visited his uncle. They honoured the king through his kinsfolk. The king and his sons ruled after no gentle fashion, and the ruler was entitled to commit all sorts of acts of violence. In this way the honour paid to the king's sister's son enabled him to rob the people freely. The Vasu-right was gradually transformed into a fundamental institution, and that which was at first serviceable to the king was now turned against him. It certainly affords no indications of a mystical and religious belief in any special sacred bond between the mother's brother and sister's son.

CHAPTER VI.

ARYAN PEOPLES.

Maine and McLennan-Patriarchal family group-Joint family groupEconomic interests-Property in land and cattle-Comparison between Hindus and Bechuanas-Primitive character of agnationHindu female line-Sapinda and Samanodoka--Agnates and cognates -Germanic female line-Marriage and guardianship-Physical relation between mother and child-Class inheritance-Inheritance of property-Arms and accoutrements-Precedence taken by female heirs-Rejpus-Woman hands down family tradition-Orestes.

THE endeavour to grasp the meaning of the line of descent is in no case more important than in that of the Aryan peoples, for since we ourselves are Aryans, these peoples possess a special interest for us. The primitive records are also more abundant, consisting of very ancient laws committed to writing, and not merely of everyday customs and usages. But the very abundance of the material increases the difficulty of dealing with it. And the special question with which we are now concerned, whether the Aryan community was originally agnatistic or not, has been treated in an unsatisfactory manner, owing to the imperfect and obscure mode in which it has been stated.

Two theories, completely opposed to each other, have been presented to us. Philologists generally hold that the primitive character of Aryan communities was exclusively agnatistic, and this theory has been supported by Sir Henry Maine in a manner which entitles us to

regard him as the representative of the patriarchal theory. This theory asserts that the child was originally ascribed to the father only, and kinship through the mother was not counted at all. On the other hand, learned men like McLennan, Bachofen, etc., hold it to be an undoubted fact that the Aryan tribes originally lived in promiscuous intercourse, and only counted kinship through the mother.

This apparently irreconcilable contradiction must not, however, be estimated too highly, since the word originally" is used in a different sense by the two parties. Sir Henry Maine understands by the primitive Aryan community only the one of which the type is found in the earliest collections of laws; while McLennan undertakes to describe the primitive community in its literal sense. It was McLennan's object to examine the salient features of the patriarchal state which may be deduced from the most ancient laws, in order to ascertain how far they have arisen from an altogether different social condition. Maine sets aside such inquiries as wholly irrelevant, and, whatever results they may afford, he holds his own theory to be firmly established.1 On this point we do not agree with Maine, for if it can be shown that a community in which there was promiscuous intercourse and a female line of descent preceded the agnatistic community, it would undoubtedly be a much more arduous undertaking to trace the causes which effected such a transformation. The strife between the two theories which still subsists must be referred to an imperfect estimate of the mode in which kinship should

be reckoned.

The family group, or joint undivided family, constitutes the typical feature of the Aryan community; that is, an association of persons who dwell under the same roof, who own their property in common, and who offer a common sacrifice to the same ancestor. Such

1 Maine, Early Law, ch. vii. p. 192. See Hearn, p. 153.

kinsfolk are termed Sapindas, or persons joined together by the cake of sacrifice. These family groups are further distributed into clans (Gotra), and members of the same Gotra are called Samanodocas, or persons joined together by the same libation of water. The Sapinda kinship ceases with the seventh person, that is, with the sixth degree of kinship; the Samanodoca connection only ceases when the birth and family name are no longer known.1 As long as the family group holds together, it is under the guidance of the eldest male of the eldest line, and the amount of power possessed by this patriarch is shown to us in the case of the Roman heads of families. This patriarchal community, a reduced form of the modern family in one respect, and its enlargement in another, is considered by Maine to be the first step

in primitive jurisprudence.2 The patriarchal power extends over the life and liberty of the members of the family. The wife and children are absolutely in the power of the head of the family, and he has not to give account to any one for his actions. We saw that the Brazilian community was constructed on these lines, which afford the typical form of brute force. The Aryan groups only differ from those of Brazil in their greater permanence; they are not, like the latter, dissolved when the son grows to manhood. In this more permanent structure a force silently arose which prescribed limits to the arbitrary power of the patriarch. Habit and custom gradually constrained him to act under a deep sense of responsibility to the presiding spirit of the family. The women, in particular, as the most defenceless, were placed under the protection of this spirit, and the head of the family no longer dared to kill his wife before he had proclaimed her guilt to the domestic tribunal. The patriarch always tended to become merely a judge who decided causes in accordance with custom and usage; he 2 Maine, Ancient Law, pp. 133, 138.

1 Hearn, p. 168.

3 Hearn, p. 97. See Grimm, p. 450.

3

ceased to be the master whose arbitrary will was law. So likewise his position as ruler of the family property was changed. As the family grew into an undivided family group, he was no longer regarded as the owner, but only as the steward of the property. As it has been truly said, he no longer inherited a property, but an office.1

The joint family group appears as soon as the children of the same father continue to live together after his death. The brothers and sisters then possess in common what had previously belonged to the father alone, and under these circumstances the patriarchal power was necessarily modified. We have seen that the Brazilians took the first step towards the joint family group, but in their case the organization had no stability, since it lacked the power which is maintained by the interests which memoers of the same family have in common. Property and religion riveted the connection among the Aryans, but both were wanting to the Brazilians, or only existed in their faint beginnings. We are told, for example, that "the Macuanis used to bury the corpses of their young children in their huts, and those of adults at a distance from the village. On the graves of the latter, which were surrounded by a ditch, they placed flesh and fruits, and lighted a fire, in order that all the needs of the departed might be satisfied. They subsequently struck a lance into the grave, or built a hut upon

it.

"2

The worship of ancestors, which we here find in the germ, became of such importance among the Aryans that it may be termed the bond of union among the groups; its force was owing to the fact that it was able to work under material conditions which had, at any rate in part, produced the formation of the joint family groups. Economical interests first led to the formation of such

1 J. D. Mayne, pp. 198-200. Hearn, p. 82.

2

Spix and Martius, vol. ii. p. 492.