WOMEN AND PRIMITIVE INDUSTRY
I have referred in an earlier chapter to a letter from Mr. H. G.
Wells, sent to me after the publication of my book, _The Truth about
Woman_. Now, there is one sentence in this letter that I wish to quote
here, because it brings home just what it is my purpose in this
chapter to show--that the mother-age was a civilisation owing its
institutions, and its early victories over nature, rather to the
genius of woman than to that of man. Mr. Wells does not, indeed, say
this. He rejects the mother-age, and in questioning my acceptance of
it as a stage in the past histories of societies, he writes: "The
primitive matriarchate never was anything more than mother at the
washing-tub and father looking miserable."
It seems to me that here, in his own inimitable way, Mr. Wells (though
I think quite unconsciously) sums up the past labour-history of woman
and man. His statement has very far-reaching considerations. It forces
us to accept the active utility of primitive woman in the community--a
utility more developed and practical than that of man. This was really
the basis of women's position of power. The constructive quality of
the female mind, at a time when the male attention and energy were
fixed chiefly on the destructive activities of warfare, was liberated
for use and invention. Women were the seekers, slowly increasing their
efficiency.
Very much the same account of the primitive sexual division in work
was given by an Australian Kurnai to Messrs. Fison and Howitt, in a
sentence that has been quoted very frequently: "A man hunts, spears
fish, fights and sits about, all the rest is woman's work." This may
be accepted as a fair statement of how work is divided between the two
sexes among primitive peoples. Now, what I wish to make plain is that
it was an arrangement in which the advantage was really on the side of
the woman rather than on that of the man. I would refer the reader
back to what has been said on this subject in Chapter III, where I
summed up the conditions acting on the women in the hypothetical first
stage of the primordial family. We saw that the males were chiefly
concerned with the absorbing duties of sex and fighting rivals, and
also hunting for game. The women's interest, on the other hand, was
bent on domestic activities--in caring for their children and
developing the food supplies immediately around them. From the
hearth-home, or shelter, as the start of settled life, and with their
intelligence sharpened by the keen chisel of necessity, women carried
on their work as the organisers and directors of industrial
occupations. Very slowly did they make each far-reaching discovery;
seeds cast into the ground sprouted and gave the first start of
agriculture. The plant world gave women the best returns for the
efforts they made, and they began to store up food. Contrivance
followed contrivance, each one making it possible for women to do
more. Certain animals, possibly brought back by the hunters from the
forests, were kept and tamed. Presently the use of fire was
discovered--we know not how--but women became the guardians of this
source of life. And now, instead of caves or tree-shelters, there were
huts and tents and houses, and of these, too, women were frequently
the builders. The home from the first was of greater importance to the
women; it was the place where the errant males rejoined their wives
and children, and hence the women became the owners of the homes and
the heads of households. For as yet the men were occupied in fighting.
The clumsy and the stupid among them were killed soonest; the fine
hand, the quick eye--these prevailed age by age. Tools and weapons
were doubtless fashioned by these fighters, but for destruction; the
male's attention was directed mainly by his own desires. And may we
not accept that among the most pressing activities of women was the
need to tame man and make him social, so that he could endure the
rights of others than himself?
So through the long generations the life of human societies continued.
Those activities, due to female influence, developing and opening up
new ways in all directions, until we have that early civilisation,
which I have called the mother-age.
All the world over, even to this day, this separation in the labour
activities of the two sexes can be traced. Destructive work, demanding
a special development of strength, with corresponding periods of rest,
falls to men; and contrasted with this violent and intermittent male
force we find, with the same uniformity, that the work of women is
domestic and constructive, being connected with the care of children
and all the various industries which radiate from the home--work
demanding a different kind of strength, more enduring, more
continuous, but at a lower tension.
Bonwick's account of the work of Tasmanian women may be taken as
typical--
"In addition to the necessary duty of looking after the
children, the women had to provide all the food for the
household excepting that derived from the chase of the
kangaroo. They climbed up hills for the opossum" (a very
difficult task, requiring great strength and also skill),
"delved in the ground for yams, native bread, and nutritious
roots, groped about the rocks for shellfish, dived beneath
the sea for oysters, and fished for the finny tribe. In
addition to this, they carried, on their frequent tramps,
the household stuffs in native baskets of their own
manufacture."[144]
[144] _Daily Life and Origin of the Tasmanians_, p. 55.
