ForthecivilizedpeoplesoftheOldWorld，fortheAryansandSemitesatanyrate，thisseemstobeestablished。
　　TheSouthernSlavzadrugaprovidesthebestinstanceofsuchafamilycommunitystillinactualexistence。Itcomprisesseveralgenerationsofthedescendantsofonefather，togetherwiththeirwives，whoalllivetogetherinonehomestead，cultivatetheirfieldsincommon，feedandclothethemselvesfromacommonstock，andpossessincommonthesurplusfromtheirlabor。Thecommunityisunderthesupremedirectionoftheheadofthehousedomacin，whoactsasitsrepresentativeoutside，hastherighttosellminorobjects，andcontrolsthefunds，forwhich，asfortheregularorganizationofbusiness，heisresponsible。Heiselected，anditisnotatallnecessarythatheshouldbetheoldestinthecommunity。Thewomenandtheirworkareunderthecontrolofthemistressofthehousedomacica，whoisgenerallythewifeofthedomacin。Shealsohasanimportantandoftenadecisivevoiceinthechoiceofhusbandsforthegirls。Supremepowerrests，however，withthefamilycouncil，theassemblyofalltheadultmembersofthehousehold，womenaswellasmen。Tothisassemblythemasterofthehouserendersaccount。ittakesallimportantdecisions，exercisesjurisdictionoverthemembers，decidesonsalesandpurchasesofanyimportance，especiallyoflandandsoon。
　　ItisonlywithinthelasttenyearsorsothatsuchgreatfamilycommunitieshavebeenprovedtobestillinexistenceinRussia。itisnowgenerallyrecognizedthattheyareasfirmlyrootedinthecustomsoftheRussianpeopleastheobshchinaorvillagecommunity。TheyappearintheoldestRussiancodeoflaws，thePravdaofYaroslav，underthesamenameasintheDalmatianlawsvervj，andreferencestothemcanalsobetracedinPolishandCzechhistoricalsources。
　　AmongtheGermansalso，accordingtoHeuslerInstitutionendesdeutschenRechts，theeconomicunitwasoriginallynotthesinglefamilyinthemodernsense，butthehousecommunity，whichconsistedofseveralgenerationsorseveralsinglefamilies，andoftenenoughincludedunfreepersonsaswell。TheRomanfamilyisnowalsoconsideredtohaveoriginatedfromthistype，andconsequentlytheabsolutepowerofthefatherofthehouse，andthecompleteabsenceofrightsamongtheothermembersofthefamilyinrelationtohim，haverecentlybeenstronglyquestioned。ItissupposedthatsimilarfamilycommunitiesalsoexistedamongtheCeltsinIreland。inFrance，underthenameofparconneries，theysurvivedinNivernaisuntiltheFrenchRevolution，andintheFrancheComtetheyhavenotcompletelydiedouteventoday[1891]。InthedistrictofLouhansSaoneetLoirelargepeasanthousescanbeseeninwhichliveseveralgenerationsofthesamefamily。thehousehasaloftycommonhallreachingtotheroof，andsurroundingitthesleeping-rooms，towhichstairsofsixoreightstepsgiveaccess。
　　InIndia，thehouseholdcommunitywithcommoncultivationofthelandisalreadymentionedbyNearchusinthetimeofAlexandertheGreat，anditstillexiststodayinthesameregion，inthePunjabandthewholeofnorthwestIndia。KovalevskywashimselfabletoproveitsexistenceintheCaucasus。InAlgeriaitsurvivesamongtheKabyles。
　　ItissupposedtohaveoccurredeveninAmerica，andthecalpulliswhichZuritadescribesinoldMexicohavebeenidentifiedwithit。ontheotherhand，CunowhasprovedfairlyclearlyinthejournalAusland，1890，Nos。42-44thatinPeruatthetimeoftheconquesttherewasaformofconstitutionbasedonmarkscalled，curiouslyenough，marca，withperiodicalallotmentofarablelandandconsequentlywithindividualtillage。Inanycase，thepatriarchalhouseholdcommunitywithcommonownershipandcommoncultivationofthelandnowassumesanentirelydifferentsignificancethanhitherto。Wecannolongerdoubttheimportantpartitplayed，asatransitionalformbetweenthematriarchalfamilyandthesinglefamily，amongcivilizedandotherpeoplesoftheOldWorld。LaterwewillreturntothefurtherconclusiondrawnbyKovalevskythatitwasalsothetransitionalformoutofwhichdevelopedthevillage，ormark，communitywithindividualtillageandtheallotment，firstperiodicalandthenpermanent，ofarableandpastureland。
　　Withregardtothefamilylifewithinthesecommunities，itmustbeobservedthatatanyrateinRussiathemasterofthehousehasareputationforviolentlyabusinghispositiontowardstheyoungerwomen，ofthecommunity，especiallyhisdaughters-in-law，whomheoftenconvertsintohisharem。theRussianfolk-songshavemorethanalittletosayaboutthis。
　　Beforewegoontomonogamy，whichdevelopedrapidlywiththeoverthrowofmother-right，afewwordsaboutpolygynyandpolyandry。Bothformscanonlybeexceptions，historicalluxuryproducts，asitwere，unlesstheyoccursidebysideinthesamecountry，whichis，ofcourse，notthecase。Asthemenexcludedfrompolygynycannotconsolethemselveswiththewomenleftoverfrompolyandry，andashitherto，regardlessofsocialinstitutions，thenumberofmenandwomenhasbeenfairlyequal，itisobviouslyimpossibleforeitheroftheseformsofmarriagetobeelevatedtothegeneralform。Polygynyonthepartofoneindividualmanwas，infact，obviouslyaproductofslaveryandconfinedtoafewpeopleinexceptionalpositions。IntheSemiticpatriarchalfamilyitwasonlythepatriarchhimself，andafewofhissonsatmost，wholivedinpolygyny。theresthadtocontentthemselveswithonewife。
　　ThisstillholdsthroughoutthewholeoftheOrient。polygynyistheprivilegeofthewealthyandofthenobility，thewomenbeingrecruitedchieflythroughpurchaseasslaves。themassofthepeopleliveinmonogamy。
　　AsimilarexceptionisthepolyandryofIndiaandTibet，theoriginofwhichingroupmarriagerequirescloserexaminationandwouldcertainlyproveinteresting。Itseemstobemuchmoreeasy-goinginpracticethanthejealousharemsoftheMohammedans。Atanyrate，amongtheNairsinIndia，wherethreeorfourmenhaveawifeincommon，eachofthemcanhaveasecondwifeincommonwithanotherthreeormoremen，andsimilarlyathirdandafourthandsoon。ItisawonderthatMcLennandidnotdiscoverinthesemarriageclubs，toseveralofwhichonecouldbelongandwhichhehimselfdescribes，anewclassofclubmarriage！Thismarriage-clubsystem，however，isnotrealpolyandryatall。onthecontrary，asGiraud-Teulonhasalreadypointedout，itisaspecializedformofgroupmarriage。themenliveinpolygyny，thewomeninpolyandry。
　　THEORIGINOF
　　THEFAMILY，PRIVATEPROPERTY，ANDTHESTATE
　　byFREDERICKENGELS
　　CHAPTERII
　　THEFAMILY
　　4。THEMONOGAMOUSFAMILY
　　Itdevelopsoutofthepairingfamily，aspreviouslyshown，inthetransitionalperiodbetweentheupperandmiddlestagesofbarbarism。
　　itsdecisivevictoryisoneofthesignsthatcivilizationisbeginning。Itisbasedonthesupremacyoftheman，theexpresspurposebeingtoproducechildrenofundisputedpaternity。suchpaternityisdemandedbecausethesechildrenarelatertocomeintotheirfather’spropertyashisnaturalheirs。Itisdistinguishedfrompairingmarriagebythemuchgreaterstrengthofthemarriagetie，whichcannolongerbedissolvedateitherpartner’swish。Asarule，itisnowonlythemanwhocandissolveit，andputawayhiswife。Therightofconjugalinfidelityalsoremainssecuredtohim，atanyratebycustomtheCodeNapoleonexplicitlyaccordsittothehusbandaslongashedoesnotbringhisconcubineintothehouse，andassociallifedevelopsheexerciseshisrightmoreandmore。shouldthewiferecalltheoldformofsexuallifeandattempttoreviveit，sheispunishedmoreseverelythanever。
