[Scanned and edited with footnote revision for the web by Spartacus, editor of The Men's Tribune. Repostings must include this link. Please report errors.]
[Montesquieu has been said to be the most influential philosopher of the founding fathers of the United States of America, who guaranteed to their states that highest form of government, the "republican form" (Art. IV, Sect. 4.)]
CONSEQUENCES OF THE DIFFERENT PRINCIPLES OF THE
WITH RESPECT TO SUMPTUARY LAWS, LUXURY, AND THE CONDITION OF WOMEN
8.--Of public Continency
So many are the
imperfections that attend the loss of virtue in women, and so
greatly are their minds depraved when this principal guard is
removed, that in a popular state public incontinency may be
considered as the last of miseries, and as a certain
forerunner of a change in the constitution.
Hence it is that the sage legislators of republican states have ever required of women a particular gravity of manners. They have proscribed, not only vice, but the very appearance of it. They have banished even all commerce of gallantry--a commerce that produces idleness, that renders the women corrupters, even before they are corrupted, that gives a value to trifles, and debases things of importance: a commerce, in fine, that makes people act entirely by the maxims of ridicule, in which the women are so perfectly skilled.
9.--Of the Condition or State of Women in different Governments
In monarchies women are
subject to very little restraint, because as the distinction of
ranks calls them to court, there they assume a spirit of liberty,
which is almost the only one tolerated in that place. Each
courtier avails himself of their charms and passions, in order to
advance his fortune: and as their weakness admits not of pride,
but of vanity, luxury constantly attends them.
In despotic governments women do not introduce, but are themselves an object of, luxury. They must be in a state of the most rigorous servitude. Every one follows the spirit of the government, and adopts in his own family the customs he sees elsewhere established. As the laws are very severe and executed on the spot, they are afraid lest the liberty of women should expose them to danger. Their quarrels, indiscretions, repugnancies, jealousies, piques, and that art, in fine, which little souls have of interesting great ones, would be attended there with fatal consequences.
Besides, as princes in those countries make a sport of human nature, they allow themselves a multitude of women; and a thousand considerations oblige them to keep those women in close confinement.
In republics women are free by the laws and restrained by manners; luxury is banished thence, and with it corruption and vice.
In the cities of Greece, where they were not under the restraint of a religion which declares that even amongst men regularity of manners is a part of virtue; where a blind passion triumphed with a boundless insolence, and love appeared only in a shape which we dare not mention, while marriage was considered as nothing more than simple friendship;1 such were the virtue, simplicity, and chastity of women in those cities, that in this respect hardly any people were ever known to have had a better and wiser polity.2
10.--Of the domestic Tribunal among the Romans
The Romans had no particular
magistrates, like the Greeks, to inspect the conduct of women.
The censors had not an eye over them, as over the rest of the
The institution of the domestic tribunal3 supplied the magistracy established among the Greeks.4
The husband summoned the wife's relatives, and tried her in their presence.5 This tribunal preserved the manners of the republic; and at the same time those very manners maintained this tribunal. For it decided not only in respect to the violation of the laws, but also of manners: now, in order to judge of the violation of the latter, manners are requisite.
The penalties inflicted by this tribunal ought to be, and actually were, arbitrary: for all that relates to manners, and to the rules of modesty, can hardly be comprised under one code of laws. It is easy indeed to regulate by laws what we owe to others; but it is very difficult to comprise all we owe to ourselves.
The domestic tribunal inspected the general conduct of women: but there was one crime which, beside the animadversion of this tribunal, was likewise subject to a public accusation. This was adultery; whether that in a republic so great a depravation of manners interested the government; or whether the wife's immorality might render the husband suspected; or whether, in fine, they were afraid lest even honest people might choose that this crime should rather be concealed than punished.
