Most sociologists believe with Lubbock, Bachofen, MacLennan, Bastian, Giraud-Teulon, Wilkens, and others that primitive man lived in s.e.xual promiscuity. If we agree with Westermark that the term marriage includes polygamy, polyandry and limited marriage, the opinion of these authors is wrong. What they have considered as promiscuity can always be included in one of these forms of marriage, even among the indigenes of Hayti, whose life is the most debauched. The author who has most confused the question is Fison, with his dogmatic theories concerning the Australians. Obliged to admit that promiscuity does not exist among these people, he still maintains that it existed formerly.

Curr, who was better acquainted than Fison with the Australians, has proved that they are normally monogamous.

Similar statements of Bastian, Wilkens and others concerning the Kustchins, the natives of Terra del Fuego, are also incorrect. In none of the African tribes is there communion of women, the men, on the other hand, are extremely jealous. Promiscuity is not observed among savage and primitive races, but among people already civilized, such as the Buddhist Butias, in whom man knows neither honor nor jealousy.

The savage Weddas are monogamous, and one of their proverbs says: "Death alone can separate woman from man."

There is in reality only one true form of promiscuity--the prost.i.tution of modern civilized races, who have introduced it among savages, subjecting them to gratify their own l.u.s.t. Among many savage races there exists, on the contrary, a very severe monogamy, and they punish with death every seducer and illegitimate child, as well as the mother. Among others, however, considerable s.e.xual freedom is allowed before or after marriage. It is impossible to lay down definite rules, but one thing may be regarded as universal, viz., that the s.e.xual depravity of savage races most often arises from the influence of civilized people who immigrate among them and systematically introduce immorality and debauchery. It is the white colonists who appropriate the women of savage races and train them in the worst forms of prost.i.tution. It is the white colonists who introduce alcoholic drink which disorganizes the most virtuous and loyal habits, and ends with ruin.

Certain Arab clans exploit European habits of prost.i.tution by sending their young girls to brothels for purposes of gain. When they have acc.u.mulated a sufficient fortune they return home and marry one of their fellow countrymen. Similar customs are observed among other races.

In this connection Westermark points out that the more advanced is civilization, the greater is the number of illegitimate births, and the more widespread is prost.i.tution. In Europe, the proportion of natural children and of prost.i.tutes is nearly double in the towns what it is in the country. This shows the absurdity of regarding promiscuity as a primitive state; on the contrary, it is a rotten fruit of civilization, and especially of semi-civilization. Primitive customs are generally chaste, and it is civilization which corrupts them. In Europe, prost.i.tution is increasing, while marriage is becoming less frequent; it is the latter which const.i.tutes the primitive and normal state.

Westermark admits, as we have mentioned above, that s.e.xual liberty before or after marriage exists among certain tribes; but in spite of this the custom of careful choice always exists among these people, and this renders their unions comparatively lasting. He cites as an example the Tounghtas of India, who practice s.e.xual connection before marriage, but among whom these connections nearly always lead to marriage; this race considers prost.i.tution as dishonorable.

We must, however, make one objection to Westermark. Promiscuity in itself is not necessarily prost.i.tution, for the latter signifies especially the sale of the body, which is not the case in promiscuity.

The fundamental fact which prevents us admitting the existence of primitive promiscuity among savage races is the following: As soon as the two s.e.xes are free, the monogamous instinct of the woman and jealousy of both s.e.xes combine to reestablish marriage. True promiscuity can only exist by means of a sort of legal obligation, such as exists in the colony of Oneidas in New York. In this colony the members formally agree to mutual and free s.e.xual intercourse. We must not forget that prost.i.tution is only kept up in women by the thirst for lucre, and ceases immediately this element disappears.

Before the Reformation there existed in Scotland a singular custom called "hand-fasting," by which young men had the right to choose a companion for a year, at the end of which time they could either separate or become married according to their inclination.

On the other hand, Lubbock mentions certain customs in Greece and India, the worship of _phallus_, for example, which obliged young girls to give themselves to all men. But these customs were not among primitive races but resulted from the eroticism of highly civilized nations. Thus, Lubbock's argument concerning the existence of primitive promiscuity falls to the ground.

Certain savage nations offer their daughters or their servants, rarely their wives, to their guests. A _jus primae nocti_ (right to the first night) has also existed and will sometimes exist in some tribes, but this right is reserved for the chiefs, kings or priests, and allows them to have s.e.xual intercourse before the husband with every newly married woman during the first night of the nuptials. This is a barbarous custom based on the right of the stronger, and a.n.a.logous to the privileges claimed by the European n.o.bles from their serfs or peasants. But such abuses do not const.i.tute promiscuity, as Lubbock maintains.

