MEANS OF ATTRACTION
The desire for self-decoration, although a specifically human quality,
is exceedingly old. There are peoples destitute of almost everything
which we regard as necessaries of life, but there is no people so
rude as not to take pleasure in ornaments. The ancient barbarians who
inhabited the south of Europe at the same time as the reindeer and the
mammoth, brought to their caves brilliant and ornamental objects.[965]
The women of the utterly wretched Veddahs in Ceylon decorate themselves
with necklaces of brass beads, and bangles cut from the chank
shell.[966] The Fuegians “are content to be naked,” but “ambitious
to be fine.”[967] The Australians, without taking the slightest pride
in their appearance, so far as neatness or cleanliness is concerned,
are yet very vain of their own rude decorations.[968] And of the rude
Tasmanians, Cook tells us that they had no wish to obtain useful
articles, but were eager to secure anything ornamental.
“Great as is the vanity of the civilized,” says Mr. Spencer, “it is
exceeded by that of the uncivilized.”[969] The predilection of savages
for ornaments has been sufficiently shown by travellers in almost
every part of the world. Feathers and beads of different colours,
flowers, rings, anklets, and bracelets, are common embellishments. A
fully-equipped Santal belle, for instance, carries two anklets, and
perhaps twelve bracelets, and a necklace weighing a pound, the total
weight of ornaments on her person amounting to thirty-four pounds of
bell metal,—“a greater weight,” says Captain Sherwill, “than one
of our drawing-room belles could well lift.”[970] Besides this, the
body is transformed in various ways. The lips, the sides of the nose,
and the lobes of the ear are especially ill-treated. Hardly any woman
in Eastern Central Africa is without a lip-ring; they say it makes
them look pretty, and “the bigger the ring, the more they value
themselves!”[971] The Shulis bore a hole in the underlip and insert in
it a piece of crystal three or four inches long, which sways about as
they speak;[972] and similar customs are common among other African
peoples,[973] as also in some parts of North and South America.[974]
The Papuans perforate the septum of the nose and insert in the hole
sticks, claws of birds, &c.[975] The most common practice is to pierce,
enlarge, or somehow mutilate the ear-lobes. Certain North American
Indians,[976] the Arecunas and Botocudos of South America,[977] and
the East African Wa-taïta[978] pull them down almost to the shoulders.
Among the Easter Islanders, says Beechey, “the lobe, deprived of its
ear-ring, hangs dangling against the neck, and has a very disagreeable
appearance, particularly when wet. It is sometimes so long as to be
greatly in the way; to obviate which, they pass the lobe over the upper
part of the ear, or more rarely, fasten one lobe to the other, at the
back of the head.”[979]
Scarcely less subject to mutilations are the teeth. In the Malay
Archipelago, the filing and blackening of the teeth are thought
to produce a most beautiful result, white teeth being in great
disesteem.[980] The Australians often knock out one or two front teeth
of the upper jaw, and several tribes in New Guinea file their teeth
sharp.[981] Again, the Damaras file the middle teeth in the upper jaw
into the form of a swallow’s tail, and knock out four teeth in the
lower jaw; whilst one of the Makalaka tribes, north of the Zambesi, and
the Matongas, on its bank, “break out their top incisor-teeth from the
sheerest vanity. Their women say that it is only horses that eat with
all their teeth, and that men ought not to eat like horses.”[982]
Many savage men take most pride in the hair of the head. Now it is
painted in a showy manner, now decorated with beads and tinsel, now
combed and arranged with the most exquisite care. The Kandhs have
their hair, which is worn very long, drawn forward and rolled up till
it looks like a horn projecting from between the eyes. Around this it
is their delight to wear a piece of red cloth, and they insert the
feathers of favourite birds, as also a pipe, comb, &c.[983] The men
of Tana, of the New Hebrides, wear their hair “twelve and eighteen
inches long, and have it divided into some six or seven hundred little
locks or tresses;”[984] and, among the Latúka, a man requires a period
of from eight to ten years to perfect his coiffure.[985] In North
America, Hearne saw several men about six feet high, who had preserved
“a single lock of their hair that, when let down, would trail on the
ground as they walked.”[986] Other Indians practise the custom of
shaving the head and ornamenting it with the crest of deer’s hairs; and
wigs are used by several savage peoples.[987] The Indians of Guiana,
the Fuegians, Chavantes, Uaupés,[988] and other tribes are in the habit
of pulling out their eyebrows.
Scarcely anything has a greater attraction for the savage mind than
showy colours. “No matter,” says Dr. Holub, “how ill a traveller in
the Marutse district may be, and how many bearers he may require, if he
only has a good stock of blue beads he may always be sure of commanding
the best attention and of securing the amplest services; his beads will
prove an attraction irresistible to sovereign and subject, to man,
woman, and child, to freeman and bondman alike.”[989] The practice of
ornamenting one’s self with gaudy baubles and painting the body with
conspicuous colours is, indeed, extremely prevalent. Of Santal men at
a feast, Sir W. Hunter says that, “if all the colours of the rainbow
were not displayed by them, certainly the hedgehog, the peacock, and
a variety of the feathered tribe had been laid under contribution in
order to supply the young Santal beaux with plumes.”[990] Especially
does the savage man delight in paint. Red ochre is generally looked
upon as the chief embellishment, whilst, of the other colours, black
and white are probably most in use. The Naudowessies paint their faces
red and black, “which they esteem as greatly ornamental.”[991] Among
the Guaycurûs, many men paint their bodies half red, half white.[992]
Throughout the Australian continent the natives stain themselves with
black, red, yellow, and white.[993] In Fiji, a small quantity of
vermilion is esteemed “as the greatest possible acquisition.”[994] In
New Zealand, the lips of both sexes are generally dyed blue; and in
Santa Cruz, or Egmont Island, Labillardière observed with surprise that
“there was very much diffused a fondness for white hair, which formed
a striking contrast to the colour of their skin.”[995]
“Not one great country can be named,” Mr. Darwin says, “from the
Polar regions in the north to New Zealand in the south, in which the
aborigines do not tattoo themselves.”[996] This practice was followed
by the ancient Assyrians, Britons, and Thracians,[997] as it is
followed by most savages still. And it may be said without exaggeration
that there is no visible part of the human body, except the eyeball,
that has escaped from being disfigured in this way. Some of the Easter
Islanders tattoo their foreheads in arched lines, as also the edges
of their ears, and the fleshy part of their lips.[998] The Abyssinian
women occasionally prick their gums entirely blue.[999] The Mundrucûs
tattooed even their eyelids.[1000] And, speaking of the tattooing of
the Sandwich Islanders, Freycinet remarks, “Aucune partie de leur
corps n’en est exempte; le nez, les oreilles, les paupières, le sommet
de la tête, le bout de la langue même dans quelques circonstances, en
sont surchargés non moins que la poitrine, le dos, les jambes, les bras
et la paume des mains.”[1001]
Often cicatrices are made in the skin, without any colouring matter
being used. Some tribes of Madagascar, for instance, are in the habit
of making marks, “which are intended to be ornamental,” by slight
incisions in the skin.[1002] The natives of Tana ornament themselves
by “cutting or burning some rude device of a leaf or a fish on the
breast, or upper part of the arm.”[1003] The Australians throughout the
continent scar their persons, as Mr. Curr assures us, only as a means
of decoration.[1004] And, in Fiji, “rows of wart-like spots are burned
along the arms and backs of the women, which they and their admirers
call ornamental.”[1005]
It has been suggested that many of these practices sprang from other
motives than a desire for decoration; and some are said to have had
a religious origin. The Australian Dieyerie, on being asked why he
knocks out two front teeth of the upper jaw of his children, can answer
only that, when they were created, the Muramura, a good spirit, thus
disfigured the first child, and, pleased at the sight, commanded
that the like should be done to every male or female child for ever
after.[1006] The Pelew Islanders believe that the perforation of the
septum of the nose is necessary for winning eternal bliss;[1007] and
the Nicaraguans say that their ancestors were instructed by the gods
to flatten the children’s heads.[1008] Again, in Fiji, it is supposed
that the custom of tattooing is in conformity with the appointment of
the god Dengei, and that its neglect is punished after death.[1009] A
similar idea prevails among the Kingsmill Islanders and Ainos;[1010]
and the Greenlanders formerly believed that the heads of those girls
who had not been deformed by long stitches made with a needle and black
thread between the eyes, on the forehead, and upon the chin, would be
turned into train tubs, and placed under the lamps in heaven, in the
land of souls.[1011] But such tales are not of much importance, as any
usage practised from time immemorial may easily be ascribed to the
command of a god.
Mr. Frazer suggests that several of the practices here mentioned are
fundamentally connected with totemism.[1012] In order to put himself
more fully under the protection of the totem, the clansman, according
to Mr. Frazer, is in the habit of assimilating himself to it by
the arrangement of his hair and the mutilation of his body; and of
representing the totem on his body by cicatrices, tattooing, or paint.
