fisheries. The total value of foreign and domestic imports | to the south of the anchorage, on the point which screens for the year ending June 30, 1877, was $12,358, and of it from the southern monsoon, in 20° 19′ 52′′ N. lat. and exports $1795. The principal industry is the manufacture 86' 46' 57" E. long. of cotton goods, especially print cloths, but there are also woollen factories, bleaching works, foundries, a shipbuild-mark. ing yard, and planing mills. In the neighbourhood there are valuable granite quarries. Fall River is the terminus of the line of steamers in the route from New York to Boston. It was incorporated as a town in 1803, and received a city charter in 1854; and in 1862 Fall River, Newport county, with 3377 inhabitants, was added to it. The population in 1850 was 11,522, and in 1870 26,766. FALMOUTH, a municipal and parliamentary borough and market-town of England, county of Cornwall, on the south side of Falmouth Harbour, 15 miles N.N.E. of Lizard Point, and 267 miles W.S.W. of London. The town consists chiefly of a long and narrow street extending along the shore. The principal public buildings are the hall of the Cornwall Polytechnic Society, the mechanics institute, the town-hall, and the market-house. In the early part of the 17th century Falmouth consisted only of a few fishermen's huts, but soon after this Sir John Killigrew, having obtained the permission of James I., constructed a new quay and laid the foundation of the present town. Its subsequent prosperity was a consequence of the excellence of its barbour, and its proximity to Land's End. For about 150 years it was the port from which the mail packets for the Mediterranean, Spain, the West Indies, and South America were despatched; and though these steamers now start from other ports it maintains steam communication with London, Liverpool, Dublin, Penzance, Plymouth, and FAMILY. Family is a word of which the etymology Southampton. The harbour is one of the best refuges for but partially illustrates the meaning. The Roman familia, shipping in England. Its entrance between St Anthony's derived from the Oscan famel (servus), criginally signified Head on the E. and Pendennis Castle on the W. is about the servile property, the thralls, of a master. Next, the a mile in width, and it thence stretches inland about five term denoted other domestic property, in things as well as and a half miles. It has depth of water and excellent in persons. Thus, in the fifth of the laws of the Twelve anchorage for the largest ships, and vessels of considerable Tables the rules are laid down :—SI. INTESTAto. moritur. burden can discharge their cargoes at the quay. In 1876 cuÍ. SUUS. HERES. NEC. SIT. ADGNATUS. PROXIMUS. FAMILIAM. the number that entered the port was 803, with a tonnage HABETO, and SI. AGNATUS. NEC. ESCIT. GENTILIS. FAMILIAM. of 118,617; the number that cleared 384, tonnage NANCITOR; that is, if a man die intestate, leaving no 26,522. The total value of imports was £240,474, and of natural heir, who had been under his potestas, the nearest exports £5261. The exports include copper, tin, tin- agnate, or relative tracing his connexion with the deceased plates, woollen goods, and fish. Falmouth along with exclusively through males, is to inherit the familia, or Penryn returns two members to parliament. The popula- family fortune of every sort. Failing an agnate, a member tion of the municipal borough in 1871 was 5294. of the gens of the dead man is to inherit. In a third sense, FALSE POINT, a land-locked harbour in the Cuttack the Roman word familia was applied to all the persons who district of Orissa, situated in 20° 20' N. lat. and 86° 47 could prove themselves to be descended from the same auE long, and reported by the famine commissioners incestor, and thus the word almost corresponded to our own 1867 to be the best harbour on the coast of India from the use of it in the widest meaning, as when we say that a Húgli to Bombay. It derives its name from the circum- person is "of a good family" (Ulpian, Dig., 50, 16, 195, stance that vessels proceeding up the Bay of Bengal fre- fin.). Leaving for a while the Roman terms, to which it quently mistook it for Point Palmyras, a degree further will be necessary to return, we may provisionally define north. The anchorage is safe, roomy, and completely land- family," in the modern sense, as the small community locked. The capabilities of False Point as a harbour remained formed by the union of one man with one woman, and by long unknown, and it was only in 1860 that the port was opened. It was rapidly developed, owing to the construc- times, and in most European countries, constitute the tion of the Orissa canals. Two navigable channels lead in-household, and it has been almost universally supposed and across the Mabánadí delta, and connect the port with that