11.--In what Manner the Institutions changed at Rome, together with the Government
As manners were
supported by the domestic tribunal, they were also supported by
the public accusation; and hence it is that these two things fell
together with the public manners, and ended with the republic.6
The establishing of perpetual questions, that is, the division of jurisdiction among the praetors, and the custom gradually introduced of the praetors determining all causes themselves,7 weakened the use of the domestic tribunal. This appears by the surprise of historians, who look upon the decisions which Tiberius caused to be given by this tribunal as singular facts, and as a renewal of the ancient course of pleading.
The establishment of monarchy and the change of manners put likewise an end to public accusations. It might be apprehended lest a dishonest man, affronted at the slight shown him by a woman, vexed at her refusal, and irritated even by her virtue, should form a design to destroy her. The Julian law ordained that a woman should not be accused of adultery till after her husband had been charged with favoring her irregularities; which limited greatly, and annihilated, as it were, this sort of accusation.8
Sextus Quintus seemed to have been desirous of reviving the public accusation.9 But there needs very little reflection to see that this law would be more improper in such a monarchy as his than in any other.
12.--0f the Guardianship of Women among the Romans
The Roman laws subjected women
to a perpetual guardianship, except they were under cover and
subject to the authority of a husband.10 This
guardianship was given to the nearest of the male relatives: and
by a vulgar expression11 it appears they were very
much confined. This was proper for a republic, but not at all
necessary in a monarchy.12
That the women among the ancient Germans were likewise under a perpetual tutelage appears from the different codes of the Laws of the Barbarians.13 This custom was communicated to the monarchies founded by those people; but was not of long duration.
13--Of the Punishments decreed by the Emperors against the Incontinence of Women
The Julian law ordained a
punishment against adultery. But so far was this law, any more
than those afterwards made on the same account, from being a mark
of regularity of manners, that on the contrary it was a proof of
The whole political system in respect to women received a change in the monarchical state. The question was no longer to oblige them to a regularity of manners, but to punish their crimes. That new laws were made to punish their crimes was owing to their leaving those transgressions unpunished which were not of so criminal a nature.
The frightful dissolution of manners obliged indeed the emperors to enact laws in order to put some stop to lewdness; but it was not their intention to establish a general reformation. Of this the positive facts related by historians are a much stronger proof than all these laws can be of the contrary. We may see in Dio the conduct of Augustus on this occasion, and in what manner he eluded, both in his praetorian and censorian office, the repeated instances that were made him.14 for that purpose.
It is true that we find in historians very rigid sentences, passed in the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius, against the lewdness of some Roman ladies: but by showing us the spirit of those reigns, at the same time they demonstrate the Spirit of those decisions.
The principal design of Augustus and Tiberius was to punish the dissoluteness of their relatives. It was not their immorality they punished, but a particular crime of impiety or high treason15 of their own invention, which served to promote a respect for majesty, and answered their private revenge. Hence it is that the Roman historians inveigh so bitterly against this tyranny.
The penalty of the Julian law was small.16 The emperors insisted that in passing sentence the judges should increase the penalty of the law. This was the subject of the invectives of historians. They did not examine whether the women were deserving of punishment, but whether they had violated the law, in order to punish them.
One of the most tyrannical proceedings of Tiberius17 was the abuse he made of the ancient laws. When he wanted to extend the punishment of a Roman lady beyond that inflicted by the Julian law, he revived the domestic tribunal.18
These regulations in respect to women concerned only senatorial families, not the common people. Pretences were wanted to accuse the great, which were constantly furnished by the dissolute behavior of the ladies.
In fine, what I have above observed, namely, that regularity of manners is not the principle of monarchy, was never better verified than under those first emperors; and whoever doubts it need only read Tacitus, Suetonius, Juvenal, or Martial.
14--Sumptuary Laws among the Romans
We have spoken of public
incontinence because it is the inseparable companion of luxury.
If we leave the motions of the heart at liberty, how shall we be
able to restrain the weaknesses of the mind?
