkeys are habitually polygamous. But the solidity
of instincts, moral or immoral, is always in proportion to
the duration of their rise. Now, during enormous chrono-
logical periods or cycles, in comparison with which the
historic ages of humanity are but a moment, our nearest
animal ancestors and our prehistoric percursors have, as far
as it was possible, lived in a polygamic regime. It is there-
fore quite natural that most men, even in the present time,
should be much inclined to polygamy, and that primitive
societies should only have emerged slowly and imperfectly
from it, while tempering monogamic marriage by polygamic
palliatives. Of these palliatives the two principal ones still
in use amongst the most civilised peoples are prostitution
and concubinage, which last becomes a concubinate when
legalised.
II. Prostitution.
It would certainly be out of place here to give a detailed
history of prostitution. Having, besides, repeatedly spoken
of it in the preceding chapters, I may now confine myself to
recapitulating the chief traits of its evolution. In primitive
societies, as we know, it is general, and in no way blamed.
Free girls and women willingly sell themselves, and more
often still, they are an article of traffic for their parents, like
any other merchandise.
No idea of shame as yet attaches to sexual unions
considered in themselves. Prostitution is a simple barter
which shocks no one, and venal love is merely restrained
by respect for the property of another. Women who are
1S6 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
already appropriated, or possessed by a man, are in principle
respected, but solely by the same title as any other pro-
perty. Their masters, their husbands, those who have bought
or captured them, have a perfect right to hire them out to
whomsoever they will, as the Australian husbands do, and
as the Polynesian ones did.
When the appropriation of women, polygamic as much as
possible, became general, the more than fickle instincts of
primitive man persisted none the less ; and, as a matter of
fact, it is then that prostitution, in the modern sense of the
word, first arose. Outside the majority of women, regularly
belonging to husband-proprietors, there existed, in much
smaller numbers, women trafficking their persons, either
voluntarily for their own profit, or for that of their legal
possessors. At Senaar, for example, and in many other
countries, merchants and slave-dealers trade very profitably
in their feminine live stock.
We know also that, in primitive Athens, the most
eminent men possessed troops of prostitutes, and drew a
large revenue from them ; for it is very slowly that prostitu-
tion, and all that relates to it, has awakened any scruple in
the human conscience.
Even at the most glorious period of Hellenic civilisation,
with what consideration were the most distinguished hetairse
still regarded, since Socrates and Pericles willingly met at
the house of Aspasia !
In all the more or less cultivated societies of the old or
new world prostitution has flourished or continues to
flourish. It is even in refined societies alone that pros-
titution becomes specialised and legalised, and ends by
being regulated, by becoming, in short, a kind of institu-
tion, supplementing legal marriage and being concurrent
with it.
Everywhere — in all countries, and among all races —
prostitution has been, or continues to be, tolerated, and
sometimes even honoured. It existed in the great states of
Central America, in ancient Peru, in ancient Mexico, and
in Nicaragua, where there were already prostitutes and
brothels. In this last country the morals were still so
impure, and continence, although very relative, so difficult
to bear, that at a certain annual festival the women of all
AND OF THE FAMILY. 157
classes were authorised to abandon themselves to whom-
soever they pleased.!
In the great societies founded by the Mongoloid races,
or the Mongols of Asia, prostitution displays itself in the
open day. In China, tea-houses abound, although the
ancient morality of the Celestial Empire makes chastity a
moral duty for unmarried girls and women. In Cochin-
China and Japan, on the contrary,^ practice and theory are
in accord. No moral brand of shame attaches to the
prostitute. In Cochin-China, says Finlayson,^ a father has
the right to give his daughter, for a small sum of money, to
a visitor or even a stranger, without the reputation of the
young girl suffering any harm, and without any hindrance
to her finding a suitable husband afterwards. In Japan
the tea-houses {tsiayd) are more numerous still than
in China; in the large towns they form vast quarters,
and some of them are very luxurious. The mode of
recruiting for inmates seems at first improbable to a
European, and this alone suffices to show the relativity of
morality.
Everywhere *' the right of the father of a family " over his
children has begun by being unlimited. In Japan it is
still excessive, even over married daughters. Thus M.
Bousquet, who was travelling in Japan a few years
ago, relates that as he was lodging one day in the
house of a young married couple, the father of the wife
offered her to him, and the husband did not dream of
protesting.*
A daughter represents a certain amount of capital,
belonging first to the father and then to the husband ; to
alienate it without the consent of the proprietor is a theft,
but with his authorisation the action becomes lawful, and
therefore parents who are in difficulties negotiate their
daughter without any intervention by the Japanese law. A
young girl is even admired when she prostitutes herself
from devotion. "The Japanese romances repeat to satiety
the story of the virtuous virgin who voluntarily submits to
this servitude in order to save her father from misery, or to
^ Bancroft, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 676.
* Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi. p. 133. ' Jbid. t. xxxiv. p. 334.
* G. Bousquet, Lejapon de nos jours (1877), t. i^r- p. 246.
158 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
pay the debts of her betrothed."^ In Japan, houses of
prostitution are a national institution ; the law regulates the
costume of the women who inhabit them, and the duration
of their stay. On this point Europe has little to envy
Japan. But what is special to Japan is that the tikakie^
the inmates of these houses, are placed there by their
parents themselves, and for a price that is debated before-
hand. These inmates of the tea-houses generally enter
them from the age of fourteen or fifteen years, to live there
till they are twenty-five years old. They are taught to
dance, to sing, to play the guitar, and to write letters.
They are lodged in handsome apartments, where men go
to see them openly and without any mystery.
They are in no way dishonoured by their trade ; many of
them marry very well afterwards; it even happens that
respectable citizens go to seek an agreeable wife in these
houses of pleasure. The most beautiful among them are
celebrated. After their death their portraits are placed in
the temples. " In the temple of Asaxa," says M. Bousquet,
" is found a painting representing several Japanese ladies in
full dress ; they are, my guides tell me, the portraits of the
most celebrated courtesans of Yeddo, which are annually
placed here in their honour." So also Dr. Schliemann
reports that he has seen statues of deified courtesans in the
Japanese temples. Their celestial intervention was implored
in an original manner. The suppliants first wrote a prayer
on a paper, then masticated the request and rolled it into a
bullet, which they shot with an air-gun at the statues of these
strange divinities. ^
It is clear that the Japanese differ very much from us in
their idea of feminine virtue. They have an idea, however,
and do not in the least permit the women to love as they
please. Thus the girl who gives herself to a lover without
paternal authorisation is legally punished by sixty lashes
with a whip, and the Japanese public would not endure in a
play the personage of a young girl in love.^
It is not the chastity of woman, as we understand it,
but her subjection, that Japanese morality requires. The
1 G. Bousquet, loc. cit., t. i^^' p. 87.
2 Schliemann, La Chine et lejapon.
8 G. Bo}x%(\}xet, Le ThSdtre au Japan {Revue des Deux Mondes, 1874).
AND OF THE FAMILY, 159
woman is a thing possessed, and her immorality consists
simply in disposing freely of herself
As regards prostitution, Brahmanic India is scarcely more
scrupulous than Japan, and there again we find religious
prostitution practised in the temples, analogous to that
which in ancient Greece was practised at Cyprus, Corinth,
Miletus, Tenedos, Lesbos, Abydos, etc.^
According to the legend, the Buddha himself, Sakya-
mouni, when visiting the famous Indian town of Vesali,
was received there by the great mistress of the cour-
tesans. ^
But the Brahmins have not been more strict in what
concerns prostitution than the founder of the great
Buddhist religion. On this point the accounts of travellers
and missionaries supplement the silence of the Code of
Manu. The writers of Lettres kdifiantes found religious
prostitution openly practised in the Brahmanic temples.
"The people have put," writes one of them, "the idol
named Coppal in a neighbouring house ; there she is served
by priests and by Devadachi^ or slaves of the gods. These
are prostitute girls, whose employment is to dance and to
ring little bells in cadence while singing infamous songs,
either in the pagoda, or in the streets when the idol is
carried out in state."^ In this case it was a matter of actual
commerce, of trading for the profit of the priests, and the
latter had recourse without any shame to what we call to-
day the advertisement to attract the customers. " I heard,"
relates the same missionary, " published with the blowing
of a trumpet, that there was danger in frequenting the
Devadachi who dwelt in the town; but that one could
safely visit those who served in the temple of Coppaiy^
An old traveller, Sonnerat, confirms the testimony of the
missionaries of the seventeenth century. He affirms that,
like all the other Hindoos, the Brahmins are much
addicted to libertinage, and that, in their practical morality,
it is not considered a fault to have commerce with
a courtesan; that they have licentious books in which
^ Lecky, History of European Morals ^ vol. i. p. 103.
2 Mrs. Spier, Life in Ancient India^ p. 28.
3 Lettres kdifiantes, t. xii. p. 412. * Ibid. p. 417.
1 60 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
refined debauchery is taught ex professo ; that they use
love-charms, etc.^
I stop here, and purposely abstain fi-om speaking of
the prostitution of Europe. We know too well that it has
always been very flourishing, as well in ancient Rome as in
the Middle Ages, although they were so catholic. In old
France it established itself boldly, in full daylight, to such
a degree that some towns, that of Rouen for example, had
Xhexx prox^nites jurhy wearing bronze medals with the arms of
the town on them.^ As for contemporary prostitution, it is
superfluous to call attention to the fact that it is one of our
great social diseases.
To sum up, the origin of prostitution goes back to the
most primitive societies ; it is anterior to all the forms of
marriage, and it has persisted down to our own day in
every country, and whatever might be the race, religion,
form of government, or conjugal regime prevailing. Taken
by itself, it would suffice to prove that monogamy is a type
of marriage to which mankind has found it very difficult to
bend itself; the very general existence of the concubinate
completes the demonstration.
III. Various Forms of Concubinage.
Between animal love, that can be tasted with the prostitute,
and the noblest monogamic union, there is a wide space,
which the concubinate has filled. Legal concubinage or
the concubinate, admitted and practised, as we shall see, in
so many countries, is a sort of free marriage, tolerated by
custom, recognised by law, and co-existing by the side of
monogamic marriage, the rigour of which it palliates. It
was at first a blending of polygamy with monogamy, and
then, undergoing itself an evolution analogous to that which
has caused the adoption by degrees of legal monogamy
among nearly all civilised peoples, it ended by becoming in
its turn monogamic in ancient Rome. I will briefly retrace
its ethnographical history.
In its primitive phase, still very confused, the concubinate
has been simply the conjugal appropriation of slaves,
^ Hisi. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxxi. p. 351.
2 Desmaze, CuriosiUs des anciennes justices ^ etc., p. 289.
AND OF THE FAMILY, i6r
especially of women captured after a victory. These were
part of the rights of the victor; the captives were con-
sidered as booty, and shared in the same way. We have
already seen in Deuteronomy that Moses authorises this
barbarous practice, and that it was habitual also among the
primitive Arabs. The Homeric warriors did the same, as
various passages of the Iliad and Odyssey prove.
I will quote a few of them. To begin with, we find the
old priest Chryses comes to offer Agamemnon a rich
ransom for his daughter, and receives from the king of
kings the brutal reply — " I will not set your daughter free :
old age shall find her in my dwelling at Argos, far from her
native land, weaving linen and sharing my bed. Go, then,
and provoke me not."^
Thersites, speaking to Agamemnon, is still more explicit —
"Son of Atreus, what more dost thou require? What
wilt thou ? Thy tents are full of brass and of many most
beautiful women, that we give first to thee, we, Acheans,
when we take a town."- Elsewhere, Achilles, speaking of
his beloved Briseis, of whom he had been robbed, cries —
"Why have the Atreides led hither this vast army? Is it
not for the sake of the dark-haired Helen ? Are they, then,
the only men who love their wives? Every wise and good
man cherishes and loves his wife. And I also loved
Briseis from my heart, although she was a captive."^
And, a little further on, he makes a clear distinction
between the slave concubine and the legitimate wife,
swearing never to accept as wife a daughter of Agamemnon.
In the Odyssey^ when Ulysses enters unrecognised his
own house, and sees pass before him in the vestibule his
female slaves, laughing and joyous as they go to play with
the suitors, his feelings are not merely those of a lawful
proprietor who is offended, but of a jealous man whose
harem has been violated. At first he is tempted to kill
these women, which he actually does a Httle later, and he
hears "his heart cry out in his bosom, as a bitch, turning
around her young ones, barks at a stranger and tries to
bite him."4
But such customs have prevailed here and there up to
1 Iliad, i. 3 7/,/^ ix.
^ Ibid. ii. * Odyssey, xx. xxii.
II
1 62 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
modern times. In 1548, in Peru, when Pedro de la Gasca
had defeated the party of Pizarro, he distributed amongst
his followers the widows of the colonists who were killed.
At Asterabad, after a small local revolt, Hanway saw the
Persian mngistrates sell fifty women to the soldiers.
In Livonia, after the taking of Narva, Peter the Great
coolly sold to the boyars the wives of the inhabitants.^
Bruce tells us also that in Abyssinia the victors habitually
take possession of the wives of the vanquished.^
But if captives serve or have served somewhat in all
countries to supply the domestic concubinate, they were not
the only ones reserved for this purpose ; female slaves,
however procured, were treated as such. The fact is so
well known that I shall abstain from establishing it by
examples. I only quote one observed at Sackatoo, in
tropical Africa, for it proves clearly that in a barbarous
country, concubinage, or the domestic and servile concu-
binate, does not outrage morality in any way, and is
regarded merely from a commercial point of viev/. At
Sackatoo, when a married man has intimate relations with
one of the female slaves given as dowry to his wife, he need
simply replace her the following day by another slave who
is a virgin and of equal value. On this purely mercenary
condition, the caprice of the husband never occasions any
conflict with the legitimate wife.^
The relative and so-called Christian civilisation of the
Abyssinians accommodates itself very easily to such customs.
By the side of the oizoro^ the proud and indolent matron,
all the great nobles have a troop of pretty servant girls with
sprightly looks.*
The king sets the example, and naturally he goes further
still. If any woman has had the good luck to please him,
he sends an envoy to invite her to live in the palace. This
distinction is received as it should be : the lady adorns
herself as quickly as possible, and obeys without a murmur;
but above these concubines there is the wife or queen, the
itighe.
As far as they can, ecclesiastical dignitaries imitate laic
1 Houzeau, Ettides sur les facuUes mentales des animaux^ t. ii. p.
381. ^ Les Abyssiniennes,Y)- 13.
' Clapperton, Second Voy. , vol. ii. p. 86. ^ Le Jean, ThSodore, ii.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 163
ones. Bruce found one, the Abba-Salam, guardian of the
sacred fire, third personage in authority in the church, who
forced women to yield to him by a threat at the same time
pious and original — the fear of excommunication.
1 have already spoken of the Malagasy concubinage, of
the chief wife \vadi-be) having her own apartment and
privileges, and ruling over the " lesser wives " {vadi-keli),
who live together in equal submission. ^
In short, the domestic concubinate is largely practised
over all central or barbarous Africa.
The ancient half-civilised nations of central America
did not disdain it either. In Peru, as we shall see, the
monogamic regime was obligatory, but only for the poorer
people.
In the Maya nations, the rich and powerful practised the
concubinate without any moderation. ^ At Guatemala, the
parents were filled with solicitude on this point, and when
a young noble married a girl of his own rank who had not
yet attained puberty, they were careful to keep him patient
by giving him a young slave as concubine, whose children,
however, would not be his heirs. ^
In Mexico there were three kinds of concubines : —
1. Young girls not yet arrived at a marriageable age, and
whom the parents usually chose for their sons at the request
of the latter. These unions required neither ceremony nor
contract, but they were often legitimated later, when they
became fruitful.
2. Partially legitimate wives, who were also partially
married, retaining only the characteristic trait of the con-
jugal ceremony — that is, the tying together of the garments
of the half-married ones. These wives could not be repudi-
ated without a motive, but neither they nor their children
could inherit.
3. Lastly, the third class comprehended simple con-
cubines, largely kept by the nobles, and who ranked not
only lower than the legitimate wives, but also than the half-
legitimate ones.* All this system is ingenious, and it is
certainly difficult to state the gradation better.
^ Dupre, Trois Alois a Madagascar, p. 153.
2 Bancroft, Native Races, vol. ii. p. 671.
* /rt'., ibid. vol. ii. p. 664, ■* Id.j ibid. vol. ii. p. 164.
T 64 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
However common the concubinate may be, nowhere
do we find it so wisely combined as in ancient Mexico,
where four sorts of sexual association were recognised —
monogamic marriage, consecrated by law and religion;
semi-legitimate marriage; free and durable union with a
legitimable concubine; and lastly, free love, escaping all
regulation.
I shall proceed soon to take an estimate of these customs,
so different from our own, but it still remains for me to
speak of the concubinate among the superior races,
the yellow and the white. The Mongols of Tartary are
monogamous in principle, in the sense of having one sole
legitimate wife ; but the rich and noble have by the side of
this matron or chief wife, concubines or lesser wives, sub-
ject to the former, who has precedence and rule over them,
who governs the household, and whose children are con-
sidered legitimate and have hereditary rights. ^
In China, the concubinage of the Mongols has been care-
fully regulated, like everything else ; it is naturally, as else-
where, the privilege of the rich and great, who sometimes
keep a veritable harem, and people it by purchasing pretty
girls, scarcely arrived at puberty, from their parents
(Macartney, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxiii. 473).^ According
to the current moraHty of China, the concubinate is blamed
unless the legitimate wife remains sterile for ten or twelve
years.^ Formerly an attempt was made to restrain it, by
only tolerating it for the mandarins and childless quadra-
genarians;* but these severe measures have fallen into
desuetude.
At the present day the Chinese concubinate has no other
check than human respect and public opinion. It is per-
fectly legal. The first or chief wife is an honoured matron;
she commands the lesser wives., who owe her respect and
obedience. If a husband attempts to lower her to the rank
of lesser wife, he incurs the bastonnade with a hundred
strokes of the bamboo, but ninety only if, on the contrary,
1 Hue, Voyage en 7'artan'e, etc., t. i^r. p. 301. — Prejevalsky, t. ler.
p. 69; t. ii. p. 121.
2 Timkowski, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxiii. p. 311.
' Sinibaldo de Mas, La Chine et les puissances Chretiennes^ t. ler.
p. 51. * Hue, V Empire Ckinoise, t. ii. p. 255.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 165
he tries to raise a lesser wife to the supreme rank.^ The
legal concubines, the lesser wives, are subordinate to the
especially legitimate wife, and are forbidden to assume the
dress reserved for her.^ The chief wife is the mistress of
the house ; she is not only the mother of her own children,
but also the putative mother of the children of the lesser
wives. The latter children wear mourning for her and not
for their natural mother; and it is on the legal mother
that they lavish the expressions of their respect, affection,
and obedience.^ We learn from Chinese comedies that
rivalries sometimes break out between the matron and her
fellow wives ; but in general the Chinese woman is so well
trained, so well broken in from infancy, that this is rare
enough, and Chinese wives have even been known to
counsel their husbands to take concubines in the towns
where they may be long detained by business.* It is well
to remember, by the way, that the human brain can retain
all kinds of impressions, and that morality and instincts
strictly result from the nature of the life and education.
The concubinate must actually have been necessary for
man, for we see it practised by all races, and by the white
races as well as the others.
We know that the monarchs of ancient Assyria had, by
the side of the single wife, a good number of concubines,
exactly like the Abyssinian negroes of our own days, or, to
keep to antiquity, like the glorious Solomon.
Polygamous as they are, the modern Arabs do not on
that account abstain from the concubinate. Even at Mecca
all the rich men keep in their houses, with their legitimate
wives, concubines who are generally natives of Abyssinia.
However, if one of these women becomes a mother, the
morality of the country requires her master to raise her to
the rank of legitimate wife." The Mekavy of the middle
and lower class also buy young Abyssinian slaves, teach
them to cook and to sew, make concubines of them, and
re-sell them afterwards advantageously to passing strangers,
^ Pauthier, Chine moderne, p. 238.
2 Milne, Real Life in China^ p. 161.
3 Hue, L Empire Chinoise, t. ii. p. 258.
* Milne, Real Life in China, p 161.
^ Burckhardt, Hist, Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi. p. 148.
1 66 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
especially if they have been sterile;^ in this commerce they
unite -pleasure and profit.
The concubinate is not more rare among the Aryans
than the Semites. The monarchs of ancient Persia had, we
know, a troop of concubines ; and in all the great barbarian
societies, the princely concubinate is only the survival of
old customs.
In India the Brahmins of the middle class often have
one chief wife, and at the same time several domestic
concubines.2
We have seen that in Homeric Greece the concubinate
was a general practice, and in no way censured. In later
times, when Greece was more civilised, the primitive
domestic concubinate disappeared, but there always
remained to alleviate the ennui of monogamic marriage
what we call concubinage, or hetairism, which was openly
practised by Socrates and Pericles. "If," says Lecky on
this subject, "we could imagine a Bossuet or a Fenelon
figuring among the followers of Ninon de Lenclos, and
publicly giving her counsel on the subject of her profes-
sional duties and the means of securing adorers, this would
be hardly less strange than the relation which really existed
between Socrates and the courtesan Theodota."^
All societies which have had any legal form of marriage
have adopted the concubinate, either free or more or less
regulated, but it has nowhere been so precisely legalised as
in ancient Rome. I shall say a few words about it, not
that I intend to walk in the steps of our legists, but in order
to show what assistance ethnographical sociology could be
to the science of written law. By its means alone can the
legal texts, which have been a hundred times studied,
commented on, and criticised in an isolated manner, as if
they related to sociological facts without analogy in the
world, be connected with the general evolution of customs
and institutions.
At the bottom, the Roman concubinate is essentially
similar to the others ; it has merely been legalised with
^ Burckhardt, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxii. p. 148.
^ Sonnerat, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi. p. 349. — /did., Laplace,
t. xviii. p. 433.
^ Lecky, Hist, of Ewopean Morals, vol. ii. p. 280.
AND OF THE FAMILY, J67
more care, and transformed into an institution as regular as
marriage proper. It was, besides, indispensable in a country
where the right of marriage, the jus connubii, was restricted.
The leges Julia and Papia Poppoda also expressly authorise
it.
In short, the Roman concubinate was a free union
between a man and a woman not wishing, or not being
able, to marry.i It was lawful to have as concubine a
woman with whom marriage was forbidden — an adulteress,
an actress, a woman of bad life, or a freed slave. This last
case was the most frequent, most moral, and the most
protected by the laws.
The intention of the parties, revealed either by a formal
declaration, or by the inequality of conditions, determined
between marriage and the concubinate. The dowry was
one of the signs which served to distinguish marriage from
the concubinate.
The Roman concubinate was only, in fact, a marriage of
inferior degree.^ Thus a married man could not take a
concubine. A bachelor could not have several at the same
time.^
The concubinate implied paternity. The child was con-
sidered as a natural child of the father {fiaiuralis^ non
vulgo conceptus)^ though he did not enter the father's
family or become his heir, but followed the status of his
mother.*
The institution of the Roman concubinate evolved
naturally, and its conditions were more and more amelio-
rated.
Under Constantine, the legitimation of children born
from a concubinate was permitted in a general way by
marriage between the father and the woman who had been
his concubine up to the day of marriage. It was necessary,
however, that the man should not have at the time a
legitimate child. But Justinian authorised the legitimation
even in this last case ; he granted also the benefit of legi-
timation to the children of an enfranchised slave marrying
1 Domenget, Instittites de Gams, sec. 63.
2 R. Cubain, Lois civiles de Rome, pp. 188, 189.
3 Domenget, loc. cit, sec. 63.
* R. Cubain, loc. cit. p. 188.
1 68 THE E VOL UTION OF MARK I A GE
her master, provided that the latter had not then any
legitimate children.^
When Christian marriage had definitely abolished the
Roman legal concubinate, custom naturally braved the laws,
and the clergy themselves were the first to set the example,
thus proving the truth of the assertion in Genesis, " It is
not good for man that he should be alone." For a long
time the anointed of the Lord had wives or concubines.
The latter took the place . of the former when, by St.
Boniface, St. Anselm, Hildebrand, etc., and the Councils,
the marriage of priests had become an atrocious crime.
In 117 1, at Canterbury, an investigation proved that the
abbot-elect of St. Augustine had seventy children in a
single village. 2 During many years a tax, called by an
expressive name {culagium), was systematically levied by
various princes on priests living in concubinage. ^ Better
still, it often happened that the lay parishioners obliged
their priests to have concubines, by way of precaution. A
canon of the Council of Palencia (1322) anathematises the
laics who act thus.^ In his History of the Council of
Trenty Sarpi says that many Swiss cantons had adopted this
custom. At the Council of Constance, an important
speaker, Nicolas de Clemangis, declared that it was a
widely-spread practice, and that the laity were firmly
persuaded that the celibacy of the priests was quite
fictitious. Bayle quotes on this point the following
remarkable passage — "Taceo de fornicationibus et adul-
teriis a quibus qui alieni sunt probro cseteris ac ludibrio
esse solent, spadonesque aut sodomitae appellantur ; denique
laici usque adeo persuasum habent nullos caelibes esse, ut
in plerisque parochiis non aliter velint presbyterum tolerare
nisi concubinam habeat, quo vel sic suis sit consultum
uxoribus, quae nee sic quidem usque quaque sunt extra
periculum."
If, leaving aside the middle age and its clergy, we cast our
eyes around us in the most civilised and polished European
societies, we see that the concubinate has indeed dis-
appeared, but that its inferior form, concubinage, is very
' Domenget, Institutes de Gains, sec. 58.
** Lea, History 0/ Sacerdotat Cetibacy {Vh\\Q.de\'(>\\\2i, 1867), p. 296.
" /</., zbid. pp. 274, 292, 422. * /(/., ibid. p. 324.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 169
flourishing. Centuries of legal and religious restraint have
not been able to uproot it, and the rigid monogamic
marriage inscribed in our laws is constantly set at defiance
by our customs. Nearly everywhere the number of births
called illegitimate is on the increase. In France it
constantly progresses —
From 1800 to 1805 . . 4.75 per cent.
„ 1806 to 1810 . . 5.43 „
„ 1821 to 1825 . . 7.16 ,,
Since that time the proportion has oscillated round 7.25 in
France. But in Sweden, from 1776 to 1866, it has risen
from 3. 1 1 per cent, to 9.5. In Saxony the return has been
15.37 in 1862-1864.1
At Paris, according to the calculations of A. Bertillon,
more than a tenth of the couples (40,000) were living in
free union.
In fact, if we interrogate all races, all epochs, and all
countries, we see that the concubinate and concubinage
have flourished, and still flourish, by the side of legal
marriage. One country alone is an exception to this —
Kabyle. But the exception confirms the rule. If we find
in Kabyle neither concubinage nor concubinate, neither
free unions nor natural children, the reason is very simple.
It is that outside marriage no sexual union is tolerated, and
in case of illegitimate birth the mother and child are both
put to death, whilst retaliation falls on the illegal father. 2
The concubinate is therefore, or at least has been till
now, natural to man. One may say, borrowing a locution
from Bossuet, that this is proved by " the experience of all
the centuries." It remains for me now to deduce from
the facts I have enumerated a sketch of the general
evolution which they represent, and to estimate their moral
significance. The evolution is of the simplest. Sexual
union, without restraint or law, has been the commence-
ment. Then the right of the strongest or the richest has
created polygamic households. In these households the
priority was at last bestowed on one wife; but as the
husband did not intend to curb his changing humour, he
kept by the side of the chief spouse either slaves or " lesser
^ M. Block, Europe Politique et Sociale^ pp. 204, 205.
* Hanoteau et Letourneux, La Kabylte, t. ii. p. 148
I70 2^HE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
wives," to whom, in the end, a legal position was accorded.
The monogamic ?-egime making more and more way, the
time came — at Rome, for example — when this disguised
polygamy was no longer tolerated, and the concubinate
became a marriage of the second order, being unable to
co-exist with the other. At length there was a pretence of
abolishing it, and there was no other matrimonial type
legally recognised except the monogamic union, lasting till
the death of the husband or wife. But custom has rebelled
against the law, and monogamy has been more apparent
than real. Prostitution for the least refined, adultery and
free union for the others, have served as safety-valves for
inclinations too inveterate and too violent to be controlled
by legal texts. Has moral purity gained thereby ? Surely
not. Moreover, there is in consequence a whole popula-
tion of illegitimate children, too often abandoned by their
fathers, and suffering from their birth a legal indignity of the
most iniquitous kind. Hence arise a thousand unmerited
sufferings, which legislation must some day or other
remedy, and from which the legal concubinate has spared
China, for example. Doubtless the ideal is a fine thing,
but it is folly to sacrifice the real to it, and to legislate
without taking into account the requirements of human
nature.
CHAPTER XL
PRIMITIVE MONOGAMY.
I. The Monogamy of Inferior Races. — The causes of monogamy —
The gynecocratic theory of Bachofen — Inferior monogamic races —
Races which are polygamic, although superior — Co-existence of
monogamy and pologamy.
II. Monoga7ny in the Ancient States of Central America. — Mono-
gamy of the common people in Mexico and Peru — Civil marriage
in Peru.
III. Monogamy in Ancient ^5"^//.— Gynecocracy in Egypt — Its
raison d^etre.
IV. Monogamy of the Totiaregs and Ahyssittians. — G5mecocracy
among the Touaregs — Fragility of Marriage in Abyssinia.
V. Monogamy among (he Mongols of Asia. — Monogamy in reality in
Thibet — Modified monogamy among the Tartars — Marriage in China
— Matrimonial legislation in China — Conjugal docility of the Chinese
women — Japanese marriage.
VI. Monogamy and Civilisation.
I. The Monogamy of Inferior Races.
After having successively studied the inferior forms of
sexual and conjugal unions, it now remains for us to
investigate the most elevated of them — the one that all,
or nearly all, the great civilised societies have ended by
adopting, at least in appearance, in their legal systems —
monogamy.
Of the great causes which have led to the adoption of
monogamic marriage, the first is the sexual equilibrium
of births as soon as it was no longer disturbed by the
casualties of savage life. Without doubt, in a society
1 7 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
composed sensibly of equal numbers of men and women,
the more powerful and rich may monopolise several
women by the right of the strongest, but in doing so
they wrong the community, and public opinion becomes
hostile to the practice. It is thus that with the Dyaks
the chiefs lose their authority and see their influence
diminish when they indulge in polygamy, although no law
forbids it.^
Another cause quite as powerful which contributed
greatly to lead to legal monogamy was the institution of
individual and hereditary property. L. Morgan does not
hesitate to refer monogamic marriage to this sole origin.
Indeed, in all societies more or less civilised, the desire for
heritable property has quickly assumed a capital import-
ance ; the more or less equitable regulation of questions of
interest, and the anxiety to safeguard these interests, form
the solid basis of all written codes. Now, nearly every-
where the heritage is transmitted according to filiation,
sometimes maternal, sometimes paternal ; but it is only in
the monogamic regifue that the parentage of children is
the same for all in the paternal as well as the maternal
line. 2
Over and above this, moral motives have reinforced the
great influences resulting from the laws of natality and the
all-powerful questions of interest. In theory or ideal, the
life-long union of two beings, giving and devoting them-
selves to each other, engaging to share good and evil
fortune, is surely very noble; but, as we shall see, the
realisation of monogamic marriage has everywhere been
most gross, and it is difficult to refer it to elevated aspira-
tions. Unless we are intoxicated with sentimentaHsm, we
cannot believe, with Bachofen,^ that women, naturally
more noble and more sensitive than their gross companions,
grew tired of primitive hetairism, and, obeying powerful
religious aspirations, enthroned monogamic marriage by
force, becoming by the same stroke heads of the family,
and inaugurating gynecocracy. These Amazonian fables
are very energetically contradicted by history and ethno-
graphy.
1 Herbert Spencer, Sociology^ vol. ii. p. 301.
2 Id.^ ibid. vol. ii. pp. 30 1, 302. * Das Mutterrecht.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 173
Nearly in every age, and nearly in every place, woman, by
reason of her native weakness, has been subordinate to her
companion, often oppressed by him, and her subjection is
the more severe as the civilisation is the more primitive.
It is a great error to believe that in all times and places
monogamic union is the sign and necessary seal of an
advanced civilisation. A number of primitive tribes are
monogamous; certain monkeys are so too. Among the
inferior monogamous races I will mention the Veddahs^ of
the woods of Ceylon, so low in intelligence that they have
not even names for the numbers; the Bochimans of South
Africa,^ scarcely more developed ; the Kurnais of Australia,
among whom monogamy, though not obligatory, is general. ^
Certain aborigines of India,* less primitive, no doubt, than
these very humble specimens of our species, but still very
savage, are also monogamous. These are : the Nagas, who
are contented to make their one wife work very hard ; the
Kisans, who limit themselves to a single wife, and have not
even any concubines;^ the Padans, who set a good example
to more than one superior race, for not only do they blame
polygamy and only practise it exceptionally, but they do
not buy their wives, and leave to their young people the
liberty of marrying as they please.^
The form of marriage is therefore not necessarily con-
nected with the degree of general civilisation. The contrary
is well proved, since very civilised peoples have adopted
polygamy, sometimes openly, and very often in a masked
form. Man is willingly polygamous by instinct, but he
is often forced to bend to the necessities of social existence.
Therefore, in the same country, and in the same race, we
may meet with tribes and ethnic groups very analogous
in everything else, but practising very dissimilar conjugal
forms. It is not rare, for example, to see monogamy and
polygamy elbowing each other. Thus the Redskins are
willingly polygamous, and yet the Pimas, the Cocomari-
copas, and a number of tribes on the banks of the Gilo, of
Colorado and of New Mexico, only marry one wife, whilst
^ Das Mutterrecht. ^ Spencer, Sociology^ vol. ii. p. 299.
' Fison and Howitt, Kainilaroi and Ktiinai.
* Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, P- 4i.
^ Id., ibid. p. 132. ^ Id., ibid. p. 28.
1 74 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
with the Navajos, the Comanches, etc., a man has as many
wives as he can buy.^
With the Zapotecs of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec there
is no polygamy ; it is forbidden.^ On the contrary, with all
the Indians of Columbia polygamy is general ; but the
Otomacs, who are reckoned among the most savage, are
monogamous.^ Necessity makes the law; and although it
may be the legal form of marriage adopted by the superior
races, monogamy does not imply in itself an advanced
civilisation. Besides, the numerous facts that I have
previously quoted abundantly prove that polygamy and
monogamy can coexist in the same society — the former for
the sole use of the ruling classes, the latter for the common
people.
II. Monogamy in the Avcient Stales of Central America.
It was thus in Mexico,* where, among the wives of the
great men, one alone was called lawful ; her children
inherited the paternal title and wealth, to the exclusion of
the others.® In Peru, as in Mexico, the law, with the bold
partiaHty which there is no attempt to disguise in barbarous
societies, permitted polygamy to the Inca and to the
enormous family of the Incas, while exacting a strict mono-
gamy from the poor. State communism, imposed on the
country, regulated the sexual unions somewhat as our rural
proprietors regulate the coupling of their domestic animals.
Peruvian marriage was a civil act, very comparable to
enforced military service in modern Europe. Every year
in the kingdom of Cuzco it was the practice to assemble
together in the squares of the towns and villages all the
individuals of marriageable age, from twenty-four to twenty-
six years for the men, and from eighteen to twenty for the
women. At Cuzco the Inca himself married the persons
of his own family, and always in a public square, by putting
in each other the hands of the different couples. In their
^ Domenech, Voyage Pitioresque dam les Deserts du Nouvean Motide^
p. 510. 2 Bancroft, Native Races ^ etc., vol. ii. p. 661.
^ Mollien, Hist. Univ. dcs Voy., t. xlii. p. 416,
* Fr. Mliller, Allgem. Et/inogr. yQic, p. 263. ^ Id.^ ibid. p. 263.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 175
respective boundaries the chiefs of districts, resembling our
mayors, fulfilled the same function for the persons of their
own rank or of an inferior rank. We are indeed told that the
consent of parents was neoessary, but it was not a question
of the consent of the interested parties.^ Besides, it was
strictly forbidden to marry outside the civil group of which
the individuals formed a part. In this case marriages must
often have been contracted between relatives more or less
near. As to incest, there was little severity, since the Inca
was legally bound to marry one of his sisters, with the
reservation that she might not be his uterine sister,^ and the
same rule was at last extended to the nobles of the empire.
In sanctioning the civil marriage of the country, the
public functionary, the Curaca, administered to the couple
the oath of conjugal fidelity, which, according to P.
Pizzarre, was generally kept ; perhaps because, as we shall
see later, the Peruvian law was not tender to adulterers.
There does not appear to have been the least nuptial
ceremony in Peru. In Mexico, on the contrary, marriage
was celebrated with much show, and it was religious. The
bride was conducted in great pomp to the house of the
bridegroom, who came with his family to meet her. The
two processions mutually perfumed each other with boxes
of burning incense. After this the future spouses sat down
on the same mat, and a priest married them by tying the
robe of the bride to the mantle of the bridegroom. The
precaution had previously been taken to consult the
diviners and augurs. Nuptial festivals followed, in which
the newly-married couple took no part. They lasted four
days, and the marriage was not to be consummated until
their termination.
III. Monogamy in Ancient Egypt.
In the ancient empires of central America the position
of the wife was very subordinate ; — this is an ordinary fact
in barbarous countries. But in this respect, a singular
exception seems to have existed in ancient Egypt, which
^ W. Prescott, Hist, of the Conq. of Pertt^ vol. i. p. I2i. — Garcilaso
de la Vega, Covi de los Incas, pp. 25, 113, 218. ^ j^ ^ ^y,^-^^^
176 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
nevertheless offers so many analogies to ancient Peru.
This anomaly must be described with some details, because
the believers in a prehistoric gynecocracy complacently rely
on it to support their theory.
The general assertions of the writers of antiquity on this
point have been confirmed by the demotic deeds recently
deciphered. I shall briefly quote both.
Let us listen first to Herodotus on the subject of Egyptian
women: "They have established laws and customs opposite,
for the most part, to those of the rest of mankind. With
them the women go to market and traffic ; the men stay at
home and weave. . . . The men carry burdens on the head,
the women on the shoulders. . . . The boys are never
forced to maintain their parents unless they wish to do so ;
the girls are obliged to, even if they do not wish it.''^ From
this last rule it is already logical to infer that the women
possessed and inherited property, which is not ordinary in
primitive monarchies. Herodotus adds that "no woman
performs sacerdotal duties towards a divinity of either sex ;
the priests of all the divinities are men."^ In a country so
profoundly religious this interdict clearly proves that in
public opinion, at least, the woman was held to be an
inferior being. Besides, polygamy was permitted in Egypt,
which suffices of itself to exclude the idea of feminine
domination in the family. However, Herodotus relates
that many Egyptians, especially "those that dwelt on the
marshes," have, like the Greeks, adopted monogamy.^
Diodorus goes further than Herodotus. He affirms that
in the Egyptian family it is the man who is subjected
to the woman : " Contrary to the received usage of other
nations, the laws permit the Egyptians to marry their
sisters, after the example of Osiris and Isis. The latter, in
fact, having cohabited with her brother Osiris, swore, after
his death, never to suffer the approach of any man, pursued
the murderer, governed according to the laws, and loaded
men with benefits. All this explains why the queen receives
more power and respect than the king, and why, among
private individuals, the woman rules over the man, and that
it is stipulated between married couples, by the terms of the
dowry-contract, that the man shall obey the woman."^
^ Herodotus, bk. ii. p. 35. ^ /r/., bk. ii. p. 42. ^ Diodorus, bk. i. p. 27.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 177
The assertion of Diodorus seems at first sight inadmis-
sible ; nevertheless, the demotic deeds, in a measure, con-
firm it. If the family subjection of the man was not general
in Egypt, at least it existed in a number of cases. In
reality, the Egyptian law did not deal with marriages, and
the interested parties contracted them at their will. Now,
in virtue of the law of matriarchal inheritance, the woman
was often richer than the man. She could therefore dictate
how the marriage contract should be drawn up. The con
jugal union was manifestly before every thing a commercial
agreement, since the word husband does not appear in
the documents until after the reign of Philopator.^ The
Egyptian woman generally married under the regime of the
separate possession of property; she did not change her
condition, and preserved the right of making contracts
without authorisation; she remained absolute mistress
of her dowry. The contract also specified the sums
that the husband was to pay to his wife, either as nuptial
gift, or as annual pension, or as compensation in case of
divorce.^
Sometimes even, by acts subsequent to marriage, the
Egyptian wife could succeed in completely dispossessing
her husband, and therefore the latter was careful to stipulate,
as a precaution, that his wife should take care of him during
his life, and pay the expenses of his burial and tomb.^
To sum up, it appears, indeed, that in ancient Egypt no
marital power existed, at least in the families of private
individuals.
This state of things lasted till the time of Philopator, who,
in the fourth year of his reign, established the pre-eminence
of the husband in the family by deciding that thenceforth
all the transfers of property made by the wife should be
authorised by the husband.'*
These facts, certainly very curious, have seemed decisive to
a number of sociologists who, with Bachofen, like to believe
that in prehistoric times there has existed a gynecocratic
period — an age of gold, when women reigned as mistresses,
and of which the mythic Amazons were a survival. The
very incomplete accounts that we possess of the condition
^ Revillout, Revue egyptiennCy 1880.
2 Id., ibid. « Id., ibid. * Id., ibid.
12
178 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
and role of woman in Egypt do not seem to me to warrant
the importance that is attached to them.
In barbarous, as in civilised societies, there are three
great means of influence — rehgion, mihtary power, and
money. In ancient Egypt, Diodorus tells us, woman was
judged unworthy of the priesthood, and therefore inferior
from a rehgious point of view. She did not possess any
warlike power. Neither monuments, nor writings, nor
traditions make any mention of female warriors, analogous
either to the Amazons of fable or those of the king of
Dahomey. There remains the influence of money, doubt-
less an enormous influence in all societies where it can
accumulate in the hands of certain individuals to the detri-
ment of others. Now, everything proves that if in ancient
Egypt women have more or less enjoyed great independence,
and have even abused it so as to subject their husbands,
they obtained it simply by the power of money.
Evidently the organisation of property and the laws of
succession in Egypt permitted women to be rich or to
become so, and in consequence to domineer over husbands
less favoured in this respect. We shall see that in ancient
Greece and Rome the same causes produced the same
effects. Is it even necessary to go to ancient times to
seek examples of feminine emancipation, even very insolent
emancipation, based only on the dowry or fortune? We
also have an abundance of plutocratic Amazons. But these
facts are not incompatible with the legal subjection of
women. If they seem to have been very common in
ancient Egypt, it is because legislation did not meddle with
marriage ; and it must also be remembered that the demotic
documents only mention, as is natural, the contracts of the
upper or middle classes, the propertied classes, which, of
course, are a minority.
So little was gynecocracy inscribed in the laws and
customs of Egypt that a simple royal decree depriving
women of the disposition of their property sufficed to cast
them into the subordinate rank which they have occupied
until the present time in all human societies, but which,
perhaps, they will not always occupy.
Nevertheless, it is a noteworthy fact that in a society so
rigid as the Egyptian, a minority of women should have
AND OF THE FAMILY, 179
been able to obtain legally a great amount of independence;
it constitutes a remarkable exception, and may, perhaps,
be referred to the influence of the Berber races, which,
according to Egyptian traditions themselves, played an
important part in the foundation of primitive Egypt.
IV. The Monogamy of the Touaregs and Abyssinians.
We have already seen that our contemporary Kabyles,
although of Berber origin, make the yoke of their wives very
hard ; but it may be admitted that, in this respect, they
have been influenced by numerous conquerors. A certain
emancipation of women seems to be a characteristic trait of
Berber societies. Even at the present time, among the
Touaregs of the Sahara, who have preserved their independ-
ence and the purity of their race better than the Kabyles,
the rich woman enjoys a social position analogous to that of
the ladies of ancient Egypt.
In spite of the Mussulman law, the Targui woman
practically imposes monogamy on the man. She would
immediately seek a divorce if her husband attempted to
give her a rival.
Amongst the Touaregs filiation is still maternal, and
confers the rank. " The child follows the blood of the
mother;" the son of a slave or serf father and a noble
woman is noble. " It is the womb which dyes the child,"
they say in their primitive language.^ " Absolute mistress
of her fortune, her actions, and her children, who belong to
her and bear her name, the Targui lady goes where she will
and exercises a real authority."^ She seldom marries
before the age of twenty, and she marries as she pleases, the
fathers only intervening to prevent mesalliances. She eats
with her husband, to whom, however, she owes obedience,
and who can kill her in case of adultery. — (Duveyrier,
339-430-)
The Targui women know how to read and write in
greater numbers than the men. It is well known, besides,
that rudimentary instruction in reading and writing is widely
spread among the Mahometan population of North Africa.
1 Duveyrier, ToAareg du Nord, 337. 2 /j ^ ^f,^^^
1 8o THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
It is to the Targui ladies, says Duveyrier, that is due the
preservation of the ancient Lybian and ancient Berber
writing.^
Leaving domestic work to their slaves, the Targui ladies
occupy themselves with reading, writing, music, and
embroidery;^ they live as intelligent aristocrats.
" The ladies of the tribe of the Ifoghas are renowned,"
says again Duveyrier, "for their savoir-vivre and their musical
talent ; they know how to ride mehari better than all their
rivals. Secure in their cages, they can ride races with the
most intrepid cavaliers, if one may give this name to riders
on dromedaries; in order, also, to keep themselves in
practice in this kind of riding, they meet to take short trips
together, going wherever they like without the escort of any
man." 3 Targui gallantry has preserved for the women
of the tribe of Imanan, who are descended from the
ancient sultans, the title of royal women {timanokaliti) on
account of their beauty and their superiority in the art of
music.
They often give concerts, to which the men come from
long distances decked out like male ostriches. In these
concerts the women sing while accompanying themselves on
the tambourine and a sort of violin or rebiza. They are
much sought after in marriage, because of the title of cherif
which they confer on their children."^
The Targui lady often sings in the evenings, improvising
and accompanying herself on the rebaza. If she is married,
says Duveyrier, she is honoured all the more in proportion
to the number of her masculine friends, but she must not
show preference to any one of them. The lady may
embroider on the cloak, or write on the shield of her
chevalier, verses in his praise and wishes for his good
fortune. Her friend may, without being censured, cut the
name of the lady on the rocks or chant her virtues.
*' Friends of different sexes," say the Touaregs, "are for the
eyes and the heart, and not for the bed only, as among the
Arabs." 5
Such customs as these indicate delicate instincts which
^ Duveyrier, Toiiareg du Nord^ p. 387. ^ Id.^ ibid. p. 430.
' /</., loc. cit. p. 362.
•*/</., ibid. pp. 345, 347. •* Id., loc. cit. p. 429.
AND OF THE FAMILY, i8i
are absolutely foreign to the Arabs and to the Kabyles.
They strongly remind us of the times of our southern
troubadours, and of the cours d'a7nour^ which were the
quintessence of chivalry. But it is important to notice
that with the Touaregs, as with the Provencals and the
Acquitainers of the twelfth century, who may well have had
Berber ancestors, these diversions and gallantries were for
aristocrats and princes, and in no way prevented the general
slavery of women. These customs are curious ; they show
a degree of moral nobility, and are worthy of note, but at
the same time we must guard against according them a
general value which they do not possess. It is important,
also, to remark that the independence of the Berber lady,
who is saved the trouble of grinding the corn, of cooking,
etc., rests on the magic power of money. "By means
of accumulation," says Duveyrier, " the greatest part of the
fortune is in the hands of women " — (p. 339). In short, it
is only by an extraordinary power of illusion that we can
recognise in the relatively favourable situation of the Berber
lady a case of Amazonian gynecocracy.
In Abyssinia, which also is not a gynecocratic country,
the women enjoy very great liberty ; their conduct is very
dissolute, and their marriage very easily broken. Bruce,
who first made known to us these curious customs, likens
them to those of ancient Egypt. " In Abyssinia," he says,
"the women live as if they were common to every one.
They pretend, however, to belong, by principle, to one
man only when they marry, but they do not act up to it."^
Divorce is so easy in Abyssinia that Bruce says he has seen
a woman surrounded by seven former husbands. ^ The
most distinguished Abyssinian ladies have cicisbei, after the
Italian fashion of old times. At their feasts, according to
Bruce again, the lovers yield themselves publicly to each
other. Their neighbours at table simply take care to hide
them very imperfectly by improvising with their cloaks a
waving partition.^ The young women of the province of
Samen, says Bruce, came alone to trade with the travellers.
^ Bruce, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xxiii. p. 358.
* Bruce, Travels, etc., vol. iv. p. 487. — A. d'Abbadie, Douze am
dans la haute nthiopie, t. ler. pp. icx), 128.
' Bruce, Hist. Univ. des Vqy., t. xxiii. p. 365.
1 8 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
"They were hard in their bargains, with the exception of
one only, in which they seemed very reasonable and very
generous. They agreed to give rather than sell their
favours, alleging that long solicitations on one side and
refusals on the other wasted time that might be more
agreeably employed."^ It is clear from this that the
monogamic r'egivie of the Abyssinians is more apparent than
real, that it is much modified by the extreme cicisbeism,
by the use of concubines, of which I have already spoken,
and lastly by the abuse of divorce, turning it into a
successive polygamy.
V. Monogamy af?iong the Mongols of Asia.
Among the Asiatic Mongols monogamy is also not very
strict. In Thibetan Himalaya polyandry seems to pre-
dominate. It is not rare, either, in Thibet proper, where,
on the other hand, polygamy is not forbidden, for there is
no rigid legislation in regard to marriage. Besides, in these
countries, as in many others, girls enjoy complete liberty
before marriage, and they use it without suffering at all in
reputation. 2
It is singular that in Lamaic Thibet, in full theocracy, in
a country where the prayers and the practices of religion
enter into nearly all the actions of civil life, marriage
escapes all ecclesiastical interference. In fact, the priests
have nothing to do with it, and all the matrimonial cere-
mony, which is purely laic, consists in a simple mutual
engagement entered into by the interested parties before
witnesses.^
This laic anarchy of marriage in Thibet must no doubt
be attributed to Lamaic bigotry itself The Lamas avoid
women, holding marriage in contempt, and all the great
functionaries, as well as many Thibetans of the other
classes, are of the same opinion.'* Religion does not
concern herself with it; she disdains it, as in Egypt,
which seems to show that a sufficient degree of religious
1 Bruce, loc. ciL^ t. xxiii. p. 255.
* Turner, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t, xxxi. p. 437.
» Id.t ibid. t. xxxi. pp. 437, 454- * -^^m ^^i^' P- 435-
AND OF THE FAMILY. 183
madness hinders theocratic legislators from thinking of civil
institutions.
But in regard to marriage, both civil and religious laws
are always subordinate to the necessities resulting from the
social condition and the proportion of the sexes. In
Thibet, therefore, in spite of the entire liberty allowed
to individuals, the marriage of the greatest number is
monogamic quite as much as if the law had prescribed it.^
In Tartary the nomad Mongols have adopted for their
matrimonial type monogamy tempered by the domestic
concubinate. I have spoken previously of their "lesser
wives," of their marriage by purchase with the ceremonial
of capture. I need not, therefore, repeat all this I will
only note in passing that their girls have also very loose
manners, which are not always corrected by marriage.^
According to one of the most recent explorers of Mongolia,
the proportion of the sexes in that country is the inverse of
that in Europe. The women are much less numerous than
the men. This may probably be the principal reason of
the celibacy of the Lamas, and of the real monogamy of
the greater number of laymen who do not belong to the
aristocracy.^
Chinese marriage essentially resembles Mongol marriage,
but with a more settled ritual and a more uniform legisla-
tion. It is also monogamic, with the palliative of the
concubinate, the " lesser wives " of whom I have already
spoken.* Besides this, the subjection of women in China
is extreme. When a Chinaman has only daughters he is
said to have no children.*^ The Chinese woman is sub-
missive in all states, as a daughter to her parents, as a wife
to her husband, and as a widow to her sons, especially to
her eldest son.« (Pauthier, Chine Moderne^ p. 239). The
young Chinese girl has not even an idea that she may be
consulted in the choice of a husband. ' She is bought from
^ Lettres idifiantes, t. xv. p. 200.
2 Pr^jevalsky, Mongolia, t. ler- p. 69. — Hue, Tartarte, t. I^r. p. 301.
3 Id., ibid. t. ler. p. 71.
* Hue, V Empire chmois, t. ii. p. 258. — Sinibaldo de Mas, Chine et
puissances Chritiennes, t. ler. p. 51.
^ Duhaut Cily, Voyage autour du monde, t. ii. p. 369.
* Milne, Real Life m China, p. 159. ^ Id., ibid. p. 159.
1 84 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
her parents, and a part of the sum agreed on is paid when
the contract is signed. ^ As in Mongoha. matrimonial
arrangements are often settled, not only from the infancy of
the future wife and husband, but even before their birth, on
the hypothesis of a difference of sex. 2 These agreements
are made by the fathers and mothers, or, in default of them,
by the grandparents or nearest relatives.^ Lastly, the
women are excluded by law from inheritance, and kept as
much as possible in seclusion, so that they scarcely see
any one besides their parents.^ By marrying, the young
Chinese girl simply changes masters. " The bride," says
a Chinese author, " ought only to be a shadow and an echo
in the house." The married woman eats neither with her
husband nor with her male children ; she waits at table in
silence, lights the pipes, must be content with the coarsest
food, and has not even the right to touch what her son
leaves.*
China is a country of very ancient civilisation, where the
laws and rites have regulated everything, and consequently
there exists a whole legislation with regard to marriage.
To begin with, conjugal union is forbidden between
persons having the same family name,^ and I shall have to
return to this circumstance.
As in ancient Rome, the law prohibits marriage between
slaves and free persons.^ It absolutely forbids marriage to
the priests of Fo^ and to those of the tao sect.^ It orders
public functionaries not to contract marriage with actresses,
comedians, or musicians. ^^ It seems that in ancient times,
in China as in Greco-Latin antiquity, the father had the
excessive right to unmarry his daughter, for to remedy this
abuse the Chinese law pronounces the punishment of a
hundred strokes of bamboo on the father-in-law who should
send away his son-in-law in order to re-marry his daughter
to another.ii Tbe Chinese widow, no longer belonging to
her original family, but to the family of her husband, can
^ Hue, Empire chinoiSy t. ii. p. 255. ' Milne, loc. cit. p. 151.
3 Hue, loc. cit. p. 255.
* G. E. Simon, Lafamille chinoise, Nouvelle Revue, 1883.
^ Milne, loc. cit. p. 154. ^ Hue, Empire chinois, t. ler. p. 268.
' Pauihier, Chine Moderne, p. 238. ^ Id., ibid. p. 218.
9 Id., ibid. 10 Jd., ibid. " Id., ibid. p. 288.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 185
be re-married by the latter. ^ Moreover, the contract of
betrothal concluded between the parents having a legal
value, the family of the betrothed man who dies before
the conclusion of the marriage has the right to marry the
bereaved fiancee ^ or false widow,^ who, by-the-bye, is much
honoured when she has the courage to devote herself to a
celibate life.^
We have seen that Chinese women are excluded from
inheritance; they have a right, however, in marrying, to a
small dowry, either in money or furniture, but the value of
it is optional. It must be at least a chest of drawers or a
small trousseau^ which the bridegroom is obliged to supply
if the parents fail to do so. Moreover, he must also give
the nuptial bed.'* Primitive and even cruel as are the
conditions and rules of Chinese marriage, the Chinese
women submit to them not only without murmuring, but
with a sort of devotion, broken in as they are by a long
ancestral education. And besides, for the Chinese in
general, it is a strict duty to marry, from a triple point of
view — social, political, and religious. Everybody marries in
the Celestial Empire, and the number of male celibates
over twenty-four years of age is quite insignificant. If a
suitable opportunity of marriage does not present itself, the
parents, who are sovereign arbiters in this matter, do not
hesitate to go to an orphanage to seek a son or daughter-in-
law.^
In Japan, during the feudal age, the end of which we are
now witnessing, marriage was nearly identical with Chinese
marriage, and there would be nothing to say about it in
particular, if during the last few years the fever of reforma-
tion, with which Japan is carried away, had not happily
modified marriage, at least in practice, by giving the young
girl a voice in the matter,^ and by awakening in some
Japanese consciences doubts on the subject of the prostitu-
tion of young girls. At the present moment, everything in
Japan is being Europeanised, and the adaptation of our Civil
Code to the old Japanese customs is only a question of time.
