[4] Studien ueber die Libido Sexualis, I., Pt.  I., 28.

[5] In the last chapter of Lotos-Time in Japan.

[6] An amusing instance of this trait may be found in Johnston’s account of his ascent of the Kilima-Njaro (271-276).

[7] Roth’s sumptuous volume, British North Borneo, gives a life-like picture of the Dyaks from every point of view, with numerous illustrations.

[8] See the chapter on Nudity and Bathing in my Lotos-Time in Japan.

[9] Bancroft, II., 75; Wallace, 357; Westermarck, 195; Humboldt, III., 230.

[10] See especially the ninth chapter of Westermarck’s History of Human Marriage, 186-201.

[11] Westermarck (74) devotes half a page in fine type to an enumeration of the peoples among whom many such customs prevailed, and his list is far from being complete.

[12] See Westermarck, Chap.  XX., for a list of monogamous peoples.

[13] The vexed question of promiscuity hinges on this distinction.  As a matter of form promiscuity may not have been the earliest phase of human marriage, but as a matter of fact it was.  Westermarck’s ingeniously and elaborately built up argument against the theory of promiscuity is a leaning tower which crashes to the ground when weighted by this one consideration.  See the chapter on Australia.

[14] For a partial list of peoples who practised trial marriage and frequent divorce see Westermarck, 518-521, and C. Fischer, Ueber die Probennaechte der deutschen Bauernmaedchen_.  Leipzig, 1780.

[15] For the distinction between sentiment and sentimentality see the chapter on Sensuality, Sentimentality, and Sentiment.

[16] Johnston states (in Schoolcraft, IV., 224) that the wild Indians of California had their rutting season as regularly as have the deer and other animals.  See also Powers (206) and Westermarck (28).  In the Andaman Islands a man and woman remained together only till their child was weaned, when they separated to seek new mates (Trans.  Ethnol.  Soc., V., 45).

[17] The other cases of “jealousy” cited by Westermarck (117-122) are all negatived by the same property argument; to which he indeed alludes, but the full significance of which he failed to grasp.  It is a pity that language should be so crude as to use the same word jealousy to denote three such entirely different things as rage at a rival, revenge for stolen property, and anguish at the knowledge or suspicion of violated chastity and outraged conjugal affection.  Anthropologists have studied only the lower phases of jealousy, just as they have failed to distinguish clearly between lust and love.

[18] All these facts, it is hardly necessary to add, serve as further illustrations to the chapter How Sentiments Change and Grow.

[19] For “love” read covet.  We shall see in the chapter on Australia that love is a feeling altogether beyond the mental horizon of the natives.