　　WemeetthisnewformofthefamilyinallitsseverityamongtheGreeks。Whilethepositionofthegoddessesintheirmythology，asMarxpointsout，bringsbeforeusanearlierperiodwhenthepositionofwomenwasfreerandmorerespected，intheheroicagewefindthewomanalreadybeinghumiliatedbythedominationofthemanandbycompetitionfromgirlslaves。NotehowTelemachusintheOdysseysilenceshismother。[ThereferenceistoapassagewhereTelemachus，sonofOdysseusandPenelope，tellshismothertogetonwithherweavingandleavethementomindtheirownbusiness——Ed。]InHomeryoungwomenarebootyandarehandedovertothepleasureoftheconquerors，thehandsomestbeingpickedbythecommandersinorderofrank。theentireIliad，itwillberemembered，turnsonthequarrelofAchillesandAgamemnonoveroneoftheseslaves。Ifaheroisofanyimportance，Homeralsomentionsthecaptivegirlwithwhomheshareshistentandhisbed。ThesegirlswerealsotakenbacktoGreeceandbroughtunderthesameroofasthewife，asCassandrawasbroughtbyAgamemnoninAEschylus。thesonsbegottenofthemreceivedasmallshareofthepaternalinheritanceandhadthefullstatusoffreemen。
　　Teucer，forinstance，isanaturalsonofTelamonbyoneoftheseslavesandhastherighttousehisfather’sname。Thelegitimatewifewasexpectedtoputupwithallthis，butherselftoremainstrictlychasteandfaithful。IntheheroicageaGreekwomanis，indeed，morerespectedthanintheperiodofcivilization，buttoherhusbandsheisafterallnothingbutthemotherofhislegitimatechildrenandheirs，hischiefhousekeeperandthesupervisorofhisfemaleslaves，whomhecananddoestakeasconcubinesifhesofancies。Itistheexistenceofslaverysidebysidewithmonogamy，thepresenceofyoung，beautifulslavesbelongingunreservedlytotheman，thatstampsmonogamyfromtheverybeginningwithitsspecificcharacterofmonogamyforthewomanonly，butnotfortheman。Andthatisthecharacteritstillhastoday。
　　ComingtothelaterGreeks，wemustdistinguishbetweenDoriansandIonians。Amongtheformer——Spartaistheclassicexample——marriagerelationsareinsomewaysstillmorearchaicthaneveninHomer。TherecognizedformofmarriageinSpartawasapairingmarriage，modifiedaccordingtotheSpartanconceptionsofthestate，inwhichtherestillsurvivedvestigesofgroupmarriage。Childlessmarriagesweredissolved。KingAnaxandridasabout650B。C。，whosefirstwifewaschildless，tookasecondandkepttwohouseholds。aboutthesametime，KingAriston，whohadtwounfruitfulwives，tookathird，butdismissedoneoftheothertwo。Ontheotherhand，severalbrotherscouldhaveawifeincommon。afriendwhopreferredhisfriend’swifecouldshareherwithhim。anditwasconsideredquitepropertoplaceone’swifeatthedisposalofasturdystallion，asBismarckwouldsay，evenifhewasnotacitizen。ApassageinPlutarch，whereaSpartanwomanrefersanimportunatewooertoherhusband，seemstoindicate，accordingtoSchamann，evengreaterfreedom。Realadultery，secretinfidelitybythewomanwithoutthehusband’sknowledge，wasthereforeunheardof。
　　Ontheotherhand，domesticslaverywasunknowninSparta，atleastduringitsbestperiod。theunfreehelotsweresegregatedontheestatesandtheSpartanswerethereforelesstemptedtotakethehelots’wives。InevitablyintheseconditionswomenheldamuchmorehonoredpositioninSpartathananywhereelseinGreece。TheSpartanwomenandtheeliteoftheAthenianhetairaiaretheonlyGreekwomenofwhomtheancientsspeakwithrespectandwhosewordstheythoughtitworthwhiletorecord。
　　ThepositionisquitedifferentamongtheIonians。hereAthensistypical。Girlsonlylearnedspinning，weaving，andsewing，andatmostalittlereadingandwriting。Theylivedmoreorlessbehindlockeddoorsandhadnocompanyexceptotherwomen。Thewomen’sapartmentsformedaseparatepartofthehouse，ontheupperfloororattheback，wheremen，especiallystrangers，couldnoteasilyenter，andtowhichthewomenretiredwhenmenvisitedthehouse。Theyneverwentoutwithoutbeingaccompaniedbyafemaleslave。indoorstheywerekeptunderregularguard。AristophanesspeaksofMolossiandogskepttofrightenawayadulterers，and，atanyrateintheAsiatictowns，eunuchswereemployedtokeepwatchoverthewomen-makingandexportingeunuchswasanindustryinChiosasearlyasHerodotus’time，and，accordingtoWachsmuth，itwasnotonlythebarbarianswhoboughtthesupply。InEuripidesawomaniscalledanoikourema，athingthewordisneuterforlookingafterthehouse，and，apartfromherbusinessofbearingchildren，thatwasallshewasfortheAthenian——hischieffemaledomesticservant。Themanhadhisathleticsandhispublicbusiness，fromwhichwomenwerebarred。inaddition，heoftenhadfemaleslavesathisdisposalandduringthemostflourishingdaysofAthensanextensivesystemofprostitutionwhichthestateatleastfavored。ItwaspreciselythroughthissystemofprostitutionthattheonlyGreekwomenofpersonalitywereabletodevelop，andtoacquirethatintellectualandartisticculturebywhichtheystandoutashighabovethegenerallevelofclassicalwomanhoodastheSpartanwomenbytheirqualitiesofcharacter。ButthatawomanhadtobeahetairabeforeshecouldbeawomanistheworstcondemnationoftheAthenianfamily。
　　ThisAthenianfamilybecameintimetheacceptedmodelfordomesticrelations，notonlyamongthelonians，buttoanincreasingextentamongalltheGreeksofthemainlandandcoloniesalso。But，inspiteoflocksandguards，Greekwomenfoundplentyofopportunityfordeceivingtheirhusbands。Themen，whowouldhavebeenashamedtoshowanylovefortheirwives，amusedthemselvesbyallsortsofloveaffairswithhetairai。butthisdegradationofthewomenwasavengedonthemenanddegradedthemalso，tilltheyfellintotheabominablepracticeofsodomyanddegradedaliketheirgodsandthemselveswiththemythofGanymede。
　　Thisistheoriginofmonogamyasfaraswecantraceitbackamongthemostcivilizedandhighlydevelopedpeopleofantiquity。Itwasnotinanywaythefruitofindividualsex-love，withwhichithadnothingwhatevertodo。marriagesremainedasbeforemarriagesofconvenience。
　　Itwasthefirstformofthefamilytobebased，notonnatural，butoneconomicconditions——onthevictoryofprivatepropertyoverprimitive，naturalcommunalproperty。TheGreeksthemselvesputthematterquitefrankly：thesoleexclusiveaimsofmonogamousmarriageweretomakethemansupremeinthefamily，andtopropagate，asthefutureheirstohiswealth，childrenindisputablyhisown。Otherwise，marriagewasaburden，adutywhichhadtobeperformed，whetheronelikeditornot，togods，state，andone’sancestors。InAthensthelawexactedfromthemannotonlymarriagebutalsotheperformanceofaminimumofso-calledconjugalduties。