little natural associations of this sort are the germ-cell Cuttack city. The trade of False Point is chiefly with of early society. The history with which, from childhood, other Indian harbours, but a large export trade in rice and oil-seeds has sprung up with Mauritius, the French colonies, nation from the one household of Abraham. It is true and France. False Point is now a regular port of call for that his patriarchal family differed from the modern family Anglo-Indian coasting steamers. Its capabilities were first in one respect. It was polygamous, but, as female chastity appreciated during the Orissa famine of 1866, when it afforded almost the only means by which supplies of rice could be thrown into the province. Between 1963-64 and 1874-75 the value of the export and import trade of False Point has increased from £51,921 to £261,212, or upwards of five times, and the nuraber of vessels visiting the port from 16 to 110. A lighthouse is situated a little FALSTER, an island in the Baltic, belonging to DenIt is richly wooded and well cultivated, and is very fertile, especially in fruits. Area, 180 square miles; popu lation (1870), 27,763. Sce DENMARK. FALUN, or FAHLUN, a town of Sweden, capital of a laen of the same name, which, however, is also called Dalarna or Dalecarlia, is situated in a bare and rocky country near the W. shore of Lake Runn, 73 miles W. of Gefle. The town is built chiefly of timber, and the inhabitants are mostly engaged in mining and smelting. West of the town are the celebrated Falun copper mines, the oldest and most celebrated in Europe. They are known to have been in existence 600 years ago, but probably their origin is some centuries earlier. Since the 17th century their produce has been gradually decreasing, and while in 1650 they produced nearly 3300 tons the total output in 1874 was only a little over 490 tons. In the town are museums of mineralogy and geology, a school of practical mining, a model room, and a large scientific library. The fumes. arising from the copper-smelting works destroy vegetation in the vicinity of the town, but so far from being injurious to human life, they seem often to have acted as a preventative against cholera and other epidemic diseases. Connected with the copper works there are shot, sulphur, vitriol, and Indian red factories. The population of Falun in 1875 was 6694. FAMAGOSTA. See CYPRUS. 66 the increase of children born to them. These in modern we are best acquainted shows us the growth of the Jewish was one of the conditions of the patriarchal family, and as descent through males was therefore recognized as certain, the plurality of wives makes no real difference to the argument. In the same way the earliest formal records of Indian, Greek, and Roman society show us the family firmly established, and generally regarded as the most primitivo of human associations. Thus, Aristotle derives. the first household (oikia πporn) from the combination of | man's possession of property-in the slave or in domesticated animals-with man's relation to woman, and he quotes Hesiod: oikov μèv πρúτiσTа yvvaîka Te Bouν T' aporipa (Politics, 1, 2, 5). The village, again, with him is a colony or offshoot of the household, and monarchical government in states is derived from the monarchy of the eldest nale member of the family. Now, though certain ancient terms, introduced by Aristotle in the chapters to which we refer, might have led him to imagine, as we shall see, a very different origin of society, his theory is, on the face of it, natural and plausible, and it has been almost universally accepted. The beginning of society, it has been said a thou sand times, is the family, a natural association of kindred by blood, composed of father, mother, and their descendants. In this family, the father is absolute master of his wife, his children, and the goods of the little community; at his death, his eldest son succeeds him; and in course of time this association of kindred, by natural increase and by adoption, develops into the clan, gens, or yévus. As generations multiply, the more distant relations split off into other clans, and these clans, which have not lost the sense of primitive kinship, unite once more into tribes. The tribes again, as civilization advances, acknowledge themselves to be subjects of a king, in whose veins the blood of the original family runs purest. This, or something like this, is the common theory of the growth of society. : On the other side, the following facts are to be noticed :(1) In many barbarous communities the family, in our sense of the word, does not exist. (2) The traditions of civilized races report a similar state of things in their early experience. (3) The domestic institutions of savages, and traces of the same manners among cultivated races, point to an age when the family was not constituted in the modern way. (4) The larger tribal associations of savages were clearly not developed out of the monogamous or patriarchal family. (5) The larger tribal associations of Greece, Rome, and India bear marks of having been evolved out of the tribal associations of savages. If these points can be proved, the family is not the earliest, but one of the latest conquests of civilization. We shall consider these points in order. 