The Barbarian Status of Women

Thorstein Veblen
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 4, (188!"
#t seems altogether $robable that in the $rimiti%e grou$s of
man&in', (hen the race first too& to a systematic use of tools
an' so emerge' u$on the $ro$erly human $lane of life, there (as
but the %ery slightest beginning of a system of status, (ith
little of in%i'ious 'istinction bet(een classes an' little of a
corres$on'ing 'i%ision of em$loyments. #n an earlier $a$er,
$ublishe' in this J)*+,A-,(1." it has been argue' that the early
'i%ision of labor bet(een classes comes in as the result of an
increasing efficiency of labor, 'ue to a gro(ing effecti%eness in
the use of tools. When, in the early cultural 'e%elo$ment, the
use of tools an' the technical comman' of material forces ha'
reache' a certain 'egree of effecti%eness, the em$loyments (hich
occu$y the $rimiti%e community (oul' fall into t(o 'istinct
grou$s ! (a" the honorific em$loyments, (hich in%ol%e a large
element of $ro(ess, an' (b" the humiliating em$loyments, (hich
call for 'iligence an' into (hich the stur'ier %irtues 'o not
enter. An a$$reciable a'%ance in the use of tools must $rece'e
this 'ifferentiation of em$loyments, because (1" (ithout
effecti%e tools (inclu'ing (ea$ons" men are not sufficiently
formi'able in conflict (ith the ferocious beasts to 'e%ote
themsel%es so e/clusi%ely to the hunting of large game as to
'e%elo$ that occu$ation into a con%entional mo'e of life reser%e'
for a 'istinct class0 (1" (ithout tools of some efficiency,
in'ustry is not $ro'ucti%e enough to su$$ort a 'ense $o$ulation,
an' therefore the grou$s into (hich the $o$ulation gathers (ill
not come into such a habitual hostile contact (ith one another as
(oul' gi%e rise to a life of (arli&e $ro(ess0 (2" until
in'ustrial metho's an' &no(le'ge ha%e ma'e some a'%ance, the (or&
of getting a li%elihoo' is too e/acting to a'mit of the
consistent e/em$tion of any $ortion of the community from %ulgar
labor0 (4" the inefficient $rimiti%e in'ustry yiel's no such
'is$osable sur$lus of accumulate' goo's as (oul' be (orth
fighting for, or (oul' tem$t an intru'er, an' therefore there is
little $ro%ocation to (arli&e $ro(ess.
With the gro(th of in'ustry comes the $ossibility of a
$re'atory life0 an' if the grou$s of sa%ages cro(' one another in
the struggle for subsistence, there is a $ro%ocation to
hostilities, an' a $re'atory habit of life ensues. There is a
conse3uent gro(th of a $re'atory culture, (hich may for the
$resent $ur$ose be treate' as the beginning of the barbarian
culture. This $re'atory culture sho(s itself in a gro(th of
suitable institutions. The grou$ 'i%i'es itself con%entionally
into a fighting an' a $eace!&ee$ing class, (ith a corres$on'ing
'i%ision of labor. 4ighting, together (ith other (or& that
in%ol%es a serious element of e/$loit, becomes the em$loyment of
the able!bo'ie' men0 the une%entful e%ery'ay (or& of the grou$
falls to the (omen an' the infirm.
#n such a community the stan'ar's of merit an' $ro$riety rest
on an in%i'ious 'istinction bet(een those (ho are ca$able
fighters an' those (ho are not. #nfirmity, that is to say
inca$acity for e/$loit, is loo&e' 'o(n u$on. )ne of the early
conse3uences of this 'e$recation of infirmity is a tabu on (omen
an' on (omen5s em$loyments. #n the a$$rehension of the archaic,
animistic barbarian, infirmity is infectious. The infection may
(or& its mischie%ous effect both by sym$athetic influence an' by
transfusion. Therefore it is (ell for the able!bo'ie' man (ho is
min'ful of his %irility to shun all un'ue contact an'
con%ersation (ith the (ea&er se/ an' to a%oi' all contamination
(ith the em$loyments that are characteristic of the se/. 6%en the
habitual foo' of (omen shoul' not be eaten by men, lest their
force be thereby im$aire'. The in7unction against (omanly
em$loyments an' foo's an' against intercourse (ith (omen a$$lies
(ith es$ecial rigor 'uring the season of $re$aration for any (or&
of manly e/$loit, such as a great hunt or a (arli&e rai', or
in'uction into some manly 'ignity or society or mystery.
