THE ORIGIN OF KISSING
With most civilised and many uncivilised nations kissing is the natural
expression of love and its kindred emotions.
How can it be explained that a kiss has succeeded in getting so deep and
comprehensive a significance? How can a trivial movement of the lips
interpret our innermost feelings in so eloquent a way that there is not
a language which has at its command words approaching to it in
argumentative power?
Are we face to face with something primitive, or something conventional
and derivative? Is it as natural to kiss when we are transported with
love as it is to smile when we are mirthful, or weep when we are sad? In
other words, is Steele right when he says, in strict conformity with a
Cypriot folk-song previously quoted, that “nature was its author, and it
began with the first courtship?”
I shall try to answer this question in the following pages, but,
nevertheless, I wish at once to state most expressly that we are now
approaching ground where we know nothing, and where no one can with
certainty know anything. We can only advance more or less likely
hypotheses.
In the first place, it is important to bear in mind that there are many
races of people who are quite ignorant of kissing as it is generally
understood. Thus it is unknown in a great part of Polynesia, in
Madagascar, and among many tribes of negroes in Africa, more
particularly among those which mutilate their lips. W. Reade, in one of
his books of travel, tells us of the horror which seized a young African
negress when he kissed her. Kissing is likewise unknown amongst the
Esquimaux and the people of Tierra del Fuego. Certain Finnish tribes
appear, from what B. Taylor tells us, not to practise it much. In his
_Northern Travel_ he relates that “while both sexes bathe together in a
state of complete nudity, a kiss is regarded as something indecent.” A
Finnish married woman, on being told by him that it was the usual custom
for husband and wife to kiss each other, angrily exclaimed, “If my
husband were to attempt such a thing, faith, I would warm his ears in
such a way that he would feel it for a whole week.”
If the question arises as to what these people substitute for kissing,
the fact is well-known that, amongst uncivilised races, there is an
endless number of different ways of salutation; some smack each other on
the arms or stomach, others blow on each other’s hands, others again rub
their right ear and put out their tongue, etc., etc. Here, however, we
must confine ourselves to the salutations which are suggestive of
kissing.
In many places people are in the habit of saluting with their noses.
This is the so-called Malay kiss, which consists in rubbing or merely
pressing one’s nose against another person’s nose. This nose-salute is
found among the Polynesians, Malays, Esquimaux, certain negro tribes in
Africa--in short, just among the majority of races which are ignorant of
kissing as we understand it.
Darwin thus describes the Malay kiss: “The women squatted with their
faces upturned; my attendants stood leaning over them, laid the bridge
of their noses at right angles over theirs, and commenced rubbing. It
lasted somewhat longer than a hearty hand-shake with us. During this
process they uttered a grunt of satisfaction.”[28] The French _savant_
Gaidoz, who has also described this custom, remarks, “I have many times
observed that cats which are fond of one another greet each other in
this way; and I myself once had a cat which always tried to squeeze its
nose against mine as a mark of affection.”[29]
Everything is in favour of this nose-salute being a very primitive
custom, and its origin may be sought beyond the sense of touch; no
doubt, in the sense of smell.
Spencer has arrived at the following conclusions: The sheep bleats after
her little lamb which has run away. It sniffs at several lambs that are
skipping about near her, and at last recognises her own by means of the
sense of smell, and undoubtedly feels great delight at recognising it.
In consequence of assiduous repetitions of this a certain relation is
developed between the two factors, so that the smell of the lamb excites
joy in the sheep.
As every animal has its peculiar smell, so, too, has every human being.
When the patriarch Isaac grew old his eyes began to get dim, and he
could not see. He wished to bless his eldest son, Esau, but Jacob
deceived him by clothing himself in his brother’s garments, and giving
himself out as the latter. Isaac then said to him: “Come near now and
kiss me, my son.” And he came near and kissed him, and he smelled the
smell of his raiment, and blessed him, and said: “See the smell of my
son is as the smell of a field which the Lord hath blessed.”
The sense of the smell peculiar to some one we are fond of is capable of
exciting pleasure. Timkowski writes of a Mongol father that the latter
time after time smelt his youngest son’s head. This mark of paternal
tenderness serves with the Mongols instead of kisses. In the Philippine
Islands, the sense of smell is so developed that the inhabitants, by
simply sniffing at a pocket-handkerchief, can tell to whom it belongs;
lovers who are separated send one another presents of bits of their
linen, and, in their absence, keep each other in mind by often inhaling
each other’s scent.
That the delicate perfume that exhales from a woman’s body plays an
important part in love affairs even with modern civilised nations is
too well-known to require more than a passing mention on my part.
Certain races of mankind now actually salute each other by smelling;
they apply their mouth and nose to a person’s cheek, and draw a long
breath. In their language they do not say “Give me a kiss,” but “Smell
me.” The same sort of kiss is also met with among the Burmese; and with
many Malay tribes the words “smell” and “salute” are synonymous. Other
races do not confine themselves to smelling each other’s faces, but
sniff their hands at every salutation.
