_Eubulides_ of Demosthenes, 24.
[242] _Historical Antiquities of the Greeks_, Woolrych’s Trans., Oxford
ed., 1837, i, 451.
[243] _Political Antiquities_, _l. c._, cap. v, s. 100.
[244] _Charicles_, Metcalfe’s Trans., Lond. ed., 1866, p. 477; citing
_Isaeus de Cir. her._ 217: _Demosthenes adv. Ebul._, 1304: _Plutarch_,
_Themist._, 32: _Pausanias_, i, 7, 1: _Achill. Tat._, i, 3.
[245] Hermann, _l. c._, v, s. 100 and 101.
[246] _History of Greece_, iii, 55.
[247] “We find the Asklepiadæ in many parts of Greece—the Aleuadæ in
Thessaly—the Midylidæ, Psalychidæ, Belpsiadæ, Euxenidæ, at Aegina—the
Branchidæ at Miletus—the Nebridæ at Kôs—the Iamidæ and Klytiadæ at
Olympia—the Akestoridæ at Argos—the Kinyradæ at Cyprus—the Penthilidæ
at Mitylene—the Talthybiadæ at Sparta—not less than the Kodridæ,
Eumolpidæ, Phytalidæ, Lykomêdæ, Butadæ, Euneidæ, Hesychidæ, Brytiadæ,
etc., in Attica. To each of these corresponded a mythical ancestor
more or less known, and passing for the first father as well as the
eponymous hero of the gens—Kodrus, Eumolpus, Butes, Phytalus, Hesychus,
etc.”—Grote’s _Hist. of Greece_, iii, 62.
[248] _History of Greece_, iii, 62, _et seq._
[249] _Hist. of Greece_, iii, 58, _et seq._
[250] _History of Greece_, iii, 58.
[251] Wachsmuth’s _Historical Antiquities of the Greeks, l. c._, i,
449, app. for text.
[252] _Iliad_, ii, 362.
[253] Tacitus, _Germania_, cap. vii.
[254] Grote’s _History of Greece_, iii, 55. The Court of Areopagus took
jurisdiction over homicides.—_Ib._, iii, 79.
[255] Ποία δε χέρνιψ] φρατέρων προσδέξεται—_Eum._, 656.
[256] _The Ancient City_, Small’s Trans., p. 157. Boston, Lee & Shepard.
[257] Aristotle, Thucydides, and other writers, use the term basileia
(βασιλεία) for the governments of the heroic period.
[258]
Ἑλληνικὸν δὲ ἄρα καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἔθος ἦν. τοῖς γοῦν βασιλεῦσιν, ὅσοι
τε πατρίους ἀρχὰς παραλάβοιεν καὶ ὅσους ἡ πληθὺς ἀυτὴ καταστήσαιτο
ἡγεμόνας, βουλευτήριον ἦν ἐκ τῶν κρατίστων, ὡς Ὅμηρός τε καὶ οἱ
παλαιότατοι τῶν ποιητῶν μαρτυροῦσι· καὶ οὐχ ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς καθ' ἡμᾶς
χρόνοις αὐθάδεις καὶ μονογνώμονες ἦσαν αἱ τῶν ἀρχαίων βασιλέων
δυναστεῖαι.—_Dionysius_, 2, xii.
[259]
δοκοῦντα καὶ δόξαντ' ἀπαγγέλλειν με χρὴ
δήμου προβούλοις τῆσδε Καδμείας πόλεως·
Ἐτεοκλέα μὲν τόνδ' ἐπ' εὐνοίᾳ χθονὸς
θάπτειν ἔδοξε γῆς φίλαις κατασκαφαῖς.
—Aeschylus, _The Seven against Thebes_, 1005.
[260] Euripides, _Orestes_, 884.
[261]
Πανδημίᾳ γὰρ χερσὶ δεξιωνύμοις
ἔφριξεν αἰθὴρ τόνδε κραινόντων λόγον.
—Aeschylus, _The Suppliants_, 607.
[262] _History of Greece_, ii, 69.
[263] _History of Greece_, ii, 69, and _Iliad_, ii, 204.
[264] Mr. Gladstone, who presents to his readers the Grecian chiefs
of the heroic age as kings and princes, with the superadded qualities
of gentlemen, is forced to admit that “on the whole we seem to have
the custom or law of primogeniture sufficiently, but not oversharply
defined.”—_Juventus Mundi_, Little & Brown’s ed., p. 428.
[265]
Οὐ μέν πως πάντες βασιλεύσομεν ἐνθάδ' Ἀχαιοί.
οὐκ for ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη· εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω,
εἷς βασιλεύς, ᾧ ἔδωκε Κρόνου παῖςἀγκυλομήτεω.
[σκῆπτρόν τ' ἠδὲ θέμιστας, ἵνα σφίσι βασιλεύῃ.]
—_Iliad_, ii, 203.
The words in brackets are not found in several MS., for example, in the
commentary of Eustasius.
[266] Smith’s _Dic., Art. Rex_, p. 991.
[267] _Thucydides_, i, 13.
[268]
βασιλείας μὲν οὖν εἴδη ταῦτα τέτταρα τὸν ἀριθμὸν, μία μὲν ἡ περὶ τοὺς
ἡρωϊκοὺς χρόνους· αὕτη δ' ἦν ἑκόντων μέν, ἐπὶ τισὶ δ' ὡρισμένων·
στρατηγὸς γὰρ ἦν καὶ δικαστὴς ὁ βασιλεὺς καὶ τῶν πρὸς θεοὺς κύριος.
Δευτέρα δὲ ἡ βαρβαρικὴ αὕτη δ' ἐστὶν ἐκ γένους ἀρχὴ δεσποτικὴ κατὰ
νόμον. Τρίτη δὲ ἣν αἰσυμνητίαν προσαγορεύουσιν· αὕτη δ' ἐστὶν αἱρετὴ
τυραννίς. Τετάρτη δ' ἡ Λακωνικὴ τούτων· αὕτη δ' ἐστὶν, ὡς εἰπεῖν
ἁπλῶς, στρατηγία κατὰ γένος ἀΐδιος.—Aristotle, _Politics_, iii, c. x.
[269] _History of Greece_, ii, 61, and see 69.
[270] _Thucydides_, lib. i, 2-13.
[271] _Thucyd._, lib. ii, c. 15. Plutarch speaks nearly to the same
effect: “He settled all the inhabitants of Attica in Athens, and made
them one people in one city, who before were scattered up and down,
and could with difficulty be assembled on any urgent occasion for the
public welfare.... Dissolving therefore the associations, the councils,
and the courts in each particular town, he built one common prytaneum
and court hall, where it stands to this day. The citadel with its
dependencies, and the city or the old and new town, he united under the
common name of Athens.”—Plutarch, _Vit. Theseus_, cap. 24.
[272] “Of the nine archons, whose number continued unaltered from 683
B. C. to the end of the democracy, three bore special titles—the Archon
Eponymus, from whose name the designation of the year was derived, and
who was spoken of as _the Archon_, the Archon Basileus (King), or more
frequently, the Basileus; and the Polemarch. The remaining six passed
by the general name of Thesmothetæ.... The Archon Eponymus determined
all disputes relative to the family, the gentile, and the phratric
relations: he was the legal protector of orphans and widows. The Archon
Basileus (or King Archon) enjoyed competence in complaints respecting
offenses against the religious sentiment and respecting homicide.
The Polemarch (speaking of times anterior to Kleisthenês) was the
leader of military force, and judge in disputes between citizens and
non-citizens.”—Grote’s _History of Greece, l. c._, iii, 74.
[273] _Public Economy of Athens_, Lamb’s Trans., Little & Brown’s ed.,
p. 353.
[274] _History of Greece_, iii, 65.
[275] _History of Greece_, iii, 133.
[276] The Latin _tribus_ = tribe, signified originally “a third part,”
and was used to designate a third part of the people when composed
of three tribes; but in course of time, after the Latin tribes were
made local instead of consanguine, like the Athenian local tribes, the
term tribe lost its numerical quality, and came, like the phylon of
Cleisthenes to be a local designation.—_Vide_ Mommsen’s _Hist. of Rome,
l. c._, i, 71.
[277] _Anglo Saxon Law_, by Henry Adams and others, pp. 20, 23.
[278] See particularly the Orations against Eubulides, and Marcatus.
[279] Hermann’s _Political Antiquities of Greece, l. c._, p. 187, s. 96.
[280] “The primitive Grecian government is essentially monarchical,
reposing on personal feeling and divine right.”—_History of Greece_,
ii, 69.
[281] Sparta retained the office of basileus in the period of
civilization. It was a dual generalship, and hereditary in a particular
family. The powers of government were co-ordinated between the Gerousia
or council, the popular assembly, the five ephors, and two military
commanders. The ephors were elected annually, with powers analogous to
the Roman tribunes. Royalty at Sparta needs qualification. The basileis
commanded the army, and in their capacity of chief priests offered the
sacrifices to the gods.
