laws which property and inheritance create; and, while in the former, other women are degraded by the will of the husband, they are here degraded by that of society, into the two subordinate classes of concubines and courtezans.

All of these classes, then exist-all contribute to the fabric of Western society! The rigid will say that society disclaims them: the philosopher must observe, that society creates and maintains them. It is of facts, not of creeds, that we speak.

Some of the causes of concubinage and courtezanism, as already shown, are natural ones; and I believe the chief of these to be the natural love of variety, a subject which I discussed in treating of infidelity.

The periods also are frequent in which woman is physically unable to indulge in love, even if at such times she were morally so disposed. It is not, therefore, difficult to see how natural it is, that man should either maintain a combat with his passions, or should find, in concubinage, a compensation for the defects of monogamy.

When, then, we consider, the frequency of these periods of indisposition on the part of woman, and when we add to this, that she is more frequently subject to sterility than he is, we cannot wonder that concubinage and courtezanism in the West are employed to compensate for polygamy in the East.

We know that true love for a woman will make man not not merely submit to inconveniences, but that these will only encrease his regard; and we cannot doubt that much true love exists in society, and produces all its chaste, peaceful and beneficent effects. But when matrimonial slavery and the other miseries

CONCUBINAGE IN ANCIENT AND MODERN TIMES. 285

of incongruous marriage are enhanced (and enhanced they will always most surely be in persons of the greatest sensibility) then the most powerful and the surest cause of concubinage and courtezanism must be called into activity.

What, then, does history tell us as to the universality of these vicious practices, in countries where monogamy has prevailed?

The Greeks appear to have had a favourable opinion of concubinage; it being permitted every where, and without scandal to keep as many concubines as they pleased. These were called rakhanides; consisted usually of women either taken captives, or bought with money; and were always deemed inferior to the law. ful wives, whose dowry, or parentage, or some other quality, gave them pre-eminence. There is frequent mention of them in Homer: Achilles had his Briseis, and in her absence Diomede; Patroclus, his Iphis; Menelaus and Agamemnon, and even Phoenix and Nestor, had their women. Nor, says a respectable writer, “is it to be wondered that heathens should run out into such excesses, when the Hebrews, and those the most renowned for piety, such as Abraham and David allowed themselves the same liberty."

In modern times, the conduct of the English and French is too notorious to require a comment.

In France, we know, that, from the time of Francis the First to the time of Louis the Fifteenth, its kings expended immense sums upon their concubines; and that the nobles almost universally followed their example.

"The name of Henry IV," says Mr. Bulwer, "is hardly more historical than that of the fair Gabrielle;

caresses.

nor has it ever been stated, in diminution of the respect still paid to this wise and beloved king, that his paramour accompanied him in the council, kissed him publicly before his court, and publicly received his No: the French saw nothing in this but that which was tout Français; and the only point which they considered of importance was, that the belle Gabrielle was really belle. On this point, considering their monarch's mistress as their own, they are inexorable; and nothing tended so much to depopularize Louis XIV as his matrimonial intrigue with the ugly old widow of Scarron.

"The use of concubines is so generally received at Venice," says Misson, "that the greater part of the wives live in good correspondence with their rivals.”

It is undeniable, that concubinage, is too apt to produce evil consequences. It may render home indifferent; it may require secrecy, deceit and fraud; it may lead to low and degrading associations, because women of delicacy will shrink from such association; may excite the jealous rage of the wife, &c. &c.

it

It would be curious to inquire why all this was not the case in ancient times, and in those nations among whom concubinage prevailed. Was this not the case, because concubinage was then lawful, because the wife and the concubine inhabited the same house, which could not therefore be rendered in one sense indifferent,—because secrecy, deceit and fraud, could never, in such case, be called into action,-because such associations were accordingly never low and de. grading, because the concubine was the inferior of the wife only in the absence of those pretensions which belong to an undisputed rank in society,-be

cause the want of modesty and humility in such case, became want of public as well as private decency,because jealousy on the part of the wife, was thus deprived of the causes of excitement ?-But, no doubt, some of the same ill effects existed.

I have thus further illustrated the nature of sexual love-I doubt whether polygamy and concubinage ever ministered sufficiently to all the variety which it licentiously demands.

That courtezanism, which does so minister, is both unsatisfactory and vicious, however inevitable under indissoluble marriage, will now appear.

In Grecian times, Asia, then deemed the mother of voluptuousness, produced the courtezans whose arts and occupations met with no check or restraint from the laxity of Ionian morals, and were even promoted and encouraged by the corruptions of the ancient religion. In most of the Greek colonies of Asia, temples were erected to the earthly Venus; where courtezans were not merely tolerated, but honoured, as priestesses of that divinity.

The wealthy and commercial city of Corinth first imported that practice from the East; and, as there was in it a temple of Venus, where the readiest method of gaining the goddess's favour, was to present her with beautiful damsels, who from that time were maintained in the temple and prostituted themselves for hire, Corinth became remarkable for being a nursery of courtezans; more than a thousand being at one time consecrated to the goddess.

The inhabitants of Corinth are indeed said to have attached great importance to this kind of celebrity, and purchased, in the neighbouring countries, and es

pecially in the islands of the Archipelago, young girls, whom they brought up to be consecrated to the worship of Venus, when they had attained the proper age. The handsomest of all the hetairai or hetairides were accordingly those of Corinth; and we are told by Strabo, that there were no less than a thousand there in his time. Hence xogiv diage, to act to Corinthian, is étagebεw, to commit fornication.

The Corinthians were a genteeler sort of courtezans, and accepted no lovers but such as were able to deposit a considerable sum, as we learn from Aristophanes. This gave occasion to the proverb Où лаντòs ἀνδρὸς ἐς Κόρινθον ἔθ' ὁ πλᾶς, which Horace has trans. lated, Non cuivis hominum contingit adire Corinthum.

. Their occupation, indeed, was very gainful, insomuch, that those whom beauty and talents recommended, frequently acquired great estates. A remarkable instance of this is recorded in Phryne, who offered the Thebans to rebuild the walls of their city when demolished by Alexander, on condition they would engrave on them this inscription-AAEANAΡΟΣ ΑΝΕΣΚΑΨΕΝ ΑΝΕΣΤΗΣΕ ΔΕ ΦΡΥΝΗ Η ETAIPA, i. e. These walls were demolished by Alexander, but raised by Phryne, the courtezan.

Aspasia, born at Miletus, the chief town of Ionia, was, we are told, the first who introduced Asiatic elegance into Europe; but Athenæus declares, that her disciples were few among the noble dames, and that the courtezans alone were eager in copying her dress and manners.

Wieland has remarked that, in Athens, where the domestic police was very severe, there were more he