The Ethnographical Notebooks of Karl Marx

Among the most important of the materials left
unpublished by Karl Marx is the body of his
ethnological excerpts and commentaries compiled
during the period 1880 - 1882 . These include
his notes taken from the works of Lewis Henry
Morgan, Sir Henry Sumner Maine, Sir John
Budd Phear and John Lubbock (Lord Avebury).
Marx’s comments on Morgan’s Ancient Society
have been known from the use made of them in
the Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigentums
und des Staats of Friedrich Engels; nevertheless,
Engels applied but a small part of Marx’s mate­
rials. The entire corpus of Marx’s excerpts and
notes is here brought out for the first time to­
gether with editorial, historical and bibliogra­
phic matters for their comprehension.
The materials contain some of the most explicit
statements of Marx in regard to the primitive
condition of mankind, the origin of class-divided
society in connection with the transition to civili­
zation, and the formation of the State.
Here are found Marx’s polemics against the His­
torical School of Jurisprudence (Henry Maine)
on the one side, and the Utilitarians (Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill) on the other.
Further, the critique of the Analytical Theory of
the State and Law (John Austin) is taken up
by Marx in the development of his positions with
regard to the state as a social institution and to
its economic base.
The critique of man in the state of nature, and
in the civilized condition, which had been the
concern of the young Marx, is here taken up
again in his last years. Yet, whereas his early
formulations had proceeded from the abstrac­
tions of a philosophical anthropology, his late
work takes up some problems from the viewpoint
of the science of man in the modem sense, that
is, the ethnological accounts of concrete societies
given by Morgan, Maine, Phear and to a lesser
extent, Lubbock.
The resultant work is thus a contribution to the
study of the ideas of Marx, their internal devel­
opment, and their relation to the writings and
schools of the late nineteenth century. N o less
important is its contribution to the history of
ethnology at a time when its empirical methods
and objects were being formed and strengthened.
On the one side Marx developed his position in
regard to the theory of human evolution and in
conjunction with this, to the theory of Darwin.
On the other, Marx’s work makes an end to the
theory of man as a self-contained atom, a theory
given in its modern form by Thomas Hobbes,
the Utilitarians, and Herbert Spencer; that
theory is replaced by Marx’s conception of man
as the ensemble of social relations, which had
been previsioned in his Theses on Feuerbach, and
is here given a concrete content in his critique of
Herausgegeben vom
Direktor: Prof. Dr. Fr. de Jong Edz.
herausgegeben von Helmut Hirsch
herausgegeben von Karl Kautsky Jr.
(Studies of Morgan, Phear, Maine, Lubbock)
Transcribed and edited, with an Introduction by Lawrence Krader
Printed in the Netherlands by Van Gorcum Assen
to the Memory
of K arl Korsch
i . Marx’s Excerpts from Morgan, Ancient Society
The State and Civilized Society
Marx’s Marginalia in the Morgan Excerpts
2. Marx’s Excerpts from Phear, The Aryan Village
3. Marx’s Excerpts from Maine, Lectures on the Early
History o f Institutions
4. Marx’s Excerpts from Lubbock, The Origin of
5. General Considerations of the Historical Place­
ment of these Works
6. Community, Collectivism and Individualism
7. Relation of Engels to Marx and Morgan
1. Chronology.
2. Varia.
Technical Apparatus and Format
Part II.
Part III.
Part IV.
Marx’s Excerpts from Lewis Henry Morgan Ancient
Marx’s Excerpts from John Budd Phear, The Aryan
Marx’s Excerpts from Henry Sumner Maine, Lec­
tures on the Early History of Institutions
Marx’s Excerpts from John Lubbock, The Origin
o f Civilisation.
to Introduction
3 54-397
to Part
to Part I I .
to Part I I I .
to Part IV
I. Marx’s Bibliographic Notes
Notes to Bibliography I .
II. General Bibliography
Index of Names .
Tables in Introduction
I. Comments by Marx on Morgan .
II. Marginal lines in the Morgan excerpts
III. Marginal lines by Marx in Phear excerpts
IV. Marx’s interpolations in the Phear excerpts
V. Marginal lines in the Maine excerpts
VI. References by Engels to Morgan
VII. Marx’s Excerpts from Morgan in Engels
Facsimile Pages
M organ.
2^ f
The conception of this book was first developed in discussion with Karl
Korsch, in 1947-195 3; it is to be regarded as an evolution therefrom.
The International Institute of Social History, and its Director, Prof. Dr.
Fr. de Jong Edz., were instrumental in carrying through the present
work; without the initial support and continued cooperation of the In­
stitute throughout its period of gestation it would not have been com­
pleted.* Those who have an idea of how a work of this nature is composed
will jusdy appreciate the kinds and qualities of the individual contribu­
tions that are necessary to it. The substantive contributions of the
members of the Institute, Mr. Ch. B. Timmer, Mr. H. P. Harstick, and
Mr. Goetz Langkau, have been invaluable. Dr. Barbara Krader parti­
cipated in the completion of the work, and, in its later phases, step by
step. Many contributed their knowledge of particular fields ; here I will
mention that of Dr. Angel Palerm on Aztec history. Drs. Stanley Dia­
mond and Dell Hymes criticized the Introduction. To all those mentioned
and others beside go the acknowledgement of their contributions and the
expression of my thanks.
February 1972.
L. K .
The International Institute of Social History kindly made available the Notebooks of Marx
containing his excerpts from Morgan, Lubbock, Maine and Phear. Mr. H. P. Harstick, of that
Institute, has treated relevant portions of the Phear and Maine materials from the standpoint
of comparative legal history in a work to appear in this series, Untersuchungen %ur Genesis des
Marx-Engelsschen Geschichtsverständnisses (I.: Marx und Engels und die historischen Wissen­
schaften; II.: Marx’ und Engels’ rechts- und verfassungsgeschichtliche Studien; III.: Histo­
rische Lektüre und Exzerpte - Verzeichnis des Lesefeldes von Marx und Engels im Bereich
der Historie).
The ethnological writings of Lewis Henry Morgan, John Budd Phear,
Henry Sumner Maine, and John Lubbock (Lord Avebury) were excerpted
and critically reviewed by Karl Marx in the period 1880-1881-1882.
A sense of unity may be derived from the juxtaposition of the names
of these writers on ethnology, as though they represented a common
tradition; such a judgment would be contrary to fact, although they
were all uncritical evolutionists in England and America, active in
the 1870s. Marx studied a number of other works in ethnology and cul­
ture history in addition to these, in particular those of Georg L. Maurer
and Maxim M. Kovalevsky. Morgan put together an account of the
evolution of human society than which none was more coherent in its
time; Maine was then the leading English figure in comparative and
historical jurisprudence; Phear and Kovalevsky were both attracted to
his doctrines, Phear on the Oriental side; Lubbock was one of the bestknown Darwinians of that period.
Marx left his notes in the state in which they are published here, his
work cut short by his death in 1883. Friedrich Engels took up Marx’s
notes on Morgan in connection with his own book, D er Ursprung der
Fam ilie, des Privateigentums und des Staats. This portion of the materials
was then discussed by Karl Kautsky, Eduard Bernstein, and Heinrich
Cunow, as those associated with the German Social Democracy at the
end of the nineteenth century and beginning of the twentieth, particularly
in its organ, D ie Neue Zeit.
The body of Marx’s excerpt notebooks containing his studies in
ethnology of this time was not surveyed until the following generation.
D. Ryazanov, the editor of the historical-critical edition of the collected
works of Marx and Engels, gave a brief account of them, with the excep­
tion of the Phear materials, in a lecture before the Socialist Academy in
Moscow, November 20, 1923, and published in the Vestnik Sotsialisticheskoy Akadem ii, in the same year; it was then brought out, under the
editorship of Carl Griinberg, in the Archiv fu r die Geschichte des So^ialismus
in 1925. A Russian version of the Morgan manuscript alone, with signifi­
cant changes, was published in the A rkhiv of the Marx-Engels Institute
1941, on the basis of photocopies of the original made by Ryazanov.
These excerpt notebooks were again surveyed, by E. Lucas in 1964, now
including the Phear manuscript; the Morgan manuscript materials of
Marx were surveyed at this time on the basis of the Russian version of
Marx’s notebooks, containing the ethnological manuscript excerpts
together with further bibliographic indications, are deposited in the
International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam.
We will refer to the contents of all these manuscript materials as
relating comprehensively to the study of prehistory, proto-history and
early history of mankind, and the ethnological study of living peoples.
These studies were being developed in the form, and with the given
subdivisions and nomenclature that they now have, during Marx’s life­
time, a development which he followed closely. Further, the empirical
study of mankind in all these disciplines and subdisciplines was at this
time being separated from the philosophical tradition of anthropology,
which preceded the empirical study historically, and whose substantive
connection to the former will be examined; Marx himself participated in
this transition.
The manner in which Marx took up these ethnological materials remains
to be examined, likewise his relations to the ethnologists and the writings
which he excerpted.
The ground held in common by Lubbock, Maine, Morgan, Phear,
widely shared in the later Victorian period, is that man is the product
of his own agency, which is subject to organic development. The growth
of human manual and mental dexterity justified an optimism in regard to
all problems of human society; although man created and has advanced
himself by his own efforts, the growth of the human faculties of technical
skill and reason is subject to natural, unconscious, undirected extra­
human law. The opposite of a teleological, directed law of nature and
man attracted Marx to the conceptions of Darwin.1 Human society lies
within the natural continuum, and was conceived by Auguste Comte,
Herbert Spencer, Paul Lilienfeld, A. E. F. Schaeffle, Oskar Hertwig,
Maine, and Morgan as an organism subject to the laws of nature; from
this followed the notion of Spencer that the development of specialized
function in nature, hence, the division of labor in society, as the mecha­
nism of progress is thereby vindicated; Emile Durkheim shared this
conviction. On the other hand, the actual separation of man from
nature, and the potentiality of his reunification therewith, was proposed
by Marx, in connection with and at once in opposition to Hegel’s theory
of alienation, first as a philosophical doctrine; it was then given an em­
pirical direction by his ethnological researches, particularly in reference
to the work of Darwin’s followers, as well as that of Morgan, and of
At the same time, Marx opposed as a groundless utopianism the doc­
trine of general evolutionary progress then advanced by ethnologists.
The positivist and utilitarian doctrines on the one side, the utopian on
the other, were deficient in critical perspectives as they were in social and
economic analysis and ground for social and political action. Morgan
came up to, but not into, the critical notion that man proceeds by
particular, empirically observable mechanisms from lower to higher forms
of social life; moreover he vouchsafed partly objective criteria for
ascertainment of the relations of lower and higher, which were: the
accumulation of property, setdement on a territory, dissolution of the
kinship bond as the primary and dominant basis of social unity; Maine’s
theory of transition of society and law from status to contract belongs to
this category. The criteria of higher and lower in Morgan (and in Maine)
were in part biological: the inbreeding of a social group is unhealthy, and
that of a small group less favorable than are large out-group breeding
practices. In part the criteria were social and moral in Morgan: the
status of women should be equal to that of men, whereas in some family
systems it is not; the ancient gentes were celebrated by Morgan as
democratic and fraternal. But in neither case did Marx’s contemporaries;
proceed to the critique of the social institutions existing at that time,
whose evolutionary etiology they laid bare. Morgan did not propose any
means to overcome the limitations or distortions of the social institution of
property; instead he proposed an act of faith in progress and optimism in
man’s capacity for development beyond his present limitation. Lubbock,
as Maine, Morgan, and in the following generations J. G. Frazer and
R. B. Onians, saw the savage or barbarian peeping through the clothing
of civilized European man. This was taken by Marx as an index that
modern man was not without an archaic communal component, which
includes a democratic and equalitarian formation, in his social being. The
comparison to man’s past was a basis for critique of the present civilized
condition for Marx. Morgan was critical of modern civilization in a
utopian, that is, ambiguous because non-particularized way; for him as
for the other ethnologists mentioned the comparison with the savage was
taken as an index of how far civilized man had come from his rude past,
hence was a ground for self-praise.
For Marx the civilized is the limited and oppositive human condition,
whose critique is bound to the revolutionary praxis, which is the first
step in overcoming the condition of limitation and opposition, internal
as well as external. Yet that condition is the sole means we have for
overcoming our internal limitation and social division. The ethnological
materials provided evidence of the development and its timedepth,
documenting its stages and general direction; the concomitant changes
in man’s physique and nature, and the human potentialities that were
realized and made actual; the ethnological materials were weakest in
laying bare the transition from one stage to the next in detail. Marx’s
interest in the evolutionary doctrine was advanced for its own sake, for
the scientific base that it provided for the determination of the deforma3
tions wrought in the capitalist epoch on mankind, and as a means to
overcome the latter. With the exception of Morgan, whose limitations
will be discussed below, none of the evolutionary school of that period
wrote with any relevancy to the theme of the deformation of man’s
character by civilization, a theme later taken up by Sigmund Freud.
The Comtean positivists, in the generation before Darwin, made a
cult of the progress of mankind, a doctrine which was not specifically
sloughed off by the Darwinians despite Darwin’s generally anti-teleological direction.2 The conceptions of T. H. Huxley, Lubbock, Maine,
Morgan, Phear, Kovalevsky, in this regard were limited in that they had
no way to translate the mechanisms of selection for survival from the
order of nature to the order of culture. Marx questioned the doctrine of
the social organism because it was related to no particular and concrete
body of scientific data, on the one hand, and as the basis for unguided
progress, was related to no particular human act on the other. Progress
is located outside the human sphere, according to this set of doctrines,
not only because of the lack of scientific data and theories; the relation
of progress to the human sphere was not worked out, in part because the
place of culture in the order of nature was not developed by those writers.
The distinction made between the workings of providence and of progress
by J. B. Bury and others is superficially attractive because divine agency
is asserted in the former case but not in the latter.3 Progress as there
conceived is, however, unrelated to anything that man does or knows:
the general disposition to progress lies as much outside human control,
as it is conceived by these thinkers in the twentieth century, as it did in
the nineteenth, and as did the action of providence in the seventeenth.
Progress is brought to the order of nature by man’s abstract conception,
just as providence is brought to it by his mystical conception; the ab­
straction is found in the mystical and the mystical in the abstract orders,
neither progress nor providence being directly connected with the actual
processes of nature.
Marx developed a series of positions in philosophical anthropology
during the years 1841-1846. Those having particular relevance to the
ethnological notebooks are in regard to the interrelations of the family,
civil society and the State (in the Critique of the Hegelian Philosophy of
Right)', the alienation of man in society and in nature (in the EconomicPhilosophical Manuscripts') ; the doctrine of man producing himself by his
labor and by his relations in society (in the German Ideology and the Holy
Family); and the opposition of the concretion to the abstraction of man
(in the Theses on Feuerbach).4 The increasingly concrete problems taken up
in his work, his revolutionary activities during the 1848 period and his
conclusion that the anatomy of civil society is to be sought in political
economy5 transformed his treatment of anthropology from a philosophi­
cal to an empirical subject. His research at the British Museum then
undertook the wholly empirical study of man, to which he constantly
returned during the 1850s, 1860s, and 1870s, and intensively during
1879-1882. His relations to philosophical and empirical anthropology
form part of the debate over the continuity and discontinuity of his
thought; the thesis of discontinuity has been averred by Auguste Cornu,
that of continuity by Georg Lukacs and Jean Hyppolite. Karl Korsch
has written that the break in continuity is indicated by his Critique o f the
Hegelian Philosophy of Right, but since that work was written in 1843,
hence several years before Marx began his economic studies on the basis
of his anatomy of civil society, it is actually an argument for continuity
while seemingly one for discontinuity.6
Marx took up the development of economy and society among primi­
tive peoples in the Grundrisse der K ritik der Politischen Ökonomie, 7 devoting
two passages of this work, which remained in draft form during his
lifetime, to the primitive condition of man, returning to the theme briefly
in the Critique of Political Economy, 1859. His exposition of primitive as
opposed to capitalist production was set forth in the chapter on the
social division of labor in Capital.8 The problems dealt with in 1841-1846
remained substantially the same during the period 1857-1867, when the
Grundrisse and the volumes of Capital were composed; these problems
continued into the period of his more systematic ethnological researches,
1879-1882. The method became increasingly concrete: it was concerned
with the evolution of civil society, with the interests of economic classes
and their opposition, the evolution of peasant collective institutions,
the relations of the family and civilized society, the State and society,
the division of social labor in relation to its nonspecialization.9 In
the Grundrisse and in Capital, primitive man is taken up as a category,
the abstraction of the primitive condition as a means and in opposition
to the concretion of the capitalist economy, without reference to partic­
ular primitive peoples. India, China, Greece, Rome, and countries of
modern Europe and America were specified therein; the further con­
cretion of the particular primitive peoples in terms of the identified social
institutions was then developed by Marx in the notebooks of the period
Marx’s studies of ethnology were connected with those on the rural
community, the land and the peasant question, at once as historical and
as current political issues, and again with the question of applications of
science and technology in agriculture; Marx had written on the Danubian
principalities, etc., and on Oriental questions, in particular India and
China, during the 1850s and 1860s. His researches into Slavic, Germanic,
Irish and South Asian peasant communities and history, and comparative
ethnological data from authors of classical antiquity were cited in the
Grundrisse, the Critique of 1859, afld Capital, but more extensively in the
notebooks of the 1870s and 1880s. Marx’s correspondence with Vera
Zasulich10 introduced the concrete side of his interest: the historical
problem of the Russian peasant commune and the social relations within
it, which had great vitality, was known to him, its like still surviving in
his native district of Trier in his day; the peasant community was col­
lective in its undertakings, wherein accumulation of private property was
not the primary social end; the interrelation of social morality and collective-communal ethics and the non-separation of the public and the
private spheres were characteristic of these communities. Slavic and
other peoples with significant peasant community composition and
institutions did not face the prospect of the necessary development of
capitalism; this is expounded by Marx in opposition to the doctrine of
historical fatalism, and is further to be directed against historicism in
general and against particular historical determinisms. His ethnological
studies during the period 1879-1882 related to the ancient States and the
communities and tribes both ancient and modern. Morgan’s category
of gentile societies was understood by Marx as a development of a
concrete institution, and as an evolutionary progress in its abstract
relation. Together with the related studies of the peasant communities,
it provided Marx with a model of what that society which was not
concentrated on the pursuit of personal and private wealth, but which
developed instead collective institutions of ownership, could be. On the
other hand, it provided a material base for the doctrine of impermanence
of property in its particular form as private property, of the monogamous
family and the State, already expounded in the Communist Manifesto and
the Grundrisse, and the possibility of separate development of peoples to
which he returned in the letters to Zasulich and against Mikhailovsky and
Otechestvennje Zapiski. (See below, Addendum 1 and note 160.) The
ethnological manuscripts therefore complement the positions of the
Grundrisse and Capita/; they are also developments of Marx’s position of
the period 1843-1845.
Engels made known Marx’s study of Morgan’s work : “ ... Marx had set
himself the task of presenting the results of Morgan’s researches in con­
nection with the conclusions of his own - within certain limits I may say
our - materialist investigations of history, and thereby to make clear their
full significance.” 12 The nature of the presentation that Marx had in view
remains, however, to be examined.
Marx had received Morgan’s work from M. M. Kovalevsky, who had
brought the book back from a trip to the United States,13 Marx having
had it perhaps only temporarily from Kovalevsky, for Engels did not
find it in Marx’s library.14 Marx took extensive notes from Morgan’s
work, coupling it with his studies of Phear, Sohm, Maine, and somewhat
later, of Lubbock.15 The sets of excerpts taken from Morgan, Phear,
Maine and Lubbock will form the domain of our inquiry, considering
also that Kovalevsky’s work on Communal Landownership, which Marx
excerpted in 1879, is also apposite both in its contents and in its close
chronological relation to the later materials.16 The excerpts taken from
Morgan, Phear and Maine, together with those from Money, Sohm and
Hospitalier, form the contents of one notebook (see note 15); the Lubbock
excerpts are found in a second. The relations of the contents of these
notebooks both to each other and to Marx’s other works will be discussed
in the following pages; a special addendum on the chronology of the
notebooks will be found at the end of this Introduction.
In view of Marx’s extensive and ongoing work on the ethnological
literature at that time we infer that if he had intended to present the
results of his researches, of which those on Morgan were the most in­
fluential, then it was in connection with this and other ethnographic and
historical matter from those authors mentioned, as well as from Bancroft,
Tylor, Bachofen, Niebuhr, Grote, Mommsen, and such others as were
cited in the notebooks.17 (On the juxtaposition of these materials to
those on colonial questions and on technology of agriculture, see the
paragraph following and note 15.) How Marx had intended to present
his work, whether as a book on an ethnological subject, or as a part of
a work on another subject is unclear; his work cannot be said to have
taken a particular form, it was rather in the process of gestation. As to
content, on the other hand, his views on Morgan, Maine, and other
contemporary authors, on the current state of ethnology, on social
evolution, prehistory and history of antiquity, on historical and evolu­
tionary fatalism and necessitarianism, have been known until now only
in outline from his correspondence and from citations drawn from the
excerpt notebook on Morgan and incorporated in Engels’ Origin of the
Family. We now have the context of those citations, together with
other comments by Marx, and the materials from the remaining authors.
The notebook containing the excerpts from the books of Morgan,
Phear and Maine also contains excerpts from Money’s book on Java as
a colony (see n. 15); the Lubbock excerpt is followed directly by notes
taken from an article on Egyptian finance; the brief excerpt from
Hospitalier may be connected with an interest as early as April-May 1851
in the application of electricity to increasing the fertility of the soil, an
idea he had taken from the Economist of London.18 The notebooks are
not to be regarded as fortuitous agglomerations; they stand as nodal
points in which ideas related to each other were explored in various
studies, perhaps not as lines of association in general, but in particular.
Starting from the study of primitive society, they lead to the evolution
of society and, to judge by their juxtaposition, to the problems of colo­
nialism and technological progress in agriculture. While the focus of
this present work is on the ethnological side, we note the conjunction of
these lines of thought, at the same time the relation to the philosophical
problems and to problems of praxis. Morgan’s writings will be discussed
below in relation to kinship (and peasant-communal) institutions.
Morgan’s theory of social progress was a simple material one: the
great epochs of human progress are identified with successive enlarge­
ments of sources of subsistence, up to the beginnings of field agriculture.
Morgan’s concept of ancient society refers to mankind in the states of
savagery and barbarism; while in the states of savagery and lower bar­
barism man was without cultural and regional difference in his attain­
ments of fishing, fire, the bow and arrow, then separately proceeding
from the lower to the middle status of barbarism by two lines of progress:
in the New World, by the invention of maize cultivation with irrigation
and (garden) plants; in the Old World man progressed to the Middle
Status of Barbarism by the invention of domestication of animals and
the use of iron; in the Old World man progressed through the Upper
Status of Barbarism to civilization, from the social plan of government
in which personal and consanguineal bonds were the dominant ones to
the civil plan, civitasyor the political state, based on territory and property.
The progress along the various lines is at varying rates in their different
chronological segments; the social life of the peoples is heterogeneous
in its internal composition; the family changes more rapidly than the
systems of consanguinity; the latter are therefore a fossil record of
mankind. The family is moreover the active element effecting change in
the organization of the life of a people, the kinship system is passive,
changing according to the change in the form of the family. The organicist conception of parts interrelated in the whole was further noted and
commented by Engels.19
On the one hand, the whole according to Morgan determines the part,
the entire social system directing the development of the family; on the
other, Morgan conceived that the form of the family had a determining
influence on the system of consanguinity. The social life of the people
was conceived by Morgan to be variable both as to relations between
peoples, the external relation of society, and internally as to the relations
between the parts of the society. The culture of mankind was not
conceived to be so variable by him, for it is conceived in the singular,
and as the total product of an ethnical period, not as the means of cul­
tivation of the human biological organism or of a particular society
(see note 16).
The general hypothesis or suggestion of Morgan is that mankind had
a common origin in Asia. The peoples of Africa and Australia separated
from the common stem when society still was organized on the basis of
sex, and the family was punaluan. The migration to Polynesia occurred
later, but without change in social form, that to America occurred later
still, after the institution of gentes; this sequence is vital to the compre­
hension of Ancient Society. L. White has criticized Morgan for having,
despite information then available to him, put Polynesia too low on the
social scale. Morgan was forming, but had not fully developed, an idea
that the several families of peoples, each with a common origin, history,
society, culture and language had peopled the continents or island worlds.
The idea was worked out only for America: the evidence of the unity of
origin of the American Indians, or the Ganowanian family, was proved
beyond reasonable doubt to him; the Eskimos were excluded from this
origin. The Turanian family of peoples of Asia is referred to in the same
terms by Morgan as the Ganowanian, but without further specification
as to its composition. This culture geography and culture history was
considered apart from the systems of consanguinity and affinity, although
the one was applied as a characterizing feature in the nomenclature of
general identification of the inhabitants of continents.
Morgan’s materialism on the one side and his relations to Darwinism
on the other have been much discussed. The general periodization applied
by Morgan was, in its conception, material or technological to be sure;
yet he conceived that the social institutions evolved out of the germs of
thought of the human species, which is the opposite of any sense of
materialism. On the other hand, he wrote of the succession of increasingly
higher organizations as the result of ‘great social movements worked out
unconsciously through natural selection.’ Morgan had not worked out
in his own mind a system of natural philosophy, but the various elements
of one are there to be found, propounded with a deep conviction.20
According to Morgan, government in primitive societies is personal
and founded upon relations that are personal. Marx, on the other hand,
implicitly controverted this in his Maine manuscript. Maine had written
that property in land has a twofold origin, partly from the disentangle­
ment of the individual rights of the kinsmen or tribesmen from the
collective rights of the body of kin - Maine had written Family here or tribe; and partly from the growth and transmutation of the sovereignty
of the chief. Marx responded to this: “ Also nicht 2 fold origin; sondern
nur 2 ramifications of the same source; the tribal property und tribal
collectivity which includes the tribal chief.” (See Maine excerpts, p. 164
and n. 15 there.) It follows from this response of Marx that the relations
of property and government in primitive society are neither personal nor
impersonal, but collective. Maine had criticized John Austin for positing
the existence of the State a priori, but, Marx wrote, Maine himself, in
making this critique had failed to distinguish between the institution of
the State and the person of the Prince: “ Der unglückliche Maine selbst
hat keine Ahnung davon, dass da wo Staaten existiren (after the primitive
Communities, etc.) i.e. eine politisch organisirte Gesellschaft, der Staat
keineswegs der Prinz ist; er scheint nur so.” (Maine excerpts, p. 191.)
The impersonal relation of the State has the appearance of the personal
relation of the prince in political organized society. The existence of the
State is established in time after that of the primitive communities, and
develops with its establishment the difference of appearance and reality.
(See below, section 3 on Maine in this Introduction.) Both commentaries
of Marx in regard to Maine bear equally upon the thesis of Morgan,
for they are strictures against any theory of primitive government
conceived as a personal relation. The individuality is expressed and
developed in the collective life of primitive society, the person exists as
such, albeit not in actual opposition to the social institution. On the one
hand, the differentiation c f the personal and the institutional relation is
potentially that which is developed into an opposition in politically
organized society. On the other, the personal and the institutional
relations are actually differentiated in either society, primitive or civilized;
it is an inconsistency to think that because the number of people in a
primitive society is small, for which reason the members may relate to
the chief personally, the governmental, or judiciary or other relations are
personal. Personal acquaintance or other relations of that sort and in­
stitutional relations in both primitive and civilized societies are differen­
tiated even where personal acquaintance, etc., is itself institutionalized.
The individual, or personal, relation exists between rulers of States and
their citizens, or subjects, as well, but the relation of ruler to subject is
not changed by virtue of the personal relation; on the other hand, judg­
ments of the tribal chief or of the ruler of the State may be equally
influenced by the personal relation, or want of the same. The develop­
ment of oppositive interests of social classes does not eradicate the
personal relation, but imposes the distinction between its reality and
the appearance of it.
The system that Marx developed in this matter is the following: The
political relation is the negation of the collective primitive relation, the
collective relation bearing within itself both the personal and the im­
personal relations in a more or less undifferentiated form. The differ­
entiation between the personal and the impersonal relations in the
primitive collectivity becomes the greater as the amount of tribal property
is increased, and, in keeping with this, as the office of chief becomes more
clearly delineated and less undifferentiated. It is therefore meaningless to
think of the differentiation of personal and impersonal relations in
extremely primitive societies, where the amount of property is low and
any such distinctive office as that of the chief is barely perceptible, if at all.
The distinction between the personal and the impersonal or objective,
institutional relations becomes increasingly important as the amount of
production and ownership of property increases, and offices as that of
the chief become more sharply defined. At this point there is still no
sharp differentiation between collective and individual property owner­
ship; Marx attributed the development of this differentiation to the period
of transition to the politically organized society, as the basis for the
development of the latter.
Ancient Society is divided into four parts: I, Growth of Intelligence
through Inventions and Discoveries; II, Growth of the Idea of Govern­
ment; III, Growth of the Idea of the Family; IV, Growth of the Idea of
Property. Marx changed Morgan’s sequence by treating of Part II,
Government, last, thus replacing Property in the order of his manuscript.
By doing so he brought the subject matter of the second part directly into
conjunction with that of property, whereas it had been separated by
Morgan through the lengthy discourse on the family. In this way,
Morgan’s peroration on the distorting effect of property upon mankind
and the condition of its eventual disappearance was excerpted in order,
but without special attention, in Marx’s manuscript notes on p. 29.
Proportionately, Marx reduced Part I to half the space that Morgan gave
to it, chiefly by omitting chapter 3, Ratio of Human Progress, in which
a time-scale of human evolution is proposed; proportionately, Marx
devoted less space than Morgan to Part I I I : Morgan’s summaries of his
past work given in the tables of kin terms and the note appended to this
Part, in which McLennan’s work is controverted, were omitted by Marx,
as well as Morgan’s Preface. Aside from these omissions, Marx excluded
little of significance from Morgan; this last is true, in the degree that will
be seen, of the excerpts from Phear and Maine; it is not all relevant to
those from Lubbock.21
Marx was generally favorable to Morgan’s work; he did not reach
Engels’ verdict that Ancient Society is an epoch-making work, and that
Morgan’s ‘rediscovery of the precedence of the matriarchal over the
patriarchal gens has the same significance for prehistory that Darwin’s
theory of evolution has for biology and Marx’s theory of surplus value
has for political economy’.22 Yet Morgan’s doctrine became for Marx
the basis for judgment of related matter in the writings of Niebuhr,
Grote, Mommsen, in classical studies; he contrasted Morgan’s republi­
canism to the aristocratic inclination of Grote and Mommsen’s quest for
princes;23 Morgan showed to Marx the limits of their understanding of
the institutions of the gens, phratry, basileus, and those of the writings
of Maine and Lubbock in ethnology. Marx accepted Morgan’s authority
on the ethnology of the American Indian and other contemporary
primitive peoples, as did Bachofen,24 hence added little to the evidence
for Morgan’s theses from extra-European sources. Morgan, however,
based his argument equally on texts from classical antiquity, particularly
of Greece and Rome, to a minor extent of the Old Testament. Marx
verified certain references to Greek and Latin authors in Morgan and
at the end of his notes set down a number of further quotations, in
particular on tribal lays as historical annals; 25 he added Greek etymologies
(e.g. syndyasmian, excerpts, p. 3), and Latin (e.g. hortus, excerpts, p. 2),
and searched out English ethnological terms as moccasin, squash (I.e.)
Marx copied out or summarized Morgan’s work; he intruded himself
but little into the excerptions, as compared, for example, with the method
applied in his Maine manuscript. In the following table, a list of what
may be considered his principal comments or additions is given. Some
of these comments are already known from the use that Engels made of
them in the Ursprung der Fam ilie. For the sake of fuller comparison, a
similar list showing in outline the utilization made by Engels of Marx’s
excerpts from Morgan is given (see below, Table VII). With reference to
the Maine excerpts, however, a different practice is followed (see below,
Table V). (The Maine excerpts contain a proportionately and absolutely
larger amount of material introduced by Marx, which is difficult to
tabulate. The reader is therefore directed to the excerpts themselves, as
he is most urgently in all cases.)
T A B L E I. Comments by Marx in the Excerpts from Morgan’s Ancient Society
Excerpts p.
i 26
Key words
Italian tribes in Upper Status of Barbarism (!)
Absolute control (? I) over nature
(Mindestens officiell!)
Ebenso verhält... politische Systeme, etc.
Südslawen, Russian communes (2 references)
Was oft anwendbar (referring to Old Britons)
References to Fourier; to South Slavs; to Goddesses on Olympus
Fire-making - chief invention (contra Morgan)
Nicht der Fall bei Celts
Fencing does not prove private ownership of land; error in Iliad citation by
Morgan; [Achille] Loria and passion for property.“
Testamentary dispositions established by Solon?
Changed form of blood-vengeance I
If! it is supposed!
Organized colonization!
Erblichmachen der Wahl
Eingeborene casuistry
Caste formation; gens petrified in caste b
Mögen Spanier__ Er hätte sagen sollen... ; Stamm, phyle
Savage peeps through.
Klassische Schülergelehrsamkeit; Herrn Grote ferner zu bemerken... e
Schulgelehrter Philister;
Germanice fleischlich;6 lernten sie dies...; Das lumpige religiöse Element
remains in the degree that real cooperation disappears. . . ; Schulgelehrter.. . ;
Mr. Gladstone...
Schoemann on Greek voting; Sorte militairischer demokratie A
Ancient Germanic justice.
Böckh on population of Attica; Schoemann on principalities; Theseus a real
person; Phantasie des Plutarch.
Germ of county?
Bekamen entscheidende Macht; Plutarch falsch; Settlers Griechen
Eigenthumsdifferenz; Schoemann contra Morgan regarding topic phyles
Attic tribes
Schoemann reference
Clan-Geschlechter in Mommsen. Analogy I
Tribun = tribal chief. Conjectur
Contra Livy (Kerl vergisst...); Superlativ dies.
Clients as plebs: Niebuhr right as against Morgan
Bürger des Romulus (Plutarch on Numa)
Mutterzunge - Fatherland. Reference to Curtius, quoted in Morgan
Bachofen: spurious (I) children; lawless (!) union; unilateres in male line
(cf. Morgan, p. 360).
great family = Geschlechtsfamilie = gens.
Bachofen on lawlessness
0 Perhaps: Achille Loria, La rendita fondiaria e la sua elisone naturale. Milano, 1880.
6 See below, Morgan excerpts, note 160.
c Reference to George Grote. On Grote’s relations to Bentham, J. S. Mill and the utilitarians,
cf. Elie Halevy, The Growth of Philosophical Radicalism (1928) 1955.
d See below, Section 7, Relation of Engels to Marx and Morgan.
Marx differed from Morgan chiefly over details (excerpts, pp. 1, 2, 20,
21, 24, 26, 77, 84, 90); basic matters (excerpts, pp. 26, 38, 48, 76-79) as
private ownership in Homer, hereditary transmission of chieftainships,
the questions of conflict of interests in the dissolution of the gens, and
property differences in the same condition, on the other hand, were
developed rather as Marx’s own expressions.
Marx completed the excerpts and notetaking at Pt. II, ch. X V of
Morgan. After covering the beginning of that chapter, he copied out
passages from Tacitus, Germania and Caesar, Gallic War, there given,
added the further passages from classical authors, including the references
from the Lipsius ed. of Tacitus (excerpts, pp. 96-98), and brought the
Morgan notes to an end.
Marx called into question Morgan’s statement, “ Mankind are the only
beings who may be said to have gained an absolute (?!) control over the
production of food__ ” (Marx’s interpolation, excerpts, p. 2).29 Ac­
cording to Morgan, cultivation of cereals preceded the migration of the
Aryan peoples from the grass plains of high Asia to the forest of West
Asia and Europe, and this culture was forced upon them by the necessities
of the domesticated animals now incorporated into their plan of life.
Marx (excerpts, p. 24) suggested that this was not the case among the
Celts.27 Morgan, on the authority of the Iliad, noted there the reference
to fences, and on this evidence attributed private land ownership to
Homeric Greece, an interpretation which Marx did not accept (Marx
excerpts, p. 26): “ Morgan irrt sich wenn er glaubt, das blosse fencing
beweise Privatgrundeigenthum” . 28
Marx sought the origin of civilized society and the State in the dis­
solution of the primitive group. The form of this group was identified as
the gens of Morgan’s description, as opposed to the joint family of
Maine’s. Moreover, Marx applied Morgan’s view that in the ancient
collectivities there existed the characteristics of society which man must
reconstitute if he is to overcome the distortions of his character in the
civilized condition. Marx made it clear, as Morgan did not, that this
process of reconstitution will take place on another level than the old,
that it is a human effort, of man for and by himself, that the antagonisms
of civilization are not static or passive, but are comprised of social interests
which are ranged for and against the outcome of the reconstitution, and
this will be determined in an active and dynamic way.
Further in reference to the relation of the institutions of ancient
society to those of the era of civilization Marx noted that the Tribune of
the Roman people who in the historic period defended the plebeians
against the patricians was originally the leader of the tribe (Morgan
excerpts, p. 87). The fraternity of the ancient gentes has been changed in
its terms of reference and in its meaning, after the establishment of the
social relations of civilization; it can neither be reconstituted nor re­
conceived in its ancient form. The outlines of the liberty and equality
of ancient society were discussed by Marx passim:
1. Morgan considered that the increasing freedom and higher social
position of women are a measure of the progress of the family: Just as
the future of mankind, once it has overcome the distortion of the career
of property, will restore the liberty and equality of the ancient gentes, so
the position of women will be restored to its earlier, higher place. Marx
wrote in this regard (excerpts, p. 16), “ Aber das Verhältnis der Göttinnen
im Olymp zeigt Rückerinnerung an frühere freiere und einflussreichere
Position der Weiber.” The recollection of a prior state of greater freedom
and influence in the position of women accounts for half of the mythology
of Juno and Minerva. The other half of the account is that the projection
into heaven of the ancient freedom and equality of the women is the
inversion of their actual position in Greek society; it is also the justifi­
cation in the mythology of their constraint in that low position, and the
expression of the hopeful fantasy of its betterment in another world.
2. The question of the gens in relation to the destruction of equality,
the formation of social ranks, further, of castes, social stratification, and
complex, oppositive society was raised by Marx in connection with the
Kutchins, an Athapaskan people of northwestern Canada (Morgan
excerpts, p. 58). According to G. Gibbs, a correspondent of Morgan,
the Kutchins had three exogamic groups of common descent, and there­
with the question of caste was raised. Marx’s comment was a hypo­
thetical query: can the gentes give rise to the formation of castes,
particularly if conquest is added to the gens principle ? This concerns the
manner in which the one is added to the other. The gentes were of
different rank among the Kutchin; this differentiation arose out of a
factor which is not external to the gens principle; the principle of the gens
has the caste as its opposite. Thus, the abstract principle of the gens has
as its opposition a concrete social organization, caste, on the one side,
and conquest on the other. In its transition the gens, by difference in
social rank, can petrify into its opposite, caste. The concretion, difference
in social rank, is in conflict with the abstraction, the gens principle; the
concrete gens is at the same time petrified in its opposite, the concrete
caste. The bond of kinship within the gentile principle, by its existence,
permits no perfected aristocracy to arise; the sentiment of fraternity
continues in the gens so long as the aristocracy does not come into exis­
tence. The form of fraternity, however, can exist in a society with an
aristocracy developed.
2.a. This is the most explicitly dialectical of all of Marx’s formulations,
in the Morgan notebook, of the transition from the primitive to the
civilized condition of mankind, wherein the opposition between an
abstraction, the principle of the gens, and a series of concretions, con­
quest, caste, and differentiation in social rank is posited. The transition
from the abstraction of the gens is at the same time opposed to the con­
crete caste; thus the two transitions, from abstraction to concretion,
and from one concretion to the next, take place at the same time; they are
preceded by the transition of the concrete gens to its abstraction. The
concretion of conquest is added to the abstraction of the gens as it is to a
principle of the latter; the concretion of social rank differentiation is in
conflict with the abstract gens principle. But can the concrete gens by
difference in social rank concretely petrify as its opposite, the concrete
caste? Caste is opposed to a further formation arising out of the dissolu­
tion of gentile society, the aristocracy; for the concretions, caste, fraternity, gentile organization, and the bond of kinship, in their petrification,
stand opposed to the development of the latter. Here a social relation
external to the gens principle must be introduced: It is not caste as such,
nor conquest as such, nor differentiation in rank, that destroys the bond
of kinship and of fraternity; the gens and gentile principle pass into
civilization, antagonistic society, and an aristocracy, subject to another
opposition than that which is delineated here; equality, fraternity, the
gens, conquest, the bond of kinship and differentiation in rank exist
together while property is not unevenly accumulated and privately
sequestered, distributed and transmitted, but for inequality in relation to
property to come about, there must have been a quantitative increase in
the amount of social property in the first place, the factor external to the
gentile principle, already introduced by Morgan, that is operative in the
transition from societas to civitas.
z.b. The ancient caste is a petrification of the internal gentile differ­
entiation. (Marx here examined the process of formation of caste, whereas
in the letter to Annenkov and in volume I of Kapital he regarded the
end-result. See below, Morgan excerpts, note 160.) The aristocracy in
its finished form is the opposite of the caste, just as its formation is the
opposite of petrification. The formation of the caste, on the other hand,
is achieved not out of the concretion of the gens, but out of its abstraction.
The petrification of the gens as caste is not the eradication of the gens as
a formal community, but it is deprived of the sentiment of equality, just
as it is in the case of the formation of an aristocracy. In the latter case,
however, both the form and the content of the bond of kinship are
destroyed. Rank differentiation is nevertheless compatible with the
formal gentile principle, not with the sentiment of equality, however.
The rise of the aristocracy is a non-cyclical revolution, for no return to
substantial equality and to blood-fraternity or community in its ancient
formis possible in the given society, once it has arisen. V. Gordon Childe,
who conceived of revolution in the archaeological period of the neolithic
settlements in the earliest agricultural communities, considered revolution
only in this sense. The sense of a cyclical and recycling revolution, as in
astronomy, was already taken up by Giambattista Vico; it has been taken
up again of late by Jean-Paul Sartre who has advanced the notion of the
recurrence in history of the perpetual factors of the human condition,
as scarcity.
Marx noted (excerpts, p. 33) that Morgan had composed a jus
gentilicium in regard to the Iroquois; Morgan did the same in regard to
the Greeks and Romans (Part II, chapters II, V III and X I of Ancient
Society take up this theme). A jus gentilicium is an anachronism; it can
only be written after a gentile system has come to an end; this was the
case in ancient Rome, where a jus gentilicium was in fact conceived, but
only after the establishment of the political society and the decline of the
gens. From another point of view, the jus gentilicium is a contradiction
in terms. Finally, it is a possible enterprise for the ethnologist, the
outsider, but he is no longer composing the jus gentilicium for a particular
society, as the Romans did for theirs; the ethnologist is writing a
universal jus gentilicium, for the gens as an abstraction, and the gentile
society as a general phenomenon. This was Morgan’s task, and his
success stands or falls as the particular jus gentilicium is related to the
generality in a concrete way, yet this side of Morgan’s work has not been
systematically pursued. He began this task himself quasi dialectically to
begin with, not in regard to the gens, but its opposite, the family, which
is taken up as an active principle (Marx, Morgan excerpts, p. 10) and as
a passivity (see this Introduction, note 16, end), but he did not bring
these two opposing sides together, nor did he develop the conception
there implied with respect to the gens. Yet the relation of the gens as an
active and as a passive principle to the gens as a concrete institution, both
passive and active, is central to the transition to civilization. Moreover,
the dissolution of the gens in regard to these processes and relations
cannot be set aside.
Marx introduced the differences from a doctrine of unilinear evolutionism
in his Morgan excerpts, in accord with the latter. The references to the
several lines of development in the two hemispheres brought out by
Morgan were noted by Marx; the quest for equivalences between the
two as well. Moreover, Morgan introduced the factor of borrowing or
diffusion between peoples who were at different stages of development
in his system. Marx noted this both in regard to the ancient Britons
(excerpts, p. 14)30 and as a general phenomenon (excerpts, p. 22).31
Morgan regarded the patriarchal family of the Hebrews and Romans as
an exceptional case in the evolution of society and the family, hence as
a non-unilinearity. Marx (excerpts, p. 4) noted this view; he then modi­
fied it to his own schema, but did not controvert it. Engels adopted the
notion that the patriarchal family is the principal form from which the
modern family evolved. The Oriental family according to Engels, was
a unilinear evolution of the ancient (Hebrew and Roman) patriarchal
family.32 The unilinear doctrine in Morgan and his contemporaries
overshadows ail else; the variations are to be understood as subordinate
to that doctrine; the dialectical interrelation of the one and the many
lines of human development was not taken up at that time.
Morgan had proposed that paternal authority developed as the family
took on a monogamous character, whereby increase in the amount of
property and the desire for its retention within the family caused descent
to be changed from the female to the male line, hence a real foundation
for that power was laid.33 (The Roman family gave the father an excep­
tional authority over the son, as Gaius had shown; Morgan regarded
the ancient Roman family, insofar as it was a patriarchy, to be an excep­
tion.) Further, Morgan rested on Tacitus for evidence that the ancient
Germans developed toward a monogamous family (Tacitus is not clear
on this): “ It seems probable... that [the family] of the ancient Germans
was too weak an organization to face alone the hardships of life; and...
sheltered itself in a communal household [Marx, Morgan excerpts, p. 16,
interpolated: as the south Slavs] composed of related families. When
slavery became an institution, these households would disappear.” 34 To
this Marx added (I.e.): “ In fact, the monogamous family rests everywhere,
in order to have an independent isolated existence, upon a domestic class
which originally was everywhere direct slaves.” Morgan considered that
the family did not carry society along, but society the family: “ German
society was not far enough advanced at this time for the appearance of a
high type of monogamian family.” This position is to be taken together
with the relation of the family to the system of consanguinity (Marx,
Morgan excerpts, p. io).35
That the Greek, Roman, Hebrew families were of patriarchal type and
were related to agricultural (and pastoral) services, to slavery and in the
Roman case potentially to serfdom is an indication that the patriarchal
family form was exceptional in human experience; the development of
western civilization in general is exceptional, as opposed to the Oriental.
Civilization arose in connection with the rise of the patriarchal family in
the West, but neither wholly nor solely in connection with it, and with
the monogamous family; it follows that civilization is itself an extra­
ordinary development. This is a line of thought opened up by Fourier
which has its root in Gaius, and which Marx further explored (Morgan
excerpts, p. 16): “ Fourier characterizes the Epoch of Civilization by
Monogamy and Private Property in Land. The Modern family contains
the germ not only of servitus (slavery) but also serfdom, since it contains
from the beginning a relation to services for agriculture. It contains in
miniature all the antagonisms within itself which are later broadly de­
veloped in society and its State.” Engels then put the comment on Fourier
into a note at the end of the Origin of the Family ,36 and the remainder of
Marx’s thought into his passage about the development of the ancient
The family of classical antiquity is the miniature of the society, but
rests, in its monogamous form, upon social institutions which are ex­
ternal to the private group of kin: slaves, domestics, (in large courts,
retainers and clients), later, serfs, etc.; therefore, the antagonisms which
the family contains in miniature are not generated by the family in the
way that they are generated in society, but by the society and then borne
into the family. The family as it is here conceived is part of a society
either on the verge of development into civilization or already in that
status. These relations of family and society and the family as the minia­
ture of the society are fundamentally different from those e.g. of the
traditional Hawaiian family and society. Morgan wrote: “ It is not
probable that the actual family, among the Hawaiians, was a large as the
group united in the marriage relation. Necessity would compel its
subdivision into smaller groups for the procurement of subsistence, and
for mutual protection; but each smaller family would be a miniature of
the group.” 38 Morgan did not specify whether he meant that the family
would be a miniature of the larger group united in the marriage relation
or the smaller group within the larger, united for subsistence and defense.
The context points to the latter, that the smaller family was the miniature
of the smaller group in Hawaii. Marx reproduced Morgan’s wording
without comment (excerpts, p. 8). The problem in this connection is that
the word ‘miniature’ on p. 16 of Marx’s excerpts refers to a wholly
different family and society, and the use of the same word with reference
to the Hawaiian case has been misleading to some. The family in the
Roman society was not a miniature of any larger social institution; the
antagonisms within it were the miniature of the antagonisms without,
also those of modern civilized society, with certain relations changed.
Neither the Roman nor the modern family of civilized society bears the
same relation to its social context that the traditional Hawaiian family did
to the primitive social group in which it was situated.
The State and Civilised Society
The question of the formation of the State is raised in these passages: the
State is an institution of society, hence it is neither extrasocial nor
supra-social. It is an institution of internally divided and opposed society,
hence it is not universal in human society, since some are primitive and
more homogeneous. The State is not to be typologically separated into
the Roman State, the modern capitalist State, etc.; it is a general institu­
tional category of the type of society indicated here. The State in relation
to society will be taken up below in connection with Marx’s note on
Maine; it is raised in the excerpt notes from Morgan in connection with
the transition from barbarism to civilization:
Morgan attributed the transition of Greek society from the gentile to
the civil (political) organization to the period between the first Olympiad
(776 B.C.) and the time of the legislation of Cleisthenes (508 B.C.).39
Marx (excerpts, p. 67) commented: “ He should have said that political
here has the meaning in Aristotle = urban, and political animal = citi­
zen.” Aristotle’s definition of man is that he is by nature, physei, a
political animal, a creature of the polis.40 Marx commented on Aristotie’s
definition in the Introduction to the Grundrisse: “ Man is in the most
literal sense a %oonpolitikon, not only a gregarious animal but one that can
become an individual only in society.” 41 He returned to the question in
Capital: “ ... Man is by nature if not a political animal as Aristotle thinks,
in any case a social animal.” To this he noted: “ Aristotle’s definition is
actually that man is by nature a town-citizen. This definition is as
characteristic for classical antiquity as Franklin’s definition that man is
by nature a tool-making animal is for Yankeedom.” 42 The definition of
man given by Aristotle follows his discussion of social life in the family,
the village, a collectivity of villages, and leads up to the discussion of the
city-state; in this connection the Greek and barbarian governmental
forms are compared.43 That man does not, in Aristode’s conception,
live everywhere in cities is clear. Therefore, the political life, the life in
the city and the city-state that Aristotle attributed to the nature of man
is not an aspect of his actual nature, for it touched and still touches only
a small proportion of the total of humanity; it is a potentiality of man,
his final end, his ultimate or best nature, furthest removed from the life
of animals and of barbarians. According to Aristotle it is the life of
human nature to which the barbarians as known to him had not yet
attained, but to which all men aspire. Marx differentiated between man
as a social an im al in general and a political animal in particular, noting
that the life in the polis or in civil society was characteristic of men in that
era, in a concrete society. The idea was formulated more abstractly by
Marx in 1857-1858, whereby the generality of sociability was opposed to
individuation, passing dialectically into its opposite only in society, the
latter remaining here without particular concretion. In the formulation
in Capital, the condition of man in society passes dialectically from its
abstraction to a concretion in particular societies, ancient Greek in one
case, and eighteenth century America in another. It does not pass from
one particularity to another, but rests in each as separate concretions,
without their historical connection. There is therefore no historical
determination of the passage from one concretion to the other. Man is
therefore in a dual relation, on the one hand to man in a particular,
concrete society, and on the other to nature by the intermediation of tools;
the positing of the problem is on the one hand the transition of a concrete
to an abstract relation, on the other from the actual to the potential state
of man, passing thereby from the intermediation of social relations to the
intermediation of work-tools in the definition of human nature. Each
criterion is at once specific and concrete in its determination, and an
abstraction in reference to the entire species. What is excluded is the
holistic, gestaltist abstraction of the determination of man and of human
nature on the one hand, and the Cartesian determination of man as the
determination of mind, on the other.
The two societies are juxtaposed, but not as irreconcilable antinomies.
They are at the same time exemplifications of two definitions of the
human in Marx; they were selected as concrete expressions in their
juxtaposition of how man becomes human: that is, by life in society and
by the use of tools. Marx’s sixth thesis on Feuerbach defines man as the
ensemble of social relations; the isolated individual is an abstraction.44
(We will take up this problem below, in reference to Marx’s excerpts
from Maine.) The Introduction to the Grundrisse further develops this
idea, which was already adumbrated in the “ Critique of the Historical
School of Right” (1842) and in the Critique of the Hegelian Philosophy of
Right (1843). The formulation in Capital expresses it concretely, as the
praxis of particular societies. The intermediation of tools in the develop­
ment of man was introduced in the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts
(1844): man relates to his generic being (Gattungswesen) by his work
upon the objective world, it is man’s generic life;45 this was given
further concretion in The German Ideology,46 the Communist Manifesto, the
Grundrisse and in C apital.47 The relation of man in society and the relation
of man to nature are first, the interactive moments of a unified theory of
man which is the opposite of an abstract theory of the human condition,
of a human essence or nature. Man becomes human not only in society,
but in a concrete society, not only by the intermediation of his tools, but
by particular practical work upon nature by their means. The second
dialectical moment is opposed to the first; it is that man is alienated
a) from nature by his tools, and b) in society, as historical processes. The
second moment was taken up in its abstraction in the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts and with increasing concretion in the corpus of the
successive writings; the position of the notebooks of 1880-1882 makes it
possible to oppose the condition of primitive men in particular societies
to the life of man in the divided, industrial, urban societies. Marx
introduced the relations of the abstract and the concrete into what ought
to have been said regarding the interpretation of the political state of
Greek society, and thus stands opposed to Morgan’s abstract formulation.
Moreover, Marx’s formulation posits the opposition of the objective and
the subjective sides in this connection, while Morgan posited the abstract
alone in its objectivity.
With reference to the transition of Greek society from gentile to
political organization, Morgan considered Theseus not as an individual
but as representing a period or series of events,48 Marx, however,
simply as the name of a period, etc. Morgan moreover referred to Theseus,
or the rulers of the period, as being inclined toward the people. Marx
wrote in this connection (excerpts, pp. 76-77):
The expression of Plutarch that “ the humble and poor readily
followed the summons of Theseus” and the judgment of Aristode
that Theseus “ was inclined toward the people” appear, however,
despite Morgan, to indicate that the chiefs of the gentes etc., through
wealth etc. had already reached a conflict of interest with the common
people of the gentes, which is unavoidably connected through
private property in houses, lands, herds with the monogamous
Marx returned to the question of the division developing within the
Greek gentile society which was then in the process of dissolution and
transformation in connection with Morgan’s view that the unity of the
old social system had become untenable through shifting locality:49
“ Aside from locality: property difference within the same gens had
transformed the unity of their interests into antagonism of its members;
in addition, beside land and cattle, money capital had become of decisive
importance with the development of slavery!” (Marx, excerpts, p. 79).
Morgan had introduced property and its accumulation along with
territory as the criterion of transition from societas to civitas, or the political
organization, in the early part of his work,50 but solely on the objective
side, without the internalization as interest, collectivity of interest and
conflict of interest of the collectivities according to the unequal distri­
bution of property. Marx noted that the criterion of property fell away
in Morgan’s analysis of the dissolution of the gens and the formation of
political society, and that moreover, the interrelation of the objective and
the subjective sides as social interest was not taken up by Morgan, but is
nevertheless an implicit part of the entire analysis.
The difference in the amount of property and its uneven distribution
was further particularized by Marx as land and cattle, and, with the
development of slavery, capital in money form. The interest is then
internalized differentially among the collectivities as capital (in money
form or in cattle) which is more readily alienable than land, and land itself
is improved by labor upon it of slaves, with the help of cattle, instruments
as mechanical devices, etc. These proceed through their history as being
first organic, and then mechanical, as Marx had noted in his comment on
Descartes.51 The slaves are both the means of the unequal distribution of
property, being themselves property, and the antagonistic interest in
society against the property, being themselves human. The relation of
master-slave, of unequal distribution of property, the individual owner­
ship of property, whether land, cattle or slaves, the circulation of capital
in money form and the antagonistic interest in society arose in the period
of dissolution of the gens, and accomplished the transformation of
gentile into political society. The relation of temporal juxtaposition of
the events and participation of these in the process of transformation is
then brought together in the formation of the subsequent form of social
life, with predominance of private ownership of property, formation of
antagonistic social classes, monopoly of political power by the one of
these which has the greatest amount of property; it is at the same time
the process of formation of social institutions of property, privative
classes, and the State. The internalization of the social forms by the
groups of individuals as collective interests was posited by Marx as the
transformation of the unity of interests into the mutually antagonistic
collectivities within the society.
The field of religion was the classical locus of development of the
dialectic in the post-Hegelian schools of right and left, in which Bruno
Bauer, Ludwig Feuerbach and others, such as S. Kierkegaard, played
their parts, Marx and Engels having made great play with these concep­
tions in the Holy Family and the German Ideology. Marx applied the
dialectic in this regard in the chapter on Commodity Fetishism in the
first volume of Capital·, and in the last chapters of the third volume
Engels brought out the materials by Marx on the subject of reification
(Verdinglichung) which further developed the same ideas. The religious
field was then subjected to dialectical critique not because it afforded the
occasion for a performance of virtuosity wherein the converted spirit
was reconverted into matter, but rather because, by the mystical formula­
tions, a relation between men has been replaced by a relation between
things, and a material interest has been substituted by its supernal repre­
sentation, or by an abstraction. That interest is the interrelation of the
subjective and objective sides of man in a particular social relation, but
it has been externalized solely as a hypostasis, its ethereal form, in its
religious representation. Both in the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts
and in Capital the relation of subjectivity-objectivity of man is shown to
have undergone a onesided formulation, as its hypostatization on the one
hand, and as its reification on the other; the critique was applied ab­
stractly by Marx to man in general in the earlier work, and to a definite
condition of man in western society in the latter. The continued concretization was applied by Marx, in a relatively few places to religion
per se in primitive society, in the Morgan, rather more in the Lubbock
excerpts; he brought out the religious element in the Morgan materials
in regard to real cooperation and real possession of property in common,
to the degree that gentile commonalty disappears the religious ceremo­
nials of the gens increase in importance. What is understood is: to the
extent that the gens survives (Morgan excerpts, p. 71).
The content of Marx’s thought in the ethnological domain, its relation
to anthropology, both empirical and philosophical, and to the practical
aspects of political action can be approached from the formal side. The
apparatus of his studies is constituted of his choice of books and themes,
method of excerption, notes and comments, which are partly matters of
content and partly matters of form; more purely formal procedures of
the notebooks involve the relative amount of space and detail devoted
to a given topic, the sequence of the topics, and the degree to which
they correspond to those of the book being studied. A wholly formal and
external approach to the content of the note-taker’s thought lies in the
underlinings and lines and marks on the margin that he made. (These
observations relate to the objective side of the sequence of Marx’s
thought. The internal relations that he bore to his earlier writings on
these and related themes are both subjective and objective.) The formal,
technical apparatus which he applied in the ethnological notebooks of
1880-1882 is at once the same as and different from that which he applied
in the Critique of the Hegelian Philosophy of Right, and the EconomicPhilosophical Manuscripts. The earlier technique was intensive, the latter
extensive. They have certain characteristics in common in the matter of
content; together with the critique of Proudhon in Marx’s Poverty of
Philosophy: by the critique of the individual writings and of the individuals
to come to the positing of a social critique, and by the social critique to
come to the critique of the individual and the individual text; in his later
notebooks it is most fully exemplified in the Maine excerpts. Further in
regard to content, the problem of the social interests of estates or classes,
as the landowning class, was taken up in the Critique of the Hegelian
Philosophy of Right, and the problem was examined in the writings at the
end of his life. The position on the historical school of law was likewise
an early and a late theme, as was that of Greek social and historical
philosophy. The formal side of the early studies was the method at once
historical, logical and philological, applied intensively to Hegel, the
same method being applied extensively in the last studies to the subjective
and the objective sides of man in the opposition of the social interests of
the collectivities. This dialectical opposition was shown in the period of
dissolution of the ancient gentes.
We will proceed from the formal side to the content of Marx’s thought:
to proceed conversely would be mere speculation, since the form that we
have has no internally determinate relation to the content, relating only
to the works of others. The form is useful as an index of significance and
of relative weight of the different materials excerpted, occasionally
illuminated by comments of Marx. We have already observed the inter­
relation of Marx’s work with and upon the Morgan material and will
take up separately that of Engels with both Morgan and Marx. This
interrelation provides a possible frame of reference for the comprehension
of Marx, and another perspective to Engels’ work; by following the
sequence of Marx’s notes and excerpts a wholly objective and external use
of the dialectic is applied. Such utilization is not wholly satisfactory, for
it does not discover, but only weighs and measures that which has already
been posited, the first step in the dialectic, which is a negative one.
The Morgan excerpts were systematically reviewed by Marx, with
frequent underlinings and marginal lines; on the other hand, there are
relatively few interpolations in the text, as compared with the excerpt
notes on Maine. Morgan’s organization of the parts and chapters was
carefully noted down, but few page references were indicated. The
technique was changed in regard to Maine where there are comparatively
many interpolations in the text, little attention was paid to the organiza­
tion by chapters or lectures, and page references were frequently noted
down. Marx introduced his own doctrines and positions in the notes
from Phear and Lubbock to a lesser degree than in those from Maine,
whether externally or by interpolations; these notes serve rather to extend
and develop the positions of the Morgan and Maine notes.
M arx's Marginalia in the Morgan Excerpts
Such passages noted down from Morgan as are singled out by lines drawn
beside them are as a separate universe of discourse. A similar task may be
performed on other matters of form: the phrases underlined, the pro­
portionate length of the notes taken, etc.; this is left for the time. Marx
signalized by means of the marginal lines some 130 passages from his
excerpts and notes from Morgan, of which 2 5 relate to comments of his
own (the total is rounded because some marginalia cover both his own
interpolations and materials other than his own). Some of these have
been made known by Engels. Their interest is manifold: they are, first,
the passages singled out by Marx for their exceptional importance;
second, they appear to be applied to raise certain points (against Achille
Loria, J. G. Bachofen, etc.). If they are examined carefully from the
viewpoint of their content, context, sequence, etc., they may provide
some insight into the nature and form of Marx’s intention for his own
work in this substantive field. But this is to be left for future discussion,
in which others will participate, and here we will limit ourselves to the
sole task of presenting the evidence and oudining the problem. A listing
of these passages follows:
T A B L E II. Marginal lines drawn beside
Excerpts p.
Morgan excerpts
Tillage, inclosed gardens
Lucretius, reference to cultivation.
Promiscuity and horde life
Herodotus on Massagetae. Common
housing in Venezuelan tribes
The same in Brazil (bohios)
Communism of consanguine and
punaluan families, syndyasmian;
Communal households; Wright on
long-houses; common property
Old Britons
Patriarchal authority over property
Monogamous family; Gaius. Germanic household
Family and social system; sex equality
Communal property of savages;
x Inheritance
More advanced tribes lifted those
below. Tribal lands in Common.
Increase in amounts of property
Metals first for ornament. Calendar
for measuring time
Accumulation of property. Commu­
nal property. Blankets and yarn
Plutarch on Solon; State and individual property. Lands in common
Homeric trade. Joint and individual
Marx’s own comments
South Slavs, Russians
(2 references)
Fourier, the family and the State “
South Slavs; family and slavery
Loria and passion for property 6
p. Morgan excerpts
Marx’s own comments
Individual property unknown
Marriage Community of men and
Group marriage. Male descent and
Joint housing of Iroquois; com­
munism in living
Movable and non-movable property
Immovable property. Communitybuilt houses
Funeral of Sachem. Phratry military
Outflow of people. Population factor.
Missouri tribes.
Ojibwa stem tribe. Indian pottery.
Outflow of tribes - geographic
factor. Language and territory.
3 natural Indian centers - geographic
Discovery of maize agriculture in
Central America, transmitted to
American Southwest, to northern
South America, to Incas. Iroquois
gentes and government.
Council of Sachems and Chiefs
Women’s role in Iroquois government
Low population of native North
America etc. because of precarious
existence and warfare
Unanimity in Council of Iroquois
Onondaga government
Iroquois Council Ceremony (3
Unanimity of vote in Council
Democracy in Lower and Middle
Barbarism. Unity of language and
Growth of property, inheritance
Gente subdivided. Naming of gentes.
Kutchin intermarriage
Gens, caste and conquest
Caste formation
Moqui origin myth
Laguna land in common
Aztec moneyless economy; Com­
munal land tenure ; geographic factor
in Aztec land settlement
Size of Aztec settlement
Aztec organization; land tenure by
Excerpts p. Morgan excerpts
Aztec government organization
Greek tribal organization
Greek communal property
Promiscuous group and gens
Solon and reform of inheritance
Achilles in Homer
Yankee republican and Gladstone
Plutarch on Theseus
Plutarch on Solon’s reforms.
Language and settlement
The same
Schoemann on Homeric democracy
Germanic judicial functions. Barbarian
settlement and fortification
Marx’s own comments
Greek tribal names, soldiery
Kleisthenes, Pericles
Mommsen - Rome
Common property of Greeks
Communism in household; tribal
Institutions, not man, in history
Romulan division of Rome
Security and slavery; Greek division.
Pueblo joint tenement; Aztec
Roman division of society by
Senators and gentes. Plutarch on
Property and democracy; private
Female descent; common lands
Gens is great family
Tacitus, Germany Lipsius - Jordanes,
etc. Tacitus on German agriculture
Caesar on Germans
Attic population
Phantasy of Plutarch
Contra Morgan; Conflict of Interest
Ancient weights and measures.
Criticism of Plutarch.
Difference in ownership;
Schoemann on deme.
Schoemann; Pericles
Roman chronology
Contra Plutarch
Contra Bachofen’s lawlessness
* Long passages.
“ See Marx Engels Werke, v. 2, pp. 207-208, v. 3, pp. 498 et seq., and note 148, below.
b See Table I, note a.
The marginalia, few in the first pages, increase in frequency and length
through Marx’s excerpts. O f these, 28 are found beside passages treating
of government in the periods of savagery and barbarism, its organization,
legislation and reform, including six that deal with primitive democracy,
unanimity of the vote in council and the role of women in primitive
government. (Morgan devoted more than half his book to the topic of
government.) There are 27 passages referring to communal property,
housing and land tenure in these periods marked by such lines. Next in
numerical importance is the topic of property in other connections than
its communal ownership or possession, of which 19 passages are marked
out by marginal lines; these have reference to its accumulation in the
later stages of barbarism, inheritance and ownership by individuals in
the transition to civilization, and gambling. There are 10 passages with
marginal lines referring to the primitive family, to the fallacy of hetaerism
and to primordial promiscuity; nine such passages refer to the outflow
of people from a given place in connection with the formation of new
tribes, etc., because of population pressure, of food and other scarcities.
There are six passages referring to forms and development of cultivation;
four such passages refer to primitive technology (yarn, pottery, the
calendar, and metals), while Marx gives another Morgan excerpt, that
pertaining to the use of fire, (Morgan excerpts, p. 21), a different inter­
pretation from that given by Morgan.
Marx signalized in this way three of his own interpolations referring
to the South Slavic and Russian peasant communes; seven passages of
this type refer to his own comments on ancient governmental organiza­
tion and reforms; three refer to his additions of factual matter: on ancient
weights and measures, Roman historical and mytho-historical chronology,
and the population of Attica. The reference to Loria (Morgan excerpts,
p. 26) is an anti-psychologism; the reference to Bachofen (Morgan
excerpts, p. 96) is an attack on the cultural boundedness of European
observers, taken up again in the mss. devoted to Phear and Lubbock.
Communal property in ancient society had as its antithesis the dis­
solution of the primitive gentes and their property; the evolvement of
mutually antagonistic social classes; the accumulation of property by
means of inventions and discoveries and by the application of these
through social labor; the appropriation of the property by private indi­
viduals, whereby the private sphere is separated from the public, and the
social whole is separated from both; the unequal distribution of property
in society in the course of this appropriation. Together with the sepa­
ration of the private from the public spheres and the unequal distribution
of property in private hands is the unequal distribution of public power.
These developments take place and are institutionalized, perhaps more
than once, even in the same society, just as the settlement upon a given
territory may take place more than once. Morgan paid insufficient
attention to territory prior to the formation of political society, or the
State; we shall return to this question (see note 102 of this Introduction,
and section 6, on Community, Collectivism and Individualism below).
Marx’s emphasis on the collective institutions of the modem peasant
communities of the South Slavs and the Russians was taken up again
within the contexts of Phear and Maine regarding the oriental commu­
nities. These points were made more explicit, in the ms. notes on Maine;
they appear likewise in the Introduction to the Grundrisse, Capital, the
correspondence with Zasulich, and the Introduction of 1882 to the
Russian translation of the Communist Manifesto.
The universal measure of equality and democracy by which Morgan
judged the progress of the family and the distorting effect of property
accumulation is not an actuality but a potentiality of the history of the
society to which it is applied. The fact that it is not an actuality is devel­
oped by Marx on the one side in his positing of the alternatives open to
the Indian and Russian rural collective institutions; this opposition was
abstractly developed by Marx in the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts,
concretely in the Introduction to the Grundrisse, and in his ms. notes on
Morgan and Maine. The matter is adumbrated in the Introduction to the
Russian edition of the Communist Manifesto.
In the depiction of the causes of the outflow of tribes from particular
places, Morgan developed a geographic or natural determinism which
Marx assumed in turn, whereby the economic factor is reduced to the
ecological or the direct imposition of the forces of nature upon primitive
man. On the other hand, Marx posited in a general way the determination
of the economic system relative to the juridical, political, etc., in the
primitive as well as the civilized statuses of mankind. The two positions
were brought out separately by Marx in his notes on Morgan; in the
Maine excerpts he added some qualifications to the determination of the
economic in relation to Maine’s moral or traditionary factor in history;
in effect, therefore, they were brought together.
Marx referred to the factor of diffusion of cultural traits in the Morgan
excerpts. The diffusion to a given society and the borrowing by it are
moments along the same path, opposed to each other by the vectors of the
initiative in the movement; thus, diffusion is not a wholly external factor
in a given social development. On the one hand, it is a relation to the
social environment of the given people. As such it is in part a passive, in
part an active relation to that environment, for within it a selectivity of
diffusive traits takes place; the passivity is an indirect activity, imposing a
qualitative canon of what kinds of traits may be received or diffused, and
a quantitative canon of the degree or amount. These passive and active
factors and the quality and quantity of the relations are an internalization
of their externality, and the potentiality of the given society to realize
these potentialities and make them its own. On the other hand, it is a
relation of a superstructure to an infrastructure, as the capacity for the
development by diffusion of the society which takes, the diffusion pro­
ceeding through its own dialectical process in this way. Thus it is but
indirectly active upon the internal developmental relations of the society;
nevertheless it cannot be relegated to the domain of mere accident.
While much has been written about military democracy as the transition
from the gentile to the political society, Marx did not regard this transi­
tion as a formal historical, still less a dialectical, category. Morgan devel­
oped the idea of a military democracy first as an elucidation of a position
of Aristode, and in separating the functions of the civil from the military
leadership of the gens and tribe. Marx supported Morgan in this con­
nection and likewise against the application of the idea of the military
commander to the notion of the ancient monarchy by George Grote.
Marx wrote, .. basileia [the office of military commander] is, together
with the council and the agora - a sort of military democracy. Basileia is
applied by the Greek writers to the Homeric kingship because generalship
is the chief feature of the king.” (Marx, Morgan excerpts, p. 74).52 The
reference to the office of basileia in this way cannot be made into the
basis of a definite stage or sub-stage of history. Engels, returning to
Morgan’s form of expression, eliminated the word “ Sorte” from his
formulation, which has encouraged later thinking of the issue in terms
of a developmental stage, but does not report exactly Marx’s conception.
Marx differed from Morgan likewise in regard to the method of election
of the barbaric chief, basileus and rex. These were conceived by Morgan
according to his idea of the Iroquois practices and functions; Marx
considered that the Iroquois model had limitations, which will become
clearer in connection with the ms. notes on Maine, in regard to the elec­
tion of the chief. The scepticism of Marx relative to the use of the
Iroquois data as a model for interpretation of other societies constitutes a
further movement away from the fixity of categories, and carries the
general loosening of the stages of evolution both forth and back in time.
The model upon which Marx based his idea of the administration of
barbaric justice, for instance, was that of the Germanic peoples (Morgan
excerpts, p. 75); this is noted in passing.
There are several points in which Morgan did not make his own system
clear. The first is in relation to the functions of the basileia, military and
priestly, but not civil. Yet the basileus was at the same time a judge, the
rex a magistrate.53 Morgan’s theory was that the kingship, magistracy,
etc., arose out of the military leadership in the status of barbarism. Yet
how the function of the judiciary in the magistracy was excluded from
the civil institution was not explained by Morgan; this refers to the
beginnings of the magistracy, not its subsequent forms. Again, Morgan
described the Roman wife as a co-heiress, but at the same time held that
the property of. the deceased paterfamilias was kept within the gens.54
Yet the wife came from another gens. He failed to add that the wife’s
right in the inheritance could not pass outside the husband’s gens, but
remained with his children and that she could not otherwise bequeath,
devise or assign it, etc. This confusion is further expanded when Morgan
described the Attican gens as ‘a great family of kindred persons’ .66 Marx
not only accepted this, but rendered it into German, ‘nenne es Ge­
schlechtsfamilie’ (excerpts, p. 95). It was neither a clan-, lineage- gensfamily, nor any other sort of family, according to Morgan’s system, for
the family contained members of other gentes.
Morgan66 had written that in all ages, the relation of mother and child
was ascertainable, that of father and child, until the development of
monogamy, was not. Marx questioned this (excerpts, p. 6) by differen­
tiation between public and private relations, public ethic and private
morality, official and unofficial ascertainment of fatherhood. The differen­
tiation is posited by Hegel in his System der Sittlichkeit and in his Rechtsphilo­
sophie, it is adumbrated in his Phänomenologie des Geistes, and outlined in his
Enzyklopädie, Pt. III. The difference was not restricted by Marx to
civilized society, but it can only be posited where the public and the
private life are separate; it cannot be applied where they are not, as in a
communal society, with its related family life and ethic.
Marx added the example of the Slavic village collectivity at several
points (excerpts, pp. 13, 16) where Morgan mentioned the communal life
of the savage (consanguine and punaluan) and the barbaric (Germanic)
families. Here Marx developed a different thought from Morgan who
made communism in living a relation of a given family organization in
these contexts. This position was more fully worked out by Marx in his
notes on Maine, for it presupposes that the family is separate from its
communal village collectivity, seeking shelter within it, etc. This was
true when the collectivity in the nineteenth century had radically changed
its communal character, but would not apply to a social relation of the
punaluan sort, as it was posited by Morgan. Marx was directing his
critique of the commune of the nineteenth century in rural parts of
eastern and southeastern Europe; here the differentiation of the public
and the private or the official and unofficial, was already made while the
form remained, at least in a degree, communal. This is relevant to his
position on the mir and zadruga in the Introduction to the Grundrisse and
in Capital, rather than to Morgan. It also represents a development from
the position of the Communist Manifesto, in the body of the Grundrisse,57
and the background to the letter to Zasulich.
Phear’s work relates directly to Marx’s interest in the oriental society, in
particular to the oriental commune. (Marx in fact referred to Phear in
his notes on Lubbock, excerpts, p. 4, as the author of the “ Aryan Com­
mune” .) Phear provided descriptive material in the first chapters of the
agricultural, village and family institutions of the East Bengal and Cey­
lonese peasantry in the mid-nineteenth century, and their relations to the
landlords, money-lenders, the government tax and judicial systems. None
of Phear’s studies is devoted to particular villages, all are generalized with
respect to either of the two regions in question. His announced task was
to describe to English readers a type specimen of an agricultural village
in Bengal. It is not a specimen that he dealt with, but a type. Never­
theless Phear provided detailed accounts of household budgets, land
accounts, tax schedules, lists of possessions which are quite concrete (see
Phear excerpts, pp. 134, 143 and passim). The brevity of Marx’s excerpts
from the last chapter, on the Aryan village, in addition to his comments
on it, indicate his impatience with such hypothetical reconstructions of
the past. Phear was well informed on rural India during the nineteenth
century particularly in regard to deltaic Bengal, but save for a few ancient
documents which he had interpreted for him he was not well informed
about India prior to the Muslim conquest; yet he attempted to reconstruct
the ‘Aryan’ village from data which he gathered in Bengal and in Singha­
lese Ceylon, to which those from Mhairwarra and Ajmere were added.
The contrast of the position of the peasant in the land tenure system of
India and in Europe was the last thought that Marx took from Phear’s
Phear held Maine in high esteem; Marx was generally objective toward
Phear, noting data derived from him, with few objections. Substantive
issues raised by Marx in opposition to Phear, beside the speculative re­
constructions already mentioned, concern the relation between the family
and society in the oriental village community, and the question of the
oriental community and society in relation to feudalism. The problem of
the relations of the family, village and society, in particular, whether the
society is the village on a larger scale, was critically treated by Marx who
rejected Phear’s idea that gradations of ‘respectability and employment’ 59
in Phear’s terms grew up within the village itself; a fortiori, therefore, the
family could still less have been the ground for the development of social
differences or economic relations. In this connection, Marx commented,
“ The asinus lets everything be founded by private families.” (Marx,
Phear excerpts, p. 15 3). The point had already been raised in regard to
the Morgan excerpts (see also in reference to Maine excerpts, n. 144); here
it is further developed by Marx in terms of the difference between urban
and rural families; the urban-rural difference is independent of the
industrial-agricultural difference, for the latter did not come into being
in a significant way in the oriental society of the nineteenth century.
Phear was directed both toward and away from the idea of the oriental
community as a social category unto itself. On the one hand he criticized
a contemporary writer for having falsified the facts by phraseology
borrowed from feudal Europe,60 on the other he alluded to sub-infeudation in East Bengal;61 further in this connection, Marx (Phear excerpts,
p. 136) noted, “ Dieser Esel Phear nennt die constitution des village
feudal” .62 The application of the category of feudalism to the oriental
community by cultural and social historians, ethnologists, Marxists,
so-called Marxists, etc., is a simplistic periodization and a simplistic
typology without reference to a chronology implicit in the periodization
of oriental society, feudalism, etc. It is an abstraction from history and
an ethnocentrism, whether performed by Europeans or not, casting the
history of the world in the European mold. Since Phear developed his
ideas within the framework of Maine,63 the question of the community,
State and society will be taken up in the section devoted to the latter. At
this point we will merely call attention to a judgment by Phear, “ In the
East, under the village system, the people practically governed them­
selves__ ’,64
Marx singled out for his attention by marginal lines some 65 excerpts
from Phear’s book. O f these all but five deal with economic and agro­
technological matters, and these latter in about equal proportion. The
rem aining five deal with instruction lay and religious, religious taboo,
clothing, polyandry. Marx denoted by an X) the joint or communal
activity of Ceylonese villagers, the interest rates and methods of debt
collection in Bengal, the absence of money and the manner of fleecing the
ryots. Especially long passages marked out by marginal lines deal with
Bengal household budgets, the village smithy, the village office and
accounts, interest rates and collection practices, and the watering of plots
in Ceylon.
Marx interspersed his own comments in five passages: the local agents
of the Zamindar also act as his spies (Phear excerpts, p. 135); the idea of
the ryot being the enemy of social reform is questioned, and the ryot’s
desire to keep his son at work in the field instead of at school is justified
(Phear excerpts, p. 136); Phear’s objection to government practice in
famine control is supported (excerpts, p. 142). (The third essay in Phear’s
book is criticized on the grounds mentioned above.)
T A B L E HI. Marginal lines by Marx in the Phear excerpts
Rice growing. Names of crops by season^
Social respect. Village buildings. Plough construction. Mahajan.
Household budget. Food costs. Market. Instruction.
Brahmin teachers. Cowmen. Blacksmith; iron implements.
Iron from England out to India. Poor man’s worship.
Rent according to soil and use.
Zemindari amla. Kachahri. Gumashta.
Mahajan. Interest rates and collection practices. **) Ryot fleeced.*)
Widow inheritance. Absurdly small plots.
Woman and sudra religious taboo. Joint family worship of deity.
Trade practice of monastic orders. Mandal versus Zemindar.
Zemindar not a landlord. Land tenure. Land law.
Comparison of English tenant rates.
Famine and scarcity practices. Mahajan and shopkeeper. Government measures.
Hiding valuables. Clothing. Food storage.
Boats. Hoes. Pools for irrigation in Ceylon.
Paddy tracts.
Rent in services more primitive. Village tenures. Joint labor for repairing fences
and dams. Watering of plots.
Fencing, ploughing. Joint action of villagers. ***) Vegetable plots. Sharecropping,
half share letting. No money rent. *) Village capitalist. Mutual assistance. Land labor.
Agricultural labor. Polyandry. Cooperative land cultivation.
Land as commodity.
Government taxes. Paddy as money. Ancient taxation. Grain levy for chief.
Ceylonese payment in services and kind. Money payment. Landownership in India.
Grain supply in ancient India. Land sale. Mortgages. Chief’s dues.
T A B L E IV. Marx’s interpolations in the Phear excerpts
Gumashta and potwar as spies of zamindar.
Ryot would not be enemy (of bettering himself); Ryot’s fear of losing son as field
hand. Against Oriental feudalism.
Phear’s plan against famine is right.
Phear ought not to speculate hypothetically. He has everything based on private
Maine’s book deals with law and society in Ireland as these matters are
interpreted from the Irish lawbooks (Senchus Mor, The Great Book of
Ancient Law, probably compiled in the eighth century, and the Book of
Aicill).66 The system was in force down to the time of the English
conquest in the sixteenth-seventeenth centuries. To this Maine added
materials known to him from his judicial experience and studies in India
and a critique of the Bentham-Austin theory of the State and law from
the viewpoint of the historical school of jurisprudence. Marx’s organiza­
tion of the Maine materials is precise with regard to page references, but
passes over in virtual silence Maine’s organization by chapters (lectures);
the materials taken from Morgan are the opposite. As to content, Marx
sharply criticized Maine: Maine’s factual knowledge was weak (a point
raised by Lubbock as well), his critique of the school of jurisprudence of
John Austin and the utilitarians superficial; Morgan’s theoretical con­
structions had already gone beyond those of Maine at that time.
In the organization of the Morgan excerpts and notes, Marx kept him­
self apart, as compared to his organization of the Maine material, making
few comments in the former. His conceptions relative to Morgan are to
be interpreted ex silentio, by his choice of materials, etc. The Maine
materials, on the contrary, contain over 100 interpolations of exclama­
tions, questions, brief comments, and lengthy passages. O f the 38
manuscript pages devoted to Maine’s Lectures, the equivalent of eight are
filled passim with Marx’s insertions of his own expressions or excerpts
from other researches, which become a continuing polemic contra Maine.
Marx’s general relation to Morgan’s theory of the gens and particular data
which he took from Morgan were applied as counterpositions to Maine.
Marx’s general theory of the ancient community and its communal
practices, the origin of the State and the role of property in its formation,
the relation of primitive and civilized society and the role of property,
social antagonisms and the State, the equality and communality of the
primitive collectivity, and thereby the perspective upon the future of
society were posited briefly but explicitly.
Instead of the juxtaposition of prehistoric and historic societies as it is
set forth in the opening sentence of the Communist Manifesto, (“ The
history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” )
(see below, section 7, Relation of Engels to Marx and Morgan), an
interaction is posited between the ancient and primitive commune and
the modern peasant commune on the one side, and on the other, the
communal and collective social plan arising out of the capitalist era and
opposed to it.
Marx drew few marginal lines in the Maine manuscript, and such as
there are chiefly demarcate the results of his researches into Irish history,
into the meanings of Roman legal terms and into Indian marriage prac­
tices, parallel to the researches of Maine (excerpts, pp. 173, 174, 175, 181,
182, 187, 191). They include notes which, we infer, were taken from
articles (actio, lex, sponsio, restipulatio) in the Latin Dictionary of Lewis
and Short or its forerunner, Andrews-Freund, with accompanying
references to Varro; two articles in Samuel Johnson’s English Dictionary
(gossipred and replevin), lengthy notes from the history “ otherwise not
worthy of mention” of M. Haverty, and T. Strange’s Hindu Law .67 Marx
signalized by a marginal line his opposition (excerpts, p. 177) to Maine’s
idea of the family and the division of the inheritance ; this is a lengthy note
in which Maine is criticized for imposing the family and inheritance form
of the urban, well-to-do family on the poor rural family. (This will be
taken up below in section 7, dealing with Engels, particularly in reference
to Fourier and the civilized family. Marx raised the same point in refer­
ence to Phear; see above.)
Of the score of passages with marginal lines in the Maine excerpts, onethird refer to Maine’s words, two-thirds to Marx’s own comments. Of
his own comments marked out by marginal lines, the passages (excerpts,
p. 177) opposing Maine’s theory of the family and the division of
inheritance, and referring to the theoretical election of the chief, will be
discussed below.
In the following table, the passages singled out by Marx for his special
attention, from Maine’s work, are listed side by side with Marx’s own
comments. The two listings are combined into the one tabular form here,
because there is difficulty in separating them. The difference in method
from that applied by Marx in the Morgan and Phear manuscripts, and the
length and substantive force of Marx’s own comments are to be noted.
T A B L E V. Marginal lines drawn beside
Maine excerpts
169 (2)
172 (2)
Spenser, Davies“
Irish Rent in Kind. Rent
Irish tenant question. Bias of
Brehon tracts toward Chiefs
Haverty quoting Curry on Conquest of
Leges Wallicae. Spenser. Gossipred 6
Stanihurst: fosterage
Harris: ditto. Spenser
Plantation of Ulster. Chichester
Contra Maine’s theory of family and division
of inheritance
Theoretical election of chief
Actio, etc.; lex e
Festus, Varro; sacra mentum
Sponsio, restipulatio, condico, etc.®
Excessive technicality of law
Marx’s own comments
Distress as breach of peace
Homesitting in Law of Alfred and
Code Napoléon
Strange: Hindu bride and marriage
State is institution, not person
* Long passage.
0 Bibliographical only.
6 Johnson’s Dictionary.
e Cf. Lewis and Short, Latin Dictionary.
Approximately half of Marx’s comments in the Maine excerpts express
his objections to Maine’s political character and scholarship; on the
other hand, he noted certain of Maine’s points with approval. The
theory of the development of society from status to contract, formulated
by Maine in Ancient Law (1861) was implicitly accepted by Marx (Maine
excerpts, p. 170), who cited as an example of this theory the conversion
of personal service to slavery in Russia. The contractual obligation is a
wholly externalized interest of both sides, of him who imposes and him
who owes it. As external it is public, official, social; it is the final end of
the communal and personal relation of service, which is that of status in
Maine. A recurrent theme is Marx’s systematic and uncompromising
rejection of race, racism and biologism generally as a determinant without
further qualification of social affairs (Maine excerpts, pp. 162, 164, 187,
Marx rejected Maine’s reconstruction of the history of Irish land tenures
in severalty (excerpts, p. 162), the latter’s proposed relation of Roman
and English property in land, and of Continental, English and American
landowning practices (Maine excerpts, p. 164); likewise, he reduced
Maine’s theory of the twofold origin of landed property to one (I.e.), in
connection with the separation of the chief and family head by Marx.
Marx further noted his view of interests of social groups and individuals
(Maine excerpts, pp. 166, 178, 191), which had been given in the Morgan
excerpts; this is developed in the Maine excerpts in relation to the use
of fictions.
Marx continued his systematic separation of the family from other in­
stitutions of primitive society, wherein he followed Morgan’s initiative,
applying the differentiation to the separation of patriarch/paterfamilias
from gens/tribe chief, likewise to the relevant forms of property and its
transmission. Private property in land is not to be directly derived in
our theory from the collective property but came gradually to replace it
in the transition to political society, just as control over the gens to the
family; inheritance within the private family is opposed to the Tanaist
rule of passage of the chiefry by election, usually to the brother and not
the son (Maine excerpts, p. 178). At this point a public fiction is intro­
duced which maintains the old rule of gentile succession as an anachro­
nism. The opposition of public and private, of official and unofficial,
which had been first expressed in the Morgan ms. notes, is here developed
more fully in connection with the passage from barbarism to civilization,
the formation of the State, and the dissolution of the archaic communal
rules of inheritance and authority. The public fictions are applied then
as the social interests become separate and antagonistic. But in Marx’s
conception the office of the chief had been opposed to the collectivity
within it not only in the period of the dissolution of the gens and tribe,
but before, since, contrary to Morgan, the chief was elected only in theory
(Maine excerpts, p. 177); the election is therefore other than any modern
conception of it, both in reference to current practice and in reference
to naive ideas of primitive democracy. Practically the office of chief is
transmittable (Maine excerpts, p. 175); here the context clearly indicates
that the opposition in Ireland of election in practice and election in
theory, in Marx’s view, did not relate to the period immediately preceding
the English conquest, but was conceived as a condition of primitive
society prior to the dissolution of the barbaric gentes. Hence it follows
that Marx found the opposition of theory and practice in the ancient as
well as modern society, in connection with the dissolution of the ancient
society and the gentile institutions.
Again, however, given the theory of the election of the chief in gentile
society, which had been advanced by Morgan, Marx noted that Maine
disclosed the same practice in the Hindu joint family and in early medieval
Europe.68 Marx commented, “ This is more normal than all else, since
the chief remains theoretically elective, to be sure, within the gens or
tribe as the case may be.” Edmund Spenser had described the same
practice in reference to the Irish of his day,69 which Maine then cited;
Marx held that Maine would have interpreted Spenser more accurately
had he known Morgan’s idea about the election of chiefs. (Marx, Maine
excerpts, pp. 175, 177» I 78.)
In reference to the relation of Oriental to Occidental society, Phear
had argued in Maine’s line:
“ In Europe, in contrast to the East, in place of the produce
[in the form of] tribute [there] was substituted a dominion over the
soil - the cultivators being turned out of their land and reduced
to the condition of serfs or laborers.
“ In the East, under the village system, the people practically
governed themselves, and the contest for power among the Chiefs
of the noble class was mainly a struggle for command of the kachahri
tabils” - the village accounts. (Marx, Phear excerpts, p. 155.)
This line was explored by Maine, but from above, the capacity of the
ruler, not from that of the village, in his account of the eighteenth century
Sikh monarch, Runjeet Singh. (Marx, Maine excerpts, pp. 194-196.)
Maine here argued that the oriental despotism was limited to taxtaking; on the contrary, legislation other than that of tax and military
levies was first introduced in the Roman empire on a scale beyond the
village community level, and thus the western European development
was set on a different course from that of the orient. Moreover, Maine
held that the empires of the ancient Orient, the Assyrian, Babylonian,
Median and Persian empires were of the type of the Sikhs under Runjeet
Singh, and that the latter would serve as a basis for insight into the
generality of the oriental empire or despotism past and present. Maine
wrote, “ Runjeet Singh never did or could (!) have dreamed of changing
the civil rules under which his subjects lived.” 70 (Interpolation of
exclamation by Marx.) The fact that the oriental monarch did not alter
local custom was accepted by Marx; according to Maine, the despot did
little but maintain his court and wage war. Marx exclaimed not against
the fact of noninterference in the traditions of the village by the monarch,
but against Maine’s extravagance (“ never could” ). It follows that in
Marx’s conception, which was in accord with Maine’s on this point, the
erection of great public works as palaces, temples, mausoleums, etc.,
played no important role in the political economy of traditional India, and
that canals and other waterworks there were not the business of the
central monarchy or of the State bureaucracy. In view of recent publi­
cation on the Oriental society and its form of government, the Asiatic
mode of production, etc., the relation of Marx to the reports on India by
Maine and Phear should be fully explored.71
In his last two chapters, Maine criticized the theory of the State and
law of the Analytical School of Jurists (Jeremy Bentham, John Austin;
Thomas Hobbes as their forerunner) as follows:
“ An assertion, however, which the great Analytical Jurists cannot be
charged with making, but which some of their disciples go very near to
hazarding, that the Sovereign person or group actually wields the storedup force of society by an uncontrolled exercise of will, is certainly never
in accordance with fact__ The vast mass of influences, which we may
call for shortness moral, [Marx’s interpolation, Maine excerpts, p. 19 1:
“ this ‘moral’ shows how little Maine understands of the matter; as far
as these influences (economical before everything else) possess (a) ‘moral’
modus of existence, this is always a derived, secondary modus and never
the prius] perpetually shapes, limits, or forbids the actual direction of
the forces of society by its Sovereign.” 72
The Austinian view of sovereignty is the result of abstraction, accord­
ing to Maine. Marx tacitly accepted this, but added (I.e.):
“ Maine ignores the much deeper point: that the seeming supreme
independent existence of the State is itself only seeming and that it
is in all its forms an excrescence of society; just as its appearance
itself arises only at a certain stage of social development, it disap­
pears again as soon as society has reached a stage not yet attained.
First the tearing of the individuality loose from the originally not
despotic chains (as blockhead Maine understands it), but rather
satisfying and agreeable bonds of the group, of the primitive com­
munity - and therewith the one-sided elaboration of the individu­
Further, according to Marx, the individual has interests which are
common to social groups and which characterize them, and therefore
individuals are class individuals, individuals of social groups which have
economic conditions underlying them, on which the State is built,
presupposing the economic base. The economic factor is here presented
as basic in the first place, and as interactive with other factors in the
second. The discussion of the economic factor in the same terms was
already set forth in relation to the direct impact of nature on primitive
society versus the economic factor in that kind of society (see section 1
on Morgan above and Marx, excerpts from Morgan, pp. 41-42). In the
Maine excerpts (p. 178), Marx wrote that “ The predominance of the
single family over the gens is connected with the development of private
property in land.” This is also to be taken together with the discussion of
the family as a miniature of the society in the primitive and civilized
conditions. (See section 1 on Morgan in Introduction, above, and Marx,
Morgan excerpts, p. 8 and n. 38.)
The position of Marx is that Maine’s conception of the private family,
as being the basis out of which the sept and clan are developed, is
completely wrong (Maine excerpts, p. 177). In this regard, Marx is on
the side of Morgan. The clan and clan chief are different institutions
from Hindu joint family and the Hindu father. Maine had the English
private family in mind. The example taken from India holds rather for
the cities than for the countryside, and among the owners of ground rent
rather than actual working members of a village community. Thus
Maine idealized and generalized a partial and privileged situation in India.
He did not understand the opposition of interests in the Indian village
community, nor the opposition between city and countryside. This is
both a methodological and a substantive point and bears as much upon
Fourier as upon Maine. (See below, section 7, Relation of Engels to
Marx and Morgan, and note 146.) On p. 177 of the Maine excerpts,
Marx posited the opposition between social classes in the Indian village
community; this position of Marx is to be taken in conjunction with his
criticism of Phear who sought to found economic functions in society
and social differences in the village on the family (see Phear excerpts,
P· 1 5 3)·
The development of the conflicting interests as the society develops
into groupings of individual interests is expressed in the opposition of
public and private, rural and urban, rich and poor (Marx, Maine excerpts,
pp. 164, 177), higher and lower estates (Stände) (Maine excerpts, p. 166).
The church, in accordance with this theory of interests becomes separated
from secular organizations of society and joins with these as a high con­
tracting party in assertion of its own interest in common with and op­
posed to others. The society becomes divided into specializations of
labor and profession, and is separated by conflicting collectivities within
itself; these collectivities have internalized their relations to each other
and to themselves, and to the society, as their interests, and are at the
same time externalized as the expression of the same. Social property
becomes that of the lesser collectivity, the social class, individually ex­
pressed as interests of particular human beings. In effect, the order is at
the same time reversed, the social property being distributed among
individuals, and providing at the same time the basis for the interest of
a social class; thereby the opposition of the individual and the collectivity,
that of the individual and the collective interests in the society, and be­
tween the social collectivities are brought about. Hegel’s hypostatic
formula, setting the State above civil society, destroys the dialectical
opposition that he sought to create in the first place. Marx restored the
opposition in its particularity, while opposing its empirical-positivist form
as simple statement of fact, after the fashion of Hume. The unity of the
primitive community and the chance of opposition made it difficult for
Marx to accept Morgan’s opposition of family and gens. The oppositive
principles in the primitive community remained to be worked out. The
theory of Engels is in two parts, a subjective and an objective factor.
The process of individuation is the articulation of the individual inter­
est in the society and the dissolution of the community in the course of
this ; the individuation is one-sided, without a corresponding interchange
in the interest of the society. Thereby the society ceases to be the final
end of the means of satisfaction of the individual, and the unity of the
society in the society belongs to the world of seeming. The interests are
at once a content of the individuation and their externalisation as charac­
terizing forms; the interrelation of the oppositive contents and the
external forms is the dissolution of the social unity, that of the individual
unity and that of the unity of the individual and the society. Marx’s
mention (excerpts, p. 191) of Losreissung, as opposed to the satisfying,
comfortable bonds of the primitive community, presupposes these dis­
unities, which are given expression in the passage of Capital dealing
with the dismemberment of man in the early period of capitalist manu­
facture.73 (See below, Introduction, section 6, Community, Collectivism
and Individualism.) That mention is opposed to the partly rightsounding
phraseology of Maine which brings the social tradition to bear on the
State sovereignty as the condition of its limitation (excerpts, p. 192). The
latter enters into the superstructure of the society.
Sovereignty and the limitations of sovereignty are not conferred upon
the person of the monarch but upon the office, a distinction either
obscured or not fully comprehended by both Maine and Austin; both
obscured the relation of society to the institution, in different ways :
Maine caused the moral sphere of reference “ for shortness” to include
the entire tradition of the society, therefore he argued by implication for
the non-separation of science from politics or of statements of fact from
those of morality.74 It is opposed to the position shared by Hume,
Bentham and Austin. Marx’s difference with Maine in this regard was
something else : Maine in his all-embracing moral category did not allow
for the preponderance of the economic influences (excerpts, p. 191).
Nevertheless, Maine introduced the economic factor in his ideas on caste
formation;75 this should be brought together with Marx’s ideas about
caste exogamy in connection with the transformation of gentile to
political society (see above, section 1 ; and Marx, Morgan excerpts, p. 58
and n. 160, below).
Civilized society is artificial, being pervaded with fictions, practices not
found in primitive communities. The joint family has a secondary char­
acter and is separated from the primitive commune where there is no
opposition of town and countryside or of rich and poor (excerpts, p. 164).
Maine wrote76 that the power of distribution of the inheritance comes to
resemble ‘mere administrative authority’ in the degree that ‘the Joint
Family, Sept or Clan becomes more artificial.’ Marx commented: “ The
matter is just the reverse. For Maine, who cannot get the English private
family out of his head after all, this quite natural function of the Chief
of the gens, further of the tribe, natural because he is its chief, (and is
theoretically always “ elected” ) appears as “ artificial” and “ mere adminis­
trative authority” , whereas the arbitrariness of the modern paterfamilias
is just as “ artificial” as the private family itself from the archaic stand­
point.” The artificiality, according to Maine, is by comparison with, or
nonsuitability to, the modern situation of the family, its position in
modern society with respect to inheritance of the estate; according to
Marx the artificiality is by comparison to the archaic condition. In his
argument against Maine’s reversal, Marx separated out, along Morgan’s
line, the condition of the gens and tribe, and the chief of each, from the
family and its head, in opposition to Maine who placed the joint family,
sept, and clan on equal footing in the same social category. Likewise,
Marx entered reservations against Morgan’s idea of election of the chief
of gens or tribe, clan or sept, which office is only elective in theory, but
transmissible in practice, as we have seen. Maine’s criterion for artifi­
ciality is that of anachronistic survival, Marx’s that of the social divisions
and antagonisms of the civilized condition as such, wherein artificiality
arises from the alienated condition of civilized man, exploited, dismem­
bered, set against his fellows and against himself, by comparison with the
archaic condition of community, satisfying, nondespotic and equal. In
the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, Marx had analyzed the
human condition into its active components: the condition of man as
alienated is that of the selfalienation of man, the alienation of man from
thing.77 The process of Aufhebung or sublation of the selfalienation
follows the same path as the selfalienation (Private Property and Com­
munism).78 In the Holy Family this is further analyzed, in such a way that
the possessing class and the proletariat present the same human self­
alienation; it is their relation to the social alienation which differs from
one class to the other.79
Marx has pointed to the beginnings of the separation of theory from
practice in the excerpts from Maine, continuing the mode of analysis
that was noted in the Morgan excerpts, wherein the official and the un­
official were separated and the public from the private, in the transition
from barbarism to civilization.
Marx (Maine excerpts, p. 191) opposed the oldfashioned (positivist)
conception of science as classification and definition, and consequently
Hume’s separation and juxtaposition of statements of fact and of moral
judgments. Thereby Marx opposed the separation and juxtaposition of
science and politics, noting that both Maine and Austin separated them­
selves thereby from Hobbes: Maine was oldfashioned, but not oldfashioned enough, for Hobbes had not made the separation of science from
politics as his followers in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were
to do. The positions of the English empiricist and the Continental
Kantian and positivist schools were opposed by the tradition that re­
garded politics and science in their interrelation: beside Hobbes, Marx
mentioned Machiavelli and Linguet (I.e.).80
Morgan criticized Maine with reference to the joint family and the gens
on two counts, i, the joint family and the gens are not the same kind of
social institution; the gens is a unilineal descent group, while the family,
joint or other, is composed of members of more than one line. 2, the
patriarchal family is an exceptional, not a normal development.81 Maine
answered Morgan, but did not meet the latter’s argument.82 [The
contradiction noted both in Morgan and Marx regarding the relation of
the family and the gens (see above, section 1, on Morgan, and note 55) is
again propounded by Marx (Maine excerpts, p. 187): here Marx wrote
that the family is encased (eingehiillt) in the gens, in which he followed
Niebuhr. According to Morgan’s idea the family is never fully encased
in the particular gens, for one of its members belongs to another gens.]
The brief notes from Lubbock were set down separately and later than
the others,84 involving the work of McLennan whom Lubbock followed
with minor reservations. Lubbock still included lists of curious practices
and remarkable customs, but belongs to an ethnological tradition which
recounted the story of man as a historism, entirely earthly, which had
been given its impetus in the eighteenth century; it became transformed
into an evolutionary account of human development in the light of
Darwin’s discovery of environmental adaptation and natural selection,
and of Alfred Wallace, Huxley, Spencer, Ernst Haeckel, and the resultant
literature of Dawkins, Lubbock, Tylor and Morgan. Lubbock accounted
for religion on naturalistic grounds, and for the formation of the State
in indigenous terms, without particular reference to exogenous factors
in a particular society, as race, conquest, or the like. Lubbock was at the
same time culture-bound, whereat Marx raised the issue of the subjective
cultural bond in ethnological practice: Lubbock had noted,85 “ Among
many of the lower races relationship through females is the prevalent
custom...” hence - the interpolations are by Marx (excerpts from
Lubbock, p. z)
the curious (!) practice that a man’s heirs [but then
they are not the man’s heirs; these civilized asses cannot free themselves
of their own conventionalities] are not his own, but his sister’s children.”
Marx’s notes on Lubbock include a long extract from Cervantes, Don
Quixote, where a point is made about delivering the great from need as
(Marx’s parallel) in India the divinity is ransomed from his chains (ex­
cerpts, p. 4·)86
Marx’s notes on Lubbock presuppose his having read Morgan, Maine,
and Phear: thus, McLennan and Bachofen began their development of
marriage and the family with a stage of hetaerism or communal marriage;
to which Marx comments, “ And Lubbock says, p. 70, that he believes
this nonsense, i.e., therefore identifies communal marriage and hetaerism;
whereas clearly hetaerism is a form which presupposes prostitution (and
this exists only in opposition to marriage, whether communal, etc., or
monogamic. This therefore^ hysteron proteron.” (Marx, Lubbock ex­
cerpts, p. 1). Engels, following Morgan, brought in hetaerism only after
the introduction of monogamy.87 McLennan had considered that
marriage by capture arose out of tribal exogamy. Lubbock: “ I believe
that exogamy arose from marriage by capture__ ” 88 Marx commented
(I.e.): “ Lubb. knows nothing of the basis - the gens.”
The place in the history of ethnology of the authors and works treated
here and Marx’s relation both to them and to the ethnological field
through them, may be examined within the tradition of the empirical
study of living peoples and of peoples of the past. Ethnography was then
being established by the initiation of reports by observers who set aside
long periods of residence among the ethnographic subjects, and who had
no obvious axe to grind in the way of demonstrating the superiority,
innate or achieved, of race, of one mode of life, or of one religious belief
over another. In part for this reason, the ethnographer at that time took
on the viewpoint of an objective, distanced natural scientist, describing
men as though his relation to them were other than that of man to man,
which is the formicological viewpoint of Hippolyte Taine. The sciences
of man had co-opted the field of ethnology and anthropology from the
philosophical study of the same undertaken by Kant, Hegel, Fichte,
Feuerbach, a tradition out of which Marx emerged, which had figured in
his doctoral dissertation and in his Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts
of 1844.
The work of Phear approaches the methods of modern ethnography,
in part is identical with it, in part falls away by its representation of an
abstract type specimen of the agricultural village of East Bengal. It
approaches the modern ethnography by the infrequency of the intrusion
of the ethnographer, the accumulation of detail about a particular subject,
e.g., the household accounts and the listings of the household furnishings,
the enumerations of the types of landholdings and the dues levied on each,
and by its spatio-temporal specificity, contradicted in turn by his assever­
ation of the type. Morgan’s work includes four chapters of description
of the Iroquois gens, phratry, tribe and confederacy, and compendious
descriptions of Greek and Roman institutions of the same scope. Maine
applied the Brehon tracts to an insight into the Irish antiquities. All these
ethnographies, after the fashion of that time, provided a knowledge in
detail of a particular people in a particular subject matter: material cul­
ture, household economy, social and political organization, kinship
organization, legal customs, with insight into the mode of life of the
peoples whose practices were described. These concrescences were
joined in the cases of Morgan and Maine to general theories of develop­
ment of political and kinship organization, or legal organization. The
work of Lubbock, in contrast, belongs to the opposite tradition of
scattered data unrelated to ethnographic particularity, of which Herbert
Spencer was the coeval representative, and which has since fallen into
Morgan and Lubbock figure among the leading writers in ethnology of
the late nineteenth century; Marx was no doubt well served in choosing
them as the indicators of the state of development of the science. He
had treated of Kovalevsky, Tylor, Maurer and Bastian in other contexts.
(See Addendum 2 on Tylor and Bastian; see above on Maurer and
The interrelation of the abstract and the concrete data was developed
during the late nineteenth century in ethnology, yet the subjective and
the objective sides of the nascent science were not well formulated. Marx
in his correspondence and in his ethnological notes drew attention to the
cultural limitations of the observer, in which the mode of social life of
the observer formed his object-glass. There remains to be integrated
into the field of ethnology the relation of the human actuality to the
potentiality of man as subject in relation to the object, man the subject
of the ethnography, on the one side. And on the other, there remains the
actual disunity and opposition of man in relation to the potentiality of
unity with himself, society and nature, positions which had been set
forth by Marx four decades earlier.
Hegel comprehended civil society in its unity, Marx in its internal
opposition; common to the two is the formation of civil society as the
achievement of the civilized condition, as the condition of that condition,
which is a process of general development on the one side, of the partic­
ular history on in the other, and the relation between the general and the
particular. The achievement of civilized condition as the human agency
is at the same time Marx’s comprehension of Hegel. The formation of
mutually antagonistic collectivities, internalized as collective interests in
their opposition to each other, is the difference between Hegel and Marx
in their respective comprehensions of civil society. This difference is
objective in itself, it is at the same time the difference between Hegel’s
subjectivity and Marx’s objectivity, and is the positing of the relation of
the subjective to the objective in society, which is wholly on the side of
Marx. In the Morgan excerpts (pp. 76-77,87 and passim) and in the Maine
excerpts (pp. 191-192 and passim) Marx took up the question of the
individual in relation to the collectivity under the condition of the dis­
solution of the archaic community and the formation of civilized society.
Here Marx examined the interrelations of objective and subjective factors
in the relation of the individual in society to his collectivity as interests.
G. Lukacs understood Marx’s position in regard to society solely on the
objective side, in opposition to Hegel. For this it is necessary to go not
only to the product of the given historical process, such as Hegel and
Marx envisaged, that is, modern bourgeois society, but to the onset of
the process of its formation, which is to grasp it as a temporal phenom­
enon. Marx set forth the history of the individual interests in their
conflicting relations to each other, resolved in the collective interest
of the social class within itself; the resolution of the conflict is not whole,
partly because the process of establishment of the new form of society is
incomplete, in which the former communal relations are carried forward,
albeit pro forma (cf. Morgan excerpts, p. 71, ref. Weihrauchsduft). Pardy,
however, the conflict is never resolved in the new form of society because
the interest of the subject is not wholly subordinated to the objective
interest; where property interest is at stake, man is as a shark to man, he
knows no interest but his own, even when it is in his interest to sub­
ordinate it to the collective one. The interest of the subject is at the same
time subjective and objective, the objective interest being in part inter­
nalized, and the subjectivity and the internalized objectivity being both
externalized in the behavior, relations and production of the group in
the society. Out of this internalization there is developed the partial,
fragmentary comprehension of the individual in society as subject-object
(v. Ernst Bloch) in mutual interrelation with the society. Yet the inter­
nalization itself comprises both the unity and the opposition of the
individual in the civilized condition. The society is divided within itself,
the individual is divided along two axes: by having internalized the social
division whole, and by opposing the social division after having ex­
perienced the comforting bonds of the foregoing communal existence.
Finally, man in the civilized condition is subdivided, as society is divided,
in the social division of labor. We thus proceed from the social atom to
the anatomized man in civil society, which was earlier laid bare by Marx’s
anatomy of civil society, and now by the diachrony of its formation.
Man in the civilized condition is formed as a divided individual, with
opposing elements both within himself and to the collectivity which
purportedly serves his interest and whose interest he purportedly serves.
Man in all conditions, civilized or not, is at once subject and object in
his relation in society, by his composition in that relation, and therefore
to himself; it is by virtue of that relation that he is subject and object.
The relation of subject and object in the individual is partial and frag­
mentary because it is not separated from its development, or its temporal
relation. The consciousness of the relation is incomplete, for man is
separated from nature, and from his own nature, the content of man’s
subjectivity ill fits, fits but does not fit well, the form of his objectivity.
The externalization of wants and their internalization as satisfactions are
social relations on the one side and human relations with nature on the
other, the latter being intermediated by human work with tools, which
were conceived after Hegel by Marx as the social instruments of labor.
The concept of culture in empirical anthropology has one of its roots
in the Hegelian theory of mediation, given that the mediate relation of
man to nature is at the same time the alienation of man from nature and
the intermediation of man’s work in the natural relation; hence the
formation of the opposition culture-nature, however empirically it is
determined, is incomplete because onesided. The conjoint relation (or
doubly, relations, for both singular and plural, the one and the many
relations between human society and nature are maintained) of inter­
mediation and alienation is at the same time the dialectical passage of the
linking of man to nature and the distancing of man from nature, by
which we mean on both sides the intervention of culture. The concept is
still abstract in Hegel’s philosophical anthropology, and has been made
only partially concrete in the empirical. There are to begin with two
dialectical moments that are to be elaborated: The first is the passage
from the concrete culture, from culture in the plural sense, the many, to
the abstract, the actual many and the potential one, and the reverse. This
has been already formulated in the empirical side of anthropology as the
interrelation of the abstract relation by which man produces himself and
his kind in general, and the concrete act of work, or the shaping of things
of use to the given society. The second was expressed by Hegel, to whom
culture meant the cultivation of the individual, or his life cycle of enculturation; in Marx it was constituted by the socialization of the individual
by means of his particular relations in society, concretely in the collec­
tivities that make up his social environment and form his social being.
The abstract and the concrete labor are likewise separate in Marx, and
joined as the abstract potentiality and the concrete actuality.
The Hegelian system is an organicism in the sense of the actualization
of a potentiality, but as an organicism within a teleology; it is in this
sense that Marx interpreted the Hegelian dialectic of anthropology and
history both explicitly and implicitly in his later writings (vide: Preface to
second edition of Capital, volume I ; Capital passim; references to Darwin
in his Correspondence; Randglossen to the ‘Lehrbuch der Politischen
Okonomie’ of A. Wagner.)89
The Hegelian system as a whole was understood as an organicism by
C. S. Peirce; according to this, the growth of living beings is not separate
from the growth in nature as a whole of animate and inanimate matter;
all nature is inseparable, in the same process. The notion has a root in the
Stoic (Chrysippus, Stobaeus, Seneca), before that in the Heracleitian and
hylozoist traditions, having been resumed in Aristotle’s doctrine of teleological entelechy. The idea of organic growth underlies the evolution
of man and of culture in the nineteenth century, particularly the evolu­
tionary doctrine shared by Spencer, Tylor, Morgan, for it is not the human
individual but the collective social life that undergoes the transformation
from the primitive to the civilized state. The growth, as all of nature, is
an undirected, internally unfolding, self-formative process. Morgan’s
conception, like that of Darwin, pointed to organic processes which
were qualitative and systemically interrelated (as Morgan’s idea of the
change in the family form bringing in its trail the changes in the system
of consanguinity). There was another part of Morgan’s thought which
was rather quantitative and mechanicist, as the settlement on a territory
and the accumulation of property which accounted for the transformations
from one mode of existence to another. This, the mechanicist part, only
later came to be separated out from the organicist in human development.
The organicist conceptions were wholly objective in Morgan, the sub­
jective side being a projection of his desire to see the recrudescence of
the ideals of the gens after the fall of the regime of property over mankind.
The organicist and the mechanicist conceptions of Morgan were juxta­
posed to each other, and were not interrelated; nevertheless, they were
set forth with materials which were empirically concrete (Iroquois,
certain Australian, Aztec, Greek, Roman, and Hebrew societies). Sub­
sequent work on Morgan’s schema has been on the objective and mechan­
icist side, presupposing the continuation of the organicist.
Morgan’s organicism was implicit in his notions of growth, develop­
mental stages, etc.; it was at the same time literal and explicit. He made
reference to the organic series (gens-phratry-tribe),90 to natural growth
from gens to phratry,91 to that growth as natural or organic processes,92
to an organic social system,93 to the organism of society,94 to living
organizations,95 etc. This organic doctrine was conceived not as an
analogy but as an analytic tool which enabled him to reconstruct a part
of the social whole where direct evidence was lacking.96 Engels followed
Morgan in this matter;97 Marx was critical of the same Cuvier whom
Engels cited in support of his organicist reconstruction after Morgan;
Marx expressed reservations regarding one of Morgan’s reconstructions:
The latter98 had inferred that the Mohawks and Oneidas had each lost
at least one phratry and one gens of the remaining phratry. Marx
(excerpts, p. 38) exclaimed at Morgan’s words: ..//(!) it is supposed (!)
that...” (Marx’s underlining). Morgan’s expertise in this matter was
then recognized; the steps in reasoning are neither many nor do they defy
the imagination. Yet Marx’s exclamations imply a doubt which is to be
registered a fortiori with regard to Morgan’s more sweeping speculative
Opposed to Morgan’s conception was that of Franz Boas, who in­
fluenced American anthropology in the direction of a mechanicism such
that growth other than that of the individual biological organism and its
organs was set down as antiscientific. This opposition was extended by
R. H. Lowie further in the same direction of an objective, positivist,
empirical mechanicism. On the other hand, A. L. Kroeber, together
with W. M. Wheeler in biology, L. Mumford in the history of urbanism
and technology, S. A. Alexander, A. N. Whitehead, C. Lloyd Morgan
developed a conception of organicism without any relation to mech­
anicism. To the organicist doctrine were related Emile Durkheim’s
idea of mechanical and organic solidarity, H. S. Maine’s of status and
contract, and following him, F. Toennies’ of community and society,
in whose work Marx figures. The closest to the Hegelian conception of
organicism in the history of law and society was Otto Gierke’s Genossenschaftsrecht,99 which we translate as law or right of societas, (== L. H. Mor­
gan’s societas). Joseph Needham has redefined mechanicism in relation
to Whitehead’s philosophy of organism, giving it the name of neo­
mechanism; Needham thereby gives biological laws an ‘interim’ character
insofar as they are different from mechanical laws, but are deprived of an
entelechy,100 in contrast to the entelechistic deism of Whitehead, Alex­
ander, and Lloyd Morgan. Marx took up the organicist doctrine from
Hegel, but in the light of Darwin, without Hegel’s implicit pantheism.
