Women Under Polygamy/Chapter 22
CHAPTER XXII
THE PERSIAN ANDERUN
The ancient Persians were a militant race, holding sway in the East of Asia and China. They subdued Egypt, and they spread westwards into Greece. In an early epoch they were cultured, and distinguished for their knowledge of astronomy and for their poetry. In A.D. 651 Persia was conquered by the Saracens, and about a century later Khouli-Khan led an army into India and laid the land waste.
Since the Fifteenth Century the country has been ruled by Shahs, who have lived in high state and grandeur. Most of the rulers in recent times have been friendly towards England, and one monarch visited our country some years ago. The religion of Persia is a form of Mohammedanism, but there are a considerable number of Armenian residents professing Christianity.
Extravagance on the part of the majority of the Shahs has caused discontent and trouble from time to time during the past ten years.
The capital, Teheran, has a population of 210,000. The Shah maintains a harem here, and also in other towns, containing a host of concubines, but he has only one legal wife.
Dr. Wills tells us that slavery in the Persian harems is an easy existence, and that the women rarely yearn for freedom. They are very well fed and clothed, and have but little work to perform. Many of the women of the anderun live to a ripe old age, and have no wish to leave the establishment. Kind treatment of harem, women and servants is the general rule. It is worthy of note that the Persians are kinder to animals than is the custom of most Oriental people.
The women most valued as servants are Abyssinians and Somalis. According to Dr. Wills[1] girls of from twelve to fourteen years of age are worth about £40 in purchase money; while damsels of lighter colour are often worth from £80 to £100. The very dark negroes are much less valuable.
The separate apartment system prevails in the harems, each beauty possessing sole rights over her quarters and her attendants. Only a few eunuchs are kept in this country, which goes to prove a greater freedom than most women enjoy in the life of the seraglio. The women are often excellent friends of each other, and on the authority of English writers, discord is infrequent.
The proportion of polygamous marriages in Persia has been set down as five per cent., or even two per cent., of the population. Probably concubinage is more widely spread than recognised plural marriage, but polygamy is certainly the exception and not the rule.
A book of Persian maxims on women proclaims:—
"Be that man's life immersed in gloom
Who weds more wives than one.
With one his cheeks retain their bloom,
His voice a cheerful tone;
These speak his honest heart at rest
And he and she are always blest;
But when with two he seeks for joy,
Together they his soul annoy.
With two no sunbeam of delight
Can make his day of misery bright."
Punishment will be meted out, therefore, to husbands who have acted unjustly or unkindly towards their wives. A husband must think always of his wife's welfare, and strive to please her in all things great and small. When he goes to the market he should buy her a gift of fruit and carry it home to her to show that he thinks of her pleasure. When the wife goes on a journey the husband must escort her. If she wishes her women visitors to remain in the house all night, she may give them couches in her chamber, and the husband must sleep alone.
Infractions of this somewhat exacting code for husbands can be remedied by the woman suing for separation. Divorce for men is not easy in Persia; in spite of Mohammedan legal provision, the process is difficult. It is easier for a woman to divorce her partner.
The evanescence of a husband's ardour is a grievous matter, and the neglected wife can leave the partner who denies her rights. A wife should at all times, and by every legitimate means, hold her position in the house, and keep her husband constant, just, and liberal towards her. She must not be imposed upon or interfered with by her husband's family. A woman must preserve an "indomitable independence." She may exert physical force, if she deems it necessary; and women are advised to use their fists, to pull the man's hair, and to kick him should he endeavour to thwart their desires.
A discontended wife should vex her spouse continually, with every form of feminine annoyance until he grows weary, and succumbs utterly to her sway. When her husband passes a loaf, she should throw it at his head.
When all these stratagems fail, the wife still has her remedy. She may seize all that is valuable in the house, and proceed to a judge, and place her case before him. Let her then pretend that she has been beaten, and show the marks on her flesh. Her evidence must be strong, but it may be concocted.
Kulsu'm Naneh, the Persian feminist, gives full advice to wives on the subject of retaining authority over husbands. No militant emancipator of women could be more precise and more vehement. This writer proposes a ceremony which symbolises the subjugation of husbands to wives. A large brass basin is set on the floor inverted, and a lighted lamp placed beneath. On the basin is a saddle and a pillow. While the bride sits in the saddle astride the bowl, the attendants sing:—
"The husband is saddled, the journey begun,
And the beautiful bride her own race has to run."