1. At whatever epoch civilized travellers have visited peoples of less cultivation, they have noted, with unconcealed surprise, not the family, but promiscuity and polyandry: They have found inen and women living together in what seemed unregulated community, or they have found that the woman had several husbands, and often that these husbands were brothers. They have alleged that the woman, not the man, was really head of the household, that kinship was traced through the female line, on account of the certainty of that sort of genealogy, and consequently that a man's children belonged, not to his own family, but to that of the wife, in whose affections he had only a limited or transitory share. It may be presumed, with some confidence, that these customs, observed in lands and ages widely apart, cannot have grown out of the monogamous or patriarcbal family as we know it. The limitless area in which such practices have been usual may be gathered from a few examples. Thus Herodotus says of the Agathyrsi, a Scythian people (iv. 104): "They have their women in common, that they may all be brothers of each other." The Nasamones (iv. 172) have similar customs; of the Massagetæ (1216) it is said that each marries a wife, ταύτῃσι δὲ ἐπίκοινα χρέωνται. Aristotle alludes to similar promiscuity among the Libyans (Pol., ii. 3, 9); they have their women in common, and distribute the children by their likeness to the men. Diodorus Siculus reports the sume manners among the Troglodytes and the Ichthyophagi on the coast of the Red Sea. The Auseis by the | Libyan lake Tritonis, though they seem to have set store on the chastity of unmarried women, are said by Herodotus to have lived like cattle, with no permanent cohabita tion (iv. 180). These are examples of reported promis cuity in ancient times. Though the observers may have overlooked, and probably did overlook, some regulations, yet it is plain that in the societies spoken of the monogamous or patriarchal family cannot have existed, and su cannot have been the germ of such wider tribal associations as were then established. Turning to modern savages, we find the custom of lending wives, as an act of friendliness and hospitality, very common. This may be no more than mere profligacy, in a society where male kin is recog nized; but the marriage custom of Thibet, which assigns to a woman several brothers as joint husbands, cannot be thus explained. This amazing practice is the rule of life "among thirty millions of respectable people" (Wilson, Abode of Snow). As to the area over which some form of polyandry extends, the reader may consult Mr M'Lennan's Primitive Marriage (Edinburgh, 1865, p. 178, 183), where it is traced "to points half round the globe." Cæsar describes something like it among the inhabitants of Britain (De Bello Gallico, lib. v. c. 14) "Ten or twelve men have wives in common, and chiefly brothers share with brothers, and father with children.' According to a fragment of Polybius, the same fraternal arrangement was not unknown among the Spartans. " Among the Nairs of Malabar, a woman has several husbands, but these are not brothers (Asiatic Researches, vol. v. p. 13; Hamilton's Account of East Indies, vol. 1. p. 308; Buchanan's Journey, vol. ii. p. 411). Among the Nairs the woman lives with her mother or brothers, or in other cases has a house of her own, where she receives her husbands. 'No Nair knows his father, and every man looks upon his sister's children as his heirs" (Buchanan, ii. 412). Some other examples of very loose relations between the sexes will be found in Mr Herbert Spencer's Principles of Sociology, vol. i. chap. 5, 6. But, to be brief, we strike on instances as soon as we look below the surface of civilization. Thus, in the Marquesas Islands, Mr Melville (Narrative of a Four Months' Residence, 1846, p. 212) describes polyandry, and asks, with some naïveté, Where else could such a practice exist even for a single day?" He would have found the practice among the Tsonnotouan Iroquois. "La polygamie qui n'est pas permise aux homines, l'est pourtant aux femmes" (Lafitau, Moeurs des Sauvages Americains, vol. i. p. 555, 1726). If we are to maintain, as it was usual to declare, that "it is difficult to say of what races of men it is not allowable to lay down that the society in which they are united was originally organized on the patriarchal model," we must believe that some strange necessity, or some monstrous profligacy destroyed the patriarchal model among the people whose manners we have been studying. 