[207] Cf. Westermarck, op. cit. p. 99 sqq.
[208] Idem, ‘Méthode pour la recherche des institutions préhistoriques à propos d’un ouvrage du professeur Kohler,’ in Revue Internationale de Sociologie, v. 451.
[209] Ratzel, op. cit. iii. 124.
[210] Waitz, op. cit. ii, 469.
[211] Reade, Savage Africa, p. 452.
[212] See Mazzarella, La condizione giuridica del marito nella famiglia matriarcale, passim; Grosse, Die Formen der Familie, p. 76; Wilkes, U.S. Exploring Expedition, iv. 447 (Spokane Indians). It seems, however, that Dr. Mazzarella in several cases infers the husband’s complete subjection to his father-in-law from statements in which such a subjection is not really implied.
[213] Marsden, History of Sumatra, p. 262.
[214] Powers, Tribes of California, p. 382.
[215] Haddon, Head-Hunters, p. 160 sq.
In the first place, wives’ subjection to their husbands is due to the men’s instinctive desire to exert power and to the natural inferiority of women in such qualities of body and mind as are essential for personal independence. Generally speaking, the men are their superiors in strength and courage. They are therefore not only the protectors of their wives, but also their masters.