Among the Indians of Guiana the men's work is to hunt, and to cut down
the trees when the cassava is to be planted. When the men have felled
the trees and cleaned the ground, the women plant the cassava and
undertake all the subsequent operations; agriculture is entirely in
their hands. They are little, if at all, weaker than the men, and they
work all day while the men are often in their hammocks smoking; but
there is no cruelty or oppression exercised by the men towards the
women.[145]
[145] Everard im Thurn, _Among the Indians of Guiana_.
In Africa we meet with much the same conditions of labour. "The work
is done chiefly by the women, this is universal; they hoe the fields,
sow the seed, and reap the harvest. To them, too, falls all the labour
of house-building, grinding corn, brewing beer, cooking, washing, and
caring for almost all the material interests of the community. The men
tend the cattle, hunt, go to war; they also spend much time sitting in
council over the conduct of affairs."[146]
[146] Macdonald, "East Central African Customs," _Journal
Anthropological Institute_, Feb. 1890, p. 342.
I may note the interesting account of Prof. Haddon[147] of the work of
the Western Tribes of the Torres Straits--
[147] _Journal Anthropological Institute_, Feb. 1890, p. 342.
"The men fished, fought, built houses, did a little
gardening, made fish-lines, fish-hooks, spears, and other
implements, constructed dance-masks and head-dresses, and
all the paraphernalia for the various ceremonies and dances.
They performed all the rites and dances, and in addition did
a good deal of strutting up and down, loafing and 'yarning.'
The women cooked and prepared the food, did most of the
gardening, collected shell-fish, and speared fish on the
reefs, made petticoats, baskets and mats."
Similar examples might be almost indefinitely multiplied. Among the
Andamanese, while the men go into the jungle to hunt pigs, the women
fetch drinking water and firewood, catch shell-fish, make fishing nets
and baskets, spin thread, and cook the food ready for the return of
the men.[148] The Moki women of America have fifty ways of preparing
corn for food. They make all the preparations necessary for these
varied dishes, involving the arts of the stonecutter, the carrier, the
mason, the miller and the cook.[149] In New Caledonia "girls work in
the plantations, boys learn to fight."[150]
[148] Owen, _Transactions of the Ethnological Society_, New
Series, Vol. II, p. 36.
[149] Mason, _Woman's Share in Primitive Culture_, p. 143.
[150] Turner, _Nineteen Years in Polynesia_, p. 424.
We should, however, fall into a popular error concerning the division
of labour in savagery, if we consider that all women's work is
regarded as degrading to men and all men's work is tabooed to women.
The duties of war and the chase are the chief occupation of men, yet
in all parts of the world women have fought at need, and sometimes
habitually, both to assist their men and also against them. Thus
Buckley, who lived for many years among the Australian tribes, relates
that when the tribe he lived with was attacked by a hostile party, the
men "raised a war-cry; on hearing this the women threw off their rugs
and, each armed with a short club, flew to the assistance of their
husbands and brothers."[151] In Central Australia the men occasionally
beat the women through jealousy, but on such occasions it is by no
means rare for the women, single handed, to beat the men
severely.[152] Again, men carry on, as a rule, the negotiations on
tribal concerns, but in such matters exceptions are very numerous.
Among the Australian Dieyerie, Curr states that the women act as
ambassadors to arrange treaties, and invariably succeed in their
mission.[153] The same conditions are found among the American
Indians. Men are the hunters and fishers, but women also hunt and
fish. Among the Yahgan of Tierra del Fuego fishing is left entirely to
the women,[154] and this is not at all unusual. Mrs. Allison states of
the Similkameen Indians of British Columbia that formerly "the women
were nearly as good hunters as the men," but being sensitive to the
ridicule of the white settlers, they have given up hunting.[155] In
hunting trips, the help of women is often not to be despised.
