Chapter 17

[191]Ancient Society, 389, and on the whole subject, 382-508. In his earlier work,Systems of Consanguinity, 480 ff.,Mr. Morgangives fifteen normal stages or institutions in the evolution of marriage and the family. See also the summary inMcLennan,Studies, I, 251, 252; andLubbock'selaborate discussion of Morgan,Origin of Civilization, 162 ff.

[192]Ancient Society, 394;Systems of Consanguinity, 10-15;Lubbock,op. cit., 165.

[193]Ancient Society, 383 ff., 401-23;Systems of Consanguinity, 480 ff., 488 ff., where the term "communal family" is used.

[194]Systems of Consanguinity, 131 ff., 489, 490;Ancient Society, 424-52. The Hawaiian wordPŭnalŭameans "dear friend," "intimate companion":ibid., 427.

[195]In forty North American tribes the former existence of the Punaluan family is thought to be proved by the Turanian system of consanguinity and by the right of the husband of the eldest sister to the younger sisters also:Ancient Society, 432, 436.

[196]Ibid., 424.

[197]Since the rule of exogamy as respecting thegenswould permit the intermarriage of brothers and sisters. For convenience McLennan's term "exogamy" is here used to indicate prohibition of marriage within thegens.

[198]Systems of Consanguinity, 131-382. But, curiously enough, among the peoples with the Punaluan family the Malayan system of consanguinity survived:Ancient Society, 426, 427,passim.Ganowániansare the American Indians, the word meaning "bow-and-arrow people":Systems of Consanguinity, 131.Cf.McLennan,Studies, I, 253, n. 1.

[199]Ancient Society, 387, 435 ff. In all more than two hundred relationships of the same person are recognized:ibid., 436.

[200]Ibid., 384 ff., 453-65. Called the "barbarian" family inSystems of Consanguinity, 490, 491.

[201]Ancient Society, 461.

[202]Ibid., 384, 465, 466;Systems of Consanguinity, 480, 491.

[203]Ancient Society, 468-97;Systems of Consanguinity, 492, 493, 3-127.

[204]Published byMorganinProceedings of the Am. Academy of Arts and Science, for 1872; and subsequently presented in full byFisoninKamilaroi and Kurnai, 50 ff., 99 ff., 159 ff.,passim;Morgan,Ancient Society, 49-61. CompareMcLennan'saccount of Australian kinship inStudies, II, 278-310, especially 304 ff.

[205]Curr,The Australian Race, I, 106-42.Cf.alsoKeane,Man: Past and Present, 154, 155; andCrawley,Mystic Rose, 348, 476 ff.

[206]Curr,op. cit., I, 111, 112.

[207]Ibid., 116.

[208]Ibid., 140. Compare the criticism ofWestermarck,Human Marriage, 56, 57.

[209]Mucke,Horde und Familie, 31 ff.,passim.

[210]Kautsky, "Entstehung der Ehe und Familie,"Kosmos, XII, 194-98, 256.

[211]SeeStudies, I, 249-315; II, 304 ff.; and the reply ofMorgan,Ancient Society, 509 ff.

[212]Studies, I, 270, 271, 273.

[213]Studies, I, 277. The form of marriage referred to is Nair polyandry. So the Turanian system is referable to Thibetan polyandry.Cf.Morgan,op. cit., 517 ff.

[214]Primitive Family, 181.

[215]Ibid., 207, 171-208.Starckeis criticised byCunow,Australneger, 165, for lack of thoroughness and consistency in his examination of the classificatory systems.

[216]History of Human Marriage, chap. v, 82 ff.

[217]Ibid., 90.Lubbock,Origin of Civilization, 162-203, criticises Morgan's views as to the classificatory systems and concludes that the "terms for what we shall call relationships are, among the lower races of men, mere expressions for the results of marriage customs, and do not comprise the idea of relationship as we understand it; that, in fact, the connection of individualsinter se, their duties to one another, their rights, and the descent of their property, are all regulated more by the relation to the tribe than by that to the family; that, when the two conflict, the latter must give way" (202).Tylor,On a Method of Investigating the Development of Institutions, 261-65, discovers a close relation between exogamy and the classificatory system. Thus out of fifty-three tribes with that system thirty-three observe the rule of exogamy (264).