　　Thuswhenmonogamousmarriagefirstmakesitsappearanceinhistory，itisnotasthereconciliationofmanandwoman，stilllessasthehighestformofsuchareconciliation。Quitethecontrary。Monogamousmarriagecomesonthesceneasthesubjugationoftheonesexbytheother。itannouncesastrugglebetweenthesexesunknownthroughoutthewholepreviousprehistoricperiod。Inanoldunpublishedmanuscript，writtenbyMarxandmyselfin1846，[ThereferencehereistotheGermanIdeology，publishedafterEngels’death——Ed。]Ifindthewords：Thefirstdivisionoflaboristhatbetweenmanandwomanforthepropagationofchildren。AndtodayIcanadd：Thefirstclassoppositionthatappearsinhistorycoincideswiththedevelopmentoftheantagonismbetweenmanandwomaninmonogamousmarriage，andthefirstclassoppressioncoincideswiththatofthefemalesexbythemale。Monogamousmarriagewasagreathistoricalstepforward。
　　nevertheless，togetherwithslaveryandprivatewealth，itopenstheperiodthathaslasteduntiltodayinwhicheverystepforwardisalsorelativelyastepbackward，inwhichprosperityanddevelopmentforsomeiswonthroughthemiseryandfrustrationofothers。Itisthecellularformofcivilizedsociety，inwhichthenatureoftheoppositionsandcontradictionsfullyactiveinthatsocietycanbealreadystudied。
　　Theoldcomparativefreedomofsexualintercoursebynomeansdisappearedwiththevictoryofpairingmarriageorevenofmonogamousmarriage：
　　Theoldconjugalsystem，nowreducedtonarrowerlimitsbythegradualdisappearanceofthepunaluangroups，stillenvironedtheadvancingfamily，whichitwastofollowtothevergeofcivilization……Itfinallydisappearedinthenewformofhetaerism，whichstillfollowsmankindincivilizationasadarkshadowuponthefamily。[Morgan，op。cit。，p。511——Ed。]
　　ByhetaerismMorganunderstandsthepractice，co-existentwithmonogamousmarriage，ofsexualintercoursebetweenmenandunmarriedwomenoutsidemarriage，which，asweknow，flourishesinthemostvariedformsthroughoutthewholeperiodofcivilizationanddevelopsmoreandmoreintoopenprostitution。Thishetaerismderivesquitedirectlyfromgroupmarriage，fromtheceremonialsurrenderbywhichwomenpurchasedtherightofchastity。Surrenderformoneywasatfirstareligiousact。ittookplaceinthetempleofthegoddessoflove，andthemoneyoriginallywentintothetempletreasury。ThetempleslavesofAnaitisinArmeniaandofAphroditeinCorinth，likethesacreddancing-girlsattachedtothetemplesofIndia，theso-calledbayaderesthewordisacorruptionofthePortuguesewordbailadeira，meaningfemaledancer，werethefirstprostitutes。
　　Originallythedutyofeverywoman，thissurrenderwaslaterperformedbythesepriestessesaloneasrepresentativesofallotherwomen。
　　Amongotherpeoples，hetaerismderivesfromthesexualfreedomallowedtogirlsbeforemarriage——again，therefore，arelicofgroupmarriage，buthandeddowninadifferentway。Withtheriseoftheinequalityofproperty——alreadyattheupperstageofbarbarism，therefore——wage-laborappearssporadicallysidebysidewithslavelabor，andatthesametime，asitsnecessarycorrelate，theprofessionalprostitutionoffreewomensidebysidewiththeforcedsurrenderoftheslave。Thustheheritagewhichgroupmarriagehasbequeathedtocivilizationisdouble-edged，justaseverythingcivilizationbringsforthisdouble-edged，double-tongued，dividedagainstitself，contradictory：heremonogamy，therehetaerism，withitsmostextremeform，prostitution。Forhetaerismisasmuchasocialinstitutionasanyother。itcontinuestheoldsexualfreedom——totheadvantageofthemen。Actuallynotmerelytolerated，butgailypracticed，bytherulingclassesparticularly，itiscondemnedinwords。Butinrealitythiscondemnationneverfallsonthemenconcerned，butonlyonthewomen。theyaredespisedandoutcast，inorderthattheunconditionalsupremacyofmenoverthefemalesexmaybeoncemoreproclaimedasafundamentallawofsociety。
　　Butasecondcontradictionthusdevelopswithinmonogamousmarriageitself。Atthesideofthehusbandwhoembellisheshisexistencewithhetaerismstandstheneglectedwife。Andonecannothaveonesideofthiscontradictionwithouttheother，anymorethanamanhasawholeappleinhishandaftereatinghalf。Butthatseemstohavebeenthehusbands’notion，untiltheirwivestaughtthembetter。Withmonogamousmarriage，twoconstantsocialtypes，unknownhitherto，maketheirappearanceonthescene——thewife’sattendantloverandthecuckoldhusband。Thehusbandshadwonthevictoryoverthewives，butthevanquishedmagnanimouslyprovidedthecrown。Togetherwithmonogamousmarriageandhetaerism，adulterybecameanunavoidablesocialinstitution——denounced，severelypenalized，butimpossibletosuppress。Atbest，thecertainpaternityofthechildrenrestedonmoralconvictionasbefore，andtosolvetheinsolublecontradictiontheCodeNapoleon，Art-312，decreed：L’enfantconfupendantlemarriageapourperelemari，thefatherofachildconceivedduringmarriageis-thehusband。Suchisthefinalresultofthreethousandyearsofmonogamousmarriage。
　　Thus，whereverthemonogamousfamilyremainstruetoitshistoricaloriginandclearlyrevealstheantagonismbetweenthemanandthewomanexpressedintheman’sexclusivesupremacy，itexhibitsinminiaturethesameoppositionsandcontradictionsasthoseinwhichsocietyhasbeenmoving，withoutpowertoresolveorovercomethem，eversinceitsplitintoclassesatthebeginningofcivilization。Iamspeakinghere，ofcourse，onlyofthosecasesofmonogamousmarriagewherematrimoniallifeactuallyproceedsaccordingtotheoriginalcharacterofthewholeinstitution，butwherethewiferebelsagainstthehusband’ssupremacy。Notallmarriagesturnoutthus，asnobodyknowsbetterthantheGermanphilistine，whocannomoreasserthisruleinthehomethanhecaninthestate，andwhosewife，witheveryright，wearsthetrousersheisunworthyof。But，tomakeupforit，heconsidershimselffarabovehisFrenchcompanioninmisfortune，towhom，oftenerthantohim，somethingmuchworsehappens。
　　However，monogamousmarriagedidnotbyanymeansappearalwaysandeverywhereintheclassicallyharshformittookamongtheGreeks。
　　AmongtheRomans，who，asfutureworld-conquerors，hadalarger，ifalessfine，visionthantheGreeks，womenwerefreerandmorerespected。
　　ARomanconsideredthathispoweroflifeanddeathoverhiswifesufficientlyguaranteedherconjugalfidelity。Here，moreover，thewifeequallywiththehusbandcoulddissolvethemarriageatwill。ButthegreatestprogressinthedevelopmentofindividualmarriagecertainlycamewiththeentryoftheGermansintohistory，andforthereasonthattheGerman——onaccountoftheirpoverty，veryprobably——