Aside from the specific ideas and data-interpretations that Marx took from
L. H. Morgan and the other ethnologists, these general conceptions are
not their common ground. Marx pointed out the way through Charles
Fourier in regard to the negative critique of civilization, which in a
different way was taken up by Sigmund Freud as well. On the other hand,
L. H. Morgan was part of an American movement of thought that was
still alive to the common egalitarian tradition out of which both the
American and French revolutions arose. L. A. White did not find that
L. H. Morgan sympathized with the working class and the socialist
movements in American life in his own day; rather he was idealistic and
utopian, anti-aristocratic and communitarian in his abstract opposition
to property. Thus, Morgan never proposed concrete means to carry
out the program of abolishing the thing which had aroused his distaste.
On the contrary, Marx identified Morgan as serving in the opposed camp
to his own, hence providing an objective support of Marx’s argument,
without Morgan’s will to do so, or have it done for him. In his letter to
Zasulich, Marx cited Morgan in support of his idea that the present
society would return to the archaic practice of common ownership of
property. Marx pointed out that Morgan had been supported in his
work by the American government (this refers to Morgan’s Systems of
Consanguinity and Affinity). Morgan did not conceive that the modern
social system is in ‘a crisis that will end only by its elimination’ ; yet Marx
and Morgan in different ways called for the revival of the archaic com­
mune with regard to property, equality and the organization of society.
(Ste Addendum i.)
R. H. Lowie criticized L. H. Morgan’s conception of primitive society
on the ground that it is atomistic101: Morgan did not take account of
territorial and police-military associations, nor of political behavior and
relations, of differentiation by stratification and ranking in primitive
societies. Lowie’s criticism of Morgan’s Ancient Society has as its pre­
supposition that Morgan’s work is an abstraction from primitive society,
a criticism that can be made of Maine’s idea of status versus contract, of
Durkheim’s idea of collective representations and of mechanical solidarity,
of Lucien Levy-Bruhl’s idea of the pre-logical savage thought, etc.
W. N. Fenton, who has worked among the Iroquois, has written that
Morgan omitted mention of their village community or local territorial
organization.102 On the other hand, Marx connected the gens and the
village community as institutions of primitive, Greek, Roman, and
oriental societies, but did not tax Morgan with having missed the con­
nection. However, several of these criticisms when added to the general
schema of Morgan help to reinforce the direction of Marx’s ideas:
differentiation of the social strata according to the amount of property
owned by each contains in germ the organization of the differentiated and
oppositive civil society, which is the civilized condition when developed;
likewise the territorial, military, and other nonconsanguineal associations
contain the germ of the institutions of political society (i.e., not the germ
of political society as such). The idea of a germinal State as the later
development out of these earlier institutions, in addition to those con­
tained in Morgan’s work (property, territorial settlement), is shared with
him in writings of Lowie, White, M. H. Fried, M. Sahlins and the present
writer. Boas, moreover, held that political organizations evolved from
small to great in size over time. In the way that the evolutionary canon
(if not the doctrine) was developed by this tradition in empirical an­
thropology, it is an organicism without teleology but it is a weak develop­
ment of the technical-mechanicist side, as in Morgan, and without an
interrelation of the different sides. Lowie’s criticism of Morgan as an
atomist misses the mark because it fails to take account of the overriding
evolutionary organicism of Morgan.
The idea of R. M. Maclver and R. H. Low ie,103 that association is
counterposed to community, as the means whereby the individual is
loosened from the bonds of the kin and territorial community, was
anticipated by Marx in his notes on Maine, and in controversion of the
latter. Gierke, however, retained the notion of Genossenschaft as the
undifferentiated institution which on further development would then
be articulated as the community on one side and, on the other, the asso­
ciation. 104
Fortes has separated Morgan’s evolutionism from his studies of
kinship and social organization, and together with this, has separated the
historicist from the synchronic reconstruction of society, and the specu­
lative deduction of the past, e.g., Morgan’s presupposition of an origi­
nally promiscuous family organization, from observation of the present.105
Organicism as a concept, however, is not only applicable as a reconstruc­
tion of an organism, or of a social, historical system, etc., which is
presumed to function like an organism, in the past; it is the presupposi­
tion of such an organism or its systematic analog at any time, past,
present, or future. Opler106 distinguished between historicism proper,
that is, the determination of a phenomenon by an earlier invention or
discovery, and that same invention or discovery as a mark or register of
the degree of development of a society; Morgan, according to this view,
is not to be taken as a historicist. Fortes did not go so far as to make
Morgan into a determinist, but conceived him as a historicist in an ex­
tended sense, that is, historicism as the intellectual act of .. looking for
explanations... in terms of sequences of antecedent actions and circum­
stances.” 107 This is the opposite of historicism conceived as the deter­
mination of that which is objectively real, and which is the usual target of
the critics of historical determinism in particular and of historicist
organicism in general. In keeping with this redirection, Fortes made
relative that which Morgan had stated without qualifications; Fortes,
however, does not substantively alter Morgan’s progressive sequence
from societas to civitas, but rejects the diachronic aspect:
Stripped of its historicist pretensions and restated in structural
terms, [Morgan’s] is the problem of how kinship and polity are
interconnected in tribal society__ “ Civitas” does not identify a
specific “ type” or “ stage” of advanced society by contrast with a
conjecturally “primitive” or historically antecedent form of society
founded exclusively upon ties of “ blood.” “ Status,” in the sense of
Maine’s juristic equivalent for Morgan’s “ societas” does not charac­
terize primitive or archaic forms or stages of society in contradis­
tinction to the principle of “ contract” which is supposed to be the
hallmark of “ progressive” societies__ These antinomies and others
that have been linked with them do not identify different forms of
social and politico-jural organization. They represent correlative
and interdependent institutional complexes that work together in all
social systems. Our paradigmatic specimens exemplify this over a
wide range of phenotypically diverse societies.... Variations in
demographic scale, economic complexity, and politico-jural differ­
entiation regulate the ways in which these complexes are manifested
and interlinked.... Where there is society, there is both kinship and
polity, both status and contract. What is distinctive is their relative
elaboration, their relative weight and scope in different sectors of
social life.108
But if the relatively higher degree of political elaboration occurs later in
time, and if there is a relatively lesser weight and scope of kinship as the
relations of civitas are built up, then Morgan cannot be said to have argued
differently. Fortes, save for a stylistic change, is close to the synchronic
aspect of Morgan; V. G. Childe, while retaining Morgan’s terminology,
departed from the substance of Morgan’s temporal sequence, thereby
following out Engels’ line of thought. L. A. White has proceeded more
directly along Morgan’s line, independently of these. The development
and transformation of social institutions, among them the gentile,
property and territorial, which were posited by Morgan, Genossenschaft
by Gierke, status by Maine and F. Toennies, association and community
by Maclver and Lowie accomplished the transition of man to the form
of society having the State among its institutions. The common feature
of the writers in this tradition is that the State is established primarily
as a relation between men, secondarily as a relation between man and
nature. Both sides have proceeded in their examination without seeking
the interrelation between the social and the natural relations of man.
The diachronic analysis of the given social institutions sets forth how
the formation of the state is concretely determined as the rrieans both
to social integration and to social opposition. Alternatively, we fall
back upon a subjective organicism of the Hegelian right wing as an
interpretation of the origin of the State, wherein it is conceived as
having grown without indicating how the growth has taken place, the
subjectivity here being conceived wholly as an abstraction.
The stages of human progress were conceived in part by Morgan as
benchmarks, and Opler has understood him in this way. Fortes for his
own purposes has interpreted Morgan’s diachrony solely as a mode of
explanation. These are partial because onesided interpretations of Mor­
gan who, at the same time posited an organic series from gens to tribe
and from societas to civitas as objectively real, as the active means of human
progress, proper and internal to it, and not merely as its external measure
or explanation. Morgan thereby made explicit that which had been
implicit in the writings of Vico and Ferguson. Morgan’s theory of
evolution was a part of the conception of ethnology as a natural science,
which was widely held in his time, but foreign to most contemporary
ethnological thought. It is an anachronism to impose our current anti­
naturalism upon the naturalism of the antecedent canon.
Lowie,Opler, and Fortes are not alone in having joined Marx to Engels in­
separably relative to Morgan’s work. It is now possible to reexamine that
combination and to determine the degree and manner in which it is justified.
The characteristic question of the nineteenth century writers is that of
the fantasy versus the reality of periodization of societies, the subjective
arbitrariness versus the objective necessity of periodization, the deter­
minate and unique versus the optional and many kinds of stages and
periods. Marx was more critical than either Morgan or Engels of hypo­
thetical reconstructions of the past based upon organicist assumptions in
regard to the workings of society.
The question of periodization in Morgan’s general account of the
progress of mankind is connected with his theory of culture (in regard to
which see note 16 below). Each period or stage of human development,
according to this theory, has a characteristic mode of life, culture being
neither the matter of all mankind on the one hand, nor of a particular
people or social group on the other; it is the matter of an ethnical period
which groups within itself a number of peoples in different parts of the
world. Moreover, the laws that govern the movement of the cultures, or
modes of life, from one period to the next are organic, being of the
natural order, and independent of the action of individuals. Thus, the
institution of political society among the Greeks was not the work of any
one person, such as Theseus, who instead represented a period, or a series
of events. The process of transition from one period to the next was in
this sense impersonal, in Morgan’s conception, therefore wholly objec­
tive. Morgan’s theory of primitive society posited a governmental plan
which was constituted of personal relations; he did not proceed to the
integration of the impersonal process, in the case of the transition
mental plan of the period which his representation overcame. The cul­
tures themselves are wholly objective in their processes and constitution,
and were conceived as objective categories by Morgan. The cultural
matter in this conception is inert, but it is not a passivity, for it contains
within itself, that is, within the given mode of life of each ethnical period,
the germ of its own dissolution and transition to the next higher ethnical
period. The various periods are marked by inventions and discoveries,
as fire, the bow and arrow, domestication of plants and animals, iron,
and writing. These inventions and discoveries, however, are not the
work of individuals, the implication being, as the process is spelled out
by Morgan in the case of Theseus, that they are independent of individ­
uals; they would be invented by someone, regardless of whether the
particular individual to whom they are accredited was in his place at the
time or not, and whether he was active to the given end or not. The in­
vention or discovery is a matter of the ripeness of the particular ethnical
period to bear that particular fruit or not, that which Aristotle called its
entelechy was at cause, or the actualization of its potential. The question
of the actual location of that potential in time and place, whether in the
individual or in the social group, was not posited by Morgan. So difficult
is the position of this problem that it was the subject of unsuccessful
attempts by many other writers of that period, for it involves the question
of the objective reality of the social group in independence of the indi­
vidual, and of the same order of natural, material reality.
The problem of periodization, together with the criteria for classi­
fication of concrete and particular societies in such terms, the homoge­
neity or heterogeneity of the societies in the different categories, are
today even more complex than in the last quarter of the nineteenth
century. We have attained a limited agreement on such generalities as
the social evolution from societas to civitas\ but how much more can be
said? Periodization of social evolution has been proposed as more than
a device of classification of man’s past; it has been connected with the
doctrine of necessitarianism, iron laws, that is, solely with the objective
and external side of man and his changing condition of social life. The
question is this, how can the subjective side be related to the objective
side in this connection? Periodization as a convenience and periodization
as a predictive device are separable. The problem Morgan posited be­
comes that of the dialectical relation of the one and the many lines of
evolution today, but in an altered form. Those categories of change take
up only the passive, external, objective, undirected tendencies in evolu­
tion. They do not take into account the directive, active, conscious acts
of man in social change on the political side, the factors of social and
national revolutions, nor do they take into account the introduction of
new scientific and technological changes, both in the sphere of inanimate
matter and in the biological sphere. Thus far these interrelations exist
only as abstraction and as possibility, the categories having been merely
juxtaposed. But a dialectic of the science of man has not been developed
thereby, for those who, as J. B. S. Haldane, have taken F. Engels’ Dia­
lectics of Nature as their starting point have brought out the objective
side exclusively. The problem of involuntary evolution as objective,
is in relation to the conscious control of the future as a subjectivity-objectivity.
Marx raised the question of the subjective and the objective aspects of
man and society relative to the identity of interest of the individual
within the collectivity, which is in turn connected to the identity of the
individual and to the process of formation of the individual in society as
a human being: man does not become a human being in general, but
becomes human only in a particular way, within the particular collec­
tivities. In the process of formation in complex society of antagonistic
social interests, and in the process of formation of the state he becomes
an internally antagonistic creature, alienated within the collectivities from
which he derives his particular social nature. The further question of the
nature of human nature in the complex condition of society is thereby
posited. Determinist periodization smuggles in a teleology by seeking to
foretell the stage to which man must advance. That determinism does not
differentiate between that which is brought about by the conscious inter­
vention of man and that which takes place without the specifically human
agency. Man is part of the kingdom of nature, and as such the natural
processes take place upon and across his physical body; but this body has
already been modified culturally. Therefore the natural processes in
question take place in part mediately, in part immediately or directly upon
the human organism and through it, by means of it. But the natural pro­
cesses relate as such even less direcdy and hence both proportionately and
absolutely more mediatively in respect of the concrete and particular
human qualities, the characteristically human works and human social
Marx distinguished between the human architect and the bee, thereby
introducing the work of the head in the role of the hand. “ At the end of
the labor process a result comes forth that was already present at its
onset in the conceptualization (Vorstellung) of the laborer. Not only does
he bring about a change in form of the natural realm; he realizes at the
same time in the realm of nature his end, which he knows, which deter­
mines the manner and mode of his action as a law, and to which he must
subordinate his will.” 109
Unlike the bee, man has separated himself from nature, and has inter­
nalized this separation, albeit partially and incompletely, as an alienation.
The non-internalized part of the separation is likewise an alienation, but
it is an alienation in which we do not freely participate, for it is imposed
upon us in our given human-infrahuman state. Man is conscious of both
the internalized, voluntary alienation and the alienation which is not, but
the role of the consciousness in either case is different. Man interposes,
as Marx pointed out, the agencies of his labor between himself and nature
in relation to an end which he has previously conceived and which he has
carried through. Since man has at no time left the natural order the same
forces continue to act upon him and through him as those which act
upon and through the bee or the chimpanzee. At the same time, his brain
and hand, which have set man aside within the natural order are inter­
active with the natural processes. Thus the same forces which have en­
larged the brain and shaped the hand lie at once within and without the
human being; they are not the sole forces at work upon man, but these
natural, pre-human forces are part of the materials which -man applies in
the shaping of his peculiarly human work tools. These human processes
are not determinate, nor can they be considered as part of any determinism
in a precise way. First, they are subject in part to the social variations
devised by the human conceptualizations. The brain conceives in a way
that is solely human and pan-human, but what it conceives and the materia
that it has to work with varies from people to people. Both the univer­
sally and solely human culture and the particular cultural variations are
at work in the'r interaction in the conceptualizations of the brain. Second,
they are not determinate, still less are they deterministic, in the sense that
our knowledge of the laws of nature and of natural workings, whether
animate or inanimate, and of the human brain, is incomplete; thereby
likewise a determinacy of human affairs is excluded.
A teleology on the other hand introduces the extra-human knowledge
of man, his works, relations to other men and to nature; it has become
associated by those who have recognized the inadequacy of man and the
power of his brain in the face of these problems which are insuperable at
the given state of development of our mental and material equipment,
with an appeal to an extra-human source of knowledge: The knower
outside our sphere is the deity who sees the direction in which we are
going, in some versions can change the direction on appeal, in others is
the do-nothing god. These fables for children have occupied great minds
as well, and the empirical anthropologists have danced up to and away
from these tacit or open admissions of our ignorance. A teleology is
likewise presupposed in the talk of objective laws which move mankind
from a lower to a higher stage of development of society. They are
rather a basis for the social morale of given political States. But the
periodization of human progress is at once like and unlike the natural
teleology. The political relation was conceived by the theorists of the
natural right and social contract as' the human relation as such, that is,
the relation in which man intervenes most closely and substantially in
the control of his own fate. It was conceived by them as the human rela­
tion a fortiori because it attributes to man the power to subject his fate
to his reason and will, which have been determined to be the particularly
and peculiarly human faculties, shared with no other beings of the natural
order. Thus they conceived the final human relation as the political
relation in society, that toward which man tends, just as the technology
which gives man control over nature is the end of man in the natural
relation. This arbitrary divorce of society from nature is specious for it
divorces man both from nature and from society, as we have already seen,
making him independent of the one and prior to the other. It is a selfvaunting, moreover, because it presupposes a greater degree of knowl­
edge of nature, society, and self, and control of these, than is in any sense
the case. The political solution in this sense was carried forward into the
twentieth century as an exaggerated act of self-confidence in the ability
to control human destiny. It was criticized by Marx in relation to Baku­
nin, and by Karl Korsch in the twentieth century. It is necessary, as
Marx showed in the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts, to separate the
actuality of the relations of the science of nature and of human history
from their potentiality; in this sense the periodization of human progress
and the natural teleology are like, as potentially they are one, while ac­
tually different.
Anthropology as a discipline has become increasingly empirical and
self-sufficient in the past century. It had successively freed itself of cul­
tural bondage as a particularism, together with biological, geographic
and cultural-abstract determinism. It has at the same time separated itself
from its own past, each generation in turn disinheriting its forerunner;
yet each forerunner has retained its partisans in the next. The relation of
anthropology, not as a deterministic historicism, but as a historism, to
wit, the recounting of the story of man which is at once an accounting for
humanity in terms of a principle remains to be taken up; on the other
hand, the interrelation between the actual and the potential condition of
humanity is eschewed as a speculative fantasy. Teleology was exorcised
as a doctrine by A. L. Kroeber’s disavowal of the organicism of the
superorganic; there is left only the positing of man in the kingdom of
nature. Man is an animal as any other, but requires a special discipline of
anthropology, separated from the others. The last remnant of Cartesianism remains to be exorcised, revived in its subjective side by JeanPaul Sartre. Man is related in and to the kingdom of nature; the resolu­
tion of the subjective paradox of man’s imagined privilege and of the
objective teleology and ideological entelechy implied therein is a problem
outside the dialectic.
The central figure of ethnology in these pages has been that of Morgan,
as it was for Marx. Before all else it is needful to point to Morgan’s
commitment to the totality of his doctrine, just as Walter Kaufmann has
recently brought out the same in regard to Hegel, and all have in regard
to Marx. Marx, Engels, Bachofen, White recognized this character in
Morgan, which influenced their approaches to ethnology. The doctrine
of Morgan was an amalgamation of scientific method, a simple mate­
rialism, and utopianism; it brought together what is perhaps the most
convincing representation of man’s social development in its day.
Morgan displayed originality and learning both in classical and contem­
porary ethnology, including reports of his own fieldwork; he argued with
acuity, showing the royalist interest of his contemporaries as against his
own republican interest, forming the amalgam of data and interpretation
into an all-embracing doctrine which was particular to its time, hence
cannot be directly translated into ours. At the same time it is part of
the material of the present, a century later, since his issues are continuous
from that time to ours, his methods are part of our instrumentation, his
conceptions part of our own. A turnabout in the appraisal of Morgan has
taken place in anthropology, beyond his continued, selective advocacy
by White, Childe, the earlier Social Democrats and the modem Soviet
School. The rejection of Morgan by Boas and Lowie has been replaced
with a partial acceptance by Fenton, and of his synchronic analysis alone
by Fortes, following W. H. R. Rivers and A. C. Haddon. Morgan had
little to say about the sufferings, actual genocide and ethnocide which
the Indians of North America were undergoing at the time of his studies ;
this reason, when coupled with the notion that Marx found Morgan alone
of the army of evolutionists of his day in the least critical of western
civilization, makes his appraisal a complicated matter. This should be
taken together with the consideration that Phear110 associated himself
with expressions of contempt for the intellectual and artistic attainments
of the peasants of Bengal; Marx (Phear excerpts, p. 136) was critical of
this side of Phear, as he was of Maine’s unfeeling blandness regarding
the fate of the Irish - save where their law was concerned. Marx likewise
criticized Lubbock’s ethnocentrism as he did that of Grote, Gladstone,
and Bachofen.
Individualism in its extreme forms of laisser faire capitalism, anarchy,
egoism, arose among the forerunners, partisans and followers of the
French Revolution ; it was a caricature of the doctrine of man and society
of Thomas Hobbes’ war of each against all, itself a caricature of itself.
Gracchus Babeuf as an extreme of the Left of the French Revolution
advocated nothing more radical than the allocation of small parcels of
land to individual owners, hence the proliferation of proprietorships.
Jean Jaurès denounced the program of Babeuf as ‘communisme parcel­
laire’, an oxymoron, a contradiction between adjective and substantive.
The communism of private properties frightened the Directory. The
opposition inherent in this doctrine is connected directly in action and
thought to the conflict of capitalism and socialism, and in the first in­
stance to the collectivization of agriculture of the USSR and the organi­
zation of the agricultural communes of the Chinese People’s Republic.
The issues both historical and actual, no less than the literature about them
are vast. Conscious of their scope and complexity we will therefore
review, in brief, one segment as it concerns the origins of property as
private or collective, and of early society as individual or communal.
Likewise, the doctrine of individualism as the absence of collective
institutions of western society in the capitalist period being but a figment,
we will allude to it only to set it aside while taking up some of its con­
sequences as Social Darwinism.
The origin of civilization was sought during the nineteenth century in
an antecedent form of society whose relations both to man and to nature
were predominantly communal. It was shown that the civilized society
was not a primordial condition of mankind, but a comparatively recent
introduction, and that the transition from the antecedent stage was an
abrupt one, neither willed or planned, and in which neither reason nor
consciousness directed the overall transition, as opposed to the transition
of parts, in a significant way. Communal forms of property ownership
were replaced by individual forms, and a collective or communal by an
individual ethos.111 Accounting for the origin of civilized society in this
way presupposed the dependence of the individual on society and the
non-separation of the individual interest from that of the community in
the anterior state, in which the society was taken as a unity and the
community in its integral relation in society. The breaking up of the
unity, the formation of mutually antagonistic collectivities, their perpetutation in society, the opposition of bodies of individual interests, in
connection with the loosening of the bond of the individual to the com­
munity, were related in etiology and occurrence. The newly formed
social classes were developed as bodies of actually and potentially con­
flicting individual interests where there was the most sharply defined
property interest, that is, where there was the greatest amount of property
at stake, both in its accumulation and its transmittal. Within the bodies
of collective interests, the internal oppositions of individual interests
were further engendered, save that, where there was the least amount
of property at stake, the communal interest was more likely to be con­
tinued into the state of civilization.
Rousseau had conceived the individual as the unity of which the
society was composed, without the intervening social institutions; the
individual confronted society directly in the social contract.112 Maine
presupposed, in opposition to this side of Rousseau’s doctrine, a com­
munal life, and the priority of society over the individual. Marx presup­
posed a primitive condition in which the individuality of man was not
separated from society, nor opposed to it; he further conceived the
opposition of the individual and the primitive community, but not the
priority of the one over the other; this is a unilaterality, equally on the
part of the individualists (Hume, Rousseau, Kant) and the collectivists
(Maine, Morgan, Kovalevsky).
The onesided development of the individual in the state of civilization
(cf. Marx, Maine excerpts, p. 191) is connected by Marx on the one side
with the transition from communal to individual ownership; it is con­
nected on the other with the actuality of the deprivation of the next man
and at the same time with the potentiality of unity of the two. The one­
sidedness lies in the suppression of the potentiality of the development
in the transition, as we shall see. The interests of the individual in the
collectivity are opposed to each other, thus limiting by the opposition
and its incomplete resolution within the collectivity the development of
the individual. The interests of the collectivities are opposed to each
other in the society, thus the development of the society is limited. The
collectivities are onesided in their development in that the oppositions
of the individuals with greater accumulations of property are more highly
elaborated than the oppositions of the individuals with lesser accumula­
tions. The onesidedness is found on both sides insofar as the influence
of the rural and communal relations in the determination of all the social
relations subsequently gives place to the predominant influence of the
private, propertied, urban, industrial relations over the rural, etc. Marx
posited, in the positive sense, the interaction throughout of the individual
and society; in the primitive condition the interaction was between the
individual and the group or community, in the civilized condition it was
between the individual and the community in certain peasant groups, as
for example in India, Ceylon, Russia (the mir), South Slavs (zadruga). He
drew attention at the same time to the difference between the community
in gentile society and in peasant society in civilization. The relation of
the individual and the peasant community in civilization was different,
in his conception, from that of the individual in the civilized urban,
rich, etc., conditions. Factors of social class to begin with, and then of
other collectivities, in their interaction, shaped these relations once they
had been introduced in civilization. In the negative sense, Marx posited
the unfreedom in the primitive condition, in contradistinction to Rous­
seau, as the non-despotic bonds of the group. Rousseau’s notion of the
chains of civilization as opposed to the primitive state of freedom was
reconceived by Marx as the chains of primitive bondage which were,
rahter, satisfying and comforting. Despotic, dissatisfying, discomforting
are the bonds of civilization.
The primitive community in Marx’s comment on Maine was conceived
both in continuity with and in opposition to the conceptions of Rousseau
and Herder. According to Marx, the individual is already alienated from
nature in the primtive condition; he is alienated both from nature and
from his own society in the civilized state, whereby, in the working out
of the individuality, the parturition is painful. It is the individuality and
not civilized society that is formed by the parturition; this is the one­
sidedness in the elaboration of the transition to civilization from the
primitive condition, and at the same time it is the onesidedness in the
elaboration of the relation of the individual and society. The chains are
the condition of civilized man, not the general human condition; this is
the working out of Marx’s critique, brought out in 1842, of the historical
school of law; the opposition to the historical school of Maine is its
continuation but on different grounds. In the earlier critique Marx
described the fiction of the eighteenth century which regarded the natural
condition of man as the true condition of human nature, creating natural
men, Papagenos, whose naivete stretched as far as their feathered skins.
“ In the last decades of that century they sensed the original wisdom of the
primitive peoples, and from all sides we bird catchers heard the twittering
song styles of the Iroquois, Indians, etc__ The correct thought behind
all these eccentricities was that the crude conditions are the naive Dutch
pictures of the true conditions.... Herder’s opinion, that the natural men
are poets and the holy books of the primitives are poetical books, does not
stand in our way, although [Gustav] Hugo speaks the most trivial, jejune
prose, for just as each century has its own nature, so it produces its own
primitives.” 113 Each conception of primitive man is a product of its own
era, just as each conception of man in general: we can speak, from the
viewpoint of the twentieth century of the conceptions of the nineteenth,
from that of the twenty-first, of the twentieth, and so forth. But at the
same time, the social institutions and the corresponding interests are
perceived and understood only as they become concrete; we can mark
this progress ourselves in the progression of Marx’s thought. The
eighteenth century had the fiction of man which Marx caricatured, the
Robinsonade, or man taken in isolation from society, whom the classical
economists were able to posit, without preconditions, preconceptions or
presuppositions. This man is divorced from all social relations, hence is
inconceivable as human. Marx opposed this abstraction of man from
society just as he opposed the abstraction of man in his generic being as
Feuerbach had proposed it, in the nineteenth century, and the abstraction
of man from the primitive condition, which permitted the vacuum to be
filled by whatever prejudice is current; he then added to this the opposi­
tion to the abstraction of man from society as the alienation of man in
society. In his comments on Maine, the primitive condition is not re­
garded as an end but as a critical weapon to be applied against the
antagonisms built into and arising out of civili2ed society. The passage of
the objective into the subjective side is set forth by Marx first as the
relation of the individual to the group and the formation of smaller col­
lectivities on an economic basis within the social whole. The dual
passage, of the individual and the society into the restricted class col­
lectivities, is thereby posited. The interrelation of the passages bears
upon the theory of society, social classes, their formation together with
that of other collectivities, the collective interests of individuals in
society, of antagonisms, and the resolution, the moral derivation, and
the actuality and potentiality of these.
According to Marx (Maine excerpts, pp. 191-192) the independent
existence of the State is not real but seeming and the State is an institution
of a given stage of social development on the one side, of a particular
society on the other. The content of the individuality of man is shown in
its onesided elaboration (Herausarbeitung) therefrom as internalization
of objective interests. These interests have a formal side in relation to
their content as the external relation between social groups of common or
class interests of individuals, or class individualities. The class individu­
ality is solely the objective and formal side of man, whereby the content
of his social relations is externalized. In the opposition of human form
and content, man has undergone the separation of his public and private
lives, the externalization of his relations to nature and to society, and the
formation of classes of social interest which are mutually antagonistic.
These interests are in the first place a wholly externalized and public
formation of social relations; wants and needs then become expressed as
group interests; the existence of classes of individuals in society is related
to these interests as their expression on the one side, their determination
on the other. They are the social means to meet the wants and needs and
the modus of their satisfaction in the given society.
The study of the family, society and the State was taken up by Marx
in his Critique of the Hegelian Philosophy of Right, written in the summer
of 1843; here he set forth Hegel’s account of the State as the higher
authority over the family and civil society, of which they are the parts,
and which presupposes them.114 Marx did not directly oppose these
ideas, but rather the pantheistic and mystical expression given to them
by Hegel. However, Hegel in Para. 305 of the same work proposed that
the family with property has as its base the natural ethic, hence is con­
stituted for the political life, i.e., is capable of serving the State without
selfserving. Marx held that this conception of Hegel’s is the barbarity of
private property against family life, the illusion of family life, the spiritless
family life.115 Thus, the family bears, according to Marx’s conception at
that time, a complex relation to society and the State in civilized society.
In the German Ideology, Marx and Engels held that the family in the life of
savages is the sole social relation, whereas in higher social development
increased wants create new social relations.116 This conception was
further developed by Marx in relation to Morgan’s theory of the gens,
particularly in reference to the family in relation to the gens. The inter­
mediation of increased wants at the same time is the subjectification of
the subject-object relation, which was later replaced by a wholly social
conception of man already initiated in the Theses on Feuerbach by Marx.
Hegel posited the relations of the subjective to the objective sides of
man in his works (of the Jena period) from 1802 to 1806, the System der
Sittlichkeit, the Naturrecht, the Realphilosophie, and in his Phänomenologie
des Geistes, of 1807; positions were developed there in regard to labor and
economics generally, to the system of human wants, to anthropology
and psychology, and to the human institutions of right, law, ethics and
morality. (See Georg Lukäcs, Der junge Hegel·, the relation of Marx to
these Hegelian positions is there raised.) The further development by
Marx and Engels of these matters in the Holy Family and the German
Ideology bears directly upon the issues raised in the ethnological notebooks,
particularly in reference to the relations of primitive and civilized man to
nature on the one side and to the family and society on the other; the
family is taken out of its direct subsumption under the category of
nature by Marx, in contrast to Hegel. However, the matter is yet more
complex. Bachofen, Maine, Lubbock, Morgan, McLennan, Engels, held
in various ways that the earliest form of human life was in a promiscuous
horde. This was modified under the term of hetairism by Lubbock and
McLennan, which aroused Marx’s sarcasm (see below, Marx, Lubbock
excerpts, p. i), a modification which did not change the issue substan­
tially. Darwin (Descent of Man, ch. 20) on the other hand, attacked the
concepts of primordial promiscuity and communal marriage. Marx at
the beginning of his excerpts from Morgan’s Ancient Society, Part III,
The Growth of the Idea of the Family, introduced phrases of his own, not
found in Morgan at that place, (Morgan excerpts, p. 4): “ Oldest of all:
horde organization with promiscuity; no family; only mother-right can
have played any kind of role here.” If this is so, then the horde is a form
of organized society; however, family and society are indistinguishable
under these circumstances. Taken as an abstraction, this prehistory of
family and society is then developed by Marx (Morgan excerpts, p. 8) such
that in the first ethnical period for which there is empirical evidence, the
family in its consanguine form is not separated from society; i.e., in this
sense it is “ the first organized form of society” . This position is then
proffered without further development in the Morgan excerpts, pp. 19-20.
The problem of incest has aroused anthropological discussion for many
centuries, including the question whether the taboo of incest is a universal
institution of the human family and society. Without going further than
to adumbrate this issue, we will confine our comment to the question,
raised by Marx, of the relation of family and society in the primitive
condition, of the family in relation to nature in reference to the procrea­
tion of children, their rearing, etc., and the external in relation to the
internal composita of man in the various social contexts, or cultures, that
is, his objective and subjective sides.
With reference to the thematics of Marx, as developed in the writings of
the early and middle 1840s, the positions that he took up in his ethnolog­
ical studies continue them and in part change them. The relation of
the family to society at the onset of the prehistoric process is interesting
from this point of view only insofar as it is related abstractly to the
question of the relation of the family and society in the period of gentile
society and its transition to civilization; otherwise the question of the
horde is entirely a conjectural matter. The comments introduced by
Marx into the excerpts from Phear, Maine and Lubbock reveal the
development of his thinking, and the direction that he took in the course
of working them out: in the development of society from savagery to
civilization, the family in its various forms was separated from society,
and became one of the sets of relations maintained by its members. On
the one side, the individual is developed as a human being first only in
and through the social relation, the collective institutions, second, as he
is incorporated in them. On the other side, the social relation is variable
accordingly as the society is simply or complexly organized. The col­
lective institutions of the family, community, village, gens, and asso­
ciations of primitive societies are rather unitary, that is, they are not
deeply riven; the effect on the individual is that they are subjectively
comforting, objectively they are not despotic, for this would implicate
the existence of an institution of hegemony that would contradict the
relative simplicity of primitive social organization. Above all, they are
not liberating : they are rather not enchaining. Formally, most, if not all
the intermediating social institutions of community and association can
be found in primitive societies: the difference from civilized society is
that in the former case their interrelation is either zero or not highly
developed, nor is their mutual opposition. On the contrary, in civilized
society, the relations of the collectivities to each other, and the individuals
within them, are divisive on the one side, privative on the other and the
interests of the collectivities are opposed to each other within the same
Hegel opposed the ‘private spheres of the family and civil society to
the State, wherein the public sphere is the superordinate power, and is an
external necessity in relation to the spheres of private social life. The
private interests are subordinate to the State, and are ultimately dependent
on it__ The particular individuals have duties to the State insofar as they
have rights against it.’ 117 This series of statements by Hegel is the fore­
runner of the theory of contract and status formulated by Maine and
implicit in Marx. In the status aspect of the theory there is no separation
of the private and public spheres; in the community all is one in this
regard; the external and internal necessities of social life, and the natural
conditions of existence, are not opposed to each other, but are the sub­
jects of the same modus of social activity. With the separation of social
life into private and public spheres, the internal needs and the external
means of their satisfaction are objectified, the former externalized and the
others in consequence are to be internalized. The system of rights and
obligations arises with the increasing articulation of the individual in
society, the separation of the spheres, and the opposition of the external
and internal social life. The opposition of rights and obligation in their
formal, official and public aspects is thereby presupposed. (What has
been omitted above is Hegel’s passage from the separation of the public
and private spheres to the State as their immanent end, wherein the
State has its strength in the universality of the final end of the unity of
the private spheres.) Hegel thereby assumed the State to be a category a
priori, as did Austin, which is an anti-dialectical and hypostatical con­
The State is an institution of society, but of a divided society; whereas
Hegel conceived the State as a unity and the society within which it is
formed as the same, this is a subjective conception, according to Marx.
Those who conceive of the State as having been developed in a divided
society, but yet bridges over the division, must then recognize that the
State cannot be successful in this because it is a unity pro forma. This
follows from Hegel’s notion that the public sphere is the external
necessity of the private spheres. According to Hegel, the State is an
immanent end of the latter, but the opposition of the actuality and the
potentiality ought to have been developed at this point and in this con­
nection; the State as the immanent end of the private spheres is their
potentiality. But if the State is external to them, as their necessity, then
it is not actually their immanent end; this externality must be first inter­
nalized in order to be immanent. Hegel did not state how this is to be
done; his dialectic is defective because incomplete in this regard. Fur­
ther, Hegel opposed civil to political society, or the State; systematic
development of the doctrine of the life of man in civil society apart from
his life in political society was set forth by Hegel ; the economic institu­
tions of society on the one side, the popular institutions as the nation on
the other were separated from the State thereby.118
Because the State was not made the dependent of society by Hegel in
this connection, he did not interpose the dialectic of contradiction of
interest and counterposition of forces into the structure of society and
the State ; Hegel fell therefore into the contradiction of the non-actuality
of the immanent, and the non-potentiality of the external. The contra­
diction is not overcome because no transition between them was indi­
cated by Hegei.
Marx made the distinction between the private and public spheres on
the basis of both his critique of Hegel’s philosophy of law and the State
(1843) and his analysis of Morgan; on the other hand, Morgan’s identifi­
cation of the relations between men in the condition prior to the develop­
ment of civitas, or political society obscures two issues : social, including
governmental, relations of the State, include the personal among others ;
the personal, the persona, as Marcel Mauss has shown, is solely a device
of civilization. Maine’s sequence from status to contract covers the same
ground as the distinctions made by Hegel and Morgan, but Hegel coun­
terposed the right to the obligation, in the separation of the private from
the public spheres.
In developing the theory of the State in opposition to that of the
Analytical School, Marx started from the premiss that there is an objec­
tive locus standi of society and of social institutions, which he had
already asserted in opposition to Hegel : The interests of the individuals
of the society are ranged, on one plane, either for or against that institu­
tion, but only in their public facies, whereas the State as such has no
private interest, being wholly objective. The private interest, however,
is at once subjective and objective, just as it is one and many. The
interest of the individual subjectivity is transformed into the objective
interest of the collectivity, the social class, and is thereby transformed into
a public interest, the society by this means being divided. The private
sphere, again, is internally divided as the individual interest is transformed
on the one hand into a public opposition of interests, for, the State being
solely a public body, the subjective relations to it as interests must first
be transformed into public and objective in order to interact with it,
whether on its behalf or in opposition to it. On the other hand, the
subjective and private interests continue as such, in their activity in
society, in part in relation to the State, but in part on another plane. The
Sta^e knows the individual only as a public and objective body, the
individual knows the State both as a subjectivity and as an objectivity;
thus, the relation of the individual to the State is reciprocal but it is not
equivalent or balanced.
The collective interest of the particular individuals is the dual relation
of the opposition of the individual interest versus the social whole on
the one side, and the opposition of the interests of classes of individuals
in the society, i.e., interests of the social collectivities, to each other, to
the society and the State, to the individuals of the society, and between
the individuals comprising the different collectivities on the other. The
individual in the civilized condition has no social existence other than
that as a member of one or another of these collectivities, save in marginal
cases, or in the cases of those who consciously renounce that membership ;
the existence of the individual as a member of society is generally derived
from the membership in the collectivity. The interest of the individual
human being in the civilized condition is determined objectively by his
relation to these collectivities, in their opposition to each other; the
objective interests of the social class, and the individuals within it, are
above all economically determined (Marx, Maine excerpts, p. 191). The
subjective interest of the individual, and his composition as a subjectivity
in relation to the objective determination, are matters calling for treat­
ment in a context of their own.
Marx developed his theory of the formation of the State in connection
with that of the collectivity of the individual interests in the social class.
The transition from communal to civilized society is the period of
accumulation of the total amount of property in society, as Morgan point­
ed out, and of its unequal distribution. Retention of property in private
hands introduced a private interest as a dual separation: of right from
obligation on the one side, and of the private from the public spheres on
the other. The newly formed propertied class had a collective interest
as a collective right and a disparate set of private interests separate from
that of the collectivity of the class, hence an internally contradictory re­
lation, which is resolved now on the side of the collectivity, now on the
side of the individuality : this is the destruction of the collectivity. The
communal institutions, in the process of their dissolution, have given
rise to the oppositions of private and public right on the one side, and
private and collective interest on the other; together these oppositions
have formed a set of conflicts in civilized society in its antagonistic
internal composition, and its form of the State. The separation of
private rights within one and the same social class thus calls for a dual
activity of the State: the first is the subordination of all social classes to
the organ of control of one, in which the political power is now formed
and concentrated; at the same time, the State acts as the organ for the
suppression of the opposed private rights and interests within the prop­
ertied class. The collectivity of that newly formed powerful class was
caught in a double contradiction, the first of which is that the individuals
can be opposed to each other in their rights, the second that their inter­
ests may be abstractly but are not necessarily the same as that of their
social class concretely. Thus, that social class becomes the opposite of a
collectivity, and the State, as its organ for the development of its rights
and interests, becomes the opposite of a collective institution, rather it is
a balance of conflicting forces which a leader such as Tarquinius Superbus,
Cleisthenes or Ch’in Shih Huang Ti may achieve in the form of imposition
from above.
The collectivity and the collective institutions of the newly formed
propertied class evolved more rapidly than that of the immediate pro­
ducers in the fields, peasantry and the like, in part because of the develop­
ment of individual and oppositive interests which it contained. The
communal institutions and interests of the past, both in the Orient and
in the societies of classical antiquity, remained more closely bound to the
social relations of the peasants, etc., than to the landowners, the urban
rich, and other propertied segments of society. The newly formed col­
lectivity of the large-scale property-owners was imperfect in the second
place because it was dedicated to the principle that the defence of the
private interest of the individual is his right, just as much as the defence
of the private right is his interest. On the other hand, Hegel had con­
ceived the political relation as the balance of right and obligation; in
this matter, Marx had followed him. But the separation of the private
right and interest from the public right and interest is a separation of
the second order; it is predicated upon the primary separation of both
the public and private from the communal. In the community the
balance of right and obligation is a traditional development, whereas in
the polity the balance must be redeveloped by appeal to force, to reason,
to sentiment or disposition, and the like; in the latter case the balance
becomes artificial, as a device of civilization. The public interest is a
political fiction, the common interest is a fiction, by the same reason
a fortiori.
The individual, under the political condition, has internalized his right
as his interest, partly together with the same internalization of the
principle by the other members of the collectivity, and to this extent the
given social class remains a collectivity; and partly against the other
individuals and collectivities of the society, thus defeating that very col­
lectivity which maintains his private right, and the public right of which,
as the externalization of his own interest he, under the opposite condi­
tions, maintains. The conflict of the internalized interest of the propertied
class and its wholly external resolution in the form of the State is at once
an objective and a subjective opposition of the individual in civilized
society. The various moments of the dialectical process of State forma­
tion were posited in their separation and juxtaposition and in their sub­
jectivity by Hegel in his Philosophie des Rechts, as had been pointed out by
Marx in his Critique of 1843, and by Marx together with Engels in the
Heilige Familie and the Deutsche Ideologic. In the latter, the thesis of the
State as an independent formation and the mythical history of the Statecommunity were criticized, and the relations between the real and the
illusory interests broken down into their parts.119 The newly introduced
data and their systematization by Morgan gave Marx the occasion to
return to the problem in the ethnological notebooks, to counterpose the
objectivity to the subjectivity in their combination, which he made in­
creasingly explicit in the excerpts from Morgan and in the reorganization
of the Morgan materials; he then made his conception into an instrument
in the notes and excerpts from Maine. Marx’s reference to society and its
State was made to elucidate the matter for its own sake, the exposition of
the State as a social institution in the Maine excerpts was made both for
its own sake and in order to refute the theory of the Analytical School.
Engels brought in the objective side of the invention of the State as an
institution of society through the introduction of the factor of accumula­
tion of property; the subjective side was brought out by Engels as greed,
the driving spirit of civilization.120
The State - early or late, it makes no difference - has as its object the
regulation of conflicting interests of property both internally among its
owners and as between them and society and the State; in this sense the
State is the organ of dominance over the propertied class. The propertied
interest is a contradictory one: on the one hand it is a relation of public
obligation as a necessity, on the other it is an interest of private exception
as a right. He who is with property wants a rule governing the payment
of taxes or the regulation of commerce for others, a loophole for himself.
During the period of the development of capitalism, the relation of
landed, mercantile and manufacturing interests to public regulation (by
the State and its organs of government) was a matter of the deepest
consciousness: above all, in the doctrine of the categorical imperative of
Immanuel Kant, and the political philosophy of Adam Smith, as in the
Protestant ethic generally. The private interest has not internalized the
public, the subjective has not internalized the objective, nor has the
public and objective interest brought about the externalization of the
subjective and private.
The doctrine of the State set forth by Marx is in opposition to that of
the Analytical School of John Austin and to the Historical School of
Maine. Marx did not undertake a critique of the theory of Hobbes, which
underlay that of Bentham and Austin. The critique of the Austinian (and
by implication Benthamist) doctrine of the State is that Austin held the
State to be unrelated to society, presupposed a priori; as such it is outside
the development of society. On the contrary, Marx held the State to be a
social institution which would disappear when society had reached a new
stage (See Marx, Critique of Gotha Program, sect. 4; Drafts of Zasulich
On the one hand, the notion of the freedom of the individual in civ­
ilized society was counterposed by Hegel to that of the positive freedom
of primitive man by Rousseau.121 On the other, the doctrine of the
origin of civilized society out of the communal life was counterposed to
the doctrine of the social contract, according to which Hobbes, Spinoza,
Locke, Pufendorf, Hume and Rousseau posited the individual as existing
prior to society, and society as dependent for its foundation on the
accord between individuals. But society, to the extent that it is mentioned
at all in the latter doctrine, was an abstraction of the conditions required
for the formation of the State, hence as an abstraction of the State. So­
ciety in the civilized state was taken primarily as political society, and the
attention was withdrawn from social institutions other than those which
led to the establishment of the State or were necessary to its functioning.
The doctrine of the social contract posited at the same time an abstraction
of man which had the force of law in particular societies; the abstraction is
his reason and will, which made him a direct contracting party to the
formation of the State. If according to Hobbes fear of pain is the force
which drives man to form political society, then man is rational in the
measures that he takes for its avoidance. Other determinants of society
and of man were subordinated to those which culminated in the State,
whereby reason and will were abstracted from their social contexts, and
made up, at the same time, the abstract representation or composition of
the human being.
The philosophy of the social contract was at once an extreme individ­
ualism and the abstraction of the State from society for the purpose of
political construction, for of all the social institutions the State is the
most specifically directive of man and society; the conception of the
State is such that society is thereby subjected to the human decisive power,
or will. Hume, Rousseau and Kant who altered the doctrine of the social
contract, and of the law of nature which it presupposed, did not develop
an empirical science of man. Although their alterations were made in the
light of increasing amounts of empirical data, yet they remained within
the abstract and directive frame of political, juridical and legislative
reference of the social contract. The writings of Vico, which express his
notion of man’s creation of mathematics, poetry and legislative acts; of
Ferguson, which express the paradox of the nature of man as art, already
incorporating the mediacy of man’s relation to nature; of Herder, who
conceived history as tradition, following Vico, and who withdrew human
history from the political plan; of Franklin, in part by his notion of man
the toolmaker, but more so by his practical ethic of work, helped to
dissolve the political abstraction of man in relation to society. Adam
Smith expressed his contempt of statesmen or politicians who were
subjected to the fluctuations of momentary affairs.122 The view of man
taken by Rousseau was ambivalent, for he conceived man at one time as
a political, at another as a social animal.123 The extreme form of atomistic
individualism of the social contract and of natural law, from which
Rousseau was only liberated in part, was an abstraction, further, because
man in the civilized condition is conceived by all who adhered to that
doctrine as wholly subjected to the State, the mortal god, and none of
man’s social institutions falls outside its power. The opposite of the
doctrine of the social contract was developed in the nineteenth century as
the science or sciences of man became increasingly empirical, and at the
same time fell increasingly under the influence of the natural sciences.
The extreme atomism and the implied abstraction of man expressed in
the doctrine of the social contract were called into question in part wit­
tingly and in part implicitly by the communal doctrines of the nineteenth
century which had their root on the one side in the empirical tradition of
the natural sciences. Both the antiquity of man and his continuity with
the rest of the natural order had been established by empirical observa­
tion, inference, doubt, etc., of geology, palaeontology, zoology and other
means of the natural sciences of the time. On the one hand, the communal
doctrine was embedded in this empirical tradition, on the other, it was
opposed to the doctrine of individualism on ideological grounds. In­
dividualists such as Spencer, Maine and T. H. Huxley did not deny the
communal origin of civilization; at the same time they affirmed the evolu­
tion of man toward individualism, of which the foundation was the
private ownership of property both for consumption and for further
social production.
The individualism of the utilitarian doctrine of Bentham on the one
side and the collectivism of the Utopians Fourier, Pecqueur, Owen on the
other were polarized in the political camps early in the nineteenth century,
but their mutual opposition was not extended into the theoretical conflict
over the origin of civilization. Saint-Simon who praised the capitalist
practices in finance and transportation for their contributions to col­
lectivist doctrine, Max Stimer (Johann Kaspar Schmidt) who confounded
anarchic individualism and the left-wing Hegelian direction to the cause
of the people, John Stuart Mill who linked the individualism of Bentham
to social reformism and to the collectivism of Auguste Comte, played
ambiguous roles. The doctrine of individualism of Herbert Spencer, in
which the last flicker of the social contract was detected by Ernest Barker,
returned the polarizing tendency of the epoch to its normal course; at the
same time Spencer wrote of the social organism as a collective entity, as
had Comte before him. Spencer did not resolve this internal contradic­
tion to his individualist doctrine.
Opposed to the internationalist and socialist collectivism was the
notion which was developed in the romanticism of the late eighteenth and
early nineteenth centuries, of the origin of the nation out of particular
collectivist institutions and traditions. The separation of civil from polit­
ical society in the Hegelian doctrine was taken as the juncture from which
the two subsequent traditions of collectivity separated : the Hegelian right
brought out the collectivity as the womb of the nation, the Hegelian left
brought out the collectivity as the womb of all mankind. The Slavo­
philes, Russian conservatives, arose out of the nationalist doctrine, seek­
ing the basis of their cultural unity and particularity in the rural social
Maurer, Hanssen, Roscher, Tylor, Morgan, Kovalevsky, Laveleye,
Geffroy, Viollet, Gierke, Waitz, Vinogradoff,125 together with most of
the socialists and anarchists of the nineteenth century maintained the
precedence of the collectivist sequence both in time and as the conceptual
building block of society; they did so for opposed reasons: Maurer and
Gierke were conservative patriots and nationalists; the socialists and
anarchists were internationalists and revolutionaries. Laveleye opposed
Marx, joined himself to J. S. Mill, as Kovalevsky to Comte and Maine,
but also sought Marx out.
The collectivist side was borne into the study of man in the twentieth
century by the doctrines of Durkheim, Stein, Toennies, Frobenius,
J. Kulischer, Bergson, and Kroeber.126 The origin of the family out of
the promiscuous horde, expressed by J. J. Bachofen, J. F. McLennan,
Morgan, Engels, J. Atkinson was then taken up variously by the psycho­
analytic schools of Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung. In the same period,
Simkhovich, Kaufman, Chuprov and Kachorovsky collected evidence of
the antiquity of the rural commune and its survival into modern times
among the Russians and other peoples of the Russian empire.127 Paul
Lafargue, Karl Kautsky, Eduard Bernstein, and Heinrich Cunow devel­
oped this side of the evolution of the collectivity within the socialist
Baden-Powell opposed Maine’s theory of the primacy of the collectiv­
ist institutions both on the ground that Maine’s use of the evidence from
India was partial and on the ground that collectivism as a social theory
had (to him) undesirable political implications.129 Ratzel attacked the
idea of primitive communal landownership as a generalization of science,
in which he was followed by Schurtz. Pohlmann attacked the thesis of
primitive communism of property ownership proposed by the socialists
on the one side and by Maine, Morgan and Kovalevsky on the other.130
Dopsch had rejected the idea of the folk-association or collectivity,
Markgenossenschaft. It was defended by J. Kulischer. The earliest
expression of the theory of the Mark-association mentioned by Kulischer
is that of the Dane, Olufsen (1821), followed by G. Hanssen. They were
preceded by C. A. Van Enschut (1818), who wrote of the markgenootschappen of the Netherlands peasantry, and by Vuk Karadzic, who wrote
of the Serbian zadruga in the same year; these two were followed by
J. Csaplowics who described the same phenomenon of the South Slavs
(of Slavonia and Croatia) in 1819.
An integral study of the development of the idea of the peasant com­
mune in Europe and in Asia in the 19th century has not been undertaken;
the doctrines of Karadzic and Csaplowics131 remain to be combined with
those of Van Enschut and Olufsen. As for the Asian side, the discussion
of the peasant community was justifiably connected to that of the Euro­
pean peasants by Maine and others, but it was marred by presuppositions
of a common Indo-European antiquity, with an undertone of race. The
difficulties of the linguistic interpretations alone, setting aside the juridi­
cal, archaeological and other institutional or material presuppositions of
that commonalty, have been set forth by E. Benveniste, who has shown
that the Indo-European roots *dem- ‘family’, and *dema- ‘build’, are to be
dissociated, with nothing but homophony in common; the roots have
been incorrectly associated by identifying the kin group (which Benveniste
takes to be the social group) with its material habitat or dwelling.132
Fustel de Coulanges had been an early opponent of the thesis of histor­
ical primacy of communal over individual ownership of the soil; in
regard to Slavic antiquity, he was followed by J. Peisker. Durkheim in
reviewing the controversy between Stanisic and Peisker on the protoand early history of the zadruga supported the former against Fustel de
Coulanges and Peisker. Durkheim held that Fustel de Coulanges was
wrong in proposing that there is no historical trace of a period in which
the soil is held in common by a local group, and that therefore it is un­
tenable to conclude that individual ownership is the primordial form.
Moreover, Durkheim considered Peisker’s conception of society to be
artificial, for the totality preceded the individual part, or was contempo­
rary with it; the part does not precede the whole.133
The opposition of Kropotkin’s collectivism to Huxley’s individualism
was recently brought out by Ashley Montagu.134
The controversy has not been exhausted, but has taken a different form
in the past generation of anthropology in the west; on the other hand, it
has virtually disappeared from most other scholarly fields, although at
one time philosophers, sociologists, economists took part in it. No recent
expression on either side has been advanced with the confidence of the
forerunners. Social Darwinism has been rejected as a biologism, to­
gether with the ethical trappings which it wittingly or unwittingly
borrowed from the social doctrine of atomistic individualism of the
preceding centuries. Since then the collectivists have added no new data
or critical insights. The energies have been spent in the overcoming of
ethnocentrism and avoidance of the chimeras of speculative reconstruc­
tions of the past; (Marx was particularly conscious of the methodological
shortcomings of his contemporaries under these headings).
Unsolved problems of the history of the concepts of collectivity,
collectivism, commune, community can be noted in past and current
usages. The differences in their use not having been systematically
examined, the concepts and terminology of socialism and communism
present problems of meaning and derivation in consequence. The rela­
tions of communism to community or Gemeinschaft and of socialism to
society or Gesellschaft are obvious, but they are not clear.
The primitive community as it was conceived by Marx established the
content as well as the form of man’s primordial existence and his conse­
quent and subsequent social character. It is carried into the modern era
by the primitive and the rural where these are opposed to the urban
institutions of recent and current times. The communal institutions
preceded the formation of political and of industrial society, and in that
former period formed the urban institutions and their modes of produc­
tion. At the same time these ancient rural communal institutions have
provided a model even in distorted form for the formation of the rural
institutions of socialist society and the character of the internal social
relations of the non-rural social institutions. The ancient rural form of
collectivity has determined the modern. But the relation of content to
form in the past example differs from that of the modern, and the same
criticism directed against the parallel between elections in ancient and in
modern society by Marx applies to the concepts of democracy, community
and collectivity. The relation of actual difference to potential unity
varies likewise in reference to theoretical parallels drawn between cooper­
ation for production and distribution in the ancient commune and the
modern; the relation of content to form differs between the types of
commune, the parallels being drawn upon the basis of form. (See Marx,
ökonomisch-Philosophische Manuskripte and drafts of letters to Zasulich.)
Marx examined the primitive and the Oriental and European peasant
communities in the Grundrisse, the Critique of Political Economy, 1859, in
the three volumes of Capital, and in the Theories of Surplus Value; of these,
the most prominent are in the sections on commodities and exchange of
the first volume of Capital. “ In the modes of production of ancient Asia,
classical antiquity, etc., the transformation of product into commodity,
and hence the existence of man as commodity producer, plays a subordi­
nate role, which becomes more significant as the community enters the
stage of its decline__ Those ancient social organisms of production are
far more simple and transparent than the bourgeois, but they rest either
on the immaturity of the individual man who has not torn free (losgerissen) from the umbilicus of the generic connection with others, or on the
relations of mastery-servitude (Herrschaft-Knechtschaft). They are con­
ditioned by a low stage of development of the productive powers of
labor and the correspondingly constrained relations of man within their
material process of producing their lives, hence their relations to one
another and to nature.” 135 His example of labor in common, that is,
directly socialized, was taken not from the communes of the dawn of
civilization, but from the undifferentiated patriarchal industries of the
contemporary peasants.136 At the same time he quoted in this connection
what he had written in 1 859 on the ancient community: “ It is a ridiculous
prejudice of recent times that the form of the natural common property
is specifically Slavic, even exclusively Russian. It is the primeval form
whose existence we can prove among Romans, Germans, Celts, of which
a whole sample-card can also be found today with many examples, even
though partly in a ruined state, in India. A more exact study of the Asian,
particularly the Indian forms of common property would prove how,
from the different forms of natural common property, different forms of
its dissolution are produced. Thus for instance the various original types
of Roman and Germanic private property are to be deduced from various
forms of Indian common property.” 137 The peoples specifically men­
tioned are all members of the Indo-European language family; their
primordial cultural unity is presupposed, which was the combined
cultural and linguistic presupposition of that time, still having force,
however reduced, today, the presupposition being shared by Maine.
Both ancient and nineteenth century India afforded examples of com­
munal ownership of property, the latter in a ruined state; this community
of ownership evolved along different lines into the Germanic and Roman
forms of private ownership. The evolution from communal to private
forms is unilinear in the abstract, multilinear in the concretely different
ways. Thus the thesis of the Morgan excerpts and notes of Marx was
developed, in part, in 18 59. The statement of the ruined state of the com­
munal ownership restates the thesis of the travestied form of the nine­
teenth century peasant commune which had been mentioned in the
Introduction to the Grundrisse; the Losreissung of the individual from the
umbilicus of the community adumbrates the position developed in the
Maine notebook. The reference to Herrschaft-Knechtschaft restates in
Marx’s terms the Hegelian position of social reciprocity in differentiation
(Phänomenologie des Geistes'). Marx wrote that the evolution of products
into commodities arises out of exchange between communities, not be­
tween members of the same community. This doctrine was incorporated
into volume 3 of Capital by Engels in 1894, with the additional note by
the latter that ‘after the extensive investigation of the original community
from Maurer down to Morgan, this is nowadays hardly disputed,’ 138 in
which Engels was perhaps optimistic; aside from that, however, if the
theory of the evolution of commodities outlined by Marx is accepted, it
is on another basis than that of Maurer-Morgan.
In the prehistoric community as well as in the historic peasant com­
mune, labor is in common, that is, directly socialized (unmittelbar verge­
sellschaftet), whereas the collectivity that arises in the context and on the
basis of industrial society, and which in turn provides its context and
base, has the same form, labor in common, but it is indirectly socialized,
for human relations to and in production are themselves mediated by the
changed relations of industry to natural matter and energy, and by the
changed relations of men to each other. The latter are complex, indirect,
mediated by the complex organizational requirements, and the medium
itself, which is the total industry in its complex organization, in turn
imposes a new form upon collective labor. This form of labor can no
longer be regarded as communal labor, labor in common. It is no more
communal in the strict and ancient sense than the protohistoric or 19th
century peasant labor was mediately socialized. The communal form in
the strict sense had its own division of labor under the regime of age and
sex differentiation,139 which are directly biological (i.e. natural) deter­
minants, to which such others as relative degree of health, and physical
strength should be added, and race understood only in these senses.
These factors become mediated in the industrial regime, just as animal
and human muscle power is replaced by machinery and the increased
technical control of natural forces and elements. The common labor of
the family, the community, etc., was regarded by Marx as naturwüchsig,
a natural growth; the labor in common is the natural form of labor and
division of labor.140 The commune, or community, is in this sense a
natural growth. The relations between primitive and peasant man and
nature and those between the natural form of the primitive and peasant
family and community on the one side and the relations between indus­
trial man and nature and those between men in the industrial collectivities
are not absolutely but relatively different. The advanced industrial
relations are found in the primitive and peasant condition as their poten­
tiality; hence ‘natural’, ‘nature’, ‘naturwüchsig’ can only be taken in the
figurative sense, for primitive men and peasants are no more natural than
are those who can read and write.
The collective relations of society exceed the communal relations in
magnitude or number, ambitus, variety, and complexity, regardless of
whether the context is a predominantly peasant or urban-industrial
society, or whether it is socialist or capitalist in either case. The relation
of the individual and society on the one side and the mutually antagonistic
relations of the collectivities on the other cannot be separated from the
political conflicts of western society which extend from 1789 down to the
present; at the same time these conflicts obscure the individual and col­
lective social relations. The praxis is the expression of the theory of the
relations ; it is at once the complication of the resolution of the conflict of
the relations in theory and the sole means for their resolution as the
realization of the potentiality of the unity of society. The potentiality of
that unity lies in the negation of the actual privative relation. The form
that the potential may take can be posited, the relation of the form to the
content, as of the objective to the subjective side and the converse, how­
ever, can only be adumbrated.
There is little interest shown in empirical anthropology at present in
the questions of the priority of the communal and the individual pos­
session of the soil, or the origin of civilization out of the one or the other;
likewise the question of the antecedence of the individual over society,
whether as a logical or a chronological antecedence, is not often discussed.
The manner of posing these questions is onesided; they are no more than
half-questions. It is only by taking the individual in relation to society,
the collectivity, or the primitive commune, and these in relation to the
individual that the history and evolution of property, culture and civiliza­
tion can be discussed at all.
7. R E L A T IO N O F E N G E L S T O M A R X A N D M O R G A N
Engels took up the primitive and communal institutions briefly in the
writings of the 1840s (in conjunction with Marx: The Holy Family, The
German Ideology, The Communist Manifesto), and in the last chapter of his
Anti-Dühring (1878). On Marx’s initiative he excerpted Bancroft in 1882.
(See Addendum 2.) In his work on the Mark, Engels dealt with the
organization of the ancient Germans according to kinship and common
property, his source being Maurer, treating briefly the evidence of
Caesar and Tacitus in regard to the communal property of the Mark
associates or members, the long duration of the collective institution and
the transition to private property in land in the nineteenth century (the
Bavarian Palatinate was singled out by him). Engels dealt with Germanic
antiquities in two longer manuscripts, but returned to the question of
the Mark, its organization and membership, property ownership only
for review.141
In the following year, while going through Marx’s posthumous papers
Engels came upon Marx’s excerpts ; this discovery is adumbrated in his
preparation of the third edition of Capital·. Marx had written ,“ Innerhalb
einer Familie, weiter entwickelt eines Stammes, entspringt eine natur76
wüchsige Theilung der Arbeit aus den Geschlechts- und Altersver­
schiedenheiten__ ” (“ Within a family, and after further development
within a tribe, there springs up a natural division of labour, out of the
differences of age and sex__ ” ) Engels added the footnote to this, “ Spätere
sehr gründliche Studien der menschlichen Urzustände führten den Ver­
fasser [des Kapital] zum Ergebniss, dass ursprünglich nicht die Familie
sich zum Stamm ausbildet, sondern umgekehrt, der Stamm die ur­
sprüngliche naturwüchsige Form der auf Blutsverwandtschaft beruhen­
den menschlichen Vergesellschaftung war, sodass aus der beginnenden
Auflösung der Stammesbande erst später die vielfach verschiednen
Formen der Familie sich entwickelten.” (“ Subsequent very searching
studies of the primitive condition of man led the author [of Capital] to the
conclusion, that it was not the family that originally developed into the
tribe, but that, on the contrary, the tribe was the primitive and spontane­
ously developed form of human association, on the basis of blood rela­
tionship, and that out of the first incipient loosening of the tribal bonds,
the many and various forms of the family were afterwards developed.” ) 142
The later studies by Marx which Engels referred to were those which
related to Morgan. Engels formulated the problem of his book on the
Origin of the Family at the end of 1883, foreshadowed both by the footnote
in Capital of November 1883, and his vain search for a copy of Ancient
Society at the beginning of January 1884.143 He prepared a synopsis of
his own work, which at first bore the title Entstehung (Development or
Formation) der Familie, etc., on the basis of Marx’s notes, read both from
these and from his synopsis to Bernstein who visited him at the end of
February-beginning of March 1884. Engels acquired his own copy of
Morgan’s work later in March,144 and finished the first eight chapters of
the Origin of the Family two months later, reserving the last chapter for
revisions145 (which were never carried through: these are in connection
with the critique of civilization by Fourier).146 He considered that Marx
himself wanted to introduce the work of Morgan to the Germans, and
published the book in ‘execution of a bequest’, thus interpreting the
design of Marx’s notebooks.147
As the opening phrase of his Origin of the Family, Engels stated,
“ Morgan is the first who, with factual knowledge, sought to bring a
definite order to the early history of mankind; so long as no significantly
expanded material calls for changes, his classification will remain in
force.” 148
Engels established his own relation to the work of Morgan on the one
side and to that of Marx on the other. The following two tables will list
the more important points of contact between Engels’ work with that of
Morgan, on the one hand, and with that of Marx, in this reference, on
the other.
T A B L E VI. Principal References by Engels to Morgan
Engels 0 p.
Morgan 6 p.
Preface, isted.
Preface, 4th ed.
Preface, ch. 1
Pt. Ill (p. 444)
109- h
ch. 9
i 6 z£.
393 et seq.
5 6 if.
Key words
Morgan and materialist conception o f history
Decline o f Morgan’s reputation
Reconstruction of human prehistory
Development of the Family - cf. Bachofen
Opposition to McLcnnan; group marriage
Iroquois and other evidence of theory of gens
Critique o f civilization - cf. Fourier
Stages of human progress
Iroquois family
Reconstruction o f prehistoric family; theory of
Evolution o f family
Iroquois gens
G ro te e
Greek gens and G ro te e
Marx’s summary of Morgan on Greek gens
Athenian State
Roman gens
Scottish clan
Roman gens and State
Barbarism and civilization
0 Engels, Origin of the Family, op. cit. Eng. tr. 1942.
6 Morgan, Ancient Society, 1907.
e See Table I, note c.
Marx’s strictures upon Morgan were generally passed over by Engels;
alone Engels determined that Morgan went too far in regarding group
marriage and the punaluan family as a necessary stage before the pairing
family, in the light of later evidence.149 Engels was also disposed more
positively toward Bachofen and Maine than was Marx.160
Morgan counterposed the future of the liberty, equality and fraternity
found in the ancient gens to the society of the present, its mere property
career, and the unmanageable power of property.151 This was a step
forward from Ralph Waldo Emerson, who had also wished to transcend
the reign of things, but had not conceived of the question of their owner­
ship and accumulation. Engels quoted part of Marx’s statement regard­
ing antagonism of interest within the gens (Marx, Morgan excerpts,
p. 79), but in connection with greed for riches which had begun to split
the unity of the gens during the period in question.152 Engels thus took
up the subjective side of the question, while the relation of the two sides
T A B L E VII. The Utilisation by Engels of M arx’s Excerpts from Morgan
Engels ° p.
Marx ° p.
Key words
91 e
95 d
95f. e
absolute control over food production
political, philosophical, etc. systems
Bachofen on punaluan lawlessness
Innate casuistry of man
Family and society in miniature
Earlier, women were freer
Savage peeps through
Gentes older than mythology
Pedantic philistines
Humbler gentes - cf. Grote; Morgan’s reply to Grote
(pedantic bookworms)
Gladstone and Yankee Republican
The line about the scepter
Sort of military democracy
Antagonism in gens
“ Engels, Origin of the Family, Eng. tr., 1942. Morgan, Ancient Society, 1907. Marx, excerpt
notes on Morgan.
6 Insertion of „almost” by Engels reflects Marx’s exclamation at the exaggeration.
c Engels here refers to Marx’s paraphrase of Morgan, Ancient Society, pp. 228 and 234.
d Identified as a later added line by Eustathius. (Marx, Morgan excerpts, p. 74).
e Engels here reproduces Morgan’s thought faithfully (cf. Morgan, Ancient Society, op. cit.,
pp. 126, 256, 259, 282).
was posited by Marx. Engels quoted Morgan about the deterioration of
man by property and the hope of return to the ancient gens as his own
peroration.153 Bernstein characterized Morgan’s work as being more like
that of the socialist theoreticians of the period 1825-1840, i.e., the Uto­
pians : “ He nowhere oversteps in principle the boundary which separates
the average cultural historian from the representatives of historical
materialism.” 154 Bernstein’s points are mutually contradictory, however.
Morgan in truth does step over the boundary by his critique of the mere
property career of mankind, hence is more than merely objective or
distanced from his subject, which is implicit in the reference by Bernstein
to the Durchschnitt der Culturhistoriker. But if Morgan’s work re­
sembles that of the utopian socialists, then it cannot be regarded as wholly
objective. The counterposition to Bernstein’s criticism of Morgan’s pure
objectivity is Morgan’s interpenetration, however defective, of his
scientific objectivity and his subjectivity, i.e., his hopes for the future.
The defect in Morgan lies elsewhere: his objectivity is concrete, his
subjectivity abstract. Thus, the dialectical passage in Morgan is one-sided
and partially developed, but nevertheless exists, and had a positive re­
sponse in Marx. Engels took up the line of criticism propounded by
Fourier; the other possibility raised by Bernstein is irrelevant. Yet Engels
pointed only briefly to the collective institutions of social life and prop­
erty in their primitive context, and even more briefly to the same in their
modern context, being chiefly concerned with these in connection with
their dissolution in the development of civilization. The dialectical
passage of the collectivity into its opposite, the individuality-privativity,
is implicit in Marx’s attention to the given excerpts from Morgan; the
nature of the collectivity in the dialectical passage from the privative was
adumbrated by him in the ethnological notebooks and others of his
writings. The excerpt from Morgan expressing the paramountcy of the
social interest over the individual interest juxtaposes its antithesis to the
unmanageable power of property and the evanescence of a mere property
career. Engels expressed these points in their transition from one to the
other in the last pages of The Origin of the Family; his thesis, also that of
Marx and Morgan, was that man’s character was laid down as a collective
and social creature over a long evolutionary period, and that this charac­
ter was distorted in the brief career of civilization. The thesis, with the
exception of the factor of time depth, was that of Fourier as well.
Morgan had posited equality, democracy and universality of right as
the measure against which the low position of the married woman, and
the disharmony and injustice of civilized society under the regime of
property is judged.155 His perspective rested on the optimistic judgment
that the property career contains the elements of self-destruction. It is
an organicism, positing no specific mechanism whereby the inequity of
rights and the disharmony of the civilized condition is to be overcome; it
has remained an abstraction, without a concrete course of action. As such
it has common features of the Hegelian historical entelechy, but since it is
limited in its organicism without the critique of the latter as that had been
posited by Hegel, Morgan’s evolutionary progressism was already sur­
passed as an explanation of the rise of civilization in the generation prior
to Marx.
The positivist criticism of Morgan’s evolutionary doctrine of progress
has rested primarily on its abstraction and its lack of concrete mechanisms
of social development. Engels had in mind that further empirical data
would cause the scientific categories and particular analyses of Morgan to
be changed; but this would not change the perspective of progress which
they shared. Engels did not overcome the objections to the utopianism
and teleology of Morgan, nor did he overcome Morgan’s utopianism and
teleology within his Origin of the Family. Engels’ dialectic here is the
juxtaposition of Morgan’s idea of the evanescence of property to the
general and, in this case implicit, unexpressed perspective known to have
been shared by Marx and himself. In the footnote and the end of his
Origin of the Family Engels proposed that he would take up the critique
of civilization in the line of Fourier’s brilliancy.
Engels, in his 1888 edition of the Communist Manifesto commented on
the opening sentence (see above, section 3, Marx’s Excerpts from Maine),
“ That is, all written history. In 1847, the prehistory of society, the social
organization existing previous to recorded history, was all but unknown.
Since then, Haxthausen discovered communal landownership in Russia,
Maurer proved it to be the social foundation from which all German
tribes started historically, and gradually it was found that village com­
munities with possession of the land in common were the primeval form
of society from India to Ireland. Finally, the inner organization of this
primeval communist society was laid bare in its typical form by Morgan’s
crowning discovery of the true nature of the gens and its place in the
tribe. With the dissolution of these primeval communities, the division
of society into separate and finally antagonistic classes begins.” The same
point was made by Engels in the fourth edition of Socialism, Utopian and
Engels here made implicit reference to the unity of the peoples of
Eurasia in the positing of a communal past, ‘from India to Ireland’ ;
implicit is also Maine’s evidence thereof. On the other hand, Engels made
explicit the theoretical presuppositions if not the factual evidence of
Maurer and Morgan. The primeval communist society in question whose
inner organization was laid bare by Morgan extended far beyond the
ambitus, India to Ireland; indeed it could not have been posited at all
on that restricted basis, since Morgan’s conceptions rested precisely on
the evidence of the middle and lower statuses of barbarism, which was
not to be adduced in the culture area of the Old World whose arc was
thereby described. On the contrary, the New World alone provided the
evidence in that scientific era, for the development of the conception of
the gens in its relation to that of society. There was not one society in
question here, but many; there was nevertheless one mode of inner
organization of these many societies which were identified in the various
statuses of barbarism by Morgan. In this connection, Engels presup­
posed here a primeval communism of property ownership as a basis for
the primitive community and the dissolution of both the property and
the social relation in the transition to civilization. The relation of the
abstraction, society, to its empirical concrescence, the societies under­
going a shared transition was the achievement of Marx, in his anthropolo­
gy, over the period from the 1840s to the 1880s.
Marx worked out his system in regard to the transition of mankind
from the primitive to the civilized social condition, but we can see no
more than the outlines, taking as the basis of it the works that he chose
for annotation and excerption, together with what is known of the
scientific, political and historical positions of the authors, and the points
he raised from their works. Morgan was his chief support, Maine his
opponent; the comments regarding Phear and Lubbock round out these
outlines, but our depth is limited. Engels accords with the position of
Marx in general, but there are significant differences between them;
Engels was less deep and less precise than Marx; such was the self­
estimation of Engels as well. The system of Marx is incomplete, for he
only sketched in his originality, the points of difference with Morgan,
and the system raised thereon; the points that he raised in regard to Maine
are, in their negativity, more important because more extensive; they are
less well-known hence in their subjectivity as well, in regard to the
critique of the historical and analytical theories of the State and Law, of
the Oriental commune and society, of the early history of the develop­
ment of capital and landownership in the Occident, and of the origin of
civilization. Above all, his empirical and philosophical anthropology in
its relation to social critique and practice, and of the social critique in its
relation to the latter are here presented from many new sides: the inter­
relation of the interest of society, collectivity, and individuality; the
relation of these to the formation of civil and political society, and a
position in regard to their outcome.
Marx wrote in 1844156, “ The greatness in the Hegelian Phenomenology
and its end-result - the dialectic of negativity as the motive and generative
principle - is thus, first, that Hegel grasps the self-generation of man as
a process, the position of the object as its opposition (Vergegenstàndlichung als Entgegenstàndlichung), as alienation and as sublation (Aufhebung) of this alienation; that he grasps the nature (Wesen) of labor and
conceives objective man, true because actual man, as the end-result of
his own labor” (Vergegenstàndlichung is objectification, the positing of
the object; Entgegenstàndlichung is both opposition, standing opposite,
and disobjectification, the disembodiment of the object. We have
understood Wesen der Arbeit as ‘nature of labor’ because labor as process
has no Wesen (or essence, being as such) which exists independently of
the process leading to the product, man himself, the object destroyed by
its objectification.) Having posited the self-generation by man as the
process of his own labor and as its product in consequence, Hegel then
conceived man as a being with a history, or as a participant in temporal
processes of which history is one. To this end, Marx comprehended man
as social man first, as having no inner essence that stands outside time,
hence as having no essence other than his relations in society and in social
production, including the production of himself. These temporal proces­
ses, as self-generation, history, and the development of the relations of
society, self, and history, are at the same time external and internal to man.
They develop as the relation to inner needs and drives, as the relation of
function to external form, as that of man to the natural world. Hegel
conceived the process as changing over time, and at once as temporality
within itself, a non-organic entelechy.
Hegel’s theory of change was conceived as an organic growth of a given
form, the realization of potentiality by an internal process externalized
as the negation of the anterior form of the same type, each antecedent
bearing within itself the germ of its own suppression and transformation
into the successive stage. It was not, however, a theory of the relations
between typic or generic forms. Thus, Hegel did not conceive the
process from without, as mediation worked upon the formal growth,
hence he did not integrate the internal with the externally originating
process into one, or the actual with the potential. In keeping with this we
note that Hegel had formulated his notion of that which we have subse­
quently come to denominate as culture, both as the mediation of man and
nature and the intermediation in the cultivation of the young ; but he had
not come to the conception of the evolution of the process, still less of the
emergence on the earth of the culture by man as a separate phenomenon,
Moreover, he separated the particular social mechanisms from his wholly
organic evolutionary concept as an inner process. The mediation itself is
subject to transformation by the relation of the particular to the whole;
it is a temporal process ; Hegel stopped short of this conception.
Morgan’s theory of evolution, on the contrary, was wholly external,
that which is brought about by mechanisms directing change from lower
to higher stages through inventions and discoveries ; human intelligence
was likewise subject in its growth to the intervention of these mechanisms.
Marx accepted from Morgan the notion of the gens as the social institu­
tion mediating, in the form of a bridge, the achievement of civilization.
The gens was at the same time conceived by Marx as the generator in its
decline of concrete mechanisms which accomplished the transition to
civilization. Accumulation of property was the objective factor accounted
for by Morgan in the decline of the gens and the transition to civilization.
The dissolution of the gens is, however, but the heading under which the
analysis is to be promulgated, which Marx then took up as a set of
internal and external relations. As internal, it is the transformation in
society of common relations to property into mutually antagonistic
relations between the peasantry in their still communal institutions, on
the one hand, and the private rights and respective institutions of the
otiose landowners on the other. The forms of the collectivities, poor
and rich, were different, the modes of internalization of the conflicting
relations were different, and the rates of social evolution within the same
group were likewise different. These social differences were therefore
not expressed as conflicts directly until a much later time than their first
appearance; the opposition is directly linked with the second dialectic
moment, that of the social opposition between the individual private
interests. Both moments provide the basis for the formation of the State
and its primary internal functions. Morgan’s objective fact was thus
differentially internalized by the social institutions.
Morgan’s conception of the changing relations to property as a devel­
opment of society was taken by Marx as common ground; Engels
conceived this as the rediscovery by Morgan of the materialist interpreta­
tion of history. The common ground has since been overemphasized:
the explicit optimism and utopism of Morgan was transformed by Marx
into the social conflict in the state of civilization. There is a second reason
for questioning the emphasis that has been placed upon the common
ground between Marx and Morgan: The anti-teleological element in
Marx’s thought found support in his reading of Darwin, but thereby he
separated the science of man from the science of nature, given both the
respective states of both sciences and the separation of man in his actuality
from nature. Marx criticized Darwin’s use of the model of contem­
porary English society in the study of the animal kingdom.167 From this
it follows likewise that Morgan wrongly because onesidedly and too
facilely proceeded from nature to man by application of the model in the
inverse sense.
Marx expressed a scepticism regarding the scientific doctrines of Cuvier,
Darwin, Lubbock, Morgan, among others. The objective side of this
scepticism is the critique of the respective sciences as doctrines internally
to the disciplines themselves, and externally in relation to their social
etiology and inspiration. The internal side of the critique is the laying
bare of their implicit organicism posited as generalities without concre­
tion in identified empirical processes and methods for their observation,
control, and the like. The negative side of this internal critique is the
speculative reconstructions detected by him in Cuvier, Morgan, Phear.
The external critique of the sciences has as its object the internalization
effected, even by their best representatives, of the social prejudices,
ethnocentrisms, uncritical borrowings of the preconceptions of their
social origins, and the return to the society in question of the scientific
conclusions in an altered form: evolution made over into evolutionism, a
doctrine comforting and comfortable to the sustainers of the given
civilization as the telos of evolutionary progress; the incorporation of
the subjective values of the civilization as the end-result of the evolution
as the ground for self-satisfaction. The past was reconstructed to these
ends, strengthening by the moral means derived therein the dominance
and exploitation of one nation by another; the forceful hand of the
colonialists was supported by the scientific-pseudoscientific apparatus.
Marx’s reserve was, however, the withholding of total commitment,
which did not diminish his recognition of scientific advancement in
paleontology, systematic and evolutionary biology, ethnology and human
evolution, and the contributions of the scientists mentioned above to one
or another of these fields.
Anti-teleology in nature is interrelated with anti-necessitarianism in
human history, each reciprocally presupposing the other. On the one
side, moreover, the human is wholly comprised within the natural
history; on the other, the matter of the form and the content of each is
without difference from the other. On the human side, Marx’s thought
implicitly and explicitly opposed the painting of pictures of the future
(‘Zukunftsmalerei’) as he opposed the fixity of process and determinacy
of form into which a society develops (see note 89 of this Introduction).
Finally, Marx, having expressed these thoughts, buried them in his
workroom. Yet their incomplete form has nevertheless indicated the
transition of Marx from the restriction of the abstract generic human
being to the empirical study of particular societies. The transition made
by Marx is likewise that of the development of society and of anthropolo­
gy in the same period. The posthumous publication of the ethnological
parts of his notebooks forms a portion of Marx’s legacy, at once con­
tinuous and discontinuous, posing anew the open questions of control of
human development by human intervention, a wholly human teleology,
and the natural science of man as its potentiality. The present generation
bears an ambiguous relation to these questions; regarding the future of
society, and the lessons to be learned from the past, we get no guidance
save that which we can work out for ourselves.
i. Chronology of materials in IISG Notebook B 146, containing excerpts
and notes from Morgan, Phear and Maine; and Notebook B 150 con­
taining excerpts and notes from Lubbock. (See below, note 15 for survey
of notebooks.)
The materials were worked on in the order indicated. There is no
direct evidence in the notebooks themselves or from correspondence,
etc., when the work was begun. There is a direct indication relative to
the dating of the close of the materials from Notebook B 146 which are
dealt with in the present essay; the indication, while it is direct, is not
entirely free of problems, and hence is not firm. Marx commented on an
Irish Coercion Bill in Parliament in his notes on Maine, p. 192, i.e. five
pages from the end, interpolating in that connection, “ Dies geschrieben
Juni 1888.” It had been announced in January 1880 that a Coercion
Statute then in force would be allowed to lapse on June 1, 1880. A new
Coercion Bill was introduced by W. E. Forster, of the party of the viceroy
of Ireland, in the British Parliament on January 24, 1881 and enacted on
March 2, 1881, after strenuous parliamentary debate and public protest.
“ It practically enabled the viceroy to lock up anybody he pleased, and to
detain him as long as he pleased, while the Act remained in force.” 158
The Notebook B 146 was filled seriatim, although number 144 was
skipped in the pagination (but not the page - see the place and note 15).
It has generally been held that this portion of the Notebook, with the
exception of the notes from Hospitalier, was filled within a fairly short,
consecutive period of time. It now must be considered that the time
period in which the materials from Morgan, Phear and Maine (as well as
Money and Sohm) as a whole were worked on was somewhat longer than
that which has been accepted hitherto. Following the notes taken from
Maine he included in Notebook B 146 in or about November 1882
those from Hospitalier’s work on electricity, which had been published
in 1881.159
As to when the sequence of the materials in this Notebook was begun,
there is no direct evidence but only external and indirect indications that
Marx worked on the first of the series, Morgan’s Ancient Society, during
the winter, and perhaps spring of 1880-1881. Vera Zasulich had written
to Marx concerning agrarian problems and the village commune in
Russia160 in a letter dated February 16, 1881. Marx’s reply is dated
March 8, 1881.161 In a draft which was not sent off Marx wrote, “ In a
word, [the rural commune] finds [the modern social system] in a crisis
which will end only by its elimination, by a return of modern societies to
an ‘archaic’ type of communal property, a form in which - as an American
author who is not at all suspected of revolutionary tendencies, supported
in his work by the government in Washington, says - ‘the new system’
toward which modern society tends ‘will be a revival in a superior form
of an archaic social type.’ ” 162 [The American author, who is not men­
tioned by name, is L. H. Morgan, who wrote “ It will be a revival, in a
higher form, of the liberty, equality and fraternity of the ancient gentes.” 163
This passage from Morgan is on the same page as that cited by Engels at
the close of the Origin of the Family.] In the same draft of the letter to
Zasulich, Marx wrote, “ In [the time of Julius Caesar] the [arable] land
was divided annually, but between gentes (Geschlechter) and tribus of the
[different] Germanic confederations and not yet among the individual
members of the commune.” (The influence of Morgan’s terminology can
be seen here as well.) Marx also referred in this context to Maine on the
commune.164 Hyndman, an English socialist, recorded in his memoirs
that he had visited Marx in London on several occasions during 18801881.165 He wrote of these contacts, “ Thus, when Lewis Morgan
proved to Marx’s satisfaction that the gens and not the family was the
social unit of the old tribal system and ancient society generally, Marx at
once abandoned his previous opinions based upon Niebuhr and others,
and accepted Morgan’s view.” 166
The generally reliable Karl M arx, Chronik seines Lebens, has given the
chronology of the excerpts and notes from Morgan, Maine, Phear, Sohm
(and Dawkins) by Marx as ca. December 1880 to ca. March 1881. The
evidence cited by the editor of the Chronik for this dating is (a) the ex­
cerpts, dated therein 1880, and (b) Hyndman (see above).167 The first
bit of evidence is to be set aside for it is circular; the date 1880 is what
was to have been proved. All that we can infer from the Hyndman
testimony is that Marx had read the Morgan and perhaps the other works.
From the evidence of the Zasulich correspondence, known to Adoratsky
and the staff of the Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute, Moscow, but not cited
by them in this connection, it is clear that Marx had read not only Morgan
but also Maine in relation to the study of primitive society and the for­
mation of political society out of the dissolution of the ancient gentes
and communities. On internal grounds we infer that Marx had famil­
iarized himself with the content of the Morgan work before setting out
to excerpt it, for the act of changing the sequence of the parts implies a
prior grasp of the whole. The mastery of the contents may have taken
place immediately or long before the actual excerptions and notes. There
is a limited amount of internal cross-reference in Notebook B 146 itself:
explicitly to Morgan in the Maine excerpts, pp. 163 and 186; implicitly
to Morgan by reference to the Upper Status of Barbarism, a category of
Morgan’s, in the Maine excerpts, p. 1 66 ; and to the gens, presumably also
with Morgan in mind (Maine excerpts, pp. 161, 178). Phear is implicitly
referred to in the Maine excerpts, p. 162; Sohm is explicitly referred to,
together with manuscript pages, Maine excerpts, p. 193. The internal
evidence supports the conclusion that the contents form a coherent whole,
that the sequence was orderly and not haphazard, and that the place of
Morgan’s ideas relative to those of Phear, Maine, etc., of Sohm in
relation to Maine, and so on, was clear to Marx at this time. There is
therefore no ground to differ from the chronology proposed by the
editor of the Chronik regarding the commencement of the work in Note­
book B 146, nor has any evidence been adduced since that time to con­
clude that this work was not carried on in a continuously organized
fashion, which is implicit in the conceptions of Ryazanov and of Ado­
ratsky. The only grounds for difference with the latter are the incom­
pleteness of the evidence that Adoratsky and his staff introduced. That is,
they knew of the Zasulich correspondence, which Ryazanov had published
some five years earlier; and they had the Maine ms. of Marx in photocopy,
for Ryazanov had brought this to Moscow as early as 1923.
If the date of December 1880 (approximately) is taken as the commence­
ment of the Notebook B 146, then it follows that the excerpts from
Maine, subject to the method of work set forth above, were being brought
to a close in June 1881.
It is possible that we have to deal with the period from the winter 1879
through spring and summer 1880: the possibility of reading ‘June 1880’
for ‘June 1888’ is supported, at least theoretically, by the fact that a
Coercion Statute was in force in England through June 1, 1880. Marx
implied that there was a special significance to this date. It is more
probable that he had reference to the Coercion Bill (of 1881) than to the
Coercion Statute (of the preceding year), and we assume that he made but
one error, that of the year, not of the month or decade. It follows that
he had the events of January through March 1881 in mind, hence the
pointedness of the reference to the month. (The possibility that we are
dealing with a time period from December 1879 to June 1881 can be
mentioned simply to touch one more possibility, but it is not a fruitful
one to pursue, for it is too far from the implied method of Marx’s work
on these materials.)
Between the two possibilities, winter 1879 to summer 1880, and winter
1880 to summer 1881, there is a slight preponderance to the choice of
the latter date. The choice is based on the consideration that the issues
and contents of these excerpts were more directly reflected in Marx’s
scientific and political work of early 1881. Moreover, the dates of publi­
cation of the works excerpted (the Phear and Sohm publications are both
dated 1880) tend to support the later date as well. Therefore we propose
that the parts of the notebook B 146 containing the excerpts from the
works of Morgan, Money, Phear, Sohm, and Maine be provisionally
assigned to the period between the end of the year 1880 and the middle
of 1881.
The Russian language version of Marx’s excerpts from Morgan, the
work of the Marx-Lenin Institute, Moscow, contains the statement that
they were in all likelihood made in the winter of 1880-1881.168 No
grounds are given to support this, nevertheless, it cannot be far from the
truth, given the reservations noted above. The editors in the Institute of
Marxism-Leninism in Berlin who are responsible for Marx Engels Werke
have based themselves on the work of the parallel body in Moscow, but
the former have proposed the dating 1881-1882 for Marx’s work on
Morgan,169 giving no grounds for this changed chronology. There is a
stylistic difficulty with the date 1881-1882: it places the activity of Marx
in reference to Hyndman and Zasulich in the past, whereas the memoir
of Hyndman in reference to Marx, and the concerns of Marx in the
successive drafts to Zasulich give the impression of current matters. The
editor of the Chronik has separated the work on Lubbock from that of
Morgan, Maine, etc., by a year and a half.170 The style and contents of
the notebooks, insofar as these matters can be treated objectively, tend to
support this separation. To argue ex silentio, i.e., that he did not mention
Morgan or Maine to this person or that, in order to promulgate one
chronology over another, is an idle speculation. To treat the matter of
the chronology any further, in the absence of firm data, direct or indirect,
is mere conjecture, which has, perhaps, already been spun out too far.
Marx returned to his work in ethnology late in 1882, adding the
excerpts from the work of Lubbock.170
2. 1/ aria Concerning M arx's Ethnological Studies
A . Christoph Meiners and Charles de Brosses
Marx read C. Meiners, Allgemeine kritische Geschichte der Religionen, 1806 ;
he took it up first in 1842, and returned to it in 185 2. Also in 1842 Marx
read C. de Brosses, Du Culte des Dieux fétiches, 1760, in a German transla­
tion by Pistorius.171 De Brosses combined a belief that man had degen­
erated from a higher state with his advocacy of the progression of man­
kind. He influenced the theorizing about primitive religion in the
nineteenth century concerning fetishism,172 while at the same time he
expressed a critical attitude toward ‘la folle imagination du fétichisme’.
While neither the substance of his general theory of mankind nor his
specific theory of fetishism had any obvious effect on Marx’s thinking,
nevertheless the formal category of fetishism, which may perhaps be
attributed to de Brosses, played a minor role in Marx’s Grundrissellz and
a major role in Capital.11* De Brosses’ rationalism in regard to the
primitive religion, but not to the religion of his own civilization, is out
of keeping with the ‘objective’ attitude prevalent among nineteenth
century ethnologists with regard to the study of primitive man.175
B. W. Cooke Taylor
In May 1851, Marx took notes from W. Cooke Taylor, The Natural
History of Society in the Barbarous and Civilised State. A n Essay Towards
Discovering the Origin and Course of Human Improvement, 2 v., 1840. (I owe
this information to Mr. Harstick.) The work describes the stages of
social advancement prior to the writings on social evolution here dis­
cussed; it is the precursor of the latter. In addition to the division of
mankind into barbarism and civilization, the work divides the barbarous
races into hunters, shepherds and agriculturists (ch. 9). Thus it is an
early statement of the hunter-pastoralist-farmer sequence later advanced
by Eduard Hahn and others. Phear in the Introduction to The Aryan
Village adopted the same sequence (see n. 58). Tylor wrote of three
stages, savagery, barbarism, and civilization,176 as did Morgan. Hegel,
Philosophie der Geschichte, mentions savage and barbarian peoples, but
without developing this distinction.
C. Adolf Bastian
Marx in a letter to Engels, Dec. 19, i860, wrote after referring favorably
to Darwin, “ Dagegen A. Bastian, ‘Der Mensch in der Geschichte’ (3 dicke
Bände, der Bursche junger Bremer Arzt, der mehrjährige Reise um die
Welt gemacht) mit seinem Versuch einer ‘naturwissenschaftlichen’ Dar­
stellung der Psychologie und psychologischen Darstellung der Ge­
schichte schlecht, konfus, formlos. Das einzige Brauchbare darin hie
und da ein Par ethnographische oddities. Dazu viel Prätention und
schauderhafter Stil.” The same ground is covered in a letter of Marx to
Lassalle, Jan. 16, 1861.177
D . Marx and E. Ray Lankester
Lankester, a biologist, palaeontologist and Darwinist, was in close touch
with Marx in 1880.178
E . Sir William Boyd Dawkins
According to the Chronik, Marx read and excerpted Dawkins, Early Man
in Britain and his Place in the Tertiary Period, 1880.179 Phear op. cit. used
Dawkins’ work in his Introduction; Engels used Dawkins as the basis
for his unpublished work Zur Urgeschichte der Deutschen. 180
F . Hubert Howe Bancroft
Engels in a letter to Marx, Dec. 8, 1882, wrote,181 “ In order to clear up
the matter of the parallel between Tacitus’ Germans and American
Redskins, I have gently excerpted the first volur*“ of your Bancroft.”
(Bancroft, The Native Races of the Pacific States, 5 v., San Francisco, 18741875; New York, 1874-1876.)182
The publication of Marx’s ethnological manuscripts has the aim of
reproducing the form and content of the materials as they were left by
their author. For this reason, the materials from the notebooks follow
the sequence in which they were left by him; details concerning that
sequence are to be found in the Introduction, note 1 5. The accuracy of
the transcription and reproduction of the materials is limited by human
error, further by the difficulties inherent in the transfer of the writings
from manuscript to typescript to printed page. While the reproduction
of Marx’s manuscripts has been as faithful as possible, departures from
this aim have been conscious in certain cases:
1. Punctuation, including periods and commas, etc., has been occasion­
ally inserted. Square and round brackets drawn by Marx have been
closed where necessary, or made consistent, so that a bracketing
introduced as round is closed as such, etc. These matters have been
treated without further indication. An exception to this will be found
in the Introduction, note 16: the matter of that note touches another
corpus of Marx’s manuscript materials; it was treated differently, and
the difference is set forth in that place.
2. Marx’s note-taking style included abbreviations standardized accord­
ing to his practice: u. = und; od. = oder; d. = any definite article of
the German language; dch = durch, ddch = dadurch; whd = währ­
end; it also included non-standardized abbreviations, word-shortenings such as elimination of vowels, reduction of consonant
clusters, contractions, etc. Thus, bdtde = bedeutende; df, drf =
darauf; flgde = folgende; v., vn = von; nothwdg = nothwendig;
wdn = werden or wurden; wf, wrf = worauf; etc. Marx rendered
‘wahrscheinlich’ variously as whsclich, wrsclich, whrsclich, etc.;
Gesellscft, Bildg, Verwandscft, Verwdtscft, have been left in the
form in which they were found, the editor being persuaded that this
will be generally obvious.
Where there is reason to doubt whether the form of the shortened
word will be readily understood, it has been either filled in by the use
of angle brackets ( ) by the editor, or else it has been given in full
within the text and annotated. More rarely, where a word appears to
be wanting from a phrase, it has been filled in by the editor, again
with the use of angle brackets. All square and round brackets found
in the texts here published are those of Marx (but see above, under i).
On the other hand, apart from Marx’s texts, that is, in the Introduc­
tion, in the notes to the texts, and in the bibliographic section,
editorial insertions in the texts and references, etc., have been made
by square and round brackets.
Departures from Marx’s forms have been noted in reference to the
Morgan, Maine and Lubbock texts. This is the case also regarding
that of Phear, save that, for reasons given in the editorial note to the
Phear text, certain terms of Indie or of so-called Anglo-Indian
provenience have been given uniform renderings without further
Paragraphing, spacing, and page format have been reproduced as
Marx set them out, within the limitations noted above.
Alternative readings and difficult or illegible parts of the manuscripts
are indicated in the notes to each text.
The text in the modern languages, which are chiefly German and
English, has been left without substantive change, save as noted
above. Citations from Greek and Latin authors of classical antiquity
have likewise been left in their original form in the text, save where
subsequent editions of the classical works have proposed changes of
the forms in which Morgan, Maine, or Marx left them. Where the
matter concerns other than a formal difference, and where it has some
significance attached to it, this has been noted, but not in the cases
of mere variations of form. These classical citations have likewise
been translated into English in the notes to the texts. The citations
and translations have been checked against some standard current
edition, in most cases that of the Loeb Classical Library. In the case
of Aristotle they have been checked against the edition of W. D. Ross.
References to Marx’s text in the Introduction and Notes are by page
number, following his sequence in the mss., which is indicated on
the left margin of the page.
Underlinings, marginal and interpolated lines are reproduced from
the manuscript insofar as it is feasible to do so.
The reproduction of the form of Marx’s bibliographic notes from
Excerpt Notebook B 146 (see above, Introduction, note 15) is
discussed in the Notes appended to that bibliographic section.
Spelling of words has been left in the form that Marx gave, even
though contemporary practice has since been changed, e.g., Theil,
commandirt, Etablirung. Grammatical and syntactic constructions
have been reproduced unchanged, likewise, unless noted otherwise,
for these matters concern Marx’s peculiar and characteristic shifts
from German to English and vice versa. No attempt has been made
to standardize differences between spelling practices in England and
America (e.g., ‘civilisation’, ‘civilization’); Marx accorded with either
practice; occasionally, it is difficult to decide between alternatives in
the manuscripts; such matters have been left without notice.
Marx wore his erudition lightly. The references to the Bible, to Shake­
speare and to Don Quixote need no comment; Pecksniff, in Martin
Chuvglervit of Charles Dickens, needs no more comment than that.
Where Marx has not supplied enough information to provide ground
for firm identification of a work, as in the references to Frédéric Le Play,
Achille Loria, Francis Parkman, Ernest Renan, James Anderson, James
MacPherson, i.a., some bibliographic indications are offered, but marked
as conjectural.
Lewis H . Morganr1 “ Ancient Society” . London i8 jy .
Part /.2 Ch. I.
A) I) Growth of intelligence through inventions and
I) Period of Savagery.
i) Lower Status. Infancy of human race; lives in its original restricted
habitat; subsists upon fruits and nuts; in this period commencement of
articulate speech; ends with acquisition of fish subsistence and knowledge of
use of fire. No tribes in this condition to be found in historical period
of mankind.
z) Middle Status: commences mit fish subsistence and use of fire. Mankind
spreads from original habitat over greater portion of earth’s surface.
Such tribes existing still, f.i. the Australians and greater part of the
Polynesians, when discovered.
3) Upper Status: commences with invention of bow and arrow, ends with
invention of art ofpottery. In this state the Athapascan tribes of the Hud­
son's Bay Territory, the tribes of the valley of Columbia u. certain coast3
tribes of North and South America; with relation to the time of their
II) Period of Barbarism
1) Lower Status begins with art of Pottery. Für d. flgde status (middle)
comes in Betracht the unequal endowment of the 2 hemispheres, western and
eastern; aber to adopt equivalents. In Eastern hemisphere the domestication
of animals, in the Western the cultivation of Mai^e andplants by irrigation,
zugleich mit use of adobe-brick and stone in house building. Im lower status
z.B. the Indian tribes of the U.St. east of the Missouri river, and such tribes
of Europe and Asia practising pottery, but were without domesticated
2) Middle Status. Commences in Eastern sphere with domestication of
animals, in the Western with cultivation by irrigation and the use of
adobe-brick and stone in architecture; ends with theprocess of smelting
iron ore. In this state f.i. the village Indians of New Mexico, Mexico,
Central America, Peru u. tribes in the Eastern hemisphere possessing
domestic animals, but without knowledge of iron. Ancient Britons belong
hierhin; they knew the use of iron and other arts of life - far beyond
the state of development of their domestic institutions - thanks to the
vicinity of more advanced continental tribes.
3) Upper Status. Commences with the smelting of Iron Ore, use of iron
tools etc, ends with the invention of a phonetic alphabet, and the use of
writing in literary composition. In the upper Status of Barbarism the
Grecian tribes of homeric ages, Italian tribes before thefounding of Rome (?).
the German tribes of Caesar's time.
Ill) Period of Civilisation.
Begins with phonetic alphabet and production of literary records; as
equivalent - hieroglyphical writing upon stone.
Ueber Pottery specially to I I Period. (/)
Flint and stone implements älter als pottery, found frequently in ancient
repositories ohnepottery. Eh diese erfunden, commencement of village life,
with some degree of control over subsistence, wooden vessels u. utensils,
finger weaving with filaments of bark, basket making u. bow u. arrow vor
appearance of pottery. Diese nicht z.B. bei d. Athapascans, the tribes of
California u. of the valley4 of Columbia. It was unknown in Polynesia (except
the islands of the Tongans u. Fijians), in Australia, California u. the
Hudson’s Bay Territory. Tylor bemerkt, dass d. “art of weaving unknown
in most of the islands away from Asia” u. “ in most of the South Sea islands
there was no knowledge ofpottery.” Flint and stone implements gave the canoe,
wooden vessels and ustensils, and ultimately timber and plank in house archi­
tecture. Boiling of food - vor pottery - rudely accomplished in baskets
coated with clay, and in ground cavities lined with skin, the boiling being effected
with heated stones.
The village Indians - wie d. Zunians, the A^teks u. d. Cholulans (in Period II,
(2) state) manufactured pottery in large quantities, and in many forms of
great excellence; the partially Village Indians of the U.St. in Period II (1)
wie d. Iroquois, Choctas, Cherokees made it in smaller quantities u. limited
number of forms
Gogueth - in last century - relates of Capt. Gonneville visiting the South
east coast of South America in 1503, that he found “ their household ustensils
of wood, even their boiling pots, but plastered with | a kind of clay, a good
finger thick, which prevented the fire from burning them” u. nach
Goguefi daubed d. wooden combustible vessels mit clay to protect them
(from)6 fire, till theyfound that clay alone would answer the purpose, and “ thus
the art of pottery came into the world.”
Nach P rof E . T. Cox of Indianapolis, the analyses of “ ancient pottery” 7
...belonging to the mound-builders age, are composed of alluvial clay and
sand, or a mixture of the former with pulverized fresh water-shells.
Development in different tribes u. families.
Einige so geographisch isolirt, dass sie selbstständig d. verschiednen
Phasen dchlaufen; andere adultera<te)d dch external influence. So Africa
was u. is an8 ethnical chaos of savagery u. barbarism; Australia u. Polynesia
were in savagery, pure and simple.
The Indian family of America - unterscheidet sich dadurch v. jeder ändern
existirenden - stellten condition of mankind in three successive ethnicalperiods
dar. When discovered, stellten sie jede der 3 conditions dar u. namentlich
lower u. middle status of barbarism more elaborate u. complete als irgend
andre portion of mankind. D .fa r Northern Indians u. some of the coast tribes
of North and South America were in the Upper Status of Savagery;
the partially Village Indians east of the Mississippi were in the Lower Status
of Barbarism,
the Village Indians of North and South America were in the Middle Status.
Part I. Ch. II. A rts of Subsistence.
Upon their (men’s) skill in this direction - arts of subsistence - the whole
question of human supremacy on the earth depended. Mankind are the only
beings who may be said to have gained an absolute control (?!) over the pro­
duction of food. (19) The great epochs of human progress - identified,
more or less directly, with the enlargement of the sources of subsistence. (I.e.)
1) natural subsistence upon fruits or roots on a restricted habitat. Primitive
period, invention of language. Such kind of subsistence unterstellt a,
tropical or subtropical climate. Fruit and nutbearing forests under a
tropical sun. (20) Were at least partially tree-living (auf Bäumen lebend)
(Lucret. de rerum natura lib. V )9
2) fish subsistence; first artificial food, not fully available without cooking;
fire first utilized for this purpose - \hunt for game too precarious ever to
have formed an exclusive means of human support.] Upon this species
of food mankind became independent of climate and locality; by following
the shores of the seas and lakes, and the courses of rivers could, while in the
savage state, spread over the greater portion of the earth’s surface.
Of the first of these migrations ... abundant evidence in the remains of
flint and stone implements found upon all the continents. In Interval bis
zur nächsten period important increase in the variety and amount of food;
bread roots z.B. cooked in ground ovens; permanent addition ofgame through
improved weapons, especially the bow and arrow; dies kam nach spear u. war
club; gab the first deadly weapon for the hunt, appeared late in savagery;
Bezeichnet (Bogen u. Pfeil) the upper status of savagery, adds iron sword to
barbarism, firearms to the period of civilisation. Bow u. arrow were
unknown to the Polynesians in general, and to the Australians. (21) (22)
In Flge d. precarious nature of all these sources offood, outside of the great
fish areas, cannibalism became the resort of mankind. The ancient universality
of this practice is being gradually demonstrated. (22)
3) Farinaceous food through cultivation.
D. cultivation of cereals scheint unbekannt gewesen zu sein im lower u. bis
nah %um Ende d. middle status of barbarism ... in der Oestlichen Hemisphäre
den tribes of Asia u. Europe. Dagegen im Lower Status of barbarism in d. West­
lichen Hemisphäre bekannt den American aborigenes; sie hatten horticulture.
Beide Hemisphären ungleich endowed by nature; d. Oestliche besass alle
Thiere, save one, adapted to domestication, u. a majority of cereals; the Western
had one cereal (Mai%e) fit for cultivation, but that the best. Gave the
advantage of condition in this period den American aborigenes. Aber als
d. most advanced Eastern tribes, at the commencement of the middle period of
barbarism, had domesticatedanimalsgiving meat and milk, without a knowledge
of the cereals, ihre condition much superior to that of the American
aborigenes mit mdi^e u. plants, aber ohne domesticated animals. Mit d.
domestication of animals scheint differen (tidytion der Semitic u. Aryan families
3 heraus aus der Masse der Barbaren begonnen zu haben. | Dass d. discovery
u. cultivation of cereals dch d. Aryan family später als domestication von
animals beweisen common terms for these animals in the several dialects der
Aryan language, and no common terms for cereals or cultivated plants, ζέα
(einzige dieser Worte), philologisch = Sanscrit yavas (bdtet in Indian
barley, in Greek “ spelt” ).
Horticulture preceded field culture, as the garden (hortos) das field (ager); the
latter implies boundaries, the former signifies directly an “ inclosed field ”
[hortus an inclosed place for plants, hence a garden; from the same root
cohors (auch cors, in einige Mscpte chors) a yard, a place walled round, a
court, (auch cattle-yard); cf. gr. χόρτος, χορός; lat. hortus; german, garten,
engl, garden, yard (ital. corte, french cour,10 engl. court) (ital. giardino, sp. u.
french jardin).
— Tillage muss aber älter sein als d. inclosed garden; erst, tilling of patches of
open alluvial land, z) enclosed space of gardens, 3) field by means of the plow
drawn by animal power. Ob d. Cultur solcher plants wie pea, bean, turnip,
parsnip, beet, squash (Kürbisartige Frucht bei Massach. Indians) u. melon,
one or more of them, preceded the cultivation of the cereals, wissen wir
nicht. Einige v. diesen haben common terms in Latin u. Greek, aber
keines davon common term mit Sanskrit.
Horticulture in11 Östlicher Hemisphere seems to have originated more in
the necessities of the domestic animals than of those of mankind. Commences
in the Western hemisphere mit Mai^e; led in America to localisation and
village life; tended bes. under the village Indians to take the place of fish and
game. V. cereals u. cultivated plants mankind obtained the first impres­
sion of the possibility of an abundance of food. - Mit farinaceous food
verschwindet cannibalism; it survived in war, practised by war parties
unter d. American aborigenes in the Middle Status of barbarism z. B. unter
Iroquois u. A^teks; but the general practice had disappeared. (Wde in
savagery practicirt upon captured enemies u. in times of famine upon friends
and kindred)
4) Meat and M ilk Subsistence. Absence of animals, adapted to domestication
in Westlicher Hemisphäre ausser Llama. D. early Span, writers speak of a
“ dumb dog” found domesticated in the West India Islands, ditto in Mexico u.
Central America, sprechen auch von poultry u. turkeys on the American
continent; the aborigenes had domesticated the turkey u. d. Nahuatlac tribes
some species of wildfowl.
Diese Differenz u. d. specific differences in the cereals beider Hemisphären
producirte essential difference with that portion ihrer inhabitants who had
attained to the Middle Status of Barbarism.
The domestication of animals provided a permanent meat and milk
subsistence; tribes, die sie besassen, differentiated v. d. mass of other
barbarians. D. Village Indians ungünstig the limitation upon an essential
species of food; haben inferior si%e of the brain verglichen mit d. Indians in
the Lower Status of Barbarism.
Vorzüge der Aryan u. Semitic families dch maintenance in number of
domestic animals. D. Greeks milked their sheep as well as their cows u.
goats (Ilias IV, 43 3)12 Aryans to noch greater extent als Semites.
Domestication of animals - in östl. Hemisphäre - gradually introduced
pastoral life, upon theplains of the Euphrates and of India u. d. steppes of A sia;
on the confines of one or the other of which the domestication of animals
first accomplished. Sie kamen so (nach)13 regions, die, so weit entfernt d.
cradle lands der human race sein, were areas they would not have occupied as
savages or barbarians in the Lower Status of barbarism, to whomforest areas were
natural homes. Nachdem sie sich gewöhnt an pastoral life, unmöglich for
either of these families to reenter the forest areas of Western Asia and of
Europe with their flocks u. herds, without first learning to cultivate some of the
cereals with which to subsist the latter at a distance from the grass plains.
Sehr probable that the cultivation of the cereals originated in the necessities of
the domestic animals, and in connection with these western migrations; and
that the use of farinaceous food by these tribes was a consequence.
In d. Western Hemisphere d. aborigenes advanced generally into the Lower
Status of Barbarism, u. ein Theil davon in Middle Status ohne domestic
animals, ausser Llama in Peru, u. upon a single cereal, mai^e, mit d. adjuncts
of bean, squash u. tobacco u. in some areas cacao, cotton u. Pepper. “ Mai%e” ,
from its growth in the hill - which favoured direct cultivation - from its
useableness both green and ripe, from its abundantyield u. nutritive properties, 14
was a richer endowment in aid of early human progress als all other
cereals together; hence remarkable progress d. American aborigines ohne
domestic animals; the Peruvians produced bronze which stands next to the
process of smelting iron ore. \
5) Unlimited subsistence through field agriculture. The domestic animals sup­
plemented human muscle with animal power, new factor of the highest
value. Später production of iron gab Pflug mit an iron point u. a better
spade and axe. Mit diesen u. aus d. früheren horticulture, came field
agriculture u. damit querst unlimited subsistence. D. plow drawn by animal
power; damit entsprang thoughts of reducing the forest and bringing wide
fields into cultivation. (Lucret. v. 1369) Dense population on limited areas
became possible. Vor field agriculture schwerlich dass | Million Menschen
held together u. developed under one government in any part of the
earth. Wo exceptions, they must have resulted from pastoral life on the
plains od. von horticulture improved by irrigation, under peculiar u. ex­
ceptional condition.
Morgan theilt d. Familienformationen (p. 27,28) ein in:
1) Consanguine fam ily; intermarriage of brothers and sisters in a group; darauf
founded (u. dient jetzt als evidence davon) das Malayan system consanguinity.
2) Punaluanfam ily; name derived von d. Hawaiian relationship of Punalua.
Founded upon the intermarriage of several brothers to each others ’ wives in
a group; and of several sisters to each other’s husbands in a group. “ Brother”
includes the first, second, third, and even more remote cousins, all
considered as brothers; u. “ sister” includes first, 2nd, 3d, and even
more remote female cousins, all sisters to each other.15 A uf this form
of family ggriindet the Turanian u. Ganowanian systems of consanguinity.
Beide Familienfor<(m)en gehören zu period of savagery.
3) The Synd(y)asmian fam ily; von συνδυάζω [)paaren (συνδυάς gepaart
Bur.) Passiv: sichpaaren od. begatten Plato, Plutarch\ [συνδυασμός Paarung,
Verbindung Zweier. Plutarch.] Founded upon the pairing of a male and
a female under the form of marriage, aber ohne an exclusive cohabitation,
ist germ der Monogamian family. Divorce or separation at the option
of both husband u. wife. Dies<e) Familienform gründet kein besondres
4) The Patriarchalfam ily; founded upon the marriage of one man to several
women. In Hebrew pastoral tribes the chiefs and principal men practiced
polygamy. Little influence on mankind for want of universality.
5) Monogamian fam ily; marriage of one man with one woman, with an exclusive
cohabitation; preeminently the family of civilised society, essentially modern.
A uf diese Familienform gegründet an independent system of consanguinity.
Part III. Ch. I The ancientfamily.
Allerältestes: Hordenwesen mit promiscuity; no family; hier kann nur
__Mutterrecht irgdwelche Rolle spielen.
Die Verwandtschaftsysteme gebaut auf different types of fam ily; ihrerseits
wieder evidence für Existenz d. letzteren, die sie überleben.
D. älteste system of consanguinity, bis jetzt entdeckt, found unter d. Poly­
nesians, wovon d. Hawaiian als typical genommen, Morgan nennts d.
Malayan system. Hier alle consanguinei fallen unter d. relationship parent,
child, grandparent, grandchild', brother u. sister; keine andre Blutverwandschaft;
ausserdem d. marriage relationships. Dies system came in with the “ consan­
guine” family form u. beweist deren alte Existenz; d. system prevailed sehr
allgemein unter den Polynesians, obgleich d. family unter ihnen über­
gegangen aus consanguine form in punaluan. Letztere von ersterer nicht
genug verschieden, um eine Modification d. auf erstere gegründeten Ver­
wandtschaftssystems zu produciren. Intermarriage %wischen brothers u. sisters
noch nicht gz verschwunden aus d. Sandwichinseln, als amerik. Missionäre
10 2
sich vor 50 Jahren dort etablirten. Muss auch in Asien geherrscht haben,
weil es d. Basis des dort noch existirenden Turanian system.
Turanian system war allgemein unter d. norcLtmerik. aborigenes u. hinreich­
end auch in Südamerika nachgewiesen, found in parts of Africa, wo jedoch
unter dessen tribes Verwandtschaftssystem sich mehr dem Malayan
nähert. Turanisches System noch prevailing in Südindien unter d. Hindus der
Dravidian language u. in modificirter Form in Nordindien unter d. Hindus
sprechend dialects der Gaura language; also in Australien in partially devel­
oped form. In d. principal tribes der Turanian u. Ganowanian families
producirt dch punaluan marriage in the group u. d. organisation into gentes,
tending to repress consanguine marriage, by | prohibition of intermarriage
in the gens, wdch own brothers u. sisters von marriage relation ausschloss.
The Turanian system recognizes all the relationships known under the
Aryan system, aber auch diesem unbekannte. In familiar u. formal saluta­
tion the people address each other by the term of relationship, nie by the
personal name; wo keine relationship exists dch “ my friend.”
Bei Entdeckung d. American aborigines war d. family aus d. punaluan in
ihre synd{y)asmian form überggen; so dass d. relationships recognised by the
system of consanguinity in zahlreichen Fällen nicht die waren die wirklich in d.
synd(j)asmian family existirten; aber ebenso hatte Malayan system of consan­
guinity überdauert den Uebergang dr consanguine family in die Punaluan.
Gradeso überdauerte Turanian system of consang. den Uebergang der
punaluan family in d. synd(j)asmian. D. Familienform variirt schneller als
systems of consanguinity whichfollow to record thefamily relationships. D. organi­
sation in gentes war nöthig to change the Malayan system in d. Turanian;
property in the concrete, with its rights of ownership u. inheritance, war nöthig,
zusammen mit d. monogamian family which it created, to overthrow the
Turanian system of consanguinity and substitute the Aryan.
The Semitic, Aryan od. Uralian system of consanguinity - defining the
relationships in the monogamian family - war nicht based upon the Turanian
system, wie dies war upon the Malayan, sondern superseded it among
civilised nations.
