Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.1
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.2
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.3
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.4
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.5
THE CONQUEST OF THE VENEREAL DISEASES-8.6
FOOTNOTES
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.1
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.2
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.3
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.4
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.5
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.6
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.7
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.8
SEXUAL MORALITY-9.9
MARRIAGE-10.1
MARRIAGE-10.2
MARRIAGE-10.3
MARRIAGE-10.4
MARRIAGE-10.5
MARRIAGE-10.6
MARRIAGE-10.7
MARRIAGE-10.8
MARRIAGE-10.9
MARRIAGE-10.10
MARRIAGE-10.11
MARRIAGE-10.12
FOOTNOTES
THE ART OF LOVE-11.1
THE ART OF LOVE-11.2
THE ART OF LOVE-11.3
THE ART OF LOVE-11.4
THE ART OF LOVE-11.5
THE ART OF LOVE-11.6
THE ART OF LOVE-11.7
THE ART OF LOVE-11.8
THE ART OF LOVE-11.9
THE ART OF LOVE-11.10
THE ART OF LOVE-11.11
FOOTNOTES
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.1
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.2
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.3
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.4
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.5
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.6
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.7
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.8
THE SCIENCE OF PROCREATION-12.9
FOOTNOTES
INDEX OF AUTHORS

 

 

FOOTNOTES: 

 

[312] Rosenthal, of Breslau, from the legal side, goes so far as to argue 

("Grundfragen des Eheproblems," _Die Neue Generation_, Dec., 1908), that 

the intention of procreation is essential to the conception of legal 

marriage. 

 

[313] J.A. Godfrey, _Science of Sex_, p. 119. 

 

[314] E.D. Cope, "The Marriage Problem," _Open Court_, Nov., 1888. 

 

[315] See _ante_, p. 395. 

 

[316] Waechter, _Eheschiedungen_, pp. 95 et seq.; Esmein, _Marriage en 

Droit Canonique_, vol. i, p. 6; Howard, _History of Matrimonial 

Institutions_, vol. ii, p. 15. Howard (in agreement with Lecky) considers 

that the freedom of divorce was only abused by a small section of the 

Roman population, and that such abuse, so far as it existed, was not the 

cause of any decline of Roman morals. 

 

[317] The opinions of the Christian Fathers were very varied, and they 

were sometimes doubtful about them; see, e.g., the opinions collected by 

Cranmer and enumerated by Burnet, _History of Reformation_ (ed. Nares), 

vol. ii, p. 91. 

 

[318] Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, enacted a strict and 

peculiar divorce law (allowing a wife to divorce her husband only when he 

was a homicide, a poisoner, or a violator of sepulchres), which could not 

be maintained. In 497, therefore, Anastasius decreed divorce by mutual 

consent. This was abolished by Justinian, who only allowed divorce for 

various specified causes, among them, however, including the husband's 

adultery. These restrictions proved unworkable, and Justinian's successor 

and nephew, Justin, restored divorce by mutual consent. Finally, in 870, 

Leo the Philosopher returned to Justinian's enactment (see, e.g., Smith 

and Cheetham, _Dictionary of Christian Antiquities_, arts. "Adultery" and 

"Marriage"). 

 

[319] The element of reverence in the early German attitude towards women 

and the privileges which even the married woman enjoyed, so far as Tacitus 

can be considered a reliable guide, seem to have been the surviving 

vestiges of an earlier social state on a more matriarchal basis. They are 

most distinct at the dawn of German history. From the first, however, 

though divorce by mutual consent seems to have been possible, German 

custom was pitiless to the married woman who was unfaithful, sterile, or 

otherwise offended, though for some time after the introduction of 

Christianity it was no offence for the German husband to commit adultery 

(Westermarck, _Origin of the Moral Ideas_, vol. ii, p. 453). 

 

[320] "This form of marriage," says Hobhouse (op. cit., vol. i, p. 156), 

"is intimately associated with the extension of marital power." Cf. 

Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 231. The very subordinate position of the 

mediaeval German woman is set forth by Hagelstange, _Sueddeutsches 

Bauernleben in Mittelalter_, 1898, pp. 70 et seq. 

 

[321] Howard, op. cit., vol. i, p. 259; Smith and Cheetham, _Dictionary of 

Christian Antiquities_, art. _Arrhae_. It would appear, however, that the 

"bride-sale," of which Tacitus speaks, was not strictly the sale of a 

chattel nor of a slave-girl, but the sale of the _mund_ or protectorship 

over the girl. It is true the distinction may not always have been clear 

to those who took part in the transaction. Similarly the Anglo-Saxon 

betrothal was not so much a payment of the bride's price to her kinsmen, 

although as a matter of fact, they might make a profit out of the 

transaction, as a covenant stipulating for the bride's honorable treatment 

as wife and widow. Reminiscences of this, remark Pollock and Maitland (op. 

cit., vol. ii, p. 364), may be found in "that curious cabinet of 

antiquities, the marriage ritual of the English Church." 

 

[322] Howard, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 278-281, 386. The _Arrha_ crept into 


Page 1 from 6: [1]  2   3   4   5   6   Forward