CHAPTER XIV.
MARRIAGE RITES.
Marriage, or sexual union of a more or less permanent character, from the intimate connection which it creates, has obvious analogies to the admission of a new member into a clan. In early stages of culture it was not, however, deemed to constitute admission into the clan; and to the present day, in English law, husband and wife, though united by the closest of all ties, are not reckoned among the next of kin to one another. Still it inaugurates a new relationship, not only as between the immediate parties, but also as between their respective kindred. As doing so, it is an occasion on which the consent and concurrence of the kindred are required, and it is appropriately solemnised by rites bearing a close resemblance to the blood-covenant. An examination of some of these rites will be useful in strengthening our apprehension of the sacramental ideas of savages, and will help to complete our view of the savage conception of life.
Among several of the aboriginal tribes of Bengal a curious ceremony is practised. It is known as sindúr (or sindra) dán, and consists in the bridegroom’s marking his bride with red lead. This ceremony is the essential part of the entire performance, which renders the union indissoluble, in the same way as the putting on of the ring in the marriage service of this country. The sindúr, or red lead, is generally smeared on the bride’s forehead and the parting of her hair, but sometimes on her neck. It is usually done either with the little finger or with a knife.[335.1] In either case this detail is significant, because it points to the origin of the custom. There can be no doubt that vermilion is a well-recognised symbol of blood. I have already mentioned the primitive usage of daubing the stone which was both god and altar with the blood of the sacrificed victim. Everywhere in India the idol, whether a finished simulacrum or a rude unchiselled stone, is dashed with vermilion. Sometimes the object of worship is a tree; and its stem in the same way is streaked with red lead. Sir William Hunter lays it down that the worship of the Great Mountain, the national god of the Santals, “is essentially a worship of blood.” Human sacrifices were common, until put down by the British. At the present day, “if the sacrificer cannot afford an animal, it is with a red flower or a red fruit that he approaches the divinity.”[335.2] Nor is red as a symbol of blood confined to India. We do not need to go further afield than the Roman Catholic Church, or even certain sections of the English Church, to find red worn in ecclesiastical ceremonies on the day of a martyr’s commemoration, expressly as an allusion to the outpouring of that martyr’s blood. The use of the colour in the wedding ceremony has reference also to blood. Among the Dom, the Muchi, the Sánkhári and other Bengali tribes red is the bridal colour;[336.1] as it is likewise in China, at least where the bride is a maiden.[336.2] In Ukrainia at a certain stage of the proceedings a red flag is hoisted and red ribbons adorn the dresses of the bride and other members of the party. The meaning attached to them in this case does not admit of doubt;[336.3] and it may be legitimately inferred in the others.
But the proof of the significance of the sindra dán rests not on the antecedent probability afforded by the use of red in rites of worship and marriage. Among the Bírhors the wedding ceremony is very simple. It consists entirely in drawing blood from the little fingers of the bride and bridegroom, and smearing it on one another.[336.4] The ritual, on the other hand, of the Káyasth, or writer caste of Behar, is as complex as that of the Bírhors is simple; and it bears at every stage the marks of antiquity. After the bridegroom arrives with his procession at the bride’s house, but before he is allowed to see her, her nails are solemnly cut. The opportunity is taken to draw from her little finger a drop of blood, which is received upon a piece of cotton soaked in red dye. Later on, after the bridegroom has formally rubbed her forehead with the sindúr, his neck is touched with this piece of cotton; and the bride’s neck is also touched with a similar piece brought by the bridegroom, but not containing any of his blood.[336.5] Here we seem to have the ceremony in a double, if not a triple form. The dye on the cotton would represent blood. Nor is it unimportant that the bridegroom having previously plastered the sindúr, which stands for his blood, on the bride, does not need to bring his blood into contact with her. Among the Kewat, another caste of Behar, the ceremony is also duplicated. After the sindúr dán a tiny scratch is made on the little finger of the bridegroom’s right hand and of the bride’s left. Blood is drawn from each and mingled with a dish of boiled rice and milk; and either party then eats the food containing the other’s blood.