Chapter XXVI: The Subjection of Wives (1)

AMONG the lower races, as a rule, a woman is always more or less in a state of dependence. When she is emancipated by marriage from the power of her father, she generally passes into the power of her husband. But the authority which the latter possesses over his wife varies extremely among different peoples.

Frequently the wife is said to be the property or slave of her husband. In Fiji "the women are kept in great subjection. . . . Like other property, wives may be sold at pleasure, and the usual price is a musket."[1] "The Carib woman is always in bondage to her male relations. To her father, brother, or husband she is ever a slave, and seldom has any power in the disposal of herself."[2] Many North American Indians are said to treat their wives much as they treat their dogs.[3] Among the Shoshones "the man is the sole proprietor of his wives and daughters, and can barter them away, or dispose of them in any manner he may think proper."[4] Among the East African Wanika a woman "is a toy, a tool, a slave in the very worst sense; indeed she is treated as though she were a {630} mere brute."[5] Many other statements to a similar effect are met with in ethnographical literature.[6]

[Footnote 1: Wilkes, _U.S. Exploring Expedition_, iii. 332.]

[Footnote 2: Brett, _Indian Tribes of Guiana_, p. 353.]

[Footnote 3: Harmon, _Journal of Voyages in the Interior of North America_, p. 344.]

[Footnote 4: Lewis and Clarke, _Travels to the Source of the Missouri River_, p. 307.]

[Footnote 5: New, _Life, Wanderings, and Labourings in Eastern Africa_, p. 119.]

[Footnote 6: Gibbs, 'Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon,' in _Contributions to N. American Ethnology_, i. 198. von Martius, _Beiträge zur Ethnographie Amerika's_, i. 104 (Brazilian Indians). Reade, _Savage Africa_, p. 548 (Negroes of Equatorial Africa). Proyart, 'History of Loango,' in Pinkerton, _Collection of Voyages and Travels_, xvi. 570 (Negroes of Loango). Andersson, _Notes on Travel in South Africa_, p. 236 (Ovambo). Castrén, _Nordiska resor och forskningar_, i. 310; ii. 56 (Ostyaks). In all these cases women are said to be mere articles of commerce, or slaves, or kept in a state of dependence bordering on slavery. In other instances women are said to be oppressed by their husbands, or treated as inferior beings (Waitz [-Gerland], _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, iii. 100 [North American Indians]; vi. 626 [Melanesians]. Bancroft, _Native Races of the Pacific States_, i. 121 [Hare and Sheep Indians]. Powers, _Tribes of California_, p. 133 [Yuki]. Tuckey, _Expedition to Explore the River Zaire_, p. 371 [Negroes]. Ling Roth, _Aborigines of Tasmania_, p. 54).]

Yet it seems that even in cases where the husband's power over his wife is described as absolute, custom has not left her entirely destitute of rights. Of the Australian aborigines in general it is said that "the husband is the absolute owner of his wife (or wives)";[7] of the natives of Central Australia, that "each father of a family rules absolutely over his own circle";[8] of certain tribes in West Australia, that the state of slavery in which the women are kept is truly deplorable, and that the mere presence of their husbands makes them tremble.[9] But we have reason to believe that there is some exaggeration in these statements, and they certainly do not hold good of the whole Australian race. We have noticed above that custom does not really allow the Australian husband full liberty to kill his wife.[10] For punishing or divorcing her he must sometimes have the consent of the tribe.[11] There are even cases in which a wife whose husband has been unfaithful to her may complain of his conduct to the elders of the tribe, and he may have to suffer for it.[12] In North-West-Central Queensland the women are on one special occasion {631} allowed themselves to inflict punishments upon the men: at a certain stage of the initiation ceremony "each woman can exercise her right of punishing any man who may have ill-treated, abused, or 'hammered' her, and for whom she may have waited months or perhaps years to chastise."[13] Of the natives of Central Australia Messrs. Spencer and Gillen say that "the women are certainly not treated usually with anything which could be called excessive harshness";[14] and we hear from various authorities that in several Australian tribes married people are often much attached to each other, and continue to be so even when they grow old.[15] Among the aborigines of New South Wales, for instance, "the husbands are as a general rule fond of their wives, and the wives loyal and affectionate to their husbands."[16] Nay, white men who have lived among the blacks assure us that there are henpecked husbands even in the Australian desert.[17]

[Footnote 7: Curr, _The Australian Race_, i. 109.]

[Footnote 8: Eyre, _Expeditions of Discovery into Central Australia_, ii. 317.]

[Footnote 9: Salvado, _Mémoires historiques sur l'Australie_, p. 279. For other similar statements referring to the Australian aborigines, see Nieboer, _Slavery as an Industrial System_, p. 11.]

[Footnote 10: _Supra_, p. 418.]

[Footnote 11: Nieboer, _op. cit._ p. 17.]

[Footnote 12: _Ibid._ p. 18.]

[Footnote 13: Roth, _Ethnol. Studies among the North-West-Central Queensland Aborigines_, pp. 141, 176.]

[Footnote 14: Spencer and Gillen, _Native Tribes of Central Australia_, p. 50.]

[Footnote 15: Westermarck, _History of Human Marriage_, p. 359. Stirling, _Report of the Horn Expedition to Central Australia_, Anthropology, p. 36.]

[Footnote 16: Hill and Thornton, _Aborigines of New South Wales_, p. 7.]

[Footnote 17: Calvert, _Aborigines of Western Australia_, p. 31.]

