The material culture and social institutions of the simpler peoples; an essay in correlation

THE

LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE

(University of London)

Series of Studies in Economics and Political Science.
Edited by the Hon. W. PEMBER REEVES, Ph.D., Director.

No. 3 of the Monographs on Sociology.
Edited by Professor L. IVHpBHOUSE and Professor E. A. WESTERMARCK

The Material Culture and Social Institutions
of the Simpler Peoples

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PAGE

Prefatory Note - v.

Introduction. The Problem - I

Chapter I. Stages of Economic Culture - 16

Appendix to Chapter I : Classified list of

peoples - - 30

Chapter II. Government and Justice - 46

Appendix A. - 83

Appendix B. - 85

Appendix C. - 120

Chapter III. The Family - 142

Appendix I. Tables - 176

Appendix II. Notes to Tables - - 216

Chapter IV. War and Social Structure - 228

Sec. I. War - 228

Sec. II. Ranks - - 233

Appendix - - 238
Sec. III. Cannibalism, Infanticide, and Human

~_ Sacrifice - - 240

Sec. IV. Property - 243

Appendix I. Tables - 255

Appendix II. Notes to Tables - 282

Bibliography - - 289

THE MATERIAL CULTURE AND SOCIAL IN-
STITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES:

AN ESSAY IN CORRELATION.

INTRODUCTION— THE PROBLEM.

THEORIES of social evolution are readily formed with the aid of
some preconceived ideas and a few judiciously selected corrobora-
tive facts. The_da£a_offored to the theorist by the voluminous
results of anthropological inquiry on the one hand, and by the
immense record of the history of civilisation on the other, are so
vast and so various that it must be an unskilled selector who is
unable, by giving- prominence to the instances which agree and
by ignoring those which conflict with his views, to make out a
plausible case in support of some general notion of human
progress. On the other hand, if theories are easily made, they
are also easily confuted by a less friendly use of the same data.
That same variety of which we speak is so great that there is hardly
any sociological generalisation which does not stumble upon some
awkward fact if one takes the trouble to find it. Anyone with a
sense for facts soon recognises that the course of social evolution
is not unitary but that different races and different communities of
the same race have, in fact, whether they started from the same
point or no, diverged early, rapidly, and in many different direc-
tions at onceT "Tf"' theorising is easy when facts are treatedj
arbitrarily, a theory which would really grow out of the facts
themselves and express their true significance presents the greatest
possible difficulties to the inquirer. The data themselves are vast
but chaotic, and at every point incomplete. They fall into two
main divisions. On the one hand, there is the historical record of
the civilisations ; upon the other there is the immense field of
contemporary anthropology. In both alike the data are equally
difficult to ascertain with precision, and when ascertained to reduce
to any intelligible order. In the history of civilisation we have full v
studies of many institutions, and we can learn something, not only
of what they were at any one moment, but of their development in
time, their genesis, their rise, their maturity, their decay. But even
here the information often breaks off short at the most interesting-
point. Beginnings are frequently matter of conjecture. The
nature of institutions, as they appear on paper, may be known to
us, while we are left to reconstruct their actual working from
casual examples, hints, and references that leave much to the

A 1

F THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

imagination. We find them decaying without intelligible cause,
and often enough we are faced with the fact that more thorough-
going inquiry has completely revolutionised our view of an
institution which had been taken as thoroughly explored and fully
interpreted by earlier schools of historians. So is it also with the
^anthropological record. Here indeed we have a handful of mono-
graphs made by trained and skilled observers in modern times,
which leave nothing to be desired excepting that the work had been
carried out three or four generations ago before contact with the
white man or with other more civilised races had begun to corrupt
Lthe purity of aboriginal institutions. Outside these monographs
we have a vast mass of travellers' reports, good, bad, and indifferent,
data which it is impossible to ignore and yet which can seldom be
taken at their face value. Moreover all anthropological data of
this kind, however simple the life of the people with which they
deal, are modern ; with the exception of the few available references
that we have to the peoples that surrounded the Greeks and
rRomans in Herodotus, Tacitus, and other writers of antiquity, the
great bulk of anthropological inquiry dates from the last three or
four centuries, and1 it is sometimes forgotten that the peoples of
whom thev treat must have lived as long, must in a sense have had
as extensive a tradition behind them, and to that extent are as far
removed from the true primitive as civilised man himself.

Therefore when we are inquiring into development and origins
we have to be careful how we take the findings of inquirers among
the people of our own day, however simple, as evidence of what
must have been in the beginnings of human kind. What ethno-
graphical research yields us is not a history but a number of
pictures of given peoples each taken as it were by an instantaneous
photograph at a given time. It is a piece of good fortune if in any
case we get successive pictures of the same people so full and true
that by comparing them we can arrive directly at the actual course
of the development of its institutions in a given period. Before the
period of civilised influence sets in we have at best only fragments
of such history, and in the main our data are descriptive rather than
historical. No comparison or classification of these data can tell
us offhand^ how institutions grew, any more than the classification
"of existing rocks tells the geologist how strata were formed. Yet
it is in the main from the actual composition and arrangement of
existing strata, assisted by what he knows of permanent physical
laws and of recorded or clearly proved physical changes, that the
geologist infers the history of the earth's crust, and it is on analo-
gous methods that any scientific theory of social evolution must
rely. c Such a theory must rest at the outset upon the discovery of
some order in the ethnological data/7 To this end two preliminary
steps seem to be necessary. The first consists in taking the main

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 3

institutions, customs, practices, and beliefs that constitute the
structure of social life at any given time, and distinguishing the
varieties of form which each institution actually presents in the
various peoples among whom we find it. Many institutions can
thus be treated from more than one point of view. Taking"
marriage, for example, we can obviously distinguish monogamy,
various forms of polygamy and of polyandry, intermixtures or
combinations of these forms, and, some may add, in addition to all
some form of group marriage. Again we can treat any -of these
forms of marriage from the point of view of its rigidity or other-
wise. We can inquire how far it is binding, distinguish cases in
which it is entered into or dissolved so easily and so entirely at the
will of either party that it is doubtful whether the term marriage
is strictly applicable ; and from this onwards we can trace every
sort of gradation in the rigidity of the institution up to indissoluble
monogamous marriage. Or again we can exhibit methods by
v which a partner is obtained, whether it be by free courtship, by
child-betrothal, by the exchange of women or of gifts, or by presents
to the parents or relations, by sheer purchase, by capture, and so
forth. And so carrying this method through the whole field of
inquiry relating to marriage, we can set up a system of forms all of
which shall be illustrated somewhere in the light of human society ;
and in general, we can so arrange them as to show transitions from!
any one form to another of such a kind that we can very easily)
conceive an institution beginning at one end and passing through
these transitional forms until it reaches the most extreme point in|
the opposite direction. What may be called a social morphology
of this kind, that is to say, the ascertaining and classification -of
the actual forms of any institution known to exist may be regarded
as the first step towards the introduction of order into the field of
comparative sociology.1 a

But beyond this lies a second and far more difficult step. We
have spoken of the form of an institution passing- by gradations
from one stagfe to another, very remote from it perhaps. It is one
thing to exhibit and even to illustrate possible gradations of such
a kind, and^another thing to show that actual institutions do pass
along such a scale of development. In some cases no doubt we
can historically trace a line of change, but it would be exceedingly
difficult to maintain that the line of change had always been the

i. The chief danger in forming any social classification is that of over-
rigidity in definition. Customs and institutions vary continuously, and
the lines of demarcation which any classification must draw are apt to be
artificial and unreal. Moreover what is on the surface the same institu-
tion may have a different content at different stages of social development.
A certain elasticity of interpretation must therefore be allowed in order to
adapt any scheme of classification to the facts without forming them into
unreal categories.

•* i-

4 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

same in fall} cases, and quite impossible, we think, at the present
stage of our knowledge to lay down that any given institution must
take its rise in one form and must pass through a series of graded
changes in a uniform direction. If indeed we could make any
assumption of this kind, the process of sociological inquiry would
(_ be enormously simplified. We should have as it were a scale of
development, the direction of which would be definitely known.
We should be able to assign to any form of institution credibly
reported in any given society, its particular place in that scale.
We should know that it had never been further on in the scale, nor
yet that it had reached its particular place by any roundabout road.
We should be able to infer that it had passed through the earlier
phases and no other, and we could in fact treat all differences to be
found in social institutions as due to a single comprehensive cause
—the difference in the rate of development. In point of fact inquiry

- lends no countenance to any such simplicity of view. A single
instance from the institution that has already been mentioned may
suffice to explain this point. We commonly think of strict mono-
gamy as the product of a high civilisation, though not necessarily
the highest civilisation, and it is true that we find polygamy
associated upon the whole with the lower civilisations and
with the peoples whom we do not regard as civilised at all.
But apart from the fact that, for fairly obvious reasons, the
majority of men in all races live with one wife at a time, we find
quite a number of instances in which a rigid monogamy is the

, established rule among some of quite the rudest races of mankind.
By whatever road the Veddas, or the Semang, or the Karok, or the
Dyaks have arrived at monogamy, we may be pretty sure that it
was by a road quite different from, that which established this
system in mediaeval Europe. Nor can we even infer from the fact
that nations of European culture agree with the Veddas, the
Semang, and the Karok, any far-reaching identity in ethical views
as to the relations of the sexes, or in fact in any other social and
moral customs or ideas which in many races stand closely asso-
ciated with the monogamic rule. We have to recognise from the
outset that two societies, as widely divergent as possible in almost
every respect, may exhibit close agreement on some one or more
points, and we have to learn accordingly that to infer from any
single institution a general state of development is to fly in the face
of the anthropological facts.

If then we cannot assume any single line of development, what
use are we to make of our morphology? Let us consider where
we stand. We suppose ourselves to have ascertained the forms
which any given institution assumes. We have now recognised
that in different societies an institution may arrive at the same form
by completely different paths, and that agreement in respect of any

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 5

one institution is no evidence for agreement in other respects. We
cannot lay down any absolute order of development, nor can we
maintain as a strict generalisation that any given form of any given
institution is to be found only in some determinate stage of the
development of society. Sociology in fact is not a science of rigid a
generalisations. Where rigid generalisation fails science resorts
^ to statistical methods, and the question arises whether this is
possible in sociology. On the practical difficulties of applying
statistics to the study of social institutions, we shall speak in the
next section. But if we suppose for a moment that these are not
insuperable, let us see what might be gained. We might begin7
with any two institutional forms, A and B and find on inquiry
that in 90 per cent, of the cases where we have A we also find B,
and that in 80 per cent, of the cases where we have B we also find
A. If that is so we can infer some connection, though probably
an indirect one, between A and B, and perhaps research may show
that the residual instances where we have B but not A are asso-
ciated with the presence or absence of a third institution C. This
would throw considerable light on the connection of these forms,
and by multiplying such conditions we might obtain considerable
insight into the inter-connexion of certain groups of institutions.^
This was in fact the method applied by Dr. Tylor to the study of
certain marriage customs some twenty years ago, and it is to be
regretted that little has been done in the interval to extend the
method to other problems.

What we propose to ask is whether it is possible to apply this1
line of inquiry to elucidating the changes of institution which
^accompany the growth of civilisation, the most important feature of
social evolution. The first difficulty that occurs here is the vague-j
ness as to the term civilisation, which, as generally used, implies
elements of material, religious, artistic, and intellectual culture. If
all these elements are insisted on and civilisations are judged in
accordance with the level attained, not in one respect but in all, we
shall of course find, if we find anything, that the most civilised race
is that which has developed furthest in all these directions. We
shall, in fact, achieve a purely identical proposition. The real ques-
N tion is how far these different developments imply one another. »
To attack this problem with any hope of a fruitful issue it is neces-J
sary to find somerone characteristic which would be generally re-
garded as essential to civilisation^ as possessing real significance
in the life of a people, and asc advancing in some determinate direc-
tion, which can be recognised and measured with some facility,
and of which tangible evidence can be obtained. It will then be
possible tox follow other lines of development and observe the cor-
relation of various forms of institution with 'successive stages in this
advance/ It may always be objected that we have not chosen the ,

6 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

most essential point as the basis of our inquiry, but of that the

results of the inquiry themselves will afford some test. At any

rrate, on these lines, if the work can<be carried through,cwe may

J expect to learn something of the correlation of different elements in

- social growth.

^"The development which seems best to serve this purpose is that
^.of material culture,' the control of man over nature as reflected in
the arts of life. It may be objected that this implies too
materialistic a view of human society, and is too superficial a
criterion of general progress. It may be replied to the latter point,
in the first place that we do not use it as a criterion of general pro-

Tgress, but propose to inquire how far progress or (if the word be
disliked) change in any definite direction is in fact associated with
advance in the control over the forces of nature. On the former
point it may be remarked that material culture is a fair index of
the general level of knowledge and, if we may use a more general
term, of mentality. The desire for comfort in his -material sur-
roundings is, with few exceptions, common to man. How much
energy he will put into the business of securing it, how much
organising capacity he can apply, what ideas, what knowledge,
and what imagination he can bring to bear on it, what fears or
scruples deter him from using all his available powers are ques-
tions which have different answers for different people, and on the
answer depends in general the level of his material culture. Hence
this culture does, roughly, though no more than roughly, reflect
rthe general level of intellectual attainment. Moreover, in this case
it is fairly easy to agree on the meaning of what in other instances
is a very disputable term — the meaning of progress. The control
of man over nature is a definite conception, and it is generally
easy to recognise any advance on this particular line, while it is
also the fact that it is on this particular line that the people that
we call civilised show the most palpable advance over those to
whom we deny the term. In the history of mankind as a whole
the advance in this direction, though neither universal nor con-
tinuous, is probably more widespread and more continuous than
in any other, and in modern civilisation it becomes more con-
tinuous and far more rapid. Finally the question whether there
is any correlation between advance on this line and any particular
movement on other sides of human life is perhaps the most im-
portant question for the general theory of social -evolution. Does
the advance of human knowledge which in relation to the under-
standing and control of natural forces seems unlimited, carry with
it any distinct movement in morals, law, religion, the general
organisation of society ? Does it make for progress in these direc-
tions, or the reverse, or is it indifferent to them ?

We do not here attempt to deal with these problems in general.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 7

To grapple with them at all would involvex to begin with, a de-
finition of progress which lies outside our immediate sphere. We
offer only a preliminary contribution. cWe do not, in fact, deal
with " civilised " peoples at all, but confine ourselves to the classi-
fication of those less fortunate races which range from the jpwest
known Naturmenschen to the confines of the historic civilisation.
We seek within these limits first to distinguish the advancing
grades of material culture, and, secondly — -without any systematic
inquiry as to what constitutes " progress " or the reverse— to
determine how far various forms of political and social institutions
can be correlated with each grade. ^

The Possibility of Sociological Correlation.

We have next to inquire how far it is actually possible to
establish any correlations between social and political institutions
on the one hand and stages of economic culture on the other, and to
what extent ordinary statistical methods can be made available to
forward this result. It must be replied at once that in view of the
peculiar nature of the subject, and in particular of the data on
which we have to rely, statistical methods can only be employed
with certain reserves. All results must be rough. All are open to
certain special causes of error, and any inference based on a com-
parison of numbers alone is dangerous. On the other hand,
numerical results in combination with close analysis of accompany-
ing conditions, are of high utility, both in checking generalisations
and in measuring the value of data. This will be better understood
if we study the actual difficulties which confront the inquirer who
endeavours to apply the test of numbers to sociological facts. *

(i) The Character of the Data.

If we^confined ourselves to monographs compiled by skilled
observers, there would be comparatively little difficulty with the
data themselves, but unfortunately, as already remarked, such
monographs are few and they would not in the aggregate prove
sufficient to warrant any statistical calculations. Moreover, so to
limit our vision would be to leave out of sight a vast amount of
material which contains valuable evidence, even if the ore is
sometimes difficult to sift from the dross. We are therefore forced
to take account of the ordinary materials of anthropology — reports
of travellers, missionaries, explorers, and casual observers, and it
need hardly be said that in all such reports the problem of inferring
from the statements of the observer the precise nature of the facts
which he means to report, is not one which admits of an easy and
straightforward solution. In particular when one endeavours to
classify forms of institutions under heads, which is the necessary
presupposition of any attempt at correlation, we must bear in mind

8 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

that no observer has the scheme of classification in his mind, and
there is considerable opportunity for error in reducing the contents
of his report to the heads of any classification, however wide we may
cast our net. Over and above these well-known difficulties in
anthropology, there are all the sources of error, obscurity and
confusion which arise from the intermixture of cultures, the rise or
decay of institutions under the influence of foreigners, and in
particular of the white immigrants themselves, to whom the reporter
may belong, and there is always the probability that the peoples
whom the reporter comes in contact with are precisely those
specimens of the tribe who lie nearest to the white man or to other
civilised people, and are most influenced thereby. All this,
however, is common matter to anthropologists and not much of it
presents any difficulty to our inquiry as compared with others.

(2) The Unit.

It is otherwise when we pass to the question of the unit which
we must take as the basis of our calculations. Every rigid statistical
inquiry supposes that the phenomena with which it deals can be
stated in terms of some unit which is constant throughout its field.
What is the unit social group ? Let us consider a people occupying
a certain area, the natives of Australia, let us say, or the Algonquin
v Indians. There are certain features common to the culture of these
peoples, but within them there are a great many tribes and even
groups of tribes. Not all that is true of one tribe will be true of
others even within the same group, and certainly not all things true
of a group would be true of all the Algonquins or all the Australians.
And lastly, within what is called the tribe itself, there are often clans,
local groups, and even sub-tribes, and even these are not always
alike in all their institutions.

Now the reports of ethnographers sometimes deal with tribes,
sometimes with divisions or branches of a tribe, and sometimes with
groups of two or three, a dozen, or even a score of tribes taken
together. We might be inclined to take the tribe as the unit. But
the term tribe is used with the utmost variety of meaning by our
reporters. Some apply the name to the smallest group of people
living together, others to the loose unity which extends over a
great area and covers all groups using a common dialect and
recognising a certain affinity which distinguishes them from the rest
of the world. In this wider sense tribes differ greatly in extent —
one may contain a dozen or a score of subordinate groups ; another
may contain one or two only. And moreover, the limitations of the
tribe sometimes seem to be assigned rather by the purview of the
traveller or by the chance extent to which a dialect has spread than
by clearly marked divisions separating it off socially or politically
from its neighbours. Indeed a population which is treated as a

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 9

" tribe " by one writer might be regarded as a collection of many
• tribes by another. Thus the statements which form our data refer
to populations of different magnitude, and there is no discoverable
means of reducing these to units of equal magnitude. But in fact
no such reduction is necessary for our purpose. What we are
examining is the correlation of social institutions with grades of
economic culture. For this purpose we wish to know the number
of separate social groups at any given grade possessing a given
institution, and for this purpose the population or the number of
subordinate bodies contained by any given social group is of
secondary importance. The real question is, what constitutes a
separate social group ? In the higher grades of social development
political independence supplies a fairly definite criterion. Yet even
here it must be remembered that independence may be partial, as
well as absolute, and that it might be legitimate and even necessary
to count a population as forming one society for certain purposes
and two or more for certain other purposes. Be this as it may, on
the lower levels political unity is a much vaguer conception, and
when the observer finds fundamental similarity of type and custom,
uninterrupted intercourse and, in particular, free intermarriage
extending over a certain area he will generally treat that area as one,
whether the population corresponds to what he calls one tribe or
not. In this he will not be far wrong, for the customs and institu-
tions of such a collection of people in all probability have a common
origin. They arise and flourish and decay in the main from the
same causes and in close interconnection. In general we have no
alternative but to follow the reporter, and take each institution that
he reports as one case of the existence of that institution. Of
course in so doing we are trusting to the judgment ot our witness.
It may be that he ought to have drawn distinctions and demarca-
tions, and these may in fact appear when we compare his account
with that of another observer, while sometimes it becomes apparent
through internal evidence. In such a case we should in fact divide
the group in our tables and count each of its parts as one. But in
so far as groupings and divisions have been made by original
observers with judgment and knowledge, it is reasonable to treat as
a single instance a homogeneous population living in a continuous
area enjoying regular interqourse throughout and not divided by
clear lines of racial, social, or political difference.1 The mere
difference in size of these units need not greatly disturb our
calculations.

On the other hand, we must recognise that the judgment of
observers is not equally to be depended on in all cases, and that

i. In a few cases our units are in strictness too large for this definition
Our reasons for attempting to divide them are indicated below.

io INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

sometimes mere chance or the bare impossibility of obtaining de-
tailed information as to separate communities has led our reporters
to treat as one peoples who might very possibly be distributed into
many distinct sections as the result of further enquiry. We note in
their place certain possibilities of error in calculation that arise from
this source, and throughout, as will be explained presently, we so
limit our inferences as to guard against this danger in cases where
its presence may have passed unnoticed.

At the same time it may be pointed out that on this side the
very defects in our reports tend to cancel one another. Close
inspection shows that statements made about a group of tribes are
in reality based often enough on the one or two members of the
group with whom the reporter has had close personal contact.
Hence different reports about the same group often prove to be
inconsistent and the explanation of the inconsistency not infre-
quently is that both are true, one of some members of the group
and the other of others. Sometimes we are able to fix the
exceptions, sometimes we can only table the statements as true,
one of "some " members of the group and the other of "some
other " members. But the repeated experience of discrepancies of
this kind reduces the value of large generalisations and tends to
equate the statistical value of the units with regard to which we may
i conceive ourselves to possess trustworthy information.

Further, it must be remembered that when we are comparing
peoples at much the same level of general culture, whatever irregu-
larity there is in our units will be pretty evenly distributed.
Suppose we are dealing with two opposite customs, both found
pretty frequently among hunting tribes. Let us say that we have
100 cases of the one and 50 of the other. The 100 will no doubt
contain large groups and small, but so also will the 50. If we
know of on*1 group of special magnitude and importance, we note
the fact and give it due weight in our summing up. But in general
there is no reason to think that there will be any aggregation of
the larger instances on one side rather than on the other. There is
nothing to weight the scale, and if our numbers were sufficiently
great, we might find in this consideration alone a solution of the
problem so far as it depends on the inadequacy of our reports.