Thus the Buffalo clans of the Iowa and Omahas wear two locks of hair in
imitation of horns; whilst the Small Bird clan of the Omahas “leave
a little hair in front, over the forehead, for a bill, and some at the
back of the head, for the bird’s tail, with much over each ear for the
wings;” and the Turtle subclan cut off all the hair from a boy’s head,
except six locks which are arranged so as to imitate the legs, head,
and tail of a turtle. The practice of knocking out the upper front
teeth at puberty, Mr. Frazer continues, is, or was once, probably an
imitation of the totem; and so also the bone, reed, or stick which
some Australian tribes thrust through the nose. The Haidahs of Queen
Charlotte Islands have always, and the Iroquois commonly, their totems
tattooed on their persons, and certain other tribes have on their
bodies tattooed figures of animals, which Mr. Frazer thinks likely to
be totem marks. According to one authority, the raised cicatrices of
the Australians are sometimes arranged in patterns representing the
totem; and, among a few peoples, the totem is painted on the person of
the clansman.[1013]
Mr. Frazer’s theory is supported by exceedingly few facts whereas
there is an enormous mass of cases in which we have no right whatever
to infer a connection with totemism. It is, indeed, impossible to
see how most of the practices considered in this chapter could have
originated in this way. How is it possible to explain the knocking
out of the upper front teeth or the thrusting of a stick through the
nose as imitations of totem animals? And how are we to connect the
mutilations of the ears and other parts of the body, and the various
modes of self-decoration, with totemism? Since all such practices are
universally considered to improve the appearance, and, as will be shown
presently, take place at the same period of life, we may justly infer
that the cause to which they owe their origin is fundamentally one and
the same. As for tattooing, Professor Gerland assumes that the tattooed
marks were originally figures of totem animals, though they are no
longer so;[1014] but an assumption of that kind is not permissible
in a scientific investigation. And even in those rare cases, where
a connection between tattooing and totemism undoubtedly exists, we
cannot be sure whether this connection is not secondary. At present
tattooing is everywhere regarded exclusively, or almost exclusively, as
a means of decoration, and Cook states expressly that, in the South
Sea Islands, at the time of their discovery, it was in no way connected
with religion.[1015] Nor can I agree with Mr. Spencer that tattooing
and other kinds of mutilation were practised originally as a means
of expressing subordination to a dead ruler or a god.[1016] Equally
without evidence is Mr. Colquhoun’s opinion that the custom originated
in the wish either to make a man more fearful in battle, or to render
the body invulnerable by the tattooing of charms on it.[1017]
It is true, no doubt, that this practice subserves various ends. Mr.
Keyser speaks of a chief in New Guinea who had sixty-three blue tattoo
lines on his chest, which represented the number of enemies he had
slain.[1018] Moreover, the tattooed marks make it possible for savages
to distinguish their own clansmen from their enemies;[1019] though
I cannot think, with Chenier,[1020] that this was their original
object. Again, many ornaments are really nothing but trophy-badges,
and many things used for ornaments were at first substitutes for
trophies, having some resemblance to them;[1021] whilst others are
carried as signs of opulence.[1022] I do not deny, either, that men
may sometimes paint their bodies in order to inspire their enemies
with fear in battle, or that the use of red ochre and fat is good as
a defence against changes of weather, flies, and mosquitoes.[1023]
Nevertheless, it seems to be beyond doubt that men and women began to
ornament, mutilate, paint, and tattoo themselves chiefly in order to
make themselves attractive to the opposite sex,—that they might court
successfully, or be courted.
It is noteworthy that in all parts of the world the desire for
self-decoration is strongest at the beginning of the age of puberty,
all the above-named customs being practised most zealously at that
period of life. Concerning the Dacotahs, Mr. Prescott states that both
sexes adorn themselves at their courtships to make themselves more
attractive, and that “the young only are addicted to dress.”[1024] The
Oráon, according to Colonel Dalton, is likewise particular about his
personal appearance “only so long as he is unmarried.”[1025] Among the
Let-htas in Indo-China, it is the unmarried youths that are profusely
bedecked with red and white bead necklaces, wild boars’ tusks, brass
armlets, and a broad band of black braid below the knee.[1026] Speaking
of the Encounter Bay tribe of South Australia, the Rev. A. Meyer says
that “the plucking out of the beard and anointing with grease and
ochre (which belong to the initiatory ceremony) the men may continue
if they please till about forty years of age, for they consider it
ornamental, and fancy that it makes them look younger, and gives
them an importance in the eyes of the women.”[1027] In Fiji, says
Mr. Anderson, the men, “who like to attract the attention of the
opposite sex, don their best plumage;”[1028] and when Mr. Bulmer once
asked an Australian native why he wore his adornments, the native
answered “that he wore them in order to look well, and to make himself
agreeable to the women.”[1029]
It is when boys or girls approach puberty that, in the north-west
part of North America, they have their lower lip perforated for the
labret;[1030] that, among the American Eskimo, the African Masarwas,
and certain Australian natives, the cartilage between the nostrils is
pierced for the reception of a piece of bone, wood, or shell.[1031] At
the same age, among the Chibchas and the aborigines of the Californian
Peninsula, holes were made in the ears.[1032] It is at this period of
life, also, that the Chaymas of New Andalusia, the Pelew Islanders, and
the natives of New Britain have their teeth blackened, as black teeth,
both for men and women, are considered an indispensable condition of
beauty;[1033] and that, in several parts of Africa and Australia, they
knock out some teeth, knowing that otherwise they would run the risk
of being refused on account of ugliness.[1034] Among the Nicobarese,
among whom the men blacken their teeth from the period of puberty,
this disfigurement is indeed so favourably regarded by the fair sex
that a woman “would scorn to accept the addresses of one possessing
white teeth, like a dog or pig.”[1035] Mr. Crawfurd tells us that,
in the Malay Archipelago, the practice of filing and blackening the
teeth, already referred to, is a necessary prelude to marriage, the
common way of expressing the fact that a girl has arrived at puberty
being that “she has had her teeth filed.”[1036] And, with reference
to some of the natives of the Congo countries, Tuckey states that the
two upper front teeth are filed by the men, so as to make a large
opening, and scars are raised on the skin, both being intended by the
men as ornamental, and “principally done with the idea of rendering
themselves agreeable to the women.”[1037]
The important part played by the hair of the head as a stimulant of
sexual passion appears in a curious way from Mr. Sibree’s account of
King Radàma’s attempt to introduce European customs among the Hovas
of Madagascar. As soon as he had adopted the military tactics of the
English, he ordered that all his officers and soldiers should have
their hair cut; but this command produced so great a disturbance among
the women of the capital that they assembled in great numbers to
protest against the king’s order, and could not be quieted till they
were surrounded by troops and their leaders cruelly speared.[1038]
Everywhere it is the young and unmarried people who are most anxious
to dress their hair.[1039] Thus, among the Bunjogees, a Chittagong
Hill tribe, the young men “stuff a large ball of black cotton into
their topknot to make it look bigger.”[1040] In the Tenimber Group,
the lads decorate their long locks with leaves, flowers, and feathers,
as Riedel says, “only in order to please the women.”[1041] Among the
Tacullies, “the elderly people neglect to ornament their heads, in
the same manner as they do the rest of their persons, and generally
wear their hair short. But the younger people of both sexes, who feel
more solicitous to make themselves agreeable to each other, wash and
paint their faces and let their hair grow long.”[1042] And in the
Admiralty Islands, according to Professor Moseley, “only the young men
of apparently from eighteen to thirty, or so, wear the hair long and
combed out into a mop or bush,” whilst the boys or older men wear the
hair short.[1043]
Passing to the practice of painting the body: Dr. Sparrman tells us
that the two Hottentots whom he had in his service, when they expected
to meet some girls of their own nation, painted their noses, cheeks,
and the middle of the forehead with soot.[1044] On Flinders Island,
whither the remnant of the Tasmanians were removed, a rebellion nearly
burst out when orders were once issued forbidding the use of ochre
and grease, for “the young men feared the loss of favour in the eyes
of their countrywomen.”[1045] Among the Guarayos, the suitor, when
courting, keeps for some days close to the cabin of the mistress of
his heart, he being painted from head to foot, and armed with his
battle club.[1046] In certain parts of Australia, when a boy arrives
at the age of puberty, his hair, body, and limbs are profusely smeared
with red ochre and fat, this being one of the rites by which he is
initiated into the privileges of manhood.[1047] Again, with reference
to the Ahts, Mr. Sproat remarks that “some of the young men streak
their faces with red, but grown-up men seldom now use paint, unless
on particular occasions.” The women cease to use it about the age of
twenty-five.[1048]
The girls are generally painted when they arrive at the epoch of the
first menstruation.[1049] Thus, among certain Equatorial Africans,
they are rubbed with black, red, and white paints in the course of a
ceremony which, according to Mr. Reade, is essentially of a Phallic
nature.[1050] If a young maiden of the Tapoyers of Brazil “be
marriageable, and yet not courted by any, the mother paints her with
some red colour about the eyes.”[1051]
The act of tattooing, also, generally takes place at the age of
puberty, in the case of men as well as in that of women. It is about
that period that, in the underlip of all freeborn female Thlinkets,
“a slit is made parallel with the mouth, and about half an inch
below it;”[1052] that, among the Eskimo, pigments of various dye are
pricked on the chin, at the angles of the mouth, and across the face
over the cheek-bones;[1053] that, in some South American tribes,
incisions are made from the shoulders of the girl to her waist, “when
she is regarded as a delicious morsel for the arms of an ardent
lover.”[1054] At the same age, either or both sexes are subject to
tattooing among the Guarayos,[1055] Abipones,[1056] Baris,[1057]
Gonds,[1058] Dyaks,[1059] Negritos of the Philippines,[1060] South
Sea Islanders,[1061] Australians,[1062] &c. Among the Nagas of Upper
Assam, it was the custom “to allow matrimony to those only who made
themselves as hideous as possible by having their faces elaborately
tattooed.”[1063] The Makalaka girls, before they could marry, had to
submit to horrible torture, about four thousand stitches being made
in the skin of the chest and stomach, and a black fluid being rubbed
into the wounds.[1064] In New Zealand, according to the Rev. R. Taylor,
it was the great ambition of the young to have fine tattooed faces,
“both to render themselves attractive to the ladies, and conspicuous
in war.”[1065] In Samoa, until a young man was tattooed, he could not
think of marriage, but as soon as this was done, he considered himself
entitled to all the privileges of mature years.[1066] “When it is
all over,” says Mr. Pritchard, “and the youths thoroughly healed, a
grand dance is got up on the first available pretext to display the
tattooing, when the admiration of the fair sex is unsparingly bestowed.