Other instances may be added to show that the so-called absolute authority of husbands over their wives is not to be taken too literally. Of the Guiana Indians Sir E. F. Im Thurn observes:--"The woman is held to be as completely the property of the man as his dog. He may even sell her if he chooses."[18] But in another place the same authority admits not only that the women in a quiet way may have a considerable influence with the men, but that, "even if the men were--though this is in fact quite contrary to their nature--inclined to treat them cruelly, public opinion would prevent this."[19] Of the Plains Indians of the United States Colonel Dodge writes:--"The husband owns his wife entirely. He may abuse her, beat her, even kill her without question. She is more absolutely a slave than any negro before the war of rebellion." But {632} on the following page we are told that custom gives to every married woman of the tribes "the absolute right to leave her husband and become the wife of any other man, the sole condition being that the new husband must have the means to pay for her."[20] Among the Chippewyans the women are said to be "as much in the power of the men as any other articles of their property," although, at the same time, "they are always consulted, and possess a very considerable influence in the traffic with Europeans, and other important concerns."[21] Among the Mongols a woman is "entirely dependent on her husband"; yet "in the household the rights of the wife are nearly equal to those of the husband."[22] Dr. Paulitschke tells us that among the Somals, Danakil, and Gallas, a wife has no rights whatever in relation to her husband, being merely a piece of property; but subsequently we learn that she is his equal, and "a mistress of her own will."[23] We must certainly not, like Mr. Spencer, conclude that where women are exchangeable for oxen or other beasts they are "of course" regarded as equally without personal rights.[24] The bride-price is a compensation for the loss sustained in the giving up of the girl, and a remuneration for the expenses incurred in her maintenance till the time of her marriage;[25] it does not _eo ipso_ confer on the husband absolute rights over her. With reference to certain tribes in South-Eastern Africa, the Rev. James Macdonald observes:--"A man obtains a wife by giving her father a certain number of cattle. This, though often called such, is not purchase in the usual sense of the word. The woman does not become a chattel. She cannot be resold or ill-treated beyond well-defined legal limits. She retains certain rights to property and an interest in the cattle paid for her. They are a guarantee for the husband's good {633} behaviour."[26] There are even peoples among whom the husband's authority hardly exists, although he has had to pay for his wife.[27]

[Footnote 18: Im Thurn, _Indians of Guiana_, p. 223.]

[Footnote 19: _Ibid._ p. 215.]

[Footnote 20: Dodge, _Our Wild Indians_, p. 205 _sq._]

[Footnote 21: Mackenzie, _Voyages to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans_, p. cxxii. _sq._ Schoolcraft, _Archives of Aboriginal Knowledge_, v. 176.]

[Footnote 22: Prejevalsky, _Mongolia_, i. 69 _sqq._]

[Footnote 23: Paulitschke, _Ethnographie Nordost-Afrikas_, pp. 189, 190, 244.]

[Footnote 24: Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 750.]

[Footnote 25: Westermarck, _History of Human Marriage_, p. 402.]

[Footnote 26: Macdonald, _Light in Africa_, p. 159.]

[Footnote 27: _E.g._, the Navahos and Pelew Islanders (Westermarck, _op. cit._ pp. 392, 393, 398 _sq._ For the position of wives among these peoples, see _infra_, pp. 638, 643).]

Among many peoples the hardest drudgeries of life are said to be imposed on the women. Among the Kutchin "the women are literally beasts of burden to their lords and masters. All the heavy work is performed by them."[28] The Californian Karok, while on a journey, lays by far the greatest burdens on his wife, whom he regards as a drudge.[29] Among the Kenistenos the life of the women is an uninterrupted succession of toil and pain, hence "they are sometimes known to destroy their female children, to save them from the miseries which they themselves have suffered."[30] "The condition of the women among the Chaymas," says von Humboldt, "like that in all semi-barbarous nations, is a state of privation and suffering. The hardest labour is their share."[31] Among the Australian aborigines "wives have to undergo all the drudgery of the camp and the march, have the poorest food and the hardest work."[32] In Eastern Central Africa "the women hold an inferior position. They are viewed as beasts of burden, which do all the harder work."[33] Among the Kakhyens "the men are averse to labour, but the lot of all women, irrespective of rank, is one of drudgery";[34] and so forth.[35] But it seems that {634} these and similar statements, however correct they be, hardly express the whole truth. In early society each sex has its own pursuits. The man is responsible for the protection of the family, and, ultimately, for its support. His occupations are such as require strength and agility--fighting, hunting, fishing, the construction of implements for the chase and war, and, frequently, the cutting of trees and the building of lodges.[36] The woman may accompany him as a helpmate on his expeditions, sometimes even participating in the battle,[37] and when they travel she generally carries the baggage. But her principal occupations are universally of a domestic kind: she procures wood and water, prepares the food, dresses skins, makes clothes, takes care of the children. She, moreover, supplies the household with vegetable food, gathers roots, berries, acorns, and so forth, and among agricultural peoples very frequently cultivates the soil. Whilst cattle-rearing, having developed out of the chase, is largely a masculine pursuit,[38] agriculture, having developed out of collecting seeds and plants, originally devolves on the women.[39]

[Footnote 28: Hardisty, 'Loucheux Indians,' in _Smithsonian Report_, 1866, p. 312.]

[Footnote 29: Powers, _op. cit._ p. 23 _sq._]

[Footnote 30: Schoolcraft, _Archives of Aboriginal Knowledge_, v. 167.]

[Footnote 31: von Humboldt, _Personal Narrative of Travels_, iii. 238.]

[Footnote 32: Curr, _The Australian Race_, i. 110.]

[Footnote 33: Macdonald, _Africana_, i. 35.]

[Footnote 34: Anderson, _Mandalay to Momien_, p. 137.]

[Footnote 35: For other instances, see Mackenzie, _Voyages to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans_, p. 147 (Rocky Mountain Indians); Parker, in Schoolcraft, _Archives_, v. 684 (Comanches); Im Thurn, _op. cit._ p. 215 (Guiana Indians); Keane, 'Botocudos,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xiii. 206; Weddell, _Voyage towards the South Pole_, p. 156, Darwin, _Journal of Researches_, p. 216, and Bove, _Patagonia_, p. 131 (Fuegians); Nieboer, _op. cit._ p. 13 _sqq._ (Australian aborigines); Williams and Calvert, _Fiji_, p. 145; Forster, _Voyage round the World_, ii. 324 (natives of Tana, of the New Hebrides); Zimmermann, _Inseln des indischen und stillen Meeres_, ii. 17 (New Caledonians), 105 (New Irelanders); Lewin, _Wild Races of South-Eastern India_, pp. 192 (Toungtha), 254 _sq._ (Kukis); Rowney, _Wild Tribes of India_, p. 214 (most of the wild tribes of India); Reade, _op. cit._ pp. 51, 259, 545 (various African peoples); Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, ii. 117 (Negroes); Valdau, 'Om Ba-Kwileh folket,' in _Ymer_, v. 167, 169.]

[Footnote 36: See Spencer, _Principles of Sociology_, i. 750 _sqq._]

[Footnote 37: For women taking part in battles, see Schoolcraft, _Indian Tribes of the United States_, i. 236 (Comanches); Powers, _op. cit._ pp. 246 (Shastika Indians of California), 253 (Modok Indians of California); Waitz [-Gerland], _op. cit._ iii. 375 (Caribs), vi. 121 (Maoris); Wilkes, _op. cit._ v. 93 (Kingsmill Islanders); Kotzebue, _Voyage of Discovery into the South Sea_, iii. 171 (natives of Radack).]

