e
parties is crystallised out of its physical and subjective mode and lifted to the thought of what is
substantive； instead of continually reserving to itself the contingency and caprice of bodily desire； it
removes the marriage bond from the province of this caprice； surrenders to the substantive； and
swears allegiance to the Penates； the physical moment it subordinates until it becomes something
wholly conditioned by the true and ethical character of the marriage relation and by the recognition
of the bond as an ethical one。 It is effrontery and its buttress； the Understanding； which cannot
apprehend the speculative character of the substantial tie； nevertheless； with this speculative
character there correspond both ethical purity of heart and the legislation of Christian peoples。
Addition： Friedrich von Schlegel in his Lucinde； and a follower of his in the Briefe eines
Ungenannten； I have put forward the view that the wedding ceremony is superfluous and a
formality which might be discarded。 Their reason is that love is； so they say； the substance of
marriage and that the celebration therefore detracts from its worth。 Surrender to sensual impulse is
here represented as necessary to prove the freedom and inwardness of love … an argument not
unknown to seducers。
It must be noticed in connection with sex…relations that a girl in surrendering her body loses her
honour。 With a man； however； the case is otherwise； because he has a field for ethical activity
outside the family。 A girl is destined in essence for the marriage tie and for that only； it is therefore
demanded of her that her love shall take the form of marriage and that the different moments in
love shall attain their true rational relation to each other。
§ 165。
The difference in the physical characteristics of the two sexes has a rational basis
and consequently acquires an intellectual and ethical significance。 This
significance is determined by the difference into which the ethical substantiality；
as the concept； internally sunders itself in order that its vitality may become a
concrete unity consequent upon this difference。
§ 166。
Thus one sex is mind in its self…diremption into explicit personal self…subsistence
and the knowledge and volition of free universality； i。e。 the self…consciousness of
conceptual thought and the volition of the objective final end。 The other sex is
mind maintaining itself in unity as knowledge and volition of the substantive； but
knowledge and volition in the form of concrete individuality and feeling。 In
relation to externality； the former is powerful and active； the latter passive and
subjective。 It follows that man has his actual substantive life in the state； in
learning； and so forth； as well as in labour and struggle with the external world
and with himself so that it is only out of his diremption that he fights his way to
self…subsistent unity with himself。 In the family he has a tranquil intuition of this
unity； and there he lives a subjective ethical life on the plane of feeling。 Woman；
on the other hand； has her substantive destiny in the family； and to be imbued
with family piety is her ethical frame of mind。
Remark： For this reason； family piety is expounded in Sophocles' Antigone … one of the most
sublime presentations of this virtue … as principally the law of woman； and as the law of a
substantiality at once subjective and on the plane of feeling； the law of the inward life； a life which
has not yet attained its full actualisation； as the law of the ancient gods； 'the Gods of the
underworld； as 'an everlasting law； and no man knows at what time it was first put forth'。 This law
is there displayed as a law opposed to public law； to the law of the land。 This is the supreme
opposition in ethics and therefore in tragedy； and it is individualised in the same play in the
opposing natures of man and woman。
Addition： Women are capable of education； but they are not made for activities which demand
a universal faculty such as the more advanced sciences； philosophy； and certain forms of artistic
production。 Women may have happy ideas； taste； and elegance； but they cannot attain to the ideal。
（Ideale。 By this word Hegel means 'the Beautiful and whatever tends thither' （Science of Logic； i。
163； footnote）。 It is to be distinguished； therefore； from Ideelle＇ The difference between men and
women is like that between animals and plants。 Men correspond to animals； while women
correspond to plants because their development is more placid and the principle that underlies it is
the rather vague unity of feeling。 When women hold the helm of government； the state is at once in
jeopardy； because women regulate their actions not by the demands of universality but by
arbitrary inclinations and opinions。 Women are educated … who knows how？ … as it were by
breathing in ideas； by living rather than by acquiring knowledge。 The status of manhood； on the
other hand； is attained only by the stress of thought and much technical exertion。
§ 167。
In essence marriage is monogamy because it is personality … immediate exclusive
individuality … which enters into this tie and surrenders itself to it； and hence the
tie's truth and inwardness （i。e。 the subjective form of its substantiality） proceeds
only from the mutual； whole…hearted； surrender of this personality。 Personality
attains its right of being conscious of itself in another only in so far as the other is
in this identical relationship as a person； i。e。 as an atomic individual。
Remark： Marriage； and especially monogamy； is one of the absolute principles I on which the
ethical life of a community depends。 Hence marriage comes to be recorded as one of the moments
in the founding of states by gods or heroes。
§ 168。
Further； marriage results from the free surrender by both sexes of their
personality … a personality in every possible way unique in each of the parties。
Consequently； it ought not to be entered by two people identical in stock who are
already acquainted and perfectly known to one another； for individuals in the
same circle of relationship have no special personality of their own in contrast
with that of others in the same circle。 On the contrary； the parties should be
drawn from separate families and their personalities should be different in origin。
Since the very conception of marriage is that it is a freely undertaken ethical
transaction； not a tie directly grounded in the physical organism and its desires； it
follows that the marriage of blood…relations runs counter to this conception and so
also to genuine natural feeling。
Remark： Marriage itself is sometimes said to he grounded not in natural rights but simply in
instinctive sexual impulses； or again it is treated as a contract with an arbitrary basis。 External
arguments in support of monogamy have been drawn from physical considerations such as the
number of men and women。 Dark feelings of repulsion are advanced as the sole ground for
prohibiting consanguineous marriage。 the basis of all these views is the fashionable idea of a state
of nature and a natural origin for rights； and the lack of the concept of rationality and freedom。
Addition： A sense of shame … to go no farther … is a bar to consanguineous marriage。 But this
repugnance finds justification in the concept of the thing。 What is already united； I mean； cannot be
united for the first time by marriage。 It is a commonplace of stock…breeding that the offspring is
comparatively weak when animals of the same stock arc mated； since if there is to be unification
there must first be division。 The force of generation； as of mind； is all the greater； the greater the
oppositions out of which it is reproduced。 Familiarity； close acquaintance； the habit of common
pursuits； should not precede marriage； they should come about for the first time within it。 And their
development has all the more value； the richer it is and the more facets it has。
§ 169。
The family； as person； has its real external existence in property； and it is only
when this property takes the form of capital that it becomes the embodiment of
the substantial personality of the family。
B。 The Family Capital
§ 170。
It is not merely property which a family possesses； as a universal and enduring
person； it requires possessions specifically determined as permanent and secure；
i。e。 it requires capital。 The arbitrariness of a single owner's particular needs is one
moment in property taken abstractly； but this moment； together with the
selfishness of desire； is here transformed into something ethical； into labour and
care for a common possession。
Remark： In the sagas of the founding of states； or at least of a social and orderly life； the
introduction of permanent property is linked with the introduction of marriage。 The nature of this
capital； however； and the proper means of its consolidation will appear in the section on civil
society。