　　werestillatastagewheremonogamyseemsnotyettohavebecomeperfectlydistinctfrompairingmarriage。WeinferthisfromthreefactsmentionedbyTacitus。First，thoughmarriagewasheldingreatreverence——theycontentthemselveswithonewife，thewomenlivehedgedroundwithchastity’——polygamywastheruleforthedistinguishedmembersandtheleadersofthetribe，aconditionofthingssimilartothatamongtheAmericans，wherepairingmarriagewastherule。Secondly，thetransitionfrommother-righttofather-rightcouldonlyhavebeenmadeashorttimepreviously，forthebrotheronthemother’sside-thenearestgentilemalerelationaccordingtomother-right——wasstillconsideredalmostcloserofkinthanthefather，correspondingagaintothestandpointoftheAmericanIndians，amongwhomMarx，asheoftensaid，foundthekeytotheunderstandingofourownprimitiveage。And，thirdly，womenweregreatlyrespectedamongtheGermans，andalsoinfluentialinpublicaffairs，whichisindirectcontradictiontothesupremacyofmeninmonogamy。InalmostallthesepointstheGermansagreewiththeSpartans，amongwhomalso，aswesaw，pairingmarriagehadnotyetbeencompletelyovercome。
　　Thus，hereagainanentirelynewinfluencecametopowerintheworldwiththeGermans。Thenewmonogamy，whichnowdevelopedfromtheminglingofpeoplesamidtheruinsoftheRomanworld，clothedthesupremacyofthemeninmilderformsandgavewomenapositionwhich，outwardlyatanyrate，wasmuchmorefreeandrespectedthanithadeverbeeninclassicalantiquity。Onlynowweretheconditionsrealizedinwhichthroughmonogamy-withinit，paralleltoit，orinoppositiontoit，asthecasemightbe-thegreatestmoraladvanceweowetoitcouldbeachieved：modernindividualsex-love，whichhadhithertobeenunknowntotheentireworld。
　　Thisadvance，however，undoubtedlysprangfromthefactthattheGermansstilllivedinpairingfamiliesandgraftedthecorrespondingpositionofwomenontothemonogamoussystem，sofarasthatwaspossible。ItmostdecidedlydidnotspringfromthelegendaryvirtueandwonderfulmoralpurityoftheGermancharacter，whichwasnothingmorethanthefreedomofthepairingfamilyfromthecryingmoralcontradictionsofmonogamy。Onthecontrary，inthecourseoftheirmigrationstheGermanshadmorallymuchdeteriorated，particularlyduringtheirsoutheasterlywanderingsamongthenomadsoftheBlackSeasteppes，fromwhomtheyacquired，notonlyequestrianskill，butalsogross，unnaturalvices，asAmmianusexpresslystatesoftheTaifaliansandProcopiusoftheHerulians。
　　Butifmonogamywastheonlyoneofalltheknownformsofthefamilythroughwhichmodernsex-lovecoulddevelop，thatdoesnotmeanthatwithinmonogamymodernsexuallovedevelopedexclusivelyorevenchieflyastheloveofhusbandandwifeforeachother。Thatwasprecludedbytheverynatureofstrictlymonogamousmarriageundertheruleoftheman。Amongallhistoricallyactiveclasses-thatis，amongallrulingclasses-matrimonyremainedwhatithadbeensincethepairingmarriage，amatterofconveniencewhichwasarrangedbytheparents。Thefirsthistoricalformofsexualloveaspassion，apassionrecognizedasnaturaltoallhumanbeingsatleastiftheybelongedtotherulingclasses，andasthehighestformofthesexualimpulse-andthatiswhatconstitutesitsspecificcharacter-thisfirstformofindividualsexuallove，thechivalrousloveofthemiddleages，wasbynomeansconjugal。Quitethecontrary。InitsclassicformamongtheProvencals，itheadsstraightforadultery，andthepoetsoflovecelebratedadultery。TheflowerofProvencallovepoetryaretheAlbasaubades，songsofdawn。Theydescribeinglowingcolorshowtheknightliesinbedbesidehislove-thewifeofanotherman-whileoutsidestandsthewatchmanwhocallstohimassoonasthefirstgrayofdawnalbaappears，sothathecangetawayunobserved。thepartingscenethenformstheclimaxofthepoem。ThenorthernFrenchandalsotheworthyGermansadoptedthiskindofpoetrytogetherwiththecorrespondingfashionofchivalrouslove。oldWolframofEschenbachhasleftusthreewonderfullybeautifulsongsofdawnonthissameimpropersubject，whichIlikebetterthanhisthreelongheroicpoems。
　　Nowadaystherearetwowaysofconcludingabourgeoismarriage。InCatholiccountriestheparents，asbefore，procureasuitablewifefortheiryoungbourgeoisson，andtheconsequenceis，ofcourse，thefullestdevelopmentofthecontradictioninherentinmonogamy：thehusbandabandonshimselftohetaerismandthewifetoadultery。
　　ProbablytheonlyreasonwhytheCatholicChurchabolisheddivorcewasbecauseithadconvinceditselfthatthereisnomoreacureforadulterythanthereisfordeath。InProtestantcountries，ontheotherhand，theruleisthatthesonofabourgeoisfamilyisallowedtochooseawifefromhisownclasswithmoreorlessfreedom。hencetheremaybeacertainelementofloveinthemarriage，as，indeed，inaccordancewithProtestanthypocrisy，isalwaysassumed，fordecency’ssake。Herethehusband’shetaerismisamoresleepykindofbusiness，andadulterybythewifeislesstherule。Butsince，ineverykindofmarriage，peopleremainwhattheywerebefore，andsincethebourgeoisofProtestantcountriesaremostlyphilistines，allthatthisProtestantmonogamyachieves，takingtheaverageofthebestcases，isaconjugalpartnershipofleadenboredom，knownasdomesticbliss。
　　Thebestmirrorofthesetwomethodsofmarryingisthenovel-theFrenchnovelfortheCatholicmanner，theGermanfortheProtestant。
　　Inboth，theherogetsthem：intheGerman，theyoungmangetsthegirl。intheFrench，thehusbandgetsthehorns。Whichofthemisworseoffissometimesquestionable。ThisiswhytheFrenchbourgeoisisasmuchhorrifiedbythedullnessoftheGermannovelastheGermanphilistineisbytheimmoralityoftheFrench。However，nowthatBerlinisaworldcapital，theGermannovelisbeginningwithalittlelesstimiditytouseaspartofitsregularstock-in-tradethehetaerismandadulterylongfamiliartothattown。
　　Inbothcases，however，themarriageisconditionedbytheclasspositionofthepartiesandistothatextentalwaysamarriageofconvenience。Inbothcasesthismarriageofconvenienceturnsoftenenoughintocrassestprostitution-sometimesofbothpartners，butfarmorecommonlyofthewoman，whoonlydiffersfromtheordinarycourtesaninthatshedoesnotletoutherbodyonpiece-workasawage-worker，butsellsitonceandforallintoslavery。AndofallmarriagesofconvenienceFourier’swordsholdtrue：Asingrammartwonegativesmakeanaffirmative，soinmatrimonialmoralitytwoprostitutionspassforavirtue。[CharlesFourier，Theoriedel’UnitiUniverselle。Paris，1841-45，Vol。III，p。120——Ed。]Sex-loveintherelationshipwithawomanbecomes，andcanonlybecome，therealruleamongtheoppressedclasses，whichmeanstodayamongtheproletariat-whetherthisrelationisofficiallysanctionedornot。Buthereallthefoundationsoftypicalmonogamyareclearedaway。Herethereisnoproperty，forthepreservationandinheritanceofwhichmonogamyandmalesupremacywereestablished。hencethereisnoincentivetomakethismalesupremacyeffective。Whatismore，therearenomeansofmakingitso。Bourgeoislaw，whichprotectsthissupremacy，existsonlyforthepossessingclassandtheirdealingswiththeproletarians。Thelawcostsmoneyand，onaccountoftheworker’spoverty，ithasnovalidityforhisrelationtohiswife。Herequiteotherpersonalandsocialconditionsdecide。Andnowthatlarge-scaleindustryhastakenthewifeoutofthehomeontothelabormarketandintothefactory，andmadeheroftenthebread-winnerofthefamily，nobasisforanykindofmalesupremacyisleftintheproletarianhousehold——except，perhaps，forsomethingofthebrutalitytowardswomenthathasspreadsincetheintroductionofmonogamy。Theproletarianfamilyisthereforenolongermonogamousinthestrictsense，evenwherethereispassionateloveandfirmestloyaltyonbothsides，andmaybealltheblessingsofreligiousandcivilauthority。