66 2. If we can trust the traditions of Indo-European and other polite peoples, they too once lived in a stage which can hardly be discerned from promiscuity, and they too allotted many husbands to one wife. Beginning with Greece, we find the legend in Suidas (p. 3102), that the women of Attica abandoned themselves to unchecked vice, and that the male parentage of children could not be ascertained. According to the story of Varro (Augustine, De Civ. Dei, 1. xviii. c. 9), it was Cecrops, the serpent-king, who first instituted marriage, just as the Australian natives credit the lizard with the discovery. The Hindoos give it to Svetaketu, before whose date women were unconfined, and roamed at their pleasure. . . . This ancient custoni is even now the rule for creatures born as brutes. and it is still practised among the northern Kurus" (Muir, Sanskrit Texts, part ii. p. 336). The Egyptians attri buted the origin of marriage to the rule of Menes; the Chinese, to Fohi. As to polyandry, among Aryans of India, a famous passage in the Mahabharata tells how the five brothers Pandava "married the fair Draaupadi with eyes of lotus blue." The whole legend of these princes is so marked with the stamp of polyandrous institutions that the very terminology of polyandry, the system of nomenclature called "classificatory," is retained. Grand-uncles, in this episode of the Mahabharata, as among the Red Indians, are called grandfathers, and uncles fathers. If, then, the Aryan race was not originally organized like the polyandrous Thibetans, the legends which declare these facts are at least singular examples of "undesigned coincidence." Before coming to that conclusion, it is now necessary to examine certain symbolic customs, certain laws of inheritance and of prohibited degrees, and so to determine whether the looser relations of savages may not have been the material out of which the modern family was gradually fashioned. This can scarcely be called a new, though it has never been a popular opinion. Mr Millar, professor of law in the university of Glasgow, expressed it distinctly in his Origin of the Distinction of Ranks, p. 47 (4th edition, Edinburgh, 1806). 3. If the practices which make kindred through males difficult or impossible to recognize were ever universally prevalent, they will have left vestiges of their existence in the custom of tracing descent through females. Again, where that custom is met with, though marriage has become fixed, and where women are mistresses of the household and heads of the family, it is not easy to give any other explanation of these facts than this, that they are survivals from a time when the union of the sexes was vague and temporary. Where, then, do we meet with examples of | kindred traced through the female line? Kindred through women is recognized in Australia (with exceptions among certain tribes), in the Marianne Islands, in Fiji, Tonga, and some other isles of the Pacific, and in the Carolina Islands. Among the Kars of the Golden Chersonese, the tribes are divided into Sgans, who recognize male descent, and Pwos, who reckon by the mother's side. The natives of the province of Keang-se are celebrated among the natives of the other Chinese provinces for the mode or form used by them in address, which is Laon peaon," paraphrastically translated (Morgan, Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family, p. 452), "Oh, you old fellow, brother mine by some of the ramifications of female relationship!" To select some more modern instances from M. Giraud Teulon's collections (Origine de la Famille, Geneva, 1874, p. 15), the Singhalese, the Nairs of Malabar, the Kocchs, an Indian tribe, and the Zaporogue Cossacks, with the red men of North America as a rule, and the Indians of British Guinea, to whom we may add many African tribes (Bowditch, Mission to Ashantee, p. 185, London, 1873; Munzinger, Ost-Afrikanische Studien, 1864), count kindred by the mother's side. Another collection of examples will be found in Mr M'Lennan's Primitive Marriage. Strabo reports that among the Iberians women were heads of families (i. 214, 319; iii. 165), and Cordier (Anciennes coutumes de Barége) shows that among the Basques women inherited property to the exclusion of males as late as the eighteenth century. The legislation of the Revolution changed all this, but a popular song still testifies to the annoyance of les héritières. This ancient custom thus fulfils the proverb, "Tout finit par des chansons" (Giraud Teulon, La Mère chez certains peuples de Antiquité, Paris, 1867, p. 42). Among ancient peoples there are very many more or less distinct vestiges of female kinship. Herodotus, it is true, says of the Lycians (i. 173), "This