My household stuff, my field, my barn,
The Taming of the Shrew.
It is an obvious fact that so far as her sex relations are concerned the position of civilized3 woman is lower than that of the female animal.
The question which presents itself at this stage of our inquiry4 is: What were the causes which led to the overthrow5 of female supremacy6 or what were the processes by which man gained the undisputed right to the control of woman’s person? By contrasting the industrial position of women under gentile institutions with that of later times, after they had become the sexual slaves of men, it will be seen that the question of economics is deeply involved in this change. Although the early independence of women is now recognized, the fact of their industrial supremacy is for the most part ignored. Indeed the part performed160 by woman in originating and developing human industries is seldom referred to by those dealing8 with this subject.
As the activities best suited to the tastes of primitive9 man were confined to war and the chase, those occupations and pursuits which were necessary for the preservation10 of the group were carried on by women. The reason for this is obvious. Fathers were not regarded as being related to their offspring. The mother was the only recognized parent. As the land was held in common, women were economically free. They were absolutely independent of men for their support. Under these conditions the importance of women’s position may be easily perceived.
Not only did women establish the first industries, but they invented and constructed the tools and implements11 by which these industries were carried on. Women were the first tillers of the soil. It was they who conceived the idea of preserving seeds whereby farinaceous food might be produced. Corn was not only raised by them but by them it was ground and further prepared for use. They built clay granaries in which to store their food products and tamed the cat to protect them. Implements for tilling the soil, and devices for grinding the grain were invented by women. They were the first architects and the first builders. They first conceived the idea of making cloth with which to protect the body. They were the first spinners and the first weavers13. They in161vented the first spindles and the first looms14. Their attempts at decoration were the beginning of art.
As these pioneers in industry were without means of transportation other than their backs, some of the difficulties which they encountered may be readily perceived. It must be borne in mind that for primitive women there was no accumulated store of knowledge and no previous race-experiences; neither were there any established rules or precedents15 to guide them. All methods and utilities had to be worked out by woman’s unaided brain. When the conditions under which these pioneers in industry laboured are considered, and when one reflects on the obstacles which must have presented themselves at every step along their untried pathway, it would almost seem that their early achievements were quite as remarkable16 as are those which have since been accomplished17 by men.
The fact is observed that woman assumed the r?le of protector and provider, not as is commonly asserted because she was compelled by man to become a beast of burden, but because she was the recognized guardian18 not only of infant life but of the public welfare. Later, after the primitive groups began to coalesce19 to form the tribe, after wife-capture became prevalent and men thereby20 secured the right to the control and ownership of individual women, a right which they still claim, then and not till then did women become beasts of burden. Then and not till then did162 man gain the right to the control of woman’s person.
It is now known that wife-capture is the origin of our present form of marriage, and that the establishment of the family with man at its head rests on the same basis. It is also known that through forcible marriage and the economic conditions which it entailed21, woman became a dependent, a mere22 appendage23 to her male mate. The dominion24 of man and the assumed inferiority of woman are the direct results of the authority which he was able to exercise over her in the marital25 relation.
We have seen that prior to the decline of female influence women taken prisoners in war were not regarded as the legitimate26 property of their captors. On the contrary, female captives were adopted into the gens and invested with the same status of personal independence enjoyed by the original members of the group. Later, however, female prisoners began to be regarded as the special booty of their captors, and as belonging exclusively to them; and although in primitive times marriage outside the limits of related groups was prohibited, owing to the esteem27 in which military chieftains came to be held, this claim was at length allowed them. Any courageous29 young warrior30, conscious of his popularity, might gather about him a band of his clansmen and march against a neighbouring tribe, the women taken prisoners during such expeditions being the special prizes of their captors.
163
These prisoners were entitled to none of the privileges of the community into which they were taken; and as the hostility34 felt toward unrelated tribes had become so strong as to be shared by women, the captive woman could no longer look for pity even from her own sex.
From this time in the history of the race may be traced the decline of woman’s power and the subjection of the natural female impulses. As, at this stage, within the limits of their own tribe, women held the balance of power in their own hands, and as they still exercised unqualified control over their own persons, the acknowledged ownership of one woman, who, being a “stranger,” was without power or influence, would be an object much to be desired, and one for which a warrior would not hesitate to brave the dangers of a hostile camp. Hence, female captives were in demand, and the women of warring tribes were sought after singly and in groups. In process of time wars for wives became general and under the new regime women had the fear of captivity36 constantly before their view as a condition more to be dreaded37 than death.
In the Mahabharata of India it is stated that formerly38 “women were unconfined and roved about at their pleasure, independent.” Finally, marriage was instituted and a woman was bound to a man for life. One of the eight forms of legalized marriage in the code of Manu was that of capture de facto and was called Racshasa. This particular164 form of conjugal39 union was practised exclusively by the military classes, among which, the women taken in battle were the acknowledged booty of their captors. A definition of this kind of marriage is as follows: “The seizure40 of a maiden41 by force from her house while she weeps and calls for assistance, after her kinsmen42 and friends have been slain43 in battle or wounded, and their houses broken open, is the marriage called Racshasa.”
Capture as the prescribed form of marriage for warriors44 may be traced through thousands of years and among various peoples. Of the three legalized forms of marital union in Rome, that by capture was the one in use among the plebeians45, the patricians46 at the same time practising Confarreatio and Usus. In Arabia, as late as Mohammed’s time, the carrying off of women was recognized as a legal form of marriage.109
That capture constituted a legal form of marriage among the Israelites, or that women taken captives in war were appropriated as sexual slaves, is shown by their religious history, in which the instructions given to the Lord’s chosen people after they had taken a city was to “smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city” they were to take unto themselves. This, it will be noticed, is to be done165 “unto the cities which are very far off,” and which “are not of the cities of these nations.”110
When the Israelites 12,000 strong marched against the Midianites, they were commanded by Moses to slay47 all the males, adults and children, and all the women except the virgins48. These virgins of whom there were 32,000 were to be spared and utilized50 as wives by the victorious51 Israelites. The fact will be noted52 that these women had been taken from their own people, hence they were wholly without influence or power. They were dependents and therefore subject to the will of their masters. They were sexual slaves or wives.
In Australia, among the North American Indians, the tribes of the Amazon and the Orinoco, in Hindustan and Afghanistan, marriage by actual capture is still practised, and many of the details connected with the modus operandi have been given by various writers. The following from Sir George Gray, relative to this form of marriage as it exists at the present time among some of the native Australian tribes, is quoted by Mr. J.?F. McLennan.