[Footnote 38: Grosse, _Die Formen der Familie_, p. 92 _sqq._]

[Footnote 39: _Ibid._ p. 159. Hildebrand, _Recht und Sitte auf den verschiedenen wirthschaftlichen Kulturstufen_, p. 44 _sqq._ Dargun, 'Ursprung und Entwicklungsgeschichte des Eigenthums,' in _Zeitschr. f. vergl. Rechtswiss._ v. 39, 110. Bücher, _Die Entstehung der Volkswirthschaft_, p. 36 _sqq._ Schurtz, _Das afrikanische Gewerbe_, p. 7. Ling Roth, 'Origin of Agriculture,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xvi. 119 _sq._ Mason, _Woman's Share in Primitive Culture_, pp. 15 _sqq._, 146 _sqq._, 277 _sq._ Havelock Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p. 5. von den Steinen, _Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Brasiliens_, p. 214. von Schuetz-Holzhausen, _Der Amazonas_, p. 67 (Peruvian Indians). Waitz, _op. cit._ iii. 376 (Caribs). Prescott, in Schoolcraft, _Indian Tribes of the United States_, i. 235 (Dacotahs). Colden, _ibid._ iii. 191; Seaver, _Narrative of the Life of Mrs. Mary Jemison_, p. 168 (Iroquois). 'Die Baluga-Negritos der Provinz Pampanga (Luzon),' in **_Globus_, xli. 238. Zöller, _Kamerun_, iii. 58 (Banaka and Bapuku). Möller, Pagels, and Gleerup, _Tre år i Kongo_, i. 129, 137 (Kuilu Negroes), 270 (Bakongo). Valdau, in _Ymer_, v. 165 (Bakwileh). Burrows, 'Natives of the Upper Welle District,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxviii. 41 (Niam-Niam). New, _op. cit._ pp. 114 (Wanika), 359 (Wataveta). Stuhlmann, _Mit Emin Pascha ins Herz von Afrika_, p. 182 (Waganda). Pogge, _Im Reiche des Muata Jamwo_, p. 243 (Kalunda of Mussumba). Decle, _Three Years in Savage Africa_, pp. 78, 79, 85 (Barotse), 160 (Matabele). von Weber, _Vier Jahre in Afrika_, ii. 195 (Zulus). There are, however, exceptions to the rule. Among the Creeks and Cherokee Indians not a third part as many women as men are seen at work in their plantations (Bartram, in _Trans. American Ethn. Soc._ iii. pt i. 31). Among the Wakamba both sexes work in the fields, all heavy work, such as clearing and breaking new ground, being done by men (Decle, _op. cit._ p. 493). Among various peoples, indeed, such agricultural work as requires considerable strength devolves on the male sex (Hildebrand, _op. cit._ p. 44 _sqq._ Havelock Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p. 5). In the Malay Archipelago the men are chiefly engaged in the field-work (Ratzel, _History of Mankind_, i. 441). In the Kingsmill Islands (Wilkes, _op. cit._ v. 91), Tonga (Cook, _Voyage to the Pacific Ocean_, i. 390 _sqq._), and the Caroline Group (Cantova, quoted _ibid._ i. 392, note) the soil is cultivated by the men. Among the Gallas, "whilst the women tend the sheep and oxen in the field, and manage the hives of bees, the men plough, sow, and reap" (Harris, _Highlands of Aethiopia_, iii. 47).]

{635} The various occupations of life are thus divided between the sexes according to rules; and, though the formation of these rules no doubt has been more or less influenced by the egoism of the stronger sex, the essential principle from which they spring lies deeper. They are on the whole in conformity with the indications which nature herself has given. Take, for instance, the apparently cruel custom of using the women as beasts of burden. To the superficial observer, as M. Pinart remarks--with special reference to the Panama Indians,--it may indeed seem strange that the woman should be charged with a heavy load, while the man walking before her carries nothing but his weapons. But a little reflection will make it plain that the man has good reason for keeping himself free and mobile. The little caravan is surrounded with dangers: when traversing a savannah or a forest a hostile Indian may appear at any moment, or a tiger or a snake may lie in wait for the travellers. Hence the man must be on the alert, and ready in an instant to catch his arms to defend himself and his family against the aggressor.[40] Dobrizhoffer writes, "The luggage being all committed to the women, the Abipones travel armed {636} with a spear alone, that they may be disengaged to fight or hunt, if occasion require."[41]

[Footnote 40: Pinart, quoted by Nieboer, _op. cit._ p. 21.]

[Footnote 41: Dobrizhoffer, _Account of the Abipones_, ii. 118. _Cf._ Wied-Neuwied _Reise nach Brasilien_, ii. 17, 37 (Botocudos); Giddings, _Principles of Sociology_, p. 266 _sq._]

Moreover, whatever may have been the original reason for allotting a certain occupation to the one sex to the exclusion of the other, any such restriction has subsequently been much emphasised by custom, and in many cases by superstition as well.[42] In Africa it is a common belief that the cattle get ill if women have anything to do with them.[43] Hence among most Negro races milking is only permitted to men.[44] In South-Eastern Africa "a woman must not enter the cattle fold."[45] The Bechuanas never allow women to touch their cattle, hence the men have to plough themselves.[46] In North America Indian custom and superstition ordain that the wife must carefully keep away from all that belongs to her husband's sphere of action.[47] On the other hand, among the Dacotahs "the men do not often interfere with the work of the women; neither will they help them if they can avoid it, for fear of being laughed at and called a woman."[48] In Abyssinia "it is infamy for a man to go to market to buy anything. He cannot carry water or bake bread; but he must wash the clothes belonging to both sexes, and, in this function, the women cannot help him."[49] Among the Beni A[h.]sen tribe in Morocco the women of the village where I was staying were quite horrified when one of my native servants set out to fetch water; they would on no account allow him to do what they said was a woman's business. The Greenlander regards it as scandalous for a man to interfere with any occupation which belongs to the women. When he has brought his booty to land, he troubles himself no further about it; "for it would be a stigma on his character, {637} if he so much as drew a seal out of the water."[50] Among the Bakongo a man would be much ridiculed by the women themselves, if he wanted to help them in their work in the field.[51] Sometimes agriculture is supposed to be dependent for success on a magic quality in woman, intimately connected with child-bearing.[52] Some Orinoco Indians said to Father Gumilla:--"When the women plant maize the stalk produces two or three ears; when they set the manioc the plant produces two or three baskets of root; and thus everything is multiplied. Why? Because women know how to produce children, and know how to plant the corn so as to ensure its germinating. Then, let them plant it; we do not know so much as they do."[53]

[Footnote 42: See Crawley, _Mystic Rose_, p. 49 _sq._]

[Footnote 43: Schurtz, _Das afrikanische Gewerbe_, p. 10.]