　　Here，therefore，theeternalattendantsofmonogamy，hetaerismandadultery，playonlyanalmostvanishingpart。Thewifehasinfactregainedtherighttodissolvethemarriage，andiftwopeoplecannotgetonwithoneanother，theyprefertoseparate。Inshort，proletarianmarriageismonogamousintheetymologicalsenseoftheword，butnotatallinitshistoricalsense。
　　Ourjurists，ofcourse，findthatprogressinlegislationisleavingwomenwithnofurthergroundofcomplaint。Moderncivilizedsystemsoflawincreasinglyacknowledge，first，thatforamarriagetobelegal，itmustbeacontractfreelyenteredintobybothpartners，and，secondly，thatalsointhemarriedstatebothpartnersmuststandonacommonfootingofequalrightsandduties。Ifboththesedemandsareconsistentlycarriedout，saythejurists，womenhavealltheycanask。
　　Thistypicallylegalistmethodofargumentisexactlythesameasthatwhichtheradicalrepublicanbourgeoisusestoputtheproletarianinhisplace。Thelaborcontractistobefreelyenteredintobybothpartners。Butitisconsideredtohavebeenfreelyenteredintoassoonasthelawmakesbothpartiesequalonpaper。Thepowerconferredontheonepartybythedifferenceofclassposition，thepressuretherebybroughttobearontheotherparty——therealeconomicpositionofboth——thatisnotthelaw’sbusiness。Again，forthedurationofthelaborcontractbothpartiesaretohaveequalrights，insofarasoneortheotherdoesnotexpresslysurrenderthem。Thateconomicrelationscompeltheworkertosurrendereventhelastsemblanceofequalrights——hereagain，thatisnoconcernofthelaw。
　　Inregardtomarriage，thelaw，eventhemostadvanced，isfullysatisfiedassoonasthepartnershaveformallyrecordedthattheyareenteringintothemarriageoftheirownfreeconsent。Whatgoesoninreallifebehindthejuridicalscenes，howthisfreeconsentcomesabout——thatisnotthebusinessofthelawandthejurist。Andyetthemostelementarycomparativejurisprudenceshouldshowthejuristwhatthisfreeconsentreallyamountsto。Inthecountrieswhereanobligatoryshareofthepaternalinheritanceissecuredtothechildrenbylawandtheycannotthereforebedisinherited——inGermany，inthecountrieswithFrenchlawandelsewhere——thechildrenareobligedtoobtaintheirparents’consenttotheirmarriage。InthecountrieswithEnglishlaw，whereparentalconsenttoamarriageisnotlegallyrequired，theparentsontheirsidehavefullfreedominthetestamentarydisposaloftheirpropertyandcandisinherittheirchildrenattheirpleasure。Itisobviousthat，inspiteandpreciselybecauseofthisfact，freedomofmarriageamongtheclasseswithsomethingtoinheritisinrealitynotawhitgreaterinEnglandandAmericathanitisinFranceandGermany。
　　Asregardsthelegalequalityofhusbandandwifeinmarriage，thepositionisnobetter。Thelegalinequalityofthetwopartners，bequeathedtousfromearliersocialconditions，isnotthecausebuttheeffectoftheeconomicoppressionofthewoman。Intheoldcommunistichousehold，whichcomprisedmanycouplesandtheirchildren，thetaskentrustedtothewomenofmanagingthehouseholdwasasmuchapublicandsociallynecessaryindustryastheprocuringoffoodbythemen。Withthepatriarchalfamily，andstillmorewiththesinglemonogamousfamily，achangecame。Householdmanagementlostitspubliccharacter。Itnolongerconcernedsociety。Itbecameaprivateservice。thewifebecametheheadservant，excludedfromallparticipationinsocialproduction。Notuntilthecomingofmodernlarge-scaleindustrywastheroadtosocialproductionopenedtoheragain——andthenonlytotheproletarianwife。Butitwasopenedinsuchamannerthat，ifshecarriesoutherdutiesintheprivateserviceofherfamily，sheremainsexcludedfrompublicproductionandunabletoearn。andifshewantstotakepartinpublicproductionandearnindependently，shecannotcarryoutfamilyduties。Andthewife’spositioninthefactoryisthepositionofwomeninallbranchesofbusiness，rightuptomedicineandthelaw。Themodernindividualfamilyisfoundedontheopenorconcealeddomesticslaveryofthewife，andmodernsocietyisamasscomposedoftheseindividualfamiliesasitsmolecules。
　　Inthegreatmajorityofcasestoday，atleastinthepossessingclasses，thehusbandisobligedtoearnalivingandsupporthisfamily，andthatinitselfgiveshimapositionofsupremacy，withoutanyneedforspeciallegaltitlesandprivileges。Withinthefamilyheisthebourgeoisandthewiferepresentstheproletariat。Intheindustrialworld，thespecificcharacteroftheeconomicoppressionburdeningtheproletariatisvisibleinallitssharpnessonlywhenallspeciallegalprivilegesofthecapitalistclasshavebeenabolishedandcompletelegalequalityofbothclassesestablished。Thedemocraticrepublicdoesnotdoawaywiththeoppositionofthetwoclasses。onthecontrary，itprovidestheclearfieldonwhichthefightcanbefoughtout。Andinthesameway，thepeculiarcharacterofthesupremacyofthehusbandoverthewifeinthemodernfamily，thenecessityofcreatingrealsocialequalitybetweenthem，andthewaytodoit，willonlybeseenintheclearlightofdaywhenbothpossesslegallycompleteequalityofrights。Thenitwillbeplainthatthefirstconditionfortheliberationofthewifeistobringthewholefemalesexbackintopublicindustry，andthatthisinturndemandstheabolitionofthemonogamousfamilyastheeconomicunitofsociety。
　　*
　　Wethushavethreeprincipalformsofmarriagewhichcorrespondbroadlytothethreeprincipalstagesofhumandevelopment。Fortheperiodofsavagery，groupmarriage。forbarbarism，pairingmarriage。forcivilization，monogamy，supplementedbyadulteryandprostitution。
　　Betweenpairingmarriageandmonogamyintervenesaperiodintheupperstageofbarbarismwhenmenhavefemaleslavesattheircommandandpolygamyispracticed。
　　Asourwholepresentationhasshown，theprogresswhichmanifestsitselfinthesesuccessiveformsisconnectedwiththepeculiaritythatwomen，butnotmen，areincreasinglydeprivedofthesexualfreedomofgroupmarriage。Infact，formengroupmarriageactuallystillexistseventothisday。Whatforthewomanisacrime，entailinggravelegalandsocialconsequences，isconsideredhonorableinamanor，attheworse，aslightmoralblemishwhichhecheerfullybears。Butthemorethehetaerismofthepastischangedinourtimebycapitalistcommodityproductionandbroughtintoconformitywithit，themore，thatistosay，itistransformedintoundisguisedprostitution，themoredemoralizingareitseffects。Anditdemoralizesmenfarmorethanwomen。Amongwomen，prostitutiondegradesonlytheunfortunateoneswhobecomeitsvictims，andeventhesebynomeanstotheextentcommonlybelieved。Butitdegradesthecharacterofthewholemaleworld。Alongengagement，particularly，isinninecasesoutoftenaregularpreparatoryschoolforconjugalinfidelity。
