FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190  
191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   >>  
l dispensation is regarded as disreputable.' On the whole, wide prohibitions of marriage are archaic: the widest are savage; the narrowest are modern and civilised. Thus the Hindoo prohibition is old, barbarous and wide. 'The barbarous Aryan,' says Sir Henry Maine, 'is generally exogamous. He has a most extensive table of prohibited degrees.' Thus exogamy seems to be a survival of barbarism. The question for us is, Can we call exogamy a survival from a period when (owing to scarcity of women and polyandry) clear ideas of kinship were impossible? If this can be proved, exogamous Aryans either passed through polyandrous institutions, or borrowed a savage custom derived from a period when ideas of kinship were obscure. If we only knew the origin of the prohibition to marry within the family name all would be plain sailing. At present several theories of the origin of exogamy are before the world. Mr. Morgan, the author of _Ancient Society_, inclines to trace the prohibition to a great early physiological discovery, acted on by primitive men by virtue of a _contrat social_. Early man discovered that children of unsound constitutions were born of nearly-related parents. Mr. Morgan says: 'Primitive men very early discovered the evils of close interbreeding.' Elsewhere Mr. Morgan writes: 'Intermarriage in the _gens_ was prohibited, to secure the benefits of marrying out with unrelated persons.' This arrangement 'was a product of high intelligence,' and Mr. Morgan calls it a 'reform.'[215] Let us examine this very curious theory. First: Mr. Morgan supposes early man to have made a discovery (the evils of the marriage of near kin) which evades modern physiological science. Modern science has not determined that the marriages of kinsfolk are pernicious. Is it credible that savages should discover a fact which puzzles science? It may be replied that modern care, nursing, and medical art save children of near marriages from results which were pernicious to the children of early man. Secondly: Mr. Morgan supposes that barbarous man (so notoriously reckless of the morrow as he is) not only made the discovery of the evils of interbreeding, but acted on it with promptitude and self-denial. Thirdly: Mr. Morgan seems to require, for the enforcement of the exogamous law, a _contrat social_. The larger communities meet, and divide themselves into smaller groups, within which wedlock is forbidden. This 'social pact' is like a return t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190  
191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   >>  



Top keywords:
Morgan
 

prohibition

 

social

 

discovery

 

exogamy

 

exogamous

 

barbarous

 

science

 

modern

 
children

origin

 

marriages

 

period

 

kinship

 

pernicious

 

supposes

 

contrat

 
interbreeding
 
discovered
 
physiological

savage

 

prohibited

 

survival

 

marriage

 

credible

 

savages

 

evades

 

determined

 
kinsfolk
 

regarded


Modern
 
dispensation
 

disreputable

 
theory
 
product
 
intelligence
 

arrangement

 

persons

 
archaic
 
unrelated

prohibitions
 

curious

 

examine

 
reform
 
larger
 

communities

 

divide

 

enforcement

 

denial

 

Thirdly