Warburton Pike writes thus: "I saw what an advantage it is to take
women on a hunting trip. If we killed anything, we had only to cut up
and _cache_ the meat, and the women would carry it. On returning to
camp we could throw ourselves down on a pile of caribou skins and
smoke our pipes in comfort, but the women's work was never
finished."[156] This account is very suggestive. The man undergoes the
fatigue of hunting, and when he has thrown the game at the woman's
feet his part is done; it is her duty to carry it and to cook it, as
well as to make the vessels in which the food is placed. The skins and
the refuse are hers to utilise, and all the industries connected with
clothing are chiefly in her hands.[157] Hearne, in his delightful old
narrative, speaks of the assistance of women on hunting expeditions--
"For when all the men are heavy laden they can neither hunt
nor travel to any considerable distance; and in case they
meet with any success in hunting, who is to carry the
produce of their labour?"
[151] _Life and Adventures of William Buckley_, p. 43.
[152] _Journal Anthropological Institute_, Aug. 1890, p. 61.
[153] _Australian Races_, cited by Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p.
9 _note_.
[154] Haydes et Deniker, _Mission Scientifique de Cape Horn_,
tome vii, 1891.
[155] _Journal of the Anthropological Institute_, Feb. 1892,
p. 307.
[156] Warburton Pike, _Barren Grounds_, p. 75.
[157] Havelock Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p. 5.
He adds with a charming frankness--
"Women were made for labour; one of them can carry or haul
as much as two men can do. They also pitch our tents, make
and mend our clothing, keep us warm at night, and, in fact,
there is no such thing as travelling any considerable
distance, or any length of time, in this country without
their assistance."[158]
[158] _A Journey from Prince of Wales's Fort to the Northern
Ocean_, p. 55.
Numerous other examples might be added which illustrate how women take
part in the destructive work of men; conversely we find not a few
cases of the co-operation of men in the women's activities. The world
over, women are usually the weavers and spinners; but with the Navajo
and in some of the Pueblos the men are among the best weavers.[159]
Among the Indians of Guiana the men are specially skilful in
basket-weaving, and here also they as well as the women spin and
weave.[160] More curious is the custom in East Africa where all the
sewing for their own and the women's garments is done by the men, and
very well done. Sewing is here so entirely recognised as men's work
that a wife may obtain a divorce if she "can show a neglected rend in
her petticoat."[161]
[159] Mason, _op. cit._, p. 10.
[160] Im Thurn, _Among the Indians of British Guiana_.
[161] Macdonald, _Journal Anthropological Institute_, Aug.
1892.
It is a common mistake, arising from insufficient knowledge, to
suppose that savage women are specially subject to oppression. Their
life is hard as we look at it, but not as they look at it. We have
still much to learn on these matters. An even greater error is the
view that these women are a source of weakness to the male members of
their families. The very reverse is the truth. Primitive women are
strong in body and capable in work. Fison and Howitt, in discussing
this question, state of the Australian women, "In times of peace, they
are the hardest workers and the most useful members of the community."
And in times of war, "they are perfectly capable of taking care of
themselves at all times, and so far from being an encumbrance on the
warriors, they will fight, if need be, as bravely as the men, and with
even greater ferocity."[162] This is no exceptional case. The strength
of savage women is proved by reports from widely different races, of
which all testify to their physical capability and aptness for labour.
Schellong,[163] who has carefully studied the Papuans of the German
protectorate of New Guinea, from the anthropological point of view,
"considers that the women are more strongly built than the men." Nor
does heavy work appear to damage the health or beauty of the women,
but the contrary. Thus among the Andombies on the Congo, to give one
instance, the women, though working very hard as carriers, and as
labourers in general, lead an entirely happy existence; they are often
stronger than the men and more finely developed: some of them, we are
told, have really splendid figures. And Parke, speaking of the
Manyuema of the Arruwimi in the same region, says that "they are fine
animals, and the women very handsome; they carry loads as heavy as
those of the men and do it quite as well."[164] Again, McGee[165]
comments on the extraordinary capacity of quite aged women for heavy
labour. He tells of "a withered crone, weighing apparently not more
than 80 to 90 lb. who carried a _kilio_ containing a stone mortar 196
lb. in weight for more than half a mile on a sandy road without any
perceptible exhaustion. The proportion of the active aged is much
larger than among civilised people."
[162] _Kamilaroi and Kurnai_, pp. 133, 147.
