THE CHEMAWA AMERICAN
5
bridegroom have their hands bound together and among the Gonds of
India the actual marriage ceremony consists of tying together the gar
ments of the bride and bridegroom. The last instances show us the
origin of the present-day "wedding-ring" . The cord of the primitive
Ceylonese and the twisted grass of the Hindoo have been transferred by
us into the more esthetic and convenient ring of gold.
On the other hand, the Australian bride is compelled to carry fire
into the tent of the groom, in token of her submission. In Grotia the
bridegroom boxes the ears of his future wife, in order to indicate that,
henceforth, he will be her master, while in ancient Russia the father of
the bride took a new whip and after striking her gently with it, told
her that he did so for the last time. He then presented the whip to
the bridegroom. Even our own wedding ceremonies are indicative of
this idea of the wife's subjection, through the formula which every
bride is expected to recite: "I promise to love, honor, and obey."
Many people seem to believe, that the religious phase of our present
day weddings owes its origin to the introduction of some higher form of
religion. This is the most erroneous idea, as it can be shown that this
element has its counterpart among pagan nations. As a matter of fact,
religion had at first absolutely nothing to do with the marriage ceremony.
Among the Hebrews marriage was no religious contract, and there is no
trace of a priestly connection of it, either in the Scriptures or in the
Talmud. Among the Mohammedans also marriage is a mere civil con
tract, although concluded with a prayer to Allah. The founder of the
Christian Church did not prescribe any ceremonies in connection with
it, and if the early Christians asked for their pastor's benediction, they
did so on their own accord. In Germany marriage was comsidered
valid even without ecclesiastical benediction until the year 1563, and
Luther himself was of the opinion that matrimonial affairs did not be
long to the Chnrch. And yet, we find that almost all people, pagan
and civilized, contract their marriages with the assistance of a shaman,
or chief, or priest. How is this to be accounted for? In a very simple
manner. As soon as marriage became a social institution, recognized
and respected by each member of a - certain community, the necessity
arose to legalize it by or before a witness. And what witness could there
be more desirable among a savage people than the chief, or shaman, or,
as a further step, the priest of a religious sect? We, at the very height
of intellectual and moral progress have gone back to the primitive idea
of the functions of a priest or chief during a marriage ceremony. Our
Justices of the Peace, and Alderman take the place of the ancient chiefs
and shamans, and we employ their services not so much in order , to have
them tie the marriage-knot, but rather to serve as legal witness to the
actual contracting of the marriage. Such was the nature of the service