Although a woman give no encouragement to her admirers,
many plots are laid to carry her off, and in the encounters which result from these, she is almost certain to receive some violent injury, for each of the combatants166 orders her to follow him, and in the event of her refusing, throws a spear at her. The early life of a young woman at all celebrated53 for beauty is generally one continued series of captivity to different masters, of ghastly wounds, of wanderings in strange families, of rapid flights, of bad treatment from other females, amongst whom she is brought a stranger by her captor; and rarely do you see a form of unusual grace and elegance54, but it is marked and scarred by the furrows55 of old wounds; and many a female thus wanders several hundred miles from the home of her infancy56, being carried off successively to distant and more distant points.111
In an account describing the search for wives by the natives of Sydney, Collins says:
The poor wretch57 is stolen upon in the absence of her protectors. Being first stupefied with blows, inflicted58 with clubs or wooden swords, on the head, back, and shoulders, every one of which is followed by a stream of blood, she is then dragged through the woods by one arm, with a perseverance59 and violence that it might be supposed would displace it from its socket60. This outrage61 is not resented by the relations of the female, who only retaliate62 by a similar outrage when they find an opportunity. This is so constantly the practice among them that even the children make it a play game, or exercise.112
By various travellers and explorers, the fact has been observed that certain symbols represent167ing force in their marriage ceremonies are in use among nearly if not all extant tribes which have reached a certain stage of growth. To such an extent, in an earlier age, has the forcible carrying-off of women prevailed, that among most of these tribes a valid63 marriage may not be consummated65 without the appearance of force in the nuptial66 ceremonies. In reference to these symbols, we have the following passage from Mr. McLennan:
Meantime, we observe that, whenever we discover symbolical67 forms, we are justified68 in inferring that in the past life of the people employing them, there were corresponding realities; and if, among the primitive races which we examine, we find such realities as might naturally pass into such forms on an advance taking place in civility, then we may safely conclude (keeping within the conditions of a sound inference) that what these now are, those employing the symbols once were.113
Among primitive tribes, the area controlled by each was small, therefore vigilance in maintaining their possessions was one of their chief duties, and hostility to surrounding tribes a natural condition. Subsequently, however, when friendly relations began to be established with hitherto hostile tribes, they are found entering into negotiations69 to furnish each other with wives. It was at this time that marriage by sale or contract was instituted, an arrangement by which the elder168 men in the tribe could be accommodated with foreign wives, at the same time that their own daughters and sisters became to them a source of revenue.
In Uganda many men obtain wives by exchanging daughters and sisters with each other. Of this practice C. Staniland Wake says:
This is not an unusual mode of proceeding70 in different parts of the world. The perpetuation71 of the monopoly of women enjoyed to a great extent by the older men of the tribe among the Australians is, according to Mr. Howitt, encouraged by those having sisters or daughters to exchange with each other for wives.114
Not unfrequently actual capture is practised side by side with fiction—violent seizure being in active operation among the same tribes at the same time with the symbol, the frequency of actual violence depending partly on the extent to which hostility prevails between the tribes, and partly on the degree of “uniformity established by usage in the prices paid for wives.” Among certain tribes, when a dispute arises concerning the price to be paid for a bride, if the man is able to seize the woman and carry her off to his tent, the law recognizes her as his wife and nothing is left for the relations to do in the matter but to accept his terms as to the price.
The peoples among which actual capture is at169 present practised, and those among which wives are procured72 by sale or contract, represent two different stages in the development of the institution of marriage, and it is owing to this fact that the symbols used among the latter may be traced to the realities in which they originated.
Of the Bedouins of Mt. Sinai, Burckhardt says that marriage is a matter of sale and purchase, in which the inclination73 of the girl is disregarded.
The young maid comes home in the evening with the cattle. At a short distance from the camp she is met by the future spouse74 and a couple of his young friends, and carried off by force to her father’s tent. If she entertains any suspicion of their designs she defends herself with stones, and often inflicts75 wounds on the young men, even though she does not dislike the lover, for, according to custom, the more she struggles, bites, kicks, cries, and shrieks76, the more she is applauded ever after by her own companions.115
In reference to the Mezeyne Arabs the same writer observes that a similar custom prevailed within the limits of the Sinai Peninsula, but not among the other tribes of that province.
A girl having been wrapped in the Abba at night, is permitted to escape from her tent, and fly into the neighbouring mountains. The bridegroom goes in search of her next day, and remains78 often many days before he can find her out, while her female friends are apprised79 of her hiding-place, and furnish her with170 provisions. If the husband finds her at last (which is sooner or later, according to the impression that he has made upon the girl’s heart), he is bound to consummate64 the marriage in the open country, and to pass the night with her in the mountains. The next morning the bride goes home to her tent, that she may have some food; but again runs away in the evening and repeats these flights several times, till she finally returns to her tent. She does not go to live in her husband’s tent until she is far advanced in pregnancy80; if she does not become pregnant, she may not join her husband till a full year from the wedding-day.116
Cranz says that in Greenland “some females, when a husband is proposed to them will fall into a swoon, elope to a desert place, or cut off their hair.... In the latter case they are seldom troubled with further addresses.” The refractory81 bride is dragged
forcibly into her suitor’s house, where she sits for several days disconsolate82, with dishevelled hair, and refuses nourishment83. When friendly exhortations84 are unavailing, she is compelled by force and even with blows to receive her husband. Should she elope, she is brought back and treated more harshly than before.117
Wherever friendly relations have been established between the tribe of the wife and that of171 the husband, he pays a price to her relatives for the privilege of removing her to his camp. This purchase price, together with the simulated hatred85 of the woman’s friends, signifies a sacrifice on the part of the wife and her family. In Nubia when a man marries he presents his wife with a wedding-dress, and gives her also a pledge for three or four hundred piastres, half of which sum is paid her in case of a divorce. Divorces, however, are very rare.118
Among the Circassians, after the preliminaries have been settled by the parents, the lover meets his bride-elect by night in some secluded86 spot, and with the assistance of two or three of his best friends seizes her and carries her away. Sometimes the pretended capture takes place in the midst of a noisy feast. The woman is usually conducted into the presence of a mutual87 friend, where, on the following day, her friends, simulating anger, seek her and demand a reason for her abduction. Although the affair is usually settled at once by the bridegroom paying the accustomed price for his bride, custom requires that there shall be still further manifestations88 of anger on the part of her friends; so, on the following day, all the relatives of the bride, armed with sticks, proceed to the place where the bride is in waiting, there to meet the bridegroom and his friends who have come to carry off the bride. A sham89 fight ensues, in which the bridegroom and his party172 are always victorious. Among certain of the Arabian tribes the bridegroom must force his bride to enter his tent, and in France, as late as the seventeenth century, a similar custom prevailed.
In describing a wedding dance in Abyssinia, Parkyns observes:
This dance is performed by men armed with shields and lances, who with bounds, feints, and springs attack others armed with guns, so as to approach them, and at the same time avoid their fire, while the gunners make similar demonstrations90, and at last fire off their guns either in the air or into the earth, and then, drawing their swords, flourish them about as a finish.
Finally the bridegroom fires off a gun and immediately rushes across to where the bride and her female relations are stationed.119
Tylor informs us that a Scandinavian warrior generally sought to gain his bride by force, that he conceived it beneath his dignity to win her by pacific means. That the affair might appear more heroic, he waited until the object of his choice was about to wed28 another, and was actually on her way to the nuptial ceremony, when with his friends he would surprise the wedding cortege, seize the bride, and carry her off. It has been said of Scandinavian marriages that they were matters of deep anxiety to the friends both of the bride and groom77, who, until the wedding was over,173 remained at home in suspense91 fearing an attack of the kind already mentioned. It was customary for a party of young men to station themselves at the church door, and, as soon as the ceremony was completed, to carry the news to the homes of the wedded92 pair. “Within a few generations the same old practice was kept up in Wales, where the bridegroom and his friends, mounted and armed as for war, carried off the bride,” and in Ireland they used even to hurl93 spears at the bride’s people, though at such a distance that no one was hurt.120
In the Amazon valley the bride is always carried away by violence. Among the Zulus, although a purchase price is paid for a woman, custom requires that a wife, after having been captured, shall make three attempts to return to her own home.
Of the marriage customs in ancient Sparta, Plutarch says: “In their marriages the bridegroom carried off the bride by violence.”121 In Rome we have the familiar example of the Sabine women, who were captured or carried off by force.