And this is the great reward, long and anxiously looked forward to by
the youths as they smart under the hands of the ‘matai.’”[1067] Often,
however, the operation is accomplished not at once, but at different
times, that the patients may be able to bear the inflammation and pain
at every stage of the process; and not unfrequently it begins when the
girls are quite young children, being constantly added to until they
marry.[1068]
The real object of the custom is shown also by several other
statements. When Mertens asked the natives of Lukunor what was the
meaning of tattooing, one of them answered, “It has the same object
as your clothes, that is, to please the women.”[1069] Bancroft
remarks that young Kadiak wives “secure the affectionate admiration
of their husbands by tattooing the breast and adorning the face with
black lines.”[1070] The raised cuts of the Australians, according to
Mr. Palmer, are “merely ornamental and convey no idea of tribal
connection,” the women marking themselves in this manner “to add to
their looks, and to make themselves attractive.”[1071] Barrington
assures us that, among the natives of Botany Bay, “scars are, by
both sexes, deemed highly ornamental;”[1072] and, in the Eucla tribe,
according to Mr. W. Williams, both sexes make horizontal scars on
the chest and vertical scars on the upper arm “for the purpose of
ornamentation.”[1073] In Ponapé, as we are informed by von Kubary
and Finsch, tattooing is practised only as a means of improving the
appearance;[1074] and, in New Guinea, the women tattoo themselves “to
please the men.”[1075] Bock remarks, “As the Dyak women are tattooed
to please their lovers, so the Laos men undergo the ordeal for the sake
of the women.”[1076]
In Samoa, great licentiousness was connected with the custom of
tattooing; and, in Tahiti, the chiefs prohibited it altogether on
account of the obscene practices by which it was invariably accompanied
in that island.[1077] The Tahitians have also a very characteristic
tale of its origin. Taaroa, their god, and Apouvaru had a daughter, who
was called Hinaeree-remonoi. “As she grew up, in order to preserve
her chastity, she was made ‘pahio,’ or kept in a kind of enclosure,
and constantly attended by her mother. Intent on her seduction, the
brothers invented tattooing, and marked each other with the figure
called Taomaro. Thus ornamented, they appeared before their sister,
who admired the figures, and, in order to be tattooed herself, eluding
the care of her mother, broke the enclosure that had been erected for
her preservation, was tattooed, and became also the victim to the
designs of her brothers. Tattooing thus originated among the gods,
and was first practised by the children of Taaroa, their principal
deity. In imitation of their example, and for the accomplishment of the
same purposes, it was practised among men.... The two sons of Taaroa
and Apouvaru were the gods of tattooing. Their images were kept in
the temples of those who practised the art professionally, and every
application of their skill was preceded by a prayer addressed to them,
that the operation might not occasion death, that the wounds might soon
heal, that the figures might be handsome, attract admirers, and answer
the ends of wickedness designed.”[1078]
This legend is especially instructive because it shows how a custom
which had originally nothing to do with religion may in time take a
more or less religious character. Professor Wundt holds that, in most
cases, religious ideas are the original sources from which customs
flow;[1079] but it is far more probable that the connection between
religion and custom is often secondary. Nearly every practice which for
some reason or other has come into fashion and taken root among the
people, is readily supposed to have a divine sanction; and this is one
of the reasons why conservatism as to religion is so often accompanied
by conservatism in other matters. This must especially be the case
among savage men who identify their ancestors with their gods, and
consequently look upon ancient customs as divine institutions.
It is, indeed, difficult to believe that the motives which gave rise to
tattooing can have been different from those which led to the painting
of the body. The chief distinction between the two is, that the
tattooed marks are indelible, being neither extinguished nor rendered
fainter by lapse of time. Hence the prevalence of tattooing may be
explained by a general desire among savages to make the decorations of
the body permanent. Sometimes, too, the custom seems to be kept up as a
test of courage.[1080]
Even to European tastes the incised lines and figures have in many
cases a certain beauty. Thus, speaking of the Gambier Islanders,
Beechey assures us that the tattooing undoubtedly improves their
appearance; and Yate remarks that “nothing can exceed the beautiful
regularity with which the faces and thighs of the New Zealanders are
tattooed,” the volutes being perfect specimens, and the regularity
mechanically correct.[1081] Forster observed that, among the natives
of Waitahoo (Marquesas Islands), the punctures were disposed with the
utmost care, so that the marks on each leg, arm, and cheek and on the
corresponding muscles were exactly similar.[1082] Among the Tahitians,
according to Darwin, the ornaments follow the curvature of the body so
gracefully, that they have a very pleasing and elegant effect; and,
among the Easter Islanders, “all the lines were drawn with much taste,
and carried in the direction of the muscle.”[1083] The fact that the
tattooed lines follow closely the natural forms of the body in order to
render them more conspicuous, has been observed in the case of other
peoples also,[1084] and it would be ridiculous to regard such marks as
transformed images of gods.
The facts stated seem to show that the object of tattooing,[1085]
as well as of other kinds of self-decoration or mutilation, was to
stimulate the sexual desire of the opposite sex. To us it appears
strange that such repugnant practices as that of perforating the septum
of the nose or removing teeth should owe their origin to coquetry, but
we must not judge of the taste of savages by our own. In this case the
desire for self-decoration is to a great extent identical with the wish
to attract attention, to excite by means of the charm of novelty.[1086]
At all stages of civilization people like a slight variety, but
deviations from what they are accustomed to see must not be too great,
nor of such a kind as to provoke a disagreeable association of ideas.
In Cochin China, where the women blacken their teeth, a man said of
the wife of the English Ambassador contemptuously that “she had
white teeth like a dog;”[1087] and the Abipones in South America, who
carefully plucked out all the hairs with which our eyes are naturally
protected, despised the Europeans for their thick eyebrows, and called
them brothers to the ostriches, who have very thick brows.[1088] We, on
the other hand, would dislike to see a woman with a crystal or a piece
of wood in her lip.
It is a common notion that women are by nature vainer and more addicted
to dressing and decorating themselves than men. This certainly does
not hold good for savage and barbarous peoples in general. It is true
that, among many of them, tattooing is exclusively or predominantly
limited to the women, and that the men sometimes wear fewer ornaments.
But several travellers, as for instance Dr. Schweinfurth[1089] and
Dr. Barth,[1090] who have a vast experience of African races, agree
that the reverse is usually the case. The women of all the tribes of
Indians Richardson saw on his route through the northern parts of the
fur countries, adorned their persons less than the men of the same
tribes; and the like is said of the Comanches.[1091] Among the Uaupés,
Mr. Wallace observed “that the men and boys appropriated all the
ornaments.”[1092] The native women of Orangerie Bay of New Guinea,
except that they are tattooed, adorn themselves less than the men,
and none of them paint their faces and bodies, as the men frequently
do.[1093] In the Admiralty Islands, young girls “sometimes have a
necklace or two on, but they never are decorated to the extent to which
the men are,” it being evidently not considered good taste for them to
adorn their persons.[1094] Among the aborigines of the New Hebrides,
New Hanover, New Ireland,[1095] and Australia,[1096] adornments are
almost entirely monopolised by the men, the “fair sex” being content
with their natural charms.