Von den 5 family forms haben 4 existed in d. historic period; nur d. con­
sanguine disappeared; can aber be deduced v. d. Malayan system of
Marriage between single pairs had existed from the older period of barbarism;
under theform ofpairing during the pleasure of the parties; wurde stabiler
mit advance of society, mit progress dch inventions and discoveries into
higher successive conditions. Man began to exact fidelity from the wife,
under savage penalties, but he claimed exemption for himself. So unter
den Homeric Greeks. Ftschrtt v. Homerisch. Zeitalter bis dem von Pericles,
with its gradual settlement into a defined institution. So moderne Familie
höher als griech. u. röm;16 Geschichte dchgemacht in histor. Zeit von
3000 Jahren dch d. monogamische Familie u. Ehe. D. Fortschritt d. alten
10 3
complicirten “ conjugal" system besteht in seiner successive reduction, bis
reduced to %ero in d. monogamian family. Jeder d. / family types belongs to
conditions of society entirely dissimilar. D. Turanian system of consanguinity,
which records the relationships in punaluan family, blieb wesentlich unver­
ändert bis zur Etablirg der monogamian family, when it became almost totally
untrue to the nature of descents, and even a scandal upon monogamy. Z.B. unter
d. Malayan system nennt ein Mann seines Bruders Sohn seinen Sohn, weil
seines Bruders Frau auch seine Frau ist; u. seiner Schwester Sohn ist auch
sein Sohn, weil seine Schwester auch seine Frau ist. Unter d. Turanian
system ist seines Bruder’s Sohn immer noch sein Sohn, aus dem selben Grund,
aber seiner Schwester Sohn ist jetzt sein Neffe, weil unter d. gentile organisation
seine Schwester aufgehört hat seine Frau zu sein. Unter d. Iroquois, wo d.
family synd(y)asmian ist, nennt ein Mann seines Bruder’s Sohn seinen
Sohn, obgleich seines Bruder''s Frau aufgehört hat, seine Frau zu sein u. so
selber Incongruenz mit grosser Anzahl andrer relationships, die der
existing form of marriage aufgehört haben zu entsprechen. D . System hat
d. Gebräuche überlebt, worin es entsprang u. erhält sich oft unter ihnen, obgleich in
the main untrue, for descents as they now exist. Monogamy kam auf to assure
the paternity of children and the legitimacy of heirs. Turanian system konnte
dch keine Reform ihm adaptirt wden; stand in schnei(d)endem Gegen­
satz zu Monogamie; d. System ward dropped; aber d. descriptive method
stets employd dch d. Turanian tribes when they wished to make a given
relationship specific wde substituted. They fell back upon the bare facts of
consanguinity u. described the relationship of each person by a combination
of the primary terms', sagten so: Bruder's Sohn, Bruder's grandson, father's
brother, father's brother's son; each phrase described a person, leaving the
relationship a matter of implication; so bei d. arischen Nationen, in d.
ältesten form bei d. Griechischen, latein., sanskritischen, celtischen, semitischen
tribes (Old testament Genealogies') Traces des Turanian system unter d.
arischen u. semit. nations down to the historical period, aber essentially
uprooted. Descriptive | substituted in its place.
Jedes der systems of consanguinity expresses the actual relationships existing in
the family at the time of its establishment. D. relations v. Mutter u. Kind,
Bruder u. Schwester, Grossmutter u. grandchild were stets versicherbar (seit
Etablirung irgendeiner Form von family), aber nicht die von Vater u. Kind,
Grossvater u. grandchild; letzteres nur (mindestens officiell?) versicherbar
in Monogamie.
D. systems of consanguinity sind classificatory oder aber descriptive. Unter d.
ersten system consanguinei “ classified?' into categories unabhängig von ihrer
Nähe od. Entfernung in degree von Ego; d. selbe term of relationship applied to
all the persons in the same category. Z.B. meine eignen Brüder u. d. Söhne von d.
Brüdern meines Vaters sind alle gleichmässig meine Brüder; meine eignen
Schwestern u. d. Töchter d. Schwestern meiner Mutter sind alle gleichmässig
meine Schwestern; such is the classification in Malayan u. Turanian systems.
Im descriptiven System dagegen d. consanguinei bezeichnet dch d. primary
terms of relationship od. combination dieser terms, wdch d. relationship jeder
Person specific gemacht. So im Aryan, Semitic, od. Uralian system, which
came in with monogamy; später introducirt a small amount of classifi­
cation dch inventions of common terms, aber d. earliest form of the system - the
Erse u. Scandinavian - typical, purely descriptive. D. radicale Unterschied d.
Systeme resulted von plural marriages in the group in one case, from single
marriages between single pairs in the other.
Relationships zweifach: i) by consanguinity or blood; diese selbst zweifach,
a) lineal u. b) collateral; a) lineal ist d. connection unter Persons wovon
eine von der ändern abstammt; b) collateral ist sie, wo persons descend von
common ancestors, aber nicht von einander. 2) by affinity or marriage:
marriage relationships exist by custom. Wo marriage between single pairs,
eachperson the Ego from whom the degree of relationship of each person is
reckoned u. to whom it returns. This position in the lineal line, which line
is vertical. Upon it, above and below him, ancestors and descendants in
direct series from father to son; these persons together constitute the
right lineal male line. Out of this trunk line emerge the several collateral
lines, male and female, numbered outwardly; in einfachster Form with
one brother and one sister etc:
ist collateral line: male, my brother and his descendants; female: my sister
and her descendants
2nd coll. line:
male, my father's brother and his descendants; female:
my father's sister u. her descendants, male, my mother's
brother and his descendants; female: my mother's sister
and her descendants.
$d coll. line:
on thefather's side: male: my grandfather's brother and his
descdts; female: my gdfathers sister and her descendants,
on the mother's side: my grandmother's brother and his
descdts; female: my gdmother's sister and her descendants.
4th coll. line:
great grandfather's brother and sister and their respective
greatgrandmother's brother and sister and ... ditto ... ditto.
Jth colL line:
great-great grandfather's brother and sister and their
respective descendants.
great-great grandmother's brother and sister and
... ditto
Habe ich several brothers u. sisters, so constituiren sie mit ihren descendants
so many independent lines, aber zusam(m)en bilden sie my first collateral line
in 2 branches, a male and a female etc etc.
Dies Zeug einfach summirt dch d. Roman civilians [Pandects lib. X X X V III,
title X. Degradibus etadfinibus et nominibus eorum; u. Institutes ofJustini(an)17
lib. III. title V : 18 De gradibus cognationis];19 adoptirt dch principal
European nations.
Römer geben bes. Namen: patruus (for uncle on father’s side) u. amita
(für aunt on father’s side);
avunculus (uncle on mother’s side) u. matertera
(for aunt on mother’s side)
avus, grandfather, gibt avunculus (a little grandfather); Matertera
soil herkommen v. mater u. altera = another mother. - D. Erse,
Scandinavian u. Slavonic haben nicht diese röm. method of description
The 2 radical forms - the classificatory u. the descriptive yield nearly the
exact line of demarcation between the barbarous u. civilised nations.
Powerful influences existed to perpetuate the systems of consanguinity after
the conditions under which each originated had been modified or had altogether
disappeared. ) In so complicated system wie d. Turanian entwickelte sich
natürlich divergence in minor particulars. D. system of consanguinity des Tamil
people of South India u. das der Seneca-Iroquois, of New York, sind noch
identisch through zoo relationships; a modifiedform of the system - standing
alone - that of the Hindi, Bengali, Marathi u. other people of North India,
ist combination d. Aryan u. Turanian systems. A civilised people, the
Brahmins, coalesced with a barbarous stock, lost their language in the
new vernaculars named, which retain the grammatical structure of the
aboriginal speech, wozu d. Sanskrit 90% of its vocables gab. Ihre 2
systems of consanguinity came into collision, the one founded on monogamy
or syndyasmy u. the other upon plural marriages in the group.
Unter d. Indian tribes von North America the family syndyasmian; aber lebten
generally20 injoint-tenement houses u. practised communism within the household.
Je mehr wir niedersteigen in d. direction d. punaluan u. consanguine
families, the household group becomes larger, with more persons crowded
together in the same apartmt. The coast tribes in Vene%u(e)la, wo d.
family punaluan gewesen zu sein scheint, are represented by the Spanish
discoverers (Herrera's: History of America) as living in bell-shaped houses,
each containing 160 persons. Husbands u. wives lived together in a group in
the same house.
Part III. Ch. I I The Consanguine Family.
Existirt in primitivster Form nicht mehr selbst unter lowest savages. Sie
ist aber bewiesen dch a system of consanguinity and affinity welches für
zahllose Jahrhunderte überlebt hat the marriage customs in which it
originated. - D. Malayan system; it defines the relationships wie sie nur in
einer consanguine family existiren konnten; es besitzt an antiquity of un­
known duration; d. inhabitants of Polynesia included it in this system,
obgleich d. eigtlichen Malays es in einigen Punkten modificirt haben.
Hawaiian u. Rotuman forms typical; t(h)e simplest, therefore the oldest.
Alle consanguinei, near u. remote, classified under 5 categories:
ist category: Ego, my brothers u. sisters, my first, second and more remote male
and fem ale cousins, are all without distinction m y brothers and
sisters, (w ord cousin here used in our sense, the relationship
being u n kn ow n in Polynesia.)
2t category: M y father and mother, together with their brothers and sisters, and
their first, second, and more remote cousins are all my parents.
$t category: M y grandfathers and grandmothers, on father’s side and m other’s
side, w ith their brothers and sisters, and their several cousins,
are m y grandparents.
4t category: my sons and daughters, with there several cousins, are all my
// category: my grandsons and granddaughters, w ith their several cousins, are
all my grandchildren.
F ern er: all the individuals o f the same grade or category are brothers and sisters
to each other.
T h e 5 categories or grades in the M alayan system appears auch in d.
“ N ine Grades or relations” o f the Chinese mit 2 additional ancestors u.
2 additional descendants.
T h e w ives o f m y several brothers, o w n and collateral, are my wives as well
as theirs; fü r d. fem ale, the husbands o f her several sisters, o w n and co l­
lateral, are also her husbands.
T h e several collateral lines are b rou g h t into and merged in the lineal line,
ascending as w ell as d escen d in g; so that the ancestors and descendants o f
m y collateral brothers and sisters becom e m ine as w ell as theirs.
A ll the members o f each grade are reduced to the same level in their relationships,
w ith ou t regard to nearness or rem oteness in num erical degrees. A u ch
bei ändern Polynesian tribes - ausser H awaiians u. R otum ans - dies S ystem ;
so unter den Marquesas Islanders u. d. Maoris o f New Zealand; den Samoans,
Kusaiens, K ing's M ill Islanders o f Micronesia; zw eifellos in every inhabitant
island o f Pacific except w here it verges upon the Turanian.
System based auf: intermarriage %wischen own brothers and sisters, andgradually
enfolding the collateral brothers and sisters as the range o f the conjugal system
widened. In dieser consanguine fam ily the husbands lived in polygyny u. d.
wives in polyandry. It w o u ld be difficult to show any other possible beginning
o f the fam ily in the primitive period. A ll traces o f it had not disappeared
am ong the H awaiians at the epoch o f their d iscovery —
T h e system also founded upon the intermarriage o f own and collateral brothers
and sisters in a group. | T h e husband in diesem Sinn weiss nicht ob dies
od. jenes K in d sein eignes Fabrikat; es ist sein Kind, w eil d. K in d einer
seiner Frauen, die er mit seinen brothers, o w n od. collateral gem ein hat.
D ie Frau kann daggen ihre K in d er v o n denen ihrer sisters unterscheiden;
sie w äre ihre step-mother; diese “ C ategorie” existirt aber nicht im S ystem ;
ihrer Schwesters K in d er also ihre K in d er. D ie Kinder dieser gem einsam en
A h n en könnten sich zw ar v o n m ütterlicher Seite unterscheiden, aber
nicht v o n väterlicher: sind daher alle Geschwister.
1 07
T h e marriage relationship extended w herever the relationship o f brother and
sister w as recognized to exist; each broth er h avin g as m any w ives as he
had sisters, o w n or collateral, and each sister as m any husbands as she
had brothers, o w n or collateral.
W h erever the relationship o f wife is fou nd in the collateral line, that o f
husband m ust be recogn ized in the lineal, and vice versa.
U nter d. Kajfern v. Südafrika d. w ives m einer Cousins - father's brother's son,
father's sister's son, mother's brother's son, m other’s sister's son - are alike m y
w iv e s .21
The larger the group recognising the marriage relation, the less the evil o f close
1820 the A m erican missions established in the Sandwich islands, w ere
sh o ck ed 22 at the sexual relations; they fanden dort die punaluan fam ily,
w ith o w n sisters and brothers n ot entirely excluded, the males liv in g in
polygyny, the females in polyandry, the people had not attained the organisation
in gentes. U nw ahrscheinlich dass d. actualfam ily am ong the H aw aiians was
as large as the g rou p united in the m arriage relation. Necessity would
compel its subdivision into smaller groups fo r the procurement o f subsistence, and
fo r mutual protection; individuals passed w hsclich at pleasure from one o f
these subdivisions into another in the punaluan as w e ll as consanguine fam ilies,
g iv in g rise to that apparent desertion b y husbands and w iv es o f each
other and b y parents o f their children m entioned b y R ev. H iram B ingham
(M issionary A m erik., in Sandw ich islands) Communism in living m ust have
prevailed bo th in the consanguine and in the punaluan fam ily als require­
ment o f their condition. I t still prevails generally among savage and barbarous
tribes, [each smaller fam ily w o u ld be a m iniature o f the group.]
U eber Chinese system o f 9 Grades see “ Systems o f Consanguinity etc p. 415,
p. 432.
In P lato ’s Timaeus (Ch. II) all consanguinei in the Ideal R ep ublic to fall
into 5 categories, in w h ich the w o m en w ere to be in com m on as w ives
and the children in com m on as to parents. (.steh meine Ausgabe p . 70/ erste
Columne) H ier dieselben 5 prim ary grades o f relations. Plato bekannt
m it hellenischen u. pelasgischen traditions reaching back in the region
o f barbarism etc. Seine grades exact die der Hawaiians.
D . state o f society indicated by the consanguine fam ily points to an anterior
condition o f promiscuous intercourse (in der H orde!) trotz D a rw in (See Descent
o f Man II, 360) Sobald d. Horde w o u ld break up into smaller groups fo r
subsistence, it w o u ld fall v o n promiscuity into consanguine fam ilies, w elches
die first “ organisedform o f society."
Part I I I . Ch. I l l The Punaluan Family.
E xisted in Europe, A sia , Am erica w ith in the historical period, in Polynesia
w ithin the present century; w id ely prevailin g in the Status o f Savagery,
rem ained in some instances among tribes advanced into the Lower Status o f
Barbarism, u. im case der Britons, am ong tribes im M iddle Status o f
G eh t h ervo r aus consanguine fam ily dch gradual exclusion o f own brothers and
sisters from the marriage relation u. com m encing in (i)solated cases, in­
troduced partially at first, then becom ing general, and finally universal
am ong the advan cing tribes, still in savagery . . . illustrates the operation
o f the principle o f natural selection.
In dem Australian class system (sieh später) evident, that their prim ary
object the exclusion o f own brothers and sisters from the m arriage relation,
w h d (see the descents o f these classes p . 42/) the collateral brothers and sisters
were retained in that relation. In d. Australian punaluan group w ie in der
Hawaiian the brotherhood o f the husbands form ed the bases o f the m arriage
relation o f one grou p, and the sisterhood o f the wives o f the other . . . T h e
Australian organisation into classes upon sex - w h ich g av e birth to the pun­
aluan gro u p , w h ich contained the germ o f the gens - prevailed w ah r­
scheinlich unter alien tribes o f m ankind w h o afterw ards fell under the
gentile organization. V o n der organisation into gentes, w h ich perm anently
excluded brothers and sisters from the m arriage relation b y an organic
law , letstere noch frequently involved in Punaluan fam ily, w ie bei d. Hawaiian,
die keine organization in gentes noch d. Turanian system o f consanguinity
1) Punaluan fam ily: i860 said Judge Lorin Andrews, o f H on olu lu , in a letter
accom panying a schedule o f the H aw aiian system o f co n san gu in ity: “ the
relationship o f pünalüa is rather am phibious. It | arose from the fact that
2 or m ore brothers w ith their w iv es, or tw o or m ore sisters w ith their
husbands, w ere inclined to possess each other in com m on: but the m odern
use o f the w o rd is that o f dear friend, or intimate companion” . W h at Judge
A n d rew s says they w ere inclined to do, and w h ich m ay then have been a
declining practice, their system o f consanguinity proves to have been once
universal among them. W eiter b ezeu gt dch d. M issionäre (see p . 42/, 428)
So schrieb R ev. Artem us Bishop, lately deceased, one o f the oldest m is­
sionaries in these islands, der dem M organ ebenfalls 1860 a similar schedule
schickte “ T h is confusion o f relationships is the result o f the ancient custom
among relatives o f the living together o f husbands and wives in common.” T h en
punaluan fam ily group consists of: one g r o u p : several brothers and their wives;
other group: several sisters with their husbands; jede g rou p includin g the
children o f the m arriages.
B e i23 d. Hawaiians a man calls his wife's sister his wife; all the sisters o f his
w ife, o w n as w ell as collateral, are also his wives. B u t the husband o f his
wife's sister he calls pünalüa, i.e. his intimate companion; and all the husbands
o f the several sisters o f his w ife the same. They werejointly intermarried in
the group. D iese husbands w aren prob ably keine Brüder, sonst w o u ld the
blood relationship have prevailed über die affineal; but their wives were sisters,
own and collateral, in such case the sisterhood o f the wives the basis upon which
the group was formed, and the husbands stood to each other in the relation o f
D ie andre gro u p rests upon the brotherhood o f the husbands, and a w om an
calls her husband’s brother her husband; alle B rüder ihres M annes, o w n
and collateral, w aren auch ihre husbands; bu t the wife o f her husbands
brother stands to her in the relationship o f pünalüa. D iese w ives generally
nicht sisters, obgleich zw eifellos exceptions in beiden G ru p p en [so dass
auch Brüder Schw estern u. Schw estern B rüder in com m on hatten] A lle
diese w ives zu einander in relationship o f pünalüa.
Brothers ceased to m arry their o w n sisters, and after the gentile organ i­
zation had w o rk ed upon society its com plete results, their collateral
sisters as w ell. B u t in the interval they shared their remaining wives in common.
In like manner, sisters ceased m arrying their o w n brothers, and after a
lon g period o f time, their collateral brothers; bu t they shared their
rem aining husbands in com m on.
M arriages in pünalüan groups explain the relationships o f the Turanian
system o f consanguinity. G ie b t nun verschidne Beispiele v o n U eberleben
über savagery hinaus o f punaluan custom ; Caesar D e bell. gall, über
Britons in the M iddle Period o f Barbarism; Caesar sagt: “ U xores habent dexi
duodexique inter se communes, et maxime fratres cumfratribus parentesque cum
liberis.” 24 Barbarian m others have n ot 10-12 sons, die als Brüder sich
gem einscftliche W eiber halten k ö n n ten ; aber d. Turanian system o f consan­
guinity liefert viele Brüder, w eil male cousins, near and rem ote, fall in this
category w ith Ego. D as “parentis que cum liberis” w ahrscheinlich falsche
Auffassung d. Cäsar fo r several sisters sharing their husbands. Herodot über
Massagetae in M iddle Status o f Barbarism (1. I, c. 216). H erodots Phrase:
„γυναίκα μέν γαμέει έκαστος, ταύτησι δέ έπικοινα χρέωνται.” 25 scheint
au f B egin n d. synd<y)asmyan fam ily hinzudeuten; jeder husband paired
w ith one w ife, w h o thus becam e his principal w ife, but w ith in the lim its
o f the g ro u p husbands and w ives continued in com m on. D ie M assagetae,
obgleich ignorant o f iron, fo u gh t on horseback arm ed w ith battleaxes o f
copper and w ith copper-pointed spears, and m anufactured and used the
w agon , (άμαξα) A lso nicht promiscuity supposable. Herodot 1. IV , c. 104
sagt auch v. d. Agathyrsi: “ έπίκοι,νον δέ των γυναικών την μεΐξιν ποιευνται,
ινα κασίγνητοί τε άλλήλων έωσι καί οίκήιοι έόντες πάντες μήτε φθόνω μ ή τ’
έχ·9·εϊ χρέωνται ές άλλήλους.” 26
Punaluan marriage in the group erklärt besser diese u. sim ilar usages in other
tribes m entioned b y H erodotus, than p o lygam y or general prom iscuity.
Herrera, H ist, o f Am erica, sagt: (das g ilt v. Z eit d. first navigators w h o
visited the coast tribes o f Venezuela?) “ T h ey observe no law or rule in
m atrim ony, bu t to o k as m any w ives as they w o u (l)d , and they as m any
husbands, quitting one another at pleasure, w ith o u t reckon in g any w ro n g
done on any part. T h ere w as no such th in g as jealousy am ong them , all
liv in g as best pleased them , w ith o u t takin g offense at one a n o th e r.. . ------------ the houses they dwelt in were common to a ll, and so spacious that they
contained 160 persons, strongly built, th ou gh covered w ith palm tree leaves,
and shaped like a bell.” | T h ese tribes used earthen vessels, w ere in Lower
State o f Barbarism. D e rselb e27 Herrera, speaking o f the coast tribes o f
B ra zil: “ T h e y liv e in bohios, or large thatched cottages, o f w h ich there are
about 8 in every village, full o f people, w ith their nests or ham m ocks to
lye in
they live in a beastly manner, w ith o u t any regard to justice
or decency.”
Bei d. Entdeckung o f N orth Am erica in its several parts, the punaluan family
seems to have entirely disappeared; synd(j)asm ian form o f family, aber environed
with the remains o f the ancient conjugal system . E in e custom z.B . noch
jetzt anerkannt in m indestens 40 N orth American Indian tribes. H eirathete
ein M ann d. älteste Tochter einer fam ily, so dch custom entitled to a ll her
sisters as wives when they attained the m arriageable age. D as R echt selten
enforced, w e gen d. Schw ierigkeit several families to m aintain, obgleich
Polygyny28 allgemein anerkannt as privilege o f the males. Früher - pünalüa - 29
o w n sisters w en t into the m arriage relation on the basis o f sisterhood;
nach A bsterben d. pünalüan fam ily the righ t rem ained w ith the husband
o f the eldest sister to becom e the husband o f all her sisters, i f he chose.
D ies genuine revival o f the ancient pünalüan custom .
2) Origin o f the Organisation into gentes.
Partial development o f gentes in the Status o f savagery, com plete d evelop ­
m ent in the Lower Status o f barbarism. Germ o f gentes fou nd in the Australian
classes w ie in d. Hawaiian punaluan group. T h e gentes are also found am ong
the Australians, based upon the classes, with the apparent manner o f their
organisation out o f them ------ Its (the gentile organization’s) birth must be
sought in pre-existing elements o f society, and its maturity w o u ld be expected
to o ccu r lo n g after its origination.
Two o f thefundamental rules o f the gens in its archaicform fou n d in the A u stral­
ian classes, the prohibition o f intermarriage between brothers and sisters, and
descent in the fem ale30 line. . . . und w h en gens appeared, the children are found
in the gens o f their mothers. N atural adaptation o f the classes to give birth to the
gens sufficiently obvious . .. U nd in A ustralien the fa c t: gens herefound [actually
in connection with an antecedent and more archaic organisation, die still the unit
o f a social system, P latz später dch die gens eingenom m en.
Germ o f gens ebso fou n d in Hawaiian punaluan group, aber confined to the
fem ale branch o f the custom , w o several sisters, o w n and collateral, shared
their husbands in com m on. D iese Schw estern, m it ihren K in d ern u.
descendants th ro u gh fem ales, liefern the exact membership o f a gens o f the
archaic type. D escen t hier n o th w d g traced dch fem ales, da paternity d.
children nicht mit certainty ascertainable. Sobald diese specifische Form
der E he in the g ro u p etablirte Institution, the foundation fo r a gens existed.
D . H awaiians did n o t turn this natural punaluan g ro u p into a gens, d.h. in
eine Organisation beschränkt a u f diese M ütter, K in d er u. A b k o m m e n in
der w eiblichen Linie. A b e r zu einer analogen G ru p p e, resting upon the
sisterhood o f the mothers, or to the sim ilar A ustralian gro u p , resting upon
the same principle o f union, the origin o f the gens m ust be ascribed.
I t took this group as it found it, and organised certain o f its members, w ith
certain o f their posterity, into a gens on the basis o f kin.
T h e gens sprang up in a fam ily, w h ich consisted o f a group o f persons co­
incident substantially with the membership o f a gens.
Sobald sich d. gens voll entwickelt u. ihre fu ll influence on society ausübte “ wives
became scarce in place o f their form er abundance,” w eil d. gens tended “ to
contract the si%e o f the punaluan group, and finally to o verth ro w it.” D .
syndyasmische Fam ilie w d e gradually prod u ced w ith in the punaluan,
nachdem d. gentile organization becam e predom inant o ve r ancient
society. A ls d. syndyasm ische Fam ilie zu erscheinen begann u. d. puna­
luan grou ps zu verschw inden, w d en wives sought by purchase and capture.
O rigin atin g in the punaluan grou p, sprengte d. gentile organization diese
ihre G eburtsstätte.
3) The Turanian or Ganowanian System o f Consanguinity.
T h is system u. d. gentile organization, w h en in its archaic form , w erden
gew ö h n lich zusam m en gefunden. D . fam ily active principle, steht nie
still, passes v o n a low er form into a high er one. Systems o f consanguinity
sind dagegen passiv; recording the progress made by the fam ily at long intervals
apart, and only changing radically when thefam ily has radically changed. [Ebenso
verhält es sich m it politischen, religiösen,juristischen, philosophischen System en
überhaupt.] | D . Turanian system o f consanguinity drü ckt aus d. actual
relationships wie sie in der Punaluan fam ily existiren; es bew eist seinerseits
die Praeexistenz dieser Fam ilie. D . System geh t herab bis a u f unsere Z eit
in A sien u. A m erica, nachdem d. Familienform, hence Eheform , aus der es
entsprang, verschw d en u. d. punaluan fam ily ersetzt dch d. syndyasm ische.
D ie substantiell identischen Form en des Verw andtscftsystem <s) der
Seneca-Iroquois (used as typical f. d. Ganowanian tribes o f Am erica) u. d.
Tam il people v . Südindien (als typical fo r d. Turanian tribes o f A sia ) haben
gem ein über 200 relationships o f the same person, (sieh d. Tabellen p. 447
N atürlich einige, aber nicht substantielle diversities d. System s bei
different tribes u. nations. A ll alike salute b y kin ; unter d. Tam il people,
w h en the person addressed is younger than the speaker, the term o f relationship
m ust be used; w h en older, salute b y kin or b y the personal nam e; bei d.
American aborigenes, the address m ust alw ays be by the term o f relationship.
D ies System w as also the means b y w h ich each individual in the ancient
gentes w as able to trace his connection w ith every m em ber o f his gens,
bis m on ogam y d. Turanian System niederwarf.
B ei d. Seneca-Iroquois the relationships o f G randfather (H o c’-sote),
grandm other (O c ’-sote), grandson (H a-yä’-da) u. granddaughter (K ayä’-da) sind d. m ost rem ote recogn ized in aufsteigender u. absteigender
D . relationships o f brother and sister sind nicht abstract, sondern in d.
doppelten F orm v. “ älter” u. “ jü n ger” , m it special terms fo r each:
E lder Brother H a ’-ge; Younger Brother - H a ’-ga; j E lder Sister: A h ’-je;
Younger Sister Kd-ga
T h e relationship o f the same person to E g o in m any cases different m it
change o f the sex o f the E g o .
1st collateral line: für male Seneca his brother’s son and daughters are his son
and daughter (H a-ah’-wuk u. Ka-ah’-wuk) u. beide nennen ihn Vater
(Hä-nih) E ben so seines brother’s grandchildren his grandsons (H a-yä’-da
(singular) u. granddaughters (K a-yä’-da); beide nennen ihn (H o c’-sote)
grandfather. A lso his brothers children u. grandchildren in same category
with his own.
Ferner: fü r male Seneca his sister’s son and daughter are his nephew
(Ha-yä-wan-da u. niece (.Ka-ya-wan-da), each calling him uncle (H ocn o ’-seh).31 So relationships o f nephew u. niece restricted to the children
o f a man’s sisters, o w n and collateral.
T h e children o f this nephew and niece w ere his grandchildren, as before,
u. he their grandfather.
F ü r Seneca fem ale einige dieser relationships different; her brother’s sonZi
and daughter are her nephew (H a-soh’-neh) and niece (K a-so h ’-neh) u.
beide nennen sie aunt (Ah-ga’-hue) (andre terms als fü r nephew u. niece
des male Seneca) T h e children dieser nephew s u. nieces sind ihre
H er sister’s son and daughter are her son and daughter, jeder v . beiden
nennt sie M utter (N oh -yeh’) u. deren children sind ihre grandchildren,
nennen sie grandmother (O c ’-sote). T h e wives o f these sons and nephews are
her daughters-in-law (Ka-sä) u. d. husbands dieser daughters u. w iv es are
her sons in law (Oc-na-hose) u. they apply to her the prop er correlative.
U nd collateral line. F or male u.fem ale Seneca: father’s brother his or her father,
calls her son or daughter. A lso all the brothers o f a father are placed in
the relation o f a father. T h eir sons and daughters are his or her brothers
and sisters, elder or you n ger. A lias: the children o f brothers are in the
relationship o f brothers and sisters.
F ü r male Seneca, the children o f these brothers are his sons and daughters, their
children his grandchildren; die children o f these sisters his nephews and
nieces, and the children o f the latter his grand-children.
F ü r fem ale Seneca: the children o f these brothers her nephews u. nieces, the
children o f these sisters her sons and daughters, and these children alike
her grandchildren.
D . father’s sister ist d. Seneca’s aunt, calls him nephew, i f he is a male.
T h e relationship o f aunt restricted to the father’s sister and the sisters o f
such other persons as stand to Seneca in the relation o f a father, to the
exclusion o f the mother's sisters. T h e father's sister's children are cousins
F ü r male Seneca: the children o f his male cousins are his sons and daughters u.
o f his fem ale cousins his nephews and nieces.
F ü r fem ale Seneca the id. id. are her nephews u. nieces and ditto her sons
and daughters.
A ll children o f the latter his or her grandchildren. |
F ür male Seneca: mother's brother is uncle, calls him nephew; the relationship
o f uncle hier restricted to the mother's brothers, o w n and collateral, to the
exclusion o f the father’s brothers. H is children sind d. male Seneca’s
cousins; the children o f his male cousins are his sons and daughters, o f his
fem ale cousins his nephews and nieces;
F or fem ale Seneca the children o f all her cousins are her grandchildren. 33
F ür male: The mother's sisters are my mothers, the mother sister's children
m y brothers and sisters, elder and youn ger. T h e children o f these brothers
are m y sons and daughters, o f these sisters m y nephews and n ieces; and
the children o f the latter my grandchildren.
F ü r fem ale: reversed the same relationships as before.
F or male Seneca: Each o f the wives o f these several brothers and o f these several
male cousins is his sister-in-law, (A h-ge-ah’-ne-ah) each o f them calls h im :
brother-in-law (H a-ya’-o).
E ach o f the husbands o f these several sisters andfemale cousins is m y brotherin-law.
Traces o f the punaluan custom remain here and there in the marriage rela­
tionship o f the A m erican ab o rigen es;
In Mandan m y b roth er’s w ife is my wife, in Pawnee u. Arickaree the sam e;
in Crow m y husband's brother's wife is “ my comrade” ; in Creek, “ m y
present occupant” , in Munsee “ my friend” , in Winnebago u. Achaotinne
“ my sister” . M y wife's sister's husband is in som e tribes “ my brother” , in
others “ m y brother-in-law ” , in Creek “ my little separater” w h atever
that m ay mean.
III d collateral side: hier nur one branch (4” entsprechend den vorh ergeh den) considered.
m y father's father's brother is m y grandfather, calls me his grandson.
It places these brothers in the relation o f grandfathers and this prevents
collateral ascendants from passing beyond this relationship. T h e principle
w h ich merges the collateral lines in the lineal line works upwards as well as
downwards. T h e son o f his grandfather is m y father, his children m y
brothers and sisters, the children o f these sisters are m y sons and
daughters, o f these sisters m y nephew and nieces; and their children
m y grandchildren. W ith E g o being a fem ale the same relationships
reversed as in previous cases.
I V th collateral line. A u ch nur eine branch dieser line betrachtet.
M y grandfather's father's brother is m y grandfather; his son also m y
grandfather; the son o f the latter m y father; his son and daughter m y
brother and sister, elder or y o u n ger; and their children and grand­
children fo llo w in the same relationship to E g o as in other cases.
V col. line - classification same as in the corresponding branches o f lid ,
except o f additional ancestors.
In Seneca-Iroquois terms fo r father-in-law (O c-na’-hose), fo r a w ife ’s
father, and H ä-gä'-sä fo r a husband's father. Form er term also used fo r
a son-in-law. Term s also fo r stepfather (H o c’-no-ese) u. stepmother
(O c’-no-ese), stepson (Ha-no) u. stepdaughter (K a-no) In a num ber o f
tribes 2 fathers-in-law and 2 m others-in-law are related, and terms to
express the connection.
In about one h a lf o f all the relationships named, the Turanian system is
identical with the Malayan. Seneca u. Tam il unterscheiden sich v o n
H aw aiian in d. relationships w h ich depended on interm arriage or
non-interm arriage o f brothers and sisters. In d. 2 ersteren z.B . m y
sister’s son is m y nephew , in d. latter m y son. T h e change o f relation­
ships resulting from the substitution der punaluan in place o f the consanguine
fam ily turns the Malayan in (to ) the Turanian system.
In Polynesia fam ily punaluan; system o f consanguinity bleibt Malayan;
In Northamerica fam ily syndyasmian, system o f consanguinity bleibt Turanian;
In Europe u. Western A sia fam ily becomes monogamian, system o f con­
sanguinity blieb fü r Z eitlan g Turanian, bis fallend in decadence u. succeeded b y the Aryan. | T h e Malayan system m ust have prevailed generally
in A sia before the Malayan migration to the Islands o f the Pacific;
the system (Turanian) transm itted in the M alayan form to the ancestors
o f the three fam ilies, w ith the streams o f the b lo o d from a common
A siatic source; afterw ard m odified into its present form b y the rem ote
ancestors o f the Turanian and G anow anian families.
T h e principal relationships o f the Turanian system created b y punaluan
fam ily; several o f the m arriage relationships have changed. T h e
brotherhood o f the husbands and the sisterhood o f the w ives form ed
the basis o f the relation fu lly expressed b y the H aw aiian custom o f
pünalüa. T h eoretically the fam ily o f the period was co-extensive w ith the
group united in the marriage34 relation; but practically, it m ust have
subdivided into a number o f smaller fam ilies fo r convenience o f habitation and
subsistence. T h e brothers, b y 10 and 12, o f the Britons, m arried to each
other’s w ives, m ay indicate the si%e o f an ordinary subdivision o f a pünalüan
Communism in living seems to have originated in the necessities o f the
consanguine fam ily, to have been continued in the punaluan, and transm itted
to the syndyasmian unter d. A m erican aborigenes, w ith w h o m it remained a practice d ow n to the epoch o f their d iscovery - (and the South
Slavonians? and even Russians to a certain degree?)
P a rt I I I . C h. I V . The Syndyasmian and the Patriarchal fam ilies.
Syndyasmian od. pairing fam ily gefunden bei E n td ecku n g d. American
aborigenes unter der Portion derselben w h o w ere in the Lower State o f
Barbarism; married pairs, fo rm in g clearly m arked though but partially
individualizedfamilies. In dieser fam ily der germ der monogamian fam ily.
V erschiedn e d. Syndyasmischen fam ilies usually found in one house [wie bei
Südslawen: der monogamischen Fam ilien], forming a communal household [wie
Südslaw en u. in som e d egree: Russian peasants v o r u. n a ch 35 Leibeign enem ancption] w o rin the principle o f communism in living was practised.
D ies fact bew eist that the fam ily was too feeble an organisation to face alone
the hardships o f life; aber founded u p o n marriage between single pairs.
D . w om an w a r jetzt etwas mehr als d. principal wife o f her husband; birth o f
children tended to cem ent the union and m ake it perm anent.
Marriage Ider fou nd ed n o t upon “ sentim ent” , bu t u p on convenience and
necessity. D . mothers arranged the marriages o f their children, ohne deren
previou s consent od. k n o w led ge; o ft so strangers b rou gh t into m arriage
rela tio n ; at the proper tim e they w ere inform ed w h en the sim ple nuptial
cerem ony w as to be perform ed. So usages bei Iroquois u. m any other
Indian tribes. Prior to the marriage, presents to the gentile relations o f the
bride, partaking in the nature o f purchasing gifts, becam e feature o f these
m atrim onial transactions. The relation continued only at the pleasure o f the
parties, M ann oder Frau. N ach u. nach gebild<e)t u. K ra ft gew inn end
p u blic sentiment g egen diese separations. W h en dissension arose, erst
V erm itd u n g versucht dch d. gentile kindred o f each party. H a lf das nicht,
so verliess Weib d. H aus ihres Manns, nahm m it ihren personal effects auch
d. Kinder, regarded as exclusive her own; w o d. w ife's kindred predominated in
d. communal household, w as gew ö h n lich der Fall, the husband left the home o f
his wife. So continuance o f marriage relations at the option o f the parties.
R ev. A sh er36 Wright, m any years a missionary among the Senecas, w ro te to
M o rga n in 1873 hierüber: “ A s to their fam ilies, when occupying the old
long-houses . . . som e one clan predominated, the women taking in husbands from
the otherzn clans; and sometimes, fo r a n ovelty, some o f their sons bringing in
their young wives until they felt brave en ou gh to leave their m others.
Usually, the fem ale portion ruled the house... The stores were in common; but
w o e to the luckless husband or lo v er w h o w as too shiftless to do his
share o f the p rovid in g. N o m atter h o w m any children, or w h atever
g o o d s he m ight h ave in the house, he m igh t at any tim e be ordered to
p ick up and b u d ge, durfte nicht attem pt to disobey. T h e house w o u ld
be too h o t fo r him , . . . he m ust retreat to his o w n clan; or, as w as often
done, g o and start a new m atrim onial alliance in som e other. The women
were the great power among the clans, as everywhere else. T h e y did n ot hesitate,
w h en occasion required, ito knock off the horns', as it w as technically called,
from the head o f a chief, and send him back to the ranks o f the w arriors.
The original nomination o f the chiefs also always rested with th em '' C f. Bachofen:
1 16
“ D a s Mutterrecht” , w o gyn ecocracy discussed. | U nter d. Iroquois,
barbarians in Lower Status o f barbarism, bu t o f h igh m ental grade, and
am ong the equally advanced Indian tribes generally, verlangten d.
M änner under severe penalties K eu sch heit v . d. W eibern, aber nicht reci­
procal obligation. Polygamy universally recognised as the righ t o f the
males, w as in practice lim ited from inability to support the indulgence.
In syndyasmian fam ily — absence o f exclusive cohabitation. T h e old
conjugal system rem ained, but under reduced u. restricted form s.
A eh n lich unter d. Village Indians in the M iddle Status o f barbarism. N ach
Clavigero (H ist, o f M exico) settled the parents all m arriages. “ A priest
tied a point o f the huepilli (gow n ) o f the bride w ith the tilm atli (m ande
o f the bridegroom ) and in this cerem ony the m atrim onial contract
chiefly consisted.” Herrera (H istory o f Am erica) says “ a ll that the bride
brought w as kept in m em ory, that in cases they should be unm arried again,
as w as usual am ong them , the goo d s m ight be parted; the man taking the
daughters, and the wife the son, with liberty to marry again.” P olyga m y a
recogn ized righ t o f the males am ong the V illa g e Indians, m ore generally
practiced than am ong the less advanced tribes.
In the punaluan fam ily was more or less o f pairing fro m the necessities o f the
social state, each m an h avin g a principal wife am ong a num ber o f w ives
and vice versa; so that tendency in the direction o f the syndyasmian fam ily.
D ies result hptsclich h ervorgebracht dch d. organisation into gentes.
In dieser organisation:
1) Prohibition o f intermarriage in the gens excluded own brothers and sisters,
and also the children o f own sisters, da diese alle in der gens. B ei subdivision
der gens the proh ibition o f interm arriage — w ith all the descendants
in the fem ale line o f each ancestor in the gens — fo llo w ed its branches,
fo r lo n g periods o f tim e, as show n w as the case am ong the Iroquois.
2) T h e structure der gens created a prejudice agst the marriage o f consan­
guinei; w a r schon sehr general unter d. A m erican a(b o)rigen es zu r Z eit
ihrer E n td ecku n g. Z .B . unter d. Iroquois none o f the b lo o d relations
enum erated w ere m arriageable. Since e s38 w a r n ö th ig to seek w ives
from other gentes they began to be acquired by negotiation u. by purchase;
scarcity o f w ives statt previou s abundance, so gradually contracted the
numbers o f the punaluan group. Such grou p s h o w ev e r disappeared,
o bgleich d. system o f consanguinity remains.
3)39 In seeking w ives they did n ot confine them selves to their own, nor
even friendly tribes, captured them by force from hostile tribes; hence Indian
usage to spare the lives o f fem ale captives, while the males were p u t to death.
W h en w ives acquired b y purchase and b y capture, they n ot so readily
shared as before. T h is tended to cut o ff that portion o f the theoretical
group not immediately associatedfor subsistence; reduced still m ore the size
o f the fam ily and the range o f the conju gal system . Practically g ro u p
lim ited itself, from the first, to o w n brothers w h o shared their w iv es
in com m on and o w n sisters w h o shared their husbands in com m on.
4) G en s created a higher structure o f society than before know n . D ie
m arriage o f unrelated persons created a m ore v ig o ro u s stock physically
and m entally; 2 advancing tribes blended, the new sku ll and brain would
widen and lengthen to the sum o f the capabilities o f both.
T h e propensity to pair, n o w so p o w erfu l in the civilised races, also nicht
normal to mankind, b u t a growth through experience, like all the great passions
u. pow ers o f the mind.
Warfare under barbarians — from m ore im proved w eapons and stronger
incentives — zerstört m ore life als Krieg unter savages. T h e males trieben
stets the trade o f figh tin g; left females in excess; this strengthened the
conjugal system created b y m arriages in the grou p , retarded the advance­
ment der syndyasmian fam ily. D a g eg e n improvement in subsistence, fo llo w in g
the cultivation o f mai%e u. plants, favored the general advancem ent der
fam ily (bei d. A m erican aborigenes) T h e m ore stable such a fam ily, the
more its individuality developed. H avin g taken a refuge in a communal house­
hold, in w h ich 2lgroup o f suchfam ilies succeeded thepunaluan group, it n o w drew
its support from itself, from the household and the gentes to w h ich the
husbands and w ives respectively belonged. Syndyasmian fam ily springing
up on the confines o f savagery and barbarism , it traversed the M iddle
and greater part o f the Later Period o f barbarism. W d superseded b y a low
form o f the monogamian. O versh ad o w ed b y the conjugal system o f the
tim es, it gained in recogn ition w ith the gradual progress o f society.
M . sagt, w as o ft anwendbar, v o n d. O ld Britons: (in the m iddle status o f
barbarism ), “ they seem to have been savages in their brains, while wearing the
art apparel o f more advanced tribes.”
Iron has been smeltedfrom the ore b y a num ber o f A frican tribes, including
the H ottentots, as far back as our kn o w led ge o f them extends. A fte r
producing the metal by rude processes acquired from foreign sources, they have
succeeded in fabricating | rude instrum ents and w eapons. (463)
D . E n tw icklu n g en müssen studirt w erden in areas w here the institutions
are homogeneous. Polynesia u. Australia best areas fo r the study o f savage
society. N orth u. South Am erica fo r condition o f society in the Lower and
M iddle Status o f Barbarism. M . nim m t an “ A sia tic origin o f the American
aborigines” Their advent in Am erica could n ot h ave40 resulted from a
deliberate migration, bu t due to the accidents o f the sea, and to the great
ocean currents from A sia to the N o rth w est coast. (464)
M iddle State o f barbarism - in 16t century - (splendidly) exem plified b y the
Village Indians o f New M exico, M exico, Central Am erica, Granada, Ecuador
and Peru, w ith its advanced arts and inventions, improved architecture, nascent
manufactures and incipient sciences.
Upper Status o f barbarism - Grecian, Roman, and later on the German tribes.
Patriarchalfam ily o f the Semitic tribes belongs to the Later Period o f Barba­
rism and rem ained fo r a tim e after the commencement o f civilisation. Chiefs
lived in polygamy; dies nicht the materialprinciple o f the patriarchal institution.
W as diese Familienform w esentlich charakterisirt: Organisation o f a
number o f person, bonds and free, into a fam ily, under paternal power, fo r the
purpose o f holding lands, and fo r the care o f flocks and herds. T h o se held to
servitude, and those employed as servants, lived in the marriage relation, and
with the patriarch as their chief, form ed a patriarchal fam ily. Authority over
~~its members and over its property was the materialfa ct. D . Charakteristische:
the incorporation o f numbers in servile and dependent relations, before that time
unknown. Paternal p o w er o ver the g ro u p ; w ith it a high er individuality
o f persons.
So auch d. Roman fam ily under patria potestas. M acht d. pater über L eben
u. T o d seiner K in d er u. descendants, w ie über slaves und servants w h o
form ed the nucleus o f the fam ily and furnished its name; his absolute ownership
o f a ll the property they created. W ith o u t polygam y, the R om an pater fam ilias
was a patriarch and his fam ily a patriarchalfam ily. In m indrem G ra d selbe
Charakteristik der ancient fam ily der Grecian tribes.
T h e patriarchal fam ily m arks the peculiar epoch in hum an progress w hen
the individuality o f the person began to rise above the gens, in w h ich it p reviou sly
had been m erged; its general influence tended p o w erfu lly to the estab­
lishm ent o f the monogamian fam ily . . . Its Hebrew and Roman form s excep­
tional in hum an experience. Paternal authority “ impossible” in the con­
sanguine and punaluan fam ilies; began to appear as a feeble influence in the
syndyasmian fam ily, and fu lly established under monogamy u. beyon d all
bounds o f reason in the patriarchalfam ily o f the Roman type.
P art I I I Ch. V The Monogamian Family.
M od e: patriarchal fam ily - in Latin or Hebrew form - zu r typical fa m ily41
o f prim itive society zu machen. T h e gens, as it appeared in the later period
o f barbarism , was understood, bu t erroneously supposed to be subsequent
in point o f time to the monogamian fam ily. T h e gens w as treated as an ag­
gregation o f fam ilies; aber gens entered gami in phratry, phratry in tribe,
tribe into the n a tio n ; aber fam ily could not enter entirely into the gens, because
husband and wife were necessarily o f different gentes. T h e w ife, d o w n to the
latest period, counted herself o f the gens o f her father, and bore the name
o f his gens under the Rom ans. A s all the parts m ust enter into the w h ole,
the fam ily could not becom e the unit o f the gentile organisation, that place was
held by the gens.
Fam ily42 m odern appearance unter R om an trib e s; bew eist d. B ed eu tg v o n
fam ilia, contains same elem ent as fam ulus = servant. Festus sagt: “ Fam uli
origo ab O scis dependet, apud quod servus Fam ul nom inabun (?) tur,
unde fam ilia vo cata.” 43 A lso in seiner prim airen B edeutg fam ily unbezogen au f d. married pair od. dessen children, sondern in relation to the body
o f slaves and servants w h o labored fo r its maintenance and w ere under the
p o w er o f the paterfamilias. In einigen testam entarischen dispositions ist
Fam ilia used als Equivalent für patrimonium, the inheritance w h ich passed
to the heir. Gajus instit. II, 102. “ A m ico fam iliam suam, id estpatrimonium
suum m ancipio dabat.” 44 W de introducirt in Lateinische G esellscft to
define a n ew organism , the head o f w h ich held w ife and children, and a
b o d y o f servile persons under paternal pow er. Mommsen nennt d .fam ilia
a „ b o d y o f servants” {Roman H ist.) D ieser term also nicht älter als the
iron-cladfamily system | o f th e 45 L atin tribes w h ich came in after field agricul­
ture and after legalised servitude, as w ell as after the separation o f the Greeks
and Romans. [.Fourier charakterisirt E p o ch e der Civilisation dch Monogamy
u. Grund Privateigenthum. D . m oderne Fam ilie enthält im K e im nicht nur
servitus (Sklaverei) sondern auch Leibeigenscft, da sie v o n v o rn herein
B ezieh g a u f Dienste fü r A ckerbau . Sie enthält in M iniatur alle d. A n ta ­
gonism en in sich, die sich später breit en tw ickeln in d. G esellscft u.
ihrem Staat.
M it der syndyasmischen Fam ilie46 K eim der väterlichen A u torität, ent­
w ickelt sich je m ehr d. neue Fam ilie monogamische Charactere annim m t.
Sobald property began to be created in masses u. the desire fo r its transmission to
children had changed descent from the fem ale line to the male, w d e %uerst a rea^
foundation fo r paternal power gelegt. Gajus selbst sagt Inst. I, 5 5. Item in
potestate nostra sunt liberi nostri [auch ju s vitae necisque], quos iustis nuptiis
procreauim us. quod ius proprium ciuium Romanorum est. fere enim nulli alii
sunt homines qui talem in filios suos habent potestatem qualem47 nos habemus. 48
M on og am y appears in a definite form in the Later Period o f Barbarism.
O ld Germans: their institutions homogeneous and indigenous. N a ch Tacitus
marriages strict am ong them ; contented themselves with a single wife, a ve ry
few excepted on account o f their rank; husband b ro u g h t d o w ry to his w ife
(not vice versa), näm lich a caparisoned horse and a shield', with a spear and
sword; b y virtue o f these gifts the wife was espoused (Germania, c. 18). T h e
presents in the nature o f purchasing g ift - zw eifelsoh ne früher fü r gentile
kindred o f the wife - damals schon w en t to bride. “ Singulis uxoribus contenti
sunt” 49 (Germania, c. 18 u. d. W eiber “ septae pudicitia agunt.” 50
W ahrscheinlich fam ily “ sheltered” itself in a communal household (wie Süd­
slaven)51 composed o f related fam ilies. When slavery became an institution,
these households would gradually disappear. [In fact die monogamische fam ily
unterstellt, um selbständig isolated existence zu können, überall a do— mestic class, die u rsprün glich 52 überall direct slaves. ]
Homeric Greeks: Monogamian fam ily o f a low type. T h e treatm ent o f their
fem ale captives reflects the culture o f the period w ith respect to w o m en
in general; tent life53 o f A chilles u. Patroclus; w h atever o f m on ogam y
existed, w as through an enforced constraint upon wives [some degree o f
seclu sion ];
D . change o f descent von d. fem ale line to the male schädlich für P osition u.
Rechte d. Frau u. M u tter; ihre K in d er transferred v o n ihrer gens zu r gens
ihres husband; sie v e rlo r dch m arriage ihre agnatic rights, erhielt kein
E qu ivalen t dafür; v o r dem Change, d. Glieder ihrer eignen gens predominated
in the household; dies g ave full force to the maternal bon d u. m achte women
rather than men the center o f the fam ily. N ach dem change stand sie allein
im household ihres husband, isolated from her gentile kindred. U nder
the prosperous classes her condition o f enforced seclusion u. als primary object
der marriage to beget children in lawful wedlock. (TzaiSoTzoieiG&a.i yvTqcrico^).
V o n A n fan g bis E n d unter d. G riech en a principle o f studied selfishness
am ong the males, tending to lessen the appreciation o f w om en, scarcely
found among savages. T h e usages o f centuries stam ped up on the minds o f
G recian w o m en a sense o f their inferiority. [A ber d. Verhältnis d.
Göttinnen im Olymp zeigt R ückerinnerg an frühere freiere u. einfluss­
reichere P osition der W eiber. D ie Juno herrschsüchtig, die W eisheit
— G ö ttin sp rin gt54 aus K o p f d. Z eu s etc] E s w a r vielleicht . . . dieser Race
nöthig, um aus Syndyasm ian in M on ogam ian System herüberzukom m en.
G reeks blieben barbarians in their treatm ent o f the fem ale sex at the height
o f their civilization; their education superficial, intercourse w ith the
opposite sex denied them , their inferiority inculcated as a principle upon
them, until it came to be accepted as a fa ct by the women themselves. D . w ife n ot
com panion equal to her husband, b u t in the relation o f a daughter.
See Becker: Charicles.
D a d. m o v in g p o w er w h ich b rou g h t in m on ogam y w as - the g ro w th o f
property and the desire fo r its transmission to children - legitimate heirs; the
actual progeny o f the married pair - in the Upper Status o f Barbarism sprang
up - als protection g egen d. survival o f som e portion o f the ancient jura
conjugalia - the new usage: the seclusion o f wives; plan o f life am ong the
civilized G reeks - a system o f female confinement and restraint.
Roman fam ily:
M aterfamilias w as mistress o f the fam ily; w en t into the streets freely
ohne restraint b y her husband, frequented w ith the m en the theaters
and festive banquets; in the house n ot confined to particular appartments, nor excluded from the table o f the men. R om an females daher
m ehr personal d ignity u. independence als griechische; aber marriage
gave them in manum viri; w ar = daughter des husband; he had the
p o w er o f correction u. o f life u. death in case o f adultery (mit con ­
currence o f the council o f her gens).
Confarreatioy coemptio, usus^h alle 3 Form en d. röm . E h e, gaben Frau
in manus d. M annes, fell o ut under the Em pire w h en free marriage
generally adopted, n ot placing the w ife in manus d. M annes.
Divorce v o n frühster Period, at the option o f the parties, (w hsclich
transm itted v . Syndyasmian fam ily Period), selten in R ep ublik (Becker:
Licentiousness - so auffallend in G recian and R om an cities at the height
o f civilization - in all probability remains o f an ancient conjugal system,
never fu lly eradicated, had fo llo w ed d ow n from barbarism as a social
taint u. now expressed its excesses in the new channel o f hetaerism.56
D . Monogamian fam ily entsprach Aryan (Semitic, Uralian) system o f consan121
guinity and affinity. G entes had their natural origin in the punaluan fam ily.
T h e principal branches o f the A rya n stock organised into gentes w h en first
k n o w n historically; zeigt, dass sie auch dort anfingen u. aus. d. punaluan
fam ily entsprang Turanian system o f consanguinity, still found connected with
the gens in its archaic form am ong the A m erican aborigenes. A lso auch dies
urspgliches System der Aryans. Im Aryan system o f consanguinity— A rm u th
o f original nomenclature fü r relationship erklärt ddch dass a large portion o f
the nomenclature o f the Turanian system w ouldfall out under monogamy. Common
unter d. several A rya n dialects nur: father u. mother, brother u. sister, son u.
daughter, u. a common term applied indiscrim inately to nephew, grandson and
cousin (Sanscrit : naptar, lat. nepos, Greek: àve^toç). In so advanced Cultur,
w ie M on ogam y voraussetzt, they could not have arrived m it such a
scanty nom enclature o f b loo d relationships. E rklärt w ith a previou s
system w ie d. Turanian dch im poverishm ent.
Im Turanian system brothers u. sisters - you n ger u. elder u. the several
terms applied to categories o f persons including persons n ot o w n
brothers and sisters. (Im ) Aryan, on basis o f monogamy, terms fo r brother
u. sister n o w in the abstract fo r the first tim e u. inapplicable to collaterals.
Rem ains o f a prior Turanian system still appear: So bei Hungarians
brothers u. sisters classified als elder u. younger b y special terms. French
frère (aîné älter, puînébl u. cadet jü n ger58); aînée u. cadette älter u. jü n ger58
sister. Sanskrit: älter Bruder u. jüngerer (agrajar u. amujar), ditto fo r
Schw ester (agrajri u. amujrï). I f com m on terms once existed in G reek,
Rom an, etc dialects fo r elder u. y ou n ger brother and sister, their former
application to categories o f persons, m achte sie unanw endbar als exclu siv für
o w n brothers and sisters.
F or grandfather no common term in the Aryan dialects. Sanskr. pitameha,
G r. 7ia7r7roç, lat. avus, Russ, djed, Welsh hendad. D e r term in a previous system
(Turanian) w as applied nicht nur zu grandfather proper, his brothers and
several male cousins, sondern auch to brothers u. several male cousins
o f his grandm other; konnte daher nicht be made to signify a lineal
grandfather and progenitor under monogamy.
Kein term fü r uncle and aunt in the abstract u. no special terms fü r uncle and aunt
väterl. u. m ütterl. Seite in d. A ryan dialects. Sanskr. pitroya, G r. 7càxpioç,
lat. patruus, Slavonic: stryc; Anglo-Saxon, Belgian, German earn, oom, oheim
fo r paternal uncle. In d. Aryan original speech no term f. O nkel mütterlicher
Seite, a relationship made so conspicuous by the gens am ong barbarous
tribes. I f the previous system Turanian, necessarily a term hierfür, aber
restricted to the own brothers o f the mother, and her several male cousins; d.
Catégorie schloss num bers o f persons ein w o v o n viele could not be
uncles under the m onogam ian system.
D a g egen erklärt sich, bei früherer E xistenz des Turanian Systems (by cate­
gories) d. U ebergang zu descriptive system a u f Basis d. M on ogam y. Jede
relationship under m on ogam y is specific; persons, under the new system ,
described b y means o f the primary terms or combinations o f them as brother's son
für nephew, father's brother fü r O n k el, father's brother's son für cousin. D ies
w ar the original o f the present system o f the A ryan , Sem itic u. Uralian
families. T h e generalizations they n o w contain | w ere o f later origin.
A l l the tribes, die d. M alayan u. Turanian system besessen, described their
kindred by the same formula, w hen asked in w h at m anner one person was
related to another; nicht as a system o f consanguinity, bu t as a means o f
tracing relationships. Schluss daraus: nach allgem einer E rrictg d. m on o­
gam ian systems unter A ryans etc, fielen diese back upon the old descriptive
form , alw ays in use under the Turanian system u. dropten diesselbst als
useless u. untrue to descents.
Beweis dass d. original des present system purely descriptive: E rse - typical A rya n
form , Esthonian - typical Uralian - are still descriptive. In Erse the only
terms fo r the b loo d relationships the primary: father and mother, brother
and sister, son and daughter. A lle andre kindred described verm ittelst dieser
terms, com m encing in the reverse order. Z .B . brother, son o f brother, son o f son
o f brother. T h e A rya n system exhibits the actual relationships under
m onogam y, assumes that the paternity o f children is know n.
Später a method o f description, m aterially different from the Celtic, was
engrafted upon the new system: bu t w ith o u t changing its radical features;
introduced b y the Roman civilians, angenom m en dch verschiedne A rya n
nations, unter denen R om an influence extended. Slavonic system has some
features entirely peculiar, o f Turanian origin (see: Systems o f consanguinity
etc p. 40)
Römische Aenderungen: unterschieden den väterlichen u. mütterlichen O nkel
mit besondern terms dafür, erfanden term fü r Grossvater als correlative o f
nepos. M it diesen terms u. d. prim ary, in connection mit suitable aug­
ments, konnten sie system atize the relationships in the lineal u. the first
5 collateral lines, w hich included the b o d y o f the kindred o f each in­
T h e A rabic system passed throu gh processes similar to the R om an u. mit
similar results.
V o n Ego to tritavus, in the lineal line, 6 generations o f ascendants u. v o n Ego
to trinepos the same number o f descendants, in deren description nur 4 radical
terms used. W äre es nöth ig to ascend farther, tritavus w o u ld becom e the
new starting point o f d escription : tritavi pater bis tritavi tritavus, the 1 2th
ancestor o f E g o in the lineal line, m ale; ebenso trinepotis trinepos etc.
is t collateral line male: frater; fra tris filius; fra tris nepos; fra tris pronepos bis
fra tris trinepos; w enn zum 12t descendant fra tris trinepotis trinepos. D ch
diese sim ple M ethod frater is made the roo t o f descent in this line.
Same line: fem ale: soror, sororis filia , sororis neptis, sororis proneptis bis
sororis trineptis (6th degree) u. sororis trineptis trineptis (12th descendant)
Beide Linien descend v o n pater; aber, b y m aking the brother and sister
the roo t o f descent in the description, the line and its tw o branches are
1 23
maintained distinct, and the relationship o f each person to Ego is specialized.
2nd collateral line: male on the father's side: father's brother, patruus; patrui
filius, p . nepos, p . pronepos p . trinepos, bis patrui trinepotis trinepos,
patrui filiu s heisst auch frater patruelis, u. im G b ru ch d. V olkssp rach e
consobrinus (cousin)
Pand. lib. X X X V I I I , tit. io “ Item fratres patrueles, sorores patrueles,
id est qui quaeve ex duobus fratribus progenerantur; item consobrini
consobrinae, id est qui quaeve ex duobus sororibus nascuntur (quasi
con sob rin i); item amitini amitinae, id est qui quaeve ex fratre ex sorore
propagan tur; sed fere v u lg o s istos omnes com m uni appellatione
consobrinus v o ca t.” 59
fem ale on the father's side, father's sister; amita, amitae filius, a. neptis,
a. trineptis, a. trineptis trineptis. Special term fo r amitae filia amitina.
$d collateral line male on the father's side: grandfather’s brother - patruus
magnus (keine existing language has an original term fo r this relation­
ship); patrui magni filius, nepos, trinepos, ending w ith patrui m agni
trinepotis trinepos. | Same line fem ale {on father’s side) com m ences w ith
amita magna, great paternal aunt etc.
4th and jth collateral lines on the father’ s side com m ence respectively m it
patruus major (great grandfather’s brother) u. patruus maximus (greatgreat-grandfather’s brother). G eh t dann w ie vo rh in : patrui majoris
filius, bis trinepos u. patrui m aximi filius bis trinepos.
Female branches (on paternal side) com m ence respectively mit amita major
u. amita maxima.
F ü r d. relatives on the mother's side the first collateral line soror etc remains
the same, w h d the fem ale lineal line is substituted fo r the male.
Second collateral line (on mother's side): avunculus (maternal uncle), avunculi
filius, nepos, trinepos etc
In the fem ale branch (on m other’s side): matertera (maternal aunt),
materterae filia , neptis, proneptis, trineptis etc
Third collateral line, male and fem ale (on m other’s side) b egin respectively
m it: avunculus magnus u. matertera magna.
F ou rth ------------ . . . m it avunculus major u. matertera major.
F if t h ----------------------- avunculus maximus u. matertera maxima.
M it B ezu g a u f d. present monogamian fam ily: it must advance as society ad­
vances, and change as society changes, even as it has done in the past. It is the
creature o f the social system . . . m ust be supposable that it is capable o f
still further im provem ent until the equality o f the sexes is attained. Should
the m onogam ian fam ily in the distant future fail to answer the require­
ments o f society, assum ing the continuous progress o f civilization, it is
im possible to predict the nature o f its successor. (491, 492)
P a rt I I I . C h. V I Sequence o f Institutions Connected with the fam ily.
F irst stage o f sequence: I) Promiscuous Intercourse.
II) Intermarriage o f Brothers and Sisters, own
and collateral, in a group; gives:
III) The Consanguine Fam ily {first stage o f the
fam ily; g iv e s :
IV ) The Malayan System o f Consanguinity u.
Second Stage o f Sequence:
V ) The Organisation upon the Basis o f S ex, and
the Punaluan Custom, tending to check the
intermarriage o f brothers and sisters; gives:
V I) The Punaluan Fam ily (Second Stage o f the
Fam ily), g ives:
V II) The Organisation into Gentes, which excluded
brothers and sisters from marriage. G iv e s :
V III) The Turanian and Ganowanian System o f
Consanguinity and Affinity.
Third Stage o f Sequence:
IX ) Increasing influence o f Gentile Organisation
and improvement in the arts o f life, advancing
a portion o f mankind into the Lower Status o f
Barbarism, g ives:
X ) Marriage between single pairs, but without an
exclusive cohabitation; g iv es:
X I) Syndyasmian Fam ily (Third Stage o f the
Fam ily).
Fourth Stage o f Sequence.
X II) Pastoral life on the plains in lim ited areas,
g iv e s :
X III) Patriarchal Fam ily (Fourth but exceptional
stage o f fam ily)
F ifth Stage o f Sequence:
X I V ) Rise o f Property, and settlement o f lineal
succession to estates, g iv es:
X V ) The Monogamian fam ily (F ifth Stage o f the
fam ily), g iv es:
X V I ) The Aryan, Semitic and Uraltan system oj
Consanguinity and A ffinity, and overthrows
the Turanian.
i) Promiscuous intercourse. Leben in Horde; no m arriage; far b elo w the
low est savage n o w liv in g ; T h e ruder flin t implements fou nd o ver part
o f the earth’s surface, and not used b y existing savages, attest extrem e
rudeness o f m an’s condition, after he had em erged from his prim itive
habitat and com m enced, as a fisherman, his spread o ver continental
areas. - Prim itive Savage. | T h e consanguinefam ily60. .. recognisedpromiscuity
within defined lim its, and those not the narrowest, and it p o in ts61 th rou gh its
organism to a worse condition62 against w h ich it interposes a shield.
ad V ) In the Australian male and female classes united in marriage, punaluan
groups are found. A m o n g the Hawaiians, the same g ro u p is also found,
w ith the m arriage custom it expresses. T h e punaluan63fam ily included
the same persons found in the previous ( consanguine, with the exception o f own
brothers and sisters, w h o w ere theoretically i f n o t in every case excluded.
ad V I I Organisation into gentes. U nter d. Australian classes, the punaluan
group is fo u n d 64 on a broad and system atic scale; the p eople w ere also
organised in gentes. H ere the punaluan fam ily older than the gens,
because it rested upon classes w h ich preceded the g e n t e s __ T h e
Turanian system requires both the punaluan fam ily and the gentile organisa­
tion to bring it into existence.
ad X and X I T en den cy to reduce the grou ps o f married persons to smaller
proportions before the close o f savagery, because the syndyasmian fam ily
becam e a constant phenom enon in the Lower Status o f Barbarism.
Custom led the m ore advanced savage to recognise one among a number o f
wives65 as his principal wife; this ripened in tim e into the custom o f
pairing, and in m aking this w ife a com panion and associate in the
m aintenance o f fa m ily __ The old conjugal system, n o w reduced to
narrow er lim its b y the gradual disappearance o f punaluan group, still
environed the advan cing fam ily, w h ich it w as to fo llo w to the ve rg e
o f civilisa tio n __It finally disappeared into the newform o f hetaerism, which
s till follow s mankind in civilisation as a dark shadow upon the fam ily
Syndyasm ian fam ily subsequent to the gens, w h ich was largely in­
strumental in its production.
F rom the Columbia66 River to the Paraguay, the Indian fam ily w as
syndyasmian in general, punaluan in exceptional areas, u. monogamian
perhaps in none.
ad X I V It is im possible to overestim ate the influence o f property in the
civilization o f m ankind. It w as the p o w e r67 that b rou g h t the A rya n
and Sem itic nations out o f barbarism into civiliza tio n __Governments
and laws are instituted w ith prim ary reference to its creation, p rotection
and enjoym ent. I t introduced human slavery as un instrument in its production.
W ith the establishm ent o f the inheritance o f p rop erty in the children
o f its ow ner, came the first possibility o f a strict m onogam ian fam ily.
ad X V The Monogamian fam ily: A s finally constituted, this fam ily
assured the paternity o f children, substituted the individual ownership o f real
as well as personal property fo r jo in t ownership, and an exclusive inheritance
by children in the place o f agnatic inheritance. M od ern society reposes upon
the M onogam ian fam ily.
A lle älteren Burschen - darunter Sir Henry Maine - nehm en H ebrew u.
Latin types (patriarchal fam ily) an as prod u cin g the earliest organised
society . . . dam it hängt zusam m en the hypothesis o f human degradation to
explain the existence o f barbarians and savages. A b e r inventions u. discoveries
came one by one; the kn o w led ge o f a cord68 m ust precede the bow and arrow,
w ie gu n p o w d er the m usket, steam engine the railw ay and steam ship;
so the arts o f subsistence fo llo w ed each other at lo n g intervals u. human
tools passed throughform s offlin t and stones before they w ere form ed o f iron.
E ben so institutions
P art I V . (The Growth o f the Idea o f Property)
C h. I. The three rules o f inheritance.
“ E arliest ideas (!) o f property” intim ately associated m it procurement o f
subsistence, the primary need. D . objects o f ownership verm ehren sich natürlich
in jeder “ successive ethnical period ” mit der multiplication der arts wovon
d. Subsistenzm ittel abhängen. Wachsthum v. Eigenthum hält so schritt mit
Fortschritt von Erfindungen u. Entdeckungen. Jede ethnische Periode zeigt
so marked advance upon its predecessors, nicht nur in der Z a hl der Erfindungen,
sondern ebenso in variety and amount o f property w h ich resulted therefrom .
T h e multiplicity o f the form s o f property w o u ld be accom panied b y the
growth o f certain regulations with reference to possession and inheritance. T h e
customs u pon w h ich these rules o f proprietary possession and inheritance depend,
are determined b y the condition and progress o f social organisation. T h e g ro w th
o f p rop erty is thus closely connected w ith the increase o f inventions | and
discoveries, and the improvements o f social institutions w h ich m ark the several
ethnical periods o f hum an progress. (/2/, /26)
I) Property in the Status o f Savagery.
M ankind, w hen ignorant o f fire, w ith o u t articulate language, and w ith o u t
artificial weapons
depended . .. u pon the spontaneous fru its o f the earth.
Langsam u. fast unbem erkbar, in d. P eriod o f savagery, avanciren sie
v o n Gebärdensprache u. unvollkommnen sounds to articulate speech; v o n dem
club (K eule), als erster Wajfey zu spear pointed w ith flint, u. schliesslich zu
arrow u. bow; v o n fiint-knife u. -chisel to stone axe u. -hammer; v o n osier
(K orbw eide) u. cane basket to the basket coated with clay, w h ich g av e a
vesselfo r boiling food with fire; and, finally to the art o f pottery.
In the means o f subsistence, they advanced from natural fru its in a restricted
habitat to scale and shell fish o f the sea, and finally to bread roots and game.
Ferner im status v o n savagery d ev elo p ed : Rope and string-making from
filaments o f bark; a species o f cloth made o f vegetable pulp; the tanning o f skins
to be used as apparel and as a coveringfo r tents; finally the house constructed
o f poles and covered with bark, or made o f plank sp lit by stone wedges. U nter
minor inventions zählten neben fire-drill (während um gekehrt alles zum
Feuerm achen G eh ö rig e d. H auptinvention!), moccasin (Indian w o rd
fo r Schuhe ohne Sohlen aus w eicherm skin v o n deer etc), u. the snow-shoe.
Während dieser Periode grosse V erm eh ru n g d. M enschen (im G egen satz
zum prim itiven Zustand) a u f Basis o f verm ehrte Consum tions M ittel,
Ausbreitung derselben über d. Continents. In socialer Organisation F ortschritt
v o n consanguine horde zu tribes organised into gentes, so possessed o f the germs
o f the principal governmental institutions.
D . entw ickelteste T h eil der savages, had finally organised gentile society u.
developed sm all tribes with villages here and there. . . ihre rude energies and
ruder arts chiefly d evoted to subsistence; n och nicht the village stockade
(Pfahlw erk) fo r defence, no farinaceous food, still cannibalism. - D e r progress
w as immense “potentially” , tru g in sich d. rudiments o f language, g o v ern ­
m ent, fam ily, religion, house architecture, prop erty; ditto the principal
germ s o f the arts o f life.
Property o f savages inconsiderable; rude weapons, fabrics, ustensils, apparel,
implements o f flin t, stone, and bone u. “personal ornaments” their chief items oj
property. W enige G egenstände des Besitzes, keine passion fü r B esitz;
kein Studium lucri, n o w such a com m anding force in the human mind.
Lands owned by the tribes in common, w hile tenement-houses owned jointly by
their occupants.
D . passion o f possession nourished its nascent p ow ers u p o n articles purely
personal, increasing w ith the slo w progress o f inventions. T h o se esteemed
most valuable deposited in the grave o f the deceased proprietor fo r their continued
use in spirit-land.
x Inheritance: its first great rule came in w ith the institution o f the gens, which
distributed the effects o f a deceased person among his gentiles. Practically they
w ere appropriated by the nearest o f kin; but the principle general that the
property should remain in the gens o f decedent,69 and be distributed among its
members. \Blieb in civilisation70 v. Greek, Roman gentes\. Children inherited
from their mother, but took nothing from their reputed father.
II) Property in the Lower State o f Barbarism.
Hauptinventions: art o f pottery, finger weaving and the art o f cultivation in
Am erica w h ich g av e farinaceous fo o d (mai^e) u. plants b y irrigation [in
E astern hem isphere bgin n in g as equivalent: domestication o f animals),
keine great inventions. Finger weaving w ith warp and woof (K ette u.
Einschlag) scheint dieser Periode anzugehören, ist eine der greatest
in v en tio n s; bu t it cannot be certainly affirmed that the art was not attained
in savagery.
T h e Iroquois u. other tribes o f A m erica in the same status m anufactured
belts u. burden straps with warp and woof o f excellent quality and finish; using
fine twine made offilaments o f elm and bass wood bark, (basswood americ. Linde).
Principles dieser Erfindung, w h ich since clothed the hum an fam ily, were
perfectly realised; b u t sie w ere unable to extend it to the production o f the
woven garment.
Picture writing seems to have made its first appearance in this p eriod ;
wenn früheren Ursprungs, erhielt es jetzt sehr beträchtliche E n tw icklu n g.
D . series o f connected inventions in this departm ent:
i) Gesture Language or language o f personal symbols, 2) Picture writing, or
idiographic symbols. 3) verte/ | 3) Hieroglyphs, or conventional symbols.
4) Hieroglyphs o f phonetic power, or phonetic symbols used in a syllabus. 5)
Phonetic alphabet or w ritten sounds.
T h e characters o n the Copan monuments apparently h ieroglyphs o f the
grade o f conventional symbols, bew eisen, dass d. Am erican aborigenes, who
practiced the j first form s, unabhängig a u f W eg in direction o f a phonetic
Stockade as a means o f village defence u. o f a raw-hide shield als defen ce71 g g e n
arrow, w h ich had n o w becom e a deadly missile, o f the several varieties o f
war-cluby armed with an encased stone or with a point o f deerhorn, scheinen zu
dieser Periode zu gehören. Jedenfalls w aren sie in common use am ong the
A m erican Indian T ribes in the L o w e r Status o f Barbarism w h en dis­
covered. D e r Spear, pointed m it flin t or bone kein custom ary w eap on w ith
the fo r est-tribes, th o u g h som etimes used; z.B . d. Ojibwas used the lance or
spear, She-mä-gun, pointed w ith flint or bone. Bow u. arrow, und war-club
H a(u )p tw affen d. A m erican Indians in diesem Status.
Einiger Fortschritt in pottery, näm lich im increased si%e der vessels produced u.
in their ornamentation; the Creeks m ade earthen vessels v o n 2 to 10 gallon s;
d. Iroquois ornam ented their ja rs u. pipes m it miniature human faces attached
as buttons; im ganzen blieb po ttery extrem ely rude bis E n de dieser Periode.
Bemerkbarer Fortschritt in House architecture in si%e u. mode o f construction.
U nter minor inventions: air-gun fo r bird shooting,, wooden mortar fo r reducing
mai%e to flour u. d. stone mortar fo r preparing paints.
Earthen u. stone pipes, with the use o f tobacco.
Bone and stone implements o f higher grades, w ith stone hammers and mauls
(Mauls sind h eavy w o o d en hammers), the handle and upper part o f the
stone bein g encased in raw hide; and moccasins u. belts ornamented with
porcupine quills.
E in ige dieser E rfind gen w ahrscheinlich geborgt from tribes in the M iddle
Status; denn es war dch diesen Process constantly repeated that the more advanced
tribes lifted up those below them, as fast as the latter w ere able to appreciate
and appropriate the means o f progress.
The cultivation o f mai^e and plants gave the people unleavened bread, the
Indian succotash (Specie v o n grünem Mais u. Bohnen) u. hominy (Maismuss),
tended also to introduce a new species o f property, cultivated lands or
Obgleich lands owned in common by a tribe, a possessory right to cultivated land
was now recognised in the individual, or in the group, which became a subject o f
inheritance. T h e group united in a common household were mostly o f the same gens,
and the rule o f inheritance w o u ld n ot allo w it to be detached from the
Inheritance: T h e property u. effects v. husband u. wife kept distinct, rem ained
after their dem ise in 72 the gens w o rin sie respective gehörten. W eib u.
K in d er nahm en nichts v o n husband u. father u. vice versa. Starb unter
d. Iroquois ein M ann leavin g w ife and children, so w d e sein Eigenthum
vertheilt unter seine gentiles so dass seine Schwestern u. deren children u. ihre
maternal uncles w o u ld receive the m ost o f it; his brothers m igh t receive a
small portion. Starb a wife, leavin g husband and children, so ihre effects
geerbt v o n ihren Kindern, Schwestern, M utter u. Mutterschwestern; d. greater
portion assigned to her children; in jedem Fall blieb property in der gens.
U nter d. Ojibwas d. effects der M utter vertheilt unter ihren K ind ern,
w en n alt gen u g to use them ; sonst, od. in default o f children, they went
to her sisters, ihrer M utter u. Mutterschwestern, to the exclusion o f her brothers.
O b g leich d. Ojibwas had changed descent to the male line, the inheritance
followed the rule which prevailed when descent was in the fem ale line.
D . variety u. amount o f property grosser als in savagery, aber noch nicht stark
gen u g to d evelop a strong sentim ent in relation to inheritance.
In d. distributions modus germ d. 2nd great rule o f inheritance, which gave the
property to the agnatic kindred to the exclusion o f the remaining gentiles. A g n a ­
tion and agnatic kindred assume jetzt descent in the male line. Princip selber
in beiden cases, aber the persons included - different. M it descent in the
fem ale line, agnates Personen w h o can trace their descent th rou gh females
exclu sively v o n | same com m on ancestor w ith the intestate; im ändern
Fall, w h o can trace their descent dch males exclusively. I t is the blood
connection o f persons within the gens by direct descent, in a given line, vom selben
common ancestor w hich lies at the foundation o f agnatic relation.
G eg en w ä rtig unter advanced Indian tribes hat begu n sich zu m anifest
repugnance ggen gentile inheritance, einige haben sie ganz über B o rd g ew o rfen
u. exclusive inheritance in children substituirt. E vid en ce o f this repugnance
unter Iroquois, Creeks, Cherokees, Choctas, Menominees, Crows u. Ojibwas.
In dieser älteren Periode o f barbarism sehr bdtende Abnahme o f cannibalism;
w d e aufgegeben als common practice; blieb als war practice in dieser u. d.
M iddle Period. In dieser F orm w ard Cannibalism gefunden in d. principal
tribes der U .S t., M exico, u. Central Am erica. E rw erb u n g v . farinaceous
fo o d H a(u )p tm ittel to extricate m ankind v o n this savage custom .
I) u. II) status o f savagery u. Lower Status o f Barbarism, diese 2 ethnische
Perioden, co ver m indestens 4/5 der ganzen E xistenz der M enschheit a u f
der Erde.
Im L o w e r Status beginnen d. high er attributes o f m ankind sich zu ent­
w ick eln : Persönliche Würde, Beredsamkeit, religious sensibility, rectitude, manli­
ness u. courage je t^ t common traits o f character, aber auch Grausamkeit,
treachery, u. fanaticism . Elem ent worship in religion, w ith a dim conception o f
personal gods, and o f a Great Spirit, rude verse making, joint-tenement houses,
and breadfrom mai^e b elo n g to this period. It produced also syndyasmian
fam ily u. confederacy o f tribes, organised into phratries u. gentes. D . imagination,
that great faculty so largely contrib uting to the elevation o f m ankind,
w as now producing an unwritten literature o f myths, legends u. traditions, already
becom e po w erfu l stim ulus upon the race.
III. Property in the M iddle Status o f Barbarism.
D . E vid en ce dieser Periode m ore com pletely lost than that o f any other.
It w as exhibited b y the Village Indians o f N orth and South Am erica in
barbaric splendour at the epoch o f their discovery.
D iese E p o ch e eröffnet in Eastern Hemisphere m it domestication o f animals,
in d. Western mit der Erscheinung d. Village Indians, liv in g in large join ttenement houses o f adobe (Luftziegel) brick u., in som e areas, o f stone laid
in courses.
Cultivation o f mai%e u. plants by irrigation, w h ich required artificial canals, u.
garden beds laid out in squares, with raised ridges to contain the water until
E in T h eil dieser Village Indians, w h en discovered, had made bronze,
brin gin g them near dem Iron sm elting process.
T h e joint-tenement house in the nature o f a fortress, hatte interm ediate
position zw ischen der stockades village o f the Lower u. the walled city o f the
Upper Status. A ls entdeckt no cities, in the prop er sense o f the w o rd ,
in Am erica.
In Kriegskunst kein grosser F ortschritt ausser in defence, dch. d. construction
o f great houses generally im pregnable to Indian assault.
Sie hatten erfunden: quilted mantles (escaupiles), stuffed with cotton as a further
shield agst the arrow u. the two-edged sword (macuahuitl), each edge having a row
o f angularflin t points imbedded in the wooden blade. T h e y still used bow u. arrow,
spear, war club, flin t knives u. hatchets, u. stone implements, o bgleich they had
the copper axe u. chisel, w h ich fo r som e reason cam e never into general use.
Z u mai%e, beans, squashes u. tobacco nun added cotton, pepper, tomato, cacao u.
the care o f certain fru its. A b eer73 w as made by fermenting the juice o f the
maguey (m exikanische Agave). D . Iroquois hattenjedoch ein ähnlich G eträn k
producirt dch fermenting maple (Ahornart) sap.
D c h im proved m ethods in the ceram ic art prod u ced earthen vessels o f
capacity to hold several gallons, o f fine texture and superior ornam entation.
Bowls, pots, water ja rs m anufactured in abundance.
Discovery and use o f the native metals, erstfo r ornaments, finally fo r implements
and ustensils, w ie copper axe and chisel, dieser Periode angehörig. M eltin g
dieser metals in crucible, w ith the probable use o f blow-pipe (Blaserohr,
Pustrohr) and charcoal, and casting them in moulds, the production o f bronze,
rude stone sculptures, the woven garment o f cotton (H akluyt: C oll. o f Voyages. I l l ,
377), houses o f dressed stone, ideographs or hieroglyphs cut on the grave-posts o f
deceased chiefs, the calendar fo r measuring time, the solstitial stone fo r marking
the seasons, cyclopean walls, the domestication o f the llama, o f a species o f dog,
o f the turkey and other fow ls b elo n g to same period in A m erica.
A priesthood, organized in a hierarchy, distinguished by a costume74; personal
gods with idols to represent them, u. human sacrifices erscheinen zuerst in
dieser Periode. | Two large Indian pueblos, M exico u. Cusco jetzt, containing
über 20,000 inhabitants, num ber u n kn ow n in the previou s period.
Aristocratic element in society, in feeble form s, am ong the chiefs, civil and
military, th ro u gh increased numbers under the same government, and the g ro w ­
ing com plexity o f affairs.
1 31
Eastern hemisphere: w e find its native tribes in dieser Periode, m it domestic
animals, yielding them a m ilk and meat subsistence aber w h sclich ohne
horticultural u. farinaceous fo o d . W ild horse, cow, sheep, ass, sow;75 ihre
Zähmung gab grossen Im puls; produced in herds u. flocks they becam e
source o f permanent progress. D e r effect wde erst allgemein, sobald pastoral
life established fo r the creation u. maintenance o f flocks. Europa, als
hauptsächlich W ald area, unadapted to the pastoral state; aber d.
grass plains o f high A sia u. upon the Euphrates, the Tigris u. other rivers
o f A sia, natural homes der pastoral tribes. T h ith er they w o u ld naturally
tend; there the rem ote A ry a n ancestors fo u n d co n fro n tin g like pastoral
Sem itic tribes.
Cultur v. cereals u. plants muss vorhergegangen sein ihrer migration von den grass
plains in d. Forest areas v . Westasien u. Europa. D iese C ultur forced upon
them by the necessities o f the domestic animals n o w incorporated into their
plan o f life. (Dies vielleicht nicht Fall bei d. Celts')
Wovenfabrics o ffla x and wool u. bronze implements u. weapons erscheinen in
dsr P eriod auch, in d. oestlichen Hemisphäre.
T o cross the barrier into the Upper Status o f barbarism unentbehrlich
metallic tools able to hold an edge and point; dazu n öth ig Invention d. process o f
Iron smelting.
Eigenthum: Grosser Zuwachs v. personalproperty u. einige changes in the relations
o f persons to land. D . territorial domain gehörte noch d. Tribus in common;
aber a portion n o w set apart fo r support o f the government, andrer fü r
religious uses, u. noch wichtigere portion - das, wovon V o lk seine Subsisten%
be^og, divided unter the several gentes, or communities o f persons who resided in
the same pueblo. N iem and ow n ed lands o r houses in his o w n righ t m it
M acht zu verkaufen u. überm achen in fee sim ple, w em er w o llte.
Individual ownership o f houses and lands excluded b y gemeinschftliches
Eigenthum an lands dch gentes od communities o f persons, joint-tenement
houses u. mode o f occupation by related fam ilies.
Rev. Sam. Gorman, M issionäre unter d. Laguna Pueblo Indians, in address
to the H istorical Society o f N e w M exico sa y s:
“ The right o f property belongs to the fem ale part o f the fam ily, and
descends in that line from m other to daughter. Their land is held in
common, b u t after a person cultivates a lo t he has personal claim to it,
which he can sell to one o f the community. . . T h eir women, generally, have
control o f the granary, are m ore p roviden t than their Spanish neighbours
about the future. Ordinarily they try to have ayear's provision on hand.1* It
is o nly w h en two years o f scarcity succeed each other, that P ueblos, as a
community, suffer hunger. (Morgan p . jß 6 , N te. Possessory rights, existing
in individuals or fam ilies, inalienable ausser dch inheritance to his or
her gentile heirs.
T h e M oqui Village Indians, ausser 7 large pueblos u. gardens, haben jetzt
flocks o f sheep, horses and mules u. considerable other personal property;
m anufacture earthen vessels o f many si^es u. excellent quality, u. woolen
"T~blankets in looms u. m it yarn o f their o w n production . M ajor / . W . Pow ell
' noticed the fo llo w in g case sh o w in g that dort still the husband acquires no
rights over the property o f the wife, or over the children o f the marriage. A
Zunian m arried an Oraybe woman, and had b y her 3 children; er w o h n te m it
ihnen zu Oraybe, bis sie f- T h e relatives o f his deceased wife ergriffen
Besitz ihrer K in d er u. household property leavin g h im his horse, clothing
u. weapons, m it certain blankets, die ihm gehörten, nicht die seiner Frau.
E r left the P ueblo m it P o w ell um nach Santa F e zu geh n u. dann to return
to his o w n people at Z u n i. - Women as well as men, n ot unlikely, had a
possessory right to such room s and sections o f the pueblo houses as they
occupied u. überliessen sie ihren next o f kin under certain regulations. |
T h e Spaniards (writers) have left the land tenure o f the southern tribes
in inextricable confusion. In unveräusserlichem common land b elo n gin g to a
community o f persons sahn sie feudal estate, im ch ief the feudal lord, im people
his vassals; sie sahen, dass d. land ow n ed in co m m o n ; nicht die community
ihrer owners selbst - die gens od. division o f a gens.
Descent in the fem ale line rem ained still in some o f the tribes o f M exico u.
Central Am erica, w h d in ändern, prob ably larger T h eil, ü bergegan gen in
a descent in the male line; letztres caused dch d. influence o f property.
U nter d. Mayas descent w as in male line, dagegen schw er zu bestim m en
in w elcher line bei A^tecs, Te^cucans, Tlacopans u. Tlascalans.
U nter d. Village Indians probable descent in the m ale line w ith remains o f
the Archaic rule w ie in the case o f the office o f T eu ctli. U nter ihnen zu
erwarten the second grand rule o f inheritance, w h ich distributed the p rop erty
am ong the agnatic kindred. W ith descent in the male line children o f a
deceased person at the head o f the Agnates, so dass sie d. greater portion (unter
d. A gnates) erhielten. A b e r w aren nicht exclusive heirs (m it A usschluss
der ändern Agnaten. 77 D . Am ericans never entered last {Upper) Period o f
Ch. I I {part I V ) The three rules o f inheritance continued
Upper Period o f Barbarism com m enced in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Process o f smelting Iron; trotz Bronze progress arrested dch w ant o f a
metal o f sufficient strength and hardness fo r mechanical purposes; fou n d zuerst
in iron. V o n da Fortschritt rapider.
IV ) Property in the Upper Status o f Barbarism.
Ende dieser Periode, property in masses verallgem einert - consisting in m any
kinds, held by individual ownership - dch settled agriculture, manufactures,
local trade, foreign commerce; aber:
O ld common tenure o f lands had not g iv en place, ausser in part, to Separateigenthum.
In diesem Status entsprang Slavery; it stands directly connected with the
production o f property. O u t o f it (slavery) came the patriarchalfam ily o f the
Hebrew type u. the similar fam ily der L a tin 78 tribes under paternal power, w ie
auch a modified form o f the same fam ily unter den Grecian tribes.
H ence, nam tlich aber von increased abundance o f subsistence, through field
agriculture, nations began to develop, zählten vielen iooonds unter one
govern m ent, w o früher nur a few iooonds. Struggle fo r d. possession
der most desirable territories intensified dch. d. localisation o f tribes in fix ed
areas, u. in fortified cities, m it d. increase der V olkszah l. A d va n ce d
Kriegskunst u. verm ehrte d. rewards o f prowess. D iese changes indicate the
approach o f civilisation.
Ersten Gesetze der Griechen, Römer, Hebräer - nach Beginn der Civilisation verw andelten chiefly nur in legal enactments the results die ihre previous
experience verkörpert hatte in usages and customs.
Gegen Ende der Upper Period o f Barbarism T en denz zu 2 Formen von Owner­
ship, näm lich, durch Staat u. durch Individuen. Lands, unter d. Griechen, still
held, einige dch d. tribes in common, andre dch d. phratry in common fo r
religious uses, andre dch die gens in common, aber d. bulk der lands had fallen
under individual ownership in severally. Z u r Z e it Solon's w ar Athenian society
noch gentil, lands in general held dch individuals w h o had learnt to mortgage
them (P lu t. in Solon c. X V . “ Σεμνύνεται γάρ Σόλων έν τούτοις δτι τής τε
προϋποκειμένης (verpfändeten) γης ορούς [die M arken die d. Schuldner bei
H aus od. A c k e r setzen m usste, w o ra u f er G e ld entlehnt hatte, m it einer
Schrift, w elche seinen N am en neben der Sum m e angab]
"Ορους ανεΐλε πολλαχή πεπηγότας ·
πρόσθ-εν δέ δουλεύουσα, νυν έλευ&έρα.” 79
T h e Roman tribes, from their first establishment, had a public domain, A ger
Romanus; w h ile lands w ere held b y the curia fo r religious uses, b y the gens,
u. b y individuals in severalty. N achdem diese social corporations ausgestorben, the lands held by them in common gradually became private property.
D iese several form s o f ownership show dass die älteste land tenure was die in
common dch den tribe; nach B egin n ihrer Cultivation, ein Theil der tribe lands
divided unter d. gentes, jede w o v o n held their portion in common; diesem fo lgte
im L a u f der Z eit allotments to individuals u. diese allotments finally ripened
into individual ownership in severalty. | Personal property, generally, w as sub­
ject to individual ownership.
Monogamian fam ily erschien in Upper Status o f barbarism herausentw ickelt
aus Syndyasmian fam ily, h ing intim ately zus. m it increase o f property u.
usages in respect to its inheritance. Descent changed to the male line; aber alles
Eigenthum, real u. personal, blieb, w ie seit time im m em orial, hereditary in
Ilias. In der Ilias (V , 20)80 m entioned fences around cultivated fields. ( I X ,
/77) an enclosure o f jo acres (πεντηκοντόγυος), h alf fo r vines, rem ainder for
tillage, X I V (121) T id eu s lives in a m ansion rich in resources, and had
corn p rod u cin g fields in abundance.
(Morgan irrt sich, w enn er glaubt, d. blosse fencing bew eise P rivatgru nd -
eigenthum ). Breeds o f horses already distinguished fo r particular excel­
lence (V , 261) “ sheep o f a rich m an standing coundess in the fo ld ” (IV , 43 3)
Coined money unknown, daher trade mostly barter, w ie in flgden lines:
έν-9-εν άρ’ οίνίζοντο (οίνάζω im m edium W ein kaufen) κάρη κομόωντες
Ά χ α ιώ ί, άλλοι μέν χαλκω (aere), άλλοι δ’αΐ&ωνι (splen did) σιδήρω άλλοι δέ
ρινοΐς (pellibus), άλλοι δ’αύτησι βόεσσιν, άλλοι δ’άνδραπόδεσσι’ (τίθεντο
δέ δαΐτα θάλειαν)81 (II. 1. V ν . 4 72_75)>
hier E rz
/III Aequivalentform \; u. wine = Er% od. Eisen od.
'w o w in e = Geld. '
Felle od. Ochsen
Felle = W ein
O chsen
(II E quivalentform )
G old in bars nam ed as passing by weight and estimated by talents. (II. X II,
274 v . M organ citirt; steht da nicht)*2
M en tion ed : manufactured articles o f gold, silver, brass and iron, textile fabrics
o f linen and woolen in m any form s, houses, palaces etc
Inheritance: N ach E rreichg so grosser Q uantität in Upper Status o f Barba­
rism v. houses u. lands, flocks u. herds u. exchangeable commodities and held
by individual ownership question o f inheritance pressed bis right d. facts
entsprach. D . domestic animals a possession o f greater value than alle
früheren A rte n prop erty zusam m en, served fo r food, exchangeable fo r
commodities, usable fo r redeeming captives, fo r paying fines, and in religious
sacrifices; capable o f indefinite multiplication in numbers - their possession
revealed to the human mind the first conception o f wealth. F o lg te in course
o f tim e the systematical cultivation o f the earth, tending to identify the fam ily
m it d. soil, and render it a property-making organisation; fand bald expres­
sion in L atin, Grecian, Hebrew tribes, in the patriarchal fam ily, involving
slaves u. servants. Labor o f father and children becam e m ore and m ore
incorporated with the land, the production o f domestic animals, and the creation
o f merchandise, it tended to individualise the fam ily u. suggested the
superior claims o f children to the inheritance o f the property they had assisted
in creating. V o r d. Lan dkultur flocks u. herds fiel naturally under the
jo in t ownership o f persons united in a group, on a basis o f kin, fo r subsistence.
Agnatic inheritance w as apt to assert itself in this condition. A b e r sobld
land had become the subject o f property, and allotments to individuals had
resulted in individual ownership, w as sure to supervene upon agnatic inheritance:
Third great rule o f inheritance, giving property to the children o f the deceased
W hen field culture bew iesen hatte, dass d. gan^e Oberfläche der Erde could be
made the subject o f property owned by individuals in severalty u. Familienhaupt
became the natural center o f accumulation, the new property career o f mankind
inaugurated - , fu lly done before the close o f the Later Period o f Barbarism,
übte einen grossen Einfluss au f human mind, rie f new elements o f character
w ach ; prop erty becam e tremendous passion im barbarian des heroic age.
(“ booty and beauty” ). D a g ege n nicht haltbar archaic u. later usages. [Herr
L oria! vo ila the w o rk in g o f passion!)] Monogamy had assured the paternity
o f | children u. maintained u. asserted their exclusive right to inherit the
property o f their deceased fathers.
Germans, w h en discovered, in Upper Status o f Barbarism, used iron, in
lim ited quantities; had flocks and herds; cultivated cereals; manufactured
coarse textile fabrics o f linen and woolen, had not attained the idea o f individual
ownership in lands. F o lg t d ah er: individual property in land unknown in A sia
u. Europe in M iddle Period o f Barbarism, came in in Upper Period. Bei
Hebrew tribes individual ow nership in lands existed before the com m ence­
m ent o f their civilisation. T h e y came out o f barbarism , w ie d. A rya n
tribes, m it possession o f domestic animals u. cereals, iron u. brass, gold and
silver, fictile wares u. textile fabrics. A b e r ihre knowledge o f field agriculture
lim ited in Z eit A braham s. N ach R econ struction d. H ebrew society, nach
dem E xo d u s, on basis o f consanguine tribes, to w h ich o n reaching Palestine
territorial areas w ere assigned, show s that civilisation fou nd them under
gentile institutions, b elo w a k n o w led ge o f political society. Inheritance was
strictly in the phratry u. prob ably in the gens “ the house o f the father” __
A fte r children had acquired an exclusive inheritance, daughters succeeded
in default o f sons; marriage w o u ld then transfer their own property from their
own gens to that o f their husband, unless som e restraint, in the case o f heiresses,
was put on the right. P resum ptively u. naturally marriage within the gens
p ro h ib ited ; question came before Moses as a question o f Hebrew inheritance,
v o r Solon as a question o f Athenian inheritance, the gens claiming a param ount
right to its retention within its membership; sie beide entschieden in dem ­
selben Sinn. Same question m ust have turned up in Rome u. in part met
b y the rule that a marriage o f a fem ale w o rk ed a diminutio capitis u. w ith it
a forfeiture o f agnatic rights.
Andre question involved in the issue: w ar marriage to be restricted by the rule
forbidding it within the gens, or become free, the degree, and not the fa ct o f kin,
bein g the measure o f lim itation! Letztere L ö su n g siegte.
Zelophehad starb, Hess Töchter, keine Söhne, u. die inheritance g iv en to the
form er. Später diese T ö ch ter about to m arry ausserhalb the tribe o f foseph
w o zu sie b elo n ged ; the members o f the tribe objected to such a transfer o f
property, brachten Suite v o r M oses.
D iese Burschen präsentiren d. Suite so:
“ I f they be married to any o f the sons o f the other tribes o f the children
o f Israel, then shall the inheritance be taken from the inheritance o f our fathers,
and shall be p u t to the inheritance o f the tribe w h ereun to they are re ceive d :
so shall it be taken from the lot o f our inheritance.” (Numbers, X X X V I , 3)83
M oses84 antw ortete:
“ T h e tribe o f the sons o f Joseph has spoken w ell. T h is is the th in g w h ich
the L o rd doth com m and concerning the daughters o f Zelophehad, saying,
“ L et them m arry to w h o m they think b e s t: o nly to the fam ily o f the tribe o f
their father shall they m arry. So shall not the inheritance o f the children o f
Israel remove from tribe to tribe: fo r everyone o f the children o f Israel shall
keep him self to the inheritance o f the tribe o f hisfathers. AncJ every daughter
that possesseth an inheritance in any tribe o f the children o f Israel shall
be w ife unto one o f the fam ily o f the tribe o f her father, that the children o f
Israel m ay en joy every one the inheritance o f his fathers.” (Numbers
X X X V I , 5-9) T h e y w ere required to m arry into their o w n phratry, not
necessarily into their o w n gens. T h e daughters o f Zelop h eh ad w ere
“ married to their father's brother's sons” (Numbers X X X V I , u ) 85 w h o w ere
n ot o n ly m em bers o f their own phratry, bu t also o f86 their own gens; they
w ere also their next agnates.
F rüher hatte Moses etablirt d. rule o f inheritance u. reversion th u s: “ A n d thou
shalt speak to the children o f Israel, saying, I f a man die and have no son,
then y o u shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughters. A n d i f he have
no daughter, then you shall g iv e his inheritance unto his brothers. A n d if
he have no brethren, then y o u shall g iv e his inheritance unto his father's
brethren. A n d i f his father have no brethren, then you shall g iv e it unto his
kinsman, that is next to him o f hisfam ily, and he shall possess it.” (N um bers,
X X V I I , 8-11)
H ier heirs: 1) the children; aber scheint that the sons took the property
subject to the obligation o f m aintaining the daughters. W ir finden else­
w here that the eldest son had a double portion.
2) the agnates in their order o f nearness: a) the brethren o f the deceased, in default
o f children des V ersto rbn en ; u. w enn er keine brethren hatte b) the brethren
o f the father o f the deceased.
3) the gentiles, also in the order o f nearness “ the kinsm an that is next to
him o f his fam ily” . T h e “fam ily o f the tribe” is the analogue o f the phratry;
also property, in default o f children u. agnates, w ent to the nearest phrator
des defunct ow ner. - D iese E rb fo lg e excludes cognates von inheritance;
a phrator m ore distant than a |father's brother, w o u ld inherit in preference
to the children o f a sister o f the deceased. D escent in the male line and the
property m ust be hereditary in the gens. T h e father did not inherit from
bis son, nor the grandfatherfrom his grandson. H ierin u. |fst in allem übrigen
Mosaic Law agrees mit d. Law o f Twelve Tables.
Später the Levitical law established marriage upon a new basis, independent o f
gentile law; ve rb o t E h e innerhalb gewissen Grade v. consanguinity u. affinity,
declared it free beyond these d egrees; dies entw urzelte gentile usages mit
B ezu g a u f E h e bei d. Hebräern, w d e später the rule o f Christian nations.
Solon's Gesetze über inheritances substantiell selber w ie die v o n M oses.84
87Bew eist, dass die früheren usages, customs, institutions d. Hebräer u. Griechen
dieselben in Be%ug auf Eigenthum.
Z u Solon's Z eit, $dgreat rule o f inheritance fu lly established unter Athenien137
sern; sons took the estate ihres deceased father mit o bligation o f maintaining
the daughters u. apportioning them suitably fo r their marriage. W enn no sons
erbten d. Töchter equally; dadurch created heiresses (έπικλήρες) b y investing
women m it estates; Solon enacted that the heiress should marry her nearest male
agnate, although they belon ged to the same gens, and Ehe unter ihnen früher
verboten dch usage. Instances occurred w o d. nächste Agnat, obgleich
verheirathet, p u t away his wife, in order to m arry the heiress, and thus gain
the estate. Protom achus im E ubulides des D em osthenes Beispiel.
(Dem ost. agst Eubulides, 41). W enn keine children, estates to the agnates,
in their default to the gentiles des defunct. Property was retained within the
gens as inflexibly among the Athenians w ie unter Hebrews u. Rom ans. Solon
turned into law , w as vo rh er established usage. U nter Solon erschienen
testamentary dispositions (established? b y him ); Plutarch sagt es sei früher
nicht erlaubt gew esen. (Romulus: 7 / 4 -717 a. C., 1-37 d. Stadt R o m ; So Ion
G esetzgeber A th en s’ about J94 a.C.)
Εύδοκίμησε δέ κάν τω περί διαθηκών νόμω, πρότερον γάρ ούκ έξην, άλλ’
έν τω γένει του τε-9-νηκότος έδει τά χρήματα καί τον οίκον καταμένειν, ό δ’ ώ
βούλεται τις έπιτρέψας, εί μη παΐδες εΐεν αύτω, δούναι τά αύτοϋ, φιλίαν τε
συγγενείας έτίμησε μάλλον καί χάριν άνάγκης, καί τά χρήματα κτήματα
των έχόντων έποίησεν. 88 P lu t. V ita Solon, c. 21
T h is law recogn ized the absolute individual ownership o f property by the person
while living, to w h ich jetzt added testamentar. Verfügg, w h en no children da,
aber d. gentile right rem ained param ount so lange children existed to represent
him in the gens. A t all events muss d. custom früher dagew esen sein
(testam entliche), da Solon in positive law — customary law verw andelte.
Roman Law o f 12 tables, first prom ulgated 449 a.C h .; dch sie anerkannt:
Intestaterbrecht: “ Intestatorum hereditates (ex) lege X II tabularum priscum ad suos heredes pertinet.” 89 (Gajus, inst, iii, 1) (mit d. children w ar wife
des defunct coheiress). “ Si nullus sit suorum heredum , tunc hereditas
pertinet e x eadem lege X I I tabularum ad agnatos” .90 (G aj. III, 9) “ Si nullus
agnatus sit, eadem lex X II tabularum gentiles ad hereditatem vo ca t.” 91 (ib.
III, 17) Seems a reasonable inference dass hereditas w irk lich grade in d. um­
gekehrten Ordnung prim itiv bei d. R öm ern existirt hatte als in d. 12 T a feln ;
inheritance by gentes v o r der der A g n a ten ; die der Agnaten v o r der exclusiven
der K ind er.
In d. later Period o f Barbarism kam Aristocratie auf, dch Entw icklg d.
individuality o f persons, increase o f wealth now possessed by individuals in masses;
slavery, b y perm anently degrading a portion o f the people, tended to
establish contrasts o f condition unknown in the previous ethnical periods; dazu,
w ith property and official position - sch u f sentiment o f aristocracy, antago­
nistisch den democratical principles fostered by the gentes.
Im Upper Status o f Barbarism, the office o f chief in its different grades,
originally hereditary in the gens and elective among its members, passed, very
likely, unter Grecian·and Roman tribes v o n father to son as a rule. A b e r
kein evidence, dass so b y hereditary right. | D . blosse possession jedoch
der offices o f archony phylo-basileus or βασιλεύς unter d. G riechen, u. v.
princeps u. rex unter d. Römern, hatte T en denz to strengthen in their
families the sentim ent o f aristocracy. O b gleich es perm anent existence
gew ann, nicht stark gen u g to change essentially the democratic constitution o f
the early governments o f these tribes.
H eutzutag, w o prop erty so im mense u. seine form s so diversified, it has
becom e, on the part o f the people, an unmanageable power. “ The human mind
stands bewildered in the presence o f its own creation. T h e tim e w ill com e,
nevertheless, when hum an intelligence w ill rise to the mastery over property
. . . A mere property career is not the final destiny o f mankind. T h e time which
has passed away since civilisation began is bu t a fragm ent (u. SFar se^r kleines')
o f the past duration o f m an’s existen ce; and but a fragment o f the ages y et
to come. The dissolution o f society bids fa ir to become the termination o f a career
o f which property is the end and aim; because such a career contains the elements
o f self-destruction. . . It (a higher plan o f society) w ill be a revival, in a higher
form , o f the liberty, equality andfraternity o f the ancient gentes.” (552)
“ W ith one principal o f intelligence and one physical form , in virtue o f a
com m on origin , the results o f hum an experience have been substantially
the same in a ll times and areas in the same ethnical status.” (552)
P art I I (Growth o f the Idea o f Government)
Ch. I. Organisation o f Society upon the Basis o f sex.
Organisation into male andfem ale classes (also organisation upon the basis o f sex)
n o w fou n d in full vitality am ong the Australian aborigenes. L o w d ow n in
“ "savagery, community o f husbands and women, 9 2 w ith in prescribed lines,
I was the central principle o f the social system ; the marital rights (Jura
conjugalia) [Romans distinguish: connubiumy related to marriage as a civil
institution, u. conjugiumy the mere physical union)\ established in the group.
] Em ancipation v o n diesen “ rights” etc slo w ly accom plished dch movements
resulting in unconscious reformations; “ worked out unconsciously through natural
In Darling River district - north o f Sydney - die nachfolgende organisation
into classes on the basis o f sex and the inchoate organisation into gentes on the
basis o f kin unter d. Australian aborigines speaking the Kamilaroi language.
W ide spread selbiges unter other A ustralian trib es; evident from internal
considerations that the male u. female classes older than the gentes, die, am ong
the K am ilaroi, are in process o f overthrowing the classes. T h e class in its male
andfemale branches is the unit o f the social system u. the centralposition, w h d d.
gentes inchoate u. advancing to com pleteness th rou gh encroachm ents upon
the form er. Selbe Organisation upon sex not yet been fou n d under savage
tribes out o f A ustralia, w eil diese insular savages slo w ly d evelop in g in their
secluded habitat, d. most archaic (organised) form am längsten erhalten
T h e Kamilaroi divided in 6 gentes, standing w ith relation to (rig h t o f )
m arriage93 in 2 divisions:
I) 1) Igana {D ult)
II) 4) E m u (Dinoun)
2) Kangaroo (M urriira) [Padymelon, a species
5) Bandicoot (Bilba)
o f K a n g aro o ]
6) Blacksnake (N urai)
3) Opossum (M ute)
U rsprün glich d. ersten 3 gentes not allowed to intermarriage with each, w eil
sie w aren subdivisions o f one original gens, durften aber m arry into either o f
the other gentes u. vice versa. D ies nun m odified unter d. K am ilaroi,
aber nicht so w eit dass m arriage erlaubt m it allen gentes ausser der gens
des individual. Absolute prohibition fo r males or fem ales to marry into their
own gens. Descent in fem ale line, which assigns children to the line o f their mother.
T h ese features o f archaic form o f gens.
A b e r au ß erd em existirt w eitere u. ältere d ivision des people in 8 classes,
4 exclusively o f males u. 4 exclusively o f females. I t 94 is accom panied w ith a
regulation in respect to marriage and descent w h ich (ob stru cts) the gens (zeigt,
dass deren organisation la ter__ M arriage is restricted to a portion o f the
males o f one gens with a portion o f the females o f another gens, w h d in ent­
w ickelter gentile organisation m em bers o f each gens allow ed to m arry
persons o f the opposite sex95 in all the gentes except their ow n. |
D ie Klassen sind:
M ale
1) Ippai
1) Ippata
2) Kumbo
2) Buta
3) M urri
j ) M ata
4) Kubbi
4) Kapota
A lle G lieder, je einer96 d. 4 m ännlichen K lassen, sind, o f whatever gens they
may be, Brüder v. einander, so alle Ippais Brüder etc, w eil alle supposed
descendedfrom a common fem ale ancestor.
E ben so alle G lied er je einer der 4 w eiblichen K lassen Schwestern v. einander
fü r same reason (descent from com m on m other), to whatever gens they may
Ferner a ll(e) Ippais u. Ippatas Brüder u. Schwestern v o n einander, o b sie nun
children der same mother or collateral consanguinei, ebenso verh ält es sich für
d. folgen den m it denselben numbers bereich (n)end Klassen. I f a K u m b o u.
Buta meet, die sich nie vo rh er gesehn, begrüssen sie sich als B ru der u.
Schwester. D . K am ilaroi sind also organised in 4 great primary groups o f
brothers and sisters, each group being composed o f a male andfem ale branch, bu t
intermingled over the areas o f their occupation. T h e classes embody the germ o f
gens, so far as z.B . Ippai u. Ippata in fact a single class in 2 branches bilden
u. not can intermarry with each other; aber keine realisirte G en s, w eil sie fall
unter 2 names (w ie Ippai u. Ippata), each o f w h ich is integral fo r certain
p u rp oses; u. w eil their children take different names from their own.
D . classes stand to each other in a different order with respect to right o f
marriage, or rather cohabitation (since broth er and sister are n ot allow ed
to interm arry) vi% s o :
1) Ippai
can m arry 4) K ap ota, and no other / Später— as show n
2) K u m b o
3) M ata
hereafter, dies scheme
3) M urri
2) Buta
I so far m odified, that
4) K u b b i
1) Ippata
1 each class o f males gets
\ righ t o f interm arriage
I m it an additional class
I o f fem ales; dies en1 croachm ent v o n gens
\up o n class.
E ach male in the selection o f a w ife so lim ited to 1 /4 o f all the K am ilaroi
w iv e s.65 Theoret{i}sch jede K a p o ta the w ife o f every Ippai. Q uotes
Rev. Fison quotes v o n a letter o f M r. T . E . Lance (der lange in A ustralien
gelebt): “ i f a K u b b i meets a stranger Ippata, th e (y ) address each other
as Goleer = Spouse... A K u b b i thus m eeting an Ippata, even th ou gh she
w ere o f another tribe, w o u ld treat her as his w ife, and his righ t to do so
w o u ld be recogn ized b y her tribe.”
U nder the conjugal system, 1 /4 aller males united in m arriage w ith 1 /4 aller
females o f the K am ilaroi tribes.
W hd d. Kinder blieben in gens ihrer M utter, gin gen sie über in eine andre
Klasse, in selber gens, different from that o f either parent.
M ale
M ale
1) Ippai marries 4) Kapota: their children are j ) M urri u. f ) M ata
2) Kumbo
3) M ata
4) Kubbi u. 4) Kapota
3) M urri
2) Buta
1) Ippai u. i) Ippata
4) Kubbi
1) Ippata
„ 2) Kumbo u. 2) Buta.
Folgt man d. fem ale line, so K ap ota (4) ist die M utter o f M ata (3) u. M ata (3)
ist hin w iederum die M utter o f K a p o ta ; ebenso Buta (2) M utter v o n Ippata
(1) u. hinw iederum Ippata (1) die M utter v o n Buta (2). Selbes m it male
class; da aber descent in the fem ale line, leiten sich d. Kamilaroi tribes selbst
ab v o n 2 supposedfemale ancestors, w hich laid the foundation fo r 2 original
gentes. - B y tracing the descent still further fand that the blood o f each
class passes through a ll classes.
O b gleich jedes In divid u u m einen d. oben erw ähnten class names führt,
so daneben the single personal name com m on am ong savages as w ell as
barbarous tribes.
T h e gentile organization supervened naturally upon the classes as an
higher organisation, by simply enfolding them unchanged, encroaches then
upon them. |
T h e classes are in pairs v o n brothers u. sisters derived from each other u. d.
gentes, verm ittelst der classes, sind auch in pairs, w ie f o lg t :
a ll
Em u
M ale
are M urri u.
„ Kumbo u.
„ M urri und
„ Kumbo u.
„ M urri u.
„ Kumbo u.
M ale
M ata oder Kubbi und Kapota
Buta oder Ippai u. Ippata
M ata od. Kubbi u. Kapota
Buta oder Ippai u. Ippata
M ata oder Kubbi u. Kapota
Buta od. Ippai u. Ippata
T h e connection o f children w ith a particular gens is p ro v en b y the law o f
m arriage. So Iguana-Mata m ust m arry Kumbo; her children are Kubbi u.
Kapota, u. n o th w en d ig Iguana in gens, because descent in the fem ale line.
Iguana-Kapota m ust m arry Ippai, her children are M urri u. M ata u. ditto
Iguana in gens. So Em u-Ippata m ust m arry Kubbi, her children are Kumbo
u. Buta u. o f the E m u gens. So die gens maintained b y keeping in its
m em bership the children o f all its fem ale m em bers. E ben so m it d.
rem aining gentes. E ach gens is made up th (e)o retically o f 2 supposed
female ancestors, and contains 4 o f the 8 classes. W ahrscheinlich ur­
sprünglich nur 2 male u. 2 fem ale classes, set opposite to each other in
respect to the right o f m arriage; and that the 4 afterw ard subdivided into 8.
T h e classes evid en tly as an anterior organisation nachher arranged w ith in
the gentes, n ot form ed b y the subdivision o f the gentes.
D a d. Iguana, Kangaroo u. Opossum gentes are counterparts to each other in
the classes they contain, so subdivisions o f an original gens; ebenso andrerseits
Em u, Bandicoot u. Blacksnake; so 2 original gentes m it d. righ t in each to
marry into the other, bu t not in itself. D ies confirm ed dch d. fact, dass 1),
3), 5) origin ally nicht interm arry durften unter einander, ebenso w e n ig
w ie 2), 4), 6). W hen the three were one gens interm arriage unter ihnen
verb o ten ; dies fo llo w ed the subdivisions, because they w ere o f the same
descent, although under different gentile names. D asselbe exact gefunden
bei den Seneca-Iroquois.
D a m arriage restricted to particular classes, w h en there w ere bu t 2 gentes,
one h a lf o f all the females o f one w ere the w ives o f one h a lf o f all the
males97 o f the other. A fte r their subdivision into 6 the benefit o f m arry­
ing o ut o f the gens w as neutralised b y the presence o f the classes m it
ihren restrictions; hence continuous in-and-in m arriages, beyond the
im m ediate degree o f brother and sister.
%.B. descents o f Ippai u. Kapota g iv in g to each interm ediate pair 2 children,
a male and a fem ale, dann:
1) Ippai marries Kapota\ their children M urri u. M ata. D ie letztem 2
können nicht einander heirathen.
2) M urri marries Buta . . . their ch ild ren : Ippai u. Ippata;
M ata marries Kumbo
their ch ild ren : Kubbi u. Kapota;
j) Ippai marries his cousin Kapota u. Kubbi marries his cousin Ippata; their
children are respectively M urri u. M ata u. Kumbo u. Buta; v o n diesen d.
M urris m arry the Butas, second cousins, etc In this condition the classes
not o nly interm arry constantly, bu t are com pelled to do so th ro u gh this
organisation u pon sex. - T h e organisation into classes seems to have been
directed to the single object o f breaking up the intermarriage o f brothers and
sisters. - Innovation: a llo w in g each triad o f gentes to intermarry w ith each
other, to a lim ited extent; and secondly, to marry into classes, n ot before
perm itted so Iguana-Murri can n o w m arry M ata in the Kangaroo gens,
his collateral sister etc E ach | class o f males in each triad o f gentes seems
n o w to be allow ed one additional class o f females in the 2 rem aining
gentes o f the same triad, from w h ich they w ere before excluded.