A notable fact in connection with the subject of capture is, that the mother of the bride, or, in case the mother is dead, the nearest female relative, is the individual who assumes the part of the principal defender94 in this ceremony. She it is who attempts to rescue the bride, and who more than any other mourns the fate of the captured wife. Among primitive peoples, with the exception of the symbol of wife-capture in marriage174 ceremonies, there is perhaps none more significant than that typifying the hatred of the mother for the captor of her daughter. Customs indicating estrangement95 or, actual aversion to sons-in-law, usually, if not always, accompany marriage by capture.
The fact that the change in the relative positions of the sexes, as indicated by the sadica and ba’al forms of marriage in Arabia, was not easily or speedily accomplished, is apparent not only in the symbols of wife-capture everywhere practised among peoples in a certain stage of development, but is strongly suggested also by the aversion found to exist among these same peoples between mothers-in-law and sons-in-law, whether appearing as a reality or as a symbol.
Among the Arawaks of South America, it is unlawful for the son-in-law to look upon the face of his mother-in-law. If they live in the same house a partition separates them, and if by chance they must enter the same boat, she must precede him so as to keep her back toward him.
Among the Caribs, all the women talk with whom they will, but the husband dare not converse97 with his wife’s relations except on extraordinary occasions.122 Mr. Tylor refers to the fact that
In the account of the Floridian expedition of Alvar Nu?ez, commonly known as Cabeca de Vaca, or Co175w’s Head, it is mentioned that the parents-in-law did not enter the son-in-law’s house, nor he theirs, nor his brother-in-law’s, and if they met by chance, they went a buckshot out of their way, with their heads down and eyes fixed98 on the ground, for they held it a bad thing to see or speak to one another.
It is observed by Richardson, an author quoted by Tylor, that among the Crees, while an Indian lives with his wife’s family, his mother-in-law must not speak to or look at him. In some portions of Australia, “the mother-in-law does not allow the son-in-law to see her, but hides herself if he is near, and if she has to pass him makes a circuit, keeping carefully concealed99 within her cloak.”
Among some of the tribes in Central Africa, from the moment a marriage is contracted, the lover may not behold100 the parents of his future bride. When a young man wishes to marry a girl, he dispatches a messenger to negotiate with her parents regarding the presents required and the number of oxen demanded. This being arranged, he may not again look upon the father and mother of his intended wife; “he takes the greatest care to avoid them, and if by chance they perceive him they cover their faces as if all ties of friendship were broken.” We are told, however, that this indifference101 is only feigned102, that they feel the same friendship as before, and in conversation extol103 one another’s merit. Mr. Caillie says that this custom extends beyond the relations; if the lover is of a different camp, he176 must avoid all the inhabitants of the lady’s camp, except a few intimate friends who are permitted to assist him in his love-making. A little tent is set up for him in the neighbourhood, under which he is to remain during the day. If he has occasion to cross the camp he must cover his face. He may not see the face of his intended throughout the day, but at nightfall he may creep silently to her tent and remain with her until the dawn. These clandestine104 visits are continued for a month or two when the marriage is solemnized. At the wedding festival the women collect round the bride singing her praises and extolling105 her virtues106.123
Gubernatis is authority for the statement that, in many parts of Italy the bride is compelled to go through the process of weeping on her wedding-day, also for the fact that one of the marriage customs prevalent in Sardinia is identical with that which appeared among the plebeians at Rome, namely, the pretence107 of tearing the bride from the arms of her mother.124
From the facts which have been obtained relative to the practice of wife-capture, it is only natural to suppose that the mother of the captured wife would be her chief ally and defender; that such has been the case seems to be clearly shown by the symbols of distrust and aversion everywhere manifested between mothers-in-law and sons-in-law among the various existing uncivilized177 races. The practice of wife-capture exists either as a reality or as a symbol entering into the marriage ceremonies among the tribes of Central Africa, the Indians of North and South America, in Australia, in New Zealand, in Arabia, in the hill tracts108 of India, among the Fuegians, and in the islands of the Pacific Ocean, and wherever this system is found the symbol of hatred between mother-in-law and son-in-law also prevails.
The simulated anger and sham violence connected with marriage ceremonies among friendly peoples, which are so far removed from a time when actual capture was practised as to be ignorant of the true significance of these symbols, show the extent to which marriage is based on the idea of force on the one side and unwilling109 submission110 on the other.
As the numerous Arabian clans32 in the time of Mohammed represented the varying stages of advancement111 from the second period of barbarism to civilization, the constitution of Arab society at that time affords an excellent opportunity for observing the growth of the institution of marriage, and the various processes by which the former supremacy of women was overthrown112.
One of the principal objects of war at the time of the Prophet is said to have been the capture of women for wives, a practice which was recognized as lawful96. Under Islam the custom of forcibly carrying off women for wives was universal and was carried on side by side with the system of178 marriage by contract or sale. The position of the captured woman, however, differed somewhat from that of the purchased wife. The former, having been forcibly carried away from her home, lost the protection of her friends, while the purchased wife, although she relinquished113 the authority which had formerly been exercised by women within the gens, and although she surrendered her person to her “lord,” did not forfeit115 her right to the protection of her own family in case of abuse.
Although in Arabia, under the form of marriage by sale or contract, the wife lost the right to the control of property belonging to her own gens, she did not, as in Rome, forfeit her claim to the protection of her kindred. If she received ill treatment within the home of her husband, her relatives, who were still her natural protectors, were bound to redress116 her wrongs. In Rome, on the contrary, under a system representing a later stage in the development of marriage, the wife was adopted into the stock of her husband whose rights over her person were supreme117, at the same time that her kindred renounced118 the right to interfere119 in her behalf.
It is to the fact, that in early Arabia the wife never relinquished her hold upon her own relations, that we are to look for an explanation of the high social position of Arabian women. We are assured that it is “an old Arab sentiment, and not Moslem,” that women are entitled to the179 highest respect, and that as mothers of the tribe they “are its most sacred trust.”
According to Professor W.?R. Smith in Mohammed’s time, in addition to the two forms of marriage mentioned, namely, that by capture and that by sale or contract, there existed also a more ancient form known as the sadica—a form of conjugal union which was a remnant of the matriarchal system. By observing the facts connected with this last-named institution, we shall be enabled to understand something of the position occupied by women during the earlier ages of human existence before wife-capture became prevalent.
Among certain tribes just prior to Islam, upon the event of marriage, the man presented the woman with a sum of money, which offering was simply an acknowledgment of the favour which she was conferring upon him. The husband went to live with the wife in her tent, and as the contract was for no specified120 length of time, he was at liberty to go whenever he tired of the conditions imposed on him by his wife and her relations. Any children, however, that were born as a result of this union belonged to the mother and became members of her hayy. If she desired him to go, she simply turned the tent around, “so that if the door had faced east it now faced west, and when the man saw this he knew that he was dismissed and did not enter.” In relation to these marriage customs Professor Smith says:180 “Here, therefore, we have the proof of a well-established custom of that kind of marriage which naturally goes with female kinship in the generation immediately before Islam.” Of this kind of marriage the same writer observes:
The mot? marriage was a purely121 personal contract, founded on consent between a man and a woman, without any intervention122 on the part of the woman’s kin12.... Now the fact that there was no contract with the woman’s kin—such as was necessary when the wife left her own people and came under the authority of her husband—and that, indeed, her kin might know nothing about it, can have only one explanation: in mot? marriage the woman did not leave her home, her people gave up no rights which they had over her, and the children of the marriage did not belong to the husband. Mot? marriage, in short, is simply the last remains of that type of marriage which corresponds to a law of mother-kinship, and Islam condemns123 it, and makes it “the sister of harlotry,” because it does not give the husband a legitimate offspring, i. e., an offspring that is reckoned to his own tribe and has rights of inheritance within it.125
Before the separation of the Hebrews and Aram?ans, the wife remained within her own tent where she received her husband, the children of such unions taking her name and becoming her heirs. This kind of conjugal union is known to have been in existence in many portions of the181 world. In Ceylon it is designated as the beena marriage.