[Footnote 44: Ratzel, _op. cit._ ii. 419.]

[Footnote 45: Macdonald, _Life in Africa_, p. 221.]

[Footnote 46: Holub, 'Central South African Tribes,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ x. 11.]

[Footnote 47: Waitz, _op. cit._ iii. 100.]

[Footnote 48: Prescott, in Schoolcraft, _Indian Tribes of the United States_, iii. 235.]

[Footnote 49: Bruce, _Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile_ iv. 474.]

[Footnote 50: Nansen, _First Crossing of Greenland_, ii. 313. Cranz, _History of Greenland_, i. 138, 154.]

[Footnote 51: Möller, Pagels, and Gleerup, _op. cit._ i. 270.]

[Footnote 52: See Payne, _History of the New World_, ii. 8.]

[Footnote 53: Gumilla, _El Orinoco ilustrado_, ii. 274 _sq._]

It is obvious that this strict division of labour is apt to mislead the travelling stranger. He sees the women hard at work, and the men idly looking on; and it escapes him that the latter will have to be busy in their turn, within their own sphere of action. What is largely due to the force of custom is taken to be sheer tyranny on the part of the men; and the wife is pronounced to be an abject slave of her husband, destitute of all rights. And yet the strong differentiation of work, however burdensome it may be to the wife, is itself a source of rights, giving her authority within the circle which is exclusively her own. Among the Banaka and Bapuku the wife, though said to be her husband's property and slave, is nevertheless an autocrat in her own house, strong enough to bid defiance to her lord and master.[54] Among the North American Indians, Schoolcraft observes, "the lodge itself, with all its arrangements, is the precinct of the rule and government of the wife. . . . The husband has no voice in this matter."[55] Many other statements to a similar effect will be quoted below.

[Footnote 54: Steinmetz, _Rechtsverhältnisse_, p. 29 _sq._]

[Footnote 55: Schoolcraft, _Indian in his Wigwam_, p. 73.]

{638} We have reason, then, to believe that the authority which savage husbands possess over their wives is not always quite so great as it is said to be. And we must distinctly reject as erroneous the broad statement that the lower races in general hold their women in a state of almost complete subjection.[56] Among many of them the married woman, though in the power of her husband, is known to enjoy a remarkable degree of independence, to be treated by him with consideration, and to exercise no small influence upon him. In several cases she is stated to be his equal, and in a few his superior.

[Footnote 56: Thus Meiners says (_History of the Female Sex_, i. 2), "Among savage nations, the entrance into the married state is for the female the commencement of the most cruel and abject slavery; for which reason many women dread matrimony more than death." In a recent work on the primitive family an Italian writer regards it as perhaps the most fundamental fact in the family institution that the woman is always and everywhere "sottoposta al più gravoso _mundium_ maritale" (Amadori-Virgilj, _L'istituto famigliare nelle società primordiali_, p. 138).]

Among many of the South American Indians the women have been noticed to occupy a respected position in the family or community.[57] Thus, among the Goajiros of Colombia, "in a quarrel or drunken brawl, women often save bloodshed by stepping in and tearing the weapons out of their husband's or brother's hand. Travelling with women is consequently perfectly safe, and in case of danger, if one undertakes to protect a stranger, he may rely upon coming out all right."[58] Among the Tarahumares of Mexico--in spite of their saying that one man is as good as five women--the woman "occupies a comparatively high position in the family, and no bargain is ever concluded until the husband has consulted his wife in the matter."[59] Among the Navahos of New Mexico the women "exert a great deal of influence";[60] they "are very independent of menial duties, and leave their husbands upon the slightest pretext of dislike";[61] "by common consent the house and all the domestic gear belongs entirely to the wife."[62] In {639} his description of North American Indians Mr. Grinnell observes:--"The Indian woman, it is usually thought, is a mere drudge and slave, but, so far as my observations extend, this notion is wholly an erroneous one. It is true that the women were the labourers of the camp; that they did all the hard work, about which there was no excitement . . . . but they were not mere servants. On the contrary, their position was very respectable. They were consulted on many subjects, not only in connection with family affairs, but in more important and general matters. Sometimes women were even admitted to the councils and spoke there, giving their advice. . . . In ordinary family conversation women did not hesitate to interrupt and correct their husbands when the latter made statements with which they did not agree, and the men listened to them with respectful attention, though of course this depended on the standing of the woman, her intelligence, etc."[63] Another competent observer, Ten Kate, strongly protests against the statement that, among the North American Indians, women are treated as beasts of burden, and affirms that their condition, as compared with that of the women of the lower classes in civilised countries, is rather better than worse.[64] Among the Omahas the women had an equal standing in society with the men; both the husband and wife were at the head of the family and the joint owners of the lodge, robes, and so forth, so that the man could not give away anything if his wife was unwilling.[65] Among the Senecas, "usually, the female portion ruled the house, and were doubtless clannish enough about it. The stores were in common; but woe to the luckless husband or lover who was too shiftless to do his share of the providing. No matter how many children, or whatever goods he might have in the house, he might at any time be ordered to pick up his blanket and budge."[66] "From documentary references," says Mr. Mooney, "it is apparent that there existed among the Cherokee a custom analogous to that found among the Iroquois and probably other Eastern tribes, by which the decision of important questions relating to peace and war was left to a vote of the women."[67] Among the Salish, or Flatheads, "although the women are required to do much hard labour, they are {640} by no means treated as slaves, but, on the contrary, have much consideration and authority."[68] Among the Nootkas "wives are consulted in matters of trade, and in fact seem to be nearly on terms of equality with their husbands, except that they are excluded from some public feasts and ceremonies."[69] Among the Indians about Puget Sound, also, women "are always consulted in matters of trade before a bargain is closed," and "acquire great influence in the tribe."[70] The Thlinket woman is not the slave of her husband; she has determinate rights, and her influence is considerable.[71] Among the natives of Cross Cape she even possesses "acknowledged superiority over the other sex."[72] Among the Western Tinneh "the women do only a fair share of the work and have a powerful voice in most affairs."[73] In Kadiak they were held in much respect, and enjoyed great liberties.[74] Among the Kamchadales they had the command of everything, and the husbands were their obedient slaves.[75] Nordenskiöld says of the Chukchi:--"The power of the woman appears to be very great. In making the more important bargains, even about weapons and hunting implements, she is, as a rule, consulted, and her advice is taken. A number of things which form women's tools she can barter away on her own responsibility, or in any other way employ as she pleases."[76] Mr. Bancroft's statement concerning the Western Eskimo, that "the lot of the women is but little better than slavery,"[77] must be understood as chiefly involving the fact that they have much hard work to do. According to Dr. Seemann they "are treated, although not as equals, at least with more consideration than is customary among barbarous nations"; nay, "it not infrequently happens that the woman is the chief authority of the house," and "the man {641} never makes a bargain without consulting his wife, and if she does not approve, it is rejected."[78] Among the Point Barrow Eskimo "the women appear to stand on a footing of perfect equality with the men both in the family and in the community. The wife is the constant and trusted companion of the man in everything except the hunt, and her opinion is sought in every bargain or other important undertaking."[79] In Greenland, also, though the woman is considered much inferior to the man, she is in no way oppressed,[80] and her husband consults with her on important matters.[81]