　　Wearenowapproachingasocialrevolutioninwhichtheeconomicfoundationsofmonogamyastheyhaveexistedhithertowilldisappearjustassurelyasthoseofitscomplement-prostitution。Monogamyarosefromtheconcentrationofconsiderablewealthinthehandsofasingleindividualsman-andfromtheneedtobequeaththiswealthtothechildrenofthatmanandofnoother。Forthispurpose，themonogamyofthewomanwasrequired，notthatoftheman，sothismonogamyofthewomandidnotinanywayinterferewithopenorconcealedpolygamyonthepartoftheman。Butbytransformingbyfarthegreaterportion，atanyrate，ofpermanent，heritablewealth——themeansofproduction——intosocialproperty，thecomingsocialrevolutionwillreducetoaminimumallthisanxietyaboutbequeathingandinheriting。Havingarisenfromeconomiccauses，willmonogamythendisappearwhenthesecausesdisappear？
　　Onemightanswer，notwithoutreason：farfromdisappearing，itwill，onthecontrary，berealizedcompletely。Forwiththetransformationofthemeansofproductionintosocialpropertytherewilldisappearalsowage-labor，theproletariat，andthereforethenecessityforacertain——statisticallycalculable——numberofwomentosurrenderthemselvesformoney。Prostitutiondisappears。monogamy，insteadofcollapsing，atlastbecomesareality——alsoformen。
　　Inanycase，therefore，thepositionofmenwillbeverymuchaltered。
　　Butthepositionofwomen，ofallwomen，alsoundergoessignificantchange。Withthetransferofthemeansofproductionintocommonownership，thesinglefamilyceasestobetheeconomicunitofsociety。
　　Privatehousekeepingistransformedintoasocialindustry。Thecareandeducationofthechildrenbecomesapublicaffair。societylooksafterallchildrenalike，whethertheyarelegitimateornot。Thisremovesalltheanxietyabouttheconsequences，whichtodayisthemostessentialsocial——moralaswellaseconomic——factorthatpreventsagirlfromgivingherselfcompletelytothemansheloves。
　　Willnotthatsufficetobringaboutthegradualgrowthofunconstrainedsexualintercourseandwithitamoretolerantpublicopinioninregardtoamaiden’shonorandawoman’sshame？And，finally，havewenotseenthatinthemodernworldmonogamyandprostitutionareindeedcontradictions，butinseparablecontradictions，polesofthesamestateofsociety？Canprostitutiondisappearwithoutdraggingmonogamywithitintotheabyss？
　　Hereanewelementcomesintoplay，anelementwhich，atthetimewhenmonogamywasdeveloping，existedatmostingerm：individualsex-love。
　　BeforetheMiddleAgeswecannotspeakofindividualsex-love。Thatpersonalbeauty，closeintimacy，similarityoftastesandsoforthawakenedinpeopleofoppositesexthedesireforsexualintercourse，thatmenandwomenwerenottotallyindifferentregardingthepartnerwithwhomtheyenteredintothismostintimaterelationship——thatgoeswithoutsaying。Butitisstillaverylongwaytooursexuallove。Throughoutthewholeofantiquity，marriageswerearrangedbytheparents，andthepartnerscalmlyacceptedtheirchoice。Whatlittlelovetherewasbetweenhusbandandwifeinantiquityisnotsomuchsubjectiveinclinationasobjectiveduty，notthecauseofthemarriage，butitscorollary。Loverelationshipsinthemodernsenseonlyoccurinantiquityoutsideofficialsociety。TheshepherdsofwhosejoysandsorrowsinloveTheocratusandMoschussing，theDaphnisandChloeofLongusareallslaveswhohavenopartinthestate，thefreecitizen’ssphereoflife。Exceptamongslaves，wefindloveaffairsonlyasproductsofthedisintegrationoftheoldworldandcarriedonwithwomenwhoalsostandoutsideofficialsociety，withhetairai——thatis，withforeignersorfreedslaves：inAthensfromtheeveofitsdecline，inRomeundertheCaesars。Iftherewereanyrealloveaffairsbetweenfreemenandfreewomen，theseoccurredonlyinthecourseofadultery。Andtotheclassicallovepoetofantiquity，oldAnacreon，sexualloveinoursensematteredsolittlethatitdidnotevenmattertohimwhichsexhisbelovedwas。
　　Oursexuallovediffersessentiallyfromthesimplesexualdesire，theEros，oftheancients。Inthefirstplace，itassumesthatthepersonlovedreturnsthelove。tothisextentthewomanisonanequalfootingwiththeman，whereasintheErosofantiquityshewasoftennotevenasked。Secondly，oursexuallovehasadegreeofintensityanddurationwhichmakesbothloversfeelthatnon-possessionandseparationareagreat，ifnotthegreatest，calamity。topossessoneanother，theyriskhighstakes，evenlifeitself。Intheancientworldthishappenedonly，ifatall，inadultery。And，finally，therearisesanewmoralstandardinthejudgmentofasexualrelationship。Wedonotonlyask，wasitwithinoroutsidemarriage？butalso，diditspringfromloveandreciprocatedloveornot？Ofcourse，thisnewstandardhasfarednobetterinfeudalorbourgeoispracticethanalltheotherstandardsofmorality——itisignored。Butneitherdoesitfareanyworse。Itisrecognizedjustasmuchastheyare——intheory，onpaper。Andforthepresentitcannotaskanythingmore。
　　Atthepointwhereantiquitybrokeoffitsadvancetosexuallove，theMiddleAgestookitupagain：inadultery。Wehavealreadydescribedtheknightlylovewhichgaverisetothesongsofdawn。Fromthelovewhichstrivestobreakupmarriagetothelovewhichistobeitsfoundationthereisstillalongroad，whichchivalryneverfullytraversed。EvenwhenwepassfromthefrivolousLatinstothevirtuousGermans，wefindintheNibelungenliedthat，althoughinherheartKriemhildisasmuchinlovewithSiegfriedasheiswithher，yetwhenGuntherannouncesthathehaspromisedhertoaknighthedoesnotname，shesimplyreplies：Youhavenoneedtoaskme。asyoubidme，sowillIeverbe。whomyou，lord，givemeashusband，himwillI
　　gladlytakeintroth。Itneverentersherheadthatherlovecanbeevenconsidered。GuntherasksforBrunhildinmarriage，andEtzelforKriemhild，thoughtheyhaveneverseenthem。Similarly，inGutrun，SigebantofIrelandasksfortheNorwegianUte，whomhehasneverseen，HetelofHegelingenforHildeofIreland，and，finally，SiegfriedofMoorland，HartmutofOrmanyandHerwigofSeelandforGutrun，andhereGutrun’sacceptanceofHerwigisforthefirsttimevoluntary。Asarule，theyoungprince’sbrideisselectedbyhisparents，iftheyarestillliving，or，ifnot，bytheprincehimself，withtheadviceofthegreatfeudallords，whohaveaweightywordtosayinallthesecases。
　　Norcanitbeotherwise。Fortheknightorbaron，asfortheprinceofthelandhimself，marriageisapoliticalact，anopportunitytoincreasepowerbynewalliances。theinterestofthehousemustbedecisive，notthewishesofanindividual。Whatchancethenisthereforlovetohavethefinalwordinthemakingofamarriage？