But in many cases our numbers are not great enough to justify
us in trusting to the impartiality of chance. The probable error
would be high, and we should often be unable to draw any inference
at all. We therefore base no inference on small differences. The
fact that a given custom is to be found, say in 55 per cent, of the
instances obtained at a given level of culture, and an opposite
custom in 45 per cent, must be taken as in itself insignificant. It
can only mean that, roughly, there is no clear tendency to the
one or the other at that stage. Such a proportion as that of 55 : 45

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES n

can be of value only if it is a link in a chain, e.g., if, at a lower
level the figures were 70 : 30, and at a higher one 30 : 70. It is
otherwise when we have a 2 : i preponderance. This is not likely to
be a mere chance. But even here it is well not to be content with the
gross numerical result, but also to examine the constitution of our
majority and minority. Such a check is desirable, not only in
view of doubts as to the equal value of our units, but to obviate
a second difficulty, which has now to be examined.

This difficulty is in a manner the exact converse of the last.
It may be asked whether in any cultural area — in any territory,
that is, where the conditions of life are very similar, and where,
though it is too large for direct intercourse between its parts, there
is opportunity for institutions to propagate themselves in the course
of generations by social contact — we ought to reckon distinct cases
at all. Institutions and customs tend to propagate themselves in-
definitely, and if we find, say, a certain form of marriage all over
a sub-continent, it may be that it has had a single origin, and
ought on our principles to be accounted one case rather than many.
Thus we find a certain amount of polygamy — very variable it is
true — common apparently, with one doubtful exception, to all
Australian tribes. Shall we count this as upwards of thirty in-
stances, or is it in reality only one instance ? The reply is that
whatever the degree of cultural unity among the Australian
aborigines, it did not prevent their marriage customs from differ-
ing in many essential respects from one another. If that is so it
seems fair to take as a unit each area which observers have, in
fact, recognised as homogeneous and interconnected, and if in the
matter of descent, or of capture, we get a great variation of custom
as between one area and another, while in regard to the permission
of polygam} we get uniformity, to let this result have its due
weight by entering each instance of polygamy separately in our
tables. The result at least shows that a certain degree of polygamy
is suited to the conditions of Australian culture generally, while
other incidents of marriage vary greatly within the limits of their
culture. If an institution has, in fact, propagated and maintained
itself over a great area, even though its origin be in some unitary
cause, we cannot regard its extensive prevalence as unimportant or
insignificant. The fact that it prevails so widely is evidence of its
suitability to the conditions of life among the peoples in question,
and this correlation is as suitably expressed as any other in the
number of separate instances which will be counted.

If such an institution is found in all or most of the various
regions of the world occupied by people of a certain industrial
grade, we may fairly sum up the instances and treat the result
as a measure of the correlation between that institution and the
level of economic culture in question. But if all, or the great

12 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

majority of instances in which it appears, are drawn from one
region, it is different. To show how dangerous a simple enumera-
tion might be in such a case we may pursue this particular instance
taken a little further. When we compare the Australians with
others of the same economic grade we find, for example, that the
Wild Semang are monogamous. Now the Wild Semang are only
entered in our table as one group. But they are very numerous
and scattered, and they count as one only, because they are not
sufficiently known for any one to make divisions among them.
In order to compare the prevalence of monogamy and polygamy
among the Lower Hunters, we cannot crudely set down the Aus-
tralians as thirty cases on the one side and the Semang as one
on the other. In such a case we must consider our figures from
more than one point of view. We must cross-classify, and group
them not only by the economic but by the geographical order. If
all, or the majority of cases of any given institution come from one
part of the world, we must note this fact and take it into account
before drawing any inferences as to the correlation of that institu-
tion with any particular grade of culture as such. This necessity
has been kept in mind, and while our geographical grouping has
necessarily been rough in this experimental inquiry, we have
throughout kept the different continents separate in our tables,
and within these certain regions of culture contact are sufficiently
apparent. Racial unity is a more problematical matter, which no
doubt would explain many identities and differences if we could
know all the facts, but to rely on this explanation would constantly
have taken us into controversial questions, and we have been com-
pelled for the time being to leave it aside. Meanwhile our plan is,
whenever we find an accumulation of instances in a particular
area to note the fact as a deduction from any generalisation that
might be founded on those instances, and, if necessary, to seek
some alternative method of presenting the results. For example,
in the particular case referred to above, we present the totals as to
polygamy and monogamy arrived at, first by taking the Austra-
lians as so many separate instances, and then by treating them
as a single cultural group equated with a corresponding cultural
type in Asia and Africa. This method — the details of which must
vary in accordance with the nature of the concrete case — yields
upper and lower limits of error, which often express the nearest
approximation that we can make to the truth.

We have then two difficulties to keep in mind. The first is the
imperfect precision of our units; the second is the deduction from
the value of separate units to be made on account of the influence
of culture contacts. Fortunately these two difficulties tend to cancel
L one another, for the influence of culture-contact diminishes the
value of the large area relatively to the smaller. But we cannot

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 13

disregard them, and to guard against them we must refrain from
basing any inference on small preponderances, while if we have
large differences, we must first examine the constitution of our
majority and minority. When these in combination have been
observed we shall in fact find that various positive results emerge.

Our general method then will be as follows. We take as a unit
each group which we find so treated in our authorities. Where
the treatment is not clear or where different authorities dealing with
the same area make different divisions, we are forced to deal with
each case on its merits, deciding by the concrete evidence whether
to enter one instance or more in our tables. What is " one in^
stance " for one purpose is, of course, one instance for all,1 and
minor variations are met by the entry of " some " or " occasional "
if one particular point is true only of certain members of a group.2
But we do not break up a group which our authority reckons as
one unless his own evidence compels us to do so by showing that
it presents clear variations of type in the relation in which it is
being examined.

There remains a technical difficulty which is much greater than
would be supposed by anyone who has not actually tried to grapple
with it — that of identifying and defining the reference of a re-
porter's statement. There is first the difficulty of knowing whether
a statement is general or particular. When a writer tells us some-
thing of " the Australian native," are we to attach any importance
to it, and if so, how are we to table the result ? In this particular
case the importance is probably very small. The writer most
likely knows one or perhaps two tribes fairly well, and he
generalises from them. If we can identify his tribes, we refer his
statement to them and neglect the generalisation. When we have

1. In a very few instances difficulties in identifying the references
of different authorities have led us to enter different group names in
different tables.

2. In comparison such instances are reckoned as J. The same value
is given to cases which are entered with a query as probable though not
quite certain. It might seem safer to omit such instances altogether, but
it must be remembered that in our investigation we are generally com-
paring this frequency of institution A with that of institution B. If we
were considering A alone we might well confine ourselves to the certain
cases, but when we are comparing it with B to ignore several probable
instances of A may be to exaggerate the preponderance of B. The least
error therefore is to reckon the probable case on a reduced value. This has
the further justification that the incomplete or imperfect statement will
very often reflect a partial development or a decadent condition of the insti-
tution, so that the half value may be claimed as nearest to an accurate
representation of the facts. It must be borne in mind throughout that
a ? in these tables^ does not mean uncertainty, but either probable evidence
for the existence of the institution or positive evidence of its partial
existence.

14 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

an observer like Grey, who travelled in South, West and North-
west Australia, and makes all his statements in general terms, but
seems to know quite clearly what he is talking about, we cannot
ignore his statement, nor can we pin it down to a single tribe.
In this case we have compared several authorities, and we formed
for ourselves rough groups of West Australians, those about Perth,
those inland on the Swan River, and those of King George's
Sound, for each of which we have independent testimony. When
we have an account which seems sound but lacking in definiteness
of reference, we adopt the device of tabling as true of " some
Victorian tribes," "some New South Wales tribes," etc. Some-
times we have general statements about a group which seem worthy
of record, but are not borne out by individual cases within the
group for which we have independent information. At first sight
this may seem simply to discredit the more general statement, but
it is also possible, and in some instances it appears to be the fact,
that the detailed description lays stress on the exceptions to a
rule, and if it is so, the existence of the rule ought not to escape
recognition. In such instances we have preserved the general
statement again by attributing it to " some " of the group in
question.

One of the most serious difficulties in this connection arises
from the want of fixity in nomenclature. Some writers refer to
savage peoples geographically, others by a name given them by
the whites, others by their own name for themselves. A single
tribe may figure under half a dozen names which we identify with
some difficulty, and sometimes after identifying them discover that
there is a local difference. Thus while some writers seem to treat
the Loucheux and the Kutchin as the same people under two
names, we find a couple of articles in a single report which deal
with them separately, and conclude that the Loucheux are a branch
of the Kutchin, whose precise limits in the end we have not satis-
factorily made out. In Australia the Narrinyeri spread from the
mouth of the Murray over Encounter Bay. Yet in the same
volume we have two writers treating of the Narrinyeri and of the
Encounter Bay tribes as though they were distinct.1 A margin of
error in our identifications undoubtedly remains, and we should
welcome detailed corrections on such points.

There must also be some overlapping. For example, the
Kamilaroi occur in a group of New South Wales tribes which we
enter. But they also occur independently because we have some
information about them which does not wholly consort with the

i. In this case detailed comparison shows that the " Encounter Bay "
tribes of the one writer correspond to four local groups of the other writer's
" Narrinyeri."

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 15

statement which we have as to the group. This fact, however,
does not prove that the latter statements are untrue. They pro-
bably hold of some members of the group, and therefore are
correctly recorded of " some " New South Wales tribes. In
general the critic must bear in mind that it is more important for
our purpose to note that some tribe of a given culture possesses
a certain custom than to determine whether it is the Kamilaroi or
another, and the statements when put together may give an
approximately accurate account of a level of culture as a whole,
although wrong in some of the details of reference. The greatest
care has been taken under that head, but only criticism and revision
can carry the matter further.

Such being our data our method of treatment must be such as
to allow for the elements of uncertainty and irregularity which they
present. As already mentioned we shall, to begin with, draw no_
inference from small variations. Buf if as we ascend the economic
scale we find a continuous and marked increase in the numerical
preponderance of a certain institution, if, for example, we find such
an institution only in one case out of four at the lowest levels and
in four cases out of five at the highest, we shall infer a true correla-
tion between it and the level of economic culture. ' We should still
bear in mind the constituent elements of which our groups are
composed, and if all or the great majority of the cases on one
side should be drawn from a single group, we should call atten-
tion to the fact and discount the result accordingly. In several
cases we shall in fact see that when due weight has been given to
all grounds of doubt, the broad fact of correlation may be fairly
taken as established. On the other hand, there are cases in which
the proportions remain remarkably constant at all grades, and we
may as fairly maintain that the frequency of a given institution is
constant at all levels of industrial culture within our limits. Lastly,
there are cases in which the variations are irregular, and no in-
ference can be drawn.

CHAPTER I.
STAGES OF ECONOMIC CULTURE.

We pass now to the classification of peoples by their economic
or industrial culture upon which the rest of our enquiry is founded.
Our starting-point here is the work of Dr. Nieboer, to whom we
must express our acknowledgments. But our object differs from his
in that we are seeking to distinguish grades in economic culture,
and for that reason we have had to depart in some essentials from
his method.

Dr. Nieboer founds his classification primarily on the method of
obtaining food, and in this we follow hirn for. three reasons :

For peoples of simple culture the method of obtaining food is
closely correlated with the whole method of life. For example,
hunting and pastoral peoples seldom have fixed dwellings for any
length of time, whereas if agriculture has reached a hfgh develop-
ment, nomadic habits must be restricted and finally abandoned.
\^A.2) Between the man who trusts to the gifts of nature, and the man
who sets nature to work for him to supply his food, there is a far-
reaching change in point of that which interests us most, the degree
of intellectual advance and the consequent extent of control over
natural forces. "-(3) Practically the method of obtaining food is
capable of easy observation and is generally reported with fair
definiteness by travellers, though some of the finer gradations are,
as we shall see, less easy to distinguish.

As we advance along the economic scale the methods of
obtaining food become less useful as a differentiating mark in
proportion as other industries grow in importance. We carry our
classification to the point at which men obtain food by a combina-
tion of the pastoral and agricultural arts, keeping cattle, ploughing
the land, using irrigation, and practising a rude rotation of crops.
Now all people, even the most civilised, gain their food ultimately
by these means, and further differentiation along these lines would
consist only in the development of more scientific breeding and
more intensive agriculture, and so it must be, at any rate until
synthetic chemistry makes some very new departure. We do not
therefore suggest that the food supply could be fruitfully used for
purposes of differentiation beyond the level to which we have
carried it, the threshold of what is ordinarily called civilisation.

But even on the lower levels, though the food supply is our

16

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 17

starting-point, it is not the sole basis of our classification. The
implements used in obtaining food, whether in hunting, fishing, or
farming, may also be brought into the account. The nature of
dwellings, the presence of other arts — sewing, plaiting, spinning,
weaving, and pottery — the use of metal, the employment of canoes,
boats, or ships, must also be considered if we are to estimate the
position of a people in regard to its general powers of dealing with
nature. The question then arises what relative weight we are to
attach to each of these considerations. The method which we have •
followed is to take the food supply first and to grade peoples
within the great classes so formed in accordance with their
proficiency in other respects, setting down certain characteristics as
the mark of a class and assigning to that class any individual which
appeared to possess more than half of these characteristics.

That being understood, we take the people who live by gathering
wild fruits and roots and hunting wild animals (including reptiles
and vermin) as our lowest class. To this it may be objected that
some of them, particularly those who are rather fishers than hunters,
live upon the whole upon a higher level than many of the lower
agriculturists. This is perfectly true, and it would be desirable to
form a higher section of fishers and hunters who should be treated
by themselves. This division, however, we have failed for lack of
sufficiently comprehensive information to carry out completely, and
the division which we have actually made within the class rests on
different lines, as will presently be explained. But we must first
remark that though it will be true that some hunting peoples are
more advanced than some agriculturists, it is safe to deny this of
hunting peoples generally. As a whole they are at a lower stage,
and propositions true of them generally may be safely affirmed as
holding of peoples at the lowest stage of culture.

We have, however, drawn two distinctions among them. In the
first place, we class as Lower Hunters peoples who (i) live very
largely by gathering fruits and nuts, digging roots, collecting
shellfish, and devouring reptiles, insects and vermin ; (2) have no
permanent dwelling, but erect windbreaks, live in caves, or put up
very slight and temporary huts of boughs or palm leaves; (3) have
no spinning and weaving except in the form of plaiting, no pottery,
no metal, and very poor canoes ; (4) no domestic animals except the
dog and possibly a few pets. People who have a good half of these
characteristics are entered in this class, which includes, in Asia, some
of the Malayan jungle tribes such as the wild Kubu ; Semang and
Sakai, the Veddas x and the Andamanese ; in Africa, the Bushmen,
Akka, Batua and other forest peoples ; in South America, the

i. Most of the Veddas now known however practise a rude agriculture
and are classed accordingly.

i8 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Botocudos and Fuegians ; and in North America the aborigines of
Lower California. With some hesitation we have included the
whole of the Australians in this class, and have added three Central
Californian tribes1 and the Shoshones, though some of the latter
were undoubtedly above it. The border line here is very difficult to
draw, as there are, for example, other North American tribes such
as the Tskekehne, who might well be candidates for the place,
and we must not emphasise any results dependent on the distinction
between these and the Higher Hunters without applying our cross
classification and looking at the details. The chief value of the
distinction is to enable us to see whether an institution attributed to
the Hunters generally is pretty fairly distributed over its different
grades or otherwise. In one or two instances we shall in fact find
that a custom which is overwhelmingly preponderant among
hunters taken as a whole is less so among the lower than the higher,
and that caution and discussion are therefore necessary before we
can say whether this custom is to be regarded as fairly characteristic
of the lowest economic culture of mankind.

The Higher Hunters are formed by the possession of those arts
in which the Lower fail. They live more by the chase than by the
collection of food, have houses of a substantial character, or well
built even if temporary tents of hide and skin. , In some instances
they spin, weave, and make pottery, are good canoe builders, and
have the horse or other domestic animals. The highest branch of
them, such as the inhabitants of British Columbia, were fishers,
built large timber houses to accommodate joint families, with
curiously carved posts, and had considerable wealth in blankets and
in horses. These should, as we have said, form a class apart, but
though we could find a number of individuals who would un-
doubtedly be referable to this class, we could not satisfy ourselves
upon a general basis of demarcation, and have for the present made
no division. We shall, however, point out cases in which the
appearance of a custom among hunting peoples is mainly referable
to individuals standing at this level. This, for example, is the case
with slavery, which, as Dr. Nieboer has already shown, scarcely
exists among hunting peoples outside those inhabitants of the

i. The Central Californians seem to us to have been on the border
line of the lowest culture. Their arts were unusually primitive (Kroeber)
and they were omnivorous, living mainly on acorns, roots and seeds.
(Bancroft, p. 373.) On the other hand, they had more or less permanent
winter dwellings, partly dug out in the ground, and built up with poles
and branches covered with earth. Powers distinguishes 4 tribes as lower
than the others. One of these— the Nishinan— he so stigmatises on account
of their social institutions. These we leave with the rest of the number
among the main mass of " hunters," but the other three we have taken
as falling below the line.

:

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 19

Pacific Coast of North America, who would all be referable to the
higher class if it had been formed. For the present we content
ourselves with the distinction between Lower and Higher Hunters,
though aware that the latter should be broken up into Higher and
Intermediate.

The majority of the peoples whom we have classed as Higher
Hunters are found in North America. Many of them are exceed-
ingly primitive, and we have doubted whether they should not
rather be ranked among the lower. Thus the Tskekehne lived in
huts made of branches constructed and abandoned at a moment's
notice. Both they and the Nahane knew the horse only by name.
They had no pottery or spinning, but they had learnt, probably from
the coast tribes, a rude form of weaving, and they seem, like others
of the Western Dene, to have had canoes and sledges.1 The
Eskimo we keep on the higher level on account of their good J
dwellings and canoes. The Kutchin had movable skin dwellings,
knew no pottery, but had the bow and arrow, and used the sledge
and snow shoes (Smithsonian Report for 1866, p. 351). These and
many other North American tribes are on the border line, and this
fact must in a measure discount some of the differences which we
shall find between Lower and Higher Hunters. In South America
we have only reckoned the Botocudos and the Fuegians on the
lowest level, and we have several Higher Hunters. But as to
some of them our information is scanty and we have put them
among the Higher only because we mean by this the normal
hunting type and do not rank any people among the Lower without
specific ground. Even so, the Zaparos at least must be regarded as
a borderline case. They are quite nomadic, have dwellings open
on all sides and apparently no furniture but a hammock (Simson,
J.A.I., vii, p. 507). Some of the South American hunters have the
horse, as the Tehuelches and the Puelches, and in some cases, as
noted below, we have difficulty in marking them out from pastoral
peoples as they have acquired cattle from the whites. We have a
few Higher Hunters in Asia, and one, the Kauralaig of the Western
Torres Straits, who live largely by fishing, in Oceania. The
African hunting tribes which we have distinguished are all of the
lower type, with the exception of the Wagenia, a fishing people.

There is, however, another group of Hunters and Gatherers
which we have distinguished, not as standing higher 'than others,
but as occupying a peculiar position. These are the hill and jungle
tribes, principally in India and the Malay region, who do not •
practise any agriculture, and cannot be called pastoral, though in
many cases they may keep a cow or a few goats or pigs. But they

i. Morice. Proceedings of the Canadian Institute, 1889, esp. pp. H7»
135. cf. the same author in Transactions of the Can. Institute, 1893.

20 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

live on the outskirts of villages, come into the markets, sell jungle
products, possibly serve the villagers in various ways, and some-
times are hunters rather in the sense in which thieves, gypsies and
brigands * may be so called than in any other. The culture of these
peoples is strongly marked by the influence of their surroundings,
and indeed in many cases it is difficult to make out how far they can
fairly be regarded as independent tribes, and how far they are
classes, trades, castes, within a larger people. Thus the Niadis
protect crops and rouse game for hunters (Rowney, p. 114). The
Bhuiyars' usual work is that of cutting wood and collecting silk
cocoons, lac, dyes, and other jungle produce (W. Crooke, ii, p. 97)
which presumably they bring into the market. The Beriyas are
quasi-gypsies who, besides hunting on their own account, are
mountebanks, conjurers, snake charmers and thieves, and it is
difficult to say whether they should be described as a caste or a
tribe (see Crooke, Vol. i, p. 242-3, and Risley, Vol. i, p. 83). The
Kardars are employed by Government and by timber merchants
and on shooting expeditions. They are also highway robbers
(Fryer, J. R. A. S., 1868, p. 479). The Kurumbas collect jungle
produce and work in the fields (Buchanan ; Thurston, iv, p. 163)
Some of the Irulas work for other people — others collect and barter
jungle products (Thurston, Vol. ii, p. 376-8). In many instances
they are at least nominally subject to British rule or to the autocracy
of a Hindoo rajah or Malay sultan, and they have been for many
centuries in contact with a higher civilisation than their own.
Probably, as far as Government and law are concerned, little weight
should be attached to their customs as evidence for the condition of
men at the lowest level of culture. Yet they often have a measure of
self-government, and the manner of their internal administration
has its distinctive characteristics. We group these people together2
as Dependent Hunters, the name importing not so much that they
are nominally or really subject to some civilised government as
that their mode of life is intermixed with and partly dependent on
that of higher peoples. This group then does not represent a
distinct cultural level, but is, so to say, a by-path in the line of
advance.

