The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1870-10-14

Eoussa Ktflrs Lchtensteir asserts thot there IL
no feeling OF love in marriage" In North Amer
lea, Il Tirn6 Indians had no word for "dcif'' or
"lclo,cd :" and the Algonquin Language is stated
10 have contained no verb meaning to loves" 50
t,lt v en- tie Bible vas translated by the mission.
aries into That language, IL aas necessary to invent
word 'oi the purpose.
Il. india tie HI tribes Of CLitiagorg, says Cilt.
Levin. reemd marriage as q mere ahim' and con.
'cni,nt Connccton--as tIe MS OF gc;tin4 th,if
dinner ,ooSoi. tb,v have no itea Of tend rnc-s.
ucr Of c iyart IS devotion. Among tic LcaiItl
Indians of Paraguay tie bonds uf uajrmony are 50
Nc,y 81 it, t3at when the parties 30 not ike ea,l
other they separate without further ceremony. In
other respects hey 90 not appear TO have tho most
distant notions Of that bashmncss natural to The
res, u mankind.
In very ancient times when the whole human race
was in a savage conuition, marriage was Unknown
and women were common property. Bachofcn and
Nc Len ran, the two most recent authors who have
studied this subject, both agree that the primitive
condition Of man socially was that OF communism,
where, as q; Oneida, every man and woman In a
small communit, were regarded as equally married
to one another. The same view Is entertained by
an American writer, Mr.. Lewis II. Morgan OF
Rochester, who has made the primitive condition Of
man special study for many years. and whose
chief work the subject embracing the most ex.
tensve researches. Il now in course OF publication
by the Smithsonian Institution. sir John Lubbock,
without having accese TO MIR. Morgan's investiga-
tions except TO very limited extent, has reached
similar conclusions. lie regards communal marriage,
in which women were common TO the whole tribe,
tic first s,neo Of human society. Individual mar.
riace, he thinks arose from captivcs In II is
obvious, he says, that even under communal
marriage a warrior who had captured a beauu-
uf.f
claim peculilr right to her, and when possible.
would set custom at defiance. II IL true that under
q communal system no man could appropriate girl
entirely TO himself without infringing the rights OF
tire whole tribe. Such act would naturally be
looked with Jealousy and only regarded a. JUST
liable under peculiar circumstances A war captive,
however was IN a pccul ar position the tribe had
no right 10 her; her captor might have killed her
Il he chose II lie preferred to keep her alive, ne was
at liberty TO do 40; he did as he liked, and the
tribe was no sufferer. Thus arose individual mar.
rllgc. which In any other way would have been an
infringement OF communal rights suro to be resisted.
Even in orr own day among the Andaminors any
woman Who attempted to refuse the marital prlv-
lcgcs claimed by any member OF the tribe was liable
to 81, gro punishment.
Sir John Lubbock maintains that the ori,in of
marriage il independent OF all sacred and social con-
sideraions that Il had nothing to do with mutual
affection consent that II was invalidatel BY any
appearance OF consent; and that II arose rot from
affection or tenderness, but by brutal violence and
unwilling submission. In all PARTS OF the world, in
all ages and among many tribes at the presen,
day. the evidence is heming that wives were
procured by force aud by capture from other tribes
And alter actual hostiities had ceased and marriage
| in its present form had been instituted the cerc-
mony was kept up Of capturing, or pretending to
IrgIo - ~
all the aboriginal races OF Hndostan, among tire
| wild tribes Of the Malay peninsula, among
! the Calmucks.I tie Mongos. and finally, among
great plumber OF South American tribes.
II prevails also in some OF the Islands OF Polynesia
| and in various parts Of Africa.
In Circassa, TO this day, important part OF the
marriage ceremony consists in the rushing in OF the
| bridegroom, attended by a number OF young
men, VINO carry of the bride by force.
| Plutnrch tells us that in Sparta the bride.
| groom usually carried of his bride by forces
| a mere ceremony, however. The Romans mad a
vcry similar custom. And In some parts OF France
down to the seventeenth century, 1t was customary
FOR the bride TO fcign reluctance to the bride
| groon's house. In Poland, Russia. nnl parts OF
| prussia, young used to carry OF their sweet
hearts ny force and then apply to the parents Tor
| their consent.
The fact Is, that marriage BY capture, either as
stern reality or as an important ceremony, prevails
| in Australia ard among the Malays In ITiudostnn
| Central Asia Siberia, and KamslSa.ka, among the
Esquimaux tho Northern Indians. the abori-inos
OF Brazil, in Chill and TERRA del Fuego, In the Pa
| ci1c islands. both among tie Polynesans and the
| Fe Jeans, In t. Philippine. among the Arabs al
Ne-roes, In Circassa, and, until recently, prevailed
| ;hrou-hou: great part Of Europe.
The Custom vi lifting the bride over the Doorstep,
| which find in such distant ard different races Us
the Romans the Canadi an Indians The Chinese, and
the Abyssinilrs had doubtless the same origin.
| Hence, also perhaps our honeymoon. during which
the bridegroom keens hi. bride away from her rea-
lives and friends hence even, perhaps as Mr..
| NcLonnnu suppo-es, the sliorer l. In mock AMER
& rown after tic departing bride and bridegroom.
| The curious custom which foruids tho father and
nothor-n law to sneak TO their sonn.law, and rice
rrsT. which we have shown above 70 he very wide.
| ly distributed, but for which no satisfactory OK.
panaton has yet been given, seems to be a natural
| consequence Of marriage by CAPTURE. Wen the
capture was rcaity the indignation Of the pare Is
would also he real when IL became a mere symbol,
the parental anger would be symbolizcd also aud
| wou'd be continued even after us origin was r
| gotten.
| This work OF Sir John Lubbock abounts IN
curious details OF savage life. Apart, however
| from is entertaining qualities the book Is an 49,
| portant contribution to chronological science ana {,
the Darwinan controversy.