is curious, we observe in the human race many of the various conditions which exist among the lower tribes of animated nature. Some classes of animals are found in pairs, corresponding to the marriage of 'cne husband and one wife, as in European nations; among other animals there is one male to a large number of females, as is tolerated and customary with the human race in the greater part of Asia and Africa. There are, in the animal creation also, instances of a single female to a number of males; and even this development of nature finds its correspondence in Tartary, in Ceylon, in the South-Sea Islands, and irregularly and exceptionally in many other countries, not excepting our own.

The sexual relations of horses, cattle, sheep, and common fowls, being familiar examples, are just as perfect, in the order of nature, as are the coupled relations of the lion, tiger, and turtle-dove; and the queen-bee—the sole female of the hive-has a right to her whole family circle of husbands, drones though they be, and destined to be cut off by the industrious neuters, on the principle that "if a bee work not, neither shall he eat." The drones are as useful in their generation as are the German princes to European royalty—but the latter have not always been so easily got rid of!

It may be asked, If all these varieties of marriage relations exist in the animal tribes-which partake more or less of our nature and intelligence-may it not be that monogamy, polygamy, and other forms of marriage, in different human races, are quite natural, and therefore right? The philosophers of Asia and Africa would doubtless argue in this manner; and European philosophers might found quite as good an argument upon the maxim, "whatever is, is right. These various conditions exist, and therefore must have entered into the design of creation, and help to form a part of the great plan of nature.

We will not be betrayed into an argument on the subject. It is our business rather to represent things as they are, than prove that they either are or are not what they should be. It may be our belief that there is much of wrong, or of imperfection, everywhere, and that the best existing conditions are very far from being what they

should be. Undoubtedly, the Author of our being has given us the instincts that ought to lead us truly, and we may hope that they one day will, since, in this matter, it is feeling, rather than reason, that must ever govern us.

The common belief is, that the whole human race descended from a single pair, who were created at nearly the same time, by the direct power and act of the Almighty. Another belief is, that the human race is the result of a progressive development from the lower links in the chain of creation, and that the various and strongly-marked varieties of the human race, or various races of humanity, have had distinct origins, being developed at different periods, and under such varying circumstances, as to account for their great and striking differences and peculiarities.

If we take the types of the highest and the lowest of the human races, the Caucasian for the one, and the Australian, or one of the South African tribes for the other, it is very difficult to believe that they had a common parentage, in one original pair. As long as there has been any observation of the conditions of mankind, the distinction has been equally wide. The highest races, were, so far as we know, always the highest-the lowest have had no change.

How can we account for the permanent characteristics of certain races, and the progressive tendencies of others? Three thousand years ago, or more, the Chinese had gained a certain point of civilization, where they have ever since remained, though then in the possession of what we consider the very elements of progress. They had gunpowder, the mariner's compass, the art of printing, and great industrial resources-moreover, and more than all, literature and science were the direct paths to honor and distinction. Had the Chinese been of the same origin and race as we, would that whole people have advanced thus far, to have remained for ever stationary at a fixed point, a boundary, beyond which they seem to have no power to pass?

But, as we have intimated, arguments on these grave subjects do not belong to the plan of our work. We may discuss them hereafter. Our present object is to give the history of the institution of marriage, in all its varieties, with especial reference to the character and condition of woman, and it may be of no importance whether there was

one single pair for the whole human race, or whether each quarter of the world, at different epochs, produced its highest development of animal life in one of the varieties of the human race.

If we take the hypothesis of a single couple, their's was the first existing marriage. If their children were born and remained in equal numbers of both sexes, it is highly probable that the marriage of one husband to one wife was continued as a custom, but an excess, at the beginning, of the number of children of one sex over the other, supposes, at once, a violation of the seemingly established law.

If we accept the scriptural account, we find that though Adam had but one wife, his immediate descendants, in his life-time, married a greater number. And when we come down to the primitive history of the Hebrew race, after the Deluge, we find the holy patriarchs taking wives and concubines, without any apparent restraint, and with no guide but their inclinations and ability to take care of them. Thus Abraham had eight or nine wives or women; and Isaac and Jacob each had several. The practice of having a plurality of wives, introduced in the life-time of Adam, has ever since been the custom of the greatest portion of the world; and this custom is so fixed, so seemingly ineradicable, that even Christian missionaries have been obliged to give up the point, and despair of converting men to Christianity, if the giving up of all but one wife is insisted upon. The polygamist cannot be made to understand or believe that his practice is contrary to the law of nature, or the requirements of religion; and our missionaries have, with what wisdom or propriety we shall not attempt to decide, concluded to leave this matter to the workings of time or the influences of grace.