custom they have to themselves, and herein agree with no other men, in that they name themselves by the mother's side and not by the father's. And if one ask another who he is, he will recount his maternal descent, and reckon up his mother's maternal ancestors." Now, so far from this mode of deducing descent being peculiar to the Lycians, it was in vogue among the Locrians (Polybius, 12, v., and Excerpta Hist. Græc. Frag., Rome, 1827, p. 381). In the bilingual Etruscan inscriptions, according to M. Giraud Teulon (Origine de la Famille, p. 21), to whom, we owe many of these citations, "the Etruscan text contains only the name of the mother of the dead, while the Latin text gives that of the father." Certain Egyptian mortuary inscriptions give the name of the mother, while the accompanying Greek text gives that of the father. A stele found in the ruins of the temple at Napata by Mariette Bey (Revue Archéologique, May 1873) shows us a monarch justifying his claim to the throne by enumerating the women of his maternal ancestry. Future historians will no doubt explain the apparent coexistence of two systems of kindred in Egypt. Meanwhile it is noteworthy that Herodotus (ii. 35) declares that daughters were compelled by law to maintain their parents, while sons were free to do as they pleased. This report has been curiously confirmed by the legal documents of certain private Egyptian families, lately deciphered by M. Revillout. We see the woman mistress of the household, and owner of the property. Many other ancient examples are published by the Baron d'Eckstein (Revue Archéologique, 1858), but M. d'Eckstein's speculations about race need not be accepted. Millar (op. cit., p. 48) quotes some survivals of the custom of tracing pedigree and deriving condition through women: "If any one be born of a Campanian father, and a mother Puteolan, he-is a Campanian citizen, unless, by some particular ĉustom (privilegio aliquo), his maternal descent is to be reckoned." Among places where this local custom ruled, Delphi is mentioned. The great collections of the fasts known about! the ancient position of women as heads of the family is Bachofen's Das Mutterrecht, in which somewhat crude speculations about religion are introduced. The most classical example of a tradition of gynæcocracy is that often-quoted tale of Varro's preserved by St Augustine (De Civitate Dei, lib. xviii. c. 9). In the time of Cecrops, the serpent king, a dispute arose between Pallas and Poseidon, which was settled by the votes of the Athenians. In these days women possessed the franchise, and a woman's vote turned the scale in favour of Pallas. To appease Poseidon, the Athenian men resolved that women should no more be admitted to the assemblies, nor should children take their names from the mother's family. In this tradition survives a memory of the Red Indian and Australian practice, which makes the child belong to the mother's clan, and also a memory of the political rights, so to speak, which women enjoyed among the ancient Britons, among the Iroquois of Lafitau's time, and which take the shape of a considerable share in the despotism of African races. It may be said that if women have ever enjoyed these privileges it is odd that among the least cultivated peoples, such as the Australians, they are treated as slaves. The reply is-if the Australians were a people of barbaric wealth, like many African nations, and if the certainty of succession to the "royal stool" and the royal treasures were a matter of the utmost moment to the state, it is not improbable that the ancient custom of female kinship would have given, among them too, dignity, import ance, and power to women. sources that Thus we know from several From the nobility of the mother Should always be the right to the sovereignty among the Celts in Scotland (M'Lennan, Primitive Marriage, 1865, p. 86, quoting Nennius; the AngloSaxon Chronicle, Rolls series, p. 1). Even in the Mahab harata there is a vestige of this system. Vasonki, the Naga (serpent) king, wished to have an heir. Instead of marrying, he found a partner for his sister Djaratkarou. The sister's son succeeded. Compare Eowditch's Ashantee (p. 185), "Their extraordinary rule of succession excludes all children but those of a sister, and is founded on the argument that, if the wives of the brothers are faithless, the blood of the family is entirely lost in the offspring, but, should the daughters deceive their husbands, it is still preserved." In leaving this part of the subject we may ask, from what considerations, except those indicated by Bowditch, could the rule of inheritance by the mother's side have been derived? 