It has been suggested that the plainer appearance of the women
depends upon their oppressed and despised position, as well as upon
the selfishness of the men.[1097] But it is doubtful whether this is
the true explanation. Savage ornaments, generally speaking, are not
costly things, and even where the state of women is most degraded
a woman may, if she pleases, paint her body with red ochre or put
a piece of wood through her lip or a feather through the cartilage
of the nose. In Eastern Central Africa, for instance, the women are
more decorated than the men, although they hold an inferior position,
being viewed as beasts of burden, and doing all the harder work. “A
woman,” says Mr. Macdonald, “always kneels when she has occasion to
talk to a man.”[1098] Almost the same is said of the female Indians of
Guiana;[1099] whereas in the Yule Island, on the Coast of New Guinea,
and in New Hanover, the women are less given to personal adornment
than the men, although they are held in respect, have influence in
their families, and exercise, in some villages, much authority, or even
supremacy.[1100]
Of all the various kinds of self-ornamentation tattooing is the most
laborious. Yet, in Melanesia, it is chiefly women that are tattooed,
though they are treated as slaves; whilst in Polynesia, where the
_status_ of women is comparatively good, this practice is mainly
confined to the men.[1101] In Fiji, where women were fearfully
oppressed, genuine tattooing was found on them only.[1102]
It is expressly stated of the women of several savage peoples that
they are less desirous of self-decoration than the men. Speaking of
the Aleuts on the Fur-Seal Islands of Alaska, Mr. Elliott says, “In
these lower races there is much more vanity displayed by the masculine
element than the feminine, according to my observation; in other words,
I have noticed a greater desire among the young men than among the
young women of savage and semi-civilised people to be gaily dressed,
and to look fine.”[1103] Among the Gambier Islanders, according to
Beechey, the women “have no ornaments of any kind, and appeared quite
indifferent to the beads and trinkets which were offered them.”[1104]
In Tierra del Fuego, Lieutenant Bove found the men more desirous of
ornaments than the women; and Proyart made a similar observation with
regard to the people of Loango.[1105] Again, touching the Crees,
Mackenzie remarks that “the women, though by no means inattentive to
the decoration of their own persons, appear to have a still greater
degree of pride attending to the appearance of the men, whose faces are
painted with more care than those of the women.”[1106]
It is difficult, then, to believe that the inferior position of the
weaker sex accounts for the comparative scarcity of female ornaments.
The fact may to some extent be explained by Mr. Spencer’s suggestion,
that ornaments have partly originated from trophy-badges, and Professor
Wundt’s, that they indicate rank and fortune: but these explanations
apply only to a few cases. If it be true that man began to decorate
himself chiefly in order to stimulate the passions of the opposite sex,
we may conclude that the vanity of the men is, in the first place,
due to the likings of the women, and that the plainer appearance
of the women is a consequence of the men’s greater indifference to
their ornaments. Mr. Darwin has shown that, among our domesticated
quadrupeds, individual antipathies and preferences are exhibited much
more commonly by the female than by the male,[1107] and the same, as
we shall see, is in some measure the case with man also. It is the
women rather than the men that have to be courted. Thus, with reference
to the natives of Gippsland, Mr. Brough Smyth, on the authority of
Mr. Bulmer, states, “The ornaments worn by the females were not much
regarded by the men. The woman did little to improve her appearance;
... if her physical aspect was such as to attract admirers she was
content.”[1108]
It should also be noted that among savages it is, as a rule, the man
only that runs the risk of being obliged to lead a single life. Hence
it is obvious that to the best of his ability he must endeavour to
be taken into favour by making himself as attractive as possible. In
civilized Europe, on the other hand, the opposite occurs. Here it is
the woman that has the greatest difficulty in getting married—and she
is also the vainer of the two.
The hypothesis as to the origin of the customs in question, set forth
in this chapter, presupposes of course that savage girls enjoy great
liberty in the choice of a mate. It will be seen subsequently that
there can be no doubt as to the accuracy of that presumption.
At a higher stage of civilization the tendency of mankind is to give
up savage ornaments, and no longer to regard mutilations of the body
as improving the appearance. In Persia, women still wear the nose-ring
through one side of the nostril,[1109] but to a European such a custom
would be extremely displeasing. In the Western world the ear-ring is
the last vanishing relic of savage taste.
* * * * *
From the naked body the ornaments were transferred to clothing, partly
because climate made clothes necessary, partly for another reason. “A
savage begins,” Professor Moseley says, “by painting or tattooing
himself for ornament. Then he adopts a movable appendage, which he
hangs on his body, and on which he puts the ornamentation which he
formerly marked more or less indelibly on his skin. In this way he is
able to gratify _his taste for change_.”[1110]
It is usually said that man began to cover his body for two reasons:
first, to protect himself from frost and damp; secondly, on account of
a feeling of shame.
There can be no doubt that, when man emigrated from his warm native
home and settled down in less hospitable zones, it became necessary for
him to screen himself from the influences of a raw climate. The Eskimo
wrap themselves up in furs, and the wretched natives of Tierra del
Fuego throw a piece of sealskin over one of their shoulders, “on the
side from which the wind blows.”[1111]
The second motive, too, seems acceptable at first sight. The savage men
of the tropics, though otherwise entirely naked, commonly wear a scanty
dress which Europeans might readily suppose to be used for the sake
of decency. Nothing of the sort is found in any other animal species;
hence Professor Wundt concludes that shame is “a feeling specifically
peculiar to man.”[1112]
But why should man blush to expose one part of the body more than
another? This is no matter of course, but a problem to be solved.
The feeling in question cannot be regarded as originally innate in
mankind. There are many peoples, who, though devoid of any kind of
dress, show no trace of shame, and others who, when they dress
themselves, pay not the least regard to what we consider the first
requirements of decency.
Thus, in the northern parts of the Californian Peninsula, both men and
women have been found in a state of nudity.[1113] Among the Miwok,
according to their own confession, persons of both sexes and of all
ages were formerly absolutely naked.[1114] Lyman found the same to be
the case with the Paiuches in northern Colorado, Columbus with the
aborigines of Hispaniola, Pizarro with the Indians of Coca, v. Humboldt
with the Chaymas, Wallace with the Purupurús, v. Schütz-Holzhausen with
the Catamixis, Prince Maximilian with the Puris at St. Fidelis, Azara
with certain Indians in the neighbourhood of the river Paraguay.[1115]
In some Indian tribes the men alone go naked,[1116] in others the
women.[1117] Again, in North America, Mackenzie met a troop of
natives, of whom the men wore many ornaments and much clothing, but
had, apparently, not the slightest notion of bashfulness. And of the
Fuegians we are told that, although they have the shoulder or the back
protected by a sealskin, the rest of the body is perfectly naked.[1118]
The men of most Australian tribes, and in many cases the women, wear
no clothes except in cold weather, when they throw a kangaroo skin
about their shoulders. “They are as innocent of shame,” says Mr.
Palmer, “as the animals of the forests.”[1119] In Tasmania, too,
the aborigines were usually naked, or, when they covered themselves,
they showed that the idea of decency had not occurred to them.[1120]
The same is said of some tribes in Borneo[1121] and Sumatra,[1122]
the people of Jarai, bordering upon the empire of Siam,[1123] the
inhabitants of the Louisiade Archipelago,[1124] Solomon Islands,[1125]
Penrhyn Island, and some other islands of the South Sea;[1126] whilst,
in others, only the men generally go naked.[1127] The Papuans of the
south-west coast of New Guinea “glory in their nudeness, and consider
clothing to be fit only for women.”[1128] In one part of Timor, on the
other hand,[1129] as also in a tribe of the Andamanese,[1130] it is the
women that are devoid of any kind of covering.
Passing to Africa, we meet with instances of the same kind. Concerning
the Wa-taveita of the eastern equatorial region, Mr. Johnston remarks
that “both sexes have little notion or conception of decency, the men
especially seeming to be unconscious of any impropriety in nakedness.
What clothing they have is worn as an adornment or for warmth at night
and early morning.”[1131] The Wa-chaga and Mashukulumbe generally go
about naked,[1132] and so do the Bushmans, except when they use a
piece of skin barely sufficient to cover the back.[1133] Again, among
the Bubis of Fernando Po[1134] and the natives of Balonda[1135] and
Loango,[1136] the women have no sort of covering, whilst, among the
Negroes of the Egyptian Soudan,[1137] the Baris,[1138] Shilluk,[1139]
Dinka,[1140] Watuta,[1141] and Masai,[1142] this is the case with
the men only. Apud Masaios membrum virile celare turpe existimatur,
honestum expromere, atque etiam ostentare.[1143] In Lancerote also,
according to Bontier and Le Verrier, the men used no covering; and,
in Teneriffe, “the inhabitants went naked, except some few who wore
goatskins.”[1144]
It might perhaps be supposed that the feeling of modesty, though
not originally innate, appeared later on, at a certain stage of
civilization, either spontaneously or from some unknown cause. This
seems, indeed, to be the opinion of Professor Wundt, who says that man
began to cover himself from decency.[1145] But let us see what covering
savages often use.