[163] Cited by Ellis, _Man and Woman_, p. 4.
[164] H. H. Johnston, _The Kilimanjaro Expedition_; Parke,
_Experiences in Equatorial Africa_. These examples are cited
by Ellis.
[165] "The Beginnings of Agriculture," _American
Anthropologist_, Oct. 1895, p. 37.
I may pause to note some of the numerous industries of which women
were the originators. First of all, woman is the food-giver; all the
labours relating to the preparation of food, and to the utilisation of
the side products of foodstuffs are usually found in the hands of
women. Women are everywhere the primitive agriculturists. They beat
out the seeds from plants; dig for roots and tubers, strain the
poisonous juices from the cassava and make bread from the residue; and
it was under their attention that a southern grass was first developed
into what we know as Indian corn.[166] The removal of poisonous matter
from tapioca by means of hot water is also the discovery of savage
women.[167] All the evolution of primitive agriculture may be traced
to women's industry. Power tells of the Yokia women in Central
California who employ neither plough nor hoe, but cultivate the ground
by digging the earth deep and rubbing it fine with their hands, and by
this means they get an excellent yield.[168] Women have everywhere
been the first potters; vessels were needed for use in cooking, to
carry and to hold water, and to store the supplies of food. For the
same reason baskets were woven. Women invented and exercised in common
multifarious household occupations and industries. Curing food,
tanning the hides of animals, spinning, weaving, dyeing--all are
carried on by women. The domestication of animals is usually in
women's hands. They are also the primitive architects; the hut, in
widely different parts of the world--among Kaffirs, Fuegians,
Polynesians, Kamtschatdals--is built by women. We have seen that the
communal houses of the American Indians are mainly erected by the
women. Women were frequently, though not always, the primitive
doctors. Among the Kurds, for instance, all the medical knowledge is
in the hands of the women, who are the hereditary _hakims_.[169] Women
seem to have prepared the first intoxicating liquors. The Quissama
women in Angola climb the gigantic palm trees to obtain
palm-beer.[170] In the ancient legends of the North, women are clearly
represented as the discoverers of ale.[171]
[166] Thomas, _Sex and Society_, p. 136.
[167] Mason, _op. cit._ p. 24.
[168] _Cont. North American Ethnology_, Vol. III, p. 167.
[169] Mrs. Bishop, _Journeys in Persia and Kurdistan_, cited
by H. Ellis, _op. cit._, p. 6.
[170] _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, Vol. I, p. 190.
[171] "Magic Songs of the Finns," _Folk-lore_, Mar. 1892.
It would be easy to go on almost indefinitely multiplying examples of
the industries of primitive women. There can be no doubt at all that
their work is exacting and incessant; it is also inventive in its
variety and its ready application to the practical needs of life. If a
catalogue of the primitive forms of labour were made, each woman would
be found doing at least half-a-dozen things while a man did one. We
may accept the statement of Prof. Mason that in the early history of
mankind "women were the industrial, elaborative, conservative half of
society. All the peaceful arts of to-day were once women's peculiar
province. Along the lines of industrialism she was pioneer, inventor,
author, originator."[172]
[172] _American Antiquarian_, Jan. 1899.
There is another matter that must be noted. The primitive division of
labour between the sexes was not in any sense an arrangement dictated
by men, nor did they impose the women's tasks upon them. The view that
the women are forced to work by the laziness of the men, and that
their heavy and incessant labour is a proof of their degraded position
is entirely out of focus. Quite the reverse is the truth. Evidence is
not wanting of the great advantage arising to women from their close
connection with labour. It was largely their control over the food
supply and their position as actual producers which gave them so much
influence, and even authority in the mother-age. In this connection I
may quote the statement of Miss Werner about the African women as
representing the true conditions--
"I cannot say that, so far as my own observations went, the
women's lot seemed to be a specially hard one. In fact, they
are too important an element in the community not to be
treated with consideration. The fact that they do most of
the heavy field-work does not imply that they are a
down-trodden sex. On the contrary, it gives them a
considerable pull, as a man will think twice before
endangering his food supply."[173]
[173] "Our Subject Races," _The Reformer_, April 1897, p. 43.