4. It has been shown that the actual practices of many barbarous races make the existence of the patriarchal, and still more of the monogamous family impossible, and that the traditions of the races called Aryan, with many frag ments of their customs, testify to a similar state of things in the past experiences of nations now organized on the basis of the family. We must now ask-(1) Of what nature are the wider tribal associations of savages (2) How did they come into existence ? (3) Are there any vestiges of similar and similarly formed associations among peoples which now possess strict marriage and kinship through males? We find that the Australian black fellows and the red men of North America are grouped in local tribes, which generally are named from the lands they occupy Thus, the Onondaga are people of the hills, the Mohawks people of the flint, the Senecas people of the great hills, the Oneidas people of the granite, and so forth (Morgan, League of the Iroquois, 1851). In Australia the tribes take the names of districts, as Ballarat, Wandyalloch, and Moreton Bay. Within these local tribes there are smaller associations, variously called "clans," "families," "septs," "tribes," by travellers. They are, as a rule, governed on this principle in Australia:-"All the children take after the clan of their mother, and no man can marry a woman of the same clan, although the parties be born of parents in no way related, according to our ideas” (G. S. Lang, Aboriginals of Australia, Melbourne, 1865, p. 10; Gray's Journals, &c., ii. 227). These smaller associations which may not intermarry are named after some animal, vegetable, or other natural object. A member of the Kangaroo associations may not slay or eat the kangaroo, which he holds in honour, and a Paddymelon must abstain from paddymelon. The obvious result of this scheme of prohibited marriage is to make every local tribe contain much the same assortment of smaller communities. ing at North America, we find the local tribe of Senecas to be composed of sets of persons called by the name of Wolf, Bear, Turtle, Beaver, Deer, Snipe, Heron, Hawk, and many of the same names prevail among Cayugas, Oneidas, Mohawks, and the rest. Just as in Australia, no man may marry a woman of the same name, though she may have been born hundreds of miles away, and may be no sort of relation in our sense of the word. As in Australia, the animal or plant from which each associntion takes its name is sacred; in America it is called the totem. The oldest Iroquois totems seem, from many legendary and political proofs, to have been Wolf, Bear, and Turtle (Morgan, Ancient Society, 1877, p. 70; see also M'Lennan, Fortnightly. Review, 1869-1870). Turning to Africa (Bowditch's Mission to Ashantee, p. 181), we read of similar institutions. Livingstone reports similar facts among the Bechwanas, Falkner among the Patagonians, Brooke among the Sea Dyaks, and Garcilasso de la Vega among the lower races of Peru. Look The essential features of these associations and groups of kindred are, for our present purpose-(1) Their indubitable growth out of female kinship, and the rule which prohibits marriage between persons who are of the same name, and own descent from the same plant, animal, or thing; (2) their existence as stocks of different blood in the same local tribe; and (3) their acknowledgment of kinship with, and of the duty to support in war, or to revenge, other members of the same name. (On this point, see Morgan, Ancient Society, p. 78. Compare also Ancient Society, p. 175, as to the Louchoux or Kutchin of the Tukon River: "A man does not marry into his own class; the children belong to the grade of the mother; members of the same grade in the different tribes do not war with each other.") For convenience of nomenclature, we shall call all such associations totem kin. The word totem points to the peculiarity of supposed descent from some natural object which gives the name, and “kin” is more convenient than "group or "clan," because the same totem and the same name cover many scattered groups. 5. The question now rises, Do we meet similar associa tions among civilised peoples who now possess the family? First we find Mr Hart of Canton saying (Ancient Society, pp. 364, 365): "In some parts of the country large villages are to be met with, in each of which there exists but one family name; thus in one district will be found, say, three villages, each containing two or three thousand people, the one of the Horse, the second of the Sheep, and the third of the Ox family name. . . . . Just as among the North American Indians husband and wife are always of different families,—that is, of different surnames. Custom and law alike prohibit marriage on the part of people having the same family surname, The children are of the father's family,-that is, they take his surname.' (Compare Narrative of Two Mahometan Travellers, Piukerton, vol. vii.) The Arabian travellers had the same law at home, prohibiting marriage between people of the same