[Footnote 57: Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_, iii. 472 (Guaycurus), 530 (Morotocos). von den Steinen, _Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Brasiliens_, p. 332 (Bakaïri).]

[Footnote 58: Simons, 'Exploration of the Goajira Peninsula,' in _Proceed. Roy. Geo. Soc._ N.S. vii. 792. See also Candelier, _Rio-Hacha_, p. 256.]

[Footnote 59: Lumholtz, _Unknown Mexico_, i. 265.]

[Footnote 60: Letherman, in _Ann. Rep. Smithsonian Inst._ 1855, p. 294.]

[Footnote 61: Eaton, in Schoolcraft, _Archives_, iv. 217.]

[Footnote 62: Stephen, in _American Anthropologist_, vi. 354.]

[Footnote 63: Grinnell, _Story of the Indian_, p. 46. _Cf._ Waitz, _op. cit._ iii. 101 _sq._]

[Footnote 64: Ten Kate, _Reizen en ondersoekingen Noord-Amerika_, p. 365. _Cf._ _ibid._ 9.]

[Footnote 65: Dorsey, 'Omaha Sociology,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ iii. 266, 366.]

[Footnote 66: Morgan, _Houses and House-Life of the American Aborigines_, p. 65 _sq._ See also Dixon, _New America_, p. 46.]

[Footnote 67: Mooney, 'Myths of the Cherokee,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ xix. 489.]

[Footnote 68: Hale, _U.S. Exploring Expedition. Vol. VI. Ethnography and Philology_, p. 207.]

[Footnote 69: Bancroft, _op. cit._ i. 196. _Cf._ Sproat, _Scenes and Studies of Savage Life_, pp. 93, 95 (Ahts).]

[Footnote 70: Bancroft, _op. cit._ i. 218.]

[Footnote 71: Krause, _Tlinkit-Indianer_, p. 161.]

[Footnote 72: Meares, _Voyages to the North-West Coast of America_, p. 323.]

[Footnote 73: Dall, _Alaska_, p. 431.]

[Footnote 74: Holmberg, 'Ethnographische Skizzen über die Völker des russischen Amerika,' in _Acta Soc. Scient. Fennicæ_, iv. 399.]

[Footnote 75: Steller, _Beschreibung von dem Lande Kamtschatka_, p. 287.]

[Footnote 76: Nordenskiöld, _Vegas färd kring Asien och Europa_, ii. 144.]

[Footnote 77: Bancroft, _op. cit._ i. 65 _sq._ Mr. Bancroft's authority is probably Armstrong, who says that the women are, to all intents and purposes, the slaves of the men, and do the greater part of the outdoor work, except hunting and fishing; but he adds that they nevertheless enjoy a higher position and more consideration than is usual amongst savages (Armstrong, _Personal Narrative of the Discovery of the North-West Passage_, p. 195).]

[Footnote 78: Seemann, _Narrative of the Voyage of "Herald,"_ ii. 66.]

[Footnote 79: Murdoch, 'Ethnological Results of the Point Barrow Expedition,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ ix. 413.]

[Footnote 80: Nansen, _First Crossing of Greenland_, ii. 312.]

[Footnote 81: Nordenskiöld, _Den andra Dicksonska expeditionen till Grönland_, p. 509.]

Among the nomadic Tangutans the women's rights in the household seemed to Prejevalsky to be equal to those of the men.[82] Of the Todas of India it is said that their women "hold a position in the family quite unlike what is ordinarily witnessed among Oriental nations. They are treated with respect, and are permitted a remarkable amount of freedom."[83] Among the Kandhs women "are uniformly treated with respect; the mothers of families generally with much honour. Nothing is done either in public or in private affairs without consulting them, and they generally exert upon the councils of their tribes a powerful influence." A wife may quit her husband at any time, except within a year of her marriage, or when she expects offspring, or within a year after the birth of a child, though, when she quits him, he has a right to reclaim immediately from her father the whole sum paid for her.[84] Among the peasants of the North-Western Provinces of India the wife is an influential personage in the household, not a mere drudge. Little is done without her knowledge and advice. If she is badly wronged the tribal council will protect her, and on the whole her position is, perhaps, not worse than that of her sisters in a similar grade of life in other parts of the world.[85] Among the Káttis the men are much under the authority of their wives.[86] Among the Bheels women "have much influence in the society," and married men have always had the credit of allowing their wives to domineer over them.[87] "A Kol or Ho," says Dr. Hayes, "makes a regular companion {642} of his wife. She is consulted in all difficulties, and receives the fullest consideration due to her sex";[88] and Colonel Dalton adds, "As a rule, in no country in the world are wives better treated."[89] The Garos are "kind husbands, and their conduct generally towards the weaker sex is marked by consideration and respect."[90] The Bódo and Dhimáls "use their wives and daughters well, treating them with confidence and kindness."[91] The Santal "treats the female members of his family with respect."[92] Among the Kukis women are generally held in consideration; "their advice is taken, and they have much influence."[93] Mr. Colquhoun observes that among the Indo-Chinese races equality of the sexes prevails, and prevailed long before Buddhism took any hold upon the country.[94]

[Footnote 82: Prejevalsky, _Mongolia_, ii. 121.]

[Footnote 83: Marshall, _A Phrenologist amongst the Todas_, p. 43.]

[Footnote 84: Macpherson, _Memorials of Service in India_, pp. 69, 132 _sq._]

[Footnote 85: Crooke, _North-Western Provinces of India_, p. 230 _sq._]

[Footnote 86: Rowney, _Wild Tribes of India_, p. 47.]

[Footnote 87: Malcolm, _Memoir of Central India_, ii. 180. Rowney, _op. cit._ p. 38.]

