The evidence adduced seems conclusive that polyandry holds a relatively unimportant place in the sociological history of mankind. It is not of frequent occurrence; it is usually modified in the direction of monogamy; and it always implies a considerable progress in civilization. The case is much the same with polygyny.[431] It is not a mere limitation of promiscuity, as some writers believe,[432] but usually makes its appearance comparatively late in social history. It is found side by side with polyandry and does not grow out of it, as McLennan supposes. Finally, like polyandry, its importance as a form of sexual relations has been greatly magnified. True, polygyny is much more widely dispersed than polyandry, being found perhaps among the majority of races both in ancient and modern times.[433] Its rise is particularly favored by the economic and social forces which produce the patriarchal system.[434] But, on the other hand, among many barbarous peoples it is "almost unknown or even prohibited." Monogamy appears to be the _prevailing_ form of the family precisely among peoples least advanced in general culture and particularly in the economic arts.[435] It is highly significant, to take a single example, that among the Dravidian Veddahs of Ceylon, commonly regarded as anatomically and intellectually among the most backward races of mankind, monogamous unions last until death dissolves them. To those still untouched by foreign influences polyandry and polygyny are entirely unknown. There is no prostitution. Conjugal fidelity is remarkable. Free courtship exists. Children are treated with kindness; and in general the Sarasin brothers present a picture of pleasing domestic life among this singular people.[436] [431] On polygyny see SWINDEREN, _Disputatio de polygynia_ (1795); WEINHOLD, _Die deutschen Frauen_, II, 13 ff.; POST, _Familienrecht_, 63 ff.; _Geschlechtsgenossenschaft_, 17 ff., 26 ff.; KOVALEVSKY, _Tableau_, 101 ff.; HELLWALD, _Die mensch. Familie_, 367-437; MASON, _Woman's Share in Primitive Culture_, 222 ff.; DARWIN, _Descent of Man_, chaps. viii, xx; LUBBOCK, _Origin of Civilization_, 143; LETOURNEAU, _L'évolution du mariage_, chaps. viii, ix, x, xi; WAKE, _Marriage and Kinship_, chap. vi; SPENCER, _Principles of Sociology_, I, 682-97; STARCKE, _Primitive Family_, 261 ff., _passim_; WESTERMARCK, _Human Marriage_, 431 ff., and Index. For examples of polygyny see KOHLER, in _ZVR._, VII, 370, 379 (Papuas); VIII, 114 (Dekkan); IX, 324 (Bengal); X, 55 (Azteks); 97-99 (Bombay); XI, 432, 433 (Kamerun); HENRICI, "Das Recht der Epheneger," _ZVR._, XI, 134; POST, "Die Kodification des Rechts der Amaxosa," _ibid._, XI, 232, 233; REHME, "Das Recht der Amaxosa," _ibid._, X, 36. [432] For instance, SPENCER, _Principles of Sociology_, I, 672, 688.