ARTICLE V. THE PROGRESS OF SOCIETY AS INDICATED BY THE CON By E, D. Sanborn, Prof, of Latin Language and Literature, Dartmouth College, N. H. Ir women are by barbarians reduced to the level of slaves," says Aristotle, "it is because barbarians themselves have never yet risen to the rank of men, that is, of men fit to govern. Nothing proves more ruinous to a state than the defective education of women; since wherever the institutions respecting one half of the community are faulty, the corruption of that half will gradually taint the whole." The practical good sense of the philosopher, exhibited in these quotations, shows him to have been, not only in advance of his age, but superior even to himself: for the sentiments here advanced are more liberal and just than his ordinary speculations upon the relations and rights of females. The wisest of the ancients did not duly appreciate the influence of woman. Her authority was rarely acknowledged in the domestic circle, and her political existence was scarcely recognized. Previous to the introduction of Christianity, even by philosophers, woman was regarded rather as the servant of man, the minister of his wants and pleasures, than his friend, companion and equal. From Christianity woman has derived her moral and social influence. To it she owes her very existence as a social being. The mind of woman, which the legislators and sages of antiquity had doomed to eternal inferiority and imbecility, Christianity has developed. The gospel of Christ, in the person of its great Founder, has descended into this neglected mine, which wise men regarded as not worth the working, and brought up a priceless gem, flashing with the light of intelligence, and glowing with the lively hues of Christian graces. Christianity has been the restorer of woman's plundered rights. It has furnished the brightest jewels in her present crown of honor. Her previous degradation accounts, in part at least, for the instability of early civilization. It is impos sible for society to be permanently elevated, where woman is debased and servile. Wherever females are regarded as inferior beings, society contains, within itself, the elements of its own dissolution. It is impossible that institutions and usages, which trample upon the very instincts of our nature, and violate the revealed law of God, should be crowned with ultimate success. The family is a divine institution. The duties and rights of its respective members are plainly indicated by the laws of our physical constitution. They are more fully prescribed by the word of God. In the infancy of the world, the family and the state were intimately associated. Both society and government naturally grew out of the divinely constituted relations of the family. The first human pair were not "isolated savages," as they have been termed by groveling infidels, nor was the natural state of mankind a state of warfare, as the philosopher of Malmesbury would have us believe. Admitting what revelation clearly teaches, that the first human pair were intelligent, civilized beings, united by God, "in the bands of holy wedlock," we have then a foundation sufficiently broad for the whole social fabric to rest upon. We need not resort to a state of nature," (technically so called,) nor to a "social compact," for the origin of government, nor to "necessity" for the origin of society. The family contained the elements of both. An enlarged family is a society. The regulations adopted by a father, for the management of his household, constitutes a government. Upon this natural foundation "the state" is based. from these simple relations, an endless variety of political institutions has arisen. Though the family and "the state" are so closely united in their origin, still we must not confound their relations. The rights and the duties of the father and the magistrate, the son and the subject are, by no means, identical. "The state and the family differ, not only in size, but in the essentials of their constitution. At the same time, however, it is undeniable that there have been stages, in the history of humanity, when the ideas of state and family were closely interwoven and almost blended together. They were mixed in the patriarch; they were continued when the family grew into a tribe; they were not always formally separated when the tribe became a nation." A more enlightened philosophy has distinguished these analogous relations, and defined the duties and rights of the father and the magistrate. The government of the family is based upon mutual affection and sympathy; the government of the state upon mutual justice and political equality. Still the family is the nursery of all those virtues which adorn the state. "Patriotism, as all languages testify, springs from the hearth." The good father makes the good magistrate. The son, who has borne the yoke in his youth," makes the exemplary citizen; while the enlightened and cultivated mother and sister give to society its highest dignity, and to home its fondest endearments. Whatever interrupts the harmony of domestic life or disturbs its divinely-appointed relations, poisons the very well-springs of society, and introduces disease into its political organization. The tyrannical father is not a safe depository of delegated power. The disobedient son early learns to contemn the wholesome restraints of law; and before his maturity, often becomes a hardened culprit. The uneducated, undis ciplined daughter is often the disgrace of her family and the reproach of her sex. In a word, the condition of the family is the true index of the condition of society. Where domestic happiness is most fully enjoyed, there society is most matured and civilization most advanced. The family, therefore, obtains a higher