Part 2

[7] “Now as to these vows of virginity, Heliogabalus did promulgate a law to the effect that no Roman maid, not even a Vestal Virgin, was bound to perpetuate virginity, saying how that the female sex was over weak for women to be bound to a pact they could never be sure of keeping.” (Brantôme: _Lives of Fair and Gallant Ladies_.) The author of this edict was not without a knowledge of sexual psychology, for we have ample evidence that some of the Vestals failed in their duty, which was, nominally, to guard the sacred fire and the Holy Things of Rome. “Far up by Porta Pia,” says F. Marion Crawford (_Ave Roma Immortalis_: London, 1903), “over against the new Treasury, under a modern street, lie the bones of guilty Vestals, buried living, each in a little vault two fathoms deep, with the small dish and crust and the earthen lamp that soon flickered out in the close, damp air.” Vestal Virgins had many privileges denied to other Roman women; they were free for life; they had a right to be present at the Emperor’s games; and they were treated with marked respect by the highest in the land. That the privileges of virginity did not necessarily make for the owner’s happiness is instanced by Brantôme’s grim story. “Maids and virgins,” he writes (_Lives of Fair and Gallant Ladies_), “would seem in old days at Rome to have been highly honoured and privileged, so much so that the law had no jurisdiction over them to sentence them to death. Hence the story we read of a Roman Senator in the time of the Triumvirate, which was condemned to die among other victims of the Proscription, and not he alone, but all the offspring of his loins. So when a daughter of his house did appear on the scaffold, a very fair and lovely girl, but of unripe years and yet a virgin, ‘twas needful for the executioner to deflower her himself and take her maidenhead on the scaffold, and only then when she was so polluted, could he ply his knife upon her. The Emperor Tiberius did delight in having fair virgins thus publicly deflowered, and then put to death,--a right villainous piece of cruelty, pardy!”

“Several authors worthy of credence assure us that these vestals were guarded by eunuchs. The temple at Cuzco had one thousand virgins, that of Caranqua two hundred. It would appear, however, that the virginity of these vestals was not so very sacred after all, for the Inca Kings used to choose from among them concubines for themselves or for their principal vassals and favourite friends.

“Marco Polo narrates how young girls were exposed by their mothers on the public highway in order that travellers might freely make use of them.[8] A young girl was expected to have at least twenty presents earned by such prostitutions before she could hope to find a husband. This did not prevent them from being very virtuous after marriage, nor their virtue from being much appreciated.[9]

[8] _C.f._ Herodotus, who tells us that in the fifth century before Christ every woman, once in her life, had to come to the temple of Mylitta, the Babylonian Venus, and yield herself to the first stranger who threw a coin in her lap, in worship of the goddess. The money could not be refused, however small the amount, but it was given as an offertory to the temple, and the woman, having followed the man and thus made oblation to Mylitta, returned home and lived chastely ever afterwards. (Havelock Ellis: _Studies in the Psychology of Sex_: vol. 6: _Sex in Relation to Society_.) Havelock Ellis has quoted Herodotus in relation to prostitution, holding that its origin is to be found primarily in religious custom. In our opinion, the practice also merits inclusion in a catalogue of virginal folk-lore, and we are further justified in our view by the statement that the woman who so yielded herself lived chastely ever afterwards.

[9] “In old times we read of a custom in the isle of Cyprus, which ‘tis said the kindly goddess Venus, the patroness of that land, did introduce. This was that the maids of that island should go forth and wander along the banks, shores and cliffs of the sea, for to earn their marriage portions by the generous giving of their bodies to mariners, sailors and seafarers along that coast. These would put in to shore on purpose, very often indeed turning from their straight course by compass to land there; and so taking their pleasant refreshment with them, would pay handsomely, and presently hie them away again to sea, for their part only too sorry to leave such good entertainment behind. Thus would these fair maids win their marriage dowers, some more, some less, some high, some low, some grand, some lowly, according to the beauty, gifts and carnal attractions of each damsel.” (Brantôme: _Lives of Fair and Gallant Ladies_.)