From the hunting peoples we proceed to the first stage of
Agriculture. Here to begin with, we must apply the maxim de
minimis. Some Australians had found out that if they put the
heads of the yams which they collected back into the earth they
would grow again. This is technically a beginning of agriculture,

1. Peoples described merely as brigands have been omitted from our
tables.

2. We have enumerated about a dozen and might have extended the
list, but considered that their cultural position was too ambiguous to be
of any real service from our point of view.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 21

but it would seem absurd to class these people as anything but
hunters and collectors.1 We must have evidence that some sort^f
clearing, digging and planting is the regular practice of some
portion of the people for a part of the year before we class the tribe
as agricultural. That being understood we constitute our first
agricultural group, which we call that of incipient agriculture, or,
after Nieboer, A1, of those peoples " with whom agriculture holds a
subordinate place, most of the subsistence being derived from other
sources," and, following him, we contrast them with the second
stage which we call agriculture without an epithet, or, to place it
among the rest, A2, in which the products of the soil are a main I
source of subsistence, though not of course to the exclusion of
hunting and fishing. But beyond this, we depart in some degree_A
from his method. To begin with he takes as two marks of the
first stage the employment of women only in agriculture and
the absence of fixed habitations. Both of them must be used with
care. When we are told that both men and women work in the
fields it is pretty strong evidence that agriculture is the main source
of subsistence, for there is nobody regularly concerned with any
other. But the converse does not always hold. Though women
may do all the field work, we may be explicitly informed that the
men are idle or that they do nothing but fight, or, finally, that they
hunt for sport rather than for necessity. So again, when habita-
tions are not fixed, it is pretty strong evidence that agriculture is
rudimentary and that the people are following their main source
of subsistence from place to place. Where they are fixed, as
Nieboer himself remarks, it may be due to natural abundance in
some spot rather than to continuity of cultivation. It must be
added that there is an intermediate case in which a clearing is tilled
for one year or possibly two or three and the camp moves on when
the first fertility is exhausted. In some at least of these cases,
though the cultivation/ is purely "extensive," it seems clear that
it is the principal spurce of subsistence, and though the tribe is
semi-nomadic it must be put above the level of incipient agriculture.
But we have also departed from our model in another way. An
agricultural tribe may also derive part of its subsistence from trade,
and it may be more or less advanced in other arts of life than those
concerned with food. Dr. Nieboer duly notes this point, but deals

i. Similarly of the Goyanaz ,Martius (p. 299) says that their agriculture
is " aiisserst gering " while Eschwege (Brasilien, vol. i, p. 223) states that
they live on wild fruits, hunting and fishing. The Goyatacaz, says
Martius, p. 303, either have no agriculture or at most the cultivation of
some roots, and Eschwege (Brasilien, vol. i, p. 220) says " nur wenige
Friichte pflanzen sie, iibrigens erhalten sie sich von der Jagd." We have
classed these together with the Topanaz, whose bionomics are identified
with those of the Goyatacaz, as higher hunters.

22 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

with it by distinguishing a people as a + c, i.e. agricultural and
cattle-keepers, or a + t, i.e. agricultural and traders. We have sought
to bring these points together in order to establish our successive
stages in cultural advance and we have accordingly considered,
besides the methods employed in agriculture itself and the degree
of its importance in the life of the people, the extent of their advance
in the other arts. Thus we inquire whether spinning and weaving
are developed, whether substantial houses are erected, whether
sheep, cattle or other domestic animals are kept, whether trade with
other peoples is developed, and so forth. Taking these into
account we have to make a third stage in which the people have
developed trades and industries, including perhaps advanced
methods of farming itself, which seem to raise them clearly above
the level described simply as that of agriculture. Dr. Nieboer has
such a class which he calls A3, his A2 corresponding to our
agriculture pure, and his A1 with our agriculture incipient. But
his A3 is formed simply by proficiency in agriculture itself, viz.,
by (i) manuring; (2) the rotation of crops; (3) the use of domestic
animals in agriculture ; (4) the export of agricultural produce. We
should put in our third class, A3, people who show any marked
advance in industry or commerce, even though their agriculture
itself remained at a lower level. And on the same principle we should
regard such an advance as a reason for raising a people from A1 to
A2, although their actual tillage might be very rudimentary. The
arts that we use are those already mentioned, and the general
description of our three classes runs as follows : —

(1) Incipient Agriculture or A1. Subsistence still depends
largely on hunting or gathering. Women do the field work. The
digging stick is the chief implement used. Culture is nomadic. No
animals except poultry, and perhaps a few pigs. No metal. Textile
industries and pottery rudimentary, and houses very variable. No
specialised trade, but some barter of natural products.

(2) Agriculture-pure or A2. Main subsistence agriculture.
Pottery, spinning and weaving but not as specialised industries.
Substantial houses of timber. No large cattle or flocks, but pigs
and small animals. Animals not used in agriculture. No trade
except as above.

(3) Highest Agriculture or A3. Flocks and herds and draught
cattle. The plough. Irrigation, manuring and some rotation of
crops. Specialised industries. M^gd; woodwork ; textile. Regu-
lar trade.

As before, the possejajjl^'of a good half of these qualifica-
tions will fix the class. ^IjBus a people may practise a meagre
agriculture, living largely on fish or game, but the fish perhaps
they export in return for corn, and they have good pottery,
spinning and weaving. We should place them in our second

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 23

class. If, on the other hand, they had only one or two of these
arts and little trade except in the barter, say, of some dye or some
stone peculiar to their district, we should leave them in the lowest
stage. As a rule we have not degraded any people living entirely
by agriculture for lack of other arts, though perhaps on very close
investigation such a step might be warranted. On the other hand,
we have generally placed a tribe in the higher class where cattle
are kept, in addition to substantial agriculture, and especially
where the plough is used. The use of metal would also certainly
justify inclusion in the highest class if it were independently
developed. But here we touch on the whole question of the weight
to be given to imported culture. Iron is used in almost every
cultural division of Africa, but there are a good many tribes which
we should class only as A2. In these we have found no evidence
that iron is smelted, or that any technical proficiency is shown in
its use. And in the absence of any other development of industry
we cannot regard the importation of this particular handicraft from
other people as a mark of specific value. In instances like this
we require at least two marks of the higher stage to justify
promotion.

Naturally, in applying these considerations we come upon a
large number of doubtful cases, and it must be admitted that the
distinction between the first and second stages of agriculture on
the one side, and the second and third stages on the other, is by
no means so sharp as that between hunting and agriculture as
such. A few illustrations will serve to show the general principles
which have guided our classification in doubtful instances.

We will begin with some people of whose inclusion among
agriculturists there may be some doubt. The Sioux and Dakota
peoples are in the main gatherers of wild rice. We do not reckon
this an agricultural employment, although there is undoubtedly
some watching and tendance of the wild rice fields. On this
ground the Assiniboins, who have no further agriculture, are
classed among hunters. On the other hand, the Dakotas, who are
said by Schoolcraft to cultivate from one-quarter up to two acres
per family, are placed in agriculture,1 while the Winnebagos, who
are said by the same authority to live largely by agriculture and
to have made considerable advances in civilisation, might be
brought up to agriculture.2 It is probable, however, that these
advances are modern. In the seventeenth century the Jesuit
relations deny agriculture to the Dakotas, and we may supppse
the advances of the Winnebagos are recent.1 They are therefore
left in the tables at A1.

i. Similarly the Omaha sub group are tabled as hunters, as we gather
from a reference in Hodge's Handbook that their adoption of agriculture is
subsequent to 1865.

24 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Among the Algonquins, the Ojibways form a doubtful case.
Sometimes their cultivation is spoken of as exceptional and slight.
(Warren, p. 40.) Others deny them agriculture to any extent in
the time before the missionaries. But in Hodge's handbook we
find that some of them, at any rate, are mentioned as cultivating
maize as early as the seventeenth century; and on the balance
they come into our lowest agricultural group.

In South America a difficult case is that of the Guaycuru, who
are pure hunters themselves, but hold the Guanas as tributaries
and tillers of the soil. If the Guanas formed a definite servile
caste, we should certainly have to regard the two peoples together
as a single agricultural nation ; but that does not seem to be the
case. We gather that the regular employment of the Guaycuru is
hunting, and they take certain agricultural tribute, of no very great
importance from a less warlike people.1

Of the Paravilhana, whose institutions are interesting, we have
unfortunately very vague information as to their bionomics, but
we have placed them in the lowest agricultural class because they
figure in the list given by Martius of peoples who all, he says,
practise some kind of agriculture, while, from his special account
of them, they appear to be nomadic (p. 630), and therefore stand pre-
sumably on a low level.

The Coropos, whose only agriculture consists in potato-planting,
might almost be excluded, but that they keep poultry and some
pigs (Von Martius, p. 337). They also make pottery, though they
have no spinning, and must be regarded as standing on the lowest
level of the agricultural stage.

Among Asiatic tribes nearly the same may be said of the
Soligas, who, according to Rowney (p. 113-114), had no domestic
animals, and lived largely on roots and yams, but among whom
agriculture was not wholly unknown, being done chiefly by
women. They also hewed timber for sale, and are, in fact, in
much the same category as our dependent hunters though a little
in advance. The Bygas, again, have no tillage except the dhya
clearing on the hillside, and they also exchange wild products
with peripatetic traders. (Forsyth " Highlands of Central India,"
pp. 360, 365.) In the Malay region the Kubus, the Sakai, the
Semang, and the Jakun are all in their natural state, hunters, and
some of them among the lowest grade. But in all cases a sprinkling
of these peoples have come under the influence of Malays or other
more advanced peoples, and have taken to a rude agriculture.

i. See Martius, i, 226, ff. and cf. Serra 2. ser. Remsta Trimensal.
Tom. 6, p. 348, etc. Azara, Tom. ii, pp. 96, in seems to distinguish the
Mbayas from the Guaycuru and make them more definitely a people living
in part by slave tillage.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 25

At the same time, their institutions seem to have been considerably
modified, and much care has to be taken with these peoples in
determining the reference of any particular statement.

Between peoples at this stage of incipient agriculture, and some
of those at its upper level, there is undoubtedly a very marked
difference. Indeed some of the tribes which we have included in
this class might with almost equal propriety have been placed in
Agriculture2. Perhaps the most doubtful are the Iroquois, the
Delaware and the Abnaqui, about whom we have hesitated long.
Among these agriculture undoubtedly played an important part,
and they accumulated considerable stores of food. But we were
in the end determined by Loskiel's account (Geschichte der Mission,
pp. 85-87), which shows that a considerable part of the vegetable
food of the Iroquois and Delaware consisted of wild plants, while
in the winter they were often driven to live on roots and bark.
Hunting he declared to be their principal and most necessary
employment.

The Ipurina, again, are a legitimate subject of doubt. As to
their food supply, Ehrenreich (p. 60) merely tells us that they
live principally by hunting and agriculture, while they have some
fishing. Our general rule when hunting and agriculture are thus
mentioned is to place a people in the lower division unless we have
reason for the contrary. In the case of the Ipurina, their house-
building is of a high type ; but, on the other hand, the only animals
they are said to possess are dogs and poultry, while their industry
is said to have been unimportant. There is a little spinning and
weaving, and the women make pottery.

The peoples of British Guiana, again, were finally placed in
A1 on account of the importance which Im Thurm attaches to
hunting and fishing among them (pp. 227-8), but in view of the
substantial houses erected by some of them and of the general
development of trade (p. 269, etc.), we cannot regard them as far
from the second class.

In North America we place the Illinois in the second class on
the basis of the account of the Jesuit relations, Vol. 51, which
states that even at that period they took two crops yearly from the
soil (Jesuit Relations, Vol. 51, p. 51), although it was prin-
cipally tilled by women, and hunting remained one of their
occupations (p. 47).

Among the Indian frontier tribes our information is often very
deficient. We have classed the Kukis under A1 as nomadic cul-
tivators on the jhum system. (Shakespeare, J.A.I. 31, p. 171).
We must, however, admit that some peoples who cultivate on
this system appear, in the light of other accounts, to deserve a
place under A2. Thus the Dhimals (Hodgson, p. 154) are
nomadic cultivators, but they keep goats, pigs, and poultry

26 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

(Hodgson, p. 157), and in some cases at present use the plough
(Risley, p. 228). We do not think they can be put below A2. The
Chakmas again, who live by the jhum cultivation (Risley, Vol. L,
p. 514), would seem to depend upon agriculture and not on natural
products, and if so, notwithstanding the rudeness of their system
of cultivation, must come into our second class. The Juangs
(Dalton, pp. 153, 154), on the other hand, who have no pottery,
spinning or weaving, and who, while cultivating rudely by clear-
ings, are still largely dependent on collecting roots, etc., form a
fairly typical instance of the lowest agriculture.

The bulk of the Melanesian and Polynesian peoples have been
referred to the second stage in consideration of the nature of their
food supply, whereas obviously there is considerable distance be-
tween the Samoans, for example, and some of the Melanesians.
But we have not found definite grounds for raising any of the
peoples in this division, except the Noeforesen, to the third class,
nor for depressing any of them to the first, with the exception
of the Baining and the people of the Western Torres Straits—
the Eastern islanders of this region clearly belong to the second
division.

These instances may serve to show the difficulties of precise
demarcation as between the first and second stages. As to the
third stage of agriculture, we have generally taken the combina-
tion of cattle-keeping with field work as a sufficient ground of
inclusion. A doubtful case is that of the Miris of the Hills (Dalton,
p. 33-4), who are very backward in the arts, but have oxen as well
as pigs and poultry in addition to agriculture. The Padam Abors,
again, whose agricultural implements are swords and pointed
sticks (Dalton, p. 26), would not on this account be placed high,
but they also forge swords, make musical instruments, and build
cane bridges over a river (p. 26), points which seem to place
them definitely above most of those peoples whom we have had
in our second division.

In the Malay region several peoples, for instance the Kayans,
are placed in this division on account of their metallurgy and other
arts ; while in Africa we have a very large group under this head,
partly owing to the combination of cattle-keeping with agricul-
ture, and partly to the working of metal.

The pastoral stage we regard as an alternative development
from the hunting stage, not necessarily anterior or posterior to
agriculture. We have only succeeded in making two divisions of
pastoralists, one in which there is little or no agriculture and but
a slight development of other arts; the other where agriculture is
developed or is practised by a serf or tributary people, metal is in
use, and war, trade, or handicrafts are well developed. The former
stage we take as roughly parallel to that of Incipient Agriculture ;

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 27

the latter, which we write as Pastoral2, is about on a level with
Agriculture3. In deciding whether a people shall rank with the
Lower Pastoral, one of our chief difficulties has turned upon the
question oi the influence of civilised men. Many North American,
and some South American, hunting tribes have acquired the horse
from the white man. This alone would not remove them from the
hunting stage,1 but in South America we find sheep and cattle
similarly acquired. Thus the Abipones, though spoken of as
pure hunters, we also learn incidentally spun and wove garments
from their flocks (Dobrizhofer, p. 130). These herds, however,
appear to have been taken from the Spaniards, and we take it that
if the Abipones were in the pastoral state at the time, they were
only just entering thereupon, and their manners and customs may
be regarded as those of a hunting people. The Aucas seem to be
in much the same condition (D'Orbigny II., p. 259), and the same
may be said of the Puelches. In the end we have classed all these
as hunters.

The Tobas, on the other hand, are said by D'Orbigny (L'homme
Americain, p. 99) to have been "pasteurs depuis la conquete," and
occasionally agricultural. Thouar (Exploration, p. 66) also
attributes to them numerous flocks of sheep, cattle and horses.
With them the pastoral state seems, therefore, to have established
itself.

The Navahos, again, in North America, became first pastoral
and then recently agricultural under white influence. We think
it should be clear that flocks and herds must be"nbt merely stolen
or kept temporarily by people, but that the rearing of them should *
be a definite part of their occupation if they are to be classed as
pastoral, and for this reason the Tobas and the Navahos are the
only American peoples whom we have placed in this group.

With regard to the higher pastoral peoples, our main doubt is
whether sojiie who have been regarded as cattle-keeping agricul-
turists a*Tcl therefore placed in A3, might not with equal pro-
priety have been regarded as pastoralists who have taken to agri-
culture as a secondary employment. It must frankly be admitted
that our information has not always been sufficient to decide this
point, but our aim has been to class under Pastoral2 those whose
mode of life, particularly the life of the richer or ruling classes,
is determined by the movements of flocks and herds rather than
by the sedentary requirements of agriculture.

A word may be added here upon the general problem of the
treatment of borrowed culture. It may be said that an art borrowed
from without is something purely external, which will not affect the
customs of the tribe. We ought, therefore, in spite of the existence

i. On the other hand the domestication of the reindeer is taken as a
mark of the pastoral stage, e.g., for the Ostyaks.

28 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

of this art, to regard the customs as having been formed in a stage
in which it did not exist, and to belong to that stage accordingly.
Now it is quite true that a borrowed art is not of the same value as
evidence of the mentality of a people as the same art if known to
have originated at home, but if we are to pursue this argument too
far, in how many cases shall we really be able to say that an art is
ultimately of domestic origin? Culture contact, direct or indirect,
is in fact the normal not the exceptional process throughout human
history. And, on the other side, how long does it remain true that
the importation of a new art is without effect upon the social
customs of a people ? We have clear evidence here and there of
acquisitions which have revolutionised the life of a people — for
example, the Comanche are a branch of the Shoshones, who, when
they acquired the horse from the white man, migrated to Texas and
became a vigorous and flourishing people of a distinctly higher
grade. A more striking instance is that of the Blackfeet. We have
to class them as a hunting people for they practise neither pasture
nor agriculture ; but they obtained from the European not only the
horse but the gun, and, according to Mr. Grinnell (p. 178), this
materially affected their mode of life, and, in particular, enabled
them to build up a great conquering federation, almost unique
among hunters. We have mentioned the Kubus, Semang, and the
Sakai, and other peoples who have become agriculturists under
foreign influence. Apparently some, at least, of their institutions,
their methods of government, and their marriage customs have been
materially affected by the same causes. Upon the whole, therefore,
f we must take people as we find them, whatever the causes may be
which have brought them to their present level. We have, however,
in cases of transition tried to satisfy ourselves that the new stage is
at least a generation old, and if we are clear on this point we classify
the people at their present level, while if the change appears to be
more recent we treat them as being at their old level. We also, as
already illustrated by our remarks on the Puelches, etc., disregard
mere rudiments of a higher culture when they are thus manifestly
imported, whereas if their origin had been domestic, we should have
felt compelled to take them into account.

We take some hunters to have advanced on their own lines
as far as the lowest agriculturists and pastoral people. We
take certain advances in pasture or agriculture as equivalent
though also divergent, and we suppose peoples who remained
fundamentally pastoral to have advanced in the highest stage to
that threshold of civilisation which is represented by our Agricul-
ture3. It would seem that beyond this the line of material advance
lies with that more sedentary life which has agriculture as its basis,
so that the pastoral development, except in subordination to agricul-
ture, represents, like the highest hunting culture, a blind alley.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

29

Our conception of the relation between the different economic
grades of culture may be roughly symbolised by a diagram : —

PASTOR ALT

PASTORAL;

HIGHER HUNTERS.

LOWER HUNTERS.

This classification does not depend on any theory of the^ order
in time in which the several economic stages have arisen. It merely
arranges the ^tages^actually found — an order corresponding to the
degree of control over nature and mastery of material conditions
manifested in each. <~

A list of the peoples referred to each grade is given in the
Appendix following this Chapter.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

APPENDIX.

CLASSIFIED LIST OF PEOPLES.

The full list of the peoples referred to each grade of culture is
given in the left-hand column. In the right-hand column will be
found the short titles of the principal authorities relied upon for
each people. For the full titles of authorities, see Bibliography.
Authorities used for groups of peoples collectively are not entered
unless they make special reference to one or more of the names in
this list.

ASIA.

Peoples.
Kubu
(i) Semang

(i) Sakai

u •

Negritos of Camarines

Negritos of Negros -

Negritos of Angat -

Negritos of Albay -

Negritos of Dumagat

Negritos of Alabat -

Andamans :

Punan » -
NORTH AMERICA.

Lower Californians -
1 ,. — Guaycuru

Cochimis -

Pericui •

Mi wok

Wintun

Patwin

Shoshones
SOUTH AMERICA.

Botocudos

Fuegians
AFRICA.
Batua

Bushmen -
Mucassequeres

LOWER HUNTERS.

Authorities.

- Forbes, Hagen.

. Skeat and Blagden, Martin, Annan-
dale.

- Skeat and Blagden, Martin, Annan-

dale.

Blumentritt.
Blumentritt.
Meyer.
Blumentritt.
Blumentritt.
Meyer.
Man.
Hose.

Bancroft.

Bancroft.

Bancroft.

Bancroft.

Powers.

Powers.

Powers.

Bancroft, Remy.

Keane, Ehrenreich, Hartt, Tschudi, zu

Wied.
Hyades and Deniker, Garson.

Hutereau, H. H. Johnston, Stuhlmann,

David.

Stdw, Fritsch, Passarge, Lichtenstein.
^ Rurchell, Moffat.
Serpa Pinto.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

AUSTRALIA.

Peoples.

Swan River
N.W.C. Queensland -
Bungyarlee
Digrj

Yerwaka & Yantra-
wanta
GouljDurn
Narrin jerri
Kaiabara
Turra -
Maryborough -
» N.S.^Wales (Some) -
Karmlaroi
Geawegal
Euahlayi -
Port 'ja'ckson -
N.S. Wales (Some) -
Perth & W. Austra-
lians

Powell's Creek
Port Lincoln -

jr

Port Darwin

Tongaranka

Turbal -

W. Victoria

Kurnai -

Waimbaio

Wiradjuri

Wotjobaluk

Mukjarawint

Yara Yara

Wurunjerri

Wudthaurung

Bangerang

Yuin

Riverina -

King George's Sound

Gringai

Chepara

Central Australians -

Northern Australians

Ngumba -

Kabi & Waaka

Herbert River -

Tasrhanians

Queensland
untamura
Watchandee
Ngurla
Newcastle

Authorities,
Salvado.
Roth.
Bonney.

Gason in B. Smyth, Howitt.
Howitt.

Le Souef in B. Smyth.

Taplin in Woods.

Howitt.

Kiihn in Fison and Howitt. i

Howitt.

Fraser.

Fraser, Howitt, Fison, Ridley.

Howitt, Rusden in Fison and Howitt.

Parker.

Collier.

Ridley.

Grey, Bates, Brown.

Fraser, J. R.

Wilhelmi in B. Smyth, Schiirman in

Woods.

Cranford, Foelsche.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Dawson.

Howitt, Bulmer in B. Smyth.
Howitt, Bulmer in Fison and Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Curr.
Howitt.
Beveridge.
Jones.
Howitt.
Howitt.

Spencer and Gillen.
Spencer and Gillen.
R. H. Mathews.
Curr, J. Mathews.
Lumholtz.
Ling Roth.
Lang.
Howitt.
Oldfield.
Curr.
Curr.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

AUSTRALIA.