^ E. Simon, Famille Chinoise^ Nouvelle Revue, 1883.
2 /(f., ibid. 4 E. Simon, loc. cit.
3 Milne, loc. cit. p. 153. ^ Id.^ ibid.
" Masana Maeda, La Sociite iaponaise, in Revue Scieniifique, 1878.
1 86 THE E VOL VTION OF MARRIA GE
VI. Monogamy and Civilisation.
The foregoing facts are sufficiently numerous to enable
us to deduce certain conclusions from them. These facts,
taken as they are from nearly all the non-Aryan races,
prove in the first place that the monogamic regif?ie is in no
way the appanage of the superior races, for among the
lowest of human races some are monogamic. In regard to
marriage, we find that primordial conditions impose the
various forms of sexual union, quite independently of the
caprice of individuals, or of the degree of culture and social
development.
In attempting to estimate the moral worth of a people, a
race, or a civilisation, we are much more enlightened by the
position given to woman than by the legal type of the con-
jugal union. This type, besides, is usually more apparent
than real. In many civilisations, both dead and living,
legal monogamy has for its chief object the regulation
of succession and the division of property. With much
naivete and effrontery, many legislators have sanctioned
polygamy in reality by recognising the domestic concubinate
by the side of legal monogamy. As for the position of the
wife who is reputed to be specially legitimate, it is often
much inferior to that enjoyed by the woman who lives
under other conjugal regimes which are theoretically less
elevated. In the greater number of countries more or less
monogamic, which I have just passed in review, woman,
whether married or not, has been subjected to extreme
subordination. In an exceptional case she acquires a
certain independence, where, thanks to maternal inheritance,
she can become possessed of personal or real estate. It is
to money alone, and not to the moralising influence of
monogamy, that woman in barbarous countries owes the
power of attaining a certain independence, for the two
peoples who have granted it to her, the Egyptians in
antiquity and the Touaregs of our own day, lived or live
under a legislation which authorises polygamy. It is import-
ant also to notice that in the valley of the Nile, and in the
Sahara, feminine emancipation is only the privilege of those
women who belong to the ruling and propertied classes.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 187
Upon the whole, in every country and in every time,
woman, organically weaker than man, has been more or less
enslaved by him, unless in the case where legislation has
allowed her to use an artificial force to serve her as a shield.
This fictitious force, before which virile brutality has lowered
its flag, has been money, wherever the laws regulating
succession have permitted women to raise themselves to the
dignity of proprietors.
A similar lesson will be given us by the study of the
monogamic regime among the white races of Asia and of
Europe. There also we shall see riches serve woman as a
defensive, and sometimes even offensive weapon, against
the severity of laws and customs.
CHAPTER XII.
HEBREW AND ARYAN MONOGAMY.
I. Monogamy of the Races called Superior, — The monogamic ideal
and the monogamic reality.
II. Hebrew Marriage. — Monogamy and concubinage — Position of
the wife — The virtuous woman of the Book of Proverbs— Obligatory
virginity— The levirate.
III. Marriage in Persia and Ancient India, — Marriage in the Avesta
— Marriage in India — General monogamy — Extreme subjection of the
wife — Purchase of the wife — Matrimonial prohibitions— The ideal
spouse — Marriage in modern India.
IV. Marriage in Ancient Greece. — Wives and concubines — Low posi-
tion of the wife — Marriage in Sparta — Celibacy chastised — The young
Greek girl assimilated to a thing — Dowry — The wife emancipated by
money.
V. Marriage in Ancient Rome. — Marriages of children — Relative
liberty of the Roman woman — The Patria potestas—Tht Mamis —
Three kinds of marriage — The rights of the husband — The case of Gate
the Elder — They'w^ connubii—The dowry and its effects.
VI. Barbarous Marriage and Christian Marriage. — Marriage among
the Germans in the Middle Ages, among the Saxons of England —
Marriage according to Christianity.
I. Monogamy of the Races called Superior.
After a long journey of exploration through the inferior
forms of the sexual union amongst mankind, we have in the
preceding chapter begun the study of monogamy, which all
the superior races have more or less adopted in their legis-
ation.
It is impossible to deny that monogamy is theoretically
THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE, 1 89
nobler than the other matrimonial forms. Nothing can be
more beautiful than the union of two intelligent and refined
beings freely associating their lives after ripe reflection " for
better, for worse," as the marriage service of England has it.
But the reality is often very different from this poetic ideal.
Even amongst the most highly civilised peoples, this spon-
taneous, disinterested, devoted union, based on moral and
intellectual sympathies, is very rare; it does not exist in
civilisations still partly barbarous, whose monogamy easily
accommodates itself to the subjection of women, however
extreme. We shall see that it is so, in studying this matri-
monial type amongst the Hebrews at first, and afterwards
amongst the Aryan races, that is to say, amongst the human
types which are reputed /^r excellence Superior.
II. Hebrew Marriage,
The Hebrews seem to have been alone among the
Semites in adopting monogamy, at least in general practice.
Moreover, the Bible tells us that concubinage was not
forbidden to God's chosen people. In speaking of the
daughter sold by her father to a rich man, the book of
Exodus used language sufficiently explicit on this point —
" If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to
himself, then shall he let her be redeemed : to sell her unto
a strange nation he shall have no power. And if he have
betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the
manner of daughters. But if he take to him another
wife, her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall
he not diminish."^ The book of Genesis indeed tells us
that " a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall
cleave unto his wife ; and they twain shall be one flesh ; "^
but this famous verse seems to indicate the violenceof the
love rather than monogamic and indissoluble marriage.
Doubtless the subjection of the Jewish woman was not
extreme, as it is in Kabyle ; it was, however, very great.
Her consent to marriage was necessary, it is true, when she
had reached majority, but she was all the same sold to
her husband. We must note, nevertheless, that she had
^ Exodus, xxi. 8-10. 2 Genesis, ii. 24,
I90 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
a recognised right of ownership, and that the property of
the husband was security for that of the wife and for her
dowry ; but the husband none the less held the wife in
strict dependence. The song of the virtuous woman at the
end of Proverbs is generally quoted as a sublime portrait of
the Jewish wife by all those who are still hypnotised by the
prestige of the so-called holy books. However, in reading
these celebrated verses with an unprejudiced mind, we
hardly find more than the portrait of a laborious servant,
busy and grasping — '*She seeketh wool and flax, and
worketh willingly with her hands. . . . She riseth while it is
yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion
to her maidens. She considereth a field, and buyeth it ;
with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard. She
girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her
arms. . . . Her candle goeth not out by night. . . . She
eateth not the bread of idleness." We shall see later that
the wife, though she might gain much money, which seems
to have been the ideal of the Hebrew husband according to
the Proverbs, was repudiable at will, with no other reason
than the caprice of the master who had bought her. Finally,
and this is much more severe, she was always obliged to
be able to prove, cloths in hand, that she was a virgin at
the moment of her marriage, and this under pain of being
stoned. Let us listen to the sacred book — " If any man
take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her . . ." and
seeking a pretext to repudiate her, he imputes to her a
shameful crime, saying, " I took this woman, and when 1
came to her, I found her not a maid . . . her father and
mother shall take her and shall represent to the elders of
the city in the gate the tokens of the damsel's virginity."
Of what kind were these proofs ? The following verses
tell us, " They shall spread the cloth before the elders of
the city. And the elders of that city shall take that man
and chastise him, and they shall amerce him in an hundred
shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the
damsel. . . . But if this thing be true, and the tokens of
virginity be not found for the damsel, then they shall bring
out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the
men of the city shall stone her with stones that she die ;
because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore
AND OF THE FAMIL K
191
in her father's house; so shalt thou put evil away from
among you."^ If we add to the preceding, that by the law
of levirate, the childless widow, whether she wished or not,
was awarded to her brother-in-law, we shall be enlightened
as to the unenviable position of the married woman under
the Hebrew law.
III. Marriage in Persia and Ancient India.
Of the conjugal customs of the ancient Persians we
know little. The only formal prescription that we find in
the Avesta is a strict prohibition against man-ying an
infidel. The Mazdean who commits such a crime troubles
the whole universe : " he changes to mud a third of the
rivers that rush down the mountain sides ; he withers a
third of the growth of trees and of herbs which cover the
earth ; he takes from pure men a third of their good
thoughts, of their good words, of their good actions ; he is
more noxious than serpents and wolves. "^
On Indian marriage we are better informed, at first by
the Code of Manu, and then by modern travellers. India
has early practised mitigated monogamy. Polygamy and
concubinage were the privilege of the Brahmins and rich
Kchatriyas ; but the mass of the nation generally lived in
monogamy, though nevertheless imposing on the married
woman a most humiliating position. Manu proclaims
aloud the necessary dependence and incurable inferiority
of the weaker sex : " If women were not guarded, they
would bring misfortune to two families." " Manu has
bestowed on women the love of their bed, of their seat,
and of adornment, concupiscence, anger, bad inclinations,
the desire to do evil, perversity."^ " A little girl, a young
woman, and an old woman ought never to do anything of
their own will, even in their own house." "During her
childhood a woman depends on her father; during her
youth, on her husband ; her husband being dead, on her
sons ; if she has no sons, on the near relatives of her
husband ; or in default of them, on those of her father ; if
^ Deut., ch. xxii., ver. 13-21. ^ Hovelacque, L Avesta, p. 396.
^ Code of Manu, book ix. pp. 517.
192 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
she has no paternal relatives, on the sovereign. A woman
ought never to have her own way."^
Given such an utter subordination of woman, it is self-
evident that there would be no question of her choosing a
husband. It is the father's duty to marry his daughter; and
he need not wait till she has reached puberty: "A father
must give his daughter in marriage to a young man of
agreeable appearance, and of the same rank, according to
the law, although she may not have attained the age of
eight years, at which he ought to marry her."^. However,
if the father neglects the prime duty of marrying his
daughter, the law ordains that the latter shall proceed to do
it. Marriage is a sacred duty : " Let a girl, although adult,
wait three years; but after that period, let her choose a
husband of the same rank as herself."^ The girl is then
free, and her husband in marrying her owes no payment to
the father: "The father has lost all authority over his
daughter in delaying for her the time of becoming a
mother."* Girls cannot be married too soon ; at eight
years old they are given a husband of twenty-eight; at
twelve years, a man of thirty.^ Some verses, in contradiction
to that which I have just now quoted, forbid the father
from receiving any gratuity whatever in marrying his
daughter, not even a cow or a bull : " All gratuity, small or
large, constitutes a sale."*^ But the prohibition to sell his
daughter, though still very little observed, is evidently of
posterior date ; and in India, as in all other countries, the
daughter has been esteemed at first as merchandise. The
law imposes at times very curious restrictions on a man who
is intending to marry. He must not take a girl with red
hair, or bearing the name of a constellation, of a river, a
bird, or a serpent.'' He must not, under pain of hell, marry
before his elder brother,^ Above all, he must not marry
below his rank. To marry a woman belonging to the servile
class is, for the Brahmin or the Kchatriya, an enormous
crime, which lowers him to the rank of the Soudras.*^ It is
an unpardonable sin : " For him who drinks the foam of
1 Codeo/Manu, v. pp. 147, 148. ^ Ibid. iii. pp. 51, 53.
2 Ibid. ' Ibid. ix. p. 90. ^ Ibid, book iii.
* Ibid. p. 93. ^ Ibid, book iii. pp. 1 7 1, 172.
^ Ibid. p. 94. ^ Ibid. pp. 14, 15.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 193
the lips of a Soudra, or who has a child by her, there is no
expiation declared by the la\v."i He descends to the in-
fernal abode, and his son loses caste. As for the son of a
Brahmanic woman and a Soudra, he is a Tchandala, the
vilest of mortals.2 The young Brahmin, after having
received the authorisation of his spiritual director, and
having purified himself by a bath, must marry a woman of
his own class, who is well made, who has a fine down over
her body, fine hair, small teeth, limbs of a charming sweet-
ness, and the graceful movement of a swan or a young
elephant. 2 But, however the wife may be chosen, she is
held in a state of servile submission. "A wife," says the
Code, "can never be set free from the authority of her
husband ; neither by sale nor by desertion." " Once only
a young girl is given in marriage ; once only the father says,
I give her."*
Taken as a whole, these antique precepts are still
observed in India. In general, monogamy prevails, but
the married woman is none the less kept in a state of abject
subjection. It is shameful, says Somerset, for a virtuous
woman to know how to read and dance; these futile
accomplishments are left to the bayadere. " Servant,
slave," are the habitual appellations used by the husband
in addressing his wife, who replies by saying " Master, lord,''
who must take care not to call her husband by his name,"
and has not the right to sit at his table.^ It is the parents
who negotiate the marriage, without any regard to the tastes
of the future husband and wife, and thinking only of rank
and fortune.^ A daughter is always married, or rather sold,
in infancy, often to a sexagenarian Brahmin, and before
she is of age to manifest any preference.®
These accounts, which are as authentic as possible,
enable us to estimate the Hindoo marriage. However
monogamic it may generally be, it is very inferior from a
moral point of view. The tyrannical right left to the
husband, his unlimited power, the servitude of the wife,
^ Code of Manu, book iii. p. 19. ^ Jbid. pp. 4-10.
^ Jbid. p. 17. * Ibid. ix. pp. 46, 47.
^ Somerset, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xxxi. p. 352.
* /</., ibid. p. 341. ^ Id., ibid. p. 350.
8 Id.y ibid. p. 350. — Lett res edifiantes^ t. x. p. 23.
13
1 94 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
yielded or negotiated in infancy, the pride of caste and the
care for wealth outweighing all other considerations, pro-
claim loudly enough that matrimonial legislation in India
has been the regulation, for the man's profit only, of
instincts of a very low order.
IV. Marriage in Ancient Greece.
In primitive Greece the position of woman was little
better. On one hand, the Iliad tells us that the epithet
"woman" thrown at a man was the most contemptuous
insult '^ on the other hand, we have seen that the girl was
purchased by the husband, either by presents or by services
rendered to the father f in short, that the husband might
have domestic concubines with the sole reservation that
their children did not inherit from him.* In the first chant
of the Odyssey the severe apostrophe of Telemachus to his
mother proves also that in the absence of the husband the
wife was humbly submissive to her sons. " Go to thy
chamber ; attend to thy work ; turn the spinning wheel ;
weave the linen \ see that thy servants do their tasks.
Speech belongs to men, and especially to me, who am the
master here."* Penelope, hke a well-trained woman,
meekly allows herself to be silenced and obeys, " bearing in
her mind the sage discourse of her son."
In later times the virtuous woman was shut up in the
gyneceum, where she could only receive her parents or the
friends authorised by her husband." She was not even
admitted to festivities. But, while the wife was semi-
cloistered in the conjugal house, the husband could at will
frequent and court the hetairae (Iratpat), and the strangers
(^emt) with whom the citizens of Athens had not the jus
connubii^ and who were not admitted like the well-born or
native Athenian woman (eXevOepa) to the thesmophors.*
It is evident that at Athens primitive marriage was
regulated by the man with very little heed to the tastes
or preferences of the woman. At Sparta it was the
^ J/t'ad, ii., vii., viii, ' Odyssey, xiv.
2 Goguet, On^. des Lois, t. ii. p. 60. ^ Ibid. i.
" Cavallotti, La Sposa di Metiecle (notes), p. 246. * Id., ibid, p. 239.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 195
sentiment of strict and zealous patriotism which inspired
Lycurgus in all his regulations regarding marriage. The
obligation of marriage was legal, like the military service.
The young men were attracted to it by making them assist
at the gymnastic exercises of naked young girls. "This
was an incentive to marriage, and, to use Plato's expression,
drew them almost as necessarily by the attraction of love
as a geometrical conclusion is drawn from the premises. "^
In the supreme interest of population, love was forced on
young men, but it was for the sake of fertility. The young
married couple were not allowed to meet except in secret
until the first pregnancy.^ It was praiseworthy for an old
husband to lend his young wife to a handsome young man,
by whom she might have a child.
In our own day it is not very rare, particularly in France,
to see poor young men marry rich old women. Solon did
not permit this conjugal prostitution of man at Athens. " A
censor," says Plutarch, " finding a young man in the house
of a rich old woman, fattening as they say a partridge fattens
by his services to the female, would remove him to some
young girl who wanted a husband." ^ At Sparta Lycurgus
went as far as to put hardened celibates under the ban of
society. In the first place, they were not permitted to see
these exercises of the naked virgins; and the magistrates
commanded them to march naked round the market-place
in winter, and to sing a song composed against themselves.
. . . They were also deprived of that honour and respect
which the young pay to the old.*
The young Greek girl could not dispose of her person
any more than the Chinese or Hindoo woman could. She
was married by her father ; in default of her father, by her
brother of the same blood ; in default of a brother, by a
paternal grandfather.*^ The right of brothers who were heirs
to their father to marry their sister was not even exhausted
by a first marriage.^ The father of the family had the
power either to marry his daughter during his lifetime, or
^ Lycurgus, xxvi.
2 Plutarch, Apophthegms of the Lacedemonians, — Demandes Romaines,
Ixv. * Solon, xxxviii. ■* Lycurgus, xxxvii.
^ Demosthenes, cf. Step. ii. ; in Cavallotti, loc. cit.
* Isaeus, Heritage of Menecles, §§ 5-9.
1 96 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
to bequeath her by will, as well as her mother, who was
assimilated, like her, to chattels or property. " Demosthenes,
my father, bequeathed his fortune, which was fourteen
talents, myself, aged seven years, my sister, aged five years,
and our mother. At the moment of dying, when asked what
he would have done with us, he bequeathed all these things
to this Aphobus and to Demophontes, his nephews \ he
married my sister to Demophontes, and gave at once two
talents."^ "In the same way," says Demosthenes again,
"Pasion dying, bequeathed his wife to Phormion."^ it
might happen that the daughter or the wife were by law one
body with the estate. Thus a daughter, in default of male
heirs, belonged to the relation who would have inherited in
her stead and place, if she had not lived.
If there were several relatives in the same degree of
succession, the daughter was to marry the eldest of them.
Further still, she was obliged in this case to quit her
husband, if previously, and even with paternal authorisation,
she had contracted marriage,^ In Greece, to safeguard or
conquer her independence, a woman had no other resources
than the seduction of her sex and the love she could inspire.
She had early recourse to these defensive weapons, for
Aristotle thinks it his duty to put young men on guard
against the excess of conjugal tenderness and feminine
tyranny, the habit which enchains the man to his wife.*
At length in Greece, as it had happened in Egypt, money
finished by protecting the woman much more efficaciously,
and even by giving her sometimes the advantage on the
conjugal field of battle. Solon, who knew Egypt, began by
decreeing the absolute poverty of the married woman.
"The bride was to bring with her only three suits of
clothes, and some household stuff of small value, for he
wished marriages to be made without mercenary or venal
views, and would have that union cemented by love and
friendship, and not by money." ' But this primitive legis-
lation could not stand against the combined action of the
affection of the girl's parents, her own desire of inde-
pendence, and lastly, the cupidity of the husband, and
^ Demosthenes, Against Aphobus.
2 Id. , For Phormion. ^ l?,o.&x5y Succession of Pyrrkus.
* Nic. Ethics, viii. i^.—Econom.y i. p. 4. •* Solon, xxxvii.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 197
thus the practice of the dowry became general. This
dowry was constituted before marriage by a public act.^
Securities and bonds were given to assure the dowry and
the conditions of marriage. The dowry was mortgaged on
the husband's property, and returned to the wife on the
dissolution of the marriage. When the woman could
shelter herself behind the shield of the dowry she was
much more respected, and she even sometimes tyrannised
in her turn. Aristophanes, Menander, Lucian, etc., pour
out endless bitter criticisms on the haughty and extravagant
rich woman.
In the comedy of The Clouds the good Strepsiades cries :
" I led so happily in the country a good simple life, without
vexation or care, rich in bees, in sheep, and in olives !
Then I married the niece of Megacles, son of Megacles. I
was of the country, she of the town ; she was a haughty,
extravagant woman, a true Cesyra. The wedding day, when
I lay down by her, I smelt the wine, the cheese, and the
wool; she cares for perfumes, saffron, tender kisses, expense,
good cheer, and wanton transports. I will not say that
she was idle — no — she worked hard at ruining me."
According to Menander, religion served as an excuse to
women for enormous expenses. Under the pretext of
piety they ruined their husbands by religious sacrifices
accompanied with perfumes, with golden clasps for the
sandals, and female slaves ceremoniously ranged in a
circle. 2
One poor hen-pecked husband groans in these terms :
" Cursed be the first man who invented marriage, and then
the second, and the third, and the fourth, and all those who
imitated them." One old husband laments : " I have
married a witch with a dowry. I took her, to have her
fields and house, and that, O Apollo, is the worst of evils." ^
Listen again to this one : " If being poor, you marry a rich
woman, you give yourself a mistress and not a wife; you
reduce yourself to be at the same time a slave and poor "
— (Anaxandrides).*
To sum up, in ancient Greece marriage implied at first
^ Isd^exx?,, Succession of Pyrrhus. ^ Menander, The Necklace.
* Mysogyne, Fr. 3. ■* Cavallotti, La Sposa di Menecle, p. 158.
1 98 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
the complete slavery of the wife, who was treated as a
thing; then by degrees conjugal customs were mitigated,
and the wife became a person, and even a proprietor, whom
her dowry or personal fortune could protect. Thence-
forward money produced its usual effect on inferior
characters : it debased or infatuated individuals who were
without moral nobility ; cupidity blinded certain men ; the
insolence of money intoxicated certain women. But this
only occurred among the ruling classes, and the fate of
husbands reduced to conjugal servitude by love of a large
dowry does not concern us here.
The important feature in Greek marriage is, that the
first legislators regarded it solely from the point of view of
increase of population, and held individual liberty, especially
that of the woman, very cheaply. Whatever we may think
of this legal tyranny, it attained its end perfectly. The
small republics of ancient Greece overflowed with men;
thus Attica had four thousand one hundred and sixty-six
inhabitants to the square league — that is to say, the
population was three times more dense than that of France
at present
V. Marriage in Ancient Rome,
In its general features Roman marriage does not greatly
differ from Greek, but its evolution has been more complete,
and the legislation on the subject is better known to us.
Marriages of children, especially of little girls, were the
rule at Rome, since the nuptial majority of girls was fixed
at twelve years. But they were often betrothed, and even
married, before that age. Vipsania Agrippina, daughter of
Agrippa and of Pomponia, was promised to Tiberius from
her first year.^ The Digest authorised betrothal at the age
of seven.2
In betrothing his daughter the father contracted a civil
obligation, sanctioned at first by an action for damages,
and later by infamy. Every woman of twenty, if she was
1 Friedlander, Moeurs romaines, etc., t. i^i^- pp. 251-254.
* Id.y ibid. t. xxiii. pp. 1-14. — Avis de Molestioit,
AND OF THE FAMIL K
99
neither married nor a mother, incurred the punishment
decreed by Augustus against celibacy and childlessness.^
We are indeed told in Roman legislation that the consent
of the girl was necessary before passing finally to betrothal
and marriage. But it is evident that the consent of a child
of twelve years, or even less, was illusory; in reality, the
young Roman girl was married by her parents. ^ The young
wife was still such a child, that on the day of her wedding
she took a ceremonious leave of her playthings and dolls,
offering them up to the gods. In reality, it was not the
wife who made the engagement, but the persons in whose
power she found herself^
Nevertheless, Roman customs conceded to women a
certain liberty of manners which the Greeks would not
have tolerated. The Roman woman walked in the streets,
went to the theatre with the men, shared in banquets, etc. ;
yet she was, especially in primitive Rome, subjected first to
her father and then to her husband. And, besides, public
opinion obliged the woman to use in great moderation the
practical liberty that was left to her. The famous epitaph
of the Roman matron — domum mansit ; lanam fecit — is well
known. This epitaph may perhaps exaggerate, but it does
not lie. Thus Suetonius tells us that the daughters and
grand-daughters of Augustus were compelled to weave and
spin, and that the Emperor usually wore no other garments
but those made by the hands of his wife and sister. *
Legally, the Roman wife was the property of her husband,
who treated her, not as his equal, but as his child. At
Rome, also, conjugal union had been looked at chiefly from
the point of view of procreation {Liberorum qucBrendomim
causd). The wife who was the mother of three children
acquired a certain independence; she could make a will
even during the lifetime of her husband, and did not need
to have recourse to a trustee." But the subjection of woman
was very great. The father, invested with the potestas^
could sell his child to a third party, in mancipium. The
^ Friedlander, loc. cit. p. 351.
2 Plutarch, Lycurgus and Ntima compared^ 4, 2.
^ Friedlander, loc. cit. p. 356.
^ Suetonius, Octavius^ Ixiv.
^ Plutarch, Numa Pompib'us, xvii.
200 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
mandpium, which was almost a right of propriety, passed
afterwards to the heirs of the owner.
We have seen that the pater familias had the right to
marry his daughter without consulting her, but he enjoyed
a right more excessive still, that of re-marrying her when
his son-in-law had been absent for three years.^ It was
Antoninus only who thought of depriving the father of his
right to annul the marriage of his daughter. To ih^ potestas
of the father succeeded the manus of the husband. The
woman in manu was considered legally as the daughter of
her husband, and therefore as the sister of her children. If
the husband was himself the son of a family, the wife in
77ianu was held as grand-daughter of the father of the
family. This entailed for her the extinction of paternal
power (on her own side), and of guardianship and the
rights of relationship with the male members of her father's
family. In the marriage with manus the husband became
the proprietor of all the dowry of his wife. The father,
however, could stipulate that the dowry should be returned
to him if his daughter died without children or was repudi-
ated. The leges Julia and Papia had, in fact, imposed on
the father the obligation of giving a dowry to his daughter ;
but the dowry could be appointed by third parties or by the
woman herself, if she was suijuris^ and then also she had
the right to stipulate for some reservations.
This terrible right of manus was acquired by the husband
with every form of marriage, even the grossest of all, the
usus^ or simple cohabitation during one year ; but the wife
could avoid the convenfio in manum by passing three nights
in the year out of the conjugal domicile. The manus
invested the husband with a large right of correction over
his wife, though in very grave cases he was to assemble the
family tribunal, which included the children of cousins-
german. These family tribunals took cognisance even .of
murder committed by the wife, and they were still in use
under the emperors.^ On the other hand, the Roman
husbands did not let their legal right of beating their wives
fall into desuetude, for Saint Monica consoled the wives of
her acquaintance whose faces showed marks of marital
^ Plautus, Stychtis.
2 L Italic ancie.ne, par MM. Duruy, Filon, etc. {passim).
AND OF THE FAMILY. 201
brutality, by saying to them : " Take care to control your
tongues. ... It is the duty of servants to obey their
masters. . . . You have made a contract of servitude."^
There were at Rome three kinds of marriages, which I
have already named — ist. The usus^ resulting from a simple
continuous cohabitation, without contract or ceremony, a
sort of Tahitan marriage ; 2nd, the coemptio or purchase, of
which I have spoken at length — that is to say, the legal
regulation of the primitive marriage by purchase, in use all
over the world at the origin of civilisations. Coemption,
without any palliatives, delivered the wife's body and goods
to her husband; 3rd, the confarreatio, or aristocratic mar-
riage, in which the high Pontiff of Jupiter gave, in the presence
of ten witnesses, a cake made of flour, water, and salt to
the bride and bridegroom, who ate it between them. The
manus was conferred on the husband in the marriage by
confarreation, the same as in the marriage by usus and
coemptio. We must note that at Rome, as in Greece, the
religious ceremony was in no way essential to the marriage,
which was a laic and civil institution in the first place.^
These three forms of marriage very probably represent
the evolution of the conjugal union in ancient Rome. The
usus^ or free cohabitation, must have been the commence-
ment; then came the purchase of the wife, the coemptio^
and at length the solemn marriage or confarreatio of the
patricians. But marriage with the husband's right of manus
subsisted for a long time, and it conferred on him all the
customary licence of savages of every country, notably that
of lending the wife, and this exorbitant right endured till
the best days of Rome, since the virtuous Cato of Utica used
it still in lending his wife Martia to his friend Hortensius.
This fact is curious, and deserves attention. Hortensius
began by asking for the loan of Cato's daughter, Portia,
already married to Bibulus, and the mother of two children.
It was, says Plutarch, with the object of selection, that
he might have a child of good race ; he promised to return
her afterwards to her husband. On the refusal of Cato,
Hortensius fell back on Martia, Cato's own wife, who was
at the time enciente. Cato was not at all shocked at the
^ Saint Augustine, Confessions, book ix. ch. ix.
^ R. Cubain, Lois civiles de Rome, p. 179.
202 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
proposition, but referred it, however, to Philip, his father-in-
law, who also saw no harm in it. A contract was therefore
concluded between Cato, Hortensius, and Philip; and
Martia, whom no one thought of consulting, was yielded to
Hortensius, and afterwards taken back, at the death of the
latter, by Cato. She was then the heir of Hortensius, and
Cato had not the least scruple in receiving her back with
her money at the same time.^
To any one not versed in ethnographical sociology these
customs seem improbable. Doubt has been cast on this
story of Hortensius and Cato, though it is attested by the
Anti-Cato of Julius Caesar, on which Plutarch relies; but it
has nothing extraordinary for us. We know that at first
woman was everywhere the absolute property of the man.
The manus of the Roman husband was in the main only an
attenuated form of primitive conjugal right, which we know
included the power to lend, barter, or cede the wife without
consulting her. The case of Cato is then only a survival of
preceding ages.
Necessarily brief and incomplete as the rhume must be
that I can here give of conjugal legislation at Rome, it will
suffice, I hope, to give a clear idea of what Roman marriage
was. I should add that the law, inspired by the old
patriotic spirit and the prejudices of caste, limited the right
of marriage, the jus connubii. The justes noces were at
first an aristocratic privilege. The plebeians coupled more
ferarum. At length the /z^i" <r^;2;^«<^// extended to marriages
between Latin and Roman, Latin and Latin, and even
foreigner and foreigner. The child followed the condition
of the mother, which seems to be a survival of the
ancient maternal family. Another vestige of the same kind
is found in the legal position of spurii — that is to say, of
children born of a marriage which is either prohibited or
incestuous or bigamous. These children, irregularly con-
ceived, have a mother, but no legal father; they do not
come under the paternal power of the father, like the child
of lawful marriage, and cannot be legitimated.^
The study of the transformations that Roman marriage
underwent from the time of Numa to that of the emperors
1 Plutarch, Cato of UHca, xxxvi. Ixviii.
* Domenget, Institutes de Gaius^ i. 64.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 203
is most interesting ; for we can follow a complete evolution
in regard to it which has never been so complete in any
other country. At first we find conjugal anarchy, the
capricious union or usus^ which could be, and which was
in fact, often polygamous, as the ulterior persistence of the
concubinate proves; then the marriage by capture, of
which the trace remained in the marriage ceremony ; then
the marriage by purchase, the coemption, with its ordin-
ary consequence, the servitude of the wife, which even the
solemn marriage or confarreation did not abolish. At
length this brutal law of the primitive ages relaxes. The
law which holds the woman under paternal power {patria
potestas) is turned round. The father himself gives his
daughter in mancipium to a third party, who afterwards
enfranchises her. Sometimes it is the patria potestas which
is a check to the manus of the husband. The wife, in
marrying, without being subject to the manus^ remains
subject to her father, who can even claim her again.
But the institution of the dowry as obligatory and
inalienable by the husband, the power of the woman to
marry while remaining in the paternal family, to have her
paraphernalia, to inherit property of her father, to control
both of these, and also the great facility of divorce, ended
by rendering the Roman, or at least the patrician matron,
almost independent. Under the empire Roman marriage
had become in fact a sort of free union, in which money
considerations played the predominant part. Plautus
already speaks of the dotal-slave, a creature of the wife's,
managing her property and ruling the husband —
" Argentum accept^ dote imperium vendidi.'"^
Horace mentions the wife ruling by means of her dowry —
^' dotata regit virum conjux^' {Od. iii. 18). Martial declares
that he wishes no rich marriage ; it does not suit him, he
says, to be married by his wife — " uxori nubere nolo meae"
{Epig. viii. 12). From Seneca to Saint Jerome, who both
speak of it, the dotal-slave is advantageously replaced by
the frizzed steward {Procurator calamistratus) managing the
^ Asinaria^ v. 70-72
204 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
affairs of my lady.^ They went further still, and as it
happens in Russia at the present day, they concluded
fictitious marriages; but at Rome, these false marriages,
contracted for ready money, had no other object than to
elude the laws against celibacy. ^
VI. Barbarous Marriage and Christian Marriage.
In order to avoid being too incomplete in this rapid
survey of marriage among all races, I will say a few words
on barbarous marriage outside the Greco-Roman world.
The barbarians of ancient Europe, more or less mono-
gamous, have differed little from any others. Their mar-
riage resembles that of their fellows of all races and all
times ; that which chiefly characterises it is the subjection
of woman.
Barbarous women, says Plutarch, neither ate nor drank
with their husbands, and never called them by their name.^
Among the Germans, who were more often monogamous,
as Tacitus says,* the wife was purchased; then the purchase-
money was transformed into a dower accorded to the bride
under the name of i7iorgengabe or oscle (psculum), the price
of the first kiss.
German betrothals, which could only be annulled for a
serious reason, strongly resembled Latin ones — that is, they
were a sale of the girl in anticipation by her legal owners.
It was necessary for the girl to have the consent of her
father, or her nearest relative, for her marriage. As widow,
having been purchased, she belonged to the relatives of her
dead husband, and could not marry again without their
leave. ** The feudalism of the Middle Ages was careful not
to emancipate the woman, and she remained a minor, or
even less, since the Code of Beaumanoir says (titre Ivii.) —
" Every husband can beat his wife when she will not obey
his commands, or when she curses him or contradicts him,
^ Seneca, De matrim. — Saint Jerome, Letters, 54, 13, 79, 9.
2 Friedlander, Mceurs, etc., t. i^r. p. 360.
^ Plutarch, On Herodotus, xxi.
* Germania, xviii.
* I.aboulaye, Hist, de la succes. des femmes.
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 205
provided that he does it moderately, and that death does
not follow in consequence." Among the Saxons, the
Burgundians, and the Germans in general, the widow was
subjected to the rule of her eldest son as soon as he had
attained the age of fifteen.
In the Middle Ages the woman surprised in committing
adultery might be executed by her husband, who even had
the right to call in the aid of her son.^ In the ninth and
tenth centuries, however, among the Saxons in England,
an advance that was quite exceptional took place. The
young girl could marry herself, was not repudiable at will,
had her own property and her keys, and the penal law of
her husband ceased to weigh upon her.^ This progress was
quite local, and operated spontaneously, quite independently
of Christian influence. In fact, Christianity has only
emancipated women spiritually, and its real influence on
marriage has been injurious. Doubtless the Christian wife
might hope to become a seraph in the next world, but in
this she was only a servant or a slave. In Greco-Roman
antiquity marriage had been considered, as it ought to be, a
civil institution. Legislation, more or less sensible and
intelligent, regarded it simply from the point of view of
population.
Christianity, which taught that the earthly country was of
no account, and taxed with impurity all that related to
sexual union, made marriage a sacrament, and consequently
an institution quite apart from humble considerations of
social utiHty. All sexual union outside marriage was reputed
criminal; the ideal preached to women was the mystic
marriage with God. The pious Constantine increased all
the penalties against sexual crimes. Adultery became again
a capital offence ; the woman guilty of marrying a slave was
condemned to death; 3 marriage was declared indissoluble;
second marriages were blameworthy. At the same time
the fathers of the Church and the preachers did not cease
to utter their thunders against woman, disparaging her,
and abusing her as an impure creature, almost devilish.
This encouraged the severe legislation of the barbarians in
1 Summa Cardinalis Hostiensis^ lib. v., De Adulteris.
^ Wake, Evolution of Morality, vol. i. p. 381.
3 Code Theod., lib. vi., tit. i^^'
2o6 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE.
conjugal matters. I have previously mentioned some traits
of these brutal laws. I shall return to them in speaking of
questions connected with marriage, which remain still to be
treated of — adultery, divorce, and widowhood. We shall
then see how hurtful the influence of Christianity has been
on marriage, and we shall come to the conclusion that in
order to manage earthly affairs well, it is not good to keep
our looks constantly raised to the skies.
CHAPTER XIII.
ADULTERY.
I. Adultery in General. — Adultery considered as a theft.
II. Adultery in Melanesia. — Indulgence and severity of Tasmanian
and Australian husbands — Adultery at New Caledonia.
III. Adultery in Black Africa. — Among the Hottentots, at the
Gaboon, in middle Africa, in Abyssinia.
IV. Adultery in Polynesia. — Punishment of unauthorised adultery —
The " fire-lighter " at Noukahiva.
V. Adultery in Savage America. — Among the Esquimaux — Special
penalty among the Redskins — Obscene retaliation.
VI. Adultery in Barbarous America. — Among the Pipiles in
Yucatan, in Mexico, in Peru, in Guatemala.
VII. Adultery among the Mongol Races and in Malaya. — Among the
nomad Tartars, in Thibet, in China, in Japan, in Malaya.
VIII. Adultery among the Egyptians^ the Berbers^ and the Semites. —
Penalty of adultery in ancient Egypt ; among the Hebrews, the Arabs,
and in Kabyle.
IX. Adultery in Persia and India. — Penalty of adultery in Persia —
Adultery in the Code of Manu — Fraternal and authorised adultery — The
obligation of a double vengeance.
X. Adultery in the Greco- Roman World. — Legal adultery according
to Lycurgus and Solon — Punishment of illegal adultery — Adultery in
primitive Rome — Lex Julia — Legal vengeance of the father — Obscene
retaliation — Laws of Antoninus, of Septimus Severus, and of Con-
stantine.
XI. Adultery in Barbarous Europe. — Among the Tcherkesses, the
Visigoths, the Francs, under Charlemagne— Singular penalties of the
Middle Ages.
XII. Adultery in the Past and in the Future,
2o8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
I. Adultery in General,
We will now pass in review some of the principal
penalties (the enumeration of all of them would be too
long) with which the men of all times and races have
attempted to repress adultery. That the human species,
and especially the primitive, unpolished human species, is
one of the most ferocious of the animal kingdom, stands
out strikingly from these investigations ; but it is perhaps in
regard to adultery that the cruelty and injustice of men are
most strongly shown ; and by the word "men" here we
mean the mascuhne half of mankind, for generally the only
adultery which has been punished has been that of the
woman. As for the adultery of the husband, men have
been very slow in admitting that it was a wrong of which the
wife might complain.
The reason of this revolting partiality is very simple,
Diderot makes Orou tell it in his Supplement au Voyage de
Bougainville; it is that " the tyranny of man has converted
the possession of woman into a property."^
On the whole, our long inquiry has abundantly proved
that very generally, in human societies, marriage has been,
or is still, a bargain, when not a capture. In all legislations
the married woman is more or less openly considered as the
property of the husband, and is very often confounded,
absolutely confounded, with things possessed. To use her,
therefore, without the authority of her owner, is a theft ; and
human societies have never been tender to thieves. Nearly
everywhere theft has been considered a crime much more
grave than murder. But adultery is not a common theft.
An object, an inert possession, are passive things ; their
owner may well punish the thief who has taken them, but
him only. In adultery, the object of the larceny, the wife,
is a sentient and thinking being — that is to say, an accom-
plice in the attempt on her husband's property in her own
person; moreover, he generally has her in his keeping;
he can chastise her freely, and glut his rage on her
without any arm being raised for her defence. On the
^ Diderot, Supplement ati Voyage de Bougainville^ i?i CEuvres, t. ii.
p. 245.
AND OF TBE FAMILY. 209
contrary, in letting loose his vengeance the husband will
frequently have public opinion and law on his side, when
the latter does not take on itself the punishment of the
guilty one. But let us listen once more to the eloquent
language of facts.
II. Adultery in Mel a fiesta.
In Tasmania and Australia the women were, or are,
considered as the property of the men. We have seen that
in these countries there is no care for decency or chastity,
and that wives are often obtained by brutal rape. Their
proprietors also make no scruple of letting them out,
lending them, or bartering them ; they have the fullest right
to use or abuse them. The Tasmanians felt very honoured
if a white man borrowed their wives, but they none the less
chastised, and very cruelly too, unauthorised infidelities, on
the simple ground, as their panegyrist, the Rev. Bonwick,
tells us, of their right of ownership.^ In certain Australian
tribes, organised in classes, the women were reputed
common to all the individuals of the same class, but all
intimate relation with a man of another group was a most
grave adultery for both the guilty ones — a social adultery.^
In the greater number of New Caledonian tribes the
punishment of adultery is left to the care of the injured
husband, who kills the thief, if he can, but often contents
himself with giving a severe punishment to his wife, some-
times inflicting a sort of scalping. At Kanala, however,
adultery has already become a social crime. The man who
commits it is led before the chief, judged by the council of
elders whom the chief presides over, and executed on the
spot.^ But in one way or another, whether he incurs the
social vengeance or that of the offended one — the robbed
one, rather — and of his relatives, the New Caledonian
who commits adultery risks his life. Sometimes, however,
he can get off by paying a fine, after the old German
fashion. Often also, in case of adultery committed by
a married man, the New Caledonians practise a singular
^ Bonwick, Daily Life, etc. , p. 72.
^ Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi, etc.
^ De Rochas, Nowvelle CaUdoniey p. 262.
14
2 1 o THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
retaliation : the adult men of the village simply violate
the wife of the delinquent.^ The wives of the chiefs
being much more sacred than the others, the slightest
attempt on the rights of their proprietors risks being cruelly
punished. M. Moncelon has seen a man condemned to
death merely for having looked at the wife of the chief while
she was picking up shells ;2 it was regarded as treason-
This ferocity in the repression of adultery is not at all
special to Melanesia. With some variations, it is found' in
all times and in all countries. It is worthy of remark also
that even when the adulterous man is punished, it is simply
because he has robbed another husband, and not because
he has failed in conjugal faith.
III. Adultery in Black Africa.
We have previously seen that among the black popula-
tions of Africa marriage is a simple bargain, and that the
negresses are only moderately chaste. Now, as the purchase
of wives and the absence of chastity in the women are
factors eminently suited to produce adultery, we shall not
be surprised to find that it is very common in Africa;
it is nevertheless very severely punished there, but only
because it is a very grave outrage on property. Among the
Hottentots, the husband, having the right of life and death^
over his wife or wives, and being allowed to kill them for
the smallest offence, naturally enjoys the same right, with a
much stronger reason, when they commit an unauthorised
infidelity, for he can lend or let them to strangers if he
likes.*
In the tribes where polygamy already inclines to mono-
gamy, and where there exists a chief wife ruling over the
others, the gravity of the crime of adultery is in relation to
the position occupied by the woman. Thus, at the Gaboon,
Du "Chaillu tells us, where the women are extremely dissolute,
a distinction is made in their infidelities. The adultery of
1 L. Moncelon, Reponse au Questionnaire de Sociologies in Bull.
Soc. d'anthrop., 1886. ^ L. Moncelon, loc. cit.
3 Burchell, Hist. Ljiiv. des Voy., t. xxvi. p. 479.
* Alexander, Expedition into the Interior of Africa,\o\. i. pp. 98, 173.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 2H
the chief wife is an enormous crime. The man who has
been an accomplice in it is, at the very least, sold as a
slave ; but adultery with less important wives can be atoned
for by a large compensation.^ As for the woman, her pecu-
niary value often protects her. The husband-proprietor has
bought his wife, and he cares very little for the purity of
her morals, since he has no scruple in making her an object
of traffic ;2 therefore, whenever she is unfaithful without his
permission, the consideration of the cost of purchase and of
the possible profit of letting her out, often restrains his
vengeful arm. He is free, however, to punish or to
pardon, and sometimes the chastisement of adultery is
terrible. At Bornou, for example, the guilty ones are
bound hand and foot, and their heads are smashed by
being struck together.^ At Kaarta, says Mungo Park, the
two guilty ones are put to death. With the Soulimas there
is a singular exception to this. The adulterous woman
merely has her head shaved, and she loses a privilege which
is probably of Berber origin — viz., that of quitting her
husband at will, simply by refunding him the amount of
purchase-money he has paid for her. All the vengeance of
the husband falls on the lover, and he makes him his
slave.'* At Jouida, in Dahomey, the offended husband had
still the right, in 17 13, of invoking judicial power in order to
have his guilty wife strangled or beheaded by the public
executioner.^ Her accomplice was not spared, and some-
times, says Bosman, he was burned at a slow fire. This
cruel wish to make delinquents suffer a long time is found
again in Uganda, where King M'tesa caused adulterers to
be dismembered, having one Hmb at a time cut off and
thrown to the vultures, who feasted on it before the eyes
of the sufferers.^ With the Ashantees, the husband, as
sovereign justiciary, can either kill his wife, or marry her
to a slave, or cut off her nose, according to his pleasure.''
^ Du Chaillu, Afriqtie equatoriale, pp. 67, 435.
^ Raftenel, Noiiv. Voy. aux fays des N^gres, t. ler. p. 402.
* Denham and Clapperton, Hist, Univ. des Voy., t. xxvii. p, 437.
* Id., ibid. t. xxviii. p. 106.
^ Demeunier, Maurs des Differents Peiiphs, t. ler. p. 223.
^ Speke, Voy. to the Sources of the Nile, p. 343.
^ Bowdich, English Mission to the Ashantees.
2 1 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
We find this last punishment specially applied to adultery
in various countries, and Diodorus will tell us the motive
for it. On the Senegal coast the all-powerful protection
of money saved the life of adulterers, and the offended
husbands spared them in order to sell them to European
slave-traders.
In Abyssinia the conjugal bond is so frail, morals are so
shameless, and divorce is so easy, that adultery is rarely
taken in a tragic light. Formerly the injured husband
often confined himself to chasing from his house the
adulterous woman, clothed in rags for the occasion.^
IV. Adultery in Polynesia,
Polynesian customs alone would suffice to prove that in
primitive countries adultery is simply punished as a robbery,
or commercial fraud. As regards sexual morality, or rather
immorality, nothing can be compared to what was practised
in Polynesia, where all modesty was unknown, where the hus-
bands willingly let out their wives, and the intimate friend
of the husband {tayo) had the right to share his wife with
him. But dissolute as they were, these islanders were
very determined conjugal proprietors, and they sometimes
punished adultery with the most extreme severity. The
missionary, Marsden, relates that a New Zealand chief killed
his adulterous wife by dealing her a blow on the head with
his club. Public opinion approved of the deed, and the
brother of the dead woman came to take the body, only
making a feint of retaliation, because the punishment was
considered to be merited.^
Cook saw at Tahiti a native man punished in the same
way for adultery, by blows of the club ; but in this case
there was the aggravating circumstance that the woman
belonged to a class superior to his.^ In some islands,
especially at Tahiti and Tonga, where the customs were less
savage, and licence was more unbridled than in New
1 Demeunier, loc. cit., t. ler. p. 218.
^ Journal of Marsden, in Voy. of the Astrolabe, p. 360.
3 Cook, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. x. p. 31.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 213
Zealand, the women sometimes got off with a simple cor-
rection. We must again remark that what was blamed
and punished was not the adultery itself, but adultery
unauthorised, or not commanded by the legal owner — in
short, theft.
At Noukahiva, says Krusenstern, there was a functionary
called the " fire-lighter " who lived with the wife of a king.
The duty of this dignitary was, in the first place, to obey
the queen, and in the next to supply her husband's place
with her in case of prolonged absence on his part.^ Taking
this fact by the side of others, as, for example, the unhmited
right of the friend, or tayo^ over the wife, we see clearly
what the Polynesians understood by adultery.
V. Adultery in Savage America.
The Esquimaux, who are as free from prejudices in their
conjugal customs as the Polynesians, have also, at least
certain of them, adopted the custom of joint husbands,
cicisbeiy who replace the husband in case of absence. ^
There are some, however, who blame the adultery of wives,
and believe even that the fairies would kill them if their
wives were unfaithful during their absence.^ But all the
Esquimaux are not equally easy going ; some of them, the
reindeer Koriaks, for example, kill at once the man and
woman taken in adultery.*
The Redskins are always less tolerant; with them adultery
is a very serious affair, although they often also consider the
exchange of wives a mark of friendship. It is generally the
husband who takes vengeance as he pleases, and he often
does so by cutting open with his teeth the nose, and some-
times the ears, of the guilty woman. This was the practice
with the Comanches,® the Yumas,^ and the Sioux.'' But
the injured, or robbed, husband is at liberty to make a
^ Cook, Hist. Univ. des Vojf., t. xvii. p. 12.
2 5^ncroft, Native Races, etc., vol. i. p. 81.
* Elie Reclus, Les Primitifs. ^ Demeunier, loc. cit., t. I^r. p. 216.
^ Domenech, Voy. pittoresqne, etc., p. 533.
^ Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol. i. p. 514.
^ Demeunier, he. cit., t. i^r. p. 219.
214 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
composition with the seducer.^ He can at will either pardon
— as did a Mandan husband who sent the wife to her lover,
adding three horses to the present^ — or he can put to death
the faithless wife and her accomplice. By a rare exception,
the Omahas recognised the right of the wife to revenge
herself on an adulterous husband and his mistress.^ With
the Omahas, also, an adulterous wife was bound to a stake
in the prairie, abused by twenty or thirty men, and then
abandoned by her husband.* We have seen that this
obscene mode of retaliation is in use at New Caledonia, and
we shall find it again in the Roman Empire. The mode of
vengeance with the Redskins, whether of the husband or the
tribe, varied according to locality, but was often atrocious.
Thus the Modocs of California publicly disembowelled the
guilty woman. ^ Among the Hoopsas, another tribe of
Californian Redskins, the male accomplice in the adultery
lost one eye,^ or, if he was married, the injured man took
his wife.
The natives of South America were not more clement
than their congeners in the north. The Caribees put both
guilty ones to death.'' The Guarayos also punished with
death the accomplice in adultery as if he were a thief.^
From this rapid survey of savage countries we may conclude
that adultery is everywhere considered as a robbery only,
but at the same time as one of the gravest of robberies.
The man who is guilty of adultery suffers consequently, by
virtue of the right of retaliation, a punishment more or less
severe. As for the adulterous woman, she is generally
chastised by the husband-proprietor with extreme cruelty,
no restraint existing to moderate his vengeance.
VI. Adultery in Barbarous America.
In the barbarous monarchies of all countries the chastise-
ment of adultery is scarcely mitigated, and for a long time
^ J. O. Dorsey, Omaha Sociology, p. 364, Smithsonian Institution,
1885.
2 Wake, vol. i. p. 428. ^ J. O. Dorsey, loc. cit. * Id., ibid.
^ Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol. i. p. 350. ^ Id., ibid. p. 412.
^ Voyage d, la Terre-ferme, etc., t. I^r. p. 304.
^ D'Orbigny, Vhomnie Americain, t. ii. p. 329.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 215
it is directly inflicted on the guilty woman by the husband
or the parents.
With the Pipiles of Salvador the man who committed
adultery was put to death, or became the slave of the offended
husband.^ In Yucatan the guilty ones were stoned or pierced
with arrows ; before this they were impaled or disjointed.^
According to Herrara, among the Yzipecs the injured
husband cut off the nose and ears of the adulterous woman. ^
The same author tells us that among the Guaxlotillans the
woman was taken before the Cacique, and if found guilty she
was cut in pieces and eaten.*
In ancient Mexico adultery was generally punished
with stoning,^ and in certain districts this crime entailed
the quartering of the guilty woman ; elsewhere, the judges
simply ordered the husband to cut off her nose and ears.^
In Peru the law also punished ordinary adultery with
capital punishment."^ There was no chastisement terrible
enough for adultery committed with one of the wives of the
Inca, the son of the Sun : the guilty man was burnt, his
parents were put to death, and his house destroyed
(Pizarro).
Guatemala offered an exception ;8 there the affair was
arranged by a composition — a fine of precious feathers paid
to the husband. The latter could also repudiate his wife,
or pardon her, in which last case he was much honoured.
If the adultery was committed with the wife of a great
lord, the crime naturally acquired an exceptional gravity;
the guilty man was then strangled if he was noble, and if
servile, was thrown down a precipice. We shall find else-
where this hierarchic iniquity, for in this matter, as in
others, various human societies and races repeat themselves.
^ Bancroft, Native Races ^ vol. ii. p. 675. ^ /</., ibid. vol. ii. p. 674.
3 Demeunier, loc. cit., t. ler. p. 224. ^ Id., ibid. t. I^^^* p. 225.
^ Prescott, Hist. Conq. of Mexico y vol. i. p. 26.
^ L. Biart, Les Azt^ques, p. 168.
7 Prescott, Hist. Conq. of Per u, vol. i. p. 59.
8 Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States, vol. ii. p. 673.
2 1 6 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
VII. Adultery among the Mongol Races and in Malaya.
Thus the Mongols of Asia seem to have copied the
Mongoloids of America. With the nomad Tartars a man
of inferior class who has committed adultery with a woman
of his own class pays the injured husband forty-five head of
cattle; but the husband must revenge himself on the
inconstant wife. The law invites him to do so; for if he
kills her, the compensation of cattle remains his property ;
if not, it goes to the prince. But if it happens that a man
of low condition has illicit intercourse with the wife of a
prince, then the crime is terrible ; the man is cut to pieces,
the faithless wife is decapitated, and the family of the guilty
man reduced to slavery. ^ If we may believe a modern
traveller, Mongol customs have become considerably modi-
fied on this point, adultery being now extremely common
in MongoHa, and so little repressed that the women hardly
take the trouble to conceal it.^
In lamaic Thibet they do not regard adultery as a
tragedy. The wife is corrected, and the lover pays a fine to
the husband, or husbands, when there are several. ^
Chinese legislation is relatively moderate in regard to
adultery. In the first place it expressly forbids the husband
to lend or let out his wife, under pain of twenty-four strokes
with the bamboo.'^ The Chinese woman can certainly be
imprisoned for adultery,^ but she is chiefly punished by
repudiation, which is obligatory on the husband on pain of
twenty strokes of the bamboo.^ She can, however, be sold
either by the husband or by the judge to whom the
offended husband remits her.'^ In contrast to certain
barbarous legislations, the Chinese law is more severe in
regard to adultery for the strong than for the weak.
''Whoever, on the strength of his power or credit, shall
1 Timkowski, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t, xxxiii. p. 341.
2 Prejevalsky, Mongolia, t. i^r. p. 69.
^ Turner, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi. p. 437.
^ Pauthier, Chine moderne, p. 238.
'^ Davis, China, vol. i. p. 322, etc.
^ Pauthier, Chine moderne, p. 239.
^ Sinibaldo de Mas, Chine et pnissances chrkiennes, t. IP'*- p. 52,
AND OF THE FAMILY. 217
take away the wife or the daughter of a free man to make
her his own wife, shall be imprisoned for the usual time
and put to death by strangulation." ^
In Japan the law gives the offended husband the cruel
and very general right to kill the guilty ones if taken in
adultery, and forbids him to spare one.^ We find this latter
injunction, perhaps more humane than it appears, in ancient
Roman legislation and elsewhere.
Nothing is at once more monotonous and more ghastly
than this ethnographic review of the penalties against
adultery.
Simple death has not sufficed to punish this crime, so
enormous has it everywhere seemed ; and thus other refine-
ments of cruelty have been added — disembowelling, cutting
in pieces, the stake, etc.
So far, among the races we have been investigating,
Chinese legislation has been the wisest and most just, since,
contrary to usual custom, it enacts the most severe penalties
against the powerful man who takes advantage of his social
position to commit adultery. Here and there, however,
we find societies where adultery excites less fury. These
societies are rare, and they are not always the most
civilised.
At Java, for example, adultery is treated with clemency,
especially if it is not committed with the chief wife. Even
in this last case the guilty one, at least the man, is often
only punished by public contempt.^ The Dyaks punish
conjugal infidelity with a fine only, for both parties.* This
is a rare example of clemency, and it is given by a still
barbarous race. We look in vain for such moderation
among much more civilised peoples, as we shall see in
studying ancient Egypt and the Berbers and Semites.
1 Pauthier, loc. cit. p. 239.
2 Masana Maeda, La SocUU japonaise^ in Revue Scientifique, 1878.
2 Waitz, Anthi-opology ^ vol. i. p. 315.
^ Jmnjal of James Brookj Rajah of Saraivak, by Capt. Munday,
vol. ii. p. 2,
2 1 8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
VIII. AduUery among the Egyptians^ the Berbers^
and the Semites.