[337.1] Similarly in the Rájput ritual the family priest of the bride’s household fills the bridegroom’s hand with sindúr and marks the bride’s forehead with it. This is done on the first day. The next morning they are brought together, and each of them is made to chew betel with which a drop of blood from the other’s little finger has been mixed. The bride is then conducted to the bridegroom’s house, and the marriage is consummated.[337.2] Among the Kharwár blood mixed with sindúr is exchanged, although what is now the final and binding act of smearing the sindúr is performed by the bridegroom alone.[337.3] The Kurmi bridegroom also touches the bride between the breasts with a drop of his own blood, drawn from his little finger and mixed with lac-dye, prior to the performance of the sindra dán.[337.4] Among the Rautiá, as among the Birhors, the sindra dán is effected with one another’s blood taken from the little fingers.[337.5]
The meaning of the ceremony therefore cannot be mistaken. It is precisely parallel to the blood-covenant: it constitutes a permanent bodily union between the parties. Oriental scholars regard it as in origin Dravidian. It is, however, now practised also by the Aryan Hindus, and its survival among many aboriginal tribes in a double form is ingeniously attributed by Mr. Risley to its readoption by them from the Hindus in the later form of smearing with vermilion, after the connection between the red lead and the blood had been lost sight of.[338.1] It is certain that many customs have been taken in recent times by the Dravidian populations from the Hindus; and the theory of readoption is confirmed by the fact that the red lead is usually smeared only by the bridegroom on the bride, as if it were an act of ownership, whereas the blood-smearing is done by both parties.
Beyond the limits of Bengal, blood is not often a prominent feature in marriage rites. Yet some significant instances may be cited. We cannot reckon that of the ancient Aztecs among these. When, after the marriage feast, the Aztec bridal pair retired to their chamber, it was only to fast and pray during four days, and to draw blood from various parts of their bodies. The object of this bleeding, however, is said to have been the propitiation of their cruel gods. In fact, the idea of propitiation seems to have entered into the rite, and to have ousted what probably was the original intention—that, namely, of sacramental communion with the divinities. Such communion with the divinities may, of course, have been indirect communion with one another; though there is not sufficient evidence to warrant our asserting that this was meant, and still less that direct communion of the same kind was effected. But we are not left without examples elsewhere. The ceremonies of the Wukas, a tribe inhabiting the mountains of New Guinea, are exactly in point. Their weddings begin with an elopement, followed by pursuit and capture of both fugitives. The next step is to bargain for the price of the bride. When this is settled the marriage is performed by mutual cuts made by husband and wife in one another’s foreheads, so that the blood flows. The other members of both families then do likewise—a proceeding, we are told, “which binds together all the relations on both sides in the closest fraternal alliance.”[339.1] The writer I am quoting does not, indeed, mention any daubing or exchange of blood; but it is clear that this must be understood. On the island of Banguey, off the northernmost point of Borneo, is a tribe of Dusuns. Mr. Creagh, the governor of British North Borneo, visiting them a year or two ago, found that their marriage-rite consisted in transferring a drop of blood from a small incision made with a wooden knife in the calf of the man’s leg to a similar cut in the woman’s leg.[339.2] An Annamite story points to a ceremony in which the blood was drunk. A husband and wife swore that when one of them died the other would preserve the body until it came to life again, and would not marry a second time. The wife died, and the husband kept her corpse for seven months. At length the village elders remonstrated, fearing that the dead woman would become a demon and haunt the village. Rather than bury his wife, the husband arranged that they should help him to make a raft, and he would put the body upon it and float with it whithersoever the winds and the waves would take him. The raft was borne to the eastern paradise; and there Buddha, touched by the man’s story, raised his wife from the dead, and asked her if she loved her husband truly and constantly. She vowed she did. Whereupon Buddha directed him to draw a cupful of blood from his finger, and give it to her to drink: which was done. It is sad to relate that after all this she proved unfaithful, and, when she died, was changed by Buddha into a mosquito, which is always sucking blood, but never can get enough to restore to her husband, in accordance with Buddha’s command, the entire cupful of blood she had taken from him.[340.1] A tale from Mota, one of the Banks’ Islands, relates that certain women, who desire to become the hero’s wives, make him give them some of his liver to eat.[340.2]