Peoples.
Wayook -
Ballardong
Koynup & Etecup
Yerkla Mining
Warburton River
Milya Uppa
Belyando River
N. Queensland -
Jupagalk -
Narrangi -
E. Victoria
Darling River -
Gournditchmara

Encounter Bay
31ycoolon
Tatuthi
Theddora
Wolgal -
Wallaroi
Wakelbura
jj>. Queensland -
Wide0*y
Bunalong

Authorities.
Curr.
Curr.
Curr.

Howitt, Curr.
Paul in Curr.
Reed in Curr.
Curr.
Roth.
Howitt.
Howitt.

R. H. Mathews.
Bonney.
Dawson, Stahle in Fison and Howitt.

Howitt.

Meyer in Woods.
Palmer.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.
Howitt.

NORTH AMERICA. HIGHER HUNTERS.

Coast Salish
Kwakiutl .
Nootka
Tsimshian
Thlinkeet
Haida »

Unalaska Aleuts
Athka Aleuts -
Loucheux
Kutchin . -
Chepewayans -
Tsekhene
E. Nahane
W. Nahane
Chilcotin -
Capers-
Similkameen
Luisenos. -
Lkungep -
Lilooct
Halokmelen
Blackfeet -
Etechemjns
Micmacs or (Souri-
quois) -

Niblack, Hill-Tout, Boaz.

Niblack, Boaz.

Niblack, Boaz, Bancroft.

Boaz, Niblack.

Bancroft, Swanton, Boaz, Niblack.

Niblack, Harrison, Bancroft, Boaz.

Wemiaminov in Petroff, Bancroft.

Yakof in Petroff.

Hill-Tout, Hardisty.

Hill-Tout, Bancroft, Strachan^ Jones.

Hill-Tout, Bancroft, Ross.

Hill-Tout, Morice, Bancroft.

Hill-Tout, Morice.

Morice.

Morice,

Hill-Tout,
Hill-Tout,
Hill-Tout, Morice.
Allison.

Boaz.

Hill-Tout, Boaz.
Hill-Tout, Teit.
Hill-Tout.

Grinnell, Macklean, J., Wilson.
' Jesuit Relations " (esp. vols. 2 & 3).
"Jesuit Relations," vol. i.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

33

NORTH AMERICA.

Peoples.
Montagnais
Ottawa

Eskimo (Greenland) -
Eskimo (Western) -
Eskimo (Pt. Barrow)
Eskimo (Behring

Straits)

Eskimo (Central)
Eskimo (Labrador) -
Kenai

E. Shushwap -
W. Shushwap -
Nez PeFces
Kariaks
Malemutes
Other Koniagas
Sarcees
Tsi£saut -
Kowitchen
Bellacoola
Niska

Heiltswk -
Kootenay

Klamaths of Oregon
Kiowa
Seri- -
Kiskakong
Crees

Apache
Comanche

N. Mexicans

Thompson- River

Assiniboins

Omaha

Karok

Yurok

Tolowa

Hupa

Petawet

Porno

Gallino Mero -

Gualala

Wappo

Shastika -

Pit River -

Nishinan

Yokuts

S. Californians

Kelta

Authorities.

"Jesuit Relations," vols. i and iv, 6.
"Jesuit Relations," vol. 51.
Nansen.
Bancroft.
Murdoch.
Nelson.

Boaz.

Turner.

Bancroft.

Boaz, Teit.

Boaz, Teit.

Maclean, J.

Bancroft.

Bancroft.

Bancroft.

Maclean, J., Wilson.

Boaz.

Boaz.

Boaz.

Boaz.

Boaz.

Chamberlain, Boaz.

Gatschet.

Mooney,

McGee.

"Jesuit Relations," 52.

" Jesuit Relations," 66 and 68, Hodge,
Schoolcraft.

Loew, Schoolcraft, vol. 5, Bancroft.

De Cassac, Tenkate, Bancroft, School-
craft, 2.

Bancroft.

Teit and Boaz.

Dorsey, Macklain.

Dorsey, Fletcher.

Powers, Kroeber.

Kroeber.

Powers.

Powers, Goddard.

Powers.

Powers.

Powers.

Powers.

Powers.

Powers, Kroeber.

Powers.

Powers.

Powers.

Bancroft, Kroeber.

Powers.

34

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

NORTH AMERICA.

Peoples.
Yuki

Makh-el-Chel -
Lassiks
Modoks
Kombo

SOUTH AMERICA.
Auca

Puelches -
Abipones -
Coroados- -
Puri - - -
Zaparo
Guaycuru
Charrua.

Goyatacaz

Mura.

Macovi & Vilela

Tehuelches

Minuares

Payuga

N. Chaco -

Topanaz

Patimaris

Govanaz -

Akkek

Pitagoa
ASIA.

Ghiliaks -

Tuski

Nicobarese

Manobos Rio Bay

Italmen

Gol3

Perak Sakai

Keddah Semang
OCEANIA.

Kauralaig
AFRICA.

Authorities.

- Powers.

- Powers.

- Powers.

- Powers.

- Powers.

- Azara, D'Orbigny.

- D'Orbigny.

- Dobrizhofer.

- Hensel, Featherman.

- zu Wied, von Martius.

- Simson, Markham.

- von Martius, Azara, Serra, Church.

- D'Orbigny, Heusser, Azara, Feather-

man.

- von Martius, Eschwege.

- von Martius, Wallace.

- De Brettes, Gonzalaz, Hutchinson.
Musters, D'Orbigny.

- Azara.
Azara.

- De Brettes.

- Eschwege.

- von Martius, Wallace.

- von Martius, Eschwege.

- De Brettes.

- Eschwege.

- Deniker.

- Nordenskjold.

- Svoboda.

- Blumentritt.

- Steller.

- Laufer.

- Skeat and Blagden.

- Skeat and Blagden.

- Haddon.

Wagenia
ASIA.

Yanadi
Beriya
(3) Bhuiyar
Korwa
Niadi
Kardar

Bataks of Palawan
*. Katodi
Chenchu •

- Coquilhat.
DEPENDENT HUNTERS.

- Thurston, Shortt.

- Crooke.

- Crooke.

- Crooke.

- Rowney.
Fryer.

Venturillo, Miller
Wilson.
Newbold.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

35

ASIA.

Peoples.

(Atkwar & Nundail)-
Bonthuks
Korumba

Irulas - - -
Villee-

Authorities.

Thurston.
Shortt, Thurston.
Shortt.

ASIA.
(16) Ainu

AGRICULTURE I.

B heels.
Lushai-
Other Kuki
Soligas
Jakun

Negritos of Zambales
Manobos 6f Agusan -
Zambales or Tinos -
Paniyans -
Arunese -
Orang Bukit
Mantra
Marea
Juang
Kubu
Candios
Perak Sakai
Central Sakai -
Kuala Kurn-am Sakai
Birho-r
Veddah -
Ab£hases
Byg-as
Santals

Keddah Semang-
NORTH AMERICA.
Mohave
Delaware -
Irocjuois -

O jib ways -
Algonquins of Que-
bec

Hurons . -
Abnaqui -

Dakota

Hidatsa

Iowa

Mandan

Isthmians

Guaymi

Winnebagos

St. John, Batchelor, von Brandt, Hol-
land.

Hunter, Crooke.
Lewin, Shakespear.
Dalton, Lewin, Shakespear.
Rowney.
Favre.

Reed, Blumentritt, Meyer.
Blumentritt.

Blumentritt ("Versuch einer Ethnog.")
Thurston ("Anthropology ").
Rosenberg.
Knocker, Grabowsky.
Borie.
Dalton.
Dalton.

Forbes, Hagen.
Moura.

Skeat and Blagden.
Wilkinson.
Knocker.
Dalton.
Seligmann.
Chantre.
Forsyth.
Risley, Hunter.
Skeat and Blagden.

Krqeber.

Loskiel, Heckewalder, Brinton.

Loskiel, "Jesuit Relations," Morgan,

Heckewalder.
Warren, Jones.
"Jesuit Relations," vols. 2, 3, 5, 6.

"Jesuit Relations," vols. 10 and 28.
'Jesuit Relations," vols. 25 and 67,

Maurault.

Schoolcraft, Riggs, Dorsey.
Dorsey.
Dorsey.

Dorsey, Lewis and Clarcke.
Bancroft, Featherman.
Pinart.
Schoolcraft, vol. 4.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

SOUTH AMERICA.

Peoples.
Guana
Lengua
Ytlracares
Paravilhana
Mauhes
Marana
Ucayali
Mbevaera

(4) Karayaki
Ipurina
Mataguayos
Roucoyennes
Charantes
Coropo
Manao
Matacco

Shingu

British Guiana -

Macusi

It6 -

Arecuna

Canea & Antioquia

Miranha -

Arawak

(5) Paumaris -

OCEANIA.

W. Torres Straits
Baining

Authorities.

von Martius, Azara, Serra.
Grubb, Hawtrey.
Halten, von, D'Orbigny.
von Martius, Sampaio.
von Martius.
von Martius.
von Martius.
Dobrizhofer.
Ehrenreich.
Ehrenreich.
D'Orbigny.
Coudreau.
von Martius.
von Martius.
von Martius.
D'Orbigny, Pelleschi, Thouar, Gon-

zalaz.
Steinen.
Im Thurm.
von Martius.
D'Orbigny.
von Martius.
White,
von Martius.
von Martius, Im Thurm.

Haddon.
Parkinson.

ASIA.

Aeneze

Kurds of Eriwan
Yourouks
Toda

Samoyedes
(18) Abakan Tartars
Chewssures
Kabards -
Buriats

Shahsewenses -
Ostyafc
Biloch

NORTH AMERICA.
Navahos •

SOUTH AMERICA.
Tobas

PASTORAL I.

- Burckhardt.

- von Stenin.

- Bent.

- Metz, Rivers.

- von Stenin, Featherman,

- Radlov.

- Seidlitz, Erckert.

- Chantre.

- Melnikow.

- Radde.

- Pallas.

- Crooke.

Schoolcraft, Mindeleff, Bancroft.

D'Orbigny, Thouar, Gonzalaz.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

37

AFRICA.

Peoples.
Beni Amer
(13) Massai

Colonial Hottentots -
Khoi-Khoin
(7) Batauana -
Dinka •
Ovaherero
Mundombe
Wambugu
Korana

Authorities.
Munzinger.
Hollis.

Fritsch, Kohler.

Wanderer in Steinmetz, Kohler.
Passarge.

Seligmann, Sullivan.
Dannert, Hartland.
Magyar.
Kohler.
Fritsch.

AFRICA.

AGRICULTURE II.

Bageshu -

Basoga

Wafipmi -

Wambugwe

Bateke

Warega

Mayombe

Mangbetu x

Bangala

Bali -

Mandja

Tuchilange

Mundombe

Azande

Baquiri

Bondei

Wanyaturu

Wawira

Maravis

Banyai

Ouissama

Angoni

Lendu

Latuka

Kunama & Barea

Fang
(12) Yaunde

Niam Niam
(15) Ba-yanzi

Banaka & Bapuku

Wadoc

Baluba

Adio

Abandia -

Gallinas

Waheiei

Bakongo •

Azimba

Wajiji

Banyang •

• Roscoe.

• Cunningham.
Baumann.
Baumann.
Guiral.

• Delhaise in Overbergh.

• Overbergh and Jonge.
Overbergh and Jonge.

• Overbergh an.d Jonge.

• Hutter.

• Gaud in Overbergh.

• Wissmann.

• Magyar.

• "Annales du Musee du Congo.'

• Leuschner in Steinmetz.

• Dale, Kohler.

• Baumann.

• Stuhlmann.

• Peters.

• Livingstone.

• Price.

• Wiese.

• Stuhlmann.

• Stuhlmann.

• Munzinger.

• Bennett, Lenz.

• Zenker.

• Schweinfurth.

• Torday and Joyce.

• Oertzen in Steinmetz.

• Stuhlmann.

• Wissmann.

• " Musee du Congo."

• " Muse"e du Congo."

• Harris.

• von Schele.

• Ward.

• Angus.

• Hore.

• Hutter.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

AFRICA.

Peoples.
Bakundu -
Mabum
Batom
Oupoti
Mpongwe
Monbutu -
(13) Masai

NORTH AMERICA.
Seminole -
Pawnees -
Creeks
Woolwa
Natchaz
Illinois

Wyandot

Porto Rico

Towka

Continental Caribs

Caribs

Tarahumare

Tepehuanes

Huicols

SOUTH AMERICA.
(4) Sambioa -

Guarayo

Mundrucu

Uaupe

Chiquito -

Moxo

Bororo

Jivaro

Apiaca.

Jumana

Chambioza

Chiriguano

Gagua

Manctaneres

Tapuya

(10) Yonca & Boni -
(6)Ges_ -

Idanna

Guato*

Campas

Tapui

Cureto

Paressi

Uanambua

Miranha

Mocetenes

Senci

Authorities.

Hutter and Conrau.
Hutter and Conrau.
Hutter.
Ward.
Buchholtz.
Schweinfurth.
Hollis.

Maccauley.

Farrand, Grinnell.

Bartram, Hawkins, Caleb Swan.

Wickham.

"Jesuit Relations," vol. 68.

"Jesuit Relations," vol. 51, Charle-

voix, de.
Powell.
Fewkes.
Bancroft.
Bancroft,
de Rochefort.
Lumholtz.
Lumholtz.
Lumholtz.

Ehrenreich.

von Martius, D'Orbigny.

von Martius.

von Martius, Wallace.

D'Orbigny.

D'Orbigny.

Fric and Radin.

Simson, Markham.

von Martius.

von Martius.

Castelnau.

D'Orbigny, Church.

Castelnau.

Markham.

" Jesuit Letters."

Coudreau.

von Martius.

von Martius, Wallace.

von Martius, Castelnau.

Ordinaire, D'Orbigny, Urquhart.

Thouar.

Wallace, Markham.

Steinen.

Wallace.

Castelnau.

D'Orbigny.

Smith and Low.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

39

OCEANIA.

Peoples.

Murray Islands
S. Melanesians
Florida
Bugotu

S.E. Solomons -
Saa -
Malo
Koita
Roro-
Mekeo
Waga Waga & Tubi-

Tubi

Bartle Bay
Trobriand Island
Marshall Bennett
Woodlark Islands
Louisiades
New Hebrides -
New Caledonians
Gazelle Peninsula -
Sulka, Neu Pommern
N. New Mecklenburg
S. New Mecklenburg
Moanu
Motu
Mowat
Naaiabui -
Bogadjim
Macklay Coast -
Mafulu
Jabim

Caroline Islands
MarsHall Islands
Peleu Islands -
Gilbeft Islands -
Maoris
Rotumians
Tongans -
Rarotongans
Hawaians
Tahitians
Marquesas
Fijians

Savage Islands
Torres Group -
St. Christeval -
Samoa

ASIA.

Paharia
Kandhs -

Authorities.
H addon.
Codringtonr~
Codrington.
Codrington.
Guppy.
Codrington.
Denian.
Seligmann.
Seligmann.
Seligmann.
Seligmann.

Seligmann.

Seligmann.

Seligmann,

Seligmann.

Seligmann.

Codrington, Williams, Agostini.

Atkinson, Moncelon, de Vaux.

Parkinson.

Parkinson, Hahl.

Parkinson.

Parkinson.

Parkinson.

Turner.

Beardman.

d'Albertis.

Hagen, Hoffman.

Miclucko, Macklay.

Williamson.

Vetter.

Christian, Graffe.

Kohler.

Kubary.

Parkinson.

Tregear, Taylor, Meinicke, Brown.

Gardiner, Meinicke.

Meinicke, West.

Meinicke.

Marcuse, Meinicke, Ellis.

Ellis, Meinicke.

Meinicke.

Fison.

B.

Williams,
Thomson,
Rannie.
Vergnet.
Turner, G.,
Billow.

Kramer, Meinicke, von

Dalton, Rowney.
Dalton, Hunter.

4o

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

ASIA.

Peoples.

Kachari

Limbus & Korantes -

Chackma

Kols

N. W. Kols -

Kharwar -

Majhwar -

Gonds

Dhimal$

Maghs

Kaupui Nagas -

Kolya Nagas •

Ao Nagas

Lhota Nagas

Soma Nagas

Lahupa Nagas -

Sea Dyaks

Land Dyaks

Nicobarese

Waralis

Dodonga -

Mentawez

Arunese

Irulas

Kiangans
(i7)T6leuts

Red Karens

Samales

Bontoc

Tagals

Subanos

Dophla

Oraons

Pani Kocch

Santals

Tharu, N.W. -

Tharu, Bengal -

Khonds

Kei - - - -

Flores

Engano

Italones

Catalanganes

Calingas

Lepcha

Toungtha

Tipperah -

Guinane

Milanau

Orang Bukit

Muruts

Authorities.
Dalton.

Dalton, Risley.
Risley, Lewin.
Rowney, Man, Crooke.
Crooke.
Crooke.
Crooke.

Crooke, Forsyth, Rowney.
Hodgson.
Risley.
Watt.
Watt.
Godden.
Godden.
Godden.
Godden.

Ling Roth, Hose and McDougall.
Ling Roth.

Man, Svoboda, Solomon.
Wilson.
Zollinger.
Rosenberg.
Rosenberg.
Thurston, Shortt.
Blumentritt.
Radlov.
Colquhoun.
Schadenberg.
Schadenberg, Jenks.
Blumentritt.
Blumentritt.
Dalton.

Dalton, Hewitt.
Dalton, Hodgson.
Risley, Hunter.
Crooke.
Risley.

Rowney, McPherson.
Rosenberg.
Riedel.
Rosenberg.

Blumentritt ("Versuch einer Ethnog."
Blumentritt ("Versuch einer Ethnog."
Blumentritt.
Dalton, Risley.
St. John, Lewin.
Lewin.
Schadenberg.
Ling Roth, Hose.
Knocker.
Ling Roth, Hose and McDougall.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

ASIA.

Peoples.
Badjus
Boksas
Pathan,
Kami

ASIA.

Larbas

Uzbegs

Midhi
(2) Turcomans

Kazak Kirghiz
Kara Kirghiz -
Yakuts

Altaian Kalmucks
Mishmis
AFRICA.

Ama Xosa
Amazulu
Bechuana.
Baquerewe
Makololo -
Wataturu
Gallas •
Bogos-
Beduan
Somal
Danakil
(Q) Bahhna

Authorities.

- Posewitz.

- Stewart.

- Crooke.

- Lewin.

PASTORAL + .

- Geoffrey.

- Vambery.

- Dalton.

- Featherman, Stein, Hagenmeister,

Moser.

- Radlov, Levschin, Hagenmeister.

- Radlov.

- Summers.

- Radlov, Kohne, Pallas.

- Dalton.

- Fritsch.

- Fritsch.

- Fritsch.

- R. P. E. Hurel.

- Livingstone.

- Baumann.

- Paulitschke.

- Munzinger.

- Munzinger.

- Paulitschke, Featherman.

- Paulitschke.

- Roscoe, H. H. Johnston.

AFRICA.

Banyoro -

Ondonga -

Basutos

Alur

Amahlubi

Washambala

Basoga Batamba

Wafipa

Sereres

Kuku

Warangi -

Akamba

Nandi

Takue

Wakikuyu

Marea

Nosse be -

Marutse

AGRICULTURE III.

- Cunningham.

- Rautanen in Steinmetz.

- Casalis.

- Stuhlmann.

- Marx in Steinmetz.

- Lang in Steinmetz, Kohler.

- Condon.

- Thomson.

- Dr. .Corre.

- Varden Plas. ^*"

- Kannenberg, Baumstark, Kohler.

- IJobtey.

- Hollis.

- Munzinger.

- von Hohnel, Hobley.
Munzinger.

- Walter in Steinmetz.

- Holub.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

AFRICA.

Peoples.
Bambara -
Segoo
Calabar
Foota Torra
Foota Jalon
Bushongo
Bambala -
Duallas
(14) Bahuana -

Basonge Meno -

Basonge

Mbengas

Waniaenwesi

Anyanza

Yao -

Ababua

Wapokomo

Baganda -

Bamsalala

Wagogo

Diakite Saracolays

Jekris

Bawenda

Warundi

Tshi

Ewe

Yoruba

Baronga

Bambala -

Geges & Nagos

Bafiote

Bukoba Natives

Suaheli

Bongos

Fanti

Ba-y^aka

\Vanyakyusa

Woloff

Sese Islanders -

Wachagga

Wadigo

Bihenos

Indikki

Kilwa

Kimbunda

Wasinja -

Wapare

Cazembe -

Wasiba

Benin Natives -

Authorities.
Featherman.
Featherman.

Featherman, Hutchinson, Walker.
Featherman.
Featherman.
" Musee du Congo."
" Musee du Congo."
Buchholtz, Kohler.
Torday and Joyce.

" Musee du Congo," Torday & Joyce.
Overbergh.
Duloup.
Kohler.

Werner, Stanuas.
Werner.

Halkin in Overbergh.
Kraft in Steinmetz.
Roscoe.

Desognies in Steinmetz.
Cole and Beverley in Steinmetz.
Nicole in Steinmetz.
Granville and Roth, Miss Kingsley.
Gottschling.
Burgdt, Hartland.
Ellis.

Ellis, Zundel, Herold.
Ellis.
Junod.

Torday and Joyce. (
Hagen.

Coquilhat, Featherman.
Richter.
Niese.

Schweinfurth.
Finsch, Featherman.
Torday and Joyce.
Fulleborn.

Tautain, Featherman.
Cunningham.
Kohler.

Baumann, Storch.
Capello and Ivens.
Hoesmann.
Eberstein.
Magyar.

Baumann. f' ^ \

Storch, Kohler, Conrau, Baumann.
Peters.
Hermann.

De Cardi in Miss Kingsley's " West
African Studies."

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

43

AFRICA.

Peoples.
Chevas
Kioko
Mabode
Lunda

ASIA.