At Rome, besides the general institutions, the censors prevailed on the magistrates to enact several particular laws for maintaining the frugality of women. This was the design of the Fannian, Licinian, and Oppian laws. We may see in Livy19 the great ferment the senate was in when the women insisted upon the revocation of the Oppian law. The abrogation of this law is fixed upon by Valerius Maximus as the period whence we may date the luxury of the Romans.
15--0f Dowries and Nuptial Advantages in different Constitutions
Dowries ought to be considerable in
monarchies, in order to enable husbands to support their rank and
the established luxury. In republics, where luxury should never
reign,20 they ought to be moderate; but there should
be hardly any at all in despotic governments, where women are in
some measure slaves.
The community of goods introduced by the French laws between man and wife is extremely well adapted to a monarchical government; because the women are thereby interested in domestic affairs, and compelled, as it were, to take care of their family. It is less so in a republic, where women are possessed of more virtue. But it would be quite absurd in despotic governments, where the women themselves generally constitute a part of the master's property.
As women are in a state that furnishes sufficient inducements to marriage, the advantages which the law gives them over the husband's property are of no service to society. But in a republic they would be extremely prejudicial, because riches are productive of luxury. In despotic governments the profits accruing from marriage ought to be mere subsistence, and no more.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
HOW THE LAWS OF DOMESTIC SLAVERY BEAR A RELATION TO THE NATURE OF THE CLIMATE
8.--Of the Separation of Women from Men
The prodigious number of wives
possessed by those who live in rich and voluptuous countries is a
consequence of the law of polygamy. Their separation from men,
and their close confinement, naturally follow from the greatness
of this number. Domestic order renders this necessary; thus an
insolvent debtor seeks to conceal himself from the pursuit of his
creditors. There are climates where the impulses of nature have
such force that morality has almost none. If a man be left with a
woman, the temptation and the fall will be the same thing; the
attack certain, the resistance none. In these countries, instead
of precepts, they have recourse to bolts and bars.
One of the Chinese classic authors considers the man as a prodigy of virtue who, finding a woman alone in a distant apartment, can forbear making use of force.21
9.--Of the Connection between domestic and political Government
In a republic the condition of
citizens is moderate, equal, mild, and agreeable; everything
partakes of the benefit of public liberty. An empire over the
women cannot, amongst them, be so well exerted; and where the
climate demands this empire, it is most agreeable to a
monarchical government. This one of the reasons why it has ever
been difficult to establish a popular government in the east.
On the contrary, the slavery of women is perfectly conformable to the genius of a despotic government, which delights treating all with severity. Thus at all times have we seen in Asia domestic slavery and despotic government walk hand in hand with an equal pace.
In a government which requires, above all things, that a particular regard be paid to its tranquillity, and where the extreme subordination calls for peace, it is absolutely necessary to shut up the women; for their intrigues would prove fatal to their husbands. A government which has not time to examine into the conduct of its subjects views them with a suspicious eye, only because they appear and suffer themselves to be known.
Let us only suppose that the levity of mind, the indiscretions, the tastes and caprices of our women, attended by their passions of a higher and a lower kind, with all their active fire, and in that full liberty with which they appear amongst us, were conveyed into an eastern government, where would be the father of a family who could enjoy a moment's repose? The men would be everywhere suspected, everywhere enemies; the state would be overturned, and the kingdom overflowed with rivers of blood.
10.--The Principle on which the Morals of the East are founded
In the case of a multiplicity of
wives, the more a family ceases to be united, the more ought the
laws to reunite its detached parts in a common centre; and the
greater the diversity of interests, the more necessary is it for
the laws to bring them back to a common interest. This is more
particularly done by confinement. The women should not only be
separated from the men by the walls of the house, but they ought
also be separated in the same enclosure, in such a manner that
each may have a distinct household in the same family. Hence each
derives all that relates to the practice of morality, modesty,
chastity, reserve, silence, peace, dependence, respect, and love;
and, in short, a general direction of her thoughts to that which,
in its own nature, is a thing of the greatest importance, a
single and entire attachment to her family.