A fashionable young Wintun woman, says Mr. Powers, wears a girdle of
deer-skin, the lower edge of which is slit into a long fringe with a
polished pine-nut at the end of each strand, while the upper border
and other portions are studded with brilliant bits of shell.[1146] The
Botocudos use a covering which has little resemblance to a garment; and
their neighbours, the Patachos and Machacaris, make this trifle still
smaller, a thread being sufficient clothing, according to their notion
of modesty.[1147] When a Carib girl attained the age of ten or twelve
years, she assumed around the waist “a piece of cotton cloth worked
and embroidered with minute grains of shells of different colours,
decorated in the lower part with fringe.”[1148] Similar ornamental
skirts are in use among the Macusís, Arawaks, and other South American
peoples.[1149] Among the Guaycurûs, the men had no covering, except
a narrow bandage round the loins, which was of coloured cotton, and
often adorned with glass beads.[1150] The Australians of Port Essington
occasionally wear girdles of finely twisted human hair, and the men
sometimes add a tassel of the hair of the opossum or flying squirrel,
suspended in front.[1151] The women on the Lower Murray manufacture
round mats of grass or reeds, which they fasten upon their backs,
“tying them in front, so that they almost resemble the shell of a
tortoise.”[1152] In Tahiti, a “maro,” composed of red and yellow
feathers, was considered a present of very great value, and the women
thought it “most ornamental” to enfold their loins with many windings
of cloth.[1153] Dr. Seemann states that, in Fiji, the girls “wore
nothing save a girdle of hibiscus-fibres, about six inches wide, dyed
black, red, yellow, white, or brown, and put on in such a coquettish
way, that one thought it must come off every moment.”[1154] A similar
practice is common in the islands of the Pacific, fringes made of
cocoa-nut fibre or of leaves slit into narrow strips or filaments of
bark, frequently dyed with gaudy colours, being, in most of these
islands, the only garment of the natives. This costume, with its
conspicuous tint and mobile fringe, has a most graceful appearance and
a very pretty effect, but is far from being in harmony with our ideas
of modesty. In the island of Yap, according to Cheyne, “the dress of
the males, if such it may be called, is slovenly in the extreme. They
wear the ‘maro’ next them, and, by way of improvement, a bunch of bark
fibres dyed red, over it.”[1155] In New Caledonia, in Forster’s time,
the natives only tied “a string round the middle and another round
the neck;”[1156] whilst, in some other groups, the costume of the men
consisted of nothing but a leaf,[1157] a mussel,[1158] or a shell.[1159]
In Sumatra, according to Marsden, young women, before they are of an
age to be clothed, have a plate of silver in the shape of a heart
hung in front by a chain of the same metal.[1160] Among the Garos of
Bengal, the women wear merely a very short piece of striped blue cotton
round the waist. The men have a very narrow waist-cloth tied behind
and then brought up between the legs; the portion hanging over in
front is sometimes adorned with brass boss-like ornaments, and white
long-shaped beads.[1161] In Lukungu, the entire covering of most of the
women consists of a narrow string with some white china beads threaded
on it.[1162] The Hottentot women, according to Barrow, bestowed their
largest and most splendid ornaments upon the little apron, about
seven or eight inches wide, that hung from the waist. “Great pains,”
he says, “seem to be taken by the women to attract notice towards
this part of their persons. Large metal buttons, shells of the cypræa
genus, with the apertures outwards, or anything that makes a great
show, are fastened to the borders of this apron.”[1163] The Bushman
women of South Africa, met with by the same traveller, had as their
only covering a belt of springbok’s skin, the part which was intended
to hang in front being cut into long threads. But the filaments, he
says, “were so small and thin that they answered no sort of use as
a covering; nor, indeed, did the females, either old or young, seem
to feel any sense of shame in appearing before us naked.”[1164] And
among the Negroes of Benin, according to Bosman, the girls had no other
garment than some strings of coral twisted about the middle.[1165]
It seems utterly improbable that such “garments” owe their origin to
the feeling of shame. Their ornamental character being obvious, there
can be but little doubt that men and women originally, at least in
many cases, covered themselves not from modesty, but on the contrary,
in order to make themselves more attractive—the men to women, and the
women to men.
In a state where all go perfectly nude, nakedness must appear quite
natural, for what we see day after day makes no special impression
upon us. But when one or another—whether man or woman—began to put on
a bright-coloured fringe, some gaudy feathers, a string with beads, a
bundle of leaves, a piece of cloth, or a dazzling shell, this could not
of course escape the attention of the others; and the scanty covering
was found to act as the most powerful attainable sexual stimulus.[1166]
Hence the popularity of such garments in the savage world.
Several travellers have noticed that there is nothing indecent in
absolute nakedness when the eyes have got accustomed to it. “Where all
men go naked, as for instance in New Holland,” says Forster, “custom
familiarizes them to each other’s eyes, as much as if they went wholly
muffled up in garments.”[1167] Speaking of a Port Jackson woman who was
entirely uncovered, Captain Hunter remarks, “There is such an air of
innocence about her that clothing scarcely appears necessary.”[1168]
With reference to the Uupés, Mr. Wallace records his opinion that
“there is far more immodesty in the transparent and flesh-coloured
garments of our stage-dancers, than in the perfect nudity of these
daughters of the forest.”[1169] In his ‘Africa Unveiled’ Mr. Rowley
remarks, “When the sight becomes accustomed to the absence of raiment,
your sense of propriety is far less offended than in England, where
ample clothing is made the vehicle for asserting defiance, if not of
actual law, yet of the wishes and feelings of the more virtuous part
of the community.”[1170] And, speaking of the Fuegians, Captain Snow
says, “More harm, I think, is done by false modesty,—by covering and
_partly_ clothing, than by the truth in nature always appearing as it
is. Intermingling with savages of wild lands who do not clothe, gives
one, I believe, less impure and sensual feelings than the merely mixing
with society of a higher kind.”[1171]
The same view is taken by Dr. Zimmermann,[1172] and by Mr. Reade, who,
with reference to the natives of Central Africa, remarks that there
is nothing voluptuous in the excessive _déshabillé_ of an equatorial
girl, nothing being so moral and so unlikely to excite the passions
as nakedness.[1173] Speaking of the Wa-chaga, Mr. Johnston observes,
“We should be apt to call, from our point of view, their nakedness
and almost unconsciousness of shame indelicate, but it is rather, when
one gets used to it, a pleasing survival of the old innocent days when
prurient thoughts were absent from the mind of man.”[1174] As a careful
observer remarks,[1175] true modesty lies in the entire absence of
thought upon the subject. Among medical students and artists the nude
causes no extraordinary emotion; indeed, Flaxman asserted that the
students in entering the academy seem to hang up their passions along
with their hats.
On the other hand, Forster says of the natives of Mallicollo, that “it
is uncertain whether the scanty dress of their women owes its origin to
a sense of shame, or to an artful endeavour to please;” and of the men
of Tana, that “round their middle they tie a string, and below that
they employ the leaves of a plant like ginger, for the same purpose
and in the same manner as the natives of Mallicollo. Boys, as soon as
they attain the age of six years, are provided with these leaves; which
seems to confirm what I have observed in regard to the Mallicollese,
_viz._, that they do not employ this covering from motives of decency.
Indeed, it had so much the contrary appearance, that in the person
of every native of Tana or Mallicollo, we thought we beheld a living
representation of that terrible divinity who protected the orchard
and gardens of the ancients.”[1176] Speaking of the very simple dress
worn by the male Hottentot, Barrow says, “If the real intent of it
was the promotion of decency, it should seem that he has widely missed
his aim, as it is certainly one of the most immodest objects, in such
a situation as he places it, that could have been contrived.”[1177]
Among the Khyoungtha, there is a native tradition worth mentioning in
this connection. “A certain queen,” Captain Lewin tells us, “noticed
with regret that the men of the nation were losing their love for
the society of the women, and were resorting to vile and abominable
practices, from which the worst possible results might be expected.
