CHAPTER VII THE EFFECTS OF INDUSTRIAL CHANGES UPON MARRIAGE The effect of industrial changes upon marriage among primitive peoples has been discussed at some length by students of primitive conditions. So closely do the industrial habits of mankind affect the social that one is forced to concede an important place to the economic in the evolution of the race. The preeminence of the struggle for subsistence in the history of civilization shows how reckless it is to make historical interpretations while neglecting the industrial side of society. race. The industrial habits of primitive peoples were intimately related to the physical environment. There had to be game before man could live by hunting; a body of water to fish in before there could be fishermen grass to feed the herds before herding could be the chief occupation of a people; and tillable soil before there could arise an agricultural stage in the history of the Favorable conditions had to exist before men could establish even a temporary dwelling place, not to mention a permanent one. Conditions determined the occupations of men, and in turn these occupations made possible a type of social life compatible with the environment. The social life was not a preconceived scheme so much as a development spontaneously arising out of existing conditions. The type of the family was no exception to this rule. Herman Grosse has a unique place as an exponent of the theory that economic occupations have always been the determining influence in the establishment of the form of marriage and the status of women. "Restricting his examination to the conditions which lie within actual historical or 'ethnological experience' he seeks to demonstrate that the 'various forms of the family correspond to the various forms of economy (Wirthschaft)'; that 'in its essential features the character of each particular form of the family may be explained by the form of economy in which it is rooted." Grosse's point of view is recognized by many writers who have given thought to the subject. Howard says, "It seems certain that the whole truth regarding the problem of kinship, as well as regarding the rise and sequence of the forms of the family, can be reached only through historical investigation of the industrial habits of mankind.' 112 Ward gives expression to the same idea when he says, “marriage is from the beginning an association dictated by economic needs." 3 No evidence existed bearing out the theory of the early prevalence of promiscuity in sexual relations other than a recognized looseness of sexual relations outside the marriage bond; or a marriage of such short duration as to warrant the appellation of temporary pairing. Where the latter custom prevails, it is the outcome of certain social conditions existing in a tribe, and not representative of a certain stage of culture. Even in our advanced western civilization there exist small communities of peoples who stand for certain moral principles developed to such extreme forms as to shock people generally. These principles often have their basis in sexual relations and are conspicuous by virtue of their contrast to general practices. They in nowise warrant the importance given them, representing as they do a mental excrescence and not a healthy social development. The same may apply equally to primitive societies. Only where certain causes have repeatedly brought about certain results are we justified in the conclusion that certain practices were common in a stage of which we have no direct knowledge. Speaking of promiscuity, Morgan thinks it "was limited to the period when mankind were frugivorous and within their primitive habitat, since its continuance would have been improbable after they had become fishermen and commenced their spread over the earth in dependence upon food artifically 1 Howard, A History of Matrimonial Institutions, I, pp. 60–61. 2 Ibid, I. p. 115. 3 Ward, Pure Sociology, p. 358. acquired. Consanguine groups would then form, with intermarriage within the group as a necessity, resulting in the formation of the consanguine family. At all events, the oldest. form of society which meets us in the past through deductions from systems of consanguinity is this family. It would be in the nature of a compact on the part of several males for the joint. subsistence of the group, and for the defence of their common wives against violence of society."+ Hobhouse says, "Sheer promiscuity is probably to be regarded rather as the extreme of looseness in the sexual relation than as a positive institution supported by social sanction." 5 Grosse finds in the different stages of industrial occupations which he designates as "lower" and "higher hunters" "pastoral peoples" "lower and higher cultivators of the soil," prevalent forms of marriage corresponding to the occupations pursued by the men. The Bushmen and the Esquimaux of the present time are the best representatives of the lower hunters among whom monogamy is the form of marriage. Whether the Bushmen or the Esquimaux represent a primitive type of the culture arising out of a lower stage of culture, or a degeneration from a higher type, the author does not know. But he tells us hunger plays a large part in their lives; and the lack of foresight or sense of accumulation accounts for the little advantage the few have over the many."'6 Hobhouse says, "the strict monogamy and well-united family life of the Veddahs is partly explained by the fact that they live in great measure in isolation. In the dry season they pass their time on their hunting ground; in the wet season small groups of families will resort to some hillock which is the center of two or three hunting grounds and sometimes two or three families will reside together for a time in cne cave.”