Women have naturally so many duties to fulfil--duties which are peculiarly theirs, that they cannot be sufficiently excluded from everything capable of inspiring other ideas; from everything that goes by the name of amusements; and from everything which we call business.
We find the manners more pure in the several parts of the East, in proportion as the confinement of women is more strictly observed. In great kingdoms there are necessarily great lords. The greater their wealth, the more enlarged is their ability of keeping their wives in an exact confinement, and of preventing them from entering again into society. Hence it proceeds that in the empires of Turkey, Persia, of the Mogul, China, and Japan, the manners of their wives are admirable.
But the case is not the same in India, where a multitude of islands and the situation of the land have divided the country into an infinite number of petty states, which from causes that we have not here room to mention are rendered despotic.
There are none there but wretches, some pillaging and others pillaged. Their grandees have very moderate fortunes, and those whom they call rich have only a bare subsistence. The confinement of their women cannot, therefore, be very strict; nor can they make use of any great precautions to keep them within due bounds; hence it proceeds that the corruption of their manners is scarcely to be conceived.
We may there see to what an extreme the vices of a climate indulged in full liberty will carry licentiousness. It is there that nature has a force, and modesty a weakness, which exceed all comprehension. At Patan22 the wanton desires of the women are so outrageous, that the men are obliged to make use of a certain apparel to shelter them from their designs.23 According to Mr. Smith,24 things are not better conducted in the petty kingdoms of Guinea. In these countries the two sexes lose even those laws which properly belong to each.
11.--Of domestic Slavery independently of Polygamy
It is not only a plurality of
wives which in certain places of the East requires their
confinement, but also the climate itself. Those who consider the
horrible crimes, the treachery, the dark villainies, the
poisonings, the assassinations, which the liberty of women has
occasioned at Goa and in the Portuguese settlements in the
Indies, where religion permits only one wife; and who compare
them with the innocence and purity of manners of the women of
Turkey, Persia, Hindostan, China, and Japan, will clearly see
that it is frequently as necessary to separate them from the men,
when they have but one, as when they have many.
These are things which ought to be decided by the climate. What purpose would it answer to shut up women in our northern countries, where their manners are naturally good; where all their passions are calm; and where love rules over the heart with so regular and gentle an empire that the least degree of prudence is sufficient to conduct it?
It is a happiness to live in those climates which permit such freedom of converse, where that sex which has most charms seems to embellish society, and where wives, reserving themselves for the pleasures of one, contribute to the amusement of all.
12.--0f natural Modesty
All nations are equally agreed in fixing
contempt and ignominy on the incontinence of women. Nature has
dictated this to all. She has established the attack, and she has
established too the resistance; and having implanted desires in
both, she has given to the one boldness, and to the other shame.
To individuals she has granted a long succession of years to
attend to their preservation: but to continue the species, she
has granted only a moment.
It is then far from being true that to be incontinent is to follow the laws of nature; on the contrary, it is a violation of these laws, which can be observed only by behaving with modesty and discretion.
Besides, it is natural for intelligent beings to feel their imperfections. Nature has, therefore, fixed shame in our minds --a shame of our imperfections.
When, therefore, the physical power of certain climates violates the natural law of the two sexes, and that of intelligent beings, it belongs to the legislature to make civil laws, with a view to opposing the nature of the climate and reestablishing the primitive laws.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
HOW THE LAWS OF POLITICAL SERVITUDE BEAR A RELATION TO THE NATURE OF THE CLIMATE
1.--Of political Servitude
POLITICAL servitude does not less depend on the nature of the climate than that which is civil and domestic; and this we shall now demonstrate.