She therefore prevailed upon her husband to promulgate a rigorous
order, prescribing the form of petticoat to be worn by all women in
future, and directing that the male should be tattooed, in order that,
by thus disfiguring the males, and adding _piquancy to the beauty of
the women_, the former might once more return to the feet of their
wives.”[1178]
Moreover, we know that some tribes who go perfectly naked are ashamed
to cover themselves, looking upon a garment as something indecent. The
pious father Gumilla was greatly astonished to find that the Indians on
the Orinoco did not blush at their nakedness. “Si les Missionnaires”
he says, “qui ignorent leurs coutumes s’avisent de distribuer des
mouchoirs, surtout aux femmes, pour qu’elles puissent se couvrir,
elles les jettent dans la rivière, où elles vont les cacher, pour
ne point être obligées de s’en servir; et lors qu’on leur dit de se
couvrir, elles répondent: ... ‘Nous ne couvrons point, _parce que cela
nous cause de la honte_.’”[1179] That this is no “traveller’s tale”
merely, appears from the following statement made by v. Humboldt with
reference to the New Andalusian Chaymas, who, like most savage peoples
dwelling in regions excessively hot, have an insuperable aversion to
clothing:—“Under the torrid zone,” he asserts, “ ... the natives are
ashamed, as they say, to be clothed; and flee to the woods when they
are too soon compelled to give up their nakedness.”[1180] Again, in an
Indian hut at Mucúra in Brazil, Mr. Wallace found the women entirely
without covering, and apparently quite unconscious of the fact. One of
them, however, possessed a “saía,” or petticoat, which she sometimes
put on, and seemed then, as Mr. Wallace says, “almost as much ashamed
of herself as civilized people would be if they took theirs off.”[1181]
There are several instances of peoples who, although they generally
go perfectly naked, sometimes use a covering. This they always do
under circumstances which plainly indicate that the covering is worn
simply as a means of attraction. Thus Lohmann tells us that, among
the Saliras, only harlots clothe themselves; and they do so in order
to excite through the unknown.[1182] In many heathen tribes in the
interior of Africa, according to Barth, the married women are entirely
nude, whilst the young marriageable girls cover their nakedness,—a
practice analogous to that of a married woman being deprived of her
ornaments and her hair.[1183] Mr. Mathews states that, in many parts
of Australia, “the females, and more especially young girls, wear a
fringe suspended from a belt round the waist.”[1184] Concerning the
natives of Botany Bay (New South Wales), Barrington remarks that “the
females at an early age wear a little apron, made from the skin of the
opossum or kangaroo, cut into slips, and hanging a few inches from
the waist; this they wear till they grow up and are taken by men, and
then they are left off.”[1185] Collins says the same of the girls at
Port Jackson;[1186] Mr. Palmer of some other Australians;[1187] and
Captain Snow of all those tribes among whom he had been for several
weeks.[1188] Again, on Moreton Island, according to Macgillivray, both
men and women went about altogether unclothed, but the female children
wore a small fringe in front. The same naturalist reports that, in
almost all the tribes of Torris Strait, the women wear a petticoat
of fine shreds of pandanus leaves, the ends worked into a waistband,
upon the construction of which much labour is expended; but it is only
“sometimes put on, especially by the young girls, and when about to
engage in dancing.” Under this, however, another covering is usually
worn.[1189] Among the Tupi tribes of Brazil, as soon as a girl became
marriageable “cotton cords were tied round her waist and round the
fleshy part of both arms; they denoted a state of maidenhood, and, if
any one but a maiden wore them, they were persuaded that the Anhanga
would fetch her away.... It cannot,” Mr. Southey adds, “have been
invented for the purpose of keeping the women chaste till marriage, for
these bands were broken without fear, and incontinence was not regarded
as an offence.”[1190] Among the Narrinyeri of Southern Australia, girls
wear a sort of apron of fringe until they bear their first child, and,
if they have no children, it is taken from them and burned by the
husband while they are asleep.[1191] In the Koombokkaburra tribe also,
the young women wear in front an apron of spun opossum fur, which is
generally given up after the birth of the first or second child.[1192]
There are several cases in which only the married women are clothed,
the unmarried going entirely naked.[1193] But such instances do not
conflict with the hypothesis suggested. Through long-continued use
covering loses its original character and becomes a sign of modesty,
whilst perfect nakedness becomes a stimulus. Usually, where nudity is
considered indecent, the garments of the girls of barbarous peoples
are restricted as much as possible, whilst those of the older women
are comparatively seemly. Thus, among the African Schulis, the married
women wear a narrow fringe of string in front, the unmarried wearing
nothing but bead ornaments.[1194] Among the natives of Tassai, New
Guinea, the former use a larger and thicker kind of petticoat of
pandanus leaf, divided into long grass-like shreds, reaching to the
knee; while that worn by the latter consists merely of single lengths
made fast to a string which ties round the waist.[1195] In Fiji,
the liku—a kind of band made from hibiscus-bark—is before marriage
worn very short, but after the birth of the first child is much
lengthened;[1196] and a similar practice occurs in other islands of the
South Sea.[1197]
The dances and festivals of many savage peoples are notoriously
accompanied by the most hideous licentiousness. Then the young men
and women endeavour to please each other in various ways, painting
themselves with brilliant colours, and decorating themselves with all
sorts of ornaments.[1198] On such occasions many tribes who go naked
in everyday life put on a scanty covering. Mr. Bonwick states that,
among the Tasmanians, a fur string or band of emu feathers was used
by some tribes, but only on great festivities; and the women wore
in the dance a covering of leaves or feathers, which, as among the
Australians on similar occasions, was removed directly afterwards.
Tasmanian dances were performed “with the avowed intention of exciting
the passions of the men, in whose presence one young woman had the
dance to herself.”[1199] Among the Australian Pegulloburras, who
generally go entirely naked, the women on festive occasions wear round
the middle small fringes.[1200] Speaking of the Brazilian Uaupés, Mr.
Wallace asserts that, “while dancing in their festivals, the women
wear a small ‘tanga,’ or apron, made of beads, prettily arranged. It
is only about six inches square, but is never worn at any other time,
and immediately the dance is over, it is taken off.” Besides, their
bodies are painted.[1201] The same was the case with the Tahitian
Areois—a sort of privileged libertines, leading a most licentious
life, and practising lewd dances and pantomimes,—who also sometimes,
on public occasions, put on a girdle of the yellow “ti” leaves,
which, in appearance, resembled the feather girdles of the Peruvians
or other South American tribes.[1202] As to the South African Basutos,
Mr. Casalis states that marriageable girls “frequently indulge in
grotesque dances, and at those times wear, as a sort of petticoat,
long bands composed of a series of rushes artistically strung
together.”[1203]
Very generally in the savage world, where climate does not put
obstacles in the way, both sexes go naked till they reach manhood,
covering being resorted to at the same period of life as other
ornaments.[1204] A South Australian boy, for instance, when fourteen
or sixteen years old, has to undergo the initiatory rites of manhood
as follows:—he is smeared all over with red ochre and grease, the hair
is plucked from his body, and all his friends gather green gum bushes,
which they place under his armpits and over the _os pubis_, after which
the boy is entitled to marry.[1205]
In conformity with other ornaments, what we consider decent covering
is said to be more common with savage men than with women. “If dress
were the result of a feeling of shame,” Professor Waitz observes, “we
should expect it to be more indispensable to woman than to man, which
is not the case.”[1206] In America, according to v. Humboldt—among the
Caribs, for instance—the men are often more decently clothed than the
women.[1207] The same is stated of the Nagas of Upper Assam;[1208] and
Barth, who had a vast experience of African savages, remarks, “I have
observed that many heathen tribes consider a covering, however poor and
scanty it may be, more necessary for man than woman.”[1209] Whether
this is the rule among savage peoples is doubtful. At any rate, the
egoism of the men cannot be blamed for the nakedness of the women. For
a savage Eve may pluck her clothes from the trees.
In support of the psychological presumption which underlies the
hypothesis here adduced, it may be added that some peoples are in the
habit of covering other parts of the body also, in order to “excite
through the unknown.” Thus, among the Tipperahs, the married women
wear nothing but a short petticoat, while the unmarried girls cover
the breast with a gaily-dyed cloth with fringed ends.[1210] Among the
Toungtha, the bosoms of women are left uncovered after the birth of the
first child, but the unmarried girls wear a narrow breast cloth.[1211]
The Chinese consider small feet to be the chief charm of their women,
and the girls have to undergo horrible torture while their feet are
being compressed to the smallest possible size. It might be supposed
that they would at least have the pleasure of fascinating the men by
a beauty so painfully acquired. But Dr. Stricker assures us that, in
China, a woman is considered immodest if she shows her artificially
distorted foot to a man. It is even improper to speak of a woman’s
foot, and in decent pictures this part is always concealed under the
dress.[1212] The women of Agades, according to Barth, generally go
unveiled, and if they sometimes cover their heads, this is done rather
from coquetry than from a feeling of shame.[1213] Mr. Man remarks
that a Hindu woman who attempts to hide her face, while she wears a
gauze which displays her whole form, in her simulated modesty always
appears as if attempting to convey an _arrière pensée_.[1214] Among
the Tacullies, it is customary for the girls to have over their eyes
a kind of veil or fringe, made either of strung beads or of narrow
strips of deer skin garnished with porcupine quills;[1215] and, among
the Chawanons, according to Moore, those young women who have any
pretensions to beauty, as soon as they become marriageable, “muffle
themselves up so that when they go abroad it is impossible to see
anything but their eyes. On these indications of beauty they are
eagerly sought in marriage.”[1216]
Finally, it is worth noting that this covering, or half covering, is
only one of the means by which savage men and women endeavor to direct
attention to that which civilized man conceals from a sense of shame.