family name. Looking at India we find in the Institutes of Menu (iii. 5) that a man of the twice-born classes may not marry woman descended from his paternal or maternal ancestors within the sixth degree, nor [in words believed to be a comment on the original] one who is known by her family name to be of the same primitive stock with his father." No one, that is to say, may marry within the ghotra, just as no Red Indian may marry within the limits fixed by the totem. If the ghotra was counted, or if the Chinese family name ran, on the female side, Chinese and Brahmans would be exactly in the position of Australian blacks, as far as prohibited degrees are concerned. Mr Cunningham (Digest of Hindu Law, Madras, 1877) says that the old rule about the ghotra is falling into disuse, and that local custom in many places permits it to be disobeyed. Now, just as observers in India note this change of practice, so observers among the Red Indians and Australians note another change of practice. Kindred among these peoples is very gradually beginning to be reckoned by the male line; children are being counted arnong some tribes in the clan of the father (Morgan, p. 86). Leaving India, and turning to Greece and Rome, we find the local tribe and, subordinate to the tribe, two forms of associations called the yéros and gens, which are prominent in early history and gradually die out. Thus, though in the Twelve Tables, as we have seen, the members of the gens succeed to the property of an intestate, yet in the 2d century Gaius declares (Inst., iii. 17) that all Gentile law had fallen into desuetude. The gens, then, was, as its very name implies, a form of kindred, but old and hastening to decay. The members of a gens, according to Cicero, had a common name, were born of free parents, an. were those who capite non sunt deminuti. Festus adds that members of a gens are ex eodem genere orti. It must be noticed that, though the members of a geus were of no recognizable kin to each other in one sense, yet they showed a certain solidarité — putting on mourning when one of the kin was in disgrace (Livy, vi. 20), sharing common religious rights peculiar to themselves, and at one time having a right to inherit property. All these things | point to consciousness of distant blood relationship. Still one feature of the ghotra seems absent. It is hardly proved that there was a time when Romans might not marry within the gens. Indications of the past existence of the rule are found in the fact that Roman genealogies do not, as it is said, show us examples of marriages between persons of the same gens. More to the point is Plutarch's statement (Περὶ αἰτίων Ρωμαϊκῶν), “In times past it was unlawful for Romans to marry women of their own kin (rvyyevíðas); . . . . nay, they did not wed ladies in any degree connected with them by blood, just as now they do not take sisters or aunts, and it was long before they ventured to take cousins to wife." It seems then that, just as in the case of the contemporary ghotra of the Hindus, an ancient and wide prohibition to marry in the gens was thrown off by the Romans. Here it must be noted that the ghotra of the Hindu law of inheritance is not identical with the ghotra in which marriage is prohibited by custom. It is rather a body composed of all the cognates within certain large limitations. | (Comparative Politics, Macmillan, 1873, p. 111), “The family grew into the clan, the clan grew into the tribe." Mr Freeman says we can trace this process best “among men of our own blood." But when we examine the early associations of the English (Kemble's Saxons in England, vol. i. p. 458), we find, just as in America, just as in Australia, groups of kindred of the same name,-take Billing, by way of example,-scattered from north to south through all the local tribes. We have seen how this happens in America and Australia, we have seen that there the family, in Mr Freeman's sense, does not grow into the clan. Did it do so in Attica and Italy, and, if so, how did a tribe, which was ex hypothesi but a swollen clan, contain so many stocks which claimed distinct, origin and distinct mythical ancestors? How did these stocks come to be scattered through local tribes, not grouped in one? The growth of savage tribes is not a development of the family; tribes singularly like those of savages are found in carly civilizations. Had the two kinds of kindred different origins? There remains a point to notice. The thoroughly savage totem-kindreds revere the animal, plant, or other object from which they take their name and claim descent, and they use it as a badge. For Greek and Roman survival of this usage see Phutarch, Theseus, M'Leunan, "The worship of plants and animals," in the Fortnightly Review, In the example of the Greek yéros we again find the 1869, 1870; and the Antiquities of