Diodorus tells us that in ancient Egypt the man who was
guilty of adultery received a thousand lashes, whilst the
woman suffered the amputation of her nose, a very special
penalty, which we have seen used in America and negro
Africa, which we shall find also among the Saxons of
England, and for which Diodorus has given us the reason.
"The legislator," he says, "has intended to deprive the
woman of attractions which she had only made use of for
seduction. "1
The Bible, also, is not tender towards adulterers. But
it makes no distinction between the culpability of the man
and the woman ; stoning is for both. This terrible punish-
ment is not only inflicted on the faithless wife, but on the
mcoviSt^XiX. fiancee. The accomplices even are put to death.
There are, however, some distinctions, and precautions are
taken to mitigate the rigour of the law; thus the guilty
woman is only condemned to be stoned if the crime has
been committed in the city. If in the fields, the man alone
incurs stoning ;2 it is thus admitted that the woman may
have suffered violence. Besides this, two witnesses are in
all cases necessary to establish the crime. Lastly, the slave
woman is not punished with death.^
The ancient Arabs were not more clement towards
adultery than their cousins of Palestine, and the Bedouins,
who have preserved more of the old customs, still consider
adultery as the greatest of crimes. Burckhardt tells us that
with them the adulterous woman is beheaded either by her
father or her brother.^ These are morals that go far
beyond the prescriptions of the Koran. It would seem
that Mahomet, much given to sexual pleasures himself, had
not the courage to be too severe on others. He, indeed,
calls the adultery of woman the " infamous action " par
excellence^ but he directs, nevertheless, that the crime be
proved by four witnesses." Moreover, the woman can
1 Diodorus, i. p. 78. ■* Burckhardt, Notes, etc., t. ii. p. 84.
2 Deuteronomy, xxii. " Sourate, iv. 8.
' Leviticus, xix. 20-22.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 219
escape the punishment by swearing four times before God
that she is innocent, and that her husband has lied.^ If
she is convicted, both she and her accompHce receive a
hundred lashes in pubHc. Then the woman must be shut
up "until death visits her, or God finds her a means of
salvation,"^ all of which is relatively mild enough.
Although Mussulmans, the Kabyles of Algeria do not
keep to the somewhat humane prescriptions of the Koran
in regard to adultery. In general, they are pitiless towards
all infractions of morals. With them a kiss on the mouth
is equivalent to adultery, and costs more than an assassina-
tion.3 Every child born out of marriage is put to death, as
well as its mother.* If the family tries to spare the guilty
one, the Djemaa stones her and imposes a fine on the
relatives.^ The child and mother are stoned by the
Djemaa or the family. Even when a woman is actually
separated from her husband her adulterous child is killed,
but the fate of the mother is left to the discretion of the
relatives.^
Whoever carries off a woman, especially a married
woman, and flees with her, becomes a public enemy, and
the village where the fugitives have taken refuge must give
them up under pain of war. The man is put to death, and
the woman is restored to her family, who do not spare
her/
Custom authorises the deceived husband to sacrifice his
wife, and if he rarely does it he is only hindered by the
loss of the capital she represents ; but usage requires the
repudiation,^ and the husband must, besides, take a striking
and bloody vengeance on the lover.^ At the very least he
must simulate it, must fire, perhaps, on the guilty one with
a gun loaded only with powder, and strike or slightly wound
his wife's lover. He has thus saved his honour; he is
content with little, as in our rose-water duels. With the
Kabyles, more than elsewhere, marriage is a mercenary
1 Koran, Sourate, xxiv. 8. ^ Id., ibid, iv. 19.
3 Hanoteau et Letourneux, Kabylie^ t. iii. p. 209.
* Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 1 86. » /^^^ ^^^ p^ 7^^
« Id., ibid. t. iii. p. 208, ^ Id., ibid. p. 187.
« Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 187. i" /</., ibid. t. iii. p. 74.
^ /(/., ibid. t. iii. pp. 212, 213.
2 20 THE E VOL UTIOiV OF MARRIA GE
affair ; consequently adultery naturally has pecuniary conse-
quences. Thus, in compensation for adultery or the
abduction of his wife, the husband has a right to the
amount of the purchase, the ihamanth^ or to an indemnity,
sometimes arbitrary, sometimes tariffed;^ but this com-
pensation in money is distinct from the retaliation, and in
no way hinders it.^
Lastly, the Kabyle legislation formally interdicts the
marriage of the adulterous woman with her accomplice.^
Beginning with Melanesia and reaching Kabyle, I have
sought among very different races, forming altogether the
major part of mankind, the penalties used or decreed
against adulterers. The result is a lamentable enumeration
of sanguinary folHes. I have passed by in silence the
legendary or exceptional sufferings. I have not spoken of
women crushed under the feet of elephants, violated by
stallions, buried alive, etc. The common reality alone
more than suffices to show that man, still far from being
very delicate in conjugal or amorous matters, considers
adultery as a great crime, especially for woman. It remains
for us to see how the races calling themselves par excellence
noble — the Indo-European races — have regarded this fault,
so difficult to pardon.
IX. Adultery in Persia and India.
The Avesta does not mention adultery in ancient Persia.
In modern Persia it has been punished with ferocity, except,
naturally, when it was committed by the Shah, who chose,
according to his fancy, any young girls or women among
his subjects, without any one daring to find fault with him.*
But for private individuals adultery was an abominable
crime ; the man who had committed it was put to death ;
the woman, treated of course more severely, was tied up
alive in a sack and thrown into the water.
The Code of Manu gives us very complete information
^ Hanoteau et Letourneux, Kahylie, t. ii. p. 159.
2 hi., ibid. t. ii. p. 165.
^ Charclin, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi." p. 251.
* G. Drouville, Voyage en Perse, t, i^r. p. 251.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 221
in regard to the penalty for adultery in ancient India. In
the first place, it is understood that the adultery of the
husband ought not to trouble the wife at all. " Although
the conduct of her husband may be blameworthy, and he
may give himself up to other amours and be devoid of good
qualities, a virtuous woman ought constantly to revere him
as a god."i The adultery of the woman is naturally quite
another thing. " If a woman, proud of her family and her
importance, is unfaithful to her husband, the king shall
have her devoured by dogs in a very frequented public
place."2 If a woman of high rank, the lover also is not
spared. " The king shall condemn her accomplice to be
burned on a bed of red hot iron."^ For the less aristocratic
adultery the punishment varies according to the caste.
" For adultery with a protected Brahmanee, a Vaisya loses
all his property, after imprisonment for a year \ a Kchatriya
is condemned to pay a thousand panas, to have his head
shaved and watered with urine of an ass." For the
Brahmin the penalty is very light. "An ignominious
tonsure is ordered instead of capital punishment for a
Brahmin in the cases where the punishment of the other
classes would be death."* The Soudra, on the contrary, who
holds criminal commerce with a woman belonging to one
of the three first classes, " shall be deprived of the
guilty member, and of all his possessions, if she was not
guarded ; but if it was so, he loses both his goods and his
existence."^ It must be noticed, also, that very slight evi-
dence suffices to prove adultery. " To pay little attentions
to a woman, to send her flowers and perfumes, to frolic
with her, to touch her ornaments or vestments, to sit with
her on the same couch, are considered by wise men as
proofs of an adulterous love."^
On the other hand, the husband, if he has had no
children, can oblige his wife to give herself either to his
brother or to another relative. "Anointed with liquid
butter and keeping silence, let the relative charged with
this office approach during the night a widow or a childless
woman, and engender one single son, but never a second."
^ Code of Majiu, v. 154. * Ibid. viii. 379.
2 Jbid. book viii. 371. ^ Ibid. viii. 374.
3 Ibid, p. 375. ^ Ibid. viii. 357.
2 2 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
Then, in the following verse, the Code alters : " Some of
those who understand this question well, think that the aim
of this precept is not perfectly attained by the birth of a
single child, and that women may legally engender in this
manner a second son."^ One verse, certainly less ancient,
contradicts these curious texts, which are evidently survivals
of primitive customs, according to which the husband
disposed as he pleased of his feminine property. More
modern Brahmanic legislation still authorises the husband
to kill the wife and her lover if taken in adultery, and there
would be nothing new to us in this, if, as in Japan, and as
formerly at Rome, the law did not formally interdict him
from killing only one of the two culprits.^
X. Adultery in the Greco-Roman World,
However Aryan India may be, she differs very remarkably
from us. Let us look now at the way in which adultery has
been regarded in Europe, and, to begin with, in the Greco-
Roman world. We know that in classic antiquity marriage
was quite crudely considered as a civic duty, and looked at
from the single point of view of population. Lycurgus and
Solon encouraged the impotent husband to favour the
adultery of his young wife. Speaking of the laws of
Lycurgus, Plutarch says — " He laughed at those who
revenge with war and bloodshed the communication of
a married woman's favours ; and allowed that, if any one
in years should have a young wife, he might introduce to
her some handsome and worthy young man, whom he most
approved, and when she had borne a child of this generous
race, bring it up as his own. Also he permitted that
if a man of character should entertain a passion for a
married woman upon account of her modesty and the
beauty of her children, he might beg her husband
that he might be allowed to plant, as it were, in rich
and fertile soil, excellent children, the congenial offspring
of excellent parents."^ This is marriage considered with-
^ Code of Manu, ix. 6o, 6i.
2 Letires edifiarites, t. xiv. p. 378.
' Plutarch, Lycurgus, xxix.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 223
out the least prejudice, from the strict point of view
of social utility. Solon imitates Lycurgus on this point,
but with one restriction which recalls the Code of Manu,
that the wife of an impotent husband should, with his
permission of course, choose a lover from among the
nearest relatives of the said husband.^
Custom sometimes went further than the laws, and
Plutarch relates that Cimon of Athens, who was a model
of goodness and greatness of soul, lent his wife to the
rich Callias.2 But that did not prevent the laws of Solon
from authorising the husband to kill the adulterer.^
Further, the law punished with civil degradation the too
indulgent husband, and authorised the family tribunals to
condemn to death the guilty woman, whom the husband
himself executed before witnesses^ Lastly, a law of Draco,
which was never abrogated, delivered the adulterous lover
to the discretion of the husband.^ After all, save for the
good of the state, before which everything had to bend, this
Greek legislation only consecrates the old primitive right by
which the wife was the property of her husband.
In all that concerns marriage ancient Rome singularly
resembles ancient Greece.^ Her customs and regulations
regarding the wife were at first of a savage atrocity. The
term adulterer begins by being applied to the woman alone,
and the law of the Ten Tables arraigned the guilty wife
before the domestic tribunal; she was condemned and
executed by the relatives themselves — Cognati necanto utl
volent. Family tribunals continued to exist during the
whole period of the republic, and even later, concurrently
with the \2iW Julia; but customs softened, and death was
commuted to banishment to two hundred miles from Rome
at the least, with the obHgation of wearing the toga of the
courtesan. The flagrante delicto naturally authorised the
husband to kill the wife on the spot;'' as for the lover, he
could keep him, torture him, mutilate him, raff anise him
^ Plutarch, Solon, xxxvi.
2 Id. , Life of Cimon. ^ Id. , Solon^ xliv.
* Legouve, Hist. Morale des Femmes, p. 182.
^ Menard, Morale avant les Fhilosophes, p. 303.
^ Lecky, Hist, of European Morals, vol. i. p. 312.
^ Wake, Evolution of Morality, vol. ii. p. 85.
2 24 THE E VOL UTION OF MARK I A GE
(I dare not give the sense of this picturesque word), and
deliver him to the ferocious lubricity of his slaves. Law
and public opinion authorised the husband to fleece the
surprised lover, and thus torture could be made a means of
extorting money from him.
The Lex Julia, enacted either by Julius Caesar or
Augustus, attempted a reform of morals. By the terms of
this law, which was in force till the time of Justinian, the
husband could not kill his wife, taken in adultery, without
being punished as a murderer. Neither could he put the
lover to death unless he were a slave, a go-between {lend), a
comedian, or a freed man of the husband or of the family.
But the husband could hold him prisoner twenty hours in
order to procure witnesses. The father had more extensive
rights than the husband ; he was authorised, in case of
flagrante delicto, to kill his daughter and her lover, but he
was to kill them both, and immediately. However, to
enable him to act thus as justiciary, he must have the
potestas still, and the crime must have been committed in
his house, or in that of his son-in-law. The Lex Julia
punishes the adulterous man by the confiscation of the half
of his goods ; it decrees the same punishment for the
woman, and, besides, forbids her to marry after the repudia-
tion, which was obligatory for the husband. The latter was
obliged even to drive away his wife at once for fear of being
called a go-between. This same Lex Julia made adultery
a public crime which every citizen could bring before the
tribunals, and it punished with the sword the adulterous
man.^ By degrees, and towards the Christian epoch, the
legislation relative to adultery was amended.
In his quality of philosopher the Emperor Antoninus was
more clement and just than his predecessors ; by one law
he interdicted the husband, who might himself be presum-
ably guilty of adultery, to kill or sue his wife surprised in
flagrante delicto. By degrees the customs became in time
so free and so tolerant that, Septimus Severus having enacted
new laws against adultery, the consul, Dion Cassius, found
at Rome three thousand plaints on the register for this
cause.2 Theodosius, says an ecclesiastical writer, mitigated
^ Institutes, iv., tit. 1 8.
2 Friedlander, Mcciirs Romaines, etc., t. i^^r- p, 367.
AMD OF THE FAMILY. 225
the penalties against adultery; he abolished an ancient
Roman custom, inspired by the idea of retaliation, according
to which the guilty woman, shut up in a little hut, was given
to the passers-by, who even were to be furnished with little
bells to attract attention.^ The same ignoble penalty was,
we have seen, in use among several of the Redskin tribes,
and this fact proves, with many others, the original equality
of the most diverse races in primitive savagery. Yielding to
the ardour of a new convert, Constantine legislated with
fury against all moral outrages, and decreed, without
wincing, the punishment of death against adulterers of
both sexes.
Justinian reformed and moderated legal severities. His
code condemns the adulteress to be whipped, to have her
hair shaved, and to be shut in a convent for life, if her
husband does not take her back before the end of two years.
In comparison with the excess of zeal shown by Constantine,
this is nearly merciful. M'e have already said enough of the
relaxation of manners under the wiser Pagan emperors.
A marriage which was almost free procured for young
women of the aristocracy an independence without much
restraint; and in practice, at least, and in spite of the
laws, adultery had ceased to be the abominable crime which
it had begun by being.2
XL Adultery in Barbarous Europe.
Our ancestors of barbarous Europe have had, as regards
adultery, customs quite as ferocious as those of the savages
of any other race. These same customs were still found
recently among the Tcherkesses of the Caucasus, where the
injured husband shaved the hair of the guilty woman, split
her ears, and sent her back to her parents, who sold her or
put her to death.^ The lover was generally killed by the
husband or his relatives. With the Lesghis, the husband
who had not killed his adulterous wife in flagrante delicto
could have her judged by the council of the tribe, and
^ Socrates, Hist. Eccles., lib. v., cap. xviii.
2 Friedlander, etc., Mxurs, t. i^r. p. 367.
' Klaproth and Gamba, Hist. Univ. des Foy,, t. xlv. p. 435.
I5t
226 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
she was then condemned and stoned after the Hebrew
fashion.^
In the Germanic and Scandinavian countries adultery has
primitively been considered as an enormous crime. Thus
the ancient Danes punished adultery with death, whilst
murder was only fined. The old Saxons began by burning
alive the adulteress, and on the extinct fire they hung or
strangled her accomplice. In England King Edmund
assimilated adultery to murder. King Canute ordered that
the man should be banished, and the woman should have
her nose and ears slit.
Tacitus tells us that with the Germans the adulteress was
made to walk naked through the villages. Prior to the
ordinances of Canute this old German custom was still
preserved in England. Her head shaved, and her body
bare to the waist, the woman was dragged out of her
husband's house in the presence of her relations, and then
whipped to death through the streets. Her lover was hung
on a tree.
According to the laws of the Visigoths, and in virtue of the
law of retaliation, the adulteress was given into the hands
of the wife of her lover, if the latter was married. And if
the lover had no children, his goods were confiscated to the
profit of the injured husband (lib. iii.).
The penalties ended by becoming entirely pecuniary,
especially for the man. The fifth section of the Salic law,
and the thirty-fifth section of the Ripuarian law, both inflict
a fine of two hundred pence on whoever abducts a married
woman. A law of Charlemagne orders the ravisher to
restore the wife and all that she has carried off. If the
husband does not exact a composition, the sheriff takes up
the matter, banishes the guilty man, and condemns him
to pay a fine of sixty pence. In the Middle Ages the
adulteress was generally shut up for life in a convent, and
lost her dowry. Whipping was sometimes added to these
punishments, as is proved by an ordinance made in 1561.^
The laws of King John (1362), of Charles le Bel (1325),
of Louis XL (1463), show that certain towns preserved the
old custom of making the adulteress run naked through the
^ Klaproth and Gamba, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xlv. p. 448.
''' Desmaze, Curiosites^ etc.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 227
city. Lastly, until 1789, legislation, although moderating
its severity, remains undecided, varies according to place,
circumstance, and even social position ; but the atrocious
and coarse penalties of ancient times are abolished and
forgotten.
XII. Adultery in the Past and in the Future,
Like all our ethnographical studies, this also affirms the
law of progress. We have seen savagery pass into barbarism,
and barbarism into civilisation. We have seen adultery
punished at first as a robbery — but a most execrable robbery
— and the chastisement falling chiefly on the woman as being
a property in revolt. For her alone fidelity is obligatory.
As to the adulterous husband, he is punished, if at all, on
the ground of having abused the property of another, and
not in the least because he has been unfaithful to his own
wife. By slow degrees, however, equity asserts certain
rights, and at the same time customs are humanised;
marriage becomes less and less a "contract of slavery"
for the woman; and, in spite of the recoil caused by
Catholicism, progress resumes its course, and we begin to
foresee the time when, marriage being instituted on rational
and just foundations, adultery will disappear, or nearly so,
from our customs and our laws.
But surely that time is far distant. Our conscience is
still so impregnated with the morality of past ages that our
public opinion and our juries willingly pardon a man who
murders his adulterous wife, while they are full of mercy for
the conjugal infidelities of this ferocious justiciary. The
antique morals which hold woman as a servile property
belonging to her husband still live in many minds. They
will be extinguished by degrees. The matrimonial contract
will end by being the same kind of contract as any other,
freely accepted, freely maintained, freely dissolved; but
where constraint has disappeared deception becomes an
unworthy offence. Such will be the opinion of a future
humanity, more elevated morally than ours. Doubtless it
will have no longer any tender indulgence for conveniently
dissimulated adultery, but, on the other hand, it will no
longer excuse the avenging husband.
CHAPTER XrV,
REPUDIATION AND DIVORCE.
I. In Savage Countries. — The right of repudiation in New Caledonia,
among the Hottentots, the Bongos, the Soulimas, the Fantis, the
Ashantees — Divorce in Polynesia — The right ot repudiation in America.
II. Divorce and Repudiation among Barbarous Peoples. — In Abyssinia,
at Haiti — The nejif of the Djebel-Taggale — Repudiation among the
Bedouins and the Touaregs — Repudiation among the Kabyles — The
*• prevented " Kabyle woman — The *' insurgent" Kabyle woman —
Repudiation among the Arabs — Divorce among the Arabs — Obligatory
divorce — Repudiation on account ot non-virginity —Divorce by mutual
consent in Peru and Thibet — Repudiation among the Mongols —
Repudiation in China — Obligatory divorce in China — Repudiation in
ancient India — Repudiation among the Hebrews — Repudiation in
Greece — Evolution of repudiation and divorce in ancient Rome —
Divorce and Christianity — Repudiation in barbarous Europe, in France,
in the Middle Ages.
III. The Evolution of Divorce.
I. In Savage Countries.
I have no longer to demonstrate that woman has
been treated with extreme brutality among nearly all
primitive peoples. In the lowest stage of savagery — as, for
example, in Australia and Tasmania— woman, being exactly
assimilated to a domestic animal, who can be beaten,
wounded, killed, and even eaten, her association with man
does not merit the name of marriage, and consequently
there is no question among these races of divorce, nor
even of repudiation. The man, being able, as master, to
dispose of the life of his wife, has, in addition, the right to
send her away, or abandon her, if he chooses.
THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE. 229
In New Caledonia, where the stage of the most brutal
savagery is past, where the wife is no longer carried off as in
Australia, but bought from her legal owners, the dissolution
of the conjugal union is still ill-regulated. The man can
chase away or repudiate his wife. The couple can also part
by mutual agreement, the children following sometimes the
mother and sometimes the father ; nothing is uniform.^ But
the purchase of the woman protects her already somewhat
against murder. As she represents a capital, the husband
often hesitates to kill her, or even to drive her away.
The Hottentots of the Damara tribe have on this point
similar customs to the New Caledonians. They do not
hesitate to send away the wives of whom they are tired, and
whom they can replace.^ In Caffraria the husbands have
also every right, without exception, over the wives they have
bought.^ In middle Africa, which is much more civilised,
divorce and repudiation are rather less simple, and often give
place to restitutions or indemnities.
With the Bongos, in case of divorce, the father must give
back a part of the utensils or fire-arms for which he had
ceded his daughter. He is even forced to a total restitution,
if the husband keeps the children while repudiating the wife.
In the last case there is evidently an idea of indemnifying
the husband for the charge he undertakes, and this view of
the matter is not uncommon in Africa.* Among the Bongos
marriage is considered as a simple commercial transaction ;
and it is the same in the whole of Central Africa, especially
among the Soulimas, where the women have the power of
leaving their husbands to unite themselves to another man,
on the sole condition of returning to their husband-proprietor
the sum that he has paid to purchase them from their
parents. However, this rare and singular liberty is taken
from them if they commit adultery. But even in this last
case they are treated with relative mildness.'' As we have
previously seen, the same custom is observed among the
1 Moncelon, Riponses au Questionnaire de Sociologies in Bull, de la
Soc, d'anthrop., 1 886.
2 Campbell, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxix. p, 343.
* Burchell, idid. t. xxvi. p, 479.
^ Schweinfurth, The Heart of Africa, vol. ii. p. 27.
° Laing, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxviii. p. 107.
230 THE E VOL UTION OE MARRIA GE
Fantis of the Gold Coast, where the woman who quits her
husband without a serious reason, taking her children with
her, need only pay him a fixed indemnity — four ackies
(twenty-two shillings and sixpence) for each child.^ In the
same way the Ashantees consider children a value worth
keeping ; thus their women can re-marry after a three years'
absence of their husband; and in case of the traveller's
return, it is the second marriage which holds good, only all
the children that are his become the property of the first
husband. 2 In fact, that equals an indemnity, since in Africa
children are generally considered as a commercial value.
In Polynesia the conjugal bond could be untied, as it was
tied, with the greatest ease. In the Marquesas Isles the
husband and wife parted of mutual accord, in case of
incompatibility of temper, and all was over ; but if without
his authorisation the wife deserted the conjugal hut to
follow a lover, the husband watched for her and administered
furious and repeated corrections.^ At Hawai the marriage
was also dissolved at will, if the husband and wife were
agreed on this point.'* At Tahiti the unions were of the
frailest ; the husband and wife parted without ceremony,
and the children were no obstacle, for by a previous agree-
ment they were made over to one or other of the partners.^
It was the same in the Caroline Isles, where, though the
race was different, the customs were analogous, and married
couples could divorce themselves at will.^
This fragility of marriages is common in savage countries.
The man always has the right of repudiation, and very often
the reciprocal right exists also. This fact seems even less
rare among savages than it is later, at the middle period of
the development of civilisation, when the patriarchal family
is solidly established.
In North America, meaning, of course, savage America,
the classic land of the matriarchate, man nevertheless enjoys
nearly always the right of repudiation, often without limits^
^ Brodie Cruikshank, The Gold Coast.
2 Bowdich, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t, xxviii. p. 425.
8 M. Radiguet, Derniers SauvageSy p. 179,
^ Revue deT Orient, 1844.
^ Moerenhout, Voy. atix ties, etc., t. ii. p. 62.
^ Freycinet, jlist. Univ. des Voy., t. xviii. p. 82.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 231
but certain tribes either admit divorce by mutual consent, or
limit the right of repudiation, or recognise certain rights of
the wife. The Malemoute Esquimaux drive away their
wives at wil^ as do also the Kamtschatdales, their con-
geners of Asia;2 but, with the Esquimaux, hardly any
but a free and capricious union is known ; there is as
yet no durable marriage. It is nearly the same in a
certain number of American tribes, where divorce is
easy at the will of the two parties. Among the Dakota
Santals the wife who is ill treated by her companion
has the right to retire; but she cannot take the child-
ren without the husband's consent.^ The marriage of
the Iroquois, and of some other neighbouring tribes, was
also broken by mutual consent. These Redskins lived in
great common houses, each one inhabited by a fraction of
the tribe, a gens^ and consequently, that one of the divorced
couple whose relations dominated in the gens^ remained
there ; the other was forced to depart* The Redskins of
California also practised this easy and mutual divorce. ** The
Navajos still recognised the right of the wife to leave her
husband, but already the masculine point of honour entered
into play, and the deserted husband was obliged, under pain
of ridicule, to revenge himself by killing some one.^ At
Guatemala the wife and husband could part at will and on
the slightest pretext.^ The Moxos of South America only
regarded marriage as an agreement that could be dissolved
by the will of the two parties.^ But in many other Redskin
tribes the right of divorce seems far from being reciprocal ;
it is replaced, to the detriment of the wife, by repudiation,
which the husband can pronounce with a word. According
to the Abbe Domenech, it is the fear of this terrible word
which maintains an appearance of harmony among the
many women in the interior of the Indian wigwams.^ With
the Chippeways a man takes or buys a girl of twelve, and
1 Bancroft, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 81.
2 Beniouski, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxxi. p. 410.
^ T. O. Dorsey, Omaha Sociology^ Smithsonian Institution, 1885.
* L. Morgan, Ancient Societies. ^ Id., ibid. p. 512.
^ Bancroft, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 412. "^ Id., ibid. vol. ii. p. 672.
^ A. d'Orbigny, L homme Amiricain, t. ii. p. 211.
^ Id., Voy.pittor., etc., p. 511.
232 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
sends her back when he is tired of her.^ The Chinook
husband can also repudiate his wife according to his
caprice.2 In a tribe of the Nahuas, the husbands enjoyed
the same rights, but on condition of exercising them on the
day after the marriage ; the experimental union preceded
the durable one.^ In New Mexico, the husband repudiated
at will, on condition only of restoring his wife's possessions.'*
A single word of the Caribean husbands also sufficed to
dismiss the wife/ The same rule is found with the
Abipones also, where the husband can repudiate his wife on
the slightest pretext.^
The conclusion to be drawn from all these facts is, that
there are no more fixed rules for divorce than for marriage
in savage societies. But, as the wife is more often bought
or captured, it is quite natural that her owner should send
her away at his pleasure. Wherever divorce is mutual, it is
when the wife costs little to obtain, or where the ties of rela-
tionship are well defined between the members of her and
her tribe, or her gens^ who then think themselves bound to
afford her a certain protection.
IT. Divorce and Repudiation among Barbarous Peoples.
These free and fragile marriages are found in societies
more civilised than those of the Polynesians and the
American Indians. Bruce tells us that in Abyssinia
marriage is in reality only a free union, without any sanction
or ceremony; couples unite, part, and re-unite as many
times as they like. There are neither legitimate nor illegiti-
mate children. In case of divorce the children are divided ;
the girls belong to the father, and the boys to the mother.^
M. d'Abbadie affirms also that Abyssinian marriage is
purely civil and always dissoluble ; he adds that it is dotal,
and co-exists, for rich men, with the concubinate.^ It is
1 Bancroft, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 117. ^ Id.^ ibid. vol. ii. p. 261.
2 Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 241. ■* /</., ibid. vol. i. p. 511.
^ loy. h la Terre-ferme, etc., t. i^r. p. 304.
* DobritzhofFer, An Account of the Abipones of Paraguay, vol. ii. p. 97.
^ Bruce, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxiii. p. 365.
^ D'Abbadie, Dotcze ans dans la haute Ethiopie, pp. 100, 128.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 233
quite certain that divorce is largely used in Abyssinia, since
Bruce says he has seen a woman surrounded with seven
former husbands. In Hayti, the only negro country that is
civilised in European fashion, we find either preserved or
instituted, by the side of legal monogamic marriage, free
unions which recall the Roman concubinate. The persons
thus paired are called " placed " ; they suffer no contempt
on this account, and their children have the same rights as
those of persons legally married. There are at Hayti ten
times more " placed " persons than married ones ; they
separate less often than the latter are divorced, and have
better morals.^ But in general the free union, or, what
comes to the same thing, the power of divorce, left to the
two united parties, is rare enough in countries more or less
civilised. Most usually it is the husband who, even with-
out any cause of adultery in the wife, has the right to
repudiate her. It is thus, for example, at Madagascar,
where, in order to repudiate his wife, a husband need
simply declare his resolution to the magistrate who has
received the notification of the marriage; it is only necessary
for him to pay for the second time the hasina^ or duty on
marriage. When once he has declared his intention, the
husband has still twelve days' grace to retract it ; but if he
exceeds this delay the repudiated wife becomes her own
mistress and free to marry again.^
In Kordofan, among the Djebel-Taggale,^ the great legal
motive for repudiation in all the primitive legislations,
sterility, justified proceedings that were absolutely savage.
The ceremony was called the nefir (drum or trumpet). A
woman being apparently sterile, the husband, before repudi-
ating her, called noisily together all his male relatives, who,
after a feast, all had intimacy with the barren wife. If this
heroic expedient did not result in pregnancy, the husband
sold his wife by auction, agreeing to return to his obliging
relatives the difference, if any, between the first price and the
sum she would fetch in the auction. Extraordinary as this
custom of nefir may seem to us, it is, apart from the
final sale, but the repetition with more shamelessness of
1 Annie Besant, Marriage, as it was, as it is, and as it should be.
2 Dupr^, Trois Mois d Madagascar, p. 153.
3 D. C\JiViy, Journal de Voyage d. Siout et du El-ObHd^ en 1857-5S.
234 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
analogous practices in India, and even in ancient Greece, in
case of well-proved sterility in the wife.
The Bedouins and the Touaregs in general have nothing
comparable to the nefir of the Djebel-Taggale, but among
them the extreme facility and excessive frequency of re-
pudiations renders marriage nearly illusory. According
to Burckhardt, repudiation is so common with the former
that a man sometimes has fifty wives in succession.^
With the Touaregs of the Sahara the wives themselves
can demand divorce, and we have seen that they thus
force their husbands to bend to monogamy, in spite of the
Koran and of their polygamic appetites.^ It seems that in
certain of their tribes the women make it a point of honour
to be often repudiated. Only to have one husband is, in
their eyes, a humiliating thing, and they are heard to say :
"Thou art not worth anything; thou hast neither beauty
nor merit ; men have disdained thee, and would have none
ofthee."3
This is quite in accord with the laisser aller habitual
to the primitive Berbers in regard to marriage. In this
respect, however, our Kabyles of Algeria contrast with the
other ethnic groups of their race. Their conjugal customs
are most rigid ; neither liberty nor libertinage exist for the
wife amongst them. Their customs in regard to repudia-
tion and divorce are consequently very curious, and are
worth studying in detail. In Kabyle, marriage is treated
literally as a commercial affair of the most serious kind,
especially for the women, who are owned as things by their
husbands. The customs and the Kanouns^ however, forbid
the exchange of wives, and the husband whose wife has fled
from the conjugal dwelling is forbidden to sell the fugitive
except to a man of the tribe, and even then he is not allowed
to have the price.* Still, the Kabyle husband has preserved
the right of repudiation, and this right he alone enjoys, and
without restriction.
There are in Kabyle two kinds of repudiation. In one,
the husband simply says, "I repudiate thee;" and he
1 Burckhardt, loc. cit.
- Duveyrier, loc. cit, p. 429.
^ Raffenel, Voy. au pays des N^gres^ t. ler. p. 355.
* Hanoteau et Letourneux, Kabylic^ t. ii. p. 164.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 235
repeats this formula three times. The wife remams depend-
ent on him until he sells her by means of a price of redemp-
tion. If he accepts from the father or some other man
this price {Jefdi) he must, when the sum is once counted
out, declare before witnesses that he gives up all rights over
his wife. Then, and only then, the marriage is dissolved.^
Under the other form of repudiation the husband says,
"I repudiate thee, and I put such a sum on thy head."
The formula is pronounced once, twice, and thrice. In
this case the husband is irrevocably bound, and by paying
the sum fixed, the wife has the power to marry again; at the
same time, the husband can specify the conditions, can say,
for example, that if the woman is married to such or such
a man, the price of redemption will be doubled or tripled.
Sometimes the sum is so great that it amounts to an abso-
lute interdiction of any fresh marriage, and the woman is
then designated " a prevented one" {thamaouok't).^ When
the formula of repudiation has only been pronounced once
or twice, the husband can, by means of a fine paid to the
dj'emda, and with the consent of the father-in-law, take back
his wife; but he loses his reputation, and his testimony is
no longer legal. If the formula has been pronounced three
times, it is irrevocable. As for the other revocation, public
opinion does not admit that it may be revocable, unless it
has only been declared once, and that the husband find a
priest who will consecrate a fresh union.^
If, after repudiation, the Kabyle woman marries again,
and becomes a widow, the first husband can retake her
without repayment and without a fine.'*
Without pronouncing the formula of repudiation, the
Kabyle husband has the power to send his wife back to her
family, with the consent of the said family. If the husband
has serious reasons of displeasure he sends her to her
parents without forewarning them, mounted on an ass, and
conducted by a servant or a negro. This treatment is so
ignominious for the wife that it is equal to repudiation, and
public opinion then forbids the husband to take her back.
Sometimes, in case of proved adultery, the husband sends
^ Planoteau et Letourneux, Kahylie, t. ii. p. 178.
2 /</., ibid, t. ii. p. 177.
^ Id.y ibid, t. ii. p. 177. * Id.^ ibid. t. ii. p. 179.
236 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
the wife back to her family, after having shaved her head ;
the guilty one is then for ever dishonoured, and how-
ever beautiful she may be, she never finds another hus-
band. ^
In case of repudiation, for any motive whatever, the
Kabyle husband has the right to keep all his children, girls
and boys, even those at the breast.^ As for the repudiated
woman, she always returns to her parents, and it is to these
last that a man must apply to marry her; but the new
marriage cannot be concluded until after the payment to
the first husband of the price of the redemption (lefdi),
which is sometimes more, sometimes less, than the
thamanth^ or price of the first acquisition. Generally, too,
the parents profit by the opportunity to claim a supplement,
or gratification. The father often agrees first with the
husband, reimburses him for the thamafith^ and afterwards
negotiates his daughter as he pleases. In a certain number
of tribes the husband can directly sell his wife, but Kabyle
morality reproves this practice,^ and permits the wife in that
case to retire to her father, where she remains " prevented "
{thamaouok' t) ; however, if the father is powerful, he risks
sometimes marrying his daughter, and the tribe at need
stands by him.'* In any case, the repudiated Kabyle woman
can only marry after a delay (at'dda), generally of four
months,® which is conformable to the prescriptions of
the Koran. If she flees the country, the parents must
restore to the husband the thamanth or lefdi^ for this
last can no longer gain them a new suitor.^ The whole
of this regime is very partial to the husband. However, as
public opinion in Kabyle is sovereign, it has decreed a
few protective measures for woman, recalling from afar
the proverbial liberality of the Berbers in conjugal matters.
Thus, though the woman is deprived of the right of divorce,
she is allowed a "right of insurrection" if she has just
complaints to make. In this case she begins by telling one
of her relatives, who fetches her back to her father openly,
the husband not being permitted to oppose ; it remains to
^ Hanoteau et Letourneux, KabyliCy t. ii. p. i8i.
2 Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 184. ^ Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 173.
3 Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 159. ^ Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 180.
* Id.^ ibid. t. ii. p. 180,
AND OF THE FAMIL K 237
him either to repudiate the fugitive or to let her be a
" prevented one." It is understood that custom protects an
"insurgent" wife only when she takes refuge with her
relatives.^ Some tribes have tariffed the thamanth; and in
case of repudiation the husband can only exact or receive
the ordained sum. As for the tariff of the repudiated woman,
it is nearly always more than the thamanth^ or price of the
virgin and the widow. This is done counting on the avidity
of the husband, to urge him to permit a fresh marriage.^
Lastly, it is the rule that after four years' absence on the
part of the husband the union is dissolved and the woman
is free.^ This is a wise law which certain European codes
might borrow with advantage from Kabyle legislation.
It is a veritable godsend for scientific sociology to be able
to know in its minute details all this curious regulation of
Kabyle marriage. Too often we are forced to content our-
selves, in regard to savage or barbarous peoples, with general
assertions that have to be completed as well as may be from
accounts that are incoherent, sometimes contradictory, and
always fragmentary. Here we possess a whole barbarous
code, quite an assemblage of old Berber customs, which
are more or less confounded with the precepts of the
Koran.
The law of Mahomet itself is only a sort of compromise
between the ancient customs of Arabia and the Biblical
precepts relating to marriage. On certain sides the Arab
customs are superior to the severity of the Kabyle kanouns,
but on others they are inferior to them, as, for example, in
not affording to the wife the right of " insurrection."
It is necessary to distinguish between the text of the
Koran and practice, which has notably departed from it —
sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The
Koran leaves to the husband the absolute right of repudia-
tion. It orders that if the formula of repudiation has been
pronounced three times, the husband cannot take back the
wife until she has been married to another ; it permits him
to do it, therefore, in the contrary case.'* It specifies that
the repudiated wife should have a sufficient maintenance
provided for her, and that the husband should not keep the
1 Hanoteau et Letourneux, Kabylie^ t. ii. p. 182. ^ Id.., ibid.
3 Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 180. * Koran, ii. 229, 230.
2s^ THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
dower she brought with her -} that the husband should have
four months' grace to retract his decision j^ that if the
repudiated wife is suckling an infant, the husband, or, in his
default, the next heir, should supply her needs during the
two years that the suckling should last.^
The Koran orders repudiated wives not to re-marry before
three menstrual periods, not to dissimulate their pregnancy,
"if they beHeve in God and in the day of judgment;" and
in the last case it advises the husbands to take them back.'*
Lastly, the law of Mahomet encourages amicable arrange-
ments, and these by money payments between ill-assorted
couples ; it authorises the husband to sell a divorce to his
wife for a cession, with her consent, of a portion of her
dowry. 6 This is what the texts, which are both legal and
sacred, declare : this, then, is the theory. We will now see
what is the practice as regards repudiation and divorce in
Algeria at the present time.
There are three graduated formulas of repudiation : first,
the discontented husband says simply to the wife, " Go
away," and if he has only said it once or twice, he may
retract his decision ; second, but if he has said, " Thou art
to me as one dead, or as the flesh of swine," it is forbidden
to take back the repudiated wife until she has been married
to another, and then repudiated or left a widow; lastly,
there is a formula so solemn that it entails a separation for
ever ; it is this, " Let thy back be turned on me henceforth,
like the back of my mother."^
Any one of these senseless reasons, which have often the
force of law with unenlightened races, can be set aside, and
the repudiation counted null when it has been pronounced
during a critical period of the woman.'' The woman with
child, on the contrary, can be repudiated, but she has a
right to an "allowance during pregnancy."^ Actual custom
also admits voluntary divorce, at the proposal of the wife,
for a redemption paid by her to her master. Sometimes
the initiative comes from the husband, who, knowing that
his wife desires her liberty, says to her, "I repudiate
1 Koran, ii. 229. ^ Ibid. ii. 233.
2 Ibid. ii. 226, 242. ^ Ibid. ii. 228. ^ Ibid, iv, 1 27.
* Meynier, Etudes sur I'lslamisme, pp. 168, 169.
' Id., ibid. p. 178. 8 Id., tbid. 174.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 239
thee, if thou givest me \h\% pallium of Herat, or this horse, or
this camel," etc. It is then a sort of divorce by mutual
consent, and the two part as good friends.^
Lastly, there is obligatory divorce, pronounced by the
Cadi, on the plaint of the woman, when the husband is
impotent, when in spite of these matrimonial conventions
he tries to compel the woman to quit the house of her
parents, or when he has corrected her with excessive
brutality.^ Then the divorced wife goes away, taking her
dowry with her.
Taken altogether, these customs, while conforming to
the spirit of the Koran, have in a certain measure improved
the position of the married woman. This is because progress
is the law of the social as well as the organic world ; more
or less slowly, more or less quickly, it ends by modifying in
practice even theocratic legislations, which are the most
rigid of all. But the old customs are still found almost
intact in certain districts of Arabia which have remained
more or less completely isolated. Thus in nearly all
Arab countries there is one especial reason which justifies
immediate repudiation of the marriage, and that is the
absence of virginity, when it has been affirmed in the
agreements preceding the union. But in Yemen this
circumstance justifies far more than mere repudiation; it
excuses the murder of the bride ; ^ it is a practical return
to the old law preserved in the Bible ordering the guilty
woman to be stoned.
After the manner of all barbarous legislations, that of
Mahomet has corrected, or at least tried to restrain, certain
especially ferocious customs ; but, on the other hand, it has
given the force of law to some particularly crying abuses,
and has thus rendered them more difficult of redress. This
is generally the case. In all barbarous societies the
subjection of woman is more or less severe; customs or
coarse laws have regulated the savagery of the first anarchic
ages ; they have doubtless set up a barrier against primitive
ferocity, they have interdicted certain absolutely terrible
abuses of force, but they have only replaced these by a
^ Meynier, Etudes sur V Islaviisme.
^ Id.^ ibid. p. 174.
^ Niebuhr, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxxi. p. 330.
240 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
servitude which is still very heavy, is often iniquitous, and
no longer permits to legally possessed women those escapes,
or capriciously accorded liberties, which were tolerated in
savage life. We shall have to prove this fact more than
once in continuing our ethnographic study of divorce in
barbarous societies.
In ancient Peru the liberal and reasonable custom of
divorce by mutual consent was adopted. ^ At Quito, at
least, where marriage was not civil and obligatory, the
married pair had the power of separating by mutual accord.
In Mexico divorce was merely tolerated. Before being
allowed to break the conjugal tie, the couple were obliged
to submit their differences to a special tribunal, which, after
a minute examination of the facts, and three hearings of the
parties, sent them away without pronouncing judgment, if
they persevered in their design.^ The tribunal could, it
seems, forbid the separation, but it did not expressly
authorise it. Its silence, however, equalled a sentence of
divorce.
This luxury of legality, this pretence of placing the con-
jugal union out of reach of the caprice or injustice of one
of the parties, can only be met with in societies already
advanced in organisation.
In lamaic Thibet, where marriage is a simple civil
convention, with which the theocratic government of the
country does not interfere, marriages are dissolved, as they
are made, by mere mutual consent; but this consent is
necessary, and there only results a separation analogous to
ours, and taking from the separated couple the power to
re-marry.^ With the nomad Mongols we find, in spite of a
relative civilisation, the absolute right of repudiation left
to the husband alone, as it is in savage countries. The
Mongol husband who is tired of his wife, whom, besides,
he has purchased, can send her back to her parents without
giving the least reason; he simply loses the oxen, sheep,
and horses that he has paid for her. On their side, the
parents make no difficulty of taking her back, for they have
the right to sell her again. The Mongol wife can also
^ Prescott, Conquest of Peru.
^ Id., Conquest of Mexico y vol. i. p. 28.
^ Turner, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxxi. p. 437.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 241
spontaneously quit her husband ; but this is not so simple a
nratter, because she represents a value. It is a capital that
has fled; therefore the parents must send her back four
times following to the husband-proprietor. If the latter
persists in not receiving her, the marriage is dissolved, but
in that case the parents must restore a part of the cattle
previously paid by the marital purchaser.^ In short, repu-
diation and divorce are considered in Mongolia entirely
as commercial transactions, and always arranged for the
advantage of the husband.
The Chinese have regulated this still quite primitive
divorce, and while leaving to the husband the right of
repudiation, they have carefully specified the conditions
of it.
A Chinese husband can repudiate his wife for adultery,
sterility, immodesty, disobedience to her father and mother
or to him, loquacity or propensity to slander, inclination to
theft, a jealous disposition, or an incurable malady. These
motives, however, no longer suffice when the wife has worn
mourning for her father-in-law or her mother-in-law ; when
the family has become rich in comparison with its former
poverty ; and lastly, when the wife has no longer a father or
mother to receive her. If, heedless of these interdictions,
the husband repudiates his wife all the same, he becomes
liable to receive eighty strokes of bamboo, and must take
her back. 2 To the husband alone belongs the right of
repudiation, but the law admits divorce by mutual consent.
On the other hand, it has taken good care to consecrate the
servitude of the wife by ordering that if she flees from the
conjugal abode when the husband refuses a divorce, she
shall be punished by a hundred strokes of bamboo, and
may be sold by her husband to any one willing to marry
her.3 Chinese legislation absolutely refuses the "right of
insurrection " to the wife, which the Kabyle Kanouns,
rigorous as they are to women, have granted. For divorce,
as for everything else, China is at the stage of mitigated
or humane barbarism. The foundation of her laws has
remained savage, but a less ancient spirit has attempted to
modify their severity. It has limited the right of repudiation,
^ Hue, Voy. dans la Tariarie^ t. i^r. p. 301.
^ Pauthier, Chine Moderne, p. 239. ^ /</., ibid.
16
24 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
at first in the power of the master; it has specified the
impediments; lastly, it has sanctioned divorce by mutual
consent, which still terrifies our legislators.
Ancient India had also left the right of repudiation to the
husband, but she had no place for divorce in her legislation,
and had imposed no restriction on the good pleasure of the
husband if there existed one of the cases enumerated by the
Code : — *' A wife given to intoxicating liquors, having bad
morals, given to contradicting her husband, attacked with
an incurable disease, as leprosy, or who has been spendthrift
of his wealth, ought to be replaced by another." "A sterile
wife ought to be replaced in the eighth year ; the wife whose
children are all dead, in the tenth year ; the wife who only
bears daughters, in the eleventh ; the wife who speaks with
bitterness, instantly." ^ " For one whole year let a husband
bear with the aversion of his wife ; but after a year, if she
continues to hate him, let him take what she possesses, only
giving her enough to clothe and feed her, and let him cease
to cohabit with her."^
Here it is no longer a question of divorce by mutual con-
sent, nor of protective measures for the wife. If she is
legally replaced without being repudiated, and then if she
abandons with anger the conjugal abode, she must be im-
prisoned or repudiated in the presence of witnesses.^ The
prolonged absence of the husband does not set free the
wife, even when she has been left without resources. She
must patiently await the return of the absent master, during
eight years if he is gone for a pious motive ; six years if he
is travelling for science or glory ; three years if he is roam-
ing the world for his pleasure. When these delays have
expired, the deserted one is none the less married ; she has
only the power to go to seek the traveller.*
Like the writers of the Code of Manu, those of the Bible
have thought very little of the rights of woman in legislating
on divorce and repudiation.
The book of Deuteronomy, very accommodating for the
husband, authorises him to repudiate his wife " when she
find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some
uncleanness in her;" he has only to put a "letter of
1 Code of Manu^ ix. pp. 8o, 8i.
2 Ibid. p. 'JT ^ Ibid, p. 83. * Ibid.
AND OF THK FAMIL Y. 243
divorce " in her hand, and may not take her again, either if
she is repudiated by another husband or becomes a widow.^
With much stronger reason a man can repudiate an im-
modest wife.2 As for the wife, she could only demand a
divorce for very grave causes : if the husband was attacked
by a contagious malady (leprosy) ; if his occupations were
too repugnant; if he deceived her; if he habitually ill-
treated her; if he refused to contribute to her maintenance;
and if, after ten years of marriage, his impotence was well
established, especially if the woman declared she needed a
son to sustain her in her old age.^ But even then it was
the husband who was reputed to have sent away his wife,
and she lost her dowry.
All these antique legislations bear on the woman with
shameful iniquity. The most humane have confined their
efforts to placing a few slight restrictions on the brutal good
pleasure of man, which nothing holds back in savage
societies. But it is important to notice that certain tribes,
still more or less buried in savagery, have regulated divorce
with humanity enough and equity enough to put to shame
the theocratic legislators of the great barbarian societies.
We discover again this iniquitous spirit in regard to
the respective situations of the man and the woman in
marriage in the Greco-Roman world, but it becomes
moderated as ancient civilisation progresses. In primitive
Greece the right of repudiation is left to the man, and he
uses it whenever he thinks he has legitimate motives for
doing so.* This right continued in more civilised Greece,
but it was gradually restricted. Nevertheless, it was always
a great dishonour for a woman to be repudiated. Euripides
makes Medea say, " Divorce is always shameful for a
woman." In Andromachus^ Menelaus, speaking of his
daughter Hermione, said : " I will not that my daughter
should be driven from the nuptial bed ; save that, all that
a woman can suffer is relatively without importance ; but for
her to lose her husband is to lose her life." At Athens
repudiations were frequent, and they would have been more
^ Deuteronomy, ch. xxiv. ver. i, 2.
"^ Mischnah (third part).
8 — - - -
* A. Weil, La Femme juive^ passim.
* Goguet, Orig. des LoiSj t. iL p. 6r.
244 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
so if considerations of interest had not often hindered the
good pleasure of the master. He was obliged, in fact, by
the conditions of the law, in repudiating his wife, to restore
her dowry, or pay interest at the rate of nine oboles.^ More-
over, the relatives who were guardians of the woman could
claim by law a pension for her maintenance. ^ A personage
of Euripides cries mournfully: "The riches that a wife
brings only serve to make her divorce more difficult." ^
However, the right of divorce was recognised for women,
but custom held the laws in check by rendering it difficult
for wives to perform any public action, and by imposing on
them the confinement of the gyneceum.*
At Rome divorce evolved more rapidly and more com-
pletely than in Greece. In primitive Rome we see at
first, as usual, the right of repudiation allowed to the
husband and forbidden to the wife. " Romulus," says
Plutarch, "gave the husband power to divorce his wife in
case of her poisoning his children, or counterfeiting his
keys, or committing adultery, and if on any other account
he put her away she was to have one moiety of his goods,
and the other was to be consecrated to Ceres." ^ The
Roman husband could also put away his wife for
sterility.^ He was, however, obliged to assemble the family
beforehand for consultation. If the marriage had been con-
tracted by confarreation it had to be dissolved by a contra-
dictory ceremony, diffarreation.''^ In the ancient law, when
the crime of the woman led to divorce, she lost all her
dowry. Later, only a sixth was kept back by adultery, and
an eighth for other crimes.^ At length divorce by consent
{bona gratia) was introduced in spite of the censors ; and
then both parties had liberty of divorce, only with certain
pecuniary disadvantages for the husband whose fault led
to the divorce. Thus the adulterous husband lost advantage
of the terms which usage accorded for the restitution of the
dowry. In the last stage of the law the guilty husband lost
the dowry, or the donatio propter nuptias. Inversely, if the
^ Demosthenes, Against Aphobus. ^ Id. ^ Against Neera.
8 Euripides, Melanippus, Fr. 31 (quoted by Cavallotti).
* Lecky, Hist, of European Morals, etc., vol. ii. p. 287.
* Romulus, XXXV. * Plutarch, Demandes Romaines, xiv.
^ Italie ancienne ( Univers pittoresque), p. 487. ^ Ibid. p. 488.
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 245
wife divorced without a cause, the husband retained a sixth
of the dowry for each child, but only up to three-sixths.^
The formula of the Roman repudiation recalls by its ener-
getic conciseness the Kabyle formula, and it seems especially
to relate to the property; Fes tuas habeto? The wife,
even though subjected to the manus^ obtained at last the
power of divorce, by sending the repudium to her husband,
who was then forced to set her free from the manus.^ In
short, divorce became in time very easy. Cicero repudiated
his wife Terentia in order to get a new dowry. Augustus
forced the husband of Livia to put her away, although she
was with child. Seneca speaks of women counting their
years, not according to the Consuls, but to the number of
their husbands. Juvenal quotes a woman who was married
eight times in five years. St. Jerome mentions another who,
after having had twenty-three husbands, married a man who
had had twenty-three wives.
Constantine, humbly obedient to the Christian spirit
which had invaded his base soul, restricted the cases of
divorce to three for each spouse, but always admitted
mutual consent, and under Justinian the full liberty of
divorce reappeared in the Code.'*
From its origin Christianity combatted the morals called
pagan, which name even was a reproach. Abandoning the
modest reality, it lost anchor from the first, and was
drowned in a sea of dreams. Marriage, instead of being
simply the union of a man and a woman in order to produce
children, became mystic ; it was the symbol of the union
of Christ with his church ; it was tolerated only, and
the church especially condemned divorce. Nevertheless,
custom and good sense held out a long time against
ecclesiastical unreason, and it was very slowly, in the
twelfth century only, that the civil law prohibited divorce, e
St. Jerome had allowed, as did afterwards the Christians of
the East, that adultery broke the bond of marriage as well
for the woman as the man, which is simply just ; but this
sentiment was condemned and anathematised by the
Council of Trent,^ which thus returned, contrary to the
^ Italic ancienney p. 488. ^ R. Cubain, Lois Civiles de Rome, p. 183.
* Italic ancienne, p. 487. * Lecky, loc. cit., p. 352. ^ /c/., ibid,
** Session xxiy., can. i7-
246 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
opinion of Papinian and the ancient jurists, to savage
customs, which make the wife the slave, and not the
companion, of her husband.
Among the Germans and the Scandinavians, the man
alone had the right of repudiation according to the almost
universal usage of barbarous peoples ; however, divorce by
mutual consent was tolerated.^ The SaHc law also per-
mitted divorce, and we find in Marculphus the form of an
act of divorce by mutual consent. "The husband and
wife, such and such a one, seeing that discord troubles their
marriage and that love does not rule in it, have agreed to
separate, and leave each other mutually free, without
opposition from either party, under pain of a fine of one
pound."
The pagan Irish had rendered divorce useless by institut-
ing marriages of one year, at the end of which the wife could
be repudiated by the temporary husband and even ceded to
another for a fresh year. These experimental marriages
were made or unmade, sometimes on the first of May, and
sometimes on the first of November of each year.^
Repudiations at the will of the husband are still in use
among the Teherkesses of the Caucasus, whose customs
have more than one feature in common with those of our
ancestors of barbarous Europe. With them the husband
can repudiate in two manners : either by sending away his
wife in the presence of witnesses, and leaving the dowry to
the parents, which implies the liberty to marry again for the
repudiated wife ; or by simply driving the wife away, and
then he can recall her again during one year.^
In France, under the two first races, the man could put
away the woman ; he could even, which is more rare and
original, repudiate his family, and leave it, after a declaration
before the judge, and this destroyed all rights of inheritance
on both sides. Later, under the influence of the Catholic
clergy, who by reason, no doubt, of their want of practical
experience in the "things of the flesh," claimed energetically
the right of regulating all conjugal questions, a distinction
1 Rambaud, Hist, de la Civil. Fran(.y t. ler* p. 107.
2 D'Arbois de Jubainville, Preface to Hist. inst. primit. of Sir H.
Maine.
' Klaproth et Gamba, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xlv. p. 435.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 247
was made between the separation of abode {quoad thorum)
and complete divorce {quoad vinculum) \ the first only was
permitted. The Church, always assuming to be immutable,
maintained in theory the indissolubility of the sacramental
marriage, and it needed the great movement of the French
Revolution to shake for a moment the Catholic prejudice
against divorce, which was incompletely re-established in
our French code a few years ago. But the brutality
of our ancient conjugal customs survives still, and they
are not up to the level of our legislation, imperfect as
that is. Many husbands always treat their wives as slaves,
against whom everything is lawful, since in a hundred suits
for separation or divorce there are ninety-one to ninety-
three made by wives on account of cruelties and serious
injuries.^ Above all, our juries almost invariably acquit the
husband who has murdered his adulterous wife. So difficult
is it to "put off the old man."
III. The Evolution of Divorce.
Our various researches on the subject of divorce have led
us to nearly uniform conclusions. They all show us that,
however dissimilar may be the countries or the epochs,
the union of man and woman begins, with very rare
exceptions, by the complete slavery of the latter, and her
assimilation to domestic animals, over which man has all
possible rights, a fortiori that of driving away. Then
as the ages move on their course we see societies which
become by degrees civilised, and in proportion to this
advance the condition of the woman improves. At
first the man could kill her if she displeased him ; then,
cases of adultery apart, he contented himself with repudiating
her ; next, the severity of this right of repudiation, at first
unlimited, was mitigated; then it was restricted to certain
well-defined cases ; some rights were even granted to the
repudiated woman. At length her own right was recognised
to seek divorce in order to escape from intolerable treatment.