Kasias

Kayans

Kayans, Mmdalam

Kayans, Mahakam

Singpho -

Padam Abor -

Munda Kols

Dusun

Bungians

Singkel

Nias

Passumahians -

Malays of Padang

Alfures

Java

Timorese -

Kafirs

Badaga

Sonthals -

Osettes

Bagobos -

Igorottes -

Suanes

Adighe

Battas of Sumatra

Tjumba

Miris of Hills -

Miris of Plains

Garps

Tingu-iane

Kharrias -

Daians

Balinese

Angani Nagas -

Kenyan

Mukassares

Bugis

Maguindanaos

Khiva

Karo Bataks

NORTH AMERICA.
Pima
Moqui
Tao -
Zuni

Authorities.

Peters.
Pogge.
Burrows.
Pogge, Schiitt.

Dalton.

Hose and McDougall.

Nieuwenhuis.

Nieuwenhuis.

Dalton, Parker, Wehrli.

Dalton.

Dalton, Selinghaus.

Ling Roth.

Blumentritt.

Rosenberg.

Rosenberg.

Junghuhn.

Junghuhn.

Junghuhn.

Junghuhn and Rosenberg.

Forbes.

Robertson.

Metz, Rivers, Thurston.

Man.

Morgan, Klaproth.

Schadenberg.

Blumentritt ("Ethnographic ").

Bodenstedt.

Bodenstedt.

Junghuhn.

Junghuhn.

Dalton.

Dalton.

Dalton, Austin.

Blumentritt.

Dalton, Risley.

Junghuhn.

Junghuhn.

Woodthorpe, Godden.

Hose and McDougall.

Junghuhn.

Junghuhn.

Blumentritt.

Wrangell.

Muller.

Bancroft.

Schoolcraft, vol. 4, Bancroft.

Schoolcraft.

Stevenson, Smiths, rep. 12.

44 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

NORTH AMERICA.

Peoples. Authorities.

Guatemala - Bancroft, Stoll.

Papago - - Bancroft, Lumholtz.

Zapotecs - - Bancroft.

Mayas - Bancroft.

Hopi - Goddard, Farrand.

- Farrand.

ipalachites - De Rochefort.

SOUTH AMERICA.

Araucanians - - Musters, D'Orbigny, Ochsenius, von

-*" Bibra, Latcham, J.A.I. 39.

OCEANIA.

Neuforezen - - von Hasselt.

NOTES.

1. With regard to the Sakai and Semaug the distinction between the
tribes living wild in the jungle and others is sufficiently clear. The former
are classed among the Lower Hunters. The latter, who mainly practise some
rudimentary agriculture, comprise numerous peoples of Semang, Sakai,
Jakun, Mantras and others, with regard to whom we have a number of
accounts by Martin, Skeat and Blagden, Wilkinson, Annandale and Robinson
and others. It is impossible to form a satisfactory grouping of these
p'eoples. The list given aims at enumerating as fairly as possible the
different representative types.

2. Turkomans : — Population nearly one million in Russian, Persian and
Chinese Empires (Stein, Dr. Petermans, 1880, p. 332). Original occupa-
tion seems to have been mainly war and robbery (p. 337). The
majority are pastoral; some also practise agriculture (pp. 229, 337),
while some live by fishing. The general statements of our authority do
not distinguish the institutions of the different parts of the population and
they are all entered here under " Pastoral.**

3. Bhuiyar : — These are in large measure Hinduised people, presumably
dependent on the Indian Government or on the Rajah's Government. The
names Bhuiyar, Bhuinhar, and Bhuiya are used by different authors, and it
is not always clear whether the same or different people are referred to.

4. Karayaki and Sambioa : — Two tribes of the Karayas, of whom Ehren-
reich gives the same general account except that the second have distinctly
more developed agriculture than the first. (Ehrenreich, Ver. Konig.
Museum ]ur V 'olkerkunde , Bd. ii, p. 8.)

5. Paumaris : — As described by Wallace (Amazon, p. 514) practised a
little agriculture, though von Martius (Beitrage, p. 419) describes them as
having had practically none — a very doubtful case of A*.

6. Ges : — Some of these have cattle as well as agriculture (p. 288) but
in general the industrial arts are said to be low while the morals of the
nation are high. (Martius, Beitrage, p. 295.)

7. Batauana : — A pastoral people that have lately taken to agriculture.
Up to the beginning of the nineties they left all agricultural work to the
subject races. They have been left in the first division of the Pastoral
stage. (Passarge, Z. Ethn., 37, p. 690.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 45

8. Ba-Yaka : — A case of an African people with rudimentary agricul-
ture and sufficient advance in other arts to be classed, though with some
doubt, as A 3. Cultivation is by women and the hoe the only instrument,
but manioc, maize, nuts and tobacco are grown, and they have cattle, though
in a semi-wild state. The men weave palm cloth, the women make pottery,
and though smelting is unknown there are hereditary smiths. Finally there
is a regular trade in rubber, hay exported, and cattle imported. On this
last ground we have placed them in the highest division. (Torday and
Joyce, J.A.I, 36, pp. 42-4.)

9. Bahima : — Classified as Pastoral 2 because, though themselves pure
cattle breeders, they have serf -settlements in each district who till the soil
and supply the smith's work. (Roscoe, J.A.I., 37, p. 98.)

10. Yonca and Boni :— Two groups of negro refugees from Dutch Guiana
settled in French Guiana, under a " Grandman " chosen for life and recog-
nised by the French Government. (Coudreau, La haute Guyane R.E.,
7, p. 460.)

12. Yaunde :— Would be classed as A i but for their smiths (p. 63) and
a certain amount of trade (p. 64) and the possession of goats and sheep
(p. 40). Much the same considerations apply to the Fang in general, of
whom the Yaundes are a branch. (Zenker, Mitt, der deutschen Schutz-
gebieten, Bd. 8.)

13. Massai : — The Massai proper do not practise agriculture at all, sub-
sisting mainly on cattle and war, but a division of them are agricultural and
settled, and said by Sir H. H. Johnston to be more advanced in the arts.
Their iron work appears to be the handiwork of a subject race or caste, this
iron being purchased from the Swahili. We enter them both under
Pastoral i and Agricultural ii. (Elliot, in Introduction to Hollis, Hollis,
p. 330. H. H. Johnston in Uganda Protectorate.)

14. Ba-Huana : — A fairly typical case of A 3. Men clear the ground
while the rest is done by the women. Domestic animals are goats, cats and
fowls, and dogs used in hunting. This would correspond to A 2. But
further they have smiths held in high esteem, tanning, weaving, and have
a developed trade, use shell currency, and are regular middlemen.
(Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 36, pp. 278-283.)

15. Ba Yanzi :— Said to be good agriculturists and therefore classed as
A 2, though some of the interior tribes are said to be hunters. (Torday
and Joyce, J.A.I., 37, p. 138.)

16. The Ainu of Japan :— Agriculture is of a very elementary nature,
consisting really of garden work attended to mainly by the women. The
men are good herdmen, but so long as the women can procure sufficient food
for the winter they do nothing. When the gardens fail they live by hunt-
ing, fishing, and gathering (p. 40). Their huts are insubstantial (p. 57).
They have weaving looms (p. 80) and pounding mortars (p. 78) of their own,
but metal adornments, cups, dishes and pots, are of Japanese manufacture
(p. 49). They have been classed as A i. (Batchelor.)

17. Teleuts :— Originally a Nomadic people, they are now settled and
agricultural. As the transition is said to be now nearly completed, they
are treated as belonging to A 2. (Radlov, vol. i, p. 334.)

18. Abakan Tartars :— Nomadic Pastoral. Some are beginning to settle
and practise a little agriculture, but as even in their case the main occupa-
tion is cattle-rearing they are treated as P i. The Abakan Tartars of the
Western group are now agricultural. (Radlov, vol. i, pp. 376-377.)

46 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

CHAPTER II.

GOVERNMENT AND JUSTICE.
I. GOVERNMENT.

The first question that we ask is : how people are governed at the
various levels of economic culture which we distinguish, how is
order maintained, and justice administered ? We distinguish first
between the question of the form of government and the administra-
tion of justice.

(i) The Form of Government.

The simpler societies, particularly those of hunters and gatherers
and the lower agriculturists and pastoralists, for the most part live
in small communities, varying in number of inhabitants from
perhaps a score to two or three hundred. Information on the
question of numbers is unfortunately too often vague and un-
certain to admit of the construction of any table on this point. But
among the lower gatherers we generally hear of quite small groups,
2 or 3 to 5 or 6 families in the usual sense of that term, making
i or perhaps 2 " enlarged families " of brothers or possibly cousins
with their wives, children and grandchildren. It may be remarked
that if we suppose an old man and his wife, two sons and their wives
with 3 or 4 growing children apiece to be living together, we
get a group of 13 people. Two such households would form a
group of 26, which is as large as many of the groups of jungle
tribes seem to be. Two pairs of such groups would be 52, which
seems to be about the average of an Australian local group, and in
many cases, though we are not unfortunately able to say in how
many, the little society appears in fact to be constituted by people
thus nearly related, the elder males being brothers or cousins.1 But

i. The " wild " Semang live in groups of this kind. It is not clear
that they are always composed of one " enlarged family " alone, but at any
rate the settlement seldom exceeds 2 or 3 huts (Martin, pp. 859-60). The
largest group known to him contained 27 persons. Among the Kubus we
hear of 3—5 and also 10—12 huts (Hagen, 93 — 95). It would seem possible
that an alliance of 2 distinct kindreds might be temporary but under
the conditions if it became permanent it would involve fusion by inter-
marriage.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 47

often, especially as we go a little further up the scale, we hear of
small villages or bands, and sometimes of numbers such as two
hundred or more, and often we learn nothing definite about the
relationships or affinities connecting their members. But there are
two possibilities which affect the question. The group may be
exogamous. If so, it is because there is a real or supposed
relationship between its members. Or there may be no bar to
marriage within its limits, and in that case the small number of
the families will secure that all are connected over and over again by
ramifying intermarriages. In fact the actual relationships will be
closer and more numerous than in the former case, though even here
it may be pointed out that the total population of the contiguous
groups within which marriage is practicable probably does not
exceed that of a very small town, so that the fictive relationship of
gens or totem is backed by a very real amount of actual con-
sanguinity. Though these little societies often cannot be identified
each as a definite kindred, they in fact have ties of kinship and
affinity at their back and are fortified by magico-religious ideas of
the totem, the clan, or the matrimonial class, in which a sense of
kinship is expressed.

Little communities of this kind form the effective social unit in
the lowest economic stages. They are in a measure self-dependent.
They own a definite area of land. They join, more or less
effectively as the case may be, in repulsing the assaults of any other
group; and again, in varying degrees of energy and community
of feeling, they will protect their members against others. They
may have a chief or a council, formal or informal, of the older
men. They may have little or no formal government.1 But in the
main they are self-dependent, owing no allegiance to anyone beyond
their limits. Yet they do stand in social relations to neighbouring
groups. A number of such groups probably speak the same
dialect, and call one another by the same name, intermarry freely,
perhaps meet at certain times for religious or ceremonial purposes,
are generally on friendly terms, and perhaps are ready to co-operate
for mutual defence. Such an aggregate of groups is generally
known as a tribe, even if it possesses no common government or
corporate individuality.

i. The Roucoyennes supply a good illustration of the informal, almost
casual, manner in which a chieftainship may arise. A man who makes a
clearing and founds a settlement is a tamouchi. He gives his daughters
in marriage to men who become his peitos, who do a certain amount of
work for him and are in semi-dependence but might leave him and found
a new settlement, while he himself becomes a peito if he lives with his
father-in-law. The tamouchi, having however established himself, may
nominate his successor, or be succeeded by his son, so that the institution
becomes permanent. (Coudreau, Chez nos Indiens, 258 — 9)

48 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Our tables will show that as we ascend the economic scale,
tribal unity becomes more clearly defined. We more and more
often find a definite tribal chief or council to which all the con-
stituent groups own a measure of allegiance. Where there is no
such common government it becomes a question — and one which
for certain purposes of classification is of no small importance —
whether we should regard the tribe or the local group as the true
social unit. The group is the more valid and effective unit, but
the ties that relate it to other groups cannot be ignored. If local
exogamy is the rule, the group is never a self-sufficient community.
If without being the rule it is a very frequent practice, the same
verdict must be passed, though in a weaker form. The only safe
course for us is to pay regard to both points of view. When the
various groups that compose a tribe live in habitual intercourse
with one another, practising intermarriage, owning a common cult,
and accepting a common name, we must speak of them as forming,
under certain aspects, one society, though they have no common
government. We must also bear in mind that under another
aspect they form several societies, and in considering our results
we must allow both aspects to pass under review.

As far as concerns government, the main result of these con-
siderations is that we must distinguish between smaller and larger
groups. If we speak of a chief or a council, we must know
whether it is the chief or council of a local group or of a tribe. But
we must remark further that a tribe may be divided, not so much
. into locally distinct groups as into totems or clans, that pervade its
whole area but yet have a semi-independent organisation of their
own. To use the most general expression possible, therefore, we
have distinguished primary and secondary social groups. The
primary group is the smallest organisation above the simple family
which has a recognised unity and a measure of self-government.
The secondary group is an aggregate of primaries. The primary
group may be an enlarged family ; it may be a clan recognising
common descent or a totemic band ; or it may be a local band.
Moreover, these divisions of a tribe may coexist, and there may be
more than one group which might deserve the name of primary.
In such cases we give the primary to the group which exercises
most of the functions of government. Often we shall, in fact, find
that there is something analogous to government fairly well
developed in the primary group, while there is little or nothing
of the sort beyond it.1

i. Sometimes the chief of the primary group is an important person
while the chief of the tribe is a shadowy figure. Thus, among the Nootka,
the chief of the sept is alone allowed to hunt whales, to give potlatches,
and offer prayers. But there is no true tribal chief, though the chief of
the highest sept has a limited authority over the tribe and the chiefs col-

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 49

As we ascend still higher in the scale there arise societies which
we should no longer call tribal. The limits of the conception of a
tribe have never been clearly laid down. We take it that when
government becomes so far centralised that local divisions have
lost their independence and local chiefs have become or are replaced
by heads of districts appointed by a ruling individual or council, a
more regular form of government has arisen. We have called
such governments national and have not sought to correlate them
further in detail with the simpler kinds, as a new nomenclature
would be necessary which would not run on all fours with the old.

We have then inquired (i) whether government is confined to
the primary or extended to a secondary group, or is of the national
kind. (2) Within each group whether it is based on the power of a
chief or council, and whether it is so vague and circumscribed that
it may be regarded as " slight or nil." 1 If there is a chief, is he
hereditary, or does he owe his position to election, or to prowess in
war or the hunt, or to wealth ?2 Such methods of obtaining his
position would be grouped in antithesis to the hereditary as
"personal." We should have liked to discover how often he is
identical with or distinct from the shaman or medicine man, but
our results have not been sufficiently numerous or clear to tabulate,
We note, however, whether the power is inherent in the office or
depends on personal ascendency and the influence which he can in
fact bring to bear. We note also whether his power is mainly in
war, whether it is confined to judicial matters, and whether the war
and peace chief are distinct. The same questions repeat themselves,
for the secondary group.

The following table summarises our results for the primary
group :—

lectively form a council. (Boas, B.A., 1890, p. 585.) Sometimes, as might
be expected, the chief of a small community extends his influence over
others, thus, among the Miris of the hills each community has an heredi-
tary chief, who, in some cases, has obtained acknowledgment from a
cluster of communities.

1. A typical instance would be that of the Central Eskimo, where,
according to Boas (B.A. 1884-5) there is a kind of chief in each settlement
who decides e.g. when it is time to shift the huts. But the families are not
bound to follow him. Among the Western Eskimos there is sometimes,
according to Bancroft, a hereditary chief, but his authority is nominal
(P- 65).

2. Or to wealth combined with liberality? e.g., among the Kenai, the
chieftainship is acquired by giving feasts. (Bancroft, p. 134.)

D

50 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

War and Government

Power in Peace Council slight

Total Hereditary Personal Power Influence War distinct powerful or nil

L.H. 36 8 6 3 10 o o 5j 17

H.H. 75 2o£ 17 13^ 32j i 2 9 *9

D.H. 8 i i 4^ o o o 3 i

AI 37 7 10 7 13^ 4 5 8 10
P1 16 14280142

A2 119 34 22 20 34^ 9 4 24 12

P2 16 2 5 i 6 o i 3j o

A3 96 i6J 14^ 7 23 2 o 19 o

TOTAL - 403 90 79^ 58 127 J 16 13 76 61

They show (i) that upon the whole hereditary and personal
qualifications count equally in determining chieftainship. We
have 90 cases classed as " hereditary " and 79^ as " personal." On
this point the stage of industrial culture seems to have no influence.

(2) In 58 cases the chief has "power," while in 127^ he has
influence merely. Roughly it is only in one case out of three in
early society that the chief's power is of a formal and decisive
character. Here again there is on the face of the figures no clear
correlation with economic status. But on this point it must be
borne in mind that in the higher economic grades, as will presently
be shown, the tribal government becomes more and more often
effective, with the result that in the primary group the powers of the
chief become subordinate. There are thus two opposite factors at
work in the different grades. In the lower it is the frequent absence
of all effective government, in the higher it is the presence of a
superior government which reduces the powers of the ' primary '
chief. Taken by themselves therefore these figures are not signifi-
cant.

(3) The cases in which the chief has marked power as a war-
leader without having general power are few — only 16 in all. There
are nearly as many — 13 — in which the peace and war chief are
distinct.

(4) There are 76 cases in which a council is noted as an im-
portant factor, but there is a vagueness in the accounts which we get
of councils which reduces the value of this figure. It may, however,
be noted that this heading appears in all the grades, and that the
total number of instances exceeds that in which the chief has power,
indicating that in the simplest societies government by discussion
is as familiar as government by the " strong man."

(5) Far the most interesting result under this head concerns
the existence of government as such. In 61 cases out of 403 we

'

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 51

have entered "government slight or nil."1 These are cases in
which we find no really coercive authority, whether exercised by a
chief or a council. The distribution of these cases is significant.
The following list gives the number in each grade, and assigns
the fraction which that number constitutes of the total cases recorded
at that grade : —

Name. Cases. Fraction of total.

L. Hunters 17 '47%

H. Hunters 19 '25

Dep. Hunters i "125

A1 10 "27

P1 2 -125

A2 12 -i '

P2 o o

A3 o o

The dependent hunters here, as in most cases, stand apart from
the rest. Omitting them we find an almost uniform fall from the
lowest to the highest stages; the only exception being that the
proportion in the lowest agricultural stage is rather high. It may
be remarked that the proportion among the lower hunters is pro-
bably underestimated, as in the case of the Australians we record
cases where there is any definite statement about the government
of the local group, but many instances have been omitted owing
to the indefmiteness of the account. It is probable that in many
of these the indefiniteness is due to the absence of any real authority
and that the number, of instances of " government slight or nil "
ought to be increased. We have then clear evidence of an advance
in organised government accompanying economic development.

i. The cases are :

Lower Hunters : — Swan River, Powell's Creek, Kabi and Wakka,
Herbert River, Lower Californians, Miwok, Shoshones, Kubu, Semang (44),
Sakai (44), Negritos of Angat (3), Negritos of Alabat (39), Andamans,
Punans, Botocudos, Batua, Bushmen.

Higher Hunters : — Thompson River, Greenland Eskimo, Labrador
Eskimo, Western Eskimo, Central Eskimo, Atkha Aleuts (33), Koniaga,
Tsekehne (26), E. Nahane (26), Luisenos, ? Carriers (26), ? Chilcotin (26),
Nishinan, Ghiliaks, Tuski, Sakai of Kuala Kurnam, Guaycuru, Charrua,
Payuga, Tehuelches.

Dependent H. : — Nicobarese.

Agricul. I : — Baining, Yuracares, Roucoyennes, British Guiana, Ite,
Mataguayo, Canea and Antioquia, Negritos of Zambales (35), Sakai of Kuala
Kurnam (44), Veddahs.

Pastoral I :— Navaho, Toba.

Agricul. II : — Nicobarese, Mocetene, Moxo, Campas, Wanyaturu,
Yaunde, Fang, Waga Waga, Gazelle Peninsula, Bogadjim, Mafulu, Savage
Islands.

52 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

A similar correlation appears when we consider the government
of the "secondary" group. In the Appendix we set out all
the cases in which we find evidence of some form of government
for the "secondary group," including what we here call " national"
government. The first group consists of cases in which a superior
chief is mentioned, though we do not know how much power he
possesses. The second gives additional cases in which he is re-
corded as possessing some definite power. The third consists of
those where we find a chief of unspecified or slight power and a
council, and the fourth those of a powerful chief and council.
The last group gives the cases in which the council is the pre-
dominant factor in our accounts, little or nothing being said of
the chief. Added together these constitute the total of the cases
in which we find evidence of effective government extending
beyond the " primary " group. The results are as follow : —

Totals

9 '25
23 '31

5 '62

8 "22 -
10 '62

53i '45
«J 73
74 77

Apart, again, from the dependent hunters, the table shows an
almost continuous increase with the advance of economic status.
The only serious exception is the low figure for incipient agricul-
ture. It will be seen also that the pastoral stages are relatively
more advanced in this respect than the agricultural, P1 being higher
than A2, while P2 is slightly higher than A3. It may also be
mentioned that the figure for the lower hunters probably overstates
the case for the same reason as before — through want of definite-
ness — the instances in which there is no tribal government do not
get adequately recorded.

The decline in the proportion of cases of " government slight or
nil " and the rise in the proportion of cases where " tribal govern-
ment " is found as we ascend the economic grades may be shown
in the following diagram : —

* If we include the Dependents among the Higher Hunters we get the
fraction '34 for the whole.

The penultimate column gives the total of the five preceding columns.
The last column reduces this total to a fraction of all cases of government
in our record.

GOVERNMENT OF TRIBE.

Tribal chief

All cases of

Tribal chief Tribal chief

with power

Council

government

Tribal chief

with power

and council

and council

Powerful

L.H.

36 -

4 .

I

I

O

3 •

H.H.

75 -

. 14 .,

5 ••

3 ••

0

i

*Dep.

H.... 8 ..

2 •

o

i

O

2

A 1

•77

2

2 -

3

I

0

o/

pi

16

4 .

2

,. 4 .

o ...

O

A2

TTO

.. I5 .

.. 26 .

.. 9 .

