Polygyny

POLYGYNY. - From the Greek πολύς = much and γυνή = wife, it is the simultaneous marital cohabitation of one man with several women.

I. MORAL THEOLOGY AND CANON LAW

Polygyny is first of all contrary to divine-positive law, proclaimed by God to the first parents Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:23) and then recalled and confirmed by Jesus Christ (Mt. 5:31 ff., 19:4-9; cf. also St. Paul: 1 Cor. 10:11). Therefore the Council of Trent, also gathering the traditions of the holy Fathers and theologians, declared anathema anyone who asserted that polygyny is not forbidden by any divine law (sess. XXIV, Canones de sacramento Matrimonii, 2: Denz-U, n. 972); and the CIC lists unity as an essential property of marriage (can. 1013 § 2 and the sources cited there).

As for natural law, it must be said that polygyny is not contrary to the primary end of marriage (procreation and education of offspring), as polyandry is, and therefore does not threaten the established order, nor does it substantially pervert it; but it is contrary to the secondary end, to such an extent as to make even the attainment of the primary end difficult. It contradicts, in fact, the equality between husband and wife (while the woman in this case gives herself completely and exclusively to one man alone for conjugal communion, the man gives himself to several women, whence the impediment to the full gift of self, at least on the part of the husband, with the consequent weakening of the mutuum adiutorium, which is the duty of spouses); it is opposed to the dignity of the wife, who easily ceases to be a consort and becomes a slave; it makes inevitable the husband's preferences for one or the other, whence jealousies, envies and quarrels; which can also occur among half-brothers, with no small obstacles to the education of the whole family.

Polygyny, by the fact that it is not opposed to the primary end of marriage, can exist by explicit divine dispensation as happened in the Old Testament (cf. Gen. 16:2; 21:12; Deut. 21:15). As to the time when this dispensation began, there are no definite and certain data in the Bible; the common opinion is that until the flood monogamy was in force, at least de iure, and that the concession was made after the flood for a more rapid repopulation of the earth. Likewise it cannot be established from the Bible whether the concession concerned only the Jewish people or also the gentiles, which is the more probable opinion. In any case the dispensation was revoked by Jesus Christ, who wished to bring the institution of marriage back to its primitive situation (Mt. 19:9; Mk. 10:11; Lk. 16:18) and declared that the dispensation had been granted "propter duritiam cordis", whereas from the beginning it was not so (Mt. 9:8); the revocation is valid also for the pagans (cf. Collectanea S. Congr. de Prop. Fide, Rome 1907, n. 1354).

For the penalties inflicted on bigamists, v. BIGAMIA.

Vincenzo Fagiolo

II. ETHNOLOGY

Modern ethnology has demonstrated that polygyny does not exist, except as an exception, among the ethnologically oldest peoples known as gatherers (v. MATRIMONIO, II. Marriage among primitives; MONOGAMY), nor is it possible among strictly matriarchal peoples, since from the crossing of these with strictly patriarchal peoples polyandry arose (v.), nor is it the rule among nomadic pastoral peoples, who take a second wife when the first is sterile, or in the case of levirate or inheritance. Among other peoples, even those of mixed culture resulting from the encounter of two peoples, polygyny exists in fact only for chiefs.

The missionary C. Salerio noted it in the last century (1855) among the inhabitants of the Woodlark Islands (east of New Guinea), of mixed culture (totemist-agricultural-matrilineal), saying that polygyny was not in vogue there; only the chiefs and aspiring chiefs had two wives. Elsewhere, however, he added, there is no limit; the chief of Trobriand, who was also at Muju (one of the Woodlark Islands), had 17 at his habitual service and a seraglio of girls at his future disposal. Regarding the same inhabitants of the Trobriand Islands, Malinowski, a modern explorer of them, wrote that polygyny (vilayana) is permitted by custom to people of high rank, to chiefs or to persons of great importance, such as, for example, famous magicians, in order to have greater wealth thanks to the work of the women. But he also wrote, of the Trobrianders, that monogamy is so much the rule among them that he was forced to treat their marriage customs and usages as if it were a matter of a single wife. The same can be said of other primitive peoples of ethnologically secondary civilization in other parts of the world, especially in Africa, wherever marriage by purchase is practiced, whereby the woman is reduced to an instrument of pleasure, or a beast of profitable labor.

Polygyny is widely practiced, insofar as wealth permits, among peoples of civilizations called tertiary in ethnology: the Medes, the Persians, the Indians, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Koreans, the Egyptians, the ancient Mexicans, etc. Among the latter a distinction was made between principal wife, secondary wife and concubine. The nuptial ceremonies were performed only with the principal bride; with the secondary one only the ceremony of binding the garments of the spouses was performed. The concubines were in a de facto relationship with the man, but there was no juridical statute in that regard. The children of secondary wives were juridically in a state of inferiority. The principal wife had a special position with respect to the secondary wives and the concubines. Among the Chinese polygyny is forbidden, but concubinage is permitted without any limitation, except that of giving the concubine the place of legitimate spouse, because it is forbidden by law under penalty of flogging. The concubine is regarded as a vile being: she lives with her master's wife, serves her as a domestic, or assists her in the administration of the house. The children of concubines are considered as children of the spouse. The children call the spouse mother and the concubine aunt. The latter is compared to the star and the spouse to the moon.