“Waitz assures us that in several countries of Africa a young girl is preferred for wife when she has made herself remarked by several amours and by much fecundity. (_C.f._ Havelock Ellis, _op. cit._, vol.6: ‘Equally unsound is the notion that the virgin bride brings her husband at marriage an important capital which is consumed in the first act of intercourse and can never be recovered. That is a notion which has survived into civilisation, but it belongs to barbarism and not to civilisation. So far as it has any validity it lies within a sphere of erotic perversity which cannot be taken into consideration in an estimation of moral values. For most men, however, in any case, whether they realise it or not, the woman who has been initiated into the mysteries of love has a higher erotic value than the virgin,[10] and there need be no anxiety on this ground concerning the wife who has lost her virginity.’)

[10] “I am not surprised if the Phœnicians, according to St. Athanasius, obliged their daughters, by severe laws, to suffer themselves before marriage to be deflowered by valets, or also that the Armenians, as Strabo relates, sacrificed their daughters in the temple of the Goddess Anaitis, with the object of being eased of their maidenheads, so as to be able afterwards to find advantageous marriages suited to their condition; for one cannot describe what exhaustion and what sufferings a man has to undergo in his first action, at all events if the girl be narrow.... It is far sweeter to have connection with a woman accustomed to the pleasures of love than to caress one who has not yet known a man; for as we ask a locksmith to ease the wards of a new lock he brings us, to save us the trouble we might have the first day, so had the nations of whom we spoke good reason for establishing such laws.” (Nicolas Venette: _La Génération de L’Homme, ou Tableau de L’Amour Conjugal_: Paris, 1751.)

“It was impossible,” continues Dr. Jacobus X--, “ever to find the signs of virginity among the Machacura women in Brazil, and Feldner explains the reason thus:--

“‘Among them a virgin is never to be found, for this reason: that the mother from her daughter’s tenderest years endeavours with the utmost care to remove all tightness of the vagina and obstacle therein. With this end in view, the leaf of a tree folded in the shape of a funnel is held in the right hand, then while the index finger is introduced into the genital parts and worked to and fro, warm water is admitted by means of the funnel.’ (_Journey Across Brazil_, 1828.)

“Among the Sakalaves in Madagascar the young girls deflower themselves, when the parents have not previously seen to this necessary preparation for marriage.

“Among the Balanti of Senegambia, one of the most degraded races in Africa, the girls cannot find a husband until they have been deflowered by their King, who often exacts costly presents from his female subjects for putting them in condition to be able to marry.

“Barth, (1856), in describing Adamad, says that the chief of the Bagoli used to lie the first night with the daughters of the Fulba, a people under his sway. Similar facts are related of the aborigines of Brazil and of the Kinipeto Esquimaux.

“Demosthenes informs us that there was a celebrated Greek hetaira, named Mæra, who had seven slaves whom she called her daughters, so that being supposed to be free a higher price was paid for their favours. She sold their virginity five or six times over, and ended by selling the whole lot together.

“The god Mutinus, Mutunus or Tutunus of ancient Rome used to have the new brides come and sit upon his knees, as if to offer him their virginity. St. Augustine says: ‘In the celebration of nuptials the newly wed bride used to be bidden sit on the shaft of Priapus.’ Lactantius gives more precise details: ‘And Mutunus, in whose shameful lap brides sit, in order that the god may appear to have gathered the first-fruits of their virginity.’ It appears, however, that this offering was not merely symbolical, for when they had become wives, they used to return to the favourite deity to pray for fecundity.[11]

[11] “According to Festus, _Mutinus_ is a god differing wholly from Priapus, having a public sanctuary at Rome, where the statue was placed sitting with _penis_ erect. Newly mated girls were placed in his lap, before being led away to their husbands, so that the deity might appear to have foretasted their virginity, this being supposed to render the bride fruitful.” (_Priapeia_: Cosmopoli, 1890.) Schurig (_Gynæcologia_: _op. cit. sup._) instances the Indian custom of deflowering young brides by means of an enormous priapus in the temples.