[Footnote 88: Hayes, quoted by Dalton, _Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal_, p. 194. _Cf._ Bradley-Birt, _Chota-Nagpore_, p. 100 _sq._]

[Footnote 89: Dalton, _op. cit._ p. 194.]

[Footnote 90: _Ibid._ p. 68.]

[Footnote 91: Hodgson, _Miscellaneous Essays_, i. 150.]

[Footnote 92: Hunter, _Annals of Rural Bengal_, i. 217. _Cf._ _Ymer_, v. p. xxiv.]

[Footnote 93: Lewin, _Wild Races of South-Eastern India_, p. 254.]

[Footnote 94: Colquhoun, _Amongst the Shans_, p. 234. _Cf._ Fytche, _Burma_, ii. 72.]

Among the Nicobarese "the position of women is, and always has been, in no way inferior to that of the other sex. They take their full share in the formation of public opinion, discuss publicly with the men matters of general interest to the village, and their opinions receive due attention before a decision is arrived at. In fact, they are consulted on every matter, and the henpecked husband is of no extraordinary rarity in the Nicobars."[95] Mr. Crawfurd thinks that in the Malay Archipelago "the lot of women may, on the whole, be considered as more fortunate than in any other country of the East"; they associate with the men "in all respects on terms of such equality as surprise us in such a condition of society."[96] In Bali they are on a perfect equality with the men.[97] The Dyak shows great respect for his wife, and always asks her opinion;[98] he regards her "not as a slave, but as a companion."[99] Among the Bataks the married women often have a great influence over their families.[100] In Serang they have in all matters equal rights with the men, and are, consequently, treated well.[101] The women of Sulu "have the reputation of ruling their {643} lords, and possess much weight in the government by the influence they exert over their husbands."[102]

[Footnote 95: Kloss, _In the Andamans and Nicobars_, p. 242.]

[Footnote 96: Crawfurd, _History of the Indian Archipelago_, i. 73.]

[Footnote 97: Raffles, _History of Java_, ii. p. ccxxxi.]

[Footnote 98: Bock, _Head-Hunters of Borneo_, p. 210 _sq._]

[Footnote 99: Selenka, _Sonnige Welten_, p. 33. _Cf._ Wilkes, _op. cit._ v. 363.]

[Footnote 100: Steinmetz, _Ethnol. Studien zur ersten Entwicklung der Strafe_, ii. 299.]

[Footnote 101: Riedel, _De sluik- en kroesharige rassen tusschen Selebes en Papua_, p. 97.]

[Footnote 102: Wilkes, _op. cit._ v. 343.]

In Melanesia the women generally have to work hard, supplying the place of slaves;[103] but at least in various islands their condition is otherwise fairly good. In the Western islands of Torres Straits "the women appear to have had a good deal to say on most questions and were by no means downtrodden or ill-used."[104] In some parts of New Guinea their position is described as one of high esteem.[105] "They have a large voice in domestic affairs, and occasionally lord it over their masters"; and their influence is felt not only in domestic matters, but also in affairs of state.[106] In Erromanga, of the New Hebrides, although the women did all of the hard plantation work, they were on the whole well treated by their husbands.[107] The same is said to be the case in the Solomon Islands;[108] in the eastern part of New Georgia they do not even seem to do much work.[109] In Micronesia the position of woman is decidedly good. In the Marianne Group "the wife is absolute mistress in her house, the husband not daring to dispose of anything without her consent"; nay, the men are said to be actually governed by their wives, "the women assuming those prerogatives which in most other countries are invested in the other sex."[110] In the Pelew Islands the women are in every respect the equals of the men; the oldest man, or Obokul, of a family can do nothing without taking advice with its oldest female members.[111] In the Caroline Group the weaker sex "enjoys a perfect equality in public estimation with the other."[112] Among the Mortlock Islanders the wife is quite independent of her husband.[113] In the Kingsmill Islands very great consideration is awarded to the women: "they seem to have exclusive control over the house," whilst all the hard labour is performed by the {644} men.[114] Among the Line Islanders "no difference is made in the sexes; a woman can vote and speak as well as a man, and in general the women decide the question, unless it is one of war against another island."[115] In many Polynesian islands, also, their position is by no means bad.[116] In Tonga "women have considerable respect shown to them on account of their sex, independent of the rank they might otherwise hold as nobles"; they are not subjected to hard labour or any very menial work,[117] and their _status_ in society is not inferior to that of men.[118] In Samoa they "are held in much consideration, . . . treated with great attention, and not suffered to do anything but what rightfully belongs to them."[119] In the valley of Typee, in the Marquesas Group, the women are allowed every possible indulgence, the religious restrictions of the taboo alone excepted; they are exempt from toil, and "nowhere are they more sensible of their power."[120] Rochon wrote of the Malagasy:--"Man here never commands as a despot; nor does the woman ever obey as a slave. The balance of power inclines even in favour of the women."[121] At the present day, in Madagascar, the woman "is not scorned as essentially inferior to man," but enters into her husband's cares and joys, and shares his life, much in the same way as a wife does amongst ourselves.[122]

[Footnote 103: Nieboer, _op. cit._ p. 392 _sqq._ Waitz-Gerland, _op. cit._ vi. 626.]

[Footnote 104: Haddon, in _Reports of the Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits_, v. 229.]

[Footnote 105: Ratzel, _op. cit._ i. 274.]

[Footnote 106: Pitcairn, _Two Years among the Savages of New Guinea_, p. 6l. _Cf._ Bink, in _Bulletin Soc. d'Anthrop. de Paris_, xi. 392; Hagen, _Unter den Papua's_, pp. 226, 243.]

[Footnote 107: Robertson, _Erromanga_, p. 397.]

[Footnote 108: Parkinson, _Zur Ethnographie der nordwestlichen Salomo Inseln_, p. 4.]

[Footnote 109: Somerville, 'Ethnogr. Notes in New Georgia,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxvi. 405 _sq._]

[Footnote 110: Moore, _Marriage Customs_, p. 187. Waitz, _op. cit._ v. pt. i. p. 107 _sq._]

[Footnote 111: Kubary, _Die socialen Einrichtungen der Pelauer_, p. 38 _sq._ _Cf._ _Idem_, 'Die Palau-Inseln,' in _Journal des Museum Godeffroy_, iv. 43; Keate, _Account of the Pelew Islands_, p. 331.]

[Footnote 112: Hale, _op. cit._ p. 73.]