[282] “During the period when the Indo-Germanic nations which are
now separated still formed one stock speaking the same language,
they attained a certain stage of culture, and they had a vocabulary
corresponding to it. This vocabulary the several nations carried along
with them, in its conventionally established use, as a common dowry
and a foundation for further structures of their own.... In this way
we possess evidence of the development of pastoral life at that remote
epoch in the unalterably fixed names of domestic animals; the Sanskrit
_gâus_ is the Latin _bos_, the Greek βοῦς; Sanskrit _avis_, is the
Latin _ovis_, the Greek ὄϊς; Sanskrit _açvas_, Latin _equus_, Greek
ἵππος; Sanskrit _hañsas_, Latin _anser_, Greek χήν; ... on the other
hand, we have as yet no certain proofs of the existence of agriculture
at this period. Language rather favors the negative view.”—Mommsen’s
_History of Rome_, Dickson’s Trans., Scribner’s ed., 1871, i, 37.
In a note he remarks that “barley, wheat, and spelt were found
growing together in a wild state on the right bank of the Euphrates,
northwest from Anah. The growth of barley and wheat in a wild state in
Mesopotamia had already been mentioned by the Babylonian historian,
Berosus.”
Fick remarks upon the same subject as follows: “While pasturage
evidently formed the foundation of primitive social life we can find
in it but very slight beginnings of agriculture. They were acquainted
to be sure with a few of the grains, but the cultivation of these was
carried on very incidentally in order to gain a supply of milk and
flesh. The material existence of the people rested in no way upon
agriculture. This becomes entirely clear from the small number of
primitive words which have reference to agriculture. These words are
_yava_, wild fruit, _varka_, hoe, or plow, _rava_, sickle, together
with _pio_, _pinsere_ [to bake] and _mak_, Gk. μάσσω, which give
indications of threshing out and grinding of grain.”—Fick’s
_Primitive Unity of Indo-European Languages_, Göttingen, 1873, p. 280.
See also _Chips From a German Workshop_, ii, 42.
With reference to the possession of agriculture by the Graeco-Italic
people, see Mommsen, i, p. 47, _et seq._
[283] The use of the word Romulus, and of the names of his successors,
does not involve the adoption of the ancient Roman traditions. These
names personify the great movements which then took place with which we
are chiefly concerned.
[284] _History of Rome, l. c._, i, 241, 245.
[285] Qui sint autem gentiles, primo commentario rettulimus; et cum
illic admonuerimus, totum gentilicium jus in desuetudinem abisse,
superuacuum est, hoc quoque loco de ea re curiosius tractare.—_Inst._,
iii, 17.
[286] Gentiles sunt, qui inter se eodem nomine sunt. Non est satis. Qui
ab ingenuis oriundi sunt. Ne id quidem satis est. Quorum majorum nemo
servitutem servivit. Abest etiam nunc. Qui capite non sunt deminuti.
Hoc fortasse satis est. Nihil enim video Scaevolam, Pontificem, ad hanc
definitionem addidisse.—_Cicero, Topica_ 6.
[287] Gentilis dicitur et ex eodem genere ortus, et is qui simili
nomine appellatur.—Quoted in Smith’s _Dic. Gk. & Rom. Antiq., Article,
Gens_.
[288] The following is the text extended: Ut in hominibus quaedam sunt
agnationes ac gentilitates, sic in verbis; ut enim ab Aemilio homines
orti Aemilii, ac gentiles; sic ab Aemilii nomine declinatae voces
in gentilitate nominali; ab eo enim, quod est impositum recto casu
Aemilius, Aemilium, Aemilios, Aemiliorum; et sic reliqua, ejusdem quae
sunt stirpes.—Varro, _De Lingua Latina_, lib. viii, cap. 4.
[289] Quid enim in re est aliud, si plebeiam patricius duxerit, si
patriciam plebeius? Quid juris tandem mutatur? nempe patrem sequuntur
liberi.—_Livy_, lib. iv, cap. 4.
[290] “When there was only one daughter in a family, she used to be
called from the name of the gens; thus, Tullia, the daughter of Cicero,
Julia, the daughter of Caesar; Octavia, the sister of Augustus, etc.;
and they retained the same name after they were married. When there
were two daughters, the one was called Major and the other Minor. If
there were more than two, they were distinguished by their number:
thus, Prima, Secunda, Tertia, Quarta, Quinta, etc.; or more softly,
Tertulla, Quartilla, Quintilla, etc.... During the flourishing state
of the republic, the names of the gentes, and surnames of the familiæ,
always remained fixed and certain. They were common to all the children
of the family, and descended to their posterity. But after the
subversion of liberty they were changed and confounded.”—Adams’s _Roman
Antiquities_, Glasgow ed., 1825, p. 27.
[291] Suetonius, _Vit. Octavianus_, c. 3 and 4.
[292] Gaius, _Institutes_, lib. iii, 1 and 2. The wife was a co-heiress
with the children.
[293] _Ib._, lib. iii, 9.
[294] Gaius, _Inst._, lib. iii, 17.
[295] A singular question arose between the Marcelli and Claudii,
two families of the Claudian gens, with respect to the estate of the
son of a freedman of the Marcelli; the former claiming by right of
family, and the latter by right of gens. The law of the Twelve Tables
gave the estate of a freedman to his former master, who by the act of
manumission became his patron, provided he died intestate, and without
_sui heredes_; but it did not reach the case of the son of a freedman.
The fact that the Claudii were a patrician family, and the Marcelli
were not, could not affect the question. The freedman did not acquire
gentile rights in his master’s gens by his manumission, although he was
allowed to adopt the gentile name of his patron; as Cicero’s freedman,
Tyro, was called M. Tullius Tyro. It is not known how the case, which
is mentioned by Cicero (_De Oratore_, i, 39), and commented upon by
Long (Smith’s _Dic. Gk. & Rom. Antiq., Art. Gens_), and Niebuhr, was
decided; but the latter suggests that it was probably against the
Claudii (_Hist. of Rome_, i, 245, _note_). It is difficult to discover
how any claim whatever could be urged by the Claudii; or any by the
Marcelli, except through an extension of the patronal right by judicial
construction. It is a noteworthy case, because it shows how strongly
the mutual rights with respect to the inheritance of property were
intrenched in the gens.
[296] _History of Rome_, i, 242
[297] Patricia gens Claudia ... agrum insuper trans Anienem clientibus
locumque sibi ad sepulturam sub capitolio, publice accepit.—Suet.,
_Vit. Tiberius_, cap. 1.
[298] Vari corpus semiustum hostilis laceraverat feritas; caput
ejus abscisum, latumque ad Maroboduum, et ab eo missum ad Caesarem,
gentilitii tumuli sepultura honoratum est.—_Velleius Paterculus_, ii,
119.
[299] Iam tanta religio est sepulcrorum, ut extra sacra et gentem
inferi fas negent esse; idque apud majores nostros A. Torquatus in
gente Popilia judicavit.—_De Leg._, ii, 22.
[300] Cicero, _De Leg._, ii, 23.
[301] “There were certain sacred rites (_sacra gentilicia_) which
belonged to a gens, to the observance of which all the members of a
gens, as such, were bound, whether they were members by birth, adoption
or adrogation. A person was freed from the observance of such _sacra_,
and lost the privileges connected with his gentile rights when he lost
his gens.”—Smith’s _Dic. Antiq., Gens_.
[302] Cicero, _Pro Domo_, c. 13.
[303] _History of Rome_, i, 241.
[304] Cicero, _De Leg._, ii, 23.
[305] _Dionysius_, ii, 22.
[306] _Ib._, ii, 21.
[307] Niebuhr’s _History of Rome_, i, 241.
[308] Bina jugera quod a Romulo primum diuisa [dicebantur] viritim,
quae [quod] haeredem sequerentur, haeredium appellarunt.—Varro, _De Re
Rustica_, lib. i, cap. 10.
[309] _History of Rome_, i, 62. He names the Camillii, Galerii,
Lemonii, Pollii, Pupinii, Voltinii, Aemilii, Cornelii, Fabii, Horatii,
Menenii, Papirii, Romilii, Sergii, Veturii.—_Ib._, p. 63.
[310] _History of Rome_, i, 63.
[311] “A fixed local centre was quite as necessary in the case of such
a canton as in that of a clanship; but as the members of the clan,
or, in other words, the constituent elements of the canton, dwelt in
villages, the centre of the canton cannot have been a town or place of
joint settlement in the strict sense. It must, on the contrary, have
been simply a place of common assembly, containing the seat of justice
and the common sanctuary of the canton, where the members of the canton
met every eighth day for purposes of intercourse and amusement, and
where, in case of war, they obtained a safer shelter for themselves
and their cattle than in the villages; in ordinary circumstances this
place of meeting was not at all or but scantily inhabited.... These
cantons accordingly, having their rendezvous in some stronghold, and
including a certain number of clanships, form the primitive political
unities with which Italian history begins.... All of these cantons
were in primitive times politically sovereign, and each of them was
governed by its prince with the co-operation of the council of elders
and the assembly of warriors. Nevertheless the feeling of fellowship
based on community of descent and of language not only pervaded the
whole of them, but manifested itself in an important religious and
political institution—the perpetual league of the collective Latin
cantons.”—_Hist. of Rome_, i, 64-66. The statement that the canton or
tribe was governed by its prince with the co-operation of the council,
etc., is a reversal of the correct statement, and therefore misleading.
We must suppose that the military commander held an elective office,
and that he was deposable at the pleasure of the constituency who
elected him. Further than this, there is no ground for assuming
that he possessed any civil functions. It is a reasonable, if not a
necessary conclusion, therefore, that the tribe was governed by a
council composed of the chiefs of the gentes, and by an assembly of
the warriors, with the co-operation of a general military commander,
whose functions were exclusively military. It was a government of three
powers, common in the Upper Status of barbarism, and identified with
institutions essentially democratical.