“Arnobius also asks: ‘Is it Tutunus, on whose huge organs and bristling tool you think it an auspicious and desirable thing that your matrons should be mounted?’

“Pertunda was another hermaphrodite divinity that St. Augustine maliciously proposed rather to name the _Deus Pretundus_ (who strikes first); it was carried on to the nuptial bed to aid the bridegroom: ‘Pertunda stands there ready in the bed-chamber for the aid of husbands excavating the virgin pit.’ (Arnobius.)

“The Kondadgis (Ceylon), the Cambodgians, and other peoples charged their priests with the defloration of their brides.

“Jager communicated to the Berlin Anthropological Society a passage from Gemelli Cancri, which mentions a _stupratio officialis_[12] practised at a certain period among the Bisayos of the Philippine Islands: ‘There is no known example of a custom so barbarous as that which had been there established, of having public officials, and even paid very dearly, to take the virginity of young girls, the same being considered to be an obstacle to the pleasures of the husband. As a fact there no longer exists any trace of this infamous practice since the establishment of the Spanish rule, ... but even to-day a Bisayo feels vexed to find his wife safe from suspicion, because he concludes, that not having excited the desire of anyone, she must have some bad quality which will prevent him from being happy with her.’

[12] _i.e._, a legalised defilement or ravishing. Blondeau, in his _Dictionnaire érotique latin-français_ (Liseux: Paris, 1885), translates _stupratio_ as “a combat in which one forces a beauty to yield to one’s passion ... to take possession of the honour of some pretty woman ... the struggle in which women succumb with pleasure.” _Stupro_, the verb; _stuprator_, the noun; and _stupratus_, the adjective have kindred meanings.

“On the Malabar Coast, also, there were Brahmins whose only religious office was to gather the virgin flower of young girls. These latter used to pay them for it, without which they could not find husbands. The King of Calicut himself used to grant the right of the first night to a Brahmin; the King of Tamassat grants it to the first stranger who arrives in the town; whereas the King of Campa reserves to himself the _jus primæ noctis_[13] for all the marriages in the kingdom. (_De Gubernatis, Histoire des voyageurs italiens aux Indes Orientales_: Livourne, 1875.)

[13] An old established practice whereby newly married women are deflowered by others than their husbands, whether by priest, lord, or stranger. To discuss this relic of feudalism would be beyond the scope of a note; it is summed up briefly in the idea that the lord of a domain was entitled to exact tribute from his subjects in the form of intercourse with every bride on the first night of her marriage. Our readers are referred to Dr. Karl Schmidt’s _Jus Primæ Noctis (The Law of the First Night)_, the most comprehensive treatise on the subject.

“Warthema says that the King of Calicut, when he took a wife, chose the most worthy and learned Brahmin to deflower the maiden; for this service he received from 400 to 500 crowns. At Tenasserim fathers used to beg of their daughters to allow themselves to be deflowered by Christians or Mohammedans.

“Pascal de Andagoya, who visited Nicaragua between 1514 and 1522, says that it was usual for a grand-priest to lie during the first night with the bride, and Oviedo, (1535), speaking of the Acovacks and other American nations, relates that the wife, in order that the marriage should be happy, passed the first nuptial night with the priest or _piache_, and Gomarra, (1551), relates the same thing of the inhabitants of Cumana.

