论文部分内容阅读
（College of Ethnology and Sociology， Central Minzu University， Beijing， China）
JOURNAL OF ETHNOLOGY， VOL. 6， NO.4， 08-16， 2015 （CN51-1731/C， in Chinese）
DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674-9391.2015.04. 02
Abstract：
John F. McLennan is well known for introducing the terms of “exogamy” and
“endogamy” in Primitive Marriage： An Inquiry into the Origins of the Form of Capture in Marriage Ceremonies（1865）. In this book， McLennan hypothesized that polyandry had prevailed around the world， and broadly described and contrasted characteristics of different kinds of polyandry. He believed that polyandry occupied a significant place in the history of marriage. As a member of the school of classical evolutionism， McLennans study of polyandry receives little attention today， and few of his books or papers have been translated into Chinese. Since the nineteenth century， anthropologists have struggled to make some hypotheses regarding the causes of polyandry， but they have been far from reaching an agreement. Up to now， some areas of the Himalayas still permit polyandrous unions. Both anthropologists and Tibetologists still have a substantial interest in explaining the origins of this rare form of marriage and to do this， it might be instructive to revive McLennans Study. This paper mainly focuses on McLennan s book Primitive Marriage and his paper Levirate And Polyandry（produced in 1877） to explore McLennans study of polyandry.
The first edition of Primitive Marriage was published in England in 1865， and it received great applause and support. Accordingly， McLennan was soon regarded as the founder and authority of the history of marriage and the family. Starting from the form of “bride capture”，the core discussion on primitive marriage is about the structure and organization of society in early history， including family and tribe groupings as well as domestic and political organization. The development of marriage and kinship are two significant trends throughout the whole book. He rejected the idea that society originated from the patriarchal family， and struggled to construct the history of early society.
In McLennans view， people have no idea about kinship or marriage at the beginning of human society， especially about concepts such as like consanguinity. At that time， people were affiliated with groups， but， how did these men came together？ McLennan gave his answer-he said that men in this stage of social evolution were bound together by a kindred feeling，that is， they went into battle together and hunted together like a brethren， and accordingly， each group thought they came from the same stock. McLennan deduced that widespread female infanticide was another characteristic of this early time in social history， and that this resulted in a scarcity of women. To avoid wars over women， people within the same group agreed to be exogamous. However， under no circumstance could these groups marry with others. This was because of the universal state of hostility that prevailed at that time. For these reasons， if a group wanted to exist they had no alternative but to “capture” women from another group. A group would never regard captive women as their own members even though these women gave birth to children for the group. Likewise， the children were also believed to be outside the stock of the group. Mothers nurtured children by themselves， and the notion of “father” did not exist. So， a man could easily perceive that he had his mothers blood， just as his brothers and sisters did， and he soon recognized the fact that there were blood-ties among them. The next step was the idea of blood relationship through females. Mothers kept together with their own children，and had a close knit society. Soon after moved out of the big house， women had their own houses and property， such as weapons and food. This was an important shift in human history， not only because of the emergence of “family”， but also private property. This also changed the structure of the primitive group. There were different stocks within a group， and intermarriage among these members was allowed， although it was still exogamous within the stock. The practice of “bride capture” by force finally stopped. As a vestige， the form of “capture” in marriage ceremonies still remains. McLennan also argued that there was no loyalty within marriage， because men shared wives with each other instead of monopolizing one wife. In addition to the obvious scarcity of women， general promiscuity was another problem. To modify the promiscuity， and ensure an even distribution of wives， the concept of polyandry appeared. Every woman must have been given more than one husband， and there was no relationship between these husbands. This was the first kind of marriage， and also the most primitive type of polyandry. From the report of travelers and adventurer in 19th century， polyandry practiced among the Nairs is the closest to the most basic type. In this form of marriage， the system of kinship is passed through the females. There is no “father” in the family， only a mother and her children or her grandchildren.As for kinship， the law of descent is also matrilineal. McLennan acknowledged that the mother led the family. However， he never recognized the idea of “mothers rights”. Even though there were brothers in the household， all of the property would be passed on to their sisters children. McLennan claimed that while this kind of family system lasted， where there was more than one sister， not all the sisters children could be heirs. Thus， there had to be restrictions to the system of succession. Only the children of the eldest sister could receive the property which was left by their uncles. At the same time， men began to realize that the children of their sex partners were closely related to themselves. Once men began to have this feeling， they wanted to give gifts to the children who were their own. Within this development of the concept of “fathers”， the law of succession underwent a radical