　　Thesamethingholdsfortheguildmemberinthemedievaltowns。Theveryprivilegesprotectinghim，theguildcharterswithalltheirclausesandrubrics，theintricatedistinctionslegallyseparatinghimfromotherguilds，fromthemembersofhisownguildorfromhisjourneymenandapprentices，alreadymadethecirclenarrowenoughwithinwhichhecouldlookforasuitablewife。Andwhointhecirclewasthemostsuitablewasdecidedunderthiscomplicatedsystemmostcertainlynotbyhisindividualpreferencebutbythefamilyinterests。
　　Inthevastmajorityofcases，therefore，marriageremained，uptothecloseofthemiddleages，whatithadbeenfromthestart——amatterwhichwasnotdecidedbythepartners。Inthebeginning，peoplewerealreadybornmarried——marriedtoanentiregroupoftheoppositesex。
　　Inthelaterformsofgroupmarriagesimilarrelationsprobablyexisted，butwiththegroupcontinuallycontracting。Inthepairingmarriageitwascustomaryforthemotherstosettlethemarriagesoftheirchildren。here，too，thedecisiveconsiderationsarethenewtiesofkinship，whicharetogivetheyoungpairastrongerpositioninthegensandtribe。Andwhen，withthepreponderanceofprivateovercommunalpropertyandtheinterestinitsbequeathal，father-rightandmonogamygainedsupremacy，thedependenceofmarriagesoneconomicconsiderationsbecamecomplete。Theformofmarriagebypurchasedisappears，theactualpracticeissteadilyextendeduntilnotonlythewomanbutalsothemanacquiresaprice——notaccordingtohispersonalqualities，butaccordingtohisproperty。Thatthemutualaffectionofthepeopleconcernedshouldbetheoneparamountreasonformarriage，outweighingeverythingelse，wasandalwayshadbeenabsolutelyunheardofinthepracticeoftherulingclasses。thatsortofthingonlyhappenedinromance——oramongtheoppressedclasses，whodidnotcount。
　　Suchwasthestateofthingsencounteredbycapitalistproductionwhenitbegantoprepareitself，aftertheepochofgeographicaldiscoveries，towinworldpowerbyworldtradeandmanufacture。Onewouldsupposethatthismannerofmarriageexactlysuitedit，andsoitdid。Andyet——therearenolimitstotheironyofhistory——
　　capitalistproductionitselfwastomakethedecisivebreachinit。Bychangingallthingsintocommodities，itdissolvedallinheritedandtraditionalrelationships，and，inplaceoftime-honoredcustomandhistoricright，itsetuppurchaseandsale，freecontract。AndtheEnglishjurist，H。S。Maine，thoughthehadmadeatremendousdiscoverywhenhesaidthatourwholeprogressincomparisonwithformerepochsconsistedinthefactthatwehadpassedfromstatustocontract，
　　frominheritedtofreelycontractedconditions——which，insofarasitiscorrect，wasalreadyinTheCommunistManifesto[ChapterII]。
　　Butacontractrequirespeoplewhocandisposefreelyoftheirpersons，actions，andpossessions，andmeeteachotheronthefootingofequalrights。Tocreatethesefreeandequalpeoplewasoneofthemaintasksofcapitalistproduction。Eventhoughatthestartitwascarriedoutonlyhalf-consciously，andunderareligiousdisguiseatthat，fromthetimeoftheLutheranandCalvinistReformationtheprinciplewasestablishedthatmanisonlyfullyresponsibleforhisactionswhenheactswithcompletefreedomofwill，andthatitisamoraldutytoresistallcoerciontoanimmoralact。Buthowdidthisfitinwiththehithertoexistingpracticeinthearrangementofmarriages？Marriage，accordingtothebourgeoisconception，wasacontract，alegaltransaction，andthemostimportantoneofall，becauseitdisposedoftwohumanbeings，bodyandmind，forlife。
　　Formally，itistrue，thecontractatthattimewasenteredintovoluntarily：withouttheassentofthepersonsconcerned，nothingcouldbedone。Buteveryoneknewonlytoowellhowthisassentwasobtainedandwhoweretherealcontractingpartiesinthemarriage。Butifrealfreedomofdecisionwasrequiredforallothercontracts，thenwhynotforthis？Hadnotthetwoyoungpeopletobecoupledalsotherighttodisposefreelyofthemselves，oftheirbodiesandorgans？Hadnotchivalrybroughtsex-loveintofashion，andwasnotitsproperbourgeoisform，incontrasttochivalry’sadulterouslove，theloveofhusbandandwife？Andifitwasthedutyofmarriedpeopletoloveeachother，wasitnotequallythedutyofloverstomarryeachotherandnobodyelse？Didnotthisrightoftheloversstandhigherthantherightofparents，relations，andothertraditionalmarriage-brokersandmatchmakers？Iftherightoffree，personaldiscriminationbrokeboldlyintotheChurchandreligion，howshouldithaltbeforetheintolerableclaimoftheoldergenerationtodisposeofthebody，soul，property，happiness，andunhappinessoftheyoungergeneration？
　　Thesequestionsinevitablyaroseatatimewhichwaslooseningalltheoldtiesofsocietyandunderminingalltraditionalconceptions。Theworldhadsuddenlygrownalmosttentimesbigger。insteadofonequadrantofahemisphere，thewholeglobelaybeforethegazeoftheWestEuropeans，whohastenedtotaketheothersevenquadrantsintotheirpossession。Andwiththeoldnarrowbarriersoftheirhomelandfellalsothethousand-year-oldbarriersoftheprescribedmedievalwayofthought。Totheoutwardandtheinwardeyeofmanopenedaninfinitelywiderhorizon。Whatdidayoungmancareabouttheapprovalofrespectability，orhonorableguildprivilegeshandeddownforgenerations，whenthewealthofIndiabeckonedtohim，thegoldandthesilverminesofMexicoandPotosi？Forthebourgeoisie，itwasthetimeofknight-errantry。they，too，hadtheirromanceandtheirrapturesoflove，butonabourgeoisfootingand，inthelastanalysis，withbourgeoisaims。
　　Soitcameaboutthattherisingbourgeoisie，especiallyinProtestantcountries，whereexistingconditionshadbeenmostseverelyshaken，increasinglyrecognizedfreedomofcontractalsoinmarriage，andcarrieditintoeffectinthemannerdescribed。Marriageremainedclassmarriage，butwithintheclassthepartnerswereconcededacertaindegreeoffreedomofchoice。Andonpaper，inethicaltheoryandinpoeticdescription，nothingwasmoreimmutablyestablishedthanthateverymarriageisimmoralwhichdoesnotrestonmutualsexualloveandreallyfreeagreementofhusbandandwife。Inshort，thelovemarriagewasproclaimedasahumanright，andindeednotonlyasadroitdel’homme，oneoftherightsofman，butalso，foronceinaway，asdroitdelafem？，oneoftherightsofwoman。
　　Thishumanright，however，differedinonerespectfromallotherso-calledhumanrights。Whilethelatter，inpractice，remainrestrictedtotherulingclassthebourgeoisie，andaredirectlyorindirectlycurtailedfortheoppressedclasstheproletariat，inthecaseoftheformertheironyofhistoryplaysanotherofitstricks。
　　Therulingclassremainsdominatedbythefamiliareconomicinfluencesandthereforeonlyinexceptionalcasesdoesitprovideinstancesofreallyfreelycontractedmarriages，whileamongtheoppressedclass，aswehaveseen，thesemarriagesaretherule。
　　Fullfreedomofmarriagecanthereforeonlybegenerallyestablishedwhentheabolitionofcapitalistproductionandofthepropertyrelationscreatedbyithasremovedalltheaccompanyingeconomicconsiderationswhichstillexertsuchapowerfulinfluenceonthechoiceofamarriagepartner。Forthenthereisnoothermotiveleftexceptmutualinclination。