[218]The so-called "Pirauru marriage" of the Dieri tribe (Howitt, inTrans. R. S. Victoria, I, Part II, 1899, 96) and the "Dilpamali marriage" of the Kunandaburi tribe (Cunow,Australneger, 163). Practically the same is the Piraungaru custom of the Urabunna tribe whichSpencer and Gillen,Native Tribes of Central Australia, 61 ff., regard as a "modified form of group-marriage."

[219]Cunow,op. cit., 161, 163-65.

[220]Idem,Australneger, 176.

[221]On the threeAltersclassenorAltersschichtungen, seeibid., 25 ff. The present class-system of the Kamilaroi, the author believes, is not older than the rise of the gentile organization. "Originally the division into classes by no means served, as Morgan and Fison assume, to exclude sexual intercourse between near collateral kindred, but to prevent cohabitation between relatives in the ascending and descending line, between parents and children, uncles and nieces, aunts and nephews, etc."Cf.as to the main point the somewhat similar views ofHellwald,Die mensch. Familie, 158 ff.;Lippert,Kulturgeschichte, I, 81-83; andKautsky,Kosmos, XII, 196-98.

[222]Cunow,op. cit., 161, 162: Among backward tribes parents are distinguished from parents' brothers and sisters; and own children from the children of own brothers and sisters.

[223]Ibid., 25. See the somewhat similar conclusion ofAtkinson,The Primal Law, 280-94; and compare the criticism ofCunowbyLang,Social Origins, 37, 112-18.

[224]Kohler,Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe, 3, 14 ff., 151 ff. This paper supplements the author's earlierRecht der Australneger,ZVR., VII, 321 ff., 329 ff., 337 ff., where Fison's general conclusions are accepted and the literature cited.

[225]"Der Totemglaube gehört zu den bildensten, lebensvollsten, religiösen Trieben der Menschheit. In dem Totemismus liegt die künftige Familien- und Staatenbildung im Keime."—Kohler,op. cit., 27.

[226]Ibid., 62.

[227]Ibid., 39 ff., 41, 53 ff., 64, 65.

[228]Ibid., 65, 163, 164.

[229]Spencer and Gillen,Native Tribes of Central Australia, 56.

[230]Ibid., 56, 57. "A man can only marry women 'who stand in the relationship ofnupa, that is, are children of his mother's elder brother's blood or tribal, or, what is the same thing, of his father's elder sister.'" The mother of a man'snupais "murato him and he to her, and they must not speak to one another." This applies to a possible mother,i. e., the sister of the father:ibid., 61, 62.

[231]Op. cit., 58.

[232]Mystic Rose, 473, 474.

[233]In general on the Australian class-systems see further,Tylor,Early History of Mankind, 288;Wake,Marriage and Kinship, chap. iv;Kovalevsky,Tableau, 13 ff.;Lubbock,Origin of Civilization, 104 ff.,Bernhöft, inZVR., IX, 6 ff.;McLennan,Studies, II, 304 ff., where the reports of Grey, Ridley, and other observers are summarized;Grosse,Die Formen der Familie, 49 ff., 58 ff., who, in the main, accepts Curr's conclusions;Dawson,Australian Aborigines, 1, 2, 26-40;Forest, "Marriage Laws of N. W. Australia,"Report 2d Meeting of Aust. Association Adv. Sci.(1890), 653, 654;Fison, "Group-Marriage and Relationships,"ibid.,4th Meeting(Tasmania, 1893), 688-97, criticising Westermarck, 717-20, criticising McLennan;Mathew, "Australian Aborigines,"Jour. R. S. N. S. Wales, XXIII, 335-49, criticising Morgan and McLennan. Consult also the references in the Bibliographical Note at the head of the chapter.For further discussion of Morgan's researches seeBernhöft,Verwandtschaftsnamen und Eheformen;Posada,Théories modernes, 52-57;Schroeder,Das Recht in der geschlechtl. Ordnung, 18 ff.;Cunow,Australneger, v-vii, 11 ff.;Grosse,op. cit., 3 ff.;Hellwald,Die mensch. Familie, 158 ff.;Beauchamp, "Aboriginal Communal Life in America,"Am. Antiquarian, IX, 343-50, attacking Morgan's views, holding that proper communism is not found among the red Indians;Giraud-Teulon,Les origines du mariage, 92-101, 169 ff.;Fison and Howitt,Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 99, 101, 149, 316 ff., who, for the Australian groups, sustain Morgan as opposed to McLennan;Wake,op. cit., 15, 19, 112, 266 ff., 297 ff.;Letourneau,L'évolution du mariage, 432, 433, who accepts Morgan's five forms of the family;Kovalevsky,op. cit., 9, 10;Maine,Early Law and Custom, 195 ff.,passim;Peschel,Races of Man, 224, 228 ff., who rejects Morgan's conclusions;Lubbock, "Development of Relationships,"Jour. Anth. Inst., Feb., 1871.