In ancient Arabia, not only did women control their own homes, but they owned flocks and herds124, and were absolutely independent of male relations. As late as the fourteenth century of our era, although the women of certain Arabian tribes were willing to marry strangers, they never followed them to their homes.
Among the Bedouins it is a rare thing for a woman at marriage to leave her home and kindred. When a woman marries a man he settles among her kinsmen, and, as she presents him with a spear and a tent by way of dowry, it would seem that he is expected to join her relations and assist in the common defence. The marks of authority under gentile rule are the possession of a tent and a lance; yet we find that these are the objects which, under matriarchal usages, the wife tenders her husband when he enters her family; the first doubtless as a symbol of her protection, the second as indicating her authority and the services which he is expected to render her and her people. Until a late period in Rome it was the custom, during the solemnities of marriage, to pass a lance over the head of the wife in token of the power which the husband was about to gain over her.126
Under the two types of marriage—namely, mot? and ba’al—the positions of women were so diametrically opposed that both could not con182tinue, hence when under the pressure brought to bear upon them, women began to accept the ba’al form of marriage within their own hayy, mot? unions were doomed125. Of the more ancient form of marriage in Arabia, under which the woman chooses her mate, evidences of which are still extant in that country, and that by capture under which she becomes the slave of her lord, Professor Smith says:
There is then abundant evidence that the ancient Arabs practised marriage by capture. And we see that the type of marriage so constituted is altogether different from those unions of which the mot? is a survival, and kinship through women the necessary accompaniment. In the one case the woman chooses and dismisses her husband at will, in the other she has lost the right to dispose of her person and so the right of divorce lies only with the husband; in the one case the woman receives the husband in her own tent, among her own people, in the other she is brought home to his tent and people; in the one case the children are brought up under the protection of the mother’s kin and are of her blood, in the other they remain with the father’s kindred and are of his blood.
All later Arabic marriages under the system of male kinship, whether constituted by capture or by contract, belong to the same type; in all cases, as we shall presently see in detail, the wife who follows her husband and bears children who are of his blood has lost the right freely to dispose of her person; the husband has authority over her and he alone has the right of divorce. Accordingly the husband, in this kind of marriage, is called not in Arabia only, but also among183 the Hebrews and Aram?ans, the woman’s “lord” or “owner,” and wherever this name for husband is found we may be sure that marriage is of the second type, with male kinship, and the wife bound to the husband and following him to his home.127
Notwithstanding the humane127 enactments128 of Mohammed in the interest of women, their position steadily129 declined, such enactments having been overbalanced by the establishment of marriages of dominion, by the growing idea that sadica or mot? marriages were not respectable, and that women could not depend upon their relations to take their part against their husbands. The history of religion shows that its growth has always followed the same course as have the ideas concerning the relative importance of the sexes. The god-idea and the fundamental doctrines130 of religion are always found to be in harmony with the established principles and ideas relative to sex domination and superiority. The religion of Mohammed was essentially131 masculine, all its principles being in strict accord with male supremacy; it is not, therefore, singular that when the weight of religion was added to the already growing tendency toward ba’al marriages that sadica marriages were doomed.
In Arabia, as elsewhere, the duties of the purchased wife were specific. The present which under the older form of marriage had been given184 to the bride as a love-token, or as an acknowledgment of the husband’s devotion to her, subsequently took the form of a purchase price, and was claimed by her father and brothers as a compensation for the loss sustained by the group through the removal of her offspring, whose services belonged to their mother’s people. In other words, the husband paid a price to the wife’s relations for the right to raise children by her which should belong exclusively to his kin—children which should she remain within her own home would belong to her kindred. The wife was therefore removed to the husband’s hayy, where, so far as the sexual relation was concerned, his rights over her were supreme.
We have observed that wherever the possessions of the gens continued to be the property of all its members, and were controlled by women, the man at marriage went to live with the woman; so soon, however, as men began to claim the soil, and property began to accumulate in their hands, the wife went to reside with her husband and his family as a dependent. Among various tribes, the form of marriage in use depends on the means of the contracting parties; if the man is able to pay to the woman’s father or brothers the full price charged for her, she goes to him as his slave—she is his property as much as is his dog or his gun; if, however, he is unable to pay the amount charged, he goes to live with her and her family, and becomes their slave.
185
In Japan, among the higher classes, upon the marriage of the eldest132 son, his bride accompanies him to his paternal133 home; but, on the other hand, when the eldest daughter marries, her husband takes up his abode134 with her parents. Eldest daughters always retain their own names, which their husbands are obliged to assume. As the wife of an eldest son becomes a member of her husband’s family, and the husband of an eldest daughter joins the family of his wife and assumes her name, the eldest son of a family may not marry the eldest daughter of another family. Regarding the younger members of the household, if the husband’s family provides the house, the wife takes his name, while if the bride’s family furnishes the home the bridegroom assumes the name of the wife.128
In the marriage customs of various nations, and in their ideas relative to the ownership and control of the home, may be observed something more than a hint of the principal causes underlying135 the decline of female power. Wherever women remain within their own homes, or with their own relations, they are mistresses of the situation; but when they follow the fathers of their children to their homes, they become dependents and wholly subject to the will and pleasure of their husbands.
It is plain, however, that under a system of marriage by sale or contract, although a woman186 might exercise little influence in the home of her husband, so long as her relations stood ready to defend her she would enjoy an immunity136 from abuse. The fact that a woman can count upon her relations for protection against her husband, shows plainly that in a certain stage of marriage by contract or sale, women are not the abject137 slaves which they have been represented to be. Although in the Fiji Islands a man may seize a woman and take her to his home, she does not remain with him unless agreeable to her inclinations138.129
Amongst the Abipones, a man, on choosing a wife bargains with her parents about the price. But it frequently happens that the girl rescinds139 what has been agreed upon between the parents and the bridegroom, obstinately140 rejecting the very mention of marriage.130
Among the Charruas of South America, divorce is quite optional. In Sumatra, if a man carries off a virgin49 against her will, he incurs141 a heavy fine, or if a man carries off a woman under pretence of marriage, “he must lodge142 her immediately with some reputable family.”131
Although in the earlier ages of marriage by sale or contract, daughters were regarded as the property of their fathers, still that stage had not been reached at which women were accounted187 simply as sexual slaves. The Arabs practised marriage by sale or contract, yet they jealously watched over their women,—they “defended them with their lives and eagerly redeemed143 them when they were taken captive.” They thought it better to bury their daughters than to give them in marriage to unworthy husbands.132 According to the testimony144 of J.?G. Wood, Kaffir women are very tenacious145 about their relations, probably, it is thought, for the reason that husbands are more respectful toward wives who have friends near them, than they are to those who have no relations at hand to take their part.133 Usually among the Kaffirs, according to Mr. Shooter, although a man pays a price to the parents of the woman whom he wishes to marry, the affair is by no means settled; on the contrary, he must undergo the closest scrutiny146 by her before she will consent to accept him. Bidding him stand, she surveys first one side of him, then the other, the relations in the meantime standing126 about awaiting her decision. Upon this subject Mr. Wood remarks: “This amusing ceremony has two meanings: the first that the contract of marriage is a voluntary act on both sides; and the second, that the intending bridegroom has as yet no authority over her.”134
Although under the system of marriage by188 sale or contract a woman has a voice in the selection of her husband, and although she can count on her kinsmen to protect her against abuse, still, practically, the contract brings the wife under the same condition as a captured wife; she follows her husband to his home, where, as a dependent, he exercises control over her person and her children. In Arabia prior to the time of the Prophet the wife could claim the protection of her kindred against her husband, yet the principle underlying marriage by contract and that by capture was the same, except that under the former the husband paid a price for the woman’s sexual subjection, while under the latter, not only in sexual matters, but in all others as well, he was her “lord” and master.