On these two stories it would be easy to lay a stress greater than they will bear. But if they have any meaning it is in the direction we are seeking. Coming to Europe, however, we find a tale where we are on firmer ground. A Norwegian youth was curious to see if it were really true that the Huldren, or wood-women (a kind of supernatural beings), occupied the mountain-dwelling in the autumn, after it was deserted by the family for the lowlands. The story runs that he crept under a large upturned tub, and there waited until it began to grow dark. Then he heard a noise of coming and going; and it was not long before the house was filled with Huldre-folk. They immediately smelt Christian flesh, but could not find the lad, until at length a maiden discovered him beneath the tub, and pointed at him with her finger. He drew his knife and scratched her finger, so that the blood flowed. Scarcely had he done it, when the whole party surrounded him; and the girl’s mother, supported by the rest, demanded that he must now marry her daughter, because he had marked her with blood. There were several objections to marrying a Huldre-woman: among others, that she had a tail. But there was nothing else for it; and happily, when she had been instructed in the Word of God and baptized, she lost the undesirable appendage, and made the youth a faithful and loving spouse.[341.1] Now it may very well be that the reason for compelling this marriage is incomprehensible to the modern teller of the story, at least as a serious one. Yet the story can hardly have arisen and been propagated, with the incident in question as its catastrophe, unless a custom of marking with blood in connection with a wedding ceremony had been known to the original tellers. The barbarous nature of the custom is indicative of a much lower grade of civilisation than the Norwegian people have now, and long since, attained. And its ascription to the Huldre-folk suggests that it was practised by a non-Aryan race rather than by the Norsemen. It was certainly practised by the Finns; for a Finnish poem, entitled The Sun’s Son, describes its hero’s wedding ceremony in the following terms:—The bride’s father “leads and places them on the whale’s, the sea-king’s, hide. He scratches them both on their little fingers, mixes the blood together, lays hand in hand, unites breast to breast, knits the kisses together, bans the knots that jealousy has conjured, separates the hands, and looses the knots of the espousal.”[342.1] The correspondence of this rite with that of the aborigines of Bengal extends to the fingers whence the blood is drawn; and it cannot be doubted that we have here in full the ceremony referred to in the Norwegian tale. It will be remembered that the Icelandic saga of the farmer who appropriated a fairy cow stops short in its description of the act with the drawing of blood. The story now before us has suffered a similar curtailment.[342.2]
In other parts of the world we find red paint of some kind used apparently as a substitute for blood. An Australian bridegroom in the neighbourhood where Sydney now stands used to spit on his bride, and then with his right thumb and forefinger he took red powder and streaked her all over the face and body down to the navel.[342.3] The Caribs are reported to have had no specific rites of marriage. But a full-grown man would sometimes betroth himself to an unborn child, conditionally on its proving a girl. When this was done the custom was for him to mark the mother’s body with a red cross.[343.1] This is an act hardly susceptible of more than one interpretation. The red mark over the mother’s womb was no doubt originally made with the man’s blood, and, since the child itself could not be reached, was the expedient for effecting the union between him and the unborn infant.
The blood of a fowl often takes the place of that of the parties, in the East Indies. Among the aborigines of Southern India a fowl is sacrificed at the threshold of the bride’s room, and the foreheads of bride and bridegroom are marked with its blood; while among the Káháyáns of Borneo a cock and a hen are slaughtered, their blood received in a cup, and the happy pair are marked from head to foot with it.[343.2]
Out of many other ceremonies expressive of union I select for illustration that familiar to us in the Roman law under the name of Confarreatio. This solemn form of marriage took its name from the central rite, in which the man and woman seem to have eaten together of the round sacrificial cake, called the panis farreus. At all events, in the corresponding Greek ceremony they partook together of a sesamum-cake. In one shape or other this rite is found in many lands, perhaps over the greater portion of the globe. It has been too often described to need an extended notice here; but a few of its various forms may be mentioned, before we pass on to consider some of the analogies between the effects of marriage and of the blood-covenant.