[312] Ap. Claudio in vinculo ducto, C. Claudius inimicum Claudiamque
omnem gentem sordidatum fuisse.—_Livy_, vi, 20.
[313] _History of Rome_, i, 242.
[314] Responsum tulisse, se collecturos, quanti damnatus esset,
absolvere eum non posse.—_Liv._, v, 32.
[315] _History of Rome_, i, 242: citing _Dionysius_, ii, 10: (ἔδει
τοὺς πελάτας) τῶν ἀναλωμάτων ὡς τοὺς γένει προσήκοντας μετέχειν.
[316] _History of Rome_, i, 240.
[317] “Nevertheless, affinity in blood always appeared to the Romans to
lie at the root of the connection between the members of the clan, and
still more between those of a family; and the Roman community can only
have interfered with these groups to a limited extent consistent with
the retention of their fundamental character of affinity.”—Mommsen’s
_History of Rome_, i, 103.
[318] It is a curious fact that Cleisthenes of Argos changed the names
of the three Dorian tribes of Sicyon, one to Hyatæ, signifying in the
singular _a boar_; another to Oneatæ, signifying _an ass_, and a third
to Choereatæ, signifying _a little pig_. They were intended as an
insult to the Sicyonians; but they remained during his life-time, and
for sixty years afterwards. Did the idea of these animal names come
down through tradition?—See Grote’s _History of Greece_, iii, 33, 36.
[319] Peregrinae conditionis homines vetuit usurpare Romana nomina,
duntaxat gentilicia.—Sueton., _Vit. Claudius_, cap. 25.
[320] Cicero, _Pro Domo_, cap. 13.
[321] _Livy_, xxv, 5.
[322] Smith’s _Dic., Art. Pontifex_.
[323] _History of Rome_, i, 66.
[324] _Ib._, i, 258.
[325] _Livy_, ii, 48.
[326] _Ib._, ii, 49.
[327] Trecentos sex perisse satis convenit: unum prope pubescem aetate
relictum stirpem gente Fabiae, dubiisque rebus populi Romani sepe domi
bellique vel maximum futurum auxilium.—_Livy_, ii, 50; and see Ovid,
_Fasti_, ii, 193.
[328] Itaque, quum populum in curias triginta divideret, nomina earum
curiis imposuit.—_Livy_, i, 13.
[329] φράτρα δὲ καὶ λόχος ἡ κουρία.—Dionys., _Antiq. of Rome_, ii, 7.
[330]
διῄρηντο δὲ καὶ εἰς δεκάδας αἱ φρᾶτραι πρὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ
ἡγεμὼν ἑκάστην ἐκόσμει δεκάδαρχος κατὰ τὴν ἐπιχώριον γλῶτταν
προσαγορευόμενος.—_Dionys._, ii, 7.
[331]
Ἑκάστη δὲ φυλὴ δέκα φρατρίας εἶχεν, ἃς ἔνιοι λέγουσιν
ἐπωνύμους εἶναι ἐκείνων τῶν γυναικῶν.
—Plutarch, _Vit. Romulus_, cap. 20.
[332] Whether Niebuhr used the word “house” in the place of gens, or it
is a conceit of the translators, I am unable to state. Thirlwall, one
of the translators, applies this term frequently to the Grecian gens,
which at best is objectionable.
[333] _History of Rome_, i, 244.
[334] Dionysius has given a definite and circumstantial analysis of
the organization ascribed to Romulus, although a portion of it seems
to belong to a later period. It is interesting from the parallel he
runs between the gentile institutions of the Greeks, with which he
was equally familiar, and those of the Romans. In the first place,
he remarks, I will speak of the order of his polity which I consider
the most sufficient of all political arrangements in peace, and also
in time of war. It was as follows: After dividing the whole multitude
into three divisions, he appointed the most prominent man as a leader
over each of the divisions; in the next place dividing each of the
three again into ten, he appointed the bravest men leaders, having
equal rank; and he called the greater divisions tribes, and the
less curiæ, as they are also still called according to usage. And
these names interpreted in the Greek tongue would be the _tribus_,
a third part, a phylê (φυλὴ); the _curia_, a phratry (φράτρα), and
also a band (λόχος); and those men who exercised the leadership of the
tribes were both phylarchs (φύλαρχοι) and trittyarchs (τριττύαρχοι),
whom the Romans call tribunes; and those who had the command of the
curiæ both phratriarchs (φρατρίαρχοι) and lochagoi (λοχαγοὶ), whom they
call curiones. And the phratries were also divided into decades, and a
leader called in common parlance a decadarch (δεκάδαρχος) had command
of each. And when all had been arranged into tribes and phratries,
he divided the land into thirty equal shares, and gave one full
share to each phratry, selecting a sufficient portion for religious
festivals and temples, and leaving a certain piece of ground for common
use.—_Antiq. of Rome_, ii, 7.
[335] _Dionysius_, ii, 7.
[336] Smith’s _Dic., l. c., Art. Tribune_.
[337] _Dionysius_, ii, 7.
[338] The thirty curiones, as a body, were organized into a college of
priests, one of their number holding the office of _curio maximus_.
He was elected by the assembly of the gentes. Besides this was the
college of augurs, consisting under the Ogulnian law (300 B. C.) of
nine members, including their chief officer (_magister collegii_); and
the college of pontiffs, composed under the same law of nine members,
including the _pontifex maximus_.
[339] _Livy_, i, 8.
[340] Eo ex finitimis populis turba omnis sine discrimine, liber an
servus esset, avida novarum rerum perfugit; idque primum ad coeptam
magnitudinem roboris fuit.—_Livy_, i, 8.
[341] _Vit. Romulus_, cap. 20.
[342] _Antiq. of Rome_, ii, 15.
[343] _Livy_, i, 30.
[344] _Ib._, i, 33.
[345] _Livy_, i, 38.
[346] In the pueblo houses in New Mexico all the occupants of
each house belonged to the same tribe, and in some cases a single
joint-tenement house contained a tribe. In the pueblo of Mexico there
were four principal quarters, as has been shown, each occupied by a
lineage, probably a phratry; while the Tlatelulcos occupied a fifth
district. At Tlascala there were also four quarters occupied by four
lineages, probably phratries.
[347] _History of Rome_, i, 258.
[348] Centum creat senatores: sive quia is numerus satis erat; sive
quia soli centum erant, qui creari Patres possent, Patres certe ab
honore, patriciique progenies eorum appellati.—_Liv._, i, 8. And
Cicero: Principes, qui appellati sunt propter caritatem, patres.—_De
Rep._, ii, 8.
[349] _Dionysius_, ii, 47.
[350] Nec minus regni sui firmandi, quam augendae republicae, memor,
centum in Patres legit; qui deinde minorum gentium sunt appellati:
factio haud dubia regis, cuius beneficio in curiam venerant.—_Liv._, i,
35.
[351] Isque [Tarquinius] ut de suo imperio legem tulit, principio
duplicavit illum pristinum patrum numerum; et antiquos patres maiorum
gentium appellavit, quos priores sententiam rogabat; a se adscitos,
minorum.—Cicero, _De Rep._, ii, 20.
[352] Cicero, _De Rep._, ii, 20.
[353] This was substantially the opinion of Niebuhr. “We may go further
and affirm without hesitation, that originally, when the number of
houses [gentes] was complete, they were represented immediately by the
senate, the number of which was proportionate to theirs. The three
hundred senators answered to the three hundred houses, which was
assumed above on good grounds to be the number of them; each gens sent
its decurion, who was its alderman and the president of its meetings
to represent it in the senate.... That the senate should be appointed
by the kings at their discretion, can never have been the original
institution. Even Dionysius supposes that there was an election: his
notion of it, however, is quite untenable, and the deputies must
have been chosen, at least originally, by the houses and not by the
curiæ.”—_Hist. of Rome_, i, 258. An election by the curiæ is, in
principle, most probable, if the office did not fall to the chief _ex
officio_, because the gentes in a curia had a direct interest in the
representation of each gens. It was for the same reason that a sachem
elected by the members of an Iroquois gens must be accepted by the
other gentes of the same tribe before his nomination was complete.
[354] _Livy_, i, 43. _Dionys_., ii, 14; iv, 20, 84.
[355] Numa Pompilius (Cicero, _De Rep._, ii, 11; _Liv._, i, 17), Tullus
Hostilius (Cicero, _De Rep._, ii, 17), and Ancus Martius (Cic., _De
Rep._, ii, 18; _Livy_, i, 32) were elected by the _comitia curiata_.
In the case of Tarquinius Priscus, Livy observes that the people by
a great majority elected him _rex_ (i, 35). It was necessarily by
the _comitia curiata_. Servius Tullius assumed the office which was
afterwards confirmed by the _comitia_ (Cicero, _De Rep._, ii, 21). The
right of election thus reserved to the people, shows that the office of
_rex_ was a popular one, and that his powers were delegated.