#llustrations of this seasonal tabu aboun' in the early history
of all $eo$les that ha%e ha' a (arli&e or barbarian $ast. The
(omen, their occu$ations, their foo' an' clothing, their habitual
$lace in the house or %illage, an' in e/treme cases e%en their
s$eech, become ceremonially unclean to the men. This im$utation
of ceremonial uncleanness on the groun' of their infirmity has
laste' on in the later culture as a sense of the un(orthiness or
le%itical ina'e3uacy of (omen0 so that e%en no( (e feel the
im$ro$riety of (omen ta&ing ran& (ith men, or re$resenting the
community in any relation that calls for 'ignity an' ritual
com$etency,. as for instance, in $riestly or 'i$lomatic offices,
or e%en in re$resentati%e ci%il offices, an' li&e(ise, an' for a
li&e reason, in such offices of 'omestic an' bo'y ser%ants as are
of a seriously ceremonial character ! footmen, butlers, etc.
The changes that ta&e $lace in the e%ery'ay e/$eriences of a
grou$ or hor'e (hen it $asses from a $eaceable to a $re'atory
habit of life ha%e their effect on the habits of thought
$re%alent in the grou$. As the hostile contact of one grou$ (ith
another becomes closer an' more habitual, the $re'atory acti%ity
an' the bellicose animus become more habitual to the members of
the grou$. 4ighting comes more an' more to occu$y men5s e%ery'ay
thoughts, an' the other acti%ities of the grou$ fall into the
bac&groun' an' become subsi'iary to the fighting acti%ity. #n the
$o$ular a$$rehension the substantial core of such a grou$ ! that
on (hich men5s thoughts run (hen the community an' the
community5s life is thought of ! is the bo'y of fighting men. The
collecti%e fighting ca$acity becomes the most serious 3uestion
that occu$ies men5s min's, an' gi%es the $oint of %ie( from (hich
$ersons an' con'uct are rate'. The scheme of life of such a grou$
is substantially a scheme of e/$loit. There is much of this $oint
of %ie( to be foun' e%en in the common!sense %ie(s hel' by mo'ern
$o$ulations. The inclination to i'entify the community (ith its
fighting men comes into e%i'ence to'ay (hene%er (arli&e interests
occu$y the $o$ular attention in an a$$reciable 'egree.
The (or& of the $re'atory barbarian grou$ is gra'ually
s$eciali8e' an' 'ifferentiate' un'er the 'ominance of this i'eal
of $ro(ess, so as to gi%e rise to a system of status in (hich the
non!fighters fall into a $osition of subser%ience to the
fighters. The acce$te' scheme of life or consensus of o$inions
(hich gui'es the con'uct of men in such a $re'atory grou$ an'
'eci'es (hat may $ro$erly be 'one, of course com$rises a great
%ariety of 'etails0 but it is, after all, a single scheme ! a
more or less organic (hole so that the life carrie' on un'er its
gui'ance in any case ma&es u$ a some(hat consistent an'
characteristic bo'y of culture. This is necessarily the case,
because of the sim$le fact that the in'i%i'uals bet(een (hom the
consensus hol's are in'i%i'uals. The thin&ing of each one is the
thin&ing of the same in'i%i'ual, on (hate%er hea' an' in (hate%er
'irection his thin&ing may run. Whate%er may be the imme'iate
$oint or ob7ect of his thin&ing, the frame of min' (hich go%erns
his aim an' manner of reasoning in $assing on any gi%en $oint of
con'uct is, on the (hole, the habitual frame of min' (hich
e/$erience an' tra'ition ha%e enforce' u$on him. #n'i%i'uals
(hose sense of (hat is right an' goo' 'e$arts (i'ely from the
acce$te' %ie(s suffer some re$ression, an' in case of an e/treme