At last a return was made to divorce by mutual consent,
which had been allowed in a good number of primitive
^ M. Block, Europe FoHtique et Sociale, p. 216.
248 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
societies, before a rigid legislation, generally theocratic, had
crystallised, in codifying them, some of the old barbarous
customs. The Catholic prejudice itself, absurd as it was in
regard to marriage, became humanised by time. Doubtless
the Church continued in principle to condemn divorce,
but she allowed a good number of cases of nullity of
marriage, undoing thus with one hand what she attempted
to build up with the other, and, willingly or not, compound-
ing and compromising with " the world."
CHAPTER XV.
WIDOWHOOD AND THE LEVIRATE.
I. Widowhood in Savage CounM'es.— Societies without widowhood
— The widow considered as property by the Hottentots and at the
Gaboon, etc. — Widowhood in Kouranko, at Kaarta, and in Mada-
gascar — The wives of Queen Ranavalo — Widowhood among the Red-
skins—Sacrifices and mutilations of widows.
II. Widowhood in Barbarous Countries. — Widowhood in Bhootan —
Polyandric widowhood— Widowhood in China— Traffic in the widow
— Glorification of widowhood — Suicides of widows — Widowhood
in India — Duties of widows — Suttees — Widowhood in Islamite
countries — Position given to the widow in the Koran — Position given
to the widow in the Bible— Widowhood in Kabylia— The sleeping
foetus — Widowhood in ancient Rome — Opinion of the Christian
Church on second marriages — Widowhood in barbarous Europe and
in the Middle Ages.
III. The Levirate, — The levirate in Melanesia, among the Redskins,
the Ostiaks, the Kirghis, the Afghans, in the Code of Manu, among
the Hebrews.
IV. Summary.
I. Widowhood in Savage Countries.
We have very little knowledge as to the condition of
widows in the lowest human societies. It is one of
those questions of social organisation hardly noticed by
the travellers to whom we look especially for information.
To begin with, we may affirm that widowhood, regarded
as a special condition recognised by customs and laws, does
not exist in very anarchic societies. Voltaire has some-
where said that the origin of divorce was doubtless posterior
by some days to that of marriage. With much stronger
250 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
reason may we infer that the existence of some kind of
marriage is necessary before there can be any widowhood.
Widowhood, therefore, does not exist in societies where
promiscuity or temporary marriage prevails. No widow-
hood is possible, for example, in the tribe of the Australian
Kamilaroi, where all the women of a class are common to
all the men of the same class. It became otherwise from
the time that, either by capture, purchase, or any other
means, woman became the particular property of one man.
Thenceforth it was necessary to regulate in some way the
condition of the widow or widows. Generally the solution
of the problem has been very simple : the widow, who has
been habitually captured or bought by the deceased, does
not cease after his death to be regarded as a thing or pro-
perty ; she is part of the inheritance, by the same title as
chattels or domestic animals. Sometimes, however, special
obligations or troubles are imposed on her ; Kolben tells us
that in passing to a fresh husband, the Hottentot widow
must cut off a joint of the little finger ; but to cut off a
finger-joint was a common custom with the Hottentots on
the death of a relative, and the women did it, or were
forced to do it, more often than the men. There is nothing
in this particular to the condition of the widow.^ At the
Gaboon a man's wives belonged to his heir, and if the
deceased was of importance in the tribe, they must resign
themselves to a period of mourning and of widowhood,
which lasts a year or two. The end of this mourning is
marked by a great festival or orgy, which Du Chaillu has
thus described — " The wives of the deceased (he had seven)
were radiant . . . they were going to quit their widow's
clothes and join the festival like brides. The heir had the
right to marry them all, but to show his generosity, he had
ceded two to a younger brother and one to a cousin." They
drank bumper after bumper (palm wine), and then began to
dance. " The wives danced. But what dances ! The
most modest step was indecent. "^
In equatorial Africa, the son inherits the widows of his
1 Burchell, Hist. Univ. des Voy., t. xxvi. p. 321. — Thompson, ibid.y
t. xxix. p. 163.
2 Du Chaillu, Voy. dans V Afrique ^quatoriale, p. 268.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 251
father : it is thus in Yarriba.^ Sometimes they are sold
simply, if they have had no children by the deceased hus-
band. ^ In Kouranko, widows have a milder fate. They
are numerous; for, as young girls, they have generally been
sold by their parents to old husbands; but according to
Laing, the custom of the country renders them free, and
makes them their own mistresses as soon as they are
widows, and they profit by this immediately to choose
themselves a young husband, and lavish cares and atten-
tions on him; it is then their turn.^ Nevertheless, the
custom of classing widows with the heritage seems very
general in negro Africa. It exists with the Bambarras of
Kaarta, where, at the death of a prince, his successor puts
the wives of the deceased monarch up to auction. Even if
old and horrible, they sell easily and dear, for men like the
honour of succeeding to a king.'* We shall find the same
usage again in Madagascar, at least in the noble families of
the Hovas. On ascending the throne, Radama simply kept
all his father's wives. So obligatory is this on the reigning
sovereign, that at the death of the same Radama, his widow
Ranavalo was bound to keep, by the title of wives^ all her
husband's widows. Then, in a great council held after her
elevation to the throne, it was decided that the Queen
Ranavalo could not marry again, but would be free to take
lovers at her will, and that all the children born of these
fugitive unions should be considered as the legitimate pos-
terity of Radama.^ By this ingenious measure all was con-
ciliated — respect to custom, the liberty of the queen, and
the regular succession to the throne.
We shall find again in very different countries this savage
custom of considering widows as a simple property, trans-
missible by inheritance. Sometimes the heir succeeds
simply to the deceased husband; sometimes he accepts
and exacts an indemnity, in case the widow re-marries.
Such was already the custom with the Smoos of Central
America. There the widows belonged by right to the
^ Clapperton, Second Voyage^ p. 90.
2 Id., ibid, p. 156.
^ Laing, Hist. Univ. des Vby., t. xxviii. p. 71.
* Raffenel, Nouveau Voyage au Fays des Nigres^ t. ler. p. 289.
'° Dupre, Trois Mois h Madagascar, p. 124.
2 5 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
relatives of the deceased husband ; and in order to
contract afresh, they had to pay to these relatives what was
called "widow money."^ Inversely, with the KHketats, if
a woman happened to die very soon after her marriage, the
husband who had bought her could claim her price back
from the parents ;2 he had been deceived in the quality of
the merchandise.
This was not all; as long as the mourning lasted, the
widow was always considered, in certain districts, as having
duties to fulfil towards her dead husband, or rather towards
his shade. Thus, with the Sambos of Central America, she
had to furnish a sufficient quantity of food during a year to
the tomb of the deceased ;^ and it was the same in Mexico.*
In many of the Redskin tribes second marriages are not
tolerated by custom till after a very long delay, exacted for
reasons that have nothing savage in them ; it is simply that
the children of the first marriage may be grown out of their
early infancy, and the custom is obligatory for the man as
well as for the woman. The Selish widow only marries
after two years ;^ but the delay is sometimes from two to
three years for the widower as well as for the widow.^
With the Nez-Percds of Columbia, the widower can marry
again at the end of one year.^ With the Omahas the delay
was much longer, from four to seven years for the man and
the woman. This rule was very strict, and in case of its
infraction, the parents of the dead husband had the right
to strike and wound, but without killing, the widow who
might be too hasty in marrying again. In a parallel case,
they confined themselves to taking a pony from the
man f' this was because a man could defend himself. On
the contrary, if the widower waited much beyond the legal
time before marrying again, the parents or relatives of the
dead wife thought themselves obliged to intervene. " This
man," said they, "has no one to sew his mocassins; let us
* Bancroft, Native Races of Pacific, etc., vol. i. p. 731.
2 Id., ibid. vol. i. p. 277.
2 Bancroft, loc. cit., p. 731.
* Demeunier, Esprit des Diffirents Peuples, t. ler. p. 244.
^ Bancroft, loc. cit., p. 277.
* Domenech, Voyage Piitoresque, etc., p. 516,
^ Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol i. p. 277.
^ O. Dorsey, Omaha Sociology, in Smithsonian Reports, p. 267 (1885).
AND OF THE FAMILY, 253
seek a wife for him." When they did so, the widower was
bound to accept their offer. ^
This question of widows has evidently been very em-
barrassing for primitive societies. They have either been
kept or sold, according as it might be agreeable or
advantageous. But another very simple way of getting rid
of the encumbrance has been to sacrifice them on the tomb
of the dead husband. Nothing is less rare than such
immolations in savage countries, and these atrocious acts
are often inspired by affectionate sentiments, by care for
the fate which awaits the deceased husband after death.
How can they let him travel alone on that dangerous
journey beyond the tomb? This is the reason of the
widely spread custom of human sacrifices, which chiefly
consist of women and slaves. I quote a few facts of this
kind, simply as specimens.
In certain tribes of New Zealand the widows were
strangled on the tomb of the deceased husband.^ In
equatorial Africa, at Yourriba, when the king dies, four of
his wives and a number of slaves are forced to poison
themselves. The poison is poured into a parrot's egg for
them, and if it does not produce any effect the patients
must supplement it by hanging themselves. At Jenna, on
the Niger, at the death of a chief, one or two of his widows
must commit suicide the same day, in order to furnish him
with pleasant company in the country beyond the tomb, of
which he is going to take possession.^ At Katunga, the
chief wife of the deceased king is obliged to poison herself
on the tomb of her husband, in company with the eldest
son and the principal personages of the kingdom. All
these victims must be buried with the dead master.*
The massacres by which the death of the king of
Dahomey is solemnised are well known, and in them also
the wives play an important part as victims. We know that
the primitive Germans had analogous customs ; for savages
of all countries, to whatever race they belong, resemble
each other and repeat themselves.
^ O. Dorsey, loc. cit.
2 Moerenhaut, Voy. aux tleSy etc., t. ii. p. 187.
^ Clapperton, Second Voyage^ vol. i. p. 94.
* R. and J. Lander, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ L xxx. p. 54.
254 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
Among various peoples funeral sacrifices are replaced by
mutilations more or less voluntary, and especially obligatory
on widows. As examples, I may mention the amputation
of the little finger by the Hottentots, the Melanesians, and
the Charruas; and the gashes which Polynesian widows
made on their faces and bodies. These bloody demonstra-
tions were obligatory, and far from corresponding to a real
grief. At Noukahiva Porter saw a widow, the funeral
wounds still fresh on her neck, breast, and arms, prostitute
herself to American sailors.^
This review of savage manners and customs in regard to
widows has only been a long enumeration of cruelties and
iniquities, and these, although much lessened in barbarous
countries, do not, by any means, disappear.
II. Widowhood in Barbarous Countries.
The natives of Himalayan Bhootan are sometimes
monogamous, sometimes polygamous, and sometimes
polyandrous, and these variations naturally affect the con-
ditions of widowhood. Among the monogamous and
polygamous, the widows can only marry again after a
delay of three years. This regulation, which we have
already found among the Redskins, has doubtless been
dictated by the same reasons ; and taken with many other
similarities existing in very dissimilar races and countries, it
tends to prove that scientific sociology can be more than a
mere name or imagination. In the Himalayan Bhootan, a
widow who has no repugnance to polygamy has many
chances of marrying again, if she has a younger sister still
free, whom the new husband can marry at the same time.^
In polyandrous famihes there can hardly be any real widow-
hood for the woman. Thus, at Ladak, if the eldest brother,
the husband in chief, happens to die, his property, authority,
and share of the wife pass to the next brother, whether the
latter be or not one of the husbands.^ This is a sort of
levirate which naturally exists in polyandrous households,
^ Porter, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xiv. p. 331.
^ Voyage au Bootan, by a Hindoo author, Revue Brittanique^
1824.
* Morcroft and Trebeck's Travels^ vol. i. p. 320.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 255
and obviates at once the question of widowhood, so em-
barrassing to the other forms of marriage. This question
of widows has been solved very grossly, and sometimes
very cruelly, in the Middle Empire or China proper.
Although on certain sides the old Chinese civilisation puts
ours to shame, it is very backward in relation to all that
concerns widows. We have previously seen that during
her whole life the subjection of the Chinese woman is
extreme, that she owes obedience first to her parents, then
to her husband, then to her son, and that she is married,
or rather sold, without being consulted at all. But widow-
hood does not even set her free, for she represents a value
which the relatives of the husband inherit, and which they
hasten to profit by. It often happens, therefore, that the
Chinese widow is made to marry again, or rather, is sold
again, and this time, also, no one dreams of asking her
consent. The child at the breast, if there is one, is
included in the bargain. In order to moderate the haste
of covetous parents, the law has been obliged to intervene,
and prevent the sale of the widow before the expiration
of the time of mourning. The Chinese widow, if she
wishes to escape this traffic in her person, and is without
fortune, has no resource except to become a bonzess.
Those widows only whose rank or riches place them above
the common, are able to pass the rest of their days without
being united to a fresh husband;^ this posthumous fidelity
is much encouraged in China by public opinion, whenever
interest does not forbid it. The betrothed maiden, who
may become a widow before being a wife, is much esteemed
if she buries herself for ever in an enforced sorrow; but
naturally, a reciprocal demand is not made on the be-
trothed man who may lose his fiancee. If the rich widow
who remains inconsolable is much praised, she who refuses
to survive her husband receives greater honour. Tablets
are erected in the temples in memory of young girls who
have killed themselves on the tombs of their betrothed,
and twice a year certain mandarins make oblations in their
honour. ^ With much stronger reason is this done for real
widows.
^ Lettres idifiantes, t. xiii. pp. 349, 353.
' Doolittle, Social Life of the Chinese, p. 78.
256 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
In 1857 the Pekin Gazette published a decree, according
a tablet to the memory of the wife of a mandarin who had
poisoned herself on hearing of the death of her husband
in a battle against the rebels. These suicides of widows
are performed in public, with great pomp and solemnity.
In January 1861 two young widows thus committed
suicide at Fou-Chow, in presence of several thousand
spectators. Another did the same at the end of December
1860.1 It would seem, therefore, that these suicides are
frequent enough even at the present time. From obser-
vations made during the Anglo-French Expedition to
China, it appears that they are generally widows without
children or relations who thus sacrifice themselves; they
do it openly and with much ceremony. A month before-
hand, the widow goes in procession through the town, as
has been thus described: — "Two executioners headed
the procession; then came musicians; then men dressed
in coarse linen tunics with hoods, carrying parasols, little
pagodas, boxes of perfumes, and streamers. After them
came a third executioner, followed by a second group
bearing poles, surmounted by figures of fantastic animals.
And lastly came a mandarin's palanquin, surrounded by
numerous servants of both sexes, dressed in mourning,
which consisted of grey linen. In the palanquin was the
heroine of the f^te^ a young woman dressed in red (the
imperial colour), and crowned with a blue diadem. Her
red satin robe was ornamented with lace and gold em-
broidery. This solemn procession had no other object
than to announce the suicide to the public, and invite them
to attend it on the following moon, day for day. The
young widow was exact in appearing at the rendezvous,
and tranquilly hung herself at the date fixed." ^
With differences of form and mode of execution, India
devotes her widows to a similar fate.
It seems, indeed, that in India also the widow is, or has
been, considered as the property of the relatives of her dead
husband, for a verse of the Code of Manu orders that if
she has been sterile, a relative shall endeavour to make her
conceive. Very striking and primitive is the inequality of
^ Sinibaldo de Mas, Chine et les Puissances Chretiennes, t. i^r. p. 55.
^ Comte d'Herisson, yijwrwa/i/'ww interfrete en Chine, p. 132.
AND OF THE FAMIL K 257
the obligations imposed by Indian law on the widower and
on the widow.^
Here is the law for the husband : " Every Dwidja knowing
the law, who sees his wife die before him, if she has obeyed
these precepts, and is of the same class as himself, must
burn her with consecrated fires and with utensils of sacrifice."
— "After having accomplished thus with consecrated fires the
funeral ceremony of a wife who has died, let him contract a
new marriage, and light a second time the nuptial fire."^ As
for the widow, her duty is very different : "A virtuous woman,
who desires to obtain the same abode of felicity as her
husband, must do nothing which may displease him, either
during life or after death." — "Let her wiUingly emaciate her
body by feeding on flowers, roots, and pure fruits ; but, after
losing her husband, let her not pronounce the name of any
other man." — " But the widow, who, through the desire of
having children, is unfaithful to her husband, incurs con-
tempt here below, and will be excluded from the celestial
abode whither her husband has gone." — "Nowhere in this
Code is the right of taking a second husband assigned to a
virtuous wife."^
The obligation not to marry again, and especially that of
living on flowers and fruits, are sufficiently vexatious, but
they are nothing to the suttees, or burning alive of widows,
which were quite recently common in Bengal. The Code
of Manu does not speak of this abominable custom, though
it was very ancient, for Diodorus mentions it, and relates
how the two widows of Ceteus, an Indian general under
Eumenes, disputed the honour of burning themselves with
the corpse of their husband. The description which
Diodorus gives corresponds in every detail with what took
place at the suttees quite recently ; so slow to change are
these old theocratic societies. One of the wives, says
Diodorus, could not be burnt because she was with child.
The other advanced to the funeral pile crowned with myrtle,
adorned as for a wedding, and preceded by her relatives,
who sang hymns in her praise. Then after having distributed
her jewels to her friends and domestics, she lay down on the
1 Code of Manu, ix. 64. "^ Ibid. v. 167, 168.
8 Ibid. V. 156, 157, 161, 168.
^7
2 5 8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
funeral pile by the side of her husband's body, and died
without uttering a cry.^
At that time, according to Diodorus, the law only allowed
the sacrifice of one wife. In the eighteenth century it was
more exacting. In fact, the writers of the Lettres edifiantes
have described in detail several sacrifices of this kind. The
custom was no longer observed except by wives of grandees,
and especially of rajahs ; but all of these were burnt, save
the women with child, whose suffering was only deferred.
In 1 7 ID, at the death of the Prince of Marava, aged
eighty years, all his wives, to the number of forty-seven,
were burnt with his corpse, which was richly adorned and
placed in a large grave filled with wood. The victims,
who were covered with precious stones, stepped at first very
bravely on the funeral pile; but the moment the flames
reached them, they uttered loud cries, and rushed on
each other. The spectators succeeded in calming them
by throwing a number of pieces of wood at them; after-
wards their bones were gathered up and thrown into the
sea, and a temple to their honour was erected over the
grave.2 At that date, and in that part of the country,
even women with child were only temporarily spared till
after their delivery.^ Two other princes, vassals of Marava,
having died at the same epoch, and leaving, the one seven-
teen, the other thirteen widows, all these unfortunate
creatures were burnt together, except one, who, being with
child, could not sacrifice herself until later. The suttees
were not a legal obligation ; relatives even tried to dissuade
the widows from it ; but the point of honour, and the fear of
public opinion, or rather of public contempt, were stronger
with them than love of life.* The mode of burning varied
in different provinces. In Bengal the woman was bound
firmly to the corpse, and the two bodies were covered with
bamboos. In Orissa, the widow threw herself on the pile,
which was in a pit or grave. In the Deccan, a country
which was in great part Tamil, and where suttees were much
more rare, the widow sat on the pile, and placed the head
of her dead husband on her knees. She remained thus,
1 Diodorus, book xix. p. 34.
2 Lettres Mijiantes^ t. xiii. pp. 23, 28.
' Ibid. p. 30. ^ Ibid. p. 32.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 259
motionless, until she was suffocated by the smoke, or over-
thrown by the fall of heavy logs of wood, previously attached
with cords to posts placed at the four corners of the pile.
It is said that in certain provinces the victim was intoxicated
with opium beforehand. Sometimes also, proper precau-
tions not having been taken, it happened that she rushed
madly out of the flames, and was then brutally thrust back
by the spectators. ^
These frightful customs, which have hardly yet dis-
appeared from India, are but survivals from the times of
savagery : such brutalities were habitual in a number of
primitive societies, as I have previously shown.
In the Koran, in the Bible, and among the Arabs, or
rather the contemporaneous Islamites, we find nothing
analogous to this; but the position given to the widow is
none the less unenviable.
A verse of the Koran shows us that before the time of
Mahomet, sons inherited all their father's wives as a matter
of course, in African fashion : *' Thou shalt not marry the
women who have been thy father's wives ; it is an abomina-
tion and a bad practice."^ We have seen that this most
gross custom, against which Mahomet inveighs, still prevails
in various countries, and especially amongst the negroes of
tropical Africa. It must have been general at the time of
Mahomet, even amongst the Arabs, since the prophet
states that his law need not have any retrospective effect :
" Let that remain," proceeds the same verse, " which has
already been done."
There is one point, however, on which the Koran is in
advance of the greater number of barbarous societies, and
even of the Bible. It recognises, in fact, the right of a
widow to inherit from her husband ; this right gives her a
fourth, if there is no child, and an eighth only in the
contrary case.^ But notwithstanding this the widow was
often abandoned, or, what is worse, confounded with the
heritage. The Bible was less kind to the widow. It
specifies indeed that the fortune of the husband is security
for the personal effects and the dowry of the wife, but it
does not place her among her husband's heirs. The Jewish
^ Lettres edifiantes^ t. xiii. p. 27.
^ Koran, iv. 26. 2 /^/^_ jy j^_
2 6o THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
widow was a charge on her children, or, if she had none,
on her own family. ^ The abandoned widow had no other
resource than her share in the offerings and public charity.^
The injunction is indeed given not to afflict her;^ it would
certainly have been better to grant her some rights.
In Judaea, the wife was bought by her husband; it is
therefore probable that, in primitive times, she formed a
part of his wealth, as is the case now among the Mussulman
Afghans and among the Kabyles.
In Afghanistan, the widow, being a mortgaged property,
cannot re-marry until the price of purchase paid for her by
her deceased husband has been reimbursed to the parents
of that husband.'* In a great number of Kabyle tribes, the
widow remains "hung" to her dead husband — that is to
say, she is counted part of the heritage.^ Generally she
returns to her family, and her father or her relatives sell her
a second time.^ If, however, she has children, especially
male children, she cannot be forced to marry again ; but
then the son redeems her, or she deducts from the property
of her children the sum necessary to redeem herself from
paternal power.^ In the tribe of Ait Flik, heirs have, by
pre-emption, the privilege of marrying the widow, and that
without having to pay the ihamanth.^ It is understood that
while awaiting the day when she is to be disposed of again,
the Kabyle widow is bound to the strictest chastity. If she
becomes with child, she is punished by stoning.^
Like the Bible, and nearly all other legislations, the
Koran only allows the marriage of a widow after a certain
term of delay. In the Koran, this term is four months and
ten days ;i^ and if the woman is with child, the delay must
extend till after her delivery. But there are some preg-
nancies that are either imaginary or fictitious, and which
come to nothing, yet in Arab countries successions are
suspended on account of them. If, at the moment of her
husband's death, a woman thinks herself with child, she
^ Leviticus, xxii. 13.
2 Deuteronomy, xxvi. 12. ^ Leviticus, xxii. 13.
* M. Elphinstone, Picture of the Kingdom of Cabul, vol. i. p. 168.
" Hanoteau and Letourneux, Kabylie, p. 156.
« Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 156. » Id., ibid. t. iii. p. 77.
"^ Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 158. ^" Koran, t. ii. p. 234.
8 Id., ibid. t. ii. p. 157.
AND OF THE FAMIL V. 261
places her girdle on the body of the deceased ; note is taken
of it, and the time awaited. If the waiting is vain, at the
end of eleven months the widow is visited and examined by
matrons; and if nevertheless the professed pregnancy has no
result, the child who refuses to be born is called " asleep "
for an indefinite time. Henceforth the widow is free, and if
she ends by becoming a mother, her child, awaited so long,
is reputed to be the son of the husband dead years before,
and inherits from him.^
This singular prejudice is common to the Kabyles and to
the Arabs. A number of Mussulman legists have vainly
tried to overcome it. All that they have been able to do is
to limit to four or five years, generally to four, the duration
of this pretended "sleep" of the foetus.^
The widow has not been more worthily treated at the
origin of Greco-Roman civilisation than in the other
barbarous civilisations. It would be strange if it were so.
We have seen that at Athens the woman, even when
married, was part of the paternal patrimony ; that the dying
husband could leave her by will to a friend, with his goods,
and by the same title; that at Rome the wife was bought
and subjected to the terrible right of the marital manus.
For a long time at Rome, as in China at the present day,
the widows who did not marry were particularly honoured
The widower married again immediately after his wife's
death ; widows, on the contrary, were in any case forbidden
to marry before a delay of six months, afterwards extended
to twelve months, and that under pain of infamy for the
father who had made the marriage, for the husband who
had taken the widow, and later for the re-married woman also,
when infamy also applied to women. By degrees Roman
customs and laws improved on this point as on others.
The Leges Julia and Papia Poppoea encouraged second
marriages, in opposition to the ancient prejudice ; the
Institutes ordained that when the widow was poor and
without dowry, she could inherit from her husband one-
fourth if there were three children, and a full masculine
share if there were none.^ But the triumph of Christianity
* Hanoteau and Letourneux, Aa^j//z>, t. ii. p. 174.
^ Id. p. 175. — E. Meynier, Etudes sur rislaniisme, p. 175.
^ Domenget, Institutes de Gaius, p. 336.
262 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
was the signal for a retrograde movement. Constantine
returned to the old ideas of primitive Rome, and went
so far as to inflict on second marriages pecuniary
penalties, which were to be paid to the children of the first
marriage.^ In acting thus, the neophyte emperor was
acting up to the logic of the Church, in whose eyes marriage
itself was an evil rendered necessary by the sin of Adam,
and by whom second marriages were emphatically con-
demned. ^
From the fusion of Christian doctrines with the gross
customs of more or less barbarous European races, on the
subject of women and marriage, there resulted for the
widow a position of extreme subjection. Among the Ger-
mans, as among the Afghans and Kabyles, the widow
became again the property of her own family, and in order
to marry her, it was necessary to pay a special price, the
reipiis, which was double the mundium or price of the first
purchase.^ The Salic law decreed that at the age of
fifteen the son should be the guardian of his widowed
mother. The Lombard law decides also that the widow
shall not marry again without the consent of her son (section
xxxvii.); and this consent was necessary even for her to
enter a convent. Thus Theodoric, adopting with barbarous
fiiry the opinions of the Church on second marriages,
promulgated a law interdicting widows from marrying
again, and condemning to the flames any man who should
be convicted of having had commerce with them.
These objections to second marriage, or at least the
blame attached to them by public opinion, are common in
many ancient societies. We have found them in India, in
ancient Rome, and Greece, etc. We can only attribute this
way of thinking, senseless and unjust as it is, to a sort of
delirium of proprietorship in the husband, who pretends
still to rule over and possess his wife from beyond the tomb,
but chiefly to the desire of avoiding disturbances in the
transmission of hereditary wealth, when the women were
able to have possessions of their own. The levirate, of which
I am now going to speak, remedied the latter inconveniences.
^ Italie ancienne, p. 488.
^ Lecky, loc. cit,, vol. ii. pp. 321, 324.
^ Giraud-Teulon, Orig. du Manage, etc., p. 336.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 263
III. — The Leviraie.
The levirate is the name given to the obhgation imposed
by custom or law on the brother of the deceased husband
to marry his sister-in-law when she became a widow. This
custom of the levirate, which for a long time has been
thought peculiar to the Hebrews, is very widely spread, and
is found among races most widely differing from each
other. There is surely good reason for it in savage or
barbarous societies where for a woman abandonment
would mean death.
I will enumerate some of the peoples who practise the
levirate, beginning as usual with the inferior races.
We meet the levirate first in Melanesia, at New Caledonia,
where the brother-in-law, whether he be already married or
not, must marry his brother's widow immediately.
We also find the levirate among the Redskins, par-
ticularly the Chippeways ; and at Nicaragua, where the
widow belongs either to the brother or nearest relative of
her deceased husband. ^
With the Ostiaks, the next brother of the husband is
obliged to marry his widow or widows; for the Ostiaks,
like the Redskins, often take for wives a whole set of
sisters. 2 It is the same with the Kirghis, and in general
with the nomad Mongols.^ The Afghans also make it a
duty of the brother-in-law to marry his sister-in-law, on her
becoming a widow.'*
The Code of Manu imposes the levirate even on the
brother of a betrothed man who dies : " When the
husband of a young girl happens to die after the betrothal,
let the brother of the husband take her for wife."^ The
object of this legal precept in India is to give a posterity
to the deceased brother ; for the following verse seems to
limit the duration of the cohabitation with the widowed
1 Bancroft, Native Races, vol. ii. p. 671.
^ Castren, Reiseberichte und Brief e aus den Jahren^ 1845- 1853, p. 56.
* MacLennan, p. 158.
* M. Elphinstone, Ficture of the Kingdom of Cabul, vol. i. p. 168.
•* Code of Manu, ix. 69.
264 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
fiancee^ and it seems indeed that all commerce is to cease
after the first pregnancy. ^
We will now consider the Hebrew levirate, which is only
a particular case of a very general fact.
We find the levirate mentioned twice in the Bible. At
first in Genesis : " Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy
brother's wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother
unto her, and raise up seed to thy brother."^ Again, in Deuter-
onomy: "If brethren dwell together, and one of them die,
and have no son, the wife of the dead shall not marry
without unto a stranger; her husband's brother shall go in
unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the
duty of an husband's brother unto her. And it shall be,
that the first-born whom she beareth shall succeed in the
name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not
blotted out of Israel."^ The Hebrew levirate was therefore
a sort of obligatory and fictitious adoption of a nephew by
the deceased uncle. We shall soon see that in all primitive
or barbarous societies this adoption is largely practised, and
that it is absolutely equivalent to a real filiation.
The verses which follow inform us that, with the Hebrews,
the levirate was rather a moral than a legal obligation ; the
brother-in-law could even refuse it; but in refusing, he
incurred the public contempt, and had to submit to a
degrading ceremony : " And if the man like not to take
his brother's wife, then his brother's wife shall go up to the
gate unto the elders, and say. My husband's brother refuseth
to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not
perform the duty of an husband's brother unto me ; then the
elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him : and if
he stand, and say, I like not to take her; then shall his
brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders,
and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face,
and she shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that
man that doth not build up his brother's house. And his
name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath
his shoe loosed."^
In India the principal object of the levirate, applied
1 Code of Manu, ix. 70. ^ Deuteronomy, xxv. 5, 6.
* Genesis, xxxviii. 8. * Ibid. xxv. 7-10.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 265
to the \i'\diOyitd. fiancee, was to furnish the deceased man with
a fictitious son, who could perform for him the sacrifices to
the manes, a duty of the highest importance in the rehgion of
Brahma. For the Hebrews, a much more practical people
than the Hindoos, the levirate had only an earthly object —
that of keeping up the name or family of the deceased, and
all that belonged to it. It may be compared with the
obligation imposed at Athens on the nearest relative in
the masculine line to marry the heiress, or to supplement
at need the impotence of the husband.
The old practice of the levirate still exists in Abyssinia
with this curious detail, that it is applied during the
lifetime of the husband if he has been the victim of an
accident, frequent in the Abyssinian wars, of emasculation.
The mutilated husband, being thus struck with what might
be called "virile death," his brother succeeds him in his
marital rights and duties.^
Some sociologists, too much given to theorise, have tried
to prove that the levirate was a remnant of polyandry.
Certainly the levirate is practised under a polyandric
regime^ but polyandry has never been more than an excep-
tional mode of marriage, and there is hardly any trace of it
among the New Caledonians, the Redskins, the Mongols,
the Afghans, the Hindoos, the Hebrews, the Abyssinians,
etc., who, all of them, practise different varieties of levirate.
The much more natural reasons that I have given above
appear to me quite sufficient and more probable.
IV. Conclusions.
From a consideration of all these facts, we find that the
fate of the widow has varied according to the matrimonial
form in use, and according to the degree of civilisation, but
that it has not always been ameliorated in proportion to
the general progress. Laws and customs have ever been
kind to the widower. It has been very different for the
woman, and her position has perhaps been better, from our
point of view, in certain primitive societies, than it became
later. Thus, in the confused state of primitive families,
^ A. d'Abbadie, Donze ans cfe sejour dajis la haute Ethiopie, p. 273.
266 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE.
when men lived either in a freedom almost bordering on
promiscuity, or in groups half polyandric or polygamic, and
more especially in polyandrous countries, there was no
actual widowhood, or state of being a widow, for woman.
The disappearance of one of the men with whom she lived
in intimate relations made no great change in her position.
Under a polygamic re^^ime it is quite otherwise ; for then the
wives are private property. Their master has nearly always
bought them, and their subjection is very great. There-
fore, at the death of their master, they are treated exactly
like things ; they follow the fate of the goods, and pass into
the hands of the heir, who can keep or sell them. Some-
times, however, they are sacrificed in greater or less num-
bers on the tomb of the dead husband, whom they must
continue to serve and love in the future life.
Under a monogamic regime societies are generally more
civilised, and the dominating ideas are then the care of
property, and sometimes the perpetuation of the name.
The widow cannot inherit, for the property must not be
divided. She is then a most embarrassing incumbrance.
Sometimes she is persuaded to follow still into the next
world the husband who has preceded her thither; this is
the most radical solution. Sometimes her relations marry
her again, and obtain a second price for her; sometimes
she is provided for by the levirate.
Traces of these ancestral iniquities are still preserved in
our modern codes, which, though nearly emancipating the
widow, push the fanaticism of consanguinity so far as not to
consider her as the relative of her husband as concerns
property. From a social point of view, the whole of this
survey of the treatment of widows is not flattering for
humanity. In short, from a moral point of view, the easy
resignation with which men and women bear widowhood,
places mankind, as regards nobility of sentiment, far below
certain species of animals, as, for example, the Illinois
paraquet {Psiitacus Illinois)^ for whom widowhood and
death are synonymous, as well for the male as the female.
Doubtless it might be alleged that even in so-called
highly civilised societies people do not marry as a rule from
any lofty sentiment ; but that is surely a poor excuse.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE FAMILIAL CLAN IN AUSTRALIA AND AMERICA.
I. The Family.
II. The Family in Melanesia. — Melanesian rape — First formation of
societies — Exogamy — The Australian clans — Native marriage state —
Marriage of clans among the Kamilaroi — Their social incest — How a
clan originates— Fictitious fraternity and the totem — How individual
marriage is made among the Kurnai — Maternal filiation — Agnation
tends to be constituted — Evolution of the family in Melanesia.
III. The Family in America. — The Redskin clans — Common
dwellings — Rights and duties — Exogamy of the clan — Clans of the
Pueblos — The family among the Indians of South America — Rela-
tionship among the Redskins — Communism — Maternal filiation —
Distinction between the matriarchate and the maternal family — Origin
of the ideas of relationship.
I. The Family,
I shall now attempt to retrace as clearly as I can the
history of the evolution of the family, first of all ascertain-
ing the facts that have been observed, and then using these
facts as a touchstone to try the solidity of the various
sociological theories that have been put forth on the subject.
Among these theories, there are some which have been very
favourably received, and not without reason. Insufficient
as they might be, they reduced a chaos of facts into order,
and contained a certain amount of truth. All of them are
open to criticism and contest, both because they are the
fruit of a too hasty generalisation, and because their authors
have claimed for them a certainty which sociological facts
do not easily bear out. Human groups have always lived
as they could, without caring about theories ; their social
268 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
conduct inevitably results from a sort of compromise in the
conflict between their appetites, their aptitudes, and the
necessities dictated by their physical environment.
Before hazarding any general conclusions, I shall be
careful, as before, to refer to comparative ethnography, and
to interrogate the various human races, from the lowest to
the most elevated. This inquiry will enable us to form a
rough idea, with a certain approximation to truth, in regard
to the probable evolution of the family in humanity. But
in order to approach this subject with sufficient impartiality,
it is absolutely necessary to clear our minds from all the
current theories in regard to the family. There is, in fact,
no theme which has inspired more empty oratorical lucubra-
tions. The doctrine has been firmly held that the family,
as we have it instituted in Europe and in European colonies,
is the beau ideal^ the sacred and immutable sociological
type. Ethnography, however, and even history, teach us
that the present familial type of Europe has not always
existed, and that it is the result, like everything else, of a
slow evolution ; from whence it is reasonable to infer that
it will still continue to be modified. But facts are more
eloquent than reflections ; I will therefore approach them,
beginning with the lowest human races, the Melanesians.
II. The Family in Melanesia.
In my sketch of the family in the animal kingdom, I
have already had occasion to remark that the family, such
as we understand it, is not indispensable to the maintenance
of societies, since the ants do without it in their republics,
in which we find neither paternity nor maternity, in the
sense we attach to them, but simply three classes of
individuals, the breeders, the young, and the educators.
With these last, the working ants, by a paradoxical con-
tradiction, maternal love has survived the atrophy of the
generative function ; it is even purified and widened, for it
is lavished without partiality on all the young ones, which
form the hope of the republic ; and though thus diluted, it
seems to have lost none of its energy.
Nothing at all similar is seen in inferior human societies,
AND OF THE FAMILY, 269
but the family is still, however, in a confused state ; paternity,
in the social sense of the word, does not exist \ filiation is
especially maternal, but the actual degrees of consanguinity
are not well distinguished in detail ; parenthood is not yet
individual, but is constituted in groups.
In the present day we may still study this familial con-
fusion in certain Australian tribes. We have seen that
marriage, or what goes by that name, resulted in Tasmania,
Australia, Bali, etc., from a violent and brutal rape, generally
ratified by a compensation and a simulation of retaliation
between the tribe of the woman and that of the ravisher.
Among the least savage tribes of Melanesia, this rape is
often fictitious, in which case it is no more than a survival ;
but sometimes it is still real, and it surely must always have
been so at the origin of the Australian societies. But
however gross these societies may be, they are none the less
the result of a long evolution. In the interior of Borneo
there are still existing human beings compared with whom
the Australians are civilised people. These absolutely
primitive savages of Borneo are probably the remains of
negroid peoples, who must formerly have been the first
inhabitants of Malaya. They roam the forests in little
hordes, like monkeys ; the man, or rather the male, carries
off the female and couples with her in the thickets. The
family passes the night under a large tree; the children
are suspended from the branches in a sort of net, and a
great fire is lighted at the foot of the tree to keep off the
wild beasts. As soon as the children are capable of taking
care of themselves, the parents turn them adrift as animals
do.i
It is doubtless thus, after the manner of the great
monkeys, that primitive human societies have been formed.
With the chimpanzees these hordes can never become very
large, for the male progenitor will not endure rivals, and
drives away the young males as long as he is the strongest.
The first men were surely more sociable, because of their
human nature. The young males of the human horde
were able to remain, in greater or less number, within the
association, but the jealousy of the progenitor-in-chief, the
father of the family, must often have obliged them to
^ Lubbock, Ong. Civil ^ p. 9.
2 70 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
procure one or several females by capturing them from
neighbouring or rival hordes; they thus became more
or less exogamous ; and, in their embryo societies, marriage,
or rather sexual union, ended by being prohibited
between brothers and sisters, not because there was the
least moral scruple about incest, but because, within the
limit of the horde, the young women were claimed by the
most robust males, who would not yield them up. We
know that this is still the case in the Australian tribes.^
In this gross social state it is necessarily the mother who
is the centre of the family, just as she is in the families of
mammifers ; it is, therefore, quite natural that the children
should bear her name and not that of their father, which,
for that matter, is not always easy to designate. When
once the custom of exogamy was well established, what
was at first a necessity ended by becoming an obligation,
and men were forbidden to unite themselves with women of
the group to which they belonged, and which bore the
same name as their own. Such is still the general rule in
Australia. 2 But in Australia this group is often only a
sub-tribe, a gens or clan ; for the hordes, becoming too
numerous, are subdivided into factions or large families,
who unite together for common defence or vengeance.
The children of each group belong sometimes to the clan
of the mother, and there is then no legal parenthood
between them and their father;^ also, in case of war, the
son must join the maternal tribe.* But this is not a
universal rule, and in many tribes the children now belong
to the paternal clan.^
These are general cases, common to the greater part of
the Australian tribes, but not to all. There are some who
have organised their marriage and their family into classes,
thus regulating, in a certain measure, the primitive con-
fusion, and establishing by this very regulation a sort of
^ Lang, Aborigines of Australia. — Eyre, Discoveries in Central
Australia, vol. ii. p. 385.
- Grey" s Journal, vol. ii. ch. ii.
^ Tylor, Researches in Early History of Mankind, vol. i. ch. ix.
^ Giraud-Teulon, pere, Origine de la Families p. 44.
^ Folklore, etc., of the Australian Aborigines {AAeXvadQ, 1879), pp. 28,
50. 57> 58, 65, 67, 87, 89, 92, 93. — Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and
Kurnai, 215.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 271
limited promiscuity. The word ''classes," employed by
travellers who have made us acquainted with these curious
customs, is improper, for neither social classes nor castes
exist in Australia. These so-called classes are simply sub-
tribes or clans, analogous to the Roman gens.
In certain of these tribes a sort of categorical promiscuity
is kept up. Thus, among the tribes of Mount Gambier, of the
Darling River, and of Queensland, each tribe is divided
into two sub-tribes, and within each of these clans all the
men are reputed brothers, and all the women are sisters,
and all marriage between these brothers and these sisters is
strictly forbidden.^ This is a primordial law ; the violation
of it is an act of the deepest guilt, which not only stains the
individual, but the group to which he belongs ; it is more
than incest, and the Australians, who have a very lively
sentiment of duty, feel intense horror of such an act. But
if every man is brother to all the women in his clan, on the
other hand he is husband to all the women of the other
clan of his tribe. Consequently, all the men of one group
are called husbands by all the women of the other, and
inversely. Marriage with these Australians is not therefore
an individual act, as with usj it is a social condition,
resulting from the fact of birth.^ However, the actual
communal union is not obligatory in the least. A man
or woman may stop at the nominal or reputed marriage;
they may merely call each other husband and wife; but
in principle, the right is admitted, and the men some-
times offer temporary wives of their own class to strangers
who visit them.3 Thus in the tribe of the Kamilaroi,
near Sydney, every man of the Kubi clan has the right
to call "my wife" every person of feminine sex belonging
to the Ipai clan, and to treat her as such. There is
no need of proposals, or of contract, or of ceremony; a
man is a husband by right of birth, but the intimate union
does not imply association by couples; the woman passes
from one to the other, or even from several to several
others. On the other hand, within the limit of the clan, all
the men and all the women call each other brothers and
sisters, and are bound to respect each other. In uniting
^ Fison and Howitt, Kajnilaroi and Kurnai, 50.
3 Id.y ibid. 3 7^,^ ji,ij^
2 7 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
with the men of the other sub-tribe having conjugal right
over them, the women do not on that account cease to
reside in their own clan, the sub-tribe of their " brothers."
Marriage within this sub-tribe is the abomination of
desolation, the sin for which there is no forgiveness. Who-
ever commits it is outlawed from society, driven from
the tribe, tracked through the woods like game, and put to
death. He has dishonoured the association, and the
children who are born of these social incests are exter-
minated.i Thus, all real consanguinity has been set aside,
and a fictitious fraternity created between all the members
of the same clan, similar to paternity by adoption. Is this
artificial parenthood the result of practical exogamy, or has
it, on the contrary, produced it? We cannot tell; but
wherever it exists, its rule is absolutely inflexible. If, for
example, as often happens in Australia, the important men,
the chiefs, the sorcerers, or the strong adults, seize a certain
number of women for their personal use, they only do it in
conformity to the law of exogamy between the sub-tribes.
If one of the women thus confiscated runs away and is
re-taken, she is not restored to the man who had usurped
possession of her, but belongs by right to those who have
caught her.
Moreover, certain neighbouring tribes are subdivided
into sub-tribes, or clans of the same name ; they have
probably sprung one from the other at some former period.
If it happens that a man steals a woman from one of these
tribes, the captured woman is immediately incorporated
into the corresponding clan of the ravisher's tribe, and she
becomes the "sister" of all the women of this clan, to
which will also belong her children. As for the ravisher,
he is always a member of another gens^ or clan, of the same
tribe. If the tribes of the captured woman and of her
captor are not symmetrical — that is to say, have not corre-
sponding clans — then the woman may become the founder
of a new clan belonging to the tribe of the man who has
carried her off.^
If a woman is captured by a party of warriors, and not
' Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kuniai, pp. 65, 66.
2 Fison and Howitt, quoted by Giraud-Teulon, ills, in Origines
dti Mariage et de la Fami/le, p. 120.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 273
by one individual only, the first care of the captors is to
inflict on her a collective violation, on the condition, how-
ever, that none of them belong^ a clan homonymous with
that of the ravished woman ; if lyiy one of their party is an
exception to this, he must abstain from so doing.^
The sign of the fictitious fraternity of the Kamilaroi, and of
all the Australian tribes organised in the same manner, is a
common emblem, the iotem. All the men bearing the same
totem are united by the bond of a conventional fraternity,
which is none the less strict for that reason. The iote7n has
evidently been invented in a primitive epoch, when the
different degrees of consanguinity were not easily dis-
tinguished, and were therefore replaced by an artificial
union far wider than the limits of the natural family.
Whenever a single individual wished to escape from this
tribal marriage, he was obliged to resort to various artifices.
One of these transitional processes has remained in use in
the Kurnai tribe, in Gippsland, Victoria.
The terms still in use with them to designate kinship
recall the former existence of a fraternal marriage; but
in practice they have none the less adopted individual
marriage. The manner in which these individual marriages
are contracted probably indicates what must have happened
in primitive times, when some innovators attempted to
escape from tribal marriage by carrying off the women
they preferred, and were only re-admitted to their tribe
after having obtained pardon and the ratification of
their audacious enterprise. Among the Kurnai every
marriage must be made by the capture of one of the
women of their tribe, even when this rape has been pre-
ceded by a friendly exchange of sisters, which is usual
enough. This simulated rape is punished by a simulation
of vengeance. The fugitives are pursued ; they are even
ill-treated, but short of being actually killed. Their punish-
ment is simply an act of obedience to ancestral customs.
When all is concluded, and the fugitive couple reinstated
among their people, the woman belongs to the man who
has carried her off; he is no longer obliged to offer her
to the visitors of his clan, as old Australian hospitality
^ Fison and Howitt, quoted by Giraud-Teulon, fils, in Origines
du Mariage et de la Famille^ pp. 86-88-
18
2 74 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
required;^ she belongs to him alone. Sometimes the
ravisher legalises his right of sole proprietor by first giving
notice to his friends, and offering them the use of his wife,
after which he can keep her to himself. ^
In proportion as tribal marriage was being trans-
formed, owing to the breaches made in it by individual
instinct, the consanguineous family was gradually arising in
place of the collective and fictitious family. It seems most
likely that uterine filiation, or the maternal family, was first
established. The Australian Motas still have filiation by
the woman's side, and among them the property of the
uncle is transmitted to the uterine nephew ; but already the
paternal family is beginning to be constituted, and the
relatives on the male side seek to redeem the heritage by
means of an indemnity.^ With other and more advanced
Australian tribes, fanatical evolution is more complete;
masculine filiation is already instituted, and agnation
adopted ; there is even a worship of the manes of male
ancestors.* The Melanesians of Australia and Tasmania
present, therefore, a tolerably complete picture of the evolu-
tion of marriage and of the family, from the primitive rape,
followed by a tribal period in which marriage is merely a
limited and regulated promiscuity, and in which real con-
sanguinity is replaced by a fictitious fraternity, down to the
regime of individual marriage and masculine filiation, pre-
viously passing through uterine filiation, or the maternal
family. We shall find traces of this evolution among other
races, but nowhere is the lower stage so well preserved as in
Australia.
III. The Family in America.
Nothing similar to the gross tribal marriage of the
Australian Kamilaroi is to be found among the American
Indians, whose familial organisation, however, strikingly
recalls that of the Melanesian clans, though already in a
higher degree of evolution.
^ Fison and Howitt, loc. cit., p. 200. ^ Id., ibid.
^ Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit., p. 447.
^ Giraud-Teulon, fils, loc. cit., p. 446.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 275
The tribes of the Redskins were, and are still, divided
into phratries, which are again subdivided into clans. Now
these clans are composed of real or fictitious relatives. In
each phratry the corresponding clans have the same totem^
and it is strictly forbidden to marry a woman belonging to
the group bearing the same totem. This organisation is
very ancient; it existed in Mexico at the time of the
Spanish conquest, and the French found it in the eighteenth
century among the Redskins of Canada. The Hurons,
Charlevoix tells us, were divided into three clans : the wolf,
the tortoise, and the bear.^ The totetn^ or emblem of the
clan, served to sign treaties.^ This is a general fact, and
the subdivision of the tribe into clans or gentes is observed
among the Tinneh Indians, the Choctaws, the Iroquois, the
Omahas, the Indians of Columbia, etc., etc. Each clan
forms one large family, inhabiting sometimes a common
house, as do still the Indians of the Pueblos, as did the
Iroquois at the time they were first discovered, and as did
the Mexicans at the epoch of the Spanish conquest. The
"long houses" of the Iroquois were buildings a hundred
feet in length. A large corridor, closed at the two ex-
tremities by a door, traversed its entire length. To the
right and left of this central corridor, and opening on it,
were stalls, or niches, each serving as the apartment of a
family. The number of these families varied from five to
twenty.^
The members of a Redskin clan had common rights and
duties. When a man died, any personal objects he might
possess were deposited in his tomb, for they might be useful
to him in the future life. The remaining property of the
deceased belonged principally to the clan, or the gentiks ;
his near relatives, however, were considered first. Thus,
among the Iroquois, the widow, the children, and the
maternal uncles claimed the largest part, while a very small
portion of the heritage came to the brothers. The general
principle was that the property should remain in the clan.
In the present day the old customs are modified, and with
* Hist, et descrip. gSnerak de la Nouvelle- France^ etc.
a Ibid. t. V. p. 393.
* L. Morgan, Ancient Societies y p. 70. — Lahontan, Voy.^ etc., t. ii.
pp. 104, 183.
2 76 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
the Iroquois, the Creeks, the Cherokees, the Choctaws, the
Crows, etc., there is no longer any gentile heritage; all
passes to the children,^
The political organisation was, or still is, republican.
The members of a Redskin clan have the right to elect
and to depose the chief of the community, and the liberty
to adopt strangers. They are united by a strict solidarity,
and have a mutual duty to help and to avenge each other.
And lastly they have their council and their sepulture in
common. 2
But the most rigorous obligation for the members of
the same clan is that of not marrying in it. To take a
wife having the same ioiem is considered as a most cul-
pable act; it is a crime sometimes punished by death. ^
The Iroquois law regulating marriages recalls, in a certain
degree, that which takes place among the Kamilaroi of
Australia. Thus an Iroquois of the Seneca tribe and of
the Wolf clan must not marry a woman belonging, not
only to his own clan, but to all the clans of the same name
in the five other tribes of the Iroquois. On the other hand,
he is perfectly free to marry in any of the seven other clans
of his own Seneca tribe.* In short, an Iroquois may be
endogamous in the tribe, but he must be exogamous from
the point of view of the clan or clans.
The motive of the prohibition of marriage within the
clan is always the supposed relationship. Thus the law
of the Tinneh Indians forbids a man of the Chitsang clan
to marry a woman of the same clan because that woman is
his sister.*
The children always belong to the gens^ or clan, of their
mother.
These rules vary more or less from tribe to tribe, except
the prohibition of marriage within the clan, which is strict
and general. Thus, among the Omahas, a man may take
a wife in another tribe, even if this woman belongs to a
clan of the same name as his own ; but he cannot marry
within his own clan, because all the women of this clan are
1 L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, pp. 528-531.
2 Id., ibid. pp. 70, 71. 3 2d., ibid. p. 97.
< L. Morgan, loc. cit. p. 513.
^ Notes on the linneh, Plardisly, in Smithsonian Reports, 1866.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 277
reputed to 1)6 his relations — sisters, aunts, nieces, daughters,
etc. We shall see presently to what women these various
appellations, which among the Redskins have a much
wider sense than with us, are applied.^
These customs, or very analogous ones, were in force
with a great number of American tribes. At the present
day the Indians of the Moqui Pueblos still live in their
common habitations, as at the time of the conquest, and
they are divided into nine clans. ^
In the Pueblo of Orayba the relatives of a married
woman who dies take her property and her children, only
leaving to the husband his horse, his clothes, and his
weapons ; ^ for by marrying the woman does not cease to
belong to her original clan. Among the Pipiles of Salvador
a genealogical tree with seven branches was painted on the
wall of the common house, and save in the case of a great
service rendered to the clan, a man could not intermarry
with any persons related up to the degree indicated by the
genealogical tree.* In reality, this people had got beyond
familial confusion, or of purely toiemic relationship, but the
principle regulating conjugal unions had not yet changed.
In Yucatan marriage between persons of the same name —
that is to say, of the same clan — entailed the penalty of
being considered as a renegade.'' The savage Abipones
were also exogamous, according to Dobritzhoffer. This
rule naturally gives way in proportion as civilisation
develops. The Nahuas still prohibited marriage between
consanguineous relatives ; but at Nicaragua the prohibition
only applied to relatives of the first degree. ^
We have previously seen, in describing the family
amongst the animals, that it is habitually maternal; it is
around the female that the young group themselves. As
for the male, if he does not abandon the family, he exercises
no other function but that of chief of the band. It must
surely have been thus that the first human hordes were
formed, and when man became intelligent enough to take
note of filiation, it was uterine parenthood alone that he
* Omaha Sociology, p. 255, in Smithsonian Reports, 1885.
* L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 178. • /</., ibid. p. 535.
* Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol. ii. p. 665.
'^ Id.y ibid. vol. ii. p. 665. « j^^^ ^-^^-^^ ^^^ U^ pp ^^^^ ^^^^
2 7 8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
considered worthy of account. The primitive family was
maternal, for in the confusion of sexual unions paternal
filiation would have been difficult to determine; no im-
portance was therefore attached to it in early times, and
the father was not looked upon as the parent of his children.
We shall find the maternal family, or at least traces of it,
in many countries, but it is especially among the Indians of
North America that it has been the best preserved and the
best studied. In the eighteenth century it was already
remarked by Charlevoix, Lafitau, and Lahontan,i that the
Redskins always bear the name of their mother, and that it
is through a man's sister that his name is transmitted to
descendants. The American clan is based on uterine
filiation ; it comprehends all the descendants, in the female
line of an ancestral mother, real or hypothetical. It is
therefore exactly the contrary of the agnatic gens of the
Greco-Roman world.
The Redskin clan is composed of all the families reputed
to be related to each other ; it is a little republic having the
right to the service of all the women for the cultivation of
the soil, and of all the men for the chase, war, and vendettas.
It is to the woman that the wigwam or family dwelling
belongs, as well as all the objects possessed by the family,
and the whole is transmitted by heritage, not to the son,
but to the eldest daughter or to the nearest maternal rela-
tive,2 sometimes to the brother of the deceased woman.
Nevertheless, this heritage must be understood in the sense
of a simple usufruct. It was the maternal clan in reality
who was the proprietor, and none of the members of the
community could seriously alienate the social property.
The husband alone, in most of the tribes, had no right over
the goods or over the children ; they all remained in the
maternal clan ;^ it was maternal filiation which regulated the
name, the rank,and the hereditary rights in the clan.* A sort
of communism reigned there. All the provisions, whether
they were the produce of the soil, of the chase, or of fishing,
were placed in public storehouses, under the control of an
aged matron ; and if it ever happened that a family had
^ Voyages y etc., t. ii. p. 154.
• A. Giraud-Teulon, fils, Orig. du Mariage, etc., p. 191.
« Id., ibid. p. 186. <^ Id., ibid. p. 177.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 279
exhausted its provisions, another family immediately came
to its aid.^
But maternal filiation was, or is, in force even where the
clans did not live in common houses, as we find it still
among the Mohicans, the Delawares, the Narrangasetts, the
Pequots, the Wyandots, the Missouris, the Minnitaris, the
Crows, the Creeks, the Chickasaws, the Cherokees, etc.