“In Europe, young girls who are not very virtuous, and who have studied all the various forms of flirtation, are most generally passed off as virgins when they marry. Even when it does not really exist, there are many ways by which a virginity--which perhaps has been sold over and over again by expert and clever procuresses--can be simulated. A little time before going to the nuptial bed, the girl inserts into her vagina a few drops of pigeon’s blood; or in some cases she selects for her wedding day the last day of menstruation. A sponge, skilfully placed, allows the blood to flow at the moment of the catastrophe, when a sudden ‘Oh!’ announces to the unsuspecting husband that the temple has been violated for the first time, and that the veil of the _sanctum sanctorum_ has really been rent by him. Add also to these methods injections so astringent that, at the required time, they will give to a prostitute, whose gap has been widened by a thousand customers, a tightness greater than that of a real virgin.”

The more one examines the question, the more one is convinced that virginity or chastity has come to be regarded as a spiritual and moral asset only in civilised, or comparatively civilised, society. “In considering the moral quality of chastity among savages,” writes Havelock Ellis (_Studies in the Psychology of Sex_, vol. 6, p. 147), “we must carefully separate that chastity which among semi-primitive peoples is exclusively imposed upon women. This has no moral quality whatever, for it is not exercised as a useful discipline, but merely enforced in order to heighten the economic and erotic value of women.

“Many authorities believe that the regard for women as property furnishes the true reason for the widespread insistence on virginity in brides. Thus A. B. Ellis, speaking of the West Coast of Africa (_Yoruba Speaking Peoples_, pp. 183 _et seq._), says that girls of good class are betrothed as mere children, and are carefully guarded from men, while girls of lower class are seldom betrothed, and may lead any life they choose.”

Virginity in woman, it seems, has been set on a pedestal unsupported by history, science, or investigation. It is obviously the outcome of man’s desire, when he buys or acquires, to obtain unsoiled goods. Comes a time, however, when the value of these so-called unsoiled goods grows questionable. Something virgin, in terms of common sense, is not necessarily something valuable; here enters the thinking, and, ultimately, the erotic, element. Let a man fall to asking why he demands virginity, and he will speedily begin to realise that it is the last thing he requires. Virginity spells ignorance, awkwardness and obstacles; maturity means understanding and co-operation. Thus, by easy stages, we reach the conclusion, mentioned by Havelock Ellis and quoted above, that for most men, whether they realise it or not, the love-wise woman has a greater erotic value than the virgin.[14]

[14] Brantôme, of course, has some pertinent remarks on the subject. In his _Lives of Fair and Gallant Ladies_, he devotes the seventh _Discourse_ to the following topic: _Concerning married women, widows and maids,--to wit, which of these same be better than other to love_. “One day,” writes the genial philosopher, “when I was at the Court of Spain at Madrid, and conversing with a very honourable lady, ... she did chance to ask me this question following:--’Which of the three had the greater heat of love: widow, wife or maid?’ After myself had told her mine opinion she did in turn give me hers in some such terms as these: ‘That albeit maids, with all that heat of blood that is theirs, be right well disposed to love, yet do they not love so well as wives and widows. This is because of the great experience of the business the latter have, and the obvious fact that supposing a man born blind, ... he can never desire the gift of sight so strongly as he that has sweetly enjoyed the same a while and then been deprived of it.’” Later, quoting Boccaccio, Brantôme also says:--“The widow is more painstaking of the pleasure of love an hundred fold than the virgin, seeing the latter is all for dearly guarding her precious virginity and maidenhead. Further, virgins be naturally timid, and above all in this matter, awkward and inept to find the sweet artifices and pretty complaisances required under divers circumstances in such encounters. But this is not so with the widow, who is already well practised, bold and ready in this art, having long ago bestowed and given away what the virgin doth make so much ado about giving.... Beside all this, the maid doth dread this first assault of her virginity, ... whereas widows have no such fear, but do submit themselves very sweetly and gently, even when the assailant be of the roughest.”

Quoting Westermarck (_History of Human Marriage_), he goes on to refer to the fact that the seduction of an unmarried girl “is chiefly, if not exclusively, regarded as an offence against the parents or family of the girl,” and there is no indication that it is ever held by savages that any wrong has been done to the woman herself.