W herever the m iddle or lo w er st<r)atum o f savagery is uncovered,
marriages o f entire groups under usages defining the grou p s, have been
— d isco vered . . . the necessities o f their condition w o u ld set a practical lim it
j to the size o f the g rou p liv in g together under this custom . “ Cases o f
physical and mental deterioration in tribes and nations m ust be adm itted, fo r
reasons w hich are kn o w n , but they never interrupted the general progress o f
m ankind... The arts by which savages maintain their lives are remarkably
persistent. They are never lost until superseded) by others higher in degree. By
the practice o f these arts, and the experience gained through social organisations,
mankind have advanced under a necessary law o f development, although their
progress m ay have been su b s ta n tia lly ) im perceptible fo r ce n tu rie s...
Tribes and nations have perished th rou gh the disruption o f their ethnic
life.” (p. 60) A m o n g other tribes (non-Australian) the gens seems to have
advanced in prop ortio n to the curtailment o f the conjugal system.
“ W e have the same brain, perpetuated by reproduction, which worked in the
skulls o f barbarians and savages in by-gone ages; and it has com e d ow n to us
ladened and saturated w ith the thoughts, aspirations and passions, w ith
w hich it w as busied th (r)o u g h the interm ediate periods. It is the same
brain g ro w n older and larger w ith the experiences o f the a g e s .. . O u t­
crops o f barbarism (wie z.B . M orm onism ) are so m any revelations o f its
ancient proclivities . . . a species o f mental atavism.” (61)
P t. I I . Ch. I I . The Iroquois Gens.
A elteste organisation - social, founded upon gentes, phratries, tribes; so
gentile society created, w o govern m ent dealt w ith persons th rou gh their
relations to a gens or tribe. These relations purely personal. K ô m m t nachher a
political organisation, founded upon territory u. property; hier govern m ent
deals w ith persons th ro u gh their relations to territory, w ie z.B . the
township, the county, and the state. (62)
Gentile Organisation fou nd in A sia, E u rope, A frica, A m erica, A u stralia;
dauert bis political society, die erst nach der C ivilisation eintritt. Irish
Sept. Scottish Clan y d. phrara der Albanians, ganas des Sanscrit etc
selber w as A m erican Indian gens. Gens, γένος u. ganas (lat. gr. Sanskr.)
bedtn alike kin; enthalten dasselbe E lem ent as gigno, γίγνομαι, ganamai
(beget alle 3); im plying an im m ediate com m on descent o f the m em bers o f
a gens. A gens daher a body o f consanguinei. D escended from the same
com m on ancestor, distinguished b y a gentile name, and bound together
b y affinities o f b loo d . It includes a m oyety only o f such descendants; w o
descent in fem ale line, w ie überall in archaic period, gens zusam m engesetzt
o f a supposed fem ale ancestor and her children, w ith the children o f her female
descendants, th ro u gh fem ales, in perpetuity; um gekehrt, w o descent in the
male line, into which the fem ale line w as changed after the appearance o f
prop erty in masses. D . m oderne Familienname ist selbst a survival o f the
gentile name, w ith descent in the male line. The modernfam ily, as expressed
b y its name, is an unorganised gens; w ith the bond o f kin 98 broken, and its
m em bers as w id ely dispersed as the fam ily name is found. F in a l form
o f gens enthält tw o changes: 1) change from fem ale to male line o f descent;
2) change o f the inheritance o f the property o f a deceased m em ber from his
gentiles to his agnatic kindred u. finally to his children.
Gens in its archaic form now exists among the Am erican aborigenes.
W o gentile institutions prevailed - and prior to the establishm ent o f political
society - w e find peoples or nations in gentile societies and noth ing beyond.
“ The state did not exist.” (p. 67) A s the gens, the unit o f organization, was
essentially democratical, so necessarily the phratry com posed o f gentes, the
tribe com posed o f phratries, and the gentile society form ed b y the con­
federations or (was höhere Form ) coalescing o f tribes [(wie d. 3 röm. in
R om , the 4 tribes o f the Athenians in A ttica , the 3 Dorian tribes in Sparta,
all o f them on som e common territory.)]
In der archaic form der gens die children einer Frau geh ören %u Ihrer gens;
ebenso d. children ihrer T ö ch ter, G rosstöch ter etc A b e r d. children ihrer
Söhne, deren G rossöhn e etc belo n g to other gentes, nämlich denen ihrer
M ütter. In the M iddle Status o f Barbarism (mit Syndyasmian fam ily) began
d. Indian tribes to change the fem ale line to the male - selber in Upper Status
o f Barbarism bei Greek tribes (except the Lycians) u. d. Italian tribes
(except the Etruskans). | Intermarriage in Gens prohibited. D ie Gens institu­
tion beginnt nothwendig m it 2 gentes; the males and females o f one gens
m arrying the females and males o f the other; the children, fo llo w in g the
gentes o f their respective mothers, would be divided between them. Resting on the
bond o f kin as its cohesive principle, gens verleiht jedem individual m em ber
that personal protection which no other existing power could give.
Gentes o f the Iroquois taken as standard exem plification in der Ganowanian
fam ily. W hen discovered the Iroquois in the lower status o f barbarism;
manufactured nets twine and rope from filaments o f bark; wove belts and burden
straps, w ith warp and woof, v o m selben M aterial; m achten earthen99 vessels
u. pipes v o n clay m ixed with siliceous materials u. hardened by fire, som e o f
them ornamented m it rude medallions; cultivated mai^e, beans, squashes u.
tobacco in garden beds, m ade unleavened bread von pounded mai^e which they
boiled in earthen99 vessels (these loaves or cakes about 6 inches in diam eter u.
an inch th ick); tanned skins into leather w ith w h ich they m anufactured
k ilts, leggins u. moccasins; used bow and arrow and warclub als H au ptw affen;
used flin t, stone u. bone implements, w o re skin garments, w ere expert hunters u.
fishermen. C onstructed long joint-tenement houses large en ou gh to accom ­
m odate j , 10, 20 fam ilies u. each householdpractised communism in living; w ere
unacquainted mit the use o f stone or adobe-brick in house architecture u. m it d. use
der native metals. In m ental capacity u. general advancem ent w aren they
d. representative branch dr Indian fam ily north o f New M exico. M ilitary “ their
career was simply terrific. They were the scourge o f G od upon the aborigines o f
the continent.”
In lapse o f tim e number u. names der respective gentes have sligh tly varied,
their largest num ber bein g 8.
I ) Senecas:
i) W olf. 2) Bear, f ) Turtle. 4) Beaver, j) D eer. 6) Snipe.
7) Heron. 8) H aw k.
I I ) Cayugas:
1) W olf. 2) Bear, 3) Turtle. 4) Beaver, j) D eer. 6) Snipe.
7) E el. 8) H aw k.
I l l ) Onondagas: 1) W olf. 2) Bear, 3) Turtle. 4) Beaver, j) D eer. 6) Snipe.
7) E el. 8) B all.
I V ”) Oneidas.
1) W olf. 2) Bear. 3) Turtle.
V ) Mohawks. 1) W olf. 2) Bear, 3) Turtle.
V I ) Tuscaroras. 1) Gray W olf. 2) Bear. 3) Great Turtle. 4) Beaver, j) Yellow
wolf. 6) Snipe. 7) E el. 8) L ittle Turtle.
D . Changes zeigen, dass certain gentes in som e o f the tribes becam e
extinct u. dass andre formed by segmentation o f overfull gentes. D as ju s
gentilicium b esteh t:
1) T h e right der gens o f selecting its sachem und chiefs.
F<a)st bei allen A m erican Indian tribes 2 grades o f chiefs, sachem u. common
chiefs; von diesen 2 primary grades a ll other grades w ere varieties; elected in
each gens from among its members, a son could n o t be elected to succeed his
father, w o descent in the fem ale line, w e il er belonged to a different gens. Office
o f sachem hereditary in the gens, insofern it w as filled so o ft als a vacancy
occurred; office o f chief non-hereditary, w eil bestow ed in rew ard o f per­
sonal m erit u. died w ith the individual. D uties o f sachem confined to peace,
konnte nicht in K r ie g ziehen as a Sachem. T h e chiefs, raised to office fo r
personal bravery, w isdom in affairs, or fo r eloquence in council, g e ­
w öhn lich d. superior class in ability, aber nicht in authority over the gens.
T h e relation des Sachem w as prim arily to the Gens, w o v o n er the official
head; die des chief prim arily to the tribe - v o n dessen council er w ie der
Sachem members.
T h e office o f Sachem älter als gens, gehört ebenso zu punaluan group or
even the anterior horde. In the gens the duties o f the office paternal; in the
gens elective am ong its male m em bers. D em Indian system o f consan-
guin ity entsprechend office o f Sachem passed v o n brother
brother, or from
uncle to nephew u. sehr selten v o n grandfather to grandson. T h e choice, b y
free suffrage o f both males andfemales o f adult ages, fiel gew ö h n lich a u f einen
Bruder des deceased Sachem od. einen der Söhne einer Schw ester; sein eigner
B ruder od. d. Sohn einer eignen Schw ester m eist preferred. Z w isch en
several brothers, o w n or collateral, on the one hand u. d. sons o f several
sisters, o w n or collateral, on the other, no priority o f right, da alle male
m em bers der gens equally eligible.
H atte d. gens einen gew ählt (Sachem) (unter d. Seneca-Iroquois z.B .), so
n och erfordert assent der 7 rem aining gentes. T h ese m et fo r the purpose
b y phratries; w enn sie d. W ahl to confirm verw eigerten, musste die gens
neu w äh len ; w d e er accepted ,so election com plete, aber der neue Sachem
m usste still “ be raised up” (i.e. invested w ith his office), dch a council o f
the confederacy, before he cou ld enter upon his d u ty ; it w as their m ethod
o f conferring the Imperium. | D e r Sachem o f a gens w as ex officio a member
o f the council o f the tribe, and o f the higher council o f the confederacy. Selbe
m ethod o f election u. confirm ation fo r the office o f a chief; aber a general
council never convened to raise up chiefs b elo w the grade o f a sachem ; they
awaited the tim e w h en sachems w ere elected.
Chiefs in each gens usually proportioned to the num ber o f its m em bers;
unter d. Seneca-Iroquois 1 ch ief fo r about every 50 persons; der Seneca
nun in N e w Y o r k einige 3000, haben 8 Sachems u. about 60 chiefs; the
proportionate num ber jezt grösser als früher. A n za h l der gentes in a tribe
m eist entsprechd der B evölkeru n gszahl des trib e ; d. Z ah l d. gentes varies
in different tribes v o n 3 unter D elaw ares u. M unsees to über 20 unter
O jibw as u. C reeks; 6, 8, 10 w aren gew öh nlich e A nzahlen.
2) Recht Sachems u. Chiefs ab^uset^en.
D ies R ech t reserved b y the m em bers o f the gens; office nom inally “ fo r
life” , tenure practically “ during g o o d beh aviou r.” D ie installation eines
Sachem h iess: “putting on the horns” , seine A b setzu n g “ taking off the horns.”
Sobald ein Sachem od. ch ief in due form abgesetzt dch gens, w ar er v o n
nun Privatperson. Council o f the tribes konnte auch Sachems u. chiefs abset^en,
ohne zu w arten au f action der gens, and even against its wishes.
3) Obligation not to marry in the gens.
D iese rule noch inflexible bei d. Iroquois. - B ei E n tstehun g der gens
brothers were intermarried to each others' wives in a group, and sisters to each
others' husbands in a group; gens sou gh t to exclude brothers and sisters from
the marriage relation b y proh ibitin g to m arry in the gens.
4) M utual rights o f inheritance o f the property o f deceased members der gens.
In Status o f Savagery property beschränkt a u f personal effects; im Lower Status
o f Barbarism kam noch hinzu possessory rights in joint-tenement houses u.
gardens. T h e most valuable personal articles buried m it body des deceased owner.
Im ü b rig e n : property to remain in the gens and to be distributed among the
gentiles des deceased owner. D ies theoretisch noch rule bei d. Iroquois;
praktisch the effects einer deceased person appropriated b y his nearest
relations w ith in the gens. In case o f a male his own brothers and sisters and
maternal uncle divided his effects am ongst each o th er; in the case o f a fem ale
her property inherited b y her children u. her sisters, to the exclusion o f her
brothers. In beiden Fällen blieb property in gens. D eshalb nahm husband
nichts v o n w ife u. vice versa. These mutual rights o f inheritance strengthened
the autonomy o f the gens.
5) Reciprocal obligations o f help, defence, and redress o f injuries.
Individual depended fo r security upon his g e n s ; bon d o f kin p o w erfu l
elem ent fo r m utual support; to w ro n g a person w as to w ro n g his gens.
Herrera: “ History o f Am erica” erzählt v o n d. Mayas o f Yukatan: w o satis­
faction to be m ade fo r dam ages, i f he adjudged to pay w as like to be
reduced to po verty, the kindred (gens) contributed, selbe sagt v . Florida
Indians: Stirbt ein B ruder od. Sohn, so verh u ngern eher the people o f
the house than seek anything to eat during 3 m onths, aber kindred u.
relations send it all in. Persons, removing von one village to another, could not
transfer their possessory right to cultivated lands or to a section o f ajoint-tenement
house to a stranger; must leave them to his gentile kindred. Herrera refers to
the usage under the Indian tribes o f Nicaragua.
Garcilasso de la Vega [Royal Commentaries Lond. ed. 1688, R ycaufs Trans,
(p. 1 of)] bem erkt über d. tribes der Peruvian Andes, dass “ w h en the
commonalty, or ordinary sort, m arried, the communities (=gentes) o f the
people were obliged to build and provide them houses.”
T h e ancient practice o f blood revenge . . . had its birthplace in the gens. Tribunals
fo r the trial o f criminals and law s prescribing their punishm ent, cam e late
into existence in gentile society. U nter d. Iroquois and other Indian tribes
generally, the obligation to avenge the murder o f a kinsman universally
recognized. V o rh er Beilegungsversuch zw ischen gens o f the slayer u. gens des
slayed; a council o f the members o f each gens held separately, propositions made
on beh alf o f the m urderer fo r a condonation o f the act m eist in F orm o f
expression o f regret u. presents o f considerable value. Z o g das alles
nicht, w e il gentile kindred der slain person im placable, so ernannte die
gens (des slain) unter ihren m em bers one or more avengers, die d. crim inal
to pursue, until discovered, and then to slay him w h erever he m igh t be
found. I f they did so, this no gro u n d o f com plaint b y any m em ber o f
the gens o f the victim . |
6) The right o f bestowing names upon the members o f the gens
Unter savage u. barbaric tribes there is no name fo r the fam ily. T h e
personal names v o n individuals derselben fam ily indicate no fam ily con­
nection betw een them. [Fam ily name ist nicht älter als d. Civilisation]
Indian personal names, h o w ever, usually indicate the gens o f the individual to
persons o f other gentes in the same tribe. A s a rule each gens had names fo r
persons that were its special property, and, as such, could n ot be used b y
other gentes in the same tribe. A gentile name conferred o f itself gentile rights.
A fte r birth o f the child his mother selected fo r him a name not in use,
belonging to the gens, w ith the concurrence o f her nearest relatives. T h e
child not fu lly christened until its birth u. the name o f its father, had been
announced at the next ensuing council o f the tribe. B ei T o d einer Person,
konnte deren Namen nicht wieder used wden in the lifetime o f his oldest surviving
son, without the consent o f the latter [Dies w ie alles particular, w en n nicht
direct G egen th eil gesagt, g ilt v o n d. Iroquois]
Zw ei classes o f names in use, one adapted to childhood, the other to aduit life ;
one “ bein g taken aw ay” (ihre expression) u. d. andere “ bestow ed.”
Im A lte r v . 16 od. 18 der erste N am e w eggenom m en, usually dch d. chief
der gens u. einer der 2ten K lasse statt dessen gegeben. A t the next council
o f the tribe the change o f names w as pu blicly announced, after w h ich the
person, i f a male, assum ed the duties o f m anhood. In som e Indian tribes
the y o u th w as required to g o o ut u p o n the w ar-path and earn his second name
b y som e act o f personal bravery. A fte r a severe illness nicht u n gew ö h n ­
lich fo r a person, from superstitious considerations, to solicit and obtain
a second change o f name. W hen a p erson w as elected a Sachem od. a chiefs
his name was taken awayy and a new one conferred at the time o f his installation.
D . In dividual had n o control o ver the question o f a change; w as prero­
g ative der fem ale relatives u. der ch iefs; b u t an adult p erson m igh t change
his nam e p ro vid ed he could induce a ch ief to announce it in council. A
person having the control o f a particular name, w ie der eldest son o f that o f his
deceased father, might lend it to a friend in another gens; bu t after the death
o f the person thus bearing it the name reverted to the gens to which it belonged.
T h e names jetzt in use unter d. Iroquois u. ändern Indian tribes meist
ancient names handed down in the gentes from time immemorial.
In fam iliar intercourse u. form al salutation the A m erican Indians address
each other b y the term o f relationship the person spoken to sustains to the
speaker. W hen related they salute by kin; w enn nicht, they substitute
“ my friend,.” G älte fü r lüm m elhaft to address an Indian by his personal name,
or to inquire bis name directly from himself. Anglo-Saxon ancestors der “ E n g ­
lish” hatten bis Norman Conquest nur single personal names, no name to
designate the fam ily. Z e ig t an späte Erscheinung der Monogamie; u. Existent^
in früherer Periode v o n a Saxon gens,
j) The right o f adopting strangers into the gens.
Captives taken in w a r either p u t to death, or adopted into som e gens;
letztres m it women u. children, taken prisoners, usual. Adoption n ot on ly
conferred gentile rights, sondern auch d. nationality o f the tribe.
T h e person adopting a captive placed him or her in the relation o f a brother
or a sister; i f a m other adopted, in that o f a son or a d au g h ter; and ever after­
wards treated100 the person in all respects as th ou gh born in that relation.
Slavery, w h ich in the Upper Status o f Barbarism becam e the fate o f the
captive, was unknown among tribes in the Lower Status in the aboriginal period.
Captives w h en adopted w ere often assigned in the fam ily the places o f
deceased persons slain in battle, in order to fill up the b rok en ranks o f
relatives. Ausnahmsweise declining gens so replenished, z.B . A t certain
tim e die H aw k gens der Senecas so m uch thinned, dass dem E rlösch en nah;
to save the gens a number o f persons from the W olf gens b y m utual consent
w ere transferred in a b o d y b y adoption to that o f 101 the H aw k. D .
A d op tio n srech t left to the discretion o f each gens. Unter d. Iroquois d.
A d optionscerem onie perform ed at a pu blic council o f the tribe, w d ch
turned practically in (to ) a religious rite .102
8) Religious rites10* in the Gens?
K a n n kaum gesagt w den, dass any Indian gens had special religious rites; aber
their religious worship m ehr od. m inder direct connection with the gentes;
religious ideas germ inated u. form s o f w orsh ip instituted in gens,
expanded from the gens o ver the | tribe, statt special to rem ain to the gens.
So bei den Iroquois 6 annual religious festivals [M aple, Planting, Berry,
Green-Corn, Harvest u. New Year's Festivals] com m on to all the gentes
united in a tribe, observed at stated seasons o f the year.
Jede gens furnished a num ber o f “ Keepers o f the Faith” , male and fem ale,
charged m it celebration jener festivals; conducted in selben d. cerem onies
zus. m it d. Sachems u. Chiefs der T ribes w h o , ex officio, “ K eep ers o f the
Faith.” W ith no official head, none o f the m arks o f a priesthood, their
functions equal. D ie “female keepers o f the fa ith " bes. charged m it prepara­
tion o f the feast, provid ed at all councils at the close o f each day fo r all
persons in attendance. D as dinner in common. T h eir w orsh ip w as one o f
than ksgiving, w ith invocations der Great Sp irit u. der Lesser Spirits to
continue to them the blessings o f life. (C f. Morgan's: League o f the Iroquois,
p. 182)
9) A common burial place.
A ncient - aber nicht exclusive- m ode o f b u ria l: by scaffolding the body until
the flesh had wasted, danach d. bones collected u. preserved in bark barrels
in a house constructed fo r their reception. D ie b elo n gin g zu r selben gens
usually placed in the same house. Rev. D r. Cyrus Byington fou n d these
practices unter d. Choctas, 1827; so sagt A d a ir [H ist, o f the Am eric. Indians
p. 183] v o n d. Cherokees: “ I saw three o f them , in one o f their tow ns
pretty near each o th e r... E ach house contained the bones o f one tribe
separately, w ith the hieroglyphical figures o f each fam ily (gens) on each
o f the oddshaped arks." D . Iroquois in ancient times used scaffolds u.
preserved the bones o f deceased relatives in bark barrels, often keeping them in
the house they occupied. T h e y also buried in the ground; im letzten Fall die
same gens not alw ays buried locally together, unless they had a common
cemetery fo r the village. Rev. A sh er104 Wright, a m issionary am ong the
Senecas, w ro te to M organ : “ I find no trace o f the influence o f clanship in
the burial places o f the dead
buried prom iscuously . . . they say that
formerly the members o f the different clans more frequently resided together than
they do at present time. A s onefam ily they were more under the influence offam ily
feeling,, and had less o f individual interest.”
A t the Tuscarora reservation (near Lew iston), obgleich d. Tuscaroras n o w
“ Christians” , hat tribe one common cemetery aber d. individuals o f the same gens
o f Beaver, Bear, G re y W o lf - etc are buried in a row by themselves. D o r t
husbands u. wives separated u. buried in separate r o w s : ebenso fathers u. their
children; aber found in the same row mothers and their children u. brothers u.
U nter d. Iroquois u. ändern Indian tribes in same status o f advancem ent
bei d. funeral o f a deceased gentilis, a ll the members o f the gens are mourners;
d. addresses at the funeral, the preparation o f the grave, u. the burial o f the body
w ere perform ed b y m em bers o f other gentes.
D . 'S/mage Indians v. M exico u. Central Am erica practiced a slow cremation
[confined to ch ief and principal m en], ebso scaffolding u. bu ryin g in the
10) A Council o f the Gens.
T h e Council - instrum ent o f govern m ent u. suprem e authority über gens,
tribe, confederacy. O rd in ary affairs adjusted dch d. chiefs; those o f general
interest subm itted to the determ ination o f the council u. d. council sprang
from the gentile organisation - the Council o f Chiefs; its history, gentil, tribaly
u. confederate, bis political society intervened, changing Council in Senat.
Simplest u. lowestform o f the Council - that o f the Gens; a dem ocratic assem bly,
w o every adult male u. female member had a v o ice upon all questions b rou gh t
before it; it elected u. deposed its sachem u. chiefs, ditto “ Keepers o f the F aith” ,
it condoned or avenged the m urder o f a gentilis, it adopted persons into the
gens. It w as the germ o f the higher council o f the tribe, and o f that s till higher
o f the confederacy, each o f which was composed exclusively o f chiefs as representatives o f the gentes. | So dies bei Iroquois u. selber Rechte der gentes der
Grecian u. L atin tribes [(save Punkte /, 2y 6, deren ancient existence doch
presum irt w d en muss)]
A ll the m em bers o f an Iroquois gens personally free, bou nd to defend each
other'sfreedom; equal in privileges u. personal rights. Sachem u. chiefs claim ing
no superiority; a brotherhood bound together by the ties o f kin. Liberty, Equality,
and Fraternityy th ou gh never form ulated, w ere cardinal principles der gens
u. diese d. unit o f a social u. governmental system, the foundation w or< au)f
Indian society organised. E rklärt sense o f independence u. personal dignity
universally an attribute o f Indian character.
Z u r Z eit der europäischen E n td eck g w aren d. American Indian tribes
generally organised into gentes, with descent in the fem ale line; In einigen
Tribes, w ie den Dacotas, the gentes had fallen out; in ändern, w ie unter
Ojibwas, d. Omahas u. d. Mayas o f Yucatan, descent has changed from fe­
male to male line. Throughout aboriginal Am erica dicgens nahm ihren Namen
von some animal, or inanimate object, neverfrom a person; in this early condition
o f society, the individuality o f persons was lost in the gens; d. gentes der Grecian
u. L atin tribes in der relativ späten Periode w o sie under historical notice
kom m en, were (bereits) named after persons. In einigen der tribes, w ie bei
M oqui Village Indians o f New M exico, the members o f the gens claimed their
descentfrom the animal whose name they bore - their rem ote ancestors h aving
been transform ed b y the G reat Spirit v o n animal into hum an form .
Personen^ahl d. gentes v a rie d :
3000 Senecas divided equally unter 8 gentes, w o u ld g iv e an average
v. 375 persons per gens;
i;,o o o Ojibwas divided unter 23 gentes - (w o u ld g iv e an average v .)
6jo perss per gens.
Cherokees w o u ld average m ore than 1000 to a gens.
In d. present condition d. H aupt Indian tribes Personenzahl in jeder gens
w o u ld range v. 100 to 1000.
E xcep t the Polynesians, every fam ily o f mankind seems to have come under the
Gentile organisation.
P t. I I . Ch. I I I . The Iroquois Phratry.
The phratry (cppaxpia) a brotherhood, a natural g ro w th from the organisation
into g en tes; an organic union or association o f 2 or more gentes o f the same tribe
fo r certain common objects. These gentes were usually such as had been form ed by
the segmentation o f an original gens.
U nter d. G recian gentes phratry nearly as constant as the gens;jeder d. 4 tribes
dr Athenians organised in 3 phratries, each composed o f 30 gentes; also 4 tribes =
12 phratries = 360 gentes, od. 4 tribes = 4 x 3 phratries = 4 x 3 x 30
gentes. Solche num erisch sym m etrische O rgan ization bew eist, dass später
Gesetz herum gearbeitet an d. gegebnen D ivision105 v. tribes in phratries u.
phratries in gentes. A l l the gentes o f a tribe - as a rule - o f common descent u.
bearing a common tribal name. T h e phratric organisation had a naturalfounda­
tion in the immediate kinship o f certain gentes as subdivisions o f an original gens
u. au f dieser basis auch d. Grecian phratry originally form ed.106 D . spätere
legislative numerical adjustment der Athenian tribes in phratries u. gentes
erheischte nur incorporation o f alien gentes u. transfer by consent or constraint.
V . d. functions d. Grecian phratry w en ig bekannt: observance o f special
religious rites; condonation or revenge o f the murder o f a phrator; 107 purification
o f a murderer nachdem er penalty o f his crim e escaped preparatory to his
restoration to society. 7ioia Se ^epviij; cppareptov 7rpocrSs^£Tai108 (Aeschylus,
Eumenides, v. 6j6). In A th en überlebte diese institution die E rrich tu n g o f
political society unter Cleisthenes; his fu n ctio n : to look after the registration o f
citizens, w d e so guardian o f descents u. o f the evidence o f citizenship. T h e wife
upon her marriage was enrolled in the phratry o f her husband u. d. children der
marriage w ere enrolled in the gens and phratry o f their father. T h e phratry
had s till the duty to prosecute the murderer o f a phrator in the courts o f justice
(Veränderte F orm der Blutrache!) W ären alle details know n , w e w o u ld
p rob ably find the phratry connected m it the common tables, the public
games, the funerals o f distinguished men, the earliest army organisation, 109 and
the proceedings o f councils, as w ell as observance o f religious rites and the guardianship o f social privileges. \ Analogue o f Greek phratry - the R om an curia.
” εΐη 8’ αν Έ λλά δι γλώ ττη τά ονόματα ταυτα μεθερμηνευόμενα φυλή μεν καί
τριττυς ή τρίβους, φράτρα δε καί λόχος ή κουρία,110 (Dionys. 1. I I , c. V I I :
cf. I. I I , c. i f ) Jede curia = 1 0 gentes in each o f the 3 R om an tribes,
m aking 30 curiae u . j 00 gentes; the curia entered directly into the g o v e rn ­
ment. T h e assembly o f the gentes - comitia curiata - vo te d by curiae, each
h avin g one collective vote. T h is assem bly the sovereign power o f the Roman
people down to Servius Tullius.
O f organic growth the phratry der Am erican aborigenes, w o sie existirte under
large num ber o f tribes ; had no governmental functions w ie gens, tribe, con­
federacy; certain social functions, nam tlich w ich tig when the tribe was large.
It presents the phratry in its archaic form and in its archaic functions.
1) The E ight gentes o f the Seneca-Iroquois Tribes, reintegrated in 2 phratries.
1st) Phratry. Gentes: 1) Bear. 2) W olf, 3) Beaver. 4) Turtle.
2nd) Phratry. Gentes: f) Deer. 6) Snipe. 7) Heron. 8) H aw k.
De-a-non-da’-a-yoh (Phratry) bedeutet brotherhood. T h e gentes in the same
phratry are brother gentes to each other, and cousin-gentes to those o f the
other phratry ; d. Senecas brauchen diese Ausdrücke w h en speaking o f gentes
in relation to the phratries. Originally marriage not allow ed unter d. m em ­
bers der same phratry, aber die M em bers je einer phratry konnte (ή )
heirathen into any gens o f the other. D ies Verbot (d. H eirath unter
G lied ern derselben Phratry) zeigt, dass d. gentes o f each phratry were subdi­
visions o f an original gens, u. d. V e rb o t to m arry into one’s o w n gens had
fo llo w ed to its subdivisions. D iese Restriction w ar seit lang versch w u n ­
den, ausser m it Be%ug auf marriage eines Individuums in seiner eignen gens.
Tradition der Senecas, dass d. Bär u. the D eer d. original gentes, v o n denen d.
andren subdivisions. A ls o : natural foundation der phratry - the kinship o f
the gentes o f which it was composed. A fte r their subdivision from increase o f
num bers there w as a natural tendency to their reunion in a higher organisation
fo r objects common to them all. Dieselben gentes nicht fü r im m er constant in a
phratry; w enn d. equilibrium in their respective num bers disturbed,
transfers o f particular gentes from one phratry to the other occurred.
M it increase o f numbers in a gens, fo llo w ed by local separation o f its members,
segmentation occurred, and the seceding portion adopted a new gentile name.
A b e r tradition o f their form er unity rem ained u. became the basis o f their
reorganisation in a phratry.
2) Cayuga— Iroquois. 8 gentes unequally divided between 2 phratries.
1st Phratry. Gentes. 1) Bear. 2) W olf. 3) Turtle. 4) Snipe, j) E e l.m
U nd Phratry. Gentes. 6) D eer 7) Beaver 8) H aw k.
Seven o f these gentes selbe w ie die der Senecas ; the Herongens versch w u n ­
den; E e l111 takes its place, bu t transferred to the other side. T h e Snipe
u. Beaver gentes also have exchanged fratries. D . Cajugas nennen auch d.
gentes der same phratry “ brother gentes” , die der opposite phratry “ Cousin
f ) Onondaga-Iroquois (8gentes, unequally divided in phratrieswie bet Cayugas.)
1st Phratry. Gentes. i) W olf. 2) Turtle, f ) Snipe. 4) Beaver. /) B a ll.
U n d 112 Phratry. Gentes. 6) D eer. 7) E e l. 111 8) Bear.
H aw k (bei d. Cayugas) ersetzt dch B a ll bei den Onondagas. C om position d.
Phratries different v o n der der Senecas. 3 d. gentes in d. is t phratry selbe,
aber Bear gens n o w fou n d m it Deer.
D . Onondagas have no H aw k, the Senecas no E el gens, aber fraternise w h en
they m eet, as connected w ith each other.
D . Mohawks u. Oneidas haben nur 3 gentes: 1) Bear, 2) W olf; 3) Turtle; no
phratries. Z u r Z e it der Bildung der Confederation seven o f the 8 Seneca
gentes existed in the several tribes, as shown by the establishment o f Sachemships in them. B u t the Mohawks u. Oneidas had on ly the 3 nam ed ; th ey had
then lost an entire phratry, and one gens o f that remaining - if ( J ) it is supposed (!)
that the original tribes were once composed | o f the same gentes.
W h en a tribe organised in gentes u. phratries subdivides, it m igh t occur
on the line o f the phratric organisation. O b gleich d. m em bers o f a tribe in­
termingled th ro u gh o u t b y marriage, each gens in a phratry is composed o f
females with their children and descendants through fem ales, w h o form ed the
bo d y o f the phratry. W o u ld incline to rem ain locally together, and
thus might become detached in a body. D . male members o f the gens m arried to
w om en o f other gentes and rem aining w ith their w ives w o u ld not affect
the gens since the children o f the male do not belong to its connexion. T h e gentes
and phratries can be fo llo w ed th ro u gh every tribe.
T h e Tuscarora-Iroquois w d en detachirt v o m main stock in unbekannter
Periode der V ergan genheit, bew ohn ten d. Neuse-river region von N orth
Carolina zu r Z e it ihrer E n td ecku n g. U m 1712 ve rjagt aus dieser A rea,
rem oved to the cou ntry der Iroquois, w ere adm itted in die C onfederacy
as 6th m em ber.
Tuscarora-Iroquois. 2 Phratries v. 8 gentes.
1st Phratry. Gentes. 1) Bear
2) Beaver, j ) Great Turtle. 4) E e l
I I Phratry. Gentes. /) Gray W olf. 6) Yellow W olf. 7) L ittle Turtle. 8) Snipe.
H aben 6 gentes in com m on w ith Cayugas u. Onondagas, / m it Senecas, 3 m it
Mohawks u. Oneidas. T h e D eer Gens, die sie einst besassen, extinct in
m odern times. W olf gens n o w divided in 2, Gray u. Yellow; ebenso Turtle
Gens verd op pelt in G reat u. L ittle. 3 o f the gentes in the first phratry the
same w ith 3 in the is t phratry der Senecas u. Cayugas, nur d. T u r tle 113
gens double. D a several 100 years zw isch en separation der T uscarora
v o n u. return zu ihren congeners, B ew eis o f perm(an)ence in the existence o f
a gens. W ie bei d. ändern tribes, d. gentes in d. same phratry called brother
gentes, die in the other cousin gentes.
Differences in the composition der Phratries zeigen ihre modification to m eet
changes o f condition, (die diese sie bildenden gentes befielen, w ie E n tv ö lk e rg
einiger, od. extinction etc) to preserve som e degree o f equilibrium in
the num ber o f phrators in each. Phratric organisation unter Iroquois v o n
unvordenklicher Z eit, älter als the confederacy, established über ^1U centuries
ago. Im G anzen d. difference in their com position as to gentes small,
bew eist perm anence der Phratry sow ohl als der gens. D . Iroquois tribes
hatten 38 gentes u. in 4 o f the tribes a total o f 8 phratries.
Unter d. Iroquois d. Phratry theils fo r social, theils fo r religious objects.
1) Games, gew ö h n lich bei tribal u. confederate councils. Z .B . in ball game
der Senecas they play by phratries, eine gegen d. andre, u. bet against each
other upon the result o f the game. E ach phratry puts fo rw a rd 115 its best
players etc. B efo r(e) d. Spiel beginnt, articles o f personal property a re116
hazarded u pon the results dch m em bers der opposite phratries, are de­
posited with keepers to abide the event.
2) A t a council o f the tribe the sachems and chiefs in each phratry usually
seated on opposite sides o f an imaginary Council-fire u. the speakers addressed
the 2 opposite bodies as the representatives o f the phratries.
3) W enn murder committed erst council d. gens des slain, dann council der gens
des M örd ers; aber gens o f the crim inal calls o ft on d. other gentes o f
their phratry (w hen the slayer u. the slayed belonged to opposite phratries), to
unite w ith them to obtain a condonation o f the andre. D an n hielt diese
Phratry ein council u. addressed itself hierauf an d. andre Phratry to w h ich
it sent a delegation with a belt o f white wampum asking fo r a council o f the
phratry u. an adjustm ent o f the crime. T h e y offered reparation to the
fam ily u. gens des m urdered in expressions o f regret u. presents o f value.
N egotiation s betw een the 2 councils, bis affirm ative or negative E ntscheidg erreicht. Influence einer phratry grösser als die einer gens u. b y
calling into action d. opposite phratry condonation wahrscheinlicher,
nam entlich bei extenuating circumstances. D aru m Grecian phratry (vo r
Civilisation) übernahm main m anagem ent o f cases o f m urder u. also o f
purification des m urderer w enn he escaped punishm ent; hence nach
Errichtung117 d. polit. society nim m t phratry an d. duty o f prosecuting the
m urderer in the courts o f justice. |
4) A t funerals o f persons o f recognised importance - conspicuous functions der
phratries (p. 95, 96) [In the case o f a defunct Sachem , the opposite phratry,
! n ot his ow n, sent im m ediately after the funeral, the official wampum-belt
o f the deceased ruler to the central council fire at Onondaga, as a notification
o f his demise. T h is was retained until the installation o f his successor,
u p o n w h o m it then bestow ed as the insignia o f his office.
5) Phratry directly concerned in the election o f sachems and Chiefs o f the
several gentes. H atte a gens successor ernannt für ihren deceased Sachem
(od. elected a ch ief o f the 2nd grade), so expected as a m atter o f course
that the gentes o f the same phratry w o u ld confirm the ch oice; aber m anchm al
opposition v o n Seiten der opposite phratry. D ad urch kam action of council
o f each phratry in ’s Spiel.
6) Früher v o r m odern times had the Senecas “ Medicine118 lodges” ; letztere
form ed a prom inent part o f their religious system ; to h old a Medicine
Lodge w as to observe their highest religious rites, and to practice their
highest religious m ysteries; they had 2 such organisations, one in each
phratry; each w as a brotherhood into w h ich new m em bers w ere adm itted
b y a form al initiation.
Unlike the Grecian phratry u. d. Roman curia this Indian phratry had no
official head; ebenso no religious functionaries belonging to it as distinguished von
gens u. tribe.
M . betrachtet die 4 “ lineages” o f the Tlascalans w h o occupied the 4 quarters
o f the pueblo o f Tlascala, als so m any phratries (nicht als so many tribes,
w eil sie occupied the same pueblo and spoke the same dialect.) E ach “ lineage”
od. phratry had a distinct military organisation, a peculiar costume u. banner,
and its head w a r-ch ief ( Teuctli) w h o w as its general m ilitary com m ander.
They went forth to battle by phratries. T h e organisation o f a military force by
phratries u. by tribes nicht unbekannt d. homerischen Griechen. Nestor sagt
SU κρΐν' άνδρας κατά φϋλα, κατά φρήτρας, Άγάμεμνον,
ώς φρήτρη φρήτρηφιν άρήγη, φυλα δέ φύλοις.119 {Horn. Iliad. II, 362-363.)
D . Chocta gentes united in 2 phratries, the first called “ Divided People” ,
containing 4 gentes; the second “ Beloved People” , contains also 4 gentes.
T h is separation of the people into 2 divisions by gentes created two phratries. - A
tribe hat nie weniger als 2 gentes. T h e gens increases in number of its members,
divides into 2; these again subdivide, and in tim e reunite in 2 or m ore
phratries. These phratries form a tribe, and its m em bers speak the same
dialect. In course o f tim e this tribe fa lls into several by process of segmentation,
which in turn reunite in a confederacy. Such a confederacy is a growth, th rou gh
the tribe and phratry, from a pair o f gentes.
Mohegan Tribe, had 3 original gentes, Wolf, Turtle, Turkey. E ach o f these
subdivided, and the subdivisions became independent gentes, bu t they retained
the names o f the original subdivisions o f each gens as their respective phratric
names, alias the subdivisions o f each gens reorganised into a phratry. D ies beweist
conclu sively the natural process, w d ch, in course o f time, a gens breaks up
into several, u. diese remain united in a phratric organisation w h ich is expressed
b y assum ing a phratric name.
Mohegan tribe, originally consisting aus 3 gentes, Wolf, Turtle, Turkey.
I) W olf Phratry. 4 gentes. i) Wolf. 2) Bear, f) Dog. 4) Opossum.
II) Turtle
4 120 gentes. j) L ittle Turtle. 6) Mud Turtle. 7) Great Turtle
8) Yellow E e l.111
III) Turkey
„ 3
gentes. 9) Turkey. 10) Crane. 11) Chicken.
Selten unter den A m erican Indian T ribes befand sich plain evidence o f the
Segmentation o f gentes, fo llo w ed b y the formation into phratries o f their
respective subdivisions. Show s also that the phratry founded upon the kinship
o f the gentes. A s a rule the name o f the original gens out o f w h ich others had
form ed - u n k n o w n ; bu t in each o f these cases it remains as the nam e o f
the phratry. D e r Nam e nur einer der Athenian phratries kn o w n to us ; die
der Iroquois had no name bu t that o f brotherhood.
P t I I C h. I V . The Iroquois Tribe.
American aborigenes fallen in %ahtt°se tribes “ b y the natural process o f
segm entation each tribe individualized by a name, a separate dialect, a supreme
government, a territory, occupied and defended as its own. T h e dialects as numerous
as I the tribes, fo r separation nicht com plete, before dialectical variation had
com m enced. - M o rga n glaubt, dass all the num erous aborigin al A m erican
tribes (minus Eskim os w h o no aborigenes) form ed out o f one originalpeople.
D . term N ation angew andt a u f viele Indian tribes, tro tz gerin ger V o lk s ­
zahl, v . w egen exclusive possession o f a dialect and o f a territory. A b e r Tribe
u. N ations nicht genaue E qu ivalents ; unter gentile institutions entspringt
nation nur, w ann d. tribes, united under the same govern m ent, have
coalesced into one people, w ie d. 4 A thenian tribes in A ttica , 3 D o ria n tribes
in Sparta, 3 L atin u. Sabine tribes at Rom e. Federation requires independent
tribes in separate territorial areas; coalescence unites them b y a high er process
in the same area, o bgleich tendency to local separation by gentes u. by tribes
w o u ld continue. T h e confederacy is the nearest analogue o f the nation.
Sehr selten Fälle unter d. A m erican aborigenes, w o the tribe embraced
peoples speaking different dialects; w o d. Fall, w a r’s Resultat der U n ion eines
schw ächeren m it einem stärkeren tribe speaking a closely related dialect, w ie
d. union der M issouris - after their overthrow - m it den Otoes. D . great body
d. aborigenes w ard gefunden in independent tribes; nur w e n ige hatten es
gebracht zu conféderacy o f tribes speaking dialects o f the same stock language.
Constant tendency to disintegration existed in the elem ents o f gentile organi­
zation, aggravated dch tendency to divergence o f speech, inseparable fro m their
social state and the large area o f their occupation. A verbal language, o bgleich
m erkw ü rd ig persistent in its vocables u. noch m ehr in its grammaticalform s, is incapable o f permanence. D e r Lokalen Separation - in area - flgt im L a u f
der Z eit variation in speech; dies leads to separation in interests u. to
ultim ate independence. D . grosse Z a h l von dialects u. stocklanguages in
N ord- u. Südamerika w ahrscheinlich - save d. E skim os - abgeleitet v o n
one original language, erheischten fü r ihre Bildung the time measured by 3 ethnic
New tribes u. new gentes w ere constantly fo rm in g b y natural g ro w th ; der
process sensibly accelerated dch the great expanse d. Am erican continent. D .
M ethode w a r einfach. F rom some overstocked geographical centre, possessing
superior advantages in the means o f subsistence, a gradual o u tflo w o f people.
D ies continued jährlich, so a considerable population developed at a distance
vom original seat des tribe; im L a u f der Z e it d. emigrants w erd en distinct in
interests, strangers in feeling, schliesslich divergent in speech; separation u.
independence fo llo w , though their territories were contiguous. D ies repeated
itself von age %u age in newly acquired as well as in old areas__ W h en increased
numbers pressed upon the means o f subsistence, the surplus removed to a new seat
w o sie sich m it Leichtigkeit etablirten, weil the government was perfect in every
gens u. in any number o f gentes united in a band. [Dies w as ‘ organised colonisa­
tion' !] U nter d. Village Indians selber Process in etwas m odificirter Form .
W h en a village becam e o vercrow d ed w ith num bers, a colony w en t up or
d ow n on the same stream u. commenced a new village; repeated at intervals,
several such villages appear, each independent o f the other and selfgo vern in g
b o d y ; b u t united in a league or confederacy fo r m utual p rotectio n ; dialectical
variation finally springing up, com pletes their growth into tribes.
Tribes form ed b y the subdivisions o f an original tribe possess a number o f
gentes in common u. speak dialects o f the same language; have a num ber o f
gentes selbst nach centuries o f separation. So die Hurons, jezt Wyandotes,
haben 6 gentes desselben Namens m it 6 der gentes der Seneca-Iroquois, nach
at least 400 J. T renn u ng. D ie Potawattamies haben 8 gentes selben Namens
mit 8 unter d. Ojibwas, w h d d. form er 6 u. d. letzteren 14 different haben;
sh ow in g dass neue gentes form ed in each tribe by segmentation seit ihrer
T renn u ng. E in noch älterer A b setzer der Ojibwas - oder eines com m on
parent tribe beider - die M iam is, haben nur 3 gentes in com m on m it den
form er, W olf\ Loon u. Eagle.
Illustrations from tribes in Lower State o f Barbarism.
8 M issouri tribes, bei ihrer E n td ecku n g occu py the banks des M issouri über
1000 miles zus. m it d. banks o f its tributaries, the Kansas u. the P latte,
ebenso the smaller rivers o f Iowa; ebenso West Bank o f M ississippi down
to the Arkansas. T h e dialects bew eisen dass the people in 3 tribes before
the last subdivisions, n äm lich :
1) Punkas u. Omahas; 2) low as, Otoes u. M issouris; 3) Kaws, O sages, u.
Quappas; ihre several dialects nearer to each other than to any other dialect der
Dakotian stock language to w h ich they b elo n g ; also linguistic necessity fo r
their derivation von an original tribe, w o v o n sie subdivisions; spreading from a
central point on the M issouri along its banks, ab o ve u. b e lo w ; m it increase o f
distance between their settlements - separation in interests, fo llo w ed by
divergence o f speech u. finally b y independence. E xten d in g along a river in a
prairie country such a people m ight separate first in 3 tribes, dann in 8,
the organisation o f each subdivision rem aining com plete. Division m eant a
separation into parts by natural expansion over a larger area, fo llo w e d by a
complete segmentation. D e r uppermost \ tribe on the M issouri - the Punkas
at the mouth o f the Niobrara river; the lowermost th e Quappas at the mouth o f
the Arkansas on the M ississippi; near 15 00 miles betw een them. T h e
intermediate region, confined to the narrow belt o f forest upon the Missouri, w as
held b y the rem aining 6 tribes. T h e y w ere strictly River Tribes.
Tribes o f L ake Superior. 1) Ojibwas; 2) Otawas ( = O -tä ’-w as); 3) Pottawa-
tamies subdivisions o f an original trib e ; die Ojibwas der original tribe, the
stem, bleiben am original seat at the great fisheries upon the outlet o f the lake;
they are styled “ E lder Brother” dch d. beiden ändern, d. Ottawas “ next elder
brother” , die Pottawatamies - “ Younger Brother” . D ie letzteren separated
first, die Ottawas last, as sh ow n by the relative amount o f dialectical variation,
that o f the Pottaw attam ies being greatest. A ls entdeckt, 16 14 , d. Ojibwas
seated at the Rapids on the outlet o f L ake Superior, from w h ich p oin t they
had spread alon g the southern shore o f the lake to the site o f Ontonagon,
along its northeastern shore and d ow n the St. Mary River w ell toward
L ake Huron; ihre position fam os fo r a fish and game subsistence [T h ey did
not cultivate mai%e and plants]; zurückstehend keiner p o rtio n in N orth america ausser dem Valley der Columbia. [D . Ojibwas m anufactured
earthen pipes, water ja rs u. vessels in ancient times, as they n o w assert.
- -Indian pottery zu verschiednen Z eiten dug up at the Sault S t. Mary, the
_w o rk o f their forefathers.] M it such advantages certain to develop a
large Indian population u. send out successive bands o f emigrants to become inde­
pendent tribes.
D . Pottawa(ta)mies occupied a region on the confines o f Upper Michigan u.
Wisconsin, w oraus 1641 the D akotas w ere in act o f expelling them . Z u ­
gleich d. Ottawas, deren earlier evidence supposed on the Ottawa river o f
Canada, had draw n w estw ard ; - damals seated up on the Georgian Bay,
the Manitouline islands u. at Mackinaw, v o n w elch en P un kten they w ere
spreading südlich über L o w e r M ichigan. - Separation in place and distance
had lo n g before their d iscovery resulted in the form ation o f dialects, u.
in tribal independence. D . 3 tribes, deren territories contigu ou s, had
form ed an alliance fo r m utual protection, “ the Ottaiva Confederation”
(offen (s)ive u. defensive league)
V o r diesen secessions another affiliated tribe, the M iam is, had brok en off
v o m O jib w a stock - the com m on parent tribe - u. m igrated to Central
Illinois u. Western Indiana. F olgen d im track dieser m igration w ere the
Illinois, another u. later offshoot v o m same stem, w h o afterwards subdivided
in PeoriaSy Kaskaskias, Weaws u. Piankeshaws. Ihre dialects m it dem der
M iam i nearest affinity m it d. Ojibwa u. next m it the Cree [The Pottaw [at) amie u. Cree have d iverged about eq u a lly ; w h sch lich Ojibwas, Ottawas u.
Cree one people in dialect nach d. detachment dr Potawattamies\
Outflow aller dieser tribesfrom central scat at the greatfisheries o f L ake Superior as a natural centre o f subsistence. D . Algonkins v. New England, Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia u. Carolina sehr w hsclich derived v o n same stock.
_Each emigrating band in the nature o f a military colony, seeking to acquire
I u. h old a new area, preserving at first, and as long as possible, a connection
with the mother tribe; dch these successive movements they so u gh t to expand
theirjo in t possessions u. afterw ard, to resist the intrusion o f alien people within
_their lim its__ T h e Indian tribes speaking dialects o f the same stock language
I have been usually found in territorial continuity, h o w ev er extended their
com m on area. D ies gilt, in the main, v o n a ll tribes o f mankind linguistically
united__ Spreading from one common centre
they have preserved their
connection with the motherland as a means o f succor in times o f danger, and
as a place o f refuge in calamity.
D am it an area initial pa rt o f migration w erde dch gradual production o f a
'T~surplus population required special advantages in the means o f subsistence.
I Solche natural centres wenig zahlreich in Nordamerika in fact, nur 3. A n der
Spitze the Valley o f the Columbia, ausgezeichnetste region on the face o f the
earth in the variety and amount o f subsistence it afforded, prior to the cultivation
o f maize and plants. E xcellent game country as m ixture o f forest u. prairie. In
the prairies w uchs a species o f bread-root, the Kamash u. zw ar abundantly;
in these respects it was, h o w ever, not superior to other areas; w as es aus(Z)eichnet - inexhaustible supply o f salmon im Columbia u. ändern Küstenflüssen.
j T h e y crow ded these streams in m illions, w ere taken in the season mit
facility u. greatest abundance. A fte r being sp lit open u. dried in the sun, they
were packed u. removed to the villages, form ed their principal fo o d during
the greater part o f the year. A usserdem d. shell fisheries der Küste, supplying
large amount o f food during the winter months. A usserdem Clim a m ild u.
equable th ro u gh o u t the year, abt that o f Virginia u. Tennessee, w as the
paradise o f tribes ohne knowledge der cereals. E s kann sehr w h clich gem acht
w erden, dass d. Valley o f Columbia the seedland o f the Ganowanian fam ily,
w o v o n successive streams o f m igratory bands, bis both divisions des Con­
tinent occupied, u. dass beide divisions, bis zu r E p o ch e der europ. E n td ecku n g
replenished w ith inhabitants v o n dieser Q uelle. D . grosse Ausdehnung der \
Centralprairien, spreading continuously m ore than i j o o miles v . N o rd nach
Süd u. über 1000 miles von O st nach West, interposed a barrier to free com­
munication zwischen Pacific u. A tlan tic sides des Continents in Nordamerika.
W hsclich daher, dass an original fam ily com m encing its spread from the
Valley o f the Columbia, u. m igrating under the influence o f physical causes,
~ T w o u ld reach Patagonia eher als Florida. D ie Entdeckung d. M aize w ürde d.
course o f events nicht m aterially change, or suspend the action o f
" p r e v i o u s causes. N ich t bekannt w o das American cereal indigenous; aber
Central Am erica, w o vegetation intensely active, w o M aize peculiarly fru itfu l,
w o d. oldest seats dr Village Indians found
probable place o f nativity o f
M aize. V o n Centralam erica die cultivation w o u ld have spread to M exico,
dann N eu M exico u. valley des M ississippi, v o n da östlich to the shores des
A tlan tic; the vo lu m e o f cultivation dim inishing from the starting poin t to
the extrem ities. It w o u ld spread independently v o n d. V illa g e Indians,
from the desire o f m ore barbarous tribes to gain the new subsistence;
aber extended nie über N eu M exico to the Valley o f the Columbia, obgleich
cultivation practiced dch d. Minnitarees u. Mandans des Upper Missouri,
die Shyans des Red River des N o rth , b y the Hurons o f L ake Simcoe in Canada,
the Abenakies o f the Kennebek, w ie generally b y a ll the tribes zwischen M is­
sissippi u. A tlantic. M igrating bands v o n d. V a lle y o f C olum bia w o u ld
press upon the village Indians o f N eu M exico u. M exico, tending to force
displaced u. fragm en tary tribes towards and through the Istmus into South
Am erica, w o h in diese w o u ld carry the first germ s o f progress developed
b y the V illa g e Indians. Repeated at intervals o f tim e it w o u ld tend to
b estow upon South Am erica a class o f inhabitants fa r superior to the wild bands
formerly supplied, and at the expense o f the N orth ern section thus im p o v­
erished. So South Am erica would attain the advancedposition in developm ent,
even in an in ferio r country, w h ich seems to have been the fact. T h e
Peruvian legend o f Manco Capac u. Mama Oello, children o f the sun, brother
and sister, husband and wife show s that a band o f village Indians, m igrating
fro m a distance, though not necessarily from N orth Am erica direct, had gath__ered togeth er and tau g h t the rude tribes o f the Andes the high er arts o f life
I including the cultivation o f Mai^e and plants; legend dropped out the band,
retained only the leader and his wife.
2)tes (nach Valley o f Columbia) natural initial centre: the peninsula between
L akes Superior, H uron u. Michigan, the seat o f the Ojibwas u. nursery land o f
many Indian tribes.
j t ) natural initial centre: the L ake region o f Minnesota, the nursery ground der
present D akotian tribes. G ru n d anzunehm en, dass Minnesota was a pa rt o f
the Algonkin area v o r B esetzg dch d. Dakotas.
Sobld cultivation o f mai^e u. plants erschien, it tended to localise the people u.
support them in smaller areas, as w ell as to increase their numbers; übertru g
aber nicht control des Continents to the most advanced tribes der Village Indians,
die fa s t nur von Cultivation subsisted. Horticulture spread unter d. principal
tribes in the Lower Status o f barbarism, im pro ved greatly their condition.
T h e y held, m it d en non horticultural tribes, the great areas o f N orth Am erica
w h en d iscovered, u. v . ihren ranks the Continent replenished m it in­
habitants. Incessant warfare d. aborigenes m it einander; als R egel the most
persistent warfare unter tribes speaking different stock languages, w ie z.B .
zw ischen Iroquois u. A lgonkin tribes u. der ersteren ditto m it d. D akota
tribes. D a g g e n A lgonkin u. D akota tribes lived at peace m it each other,
gezeig t dch occupation o f continuous areas. D ie Iroquois pursued a w ar o f
exterm ination g eg e n th eir kindred tribes, the E ries, N eutral N ation, the
Hurons u. d. Susquehannocks. T ribes speaking dialects derselben stocklanguage
können sich verstän d igen , com pose their differences, u. lernen, in virtue
o f their com m on descent, sich als natural allies zu betrachten.
Bevölkerungs^ahl121 in a given area lim ited b y amount o f the subsistence it
afforded; w h en fish u. game th e main reliance fo r food., immense area required
to m aintain a small tribe. A ls farinaceous food hinzukam , area occu pied b y
a tribe still large in proportion to the number o f the people. New York - m it
47,000 □ miles hatte nie m eh r als 2j,ooo Indians, inclus. m it d. Iroquois d.
Algonkins on the eastside des Hudson u. upon the Long Island u. d. E ries u.
N eutral N ation in d. westlichen Seite des Staats. A personal government,
gegründet upon gentes, u n fäh ig hinreichde central power zu entw ickeln to
con trol the increasing num bers des people, w en n sie nicht in reasonable
distance v o n | einander blieben.
Unter d. Village Indians v o n N eu M exico, M exico u. Centralamerica Wachsthum der Bevölkrungs%ahl upon a sm all area hielt nicht den Process der D is­
integration auf. W o verschiedne pueblos seated nah bei einander am selben
Strom , the people usually o f common descent u. under a tribal o r confederate
government. [E ach pueblo g ew ö h n lich an independent, selfgo vern in g community\. A b o u t 7 stock languages, allein gesprochen in New M exico, jede
mit several dialects. Z u r Z e it v. Coronado's expedition - i j 40-42 - the
villages fo u n d numerous bu t small. E s w aren ihrer 7 o f Cibola, Tucayan
u. Quivira u. Heme% u. 12 o f Tiguex, u. andre g rou p s indicating a linguistic
connection o f their m em bers. U nbekannt ob each g ro u p confederated.
D ie i M oqui Pueblos (die T u cayan villages o f C o ro n ad o ’s expedi­
tion) sollen jetzt confederate sein, w aren es w ahrsclich zu r Z eit ihrer
E n td eckg.
D .process o f subdivision operating unter d. A m erican aborigenes fü r iooode
v . Jah(r)en , hat in N orth Am erica allein an 40 stock languages entw ickelt,
w o v o n jede gesprochen in A n zah l v . dialects dch gleiche Z ah l unab­
hängiger tribes.
F ür an Am erican Indian tribe nur a few hundreds u. höchstens a few 1000
people erh e(i)sch t, um ihn in a respectable position in Ganowanian fam ily
zu stellen.
Functions u. attributes o f the Indian tribes, (p . 112-121)
1) Possession o f a territory and a name.
The territory - their actual settlement u. so m uch o f the surrounding region als
tribe ranged over in hunting u. fishing u. could defend g egen andre encroaching
trib es; darüber hinaus a wide margin o f neutralgrounds, separating them v o m
nächsten T ribe, speaking a different language, and claim ed b y neither; less
w id e and less clearly m arked, w h en they spoke dialects o f the same language.
D ie names, die nach u. nach d. tribes individualize, in vielen cases zu fällig
w ie d. Senecas nannten sich selbst “ Great H ill People” etc N ach Beginn der
europäischen Colonisation im nördlichen A m erik a erhielten d. Indian tribes
Namen von ändern tribes w h o had bestow ed names u p o n them different
from their ow n. H ence a number o f tribes kn o w n in h istory under names not
recognised b y them selves.
2) The exclusive possession o f a dialect.
T rib e and dialect substantially co-extensive. D . 12 D akota bands jetzt
p roperly tribes, aber fou n d in vo rzeitige T ren n u n g dch advance o f
A m ericans u pon their original area w h ich forced them upon the plains.
F rüher w a r ihre connexion so intim ate geblieben dass nur one new dialect
w as form in g, the Teeton, o n the M issou ri; the Isauntie on the M ississippi
bein g the original speech. V o r einigen Jahren d. Cherokees zählten 26,000,
largest num ber o f Indians ever fou n d w ith in U .S t., speaking the same
dialect; in the mountain districts o f Georgia a slight divergen ce o f speech
had occurred. D . Ojibwas, still in the m ain non-horticultural, about 1 5,000,
speak the same dialect; d. D a k o ta tribes, 2j,ooo, 2 closely related dialects.
D ies Ausnahm en. In U . St. u. British Am erica zählt a tribe on average
less than 2000.
3) The right o f investing Sachems u. Chiefs elected b j the Gentes.
4) The right to depose Sachems and Chiefs.
In the Status o f Savagery and in the Lower and also in the M iddle Status o f
barbarism, office w as b estow ed fo r life, or during g o o d behaviour.
D . Sachems u. Chiefs, v . d. gentes gew ählt, w d en nach T rib e B ildu ng,
members d. Tribal Council; hence d. R echt v . Investitr letzteren Vorbehalten;
(ebenso hatte er auch A bsetzn gsrecht; g in g, nach B ild u n g v. C onfeder­
ation a u f council o f confederacy über. T h e offices o f sachem and chief universally
elective north o f M e x ic o ; evidence in other parts o f the Continent, evidence,
dass sie es allgem ein so ursprünglich gew esen.
5) The possession o f a religious fa ith and worship.
“ A fte r the fashion o f barbarians the Am erican Indians were a religious people”
(p. 115) Medicine lodge - Dancing form o f worship.
6) A supreme government through a council o f chiefs.
Gens represented b y its chiefs. Tribe represented b y the council o f the chiefs
o f the gentes. Called together under circum stances kn o w n to all, held in
the m idst o f the people, open to their orators, it w as certain to | act
under popular influence. Council (tribal) had to guard and p rotect the
com m on interests o f the tribe. Q uestions and exigencies arising th rou gh
their incessant w arfare w ith other tribes. A s a general rule, the council
open to any private individual desiring to address it on a p ublic
“ p T h e women allowed to express their wishes and opinions through an orator o f
their own election. Decision g iv en b y the Council. Unanimity was a funda­
mental law o f its action among the Iroquois. M ilitary questions usually left to
the action o f the voluntary principle. T h eoretically each tribe at war with
every other tribe w ith w h ich it had not form ed a treaty o f peace. A n y person
at liberty to organise a war-party and conduct an expedition w o h in er
w ollte. E r announced his project by giving a war-dance and inviting volunteers.
I f he succeeded in fo rm in g a party, w h ich w o u ld consist o f such persons
as joined him in the dance, they departed immediately, w h ile enthusiasm
was at its height. When a tribe was menaced with an attack, w a r parties w ere
form ed to m eet it in m uch the same manner. W here forces so raised w ere
united in one b o d y, each under its own war-captain and their jo in t movements
determ ined by a council o f these captains. T h is relates to tribes in the Lower
Status o f Barbarism. T h e A ztecs u. Tlascalans w en t o ut by phratries, each
subdivision under its own captain, u. distinguished by costumes and banners.
Confederation o f Iroquois u. that o f the A ztecs w ere the m ost rem arkable fo r
aggressive purposes. U nter Tribes in the Lower Status o f Barbarism, incl. the
Iroquois, the m ost destructive w o r k perform ed b y inconsiderable war-parties,
beständig form in g and m aking expeditions into distant regions. Sanction
o f the Council fo r diese expeditions w eder sought, no r necessary.
Council o f the tribe had p o w er to declare war u. make peace, send and receive
embassies, make alliances; intercourse between independent tribes conducted b y
wise men and chiefs, delegated dazu. W hen a tribe expected such a delega­
tion, a council was convened fo r its reception and fo r the transaction o f its
7) A . head chief o f the tribe in some instances.
N äm lich a Sachem, superior in rank to his associates. D e r Council nur
selten in session u. urgencies m igh t arise demanding the provisional action
o f someone authorized to represent the tribe, subject to the ratification o f
his acts b y the council. T h is on ly basis fo r the office o f head chief. Iroquois
had none u. their confederacy had no executive officer. W o d. head chief in
Indian tribes existed there, in a form too feeble to correspond to the con­
ception o f an executive magistrate. T h e elective tenure o f the office o f chief and
the liability o f the person to deposition, settle the character o f the office.
D . Council o f Indian C h ief(s) w as a govern m en t o f one power, prevailin g
generally am ong the tribes in Lower Status o f Barbarism. D ies erstes Stadium.
Zweites Stadium: a govern m ent coordinated betw een a council o f chiefs and
a general military commander, one representing the civil, the other the military
functions. D ies form began to m anifest itself in the L o w e r Status o f Bar­
barism after formation o f Confederacies, becam e definite in M iddle Status. D .
office o f general - ch ief m ilitary com m ander - was the germ o f that o f a chief
executive magistrate, king, em peror, president; a government o f 2 powers.
D rittes Stadium: govern m en t o f a people or nation b y a council o f chiefs,
an assembly o f the people, and a general military commander. A ppears under
tribes w h o had attained to the Upper Status o f Barbarism, Homeric Greeks
or Italian tribes o f the period o f Romulus. L arge increase o f p eople united in
a nation, their establishment in walled cities, creation o f wealth in flocks, herds,
lands, b rou g h t in the assembly o f the people as an instrum ent o f govern m ent.
Councils o f chiefs becam e a preconsidering council; popular assembly adopted or
rejected public measures, its action final; lasdy a general. D ies blieb bis
E intritt v . political society, w enn unter A thenians z.B ., council o f chiefs
becam e Senate, the assem bly o f the people the ecclesia or popular assembly.
In M iddle Status o f Barbarism the gentes organised into tribes rem ained as
before, aber confederacies m ore frequent. In som e areas, as in the Valley o f
M exico, keinesw egs - no evidence dafür - dass political society established.
It is impossible to fo(u )n d a political society or a state upon gentes.
P t. I I . Ch. V . The Iroquois Confederacy.
Verbindung fo r mutual protection erst122 - einfach fact, h ervo rgeru fen dch
necessities (w ie attack v o n aussen), dann League, dann systematic confederacy.
Bei E n td ecku n g v . A m erica existirten confederacies in verschiednen
parts, u. a. nam tlich: Iroquois confederacy o f / independent tribes, Creek
Confederacy o f 6, Otawa Confederacy o f 3, D akota League123 o f the | “ Seven
Council Fires” , d. M oqui Confederacy in New M exico o f 7 Pueblos, the A%tec
Confederacy o f 3 tribes in the Valley o f M exico. A m leichtesten B ild g v.
confederacy (generally difficult w e gen den “ unstable geographical relations”
fü r d. Village Indians im M iddle Status o f Barbarism ) w e ge n der nearness
ihrer pueblos zu einander u. d. smallness ihrer areas. D ie berühm testen
Confederacies in N ortham erica die der A ztecs, u. die der Iroquois;
letztere genau bekan nt; erstere hatte whsclich denselben Charakter o f
systematic confederacy, aber in d. historischen (span.) B erichten erscheint sie
m ehr od. m inder als blosse league o f 3 kindred tribes, offensive and defensive.
The Confederacy had the gentesfo r its basis and centre u. stock language (w o vo n d.
dialects s till mutually intelligible') and stock language fo r its circumference; none
fo u n d b eyo n d the bounds o f the dialects o f a com m on language - other­
w ise heterogeneous elem ents w o u ld have been forced into the organi­
sation. Ausnahmsweis w o h l einm al die remains o f a tribe n o t cognate in
speech admitted into an existing confederacy, w ie z.B . die N a t c h e after their
o verth ro w b y the French, into the Creek Confederacy. T h ere w as no
possible way o f becoming connected on equal terms with a confederacy ausser dch
membership in a gens and tribe, and a common speech.
Monarchy incompatible with gentilism. T h e Grecian tyrannies w ere despotisms
founded upon usurpation - the germ o ut o f w h ich the later kingdom s a ro se;
the socalled kingdoms o f the homeric age w ere military democracies, and noth in g
m ore. D ie Iroquois ursprünglich em igrants from beyon d the M issis­
sip p i,124 w h clich a branch des D akota stock; erst nach valley d. S t. Lawrence,
settled near Montreal. D c h d. h ostility d. surrounding tribes gezw u n gen ,
sie nach d. central region o f N e w Y o r k . M it canoes coasting d. östliche
G estade des See Ontario (their num bers sm all).125 Ihre erste Niederlassung
an Mündung des Oswego river, w o sie nach ihren traditions lang blieben;
w aren damals w enigstens 3 distinct tribes, /) Mohawks, 2) Onondagas u.
3) Senecas. E in tribe settled nachher at the head o f the Canandaigua lake, 126
becam e the Seneca; andrer occupied the Onondaga127 valley, w d en die
Onondagas; dritter passed östlich, settled erst at Oneida, bei site o f U tica,
rem oved then to Mohawk Valley, becam e the Mohawks. D ie die blieben,
w d en die 4) Oneidas. E in T h eil der Senecas oder der O nondagas settled
entlang dem eastern shore des Cayuga lake, w d en d. Cayugas. V o r B esetzn g
dch d. Iroquois, scheint New York T h eil der area der A lgon[kin\128
tribes gew esen zu sein 128; nach ihren traditions entsetzten d. Iroquois d.
alten B ew ohn er w ie sie gradually ihre N iederlassungen ausdehnten,
östlich v o m Hudson, u. w estlich v o m Genesee.
[A lso bis dato 5 tribes: 1) Seneca 2) Cayuga, 3) Ononondaga, 4) Oneidas
5) Mobawk)\
N ach ihrer tradition lange Z e it nach ihrer N iederlassung in N e w Y o r k ,
w h d der sie com m on cause against their enemies m achten, aber ehe sie
C onfederacy bildeten. Residirten in villages, gew ö h n lich um geben m it
stockades, lebten von fish u. game, u. d. products o f a limited horticulture. Ihre
~TAnzahl nie über 20,000. Precarious subsistence u. incessant warfare repressed
I numbers in all the aboriginal tribes, inclus. the Village Indians. T h e Iroquois
enshrouded in great forests, then overspreading N e w Y o rk . Zuerst sie
entdeckt 1608; um i 6j j culminating point ihrer dominion über weite
Area, covering grösseren Theil v. New York, Pennsylvania u. Ohio.
[( 16j i -/ expelled sie their kindred tribes, d. Eries, von Area ^wischen
Genesee river u. Lake Erie, kurz nachher d. Neutral Nations vo m Niagara
river, kamen so in Besitz des Rests von N e w Y o rk , mit Ausnahme des
Lo w er Hudson u. Lo n g Island)] u. portions of Canada, north o f lake O n ­
tario. Z u r Zeit ihrer Entdeckg waren sie d. highest representatives o f
the Red Race im Norden v. ( N e w ) 129 Mexico in Intelligenz u. advance­
ment, obgleich inferior to the G u lf tribes in arts o f life. N och 4000 Iro­
quois in N e w Y o rk , abt 1000 in Canada u. ebenso viel im Westen.
Confederation formed about / 400-14J0 (früher nach den generations o f
Sachems in the history o f David Cusick, 130 a Tuscarora.) The Iroquois
lebten - die 5 tribes - in contiguous territories, sprachen einander ver­
ständliche dialects derselben Sprache u. hatten certain common gentes in
the several tribes. Andre tribes in selben Umständen, aber d. Iroquois,
dch Bildung der confederacy, zeigten ihre superiority. N ach ihrer Sage
d. confederacyformed dch a council of wise men and chiefs der 5 tribes, meeting
for d. purpose on the north shore of the Onondaga lake, near the site of Syracuse,
perfected in ihrer session d. organization u. set in immediate operation.
D . origin d. plan zugeschrieben einer traditionary person Hä-yo-wenf-hä,
der Hiawatha Longfellow ’s. D . formation d. Confederation still cele­
brated unter ihnen as a masterpiece o f Indian wisdom, nach d. Iroquois
selbst bis jetzt ftexistirende Form ihrer Organisation mit kaum irgend
einem change. |
D . general practices der Iroquois confederacy sind:
1 ) A union of j tribes, composed o f commongentes, under one government on
the basis o f equality; jeder tribe remaining independent in all
matters pertaining to local self-government.
2) A general Council of Sachems, limited in number, equal in rank u.
authority, invested with supreme powers in all matters relating to
the Confederacy.
3) jo Sachemships were created and named in perpetuity in certain gentes of
the several tribes; with power in these gentes tofill vacancies occurring, by
election from among their respective members, u. mit power to
depose from office for cause; the right to invest these Sachems with office
reserved to the General Council.
4) The Sachems o f the Confederacy also Sachems in their respective tribes,
and with the Chiefs of these tribes formed the Council of each, which
tribal council supreme over all matters pertaining to the tribe exclu­
1 65
T ~ 5) Unanimity in the Council made essential to every public act.
' 6) In the General Council the Sachems voted by Tribes, each tribe had so
a negative upon the others. (Poland!)
7) Council of each tribe hadpower to convene the general council; the latter had
no power to convene itself.
9) The Confederacy had no chief Executive Magistrate, or offinal head.
8) The General Council was open to the orators of the people for the discussion
ofpublic questions; but the Council alone decided.
10) Experiencing the necessityfor a general military commander they created the
office in a dualform, that one might neutralize the other. T he 2 prin­
cipal warchiefs created were made equal in power.
When the Tuscaroras später admitted, they allowed by courtesy to sit as
equals in the General Council, but the original number of Sachems wde nicht
The Sachemships were distributed unequally among the j tribes, but without
giving to either a preponderance o f power, and unequally among the gentes
of the last three tribes.
Mohawks had 9 Sachems, Oneidas 9, Onondagas 14, Cayugas 10, Senecas 8.
D . Sachems waren arrangirt in Klassen to facilitate the attainment o f
unanimity in the Council
1) Mohawks, iste class. 3 (Turtle tribe). 2t class 3. (W olf tribe). 3t Classe
3 (Bear tribe)
2) Oneidas
3 (W olf tribe)
3 (Turtle tribe) „
3 (Bear tribe)
3) Onondagas. ist class. 3 (ister Bear tribe. 3ter Bear tribe. Dieser u. 2ter
were hereditary councillors o f the To-do-dä-ho, who
held the most illustrious Sachemship.)
2te Class 3. (iste (Snipe tribe) (2t. Turtle tribe)
3te Class. 1 (W olf tribe) This sachem was hereditary
keeper o f the wampum.
4te class. 4. (ister Deer tribe; 2t. Deer tribe. 3t Turtle
tribe. 4ter Bear tribe.)
jt class. 3. (ister Deer tribe. 2ter Turtle tribe. 3t Turtle
4) Cayugas.
1 ste class. 5. (1 ster Deer tribe. 2t Heron tribe. 3t Bear tribe.
4t Bear tribe. 5t Turtle tribe.)
2t Class 3. (2t. Turtle tribe. 3t Heron tribe.)
3 Class 2 (beide Snipe tribe.)
5) Senecas.
ist class 2. (Turtle tribe und Snipe tribe)
2 class 2 (Turtle tribe u. H awk tribe)
3 class (2) (Bear tribe u. Snipe tribe)
4 class. 2. (Snipe tribe u. W o lf tribe)
In fact besteht d. General Council nur aus 48. Hä-yo-wenf-hä u. Da-gäno-we’-da d. 2 legendären Gründer consented to take the office unter d.
M ohawk Sachems u. to leave their names in the list unter Bedingung that
after their demise the 2 should remain thereafter vacant. A t all councils
for the investiture o f Sachems their names are still called. (Candidatures
mortes) | Jeder Sachem hat einen aid elected by the gens of his principal from
among its members, was installed mit same forms u. ceremonies; had to
stand behind his superior on all occasions o f ceremony, act as his messenger,
in general subject to his directions; er hatte (d. aid) office of chief\ machte
seine Wahl nach T o d des Sachem an dessen Stelle wahrscheinlich; diese
aids heissen: “ Braces in the Long House” (dies “ Long House” symbolized
the Confederacy)
The names bestowed upon the original Sachems wden d. Namen
ihrer resp. successors in perpetuity. Z .B . bei T o d v. Gä-ne-o-di'-yo,
einem der 8 Seneca Sachems, sein successor gewählt dch d. Turtle gens,
worin Sachemship erblich u. when “ raised up” by the General Council, his
own name would be “ taken off” u. jener ihm gegeben, was part der
ceremony. Ihr jetziger Council noch fully organised,131 except d.
M ohawk tribe, removing to Canada about 17 7 5 . Vacancies occurring
their places are filled u. a general council is convened to install the new
Sachems u. their aids.
F or tribal purposes the 5 tribes independent o f each other, their territories
separated by fixed boundary lines, their tribal interests distinct. A ls
organisation d. tribe weder weakened noch impaired dch den Confederate
com pact; noch in vigorous life. D . Iroquois recommended to the fore­
fathers der Americans (Engl.) i y j j a union of the colonies similar to their own.
They saw in the common interests u. common speech der several colonies
elements for a confederation.
The Onondagas were made “ Keepers of the Wampum” u. “ Keepers of the
Council Brand” , the Mohawks “ Receivers of Tribute” from subjugated tribes,
the Senecas “ Keepers of the Door” des Lo n g House. Diese u. ähnliche
Provisions were made for the common advantage.
D . confederacy rested upon the tribes ostensibly, but primarily upon common
gentes. A ll the members o f the same gens, whether Mohawks, Oneidas,
Onondagas, Cayugas, or Senecas were brothers and sisters to each other in virtue
o f their descent von the same ancestor. When they met, the first inquiry
was the name o f each other’s gens, and next the immediate pedigree of
their respective sachems; dann able under their system o f consanguinity
to find ihre wechselseitige relationship.
3 gentes, - W olf, Bear, T u rtle -co m m o n to the 5 tribes; diese u. 3 others
were common to 3 tribes: the W o lf gens, dch division o f an original tribe
into 5, nun in 5 divisions, w ovon one in each tribe; selber mit Bear u.
Turtle gentes. Deery Snipe u. Hawk gentes were common to Senecas,
Cayugas u. Onondagas. [Das Erblichmachen d. Wahl d. Sachems in certain
gentes, does it not spring davon, dass certain gentes most common alien
tribes?] D er M ohawk des Wolf gens recognised an Oneida, Onondaga,
Cayuga od. Seneca von selben gens, though its members spoke different
dialects o f the same language, as a brother etc. In the estimation o f an
Iroquois every member o f his gens in whatever tribe was as certainly a
kinsman as an other132 brother; dies noch in its originalforce; explains the
tenacity, wom it d. old confederacy zusammenhielt. Had the 5 tribes fallen
in collision, it would have turned W o lf agst W olf, Bear agst Bear etc,
brother agst brother. So lang d. confederacy dauerte, nie Anarchie nor
rupture der Organisation. Such persistency d. bond of kin.
The “Long House” (Ho-de-no-sote” wde Sym bol d. Confederacy; sie
nannten sich selbst the “ People o f the Lo n g House” (Ho-de-no-sau-nee),
der einzige Name, den sie sich gaben.
Coalescence höhere Stufe des Processes. Z .B . d. 4 Athenian tribes coalesced
in Attica into a nation by the intermingling of the tribes in the same area u.
thegradual disappearance dergeographical lines between them. D . tribal names u.
organizations remained in full vitality, aber without the basis of independent
territory. When political society was instituted on the basis of the deme or
toivnship, u. all the residents o f the deme became a bodypolitic, irrespective
o f their gens u. tribe, the coalescence became complete.
The Valley o f the Onondaga as the seat o f the central tribe, and the place
where the Council Brand was supposed to be perpetually burning, the usual
aber keineswegs exclusive place for holding the councils o f the confed­
eracy etc.
Ursprünglich the Hauptobject des Council to raise up sachems to fill va­
cancies (von death od. deposition), but transacted all other business mit
Bezug auf common welfare. Nach u. nach the Council fell into 3 distinct
kinds (nach d. functions, die er abwechselnd übt); Civil (declares war,
makes peace, send u. receives | embassies, enters treaties mit foreign
tribes, regulates the affairs o f subjugated tribes etc); Mourning Council
(raises up Sachems, invests them mit Office); Religious Council (held for
the observance o f a general religious festival.). Nach u. nach Mourning
Council for both purposes; jetzt d. einzige, da d. civil powers o f the
Confederacy terminated with the supremacy over them o f the State.
A n Overture made b y a foreign tribe to either o f the 5 tribes; d. tribal
council entschied ob d. affair worth while to require a council of the con­
federacy; if so, a herald sent to the nearest tribes (v. d. 5) in position, on
east u. west, with a belt of wampum, containing a message to the effect
that a civil council (Ho-de-os-seh) at specified place, time u. object; der
tribe, der d. message empfing, musste es senden dem next in position, bis
d. notification complete. Council assembled nie unless summoned under
the prescribed forms. Wenn d. Council was to meet for peacefulpurposes,
then each sachem was to bring with him a bundle of fagots of white cedar,
typical o f peace; if for warlike purpose, fagots of red cedar, emblematical
o f war.
I Gesetzt d. Onondagas seien d. tribe, der d. General Council had summoned.
| A m appointed day the Sachems of the several tribes, with their followers,
who usually arrived a day or 2 before u. remained encamped at a distance,
were received in a formal manner by the Onondaga sachems at the rising
o f the sun. They marched in separate processions from their camps to the
council grove, each bearing his skin robe and bundle o f fagots, w o d.
Onondaga Sachems awaited them with a concourse o f people. The Sachems
thenformed themselves in a circle, an Onondaga sachem, acting by appoint­
ment as master o f the ceremonies, occupying the side towards the rising
sun. A t a signal they marched round the circle moving by the North. The
rim o f the circle toward the North called “ the cold side” , that on the west
“ the side toward the setting sun” , that on the south “ the side o f the high sun” ,
that on the east “ the side of the rising sun” . After marching 3 times around
on the circle single file, the head and foot o f the column being joined, the
leader stopped on the rising sun side, and deposed before him his bundle of
fagots. In this followed by the others. X X After this each sachem spread
his skin robe in the same order and sat down upon it, crosslegged, behind his
bundle of fagots, with his assistant sachem standing behind him. [to X X
formed an inner circle o f faggots.] After a moment’ s pause, the master o f
the ceremonies arose, drew from his pouch 2 pieces of dry wood and a piece
of punk (Zündschwamm) with which he proceeded to strike fire by friction.
W hen fire obtained, he stepped within the circle u. set fire to his ow n
bundle, and then to each o f the others. When diese well-ignited, and
at a signal from the master o f the ceremonies, the sachems arose and
marched 3 times around the Burning Circle, going as before by the North.
Each turned v. time to time as he walked so as to expose all sides o f his
person ... then reseated themselves, each upon his own robe. Master o f
the ceremonies again rising to his feet, filled and lighted the pipe ofpeace
from his ow n fire; drew 3 whiffs, the first toward the Zenith (bdtet thanks
to the Great Spirit for his preservation during the last year u. for being
permitted to be present at this council); the second toward the ground
(means thanks to his Mother, the Earth, for the various productions which
had ministered to his sustenance; third toward the Sun (means thanks for
his never-failing light, ever shining upon all.) Then he passed the pipe to
the first upon his right toward the North, who repeated the same cere| monies u. so on around the burning circle. The ceremony of smoking the
calumet bdtete auch mutual pledg(ing) o f their faith, friendship, honour.
M it dieser ceremony opening o f the council completed, u. dieser d(arau)f
declared ready for business.
A u f d. opposite sides d. Council fire, sassen, auf d. einen: Mohawk, Onondaga
u. Seneca Sachems; ihre tribes, wenn in council, were brother tribes to each
other u. father tribes to the two other; they constituted, by extension o f the
principle, a phratry of tribes u. sachems.
On the opposite side of the fire the Oneida u. Cayuga u. später die Tuscarora
Sachems; a second tribal phratry; brother tribes to each other and son tribes
o f those opposite.
D . Oneidas, being a subdivision o f the Mohawks, u. d. Cayugas a subdivision
o f the Onondagas or Senecas, they were in reality younger tribes, hence their
relations o f juniors u. seniors u. application of the phratric principle.
When the tribes named in Council, the Mohawks named first, their tribal
epithet: “ The Shield’’' ; next the Onondagas, under epithet o f “ Name-Bearer” ,
because they had been appointed to select and name the jo original sachems.
Nach d. tradition d. Onondagas deputed a wiseman to visit the territories
o f the tribes and select and name the new Sachems je nach circumstances;
which explains the unequal distribution of office among the several gentes;
next in order the Senecas, the “ Doorkeeper” , were made perpetual keepers
o f the western door o f the Lon g House; dann d. Oneidas, the “ Great Tree”
u. d. Cayugas the “ Great Pipe” ; the Tuscaroras named last ohne distinguishing epithet. | D . Foreign tribe represented at the Council dch a
delegation o f wise-men u. chiefs who bore their proposition and presented
it in person. N ach ihrer introduction, macht einer d. Sachem short
address, thanking the Great Spirit etc, dann informing the delegates dass
Council prepared to hear them. One o f the delegates submits the pro­
position in form, sustains it by arguments; 133 nach conclusion der address,
the delegation withdraws vom Council to wait at a distance. N un Debate
unter d. Sachems; when decision come to, a speaker appointed to com­
municate the answer of the council zu deren Em pfang the delegation were
recalled. A ls Speaker des Council meist chosen einer von tribe, der had
convened the council; macht förmlichen speech reviewing the whole
question, theilt dann rejection (mit reasons) mit od. acceptance (völlig od.
in part). Im letzteren Fall belts of wampum exchanged as evidence of the terms
o f the agreement.
“ This belt preserves my words” , common remark o f an Iroquois chief in
council, often delivering the belt as evidence o f what he had said. Several
such belts given in the course o f a negotiation to the opposite party. In
the reply of the latter a belt would be returnedfor each proposition accepted.
Unanimity of the Sachems required upon all public questions u. essential
to the validity o f every public act; it was a fundamental law der confedI eracy; kannten nichts von majorities u. minorities in the action of councils; zur
' Erreichg d. votes die oben angeführten classes. Kein Sachem allowed to
express an opinion in council in the nature of a vote bevor er nicht had first
agreedwith the sachem or sachems seiner class upon the opinion to be expressed,
and had been appointed to act as a speaker for the class. So d. 8 Seneca
sachems in 4 classes konnten nur 4 opinions haben, u. d. 10 Cayuga
sachems, in selber number o f classes, konnten auch nur 4 opinions haben.
Dann a cross134 consultation zwischen d. 4 sachems appointed to speak for
the 4 classes; when they had agreed, they designated one of their number to
express their resulting opinion, which was the answer of their tribe. Wenn so
d. Sachems jedes-der tribes separately had become o f one mind, their
several opinions compared u. if they agreed the decision o f the council
was made. The / persons appointed to express the decision of the / tribes
erklärt vielleicht d. functions u. appointment der 6 electors in d. A%tec
confederacy. W ar any sachem obdurate u. unreasonable, influences brought
to bear upon him, which he could not well resist. Seltner Fall auch.
Beim Beginn der Amerik. Revolution konnten d. Iroquois, wegen want o f
unanimity im confederate council, nicht übereinstimmen über Kriegserklärg gegen d. neue American confederacy. Theil der Oneida Sachems
refused. A s neutrality was impossible with the Mohawks u. d. Senecas were
determined to fight, it was resolved that each tribe might engage in the war
upon its own responsibility or remain neutral. The war agst the Eriesy
the Neutral Nation and Susquehan(n)ocks, u. d. several wars gegen French,
were resolved upon in General Council. “ O ur colonial records largely
filled mit négociations mit d. Iroquois Confederacy.”
The induction of new Sachems into office great interest to the people u. to
the Sachems selbst. Für d. ceremony o f raising sachems the general
council primarily instituted ; in this capacity called Mourning Council, weil
had to lament the deceased u. to install his successor. Bei death o f a
Sachem, der tribe der ihn had lost had power to summon a General
Council, name time u. place for meeting ; a herald sent out with a belt o f
wampum, meist the official belt of the deceased sachem which conveyed the
message : “ the name (der des defunct’s) calls for a council” , announced also
the day u. place o f convention. Mourning Council mit d. festivities that
followed Hptattraction für d. Iroquois, flocking to attendance from the
most distant localities with zeal u. enthusiasm. Bei der lamentation
(womit proceedings opened), a processionformed, and the lament was chanted
in verse, with responses, by the united tribes, as they marched vom place o f
reception to the place o f council. Dies ist day's proceeding; 2nd day:
installation ceremony, lasts meist bis 4th day.
U. a., for d. instruction d. newly raised sachem, the ancient wampum belts, into
which, nach their expression, the structure and principles o f the con­
federacy “ had been talked” , were produced u. read i.e. interpreted. A wiseman, not necessarily one o f the Sachems, took these belts one after the other
u. walking to and fro between the 2 divisions o f sachems, read from them
the facts which they recorded. | Nach der Indian conception, these belts can
tell, by means o f an interpreter, the exact rule, provision or transaction talked
into them at the time, and of which they were the exclusive record. A strand
[Germ, strahn, one o f the twists of which a rope is composed, Strähn = hank,
skein1Zb (Gebind] o f wampum bestehend aus strings von purple u. white shell
beads, or a belt woven with figures formed by beads of different colour, operated
on the principle o f associating a particular fact with a particular string;
thus giving a serial arrangement to the facts as well as fidelity to the
memory. These strands u. belts o f wampum were the only visible records der
Iroquois; aber they required trained interpreters who could draw from their
strings and figures the records locked up in their remembrance. One o f
the Onondaga Sachems was made “Keeper of the Wampum” , and 2 aids were
raised up with him w ho were required to be versed in its interpretation as
well as the sachem. The interpretation dieser several belts u. strings
brought out, in the address o f the wise-men, a connected account o f the
occurrences at the formation o f the confederacy. The tradition was repeated
in full, and fortified in its essential parts-by reference to the records con­
tained in diesen belts. Thus the council to raise up sachems became a
teaching council which maintained in perpetual freshness in the minds o f
the Iroquois the structure and principles dr confederacy, as well as
the history o f its formation. These proceedings occupied the council until
noon each day; the afternoon being devoted to games u. amusements.
A t twilight each day a dinner in common served to the entire body in
attendance; consisted o f soup and boiled meat cooked near the council-house,
and served directly from the kettle in ivooden bowls, trays and ladles. Grace
was said before the feast commenced; it was a prolonged exclamation by
a single person on a high shrill note, falling down in cadences into
stillness, followed by a response in chorus by the people. The evenings
devoted to dance. After these ceremonies u. festivities - for several days their sachems inducted into office.
Ob d. right d. council to “ invest” Sachems nur functional? Jedenfalls no
case o f rejection mentioned. Obgleich in form an oligarchy, this ruling
body of sachems a representative democracy o f the archaic type. Right o f
gentes to elect u. depose sachems u. chiefs, right o f the people to be
heard in council dch orators o f their election, and the voluntary system
in the military service. In diesem lower u. middle ethnical period democratic
principles were the vital element o f gentile society.
Ho-yar-na-go-war, the Iroquois name for a sachem, means: “a counselor of
the people"; analog bei d. members o f the Grecian council o f chiefs; so
bet Aeschylus, The Seven against Thebes, zoo/:136
δοκοΰντα καί δόξαντ’ άπαγγέλλειν με χρή
δήμου προβούλοις τησδε Καδμείας πόλεως.
Chief of the second grade heisst: “ Ha-sa-no-wä'-na” , “an elevated name” ,
indicates appreciation dr Barbaren o f the ordinary motives for personal
ambition. Fst ohne Ausnahme d. celebrated orators, wise-men und war-chiefs
der Iroquois - chiefs of the 2nd grade. Office of chief bestowed for merit,
fell necessarily auf d. ablest men (diese also excluded von General Council,
aus dem so d. ambitious element entfernt). In American (European)
annals fst nur berührt solche chiefs; none o f the long lines o f sachems
ausser Logan (einer dr Cayuga sachems), Handsome Lake (Seneca sachem,
Gründer der New Religion dr Iroquois) u. at a recent day Ely S. Parker
(Seneca sachem)
Ind. confederacy of tribes taucht zuerst auf the office of General (Hos-gä-ägeh'-da-go-wä = “ Great War Soldier” ) Entstanden von cases, when the
several tribes in their confederate capacity would be engaged in war. So want felt
for a general commander to direct the movements of the united bands. D . intro­
duction of this office as apermanentfeature verhängnisvoll event in human history.
Beginn der differentiation of the military von d. civil power, which, when com­
pleted, changed essentially the external manifestation o f the gvernment.
A ber gentilism arrested usurpation; government o f one power became nun
one o f 2; the functions of gvt became in time co-ordinate between the two.
This new office - the germ of a chief executive magistrate; out o f the general
came the king etc The office sprang v. d. military necessities of society. - \
The Great War Soldier dr Iroquois {lower status of barbarism), der Teuctli der
Aztecs (middle status of barbarism), der βασιλεύς der Griechen u. rex d. Römer
(Upper Status of barbarism) - three successive ethnic epochs - selbes office,
das eines Generals in a military democracy. Bei Iroquois, Aztecs, Romans d.
office elective u. confederative dch a constituency; wahrscheinlich auch bei
d. Griechen whd d. traditionary period; auf nichts gegründet d. Behptg, dass
es erblich bei d. homerischen tribes v. father to son; widerspricht dem
groundwork o f gentile institutions. Wenn in zahlreichen Fällen d. office
passed von father to son, dies might have suggested the inference unbegründete - of hereditary succession, now adopted as historically true.
Hereditary succession, when first established, came from force (usurpation),
nicht by thefree consent of the people.
Nach Stiftng d. Iroquois confederacy two permanent war-chiefship(s)
created u. nam<e)d, both assigned to the Seneca tribe. One o f them - Tawan'-ne-ars, signifying needle breaker) made hereditary in the Wolf gens u.
the other - So-no-so-wä = “great oyster shell” - in the Turtle gens. Senecas
erhielten beide offices, weil the greater danger of attack at the westend of their
territories; were elected in same manner as the sachems, “ raised up” by a
general council, u. both equal in rank u. power. A s general commanders
they had charge of the military affairs o f the confederacy u. the command of
itsjointforces when united in general expedition. Governor Blacksnake, recently
deceased, held the office first named, showing that the succession has been
regularly maintained. 2 gewählt to prevent the domination of a single man even
in their military affairs; so d. 2 Romans consuls, nach Abscffg des rex.
The Iroquois conquered other tribes and held them in subjection, z.B. d.
__ Delawares, aber d. letztem blieben unter dem government of their own chiefs,
and added nothing to the strength o f the confederacy. It was impossible
in this state o f society to unite tribes under one government who spoke different
languages, and to hold conquered tribes under tribute with any benefit but
the tribute.
The Iroquois brain approachedin volume the Aryan average; eloquent in oratory,
vindictive in war, indomitable in perseverance, they have gained a place
in history. They had urged the Eries and the Neutral Nation to become
members o f their confederacy, and for their refusal expelled them from
their borders. In the competition between English u. French for supremacy
in N orth America - as the 2 were nearly equal in power and ressources
during the first century o f colonization - the French Scheitern in no
small degree to be ascribed to the Iroquois
Pt. II. Ch. V I Gentes in other tribes of the Ganowanian Family.
Bei Entdeckung von America in several regions, the aborigines found in 2
dissimilar conditions: 1) The Village Indians, abhängig fst ganz upon
horticulture für Subsistence; such the tribes in this status in New Mexico,
MexicOy Central America u. auf dem Plateau der Andes; 2) d. non-horticultural
Indians, depending uponfish, bread-roots u. gam e;™ such those o f the Valley
of Columbia, o f the Hudson Bay Territory, parts Canada etc Zwischen diesen
tribes, u. connecting the extremes by insensible gradationSy 3) the partially
Village u. partially Horticultural Indians; such: IroquoiSy the New England
u. Virginia IndianSy the CreekSy ChoctaSy CherokeeSy MinnitareeSy Dakotasy
Shawnees. IFeapons, arts, usages, inventions, dances, house architecture,
form o f government, plan o f life, all bear impress of a common mind; über
wide range zeigen sie the successive stages o f development o f the same
original conceptions.
E s w d nun (v. Europas u. American writers) erst overrated the comparative
advance der Village Indians, underrated der der non-horticulturaly138 hence
betrachtet als 2 different races. A ber Anzahl d. non-horticultural tribes were
in Upper State of Savagery; the intermediate tribes in the Lower Status of
barbarismy d. village Indians in Middle Status of Barbarism. D . evidence o f
their unity of origin now so accumulated that settled; Eskimos belong to a
different family. | In d. “ Systems of Consanguinity etc” M organ presented
selbiges von 70 American Indian tribes; selbes system nachgewiesen bei
ihnen mit evidence of its derivation von common source; er nannte sie allzusammt
d. Ganowanian Family (“ Family of the Bow and Arrow")
Giebt nun mit Bezug auf d. Gentes d. different tribes dieser Ganowanian
Fam ily: (nach Nomenclatur in “ Systems of Consanguinity” )
I) Hodenosaunian Tribes.
1) Iroquois. Gentes: 1) W olf. 2) Bear. 3) Beaver. 4) Turtle. 5) Deer.
6) Snipe. 7) Heron. 8) Hawk.
2) Wyandotes; remains o f the ancient Hurons, separated v. Iroquois at least
400 years.
Gentes. 1) W olf, 2) Bear, 3) Beaver, 4) Turtle, 5) Deer, 6) Snakey
7) Porcupiney 8) Hawk.
H awk no<w )extinct;139 noch 5 gentes in common mit Iroquois, names
nun changed.
Descent in female line; marriage in gens prohibited; office of sachem (civil
chief) hereditary in gens, elective among its members; office o f Sachem
passes von brother to brother or v. uncle to nephew; that o f warchief
bestowed for merit, haben 7 sachems u. 7 warchiefs; property hereditary in
gens, children inherit their mother's (nothing from father) effects, w<h)ether
married or unmarried; each gens has power to depose and elect its chiefs.
The Eries, Neutral Nation, Nottoways, Tutelos u. Susquehannocks, now
extinct, or absorbed in other tribes, belong to same lineage.
II) Dakotian Tribes
Z . Zeit ihrer Entdeckung in zahlreiche groups zerfallen, ebenso ihre
Sprache in viele Dialekte; aber dr Hauptsache nach bewohnten sie
continuous areas; occupied the head waters d. Mississippi u. beide banks d.
Missouri für mehr als 1000 miles in extent; Iroquois u. their cognate
tribes whsclich oifsho(o)t o f this stem.
1) Dakotas or Sioux; jet^t about 12 independent tribes; gentile organisation in
decadence, aber their next congeners, the Missouri tribes possess it;
have societies named after animals analogous to gentes, aber letztre
jezt verschwunden.
Carver, Travels in North America Philad. ed. 1796 , p. 164, war bei ihnen
1767; he visited the Eastern Dacotas on the Mississippi. Giebt exacte
tribe u. gentes Beschreibung derselben, stimmt auch ganz mit sachem u.
warchief etc. Morgan besuchte Eastern Dacotas 1861, Western 1862,
also beide fast a century nach Carver, fand nichts mehr v. gentes; a
change o f life den Dakotas aufgezwungen im Interval when they
were forced upon the plains u. fell into nomadic bands.
2) Missouri tribes.
a) Punkas. Gentes: 1) Grimly Bear; 2) Many People. 3) E lk. 4) Skunk.
5) Buffalo. 6) Snake; 7) Medicine; 8) Ice.
Hier descent in male line, the children belonging to the gens o f the
father; office of Sachem hereditary in gens, choice elective, but sons o f a
deceased Sachem eligible; change vom archaic whsclich recent, da descent
noch in female line bei 2 der 8 Missouri tribes, Otoes u. Missouris u.
unter d. Mandans (Upper Missouri tribes).. Property hereditary in thegens,
worin intermarriage prohibited.
b) Omahas. gentes: 1) Deer
2) Black 3) Bird
4) ( Turtle) 140
j) Buffalo 6) Bear 7) Medicine 8) { Kaw)
Head 10) Red. 11) Thunder 12) {Many Seas
Descent, inheritance, marriage same wie bei Punkas.
c) lowas.gentes: 1) Wolf 2) Bear. 3) Cow Buffalo 4) E lk Beaver gem existed
j) Eagle. 6) Pigeon. 7) Snake. 8) Owl unter Iowas u. Otoes,
extinct. Anything
else as before.
d) Otoes u. Missouris. Diese tribes have coalesced, into one, mit following
8 gentes.
i) Wolf 2) Bear 3) Cow Buffalo 4) E lk . i Descent in female line. Office
/) Eagle. 6) Pigeon 7) Snake. 8) Owl.
' of Sachem u. property hereditarj in gens, wo intermar­
e) Kaws (Kaw-^a)
Gentes i) Deer
4) Eagle (white)
7) E lk
10) Turtle
13) Tent
2) Bear
j) Eagle(black)
8) Raccoon
11) Earth
14) Thunder
riage prohibited.
I Descent,
I inheritance,
PrairieWolf) marriage
Deer Tail \ regulations
I wie bei
\ Punkas
D . wildest der American aborigenes; intelligent; 1869 the K aw s, much re­
duced, about 7 00, giebt 5o per gens. Osages u.Quappas (tribes) hat M organ
nicht besucht. - Home country aller dieser tribes along the Missouri and its
tributaries, von Mündung des Big Sioux to the Mississippi u. down the west
bank des letzteren bis Arkansas river. Alle speak closely related dialects
o f the Dakotian stock language. |
6) Winnebagoes. Gentes. 1) Wolf 2) Bear 3) Buffalo. 4) Eagle
f) E lk . 6) Deer141 7) Snake 8) Thunder.
When first discovered tribe resided near the lake o f same name in W iscon­
sin; offshoot o f the Dakotian stem, flgten in track d. Iroquois nach valley
of St. Lawrence, progress arrested dch d. Algonkin tribes zwischen lake
Huron u. Lake Superior. Ihre nächste affiliation mit. d. Missouri tribes.
Descent, inheritance, marriage, wie bei Punkas. Sonderbar dass so many
tribes o f this stock changedfemale (to) male line of descent, da, wenn entdeckt,
property bei ihnen nur slightly über germinating stage. Whsclich all dies
recent under American u. missionary influence. Carver fand bei d. Winnebagoes
traces o f descent in the female line in ij8y. Sieh “ Travels I.e. p. 166) E r
sagt: “ Some nations, when the dignity is hereditary, limit the succession in
thefemale line. On the death o f a chief his sister's son succeeds in preference
to his own son; and if he happens to have no sister the nearestfemale relation
assumes the dignity. This accounts for a woman being at the head of the
Winnebago nation, 142 which before I was acquainted with their laws,
appeared strange to me.”
1869 the Winnebagoes numbered 1400, per gens average o f 150 persons.
3) Upper Missouri Tribes.
1) Mandans. Gentes. 1) Wolf 2) Bear 3) Prairie Chicken 4) Good Knife.
f) Eagle. 6) Flat head. 7) High Village.
In intelligence u. arts o f life the Mandans ahead o f all their kindred
tribes, dafür probably indebted to the Minnitarees. Descent in female line,
office and property hereditary in the gens, worin intermarriage prohibited.
Zeigt, dass originally female descent in Dakotian stock.
2) Minnitarees. This tribe u. the Upsarokas or Crows subdivisions of an
original people, doubtful members of this branch of the Ganowanian family,
placed in there from number o f words common mit denen d. Missouri
u. Dakota tribes placed with them. They carried horticulture, the
timber-framed house u. a peculiar religious system into this area which they
taught the Mandans; können sein descendants der Moundb(u)ilders.
Minnitarees u. Mandans live now in the same village; among the finest
specimens o f red men now in North America.
3) Upsarokas143 or Crows. Gentes: 1) Prairie Dog. 2) Bad Leggins, f)
Skunk. 4) Treacherous Lodges, j) Lost
Lodges. 6) Bad Honors. 7) Butchers.
8) Moving Lodges. 9) Bear's Paw Moun­
tain. 10) Blackfoot144 Lodges. 11) Fish
Catchers. 12 ) Antelope, if) Raven.
Descent, inheritance, marriage etc wie bei
I f a person to whom any article o f property had been presented died with
it in hispossession, and the donor was dead, it reverted to the gens o f the latter.
Property made or acquired by a wife descended after her death to her
children, that o f a husband to his gentile kindred. I f a person made a
present to a friend and died, the latter must perform some recognised act of
mourning, such as cutting off thejoint of a finger at thefuneral or surrender the
property to the gens of the donor. This act o f mourning very common unter
d. Crows, auch as a religious offering when they hold “ Medicine lodge” , a
great religious ceremonial.
The Crows haben einen Ehegebrauch, den M organ bei mindestens 40
ändern Indian tribes gefunden: when a man marries the oldest daughter in a
family he is entitled to all her sisters when they attain maturity. (Survival of
custom of punalua)
Polygamy allowed generally by usage unter allen American aborigenes, never
prevalent in irgd bdtenden Mass wegen inability ofpersons to support more
than onefamily.
IT) Gulf Tribes.
1) Muscokees or Creeks.
The Creek Confederacy consisted of 6 tribes, vis·'
Creeks; Hitchetes; Yoochees; 145 Alabamas; Coosatees u. Natches. Mit
Ausnahme der letzteren, admitted in ihre confederacy after their
overthrow dch French, spoke all dialects der same language.
Descent unter d. Creeks in female line, sachemship u. property o f deceased
persons hereditary in gens, worin intermarriage prohibited; d. andren
tribes hatten auch gentile organization; jetzt d. Creeks partially civilized,
political system, in a few years traces o f their gentile organization will
have disappeared. | 1869 Creeks numbered abt ij,ooo, average von
5 5o persons to gens.
Gentes der Creeks. (22)
1) Wolf.
4) Alligator
2) Bear.
f) Deer
j) Skunk.
6) Bird.
7) Tiger.
8) Wind.
10) Mole
11) Fox
iß) Fish
14) Corn
if ) Hickory Nut. /7) Salt. 18)
19), 20) 21) 22) signification lost.
Wild Cat.
2) Choktas. Bei ihnen each phratry named; 2) phratries mitje 4 gentes, wie bei
1 st Phratry Divided People gentes: i 1) Reed. 2) Law Okla. f) Lulak.
) 4) Linoklusha.
Und “
Beloved People.
j 1) Beloved people. 2) small people.
f j) Large People. 4) Cray Fish.
Gentes o f same phratry could not intermarry, but jede mit gentes d.
other; zeigt, dass wie bei Iroquois, the Choktas commenced mit 2 gentes,
jede146 davon nachher subdivided into 4. Descent in female line, Property
and Sachemship hereditary in gens. 1869 - some 12,000, gives average
per gens = 1500. 1820 residirten sie noch in their ancient territory, east of
Mississippi; immigrated dann in Indian territory. - Nach Chocta usages,
property after the death o f a man distributed unter his brothers and sisters
and the children of his sisters, nicht under his children; couldgive his property
to his children in his lifetime, then they could hold it against his gens.
Viele Indian tribes habenje%t considerable property in domestic animals, houses u.
lands, owned by individuals; unter ihnen common practice to give it to their
children during their life147 time. Im Mass wie property wuchs, dis(inheritance
of children began to arouse opposition to gentile inheritance u. in some of the
tribes, u. a. bei den Choctas old usage abolished a few years since, right of in­
heritance exclusively vestedin the children of defunct owner. Dies came, however,
dch substitution of a political system in the place of gentile system, and elective
council u. magistracy substituted to the oldgvt by chiefs. Under previous usages
wife inherited nothing from her husband and vice versa, nor he from her;
but the w ife’ s effects divided among her children u. in default o f them her
3) Chickasas. 2 phratries, Iste 4 gentes, lie 8.
1 st Pant(b)er Phratry. „ ,
1) Wild Cat. 2) Bird, f) Fish. 4) Deer.
Ilnd Spanish Phratry. en es' 1) Raccoon. 2) Spanish, j) Royal.
4) Hush-ko-ni. j) Squirrel.
6) Alligator. 7) Wolf.
8) Blackbird.
Descent in female line, intermarriage in gens prohibited, sachemship
und property hereditary in gens.
1869 they numbered jooo, average per gens about 400.
4) Cherokees, ursprünglich 10 gentes, w ovon Acorn u. Bird now extinct.
Gentes: i) Wolf
2) Red Paint 3) Long Prairie /' Descent infemale
4) Deaf (A Bird) f) Holly.
6) Deer.
' line; intermar7) Blue
8) Long Hair
\ riage in gens for( bidden.
1869: 14,000, average per gens = 17 5 0 .148 Jezt Cherokees u. Ojibwas
exceed all the remaining Indians in U. St. in Anzahl o f persons speaking
the same dialect. Nicht wahrscheinlich, dass jemals in any part of North
America 100,000 spoke same dialect; dies nur bei Aztecs, Te^cucans u.
Tlascalans (tribes) u. selbst dies schwer zu beweisen upon Spanish evi­
dence. The unusual numbers of Creeks u. Cherokees due to possession of
domestic animals u. welldevelopedfieldagriculture; now partially civilised, having
substituted an elective constitutional gvt to the ancient gentes, unter dessen
influence diese in raschem Verfall.
5) Seminoles: o f Creek descent, said to be organized into gentes.
I V Pawnee Tribes.
Die Pawnees sollen nach Aussage des missionary Rev. Samuel A llis in
6gentes organisirt sein : Bear, Beaver, Eagle, Buffalo, Deer, Owl. I f so, auch
d. Arickdrees (deren village near dem der Minnitarees u. die d. next
congeners der Pawnees), d. Huecos u. 2 od. 3 andre small tribes residing on
the Canadian river; haben alle stets west von Missouri gelebt u. sprechen an
independent stocklanguage. |
V . Algonkin Tribes.
Bei Entdeckung dieses great stock der American aborigenes nahmen sie ein
Area v. Rocky Mountains bis Hudson's Bay südlich von Siskatchewun, u. dann
östlich %um Atlantic, einschliesslich beider Ufer des Lake Superior except
at its head u. beide Seiten d. St. Lawrence, below 149 Lake Champlain.
Südlich extended their area entlang der atlantischen Küste bis Nord Carolina
u. down the East Bank des Mississippi v. Wisconsin, Illinois bis Kentucky.
Innerhalb der östlichen Section dieser immense region waren d. Iroquois u.
their affiliated tribes an intrusive people, einzige conkurrenten der A lg o n ­
kins innerhalb der boundaries dieser Section.
a) Gitchigamian Tribes (From the Ojibwa, gi-tchV (great) u. gä-me (lake),
the aboriginal name o f Lake Superior u. other great lakes.
1) Ojibwas. Sprechen selben Dialekt, organized in gentes, w ovon
Morgan 23 gefischt. In ihrem dialect the symbol or devise o f gens
heisst totem (ebenso oft pronounced dodaim); z.B. a W o lf das totem
der W o lf Gens. Hence hat Schoolcraft (“ History of Indian Tribes” ) d.
gentile organization “ totemic organization” getauft.
23 gentes (bekannt)150 1) Wolf, 2) Bear, 3) Beaver \4) Turtle (mud) j) Turtle
(Snapping) 6) Turtle (little) 7) Reindeer. 8) Snipe 9) Crane 1 10) Pigeon
Hawk 11) Bald Eagle. 12) Loon I 13) Duck 14) Duck, if) Snake |
1 6) Muskrat, iy ) Marten. 1 8) Heron \ 19) Bull Head. 20) Carp 21) Cat
Fish I 22) Sturgeon. 2$) Pike.
Descent in male line, children belonging to their father’s gens. Ursprüng­
lich female. Denn 1) d. Delawares, anerkannt dch alle Algonkin tribes als
einer der ältesten, von allen “ Grandfathers” genannt, haben noch descent in
female line, wie ditto etzliche andre Algonkin tribes; 2) Evidence, dass noch
1 840 descent in the female line with respect to the Sachem. 3) American u.
missionary influence; d. Missionaries, schien Erbfolge die d. Sohn enterbte,
ungerecht. W o w ir d. W ort “ hereditary” anwenden, z.B. für nephew
(seiner Schwester Sohn) eines Sachern, folgt nicht, dass letzterer “ hereditary
right” hatte im modernen Sinn, sondern dass er in line of succession (in
dr gens) u. his election substantially secured.
Property u. office hereditary in gens (worin intermarriage verboten); jetzt
bekommen Kinder d. meiste to the exclusion ihrer gentile kindred.
Property u. effects der mother pass to the children, u. in their default
to her sisters, own u. collateral. Ein Sohn kann jetzt seinem Vater flgen
in office; w o several sons choice determined by election; the gentiles kann nicht
nur elect, sondern auch depose.
Jetzt Ojibwas some 16,000; gibt averagefür gens about 700.
2) Potawattamies. 15 Gentes. Alles andre wie bei Ojibwas. Die gentes sind:
1) Wolf 2) Bear 3) Beaver \4) E lk. /) Loon 6) Eagle \7) Sturgeon, l Laon =
8) Carp. 9) Bald Eagle. 10) Thunder. 11) Rabbit. 12) Crow | / Taucher-
13) Fox. 14) Turkey. 1 j) Black Hawk.
( sorte
3) Ojibwas, Otawas, u. Potawat(f)amies subdivisions o f an original tribe,
when first known - confederated.
4) Crees; when discovered held northwest shore of Lake Superior, spread v.
da zu Hudson's Bay u. dann westlich to the Red River of151 the North;
occupy später the region of the Siskatchewun, 152 ihre gentile organisation lost;
nearest related to the Ojibwas, gleichen ihnen closely in manners, customs,
personal appearance.
b) Mississippi Tribes. Western Algonkins, occupied eastern banks of Mis­
sissippi in Wisconsin153 u. Illinois u. südlich bis Kentucky.
i. Miamis. 10 gentes. i) Wolf. 2) Loon. 3) Eagle. 4) Bustard. \ f) Panther.
Turkey. 7) Raccoon 8) Snow | 9) Sun. 1
Ihre immediate congeners - Weas, Piankeshaws, Peorias, KaskaskiasXf&
early known unter collective name o f Illinois, jetzt wenige, haben ihre
alte Lebensart verloren for settled agricultural life.
D . Miamis declining in numbers, changed condition,^«///? organisation
quickly disappearing. When decline commenced, descent in male line, sonst
wie vorher. |
2) Shawnees (highly advanced); haben noch ihre gentes, obgleich sie substistuted (for) die gentilt-civil organisation. - Ihre gentes erhalten sie für
genealogical u. social purposes, sind: \Shawnees formerly worshipped a
female deity - Go-gome-tha-mä’ (our
i ) Wolf 2) Loon ß) Bear 4) Bustard \j) Panther 6) Owl, 7) Turkey, 8) Deer I
9) Raccoon. 10) Turtle. 11) Snake. 12) Horse \ if) Rabbit.
Descent etc wie bei Miamis. 1869 154 ihrer nur 700, about 50 per gens;
früher 3-4000, was above the average o f American Indian tribes. Shawnees
hatten a custom - wie auch d. Miamis, ditto Sauks u. Foxes - o f naming
children in gens v. Vather od. Mutter od. any other gens under certain restric­
tions. Unter d. Iroquois, sieh oben, hatte jede gens its own special namesfür
persons which no other gens had a right to use; in every tribe daher the name
(special, personal) indicated the gens. So unter d. Sauks u. Foxes “ Lo n g
H orn” is a name belonging to the Deer Gens: Black Wolf to the W o lf
G ens; in the Eagle gens the following are specimen155 names: Ka-po-nä
(“ Eagle drawing his nest” ); Ja-ka-kwä-pe (“ Eagle sitting with his head
up” ) ; Pe-ä-tä-na-kä-hok (“ Eagle flying over a limb)
Unter d. Shawnees these names carried mit sich the rights o f the gens to
which they belonged, so that the name determined the gens of theperson.
D er Sachem musste in allen Fällen zu seiner gens gehören; whsclich d.
change vonfemale to male line commenced thus: in erster Instanz to enable a
son (der zur gens der Mutter gehörte) to succeed to hisfather, u. zweitens, to
enable children to inherit property from their father. Em pfing ein Sohn den
Namen seines Vaters, so konnte er ihn in office nachfolgen, subject to election.
Aber d. father had no control over the question; it was left by the gens to
certain persons, mostly matrons to be consulted when children were to
be named, with power to determine the name156 to begiven. D ch dies arrange­
ment between the Shawnee gentes these persons had this power, could so
carry the person into the gens to which the name belonged. [Eingeborne casuistry of
man to change things by changing names\ u. Schlupfwinkel zu finden um
innerhalb der Tradition die Tradition zu durchbrechen, w o actual interest
powerful motive dazu gab!] Traces der archaic rule of descent existiren unter
den Shawnees.
3) Sauks u. Foxes: diese tribes consolidated into one; alles andre wie Miamis;
1869 nur 700, abt 50 per gens. N och 14 gentes.
1) Wolf 2) Bear ß) Deer. 4) E lk \ j) Hawk. 6) Eagle. 7) Fish. 8) Buffalo. |
9) Thunder 10) Bone 11) Fox. 12) Sea | iß) Sturgeon. 14) Big Tree |
4) Menominees u. Kikapoos. Diese tribes independent o f each other, or­
ganised in gentes; property hereditary in the gens, but restricted to the
agnatic kin in the female line.
c) Rocky Mountain tribes. 1) Blood Blackfeet u. 2) Piegan Blackfeet. Jeder
dieser 2 tribes in gentes getheilt, erster in 5, 2ter in 8. Namentlich
unter d. letzteren Namen (von gens), die mehr nach Bands als gentes
riechen, wie Web Fat, Inside Fat, Conjurers, Never Laugh^ Starving,
H alf Dead Meat; aber nicknamesfor gentes superseded in some cases the
original names. Descent in male line, intermarriage in gens prohibited.
d) Atlantic Tribes.
i ) Delawares, one of the oldest of the Algonguin Tribes; when discovered,
their home country region around and North of Delaware Bay
haben 3 gentes: 1) Wolf; 2) Turtle. 3) Turkey; aber jede dieser gen(te)s a
phratry, da Wolf getheilt in 12 subgentesyeach having some o f the attributes
o f a gens; Turtle in 10 subgentes (2 fernere extinct), Turkey in 12 subgentes.
