One of the most important of the influences which determine the form of marriage is the position of women, or rather the respect in which they are held by men. For polygyny implies a violation of woman’s feelings.
Several statements tend to show that jealousy and rivalry do not always disturb the peace in polygynous families. It sometimes happens that the first wife herself brings her husband a fresh wife or a concubine, or advises him to take one, when she becomes old herself, or if she proves barren, or has a suckling child, or for some other reason.[3123] In Equatorial Africa, according to Mr. Reade, the women are the stoutest supporters of polygyny:—“If a man marries,” he says, “and his wife thinks that he can afford another spouse, she pesters him to marry again, and calls him ‘a stingy fellow’ if he declines to do so.”[3124] Speaking of the Makalolo women, Livingstone observes, “On hearing that a man in England could marry but one wife, several ladies exclaimed that they would not like to live in such a country: they could not imagine how English ladies could relish our custom, for, in their way of thinking, every man of respectability should have a number of wives, as a proof of his wealth. Similar ideas prevail all down the Zambesi.”[3125] Among the Californian Modok also, according to the Hon. A. B. Meacham, the women are opposed to any change in the polygynous habits of the men.[3126] But such statements may easily be misinterpreted. Often the wives live peacefully together only in consequence of the strict discipline of the husband.[3127] They put up with polygyny, thanks to long custom; they even approve of it where it procures them advantages. The consideration of the whole family, and especially of the first wife, is increased by every new marriage the husband concludes.[3128] Where the wife is her husband’s slave, polygyny implies a greater division of labour. This is the reason why, among the Apaches, the women do not object to it; why, among the Bagobos of the Philippines, they rejoice at the arrival of a new wife; why, in the Mohammedan East, they themselves encourage the husband to marry more wives.[3129] Among the Arabs of Upper Egypt, says Baker, one of the conditions of accepting a suitor is, that a female slave is to be provided for the special use of the wife, although the slaves of the establishment occupy, at the same time, the position of concubines.[3130] Von Weber tells us of a Kafir woman who, on account of her heavy labour, passionately urged her husband to take another wife.[3131] Nevertheless, polygyny is an offence against the feelings of women, not only among highly civilized peoples, but even among the rudest savages. For jealousy is not exclusively a masculine passion, although it is generally more powerful in men than in women.[3132]
The Greenlanders have a saying that “whales, musk-oxen, and reindeer deserted the country because the women were jealous at the conduct of their husbands.”[3133] Regarding the Northern Indians, Hearne says, “The men are in general very jealous of their wives, and I make no doubt but the same spirit reigns among the women, but they are kept so much in awe of their husbands, that the liberty of thinking is the greatest privilege they enjoy.”[3134] Franklin tells us of an Indian woman who committed suicide by hanging herself, in a fit of jealousy; and another woman threw herself into the Mississippi with her child, when her husband took a new wife.[3135] As regards the Dacotahs, Mr. Prescott says that “polygamy is the cause of a great deal of their miseries and troubles. The women, most of them, abhor the practice, but are overruled by the men. Some of the women commit suicide on this account.”[3136] The natives of Guiana, according to the Rev. W. H. Brett, live in comfort, as long as the man is content with one wife, but, when he takes another, “the natural feelings of woman rebel at such cruel treatment, and jealousy and unhappiness have, in repeated instances, led to suicide.”[3137] Among the Tamanacs, says v. Humboldt, “the husband calls the second and third wife the ‘companions’ of the first; and the first treats these ‘companions’ as rivals and ‘enemies’ (‘ipucjatoje’).”[3138] Among the Charruas, it often happens that a woman abandons her husband if he has a plurality of wives, as soon as she is able to find another man who will take her as his only wife.[3139] And, when a Fuegian has as many as four women, his hut is every day transformed into a field of battle, and many a young and pretty wife must even atone with her life for the precedence given her by the common husband.[3140]