In many countries the courtesans and concubines were held in high esteem, and are so even at the present day, more than is supposed; but this again is not a question of promiscuity.

Morgan has deduced his theories of promiscuity from terms employed in certain savage dialects to designate relationship. These conclusions are false and Morgan, like others, has been led into error by the obscurity of the language of these people. The simple fact that paternal parentage is recognised among them proves the absurdity of Morgan's reasoning, for promiscuity cannot recognize paternal parentage.

In 1860 Bachofen drew attention to the ancient custom of naming the children after the maternal side, and it is now certain that this custom has existed among many primitive races, while in others children were named after the paternal side. The term _matriarchy_ is given to denomination after the maternal side. MacLennan maintains the existence of matriarchy in promiscuity, but this is inadmissible.

Maternity is self-evident, while paternity can only be proved indirectly by the aid of reasoning. No doubt all nations appear to have recognized the real part which the father takes in every conception, and from this results the singular custom among certain tribes, in which the husband retires to his couch and fasts during the accouchement of his wife.

Westermark explains matriarchy in a simpler and more natural way, by the intimate relations of the child to the mother. Children, especially when they are still young, follow the mother when she separates from the father. Matriarchy is quite natural in marriages of short duration, with change of wives, and in polygamy; while, in monogamous nations, it is _patriarchy_, or denomination after the paternal line, which dominates.

Among nations where the denomination of uncles exists, and where the married woman lives with her family till she has a child, matriarchy results quite naturally from this fact. In j.a.panese families who have only daughters, the husband of the eldest takes his wife's family name. Among savages in general, the name has a great importance. When rank and property are only inherited in the female line, the children are always named after this line. We are thus concerned here with very complex questions which have nothing to do with promiscuity.

Maine has proved that prost.i.tution and promiscuity lead to sterility and decadence. Among the few tribes in which polyandry is the rule, especially in Thibet, several brothers generally have the same wife.

But they usually alternate, and never dwell together. In the fifteenth century, in the Canary Islands, every woman had three husbands, each of whom lived with her for a month, and the one who was to possess her during the following month had to work both for her and for the other two husbands. Polyandry has always originated in scarcity of women.

The jealousy of men, which has never ceased to exist, gives the clearest proof of the impossibility of promiscuity. Polyandry is only possible among a few feeble and degenerate races who ignore jealousy.

These tribes are diminishing and tend to disappear. The jealousy of savages is generally so terrible that among them a woman who commits adultery is usually put to death along with her seducer. Sometimes they are content with cutting off her nose or inflicting other chastis.e.m.e.nt. It is from jealousy that results the obligation of chast.i.ty in the woman.

Religious ideas on the future of man after death are often combined with these ideas; this is why chast.i.ty, death, or even all kinds of torture are, in certain countries, imposed on the woman after death of the husband.

It must not be forgotten that among most savages the wife is regarded as the property of her husband. If the latter lends his wife to a guest, he offers her as part of a feast. This is not, however, promiscuity, and we must understand that these people have quite different sentiments to ours. In clans or tribes the most powerful men have always had the youngest and most beautiful wives.

To sum up, there is not the shadow of proof in support of the doctrine of primitive promiscuity, a doctrine which is based on purely hypothetical grounds.

MARRIAGE AND CELIBACY

Among animals the voluntary celibate exists only among the females of certain birds which have become widowed, and even then the case is rare. In savage man, nearly every individual marries, and the women look upon celibacy or widowhood almost in the same way as death. The savage despises celibates as thieves or sorcerers. In his opinion a man without a wife is not a man. He therefore marries at a much earlier age than civilized man, sometimes even (in Greenland) before fecundation is possible. Among certain Indians men sometimes marry at the age of nine or ten years, generally between fourteen and eighteen; the girls between nine and twelve. In some comparatively civilized nations the celibate is so much despised that they go as far as marrying the spirits of departed children! Among the Greeks, celibates were punished, and among the Romans they were taxed heavily. Celibacy becomes more rare the further we go back in the history of the human race; celibacy increases with the corruption of morals. It is civilization which does most harm to marriage, especially in the large towns, and the age at which people marry becomes more and more advanced, although in Europe there are more women than men. Want of money and insufficient salaries diminish more and more the number of marriages in the large centers, while among savages, and also among our peasants, the women and children are one of the princ.i.p.al sources of wealth, because they work and have few needs. Among the middle cla.s.ses, on the contrary, the wife is a source of expense, as well as the education of the children. For men, the length of intellectual and professional education (and military service in many countries) cause marriage to be postponed and celibacy is obligatory at the time when the s.e.xual appet.i.te is most powerful. Thus, the more civilization advances, the longer is marriage postponed. The refinement and the multiplicity of pleasures also diminish the attractions of marriage.

