himself. Even when he dominates over his wife, he continues to be a stranger in her family, at any rate until his children are born; his authority over these is not absolute, but he tries as far as possible to make them into active hunters and warriors.1 Among the Columbian tribes, the son remains with his father; both among them and the Sioux, when the son is left a minor, he is generally robbed of his inheritance, which his kinsfolk take for themselves.2 In other such cases, where there are no clans, there can be no question of a distinct line of descent. We cannot agree with Morgan, who, as we have already said, seeks to explain the existence of the female line in so many of the other North American tribes from the fact that it prevailed at the time of their migration from Columbia. In the first place, there are no grounds for ascribing to the Columbians a primary and clearly defined line of descent, since they are, even in our day, still incapable of defining such a line. And, secondly, there are sufficient causes to account for the development and maintenance of the female line in the customs just described, by which the man inhabits his wife's home as a stranger, the children grow up in a house belonging to the members of the mother's clan, and the child is always, or at any rate generally, assigned to that clan when named. As the sense of clanship becomes ever more powerful, it would be difficult for the man under such circumstances to enrol his children in his own clan. We have every reason to think that this was not the position originally occupied by the husband, and hence we may affirm that the female line was adopted at a subsequent period. In this case polygamy may have had some influence, since it became more desirable to distinguish 1 Lafitau, vol. i. pp. 475, 579. Carver, p. 314. Hunter, p. 251. Morgan, Anc. Soc., pp. 72, 455. Giraud-Teulon, p. 192. Mackenzie, p. 96. Appendix XIII. 2 Wilkes, vol. iv. p. 448. Schoolcraft, vol. ii. p. 194. between the children when the position taken by a husband in the family impressed upon marriage the character of a monogamy in which concubines were permitted. Yet, for reasons which I shall give presently, I think that the influence of polygamy was extremely slight. This In most cases the North American clan is strong enough to retain its members, and it becomes a political organization, with chiefs for peace (Sachems) and for war. Where the female line of descent is observed, the sons do not inherit dignity nor property; these always go to the son of the brother or sister. Here, again, we are presented with facts which cannot be explained by ideas about the tie of blood, but which arise from the usages of social life, formed under the influence which local circumstances exert upon the fancy. Morgan relates of the Iroquois that after a man's death, the brothers, sisters, and mother's brothers divide the property among themselves, but that a woman's property is inherited by the children and sisters, not by the brothers.1 custom may be formulated in general terms by saying that the inheritance falls to those who dwell together in one place. Owing to the faculty of memory, childhood and youth involve a young man in such a web of associations that he afterwards finds it hard to detach himself from them. The man who, when married, has lived as a stranger in the house of another, clings to the impressions of his former home, and his earlier household companions become his heirs. But the brother who has wandered elsewhere stands in a more remote relation to his sister than do the sisters and the children living with her in the parental home, and he is therefore excluded from the inheritance. It is evident that no ideas of kinship will explain why sisters should inherit from their brother, while brothers do not inherit from their sister. This order is due to the influence of 1 Morgan, Anc. Soc., p. 76. Bartrams, Reisen, p. 448. locality, and the assertion must be wholly rejected that the relations of persons to each other are only decided by considerations of blood-kinship, and that consequently the female line of descent had its origin in a condition of promiscuous intercourse which has now disappeared. Even if the correctness of our hypothesis is still unproved, yet it is certain that all proofs of the other hypothesis are wanting. The female line of descent does not imply ignorance of the child's paternity, but only the invalidity of its legal rights; the female line does not sever the child from its father, but only from the father's clan. Our assertion that the household is the source of legislative order, not from its character of blood-relationship, but from its local isolation, is confirmed by the circumstances of the South American Indians, where the causes at work are presented under somewhat different conditions. Both among the Caribs, and in the southern tribes of Guiana and Brazil, we look in vain for any distinct clan organization, except in the case of the twenty-seven Arowak families, with which we are