In the islands of the Pacific similar scenes occur. The missionary Williams’s wife once asked a Fiji woman who was minus her nose, “How is it that so many of your women are without a nose?” “It is due to a plurality of wives,” was the answer; “jealousy causes hatred, and then the stronger tries to cut or bite off the nose of the one she hates.”[3141] In Tukopia, many a wife who believed another woman to be preferred by the husband committed suicide.[3142] Among the Australian aborigines, the old wives are extremely jealous of their younger rivals, so that “a new woman would always be beaten by the other wife, and a good deal would depend on the fighting powers of the former whether she kept her position or not.”[3143] Among the Narrinyeri, according to the Rev. A. Meyer, the several wives of one man very seldom agree well with each other; they are continually quarrelling, each endeavouring to be the favourite.[3144] “The black women,” says Herr Lumholtz, “are also capable of being jealous.”[3145]
Among the Sea Dyaks, according to Sir Spenser St. John, the wife is much more jealous of her husband than he is of her.[3146] In China, many women dislike the idea of getting married, as they fear that, should their husbands become polygynists, there would remain for them a life of unhappiness. Hence, some become Buddhist or Taouist nuns, and others prefer death by suicide to marriage.[3147] Mr. Balfour asserts that, among the Mohammedans and ruling Hindu races who permit and practise polygyny, it causes much intriguing and disquiet in homes.[3148] According to Mr. Tod, it “is the fertile source of evil, moral as well as physical, in the East.”[3149] The same view is taken by Pischon and d’Escayrac de Lauture with regard to the polygyny of the Mohammedans.[3150] In Persia, says Dr. Polak, a married woman cannot feel a greater pain than if her husband takes a fresh wife, whom he prefers to her; then she is quite disconsolate.[3151] In Egypt, quarrels between the various women belonging to the same man are very frequent, and often the wife will not even allow her female slave or slaves to appear unveiled in the presence of her husband.[3152] In the description, in the Book of Proverbs, of domestic happiness, it is assumed that the husband has only one wife;[3153] and, in the latter part of the ‘Rig-Veda,’ there are hymns in which wives curse their fellow-wives.[3154]
The Abyssinian women are described as very jealous; and in the polygynous families of the Eastern Africans, Zulus, Basutos, &c., quarrels frequently arise.[3155] The Hova word for polygyny is derived from the root “ràfy,” which means “an adversary.” “So invariably,” says the Rev. J. Sibree, “has the taking of more wives than one shown itself to be a fruitful cause of enmity and strife in a household, that this word, which means ‘the making an adversary,’ is the term always applied to it.... The different wives are always trying to get an advantage over each other, and to wheedle their husband out of his property; constant quarrels and jealousy are the result, and polygamy becomes inevitably the causing of strife, ‘the making an adversary.’”[3156] Statements of this kind cannot but shake our confidence in the optimistic assertions of Dr. Le Bon and other defenders of polygyny.[3157]
In order to prevent quarrels and fights between the wives, the husband frequently gives each of them a separate house. It is probably in part for the same reason that, among several peoples, wives are usually chosen from one family. In general, says Domenech, when an Indian wishes to have many wives, he chooses before all others, if he can, sisters, because he thinks he can thus secure more domestic peace.[3158] This is true of many of the North American aborigines;[3159] a man who marries the eldest daughter of a family secures in many cases the right to marry all her sisters as soon as they are old enough to become his wives.[3160] The same practice is said to prevail in Madagascar,[3161] and, combined with polyandry, among certain peoples of India. But it is obvious that the evils of polygyny are not removed by such arrangements.