Among the Admiralty Islanders, the only covering is a shell, which
shell is often tastefully engraved with the usual zigzag patterns,
whilst its dazzling whiteness forms a very striking contrast with the
blackness of the skin.[1217] On reaching puberty, the Tankhul Nagas
assume, instead of a shell, a horn or ivory ring from an eighth to
a quarter of an inch in breadth; being apparently of opinion that
exposure, if so attended, is not a matter to be ashamed of.[1218] Some
of the Brazilian Tupis, according to Castlenau, “mentulam inserunt in
annulum ligneum, unde appellantur Porrudos, _i.e._ mentulati;”[1219]
and, in several of the South Sea Islands, those parts of the body
which civilized people are most anxious to conceal, are decorated with
tattoos.[1220] De indigenis Tanembaris et Timorlaonis dum loquitur
Reidel, adulescentes et puellas dicit saepe consulto abradere pilos
pubis nulla alia mente, nisi ut illæ partes alteri sexui magis
conspicuæ fiant.[1221]
Above all the practice of circumcision should be noticed in this
connection, since, as I believe, it owes its origin to the same
cause. It is by no means a specifically Jewish custom, but is widely
spread over the earth. It is in use among all the Mohammedan peoples,
among most of the tribes inhabiting the African West Coast, among the
Kafirs, among nearly all the peoples of Eastern Africa, among the
Christian Abyssinians, Bogos, and Copts,[1222] throughout all the
various tribes inhabiting Madagascar,[1223] and, in the heart of the
Black Continent, among the Monbuttu and Akka. Moreover, it is practised
very commonly in Australia, in many islands of Melanesia,[1224] and
in Polynesia universally. It has also been met with in some parts of
America: in Yucatan,[1225] on the Orinoco,[1226] and among certain
tribes in the Rio Branco in Brazil.[1227] The Jews, Mohammedans,[1228]
Abyssinians,[1229] and some other peoples being excepted, it is always
performed when the boy attains manhood—_i.e._, at the same age as
that at which he is tattooed or painted, or begins to dress or adorn
himself. Indeed, through the operation of circumcision, the boy becomes
a man, and, where it is wanting, some other operation or deformation
of the body supplies its place.[1230] Thus, in Australia, some tribes
practise circumcision, others knock out teeth, when the youth becomes
virile.[1231] Where circumcision is in use it is generally considered
an indispensable preliminary to marriage, “uncircumcised” being a
bad word, and the women often refusing all intercourse with such a
man.[1232]
Several different explanations of this custom have been
suggested.[1233] Some authors believe that it is due to hygienic
motives. But circumcised and uncircumcised peoples live under the
same conditions in the same neighbourhood side by side, without any
difference in their physical condition.[1234] Mr. Sturt remarks that,
in Australia, “you would meet with a tribe with which that custom did
not prevail, between two with which it did.”[1235] Moreover, as Mr.
Spencer observes, while the usage does not exist among the most cleanly
races in the world, it is common among the most uncleanly.[1236] Among
the Damaras and Bechuanas, the boys are circumcised, though these
peoples are described as exceedingly filthy in their habits,[1237] and
so also among the people of Madagascar and the Malays, who are far from
being so cleanly as might be desired.[1238]
Again, according to Mr. Spencer, circumcision involves an offering to
the gods. He suggests that in the first instance vanquished enemies
were mutilated in order that a specially valuable trophy after a battle
might be presented to the king Then, “in a highly militant society
governed by a divinely-descended despot, ... we may expect that the
presentation to the king of these trophies taken from enslaved enemies,
will develop into the offering to the god of like trophies taken from
each generation of male citizens in acknowledgment of their slavery
to him.”[1239] This conclusion Mr. Spencer draws from the single fact
that, “among the Abyssinians, the trophy taken by circumcision from
an enemy’s dead body is presented by each warrior to his chief.” But
there is no evidence whatever that this curious custom is of common
occurrence. Circumcision is spread over a very large part of the
earth, and prevails even in societies which are not “governed by a
divinely-descended despot,” who could require all his subjects to bear
this badge of servitude. With regard to the Australian aborigines, many
tribes of whom practise circumcision, Mr. Curr says, “On the subject
of government (by which I mean the habitual exercise of authority, by
one or a few individuals, over a community or a body of persons) I have
made many inquiries and received written replies from the observers
of about a hundred tribes to the effect that none exists. Indeed, no
fact connected with our tribes seems better established.”[1240] Since
there is nothing to indicate that there ever was a different state
of things in Australia, how are we to reconcile these facts with the
interpretation offered by Mr. Spencer?
In the Book of Genesis the practice of circumcision is presented as
a religious rite, deriving its origin from a command of God. But
among most peoples it appears to have little, if any, religious
significance.[1241] Sometimes, indeed, it is performed by a priest
of the community, but, as Herr Andree justly remarks, this has no
necessary relation to the question, the priests generally being the
physicians of savage tribes.[1242] Moreover, as has already been
pointed out, almost every ancestral custom may by degrees take a
religious character. Thus, the ancient Peruvians’ habit of enlarging
the lobe of the ear, so as to enable it to carry ear-tubes of great
size, is supposed to have been connected with sun-worship; for Spanish
historians mention that elaborate religious ceremonies were held at
the Temple of the Sun at Cuzco, on the occasion of the boring of the
ears of young Peruvian nobles.[1243] But we should not be warranted in
inferring that this custom had originally anything to do with religion.
With regard to circumcision among the Jews, I agree with Herr Andree
that its religious character was almost certainly of a comparatively
late date.[1244]
The peoples among whom this practice prevails are themselves unable
to give any adequate account of its origin. With reference to the
circumcision of the Southern Africans, the Rev. H. H. Dugmore says
that they do not know how it began and that they have no traditionary
remembrances about it, except that it has prevailed as a national
custom from generation to generation. “Our forefathers did so, and
therefore we do the same,” is all that the present generation can say
about the matter.[1245]
That the practice of circumcision arose from the same desire as that
which led to other kinds of mutilation, is rendered more probable
by the fact that disfiguration is sometimes effected in quite a
different way. Novae Zealandiae incolas Cook narrat non solum se
non circumcidere, sed contra tam necessarium habere praeputium,
ut anteriorem eius partem redimire soleant ligamento, quo glandem
penis tegant.[1246] The same curious usage is met with in some other
Islands of the South Sea;[1247] and in Brazil, according to Dr. Karl
von den Steinen, among the Trumaí.[1248] Indigenae Portus Lincoln
pueros pubertatem ingressos mirum in modum secant: quarzi fragmento
penem ex ore secundum inferiorem partem usque ad scrotum incidunt
itaque totum longitudinis spatium detegunt.[1249] In defence of this
practice, says Mr. Schürmann, the natives had nothing to suggest
except that “it was observed by their forefathers, and must therefore
be upheld by themselves.”[1250] In Ponapé, boys are always subjected
to semi-castration, as Dr. Finsch remarks, in order to prevent the
possibility of orchitis, and, further, because the girls consider men
thus disfigured handsomer and more attractive than others. According to
Captain Wright, the same custom prevails in Niutabutabu, of the Tonga
Islands.[1251]
Among many peoples of Africa, and in certain tribes of the Malay
Archipelago and South America, the girls also undergo a sort of
circumcision, and this is looked upon as an indispensable preliminary
to marriage.[1252] Sunt autem gentes, quarum contrarius mos est,
ut clitoris et labia minora non exsecentur, verum extendantur, et
saepe longissime extendandur. Atque ista etiam deformatio insigne
pulchritudinis existimatur.[1253] De indigenis Ponapéis haec adnotat
Dr. Finsch; labia interna longius extenta et pendentia puellis et
uxoribus singulare sunt incitamentum, quae res eodem modo se habet apud
alias gentes, ut apud Hottentottas.[1254]
It certainly seems strange that such deformities should have been
originally intended to improve the appearance. But we must remember
the rough taste of savages, and the wish for variety so deeply rooted
in human nature. These practices evidently began at a time when man
went in a state of perfect nudity. The mutilations, as the eyes became
accustomed to them, gradually ceased to be interesting, and continued
to be inflicted merely through the force of habit, or from a religious
motive. A new stimulus was then invented, parts of the body which had
formerly been exposed being hidden by a scanty covering: as the Chinese
women at first had their feet pressed in order to excite admiration,
but afterwards began to conceal them from coquetry, or as the Tassai
beauties, though entirely naked otherwise, wear two or three petticoats
one over another.[1255]
* * * * *
How, then, are we to explain the connection which undoubtedly exists
between nakedness and the feeling of shame? The hypothesis here set
forth cannot be regarded as fully established until this question is
answered.