I

2J "

. .... A J.y

P2

16 .

•7.

6 .

i

2i

O

A3

06

O
IT.

TI

TO

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 53

P2 A3

We may then conclude that there is a tendency both to the
consolidation of government and to the extension of the area of
organised society as we advance in the economic scale. In the
lowest societies there is in nearly half the cases no organised
government at all, and in three out of four cases no government at
all beyond the primary group. In the highest pastoral and agri-
cultural societies there is organised government in all cases, and in
three cases out of four the organised government includes more
than one " primary " group, and extends to a large village, a
tribe, or perhaps a " nation."

II. JUSTICE.

All societies recognise certain customary rules as binding their
members, and at least within the society custom alone has a
sufficient power to secure observance in normal cases. Differences
arise in the nature of the rules themselves and in the definite
measures taken to secure their observance by punishing a breach.
It is the latter point which is considered under the present head.
Here three main questions arise : —

i. To what extent or in what cases does society act as a whole
or through its heads or through some definite institution
to restrain or punish the wrongdoer ?

54 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

2. What methods of punishment are in use ?

3. What procedure is employed ?

(i) Private and Public Justice.

In the first place there may be no regular action on the part of
society as a whole. Murder, theft, abduction, or adultery may be
treated as injuries to the individual affected, and they may seek
redress either of their own strength or with the aid of their kindred
or friends. Justice in such a case is a private matter. Redress
may be sought by retaliation in like manner to the wrong done or
simply by killing or beating the aggressor. ' Or it may take the
form of a demand for compensation in goods. Or there may be a
regular fight under conditions prescribed by custom ; 1 or, lastly,
without fighting, the aggressor may be required to stand a cut or
thrust. Custom and sentiment may support the injured party, but
unless the neutral public would actually come to his help at need we
should regard this as a case of private redress. Similarly, in the
Regulated Fight, custom certainly imposes limits as to methods of
redress, but redress itself is left to the strength and skill of the
parties. These cases are placed in our tables under the heads of
(i) Retaliation and Self-help, (2) Compensation, and (3) Regulated
Fight. The case of a ceremonial cut or thrust, which is peculiarly
frequent in Australia, is classed as an " Expiatory Fight." Very
often no bloodshed occurs, and it is then more like a composition in
that it is a form of satisfaction given by the wrongdoer to the
injured party. It is certainly held to wipe out the murder and end
the feud. Either retaliation or composition may be collective or
vicarious, i.e., may attach to the whole family of the aggressor or
to any one of its members. We take these cases together under
our third head. But this is not universal. It is just as likely that
redress is sought at the expense of the wrongdoer alone.

At the other extreme justice may be a public function, regularly
exercised by a chief, a council, or a special court for the punish-
ment of all serious offences. This we call Regular public justice.
But between the two extremes are gradations which are often
very difficult to classify. To begin with, the public authority, be
it what it may, may concern itself only with offences held to injure
the whole community, e.g., ceremonial offences, breaches of the
tribal marriage laws, witchcraft, and especially murder by witch-
craft, indiscipline, treason, cowardice, violation of the rules of the

i. Among the Central Esquimaux a murderer settles in the house with
the relations of the murdered man, and after some weeks' residence with
them is challenged to a wrestling bout. If defeated, he suffers death ; if
victorious he may kill one of the family. (Boaz, op. cit., p. 582.) In many
cases the regulated fight is less serious, thus, among the Western Esqui-
maux, quarrels are often settled by a boxing match. (Bancroft, p. 65.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 55

hunt. These we class as "Tribal or Sacral offences," and we find
in fact a large number of instances in which such offences are
punished by some public effort and no others. Thus among the
Bellacoola, a Salish group, we find that for transgressing the laws
of the Kusiut ceremony, e.g., by performing a dance to which a
man has no right or making a mistake in dancing, the penalty is
death, adjudged by the assembled chiefs. The execution is by a
shaman, who bewitches or poisons the offender, but if the offender
recovers he is not molested further, and a relative may, if willing,
be substituted.1 There is no account here of the treatment of other
offences, but of the Salish, Kwakiutl, Nootka, Tsimshian, Thlinkeet,
and Haida peoples, Niblack (Smithsonian Reports, 1888, p. 253)
says : " In cases such as witchcraft or offences of medicine men,
sentence of death or of fine is adjudged by the leading men of the
village after trial. In most instances, however, the law of blood
revenge, an eye for an eye, leaves little need for other than family
councils, as they are purely totemic offences and are arranged by
the injured gens." These are clear cases of the distinction between
sacral offences deemed to concern the tribe, and private matters.
More doubtful instances are those from the Makh-el-chel, a
Californian tribe among whom, according to Powers (p. 214), we
are told that a woman could be put to death by the chief for
marriage or adultery with a white man. So again among the
Nishinan, a very low Californian tribe according to the same
authority (pp. 318, 320), kidnapping was punished by the com-
munity, but the leading case is that of a chief who sold a woman
to the Spaniards. Probably both these instances are to be regarded
as acts of quasi-treason to the community. Among the Seri,
again, there was a kind of ostracism which might culminate in
outlawry for associating with aliens, deformity, incurable indo-
lence, disease, mental aberration, decrepitude, and a certain breach
of the marriage law. Of these indolence was an offence against
the clan, because it had to support each of its members ; and the
marriage regulation was that a bride should for a year be at the
disposal of the bridegroom's clan fellows. If he exercised his own
rights during that time, he offended them collectively. All these
therefore we should class upon the whole as of the nature of public
offences. Sometimes again, breaches of order in the hunt might
be punished by a special Hunt police, as among the Omaha,2 while
among many Australian tribes, it is well known, breach of the
marriage rules was the most definite occasion for the intervention
of the collective force of the group. Next, the community may
intervene irregularly or in special cases. It may avenge the death

i. Boaz, B.A., 1891, p. 417.
2. Dorsey, Omaha Sociology. Smiths. Report, in., pp. 288, 363, 367.

56 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

of a chief or popular man.1 It may expel or kill a man who has
killed two or three others in cold blood or who has made himself
generally unpopular.2 This sort of public justice falls far short
of any regular rule assigning definite punishment to a specific
offence. It is more like lynch law, or the exceptional act of a
civilised government in troubled times. We class such cases as
acts of " Occasional " public justice.

Next a public authority may deal with some cases of private
wrong and not others, e.g., with homicide and not theft, as in some
Australian groups; or with theft and not homicide, as in some
South American instances. These come under our heading "Public
justice in some private offences."

Again, the system we find may be one in which private and
public elements are intermingled. The injured party may, for
instance, get the chief or some officer to help him, to find the stolen
goods, s or to arrest and confine the murderer of his brother. But
he initiates the proceedings. He decides whether he will forgive
or accept compensation or exact life for life,4 and he executes the

1. Thus among the Shoshones, according to Bancroft (p. 435), a mur-
derer may be left to vengeance, " or if the sympathies of the tribe are with
the murdered man, he may possibly be publicly executed but there are no
fixed laws for such cases."

2. Thus among the Esquimaux of Labrador (Turner, Smithsonian
Reports n, p. 186) a man of very bad character may be boycotted, and if,
under these conditions, he were to commit a murder, several men may
combine to put him to death. So too among the Central Esquimaux
(Boaz, Smithsonian, 1884-5, P- 5^2 and appendix), if a man has made him-
self odious, e.g., by murder, and especially by repeated murders, any man
may ask the consent of his neighbours separately to his death and may
kill him without fear of vengeance. A transition to more res^ular law may
be illustrated from the Campas, who had no regular government and habitu-
ally practise vengeance, but of whom Urquhart (Scottish Geogr. Magazine,
J893, p- 349) states, in the case of a man who had murdered his mother,
" Not an Indian but would kill him upon sight." Lynch law is here
becoming as effective for certain purposes as public justice, but we should
still, on the whole, class the case as " Occasional."

3. E.G., among the Karayaki and Sambioa, the chief's function is to
help in bringing offenders to account, but not to execute punishment,
which is for the injured party or kin. (Ehrenreich. Beitrage, p. 29.)
Among the Kalmuks there is no death penalty but a murderer refusing to
pay the fine might be surrendered to the relatives. (Liadov, J.A.I., i,
p. 414.)

4. Thus, among the Gallino-mero of California, Powers (Contrib. to
N.A. Ethn. iii, p. 177) states that the avenger of blood has his option
between vengeance and composition, " but he does not seem to be allowed
to wreak on him a personal irresponsible vengeance." The chief ties the
criminal to a tree while a number of people " shoot arrows into him at
their leisure."

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 57

sentence.1 Possibly there is even a regular trial, but sentence is
left to the accuser to execute, and if he cannot enforce it there is
no further means of redress. Again, it may be wrong for him to
exercise revenge until he has obtained a judgment in his favour
which states what the revenge ought to be. Or it may be that he
can avenge himself on the spot, but if time has elapsed he ought to
go to a court. In all these cases there is a blending of opposite
principles. We class them as cases in which private justice is
assisted or controlled, or both. The difference between Assistance
and Control is difficult to assign in general terms, but we have
placed each concrete case under one head or the other according to
the details given.

How far to extend these heads is one of our most difficult ques-
tions. At the lower limit we demand something more than custom
or public sentiment as the force supporting (or controlling) the
avenger. To take a concrete case. Among the Geawegal in Aus-
tralia we are told that custom requires a man who has injured
another to expose himself to spears thrown by him. This, Rusden 3
says, is never refused, but if it were it would be enforced by the
collective power of the people. Taking this as literally true, we
class it as a case of Assisted Private Justice.4 Among the Ban-
gerang, according to Carr, there is a similar custom. But if the
aggressor declined the result would probably be that he would be
killed some time or other by the injured man and no one would
avenge him. We leave this among cases of private justice. Other
cases of expiation, where we are not told what would happen but

i E.G., among the Ojibways, according to Jones (Hist, of the Ojibway
Indians, p. 109), murderers were brought to trial before the council, and
if the relatives required it, the punishment was usually death, executed by
the next of kin.

2. Thus, among the Bataks of Palawan, in cases of murder, theft, or
adultery, the relations may exercise vengeance on the spot, but if the
matter is reported the old men intervene and prescribe punishment.
(Venturillo, I.A.E., xviii, p. 138.)

3. Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 282.

4. A doubtful and peculiar case is that of the Greenland Esquimaux.
An injured man, according to Nansen, will challenge another to a drum
dance, in which each party sang satirical songs at the other, and the losers
might be " fairly driven out of their homes and settlements by this means "
(Nansen, First Crossing of Greenland, ii, p. 328). It would be absurd to
call this Public Justice, as we are told that the winner was the man who
could secure the laughter of the audience on his side; though it may be
held to involve a certain public intervention. It has been brought here
with some doubt, under the head of " The Regulated Fight." Vengeance
by relatives also occurred among these peoples, a murder being no "business
of the community." Yet bloodshed was abhorred (Id. Eskimo Life, p. 162-3).

58 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

merely that it is the custom, we have entered separately. Generally
when we find either (i) that a man can get the help of a chief, but
that there is no account of any trial, or (2) that there is something of
the nature of a trial, but that the accuser has in the end to act for
himself, and can accept any satisfaction offered him, we class the
case as one of Assisted or Controlled Private Justice, as the case
may be.

Apart from punishment for wrong done, the chief or the com-
munity may intervene to settle disputes. This is the rudiment of
civil justice, and nothing is more, common than to hear that it is
the business of the chief to " settle disputes." But if we read
further of the functions of the chief we are quite likely to find that
he has no definite powrer, that he trusts to his influence, that this
depends on his character and circumstances, or that he rules by
persuasion rather than authority. We cannot, then, regard him
as a civil judge with powers to execute his decisions.1 Very pro-
bably his decisions are, in fact, accepted as a rule, but unless there
exist means of coercing the recusant in the last resort we cannot
speak of civil justice in the full sense. We class all such cases
under " Arbitration," a heading which will include at the one end
the simple settlement of disputes by an impartial person, and at the
other an award which is formally given but is not enforced on the
parties.2 It would be useful to subdivide these cases, but this has
not been attempted on the present occasion.

In some cases our information takes the form of a denial of
any regular method of redress, rather than a positive description
of self-help. We gather that there is very little regular govern-

1. We should hesitate to attribute anything more than powers of
arbitration in a case like that of the Manthra, where the chief is said to
settle disputes, including questions of theft, but no information is given
about the punishment. One would suppose in such an instance that if the
chief inflicted punishments, a statement to that effect would have been
added. (Borie, Tijd. voor Indische taal land en volkerkunde, x, p. 407.)

Sometimes the arbitrator might be changed. Thus, among the Tagals,
the dato administered justice but if not satisfied with him, the parties
might go to an arbitrator. We must infer that his authority was not
executive, though among this people there was a death penalty for tribal
offences and a scale of composition for others. (Blumentritt, Z.E.,
25, J- 16.)

2. As among the Hupa of California, Goddard (University of California,
Explorations, vol i, p. 59) shows that there was a regular system of arbitra-
tion which was wholly voluntary, and if it failed, vengeance, which might
be vicarious, was the resort. Among the Ghiliaks all we hear of the main-
tenance of order is that the elder men would adjust disputes, the alterna-
tive being a duel, in the presence of witnesses, terminated by a slight
wound. (Deniker, R.E., ii, p. 309.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 59

ment, no regular law, no courts, etc.1 In such cases, if the evidence
is sufficiently positive, we may infer that if a man wants redress,
he must get it for himself. But it would be going beyond our
warrant to say that self-redress actually exists. The evidence is
negative and as such must be received with caution. Where we
decide to accept it we class the case as one of " No Law," meaning
by that there is no stated method by which the collective force of
the community is brought to bear upon a wrongdoer.

In some instances the reason for the lack of this function is that
happily it is not needed. Grave crime is so rare that no provision
is made for dealing with it, and the question what would happen
if it occurred can only be answered hypothetically. Thus the
sixteenth century Jesuits found the Tapuya people to be such
lovers of peace that none of them had any remembrance of
" balterie " or quarrelling among themselves, while they even
treated their enemies humanely. Though the Tuski have no
assignable methods of dealing with crime, it may be, as we have
seen, because it is too rare to have given occasion for any such
institution. Among the Dodonga we are told that murder, theft,
and adultery are almost unknown, and similar accounts are given
here and there of other peoples. We class these happy commu-
nities, of which there is a sprinkling in most of our grades, as
" Crimeless."

Lastly, there are cases in which public punishments are spoken
of, but the nature of the offence which would provoke them is not
given. These are tabled as " Unstated."

(2) Methods of Redress.

As to methods of redress something has already been said. But
it should be noted that there are several points which are distinct
in idea but may in practice be combined or entangled with one
another.

(a) When an act is regarded as a private wrong, the desire of
the injured party may be for physical vengeance. Or he may be
satisfied with some form of compensation. In the case of ven-
geance he is apt to exact as much as he suffered, for otherwise he
is left with a feeling of inferiority, and his pride must be reckoned
with as well as the instinctive impulse to "take it out" of the
man who has hurt him. Anything like "exact talion," therefore,

i. Thus, among the Koniaga, the information collected by Bancroft
gives no clear account of the manner in which any offences would be dealt
with ; we are only told definitely that " authority is exercised only by heads
of households " (p. 80). So again, according to the same authority, the
Chepewyans have no laws or government (p. 121). Among the Tuski, it
is clear from Nordenskj old's account (Die Umsegelung Asiens, Bd. ii, p.
123), that there is no definite method of maintaining order, but here crime
appears to be very rare, if not quite unknown.

60 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

even when inflicted by a public body, is suggestive of underlying
private redress, and this is still more the case where talion takes
the form of the satisfaction of one family group at the expense of
another. If one of family A has killed one of family B, it has
weakened it, and equality demands that A should be weakened
proportionately by the loss of as good a member.

(b) When an act is regarded as a public wrong the leading idea
is the defence of society. Hence in grave cases the object is to
exterminate the offender ; exile may be sufficient but death is surer
and it rids society of a centre of danger. In less grave cases
society, like the individual, may be satisfied with atonement. This
is (a) a way of punishing the offender,1 (b) if the wrong is an offence
against an individual of satisfying him, (c) of enforcing on the
offender an admission of his wrongdoing, possibly of placating
supernatural powers (e.g., by a sacrifice or feast at the expense of
the offender), and also of re-establishing harmony and good
relations by a payment to the chief or to the community. There
is a very clear notion in early society, as in our own childhood,
that many, if not all, offences may be wiped out by a certain
sacrifice on the part of the doer. This is not true compensation.
It is atonement.

We class as Composition only cases where payment of some
sort is made to the sufferer. Where this is clearly made by the
judgment of a court we class it under Public Justice as " Fine to
injured party " and contrast it with the " Fine to Court " (i.e., to
the chief judge, or possibly the community), which in practice often
goes along with it.2 We class under " Atonable " cases in which

1. Where expiation is the prime motive, the penalty may only come
upon the offender in a roundabout fashion. Thus, among the Padam Abors,
no free man may be put to death, and if a crime is committed the com-
munity must expiate it by a sacrifice. For this purpose it takes the first
animal that comes to hand, the owner thereof being free to recover as best
he can from the original offender. (Dalton, Eth. of B.} p. 24.)

2. While we are frequently told that offences are compoundable, it is
not always easy to make out whether the fine is inflicted by a chief or court,
or exacted by the injured party. Thus among the Petawet in Calif omia,
Powers (op. cit., p. 98) tells us that murder is punished by a fine of shell
money — 10 strings for a man and 5 for a squaw, but he does not state
definitely by whom it is imposed. From his general account of the Cali-
fornians we may assume that it is a case of composition for vengeance, and
we have entered it as such with a query. Sometimes, when it is clear
that a fine is inflicted by a court, it is not certain to whom it was paid ;
thus, in Flores (Riedel, Rev. Coloniale Internationale, 1886, p. 69), the chief
and elders are charged with the settling of disputes, and we are told that
adultery, arson, wounding and larceny are punished by fines in default of
which the offender may be sold into slavery, but we are not told to whom
the fines go. We have therefore had to enter the case under " Crimes
Atonable," not under ' Composition," though very probably the latter
head would be justified.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 61

we are told that all or most grave crimes can be made good by pay-
ment, but without learning more precisely the form in which this
payment is imposed. Our figures tend to show that the principle
of atonement rather extends than restricts itself as we ascend the
scale. It is only in Australia that the form of atonement which we
call the Expiatory Combat occurs in any large number of" instances,
and if we omit these the cases of atonement among the Hunters
would be very few. This result is what we might expect from the
economic development.

(3) Procedure.

In the lower societies information about procedure is often very
defective. We sometimes hear of a man being " found guilty,"
but with no indication of any trial which precedes the verdict. Often
an Australian group holds definite consultation on the question
whether a man should be killed, but on what grounds the decision
is taken we do not know. Here and there, as in N.W. Central
Queensland, we hear specifically that the camp council enquires
whether a man who has slain another in a fight had just reason for
so doing, and, if not, puts him to death. This seems to be at least
a rudimentary trial, but unless we have a clear statement that the
accused is heard, or that some regular process is gone through by
which justice is established, we hesitate to give it the name. We
table as cases of Public Justice " With Trial " those in which the
evidence points to a formal investigation, and we have numbered
the instances in which the Oath or Ordeal is used.

The bald results in each grade will be found in the tables in
Appendix B. To interpret them we must in the first place
group them together; and, in the second place, consider them in
relation to the actual structure of society in different parts of the
world and in different economic grades.

THE RESULTS GROUPED.

In order to ascertain whether there is any real advance in the
public enforcement of justice as we ascend the scale, we have
brought our headings together in three columns, representing stages
in the transition from unorganised to organised justice. The task
of so grouping them presents considerable difficulties and we have
accordingly formed two classificattons, referred to as A and B, in
order to check our results at the principal points of doubt.

CLASSIFICATION A.

In the first place we form three columns :—

In column I we place cases of Retaliation, No Law, Regulated or
Expiatory Fight (where we have no reason to regard this as a

62 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

penalty enforced in the end by the community). We do not remove
a case from this group, because it also comes under " Occasional
Public Justice," "Public Justice in Tribal offences," "Composi-
tion," or "Arbitration." We regard this as the lowest normal
level of organisation.

In Column II we place cases of Assisted or Controlled Private
Justice, and those in which some Private Offences are publicly
punished. These may be combined with Retaliation or Composi-
tion. We add to this column the numerous cases in which there
is a definite system of Public Justice covering all or most ordinary
offences, yet self-help is still a recognised institution — the two in
fact existing side by side.1

In Column III we have only those cases in which Public Justice
is the regular system, although Composition may be allowed.

We are able to bring most cases under one or other of these
groups and to find material differences as we pass from one stage
to another. One point, however, remains to be explained, before we
consider our results.

It will be seen that in some cases the letter E is entered in place
of a cross under Retaliation. This means that injuries by anyone
alien to the community are redressed by the sufferer. This seems
at first sight to have nothing to do with internal justice but to be

i. The intermixture of private and public justice is due to various
causes. It may be that the ties of kinship are too strong for the nominal
authority of the chief. That would seem, from Ling Roth's account
(Natives of Sarawak, vol. ii, p. 228), to be the case with the Sea Dyaks.
Similarly, among the Munda Kols, we are told that cases of divorce and
adultery were brought before the village meeting and the offending man
might be beaten, but this was often not carried out owing to the power of
the kindred. (Sellinghaus, Z. f- Ethn. iii, pp. 370, 371.)

Sometimes we see a transition due to the contact with the higher civili-
sation, thus, among the Araucanians of Chile, the older system is one of
pure retaliation while now, according to Latcham (J.A.I., xxxix, p. 355, 6),
crimes are tried by the chiefs and elders of a clan but the condemned man
may still resist, and if he belonged to another clan would do so, with the
result that a tribal feud might arise. Among the Sonthals again, disputes
were formerly decided by duels, " but of late time, as equitable remedies
have been brought near them, this remnant of a barbarous age has
departed." (Man, Sonthalia, p. 90.)