The Prophet says: “I charge you with your women, for they are with you as captives (awan?).” Professor Smith informs us that according to the lexicons147 awan? is actually used in the same sense as married women generally.135 For long ages after ba’al marriages had been established, so degrading was the office of wife that women of rank were considered too great to marry.
After relating some interesting accounts of certain practices in common with the custom of capture among the Brazilian tribes, Sir John Lubbock says:
This view also throws some light on the remarkable subordination of the wife to the husband, which is so189 characteristic of marriage, and so curiously148 inconsistent with all our avowed149 ideas; moreover it tends to explain those curious cases in which Hetair? were held in greater estimation than those women who were, as we should consider, properly and respectably married to a single husband. The former were originally fellow-countrywomen and relations; the latter captives and slaves.136
With the development of the egoistic principle, or when selfishness and the love of gain became the rule of action, the protection of her kindred, which in an earlier age a woman could count on against her husband, was withdrawn150, and daughters came to be looked upon as a legitimate source of gain to their families. On this subject C. Staniland Wake remarks:
Women by marriage became slaves, and it was the universal practice for a man who parted with his daughter to be a slave to require a valuable consideration for her. Moreover, as a man can purchase as many slaves as he likes, so he can take as many wives as he pleases.137
Thus arose polygamy.
In Rome, in the Latter Status of barbarism and the opening ages of civilization, woman, at marriage, forfeited151 all the privileges belonging to her as a member of her own family, while within that of her husband no compensatory advantages were190 granted her. Even a proprietary152 right in her own children was denied her, and from a legal point of view the wife became the daughter of her husband, and not unfrequently the ward35 of her own son.
After the power gained by man over woman during the latter ages of barbarism had reached its height, the family was based not on the marriage of a woman and a man, but upon the power of a man over a woman and her offspring, or upon the absolute authority of the male parent. In Rome a man’s wife and children were members of his family not because they were related to him but because they were subject to his control. At this stage in the development of the family, the father had the power of “uncontrolled corporal chastisement” and of life and death over his children.138 If it was his will to do so, he could even sell them. Indeed, a son’s freedom from paternal tyranny could be gained only by the actual sale of his person by his father. Relating to the control exercised by the father over his children, it is observed that he had the right “during their whole life to imprison153, scourge154, keep to rustic155 labour in chains, to sell or slay, even though they may be in the enjoyment156 of high state offices.”139 If a father granted freedom to his son, that son was no longer a member of his family.
191
That, with the exception of force, there is no quality in the male constitution capable of binding157 together the various individuals born of the same father, is apparent from the past history of the human race. Mr. Parkyns, referring to the character of the Abyssinians, observes that the worst point in the constitution of their society is the want of affection among relations, “even though they be children of one father.” He says that the animosities which keep the tribes in a constant state of warfare158 do not exist among the offspring of the same mother and father, but, as the children of polygamous fathers are more numerous than own brethren, fraternal affection is a rare thing.140 A comparison between the family group under archaic159 usages at a time when woman’s influence was in the ascendency, and the Roman family under the older Roman law, will serve to show the wide difference existing between the altruistic160 and egoistic principles as controlling agencies in the home and in society.
A significant fact in connection with this subject is here suggested, that, although for untold161 ages women were leaders of the gens, so long as their will was supreme, no human right was ever invaded, and no legitimate manly162 prerogative163 usurped164; but, on the contrary, all were equal, and the principles of a pure democracy were firmly grounded. Liberty and justice had not at that192 time been throttled165 by the extreme selfishness inherent in human nature.
Although the processes by which women at a certain stage of human development lost their independence were gradual, they are by no means difficult to trace. The history of human marriage as gathered from the various tribes and races in the several stages of growth shows the primary idea of the office of wife to have been that of sexual slavery, and discloses the fact that it was the desire for foreign women who, shorn of their natural independence, could be controlled, which caused the overthrow of female supremacy.
As during the earlier ages of human existence the women of the group were absolutely independent of men for the means of support, they were able to so control their own movements. Only foreign women—captives stolen from their homes and friends—taken singly or in groups could be subjugated166 or brought into the wifely relation. Indeed, until the systematic168 practice of capturing women from hostile tribes for sexual purposes had been inaugurated, and the subsequent agency of repression—namely, ownership of the soil by males, had followed as a natural consequence, the usurpation169 by man of the natural rights and privileges of woman was impossible. The male members of the group had not at that time the power to sell their sisters and other female relations, but, on the contrary, defended them manfully against the assaults of hostile tribes. The193 foreign captor, the wife-catcher, was an enemy who was both feared and hated, and upon him were showered the maledictions of the entire group upon which the assault had been made. In retaliation170 for his offence, the men who had been bereft171 of a sister must in their turn commit a like depredation172; thus, through the removal of women, the men of early groups gradually gained control of the common possessions at the same time that they were being supplied with foreign wives over whom they exercised absolute control. In process of time, when wealth began to accumulate in the hands of men, and when friendly relations began to be established between neighbouring tribes, foreign wives, without influence, were received in exchange for the free-born women of a man’s own clan31; henceforward a resort to capture was unnecessary. Distant tribes, however, were still liable to attack. Wars were waged against the men, who were sometimes slain, sometimes taken prisoners, the invaders173 taking possession of the lands and compelling the women to accept the position of wife to them. Finally, negotiations were entered into whereby women were uniformly taken from their homes to become wives in alien groups. Later, the ba’al form of marriage came to prevail within the tribe. Professor Smith, quoting from the advice given by an Arab to his son, says: “Do not marry in your own hayy, for that leads to ugly family quarrels,” to which he adds,
194
there was a real inconsistency in the position of a woman who was at once her husband’s free kinswoman and his purchased wife. It was better to have a wife who had no claims of kin and no brethren near to take her part.141
Under earlier conditions of the human race women as bearers and protectors of the young were regarded as the natural land-owners; hence, they did not leave their own homes to follow the fathers of their children. The woman who left her own relations for the hayy of her husband could no longer exercise control over the possessions of her own gens, neither could she at a later period inherit property from her kindred for the reason that her interests were identical with those of her children and her children belonged to another clan. As property could not be transferred from the group in which it originated, she was disinherited. Through marriage women gave up their natural right to the soil, and consequently to independence. A knowledge of the facts connected with the origin of the institution of marriage, reveals the fact that women lost their influence and power, not because of their weakness, but because they were foreigners and dependents in the homes of their husbands.
The statement was made at the beginning of this chapter that the origin of marriage and the establishment of the family with man at its head involve the subject of economies.