[356] Mr. Leonhard Schmitz, one of the ablest defenders of the theory
of kingly government among the Greeks and Romans, with great candor
remarks: “It is very difficult to determine the extent of the king’s
powers, as the ancient writers naturally judged of the kingly period by
their own republican constitution, and frequently assigned to the king,
the senate, and the _comitia_ of the _curia_ the respective powers and
functions which were only true in reference to the consuls, the senate
and the _comitia_ of their own time.”—Smith’s _Dic. Gk. & Rom. Antiq.,
Art. Rex._
[357] _Dionys._, ii, 12.
[358] _Dionysius_, iv, 1.
[359] Niebuhr says: “The existence of the plebs as acknowledgedly a
free and very numerous portion of the nation, may be traced back to the
reign of Ancus; but before the time of Servius it was only an aggregate
of unconnected parts, not a united regular whole.”—_History of Rome_,
_l. c._, i, 315.
[360] _History of Rome_, i, 315.
[361] “That the clients were total strangers to the plebeian commonalty
and did not coalesce with it until late, when the bond of servitude had
been loosened, partly from the houses of their patrons dying off or
sinking into decay, partly from the advance of the whole nation toward
freedom, will be proved in the sequel of this history.”—_History of
Rome_, i, 315.
[362] _Dionysius_, ii, 8.
[363] Plutarch, _Vit. Rom._, xiii, 16.
[364] _Vit. Tiberius_, cap. 1.
[365] _Hist. of Rome_, i, 256, 450.
[366] Smith’s _Dic., Articles Gens, Patricii, and Plebs _.
[367] _Dionysius_, ii, 8; Plutarch, _Vit. Rom._, xiii.
[368] _Ib._, ii, 8.
[369] Quum ille Romuli Senatus, qui constabat ex optimatibus, quibus
ipse Rex tantum tribuisset, ut eos patres vellet nominari patriciosque
eorum liberos, tentaret, etc.—_De Rep._, ii, 12.
[370] Patres certe ab honore, patriciique progenies eorum
appellati.—_Liv._, i, 8.
[371] Hic centum homines electos, appellatosque Patres, instar habuit
consilii publici. Hanc originem nomen Patriciorum habet.—_Velleius
Paterculus_, i, 8.
[372] _Livy_, ii, 49.
[373] _History of Rome_, i, 246.
[374] _Ib._, i, 246.
[375] _Livy_, iv, 4.
[376] A plebe consensu populi consulibus negotium mandatur.—_Liv._, iv.
51.
[377]
Ἦν δὲ ἡ διανομὴ κατὰ τὰς τέχνας, αὐλητῶν, χρυσοχόων, τεκτόνων, βαφέων,
σκυτοτόμων, σκυτοδεψῶν, χαλκέων, κεραμέων.—Plutarch, _Vit. Numa_, xvii,
20.
[378] The property qualification for the first class was 100,000 asses;
for the second class, 75,000 asses; for the third, 50,000; for the
fourth, 25,000; and for the fifth, 11,000 asses.—_Livy_, i, 43.
[379] _Dionysius_, iv, 20.
[380] _Ib._, iv, 16, 17, 18.
[381] _Livy_, i, 43.
[382] _De Rep._, ii, 20.
[383] _Dionysius_, iv, 16.
[384] _Livy_, i, 43.
[385] _Livy_, i, 43. But Dionysius places the equites in the first
class, and remarks that this class was first called.—_Dionys._, iv, 20.
[386] _Livy_, i, 44; Dionysius states the number at 84,700.—iv, 22.
[387] Cicero, _De Rep._, ii, 20.
[388] Censum enim instituit, rem saluberrimam tanto futuro imperio:
ex quo belli pacisque munia non viritim, ut ante, sed pro habitu
pecuniarum fierent.—_Livy_, i, 42.
[389] _Dionysius_, iv, 15.
[390] _Dionysius_, iv, 14.
[391] _History of Rome_, _l. c._, Scribner’s ed., i, 136.
[392] _Dionysius_, iv, 15; Niebuhr has furnished the names of sixteen
country townships, as follows: Aemilian, Camilian, Cluentian,
Cornelian, Fabian, Galerian, Horatian, Lemonian, Menenian, Paperian,
Romilian, Sergian, Veturnian, Claudian.—_Hist. of Rome_, i, 320, _note_.
[393] Rawlinson’s _Herodotus_, i, 173.
[394] If a Seneca-Iroquois man marries a foreign woman their children
are aliens; but if a Seneca-Iroquois woman marries an alien, or an
Onondaga, their children are Iroquois of the Seneca tribe; and of the
gens and phratry of their mother. The woman confers her nationality and
her gens upon her children, whoever may be their father.
[395] _Description of Ancient Italy_, i, 153; citing _Lanzi_, ii, 314.
[396] _History of Greece_, Scribner & Armstrong’s ed., Ward’s Trans.,
i, 94, _note_. The Etiocretes, of whom Minos was the hero, were
doubtless Pelasgians. They occupied the east end of the Island of
Crete. Sarpedon, a brother of Minos, led the emigrants to Lycia where
they displaced the Solymi, a Semitic tribe probably; but the Lycians
had become Hellenized, like many other Pelasgian tribes, before the
time of Herodotus, a circumstance quite material in consequence of the
derivation of the Grecian and Pelasgian tribes from a common original
stock. In the time of Herodotus the Lycians were as far advanced in the
arts of life as the European Greeks (Curtius, i, 93; Grote, i, 224). It
seems probable that descent in the female line was derived from their
Pelasgian ancestors.
[397] _Das Mutterrecht_, Stuttgart, 1861.
[398] Bachofen, speaking of the Cretan city of Lyktos, remarks that
“this city was considered a Lacedaemonian colony, and as also related
to the Athenians. It was in both cases only on the mother’s side, for
only the mothers were Spartans; the Athenian relationship, however,
goes back to those Athenian women whom the Pelasgian Tyrrhenians
are said to have enticed away from the Brauron promontory.”—_Das
Mutterrecht_, ch. 13, p. 31.
With descent in the male line the lineage of the women would have
remained unnoticed; but with descent in the female line the colonists
would have given their pedigrees through females only.
[399] _Das Mutterecht_, ch. 38, p. 73.
[400] _Polybius_, xii, extract the second, Hampton’s Trans., iii, 242.
[401] ἀδελφὴν γὰρ ὁ πάππος οὑμὸς ἔγημεν οὐχ ὁμομητρίαν.—_Demosthenes
contra Ebulides_, 20.
[402] Demosth., _Eubul._, 24: In his time the registration was in the
Deme; but it would show who were the phrators, blood relatives, fellow
demots and gennetes of the person registered; as Euxitheus says, λέγω
φράτερσι, συγγενέσι, δημόταις, γεννήταις; vide also Hermann’s _Polit.
Antiq. of Greece_, §. 100.
[403] _Prometheus_, 853.
[404] ἀλλ' αὐτογενεῖ φυξανορίᾳ,
γάμου Αἰγύπτου Παίδων ἀσεβῆ τ'
ὀνοταζόμεναι.—Aeschylus, _Supp._, 9.
[405] _Early History of Institutions_, Holt’s ed., p. 7.
[406] _Germania_, c. ii.
[407] _De Bell. Gall._, vi, 22.
[408] _Germania_, cap. 7. The line of battle, this author remarks,
is formed by wedges. _Acies per cuneos componitur._—_Ger._, c. 6.
Kohlrausch observes that “the confederates of one mark or hundred, and
of one race or sept, fought united.”—_History of Germany_, Appletons’
ed., trans. by J. D. Haas, p. 28.
[409] _De Bell. Gall._, iv, 1. _Germania_, cap. 6.
[410] Dr. Freeman, who has studied this subject specially, remarks:
“The lowest unit in the political system is that which still exists
under various names, as the _mark_, the _geminde_, the _commune_,
or the _parish_. This, as we have seen, is one of many forms of the
_gens_ or clan, that in which it is no longer a wandering or a mere
predatory body, but when, on the other hand, it has not joined with
others to form one component element of a city commonwealth. In this
stage the gens takes the form of an agricultural body, holding its
common lands—the germ of the _ager publicus_ of Rome, and of the
_folkland_ of England. This is the _markgenossenschaft_, the village
community of the West. This lowest political unit, this gathering of
real or artificial kinsmen, is made up of families, each living under
the rule, the _murd_ of its own father, that _patria potestas_ which
survived at Rome to form so marked and lasting a feature of Roman
law. As the union of families forms the _gens_, and as the _gens_ in
its territorial aspect forms the _markgenossenschaft_, so the union
of several such village communities and their _marks_ or common lands
forms the next higher political union, the hundred, a name to be found
in one shape or another in most lands into which the Teutonic race has
spread itself.... Above the hundred comes the _pagus_, the _gau_, the
Danish _syssel_, the English _shire_, that is, the tribe looked at as
occupying a certain territory. And each of these divisions, greater and
smaller, had its chiefs.... The hundred is made up of villages, marks,
geminden, whatever we call the lowest unit; the _shire_, the _gau_, the
_pagus_, is made up of hundreds.”—_Comparative Politics_, McMillan &
Co.’s ed., p. 116.
[411] _Descriptive Ethnology_, i, 80.
[412] McLennan’s _Primitive Marriage_, p. 109.
[413] Quoted in _Primitive Marriage_, p. 101.
[414] _Letter to the Author_, by Rev. Gopenath Nundy, a Native
Bengalese, India.
[415] _Early History of Mankind_, p. 282.
[416] _Primitive Culture_, Holt & Co.’s ed., ii, 235.