With the Iroquois and the Hurons, the father, says
Charlevoix, was almost a stranger to his children. "Among
the Hurons," continues the same observer, "dignity and
succession are inherited through the women. It is the son
of the sister who succeeds, and in default of him the next
relative in the female line."^
"With these peoples," says Lafitau, "marriages are
arranged in such a way that the husband and wife do not
leave their own family to establish a family and a cabin
independently. Each one remains at home, and the
children born of these marriages belong to the families that
have produced them, and are counted as members of the
family and cabin of the mother, and not at all as belonging
to those of the father. The possessions of the husband do
not go to his wife's cabin, to which he is himself a stranger ;
and in his wife's cabin the daughters are heirs in prefer-
ence to the males, who have nothing there but mere
subsistence."^
" Besides this," continues Lafitau, " the wife's cabin has
rights over the product of the husband's hunting ; all of this
must be contributed during the first year, and a half only
afterwards."*
The mothers negotiated the marriages, and naturally did
so without consulting the interested parties. When the
affair was once settled, presents had to be made to the
gentile relatives of the bride. It was the care of these
relatives, in case of conjugal dissensions between the
married pair, to attempt a reconciliation and to prevent
a divorce.^ At the present time, among the Santi-Dakotas,
1 A. Giraud-Teulon, Oi'ig. du Mariage^ p. 185.
3 Charlevoix, Hist, de la Nouvelle France^ t. v. p. 395.
* Lafitau, Mcetirs des Sauvages Am^ricaiiis, t. l^^' p, 69, etc.
* Id.y ibid. t. ii. pp. 252, 268.
^ L. Morgan, Ancient Soctgiies, p. 454.
28o THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
if a wife is ill-treated by her husband, the mother-in-law has
the right to take back her daughter ; the husband's power
must yield to hers.^ Does the institution of filiation by
women, or the maternal family, entail, as some have
pretended, the regime of the matriarchate ? North America
being par excellence the country of exogamy and of the
maternal family, the theorists of the primitive matriarchate
have often drawn arguments from thence which it is interest-
ing to weigh.
At the epoch during which the Seneca-Iroquois still lived
in their "long houses," it seems that the influence of the
women in the community was very great. The missionary,
Arthur Wright, wrote in 1873: — "It was the custom for
the women to govern the house. The provisions were in
common ; but woe to the unfortunate husband or lover too
idle or clumsy to bring home from the chase a sufficient
booty. Whatever the number of his children or the value
of the goods he possessed in the house, he might be ordered
at any moment to take up his blanket and pack off." After
that, unless he obtained the intercession of some aunt or
grandmother, he was forced to obey, return to his own clan,
or contract an alliance elsewhere. " The women were the
chief power in the clans, and they did not hesitate, when
necessary, to depose a chief, and make him re-enter the
ranks of simple warriors. The election of the chiefs always
depended on them."^
Among the Wyandots there is in every clan a council
composed of four women elected by the female chiefs of
the family. These four women choose a chief of the clan
from among the men ; then the totem of the clan is painted
on the face of this chief. The council of the tribe is formed
by an assemblage of the clan councils; four-fifths of it,
therefore, consist of women. The sachem, or chief of the
tribe, is chosen by the chiefs of the clans.^
Charlevoix relates that in 1721 the Natchez Indians
were governed by a very despotic chief, the Sun, who was
^ J. Owen Dorsey, Omaha Sociology, p. 261, in Smithsojiian
Reports, 1885.
- L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 455.
* J. W. Powell, Wyandot Government, in Smithsonian Reports^
i88i.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 281
succeeded by the son of his nearest of kin. This was the
female chief, and she had, hke the Sun, the power of life
and death over the people. At the death of the female
chief in 1721, her husband, not belonging to the family of
the Sun, was strangled by her son, according to custom,
and that without prejudice to other human sacrifices.^ The
ancient Spanish chroniclers also speak of the submission of
the husbands to their wives in Nicaragua; they seem to
have been treated as servants (Herrera, Audogoya).
Lastly, among the Redskins the matrons had the right
to baptise the children — that is to say, to make them enter
either the maternal or the paternal clan.^
These facts are curious. They prove, indeed, that with
the Redskins the women enjoyed a notable influence,
especially in ancient times. With the Seneca-Iroquois
they could expel the incapable hunter; but this was
evidently by their title of housekeepers of the clan.
Among the Wyandots, they figured numerously in the
council; but nevertheless, the supreme chief was a man.
As for the woman-chief of the Natchez Indians, we find an
equivalent of it in certain little despotic monarchies of
black Africa. Among the Ashantees, and in Darfour, etc.,
the princesses dominate their husbands or their lovers by
the prestige of royalty. Nothing is more natural than that
a plebeian husband should be strangled on the tomb of his
wife with other human victims, when we consider the
prevailing ideas of future life and the absolute servility of
the subject in primitive monarchical states. In fact, the
power of women among the Redskins was more apparent
than real. Charlevoix himself declares that their domina-
tion is fictitious,^ " that they are, in domestic life, the slaves
of their husband," that the men hold them in profound
contempt, and that, amongst themselves, the epithet of
" woman " is a cutting insult.
Important affairs were kept secret from them ; * polygamy
was habitually permitted to the men, but polyandry was
nearly always prohibited to the women. In fact, among
the Redskins the woman is the slave of her husband, and
^ Charlevoix, loc. ciL, t. vi. pp. 1 77- 1 79.
2 L. Morgan, Ancient Societies^ p. 169.
3 Charlevoix, t. v. pp. 397-421. ^ Id., ibid., t. vi. p. 172.
2 8 2 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
the latter thinks so sh'ghtly of her, that frequently the men
live conjugally for years without communicating with their
wives otherwise than by signs, as owing to exogamous
marriage they speak different languages. ^ The authority
that the husbands concede to their wives in certain tribes is
entirely domestic \ it is a household royalty.
Thus, with the Selisches, the cabins containing the
provisions are confided to the women, and the husband
himself can take nothing without their permission. ^ The
husband or the son commands in the woods and on the
prairie; but in the interior of the wigwam it is the most
aged woman or the mother who governs and assigns to each
one his place.^
These customs and the marriages by servitude have Jed
several observers to attribute to the women a considerable
authority which they do not really possess. In fact, they
are nearly always purchased, and are very submissive. The
maternal family and the matriarchate are very different
things. The first is common ; the second is very rare, if
indeed it has ever existed. The Australians, who have the
maternal family, none the less treat their wives as we should
not dare to treat our domestic animals. And again, in
order that filiation by the female side should give women a
notable social influence, it is necessary that society should
be very civilised, that there should be exchangeable values,
and that women should become rich by inheritance. Then
they are in a position to exercise the power that fortune
gives in every country. But among the Redskins private
property as yet hardly existed ; the clans preserved the prior
claim ; personal property had not a great value ; there were
no domestic animals; it was difficult for any individual,
man or woman, to become rich. Lastly, the chief occupa-
tions, those which were reputed noble, those also on which
the existence of the tribes depended, were the chase and
war ; now the women took no part in these. They have
not therefore been able to exercise a dominant influence,
even in the tribes where they were treated with relative
mildness. Among the Redskins in general, all the painful
* Lubbock, Oris;. Civil. ^ p. 152.
2 Dom^nech, Voy. pitt. dans les deserts du Nouveau- Monde, p. 508.
» Ibid. p. 543.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 283
labours fall to the women, except the fabrication of
arms. It is she who takes care of the home, who cooks,
prepares the skins and the furs, gathers the wild rice, digs,
sows and reaps the maize and the vegetables, dries the
meat and the roots for the winter-provision, makes the
clothes and the necklaces, etc. She even works at the
construction of bark canoes, but in this, man comes to her
aid. With that exception, he confines himself to hunting
and fighting, smoking, eating, drinking, and sleeping. In
his eyes work is a disgrace.^ Such are the customs of
living Redskins. Were they different last century? Not
at all, if we may believe the authorities even who are
invoked by the modern theorists of the American matri-
archate. Charlevoix tells us that the Huron husbands
prostituted their daughters and their wives for money,^ that
the Sioux cut off the noses of their unfaithful wives and
scalped them,^ and that all the hard work was left to
the women, the men glorying in their idleness.'* Lafitau
enumerates, with still greater detail, the many and painful
occupations of the women,^ and he narrates the story of a
husband who burnt his adulterous wife at a slow fire.^ It
is not then amongst the Redskins that we can find the
matriarchate. Their familial system is none the less very
curious, especially if we compare it with that of the
Australians.
The familial clan of the Australians and of the Redskins
enables us to retrace the origin of the ideas of kinship.
Nothing similar seems to exist among the animals. In the
best endowed species, the parents, especially the females,
have an instinctive love of their young, but only as long as
they are young. After that period they no longer recognise
them, and often even drive them away.
Man, who has certainly begun his existence in the same
way as the animals, has early attained, not to ideas of
precise filiation, but to a vague idea of consanguinity
^ Domenech, loc. cit.^ pp. 338, 425, 467.
2 Charlevoix, y<?«r«a/, etc., t. vi. p. 39.
2 Id.y ibid.y t. V. p. 271. * /<r/., ibid.^ t. vi. p. 44.
^ Moeurs des Sauvages, ii. 266 ; iii. 56, 69, 70. 72, 76, 92, 97, 98,
120.
* Ibid.y t. ii. pp. 274, 275.
284 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
between all the members of his horde. In these little
primitive groups, no distinction has at first been made
between real and fictitious kinship. All the men of the
same clan have been brothers, all the women have been
sisters, and by the help of an inveterate habit of exogamy,
a gross morality has been formed, which condemned social
incest. But as the life of the clan was, before all things,
communal, while marriages within the clan were prohibited,
it was decided that the clans of the same name^that is,
those who had sprung one from the other — should be united
by a sort of social marriage, all the women of the one being
common to all the men of the other. Then, in the course
of time, the instinct of individual appropriation having
undermined the primitive community, the women were
distributed amongst the men ; they formed families which
were often singular ones, and of which I shall have to speak
again. There was no longer promiscuity from clan to clan,
but the wife was to be taken from an allied clan. The first
filiation which was established was surely maternal filiation :
primitive conjugal confusion would not permit of any other.
But at length, when the family became more or less
instituted, the relations could be classified, and the degrees
of consanguinity distinguished.
It was not without difficulty that man succeeded so far.
A long period of time was required to disentangle the skein
of family relationships ; and fictitious kinship continued to
be confounded with real kinship for many ages. Change
came only by a slow evolution, which we will now proceed
to study.
CHAPTER XVII.
THE FAMILIAL CLAN AND ITS EVOLUTION.
I. The Clan among the Redskins.— Vxvai\\\\& form of the Tribe—
The Clan.
II. The Family among the Redskins.— QXd&^z?, of relations among the
Omahas — The family among the Iroquois-Senecas, the Omahas, etc. —
Primitive familial stage of the Redskins— Adoption and its miracles-
Rise and evolution of masculine filiation in America— Exogamy and
endogamy.
III. The Family in Polynesia. — Maternal filiation — Rarity of
exogamy — Hawaian marriage — The terms of kinship — The father
humbling himself to the male child — Adoption in Polynesia.
IV. The Family among the Mongols. — Familial exogamy among
the Mongols — Kinship by classes — Evolution of kinship by classes.
V. The Clan and the Family. — The European family has not been
the "cellule" of societies — The primitive clan.
I. The Clan among the Redskins.
In the preceding chapter we have seen the nature
of Redskin exogamy, on which it has sometimes been
attempted to construct theories of conjugal evolution
applicable to the entire human race. As a matter of fact,
the North American Indians marry within their tribe \ they
are therefore endogamous as regards the tribe, but they do
not take their wives from their own clan, and consequently
they are exogamous as regards this clan. But the clan
being composed of real or supposed blood-relations, the
exogamy of the Redskins is actually nothing more than our
own prohibition, very much extended, of marriages within
certain degrees of kinship.
286 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
There is really nothing here which resembles marriage by
capture, so often classed with exogamy \ but the latter may
very easily co-exist with the former, and may even be the
general rule in more savage tribes. It prevailed, we are
told, among the Caribs^ to such a degree that the wives did
not speak the same language as their husbands.
How was the American tribe originally formed ? Either
consanguineous hordes have ranged themselves side by
side, or, which is more probable, a horde, becoming too
numerous, has swarmed. Analogous groups, proceeding
from it, have formed large families, remaining all the while
attached to the original stock, but constituting, nevertheless,
distinct communities, confederated with each other and
with the primitive clan, which at length became indis-
tinguishable from the others. The whole of these clans
taken together represent a tribe. If the clans are too
numerous, they group themselves in twos, or threes, etc.,
within the bosom of the tribe, and thus form what in
primitive Greece were called phratries^ the bond between
them being a lesser degree of kinship. At first, marriage
was prohibited within the phratry, and afterwards exogamy
was restricted to the clans. The clans composing the
phratry had festivals in common, and considered themselves
bound to aid each other in revenging wrongs.^ The clan,
or gens^ is a group of persons united by a closer con-
sanguinity, but in the female line. The children of the
women of the clan remain in the clan of their mother.
" The woman bears the clan," say the Wyandot Indians,*''
just as our ancestors said, " The womb dyes the child."
Each clan has its totem (a tortoise, bear, eland, or fox, etc.).
In the "long houses" of the Iroquois, or in the Pueblos,
the members of each clan even had a common habitation, in
which each family had its own cell; but the members of
this cell-family belonged to different clans, as the husband
was not of the same clan as his wife, and sometimes did not
inhabit the same dwelling. We have heard it said many
times that "the family is the social cellule." Now this is
evidently false in regard to the American tribe, and to all
^ MacLennan, Primitive Marriage, p. 71.
2 A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit.^ p. 170-172.
* Powell, Reports of Smithsonian JnstituHofii 1881.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 287
tribes that are organised on the same plan. In them it is
the clan which is the social unit, or cellule, to keep to the
metaphor favoured by H. Spencer, and it is feminine
filiation which determines the kinship. What is this kin-
ship in the female line in its details? That is what we
must now proceed to inquire.
II. The Family among the Redskins.
The manner in which the different degrees of kinship
are understood and named varies somewhat among the
diverse Redskin tribes ; but, in general, the similarity is
very great, and great also is the confusion between real
consanguinity and fictitious kinship. Among the Omahas,
for example, five classes of kinship are recognised — ist, the
nikie kinship, arising from a very distant common ancestor ;
2nd, the clan kinship ; thus the families whose tents
adjoin each other when the tribe is assembled, are of this
kinship ; 3rd, kinship by the calumet dance — that is to say,
by adoption ; 4th, kinship by marriage, including the
husband, wife, son, and daughter's husband; 5th, kinship
of blood-relation, including the clans of the mother, grand-
mother, and father.!
The Omahas admit, therefore, entire groups of so-called
kinsfolk quite unknown in our individualist societies ; and
moreover, the adopted kinsmen are held exactly on the
same footing as the others.
If we confine ourselves to real kinship, we shall see that
it is understood in a very wide manner. I will simply give,
as a detailed example, a description of the family among
the Iroquois Senecas and the Omahas. With the Iroquois
Senecas, the direct line, both ascending and descending, is
very short. It does not go farther than grandfather and
grandmother, and grandson and grand-daughter. The
more distant ancestors and descendants are all comprised
without distinction in the same categories ; they form
groups of grandfathers or grandsons. In a collateral line,
they proceed by groups, in the same manner. Thus, for a
^ Owen Dorsey, Omaha Sociology^ p. 252, in Reports of Smithsonian
Institution, 1885.
288 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
tvoman^ the sons and daughters of a sister are reckoned as
her own sons and daughters, and their children are her
grandchildren. The collateral kinship is then confounded,
at least in terminology, with kinship in a direct line. On
the contrary, the sons and daughters of a woman's brother
are only her nephews and nieces. How can we explain
this familial confusion on one side, and this distinction on
the other ? It may probably be attributed to the habit of
the Redskins to marry a lot of sisters at the same time.
A woman counts her sister's children as her own, because
the husband of that sister, whom we should call her
brother-in-law, is virtually her husband also. Inversely, for
a 7nan, his brother's children, or his fraternal nieces and
nephews, are reckoned as his own children ; their children
are his grandsons or grand-daughters, whilst the children
and grandchildren of his sister are only his nephews and
nieces.^ Following our previous line of reasoning, we are
led to suppose that these denominations of kinship go
back to a distant epoch, when brothers had their wives in
common, but abstained from marrying their own sisters.
This supposition is confirmed by the examination of the
collateral ascending kinship. Thus, either in the case of a
man or woman, the father's brother, or the paternal uncle,
is reckoned as the father, and his sons and daughters are
reckoned as brothers and sisters.
The sisters of the father, or of any person bearing the
title of father, are called aunts. The children of these
aunts are cousins. For a man, the kinship of uncle is
restricted to the brothers of the mother, and the children of
these uncles are cousins. The mother's sister, or the
maternal aunt, is counted as a mother; her children are
not nephews and nieces, but sons and daughters. All
sisters, real or fictitious, are mutually mothers of all their
children. The children of a man's brothers are not his
nephews and nieces, but his sons and daughters; his
sisters' children are his nephews and nieces,^ probably
because these names have been given at an epoch when the
brothers married groups of sisters in common, but not
their own sisters.
^ Lewis Morgan, Ancient Societies^ p. 436.
a Id., ibid. p. 438.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 289
The Omaha Redskins distinguish the degrees of kinship
almost in the same way as the Iroquois Senecas. For
them also the most distant ascendants are all grandfathers
or grandmothers. They class all their relations in groups,
formed of individuals virtually brought together by similar
degrees of consanguinity or alliance. Whole categories of
individuals, more or less numerous, are called brothers or
fathers of a man or woman ; all those whom the father of a
person calls brothers are fathers to that person ; all those
whom the mother of a woman calls husbands are also
fathers to that woman. The name "mother" is given to
all the women reputed as sisters to the mother, to the
aunts or nieces of the mother, and also to the virtual wives
of the father.
A man has virtually for wives all the wives of his brothers,
and also their widows, on account of the levirate.
If a man has a brother-in-law who is at the same time the
husband of a paternal aunt, the sister of that man is the
grand-daughter of the brother-in-law.
A man becomes your brother-in-law if he is merely the
husband of a paternal aunt, because he can marry your
sister.
The husband of a daughter, of a niece, or of a grand-
daughter, is a son-in-law.^
All the sons and all the daughters of persons reputed as
fathers and mothers call each other brothers and sisters.
All the wives, real or virtual, of the grandfather are called
grandmothers; so are also all the mothers or grandmothers of
the fathers and mothers, and all the women that the fathers
and mothers call sisters.
A man counts as his sons all the sons of his brothers or
of his virtual wives ; but the sisters of these sons are his
sisters. A woman calls the sons and daughters of her
brothers her nephews and nieces, but the children of her
sister are counted as her own children ; because their
father is virtually her husband.
Among the Omahas a man calls his sister's children
nephews and nieces. A person of either sex counts as
grandchildren all those who are called the children of his
sons, daughters, nephews, and nieces, or reputed as such.
^ Owen Dorsey, loc. cit.^ p. 255.
19
290 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
A man counts as uncles all those whom his mothers call
** brothers"; and as aunts all the sisters of his father
and the wives of his uncles. A man has for brothers-in-
law the husbands of his father's sister ; for they are the
real or virtual husbands of his sisters ; a woman has them
for virtual husbands.^
Various prohibitions of marriage result from these con-
ventional kinships. A man may not marry the women that
he calls daughters of a sister, or grand-daughters, etc.
A woman may not marry the men who are her sons, the
sons of her sister, of her aunt or of her niece, or who are
her brothers, etc.^
But an Omaha may marry any woman who is not a blood
relation, provided that she does not figure among the
prohibited affinities.^
We have not such detailed information regarding the
other Redskin tribes ; but we know enough of them to be
certain that their systems of kinship are very analogous to
those of the Iroquois Senecas and the Omahas. Fihation
is everywhere maternal, except in certain tribes in the course
of evolution ; nearly everywhere also it is a crime to marry
a woman having the same totem^
Among the Mandans, Pawnies, and Arickaries, a man
calls his brother's wife his wife also. Among the Crows a
woman calls her husband's brother's wife her " comrade ";
but among the VVinebagos she calls her " sister." In some
tribes a man's wife's sister's husband is called his "brother."^
Some very severe and inconvenient rules of decency have
resulted from these fictitious kinships, with their prohibitions
of marriage.
Thus, among the Omahas, the young girls may only speak
to their father, brother, and grandfather. A woman avoids
passing before her daughter's husband as much as possible ;
and, unless under extraordinary circumstances, a woman does
not speak directly to the father of her husband. A man
never addresses a word to the mother or grandmother of his
wife.*' In the last century, among the Iroquois, a young
1 Owen Dorsey, he. cit., pp. 254, 255.
2 Id., ibid, p. 256. ■* MacLcnnan, Primitive Marriage, p. 97.
^ Id., ibid, p. 257. ^ L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 440.
* Owen Dorsey, loc. cit., pp. 262, 263.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 291
man was dishonoured if he stopped to converse in public with
a young girl who was certainly within the prohibited degree
of kinship. 1 For a young Iroquois girl to call the husband
of her aunt by his personal name was considered a grave act,
indicating a culpable liaison?
From the manner in which the Redskins understand
kinship, we may infer two things : first, that they must have
passed through a familial stage, in which groups of brothers
married groups of sisters and possessed them in common,
thus combining polygamy and polyandry, since they attach
little value to real consanguinity, and their kinships are
very often fictitious ; and secoftdly, that they make no differ-
ence between real filiation and adoption, and in this they
resemble savages and even barbarians of all countries.
Among the Omahas the word used to signify adoption
means literally " to take for one's own son."^ The adopted
child is always treated as the first-born, and takes his place ;
the father who adopts him refuses him nothing, and gives
him a share in all his wealth. The real father, on his side,
makes presents to the adopted father. And lastly, there is a
prohibition of marriage during four years between the two
families, on account of the kinship created by the adoption.*
Sometimes an entire clan adopts another. Thus the
Wolf-Iroquois were adopted by the Falcon-Iroquois, and the
effect of this adoption was that the two clans became com-
pletely assimilated, the new-comers taking the kinships of
the adoptive clan.''
The adoption of enemies, taken prisoners after a battle,
is still more curious. This adoption has almost miraculous
effects ; it extinguishes the ferocious hatred which the Red-
skins always feel for men belonging to rival tribes ; more
than that, it makes the captive warrior become the husband
of the woman whom he has perhaps rendered a widow, or
of the daughter whose father he may have killed. The
Redskins have, it should be said, very exaggerated ideas
on the subject of warlike valour. A combatant must
never surrender unless very severely wounded. Every
^ Lettres idifiantes^ t. xii. p. 130. ^ Ibid. p. 144.
* Owen Dorsey, loc. cit.^ p. 265.
4 Id., ibid, p. 281.
^ Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 81.
292 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
warrior who is taken prisoner is dishonoured and held as
dead by his tribe, and his captors generally torture him to
death. However, in the last century, the most ferocious of
the Redskins, the Iroquois, sometimes spared a few prisoners
to offer them to the wives or daughters whose relations had
been killed. The latter had the power either to put them
to death, in order that their shades might serve as slaves to
their father, brother, or husband, etc., who had fallen, or to
pardon them, and even adopt them. In this last case, the
enemies of the previous night took a place among the
warriors of the clan, and were no longer distinguished from
the others.^
This system of kinship in the familial clan is curious,
because it holds real consanguinity very cheap, unhesitat-
ingly confusing real with fictitious kinship, and thus forming
classes of fictitious relations. It seems to prove the exist-
ence of an ancient period of promiscuity, during which
there was scarcely any thought of determining with precision
the degrees of consanguinity of individuals. Naturally, the
first form of the family which was more or less vaguely
outlined in the confused groups anterior to the familial
clans, was the maternal family ; but this system of filiation
by classes is in no way incompatible with paternal filiation.
Up to the present time kinship in the female line
prevails among most of the Redskin tribes. Certain of
them, however, are evolving in the direction of masculine
filiation, and this movement was already commencing at
the close of the last century.^ The transformation began
with the chiefs and more powerful men. Among the
Thlinkits of Russian America the great men already give
the paternal name to their children ; but the poorer people
are still in the stage of uterine filiation.^ Certain tribes
have quite recently adopted the system of paternal filiation.
It is owing to European influence that this change is
operating, and its accomplishment is only a question of
time. The Ojibways have only taken two generations to
effect the adoption of agnatic filiation.'* A similar evolution
^ Voyages du baron de Lahontan, etc., t. ii. pp. 203, 204 (1741).
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit.^ p. 196.
3 Holmberg, Skizzen uber die Volker des Kussichen Amert'ka, p. 32.
* L. Morgan, loc. cit., pp. 166, 344.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 293
was spontaneously accomplished in the great states of
Central America. In Peru maternal filiation was still in
general use, but the paternal family was beginning to
appear. In the mass of the nation, says Gomara, the herit-
age was transmitted to nephews and not to sons ; but in the
family of the Incas direct male descendants alone had the
right to avail themselves of their origin, and sons inherited.^
It seems that in Mexico the familial evolution may have
been more advanced, for there it is always the paternal
personality which predominates, and it is the father who
dictates to the children rules of conduct and moral precepts.
The mothers exhort their daughters to be submissive to
their husbands, to obey them and strive to please them.
The familial customs which I have just described are
general in America; they are not universal as regards
exogamy, for Hearne tells us that many Chippeways fre-
quently take to wife their sisters, daughters, and even
mothers.2 We know, on the other hand, that the Peruvian
Incas married their sisters, and that throughout the Peruvian
empire no one married outside the administrative district.
In some parts of America the diversity is still greater. The
Caribs married their relatives, with the exception of sisters,^
indiscriminately; the Indians of Guiana, on the contrary,
practised totemic exogamy, like the Redskins.*
The Indians of Guatemala were unacquainted with
maternal kinship. They willingly married their sisters,
provided they were not children of the same father, and
among them the children belonged to the class of the father
even when the mother was a slave. ^ Among the Mayas
descent was also reckoned in the male hne.^ In various
savage tribes of Mexico the women did not inherit. Among
the Ityas and in Yucatan the name of the child was formed
by combining the names of the father and mother; the
mother's name, however, had the precedence."^
The monk Thevet relates that the Indians of Brazil
^ H, Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 340.
2 Id., ibid., vol. ii. p.^2i8.
^ Squier, States of Central America, p. 237.
* Brett, Indian Tribes of Guiana, p. 98
^ Bancroft, loc. cit., pp. 664, 665.
* L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 538
' Bancroft, loc. cit.j vol. ii. p. 680.
294 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
already pushed the agnatic system, at least in theory, to its
most extreme limits; for they affirmed, he says, that in
procreation the part of the father is predominant, and
that of the mother only secondary.^ The general con-
clusion to be drawn from these very dissimilar facts is, that
we should abstain from forming any absolute theories on
these great sociological questions of marriage and the
family, which are still so far from being elucidated.
III. The Family in Polynesia.
Filiation by the female line seems to be generally adopted,
not only in Polynesia, but in many Melanesian or Micro-
nesian archipelagoes. It has been found in the Fiji Islands,
at Tonga and the Carolines,^ etc. But exogamy, even the
exogamy of the clan, after the American fashion, appears
rare. It existed at Samoa, but in any case it seems not to
have been a general custom.^
In New Zealand endogamy predominated, and marriage
with a woman of another tribe was even prohibited, unless
an important political motive could be given as an excuse.*
Endogamy was also practised in the Hawaian Islands. In
the Mulgrave Islands every marriage required the sanction
of an assembly of all the friends and relatives, or rather of
the whole clan,^ for the interest of the community was
involved in it.
In the Hawaian Islands there existed a confused kinship
by classes, analogous to that of the familial clan among
the Redskins, but much more gross. Group-marriage of
brothers and sisters prevailed, but generally the brothers
did not marry their own sisters. As for the names
expressing the degrees of kinship, they were names of
classes. The Hawaians had no words to express "father"
or "mother." They used the word ^^ mMa^^^ which
signifies "parents." To say "father," they added the
word ^^ kana" which signifies "male": MMa kana^ male
^ Thevet, Singularites de la France antarctique, p. 215.
2 A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit.^ p. 167.
^ Hubner, Six semaines en Polyntsie in Revue des Deux-Mondes, 1886.
* Yate, Netu Zealand, p. 99.
^ Paulding, Hist. Univ. des Voy.f t. xvi, p. 459.
AND OF THE FAMIL K 295
parent. To say "mother," they used the combination,
Mkua ouahma^ female parent. There was no expression
for "son" or "daughter." They used the word keiki^
child, or little one, to which they added kana or ouahina^
as before, according as the child was male or female. The
language had no terms for "brother" or "sister."^ The
word employed to express " wives " is collective ; it applies
to the wife's sister as well as to the wife proper, and signifies
literally "female"; in the same way, for "husband" they
used the word kana (male), and applied it also to the
husband's brother and sister's husband. All the sisters of
a woman were called "the wives of the husband of that
woman," even when they were not actually so.^ The
Hawaians had no expressions for "grandfather" or "grand-
mother." Their word kapuna signifies an ancestor of any
degree beyond the father and mother (mMa). Neither had
they any special denomination for "grandson" or "grand-
daughter." As brothers and sisters did not generally
intermarry, the women called the husband or husbands of
their sisters, not "husbands," but "intimate companions"
i^punalua).^
It was possible for either the paternal or maternal family
to evolve from this confused system of kinship, based at
first apparently on the promiscuity of brothers and sisters ;
but it was the latter which at first arose, and in the time of
Cook the rank and dignity of the chiefs were transmitted
in the female line.'* A singular custom noticed by Cook in
the Society Isles may perhaps be interpreted in the sense
of maternal filiation. They spoke of the transmission
of the title and dignity of the chiefs to their first-
born, and that even at the moment of birth. As soon as
the wife of a chief had given birth to a son, the father was
reckoned as deposed, and became a simple regent ; he owed
homage to his son, and might not ren.ain in his presence
without uncovering to the waist.^ At Tonga maternal
filiation was well established ; rank was transmitted by the
^ L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 374.
2 Id., ibid. p. 428. — MacLennan, Primitive Marriage, p. 375.
^ L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 428.
* De Varigny, Qiiatoze ans aiix ties Sandwich^ p. 14.
^ Cook (Second Voyage), Hist. Umv. des Voy.y t. vii. p. 417.—
Moerenhout, Voy. auxUes, etc., t. ii. pp. 13, 15.
296 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
women, who sometimes even reigned,^ and the father was
not counted as the parent of his child.^
Of late years, and manifestly under European influence,
the familial system has become modified in Polynesia. At
Tonga masculine filiation is being substituted by degrees
for feminine filiation.^ The Maoris of New Zealand have
also adopted agnatic filiation, but this new system still jars
against ancient usages, which formerly harmonised with the
maternal family.
This evolution of the family in Polynesia has probably
had for its starting-point a confused promiscuity, and after-
wards a system of classification of relations, in which real
and fictitious ties were hardly distinguished from each
other. With the slight importance attached to real con-
sanguinity might very naturally coexist a great facility to
practise adoption. This was abused to such a degree in
the Marquesas Islands that it was not uncommon to see aged
persons getting themselves adopted by children, and even
animals were adopted also. Thus a chief had adopted a
dog, to which he had ceremoniously offered ten pigs and
some precious ornaments ; he had liim constantly carried by
a kikino ; and at the banquets of the chiefs, the animal had
his appointed place by the side of his adoptive father.'*
There was no distinction generally made between the real
and the adoptive parent,^ and we may hence conclude
that the degrees and bonds of kinship were not well
distinguished.
IV. Tlie Family among the Mongols.
The family of the Polynesians, and more especially of
the Hawaians, may well have been, as L. Morgan supposes,
the primitive familial type of the American Redskins. It
has for its basis a marriage which is at once polyandric
and polygynic, between groups of sisters and corresponding
^ Th. West, Ten Years in South Central Polynesia^ p. 260.
2 Mariner, Voy. to the Friendly Islands^ etc., vol. ii. p. 165.
^ Erskine, Islands of the Western J'acijic.
* M. Radigiiet, Demiers Sativa^es, p. 181.
^ Mariner, 7 onga Islands, vol. ii. p. 98.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 297
groups of brothers, and it results quite naturally in a system
of kinship by classes, holding real consanguinity very cheap.
It seems probable that analogous systems of kinship may
have been adopted by the greater number of the Asiatic
Mongols. This may at least be inferred from the frag-
mentary but significant accounts with which explorers have
supplied us. Among the Yourak Samoyedes, it is forbidden
to marry a woman of the same tribe (or rather clan).^ The
people among the Kalmucks are subject to restrictions of
the same kind in regard to marriage, which must not take
place within three or four degrees of kinship. The great
men, however, for whom the laws are more lenient in all
countries, sometimes obtain immunity from these incon-
venient obligations, but the populace is very much shocked
at their laxity. "Great men and dogs," they say, "have no
kin." Nevertheless, the sons of the great men, who often
also marry their sisters-in-law, always take a wife in another
clan.2 Kinship by classes surely existed among the Mongols
only a few centuries ago, for Baber, the founder of the
Mongol Empire of Delhi, speaks in his Memoirs of one of
his lieutenants, named Lenguer Khan, who possessed a
whole tribe of maternal uncles, the Djendjouhah, forming a
people who lived in the mountains of the Punjaub.^
V. The Evolution of the System of Kinship by Classes.
These facts, and the inferences they suggest, enable us
to solve a difficulty which has embarrassed an eminent
sociologist, L. Morgan, to whom we owe our acquaintance
with the details of the curious systems of kinship by classes
prevailing among the Polynesians and the Redskins.
Morgan, in comparing, term for term, the denominations
indicating kinship among the Iroquois-Senecas and the
Tamils of India, found them identical as to meaning and
number, and he admits, but not without hesitation, that
there has been, in both races, a parallel and spontaneous
1 Latham, Descriptive Ethnology, vol. ii. p. 455.
^ MacLennan, loc. ciL, pp 78, 79.
3 A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. du Mariage, p. 268.
298 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
evolution.^ This way of explaining ethnic similarities is
certainly in general very legitimate. At first sight it often
appears trustworthy, and saves the trouble of inventing
fantastic migrations. In thousands of cases men of every
period, every country, every race have conducted them-
selves in the same way, had the same ideas, realised the
same inventions, adopted the same practices, without know-
ing each other, without even supposing the existence of the
other peoples, and this simply because all of them were
part of the great human family. But between the
Mongoloids of North America, their cousins of Northern
Asia, and the Hawaians, there is probably the bond of a
distant and common origin, and, besides this, the nomad
Mongols of Asia have more than once penetrated into
India. Up to the present time, half-savage Mongol tribes
occupy entire regions of the Himalayah. Mongols and
Tamils have had wide and long communications with each
other during prehistoric ages ; it has therefore been pos-
sible for them to borrow mutually their system of kinship.
There exists quite a chain of peoples, including the Tamils
of India, the least civilised Mongols, the American Red-
skins, and lastly the greater number of the Polynesians, all
of whom have formerly adopted, or still practise systems of
kinship, based, not on consanguinity, but on a classification
more or less fictitious.
The fact is interesting ; but it is somewhat bold to attach
to it, as Morgan has done, a universal value, and to pretend
that all human races have passed through this phase of
kinship by classes. Even in the countries where this
familial form prevails, it is subject to more than one
exception, and it is probable that each great human type,
having had its special centre of creation, has evolved
physically and psychically in its own manner, sometimes
unconsciously imitating the others, but quite as often
deviating from them, according as the environment, the
difficulties to be overcome, and the necessities of the
struggle for existence imposed on it such or such a line
of conduct.
^ L. Morgan, Conjectural Solution of the Origin of the CI as si fie at ory
System of Relationships in Pioceedings of the American Academy of
Arts and Sciences. 1868.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 299
However it may be, if we condense, by classification, all
the notions that have been collected in relation to kinship
by classes among the Australians, the Tamils, the primitive
Mongols, the Mongoloids of North America and those of
Polynesia, we may retrace the evolution of kinship by
classes with sufficient appearance of truth.
To begin with, there must have existed hordes, which,
though doubtless human, were still very bestial as regards
their instincts and intelligence. In these hordes, which
were not very numerous, the women being taken possession
of by the most robust old males, the young ones were
obliged either to quit the group or to remain in it by
ravishing one or two women from rival hordes; for
exogamy was a necessity. The least advanced of the
Australian tribes seem to be still in this primitive stage.
At length a little order was put into this disorder by the
horde breaking up into clans ; it was then decided that all
the men and all the women of each clan should be brothers
and sisters, and should not intermarry, and that on the
other hand, all the men of a clan should be the husbands of
all the women of the neighbouring clan, simply by right
of birth. The Kamilaroi of Australia may represent the
second stage.
In Polynesia the principle is the same, but the idea has
become restricted and defined. Groups of real brothers
marry groups of women actually sisters, thus forming house-
holds at once polyandric and polygamic ; but traces of the
antique marriage by fictitious groups of brothers and
sisters appear again in the terms used to designate the
various degrees of kinship. These terms are in reality
purely classificatory, and take little account of real
consanguinity.
Among the Redskins a new and important restriction
has been established. Marriage outside the clan is con-
tinued, but not marriage by groups of sisters and brothers.
That this was done in primitive times, however, is proved
by the familial vocabulary. On the other hand, they have
clearly renounced polyandry, and adopted polygamy with
not less clearness ; but this polygamy is special, and it is
generally a group of sisters who marry the polygamous
husband.
300 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
As for the terms of kinship, they are always general and
classificatory. The relations are denominated by groups,
and the titles of kinship do not in the least correspond to
the ties of blood.
Lastly, among certain nomad Mongols of Asia, the strict
prohibition to marry within the clan, and the terms of
kinship applying to groups, show that- formerly a familial
system, analogous to that of the American Redskins, has
been in use.
Moreover, this classificatory system is preserved entire in
the denominations of kinship by the Tamils of India. But
among these last, and also among certain Mongol popula-
tions of Thibetan Himalaya, the primitive family, at once
polygamic and polyandric, that of the Hawaian islanders,
has evolved after its own manner, which it is interesting to
notice.
The Polynesian, or rather the Hawaian family, formed
essentially by the conjugal union of a group of brothers
with a group of sisters, may evidently be restricted in two
ways. Either, in the long run, polyandry is found irksome ;
the men will no longer share their wives, even with brothers,
but find polygamy very convenient; in this case the
brothers contract isolated marriages, preserving nothing
of the old ways but the custom of marrying, when possible,
a group of sisters: the Redskins have done and still do
this. Or, on the contrary, for one reason or another, and
most often on account of the relative scarcity of women,
the Hawaian marriage evolves in another direction.
The brothers continue to marry in a group; but, instead
of marrying simultaneously several sisters, they take only
one wife and possess her in common : this time it is in the
direction of polyandry that primitive group- marriage has
evolved. From the Himalaya to Ceylon we find a long
track of ethnic groups who have thus transformed their
marriage. The mountaineers of Bhootan, the Nairs, certain
other aboriginal tribes of India, and a part of the population
of Ceylon, where the Tamils have largely immigrated, are
all of them the remains or landmarks of an ancient layer
of polyandric population traversing the whole of Hindostan.
All these facts can be classed in a satisfactory manner.
Thus united, and placed in a series, they complete and
AND OF THE FAMILY. 301
throw a light on each other, and show us the reason of
customs which before appeared inexplicable.
All this evolution is quite admissible, but it is important
to restrict it to the populations with which it actually appears
to be connected, and not to make of it a universal law,
applicable to the whole human race.
VI. The Clan and the Family.
Independently of their intrinsic interest, the facts that
I have so rapidly enumerated have a very wide bearing.
Taken alone, they suffice to destroy altogether the generally
accepted ideas as to the origin of human societies. The
current doctrine, so often asserted, and manifestly inspired
by the Edenic tradition of a terrestrial Paradise and by the
memory of the Roman family, insists that human societies
have always and everywhere started with the family, and by
this word is understood the patriarchal family, essentially
composed of the father and the mother, or at most the
mothers and the children. From this first family, grouped
submissively around one august chief, the father, similar
families are supposed to have sprung, which, side by side,
constituted tribes, cities, and states. This familial unit,
supposed to be primordial, this "cellule" of societies, is
held to be particularly respectable ; the chief who governs
it despotically, the father, has something enchanting about
him. At his voice the celestial wrath bursts without mercy
on the child bold enough to brave it. Even as late as the
last century, the paternal malediction had the effect of a
moral thunderbolt; in romances and theatrical plays the
writers often had recourse to it in order to effect the
catastrophes of their plots.
We are forced in the present day to renounce this
traditional notion. We must bid adieu to the primitive
patriarchate. The patriarchal, or even simply paternal
family, does not date, at least in most cases, from the
origin of societies.
The truly primitive stock is no other than the clan, that
is, a small consanguine group in which the kinship is still
very much confused. It was not in a day that the first
302 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE,
men succeeded in constructing genealogical trees, or
even in determining with any precision the degrees of
consanguinity. Not only does the father not stand out as
a principal personage from the background of the familial
clan ; he has not even yet any recognised social existence
in the little group ; in short, the actual physiological father
has had in principle no ascertainable relationship with his
children, for marriage was anything but monandric.
Within the primitive social unit, the familial clan, every
one was consanguine, but in a confused way; the wives had
several husbands, and the husbands several wives; the
degrees of kinship were not individual, but applied to
classes of individuals. At this period of social develop-
ment it was difficult to distinguish as yet the real from the
possible, fictitious consanguinity from real consanguinity.
Every one had groups of fathers, mothers, brothers, and
sisters : filiation and the true ties of consanguinity in
numerous cases could not be discerned.
In these groups of consanguine individuals, these clans
with kinship still confused, the first thing that became most
habitually differentiated was not the paternal family, for
that could scarcely exist, seeing that the father of a child
was not easy to designate; it was the maternal family,
which we will now proceed to examine.
CHAPTER XVIII.
THE MATERNAL FAMILY.
I. The Familial Clan and the Family froperly so-called. — The prob-
able evolution of the family — It cannot have been uniform — Why the
uterine family has been common.
II. The Family in Africa. — The maternal family among the
negroes of Africa, in Egypt, in Abyssinia, in Madagascar, among the
Arabs and Kabyles.
III. The Family in Malaya.
IV. The Family among the Ndirs of Malabar. — The female pro-
genitrix, the mother-bee — The uncle among the Nairs.
V. The Family among the Aborigines of Bengal. — Co-existence of
the maternal and paternal family ; exogamy and endogamy.
VI. The Couvade.~\t exists in very different countries — The
couvade in antiquity — The couvade in contemporary Europe —
Signification of the couvade.
VII. The Primitive Family.
I. The Familial Clan and the Family properly so-called.
At the conclusion of the preceding chapter I have
ventured to sketch the probable evolution of the family, or
at least that which must have been effected among the
greater number of Melanesians, Polynesians, American
Redskins, Tamils, and ancient Mongols. The small
primitive societies founded by these races seem to have
begun, not with the family, in the sense we give to this
word, but by groups of consanguine individuals with still
very confused filiation. The familial form which first
emerged from this primitive clan was most often a
matrimonial association between several sisters on the one
hand and several brothers on the other. Then, from this
304 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
household, at once polygamic and polyandric, sprang some-
times the polyandric family, when several brothers had a
single wife in common, and sometimes the polygynic fannly,
when a single man married or bought several women, who
mi.i^ht, or might not, be sisters to each other.
But has the familial group evolved in the same manner
all over the earth and among all races ? Except for the
countries previously enumerated, precise and detailed in-
formation is wanting, and we are reduced to conjectures
which are more or less probable. With rare exceptions, the
races which it remains for us to examine have definitely
emerged from primitive familial confusion, and they have
adopted either maternal or paternal filiation. Have they
first passed through the familial clan with classes of fictitious
or real relations ? We cannot certainly affirm it. The
existence of a totem and the custom of exogamy seem to
bear witness in favour of this hypothesis; but these are
insufficient proofs. The totem does not necessarily imply
consanguinity ; and exogamy may be dictated by very
diverse reasons, for we often find exogamic tribes living
side by side with endogamic tribes.
What is still more general than the clan, is the institution
of the maternal family, or uterine filiation ; but this famihal
type is not invariably deduced from a previous familial
clan. Among m_any animal species the maternal family
exists without there ever having been either clan or gens.
As a matter of fact, in humanity as well as in animality, the
uterine family establishes itself spontaneously, whenever
the male abandons the female and her progeny. This
familial type will therefore necessarily appear in every horde
where there is no durable pairing of males and females, of
men and women. In every ethnic group living in promis-
cuity, for example, uterine filiation shows itself, and it will
be the same under a polyandric rtgime^ unless fictitious
paternity is established. In short, for the adoption of the
paternal family, it is imperative that the wives should be
appropriated by a particular man, though it is of no import-
ance whether the marriage be monogamic or polygamic.
But this possession of one or more women by one man to
the exclusion of all others, presupposes already a complex
social condition, which has necessarily been preceded by a
AND OF THE FAMIL K 305
period of gross savagery, when only uterine filiation was
possible. Now, it is a rule that ancient customs endure for
a long time, and survive the social condition which had
given birth to them.
II. The Family in Africa.
The uterine family is far from being rare in negro Africa,
but this does not in any way hinder the man from
exercising a discretionary power over his wife or wives, and
still more over his children. We have previously seen how
lamentable the fate of woman is among the negro Africans,
and how excessive are "the rights of the father of the
family," since he can trafific in his children without rebuke.
This virile despotism may easily coexist with the adoption
of uterine filiation. In one Kaffir tribe, the men used their
own children to bait their traps for catching lions, ^ and yet
maternal filiation prevails in Kaffraria ; only it does not
govern inheritance. This mode of filiation is adopted by
other races as well as Kaffirs. "In Guinea,' says Bosman,^
" if it pleases the daughter of a king to marry a slave, her
children are free." Among the Fantees, the chief slave has
the rights of succession, to the exclusion of the son ; but the
latter is only deprived of paternal succession ; the property
of his mother, as distinct from that of his father, comes to
him.^ At Dahomey there seems to be, in the royal family,
a symbolic survival of the maternal family. At the death of
the king, his sister exercises a regency of several days, and
her duty is to occupy the throne in reality, and to remain
seated on it as long as a successor has not been appointed.*
But this does not in any way hinder the populations of
Dahomey from adopting as a general custom, not only
masculine succession, but even the right of primogeniture.*
Barbarous as Dahomey may be, it is already a society of too
complex a structure to accommodate itself easily to the
^ 'LdiyXsiViaf Journal of Ethnological Society, 1869.
2 Bosman, Voyage en Guinee, p. 197.
^ Bowdich, Observations sur le Gouvernement des Achantis (collection
Walkenaer, t. xii.).
* A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. de la Famille, p. 216.
•^ Herbert Spencer, Sociology, vol. ii. p. 340.
20
3o6 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIAGE
maternal family. Has this savage mode of filiation been
formerly in use there ? It is possible ; but the short regency
of the king's sister is a very insufficient proof of it. In
eastern Africa, among the Vouazegouras, and also among
the Bangalas of Cassanga, the uncle has the indefeasible
right to sell his nephews, and in so doing he has the strong
approval of public opinion. "Why," say they, "should a
man remain in need while his brothers and sisters have
children?" Yet this relates to tribes long under Arab
influence. In the same region, the Vouamrimas generally
consider the son of their sister as their heir, in preference to
their own children. i Among the Bazes and the Bareas,
succession is also in the maternal line, and the heirs are, in
the first degree, the eldest son of the eldest sister ; and in
the second degree, the second son of the same sister,^ etc. In
southern Africa the children belong to the maternal uncle,
who also has the right to sell them.^ It is the same among
the Basuto Kaffirs. With these last, as a Kaffir chief informed
me, it is again the nephew who succeeds to the throne."*
The Makololo Kaffirs, however, seem to be in process of
adopting paternal filiation; or at least they combine it with
maternal filiation, by compelling the husband, as Livingstone
informs us, to redeem his children by the payment of a tax,
without which they would belong to the maternal grandfather.
In short, there is no uniform rule among the Kaffirs, for
Levaillant has seen a tribe with whom the inheritance was
transmitted at a man's death to his wife and male children,
to tne exclusion of the daughters,^ which is again a transi-
tional regime.
In some districts of central Africa, among populations
that are half-civilised, and more or less converted to
Mahometanism, matriarchal customs still persist. On the
Niger, at Wowow and at Boussa, it is the grandmother who
grants or refuses to her grand-daughter the permission to
mairy.6 The curious privilege that, according to Laing, the
^ Burton, Jou7'ney to the Great Lakes^ p. 37.
2 A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit., p. 211.
* L. Magyar, Reisen in Sud- Africa, pp. 256, 284.
* Ch. Letourneau, Bull. Soc. (tAnlhrop.^ 1872.
^ Levaillant, Hist. Univ. des Voy.^ t. xxiv. p. 210.
* R. and J. Lander, Hist. Univ. des Voy.y t. xxx. p. 244.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 307
Soulima have, to quit their husband when they please, is
perhaps of matriarchal origin also.^
The exogamy of the clan, which frequently coexists with
uterine filiation, is met with here and there in Africa.
Burton has proved the existence of it among the Somals,^
and Du Chaillu has found it at the Gaboon.^ Traces of the
maternal family still exist, or have existed, in African
societies that are more or less barbarous, but which have,
however, emerged from savagery; in Madagascar, Nubia,
Abyssinia, and especially in ancient Egypt. Among the
Hovas of Madagascar, not only wealth, but political dignities,
and even sacerdotal functions, are transmitted to the nephew,
the sister's son. The Saccalavas do the same as the Hovas,
and among them the women of high rank willingly take
husbands of inferior rank, who simply become their servants.
As for the children, they inherit the rank and rights of their
mother.* The same customs prevail among the Nubians, or
did formerly prevail ; the Arab chroniclers tell us that among
them the heritage belonged, not to the son of the deceased,
but to the nephew, the sister's son. The Nubians justified
this custom pertinaciously, by saying that the consanguinity
of the sister's son had the advantage of being incontestable.^
And lastly, Nicholas of Damascus says the same thing of
the Ethiopians.^
Without the proof of any absolutely precise text, we
have an accumulation of facts which render it very probable
that, in ancient Egypt, maternal filiation was in force. In
a preceding chapter I have spoken of the exceptional
position granted to the free woman in the kingdom of the
Pharaohs. I will recall, in passing, that until the time of
Philometor, who deprived women of the right to dispose of
their property, the word husband never occurs in marriage
deeds. '^ Besides this, public deeds often only mention the
mother, up to the time of this same King Philometor, who,
being evidently a determined partisan of the patriarchate,
^ Laing, Hist. Univ. des Voyages, t. xxviii. p. 106.
2 Burton, First Footsteps ^ etc., p. 420.
^ Equatorial Africa,
* Noel, Bult. Sac. de Geogr.^ t. xx. p. 294 (quoted by Giraud-Teulon)
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. de la Famille, p. 209.
^ Jd.y ibid. p. 208. 7 Id., ibid. p. 248.
3o8 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
ordered the names of contractors to be registered accord-
ing to the paternal name.^ Also, in the valley of the Nile,
the hieroglyphic funeral inscriptions frequently bear the
name of the mother without indicating that of the father,
and it is only in demotic inscriptions that paternal filiation
is mentioned.^ We must add that in Egypt women could
reign, and that during the lifetime of the monarch who was
their husband they divided with him the sovereign honours,
and even, according to Diodorus,^ received the larger share
of them. All these facts seem to attest that in Egypt free
women enjoyed an exceptionally favourable position, and
they render probable the ancient existence of uterine filiation
in the valley of the Nile. There are, however, some con-
tradictory facts, especially the genealogy of the chief priests,
of which Herodotus speaks, and also the incestuous
endogamy customary in the royal families. According to
Herodotus, the Egyptian priests showed him, at Thebes,
three hundred and forty-one wooden statues representing
high-priests, all born one of the other in the masculine line :
"Each of these statues," he says, "represents a Piromis
born of a Piromis."* From which it would result that in
Egypt, at least in the sacerdotal caste, masculine filiation
was established from the highest antiquity, for a hundred
and forty-one generations represent something like ten or
eleven thousand years. Maternal filiation is also generally
connected with exogamy, while the Pharaohs habitually
married their sisters. According to Diodorus, this was
even obligatory.^ In the ancient royal records the
qualities of sister and wife of kings are often found
united. Under the Ptolemies, all the queens have borne
both these titles ; and we may perhaps refer to an ancient
tradition of Egyptian origin certain customs which recently
existed in the Soudan, Abyssinia, and Madagascar. At
Massegna, in the Soudan, Earth tells us that Othman
Bougoman, Sultan of Massegna, had among his wives one
of his sisters and one of his daughters. At the end of the
seventeenth century, the sister of the king of Abyssinia dis-
played a sumptuous style of living peculiarly feminine:
1 A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. de la Famine, p. 233.
2 Id., ibid. p. 232. * Herodotus, ii. 143.
« Diodorus, i. 27. ** Id., i. 27.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 309
" The sister of the emperor appears in public mounted on a
mule richly caparisoned, having by her side her women
bearing a dais over her. From four to five hundred
women surround her, singing verses in her praise, and
playing the tambour in a lively and graceful manner."^ And
at the present time, among the Malagasy nobility, marriage
between brother and sister is very common. ^
There is certainly nothing farther from exogamy than
marriages between brothers and sisters ; but, to say the
truth, there is no logical and necessary connection between
the form of filiation and exogamic or endogamic customs.
The Malagasy contract what we should call incestuous
marriages, while preserving maternal filiation; the Arabs
and Kabyles, on the contrary, in obedience to the prescrip-
tions of the Koran, have a horror of incest. The sacred
book prohibits a man from taking to wife his mother,
daughter, sister, his paternal or maternal aunt, his grand-
daughter, his mother-in-law, his daughter-in-law, or even
his nurse and foster-sister. A man was not to marry two
sisters at the same time.^ This is indeed a limited exogamy ;
and yet the Koran establishes the paternal and even patri-
archal family very clearly. The study of the family in
Malaya and among the aborigines of India will complete
the proof that in the same country, and in the same race,
various systems of marriage, family, and filiation, may
coexist, and that consequently we must guard against
formulating too strict sociological laws in regard to them.
III. The Family in Malaya.
At Sumatra there were three kinds of marriages — ist, the
wife, or rather the family of the wife, bought the man, who
henceforth became her property, worked for her, possessed
nothing of his own, was liable to be dismissed, and could
commit no fault without the proprietary family being re-
sponsible for it, exactly as the Roman master answered for
1 Lettres idifiantes, t. iv. p. 327 ( Voyage en hhiopie du medecin^
Ch. J. Poncet^ en 1698- 1700).
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. de la Families p. 258.
* Sural, iv. 27.
3IO THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
his slaves; 2nd, the man and the woman could marry on a
fooling of equality; 3rd, the man bought his wife or wives. ^
The first form of marriage, that of servitude of the man,
who, instead of marrying, is married by the family of his
wife, has fallen into desuetude in Malaya, but it has left
behind it, in certain districts, the system of maternal
filiation. It is the maternal uncle who is the head of the
family, or, in default of him, the eldest son of the wife's
family. If there is neither uncle nor son old enough, it is
the mother who becomes the head of the family, and the
father only takes her place in case she has disappeared, and
when all the children are minors. At the death of a man,
his property does not go to his wife or children, but to his
maternal family, and in the first place to his brothers and
sisters. The married man also continues to live in his
maternal family ; it is the field of his own family that he
cultivates, and he only accidentally assists his wife.^ In
short, under this system the individual, whether man or
woman, is not set free in the least from the family in which
he is born ; it is for this family that the woman bears
children ; filiation and inheritance must therefore follow
the maternal line. But it is not at all the same throughout
Malaya. Marsden tells us that a man sometimes buys his
wife by giving a sister in exchange;^ he must therefore be
the proprietor of his sister, and consequently of the wife
whom he procures by means of this barter.
In the Arroo Isles the men buy their wives, by giving
gongs, clothes, etc., to the parents of the women.^
At Timor the son-in-law buys his wife thus from his
father-in-law, and the latter can remain owner of the
children if they are not included in the bargain ; ^ but
these customs are not easily compatible with the system
of the maternal family, and, taken altogether, they prove
that in Malaya the family is not by any means constituted
in a uniform manner. We shall see that it is the same with
the primitive races of India.
^ Marsden, Hist, of Sumatra, p. 262.
2 A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. de la Famille, pp. 199, 200, etc.
8 Marsden, Hist, of Sumatra.
* Wallace, Malay Archipelago, vol. ii. p. 169.
" A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit.y p. 265.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 311
IV. The Family among the Na'irs of Malabar.
In the first place, we have to inquire what the family is
among the Nairs of Malabar, whose curious polyandry I
have previously described. The Nairs of Malabar are not
by any means savages ; they form an aristocratic caste.
We have seen how, from a very early age (ten to twelve
years), the young Nair girls, after having been solemnly
deflowered by a stranger, who has been paid to perform
this task, practised the widest polyandry, without any other
restriction than the prohibitions relative to caste and tribe.