“The ideas of modesty,” Forster truly says, “are different in every
country, and change in different periods of time.”[1256] As v. Humboldt
remarks, “A woman in some parts of Asia is not permitted to show
the ends of her fingers; while an Indian of the Caribbean race is far
from considering herself naked, when she wears a ‘guajuco’ two inches
broad. Even this band is regarded as a less essential part of dress
than the pigment which covers the skin. To go out of the hut without
being painted with arnotta, is to transgress all the rules of Caribbean
decency.”[1257] In Tahiti, a person not properly tattooed would “be
as much reproached and shunned, as if with us he should go about the
streets naked;”[1258] and, in Tonga also, the men would think it very
indecent not to be tattooed.[1259]
M. Letourneau reports that, at Basra on the Euphrates, it was the duty
of a woman, if surprised when taking her bath, to turn her face; no
further concealment was considered necessary.[1260] The same habit
prevailed among the fellah women in Egypt;[1261] while, in Arabia,
according to Ebers, a woman acts even more indecorously in uncovering
the back of the head than in uncovering the face, though this also is
carefully hidden.[1262]
The Tubori women in Central Africa wear only a narrow strap, to which
is attached a twig hanging down behind; but they feel greatly ashamed
if the twig happens to fall off.[1263] A Chinese woman, as previously
stated, is not permitted by the law of modesty to show her feet; and
the Samoans considered it most disgraceful to expose the navel.[1264]
The savage tribes of Sumatra and Celebes have a like feeling about the
exposure of the knee, which is always carefully covered.[1265] Speaking
of the horrible mouth adornment worn by the women of Port des Français
(Alaska), which makes the lower part of the mouth jut out two or three
inches, La Pérouse remarks, “We sometimes prevailed on them to pull
off this ornament, to which they with difficulty agreed; they then
testified the same embarrassment, and made the same gestures, as a
woman in Europe who discovers her bosom.”[1266] Et Polynesios, quamquam
eum tenent morem, nullam ut aliam corporis partem nisi glandem penis
tegant, hanc tamen nudare vehementer pudet. Ita Lisiansky animadvertit
indigenas Nukahivae, qui praeputium peni abductum habent et extremam
eius partem lino constrictam, linum illud magni aestimare manifesto
apparere. “Accidit enim,” inquit, “ut frater regis, ubi navem meam
ascendit, linum amitteret, qua occasione mala quam maxime angebatur.
Qui cum constratum navis ingrederetur, illa re commotus partem non
redimitam manibus velavit.”[1267] Dr. Mosely asserts that the Admiralty
Islanders, who wear nothing but a shell, always cover themselves
hastily on removing the shell for barter, and evidently consider that
they are exposing themselves either indecently or irreligiously, if
they show themselves perfectly nude.[1268] The Kubus of Sumatra have a
tradition that they are descendants of the youngest of three brothers,
the first and second of whom were circumcised in the usual way, while
it was found that no instruments would circumcise the third. This so
_ashamed_ him that he betook himself to the woods.[1269]
Ideas of modesty, therefore, are altogether relative and conventional.
Peoples who are accustomed to tattoo themselves are ashamed to appear
untattooed; peoples whose women are in the habit of covering their
faces consider such a covering indispensable for every respectable
woman; peoples who for one reason or another have come to conceal the
navel, the knee, the bosom, or other parts, blush to reveal what is
hidden. It is not the feeling of shame that has provoked the covering,
but the covering that has provoked the feeling of shame.
This feeling, Dr. Bain remarks, “is resolved by a reference to the
dread of being condemned, or ill-thought of, by others.”[1270] Such
dread is undoubtedly one of the most powerful motives of human
action. Speaking of the Greenlanders, Cranz says that the mainspring
of all that they do is their fear of being blamed or mocked by other
men.[1271] Among savages, custom is a tyrant as potent as law has
ever been in civilized societies, every deviation from a usage which
has taken root among the people being laughed to scorn, or regarded
with disdain. The young ladies of Balonda, wholly unconscious of
their own deficiency, could not maintain their gravity at the sight
of the naked backs of Livingstone’s men. “Much to the annoyance of
my companions,” he says, “the young girls laughed outright whenever
their backs were turned to them, for the Balonda men wear a dress
consisting of skins of small animals, hanging before and behind from
a girdle round the loins.”[1272] By degrees a custom is associated
with religion, and then becomes even more powerful than before. Mr.
Williams tells us of a Fijian priest, who, like all his countrymen,
was satisfied with a “masi,” or scanty hip-cloth, but on hearing a
description of the naked inhabitants of New Caledonia and of their
idols, exclaimed, contemptuously, “Not have a ‘masi,’ and yet pretend
to have gods!”[1273] And, as Peschel remarks, “were a pious Mussulman
of Ferghana to be present at our balls, and see the bare shoulders of
our wives and daughters, and the semi-embraces of our round dances,
he would silently wonder at the long-suffering of Allah, who had
not long ago poured fire and brimstone on this sinful and shameless
generation.”[1274]
Covering the nakedness has, for the reason already pointed out, become
a very common practice among savage peoples; among those of the
tropics, no other sort of clothing is generally in use. Hence, through
the power of custom, the feeling of shame aroused by the exposure of
the nakedness. If this is the true explanation, some may be disposed to
infer that savages who, for the sake of cold, cover almost the entire
body, will feel ashamed to bare even such parts as may elsewhere be
shown without compunction. But this would be to overlook the essential
fact that the heat of their dwellings, where they spend most of the
winter, and the warmth of the summer sun, in many cases make it
necessary for them, as they think, to throw off all their clothes.
When this is done, they seem to be devoid of any sense of shame. Thus,
the Aleuts undress themselves completely in their warm jurts, and
men and women have for ages been accustomed to bathe together in the
sea; “they do not think of there being any immodesty in it, yet, any
immorality is exceedingly rare among them.”[1275] The Tacullies, who
usually take off their clothes in summer, though they are well clad
in winter, manifest, according to Harmon, as little sense of shame
in regard to uncovering “as the very brute creation.”[1276] The
Eskimo of Etah, who in the winter are enveloped to the face in furs,
nevertheless, according to Kane’s description, completely put aside
their garments in their subterranean dwellings;[1277] and the demeanour
of the wife of Hans the Eskimo on board Hayes’s ship, plainly showed
that she had no idea of decency.[1278]
On the other hand, we know that peoples living in warm climates
who cover only the nakedness are utterly ashamed to expose it. The
Andamanese, although they wear as little clothing as possible, exhibit
a delicacy that amounts to prudishness, the women of the tribes of
South Andaman being so modest that they will not remove their small
apron of leaves, or put anything in its place, in the presence of any
person, even of their own sex.[1279] Speaking of the Fijians, Wilkes
asserts that, “though almost naked, these natives have a great idea
of modesty, and consider it extremely indelicate to expose the whole
person. If either a man or woman should be discovered without the
‘maro,’ or ‘liku,’ they would probably be killed.”[1280] The female
natives of Nukahiva have only one small covering, but are so tenacious
of it that the most licentious will not consent to take it off.[1281]
Among those Australian tribes, in which a covering is worn by the
women, they will retire out of sight to bathe.[1282] In Lukunor and
Radack, men and women never appear naked together;[1283] and among
the Pelew Islanders, according to Semper, the women have an unlimited
privilege of striking, fining, or, if it be done on the spot, killing
any man who makes his way in to their bathing-places.[1284]
These facts appear to prove that the feeling of shame, far from being
the original cause of man’s covering his body, is, on the contrary,
a result of this custom; and that the covering, if not used as a
protection from the climate, owes its origin, at least in a great many
cases, to the desire of men and women to make themselves mutually
attractive.[1285] To some readers it may perhaps seem probable that the
covering of the nakedness was originally due to the feeling which makes
intimate relations between the sexes, even among savages, a more or
less secret matter. But, whilst this feeling is universal in mankind,
there are, as we have seen, a great many peoples who attach no idea
of shame to the entire exposure of the body, and these peoples are
otherwise not less modest than those who cover themselves. Their number
is, indeed, so great that we cannot regard the absence of shame as a
reversion or perversion; and it may be asserted with perfect confidence
that the modesty which shows itself in covering is not an instinct in
the same sense as that in which the aversion to incest, for example,
is an instinct,—an aversion to which sexual bashfulness seems to be
very closely related. Travellers have observed that, among various
naked tribes, women exhibit a strong sense of modesty through various
attitudes. But these attitudes may, like concealment by clothing, have
been _originally_ due to coquetry. They imply a vivid consciousness of
certain facts, and the exhibition of this consciousness is far from
being a mark of modesty. It may, further, be supposed that decent
covering was adopted for the protection of parts specially liable to
injury. This may hold good for some cases; but the general prevalence
of circumcision even among naked tribes shows that savages are not
particularly anxious about the safety of their persons.