.' {248}
On this first question, let us grant to Sir Henry Maine, to Mr. Darwin,
and to common sense that if the very earliest men were extremely animal
in character, their unions while they lasted were probably monogamous or
polygamous. The sexual jealousy of the male would secure that result, as
it does among many other animals. Let the first point, then, be scored
to Sir Henry Maine: let it be granted that if man was created perfect, he
lived in the monogamous family before the Fall: and that, if he was
evolved as an animal, the unchecked animal instincts would make for
monogamy or patriarchal polygamy in the strictly primitive family.

(2.) Did circumstances and customs ever or anywhere compel or induce man
(whatever his original condition) to resort to practices which made
paternity uncertain, and so caused the absence of the patriarchal family,
kinship being reckoned through women? If this question be answered in
the affirmative, and if the sphere of action of the various causes be
made wide enough, it will not matter much to Mr. M'Lennan's theory
whether the strictly primitive family was patriarchal or not. If there
occurred a fall from the primitive family, and if that fall was extremely
general, affecting even the Aryan race, Mr. M'Lennan's adherents will be
amply satisfied. Their object is to show that the family, even in the
Aryan race, was developed through a stage of loose savage connections. If
that can be shown, they do not care much about primitive man properly so
called. Sir Henry Maine admits, as a matter of fact, that among certain
races, in certain districts, circumstances have overridden the sexual
jealousy which secures the recognition of male parentage. Where women
have been few, and where poverty has been great, jealousy has been
suppressed, even in the Venice of the eighteenth century. Sir H. Maine
says, 'The usage' (that of polyandry--many husbands to a single wife)
'seems to me one which circumstances overpowering morality and decency
might at any time call into existence. It is known to have arisen in the
native Indian army.' The question now is, what are the circumstances
that overpower morality and decency, and so produce polyandry, with its
necessary consequences, when it is a recognised institution--the absence
of the patriarchal family, and the recognition of kinship through women?
Any circumstances which cause great scarcity of women will conduce to
those results. Mr. M'Lenn