[417] _Descriptive Ethnology_, i, 290.
[418] _Origin of Civilization_, 96.
[419] _Descriptive Ethnology_, i, 475.
[420] _Genesis_, xiii, 2
[421] _Genesis_, xxiii, 16.
[422] _Ib._, xviii, 6.
[423] _Ib._, xviii, 8.
[424] _Ib._, xxii, 6.
[425] _Ib._, xxiv, 53.
[426] _Ib._, xxiv, 65.
[427] _Ib._, xx, 12.
[428] _Genesis_, xi, 29.
[429] _Exodus_, vi, 20.
[430] _Numbers_, iii, 15-20.
[431] _Ib._, i, 22.
[432] _Ib._, iii, 30.
[433] _Ib._, ii, 2.
[434] Kiel and Delitzschs, in their commentaries on Exodus vi, 14,
remark, that “‘father’s house’ was a technical term applied to a
collection of families called by the name of a common ancestor.” This
is a fair definition of a gens.
[435] 1 _Samuel_, xx, 6, 29.
[436] _Numbers_, i, 2.
[437] _Descript. Eth._, ii, 184.
[438] _Ashango Land_, Appletons’ ed., p. 425, et seq.
[439] _Travels in South Africa_, Appletons’ ed., ch. 30, p. 660.—“When
a young man takes a liking for a girl of another village, and the
parents have no objection to the match, he is obliged to come and
live at their village. He has to perform certain services for the
mother-in-law.... If he becomes tired of living in this state of
vassalage, and wishes to return to his own family, he is obliged to
leave all his children behind—they belong to his wife.”—_Ib._, p. 667
[440] _Travels in South Africa_, p. 219.
[441] _Ib._, p. 471.
[442] _Ib._, p. 471.
[443] See also Taylor’s _Early History of Mankind_, p. 284.
[444] _Systems of Consanguinity_, etc., loc. cit., pp. 451, 482.
[445] _Missionary Herald_, 1853, p. 90.
[446] _Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge_, vol. xvii.
[447] _Pandects_, lib. xxxviii, title x. De gradibus, et ad finibus et
nominibus eorum: and _Institutes of Justinian_, lib. iii, title vi. De
gradibus cognationem.
[448] Our term aunt is from _amita_, and uncle from _avunculus_.
_Avus_, grandfather, gives _avunculus_ by adding the diminutive. It
therefore signifies a ‘little grandfather.’ _Matertera_ is supposed to
be derived from _mater_ and _altera_, = another mother.
[449] Herrera’s _Hist. of Amer._, i, 216, 218, 348.
[450] The Rotuman is herein for the first time published. It was
worked out by the Rev. John Osborn, Wesleyan missionary at Rotuma, and
procured and forwarded to the author by the Rev. Lorimer Fison, of
Sydney, Australia.
[451] a as in ale; ä as a in father; ă as a in at; ǐ as i in it; ŭ as
oo in food.
[452] _Systems of Consanguinity_, loc. cit., p. 445.
[453] _Ib._, pp. 525, 573.
[454] _Systems of Consanguinity_, etc., l. c., Table iii, pp. 542, 573.
[455] Among the Kafirs of South Africa, the wife of my father’s
brother’s son, of my father’s sister’s son, of my mother’s brother’s
son, and of my mother’s sister’s son, are all alike my wives, as well
as theirs, as appears by their system of consanguinity.
[456] _Races of Man_, Appleton’s ed. 1876, p. 232.
[457] Bingham’s _Sandwich Islands_, Hartford ed., 1847, p. 21.
[458] _Ib._, p. 23.
[459] _Systems of Consanguinity_, etc., p. 415.
[460] _Ib._, p. 432, where the Chinese system is presented in full.
[461] _Timæus_, c. ii, Davis’s trans.
[462] _Descent of Man_, ii, 360.
[463] The Ippais and Kapotas are married in a group. Ippai begets
Murri, and Murri in turn begets Ippai; in like manner Kapota begets
Mata, and Mata in turn begets Kapota; so that the grandchildren
of Ippai and Kapota are themselves Ippais and Kapotas, as well as
collateral brothers and sisters; and as such are born husbands and
wives.
[464] _Historical Sketch of the Missions, etc., in the Sandwich
Islands_, etc., p. 5.
[465] Uxores habent deni duodenique inter se communes, et maxime
fratres cum fratribus parentesque cum liberis.—_De Bell. Gall._, v,
14.
[466] γυναῖκα μὲν γαμέει ἕκαστος, ταύτῃσι δὲ ἐπίκοινα χρέωνται.
[467] ἐπίκοινον δὲ τῶν γυναικῶν τὴν μίξιν ποιεῦνται, κασίγνητοί τε
ἀλλήλων ἔωσι καὶ οἰκήïοι ἐόντες πάντες μήτε φθόνῳ μήτ' ἔχθεï χρέωνται
ἐς ἀλλήλους.—Lib. iv, c. 104.
[468] Herrera’s _History of America_, l. c., i, 216. Speaking of the
coast tribes of Brazil, Herrera further remarks that “they live in
bohios, or large thatched cottages, of which there are about eight in
every village, full of people, with their nests or hammocks to lye
in.... They live in a beastly manner, without any regard to justice
or decency.”—_Ib._, iv, 94. Garcilasso de la Vega gives an equally
unfavorable account of the marriage relation among some of the lowest
tribes of Peru.—_Royal Com. of Peru_, l. c., pp. 10 and 106.
[469] _Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family_,
Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. xvii.
[470] The late Rev. Ashur Wright, for many years a missionary among
the Senecas, wrote the author in 1873 on this subject as follows: “As
to their family system, when occupying the old long-houses, it is
probable that some one clan predominated, the women taking in husbands,
however, from the other clans; and sometimes, for a novelty, some of
their sons bringing in their young wives until they felt brave enough
to leave their mothers. Usually, the female portion ruled the house,
and were doubtless clannish enough about it. The stores were in common;
but woe to the luckless husband or lover who was too shiftless to do
his share of the providing. No matter how many children, or whatever
goods he might have in the house, he might at any time be ordered to
pick up his blanket and budge; and after such orders it would not be
healthful for him to attempt to disobey. The house would be too hot for
him; and, unless saved by the intercession of some aunt or grandmother,
he must retreat to his own clan; or, as was often done, go and start
a new matrimonial alliance in some other. The women were the great
power among the clans, as everywhere else. They did not hesitate, when
occasion required, ‘to knock off the horns,’ as it was technically
called, from the head of a chief, and send him back to the ranks of the
warriors. The original nomination of the chiefs also always rested with
them.” These statements illustrate the gyneocracy discussed by Bachofen
in “Das Mutterrecht.”
[471] _History of Mexico_, Phil. ed., 1817, Cullen’s trans., ii, 99.
[472] _Ib._, ii, 101.
[473] _History of America_, l. c., iii, 217.
[474] _History of America_., iv, 171.
[475] A case among the Shyans was mentioned to the author, by one of
their chiefs, where first cousins had married against their usages.
There was no penalty for the act; but they were ridiculed so constantly
by their associates that they voluntarily separated rather than face
the prejudice.
[476] Iron has been smelted from the ore by a number of African tribes,
including the Hottentots, as far back as our knowledge of them extends.
After producing the metal by rude processes acquired from foreign
sources, they have succeeded in fabricating rude implements and weapons.
[477] The Asiatic origin of the American aborigines is assumed. But
it follows as a consequence of the unity of origin of mankind—another
assumption, but one toward which all the facts of anthropology tend.
There is a mass of evidence sustaining both conclusions of the most
convincing character. Their advent in America could not have resulted
from a deliberate migration; but must have been due to the accidents of
the sea, and to the great ocean currents from Asia to the North-west
coast.
[478] Famuli origo ab Oscis dependet, apud quo servus Famul
nominabuntur, unde _familia_ vocata.—_Festus_, p. 87.
[479] Amico familiam suam, id est patrimonium suum mancipio
dabat.—Gaius, _Inst._, ii, 102.
[480] _History of Rome_, l. c., 1, 95.
[481] Item in potestate nostra sunt liberi nostri, quos justis nuptiis
procreauimus, quod jus proprium ciuium Romanorum est: fere enim nulli
alii sunt homines, qui talem in filios suos habent potestatem, qualem
nos habemus.—_Inst._, 1, 55. Among other things they had the power of
life and death—jus vitæ necisque.
[482] _Germania_, c. 18.
[483] _Ib._, c. 19.
[484] _Iliad_, ix, 128.
[485] _Il._, ix, 663.
[486] The following condensed statement, taken from Charicles
(_Excursus_, xii, Longman’s ed., Metcalfe’s trans.), contains the
material facts illustrative of the subject. After expressing the
opinion that the women of Homer occupied a more honorable position
in the household than the women of the historical period, he makes
the following statements with respect to the condition of women,
particularly at Athens and Sparta, during the high period of Grecian
culture. He observes that the only excellence of which a woman was
thought capable differed but little from that of a faithful slave (p.