Lastly, intellectual culture exalts the desire for the ideal, so that men and women well suited to each other meet less frequently, as their mutual adaptation becomes more complicated.

Nevertheless, I must repeat here what I have already said concerning the way in which novelists present us with the extreme pa.s.sions of ill-balanced people and describe them as types, the normal man being too prosaic to attract their readers. Rotten as it is with neurotic degenerates, our modern society is certainly not wanting in pathological models for the novelists, but it is nevertheless false to always put these into prominence. The cultured man of well-balanced mind, adapts himself to marriage on the whole very well, and is not always so difficult to please. However, it must be recognized that marriage becomes less easy if a too high ideal is expected from it.

With characteristic prudence, Westermark does not answer the question whether marriage will progressively diminish in the future.

=The Cult of Virgins. Sanct.i.ty of the Celibate.=--Among many savages the singular idea obtains that there is something impure in s.e.xual intercourse. The celibacy ordained by several religions originates from ideas of this kind.

Many nations have worshiped virgins, for instance the vestal virgins of the Romans. The mother of Buddha was declared to be holy and pure, Buddha having been conceived supernaturally, according to the legend.

A Buddhist monk is forbidden to have s.e.xual intercourse, even with animals! Celibacy among certain priests exists also in China.

Among the Hebrews, the idea of the impurity of marriage had got a footing, and this no doubt powerfully influenced Christianity. St.

Paul thus places celibacy higher than marriage, and this is how the idea became established among the fathers of the Church that the repression of all sensuality was a cardinal virtue, and that G.o.d had contemplated in paradise an as.e.xual reproduction of the human species, which was annulled by the fall of Adam. Men who remained pure were to be immortal. "The earth is filled with marriage and the heavens with virginity," says Jeremiah. Such are the ideas which have given rise to the obligation of celibacy for priests.

Westermark thinks that the idea of impurity attached to s.e.xual intercourse is possibly derived from the instinctive repugnance experienced by members of the same family to have s.e.xual intercourse between themselves. Banished from the family circle this intercourse was tainted with a stigma which offended modesty, and by the a.s.sociation of ideas so common in man, this stigma was extended to legal marriage outside the family. Moreover, religious celibacy is complicated by ascetic conceptions, and the idea of the impurity of s.e.xual intercourse is by no means general.

For my part, I think rather that the jealousy natural to both s.e.xes has gradually compelled them to limit their s.e.xual intercourse to intimacy and to conceal it. But man is ashamed of everything which he conceals, and we shall soon see that the sentiment of modesty concerns all parts of the body which are concealed. This simple fact is sufficient to give rise to the idea that coitus is impure, and I do not think it necessary to seek any further explanation.

ADVANCES MADE BY ONE s.e.x TO THE OTHER--DEMANDS IN MARRIAGE

A natural law compels the male germinal cell to move toward the egg; exceptions to this law are rare, the female germinal cells being larger and produced in less number. It follows that in copulation, or the union of individual s.e.xual ent.i.ties, man included, it is the male which is the active party and makes the advances. Among certain tribes (Paraguayans, Garos, Moquis), however, it is the female who makes the advances. Everyone knows the combats for the female which takes place between the male of animals, c.o.c.ks and stags for example. Among certain Indians similar struggles are also observed, after which the vanquished has to surrender his wife to the conqueror. The same custom obtained among the ancient Greeks, as we see in the suitors for Penelope. In Ireland similar customs prevailed up to the last few centuries.

On the other hand, we often see among savages and among birds the favors of the female obtained by a.s.siduous courtship rather than by combat. In some savage tribes struggles take place between the females for possession of the male. However, it is usually coquetry in all its degrees which furnishes woman with the basis for her advances. In many nations, if not in most, women have the right to refuse a demand for marriage.

METHODS OF ATTRACTION

=Adornment in the Two s.e.xes.=--Vanity is older than man, for it is found in many animals. The lowest and most savage peoples adorn themselves. Tattooing, staining the skin, rings on the arms and feet, in the lips, nose and ears serve to attract one s.e.x toward the other.

