The Position of Woman in Primitive Society Part 11

cit._, pp. 126-127.

[138] Wilken, _Das Matriarchat bei den alten Arabern_, p. 26.

These facts throw a strong light on the bond between the father and the child, which was a legal bond, not dependent, as it is with us, upon blood relationship. Fatherhood really arose out of the ownership of purchase. And for this reason the father's right came to extend to all the children of the wife. It does not appear that the husband makes any distinction between his wife's children, even if they were begotten by other men. Chast.i.ty is not regarded as a virtue, and in those cases where unfaithfulness in a wife is punished, it is always because the woman, who has pa.s.sed from the protection of her kindred, acts without her husband's permission. Interchange of wives is common, while it is one of the duties of hospitality to offer a wife to a stranger guest. Husbands sometimes, indeed, seek other men for their wives, believing they will obtain sons who will excel all others. Thus of the Arabs we are told, there is one form of marriage according to which a man says to his wife, "Send a message to such a one and beg him to have intercourse with you." The husband acts in this way in order that his offspring may be n.o.ble.[139] When a Hindu marries, all the children previously born from his wife become his own; in Pakpatan, even when a woman has forsaken her husband for ten years, the children she brings forth are divided between her and her lover.[140] Similarly in Madagascar, when a woman is divorced, any children she afterwards bears belong to her husband.[141] Campbell tells us of children born out of wedlock in the Limboo tribe that the father may obtain possession of the boys by purchase and by naming them, but the girls belong to the mother.[142]

[139] Wilken, _op. cit._, p. 26.

[140] Wade, _Journal Asiatic Society of Bengal_, Vol. VI, p.

196.

[141] See _Truth about Woman_, pp. 160-161, for account of Madagascar.

[142] _Journal Asiatic Society of Bengal_, Vol. IX, p. 603.

I am very certain that it was through property considerations and for no moral causes that the stringency of the moral code was tightened for women. It seems to me of very great importance that women should grasp firmly this truth: the virtue of chast.i.ty owes its origin to property. Our minds fall so readily under the spell of such ideas as chast.i.ty and purity. There is a ma.s.s of real superst.i.tion on this question--a belief in a kind of magic in chast.i.ty. But, indeed, continence had at first no connection with morals. The sense of ownership has been the seed-plot of our moral code. To it we are indebted for the first germs of the s.e.xual inhibitions which, sanctified, by religion and supported by custom, have, under the unreasoned idealism of the common mind, filled life with cruelties and jealous exclusions, with suicides, and murders, and secret shames.[143]

[143] This pa.s.sage is quoted from _The Truth about Woman_, p.

171. I give it here, because its importance seems to me to be very great.

This brings me to summarise the point we have reached. Father-right was dependent on purchase-possession and had nothing to do with actual fatherhood. The payment of a bride-price, the giving of a sister in exchange, as also marriage with a slave, gained for the husband the control over his wife and ownership of the children. I could bring forward much more evidence in proof of this fact that property, and not kinship, was the basis of fatherhood, did the limits of my s.p.a.ce allow me to do so; such cases are common in all parts of the world where the transitional stage has been reached. The maternal clan, with its strong social cohesion is then broken up by the growing power of individual interests pushing aside the old customs, and bringing about the restoration of the family. I believe that the causes by which the father gained his position as the dominant partner in marriage must be clear to every one from the examples I have given. Fatherhood established in the first stage of the family on jealous authority, now, after a period of more or less complete obscuration, rises again as the dominant force in marriage. The father has bought back his position as patriarch. On the other hand the mother has lost her freedom that came with the protection of her kindred, under the social organisation of the clan. Looking back through the lengthening record, we find that another step has been taken in the history of the family.

This time is it a step forward, or a step backward? This is a question I shall not try to answer, for, indeed, I am not sure.

Yet in case I am mistaken here, let me say at once I am certain that this return to the restricted family was a necessary and inevitable step. The individual forces had to triumph. This may seem a contradiction to all I have just said. What I wish to show is this: one and all the phases in the development of society have been needful and fruitful as successive stages in growth; yet none can continue--none be regarded as the final stage, for each becomes insufficient and narrow from the standpoint of the needs of a later stage. We have reached the third stage--the patriarchal family which still endures. And last and hardest to eradicate is that monopoly of s.e.xual possession, which says: "This woman and her children are mine: I have tabooed her for life." Mankind has still to outlive this brute instinct in its upward way to civilisation.

CHAPTER IX

WOMEN AND PRIMITIVE INDUSTRY

I have referred in an earlier chapter to a letter from Mr. H. G.