'i%ergence they are eliminate' from the effecti%e life of the
grou$ through ostracism. Where the fighting class is in the
$osition of 'ominance an' $rescri$ti%e legitimacy, the canons of
con'uct are sha$e' chiefly by the common sense of the bo'y of
fighting men. Whate%er con'uct an' (hate%er co'e of $ro$rieties
has the authentication of this common sense is 'efiniti%ely right
an' goo', for the time being. an' the 'eli%erances of this common
sense are, in their turn, sha$e' by the habits of life of the
able!bo'ie' men. 9abitual conflict acts, by selection an' by
habituation, to ma&e these male members tolerant of any
infliction of 'amage an' suffering. 9abituation to the sight an'
infliction of suffering, an' to the emotions that go (ith fights
an' bra(ls, may e%en en' in ma&ing the s$ectacle of misery a
$leasing 'i%ersion to them. The result is in any case a more or
less consistent attitu'e of $lun'ering an' coercion on the $art
of the fighting bo'y, an' this animus is incor$orate' into the
scheme of life of the community. The 'isci$line of $re'atory life
ma&es for an attitu'e of mastery on the $art of the able!bo'ie'
men in all their relations (ith the (ea&er members of the grou$,
an' es$ecially in their relations (ith the (omen. :en (ho are
traine' in $re'atory (ays of life an' mo'es of thin&ing come by
habituation to a$$rehen' this form of the relation bet(een the
se/es as goo' an' beautiful.
All the (omen in the grou$ (ill share in the class re$ression
an' 'e$reciation that belongs to them as (omen, but the status of
(omen ta&en from hostile grou$s has an a''itional feature. Such a
(oman not only belongs to a subser%ient an' lo( class, but she
also stan's in a s$ecial relation to her ca$tor. She is a tro$hy
of the rai', an' therefore an e%i'ence of e/$loit, an' on this
groun' it is to her ca$tor5s interest to maintain a $eculiarly
ob%ious relation of mastery to(ar' her. An' since, in the early
culture, it 'oes not 'etract from her subser%ience to the life of
the grou$, this $eculiar relation of the ca$ti%e to her ca$tor
(ill meet but slight, if any, ob7ection from the other members of
the grou$. At the same time, since his $eculiar coerci%e relation
to the (oman ser%es to mar& her as a tro$hy of his e/$loit, he
(ill some(hat 7ealously resent any similar free'om ta&en by other
men, or any attem$t on their $art to $ara'e a similar coerci%e
authority o%er her, an' so usur$ the laurels of his $ro(ess, %ery
much as a (arrior (oul' un'er li&e circumstances resent a
usur$ation or an abuse of the scal$s or s&ulls (hich he ha' ta&en
from the enemy.
After the habit of a$$ro$riating ca$ture' (omen has har'ene'
into custom, an' so gi%en rise on the one han' to a form of
marriage resting on coercion, an' on the other han' to a conce$t
of o(nershi$,(1." a 'e%elo$ment of certain secon'ary features of
the institution so inaugurate' is to be loo&e' for. #n time this
coerci%e o(nershi$!marriage recei%es the sanction of the $o$ular
taste an' morality. #t comes to rest in men5s habits of thought
as the right form of marriage relation, an' it comes at the same
time to be gratifying to men5s sense of beauty an' of honor. The
gro(ing $re'ilection for mastery an' coercion, as a manly trait,
together (ith the gro(ing moral an' aesthetic a$$robation of
marriage on a basis of coercion an' o(nershi$, (ill affect the
tastes of the men most imme'iately an' most strongly0 but since
the men are the su$erior class, (hose %ie(s 'etermine the current