Alfred Grandidier, a French traveller, says of the nose-kiss in
Madagascar: “It always excites the merriment of Europeans, and yet it
has its origin in an extremely refined idea. The invisible air which is
continually being breathed through the lips is to savages, not only, as
with us, a sign of life, but it is also an emanation of the soul--its
perfume, as they themselves say--and, when they mingle and suck in each
other’s breath and odour, they think they are actually mingling their
souls.”[30]
Then the origin of the nose-kiss, it seems, undoubtedly ought to be
sought--at any rate partly--in the sense of smell. The love of another
human being involves, as a consequence, one’s loving everything
belonging to this other being; and this love is shown _in casu_ by
drinking in his or her breath, whereby, little by little, a peculiar
nose-salutation is very ingeniously developed, which, naturally, is
capable of gradually assuming various conventional forms.
Now we will proceed to the kiss proper--that on the mouth. How can its
origin be explained?[31]
It does not seem very rational to assume that the motion of the muscles
in breathing should of itself be the natural, purely physical reflex of
a feeling of love in the same way as, for instance, certain
half-spasmodic contractions of several muscles in the upper part of the
face can be the immediate expression of wrath.
I do not believe either that the mere contact of the lips with another
person’s face was originally sufficient to express “I love you.”
Naturally, the longing to touch the beloved ones body, to approach it as
closely as possible, is a very essential manifestation of erotic
emotion; but so far as the contact of the lips is concerned, there is
reason for assuming that, originally, without its being the direct
object, it had been, moreover, and perhaps in an equally high degree, a
means of attaining a definite sensual gratification--a gratification
that can be realised by the co-operation of the lips and mouth.
As the nose-salutation partly originates in smell, so the mouth
salutation may, to a certain extent[32] at least, have its origin in
taste, or--which is even more probable--in both smell and taste? These
latter, as you know, are very closely related to each other.
The dog shows his joy at his master’s presence by licking the latter’s
hand. Why is this? It would not, I suppose, be too rash to assume that
he as good as “tastes” him; loving his master, he therefore loves the
taste and smell peculiar to him.
The cow licks her calf, and in this one may presumably see the
expression of a feeling which is to some extent satisfied by this
action. And why so? Undoubtedly by recognising by the tongue (and nose)
the taste (and smell) peculiar to the calf.
Now, is it not exceedingly probable that the human kiss, in its original
form, can, as to its passive element, be accounted for in an identical
way, viz., as a purely sensual assimilation, by means of the nerves of
taste and smell, of another person’s peculiar qualities with respect to
_gustus_ and _odor_? These qualities have probably been much more
conspicuous in primitive mankind than nowadays, just as it is quite
certain that its faculty of taste and smell were far more developed than
ours.
And have we not still, especially in the love-kiss, but also in kisses
between women, very numerous representatives of the primitive kiss,
which I should like to term the “taste-kiss.” I have many times pointed
out, in the preceding pages, the part which taste plays in kissing; and
I shall now add what I have often heard young girls say to a lady they
had kissed amorously: “Your kisses taste so nice.”
From being a natural expression for love the sucking, tasting kiss has,
in course of time, become reduced to nothing more than a simple
inspiratory movement of the lips, which, by analogy, has come to express
many other feelings, such as gratitude, admiration, compassion,
tenderness, etc. It has become at length so degraded as to be used as a
purely conventional salutation.
If this reasoning be correct, then the mouth-kiss, in the course of its
development, presents a perfect parallel with the nose-kiss. Both these
forms of greeting were originally closely allied, but the mouth-kiss had
better conditions for development than the nose-kiss. It has become a
salutation of a considerably higher sort, and whenever savage tribes
come into contact with civilised nations the nose-kiss is gradually
discarded. Such, for instance, was the case in Madagascar. There is no
doubt that savages can express very deep emotions by the nose-kiss. A
French missionary tells the story of how he was received when he went
back to the island of Pomotu: “When we approached the country all the
population assembled on the beach. They had harpoons in their hands, for
they imagined we were enemies; but, as soon as they saw my cassock, they
shouted, ‘That’s the Father, away with the harpoons,’ and when we
reached the shore they all rushed forward to kiss me by rubbing their
noses against mine, according to the custom of that country. The
ceremony was not very agreeable to me, and I was not altogether pleased
at having to take part in it.”[33] Civilised people, on the other hand,
regard the nose-kiss as something highly ludicrous, and I doubt if any
poet has the power of casting a halo of romance over it.
The mouth-kiss, on the contrary, is redolent of the purest and most
delicate poesy. A German minnesinger rhapsodises thus: “The radiant sun
is darkened before mine eyes when I behold the roses that bloom on my
darling’s mouth.”
“He who can pluck these roses may rejoice in the depth of his heart.
Many are the roses I have beheld, but never have I looked on any so
splendid.”
“How beauteous are the roses one gathers in the valley; nathless her
delicate, ruddy lips conjure up thousands that are lovelier still.”
L’ENVOI
Wherefore, methinks, let ev’ry man
Kiss as he knows best, will, should, can;
But I and my beloved know this:--
How we ought properly to kiss.--PAUL FLEMING.
W. F. H.
Printed by
Oliver & Boyd
Edinburgh.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] H. F. Cary’s translation.