2.--The Difference between Nations in point of Courage
We have already observed that
great heat enervates the strength and courage of men, and that in
cold climates they have a certain vigor of body and mind, which
renders them patient and intrepid, and qualifies them for arduous
enterprises. This remark holds good, not only between different
nations, but even in the different parts of the same country. In
the north of China25 a people are more courageous than
those in the south; and those in the south of [K]orea26
have less bravery than those in the north.
We ought not, then, to be astonished that the effeminacy of the people in hot climates has almost always rendered them slaves; and that the bravery of those in cold climates has enabled them to maintain their liberties. This is an effect which springs from a natural cause.
This has also been found true in America; the despotic empires of Mexico and Peru were near the Line, and almost all the little free nations were, and are still, near the Poles.
3.--0f the Climate of Asia
... in Asia the strong nations are opposed
to the weak; the warlike, brave, and active people touch
immediately upon those who are indolent, effeminate, and
timorous; the one must, therefore, conquer, and the other be
conquered. In Europe, on the contrary, strong nations are opposed
to the strong; and those who join each other have nearly the same
courage. This is the grand reason of the weakness of Asia, and of
the strength of Europe; of the liberty of Europe, and of the
slavery of Asia: a cause that I do not recollect ever to have
seen remarked. Hence it proceeds that liberty in Asia never
increases; whilst in Europe it is enlarged or diminished,
according to particular circumstances.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
OF LAWS IN RELATION TO THE
PRINCIPLES WHICH FORM THE GENERAL SPIRIT,
THE MORALS, AND CUSTOMS OF A NATION
12.--Of Customs and Manners in a despotic State
It is a capital maxim, that
the manners and customs of a despotic empire ought never to be
changed; for nothing would more speedily produce a revolution.
The reason is, that in these states there are no laws, that is,
none that can be properly called so; there are only manners and
customs; and if you overturn these you overturn all.
Laws are established, manners are inspired; these proceed from a general spirit, those from a particular institution: now it is as dangerous, nay more so, to subvert the general spirit as to change a particular institution.
There is less communication in a country where each, either as superior or inferior, exercises or is oppressed by arbitrary power, than there is in those where liberty reigns in every station. They do not, therefore, so often change their manners and behavior. Fixed and established customs have a near resemblance to laws. Thus it is here necessary that a prince or a legislator should less oppose the manners and customs of the people than in any other country upon earth.
Their women are commonly confined, and have no influence in society. In other countries, where they have intercourse with men, their desire of pleasing, and the desire men also have of giving them pleasure, produce a continual change of customs. The two sexes spoil each other; they both lose their distinctive and essential quality; what was naturally fixed becomes quite unsettled, and their customs and behavior alter every day.
13.--0f the Behavior of the Chinese
But China is the place where the customs of the country can never be changed. Besides their women being absolutely separated from the men, their customs, like their morals, are taught in the schools. A man of letters may be known by his easy address.27 These things being once taught by precept, and inculcated by grave doctors, become fixed, like the principles of morality, and are never changed.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
1.--Of the Origin and Revolutions of the Roman Laws on Successions
.... The laws of the ancient Romans concerning successions, being formed with the same spirit which dictated the division of lands, did not sufficiently restrain the riches of women; thus a door was left open to luxury, which is always inseparable from this sort of opulence. Between the second and third Punic wars, they began to perceive the evil and made the Voconian law;28 but as they were induced to this by the most important considerations; as but few monuments have reached us, that take notice of this law, and as it has hitherto been spoken of in a most confused manner, I shall endeavor to clear it up.
Cicero has preserved a fragment, which forbids the instituting a woman an heiress, whether she was married or unmarried.29 The epitome of Livy, where he speaks of this law, says no more:30 it appears from Cicero31 and St. Augustin,32 that the daughter, though an only child, was comprehended in the prohibition.
Cato, the elder, contributed all in his power to get this law passed.33 Aulus Gellius cites a fragment of a speech,34 which he made on this occasion. By preventing the succession of women, his intent was to take away the source of luxury; as by undertaking the defence of the Oppian law, he intended to put a stop to luxury itself....