%ie(s of the community, their common sense in the matter (ill
sha$e the current canons of taste in its o(n image. The tastes of
the (omen also, in $oint of morality an' of $ro$riety ali&e, (ill
$resently be affecte' in the same (ay. Through the $rece$t an'
e/am$le of those (ho ma&e the %ogue, an' through selecti%e
re$ression of those (ho are unable to acce$t it, the institution
of o(nershi$!marriage ma&es its (ay into 'efiniti%e acce$tance as
the only beautiful an' %irtuous form of the relation. As the
con%iction of its legitimacy gro(s stronger in each succee'ing
generation, it comes to be a$$reciate' unreflectingly as a
'eli%erance of common sense an' enlightene' reason that the goo'
an' beautiful attitu'e of the man to(ar' the (oman is an attitu'e
of coercion. ;,one but the bra%e 'eser%e the fair.;
As the $re'atory habit of life gains a more un3uestione' an'
un'i%i'e' s(ay, other forms of the marriage relation fall un'er a
$olite o'ium. The masterless, unattache' (oman conse3uently loses
caste. #t becomes im$erati%e for all men (ho (oul' stan' (ell in
the eyes of their fello(s to attach some (oman or (omen to
themsel%es by the honorable bon's of sei8ure. #n or'er to a
'ecent stan'ing in the community a man is re3uire' to enter into
this %irtuous an' honorific relation of o(nershi$!marriage, an' a
$ublicly ac&no(le'ge' marriage relation (hich has not the
sanction of ca$ture becomes un(orthy of able!bo'ie' men. But as
the grou$ increases in si8e, the 'ifficulty of $ro%i'ing (i%es by
ca$ture becomes %ery great, an' it becomes necessary to fin' a
reme'y that shall sa%e the re3uirements of 'ecency an' at the
same time $ermit the marriage of (omen from (ithin the grou$. To
this en' the status of (omen marrie' from (ithin the grou$ is
sought to be men'e' by a mimic or ceremonial ca$ture. The
ceremonial ca$ture effects an assimilation of the free (oman into
the more acce$table class of (omen (ho are attache' by bon's of
coercion to some master, an' so gi%es a ceremonial legitimacy an'
'ecency to the resulting marriage relation. The $robable moti%e
for a'o$ting the free (omen into the honorable class of bon'
(omen in this (ay is not $rimarily a (ish to im$ro%e their
stan'ing or their lot, but rather a (ish to &ee$ those goo' men
in countenance (ho, for 'earth of ca$ti%es, are constraine' to
see& a substitute from among the home!bre' (omen of the grou$.
The inclinations of men in high stan'ing (ho are $ossesse' of
marriageable 'aughters (oul' run in the same 'irection. #t (oul'
not seem right that a (oman of high birth shoul' irretrie%ably be
outclasse' by any chance!comer from outsi'e.
Accor'ing to this %ie(, marriage by feigne' ca$ture (ithin
the tribe is a case of mimicry ! ;$rotecti%e mimicry,; to borro(
a $hrase from the naturalists. #t is substantially a case of
a'o$tion. As is the case in all human relations (here a'o$tion is
$ractice', this a'o$tion of the free (omen into the class of the
unfree $rocee's by as close an imitation as may be of the
original fact for (hich it is a substitute. An' as in other cases
of a'o$tion, the ceremonial $erformance is by no means loo&e'
u$on as a fatuous ma&e!belie%e. The barbarian has im$licit faith
in the efficiency of imitation an' ceremonial e/ecution as a
means of com$assing a 'esire' en'. The entire range of magic an'
religious rites is testimony to that effect. 9e loo&s u$on
e/ternal ob7ects an' se3uences nai%ely, as organic an' in'i%i'ual
things, an' as e/$ressions of a $ro$ensity (or&ing to(ar' an en'.