195
When property began to accumulate in the hands of men, when women were forced to relinquish114 their right to the soil and thus to become dependent on men for their support, their slavery was inevitable174. Later, when through the exigencies175 of the situation, woman went without protest to the home of her master, there to become a pensioner176 upon his bounty177, her slavery was complete.
In process of time, women bound to foreign tribes by the children which they had borne, began to accommodate themselves to the situation, and even to claim an interest in the home of their adoption178, whereupon friendly relations began to be established between the tribe of the mother and that of the father. Hence may be observed the fact that the maternal179 instinct was the agency by which the barriers between unrelated groups were gradually broken down, and by which a spirit of friendliness180 was established between hitherto hostile tribes. As the coherence181 of the group and the combination of the gentes to form the tribe had been possible only by means of this instinct, so the confederacy of tribes to form the nation was accomplished in the same manner.
The change from female supremacy to male dominion is among the most important of the evolutionary182 processes. From the facts underlying the development of human society, and especially those underlying the two diverging196 lines of sex-demarcation, it is evident that evolution does not proceed in an undeviating line toward progress. It is perceived, that seeming retrogressions always involve a gain—a gain which could have been accomplished in no other way.
Among the benefits derived184 from this change in the positions of the sexes was the development of altruism185 in man. When fathers began to take an interest in their own offspring, to care for them and to become responsible for their welfare, an important step had been taken toward the establishment of the principle of brotherhood186 among mankind. The evolutionary processes indicate a constant tendency toward the solidarity187 of the race, they may be said to represent a resistless force ever drawing the human family together in a closer bond of union and sympathy. Under female supremacy, combination, or association of interests, was confined to the gens. The extension of these interests which resulted from the new order was necessary before humanity could proceed on its onward188 course. These changes could not have taken place under the early system based on the supremacy of women.
The facts brought out by scientists going to prove that the progressive principle is confided189 to the female are accentuated190 by those connected with the origin and subsequent development of marriage and the family. That within the female lie the elements of progress is clearly indicated,197 not only in the position which the female occupied among the orders of life lower in the scale of being, and during the earlier ages of human history, but also by her career as the slave of man. Simply by means of the characters developed within the female constitution, without material resources, and deprived of recognized influence, women have been able to a certain extent, to dignify191 the family and the home.
It is more than likely that in the not distant future, even the institution of marriage, through which women have been degraded, will become so purified and elevated that its results, instead of being a menace to higher conditions will constitute a continuous source of progress and a promise of still higher achievement. Before this may be accomplished, mothers must be absolutely free and wholly independent of the opposite sex for the means of support. Marriage must be a co partnership192 in which neither sex has the right to control the other.
Although our present system of marriage took its rise in the practice of forcing women into the marital relation, it must be borne in mind that it was not inaugurated for the purpose of establishing monogamy. On the contrary, the privileges of the captor remained the same within his tribe as before the foreign woman was stolen. The theft was committed for no other purpose than to augment193 the hitherto restricted range of sexual liberties, and to give to the father abso198lute dominion over the individuals born in his house.
The system of marriage in vogue194 at the present time has never restricted men to the possession of a single woman. Monogamy, as established under male supremacy, means one husband for one woman, while a man may have as many women as he is able or willing to support. As women are still dependent upon men for the necessities of life, the supply of the former is regulated by the demands of the latter.
Marriage still retains its original meaning and significance, namely, the ownership and control of women. With the exception of physical force all the ceremonies, customs, ideas, and usages of primitive marriage have been preserved. When a woman marries she is “given” to her husband by her father or some other male relative. She promises to obey her master and accepts a ring as a badge of her dependence7 upon him. She relinquishes195 her own name and family, accepting as her own the name and family of her husband. She follows him to his home where, as she is supported by his bounty, she is subject to his will and pleasure. Until women are economically free they will remain sexual slaves.
Of all the forms of human slavery which have ever been devised there has probably never been one so degrading as is that which has been practiced within the marital relation, nor one in which the extrication196 of the enslaved has been a matter199 of such utter hopelessness. The present struggle of women for freedom shows how deeply rooted is the instinct which demands their subjection.
The descent of woman has encompassed197 the lowest depths of human degradation198, but the end of the long and weary road which she has traversed is nearly reached. Already the evolutionary processes which are to release her from bondage199 are in operation.
From available facts relative to the development of early mankind, it is certain that it must have required centuries upon centuries of time to subjugate167 women and bring them into harmonious200 relations with men while occupying a position of sexual slavery; first, physical force, second, dependence, and third the substitution of masculine opinions for the instincts and ideas which are peculiar201 to the female constitution. This accomplished the processes were begun which were to rivet202 the chains by which they were bound and by means of which women themselves in their weakened condition were to acquiesce203 in their own degradation. Religion was the means employed. Apollo, according to Greek mythology204, issued an edict declaring that man is superior to woman and must rule, and Athene herself finally accepted the edict. Through religion, women came to regard themselves simply as appendages205 to men, as tools or instruments for their pleasure and gratification, and as possessing no inherent right either to liberty or happiness.
200
Religion has its root in sex. As we have already seen the creative force has ever been regarded as masculine or feminine according to the relative importance of the two sexes in human society and in the reproductive processes. So long as woman’s influence and power were in the ascendency the mother was the only recognized parent. She was the creator of offspring. Later, the abstract idea of female reproductive power was manifested in the female deities206. It required thousands upon thousands of years to subdue207 women. It also required millenniums to dethrone the female deities.
When, with the rise of male power, man began to assume the r?le of parent, he assumed also all the functions which had formerly belonged to woman. As has been noted in another portion of this work he even went to bed when a child was born. With this change in the physical relations of the sexes, the creative principle soon began to assume a masculine aspect. Male deities began to appear associated with the goddesses. In process of time, as male power increased, the god-idea became wholly masculine. The Jewish god is a personified idea of male power and reproductive energy. This subject will be referred to later in these pages.
Thus the ancient plan of government which was the outgrowth of the free maternal instinct, and which had guided humanity on its course for thousands of years, finally succumbed208 to a system201 based on physical force. When we remember the conditions surrounding early society we may well believe that civilization was gained, not because of the fact that male power succeeded in gaining the ascendency over female influence, but in spite of it.
Given a combination of circumstances involving the supremacy of the lower instincts in mankind, and the individual ownership of land, the subjection of women, monarchy209, and slavery, with all their attendant evils, namely, poverty, disease, crime, and misery210 were sure to follow.
When we consider the fundamental bias211 of the two diverging183 lines of sexual demarcation, it is not perhaps singular that the strong sexual nature which has prompted males to vigorous physical action should for a time have gained the ascendency over the higher qualities peculiar to females; yet the material progress achieved under the inspiration and direction of agencies like this will not, in a more enlightened stage of existence, be regarded as embodying212 the results of the best efforts of human activity, or as representing the highest capabilities213 of the race.
Probably no one will deny that the accumulation of wealth by individuals, and the subsequent change in the relative positions of the sexes, were necessary steps toward the establishment of society on a political or territorial214 basis, or toward the breaking up of kindred groups and the acknowledgment of the idea of the unity33 of the entire202 human family. Neither will the proposition be contradicted that the evils attending these changes namely, monarchy, slavery, and the inordinate215 love of gain have been unavoidable adjuncts to the development of the race; yet, who will doubt that under higher conditions, as the animal recedes216 in the distance, these blots217 on the records of human history will be regarded not as regular steps in the advancement of mankind, but as by-paths which, owing to the peculiar bias which had been given to the male organism among the lower forms of life, the human race has been obliged to take in order to reach civilization?