464); that her utter want of independence led to her being considered
a minor all her life long; that there were neither educational
institutions for girls, nor any private teachers at home, their whole
instruction being left to the mothers, and to nurses, and limited
to spinning and weaving and other female avocations (p. 465); that
they were almost entirely deprived of that most essential promoter of
female culture, the society of the other sex; strangers as well as
their nearest relatives being entirely excluded; even their fathers
and husbands saw them but little, the men being more abroad than at
home, and when at home inhabiting their own apartments; that the
gynæconitis, though not exactly a prison, nor yet a locked harem, was
still the confined abode allotted for life to the female portion of
the household; that it was particularly the case with the maidens, who
lived in the greatest seclusion until their marriage, and, so to speak,
regularly under lock and key (p. 465); that it was unbecoming for a
young wife to leave the house without her husband’s knowledge, and in
fact she seldom quitted it; she was thus restricted to the society
of her female slaves; and her husband, if he chose to exercise it,
had the power of keeping her in confinement (p. 466); that at those
festivals, from which men were excluded, the women had an opportunity
of seeing something of each other, which they enjoyed all the more from
their ordinary seclusion; that women found it difficult to go out of
their houses from these special restrictions; that no respectable lady
thought of going without the attendance of a female slave assigned
to her for that purpose by her husband (p. 469); that this method of
treatment had the effect of rendering the girls excessively bashful and
even prudish, and that even a married woman shrunk back and blushed if
she chanced to be seen at the window by a man (p. 471); that marriage
in reference to the procreation of children was considered by the
Greeks a necessity, enforced by their duty to the gods, to the state
and to their ancestors; that until a very late period, at least, no
higher consideration attached to matrimony, nor was strong attachment a
frequent cause of marriage (p. 473); that whatever attachment existed
sprang from the soil of sensuality, and none other than sensual love
was acknowledged between man and wife (p. 473); that at Athens, and
probably in the other Grecian states as well, the generation of
children was considered the chief end of marriage, the choice of the
bride seldom depending on previous, or at least intimate acquaintance;
and more attention was paid to the position of the damsel’s family,
and the amount of her dowry, than to her personal qualities; that
such marriages were unfavorable to the existence of real affection,
wherefore coldness, indifference, and discontent frequently prevailed
(p. 477); that the husband and wife took their meals together, provided
no other men were dining with the master of the house, for no woman who
did not wish to be accounted a courtesan, would think even in her own
house of participating in the symposia of the men, or of being present
when her husband accidentally brought home a friend to dinner (p.
490); that the province of the wife was the management of the entire
household, and the nurture of the children—of the boys until they were
placed under a master, of the girls until their marriage; that the
infidelity of the wife was judged most harshly; and while it might
be supposed that the woman, from her strict seclusion, was generally
precluded from transgressing, they very frequently found means of
deceiving their husbands; that the law imposed the duty of continence
in a very unequal manner, for while the husband required from the wife
the strictest fidelity, and visited with severity any dereliction on
her part, he allowed himself to have intercourse with hetæræ, which
conduct, though not exactly approved, did not meet with any marked
censure, and much less was it considered any violation of matrimonial
rights (p. 494).
[487] _Vit. Rom._, c. 20.
[488] Quinctilian.
[489] With respect to the conjugal fidelity of Roman women, Becker
remarks “that in the earlier times excesses on either side seldom
occurred,” which must be set down as a mere conjecture; but “when
morals began to deteriorate, we first meet with great lapses from this
fidelity, and men and women outbid each other in wanton indulgence.
The original modesty of the women became gradually more rare, while
luxury and extravagance waxed stronger, and of many women it could
be said, as Clitipho complained of his Bacchis (Ter., _Heaut._, ii,
1, 15), _Mea est petax, procax, magnifica, sumptuosa, nobilis._ Many
Roman ladies, to compensate for the neglect of their husbands, had a
lover of their own, who, under the pretense of being the procurator of
the lady, accompanied her at all times. As a natural consequence of
this, celibacy continually increased amongst the men, and there was the
greatest levity respecting divorces”—Gallus, _Excursus_, i, p. 155,
Longman’s ed., Metcalfe’s trans.
[490] _Systems of Consanguinity_, Table I, p. 79.
[491] _Systems of Consanguinity_, etc., p. 40.
[492] _Pandects_, lib. xxviii, tit. x, and _Institutes_ of Justinian,
lib. iii, tit. vi.
[493] Item fratres patrueles, sorores patrueles, id est qui quæ-ve ex
duobus fratribus progenerantur; item consobrini consobrinæ, id est qui
quæ-ve ex duobus sororibus nascuntur (quasi consorini); item amitini
amitinæ, id est qui quæ-ve ex fratre ex sorore propagantur; sed fere
vulgos istos omnes communi appellatione consobrinus vocat.—_Pand._,
lib. xxxviii, tit. x.
[494] It is a revision of the sequence presented in _Systems of
Consanguinity_, etc., p. 480.
[495]
μῖξιν δὲ ἐπίκοινον τῶν γυναικῶν ποιέονται, οὔτε συνοικέοντες
κτηνηδόν τε μισγόμενοι.—Lib. iv, c. 180.
[496] Garamantes matrimonium exsortes passim cum femines degunt.—_Nat.
Hist._, lib. v, c. 8.
[497]—καὶ φανερῶς μίσγεσθαι ταῖς τε ἄλλαις γυναιξὶ καὶ μητράσι καὶ
ἀδελφαὶς.—Lib. iv. c. 5, § 4.
[498] Lib. xvi. c. 4, § 25.
[499] “The _Tables_, however, are the _main results_ of this
investigation. In their importance and value they reach beyond
any present use of their contents the writer may be able to
indicate.”—_Systems of Consanguinity_, _etc._, Smithsonian
Contributions to Knowledge, vol. xvii, p. 8.
[500] _Descriptive Ethnology_, Lond. ed., 1859, i, 475.
[501] _Ib._, i, 80.
[502] _League of the Iroquois_, p. 364.
[503] For example, the Ojibwas used the lance or spear, She-mä′-gun,
pointed with flint or bone.
[504] The Creeks made earthen vessels holding from two to ten gallons
(Adair’s _History of American Indians_, p. 424); and the Iroquois
ornamented their jars and pipes with miniature human faces attached as
buttons. This discovery was recently made by Mr. F. A. Cushing, of the
Smithsonian Institution.
[505] Herrera, l. c., iv, 16.
[506] _Ib._, iii, 13; iv, 16, 137. Clavigero, ii, 165.
[507] Clavigero, ii, 238. Herrera, ii, 145; iv, 133.
[508] _Hakluyt’s Coll. of Voyages_, l. c., iii, 377.
[509] The Rev. Samuel Gorman, a missionary among the Laguna Pueblo
Indians, remarks in an address before the Historical Society of New
Mexico (p. 12), that “the right of property belongs to the female part
of the family, and descends in that line from mother to daughter. Their
land is held in common, as the property of the community, but after a
person cultivates a lot he has personal claim to it, _which he can sell
to one of the community_.... Their women, generally, have control of
the granary, and they are more provident than their Spanish neighbors
about the future. Ordinarily they try to have a year’s provisions on
hand. It is only when two years of scarcity succeed each other, that
Pueblos, as a community, suffer hunger.”
[510]
Σεμνύνεται γὰρ Σόλων ἐν τούτοις, ὅτι τῆς τε προϋποκείμενης γῆς Ὅρους
ἀνεῖλε πολλαχῆ πεπηγότας· πρόσθεν δὲ δουλεύουσα, νῦν ἐλευθέρα.
—Plutarch, _in Solon_, c. xv.
[511] _Iliad_, v, 90.
[512] _Ib._, ix, 577.
[513] _Ib._, xiv, 121.
[514] _Ib._, v, 265.
[515] _Ib._, iv, 433, Buckley’s trans.
[516] _Ib._, vii, 472, Buckley’s trans.
[517] _Iliad_, xii, 274.
[518] The German tribes when first known historically were in the
Upper Status of barbarism. They used iron, but in limited quantities,
possessed flocks and herds, cultivated the cereals, and manufactured
coarse textile fabrics of linen and woolen; but they had not then
attained to the idea of individual ownership in lands. According to
the account of Cæsar, elsewhere cited, the arable lands were allotted
annually by the chiefs, while the pasture lands were held in common. It
would seem, therefore, that the idea of individual property in lands
was unknown in Asia and Europe in the Middle Period of barbarism, but
came in during the Later Period.
[519] _Genesis_, xxiii, 13.
[520] _Numbers_, xxxvi, 4.
[521] _Numbers_, xxxvi, 5-9.
[522] _Ib._, xxxvi, 11.
[523] _Ib._, xxvii, 8-11.
[524] _The Ancient City_, Lee & Shepard’s ed., Small’s trans., p. 99.
[525] _Demosthenes against Eubul._, 41.
[526] Εὐδοκίμησε δὲ κἀν τῷ περὶ διαθηκῶν for νόμῳ· πρότερον γὰρ οὐκ
ἐξῆν, ἀλλ' ἐν τῷ γένει τοῦ τεθνηκότος ἔδει τὰ χρήματα καὶ τὸν οἶκον
καταμένειν, ὁ δ' ᾧ βούλεταί τις ἐπιτρέψας, εἰ μὴ παῖδες εἶεν αὐτῷ,
δοῦναι τὰ αὑτοῦ, φιλίαν τε συγγενείας ἐτίμησε μᾶλλον καὶ χάριν ἀνάγκης,
καὶ τὰ χρήματα κτήματα τῶν ἐχόντων ἐποίησεν.—Plutarch, _Vita Solon_, c,
21.