It will be assumed that Persian husbands are bound to give all and to accept little. But this is not quite the case. A woman must know how to please and humour a man. She should be trained by her mother from childhood in the art of love and endearment. A girl must "store, enrich, and dignify the mind." She is instructed to maintain her beauty, her charm of disposition, and to preserve good sense.
Women are seldom punished in Persia, and there is no part of the prisons reserved for female offenders.
In the preceding chapter I have shown the women of Persia in the light of the experience of Mr. W. S. Landor and Dr. Wills, two modern authorities, and from that of other travellers. It is perhaps a rosy picture. At any rate, Mrs. M. E. Hume Griffith, the writer of "Behind the Veil in Persia and Turkish Arabia," discerns many inequalities and evils in the lives of the anderun women. This author hints at tragedies in the harems of the two countries visited by her. She refers to poison being placed by jealous women in a rival's coffee. In her view, "love has no part in the life of a Moslem woman," and she regards the whole system of polygamy as one of "degradation and vice."
Mrs. M. E. Hume Griffith has only condemnation for the harem: "There is no hope for the children of Mohammedan lands until the mothers have learnt a little of the meaning of pure life and conversation. There is no hope for the women while the men are what they are. The whole system is one of degradation and vice."
"The longer I live amongst Moslem women the more my heart yearns with love and pity for them, and the more thankful I am that their lot is not mine."
"Poor, blind, misguided Moslem women of Mosul and other Mohammedan lands! How my heart aches for them! Will no one heed the cry of anguish and despair which goes up from their midst?"
In her volume "Journeys in Persia and Kurdistan," Miss Bird refers with pity to the condition of the Persian woman. She sees only the darker aspects of harem life, and declares that polygamy militates against all the higher interests of women. Miss Bird was allowed to converse with some of the inmates of the anderuns; and on one occasion she was introduced to the sixteen wives of an eminent khan.
The chieftain's brides said that there was much quarrelling and jealousy in the harems. The khan sat by the side of the reigning favourite, and almost disregarded his other wives. Some of the women visited by Miss Bird had stars painted on the backs of the hands, on the forehead and the chin. A few were beautiful, but others were ungainly in form. This writer says that at twenty the women look past forty. Many have fine eyes and shining black hair. The women of the wilder districts are healthy in appearance. Their hands are stained with henna, and they wear amulets. According to Miss Bird, Persian peasants keep as many women as they can afford, and even poor men own more than one wife. Polygyny is said to be common in the rural districts. The average family is large, and there is little infant mortality. In this matter Persia appears to contrast with India, where the infant death-rate is very high.
The women eagerly questioned their English visitor concerning the position of their sex in her own country. They often asked her if she could recommend them effective philtres for securing or retaining the affection of their husbands.
Miss Bird visited the Amir in Isfahan. He talked intelligently on his country, and was very interested in the replies to his questions about the women of Eng-
PERSIAN GIRL OF THE UPPER CLASS OF TEHERAN.
The costume is said to be the result of a Shah's admiration of the
Parisian ballet dress.
This observant traveller gives us an instructive picture of life among the Bakhtiari tribe of Persia, who are in many respects primitive in their customs. One of the men remarked that "women have no religion, for women won't live again." This belief is contrary to the teaching of the Koran. Polygamy prevails among these people, and Miss Bird regards the institution as degrading to women.
The harem system in Persia was probably adopted in ancient times through the example of Egypt. Herbert Spencer, in "Sociology," holds this view, and says that the sovereigns had three or four wives and a number of concubines. The favourite legal wife was the queen. Letourneau, quoting from the sacred Avesta, states that before the Egyptian influence the Persians had a very severe code of sexual morality. The laws regulating the relations of the sexes were, indeed, more strict than those in England at the present day. Resorting to courtesans was punishable, and seduction, sexual excesses, and procuring abortion were penal offences. Polygamy was not permitted. It was not even recognised. Marriage seems to have been rigidly monogamous, except when the first wife was infertile.
Quite probably plural marriage is still comparatively uncommon in Persia through the survival of ancient tradition discountenancing the practice. That the Avesta Code was formed by primitive Puritans is apparent, for it reveals a fear of the lures of the flesh. Polygamy and the concubinate may have followed upon a long period of sexual restriction and asceticism as a natural reaction. The theory is at all events worthy of fuller and careful investigation.