The Voconian law was made to hinder the women from growing too wealthy; for this end it was necessary to deprive them of large inheritances, and not of such as were incapable of supporting luxury...
At the time the Voconian law was passed, the Romans still preserved some remains of their ancient purity of manners .. But latterly their morals were corrupted ...
Rome, corrupted by the riches of every nation, had changed her manners; the putting a stop to the luxury of women was no longer minded. Aulus Gellius, who lived under Adrian,35 tells us, that in his time the Voconian law was almost abolished; it was buried under the opulence of the city ...
The ancient laws of Rome began to be thought severe ...
We have seen, that by the ancient laws of Rome mothers had no share in the inheritance of their children. The Voconian law afforded a new reason for their exclusion ...
These laws were extremely conformable to the spirit of a good
republic, where they ought to have such an influence, as to
prevent this sex from rendering either the possession, or the
expectation of wealth, an instrument of luxury. On the
contrary, the luxury of a monarchy rendering marriage expensive
and costly, it ought to be there encouraged, both by the riches
which women may bestow, and by the hope of the inheritances it is
in their power to procure. Thus when monarchy was established at
Rome, the whole system of successions was changed. The
praetors called the relatives of the woman's side in default of
those of the male side; though by the ancient laws, the relatives
on the woman's side were never called. The Orphitian,
senatus-consultum called children to the succession of their
mother; and the Emperors Valentinian, Theodosius, and Arcadius
called the grandchildren by the daughter to the succession
of the grandfather.36 In short, the Emperor
Justinian37 left not the least vestige of the ancient right of successions: he established three orders of heirs, the descendants, the ascendants, and the collaterals, without any distinction between the males and females; between the relatives on the woman's side, and those on the male side; and abrogated all of this kind, which were still in force: he believed that he followed nature, even in deviating from what he called the embarrassments of the ancient jurisprudence.
[Justinian's reign began in 527 A. D., about the same time that the Dark Ages began; "The regulations made by the Romans to increase the number of their citizens had their effect while the republic, in the full vigour of her constitution, had nothing to repair but the losses she sustained by her courage, by her intrepidity, by her firmness, her love of glory and of virtue. But soon the wisest laws could not re-establish what a dying republic, what a general anarchy, what a military government, what a rigid empire, what a proud despotic power, what a feeble monarchy, what a stupid, weak, and superstitious court had sucessively pulled down. It might, indeed, be said that they conquered the world only to weaken it, and to deliver it up defenseless to barbarians." Montesquieu.]
1 "In respect to true love," says Plutarch, " the women have nothing to say to it." In his "Treatise of Love," p.600. He spoke in the style of his time. See Xenophon in the dialogue entitled "Hiero." [BACK]
2 At Athens there was a particular magistrate who inspected the conduct of women. [BACK]
3 Romulus instituted this tribunal, as appears from Dionysius Halicarnassus, book II. p.96.
4 See in Livy book XXXIX., the use that was made of this tribunal at the time of the conspiracy of the Bacchanalians (They gave the name of conspiracy against the republic to assemblies in which the morals of women and young people were debauched) [BACK]
5 It appears from Dionys. Haficarn. lib. II., that Romulus's institution was, that in ordinary cases the husband should sit as judge in the presence of the wife's relatives, but that in heinous crimes he should determine in conjunction with five of them. Hence Ulpian, tit. 6, secs 9, 12, and 13, distinguishes in respect to the different judgments of manners between those which he calls important, and those which are less so; mores, graviores, leviores. [BACK]
6 "Judicio de moribus (quod antea quidem in antiquis legibus positum erat, non autem frequentabatur) penitus abolito."-Leg. II, "Cod. de repud."
