Folklore; Manners and customs; Mythology; Religion
6. The evidence from direct historical statements as to the prevalence
of the matriarchal family, and inheritance through the maternal line.
To take these various testimonies in their order, let us begin with
(1.) The form of capture in bridal ceremonies. That this form survived
in Sparta, Crete, in Hindoo law, in the traditions of Ireland, in the
popular rustic customs of Wales, is not denied.
If we hold, with Mr. M'Lennan, that scarcity of women (produced by female
infanticide or otherwise) is the cause of the habit of capturing wives,
we may see, in survivals of this ceremony of capture among Aryans, a
proof of early scarcity of women, and of probable polyandry. But an
opponent may argue, like Mr. J. A. Farrer in 'Primitive Manners,' that
the ceremony of capture is mainly a concession to maiden modesty among
early races. Here one may observe that the girls of savage tribes are
notoriously profligate and immodest about illicit connections. Only
honourable marriage brings a blush to the cheek of these young persons.
This is odd, but, in the present state of the question, we cannot lean on
the evidence of the ceremony of capture. We cannot demonstrate that it
is derived from a time when paucity of women made capture of brides
necessary. Thus 'honours are easy' in this first deal.
(2.) The next indication is very curious, and requires much more
prolonged discussion. The custom of Exogamy was first noted and named by
Mr. M'Lennan. Exogamy is the prohibition of marriage within the supposed
blood-kinship, as denoted by the family name. Such marriage, among many
backward races, is reckoned incestuous, and is punishable by death.
Certain peculiarities in connection with the family name have to be noted
later. Now, Sir Henry Maine admits that exogamy, as thus defined, exists
among the Hindoos. 'A Hindoo may not marry a woman belonging to the same
gotra, all members of the gotra being theoretically supposed to have
descended from the same ancestor.' The same rule prevails in China.
'There are in China large bodies of related clansmen, each generally
bearing the same clan-name. They are exogamous; no man will marry a
woman having the same clan-name with himself.' It is admitted by Sir
Henry Maine that this wide prohibition of marriage was the early Aryan
rule, while advancing civilisation has gradually permitted marriage
within limits once forbidden. The Greek Church now (according to Mr.
M'Lennan), and the Catholic Church in the past, forbade intermarriages
'as far as relationship could be known.' The Hindoo rule appears to go
still farther, and to prohibit marriage as far as the common gotra name
seems merely to indicate relationship.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account