The unso$histicate' common sense of the $rimiti%e barbarian
a$$rehen's se3uences an' e%ents. in terms of (ill!$o(er or
inclination. As seen in the light of this animistic
$reconce$tion, any $rocess is substantially teleological, an' the
$ro$ensity im$ute' to it (ill not be th(arte' of its legitimate
en' after the course of e%ents in (hich it e/$resses itself has
once fallen into sha$e or got un'er. (ay. #t follo(s logically,
as a matter of course, that if once the motions lea'ing to a
'esire' consummation ha%e been rehearse' in the accre'ite' form
an' se3uence, the same substantial result (ill be attaine' as
that $ro'uce' by the $rocess imitate'. This is the groun' of
(hate%er efficiency is im$ute' to ceremonial obser%ances on all
$lanes of culture, an' it is es$ecially the chief element in
formal a'o$tion an' initiation. 9ence, $robably, the $ractice of
moc&!sei8ure or moc&!ca$ture, an' hence the formal $rofession of
fealty an' submission on the $art of the (oman in the marriage
rites of $eo$les among (hom the househol' (ith a male hea'
$re%ails. This form of the househol' is almost al(ays associate'
(ith some sur%i%al or reminiscence of (ife!ca$ture. #n all such
cases, marriage is, by 'eri%ation, a ritual of initiation into
ser%itu'e. #n the (or's of the formula, e%en after it has been
a$$reciably softene' un'er the latter!'ay 'ecay of the sense of
status, it is the (oman5s $lace to lo%e, honor, an' obey.
Accor'ing to this %ie(, the $atriarchal househol', or, in
other (or's, the househol' (ith a male hea', is an outgro(th af
emulation bet(een the members of a (arli&e community. #t is,
therefore, in $oint of 'eri%ation, a $re'atory institution. The
o(nershi$ an' control of (omen is a gratifying e%i'ence of
$ro(ess an' high stan'ing. #n logical consistency, therefore, the
greater the number of (omen so hel', the greater the 'istinction
(hich their $ossession confers u$on their master. 9ence the
$re%alence of $olygamy, (hich occurs almost uni%ersally at one
stage of culture among $eo$les (hich ha%e the male househol'.
There may, of course, be other reasons for $olygamy, but the
i'eal 'e%elo$ment of $olygamy (hich is met (ith in the harems of
%ery $o(erful $atriarchal 'es$ots an' chieftains can scarcely be
e/$laine' on other groun's. But (hether it (or&s out in a system
of $olygamy or not, the male househol' is in any case a 'etail of
a system of status un'er (hich the (omen are inclu'e' in the
class of unfree sub7ects. The 'ominant feature in the
institutional structure of these communities is that of status,
an' the groun'(or& of their economic life is a rigorous system of
o(nershi$.
The institution is foun' at its best, or in its most
effectual 'e%elo$ment, in the communities in (hich status an'
o(nershi$ $re%ail (ith the least mitigation0 an' (ith the 'ecline
of the sense of status an' of the e/treme $retensions of
o(nershi$, such as has been going on for some time $ast in the
communities of the (estern culture, the institution of the
$atriarchal househol' has also suffere' something of a
'isintegration. There has been some (ea&ening an' slac&ening of
the bon's, an' this 'eterioration is most %isible in the
communities (hich ha%e 'e$arte' farthest from the ancient system
of status, an' ha%e gone farthest in reorgani8ing their economic
life on the lines of in'ustrial free'om. An' the 'eference for an
in'issoluble tie of o(nershi$!marriage, as (ell as the sense of
its 'efiniti%e %irtuousness, has suffere' the greatest 'ecline
among the classes imme'iately engage' in the mo'ern in'ustries.
So that there seems to be fair groun' for saying that the habits
of thought fostere' by mo'ern in'ustrial life are, on the (hole,
not fa%orable to the maintenance of this institution or to that
status of (omen (hich the institution in its best 'e%elo$ment
im$lies. The 'ays of its best 'e%elo$ment are in the $ast, an'
the 'isci$line of mo'ern life ! if not su$$lemente' by a $ru'ent
inculcation of conser%ati%e i'eals ! (ill scarcely affor' the
$sychological basis for its rehabilitation.