[Footnote 113: Kubary, 'Die Bewohner der Mortlock Inseln,' in _Mittheilungen der Geograph. Gesellsch. in Hamburg_, 1878-9, p. 261.]

[Footnote 114: Wilkes, _op. cit._ v. 91.]

[Footnote 115: Tutuila, in _Jour. Polynesian Soc._ i. 269.]

[Footnote 116: See Waitz-Gerland, _op. cit._ vi. 120 _sqq._]

[Footnote 117: Mariner, _Natives of the Tonga Islands_, ii. 97.]

[Footnote 118: Erskine, _Cruise among the Islands of the Western Pacific_, p. 158.]

[Footnote 119: Wilkes, _op. cit._ ii. 148. _Cf._ Waitz-Gerland, _op. cit._ vi. 121.]

[Footnote 120: Melville, _Typee_, p. 299.]

[Footnote 121: Rochon, 'Voyage to Madagascar,' in Pinkerton, _Collection of Voyages and Travels_, xvi 747. _Cf._ Waitz, _op. cit._ ii. 438.]

[Footnote 122: Little, _Madagascar_, p. 63.]

Turning, finally, to the African continent, we find that among the Negro races the woman, though often heavily burdened and more or less subservient to her husband, is by no means without influence.[123] "When we become more closely acquainted with family conditions," Herr Büttner observes, "we notice that there, as elsewhere, husbands are under petticoat government, and those most of all who like to pose before the outer world as masters of their house. The women, including the aunts, have on all occasions, important and unimportant alike, a weighty {645} word to contribute."[124] The Monbuttu women, according to Dr. Schweinfurth, exhibit towards their husbands the highest degree of independence; "the position in the household occupied by the men was illustrated by the reply which would be made if they were solicited to sell anything as a curiosity, 'Oh, ask my wife: it is hers.'"[125] Among the Momvus "the women are on a footing of equality with the men, and go hunting with them, and accompany them to the wars, taking their part in the combat."[126] Among the Madi or Moru tribe of Central Africa "women are treated with respect and politeness by the men, who always show them preference, resigning to their use the best places, and paying them such like courtesies." The women associate with the men on equal terms, being consulted and honoured; and any insult to a woman is revenged, nay is frequently the cause of war.[127] In a Hottentot's house the woman is the supreme ruler, and the husband has nothing at all to say. "While in public the men take the prominent part, at home they have not so much power even as to take a mouthful of sour milk out of the tub, without the wife's permission. If a man ever should try to do it, his nearest female relations will put a fine on him, consisting in cows and sheep, which is to be added to the stock of the wife."[128] Among the peoples of Berber race the women exercise considerable influence over the men. Among the Guanches of the Canary Islands they were much respected.[129] Among the Touareg "la femme est l'égale de l'homme, si même, par certains côtés, elle n'est dans une condition meilleure."[130] Among the Beni Amer a husband undertakes nothing before consulting his wife, on whose goodwill he largely depends.[131] Of the Aulâd Solîmân, an Arab tribe in the Sahara, Dr. Nachtigal observes that it was curious to see how powerless those much feared robbers and cut-throats were in their own houses.[132] Both in the Sahara[133] and in the East[134] the Bedouin women {646} enjoy a considerable degree of freedom, and sometimes actually rule over their husbands.

[Footnote 123: Waitz, _op. cit._ ii. 117. Ratzel, _op. cit._ ii. 332. Buchner, _Kamerun_, p. 32 _sq._ Möller, Pagels, and Gleerup, _op. cit._ i. 171 (Lukungu). Steinmetz, _Rechtsverhältnisse_, p. 29 (Banaka and Bapuku). Lang, _ibid._ p. 225 (Washambala). Burrows, _Land of the Pigmies_, p. 62 (Niam-Niam). Chanler, _Through Jungle and Desert_, p. 485 (Wakamba).]

[Footnote 124: Büttner, quoted by Ratzel, _op. cit._ ii. 334.]

[Footnote 125: Schweinfurth, _Heart of Africa_, ii. 91.]

[Footnote 126: Burrows, _op. cit._ p. 128.]

[Footnote 127: Felkin, 'Notes on the Madi or Moru Tribe,' in _Proceed. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh_, xii. 329.]

[Footnote 128: Hahn, _The Supreme Being of the Khoi-Khoi_, p. 19.]

[Footnote 129: Bory de St. Vincent, _Essais sur les Isles Fortunées_, p. 105. Mantegazza, _Rio de la Plata e Tenerife_ p. 630.]

[Footnote 130: Dyveyrier, _Exploration du Sahara_, p. 339. _Cf._ Chavanne, _Die Sahara_, p. 181; Hourst, _Sur le Niger et au pays des Touaregs_, p. 209.]

[Footnote 131: Munzinger, _Ostafrikanische Studien_, p. 325.]

[Footnote 132: Nachtigal, _Sahara und Sudan_, ii. 93.]

[Footnote 133: Chavanne, _op. cit._ p. 397.]

[Footnote 134: Wallin, _Reseanteckningar från Orienten_, iii. 151, 152, 269. Blunt, _Bedouin Tribes of the Euphrates_, ii. 214, 226, 228.]

All these statements certainly do not imply that the husband has no recognised power over his wife, but they prove that his power is by no means unlimited. It is true that many of our authorities speak rather of liberties that the woman takes herself than of privileges granted her by custom; but, as we have seen before, customary rights are always more or less influenced by habitual practice. It should be added that among many savage peoples the husband has a right to divorce his wife only under certain conditions;[135] and among a very considerable number custom or law permits the wife to separate either for some special cause or, simply, at will.[136] In certain parts of Eastern Central Africa divorce may be effected if the husband neglects to sew his wife's clothes, or if the partners do not please each other.[137] Among the Shans of Burma the woman has a right to turn adrift a husband who takes to drinking or otherwise misconducts himself, and to retain all the goods and money of the partnership.[138] Among the Irulas of the Neilgherries the option of remaining in union, or of separating, rests principally with the woman.[139] Among the Savaras, an aboriginal hill people of the Madras Presidency, "a woman may leave her husband _whenever she pleases_."[140] This is surely something very different from that absolute dominion which hasty generalisers have attributed to savage husbands in general.

[Footnote 135: Westermarck. _op. cit._ p. 523 _sq._]

[Footnote 136: _Ibid._ p. 526 _sqq._]

[Footnote 137: Macdonald, _Africana_, i. 140.]

[Footnote 138: Colquhoun, _Amongst the Shans_, p. 295.]

[Footnote 139: Harkness, _Description of a Singular Aboriginal Race inhabiting the Neilgherry Hills_, p. 92.]