From ethnological study polygyny emerges as a phenomenon that disturbs true married life and destroys family harmony. The husband often manifests his preferences for one or another of his wives, whereby jealousy arises among the women of the house. In ancient Chinese literature one reads that the Empress was advised not to be jealous, given that the Emperor had several orders of concubines. The polygamous father, also through the influence of his favorite woman, favors certain children over others. This happens especially when it is a matter of inheriting the father's authority as head of the clan or tribe, because in this case the father's preference for the son of the favorite woman is easy, thus also endangering the right of primogeniture of the firstborn. Scandals also occur in the family. The aforementioned Malinowski observed, for example, that of the numerous wives, divided into three classes, of a chief of the Trobriand Islands, it was the youngest who lacked fidelity to their lord. He recounts, moreover, that the men who committed adultery with the chief's wives were his own sons. Not to mention the deleterious effects that polygyny has on the character of man and the degradation of woman that follows from it. It is clear, moreover, that these effects acquire a broader significance, because they involve the political life of an entire people, in the polygyny of the harem of Sovereigns and Princes, as appears, for example, in the dynastic histories of China. With the harem is connected the custom of eunuchs, unhappy people, who have often sinisterly influenced the courts.

Great importance has been given in ethnology to the custom of pirraurà of the Dieri and the Arabana (Urabunna) of Australia and of certain peoples of the extreme northeast of Asia, a custom that is a kind of polygyny connected with polyandry. Wundt in his Folk Psychology considered it as an effect of marriage by capture. Among the said Australians the abducted woman would have become the regular wife (tippa-malcu) of the abductor and the secondary wife (pirraurà) of the companions who helped the abductor. The latter, by the fact that he lends the same help to his companions, would have acquired the right to have as secondary wives the regular wives of his companions.

The same custom has been considered by evolutionists as a residue or an example of group marriage, one of the usual stages of the evolution of human marriage. Now, from Thomas's investigations in Australia it emerges clearly that the custom of pirraurù cannot be considered a group marriage. Because 1) it is not an entire group of men that has access to all the women of another group, but only some men and some women; 2) this free access is conditioned by the husband's consent and can be exercised only in his absence; 3) there exists a distinction between married and unmarried women, so that a woman cannot be pirraurù unless she has first been united in marriage with a man, that is, unless she is already tippa-malcu. For this last reason the custom of pirraurù can not even be considered as a residue of the group marriage of past times. This custom was born from the crossing of a monogamous culture with a polygamous one, which prevailed, imposing the strange custom of having in the clan also secondary wives with the aforementioned limitations.

THE ORIGIN OF POLYGYNY

According to Wundt, the first determining motive is evidently man's material instinct, developed so as to satisfy itself more fully than in monogamy. But it is not the only one, and as a rule other subsidiary circumstances come into play. The right of property and the factor of authority constitute in particular two essential elements. P. flourishes especially where the idea of property and of authority, and with respect to the latter, the idea of authority within the family, are predominant. Through the combined action of these motives the woman becomes the absolute property of the man, and therefore among barbarian peoples, where P. prevails, a woman may even be given away or exchanged. It follows that in the higher classes the rich and distinguished man possesses more women. Since the concubine ordinarily must be bought and then maintained, only the rich man can have one. Thus concubinage also becomes a sign of prestige. Are these motives sufficient to explain the origin of P.? Historically one must distinguish between one people and another. Among peoples in which the cult of the dead has developed, which cannot be performed by the woman but only by the man, the necessity is felt of taking a second wife when the first is sterile or has no male children. Here P. arises from reasons of a religious nature. Among nomadic pastoral peoples with great flocks, the necessity is felt of having many children, especially male children, to pasture and increase the flock. Therefore, if the wife is sterile, another is taken: here P. derives from a reason of an economic nature. Among those peoples in which the levirate is practiced and the wives of the father are inherited, P. is generated by the duty, imposed by the clan or the tribe, of helping and protecting a relative and his family, or by the duty of supporting the wives of the father whose authority one inherits. Still different is the origin of P. arising from the assignment of the women of the vanquished to the victorious warriors. A much more particular reason, though now difficult to find, lies at the origin of the P. of the sororate in the marriage of a prince or of the emperor in China, to whom respectively 12 or 9 women had to be given, of whom one had to be the younger sister of the bride, another the niece, daughter of the bride's brother, and all the others of the same family name: they automatically came to form part of the harem of the emperor or of the prince. To the particular causes of P. there may naturally be added the general causes indicated by Wundt, which reduce to Bastian's elementary thought. One should reflect, however, that these general causes could also operate among those peoples who do not admit P. It seems therefore that the ultimate cause of P. must be sought more than anything else in a lowering or dulling of the religious and moral sentiment of a people.

Luigi Vannicelli