7 Judicia extraordinaria.
8 It was entirely abolished by Constantine: "It is a shame," said he, "that settled marriages should he disturbed by the presumption of strangers." [BACK]
9 Sextus Ouintus ordained that, if a husband did not come and make his complaint to him of his wife's infidelity, he should be put to death. See Leti. [BACK]
10 Nisi convenissent in manum viri.
11 Ne sis mihi patruus oro.
l2 The Papian law ordained, under Augustus, that women who had borne three children should be exempt from this tutelage. [BACK]
13 This tutelage was by the Germans called Mundeburdium.
14 Upon their bringing him a young man who had married a woman with whom he had before carried on an illicit commerce, he hesitated a long while, not daring to approve or to punish these things. At length recollecting himself, "Seditions," says he, "have been the cause of very great evils; let us forget them." Dio, book LIV. The Senate having desired him to give them some regulations in respect to women's morals, he evaded their petition by telling them that they should chastitise their wives in the same manner as he did his; upon which they desired him to tell them how he behaved to his wife. (I think a very indiscreet question.) [BACK]
15 "Culpam inter viros et foeminas vulgatum gravi nomine laesarum re- ligionum appellando, clementiam majorum suasque ipse leges egrediebatur." --Tacit. "Annal." lib. III.
16 This law is given in the Digest, but without mentioning the penalty. It is supposed it was only relegatio, because that of incest was only deportatio. Leg. si quis viduam, ff. de quaest.
17 "Proprium id Tiberia fuit scelera nuper reperta priscis verbis obtegere."-- Tacit.
18 "Adulterii graviorem paonam deprecatus, ut exemplo majorum propinquis suis ultra ducentesimum lapidem re- moveretur, suasit. Adultero Manlio Italia atque Africa interdictum est."-- Tacit. "Annal." lib. II.
19 Dec. 4. lib. IV.
20 Marseilles was the wisest of all the republics in its time; here it was ordained that dowries should not exceed one hundred crowns in money, and five in clothes, as Strabo observes, lib. IV. Strabo further allows a small sum in gold ornaments to serve in the decoration of the bride.
21 "It is an admirable touch-stone, to find by oneself a treasure, and to know the right owner; or to see a beautiful woman in a lonely apartment; or to hear the cries of an enemy, who must perish without our assistance." Translation of a Chinese piece of morality, which may be seen in Du Halde, vol: iii. p. 151. [BACK]
22 "Collection of voyages for the establishment of an India Company," vol. ii. p. 2.
23 In the Maldivian isles the fathers marry their daughters at ten and eleven years of age, because it is a great sin, say they, to suffer them to endure the want of a husband. See Pirard, cap. xii. At Bantam, as soon as a girl is twelve or thirteen years old, she must be married, if they would not have her lead a debauched life. "Collection of Voyages for the establishment of an India Company," p. 348. [BACK]
24 "Voyage to Guinea," part second. "When the women happen to meet with a man, they lay hold of him, and threaten to make a complaint to their husbands if he slight their addresses They steal into a man's bed, and wake him; and if he refuses to comply with their desires, they threaten to suffer themselves to be caught in flagranti." [BACK]
25 Du Halde, vol. i. p. 112.
26 The Chinese books make mention of this. Ibid.
27 Du Halde.
28 It was proposed by Quintus Voconius, Tribune of the people. See
Cicero's "Second Oration against Verres. In the "Epitome" of T. Livy,
lib. XLI., we read Voconius, instead of Voluminus.
29 "Sanxit ... ne quis haeredem virginem neve
Cicero's "Second Oration against Verres."
30 "Legem tulit, ne quis haeredem mulierem institueret."--Lib. IV.
31 "Second Oration against Verres."
32 "Of the City of God," lib. III.
33 "Epitome" of Livy, lib. XL.
34 Lib. XXVII. cap. vi.
35 Lib. XX. cap. i.
36 Lib. 9. Cod. "de suis et legitimis haeredibus."
37 Lib. XIV. Cod. " de suis et legitimis
haeredibus," et "Nov." 118 and 127.