Sometimes a criminal if caught may be killed on the spot. This is the
<rase with a murderer among the Yao (Werner, p. 264), where, nevertheless,
a regular system of public justice is found. Among the Wadschagga,
along with the regular system of justice, blood revenge for murder seems
to be fully recognised. • (Kohler, Z.V.R., 15, pp. 53, 62.) And among the
Ova Herero the chief does not interfere with vengeance for murder unless
moved to do so. Moreover, if the injured party is not satisfied with the
decision of the court, he will take vengeance on his own account. (Dannert,
pp. 10, n.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 63

more of the nature of irregular warfare, and it is true that the line
between family vengeance on an outside clan, and inter-clan feuds
merging into tribal warfare is not easy to draw. But war proper
is a collective act, and the characteristic of the vengeance in
question is that it is instituted and executed by the aggrieved party
and his kin without reference to the community as a whole.1 It is
therefore true retaliation, true private justice. But it is compatible
with a high development of public justice within the society, and
it must therefore be distinguished from self-redress within the
community.

But here arises a difficulty which affects our classification a
good deal. In many cases the question whether self-redress is
classified as internal or external depends on the classifier's selec-
tion of the social unit. In the case of the ordinary Australian
tribe we could produce solid reasons for taking the local group as
the unit, and solid reasons for taking the tribe as the unit. On the
former view we could produce a large number of cases of partially
developed public justice or of assisted and controlled private
redress — e.g., in North and N.W. Central Queensland, among the

i. Thus among the Australians, we are often told that any natural
death is attributed to a member of some other tribe or local group. It may
then be the duty of the whole group to which the dead man belongs to
avenge him. This gives rise to a tribal war or a feud between groups,
which is often settled by a ceremonial fight. But it may also be avenged
by the relatives. Thus, on the Darling River, if a corpse makes a move-
ment in the direction of the guilty sorcerer's camp, some months after-
wards a brother or other relation takes other men with him and finds the
murderer, wounding and perhaps killing him. (Bonney, J.A.I., 13,
134.) This seems to be primarily an affair for the relatives and friends,
and in any case is mere vengeance upon an individual. Similarly, accord-
ing to Le Souef (in Brough Smyth, ii, p. 289) any death is avenged by the
relatives killing the first man of another tribe whom they meet. Again,
among the Watchandee, while an aggravated case of real murder would
lead to the invasion of a hostile tribe by all the males and indiscriminate
massacre, a magic murder is dealt with by a single man who tracks the
foe to his camp, where he is hospitably received though his errand is known,
and he presently assassinates his man. (Oldfield, Trans. Ethnol. Society,
1865, p. 246.) This we should treat as External Retaliation. Sometimes
the line is hard to draw. Thus, among the Paharias, according to Dalton
(Ethnology of Bengal, p. 265) a man who has a claim on one of another
village, gets his chief to assemble the vassals, plunder the village, and
seize the offender, who would be detained until his relations paid up. As
the chief acts in this case, and with his followers takes the plunder, we
treat it as war, though it is mainly a matter of private redress. A clearer
case is the custom which we find among the Bontoc Igorottes, according to
which if a man is killed by a member of another village, he may be put
to death by his own community or it may offer compensation ; failing this
there is war. This is clearly not a case of private redress but of the action
of the community. (Jenks, p. 170.)

64 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Narrinyeri, in West Victoria, among the Dieri, and so forth, and
the cases of self-redress, at least as far as the murder of an adult
male is concerned, could not be verv numerous. The feuds,
regulated fights, and expiatory fights between different groups of
the same tribe would then all be regarded as external matters
irrelevant to domestic justice and pertaining to the province of war.
On these lines we should regard the typical Australian community
as very small, consisting often of not more than 20 to 40 or 60
individuals,1 as maintaining justice among its handful of members
through the council of elders and as living on terms of friendliness,
chequered with frequent charges of magic murder, with other
groups speaking the same dialect, quarrels between groups being
settled by real or ceremonial combats. The society would figure
as tiny but as relatively well organised internally.

On the other hand the whole tribe might with equal appro-
priateness be regarded (in the sense explained above, p. 48), as a
single, larger, but less well organised society,2 between whose
divisions party quarrels were frequent and were settled by fighting,
more or less serious according to the nature of the case and the
feeling between the groups. So treated an Australian tribe would
be analogous to some more advanced society, comprising clans,
villages, or other divisions. Within the clan of such a society,
there is very possibly impartial justice, while between the clans
there is only collective self- redress.5 In this case, however, we are
too likely to hear nothing of the justice within the clan. It is
between clans that trouble arises and with this trouble that the code
of the tribe is concerned.4 Such a society therefore is apt to figure

i. Though occasionally extending beyond 100.

2. Thus throughout the Boulia district, according to W. E. Roth (p. 41),
the natives can make themselves mutually intelligible, and possess in
common trade-routes, markets, hunting grounds, customs, manners, and
beliefs. They intermarry and would make common cause against an
enemy. Mr. Roth describes them as messmates. His statement defines
very fully what we mean when we speak of a single society in the absence
of a common government.

3. Thus, among the Wyandots, who had a well developed gentile
system, there is a clear distinction between offences within the gens, dealt
with primarily by the gentile council, and offences between gentes, which
are matter for compensation or, in the alternative, of vengeance by the kin.
Though the tribal council in either case might intervene (at least in a ques-
tion of murder), the distinction of principle is clear. (Powell, Wyandot
Government, Smithsonian Reports i, p. 67.) Among the Ossetes, there was
vengeance and later composition as between family groups, while within
them the head might fine and even excommunicate an offender.

4. Thus, among some of the Igorottes, we have clear accounts of ven-
geance exercised upon members of other villages and leading to prolonged
blood feuds (Blumentritt, Dr. Pet. p. 28), but we have no statement as to
the relations within the village. The existence of ordeals (p. 30) would

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 65

in our Column I, as an instance in which self-redress by the kinsfolk
is the regular method of obtaining justice, for there is no doubt that
it is one society, and that self-redress exists as between its consti-
tuent parts while of the internal regulation of the parts we hear
nothing.

It will be seen that unless we are careful to compare like with
like as nearly as the conditions allow our classification may give a
topsy-turvy result. The very fact that a society has grown beyond
the primary group, and in its wider form is sufficiently compact to
make it clearly recognisable as a unity, will also lead to recognised
internal self-redress as one of its institutions, and it gets into our
Column I in consequence. Were the society still better organised
no doubt it would have public justice throughout. But the serious
point is that if it be less organised, so little organised that we do not
easily recognise it as a unity, it again escapes Column I and gets
back into the highest column on account of the justice found in its

seem to point to some public regulation but we can assert nothing with
any definiteness. Among the Bagobos, again, blood revenge is said to
exist to the fullest extent, but the description appears to refer to different
villages, and of offences within the village we learn only that they are com-
poundable without being told how the composition would be enforced.
(Schadenberg Z.E. 17, p. 28.)

In other cases what we hear is incidental and vague, but often sufficient
to show that quite different ideas are at work. Thus, among the Thlinkeets,
we learn from Swanton (Smiths. Rep., xxvi, p. 427) that as between clans,
there is retaliation, which may be vicarious, or composition; while within
the family any disgraceful act is so keenly felt that the offender may be killed
for it. Among the Shush wap, an interesting case is related by Mr. Teit..
A bad man is slain by his relatives on the ground that he has conducted
himself in such a way that someone will kill him, " and then we shall have
to avenge his death." The deed is done in a large lodge but no one inter-
feres until his slayers begin to challenge the others. (Jesup Expedn.,
vol. ii, p. 560.)

Among the Creeks, in the time of Hawkins (Trs. American Eth. Soc.,.
J853, pp- 66, 67) murder w7as primarily an affair for the felatives but the
tribe might interfere if it thought itself likely to be affected, and then
might seize either the murderer or the next of kin, hence the relations
sometimes put the guilty man to death in self-protection.

According to Loskiel's account referring mainly to the Iroquois and
Delaware, murder was avenged if not compounded, but if a man had killed
his own relation, he escaped without much difficulty, for the family— who
alone had the right to take vengeance — did not choose to deprive themselves
of two members at once. (History, vol. i, p. 16.) Such illustrations tend
to show how the very fact that men rely on the kin mainly for protection
implies a different attitude, whether more or less severe, to offences within
the kindred. The system moreover involves the virtual autonomy of kin
in a code of customs recognised by the whole community, and therefore
likely to impress a visitor.

66 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

smallest groups. We should thus get the paradox that societies of
very low organisation (we are not speaking here of their economic
grade) would tend to rank it with the most highly organised
societies and above those which are really intermediate.

We avoid this pitfall by tabulating our societies twice over.
With this object we form the heading " Primary group alone,"
under which we enter those societies in which we find some element
of public justice, but only within what we have called the Primary
Group. Of these we have two cases : —

(1) Among the Asiatic forest peoples the Primary Group is the
only society that there is. Within it the elders may maintain order
and punish offenders, and this is " public justice " in the only sense
in which the term can be applied among such peoples. But beyond
the group there are no regulated relations at all, so that such a
people is really of lower social organisation — has on the whole less
provision for the maintenance of order and redress of wrongs — than
a tribe recognising a common head, but consisting of a number of
such groups practising self-redress as against one another in accord-
ance with a recognised code, for in such a tribe as has been observed
there may be " public justice " within the kinsfolk though not as
between one set of kinsfolk and another. Our first case, then,
consists of those instances in which the enlarged family or family
group and society are identical.

(2) Our second case comprises societies which have subdivisions,
often but not always coincident with a kindred, protecting their own
members and exercising some internal justice.

Including these two cases within the meaning of the term "justice
within the primary group," we proceed, so far as our evidence allows,
to distinguish the instances in which public justice extends so far but
no farther, and on the basis of this distinction we make two tables.
The first recognises "public justice" when confined to the primary
group. The second ignores it when so limited, requiring (a) that it
should be extended to a society wider than that of the family group,
and (b) that it should cover the relations of any divisions which such
a society may comprise. In other words, in the first table we take
the narrower of the available views of what constitutes the social
unity, while in the second table we take the broader. Thus in the
case of the Australians — numerically the most important body con-
cerned in this question — we take first the view that the local group is
the society, and reckon all retaliation beyond it is "external";
while in the second table we take the view that the tribe is the social
unit and that feuds between groups constitute a form of internal self-
redress.1

i. The difficulty in applying this definition in Australia is that tl^e
term tribe is differently used by different writers (e.g., in the passage
quoted above Mr. Roth uses it of the several " messmates " separately) and

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 67

Of the two tables the second gives the fairer basis of comparison
between societies of different grades. For, as already remarked,
in the larger societies we are often left without information as to the
conditions obtaining within the primary group, whereas in the
lower societies it stands out as the effective social unit. Hence in
the first table many societies will figure as practising self-redress
alone, although there may in fact be quite as much " public justice "
within their constituent groups as is found in lower societies which
do not extend beyond such groups. Moreover, this table involves
the placing of justice between the nearest neighbours and kinsfolk
on a level with justice as between distinct groups, and it is, in fact,
precisely the difference between these two applications of justice
which constitutes the principal distinction in the organisation of the
simpler societies in relation to the maintenance of order. Never-
theless, it is desirable that both points of view should be exhibited,
and our first table acts as a check on our second, indicating (as will
be seen on comparing the two) the existence of elements of justice
penetrating down to the lowest levels of social organisation.

There is, however, just this difficulty to be met. Among higher
peoples it is barely possible that the cases marked as External
Retaliation would in some instances be really analogous to self-
redress, as between groups in, for instance, an Australian tribe. We
have therefore made a third table, in which all cases of external
retaliation above the Lower Hunters are reckoned under Column I,
while among the Lower Hunters retaliation is not reckoned unless
it be known to be between groups of the same tribe. This is done
to avoid the danger of exaggerating the preponderance of retalia-
tion among the Hunters. A comparison of Tables II. and III.
shows that the discrepancy is not great, and as undoubtedly most
of the " external " instances are truly external, and not comparable
to the inter-group relations, the error, if any, in Table II. cannot be
large.

that the limits of the tribe in the wider sense are often vague. We have
no doubt that the local group is normally a member of a wider society in our
sense. But we cannot always identify this society. In that case we have
no alternative but to treat all dealings beyond the group as external or
" foreign." But often there is clear mention of a " tribe " to which the
group belongs and in general we may roughly identify this tribe with our
wider society. In so doing we are on the safe side for in point of fact
close social relations often extend beyond the tribal limits.

As to the local group it is not always identical with a kindred or
enlarged family—though it seems to be so in many cases— for it may
contain kindreds within it. But though not identical it is in relation and
tribal government closely analogous to the kindreds or clans of other
peoples. Our first table emphasises the differences, our second the agree-
ment, so far as affects justice.

68 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

The full list of peoples on which the tables are based is given
in Appendix C> together with a discussion of certain difficulties and
doubtful points in the classification, subject to these we arrive at the
following results : —

CLASSIFICATION A.
TABLE I. JUSTICE WITHIN THE GROUP.

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

L. H 23 ... isi ... i

H. H 53 ... 5 .- 3

Dep. H. ... 4 ... 6J ... i

A1 16 ... 7 ... 6

P1 5* - 5 -. 3

A2 36i ... 3oJ .- 23i

P2 5 - 3 7i

A3 13 J ... 38 ... 37i

Expressing the figures in each column as a fraction of all the cases
in each grade we have : —

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

L. H 62 ... .36 ... .01

H. H 87 (.78)... .08 (.16)... .Q5(.o6)

[Dep. H. ... .17 ... .72 ... .11]

A1 55 ... .24 ... .21

P1 ... .41 .37 .22

A2 40 ... .34 ... .26

P2 ... .32 .19 48

A3 ... .15 43 42

The Dependent Hunters should either be passed over or reckoned
in with the Higher Hunters. The figure in brackets shows the
result of the latter method.

From Table I. we form Table II. for Justice beyond the Primary
Group by taking from Cols. II. and III. cases in which public
intervention in private offences is confined to the primary group.
These are added to Col. I. if we have direct evidence of self-help.
Otherwise they are merely deducted.1

i. Where the conditions within the group are too vague for entry but
there is clearly no organisation beyond it, e.g., among the Veddas we get
in Table ii an addition to col. i. In the case of the Wyandots justice
within the group falls under col. iii, beyond it under col. ii.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 69

TABLE II. JUSTICE IN THE SECONDARY GROUP.

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

L. H 34s ... 4 -.. o

H.H 53 ... 5 ... 3

Dep. H. ... i| ... 6J ... i

A1 17 ... 6J ... 6

P1 5i ... 5 .- 2

A2 36J ... 31^ ... 2i\

P2 5 3 ... 71

A3 ... i4± ... 37 ... 36^

Or in fractions of all cases : —

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

L. H 9 ... .1 ... .o

H.H 87 (.78)... .08 (.16)... .05 (.06)

[Dep. H. ... (.17) ... (.72) ... On)]

A1 58 ... .22 ... .20

P1 44 ... .40 ... .16

A2 41 ... .35 ... .24

P2 ... .32 .19 .48

A3 ... ... .16 ... .42 ... .41

Finally, we subjoin for comparison Table III., in which above
the Lower Hunters cases of external retaliation are reckoned as
affecting justice.

TABLE III. JUSTICE, RECKONING EXTERNAL RETALIATION.

Col. I.

Col. II.

Col. III.

L. H. ...

... 34i

4

o

H. H. ...

... 56

5

3

Dep. H.

... i} ...

6} ...

i

A1

... 18

6} ...

6

P1

5!

6

i

A2

- 37* -

33}

19!

P2

... 5

3

7i

A3

... 16}

38

35}

Or in fractions of all

cases : —

Col. I.

Col. II.

Col. III.

L. H. ...

... .9

.1

.0

H. H. ...

... .88 (.79)...

.08 (.16)...

.05 (-05)

Dep. H.

... .17

.72

.11

A1

... .59

.21

.20

P1

... 44

.48 ...

.08

A2

... .41

-37

.22

P2

... .32

.19

.48

A3

... .18

42

.39

70 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

The Dependent Hunters, being either reckoned with the Higher
Hunters or omitted, it will be seen that in Table I. the first column
descends steadily from the Lower Hunters to A3, except for a
sharp rise in the Higher Hunters. Col. III., regular justice, at the
same time rises from *oi to '48 in the highest pastoral, which is
slightly above the higher agricultural stage in this respect. Col. II.,
on the other hand, is irregular, as it gains from Col. I. but loses to
Col. II. through the advance of justice. The only serious deviation
from the correlation of justice with the economic grade in this table
is the excess of the Higher over the Lower Hunters in Col. I. In
the second table this disappears, and the only interesting irregu-
larity here is the somewhat high figure in Col. III. for the lowest
agriculture.

As explained above, the safest measure of the correlation
between justice and economic development is to be obtained by
taking the fraction derived from Table II., Table III. indicating the
narrow limits of any possible error that may have arisen by classing
retaliation among the higher peoples as external, which might,
perhaps, correspond to the inter-group retaliation of the Australians.

The results of Tables I. and II. may be shown in graphic form :

JUSTICE IN THE SMALLER GROUP. I.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 71

JUSTICE IN THE WIDER SOCIETY. I.

L.H. H.H. A1 P1 A2 P2 A3

100

0
Dotted lines show the effect of including Dependent with Higher Hunters.

CLASSIFICATION B.

Perhaps the only serious element of uncertainty in the above
tables concerns the borderland between Cols. I. and II. Some
slight amount of " public assistance " may be given or " public
punishment " inflicted in a system which is mainly retaliatory, and
a reference to Appendix C will show the difficulties which we have
met in classifying certain societies on this account. In fact, it is
hardly likely that a small and homogeneous society could be
wholly indifferent to wrongs done among its members, with all
the possible consequences to internal peace. It is perhaps only
when strongly organised kinsfolk are found within a community
resolute to act for themselves and capable of resenting inter-
ference by others that redress is, as a matter of principle, left in
their hands. We may suspect that if we had fuller information we
should find some form of public intervention more frequent than
appears in our tables. Further, there is a measure of intervention
implied in regulated fights and expiatory ordeals, and in what was
called "arbitration." We have therefore checked the above
tables by a slightly different arrangement. We now make a
fourfold classification by dividing our first two columns into three.

Col. I. contains the cases in which we have no evidence that
private wrongs are treated as matters for public intervention. Thus

72 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

it includes instances of Self-redress and No Law (whether with or
without public punishment for Sacral and Tribal offences and
" Occasional " Public Justice).

Col. II. is that in which self-redress appears as the real basis of
Justice but is qualified by some measure of public intervention.
We refer to this column (i) cases of regulated or expiatory combats,
(2) cases of Arbitration combined with evidence of self-redress, (3)
cases of public assistance to, or control of self-redress, or of the
public punishment of some " private " offences when these are
combined with the existence of pure self -redress.

Col. III. is that in which public intervention is, in as far as our
information goes, the leading feature, but is not complete. Here
we have two subordinate groups, (a) those in which there is public
assistance or control or the public punishment of some private
offences with no mention of any pure self-redress; (b) those in
which a regular public system is established but self-redress is still
tolerated as a more or less admitted practice. These cases are
removed from Column II. because in them Public Justice has
become a complete system independent of the private avenger,
although his irregular proceedings may still be countenanced. For
the same reason these cases stand nearer to full Public Justice than
those of group (a), though they have not been formed into a
separate column to avoid too much subdivision.

Column IV. contains the cases in which Public Justice is the
regular system.

The following Table gives the number of peoples in each column for
each economic grade. The lists on which the numbers are based will be
found in Appendix C. The decimal in brackets after each figure
shows what fraction it is of all cases in its grade.

II. III. IV.

L. H. ...

ioj

(.29)

19

G53)

6

(-17)

I

(.01)

H. H. ...

38

(.62)

18

(-30)

2

(-03)

3

(•05)

Dep. H.

i\

(-17)

i

(.11)

Si

(.61)

i

(.11)

A1

13

(44)

6

(.21)

4

(-14)

6

(.21)

P1

32

(.26)

4

(-30)

3

(-22)

3

(-22)

A2

3Is

(-35)

15

(-17)

20\

(-23)

23.1

(.26)

P2

3

(-19)

3

(.19)

2

(-13)

7|

(-48)

A3

9

(.10)

X4s

(.16)

28

(-31)

(-42)

Combining the first and second columns in which self-redress

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 73

preponderates, and the third and fourth in which public justice
preponderates, we get the following fractions : —

I.&II. III. & IV.

L. H. ...

... .82

.18

H. H. ...

... .92(84)* ...

.08 (.16)*

Dep. H. ...

... .28

•72

A1

... .66

•34

P1

... .56

•44

A2

... .51

.49

P2

... .39

.61

A3

... .26

•74

* The figures in brackets show the effect of including the
Dependent Hunters with the Higher Hunters.

To obtain the corresponding figures for justice beyond this
group we transfer from a higher to a lower column cases in which
the elements of public justice are found within the group alone,

The principal effect is to include all the Asiatic Lower Hunters in
column I., to transfer several Australian tribes from column III. to
column II., and to add several more Australians to column II. Above
the Lower Hunters alterations are few. Details are given in
Appendix C.

The figures are : —

I. II. III. IV.

L. H. ... i8J (.40) 27 (.58) i (.02)

H. H. ...

38

(.62)

18

(-30)

2

(-03)

3

(-05)

Dep. H.

ii

(-17)

i

(.11)

Si

(.61)

i

(.11)

A1

14

(-48)

6

(.21)

3

(.10)

6

(.21)

P1

3i

(.28)

4

(-32)

3

(.24)

2

(.16)

A2

3'i

(-35)

16

(.18)

20^

(-23)

2I2

(.24)

P2

3

(•19)

3

(-19)

2

(-13)

7a

(.48)

A3 ... 10 (.11) 151 (.17) 27 (.30) 36J (40

Combining Cols. I and II. and Cols. III. and IV. we have : —

I.&II.

III. & IV.

L. H. ...

... .98

.02

H. H. ...

... .92 (.84) ...

.08 (.16)

Dep. H. ...

... .28

.72

A1

... .69

•31

P1

... .60

.40

A2

... .53

•47

P2

... .39

.61

A3

... .29

•7i

74

L.H.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

JUSTICE IN THE SMALLER GROUP.
H.H. A1 P1 A2 P2

JUSTICE IN THE WIDER SOCIETY.

100

Dotted lines show the effect of including Dependent with Higher Hunters.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 75

It will be seen in these tables that if we take the first two
columns 'together there is a pretty uniform decline from the lowest
to the highest culture, indicating a falling off in self-redress, while
conversely, if we take the last two together, and still more if we take
the last column alone, there is a nearly uniform increase, showing
the development of public justice.