importance as society improves and woman assumes the true position for which she is so admirably adapted by the laws of her physiological and mental constitution. Among savage nations the condition of woman is always degraded and servile. This is one of the most odious features of barbarism, and one of the most difficult to eradicate. No system of religion recognizes woman as the companion and equal of man, except Christianity, and under no other system can she enjoy her inalienable rights. Society may change in its external aspect, may exhibit the glitter of wealth, the refinements of taste, the embellishments of art, or the more valuable attainments of science and literature, and yet the mind of woman remain undeveloped, her taste uncultivated, and her person enslaved. But wherever Christianity enters, woman is free. The gospel, like a kind angel, opens her prison doors, and bids her walk abroad and enjoy the sunlight of reason and breathe the invigorating air of intellectual freedom. Among the nations of antiquity, woman enjoyed the highest consideration where the private virtues were most cultivated. With the Egyptians and Romans, the pleasures of home were better appreciated than in Greece. Though the intellectual culture of Greece was superior to that of Egypt, there is little doubt that the Greeks were less domes tic, and consequently less virtuous, than the Egyptians. The researches of antiquarians, among the ruins of Egypt, have recently thrown a flood of light upon the character of that interesting people, and rendered their history almost as familiar to us as the events of the last century. The paint ings and sculptures formed upon existing monuments reveal all the processes of the arts and of domestic life, with a definiteness and accuracy surpassing the most lucid narrative. Besides the sculptures, and pictorial representations of ancient usages, the cabinets of European kings and antiquaries are full of the remains of art. In these magnificent collections, may be found specimens of almost every article of furniture, tool and ornament, used by the Egyptians. It is probable that a work-shop, or a kitchen might be fitted up with its appropriate apparatus, from the tombs of Egypt. The paintings upon the walls of the tombs show us how they used the furniture and tools. The whole public and private life of the Egyptians, from the bloody arena of mailed war. riors, to the puppet show; from the dignified employments of the monarch, to the nursery-sports of children, are engraved and painted upon their enduring monuments. You may there, in imagination, mount the car of the victorious warrior, and ride with him over the bodies of his slaughtered foes, or accompany the priest to the very penetralia of his awful deity, without hearing the "procul este profani" from his shriveled lips; or you may step into the carriage of an Egyptian gentleman, and drive with him to a party in high life, seat yourself upon a divan, ottoman or splendid chair, rivaling modern art in its curious carvings and decorations, and witness the arrival and entertainment of guests, of both sexes, and discover no jealousy in the countenances of those antiquated belles. You may visit, if you please, the shops of the mechanics, the fields of the agriculturists, the pleasure grounds of the nobles, the kitchen of the housewife, the parlor of the lady; you will find the owners all at home, each with his stone countenance fixed and changeless as eternity. These pictorial illustrations of the private life and manners of this early age surpass, in accuracy and minuteness of detail, the most graphic description. Language may be equivocal; historians may be prejudiced, or misinformed; travellers may exaggerate, but these monuments cannot deceive these pictures cannot lie. These discoveries give unequivocal testimony in favor of the general accuracy and fidelity of Herodotus. They show that he was sometimes deceived, or perhaps imposed upon, but, in a great majority of instances, they confirm his state ments. For freedom from prejudice, accuracy of description and fidelity to truth, "the father of history" stands unrivalled, even among modern travellers. The united testimony of the historian and the paintings leave it beyond a doubt, that females in Egypt were treated with more respect than in any other nation of antiquity. Though frequently engaged in domestic employments, they were not confined and secluded, as in Greece, nor tasked and oppressed as among the Asiatics. They enjoyed that respect and consideration, which are the growth only of a high state of civilization and comparative moral purity. Of the mode of contracting marriage among the Egyptians very little is known. The marriage ceremony is nowhere represented in the paintings of their tombs. Diodorus informs us that, on account of the great benefits conferred on mankind by Isis, not only did the queen obtain greater authority and honor than the king, but the wife of the citizen governed her husband, and that he was bound by the marriage contract, to yield an unhesitating obedience to her commands. If such a custom ever obtained, it can hardly be supposed that the supremacy of the wife extended beyond the management of domestic affairs. It is certain, however, that royal authority was entrusted, without reserve, to women. They succeeded to the throne, by hereditary right, as in many of the states of modern Europe. They also assumed the office of regent at the death of their husbands. Herodotust asserts, that the office of the priesthood was, in every instance, confined to men; that there were no priestesses in Egypt, in the service of gods or goddesses. In this statement the historian is evidently mistaken, and he furnishes *Diodorus 1: 27. Herodotus 2: 35. |