Heraldry, by W. S. common name a patronymic, generally thought to be Ellis, 1869. If the ordinary theory, that the tribe and derived from a hero. We find that all who bore the name clan are overgrown families, be rejected, the converse theory shared certain religious rights, and before Solon's date may be stated thus:-The totem-kindreds of savages grow were co-heirs to property, and took up the blood feud if up through exogamy and female kin. The change to male one of the yivos were slain. Yet the yevrat are often kinship (a change which is demonstrably taking place in defined as not akin in blood, so entirely did the old senso America and Australia) produced something like the of relationship dwindle, in Greece as in Rome. The lexico Chinese circle of relationship. The substitution of the graphers supposed that the yen were constituted by legis name of a fictitious ancestor for that of the sacred plant, lative enactment, vouw Tive EXOVTES KOLVwvíav. (See Meier, animal, or natural object produced a circle of affinity like De Gentibus Atticis, Philippi, Der Areopag und die Epheten, the Hindu ghotra of customary religion. The decay of the Berlin, 1874, p. 68; Schoemann, Griechische Alterthümer, prohibition to marry within the kin united by the family Berlin, 1861, vol. i. p. 329, with Schoemann's theory of name, like the growing laxity of rule in the ghotra, prothe growth of the yévos; F. Haase, Die Athenische Stammduced something like the Greek yéros and the Roman gens. verfassung, also Grote's History of Greece, iii. 53.) Now, Nothing remained but joint religious rites, a common place hard as it is to ascertain the exact nature of the yévos, of burial, a common name, a vague feeling of connexion, and of its relation to the tribe, it seems, on the whole, traditions of the prohibition to marry within the gens, the more analogous to the totem-kin than to the caste or joint duty of taking up the blood-fend, and vestiges of the jointfamily of the modern Hindus. (See Sir Henry Maine, heirship. In process of time the intenser affections of the "South Slavonians and Rajpoots," Nineteenth Century, family caused the old gentile ties to disappear, and gentile December, 1877.) A common name, co-heirship, the duty law became an empty memory. of avenging a member, all point to the idea of kinship. As to exogamy, a Greek could certainly marry in his own yéros, for the common name went by the father's side, and a Greek might marry his father's though not his mother's daughter. It has been argued that the prohibition to marry a uterine sister, though kinship in historic Greece went by the male line, indicates a past when the maternal tie was more strict,when, in fact, a man who married his uterine sister married within the yévos, and a man who took his half-sister by the father's side married outside the yéros. Here it may be observed that Aristotle (Pol., 1, 2, 5, 6) gives very ancient synonyms of yervira, the terms poyadakтes (nourished on the same milk), oporivo (eating from the same vessel), oμokúnrot (warmed by the same fire). These terms speak of a time when motherhood or fosterage, when community of shelter, not blood kinship, were the bonds that kept members of the same kin together. The words may be compared with Gaelic teadhloch and coediche, Gaelic names for family, signifying, the first, having a Common residence, the second those who cat together" (M'Lennan, Prim. Mar., p. 154). It has been usual, almost universal, to explain the Greek yeros and Roman gens by simply saying, like Mr Freeman It has been shown that arrangements ruder than the modern family exist among contemporary savages, and have existed among ancient peoples. It has been shown that these rude institutions produce large associations of men, tribes and totem kindred, among savages, and that, by a series of changes, every one of which is exemplified in experience, the Greek and Roman gentes, the units of early political society, may have been developed out of barbarous groups. There are next certain customs to be examined, which tend, as far as they go, to show that civilized society passed through savage stages. The chief of these customs are the ceremony of capture and bridal etiquette. the ceremony of capture it is superfluous to say much, as the subject has been handled, with complete originality and copious illustrations, in M'Lenuan's Primitive Marriage. The classic example of the ceremony of capture is thus stated by C. C. Muller, History and Antiquities of the Doric Race, English translation, Oxford, 1330, vol. ii. p. 298): "Two things were requisite as an introduction and preparation to As to 1 We have examples in Zuhi-land of the declining belief in animal ancestry (Callaway's Religion of the Amazulu), and in Greek history we have frequent instaunes of the fictitious adoption of eponymous heroic ancestors. |