The names der subgentes are personal, u. meist, wenn nicht alle, female; sind
betrachtet by the Delawares selbst (jezt at the Delaware Reservation in
Kansas') betrachtet als their several eponymous ancestors. Dies zeigt zweierlei:
1) wie d. ursprünglichen Thiernamen der gentes Platzmachen können Personen­
namen. [D. Namen der ursprünglichen Gentes bleiben wie Wolf Turtle,
Turkey; aber d. Segmentation der gens in subgentes nach d. specific (per­
sonal) Namen der Stammmütter der Theile (Unterabtheilgen der Gens­
familien) ; so werden d. ursprünglichen Thiernamen der gentes Namen von
Phratries u. die der subgentes von Personen (Müttern) ohne dass dieser
Change (wie bei male descent d. Antiken) anything mit hero worship (als
Urahnen) zu thun hätte.] Zweitens: zeigt sich hier natural growth von
Phratry dch segmentation einer gens in several subgentes.
Descent bei d. Delawares in female line u. alles andre archaisch. (So d. 3
originalgentes could not intermarry innerhalb selber gens); in recentyears the
prohibition limited to the subgentes; so in Wolf gens157 z.B. die of same name
cannot intermarry, wohl aber die o f different names. A u ch d. practice
of naming children into the gens | of theirfather aufgekommen bei d. Dela­
wares, has introduced the same confusion of descents wie unter Shawnees u.
Miamis. [Dies scheint der natürliche Übergang von female to male line;
der confusion konnte nur dch den Change Ende gemacht werden.]
American civilisation u. intercourse gave shock to the institutions der Indians, ihr
ethnic life so gradually breaking down.
Weil descent in female line, bei d. Delawares wie Iroquois, office o f Sachem
v. Bruder to Bruder od. von (mütterlichen) Onkel to Nephew (Schwesterssohn)
2) Munsees: offshoot der Delawares, haben dieselben gentes: W olf, Turtle,
T urk ey; female descent etc
3) Mohegans: form part of the New England Indians, south of river Kennebeck,
die all closely related in language, could understand each others’ dialects.
Mohegans haben, wie Delawares u. Munsees - the Wolf Turtle u. Turkey,
each of which composed of a number of gentes, also break up v. original gens
into several which remain united in a phratry. D . phratries bet d. Mohegans
cover the gentes o f each u. d. phratries must be stated, to explain the
classification o f the gentes. Descent infemale line [auch so unter Pequots
u. Narragansetts]
I) Wolf Phratry 1) Wolf
2) Bear
j) Dog 4) Opossum
IT) Turtle
1) Little Turtle 2) Mud Turtle j) Great Turtle
4) Yellow E e l.™
I ll) Turkey „ „ i) Turkey
2) Crane
4) Abanakis (bdtet “ rising sun” . Dies tribe more closely connectedmit d. Micmacs
als den New England Indians south of the Kennebeck. 14 gentes, worin
verschiedene the same as among the Ojibwas. Descent nun in male line,
prohibition o f intermarriage in gens now much weakened, office o f
Sachem hereditary in gens.
V I) Athapasco-Apache Tribes
"T~Ob d. Athapascans der Hudson’s Bay Territory u. d. Apaches of New Mexico,
' die subdivisions eines original stock, sind organized in gentes, nicht definitely
ascertained. - Hare and Red Knife Athapascans (in Hudson’s Bay Territ.) Slave Lake Athapascans in ditto.
D . Kutchin (Louchoux) der Yukon river Region \Northwest Territories,
British Northamerica, südlich von den ex-russischen Küstenniederlas­
sungen] sind Athapascans und bei ihnen (nach Brief o f late George Gibbs an
M organ ): unter d. Kutchin “3 grades or classes of society (soll heissen totem,
die aber in rank verschieden sein mögen) [u. in d. A rt, namtlich w ie 158
zum gensprincip Eroberung hinzukömmt, können nach u. nach d. gentes
I zur Kastenbildung Anlass geben? w o dann d. V erbot d. intermarriage
! ^wischen verschiedenen gentes ganz verkehrt die archaische rule der inter1— marriage innerhalb the same gens; ] ; a man does not marry into his own class,
but takes a wife from some other; and that a chieffrom the highest may marry
with a woman of the lowest without loss of caste. [D. Begriff der caste trägt
d. Briefschrieber hinein u. interpretirt sich so, dass ein Mann nicht in
seiner eignen gens heirathen kann, wohl aber in gens seiner andren brother—
od. cousin phratry; zeigt aber, dass sobald difference of rank %'wischen
blutsverwten o/159 gentes entsteht, dieses in conflict mit d. gentilen Princip
__ geräth u. d. gens in ihr Gegentheil, caste, versteinern kann.]160 The
children belong to the grade of the mother [welches also d. Rangunterschied
Swisehen gentes, Brüder u. Schwester aller gentes finden sich in gentes jedes
Rangs. D . Verwandtschaftsband lässt keine finirte Aristokratie aufkommen, fraternity bleibt in Gleichheitsgefühl] The members of the same grade
in the different tribes do not war with each other.”
Kolushes d. Nordwestküste, linguistisch closely related161 mit d. Athapascans,
haben gens organisation; Gentes haben Thiernamen, descent in female line; right
of succession in female line von uncle to nephew, except the principal chief, who
is generally the most powerful o f the family. |
V II) Indian Tribes of the Northwest Coast.
In einigen dieser tribes - ausser d. Kolushes - prevails gentile organiza­
tion. See: D ali: “ Alaska and its resources” u. namtlich Bancroft: Pacific
States, I, 109.
V III) Salish, Sahaptin u. Kootenay Tribes.
Dies d. principal stock der tribes des Valley of the Columbia, ohne gentile
organisation. Dies war d. initial point der migrations der Ganowanian
family, spreading over both divisions des Continent; their possessors
besassen daher gentile organization, fell into decay and finally disappeared.
I X ) Shoshonee Tribes.
Die Comanches of Texas, zusammen mit Utah tribes, Bonnaks162 (Panacks?),
Shoshonees u. some other tribes gehören dazu.
i 8j 9 (berichtet by Mathew Walker, a Wyandote halfblood, lived among the
Comanches) hatten d. Comanches 6 gentes:
Comanche tribe. Gentes. i) Wolf. 2) Bear. 3) Elk. I 4) Deer, j) Gopher.
(amerik. Erdeichhörnchen) 6) Antelope \
D a d. Comanches gentes, so presumption, dass auch d. other tribes dieses
Hiermit schliesst M organ ab mit d. Indians North of New Mexico. Ihre
grössere Anzahl zur Zeit der europ. Entdeckung in Lower Status of
Barbarism, d. remainder in Upper Status of Savagery. Organization into
gentes u. descent in female line erschien ursprünglich universal. Ihr
system purely social; unit d. gens, phratry, tribe, confederacy the remaining
members der organic series. Selber bei Aryan u. Semitic tribes, when
emerging from barbarism; also system universal in ancient society; inferentially had a common origin - the punaluan group, giving origin to the gentes; all the Aryan, Semitic, Uralian, Turanian u. Ganowanian families of mankind
point to a common punaluan163 stock - with organisation of gentes engrafted
upon it - o f which all were derived, and finally differentiated into families.
X ) Village Indians
i) Moqui Pueblo Indians; still possessed of their ancient communal houses, 7 in
number, near the Little Colorado in Arisona, once a part of New Mexico;
living under their ancient institutions, represent type of Indian life von
Zuni (pueblo) (Neu Mexico) bis Cusco (North Peru) Zuni, Acoma, Taos
u. several other New Mexico pueblos haben selbe Struktur, worin gefunden
von Coronado ( / J40-1J42). Bisher nichts Nennenswerthes studirt über
ihre innere Organization.
Die Moquis organized in gentes: (9), as fo llo w s:
1) Deer. 2) Sand. 3) Rain. I 4) Bear, j) Hare. 6) Prairie Wolf. | 7) Rattlesnake.
8) Tobacco Plant. 9) Reed Grass \
Dr. Ten Broeck, Assistant Surgeon, U. S. A ., lieferte dem Mr. Schoolcraft
d. Moqui Legend über origin164 o f their villages. Ihre Grandmother165
brought from her home, the West, 9 races o f men, first the Deer u. so
weiter d. übrigen gentes (cf. über d. Grandmother der166 Shawnees, oben
p. 57). Nachdem sie selbe gepflanzt on the spot w o nun die villages,
verwandelte sie selbe (nämlich D eer,141 Sand, Rain, Bear etc) in men u. diese
built up the different pueblos u. d. distinction o f races, Deer race, Sand race,
etc is still kept up. They believe in Metempsychosis u. say, nach T o d werden
sie rückverwandelt wden in bears, deer167 etc.; government hereditary, aber
nicht necessarily to the son of the incumbent; for if the(y) prefer any other blood
relative, he is chosen.” Here also gentile organisation found in lower state of
barbarism, aber von diesem Punkt an, sowohl im remainder des North als
"im ganzen Süden keine definite information except in regard to the Lagunas.
A ber still tracesJeft in the Early Spanish writers u. direct knowledge of it in
afew later writers.
There are current traditions in many gentes, wie bei d. Moquis, von trans­
formation ihrer ersten progenitors aus dem animal, or inanimate object, which
became the symbol o f the gens {totem), into men and women. (So bei den
Crane gens unter d. Ojibwas). Ferner Anzahl von tribes, die abstain |
from eating the animal, whose name they bear, doch dies far from universal.
2) Lagunas. (N ew Mexico). Aus Address von Rev. Samuel Gorman an d.
“ Historical Society of New Mexico” i860:
“ Each town is classed into tribes or families (read gentes), and each of these
groups named after some animal, bird, herb, timber, planet, or one of the 4
elements. In pueblo of Laguna, mit about 1000 inhabitants, 17 dieser tribes;
some are called deer, some rattlesnake, some corn, some wolf, some water etc
Children of same tribe as their mother. And, according to ancient custom,
2 persons of the same tribe areforbidden to marry; recently diese Gewohnheit
nicht mehr so rigurös beobachtet wie anciently. Their landis heldin common,
but after a person cultivates a lot, he has a personal claim to it, which he can sell
to anyone of the same community; or else when he dies it belongs to his w idow
or daughter; or, if he were a single man, it remains168 in hisfather's family.”
That wife and daughter inheritfrom thefather is doubtful.
3) Aztecs, Te^cucans u. Tlacopans, ditto the remaining Nahuatlac tribes in
Mexico - flgdes chapter.
4) Mayas of Yucatan.
Herrera: “ General History of America’ spricht oft von “ kindred” mit regard
to the tribes in Mexico, Central America u. South America, dass gens daraus
hervorguckt. E r u. d. ändern early Spanish observers noticed that large
numbers of persons were bound together by the bond of kin u. mention daher
the group als “ kindred” , weiter forschten sie nicht.
Herrera sagt u. a. von d. Mayas (Lond. ed. 1726, Stevens transl. III, 299):
“ they were wont to observe their pedigrees very much, and therefore (!) thought
themselves all related and were helpful to one another
They did not marry
mothers, or sisters-in-law, nor any that bore the same name as theirfather, which
was looked upon as unlawful.” The pedigree o f an Indian under their
system of consanguinity could have no significance apart from a gens. Sagt
Tylor in his: “ Early History of Mankind” : “ The analogy of the North American
Indian custom is therefore with that of the Australian in making clanship on the
female side a bar to marriage, but if we go further down into Central America,
the reverse custom, as in China, makes its appearance. Diego de Landa says
o f the people of Yukatan that no one took a wife of his name, on the father’s
1 85
side, for this was a very vile thing among them; but they might marry
cousins German on the mother’s side.”
X I.) The South American Indian Tribes.
Traces of the gens found in all parts of South America, as well as the actual
presence of the Ganowanian system of consanguinity, aber the subject nicht fully
Sprechend von den nume(f)ous tribes der Andes sagt Herrera {General
History of America): “ this variety of tongues proceeded from the nations
being divided in races, tribes or clans” (d. clan = gens). Jene tribes o f the
Andes, von denen er spricht, brought by the Incas under a species of confed­
eracy. - Nachdem E . B. Tylor gesprochen v. Yukatan w o d. Descenden%in
männlicher Linie u. entsprechendem E h verbot, sagt er: “ Weiter südlich,
unterhalb der Landenge, erscheint d. “clanship u. prohibition wieder (reappears)
auf weiblicher Seite, so in Brit. Guiana bei d. Arrawaks, bei d. Guaranis u.
Abiponen in Paraguay (Dtsche Ueberset^g (363, 64.) - Brett {Indian Tribes of
Guiana) remarks v. d. Indian Tribes in Guiana: these tribes divided into
families (read gentes), each o f which has a distinct name, as the Siwidi,
Karuafudi, Onisidi etc ... these all descend in thefemale line, and no individual
of either sex is allowed to marry another of the same family name. Thus a
woman o f the Siwidi family bears the same name as her mother, but
neither her father nor her husband can be o f that family. Her children
and the children o f her daughter are prohibited from an alliance with any
individual bearing the same name; though they may marry into the family
o f their father, if they choose etc.”
Mit Ausnahme der Andeans, die South American tribes, when discovered,
either in lower status of barbarism or in Status of Savagery. M any o f the
Peruvian tribes concentrated unter the government established bet the Inca
village Indians were in Lower State of Barbarism, if zu conclude von der
imperfect | description des Garcillasso de la Vega.
Wurzel der Gens in status of savagery; letzte Entwicklungsphase bei Greeks u.
Romans (Upper Status of Barbarism). W o d. gentes bei einem tribe o f
mankind gefunden in their last form, their remote ancestors must have
possessed them in the Archaicform. D . Wichtige wäre d. Middle Phase (in
Middle Status of Barbarism) genau zu kennen; existirte im i6 l Jhdt bei d.
Village Indians, aber Spanish colonists lost the golden opportunity - to
understand a condition of society, deren unit (d. gens) sie unfähig to pick up.
Pt. II. Ch. V I. <V lh The A%tec Confederacy.
Einziger stronghold der Aztecs was d. Pueblo de Mexico, mit its capture
their governmental fabric destroyed u. substituted d. Rule der Spaniards.
Diese sahen im Aztec government Analogon europ. Monarchie, fälschten
so their whole historical narrations; sind nur “ historisch” mit Bezug auf
acts der Spanier, acts u. personal characteristic der Aytecs; mit Bezug auf
deren Waffen, implements u. ustensils,fabrics,food and raiment u. d. gl. Taugen
nichts mit Bezug auf Indian society u. gvt. “ They learned nothing and
knew nothing o f either.”
Aztecs u. their confederate tribes in middle Status of Barbarism; ohne
~T~iron u. iron tools; ohne money; traded by barter of commodities; sicher, dass sie
' prepared one meal each day, erst assen Männer für sich, dann Weiber u.
Kinder für sich, hatten weder tables noch chairs.
Commune tenure of lands; Life in large households composed of a number of
related families u. reasons for believing that they practiced communism in
living in the household. Andrerseits: they worked the native metals, cultivated
by irrigation, manufactured coarse fabrics of cotton, constructedjoint-tenement
houses of adobe-bricks and of stone, made earthenware o f excellent quality. E s
existirte kein “Kingdom of Mexico” , wie es in d. älteren descriptions heisst,
noch “Empire of Mexico” wie in d. späteren getauft. Was d. Spanier
fanden, simply “Confederacy of 3 Tribes” , dessen counterpart existirte in all
parts o f the continent. D . government administered b y a Council of Chiefs
mit cooperation eines General Commander of the military bands(principal warchief). Die 3 tribes were: 1) Aztecs or Mexicans; 2) Te^cucans; 3) Tlacopans.
D . Aztecs gehörten zu 7 tribes, migrated vom North, settled in u. near the
valley of Mexico, were among the historical tribes dort at time o f Spanish
Conquest. Alle diese tribes nannten sich collectively “ Nahuatlacs” in their
traditions, sprachen dialects der Nahuatlac common (stock) language.
Acosta (1585 auf visit in Mexico) erzählt d. current tradition ihrer successiven
1) Sochimilcas “ Nation of the Seeds of Flowers” , settled beim Lake Xochimilco,
auf südlichem slope d. valley o f Mexico.
2) Chalcas “ People of Mouths” , kamen viel später, settled neben den 1) on
Lake Chaleo.
3) Tepanecans. “ People of the Bridge” , settled at A%copo%alco, west o f Lake
Te^cuco, on the western slope o f the valley.
4) Culhuas. “ A Crooked People” , settled on east side o f Lake Te^euco - after­
wards known as Te^cucans.
5) Tlatluicans. “ Men of the Sierra” , finding the valley appropriated around the
Lake, passed over the Sierra, südlich u. settled on the other side.
6) Tlascalans. “ Men of Bread” , lebten zeitlang mit d. Tepanecans, 169 settled
dann beyond the valley, eastward at Tlascala.
7) Aztecs, came last, occupied the site o f the present city o f Mexico.
Acosta bemerkt, dass sie (die A ztecs!) came from far countries lying toward
the North, w o sie nun ein kingdom gestiftet, das sie Neu Mexico nennen.
Selbe Tradition bei Clavigero u. Herrera.
Die Tlacopans nicht mentioned, wahrscheinlich subdivision der Tepanecans,
remaining in the original area o f that tribe, w hd der remainder to a
territory immediately South o f the Tlascalans, w o gefunden under name
o f Tepeacas.
Die tradition enthält 2 facts: 1) 7 tribes of common origin, speaking related
dialects, 2) that Afcy ftzz»* /row the North. They were originally one people,
dch segmentation naturally fallen into several tribes.
D . Aztecs fanden d. best situations des Thals occupirt u. nach verschiedentlichem Ortswechsel settled upon a small expanse of dry land in Mitte of
marsh bordered with fields ofpedregal170 u. mit naturalponds. (Teich, Weih­
er). Hier gründeten sie d. Pueblo of Mexico ( Tenoch(f)itlan 13 2 ] (nach
Clavigero), 196 J. vo r Span. Conquest. Waren schwach in number u. poor
in condition. Aber entlang ihrem site flössen in Lake Tezcuco rivulets
v. d. Western Hills u. d. outlets der Lakes Xochimilco u. Chalco. Vermittelst
causeways (Chausseen, Fahrdämmen) und | Deichen umgaben sie ihr Pueblo
mit artificial Teich (pond) von large extent, d. Wasser beingfurnished by the
named sources. D a d. Niveau d. Lake Te^cuco höher alsje%t war, gab es ihnen,
nach vollendetem Werk, d. sicherste position aller pueblos im Thal. Ihr
mechanical engineering wdch sie dies Resultat erreichten, one o f the greatest
achievements der Aztecs.
Z u r Zeit der span. Eroberung, / der 7 tribes - Aztecs, Te^cucans, Tlacopans,
Sochimilcans u. Chalcans residirten im valley; dies o f limited area, about
equal to the State of Rhode Island; es war a mountain or upland basin ohne outlet,
oval in Form , längest von N ord to Süd, 120 miles in circuit, embracing
about 1600 □ wiles, excluding the surface covered by water; d. valley selbst
surrounded by a series of hills, one range rising above mit depressions be­
tween, encompassing the valley with a mountain barrier. D . tribes residirten
in some 30 Pueblos, w ovon Mexico the largest. Abundant evidence, dass der
Rest des modernen M exico’ s besetzt171 dch zahlreiche tribes, die vom
Nahuatlac verschiedne Sprachen redeten, in deren Majorität unabhängig.
Die remaining Nahuatlac tribes, die ausserhalb d. Thals v. Mexico lebten,
waren d. Tlascalans, d. Cholulans (supposed subdivision der former), d.
Huexot^incos, d. Me^titlans (supposed subdivision der Te^cucans) die alle
unabhängig, endlich d. Tepeacas u. Tlatluicans, die abhängig. Bedtende Anzahl
andrer tribes, bildend about / 7 territorial groups mit ebensoviel stock languages,
hatten diese d. Rest v. Mexico, fst dies genaue Wiederholung - in their
state of disintegration u. independence der tribes der U. States u. British Americas,
%ur Zeit ihrer Entdeckung ein Jahrhundert od. mehr später.
1426 d. A%tec Confederacyformed; vorher wenig historisch wichtige events
unter d. valley tribes; uneinig, belligerent, ohne Einfluss jenseits ihrer
unmittelbaren Lokalitäten. Um jene Zeit bei Aztecs preponderance o f
numbers u. strength. Unter ihrem war chief It^coatl overthrown d. frühere
supremacy der Te^cucans u. Tlacopans u. als Folge d. früheren wars gegen
einander errichtet league oder aber confederacy. E s war Defensiv - u.
Offensive Alliance %'wischen d. 3 tribes, mit stipulation für Vertheilung unter
ihnen der spoils in festgesetzten Proportionen u. der tributes of subjugated
tribes. Jezt schwierig zu bestimmen, ob d. Verbindung League (at pleasure
verlängerbar u. auflösbar) od. confederacy, i.e. consolidated organisation wie
der Bund der Iroquois. Jeder tribe blieb independent in seinem local selfgovern­
ment; die 3 ein Volk nach aussen mit Be%ug auf Angriff u. Verteidigung.
Jeder tribe hatte seinen eignen council of chiefs u. its own head war-chiej, aber
der A%tec war-chiej w ar commander-in-chiej der confederate bands; to be
inferred davon, dass Te^cucans u. Tlacopans had a voice in election u. con­
firmation des A%tec war-chief; zeigt dass A^tec influence predominated bei
Gründung der Confederacy.
1426-1J20 - 94 Jahre - d. Confederacy had frequent wars mit adjacent tribes
u. besonders mit d. feeble Village Indians, südlich vom Thal v. Mexico to
the Pacific u. östlich bis Guatemala. Sie begannen mit d. nächsten, overcame
them; the villages in dieser area were numerous, aber small, oft nur a single
large structure of adobe - brick or o f stone, in some cases - several mit structures
j grouped together. Diese forayx172 wiederholt mit avowed object of gathering
spoil, imposing tribute, capturing prisoners for sacrifice, bis d. principal tribes
in dieser area subdued (mit some exceptions) u. tributary gemacht, incl. d.
scattered villages der Totonacs nahe bei present Vera Cru
D . Aztecs, wie d. northern Indians, neither exchanged <n)or releasedprisoners;
the stake their doom bei the Northern Indians unless saved by adoption.
Unter d. erstem - unter Pfaffeneinfluss - offered as sacrifice to the principal
god worshipped. Unter d. American aborigenes erscheint organisedpriesthood
erst im Middle Status of Barbarism, connection mit der invention of idols u.
human sacrifices as a means o f acquiring authority over mankind. Whsclich
selbe Geschichte in the principal tribes o f mankind.
Mit Be^ug auf Gefangne 3 successive usages, in d. 3 sub-periods of Barbarism;
in ist Period burned at the stake, in 2ter den gods geopfert, in 3 ter wden sie
%u Sklaven gemacht; bei allen 3 das zäh bis tief in s.g. Civilisation sich
erhalt (en)de Princip, dass prisonerforfeited to his captor.
D . A^tec confederacy versuchte nicht in selbe d. subdued tribe zu absorbiren,
unter gentile institutions macht das barrier of language impossible. They
were left to the. government of their chiefs u. ihren alten customs. Manchmal
a collector of tribute resided amongst them. Member o f government konnte
man | nur dch gens wden, aber Aztecs nicht far advanced enough - wie
Romans z.B. - to remove the gentes o f the subdued tribes in ihren eignen
Sitze u. incorporating them. Aus demselben Grund - u. wegen d.
Sprachhindernisses - konnten Colonists o f Aztec confederacy nicht assim­
ilate the conquered tribes - A^tec confederacy gewann daher nicht Kraft
dch ihren terrorism od. by holding these tribes under burdens, inspired mit
enmity u. stets ready for revolt. Eben d. remaining Nahuatlac tribes nicht
in d. confederacy; d. Xochimilcans u. Chalcans waren nominell unabhängig,
keine members der confederacy, aber tributary.
D . confederacy was confronted dch hostile u. independent tribes, so d. Mechoacans im Westen, die Otomies im Northwest (scattered bands dieser near
the valley had been placed under tribute), die Chichimecs or wild tribes im
North der Otomies, die Me^titlans im Nordosten, d. Tlascalans im Osten, die
Cholulans u. Huexotyincos im Südosten, u. über diese hinaus, d. tribes der
Tabasco, der Chiapas, u. der Zapotecas (Zapotecs). In diesen verschiednen
Richtungen erstreckte sich d. dominion der A^tec Confederacy nicht 100
miles beyond the valley of Mexico u. a portion der surrounding area unzweifel­
haft neutral ground trennend d. confederacy von perpetual enemies. Aus
diesen limited materials fabricated the Kingdom of Mexico der spanischen
Chroniken, später magnified in d. A^tec Empire of101 current history.
D . Bevölkerung der valley u. Pueblo of Mexico excessiv angeschlagen auf
2 jo,ooo Persons; gäbe für □ mile about 160 persons, fst 2 173 mal d. present
averagepopulation des State of New York u. about equal to the averagepopulation
of Rhode Island. Sie hatten wederflocks noch herds, nochfield agriculture. V o n
jener Population für Pueblo v. Mexico vielleicht to be assigned 30,000.
Phantasiesahlen:Zua%o (visiting Mexico in i j 2 i giebt ihm 60,000 Einwohner,
ebenso der Anonymous Conqueror, who accompanied Cortes (H. TernauxCompans, X , 92); Gomora u. Martyr verwandeln d. 60,000 Einwohner in
60.000 Häuser u. dies angenommen dch Clavigero, Herrera u. last, Prescott
(“Conquest of Mexico” ) Solis macht aus d. 60,000 Einwohner - des Zue^o 60.000 families, würde geben population o f 300,000, whd London damals
nur i 4 J , o o o Einw. hatte (Blacks London). Torquemada, cited by Clavigero,
macht aus 60,000 houses - 120,000 ! The houses in Pueblo of Mexico were
zweifelsohne in general large communal or joint-tenement houses wie die in
Neu-Mexico zur selben Period, gross genug zu accom(m)odirsn von 10 bis
jo u. 100 families in each.
D . A^tec confederacy - in plan and symmetry - unter der der Iroquois.
D . Pueblo of Mexico war largest in America; romantisch gelegen mitten in
einem künstlichen See, largejoint-tenement houses plastered over mit gyp­
sum, wdch sie brillant weiss, schlug es v. weitem span. Imagination; hence
d. extravagance o f opinion.
Bei d. Aztecs found: ornamental gardens, magazines of weapons u. military
costumes, improved apparel, manufacturedfabrics of cotton o f superior w ork­
manship, inproved implements u. ustensils u. increased variety of food;picture
writing, mainly to indicate the tribute in kind every subjugated village had
to pay (these tributes enforced mit system u. rigour o f execution were
manufacturedfabrics u. horticultural products); a calendar for measuring time,
open markets for barter o f commodities, ferner Administrative offices to meet
the demands o f a grow ing municipal life; priesthood, with a temple worship
u. a ritual including human sacrifices. Office of head war-chief had risen into
increased importance etc.
I. Gentes u. Phratries
Spanish writers (contemporär d. Erobng) sahen d. A^tec Gentes nicht;
aber for more than 200 years sahen d. Anglo-Americans sie nicht bei d.
Iroquois; sie bemerkten früh Existenz o f clans mit besdrn Thiernamen,
aber nicht als social unit, w f tribe u. confederacy aufgebaut. Herrera (etc)
spricht o f a “ kindred” als o f group (gens) u. “ lineage” (dies phratry bei einigen
writers, bei ändern gens) D . pueblo of Mexico geographisch getheilt in
4 quarters, jedes occupied by a “ lineage” (phratry) u. jedes quarter “ subdi­
vided” ; each subdivision occupied by a community ofpersons bound together
by some common tie (gens). [In Mexico nur i tribe; der der Aztecs.
Selber erzählt v. Tlascalans (Herrera, Clavigero); their pueblo divided in
4 quarters, each occupied by a “lineage” ; each had its own Teuctli (head war
chief), distinctive military costume, its own standard u. blazon. “ The
four warchiefs” were ex officio members of the Council. (Clavigero) Ebenso
Cholula getheilt in 6 quarters.
D a d. Aztecs in their social subdivisions had arranged unter sich selbst the
parts of the pueblo they were severally to occupy, from this their mode o f
settlement resulted geographical districts. | Nach Acosta giebt Herrera short
sketch o f the building of Mexico, erst “a chapel of lime and stonefor the idol” .
Idol befiehlt dann d. Priester, dass sein (das idol’s) Haus in Mitte bleiben
soll; die chief men soll divide themselves, with their kindreds und
followers, into ^ 174 wards or quarters, and each party to build as they liked
best; dies d. 4 quarters of Mexico, nun called St. John, St. Mary the round,
St. Paul u. St. Sebastian. Nachdem diese divisions made, befahl d. idol
wieder unter sich zu distribuiren d. gods he should name, and each ward
to appoint peculiar places where the gods should be worshipped. So every
quarter had several smaller wards in it according to the number o f their gods
this idol called them to adore___ Nach dieser partition, die, die sich
injured dachten, mit kindred und followers, went away to seek some
__other place, nämlich Tlatelueco, das in der Nähe.
I Diese Erzählung procedirt, wie Mode, nach fertigen Resultat; erst kin in
-1 -4 divisions getheilt u. diese in smaller subdivisions. The actual process ist
I genau d. Gegentheil; erst each body of kindred gens located into an area by
! themselves, u. d. several bodies ( phratries) in such a w ay as to bring those
most nearly related in geographical connection mit einander. Also wenn
lowest division a gens, each quarter occupied by a phratry, composed of
relatedgentes. ( Grecian u. Roman tribes settled in dieser A rt in towns or cities)
Each gens of the same phratry (die 4 quarters v. Mexico) in the main locally
by itself. D a husband u. wife o f different gentes u. d. children o f gens d.
Vaters od. d. Mutter, je nachdem gens in male or female line, the pre­
ponderating number in each locality would be of the same gens.
Their military organisation based upon these social divisions. In d. Mexican
Chronicles by the native author Tespspm°k (M organ erhielt dies von A . F .
Bandelier, o f Highland, Illinois, engaged upon translation dieses Buchs),
referring to a proposed invasion o f Michoacan, sprach Axaycatl zu d.
2 Mexican captains etc u. all d. ändern u. fragte ob alle “ Mexicans were
prepared, after the usages u. customs of each ward; if so, they should begin
to march u. that all were to unite at Matlatsjnco Toluca; ” dies indicates
military organisation nach gentes 11. phratries.
I Auch d. land tenure zeigt hin auf gentes. Clavigero sagt: “ the lands called
I9 I
Altepetlalli (altepetl = pueblo), that is those o f the communities o f cities
and villages, were divided into as many parts as there were districts in a city,
and every district possessed its own part entirely distinct from, and indepen­
dent o f every other. These lands could not be alienated by any means what­
Jede dieser communities war a gens, whose locali^ation^NZx nothwendig. Consequenz ihres socialen systems. D . community machte d. District (Clavigero
puts the district for the community) and which owned the lands in common.
Das element of kin, which united the community, ausgelassen v. Clavigero,
ist ergänzt dch Herrera. E r sagt: “ There were other lords, called major
parents \Sachems\ whose landed property all belonged to one lineage [gens],
which lived in one district, and there were many o f them when the lands
were distributed at the time N e w Spain was peopled; and each lineage
received its own, and have possessed them until n o w ; and these lands did not
belong to anyone in particular, but to all in common, and he who possessed
them could not sell them, although he enjoyed themfor life and left them to his
sons and heirs; and if a house (alguna casa, feudal expression d. Spaniers) died
out, they were left to the nearest parent to whom they were given and
to no other, w ho administered the same district or lineage.”
T>.feudalen Vorstellungen d. Spaniers u. d. indianischen Verhältnisse, die er sah,
laufen hier durch einander - aber trennbar. D er Aztec “Lord” was der
Sachem, civil chief o f a body of consanguinei o f whom he is called “ the major
parent” D . lands gehörten jenem body (gens) in common; when the chief
died, his place (according to Hei-rera) ging über auf seinen Sohn; was
überging war in diesem Fall d. office of Sachem, nicht d. land, das niemand
in trust “possessed” ; hatte er keinen Sohn “ the lands were left to the nearest
major parent” , d. h. another person was elected Sachem.
“Lineage” kann hier nichts andres sein wie gens u. office hereditary in the gens,
wie bei d. ändern Indians, selective unter d. members der gens; wenn
descent in male line, choice would fall on one o f the sons o f the defunct
Sachem, own or collateral, or upon a brother, own or collateral etc
The “ lineage“ o f Herrera u. “ the communities” o f Clavigero offenbar selbe
o r g a n i s a t i o n s - Der Sachem | had no title over lands u. konnte sie
transmit to nobody. Spanier betrachteten d. Sache so, weil he held an
office perpetually maintained u. weil there was a body of lands perpetually
belonging to a gens over which he was a sachem; dieser (ausser seinen
functions o f chief der gens) hatte so wenig authority über diepersons (die ihm
d. Spanier zuschreiben) wie über d. lands.
Was sie über inheritance sagen, ebenso confus u. contradictory; nur
w ichtig hier, soweit sie show bodies of consanguinei u. the inheritance o f the
children from their fathers, in welchem Fall descent in male line.
II) Existence u. Functions des Council of Chiefs.
Für Existenz eines A^tec Council - evidence; fast nichts über seine Func­
tions u. Anzahl seiner Glieder.
Brasseur de Bourbourg sagt “ nearly all the towns or tribes divided into 4 clans
or quarters, whose chiefs constitute the great council” ; später sagt er, der
A^tec Council habe aus 4 bestanden. (Bourbourg, Popul Vuh).
Diego Duran - (schrieb seine “History of the Indies of New Spain and Islands
of the Main Lands” 1 jy ^ -i j 8i , also vor Acosta u. Te^o^omoc.) - sagt: “ In
Mexico, nach Wahl eines Königs wählten sie 4 lords of the brothers or near
relations of this king whom they gave the titles of princes, and from whom
they had to choose the king___ These 4 lords or titles after being elected
princes, they made them the royal council, like the presidents and judges
o f the supreme council, without whose opinion nothing could be done.” Acosta175
nennt d. same 4 offices [Tlacachcalcatl, Tlacatecal, Ezuau(u)acatl, u.
Fillancalque], nennt d. tenants dieser officers “ electors” u. “ all these 4
dignities were o f the great council, without whose advice the king might
not do anything o f importance.”
Herrera places dies officers in 4 grades, sagt dann: “ These 4 sorts o f
noblemen were o f the supreme council, without whose advice the king
was to do nothing o f moment, and no king could be chosen but what was one of
these 4 orders.” “ K in g ” für principal war chief u. “ princes” für Indian chiefs.
A ls d. Huexot^incos delegates nach Mexico sandten zum Vorschlag einer
Allianz gegen d. Tlascalans, sagte ihnen - nach Tezozom oc - Montezuma:
“ Brothers and sons, you are welcome, rest yourselves awhile, for although
I am king indeed I alone cannot satisfy you, but only together with all the chiefs
of the sacred Mexican senate.” Hier materialpoint, wie in d. obigen accounts:
Existence of a supreme council, with authority over the action of the principal
warchief. D . limitation des Council to 4 unwahrscheinlich; so würde der
Council represent nicht den A^tec tribe, sondern the small body of kinsmen
aus welchen d. military commander was to be chosen. A ber im indianischen
System (u. everywhere else unter gentile institution) jeder chief represents a
constituency u. d. chiefs Together represent the tribe. Manchmal gemacht
electionfrom them to form a general council; dann aber stets dch an organic
provision fixing the number, and providing for their perpetual mainte­
D . Te^cucan Council o f 14 members (.Ixtlilxochitl, Hist. Chichimeca, Kingsborough, Mexican Antiq. I X , p. 243); d. Council at Tlascala was a numerous
body; w ir finden ebenso a Cholulan u. a. Michoacan council, aber Clavigero
sagt mit Be^ug auf Aztecs: “ In the history o f the conquest we shall find
Montezuma in frequent deliberation with his council on the pretensions o f
the Spaniards. We do not know the number of each Council, nor do histories
furnish us with the lights to illustrate such a subject.”
Sofern d. A^tec Council limited to 4 members, all of the same lineage, it is
presented in unwahrscheinlicher Form. [Mögen Spanier dem Tribal Council,
__aus d. Chief der gentes bestehend, nicht fälschlich untergeschoben haben
__d. gens aus der principal war chief u. vielleicht 4 andre offices %u wählen? Ganz
wie z.B. d. wampum keeper aus bestimmter gens bey Iroquois zu
wählen? A m t konnte hereditary an gens gekommen sein.]
Jeder tribe in Mexico u. Central America had its Council of chiefs.
Die Aytec Confederacy scheint keinen General Council gehabt zu haben,
composed of the principal chiefs of the 3 tribes, im Unterschied v. d. separate
council jedes tribes. In diesem Fall wäre A%tec Confederacy nur League
gewesen, offensive u. defensive, u. as such under the primary control of the
A%tec tribes. Dies noch to elucidate.
3) Tenure u. Functions des Office of Principal War chief.
D . Name des office d. Montezuma - Teuctli, war chief, als member d.
Council of chiefs er manchmal genannt Tlatoani ( = speaker). This office o f
a general military commander the highest known to the Aztecs, war sonst
same als d. Haupt war-chief der Iroquois Confederacy. D . office machte
seinen Träger ex officio member of the Council of chiefs. The title o f Teuctli
added als a sort o f surname w ie: Chichimeca-Teuctli, Pil-Teuctli etc. |
Bei Clavigero heissts: “ The teuctli took precedency o f all others in the Senate,
both in the order o f sitting and voting, and were permitted to have a
servant behind them (der subsachem dr Iroquois) with a seat, which was es­
teemed a privilege o f the highest honour.” D . Spanish writers brauchen
nie d. W ort “ teuctli” , verwandeln es in king für Montezuma u. dessen
successors. Ixtlilxochitl, o f mixed Tezcucan u. Spanish descent nennt d.
head warchiefs o f Mexico, Te^cuco u. Tlacopan nur “ warchief’ teuctli u. andrem
W ort to indicate the tribe {teuctli = warchief = general). Obiger Ixtlilxo­
chitl sagt, sprechend von der division o f power zwischen d. 3 chiefs, when
the confederacy was formed etc:
“ The king o f Te^cuco was saluted [dch d. assembled chiefs der 3 tribes]
by the title o f Aculhua Teuctli, also by that o f Chichimecatl Teuctli which his
ancestors had w orn and which was the mark o f the empire [das Beiwort
tribal designation]; It%coat%in (Itzcoatl), his uncle, received the title o f
Culhua Teuctli, because he reigned over the Toltecs-Culhuas [war warchief
o f the Aztecs, when the confederacy was form ed]; and Totoquihuat^in den
of Tecpanuatl Teuctli, which had been the title o f Azcaputzalco. Since
that time their successors have received the same title.”
176Die Spanier stimmen überein, dass d. office Montezuma held was
elective with the choice confined to a particular family, u. was sie wundert,
nicht von Vater auf Sohn, sondern v. Bruder %u Bruder, oder von Onkel auf
Neffen. Unter d. immediate notice der conquerors fanden 2 Wahlen statt;
die d. Montezuma folgte sein Bruder (unbekannt, ob own od. collateral)
Cuitlahua; nach T o d dieses elected177 sein Neffe Guatemo^in (own or
collateral nephew?) Schon bei früheren Wahlen Bruder dem Bruder
gefolgt od. Neffe dem Onkel (Clavigero). A ber wer wählte? Duran (sieh
oben) bringt 4 chiefs as electors, denen zugefügt 1 elector von Te^cuco u. 1
von Tlacopan, zus. 6, invested with power to choose from a particular
family the principal war-chief. Dies entspricht nicht dem system o f an
elective Indian office.
Sahagun (“ Historia General etc” ch. X V I II) sagt: “ When the king or lord
died, all the senators called Tecutlatoques, and the old men of the trihe called
Achcacauhti, and also the captains and old warriors called Yautequioaques,
and other prominent captains in warlike matters, and also the priests
called Tlenamacaques, or Papasaques - all these assembled in the royal houses.
Then they deliberated upon and determined who had to be the lord, and
chose out o f the most noble of the lineage o f the past lords, who should be
a valiant man, experienced in warlike matters, daring and b ra ve ...
When they agreed upon one they at once named him as lord, but this election
was not made bj ballots or votes, but all together conferring at last agreed
upon the man ... the lord once elected they also elected 4 others which were
like senators, and had to be always with the lord, and be informed o f all
the business o f the kingdom.” Hatten d. A^tecgentes, the office hereditary
in a particular gens, but elective among its members; would pass (wie
der Sahagun v. d. Aztecs oben erzählt) by election within the gens, von
brother to brother od. von uncle to nephew, aber nie von Vater to son (nämlich
bei descent in female line, wie bei d. Iroquois) Diese succession bei der WahJ.
d. Aztecs v. head warchiefs beweist dass sie gentes hatten u. with respect to
this office wenigstens noch descent in female line.
Morgan conjectuirt: office held by Montezuma hereditary in a gens (the eagle
was the blazon or totem on the house occupied by Montezuma), deren
members ihn aus ihrer Zahl wählten; diese nomination then submitted
separately to the 4 lineages ( phratries) o f the Aztecs for acceptance or re­
jection; auch den Te^cucans u. Tlacopans, direct interested in Wahl des
general commander. Nachdem sie severally considered u. confirmed the
nomination each division appointed a person to signify their concurrence; hence
the 6 miscalled “ electors” ; d. 4 high chiefs der Aztecs, mentioned as elec­
tors, wahrscheinlich the 4 war-chiefs o f the 4 lineages od. phratries der
Aztecs, like the 4 war-chiefs o f the 4 lineages o f the Tlasculans; ihre
function nicht to elect, sondern to ascertain dch Conferenz mit einander,
ob d. choice made by the gens had been concurred in, and if so to an­
nounce the result. Abset^ungsrecht folgt v. Wahlrecht, where the term was
for life. A ls Montezuma, dch intimidation, sich von seiner Residenz nach
Quartier v. Cortez geleiten lässt, w o er placed under confinement, the
Aztecs zunächst paralysed. - In d. West Indies hatten d. Herrn Spanier
entdeckt, dass wenn der ca^ique eines tribe caught u. als Gefangner gehalten,
d. Indians paralysed refused to fight. Im Besitz dieser Kenntniss, | sobald
sie auf’s Festland kamen, suchten sie d. principal chief to entrap, by force
or fraud, u. hielten ihn gefangen bis ihr Zw eck erreicht war. So Corte\
mit Montezuma; so Pi^aarro when he seized Atahuallpa. Unter d. Indians
selbst prisoner put to death; if a principal chief\ the office reverted to the tribe u.
was at once filled. The Action des people (dch Spaniards) paralyzed by
novel circumstances; prisoner hier alive u. in possession of his office. Cortez
put the Aztecs in this position. Erst warteten sie einige Wochen, hoffend d.
Spaniards would retire; dann aber setzten sie Montezuma ab for want of
resolution, wählten seinen Bruder an seine Stelle, assaulted gleich d(araü)f
d. Spanish quarters mit great fury u. vertrieben sie schliesslich aus ihrem
Pueblo. Corte%sent Marina zu Montezuma ihn zu fragen ob er glaube, sie
hätten government in hands von new commander gegeben? (Alles dies
Herrera) D er replied: “ they w ould not presume to choose a king in
Mexico whilst he was living” , geht dann auf’s Dach des Hauses, addressirt his countrymen, u. (nach Clavigero) er hielt A n tw ort von an A^tec
warrior: “ Hold your peace, you effeminate scoundrel, born to weave and
spin; these dogs keep you a prisoner, you are a coward” ; sie schiessen
d a n n mit arrows auf ihn u. stoned ihn, er starb kürz nachher von der
Dem üthigung; d. warchief,‘ in diesem assault der Aztecs commandirend,
war sein Bruder Cuitlahua.
Kein Grund anzunehmen, vielmehr alles daggen, dass Montezuma had
any power on the civil affairs der Aztecs. A ber functions of a priest u. wie
Herrera sagt, auch o f a judge, attached to his office o f principal war chief....
Council hatte also Recht, wie to elect, so to depose. - D . Spanier selbst erst
anerkennen, dass d. A^tec confederacy - a league or confederacy of tribes. Wie
konnten sie daraus A^tec monarchy fabriciren?
Pt. II. Ch. V III. The Grecian Gens.
A bout 8jo B .C. begins civilization unter Asiatic Greeks mit Homeric
poem s; unter d. European Greeks about century later mit Hesiodic peoms.
Period vorher von several iooonds years, während deren Hellenen ad­
vancing dch lower Status o f Barbarism; ihre ältesten traditions finden sie
schon established in Grecian peninsula, auf eastern border o f Mediter­
ranean u. d. intermediate u. adjacent islands. Aeltere branch derselben Stock,
w o von Pelasgians die chief representatives, hatten vorher grösseren Theil
derselben Area occupirt, in time either helleni^ed od. forced dch Hel(e)enen
into emigration.
Pelasgians u. Hellenes organized in gentes, phratries (nicht common to the
Dorian tribes. Muller's “ Dorter” ) u. tribes; in einigen Fällen d. organic
series nicht complete, aber überall gens die unit of organisation; Council of
chiefs; agora od. assembly of the people; βασιλεύς or military commander.
Modifications mit Entwicklung forced upon gens, nämlich: i) change von
female to male descent; z) intermarriage in genspermitted in case offemale orphans
u. heiresses; 3) children had gained an exclusive inheritance of their fathers
(property). Hellenes were in fragmentary tribes analog to Indians etc.
Griechische society comes first under notice about /j·/178 Olympiade (jj6 B .C .)
u. von da bis legislation of Cleisthenes (509 B.C.) vorgehend Uebergang von
gentile in political (civiJ)Organisation. [E r hätte sagen sollen dass political hier
Sinn des Aristoteles hat = städtisch u. politisches animal = Stadtbürger.]
D . Township, mit d. fixed property it contained u. the people who inhabited
for the time being, was to become the unit o f organization; gentilis
transformed into civis. The re’dtions of the individual to his gens, which were
personal, had to be transferred to the township and become territorial; der
demarch (Vorsteher der deme) der township taking in some sense the place
of the chief of the gens.
Property was the new element that had been gradually remoulding Grecian
institutions to prepare for this change; nachdem several centuries elapsed in
Versuche ihn auf Basis der gens auszuführen. Distinct schemes verschiedner
A rt of legislation tried in the various Grecian communities w ho copied
more or less each other’s experiments, all heading to the same result.
Unter Athenians legislation of Theseus (Tradition); 624 B .C . Draco; 594
B.C. Solon; J09 B.C . Cleisthenes.
Bei Beginn d. historischen Periode d. Ionians of Attica divided in 4 tribes:
Geleontes, Hopletes, Aegicores u. Argades.
\Stamm φυλή; dann φρατρία od. φρατορία; φράτωρ Glied einer phratry; Γένος
Geschlecht {auch: Nation u. Stamm.)] “ D . Geschlechterphylen gewöhnlich in
Unterabtheilungen - Phratrien, diese wieder in Geschlechter [ausser Γένος
(τό) γένω) kommt aber bei Homer Γενεά, ion. γενεή u. zwar für Stamm,
Geburt, Familie, Nachkommenschaft.)] D . Geschlechter wieder abgetheilt
in οΐκοι {Häuser od. Familien); d. Unterabtheilungen dagegen der topischen
Phylen sind Gaue (δήμοι) od. Ortschaften (κώμαι) ... ursprünglich, auch wo
Geschlechterphylen waren, | wohnten d. Genossen eines Stammes zusammen im
selben Theil des Landes, ebenso d. Genossen einer Phratrie u. eines Geschlechts,
so dass auch hier, mit d. Eintheilung d. Volks zugleich eine Eintheilung
d. Landes in grössere od. kleinere Districte verbunden war. - Bei d.
topischen Phylen kamen lediglich d. Wohnsitze in Betracht. Später dies doch
nicht so streng gehalten, dass Verlegung d. Wohnsitzes aus einem Phylendistrict in anderm nothwendig auch Versetzung in andere Phyle herbei­
gezogen hätte [134, iß J. Schoemann, I. Einer Phyle u. in derselben einer
Phratrie od. δήμος {Gau) anzugehören w ar überall wesentliches Merkmal u.
Bedingung des Bürgerthums... w ovon die nicht injenen Abtheilungen begriffenen
Landeseinwohner ausgeschlossen. Nähres über letztere ib. p. 135 sq.]
Die 4 attischen tribes - Geleontes, Aegicores, Hopletes, Argades - selben
Dialekt sprechend, occupying a common territory, had coalesced into a
nation, waren vorher aber whsclich blosse confederacy. \Hermann {Political
Antiquities of Greece) mentions the confederacies o f Athens, Aegina, Prasia,
Nauplia etc Each Attic tribe composed o f ß phratries, each phratry o f
ßo gentes, hence 4 (tribes) χ ß phr. od. 12 χ βο = β6ο gentes; phratries u.
tribes constant, aber Anzahl d. gentes variirt.
Dorians generally found in ß tribes - Hylleis, Pamphyli179 u. Dymanes, at
Sparta, A rgos, Sicyon,180 Corinth, Troezen etc w o sie verschiedne nations
bildeten u. jenseits d. Peloponnes in Magareis etc. 1 or more non -Dorian
tribes in some cases united mit ihnen, wie in Corinth, Sicyon, 180 Argos.
In all cases d. Grecian tribe presupposes gentes, selben Dialekt redend;
Phratria kann fehlen. Z u Sparta 3 ώβη(ώβάζω lak(onian) in ώβές eintheileny
ώβάτης Glied einer ώβή). Jeder tribe enthielt 10 ώβαι (?) Phratrien? V o n
ihrer Function nichts bekannt; in d. ancient Rhetra d. Lykurg d. tribes
in obes directed to be maintained unaltered.
Local system d. Athenians; 1) Γένος gens, founded upon kin; dann φρατρία,
auch φράτρα, from segmentation o f an original gens, brotherhood o f
gentes; dann φΰλον, später φυλή, tribe composed o f several phratries; dann
people or nation composed o f several tribes. Confederacy oftribes kommt früh
vo r (d. tribes occupying independent territories') led to no important results.
Likely dass d. 4 tribes, erst confederated, dann coalesced, after having
collected in one territory under pressure from other tribes.
Grote, in his “History of Greece” stellt Sache so dar: “ Phratries u. gentes
seem aggregations o f small primitive unities into larger ... independent of,
and do notpresuppose the tribe ... Basis of the whole the house, hearth orfamily
(οίκος), a number of which, greater or less, composed the Gens (Γένος) clan,
sept or enlarged, and partly fictitious,181 brotherhood, bound together by:
1) common religious ceremonies, and exclusive privilege of priesthood, in honour
o f the same god supposed to be theprimitive ancestor, characterised by a special
2) common burial place.
^ καίτοι τις εστιν 6στις άν εις τά πατρώα
\ μνήματα τούς μηδέν ένγένειτιθέναιεΐασεν
182 Demosth. Eubulides.
3) mutual rights of succession toproperty.
4) reciprocal obligations of help, defence, and redress of injuries;
5) mutual right and obligation to intermarry in certain determinate cases, especially
where there was an orphan daughter or heiress.
~T~6) Possession in some cases at least of common property; an archon and treasurer
o f their own.
Phratric union, binding together several gentes, less intimate ... doch auch
mutual rights u. obligations o f an analogous character; especially a com­
munion ofparticular sacred rites, and mutualprivileges ofprosecution in the event
of a phrator107 being slain ___A ll the phratries of the same tribe enjoyed a
certain periodical communion of sacred rites under the presidency o f a magistrate
called the Phylo-Basileus or tribe-king selected from the Eupatrids.”
D ch d. Greciangens guckt d. Wilde (Iroquois z.B.) aber auch unverkennbar
Sonst eigentümlich to the Grecian gen s:
7) limitation of descent to male line; 8) prohibition of intermarriage in the gens
ausser in case of heiresses; 9) Right of adopting etrangers in the gens; 10) right of
electing u. deposing its chiefs.
ad 7. In unsrer eignen modernen Familie, those descendedfrom males bear
the family name, constitute a gens, obgleich in a state of dispersion u. ohne
bond of union ausser d. nearest in degree. D . females lose mit Heirath their
family name, werden mit their children transferred to other gens. Herrmann
sagt: “ Jedes K ind wurde einregistrirt in d. Phratrie und Geschlecht [Γένος]
seines Vaters.” |
ad 8) [Introduction o f intermarriage in gens geht hervor schon aus d. Aus­
nahme, for heiresses, w o dies erlaubt.]
Wachsmuth: “ D ie Jungfrau, die ihres V ater’s Haus verlässt, ist nicht
länger Theilnehmer am väterlichen Opferherd, sondern enters the religious
communion ihres Mannes, u. this gave sanctity to the marriage tie.” Hermann
sagt: “ Jedes neu verheirathete Frauenzimmer, herself a citizen, was on this
account enrolled in the phratry of her husbandSacra gentilicia common in
griech. u. röm. gens. Scheint nicht, dass bei Griechen - wie bei Römern the wife forfeited her agnatic rights by marriage; sie doubtless counted herself
of thegens o f her father.
Rule, die intermarriage in gens verbietet, dauert fort, selbst nach Gründung
der monogamian Ehe [die solche limits auf nearest degrees to limit sucht],
so lang gens basis des social system bleibt. Becker sagt in Charicles:
“ relationship was, with trifling limitations, no hindrance183 to marriage, which
could take place with all degrees o f άγχιστεία, or συγγένεια, though naturally
not in the γένος itself"
ad 9) Adoption später practicirt, mindestens in families, doch mit public
formalities u. limited to special cases.
ad 10) D . right to elect and depose its chiefs gehörte unbedingt d. Grecian
gentes in early period; each gens had its άρχός, the common name for a chief.
Dass d. office erblich auf son in homericperiod nicht anzunehmen, consider­
ing the free spirit der Athenian gentes down to Solon u. Cleisthenes. Pre­
sumption stets gegen hereditary right, w o nicht decisive evidence, da d. stärkste
Widerspruch gegen d. archaic rule.
Was abgeschmackt bei Grote, dass d. Basis d. social system der Greeks d.
οίκος “ the house, hearth, or family.” E r verlegt offenbar d. Roman family
under the ironclad rule of a paterfamilias in’s homerische Zeitalter der griech.
Familie. Gens in origin älter als monogamian u. synd(y)asmian families,
essentially contemporaneous mit punaluan family; aber gens nicht founded
upon either. - Jede family, archaic or not, ist halb in, halb ausser gens, weil
husband u. wife belong to differentgentes. [Aber
184 entspringt nothwendig
aus einer Promiscuous group; sobald innerhalb dieser schon intermarriage
^wischen Brüdern u. Schwestern entfernt (stopped) zu werden beginnt, kann
gens gepfropft werden auf d. group, nicht vorher; Vorausset^g d. gens,
dass Brüder u. Schwestern (own u. collateral) bereits von ändern consanguinei geschieden sind. Die gens einmal da, bleibt sie unit des social
— system, whd d. Familie grosse changes dchläuft.
Gens geht gan% ein in phratry, diese in tribe, diese in nation, aber family
geht nie ganz ein in gens, sobld letztere einmal existirt; sie geht immer
nur halb ein in gens d. Mannes u. halb in gens der Frau.
Nicht nur Grote, sondern Niebuhr, Thirlwall, Maine, Mommsen etc - alle
von klassischer Schülergelehrsamkeit - nehmen selben Stand mit Be^ug
auf monogamische Familie of patriarchal type als integer around which society
integrated in the Grecian u. Roman systems. Family konnte ebensowenig
- selbst d. monogamische - natural basis ofgentile society bilden, wie heutzu­
tage in bürgerlicher Gesellschaft the family is not the unit of the political
system. D . Staat recognizes the counties woraus er zusammengesetzt, diese
its townships, but the township takes no note of the family; so d. nation
recognised its tribes, the tribes its phratries, the phratries its gentes, but the
gens took no note of thefamily.
Herrn Grote ferner zu bemerken, dass obgleich d. Griechen ihre.gentes aus
d. Mythologie herleiten, jene älter sind als d. von ihnen selbst geschaffne
Mythology mit ihren Göttern u. Halbgöttern.
In the organization o f gentile society, the gens is primary, forming both
the basis u. unit d. systems; d. family auch primary u. älter als d. gens; the
consanguine u. punaluan families having pre-existed in time; but it is not a
member o f the organic series.
Grotelss sagt: “ Primitive religious and social union der attischen Bevölkg - im
Unterschied v. d. political union, die wahrscheinlich (!) späterer introduction,
representedatfirst dch d. trittyes u. naukraries, u. später d. io Kleisthener tribes,
subdivided into trittyes u. demes. In the former personal relation is the essential
u. predominant characteristic - local relation being subordinate; in the
latter, property and residence become the chief considerations u. d. personal
element counts only as measured along with these accompaniments___ The
festival of Theoenia (Attic) u. Apaturia (common to all the Ionian race)
annually brought together the members o f these phratries u. gentes for
worship, festivity u, maintenance o f special sympathies.” | “ The gentes,
both at Athens u. in other parts of Greece bore a patronymic name, the stamp
o f their believed commonpaternity___ Asklepiadae in many parts o f G reece;
Aleuadae in Thessaly; Midylidae, Psalichydae, Belpsiadae, Euxenidae, at
Aegina; Branchidae at Miletus; Nebridae at Kos, Iamidae u. Klytiadae at
Olympia, Akestoridae at Argos, Kinyradae at Cyprus, Penthilidae at Mitylene,
Talthybiadae at Sparta - , Kodridae, Eumolpidae, Phytalidae, Lykomedae,
Butadae, Euneidae, Hesychidae, Brytiadae etc in Attica. T o each corre­
sponded a mythical ancestor passing for the first father of all as well as the
eponymous hero of the gens - Kodrus, Eumolpus, Butes, Phytalus, Hesychus
In Athen, mindestens nach der Revolution des Kleisthenes, der
gentile name nicht employed; a man described first by his own single name,
dann by name of hisfather u. next by that of the deme to which he belonged, wie
Aeschines son of Atrometus, a Kothokid ... gens a close corporation, both as
to property and to persons. Bis Solon's Zeit keine power of testamentary
disposition. Wenn er ohne Kinder starb, succeeded his gennetes in sein
Eigenthum, u. dies selbst nach Solon, if he died intestate___I f a man mur­
dered, first his nearest relations, dann his gennetes u. phrators beide allowed u.
required to prosecute the crime at law; while hisfellow demots, or inhabitants
o f the same deme, did not possess the like right o f prosecuting.186 A ll
that we hear o f the most Ancient Athenian laws based upon thegentile andphratrie
divisions which are treated throughout as extensions of thefamily ( ! ? ) . . . this
division is completely independent of anyproperty qualification - rich men as well as
poor being comprehended in the same gens___ Different gentes unequal in dignity,
arising chiefly from the religious ceremonies o f which each possessed the
hereditary and exclusive administration, and which, being in some cases
considered o f pre-eminent sanctity, were therefore nationalised. Thus the
Eumolpidae and Kerykes, who supplied the hierophant and superintendent o f
the mysteries o f the Eluesinian Demeter - and the Butadae, who furnished
the priestess o f Athene Polias, as well as the priest o f Poseidon Erechtheus
in the Acropolis - seem to have been reverenced above all the other
Gens existed in the Aryan family when the Latin, Greek u. Sanskrit speaking
tribes onepeople {gens, Γένος u. ganas); derived it from their barbarous ancestors
u. more remotely from their savage progenitors. I f the Aryan family became
as early separated as the Midlde Period of Barbarism, u. dies wahrscheinlich,
thegens must have been transmitted to them in its Archaicform ___Cf. gens of the
Iroquois, in the lower Status of Barbarism mit gens d. Grecian in Upper Status,
schlagend dieselbe organisation, dort in its archaic form, hier in its ultimate
form. The differences between them forced upon the gens by the exigencies
o f human progress.
Mit diesen mutations in gens parallel mutations in the rule of inheritance___
When Solon allowed the owner ofproperty to dispose of it by will, in case he had
no children, he made the first inroad upon the property rights of the gens.
Herr Grote, nachdem er remarked that “ Pollux informs us distinctly that
the members of the same gens at Athens were not commonly related” erklärt d.
Ursprung d. Gens als Schulgelehrter Philister so: “ Gentilism is a tie by
itself; distinct from the family ties, but presupposing their existence and
extending them by an artificial analogy, partly founded in religious belief’ and
partly onpositive compact, so as to comprehend strangers in blood. A ll the
members of onegens, or even o f one phratry, believed themselves to be sprung ...
from the same divine or heroic ancestor ... Doubtless Niebuhr is right in sup­
posing the a(n)cient Roman gentes were not real families, procreatedfrom one
common historical ancestor. Still it is not less true ... that the idea of the gens
involved the belief in a common first father, divine or heroic - a genealogy...
fabulous, but consecrated and accredited187 among the members o f the
gens itself; it served as one important bond o f union between them ...
The natural families o f course | changedfrom generation to generation, some
others diminished, or died out; but the gens received no
alterations, except through the procreation, extinction and subdivision o f
these component families. Accordingly the relations o f the families mit
d. gentes in perpetual course o f fluctuation, and the gentile ancestralgenealogy, adapted as it doubtless was to the early condition o f the gens, became
in progress188 o f time partially obsolete and unsuitable. W e hear of this
genealogy but rarely ... only brought before thepublic\(in) certain cases preeminent
and venerable. But the humbler gentes had their common rites (Sonderbar
dies, M r. Grote?), and common superhuman ancestor and genealogy, as
well as the more celebrated: (how very strange this on the part o f humbler
gentes! Is it not, M r. Grote?) The scheme and ideal (Dear Sir, not ideal,
but carnal, Germanice fleischlich) basis was the same in all.”
The system of consanguinity pertaining to gens in its archaic form - u. d.
Griechen hatten diese once besessen like other mortals - preserved a
knowledge of the relationships of all the members of the gentes to each other.
[Lernten dies für sie entscheidend Wichtige dch Praxis v. Kindesbeinen.]
This fell into desuetude with the monogamicfamily. The genteel name created a
pedigree beside which that of a family was insignificant. It was the function
of this name to preserve the fact o f the common descent o f those who bore
it; but the lineage of the gens so ancient that its members could not prove the
actual relationship between them, ausser in beschränkter Zahl von cases
through recent common ancestors. D . name itself evidence o f a common
descent and conclusive, except as it was liable to interruption through the
adoption ofstrangers in blood into the previous history der gens. Dahingegen
d. practical denial aller relationship %-wischen its members ä la Pollux u. Niebuhr,
changing the gens into a purely fictitious creation würdig idealer, i.e. stubenhockerischer Schriftgelehrter. [Weil d. Verkettung der Geschlechter, na­
mentlich mit Anbruch d. Monogamie, in d. Ferne gerückt u. d. past reality
in mythological Phantasiebild reflectirt erscheint, hence schlossen u. schliessen Philister-Biedermän(n)er, dass d. Phantasiegen(e)alogie wirkliche gen­
tes schuf!] Grosse Proportion v. Gliedern der Gens konnten ihre
Abstammung weit züruck nachweisen u. bei d. remainder the gentile name
they bore sufficient evidence o f common descent for practical purposes.
The Grecian gens meist small body; 30 families to a gens, abgesehen
v. den wives der Familienhäupter, would give average of 120 persons
by gens.
In gens the religious activity der Greeks originated, expanded over the
phratries, culminated in periodical festivals common to all. (De Coulanges')
[Das lumpige religiose Element w d Hauptsache bei gens, im Mass wie real
cooperation u. common property alle werden; d. Weihrauchsduft, der übrig
Pt. II) Ch. I X The Grecian Phratry, Tribe and Nation.
D . griech. phratry its natural foundation in bond of kin, gentes die sub­
divisions einer common gens gebildet. Says Grote: “ A ll the contemporary
members o f the phratry o f Hekatäus had a common god for their ancestor
at the 16th degree” ; the gentes were brother gentes literally [originally] u.
hence their organization - phratry. D . Existenz d. letzteren erklärt sich
schon Dikaearchus rationalistisch so: thepractice of certain gentes in supplying
each other with wives led to the phratrie organisation for (!) the performance of
common religious rites. A fragment dieses Dikaearchus preserved dch
Stephanus of Byzantium. E r braucht Tiaxpa für gens, wie Pindar oft u. Homer
manchmal. Stephanus berichtet s o :
“ Patry is one of 3 forms of social union among Greeks, according to Dikaear­
chus, which we call respectively patry, phratry and tribe. The patry comes
into being when relationship, originally solitary, passes over into the
second stage [relation o f parents with children and children with parents],
and derives its eponym from the oldest and chief member o f the patry, as
Aicidas, Pelopidas. But it came to be called phatria or |prahtria when certain
ones gave their daughters to be married into anotherpatry. For the woman who
was given in marriage participated no longer in the paternal sacred rites, but
was enrolled in the patry of her husband; so that for the union, formerly
existing by affection between sisters and brothers, there was established another
union based on community of religious rites, which they denominated a phratry;
and so that again, while the patry took its rise in the w ay we have previ­
ously mentioned, from the blood relation between parents and children, and
children andparents, the phratry took its rise from relationship between brothers.
But tribe and tribesmen were so called from the coalescence into communities and
nations so called, for each of the coalescing bodies was a tribe.” (Wachsmuth: Hist.
Antiquitäten der Griechen>y)
Marriage out of the gens here anerkannt als custom, u. wife enrolled in the
gens (patry) rather than the phratry o f her hu(s)band.
Dikäarchus, ein Schüler d. Aristoteles, lebte zur Zeit w o gens existed chiefly
as a pedigree of individuals, its powers having been transferred to new
political powers. Intermarriages, mit common religious rites, konnten
nicht gründen, wohl aber cement the phratrie union. Griechen wussten v.
ihrer eignen Geschichte nichts ausser bis in Status of Upper Barbarism
Sieh in array of military forces phratries u. tribes bei Homer. (Sieh oben!)
A us d. advice d. Nestor an Agamemnon geht hervor, dass the organization
o f armies by phratries u. tribes had then ceased to be common. \Gens v. vorn
herein too small a basis for organization o f an army.] [Tacitus, De moribus
Germaniae, sagt v. d. Germanen im Krieg, caput 7 : nec fortuita conglobatio
turmam aut cuneumfacit, sed familiae et propinquitates 189
Obligation of blood revenge - turned später in duty of prosecuting the murderer
before the legal tribunals - rested primarily upon thegens of the slain, aber stand
auch by phratry, u. became a phratrie obligation. The extension der obliga­
tion d. gens zu phratry implies a common lineage of all the gentes in a phratry.
- Unter d. Athenern überlebte phratrie organisation the overthrow of the gentes
as the basis o f a system; retained, in d. new polit. society, some control over
the registration of citizens, the enrollment of marriages u. the prosecution of the
murderer of a phrator before the courts. Greek gentes u. phratries liessen als by
aim to the new society they were destined to found: their institutions, arts,
inventions u. mythological(polytheistic) system.
W ie an Spitze der gens άρχός, so an Spitze der Phratry Phratriarch (φρατριάρχος), presided at its meetings u. officiated in the solemnisation of religious
rites. Sagt Coulanges: “ The phratry had its assemblies and its tribunals,
and could pass decrees. In it, as well as in the family there was a god, a
priesthood, a legal tribunal and a government.” The religious rites of the
phratries were an expansion o f those o f the gentes o f which it was com­
A number of phratries composed the tribe; the persons in each phratry, o f
same common lineage, spoke the same dialect. T he concentration of such
Grecian tribes as had coalesced into a people, in a small area, tended to repress
dialectal variations, which a subsequent written language tended still further
to arrest.
When d. several phratries o f a tribe united in the commemoration o f their
religious observances, so in ihrer quality qua tribe; as such under the
presidency o f a phylo-basileus, the principal chief of the tribe; he possessed
priestly functions, always inherent in the office of basileus, u. übte a criminal
justice aus in cases o f murder; daggen absence of civil functions; also King
schlechter misnomer für “ basileus.” Unter d. Athenern d. tribe-basileus,
dann selber term for the general military commander of the 4 tribes. Gentile
institutions essentially democratical, monarchy incompatible with gentilism.
E ve ry gens, phratry, tribe a completely organised self-governing body; w o
several tribes coalesced into a nation, the resulting government constituted in
harmony with the principles animating its constituent parts.
Tribes, coalesced into a nation, wie d. tribes d. Athenians u. Spartans, simply
a more complex duplicate of a tribe. There was no name (social one) for the
new organism [wo tribes took the same place in the nation as phratries in
the tribe, gentes in the phratry]; Aristoteles, Thucydides u. andre “ mo­
derne” nennen d. governments der heroic period - βασιλεία; statt dessen
sprang up namefor the people or \ nation. So bei Homer Athenians, Locrians,
Aetolians etc, aber auch v. city od. country they came from. So, vor Lykurg
u. Solon, 4 stages o f social organization: gens, phratry, tribe u. nation. So
gentile Grecian society a series of aggregates ofpersons, with whom the go­
vernment dealt through their personal relations to a gens, phratry or tribe.
Im heroic age bei Athenian nation 3 coordinate departments or powers: 1) the
council of chiefs (βουλή); 2) αγορά, assembly o f the people; 3) βασιλεύς,
general military commander.
1) Council of chiefs, βουλή. Had permanence as a feature of their social system;
its powers ultimate and supreme; wahrscheinlich auch hier composed o f the
chiefs ofgentes; selection must have been made, da ihre Anzahl meist kleiner
als die der gentes; Council auch legislative body representing the principal
gentes; seine importance mag abgenommen haben mit wachsender W ich­
tigkeit des office o f βασιλεύς u. the new offices created in their military
u. municipal affairs with their increase in numbers u. wealth; but it could
not be overthrown without a radical change of institutions. Hence every office
of the government muss d. Council accountable geblieben sein for its
official acts.
Dionysius, 2 , X I I 190 sagt: Έλληνικόν δέ άρα καί τούτο <τό> εθ-ος ήν.
τοΐς γοϋν βασιλευσιν, δσοι τε πατρίους άρχάς παραλάβοιεν καί όσους ή
πλη&ύς αυτή καταστήσαιτο ήγεμόνας, βουλευτήριον ήν έκ των κρατίστων,
ώς 'Όμηρός τε καί οί παλαιότατοι των ποιητών μαρτυροϋσι· καί ούχ
ώσπερ έν τοΐς καθ’ ήμας χρόνοις αύ&άδεις καί μονογνώμονες ήσαν αί
τών άρχαίων βασιλέων δυναστεΐαι.
In Aeschylus “ Έ π τ ά έπί -9-θήδας” (“ Seven against Thebes” ), wo beidefallen,
Eteokles in command von Thebai u. sein Bruder Polynices als einer der
7 chiefs, die d. Stadt belagern, kommt Herold des Raths u. theilt dem
Chorus [sonst answered Antigone u. Ismene] mit das Gutachten u. Schluss
d. Raths δοκοΰντα (was Rath facienda esse censuit) u. δόξαντα (quae
decrevit'): δημοϋ της Καδμείας πόλεως πρόβουλοι, d. Stadtrath von Theben
zusammengesetzt aus d. chiefs seiner vornehmsten gentes. Die Stelle bei
v. io oj-io:
“ Δοκοΰντα καί δόξαντ’ απαγγελλειν με χρή
Δήμου προβούλοις. της δε Καδμείας πόλεως
Έτεοκλέα μέν τούδ' έπ' ευνοία χθ-ονός
■9-άπτειν εδοξε γης φίλαις κατασκαφαΐς etc.” 191
2) άγορά established in der heroic period - an assembly of the people.
In Agora gehn u. in Krieg; bei Homer heisst’s vom grollenden Achilles:
/, 490, 9 1 II.: “ Οΰτε ποτ’ εις άγορήν πωλέσκετο κυδιάνειραν, (d. Mann
ehrend) ουτε ποτ’ ές πόλεμον,”
„ E r ging weder in d. ruhmvolle {den Mann ehrende') Agora
__ N och in die Schlacht.” [Iliad, book I, v. 490-491]
D . Agora - spätere Einrichtg als der Council o f chiefs [der früher wie bei
Iroquois mit άγορά so far verbunden als die Volksleitg (auch Weiber) dort
reden konnten u. immer Masse anwesend], hatte power to adopt or reject
public measures submitted by the council. D . agora - bei Homer u. in
Greek Tragedians - has some characteristics which it afterwards main­
tained in the ecclesia dr Athenians u. d. comitia curiata dr Romans. Im
heroic age agora a constant phenomenon among the Greek tribes [ditto
Germans in Upper Status o f Barbarism]. Jeder konnte sprechen in
A g o ra; sie machte in ancient times meist ihre decision kund durch show
of hands.
In d. “ Schut^flehenden” des Aeschylus fragt χορός:192
δήμου κρατούσα χειρ δπγ) πληθύνεται.
Antw ortet Δ Α Ν Α Ο Σ :
ν. 605
εδοξεν Άργείοισιν ού διχορρόπως,___
ν. 607 - ^ πανδημία γάρ χερσί δεξιωνύμοις
6 14 ^ έφριξεν αίθ-ήρ τόνδε κραινόντων λόγον ■ etc.
Der Basileus. [D. europäischen Gelehrten - meist geborne Fürsten­
bediente, machen aus d. βασιλεύς Monarch im modernen Sinn. Dagegen
Morgan, Yankee Republican; er sagt sehr ironisch, aber true, vom öligen
Gladstone: “ M r. Gladstone ... presents to his readers [in “Juventus Mundi” ]
the Grecian chiefs o f the heroic age as kings and princes, with the
superadded quality of gentlemen,” selbst er muss aber zugeben (der “ G utstein” ) “ on the whole we seem to have the custom or law ofprimogeniture |
— sufficiently, but not oversharply defined.” ]
Mit Bezug auf d. Agora bei Homer sagt Schoemann I, 2 7 : 193 “ V o n förm­
licher Abstimmung des Volks ist niemals194 d. Rede; nur durch lautes
Geschrei < ...) giebt d. Versammlung ihren Beifall oder ihr Missfallen
über d. Vorgetragene zu erkennen, u. wenn es sich um eine Sache handelt
zu deren Ausführung d. M itwirkung des Volkes erforderlich ist, so
verräth uns Homer kein Mittel, wie dasselbe gegen seinen Willen da%u gezwungen
__ werden könne ( . . . ) ”
Frage: ging d. office o f basileus dch hereditary right von Vater auf Sohn
über? Im Low er Status of Barbarism d. office of chief hereditary in a gens,
d.h., vacancy, when occurring, filled from the members of the gens. When
descent infemale line - wie bei d. Iroquois - an own brother meist elected to
succeed the deceased chief; wenn in d. male line - wie bei Ojibwas u.
Omahas - the oldest son. In the absence of objections to the person such became the
rule; aber d. elective principle remained. Also blosse faktische Nachfolge d.
ältesten Sohns od. eines der Söhne (wenn mehre) beweist also nicht “hereditary
right” \ because by usage he was in the probable line of succession by a free
election from a constituency. Presumption daher f. d. Grecians, ent­
sprechend ihren gentile inst(it)utions, either for free election od. a con­
firmation of the office by the people through their recognized organisations,
wie bei Roman rex. In diesem Fall konnte der s.g. Nachfolger office nicht
antreten ohne Election od. confirmation, u. d. power (Seitens d. Volks)
to elect or confirm schloss ein right to depose.
Was d. berühmte Stelle in Ilias, ι. II, v. 203-6 angeht (worauf auch Grote
seine “ royalistische” Anschauung gründet):
“ ού μέν πως πάντες βασιλεύσομεν έν&άδ' ’Αχαιοί,
ούκ άγαθ-όν πολυκοιρανίη ■ εις κοίρανος εστω,
είς βασιλεύς, ώ δώκε Κρόνου πάις άγκυλομήτεω
[σκήπτρόν τ' ήδέ θέμιστας, ινα σφίσι βασιλεύη].” 195
2 θ6
So erstens t(u bemerken: Agamemnon— für den Odysseus in obiger Stelle
spricht - erscheint in Ilias nur als d. principal warchief, commanding an
army before a besieged city. Der Vers in brackets not found in several M s.,
z.B. nicht im commentary v. Eustathius. 196 Ulysses hält hier keine V o r ­
lesung über eine Regierungsform, kgliche od. andre, sondern verlangt
“ Gehorsam” an chief warrior im Kriegsdienst. Considering dass G rie­
chen vo r Troja nur qua Heer erscheinen, geht’s in der agora demokratisch
genug zu. Achilles, wenn er von “ Geschenken” , i.e. Austheilung d. Beute
spricht, macht stets zum Vertheiler weder d. Agamemnon, noch einen
ändern βασιλεύς, sondern “ d. Söhne der Achäer” , d. Volk. D . Prädicate
“ διογενεΐς” od. “ διοτρεφεΐς” beweisen auch nichts, da jede gens von einem
G ott herstammt. Die tribe-chiefs gens schon von “ vornehmerem” Gott,
(hier Zeus); selbst die persönlich Unfreien - wie der Sauhirt Eumäus u.
Rinderhirt Philoitios sind δΐοι od. δεΐοι, u. dies in Odyssee, also in viel
späterer Zeit als die der Ilias; d. Name ήρως wird in selber Odyssee auch d.
Herold Mulios, den blinden Sänger Demodokos beigelegt; etc. Κοίρανος,
was Odysseus Agamemnon neben βασιλεύς anwendet, heisst noch nur
Befehlshaber im Krieg dort, βασιλεία, angewandt v. d. griech. Schriftstellern
für d. homerische Königtum (weil generalship his chief feature) mit βουλή
u. agora ist - Sorte militärischer demokratie.
Im homerischen Zeitalter lebten d. Grecian tribes in walled cities; Bevölkerungs^ahl stieg dch field agriculture, Manufactur-industrie, flocks u. herds;
new offices required u. some separation of theirfunctions; new municipal system
was grow in g; period o f incessant military strife for the possession of the most
desirable areas; mit increase ofproperty wuchs the aristocratic element in society,
war Hauptursache der disturbances in Athenian Society von Zeit d. Theseus bis
%u Solon u. Cleisthenes.
W hd dieser Periode u. bis zur final abolition des βασιλεύς office einige Zeit
vor der isten Olympiade (j j 6 B.C.) wde office d. βασιλεύς more prominent u.
powerful than das irgend einer andren Person in ihrer früheren Erfahr­
ung. Functions of Priest u. Judge attached to or inherent in the office;
er scheint ex officio a member of the council of chiefs. Powers o f general in
Feld u. Garrison in d. walled city, gab ihm Mittel ebenso Einfluss in
civil affairs zu gewinnen; scheint aber nicht dass er civil functions besass.
A u f Seite d. βασιλεύς entwickelt sich nothwendig tendency to usurp additional
powers, in beständigem | K am pf mit d. council of chiefs, representative o f
the gentes. [Hence endlich d. office abgeschafft v. d. Athenern.]
Unter d. Spartan tribes früh Einrichtung d. Ephorats to limitpower of βασιλεύς.
[D. βουλή blieb d. supreme power, unterstützt dch agora im homer.
Thucydides sagt I, c. iy . Δυνατωτέρας δε γιγνομένης της Ελλάδος καί
των χρημάτων την κτησιν έτι μάλλον ή πρότερον ποιουμένης τά πολλά
πόλε σι.
των προσόδων
μειζόνων γιγνομένων (πρότερον δέ ήσαν | έπί ρητοΐς γέρασι (mit fest­
gesetzten powers) πατρικαί (gentiles) βασιλεΐαι), ναυτικά τε έξηρτύετο
ή Ε λ λ ά ς καί της θαλάσσης μάλλον άντείχοντο.197
Aristoteles. Politics, I I I , c. X : “ βασιλείας μέν ούν εϊδη (Arten) ταϋτα,
τέτταρα τον άριθμόν, μία μέν ή περί τους ήρωϊκούς χρόνους (αΰτη δ’ήν
έκόντων (von Freien, over a free people) <μέν,> έ'πι τισί δέ (in einigem
aber) ώρισμένοις. στρατηγός γάρ ήν καί δικαστής ό βασιλεύς, καί των
πρός <τούς> θεούς κύριος (Hauptpriester); δευτέρα δ’ή βαρβαρική (αΰτη
δ'έστίν έκ γένους αρχή δεσποτική κατά νόμον), τρίτη (d. 3 te Form ) δέ
έν αίσυμνητείαν προσαγορεύοσιν (αύτη δ', <έστίν> αιρετή τυραννίς ( Wahl­
tyrannei). τετάρτη 8 ’ ή Λακωνική <τούτων> (αΰτη δ’έστίν ως είπεΐν άπλώς
στρατηγία (generalship), κατά γένος άίδιος)” (erbliche generalship).193
Aristoteles giebt dem βασιλεύς keine civil functions. [Was d. richterliche
function angeht, muss sie wie bei d. alten Germanen gedeutet werden, als
Vorsteher d. Gerichts, welches Versammlung ist; d. Vorsitzer stellt d.
Frage, ist aber nicht der Urtheilfinder.\
D . Tyrannis war usurpation, erhielt nie a permanent footing in Greece,
galt stets ihnen als illegitim; seine Tödtung galt für verdienstvoll.
Cleisthenes rejected the βασιλεύς office; hielt council of chiefs bei in elective
senate u. d. agora im people (ecclesia); elective archon folgte bei d. Athenern
dem βασιλεύς; dieser selbst, in Upper Status of Barbarism, was in dessen
Middle Status Teuctli ( Great War Soldier verbunden mit functions of Priest) in
d. A%tec Confederacy; dieser hinwiederum in Lower Status of Barbarism der
Great War Soldier wie z.B. der Iroquois Confederacy, u. dieser selbst entsprang
aus d. common warchief des tribe.
Pt. II. Ch. X . Institution of Grecian Political Society.
A us der failure der gentile institutions to meet the now complicated wants o f
society, gradually all civil powers entzogen d. gentes, phratries u. tribes u. diese
übertragen auf new constituencies. D . eine system went gradually out, d.
andere gradually in, the twofor a part of the time existing side by side.
Stockaded village usual home o f the tribe in Lower Status of Barbarism; im
Middle Statusjoint-tenement houses o f adobe brick and stone, in the nature o f
fortresses; im Upper Status cities surrounded mit ring embankments, schliesslich
mit walls of dressed stone, mit towers, parapets, gates, designed to protect all
alike and to be defended by the common strength. Cities o f this grade imply
the existence of a staple u. developed field agriculture, possession of domestic
animals in flocks and herds, o f merchandise in masses u. o f property in houses u.
lands. A necessity generally arose for magistrates u. judges, military u.
municipal offices o f different grades, with a mode of raising and supporting
military levies which would require public revenues. Dies alles machte dem
“ council of chiefs” d. Regieren schwer. - D . Militairgewalt, erst devolved
upon ßocaiXeu? jezt auf general; d. captains under greater restrictions;
judicial power jezt bei Athenians exercised dch archons u. dicasts; d. magis­
terial powers devolved upon municipal magistrates. Nach u. nach several
powers by differentiation taken von der sum ofpowers des original council of chiefs,
so weit sie vom V o lk auf letzteren übergegangen waren. Diese Zeit d.
Uebergangs erscheint bei Thucydides (lib. I, 2-13) u. other writers als Zeit
ftwhder (fortwährender) disorders von conflict o f authority u. abuse o f
powers not yet well defined u. als failure d. old systems o f government,
auch Bedürfniss v. written law für blosse usages u. customs ddch nöthig
geworden. Diese transition | dauerte centuries.
D . Theseus v. d. Athenern first attempt to subvert the gentile organisation
zugeschrieben; man muss ihn betrachten als Namen für eine Periode od.
Series of events.
Die Bevölkerung v. Attica (Böckh) in seiner blütenden Zeit about \ Million;
davon mehr als §, nämlich 36j , 000 Sklaven, ausserdem etwa 4j,ooo
angesiedelte Fremde, bleibt für d. freie bürgerliche Bevölkerung - po,ooo\
N ach Schömann: Attika in mehre kleine Fürstenthümer getheilt; d. Alten
(Strabo, b. I X , Plutarch: Theseus c. 24, 32, 36) nennen 12 Staaten; in manchem
dieser 12 nicht eine, sondern mehrere Stadt u. Städtchen. Die Sage lässt
d. Theseus Land u. V o lk unter d. Regierung eines einzigen Fürsten vereinen,
__ Athen %um Sit% der Centralgewalt machen, d. Theilregierungen Ende machen.
Theseus angeblich Basileus v. Athen in d. 2. Hälfte d. 13 Jhdts B.C .
V o r Theseus (sie<(h) Schoemann) lebte A ttic V o lk in cities [12 angegeben
nach Schömann, als ebensoviel independent Wohnsitze u. Territorien der
12 phratries], bildeten independent tribes, jeder mit eignem Territorium w o
the people localised, eignen council houses u. prytaneums, aber confederated
for mutual protection, u. elected Basileus als general commander of their
common forces. A ber (sieh Thucydides, u. ähnlich bei Plutarch), sobld
Theseus Basileus wurde, überredete er sie to break up the council-houses u.
magistracies ihrer verschiednen Städte, u. come in to relation with Athens,
mit einem council-house (ßouXeuTyjpio?) u. einem 7rpuTavsIov. [Letzteres ein
öffentliches Gebäude, worin d. heilige Feuer unterhalten wurde, u. d. Prytanen
od. Vorsitzenden des Senats wohnten.] So d. 4 tribes brought unter
Theseus to coalesce into one people [Sagt Plutarch in “ Theseus” c. 24:
“ Die Bewohner Atticas wohnten bisher zerstreut u. konnten nur mit Mühe
für gemeinsame Angelegheiten %usammengebracht werden (dies zeigt, dass sie
confederirt waren, bevor sie coalesced), ja bisweilen waren sie in Streit u.
Fehden mit einander gerathen. Theseus vereinigte nun alle in einer Stadt u.
bildete aus ihnen eine einzige Gemeine eines einzigen Staats. Z u diesem
Zw eck reiste er bei d. einzelnen Gemeinen u. Geschlechtern umher, u. suchte
ihre Einstimmung zu erhalten etc] Den Mächtigen versprach er Aufhebung
der kgl. Gewalt etc u. c. 2y. “ Um d. Stadt noch mehr zu vergrössern, rief er
Jedermann unter der Zusicherung gleicher Rechte hinzu, u. erliess dabei,
wie man sagt, den bekannten Heroldsruf: “ Hieher kommt, alF ihr Völker!”
verkünden; denn er wollte in Athen einen allgemeinen Völkerverein (lies
Verein d. Attischen tribes) stiften.199 Damit aber d. herbeigeströmte ge­
mischte Menge [Phantasie des Plutarch, gab damals keine solche “ M engen” ]
nicht Unordnung u. Verw irrung in den Freistaat brächte, theilte er d. Volk
querst in Edle, Landbauern u. Handwerker. Den Edlen übertrug er die
Aufsicht über d. religiösen Angelegheiten u. d. Recht, öffentliche Aemter
%u besetzen (?), er ernannte sie zu Lehrern der Gesetze, zu Auslegern d.
göttlichen u. menschlichen Rechte, stellte sie aber d. übrigen Bürgern
gleich, indem d. Edlen zwar durch Ansehen, die Landbauern aber durch
Nützlichkeit u. d. Handwerker dch Menge den V orzug zu haben schienen.
Dass er querst, wie Aristoteles sagt, “sich %um Volk hinneigte u. d. Alleinherrscft aufgab, scheint auch Homer %u bezeugen, welcher im Schiffsver_ %eichniss (2’ Buch der Ilias) d. Athener eine Gemeine, Demos, nennt” ]
Theseus theilte V o lk in 3 classes, irrespective ofgentes, Eupatridae (well-born),
Geomori (husbandmen) u. “ Demiurgi” artisans. D . principal offices as­
signed to first class, both in the civil administration u. priesthood. Diese
classification nicht nur recognition ofproperty u. aristocratic element in govern­
ment der society, sondern direct movement gegen d. governing power der gentes.
Intention offenbar to unite the chiefs of the gentes mit ihren Familien u. d.
men of wealth in the severalgentes in a class by themselves, with the right to hold
the principal offices in which the powers o f society were lodged. D .
separation ds remainder in 2 grosse classes wieder Verletzung der gentes.
A ber gelang nicht. Die jetzt s.g. Eupatrides waren whsclich d. men der
gentes vorher called into office. Dies scheme brach down, weil es in fact
no transfer ofpower von gentes, phratries u. tribes zu d. classes u. weil such
classes inferior den gentes as a basis200 of a system.
[D. Aeusserung v. Plutarch, dass “ d. Niedrigen u. Armen bereitwillig der
Aufforderung des Theseus \ folgtet'’ u. der von ihm citirte Ausspruch d.
Aristoteles, dass Theseus “ sich %um Volk hinneigte” scheinen aber trotz
M organ darauf hinzuweisen, dass d. chiefs d. gentes etc dch Reichthum etc
bereits in Interessenconflict mit der Masse der gentes gerathen, was unver­
meidlich bei Privateigenthum in Häusern, lands, Herden verbunden mit
monogamischen Familie.]
V o r j j 6 B.C . (erste Olympiade) Am t d. Basileus in Athen abgeschafft, an
dessen Stelle archonship, wie es scheint erblich in gens, d. ersten 12 archons
genannt Medontidae, von Medon, angeblichem Sohn des Kodrus, des letzten
Basileus. (Nach Morgan lebenslänglich d. archonship, hereditary in gens,
also nicht hereditary im modernen Sinne.)
j i i B .C . Archonship beschränkt auf 10 Jahre, bestowed by free election
auf d. würdigst gehaltne Person; hier Anfang d. historischen Periode, mit
election to highest office in the gift of the people.
68ß B.C. office of archon made elective annually, their number increased to nine,
blieb so bis Ende der athen. Demokratie;
1) Archon Eponymus, von seinem Namen d. designation des Jahrs was
derived; er determined all disputes, relative to thefamily, gentile u. phratric
relations; was legal protector o f orphans u. widows.
2) Archon Basileus; had competence in complaints respecting offences agst
the religious sentiments and homicide.
3) Archon Polemarch (in times prior to Kleisthenes) leader of military force u.
judge in disputes between citizens u. non-citizens.
4) D . 6 ändern Archonten hiessen Thesmot(Jj)etae.
Erst war d. Attische archon chief o f gens u. this office hereditary in gens;
when descent changed v. female to male line the sons of the deceased chief201
in the lines o f the election; Athener gaben später dann d. alten Titel des
chief o f gens - archon - dem highest magistrate, machten office elective,
irrespective o f gens etc., erst lebenslänglich, dann 10, dann i Jahr.
624 B.C . Draco had framed a code o f laws for the Athenians; shows that
usages u. customs were to be superseded by written laws. Athenians were in
the stage w o lawgivers appear and legislation is in a scheme or in gross,
under the sanction o f a personal name.
J94 B.C . Solon comes into Archonship. - In seiner Zeit had schon come in
existence der Areopagus, bestehe(n)d aus d. Exarchons mit power to try
criminals u. censorship over morals, zugleich mit Anzahl newer offices in military,
navalu. administrative services. - Wichtigste event: Errichtung der ναυκραρίαι
(.Naukraries), 12 injedem tribe, 48 in all; jede Naukrarie a local circumscrip­
tion of householders, aus der levies drawn into military u. naval service, u from
which taxes wahrscheinlich collected. D ie naucrary was the incipient deme
or township. Nach Böckh bestand sie schon vor Solon's Zeit, da d. presiding
offices der naucraries (πρύτανεις των ναυκράρων) schon mentioned früher,
Aristoteles schreibt sie dem Solon zu, weil dieser sie in seine Constitution
aufnahm. - 12 naticraries bildeten a τριττύς (trittys), a larger territorial
circumscription, nicht necessarily contiguous; bildete germ o f the “ county”
(?). Council of chiefs (βουλή) dauerte fort, aber jetzt daneben agora, d.
Court des Areopagus, u. die 9 archons. It doubtless had the general ad­
ministration der finances. A ls Solon zur archonship came, social state
bösartig, in Folge des struggle for the possession of property. Ein Theil der
Athener in Sklaverei gefallen, durch Verschuldung, d. Person d. Schuldners
being liable to enslavement in default o f payment; andre had mortgaged
their lands u. were unable to remove the encumbrances. Ausser body
von Gesetzen, w ovon einige neu, but corrective of the principal financial
difficulties, erneuerte Solon Project v. Theseus die Gesellscft in classes zu
theilen, diesmal aber nicht nach callings, sondern nach amount of their
property; er theilte d. Volk in 4 classes, nach measure o f wealth.
[Nach Plutarch “Solon” c. 18 : Iste C lasse: Grundertrag = joo Mass trockner
u. flüssiger Früchte. [Gewöhnliche Mass d. Getreides ein Medimnus (etwas
über I j f i 6 des Berliner Scheffels), der Flüssigkeiten ein Metrete (etwas mehr
als 33 Berliner Quart.) W er dazu gehörte joo Scheffler.202 Ilte Classe:
die 300 Mass erndteten, hiessen zur Ritterschaft Steuernde. Illte Klasse:
D ie 200 Mass v. einer d. beiden Früchte. Zwiespänner (ζευγΐτοα, wohl vom
Gespann Maulthiere, das sie hielten. (Dies geschah nachdem er Schätzung
__ der Bürger verordnet.) Alle ändern d. IVte Klasse: Fröhner (Theten).
Erhielt d. 3 ersten Klassen, i.e. d. Vermögenden, den Zu gang | ‘\u allen
obrigkeitlichen Aemtem; Theten (4te K l.) hatten kein A m t zu verwalten,
hatten aber an der Regierung Theil als Mitglieder der Volksversammlungen u.
Gerichtshöfe. (Dadurch bekamen sie entscheidende Macht um so mehr)
“ da Solon auch bei solchen Sachen, worüber d. Obrigkeit zu erkennen
__ hatte..., eine Berufung an d. Volksgericht erlaubte.”
Gentes weakened hierdurch, in ihr decadence eingeleitet. A ber sofern
classes composed of persons substituted for gentes composed of persons, govern­
ment still founded on persons u. upon relations purely personal.
D . erste classe war allein eligible to the high offices, 2te zum Rich(f)erdienst,
3te %ur Infanterie, 4te zu leicht bewaffneten soldiers; letzte d. Majorität; they
paid no taxes, aber in der popular assembly hatten sie vote bei Wahl aller
Magistrate u. Officere, mit power to bring them to an account; could
adopt or reject all public measures. Alle freemen, wenn auch nicht connected
with a gens u. tribe, now brought, to a certain extent, into the government,
became citizens u. members of the public assembly.
D . Iste (vornehmste) Klasse nicht liable to military service.
Neben d. Areopag ein Rath (Plutarch lässt ihn falsch v. Solon gründen, er
nahm nur d. alte βουλή in seine Constitution auf, worin er aus jedem der
4 tribes 100 Männer wählen Hess, Vorberather d. Volks, so dass nichts ohne
ihre vorherige Prüfung an d. Gemeine gelange.
D . territorial element was partially incorporated dch d. naucraries, w o wahr­
scheinlich was an enrollment of citizens u. of their property toform a basis for
military levies u. taxation. D . gentes, phratries, tribes blieben in full utility,
though mit diminished powers. - A transitional condition.
V o n d. disturbed condition der Grecian tribes u. d. unavoidable movements
des people in d. traditionary time vor Solon, viele Persons transferred
themselves v. one nation to another, lost so connection mit ihrer eignen
gens ohne Verbindung mit einer ändern zu gewinnen; dies wiederholt
von Zeit zu Zeit, dch personal adventure, spirit of trade, exigencies of warfare,
bis considerable number with theirposterity in every tribe unconnectedwith any gens.
A ll such persons without the pale o f government. Says Grote: “ The
phratries and gentes probably never at any time included the whole population
of the country - and the population not included tended to become larger and larger
in the times anterior to Kleisthenes, wie nach ihm.” Schon zur Zeit des Lykurg
bedtde immigration nach Griechenland von d. Inseln d. Mittelmeer u. d.
Ionischen Städten seiner östlichen Küste; wenn sie mit families kamen brachten
sie afragment of a new gens mit sich; blieben aber aliens unless the gens admitted
into a tribe, was wahrscheinlich häufig geschah; explains the unusual number
ofgentes in Greece. The poorer class would not be admitted either as a gens
in einen tribe od. adopted in eine gens eines tribes. Z u r Zeit d. Theseus
schon, aber mehr speciell in der des Solon Zahl der unattached class - exclusive
o f slaves - had become large ; diese class o f persons a growing element of
dangerous discontent. Wurden deh Theseus u. Solon admitted to citizenship
through the classes, aber blieben excluded von d. verharrenden gentes u.
phratries. In d. Council konnten203 nur Stimmen 400, je <(100) aus einem
d. 4 tribes (den new probouleutic or pre-considering senate); selbe conditions
nach old custom of eligibility for d. 9 Archontes, also auch für Areopag [d.
tribes bestanden nur o f gentes u. phratries; w er also ausser diesen, ausser
tribe] also nur in public assembly (ecclesia) konnte ein Athenian, nicht ein
memberjener tribes Zulass erhalten, aber eben ddch w ar er citizen, nahm
Theil an Wahl d. Archonten etc., nahm Theil in der jährlichen decision
ihrer accountability, konnte claim redress for wrong von d. archons in his own
person, whd ein alien dies nur konnte dch intervention o f an avouching
citizen or Prostates. Alle (other) persons, whatever their grade or fortune,
befanden sich politisch auf level with d. 4ten Klasse der Thetes. Zugleich
tended the policy o f Solon to invite industrious settlersfrom otherparts of Greece
to Athens. Dies one of the reasons of thefailure ofgentile organization. [Diese
settlers alle Griechen; mit written language hatte d. dialectic Unterschied nicht
mehr Macht zur Barriere v. Scheidung (Unverständlichkeit) zu werden;
andrerseits migration, Seefahrt u. alle mit commerce verbundne Personenbewegung
I - nicht fassbar in aufgens gegründete societies.]
Andrerseits Schwierigkeit gens, phratry u. tribe local zusammen zu halten.
Früher hatte d. gens its lands in common, the phratries certain lands in common
for religious purposes u. wahrscheinlich auch d. tribes other lands in common.
Wenn sie sich established in town or country, settled sie neben einander by
gentes, | phratries, tribes,gemäss ihrer social organisation. Jede gens in the main
by itself nicht alle ihre Glieder, denn 2 gentes representirt in jeder Familie,
but the body who propagated the gens. The gentes derselben Phratry suchten
local zusammen zu bleiben, u. so d. several phratries einer tribe. A ber
zur Zeit d. Solon lands u. houses owned by individuals in severalty, mit power of
alienation of lands, but not of houses, out of the gens. So immer schwieriger to
keep the members o f a gens locally zusammen, wegen der shifting relations
o f persons to land u. von d. creation of new property by its members in other
localities. The unity o f their social system was becoming unstable in place
u. in character. [Abgesehen v. locality: die Eigenthumsdijferenz in selber gens
hatte Einheit ihrer Interessen in Antagonismus ihrer members verwandelt;
ausserdem war neben Land u. Vieh Geldcapital entscheidend wichtig
I geworden, mit d. Entwicklg der Sklaverei !]
N ur d. unsettled condition u. incessant warfare der tribes (Attic), from their
settlement in Attica bis zur Zeit d. Solon hatte die alte gentile Organisation so
lang aufrecht erhalten können. The township mit its fixed property u. its
21 3
inhabitants for the time beingyielded the element of permanence now wanting in
the gens.
Zur Zeit d. Solon Athenians already a civilised people, had been so for 2
centuries; bdtend development o f useful arts, commerce at sea became a national
interest, advancement o f agriculture u. manufacture, commencement o f
written composition in verse; aber ihre institutions ofgovernment still gentile, o f
the type o f the Later Period of Barbarism; beinah ein Jahrhundert nach
Solon full o f disorders.
joy B.C. Kleisthenes’ constitution (Kern derselben lag in d. naucrary)
dauerte bis zu Verlust der Unabhängigkeit Athens. Theilte Attica in 100
demes or townships (wards), jedes umschrieben by metes u. bounds, u. distinguished
by a name. Jeder citizen hatte sich selbst ein^uregistriren u. to cause an
enrollment of his property in the deme wo er resided. Dies enrollment evidence
u. foundation o f his civil privileges. The deme displaced the naucrary; its
inhabitants had powers of local self-government. Diese demotae wählten einen
δήμαρχος who had the custody of thepublic register, also the power to convene the
demotae for the election of magistrates andjudges, for revising the registry of the
citizens, u. enrolling such as became of age during theyear. Sie elected a treasurer
u. provided for the assessment and collection of taxes u. for furnishing the quota
of troops required from the deme für state service. T hey also elected 30
dicasts204 orjudges, trying all causes arising in the deme below a certain sum;
ausserdem had deme its own temple, religious worship u. own priest, der also
elected by the deme. A ll registered citizens free u. equal except equal eligibility
to higher offices.
Second member der organic territorial series: 10 demes, united in a larger geo­
graphical district, was called a local tribe - φυλον τοπικό v. (So wde d. römische
tribus - ursprünglich 1/3 o f the people composed o f 3 tribes - verwandelt
aus numerical quality in a local designation.) Each district named after an
Attic hero; einige der 10 demes waren205 detached (nicht locally contiguous)
whslich in consequence o f the local separation o f portions des original con­
sanguine tribe who desired to have their deme incorporated in the district
o f their immediate kinsmen. [Morgan nennt d. topischen Phylen counties,
Schoemann aber nennt d. Unterabtheilung der topischen Phylen auf W ohn­
sitze u. Theile der Stadt u. Landschaft gegründet, ihre Unterabteilungen
Gaue (δήμοι) oder Ortschaften (κώμαι). E r sagt von Kleisthenes: E r theilte d.
gesammte Land in 100 Verwaltungsbezirke, hiessen δήμοι u. d. einzelnen
Demen wden theils nach d. kleinen Städten od. Flecken, theils nach aus­
gezeichneten Geschlechtern benannt; die nach Geschlechtern benannten
Demen vorzugsweis in d. Theil d. Landes, der der Phyle der Gehonten
t^ugewiesen (.Hauptstadt Athen u. ihre nächste Umgebung, w o also d.
meisten u. bdtensten Adelsfamilien lebten, w o ihre Güter gelegen.
Lang vo r Kl(e)isthenes gab es Bezirke, Städte u. Flecke die sich Demen
nannten. Zahl der Demen stieg zuletzt auf 17 4 ; doch erinnerte an d. ur­
sprüngliche Zahl d .100 Heroen, d. Eponymen d. 100 Demen. D . Phylen
— Verbände von 10 D em en.]206
Jede Phyle od. District nach an A ttic hero. D . Einwohner wählten einen
φύλαρχος, der d. Cavallerie commandirte; ταξίαρχος, commandirte foot
soldiers u. στρατηγός commandirte both; jeder District 5 triremes zu liefern,
wählte wahrscheinlich as many τριήραρχος to command them. Cleisthenes207
increasedSenate to joo, assigned 50 to each district; elected by its inhabitants·
(Attica kaum 40 □ miles gross.) \ Third u. last member der territorial series d·
Athenische Staat, aus 10 local tribes bestehd, represented by Senate,
ecclesia, Court o f Areopagus, archons, judges, electd military u. naval
Um Staatsbürger zu sein, musste man Mitglied eines Deme sein; um in
Senat gewählt zu werden od. zum Command v. einer division v. army or
navy, dch a topic phyle gewählt wden. The relations to gens or phratry
ceased to govern the duties o f an Athenian as a citizen. The coalescence of
the people into bodies politic in territorial areas now complete.
Also deme, phyle, u. Staat an Stelle von Gentes, phratry, tribe etc. Sie blieben
(letztre) jedoch for centuries as a pedigree of lineage u. fountains of religious life.
N o executive officer existed under the system. The president of the Senate,
elected by lot for a single day, presided over the popular assembly [konnte
during the year nicht zur selben Würde wiedergewählt wden] and held
the keys o f the citadel and the treasury.
Sparta retained the office o f Basileus in period o f civilization; a dual
generalship, hereditary in a particular family; the powers of government
co-ordinate between the Gerousia or Council, popular assembly, 5 Ephors
(elected annually. D . Ephores mit powers analogous den Roman tribu(n)es). Die Basileis commanded the army and als chiefpriests offered the
sacrifices to the gods.
Mit Bezug auf d. 4 tribes des attischen V olk s: 1) Geleontes; 2) Hopletes
(οπλίτης schwerbewaffneter Infantarist, Soldat mit Panzer u. Schild, der
d. ganzen Körper deckt,
δπλον, Zeug, Werkzeug, Geräth, bes. zur A u s­
rüstung der Soldaten: Waffe, ferner = der grosse Schild u. Panzer des
Schwerbewaffneten; heisst auch männliches Glied; οπλομαι-οπλίζομαι u
οπλίζω Zubereiten, in Stand setzen v. Speisen u. Getränken; sieh Homer:
ausrüsten von Schiff (Odyssee) waffnen etc)
3) Aigikoreis. Ziegenhirte von αΐξ (gen. αιγός Ziege, von άισσω sich schnell
bewegen) u. κορέννυμι - ion. = κορίω sättigen, satt machen. (Αίγικορεΐς.
αίγικορεύς der Ziegenhirt)
4) Argadeis. άργαδεΐς =
έργάται (Plutarch) εργάτης Arbeiter, Feldarbeiter■>
Taglöhner; έργάω u. med. - έργάζομαι (εργον Werk, That) ich arbeite»
bin thätig, bes. treibe Ackerbau.
Nach Schömann: 208 Hopletes Phyle, die hellenischen Einwandrer, die einst
unter Xuthus für d. Attiker gegen d. euböischen Chalcodontiden209 gestritten
u. dafür d. Tetrapolis auf der nach Euböa schonenden Küste u. beträc(h)t215
liehen Theil des angrenzenden Landes zu Wohnsitz erhielten; - das
benachbarte Hochland mit Brilessos u. Parnes bis %um Kithäron;
Der Phyle der Aegikoreis: S i t weil hier d. Beschaffenheit des Landes
Viehzucht zur Hauptbeschäftigung machte, in diesem Bezirk also Ziegen­
hirten d. Zahlreichsten.
Argadeis Phyle: auf dem vom Brilessos nach West u. Süd sich hinstreckende
Theil d. Landes, w o d. ßgrossen Ebnen liegen, d. thriasische, das Pedionod. d.
Pedias u. d. Mesogäa. (Auch d. Phyle der Geleontes hatte hier ihren Sitz.
D . Hauptsitz d. Adels Athen (“ εύπατρίδαι ot αυτό τό άστυ οίκουντες” ) .210
Was Schoemann weiter sagt: dass “ Hauptstadt u. nächste Um gebung”
bekamen daher d. Namen Geleontes; er hiess d. Geleontenbe^irk, u. alle die
in diesem Bezirk wohnten, ob Adliche od. JJnadliche, wden der Phyle der
Geleonten zugezählt, - so zeigt dies welchen Begriff dieser Schulmeister
von der Natur einer Phyle od. tribe hat.
A ls nach Sturz der Pisistratiden der Adel unter Isagoras eine Zeitlang d. Sieg
gewonnen, d. V o lk in Gefahr seine Freiheit zu verlieren, wenn Kleisthenes211
nicht d. Adelspartei besiegt. (Darauf bezieht sich Herod. V 69. “ τον
δήμον πρότερον (vor Kleisthenes unter Isagoras) άπωσμένον πάντως” ) 212
Kleisthenes vermehrte erst d. Zahl d. Volks dch Einbürgerung vieler in
Attica ansässigen Nichtbürger od. Metöken, wozu auch d. Freigelassenen ge­
hörten. (Arist. Polit. III, 1, 10.) Seine Abscffg d. Eintheilg in 4 Geschlechtphylen, tribes, theils nöthig, weil in d. alte Eintheilung d. Neuaufgenommenen
nicht einrangirt werden konnten, andrerseits) aber verlor dadurch Adel den
Einfluss, den er bisher (als chiefs o f gentes) in d. ländlichen Districten geübt.
Kleisthenes211 besetzte mehre u. zwar bdtende Aemter, namtlich d. Colle­
gium der 9 Archonten statt wie | bisher dch Volkswahl - dch Loos, aber diese
Losung fand nur unter Bewerbern statt aus d. 3 Oberen u. für Archonten nur
aus d. ersten. Klasse statt.
Kurz nach den Reformen d. Kleisthenes213 Perserkriege, worin sich d. Athener
aller Klassen ruhmvoll bewährt. Aristides setzte nun dch, dass fortan d.
Schranken aufgehoben, wodeh d. ärmeren (rather niedrigeren) Bürger von d.
Staatsämtern ausgeschlossen. Plutarch, Aristides c. 22:
γράφει ψήφισμα κοινήν είναι τήν πολιτείαν
καί τούς άρχοντας έξ ’Αθηναίων πάντων αίρεΐσθαι.214
(Dies letztere W ort, nach Schömann, hier nicht wählen, sondern losen, so
auch bei Pausanias I, 15 , 4.) D och blieben gewisse Aemter nur den
Pentakosiomedimnen, d. joo Schefflern, zugänglich. In d. pen Klasse auch
Wohlhabende, die nur nicht so viel Landbesitz hatten als der Census der 3 oberen
Klassen erforderte. Und diese A rt d. Wohlstands seit Solon’s Zeit bdtend
gewachsen: Handel u. Gewerb in rascher Entwicklung, gewinnen nicht
weniger Bdtg als Landbau. Ausserdem hatte K rieg - Attika wiederholt
v. d. 215 Perserschaaren verheert - namentlich viele Landbesitzer ruinirt, manche
ihre niedergeb ra (ch)ten
mussten sieb ihres Besitzthums entäussern, waren so in ^te Klasse gesunken:
auch für diesen d. Aenderung d. Aristides zu gut kommend. On the
whole aber hatte sein Gesetz d. W irkung d. einseitige Bevorzugung d.
ländlichen Grundbesitzer aufzuheben u. Gewerbtreibenden u. Kapitalisten ohne
Landbesitz Zutritt zu d. Aemtern zu gewähren.
Pericles: So lange nichts bezahlt für d. Besuch der Volksversammlgen hielten
d. Aermeren sich meist gern davon fern. V o n Pericles an d. Zahlung;
erst - unter ihm - für Besuch in Volksversammlung u. Funktion in Gerichten
nur ein Obol> spätere Demagogen erhöhten sie aufs 3 fache. Die
wohlhabenden Klassen waren für Frieden, d. Aermeren gingen leichter
auf d. kriegerische Politik d. Perikies ein.
Ephialtes - selber Richtg wie Perikies - entzog dem Areopag sein bis­
heriges Oberaufsichtrecht über d. ganze Staatsverwaltg, Hess ihn nur d.
Blutgerichtsbarkeit. D . Areopag gehörte grössten Theils zur ruhe­
liebenden u. conservativen Partei: statt seiner eingesetzt zur Beaufsichtigung
u. Controlle des Raths, der Volksversammlung u. der Magistrate eine neue
Behörde - Collegium von 7 Nomophylakes od. Gesetzwächter; d. V o lk
wde mit d. Areopag einer aristokratischen Zuchtbevormundungsbehörde entledigt.
Pt. II. Ch. X I. The Roman Gens.
Bei Einwandrg in Italien v. Lannern, Sabeller, Osker u. Umbriern, wahr­
scheinlich als one people, sie in Besitz of domestic animals u. whschlich
bekannt mit Cultur v. cereals u. plants; jedenfalls well advanced in Middle
Status of Barbarism, u. als sie historisch erschienen in Upper Status, an
Schwelle von Civilization.
N ach Mommsen: “ barley, wheat, and spelt gefunden wild growing an der
rechten Bank d. Euphrates, northwest von Anah. D . growth v. barley u.
wheat in wild state in Mesopotamien schon erwähnt dch d. babylonischen
historian Berosus.” Fick in: “ Primitive Unity of Indo-European Languages”
Göttingen, 1873, sagt: “ Pasturage foundation... but very slight beginnings of
agriculture. Sie waren bekannt mit a few grains, deren Cultivation carried on
incidentally in order to gain a supply of milk and flesh. D . material existence
d. people rested nicht on agriculture. Wenige primitive words bezjehn sich
auf agriculture. Diese w o rd s \ yava, wild fruit; varka (hoe) (od. plow );
__ rava (sickle); pio (pinsere) bake u. mak. Gk fiaacroo which indicates threshing
out u. grinding ofgrain.
Zu r Zeit d. Romulus (7 j 4-717 B .C. od. 1-37 d. Stadt Rom) \Romulus bdtet
hier nicht Person, sondern Zeitperiode, wie bei seinen Nachfolgern)]
Latin tribes - on Alban hills u. ranges of the Appenines östlich von Rom - dch
Segmentation bereits in 30 independent tribes zerfallen, still united in loose
confederacy for mutual protection; ebenso Sabellians, Oscans, Umbrians.
Alle, wie ihre nördlichen Nachbarn, Etrusker, organized in gentes.
Z u r Zeit v. Rom's Stiftg (abt yjß B.C.) had become agricultural mit
flocks of domestic animals, monogamian family, confederacy in form o f
League. - The Etruskan tribes confederated.
D . Latin tribes, possessed o f numerous fortified towns u. country strong­
holds, spread over the surface o f the country for agricultural purposes.
Unter d. institutions der Latin tribes bei Beginn der historischen Periode:
gentes, curiae u. tribes. Latin gentes | o f same lineage, Sabine u. other gentes
cognate, except Etruscans. Zu r Zeit d. Tarquinius Priscus, 4ter von Romulus,
the organisation brought to a numerical scale; 10 gentes to curia, 10 curiae to
a tribe, 3 tribes, giebt 30 curiae u. 300 gentes.
Statt confederacy of tribes, composed of gentes od. occupying separate territories
makes Romulus them concentrate u. coalesce in one city; dies worked out
in 5 generations. A u f u. um Mons Palatinus vereinigte Romulus 100gentes,
organised as a tribe, die Ramnes; dann large body of Sabines added, deren
gentes, nachher increased to 100 , organized as a 2nd Tribe, Tities; (angeblich
auf Quirinat); unter Tarquinius Priscus ßd tribe, Luceres, 100 gentes drawn
from the surrounding tribes, inclus. Etruscans. - Senate (Council o f Chiefs),
comitia cur(i)ata (assembly o f the people) u. military commander {rex). Unter
Servius Tullius wde Senat “ patrician” , patrician rank being conferred upon
its members u. their posterity; ddch privileged class created, intrenched
first in the gentile u. dann political system, ultimately overthrew the demo­
cratic principles inherited von gentes.
Niebuhr, Hermann, Mommsen etc regard the gens as composed offamilies, whd
gens216 composed of parts offamilies u. gens, nicht family unit d. social system.
Man weiss wenig über ältere “ social” history o f R om ; weil power ofgentes
bereits übertragen auf new political bodies bevor römische Geschicht­
schreibung beginnt. Gajus - Institutiones III. 17 - sagt: qui sint autem
gentiles primo commentario rettulimus, et cum illic admonuerimus
totum gentilicium tus in desuetudinem abiisse, superuacuum est hoc quoque
loco de ea [dem re iterum] curiosius tractare.217
Cicero, topica 6. Gentiles sunt inter se qui eodem nomine {toteml) sunt. N o n
est satis. Qui ab ingenuis oriundi sunt. N e id quidem satis est. Quorum
maiorum nemo servitutem servivit. Abest etiam nunc. Qui capite non sunt
deminuti. H oc fortasse satis est. Nihil enim video Scaevolam pontificem
ad hanc definitionem addidisse. 218
Festus: “ Gentilis dicitur et ex eodem genere ortus, et is qui simili nominem
appellatur.” 219
Varro, “de lingua latina” lib. V III, c. 4. “ Ut in hominibus quaedam sunt
agnationes ac gentilitates, sic in verbis: ut enim ab Aemilio homines orti
Aemilii, ac gentilis, sic ab Aemilii nomine declinatae voces in \gentilitate\
nominali: ab eo enim, quod est impositum recto casu Aemilius, (orta
Aem ilii,) Aemilium, Aemilios, Aemiliorum, et sic reliquae ejusdem quae
sunt stirpis” ™
D ch andre Quellen constatirt dass die nur %ur gens gehörten who could trace
their descent dch males exclusively from an acknowledged ancestor in d. gens;
musste d. gentile name haben (dies Cicero).