Wells, sent to me after the publication of my book, _The Truth about Woman_. Now, there is one sentence in this letter that I wish to quote here, because it brings home just what it is my purpose in this chapter to show--that the mother-age was a civilisation owing its inst.i.tutions, and its early victories over nature, rather to the genius of woman than to that of man. Mr. Wells does not, indeed, say this. He rejects the mother-age, and in questioning my acceptance of it as a stage in the past histories of societies, he writes: "The primitive matriarchate never was anything more than mother at the washing-tub and father looking miserable."

It seems to me that here, in his own inimitable way, Mr. Wells (though I think quite unconsciously) sums up the past labour-history of woman and man. His statement has very far-reaching considerations. It forces us to accept the active utility of primitive woman in the community--a utility more developed and practical than that of man. This was really the basis of women's position of power. The constructive quality of the female mind, at a time when the male attention and energy were fixed chiefly on the destructive activities of warfare, was liberated for use and invention. Women were the seekers, slowly increasing their efficiency.

Very much the same account of the primitive s.e.xual division in work was given by an Australian Kurnai to Messrs. Fison and Howitt, in a sentence that has been quoted very frequently: "A man hunts, spears fish, fights and sits about, all the rest is woman's work." This may be accepted as a fair statement of how work is divided between the two s.e.xes among primitive peoples. Now, what I wish to make plain is that it was an arrangement in which the advantage was really on the side of the woman rather than on that of the man. I would refer the reader back to what has been said on this subject in Chapter III, where I summed up the conditions acting on the women in the hypothetical first stage of the primordial family. We saw that the males were chiefly concerned with the absorbing duties of s.e.x and fighting rivals, and also hunting for game. The women's interest, on the other hand, was bent on domestic activities--in caring for their children and developing the food supplies immediately around them. From the hearth-home, or shelter, as the start of settled life, and with their intelligence sharpened by the keen chisel of necessity, women carried on their work as the organisers and directors of industrial occupations. Very slowly did they make each far-reaching discovery; seeds cast into the ground sprouted and gave the first start of agriculture. The plant world gave women the best returns for the efforts they made, and they began to store up food. Contrivance followed contrivance, each one making it possible for women to do more. Certain animals, possibly brought back by the hunters from the forests, were kept and tamed. Presently the use of fire was discovered--we know not how--but women became the guardians of this source of life. And now, instead of caves or tree-shelters, there were huts and tents and houses, and of these, too, women were frequently the builders. The home from the first was of greater importance to the women; it was the place where the errant males rejoined their wives and children, and hence the women became the owners of the homes and the heads of households. For as yet the men were occupied in fighting.

The clumsy and the stupid among them were killed soonest; the fine hand, the quick eye--these prevailed age by age. Tools and weapons were doubtless fashioned by these fighters, but for destruction; the male's attention was directed mainly by his own desires. And may we not accept that among the most pressing activities of women was the need to tame man and make him social, so that he could endure the rights of others than himself?

So through the long generations the life of human societies continued.

Those activities, due to female influence, developing and opening up new ways in all directions, until we have that early civilisation, which I have called the mother-age.

All the world over, even to this day, this separation in the labour activities of the two s.e.xes can be traced. Destructive work, demanding a special development of strength, with corresponding periods of rest, falls to men; and contrasted with this violent and intermittent male force we find, with the same uniformity, that the work of women is domestic and constructive, being connected with the care of children and all the various industries which radiate from the home--work demanding a different kind of strength, more enduring, more continuous, but at a lower tension.

Bonwick's account of the work of Tasmanian women may be taken as typical--

"In addition to the necessary duty of looking after the children, the women had to provide all the food for the household excepting that derived from the chase of the kangaroo. They climbed up hills for the opossum" (a very difficult task, requiring great strength and also skill), "delved in the ground for yams, native bread, and nutritious roots, groped about the rocks for sh.e.l.lfish, dived beneath the sea for oysters, and fished for the finny tribe. In addition to this, they carried, on their frequent tramps, the household stuffs in native baskets of their own manufacture."[144]

[144] _Daily Life and Origin of the Tasmanians_, p. 55.

Among the Indians of Guiana the men's work is to hunt, and to cut down the trees when the ca.s.sava is to be planted. When the men have felled the trees and cleaned the ground, the women plant the ca.s.sava and undertake all the subsequent operations; agriculture is entirely in their hands. They are little, if at all, weaker than the men, and they work all day while the men are often in their hammocks smoking; but there is no cruelty or oppression exercised by the men towards the women.[145]

[145] Everard im Thurn, _Among the Indians of Guiana_.