For further discussion of Morgan's researches seeBernhöft,Verwandtschaftsnamen und Eheformen;Posada,Théories modernes, 52-57;Schroeder,Das Recht in der geschlechtl. Ordnung, 18 ff.;Cunow,Australneger, v-vii, 11 ff.;Grosse,op. cit., 3 ff.;Hellwald,Die mensch. Familie, 158 ff.;Beauchamp, "Aboriginal Communal Life in America,"Am. Antiquarian, IX, 343-50, attacking Morgan's views, holding that proper communism is not found among the red Indians;Giraud-Teulon,Les origines du mariage, 92-101, 169 ff.;Fison and Howitt,Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 99, 101, 149, 316 ff., who, for the Australian groups, sustain Morgan as opposed to McLennan;Wake,op. cit., 15, 19, 112, 266 ff., 297 ff.;Letourneau,L'évolution du mariage, 432, 433, who accepts Morgan's five forms of the family;Kovalevsky,op. cit., 9, 10;Maine,Early Law and Custom, 195 ff.,passim;Peschel,Races of Man, 224, 228 ff., who rejects Morgan's conclusions;Lubbock, "Development of Relationships,"Jour. Anth. Inst., Feb., 1871.

[234]Studies in Ancient History, I, viii, 83-146. McLennan's views are somewhat modified and further developed in hisPatriarchal Theory, notably in chaps. xii and xiii, 181-242; and a mass of new material is presented in hisStudies, 2d ser. (1896).

[235]In his two earlier works McLennan is vague as to the exact meaning of "promiscuity" and "polyandry;" but in his letter to Darwin (1874),Studies, II, 50-56, he defines these terms, so that, in effect, he makes important concessions to the adherents of early monogamy and polygyny and to those critics who have questioned his theory of universal phases of progress. He says, referring to the first series ofStudies: "The import of my reasoning is that more or less of it [promiscuity] and ofindifferencemust appear in the hordes or their sections or some of them." It is used to "denote the general conduct as to sexual matters of men without wives.... Now I agree with you that from what we know of human nature we may be sure that each man would aim at having one or more women to himself, and cases would occur wherein for a longer or shorter time the aim would be realized, and there would be instances of what we may call polygyny and monogamy—your first stage.... I take it, polygyny, monogamy, and polyandry (or its equivalents) must have occurred in every district from the first;" but the cases of polyandry would be much more numerous. "Polyandry, in my view, is an advancefrom, andcontractionof, promiscuity. It gives men wives. Till men have wives they may have tastes, but they have no obligations in matters of sex. You may be sure polygyny in the early stage never had the sanction ofgroup opinion." This late explanation does not, however, relieve the author from responsibility for the misleading statements or obscurities of his earlier works.Cf.the rather too appreciative review of the second series ofStudiesbyProfessor Giddings, inAnnals of the Am. Academy, IV, 97-100.

[236]Studies, I, 83, 88-90.

[237]Ibid., chap. viii.

[238]On the three systems of kinship seePost,Familienrecht, 6 ff.

[239]McLennan,op. cit., I, 83, 84.

[240]Ibid., 90, 91, 75-77; II, 77-80. After the appearance of totem groups, infanticide would be checked by the blood-feud:ibid., I, 145.

[241]Ibid., 91-93.

[242]On totemism seeMcLennan,Patriarchal Theory, 206, 207, 227-29, 230-36;Studies, II, 368 ff.,passim;Morgan,Ancient Society, 49 ff., who gives many facts relating to totemgentesamong the American Indians and elsewhere;Wake,Marriage and Kinship, Index;Fison and Howitt,Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 40-49, 165-71, who criticiseLubbock,Origin of Civilization, 210, 338 ff., 263;Starcke,Primitive Family, 20 ff., 29 ff.,passim;Tylor,Primitive Culture, I, 42, 213, 215.Westermarck,Human Marriage, chap, ix, denies that tattooing is fundamentally connected with totemism, and holds that it is a form of ornamentation to serve as a means of sexual attraction.Cf.Mucke,Horde und Familie, 77;Ploss,Das Weib, I, 94 ff.; 196 ff.;Bachofen,Mutterrecht, 335;Fraser,Totemism;idem,Golden Bough, III, 416 ff.;Crawley,Mystic Rose, 249, 398, 457, 470;Hellwald,Die mensch. Familie, 190 ff.;Fletcher, "A Study from the Omaha Tribe,"Procds. A. A. A. S., XLVI, 325-34;idem, "Emblematic Use of the Tree in the Dakotan Group,"ibid., XLV, 191-209; especiallyKohler,Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe, 27 ff.; andSpencer and Gillen,Native Tribes of Central Australia, containing the best and fullest account of the Australian forms of the institution.

[243]ForMcLennan'sbest statement as to the nature and prevalence of polyandry see his interesting letter to Darwin,Studies, II, 50-56, already mentioned.

[244]Ibid., I, 93 ff., 97, 133 ff.; II, 47-56;Patriarchal Theory, 267 ff. In general, on polyandry, seeMarshall,A Phrenologist amongst the Todas, 190-232;Starcke,op. cit., 128-40, 77 ff.,passim;Smith,Kinship and Marriage, 121 ff., 277-79;Fison and Howitt,op. cit., 144 ff.;Wake,op. cit., 134-78, Index;Giraud-Teulon,Origines du mariage, 150 ff., 434 ff.;Westermarck,op. cit., chaps, xx-xxii, 3, 115-17, 547-49;Mayne,Hindu Law and Usage, 60 ff.;Spencer,Principles of Sociology, I, 672-81, 641 ff.;Lubbock,Origin of Civilization, 79, 143 ff.;Schmidt,Jus primae noctis, 35, 36, 319, 320;Post,Familienrecht, 54-63;idem,Afrikanische Jurisprudenz, I, 40, 303;idem,Die Geschlechtsgenossenschaft, 16 ff.;Letourneau,L'évolution du mariage, 40, 49, 90-109;Mason,Woman's Share in Primitive Culture, 221, 222;Maine,Early Law and Custom, 106, 123, 200;Friedrichs, "Ursprung des Matriarchats,"ZVR., VIII, 371 ff.;idem, "Familienstufen und Eheformen,"ibid., X, 257, 258;Mucke,op. cit., 181-38;Kautsky, "Entstehung der Ehe und Familie,"Kosmos, XII, 258, 264, 344-48;Bernhöft, inZVR., IX, 12 ff.;Kohler,op. cit., 143;Grosse,Die Formen der Familie, 117 ff.;Hellwald,op. cit., 241-61;Schneider,Die Naturvölker, II, 459 ff.;Achelis,Entwicklung der Ehe, 28 ff.;Ellis, inPop. Sci. Monthly, Oct., 1891.

[245]McLennanbelieves this form to be wide-spread. It is found in Ceylon, among the Kasias and Saporogian Cossacks, and elsewhere. The higher and lower forms often appear together among the same people:Studies, I, 99 ff. "Beena" marriage of Ceylon is believed to be a modification of their polyandry.

[246]Buchanan,Journey, II, 594;McLennan,op. cit., I, 102.Cf.on the Nairs,Giraud-Teulon,op. cit., 150-64;Starcke,op. cit., 83-87, 133 ff.;Smith,Kinship and Marriage, 122;Letourneau,op. cit., 99-101.

[247]Cf.Spencer,Principles of Sociology, I, 676, 677.

[248]Marshall,op. cit., 210. According toFrau Janssen(Globus, XLIII, 371), it is the custom for the "young wife to become the spouse ofallthe brothers of her husband; her first child counts as that of the eldest brother, the second as that of the second, and so forth."Cf.Hellwald,op. cit., 246.

[249]Marshall,op. cit., 206, 207. To be abarudior widow or abarudaor widower is a term of reproach:ibid., 208.

[250]Ibid., 111, 196, 213.

[251]Ibid., 221. In this regard as in many others the Todas resemble the Veddahs:Sarasin,Die Weddas von Ceylon, I, 465-67. For a good account of polyandry among the Todas and other peoples seeHellwald,op. cit., 241 ff., 246 ff.

[252]On wife-purchase and initiation, as a means of transition to the paternal system, seeMcLennan,Patriarchal Theory, 232-38.

[253]Thus, in Guinea, according to Bosman, in ordinary marriages, even when the wives were purchased, the children belonged to the mother. "It was customary, however, for a man to buy and take to wife a slave, a friendless person ... and consecrate her to his Bossum or god." In this case the "children would be born of his kindred and worship."—Bosman,Description of Guinea, 161;McLennan,op. cit., 235, 236.

[254]Mason,Woman's Share in Primitive Culture, 222;Rockhill,Land of the Lamas, 213, 339;Marshall,op. cit., 210 ff., 217, 219.

[255]An "appointed daughter" is one assigned by contract in marriage to bear an heir to her father who has no son. In the Niyoga a son is begotten upon the wife, in the lifetime of the husband, by a person appointed for that purpose. The levirate and other like expedients existed also among the Hindus:Ordinances of Manu, IX, 53, 57-69, 97, 143 ff.;Burnell and Hopkins, 253 ff.; "Gautama,"Sacred Books of the East, II, 267 ff.;Mayne,Hindu Law and Usage, chap. iv;McLennan,Patriarchal Theory, 268, 286 ff.;Leist,Alt-arisches Jus Gentium, 122, 123;Jolly,The Hindu Law of Partition, 144-66;idem,Rechtliche Stellung der Frauen bei den alten Indern, 36-38 (levirate). For the Hebrew form of the levirate, see Deuteronomy 25:5-11, where the brother is required to "perform the duty of an husband's brother to the widow." The book of Ruth contains many illustrations of primitive family custom.Sir Henry Maine,Early Law and Custom, chap. iv, regards the Niyoga, the levirate, and similar expedients for supplying a male heir, as fictions, under the influence of the worship of male ancestors, for maintaining the agnatic family. J. D. Mayne explains the Niyoga on the theory that the lord and owner of the wife is the lord of the child, physical paternity not being essential; and the levirate is an extension of the Niyoga.McLennan,op. cit., 266-339, criticises the theories of the two last-named writers. See alsoKohler,Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe, 153;Hellwald,Die mensch. Familie, 262, 274, 470;Schneider,Die Naturvölker, I, 25; II, 461;Achelis,Entwicklung der Ehe, 36 ff.;Redslob,Die Levirats-Ehe bei den Hebräern, 1 ff.;Starcke,Primitive Family, 141-58, 159-70 (inheritance by brothers);Spencer,Principles of Sociology, I, 679-81;Letourneau,L'évolution du mariage, chaps. xii, xv;Fison and Howitt,Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 146, 147;Wake,Marriage and Kinship, 171-78, 436 ff.; especiallyWestermarck,Human Marriage, 3, 510-14, who cites the literature. Various examples are mentioned inZVR., III, 394-407, 419, 420; VI, 280 (Germany); VIII, 242; X, 81; XI, 237.

[256]McLennan,Studies, I, 23, 72, 73,passim.

[257]Ibid., I, 127-40, 50-71.

[258]Principles of Sociology, I, 641 ff. In general for criticism and summary of McLennan's views seeMorgan,Ancient Society, 509-21;Maine,Early Law and Custom, 106 ff., 123, 124, 150, 192-228;Giraud-Teulon,Origines du mariage, 102 ff.,passim;Smith,Kinship and Marriage, 80, 118, 121, 129 ff., 230;Fison and Howitt,Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 23 ff., 67, 101 ff., 130 ff.;Lubbock,Origin of Civilization, 102, 109, 130, 143 ff.,passim;Schurman,The Ethical Import of Darwinism, chap, vi;Mason,Woman's Share in Primitive Culture, chap, x;Starcke,Primitive Family, 94 ff., 128 ff., 141 ff.,passim;Wake,Marriage and Kinship, 14 ff., 58 ff., 134 ff., 253 ff., 297 ff.,passim;idem, "Primitive Family,"Jour. Anth. Inst., August, 1879;Kautsky, inKosmos, XII, 258 ff.;Westermarck, Index;Spencer,Various Fragments, 70 ff.;Gomme, "Primitive Human Horde,"Jour. Anth. Inst., XVII, 118-33; who is criticised byWake, "Primitive Human Horde,"ibid., November, 1887, 276 ff.

[259]Such is the view ofLubbock,Origin of Civilization, 103, 129, 134, 135;Westermarck,Human Marriage, 466, 472, 473, 547;Fison and Howitt,op. cit., 133 ff., 171 ff., 190, 357;Wake,Marriage and Kinship, 75 ff. "It is not proved that the tribes which practice child-murder put to death the female infants by preference."—Starcke,op. cit., 131 ff. Such is also the opinion ofFison and Howitt,loc. cit.;Lubbock,op. cit., 103;Darwin,Descent of Man, II, 364, 591-93; andGiraud-Teulon,op. cit., 110-16. See alsoSmith,Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, 129, 130, 279-85;Friedrichs, "Familienstufen,"ZVR., X, 219-37;Ploss,Das Kind, II, 243-64;idem,Das Weib, I, 250, 251;Grosse,Die Formen der Familie, 36;Schneider,Die Naturvölker, I, 297 ff.;Martin,Hist. de la femme, 3 ff.; and various examples inZVR., VII, 355, 374; IX, 14 ff. (Todas); X, 122; XI, 427 (Kamerun);Brouardel,L'infanticide(Paris, 1897);Marshall,A Phrenologist amongst the Todas, 108 ff., 190 ff.;Nelson, "The Eskimo about Bering Strait," inXVIII. Rep. of Bureau of Eth., Part I, 289;Chamberlain,The Child, etc., 110 ff.In his second series ofStudies, 74, 111,McLennandefends his view as to the prevalence of female infanticide and presents a mass of facts relating to it among many peoples.Farrer,Early Wedding Customs, 224, denies that infanticide is the cause of exogamy.

In his second series ofStudies, 74, 111,McLennandefends his view as to the prevalence of female infanticide and presents a mass of facts relating to it among many peoples.Farrer,Early Wedding Customs, 224, denies that infanticide is the cause of exogamy.

[260]Spencer,op. cit., I, 646.

[261]Ibid., 646, 647. But McLennan meets this difficulty by insisting that wife-stealing, among polyandrous peoples would lead to polygyny on the part of the most successful. This would also explain the inconsistency alleged bySpencer(648) that polygyny and polyandry sometimes coexist, as among Fuegians, Caribo, Eskimo, Warrens, Hottentots, and the ancient Britons. SeeMcLennan,Studies, I, 145, 146; andcf.Post,Familienrecht, 62.

[262]Spencer,op. cit., I, 649.

[263]Primitive Family, 132. Other objections are brought forward by this able writer. "It has been suggested that the motive for the murder of female infants is the fear of becoming the object of the predatory instincts of other tribes; whence we must conclude that the tribe which keeps its women alive is tolerably strong; those tribes which lack women cannot, therefore, obtain them by violence to any great extent. It also seems to be a strange thing to kill the female infants from a dread of being exposed to attack, and at the same time to seek to increase the number of women by carrying them off by violence from other tribes."—Ibid., 132.

[264]Spencer,op. cit., I, 644.

[265]McLennan,Studies, I, 78-80, 124, 142-45, 147 ff.; II, 57 ff.Cf.his article on "Exogamy and Endogamy,"Fortnightly Review, XXI, 884 ff., where he seems to waver somewhat in his conclusions on this point.

[266]Among the great living investigators in this field no one, perhaps, has sinned more frequently in making hazardous generalizations thanKohler, who is particularly harsh in his criticism of Westermarck, Curr, and other adversaries. See, for example, hisZur Urgeschichte der Ehe, 2 ff., 150 ff.

[267]Primitive Family, 7, 8.

[268]SeeLetourneau,L'évolution du mariage, chap. ii, on "Le mariage et la famille chez les animaux;" and hisSociology, 327-30, 380-82.

[269]L'évolution du mariage, chap. i.

[270]Starcke,op. cit., 8, 9.

[271]Human Marriage, 9. See alsoibid., chap. iii, on the "Antiquity of Human Marriage."

[272]Die mensch. Familie, 4 ff.

[273]Among the aborigines of New Britain, according toPowell,Unter den Kannibalen von Neubritannien, 123; and among the Lacondou Indians of Central America, according toCharnay,Les anciennes villes du nouveau monde, 399. "Negro women of unmixed blood seldom have voluptuous figures, and in anatomical structure they resemble the men in a remarkable way, so that seen from a distance they are scarcely to be distinguished from them. The same is true for a whole series of low races."—Hellwald,op. cit., 6.

Back to Index Next