[527] Livy, iii, 54, 57.
[528] Intestatorum hereditates lege xii tabularum primum ad suos
heredes pertinent.—Gaius, _Inst._, iii, 1. Si nullus sit suorum
heredum, tunc hereditas pertinet ex eadem lege xii tabularum ad
adgnatos.—_Ib._, iii, 9. Si nullus agnatus sit, eadem lex xii tabularum
gentiles ad hereditatem uocat.—_Ib._, iii, 17.
INDEX.
A
Abipones, 183.
Adair, James, 15, 77, note; 83, 530.
Adams, Prof. Henry, 273.
Adoption, ceremony of, among Iroquois, 81, note.
Age of Stone, of Bronze, and of Iron, 8.
Algonkin tribes, 165.
Alphabet, phonetic, 12.
Its invention, 31, note.
Animals, their domestication, 11, 42.
Archon, office of, 261.
Arickarees, 165.
Aristocracy.
Its rise, 260.
Its future, 549.
Army organization in gentile society, by gentes, by phratries,
and by tribes, 237.
In Athenian political society by property classes, 265.
In Roman by same, 334.
Arts of subsistence, 19.
1. Fruits and Roots, 20.
2. Fish, 21.
3. Farinaceous Food, 22.
4. Meat and Milk, 24.
Field Agriculture, 26.
Arrawaks, 182.
Aryan, Family of, 39, 468.
System of consanguinity and affinity, 484.
Table, 493.
Assembly of the people, 119, 120.
Agora of Athenians, 245.
_Comitia Curiata_ of the Romans, 315, 340.
_Comitia Centuriata_, 331, 333.
Ashangos, 371.
Athapasco-Apache Tribes, 175.
Australian organization on basis of sex, 50.
Classes, 52.
Descents, 57, note.
Aztec Confederacy, 186.
Of three Nahuatlac tribes, 189.
When established, 192.
Extent of territorial domination, 193.
Population of Valley of Mexico, 195.
Of Pueblo, of Mexico, 196, note.
Gentes and phratries, 197.
Ownership of lands in common, 200.
Council of Chiefs, 203.
Office of Teuctli, or principal war-chief, 206.
Aztec monarchy a fiction, 213.
B
Bachofen, Das Mutterrecht, 349, 350, 573, note.
Bandelier, Ad. F., 200, 201, note; 203, note.
Bancroft, H. H., 176.
Barbarism, period of, 42.
Inventions and discoveries in Later Period, 32.
In Middle Period, 33.
In Older Period, 35.
Great achievements in this Period, 42.
Basileus, 246.
Probably elective, 248.
Office without civil functions, 252.
Office of Roman Rex elective, 253.
Each a general, with the additional functions of a priest
and judge, 250.
Aristotle’s definition, 251.
Early Grecian governments military democracies, 252, 274.
Romans under the _reges_, the same, 253.
Office of basileus abolished by the Athenians, 260, 274.
Of rex by the Romans, 319.
Basileia, 249.
Aristotle’s definition, 256.
Becker, Prof. W. A. Family of ancient Greeks, 475, note.
Of Romans, 478, note.
Blackfeet tribes, 171.
Blood revenge, 77, 238.
Bow and arrow; its invention created an epoch, 10.
Difficult to invent, 21, note.
Burial place of gens.
Usually common among Indian tribes, 83.
Of Tuscaroras, 84.
Byington, Rev. Dr. Cyrus, 162.
C
Cameron, Mr. A. S. P., 375.
Categories of relatives: of Hawaiians, 405.
Of Chinese, 416.
In Timæus of Plato, 417.
Cayugas, gentes, 70.
Phratries, 91.
Chief, office of, elective, 72, 145.
Head-chief of tribe, 118.
Described as a lord, 202.
No analogy, ib.
Chief of Grecian gens, 261.
Cherokees, 164.
Chickasas, gentes, 163.
Phratries, ib.
Choctas, gentes, 161.
Phratries, 99.
Civilization, Period of.
Its contributions to knowledge, 30, 31.
Cleisthenes.
Founder of second great plan of government, 216, 254.
His legislation, 270.
Institution of Athenian political Society, 270.
The Deme, or Township, ib.
Local tribe or county, 271.
Commonwealth or State, 272.
Inhabitants of each an organized self-governing body politic, 270-272.
Coalescence of tribes in a nation, 135, 259.
Confederacy of tribes, 122.
Iroquois Confederacy, 126.
Its organization and functions, 128.
Common gentes, and dialects of a common language its basis, 123.
Aztec Confederacy, 186.
Comanches, 177.
Columbia River, Valley of.
Seed land of Ganowánian family, 108, note.
Its salmon fisheries, bread roots, and game, 109, note.
_Comitia Curiata_, 315, 340.
_Centuriata_, 331, 333.
_Tributa_, 336.
Consanguine Family, 384, 401.
Consanguinity, Malayan system of, oldest, 385.
Turanian and Ganowánian, the second great form, 386.
Aryan, Semitic, and Uralian, third great form, 388.
Systems natural growths, 393.
Two ultimate forms: one classificatory, the other descriptive, 394.
Nature of a system of consanguinity, 395.
Its permanence, 402, 408.
Details of Malayan system, 404.
Relatives in categories, 407.
Its origin, 410.
Details of Ganowánian and Turanian, 435.
Origin of system, 422.
Aryan system, 485.
Its origin, 490.
Communism in living, 446, 453.
Coulanges, M. De. His work, “The Ancient City,” 234, 240, 549.
Council of Chiefs, 119.
Iroquois Council invested chiefs with office, 136, 141.
Manner of convening, 137, note.
Manner of transacting business, 139.
Unanimity required, 140.
Aztec Council, 203.
Grecian Council, 243.
Its universality, 244.
Roman _Comitia_, 298.
Senate, 307, 315.
_Comitia Centuriata_, 331.
Cox, Prof. Edward F. Analysis of pottery of Mound Builders, 15.
Creeks, 160.
Crees, 167.
Crows, 159.
Curtius, Prof., 348.
Cushing, Mr. N. A., 530, note.
D
Dakota tribes, 154.
Dance. A form of worship among Indian tribes, 116.
Delawares, 101, 171.
Deme, or township of Athenians, 217.
Democracy.
Universal in Ancient Society and inherited from the gentes, 73, 253.
Liberty, equality, and fraternity cardinal principles of the gens, 85.
Athenian Democracy, 253, 270.
Descent in female line when gens is in archaic form, 67.
In American Indian tribes, 153-183.
In male line, 155-157, 166-169, 171-182.
How changed from female line to male, 344.
Causes which produced the change in Grecian gentes, 345.
In female line among Lycians, 347.
Etruscans, 348.
Views of Curtius, 348.
Of Bachofen, 349.
Among Athenians prior to Cecrops, 350.
Required to explain certain marriages, 351.
Legend of Danaidæ, 354.
In female line among Ashiras, Aponos, and Ashangos of Africa, 371.
Banyi, 372.
Bangalas, 373.
Du Chaillu, 371.
E
Ethnical Periods, 8-13.
Advantages of these subdivisions, 16.
Their relative length, 38.
Ephoralty of the Spartans, 250.
Eries, 126, note; 149-153.
Etruscans, 279, 348.
F
Family, the, Five successive forms, 384.
The consanguine, 384, 401.
The punaluan, 384, 424.
The syndyasmian or pairing, 384, 453.
The patriarchal, 384, 465.
The monogamian, 384, 468.
First, second, and fifth radical, creating three systems of consanguinity
and affinity, 324.
Consanguine family, origin of relationship in, 410.
Punaluan family, origin of relationship in, 422.
Syndyasmian, 453-461.
Patriarchal, 465.
Monogamian family of ancient Germans, 471;
of Homeric Greeks, 472, 475, note;
of Romans, 477.
Origin of relationship in, 485-490.
Sequence of institutions connected with the family, 498.
Freeman, Dr., on the organization of German tribes, 361, note.
Fison, Rev. Lorimer, 14, 51, note; 54, 374, 375, 403.
G
Ganowánian family, its name, 152.
Ganowánian system of consanguinity and affinity, 432, 435.
Table, 447.
Gentile organization, 62, 185.
Institutions democratical, 212.
Gens of Australian tribes, 51-56,
of Iroquois, 62.
Founded upon kin, 63.
Definition of a gens, 67.
Descent in female line, 68.
Intermarriage in the gens prohibited, 69.
Rights, privileges, and obligations of its members, 71-84.
Liberty, equality, and fraternity, its cardinal principles, 85.
Grecian gens, 215.
Descent in male line, 216.
Rights, privileges, and obligations of its members, 222.
Unit of the social system, 226.
Roman gens, 277.
Definition of a gentilis, 283.
Descent in male line, 284.
Rights, privileges, and obligations of its members, 285.
Number of persons in a Roman gens, 299.
Gentes in other tribes of mankind, 357-379.
Probable origin of the gens, 377.
Gibbs, George, 175, 176.
Government.
First plan gentile and social, 6.
Organic series, gens, phratry, tribe, and confederacy, with a final
coalescence of tribes in a nation, 49, 66.
First stage, a government of one power, the council of chiefs; second,
of two powers, a council and a military commander; third, of three
powers, a council, a general, and an assembly of the people, 119, 120, 257.
Second plan territorial and political, 6.
Property classes of Solon, 264.