44j B .C . In address d. Roman Tribun Canulejus, on his motion d. Gesetz
abzusc(ha)ffen d. verbot intermarriage zwischen patricians u. plebejans,
sagte er (Livius I V , c. 4): “ Quid enim in re est aliud, si plebejam patricius
duxerit, si patriciam plebeius? Quid iuris tandem mutatur? nempe patrem
sequuntur liberi.” 221 (Dies involvirt descent in male line). A ls praktische
Illustration, dass descent in male line: Julia, Schwester des Cajus Julius Caesar,
married Marcus Attius Baibus. Ihr Name zeigt, dass sie gehörig zur Julian
gens. Ihre Tochter Attia nahm gentile name o f her father, belonged to
Attian gens. Attia married Cajus Octavianus, w d Mutter d. Cajus Octavianus
(i.e. d. spätere Augustus'). Ihr Sohn nimmt Name d. Vaters, belongs to
the Octavian gens.
N ach Adams, Roman Antiquities: war nur eine Tochter in family, so called
nach Name der gens; so TuIlia, Tochter d. Cicero; Julia, Tochter des
Caesar; Octavia, Schwester d. Augustus, etc. Sie behielten denselben Namen
bei nach Verheirathg. Wenn 2 Töchter, die eine called Major, die andre Minor
(wie bei Savages). Wenn mehr als 2, unterschieden dch ihre Zahl: Prima,
Secunda, Tertia, Quarta, Quinta, or softer Tertulla,Quartulla,Quintilla__
W hd d. blühenden Zustands der Republik, d. names der gentes u. surnames d.
families, blieben fix u. certain. They were common to all the children
der family, descended to their posterity. Changed | u. confounded nach
subversion of liberty.
So lange w ir v. Römern wissen, descent in male line. In allen oben citirten
cases persons married out of the gens. Folgende rights u. obligations d. Roman
1) Mutual right of succession to the property of deceasedgentile; 2) Possession of
common burialplace; 3) common religious rites; sacra gentilicia; 4) Obligation
not to marry in gens; 5) Common Possession of lands; 6) Reciprocal obligation
of help, defense, and redress of injuries; 7) Right to bear the gentile name;
Right to adopt strangers into the gens. 9) Right to elect and depose chiefs?
ad 1) 4j i B.C . Law of 12 Tables promulgated; ancient rule der inheritance
unter gentiles bereits superseded; passed to sui heredes (children) u. in
default of children to lineal descendants des defunct through males.
Gajus Inst. /. I ll, 1. u. 2. (Wife was co-heiress mit children.) D .
living children took equally, d. children of deceased sons the share of their
father equally; the inheritance remained so in the gens; the children offemale
descendants of the intestate, who belonged to other gentes, were excluded.
Wenn no sui heredes (ib. lib. I ll, 9) by same law - the inheritance passed to
the Agnates; agnatic kindred all persons able to trace descent th(r)o(u)gh
malesfrom same common ancestor with the intestate; vonwegen dieses descent
all bore the same gentile name, females wie males, u. were nearer in degree
to the deceased als d. remaining gentiles. D . Agnates, nearest in degree,
hatten V o rzu g ; i) brothers u. unmarried sisters; z) paternal uncles u.
unmarried aunts des intestate u. s. w . A ber d. children of married sisters
ausgeschlossen - weil %u andrer gens gehörig - eben by gentile kinsmen
(agnatic), dass ihre relation to intestate nur noch nachweisbar in gentile
name; the gentile right predominated über consanguinity, weil d. prin­
ciple, retaining the property in the gens, fundamental. D . Reihenfolge
(historische) ist natürlich grade d. umgekehrte von der, wie sie in d. 12
Tafeln erscheint. 1) D . Gentiles; 2) d. Agnates, worunter d. Kinder des
intestate nach change o f descent v. weiblicher in male line; 3) d. Kinder,
mit Ausschluss der Agnaten.
D ch Heirath erlitt a female deminutio capitis, \.e. forfeited her agnatic rights;
an unmarried sister could inherit, nicht a married, would have transferred
the property in andre gens.
V o n d. Archaischen (principles) erhielt sich am längsten im Rom reversion
of property in certain cases to the gentiles (bemerkt auch Niebuhr. - The
freedman (Emancipirte) erwarb nicht gentile rights in his master’s gens dch
manumission, aber allowed to adopt thegentile name of hispatron, so Cicero’s
freedman Tyro called M. Tullius Tyro. D . Geset% d. 12 Tafeln gave the
estate eines freedman, der intestate starb, to his former patron.
ad 2) Im Upper Status of Barbarism - a burial place for the exclusive use of
members of the gens. So unter d. Romans. Z .B . d. Appius Claudius, chief d.
Claudian gens, removed from Regili, town d. Sabini, nach Rom, w o er
Senator wurde, mit seiner gens u. vielen Clienten - Suet, vita Tiberius, c. I
sagt: “ Patricia gens Claudia... agrum (Theil der state lands) insuper trans
Anienem (upon the Anio) clientibus locumqtie sibi ad sepulturam sub Capitolio,
publice accepit.” 222 E r received burial place for the gens nach damaliger
D . family tomb hatte in Zeit v. Julius Caesar noch nicht gan^ das der gens
superseded; Beweis Quintilius Varus, had lost his army in Germ any,
destroyed himself, sein Körper fiel in d. Hände der Feinde, half burnt.
Vellejus Paterculus II, 1 1 9: Vari corpus semiustum hostilis laceraverat feritas;
caput eius abscisum latumque ad Maroboduum et ab eo missum ad Caesarem
gentilicii(tarnen) tumuli sepultura honoratum est.223 Cic., De Legibus II, 22.
“ Iam tanta religio est sepulcrorum (so gross d. Heiligkeit der Begräbnisse),
ut extra sacra et gentem inferi (ohne religious rites u. Grabstätte der gens)
fas negent esse; idque apud majores nostros. A . Torquatus in gente Popilia
judicavit.” 224 Z u Cicero's Zeit das family tomb nahm d. Platz ein o f that
o f the gens, as the families in the gentes rose to complete autonomy. - Vor
d. 12 Tafeln cremation u. inhumation equally practiced, (12 Tafeln verboten
Verbrennen od. | Begraben innerhalb der city. Das columbarium (a sepulchre
mit niches for urns) would usually accommodate several 100 urns,
ad 3) Sacra privata od. sacra gentilicia, performed by the gens at stated
periods. (Alle members der gens dazu verpflichtet, ob members by birth,
adoption oder adrogation. A person was freedfrom them u. lost the privi220
leges connected with them, when he lost his gens.) Cases erwähnt, w o d.
expenses o f maintaining these rites, Bürde für gens wden in Folge der
verminderten Anzahl ihrer Glieder. The sacred rites - public and private
- exclusiv under pontifical regulation, not subject to civil cognisance.
Colleges of pontiffs, curiones u. augurs, with elaborate system o f worship
unter diesen priesthoods, became established, aber priesthood in the main
elective; jedes Familienhaupt auch priest des household.
In early times o f Rome hatten viele gentes their own sacellum (small unroofed
sanctuary; a chapel; sacellum est locus parvus deo sacrata cum ara (Trebatius in
Gell. c. 1 2 ; “ Sacella dicuntur loca diis sacrata sine tecto.” Festus.)225 für
performance226 ihrer religious rites; several gentes had each special sacrifices
to perform transmitted from generation to generation. Considered
obligatory (Nautii to Minerva, Fabii to Hercules, etc.)
ad 4) Gentile regulations were customs having the forms of law; so Verbot der
intermarriage in gens; scheint zu Rom nicht später in Geset^ verwandelt
wden zu sein; aber d. Roman genealogy beweist d. rule - marriage out
o f gens. Zeigt sich darin ferner: ohne Ausnahme: a woman by her
marriage forfeited her agnatic right, weil became ex-gens. (Sollte property
aus eignen gens in der ihres husband nicht transfer). A us selbem
G rund: exclusion d. Kinder of a female from all rights of inheritance from
a maternal uncle or grandfather; da sie ausser gens heirathet, ihre children
o f the gens of thefather - also nicht von ihrer gens, also dort auch nichts
zu erben.
ad f): Common property of lands, allgemein unter barbarous tribes. Darum
natürlich bei Latin tribes; von sehr früher Periode erscheint Theil ihrer
lands held in severalty by individuals; at first sicher nur possessory right to
lands in actual occupation, was sich schon in Status of Lower barbarism
Unter d. rustic Latin tribes, lands held in common by each tribe, other lands by
gentes, still other by households. Allotments of lands to individuals wde ge­
wöhnlich in Romulus Period, später quite general. Sagt Varro, De Re
rustica i. I, c. 10. “ Bina jugera quod a Romula primum divisa (dicebantur)
viritim, quae heredem sequerentur, heredium appellarunt” 227 (Selbes bei
Dionysius). Similar allotments said to have been made by Numa u. Servius
Tullius; diese die beginnings o f absolute ownership in severalty, presuppose a
settled life etc. It was not only admeasured but granted by the government,
form sehr verschieden von possessory right in lands growing out of an individual
These lands taken from those held in common by the Roman people.
Gentes, curiae u. tribes held certain lands in common nach Beginn d. Civiliza­
tion, ausser d. individual allotments.
Mommsen sagt dann: “ das römische territorium in d. frühsten Zeiten
getheilt in Anzahl von clan (heisst wohl Geschlechter bei ih m !) districts, die
später employed in the formation d. ältesten rural wards districts (tribus
rusticae)___Diese Namen (der Districts) nicht wie die der districts added at a
later period, derived von d. localities, sondern formed ohne Ausnahme v. Gesch(Jech')ternamen wie Camilii, Galerii, Lemonii, Pollii, Pupinii, Voltinii,
Aemilii, Cornelii, Fabii, Horatii, Menenii, Papirii, Romilii, Sergii, Voturii ” 22s
Jede gens hielt an independent district u. was localised upon it. (Aber auch /»
Rom selbst gentes localised in separate areas.)
Mommsen sagt ferner:
“ Wieyft&r Haushalt seine eigne Portion Land hatte, so d. ^»-h o u seh o ld
(das wohl nicht d. W ort bei Mommsen) or village, had clan lands be­
longing to it
... were managed up to a comparatively late period after
the analogy (!) ojhouse-lands, that is, on the system ojcommon | possessions ...
These clanships jedoch von Anfang an nicht betrachtet als unabhängige
Gesellscften, sondern als integralparts of a political community {civitas popult).
This first presents itself as an aggregate of a number of clanvillages of the same
stock, language and manners, bound to mutual observance o f law and mutual
legal redress and to united action in aggression and redress.” 229 M om m ­
sen represents the Latin tribes anterior to the foundation of Rome as holding
lands by households, gentes u. by tribes, zeigt the ascending series of social
organisations in the tribes, ganz parallel230 to d. Iroquois - gens, tribe, confederacy.
Phratry nicht mentioned. The household referred to could scarcely have been a
single family, wahrs (chein)lich composed of relatedfamilies occupying a jointtenement house u. practicirend communism in living in the household,
ad 6). Erstes feature des gentilism - dependence der gentiles upon each otherfor
the protection of personal rights, verschwindet zuerst, sobald civitas
gegründet, w o jeder Bürger sich für Protection an law u. State wendet;
kann in historischer Periode nur noch in remains gefunden wden bei
A b t 432 B.C. Appius Claudius in prison geworfen. A ber Livius V I, 20:
“ Ap. Claudio in vinculo dueto, C. Claudium inimicum (des Appius CI.)
Claudiamque omnem gentem sordidatum (in mourning Kleidern) fuisse” 2*1
W hd d. 2t punischen Kriegs, bemerkt Niebuhr verbanden sich d. gentes to
ransom ihre in Gefangenscft befindlichen Genossen; der Senat verbot's ihnen;
nach selbem Niebuhr gens verpflichtet ihren indigent gentiles beizustehen; er
citirt dafür Dionysius: II, 10 “ εδει τούς πελάτας των άναλωμάτων ως
τους γενει προσηκοντας μετεχειν.
ad 7) Zuletzt d. persons unmöglich geworden to trace their descent back to
thefounder. Niebuhr (auf diesem abgeschmackten Grund sich stützend)
läugnet d. Existenz irgendwelcher Blutverwandtscft in a gens, weil sie nicht
beweisen konnten a connection through a common ancestor; dana(c)h gens bios
fictitious organization—
Nachdem descent vonfemale to male line changed, d. Namen d. gentes, whsclich
taken v. animals, gave place to personal names. Irgdein Individuum, berühmt
in d. Tradit. Geschichte der gens, ward its eponymous ancestor u. diese Person,
nicht unlikely, at long intervals wieder ersetzt dch andre. Theilte sich a gens
in Flge von lokaler Separation, so one division apt to take a new name;
dieser change of name would not disturb the kinship w(orau)f d. gens be­
gründet... Nur auf einem Weg adulteration of gentile descent - durch
Adoption. Dies nicht häufig__ In an Iroquois gens of 500 persons gens coming in with a system of consanguinity reducing all consanguinei to a
small number of categories, and retaining their descendants indefinitely in
the same - all its members related to each other and each person knows or
can find its relationship to the other; so that thefact of kin was perpetually
present in archaic gens. Mit monogamian Ehe came in a totally different system
of consanguinity, worin d. relationships 3wischen- collateral/ rasch disappeared.
Dies System d. Greek u. Latin tribes bei Beginn d. historischen Periode.
Grote, History of Greece. Ill, 33, 36, erzählt: Cleisthenes of Argos changed
the names of the 3 Dorian tribes of Sicyon, einen in Hyatae (im singular:
a boar), 2ten in Oneatae (an ass), 3d to Choereatae, {littlepig); dies intended as
insult gegen d. Sicyonians, blieben ihnen während seiner Lebzeit u. 60
Jahre später. “ Did the idea of these animal names come down through
tradition?” 233
Nach Beginn des Verfalls der gentilen Organisation, hört auf neue Geschlechterbildg dch d. process of segmentation; andre existirende died out. This tended to
enhance the value of a gentile descent as a lineage. Zur Zeit d. Kaiserthums
etablirten f<or)tw<ähren)d sich neue Familien from foreign parts in Rom u.
nahmen gentile names an to gain social advantages. Emperor Claudius - 40-J4
A .D . - verbot | den foreigners röm. Namen anzunehmen, besonders
alter Geschlechter. Sueton. Vit. Claudius, c. 2 j sagte: “ Peregrinae conditionis homines vetuit usurpare Romana nomina, dumtaxat gentilicia.” 234
Römische Familien, belonging to the historical gentes, setzten höchsten
Werth auf their lineages, sowohl unter Empire, wie vorher in republic.
ad S. Sowohl unter Republik wie Empire practicirt adoption into the family,
die carried the person adopted into the gens of the family; das attended mit
formalities, die es erschwerten. Kinderlose Person u. past the age to expect
them might adopt a son mit consent der pontifices u. der comitia curiata.
Cicero, Pro Domo, c. 13. Die noch zu Cicero’s Zeit existirenden pre­
cautions, zeigen dass früher d. restrictions grösser u. cases seltner.
ad p Bei Römern keine direct information über tenure des office of chief
(princeps); jedegens, vorEntstehg der civitas, hatte einen chief, probably
mehre; hereditary right dazu wahrscheinlich nicht bei Latin tribes, da
elective principle später vorwiegt - i.e. unter reges u. in Republik; d. rex
selbst, d. highest office, was elective, the office of senator elective or by
appointment, so that of consuls u. inferior magistrates. D. college of pontiffs
- instituted dch Numa - filled erst (d. pontiffs selbst sich ergänzend)
vacancies by election; Livius (X X V , 5) spricht of election of a pontifex
maximus dch d. comitia about 212 B.C. A uf Volk transferred, dch
lex Domitia, the right to elect the members of the several colleges of
pontiffs u. priests, später modified dch Sulla. - Also abgeschmackt
- ohne positive evidence - anzunehmen dass office ofprinceps (chiefofgens)
“ hereditary” war. Wo aber Wahlrecht - the tenure des office being for
life - da auch Recht to depose.
Diese chiefs of gentes od. eine selection davon, bildeten d. Council der Latin
tribes vor Stiftung Roms. A ll of these “cantons (read tribes) were in primi­
tive times politically (asinus!) sovereign, u. each of them was governed by
its prince [Prinzerfindender Mommsen; read chief of the tribe], and the
cooperation of the council of elders, and the assembly of the warriors.” {Mommsen.
It was the council, Herr Mommsen, u. nicht der military commander, Momm­
sen’s Prins·, who governed.)
Niebuhr sagt: “ In all the cities belonging to civilized nations on the coasts
of the Mediterranean a senate was a no less essential and indispensable part of
the state, than a popular assembly; it was a select body of elder citizens; such a
council, says Aristoteles, there always is, whether the council be aristocratical or
democratical; even in oligarchies, be the number of sharers in the sovereignty
ever so small, certain councillors are appointed for preparing public
measures.” Senate of polit. society folgte dem council of chiefs der gentile
society. Romulus Senate 100 elders representing the 100 gentes, was office
for life, non-hereditary, woraus folgt dass office of chief was at the time elec­
A bt 474 B.C. d. Fabian gens schlag dem Senat vor als a gens to undertake
the Veientian war. Ihr Antrag accepted, fielen in Embuscade. Liv. II,
jo. [see auch Ovid, Fasti, II, 193.] “ Trecentos sex (so viel zogen aus) perisse
satis convenit; unum prope puberem (unter age of puberty) aetate relictum
stirpem genti Fabiae, dubiisque rebus populi Romani saepe domi bellique vel
maximum futurum auxilium.” 235
D. Zahl d. 300 would indicate an equal number of females, who with the
children of the males, would give an aggregate von at least 700 für Fabian
gens (nicht d. eine pubes). |
Pt. II, Ch. X II. The Roman Curia, Tribe and Populus.
Angebliche Perioden bis zur Errichtg der Republik: 1) Romulus. 7)4 -717
B.C. {1-37 a.u.c.) 2) Numa Pompilius. 717-679 B.C. {37-7J a.u.) 3) Tullus
Hostilius. 679-640 B.C. {7 J-114 a.u.) 4) Ancus Marcius 640-618 B.C. {114136 a.u.) 5) Tarquinius Priscus. 618-J78 B.C. {136-176 a.u.) 6) J78-J34 B.C.
{176-220 a.u.) Servius Tullius. 7) J34-J09 B.C. {220-24j a.u.) Tarquinius
— Superbus.
Societas, founded upon gens; neben civitas, founded upon territory u. prop­
erty; letztere Organization im Lauf v. 200 Jahren gradually supplanting
the former; to a certain degree completed der change unter Servius Tullius
{J78-J34 B.C . 176-220 a.u.) Curia, analogous to Greek236 phratry, = 10
gentes; 10 curiae = 1 tribe; unter Servius Tullius war Populus Romanus =
tribes, 10 curiae, 300gentes. Wurst ob Roman kings fabelhaft od. nicht;
ebenso Wurst, ob d. legislation ascribed to either of them be fabulous or
I true. The events of human progress embody themselves, independently of
I particular men, in a material record, which is crystallised in institutions, usages
I u. customs, u. preserved in inventions u. discoveries.
D. numerical adjustment von gentes etc—a result of legislative procurement, not
older in the first z tribes, than the times of Romulus. The curia der
Romans - ungleich d. Phratry d. Greeks u. Iroquois, grew into an or­
ganization, having distinct governmental character engrafted upon itself.
Wschlich d. gentes einer Curia related to each other, versahn sich ein­
ander dch intermarriage mit wives. (Dies Conjectur.) The organization as
a phratry - obgleich erst mentioned in Roman history in connection mit
legislation des Romulus, von time immemorial in Latin tribes.
Livius I, iß. “ Itaque, quam (der Romulus) populum in curias triginta
divideret (nach dem Frieden mit den Sabinern), nomina earum (der ge­
raubten Sabinerinnen) curiis imposuit.” 237
Dionys. Antiq. of Rome, I I , 7 . “ φράτρα δέ καί λόχος (Kriegerschaar,
Rotte) ή κουρία” ; ibid. heisst's: διήρηντο δέ καί εις δεκάδας cd φρατραι
πρός αύτοΰ, καί ήγεμών έκάστην έκόσμει δεκαδα, δεκουρίων κατά την
έπιχώριον γλώτταν προσαγορευόμενος."238
Plut. Vit. Rom. c. 20. Έκάστη δέ φυλή δέκα φρατρίας ειχεν λέγουσιν
έπωνύμους είναι εκείνων των γυναικών.” 239 Was Romulus that was the
adjustment of the number ofgentes in each tribe, was er fertig bringen konnte
dch d. accessions gained from the surrounding tribes. In d. Ramnes (ersten
tribe) nahm er related gentes in selber curia, reached numerical symmetry by
artibitrarily taking the excess ofgentes vononenatural curia to supply the deficiency
of the other (kommt auch bei d. Red Indians vor.) D. Titles meist Sabiner;
d. Luceres heterogenous, formed later from gradual accessions u. con­
quests ; enthielten auch Etruscan gentes. In d. reconstruction gens blieb
pure, curia made to include in some cases gentes nicht related, durchbrach
also Schranke der natural phratry; ebenso tribe <u )mschloss foreign elements
that not belong to a tribe by merely spontaneousgrowth. The third tribe (Luceres)
in great part an artificial creation; Eturscan element darin lässt annehmen,
that their dialect not wholly anintelligible to Romans.
Niebuhr zeigte zuerst that the people was sovereign, so-called kings had
delegated power, u. dass d. Senat based on principle of representation. Aber
Niebuhr at variance with fact, wenn er sagt: d. numerischen Propertions seien unwiderleglicher Beweis dass d. Roman gentes nicht älter als
d. Constitution d. Romulus, dass sie “ Corporations formed by a legislator in
harmony with the rest of his scheme.” 240 A legislator could not fabricate a
gens; auch eine curia konnte er nur machen by combining gentes; er
konnte by constraint increase or decrease the number ofgentes in a curia u.
the number of curiae in a tribe.
D. Stelle bei Dionysius (Halicarnassensis) ι. II, c. y lautet in full: “ Nachdem
er (Romulus) d. ganze Masse dreigetheilt, machte er den Hervorragend­
sten jedes der (3) Theile zum leader (ήγεμόνα έπέστησεν); dann theilte er
wieder jeden der ß Theile in 10, aus gleichen (im Rang ΐσος)241 Führern
dieser ernannte er wieder d. tüchtigsten; die (3) grössern Theile nannte er
tribus; die kleineren Curien (κουρίας), wie sie auch jetzt noch heissen. In
griech. Sprache interpretirt ist der tribus = φυλή od. τρίττυς; die Curia =
φράτρα u. λόχος (Band, Kriegerrotte); die Männer an der Spitze des
Tribus = φύλαρχοι od. τριττύαρχοι, die die Römer Tribunen nennen.
\Tribun also literally d. Equivalent d. alten tribe~Chief\. | Die Vorsteher der
Curien = φρατρίαρχοι u. λοχαγοί, welche d. Römer Curionen nennen. D_
Phratrien wurden wieder abgetheilt in Dekaden, u. ein Führer leitete jede
Dekade; decourio genannt in d. Landeszunge. Nachdem aber so alle
eingetheilt u. zusammengestellt in Phylen u. Phratrien, theilte er das Land
in ßo gleiche Loose, gab jeder Phratrie ein Loos, nahm Land genügend für
sacra u. Tempel, u. Hess auch gewisses Land für gemeinschaftlichen Gebrauch
übrig (καί τίνα τω κοινω γην καταλιπών). Nur diese Theilung von Leuten
u. Land dch Romulus, allgemeine u. grösste Gleichheit.”
Mitglieder d. curia hiessen curiale; wählten einen priest, curio, chief officer
der fraternity; jede hatte its sacred rites, its sacellum as a place of worship
u. ihren Versammlungsplat^ für transaction of business; neben d. curio
gewählt an assistant priest flamen curialis, had the immediate charge of the
observances; d. 'Volksversammlung comitia curiata, sovereign power in
Rom, mehr als der Senat des gentile system.
Vor Zeit des Romulus unter d. Latin tribes - tribal chiefs (Dionysius II, 7);
ein tribal chief - der chief officer des tribe, whose duties magisterial (in city),
military (in the field) u religious (administering the sacra) (Dionys. I.e.)
Jedenfalls his office elective, whsclich gewählt dch d. curiae collected in a
general assembly. D. “ tribal chief” whsclich genannt “ rex” vor d. Grün­
dung Roms, ebenso d. Council Senate (senex) u. d. tribal assembly - comitia
(con-ire). Nach der coalescence der ß Roman tribes - the national character of
the tribe lost.
Die ßo curiones as a body wden organisirt in a college ofpriests, einer davon
had the office of curio maximus; was elected by the assembly of gentes.
Daneben college of augurs, bestehend unter Ogulnian law (300 B.C.) aus
9 members inclus. their chief - magister collegii; u. college of pontiffs, 9
members unter demselben Gesetz, inclus. pontifex maximus. D. Gan%e,
as organized by Romulus, nannte sich: Populus Romanus; war nichts als a
gentile society; change ernöfhigt u. zwar fundamental one dch raschen An­
wachs d. Bevölkg unter Romulus u. namentlich in d. Periode \ wischen ihm
u. Servius Tullius. (7J4~Jß4)·
Livius sagt, dass es “vetus conrilium” (Livy /, 8) alter trick of the founders
of cities to draw to themselves an obscure and humble multitude, and
then set up for their progeny the autocht(h)onic claim. Romulus so
opened an asylum near the Palatine, u. invited all persons in the surround­
ing tribe <s), etc. “ Eo ex finitimis populis turba omnis sine discrimine, liber
an servus esset, avida novarum rerum perfugit; idque primum ad coeptam magni226
tudinem roboris f u i t ( L i v . /, (P.)242 Plut. Romulus c. 20 u. Dionys. II, 15
erwähnen auch d. asylum orgrove. Zeigt, dass d. Barbarische Bevölkg Italiens
sehr angewachsen, discontent unter ihnen, Mangel an persönlicher
Sicherheit, existence of domestic slavery, apprehension of violence. Angriff
seitens d. Sabiner, wegen d. ihnen gestohlnen Weiber; resultirte in Compromiss, Latiner u. Sabiner coalesced into one society, jede division behielt its
own military leader, d. Titles (Sabiner) unter Titius Tatius. - 679-640 B.C.
Tullus Hostilius nahm d. Latin city of Alba , brachte ihre ganze Bev'6lk(e)rung
nach Rom; sie besetzten angeblich Coelian H ill; Zahl d. citizens nun doubled
nach Liv. I, 30. 640-618: Ancus Marcius nahm d. lat. Stadt Politorium,
transferred the people bodily to Rome; ihnen angeblich Aventinus mons
eingeräumt mit same privileges. Kurz nachher d. inhabitants of Tellini u.
Ficana subdued, removed to Rome, also occupied M. Aventinus {Liv. I, jj) .
D. gentes nach Rom gebracht, blieben alle locally distinct, das thaten gentes
überall in Middle u. Upper Status of Barbarism, sobald d. tribes began to
gather in fortresses u. walled cities. [In the pueblo houses in New Mexico alle
occupants of each house belonged to the same tribe u. in einigen Fällen a single
joint-tenement house contained a tribe. A t Tlascala 4 quarters occupied by 4
— lineages, probably phratries etc.] D. greater portion dieser new admissions
united in the 3rd tribe Luceres, der erst completed unter Tarquinius Priscus
(618-J78) dch Einverleibung einiger neuen Etruskischer gentes.
Growth d. tribes in Rome under legislative constraint, not entirely free from
the admixture of foreign elements, hence name tribus ,1/3 of the people;
Latin language must have had a term equivalent of Phyle, became extinct;
zeigt heterogeneous elements in Roman tribes, whd griech. Phyle pure. |
D. Senate d. Romulus mit functions similar to those of the previous council
of chiefs. Jede gens, sagt Niebuhr, sent its decurion, who was its alderman to
represent it in the Senate. Also representative u. elective body, blieb
elective od. selective bis zum Empire. Office der Senators lebenslänglich,
einziger term of office then known (wie farmer bei Anglosaxon mindestens for
one life). Liv. /, 8 sagt: “ Centum creat (Romulus) senatores: sive quia is
numerus satis erat; (Kerl vergisst, that there were then only 100 genjtes,
constituting the tribe der Ramnes); sive quia soli centum erant, qui creari
Patrespossent. (Superlativ dies von faselndem Pragmatismus). Patres certe
ab honore [Pater, weil chief of gens], pairiciique progenies eorum appellati.” 243 Cic. de rep. II, 8: “ Principes, qui appellati sunt propter caritatem,patres.” 244 D. distinction of patricians conferred upon their children u.
lineal descendants in perpetuity schufen at once an aristocracy of rank in
centre d. Roman social system where it became firmly intrenched; this
aristocratic element nowfor the first time planted in gentilism. Nach der union
der Sabines Senat increased to 200 dch addition v. 100 v. tribe der Tides
(Dion. II, 47) u. when Luceres increased to 100 gentes in time der Patri­
cians, a 3d 100 added v. d. gentes dieses tribe; dch Tarquinius Priscus.
Liv. I, 3 J. “ Nec minus regni sui firmandi, quam augendae re(i) publicae
memor centum in patres legit ( Tarquin. Priscus) qui deinde minorum gentium
sunt appellati:factio hauddubia regis, cujus beneficio in curiam venerant.” 245
Etwas verschieden Cic. de Rep. II, 20: “ Isque (Tarquinius) ut de suo
imperio legem tulit, principio duplicavit illum pristinum patrum numerum
(dies setzt voraus, dass d. alten patres v. 200 auf 150 herabgesunken;
waren dann 50 zu ergänzen aus Ramnes u. Tities u. 100 neu zugefügt aus
Luceres); et antiquospatres majorumgentium appellavit [dies auch bei Iroquois,
aber mit d. primitiven Bedtg, dass d. minores gentes Abkommen der
majores, später daher gebildt] quos priores sententiam rogabat; a se
adscitos, minorum.” 246
D. Form d. statement shows, dass jeder Senator representative of a gens;
ferner, da jede gens sicher hatte its principal chief - princeps - dies person
chosen von gens od. 10 auf einmal v. d. 10 gentes wählend als curia. Dies
dem Wesen nach auch Niebuhr's Ansicht. Nach d. Erric(h)t(un)g d.
Republik (seit jo<? B.C.) besetzten d. Censoren d. Lücken im Senat nach
ihrer choice, dies fiel später den Consules zu; d. Senators generally selected
aus ex-magistrates der higher grades.
All public measures originated im Senat, sowohl die wobei sie unabhängig
verfahren konnten, als die die sie der popular assembly zur Adoption to
submit. D. Senat hatte general guardianship of public welfare, management
drforeign relations, levy of taxes and militaryforces, general control of revenues u.
expenditures; hatte auch oberste power over religion, obgleich d. administra­
tion der religious affairs den several collegia zufiel.
Assembly of the People {in dieser Form unknown in Lower u. whslich auch
Middle Status of Barbarism) existed in Upper Status, in agora der Greek
tribes (highest form in ecclesia der Athener), u. ebso in d. assembly of warriors
der Latin tribes, erhielt hier höchste Form in d. comitia curiata d. Römer.
Letzte bestanden aus d. adult members der gentes, jede curia had one collective
vote, majority in each ascertainedseparately, determined what that vote should
be. (Liv. I, 43; Dion. II, 14, IV, 20, 84.) Es war d. assembly der gentes,
who alone were members of the government. Plebejans u. clients - forming
already a numerous class, excluded, weil keine connection möglich mit
Populus Romanus, ausser dch a gens and a tribe. Comitia did not originate
public measures, nor amend those submitted to them; nahm sie an od. verwarf
sie; alle magistrates u. high public functionaries, incl. rex, elected by the
comitia on the nomination of the Senate. So dch comitia curiata elected Numa
Pompilius (Cic. de Rep. II, 11. Liv. 1 , 17), Tullus Hostilius (Cic. de Rep. II, 17)
u. Ancus Martius (Cic. de Rep. II, 18; Liv. I, 3 2). Mit Bezug auf Tarquinius
Priscus bemerkt Livius (I, 35), dass d. Populus dch great majority ihn zum
rex ernannte. Servius Tullius assumed the office, afterwards confirmed by
the comitia (Cic. de Rep. II, 21) - The Imperium conferred upon these
persons by a law of the assembly - Lex curiata de imperio - Roman method of
investing with office; vor dieser Uebertragung d. imperium konnte d.
person elected nicht ihr office antreten. D. comitia curiata, by appeal, had
the ultimate decision in criminal cases involving the life of a Roman citizen.
The office of rex abolished by a popular movement. D. assembly had no power
to convene itself; it is said to have met on the summons of the rex, oder in
his absence, des praefectus urbis; in d. Republik dch d. consules berufen,
od. in deren absence, dch praetor; in allen Fällen präsidirte d. berufende
Person über d. deliberations der comitia. | D. rex war General u. Priest,
aber ohne civilfunctions.
Nach Abschaffung d. Königthums 2 consules an seine Stelle, wie d. 2 warchiefs der Iroquois.
D. rex as chief priest took the auspices on field of battle wie in city on
important occasions, verrichtete auch other religious rites. Nach Abschaffg
der Königswrde, ihre priestly functions übertragen auf d. neu geschaffne
office des rex sacrorum od. rex sacrificulus; bei Athenern analog d. eine d. 9
Archonten, Archon basileus, der a general supervision of religious affairs
hatte. — D. Romans in diesen 200 years (bis Servius Tullius) had experi­
enced the necessityfor written laws to be enacted by themselves als Substitutfor
usages u. customs; had created ausserdem a city magistracy u. a complete
military system, including the institution of the equestrian order.
Unter d. new magistrates created wichtigster that of warden of the city custos urbis, war zugleich Princeps senatus. Nach Dionys. II, 1 2 appointed
by Romulus. - Nach d. Zeit d. Decemviri (4j 1-447) dies office changed to
praefectus urbi, its powers enlarged u. it was made elective by the new
I comitia centuriata [<Census u. comitia centuriata eingesetzt dch Servius Tullius
j nach seiner division des people according to property__ D. trial of Coriolan
bewog d. Tribunen to usurp the right of summoning some patricians
before the tribunal of the people; hence the comitia tributay either mere
assemblies of the commons, or assemblies so organized, that the com­
mons had the preponderance; diese Institution gab d. tribunes their share
in legislation, those officers being allowed to lay proposals before the
! commons.]
Unter Republik had d. consules u. in their absence the praetor power to
convene the Senate u. also to hold the comitia. Später d. office of Prätor Prätor urbanus (absorbed the functions of the old office des Praefectus urbi.)
A judicial magistrate, prototype of the modern judge, der Roman “ Prätor.”
Bei Tod d. Romulus d. society noch gentile.
Pt. II. Ch. X III. The Institution of Roman Political Society.
J78 od. J76 -J33. Servius Tullius. Seit Romulus röm. Gesellscft gespalten
in Patricians, constituting the Populus, u. plebejans, d. Plebs; beide persönlich
frei u. beide entered the ranks of the army; blebejans aber, nicht einbegriffen
in gentile society, ausserhalb the government. Nach Niebuhr, d. Existentz d.
plebs als anerkannt freie u. sehr zahlreiche Portion der Bevölkg nachweisbar
bis zu reign d. Ancus Marcius (640-618). Plebs excluded v. office, comitia
curiata, sacred rites d. gentes (v. intermarriage mit diesen). Zur Zeit d.
Servius plebs fast so numerous247 wie populus; subject to military service,
possessing families u. porperty. D. Constitution dergentile organisation schloss
sie aus; hence letztre musste fliegen.
Entstehung d. plebs, i.e., v. Personen not members of an organised gens, curia,
tribe. Adventurers who flocked to the new city from the surrounding
tribes, war captives afterwards set free, unattached persons mingled with
the gentes transplanted to Rome, would rapidly furnish such a class;
ausserdem might happen that in filling up the 100 gentes of each tribe,
fragments of gentes and gentes having less than a prescribed number of
persons, were excluded. Aus d. Epitheton d. Luceres “ Fathers minorum
gentium” ersichtlich dass d. old gentes reluctant ihre entire equality
anzuerkennen. Nach filling up des 3d tribe mit d. prescribed number of
gentes the last avenue of admission closed, wonach d. Zahl der plebejan
class rasch anwachsend. Niebuhr läugnet, dass clients part d. plebejan
Dionys. II, 8 u. Plut. Vit. Romuli X I I I , 16 schreiben248 Romulus d.
Einrichtung (!) der relation v. patron u. client zu, ditto Suetonius Tiberius, c. 1.
(Alles was diese 3 sagen beweist gefällig nichts!) [Morgan's Behauptung,
dass d. clients v. Anfang an a part of the plebejan body - falsch, Niebuhr
Niebuhr u. andre nehmen an dass d. entire populus were patricians ... Nach
Dionysius II, 8 (vgl. Plut. vit. Romuli, XIII) fand Errictg d. Patrician class
vor Bildung d. Senats statt; nur zusammengesetzt aus Personen ausge­
zeichnet dch Tapferkeit, birth (!) u. wealth. Danach blieben aber noch
large class in d. several gentes, die keine Patricier.
Cic. de Rep. II, 12. “ Quum ille Romuli Senatus, qui constabat ex optimatibus,
quibus ipse rex tantum tribuisset, ut eospatres vellet nominari, patriciosque
eorum liberos, tentavit, etc.” 249 |Liv. I, 8. “ Patres certe ab honore,patriciique
progenies eorum appellati.” 250
D. Bildg d. Senatoren aus chiefs d. gens schliesst nur ein dass d. gewählten
family chiefs - u. nur eine family aus d. vielen der gens hatte ihr Haupt im
Senat, bedingt nur, dass diese Burschen Patres u. nur ihre progenies patricii,
aber nicht alle membersjeder gens, also d. gan%e populus (im Gegensatz zu
Plebs) wie Niebuhr meint. Unter d. reges u. d. Republik individuals created
patricians by the government.
Vellejus Paterculus I, 8: “ Hie centum homines electos appellatosque Patres
instar habuit consilii publici. Hanc originem nomen Patriciorum habet.” 251
There could be no patrician gens u. no plebejan gens [notabene später, als
gentile society abolished] particular families in one gens could be patrician
u. other plebejan. All the adult members of the Fabian™ gens, 306, were
patricians; could either trace their descentfrom senators or to some public act,
wdch their predecessors raised to patriciate. Vor Servius Tullius Romans
divided in Populus u. Plebs; nachher, namentlich nach der Licinian legislation
(j6y B.C.), wdch alle Staatwürden jedem civis zugänglich gemacht, alle
freien Römer in 2 Klassen: Aristokratie u. commonalty; die ersteren bestan­
den aus senators u. deren descendants mit denen die eins der 3 curules offices
(consul, praetor, curulis aedilis) innegehabt u. deren Nachkommen; d.
commonalty, nur alle Roman cives; d. gentile organization verfiel u. d. old
division nicht länger haltbar. Personen, die in d. ersten Periode zum
Populus gehört, gehörten in der 2ten zur Aristokratie, ohne Patricier zu
sein. Claudii u. Marcelli 2 Familien d. Claudian gens; d. ersteren patricii,
(could trace their descent v. Appius Claudius') die 2ten Plebejer.
D. Patrician class zahlreich; bei jeder Lücke neuer Senator gewählt, con­
ferred patrician rank auf ihre Nachkommen; others v. Zeit zu Zeit zu
patriciis gemacht dch act of the state. (Liv. IV, 4).
Schatten d. alten JJnterscheidg v. Populus u. Plebs blieb: “ A plebe consensu
populi consulibus negotium mandatur.” 253 (Liv. I V , j i ) . Numa (717-679
B.C.), der Nachfolger d. Romulus, tended to traverse the gentes, dch
Eintheilung d. Volks in Klassen (wie Theseus), some 8 in number,
entsprechend to their arts u. trades.
Plutarch. Numa c. 17 , “Numa bedachte nun, dass man auch Körper, die
ursprünglich unmischbar u. spröde sind, dch Stampfen u. Zerstossen in
Verbindung bringe, weil kleine Theile sich eher vereinen. Daher beschloss
er dann d. gesamte Menge in mehre Theile zu scheiden, u. dch Hervorbring­
ung neuer Verschiedenheitenjene erste grosse gleichsam in kleinere zu zersplittern
u. eben dadurch aufzuheben. Er theilte also das Volk nach den Gewerben in
I Fl(ö)tenspieler (αύλητών), Goldarbeiter (χρυσοχόων), Zimmerleute (τεκτόνων),
Färber (βαφέων), Schuster (σκυτοτόμων), Gerber (σκυτοδεψών), Schmiede (χαλκέων),υ. Töpfer(v.zραμέωv). Die übrigen Gewerbe vereinigte er mit einander, u.
bildete aus allen zusammen eine Zunft. Dch d. Gemeinschaften, Zusammen­
künfte u. gottesdienstlichen Feierlichkeiten, die er für jede Zunft nach
Gebühr anordnete, brachte er es in der Stadt dahin, dass d. Unterscheidung
Zwischen Sabinern u. Römern, zF^sc^en Bürgern des Tatius u. Bürgern des
Romulus völlig aufgehoben wde, so dass diese Absonderung eine Vereinigung u.
__Verschmelzung Aller mit Allen bewirkte.” Da diese classes aber nicht
invested mit d. powers exercised by the gentes, the measure failed.
[Aber nach d. Darstellung d. Plutarch’s handelt es sich um “ Bürger des
Romulus” (Latins) u. Bürger d. Tatius (Sabiner); dies würde d. gentes als
hauptsächlich Handwerktreibende stempeln! wenigstens die in der Stadt.\
Servius Tullius Periode j76 -jß j B.C . folgt closely der d. Solon (jp6 B.C.)
u. vor der des Cleisthenes (jop B.C.). Seine Constitution modeled nach der
des Solon; was in practical operation bei Errichtg der Republik (509 B.C.)
D. Hauptchanges, setting aside the gentes u. inaugurating political society,
were: 1) substitution of classes formed nach individual wealth; 2) comitia
centuriata, the new popular assembly, statt comitia curiata, assembly der
gentes; 3) creation of 4 city wards, circumscribed by metes and bounds, u.
named as territorial areas, wo d. residents of each ward required to enroll their
names and register their property.
Servius254 divided the whole people in j classes nach value of their property,
wovon effect to concentrate in one class the wealthiest men of the several gentes.
Property qualification war für iste class | iooyooo asses; 2/ class 75,000;
jtclass 50,000; 4t cl. 25,000; jtclass 11,000 asses (Livy, I, 43).255 Dionysius
fügt 6t class hinzu, consisting of one century mit 1 vote; composed of those
withoutproperty or less than required for admission in /. class, paid no taxes
u. dienten nicht in Krieg. (Dionys. IV, 20) (einige andre differences
zwischen Dionys, u. Livius).256 Jede class subdivided in centuries, deren
Anzahl willkührlich, ohne Rücksicht auf Personenzahl in der class, with
one vote to each century in d. comitia. So iste class zählte 80 centuries, hatte
80 votes in the comitia centuriata; 2t class, 20 centuries, wozu 2 of artisans
attached, mit 22 votes; 3d class, 20 centuries mit 20 votes; 4th class, 20,
wozu 2 centuries of hornblowers and trumpeters, 22 votes; jth class of
30 centuries mit 30 votes. Ausserdem Ritter mit 18 centuries u. ebensoviel
votes. Dadurch government, so weit beeinflussbar dch d. popular assembly,
comitia centuriata - in hands der isten class u. der equites, hatten zusammen
98 votes, majority d. whole. Die centuries jeder class divided into seniors,
über 5 5 Jahr, charged mit duty as soldiers of defending the city, u.juniors,
v. 17 Jahren bis j 4 Jahr inclus., charged with external military enterprises.
(Dionys. IV, 16). Jede centurie agreed upon its vote separately when assem­
bled in the comitia centuriata; in taking a vote upon any public question,
equites called first, then the ist class. Stimmten sie überein in ihrem vote,
then the question decided, u. d. übrigen centuries nicht cal(T)ed upon to vote;
wenn they disagreed, 2nd class called upon u. sf. D. Rechte d. comitia
curiata, etwas erweitert, übertragen auf d. comit. c(enf)uriata; elected all
officers and magistrates upon the nomination of the Senate; enacted or rejected laws
proposed dch letzteren; repealed existing laws auf sein Verlangen, wenn’s
ihnen gefiel; declared war auf seine recommendation, aber Senat schloss Frieden
ohne sie zu consultiren. An appeal to the comitia centuriata in all cases
involving life; they had no control (die comit. centur.) overfinances. - Property,
not numbers, controlled the gvt. Meetings of the comitiajährlich held in Campus
Martius für Wahl v. Magistrates u. officers u. zu ändern Zeiten, wenn
nöthig. Volk assembled by centuries u. by classes under their officers, organised
as an army (exercitus); centuries u. classes designed for civil u. military
organization. Bei erster Musterung unter Servius Tullius 8oyooo in
Waffen in Campus Martius, jeder Mann in seiner century, jede century
in ihrer Klasse, jede Klasse besondert (Liv. /, 44; Dionys., der 84,700
zählt, IV, 22.)
Jedes member einer Centurie nun civis Romanus; dies d. Hauptresultat.
Nach Cicero, De Rep. II, 22 wählte Servius Tullius d. Equites from the
common mass of the people, (langte sich d. Reichsten heraus) u. divided
the remainder into 5 classes.
The property classes subserved the usefulpurpose of breaking up the gentes, which
had become close corporations, excluding the mass of the population. The
5 classes, mit some modification of the manner of voting, remained to the
end of the republic. Servius Tullius soll auch instituirt haben d. comitia
tribufa, a separate assembly of each local tribe or ward, deren chief duties
relating to the assessment and collection of taxes u. to furnishing contingents of
troops. Später elected dies assembly d. tribunes of the people.
Einer d. ersten acts des Servius - der Census. “ Censum enim instituit, rem
saluberrimam tanto futuro imperio; exquo belli pacisque munia non viritim ...
sed pro habitu pecuniarum fierent.” (Liv. /, 42)257 Jede Person hatte sich
selbst to enroll in ward of his residence, with statement of amount of his
property, geschah in Gegenwart von Censor; the lists when completed
furnished the basis upon which the classes were formed. Creation of 4 city wards
gleichzeitig. Circumscribed by boundaries u. mit eignen Namen; such
Roman ward a geographical area, mit a registry of citizens u. their property,
a local organization, a tribune u. other elective officer u. with an assem­
bly - aber nicht wie Attic deme zugleich polit. body mit complete selfgovernment, elective magistracy, judiciary u. priesthood. | Dies Roman
ward a newer copy of the previous Athenian naucrary, die wahrscheinlich
auch ihr model war. Dionys. I V , 14 sagt, dass nachdem Servius Tullius
inclosed the 7 hills mit one wall, he divided the city into 4 parts: 1) Palatina,
2) Suburra, 3) Collina, 4) Esquilina (früher hatte d. city 3 parts); sie hätten
nun zu diesen (diese Theile) statt nach φυλάς τάς γενικάς nach φυλάς τάς
τοπικάς;258 setzte sie commanders über jeden tribe as phylarchs u. comarchs,
whom he directed to note what house each inhabited. Nach Mommsen
hatte jeder dieser 4 levy districts to furnish the 4th part nicht nur of theforce
as a whole, sondern vonjeder ihrer militair(\sch&Vi) Unterabtheilungen u. jede
century zählte gleiche Zahl von Conscribirten from each region, to merge all
distinctions of gentile u. local nature into one common u. dch influence of
military spirit to bind meteoci u. burgesses into one people.259
Ebenso d. Umgegend,, under the government of Rome, organised in tribus
rusticae, nach einigen 26, nach ändern 31, mit d. 4 city tribus in einem
Fall 30, im ändern 35. These townships did not become integral in the sense
of participating in the administration of the government.
The overshadowing municipality of Rome made the centre of the State.
Nach Einführung d. new polit. system behielten d. comitia curiata noch,
(ausser religiösen curia dreck inaugurated certain priest(s) -) it260
conferred the imperium upon all the higher magistrates, became in time a matter
of form only. - After ist Punic War verloren sie alle Bdtg u. fell soon in
oblivion; ebenso d. curiae - beide superseded rather than abolished. Gentes
blieben lang ins empire hinein, as a pedigree u. a lineage.
The element ofproperty, which has controlled society to a great extent during
the comparatively short period of civilisation, gab mankind despotism, im­
perialism, monarchy, privileged classes u. finally representative democracy.
Pt. II. Ch. X I V . Change of Descent von Female to Male Line.
1) Female descent: Female ancestor u. her children (sons u. daughters'); children
of her daughters, and of her female descendants through females, in per­
petuity. (Children of her sons, and of her male descendants, through males
were excluded.) Dies bildet archaic gens.
2) Descent in male line: gens consists of a supposed male ancestor u. his
children, together mit d. children of his sons and of his male descendants
through males in perpetuity.
Bei change v. (/) %u (2) blieben alle present members der gens Mitglieder
derselben, nur in future all children, whose fathers belonged to the gens,
should alone remain in it u. bear the gentile name, while the children of thefemale
members should be excluded. This would not break or change the kinship
or relations of the existing gentiles; but thereafter it would retain in the
gens the children it before excluded, and exclude261 those if before retained.
So lang descent in female line: 1) Marriage in the gens prohibited; hence
children in another gens than that of her reputedfather. 2) Property and the office
of chief hereditary in thegens: thus excluding childrenfrom inheriting theproperty
or succeeding to the office of their reputedfather. - Sobald change of condition
(dch Entwicklg v. individual property u. monogamy namentlich) such,
dass diese exclusions “ungerecht” erschienen, - change of descent effected.
[.Private property in flocks u. herds u. nchdem tillage had led to the ownership
of houses u. lands in severalty. ] With property accumulating in masses and
assuming permanent forms, and with an increasedportion of it held by individual
ownership, descent in the female line [v. wegen inheritance] certain of over­
throw. Change to descent in male line would leave the inheritance in the gens as
before, but it wouldplace children in the gens of theirfather u. at the head of the
agnatic kindred.
Probable, that when descent changed to the male line, or still earlier, animal
namesfor the gentes laid aside and personal names substituted in their place.
After this substitution, the eponymous ancestor became a shifting person.
The more celebrated Grecian gentes made the change of names; they
retained the name of the mother of their gentilefather and ascribed his birth to her
embracement by some particular god. So Eumolpus, d. eponymous ancestor
der Attic Eumolpidae, was the reputed son of Neptune u. Chione. \ 440 B.C.
Herodot: sagt v. d. Lycians (von denen er erzählt, dass sie sprang from
Creta, u. nach Lykia gewandert unter Führung d. Sarpedon; dass “ ihre
customs partly Cretan, partly Carian.” “ Die Lykier haben eine sonderbare
Gewohnheit worin sie abweichen von jeder ändern Nation in der Welt. Frage
einen Lykier wer er ist u. er antwortet indem er seinen Eigennamen giebt, den
seiner Mutter u. so on in thefemale line. Ferner, wenn eine freie Weibsperson
einen Mann heirathet, der ein Sklave ist, so sind ihre Kinder freie Bürger;
aber wenn einfreier Mann ein ausländisch Weib heirathet, oder cohabits with
a concubine, selbst wenn er die first person im Staat ist, the childrenforfeit all
the rights of citizenship.” 262
Now cfr: Wenn ein Seneca-Iroquois ein fremdes Weib heirathet, sind seine
Kinder aliens; aber wenn ein(e> Seneca-Iroquois Weibsperson einen Fremden
heirathet, od. einen Onondaga, sind ihre Kinder Iroquois of the Seneca tribe u.
of the gens u. phratry ihrer Mutter. D. Frau überträgt ihre nationality u. her
gens auf ihre Kinder, whoever their father.
Flgt aus Herodot’s Stelle, dass d. Lykier organized in gentes (of archaic
form), hence mit descent in female line.
D. aborigines v. Creta (Kandia) waren Pelasgian, Semitic u. Hellenic tribes,
living locally apart. Minos, der brother des Sarpedon, gilt als head der
Pelasgians in Creta; d. Lykier zu Herodot’s Zeit ganz hellenisirt, con­
spicuous, unter d. Asiatic Greeks, for their advancement. D. Insulation
ihrer Vorfahren auf Creta-Insel, vor ihrer migration in the legendary
period to Lycia mag erklären ihre retention of the female line in this late
Etrusker [nach Cramer: Description of Ancient Italy (dieser selbst quotes
Lan%i)\y wie wir aus ihren Monumenten sehn, “ Hessen ihre Weiber zu
ihren Festen u. Banquets zu; sie beschreiben ihre parentage u. family invari­
ably with reference to the mother, and not the father. Dieselben 2 customs
noticed von Herodot bezüglich der Lykier u. Caunians v. Asia Minor.”
Curtius {Griech. Geschichte) commenting on Lycian, Etruskan u. Cretan
descent infemale line, sagt: dies wurzle in d. primitive conditions of society, als
Monogamie noch nicht etabHrt hinreichend to assure descent on thefather's
side. D. Gebrauch erstreckt sich daher weit über Lycian territory; occurs
heut noch in Indien; existirte unter den alten Aegyptern; mentioned by
Sanchoniathon (p. 16, Orell); bei Etruskansy Cretans, who called their
fatherland - Motherland [noch immer sagt jeder: Mutter%ungey Fatherland;
d. Sprache gehört immer noch der Mutter.] D. Stelle bei Herodot beweist
nur, dass sich d. customs of descent in female Hne von allen related to
the Greeks u. am längsten unter d. Lykiern erhalten__ As life became
more regulated, relinquished u. naming children after their fathers became
general in Greece. Cf. Bachofen Mutterrecht, Stuttgart 1861.
Bachofen {Mutterrecht) has collected u. discussed the evidence of Mutter­
recht u. Gyneocracy unter Lykierny Creterny Athener, Lemnierny Aegyptery
Orchomeniansy Locriansy Lesbians u. unter östlichen Asiatischen Nationen.
Dies aber setzt voraus - gens in its archaicform; diese would give the gens
of the mothers the ascendancy in the household. D. family - whsclich schon
in syndyasmi(a)nform - noch environed mit d. remains of conjugal system of
still earlier condition. Such family - a married pair with their children mit kindred families in a communal household wo d. several mothers u. ihre
Kinder of the same gensy the reputedfathers dieser children of other gentes.
Common lands u.joint tillage would lead tojoint-tenement houses and communism
in living; gyneocracy unterstellt für Entstehung - descent in the female line
producirt. Women entrenched in large householdsy suppliedfrom common storesy
in which their own gens largely predominated in numbers__ When descent
changed to male line mit monogamian family the joint-tenement house displaced,
stellte in midst einer rein gentile society the wife and mother in a single house
u. separated her from her gentile kindred.
Bachofen sagt v. Cretan city of Lyktos: diese Stadt wde betrachtet als
lacedämonische Colonie u. auch als related to the Athenians; war in beiden
Fällen so on the mother's side, denn nur d. Mütter waren spartan. Abkunft.
D. Athenian Verwandtschaft geht zurück auf Athenische Weiber welche d.
Pelasgian Thyrrheniansfrom Brauron promontory enticed haben sollen. - Mit
descent in male line, bemerkt treffend Morgan, wde d. lineage d. women
unberücksichtigt geblieben sein; aber mit female line gaben d. Colonists their
pedigrees through \females only.
Monogamy unter Greeks probably nicht vor Upper Status of Barbarism. Wie
pragmatisch u. als echter deutscher Schulgelehrter Bachofen selbst d.
Sache auffasst, sichtbar aus folgenden passus:
Denn vor der Zeit des Kekrops hatten d. Kinder nur eine Mutter, keinen
Vater; they were of one line. An keinen Mann ausschliesslich gebunden,
brachte das Weib nur spurious (!) children zur Welt. Kekrops (!) machte (!)
diesem Zustand der Dinge ein Ende ; brachte zurück (!) die lawless (!) union
of sexes zur Exclusivität der Ehe, gab d. Kindern einen Vater (!) u. eine
Mutter (!) u. machte sie so from unilateres - bilateres.” (machte sie unilateres
in male line of descent!)
Polybius X II. extract I I : “ Die Lokrier selbst [d. 100 families of Locrians in
Italy] haben mich versichert dass ihre eignen traditions mehr dem Bericht
des Aristoteles entsprechen als dem des Timäus. Geben dabei folgde
Beweise__ Alle nobility of ancestry ist unter ihnen von Weibern abgeleitet u.
nicht von Männern. Die allein sind noble, die ihren Ursprung von d. 100
families ableiten; diese families were noble unter d. Locrians vor ihrer
Wanderung; u. waren in d. That dieselben von denen dch Loos 100 virgins
taken, wie d. Orakel befohlen hatte, u. die nach Troja gesandt wurden.”
Wahrscheinlich d. hier erwähnte Rang (Adel) connected mit office of chief
ofgens, ennobled d. besondre Familie innerhalb der gens, auf eines deren Glie­
der conferred; dies implicirt descent in the female line both as to persons u.
office; d. office of chief hereditary in the gens u. elective unter its male members
in archaic times; mit descent263 in female line passes v. Bruder %u Bruder u.
von Onkel%u Nephew (Schwestersohri). 264 Aber office 265 stets passed through
females, the eligibility der Person depending upon the gens of his mother,
who gave him connection with the gens u. the defunct chief whose place he
was to fill. Wo office u. rank runs through females, it requires descent in the
female line for its explanation.
In traditionary period d. Greeks: Salmöneus u. Kretheus own brothers, Söhne
des Aeolus. Der erstere gab seine Tochter Tyrö in Ehe ihrem Onkel. Mit
descent in male line Kretheus u. Tyro of the same gens, hätten nicht heirathen
können; mit descent in female line Tyrö of gens ihrer Mutter, nicht ihres
Vaters. Salmöneus, also of different gens als Kretheus; d. Heirath also
within gentile usage. D. mythische Charakter d. Personen gleichgültig, the
legend applies gentile usages correctly; zeigt also hin auf descent in female line
im hohen Alterthum (griechischer)
Nach der Zeit d. Solon konnte ein Bruder seine Halbschwester heirathen,
wenn sie born of different mothers, nicht aber when born of differentfathers
and same mother. Mit descent in female line, they would be of different
gentes; aber in male descent line - u. diese existirte damals faktisch - of
the same gens, ihre Heirath daher verboten. [Dies also Ueberleben der alten
praxis, surviving the change of descent to the male line.\ Cimon heirathete seine
Halbschwester Elpinice, vom selben Vater, aber verschiednen Müttern.
Im Eubulides des Demosthenes sagt Euxithius: άδελφήν γάρ ό πάππος (grand­
father) ούμός έγημεν ούχ όμομητριάν 266 (nicht von derselben Mutter) Vgl.
ld. Eubulides 24.
Descent in the female line presupposes the gens to distinguish the lineage; war
- [wozu gar keine histor. evidence weiter nöthig, nachdem dies als
archaicform entdeckt] - ancient law d. Latin, Grecian u. other Graeco-Italian
Annehmend Zahl of registered Athenians %ur Zeit Solon’s = 60,000 u.
dividing them equally unter d.360 Attic gentes gäbe average von 160 persons
to gens. D. gens was a great family (nenne es Geschlechtsfamilie) of kindred
~Tpersons, with common religious rites, common burial place, u., in general,
I common lands. Intermarriage verboten. Mit change of descent to male line, rise
of monogamy, exclusive inheritance in the children u. appearance of heiresses way
gradually prepared for free marriage regardless ofgens, except prohibition für
certain degrees naher Blutsverwandtschaft. Marriages began in the group, alle
males u. females of which - ausschliesslich der Kinder - were joint husbands u.
wives; aber husbands u. wives were of different gentes; it ended267 in marriage
96 between single pairs with a(n> (officially) exclusive cohabitation. |
D. Turanian Verwandtschaftsystem (Asien, Africa, Australien) [entsprechend
dem Ganowänian in America] muss auch unter Greek u. Latin tribes in selber
Entwicklungsperiode geherrscht haben. Ein Charactering derselben: die
Kinder von Brüdern sind selbst Brüder u. Schwester, als solche nicht intermarriable; d. Kinder von Schwestern in demselben Verhältniss, unter selber
prohibition. [Wenn Bachofen diese punuluan Ehe lawless findet, so finde
Mann aus dieser Periode d. meistenjetzigen Ehen zwischen nahen u. fernen
Cousins, sei es väterlicher, sei es mütterlicher Seite, blutschänderisch,
__nämlich als Ehen %wischen blutsverwandten Geschwistern.] Dieses erklärt
d. Legende d. Danaiden (worauf Aeschylus seine “ Schut^ßehenden” ge­
Danaus u. Aegyptus waren Brüder u. descendants der Argivischen Io.
Danaus, von different wives hatte jo Töchter u. Aegyptus jo Söhne; letztere
sought the first in marriage; diese nach Turanian System - Brüder u. Schwes­
tern, unverheirathbar. Wenn damals descent in male line hätten sie auch zur
selbengens gehört, andres Heirath obstacle. Die jo Danaus Töchter - Dana­
iden - fliehn v. Aegypten nach Argos, um dem unlawful u. blutschänderischen
wedlock zu entfliehn. Dies event foretold to Io von Prometheus.
(Aeschylus, (Prometheus) 8jf).
In d. Schutzflehenden v. Aeschylus erklären d. Danaiden den kindred Argives
(in Argos), sie seien nicht verbannt
“ Δίαν δέ λιπουσαι χ-9-όνα σύγχορτον Συρία φεύγομεν, οΰτιν' έφ’
αίματι δημηλασίαν ψήφω πόλεως
γνωσθ-εΐσαι άλλ' αύτογενεΐ φυξανορία γάμον Αίγύπτου παίδων
άσεβή όνοταζόμεναι <παράνοιαν>”
(Aesch. Suppl. v. j sq.)
worden von Aegypten, sondern:
σύγχορτον = conterminam, da χόρτος
(hortus, cursus) auch = terminus,
So χόρτος αύλής, ό της αύλής δρος,
die Grenze des Hofes. So Eurip.
Andromache v. 17: “ σύγχορτα ναίω
πεδία” , Ich bewohne angrenzende
Felder {Ebnen).
— Nicht wegen Blutthat (Mord) dch Volksverbannenden Beschluss verurtheilt, sondern aus Männerfurcht, die blutsverwandte u. unheilige Ehe der
Söhne des Aegyptus verschmähend.
Die Stelle scheint verdorben grammatice. Sieh Schütz·, “ Aeschylus” , vol. 2,
p. 378.
Nur wenn sie den casus der Hiketiden gehört, beschlossen d. Argiver in
Council ihnen Schutz Zugewähren, was implicirt Existenz von Verbot solcher
Ehen u. the validity of their objection. Zur Zeit wo diese Tragoedie
aufgeführt in Athen erlaubte u. forderte selbst d. Athenische Gesetz marriage
between children of brothers in case of heiresses u. orphans, obgleich diese Regel
auf solche Ausnahmsfälle beschränkt scheint.
Pt. II. Ch. X V . Gentes in other tribes of the Human Family.
Celtic branch d. Aryan family {ausser deren of India) hielt länger als irgend
andre d. Gentile Organization bei; - Scottish Clan in d. Highlands of Scotland feuds u. blood revenge, localization by gentes, use of lands in common, fidelity of
clansman to his chiefand members of the Clan to each other. - Irish sept \Celtisch:
Villein - Communities on French Estates. Andrerseits: Phis or Phrara of
Albania; d. Familiengemeinschaften in Dalmatien u. Croatien. Die Sanscrit
“ Ganas” (“gentes.” )
Germans: were in Upper Status of Barbarism, when first known to the
Romans, konnten kaum mehr developed ideas of government haben als
Römer u. Griechen, wenn (the latter were) first known.
Tacitus. De Moribus Germanorum, c. 2. “ Celebrant carminibus antiquis, {quod
unum apud illos memoriae et annalium genus est), Tuistonem deum, terra
editum, et filium Mannum originem gentes conditoresque. Manno tris
filios adsignant, e quorum nominibus proximi Oceano - Ingaevones, medii Herminones, ceteri - Istaevones vocentur. Quidam, ut in licentia vetustatis,
pluris deo ortos plurisque “gentis” {tribe) appellationes, Marsos Gambrivios
Suebos Vandalios adfirmant, (eaque vera et antiqua nomina). Ceterum
Germaniae vocabulum recens et nuper additum; quoniam qui primi Rhenum
transgressi Gallos expulerint ac nunc Tungri, tunc Germani (Wehrmann,
guerriers) vocati sint; ita “ nationis” nomen, non gentis evaluisse paulatim, ut
omnes primum a victore ob metum, mox (etiam) a se ipsis invento nomine
Germani vocarentur.” 268 | (natio muss hier = confederacy of tribes sein;
jeder tribe = gens segmentated in mehre gentes. “ {Suevi} maj orem (enim)
Germaniae partem obtinent, propriis ad huc nationibus nominibusque discreti
(Tacit. Germ. c. ^<f.);269 d. nationes sind hier verschiedne näher related tribes
od. auch tribes (wie z.B. Seneca-Iroquois etc), auf keinem270 Fall gentes.)
Lipsius interpretirt: Die, qui transgressi primitus Rhenum sint,271 sind
eben d. Volk, das jetzt Tungri, damals Germani genannt wurden. Dieser
(d. Name “ Germani” ) Particularname einer einzigen Natio, nach u. nach
auf alle übertragen. Meint umgekehrt: “ ita nationis nomen, non gentis
evaluisse paulatim” : der Name prevailed nach u. nach, nicht als der einer
gens (hier für erweiterte gens = tribe) sondern als nationis nomen, wo natio
d. ganze deutsche Volk, alle tribes zusammen ist.]
Dass alte Gesänge ihre einzigen historical accounts (“ memoriae"') u. Annalen,
so fanden es d. Spanier bei the village Indians. Eginhartusy “ Vita Caroli
Magni": “ Barbara et antiquissima carmina quibus vetum regum actionis
et bella canebantur, scripsit, memoriaeque mandavit.” 272
Jornandes “de Gothis” (quemadmodum et) in priscis eorum carminibus
poene storicu ritu (in commune re)colitur etc.273
Tacit. lib. II. Annal, de Arminio : “ Caniturque adhuc barbaras apud gen­
tes. 274
Julianus in “ Antiochico” nennt diese cantus “ άγρια μέλη (agrestia carmina)
παραπλήσια ταΐς κλάγγαις των τραχύ βοώντων ορνίθων (similia clangoribus
avium aspere clamantium)275
Tacitus I.e. (German.) c. 3, spricht dann v. ihren Kriegsgesängen: “ Sunt illis
haec quoque carmine, quorum relatu, (durch deren delivery; Art sie auszu­
schreien] (quem barditum vocant) accedunt animos. 276 barditusfür baritus
von Old German bar, baren, raise the voice. Tacitus confounds the battle
cry mit d. battle song.
Tac. German, c. 5 beschreibt: “ Terra ... aut silvis horrida, aut paludibus
satis (ablat. von sat) ferax (fruchtbar an Korn), frugiferarum
arborum impatiens: pecorum fecunda (abondant en bétail) sed plerumque
improcera (nicht tali, klein): ne armentis (Ochsen) quidem suus honor
(d. Hom), aut gloria frontis; numero gaudent (le nombre de domage),
eaque solae et gratissimae opes sunt (sind ihr einziger Reichthum, den sie am
meisten schätzen) ... possesmne et usu (Edelmetallen) haud perinde
afficiuntur. (Haud perinde, nicht gleich d. Römern, nicht so sehr als.)
Est videre apud illos argentea vasa, legatis et principibus eorum muneri
data, non in alia vilitate quam quae humo (Erde, Lehm, Thon) finguntur,
quamquam proximi (die an d. röm. Grenzen Wohnend) ab usum commerciorum
aurum et argentum in pretio habent, formasque quasdam nostiaepecuniae agnoscunt
atque eligunt: interiores simplicius et antiquius permutatione mercium utuntur.
Pecuniam probant veterem et diu notam, Serratos (von serra = Säge, waren
nämlich so indentirt) Bigatosque (v. biga, hatten empreinte d’un char attelé
de deux chevaux). Argentum quoque magis quam aurum sequuntur,
nulla affectione animi, sed quia numerus argenteorum (argentei numi, silver
coils) facilior usui est promiscua ac vilia mercantibus,” 277
Tac. Germ. c. 7. “ Reges (d. chiefs of the tribes) ex nobilitate (i.e. aus gens,
i.e. aus more illustrious family of a gens u. mehr prominent gens), duces
(the chief warriors) ex virtute sumunt (wie d. Iroquois). Nec regibus infinita
ac libera potestas; et duces exemplo potius quam imperio
praesunt.” 278
c. X I. “ De minoribus rebus principe consultant; de majoribus omnes etc.”
(see d. weitere).279
c. X II. “ Licet apud concilium accusare quoque et discrimen capitis inten­
dere__ Eliguntur in isdem conciliis et prncipes, qui jura per pagos (Gaue)
vicusque (bourgades) reddunt; centeni singulis ex plebe comites concilium simul
et auctoritas adsunt.280
c. X X . “ Sororumfilius idem apud avunculum (Oncle) qui apudpatrem honor.
Quidam sanctiorem artioremque hunc nexum sanguinis tenent arbitrantur et in
accipiendis obsidibus magis exigunt, tamquam (ziehn d. nephews d. Söhnen
vor) et animam firmius et domum latius teneant. Heredes tamen successoresque
sui cuique liberi, et nullum testamentum. Si liberi sunt, proximus gradus in
possessione fratres, patrui, avunculi.” 2811
Caesar, de bello gallic. V I, c. 22.
“ Agriculturae non student, maiorque pars eorum victus in lacte, caseo, carne
consistit. Neque quisquam agri modum certum aut finis habet proprios: sed
magistratus ac principes in annos singulos gentibus cognationibusque hominum,
qui cum una coierunt, quantum et quo loco visum est agri attribuunt atque
anno post alio transire cogunt. Eius rei multas adferunt causas: ne assidua
consuetudine capti studium belli gerendi agri cultura commutent; ne
latos finis parare studeant, potentioresque humiliores possessionibus expellant;
ne accuratius ad frigora atque aestus vitandos aedificent; ne qua oriaturpecuniae
cupiditas, qua ex re factiones dissensionesque nascuntur; ut animi aequitate
plebem contineant, cum suas quisque opes cumpotentissimis aequari videat.” 282
ib. c. X X I I I :
Civitatibus maxima laus est quam latissime circum se vastatisfinibus solitudines
habere. Hoc proprium virtutis existimant, expulsos agris finitimos cedere
neque quemquam prope audere consistere; simul hoc se fore tutiores arbitrantur,
repentinae incursionis timore sublato. Cum bellum civitas aut inlatum defendit
aut infert, magistratus qui ei bello praesint, ut vitae necisque habeant
potestatem, deliguntur. In pace nullus est communis magistratus, sed principes
regionum atque pagorum inter suos ius dicunt controversiasque minuunt. 283
D. principes regionum u. pagorum - d. Sachem - sind nicht d. warchiefs,
sondern civil chiefs wie bei Indians ; für d. Krieg werden sie gewählt, wie
dort ditto. [Dies zu Caesar’s Zeit.] Caesar spricht oben von “gentibus
cognationibusque hominum, qui una coierint.” D. Aecker jährlich vertheilt von
d. principes.
Tacit. Germ. V II, wo er von Armeeformation spricht, “ nec fortuiter
conglobatio turmam (Reiterschwadron) aut cuneum (Infanteriekeil) facit, sed
familiae et propinquitates; 189 hier tritt schon mehr familia hervor, aber
bei Cäsar ist diese selbst bestimmt als gens.
Ibid. X X V I . “ Faenus agitare et in usuras extendere ignotum; ideoque magis
servatur quam si vetitum esset. Agri (les terres), pro numero cultorum (en
raison du nombre der Bebauer Cultor, der bras), ab universus (par tous les
peuplades) per vices (successivement) occupantur, quos mox inter se
secundum dignationem (bei Cäsar noch gleich), partiuntur facilitatem partiendi
camporum spatia praestant. Arva {arable field, cultivated land) per annos
mutant, et superest ager; nec enim cum ubertate et amplitudine soli labore
contendunt, ut pomaria conserant (so dass sie planteraient des vergers), et
prata separent (od. feraient exclure les prairies) et hortqs rigent (od. aroseraient des jardins): sola terrae seges imperatur (Iis ne demandent ä la terre
que du ble.)” 284
D. Mark u. Gaueintheilung (pagus) scheinen groups of settlements associ­
ated with reference to military levies; transitional stages, diese organiza­
tions, between a gentile and a political system, the grouping of the people
still resting on consanguinity.
Nach der form d. statement bei Cäsar scheint d. family syndyasmian gewesen
Zu sein.
Sir. J . Phear: “ The Aryan Village in India and Ceylon” . 1880.
I) Modern Village Life in Bengal. (Bis wo d. Gegentheil angezeigt, d. Zeug
Abdrucke v. Artikeln in Calcutta Review für 1874, July and October
Was der Mann beschreibt, ist “ agricultural village” im Deltaic Bengal; von
d. sea lines der Sunderbunds on the South, to the curve, which, passing
through Dacca, Pubna, Moorscheedabad forms the lower boundary of the
red land of the North, the whole country ist almost perfect alluvial plain;
exhibits generally large open spaces, oft very large, limited to the eye by
heavy masses of foliage. Diese open spaces, during the height of the
South-West Monsoon more or less covered with water, at the end of the rains
by green waving swarths of rice, u. in dry season to a large extent fallow
ground, varied by plots of the different cold weather (rabi) crops. (3, 4) Fast
no roads, ausser a few trunk roads of communication zwischen the capital u.
district towns, sonst only irregular tracks, sometimes traversable by
wheels, along the balks (or ails) which divide and subdivide the soil into
small cultivated patches or khets. Die wenigen sonstigen roads sind
kachcha (d.h. unmetalled) ausser in dry season. ( West Bengal - im Gegensatz
zu deltaic Bengal - relatively high land) liegt ausserhalb des Delta, below
the Ghats, something like roads through and about the large villages,
obgleich oft not fitted for wheel traffick. (p. 4) Als main roads for loco­
motion u. carriage of goods dienen innumerable khäls (canals), brandling
out from Hooghly, Ganges, Pudda, Megna etc. rivers, intersecting the country
in all directions. (5) Ob d. village placed on the high bank of a khal (the
banks meist of bare, greasy mud, high enough above the water) or is
situated inland, it invariably stands on relatively elevatedground above reach of the
water whd Regensaison u. fst hidden, in the midst of ajungle; diese villages
zugänglich von jeder Seite across the khets by passing along the dividing
(ails) balks. No trace of street or any arrangement of the houses in them. (6)
Each dwelling is a small group of huts, generally four - a homestead. The site
of the group a carefully levelled platform, raised somewhat above the
general elevation of the village land, roughly square in figure, and con­
taining 500-1000 □ yards in area. The huts made of bamboo and plastered
over with mud, sometimes o f1 mud alone, the floor of the structure also
of mud being again raised above the level of the platform; each hut is one
apartment only, about 20 feet long and 10 or 15 feet wide, commonly without
a window (side walls low, roo/highly peaked, thatched with a jungle grass,
the eaves (Dachrinnen) project considerably, thus forming low verandahs
on the back and front of the hut. Diese huts (mostly 4) der homestead
are ranged on the sides of the platform, facing inwards, berühren sich
selten,22 shut aber gewissermassen in the interior space - the house-space
(uthän) [1 st Hof space. 1 st Quadrangle. ] Hier spielen d. Kinder, seeds are
spread to dry, the old women sit and spin etc. (7, 8)
D. principal hut hat oft ausser d. Thüre which opens on this interior
quadrangle a second door and well kept verandah on the opposite side opening on
the path, by which the dwelling can be best approached; this is the
baithakhäna (sitting room) wo strangers or men not belonging to the
family, received, u. sehr oft auch d. Schlafzimmer der male members der
family; the mud? floor of the hut or verandah, spread mit a mat, reicht diese
hin etc. D. hut which faces the baithakhäna is appropriated to the women
and children; eine der 2 ändern huts contains the chula (mud fireplace),
serves as kitchen; endlich d. 4te Hütte ist a gola (store-room for grain). In
einer der huts, sei es in quadrangle or outside, ist der dhenki, u. d. Hütte
heisst dhenki ghar; dhenki ist a very large pestle (Mörserkeule) and mortar
(Mörser)4 dessen main purpose to husk (enthülsen) Reis. Der Mörser4
gewöhnlich ein Gefäss ausgehöhlt of a log of wood u. is sunk in the
ground; d. pestle ist ein Hammerkopf auch aus Holz, einer horizontalen
Hebe bar which works on a low post or support u. dessen anderer arm
is depressed by 1 or 2 women applying their weight to it; sobald sie
ihren Arm loslassen fällt der Hammer, pounds the paddy in the mortar u.
dch Wiederholung dieser operation the (husk of the) grain is rubbed off.
Paddy, the grain rice, gleicht etwas barley, u. must be husked before eaten.
D. dhenki attains its object surprisingly ( well). (8-10)
Ist d. Familie better off als on an average, so mag d. Hüttengruppe der
1 29 homestead mehr als 4 Hütten enthalten, | one or more, d. bullockshed, gola
od. selbst dhenki-ghar situated ausserhalb d. quadrangle, perhaps in front of
or near to a corner. (10-11)
The homestead platform generally surrounded irregularly by large trees,
wie mango, pipal, palms. In small clearings among these a few herbs u.
vegetables are grown for family use in the curry (diese small vegetable plots
meist wenig mehr als irregular scratchings in the midst of low jungle under­
growth; nothing like a garden, no flowers); d. whole area or compound be­
longing to the homestead marked off from its neighbours, generally, very
obscurely, by most rude metes and bounds, sehr selten a neat fence; d.
Weiber halten d. hardened mudz floor des house space, der principal huts u.
verandahs sehr clean, often adorn the front wall des baithakhana mit
grotesque figures in chalk; in d. Regel remainder of the homestead compound
in a most neglecteddirty state. Der modern Bengali wenig Begriff of neatness,
ist absolut unfähig, unassisted, of drawing a straight line or an evenly curved line;
the traces left by his plough, the edges of his little fields, die rows of his
planted paddy etc. like inked spider legs across a sheet of paper. (11, 12)
The ordinary agricultural village of Bengal is a closely packed aggregate of
such homesteads ... more or less concealed among the trees of their com­
pounds ; hier u. da waste land in the shape of unoccupied sites for dwel­
lings ; auch tanks or ponds of water in the excavations, which furnished the
earth for the construction of the homestead, plat-forms etc. (12) Diese
Teiche (Weiher) od. Bassins oft rich in all sorts of abomination (wimmeln
alle mit fish), overhung mit jungle, and surface covered with shiny pond
weed; hier the people bathe, cleanse their body cloths, get their drinking water,
catch fish in them, (i 3) In Bengal jeder pool of water swarms with fish,
small or great; the very ditches, gutters and hollows dried up for months,
on the first heavy downfall filling them, turn out to be complete preserves
offish. (I.e.) Manchmal has a fortunate or wealthy ryot a tank attached to
his homestead all his own, to which his neighbours have no right to
resort. (I.e.) Maidän (green bewachsen)
D. land tilled by the cultivators of the village, i.e. the bulk of the inhabitants, is
a portion of the lower lyingplain outside and around the village. D. family of the
homestead - consisting of a father and sons, or of brothers or of cousins cultivates von 2 to 10 acres in the whole, made up of severalplots, often lying
at some distancefrom each other. D. men gehn zu ihrem work at daybreak,
plough on shoulder, driving their cattle before them along the nearest
village path which leads to the open; manchmal they return at noon for
a meal and a bath in the tank u. gehn dann wieder aus for their work;
öfter aber bleiben sie bis afternoon having some food brought them
about midday by the women and children. (14) One man and hisyoung son
(still in his boyhood) with a plough and a pair of oxen will cultivate 3 acres
(u. so - in proportion), perhaps more, with the aid received in reaping
etc. No purely agricultural class wie in England. Small cultivators u. d.
überflüssigen Hände einer Familie arbeiten spare times for hire on their
neighbours' land; in some villages, wo d. occupation of a caste, z.B. the wea­
vers’ caste, naturally died out, the members forced to earn their livelihood by
manual labour, arbeiten u. a. auch auf Land for wages. Für d. Herbst ist oft
besondres arrangement made. The paddy grown on land in one situation
reicht oft später od. früher als paddy grown under slightly different circum­
stances. [1Crops are known by designations drawn from the months or seasons
in which they are reaped or gathered, as Bhaduwi, Kharif, Rabi; u. diese
respectively depend upon the season of sowing] u. so small gangs of cultivators
— from one village or district go to help the cultivators of a distant village to
cut their paddy, this assistance being returned if needed. The remuneration
receivedfor this work is usually one bundle5 out of everyfive, or out of every seven
that are cut. The foreigners build a mat hut for themselves in the harvest
field u. nach geleistetem Dienst carry home their bags of grain. (15, 16) |
130 Grosse uniformity of life etc. in all the component classes of a village.
(16) D. House d. wealthier or more influential man ist manchmal pakka
or brickbuilt, (selber Plan wie bei bamboo homestead) - generally out of
repair and partially broken down. Er hat zahlreichere Kleider u. better
blankets; seine cooking ustensils u. d. sehr wenigen other domestic articles
sind vielleicht of Brass statt Erdenwaare, seine hukhas (hukha od. hookha
a form of pipe for smoking tobacco) of metal or even silver mounted
statt eine Coconusschale, seine Weiber tragen reicheres, u. zahlreicheres
Schmuck. Er hat vielleicht a wooden gaddi {takhtaposh) (gaddi = a seat;
takhtaposh = a low platform or sitting place) in his receiving room, on
which he u. his guests or clients may sit crosslegged, slighdy raised above
the earthen floor. Hat vielleicht a richly carved statt a plain sanduk
(strong box) for the custody of his valuables, or a plurality of them.
Sonst both households gleich primitiv; fand rice in someform or other and
curry (mit Curry sauce bereiteter Ragout) u. dies eaten by taking it out
of the platter or off the plaintain leaf with the fingers. (17, 18) In Haus u.
while at work most men go naked, ausser the dhoti (loin cloth) u. Kinder
bis 7 od. 8 Jahr meist absolut nackt. (18) Wealth zeigt sich by the expen­
diture of money at family ceremonies, wie bei marriages, bei shraddhas
(funeral obsequies) u. readings of national u. religious epics, the Bhagbuty
Rämäyan etc. Bei shadis (shady = nuptial ceremony) u. shraddhas the cost
is in the purchase and preparation of offerings, presents and payments
to Brahman priests, presents to, and the feeding of, Brahmans generally.
For the readings, the Brahman narrator (Kathak) paid very highly, u. he
u. his audience oft maintained for several days by the employer. Then
certain religious festivals are kept annually by such families as can afford
it; Kali's in Kartik (October), Saraswati's or Sri Panchami's in Magh (end
of January), and ceremonies in honour of Durga commonly performed by
~T well to do people. (19, 20) The Social Respect commanded by wealth,
■ meted out in Bengal very much according to the mode or degree of mag­
nificence with which these semi-public family duties (in fact spectacles') are
performed. (20)
Women all sehr superstitious etc., do all the menial work of the household,
even when family of the better classes; go daily to the tanks to fetch
water, gives opportunity for gossip etc., astrologers live in all villages als
Auguren zur Deutung aller phenomena d. täglichen Lebens, gelenkt dch
supernatural governors (spiritual agencies). (21-23)
D. Boden w<orau)f d. homestead stands u. the small surrounding com­
pound, is hired of a superior holder; a common rent is Re 1, 1-4, 1-8 p.a. for
the homestead plot u. etwas weniger für d. attached piece. D. Buildings,
die d. homestead bilden, gewöhnlich constructed dch tenant, gehören
ihm; zieht er fort, so kann er d. Materialien mitnehmen od. verkaufen;
dies ein Grund, warum mud, mat u. bamboo dwellings the rule, u. pakka
(brickbuilt houses) the exception. The largest mat hut of a homestead
kostet Rs ßo-jo to build entirely anew; the chulha (cooking stove) is made
by the women of mud. The dao (bill-hook, Spitzhaken), as a tool the
Bengali’s jack-of-all-trades, is got from the village blacksmith for a few
annas. The plough handle des cultivator prepared almost for nothing by the
ryot himself, perhaps mit assistance des village carpenter, u. its toe is shod
with iron by the village blacksmith for 1 rupee. [.Plough is a most simple
wooden tool ohne Eisen ausser the pointedferule at the toe, gleicht genau in
shape a thin anchor; one claw goes into the ground at such an inclination
that the other is nearly vertical and serves as6 a handle for the ploughman;
the shank is the plough-beam to which the bullocks are attached. There
is no share coulter or breast; the pointed end only stirs the earth, does not
turn it. The whole so light that a man easily carries it over his shoulder.]
An average pair of bullocks obtainable for Rs 20, u. the price der few
earthenpots andpans of various sorts - constituting the necessary ustensils
__ for household purposes - may be reckoned in pice. (23, 24) So klein d.
I accumulatedcapital d. villagers u. selbst]dies oft due to the mahäjan. [.Mahäjan
= merchant, money dealer - one who makes it his business in the villages to
131 advance money andgrain to the Ryot on thepledge of crop. (24) Extreme |poverty
of by far the largestportion, i.e. the bulk of the population in Bengal (the richest
part of India!) seldom rightly apprehended by the English people. The
tropical climate u. the tropical facility of producing rice admit of life and a
certain low type of health being maintained on a minimum of means. 7 rupees a
month a sufficient income for support of a whole family; food the principal
item of expense, u. probably one rupee 8 annas a month in most parts of Bengal
sufficient to feed an adult man u. 12 annas a woman even in a well to do
establishment. D. villagers, die cultivators, have mostly sufficient rice of their
own growth for their home consumption; the little cash they require is the
produce of the sale of the rabi (cold weather crops). Die andren villagers buy their
rice unhusked (paddy) from time to time in small quantities, u. alle so ihr
Salary Taback (wenn sie ihn nicht selbst bauen), gurh (coarse sugar of date
tree, etc., hardened into a cake - molasses), oil, masala (spice, seasoning),
fst täglich at the general dealer’s {modi) shop. (25) Für kaufen, wie of
curry spices the pice or */4 anna (1 anna = 1/16 silver rupee), the lowest
piece struck by the Mint, nicht sufficiently small u. cowries (Kauri a small
shell, Cypraea, used as money) at the rate of about / , 7 2 0 to the rupee
_universally employed to supplement the currency. (26)
In a large village 3 or 4 modis’ shops. (Sells auch liquid articles.) Beschrei­
bung solchen shops. (25-28)
Hat or market held in most villages twice a week; meist a tolerably open
part of the village site; meist keine stalls for the protection of the sellers or
their goods; when so simply long narrow lines of low shed roofs covering a
raisedfloor, supported on bamboo posts, without any side walls. (28, 29)
Zum hat bringt der producer his spare paddy, mustard1-seed, betel-nuts,
sugar-cane, gurh-treacle, his chillies, gourds, yams; the fisherman his fish, the
seedcrusher his oils, the old widow her mats and other handy work, the
potter his gharas ( = a necked, narrow mouthed, earthen vessel) u. gamlas
{gamla = open earthen vessel), the hawker his piece goods, bangles, etc;
the town traders' agents u. the local modis come to increase their stocks, the
rural folks to supply their petty wants, all gossip, not a few stay to drink
(not rare this accomplishment in India). Each vendor sits crosslegged on the
ground with his wares set out around him, u. for the privilege of this primitive
stall he pays a certain small sum or contribution in kind to the owner of
the hat, meist der Zamindär (proprietor of the rest of the village land).
I D. profits derived from a popular hat sufficiently considerable (relative)
to the ordinary rent to induce a singular competition on the part of the
neighbouring Zamindärs; jeder will set up a hat, verbietet d. ryots
Besuch der andren, führt oft zu Keilereien. (29, 30)
Ist d. village, or any substantial portion of it, inhabited by Mussulmans,
dann a masjid (mosque) in it; of brick, wenn a member der community
defrays the cost of erecting it, meist of mat and bamboo; the mulla who
officiates there may be a tradesman, or modi, gifted with a smattering of
Arabic sufficient to read the Koran; ist in theory chosen by the mahalla
(Muhammedan quarter), aber praktisch the office hereditary, remunerated
dch small money payments made bei marriages u. other ceremonies. (31)
Patshäla or hedge school; along a village path a group of 10-20 almost
naked children, squatting under a pipal tree, near a homestead, or even
under a thatched verandah dazu gehörig, engaged in marking letters on
a plantain or a palm leaf, or in doing sums on a broken piece of foreign
slate, od. even on the smoothed ground before them - the indigenous
means of educating the rising generation. Instruction here given gratis,
for contrary to an oriental's social and religiousfeelings of propriety that learning
of any sort should be directly paid for; d. teacher an elderly Brahman: Guru
Mahasoy; eigdich sollen nur Brahmanen u. andre twice born classes unter­
richten, thut’s aber faktisch für outside classes für reading u. writing the
vernacular, arithmetic, etc. gelegtlich verbindet ein modi mit seinem shop
auch dies business mit Bezug | auf d. children squatting under the
eaves of his shop hut. - D. instructor erhält bei special events in d. family
v. d. parents of his pupils small presents of rice or däl ( = split pea, or any
other split pulse), or even a piece of cloth; ditto when an urchin achieves a
marked stage in his progress. (3 2,33) A Brahman gets in addition his share
of the gifts to Brahmans, so serious an item of expense in the celebration of
die many festivals obligatory on a well-to-do Bengali. (34)
In parts of Bengal noted for Sanscrit learning, wie Vikrampur u. Nuddea
etwas Aehnliches gleich wie oldfashioned Engl, grammar school some
times met with; a turn of the village path brings you to a ToI; dort in
half open mat shed sit crosslegged on the raised wood floor, dozen Brah­
man youths decently clad, mit Sanscrit manuscripts on their laps, learning
grammar; each remains 2 or 3 or even more years at this monotonous
occupation wie transcribing sacred rolls, until he is able to pass to the
home of deepest learnings Nobodweep. Master of the Tol, a Brahman Pundit
who in obedience to the Hindu principle not only teaches but maintains
his scholars, (34, 35), personally stets poor. (35) Er u. seine disciples
leben v. d. Gaben d. richer Hindus in neighbourhood; whd 2 Monaten
Ferien, besucht er sie der Reihe nach, u. never leaves a roof ohne Honorar
von i Rupee, 2, selbst 20 je nach wealth of his host. (35, 36)
One or more specimens of the Byragi and his female companion - coarse
licensed beggars of a religious ascetic order, (aber meist lose Vögel) in
d. meisten villages; in seiner homestead - one of the huts, thakurbdri of
Krishna (incarnation of Vishnu) wo d. members of the very numerous sect
of Boistubs od. Vaisnabas (Vishnubites) on certain festivals lay their
offerings. The Byragiist der minister einer der sects which owe their origin
to the great reformer Chaitanya about 300 years since. (36, 37)
The homestead of the godla, or cowman, wovon several in a village, wie die
seiner neighbours, ist cultivator wie most of them. Meist the cowshed
actually brought up to the uthän and fill(s) one of the sides. D. cows being
litde animals often not more than 3 feet high u. miserably thin are kept
tethered close, side by side of each other in the open shed, there fed with
dried grass, wetted straw, ausser when under the care of a boy they can on
the waste places abt the village, and on the fallow khäts pick up what they
find. A ll Hindus, if they can afford it, consume milk; after rice and pulse
(däl bhät) it the staple food of the people; keine Butter noch Käse; der godla
verkauft nicht nur Milch in raw state, sondern compounds auch d. various
preparations of it, thickened; eine davon, dahi gleich a mass of thick
clotted cream with all the fluid portion omitted is daily hawked about
from homestead to homestead by the goälas in earthen gharas, carried
scale fashion, or bahangi (a bamboo furnished with cords at each end, by
means of which luggage is carried slung across the shoulder), suspended
von d. 2 extremities of a bamboo across the shoulder. (38, 39)
Blacksmith's shop: a thatched shed, with old iron and new of small dimen­
sions lying about in confusion. Im centre des mud floor is a very small
anvil, close to the fireplace, welcher a hole sunk in the ground. The no^le of
the very primitive bellows is also let into the ground. The headsmith,
sitting on a low stool or on his heels, works the bellows by pulling a
string with one hand while with a tongs in the other he manipulates the
iron in the fire, and then, still keeping his seat, turns to the anvil with a
small hammer in his right hand; he performs the guiding part in fash­
ioning the metal, and an assistant also squatting on his heels follows his
lead with a larger hammer. The hammer heads are long, on one side only
of the haft, and unbalanced by any make-weight, and the anvil is ex­
ceedingly narrow; yet the blows struck by both workmen with unerring
precision. The villagers brauchen nur wenig in the shape of iron work; a few
nails, the toes of the ploughs, cultivating hoes (kudalis), billhook or cleaver
(dao)y the bonti (a broad sickle-shaped knife blade, fixed vertically into a
heavy wooden stand. In use, the stand is held firm by the feet, and the fish,
vegetable, straw or other article to be cleaned, sliced, or cut up, is with
the hand duly worked against the concave cutting edge thus made fast.) of
domestic and other use (fixed curved blade); all diese articles made or
repaired by the village blacksmith. His stock of iron is mainly English |
133 ~Thoop iron bought at the nearest town by him (or for him) which has come
out to India in the shape of bands round the imported piece good bales. (39-41)
“ Professionals” im village: not seldom the kabiraf or native doctor (of the
Vaidya caste), trägt seine Pillen in paper packets in a tolerably large bundle
(cover with (in) cover) in the end of his chadr od. chadra (a sheet or cloth) mit
sich herum; many of his pills, compounded after receipts of antiquity,
excellent specifics; der kabiraj macht vorher in jedem einzelnen Fall
bargain, z.B. Re i od. 2 f. d. ordinary medicine mit 2 or 3 visits in an
obstinate case of malarious fever. (41, 42)
Astrologer, fst in jedem principal village; ist an Acharjee (Lugu Acharjee),
but of a somewhat low class of Brahman, whose business is to paint
the thakurs (idols) u. d. various traditional representations der deities;
to prepare horoscopes etc. Andre paint pictures in water colours for
decorative use bei great ceremonies performed by the richer families;
keine Perspective, aber outline in colour well depicted on the flat; many8 of
these men work together on a given subject for monthly pay of Rs 20-30;
meist aber each prepares his pictures at leisure in his own home u. presents
them when finished to some rich person, wfür er meist ample remunera­
tion erhält. (42, 43)
Gottesworship bei d. Mahommedanern congregational u. personal; the masjid,
public preaching, united prayer u. adoration offered by individuals col­
lected in congregations d. characteristic features. (43)
Bei d. Hindus der Cultus domestic u. vicarious; the family idol, daily service
in worship des idol performed by a priest for the family, and the periodic
celebration of ceremonies in honour of that manifestation of the deity which
the family adopt, wie for the deceased ancestors' souls, die principal ingre­
dients. Unter d. wealthy Hindus the hereditary spiritualguide, the hereditary
Purchit (family priest) and the service of the jewelled thakur form the
keystone of thejoint family structure, u. d. poor folks of a country village
dasselbe in ärmlicher Form. Jeder respectable household that can afford
the small expense has a rude thakur, or image of its patron deity placed in a
separate hut of the homestead u. a Brahman comes daily to perform its
worship u. service; d. village purohits - belonging to a lower caste of imperfecdy educated Brahmans - an extremely ignorant set of men. In
some districts mosdy foreign to the village, coming there from a distance,
residing in it for a few years, then return home for an interval, providing
a substitute or vicar whd ihrer period of absence; erhalten remuneration
in the shape of offerings u. small fees, haben pretty good livelihood
by serving several families at a time. Wie d. andren Brahmanen they
come in for a share of the gifts distributed by wealthy men bei family
ceremonies u. festivals. Grossentheils purohit erblich, stets so bei families
of social distinction; diese haben mehre spiritual guides exclusively for
themselves; the guru (spiritual instructor of the individual who gives
him the mantra — a passage from the Veda, a prayer), d. higher class purohit
who is a(ri) Acharjee u. conducts the periodic puja (Poojah = worship)
festivals of the family in addition to the ordinary purohit who performs
the daily service of the thakur. (44-46)
The mass of the ryots who form the population of the village too poor to
have a family deity, müssen sich begnügen part der audience zu bilden bei
religious festivals celebrated by their richer neighbours, u. den annual
pujas performed at the village mandap (an open sided roofed structure or building)
on behalf of the community. (46)
Mandal - the village headman; the chaukidar - the village watchman, or
constable; the barber u. the washerman auch noch wichtige Personages,
ebenso carpenterspotter, weaver, fisherman;jalhar-wala - one who has a right
134 of fishing; pitch-worker, etc. |
Zeminder and Mahajan
The wooded dwelling area (des village) is skirted by waste or common land
of very irregular breadth u. beyond this again comes the cultivated land of
the open plain (math). Up to a certain line - of immemorial origin but
ordinarily well ascertained - all the land both waste u. cultivated, reckoned
outwards from the village, belongs to the village (als possession); on the
other side of the line begins another community land. In Theilen von Bengal
wo portions der country in a state of nature the limits des village territory
includejungle u. sonst unappropriated land. (48, 49)
The village and its land als Ganzes heissen a mau^ah. (49) Dies land des
mau%ah cultivated in smallpatches by the resident ryots on payments of dues,
~ r according to the nature of the soil, and the purpose of the cultivation, to the
I Zemindar; they are most commonly variable and capable of adjustment
from time to time zwischen Zemindar u. Ryot. (50) (they) are classified
mit extreme minuteness according to characters attached to the land by custom,
not all concrete. (51)
Salt - land wholly submerged whd period of rains - of different grades; Sunay
not submerged, also of different grades;
Nadki, land for which rent is paid in cash per bigah;
Bhaoli, land for which rentpaid in kindpart of theproduce; - ebenso Bhaoli:
land for which rent is paid in cash per crop per bigah.
Bhiti - raised house-site9 land. (51)
Khudkashty lands which the residents of the village are entitled to cultivate.
Pahikasht - land which outsiders may cultivate. (52)
Diese characters adhere almostpermanently to the same land; for each village a
recognised rate of rent (nirkh) properly payable according to them. When
the occupation, wie meist der Fall mit Sunaland, on an utbandi jama (rent
according to the land actually tilled, when land tilled oneyear is allowed to lie
fallow t(he) next) u. d. cultivation is by alternation of cropping u. fallow,
Zahlt d. Ryot nur so viel vonjeder Sorte of lands as he actually tills. In most
villages by far the larger portion of land is Khudkasht. (52)
Also the open lands der village divided up among the resident ryots in
small allotments, oft consisting of several scattered pieces, generally com2 53
prehending land of various qualities - rarely über 10 acres in Total u. oft viel
weniger, ... Zahlung d. Rente dch each ryot to Zemindar nach shifting scale,
depending upon more or less of the elements mentioned. (53)
Abbreviated example of theyear's account zwischen ryot u. i^emindar
Description of land
Sali, rice land, first quality
Big. Cot
2 1 0 0
Dtto -
second qual.
Dtto -
third qual.
0 7 J 0
of Rent
Rs As
4 0 0
0 1 3
0 2 1 5
1 5 0 0
1 5 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1 2 0
o (285)
In extenso füllt diese Geschichte (285, 286) 40 u. oft mehr Parallele
Columns, mit column for arrears etc. (286) Matter of fact that the Bengal
ryot little disposed to move u. for generation after generation, from father
to son, the same plots of land, or approximatively so, remain in the hands of
the samefamily. (53)
The Zemindari is an aggregate of many entire mau^ahs. (54)
D. jährliche Rente meist gezahlt in 3 or 4 kists (instalments) d. collection
13 5 j dieser Rents nur | ausführbar dch an organised staff\ commonly called, both
individually and collectively, the zemindar’s, or
amla; besteht
gewöhnlich aus: einem Tehsildar {collector of the rents; if the Zamindari large,
one Tehsildar collects für je 3 or 4 mauzahs.)
In jedem village od. Mau%ah a Tehsildar’s kachari [(auch called “ Cutchary” )
nämlich a court or office ,where public business, or the business of a zemin­
dar’s estate (wie hier), is done]; dort the zamindari books and papers
relative to the village collection made up and kept. Bookkeeping von
Hindus carried to an almost absurd extent of detail; would be tedious to
describe all the books kept in due course of the kachahri business; theprincipal
of them are : 3 or 4 books genannt Chittha (Memorandum - name of a business
book used in the management of a Zamindar’s property, in which
measurements and other like information are entered); dies ist in fact a
numbered register in various ways and in minute detail of all the small
dags or plots into which the village lands are divided, the measurement of each,
its situation, the quality of the land, the ryot who cultivates it, etc, the last of
them being the khatiyan (an account book of the nature of a ledger), or
ledger, which gives under each man's name all the different portions of land
held by him, with their respective characteristics. The jama bändig a sort
of assessment paper made up for each year, with the view of showing for
every ryot, as against each portion of the land held by him, the rate at
which it is held, according to quality or crop, and also to exhibiting the
total amount which in this way becomes due from him, and the Jkists in
which it is to be paid; and the jama-wasil-baki (resuming the principal
statements of the jama bandi - an account paper showing simultaneously
the full rent, the amount collected, and the amount of arrears, in respect
of an estate, village, or district. A Bengali account book is formed by
sewing together with a cord any number of very long narrow loose sheets
at one of their ends, and when it is closed the free ends of the sheets are
folded back upon the ends which are thus bound. (//-/7)
The Gumashta (Gomashta) [generally agents one who carries on business
for another] u. Patwar: [one who keeps the collection papers of a mau^ah,
and commonly also makes the collections of the village), or similar offices,
whatever their different names in different districts, are charged with
keeping up the kachahri-books according to the varying circumstances of
the ryots’ holdings; haben daher d. ganze Jahr dch (als spies des Zemin­
dar !) a sharp eye upon the ryots’ doings. As a rule diese Burschen selbst
belong to the class of village ryots u. sind selbst cultivators. Findet
sich hence that the plots in their hands are the best in the village; ihr “proper
work” verhindert sie selbst to cultivate u. they are “ supposed” to pay other
ryots tilling the soil for them; sie mogeln meist dass dies gratis geschieht;
erschleichen u. erpressen sich auch “ the offer of gratifications” . In so
weit dies office hereditary, dass generally the son succeeds the father; aber
das meist nothwendig, weil selten mehr als i od 2 andre unter d. villagers
das für dies Geschäft nöthige Quantum v. Lesen u. Schreiben besitzen.
( 57- 59)
D. Zamindar ist d. “ superior lord” der ryots (“ subjects” ) both by habit
and feeling glebae adscripti; seine Authorität u. die seines amla in Zaum
gehalten dch den mandal (gewöhnlichste Bezeichnung, wechselt aber mit
District), the village headman, mouthpiece u. representative der ryots des
village in all matters between them and the zemindar or his officers.
D. Mandal cultivator wie d. übrigen ryots, keineswegs d. reichste unter ihnen;
sein office10 in theory wählbar, in fact fst invariably von father to son u. so
hereditary aus selbem Grund dass alle occupations u. employments in India
hereditary. Er muss hinreichend lesen u. schreiben u. d. Zamindari
accounts verstehen können u. Bekannt sein mit d. customary rights der
villagers; erhielt nicht directes emolument, aber d. ryots helfen ihm von
Zeit zu Zeit gratuitously in his cultivation, zahlt oft auch geringere Rent
als d. ändern ryots. Der mandal u. a few of the elder men constitute the
village panchayat, by whom the most ordinary disputes u. quarrels are
adjusted. [Er erklärt Panchayat a body of five caste men, villagers or others,
who deal (with) and settle disputes relating to caste, occupation etc.]
In more obstinate cases the mandal and the parties go to the zemindar or
his representative the naib [Deputy or representative - the head officer or
steward representing the zemindar in the management of large zemin136 daries] or gumashta, for discussion and | arbitration.11 So ohne d. theuren
public courts viel Justizadministration in d. rural districts of Bengal
abgemacht. (59-61) Residirt der Zemindar im Dorf, so oft d. barber who
shaves the members of his family, the dhobi who washes for them, the
head darwan (porter) and other principal servants - sind hereditary, haben
portion of village land zu relative (ly) low rent or rent free. Der dhobi u.
barber have the right to be employed at customary rates of pay by all the
ryots; oft carpenter u. blacksmith in gleicher Lage; d. hereditary watchman
(chaukidar) erhält sein Land rentfree; ebenso Brahman priest, whether of
the Zemindar’s family, or maintained for the village pujas etc. (61, 62)
(Dieser Esel Phear nennt d. Constitution d. village feudal). Ausserhalb
dieser Village Constitution d. Mahajan, der village capitalist. D. village ryot
muss periodisch Geld auslegen; z.B. a Hütte des homestead neu zu bauen
or to repair, Pflug od. anderes Instrument zu machen, Paar bullocks zu
kaufen, Saat für Aussaat nöthig, endlich Reis für sich u. Familie, several
kists of his rent to bepaid before all his crops can be secured and realised. Im
western part des Delta reichen seine savings selten hin to tide him aus
über die Periode die verfliessen muss bevor seinejährliche Produktion einkommt.
Muss also zum Mahäjan gehn for money and for paddy as he wants them.
Gewöhnlichste Transactionsweise zwischen beiden Seiten: d. paddy for
sowing andforfood u. auch andre Saamen, wd geliefert unter Bedingung dass
er sie returnirt + ;o % in quantity ^ur Herbstungs^eit; Geld andrerseits to be
repaid, auch at harvest time, mit 2% per Monat Zins entweder in Form von
Equivalent of Paddy, reckoned at Bazaar prices, or in cash at the option of the
lender. Als security für Execution dieses Uebereinkommens nimmt der
Mahäjan häufig hypotheke auf des ryot's future crop u. er hilft sich selbst to
the stipulated amount on the very threshingfloor, in the openfield. (63, 64)
D. Zemindar - dieser falsche engl, landlord - merely a rent-charger; d. ryot
a field-labourer, living from hand to mouth; d. mahäjan, der d. farming
Capital liefert, d. Arbeit %ahlt u. alien Profit einsteckt, ist ein stranger, having
no proprietary interest in the land; a creditor only, whose sole object is to
realise his money as advantageously as possible. After setting aside in
his golas (gola = a hut, meist circular in form, in which grain is stored) as
much of the produce come to his hands, as he is likely to needfor his next
year's business, he deals12 with the rest simply als cornfactory sending it to the
most remunerative market. A thriving mahäjan may have a whole mau%ah
or more under his hand - and yet he has no legitimate proprietary status in the
community, while those who have - the ryot ... and the %emindar
different reasons are apparently powerless. (64-65) Hence, d. unprogressive
xx) character of an agricultural village, so beschrieben by a young zemindar,
Bobu Peary Chund Mookerjee, Beng. Soc. Sei. Trans., v. I V , jw.
“ A husbandman of the present day is the primitive being he always (!) has
been. With a piece of rag round his loins for his clothing, bare feet, a
miserable hut to live in, and a daily fare of the coarsest description, he
lives a life unruffled by ambition. If he gets his two meals and plain
clothing he is content with his lot, and if he can spare a few rupees for
purchasing jewellery for his wife and children, and a few rupees more for
religious ceremonies, he will consider himself as happy as he can wish
to be. He is thegreatest enemy of social reform [? wäre nicht enemy of getting
himself the rent to pay to Zemindarees, old or young!]13, and never
dreams of throwing off the trammels which time or superstition has
spun around him. He will not send his son to school for fear [and a very
just one, too!] of being deprived of his manual assistance in the field;
he will not drink the water of a good tank because he has been accustomed
to use the water of the one14 nearer to his house; he will not sow a crop
of potatoes or sugar-cane because his forefathers never did it; he will
x) allow himself to be unmercifully fleeced by his hereditary priest to secure the hope
of utter annihilation after death__ The ryots too poor (!), too ignorant, too
disunited among themselves to effect... improvement.” (65-67)
Domestic Life
Wealthy enterprising %amindars sehr selten im Mofussil [or Mafassal = the
country as opposed to the town; the subordinate as opposed to the principal].
137 The Hindu | gentleman of the Bengali village, the landedproprietor of the
locality, had income von Rs 100 to Rs 200 per Jahr höchstens; nicht immer
a pakka house; his property is probably a share of the village, or of several
villages together, held on some tenure; his net income = d. remainder of the
collections he has madefrom the ryots after he haspaid thejama [od.jamma = the
aggregate of payments made for land in the year - the total rent\ of his
tenure to his superior or to the Government, as the case may be. (68, 69)
Bhadralog,, respectable well to do people, who are not Brahmans;
Andar mahäl [D. Wort Mahalla = a division of a town, a quarter], the
portion of the house or homestead allotted to the female members of the
family, which strangers and non-privileged males are not allowed to enter.
Ashan = a square piece of carpet; thdla metal plate or dish;pan = a betel
leaf. Tiffin = a refreshment; bau = young married girl; hart = a dwelling
house, homestead.
Universal habit in Bengal prevalent in all classesfor the members of afamily to
livejoint and to enjoy theprofits ofpropertyjointly. Z.B. in Ryofsfamily: nach
Tod d. Vaters, seine Söhne, früher dependent members of the family
living in the same homestead and assisting the father in the cultivation
of his jot ( = jote = both the land which the cultivator tills, and his tenure
of it), continue in same homestead, cultivating the same jot, but now as
owners. Manchmal tragen sie ihre Namen collectively ein statt dessen
d. Vaters in d. book of the zamindar’s kacbahri; manchmal the dead man’s
name remains there unaltered. Jeder brother, with his wife and children, if
possible, occupies a separate hut in the homestead, u. so oft nöthig für dies
purpose, an additional hut added to the group. (76, 77) D. brothers by law
entitled to equal shares of inheritance in the whole of any heritable property they
have thus taken in common, and each has a right at any time to compel a
~T~partition. Stirbt einer d. Brüder, his sons, wenn er keine hat, his widow, step
' into his place and represent him in all respect(s). (77) Generation auf
generation ftghnd würde dies a complex distribution of undivided shares
hervorbringen; aber bei ryots kommt’s rasch zu End, the smallness of
the original subject rendering the aliquot parts insignificant. Eh es so
weit, d .jüngeren members der family give up or sell their shares to the others
u. suchen sich andere Beschäftigung. Ist d. jot inheritable in its nature,
so d. joindy living members of family actually divide the land unter einander
--according to their shares and cultivate separately. So d. Land in some villages
subdivided into absurdly small plots u. this evil has a natural tendency to
increase. (78)
In wohlhabenden Familien mit bedeutenden Besitzgen, sei es in Handel od.
in Zamindaries u. other landed tenures, the state of “jointhood” dauert
gewöhnlich lang. The whole property managed by one member of the
family called the “ karta,” meist d. älteste Individuum der ältesten Branche;
theoretisch responsible to the entire body of joint co-sharers, jeder von
denen kann einsehn d. family books of accounts u. papers regularly kept
in a sort of office (daftarkhana) by the family servants; selten jedoch one
interferes, bis quarrel, dann fought out mit acrimony, partition effected,
and accounts insisted upon. As a rule the co-sharers content to be sup­
ported in the family house, out of the family funds, each getting, as he
wants, sufficient small sums of money for ordinary personal expenses.
Das money saved nach disbursement of the general family u. proprietary
expenses, is invested by the karta in the purchase of some addition to the
joint property; d. Geld required for extraordinary family ceremonies or
religious performances commonly raisd dch d. karta in the form of a
loan charged on the common property. (78-80) Dies domestic community
oft sehr numerous; erstens d. co-sharers, Brüder, Neffen u. male cousins
deren fathers’ shares have devolved upon them u. d. widows or daughters of
co-sharers, verstorben ohne Söhne oder Enkel; zweitens: the mixed dass
of dependent members - wives and children of existing co-sharers, wives
and daughters of former co-sharers (whose shares went to sons') and individ­
uals labouring under any infirmity disqualifying them from inheriting. In
Calcutta u. selbst im Mofussil Beispiele von familien v. 300-400 Individuen,
incl. servants, living in one house. Meist zählt d. family 50-100. (80, 81) |
138 Deorhi [entspricht der French conciergerie; nämlich in entrance passage of
old family houses, oft auf beiden Seiten a raised floor mit 1 od. 2 open
cells worin d. darwans (door keepers) sit, lie u. sleep, in fact dwell.]
Puja dalan: die verandah, deren chief purpose to serve as a stage for the
performance of religious and domestic ceremonies.
Shamiana. (Tent ca(ri)vas stretched horizontally across, as a covering from
side to side of a quadrangle, or from top to top of poles, firmly fixed in
the ground-awning.
Thakurbäriy chamber where the figure of the family deity (thakur) resides
u. where its daily service u. worship is performed. Weiber dürfen nicht
selbst worship the family idol or any visible thakur, ausser der clay figure
of Siwa made for every day worship. The Shastras forbid to women and
Sudras all knowledge and use of sacred texts.
Hat d. Familie 3 or 4 generations removed von d. common ancestor
erreicht, so there several heads of branches; diese branches settle themselves by
stirpes, in separate parts of the house under their own heads; manchmal
d. Separation so complete that the portion of the house allotted to each
branch is parted off from the remainder of the house by blocking up of
doors, and by the opening of a separate entrance. Each group as a rule
messes by itself, and every adult member of it has a room to himself in
which he lives, all the female members together in the inner apartments,
commonly called among Europeans the Zenana. All the branches usually
keepjoint with regard to the worship of thefamily deity. Und selbst when the
branches sever in everything - i.e. in foodt worship, and estate - the samefamily
deity is commonly retained by all, and the worship conducted by the different
branches in turn, each turn proportionate in duration to the owners' share in the
joint property. Z.B. if family in its divided state is represented by 4 heads,
2 brothers, and their 2 nephews, sons of a 3d brother deceased, the turn or
pallas of worship would be respectively 4 months, 2 months and15 2 months
or equimultiples of these. (85, 86)
Nur in Calcutta u. ändern sehr large towns the family swarm continues in
the family hive at such dimensions. Aber in country villages, wo d. Zamindar’s family sich maintained for many generations, much about the
same thing occurs. (86)
Maidany an open grass-covered space; mandir a temple; mandap an open
sided roofed structure, or building. Majlis an assembly.18 Mohan the
superior of a math (an endowed temple or shrine; math dag(e)gen the
open arable plain, forming the cultivated land of a village.) Gaddi, a seat.
Grave and Gay.
Inordinate love of spectacles. (89) Drinking to a considerable extent. “ In a
portion of the Veds the delights of intoxication are dwelt upon, and some
of the tantric writings devoted to the encouragement of drink.... tari
spirit made from many sorts of saccharine juices, especially the juice of the
tari palm, is made largely in every village by crude native methods, is
evidently of purely home origin. (90)
Bengali of all ranks like gambling; cards u dice the common form prevailing
with the middle classes. (91)
2 59
In Bengal 2 distinct sects unter the Muhammedans, Sunis u. Shias; both a good
deal given to observances u. practices of Hinduism; the Bengali Musulmdn
is nothing but a roughly converted Hindu. In d. besten u. fruchtbarsten
Theilen des Delta d. mohammedan. Element über 60% d. Bevölkerg,, im rest
of Bengal Proper ist es 30-40%; in einigen districts d. villages ganz
muhammed. od. ganz Hindu, aber more commonly hat jedes village sein
Mahommed. Quarter u. sein Hindu quarter (91, 92)
Viele sects auch unter d. Hindus (92) pretty universally in the rural villages
Boistobs (mit immense number of varieties u. subdivisions), Saktas, Sivas,
Ganapatyas etc. (93) D. chief development d. Boistobs - deren Vishnu ist
the Brahma (Krishna eine seiner incarnations) originated mit Chaitanya,
who preached purity, meditation, and the equality of all men, without dis­
tinction of sect or caste, before God. And a certain freedom from caste
trammels, and disregard of religious observances, with an appreciation of
the importance of conduct, still seem to characterise the sect. The Boi­
stobs have been, and even now are being, recruitedfrom all castes, but taken
together in all their varieties ... are commonly reckoned as a sort of caste by
themselves. (94)
D. Saktas vielleicht d. majority der village inhabitants; jetzt a great deal
united with the Saivas, die upon Siva (the Destroyer) look as the primary
and more exalted form of Brahma u. d Saktas speciell verehren d. divine
nature in its activity, the female forms of the supreme deity, as Durga od.