A Santal woman may carry as much as fifteen kilogrammes of ornaments on her body. Vanity leads to incredible eccentricities, certain tribes, for example, pull out their teeth to increase their attractions. Absurdities of this kind are often a.s.sociated with religious ideas, although the latter generally play a secondary part.

The true origin of these customs lies in vanity, combined with the s.e.xual desire to captivate. In hot climates, at any rate, the savages only commenced to cover their bodies with clothes with the object of pleasing by personal adornment. The religious observances attached to the custom of adornment are not primitive. The latter is derived from the s.e.xual appet.i.te and from vanity, and has only been incorporated in the dogmas of religious mysticism after being first established in the habits of the people.

Among savages the men are more inclined to personal adornment and to coquetry than the women. This is not due to the inferior social position of the women, for those who enjoy the greatest liberty are often less extensively tattooed than those who are reduced to slavery.

The true reason is that the man risks much more than the woman by remaining celibate, and this obliges him to take more pains than the women to make himself fascinating. As a rule the wives of savages attach less importance to their personal appearance than to that of their husbands, and the vanity of the latter is guided chiefly by the taste of their wives. The objects with which savages adorn themselves are generally trophies.

Among civilized people, on the contrary, the men have a much wider choice and many women remain celibate. This is one of the reasons which compel women to study their personal appearance and the art of flirtation. In Europe, earrings represent the last vestige of the savage methods of adornment.

=Sentiment of Shame of the Genital Organs. Nudity.=--What is the origin of the fact that man is ashamed of his genital organs? Nothing of the kind occurs in animals. The psychologist, Wundt, maintains that man has always had a s.e.xual sentiment of modesty. This is not correct, for many races present no trace of it, and sometimes cover all parts of their body except the genital organs. In some, the men, and in others the women go absolutely naked. Originally, clothes were only worn for adornment or for protection against the cold. The Ma.s.sais would be ashamed to hide their p.e.n.i.s, and it is their custom to exhibit it. Other savages cover the glans p.e.n.i.s only with a small cap; they retire to pa.s.s water, but regard themselves as fully dressed so long as the glans p.e.n.i.s is covered. The girdles and other garments of savage women are intended for ornament, and as a means of attraction; they have nothing to do with modesty. In a society where every one goes naked, nudity seems quite natural, and provokes neither shame nor eroticism. The custom of adorning the s.e.xual organs then serves as a means of attraction, both in men and women. The short transparent skirts of a ballet dancer are in reality much more immodest than the nudity of the female savages. A great naturalist has said that veiled forms provoke the s.e.xual appet.i.te more than nudity. Snow remarks that a.s.sociation with naked savages excites much less sensuality than the society of fashionably dressed women in our salons. Read also remarks "Nothing is more moral or less calculated to excite the pa.s.sions than nudity." It is needless to say that this statement is only correct when nudity is a matter of custom, for in s.e.xual matters it is always novelty which attracts. Pious persons have tried to make savages modest by clothing them, but have only produced the contrary effect.

Savage women regard it as shameful to cover their s.e.xual organs. The naturalist, Wallace, found in one tribe a young girl who possessed a dress, but who was quite as much ashamed of clothing herself with it as one of our ladies would be of undressing before strangers.

It is only owing to the custom of wearing clothes that nudity provokes the s.e.xual appet.i.te. This custom develops artificially a sentiment of modesty with regard to nudity, which increases progressively in intensity and is especially marked in aged women. It is not so much habit, as to the feeling of progressive deterioration of their charms, which leads the latter to cover themselves as they grow older, and is part of the instinctive aesthetic sentiment of woman.

At the orgies and fetes held among savages the women cover their s.e.xual organs with certain objects, as a means to excite the men.

Complete nudity is found more often in savage women than in the men.

Later on when it became the custom to wear clothes, nudity became attractive and was considered shameful. This is why the Chinese feel shame at exposing their feet, the Mahometans their faces, and some savages even the ends of their fingers.

Certain customs, like circ.u.mcision among the Jews, Polynesians and Australians; the artificial elongation of the lips of the v.u.l.v.a in Hottentots, Malays, and North American Indians, originated, according to Westermark, in the intention of exciting the s.e.xual appet.i.te, or of introducing variety into its satisfaction. Later on routine, which sanctions everything, transferred these customs into religious cult.

It is possible, however, that among the Jews, who are a practical race, the hygienic advantage of circ.u.mcision took a part in its transformation into a rite.