This form of marriage, or of o(nershi$, by (hich the man
becomes the hea' of the househol', the o(ner of the (oman, an'
the o(ner an' 'iscretionary consumer of the househol'5s out$ut of
consumable goo's, 'oes not of necessity im$ly a $atriarchal
system of consanguinity. The $resence or absence of maternal
relationshi$ shoul', therefore, not be gi%en 'efinite (eight in
this connection. The male househol', in some 'egree of
elaboration, may (ell coe/ist (ith a counting of relationshi$ in
the female line, as, for instance, among many ,orth American
tribes. But (here this is the case it seems $robable that the
o(nershi$ of (omen, together (ith the in%i'ious 'istinctions of
status from (hich the $ractice of such an o(nershi$ s$rings, has
come into %ogue at so late a stage of the cultural 'e%elo$ment
that the maternal system of relationshi$ ha' alrea'y been
thoroughly incor$orate' into the tribe5s scheme of life. The male
househol' in such cases is or'inarily not 'e%elo$e' in goo' form
or entirely free from traces of a maternal househol'. The traces
of a maternal househol' (hich are foun' in these cases commonly
$oint to a form of marriage (hich 'isregar's the man rather than
$laces him un'er the sur%eillance of the (oman. #t may (ell be
name' the househol' of the unattache' (oman. This con'ition of
things argues that the tribe or race in 3uestion has entere' u$on
a $re'atory life only after a consi'erable $erio' of $eaceable
in'ustrial life, an' after ha%ing achie%e' a consi'erable
'e%elo$ment of social structure un'er the regime of $eace an'
in'ustry, (hereas the un3ualifie' $re%alence of the $atriarchate,
together! (ith the male househol', may be ta&en to in'icate that
the $re'atory $hase (as entere' early, culturally s$ea&ing.
Where the $atriarchal system is in force in fully 'e%elo$e'
form, inclu'ing the $aternal househol', an' ham$ere' (ith no
in'ubitable sur%i%als of a maternal househol' or a maternal
system of relationshi$, the $resum$tion (oul' be that the $eo$le
in 3uestion has entere' u$on the $re'atory culture early, an' has
a'o$te' the institutions of $ri%ate $ro$erty an' class
$rerogati%e at an early stage of its economic 'e%elo$ment. )n the
other han', (here there are (ell!$reser%e' traces of a maternal
househol', the $resum$tion is that the $re'atory $hase has been
entere' by the community in 3uestion at a relati%ely late $oint
in its life history, e%en if the $atriarchal system is, an' long
has been, the $re%alent system of relationshi$. #n the latter
case the community, or the grou$ of tribes, may, $erha$s for
geogra$hical reasons, not ha%e in'e$en'ently attaine' the
$re'atory culture in accentuate' form, but may at a relati%ely
late 'ate ha%e contracte' the agnatic system an' the $aternal
househol' through contact (ith another, higher, or
characteristically 'ifferent, culture, (hich has inclu'e' these
institutions among its cultural furniture. The re3uire' contact
(oul' ta&e $lace most effectually by (ay of in%asion an' con3uest
by an alien race occu$ying the higher $lane or 'i%ergent line of
culture. Something of this &in' is the $robable e/$lanation, for
instance, of the e3ui%ocal character of the househol' an'
relationshi$ system in the early <ermanic culture, es$ecially as
it is seen in such outlying regions as Scan'ina%ia. The e%i'ence,
in this latter case, as in some other communities lying farther
south, is some(hat obscure, but it $oints to a long!continue'
coe/istence of the t(o forms of the househol'0 of (hich the
maternal seems to ha%e hel' its $lace most tenaciously among the
sub7ect or lo(er classes of the $o$ulation, (hile the $aternal
(as the honorable form of marriage in %ogue among the su$erior
class. #n the earliest traceable situation of these tribes there
a$$ears to ha%e been a relati%ely feeble, but gro(ing,
$re$on'erance of the male househol' throughout the community.
This mi/ture of marriage institutions, as (ell as the correlati%e
mi/ture or ambiguity of $ro$erty institutions associate' (ith it
in the <ermanic culture, seems most easily e/$licable as being
'ue to the mingling of t(o 'istinct racial stoc&s, (hose
institutions 'iffere' in these res$ects. The race or tribe (hich
ha' the maternal househol' an' common $ro$erty (oul' $robably
ha%e been the more numerous an' the more $eaceable at the time
the mi/ing $rocess began, an' (oul' fall into some 'egree of
sub7ection to its more (arli&e consort race.