139 Kali. D. Sivaite u. Sakta worship | in a marked degree a worship of
dogma, gorgeous ceremony u. bloody sacrifices etc. D. Boistobs den
Saktas gegenüber “ Protestanten” . (94, 95)
D. monastic order is celibate u. in great degree erratic od. mendicant,
hat aber anchorage places u. headquarters in the maths (Ursprünglich
Bedeutung von math scheint Cell oder Chamber wie von Eremit);
heutzutag typisch math ist an endowed temple or shrine mit a dwelling place
for a superior (the Mohant) u. his disciples (Chelas); d. endowment d.
math entweder result of a private dedication, oder aber of a grant by an
a<l)ready existing wealthy math, gegen die es in gewisser17 Art subordi­
nate bleibt etc. (y 6-100)
In einzelnen Fällen the Mohants either by decline from the strict path of
sanctity originally marked out for them, or even in prosecution of the
founder's purpose [für d. Stiftung, nicht für d. einzelnen Mönche], make
the acquirement of wealth by trade their great object. Sehr vielte) instances
davon in the northwestern-part der Bengal presidency, wo numerous trader
Mohants of great wealth and influence to befound, (p. 97)
A shrine (dargah) of some holy Mohammedan fakir oft to be met with on
the wayside, with the hut or homestead of its keeper near at hand. Passersby
of all creeds and denominations throw in their cowries and pice. (101)
_____ In a large village will be a mandap, i.e. a spacious open-sided covered-in room,
wo d. village puja festivals celebrated u. other village gatherings (as in a
vestry room) occur; manchmal ist’s pakka struct(u)re, meist of bamboo u.
thatch; ist usually kept up by the Zamindar. (I.e.)
Rural crime. Dakait: [.Dakait one of a gang of robbers] or gang robbery
(anglice: dacoity.) (badmashes = the bad characters of a village; pitara: a
wicker work or other slightly-constructed box of peculiar shape] (p. 102105) Verfahren (charakteristisch!) d. Polizei (105-107) D. Gericht (1081 10) Mookhtar = law agent.
Mord for vindicatingfamily honour (relates to womankind), ( m - 115 )
Purely agrarian outrage more common than any other. “ A strong sense of
vested right unprotected by the arm of the law leads in India as elsewhere to
the endeavour at vindicating it by violence.” (115) Krakehle (blutige)
unter d. Ryots selbst. (115-118 ) Affray of the Zamindar'speople on d. Mandal
(headman of the village) a mau%ah had been sold in execution of a decree,
a stranger had purchased it; Zamindar takes measures for enhancing
the rents of his ryots; war successful at obtaining kabulyats \kabulyat = the
counterpart of a pottah or lease, nämlich given by the tenant to his landlord] at
increased rates from several ryots, aber der mandald. village, dessen example
most influential, sturdily held out and led the opposition. Gegen ihn
schickt d. Zamindar seine retainers, with the view of capturing him and
__carrying him off. (p. 118, 119) Endet mit Mord v. ein paar Leute, aber
Mandal Sieger, (p. 119, 120) Andrer case wo d. Ryots gegen d. Mandal
weil er zu sehr die Seite d. Zamindar in certain matters nehme; the­
refore resolved in “ committee” that he should be punished and warned,
lassen ihn dch einige “ charged” damit dch prügeln, (wobei er t) (120,
Faction fight zwischen d. Ryots verschiedner tenure-holders (p. 12 1, 123)
(T odtschlägerei).
Jangal (Jungle = a wood, any tract, large or small, wo d. natural growth
of trees, bushes, and vegetation undisturbed.
Bhat = boiled rice; bigha, a land measure, in Bengal = about 1/3 acre;
Arhar = kind of pulse (cytisus cajan) grown for food.
Administration and Landlord, (dies der letzte Abschnitt (VI) dieses Buchs
der schon vorher in Calcutta Review gedrückt.)
A Zillah district in India, fälschlich compared to an Engl, county, umfasst
area von 2-3000 □ m. u. has population von (1 to) 2 millions, f. i.,whd
Co. of Suffolk, z.B., hat nur area v. 1,414 □ m. w. population of some 360,000.
Alle European officers of a Zillah höchstens a do%en [wovon 1/2 about kept
by their duties at the Zillah station], viz. 1 magistrate and collector18 mit
3 od. 4 joint, assistant u. deputy magistrates, 1 district and sessionsjudge, 1 small
court, or subordinate judge, 1 superintendent ofpolice, 1 assistant superintendent
of police u. i medical officer. (125)
[Selten “ has one of them a real command of the vernacular language.”
No tax gatherers in India (save those recently introduced mit d. imposition
of a license tax); all taxes sind land revenue, stamps (needed for every pro­
ceeding in a court of justice or public office or copy of any paper filed in
a court or office or document of agreement or receipt etc), Customs u.
excise (d. tari u. Sal% für Ryot vertheuert). Kürzlich Steuervermehrung dch
imposition of a road cess, a small rateable addition to the rent of each ryot,
which he pays to his rentreceiver, dieser an Government. (128, 129)
A portion of the rent, every cultivator of the soil pays for his plot, goes to
Government as land revenue; es bezieht about 2o1/2 Millions £ St p. annum
140I in the shape of land revenue. (133) | Vor d. Bengal setdement of 1793
d. Zemindar bekanntlich nur Steuercollector, nicht landlord. Bursche
Phear says: “ The area of his Zamindari covered large districts of country,
and was reckoned not by bighas but in communities of men - mau^ahs” . Seine
“ money proceeds” wden nicht “ spoken of as rent, sondern als jamas
(collections) of the included villages; seine assets were “ made up of the
_jamas of the sub-tenures, and the collections of the villages.” (135) The
zamindar’s village kachahri (schon vor d. Engländern) was an office in
each mau%ah, with a headman, an accountant, and a field officer. (Hatten d.
früher beschriebnen duties d. jetzigen Collectors etc. des Zemindar).
D. kachahris von je 5 or 6 mauzahs, je nach deren size, were supervised
by a superior officer, say a Tehsildar, who had his own kachahriy with its
books u. papers, either duplicates of, or made up from those of, the
mau^ah kachahris. D. collections effected by the officers of the village
kachahri were handed over to him, and he passed them to a next high
officer. So the money arrived at last at the Zamindar’s own kachahri; out of
them he paid the Gvt revenue due from his Zemindari, and kept the rest
for himself. (13 8) Each middleman was so the apex and head of a struc­
ture precisely like the principal structure in form and constitution, nur
mit a smaller basis. A slightly disturbing force might serve to detach it
and leave it standing by itself, or to put it into an appendant condition.
(139) (See also: Hunter'. “ Orissa” ) Lang vor d. Engländern the original sim­
plicity of the zemindari system lost; there were Zemindaris u. taluqs of
several orders and designations paying revenue directly to Gvt; innerhalb
derselben wieder subordinate taluqs u. tenures converted from the con­
dition of being parts of a homogeneous collecting machine into semi­
independence, u. zahlend in that character a recognised jama directly to
the superior kachahri statt to send on to it in ordinary course their respective
collections. (141)
(By u. by) jeder subordinate jama-paying “ mahal” or tenure wde bald a
miniature %amindari, worin gewissejamas were taken in lieu of collections,
and the remaining collections were made by the old machinery. Waste
Landgrants or conversions were also the origin of taluqs, both dependent and
independent, and so, too, jaghir grants for services. (141, 142)
Innerhalb d. village selbst - mit Bezug auf d. occupation of land - an
analogous process came into operation. The principal persons of the
zemindari amla and the headmen of the ryots (mandals), or others of influence,
and privileged persons such as Brahmans, often got recognized as holding
uponfixed andfavourable terms larger portions of the village lands than they could
or did cultivate. These
they sublet, wholly or in part, and so arose
varieties of “jots” u. ryottee tenures. (142) Vor d. legislation of 1793 d.
middle tenures, wie sie damals existed, depended for their maintenance
upon usage and the personal power and influence of the holder. The ryottee
tenures u. jots ditto regulated by usage, the arbitrament of the village
panchayat u. the Zamindari amla; alles customary, involving nothing of
__personal proprietary right. (142, 143) D. Verwandlung - dch d. English
rogues and asses - der Zemindaris in private proprietors machte eo ipso
(wenn auch nicht in Idee jener asses) all intermediate interests zu rights in
land, u. the owner of any such interest could encumber the land or
alienate it within the limit of the right; seine ownership selbst konnte
wieder d. complex Hindu joint-parcenary form annehmen. (147, 148)
A middle tenure or interest below the revenue paying Zamindar is
essentially the right, on payment of the properjama to a superior holder,
to make collections from the cultivators of land and to take thejamas from
subordinate holders within a specified area. (148) The middle tenure of
every degree is thus in a great measure an account book matter, and is very
completely represented by thejamabandi paper. Will the owner of such a
property benefit a child or a family connection, so kann er es thun by
making him a mokarari (that which is fixed or established - permanent)
grant, in some form, of a portion of his collections. (149) Allzumeist the
tenure of the grantor himself amounts only to a right to afractional share of
the rents, etc, and then his grant [made to child etc] will pass a fraction of
afraction. (149-150) Such a tenure holder mag auch make a grant dieser Art
to a stranger in consideration of a bonus or premium. Er mag’s auch thun um
to ensure to himself, in the shape of the rent reserved on the subject ofgrant, the
regular receipt of money wherewith to pay his own jama. Oder er mag, by
way of affording security for the repayment of a loan of money made to him,
temporarily assign to the lender unde(r) a %ar-i-peshgi ticca his tenure right of
making collections. In these or similar modes, the Bengali tenure-holder,
141 proprietor, %emindar, | u. whatever else the name, is obliged to deal with
his interest where he wants to raise money, or to confer a benefit; veräussert er
also nicht ganz u. gar the entirety of his interest, wozu er nur selten
Zuflucht nimmt, wenn er es vermeiden kann - so klar that in each instance
he creates a fresh set of proprietary rights. (150)
Was ferner a middle tenure or right of land als Gegenstand ofjoint ownership
angeht, so z.B. eine gan^e share of a village (oder of any number of villages)
sei = 16 annas ( = 1 Re); nun habe einer a fractional share, say a ^1/2 annas
share; dies kann statt haben in } od. 4 verschiednen Formen. Es kann be­
deuten, 1): the tenure holder has a mokarari (permanent) right to the rents
and dues arising out of a specified portion of the area of the village which is
separated from the rest by metes and bounds, and bears to the entirety the
proportion of ^1/2: 16. Oder: 2) in certain parts of the area covered by the
grant he has a sole right to the rents, and in other parts to afractional portion
only, so arranged that in the whole he gets 91/2 out of 16 annas of the entire
profits of the area, etc. Meist incidental to his right, dass er das ihm zu­
ständige can collect by his own officers at his own kachahri; vielleicht hat er
aber auch nur d. Recht to draw hisfractional share of the net collections made
2X2ijoint-kachahrib&\ong\.ngyso to speak, to several share-holders. (15 1,15 2 )
Aber der owner dieser mokarari tenure of ^x/2 annas of property usually a
joint-family, or a group of persons representing an original joint-family;
alle Glieder solcher Gruppe haben jedes seine eigne share in the tenure, which,
although existing in a state undivided from the rest, is capable of being
assigned to a purchaser separately from them. Ausserdem, very often,
each member of the group can, as between himself and his shareholders,
insist upon having an actual partition of the subject of tenure. Sobald dies
gesichehen wird er by himself separately entided to a fraction z.B. der 91/2
anna tenure; sage zu 1/6 derselben; dann seine besondere share of the rents
andprofits accruingfrom the area covered by the tenure, subject of course to the
payment of the superior rent or jama, is 1/6 of 91/2 annas = 1 anna 7 pie.
So d. mau^ah selbst, the unit in terms of which the zamwda™ caculated,
comes to be divided into small portions; u. der rent receiver who stands to
a particular ryot in the position of %amindar kann sein u. ist oft a very small
man indeed. Z.B. der ryot may have to pay the whole of his rent to the
patwari of the / anna 7 pie shareholder, or to pay 1 anna 7 pie out of 16 annas
of his rent to him, and the remainder to the other shareholders separately,
or in groups; or he may have to pay the entirety of his rent to the jointkachahri from which each shareholder will get his share on division. (153,
* 54)
This system of sub-infeudation and subdivision of joint-interests,
accompanied by severalty of right, prevails universally throughout Bengal. (154)
Daher beispiellose complexity of landed interests u. keiner hat ein
Interesse improvements d. land zu machen. (I.e.) Unter diesem System
d. locally resident zamindars generally small shareholders of subordinate
tenures, deren means nicht greatly superior to those of the well-to-do
ryots. (155)
Die lands of a village broadly unterscheidbar in 2 sets: the ryottee lands (the
bulk of the village area, the village lands) einerseits, u. andrerseits the
Zamindar’s [in letzter instance der dem government revenue-paying
Zamindar] Land, %iraat, khamar, nijjot, or sir-lands (auch noch andre terms
dafür). (155, 156) In Bengal heisst d. erstere Land meist the ryot’s “jot” .
(156) Wenn dieser wieder sub-lets, so his lessee derives everything from
him and goes out of possession with him whenever he goes, erhält also
nur a sub-tenure properly so called. (157) By legislative enactment, actual
occupation of the same land for a period of 12 years confers upon the ryot
(if he has it not otherwise, by custom etc) a personal right of occupation on
payment of a fair and reasonable rent; and occupation for 20 years at a
uniform rate of rent generally confers a right of occupation at that rate. A
very large number of ryots in Bengal have in one way or another acquired
permanent right of occupancy in the land which they cultivate, but the remain­
der, a larger number, merely occupy, on payment of the rents and dues which
usually have been paid to the zamindar’s kachahri in respect of their land;
meist much less in rate than rentspaid by agricultural tenants in Engld. Zamindar kann theoretically verlangen was ihm gutdünkt before the commence­
ment of every year, u. turn this class of ryot out, if he does not agree, but
seldom does so. (157-158) On %iraat, khamar, nij-jot, or sir-lands zamindar
kann d. Land auf eigne Rechng bebauen, or put in cultivators on any terms
which they agree to accept; sie sind seine tenants, er ihr landlord im
(europäischen) ordinary sense of the word; hier hat d. zamindar un­
qualified ownership in land ... In ryottee lands the use belongs to the ryots.
142 (158-159) I In einigen Theilen Bengals, jots od. ryottee interest in consider­
able tracts of unclaimedjungle, or otherwise waste lands, have at times been
granted, of a perpetual character, upon insignificant rents; dies land afterwards
sublet to cultivators. In solchen Fällen nicht zu unterscheiden between
the jot-dar u. an ordinary middle-tenure-holder. (159)
Ways and Means.
Fast absence of the means of intercommunication between village and
village, and between one portion of a rural district and another. (161)
There is not a stone, or anything harder than clay, to be found in the soil of the
delta; and the floods of the rainy season break down, and sometimes al­
most obliterate, such roadways as have not been expensively constructed
by skilled engineers. (161, 162)
The vehicle(s) in use for the carriage of goods are boats, the heads of men
and women, little tiny bullocks, and bambu carts of very rude construction; when
well-to-do people travel they are carried in palkis and doolies, or go by
boat. In the dry season, the men, the bullocks, and the carts can and do go
anywhere. The local traffick usually takes place in detail of very small
quantities. The dana ( = grain) or other seed is trodden out by the bullocks
at the khaliän almost on the plot where it is grown. [In some districts wie
in Chota Nagpore, a rude handflail is used for thrashing grain]; and both
the grain and the straw are very easily carried to the homestead on the
heads of the various members of the ryot’s family. The surplus produce, if
any, of the ryot which does not go to his mahajan passes in little items to
the nearer häts, and so becomes diffused over the neighbouring mau%ahs>
or is carried on further to the larger hats, the mahajan u. the modi affording
the only village depots. The larger hats again, or local centres of country
produce trade, are commonly situated on roads or khäls. The produce trader
here, by his agents, gathers in the results of his scatteredpurchases, and sends it
away in carts or boats; and thus the outflow takes place very evenly.
(163, 164)
It is often said, on occasions of scarcity orfamine, that the stream will not reverse
itself when necessary. (164) Aber d. Sache die: A s long as the ryots are able
to pay the requisite retail price, the village mahdjans u. modis will succeed in
keeping up their stocks, whatever the local deficiency may be. (164, 165) Aber
wenn season of scarcity approach (es) sind beide, mahajan u. modi “ inactive” .
They know very accurately the extent of their clients’ and customers’
means. D. mahajan naturally enough declines to increase his stock at
great cost to himself, when his clients are already hopelessly involved in debt to
him; u. d. village modi for like reason will not lay in a stock at abnormal
prices to retail it to those who cannot pay for what they purchase. This
state of things would be completely changedif neither the mahajan nor the village
dealer had reason to doubt the ability of the ryot to pay a remunerating price for
imported food. (165) It is the occurrence of pauperism in the ryots, when a
certain price of food-stuffs is reached, which throws the ordinary machinery
__ out of gear. (166)
Was aber in times of scarcity the Government activity betrifft etc [paralysirt
diese sich selbst to a great extent, dies der sense of the “ Kohl” of Phear,
aber sehr richtig dies.] Was thut Gvt in emergencies of this sort? Er­
richtet “ relief works on a large scale, where great numbers of people,
drawnfrom their homes, are massed together within limited areas; grain in
considerable quantities ist transported from the outside to certain local centres,
for the support of those engaged on the works and for the distribution
so far as practicable by the hands of the local committees. (166) D.
preparations des Government für dies unusual work themselves very greatly
hinder ordinary traffic in rural lines of route; boats and carts, etc have to be
collected - even impressed - in all directions, and become locked up for days and
weeks, before they are actually wanted, damit sie certainly ready when needed.
I So, nicht nur while Gvt is importing, sondern long before it commences to do so,
• private enterprise is left without a vehicle. (166, 167) D. Govmnt method of
proceeding hat direct tendency to remove the pressure upon the village mahajans
u. modis u. to make the market which they supply noch unsichrer, indem d.
Gvt draws away as manypersons as possible, u. zwar d. ablebodied rather than
the infirm, from their homes, u. wirkt ebenso by supplying grain. - As soon
as Gvt announces its anticipation of a famine and its intention to take
extraordinary measures of prevention, all natural effort at the village end of
143 the system ceases. (168) | Peon (for Piada) = footman (inferior servants of a
Zemindar or landholder); sandük or sinduk = a wooden chest;
Ryot = Raiyat, originally a subject, jetzt peasant;
Rabi od. Rubbee: The March or A pril period of theyear; the harvest season
of the crops sown or planted after the cessation of the monsoon rains in September
or October of the precedingyear.
Talüq = a dependency; Tehsildar or Tahsildar, one who collects rents
or revenue.
Top, od. tope, o</. /o/w - a grove of fruit bearing trees.
Zu bemerken dass Tdri od. tadi vulgarly toddy, the juice of palm tree,
fermented or unfermented, auch spirit made v. other sources.
Ueber d. Means d. agriculturalfamilies in Eastern Bengal: It (is} Memorandum,
dem Phear zugestellt von Baboo Ram Sundar Basack of Dacca. Phear giebts
in “ Appendix” , Note A .
<see p. 268 chart)
Charpoy = aframe ofwood, having a web of tape or cord stretched across it,
and resting upon 4 short legs.
Dao billhook or cleaver.
1st class of ryots: cultivate 1 j bigas and upwards and have a family of 1 or
2 brothers u. 4 or 5 grown up sons. Ihre Zahl sehr gering.
I I class (of ryots'); cultivate S or 10 bigas, mit abt 3 or 4 male adults in the
family. Ihre Zahl) als die der first class. Ein ryot hat oft no other adult
male in the family to assist him, but capital enough to employ labourers,
gehört dann zu ist od. 2nd class.
I I I class (of ryots), 4 or j bigas, have 1 son or brother or nobody to assist
them (können daher nur 4-5 bigas bebauen) Bilden die Majorität.
I V class: a large number. Haben 1 or 2 bigas of land, sustain themselves u.
family mainly by workingfor others on hire: sind labourers more properly than
regular cultivators.
1st class haben generally 4 thatched houses in good condition to inclose
the quadrangle together, mit 3 or 4 out-houses to serve as the dhenkighur
(dhenki, a pestle u. mortar chiefly used to husk and clean rice), cowshed u.
gola. D. Haupthaus unter den 4 inclosing the quadrangle costs generally
Rs 30 or 40, the labour being supplied by themselves. D. other houses
kosten generally abt Rs 20 or 2 5. Cost of house erection für such a family
daher Rs ijo or i j j Rs.
Und class ausser den 4 ds quadrangle nur 1 od. 2 outhouses; ihre value
altogether Rs 100-125.
H id class, has 1 or 2 houses with a cow-shed, or 1 or 2 single thatched
houses to serve as kitchen, dhenkighur, etc. D. value dieser houses
Rs 30-40.
D. value hier estimated at cost of erection; if sold in good condition fetch
generally less, variirt aber (sale price) mit condition, situation, demand,
1st class ryot has generally a brass kalsi (kalsi = a large water pot), 3 or 4
lotahs (lotah or pali = tumbler), 4 or j thalas (plates), 1 or 2 batis ibati =
1 cup), 1 boughna (brass vessel) or 2 iron pans. The quantity of brass forming
these ustensils about 12 or i j seers; when bought the cost per seer von
Re 1, 8a to Rs 2 ; when sold the price varies von 12 a. (annas) to Re 1, 4 a.
per seer. On the whole the value of these ustensils = Rs 20. - The iron
pj o
• 3 ^ ‘ SO B Q
s q S n o jj
sapijJB E|og
_(2 _S'
* 00
_ _
^ °
Suipnpui ssqiOQ
______________ ____________2_____ ^__________
cu °
^ 0
ptf ~
£ *
-------------------- ------- ~-------------------------------------s[isu 3jfi p[oi]3snoj-{
,- Q
«3 00
« ‘S °
ja 0 (5*
* ° I I !< I P “ * B q w re > l
--------------------------------------------------------------^ O
0«5■ s
p: 0
^ °
U I0 0 J3 J0 0 3 u i
p. o
u *·
basins and i or 2 china plates in the case of Mahommedans, u. country
earthenware pots and dishes to be valued at a couple of rupees.
Baskets u. other utensils19 made of bamboo 20 or cane-work, wie jhakee, dalli,
kulat dalla, katta u. dhama, or measure of capacity, may be valued at 1 Re.
Bei Und class ryots the total quantity of brass about 8 or 10 seers = Rs. 8, 12,
or 15 ; the other class of utensils at Rs. 2.
A H id class ryot has generally 1 or 2 brass lotahs (tumblers), 1 or 2 thalas,
sometimes a boughna; quantity = 5 seers, about = Rs. 8. D. earthen u.
bamboo utensils same as in 2nd class, for the want of brass utensils to be
supplied by these.
Unter 1 st class ryots haben nur wenige anything like the sinduk, stets in
the house of a trading class in the village. Preis = ij-20 Rs. Statt d.
regular family sinduks haben d. ryots dieser Klass(e) meist one small chest
of mangoe or other inferior wood, and 1 or 2 petaras (od .pitara, see oben)
constructed of matted cane. In price von Rs. 2 to 4. (D. pitaras kosten
eben so viel.) |
145 Ausserdem haben meiste Ryots od. deren females 1 or 2 small wooden or tin
boxes to keep cash, ornaments od. other valuables. Price davon i 1/2 Rs.
Gesammtvalue dieser chests, boxes, etc. = 6-8 Rs.
lie class families haben generally 1 petara and 1 small box or 2, about =
3 or 4 Rs.
IH d class ryots haben höchstens jhaels or small petaras in some cases, v.
Price = about i 1^ Rs.
T~The general custom to keep the valuables hidden in earthenware pots kept
under the ground or outside.
Mit sehr wenigen Ausnahmen haben d. Ryots keine Chowkees or Charpoys
etc. Statt dessen different spreadings on the floor at night for the bedding.
1 Re for each family average value of spreadings for all sorts of ryots.
A ll ryots use chhalas or gunny bags to sit upon, which are, when occasion
requires, used also to hold grains.
Seats of various kinds made of bamboo slips, canes, and splinters of betel-nut tree,
and of small plants called peera or low stools; so small in size that they can
hold only one man on each.
Each ryot male or female has 2 dhutees of coarse Manchester clothfor ordinary
use while out of work about 12 feet long and 3 feet broad. In well to do
families haben ausserdem namentlich d. females country sharees u. %enana
coats, and men chaddarsy manchmal peerans. Für d. Wintersaison haben
elderly men u. women chaddars of thick cloth, while at work they use very
narrow and short gamchas or worn out clothes turned into smaller size.
No difference among the different classes as to the clothes possessed by a family
ausser so weit dies depend upon the number of individuals in each. D. average
value of clothes belonging to each individual male u. female, about Rs 2.
Dhutee: a piece of Manchester cloth, known in the bazaar as longcloth or
American drill; Shari, a piece of cloth put on by women having borders of
different colours; Chadors or sheet - a piece of American drill or longcloth measuring about 9 feet in length; Peeratt or shirt, a coat newly in­
troduced into fashion of American drill or longcloth. Gamcha or napkin,
a piece of cloth short in breadth and length. Kantha, quilt stuffed with
In 1 st class (ryot) family, of 12 persons, 4 of whom may be left out of consider­
ation, in consideration of the different persons wearing the same clothes, the value
d. clothes = Rs i j or 16 ; in Ilclass of about 7 persons, wo ß persons may be
left out for same reason, average value of clothes = Rs 8 or 9 ; in I I Id class
families of 2 or 3 individuals, cloth (es) value = Rs 4 or 5.
In addition to these Rs ß, 2 and 1 may be taken as the average value of leps
(quilt), kanthas, and pillows belong(ing) to a family of Ist, Und, and Hid
class ryot(family) respectively.
Ornaments: adult males use none; boys have sometimes brass or silver bangles
for the hands and mandulees or patta to hang from the neck; women use
ornaments of various kinds made of gold or silver and sometimes of brass, als da
Nath, or ring for the nose; Besar, an ornament hung from the nose; Dana,
beads for the neck used by Hindus, but very seldom; Kalse ornaments for
arms; Balia = bangles; Mul> or kharu - anklets; Churi, bracelet used by
Mahommedans; Hasli, a large ring round the neck. - On the whole, the
value of ornaments belonging to a 1st class family = Rs 40-50. (Women
whose husbands are living, when Muhammedans use churi of silver or of lac,
u. when Hindu, a pair of shell bracelets. Für Und classfamily about Rs ßo,
für H id classfamily abt Rs 1 0 or i j .
In cookhouse kaum article ausser pata (a flat stone) und puta (a stone mullar)
for grinding condiments in addition to brass and earthen pots. So: ghotee,
a brass or earthen water-pot; Raing, an earthen pot used in cooking
rice; Patil, an earthen basin used in cooking curry; Shara, an earthen
cover for a pot; Jhajree, an earthen vessel for straining water when washing
rice, etc.; Hatta, an iron or wooden ladle or spoon used in cooking; Bowlee,
an iron tongs used in catching pots when warm; Tagaree, a wooden bowl
for holding things cooked. Diese zus. mit dhenki, ukti, u. mosal (a large
wooden mortar u. pestle) to be valued abt ß Rs for each family.
Ryots keep generally, according to the circumstances, a quantity of rice,
mustard etc, for consumption during theyear, and seedsfor nextyear's cultivation:
the value for ist class 90-100 Rs, 2nd class Rs 40-50, ßd class Rs 25.
Cattle: 1st class family 8 or 10 cows and bullocks, mchmal a couple of
goats or sheep; in case of Mahommedans a number of fowls; Und class
family 4 or 5 cows; in a IH d class 2 or 3; the value of cattle for 1 st Rs 70,
Ilnd Rs 40, Hid Rs 20.
Instruments: a 1st class family besitzt about 8-10 ploughs, u. ß or 4 harrows,
valued a. Rs 8; for Ilnd u. H id class respectively value d. ploughs Rs 5
u. Rs 3. I
146 A 1st class family hat generally 3 daos, 4 or j kachees, 2 kodalees or spades,
1 khuntee (a digging hoe) u. an axe; gesammt value Rs 5; Und u. H id class
selben articles in less numbers, of value of Rs 3 u. Rs 2 respectively.
~TBoats'. Ryots living in lowlands u. fields etc watered by annual inundation,
' and on river side, have generally a dingee (a small boat) of value of Rs 10-30.
Dieses Luxus “instrument” nur by Ist u. Und class ryots, sehr selten bei
Illd class.
The large I V class hat im allgemeinen a single house, a brass lota or thalla, or a
stone or woodenplate and cane or bamboo basket, etc., and nothing in the way
of a sinduk or charpoys; 1 or 2 mats and kanthas and pillows and a couple
of dhutees, a plough, a harrow, a dao, a kodalee, a kachee u. manchmal a cow or 2 ;
value des ganzen Krams in average may be estimated at Rs 2j.
~rKoddl or Kodali = a hoe, by means of which the work of the spade, the
I shovel, and the hoe alike is done.
Kathak = a professional story teller; one who recites traditional poems,
Latti, or Lattee = a stick or bludgeon, usually of bamboo, heavily ringed
and feruled with metal; Morha, a stool.
Mulla, or Mulana: one who has charge of the village mosque, Mahommedan schoolmaster.
Kachcha = raw, crude, immature, incomplete; Pakka = ripe, mature,
Nirkh, a standard or customary rate, as of rent, etc.
Palla, a turn (Reihe die an einen kommt) as of worship, or enjoyment of
Dhoti = the cloth worn round the loins. Bhdt, boiled rice;
Ghat = the landing slope, or steps, on the bank of a river, or of a tank;
the pass up a mountain or ridge of hills, sometimes the line of the hill
Jagir, Jaghir, a service tenure of land or revenue; Jalkar-wala, one who has
rights of fishing.
Flgt nun d. 2te Abtheilung v. Phear's book über Ceylon. Dieser Bursch
residirte 10 Jahre in Calcutta; lebte in Ceylon 18-77-1879. D. 3d Paper
(Evolution of the Indo-Aryan Social u. Land System) was read 1872 durch
d. Burschen vor d. Bethune Society of Calcutta.
II. The Agricultural Community21 in Ceylon.
1) The Village Economy.
Island of Ceylon = a Pear; the circular portion of the Pear occupied by a
mass of mountains rising manchmal to 7-8000 feet, bordered at its base with
a margin of lower land which continues to the coast on all sides. (173)
The New North Central Province, constituted on 6, Sept. 1873, f ° r ad­
ministrative purposes, covers the mid-islandportion of the Northern plain...
Interminable jungle in a state of nature, dotted very sparsely with tiny specks
of yellow-green cultivation mit some few pools of water or tanks
surface nicht absolutely flat, sondern mit considerable undulation an einigen
Stellen, an ändern broken by low ridges or rounded bosses ofgneiss. In d. Regel
pools seem by origin nur accumulations of water in natural depressions of the
ground as have no outlet sufficiently low to drain them ... aber their depth u. si%e
“ pin most instances artificially increased dch an earthen bund or embankment,
I thrown across the lower side of the depression. In d. drier seasons des
Jahrs, as the water bulk shrinks back towards the bund, i.e. towards the
deeper side, it withdraws from the greater portion of the tank space, so that
thejungle is enabled to flourish there (as it also does on the embankment itself)
ebenso vigorously als überall sonst in the surrounding tracts. Daher
schwer den tank %u sehn, selbst wenn man in seiner Nähe. Und when d.
tank voll, much of it closely resembles a circuit offloodedforest. (173-175).
Anuradhdpura, the classic city of the Mahawansa, für 7-800 Jahre d. metro­
polis der successiv regierenden dynasties ruling over the larger portion
of Ceylon, dann für eben so lange Zeit left to decay, is sehr nah d. Mittel­
punkt d. neuen Provinz. Ihre Bevölkerung ( i 8 j i nur 16 to □ mi., the
inhabitants of the rural villages u. the modern bazar counted together) für
sehr lange Periode, bis lately, preserved by the remoteness u. inaccessi­
bility of its situation v. disturbing action offoreign influences of (any) kind,
daher dort a “ living specimen typical” sehr primitiver agricultural economy
u. civilisation. (175-6) D. People are Singhalese u. class themselves mit d.
Kandyan or highlanders im Unterschied v. d. low-country Singhalese who
border on the coast on22 either side; sehr verschieden von d. comparative­
ly slight-limbed, black-complexioned Tamils, who constitute the popula­
tion of the Northern portion des Island. (176, 177) D. Singhalese language
147 belongs to the [ Aryan group, apparently sprung from a root closely allied
to the Sanscritic prakrits of Northern India; aber d. Singhalese people haben
Aussehn d. hindeutet auf intermixture of an Aryan with some other,
yellow tinted, coarsely built, ethnic element; sind broadshouldered,
deepchested, muscular, with a pronounced calf to the leg, like all Mongolian
peoples, unlike the Aryans of India; schlagendste peculiarity - excessive
hairiness of both male andfemale. Dies findet sich nicht bei d. best bekannten
mongolischen Stämmen; aber d. Ainos, a Turanian race in the extreme east
of Asia , possess this extraordinary capillary development in noch höherem
Grad. (177-178)
The Tamil inhabitants der Northern Province sind ununterscheidbar von
their brethren of the mainland of India, with their slight build, black skin,
thick lips, open nostrils, coarse hair; they belong unmistakably to the
Dravidian race. (179) Exceptionally, auf d. Grenzmarken der Tamil u.
Singhalese districts, to be found low caste villages, wo no pure type of
either kind preserved. (I.e.)
Ausser d. distribution der population des Districts by agricultural villages,
Fälle of petty u. often ephemeral bazars sprung up at convenient places along
the highways - gradually as these have been opened out through the
forest, perhaps never kept by the Kandyans, sondern nur durch low coun­
try Singhalese, Moormen, or Tamils. (I.e.)
Controlling element d. village - the paddy tract or paddy field which is itself
“ a function of the supply of water.” (179, 180) Meist d. field attached, or
appended to, a tank u. ist oft strikingly tiny im Verhältnis zum si\e des
entire tank; es wird irrigirt by the flow of water passing out from the tank
through a masonry culvert (Abzugskanal) piercing the lowest part of the
retaining bund u. öfter noch through a breach or cutting made in the bund
itself, u. d. Lage (the lie) d. Feldes so, dass the outflow of water can be
made to flood the whole of it in a succession of flats, to the lowest and most
remote from it; the line of soil surface from side to side being almost
always horizontal throughout. Je nach dem local Character des ground
hat d. field more or less irregular shape, with its longer extension stretching
away from the tank bund. Sonst ist es a single clearing in that universaljungle
prevailing on all sides, selbst bedeckend the actual bund of the tank, and
very much of the tank bottom itself. (180)
Jedem Feld entspricht a gama or village, i.e. group of homesteads wo d.
cultivators live; selten hat a village mehr als ein field; d. Gruppe steht im
Jungle neben d. field, obscured by trees, and next the bund; exhibits
gewöhnlich no order of arrangement. Die einzelne homestead, wenn ihr
owner well to do, a low, thatched, mud-wattled hut, of perhaps 2 unlighted
rooms opening upon the diminutive veranda, deren floor die earthplatform
der hut, u. deren roof its projecting eaves; in front dieser hut small,
mud-plasteredattawas, or roofed cylinders of wicker-work, raised upon supports
for storage of grain (ist equivalent der golas of Bengal). A uf einer Seite
steht ausserdem a large open shed, with its little loft for cattle (if the cottier
has any), implements, curry grinder, rice pounder (the dhenki of Bengal), etc.
Under the back eaves of hut auch a place for ploughs, the surface-smoother,
harrows, etc. Abutting upon the litde homestead’s curtillage, or partially
enclosing it, - a garden or loosely cultivated plot for fruit trees, condiments,
curry vegetables (säg of Bengal) etc; the whole meist ill-kept and ne­
glected; d. different homesteads der village group von einander getrennt
durch irregular, ill-defined, muddy tracks. (181, 182)
An Spitze a territorial head, und in diesen modem days (fälschlich!) “proprie­
tor des village” genannt; er Nachfolger des primitive chieftain; er mag
jetzt d. Krone (engl.) sein, or a religiousfoundation, or a private Singhalese
—gentleman. (182) D. village field, or paddy tract, divided into portions by
parallel balks drawn across itfrom side to side at right angles to the line of waterfiow; each such portion hereditary share of some one person or family
resident in or belonging to the village. The principal portion or share genannt Mottettuwa (Ziraat in Bengal) gehört dem head des village; alle
ändern share holders hat dem Burschen to make some contribution ofproduce
in kind, or to render him some definedand specific service, domestic or agricultural.
Dies distinction of tenure23 - produce in kind oder aber service - ent273
spricht genau dem raiotti (Ryott) u. lakhiraj conditions | of holding in
Bengal. Nur d. Unterschied: in Bengal d. raiotti holding (holding by
contributing of share of product) is the prevalentform u. lakhiraj holding
d. exception; in Ceylon the holding by rendering of service - nilakariya is (or rather was) all but universal, and the other the exception. [Dies
beweist, dass Ceylon form d. primitivere; denn d. Dorfälteste or village
chief war kein landlord, hatte keine “ rent” zu beziehen, wde abgefunden
durch “ services” .] In Bengal the service or the lakhiraj holding stets free u.
honourable, such as that of the priest, doctor, watchman, etc; in Ceylon that
of the nilakariya is usually menial. (183, 84)
Meist a plurality of villages have a common head, u. früher the household
establishment of a wealthy native chieftain kept up by turns of menial
service discharged by villagers, drafted from, the many villages in due
order upon the footing of their land tenure obligation. Jezt the service
tenure has so to say become freehold (?) Wo a Buddhist Vihara, or temple,
was oft in d. North Central Province, d. personal service der hier special
forms bekleidet, as: maintaining illuminations, thatching or doing other repairs
to thepansala (the Buddhist priest’s residence) etc., noch in vollem Gang.
(184, 85)
D. administrative organisation, zur Perception d. services for d. head of the
village, bestand aus i or 2 officials, the Gamerale (the village man), the
Lekham (writer or accountant) etc. Some of the more wealthy of the share
F holders in the village field, probably by reason of being byfamily origin of the same
blood with the chieftain, held their share by the service offilling hereditarily one
of these offices, or of yielding hospitality to the head of the village, when he
comes, or to any other visitors whom the village receives. (185-86) Einige
dieser services bestehn in doing smith's, carpenter's, dhobi's work, or even
that of the doctor (Vederale). Im village selbst diese persons paid in their
turn by their fellow villagers for their professional or artisan's functions,
either by labour donefor them in the tilling of their shares of the village field or by
a quota of thepaddy on the payer's threshingfloor, measured out and delivered
when the harvest completed. Other service consists in supplying the village
head mit oil, betel-nuts, honeyfrom thejungle, game, etc. (186)
“ ‘ Viel wichtiger the combined action on the part of the villagers for their joint
benefit, necessitated by the exigencies of cultivation under theprimitive conditions
obtaining in the North Central Province, and indeed allgemein in Ceylon,
2.3. fencing the villagefield every season against the wild animals of thejungle which
surrounds it; kein einzelner shareholder könnte unaided execute the whole work;
u. wenn ein Riss (Mangel, flaw) in it irgendwo so ist every shareholder's plot
open to invasion; jeder shareholder so direct interessirt in this work, has
to bear his portion of it in proportion to his share in the field. Ebenso wenn
a breach im bund (Damm) to be filled up, or some repair to be done to it, dies
done by all the shareholders jointly furnishing out of their families or de­
pendents, each in due proportion, a continual supply of labour in successive relays
until the work is done. (187)
Obgleich jeder shareholder in the village paddy field, hat erbliches Recht
in his plot u. right of cultivating it exclusively, dennoch the mode of cultivation
which is generally pursued connects him ... in almost every step of his tilling
with his neighbours, above and below, either in a dominant or a servant char­
acter. D. Process der Zubereitung u. clearing the soil for the seed sowing or
planting, of killing the weeds and keeping them down, and of promoting thegrowth
of thepaddy plant, is from beginning to end in a large degree effected by the aid
of successive submersions of the plot, which have to be varied as regards the
depth of water according to the process and the stage of it. Commonly 3
prolonged submersions in the course of tilling, and 7 shorter ones during the
growth of theplant. Da d. submergence of a relatively lowerplot generally means
the submergence of theplots above it, while the paddyplant cannot be depended
upon to grow equallyfast in all the plots, hence, damit kein risk of one share­
holder's operations destroying theyoung plants of his neighbours, usual rule dass
the shareholder of the lower end of the field should commence the operations of the
tilling season in his plot before any one else, and so get a safe start of the man
next above him. Selbe order followed by all the others in succession. (188-89)
Wenn in einem Jahr, von Mangel an Wasser^ufuhr od. sonst welchem
Grund nur ein Theil des village paddy field can be effectively cultivated, wd that
limitedportion taken as the whole u. is divided unter d. village shareholders as the
original entirety was. D. Entscheidung darüber genommen dch d. shareholders
as a body. Dies jetzt nicht überall known in practice, aber ist oft vorgesehn in the newlyframed Gansabawa rules, at the instance of the villagers them­
selves, to indicate that it was a deeply rooted ancient custom. (189) |
149 Ganz unabhängig v. d. relations zum head of the village, daher in each
village of the North Central Province (u. in fact prevailing universally)
Beamte, the vel vidahne u. others chosen by the shareholders to control and carry
out the system offencing, ploughing, sowing, shifting of allotment, when necessary,
etc or generally the internal agricultural economy ds village. (190)
D. Reis production d. irrigated fields nicht genügend to form even the
principalportion of the shareholder's support in d. Mehrzahl der villages dieser
Provinz. D. ordinary staple of life the dry grain, koraccan, grown upon the
upland, i.e. on merely unwatered gt ound, or ground which the flow of the
water cannot be made to reach. A piece of theforest which surrounds the
village and the village paddy field, is felled and burnt, and a crop of karaccan
is raised thereupon for a couple of consecutiveyears at most, when the clearing
is allowed to relapse intojungle again; and thisprocess is not repeated on the same
spot for another 10 years at least. (190-91) This process of chena clearing is
*** often done in *** the North Central Province by the joint action of the
village shareholders, under the management of their own officers; and
sometimes the whole course of cultivation whichfollows is alsojoint, with apartition
only of the produce. Manchmal aber auch, nachdem the clearing effected,
the land is divided u. allotted previously to the cultivation; dies immer in case
~j~of theplots requiredfor thegrowth of eachhousehold's vegetables or curry stuff. (191)
(Cabbage garden) - In d. Maritime Provinces scheint dies System ofjoint
clearing unbekannt; jeder who has chena land scheint to own it absolutely,
cultivates u. clears it himself at long intervals, or gets this donefor him on
some terms of anda letting. (191-92)
In einigen wenigen instances, it is said,forest u. chenaground (is) recognised
as appurtenant to the village in d. Sinn d. shareholders des village paddy field
können ohne Erlaubniss of head of village od. Government clear and
cultivate in obenbeschriebner Art any portion on the foundation of and in
proportion to their village holdings. Generally the Crown (John Bull) asserts
a paramount claim to all jungle u. waste land wherever situated, which
has not been before appropriated to actual use; no tree (!) can be felled
or chena cultivated thereon ausser mit Gvt license. (192)
D. actual work of tilling meist verrichtet dch jeden villager by the hands
of his family; paddy cultivating speciell so respectable, fst of sacred charac­
ter, dass women unwürdig daran Theil zu nehmen, u. dürfen sich nicht
zeigen on the threshingfloor, namtlich wenn d. so-called hillpaddy, or more
highly valued sort of rice grain, is being threshed. (192-93)
Wenn der shareholder ist Weiberperson ohne Kinder, oder er anderweitig
beschäftigt, od. gut genug dran to be able to abstain from manual labour,
dann common arrangement dass his share cultivated for him by another
person upon the terms of this latter, die dann renders dem shareowner a
specified share ofproduce; dies benamst a letting in ande; i.e. half share; meist,
vielleicht fast immer, the agreed upon share = 1/2 the produce both in straw
andpaddy; der cultivator muss ausserdem give a share to the responsible
servant usually sent by the shareowner to remain on the ground and look
after his interests from the day of reaping to the day of partition, and having
moreover to feed this man during the interval. (193-94)
Fst alle vicarious cultivation assumes this shape; not known: letting the land
for a money rent; existirt ditto no class of agricultural labourers, working on
the land of another for money hire. In fact, in d. rice agricultural village of
Ceylon -* practically = no money in use. Vielleicht Mehrzahl der villagers
haben nicht paddy enough to last them for food till next season of harvest or
for seed, oder haben no plough or no oxen. Diese erhalten sie when and as
they are required, vom Capitalist des village, on the terms of setting apart
for him on the threshing floor a certain stipulated quantity or share of the
produce in return for each item of loan. Ebenso remunerated the services
_ rdes Vederale, village blacksmith u. other artizans. Selbes mag manchmal
Vorkommen auch in the matter of land labour, aber general customfor neighbouring
shareholders to mutually assist one another in this particular when needed. (19495) Der head of the village mit Bezug auf his muttettuwa has this cultivated
umsonst under Aufsicht of his officers by the turns of tillage service due to him
from those of the villagers whose tenures involve the service; cultivirt er
in this way, so gehört ihm d. ganze Product des harvest. Aber auch er
150 zieht I oft vor to dispense with these services u. to let out the muttettuwa
land in ande (ande in terms of receiving a specified, originally half share of
the produce.) (195) D. gegebne Schilderung genommen v. North Central
u. Kandyanprovinces. (196) Erst errichtet sich a regal (!) hierarchy on the basis
of the village; aber d. sovereign power (!), when once constituted, wird in
course of time the instrument for generating u. developing gz neue con­
ditions u. notions (!) of property in land. (I.e.)
2) Land Tenure and State Economy
to Adigars, Dessaves etc u. ändern chieftains by the kings conferred - nicht
tracts of land (zum Lohn für military u. civil services) sondern grants of
dominion over populations. Der grantee erhielt the chieftains customary
rights over the villages u. nun appropriated lands; daher Nindegama
(village unter private ownership) as opposed to the royal or Gabada-gama.
(197, 198) Sub-infeudation nicht in Ceylon to any considerable extent.
(198) [Even the Bengal subtenures did not attain their extraordinary modern
development until after the Permanent Settlement had given the zamindars an absolute right of property in all the land of their zamindaries, - a
right without parallel in Ceylon.] (199) Einige grants - royal or durch
private seignior - became cultivating settlements, having thegrantee (nicht
the grantor) at their head; der grantor had no connection mit der new
community ausser the link of service which bound the grantee to him u.
which often in course of time wore out, became un(en)forceable. Others
perhaps were from the beginning exclusive u. free of continuing obliga­
tion. (199, 200)
Daher will Phear ableiten die sehr zahlreichen cases of cultivators u. even of
non-cultivatingproprietors, who own lands by a right of an absolute u. independent
character, to be found in all parts of the country, speciell in the maritime
provinces, obgleich hier the Dutch dominant authority probably effected the
_larger part of the change which has taken place in modern times. (200)
I So now coming into existence an agricultural labourers' class; denn wealthy
1 native gentlemen, die Geld auf andrem Weg als Agricultur gewonnen, found
themselves able to obtain the labour of the poorer village proprietors for daily
money wages, u. so to “farm” their lands extensiv im English Sinn des
term. (200, 201)
Joint family system ebenso conspicuous in Ceylon als in Bengal, doch im
erstem selten of so large dimensions; besdrs charakteristisch d. Ceylon
joint-family system: 2 or probably** more brothers living together under one roof
I will have one wife between them; practice discouraged by English legislation,
aber keineswegs extinct; still enters as a curious factor25 in the law of
inheritance, which has to be administered by the civil courts. (201)
Enjoyment der property derjoint-family managed by agreement, express or
implied, aller adult joint sharers in the family property, who often
separate themselves into smaller groups each taking its own plot of land;
jeder dissentient sharer can claim to have his share divided offfor him. (202)
In Fällen von cocoa-nut or areca nut plantations, of jak trees u. selbst of
paddy fields, usual that every gathering of the crop should be made in the presence
of all the sharers, and the produce then and there divided according to the shares.
In such cases verrichten all the sharers together the necessary work incidental
to the cultivation or the keeping up of the plantation and constitute in fact a
cooperative society. Eine andre Praxis ist dass d. sharers let out the land or
plantation in Ande, entweder to an outsider, or to one or more of
themselves. Dann alle sharers to be present at the division of the produce,
which is effected in 2 steps, first division into moieties und dann a division of
one moiety among the sharers. (202, 203) Manchmal the enjoyment of the
property by tatta maru succession; erst getheilt (ideell), u. every sharer
obtaining his proper number of parts, dann takes the entirely for the same
number of seasons as he is entitled to parts, giving it up at the end of such
period of time to the sharer who stands next in the rota etc. Z.B. A , B , C
joindy entitled to a paddy field in undivided shares proportionate to 2, 3,
and 4, i.e. to a 2/9, 1/3, 4/9 share of the whole respectively, then A would
take the whole field for 2 years, B for 3, u. schliesslich C for 4, u. then
the set of turns repeated in the same order, for successive periods of 9 years,
until some sharer (should) insist upon having an actual partition of the
field. (203, 204)
Aehnliche Sorte of Reihenfolge adoptirt in einigen villages an d. Küste zum
enjoyment by the villagers of the j fishing grounds belonging to the village;
diese are divided into localities; u. d. recognised boats of the village fish these
localities by turns which are settled by gansabawa arrangement. Jedes
dieser boats mit its nets is a valuable property, belonging to many co-sharers
joindy, who are commonly members of one family, and have become
entided to their shares by inheritance__ On a day's fishing the produce
is drawn ashore, divided in a sufficient number of lots, each estimated to be
worth the same assigned value, u. diese lots then so distributed, dass:
1/60 to the owner of the land on which the fish are brought ashore; x/4 to
those engaged in the labour; x/5 for the assistance of extra nets etc, rendered by
third parties in the process of landing and securing the fish, which
together = 2 + 25 + 2 0 = 47 ;die remaining 53 go to the owners of the
boat and net according to their share therein. (204, 205)
Panguwa = share of the village paddy field, das dem Singhalese nilacaraya
zukommt. (206)
The cultivation in ande bei d. Singhalese ist precise counterpart der batai
cultivation der Bengalese. The deputing of the right to cultivate the soil, as
distinguished from the letting out land as a commodity in beiden agricultural
systems. The usufructuary mortgage, flowing from this conception, is the
prevailing form of dealing mit the panguwa u. the jot respectively as com­
modities. (207, 208)
In Ceylon wie in Bengal double set of village officers, one ernöthigt dch
relation der members der little village republic to each other, andre dch
relation “ with their (!) lord” ; d. gamerale, lekhama, kankaname entsprechen
dem bengal. naib, patwari, gomashta; andrerseits der vel vidane equivalent
dem mandal. (208) (3 t Ceylon u. Bengal p. 206-213.) batai agreement (Bengal),
under which the tilling is done by a person not the owner - in consider­
ation of a definite share of the produce being yielded to the owner. (237)
4) The Grain Tax. Obligation des cultivator topay to the Crown a tithe or share
of his paddy crop if he has any, u. in some parts der country, also of his
other grain crops. (214)
In vielen instances villages were kept in hand by the Crown (held khas as
it is phrased in India) for the especial support of the central establishments:
the muttetuwa darin was service-tilled, or let out in ande, under the
direction of royal servants; the produce thus accruing was deposited in
kind in royal storehouses (gabedawa), arsenals (awudege), or treasuries {arramudale), according to its sort, u. d. personal services due were rendered
at the palace or elsewhere, to meet some immediate royal requirement.
D. ’crown villages or lands were known under various designations, as ratninda or ande, original<ly) crown lands; nillapalla, those which had fallen
into the crown from failure of the office to which they were attached; malla
palla, those reverted to the Crown from death of the Grantee. (216, 17)
Unter Portugiesischer Herrscft several native powers at times maintained
a separate simultaneous existence in the different provinces; but little
continuity of general municipal administration of any kind. Village
system still in activity, even im Theil d. Landes most affected by foreign
influences u. other disturbing forces, in the low part of the country near
the coast; dch d. services u. contributions derivable from this source, first
the native powers of the low country, u. nach ihnen the Portuguese, recruited
their military forces u. obtained the means of gvt. The Portuguese, when
become superior over the southern maritime circuit of the island, took up
the position der native kings, whom they superseded, and adopted their fiscal
and administrative machinery as it stood. (217, 218)
D. Holländer, having turned out the Portuguese, ditto in power über d.
maritime provinces, displaced all the native local heads u. officials; ihr gvt
übernahm the direct collection and benefit der various dues, cesses u.
services, fastened upon the holder of the land to whomsoever they had
been rendered. (218, 219)
Engländer, in their turn, assuming the gvt der maritime provinces, folgten
zuerst dem Vorgang der Dutch, brauchten d. services deren, die land on
tenure of service hatten (u. on that account duty free), nahmen auch an d.
storehouses etc the seignior's share of produce in kind, von den Mallapalla,
1 52 Nillapalla, Ratninda, or Ande lands, u. nahmen endlich | such benefits as
were derivable from holders of land on other u. uncertain tenures,
inclusiv the payment of quotas of produce u. of measures of paddy. (219)
Diese letzte sort of dues converted dch Royal Proclamation of 3 May 1800,
in tax o f 1/10 des Produce, scheint sich zu beziehen auf d. residue of lands
nach Abzug der Government lands u. der lands held on tenure of service
to Government. Offenbar waren private seignior und the vihara headship
schon verschwunden vor d. Dutch. (219, 220)
3 September 1801 durch Proclamation d. obligation to service on tenure of land
in d. maritime provinces abgeschafft (do von 1 Mai 1802) u. solches Land
unterworfen to payment to Gvt of V10 des produce if highland, x/5 of produce
if lowland. Zugleich the payment of x/4 of the produce für Mallapalla, Nillapalla, Ratninda or Ande lands reserved. (220) Obgleich so d. obligation to
service divorced from land, ward dem Governor the power reserved to
exact it by special order von persons aller castes u. conditions for adequate pay
to be given therefore. D. exigencies of the Kandyan war gaben dem Gvt
dann den Vorwand to renew a general claim to the services of thepeople, nicht
mit Bezug auf Grundbesitz, sondern of custom and caste, payment to be
made at rates fixed by Gvt; 1809 wde Wegbau zu gratuitous service gemacht,
lying on the inhabitants des Districts through which they passed. (221)
Diese enactments applied nur to the maritime provinces acquired von
d. Dutch. 18 1 j erhielten d. Britishers dch conquest u. treaty auch d.
Government of the Central or Kandyan province, bis dahin solely under the
administration der native powers. 1818, dch Proclamation von 21 No­
vember, alle duties bis dahin payable in royal storehouse, treasury, or
arsenal, u. alle ändern duties u. taxes abgeschafft, ersetzt dch tax of1/10 of the
produce onpaddy lands, reduced to x/14 in certain specified Korles. (221, 222)
Zugleich die services due in respect of service tenure lands (auf welche
grade die neue Tax fiel) retained, obgleich stipulated that the services
generally should be paid for at an established rate; aber repair u. making of
roads, wie in d. maritime provinces, gratuitous service gemacht. (222)
Dch Proclamation v. 21 Nov. 1818 auch d. liability of certain inhabitants
of temple lands to perform service to Gvt also retained. (I.e.)
A uf Report v. 24 December 18 31 des Lt. Colonel Colebrooke, (nämlich dieser
u. Mr. Cameron waren commissioned wden die Administration von
Ceylon to inquire into) an Order of Council d. cl. 12 A pril 1832 erklärte,
dass Niemand of His M ’s native or Indian subjects in island liable to render
any service in Bezug auf ihre land tenure, oder wegen ihrer Caste od. sonstwie
zu welcher d. subjects of European birth were not liable. Aber auch diese
Proklamation enthielt the reservation of services to the crown of holders of land
in royal villages in the Kandyan province u. dasselbe for vihara u. private owners
in the same province. (I.e.)
According to Ribeyro, Knox u. 1Yalentyn2* in the Portuguese u. earlier times
there was almost no money in the country. A ll trade which was not a
Crown monopoly was effected by barter. Paddy was the commodity which
commonlyfilled theplace of coin. Die meisten presents which accompanied all
service, took the form of paddy, and nearly all obligations by the way of
remuneration or duty were discharged by a measure ofgrain drawn from the
contents of the threshing floor at harvest. (225) Von dem librarian of
the Malagava, Kandy, dem “ learned” Suriyagoda Unanse, erhielt der Bursch
Phear flgde bemerkenswerthe Notiz:
D. frühste Erwähnung irgendeiner tax or contribution des Volks für support
of a royal person to be found in the historical books of Ceylon, occurs in the
Aggauna Satha (a sermon by Buddha himself) in Digha Nitraya, u. in the
commentary thereon called Sumangali Vilasani by the learned Buddhist
divine Buddhagosha. Der passage des sermon lautet: “ We shallgive aportion
of our paddy” Dazu commentirt Buddhagosha: “ We shall give you at the
rate of ammunan of paddy from each field of ours. [Das word “ Sali” im
”T~Original is literally a particular kind of rice, soll aber hier stand for all grain
I produce]. You need notfollow any trade. But be you our chief.” (227, 228)
Weiter keine tax or obligation an governing power erwähnt; nichts von
Diensten: diese, meint Phear, späteren Ursprungs; u. the paddy cesses
ultimately often again superimposed upon the services, came in later still,
with an increase in the central power of exaction. (227, 228) D. Singhalese
word “ otu” , wdch d. Gvt tax or claim meistens benamst, heisst “ one” , also
1 53 equivalent only to one portion or one share ohne indication | irgendeiner
Proportion der share zum Ganzen. (228, 229)
Also d. 1/10 im English impost scheint founded upon the practice of the
Dutch in granting out Crown lands. D. grain tax folglich nicht älter als
the century; in a certain sense return to the earliest u. most widely prev-r-alent form of national revenue developed from the basis of the village
I organisation, aber charakteristisch dass d. Ceylon Aryans from the same
basis produced the service system in its stead. (229)
III) Evolution of the Indo-Aryan Social and Landed System.
At the present time every settlement report sent in to the Government (in
India) will be found to furnish instances, and to describe the circumstances
of newly created agricultural communities. (234. Phear27 hätte besser gethan
statt seines hypothetischen Kohls description solcher instances zu geben!)
Dieser respectable Esel bildet sich ein, dass “ there grew up, evenfrom the
commencement, a gradation of respectability and employment within the village
itself.” [!] (Der asinus lässt auch28 alles dch private families gründen)
(p. 238)
The proprietary conception went no farther than this namely, that the
particular plot of land which the family, or the individual claimed was the
part of the village land, which he or it was entitled to cultivate, or to have
cultivated for his own benefit. The business of allotment (so long as the
practice of allotting remained), the order of cultivation, the maintenance of
the water supply, the keeping up offences, and all other affairs of common
interest to the little community, were managed by the heads offamilies,
entitled to their share of the village lands, in the panchayat assembled. (241)
Each litde colony or abad. (242) nij or private lands. (243)
Kshatria caste nur mentioned in Brahmanical pages, and it certainly has no
reality now. (See Growse's “ Mathura” ) (p. 246) Ebenso the existence of
the Vaisja (Kaufmann’s) Kaste nur evidenced by Brahmanical writers.
(248) The great hulk o f the descendants of the original settlers (speaking o f
villages in the mass) less careful o f purity o f blood, or o f preserving any
mark o f descent from the immigrant race ... mit ihnen gradually inter­
mixed people o f all kinds, aborigenes, run-aways from other abads for
cause o f pauperism, feud, or otherwise, some o f whom came to be even
allowed a portion o f the village lands. (248, 249) Probably the Brahman,
Kschatria, Vaisja u. Sudra der Brahmanical codes bios Utopian class dis­
tinctions o f a prehistoric More. (2 5o)
In allem there is at most conceived only the right to cultivate land, and a
deputing o f that right to another in consideration o f a share in the pro­
duce. (255) Selbst in seinem private land or nij d. chief had only the
right to cultivate by himself’ or to get somebody else to do it on condition
o f dividing the product. (2 5 6) The share ofproduce which the Chief could
take from the cultivators was not regulated by his own pleasure, or
by the making of a bargain, but by custom, or practice, in regard to which the
village panchayat was the supreme authority, and the chief had no power
to turn the cultivator out o f possession. (257) D . Verwandlung dieser
quotas o f produce into money payments, or their equivalent (an event which
has not happened universally even yet) machte sie nicht zu rent paid for
occupation and use of land as an article belonging to and at the disposal of theperson
paid, but were dues payable to a superior ruling authority___ D . Chief,
though zamindar o f all the land within the Zamindary, was at most
landlord, (u. das nur als one merely having the right to dispose o f the
occupation and tilling o f the soil) o f his nij lands, and in some instances
probably o f the wastes. Seine machinery was sein Kachahri, the centre o f
local authority, side by side womit the panchayat, i.e. the old abad selfgovernment. (257, 258)
In Manu’s Institutions nowhere a mention o f land as a subject o f property
in the modern English sense. Private ownership of cultivated plots is re­
cognized, ist aber simply the ownership of the cultivator; the land itself
belongs to the village; no trace o f rent; owner is only another name for
cultivator. E r ist under obligation to cultivate lest the Rajah’s or lord’s
dues in kind be shortcoming, aber er might cultivate by servants, or
15 4 arrange with someone else to cultivate on a division of crops (i.e. | the batai
system, a form o f metayer). In another place o f Manu, everyone enjoined
T to keep a supply o f grain sufficient for his householdfor yyears ___ Almost
I everybody so supposed to be an actual cultivator
The practice of
batai. .. did not infact lead to the letting of land; u. rent in any form unknown
to Manu. (258, 259) Selling of land, or even of the use of land, nirgendswo
directly alluded t o ___ Appropriating a field, giving a field u. seizing a field
erscheinen alle bei Manu, aber nicht buying or selling a field. (259, 260)
Etw as später, nach the Mitakshara, separated kinsmen had acquired
uncontrolled power o f disposing of their respective shares of the family allot282
ment; dies was a mere transfer of a personal cultivating right, incidental to
personal status in the village community, and subject to an obligation
to render to the lord his share o f the produce. Daher the transaction to
be accompanied by specified public formalities; and an out-and-out sale dis­
countenanced except for necessity. Ausserdem, when the transfer not
absolute, but conditional by way of securityfor the repayment of a debt, it always
took the form o f what is now called a usufruct(u)ary mortgage. (260, 261)
The usufruct of land by actual tillage on the footing o f a right o f partnership
in the village cultivating community, and not the land itself, constituted
the object w o r(au )f sich d. w ord “ ownership” in d. Hindu law writers
bezieht. (261)
Dies auch bestätigt dch copper-plates of title, old sanads, u. ähnliche evidence ;
sie disclose the pretty frequent grant or assignment o f the right to make
collections u. other %amindari rights proceeding from a superior lord, or the
gift of a plot from the waste, or out o f the zamindar’s t^iraat, to a Bnzhmzzn
or other person; but no instance o f private transfer by purchase and sale of
actual land\ or even o f the lease of landfor a term ofyears in consideration of a
rent. (261, 262) D . Sanchi tablet, w ovon a translation given in the Journal
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, v. V I, p. 45 6, bezieht sich nicht auf purchase
u. sale o f land as between private owners ; sondern an enfranchisement of
some sort (such as redemption o f liability to pay revenue to the lord) with
the view to the land becoming debattar. ( 262 , nt. 1 )
M r. L a Touche’s “ Settlement Report of Ajmere u. Mhairwarra” recently
published, obgleich La Touche nach Phear d. facts verfälscht deh phrase­
ology borrowed from feudal Europe. (263) Die Sache kömmt dar(auf)
hinaus: Certain members of the village community enjoy the permanently
cultivated or improved lands o f the village by some recognised hereditary
or customary right of cultivation, sometimes termed ownership, u. some­
times proprietorship; zahlen sie the customary share o f the produce to the
person entitled to receive it, so they consider themselves entided to
continue undistrubed in the occupation and cultivation o f their land, or
even to transfer it to another ; no such thing as the letting of land on terms of
profit; private sales o f land practically unknown u. the sale of land by the
Civil Court (an English innovation) has been prohibited because so opposed
to ancient custom as to be incapable o f being carried into effect ; mortgages
— are almost all o f an usufructuary kind, and in Mhairwarra a kind o f metayer
system established between the mortgager and the mortgagee: the State - the
representative o f the former superior Chief - collects the revenue (the mod­
ern equivalent to the old customary share of the produce) from the cultivators
by certain agency machinery etc, ausser over lands, w o the Chief's rights
I to collect dues, and o f other kind, were assigned by him to minor Chiefs,
- istamrardars orjaghirdars - on conditions o f military service, or for other
consideration; unter d. rights so exercised by the State u. its assignees,
was the right to dispose of waste lands; obgleich within the State area of col283
lection the revenue is settled in theform of a money payment in all jaghir estates
the revenue is collected by an estimate of the produce, and money assessments
are unknown, (p. 263-265) u. sagtLa Touche selbst: “ The land tenures are, as
might be expected, entirely analogous to those prevailing in the adjacent Native
15 5 S t a t e s (p. 266) | In Europe, im Unterschied vom East, in place of the
produce {type o f) tribute was substituted a dominion over the soil - the cul­
tivators being turned out o f their land u. reduced to the condition o f serfs
or labourers. (266, 26 7)29
In the East, under the village system, the people practically governed themselvesy and the contest for power among the Chiefs o f the noble class
was mainly a struggle for command o f the kachahri tabils. (271)
Sir Henry Sumner Maine: “Lectures on the Early History of Institutions.
London i8 y j.”
In d. Uebersetzten d. Brehon Laws - an assemblage o f law tracts, wich­
Senchus Mor (Great Book o f the Ancient Law ), and the Book of A icill. Nach
M r. Whitley Stokes das erstere compiled in od. kurz vo r / / Jb d t;1 d. Buch
v. A icill ein Jhd t früher. (12)
Edmund Spenser: “ View of the State of Ireland”
Sir John Davies2.
Laws of Wales.
Brehons a class o f professional Irish Lawyers, whose occupation became
[De\ B\elld\ G\allico] Caesar. V I,
i j
14 s:
The learned writer o f one o f the modern prefaces prefixed to the Third
Volum e o f the Ancient Law contends that the administration o f the
Brehon system consisted in references to arbitration (p. 38) (See “ Ancient
Laws of Ireland” ) W ill ein vornehmer Mann seine Schuld (a claim upon
him) nicht discharge, Senchus Mor tells you to “fast upon him” (I.e. Ancient
Law s etc. vol. I, p. 1 1 3 ) Dies identisch mit was d. Hindu call “ sitting
dharna” (39, 40).
Alle Pfaffenautorität in Irld ging natürlich, nach d. conversion d. Irish
Celts über an d. “ tribes of the saints” (the missionary monastic societies
founded on all parts o f the island u. d. multitude o f bishops dependent
on them. D . religious Theil der old Law s daher superseded, ausser so far
as the legal rules exactly coincided with the rules o f the new Christian code,
the “ law of the letter” . (38) The one object o f the Brehons was to force
disputants to refer their quarrels to a Brehon, or to some person in au­
thority advised by a Brehon, and thus a vast deal o f the law tends to run
into the Law of Distress, which declares the various methods by which a
man can be compelled through seizure o f his property to consent to an
arbitration. (38, 39) The Brehon appears to have invented (dch hypothe­
tische Conjecturen, i.e. purely hypothetical cases) the facts which he used
as the framework for his legal doctrine. His invention necessarily limited by
his experience, and hence the cases suggested in the law tracts... throw
light on the society amid which they were composed. (43, 44) The “ law
of nature” meint d. ancient law (custom) explained by the Brehons, u. dies
bindend as far as it coincided with the “ law of the letter” (i.e. dem Christli­
chen Kram). (50) The Brehon did claim that St. Patrick and the other
great Irish Saints had sanctioned the law which he declared, and that some
o f them even revised it. (51)
D ch d. Churchmen, die mit notions o f roman law [rather ditto o f canonical
law] more or less imbued, kam auch d. röm. Einfluss ( - so far as it goes -)
on Brehon law. (55) Daraus im Interesse d. Kirche Testament derived
(“ W ill” ) ; ebenso conception o f “ Contract” (the “ sacredness o f promises”
etc. sehr wichtig für Pfaffen) Eine Unterabtheilg (published) des Senchus
Mor, nämlich Corus Bescna chiefly concerned mit “ Contract” u. zeigt sich
darin that the material interests of the Church furnished one principal motive
16 1
for (its) compilation. (5 6)
Nach d. Brehon law giebts 2 Sorten o f “ contract” : “ a valid contract, and an
invalid contract” ... Anciently, the power o f contract is limited on all
sides ... by the rights o f family, distant kinsmen, co-villagers, tribe, Chief,
and, if you contract (später mit Christenthum) adversely to the Church,
by the rights o f the Church. The Corus Bescna is in great part a treatise
on these ancient limitations. (57, 58)
4The “ Book of A icill” provides for the legitimation not only o f the bastard,
but o f the adulterine bastard, and measures the compensation to be paid
to the putative father. The tract on “ Social Connections” appears to assume
that the temporary cohabitation of the sexes is part o f the accustomed order
o f society, and on this assumption it minutely regulates the mutual rights
o f the parties, showing an especial care for the rights o f the woman,
even to the extent o f reserving to her the value o f her domestic services
during her residence in the common dwelling. (59) Dieser tract on “ Social
Connections” notices a “first” w ife.5 (61) Dies hält Maine für Kircheneinfluss, kommt aber überall in higher state o f savagery vor, z.B. bei
Red Indians. | The common view seems to have been that (d. christliche)
chastity ... the professional virtue o f a special class, (monk, bishop, etc)
(61) (Die flgden “ Extracts” zeigen, einerseits dass Herr Maine sich noch
nicht aneignen konnte was Morgan noch nicht gedruckt hatte, andrerseits,
dass er Sachen die sich u. a. schon bei Niebuhr finden, darzustellen sucht
as “ pointed out” by the identical Henry6 Sumner Maine! — : “ From the
moment when a tribal community settles down finally (dies “ finally” ! absurd,
da der tribe, wie w ir sehr7 oft finden,8 having once settled down, migrates
de9 nouveau u. settles again, either voluntarily, or forced to do so some­
where else) upon a definite space of land, the Land begins to be the base o f
society in place o f the kinship. The change is extremely gradual etc.” (72)
[Dies zeigt nur, wie wenig er d. point of transition kennt.] E r führt fort:
“ The Constitution o f the Family through actual blood-relationship is o f
course an observable fact, but, for all groups of men larger than the Family,
the Land on which they live tends to become the bond o f Union between
them, at the expense o f kinship, ever more and more vaguely conceived.”
(72, 73) [Dies zeigt, wie wenig die Gens a fact observed by the identical
Maine is!] “ Some years ago I pointed out (“ Ancient Law ” , p. 103 sq.) the
evidence furnished by the history o f International L a w that the notion
of territorial sovereignty, which is the basis o f the international system, and
which is inseparably connected with dominion over a definite area o f land,
very slowly substituted itself for the notion o f tribal sovereignty.” (73)
Nach Herrn Maine, first: Hindoo Joint Family, 2nd, Household Community of
the Southern Slavonians, 3d) the true Village Community asfoundfirst in Russia
and next in India. [Dies “ first” u. “ next” bezieht sich nur auf d. relative
periods worin diese things dem great Maine bekannt geworden.] (78)
Ohne d. collapse der “ smaller social groups” and the decay o f the authority
which, whether popularly or autocratically governed, they possessed over
the men composing them, wie sagt d. würdige Maine, ( w e ) 10 “ should
never have had several great Conceptions which lie at the base o f our stock
o f thought” (86) u. zwar sind diese great conception(s): “ the conception
o f land as an exchangeable commodity, differing only from others in the
limitation o f the supply” (86, 87), “ the theory of Sovereignty” , or (in other
words) o f a portion in each community possessing unlimited coercive force over
the rest” , “ the theory o f L aw as exclusively the command o f a sovereign
One or Num ber” , “ the ever increasing activity o f legislation” u. - [asi­
n us!] - der test o f the value o f legislation ... v iz : “ the greatest happiness
o f the greatest number.” (87)
The form o f private ownership in land which grew out o f the appropria­
tion ofportions of the tribal domain to individual households of tribesmen is plainly
recognized by the Brehon lawyers; yet the rights o f private owners are
limited by the controlling rights o f a brotherhood o f kinsmen, and the
control is in some respects even more stringent than that exercised over
separate property by an Indian village community. (89, 90) Dasselbe
W ort: “ Fine” or Family (?) is applied to all the subdivisions o f the Irish
society, von d. Tribe in its largest extension u. all intermediate bodies
down to the Family (in the present sense), and even for portions of the
F a m ily (Sullivan, Brehon Law. Introductiorf\) (90) Sept = sub-tribe, or
Joint Family in d. Brehon tracts. (91) The chief for the time being was, as
the Anglo-Irish judges called him in the famous “ Case o f Gavelkind” , the
caput cognationis. (91) N o t only was the Tribe or Sept named after its
eponymous ancestor, but the territory which it occupied also derived
from him the name which was in commonest use - so wie “ O ’Brien’ s
Country” or “ Macleod’ s Country” . (I.e.) V o n portions des land occupied
by fragments of the tribe some are under minor chiefs or “flaiths” (93)
A ll the unappropriated tribe-lands are in a more especial w ay the property
o f the tribe as a whole, and no portion can theoretically tbe subjected to
more than a temporary occupation. (93) A m ong the holders o f tribe-land
are groups o f men calling themselves tribesmen, bilden in reality associations formed by contract, chiefly for the | purpose o f pasturing cattle.
(I.e.) A u f dem “ waste” - common tribeland not occupied - Stücke
beständig brought under tillage or permanent pasture by settlements of
tribesmen, and upon it cultivators o f servile status are permitted to squat,
particularly towards the border. It is the part des territory worüber d.
authority des Chief tends steadily to increase, u. here he settles his
*'fuidhir” , 11 or stranger-tenants, a very important class - the outlaws and
“ broken” men from other tribes who come to him for protection ... are
only connected with their new tribe by their dependence on its chief,
and through the responsibility which he incurs for them. (92)
Particular families manage to elude the theoretically periodical re-division
o f the common patrimony o f the group; others obtain allotments with
its consent as the reward o f service or the ap(p)anage o f office; and there
is a constant transfer o f lands to the Church, and an intimate intermixture
o f tribal rights with ecclesiastical rights
Brehon law shows that by
the time it was put into shape, causes etc. tending to result in Several
Property ... had largely taken effect. (95) The severance o f land from
the common territory appears most complete in the case o f Chiefs, many
o f whom have large private estates held under ordinary tenure in 12
addition to the demesne specially attached to their signory. (I.e.)
Dieser asinus bildet sich ein dass “ modern research
conveys a stronger
impression than ever of a wide separation between the Aryan race and races of
other stocks (!) but it suggests that many, perhaps most, o f the differences
in kind alleged to exist between Aryan sub-races are really differences
merely in degree o f development. (96)
Anfang d. X V I I Jhdts erklärten d. Anglo-Irish Judges the English Common
Law to be in force throughout Ireland, u. so seit dem lausigen James I
all land to descend to the eldest son o f the last owner, unless its devolution
was otherwise determined by settlement or will. D er Sir John Davis,2
in seinem report o f the case u. d. arguments before the Court, recites that
hitherto all land in Ireland had descended under the rule of Tanistry oder
those of Gavelkind. Was dieser Davis 2 sich einbildet as system of inheritance,
called Gavelkind, he (D avis)2 describes s o : “ When a landowning member
o f an Irish Sept died, its chief made a re-distribution of all the lands of the Sept.
He did not divide the estate o f the dead man among his children, but used it
to increase the allotments o f the various households o f which the Sept
was made up. A ber was diesen English judges nur als “ systems o f
succession” erscheint, w ar “ ancient mode o f enjoyment during life” . (99)
So in the Hindoo Joint Undivided Family the stirpes or stocks, dem European
law nur bekannt as branches o f inheritors, are actual divisions of the family,
and live together in distinct parts of the common dwelling. (Calcutta Review,
July 1874, p. 208) (100)
Rundale holdings in part o f Ireland; jetzt meist common form : arable land
held in severalty (dies beschreibt d. Sache falsch!), while pasture u. bog are
in common. A ber noch vor 50 Jahren, cases werefrequent w o d. arable land
divided in farms which shifted among the tenant-families periodically, and
sometimes annually. (10 1) Nach Maine “ the Irish holdings “ in rundale”
are not forms of property, but modes of appropriation” , 13 aber d. Bursche
selbst bemerkt: “ archaic kinds of tenancy are constantly evidence o f ancient
forms ofproprietorship___ Superior ownership arises through purchase from
small allodial proprietors (?), through colonization o f village waste-lands
become in time the lord’s waste, or (in an earlier stage) through the sinking
of whole communities of peasants into villeinage, and through a consequent
transformation o f the legal theory o f their rights. A ber selbst wenn a
Chief or Lord has come to be recognized as legal owner o f the whole
tribal domain, or o f great portions o f it, the accustomed methods o f
occupation and cultivation” are not altered. (102)
D . chief Brehon law tract setting forth the mutual rights o f the collective
tribe and o f individual tribesmen or households o f tribesmen in respect
o f tribal property, is | called the Corus Bescna, printed in the third volume
o f the official edition. (103) Das was die ganze Sache verdunkelt ist the
“ strong and palpable bias o f the compiler towards the interest o f the
Church; indeed, part o f the tract is avowedly devoted to the law o f Church
property and o f the organisation o f religious houses. When this writer
affirms that, under certain circumstances, a tribesman may grant or
contract away tribal land, his ecclesiastical leaning constantly suggests a
doubt as to his legal doctrine. (104)
In the Germanic countries, their (d. chrisd. Pfaffen) ecclesiastical societies,
were among the earliest and largest grantees o f public or “ folk” land.
(Stubbs: “ Constitutional History” , v. I, p. 104). The W ill, the Contract,
and the Separate Ownership, were in fact indispensible to the Church
as the donee o f pious gifts. (I.e.) A ll the Brehon writers have a bias
towards private or several, as distinguished from collective, property.
(io 5)
Weiter über the “ Tribe” or “ Sept” see “ Ancient Laws of Ireland” , II, 283,
289; III, 4 9 -5 1; II, 2 8 3; III, 52, 53, 55. Ill, 47, 49. Ill, 1 7 ; III, 5. Der
collective brotherhood o f tribesmen, wie der Agnatic Kindred in Rom,
some ultimate right of succession appears to be reserved. ( 1 1 1 , 112 )
The “Judgments of Co-Tenancy” is a Brehon law tract, noch unpublished
(18 75), w ovon sich aber Herr Maine, der nur d. Ueberset^g kennt, nicht d.
Text, so pfiffig war sich vo r d. Publication flgdes mittheilen zu lassen:
D . tract fragt: “ Whence does Co-Tenancy arise” ? A nsw ers: “ From
several heirs and from their increasing on the land” ; dann bemerkt der
tract: the land is, in the first year, to be tilled by kinsmen just as each
pleases; in the second year they are to exchange lots; in the 3d year the
boundaries are to be fixed u. the whole process oj severance is to be consummated
in the 10thyear." ( 112 ) Maine bemerkt richtig, dass d. Zeitbestimmgen
ideales arrangement des Brehon law giver,14 aber d. Inhalt: “ First a Joint
Family (dies statt gens, weil d. Herr Maine d. Joint Family wie sie in Indien
existirt fälschlich als ursprüngliche Form betrachtet), composed o f
“ several heirs increasing on the land” , is found to have made a setdement.
In the earliest stage the various households reclaim the land without set
rule. (!) N ext comes the system o f exchanging lots. Finally, the portions
o f land are enjoyed in severalty.” ( 113 )
Herr Whitley Stokes hat dem Maine 2 passages occurring in non-legal Irish
literature mitgetheilt. T he “ liber Hymnorum” (soll v. n t Jhdt sein)
contains folio 5A : “ Numerous were the human beings in Ireland at that
time (i.e. the time o f the sons o f A ed Slane A . D . 618-694) and such was
their number that they used not to get but thrice 9 ridges for each man in
Ireland to wit, 9 of bog,, and 9 of smooth (arable), and 9 of wood” (114 )
Another Irish Mscpt, believed o f the 12. century, the “ Lebor na Huidre”
says that “ there was not ditch, nor fence, nor stonewall round land, till
came the period o f the sons o f A ed Slane, but (only) smooth fields. Be­
cause o f the abundance o f the households in their period, therefore it is
that they introduced boundaries in Ireland” . (114 ) Beide schreiben a
change from a system o f collective to a system o f restricted enjoyment zu
dem “ growth o f population” . The periodical allotment to each household
o f a definite portion o f bogland, w ood land, u. arable land gleicht sehr
dem apportionment o f pasture and w ood and arable land still going on
under the communal rules o f the Swiss Allmenden (I.e.)
Herr Maine als blockheaded Englishman geht nicht von gens aus, sondern
von Patriarch, der später Chief w ird etc. Albernheiten. (116 -18 ). Dies
passt namtlich für d. älteste Form der gen s! - Dieser Patriarch - z.B. bei
d. Morganschen Iroquois (wo d .gens in female descent!) | D er Blödsinn
Maine’s gipfelt in d. Satz: “ Thus all the branches o f human society may
or may not have been developed from joint families [wo er grade die
jetzige Hindooform der letzteren im A u g hat, dies sehr sekundären
Character hat, u. deshalb15 auch - ausserhalb d. village communities thront,
namentlich in d. Städten\\ which arose out o f an original patriarchal cell;
but, wherever the Joint Family is an Institution o f the Aryan race (!),
we (who ?) see it springing from such a cell, and when it dissolves, we see
it dissolving into a number o f such cells.” (118 )
Property of land has had a twofold (?) origin ... partly from the disen­
tanglement of the individual rights o f the kindred or tribesmen from the collective
rights of the Family or Tribe ... partly from the growth and transmutation of
the Sovereignty of the Tribal Chief. [Also nicht 2 fold origin; sondern nur 2
ramifications o f the same source; the tribal property u. tribal collective
body, which includes the tribal chief.]1 6 ___ Beide in most o f Western
Europe passed through the crucible o f feudalism___ The first (the
sovereignty o f the Chief) re-appeared in some wellmarked characteristics
o f military or knightly tenures ... the other in the principal rules of non-noble
holdings, and amongst them o f Socage, the distinctive tenure o f the free
farmer. (120) In sehr oberflächlicher W eise: “ The Status of the Chief
left one bequest in the rule o f Primogeniture, which, however, has long
lost its most ancient fo rm ; ... in the right to receive certain dues and to
enforce certain monopolies; and drittens in a specially absolute form of property
... once exclusively enjoyed by the chief (?), and after him by the Lord, in a
portion of the tribal territory whichformed his own dominion. Andrerseits: Out
of tribal ownership in various forms of decay have sprung several systems of
succession after death, among them the equal division of the land between the
children u. has left another set of traces ... in a number o f minute customary
rules which govern tillage and occasionally regulate the distribution of theproduce.
(120, 12 1) Nach Arthur Young (Travels: 1787, 88, 89, p . 407) more than
1/3 o f France smallproperties, that is, littlefarms belonging to those who cultivate
them” (says A . Young,) Nach Toic^queville (“ Ancien Régime” ) the proportion
was grow ing, dch d. extravagance der nobles which Court life fostered u.
compelled them to sell their domains to peasants in small parcels” . ( 1 2 1, 122)
The law of equal or nearly equal division after death was thegeneral law of France;
primogeniture was alLzumeist confined to lands held by knightly tenure. “ In
Siidf(ran)k(reï)ch the custom o f equal division verstärkt dch d. identical
rule of Roman jurisprudence u. dort d. privileges des eldest son nur gesichert
dch Anw endg d. Ausnahmsregeln des Roman law giving the benefit to
milites (soldiers on service) when making their wills or regulating their
successions, and by laying down that every chevalier, u. every noble o f
higher degree, was a miles im Sinn der röm. Jurisdiction. ( 12 2 ) D . röm.
Gesetz - 12 Tafeln - lässt absolute Freiheit der V erfg g d. testator; gleiche
Theilung nur bei intestate (sui heredes), später erst d. Recht d. Kinder etc.
D aggen (d. W illkühr17 d. testator) secured etc. Tocqueville (I, 18) “ Ancien
Régime” has explained that the right to receive feudal dues and to enforce petty
monopolies made up almost the entire means o f living für d. majority der
French nobility. A certain number o f nobles had, besides their feudal
rights, their terres (domain, belonging to them in absolute property, and
sometimes o f enormous extent ; d. rest lived mainly, not on rent, but on their
feudal dues, and eked out a meagre subsistence by serving the king in arms
(12 3 , 124)
In Folge d. französischen18 Revolution: the land law of the people superseded
the land law of the nobles; in Engld der | umgekehrte Process: primogeniture,
once applying only to knightly holdings, came to apply to the great bulk
o f English tenures, ausser d. Gavelkind of Kent u. einige andre Lokale.
(12 3 , 1 24) Dieser Change was rapidly proceeding %-wischen Zeit of Glanville
[whscheinlich 33d 19year of Henry's reign, hence 118 6 ; Henry I I ( i i j 4-1189)]
u. Bracton [wahrsclich nicht later als / 2nd year of Henry III, i.e. 1270 ;
Henry I I I ( 12 16 -12 7 2 )]. Glanville schreibt as if the general rule o f law
caused lands held byfree cultivators in socage19 to be divided equally between all
the male children at the death o f the last owner; Bracton, as if the rule o f
primogeniture applied universally to military tenures and generally to
socage tenures. (125) Optimist Maine findet dass andrerseits “ the trans­
mutation o f customary and copyhold into freehold property ... proceeding
for about 40 years under the Conduct of the Copyhold and Enclosure Commis­
sioners” u. dies betrachtet dieser comfortable Bursch as the English
equivalent of the French Revolution. Risum teneatis! (see d. fellow p. 125)
Dieser lächerliche Bursche macht d. röm. Form d. absolute landed
property zur “ English form of ownership” , u. fährt dann fort:
“ . .. to the principle o f several and absolute property in land [das überall
2 93
in occidental Europe mehr existirt als in E n gd] I hold this country to be
committed ... there can be no material advance in civilisation unless landed
property is held by groups at least as small as Families; . .. we are in­
debted to the “ peculiarly” absolute English form of ownership for such an
achievement as the cultivation of the soil of North America ( 126 , w o grade alles
specifisch English20 in landed Property vernichtet! O D u Philister)
The Norman nobles who first setded in Ireland are well known to have
become in time21 Chieftains of Irish tribes... it is suggested that they were the
first to forget their duties to their tenants and to think of nothing but
their privileges. (128)
E ven according to the (Irish) texts apparently oldest, much of the tribal
territory appears to have been permanently alienated to sub-tribes, families, or
dependent chiefs
d. glosses u. commentaries show that, before they
were written, this process had gone very far indeed. (129) The power of
the Chief grow s first through the process anderswo called “ Commendation,”
wdch the free tribesman becomes “ his marf\ and remains in a state o f
dependence having various degrees
ferner dch his increasing authority
over the waste lands of the tribal territory u. from the servile or semi-servile
colonies he plants there; endlich from the material strength he acquires through
the numbers of his immediate retainers u. associates, most o f whom stand to
him in more or less servile relations. (130)
The Manor with its Tenemental lands held by the free tenants o f the Lord
and with its Domain which was in immediate dependence on him, was the
type of all feudal sovereignties in their complete form , whether the ruler ac­
knowledged a superior above him or at most admitted one in the Pope,
Em peror, or G o d himself. (130 -31)
D . abominable Freeman ^Norman Conquest” I, 88) erklärt sich d. V erw dlg
d. tribe chiefs in feudal lords etc leicht, indem er voraussetzt was er
entwickeln soll, nämlich dass d. privlged class always formed a distinct
class or section of the community, sagt, I.e. “ the difference between eorl u. ceorl is
a primary fact from which we start" ( 13 1)
D . chief source o f nobility seems to have been the respect o f the co-villagers
or assemblages of kinsmen for the line of descent in which the purest blood
o f each little society was believed to be preserved. (132 ) “ E v e ry chief” ,
says the text, “ rules over his land, whether it be great or whether it be
small.” (132 ) I A ber the Brehon law shows the w ay in which a common
freeman m ay22 become a chief u. zugleich ist diese position to which he attains
“ the presidency of a group of dependents” - (später wden diese Burschen erst
Glieder einer besondern Klasse). (13 3 ) W o aristocracy a section o f the
community from the first besondre Umstände, die notabene selbst schon
derivative sind, nämlich, w o an entire tribal group conquers or imposes its
supremacy upon other tribal groups also remaining entire, oder w o an original
body of tribesmen, villagers, or citizens, gradually gathers round itself a miscel­
laneous assemblage of protected dependents. In Scottish Highlands some entire
septs or clans stated to have been enslaved to others; u. ebenso frühest in
Ireland met a distinction between free u. rent paying tribes. (133 )
Im Brehon law a Chief vo r allem a rich man (133 ), nämlich reich - nicht in
Land, sondern in flocks u. herds, sheep, vor allem Ochsen. D . Opposition
zwischen birth u. wealth, bes(onders) wealth other than landedproperty, ganz
modern. See Homer’s u. Niebelungen Helden; in späterer griech. Literatur
pride of birth identified mit pride in 7 wealthy ancestors in succession,
έπτα πάπποι πλούσιοι, in Rom rasch d. Geldaristokratie assimilirt mit
Blutaristokratie. (134)
Im tract (Brehon L a w s): “ Cain-Aigillne” (p. 279) heissts that “ the head o f
every tribe should be the man o f the tribe who is the most experienced,
the most noble, the most wealthy, the most learned, the most truly popular,
the most powerful to oppose, the most steadfast to sue for profits and to be
suedfor losses.” Also personal wealth. [Aber Herr Maine, dies only in Status
of Upper Barbarism, far from being archaic] the principal condition
o f the Chief’s maintaining his position and authority. (134 , 135)
Brehon law zeigt dass dch d. acquisition o f such wealth the road was always
open to chieftainship. Portion o f the Danish nobility originally peasants u. in
early English laws some traces o f a process wdch a Ceorl might become a
Thane. (135 )
Brehon law speaks o f the Bo-Aire (the cow-nobleman). 1st simply a peasant,
grown rich in cattle, probably through obtaining the use o f large portions o f
tribe-land. (135 ) D . true n obles-th e Aires getheilt [von d. Pfaffenjuristen,
d. Brehons notabene; dies wie alle alten Pfaffenbücher (Menu f.i.) voller
fictions in Interesse d. Chiefs, höheren Stände etc, schliesslich all das
wieder in Interesse der Kirche. Ausserdem sind sie wie Juristen aller
Sorten bei d. Hand mit fictive classifications.)] Jeder Grad unterschieden
von dem anderen dch the amount of wealth possessed by the Chief be­
longing to it, by the weight attached to his evidence, by the power of
binding his tribe by contracts (literally o f “ knotting” ), by the dues he
receives in kind from his vassals, by his Honor-Price, or special damages
incurred by injuring him. A t the bottom o f the scale is the Aire-desa; u. d.
Brehon L aw provides dass wenn der Bo-Aire has acquired 2X the wealth
o f an Aire-desa, and has held it for a certain number o f generations, he
becomes an Aire-Desa himself. “ He is an inferior chief - says the Senchus
Mor - whose father was not ;a d iie f” . (136) Enormous importance of
wealth u. specially wealth in tattle reflected in the Brehon tracts. (137)
Wahrscheinlich the first aristocracy springing from kingly favour consisted
o f the Comitatus, or Companions of the King. (138) Major Domus bei d.
Franken ward K ö n ig ; das blood | des Steward (and Great Seneschal) of
Scotland runs in the veins o f the Kings o f England. N och in-England the
great officers of the Royal Council u. Household haben Vorrang vo r allen Pairs,
od. mindest o f all Peers o f their own degree. Alle diese hohen Würden
[dies hat Maurer u. z. Th. schon Hüllmann lang gewusst vo r M aine],23
wenn nicht marking an office originally clerical, point to an occupation... at
first ... menial.” (139) D . Household sprang von very humble beginnings.
(139) D . stubbige Stubbs (^Constitutional History” ) states that “ the gesiths
of an (English) king were his guard and private council” , wobei er bemerkt, dass
“ the free^household servants of a ceorl are also in a certain sense his gesiths” .
D . Companions des king in the Irish legal literature nicht noble, u. associated
mit d. king's body-guard which is essentially servile.
Wsclich dass in a particular stage o f society, der personal service to the Chief
or King was überall rendered in expectation o f a reward in the shape o f a
gift o f land. D . Companions d. Teutonic Kings shared largely in the
Benefices, grants o f Roman provincial land fully peopled u. stocked; in
ancient En gld selbe class largest grantees (nach Pfaffen s’il vous plait) o f
public land; u. dies part o f the secret o f the mysterious change wdch a new
nobility o f Thanes, deriving dignity u. authority from the K in g, absorbed
the older nobility of the Eorls. (14 1) A ber in countries lying beyond the northern
u. western limits of the Roman Empire, or just within them (land) was
plentiful. E s w ar noch im Mittelalter d. “ cheapest commodity” . D .
practical difficulty was not to obtain land, but the instruments for making it
productive. ( 14 1, 42) D . Chief (Irish) w ar vo r allem reich in flocks u. herds;
he was military leader; great part o f his wealth was spoil of war u. in his
civil capacity he multiplied his kine through his grow ing power of appro­
priating the wastefor pasture, and dch a system o f dispersing his herds among
the tribesmen. D . Companion,24 der followed him to the foray etc auch
enriched by his bounty; if already noble, he became greater; if not noble,
the w ay o f nobility lay through wealth. (142) (Vergl. Dugmore: “ Com­
pendium of Kaffir Laws and Customs” )
Whenever legal expression has to be given to the relations o f the Comitatus to the Teutonic kings, the portions o f the Roman law selected are
uniformly those which declare the semi-servile relation of the Client or
Freedman to his Patron. Nach d. texts d. Brehon L a w a Chief o f high
degree is always expected25 to surround himself with unfree dependents u. d.
retinue eines K in g o f Erin was to consist not only o f free tribesmen but
of a bodyguard of men bound to him by servile obligations ... A uch ... wenn d.
Comitatus or Companions o f the Chief (were) freemen, nicht nothwdig od.
gewöhnlich his near kindred. (145)
In d. Brehon Laws spielen grosse Rolle horned cattle, i. e.bulls, cows, heifers,
and calves; auch horses, sheep, swine, dogs, bees (the latter = the producers o f
the greatest o f primitive luxuries). V o r allem aber kine (cows). Capitale kine reckoned by the head, cattle has given birth to one o f the most
famous terms o f law and one o f the most famous terms o f political
economy, Chattels and Capital. Pecunia. (147) The Primitive Roman law
places oxen in highest class o f property, mit land u. slaves as items o f the
Res mancipi. Kine, which the most ancient Sanscrit literature shows to |
have been eaten as food, became at some unknown period sacred and their
flesh forbidden; two o f the chief “ Things which required a Mancipation
at Rome” , oxen and landed property, had their counterpart in the sacred
bull of Siwa and the sacred land o f India. (148) Horned cattle showed their
greatest value when groups o f men settled on spaces of land and betook
themselves to the cultivation of food-grain. (I.e.) Erst für ihr flesh u. milk
valued, schon in very early times a distinct special importance belonged to
them as instrument or medium of exchange; bei Homer sind sie a measure of
value; traditional story dass d. earliest coined money known at Rome stamped
with the figure o f an o x; “ pecus” u. “ pecunia” . (14 9 )26 In Brehon laws
figuriren horned cattle als means of exchange; fines, dues, rents u. returns are
calculated in live-stock, not exclusively in kine, but nearly so. Beständig
referred to two standards of value, “ sed” u. “ cumhal” ; cumhal soil originaliter
have meant a female slave, aber “ sed” plainly used for an amount or quantity
of live stock. Aber, später, cattle hauptsächlich valued for their use in tillage,
their labour and their manure. E rst nach u. nach as beasts ofplough ersetzt dch
Pferde in Western Europe (auch hier nicht überall); in still large portions o f
the w orld horse noch ausschliesslich employed, wie wohl ursprünglich
überall, for war, pleasure, or the chase. (150) Oxen waren so fst einziger
Representative o f what now called Capital. (I.e.) The same causes which
altered the position o f the ox and turned him into an animal partially
adscriptus glebae, undoubtedly produced also a great extension of slavery
Enormous importation o f slaves into the central territories o f the Roman
Commonwealth, and the wholesale degradation o f the free cultivating
communities o f Western Europe into assemblages o f villeins. (150, 15 1 )
D . Schwierigkeit - in ancient Ireland - not to obtain land, but the means of
cultivating it. D . great owners o f catde were the various Chiefs, whose
primitive superiority to the other tribesmen in this respect was probably
owing to their natural functions as military leaders o f the tribe. Andrer­
seits scheint aus d. Brehon laws zu folgen that the Chiefs pressed by the
difficulty o f finding sufficient pasture for their herds. Hatten ihrer
grow ing power over the waste land dr particular group worüber sie
präsidirten, aber die most fruitful portions o f the tribal territory whsclich
those which the free tribesmen occupied. Hence d. system of giving and
receiving stock, to which 2 sub-tracts des Senchus Mor are devoted, the CainSaerrath u. d. Cain-Aigillne, the Law of Saer-Stock tenure u. the L aw o f
Daer-Stock Tenure. (152)
In Feudalgesellscft everybody has become the subordinate o f somebody else
higher than himself and yet exalted above him by no great distance. (153)
N ach Stubbs (Constit. History. I, 252) Feudalism has “ grow n up from 2
great sources, the Benefice and the practice o f Commendation. (154)
Commendation, in particular, went on all over Western Europe. (155)
D . Chief (Irish) - sei er einer d. many tribal rulers whom the Irish records
call kings, or one o f those heads o f joint families whom the Anglo-Irish
lawyers at a later period called the Capita Cognationum, - is not owner of
the tribal lands. His own land he may have, consisting o f private estate or
o f official domain, or o f both, and over the general tribal land he has a
general administrative authority, ever grow ing greater over that portion o f it
which is unappropriated waste. He is meanwhile the military (leader) o f his
tribesmen, and probably in that capacity
has acquired great wealth in
cattle. It has somehow become o f great importance to him to place out
portions o f his herds among the tribesmen, and they on their part
occasionally find themselves through stress o f circumstance in pressing
need o f cattle for employment in tillage. Thus the Chiefs appear | in the
Brehon law as perpetually giving stock' and the tribesmen as receiving it.
B y taking stock the free Irish tribesman becomes the Ceile or Kyle, the
vassal or man of his Chief owing him not only rent but service and homage.
The exact effects o f “ commendation” are thus produced. (15 8) Je mehr
stock der tribesman accepts from his Chief, desto tiefer der status zu dem
er herabsinkt. Hence die 2 classes o f Saer und Daer tenants (entspreche (n)d
dem status der free und higher base tenants o f an English manor).
D . Saer Stock tenant erhält nur limited amount o f stock from the Chief,
bleibt freeman, retains his tribal rights in their integrity; the normal period
of his tenancy was j years, and at the end o f it he became entitled to the cattle
which had been in his possession. In d. Zwischenzeit hatte er the advantage of
employing them in tillage, and the Chief erhielt the growth and increase [i.e.
theyoung and the manure\ and milk. Zugleich it is expressly laid down dass
d. Chief überdem entitled to receive homage and manual labour; manual labour
is explained to mean the service of the vassal in reaping the Chief's harvest and
in assisting to build his castle or fo rt; u. it is stated that, in lieu o f manual
labour, the vassal might be required to follow his Chief to the wars. (158 ,
! 59)
Daer-stock tenancy gebildet, wenn entweder any large addition to the stock
deposited with the Saer-Stock tenant, od. an unusual quantity accepted in
the first instance by the tribesman. D . Daer Stock tenant had parted with some
portion of his freedom u. his duties invariably referred to as very onerous. D .
Stock, den er vom Chief erhielt, bestand aus 2 portions, w ovon die eine
entsprechend dem Rang des Empfängers, d. andre der rent in kind to which
t(h)e tenant became liable. D . technical standard seines Rangs, war des
tenant “ honor-price", d.h. the fine or damage payable for injuring him, variable
T ”mit the dignity o f the person injured. M it Be^ug auf die rent heisst’s im
Brehon Law : “ The proportionate stock o f a calf o f the value o f a sack
with its accompaniments, and refections for three persons in the summer,
and w ork for three days, is three “ sam-haisc"^ heifers or their value”
(Cain-Aigillne, p. 25), in ändern W orten: Deponirt der Chief beim tenant
3 heifers28 so wird er entitled to the calf, the refections, and the labour.”
Ferner: “ The proportionate stock of a “ dartadh" heifer with its accompaniment,
I 7°
is 12 “ seds" - explained to mean 12 “ sam-haisc" heifers, or 6 cows, etc etc.
Diese rent in kind, od. food rent, hatte in dieser ihrer ältesten Form , nichts
%u thun mit der value of the tenant's land, but solely to the value of the Chiefs
stock deposited with the tenant; sie entwickelte sich erst später in a rent
payable in respect of the tenant's land. Die lästigste imposition des Daer-Stock
tenant sind dies “ refections"; dies war nämlich d. Recht des Chief, der den
stock gegeben hatte, to come with a company o f a certain number, and
feast at the Daer-stock tenant’ s house, at particular periods, for a fixed
number o f days. D . Irish chief war wahrscheinlich, sagt Herr Maine,
litde better housed and almost as poorly furnished out, wie seine tenants,
and could not have managed to consume at home the provisions to which
his gifts o f stock entitled him. The Brehon law defines and limits the
practice narrowly on all sides, but its inconvenience u. abuse manifest;
from it doubtless descended those “ oppressions” which revolted such
English observers o f Ireland as Spenser and Davies29 (!), the “ coin and
livery” , and “ cosherings” o f the Irish Chiefs which they [these selfrighteous English canaille!] denounce with such indignant emphasis (!).
D er würdige Maine, vergessend die Rundreisen d. englischen Könige
u. ihrer Höflinge (see Anderson u. Macpherson) (vgl. auch Maurer) 30 hat d.
Frechheit zu vermuthen: “ Perhaps there was no Irish usage which
seemed to Englishmen (!) so amply to justify
the entire judicial or |
legislative abolition o f Irish customs” (!) (15 9 -16 1) Nach d. Brehon
lawyers the relation out o f which Daer-stock tenancy and its peculiar obli­
gations arose, were not perpetual. After food-rent and service had been
rendered for 7 years [Zeit die Jacob zu dienen hatte?], if the Chief died, the
tenant became entitled to the stock; wenn andrerseits der tenant starb,
waren seine heirs theilweis, obgleich nicht ganz, relieved from their
obligation. Wahrscheinlich d. Daer-stock tenancy, beginning in the
necessities o f the tenant, was often from the same cause rendered practi­
cally permanent.. (162)
The Heriot of English Copyhold tenure, the “ best beast” taken by the Lord
on the death o f a base tenant, has been explained as an acknowledgment o f31
the Lord's ownership of the cattle with which he anciently stocked the lands
o f his villeins, just as the Heriot of the military tenant is believed to have had
its origin in a deposit o f arms. Adam Smith recognized the great antiq­
uity o f the Metayer tenancy, w o von er noch in seiner Zeit found in Scotland
one variety, the “ steelbone". (162) In einer der prefaces der official translation
der Brehon laws Vergleichg gemacht zwischen Metayer tenancy u. the Saer u.
Daer-stock tenancy o f ancient Irish law. Die differences aber: In Metayage
giebt landlord land u. stock, der tenant nur Arbeit u. skill; in Saer u. Daer
stock tenancy the land belonged to the tenant. Ferner: d. ancient Irish
relation produced nicht allein a contractual liability, sondern a status; the
tenant had his social u. tribal position distinctly altered by accepting
stock. [Wie leicht in ancient times mere contractual liability umschlägt,
17 1
oder kaum zu ändern ist von status, Beweis z.B. Russld w o persönlicher
Dienst direct in Sklaverei umschlägt u. selbst freiwillige Feldarbeit etc nur
mit Mühe von selbem Umschlag zu schützen. Sieh darüber d. Weitere in
d. russ. Quellen.] (163) In Ireland the acceptance of stock not always volun­
tary; a tribesman in one stage o f Irish custom at all events was bound to
receive stock from his own “ King” ... Dies the Chief of his32 tribe in its
largest extension. In eingen cases the Tribe wzu der intending tenant
gehörte had in some cases a veto on his adoption o f the new position. Um
d. Tribe opportunity to geben to interpose whenever it had legal power
to do so, the acceptance of stock had to be open and public, and the conse­
quences o f effecting it surreptitiously are elaborately set forth by the law.
Hence one o f the rules: “ no man should leave a rent on his land which he
did not find there.” (16 3, 164)
Gehörten der Chief der den stock gab u. der Ceile der ihn accepted zum
selben Tribe, so relation geschaffen verschieden von d. tribal connection
u. much more to the advantage o f the chief. A ber dieser Chief war nicht
immer der Chief o f the tribe(s)man’ s own Sept or Tribe. Brehon law
sucht Schwierigkeiten in d. W eg zu legen w o attempt dies vassalage
Verhältniss %u etabliren %·wischen a tribesman and a strange Chief. Aber
abundant admission that dies vorkam. Jeder nobleman assumed to be
as a rule rich in stock, u. having the Zw eck to disperse his herds by the
practice o f giving stock. D er enriched peasant, der Bo-aire, had Ceiles
who accepted stock from him. Hence the new groups formed in this w ay
were manchmal ganz distinct von den old groups composed o f the Chief
and his Clan. A uch die new relation nicht confined auf Aires, or noble­
men, u. Ceiles (i.e. free but non noble tribesmen). The Bo-aire certainly
and apparently the higher Chiefs also, accepted stock on occasion from
chieftains more exalted than themselves, and in the end to “ give stock”
came to mean the same thing wie anderswo “ Commendation___ By
fiction the Brehon L a w represents the K in g o f Ireland as “ accepting stock'
from the Emperor. E s sagt: “ When the King of Erin is without opposition
(wovon the explanation runs: when he holds the ports of Dublin, | Water­
ford and Limerick, which were usually in the hands o f the Danes - “ he
receives stock from the King of the Romans” . (Senchus Mor. 33 II, 2 2 ;). The
commentary goes on to say, that sometimes “ it is by the successor of Patrick
[dies statt “ Pope” ] that the stock is given to the K in g o f Erin ” . (164-166)
This natural growth offeudalism was not, as some eminent recent writers
have supposed, entirely distinct from the process by which the authority
o f the Chief or Lord over the Tribe or Village was extended, but rather
formed part o f it. While the unappropriated waste lands were falling into
his domain, the villagers or tribesmen were coming through natural (?)
agencies under his personal power. (167)
The law-tracts (Brehon) give a picture o f an aristocracy of wealth in its most
primitive form ; cf. über d. Gallic Celts Caesar B. G .3 I. 4, u. V I. 13. In
ancient world finden w ir sehr early plebejan classes deeply indebted to aristo­
cratic orders. (167) Athenian commonalty the bondslaves through debts of the
Eupatrids; so the Roman Commons in money bondage to the Patricians.
(167, 168) In very ancient times land was a drug, while capital was ex­
tremely perishable, added to with the greatest difficulty, and lodged in
very few hands ... The ownership o f the instruments of tillage other than
the land itself was thus, in early agricultural communities, a power o f the
first order ... it may be believed (!) that a stock of the primitive capital larger
than usual was very generally obtained by plunder ... mostly daher in the
hands o f noble classes whose occupation was war and who at all events
had a monopoly of the profits o f office. The advance o f capital at usurious
interest, and the helpless degradation o f the borrowers, natural results
o f such economical conditions. (168, 169) D . Brehon writers der CainSaerrath u. Cain-Aigillne, dch their precise u. detailed statements,
plainly intend to introduce certainty and equity into a naturally oppressive
system. (169)
“ Eric-fines” , or pecuniary composition for violent crime. (170) B y this
customary law, the sept or family to which the perpetrator o f a crime
belonged etc had to pay in cattle (später Geld) dies fine. ( 1 7 1)
Feodum, Feud, Fief, von Vieh, cattle. Ebenso Pecunia u. Pecus. Wie d.
Roman lawyers tell that pecunia became the most comprehensive term
for all a man’ s property, so “feodum” - originally meaning “ cattle” .
i1! 1, 172 )
Nach Dr. Sullivan feodum Celtic Sprachursprung; he connects it with
fuidhir. Nämlich d. territory jedes Irish tribe seems to have had settled
on it, neben den Saer und Daer Ceiles, certain classes o f persons deren
status nearer to slavery than to that o f the Saer u. Daer tribesmen. Diese
classes genannt Sencleithes, Bothachs und Fuidhirs; diese 2 letzten classes
wieder subdivided in Saer u. Daer Bothachs und Saer u. Daer Fuidhirs.
Ersichtlich aus d. tracts u. namentlich dem noch unpublicirten “ Corus
Fine” , dass d. servile dependents, gleich den freemen des territory, had
a family or Tribal organisation; and indeed all fragments of a society like
that of ancient Ireland take more or less the shape of the prevailing model. D.
position d. classes, obscurely indicated in Domesday u. other English
records as Cotarii und Bordarii whclich sehr ähnlich denen der Sencleithes
u. Bothachs; in beiden Fällen had diese servile orders whsclich an origin
distinctfrom that of the dominant race, and belonged to the older or aboriginal
inhabitants of the country. Ein Theil der families or subtribes formed out
o f them were certainly in a condition o f special servitude to the Chief or
dependence on him; diese either engaged in cultivating his immediate
domain-land and herding his cattle, or were planted by him in separate settlements
on the waste land of the tribe; rente or service which they paid scheint von
Willkühr des Chief abhängig gewesen zu sein. (17 2 , 173) | D . wichtigste
Theil dieser Klassen der settled by the Chief on the unappropriated tribal
lands. Diese Fuidhirs u. ausserdem strangers or fugitives from other ter­
ritories, in fact men w ho had broken the original tribal bond which gave
them a place in the community. A us Brehon law sichtbar, dass diese Klasse
zahlreich; spricht à diverses reprises von the desertion of their lands by
families or portions of families. Unter gewissen Umständen wden the
rupture of the tribal bond u. d. Flucht deren who break it als “ eventualities”
von d. Gesetz behandelt. D . 'Verantwortlichkeit von tribes, subtribes, u.
families for crimes ihrer Glieder u. even to some extent of civil obligation
derselben - might be prevented by compelling or inducing a member of the group
to withdraw from its circle; and the Book of A icill gives the legal procedure
which is to be observed in the expulsion, the tribe paying certain fines
to the Chief and the Church and proclaiming the fugitive ... Result
probably to fill the country with “ broken men” u. diese could find a home
and protection by becoming Fuidhir tenants; alles tending to disturb the
Ireland der Brehon Law s tended to multiply this particular class. ( 17 3 ,
D . Fuidhir tenant exclusive(ly a) dependent o f the Chief u. nur dch
letzteren connected mit d. Tribe; Chief wde auch responsible für sie; sie
kultivirten sein Lan d; sie daher the first “ tenants at will” known to Ireland.
The “ three rents” , says the Senchus Mor are the rackrent from a person of a
strange tribe [dies person undoubtedly the Fuidhir\, a fair rent from one of
the Tribe, and the stipulated rent which is paid equally by the tribe and the strange
tribe” . In einer der glosses, was “ rackrent” übersetzt ist, verglichen “ to
the milk of a cow which is compelled to give milk every month to the end of the
year” . (174 , 175) Andrerseits hatte Chief grosses Interesse to encourage
diese Fuidhir tenants. Heisst in one o f the tracts : “ He brings in Fuidhirs to
increase his wealth” . D . interests really injured were those of the tribe... which
suffered as a body by the curtailment of the waste land availablefor pasture. V g l.
Hunter's “ Orissa” w o shown wie d. “ hereditary peasantry” o f Orissa be­
schädigt dch d. broken “ migratory husbandmen” etc. (Sieh Orissa, /, /7 , jS )
( 1 7 5 - 1 7 7 ) 34 Cf. Edmund Spenser (writing not later than ijp 6 ) u .**
Für d. comfortable Maine d. Irish Tenant question “ was settled only the
other day” . (178) M it seinem gewöhnlichen Optimismus d. Sache settled
dch d. A ct of i8yo (!)
**Sir John Davis2, writing before 16 13 . 35
The general bias der writers der Brehon Tracts rather towards the exagger­
ation o f the privileges o f the Chiefs than towards overstatement o f the
immunities o f tribesmen. (180)
The power o f the Irish Chiefs u. their severity to their tenants in the
16th century being admitted, have been accounted for by the Norman nobles
- the Fitzgeralds, Burkes, Barrys - becoming gradually clothed with Irish
chieftainship had first abused it u. thus set an evil example to all the
Chiefs in Ireland. (18 1) Better Theory of Dr. Sullivan (in his Introduction,
p. cxxvi) wonach dies régime determined “ by the steady multiplication of
Fuidhir tenants” . (i 82) Und causes at work, powerfully u. for long periods
o f time, to increase the numbers o f this class: Danish piracies, intestine
feuds, Anglo-Norman attempts at conquest, the existence o f36 the Pale, u.
the policy directed from the Pale ofplaying off against one another the Chiefs
beyond37 its borders. D ch dies civil war etc tribes fa r u. wide broken up, dies
implies a multitude of broken men. ( 183) Dann wie in Orissa die immigrated
cultivators at the disposal o f the Zeminders make greatly rise for d. ancient
tenantry the standard o f rent u. d. exactions d. landlords - selber Einfluss
d. Fuidhir tenants in Ireland; altered seriously for the worse the | ^ p o r­
tion o f the tenants by Saer Stock u. by Daer Stock Tenure. (18 3, 184)
Spenser: “ View of the State of Ireland” .
In d. übrigens sonst kritisch nicht erwähnenswerthen: “ History of Ireland,
Ancient and Modern” (Dublin 1867) von Martin Haverty, w d bemerkt:
“ tanaisteacht (or tanistry), a law o f succession, bezog sich auf “ transmission
of titles, offices, and authority.” Says Professor Curry: “ There was no invari­
able rule o f succession... but according to the general tenor o f our ancient
accounts the eldest son succeeded the father to the exclusion o f all collateral
claimants, unless it happened that he was disqualified etc. T he eldest son,
being thus recognised and the presumptive heir and successor to the dignity,
was denominated tanaiste, that is, minor or second,, while all the other sons
or persons that were eligible in case o f his failure, were simply called
righdhamhna, i.e. king-materialor king-makings. This was the origin o f
tanaiste, a successor, and Holnais Flacht, successorship. The tanaiste had a
separate establishment,39 as well as distinct privileges and liabilities.
He was inferior to the king or chief, but above all the other dignitaries
o f the State___ Tanistry, in the Anglo-N orm an sense, was not an
original, essential element o f the law o f succession, but a condition that
might be adopted or abandoned at any time by the parties concerned; and
it does not appear that it was at any time universal in Erin, although it
prevailed in many parts o f it___ Alternate tanaisteacht did not involve
any disturbance o f property, or o f the people, but only affected the
position o f the person himself\ whether king, chief, or professor of any of the
liberal arts, as the case might be; ... it was often set aside by force.” [Prof.
Curry in : “ Introduction, etc to the battle of Magh Leana” , printedfor the Celtic
Society, Dublin, 18 j j ; quoted in Haverty, Hist, of Irld, p. 49, w o es weiter
heisst: “ The primitive intention was that the inheritance should descend
to the oldest and most worthy man o f the same name and blood, but
practically this was giving it to the strongest, and family feuds and intestine
wars were the inevitable consequence.” (Haverty, p. 49)]
B y gavelkind (or gavail-kinne) [common also to the Britons, Anglo-Saxons,
Francs, etc] the property was divided equally between all the sons, whether
legitimate or otherwise . . . ; but in addition to his own equal share, which
the eldest son obtained in common with his brothers, he received the
dwelling house and other buildings, which would been received by the
3 °3
father or kenfine - [Dies W ort “ kenfine” oder “ Caen-fine” was (nach Prof.
Curry) only applied to the heads o f minor families, and never to any kind
o f chieftains], if the division was made, as it frequently was, in his own
life-time. This extra share was given to the eldest brother as head of the
family, and in consideration o f certain liabilities which he incurredfor the security
o f the family in general. I f there were no sons, the property was divided
equally among the next male heirs o f the deceased, [Nach Curry: in default
o f any male issue daughters were allowed a life interest in property.] whether
uncles, brothers, nephews, or cousins; but the female line was excluded
from the inheritance. Sometimes a repartition of the lands of a whole tribe,
orfamily of several branches, became necessary, owing to the extinction of some ofthe
branches; but it does not appear that any such confusion or injustice re­
sulted from the law, as is represented by Sir John Davis and by other English
lawyers who have adopted his account o f it. (p. jo . He quotes: “ Disserta­
tion upon40 the Laws of the Ancient Irish, written by D r. O'Brien , author o f
the Dictionary, but published anonymously by Vallencey in the 3d number
o f the “ Collectanea de Reb. Hib.''')