Concubinage still exists in Persia, as in other parts of Asia, as a relic of the former magnificence of royal palaces. The old monarchs of the country lived in great state, and the seraglio was an essential part of the splendour of courts. No doubt the survival of the harem is to be attributed to this love of ostentation and display rather than to men's strongly-developed amativeness. The harem stands for wealth, social superiority, and property. It is a symbol of the passion for the private ownership of expensive things.
Letourneau fails to trace any sign of maternal supremacy in ancient Persia. Yet, judging by the quotations from old Persian writers, in the preceding chapter of this book, women possessed many privileges pointing to matriarchal ideals. To-day we see that the grandmother and the mother are held in the highest reverence.
Term-marriages, or temporary unions, were allowed in early days, and according to Dubeux, in La Perse, they are still permitted. This seems to be a form of the mutʾah marriage, to which I have referred. In these contracts the wife is hired for a period, and at the end of the engagement both parties may marry again, or they may renew the intimacy. If the man desires to sever himself before the expiration of the agreed period, he must give to the woman the full amount of the fixed sum. No children born of these unions are considered illegitimate. They have full civic rights, and can legally inherit property.
This ephemeral wedlock is, no doubt, an example of trial-marriage, a fairly common custom in many parts of the world. Such temporary alliances were frequent until recent times in the British Islands, and especially in Wales.[2]
In old days there seems to have been no penalty for adultery in Persia. There have been severe punishments for this offence in modern times. Both of the guilty persons have suffered death. But the cases of proven infidelity are rare in Mohammedan nations. Mohammed was more merciful than Moses in laying down the law of adultery. The suspected woman was allowed to establish her innocence by an oath repeated four times. Moreover, there must be four accredited witnesses to the act of unfaithfulness.
In "Queer Things about Persia," by Eustache de Lory and Douglas Sladen, the authors relate that there have been death penalties for adultery in modern times. At Tabriz, not very long ago, an offending woman was enclosed in a sack and clubbed to death; and there are deep wells in Persia into which adulterous wives used to be thrown. These writers say that crimes and intrigues are not infrequent in the harems.
Their testimony as to the position of women contradicts, on the whole, the views of authors already cited. "Polygamy is less general in Persia than one would believe"; but the practice is not very uncommon in the country districts. Here the men find that more than one helpmate proves useful in tillage and industry. Wife-beating is not unknown amongst the rural population, but it is not a common practice in the upper classes.
The authors of the above-mentioned work state that the temporary unions, which we have noted, were instituted as a check upon prostitution. There are courtesans in the towns, and Mr. W. S. Landor says that the diseases inseparable from sexual irregularity are common.
Schools for girls have been opened lately in the Persian cities. Some of the ladies of influential families are becoming learned, and they are able linguists, speaking several languages.[3] Nevertheless, the status of women, in the opinion of these observers, is unfavourable to their mental progress. Nor are they defenders of the position of women in marriage. There is no true intimacy between husband and wife. As in India, husbands and wives do not eat together, and in the streets the men walk in front of the woman. I have already alluded to the Hindu origin of the latter custom. It is doubtful whether it can be accepted as an indication of the inferiority of women. The authors refer to the dominance of mothers in the home-life, and corroborate the statements that I have quoted concerning the respect shown by sons. Mothers are the chief counsellors of their children, even in manhood.
The Shah exercises the privilege of claiming any woman upon whom he casts an approving eye. Monarchs have caused all the women, married and single, in a village, to assemble in the streets in long lines, and they have selected some of the more attractive for the royal anderun. The women are never unwilling; on the contrary, no greater honour can be paid to them than to grace the palace. No objection is raised by the husbands, who often receive a solatium or royal favour.[4]
One of the Shahs had a thousand children. Occasionally a European woman elects to enter a Persian seraglio. The writers whom I have quoted above give an instance of an English girl who became the wife of a Kurdish chief.
- ↑ "In the Land of the Lion and the Sun."
- ↑ See "Chapters on Human Love" ("Geoffrey Mortimer") Walter M. Gallichan.
- ↑ Eustache de Lory and Douglas Sladen. Op. cit.
- ↑ Eustache de Lory and Douglas Sladen. Op. cit.