ī Among the higher hunters, according to Grosse, monogamy is the prevalent form of marriage but polygamy is sanctioned, and practiced by the wealthy. Morgan, Ancient Society, p. 501. 8 5 Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution, p. 140. Hobhouse, Morals in Evolution. I, p. 43. The conditions of the herders are better known than that of the hunters. The individual family may rest upon monogamy or polygamy depending upon the wealth of the nomad. In Central Asia the price of the wife is often very high, and the father considers his daughters as a means of increasing his wealth. The price a well-to-do Kalmuck asks for his daughter is fifteen horses, fifteen cows, three camel, and twenty sheep. He gives in return as a dowry, one camel, one horse, four sewed garments, eight unmade garments, and tools depending upon his wealth." The great family (sippe) whether on the father's or mother's side developed a social organization having its basis in agriculture. Starke says, "An agricultural community lays much more claim to the capacity of each individual for labour than is the ease with a community which is wholly or chiefly occupied with the rearing of cattle. In the former case the diminution of the number of the household is a loss which is difficult to supply, and they are chiefly concerned in keeping up their numbers, that is, in retaining their hold on the individual. But in a cattlebreeding community men make it their first object to increase the number of stock. In the former community the head of the family opposes the departure of his daughter, and seeks to induce her wocer to become one of the household; but in the latter he sells her early, and for as high a price as possible." 10 While Grosse emphasizes the fact that the different forms of economy influence the prevalent form of marriage, it is apparent that polygamy exists in a marked degree where women are not valued for their labor, and where there has developed a stage of economy admitting of inequalities in wealth. It is when woman's work has real economic value that she obtains rights of her own. Agriculture as a means of subsistence is pursued to a marked degree only where there is a measure of security against enemies where there is strength by virtue of numbers. Under these circumstances warfare is not so common, and there is a tendency for the numbers of the sexes to remain comparatively equal. 9 Grosse, Ibid, pp. 104-5. 10 Starke, The Primitive Family, pp. 99, 100. "The circumstances attending marriage by service, especially when we compare it with marriage by purchase or capture, have shown us how much the relations of husband and wife are determined by what in the modern world is called the economic factor. The savage woman's price-if we mean by price the difficulty of approaching her-may be high or low. Where it is always possible to organize a raid and carry her off it is decidedly low, and she becomes the captor's property. When this is not countenanced, it is posible to buy her from her guardian, and then presumably her price like that of other things, is a matter of supply and demand. "'11 In all civilizations inequalities of wealth arise, and make possible social privileges differing from the common practices of the general population. Under such circumstances we always find social types at variance with established conceptions of right, and human nature showing itself in many cases unspeakably repulsive when free from any economic restraint. This is perhaps, the effect of a freedom from restraint which is made possible by great wealth. The only restraint then is public opinion or religious precepts; the former is easily swayed by the powerful and wealthy, and the latter often admits of a tolerance not shown to the masses of the people. In industrial communities where no great inequalities of wealth exist, the marriage relation tends toward monogamy. Even where western civilization has made little impression on social institutions, great and conscious inequalities do not often exist between the sexes, and woman's position is not a degraded one. All the important factors entering into economic life, tending to create serious distinctions-social, political and industrial-between men and men, between the rich and the poor, tend to differentiate status between men and women. Women are most degraded in the marriage relations where they are economically the weakest; where they personally control the least wealth. The few who are more fortunately situated are not sufficiently numerous to make any impressive protest even if they desired to do so. In a society where the few dictate to the many because of 11 Hobhouse, Morals and Evolution, I, p. 176. |