　　Andassexualloveisbyitsnatureexclusive——althoughatpresentthisexclusivenessisfullyrealizedonlyinthewoman——themarriagebasedonsexualloveisbyitsnatureindividualmarriage。WehaveseenhowrightBachofenwasinregardingtheadvancefromgroupmarriagetoindividualmarriageasprimarilyduetothewomen。Onlythestepfrompairingmarriagetomonogamycanbeputdowntothecreditofthemen，andhistoricallytheessenceofthiswastomakethepositionofthewomenworseandtheinfidelitiesofthemeneasier。Ifnowtheeconomicconsiderationsalsodisappearwhichmadewomenputupwiththehabitualinfidelityoftheirhusbands——concernfortheirownmeansofexistenceandstillmorefortheirchildren’sfuture——then，accordingtoallpreviousexperience，theequalityofwomantherebyachievedwilltendinfinitelymoretomakemenreallymonogamousthantomakewomenpolyandrous。
　　Butwhatwillquitecertainlydisappearfrommonogamyareallthefeaturesstampeduponitthroughitsorigininpropertyrelations。
　　theseare，inthefirstplace，supremacyoftheman，and，secondly，indissolubility。Thesupremacyofthemaninmarriageisthesimpleconsequenceofhiseconomicsupremacy，andwiththeabolitionofthelatterwilldisappearofitself。Theindissolubilityofmarriageispartlyaconsequenceoftheeconomicsituationinwhichmonogamyarose，partlytraditionfromtheperiodwhentheconnectionbetweenthiseconomicsituationandmonogamywasnotyetfullyunderstoodandwascarriedtoextremesunderareligiousform。Todayitisalreadybrokenthroughatathousandpoints。Ifonlythemarriagebasedonloveismoral，thenalsoonlythemarriageinwhichlovecontinues。Buttheintenseemotionofindividualsex-lovevariesverymuchindurationfromoneindividualtoanother，especiallyamongmen，andifaffectiondefinitelycomestoanendorissupplantedbyanewpassionatelove，separationisabenefitforbothpartnersaswellasforsociety——
　　onlypeoplewillthenbesparedhavingtowadethroughtheuselessmireofadivorcecase。
　　Whatwecannowconjectureaboutthewayinwhichsexualrelationswillbeorderedaftertheimpendingoverthrowofcapitalistproductionismainlyofanegativecharacter，limitedforthemostparttowhatwilldisappear。Butwhatwilltherebenew？Thatwillbeansweredwhenanewgenerationhasgrownup：agenerationofmenwhoneverintheirliveshaveknownwhatitistobuyawoman’ssurrenderwithmoneyoranyothersocialinstrumentofpower。agenerationofwomenwhohaveneverknownwhatitistogivethemselvestoamanfromanyotherconsiderationsthanreallove，ortorefusetogivethemselvestotheirloverfromfearoftheeconomicconsequences。Whenthesepeopleareintheworld，theywillcarepreciouslittlewhatanybodytodaythinkstheyoughttodo。theywillmaketheirownpracticeandtheircorrespondingpublicopinionaboutthepracticeofeachindividual——
　　andthatwillbetheendofit。
　　Letus，however，returntoMorgan，fromwhomwehavemovedaconsiderabledistance。Thehistoricalinvestigationofthesocialinstitutionsdevelopedduringtheperiodofcivilizationgoesbeyondthelimitsofhisbook。Howmonogamyfaresduringthisepoch，therefore，onlyoccupieshimverybriefly。He，too，seesinthefurtherdevelopmentofthemonogamousfamilyastepforward，anapproachtocompleteequalityofthesexes，thoughhedoesnotregardthisgoalasattained。But，hesays：
　　Whenthefactisacceptedthatthefamilyhaspassedthroughfoursuccessiveforms，andisnowinafifth，thequestionatonceariseswhetherthisformcanbepermanentinthefuture。Theonlyanswerthatcanbegivenisthatitmustadvanceassocietyadvances，andchangeassocietychanges，evenasithasdoneinthepast。Itisthecreatureofthesocialsystem，andwillreflectitsculture。Asthemonogamianfamilyhasimprovedgreatlysincethecommencementofcivilization，andverysensiblyinmoderntimes，itisatleastsupposablethatitiscapableofstillfurtherimprovementuntiltheequalityofthesexesisattained。Shouldthemonogamianfamilyinthedistantfuturefailtoanswertherequirementsofsociety……itisimpossibletopredictthenatureofitssuccessor。
　　THEORIGINOF
　　THEFAMILY，PRIVATEPROPERTY，ANDTHESTATE
　　byFREDERICKENGELS
　　CHAPTERIII
　　THEIROQUOISGENS
　　WEnowcometoanotherdiscoverymadebyMorgan，whichisatleastasimportantasthereconstructionofthefamilyinitsprimitiveformfromthesystemsofconsanguinity。TheproofthatthekinshiporganizationsdesignatedbyanimalnamesinatribeofAmericanIndiansareessentiallyidenticalwiththegeneaoftheGreeksandthegentesoftheRomans。thattheAmericanistheoriginalformandtheGreekandRomanformsarelaterandderivative。thatthewholesocialorganizationoftheprimitiveGreeksandRomansintogens，phratry，andtribefindsitsfaithfulparallelinthatoftheAmericanIndians。thatthegensisaninstitutioncommontoallbarbariansuntiltheirentryintocivilizationandevenafterwardssofarasoursourcesgouptothepresent——thisproofhasclearedupatonestrokethemostdifficultquestionsinthemostancientperiodsofGreekandRomanhistory，providingusatthesametimewithanunsuspectedwealthofinformationaboutthefundamentalfeaturesofsocialconstitutioninprimitivetimes——beforetheintroductionofthestate。Simpleasthematterseemsonceitisunderstood，Morganonlymadehisdiscoveryquiterecently。Inhispreviouswork，publishedin1871，[1]hehadnotyetpenetratedthissecret，atwhosesubsequentrevelationtheEnglishanthropologists，usuallysoself-confident，becameforatimeasquietasmice。
　　TheLatinwordgens，whichMorganusesasageneraltermforsuchkinshiporganizations，comes，likeitsGreekequivalent，genos，fromthecommonAryanrootganinGerman，where，followingthelaw[2]
　　Aryangisregularlyreplacedbyk，kan，whichmeanstobeget。
　　Gens，，Genos，Sanscritjanas，Gothickunifollowingthesamelawasabove，OldNorseandAnglo-Saxonkyn，Englishkin，MiddleHighGermankunne。，allsignifylineage，descent。GensinLatinandgenosinGreekare，however，usedspecificallytodenotetheformofkinshiporganizationwhichpridesitselfonitscommondescentinthiscasefromacommonancestralfatherandisboundtogetherbysocialandreligiousinstitutionsintoadistinctcommunity，thoughtoallourhistoriansitsoriginandcharacterhavehithertoremainedobscure。
　　Wehavealreadyseen，inconnectionwiththepunaluanfamilyP-33，whatisthecompositionofagensinitsoriginalform。Itconsistsofallthepersonswhoinpunaluanmarriage，accordingtotheconceptionsnecessarilyprevailingunderit，formtherecognizeddescendantsofoneparticularancestralmother，thefounderofthegens。Inthisformoffamily，aspaternityisuncertain，onlythefemalelinecounts。Sincebrothersmaynotmarrytheirsistersbutonlywomenofdifferentdescent，thechildrenbegottenbythemwiththesealienwomencannot，accordingtomother-right，belongtothefather’sgens。Thereforeonlytheoffspringofthedaughtersineachgenerationremainwithinthekinshiporganization。theoffspringofthesonsgointothegentesoftheirmothers。Whatbecomesofthisconsanguinegroupwhenithasconstituteditselfaseparategroup，distinctfromsimilargroupswithinthetribe？