Mr. Horatio Hale, a well-known American anthropologist likewise
observes--
"The common opinion that women among savage tribes in
general are treated with harshness, and regarded as slaves,
or at least as inferiors, is, like many common opinions,
based on error, originating in too large and indiscriminate
deduction from narrow premises.... The wife of a Samoan
landowner or Navajo shepherd has no occasion, so far as her
position in her family or among her people, to envy the wife
of a German peasant."[174]
[174] _Journal Anthropological Institute_, May 1892, p. 427,
cited by H. Ellis.
Certainly savage women do not count their work as any degradation.
There is really an equal division of labour between the sexes, though
the work of the men is accomplished more fitfully than that of the
women. The militant activities of fighting and hunting are essential
in primitive life. The women know this, and they do their share--the
industrial share, willingly, without question, and without compulsion.
It is entirely absurd in this work-connection to regard men as the
oppressors of women. Rather the advantage is on the women's side. For
one thing, just because they are accustomed to hard labour all their
lives, they are little, if any, weaker than men. Primitive women are
strong in body, and capable in work. The powers they enjoy as well as
their manifold activities are the result of their position as mothers,
this function being to them a source of strength and not a plea of
weakness.
"They who are accustomed to the ways of civilised women
only," remarks Mr. Fison, "can hardly believe what savage
women are capable of, even when they may well be supposed to
be at their weakest. For instance, an Australian tribe on
the march scarcely take the trouble to halt for so slight a
performance as childbirth. The newly born infant is wrapped
in skins, the march is resumed, and the mother trudges on
with the rest. Moreover, as is well known, among many tribes
elsewhere it is the father who is put to bed, while the
mother goes about her work as if nothing had happened."[175]
[175] _Kamilaroi and Kurnai_, p. 358.
Another important advantage arising to women, through their
identification with the early industrial process, was their position
as the first property owners. They were almost the sole creators of
ownership in land, and held in this respect a position of great power.
This explains the fact that in the transactions of the North American
tribes with the Colonial Government many deeds of assignment bear
female signatures.[176] A form of divorce used by a husband in ancient
Arabia was: "Begone, for I will no longer drive thy flocks to
pasture."[177] In almost all cases the household goods belonged to
the woman. The stores of roots and berries laid up for a time of
scarcity were the property of the wife, and the husband would not
touch them without her permission. In many cases such property was
very extensive. Among the Menomini Indians, for instance, a woman of
good circumstances would own as many as 1200 to 1500 birch-bark
vessels.[178] In the New Mexico Pueblos what comes from the outside of
the house as soon as it is inside is put under the immediate control
of the women. Bandelier, in his report of his tour in Mexico, tells us
that "his host at Cochiti, New Mexico, could not sell an ear of corn
or a string of chili without the consent of his fourteen-year-old
daughter, Ignacia, who kept house for her widowed father."[179]
[176] Ratzel, _History of Mankind_, Vol. II, p. 130.
[177] Robertson Smith, _Kinship and Marriage in Early
Arabia_, p. 65.
[178] Hoffman, "The Menomini Indians," _Fourteenth Report of
the Bureau of American Ethnology_, p. 288.
[179] Papers of the _Archæological Institute of America_,
Vol. II, p. 138.
I must now bring this brief chapter to a close. But first I would give
one further example. It is an account of the Pelew matrons' work in
the taro fields. Here the richest and most influential women count it
their privilege to labour, and it will be remembered that these women
are called "mothers of the land." They are politically and socially
superior to the men; and their position is dependent largely on their
close connection with the staple industry of the island.
"The richest woman in the village looks with pride on her
taro patch, and although she has female followers enough to
allow her merely to superintend the work without taking part
in it, she nevertheless prefers to lay aside her fine apron,
and to betake herself to the field, merely clad in a small
apron that barely hides her nakedness, with a little mat on
her back to protect her from the burning heat of the sun,
and with a shade of banana leaves for her eyes. There,
dripping with sweat in the burning sun, and coated with mud
to the hips and over the elbows, she toils to set the
younger women a good example. Moreover, as in every other
occupation, the _Kalitho_, the gods must be invoked, and who
could be better fitted for the discharge of so important a
duty than 'the Mother of the House.'"
Here is a picture of labour that may well make women pause to think.