The Tenure of land in Ireland was essentially a tribe orfamily right... all the
members o f a tribe or family in Ireland had an equal right to their
proportionate share o f the land occupied by the whole. The equality
o f tide and blood thus enjoyed by all must have created a sense of
individual self-respect and mutual dependence, that could not have
existed under the Germanic and Anglo-N orm an system o f vassalage. |
J74 The tenures o f whole tribes were o f course frequently disturbed by w ar;
and whenever a tribe was driven or emigrated into a district where it had no
hereditary claim, if it obtained land it was on the payment of a rent to the king
of the district; these rents being in some instances so heavy as to compel
the strangers to seek for a home elsewhere. (I.e. p. 50) (cf. ib. p. 28 N te ,
ein (angeblich) Beispiel aus d. Zeit der Queen MabX)
D . Hünde v. Engländern - man kennt d. Humanität dieser Bestien aus d.
Zeiten Henry's V III, Elizabeth's u. James 1\ - machten gross Geschrei
über Irish compositio od. “ eric” ; vergessend dass sich selbiges findet in
Laws of Athlestan, Leges Wallicae (Howell D d a’s)41 etc. see I.e. p. / / u.
daselbst N te f.)
Fosterage prevailed, up to a comparatively recent period; Engl.gvt. machte
oft stringent laws daggen, to prevent the intimate friendships which sprung
up between the Anglo-Irish families and their “ mere” Irish fosterers. B y
the statute of Kilkenny, 40 Ed. ///(a .d . 1367) wden Fosterage and gossipred
[gossipred or compaternity, by the canon law, is a spiritual affinity, and
the juror that was gossip to either o f the parties, might, in former times,
have been challenged as not indifferent.” \Davies on Ireland, bei Dr.
Johnson Diet, sub voce: gossipred.)] as well as intermarriages, with the native
Irish, declared to be treason. Says Giraldus Cambrensis (Top. Hib. Dist. 3 ,
ch. 23) “ if any love or faith is to be found among them (the Irish), you
must look for it among the fosterers and their foster-children” . Stanihurst,
De reb. bib. p. 49, says, the Irish loved and confided in their foster-brothers
more than their brothers by blood: “ Singula illis credunt; in eorum spe
requiescunt; omnium conciliorum sunt maxime consoci. Collactanei
etiam eos fidelissime et amantissime observant” . See also Harris's Ware
— v. II, p. 72 (p. 51, 52 I.e.)
E h w ir ftfahren mit dem Maine, zunächst zu bemerken dass 4 Ju li 160 /
der elende Jacob I [der zur Zeit der Elizabeth, before his accession den
Katholikenfieund gespielt u., wie D r. Anderson: “ Royal Genealogies, p.
786” sagt, “ assisted the Irish privately more than Spain did publicly” ]
issued a proclamation, formally promulgating für Irland the A ct o f
Uniformity (2 E li^.) and commanding the “ Papist clergy” to depart
from the realm. Im selben Jahr the ancient Irish customs o f tanistry u.
gavelkind were abolished by a judgment o f the Court of King's Bench, and
the inheritance o f property was subjected to the rules o f English law.
(D. lumpacii affirmed the illegality o f the native Irish tenures of land;
declared42 the English common law to be in force in Ireland, u. von da
the eldest son succeeded, as heir-at-law, both to lands which were at­
tached to a Signory and to estates which had been divided according to the
peculiar Irish custom o f gavelkind. Maine. 18 5] D . lausige Sir John Davis
was K in g James Attorney-General for Ireland u. für diesen Posten war
natürlich entsprechender Lum p gewählt -ein ebenso “ vorurtheilsfreier”
u. uninteressirter Patron wie der Elizabeths Arschkissende Poet Spenser43
I i^State of Ireland"'). His remedy for the ills o f Ireland, the employment of
large masses o f troops “ to tread down all that standeth before them in
foot, and lay on the ground all the stiffneckedpeople of that land" u. zwar
sollte that war nicht nur im Sommer, sondern auch im Winter geführt
werden, u. fährt dann fo rt: “ the end will be very short" u. describes in proof
what he himself had witnessed in the late wars o f Munster” etc. See d.
weiteren Cannibalismus dieses Poeten bei Haverty, I.e. p. 428 Nte.)
D . bewusste Zw eck d. James was “ looting” , was d. Bursche Colonisation
nannte. Vertreibg u. Unterjochung d. Irish, u. confiscation ihres Lands
u. Habe, alles das unter d. Prätext von Anti-Popery. i6oy O 'N eill u.
O'Donnell, noch in possession o f vast tracts o f country, the last great
Irish chieftains, crushed.44 1608 d. Chiefs im Norden, Sir Cahir O'Doherty
etc crushed (ihr Revolt). N un 6 counties of Ulster - Tyrone, Derry, Donegal,
Fermanagh, Armagh u. Cavan - confiscated to the Crown u. parcelled out
among adventurers from England and Scotland. Dazu benutzt Sir Arthur
Chichester (Bacon’s plan gefiel nicht dem beasdy fool James II), the lord
deputy, der zum Dank erhielt the wide lands o f Sir Cahir O'Doherty for
his share in the wholesale spoliation, (see O 'Donovan, “ Four Masters".
Die reichen Spiessbürger der London City were the largest participators in
the plunder. T hey obtained 209,800 acres and rebuilt the city (i.e. Derry)
175 since then called Londonderry. Nach d. plan finally | adopted for the
“plantation of Ulster” the lots into which the lands were divided were
classified into those containing 2000 acres, which were reserved for rich
undertakers and the great servitors of the crown; those containing i j o o acres,
which were allotted to servitors of the crown in Ireland, with permission to
take either English or Irish tenants; and, thirdly, those containing 1000 acres,
to be distributed with still less restriction. The exclusion o f the ancient
inhabitants, and the proscription45 o f the Catholic religion, were the
fundamental principles to be acted on as far as possible in this settlement.
Cox says that in the instructions, printed for the direction o f the settlers, it
was especially mentioned “ that they should not suffer any laborer, that
w ould not take the oath o f supremacy, to dwell upon their land” , (p. 497500 I.e.)
Irish Parlement berufen angeblich für “ Protestant Ascendancy” , aber na­
mentlich auch um Geld für James I zu pressen (whose insatiable rapacity
u. stete Geldnoth notorious, (p. 501-503 I.e.)
D a der Raub vermittelst der “plantation so gut gelungen, suchte James I
Sache jetzt auf andre Theile Irlands auszudehnen; appointed commission
o f inquiry to scrutinize the titles and determine the rights o f all the lands
in Leinster; commissioners worked so rapidly, that in a little time land to
the extent o f 385,000 acres placed at Jam es’s disposal [dieser “ silly,
pedantic fool” , der “ British Solomon lauded by Hume] for distribution.
(Weiteres darüber p. 501-505 I.e.) See Leland. D er puritanisch thuende
ruffian Arthur Chichester [der für jede neue infamy additional grant o f Irish
lands erhielt u. d. T id e : Baron o f Belfast, hatte 16 16 sein W erk gethan
u. withdrew from the Irish gvnment] laid down as the punishment of
jurors who would notfindfor the king on “ sufficient evidence” 46 the Star Chamber;
sometimes they were “ pillor<i)ed with loss o f ears, and bored through
the tongue, and sometimes marked on the forehead with a hot iron etc.”
{Commons' Journal, v. / , p. 30J.) (I.e. p. 505. ntef)
D . flgde Passus in einem d. “ famous” (why not “ infamous” ?) cases in
which the Anglo-Irish Judges affirmed the illegality o f the native Irish
tenures o f land: “ Before the establishment o f the (English) common law,
all the possessions within the Irish territories ran either in course of
Tanistry or in course o f Gavelkind. Every Signory or Chiefry with the portion
of land which passed (withy it went without partition to the Tanist, who always
came in by election or with the strong hand, and not by descent; but all inferior
tenanties were partible between males in Gavelkind". (Sir f . Davis' Reports;
“Le Cas de Gavelkind" , H il. 3, Jac. /, before all the Judges.) (p. 185)
[Dass Tanistry (see d. vorigen Ausz. aus Haverty) eine ältere Form (ar­
chaische) der Primogenitur, ist keine Entdeckg d. Herrn Maine, sondern
wie d. Auszüge aus Haverty zeigen war von D r. O'Brien, Prof. Curry etc
lang vorher als fact angenommen. E s beruht einfach d<arau)f, dass d.
Chief, sei es der gens, sei es d. Tribe, theoretisch gewählt, praktisch ver­
erbbar in d. Familie (u. für tribe, rather die gens) der der defunct Chief
angehört; meist ältester Sohn, relativ Onkel (modificirt dch descent linie);
ist bereits eignes head verbden mit d. function, so geht dies natürlich mit
d. Function.]
V o n Gavelkind sagt Sir John D avis: “ B y the Irish custom of Gavelkind, the
inferior tenanties were partible among all the males of the Sept, both Bastards
and Legitim ate; and, after partition made, if any one of the Sept had died,
his portion was not divided among his sonnes, but the Chief of the Sept made a
new partition of all the lands belonging to that Sept, and gave everyone his part
according to his antiquity.” (186) [D. Irish Sept = Gens.] Skene citirt ob­
servation eines engl. Engineer officer in d. Highlands abt 17 3 0 : “ They
(the Highlanders) are divided into tribes or clans under chiefs or chieftains,
and each clan is again divided into branches from the main stock, w(fi)o have
chieftains over them. They are subdivided into smaller branches of jo or 60 men,
who deduce their originalfrom their \particular chieftain.” {Skene: “ Highlanders”
I, p. 156) Was Davis describes passirt ähnlich in a Hindoo Joint Family in
case o f death o f one o f its members. (187) D ort nämlich, all the property
being brought into the “ common chest or purse” , the lapse o f any one
life would have the effect, potentially if not actually, o f distributing the
dead man’s share among all the kindred united in the family group. A n d
if, on a dissolution o f the Joint family, the distribution o f its effects were
not per capita but per stirpes, this would correspond to Davis's Chief
giving to each man ‘according to his antiquity.’ (p. 18 7, 188) Gavelkind
entspringt aus d. gleichen od. period. Theilung d. Lands in rural com­
mune ; zuletzt “ the descendants (aber vorher dies auch schon bei Leb^eit)
o f the latest holder take his property, to the exclusion o f everybody else
u. d. rights o f the portion o f the community outside the family dwindle
to a veto on sales, or to a right o f controlling the modes o f cultivation.”
C1 89)
Das was in D avis’s Report (sieh oben) in Widerspruch scheint mit d.
Brehon Laws, u. a. mit Corus Bescna (which deals with rights over tribal
lands) ist dass er ausser rule o f Tanistry nur die o f “ Gavelkind” kennt,
whd in Brehon Law s andre (nicht tribal oder gentilician) “ property”
excluding the “ Sept.” Dr. Sullivan in Introduc. (Breh. Law s p. C L X X )
says: “ According to the Irish custom, property descended at first only to
the male heirs o f the body, each son receiving an equal share___ Ulti­
mately, however, daughters appear to have become entided to inherit all,
if there were no sons.” (Dies analog dem Gavelkind of Kent.) Corus Bescna
implies that under certain circumstances land might be permanently alienated,
at all events to the Church. (19 1) Ist möglich, dass in certain time the Irish
Gavelkind (in distinct sense d. Vertheilung unter Sept d. Landes d. defunct),
the modern Gavelkind known to Kent, and many forms o f succession
intermediate between the two, co-existed in Ireland. The Brehon writers
als lawyers u. friends of the Church [“ Comfortable” Maine adds in his usual
Pecksniff unctuosity: “ and (it may be) as well wishers to their country” \]
17 7
sehr biassed für descent o f property in individual families. (193) Be­
ständig kam vor in Irland u. schott. Highlands dass a Chief, ausser domain
appertaining to his office, had a great estate held under what the English
lawyers deemed the inferior tenure. D . Beispiele on record w o 2 grosse
Irish chiefs distributed such estates among their kindred. Im 14 Jhdt Connor
More O'Brien assigned the bulk of the estate to the variousfamilies of the Sept
formed by his own relatives (also Gens), behielt sich nur 1/2 o f a 3d = 1/6 vor,
u. dies V6 divided er unter his 3 sons, reserving only a rent to himself. A m
Ende d. i j Jhdts Donogh O'Brien, son o f Brien Duff, son o f Connor, King o f
Thom ond, divided all his land unter seine 1 1 sons, reservirte für sich nur
mansion u. the demesne in his vicinity. Diese 2 cases getrennt dch a
century. Im ersten Fall d. land had remained in a state of indivision whd
several generations; in 2ten had been periodically divided. D er Connor
M ore O ’Brien distributed the inheritance o f a Sept; Donogh O'Brien that
o f a family. ( Vallancey: “ Collectanea de Rebus Hibernicis" I, 264, 265. Cf.
Haverty. Maine exploits former Irish writers without naming them.)
Connor M ore O ’Brien scheint (!) to have paid regard to the various
stirpes or stocks, worin d. gens sich branched out; entsprechend was Davis
sagt dass d. Chief divided a lapsed share between the members of a sept
“ according to their antiquity". In d. most archaic form der Joint Family (soli
heissen Gens) u. d. institution which grew out o f it, the Village Community,
diese distributions per capita, später distribution per stirpes, w o careful
attention is paid to the lines into which the descendants o f the ancestor
o f the joint-family (read: gens) have separated, and separate rights are
reserved to them. Finally, the stocks themselves escape from the sort o f
shell constituted by the Joint Family (gens); each man’s share o f the
property, now periodically divided, (diesen Uebergang d. period, gleichen
Theilung erklärt Maine nicht) is distributed among his direct descendants
at his death. A t this point, property in its modern form has been established;
but the Joint Family has not wholly ceased to influence successions.
[Keineswegs ist ddch “ property in its47 modern form” established; see
Russian communes f. i.] Fehlen direct descendants, it is even now the rules
o f the Joint Family which determine the taking o f its inheritance.
Collateral successions, when distant, follow the more primitive form - per
capita; when they are those of the nearer kindred ... per stirpes. (194-96) |
D . Theilung bei Lebzeiten, das sich bei beiden Chiefs findet, auch in Hindoo
Joint-Family; auch Laertes in Odyssee, 48 the Old Chief, wenn krackschelig,
parts with his power u. retains but part o f the property he has adminis­
tered; daggen d. “poorer freeman" w d einer der “ senior” pensioners des
tribe so often referred to in the tracts (Brehon). (196)
[Es ist modernes Vorurtheil, d. Theilung post mortem, hervorgegangen aus
d. testamentarischen Erbscft, als etwas Specifisches zu betrachten. D .
Eigenthum an Land z.B., common selbst nach Verwandlg in privates
Familieneigthm, nämlich common property d. family, worin jeder seinen
ideellen Antheil hat, bleibt so nach Tod, sei es dass d. Familie zusammen­
bleibt, sei es dass sie faktisch theilt; folgt daher dass d. Theilung,, wenn der
Chief d. family (od. wie bei Hindoo joint-family der gewählte od. erbliche
Repräsentant der family dazu gezwungen w d dch d. co-parceners) will,
bei seinen Lebzeiten stattfindet. D . gan^ falsche Vorstellung des Maine,
der d. Privatfamilie, wenn in Indien auch in d. Form , worin sie dort
existirt, - u. zwar in d. Städten mehr als auf d. Land, u. bei d. Grundrentbesitzern mehr als bei d. wirklichen arbeitenden Gliedern einer village
community - als d. Basis betrachtet, woraus sich Sept u. Clan entwickeln
etc, zeigt sich auch in flgder Phrase: Nachdem er gesagt, dass d. “power of
distributing inheritances vested in the Celtic Chiefs” essentially dieselbe Insti­
tution sei, die dem “ Hindoo father” reserved ist dch die “ Mitakshara” ,
fährt er fo rt: “ It is part o f the prerogative (eselhafter Ausdruck für die gens
u. Tribe Verhältnisse) belonging to the representative o f the purest49
blood in the joint family; but in proportion as the Joint Family, Sept, or
Clan becomes more artificial, the power of distribution tends more and more to
look like mere administrative authority” . (196, 197) D . Sache ist grad
umgekehrt. Für Maine, der sich d. English Private family after all nicht
aus d. K o p f schlagen kann, erscheint diese gan% natürliche Function des Chief
of gens, weiter of Tribe, natürlich grade weil er ihr Chief ist (u. theoretisch
immer “ gewählter” ) als “ artificial” u. “ mere administrative authority” ,
whd d. Willkühr d. modernen pater familias grade “ artificial” ist, wie d.
__ Privatfamily selbst, vom archaischen Standpunkt.]
In einigen systems o f Hindoo law, hat der Vater, der bei Lebzeiten d. Eigen ­
thum vertheilt, d. Recht to retain a double share u. nach einigen Hindoo
customs, nimmt der älteste Sohn, wenn d. patrimony theil end mit seinen
Brüdern, 2 x grösseren Antheil als d. anderen. Aehnlich uthe birthright”
o f the Hebrew patriarchal history. Dies nicht zu verwechseln mit Recht
of the rule of Primogeniture. [Sieh oben Haverty, zum Beweis, dass d. irischen
Vorgänger des Herrn Maine dies lange vor ihm constatirt hatten, w o sie
diese Ungleichheit bei Gavelkind sehr genau scheiden von Tanistry u. auf Pflichten
d. ältesten Sohns etc reduciren.] E r sucht sich dann the double share
plausible zu machen [sie sei “ reward or security for impartial distribution”
(!)] u. bemerkt das sei oft coupled with the right to take exclusively such
things deemed incapable of division, the family house, f.i., and certain ustensils.
Statt d. ältesten Sohns dies Privileg manchmal dem jüngsten Sohn zufallend.
(197) Primogenitur unbekannt Griechen u. Römern u. Semiten {Juden u. a.
auch). A ber w ir finden als familiar fact dass d. letzten Königs ältester Sohn
ihm folgt; d. griech. Philosophen speculiren auch dass in älteren states o f
society, smaller groups o f men., families u. villages, governed by eldest son
after eldest son. (198)
A uch beim Einfall d. Teutonic Barbars in West Europa Primogenitur nicht
d. gewöhnliche Regel der Nachfolge. D . Allodial Property d. Teutonic
freemen - theoretisch d. share he had got bei original Erobrungssettlement
d. tribe etc. wenn getheilt, gleichgetheilt ^ wischen Söhnen od. auch %wischen
Söhnen u. Töchtern. D och erscheint erst mit diesen Barbaren Primogenitur
rasch ausgebreitet über Westeuropa. Und nun findet Maine neue Schwie­
rigkeit, die jedoch nur aus seiner Unbekanntsc(ha)ft mit Wesen der gens
herstammt, nämlich dass statt ältesten Sohns the eldest male relative of the
deceased eintritt (dies bei Vorherrschen d. gens d. Normale, da der eldest
male relative - w o female descent also superseded - näher dem Vater des
deceased als der son des deceased) oder dass neither the succession of the eldest
son nor that of the eldest relative could take effect without election or confirmation
by the members of the aggregate group to which they belong. (199) [Dies ist noch
— normaler als alles andre; da d. Chief immer theoretisch elective bleibt, only
__ selbstverständlich, within the gens, resp. within the tribe.] U m sich
178 letzteren Punkt | klar zu machen, pflückt Herr Maine wieder in seiner
beliebten Hindoo Joint Family, w o nach T o d d. Familienhaupts, wenn d.
Familie separates, gleiche Theilung stattfindet; wenn nicht, election, meist
ältester Soh n ; wenn dieser als improper set aside, nicht sein Sohn, sondern
meist d. brother of deceased manager gewählt; so sort o f mixture of election
and doubtful succession, was auch gefunden wird in the early examples o f
European primogeniture. (200) So d. Tribe Chief gewählt from the Chief­
tain’s family “ as representing the purest49 blood o f the entire brother­
hood” . (Blödsinn, wenn von wirklich primitive communities Rede. See
f.i. Red Indian Iroquois. Umgekehrt, weil meist d. Wahl traditionell in
derselben, od. gewissen gentes ftführt, u. dann wieder in einer bestimmten
Familie derselben gens, mag diese später, unter changed circumstances als
“ representing the purest49 blood” gelten.) u. instances o f the choice being
systematically made from 2 families in succession. (200) Ist auch eine
Fiktion d. Herrn Maine, dass der war chief ursprünglich der Tribe chief ist.
Dieser wde umgekehrt nach seinen individual capacities gewählt. Spenser,
aus dem Maine flgde Stelle citirt, ist authority good enough for stating
the facts he saw, but their origin cannot be elucidated from Spenser’s
plausible reasons for the facts observed. Folgendes d. Stelle aus Spenser:
“ It is a custom among all the Irish that presently after the death o f
any o f their chief lords or captains, they do presendy assemble themselves
to a place generally appointed and known to them to choose another in
his stead, where they do nominate and electfor the most part, not the eldest son,
nor any o f the children o f the lord deceased, but the next to him o f blood
that is eldest and worthiest, as commonly the next brother if he have any, or
the next cousin ( .. . ) as any is elder in that kindred or sept; and then, next to
him,50 they choose the next of the blood to be Tanaist, who shall succeed him in the
said51 Captaincy, if he live thereunto___ For when their Captain dieth,
if the Signory should descend to his child, and he perhaps an infant, an­
other might peradventure step in between or thrust him out by strong
Hand, being then unable to defend his right and to withstand the force
o f a forreiner; and therefore they do appoint the eldest o f the kin to have
the Signory, for that commonly he is a man o f stronger year(s) and
better experience to maintain the inheritance and to defend the co u n try...
A n d to this end the Tanaist is always ready known, if it should happen to
the Captain suddenly to die, or to be slain in battle, or to be out o f the
country, to defend and keep it from all such dangers.” (Spenser: “ View of
the State of Ireland” , bei Maine, p. 20 1, 202) [Maine, der gar nicht erwähnt
(cp. oben Haverty) was d. Irisch writers gesagt, giebt als seine Entdekkung:] “ Primogeniture, considered as a rule o f succession to property,
appears to me a product of tribal leadership in its decay. (20(2)) Glanville
(unter Henry II, whslich n 8 6 )hZ writes mit Bezug auf English military
tenures: “ When anyone dies, leaving a younger son and a grandson, the
child o f his eldest son, a great doubt exists as to which o f the two the law
prefers in the succession to the other, whether the son or the grandson.
Some think the younger son has more right to the inheritance than the
but others incline to think that the grandson might523 be
preferred to his uncle.” (Glanville, V II. 7) Ebenso disputes among
Highland families about the tide to the chieftaincy o f particular clans.
(I.e. 203) Maine versteht d. ganzen case nicht; meint d. Onkel z.B. ge­
wählt, weil mehr wehrhaft; daggen sobald times had become friedlicher
unter central authority o f a king “ the value of strategical capacity in the
humbler chiefs would diminish, and in the smaller brotherhoods the respect
for purity of blood would have unchecked play” . (203) [Dies reiner Blödsinn.
D . Sach’ ist allmälig Ueberwigen (zusammenhängend mit Entw icklg v.
Privatgdeigenthum) der Ein^elfamilie über d. Gens. Des Vaters Bruder
näher dem ihnen beiden gemeinscftlichen Stammhaupt, als irgendeiner
der Söhne des Vaters; also der Onkel der Söhne näher als einer von
diesen selbst. Nachdem schon mit Bezug auf d. Familie d. Kinder d.
Vaters theilen, u. d. gens nur noch wenig od. gar nicht an d. Erbscft
betheiligt, kann für öffentliche FunktionenS2b, also gens chief, tribe chief,
etc noch d. altegens rule vorwiegend bleiben; nothwendig entsteht aber strug­
gle zwischen beiden.] Dieselbe Streitfrage arose zwischen d. descendants
o f daughters in d. controversy zwischen Bruce u. Baliol über Krone von
Schottland. (204) (Edward I liess für Baliol entscheiden, danach d. de­
scendants o f an elder child must be exhausted before those o f the younger
had a title.) Sobald d. älteste Sohn statt d. Onkel folgte to “ the humbler
chieftaincies” he doubtless also obtained that “ portion o f land attached
to the Signory which went without partition to the Tanaist.” 53 (204)
So “ the demesne” , as it was afterwards called, assumed more and more the
character o f mere property descending according to the rule o f primo179 geniture” . (p. 204) | Nach u. nach dann this principle o f primogeniture
extended from the demesne to all the estates o f the holder o f the Signory,
however acquired, and ultimately determined the law o f succession for
the privileged classes throughout feudalised Europe. (204, 5) French
“ Parage” under which the near kinsmen o f the eldest son still took an
interest in the family property, but held it o f him as his Peers. (205)
Unter act o f the 12th year of Elizabeth (1570) the Lo rd Deputy was em­
powered to take surrenders and regrant estates to the Irishry. “ The Irish
Lords” , says Davis, “ made surrenders o f entire counties and obtained
grants o f the whole again to themselves only, and none other, and all in
demesne. In passing o f which grants, there was no care taken of the inferior
septs ofpeople___ So that upon every such surrender or grant, there was
but one freeholder made in a whole country, which was the lord himself; all the
rest were [made dch Elizabeth’s A ct] but tenants at will, or rather tetuints
in villeinage (bei Maine p. 207)
In Brehon Laws (Book of A icill, namentlich Third V ol.) Irish family getheilt
in Geilfine, Deirbhfine, Iarfine u. Indfine (wovon d. 3 letzten übersetzt: the
True, the A fter u. d. En d Families). D . Editor d. Third Volum e (Brehon
Laws, w o von d. Book of A icill) sagt: “ Within the Family, 17 members
were organised in 4 divisions, o f which the junior class, known as the
Geilfine division, consisted o f 5 persons; d. Deirbhfine - 2nd in order, larfine - 3d in order, and the Indfine - the senior of all - consisted respectively
o f 4 persons. The whole organisation consisted, and could only consist,
o f 17 members. [(3 X 4 + 5.)]54 I f any person was born into the Geilfine
division, its eldest member was promoted into the Deirbhfine, the eldest
member of the Deirbhfine passed into the Iarfine, the eldest member o f the
Iarfine - moved into the Indfine, and the eldest member o f the In<d)fine
passed out o f the organisation altogether. It would appear that this
transition from a lower to a higher grade took place upon the introduction
of new members, not upon the death of the seniors.” (citirt bei Maine, 209)
N ach Maine (Bei diesem Bursch nöthig d. Irländer zu vergleichen): any
member of theJointfamily or Sept might be selected as the starting (point),
and become a root from which sprung as many o f these groups o f 17 men
as he had sons. Sobald einer dieser Söhne 4 Kinder hat, ist a full Geilfine
sub-group formed o f 5 persons; w d ein neues male K ind (Sohn) zugeboren
diesem Sohn or to any o f his male descendants, so d. älteste Glied der Geilfine
sub-group - provided always he were not the person from whom it had
sprung - sent into the Deirbhfine. A succession o f such births completed
the Deirbhfine Division, and went on to form the Iarfine and the In(d>fine, the After and the E n d Families. D . jte Person m d. Geilfine division
soll sein the parent von dem d. 16 descendants spring; er scheint to be
referred to in the tracts as the Geilfine Chief. (210)
The Geilfine group is several times stated by the Brehon lawyers to be at
once the highest and the youngest. Whitley Stokes told dem Maine, dass
Geilfine = hand-family; nämlich “ G il” sei = hand (also the rendering o f
O'Curry) and sei in fact = χειρ; u. hand in several A ryan languages =
power, namtlich für family or patriarchal pow er; so, in Greek, υποχείριος
u. χέρης, for the person under the hand; latin. “ herus” (master) von an old
word, cognate to χείρ ;55 ebenso lat. manus, in manu etc, in Celtic “ Gilla ”
(a servant, bei Walter Scott “ Gillie” ) (216, 217) Hence der gewaltige
Gedanke des Maine, dass hinter dieser Irish distribution der Family d.
Patria Potestas u. founded (d. Eintheilung) on the order of emancipation von
Paternal authority. The Geilfine, Hand family, consists o f father u. 4 natural
or adoptive sons immediately under his pow er; d. other groups o f
emancipated descendants diminishing in dignity in propertion to their
distance from the group which ... constitutes the true or representative |
family. (217) Aehnlich in Roman family, w o die enumerated members der
family underwent a capitis deminutio. (218)
The Irish division o f the Family seems only to have been wichtig mit
Bezug auf law o f succession after death. A ber dies rule in all societies.
When the ancient constitution of the Family has ceased to affect anything else,
it affects inheritance. (219) D . authors der Brehon law tracts oft compare the
Geilfine Division der family (mit) der human hand. Dr. Sullivan says:
“ as they represented the roots o f the spreading branches o f the Family,
they were called the cuic merane fine or the ‘five fingers of the Fine'.” (p. 220)
Patria potestas referred to in the Irish tracts as the father’s power of
“ judgment, proof, and witness over his sons. (I.e.) See Tylor über
‘ ‘ Finger-Counting' (in “ Primitive Culture” . Weil menschliche Hand j
Finger zählt, 5 a primitive natural maximum number. Early English
Township represented by the Reeve and the 4 men; the Indian punchayet.
“ Borough English” , unter which law the youngest son and not the eldest
succeeds to the burgage-tenements o f his father. (222) B lackstone, um dies zu
erklären, citirt von Duhalde that the custom o f descent to the youngest son
prevails among the Tartars; sobld d. älteren sons fähig to lead a pastoral life,
verliessen sie den father to migrate “ with a certain allotment of cattle” , and
go to seek a new habitation. D . younges(t), w ho continues longest with
his father, is naturally the heir o f his house, the rest being already provided
for. (222) In d. Leges Wallicae, diese Gewohnheit for all Welsh cultivating
villeins: “ Cum fratres inter se dividunt hereditatem, junior debet habere tygdyn,
i.e., aedificia patris sui, et octo acras de terra, si habuerint.” (L . Wall. v. II,
p. 780), ausserdem certain ustensils; - the other sons are to divide what
remains. (223) D . youngest, remaining under patria potestas, preferred to
the others. (I.e.) Primogeniture ... comes
from the Chief (of clan);
“ Borough English” wie “ Geilfine” dagegen von ancient conception o f
family as linked with patria potestas. (I.e.)
D . Irish w ord Fine - in the Brehon Law s - used for d. family in present
sense, for d. Sept, for Tribe etc. (231)
Irish family liess Adoption zu; the Sept admitted strangers on stated con­
ditions, the Fine Taccair; d. Tribe included refugees from other tribes, die
nur im Zusammenhang mit ihm dch Chief. (2 3 1, 232)
In D r. Sullivan’ s introduction he traces the origin o f Guilds to the gracing
partnerships common among the ancient Irish; the same words used to
describe bodies of co-partners, formed by contract, and bodies o f co-heirs
or co-parceners formed by common descent. (232)
“ Tribe of Saints” or Verwandtscftsideen applied to monastic houses with
its monks and bishops, ebenso to the collective assemblage o f religious
houses etc. (p. 236, sq.) The abbot o f the parent house and all the abbots o f
the minor houses are the “ comharbas” od. co-heirs of the saint. (I.e.) A n
entire sub-tract in the Senchus Mor devoted to the Law of Fosterage, setting
out with the greatest minuteness the rights and duties attaching to all
parties when the children o f another family were received for nurture and
education. (.241 sq.) This classed with “ Gossipred” , religious Verwdt§cft.
(p. 242) [The same mother V milk given to children o f different origin.
Dies reminds one d. Mutterrecht und the rules flowing from it; but Maine
noch unbekannt hiermit, it seems.] “ Literary Fosterage, (p. 242 sq.)
D . Brehon lawyers selbst sind betrachtet by the English writers who have
noticed them as a caste. Nach evidence d. Irish records jedoch anyone
w ho went through a particular training might become a Brehon. Z u r
Zeit w o Ireland began to be examined by English observers, the art and
knowledge der Brehon had become hereditary in certain families attached
to or dependent on the Chiefs o f particular tribes. Dieser selbe change
has obviously occurred with a vast number o f trades andprofessions in. India,
jetzt popularly called castes. M it a native Indian schwer zu verstehen w hy
z.B. a son should not succeed to the learning o f a father, and consequently
his office and duties. In d. States von Engl. Indien governed by native princes,
it56 is still praktisch allgemeine rule that office is hereditary. A ber dies
erklärt nicht the growth o f those castes which are definite sections of great
populations. N u r eine einzige dieser castes really survives in India, that of
the Brahmins u. it is strongly suspected that the whole literary theory ofCaste,
which is of Brahmin origin, is based on the existence of the Brahmin caste alone.
(245) Bei d. Irish gesehn wie all sorts o f groups o f men considered as con­
nected through blood relationship (247); so “ associations o f kinsmen
shading off into assemblages o f partners and guild-brothers-; foster
18 1 parentage, spiritual parentage, and preceptorship | (Teacher and pupil)
taking their hue from natural paternity - ecclesiastical organisation blend­
ing with tribal organisation. (248)
Grösster Theil des Senchus Mor - the largest Brehon law-tract - handelt v.
Distress. E s handelt sich hier um Procedur, die bei d. Rechtsanfängen d.
In Anfang d. Book I V des 18 16 von Niebuhr disinterred manuscript o f
Gajus fragmentary u. imperfect account o f the old Legis actiones.
Actio generally = Handlung, Vollbringung, That. (Cic. N . D . Deos
j spoliat motu et actione divina. actio vitae, id. Off. I, 5 ( = vital action; ferner
actiones = public functions57 or duties, wie actio consularis; dann:
negotiation, deliberation w ie : “ discessu consulum actio de pace sublata est etc;
! political measures or proceedings, addresses of the magistrates to the People. N un
kommen w ir aber zum sense worin legis actio: an action, suit,process with a
defining genitive: actiofurti action for theft; auch mit de: “ actio de repetundis”
action (prosecution for refunding money extorted by magistrates), actionem
alicui intendere, actionem instituere (bring an action agst som(e)body).
“ Multis actiones (processes, suits) et res (the property in suit) peribant. Liv.)
Daher allgemein: a legal formula or form of process (procedure) “ inde ilia
actio: ope consilioque tuo, furtum aio factum esse.” actiones Manilianae,
forms relative to purchase and sale.) “ Dare alicui actionem” , Permission to
bring an action which was the office o f the Prätor. “ Rem agere ex jure,
lege, causa etc “ to bring an action, to manage a cause or suit.
Lege, respective legem - agere, to proceed according to law, mode of executing law,
to execute a sentence. “ Lege egit in hereditatem paternam ex heres filius.”
Cic. de Orat. I, j?«?)58
Bentham unterscheidet zwischen Substantive Law, the law declaring rights
and duties, and Adjective Law, the rules wonach that law is administered.
In älteren Zeiten rights and duties (were) rather the adjective of procedure
als umgekehrt. Difficulty in such times not in conceiving what a man
was entitled to, but in obtaining it; so that the method, violent or legal,
by which an end was obtained, was o f more consequence than the nature o f59
the end itself___ D . wichtigste sehr lange Zeit the “ remedies” . (252)
D . first dieser alten (Roman) actiones ist die: Legis Actio Sacramenti, the
undoubted parent o f all the Roman actions u. daher o f most o f the civil
remedies now in use in the world, [sacra mentum in law: the sum which the
parties to a suit at first deposited with the tresviri capitales, but for which they
subsequently gave security to the praetor, so called because the sum deposited
by the losing party was usedfor religious purposes, esp. for the sacra publica; or
rather, perhaps, because the money was deposited in a sacred place. Festus,
“ ea pecunia, quae injudicium venit in litibus, sacramentum a sacro. Qui pete­
bat et qui infitiabatur, de aliis rebus utrique quingenos aeris ad pontem
deponebant, de aliis rebus item certo alio ligitimo numero assum; qui
judicio vicerat, suum sacramentum e sacro auferebat, victi ad aerarium
__ redibat.” Varro.]60
Diese A ctio sacramenti is a dramatisation o f the Origin o f Justice; 2
Bewaffnete Männer ringen mit einander, Prätor geht vorbei, interposes to
stop the contest; d. disputants state him their case, agree that he shall
arbitrate; arrangirt dass der loser, ausser resigning the subject o f the
quarrel shall pay a sum o f money to the umpire (the Prätor )(p. 253)
(Dies scheint rather Dramatisation o f how law disputes were becoming a
source o f fees profit to law yers! u. dies nennt Herr Maine, als a lawyer,
“ the Origin ofJustice” !)
In dieser dramatisation the claimant holds a wand in his hand, der nach
Gajus a spear repräsentirt, the emblem o f the strong man armed, served as
the symbol ofproperty held absolutely and agst the world (rather the symbol
o f Gew alt als origin o f Roman u. other property!) in Roman u. several
Western societies. Quarrel between plaintiff u. defendant [assertions u.
reassertions - formal dialogue dabei] was a mere pretence among the
Romans, long remained a reality in other societies u. survived in the
Wager of Battle, der als English Institution erst “ finally abolished in our
father’ s day” . (255)
The disputants staked a sum o f money - the Sacramentum - on the merits
o f their quarrel, and the stake went into the public exchequer. The
money thus wagered, das erscheint in a large number o f archaic legal systems,
is the earliest representative of Court Fees___ [D. Legis Actio Sacramenti so
conducted, u. dies wieder showing the intimate nature o f the Lawyer dass d. Lex, d. geschriebne Recht, aber auch literally - nicht d. Geist,
18 2 sondern | der Buchstabe d. Gesetzes, d. Formel d. Wichtigste] So sagt
Gajus: if you sued by Legis Actio for injury to your vines, and called them
vines, you would fail; you must call them trees, because the Text of the
12 Tables speaks only o f Trees. Ebenso enthält d. alte collection o f
Teutonic legalformulas - the Malberg Gloss - provisions von genau derselben
Natur. I f you sue for a bull, you will miscarry if you describe him as a bull;
you must give him his ancient juridical designation o f “ leader of the herd?'.
Y o u must call the fore-finger the “ arrow" finger, the goat the “ browser upon
leeks". (255, 256)
F lgt bei Gajus the Condictio [in Digests: demand for restitution]; er sagt
sie sei gegründet, soll aber nur regulated wden sein dch 2 Roman Statutes
o f the 6th Century B .C ., the L ex Silia u. the L ex Calpurnia; becam Namen
von a notice die der Kläger dem Beklagten gab in 30 Tagen vo r Prätor zu
erscheinen, damit ein judex oder referee might be nominated, \condicere, to
speak with, agree upon, decide, appoint, ansagen. “ condicere tempus et
locum coeundi” . “ condicere rem” , demand restitution, “pecuniam alicui”
Ulp. I .61 Nach d. condictio the parties entered into “ sponsio” u. restipu­
latio". Sponsio, a solemn promise or engagement, guarantee, security.
“ sponsio appellatur omnis stipulatio promissioque.” Dig. 5 0 ,16 , 7.61 “ non
foedere pax Caudina sed per sponsionem (by giving surety) facta est.” (Liv.)
Speciell in civil Suits, ein agreement between 2 parties in a suit, dass der
der den Process verliert shouldpay a certain sum to him who gains it. “ Sponsionem
facere” . (Cic.) Endlich: a sum of money deposited according to agreement, a
stake (Einsatz beim Spiel, bei Wette, that which is laid down, as the
__ amount o f a wager etc.)62
Restipulatio. A counter-engagement or (counter-)obligation (Cic.)
restipulor to stipulate or engage in return.]63
Nachdem diese condictio gegeben, the parties entered into a “ sponsio”
and “ restipulatio” , i.e. laid a formal wager (distinct from the so called64
Sacramentum) on the justice o f their respective contentions. D . sum so
staked always65 = 1/3 o f the amount in dispute, went in the end to the
successful litigant, and not, like Sacramentum, to the State. [Hat ausser­
dem d. innern ironischen Sinne, dass die Parteien d. Processes dasselbe
unsichre Hazardspiel treiben wie beim Wetten, ddch dies ein d. röm.
jurisprudenz unbewusster W itz!]
Gajus proceeds von der Condictio zur Manus Injectio u. Pignoris Capio,
actiones legis die nichts mit modernem Begriff von actio gemein haben.
Manus injectio ausdrücklich stated to have been originally the Roman mode
of execution against the person of a judgment debtor; war the instrument der
Cruelties prakticirt66 dch röm. Aristokratie on their defaulting plebejan debtors,
gab so impetus to series ofpopular movements affecting the whole history o f
Roman commonwealth. D . Pignoris Capio war zuerst ein völlig extra­
judicial proceeding. D . Person die es anwandte seized (beschlagnamte) in
certain cases the goods o f a fellow citizen, agst whom he had a claim, but
against whom he had not instituted a suit. Dies zuerst beschränkt - diese
power o f seizure - auf soldiers againstpublic officers bound to supply them with
pay, horse, orforage; ditto auf seller o f a beastfor sacrifice against a defaulting
purchaser; später extended to demands for overdue arrears ofpublic revenue.
Etw as Aehnliches in Plato's Leges, auch als remedy for breach o f public
duties connected with military service or religious observance. (Dies
dem Maine verrathen von Post.). Gajus sagt dass d. Pignoris Capio could
be resorted to in the absence of the Prätor and generally o f the person under
liability, and also that it might be carried out even when the Courts were not
sitting. (256-59)
The Legis actio sacramenti assumes that the quarrel is at once referred to
a present arbitrator; the Condictio, dass d. Referenz to the decision o f an
arbitrator nach 30 days; aber meantime the parties have entered into a
separate wager on the merits o f their dispute. N och zu Cicero’s Zeit, als
condictio eine der most important Roman actions geworden, an independent
penalty attached to the suitor in dieser Klage. (260)
Glaubt dass die Pignoris Capio, obgleich dies schon veraltet zur Zeit d.
12 Tables, taking forcible possession der moveable property des adversary and
detain it till he submits. (260)
So in English L aw Power of Distraint or Distress - (womit connected als
Remedy d. socalled Replevin) - z.B. heut zu T ag landlord’s right to sei^e
the goods of his tenantsfor unpaid rent, and the right o f the lawful possessor
o f land to take and impound stray beasts which are damaging his crops or
soil. (261, 262) Im letztren Fall cattle kept bis satisfaction made for the
injury. (I.e.)
Aelter als Roman Conquest in En gld the practice o f Distress, - o f taking
nams, word erhalten im law-term withernam. (262, 63) Z u r Zeit v. Henry I I I
confined to certain specific claims u. wrongs. Damals: Person seizes
1 8 3 the goods (almost always cattle) | der Person von der er sich benachtheiligt
glaubt; treibt d. beasts to a pound (von angels(ächsisch) pyndan), an
enclosed piece o f land reserved for the purpose, and generally open to
the sky ... eine d. ältesten Institutionen Englands; the Village-Pound far
older than the K in g ’s Bench, and probably than the Kingdom . While
the cattle were on their w ay to the pound the owner had a limited right
o f rescue which the law recognised, but which he ran great risk in ex­
ercising. Once lodged within the enclosure, the impounded beasts, when
the pound was uncovered, had to be fed by the owner and not by the distrainor;
this rule only altered in the present reign. (263) Wenn d. Eigner d. cattle
altogether denied the distrainor’s right to distrain, or refuse to release
the cattle, on security being tendered to him, dann d. cattle owner might
apply to the K in g ’ s Chancery for a writ commanding the Sheriff to
“ make replevin” , or he might verbally complain himself to the Sheriff,
who would then proceed at once to “ replevy” . (264)
Replevin (to), Spenser, to “ replevy” , replegio L aw Latin, o f re u. plevir or
plegir, fr. to give a pledge; bdtet nach Johnson: to take back or set at liberty,
upon security, anything seized; er citirt aus Hudibras:
“ That you’re a beast and turn’ d to grass,
Is no strange news, nor ever w as;
A t least to me, who once, you know,
Did from the pound replevin you.”
In d. action o f Replevin, wenn d. Sache vo r Gerichtshof kam, der owner
des distrained catde war der Kläger u. der Distrainor was the defendant.
(265) “ Taking in withernam” o f Old English Law means, wenn d.distrainor
dem Sheriff d. distrained cattle nicht seizen wollte od. es in distance out of
his jurisdiction removed, so erhob dieser wegen Brechen o f K in g ’s Peace,
“ hue u. cry” wider ihn u. seized von des distrainor’s cattle double the value of
the beasts which were not forthcoming; letztres “ taking in withernam” . (I.e.)
Dies seizure, rescue u. counterseizure ursprünglich disorderly proceeding
which the law steps in to regulate. (I.e.) In d. Form of impounding, w o d.
person distrained must feed the cattle (als Zeichen o f deren continued
ownership), Verbot für distrainor to w ork them. - Distress becomes a
semi-orderly contrivance for extorting satisfaction. (266) Blackstone hat be­
merkt, that the modified exemption of certain classes of goods from distraint
- z.B. plough-oxen u. instruments of trade, ursprünglich nicht intended als
kindness to owner, sondern weil ohne d. instruments of tillage or handicraft,
the debtor could never pay his debt, ( l.c ) D letzte - u. auch historisch
letzt entwickelte incident des proceeding ist: the King steps in, dch his
deputy, den Sheriff; selbst wenn dieser obtains his view, he can do noth­
ing unless the cattle owner is prepared with security that he will try the ques­
tion between himself u. den distrainor in a Court ofJustice; dann erst steps
in the judicial Power o f the Commonwealth; its jurisdiction acquired
through the act of the Sheriff in restoring the cattle upon pledge given. D .
distrainor has lost his material security, the cattle; the owner o f the cattle
has become personally bound; so both placed under a compulsion which
drives them in the end to a judicial arbitration. (267) [D. ganze Procee­
ding implies dass d. Power o f State - i.e. Court ofJustice - noch nicht so
firmly settled, dass people de prime abord submit to its judicial autho­
Fast alle Leges Barbarorum refer to Pignoratio od. distraint of goods. D .
L e x Visigothorum verbietet es ausdrücklich; d. L e x Lombardorum, permits
it after simple demand o f payment. D . Salic Law - nach d. neusten
deutschen Autoritäten - redigirt zwischen Tacitus Zeit u. d. Zeit d.
Invasion des Roman Em pire dch d. Franken, enthält sehr genaue Be­
stimmungen die zuerst fully interpreted by Sohm. In diesem System
Distress not yet a judicial remedy; ist noch an extrajudicial mode of redress,
but it has been incorporated with a regular and highly complex procedure.
Eine succession o f notices to be given in solemn form dch d. complainant
der Person über die sich der would be dist(r)ainor beklagt u. whose
property he proposes to seize. E r kann nicht saisiren bevor er jene
person vor d. Volksgericht geladen u. bevor d. Popular Officer dieses
Gerichts, der Thunginus, pronuncirt hat eine Formel licensing distraint.
Dann erst kann er distress auf seinen Gegner machen. Entsprechend eine
Ordon(n)an%von Canut that no man is to take nams unless he has demanded
3 times in the Hundred; erhält er d. 3t mal keine justice, so geht er zum
Shire-gemot; d. Shire appoints him a 4th time, u. when that fails, he may
take the distress. (269, 270)
D . fragment o f the system which has survived in the English Common Law
(and it is to this that it probably owes its survival) was from the first
pre-eminently a remedy by which the lord compelled his tenants to render him
their services. Was archaischer im engl. Gesetz als in den leges barbarorum:
notice of the intention to distrain was never in England essential to the legality
of distress, obgleich d. Statute-law renders it necessary to make a sale of the
distrained property legal; ebenso im ältesten state d. Common Law ,
obgleich distraint sometimes followed a proceeding in the lord’s Court,
yet it did not necessarily presuppose or require it. (270-71) D . Frankish
procedure was completely at the disposal o f the complainant. | It is a
procedure regulating extrajudicial redress. Beobachtet der complainant the
proper forms, so ist the part o f the Court in licensing seizure purely
passive ___ When the defendant submitted or was unsuccessful in
attacking the proceedings o f the other side, he paid not only the original
debt but various additional penalties entailed by neglect to comply with
previous notices to discharge it. Dies founded on the assumption that
plaintiffs are always in the right u. defendants always in the wrong, whd the
modern principle compels the complainant to establish at all events a prima
facie case. Früher the man most likely to be in the right the man who
faced the manifold risks attending the effort to obtain redress, to com­
plain to the Popular Assembly, to cry for justice to the king sitting in the
gate___ In einem Fall, w o K ing Kläger, d. Presumption dass Kläger in
the right lang aufrecht erhalten in engl. Recht u. hence the obstinate dislike
of (Engl.) lawyers to allowing prisoners to be defended by Counsel. (271-73)
Gajus sagt v. d. Legis Actiones im allgemeinen dass “ sie in discredit fielen,
weil wegen der excessive subtlety der ancient lawyers things came to such
a pass that he who committed the smallest error failed altogether.”
Ebenso Blackstone remarks on English Law o f Distress: “ The many
particulars which attend the taking o f a distress used formerly to make it
a hazardous kind o f proceeding; for, if any one irregularity was com­
mitted, it vitiated the whole.” (273)
[Diese excessive technicality of ancient law zeigt67 Jurisprudenz as feather
o f the same bird, als d. religiösen Formalitäten z.B. bei A u g u r’s etc, od.
d. Hokus Pokus des medicine man der savages!]
N ach Sohm the power o f seizing a man’s property extrajudicially in satis­
faction o f your demand mit grossen risks verbunden; ging der complai­
nant who sought to distress nicht dch alle acts u. words required by the law
with the most rigorous accuracy so, besides failing in his object, incurred
a variety o f penalties, which could be just as harshly exacted as his own
original demand. (273, 74) Ha(u)ptsache bei d. Barbaren to compel the
appearance of the defendant and his submission tojurisdiction, was damals noch
keineswegs selbstverständlich. (275) In d. Fränkischen Gesetz wenn in
gewissen cases auch selbe von Anfang an bis judgment judicially tried, so
noch nicht thejudgment by its ownforce operative. Hat der defendant ausdrück­
lich erklärt to obey it, the Court or royal deputy, on being properly summoned,
will execute it; but if no such promise has been made, the plaintiff has no remedy
except an application to the King in person. (275)
Später sobald d. Franks settled in Roman Empire, the royal deputy will
execute the judgment ohnepromise des defendant to submit. In England dieser
change u. d. Macht der Courts greatly due to the development of royaljustice
at the expense ofpopularjustice. D och savoured Engl, judicial proceedings
noch long o f the old practices. Hence on the smallest provocation the
K in g constantly took the lands of the defendant into his hands or seized his goods,
simply to compel or perfect his submission to the royal jurisdiction. [See bei
Walter Scott, dass ein Mann wegen Schulden eingesperrt wird wegen d.
Fiction seiner contempt of the King.\
D . survival o f distress in En gld den Herrn landlords zu lieb. The modern
dem Ursprünglichen ganz wiedersprechde - theory of distress: ist that a
landlord is allowed to distrain because x by the nature of the case he is always
compelled to give his tenant credit, and that he can distrain without notice
because every man is supposed to know when his rent is due. (277)
Ursprünglich distress treated as willful breach of the peace; ausser w o it was
connived at so far as it served to compel the submission of defendants to the
jurisdiction of courts. (278)
Ueber Hälfte d. Senchus Mor taken up with Law of Distress. Senchus M or
pretends to be the Code o f Irish Law prepared unter the influence of
St. Patrick upon the introduction o f Christianity in Ireland. (279)
E r gleicht sehr d. Teutonic Laws u. English Common Law. Putting in a pound
kommt noch darin von d. Speciality drin: “ I f the defendant or debtor
were a person o f chieftain grade, it was necessary not only to give
notice, but also to fast upon him. The fasting upon him consisted in
going to his residence and waiting there a certain time without | food.
I f the plaintiff did not within a certain time receive satisfaction for his
claim, or a pledge therefore, he forthwith, accompanied by a law-agent,
witnesses, and others, seized his distress” etc. (p. 280-81. Cf. Senchus Mor.
ist vol. remarks o f the Editor.) Erlaubte d. Schuldner nicht his cattle to
go to pound u. gab er sufficient pledge (e.g. his son, or some article o f value,
to the creditor, that he68 would within a certain time try the right to the
distress by law, the creditor was bound to receive such pledge. I f he did
not go to law, as he so undertook, the pledge becameforfeitedfor the original
debt.” (p. 282. [Noch heut zu T a g bei distress in Oudh d. creditor landlord
takes ausser cattle (dies vo r allem etc) auc(h) Personen als Sklaven. See
The Garden of India von Irwin.] [Im Wesentlichen d. Irische law hier mehr
identisch mit d. Leges Barbarorum als mit d. Englischen.] “ The distress o f
the Senchus M or is not, like the Distress o f the English Common Law ,
a remedy confined in the main to demands of the lord on his tenants; as in the
Salic u. andren Leges Barbarorum it extends to breaches of contract u., so far
as the Brehon law is already known, it would appear to be the universal
method o f prosecuting claims o f all kinds.” (p. 283) The Irish stay of
proceedings (D ithim) entspricht einigen provisions in d. leges barbarorum. In
einigen derselben when a person’s property is about to be seized he makes
a mimic resistance; im Salic law he protests against the injustice o f the
attempt; im Ripuarian law he goes through the formality o f standing at his
door with a drawn sword. Thereupon the seizure is interrupted u. opportu­
nity given for enquiring into the regularity o f the proceedings etc. (284)
M it d. English law hat d. Irische speciell gemein - was ganz absent from
the Teutonic procedures - the “ impounding” , the “ taking in withernam”
u. namtlich dass nicht required “ assistance od. permission from any Court
o f Justice. (2 84)69 Dies nur im Lombardic law (unter den leges barbarorum)
(I.e.) Ferner - u. dies in England erst dch Statute Law eingeführt - im
Brehon Law the seizure of cattle nicht nur als a method o f satisfaction,
sondern it provides for their forfeiture in discharge of the demandfor which
they are taken. (285)
Sohm sucht zu beweisen dass d. Fränkischen Volksgerichte nicht ihre eignen
Dekrete exequirten; versprach der defendant to submit to an award, the
local deputy o f the K in g might be required to enforce it, aber, when no
such promise, the plaintiff was forced to petition the King in person u. in d.
älteren Zeiten, vo r full development der kgl. Gewalt, Courts o f Justice
existed less for the purpose o f doing right generally than for the purpose
o f supplying an alternative to the violent redress of wrong___ The Norse
literature (see M r. Dasent) shows that perpetualfighting and perpetual litigation
may go on side by side, and that a highly technicalprocedure may be scrupulously
followed at a time when homicide is an everyday70 occurrence....
Contention in Court takes the place of contention in arms, but only gradually
takes its place___ In our day,71 when a wild province is annexed to the
British Indian Empire, there is ... a rush of suitors to the Courts which are
immediately established___ The men w ho can no longer fight go to law
instead ... Hasty appeals to a judge succeed hurried quarrels, and here­
ditary law-suits take the place o f ancestral blood-feuds. (288,72 289)
Im Allgem . probable that, in proportion as Courts grow stronger, they
first take under their control the barbarous (aber d. Sache bleibtja , auf das
legale übersetzt) practice o f making reprisals on a wrongdoer by seizing
his property, and ultimately they absorb it into their own procedure. (290)
D . Irish L a w o f Distress offenbar in Zeit w o action o f Courts o f Justice
feeble and intermittent. (291) Statt dieser - d. law agent (Brehon lawyer)
d. grosse Rolle spielend. (I.e.)
The Irish used the remedy of distress, because they knew no other remedy, u. d.
Hunde von Engländern made it a capital felony (mit Todesstrafe) in
an Irishman to follow the only law with which he | was acquainted. (294 Cp.
Spenser. “ View of the State of Ireland.” ) N ay, those very subdeties o f Old
English L a w which, as Blackstone says, made the taking o f distress ‘a
hazardous sort o f proceeding’ to the civil distrainor, might bring an
Irishman to the gallows, if in conscientiously attempting to carry out the
foreign law he fell into the smallest mistake. {I.e. Also gehangen, wenn er
seinem native law nach handelte, ditto gehangen wenn er sich dem auf­
gezwungnen englischen zu adoptiren suchte!)
M it Bezug auf d. “fasting upon” the debtor heisst es in Senchus M or: “ Notice
precedes every distress in the case o f the inferior grades except it be by
persons o f distinction or upon persons o f distinction. Fasting precedes
distress in their case. He who does not give a pledge tofasting is an evader o f
all; he who disregards all things shall not be paid by G o d or M an.”
Dies, wie Whitley Stokes zuerst pointed out, diffused over the whole East ,
entspricht dem Hindoo “ sitting dharna". (Cf. Strange-. Hindoo Law.)
(297) Heute noch sehr striking examples davon in Persien, w o a man
intending to enforce payment of a demand byfasting begins by sowing some barley
at his debtor's door and sitting down in the middle. (I.e.)
D . W ort dharna soil exact equivalent sein von Roman “ capio” , and mean­
ing “ detention” or “ arrest” . Soll V IH , 49 bei Manu Vorkommen. (I.e.) Im
Vyavahara Mayukha, Brihaspiti is cited as enumerating, among the lawful
modes of compulsion by which the debtor can be made to pay, “ confining his
wife, his son, or his cattle, or watching constantly at his door." (298)
See Lord Teignmouth's description (in Forbes “ Oriental Memoirs” II, 2 f) d.
form dieses “ watching constantly at the door” in British India vo r Ende
d. 18. Jhdts.)
In einem Law of Alfred heissts :
“ Let the man who knows his foe to be homesitting fight not before
he have demanded justice o f him. I f he have power to beset his foe
and besiege him in his house, let him keep there for 7 days but not
attack him if he will remain indoors. I f then, after seven days, he be
willing to surrender and give up his weapons, let him be kept safe for
thirty days, and let notice be given to his kinsmen and friends. But
if the plaintiff have no power o f his own, let him ride to the Ealdorman,
and, if the Ealdorman will not aid him, let him ride to the K in g before
he fights.” Schliesslich kommt dann a provision that if the man who
is homesitting be really shut up in his house with the complainant's wife, daughter,
or sister, he may be attacked and killed without ce rem o n y (Dies letztere
auch in 324. Code Pénal des Herrn Napoleon___) The Anglo-Saxon rule
is to be enforced by the civil power, the Ealdorman or the K in g ; the
Hindoo Brahminical rule by the fear o f punishment in another world.
(303, 4) “ Sitting dharna” placed under the ban o f the Brit, law, still
common in the Native Indian States, u. dort hptsächlich an expedient
resorted to by soldiers to obtain arrears ofpay, wie “pignoris capio” beim Gajus
surviving in 2 cases, w o von einer the default o f a military paymaster.
1 87
(304, 5)
In Lecture X I “ The Early History of the Settled Property of Married Women"
hat comfortable Maine noch keine Bekanntscft mit Mutterrecht (Bachofen
etc.) gemacht, hatte auch Morgan's Buch noch nich(t) für “ elegante”
Verm öblg seinerseits.
A man o f continuous servile occupation in a Roman household wde dch Usucapio
(was später Prescriptio) a slave o f the paterfamilias. (315 ) Später d.
ordinary Roman marriage a voluntary conjugal society, terminable at the
pleasure of either side by divorce. (317 ) Nach dem Ancient Irish Law women
had some power o f dealing with their own property without the consent of their
husbands, and this was one o f the institutions expressly declared by the
[.English blockheaded] Judges to be illegal at the beginning of the iyth century. (3 24)
Die Brahminical Indian Lawyers haben ganz | ausgearbeitet (u. dies be­
ginnt fast with Manu) the doctrine of “ Spiritual Benefit” , as they call it.
Inasmuch as the condition of the dead could be ameliorated by proper expiatory
rites, theproperty descending or devolving on a man came to be regarded by them
partly as afundfor paying the expenses of the ceremonial by which the soul of the
personfrom whom the inheritance came could be redeemedfrom suffering or degrada­
tion, and partly as a rewardfor theproper performance of the sacrifices. ( 3 3 2 ,3 3 3 )
Ebenso Catholic Church: the first and best destination o f a dead man's goods
to purchase massesfor his soul, u. out o f these views grew the whole testamen­
tary and intestate jurisdiction o f the Ecclesiastical Courts. (332)
Im Mitakshara heissts: “ The wealth of a regenerate man is designed for
religious uses, and a woman’s succession to such property is unfit because
she is not competent to the performance o f religious rites.” (332, 33)
D . Gunst der indischen Gesetzgebung für d. Frauen, die sich bis jetzt in
dem Stridhan (setded property o f a married woman), incapable o f aliena­
tion by her husband, u. ebenso darin verspricht, dass d. Habe der Frau
auf d. Töchter od. die female members ihrer family übergeht (cf. Strange:
“ Hindoo Law ” ) etc - alles dies von Herrn Maine nicht richtig gedeutet,
weil ihm alle Einsicht in gens u. daher auch ursprüngliche Vererbung in
female, - nicht male, line of descent- abgeht. D er Esel sagt selbst mit welchen
gefärbten Brillen er sieht: “ A m ong the A ryan [the devil take this “ A ryan ”
cant!] sub-races, the Hindoos may be as confidently asserted as the Romans
to have had their society organized as a collection of patriarchally governed
families. [Aus Niebuhr konnte er schon wissen, dass d. röm. family noch
eingehüllt in der gens, selbst nachdem sie in ihrer specif. Form mit d.
patria potestas ausgebildet.] If, then, (a nice “ I f ” only resting upon
Maine’s ow n “ confident assertion) then, (dies “ then” Pecksniffian), at any
early period, [Maine transports his “ patriarchal” Roman family into the
very beginning o f things] the married w om an73 had among the Hindoos
her property altogether enfranchisedfrom her husband's control [“ enfranchised” ,
that is to say, from Maine’ s “ confident assertion” ], it is not easy to give a
reason w h y the obligations of thefamily despotism [a principal pet-doctrine o f
blockheaded John Bull to read in original “ despotism” J were relaxed in
this one particular. (323)
Maine citirt folgende Stelle aus d. treatise Mitakshara u. zwar Stelle schon
citirt von Sir Thomas Strange “ Hindu Law ” (see Daselbst t. I, p. 26-32) in
Strange’ s Buch (obgleich schon 1830 publicirt citirbar als 2nd edit, seines
W erk s: “ Elements of Hindu Law ” , enthält viel vollständigereQuellenangaben^.
Auseinandersetzg über diesen Punkt. M an ersieht ferner aus dem was
Strange aus d. Quellen angiebt, das schon im Mitakshara, nicht zu sprech­
en von späteren Hindu juristischen Commentaren, ihr Verfasser den
Ursprung der Stridhana nicht mehr versteht u. sich selbe ganz so falsch
rationalistisch plausibel zu machen sucht, wie etwa d. röm. Juristen aus
Cicero’s Zeit ihnen unverständliche altrömische (für sie “ archaische” )
Rechtsgebräuche od. Formeln. Eine solche rationalistische Erklärung ist
es z.B., wenn in Mitakshara d. “fee” der Braut “ what is given her in her
bridal procession, upon the final ceremony, when the marriage already
contracted and solemnized, is about to be consummated, the bride having
hitherto remained with her mother” (Strange, 1 . 1, p. 29); Strange bemerkt
o f this domi-ductio, this bringing o f the bride home, which, with the Hin­
doo, is a consequence only of the antecedent contract, that, among the Romans,
it was an ingredient wanting to its completion; till when, the bride was a
“ sponsa” only; becoming “ uxor” statim atque ducta est, quamvis nondum
in cubiculum mariti venerit” ; und fährt Strange fort: “ The fee o f a Hindu
188 wife has moreover this anomaly attending it, | that, upon her death, it de­
scends in a course of inheritance peculiar to herself.” Diese “ anomaly” ist nur
fragmentarisches, auf bestimmten Theil d. Vermögens reducirte, survival
32 4
d. alten normalen rule, die gegründet auf descent der gens in der female line,
der74 primitiven. So verhält es sich allzuerst mit den “ Anomalien” in
Recht etc. (In d. Sprache d. Ausnahmen auch allzuerst Ueberbleihsel d.
älteren, ursprünglicheren) D . alte N orm erscheint in veränderten relativ
modernen Zustand als “ Anomalie” , als unverständliche Ausnahme.
Sämdiche indische Rechtsquellen u. Commentare verfasst, nachdem d.
descent in female line schon seit lange übergegangen in descent in male line.
(Aus Strange ferner ersichtbar, dass in verschiednen Theilen Indiens d. Anomalie
mehr od. minder “ vollständiges” Ueberbleibsel.)
D ie von Maine citirte Stelle aus Mitakshara lautet:
“ That which is given (to the wife) by the father, the mother, the husband,
or a brother, at the time o f the wedding, before the nuptial fire.” A ber
d. compiler o f the Mitakshara adds a proposition not found elsewhere:
“ also property which she may have acquired by inheritance, purchase,
partition, seizure, or finding, is denominated by Manu and the others
“ woman's p ro p e rty (Mit. X I. 2) (p. 322)
Hierüber heftige controversies unter d. Brahminical commentators.
U. a. erklärt sich d. pfiffige Maine d. Sache wie folgt:
Unter d. Aryan Communities findet76 man “ the earliest traces o f the
separate property o f women in the widely diffused ancient institution
known as Bride-Price. Part o f this price, which was paid by the bride­
groom either at the wedding or the day after it, went to the bride’s father
as compensation ( !) for the Patriarchal or Family authority which was transferred
to the husband, but another part went to the bride herself and was generally
enjoyed by her separately and kept apart from her husband’s property.
It further appears that under a certain number o f Aryan customs the
proprietary rights of other kinds which women slowly acquired were assimilated
to their rights in their portion o f the Bride-Price, probably ( !) as being the
only existing type o f wom en’s property.” (324) Richtig dagegen was
Maine sagt: “ There are in fact clear indications o f a sustained general
effort on the part of the Brahminical writers on mixed law and religion, to
limit the privileges o f women which they seem to have found recognised
by older authorities.” (325. In Rom selbst die Stellung d. patria potestas
vis-à-vis der Frau exaggerated in opposition to the old contrary tradition.)
D . Sauerei der Brahminen gipfelt in d. “ Suttee” or widow burning. Dass
diese practice “ malus usus” , nicht “ law” sagt schon Strange, da sich bei
Manu u. other high authorities nichts davon finde; dieser “ as the condi­
tion on which the w idow may aspire to Heaven” have simply required
that she should, on the decease o f her husband, live a life o f seclusion,
privation, and decency.” (Post, p. 245) Im Shaster auch noch d. suttee
(Strange I.e. p. 241) nur recommended. A ber sieh oben, wie d. Brahminen
selbst d. Sache erklären (“property designedfor religious uses") u. d. Interesse
der Burschen, denen sie d. Nachlassenscft zuwälzen (die dafür have to pay
the expenses of the ceremonial). Strange spricht ausdrücklich o f “ designing
Brahmins” u. “ interested relatives” (I.e. p. 239)
32 5
N äm lich: “ the wife surviving her husband, succeeds as heir to him, in default of
male issue. (Strange, t. I, p. 236) Ausserdem “ her claim to be maintained by
his (the defunct husband’s) representatives. (I.e. p. 246) M it Ausnahme der
“ Stridhana” , die sie in her own right besitzt, geht das was sie von ihrem
husband ererbt, (sofern dieser kein male issue hatte) über to her husband's
heirs, not the immediate ones merely, but the whole living at die time.”
(p. 247) Hier d. Sache klar: d. suttee einfacher religiöser Mord, um d.
Erbscft theils für religiöse Feierlichkeiten (für d. Verstorbnen) in Hände
d. Brahmanen76 (geisdichen) zu bringen, theils der dch d. brahmin.
Gesetzgbg an Beerbung d. W itw e77 interessirten gens, nearer family
des husband. Hence d. violence u. infamies, meist von Seiten der “ connexions”
to bring the w idow to Flammentod. (239, 240 Strange, t. I)
Herr Maine selbst fügt dem, was man schon bei Strange findet nichts zu.
Und selbst | wenn er generalisirt, dass: “ The Hindoo laws, religious and
civil, have for centuries been undergoing transmutation, development,
and, in some [! Maine always mild when speaking o f clergy and law yers!
and higher class people generally!] points, depravation at the hands o f
successive Brahminical expositors.” (3 26) So weiss dies Strange auch, setzt
aber hinzu, dass d. Kirchenpfaffen es anderswo nicht besser machten!
Das ganze Primitive fasst d. englische Philister Maine auf as “ the despotism
of groups over the members composing them” (p. 327)! Damals hatte Bentham
-nämlich in d. Urzeiten - noch nicht die nach Maine merkwürdig die
Neuzeit repräsentirende Formel u. Treibwerk d. “ modernen” Gesetzgebg
erfunden: “ The greatest happiness of the greatest n u m b e r O D u Pecksniff!
W ir haben gesehn, dass wenn der Mann ohne issue stirbt, the widow comes
in for her life (diese Herabsetzung auf tenure for life auch erst später, wie
genaue Musterung des von Strange angeführten Quellen zeigt) before the
collateral relatives (of her husband, not her own, was Maine zu sagen vergisst;
ihre eignen Verwandten hatten beim suttee bloss d. Interesse, dass sie
sich “ religiös” bewährte). “ A t the present moment, marriages among the
upper classes of Hindoo being very commonly infertile, a very considerable portion
of the wealthiest Indian province (Bengal) is in the hands of widows as tenants
for life. But it was exacdy in Bengal proper that the English, on entering
India, found the Suttee “ not merely an occasional, but a constant and almost
universal practice with the wealthier classes.” [Strange, dessen Buch 45 Jahr
älter als das des Maine, u. der Chief Justice of Madras gewesen war, u.
1798 entered upon the administration of justice, at the Presidency of Madras
(I.e. Preface V III) wie er selbst uns in Vorrede seines Buchs erzählt, sagt
daggen mit Bezug natürlich auf d. Präsidentschft v. Madras: “ It (the
custom o f Suttee) is confinedpretty much to the lower classes,” - a proof that
it has no deeper root in the religion, than it has in the law o f the country.
T. /, p. 241)] “ and, as a rule, it was only the childless w idow , and never
the w idow with minor children, who burnt herself on her husband’s
funeral pyre. There is no question that there was the closest connection
between the law and the religious custom, and the w idow was made to
sacrifice herself in order that her tenancy for life might be got out of the way.
The anxiety o f her family [Umgekehrt: of her husband's family, die erbte;
nur die weiblichen Glieder ihrer family waren interessirt in her Stridhana;
im übrigen konnte ihre family nur dch religiösen Fanatismus u. Einfluss
der Brahminen interessirt sein] that the rite should be performed, which
seemed so striking to the first English observers o f the practice, was, in
fact, explained by the coarsest motives; but the Brahmins [ausser d.
ecclesiastical Brahmins could, namentlich in d. higher classes, d. Verwandtscft d. Mannes musste es gross <t)entheils aus weltlichen Brahminen
bestehen!] who exhorted her to the sacrifice were undoubtedly (! naiver
Maine!) influenced by a purely professional dislike to her enjoyment ofproperty.
The ancient [i.e. dies auch modificirtes survival vom Archaischen] rule
o f the civil law, which made her tenantfor life, could not be got rid of\ but it
was combated by the modern institution which made it her duty to
devote herself to a frightful death.” (335, 336)
Obgleich Suttee eine Neuerung,, v. d. Brahminen eingeführt, hindert dies
nicht, dass in d. Brahminenköpfen d. Neuerung selbst wieder auf Reminiscenz auf älterer Barbarei (Begraben d. Mannes mit seinem Eigenthum)
beruhte! Namentlich in Pfaffenköpfen revive d. urältesten Greuel aber
ihrer Naiven Ursprünglichkeit beraubt. | Wenn Herr Maine sagt: “ There
can be no serious question that, in its ultimate result, the disruption of the
Roman Empire was very unfavourable to the personal and proprietary
liberty o f women” (337), so dies verdammt cum grano salis zu nehmen.
E r sagt: “ The place o f women under the new system (d. Barbaren) when
fully organised (d.h. nach Entw icklg d. Feudalwesens) was worse than it
was under Roman law, and would have been very greatly worse but for the
efforts ofthe Church" (337) so dies abgeschmackt, considering dass d. Church
den divorce (röm.) aufhob od. so viel als möglich erschwerte u. überhaupt
d. Ehe, obgleich sacrament, als Sünde behandelte. M it Bezug auf “ pro­
prietary right” hatte d. Güterschleichde Kirche allerdings Interesse den
Weibern einiges zu sichern (umgekehrtes Interesse wie die Brahminen!)
Herr Maine in Lecture78 ^Y77 theilt d. erstaunten Europa mit, dass England
d. Privileg d. s. dort79 g. “ Analytical Jurists" besitzt, w ovon d. be­
deutendsten Jeremy Bentham u. John Austin. (343) Austin's: “ Province
of Jurisprudence Determined" has long been one o f the higher classbooks
in this University. (345) (andre lectures des Kerl more recendy given to
the world.) Seine V orgänger Bentham u. Hobbes. Folgendes d. grosse
Entdeckung selbigen John Austin's:
“ I f (says the immense John Austin) a determinate human superior, not in the
habit o f obedience to a like superior, receive habitual obedience from the
bulk of a given society, that determinate superior is Sovereign in that society,
and the society, including the superior, is a society political and indepen­
19 1
dent.” “ T o that superior the other members o f the society are subject; or
on that determinate superior the other members o f the society are dependent.
The position of its other members towards that determinate superior is a state
of subjection or a state of dependence. The mutual relation which subsists
between that superior and them, may be styled the relation o f Sovereign
and Subject, or the Relation o f Sovereignty and Subjection” (citirt bei
Maine p. 348, 349) D . “ determinate human superior” so der Sovereign is
“ an individual or a collegiate Sovereigtf’ (diese Phrase für single person or
group auch eine Erfindg d. Austin) (349) Herr Maine erklärt d. Aussichten
d. Austin weiter dahin: I f the community be violently or voluntarily
divided into a number o f separate fragments, then, as soon as each
fragment has setded down (perhaps after an interval o f anarchy) into a
state o f equilibrium, the Sovereign will exist and will be discoverable in
each o f the now independent portions. (349, 350) Das gemeinsame
Charaktermal aller shapes o f dr S o v e r e ig n t y - whether the Sovereign
a person or a combination o f persons - ist, dass er has* the possession of
irresistible force, not necessarily exerted but capable of being exerted. 1st d.
Sovereign a single person, so nennt ihn Austin a Monarch; if a smallgroup Oligarchy; if a group o f considerable dimensions, an Aristocracy; if very
large and numerous, a Democracy. Austin hates the name o f “ Limited
Monarchy” , in his days more fashionable than now, u. d. Government of
Great Britain he classes with Aristocracies. W as alle forms of Sovereignty
gemein haben is the power (but not necessarily the will) to put compulsion
without limit on subjects or fellow-subjects. (350) W o kein solcher sovereign
erkennbar - Anarchie. (3 5 1) The question o f determining his (the Sover­
eign’ s) character [in a given society] is always a question offa c t... never a
question of law or morals. (I.e.)
D . Sovereign must be a determinate human superior. Besteht er aus mehren
Personen,80 so he must be a number o f persons capable of acting in a
corporate or collegiate capacity ... since the Sovereign must effect his exertions
ofpower, must issue \ his orders, by a definite exercise of his will. The possession
of physical power unentbehrliches Merkmal. (35 1) The bulk of the society
must obey the superior who is to be called Sovereign. N ot the whole of the
Society, for in that case sovereignty would be impossible, but the bulk, the large
majority, must obey. (3 5 2)
The Sovereign must receive an habitual obediencefrom the bulk of the community.
(3 5 3) Ferneres characteristic desselben: is immunityfrom the control of every
other human superior. (I.e.)
[Dies d. Grundtext nach, wie Maine selbst zugiebt, v. Austin, wie so
weit damit identisch, von Bentham81 aus Hobbes (Leviathan: Ch. De Cive,
first published in Latin, in the Elementa Philosophiae)\
A ber sagt Maine: Hobbes’ Object w ar politisch; das des Austin “ strictly
scientific” ( j j j ) [Scientific\ doch nur in d. Bdtg, dies dies W ort im K o p f o f
blockheadish British lawyers haben kann, w o altmodische Classification,
Definition etc als scientific gilt. Vgl. übrigens i) Machiavelli u. 2) Linguet.\
Ferner: Hobbes will origin o f Staat {Government u. Sovereignty) ergründen;
dies Problem existirt für lawyer Austin nicht; für ihn dies fact gewissermassen a priori vorhanden. Dies sagt Maine p . 3 j6 . D . unglückliche
Maine selbst hat keine Ahnung davon, dass da w o Staaten existiren (after the
primitive Communities etc) i.e. eine politisch organisirte Gesellschaft, der
Staat keineswegs d. Prim%ist; er scheint nur so.
Herr Maine bemerkt über Austin’ s Ausgabe der Hobbes’schen “ force”
I f all the members o f the community had equal physical strength and were
unarmed, the power would be a mere result from the superiority o f
numbers; but, as a matter o f fact, various causes, of which much the most
important have been the superior physical strength and the superior
armanents ofportions of the community have conferred on numerical minorities
the power o f applying irresistible pressure to the individuals who make up
the community as a whole. (358)
Die assertion which the great “ Analytical Jurists” (Bentham u. Austin)81
cannot be charged with making, but which some o f their disciples go very
near to hazarding, that the Sovereign person or group actually wields the
stored-upforce of society by an uncontrolled exercise of will, is certainly never in
accordance with fact. The vast mass of influences, which w e may call for
shortness moral, [dies “ moral” zeigt wie wenig Maine von der Sache
versteht; so weit diese influences (economical before everything else)
“ moral” modus o f existence besitzen, ist dies immer ein abgeleiteter,
secundärer modus u. nie das prius\ perpetually shapes, limits, or forbids
the actual direction o f the forces o f society by its Sovereign. (359) The
Austinian view o f Sovereignty really is - that it is the result of Abstraction
[Maine ignores das viel Tiefere: dass d. scheinbare supreme selbständige
Existenz des Staats selbst nur scheinbar u. dass er in allen seinen Formen
eine excrescence of society is; wie seine82 Erscheinung selbst erst auf einer
gewissen Stufe der gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung vorkömmt, so ver­
schwindet sie wieder, sobld d. Gesellscft eine bisher noch nicht erreichte
Stufe erreicht hat. E rst83 Losreissung84 85 der Individualität von d.
ursprünglich nicht despotischen Fesseln (wie blockhead Maine es versteht),
sondern befriedige(ti)den u. gemüthlichen Banden der Gruppe, der primitiven
Gemeinwesen, - 86damit d. einseitige Herausarbeitung der Individualität.87
Was aber die wahre Natur der letzteren zeigt sich erst wenn w ir d. Inhalt d. Interessen dieser “ letzteren” analysiren. W ir finden dann, dass diese
Interessen selbst wieder gewissen gesellscftlichen Gruppen gemeinsame u.
sie charakterisirende88 Interessen, Klasseninteressen etc sind, also diese
Individualität selbst Klassen- etc Individualität ist u. diese in letzter
Instanz haben alle ökonomische Bedingungen zur Basis. A u f diesen als Basen
baut sich der Staat auf u. setzt sie voraus.] It is arrived at by throwing
aside all the characteristics and attributes o f Government and (!) Society
except one, and by connectingallforms ofpoliticalsuperiority together through
their common possession of force. [Das ist nicht der Grundfehler; dieser |
ist, dass d. political superiority, whatever its peculiar shape, and whatever
the ensemble o f its elements, is taken als etwas über d. Gesellschaft
stehendes, auf sich selbst beruhendes.] The elements neglected in the
process are always important, sometimes o f extreme importance, for they
consist of all the elements controlling human action exceptforce directly applied
or directly apprehended. [Z .B . die bessere Bewaffnung ist schon ein direct auf
Fortschritt in d. Productionsmitteln (diese fallen z.B. bei Ja g d u. Fischfang
direct zusammen mit Zerstörungsmitteln, Kriegsmitteln) berühendes E le­
ment.] but the operation o f throwing them aside for purposes of classification
is ... perfectly legitimate.” (359) W e reject in the process o f abstraction
by which the conception o f Sovereignty is reached ... the entire history of
each community ... the mode in which the result has been arrived at. (360)
Seine flache K ritik,89 die er unter zum Theil richtig klingender Phraseo­
logie verbirgt, windet sich ab erstens in folgender Phrase: “ It is its
history90 (des Gemeinwesens), the entire mass o f its historical antecedents,
which in each community determines how the Sovereign shall exercise
or forbear from exercising his irresistible coercive power,” (p. 360)
aber diese ganze Geschichte löst sich bei Maine in socalled “ moral ele­
ments” auf, denn er fährt wieder, als either Jurist od.91 Ideolog unmittelbar
fort: “ A ll that constitutes this - the whole enormous aggregate of
opinions, sentiments, beliefs, superstitions, and prejudices of all kinds, hereditary
and acquired, some produced by institutions and some by the constitution
of human nature - is rejected by the Analytical Jurists. A n d thus it is that,
so far as the restrictions contained in their definition o f Sovereignty are
concerned, the Queen and Parliament o f our own country might direct
all weakly children to be put (to ) death or establish a system o f lettres de
cachet” (p. 360) (such as the English now have established by their
coercion bill in Irld. Dies geschrieben Juni 1 8 8 1) 92 [Gutes Beispiel d.
halb verrückte Iwan IV . W hd wüthend gegen Bojaren u. auch gegen
rabble in Moskau, sucht er, u. muss er, sich halten als Vertreter d.
Bauerninteressen. ]
D aggen werden d. “ assertions” des Austin “ seif evident propositions” ,
sobld man weiss dass “ in his system the determination of Sovereignty ought to
precede the determination of Law” , it being once understood that the
Austinian conception of Sovereignty has been reached through mentally
uniting all forms of Government in a group by conceiving them to be9Z
stripped of every attribute except coercive force” , and (hier zeigt sich wieder
der Eselsfuss) when it is steadily born(e) in mind that the deductions from
an abstract principle are neverfrom the nature of the case completely exemplified
in facts.” (362)
Weitere Dogm en des Austin: “ Jurisprudence is the science o f Positive
Law. Positive Law s are Commands, addressed by Sovereigns to their
Subjects, imposing a Duty, or condition o f obligedness, or obligation, on
those Subjects, and threatening a Sanction, or Penalty, in the event o f
disobedience to Command. A
is the faculty or power conferred by
the Sovereign on certain members o f the community to draw down the
sanction on a94 fellow-subject violating a D uty.” (362)
Alle diese kindischen Trivialitäten - Höchste95 Obrigkeit ist wer d. Macht
hat zu zwingen, Positive Gesetze sind Befehle der Obrigkeit an ihre Unterthanen; sie legt dadurch diesen Unterthanen Verpflichtungen auf, u. dies
ist Pflicht, u. droht mit Strafe für Ungehorsam gegen d. Befehl; Recht ist
die Macht welche d. Obrigkeit gewissen Gliedern der Gesellscft überträgt
pflichtwidrig handelnde Gesellscftsglieder zu strafen - dies Kindische,
u. viel mehr kann selbst ein Hobbes aus der blossen obrigkeitlichen
Gewaltstheorie nicht herausklauben - dies von John Austin ernsthaft
doctrinair gepredigte nennt Maine eine “ Procedur” der analytischen J u ­
risten, die closely analog sei mit der in Mathematik u. d. Politischen
193 Oekonomie befolgten u. “ stricdy scientifick” ! | Alles dreht sich hier nur
um d .formelle Seite, die natürlich für einen Juristen überall d. Hauptsache.
“ Sovereignty, for the purposes o f Austin’s system, has no attribute butforce,
and consequently the view here taken o f “ law” , “ obligation” , u. “ right”
is a view o f them regarded exclusively as products o f coercive force. The
“ sanction” (penalty) thus becomes the primary and most important
member o f series o f notions and gives its colour to all the others” . (363)
Niemand, sagt Maine, w d es schwer finden dies zuzugeben (“ allowing” )
“ that laws have the character given to them by Austin, so far as such laws
have proceeded from formal Legislatures.” (I.e.) A ber manche Personen
protestiren dagegen. Z .B . with regard “ to the customary law o f all
countries which have not included their law in Codes, and specially the
English Common Law . (I.e.) The w ay in which Hobbes and he (Austin,
the great Pompejus!) bring such bodies o f rules as the Common L a w
under their system by insisting on a maxim which is o f vital importance
to it: “ Whatever the Sovereign permits, he commands” (p. 363) Until customs
are enforced by Courts o f Justice, they are merely “ positive morality” ,
rules enforced by opinion, but, as soon as Courts o f Justice enforced
them, they become commands o f the Sovereign, conveyed through the
Judges who are his delegates or deputies. (364) [Hier Austin ohne es zu
wissen (sieh oben Sohm p. 15 5 -5 9 )96 hat als engl. Jurist d. engl, fact in
Knochen, dass d. normänn. Könige in En gld dch ihre normänn. courts of
justice erzwungen (Aenderungen in Rechtsverhältnissen), die sie auf
legislativem W eg nicht hätten erzwingen können] D . Herr Maine
erklärt dies weiter: “ T hey command (d. Sovereigns) what they permit,
“ because, being by the assumption possessed of uncontrollable force, they could
innovate without limit at any moment. The Common L a w consists o f their
commands because they can repeal or alter or re-state it at pleasure.” (364)
L a w is (by Austin) regarded as regulatedforce. (365)
D er comfortable Maine glaubt: “ The one doctrine o f this school o f
jurists which is repugnant to laywers w ould lose its air o f paradox if an
assumption were made which, in itself theoretically unobjectionable (!),
manifesdy approximates to practical truth as the course o f history proceeds
- the assumption that what the Sovereign might (!) alter, but does not alter,
he commands. (366) Dies d. Mainesche Ausgabe von Hobbes u. his litde
man Austin. Dies blosse scholastische Spielerei. D . Frage ist “ what he
might alter” . Nehmen w ir selbst etwas juristisch Formelles. “Laws” ,
ohne abgeschafft zu werden,97 fallen in “ desuetude” . D a “ positive laws”
commands des sovereign, so bleiben sie sein command, so lange sie
existiren. D a he not alters them - he “ might” do so, because the fact o f
their falling into “ desuetude” proves, that98 the social state has outgrown
them; shall w e now say, that he99 commands them, because he does not
abrogate them, though he “ might” do so, as Maine’s panacea runs; or
shall we say, that he commands them to fall into “ desuetude” , because he
does not enforce them? In that case he commands that his positive commands
shall not be obeyed, i.e. executed, which shows that his “ command” is a
very imaginary, Active sort o f command. Austin’s “ own ethical100 creed...
was Utilitarianism in its earlier shape.” (j68. Benthamism g(an)z würdig
des Maines)
T he 2nd, 3d, and 4th Lectures (of Austin) are occupied with an attempt to
identify the law of God and the law of Nature (so far as these last words can
be allowed to have any meaning) with the rules required by the theory
of utility — The identification. .. is quite gratuitous and valueless for any
purpose (369) The jurist, properly so called, has nothing to do with any
ideal standard o f law or morals.” (p. 370. V ery true this! as litde as
theology h as!)
Lecture X I I I . Sovereignty and Empire. (Dies letzte Lecture des Maine’schen
The w ord “ law” has come down in close association with two notions,
194 the notion o f “ order” and the notion o f “ force” . (371) | The principal
writings o f Austin are not much more than 40 years old. (373)
From the point o f view o f the Jurist, law is only associated with order
through the necessary condition o f every true law that it must prescribe a
class of acts or omissions, or a number o f acts or admissions determined
generally; the law which prescribes a single act not being a true law, but being
distinguished as an “ occasional” or “particular” command. Law , thus
defined and limited, is the subject-matter o f Jurisprudence as conceived
by the Analytical Jurists. (375)
Austin in his treatise examines “ a number o f existing governments or (as
he would say) forms of political superiority and inferiority, for the purpose
o f determining the exact seat of sovereignty in each o f them. (375, 376)
Austin recognizes the existence o f communities, or aggregates o f men, in
which no dissection could disclose a person or group answering to his
definition o f a Sovereign.101 D ’abord, er, wie Hobbes (whose little man
he is) fully allows that there is a state of anarchy. Wherever such a state isfound,
the question of Sovereignty is being actively fought out, u. er giebt als Beispiel
that which was never absent from Hobbes’s mind, the struggle zwischen
Charles I u. his Parliament. A n acute critic o f Hobbes u. Austin, der
gewaltige Fitfyames102 Stephen, insists that there is a condition o f dormant
anarchy, z.B. United States (d. Beispiel v. Maine before the W ar o f Seces­
sion. (377) Dies alles most characteristic o f “ acute” English jurists!
Grausser Maine seinerseits declares ... there may be deliberate abstinence
from fighting out a question known to be undecided, and I (Maine him
selber!) see no objection to call(ing) the temporary equilibrium thus
produced a state o f dormant anarchy, (p. 377)
Austin further admits the theoretical possibility o f a state of nature;
giebt ihm nicht d. Wichtigkeit wie Hobbes u. andre, aber allows his
existence, wherever a number o f men, or o f groups not numerous enough
to be political, have not as yet been brought under any common or
habitually acting community. (378)
Austin sagt, p. 237, 1st vol., 3d ed.:
“ Let us suppose that a single family o f savages lives in absolute estrange­
ment from every other community. A n d let us suppose that the father, the
chief o f this isolated family, receives habitual obedience from the mother
and children. N o w , since it is not a limb o f another and larger community,
the society formed by the parents and children, is clearly an independent
society, and, since the rest o f its members habitually obey its chief, this
independent society would form a society political, in case the number of
its members were not extremely minute. But since the number o f its
members is extremely minute, it would, I believe, be esteemed a society
in a state of nature” ; that is, a society consisting of persons not in a state of
subjection. W ithout an application o f the terms, which would somewhat
smack o f the ridiculous, we could hardly style the society a society political
and independent, the imperative father and chief a monarch or sovereign,
or the obedient mother and children subjects.” (Sehr tiefe!)
Dies so far Wasser auf d. Mühle Maine’s, “ since, wie er sagt, the form of
authority about which it is made, the authority of the Patriarch or Pater­
familias over his family, is, at least according to one (Maine’s u. consorts)
modern theory, the element or germ out o f which all permanent power
o f man over man has been gradually developed” . (379)
A ber nun kommt Maine mit “ schwerem Geschütz” . D . Punjaub, after
passing dch every conceivable phase o f anarchy and dormant anarchy,
fell, about 25 Jahre vor seiner Annexation, under the tolerably | con­
solidated dominion o f a half military, half religious oligarchy, known as
the Sikhs, sie selbst reduced to subjection by a single chieftain belonging
to their order, Runjeet Singh. Dieser allgewaltiger Despot. He took, as
his revenue, a prodigious share o f the produce o f the soil. He harried
villages which recalcitrated at his exactions, and he executed great
numbers o f men. He levied great armies; he had all material o f power,
and exercised it in various ways. But he never made a law. The rules which
regulated the life o f his subjects were derived from their immemorial
usages, and these rules were administered by domestic tribunals, in
families or village-communities. (380, 381) Runjeet Singh never did or
could (!) have dreamed o f changing the civil rules under which his subjects
lived. Probably he was as strong a believer in the independent obligatory
force o f such rules as the elders themselves who applied them. A n
Eastern or Indian theorist in law, to whom the assertion was made that
Runjeet Singh commanded these rules, would etc feel it etc absurd etc. (382)
Dieser state d. Punjab under Runjeet Singh may be taken as the type o f all
Oriental communities in their native state during their rare intervals o f
peace and order. They have ever been despotisms etc. D . commands der
despots at their head, harsh and cruel as they might be, implickly obeyed.
But then these commands, save in so far as they served to organise
administrative machineryfor the collection of revenue, have not been true laws;
were o f the class called by Austin occasional or particular commands.
The truth is that the one solvent of local and domestic usage . .. has been not
the command o f the Sovereign but the supposed command o f the Deity.
In India, the influence o f the Brahminical treatises on mixed law and
religion in sapping the old customary law of the country has always been great,
and in some particulars
it has become greater under English rule.
(382, 383)
D . Assyrian, Babylonian, Median u. Persian Empires, for occasional wars o f
conquest, levied vast armies from populations spread over immense areas;
verlangten absolute obedience to their occasional commands, punished
disobedience with the utmost cruelty; dethroned petty kings, trans­
planted whole communities etc. A ber mit all dem interfered but little
with the every day religious or civil life o f the groups to which their
subjects belonged. The “ royal statute” and “ firm decree” preserved to us as
a sample o f “ law of the Medes and Persians which altereth nof\ ist kein law
in modernem Sinn, sondern a “ particular command” , a sudden, spasmod­
ic, and temporary interference with ancient multifarious usage left in
general undisturbed. Selbst d. Athenian empire, so weit es nicht Attica
betraf, sondern d. subject cities u. islands, was clearly a tax-taking Empire
wie die Asiatischen, nicht a legislating Empire. (384, 385)
A new order o f legislation introduced into the w orld dch d. empire of the
Romans. (386)
Nach d. Burschen Maine d. origin of the political communities called States is
that they were formed by the coalescence ofgroups, the original group having
been in no case smaller than the patriarchal family. (Againl) A ber dies
coalescence was soon arrested. (386)
In a later stage, political communities ... often o f very great territorial
extent, are constructed by one community conquering another or one chieftain,
at the head of a single community or tribe, subjugating great masses o f
population. But ... the separate local life o f the small societies included
in these great States was not extinguished or even much enfeebled. (386,
387) I The “ complete trituration in modern societies o f the groups which
once lived with an independent life has proceeded concurrently with much
greater activity in legislation (387)
I f the powers o f the Village Council (später Athenian Ekklesia etc.) must
be described by modern names, that which lies most in the background is
legislative power; that which i(s) most distincdy conceived is judicial
powers.103 The laws obeyed are regarded as having always existed, and
usages really new are confounded with the really old. (388, 389) The
village communities o f the Aryan (! again this nonsense!) race do not
therefore exercise true legislative power so long as they remain under
primitive influences. N o r again is legislative power exercised in any
intelligible sense o f the w o rd 104 by the Sovereigns o f those great States,
now confined to the East, which preserve the primitive local groups most
nearly intact. Legislation, as we conceive it, and the break up of local life appear
to have universally gone on together. (389) The Roman Em pire was the
source o f the influences which have led, immediately or ultimately, to
the formation o f highly-centralised, actively legislating, States. It was
the first great dominion which did not merely tax , but legislated also. The
process was spread over many centuries ___ Its commencement and
completion, I should place ... roughly at the issue o f the first Edictum
Provinciate, and at the Extension of the Roman citizenship to all subjects of the
Empire. But, in the result, a vast and miscellaneous mass o f customary
law was broken up and replaced by new institutions___It (the Roman
Empire) devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet.
(39 °, 391) Dann wirkte d. Roman Em pire u. sein law auf d. neuen dch d.
Barbaren gegründeten Reiche etc. (391)
Customary law ... is not obeyed, as enacted law is obeyed. When it
obtains over small areas and in small natural groups, the penal sanctions
on which it depends are partly opinion, partly superstition, but to a far
greater extent an instinct almost as blind and unconscious as that which
produces some o f the movements o f our bodies. The actual constraint
which is required to secure conformity with usage is inconceivably small.
When, however, the rules which have to be obeyed once emanate from
an authority external to the small natural group and forming no part o f it,
they wear a character wholly unlike that o f a customary rule. They lose
the assistance o f superstition (par exemple Christian Religion. Roman
Church ?), probably that o f opinion, certainly that o f spontaneous impulse.
The force at the back of law comes therefore to be purely coercive force to a
degree quite unknown in societies o f the more primitive type. M oreover,
19 7
in many communities, thisforce has to aetata very great distancefrom the hulk
of the persons exposed to it, and thus the Sovereign who wields it has to deal
with great classes of acts and with great classes of persons, rather than with
isolated acts and with individuals. Daher d. indifferency, inexorableness,
u. generality ihrer “ laws” . (392, 393)
Their generality (of the Law s) and their dependence on the coercive force
o f a Sovereign are the result o f the great territorial area o f modern States,
o f the comminution o f the sub-groups which compose them, and above
all o f the Roman Commonwealth etc. (394)
W e have heard o f a village Hampden, but a village Hobbes is inconceiv­
able. Flüchtet v. England wegen civil disturbance; a (u )f continent sah d.
Bur(s)che governments rapidly centralising (i.e. was Maine zu tief zu sagen:
Richelieu, Mazarin etc), local privileges u. jurisdictions in | extreme
decay, the old historical bodies, such as the French Parliaments, tending
for the time to become furnaces o f anarchy, the only hope discoverable in
kingly power. These were among the palpable fruits o f the wars which
ended in the Peace o f Westphalia. The old multiform local activity o f
feudal or quasi-feudal society was everywhere enfeebled or destroyed.
(Dagegen hingegen Locke Holland vo r Augen, ebso wie Petty). Was
dahingegen d. graussen Bentham betrifft, was hatte er hinter sich:
(Französ. Revol. u. Napoleon). A Sovereign who was a democrat
commenced, and a Sovereign w ho was a despot completed, the Codifica­
tion of the laws of France. There had never before in the modern world
been so striking an exemplification o f the proposition that, what the
Sovereign permits, he commands, because he could at any time substitute
an express command for his tacit permission, nor so impressive a lesson
in the far-reaching and on the whole most beneficial results (!) which might
be expected from the increased activity o f Sovereigns in legislation
proper. (396)
M A R X ’S E X C E R P T S FR O M JO H N L U B B O C K ,
Sir John Lubbock: “ The Origin of Civilisation and the Primitive Condition of
M an” London, i Sjo .
Lubbock citirt in Vorrede Müller (F. G .) “ Geschichte der Amerikan. Urreligionerf\ M'Lennan: '‘'‘Primitive Marriage” , Bachofen: “ Das Mutterrecht,”
Lord Karnes “ History of Man.”
E r sagt in ch. I (Introduction) mit Bezug auf Maine's “ Ancient Law ” , dass
dieser Bursch, wenn er sich bekannter gemacht hätte mit Reisebeschrei­
bungen etc. u. a. nicht als “ an obvious proposition” aufgestellt haben
würde that: “ the organisation o f primitive societies would have been
confounded, if men had called themselves relatives of their mother’s relatives”
while I (viz. Lubbock) shall presently show that, as indeed M r. M cLennan
has already pointed out, relationship through females is a common custom
o f savage communities all over the world, (p. 2, 3)
Heisst in the People of India (by J. F. W atson and J. W . Kaye) von den
Teehurs o f Oude, dass they “ live together almost indiscriminately in large
communities, and even when two people are regarded as married the tie is but
nominal” (cit. bei L . p. 60).
McLennan, like Bachofen, starts with a stage of hetairism or communal
marriage [u. Lubb. sagt p. 70, dass er diesen Blödsinn glaubt, i.e.
communal marriage u. hetairism identificirt; w hd offenbar hetairism
Form ist, welche Prostitution (u. diese existirt nur im Gegensatz zu
riage, whether communal etc or monogamic) voraussetzt. Dies
Hysteron Proteron.] The next stage was, in his (M cLennan’s) opinion,
that form o f polyandry in which brothers had their wives in common; after­
wards came that o f the levirate, i.e. the system under which, when an elder
brother died, his second brother married the w idow , and so on with the
others in succession. Thence he considers that some tribes branched off
into endogamy, others into exogamy; that is to say, some forbade marriage
out of, others within, the tribe. I f either o f these two systems was older
than the other, he considers that exogamy must have been the most
ancient. Exogam y was based upon infanticide, and led to the practice o f
marriage by capture. In a further stage the idea offemale descent, producing
as it would a division in the tribe, obviated the necessity o f capture as a
reality and reduced it to a symbol. (69, 70)
Lubb. admits the prevalence of infanticide among savages, aber “ among the
lowest boys were killed as frequendy as girls” , wie Eyre (d. Berüchtigte!)
(^'Discoveries in Central Australia!’) dies z.B. express statuirt1 in Australien.
(70) Schlagdes Beispiel der Kritik des Lubb., dass er McLennan*s Blödsinn
mit “ Exogamie” u. “ endogamie” annimmt, aber dann als Pfifficus sich d.
Sache so “pragmatisirt” :
“ Communal marriage was gradually superseded by individual marriagefounded
on capture, and that this first led to exogamy and then to female infanticide;
thus reversing M cLennan’s order o f sequence. Endogam y and regulated
polyandry, though frequent, I regard as exceptional, and as not entering
into the normal progress of development, (p. 70) Even under communal
marriage, a warrior who had captured a beautiful girl in some marauding
expedition would claim a peculiar right to her, and, when possible, would
set custom at defiance (!)
There are other cases of the existence of
marriage under two forms; and there is, therefore, no real difficulty in
assuming the co-existence of communal marriage and individual mar­
riage ... A war captive ... was in a peculiar position: the tribe had no
right to her; her capturer might have killed her if he chose; if he preferred
to keep her alive he was at liberty to do so; he did as he liked, and the
tribe was no sufferer.” (70, 71)
He (McLennan) also considers that marriage by capture followed, and
arose from that remarkable custom, namely, of marrying always out of the tribe,
for which he has proposed the appropriate name of exogamy. I believe
that exogamy arose from marriage by capture etc.” (72) Lubb. weiss
2 also nichts v. d. Basis - der gens | die innerhalb d. tribe existirt, so wenig
wie McLennan, obgleich er einige facts citirt, die ihm d. Sache unter
d. Nase reiben, u. sie in d. That etwas kitzelten.
Lubb. schreibt nun d. McLennan ab, um zu zeigen “ how widely ‘capture’,
either actual or symbolical, enters into the idea of marriage. Mr. McLen­
nan was, I believe, the first to appreciate its importance. I (Lubb.) have
taken some of the following evidence from his valuable work, adding,
however (!), several additional cases.” (jß. Great, greatest Lubb.!) If we
assume the case of a country in which there are four certain neighbouring
tribes, who have the custom of exogamy, and who trace pedigrees through
the mother, and not through the father - . . . after a certain time the result
would be that each tribe would consist of four septs or clans, representing
the 4 original tribes, and hence we should find communities in which
each tribe is divided into clans, and a man must always marry a woman of
a different clan. (75)
Among agricultural tribes, and under setded forms of government, the
chiefs often have very large harems, and their importance even is
measured by the number of their wives, as in other cases by that of their
cows or horses. (104)
“ Among many of the lower races relationship throughfemales is theprevalent
custom” , daher “ the curious (!) practice that a marts heirs [aber sie sind ja
dann nicht the marts heirs; diese civilisirten Esel können ihre eignen
conventionalities nicht los werden] are not his own, but his sister's
children.” (105) Thus when a rich man dies in Guinea, his property,
excepting the armour, descended to the sister's son, expressly, according
to Smith (Smith's “ Voyage to Guinea" p. 143. See also Pinkerton's Voyages
v. X V , p. 147, 421, 528); Astley's Collection of Voyages, v. II, p. 63, 265),
on the ground(Pragmatisirung!) that he must certainly be a relative.” (105)
Battel (in Pinkerton's Voyages, v. X V I, p. 330) mentions that the town of
Longo (Loango) is governed by 4 chiefs, which are sons of the king’s
sisters; for the king’s sons never come to be kings.” Quatremère {Mém.
gêogr. sur l’Egypte et sur quelques contrées voisines, Paris, 18 11, quoted
by Bachofen (p. 108) mentions that: “ Chez les Noubiens dit Abou Selah,
lorsqu’un roi vient à mourir et qu’il laisse un fils et un neveu du côté de
sa soeur, celui-ci monte sur le trône de préférence à l’ héritier naturel ( !)”
{Caillié's Travels, v. I, p. 153, dieser sagt: von Central Africa: “ the
sovereignty remains always in the same family, but the son never succeeds
hisfather; they choose in preference a son of the king’s sister, conceiving
that by this method the sovereign power is more sure to be transmitted to one of
the blood royal” (p. 105) Wenn nicht Caillié, sondern die Afrikaner selbst
dort d. sagten, beweists, dass d. weibliche Nachfolge sich nur noch für
die höchsten Funktionäre (chiefs) erhalten u. sie selbst d. Grund nicht
mehr wussten). In Northern Africa we find the same custom among the
Berbers; and Burton mentions it as existing in the East. (105) Polybius
(maternal ancestry in the female line) bemerkt dies mit Bezug auf Locrier;
u. on Etruscan tombs descent is stated in the female line. (p. 106)
In India the Kasias, the Kocch, and the Nairs have the system of female
kinship. Nach Buchanan, among the Buntar in Tulava a man’s property
does not descend to his own children, but to those of his sister” . Nach Sir W.
Elliot the people of Malabar, “ notwithstanding the same diversity of caste
as in other provinces, all agree in one remarkable usage - that of transmit­
tingproperty throughfemales only.” He adds on the authority of Lieutenant
Conmer, that the same is the case in Travancore, among all the castes
except the Ponans and the Namburi Brahmans. Latham states (Descriptive
Ethnology v. II, p. 463) “ no Nair son knows2 his own father, and vice versâ,
no Nair father knows his own son. What becomes of the property of the
husband? It descends to the children of his sisters.” (106)
Among the Limboos (India), a tribe near Darjeeling, the boys become the
property of the father on his paying the mother a small sum of money,
when the child is named, and enters his father's tribe: girls remain with the
mother, and belong to her tribe” (Campbell, Trans. Ethn. Soc.) Marsden
(History of Sumatra, p. 376) tells: dass among the Battas of Sumatra, “ the
succession to the chiefships does not go, in the first instance, to the son of the
deceased, but to the nephew by a sister; and that the same extraordinary (!)
rule, with respect to theproperty ingeneral prevails also among the Malays of
that part of the island, and even in the neighbourhood of Padang.” (106,
Sir John Richardson {BoatJourney, v. I, p. 406) tells dass unter den Kenaiyers
of Cooks Inlet a man’s property descendes) not to his own children, but to
those of his sister. Selbes d. Fall mit d. Kutchin {Smithsonian Report, 1866,
p. 326) p. 107. Carver (Travel(s) in North America) mentions dass unter
3 den Hudson’s Bay | Indians the children “ are always distinguished by the
name of the mother; and if a woman marries several husbands, and has
issue of each of them, they all are called after her.” (107) Similar rule
prevailed in Haiti u. Mexico (F. G. Müller, Amerikan. Urreligionen,
P· 167, 539)] (p. 107)
Mit Be%ug auf Polynesia Mariner states dass in d. Friendly or Tonga Islands
(in his “ Tonga Islands” , v. II, p. 89, 91) “nobility descends by ihefemale line,
for when the mother is not a noble, the children are not nobles.” (p. 107)
Nach einem ändern passage bei Mariner3 scheint’s dass these islanders
were passing the stage of relationship through females to that through
males.) D. existence of inheritance through females is clearly indicated
in the Fijian custom known as Vasu. (107, 108) So auch in Western
Australia “ children of either sex, always take the family name of their
mother” (Eyre) (p. 108)
Nach Herrn Lubbock, stages in religion:
1) Atheism; in sense, that absence of any definite idea on the subject.
2) Fetichism; wo man supposes he can force Deity (Deity immer of bös­
artiger Natur) to comply with his desires. 3) Nature worship or Totemismy
wo natural objects, trees, lakes, stones, animals, etc.4(celestial bodies etc.)
worshipped. 4) Shamanism; wo d. superior deities are far more powerful
than man, and of a different nature. Their place of abode also far away, u.
accessible only to the Shamans. 5) Idolatry or Anthropomorphism; gods still
more completely take the nature of men... more powerful; still amenable
to persuasion; they are a part of nature, and not creators; are represented
by images or idols. 6) Deity and Author, not merely a part, of nature; wd
for the first time a supernatural being. [Dies meint, Herr Lubbock: wd
ein Verstandesgespinst.] 7) Morality wd associated mit religion. (119)
The savages almost always regard spirits as evil beings ... a member of an
invisible tribe. (129)
Vgl. über die dem Lubbock unbewusste Ueb<e)rl<e)g<en)heit5 d.
“raisonnements” d. Wilden über das d. Gottesgläubigen Europäer. Lubb.
p. 128 sqq.
The Sumatrans tell of a man in the moon who is continually spinning cotton,
but that every night a rat gnaws his thread, and obliges him to begin his
work afresh. (138)
Sacred dance der natives of Virginia zwischen cercle of upright stones, die,
except that they are rudely carved at the upper end into the form of a
head, exactly resemble our so-called Druidical temples. (See Lubb. p. 1 j6
fig., taken from Lafitau’s “Moeurs des Sauvages” )
Interessant über d. Indians in California u. ihren Unglauben u. equality etc.
(v. father Baegert, a Jesuit Missionary: “Nachrichten von der Amerik.
Halbinsel Californie. 1773. Transl. in Smithsonian Reports 186ß-4)6
D. Zulus - die Unglücklichen! - “ it never entered,” sagt Callaway, “ their
heads that the earth and sky might be the work of an invisible Being”
(162, 163), aber sie haben a belief in invisible beings, founded partly on the
shadow, but principally on the dream. They regard the shadow as in some
way the spirit which accompanies the body (übliche idea unter d. Greeks).
Glauben an d. Reality d. fathers or brothers (als still living), die ihnen im
Traum erscheinen, grandfathers dagegen regarded as generally dead. (163)
Worship of Idols characterises a somewhat higher stage of human develop­
ment; no traces of it among the lowest races of man in Lafitau (Moeurs des
Sauvages Américains, v. I, p. 151) sagt mit Recht: “ On peut dire en général
que le grand nombre des peuples sauvages n’a point d’idoles” . Sind
nicht zu verwechseln mit Fetisch; fetichism is an attack on the Deity,
Idolatry an act of submission to him. (225)
The idol usually assumes the humanform, and idolatry is closely connected
with that form of religion which consists in the worship of ancestors,
(p. 228) The worship of ancestors ... more or less prevalent among all
the aboriginal tribes of Central India. (229) The Kaffirs sacrifice and pray to
their deceased relatives. (I.e.) Other races endeavour to preserve the
memory of the dead by rude statues. Pallas ( Voyages, v. IV , p. 79) mentions
that the Ostyaks of Siberia “ rendent un culte à leurs morts. Ils sculptent des
figures de bois pour représenter les Ostiakes célébrés. Dans les repas de
commémoration onplace devant cesfigures unepartie des mets. Les femmes qui
ont chéri leurs maris ont de pareillesfigures, les couchent avec elles, les parent,
et ne mangent point sans leur présenter une partie de leur portion.”
Erman (“ Travels in Siberia,” v. II p. 56) also mentions that when a man
dies “ the relatives form a rude wooden image representing, and in honour
of, the deceased, which is set up in theiryurt, and receives divine honours”
4 for a certain time. “ At every meal they set an offering | of food before
the image etc.” (I.e.) In ordinary cases this semi-worship only lasts a few
years, after which the image is burned. “ But when a Shaman dies, this
custom changes in his favour, into a complete and decided canonisationdann
(fahrt Erman fort) erhält “ the dressed block of wood which represents the
deceased” nicht nur “ homage for a limited period” , sondern “ the priest’s
descendants do their best to keep him in vogue from generation to
generation; [sieh den Phear, “ The Aryan Village,7 wo ganz dasselbe noch
heute in Bengal für Aristocraten etc] and by well-contrived oracles and
other arts, they manage to procure offerings for their families' penates, as
abundant as those laid on the altars of the universally acknowledgedgods.
But that the latter (sagt Erman) also have an historical origin, that they were
originally monuments of distinguished men, to which prescription and
the interest of the Shamans gave by degrees an arbitrary meaning and im­
portance, seems to me not liable to doubt; and this is, furthermore,
corroborated by the circumstance (that) of all the sacredyurts dedicated to
these saints, which have been numerous from the earliest times in the
vicinity of the river, only one has been seen (near Samarovo) containing the
image of a woman.” (p. 230)
[Lubb. citirt den Salomon d. Weisen (Wisdom, ch. X I V , p. 12) wo dieser
wiseacre flgdes orakelt über d. origin des worship of statues as of deities.
“ 13. Neither were they from the beginning, neither shall they be
14- For by the vainglory of men they entered into the world’, and therefore
shall they come shordy to an end.
15. For a father afflicted with untimely mourning, when he hath
made an image of his child soon taken away, now honoured him as a
god, which was then a dead man, and delivered to those that were
under him ceremonies and sacrifices.
16. Thus, in process of time, an ungodly custom grown strong was
kept as a law, and graven images were worshipped by the commandments of
17. Whom men could not honour in presence, because they dwelt far off,
they took the counterfeit of the visagefromfar, and made an express image
of a king whom they honoured, to the end that by this their forward­
ness, they mightflatter him that was absent, as if he. were present;
18. Also the singular diligence of the artificer did help to set forward
the ignorant to more superstition.
19. For he, (viz: the artificer), peradventure willing to please one in
authority, forced all his skill to make the resemblance of the best fashion.
20. And so (the) multitude, allured by the grace of the work, took him
now for a god, which a litde before was but honoured as a man.” ]
The idol is by no means regarded as a mere emblem. In India (Dubois,
p. 407), when the offerings of the people have been less profuse than usual,
the Brahmans sometimes “put the idols in irons, chaining their hands and
feet. They exhibit them to the people in this humiliating state, into which
they tell them they have been brought by rigorous creditors,from whom their
gods had been obliged, in times of trouble, to borrow money to supply their wants.
They declare that the inexorable creditors refuse to set the god at liberty, until
the whole sum, with interest, shall have beenpaid. The people come forward,
alarmed at the sight of their divinity in irons; and thinking it the most
meritorious of all good works to contribute to his deliverance, they raise
the sum required by the Brahmans for that purpose.” (p. 231)
(Vgl. hierzu Don Quixote, 2 Theil, ch. X X III, wo der Brave in d. Höhle
des Montesinos. Während er mit letzterem sich unterhält, sieht er una de
las dos companeras de la sin Ventura Dulcinea zu ihm kommen, y llenos
los ojos de lagrimas, con turbada y baxa vos me dixo: mi senora Dulcinea
del Toboso besa a vuesa merced las manos, y suplica a vuesa merced se la
haga de hacerla saber cömo estä, y que por estar en una gran necesidad,
asimismo suplica ä vuesa merced cuan encarecidamente puede, sea servido de
prestarle sobre este faldellin que aqui traigo de cotonia nuevo, media docena de
reales, ö los que vuesa merced tuviere, que ella da su palabra de volverselus con
mucha brevedad. Suspendiöme (erzählt Don Quixote dem Sancho Panza u.
dem Studiosus) y admiröme el tal recado, y volviendome al senor
Montesinos, le pregunte: <: es posible, senor Montesinos, que los encantados
principales, padecen necesidad? A lo que el me respondio; creame vuesa merced,
senor Don Quixote de la Mancha, que esta que llaman necesidad, adonde
quiera se usa,y por todo se entiendey a todos alcanna, yam hasta los encantados
no perdona: y pues la senora Dulcinea del Toboso envia a pedir esos sets
reales, y la prenda es buena, segun parece, nota y sino darselos, que sin duda
debe de estar puesta en algun grande aprieto. Prenda no lo tomareyo (sagt
Don Quixote), le respond!, ni menos le dare lo que pide, porque no tengo
sino solos quatro reales, los quales le d i ... y la dixe: decid, amiga mia, a
vuesa senora, que a mime pesa en el alma de sus trabajos, y que qui siera
ser un Fücar (Fugger) para remediarlos etc.” )8
D. in Tyros worshipped Statue des Herkules selbst die als Gottheit be­
trachtet; daher während der Belagerung durch Alexander Magnus fast
bound in chains toprevent htmfrom deserting to the enemy, (p. 231, 32)
As civilisation advances u. die Chiefs mehr despotisch werdend, exact more
and more respect, the people are introduced to conceptions ofpower and magni­
ficence higher than any which they had previously entertained. (232) u.
5 diese dann auch auf d. Götter übertragen. | Idol worship zeigt higher
mental condition as worship of animals and even the heavenly bodies.
Selbst sun-worship generally, though not invariably, associated with
a lower idea of the Deity than is the case with Idolatry. [D.h. der Hofdienst
gegen die Götter “ lower” als unter idol worship]. This arises pardy
from the fact that the gradually increasing power of chiefs and kings has
familiarised the mind with the existence of a power greater than any which
had been previously conceived. (I.e.) So, in Westafrika, the slave trade
having added considerably to the wealth and consequendy to the power of
the chiefs or kings, they maintained much state, and insisted upon being
treated with servile homage. No man was allowed to eat with them, nor to
approach them excepting on his knees with an appearance offear, which no
doubt was in many cases sufficiently well-founded. (233) These marks of
respect so much resembled adoration, that “ the individuals of the lower
classes are persuaded that the king’s power is not confined to the earth,
and that he has credit enough to make rain fall from heaven etc.” (233,
citirt aus: “ Proyart’s History of Loango” etc.) The tyrants of Natal, says
Casalis, “ exacted almost divine homage.” (233) The king and queen of
Tahiti were regarded as so sacred that nothing once used by them, not
even the sounds forming their names, could be used for any ordinary
purposes. The language of the court was characterised by the most ridiculous
adulation. The king’s “ houses were called the aarai, the clouds of heaven
etc.” (I.e.)
Manworship would not long be confined to the dead. In many cases it
extends to the living also. Indeed, the savage who worship(s) an animal
or a tree, would see no absurdity in worshipping a man. [As if the
civilised Englishman did not “ wors