We purpose now, commencing with the earliest ages of which we have any account, to give an impartial history of the connection of woman with man in the marriage relation in all the countries in the world, and among all the races and tribes of humanity. Such an account cannot but be interesting, and we trust, that it may prove instructive.

The first difficulty we encounter is the question whether

the human race arose from a state of barbarism, or sunk from one of purity and intelligence. That God instituted marriage by creating man male and female, may be true in no other sense than it evidently is in regard to the other animals, which were also thus created, and have by natural constitution, such relations to each other.

In existing nations most primitive and savage, marriage' is the unceremonious appropriation of one or more females by the right of the strongest. We may suppose that the same was the case before the dawnings of civilization. But very early in the history of our race we find contracts made with certain impressive solemnities. Covenants were made memorable by an exchange of presents, still a custom among barbarous tribes, and the "know all men by these presents," preserved in forms of law, may bear such a meaning. Abraham made presents of sheep and oxen; the Phoenicians set up a pillar or raised a heap of stones; the Scythians poured wine into a vessel, mixed with it the blood of the contracting parties, and dipped into it a cimeter, arrows, a javelin, and with imprecations on whoever should break the agreement, the parties and their witnesses drank; the ancient Arabians cut their hands, and sprinkled the blood upon seven stones, invoking the gods; the ancient Medes and Lycians sucked the blood from each other's arms; the Nasamones drank with each other; the Greeks and Romans shook hands and swore by the gods, and the tombs of their ancestors.

But the most common pledge of good faith, is eating together. This is considered, all over the world, as a pledge of amity. A feast is, therefore, one of the earliest and most general modes of solemnizing a marriage contract: and for ages, and in many countries, it was the only one known. Marriage, as a religious ordinance or sacrament, has been recognised by but a small portion of the human race. It was such among the Greeks and Romans, who connected religion with all the actions of their lives, and invoked the gods in their most simple and familiar labors and pastimes.

All nations, of whom we have any historical account, ascribe the regulation of marriages to their first lawgivers. Thus Menes, first king of Egypt, is said to have first introduced matrimony, and fixed the laws concerning it; the

Greeks attribute the same institution to Cecrops; the Chinese to Fo Hi; the Peruvians to Manco Capac; and the Jews to God, himself. Mythology would seem to teach monogamy, or the marriage of one wife, though polygamy was occasionally the practice. Thus Jupiter had only his Juno; Pluto his Proserpine; Osiris his Isis; and the stolen amours of the gods, with the jealousies of their wives, point very significantly to the idea of confining the relation to a single couple, in theory, whatever irregularities were tolerated in practice.

But if we look back to the patriarchal ages, in oriental countries, where the highest type of humanity is held to have had its origin, we find polygamy to have existed time out of mind and as we have before noticed, even in the life time of Adam, in the ante-diluvian period. In the early ages, a wife was of much consequence and value. Her labor was of great use, for from her skill in handicraft, men derived shelter, clothing and many of the comforts of their simple life. When men were long lived, it was a great object to have many children, to take care of their flocks and herds, and for a defence against aggression. To be well-served, therefore, and to ensure a numerous progeny, men took a number of wives, and each wife strengthened the patriarch, by securing the friendship of the family from which she was taken. But as, in the order of Providence, men and women were born in nearly equal proportions, the demand for women caused a price to be set upon them, and the husband was obliged to purchase his wife, by paying a liberal sum; and this is still the case in China, where customs are petrified, and generally over Asia.

When the price agreed upon was paid, the marriage was celebrated with a feast. Laban gathered his friends and made a marriage feast, when he pretended to give Rachael to Jacob, for seven years labor, and then defrauded him, by placing Leah in the nuptial bed, instead of her more beautiful sister, to whom Jacob was married seven years afterward. Samson, when he married Delilah, gave a feast which lasted seven days. The Babylonians carried the splendor of their marriage-feasts to such an extravagant and ruinous extent, that they had to be restrained by law. Among the Scandinavians, the celebration of a marriage