CRITICISM OF THE DOCTRINE OF PROMISCUITY
Most sociologists believe with Lubbock, Bachofen, MacLennan, Bastian, Giraud-Teulon, Wilkens, and others that primitive man lived in sexual 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 prostitution of modern civilized races, who have introduced it among savages, subjecting them to gratify their own lust. 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 sexual 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 sexual 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 prostitution. 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 prostitution by sending their young girls to brothels for purposes of gain. When they have accumulated 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 prostitution. In Europe, the proportion of natural children and of prostitutes 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, prostitution is increasing, while marriage is becoming less frequent; it is the latter which constitutes the primitive and normal state.
Westermark admits, as we have mentioned above, that sexual 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 sexual connection before marriage, but among whom these connections nearly always lead to marriage; this race considers prostitution as dishonorable.
We must, however, make one objection to Westermark. Promiscuity in itself is not necessarily prostitution, 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 sexes are free, the monogamous instinct of the woman and jealousy of both sexes combine to reëstablish 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 sexual intercourse. We must not forget that prostitution 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 primæ 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 sexual 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 analogous to the privileges claimed by the European nobles from their serfs or peasants. But such abuses do not constitute 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 Japanese 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 prostitution 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 chastisement. It is from jealousy that results the obligation of chastity in the woman.
Religious ideas on the future of man after death are often combined with these ideas; this is why chastity, 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 principal sources of wealth, because they work and have few needs. Among the middle classes, 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 sexual appetite 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 passions 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. Sanctity of the Celibate.—Among many savages the singular idea obtains that there is something impure in sexual 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 sexual 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 God had contemplated in paradise an asexual 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 sexual intercourse is possibly derived from the instinctive repugnance experienced by members of the same family to have sexual intercourse between themselves. Banished from the family circle this intercourse was tainted with a stigma which offended modesty, and by the association 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 sexual intercourse is by no means general.
For my part, I think rather that the jealousy natural to both sexes has gradually compelled them to limit their sexual 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 SEX 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 sexual entities, 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, cocks 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 assiduous 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 Sexes.—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 sex 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 associated with religious ideas, although the latter generally play a secondary part. The true origin of these customs lies in vanity, combined with the sexual 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 sexual appetite 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 sexual 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 Massais would be ashamed to hide their penis, and it is their custom to exhibit it. Other savages cover the glans penis only with a small cap; they retire to pass water, but regard themselves as fully dressed so long as the glans penis 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 sexual 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 sexual appetite more than nudity. Snow remarks that association 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 passions than nudity." It is needless to say that this statement is only correct when nudity is a matter of custom, for in sexual 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 sexual 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 sexual appetite. 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 æsthetic sentiment of woman.
At the orgies and fêtes held among savages the women cover their sexual 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 circumcision among the Jews, Polynesians and Australians; the artificial elongation of the lips of the vulva in Hottentots, Malays, and North American Indians, originated, according to Westermark, in the intention of exciting the sexual appetite, 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 circumcision took a part in its transformation into a rite.
To resume, everything derogatory to established custom excites the sentiment of shame or modesty, not only in sexual matters but in others. Most children are ashamed of not behaving exactly as their comrades or their brothers and sisters, and are very uncomfortable if they are obliged to behave otherwise. All sentiments of morality and modesty rest on conventionalities. The savage women burst into laughter when the naked companions of Livingstone turned their backs from modesty. The sentiment of modesty or shame thus depends only on exceptional violation of an old custom. This is why unconventional ways in one of the sexes (especially in woman) tend to offend the sentiments of modesty, and usually excite the sexual appetite of the other sex.
LIBERTY OF CHOICE IN MARRIAGE—PATRIARCHISM
Among savages, the women sometimes have the right of giving their hand in marriage, sometimes not. The latter case is not surprising in countries where women are considered as merchandise. Among the Esquimaux every girl is betrothed from birth. Among the Boschimans, Ashantis, etc., the unborn girl is even betrothed while she is in her mother's womb! These betrothals are generally arranged by the maternal parents together with the mother.
Very often, however, the consent of the woman is required; or, the marriage may be only valid after the birth of the first child on condition of the woman's consent.
Among the American Indians, if the woman is not a consenting party she elopes with her lover and thus escapes the would-be-husband. In this way elopement has gradually become a recognized institution among certain races. I was told by a Bulgarian that the peasants in his country buy their wives from the father, generally for two or three hundred francs, but if the father demands too much, the women are raped. After this marriage becomes indispensable and the father receives nothing, for, in Bulgaria, which is not yet spoiled by civilization, unions apart from marriage are considered as a terrible disgrace.
In certain races, the woman has a free choice among several men and her wish becomes law, so that the parents have no voice in the matter; this occurs among the natives of the Celebes. The bridegroom is nevertheless obliged to pay the dowry demanded. Similar customs prevail among other races.
Westermark comes to the conclusion that in the primitive state of humanity the women had a much freer choice than afterward. Marriage by purchase developed later and constituted an intermediate stage. When the first civilizations became more complicated and recognized the value of woman's labor, the fathers began to sell their daughters, as we now see savage tribes abandon their women to prostitution with the white man. But in primitive times, when there was neither civilization, money, nor labor, properly so-called, each individual fought for his life and the father had no more possibility of selling his daughter as a slave than a gorilla or an orang-utan would have to-day.
Marriage by rape, which occurred after wars when the women were abducted and married against their will, must not be confounded with marriage by elopement which takes place with the woman's consent, and of which the latest fashion is elopement by automobile.
Among savages, the boys are also most often the property of the father, who has the right to sell them and even to put them to death. But they become free at the age of puberty and then have the right to marry according to their inclination without being forced by their parents.
There existed and still exist many patriarchal races (certain Indians and Asiatics, for example) among whom the father possesses unlimited power. The older he is the more he is honored, and the more his power is uncontested. All the children and grandchildren, with their wives and children, eat at his table; none of his descendants can marry without his consent, etc. The effects of patriarchism are deplorable and very immoral. The patriarch abuses his power—gives his old wives to his children and takes the young ones, for example. The purest and most virtuous Japanese girl is obliged to go to a brothel if her father orders it. The patriarch has the power of life and death over both sexes, and from this is derived the cult of ancestors. At the present day we see immorality of this kind in the Russian patriarchism among the peasants; the fathers have the custom of misusing their sons' wives. Patriarchism thus degenerates into atrocious tyranny on the part of the chief of the family, who becomes looked upon as a god.
A law which is common in the Latin races, which forbids marriage before the age of thirty, without the consent of the father, is a vestige of patriarchism.
We see, therefore, that quite primitive savage races approached our most modern ideas in liberty of choice in marriage. Between these two periods humanity was under the yoke of a barbarous error—the intermediate stage of marriage by purchase and patriarchal autocracy. There has existed and still exists more than one aberration of this kind in the intermediate stages of civilization; for instance, torture, slavery and the use of narcotic substances, such as alcohol.
SEXUAL SELECTION
By sexual selection we mean union by choice among males and females. In the vertebrates, the female chooses much more commonly than the male, the latter being more disposed to pair with all the females than the females with all the males. We may certainly admit that this was also the case in primitive man, especially when there existed a rutting period, for then the sexual appetite was more violent. Moreover, even at the present day, women are on the average more difficult to please and more strict in their choice than men.
In the case of hybrids it is generally the male which violates the law of instinct. Female slaves often flee from their free husbands, but we never see male slaves abandon their free wives. Among savage races the woman is always more difficult to please than the man. Among half-breeds, it is nearly always the father who belongs to a higher race. The inverse rarely occurs; it is exceptional for a white woman to marry a negro. The same thing is reproduced among ourselves; we often see a cultured man marry an uneducated woman, but a cultured woman seldom marries a laborer.
It is especially among savages that the woman prefers the man who is strongest, most skillful, most ardent, and most audacious. Heroes always haunt the minds of women, who love to throw themselves at the head of conquerors. The ideal of certain women in Borneo is a husband who has killed many enemies and possesses their heads (head-hunters of Borneo). This psychological trait responds to natural selection, for the women obtain by this custom better protectors and stronger children.
On the other hand, man looks instinctively for a young, healthy and well-developed woman. It is on this basis that Greek art formed Eros and Aphrodite, designating the latter as goddess of both love and beauty.
Conception of Beauty.—The conception of beauty is very relative. The Australians laugh at our long noses and the natives of Cochin-China at our white teeth and red cheeks. Certain savage women bind their legs below the knees to make them swell, this effect being part of their idea of beauty. The Chinese admire the deformed feet of their women and their prominent cheek bones. In each nation the conception of beauty generally corresponds to the ideal type of the race, for both sexes. As a general rule muscle is admired in man and fullness of figure in woman. The Hottentots like women's breasts to be so pendulous that they can throw them over shoulder, and suckle the infants carried on their backs; they also admire the elongated lips of the vulva.
There are, therefore, few general typical characters of sexual preference; these are especially the ideal type of the race and the health of both sexes, voluptuous forms and grace in women, muscular strength and dexterity in men. Everything else is relative and variable, and depends on the local point of view, customs, race, individual taste, etc.
Thus, according to the conception of æsthetics, tattooing, the arrangement of the hair and beard, deformations of the nose, cranium, or feet, are admired by different peoples. Each race extols its own peculiarities; the European compares a woman's breasts to snow, the Malay to gold, etc. The natives of Coromandel paint their gods black and their devils white, while in Europe it is the reverse.
The association of love with beauty is not based on æsthetic sentiments, for the latter are disinterested, while the original instinct of love is interested. The association of the two things depends on the instinctive necessity of health, combined with the sexual appetite, although custom has produced numerous aberrations. Everything which differs markedly from the type of the race is more or less pathological. This is why instinct, determined by natural selection, repels it.
Fashion also rules among savages, but is less changeable among them than with us, and their taste for adornment only varies in the narrow circle of their customs.
Climate has a powerful action on the types of races, the latter being generally adapted to the climate in which they live. Thus, the European becomes darker in the tropics while negroes and Indians become paler in the north.
LAWS OF RESEMBLANCE—HYBRIDS
Every animal species has an instinctive repugnance to pair with another. Even where they are possible, natural hybrids are rare, and only become a little more frequent in domestic animals and plants. The fecundity of hybrids diminishes when they have connection among themselves, and this explains why the instinct for such connections tends to gradually disappear.
In his book on "The Mneme," Semon explains the infecundity of hybrids in a very plausible manner, by the disorder that a too large quantity of dissimilar hereditary engrams causes in the hereditary mneme of two conjugated cells. When the parents differ from each other only in a moderate degree homophony may still be reëstablished, and then the divergencies have a very favorable effect on the product, by the new combinations which they furnish in the course of its development.
Moral ideas follow the course of instincts, and this explains why sexual connection with animals is regarded as a horrible crime. This is especially produced by pathological aberration, or when one sex is completely isolated from the other. There is also a certain degree of aversion to copulation between different races, in animals as well as man; for example, between sheep and horses of different races, and between white men, negroes and Indians. There are, however, many hybrids or half-breeds in South America, and in Mexico they even constitute two-thirds of the population.
Broca maintained that human hybrids produced by the crossing of remote races, for example, between English and negroes or Australians, were usually sterile. Westermark disputes this, but agrees that these hybrids become enfeebled in a few generations. It has also been established that mixed marriage between Jews and Aryans are generally less fecund; but this fact is not yet sufficiently explained. Mulattoes, or hybrids between negroes and whites, constitute a degenerate race and hardly viable, at any rate if their descendants do not return entirely to one of the original races. Half-breeds between whites and American Indians, also called Ladinos, seem on the contrary to form a viable race, but one of little valor.
PROHIBITION OF CONSANGUINEOUS MARRIAGES
Sexual union between near relations nearly always causes a feeling of repugnance in man, and has been stigmatized by the term incest. Coitus between mother and son especially excites disgust. Sexual connection between parents and children, as well as between brothers and sisters is, however, common among certain tribes. Many other races allow marriage between brothers and sisters, but this is elsewhere generally condemned.
Among the Weddas, marriage between an elder brother and his younger sister is considered normal, while that between a younger brother and his elder sister, or between a nephew and his aunt, is regarded as unnatural. The latter simply shows that unions between young men and old women are not natural. Unions between brothers and sisters, and especially between half-brothers and half-sisters were licit among the Persians, Egyptians, Syrians, Athenians and ancient Jews. Those between uncles and nieces (more rarely between aunts and nephews) are sometimes permitted, sometimes prohibited. With the exception of Spain and Russia marriages between first cousins are allowed in Europe.
Exogamy and Endogamy.—Among many savages the prohibition of consanguineous marriage may be extended to relationship of the third degree. Marriage may even be prohibited among all members of the same tribe or clan, even when they are not related. This is called exogamous marriage, and reaches its extreme development among the Australians, who are only allowed to marry into remote clans.
We thus see that the great majority of savages extend their idea of incest much further than we do. The reason of this has been much discussed. It was formerly said that consanguineous marriage was contrary to the commandments of God; that it offended the natural sentiment of modesty; that it obscures relationship, etc. Nowadays, it is said to be injurious to posterity. Ethnography teaches us, however, that these statements are of little value.
Along with the exogamy of many tribes there is among other savages a system of endogamy, described by MacLennan; this is the prohibition of marriage between different clans. Spencer and MacLennan have different explanations of this custom which seem hardly natural. Westermark appears to be nearer the truth in remarking as follows: The sexual appetite, especially in man, is excited by new impressions and cooled by habit. It is not the fact of a man and woman being related, but intimate companionship since youth, which produces in them a repugnance to sexual union. We find the same repugnance between adopted brothers and sisters and between friends who have been intimate since childhood. When, on the contrary, brothers and sisters or near relatives have been separated from each other since an early age, they often fall in love with each other when they meet later on. There is, therefore, no innate or instinctive repugnance to incest in itself, but only against sexual union between individuals who have lived together since childhood. As it is parents and their children who are usually in this situation, everything is explained simply and clearly.
The causes of exogamy are explained in the same way, by the fact that members of the same clan often live together in close intimacy. It is the small clans, formed of thirty or fifty individuals of a few families living together, which have the most severe laws against incest or endogamy. Where the families live in separate homes, such prohibitions do not exist. The Maoris, who are endogamous, inhabit villages which are widely separated, and marriage between relations is allowed. Endogamy generally exists where the clan life is little developed, and where relatives know and see little of each other. The aversion to marriage between persons living together has thus created prohibition of marriage between relations as well as that of marriage between members of the same clan. It is the same reason which has led to the prohibition of marriage between brothers-and sisters-in-law, between brothers and adopted sisters, etc. In people living in small communities, endogamy does not appear to have ever existed.
Incest between relatives living together appears to have everywhere the same natural cause—the scarcity of women in isolated families living in remote districts. There is also a psycho-pathological form of incest associated with morbid appetites in the families of degenerates. In animals living alone and whose families break up very rapidly (cats for example) incestuous unions, between parents and young, for instance, are quite common.
Let us now consider the scientific side of the question. We see everywhere that sexual union between quite distinct animal species gives no result. At the most, certain closely allied species, such as the ass and the horse, the rabbit and the hare, give progeny which are themselves sterile (mules, etc.). The feebleness and sterility of hybrids derived from widely separated races or nearly allied different species proves the deficiency in vital force of the offspring of fundamentally dissimilar procreators. But, on the other hand, the dangers of continuous consanguineous reproduction are no less evident. Perpetual unions between brothers and sisters for several generations, lead to degeneration of the race. For example, the still-births will be 25 per cent. instead of 8 per cent., which is the figure in ordinary crossings. The prejudice against consanguineous unions may, however, depend on the accumulation of certain pathological defects.
Westermark admits that it is difficult to show clearly that consanguineous marriages are prejudicial in man. The consanguinity which causes evil effects in animals concerns long-continued unions between parents and children or brothers and sisters. But this never occurs in man. Animals and plants may be perpetuated for many years in the closest consanguinity without degeneration resulting. Among the Persians and Egyptians, intimate unions have existed for a long time without producing degeneration.
On the other hand, breeders of animals tell us that a single drop of new blood (or rather sperm) is enough to counteract all the evil effects of consanguinity. In man the most frequent incests are always interrupted by some other union. The Ptolemies, who nearly always married their sisters, nieces or cousins, lived long and were far from being sterile. In Ceylon, the Weddas perpetuate their consanguineous unions; insanity is rare among them, but they are small, unfruitful and tend to become extinct.
In Europe, the question of marriages between first cousins has been much discussed, and it has been constantly attempted to prove that they are injurious. Nevertheless, when we examine the question impartially, we always find that the prejudices against them do not arrive from consanguinity, but from certain pathological defects, such as insanity, hemophilia, etc., which are naturally perpetuated by consanguineous unions when they are accumulated in one family, as well as when two insane persons of different families marry. Therefore it is not consanguineous unions in themselves (which are always accidental in man and interrupted by others) but the hereditary reproduction of pathological defects, often of blastophthoric origin, which are the real cause of the evil. Statistics have clearly proved that marriage between first cousins plays no part in the causes of insanity.
Influenced, no doubt, by general opinion, Westermark tries to believe in some instinctive repulsion of man for consanguineous unions. If in modern society such unions, perpetuated between parents and children, brothers and sisters, were still produced as in animals I should agree that they might be injurious to the species; but, considering how cosmopolitan and mixed is our modern society, I cannot make the concession. On the contrary, I maintain that the isolated unions which still take place between relatives in civilized countries are so exceptional that they do not present the least danger, excepting among the families of degenerates. It is therefore only a question of superstition. What we have to guard against are unions between pathological individuals and blastophthoric influences. We must not forget that many degenerates and idiots have a great pathological tendency to incest, and this is no doubt why the effect has been confounded with the cause.
Westermark himself gives us a striking example. Since the most remote times the inhabitants of the Commune of Bats, composed of 3,300 persons, have intermarried; yet this population is very healthy and vigorous and shows no sign of degeneration. On the other hand, we have seen that contrasts produce a mutual attraction in the domain of love, while strong resemblances rather repel. Bernardin de St. Pierre has said that love is created by contrasts; the greater the contrast the greater the love. Schopenhauer remarks as follows: "Every individual seeks in the opposite sex peculiarities which contrast with his own; the most masculine man seeks the most feminine woman, while small and feeble men love large and strong women; people with short noses prefer long ones, tall and thin men prefer short and stout women. All this increases fecundity." Thus instinct is sufficient to protect humanity against consanguinity, each sex instinctively seeking the contrasts which consanguinity diminishes.
SENTIMENT AND CALCULATION IN SEXUAL SELECTION
Youth, beauty, health, finery and flirtation excite the sexual appetite. Many other sentiments are accessory, such as admiration, the pleasure of possession, respect, pity, etc. Inclination is an important element, but in no way necessary to sexual union.
In the lower stages of human development, tenderness toward children is much stronger than sexual love. Among many savage races the love of a man for his wife is completely wanting, as well as that of the wife for her husband. In this case marriage depends on reciprocal convenience, on the desire to have children, and profits by personal comfort and the satisfaction of a purely animal sexual appetite. However, among these people the parents have a tender regard for their children. The husband has the right to beat his wife, but the wife is considered as unnatural or even criminal if she beats her children. Among the North American Indians, for example, conjugal love is, so to speak, unknown. On the other hand, in other savage races, such as the Touaregs, the Niam-Niams, the New Caledonians, the Tonganese and Australians, the conjoints have a deep affection for each other, and the husband often commits suicide on the death of his wife. On the whole, the sentiments of affection of the conjoints are the result of a long sexual life in common, and they are especially strengthened by the love of the parents for their children.
As a rule, the mutual attachment of conjoints for each other among cultivated races is developed along with altruism. The tenderness and refinement of love as they exist at the present day among highly civilized races were unknown to most savages and to the older civilizations. In China it is considered good manners to beat the wife, and when a poor Chinaman treats his wife with consideration, it is to avoid having to buy another. What the Arab understands by love is only sexual appetite, and among the ancient Greeks it was nearly the same.
In civilized Europe mental culture progresses in the direction of equality of rights between the two sexes, so that a man regards his wife more as a companion who is his equal and no longer a slave. Community of interests, opinions, sentiments and culture constitute a primary condition for sentiments of mutual sympathy and favors affection. No doubt, excitation of the sexual appetite by contrasts acts here as an antagonistic force. Contrast should not be so great as to exclude sympathy.
Too great difference in age is dangerous for attachment, for it causes too great a divergence in the aims and interests of life. Education and social equality also favors love, and this tends to preserve class distinction. It is rare for a well-educated man to fall in love with a peasant, or a laboring man with an educated woman, except in a sensual way. Men generally avoid marriage with individuals of another race, or of another religion.
Endogamy and exogamy do not form such an absolute contrast as at first sight might appear. Even among exogamous races, there is a limit which must not be passed. These races often prohibit marriage with individuals of another race. Among the Arabs, for example, the instinct of ethnical separation is so strong, that the same Bedouin wife who will prostitute herself for money with Turks or Europeans, would think it dishonorable to marry one of them. In this way custom produces endogamy of caste and class among the same people. The same with the nobility; in ancient Rome it was forbidden for a patrician to marry a plebeian. Sometimes an endogamy of religious origin is met with, among the Jews for example.
Children are treasures for the man of low culture, while they become a burden to the cultivated man. In spite of this the natural man ardently desires children. In Switzerland, two-fifths of the divorces occur in sterile unions, although the latter only form one-fifth of all marriages.
Calculation often smothers sentiment when it becomes the basis of marriage. We live to-day under the sway of Mammon, with the result that the influence of love, strength, beauty, capacity for work, intelligence, skill, character and even health, count for little compared with money in the question of marriage. This sad sign is really a new form of marriage by purchase, hypocritically disguised.