[2] From _osculum_ we get the words osculogy, the science of kissing,
and osculogical, that which pertains to kissing; but the Greek
derivations philematology and philematological are perhaps preferable.
[3]
The tiny little mouth, red as a rose
That blossoms hidden in some garden-close,
Pleasant and amorous through being kissed.
W. F. H.
[4] Translated from the Danish Version.
[5] A Danish poet, philologist, and collector of proverbs (1631-1702).
[6] This and most of the following Servian ballads were translated by
Prof. Nyrop into Danish from the German version of O. P. Ritto.
[7] From “Various Verses,” 1893.
[8]
He who a kiss has snatched and takes naught more,
Deserves to lose the kiss he has in store,
How much was lacking to my perfect bliss?
Not modesty but clownishness was this.
W. F. H.
[9] Translated by Edward, Earl of Derby.
[10] William Morris’ Translation.
[11] William Morris’ Translation.
[12] William Morris’ Translation.
[13] William Morris’ Translation.
[14] Retranslated from the Danish of the Text.
[15] We have here a striking example of how legends arise. John,
the Father of the Church, got the epithet “golden-mouth” on account
of his great eloquence; but the people sought another more concrete
explanation, if I may use the term, of that name, the metaphorical use
of which they failed to comprehend.
[16]
And when he had to kiss Charles’ foot--such kissing Rollo spurned--
He thrust his hand forth downward, and to the monarch turned.
He raised the king’s foot to his lips, and overturned the king,
Who quickly rose upon his feet whilst mirth around did ring.
W. F. H.
[17] Which may be freely translated:
Dear, kind rod that’s trusty stood,
Without thee ne’er should I do good.
[18]
... Well, if you chose
With less to be content, don’t stick at this.
I have for you a face without a nose.
W. F. H.
[19]
My first is for my husband, not for you;
But you’re right welcome to the other two.
W. F. H.
[20] My dear Arlequin, a handsome lad like you, when a lady offers him
anything, ought to kiss the hand when he receives it.
[21] Omitted in the last edition.
[22] Omitted in the last edition.
[23] _Si ab sponso rebus sponsæ donatis, interveniente osculo,
ante nuptias hunc vel illam mori contigerit, dimidiam partem rerum
donatarum ad superstitem pertinere præcipimus, dimidiam ad defuncti
vel defunctæ heredes cuiuslibet gradus sint et quocunque iure
successerint, ut donatio stare pro parte media et solvi pro parte
media videatur: osculo vero non interveniente, sive sponsus sive
sponsa obierit, totam infirmari donationem et donatori sponso sive
heredibus eius restitui._
[24] Retranslated from the Danish Text.
[25]
Now down on your knees fall,
And promise straightway
To be wife and husband,
And then kiss away.
W. F. H.
[26]
Madame, join the dancing throng,
Listen to their measured song;
But remember, for the rest,
You shall kiss whom you love best.
W. F. H.
[27] Retranslated from the Danish of the Text.
[28] Retranslated from the Danish Version in the Text.
[29] Retranslated from the Danish Version in the Text.
[30] Retranslated from the Danish Version in the Text.
[31] Naturally, I am not concerned here with the various explanations
given by the poets as to the origin of the kiss. Gressner, in an
idyll of Daphnis and Chloe, has told us how both the lovers observed
the sport of the doves in the grove and then tried to imitate it by
pressing their mouths together as the doves do their beaks.
[32] Besides the passive or receptive element of the kiss, which is
essentially the object of my investigation, there is also, as we have
previously noticed, an active element which must not be overlooked,
viz., the contact and muscular sensation at the pressure. During the
erotic transport, which excites the desire for something further of a
brutal and violent nature, the body trembles with powerful muscular
tension, and a pressure or bite of the mouth is one of the forms by
which the passion of love finds expression. It is difficult, in these
pages, to go further into this aspect of the kiss, which is regarded
by certain philosophers as the main one, which it really is in respect
to certain kisses under certain circumstances; but there are other
kisses which are equally so originally, and in which the passive
element seems to me the most essential. The origin of the love-kiss
ought scarcely to be sought in any single source, whether in the sense
of touch or in that of taste and smell combined. Unquestionably both
these elements co-operate in its production, but under constantly
varying conditions, just as the active or the passive element
predominates, the kiss accompanies and interprets according to the
erotic phase. In what follows I shall confine myself exclusively to
the receptive element in the kiss.
[33] Retranslated from the Danish Version in the Text.
* * * * *
Typographical errors corrected by the etext transcriber:
Inbruntskuss=> Inbrunstkuss {pg 9}
Kuss aus!=> Küss aus! {pg 10}
eine grosse Kleinigheit=> eine grosse Kleinigkeit {pg 64}
Er kan mich küssen da wo ich keine Nase habe=> Er kann mich küssen da wo
ich keine Nase habe {pg 128}
Lucius Turquinius=> Lucius Tarquinius {pg 131}
the same state of thing=> the same state of things {pg 155}
pedanticly asks=> pedantically asks {pg 155}
End of Project Gutenberg's The kiss and its history, by Kristoffer Nyrop