revolution. Men were unwilling to pass their property to their nieces or nephews; they wanted to pass it to their own children. Meanwhile， it became to ignore the fact that a mans sex partners had relationships with others. So， it became difficult to determine if a man were the biological father of the children that he considered as his own. Now the matrilineal law of inheritance was shaken， the paternal law of inheritance appeared. Along with the shift in the system of inheritance， men realized the necessity and urgency of conjugal fidelity in order to ensure that their property was passed on to their offspring. For this reason， the form of marriage had to change. The Tibetan type of polyandry would be the best option. In such kind of marriage and family， brothers share a wife. When the eldest brother reached adulthood， he took a wife on behalf of his little brothers. The wedding ceremony was held only once. When the little brothers reached sexual maturity， they became mates of the wife. In most cases， all children belonged to the eldest brother， and the younger brothers were their “uncles”. Women gradually gave up leadership of the household， and the eldest brother became the leader of the family. Kinship descent changed from female to male and the law of patrilinieal inheritance was established. This was also quite revolutionary for the development of marriage and family. Soon thereafter， men no longer want to share their wives with their brothers. Finally， monogamy and polygyny appeared. It is most likely that all possible forms of polyandry must lie in between， or be contained within the Nair and Tibetan forms. Mclennans original version of polyandry was that he did not think polyandry was s a special form of marriage. A specific analysis of polyandry in its different forms shows us that this form of marriage was not a heresy， but was an important stage and turn in the history of human marriage. The polyandry practiced by the Nairs represents the most primitive polyandry， which first aimed at regulating human sexual life.And， afterwards， the most ancient system of kinship with descent through the female developed. The earliest primitive human family also appeared during this period， in which the female probably accepted responsibility for the familys leadership and management. This system evolved to the polyandry marriage system as found in Tibet which established a stricter concept of marriage and family.Compared with the earlier family structure，it changed， and the role of father appeared in the family. The earliest patriarchy produced not the father， but also the eldest brother as the family leader. According to the analysis of Mclennan， the Tibetan form of a polyandry marriage is an important turning point in human marriage and family evolutionary history which turned to the patriarchal family and kinship system. It was the parent of monandry and a preparation stage. From a historical perspective of Tibet， as early as the Tubo Period， polyandry marriage was not the sole form of marriage. Polygyny and monogamy， the other two forms of marriage， also existed within the royal family. These most likely evolved from polyandry. In the later stage of social evolution，all of this three kinds of marriage co-existed. Even now， polyandry is popular in some areas of Tibet. The idea that polyandry limits the division of the possessions or family is just a motive， but not the causes of polyandry.
Key Words： J. F. Mclennan; polyandry; Primitive Marriage
References：
E.B. Tylor. The Patriarchal Theory.In The Academy， 1869-1902（691）.
John F. Mclennan.Primitive Marriage， The Early Sociology of The Family.Originally published in 1865， reprinted by The University of Chicago， Chicago，1970.
John F. Mclennan. Levirate And Polyandry. Fortnightly Review， 1865（May）.
Lewis H. Morgan. Ancient Society. The Commercial Press，Beijing，1989 （January）.
Rolf Alfred Stein. Civilization Tibetan. In China Tibetology Press，2012（January） .
JOURNAL OF ETHNOLOGY， VOL. 6， NO.4， 08-16， 2015 （CN51-1731/C， in Chinese）
DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674-9391.2015.04. 02
Abstract：
John F. McLennan is well known for introducing the terms of “exogamy” and
“endogamy” in Primitive Marriage： An Inquiry into the Origins of the Form of Capture in Marriage Ceremonies（1865）. In this book， McLennan hypothesized that polyandry had prevailed around the world， and broadly described and contrasted characteristics of different kinds of polyandry. He believed that polyandry occupied a significant place in the history of marriage. As a member of the school of classical evolutionism， McLennans study of polyandry receives little attention today， and few of his books or papers have been translated into Chinese. Since the nineteenth century， anthropologists have struggled to make some hypotheses regarding the causes of polyandry， but they have been far from reaching an agreement. Up to now， some areas of the Himalayas still permit polyandrous unions. Both anthropologists and Tibetologists still have a substantial interest in explaining the origins of this rare form of marriage and to do this， it might be instructive to revive McLennans Study. This paper mainly focuses on McLennan s book Primitive Marriage and his paper Levirate And Polyandry（produced in 1877） to explore McLennans study of polyandry.
The first edition of Primitive Marriage was published in England in 1865， and it received great applause and support. Accordingly， McLennan was soon regarded as the founder and authority of the history of marriage and the family. Starting from the form of “bride capture”，the core discussion on primitive marriage is about the structure and organization of society in early history， including family and tribe groupings as well as domestic and political organization. The development of marriage and kinship are two significant trends throughout the whole book. He rejected the idea that society originated from the patriarchal family， and struggled to construct the history of early society.
