him either to repudiate the fugitive or to let her be a "prevented one." It is understood that custom protects an "insurgent" wife only when she takes refuge with her relatives.[1] Some tribes have tariffed the thâmanth; and in case of repudiation the husband can only exact or receive the ordained sum. As for the tariff of the repudiated woman, it is nearly always more than the thâmanth, or price of the virgin and the widow. This is done counting on the avidity of the husband, to urge him to permit a fresh marriage.[2] Lastly, it is the rule that after four years' absence on the part of the husband the union is dissolved and the woman is free.[3] This is a wise law which certain European codes might borrow with advantage from Kabyle legislation.
It is a veritable godsend for scientific sociology to be able to know in its minute details all this curious regulation of Kabyle marriage. Too often we are forced to content ourselves, in regard to savage or barbarous peoples, with general assertions that have to be completed as well as may be from accounts that are incoherent, sometimes contradictory, and always fragmentary. Here we possess a whole barbarous code, quite an assemblage of old Berber customs, which are more or less confounded with the precepts of the Koran.
The law of Mahomet itself is only a sort of compromise between the ancient customs of Arabia and the Biblical precepts relating to marriage. On certain sides the Arab customs are superior to the severity of the Kabyle kanouns, but on others they are inferior to them, as, for example, in not affording to the wife the right of "insurrection."
It is necessary to distinguish between the text of the Koran and practice, which has notably departed from it—sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The Koran leaves to the husband the absolute right of repudiation. It orders that if the formula of repudiation has been pronounced three times, the husband cannot take back the wife until she has been married to another; it permits him to do it, therefore, in the contrary case.[4] It specifies that the repudiated wife should have a sufficient maintenance provided for her, and that the husband should not keep the