As is usual and even natural, Nair polyandry coexists with
a system of maternal filiation. Precautions are taken in
order that the free and numerous unions of the Nair ladies
should not destroy the family. The Nair husbands are
reduced to the modest rble of progenitors ; and it is to the
wife that the fortune of the family belongs. It is not,
however, the mother who governs the family, but her
brother. To this brother belongs the duty of bringing
up his nephews, of protecting them, and of mourning for
them, if they happen to die ; in reality, he is an avuncular
father, and when he dies his nephews inherit his personal
property. In the Nair family the polyandrous mother is
much respected, and the next in honour to her is her
eldest daughter, who will replace her in her role of mother-
bee, the producer of children. The Nair husbands, the
■ fathers, only enter the house of their common wife by turns
and on certain days ; they have not even the right to sit
down by the side of their wife or their children ; they are
mere passing guests, almost strangers.^
If we regard these facts on a certain side, it appears as if
we may at last have found among the Nairs, in a country
where the matriarchate incontestably reigns, the legal pre-
eminence of woman over man, or the materna potesias. It
is, in fact, the Nair woman who possesses; it is through
her that wealth is transmitted, and, given the regime of free
polyandry, it is difficult for Nair children to know their
own father. Moreover, in various polyandric countries of
^ Bachofen, Antiq. Briefe^ pp. 216, 278 (quoted by A. Girtud-Teulon,
loc. cit., pp. 150, 154).
3 1 2 THE E VOL UT20N OF MARRIA GE
Malabar, the pre-eminence of the woman in the family
has influenced the political organisation, and thus an entire
female feudal system has arisen, the bonds of suzerainty
and vassalage reposing on a fictitious polyandry. Thus, in
February 1887, the English journals announced that the
Sultan of the Laccadives, having become the vassal of
England, had notified to his subjects his new position by
means of a proclamation, in which he explained that he had
ceased to be the husband and subject of his ancient
suzerain, the Bibi of Cannanor; for by a special favour
the government of Ceylon had consented to admit
him to the number of the husbands^ that is to say, of
the direct vassals, of the Queen of England. We must
note that for the Indians of this region the Queen of
England is "the daughter" of the East India Company,
and lives in a palace in London with many men. And
now what is the real value of this polyandric matriarchate ?
It is surely more apparent than real. Among the Nairs,
as everywhere else, property assures to the man or woman
who possesses it an importance in proportion to its value.
The Nair lady then, being a proprietor, is highly esteemed.
But it does not follow that this esteem is equal to undis-
puted domination. Doubtless among the Nairs the man,
as husband, does not exist ; nevertheless he is a warrior, and
even a very fierce one. But military force has this in
common with money, that it is nowhere despised. There-
fore, in the family of his sister, the Nair man is anything
but a subordinate. We have just seen this. It is he who
governs and brings up the children of his sister by her
numerous husbands. He is, in reality, the chief of his
sister's family, and what he loses as husband he gains as
uncle.
Reduced to their true value, the polyandry and the
familial r'egwie of the Nairs still remain a sociological
fact of the greatest interest. It is at once the most com-
plete and the most logical of polyandric systems. In
reality, the Nair marriage does not only or specially include
groups of brothers or sisters; full liberty is given to the
woman, save only the restrictions of class. There is no
attempt, as in Thibet, to create a masculine pseudo-fiHation,
by arbitrarily attributing such or such children to such or
AND OF THE FAMILY. 313
such husbands. Among the Nairs, the maternal family is
instituted in all its plenitude; and lastly, their polyandry is
in no way thwarted by the proportion of the sexes, for if
the woman may contract marriage with several men, each
one of the latter in his turn has power to enter several
conjugal associations. This matrimonial regime is therefore
perfectly compatible with the maintenance of the population
and the equilibrium of the sexes.
V. The Family among the Aborigines of Bengal.
If we proceed with our investigations by studying the
familial and matrimonial regime of the aborigines of
Bengal, we shall find, among populations having probably a
common origin, systems of family and marriage which are
very dissimilar.
Here and there we discover the maternal family, or
customs proving that this familial fashion has formerly been
in force.
According to Buchanan, among the Buntar, who are
neighbours to the Nairs, a father is free during his lifetime
to make presents to his children, but at his death all that
he possesses goes to his sisters and their children. The
Kochh, also, have no kinship or succession except through
the women. The mothers arrange the marriages; the
fathers never interfere, and the husband goes to live with
his wife and his mother-in-law, whom he obeys. As for
widows, they choose themselves young husbands when they
are rich. Among the Yerkalas of Southern India, the
maternal uncle has the right to claim for his sons the two
eldest daughters of his sister. 1 Among the Khasias, it is to
the son of the sister that the power of the Rajah is trans-
mitted ; but this princess {Kunwari) has not the right to
marry herself; she is subject to reasons of state, and her
husband is chosen by the assembled people. ^ The Garos
have established the rule, that in marriages the right of
initiative belongs to the woman ; it is the young girl who
distinguishes the man of her choice, tells him so, and invites
^ Shortt, Trans. Ethn. Soc. , vol. vii. (New Series).
2 Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 54.
3 14 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
him to follow her. Any advance made by a man is con-
sidered as an insult to all the clan (mahari) of the girl, and
in order to expiate it, libations of beer and sacrifices of pigs
are required, all of them at the expense of the mahan of the
man. The marriage of the Garos answers exactly to the
ceremony of capture, only the actors change parts ; it is here
the bridegroom who pretends to refuse the bride, runs away
and is conducted by force to his future wife amidst the
lamentations of his relations.^ At the death of a man,
among the Garos, the widow remains mistress of the house,
but the other property passes to a collateral heir, who
marries the widow and sometimes her daughter also.
If we were to confine ourselves to the consideration and
interpretation of these facts only, we might naturally con-
clude that the familial regime of the aborigines of Bengal
is maternal; but contradictory facts are not wanting.
Among the Bhuiyas, although the demand in marriage is
made by the girls, as with the Garos, the sons receive the
names of their male ascendants \ the eldest son takes the
name of the grandfather ; the second son takes that of the
great-grandfather, and the names of collaterals are given to
the other sons.^ Among the Muasis, it is the father who
negotiates the marriage of his daughter, or who sells her,
rather, for a certain number of measures of rice solemnly
measured and delivered.^
Among the Malers of Rajmahal, it is again the father who
places his daughter's hand in that of her future husband and
exhorts him to love his wife.* The Kandhs have adopted
succession in the masculine line, with a division of property
amongst the sons.^ The servitude of the women amongst
the Korwas is very great; they are oppressed with work,
and till the fields and gain the daily bread, whilst the men
hunt or repose.^ The Michmis buy their wives, have as
many as they can procure, and own them like chattels,
since at a man's death all his wives, except the
mother of the heir, pass to the nearest male relation.''
Among the Mundas, after the decease of the father of a
family, the sons live together until the majority of the
^ Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 63.
2 Id., ibid. p. 142. * /</., ibid. p. 273. ^ Id., ibid. p. 226.
• /^., ibid, p. 2^1. ^ Id.^ ibid. p. 294. "^ Jd.y ibid. p. 16.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 315
youngest of them ; they then proceed to divide the property,
including their sisters, who are exactly assimilated to caltle.^
The Ooraons share the widows amongst the brothers and
cousins in the same way as the Mundas share their sisters.^
We find, therefore, no uniformity in the familial organisa-
tion of the Bengalese aborigines; and it is the same in
regard to their exogamy or endogamy. Exogamy is
common. Thus the Juangas are divided into exogamous
tribes.3 The Khonds think it humiliating to marry the
women of their own tribe. It is more manly, in their
opinion, to go and take a wife from a distant neighbour-
hood.* The Munniporees are divided into four clans,
who do not intermarry.^ Among the Santals, it is forbidden
to men to marry in their own clan ; but their children belong
to the paternal clan.^ The Limboos (near Darjeeling) are
also exogamous, but evidently oscillate between the maternal
and paternal family; for the daughters remain in the
tribe or rather in the clan of their mother, whilst the sons
belong to the paternal clan, but only after the father has
paid a certain sum to the mother.'^ The Garos are divided
into several clans or maharis, and, amongst them, a man
must not marry in his own clan, but in another appointed
clan, in which from time immemorial his family has been
accustomed to take wives.
Other aborigines of Bengal are endogamous. Thus it is
imperative for the daughters of the Abors to marry in their
own clan, or the sun and moon would cease to shine.^
According to Heber, the Karens of Tenasserim are more than
endogamous, for among them marriages between brother
and sister, father and daughter, are frequent enough in the
present day.^
What may we deduce from these contradictory facts ? A
general conclusion, which I have expressed several times
^ Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 200.
2 Id., ibid. p. 272. 3 /^.^ ihid. p. 158.
* Macpherson, Report on the Khonds. — Account of the Religion of the
Khonds in Orissa, p. 57.
^ MacCuUoch, Account of the Valley of Munniporees, etc., pp. 49, 69.
^ Hunter, Annals of Rural Bengal, p. 236.
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. du Mariage, p. 266.
8 Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 28.
* Herbert Spencer, Sociology ^ vol. ii. p. 218.
3 1 6 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
over: namely, that in what concerns the evolution of
marriage and of the family, there is no absolute law.
Nevertheless, by reason of the familial and matrimonial
confusion usual in the greater number of primitive societies,
maternal filiation has been adopted more often than paternal,
and has frequently preceded it.
VI. The Couvade.
There is a custom, at first sight extraordinary but still
common enough, which must have arisen during transi-
tional epochs, when, polygamic or monogamic marriage
having become established, the husbands have exerted
themselves to affirm their parental rights, and to substitute
masculine filiation for the ancient uterine filiation. In the
same way as in certain countries, Abyssinia,^ for example,
in order to proclaim an adoption, the adoptive father simu-
lates some maternal practice, sometimes goes so far as to
offer his breast solemnly to his adoptive son, so, in very
different countries, the husband has found no better way
to prove his paternity than to simulate childbirth ; and hence
the very singular custom of the couvade.
At first sight, it seems very foolish for the husband to
take to his bed immediately after the delivery of his wife,
and for a certain number of days to be nursed and tended
by the mother herself.
The existence of the custom has often been questioned.
It will not be out of place, therefore, to quote authentic
facts which put all doubt to silence. These facts are
numerous enough, and have been observed in various parts
of the globe ; in America, Asia, and Europe.
In New Mexico, among the Lagunero and the Ahom-
ana, when a woman is delivered of a child, the father goes
to bed for six or seven days, and scrupulously abstains from
eating fish or meat.^ As soon as a Carib became a father,
he at" once went to bed and simulated childbirth by suitable
cries and contortions ; the women of the hamlet hastened
to his side and congratulated him on his happy delivery.^
^ D'Abbadie, Douze ans dans la haute Ethiopie^ p. 272.
^ Bancroft, Native Races, etc., vol. i. p. 585.
3 Du Tertre, Histoire des Antilles (1667), t. ii. p. 371.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 317
The Choctaw Redskins formerly had an analogous custom.
Brett and Im Thurn have observed this "lying-in"
among the Indians of Guiana. The father, Brett says,
goes to his hammock quite naked, taking the most
indecent posture, and he remains there some days as if
he were ill, receiving the congratulations of his friends and
tended by the women of the neighbourhood, whilst the
mother of the new-born infant goes about her cooking
without receiving any attention.^
The testimony of the Jesuit Dobritzhofifer, in regard to
the Abipones, is not less explicit: "Among the Abipones
of South America," he says, "as soon as the wife has given
birth to a child, the husband is put to bed, and carciully
tended ; he fasts for a certain time. You would swear that
it is he who has just been delivered. I had formerly read
of this and smiled at it, not being able to credit such folly,
and supposing that this barbarous custom was related more
as a joke than seriously, but at last I have seen it with my
own eyes amongst them." 2 More recent testimony confirms
what I have just quoted. In 1842 M. Maze, Commissioner-
General in French Guiana, himself proved the custom
of couvade among the Indian tribes on the river Oyapok.
In 1852 M. Voisin, justice of the peace in a commune of
French Guiana, ascending in a canoe the river Mana,
received hospitality one night in the hut of some Galibi
Indians. On awaking he learned that during the night, and
behind a partition of fohage which separated his hammock
from the household of his hosts, a child had been born.
The mother had uttered no sound, and at daybreak M.
Voisin saw her go to the river-side and make her toilet,
then take her new-born child and throw it several times
into the water, catching it as it rose to the surface, and then
wiping it with her hands. The husband, on the contrary,
remained all the while in his hammock, acting the invalid,
and receiving with the greatest seriousness the attention
lavished on him by his wife.^
The couvade comedy is not always so complete. In
certain tribes it is attenuated, and becomes more symbolic.
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. du Mariage, p. 138.
2 Historia de Abiponibus (1784), vol. ii. p. 231.
8 Bull. Soc. d'Anthrop. (July 1884).
3 1 8 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
Thus in California, when the mother is delivered, the
father is content to keep to the house and abstain from
eating fish and meat.^
Among various tribes of South America the husband of
the woman limits the practice to a few hygienic pre-
cautions ; this is the couvade reduced to its simplest
expression.2
This custom was found in Asia, among the Tartars,
by Marco Polo. It still exists in Bengal, among the Larkas,
although attenuated ; on the occasion of a birth the parents
quit the house, the wife and husband are both declared
unclean for eight days, and during that time the husband
cooks the food. After which the masculine filiation of the
child is proclaimed by solemnly giving him the name of
his grandfather.^ We shall be mistaken if we imagine
that the couvade is special to very inferior races. The
Greco-Roman writers have quoted a certain number of
examples observed among the barbarians of the ancient
world. Strabo relates that the Iberian women, after the
example of those of the Celts, Thracians, and Scythians,
quit their beds as soon as they are delivered, and give them
up to their husbands, whom they tend.* Diodorus tells
us that in Corsica, after a woman has given birth to a
child, the husband goes to bed as if he were ill, and he
remains there an appointed number of days like a lying-in
woman. ^
In his Argonautica ApoUonius of Rhodes speaks of a
people of Tibarenedes, on the north-west coast of Asia
Minor, who had the custom of the couvade : " As soon
as the married women are delivered, their husbands
groan, lie on beds, and cover their heads. All this time
their wives give them strengthening food, and prepare baths
for them suitable for lying-in women." ^ It is probable that
more than one trace of this '' lying-in " still exists in Europe,
in superstitious and popular practices. Quite recently a
Russian has informed me that it is still in use in the
Baltic provinces, but naturally in a form of survival in
^ Bancroft, Native Races, vol. i. p. 412.
2 A. d'Orbigny, Lhomme Ameruaitt, t. i. p. 237,
'' Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 190.
* Strabo, iii. 16. ** Diodorus, v. 14. ^ Argonautica^ ii.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 319
which the meaning is lost. It is, however, complete
enough ; the husband goes to bed, utters groans and
cries, and his neighbours hasten to his side. And lastly,
M. L^on Donnat told me lately that he had discovered
the couvade still practised in the little island of Marken,
in the Zuydersee.
However strange it may be, a custom that is thus widely
spread in countries, races, and epochs extremely diverse
must have had a serious raison d^^tre. It cannot be
attributed to mere caprice.
Now the only plausible explanation is that which gives
to the couvade the value of our registry of birth. Not,
perhaps, all over the world, but here and there, at the
moment when the effort was being made to found the
paternal family, or at least to determine masculine filiation,
some very simple-minded tribes conceived the idea of
symbolising the share of the man in procreation by the
gross mimicry of childbirth. By this practice, so well
calculated to strike the attention, the father openly affirmed
his paternity, and doubtless acquired certain rights over
the new-born child. Let us note that the custom has been
especially preserved among the American Indians, that is
to say, in a country where the system of the maternal
family has been, and still is, widely spread. The couvade
probably represents an effort to emerge from it. It shows
that the man will no longer share his wife or wives, that
he claims to have children which are certainly his own,
and who will doubtless inherit his possessions. It is, in
short, a revolt of individualism against primitive com-
munism. The mimicry is gross and strange, but in a
social condition where there exists neither lawyer, nor
mayor, nor register of civil acts, testimonial proof is the
great resource, and, in order to make it sure and durable,
men have willingly had recourse to striking and complicated
practices which are calculated to engrave the remembrance
of a fact on the memory of those present.
The procedure of primitive Rome offers us many
examples of the same kind; and notably in the formali-
ties of emancipation, when the Roman father made,
three times in succession, a simulation of selling his
son.
320 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIAGE
VII. The Primitive Family.
In the preceding pages I have collected together, with
as much exactitude as I could, all that we know of the
familial clan and the maternal family. It would be bold
to assert that such have been the primitive and always
necessary forms of the family. It is indisputable, how-
ever, that they are or have been very common in all coun-
tries and in all races. But these are types of familial
association already regulated and complicated. Anterior
to them there must have existed, in the little human hordes,
a complete anarchy, most often characterised by the des-
potism of the strongest male, dominating a small flock of
women and children, who were meekly submissive to his
caprices — in fact, a sort of bestial patriarchate. Among
thinly -scattered races, without intelligence or industry,
practical monogamy was established at the very outset.
We know that this was the case with the stupid Veddahs of
Ceylon, when they wandered in simple families in the
virgin forests of their island, incapable of constituting even
the smallest horde. As soon as men have grouped them-
selves in small societies, regulated even in a slight degree,
the familial clan with its confused kinship must frequently
have been constituted, but on plans which were necessarily
variable according to the conditions and exigencies of the
social life. All that was possible has surely been attempted ;
sometimes regulated promiscuity, for each man claimed his
rights, sometimes the mixed polyandric and polygynic
household, elsewhere simple polyandry, when the women
were scarce, and at other times monogamy.
I repeat, all that was compatible with the maintenance
of the little social group must have been tried at first ; and
then selection assured the permanent adoption of such
or such a system. As soon as men began to take note of
descent, it was always uterine filiation that they held in
account; paternal descent was less evident, and less easy
to prove : it has been nearly everywhere the latest, and the
widely-spread custom of the couvade proves that it was not
established without difficulty. It has ended, however, by
triumphing, all over the world, in the states that are still
AND OF THE FAMILY. 321
barbarous, but which have a complex social and political
structure, where the primitive tribal rk^^ime has more or less
disappeared, and where a line of demarcation sufficiently
strong separates the interests of the individual from those
of the group to which he belongs. In short, the social
transformation from which the paternal family has arisen
has nearly always coincided with a radical change in the
regime of property, which has simultaneously become indi-
vidual or, at least, familial.
21
CHAPTER XIX.
THE FAMILY IN CIVILISED COUNTRIES.
I. The Family in China. — Filiation in Japan — Traces of ancient
fraternal filiation in China — Fictitious kinship in China — The patri-
archate in China — The Chinese clan — The idea of the family in the
political organisation.
II. The Family among the Semitic Races. — The primitive clan among
the Arabs — The primitive clan among the Hebrews — Laws of inherit-
ance among the Hebrews — The uterine sister and the german sister —
The maternal family in Pheenicia.
III. The Family among the Berbers. — Meaning of the word "Berber"
—Maternal filiation among the ancient Berbers and Touaregs —
Traces of the ancient organisation of the clan among the Kabyles
— The actual patriarchate among the Kabyles — Categories of heirs.
IV. The Family in Persia. — No trace of the familial clan and of
exogamy — Incestuous endogamy — Marriage by rent in modern Persia —
The right of primogeniture.
V. The Family in India. — The family in Vedic India — The patri-
archate in the Code of Manu — The right of primogeniture — Paternity
by suggestion — Traces of the familial clan and of the maternal family in
Tamil India and Ceylon.
VI. The Greco - Roman Family. — The primitive gens — Maternal
filiation in Crete, in primitive Athens — Uterine fraternity and german
fraternity — Paternal filiation in the Orestes. — The Patria potestas at
Rome.
VII. The Family in Barbarous Europe. — The Celtic clan — Incestuous
endogamy of the Irish — The Slav mir — Traces of maternal filiation in
Germany and among the Picts.
I. The Family in China.
In order to study the family under the latest forms that it
has assumed, we must set aside all strict distinction of race.
Doubtless the white races have ended by excelling the
THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE. 323
others, and by attaining a higher degree of moral, social, and
intellectual development. Nevertheless, the ethnic groups,
belonging to the races classed together en bloc as inferior,
have emerged from savagery, and formed large societies,
which have been veritable training schools for the men of
their race.
Now, in all the States which have succeeded in attaining
some degree of civilisation, the paternal family is the type
that has been finally adopted. It was thus in Peru, in Mexico,
and even in ancient Egypt, where King Philometor gave the
finishing stroke to the maternal family which had so long
flourished in the valley of the Nile. With much more
reason in China, a country very civilised after its own
fashion, an analogous evolution must have been effected.
Indeed, in China proper, there are scarcely any traces of
the maternal family left ; but they are still visible in Japan,
whose civilisation has been entirely borrowed from China.
In Japan, as formerly among the Basques, filiation is
subordinated to the transmission of the patrimony whole and
inalienated. It is to the first-born, whether boy or girl, that
the inheritance is transmitted, and he or she is forbidden to
abandon it. At the time of marriage the husband or wife
must take the name of the heir or heiress, who marries and
personifies the property. Filiation is therefore sometimes
maternal and sometimes paternal ; but the maternal uncle
still bears the name of "second little father"; the paternal
aunt is called "Httle mother," the paternal uncle is called
" little father," etc.^ Marriage between groups of brothers
and other groups of sisters has been common enough in
primitive societies to enable us to see in this familial
nomenclature the traces of one of those ancient unions at
once monogamic and polygamic.
In China the language itself attests the ancient existence
of a marriage contracted by a group of brothers having
their wives in common, but not marrying their sisters. A
Chinaman always calls the sons of his brother his "sons,"
whilst he considers those of his sister as his nephews ;^ but
the virtual, or rather fictitious fathers, brothers, and sons,
^ Lubbock, Orig. Civil. ^ p. 177.
- L. H. Morgan, Systems of Consanguinity y etc., in Sm-'thsonian
Contributions^ vol. xvii. pp. 416, 417.
324 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
are distinguished from the real fathers, brothers, and
sons, by the epithet "class" added to their appellation.
Thus they say, " class-father, class-son, class-brother " — that
is to say, the man who belongs to the class of the father,
to that of the son, or to that of the brother. It is there-
fore simply the American nomenclature perfected.^ We
have previously seen that in China proper, not only the
paternal family, but the patriarchate, are rigorously estab-
lished; that woman is in extreme subjection, and always
disinherited j^ but certain impediments to marriage can
only relate to an ancient familial organisation which has
now disappeared. In all the vast Chinese empire there
are scarcely more than from one to two hundred family
names, and the Chinese call themselves the "people of a
hundred families." Now in China all marriage between
persons bearing the same name is prohibited.^ In certain
villages every one has the same family name ; two or three
thousand persons, for example, are called "sheep," "ox,"
" horse," etc., all of them appellations agreeing well with
clans having corresponding totems,^ But however it may
have been in the past, at the present day masculine filiation
is well established in China, and nine degrees of kin-
ship in the direct line are distinguished, which an old
Chinese author has enumerated as follows : — " All men who
come into the world have nine degrees of kinship — namely,
my own generation in the first place, then that of my
father, of my grandfather, and of the father and grandfather
of my grandfather. In a descending line come the gener-
ation of my son, that of my grandson, then that of his son
and his grandson. All the members of one same gener-
ation are brothers to each other." ^ Let us note that this
filiation, short as it is, is still associated with kinship by
classes.
Doubtless these accounts, taken alone, would be insuffi-
cient, but united with those which the study of the family
^ Morgan, loc. cit.^ p. 422.
2 G. Eugene Simon, La Famille Chinoise, in Nouvelle Revue, 1883.
2 Davis, The Chinese^ vol. i- p. 282. — Pauthier, Chine moderne,
p. 238.
•* A. Giraud-Teulon, Orig. du Mariage, p. 363.
5 L. Morgan, loc. cit., pp. 416, 425.
AND OF TBE FA Mil y. 325
among the Australians, the Redskins, the Tamils, etc., has
furnished us with, they warrant us in believing that the
Chinese paternal family is the last term of an evolution
having for its starting-point the familial clan, and having
passed through the maternal family.
Let us add, in conclusion, that the system of fictitious
kinships is reflected throughout the governmental organisa-
tion of China. In reality the political structure of China
is only an enlarged copy of the family. The emperor is
the reputed father and even mother of all the empire.
The mandarin who governs a town is the "father" of that
town, and he himself has for "governmental father" the
mandarin of a superior grade, whom he obeys. ^
We shall now discover traces of a similar evolution of
the family among the Semites and Berbers.
II. The Family among Semitic Races,
When we read the word "patriarch" in our current
literature, our thoughts instantly fly to the chief of the
ancient Semitic, and especially the Hebraic family, the
little tyrant holding grouped under his despotic sway his
wives, children, and slaves — that is to say, the patriarchate
in all its severity, with the power of life and death attributed
to the patriarch. But this Semitic patriarch has not
existed from the beginning ; he is the result of a long
anterior evolution, and, like so many other peoples, the
Semites have begun with the confused kinship of the
familial clan. We have previously found, in studying
primitive marriage among the Arabs, an ancient regime
of free polyandry, analogous to that of the Nairs. At
this distant epoch the woman still bore children for her
clan, and this clan was so much like a large family, that
in the present day even, in certain parts of Arabia, the
word used for clan literally signifies " flesh. "^ To be of
the same clan, therefore, was to be of the same flesh.
It was in a relatively recent epoch that paternal filiation
was established among the Arabs. In the time of the
^ Lettres Mijiantes, t. xv. p. 164.
* R. Smith, Kinships etc., p. 148.
326 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAC^^
prophet the prohibitions of marriage were still on the
maternal side/ and in all ages the collateral kinship with
uncles and aunts has been considered very close in
Arabia.2
Among the Hebrews, individual property was instituted
in very early times, for it is alluded to in Genesis.^ But
various customs show clearly the ancient existence of
communal clans. Thus the inheritance, especially the
paternal inheritance, must remain in the clan. Marriage
in the tribe is obligatory for daughters : " Let them marry
to whom they think best ; only to the family of the tribe
of their father shall they marry. So shall not the inherit-
ance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe ;
for every one of the children of Israel shall keep himself to
the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers."*
Moses instituted three classes of heirs : first the children,
then the agnates, and then the members of the clan or gen-
tiles.^ The Hebrew father did not inherit from his son, nor
the grandfather from his grandson, which seems to indicate
an ancient epoch, when the children did not yet belong
to the clan of their father.
For a long time among the Hebrews the german sister
was distinguished from the uterine sister ; the kinship with
this last was considered much closer. In primitive Judaea a
man could marry the first, but not the second. To the King
of Egypt and to Abimelech, who reproached Abraham for
having passed Sarah off as his sister, the patriarch replies :
" For indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father,
but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife."
In the same way Tamar could become the wife of Amnon,
for she was only his paternal sister.^ The father of Moses
and Aaron married his father's sister, who was not legally
his relation. '^ Abraham himself could marry his paternal
sister, and his brother Nabor took to wife his fraternal
niece, the daughter of his brother.^ But by degrees
paternal kinship was recognised by the same title as
1 R. Smith, Kinship, etc., pp. 147, 151.
2 /(/., ibid., p. 159. ^2 Samuel, xiii. 16.
' Genesis, xxiii. 13. ^ Exodus, vi. 20.
^ Numbers, xxxvi. 4-8. ^ Genesis, xi. 26-29.
^ Numbers, xxxii. 8-11.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 327
maternal kinship, and Leviticus advances as far as to
expressly forbid marriage with father's sisters as well as
with mother's sisters/ " whether they be born at home or
abroad." Doubtless all these indications have their value ;
they are, however, only indications, and it is especially in
placing them by the side of similar facts observed amongst
other peoples where the existence of the maternal family
and the famih'al clan is indisputable, that we are inclined to
accord to them the same significance. In short, it is clear
that the Hebrews early adopted paternal filiation and the
patriarchate.
The memory of a distant epoch of confused kinship and
of free sexual unions had, however, remained in Semitic
tradition. Sanchoniathon, indeed, in his History of Fhmiicia^
says that the first men bore the name of their mother,
because then the women yielded themselves without shame
to the first comer.2 Among the Berbers familial evolution
is much easier to follow than with the Semites, and its
lower phases are more evident..
III. The Family ainong the Berbers.
During late years the meaning of the word **' Berber " has
become considerably widened. We are now inclined to
consider as varieties of the same very old race the men
of Cro-Magnon, the ancient inhabitants of the cave of
Mentone, the ancient Vascons, the Cantabrians, Iberians,
Guanchos, Kabyles, Berbers, and Touaregs, etc. All these
peoples are thought to belong to one great human type,
which we may call Berber, and of which numerous repre-
sentatives still exist. Anterior to all Asiatic migration, and
from the time of the stone age, this race seems to have
occupied the south of Gaul and Spain, the Canary Isles,
and Northern Africa. At the present day the most
important epigonic groups of the Berber race are the
Kabyles and the Touaregs of the Sahara. Several writers
of antiquity have told us how the family of the ancient
Berbers was formerly instituted, and we know de visu what
^ Leviticus, xviii. 9.
^ Eusebius of Csesarea, Preparation of Gospel, i.
328 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
it is among contemporary Berbers. We are therefore able
to give a rough outline of it.
The general characteristics of the Berber family seem to
have been a privileged position accorded to women and
maternal filiation, with tendencies even to the matriarchate.
Speaking of the Cantabrians, Strabo writes : " Among the
Cantabrians usage requires that the husband shall bring a
dower to his wife, and the daughters inherit, being charged
with the marriage of their brothers, which constitutes a kind
of gynecocracy." ^ The word gynecocracy is surely too
strong. We have here probably an account of a custom
which still exists in Japan, and which existed quite recently
in Basque countries, that of leaving to the first-born, whether
boy or girl, the administration of the inalienable patrimony
of the family, and of obliging his or her wedded partner
to take the name and abode of the family. This is what
M. le Play has formerly called the family-stock ; but this
family-stock may, and doubtless must, have co-existed primi-
tively with maternal filiation.
This last is still in force among the Touaregs of the
Sahara, and I have previously spoken of the great independ-
ence which their women enjoy, and especially the rich and
noble ladies. At Rhat, for example, by inheritances and by
the accumulation of productions, it has come to pass that
nearly the whole of the real property has fallen into the
hands of the women.^ We know that in ancient Egypt,
where the Berbers were largely represented, the women also
enjoyed a very similar position. As a consequence of this
rkgime^ the rights and pretensions of the Berber ladies have
become so inconvenient for the men, that many of them
prefer to marry slaves. ^ The family among the Touaregs
will surely evolve, as it formerly did in Egypt, and as it has
done with the Kabyles, where the most rigorous patriarchate
has at length replaced the ancient maternal family. In
Kabylie, however, traces of the ancient organisation, anterior
to Rome and to Islamism, still exist. The Kabyle village
has, in its tribe, a political personality which strongly recalls
the clan. Many customs, indeed, are evident survivals
of an ancient communal organisation. Thus, with the
1 Strabo, iii. i8.
2 Duveyrier, Toudreg du Nord^ p. 339. ^ Id.y ibid.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 329
Kabyles, mutual assistance between fellow-citizens is a strict
duty. Even in a foreign land the fellow-citizen must be
helped, at the risk of all interests and at the peril of
one's life. Whoever fails in this duty incurs public con-
tempt; he is even punished with a fine, and made responsible
for the losses suffered by the deserted compatriot. Even
the Kabyle of another tribe must, at need, be succoured, or
his tribe may bring a plaint before the djemaa of the tribe to
which the egoist belongs, and the latter is punished or
reprimanded.
In a Kabyle village, when an individual erects a building,
he has a right to the assistance of all the inhabitants. In
the same way the greater part of the field labour is performed
by mutual assistance.^ But all this refers to the men ; for
woman there remains no trace either of the maternal family
or of the more or less serious advantages which it generally
confers on wives and mothers. One custom, however, and
one only, still recalls ancient manners; this is "the right of
rebellion," of which I have spoken elsewhere.
We are acquainted with the date at which the last seal
was placed on the subjection of the Kabyle woman. It was
only a hundred and twenty years ago that the men refused
henceforth a legal position to women in the succession of
males.2 At present the Kabyle woman, whether married or
not, no longer inherits.^
The Kabyle Kanoims admit six categories of heirs: ist,
the a^eb or universal heirs — that is to say, all the male
descent, the direct line through males, and all the collaterals
descending through males of the paternal branch ; 2nd, the
ascendants through males on the paternal side — the father,
grandfather, and great-grandfather ; 3rd, the uterine brother,
heir to a legal portion ; 4th, the master and the freed man,
a^b heirs of each other ; 5th, the karouba — that is to say, the
community having its assembly of major citizens, the djemda^
and being a civil personage ;* 6th, the ensemble of the
karoubas^ constituting the village. However, the collaterals
^ Hanoteau et Letourneux, Kabylie, t. ii. p 59.
2 Id., ibid., t. ii. p, 283.
3 Id., ibid., p. 286.
* E. Sabatier, Essai sur forigine des Berblres sidentaires^ in Revue
d^ Anthropologic, 1882.
330 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
of all degrees may inherit in default of ascendants and
descendants.^ In all this list there is no mention of women.
In fact, whatever property a Kabyle woman may have
been able laboriously to amass, it falls to the male descent,
to the ascendants, or to the husband, or to the collaterals
in the paternal line. It is only in default of this cloud of
male heirs that the succession to the property gained by a
Kabyle woman devolves at last on her daughters, or her
mother or grandmother.^ From all the preceding facts,
and in spite of gaps in our information, we may, however,
suppose that in the Berber world also the family has
evolved in passing through three degrees, which we have
already found amongst various races, and which are the com-
munal clan, the maternal family, and the patriarchate.
IV. The Family in Persia,
This evolution seems therefore very common; it is a
general fact, but we are not yet warranted in calling it a
law. Thus, as far as our information goes, which it is true
is not very complete, no trace of it is to be found among
the ancient Persians, with whom we will now begin our
interrogation of the Aryan races, from the point of view
of their familial organisation. If the familial clan with
confused kinship has ever existed in ancient Persia, it can
only have been at an extremely remote epoch ; there is no
trace of it in the Avesta. And more than this, the most
ancient accounts show us the patriarchal family, in the
Hebraic sense of the word, instituted among the Mazdeans :
a legitimate wife, purchased from her parents, and by
the side of her a greater or less number of concubines ; and
lastly, dominating all the rest, the father of the family, having
the right of life or death over the wives and children.^
Not only does the clan not exist, but exogamy is replaced
by the most incestuous of endogamies. Thus Strabo relates
that, following a very ancient custom, the Magi might have
^ Hanoteau et Letourneux, Kahylie, t. ii. pp. 287, 288.
^^ Id., ibid.^ t, ii. p. 297.
^ Dareste, Sur I'ancien droit des Perses, in Bull, de I' Academic des
Sciences Morales et Politiqties, 23rd Oct. 1886. — Strabo, xv. 17.
ANb OP THE FAMILY, 331
commerce with their own mothers. ^ According to Ctesias,
marriage between mother and son was a common thing in
Persia, and this not from sudden passion, but by dehberate
proposal, " by false judgment." - Lucian, on his part, says
expressly that marriage between brother and sister among
the Persians was perfectly legal. Indeed, in various passages
of the Avesta^ consanguineous unions are recommended and
praised.3 In the eyes of the Mazdeans, whose sacred code
expressly forbade all alliance with infidels, endogamy, even
when excessive, was evidently moral ; and they encouraged
it to such a degree as to approve of the kind of incest which
is regarded as the most criminal by nearly all other peoples.
Neither is there any trace of the matriarchate in ancient
Persia, unless we choose to see a vestige of it in the legend
according to which, in the time of the mythic monarchies,
the eldest daughter of the king had the right to choose her
husband herself. For this purpose all the young nobles of
the country were assembled together at a festival, and the
princess signified her preference by throwing an orange to
the man who pleased her best.^ I mention this tradition
that I may omit nothing, but it evidently constitutes a most
insignificant proof. Modern Persia, being Mahometan, has
regulated marriage and the family in accordance with the
Koran. We find, however, by the side of the perpetual
marriage which only death or divorce can dissolve, a form
of conjugal union less solemn and more ephemeral, and
which is not generally recognised by law in countries even
slightly civilised. I speak of marriages for a term, or rather
the hiring of a wife for a time and for a fixed price. Unions
of this kind are legal in Persia. They are agreed on before
the judge, and at the expiration of the contract, or rather
the lease, the interested parties may renew the engagement
if they think well. In a contrary case, the woman can only
contract another union of the same kind after a delay of
forty days. If before the expiration of the conjugal lease
the man desires to break it, he can do so, but only on
condition of placing in the hands of the woman the total
1 Strabo, xv. 20.
2 Sandi Joannis Chrysosiomi, Op. i. 384, and x. 573.
^ A. Hovelacque, Avesta, p. 465.
* L. Dubeux, La Perse ^ p. 262.
^32 THE INVOLUTION OP MARRIAGE
sum stipulated in the contract. ^ The offspring of these
temporary unions, or of any sort of union, are all equal
before the Persian law, which merely subjects them to the
right of primogeniture. At the death of the father, the
eldest son, though born of a slave mother, takes two-thirds
of the succession. The remaining third of the property is
divided amongst the other children, but in such a way that
the share of the boys is half as large again as that of the
girls.2 This right of primogeniture and these advantages
granted to boys exclude all idea of maternal filiation in the
customs of modern Persia, and we have seen that there was
no trace of it in ancient Persia ; this race therefore seems
not to have passed through the phase of the maternal family,
nor perhaps through that of the clan.
V. The Family in India.
In India, on the contrary, certain customs and traditions
appear to be true survivals, relating to an ancient organisa-
tion of exogamic clans with maternal filiation. But of
these old customs the sacred books retain no trace. In
Vedic India the family is already patriarchal, since the
husband is called pati, which signifies master; but this
Vedic family is of a most restricted kind. It is composed,
essentially and simply, at first of the husband and wife, who
become the father and the mother ; then of the son and of
the daughter, who are mutually brother and sister. The
grandparents belong to the anterior family ; the uncles
and aunts are part of the collateral families.^ The Code of
Manu is already less exclusive, for it admits, as we shall
see, a fictitious fihation; but it is still patriarchal, and,
according to Manu, the daughters occupy an entirely sub-
ordinate position. It is a son and a chain of male
descendants that it is important to have; religion even
makes it an obligation ; for the ancestors of any man who
has not a son to perform in their honour the sacrifice
* L. Dubeux, La Perse, p. 468.
2 Chardin, Hist. Univ. des Voyages, t. xxxi. pp. 230, 236. — L.
Dubeux, loc. cif., p. 468.
* E. Burnouf, Essai sur le Vida, p. 190.
AND OF THE FAMILY, 333
to the manes, or the Srdddha, are excluded from the celes-
tial abode. It is necessary to have a son to " pay the debt
of the ancestors." *'By a son, a man gains heaven; by
the son of a son, he obtains immortality ; by the son of
this grandson, he rises to dwell in the sun."i The Code of
Manu already proclaims the right of primogeniture. It is
by means of the eldest son that a man pays the debt of the
ancestors ; it is therefore he who ought to have everything ;
his obedient brothers will live under his guardianship, as
they have lived under that of the father, 2 on condition,
however, that if the sons are of different mothers, the
mothers of the younger ones are not of superior rank to
that of the mother of the eldest son.^ The son of a brah-
manee, for example, would not yield precedence to the son
of a kchcLtriya: caste is always of the first consideration.
But the quality of son may be acquired otherwise than by
community of blood. Thus a husband may, as we have
seen, have his sterile wife fertilised by his younger brother.
The child thus conceived is reputed to be son of the hus-
band ; nevertheless, in the succession, he is given the share
of an uncle only, and not the double share to which he
would have had a right if he had been the real son* by
flesh and blood. If a man has the great misfortune to have
only daughters, he can obviate this by charging his daughter
to bear him a son. For this purpose, it suffices for him to
say mentally to himself: "Let the male child that she
gives birth to become mine, and fulfil in my honour the
funeral ceremony." ^ The son thus engendered by mental
incest and by suggestion, as we should say to-day, is per-
fectly authentic. He is not a grandson, but a real and true
son, and he inherits all the fortune of his maternal grand-
father, with the light charge on it of offering two funeral
cakes — one to his own father, his father according to the flesh,
the other to his maternal grandfather, or father according to
the spirit.^ The law of Manu does not totally disinlierit
daughters, but it cuts down their share considerably. Under
pain of degradation, brothers must give their sisters, but
only to their german sisters, the fourth of their share, to
^ Code of Manu, ix. 137. ^ Ibid., 120, 121.
2 Ibid., 105, 106. ^ Ibid., 127.
3 Ibid., 125. 6 Ibid., 132.
334 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
enable them to marry. ^ Another verse ^ accords to the
daughter the inheritance of the maternal property, composed
of what has been given to the mother at her marriage. But
to be capable of inheriting, this daughter must still be
celibate. In the contrary case, she merely receives a
present. In short, the whole Brahman ic code is based, in
what concerns the family, on masculine filiation and the
patriarchate. Nevertheless, customs that are kept up by the
side of it, and doubtless in spite of it, prove that in certain
parts of India there must formerly have existed exogamic
clans and a system of maternal fiHation.
But it is important to remark that these survivals are, or
were, met with especially in Tamil districts, in Malabar or
Ceylon, which were in great measure colonised by Tamils.
In certain small kingdoms of Malabar, as late as the seven-
teenth century, the right of succession was transmitted
through the mother ; a princess could also, if she pleased,
marry an inferior.^ Custom still designated as brothers to
each other the children either of two brothers or two sisters,
but the children of the brother and of the sister were only
german cousins.^ Certain families never made any parti-
tion, thus preserving the custom of the ancient familial clan.^
Wherever feminine filiation prevailed, it was the sister's son
who succeeded the defunct Rajah.^ So also in the eastern
part of Ceylon, the property was transmitted to the sister's
son, to the exclusion of the sons.'^ To conclude, I will
mention the custom, also very widely spread in India, of
not marrying a woman of the same name.
We must beware of exaggerating the value of these partial
facts; they permit us, however, to infer that in certain parts of
India, and especially among the Tamils, the family has at first
been maternal, and has slowly evolved from the primitive clan.
VI. The Greco- Roman Family.
The chief object of this book being to study the evolution
of the family and of marriage, I need not describe in detail
^ Code of Mann, ix. ii8. ^ Ibid., p. 320.
2 Ibid., 131. ° Ibid., t. xiv. p. 396.
3 Lettres 'edijiantes, t. xiv. p. 387. " MacLennan, loc. cit., p. 189.
'' O. Sachot, r lie de Ceylon., p. 27.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 335
the Greco-Roman family, which has, besides, served as a
theme for so many writers. It certainly appears, contrary to
the opinion of the Romans themselves, to have emerged
tardily enough from the primitive clan or gens. This
Roman gens was composed, really or fictitiously, of con-
sanguine individuals, living under an elected chief, and
having the same name. The union of several gentes formed
the curia or the phrairy. Grouped together, the phratries
or curiae constituted iribus. And lastly, the assembly of
the tribus formed the nation: Rome or Athens. ^ It is
therefore the clan, or gens, and not the family, which has
been at Rome, and at Athens the cellule, according to the
fashionable expression, of ancient society.
At the dawn of history, these clans were already agnatic ;
they had adopted paternal filiation, and each of them claimed
a common masculine ancestor ; but the right of the gens to
the heritage, and in certain cases the possession of an ager
publicus, still proved the antique community of property;
and a number of indications and traditions bore witness in
favour of the existence of a prehistoric phase of the maternal
family, preceding agnation. Bachofen goes much further,
and not without a show of reason. He insists, for example,
that kinship in the Latin clan may at first have been con-
fused. He alleges, on this point, that in the time of Numa
the yfordi parricide signified, not the murder of a father, but
that of a free man of some sort; that in the family tribunal
the cognates of the wife figured, and that the cognates wore
mourning for each other ; that the cognates of the wife, and
those of the husband of a wife, had over her the Jus osculi,
or the right of embracing her, etc. ; lastly, that the Etruscan
Servius, the founder of plebeian liberty, was conceived, says
the legend, during a great annual festival, when the people
reverted to primitive sexual disorder. ^
The Greek ykvo% resembled the Roman gens. Its
members had a common sepulture, common property, the
mutual obligation of the vendetta, and an archon.^
In the protohistoric clans of Greece maternal filiation
was first of all established. The Cretans said motherland
^ L. Morgan, Ancient Societies, pp. 35, 67.
2 Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit., p. 411.
^ Grote, Hist, of Greece, vol. iii. p. 95.
336 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
(/xryrpis), and not fatherland (iraTpcs). In primitive Athens
the women had the right of voting, and their children bore
I heir name — privileges which were taken from them, says the
legend, to appease the wrath of Neptune, after an inunda-
tion.i Tradition also relates that at Athens, until the time
of Cecrops, children bore the name of their mother.^
Among the Lycians, says Herodotus, the matriarchate
endured a long time, and the children followed the status
of their mother. Uterine brothers were carefully distin-
guished from german brothers for a long period in Greece ;
the former are called oixoyda-rpioi in Homer, and the latter
oTrarpoL; and uterine fraternity was regarded as much more
close. Lycaon, pleading with Achilles, says, in order to
appease him, that he is not the uterine brother of Hector.^
At Athens and Sparta a man could marry his father's
sister, but not his mother's sister."* In Etruria the funeral
inscriptions in the Latin language make much more fre-
quent mention of the maternal than the paternal descent.
Sometimes they mention only the name of a child and that
of his mother (Lars Caius, son of Caulia, etc.) ; sometimes
they indicate the father's name by simple initials, whilst
that of the mother is written in full.^
As in so many other countries, the paternal family suc-
ceeded the maternal family in the ancient world, but not
without difficulty. To begin with, the fact of marriage did
not suffice alone to establish paternal filiation ; the declara-
tion of the father was necessary, as well in Greece as in
Rome. In his Oresieia, ^schylus puts in opposition before
Minerva the old maternal right and the new paternal right.
The chorus of the Eumenides, representing the people,
defends the ancient customs ; Apollo pleads for the inno-
vators, and ends by declaring, in a fit of patriarchal delirium,
that the child is not of the blood of the mother. " It is
not the mother who begets what is called her child ; she is
only the nurse of the germ poured into her womb ; he who
begets is the father. The woman receives the germ merely
1 A. Giraud-Teulon, loc, cit., p. 289.
2 Varro, quoted by St. Augustine, City of God, vol. xviil. p. 9
* MacLennan, loc. cit., p. 244.
* Id., ibid. pp. 177, 275.
5 Ott. Milller and Bachofen (quoted by A. Giraud-Teulon, pp. 283,
284).
AND OF THE FAMILY. 33^
as guardian, and when it pleases the gods, she preserves it."
The Orestes of Euripides takes up the same theory when
he says to Tyndarus — " My father has begotten me, and
thy daughter has given birth to me, as the earth receives
the seed that another confides to it; without a father, there
could be no child." These patriarchal theories naturally
consecrated the slavery of woman. The laws of Solon still
recognised the right of women to inherit, in default of
paternal relations of the male sex, to the fourth degree, but
in the time of Isaeus the law refused to the mother any
place among the heirs of her son.^
In fact, throughout the historic period the Greco-Roman
world is patriarchal. In Greece and at Rome woman is
despised, subjected, and possessed like a thing ; while the
power of the father of the family is enormous. It is especi-
ally so at Rome, where, nevertheless, the family is not yet
strictly consanguineous, for it includes the wife, children,
and slaves, and where agnation has for its basis the patria
potestas. " All those are agnates who are under the same
paternal power, or who have been, or who could be, if their
ancestor had lived long enough to exercise his empire. . . .
Wherever the paternal power begins, there also begins
kinship. Adoptive children are relations. ... A son
emancipated by his father loses his rights of agnation."^
At the commencement of Roman history, we see, therefore,
clans, or gentes, composed of families, of whom some are
patrician — that is, able to indicate their agnatic lineage —
and the others plebeian. The " justae nuptiae" are for the
former ; the latter unite without ceremony, more feraru77i.
The family is possessed by the pater Janiilias ; he is the
king and priest of it, and becomes one of its gods when his
shade goes to dwell among the manes. In this last case,
the family simply changes masters; "the nearest agnate takes
thefamily^^ says the law of the Twelve Tables. Something
very similar existed in Greece, for we have seen that at
Athens the right of marrying their sisters, left to brothers
who were heirs, was not even exhausted by a first marriage.^
^ Morgan, Ancient Societies, p. 548. — MacLennan, Primitive Mar-
riage, p. 255.
2 H. Maine, Ancient Law, pp. 141, 142.
^ Isaeus, Heritage of Menecles.
22
33^ THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
The institution of individual, or rather famihal property,
that of masculine fihation, and of patriarchal monogamy,
dismembered the gens^ which at length became merely
nominal. The law of the Twelve Tables, however, still
decides that the succession shall be vacant if, at the death
of the father, the nearest agnate refuses to '' take the
family," and in default of an agnate the gentiles shall take
the succession. The nominal gens persisted for a long
time in the ancient world ; thus every Roman patrician had
three names — that of his gens^ that of his family, and his
personal name.^ At Athens, in the time of Solon, \\\q gens
still inherited when a man died without children.
The long duration of Greco-Roman society enables us to
follow the whole evolution of the family in it. It would be
going beyond the facts to affirm the existence of a still
confused consanguinity in the ancient gens ; but it seems
very probable that this gens first adopted the maternal and
then the paternal family, which last became somewhat
modified, in the sense of the extension of feminine rights.
This extension was slow, and it was not till the time of
Justinian that equal shares were given to sons and daughters
in succession, or even that widows were entrusted with the
care of their children.
VII. The Fa?nily in Barbarous Europe.
Organisation into clans more or less consanguineous, then
into phratries and tribes, seems natural in many primitive
societies \ and outside the Greco-Roman world the bar-
barous populations of Europe had all adopted it. In these
clans, has kinship begun by being confused ? Has exogamy
prevailed? On these particular points precise information
is wanting ; doubtless evolution cannot everywhere have
been uniform. One thing is, however, certain, namely, that
the Celtic populations have preserved the institution of the
clan much longer than any others. In Wales and Ireland
the clan was still the social unit ; it was responsible for the
crimes of its members, paid the fines and received the
compensations. In Ireland, and surely elsewhere, there
1 A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cii., p. 372.
AND OP THE FAMIL K 339
was an ager publicus allotted amongst the members of the
clans. Individualism prevailed in the end, as it did every-
where. A certain portion of the common soil, reserved in
usufruct for the chiefs, was at last seized by them as
individual property ; but all the members of a clan were
reputed as of kin, and at a man's death his land was allotted
by the chief amongst the other families of the clan or sept?-
These clans, however, were anything but exogamous, if we
may believe Strabo, who affirms that the ancient Irish, like
the Mazdeans, married, without distinction, their mothers
and sisters.2 Irish marriage had in no way the strictness of
the Roman marriage ; temporary unions were freely allowed,
and customs having the force of law safeguarded the
rights of the wife.^ Other European barbarians, on the
contrary, were exogamous, and prohibited under pain of
severe punishment, as whipping or drowning, marriage
between members of the same clan.* The mir of the
southern Slavs may be considered as a survival of these
ancient barbarous clans, sometimes endogamous, sometimes
exogamous.
In becoming subdivided into families, have these little
primitive clans adopted maternal filiation ? This is possible;
but when they came in contact with the Roman world the
greater number had already the paternal family. Let us
notice, however, that the Irish law, far from subjecting the
mother, accorded her a position equal to that of the father.^
Let us also recall the following passage of Tacitus^ apropos
of the Germans : " The son of a sister is as dear to his
uncle as to his father; some even think that the first of
these ties is the most sacred and close; and in taking
hostages they prefer nephews, as inspiring a stronger attach-
ment, and interesting the family on more sides." We may
add to this that in Germany the mother could be the
guardian of her children -J that the Salic law, non emendaia,
1 H. Maine, Early Institutions ^ pp. 1 13, Il6, 124.
2 Strabo, iv. 4.
3 H. Maine, loc. cit., p. 76.
* '^qW, Journal of a Residence in Circassia, vol. i. p. 347.
^ H. Maine, loc. cit.
^ De moribus Germanorum^ xx.
^ Laboulaye, Recherches sur la condition civile et politique des femmes^
etc., pp. 166, 167.
340 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.
admitted to the succession, in default of children, the father
and mother, the brothers and sisters, and then the sister of
the mother in preference to that of the father. Let us
remember, also, that in Slav communities women have a
right to vote, and may be elected to the government of the
community ;i but this is still a long way off the matri-
archate, or even uterine filiation. The Saxon law (tit. vii.),
the Burgundian law (tit. xlv.), and the German law (tit.
Ivii. and xcii.) only admit women to the succession in
default of male ascendants ; the law of the Angles prefers
paternal agnates, even to the fifth degree, before women.
To sum up, there are only two precise testimonies that
may be quoted in favour of the ancient existence of
maternal filiation among the barbarians of Europe — that of
Strabo, relating to the Iberians ; and the case of the Picts,
amongst whom the hsts of kings show that fathers and sons
had different names, and that brothers succeeded instead
of sons.2 From this absence, or rather rarity, of proofs in
favour of the ancient existence of the maternal family
among the barbarians of Europe, must we conclude that it
has never existed ? Not at all ; we can only say that this
ancient filiation is possible, and even probable, but as yet
insufficiently established.
What cannot be disputed is, that always and everywhere
peoples who are in process of civilisation have adopted
the paternal family, according even excessive powers to the
father of the family. What is probable is, that in the
majority of cases paternal filiation has succeeded to maternal
filiation and to more or less confused familial forms. Is
this paternal or even patriarchal family the final term of
familial evolution ? Has evolution, never as yet arrested in
its course, said its last word in regard to marriage and the
family ?
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, loc. cit., pp. 41, 42.
^ MacLennan, Pritnitive Marriage, p. loi.
CHAPTER XX.
MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY IN THE PAST, THE PRESENT,
AND THE FUTURE.
I. The Past. — Sociology and evolution — Sociology and scientific
method — The biological reason of marriage and the family — Primitive
forms of marriage — Its evolution — Consanguineous primitive groups —
The evolution of the family — The stages of this evolution — From com-
munism to individualism — Advantages of the primitive clan — Poly-
gamy and statistics of births.
II. The Present. — Present marriage in Europe — The dangers of
celibacy according to A. Bertillon — They marry who can — Imperfect
categories of celibates — Money and matrimony — Selection by money —
Marriages by purchase.
III. The Future. — Prehistoric peoples still surviving — Progress is
the law of the world — The meaning of matrimonial and familial
evolution — Sociological rhythms — Future collective societies — The
family and society — Progress of conjugal discord — The marriage of the
future — Herbert Spencer and Montaigne — Slowness of social evo-
lutions — Conservatives and innovators — Nothing dies; everything is
renewed.
I. The Past.
In the preceding chapters I have attempted to describe
how men of all countries and all races have more or less
constituted and organised their marriage and their family,
and for this purpose I have patiently classified a multitude
of facts collected singly by an army of observers.
Moreover, in conformity with the method of evolution,
and in order not to neglect the most distant sources, I have
prefaced my minute inquiry into marriage and the family
among men by an investigation of the same kind in regard
to animals. Man is neither a demi-god nor an angel ; he
is ^ primate n^ore intelligent than the others, and his
342 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
relationship with the neighbouring species of the animal
kingdom is more strongly shown in his psychic than in his
anatomical traits.
r More than once, I fear, the accumulation of detailed
facts which forms the groundwork of this book may have
fatigued my readers ; but this is the only condition on
which it is possible to give a solid basis to sociology. It
is, in fact, nothing less than a matter of creating a new
science. We are scarcely beginning to be really acquainted
with mankind, to take a complete survey of it in time
and space. Now this would be quite impossible without
the help of comparative ethnography. We must regard the
existing inferior races as survivals, as prehistoric or proto-
historic types that have persisted through long ages, and
are still on different steps of the ladder of progress ; it is
this view alone whicli we shall find suggestive and enlight-
ening; and it is in strict correlation with the method of
evolution, to which, indeed, it owes its value.
The innumerable dissertations on the history of marriage
and of the family which appeared previous to the rise
of scientific method, have necessarily been devoid of
accuracy and especially of breadth of thought. A thick
veil concealed the real origin of these institutions;
religious legends, that had become venerable on account
of their antiquity, paralysed scientific investigation. To
submit our social institutions to the great law of evolution,
by means of disagreeable researches, was not to be tolerated
by public opinion. In fact, if marriage and the family
have been constantly modified in the past, we cannot
maintain that these institutions will remain for ever crys-
tallised in their present state. Until this revolutionary
idea had taken root and become sufficiently acclimatised
in public opinion, all so-called social studies were scarcely
more than empty lucubrations. From time to time,
no doubt, a few bold innovators, braving scoffs or even
martyrdom, have dared to construct theories of new
societies ; but, being insufficiently informed, they could
only create Utopias contemned by the mass of the public.
