Hegel, in his celebrated definition of marriage,[164] which he regards as the embodiment of the reality of the species and as the spiritual unity of the natural sexes brought about by self-conscious love, as legal-moral love, has not done justice to the recognition and development of the individuality of =both= parties. The “unity,” the “one body and one soul,” corresponds indeed to the patriarchal conception, according to which the woman is completely absorbed into the man; it does not correspond, however, to the modern idea of individual marriage, in which both man and woman are united as free personalities. This, as we shall see later, is the meaning of the struggle for “free-love,” which must not be confused, as, for example, it is confused by Ludwig Stein (“Beginnings of Civilization,” p. 110), with the free-love, the hetairism, of ancient times, or with the simple extra-conjugal intercourse of the present day. =Neither the mother-right alone, nor the father-right alone, is competent to satisfy the ideals of modern civilized human beings, in respect of the configuration of the social forms of the amatory life.= This is only possible when both forms of right are united in a new form, by equal rights given to both sexes.[165] Hence, in association with the endeavour for the free individual development of the feminine nature, we find also the tendency to reintroduce into public life, into true valuation and honour, the ancient conception of the mother-right. “Slowly and gradually,” says Kohler, “has the reawakened idea of the mother-right been gnawing with a sharp tooth, now in one way, now in another, at the rigid fetters of this system, and has loosened them.... =That in this manner woman will attain a worthier position is certain.= But the unitary family-sense has long ceased among us to be the powerful incentive to action that it is among the purely agnate (patriarchal) peoples.... Our own conditions render it possible that the institutions of civilization will continue to thrive, even though the family tie is no longer tense and exclusive.”