at present only imperfectly acquainted.1 We find that clans are everywhere classified according to their villages, not by their families. The father or head of the household exerts unlimited authority over his wives and children, but this authority is not founded on legal rights, but upon his physical superiority.2 Sons leave the parental roof when they grow up, but the daughters remain subject to their father until they marry. It is in agreement with these simple conditions that children are their fathers' heirs.3 In these countries the female line is only observed 1 Schomburgk, Reisen, vol. ii. p. 459. Brett, Ind. Tribes, p. 98. Traces exist among the Gês (Martius, vol. i. pp. 54, 283), the Guaycurus (Spix and Martius, vol. i. p. 268), and the Yameos (Martius, vol. i. p. 117). Yet the question is rather of communities than of race. 2 Martius, vol. i. p. 122. Prinz Maximilian, vol. ii. p. 40. ' Martius, vol. i. p. 92. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 383. 1 by the Arowaks, Warraus, and Macusis. Among the Arowaks, who are divided into clans, it is only the child's clan which is decided by the female line; the conditions in the other two tribes are somewhat obscure. Schomburgk states that tribal dependence is never derived from the father, but only from the mother, and that the offspring of an Arowak and of a Warrau woman would be reckoned in the Warrau tribe; he adds that the right of inheritance is in agreement with that of the tribal claims.2 Nothing certain can be inferred from this fact; it is possible that the Warraus have followed the customs of the Arowaks, with whom they are closely connected. There is certainly no rupture of the relation between father and son, since the office of a wizard devolves upon his eldest son.3 5 4 The relations between father and son are so close among the Macusis that the simple assertion that among them, as well as among the other tribes of Guiana, the descent of the child is traced through its mother, must be received with the greatest caution. The father fondly loves his child; it is completely in his power, and he can sell it, if so disposed, while the adult son is as a stranger to his mother. Again, a strange light is thrown on the female line of descent by the prohibition to marry a brother's daughter, since this is regarded as the nearest degree of kinship among brothers and sisters. father's brother is called papa as well as the father. On the other hand, it is permitted to all to marry a sister's daughter, a dead brother's wife, or a stepmother, after her husband's death. The idea that the mother was more closely akin to the child than its father could not have resulted in such a state of things; on the other hand, it may be explained in accordance with our 6 1 Schomburgk, Reisen, vol. i. 169; vol. ii. pp. 314, 459. 2 Ibid., vol. i. p. 169. 3 Ibid., vol. i. p. 172. The principle, when we go on to consider the way in which the tribes in question lived. The young husband usually lives for some time with his parents-in-law, and works for them.1 The analogy between this custom and that which prevails in North America is apparent, but the distinction between them is not so plain. In the north, the custom was an expression of the clan sentiment, and this ideal character gave it greater weight. In the south it is reduced to a question of gain, and the son-in-law must serve for his bride as Jacob served for Rachel. The wooer may give other things for his bride besides his labour; when he has come to an understanding with the father, he gives a present and makes amends to him for the loss of his daughter by promising to give a sister in marriage to one of his sons, or, in default of this, he promises to give his own first-born daughter. This mode of ransom is the true source of a custom in which, without further proof, the origin of a former observance of the female line has been sought. Waitz is surprised that among the Caribs the sons inherit from their fathers, "although they only appear to have regarded kinship in the female line as a true kinship.' "3 This female line results from the claim made by men on the daughters of their father's sister, and also from a similar claim made by the mother's brother. It is, however, easy to see that they merely follow from the ransom we have just mentioned ; for if, when the first daughter is born, the mother's 1 Schomburgk, Reisen, vol. i. p. 164; vol. ii. p. 318. Brett, p. 101. Martius, vol. i. p. 108. Gili, p. 344. Du Tertre, vol. iii. p. 378. 2 Plogge, "Reise in das Gebiet der Guajajara-Indianen," quoted in Petermann's Mittheilungen, 1857, p. 206. 3 Waitz, vol. iii. p. 383. Du Tertre, vol. ii. p. 400. Oviedo states that in Hayti the sons of the head wife are the first to inherit, next, the brothers, the sister's son, then the sons of the other wives (Sprengel, Auswahl, vol. i. p. 39). This does not imply a female line, but the dawn of a monogamous order of things, which regards the children of the inferior wives as illegitimate. Du Tertre, vol. ii. p. 377 |