In Africa we meet with much the same conditions of labour. "The work is done chiefly by the women, this is universal; they hoe the fields, sow the seed, and reap the harvest. To them, too, falls all the labour of house-building, grinding corn, brewing beer, cooking, washing, and caring for almost all the material interests of the community. The men tend the cattle, hunt, go to war; they also spend much time sitting in council over the conduct of affairs."[146]

[146] Macdonald, "East Central African Customs," _Journal Anthropological Inst.i.tute_, Feb. 1890, p. 342.

I may note the interesting account of Prof. Haddon[147] of the work of the Western Tribes of the Torres Straits--

[147] _Journal Anthropological Inst.i.tute_, Feb. 1890, p. 342.

"The men fished, fought, built houses, did a little gardening, made fish-lines, fish-hooks, spears, and other implements, constructed dance-masks and head-dresses, and all the paraphernalia for the various ceremonies and dances.

They performed all the rites and dances, and in addition did a good deal of strutting up and down, loafing and 'yarning.'

The women cooked and prepared the food, did most of the gardening, collected sh.e.l.l-fish, and speared fish on the reefs, made petticoats, baskets and mats."

Similar examples might be almost indefinitely multiplied. Among the Andamanese, while the men go into the jungle to hunt pigs, the women fetch drinking water and firewood, catch sh.e.l.l-fish, make fishing nets and baskets, spin thread, and cook the food ready for the return of the men.[148] The Moki women of America have fifty ways of preparing corn for food. They make all the preparations necessary for these varied dishes, involving the arts of the stonecutter, the carrier, the mason, the miller and the cook.[149] In New Caledonia "girls work in the plantations, boys learn to fight."[150]

[148] Owen, _Transactions of the Ethnological Society_, New Series, Vol. II, p. 36.

[149] Mason, _Woman's Share in Primitive Culture_, p. 143.

[150] Turner, _Nineteen Years in Polynesia_, p. 424.

We should, however, fall into a popular error concerning the division of labour in savagery, if we consider that all women's work is regarded as degrading to men and all men's work is tabooed to women.

The duties of war and the chase are the chief occupation of men, yet in all parts of the world women have fought at need, and sometimes habitually, both to a.s.sist their men and also against them. Thus Buckley, who lived for many years among the Australian tribes, relates that when the tribe he lived with was attacked by a hostile party, the men "raised a war-cry; on hearing this the women threw off their rugs and, each armed with a short club, flew to the a.s.sistance of their husbands and brothers."[151] In Central Australia the men occasionally beat the women through jealousy, but on such occasions it is by no means rare for the women, single handed, to beat the men severely.[152] Again, men carry on, as a rule, the negotiations on tribal concerns, but in such matters exceptions are very numerous.

Among the Australian Dieyerie, Curr states that the women act as amba.s.sadors to arrange treaties, and invariably succeed in their mission.[153] The same conditions are found among the American Indians. Men are the hunters and fishers, but women also hunt and fish. Among the Yahgan of Tierra del Fuego fishing is left entirely to the women,[154] and this is not at all unusual. Mrs. Allison states of the Similkameen Indians of British Columbia that formerly "the women were nearly as good hunters as the men," but being sensitive to the ridicule of the white settlers, they have given up hunting.[155] In hunting trips, the help of women is often not to be despised.

Warburton Pike writes thus: "I saw what an advantage it is to take women on a hunting trip. If we killed anything, we had only to cut up and _cache_ the meat, and the women would carry it. On returning to camp we could throw ourselves down on a pile of caribou skins and smoke our pipes in comfort, but the women's work was never finished."[156] This account is very suggestive. The man undergoes the fatigue of hunting, and when he has thrown the game at the woman's feet his part is done; it is her duty to carry it and to cook it, as well as to make the vessels in which the food is placed. The skins and the refuse are hers to utilise, and all the industries connected with clothing are chiefly in her hands.[157] Hearne, in his delightful old narrative, speaks of the a.s.sistance of women on hunting expeditions--

"For when all the men are heavy laden they can neither hunt nor travel to any considerable distance; and in case they meet with any success in hunting, who is to carry the produce of their labour?"

[151] _Life and Adventures of William Buckley_, p. 43.

[152] _Journal Anthropological Inst.i.tute_, Aug. 1890, p. 61.

[153] _Australian Races_, cited by Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p.

9 _note_.

[154] Haydes et Deniker, _Mission Scientifique de Cape Horn_, tome vii, 1891.

[155] _Journal of the Anthropological Inst.i.tute_, Feb. 1892, p. 307.

[156] Warburton Pike, _Barren Grounds_, p. 75.

[157] Havelock Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p. 5.

He adds with a charming frankness--