Attic Deme or township, 270.
Registration in Deme, ib.
Local tribe or county, 271.
The state, 272.
Athenian democracy, 273.
No chief executive magistrate, 275.
Roman political society, 322.
Property classes of Servius Tullius, 331.
The centuries, 333.
_Comitia Centuriata_, 333.
The census, 336. City wards, 337.
Registration in ward of residence, 336.
Municipality of Rome, 339.
Transition from gentile into political society, 340.
Grote, on Grecian gentes, phratries and tribes, 220-228, 230-232.
His view of the early Grecian governments erroneous, 247.
His illustration from the Iliad, 248.
H
Hale, Horatio, 127, note; 153, 175.
Hart, Robert. On the hundred families of the Chinese, 364.
Hebrew tribes, 366.
Marriages in early period indicate gentes, with descent in the female
line, 367.
Gentes and phratries in the time of Moses, 368.
Hodenosaunian tribes, 153.
House life, and plan of living among savage and barbarous tribes deserve
special study, 399, 446.
I
Iowas, 156, 166.
Inventions and discoveries, 29, 45.
Iron, 11.
Process of smelting, 43.
Ancient side hill furnaces in Switzerland, 43, note.
Iroquois, gentes, 63-70.
Phratries, 90-97.
Tribes, 102.
Confederacy, 122.
Sachems of the general council, 150.
J
Jones, C. C., 14, note.
K
Kaskaskias, 107.
Kaws, 106, 156.
Keepers of the faith in the Iroquois, 82.
Kennicott, Robert, 175.
Kikapoos, 170.
Kolushes, 175.
L
Lagunas, 180.
Lands owned in common among Indian tribes in Lower Status
of barbarism, 151-174.
With a possessory right in individuals to occupied lands, 530.
In common by Aztec gentes probably, 200.
By Roman gentes, 290, 292, note; 541.
Some by phratries and tribes, 292.
Latham, R. G., 362, 364, 371.
Language, growth of, 5.
Question of its origin, 36, note.
Lockwood, Charles G. N., 375.
Locrians, hundred families of, 350.
Lycians, descent in female line, 347, 348.
Lubbock, Sir John, 14, 183, 364.
M
Magars of Nepaul, 362.
Maine, Sir Henry, 227.
On Celtic groups of kinsmen on French estates, 358.
His original researches, 507.
Malayan system of consanguinity and affinity, its origin, 410.
McLennan, Mr J. F., 362, 409.
Note concerning his work on “Primitive Marriage,” 509-521.
Mandans, 158.
Marriage, Australian scheme, 53, 57.
Hebrew, 410.
Consanguine, 401.
Punaluan, 424.
Syndyasmian, 453.
Monogamian, 468.
Menominees, 170.
Metals, native, 44.
Minnitarees, 158.
Miamis, 107, 168.
Mississippi tribes, 168.
Missouri tribes, 155.
Mohegan gentes, 173.
Phratries, 174.
Mohawks, 125.
Mommsen, Theodor, on domestication of animals, 23.
Family names, 78.
On introduction of agriculture, 277, note.
Roman gens, 281.
On gentile and tribal lands, 291.
Montezuma, principal war-chief of Aztec Confederacy, 206, 207.
Tenure and functions of the office, note.
His seizure of Cortes, 211, note.
His deposition by the Aztecs, 211.
Monogamian Family, 384, 468.
Monarchy incompatible with gentilism, 124, 252.
Moqui Village Indians, 86, 179.
Müller, Max, 23.
Munsees, 173.
N
Names of members of a gens, 78.
How bestowed, 79.
The name conferred gentile rights, ib.
Nation formed by coalescence of tribes, 135, 242, 259.
Neutral nation, 149, 153.
Naucraries of Athenians, 262.
Niebuhr, on Roman and Grecian gentile questions, 23, 281, 287,
292, note; 295, 298, 305, 313, 315, 325.
O
Ojibwas, 106, 166.
Omahas, 106, 155.
Oneidas, 70.
Onondagas, gentes, 70.
Phratries, 91.
Osages, 106.
Osborn, Rev. John, Rotuman system of consanguinity, 403, note; 419.
Otawas, 167.
Otawa Confederacy, 106.
Otoes, 106, 156.
P
Parkman, Francis, 153, note.
Patriarchal Family, 384, 465, 480.
Patricians, Roman, 326, 330.
Pawnees, 164.
Peorias, 107.
Peschel, Oscar, 14, 413.
Phratry, its character, 89.
Of Iroquois, 90.
Its functions, 94-97.
Phratric organization in American Indian tribes, 90 _et seq._
Of Athenians, 220.
Obês of Spartans, 219.
Definition of Dikæarchus, 236.
Objects of phratry, 237.
Uses in army organization, 287.
Phratriarch, 240.
Blood revenge, 238.
Roman _curia_ a phratry, 303.
Its composition and functions, 304, 305.
Piankeshaws, 107.
Plebeians, persons unconnected with any gens, 266.
Unattached class, at Athens, 267.
Made citizens by Solon, 268.
Roman plebeians, 324, 325.
Potawattamies, 166, 167.
Property, growth of, 6.
Its inheritance. First Rule: In American Indian tribes, 75, 153, 185,
528, 530;
in Status of savagery, 526;
in Lower Status of barbarism, 528.
Second Rule, 531: Property in Middle Status, 540;
in Upper Status, ib.
Third Rule, 544: Hebrew inheritance, 545, 547;
daughters of Zelophehad, 546;
Athenian inheritance, 548;
Roman, 550;
property career of civilized nations, 522.
Polyandry, 409.
Polygyny, 404.
Political society, 218.
Institution of Athenian, 256.
Experiments of Theseus, 258, 259.
Draco, 263.
Legislation of Solon, 264.
Property classes, ib.
Organization of army, 265.
Legislation of Cleisthenes, 270.
Attic deme or township, ib.
Inhabitants of each a body politic, with powers of local
self-government, 271.
Local tribe or county, ib.
The Athenian Commonwealth or State, 272.
Government founded upon territory and upon property, ib.
Powers of gentes, phratries, and tribes transferred to the demes,
counties, or state, 272, 274.
No chief executive magistrate, 275.
Institution of Roman political society, 323-342.
Pottery, 13, 15, 16.
Punaluan Family, 384, 424.
Of Hawaiians, 427.
Of Britons, 429.
Other tribes, 430, 431.
Punkas, 106, 155.
Powell, Maj. J. W., 536, 537.
Q
Quappas, 106.
R
Ratio of human progress, 29.
Geometrical, 38.
Raw, Prof. Charles, 14, note.
Religious ideas, growth of, 5.
Religious rites, 81, 222, 289.
Faith and worship of American Indian tribes, 115.
Roman tribe, 314.
State, 319, 331.
Rome, founding of, 278, 309, 310, 312.
S
Sachem, 71.
Elective tenure of the office, 72.
Iroquois mode of electing and investing sachems, 141, 144.
Aztec sachems, 202.
Salish, Sahaptin, and Kootenay tribes, 177.
Savagery, its contributions to knowledge, 36.
Formative period of mankind, 41.
American aborigines commenced their career in America in savagery, 40.
Sawks and Foxes, 170.
Schoolcraft, Henry R., on the word “totem,” 165.
Scottish Clan, 357.
Semitic family, 39.
Senecas, gentes, 70.
Phratries, 90.
Medicine Lodges, 97.
Sequence of institutions connected with the family, 498.
Shawnees, 168.
Shoshones, 177.
Society, gentile and political. See “Government,” and “Political Society.”
South American Indian tribes, 182.
Subsistence, Arts of, 19.
Fish and game, 26.
Farinaceous food, 22, 26.
Meat and milk, 24.
Made unlimited by field agriculture, 26.
Syndyasmian family, 384, 453.
T
Taplin, Rev. George, 374.
Thlinkeets, gentes, 101, 176.
Phratries, 101.
Thums, or gentes of Magars of Nepaul, 362.
Totem. The symbol of a gens; thus, the figure of a wolf is the totem
of the wolf gens, 165.
Tribe, Indian. Definition of, 103.
Natural growth through segmentation, 104, 125.
Attributes of an American Indian tribe, 112, 116.
Athenian tribe, 241.
Roman tribe, 302, 311.
Turanian system of consanguinity and affinity, 435.
Its origin, 422, 445.
Remains of system in Grecian and Roman tribes, 482.
Tuscaroras, gentes, 70.
Phratries, 93.
Burial-place, 84.
Tylor, Mr. Edward B., 13, 14, 182.
On the clans of tribes in India, 364.
U
Upper Missouri tribes, 158.
V
Valley of Columbia, seed land of Ganowánian family, 109, and note.
Village Indians, 151, 178.
W
Wampum, belts of, their use, 139, 142.
War-chief, germ of the office of a chief executive Magistrate, King,
Emperor, and President, 129, 146.
Principal war-chiefs of Iroquois, 146.
Office elective, ib.
Of Aztecs, 207.
Office of Teuctli elective, 210.
Basileus of Grecian tribes, 246.
Probably elective, ib.
Rex of Roman tribes, 300.
Nominated by the Senate, and elected by the _Comitia Curiata_, ib.
Weaws, 107.
Winnebagoes, 157.
Wright, Rev. Ashur, 83, 455.
Wyandotes, 153.
Z
Zuñi Village Indians, 178.