“Westermarck realises at the same time,” adds Havelock Ellis, “that the preference given to virgins has also a biological basis in the instinctive masculine feeling of jealousy in regard to women who have had intercourse with other men, and especially in the erotic charm for men of the emotional state of shyness which accompanies virginity.”

Here, in all probability, are the most powerful reasons for the value placed on virginity; each reason, too, is highly practical. Who among us truly wants to share his most treasured possession? And the shy charm of virginity ‘neath the attack of the amorous lover is as undeniable as it is indescribable. Hence the virgin’s lure for the old and worn-out roué, who finds in her shrinking reluctance a stimulant to his erotic prowess which sympathy, boldness, even lewdness, have no power to furnish. That quaint old book, “_Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure_,” (London, 1780), gives a typical account of the attempt and failure of an aged rake to ravish the then virginal heroine of the story.[15]

[15] We can supplement these remarks by a further quotation from that curious work already noticed, _The Battles of Venus_, wherein we read: “This lust, then, after the _untouched_ morsel, I take not to be an original dictate of nature; but consequently to result from much experience with women, which has been demonstrated to lead to novelty of wishes from fastidious impotence.... Yet, in truth, I esteem the fruition of a virgin to be, with respect both to the mind and body of the enjoyer, the highest aggravation of sensual delight. In the first place, his fancy is heated with the prospect of enjoying a woman, after whom he has perhaps long sighed and has been in pursuit, who he thinks has never before been in bed with a man, (in whose arms never before has man laid), and in triumphing in the first sight of her virgin charms. This precious operation, then, of fancy, has been shown in the highest degree to prepare the body for enjoyment. Secondly, his body perceives, in that of a virgin, the cause of the greatest aggravation of delight. I mean not only in the coyness and resistance which she makes to his efforts, but when he is on the point of accomplishing them: when arrived, as the poet sings, ‘on the brink of giddy rapture,’ when in pity to a tender virgin’s sufferings, he is intreated not to break fiercely in, but to spare ‘fierce dilaceration and dire pangs.’ The resistance which the small, and as yet unopened, mouth of bliss makes to his eager endeavours, serves only, and that on a physical principle, to strengthen the instrument of his attack, and concurs, with the instigation of his ardent fancy, to reinforce his efforts, to unite all the co-operative powers of enjoyment, and to produce an emission copious, rapid, and transporting.... ‘In this case, part of the delight arises from considering that ... you feel the convulsive wrigglings of the chaste nymph you have so long adored....’” Our acknowledgements are again due to Pisanus Fraxi, from whose _Index Librorum Prohibitorum_ our extract is taken. The author of _The Battles of Venus_, it need hardly be said, is in no sense an authority; his work, indeed, is pornographic rather than artistic; at the same time, it is impossible to ignore his flashes of insight into a question which has exercised the minds of the greatest psychologists.

At certain times and with certain peoples the virgin maid has been fenced about with all manner of safeguards up to the very hour of her marriage; but have these and other peoples ever troubled to preserve the virginity of their daughters as they were at pains to guard the chastity of their wives? What nation ever inflicted that ghastly contrivance, the Girdle of Chastity, upon its virgin daughters? This bar to erotic pleasure was reserved exclusively for the potentially froward wife.

Originating in the woollen band worn by the Spartan virgins[16]--a garment removed for the first time by the husband on the wedding night--these Girdles of Chastity, with their padlocks and keys, were undoubtedly in use in the fourteenth or fifteenth century, and in use for an unmistakable purpose. “The first to employ this apparatus,” says Dr. Jacobus X--(_Ethnology of the Sixth Sense_: Charles Carrington: Paris, 1899), “was Francis of Tarrara, Provost of Padua in the fourteenth century. It was a belt having a central piece made of ivory, with a barbed narrow slit down the middle, which was passed between the legs and fixed there by lock and key. A specimen of this safety apparatus is to be seen actually at the Musée de Cluny in Paris.”