Scientific sociology builds its edifice stone by stone; its
duty is to bind the present to the most distant past; its
honour will lie in furnishing a solid basis of operation to
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 343
the innovators of the future ; but this new branch of human
knowledge can only grow by submitting to the method of
the natural sciences. Before everything else, it is important
to classify the facts that have been observed. This course
is imperative. It is dry, and lends itself with difficulty to
oratorical effusions, but no other path can lead to the truth.
My constant anxiety has been to be faithful to it, and as
an anthropologist I have especially borrowed my materials
from ethnography. Step by step, and following as much*'
as possible the hierarchic order of human races and of
civilisations, I have described the modes of marriage and
of the family adopted by the numerous varieties of the
human type ; I have endeavoured to note the phases of their
evolution, and to show how superior forms have evolved
from inferior ones. Now that I am at the end of my
inquiry, it will be well to sum up clearly its result.
The prime cause of marriage and the family is purely
biological ; it is the powerful instinct of reproduction, the
condition of the duration of species, and the origin of
which is necessarily contemporaneous with that of primal
organisms, of protoplasmic monads, multiplying themselves
by unconscious scissiparity. By a slow specialisation of
organs and functions, in obedience to the laws of evolu-
tionary selection, various animal types have been created ;
and when they have been provided with separate sexes and
conscious nervous centres, procreation has become a tyran-
nic need, driving males and females to unite in order to
fulfil the important function of reproduction. ^
In this respect man is strictly assimilable to the other
animals, and with him as with them all the intoxication
of love has for its initial principle the elective affinity
of two generating cellules of different sex. So far, this is
mere biology, but it results, among superior animals, in
sociological phenomena, in pairings which endure after the
satisfaction of procreative needs, and produce in outline
some forms of human marriage, or rather, of sexual union
in humanity — namely, promiscuity, polygamy, and even
monogamy. Our most primitive ancestors, our precursors,
half men and half apes, have certainly had extremely gross
customs, which are still in great measure preserved among
the least developed races,
344 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
The study, however, of contemporary savage societies
proves to us that absolutely unbridled promiscuity, without
rule or restraint, is very rare even in inferior humanity.
In exceptional cases, individuals of both sexes may have
abandoned themselves, of common accord, to promiscuity,
as did the Polynesian areo'is ; but these instances relate to
acts of debauchery, and not to a regulated social condition
compatible with the maintenance of an ethnic group.
The conjugal form nearest to promiscuity is the collec-
tive marriage of clan to clan — as, for example, that of
the Kamilaroi, amongst whom all the men of one clan
are reputed brothers to each other, and at the same time
husbands of all the women of a neighbouring clan,
reputed also sisters to each other. Other varieties of
sexual association are more common, and may be arranged
under the general heads of promiscuity, polygamy, poly-
andry, and monogamy. We hear also of temporary unions,
marriages for a term, and partial marriages concluded at a
debated price for certain days of the week only, etc.
Every possible experiment, compatible with the duration of
savage or barbarous societies, has been tried, or is still
practised, amongst various races, without the least thought
of the moral ideas generally prevailing in Europe, and
which our metaphysicians proclaim as innate and necessary.
Having elsewhere demonstrated at length the relativity of
morality, I will not go over the ground again, but will
quote on this point some lines of Montaigne : — " The laws
of conscience, which we pretend to be derived from nature,
proceed from custom ; every one having an inward vener-
ation for the opinions and manners approved and received
amongst his own people, cannot without very great reluct-
ancy depart from them, nor apply himself to them without
applause. . . . The common fancies that we find in repute
everywhere about us, and infused into our mind with the
seed of our fathers, appear to be most universal and
genuine. From whence it comes to pass, that whatever is
off the hinges of custom is believed to be also off the hinges
of reason."^ The partial marriages of the Hassinyeh Arabs
are surely off the hinges of our custom ; and it is the same
with polyandry, which borders on these partial marriages,
^ Montaigne, Essays ; Custom.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y. 345
but is much more widely spread. Like everything else,
polyandric marriage has evolved, from its most complete
form, that of the Nairs, to the polyandry in use in Thibet,
which already inclines towards monandry and the paternal
family. Primitive polyandry has easily arisen from the
marriage by classes practised by many savage clans; but
most often it is polygamy which has sprung from it.
And the latter must frequently have been established
from the first in primitive hordes, simply by the right of the
strongest. -,
Man may be monogamous in the very lowest degree of
savagery and stupidity ; certain animals are so ; but in
humanity it is more often the instinct of polygamy which
predominates ; and therefore, when in the course of the
progressive evolution of societies monogamy at length
became moral and legal, men have been careful to soften
its rigour by maintaining together with it concubinage and
prostitution, and by generally leaving to the husband the
right of repudiation, which has nearly always been refused
to the wife. This injustice appeared quite natural, for as
the wife had usually been captured or bought, she was con-
sidered as the property of the man, and held in strict sub-
jection. At length, in its last form, monogamic marriage,
which had at first been the association of a master and a
slave, tended more and more to become the union of two
persons, living on a footing of equality.
The family has undergone a similar evolution. Apartj
from a few exceptional cases of precocious monogamy
(Veddahs, Boshimans, etc.), ethnography shows us the
greater number of savage races living in little consanguine
groups, in which the kinship is still confused and the solidarity
strong. The degrees of consanguinity are not well defined ;
real kinship is easily confounded with fictitious kinship, and
classes of relations are created, ranged under the same title,
although very differently united by ties of blood. The
woman nearly always bears children for her group, or clan,
and this clan is very often exogamic ; this exogamy is
practised from clan to clan, and only within the tribe. There
is no absolute rule, however, and it is not unusual to see
endogamy elbow exogamy.
In the large and confused family of the clan, all the
346 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
members of which were bound together by a strict solidarity
of interests and a real or fictitious kinship, the restricted
family became gradually established by a reaction of indi-
vidual interests. On account of the more or less complete
confusion of sexual unions, the first to become detached
from the consanguine clan was the maternal family, based
on uterine filiation, the only filiation capable of sure proof;
but the great association of all the members of the clan
still existed. By the simple fact of birth in this little ethnic
group, the individual had rights to the territory of the clan
and his share in the common resources ; his clan were
bound to give him aid, assistance, and, at need, vengeance
also. In proportion as the family assumed more distinct
proportions in the clan, it tended to become separate from
it, and then, nearly always, it was based not on maternal
but on paternal filiation. This did not come to pass in a
day j it took a long time to arrive at the point of attributing
to such or such a man the ownership of one or more
women and their progeny. The ridiculous ceremonial of
the couvade was probably invented during this period of
transition, when it was no easy matter for a man to obtain
the recognition of his paternal title and rights by the other
men of the clan. For a long time the maternal family
resisted the enthronisation of the paternal family, and here
and there it succeeded in maintaining its existence, and in
serving as a basis for the transmission of inheritance. For,
whether paternal or maternal, the institution of the family,
when well consolidated, had for its result the parcelling out
of the possessions of the ancient clans, and the creation of
familial or individual property on the ruins of the ancient
common property. Finally, nothing more remained of the
clan, or gens^ but the sign or ioiem^ the name, and a kinship,
also nominal, between the various families that had come
from it.
The system and the vocabulary of kinship were then
renewed ; to the classificatory mode, grouping the relations
by classes, without much care as to consanguinity, has
succeeded the descriptive mode, which carefully specifies
the degree of consanguinity of each person, and distinguishes
a direct line from collateral lines, and in which each indi-
vidual is the centre of a group of relations.
AND OF THE FAMIL Y, 347
In a remarkable book, which has not yet had all the
success it deserves, Lewis Morgan believes he has
recognised five stages in the evolution of the family : ist,
the family is consanguineous — that is to say, founded on the
marriage of brothers and sisters of a group; 2nd, several
brothers are the common husbands of their wives, who are
not sisters ; 3rd, a man and woman unite, but without exclu-
sive cohabitation, and with faculty of divorce for one or the
other ; 4th, then comes the pastoral family of the Hebrews,
the marriage of one man with several women ; but this
patriarchal form has not been universal; 5th, at last
appeared the family of civilised societies, the most modern,
characterised by the exclusive cohabitation of one man and
one woman. Not taking this classification too literally, and
reserving a place for varieties and exceptions, we have here
five stages which mark tolerably well the evolution of the
family in humanity.
The moral direction of this slow transformation is evi-
dent ; it proceeds from a communism more or less extensive
to individualism ; from the clan, where all is solidarity, to
the family and the individual, having their own interests,
which are as distinct as possible from those of other families
and other individuals. Each one has endeavoured to getj
for himself as large a share as possible of that which was
formerly held in common ; each man has aimed at obtain-
ing a more and more exclusive right over property, wife,
and children. From these appetites, more economic than
ethereal, have at length proceeded the patriarchal family,
monogamy, and familial property, and later, individual
property ; ^ the regime of the family and that of property
have evolved in company. But this transformation has
been effected by extremely slow degrees ; for a long time
the new regime bore the mark of the old one in certain
rights reserved to the clan, in certain prohibitions, in certain
obligations, which still imposed some solidarity on indi-
viduals — as, for example, the legal injunction to help a man
in peril, to hasten to the assistance of a village plundered
by robbers, the general duty of hospitality, etc. — all of them
precepts formulated by the codes of Egypt and India, and
^ A. Giraud-Teulon, Oj'io, du Manage^ etc., p. 428. — L. Morgan,
Ancient Societies, p. 389.
348 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
still to be found in Kabylie, and which have disappeared
from our frankly individualistic, or rather egoistic, modern
legislations.
It is indisputable that this evolution has everywhere coin-
cided with a general progress in civilisation, and the advance
has been sensibly the same among the peoples of all races,
on the sole condition that they should have emerged from
savagery. Everywhere, in the end, the paternal family and
monogamic marriage have become a sort of ideal to which
men have striven to conform their customs and institutions.
It has very naturally been concluded that these last forms of
the family and of conjugal union have an intrinsic sociologic
superiority over the others, that in all times and places
they strengthen the ethnic group, and create for it better
conditions in its struggle for existence. But this reasoning
has nothing strict in it; civilisation is the result of very
complex influences, and if a certain social practice has been
adopted by inferior races, it does not logically follow that it
is, for that reason only, bad in itself. What seems indis-
putable is, that man tends willingly towards individualism,
and yields himself up to it with joy as soon as that becomes
possible to him, thanks to the general progress of civilisation.
At the origin of civilisations, in a tribe of savages,
surrounded with perils, and painfully struggling for
existence, a more or less strict solidarity is imperative;
the co-associates must necessarily form as it were a large
family, in which a more or less communal regime is essen-
tial. The children, the weak ones, and the women have
more chance of surviving if in some measure they belong
to the entire clan ; perpetual war soon cuts down a great
number of men ; it is therefore necessary that their widows
and children should find support and protection without
difficulty, and the regime of the clan, with its wide and
confused kinship, lends itself better to this helpful fraternity
than a strict distinction of tuum and meu/n applied to
property and persons. The same may be said of patriarchal
polygamy, which often flourished on the ruins of the clan.
For this regime to become general, it is necessary that, in the
ethnic group, the proportion of the sexes should be to the
advantage of the feminine sex; in this case it is impera-
tive, and evidently becomes favourable to the maintenance
AND OF THE FAMILY, 349
of the social body ; in fact it guarantees the women against
desertion, augments the number of births, and assures
to the children the care of one or more adoptive mothers,
if the real mother happens to die. I'he opinion of
Herbert Spencer, who quite i priori attributes to mono-
gamy a diminution in the mortality of children, ^ is a
most hazardous one. By the last census taken in Algeria
we learn, not without surprise, that the increase in the
indigenous Mussulman and polygamic population was much
superior to that of the most prolific of the European mono-
gamous states. Polygamy may therefore have its utilitarian
value, and this is the case as soon as it adapts itself to the
general conditions of social life.
11. The Present
It is many centuries since Europe adopted monogamic
marriage as the legal type of the sexual union. That there
exists by the side of regular marriage a considerable margin,
in which are still found nearly all the other forms of sexual
association, we do not deny; but in France, for example,
two-thirds of the population live so entirely under the
regime of legal monogamy, that it would be evidently super-
fluous to describe it here; it is, in substance, the Roman
marriage, the bonds of which Christianity has striven to
lighten. In the general opinion, marriage such as our laws
and customs require it to be, is the most perfect type
possible of conjugal union ; and this current appreciation
has not been a little strengthened by a learned treatise,
frequently quoted, and of which I cannot dispense with
saying a few words.
In 1859, a justly celebrated demographer, whom I have
the honour to call friend, Dr. Adolphe Bertillon, published
a monograph on marriage, which made a great sensation. ^
This work, bristling with figures, scrupulously collected
and strictly accurate, proves or seems to prove that the
celibate third of the French population is, by reason of its
celibacy, struck with decay, and plays the part of an inferior
^ Sociology^ vol. ii. p. 304.
2 Article, ** Marriage," in the Dictionnaire encyclopidique des sciences
midicales.
3^0 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
race by the side of the married two-thirds. In com-
parative tables, which are extremely clear, A. Bertillon
follows step by step the different fates of the married and
unmarried, and he shows us that at every age the celibate
population is struck by a mortality nearly twice as great as
the other ; that its births merely make up 45 per cent.
of its annual losses; that it counts every year twice as
many cases of madness, twice as many suicides, twice as
many attempts on property, and twice as many murders
and acts of personal violence. Consequently, the State has
to maintain for this celibate population twice as many
prisons, twice as many asylums and hospitals, twice as
many undertakers,^ etc. These revelations, absolutely true
as raw results, caused a great commotion in the little public
specially occupied with demography and sociology. Their
alarm was soon calmed.
From his interesting work A. Bertillon had drawn con-
clusions which were very doubtful, taking surely the effect
for the cause, by attributing the inferiority of the celibate
population solely to its celibacy. If this be so, we have
only to marry these weak ones in order to raise them;
but the superiority of the married population, which on
the whole is indisputable, does not necessarily imply the
superiority of the marriage state.
It is in consequence of economic hindrances, and of
physical or psychical inferiority, that, in the greater number
of cases, people resign themselves to celibacy. Those who
wish to marry cannot always do so, and A. Bertillon knew
better than any one that the number of marriages, the age
at marriage, the number of children by nnrriage, etc.,
depend in the mass not on individual caprice, but on
causes altogether general. Setting aside money con-
siderations — which are so powerful, and to which I shall
presently return — and confining our calculation to persons
of normal endowment, it is probable that there is more
energy, more moral and intellectual vitality, in those who
bravely face the risk of marriage than in the timid
celibates ; but it is certain that the celibate population,
taken as a whole, includes the majority of the human waste
of a country. At the time when A. Bertillon wrote his
^ A. Bertillon, loc. cit.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 35!
learned treatise, in 1859, statistics prove the existence in
France of 370,018 infirm persons,^ of whom the greater
number were evidently condemned to celibacy by the very
fact of their infirmity. On the other hand, it is probable
that among the beggars, properly so called, there is a large
proportion of celibates, without counting the infirm; now
in 1847 there were 337,838 beggars in France.^
To these lists of unwilling celibates must be added,
especially, the virile population in the army, the mortality
in which was, as we well know, double that of the
civil population. Now, on the ist January 1852, the
French army counted 354,960 men.^ To these matri-
monial non-values, contributing a larger tithe to sickness
and death, must be further joined the celibates from
religious vows. The census shows 52,885 of the latter.
Without any ill-feeling towards the Catholic clergy, we
may be allowed to hold the opinion that the very fact of a
man's vowing himself to celibacy — that is to say, of setting
at nought the desires of nature and the needs of the
society of which he forms a part — merely for metaphysical
motives, often imph'es a certain degree of mental inferiority.
The special statistics of the little ecclesiastical world arc
not published in France ; but M. Duruy having once had
the happy thought of ascertaining from the judicial pigeon-
holes the number of crimes and misdemeanours committed
by the members of religious orders engaged in teaching,
compared w4th those of lay schoolmasters, during a period
of thirty months, the result of the inquiry showed that,
proportionally to the number of schools, the former were
guilty of four times as many misdemeanours and twelve
times as many crimes as the latter.* Short as the period
of observation was, this enormous difference gives matter
for reflection, although it may not have the value of a law.
But the principal causes which influence matrimony are
the greater or less facility of existence, and the extreme
importance attached to money. As a general rule, life and
death tend to balance each other, and the populations
whose mortality is great have, as compensation, a rich birth-
^ M, Block, Statistiqnc de la France, t. ii. p. 55.
2 Id., ibid. p. 298. ^ Id., ibid. p. 506.
* A. Bertillon, article "Marriage," loc, cit.
352 THE E VOL UTiON OF MARRIA CE
rate. We invariably see the number of marriages and
births increasing after a series of prosperous years, and
vice versa. General causes have naturally a greater influ-
ence on the population living from hand to mouth. The
well-to-do classes escape this, and we even find that the
chances of marriage for the rich increase during years of
high prices. 1
We can scarcely attribute to anything else but an excessive
care for money and a forethought pushed to timidity some
very disquieting traits in our marriage and birth rates in
France. I will merely recall, by the way, the continually
decreasing excess of our births, which, if not stopped by
radical social reforms, can only end in our final decay.
The fear of marriage and the family is the particular
feature of French matrimoniality. The desirable age for
marriage, says A. Bertillon,^ is from twenty-two to twenty-
five for men, and from nineteen to twenty for women. In
England more than half the marriages for men (504 in
1000) and nearly two-thirds of those of women are con-
tracted before the age of twenty-five. Now, this is only
the case in France for 0.29, and in Belgium for 0.20 of the
marriages. A demographical phenomenon of the same
kind is observed in Italy, where only 232 men out of 1000
marry before the age of twenty-five.^ At Paris, where the
struggle for existence is more severe, and where the care for
money is more predominant, late marriages abound, and it
is only above the age of forty for men and thirty-five for
women that the marriage rate equals, and even exceeds,
that of the whole of France ;* it is self-evident that the
result of this must be a decrease in the total of births by
marriage. Whether these facts proceed from the growing
difficulties of existence, or from a fear, always augmenting
also, of trouble and care, or from these two causes com-
bined and mutually strengthening each other, the conse-
quence is the same : marriages are becoming more and
more simple commercial transactions, from whence arises
the worst and most shameful of selections — selection by
money. As a moral demographer, A. Bertillon thunders
against what he calls "the system of dower" more
^ A. Bertillon, article ** Marriage," loc. cit.
a Id., ibid. 8 Id., ibid. 4 M.y ibid.
AND OF THE FAMIL V.
353
peculiar to the I^atin races, since we get it from Rome,
where recourse was doubtless had to it in order to eman-
cipate patrician women from strict conjugal servitude. But
the remedy has become an evil, and it is surely to the love
of the dowry rather than to "the beautiful eyes of the
casket " that must be attributed a whole list of true marriages
by purchase, much more common in our own country than
elsewhere. Sometimes it is old men who conjugally pur-
chase young girls, and sometimes old women who buy
young husbands. I will especially notice this last category
of marriages by purchase. As regards them, France is
unworthily distinguished beyond other nations. In our
tables of statistics, for example, the proportionate number
of marriages between bachelors from eighteen to forty years
and women of fifty and upwards, is ten times greater than
in England.^
Marriages with Women of Fifty Years and iipivards.
{In a million marriages^
IN FRANCE.
Asre of Nmnljer of
Bachelors. Marriages.
1 8 to 20 years ... 64
20 „ 25 „ ... 109
25 » 30 r ••• 151
30 - 35 >' ••• 1^8
35 '. 40 » ••• 257
769
IN ENGLAND.
Age of
Bachelors.
Number of
Marriages.
16
to 20 years
20
,. 25 „
•• 5
25
,, 30 „
12
30
n 35 n
.. 22
35
» 40 „
.. 40
79
We must remark, in comparing these tables, that the first
group, including the married men from eighteen to twenty
years with women of fifty and upwards, is unknown in
England; and that the second group, that of the married
men of twenty to twenty-five years with women of fifty
years and upwards, is scarcely represented. The com-
parison is not flattering for us. It is important to note,
also, that these figures only refer to first marriages. Tables
of the same kind, showing the marriages between young
^ A. Bertillon, loc, cit.
23
354 THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE
girls and old men, or between aged widows and young
men, would add to our confusion, and bring to our thoughts
the picturesque exclamation which Shakespeare puts into
the mouth of King Lear—" Fie ! Fie ! Fie ! Pah ! Pah !
Give me an ounce of civet, good apothecary, to sweeten
my imagination."^
Marriages with Men of Sixty Years and upwards.
IN FRANCE.
IN ENGLAND.
Age of Girls. SS^.'
Age of Girls.
Number of
Marriages.
15 to 20 years ... 94
15 to 20 years .
2
20 „ 25 „ ... 139
20 „ 25 „
•• 15
25 » 30 » — 176
25 „ 30 M
.. 32
30 „ 35 „ ... 242
30 » 35 »
.. 49
651
III. The Future.
98
What will marriage and the family become in the future ?
For one who is not a prophet by supernatural inspiration,
it is hazardous to make predictions. The future, neverthe-
less, is born from the womb of the past, and, after having
patiently scrutinised the evolution of bygone ages, we may
legitimately risk a few inductions with regard to the ages to
come. Doubtless the primitive forms of marriage and the
family will persist, if not for ever, as Herbert Spencer
believes, at least for a very long time among certain inferior
races, protected and at the same time oppressed by climates
which the civilised man cannot brave with impunity.
These backward prehistoric races will continue to subsist
in unwholesome regions, as witnesses of a distant past,
recalling to more developed races their humble origin. But
with these last the form of marriage and of the family,
which has incessantly been evolving, cannot evidently
remain immutable in the future. The little human world
knows no more repose than the cosmic environment from
whence it has sprung, and which encloses it. Among
^ King Lear, Act iv. Sc. 6.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 355
peoples, as among individuals, vital concurrence and selec-
tion do their work. Now, when it is a matter of institutions
so essentially vital as marriage and the family, the least
amelioration is of the highest importance ; it has an influ-
ence on the number and quality of fresh generations, and
on the flesh and spirit of peoples. All things being equal,
the preponderance, whether pacific or not, will always fall to
the nations which produce the greatest number of the most
robust, most intelligent, and best citizens. These better
endowed nations will often absorb or replace the others,
and always in the long run will be docilely imitated by them.
Ethnography and history show us the true sense of evolution
in the past. Societies have constantly advanced from con-
fusion to distinction. Monogamic marriage has succeeded
to various more confused modes of sexual association. So
also the family is the ultimate residuum of vast communities
of ill-defined relationships. In its turn, the family itself has
become restricted. At first it was still a sort of little clan ;
and then it was reduced to be essentially no more than the
very modest group formed by the father, the mother, and
the children. At the same time the familial patrimony
crumbled, just as that of the clan had been previously
parcelled out \ it became individual. What is reserved for
us in the future ? Will the family be reconstituted by a slow
movement of retrogression, as Herbert Spencer believes?^
Nothing is less probable. ^
Institutions have this in common with rivers, that they
do not easily flow back towards their source. If they some-
times seem to retrograde, it is generally a mere appearance,
resulting from a sort of sociologic rhythm. In truth, the end
and the beginning may assume a superficial analogy, masking
a profound difference. Thus the unconscious atheism of the^
Kaffirs has nothing in common with that of Lucretius, and
nothing can be less analogous than the anarchic equality
of the Fuegians and American individualism. If, as is
probable, the individualist evolution, already so long begun,
continues in the future, the civilised family — that is to say,
the last collective unit of societies — must again be dis-
integrated, and finally subsist no longer except in genealogy
scientifically registered with ever-increasing care ; for it is,
^ Sociology^ vol. ii. p. 418.
356 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
and always will be, important to be able to prejudge how
"the voice of the ancestors" may speak in the individual.
But even from the crumbling of the family will result the
reconstitution of a larger collective unit, having common
interests and resuscitating under another form that solid-
arity without which no society can endure.
But this new collectivity will in no way be copied from
the primitive clan. Whether it be called State, district,
canton, or commune, its government will be at once
despotic and liberal ; it will repress everything that would
be calculated to injure the community, but in everything
else it will endeavour to leave the most complete independ-
ence to individuals. Our actual family circle is most often
very imperfect ; so few families can give, or know how to
give, a healthy, physical, moral, and intellectual education to
the child, that in this domain large encroachments of the
State, whether small or great, are probable, even desirable.
There is, in fact, a great social interest before which the
pretended rights of families must be effaced. In order to
prosper and live, it is necessary that the ethnic or social
unit should incessantly produce a sufficient number of
individuals well endowed in body, heart, and mind. Before
this primordial need all prejudices must yield, all egoistic
interests must bend.
But the family and marriage are closely connected ; the
former cannot be modified so long as the latter remains
unchanged. If the legal ties of the family are stretched,
while social ties are drawn closer, marriage will have the
same fortune. For a long time, more or less silently, a slow
work of disintegration has begun, and we see it accentuated
every day. Leaving aside morals, which are difficult to appre-
ciate, let us simply take the numerical results which statistics
furnish us with in regard to divorce and illegitimate births.
In the five countries compared as follows, the increase of
divorces has been continuous and progressive during thirty
years, and in France the number has doubled.
The number of illegitimate births followed simultaneously
an analogous progression. In France, during the period
1800-1805, it was 4.75 per 100; now, wrote M. Block in
1869, it has gradually risen to 7.25 per loo.i At the same
1 M. Block, Europe politique et sociale, p. 204.
AND OF THE FAMILY. 357
time, and as a consequence of this demographic movement,
the proportion of free unions has considerably increased.
Increase of Divorces.^
The frequency of divorces in 1851-55 being lOO, what has it become
during the following years ?
France.
Separations,
Saxony,
Divorces.
Belgium.
Divorces.
Holland.
Divorces.
Sweden.
Divorces
1851-55
. 100 .
100
100
100
ICO
1856-60
1861-65
128 .
150 .
83
75
. 140
. 160
100
112
98
109
1866-70
1871-75
1876-80
. 190 .
163 .
225 .
72
80
105
190
. 280
. 420
151
113
132
161
A. Bertillon calculated this proportion for Paris at about a
tenth. But these results are simply the logical continuation
of the evolution of marriage. It is in the sense of an ever-
increasing individual liberty, especially for woman, that this
evolution is being effected. Between men and women the
conjugal relations have at first been nearly everywhere from
masters to slaves ; then marital despotism became slowly
attenuated, and at Rome, for example, where the gradual
metamorphosis may be traced during a long historic period,
the power of the paterfamilias^ which at first had no limit,
at length became curbed ; the personality of the woman
was more and more accentuated, and the rigid marriage of
the first centuries of the Republic was replaced under the
Empire by a sort of free union. Doubtless this movement
necessarily retrograded under the influence of Christianity ;
but, as always happens in the logic of things, it has, never-
theless, resumed its course ; it will become more and more
evident, and will surely pass the point at which it stopped
in imperial Rome.
Monogamic marriage will continue to subsist ; it is the
last-comer, and much the most worthy, and besides, the
balance of the sexes makes it almost a necessity; but it
will have more and more equality in it, and less and less of
legal restraint. On this point I am glad to find myself in^
^ J. Bertillon, Etude demographique dti divorce, p. 61.
358 THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
accord with the most celebrated of modern sociologists,
Herbert Spencer, who is not very bold, however, on these
delicate points. "In primitive phases," he says, "while
permanent monogamy was developing, union in the name
of the law — that is, originally, the act of purchase — was
accounted the essential part of the marriage, and union in
the name of affection was not essential. In the present day
union in the name of the law is considered the most
important, and union by affection as less important. A
time will come when union by affection will be considered
the most important, and union in the name of the law the
least important, and men will hold in reprobation those
conjugal unions in which union by affection is dissolved." ^
Montaigne once wrote : " We have thought to make our
marriage tie stronger by taking away all means of dissolving
it ; but the more we have tightened the constraint, so much
the more have we relaxed and detracted from the bond of
will and affection. "^
It is therefore probable that a future more or less distant
will inaugurate the regime of monogamic unions, freely con-
tracted, and, at need, freely dissolved by simple mutual
consent, as is already the case with divorces in various
European countries — at Geneva, in Belgium, in Roumania,
etc., and with separation in Italy. In these divorces of the
future, the community will only intervene in order to safe-
guard that which is of vital interest to it — the fate and the
education of the children. But this evolution in the
manner of understanding and practising marriage will
operate slowly, for it supposes an entire corresponding
revolution in public opinion; moreover, it requires as a
corollary, profound modifications in the social organism.
The r'egime of liberty in marriage and the disintegration of
our actual familial type are only possible on condition
that the State or the district, in a great number of cases,
is ready to assume the role of guardian and educator of
children ; but, before it can take on itself these important
functions, it must have considerable resources at its disposal
which to-day are wanting. In our present regime^ the
family, however defective it may be, still constitutes the
^ Herbert Spencer, Sociology^ vol. ii. p. 410.
^ Montaigne, Essays y vol. ii. p. I5»
AND OF THE FAMILY, 3^9
safest, and almost the only shelter for the child, and we
cannot think of destroying this shelter before we have
constructed a larger and better one.
Transformations so radical as these cannot evidently be
wrought instantaneously, by a mere change of view, after
the fashion of political revolutions. Nothing is more
chimerical than to fear or to hope for the sudden destruc-
tion of our actual forms of marriage, of the family, and of
property ; but there is no doubt that all this is tottering.
The alarm and the lamentations of so many moralists, both
lay and religious, are not therefore without some founda-
tion. Societies have always evolved, but the rapidity of
this evolution is accelerating ; it is, in some sort, propor-
tionate to the square of the time elapsed. I fear that in the
eyes of our descendants we shall appear slaves of routine,
as our ancestors are in ours.
For those who have not firmly rallied to the side of the
great law of progress, the future is full of terror. It
has always been thus; the apostles of progress have
always had to overcome the resistance of the sectaries
of the past. From time immemorial, certain Dyak tribes
were accustomed to fell trees by chopping at the trunk with
a hatchet, perpendicularly to the fibres. One day some
revolutionaries proposed making V-shaped cuttings, in the
European method. The Dyak conservative party, inspired
by the regard due to custom, were wroth at this, and
punished the innovators by a fine. ^ Nevertheless, I do not
doubt that the new method has triumphed in practice ; it
was found advantageous. But this incident is, in miniature,
the history of all transformations, small or great.
It is very certain that in societies where marriage by groups
half polyandric and half polygamic had been instituted for
centuries, the bold agitators who attempted to substitute
individual union were considered at first as dangerous
revolutionaries, and those who dismembered into families
the comnmnal clan only succeeded at the cost of great
difficulty and peril. Thus in the Oresieia of ^schylus, of
which I have spoken in the last chapter, the chorus of the
Eumenides gives voice to the protestations of public opinion
against the establishment of the paternal family in Greece.
^ Journal Ind. Archip., vol, ii. p. 54.
36o THE E VOL UTION OF MARRIA GE.
The prospects which alarm the conservative spirits of to-day
are, in truth, but the last consequence of that ancient
evolution. Statisticians who are not evolutionists prove,
without understanding it, that the indissolubility of marriage
becomes more and more intolerable for individuals.^ There
is, as it were, a tide of discord continually rising which
renders conjugal stability more and more precarious. This
grievous state of things distresses, on the other hand, the
moralists, for neither do they see the reason of it. The
surprise of the former is not more justified than the
lamentation of the latter. It is nothing more than the
future, which, with its habitual effrontery, persists in
rising out of the past. The faint-hearted cry to us that
everything is coming to an end. It is not so; on the
contrary, everything is about to be renewed. From the
most distant stone age, the history of humanity has only
been a long series of regenerations. Far from mourning
when the world seems to be entering a period of fresh life,
let us rather rejoice and say again with Lucretius —
"Cedit enim rerum novitate extrusa vetustas
Semper et ex aliis aliud reparare necesse est.''
* J. Bertillon, loc. at., p. 6i.
INDEX.
Abyssinia, The concubiuate in, 162
. . Monogamy in, 179
. . Dissolute morals of women in, 181
. . Facilitj^ of divorce in, 181
. , Cicisbei in, 181
. . Divorce in, 232
. . Levirate bj emasculation in, 265
. . Adoption m, 316
Abyssinian women. Licentious manners
of, 51
Adoption among the Redskins, 291
. . in Polynesia, 296
. . in Abyssinia, 316
Adultery in the Middle Ages, 204,
226
. . Of, in general, 208
. . considered as a theft, 208
. . in Melanesia, 209
. . in New Caledonia, 209
. . in negro Africa, 210
. . among the Hottentots, 210
. . at the Gaboon, 210
.. in Bornou, 211
. . at Kaarta, 211
. . among the Soulimas, 211
. , at Youida, 211
. . in Uganda, 211
. . in Senegal, 212
. . in Abyssinia, 212
. . in Polynesia, 212
. . in New Zealand, 212
.. at Tahiti, 212
. . at Noukahiva, 213
.. in the American savage, 213
. . among the Esquimaux, 213
. . among the Redskins, 213
. . among the Omahas. 214
..in South America, 2:4
. . in barbarous America, 214
. . in ancient Mexico, 215
. . in Peru, 215
. . in Guatemala, 215
. . among the Mongols, 216
. . in Thibet, 216
. . in China, 216
. . in Japan, 217
Adultery in Malaya, 217
. . in Egypt, 218
. . among the Hebrews, 218
. . among the Arabs, 218
. . among the Kabyles, 219
. . in Persia and India, 220
. . in the Greco-Roman world, 222
. . at Sparta, 222
. . at Athens, 223
. . at Rome, 222-225
.. among the Tcherkesses of the
, Caucasus, 225
. . in barbarous Europe, 225
. . among the ancient Saxons, 226
. . among the Germans, 226
. , in feudal France, 226
. . The evolution of, 227
. . and Christianity, 245
Africa, The concubinate in middle, 161
. . Adultery in negro, 210
. . The family in, 305
Agathyrses, Promiscuity of the, 40
Akilisenus, Sacred prostitution in, 46
Amazons, The so-called age of, 105
Amhlyornis inornata, Love architecture
of, 14
America, Prostitution in central, 156
. . Concubinate in, 163
. . Familial clan in, 267
. . The family in, 274
Amorous combats of sticklebacks, 10
Analis erystellatus. Amorous combats
of, 11
Andamanites, Promiscuity of, 43
. . Prostitution of girls amongst the,
58
Animals, Love among, 10
, . Amorous preferences of, 17
Grossness of the male among, 18
Durable pairing among, 18
Marriage and the family among, 20
Matriarchate among, 21
Patriarchate among, 21
Divers types of sexual association
among, 21
Marriage among, 21
23*
362
INDEX,
Animals, Inferior, have not maternal
love, 21
.. Various forms of sexual associa-
tion among, 26
. . The family among, 29
.. Shortness of love for the young
among, 31
. . Variation of the matrimonial type
among, 35
. . Divers types of marriage among, 35
Ansarians, Religious promiscuity of, 43
Anses, Promiscuity of, 41
Anthropophagy, Familial, of the Red-
skins, 26
Ants, Originality of Republics of, 23
. . Workers, ancestral forms, 23
Arabs, Fraternal polyandry of the
ancient, 39
. . Loan of wife among the, 52
. . Temporary marriages among, 68
. . Causes of polyandry of the, 82
. . Polyandry of ancient, 82
,. Infanticide of daughters among
the ancient, 83
, . Cais, legend of infanticide, 83
. . Community of wives among the, 81
. . Fraternal polyandry of the, 84
. . Term-marriage among the, 85
.. Patriarchal marriage among the.
86
. . Marriage by capture among the,
99
. . Polygamy of the, 139
. . Concubinate among the, 161
. . Adultery among the, 218
. . Repudiation among the, 237, 239
. . Widowhood among the, 259
Areois in Polynesia, 61
Aryas, Polygamy among Vedic, 135, 150
. . Infanticide among, 150
Aryomania, 134
Association, Singular forms of sexual.
56
Assyria, Concubinate in, 165
Athens, Dotal marriage in, 120
. . Prostitution at, 156
.. Adultery at, 222
. . Widowhood at, 261
Attica," Density of population in, 198
Australia, Licentious morals of young
girls in, 50
. . Rape in, 90
. . Capture of women in, 90
, . Loan of wife in, 123
. . Familial clan in, 261, 270
. . Communal marriage in, 270, 272
. . Fraternity of clan in, 271
, . Totem amongst the Kamilaroi of,
273
. . Communal marriage transitory in,
273
. . Maternal family in, 274
Australians, Law of amorous battle
among the, 58
Avesta, Marriage in the, 191
Avunculate, The, among the Nairs, 311
Babylon, Hetairism at, 45
. . Religious prostitution at, 45
Battas, Monogamic tendencies of, 134
Battle, Law of, among vertebrates, 16
. . Law of, 11
. . Amorous, among the Analii cristel-
latus, 11
. . of blue herons, 12
. . of Canadian geese, 12
. . of gallinacese, 12
. . of grouse, 12
. . of Tetras urogalltis, 12
. . of Tetras umbellus, 13
Bees, Republic of, 23
. . Workers, ancestral forms, 23
. . Matriarchate of, 24
. . Death of Queen of, 24
Berbers, The family amongst, 327
. . Meaning of the word, 408
. . The maternal family amongst, 328
Birds, Love amongst, 11
. . Esthetic tournaments of, 13
. . Love dances of, 13
. . Love parades of, 13
, . Intentional love parades of, 13
. . Cours d'amour of, 13
. . Decorated nests of humming, 14
. . Preliminaries abridged with old, 15
. . Females of certain, stronger than
males, 15
. . Males more ardent, 15
. . Amorous attempts of males of, 15
. . more delicate in love than other
vertebrates, 15
. . Amorous selection among the
females of, 17
. , Monogamy among, 27
. . Fickle monogamy of certain, 28
. . Amorous fancies of certain, 28
. . The family amongst, 29
. . Absence of paternal love amongst
certain males of, 29
. . Polygamous, often devoid of pater-
nal love, 30
. . PateiTial love developed among
many, 30
,. Shortness of love for the young
amongst, 31
Births, Sexual relation of, and mar-
riage, 73
. . Sexual relation of, 74
Bitches, Amorous preferences of, 18
Blackcock, Amorous battles of, 12
Bochimans, Loan of woman among the,
58
Californian Indians, Promiscuity of, 43
Celibacy, Disadvantages of , according to
A. Bertillon, 349
Celibates comprise the waste of the
population, 350
Celts, Warlike rape among the, 93
Ceylon, Polyandry in, 78
Child marriages in Rome, 198
('hina. Primitive promiscuity in, 42
. . Marriage by capture in, 116
INDEX.
363
China, Prostitution in, 156
. . Concubinate in, 1G4
. . Monogamy in, 183
. . Marriage by purchase in, 183
. . Submission of woman in, 185
. . Adultery in, 216
. . Repudiation in, 245
. . Widowhood in, 255
. . Widowhood of brides in, 255
. . The family in, 322
. . Family nomenclature in, 323
.. Trace of fraternal marriage in,
323
. . Traces of familial clan in, 324
. . The paternal family in, 324
. . Fictitious kinship in, 324
Chlamydera maculata. Love bowers
of, 14
Chorda dorsalis, 6
Chromis paterfamilias, Paternal love
of, 24
Civilisation depraves certain birds, 25
Clan, Familial, in America, 267
. . Familial, in Australia, 267, 270
. . Fraternity of, in Australia, 271
. . Exogamy of, among the Redskins,
275
. . Duties of, among the Redskins, 275
. . Common house of the, among the
Redskins, 275
. . The, of the Pueblos, 277
. . Communism in the Redskin, 278
. . The familial, and its evolution, 286
. . among the Redskins, 285
. . and the family, 301
.. "i^ocial cellule," 301
. . Familial, and the family, 303
. . Traces of the familial, in China, 323
.. Traces of communal, among the
Hebrews, 326
. . Traces of ancient, among the
Kabyles, 828
. . Not found in Persia, 330
. . Vestiges of ancient, in India, 334
. . Primitive, at Rome, 334
. . Primitive, in Greece, 334
. . Primitive, in Ireland, 338
Clergy, The concubinate among ancient
Catholic, 168
Clergymen, Sexual relation of births
among, 75
Coemptio at Rome, 201
Communism in the Redskin clan, 278
. . From, to individualism, 347
Concubinage in general, 154
Concubinage and prostitution, 154
. . Various forms of, 160
. . in Europe, 168
. . Absence of, in Kabylie, 169
. . Evolution of, 169
. . and morality, 170
Concubinate, 160
. . among the Hebrews, 161
. . among the Arabs, 161
. . in primitive Greece, 161
. . in modern Peru, 162
Concubinate in Livonia, 162
. . in middle Africa, 162
. . in Abyssinia, 102
. . in Central America, 163
. . in ancient Mexico, 163
. . in Mongolia, 164
. . in China, 164
. . in ancient Assyria, 165
. . at Mecca, 165
. . in ancient Persia, 166
. . in Greece, 166
. . at Rome, 166
. . among the Catholic clergy, 108
Concubine bought by labour of wife
among Zulus, 125
. . offered by wife at Fiji, 124
Confarreatio at Rome, 201
Conjugation, 4
. . among algae, 4
Conservation of species, 20
Coquetry among insects, 10
. . The law of, 10
. . among butterflies, 10
. . among fishes, 10
. . among vertebrates, 11
Couvade, 316
. in New Mexico, 316
. . among the Redskins, 317
. . among the Abipones, 317
. . among the Galibis, 317
. . in California, 318
. . in South America, 318
. . among the Tartars, 318
. . in Bengal, 318
. . among the Celts, 818
. . among the Thracians, 318
. . among the Scythians, 318
. . in Corsica, 318
. . in the Tibarenede, 318
. . in Europe of to-day, 318
. . Reason of the, 319
Crete, Sodomy in, 63
Culage, Droit de, 48
Cynicism, Erotic, in India, 40
. . of the Massagetes, 40
Debauchery, Savage, and that of civilised
peoples, 72
Decency, Rules of, among Redskins, 290
Defloration, Religious, in Cambodia, 47
. . Maternal, with the Saccalaves, 67
. . in India, 67
Divorce, Facility of, in Abyssinia, 181
. . in savage countries, 228
. . among the Bou^os, 229
. . among the Soulimas, 229
. . among the Fantees, 230
. . in Polynesia, 230
. . in the Caroline Islands, 230
. . among the Moxos, 231
. . in Abyssinia, 232
. . among the Arabs, 238
. . in ancient Peru, 240
, . in lamaic Thibet, 240
. . among the Mongols, 241
. . among the Hebrews, 242
3^4
INDEX,
Divorce in Greece, 243
. . at Rome, 244
. . and repudiation, 228
. . among barbarous peoples, 232
. . condemned by Christianity, 245
. . The evolution of, 247
. . and Christianity, 247
. . among the Germans, 246
. . among the ancient Irish, 246
. . Modern, 247
. . Increase in number of, in Europe,
357
Dogs, Sexual coarseness of, 18
Dower and its results in France, 352
Duck, Love at fli-st sight in a wild, 28
Egypt, Polygamy in, 149
. . Royal incest in, 66
. . Monogamy in ancient, 175
. . Pretended gynecocracy in ancient,
176, 177
. . Adultery in, 218
. . The maternal family in, 308
. . The paternal family in, 308
Emasculation in Abyssinia, 265
Endogamy in New Zealand, 294
. . in Bengal, 315
. . Incestuous, in Persia, 330
Esquimaux, Licentious morals of, 58
. . Letting of wives among the, 58
. . Sodomy among the, 58
. . Marriage by capture among the, 94
Etruscans, The maternal family among
the, 336
Europe, Increase of illegitimate births
in, 169
Exogamy in Bengal, 315
. . of the clan among the Redskins, 276
. . at Samoa, 294
Family, R6le of the male in the animal,
21
. . Maternal, amongst the animals, 21
. . amongst the mammifers, 25
. . amongst the animals, 29
. . Maternal, amongst the Nairs, 81
. . Maternal, at Rome, 202
.. 233
. . in Melanesia, 335, 268
.. Origin of the, 267
. . Maternal, in Australia, 274
. . in America, 274
.. Maternal, among the Redskins,
278
. . Origin and evolution of the, 284
.. Maternal, and the matriarchate,
282
. . among the Omahas, 287
. . among the Redskins, 287
. . among the Iroquois Senecas, 287
. . Nomenclature of, among the Red-
skins, 288
. . Evolution of the, among the Red-
skins, 292
.. Genesis of the paternal family
among the, 292
Family, The paternal, among the Incas,
293
. . Maternal, in Peru, 293
. . Paternal, in Peru, 293
. . Paternal, in Mexico, 293
. . in Polynesia, 294
.. Nomenclature of the, at Hawaii,
295
. . Genesis of the maternal, at Hawaii,
295
. . Genesis of the paternal, in Poly-
nesia, 295
. . among the Mongols, 296
. . among the Tamils, 296
. . and the clan, 301
. . The maternal, 303
. . and the familial clan, 303
. . Genesis of the uterine, 301
. . in Africa, 305
. . The maternal, in Kaffirland, 305
. . among the Fantees, 305
. . in eastern Africa, 306
. . among the Nubians, 307
. . in Egypt, 307
. . The paternal, in Dahomey, 305
. . The maternal, in Africa, 305
. . The maternal, in Madagascar,
307
, . The paternal, in Egypt, 308
. . in Malaya, 309
. . among the Nairs, 311
. . among the aborigines of Bengal,
313
. . The maternal, in Bengal, 313
. . The paternal, in Bengal, 314
. . The primitive, 320
. . in civilised countries, 322
.. in China, 322
. . in Japan, 323
. . The paternal, in China, 323
. . among the Semites, 325
. . Traces of the maternal, among the
Hebrews, 326
. . The maternal, in Phoenicia, 327
. . among the Berbers, 327
. . The maternal, among the Berbers,
327
. . in Persia, 330
, . in India, 332
. . The patriarchal, in Vedic India, 332
. . The maternal, in India, 333
. . The maternal, among the Tamils,
334
. , The Greco-Roman, 334
, . The maternal, in Greece, 335
. . The maternal, in Etruria, 336
. , Genesis of the paternal, in Greece,
336
. . Evolution of the, at Rome, 347
. . in barbarous Europe, 338
. . The paternal, in barbarous Europe,
339
. . The maternal, in Germany, 339
. . in the past, present, and future,
341
. . in the past, 341
INDEX.
365
Family, Stages of the, according to L.
Morgan, 347
. . Actual state of tlie, 349
Father, The pote^tas of, at Rome, 199
Fecundation, 4
. . among superior animals, 7
Feudality, Polyandric, in Malabar, 311
Filiation, Maternal, among the Toua-
regs, 179
Fishes, Paternal love in certain, 24
. . Coquetry in, 10
France, Prostitution in mediaeval, 160
. . Adultery in feudal, 226
. . Repudiation in feudal, 246
. . Late marriages in, 352
. . Malthusianism in, 352
.. Dowry and its results on mar-
riage in, 352
. . Disproportionate marriages in, 323
Gallinaceae, Amorous combats of, 12
. . Vertigo of love in, 27
Gasterosteus leiurus. Paternal love of, 25
Gauls, Polygamy of, 135
Geese of Canada, Amorous battles of, 12
Generation by budding, 4
. . by division, 4
. . a product of nutrition, 4
. . among animals, 18
. . by ovulation, 5
. . by conjugation, 4
. . the aim of life, 5
. . in the cochineal, 5
. . Evolution of, 5
. . in the paramcecia, 6
. . Essential phenomenon of, 6
Gens in Greece, 835
. . at Rome, 334
Germans, Polygamy of, 135
.. The maternal family among the,
339
.. The paternal family among the,
339
, . Laws of succession among the, 339
. . Marriage by purchase among the,
204
. . Subjection of women among the, 204
. . Adultery among the, 225
. . Repudiation among the, 246
. . Divorce among the, 246
. . Widowhood among the, 262
Girls, Prostitution of, among the Anda-
manites, 58
. , Prostitution of, in Polynesia, 59
. . married by the father in India, 192
. . Marriage of little, in India, 193
.. Gymnastic exercises of naked, in
Sparta, 195
. . Marriage of little^ at Rome, 198
. . Conjugal sale of little, 107
.. married by the grandmother at
Boussa, 112
. . Free conjugal choice of, at Nicar-
agua, 115
. . Consent of the, in Mussulman mar-
riage, 144
Girls, How, inherit in India, 334
Greece, Loan of wife in ancient, 53
, . Sodomy in, 63
. . Marriage by capture in, 100
. , Concubinate in primitive, 161
. . Concubinate in, 166
. . Subjection of women in, 195
. . Hetairse in, 166
. . Subjection of women in, 194
. . Marriage in ancient, 194
. . Dotal marriage in, 196
. . Evolution of marriage in, 197
. . Adultery in, 222
. . Repudiation in, 243
. Divorce in, 243
. . The primitive clan in, 334
. . The maternal family in, 335 •
. . The gens in, 335
. . Genesis of the paternal family in,
336
Greeks, Promiscuity of the ancient, 41
Guaranis, Qualities exacted of the hus-
band among the, 115
Gynecocracy according to Bachofen, 172
. . Pretended, in ancient Egypt, 175
.. Pretended, among the Touaregs,
179
Hawaii, Kinship by classes in, 294
. . Familial nomenclature at, 295
. , Genesis of the maternal family in,
294
Hebrews, Concubinate among the, 161
. . Marriage among the, 189
. . Monogamy among the, 189
. . Virginity among the, 190
. . Levirate among the, 190
. . Adultery among the, 218
. . Divorce among the, 242
. . Repudiation among the, 242
. . Widowhood among the, 259
. . The levirate among the, 263
. . Laws of succession among the, 326
.. Traces of communal clans among
the, 826
Herons, Amorous battles of blue, 12
Hetai'rse in Greece, 166
Hetairism, 45
. . No primitive, 45
. . at Babylon, 45
Hiring out of wives in Polynesia, 60
Humming-birds, Decorated nests of, 14
Husbands, Brutality of, at Gaboon, 125
. . Jealousy of, unknown in Africa, 128
. . Duties of Mussulman, 145
.. Rights of punishment of Kabyle,
147
. . Manus of, at Rome, 200
Icterus pecoris, Promiscuity of the, 26
Immodesty, Primitive, 56
Immorality, Primitive sexual, 56
Incas, Polygamy of the, 148
Incest permitted among various Ameri-
can peoples, 65
. . permitted among the Karens, 66
S66
INDEX.
Incest among the Parthiana, 06
. . in ancient Persia, 66
. . among the Scythians, 66
. . Royal, in Egypt, 66
. . of the Incas, 66
. . in ancient Ireland, 66
. . Royal, in Siam, 66
. . in Bhootan, 133
. . among the Malagasies, 809
. . Horror of, in Kabylie, 309
India, Primitive promiscuity in, 42
. . Religious prostitution in, 46
. . Marriage by capture in, 93
. . Polygamy in Brahmanic, 151
. . Prostitution in, 159
.. Polygamy among the aborigines
of, 135
. . Monogamic tendencies in the abori-
gines of, 133
. . Repudiation in, 242
. . Widowhood in, 256
. . Mitigated monogamy in, 191
. . Inferiority of women in, 191
. . Daughter married by the father in,
192
. . Marriage by purchase in, 192
. . Prohibitions to marriage in, 192
. . Subjection of woman in, 192
. . Marriage of little girls in, 193
.. Adultery in, 220
. . The levirate in, 263
. . The family in, 332
.. The patriarchal family in Vedic,
832
. . The patriarchate in, 332
. . Primogeniture in, 333
. . Paternity by suggestion in, 333
. . How daughters inherit in, 333
. . The maternal family in, 334
. . Vestiges of ancient clans in, 334
Individualism has succeeded to com-
munism, 347
Infanticide committed by male mam-
mifers, 34
. . of girls among the ancient Arabs,
83
. . Legend of Cais, 83
. . The paternal right of, in Polynesia,
113
. . among the Vedic Aryans, 150
Innovators, Fate of, 359
Insects, Maternal prescience of, 22
. . Coquetry amongst, 10
Ireland, The primitive clan in, 338
Irish, Ptomiscuity of the ancient, 41
. . Incest among the ancient, 66
.. Temporary marriages among the,
246
. . Divorce among the ancient, 246
Japan, Prostitution of young girls in, 51
. . Prostitution in, 157
. . Marriage in, 185
. . Adultery in, 217
. . The maternal family in, 322
. . Familial nomenclature in, 324
Jews of Morocco, Temporary marriages
among the, 67
Jus primce noctis, 45
. . Religious, in Malabar, 47
. . among the Nasamons, 47
. . in the Balearic Isles, 47
. . Seignorial, 47
. . in Cochin China, 48
. . of parents and friends, 50
Kabyles, Adultery amongst the, 219
Repudiation amongst the, 234
Right of insurrection of the wife,
236
Widowhood among the, 260
Horror of incest among the, 309
Traces of the clan among the, 328
Mutual assistance amongst the,
329
Disinheritance of the wife, 329
Laws of succession among the,
329
Kabylie, Marriags by purchase in, 145
. . Tariff of the woman in, 146
. . Essential condition of marriage in,
146
. . Loan of jewels to the wife in, 146
. . Subiection of the wife in, 145
. . Rights of correction of the husband
in, 147
. . The wife a thing possessed in, 147
. . Fate of woman m, 147
. . Absence of concubinage in, 169
Kaffirs, Right of the chief among the, 47
Kamilaroi, Regulated promiscuity of
the, 44
. . Marriage among the, 271
Kinship, Origin of ideas of, 283
. . by classes in the Hawaii Isles, 294
. . The evolution of, by classes, 297,
801
. . Fictitious, in China, 325
Koran, The, and the inferiority of
women, 140
.. Restrictions on polygamy in the,
140
. . Celestial polygamy in the, 142
. . Purchase of the wife in the, 141
Kurnai, Marriage among the, of Austra-
lia, 273
Lark, Loves of, 12
Larva, The, is a survival, 23
Larvae, Fertile, 23
. . Maternal love in sterile, 23
Law of amorous battle among the Aus-
tralian women, 57
Levirate, The, among the Hebrews,
191
. . and widowhood, 191
. . The, 263
. , in Malaya, 263
. . in New Caledonia^ 263
. . among the Redskins, 263
, . among the Mongols, 263
. . among the Afghans, 263
INDEX.
3«7
Levirate in India, 263
. . among the Hebrews, 263
. . in Abyssinia, 265
Loan of the wife among savages, 52
. . among the Redskins, 62
. , amon§ the Arabs, 53
. . in antique Greece, 53
. . in antique Rome, 53
.. 53
. . in Australia, 57
. . among the Bushmen, 58
Love, The snare of, 3
. . according to Haeckel, 6
. . and rut, 7, 8
. . according to Schopenhauer, 9
. . and pairing, 9
. . according to Imitation of Christ, 10
. . in insects, 10
. . in birds, 11
. . in the lark, 12
. . dances of birds, 13
. . parades of Tetras phasaniellus, 13
. . parades of birds, 13
. . Intentional, parades of birds, 13
.. courts of birds, 14
.. bowers of Chlamydera maadata,
U
. . house of the Amhlyomis inornata,
14
. . tourneys of nightingales, 14
. . songs of weaver birds, 15
. . The instinct of, is not blind, 17
. . Choice in, among animals, 17
. . Selection in, among females, 17
. . Selection in, among female birds,
17
. . Exclusive, of bitches, 18
. . Essential identity of, with animals
and man, 19
.. Maternal, wanting in lower ani-
mals, 21
. . Maternal, in spiders, 22
. . Paternal, wanting in spiders, 22
. . Biological reason of maternal, 22
. . Maternal, in the sterile larvpe, 23
. . Paternal, in certain fishes, 24
. . Paternal, of Chinese Maeroptts, 24
.. Paternal, of Chromis paterfa-
milias, 24
.. Paternal, of the Gasterosteus
leiurus, 25
. . Paternal, of toads, 25
. . Paternal, in the Pipa, 25
. . Maternal, in reptiles, 25
. . Vertigo of, in gallinacefe, 26
. . at first sight in a wild duck, 28
.. Passion of, analogous in animal
and man, 29
.. Paternal, absent in certain male
birds, 29
.. Paternal, wanting in polygamous
birds, 31
. . Paternal, developed in many birds,
31
. . Paternal and maternal, is brief in
duration with birds, 31
Love, Coi^ugal, in female chimpanzees.