In McLennans view， people have no idea about kinship or marriage at the beginning of human society， especially about concepts such as like consanguinity. At that time， people were affiliated with groups， but， how did these men came together？ McLennan gave his answer-he said that men in this stage of social evolution were bound together by a kindred feeling，that is， they went into battle together and hunted together like a brethren， and accordingly， each group thought they came from the same stock. McLennan deduced that widespread female infanticide was another characteristic of this early time in social history， and that this resulted in a scarcity of women. To avoid wars over women， people within the same group agreed to be exogamous. However， under no circumstance could these groups marry with others. This was because of the universal state of hostility that prevailed at that time. For these reasons， if a group wanted to exist they had no alternative but to “capture” women from another group. A group would never regard captive women as their own members even though these women gave birth to children for the group. Likewise， the children were also believed to be outside the stock of the group. Mothers nurtured children by themselves， and the notion of “father” did not exist. So， a man could easily perceive that he had his mothers blood， just as his brothers and sisters did， and he soon recognized the fact that there were blood-ties among them. The next step was the idea of blood relationship through females. Mothers kept together with their own children，and had a close knit society. Soon after moved out of the big house， women had their own houses and property， such as weapons and food. This was an important shift in human history， not only because of the emergence of “family”， but also private property. This also changed the structure of the primitive group. There were different stocks within a group， and intermarriage among these members was allowed， although it was still exogamous within the stock. The practice of “bride capture” by force finally stopped. As a vestige， the form of “capture” in marriage ceremonies still remains. McLennan also argued that there was no loyalty within marriage， because men shared wives with each other instead of monopolizing one wife. In addition to the obvious scarcity of women， general promiscuity was another problem. To modify the promiscuity， and ensure an even distribution of wives， the concept of polyandry appeared. Every woman must have been given more than one husband， and there was no relationship between these husbands. This was the first kind of marriage， and also the most primitive type of polyandry. From the report of travelers and adventurer in 19th century， polyandry practiced among the Nairs is the closest to the most basic type. In this form of marriage， the system of kinship is passed through the females. There is no “father” in the family， only a mother and her children or her grandchildren.As for kinship， the law of descent is also matrilineal. McLennan acknowledged that the mother led the family. However， he never recognized the idea of “mothers rights”. Even though there were brothers in the household， all of the property would be passed on to their sisters children. McLennan claimed that while this kind of family system lasted， where there was more than one sister， not all the sisters children could be heirs. Thus， there had to be restrictions to the system of succession. Only the children of the eldest sister could receive the property which was left by their uncles. At the same time， men began to realize that the children of their sex partners were closely related to themselves. Once men began to have this feeling， they wanted to give gifts to the children who were their own. Within this development of the concept of “fathers”， the law of succession underwent a radical revolution. Men were unwilling to pass their property to their nieces or nephews; they wanted to pass it to their own children. Meanwhile， it became to ignore the fact that a mans sex partners had relationships with others. So， it became difficult to determine if a man were the biological father of the children that he considered as his own. Now the matrilineal law of inheritance was shaken， the paternal law of inheritance appeared. Along with the shift in the system of inheritance， men realized the necessity and urgency of conjugal fidelity in order to ensure that their property was passed on to their offspring. For this reason， the form of marriage had to change. The Tibetan type of polyandry would be the best option. In such kind of marriage and family， brothers share a wife. When the eldest brother reached adulthood， he took a wife on behalf of his little brothers. The wedding ceremony was held only once. When the little brothers reached sexual maturity， they became mates of the wife. In most cases， all children belonged to the eldest brother， and the younger brothers were their “uncles”. Women gradually gave up leadership of the household， and the eldest brother became the leader of the family. Kinship descent changed from female to male and the law of patrilinieal inheritance was established. This was also quite revolutionary for the development of marriage and family. Soon thereafter， men no longer want to share their wives with their brothers. Finally， monogamy and polygyny appeared. It is most likely that all possible forms of polyandry must lie in between， or be contained within the Nair and Tibetan forms. Mclennans original version of polyandry was that he did not think polyandry was s a special form of marriage. A specific analysis of polyandry in its different forms shows us that this form of marriage was not a heresy， but was an important stage and turn in the history of human marriage. The polyandry practiced by the Nairs represents the most primitive polyandry， which first aimed at regulating human sexual life.And， afterwards， the most ancient system of kinship with descent through the female developed. The earliest primitive human family also appeared during this period， in which the female probably accepted responsibility for the familys leadership and management. This system evolved to the polyandry marriage system as found in Tibet which established a stricter concept of marriage and family.Compared with the earlier family structure，it changed， and the role of father appeared in the family. The earliest patriarchy produced not the father， but also the eldest brother as the family leader. According to the analysis of Mclennan， the Tibetan form of a polyandry marriage is an important turning point in human marriage and family evolutionary history which turned to the patriarchal family and kinship system. It was the parent of monandry and a preparation stage. From a historical perspective of Tibet， as early as the Tubo Period， polyandry marriage was not the sole form of marriage. Polygyny and monogamy， the other two forms of marriage， also existed within the royal family. These most likely evolved from polyandry. In the later stage of social evolution，all of this three kinds of marriage co-existed. Even now， polyandry is popular in some areas of Tibet. The idea that polyandry limits the division of the possessions or family is just a motive， but not the causes of polyandry.
Key Words： J. F. Mclennan; polyandry; Primitive Marriage
References：
E.B. Tylor. The Patriarchal Theory.In The Academy， 1869-1902（691）.
John F. Mclennan.Primitive Marriage， The Early Sociology of The Family.Originally published in 1865， reprinted by The University of Chicago， Chicago，1970.
John F. Mclennan. Levirate And Polyandry. Fortnightly Review， 1865（May）.
Lewis H. Morgan. Ancient Society. The Commercial Press，Beijing，1989 （January）.
Rolf Alfred Stein. Civilization Tibetan. In China Tibetology Press，2012（January） .