[Footnote 140: Fawcett, in _Jour. Anthrop. Soc. Bombay_, i. 28.]

It is often said that a people's civilisation may be measured by the position held by its women. But at least so far as the earlier stages of culture are concerned, this opinion is not supported by facts. Among several of the lowest races, including peoples like the Veddahs, Andaman Islanders, and Bushmans, the female sex is {647} treated with far greater consideration than among many of the higher savages and barbarians. Travellers have not seldom noticed that of two neighbouring tribes the less cultured one sets in this respect an example to the other. "Among the Bushmans," says Dr. Fritsch, "the female sex makes life-companions, among the A-bantu beasts of burden."[141] Lewis and Clarke affirm that the _status_ of woman in a savage tribe has no necessary relation even to its moral qualities in general. "The Indians," they say, "whose treatment of the females is mildest, and who pay most deference to their opinions, are by no means the most distinguished for their virtues. . . . On the other hand, the tribes among whom the women are very much debased, possess the loftiest sense of honour, the greatest liberality, and all the good qualities of which their situation demands the exercise."[142] That the condition of woman, or her relative independence, is no safe gauge of the general culture of a nation, also appears from a comparison between many of the lower races and the peoples of archaic civilisation.

[Footnote 141: Fritsch, _Die Eingeborenen Süd-Afrika's_, p. 444.]

[Footnote 142: Lewis and Clarke, _op. cit._ p. 441.]

In China the condition of woman has always been inferior to that of man, and no generous sentiment tending to the amelioration of her social position has ever come from the Chinese sages.[143] Her children must pay her respect, but she in her turn owes to her husband the subjection of a child;[144] a wife is an infinitely less important personage than a mother in the Chinese social scale.[145] The husband has certainly not absolute power over his wife: he may not kill her, nor sell her without her consent,[146] nor even divorce her, except for certain causes specified by law.[147] But these causes are very elastic; {648} it is said that "when a woman has any quality that is not good, it is but just and reasonable to turn her out of doors."[148] And in a book containing the cream of all the moral writings of the Chinese, and intended chiefly for children, we read:--"Brothers are like hands and feet. A wife is like one's clothes. When clothes are worn out, we can substitute those that are new. When hands and feet are cut off, it is difficult to obtain substitutes for them."[149] A woman, on the other hand, cannot obtain legal separation on any account.[150] Confucius says that "man is the representative of Heaven, and is supreme over all things. Woman yields obedience to the instructions of man, and helps to carry out his principles. On this account she can determine nothing of herself, and is subject to the rule of the three obediences. When young, she must obey her father and elder brother; when married, she must obey her husband; when her husband is dead, she must obey her son."[151] In Japan, also, a woman was formerly, in the eye of the law, a chattel rather than a person. "Having all her life under her father's roof reverenced her superiors, she is expected to bring reverence to her new domicile, but not love. She must always obey but never be jealous. She must not be angry, no matter whom her husband may introduce into his household. She must wait upon him at his meals and must walk behind him, but not with him. When she dies her children go to her funeral, but not her husband."[152] In Japan a man might repudiate his wife for the same reasons as in China,[153] and till the year 1873 a wife could not obtain separation according to law.[154] However, though the Japanese wife is "the first servant of the household," training and public opinion require that she should be treated with respect, if the marriage be blessed {649} with children.[155] She is addressed as "the honourable lady of the house," and her position is said to be higher than in any other Oriental country.[156]

[Footnote 143: Legge, _Religions of China_, pp. 107, 108, 111.]

[Footnote 144: de Groot, _Religious System of China_, (vol. ii. Book) i. 550.]

[Footnote 145: Giles, _Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio_, i. 315, n. 3.]

[Footnote 146: Doolittle, _Social Life of the Chinese_, ii. 209.]

[Footnote 147: Medhurst, 'Marriage, Affinity, and Inheritance in China,' in _Trans. Roy. As. Soc. China Branch_, iv. 25 _sq._ Gray, _China_, i. 219. Müller, _Reise der Fregatte Novara_, Ethnographie, p. 164.]

[Footnote 148: Navarette, 'Account of the Empire of China,' in Awnsham and Churchill, _Collection of Voyages and Travels_, i. 73.]

[Footnote 149: _Indo-Chinese Gleaner_, i. 164.]

[Footnote 150: Gray, _op. cit._ i. 219.]

[Footnote 151: Legge, _Chinese Classics_, i. 103 _sq._]

[Footnote 152: Griffis, _Religions of Japan_, p. 124 _sq._]

[Footnote 153: Westermarck, _op. cit._ p. 525.]

[Footnote 154: Rein, _Japan_, p. 424 _sq._]

[Footnote 155: _Ibid._ p. 425.]

[Footnote 156: Norman, _The Real Japan_, p. 184. Griffis, _Religions of Japan_, p. 318.]

From various quarters of the ancient world we hear of the rule that the husband shall command and the wife obey. The Lord said to the woman, "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."[157] How great the husband's power was among the Hebrews we do not know exactly. He could divorce his wife if she did not please him because he had "found some uncleanness in her,"[158] whereas a wife could not legally separate from her husband.[159] In later times her condition evidently improved.[160] From the old Jewish point of view it is surely surprising to find Sirach putting the companionship of a wife not only above that of a friend, but even above children.[161] In the Talmud a husband is admonished to love his wife like himself and to honour her more than himself,[162] though he should take care not to be ruled by her;[163] and the wife also is authorised to demand a divorce under certain circumstances, namely, if the husband refuses to perform his conjugal duty, if he continues to lead a disorderly life after marriage, if he proves impotent during ten years, if he suffers from an insupportable disease, or if he leaves the country for ever.[164]

[Footnote 157: **_Genesis_, iii. 16.]

[Footnote 158: _Deuteronomy_, xxiv. 1.]

[Footnote 159: Josephus, _Antiquitates Romanæ_, xv. 7, 10. Keil, _Manual of Biblical Archæology_, ii. 175.]

[Footnote 160: _Cf._ Klugmann, _Die Frau im Talmud_, p. 63 _sq._]

[Footnote 161: _Ecclesiasticus_, xl. 19, 23. _Cf._ Montefiore, _Hibbert Lectures on the Religion of the Ancient Hebrews_, p. 491.]

[Footnote 162: Deutsch, _Literary Remains_, p. 56.]

[Footnote 163: _Beza_, fol. 32 B, quoted by Katz, _Der wahre Talmudjude_, p. 114.]

[Footnote 164: Glasson, _Le mariage civil et le divorce_, p. 149 _sq._]