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
chattels
|
|
| n.动产，奴隶( chattel的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
ass
|
|
| n.驴；傻瓜，蠢笨的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
inquiry
|
|
| n.打听，询问，调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
overthrow
|
|
| v.推翻，打倒，颠覆；n.推翻，瓦解，颠覆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
supremacy
|
|
| n.至上；至高权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
dependence
|
|
| n.依靠，依赖；信任，信赖；隶属 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
preservation
|
|
| n.保护，维护，保存，保留，保持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
implements
|
|
| n.工具( implement的名词复数 )；家具；手段；[法律]履行（契约等）v.实现( implement的第三人称单数 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
kin
|
|
| n.家族，亲属，血缘关系；adj.亲属关系的，同类的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
weavers
|
|
| 织工，编织者( weaver的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
looms
|
|
| n.织布机( loom的名词复数 )v.隐约出现，阴森地逼近( loom的第三人称单数 )；隐约出现，阴森地逼近 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
precedents
|
|
| 引用单元； 范例( precedent的名词复数 )； 先前出现的事例； 前例； 先例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
guardian
|
|
| n.监护人；守卫者，保护者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
coalesce
|
|
| v.联合，结合，合并 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
entailed
|
|
| 使…成为必要( entail的过去式和过去分词 )； 需要； 限定继承； 使必需 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
appendage
|
|
| n.附加物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
dominion
|
|
| n.统治，管辖，支配权；领土，版图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
marital
|
|
| adj.婚姻的，夫妻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
esteem
|
|
| n.尊敬，尊重；vt.尊重，敬重；把…看作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
wed
|
|
| v.娶，嫁，与…结婚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
courageous
|
|
| adj.勇敢的，有胆量的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
warrior
|
|
| n.勇士，武士，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
clan
|
|
| n.氏族，部落，宗族，家族，宗派 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
clans
|
|
| 宗族( clan的名词复数 )； 氏族； 庞大的家族； 宗派 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
hostility
|
|
| n.敌对，敌意；抵制［pl.］交战，战争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
ward
|
|
| n.守卫，监护，病房，行政区，由监护人或法院保护的人（尤指儿童）；vt.守护，躲开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
captivity
|
|
| n.囚禁；被俘；束缚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
dreaded
|
|
| adj.令人畏惧的；害怕的v.害怕，恐惧，担心( dread的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
conjugal
|
|
| adj.婚姻的，婚姻性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
seizure
|
|
| n.没收；占有；抵押 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
maiden
|
|
| n.少女，处女；adj.未婚的，纯洁的，无经验的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
kinsmen
|
|
| n.家属，亲属( kinsman的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
slain
|
|
| 杀死，宰杀，杀戮( slay的过去分词 )； (slay的过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
warriors
|
|
| 武士，勇士，战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
plebeians
|
|
| n.平民( plebeian的名词复数 )；庶民；平民百姓；平庸粗俗的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
46
patricians
|
|
| n.（古罗马的）统治阶层成员( patrician的名词复数 )；贵族，显贵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
slay
|
|
| v.杀死，宰杀，杀戮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
virgins
|
|
| 处女，童男( virgin的名词复数 )； 童贞玛利亚（耶稣之母） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
virgin
|
|
| n.处女，未婚女子；adj.未经使用的；未经开发的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
utilized
|
|
| v.利用，使用( utilize的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
victorious
|
|
| adj.胜利的，得胜的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
elegance
|
|
| n.优雅；优美，雅致；精致，巧妙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
furrows
|
|
| n.犁沟( furrow的名词复数 )；（脸上的）皱纹v.犁田，开沟( furrow的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
infancy
|
|
| n.婴儿期；幼年期；初期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
wretch
|
|
| n.可怜的人，不幸的人；卑鄙的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
inflicted
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
perseverance
|
|
| n.坚持不懈，不屈不挠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
socket
|
|
| n.窝，穴，孔，插座，插口 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
outrage
|
|
| n.暴行，侮辱，愤怒；vt.凌辱，激怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
retaliate
|
|
| v.报复，反击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
valid
|
|
| adj.有确实根据的；有效的；正当的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
consummate
|
|
| adj.完美的；v.成婚；使完美 [反]baffle | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
consummated
|
|
| v.使结束( consummate的过去式和过去分词 )；使完美；完婚；（婚礼后的）圆房 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
nuptial
|
|
| adj.婚姻的，婚礼的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
symbolical
|
|
| a.象征性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
negotiations
|
|
| 协商( negotiation的名词复数 )； 谈判； 完成（难事）； 通过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
proceeding
|
|
| n.行动，进行，(pl.)会议录，学报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
perpetuation
|
|
| n.永存，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
procured
|
|
| v.（努力）取得， （设法）获得( procure的过去式和过去分词 )；拉皮条 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
inclination
|
|
| n.倾斜；点头；弯腰；斜坡；倾度；倾向；爱好 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
spouse
|
|
| n.配偶(指夫或妻) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
inflicts
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
shrieks
|
|
| n.尖叫声( shriek的名词复数 )v.尖叫( shriek的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
groom
|
|
| vt.给（马、狗等）梳毛，照料，使...整洁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
apprised
|
|
| v.告知，通知( apprise的过去式和过去分词 )；评价 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
pregnancy
|
|
| n.怀孕，怀孕期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
refractory
|
|
| adj.倔强的，难驾驭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
disconsolate
|
|
| adj.忧郁的，不快的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
nourishment
|
|
| n.食物，营养品；营养情况 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
exhortations
|
|
| n.敦促( exhortation的名词复数 )；极力推荐；（正式的）演讲；（宗教仪式中的）劝诫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
secluded
|
|
| adj.与世隔绝的；隐退的；偏僻的v.使隔开，使隐退( seclude的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
manifestations
|
|
| n.表示，显示（manifestation的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
sham
|
|
| n./adj.假冒(的)，虚伪(的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
demonstrations
|
|
| 证明( demonstration的名词复数 )； 表明； 表达； 游行示威 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
suspense
|
|
| n.（对可能发生的事）紧张感，担心，挂虑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
wedded
|
|
| adj.正式结婚的；渴望…的，执著于…的v.嫁，娶，（与…）结婚( wed的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
hurl
|
|
| vt.猛投，力掷，声叫骂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
defender
|
|
| n.保卫者，拥护者，辩护人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
estrangement
|
|
| n.疏远，失和，不和 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
lawful
|
|
| adj.法律许可的，守法的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
converse
|
|
| vi.谈话，谈天，闲聊；adv.相反的，相反 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
concealed
|
|
| a.隐藏的，隐蔽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
behold
|
|
| v.看，注视，看到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
indifference
|
|
| n.不感兴趣，不关心，冷淡，不在乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
feigned
|
|
| a.假装的，不真诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
extol
|
|
| v.赞美，颂扬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
clandestine
|
|
| adj.秘密的，暗中从事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
extolling
|
|
| v.赞美( extoll的现在分词 )；赞颂，赞扬，赞美( extol的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
pretence
|
|
| n.假装，作假；借口，口实；虚伪；虚饰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
tracts
|
|
| 大片土地( tract的名词复数 )； 地带； （体内的）道； （尤指宣扬宗教、伦理或政治的）短文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
unwilling
|
|
| adj.不情愿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
submission
|
|
| n.服从，投降；温顺，谦虚；提出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
advancement
|
|
| n.前进，促进，提升 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
overthrown
|
|
| adj. 打翻的，推倒的，倾覆的 动词overthrow的过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
relinquished
|
|
| 交出，让给( relinquish的过去式和过去分词 )； 放弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