,o attem$t is hereby ma'e to account for the %arious forms of
human marriage, or to sho( ho( the institution %aries in 'etail
from $lace to $lace an' from time to time, but only to in'icate
(hat seems to ha%e been the range of moti%es an' of e/igencies
that ha%e gi%en rise to the $aternal househol', as it has been
han'e' 'o(n from the barbarian $ast of the $eo$les of the (estern
culture. To this en', nothing but the most general features of
the life history of the institution ha%e been touche' u$on, an'
e%en the e%i'ence on (hich this much of generali8ation is base'
is, $er force, omitte'. The $ur$ose of the argument is to $oint
out that there is a close connection, $articularly in $oint of
$sychological 'eri%ation, bet(een in'i%i'ual o(nershi$, the
system of status, an' the $aternal househol', as they a$$ear in
this culture.
This %ie( of the 'eri%ation of $ri%ate $ro$erty an' of the
male househol', as alrea'y suggeste', 'oes not im$ly the $rior
e/istence of a maternal househol' of the &in' in (hich the (oman
is the hea' an' master of a househol' grou$ an' e/ercises a
'iscretionary control o%er her husban' or husban's an' o%er the
househol' effects. Still less 'oes it im$ly a $rior state of
$romiscuity. What is im$lie' by the hy$othesis an' by the scant
e%i'ence at han' is rather the form of the marriage relation
abo%e characteri8e' as the househol' of the unattache' (oman. The
characteristic feature of this marriage seems to ha%e been an
absence of coercion or control in the relation bet(een the se/es.
The union ($robably monogamic an' more or less en'uring" seems to
ha%e been terminable at (ill by either $arty, un'er the
constraint of some slight con%entional limitations. The
substantial 'ifference intro'uce' into the marriage relation on
the a'o$tion of o(nershi$!marriage is the e/ercise of coercion by
the man an' the loss on the $art of the (oman of the $o(er to
terminate the relation at (ill. 6%i'ence running in this
'irection, an' in $art hitherto un$ublishe', is to be foun' both
in the mo'ern an' in the earlier culture of <ermanic communities.
#t is only in cases (here circumstances ha%e, in an
e/ce$tional 'egree, fa%ore' the 'e%elo$ment of o(nershi$!marriage
that (e shoul' e/$ect to fin' the institution (or&e' out to its
logical conse3uences. Where%er the $re'atory $hase of social life
has not come in early an' has not $re%aile' in un3ualifie' form
for a long time, or (here%er a social grou$ or race (ith this
form of the househol' has recei%e' a strong a'mi/ture of another
race not $ossesse' of the institution, there the $re%alent form
of marriage shoul' sho( something of a 'e$arture from this
$aternal ty$e. An' e%en (here neither of these t(o con'itions is
$resent, this ty$e of the marriage relation might be e/$ecte' in
the course of time to brea& 'o(n (ith the change of
circumstances, since it is an institution that has gro(n u$ as a
'etail of a system of status, an', therefore, $resumably fits
into such a social system, but 'oes not fit into a system of a
'ifferent &in'. #t is at $resent %isibly brea&ing 'o(n in mo'ern
ci%ili8e' communities, a$$arently because it is at %ariance (ith
the most ancient habits of thought of the race, as (ell as (ith
the e/igencies of a $eaceful, in'ustrial mo'e of life. There may
seem some groun' for hol'ing that the same reassertion of ancient
habits of thought (hich is no( a$$arently at (or& to 'isintegrate
the institution of o(nershi$!marriage may be e/$ecte' also to
(or& a 'isintegration of the correlati%e institution of $ri%ate
$ro$erty0 but that is $erha$s a 3uestion of s$eculati%e curiosity
rather than of urgent theoretical interest.
,)T6S=
1. ;The #nstinct of Wor&manshi$ an' the #r&someness of -abor,;
Se$tember 188, $$. 18>!11?.
1. 4or a more 'etaile' 'iscussion of this $oint see a $a$er on
;The Beginnings of )(nershi$; in this J)*+,A- for ,o%ember, 188.