Where women have succeeded in obtaining some power over their husbands, or where the altruistic feelings of men have become refined enough to lead them to respect the feelings of those weaker than themselves, monogamy is generally considered the only proper form of marriage. Among monogamous savage or barbarous races the position of women is comparatively good; and the one phenomenon must be regarded as partly the cause, partly the effect of the other. The purely monogamous Iroquois, to quote Schoolcraft, are “the only tribes in America, north and south, so far as we have any accounts, who gave to woman a conservative power in their political deliberations. The Iroquois matrons had their representative in the public councils; and they exercised a negative, or what we call a veto power, in the important question of the declaration of war. They had the right also to interpose in bringing about a peace.”[3162] Moreover, they had considerable privileges in the family.[3163] Among the Nicaraguans—a people almost wholly monogamous,—the husbands are said to have been so much under the control of their wives that they were obliged to do the housework, while the women attended to the trading.[3164] Among the Zapotecs and other nations inhabiting the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, who do not permit polygyny, “gentleness, affection, and frugality characterize the marital relations.”[3165] In New Hanover[3166] and among the Dyaks,[3167] the wife seems to have a kind of authority; and among the Minahassers, according to Dr. Hickson, “the woman is, and probably has been for many generations, on a footing of equality with her husband.”[3168] Mr. Man states that, in the Andaman Islands, “the consideration and respect with which women are treated might with advantage be emulated by certain classes in our own land.”[3169] The Pádam wives are treated by their husbands with a regard that seems singular in so rude a race. “But I have seen,” says Colonel Dalton, “other races as rude who in this respect are an example to more civilized people. It is because with these rude people the inclination of the persons most interested in the marriage is consulted, and polygamy is not practised.”[3170] The Munda Kols of Chota Nagpore call a wife “the mistress of the house,” and she takes up a position similar to that of a married woman in Europe.[3171] The Santal women, who enjoy the advantage of reigning alone in the husband’s wigwam, according to Mr. E. G. Man, hold a much higher status in the family circle than their less fortunate sisters in most Eastern countries.[3172] The Kandhs, Bodo, and Dhimáls treat their wives and daughters with confidence and kindness, and consult them in all domestic concerns.[3173] Among the monogamous Moors of the Western Soudan, the women exercise a considerable influence on the men, who take the greatest pains to pay them homage.[3174] The Touareg wives’ authority is so great that, although Islam permits polygyny, the men are forced to live in monogamy.[3175] Among the monogamous Tedâ, the women hold a very high position in the family.[3176] As for European monogamy, there can be no doubt that it owes its origin chiefly to the consideration of men for the feelings of women.
The form of marriage is, further, influenced by the quality of the passions which unites the sexes. When love depends entirely on external attractions, it is necessarily fickle; but when it implies sympathy arising from mental qualities, there is a tie between husband and wife which lasts long after youth and beauty are gone.
It remains for us to note the true monogamous instinct, the absorbing passion for one, as a powerful obstacle to polygyny. “The sociable interest,” Professor Bain remarks, “is by its nature diffused: even the maternal feeling admits of plurality of objects; revenge does not desire to have but one victim; the love of domination needs many subjects; but the greatest intensity of love limits the regards to one.”[3177] The beloved person acquires, in the imagination of the lover, an immeasurable superiority over all others. “The beginnings of a special affection,” the same psychologist says, “turn upon a small difference of liking; but such differences are easily exaggerated; the feeling and the estimate acting and re-acting, till the distinction becomes altogether transcendent.”[3178] This absorbing passion for one is not confined to the members of civilized societies. It is found also among savage peoples, and even among some of the lower animals. Hermann Müller, Brehm, and other good observers have proved that it is experienced by birds; and Mr. Darwin found it among certain domesticated mammals.[3179] The love-bird rarely survives the death of its companion, even when supplied with a fresh and suitable mate.[3180] M. Houzeau states, on the authority of Frédéric Cuvier, “Lorsque l’un des ouistitis (Harpale jacchus) du Jardin des Plantes de Paris vint à mourir l’époux survivant fut inconsolable. Il caressa longtemps le cadavre de sa compagne; et quand à la fin il fut convaincu de la triste réalité, il se mit les mains sur les yeux, et resta sans bouger et sans prendre de nourriture, jusqu’à ce qu’il eût lui-même succombé.”[3181]