relinquish
|
|
| v.放弃，撤回，让与，放手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
forfeit
|
|
| vt.丧失；n.罚金，罚款，没收物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
redress
|
|
| n.赔偿，救济，矫正；v.纠正，匡正，革除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
renounced
|
|
| v.声明放弃( renounce的过去式和过去分词 )；宣布放弃；宣布与…决裂；宣布摒弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
interfere
|
|
| v.(in)干涉，干预；(with)妨碍，打扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
specified
|
|
| adj.特定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
intervention
|
|
| n.介入，干涉，干预 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
condemns
|
|
| v.（通常因道义上的原因而）谴责( condemn的第三人称单数 )；宣判；宣布…不能使用；迫使…陷于不幸的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
herds
|
|
| 兽群( herd的名词复数 )； 牧群； 人群； 群众 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
doomed
|
|
| 命定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
humane
|
|
| adj.人道的，富有同情心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
enactments
|
|
| n.演出( enactment的名词复数 )；展现；规定；通过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
steadily
|
|
| adv.稳定地；不变地；持续地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
eldest
|
|
| adj.最年长的，最年老的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
paternal
|
|
| adj.父亲的，像父亲的，父系的，父方的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
abode
|
|
| n.住处，住所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
underlying
|
|
| adj.在下面的，含蓄的，潜在的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
immunity
|
|
| n.优惠；免除；豁免，豁免权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
abject
|
|
| adj.极可怜的，卑屈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
inclinations
|
|
| 倾向( inclination的名词复数 )； 倾斜； 爱好； 斜坡 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
rescinds
|
|
| v.废除，取消( rescind的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
obstinately
|
|
| ad.固执地，顽固地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
incurs
|
|
| 遭受，招致，引起( incur的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
lodge
|
|
| v.临时住宿，寄宿，寄存，容纳；n.传达室，小旅馆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
redeemed
|
|
| adj. 可赎回的，可救赎的 动词redeem的过去式和过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
tenacious
|
|
| adj.顽强的，固执的，记忆力强的，粘的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
scrutiny
|
|
| n.详细检查，仔细观察 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
lexicons
|
|
| n.词典( lexicon的名词复数 )；专门词汇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
curiously
|
|
| adv.有求知欲地；好问地；奇特地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
avowed
|
|
| adj.公开声明的，承认的v.公开声明，承认( avow的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
withdrawn
|
|
| vt.收回；使退出；vi.撤退，退出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
forfeited
|
|
| （因违反协议、犯规、受罚等）丧失，失去( forfeit的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
proprietary
|
|
| n.所有权，所有的；独占的；业主 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
imprison
|
|
| vt.监禁，关押，限制，束缚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
scourge
|
|
| n.灾难，祸害；v.蹂躏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
rustic
|
|
| adj.乡村的，有乡村特色的；n.乡下人，乡巴佬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
enjoyment
|
|
| n.乐趣；享有；享用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
binding
|
|
| 有约束力的，有效的，应遵守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
warfare
|
|
| n.战争(状态)；斗争；冲突 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
archaic
|
|
| adj.(语言、词汇等)古代的，已不通用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
altruistic
|
|
| adj.无私的，为他人着想的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
untold
|
|
| adj.数不清的，无数的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
manly
|
|
| adj.有男子气概的；adv.男子般地，果断地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
prerogative
|
|
| n.特权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
usurped
|
|
| 篡夺，霸占( usurp的过去式和过去分词 )； 盗用； 篡夺，篡权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
throttled
|
|
| v.扼杀( throttle的过去式和过去分词 )；勒死；使窒息；压制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
subjugated
|
|
| v.征服，降伏( subjugate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
subjugate
|
|
| v.征服；抑制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
systematic
|
|
| adj.有系统的，有计划的，有方法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
usurpation
|
|
| n.篡位；霸占 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
retaliation
|
|
| n.报复，反击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
bereft
|
|
| adj.被剥夺的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
depredation
|
|
| n.掠夺，蹂躏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
invaders
|
|
| 入侵者，侵略者，侵入物( invader的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
exigencies
|
|
| n.急切需要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
pensioner
|
|
| n.领养老金的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
bounty
|
|
| n.慷慨的赠予物，奖金；慷慨，大方；施与 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
adoption
|
|
| n.采用，采纳，通过；收养 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
maternal
|
|
| adj.母亲的，母亲般的，母系的，母方的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
friendliness
|
|
| n.友谊，亲切，亲密 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
coherence
|
|
| n.紧凑；连贯；一致性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
evolutionary
|
|
| adj.进化的；演化的，演变的；[生]进化论的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
diverging
|
|
| 分开( diverge的现在分词 )； 偏离； 分歧； 分道扬镳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
altruism
|
|
| n.利他主义，不自私 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
solidarity
|
|
| n.团结；休戚相关 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
188
onward
|
|
| adj.向前的，前进的；adv.向前，前进，在先 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
189
confided
|
|
| v.吐露（秘密，心事等）( confide的过去式和过去分词 )；（向某人）吐露（隐私、秘密等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
190
accentuated
|
|
| v.重读( accentuate的过去式和过去分词 )；使突出；使恶化；加重音符号于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
191
dignify
|
|
| vt.使有尊严；使崇高；给增光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
192
partnership
|
|
| n.合作关系，伙伴关系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
193
augment
|
|
| vt.(使)增大，增加，增长，扩张 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
194
Vogue
|
|
| n.时髦，时尚；adj.流行的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
195
relinquishes
|
|
| 交出，让给( relinquish的第三人称单数 )； 放弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
196
extrication
|
|
| n.解脱；救出，解脱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
197
encompassed
|
|
| v.围绕( encompass的过去式和过去分词 )；包围；包含；包括 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
198
degradation
|
|
| n.降级；低落；退化；陵削；降解；衰变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
199
bondage
|
|
| n.奴役，束缚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
200
harmonious
|
|
| adj.和睦的，调和的，和谐的，协调的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
201
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
202
rivet
|
|
| n.铆钉；vt.铆接，铆牢；集中(目光或注意力) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
203
acquiesce
|
|
| vi.默许，顺从，同意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
204
mythology
|
|
| n.神话，神话学，神话集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
205
appendages
|
|
| n.附属物( appendage的名词复数 )；依附的人；附属器官；附属肢体（如臂、腿、尾等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
206
deities
|
|
| n.神，女神( deity的名词复数 )；神祗；神灵；神明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
207
subdue
|
|
| vt.制服，使顺从，征服；抑制，克制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
208
succumbed
|
|
| 不再抵抗（诱惑、疾病、攻击等）( succumb的过去式和过去分词 )； 屈从； 被压垮； 死 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
209
monarchy
|
|
| n.君主，最高统治者；君主政体，君主国 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
210
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
211
bias
|
|
| n.偏见，偏心，偏袒；vt.使有偏见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
212
embodying
|
|
| v.表现( embody的现在分词 )；象征；包括；包含 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
213
capabilities
|
|
| n.能力( capability的名词复数 )；可能；容量；[复数]潜在能力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
214
territorial
|
|
| adj.领土的，领地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
215
inordinate
|
|
| adj.无节制的；过度的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
216
recedes
|
|
| v.逐渐远离( recede的第三人称单数 )；向后倾斜；自原处后退或避开别人的注视；尤指问题 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
217
blots
|
|
| 污渍( blot的名词复数 )； 墨水渍； 错事； 污点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |