development of what we have called the local influence.'

The men who assist him are his brothers, blood and tribal, the sons of his mother's brothers, blood and tribal. That is, if he be a Panunga man he will have the assistance of the Panunga and Ungalla men of his locality, while if it comes to a general fight he will have the help of the whole of his local group. . . . It is only indeed during the performance of certain ceremonies that the existence of a mutual relationship, consequent upon the possession of a common totemic name, stands out at all prominently. In fact, it is perfectly easy to spend a considerable time amongst the Arunta tribe without even being aware that each individual has a totemic name.” 1

When from the savage and barbarous races of men we pass to peoples of a higher culture, as they first appear to us in the light of history, we meet among them social units similar in kind to those prevalent at lower stages of civilisation : the family, clan, village, tribe. We also find among them, side by side with the family consisting of parents and children, a larger family organisation, which, though not unknown among the lower races, assumes particular prominence in the archaic State.

In China the family generally remains undivided till the children of the younger sons are beginning to grow up. Then the younger branches of the family separate, and form their own households. But the new householders continue to take part in the ancestral worship of the old home ; and mourning is worn in theory for four generations of ascendants and descendants in the direct line, and for contemporaries descended in the same fifth generation from the “honoured head ” of the family.” At the same time we find in China at least traces of a clan organisation. Large bodies of persons bear the same surname, and a penalty is inflicted on anyone who marries a person with the same surname as his own, whilst a man is strictly forbidden to nominate as his heir

1 Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes 2 Simcox, Primitive Civilizations, of Central Australia, pp. 34, 544. ii. 303, 493, 69.




an individual of a different surname. Moreover, there are whole villages composed of relatives all bearing the same ancestral name. “ In

many cases,” says Mr. Doolittle, “ for a long period of time no division of inherited property is made in rural districts, the descendants of a common ancestor living or working together, enjoying and sharing the profits of their labours under the general direction and supervision of the head of the clan and the heads of the family branches. . . . There may be only one head of the clan. Under him there are several heads of families." 2

The “four generations ” of the Chinese, comprising those who are regarded as near relatives, have their counterpart in the family organisation of most so-called Aryan peoples. The Roman Propinqui—that is, parents and children, brothers and sisters, uncles and aunts, nephews and nieces, first cousins (consobrini) and second cousins (sobrini)—exactly corresponded to the Anchisteis of the Greeks, the Sapindas of the Hindus, and the “Syngeneis” of the Persians.* The persons belonging to these four generations stood in a particularly close relationship to each other. They had mutual rights and duties of various kinds. In early times, if one of them was killed, the survivors had to avenge his death. They were expected to assist each other whenever it was needed, especially before the court. They celebrated in common feasts of rejoicing and feasts for the dead. They had a common cult and common mourning. In short, they formed an enlarged family unit of which the individual families were merely sub-branches, even though


1 Medhurst, ' Marriage, Affinity, and great-grandson's son.” Laws of Manu, Inheritance in China,' in Trans. Roy. ix. 186:-“To three ancestors water Asiatic Soc. China Branch, iv. 21, 22, must be offered, to three the funeral

cake is given, the fourth descendant is 2 Doolittle, Social Life of the Chinese, the giver of these oblations, the fifth ii. 225 sqq:

has no connection with them.” Cf. 3 Baudhayana, i. 5. II. 9:- “The Jolly, 'Recht und Sitte,' in Bühler, great-grandfather, the grandfather, the Grundriss der indo-arischen Philologie, father, oneself, the uterine brothers, the son by a wife of equal caste, the + Brissonius, De regio Persarum grandson, and the great-grandson- principatu, i. 207, p. 279. Leist, Alt. these they call Sapindas, but not the arisches Jus Civile, i, 47 sqq.


ii. 85.


[ocr errors]

they did not necessarily live in the same house. In India we still meet with a perishable survival of this organisation. “In the Joint Family of the Hindus,” says Sir Henry Maine,

the agnatic group of the Romans absolutely survives--or rather, but for the English law and English courts, it would survive. Here there is a real, thoroughly ascertained common ancestor, a genuine consanguinity, a common fund of property, a common dwelling.” ? The Gwentian, Dimetian, and Venedotian codes likewise represent the homestead and land of the free Welshman as a family holding. “So long as the head of the family lived,” says Mr. Seebohm, “all his descendants lived with him, apparently in the same homestead, unless new ones had already been built for them on the family land. In any case, they still formed part of the joint household of which he was the head. When a free tribesman, the head of a household, died, his holding was not broken up. It was held by his heirs for three generations as one joint holding.":

So also among the subdivisions of ancient Irish society there was one which comprised the “near relatives,” the Propinqui of the Romans. Many of the South Slavonians to this day live in house communities each consisting of a body of from ten to sixty members or even more, who are blood-relations to the second or third degree on the male side, and who associate in a common dwelling or group of dwellings, having their land in common, following a common occupation, and being governed by a common chief. Among the Russians,

1 Klenze, ‘Die Cognaten und Af- 4 Maine, Early History of Institufinen nach Römischem Rechte in Ver

tions, p: 90 sq. Leist, Alt-arisches Jus gleichung mit andern verwandten Civile" i. Anhang i. Rechten,' in Zeitschr. f. geschichtliche 6 Krauss, Sitte und Brauch der Rechtswiss. vi. 5 s99. Leist, Alt- Südslaven, pp. 75, 79 599. Maine, arisches Jus Civile, i. 231 sqq. Rivier, Dissertations Early Law Précis du droit de famille romain, p. Custom, p. 241 sqq. Utiešenović, Die 34 $99.

Hauskommunionen der Südslaven, p. 2 Maine, Dissertations on Early Law 20 s99. Miler, ‘Die Hauskommunion and Custom, p. 240.

der Südslaven,' in Jahrbuch d. internat. * Seebohm, English Village Com- Vereinigung f. vergl. Rechtswiss. iii, munity, p. 193. Idem, Tribal System 199 599. in Wales, p. 89 599.



[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

too, there are households of this kind, containing the representatives of three generations; and previous to the emancipation of the serfs in 1861 such households were much more common than they are now. The ancient Teutons are the only “Aryan” race among whom the joint family organisation cannot be proved to have prevailed.?

Among all these peoples a number of kindred families or joint families were united into a larger social group forming a village community or a cluster of households. The Vedic people called such a body of kindred janmanā or simply grāma, which means “village"; 3 and the same organisation still survives in India, though in a modified form. The type of Indian village communities which has been described by Sir Henry Maine is at once an assemblage of co-proprietors and an organised patriarchal society, providing for the management of the common fund and generally also for internal government, police, the administration of justice, and the apportionment of taxes and public duties. Unlike the joint family, the related families of the village community no longer hold their land as an indistinguishable common fund: they have portioned it out, at most they redistribute it periodically, and are thus on the high road to modern landed proprietorship. And whilst the joint family is a narrow circle of persons actually related to each other, the village community has very generally been adulterated by the admission of strangers, especially purchasers of shares, who have from time to time been engrafted on the original stock of blood-relatives. Yet in all such cases there is the assumption of an original common parentage; hence the Hindu village community of the type indicated, whenever it is not actually an association of kinsmen, is always a body of co-proprietors formed on the model of such an association. 1 Mackenzie Wallace, Russia, i. 134.

i. Anhang i. von Hellwald, Die menschliche Familie, 3 Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, p. p. 506 sq. Kovalewsky, Modern Cus:

159 sq; toms and Ancient Laws of Russia, Maine, Ancient Law, p. 260 sqq.

Idem, Dissertations on Early Law and See Leist, All-arisches Jus Civile, Custom, p. 240. Elphinstone, History

[ocr errors]


p. 53 sq.



Corresponding to the Vedic grāma there were the Iranian viç, the Greek genos, and the Roman gens; and as among the Vedic people several grāmas formed a viç and several viçs a jana, so the Iranian viç, the Greek genos, and the Roman gens were, respectively, subdivisions of a zantu, phratria, and curia ; and these again were subdivisions of a still more comprehensive unit, a daqyu, phyle, and tribus.? The Roman territory was in earliest times divided into a number of clan-districts, each inhabited by a particular gens, which was thus a group associated at once by locality and by a common descent. Whilst each household had its own portion of land, the clan-household or village had a clanland belonging to it, and this clan-land was managed up to a comparatively late period after the analogy of household-land, that is, on the system of joint-possession, each clan tilling its own land and thereafter distributing the produce among the several households belonging to it. Even the traditions of Roman law furnish the information that wealth consisted at first in cattle and the usufruct of the soil, and that it was not till later that land came to be distributed among the burgesses as their own special property. Still in historical times, if a person left no sons or agnates living at his death, the inheritance escheated to the gentiles, or entire body of Roman citizens bearing the same name with the deceased, whereas no part of it was given to any relative united, however closely, with the dead man through female descent. But as the Hindu village community, so also the Roman gens, though originally a group of blood-relatives inhabiting a common district, was already in early times recruited from men of alien extraction who were assumed to be descended from a common ancestor. And it is difficult to believe


2 Leist,

of India, p. 68 s99. Mr. Baden-Powell

Greco-italische Rechts(Indian Village Community, p. 3 $99;) geschichte, p. 104 sq. has shown that Sir Henry Maine's 3 Mommsen, History of Rome, i. 45, general description of Indian village 46, 238. communities holds true only of a cer- Maine, Ancient Law, p. 220 sq. tain class of villages in India.

Fustel de Coulanges, La Cité antique, 1 Zimmer, op. cit. p. 159 sq.

P. 126,

« ͹˹Թõ