Note 155 — Chapter X

P. Näcke, one of the most trustworthy authorities on sexual anthropology, writes as follows: “That in ancient times, before monogamy, there was polygamy, or even a state resembling promiscuity, is very probable (Westermarck notwithstanding), and can, in fact, be assumed a priori” (“Einiges zur Frauenfrage und zur sexuellen Abstinenz”—“A Contribution to the Woman’s Question and to the Problem of Sexual Abstinence”), published in the Archiv f. Kriminalanthropologie, vol. xiv., p. 52 (Hans Gross, 1903). Cf. also Lohsing’s “Zustimmung zur Annahme einer ursprünglichen Promiscuität,” ibid., vol. xvi., p. 332.

The question of sexual promiscuity has recently been further considered by P. Näcke (“Earliest Beginnings of Human Society,” in Die Umschau of August 17, 1907). He believes that the state of pure promiscuity lasted a short time only, and gave place to certain nuclei of family structure, a kind of semi-promiscuity, which, prior to the complete development of the family union, lasted much longer than the state of pure promiscuity. Still, these earliest families were merely temporary, and only later became fixed and permanent. This assumption, however, does not affect the fact of a primordial pure promiscuity. Näcke himself also recognizes promiscuity as the natural state of primitive man.

[156] H. Schurtz, “Altersklassen und Männerbünde: eine Darstellung der Grundformen der Gesellschaft”—“Age Classes and Associations of Men: a Demonstration of the Fundamental Forms of Society,” p. 176 (Berlin, 1902).

[157] N. Melnikow, “The Buryats of the District of Irkutsk,” published in the Transactions of the Berlin Society of Anthropology, Ethnology, and Primeval History, p. 440 (1899).

[158] Marco Polo, translated by Yule, 2nd edition, vol. ii., pp. 38, 39 (London, 1875).

[159] Cf. my “Contributions to the Etiology of Psychopathia Sexualis,” vol. i., pp. 165-169.

[160] Cf., regarding group-marriage, the writings of Joseph Kehler, more particularly “Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe”—“The Primitive History of Marriage” (Stuttgart, 1897); “Rechtsphilosophie und Naturrecht”—“The Philosophy of Law and Natural Right,” published in Holtzendorff-Kohler’s “Encyklopädie der Rechtswissenschaft,” pp. 27-36 (Leipzig, 1902); “Die Gruppenehe”—“Group-Marriage,” in “Aus Kultur und Leben,” pp. 22-29 (Berlin, 1904); finally the chapter on “Group-Marriage” by Schurtz (op. cit.). [A quite modern instance of group-marriage was the Oneida community, “a league of two hundred persons to regard their children as ‘common.’” For an account of the Oneida experiment see Noyes, “A History of American Socialisms.”—Translator.]

[161] J. J. Bachofen, “Das Mutterrecht”—“Matriarchy” (Stuttgart, 1861).

[162] Ludwig Stein, “Die Anfänge der Kultur”—“The Beginnings of Civilization”—pp. 106, 107.

[163] Eduard von Mayer, “Die Lebensgesetze der Kultur”—“The Vital Laws of Civilization”—p. 210.

[164] G. F. W. Hegel, “Fundamental Outlines of the Philosophy of Law, or Natural Rights and Political Science in Outline,” edited by Eduard Gans, second edition, p. 218 (Berlin, 1840).

[165] That is to say, it is not sufficient to replace the father-right by the mother-right, as, for example, Ruth Bré demands (“The Children of the State, or the Mother-Right?” Leipzig, 1904).

[166] There is a most apposite remark in one of George Meredith’s novels. He imagines that an Oriental vizier (from a Mohammedan country) is visiting our “Christian” capital, and late one evening, after a dinner-party at a distinguished house, walks homeward by way of Piccadilly. He asks, and is told, who are the numerous ladies walking the streets at that late hour. “I perceive” said the vizier, “that monogamic society has a decent visage and a hideous rear.”—Translator.

[167] M. Nordau, “The Conventional Lies of our Civilization,” pp. 263-317 (Leipzig, 1884).

[168] Georg Hirth estimates the percentage of marriages of convenience as even higher—viz., 90 per cent. Cf. his “Ways to Love,” p. 607.

[169] Cf. my “Contributions to the Etiology of Psychopathia Sexualis,” vol. i., pp. 165-174; vol. ii., pp. 190, 191, 208, 209, 363, 364.

[170] Schopenhauer’s Collected Works, edited by E. Grisebach, vol. ii., p. 1337 (Leipzig, 1905).

[171] Ernest Stiedenroth, “Psychologie zur Erklärung der Seelenerscheinungen,” pp. 224, 225 (Berlin, 1825).

[172] Max Nordau, “Conventional Lies,” p. 305.

[173] Cf. in this connexion the feuilleton of the Vossische Zeitung, No. 286, June 17, 1904. Jean Paul, also, was an enthusiast in theory and practice for such double love. He called it “simultaneous love.” The idea of simultaneous love has also been employed in a recently published French novel, “A la Merci de l’Heure,” by Jean Tarbel (Paris, 1907). The heroine has need of two lovers—a celebrated literary professor for head and heart, and in addition, a young physician for the gratification of her sensual needs. Contrariwise, Knut Hamsun, in “Pan,” and Guy de Maupassant in “Notre Cœur,” describe the double love of a man for a woman of the world and for a child of Nature.

[174] Friederich Schleiermacher, “Philosophic and Other Writings,” vol. i., p. 473 (Berlin, 1846).

[175] Cf. Eduard von Hartmann, “Philosophie des Unbewussten,” p. 205. In a French collection—“L’Amour par les Grands Écrivains,” by Julien Lemer, p. 14 (Paris, 1861)—we find the saying, “Ordinairement, lorsqu’on se marie par amour, il vient ensuite de la haine; c’est que j’ai vu de mes yeux” (“Ordinarily, when one marries for love, hate takes its place. I have seen it with my own eyes”).

[176] B. Z. am Mittag, No. 210, September 7, 1906.

[177] “Annales d’Hygiène Publique,” 1900, p. 340.

[178] Elard H. Meyer, “Deutsche Volkskunde,” p. 166 (Strasburg, 1898).

[179] Ludwig Stein, “Der Sinn des Daseins”—“The Sense of Existence,” p. 235 (Tübingen and Leipzig, 1904).

[180] H. Th. Buckle, “History of Civilization in England.”

[181] G. Schmoller, “Elements of General Political Economy,” vol. i., p. 250 (Leipzig, 1901).

[182] § 1568 runs: “A husband or wife can sue for divorce when the wife or husband by serious disregard of the duties entailed by marriage, or by dishonourable or immoral conduct, has brought about so profound a disorder of the conjugal relationship that to the offended party the continuation of the marriage appears impossible. Gross ill-treatment is also to be regarded as a serious infringement of these duties.” It is clear that the emphasized passage is capable of manifold interpretations, and it thus compensates for the abolition of the earlier grounds for divorce based upon incompatibility of temper.

[183] Taken from the newspaper Le Jour, No. 337, July 6, 1906.

[184] Compare Browning’s lines, in “James Lee’s Wife”:

[185] “Die Schicksale der Frauen und die Prostitution im Zusammenhange mit dem Prinzip der Unauflösbarkeit der katholischen Ehe und besonders der österreichischen Gesetzgebung und der Philosophie des Zeitalters” (Leipzig, 1847).