Maeropua, Chinese, paternal love of, 24
Madagascar, The maternal family in,
307
. . Incest in, 309
Mahomet, Conjugal freedom of, 141
. . and the debitum conjugate, 142
Malagasies, Civil marriage among the,
129
Malaya, Adultery in, 217
. . The levirate in, 263
. . The family in, 309
. . Marriage by purchase in, 310
Malays of Sumatra, Three modes of
marriage with the, 119
Male, Part of the, in the animal family,
21
Malthusianism, Natural, 20
. . in France, 352
Mammals, Marriage among, 25
. . Marriage and the family among, 25
. . Promiscuity in the, 31
. . No polyandry in the, 31
. . Polygamous societies of, 32
.. Conjugal devotion of females of,
32
. . Male infanticides amongst, 34
Man, The taxonomic place of, 2
. . Grandeur and inferiority of, 2
. . Real place of, 2
. . Origin of, 71
Manus, The, of husband at Rome, 200
Marquette, Right of, 48
Marriage, Biological origin of, 1
. . Object of, 2
. . among animals, 20
. . among mammals, 25
. . Various types of, among animals, 35
. . Primitive evolution of, 54
. . Strange forms of, 64
,. a simple pairing with many
savages, 64
. . Experimental, 67
. . Experimental, in Canada, 67
, . Experimental, among the Otomies,
67
. . Experimental, among the Sonthals,
67
. . Experimental, among the Tartars,
67
. . Experimental, at Ceylon, 67
. , Temporary, among the Jews of
Morocco, 67
. . Temporary, among the Tapyres, 68
. . Free, at Noukahiva, 68
. . Free, among the Hottentots, 68
. . Free, in Abyssinia, 68
. . Partial, of the Hassinyehs, 68
. . Temporary, in Persia, 68
. . Temporary, among the Arabs, 69
. . the right of the strongest among
many savage peoples, 69
. . and the sexual proportion of births,
73
368
INDEX.
Marriage, Initiation into, by the Nairs,
80
. . Term, moVa, with the Arabs, 85
. . Patriarchal, with the Arabs, 85
. . by capture, 89
. . by capture in India, 93
. . by capture, 93
. . by capture among the Esquimaux,
95
. . by capture among the Redskins, 95
. . among the Kamschatdales, 95
. . among the Kalmucks, 96
. . among the Tannganses, 96
. . among the Turcomans, 97
. . among the aborigines of Bengal, 97
.. in New Zealand, 98
. . in Arabia, 99
. . in Java, 100
. . among the Beotians, 100
. . at Sparta, 100
. . at Rome, 100
. . in Circassia, 101
., in Wales, 101
. . among the Slavs, 101
. . by capture. Signification of, 102
. . by purchase at Fiji, 103
. . by purchase of servitude, 106
.. Premature, by girls in New Cale-
donia, 107
. . among the Hottentots, 107
. . in Ashantee, 107
. . in Polynesia, 107
. . in South America, 107
., in India, 108
. . in ancient Italy, 108
. . Premature, of little boys among the
Red dies, 108
. . in Russia, 108
.. of deceased children among the
Tartars, 108
. . by servitude, 109
. . among the Redskins, 109
. . in Central America, 109
. . among the aborigines of Bengal, 110
. . among the Hebrews, 110
. . by purchase, 110
. . among the Hottentots, 111
. . among the KaflSrs, 111
. . in Central Africa, 111
. . at Sackatoo, 112
. . at Kouranko, 112
. . in Polynesia, 113
. , among the Redskins, 113
. . in California, 114
. . in New Mexico, 114
. . in Central America, 115
, . among the Guaranis, 115
.. among the Mongols, 115
.. among the Turcomans, 116
.. in China, 116
.. among the aborigines of India, 117
. . among the Arabs, 118
.. among the Afghans, 118
.. in Brahmanic India, 119
. . amoQg the Scandinavians, 119
. . among the Germans, 119
Marriage in primitive Greece, 120
. . at Rome, 120
. . by capture in China, 116
. . by usu% at Rome, 120
. . Dotal, at Athens, 120
. . Dotal, at Rome, 120
. . by coemption at Rome, 120
. . by confarreation at Rome, 120
. . State, among the Bongos, 129
. . by purchase, Signification of, 120
. . Civil, with the Malagasies, 129
. . Mussulman and laic, 143
. . by purchase with the Mussulmans,
143
. . Mussulman, is a contract of sale,
143
. . Virginity in the Mussulman, 143
.. Consent of girl in Mussulman, 144
.. Debitum conjugate in Mussulman,
144
. . Marital rights in Mussulman, 145
. . by purchase in Kabylie, 145
. , Essential condition of Kabyle, 146
. . Free, at Paris, 169
. . The form of, and civilisation, 173
.. Civil, in Thibet, 182
. . by purchase in China, 183
. . in Japan, 185
. . Hebrew, 184
. . in ancient India and Persia, 191
.. in the Avesta, 191
. . by purchase in India, 191
. . Prohibitions of, in India, 192
. . in ancient Greece, 194
. . obligatory at Sparta, 195
. . Dotal, in Greece, 196
. . in ancient Rome, 198
. . Evolution of, in Greece, 198
. . by confarreatio at Rome, 201
. . by coemptio at Rome, 201
. . by ibsus at Rome, 201
. . Dotal, at Rome, 200
, . The evolution of, at Rome, 201
. . Barbarous and Christian, 204
, . by purchase with the Germans, 204
. . Christian, 205
. . Free, at Hayti, 233
.. Temporary, among the Irish, 246
. . Communal, in Australia, 270
.. Communal, transitory in Austra-
lia, 273
. . among the Redskins, 275
. . Ijjcestuous, with the Redskins, 293
. , Three sorts of, at Sumatra, 309
. . by purchase in Malaya, 309
. . by purchase in Bengal, 315
. . Traces of fraternal, in China, 323
. . Terra, in Persia, 331
. . in the past, present, and future, 341
. . Influence of money on the frequency
of, 351
. . The age of election of, 352
. . Late, m France, 352
. . Disproportionate in France, 353
, . The future of, 354
. . by affection in the future, 358
INDEX.
369
Matriarchate in animals, 24
. . in bees, 24
. . and the maternal family, 202
. . Pecuniar'y, of the Touareg women,
328
Mecca, The concubinate in, 165
Melanesia, Adultery in, 209
. . The family in, 268
Menstruation and ovulation, 8
Mexico, Polygamy of the great in, 148
. . Monogamy of the people in, 149
. . The concubinate in ancient, 163
. . Monogamy In, 174
. . The paternal family in, 293
.. Adultery in, 215
Modesty, Genesis of, 56
Mongols, Polygamy of the, 133
. . The concubinate among the, 164
. . Monogamy among the, 182
. . Adultery among the, 216
. . Repudiation among the, 240
. . Divorce among the, 240
. . The family among the, 296
Monkeys, Polygamy of certain, 33
. . Monogamy in certain, 33
. . Polygamy of anthropomorphous, 33
, . Monogamy of, 33
. . Conjugal love of females amongst,
33
Monogamy of golden woodpeckers, 27
, . of the Illinois parrot, 27
. . of rapacious animals, 27
. . of anthropomorphous apes, 33
. . of certain apes, 42
. . in Polynesia, 129
. . dawning among the Battas, 133
.. dawningamong the Redskins, 131
.. dawning among the aborigines of
India, 133
. . Proletarian, obligatory in Peru, 149
. . of the populace in Mexico, 149
, , Primitive, 171
. . of inferior races, 171
. . Causes of, 171
.. Ideal of, 171
. . in Central America, 174
. . Administrative, in Peru, 174
. . in Mexico, 175
., in ancient Egypt, 175
.. of the Touaregs and Abyssinians,
179
, . among the Mongols, 182
,. in Thibet, 182
, , in China, 185
. . and civilisation. 186
, . Hebraic and Aryan, 189
. . of superior races, 189
. . Hebrew, 189
. . Ideal, and in reality, 189
. . mitigated in India, 191
. . in the future, 357
.. Advantages of, according to A.
Bertillon, 349
Montaijine, Origin of laws of conscience
according to, 349
Morality, Variability of, 73
Morality various amongst birds, 27
Morgan, L., Stages of the family accord-
ing to, 347
Moses and rape in war, 93
Mumho Jumbo, 128
Nairs, Polyandry of, 80
. . Initiation in marriage among the,
80
. . The maternal family among the, 81
. . The avuncular family among the,
311
. . The family among the, 311
. . Rational polyandry of the, 312
Namaquois, Promiscuity of chiefs of
the, 44
Natality, unregulated, among fishes, 24
Nature, the personification of natural
forces, 5
. . Absence of design in, 34
Nefir, The, among the Djebel-Taggal^,
233
Nemesia Eleonora, Rearing of young
with the, 22
Nests, Decorated, of humming-birds, 14
New Caledonia, Sodomy in, 62
. . Adultery in, 209
. . The levirate in, 263
Nightingale, Amorous song of, 14
Noces, pistes, at Rome, 202
Nutrition the basis of generation, 3
Omahas, The family amongst the, 287
Paramcecia, Generation in the,
Parents, The power of, 105
. . Right of propriety of, over children,
106
Paris, Free marriages at, 169
Parrot, Conjugal fidelity of Illinois, 27
Paterfamilias at Rome, 333
Paternity by suggestion in India, 333
Patria Potestas at Rome, 337
Patriarchate among the animals, 21
. . Semitic, 325
. , in India, 332
. . at Rome, 337
Persia, Incest in ancient, 66
. . Polygamy in ancient, 150
. . The concubinate in ancient, 166
. . Adultery in, 220
. . The family in, 330
. . No clans in, 330
. . Incestuous endogamy in, 330
. . Term -marriage in, 331
. . Laws of succession in, 332
Peru, Sodomy in, 62
. . Proletarian monogamy obligatory
in, 149
. . Concubinage in, 162
. . Administrative monogamy in, 174
. . Adultery in, 215
. . Divorce in ancient, 240
.. The paternal family among the
Incas of, 293
Pigeons, Matenial love in, 30
370
INDEX.
Pipa, Paternal love in, 25
Polyandry does not exist in mammals, 31
.. Fraternal, of the ancient Arabs,
39,73
.. and the sexual proportion of
births, 74
. . and infanticide of girls, 76
. . and sale of girls, 76
. . has not been general, 76
. . The ethnography of, 77
. . of the ancient Britons, 77
. . of the Arabs, 77
. . of the Guanches, 77
. . of the New Zealanders, 77
. . of the Marquesas Islanders, 77
. . in America, 77
. . of the aborigines of India, 77
. . of the Hindoos, 77
. . at Ceylon, 78
. . Fraternal, in Thibet, 78
. . among the Todas, 80
. . of the Nairs, 80
. . of Thibet and of Nairs, 81
. . in ancient Arabia, 82
. . Causes of Arab, 84
. . Fraternal, in Arabia, 84
. . in general, 86
. . Matriarchal, 87
. . Patriarchal, 87
. . ^he evolution of, 88
. . and polygamy in Bhootan, 133
. . Feudal, in Malabar, 311
. . Rational, of the Nairs, 312
Polygamy of gallinacese, 26
. . favoured by sociability, 31
. . of mammals, 32
. . of certain monkevs, 33
, . of anthropomorphous apes, 33
. . Primitive, 122
. . in Oceania, Africa, and America,
122
. . Causes restraining, 122
. . Object of, in New Caledonia, 123
. . and concubinage at Fiji, 124
. . tlie measure of wealth on the Zam-
besi, 125
.. Economic motives for, in Africa,
125
.. restrained by the dearness of
women amongst the Bongos, 126
. . Excessive, in Central Africa, 127
. . in Polynesia, 129
.. of the Indians in South America,
180
, . among the Redskins, 131
.. a sign of wealth among the Red-
skins, 131
. . in Asia and in Europe, 132
. . and polyandry in Bhootan, 133
. . of the Vedic Aryans, 136
. . of the Gauls, 135
. . of the Germans, 135
.. Primitive, 136
.. Evolution of, 137
.. of civilised peoples, 138
.. The stage of , 138
Polygamy, Arab, 189
. . Islamism and, 139
, . Restrictions on, in the Koran, 140
. . Celestial, in the Koran, 142
. . in Egypt, in Mexico, and in Peru,
148
. . and the subjection of women, 148
. . in Egypt, 148
. . of the great in Mexico, 148
. . in ancient Persia, 160
. . among the Vedic Aryans, 150
. . in Brahmanic India, 151
. . The evolution of, 162
. . Genesis of the instinct of, 155
. . may favour the growth of popula-
tion, 849
Polynesia, Licentious morals of young
girls in, 50
. . Licentious morals in, 59
. . Prostitution of girls in, 59
. . Leasing of wives in, 60
. . Freedom of women in, 60
. . Shameless language of the women
in, 61
. . The Areois of, 61
. . Sodomy in, 61
. . Paternal right of infanticide in, 113
. . Polygamy in, 129
. . Monogamy in, 129
. . Adultery m, 212
.. Tlie family In, 294
. . Genesis of paternal family in, 295
. . Adoption in, 296
Population, density of, in Attica, 198
. . Increase of, favoured sometimes
by polygamy, 349
Potestas, The, of the father at Rome, 199
Prelibation, Right of, 48
. . The right of, and the right of con-
quest, 48
Prescience, Maternal, of insects, 22
Primogeniture, Right of, 333
Procreative instinct. Origin of, 9
Promiscuity among sociable animals, 26
. . of the Icterus pecoris, 26
. . among the mammals, 81
. . If there has been a stage of, 37
, . is the lowest form of sexual associa-
tion, 38
. . rare amongst vertebrates, 38
. . is exceptional in humanity, 39
. . Case of human, 39
. . in the Troglodyte, 39
. . of the Agathyrses, 40
. . of the Anses, 41
. . of the ancient Irish, 41
. . of primitive Greeks, 42
. . in the Timmiis, 42
. . Primitive, in China, 42
. . Primitive, in India, 42
. . of the Andamanites, 43
. , of the Indians of California, 43
. . of certain aborigines of India, 43
. . of the Zaporog Cossacks, 43
. . Religious, of the Ansarians, 43
.. of the Yazidies, 44
INDEX,
371
Promiscuity of the Namaqiioia chiefs, 44
. . Regulated, of the Kamilaroi, 44
. . No universal stage of, 44
Property, Right of, of parents over
children, 106
Prostitution, Religious, in India, 46
. . Religious, at Babylon, 46
. . Religious, in the Akilisenus, 46
. . of young girls in Japan, 51
. . Dotal, in ancient Rome, 51
. . honoumble in Tasmania, 57
. . of girls among the Andamanites, 58
. . of girls in Polynesia, 59
. . Religious, among the ancient Sem-
ites, 86
. . Evolution of, 155
. . in primitive Athena, 156
. . in Central America, 156
. . in Japan, 157
. . in Brahmanic India, 159
. . in Buddhist India, 159
. . in modem India, 159
. . in France in the Middle Ages, 160
. . and concubinage, 154
Pueblos, Marriages of love in the, 114
. . The clans of the, 277
Rapacious animals, Monogamy of, 27
Rape, 89
. . in Australia, 90
. . among the negroes of Africa, 92
. . The expiation of, in Austi-alia, 91
, . in New Guinea, 91
. . among the Indians of America, 92
. . among the Tartars, 93
. . among the Hebrews, 93
. . in war, and Moses, 93
. . in war among the Celts, 93
Rearing of young among animals, 21
. . with the Nemesia Meonora, 22
Redskins, Familial anthropophagy of
the, 26
. . Sodomy among the, 62
. . Marriage by capture among the, 95
.. Right of protection of relations
over women of, 114
. . Polygamy among the, 131
. . Sister wives among the, 131
. . Polygamy a sign of wealth among
the, 132
.. Conjugal submission of women
among the, 132
. . Monogamic tendencies among the,
130
.. Subjection of women among the,
132
. . Adultery among the, 213
, . Widowhood among the, 252
. . Rules of decency among the, 298
. . The levirate among the, 263
. . The totems of the, 275
. . The clan among the, 275
.. The common house of the clan
among the, 275
. . Duties of the clan among the, 275
.. Exogamy of the clan among the, 276
Redskins, Marriage among the, 276
. . Inheritance among the, 275
.. The maternal family among the,
277
. . Communism in the clan of the, 278
.. The power of the women among
the, 278
.. Subjection of woman among the,
283
. . The clan among the, 285
. , The family among the, 286
. . Familial nomenclature among the,
287
. . Adoption among the, 291
.. Incestuous marriages among the,
. . The evolution of the family among
the, 292
. . Genesis of paternal filiation among
the, 293
Repudiation and divorce, 228
. . in savage countries, 228
. . in New Caledonia, 229
. . among the Hottentots, 229
. . among the Redskins, 231
. . among the Esquimaux, 231
. . at Madagascar, 233
. . among the Djebel-Taggale, 233
. . among the Touaregs, 234
. . among the Kabyles, 234
. . among the Arabs, 237
. . among the Mongols, 240
. . in China, 241
. . in India, 242
, . among the Hebrews, 242
. . in Greece, 243
. . at Rome, 244
. . among the Germans, 246
. . among the Scandinavians, 246
. . among the Tcherkesses, 246
. . in feudal France, 246
Rome, Loan of the wife in ancient, 53
. . Marriage by capture at, 100
. . The wife assimilated to a slave at,
104
. . Marriage by confarreation at, 120
. . Marriage by purchase at, 120
. . Marriage by usus at, 120
. . Marriage by coemption at, 120
. . Dotal marriage at, 120
. . The concubinate at, 166
. . Marriage in ancient, 198
. . Marriages of children at, 198
. . Relative liberty of the wife at, 198
. . The wife considered as a daughter
of her husband at, 198
. . The potestas of the father at, 199
. . The munus of the husband at, 200
. . Dotal marriage at, 200
. . Marriage by usus at, 201
. . Marriage by coemptio at, 201
. . Marriage by confarreatio at, 201
. , Loan of women at, 201
. . The evolution of marriage at, 201
. . The j«« connvi)ii at, 202
. . The maternal family at, 202
372
INDEX.
Rome, The s-purii at, 202
. . Divorce at, 244
. . Repudiation at, 244
. . Widowhood at, 261
. . The gens at, 335
. . The primitive clan at, 335
. . The patriarchate at, 337
. . The right of succession of the gen-
tiles at, 838
.. The evolution of the family at,
338
. . The evolution of marriage at, 357
Rut and love, 7
. . Sociologic importance of, 7
. . The madness of, 8
. . a sort of puberty, 8
. . among toads, 8
. . among mammals, 8
. . The pnysiological reason of, 9
, . and human love, 9
. . Moral position of, 17
Salmon, Battles of amorous, 11
. . Maternal love among, 24
Savages, Loan of the wife among, 52
Schopenhauer and his theory of love, 9
Scythians, Incest among the, 66
Seignor, Right of the, among the Kaffirs,
in New Zealand and New Mexico,
etc., 47
Selection, Sexual, by females, 17
Semites, The family among the, 325
. . The patriarchate of the, 325
Senecas, The family among the Iroquois,
287
Sexes, Proportion of the, 75
. . The proportion of the, and infanti-
cide, 75
Sociability often comes from weakness,
81
. . engenders altruism, 81
. . favourable to polygamy, 31
Sociology, Biological origin of, 3
. . The animal sources of, 10
. . The rhythms of, 355
, . The method of, 842
Sodomy among the Esquimaux, 58
. . in New Caledonia, 62
.. in New Zealand, C2
. . among the Redskins, 62
. . in Peru, 62
. . at Mecca, 63
. . in the East, 63
.. repressed by the Celts and the
Germans, 63
. . in Greece, 63
. . in Crete, 63
Sparta, Gymnastic exercises of naked
girls at, 195
, . Obligatory marriage at, 195
. . Adultery at, 322
Species, Pi-eservation of, 20
Spiders, Maternal love of, 22
Spurii at Rome, 202
Sticklebacks, Amorous battles of, 11
Suttees of widows in India, 257
Suttees, Indian, in the time of Alexander^
257
. , in modern times, 258
Succession, Customs of, among the Red-
skins, 277, 278
. . Laws of, among the Kabyles, 329
. . Laws of, in Persia, 331
.. The right of, of the gentiles at
Rome, 338
. . Laws of, among the Germans, 339
Tamils, The family among the, 296
. . The maternal family among the, 334
Tasmania, Honourable prostitution in,
57
Tatoways, Coupling of the, 16
Tchin-than, Cambodian, 49
Termites, Republics of, 3
Tetras phasaniellus, Amorous parades
of, 13
Tetras nmbellus, Amorous combats of, 13
Tetras urogalhis. Amorous battles of, 12
Thibet, Polyandry in, 78
Civil marriage in, 182
Monogamy in, 182
Adultery in, 216
Divorce in, 240
Widowhood in, 254
Toads, Paternal love of, 25
Todas, Polyandry among the, 80
Totem, The, among the Kamilaroi of
Australia, 273
. . of the Redskins, 275
Touaregs, Paternal right redeemed by
prostitution among the, 118
. . Monogamy among the, 179
. . Maternal filiation among the, 179
.. Independence of woman among
the, 179
. . Pretended gynecocracy of, 181
. . Repudiation among the, 234
. . The pecuniary matriarchate of the
women, 328
Tournaments, ^^sthetic, of birds, 13
Troglodytes, Promiscuity among the, 39
Turkeys, League of female, against the
males, 30
Usiis at Rome, 200
Vertebrates, Coquetry among the, 10
.. Strength greater in males among
the, 15
. . Law of battle among the, 16
. . Promiscuity rare among the, 38
Virginity among the Hebrew;*, 190
Weaver bird, Amorous music of, 15
Widowhood and the levirate, 249
. . in savage countries, 249
. . Societies without, 250
. . among the Hottentots, 250
, . at the Gaboon, 250
. . in equatorial Africa, 250
. . at Madagascar, 251
. . in Central America, 251
INDEX.
373
Widowhood among the Redskins, 252
. . in Bhootan, 254
. . in Thibet, 254
.. in China, 255
. . of brides in China, 266
. . in India, 256
. . in the Koran, 259
. . in the Bible, 259
. . in Afghanistan, 260
. . among the Kabyles, 260
. . among the Arabs, 260
. . at Athens, 261
. . at Rome, 261
. . among the Germans, 262
. . among the Lombards, 262
. . in general, 265
Widows, Right of, at Kouranko, 112
.. Immolation of, 253
. . Suicides of, in China, 255
. . Suttees of, in India, 257
Wives, Loan of, in America, 52
. . Loan of, among the Esquimaux, 52
. . Loan of, 52
. . Loan of, among the Redskins, 52
. . Loan of, among the Arabs, 53
. . Loan of, in antique Greece, 53
, . Loan of, in antique Rome, 53
. . Loan of, in Australia, 57
. . Loan of, among Bushmen, 58
, . Lease of, among the Esquimaux, 68
. . Lease of, in Polynesia, 60
, . Community of, among Arabs, 84
. . Assimilated to slaves at Rome, 104
. . Right of refusal of the, among the
Moors of Senegambia, 112
. . Subjection of, 105
. . Food in reserve in Melanesia, 106
. . Seizure of, in Australia, 123
. . Servility of, in Africa, 136
. . the " oxen " of the husband, among
Kaffirs, 128
., Labour of, among the Guaranis,
130
. . Sister, among the Redskins, 131
.. Conjugal submission of Redskin,
132
. . Subjection of, by Redskins, 132
.. Sisters, in Bhootan, 133
. . Sisters, among the Ostiaks, 133
Wives, Purchase of, in the Koran, 141
. . Rights of the, in Mussulman mar-
riage, 144
. . Subjection of, in Kabylie, 145
. . Loan of jewels to the Kabyle, 146
. . Price of the, tariffed in Kabylie,
146
. . Kabyle, is a thing possessed, 146
. . Fate of the Kabyle, 147
. . Independence of Touareg, 149
. . considered as daughters of husband
at Rome, 199 -
. . Loan of, at Rome, 201
. . Christian subjection of, 205
. . Independence of, among the Saxons
of England, 205
. . Subjection of, among the Germans,
204
.. Kabyle, have "right of insurrec-
tion," 236
. . Power of, among Redskins, 280
.. Subjection of, among Redskins,
282
Women, Freedom of, in Polynesia, 60
.. Shameless language of, in Poly-
nesia, 61
. . Shamelessness of, in Africa, 127
. . Inferiority of, in the Koran, 140
.. Dissolute morals of, in Abyssinia,
181
. . Submission of, in China, 185
. . Emancipated by money, 187
. . Virtuous, of Proverbs, 190
. . Inferiority of, in India, 191
. . Subjection of, in India, 192
. . Subjection of, in primitive Greece,
194
. . Subjection of, in Greece, 195
. . Relative liberty of, in Rome, 198
Yazidies, Promiscuity of, 44
Young girls. Licentious manners of, in
Australia, 50
. . Licentious manners of, in Poly-
nesia, 50
. . Licentious manners of, in savage
countries, 50
Zaporogs, Promiscuity of, 43
THE WALTER SCOTT PKESS, NEWCASTLE-ON-TY'NE.
Crown Svo, Cloth. Price ^s. 6d. per Vol.; Half Mor.^ 6s. 6d.
THE CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE SERIES
Edited by HAVELOCK ELLIS.
Illustrated Volumes, containing between 300 and 400 pages.
Already Published: —
THE EVOLUTION OF SEX. By Prof. Patrick Geddes
and J. Arthur Thomson.
ELECTRICITY IN MODERN LIFE. By G. W. de
TUNZELMANN.
THE ORIGIN OF THE ARYANS. By Dr. Isaac Taylor.
PHYSIOGNOMY AND EXPRESSION. By P. Mantegazza.
EVOLUTION AND DISEASE. By J. Bland Sutton,
F.R.C.S.
THE VILLAGE COMMUNITY. By G. L. Gomme.
THE CRIMINAL. By Havelock Ellis.
SANITY AND INSANITY. By Dr. C. Mercier.
HYPNOTISM. By Dr. Albert Moll (Berlin).
MANUAL TRAINING. By Dr. C. M. Woodward.
THE SCIENCE OF FAIRY TALES. By Edwin Sidney
Hartland.
PRIMITIVE FOLK. By Elie Reclus.
BACTERIA AND THEIR PRODUCTS. Dy Dr. Sims
Woodhead.
THE EVOLUTION OF MARRIAGE. By Letourneau.
other volumes to follow at short intervals, including "The Laws of Life in
Language," "The Development of Electro-Magnetic Theory," "Capital and
Interest," "Matter and Force," "Industrial Development," "The Factors of
Organic Evolution," etc.
The following Writers are preparing Volumes for this Series :—
Prof. E. D. Cope, Prof. G. F. Fitzgerald, Prof. J. Geikie, Prof.
J. Jastrow (Wisconsin), Prof. A. C. Haddon, Prof. C. H. Herford, Prof.
Karl Pearson, Sidney Webb, etc.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
IBSEN'S PROSE DRAMAS,
Edited by WILLIAM ARCHER.
CROWN Svo, CLOTH, PRICE ^s. 6d. PER VOLUME.
"The name and fame of Henrik Ibsen are advancing day by day in England."—
Contemporary Review.
" The art of prose translation does not perhaps enjoy a very high literary status
in England, but we have no hesitation in numbering the present version of Ibsen,
so far as it has gone (Vols. I. and II.), among the very best achievements, in that
kind, of our generation."— A caciwnp.
VOL. L
With Portrait of the Author and Biographical Introduction.
** A DOLL'S HOUSE," "THE LEAGUE OF YOUTH" {never before
translated), and "THE PILLARS OF SOCIETY."
VOL II.
"GHOSTS," "AN ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE," and "THE
WILD DUCK." With an Introductory Note.
VOL. III.
"LADY INGER OF OSTRAT," "THE VIKINGS AT HELGE-
LAND," " THE PRETENDERS." With an Introductory Note
and Portrait of Ibsen.
VOL IV.
" EMPEROR AND GALILEAN." A World-Historic Drama.
Fifth Volume in Preparation.
JUST ISSUED. Crown Svo, Price One Shilling.
" ROSMERSHOLM " : A Drama in Four Acts.
By Henrik Ibsen. Translated by Charles Archer.
JUST ISSUED. PRICE ONE SHILLING.
CROWN Svo, REVISED AND CHEAPER EDITION.
THE NEW SPIRIT.
By HAVELOCK ELLIS.
"It is easy to dislike his book, it is possible to dislike it furiously. . . . Mr.
Ellis has produced a book which will be hotly discussed, no doubt, for it is nothin;;
if not initiative, we might almost say revolutionary ; but it is not a book to be
disregarded. "Speaker.
" Admirable in information, firm in grasp, stimulating in style, appreciative in
matter. An altogether unusual work, both for its ambition and for its matter."—
Nation.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
SECOND EDITION, WITH PREFACE.
Crown SvOj Cloth^ Price 3^. 6^.
THE
CAREER OF A NIHILIST.
A NOVEL.
By STEPNIAK,
Author of *' The Russian Storm Cloud" *' The Russian Peasantry*
*^ Russia under the Tzars^'' etc., etc.
The large section of the English public now reading Russian fiction
will be interested in the appearance of this work, the first novel written
in English by a Russian. Intimately acquainted with the life of revolu-
tionary Russia as the celebrated author is, he gives in this book a vivid
picture of the manners and ways of the men and women engaged in the
struggle against the system of despotism under which the subjects oi
the Tzar live, and lets us into the very heart and secret of Nihilism.
Besides exhibiting that subtle psychology •which we have learnt to look
for as a special trait of Russian writers, this novel is full of stirring
incident, and possesses one of the most powerful and pathetic plots to be
found in the whole range of fiction.
'* One expects a Nihilist romance by Stepniak to be full of the
actualities of the situation, to display the genuine and intimate senti-
ments of revolutionary society in Russia, and to correct not a few of the
impressions formerly gathered from novelists who only know that
society by hearsay and at second-hand. The reader will not be
disappointed in this expectation. No one can read this story . . .
without deep interest." — AthencEum.
'* A very brilliant and remarkable novel just published by Walter
Scott, which will soon be the talk of literary London. We have seldou:)
read a more fascinating book than Stepniak's Career of a Nihilist.'*
— The Star.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Demy 8vo, Cloth^ 420 Pages ^ Price 'js. 6d.
A SHORT HISTORY
OF
ANGLO-SAXON FREEDOM.
THE POLITY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING RACE.
By James K. Hosmer, Professor in Washington University; Author of
'• A Life of Young Sir Harry Vane,^' etc.
In this book an effort is made to compress a sketch of
constitutional history for a period of nearly two thousand
years, from the time of the Teutons of Caesar and Tacitus
to the British Empire and United States of 1890. Anglo-
Saxon polity, in its long history, has shown adaptation to
the needs of ever vaster multitudes and higher civilisations,
manifold development and elaboration, one spirit, however,
surviving throughout it all, apparent in the deliberations of
the ancient folk-moots as in those of a modern Parliament.
It is this unity which is traced in this highly interesting and
brilliantly-written book.
"A volume in which Professor Hosmer ably pro-
pounds and justifies his well-known views. . . . The
work might very properly be used in schools, but is
also interesting to grown people, and may be strongly
recommended to mechanics' institutes, workmen's
clubs, an d public libraries.'* — Athencemn.
London: WALTER SCOTT, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Rjw.
Monihiy Shilling Volumes. Cloth, cut or uncut edges.
THE CAMELOT SERIES.
Edited by Ernest Rhys.
Volumes Already Issued—
ROMANCE OF KING ARTHUR.
THOREAU'S WALDEN.
ENGLISH OPIUM-EATER.
LANDOR'S CONVERSATIONS.
PLUTARCH'S LIVES.
RELIGIO MEDICI, &c.
SHELLEY'S LETTERS.
PROSE WRITINGS OF SWIFT.
MY STUDY WINDOWS.
GREAT ENGLISH PAINTERS.
LORD BYRON'S LETTERS.
ESSAYS BY LEIGH HUNT.
LONGFELLOW'S PROSE.
GREAT MUSICAL COMPOSERS.
MARCUS AURELIUS.
SPECIMEN DAYS IN AMERICA.
WHITE'S SELBORNE.
DEFOE'S SINGLETON.
MAZZINI'S ESSAYS.
PROSE WRITINGS OF HEINE.
REYNOLDS' DISCOURSES.
Papers of Steele and Addison.
BURNS'S LETTERS.
VOLSUNGA SAGA.
SARTOR RESARTUS.
WRITINGS OF EMERSON.
SENECA'S MORALS.
DEMOCRATIC VISTAS.
LIFE OF LORD HERBERT.
ENGLISH PROSE.
IBSEN'S PILLARS OF SOCIETY.
IRISH FAIRY AND FOLK TALES.
EPICTETUS.
THE ENGLISH POETS.
ESSAYS OF DR. JOHNSON.
ESSAYS OF WILLIAM HAZLITT.
LANDOR'S PENTAMERON, &c
POE'S TALES AND ESSAYS.
VICAR OF WAKEFIELD.
POLITICAL ORATIONS.
CHESTERFIELD'S LETTERS.
THOREAU'S WEEK.
STORIES FROM CARLETON.
Autocrat op the Breakfast-Tablb
JANE EYRE.
ELIZABETHAN ENGLAND.
WRITINGS OF THOMA.S DAVIS.
SPENCE'S ANECDOTES.
MORE'S UTOPIA.
SADI'S GULISTAN.
ENGLISH FAIRY TALES.
NORTHERN STUDIES.
FAMOUS REVIEWS.
ARISTOTLE'S ETHICS.
PERICLES AND ASPASIA.
ANNALS OF TACITUS.
ESSAYS OF ELIA.
BALZAC.
DE MUSSET'S PLAYS.
CORAL REEFS.
SHERIDAN'S PLAYS.
OUR VILLAGE.
London : WALTER SCOTT, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
GREA T WR ITERS.
A NEW SERIES OF CRITICAL BIOGRAPHIES.
Edited by Professor Eric S, Robertson, M.A,
MONTHLY SHILLING VOLUMES.
VOLUMES ALREADY ISSUED—
LIFE OP LONGFELLOW. By Prof. Eric S. Robertson.
" A most readable little work." — Liverpool Mercury.
LIFE OF COLERIDGE. By Hall Caine.
"Brief and vigorous, written throughout with spirit and great literary
sk.\ll"— Scotsman.
LIFE OF DICKENS. By Frank T. Marzials.
" Notwithstanding the mass of matter that has been printed relating to
Dickens and his works ... we should, until we came across this volume,
have been at a loss to recommend any popular life of England's most
popular novelist as being really satisfactory. The difficulty is removed by
Mr. Marzials's little hook."— Athenceum.
LIFE OF DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI. By J. Knight.
"Mr. Knight's picture of the great poet and painter is the fullest and
best yet presented to the public." — The Graphic.
LIFE OF SAMUEL JOHNSON. By Colonel F. Grant.
"Colonel Grant has performed his task with diligence, sound judgment,
good taste, and aiccviva.cy."— Illustrated London News.
LIFE OF DARWIN. By G. T. Beltany.
" Mr. G. T. Bettan/s Life of Darwin is a sound and conscientious work."
—Saturday Review.
LIFE OF CHARLOTTE BRONTE. By A. Birrell.
" Those who know much of Charlotte Bronte will learn more, and those
who know nothing about her will find all that is best worth learning in
Mr, Birrell's pleasant book." — St. James' Gazette.
LIFE OF THOMAS CARLYLE. By R. Garnett, LL.D.
" This is an admirable book. Nothing could be more felicitous and fairer
than the way in which he takes us through Carlyle's life and works."— PaW
Mall Gazette.
LIFE OF ADAM SMITH. By R. B. Haldane, M.P.
"Written with a perspicuity seldom exemplified when dealing with
economic science."— Scotsman.
LIFE OF KEATS. By W. M. Rossetti.
" Valuable for the ample information which it contains." — Cambridye
Independent.
LIFE OF SHELLEY. By William Sharp.
" The criticisms . . . entitle this capital monograph to be ranked with
the best biographies of SheUey. "—Westminster Review.
LIFE OP SMOLLETT. By David Hannay.
" A capable record of a writer who still remains one of the great masters
of the English noveV—Saturday Review.
LIFE OF GOLDSMITH. By Austin Dobson.
" The story of his literary and social life in London, with all its humorous
and pathetic vicissitudes, is here retold, as none could tell it better." —
Daily Nevm.
LIFE OF SCOTT. By Professor Yonge.
" This is a most enjoyable hook."— Aberdeen Free Press.
LIFE OF BURNS. By Professor Blackie.
"The editor certainly made a hit when he persuaded Blackie to write
about Burns." — Pall Mall Gazette.
LIFE OF VICTOR HUGO. By Frank T. Marzials.
" Mr. Marzials's volume presents to us, in a more handy form than any
English or even French handbook gives, the summary of what is known
about the life of the great poet."— Saturday Review.
LIFE OF EMERSON. By Richard Garnett, LL.D.
"No record of Emerson's life could be more Aesirdible."— Saturday Revier/k
LIFE OF GOETHE. By James Sime.
" Mr. James Sirae's competence as a biographer of Goethe is beyond
questioji."— Manchester Guardian.
LIFE OF CONGREVE. By Edmund Gosse.
"Mr. Gosse has vmtten an admirable biography."— ^catiemi/.
LIFE OF BUNYAN. By Canon Venables.
"A most intelligent, appreciative, and valuable memoir." — Scotsman.
LIFE OF CRABBE. By T. E. Kebbel.
"No English poet since Shakespeare has observed certain aspects of
nature and of human life more -AosqIy. "—Athenceum.
LIFE OF HEINE. By William Sharp.
"An admirable monograph . . . more fully wi-itten up to the level of
recent knowledge and criticism than any other English vfoxk." —Scotsman.
LIFE OF MILL. By W. L. Courtney.
" A most sympathetic and discriminating TUQxaoir."— Glasgow Herald.
LIFE OF SCHILLER. By Henry W. Nevinson.
" Presents the poet's life in a neatly rounded picture." — Scotsman.
LIFE OF CAPTAIN MARRY AT. By David Hannay.
" We have nothing but praise for the manner in which Mr. Hannay has
done justice to him." — Saturday Review.
LIFE OF LESSING. By T. W. Rolleston.
" One of the best books of the series." — Manchester Guardian.
LIFE OF MILTON. By Richard Garnett, LL.D.
"Has never been more charmingly or adequately told."— Scottish Leader.
LIFE OF BALZAC. By Frederick Wedmore.
LIFE OF GEORGE ELIOT. By Oscar Browning.
LIFE OF JANE AUSTEN. By Goldwin Smith.
LIFE OF BROWNING. By William Sharp.
LIFE OF BYRON. By Hon. Roden Noel.
LIFE OF HAWTHORNE. By Moncure Conway.
LIFE OF SCHOPENHAUER. By Professor Wallace.
LIFE OF SHERIDAN. By Lloyd Sanders.
LIFE OF THACKERAY. By Herman Merivale and Frank
T. Marzials.
Library Edition cf^^ Great Writers^' Demy 8vo, 2s. 6d.
London: WALTER SCOTT, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Foefes.
Edited by William Sharp.
Cloth, Red Edges - Is.
Cloth, Uncut Edges - Is.
In 1/- MoNTULY Volumes.
Red Roan, Gilt Edges 2s. 6d.
Fad, Morocco, Gilt Edges - 5s.
KEBLE'S CHRISTIAN YEAR.
COLERIDGE. Ed, by J. Skipsey.
LONGFELLOW. Kd. by E. Hope.
CAMPBELL. Ed. by J. Hogb«n.
SHELLEY. Edited by J. Skipsey.
WORDSWORTH,
Edited by A. J. Symington.
BLAKE. Ed. by Joseph Skipsey.
WHITTIER. Ed. by Eta Hope.
POE. Edited by Joseph Skipsey.
CHATTERTON. By J. Richmond.
BURNS. Poems \ Edited by
BURNS. Songs /Joseph Skipsey.
MARLOWE. Ed.byP.K.Pinkerton.
KEATS. Edited by John Hogben.
HERBERT. Edited by E. Rhys.
HUGO. Trana. by Dean Carrington.
COWPER. Edited by Eva Hope.
SHAKESPEARE'S Poems, etc
Edited by William Sharp.
EMERSON. Edited by W. liowin.
SONNETS of thU CENTURY.
Edited by William Sharp.
WHITMAN. Edited by E. Rhya.
SCOTT. Marmlon, etc.
SCOTT. Lady of the Lake, etc.
Edited by WiUiam Sharp.
PRAED. Edited by Fred. Cooper.
HOGG.ByhiflDaughter.Mrs. Garden.
GOLDSMITH. Ed. by W. Tirebuck.
MACKAY'S LOVE LETTERS.
SPENSER. Edited by Hon. R. Noel.
CHILDREN OF THE POETS.
Edited by Eric S. Robertson.
JONSON. Edited by J. A. Symonds.
BYRON (2 Vols.) Ed.byM.Blind.
THE SONNETS OF EUROPE.
Edited by S. Waddington.
RAMSAY. Ed. by J. L. Robertson.
DOBELL. Edited by Mrs. DobeU.
DAYS OF THE YEAR.
With Introduction by Wm. Snarp.
POPE. Edited by John Hogben.
HEINE. Edited by Mrs. Kroeker.
BEAUMONT & FLETCHER.
Edited by J. S. Fletcher.
BOWLES, LAMB. &c.
Edited by ^Villiara Tirebuck.
EARLY ENGLISH POETRY.
Edited by H. Macaulay Fitzgibbon.
SEA MUSIC. Edited by Mrs Sharp.
HERRICK. Edited by EmestRhys.
BALLADES AND RONDEAUS
Edited by J. Gleeson White.
IRISH MINSTRELSY.
Edited by H. Halliday Sparling.
MILTON'S PARADISE LOST.
Edited by J. Bradshaw, M. A., LL.D.
JACOBITE BALLADS.
Edited by G. S. Macquoid.
AUSTRALIAN BALLADS.
Edited by D. B. W. Sladen, B.A.
MOORE. Edited by John Dorrian.
BORDER BALLADS.
Edited by Graham R. Tomson.
SONG-TIDE. By P. B. Maraton.
ODES OF HORACE.
Translations by Sir S. de Vere, Bfc.
OSSIAN. Edited by G. E. Todd.
ELFIN MUSIC. Ed. by A. Waite.
SOUTHEY. Ed. byS. R. Thompson.
CHAUCER. Edited by F. N. Paton.
POEMS OF WILD LIFE.
Edited by Chas. G. D. Roberts, M.A.
PARADISE REGAINED.
Edited by J. Bradshaw, M.A., LL.D.
CRABBE. Edited by E.Lamplough.
DORA GREENWELL.
Edited by William Dorling.
FAUST. Edited by E. Craigmyle.
AMERICAN SONNETS.
Edited by William Sharp.
LANDOR'S POEMS.
Selected and Edited by E. Radford.
GREEK ANTHOLOGY.
Edited by Graham R. Tomson.
HUNT AND HOOD.
Edited by J. Harwood Panting.
HUMOROUS POEMS.
Edited by Ralph H. Qaine.
LYTTON'S PLAYS.
Edited by R. F. Sharp.
GREAT ODES.
Edited by William Sharp.
MEREDITH'S POEMS.
Edited by M. Betham-Edwards.
PAINTER-POETS.
Edited by Kineton Parkes.
WOMEN POETS.
Edited by Mrs. Sharp.
LOVE LYRICS.
Edited by Percy Hulburd.
WALTER SCOTT. 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
POPULAR BOOKS IN 3 VOL. SETS
By Oliver Wendell Holmes, Walter Savage Landor,
Ch arles Lamb, Leigh Hunt, William Hazlitt, etc.
By OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES.
The Autocrat of
the Breakfast-Table
The Poet at
the Breakfast-Table
The Professor at
the Breakfast-Table.
Reduced fac simile of HOLMES and LANDOR.
3 Vols., Crown 8uo, Cloth, Gilt Top, in Shell Case. Price 4s. 6d.
3 Vols., Crown 8uo, Cloth, Gilt Top, in Cloth Pedestal Case. 5s.
The Vols, may be had separately at 1/6 each.
Also in Half Polished Morocco, GUt Top, Antique.
UNIFORM WITH ABOV^E—
SELECTIONS FROM LANDOR (in 3 Vols.) :—
I— IMAGINARY CONVERSATIONS.
2— PENTAMERON. 3— PERICLES AND ASPASIA.
IN TliRKE VOLUMES-
Essays of Cha rles Laml), William Hazlitt, an d Leigh Hunt.
IN THREE VOLUMES —
MEDITATIONS OF MARCUS AURELIUS.
TEACHING OF EPICTETUS. MORALS OF SENECA.
London: Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Crown Sw, about I'^o pp. each, Cloth Cover ^ 2S. 6d. per voL
Half-polished Morocco, gilt top, ^s.
COUNT TOLSTOI'S WORKS.
The following Volumes are already issued—
A RUSSIAN PROPRIETOR.
THE COSSACKS.
IVAN ILYITCH, and other Stories.
THE INVADERS, and other Stories.
MY RELIGION
LIFE.
MY CONFESSION.
CHILDHOOD, BOYHOOD, YOUTH.
THE PHYSIOLOGY OF WAR.
ANNA KARENINA. (2 Vols.)
WHAT TO DO?
WAR AND PEACE. (4 Vols.)
THE LONG EXILE, and other Stories for Children.
SEVASTOPOL.
THE KREUTZER SONATA, AND FAMILY
HAPPINESS.
Uniform with the above.
IMPRESSIONS OF RUSSIA.
By Dr. Georg Brandes.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Crown Svo, Gilt Letterings One Shilling each.
By count LEO TOLSTOL
WHERE LOVE IS. THERE GOD
IS ALSO.
THE TWO PILGRIMS.
WHAT MEN LIVE BY.
THE GODSON.
IF YOU NEGLECT THE FIRE, YOU
DON'T PUT IT OUT.
Published originally in Russia, as tracts for the people,
these little stories possess all the grace, naivete, and power
which characterise the work of Count Tolstoi, and while
inculcating in the most penetrating way the Christian ideas
of love, humility, and charity, are perfect in their art form
as stories pure and simple.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Line, Paternoster Row.
THE OXFORD LIBRARY
Handsomely bound in Blue Cloth, Gilt Top, Uncut Edges,
PRICE 2s. EACH.
Comprises the most popular Works of Scott, Dickens
Lytton, Marryat, lever, Oliver WendelZ Holmes,'
bHERiDAN, etc., and original Novels by New Authors.
BARNABY RUDGE.
OLD CURIOSITY SHOP.
PICKWICi: PAPERS.
NICHOLAS NICKLEBY.
OLIVER TWIST.
MARTIN CHUZZLEWIT.
SKETCHES BY BOZ.
RODERICK RANDOM.
PEREGRINE PICKLE.
IVANHOE.
KENILWORTH.
JACOB FAITHFUL.
PETER SIMPLE.
PAUL CLIFFORD.
EUGENE ARAM.
ERNEST MALTRAVERS.
ALICE; or, the Mysteries.
RIENZI.
PELHAM.
LAST DAYS OF POMPEII.
THE SCOTTISH CHIEFS.
WILSON'S TALES.
THE INHERITANCE.
ETHEL LINTON.
A MOUNTAIN DAISY.
HAZEL; or, Perilpoint Lighthouse.
VICAR OF WAKEFIELD.
PRINCE of the HOUSE of DAVID.
WIDE, WIDE WORLD.
VILLAGE TALES.
BEN-HUR.
UNCLE TOM'S CABIN.
ROBINSON CRUSOE.
THE WHITE SLAVE.
CHARLES O'MALLEY.
MIDSHIPMAN EASY.
BRIDE OF LAMMERMOOR.
HEART OF MIDLOTHIAN
LAST OF THE BARONS.
OLD MORTALITY.
TOM CRINGLE'S LOG.
CRUISE OF THE MIDGE.
COLLEEN BAWN.
VALENTINE VOX.
NIGHT AND MORNING.
BUNYAN.
FOXE'S BOOK OF MARTYRS
MANSFIELD PARK.
LAST OF THE MOHICANS.
POOR JACK.
THE LAMPLIGHTER.
JANE EYRE.
PiLLAR OF FIRE.
THRONE OF DAVID.
DOMBEY AND SON.
VANITY FAIR.
INFELICE.
BEULAH.
HARRY LORREQUER.
BURNS'S POEMS.
SHERIDAN'S PLAYS.
WAVERLEY.
QUENTIN DURWARD.
TALISMAN.
London: Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
RE-ISSUE IN 12 MONTHLY VOLUMES,
Commencing' February 25th, 1891.
Strongly Bound in Cloth, Gilt Top, 2/6 each.
WILSON'S
TALES OF THE BORDERS
AND OF SCOTLAND:
HISTORICAL, TRADITIONARY, AND IMAGINATIVE.
REVISED BY ALEXANDER LEIGHTON.
No collection of tales published in a serial form ever enjoyed so
great a popularity as " The Tales of the Borders ; " and
the secret of their success lies in the fact that they are stories
in the truest sense of the word, illustrating in a graphic and
natural style the manners and customs, trials and sorrows,
sins and backslidings, of the men and women of whom they
treat. The heroes and heroines of these admirable stories belong
to every rank of life, from the king and noble to the humble
peasant.
"The Tales of the Borders" have always been immensely
popular with the young, and whether we view them in their
moral aspect, or as vehicles for instruction and amusement, the
collected series forms a repertory of healthy and interesting
literature unrivalled in the language.
The Scotsman says: — "Those who have read the tales in the
unwieldy tomes in which they are to be found in the libraries will
welcome the publication of this neat, handy, and well-printed edition."
The Dundee Advertiser %z.y%'. — "Considering how attractive are these
tales, whether regarded as illustrating Scottish life, or as entertaining
items of romance, there can be no doubt of their continued popularity.
We last read them in volumes the size of a family Bible, and we are
glad to have an opportunity to renew our acquaintance with them in a
form so much more handy and elegant."
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Quarto, doth elegant^ gilt edges^ emblematic design on cover^ 6s,
May also be had in a variety of Fancy Bindings,
MUSIC OF The POETS;
A MUSICIANS' BIRTHDAY BOOK.
Edited by Eleonore D'Esterre Keeling.
This is a unique Birthday Book. Against each date are given
the names of musicians whose birthday it is, together with a
verse-quotation appropriate to the character of their different
compositions or performances. A special feature of the book
consists in the reproduction in fac-simile of autographs, and
autographic music, of living composers. The selections of verse
(from before Chaucer to the present time) have been made with
admirable critical insight. English verse is rich in utterances of
the poets about music, and merely as a volume of poetry about
music this book makes a charming anthology. Three sonnets by
Mr. Theodore Watts, on the "Fausts" of Berlioz, Schumann,
and Gounod, have been written specially for this volume. It is
illustrated with designs of various musical instruments, etc.;
autographs of Rubenstein, Dvorak, Greig, Mackenzie, Villiers
Stanford, etc., etc.
"To musical amateurs this will certainly prove the most
attractive birthday book ever published." — Manchester Guardian.
" One of those happy ideas that seems to have been yearning
for fulfilment. . . . The book ought to have a place on every
music stand." — Scottish Leader.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row,
miliiiisoi s enes of Poeiiimi B moaies.
Printed on Antique Paper, Crown 8vo. Bound in Blue Clothe
each with suitable Emblematic Design on Cover^ Price 3s. 6d,
Also in various Calf and Morocco Bindings,
Women's Voices. An Anthology of the
most Characteristic Poems by English, Scotch, and Irish Women.
Edited by Mrs. William Sharp.
Sonnets of this Century. With an
Exhaustive Essay on the Sonnet. Edited by Wm. Sharp.
The Children of the Poets. An Anthology
from English and American Writers of Three Centuries. Edited
by Professor Eric S. Robertson.
Sacred Song. A Volunne of Religious
Verse. Selected and arranged by Samuel Waddington.
A Century of Australian Song, Selected
and Edited by Douglas B. W. Sladen, B.A., Oxon.
Jacobite Songs and Ballads. Selected
and Edited, with Notes, by G. S. Macquoid.
Irish Minstrelsy. Edited, with Notes and
Introduction, by H. Halliday Sparling.
The Sonnets of Europe. A Volume of
Translations. Selected and arranged by Samuel Waddington.
Early English and Scottish Poetry.
Selected and Edited by H. Macaulay Fitzgibbon.
Ballads of the North Countrle. Edited,
with Introduction, by Graham R. Tomson.
Songs and Poems of the Sea. An
Anthology of Poems Descriptive of the Sea. Edited by Mrs.
William Sharp.
Songs and Poems of Fairyland. An
Anthology of English Fairy Poetry, selected and arranged, with
an Introduction, by Arthur Edward Waite.
Songs and Poems of the Great Dominion.
Edited by W. D. Lighthall, of Montreal.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Cloth Elegant, Croivn Svo, 416 Pages, with 48
Illustrations. Price 2s. 6d.
THE CENTENARY
LIFE OF WESLEY.
Beginning with the early home of the Wesley s at
Epworth, this biography traces John Wesley's life at
Charterhouse, and subsequently at Christ Church,
Oxford, and his career as Fellow of Lincoln. It
describes his doings as a missionary in the colony of
Georgia ; his meeting, after his return, with Bohler
and his brother Moravians, and Wesley's conversion.
It then deals with the period of his open-air preach-
ing, first near Bristol, afterwards in London, where
he was often listened to by crowds of five to twenty
thousand, his itinerary as a preacher, and the gradual
establishment of Methodism throughout the kingdom.
Sympathetically and ably written, this volume,
dealing with a man of such special gifts as Wesley
possessed, — gifts which he employed with such effect
during his extraordinary life, — will be read with
interest by all who care for the history of a career
devoted to great objects.
London: WALTER SCOTT, 24 Warwick Lank
COMPACT AND PRACTICAL.
In Limp Cloth ; for the Pocket. Price One Shilling,
THE EUROPEAN
CONVERSATION BOOKS,
FRENCH ITALIAN
SPANISH GERMAN
CONTENTS.
Hints to Travellers — Everyday Expressions — Arriving at
and Leaving a Railway Station — Custom House Enquiries — In
a Train — At a Buffet and Restaurant — At an Hotel— Paying an
Hotel Bill — Enquiries in a Town — On Board Ship — Embarking
and Disembarking — Excursion by Carriage — Enquiries as to
Diligences — Eitquiries as to Boats — Engaging Apartments —
Washing List and Days of Week — Restaurant Vocabulary —
Telegrams and Letters^ etc.^ etc.
The contents of these little handbooks are so arranged as to
permit direct and immediate reference. All dialogues or enquiries not
considered absolutely essential have been purposely excluded, nothing
being introduced which might confuse the traveller rather than assist
him. A few hints are given in the introduction which will be found
valuable to those unaccustomed to foreign travel.
London : Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
New and Forthcoming Books,
THE CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE SERIES.
AprU 25.] Crown Zvo. Price 3J. dd. Clothj Hal/Mor., 6s. 6d. [ i5r?l25.
Bacteria and Their Products.
By Dr. SIMS WOODHEAD.
Written by Dr. Sims Woodhead, the recently appointed Director of the Laboratory
of the Colleges of Surgeons and Physicians in London, it includes a full discussion of
the causes of Hydrophobia, Cholera, Diptheria, and Consumption, dealing especially
with Dr. Koch's discovery. The work will be copiously illustrated by micro-photo-
graphs of Bacteria, etc.
Crown SvOf Clothj is.; Cut and Uncut Edges.
ApJu^ls.] THE CANTERBURY POETS. l^AxL.
The MAY Volume will be
American Humorous Verse.
An Anthology, Selected and Edited by JAMES BARR, Editor of the Detroit Free Press.
The greater part of the contents of this volume, rich in characteristic American
humour, will be entirely new to the great majority of British readers.
Crown Svo, Clothj \s.; Cut and Uncut Edges.
mI?^1] THE CAMELOT SERIES. [ Ma?2?.
The JUNE Volume will be
Shorter Stories of Dickens.
Selected and Edited, with an Introduction, by FRANK T. MARZIALS.
{There will be NO VOLUME of this Series issued on April 25).
JUST ISSUED. Crown Svo, Price One Shilling.
Rosmersholm: A Drama in Four Acts.
By HENRIK IBSEN. Translated by CHARLES ARCHER,
London: WALTER ScOTT, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
i RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT
TO^^- 202 Main Library 4
LOAN PERIOD 1
2
3
HOME USE
4
5
6
ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS
Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date.
Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405.
DUE AS STAMPED BELOW
JUNfl8l990
AMTO. DISC.
JUL2Ql gg?
C I PnULATt '
FORM NO. DD6
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKE'
BERKELEY, CA 94720
VB 07254
«.C.
fif/?/ffi
^^ LIBRARIES