The only serious exception to this uniformity is the preponder-
ance of the Lower Hunters in Col. II. This is due to the develop-
ment in Australia of the method of mitigating vengeance by cere-
monial encounter, etc. The Higher Hunters have also their
method of mitigating vengeance, viz., composition. We have 25
cases of composition among those classes of .Higher Hunters. 15 of
which fell under Col. I. If we transfer these 15 from Col. I. to
Col. II. we should have 23 cases in Col. I. and 35 in Col. II., nearly
the same proportion for each column as among the Lower Hunters.
We do not do this because composition does not suggest the same
amount of Public Interference, but it is an alternative method of
making peace.

The Australians, with no economic development, desire personal
expiation as a method of avoiding vengeance. The American
Hunters, of a slightly higher economic level, begin the practice of
composition, which undergoes a material development in later
stages.

As a still further test we have taken these four columns by con-
tinents in order to see whether the correlation repeated itself in all
parts of the world. On this method some of the groups naturally
are reduced to very small numbers, so that some irregularity is
inevitable. Nevertheless, the, correlation is clearly marked in each
geographical division.

The figures are given in the following table : —

ASIA.

I. and II. III. and IV.

as Fraction as Fraction

I. II. of Total. III. IV. of Total.

L. H. ... 9 (i.0) — —

H.H. ... 2 2 (.67) O 2 (.33)

A1 - 3 2 (.43) ii 5 (-57)

P1 ... i 3 (.80) o i (.20)

A2 ... 7i 2 (.42) 8* 4} (.58)

P2 -, 2 I (.5) I 2 (.5)

A3 ... 2 5 (.28) 12 6 (.72)

... ij i (.78) 5| i (-22)

76 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

AFRICA.

L. H. ... 2 (1.0) ...... —

P1 -. 2 i (.5) ...... 3 o (.5)

A2 ...3.7 (-37) ...... 7 10 (.63)

P2 ... i 2 (.32) ...... i 5j (.68)

A3 ... 4 9 (-24) 1 6 25 (.76)

OCEANIA.

H. H. ... — i — — —

AI ... — i ...... —

A2 ... 15 5 (-69) ...... 5 4 (-SO

A3 ... — i ...... —

NORTH AMERICA.

L. H. ... 3$ (1.0) ...... (.01)

H. H. ... 29! 14 (.94) ...... 2 i (.06)

A* ... 7 i (.89) ...... i o (.11)

A2 ... 2 2 (.73) ...... O ij (.27)

A3 ... 2 o (.27) ...... o 5j (.73)

SOUTH AMERICA.

L. H. ... i i (1.0) ...... —

H. H. ... 6} i (i.o) ...... o o

A1 ... 4 2 (.80) ...... i i (.20)

A2 ... 4 i (.77) ...... o 1} (.23)

A3 ... i o (.5) ...... o i (.5)

Considering the small numbers which these subdivisions
reach, it will be seen that the correspondence with the economic
grades is remarkably close. The only groups actually out of their
order are the two Pastorals in Asia, consisting of five and six
members respectively, A3 in Oceania consisting of a single member
and P1 in North America a single doubtful case. On the other
hand, the Dependent Hunters are quite out of their place, and if
combined with the other Hunters in Asia bring the Higher Hunters
just to the level of A1. With these exceptions the subdivision is
singularly even, and while we should draw no inference from
results resting on small numbers when taken by themselves, we
may fairly say that the correlation indicated by the two previous
tables does not depend on any single region. It is, on the whole,
independent of regional influences, and extends to the whole area
of survey.

To sum up. Of the Lower Hunters there are three main groups.
There are forest tribes in the Malay region and Borneo and some

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 77

scattered tribes of similar life habits in Africa and South America.
All of these appear to be of the nature of family groups, with very
little organic relation to one another. The name of public justice
is not really suitable in these cases, but it may be used for purposes
of comparison and applied to those instances in which the older
people keep internal order. Understanding it in this sense, we
find that even within these little groups it is by no means regularly
developed. There are cases of self-redress even in this primitive
cell of the social organism. The next group is that of the Austra-
lians, where the primary groups are in some cases more extensive,
and are loosely united in tribes; and here, too, there are many cases
of self-redress within the group, as well as many of collective justice,
though there are very few where public justice extends to the tribe
as a whole. Lastly, there are the Californians and one or two
North Americans, where the primary group is not clearly differen-
tiated. Here again self-help predominates as far as our accounts

go-

Of the Higher Hunters, far the largest number are to be found
in North America, though there is also a sprinkling in South
America. Here we can seldom differentiate the primary group
from the little society, which is certainly more than a family group,
as a rule, though perhaps less than a tribe. Throughout this area
self-redress heavily predominates.

When we pass to peoples of higher culture we are, as a rule,
dealing with something distinctly more than the primary group,
though there may be some cases in which the contrary is true at the
level of Incipient Agriculture, and this perhaps explains the some-
what high number of apparent cases of public justice or semi-public
justice at this level. But, apart from these, our societies are now
enlarged, and include at least a village, and often an aggregation of
villages. Thus, as we ascend the scale, our social organisation is
extending in two senses. First, in the most literal sense, it is
including a larger population, with greater variety of groups within
it. Secondly, it is extending in the sense of becoming more com-
plete, taking on itself more and more the function of the redress of
wrongs and the maintenance of order. But in appearance these
two movements tend to some extent to counter one another. For
order is first established, it would seem, within the little group, and
then extends itself to the wider society, which contains several such
groups. The consequence is, as already pointed out, that in the
intermediate stages, where several groups are sufficiently alike to
constitute a loose unity, we have retaliation as between them
strongly developed, while the same relations between corresponding
groups at a lower stage will be thought of rather as feuds or as war
between separate societies than as juridical relations between mem-
bers of the same society. When we guard against the difficulties

78 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

arising from this peculiarity we see that the sphere of the collective
maintenance of justice, viewed as a whole, marks a steady advance
from the primary group outwards. We see also that even within
the primary group public justice advances upon the whole though
less regularly with the advance in material culture in the tribes that
we have before us, and we therefore seem justified in regarding pure
self-redress as the initial stage of development, and public control as
superimposed by successive stages upon that method of maintaining
order. In corroboration of this view, it may be pointed out that in
the Australian instances, which are the most notable of those where
public control within the group is brought to bear upon private
offences, the object seems clearly to be that of preventing the exten-
sion of blood vengeance. Thus in Queensland a man may avenge
his own wrongs, but if he does serious injury to the offender the
camp council inflicts equal injury upon him or sees that it is so
inflicted. It acts in restraint, that is to say, of unauthorised aggres-
sion or of excessive vengeance. There is no question here of the
suppression of homicide as such, for parents may put their children
to death without question, and if a man kills his wife he only at
most exposes himself to the vengeance of her relations. So again
with the Yuin ; deliberate murder of another man is punished, but
if a man is avenging himself, no steps will be taken against him.
The expiatory combats and the regulated rights of the Australians
are also all of them palpably means of ending a quarrel, or marking
a point beyond which it is not to go. They do not seek to punish
a wrong but to arrest vengeance for wrong at a point which will
save the breaking-out of a devastating fight.

The punishment of sacral and tribal offences has an important
bearing upon these issues. Steinmetz and others have held that
these are the first offences that were publicly punished, excepting
in so far as public punishment has been adopted as a means of
restraining vengeance. We have tested this theory by enumerating
cases in which tribal offences are the only ones for which we have
any evidence of public punishment and comparing them with the
number of cases in which we have evidence of the punishment of
private offences, but not of those which are tribal in character. The
result is shown in the following table, which gives, in each grade of
culture, the number of cases of public punishment (a) of tribal
offences without others ; (b) of others without tribal offences, and
exhibits each number as a fraction of the total formed by the two.
The numbers are small, so we have grouped (a) the two sets of
Hunters,1 (b) Agriculture1 and the Lower Pastoral, and (c) the

i. The Dependent Hunters, as in other cases, stand outside the normal
order, but even if we include them with the other Hunters we still have a
preponderance of cases in which Tribal Offences alone are given as punish-
able.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 79

Higher Pastoral and Higher Agriculture together. The result is to
show that among the Hunters, the number of cases in which tribal
offences alone are publicly punished is overwhelmingly greater
than the number in which private offences alone are so punished,
while in the higher grades the relation is reversed. This result
seems to corroborate Steinmetz's view.

PUBLIC PUNISHMENT OF TRIBAL AND PRIVATE OFFENCES.

Tribal but not Private but not

Private Offences Tribal Offences

Punished. Punished.

L. H 3 o

H. H ii 3

Dep. H o 6

A1 3 5

P1 o 3

A2 8 17

P2 ... o i

A3 2 14

Grouping which cultures we have :

H 14 3

Dep. H o 6

A^andP1 3 8

A2 8 17

P2 and A2 2 15

We should not interpret the cases in which private offences
alone are tabled as punishable as meaning that in reality no sacral
or public offences are recognised, but rather as implying that they
have ceased to play the prominent part in judicial arrangements
which they occupy among the Hunters, so that they pass un-
recorded.

METHODS OF PUNISHMENT.

The various forms of punishment seen in our tables reveal three
methods of dealing with crime. The first, treating it as an
aggression to be revenged ; the second, as a trespass (whether
against an individual or the community or the gods) that may be
atoned ; the third, as something wrong that must be put down. It
may be well to compare the numbers under each of the heads
specially representing these methods. For the first we take the
head of Retaliation only; for the second we combine Composition
and Atonement, and we include under them the ceremonial and
expiatory fights of the Australians. For the third we take Public
Justice alone, eliminating cases of composition and atonement.
We subjoin instances of the collective or vicarious principle which
tends slightly to expand with the practice of composition. The
results are : —

8o INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Collective

Eetalia- Compo- Atone- or Public

tion. sition. ment. Total. Vicarious. Justice.

L. H 44^ 6 21 27 10 \ (.01)

H. H 50^ 25 i 26 io\ i (.02)

Dep. H. ... 2\ 2 o 201 (.11)

A1 17 14 i 15 93 (-10)

P1 9 10 o 10 52 (.16)

A2 59 43 8 50 17 13 (.14)

P2 8 9 i 10 5 4} (.29)

A3 43^ 49 13 6 1 34 21 J (.24)

PROCEDURE.

Our information about procedure is somewhat scanty, particu-
larly among the lower peoples. Here, wherever there is anything
of the nature of public justice, our informants are generally satisfied
with stating, for example, that, if the accused is found guilty, such-
and-such a penalty is exacted. But what sort of enquiry is held,
and by what means the guilt is ascertained, we are not informed.
In Australia, indeed, the spear-throwing ordeal may be regarded
as trial and punishment in one, but if we restrict the conception of
a trial to something which must precede punishment, we shall omit
this. There still seem to be four pretty clear, and one more
doubtful, cases of something like an investigation mentioned
among the Australians. With this exception, trials are hardly
mentioned, until we reach the Agricultural stage, as shown in the
accompanying table. The list would be very much enlarged if we
included, under trial, all cases in which the use of an ordeal is
recorded. We have not done this because an ordeal may be of the
nature of a challenge between two parties, rather than the regular
part of a procedure of a duly constituted court. On the other hand,
it is probable that most of the cases of regular public justice really
have trials, though they happen not to be mentioned in our authori-
ties. Thus it is pretty certain that our table understates the extent
to which judicial procedure advances in the higher stages. On the
other hand, the figures as to ordeals and oaths show that the
direction of this advance is towards the adoption of supernatural
tests rather than of rational procedure. In this respect the higher
barbarism resembles the archaic civilisation : —

L. H. ...

Trial.
^

Ordeal.
O1

Oath.

o

H. H. ...

2

I

o

Dep. H. ...

o

I

o

A1

2

1

o

PI

I

I

I

A2

7

26

7

P2

6

4"

/
•a

A3

20

.If?

8

i. Australian spear-throwing ceremonies omitted.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES Si

JUSTICE AND GOVERNMENT.

Lastly, we have sought to investigate the relation between the
development of justice and that of government in general. Our
main difficulty here has been that government may be exercised by
a council whose powers are often so loosely described that we
have great difficulty in deciding whether they should be regarded
as an original form of government or not. We have therefore
ended by leaving the council out of the question and confining
ourselves to the power of the chief alone. We have taken those
cases in which the chief, whether of a smaller or larger group,
is described as possessing real power, and we enter in the following
table the number of cases in which a powerful chiefship is asserted
at each grade in the development of justice : —

CORRELATION OF CHIEF'S POWER AND JUSTICE.
CHIEF POWERFUL.

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

2 O

2 2

3 I

3 3

I 1

9 13

\ 7

16 27

L. H. ...

o

H. H. ...

7i

Dep. ...

0

A1

I

P1

I

A2

5

P2 ...

i

A3

2

Total ... :7i (.16) 36J (.34) 54 (-So)

The result is to show a certain correlation, but not so much as
might have been anticipated a priori.1 It must, however, be

i. In some cases it is clear that, notwithstanding the despotic power of
the king, he does not exert himself to suppress vengeance. Thus, among
the Baquerewe (Hurel, Anthropos, vi, p. 94), it is distinctly stated that the
king has nothing to do with justice and that the blood feud is in full
vigour. More often we find the chieftainship struggling to exert its power
in the suppression of disorder, thus Dorsey (op, cit. p. 370) speaks of
punishments for drunkenness inflicted by the chief of the Omaha, but
Fletcher and La Fleche (Smiths, xxvii, 619) show that this was due to
the efforts of a single half-breed chief, and was in the end tolerated by the
tribe. Among the Creeks Caleb Swan, at the end of the i8th century
(Schoolcraft, v, p, 281), describes the introduction of whipping for horse-
stealing, by a chief named McGillivray, presumably either a white man or
a half-breed, who appears to haVe had some power as he is said to have
appointed young men to punish whom he would, but yet was afraid to
decide disputes for fear of vengeance. As to the whipping, Swan adds that
"as in other cases " the punishment depends " at last " on the superior
force of the injured clan.
F

82 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

remembered that we are only dealing with one organ of govern-
ment, and if we were to ask how far does the general organisation
of government affect the organisation of justice, the answer would
certainly be : more closely than this table shows, but how much
more closely we have not the means of telling in numerical terms.
Upon the whole matter we conclude that, both in extent and in
internal quality, the development of social order is roughly cor-
related with advance in economic culture. The lowest societies are
very small, and even within the smallest groups there is very often
no provision for the maintenance of justice. As we advance from
the Lower Hunters, we get always larger societies, and by degrees
provision for the maintenance of justice within these extended
groups. At our highest point we get a large proportion of the
cases in which public justice is fully developed over the whole of
an extensive group, and this brings us to the threshold of civilised
order just as economically we have come to the point at which
L civilisation is usually held to begin.

APPENDIX A.

GOVERNMENT OP SECONDARY GROUP.

The peoples to whom the numbers in the text, p. 52, refer are : —

Lower Hunters : — Group I : Yerwaka and Yantrawanta, Powell's Creek,
? Kulin, ? Yuin, Miwok. Group II : Gournditchmara,. Group III : Dieri.
Group V : ? N. Queensland, ? Mycoolon, Euahlayi, N. Australians.

Higher Hunters :— Group I : Seri, Montagnais (33), Unalashka Aleuts,
Lillooet, Halokmelen, Lkungen, Haida, Kwawiutl, Kootenay, Klamaths,
Yurok, Yokuts, Aucas, Puelches. Group II : Blackfeet, Kiowa (27),
Similkameem, Italmen, Tehuelches. Group III : Tsimshian, Nootka,
Shastika. Group V : B'ellacoola.

Dependent Hunters :— Group I : Bataks of Palawan (36),Yanadi. Group
III : Korwa. Group V; Bhuiyar, Chenchu (34).

Agricul. I : — Group I : Mohave, Delaware (29). Group II : Lushai (41),
Mantra. Group III : Iroquois (28), Huron, Ojibways. Group IV : Santals.

Pastoral I : — Group I : Beni Amer, Wambugu, Kurds of Eriwan, Aeneze.
Group II : Dinka, Shasewenses (37). Group II : Ovaherero, Batauana,
Colonial Hottentots, Khoi Khoin.

Agricul. II : — Group I : Kandhs, Kaupui Nagas (some), ?Lendu, Banaka
and Bapuku, Fang, Niam Niam, Mayombe, Bageshu, Bakongo, Creeks (30),
Pawnees, Illinois, Marshall Bennett Islands, ? Ambrym, ? Mowat, other
Caroline Islands, Rotumians. Group II : Chakma, Kolya Nagas, Bororo,
Chiriguano, Yonca and Boni, Bali, Azande, Adio, Azimba, Maravis, Angoni,
Latuka, Monbuttu, Mangbetu, Waheiei, Wadoe, Natchez, Koita, Wagap,
New Caledonia, Maoris, Tongans, Rarotongans, Hawaians, Tahitians,
Fijians. Group III : Land Dyaks, Khonds, Bangala, Bayanzi, Gallinas,
Warega, Wyandots, Gilbert Islands, Samoans. Group IV : Wambugwe
Group V : Kharwar, Majhwar, ? Torres Group.

Pastoral II : — Group I : Wataturu, Bogos, Kazak Kirghiz (42). Group
II : Danakil, Bahima, Makololo, Baquerewe, Altaian Kalmucks, other
Kalmucks. Group III : Somal. Group IV : Bechuana, Ama Xosa, Gallas
(some).

Agricul. Ill :— Group I : Ossetes (formerly), Nias,Alfures, Achinese and
Pedirese, Javans, Pima, Kuku (46), Wakikuyu, Bahuana (formerly),
Basonge, Ababua, Jekris, Marea. Group II : Kasias, Suanes, Battas,
Maguindanaos, Khiva, Apalachites, Zapotheks (formerly), Marutse,
Ondonga, Banyoro, Bukoba, Nandi, Wasinja, Washambala, Basoga
Batamba, Wafipa, Bihenos, Cazembe, Bayaka, Bushongo, Waniamwesi
Bamsalala, Baganda, Lunda, Kimbunda, Baronga, Ewe (49), Tshi, Yoruba,
Geges and Nagos, Diakite Saracolays, Warundi, Bambara, Foolah, Segoo,
Benin Natives, Nossi Be. Group III : Some Kayans, Kenyahs, Passu-
mahians, Malays of Padang, Pueblos of New Mexico (31), Akamba, Wapare,
Bawenda, Fiote, Amahlubi, Guatemala. Group IV : Kayans of Mendalam,
Kayans of Mahakam, Badagas, Balinese, Basutos, Alur, Wachagga, Yao,
Wagogo, Calabar. Group V : Padam Abor, Singkel (dep.). Mbengas.

83

APPENDIX B.

TABLES INDICATING METHODS OF MAINTAINING ORDER AND RE-
DRESSING WRONGS IN THE SIMPLER SOCIETIES OF EACH
ECONOMIC GRADE.

LOWER HUNTERS.

Retaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight conti'olled assisted

(8) Swan Kiver

+

(15) N.W.C. Queensland -

+

+

+

(7) Bungyarlee

+

(10) Dieri

+

+

(9) Bangarang

+

E +

(22) Narrinjerri

i

(2) Kaiabara -

+

+

(2) Maryborough -

+ ?E

+

N.S. Wales (Some) -

+

+

(20) Kamilaroi

+

+

(5) Geawegal

+

(6) Euahlayi -

E

(19) Rose Bay -

+

+

(Namoi R.)

+

+

Powell's Creek

E

(3) Port Lincoln

+

+

(16) Port Darwin

+

+

(14) Tongaranka

+

(2) Turrbal

+

+

(i2)W. Victoria

+

+

(13) Kurnai

+

+

(24) Waimbio

+

(2) Wiradjuri

+

(8) Perth & W. Australia

+

+

+

(2) Wotjobaluk

+

?

Yarra Yarra

(2) Wurunjeri

+

Wudthaurung

_j_

+

NOTE. — The headings are fully explained in the text, pp. 54 to 61.

86

Crimes
' anable

Public
punish-
ments
tribal
and sacral
offences

Public
punish-
ments
some
private
offences

Un-

statec

Occa-
l sional

Arbi-
tration

Execu
tive

Regula

Primar
r group

y With a
trial

Fine to
ggrieved
party

Fine
to the
Court

Ordeal

Expia-
tory
s combat

+

+

+

+

+

?

+

Formal

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

?

+

+

+

Formal

Private

?Cere

+

+

+

+

•

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Private

+

+

+

+

Private

-

G2

87

Eetaliation Collective

and Composi- or Crime-

self-help tion vicarious No law less

Private

Regulated justice jue

flght controlled assis

(2)Yuin

+

Gringai

+

Chepare -

(n)C. Australians

+

(u)N. Australians -

+

Ngeumba

E +

+

(17) Kabi and Waaka

+

(18) Herbert River

+

+

Tasmanians

•f

(i) Adelaide -

+

(23) Buntamurra

+

Watchandee

E +

E +

Ngurla

,

Newcastle Tribes

E

Whayook

Ballardong

' E

Koynup and Etecup

|

Yerkla Mining -

E +

Warburton River

E

Milya Uppa

1

(2i)Belyando River

+

+

N. Queensland -

+

+

1

(4) Riverina -

+

I

(4) Some Murray R.

+

+

;

(8) King George's Sound

+

+

Shoshones

+

Lower Californians -

+

Patwin

+

88

Crimes
;,tonable

Public

punish-
ments
tribal
and sacral
offences

+

Public
punish-
ments
some
private
offences

+

Un- Occa-
stated siona

Arbi-

. tratioi

Execu
L tive

Regula

Primai
r group

+

y With a
trial

Fine to

ggrievet
party

Fine
to the
Court

Ordeal

Expia-
tory
a combat

+

+

+

+

+

I

+

+

+

+

+

+

Private

Private

Private

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

;

Retaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self -help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assistec

Miwok

? +

Botocudos

+

+

Fuegians -

+

Batua

+

Bushmen -

+

Kubu (Wild) -

amil;
Group

? +

(44)Semang -

Do.

(44) Sakai

Do.

Andamanese

+

+

(39) Negritos of Alabat -

Famil;
Grouj

(39) Negritos of Angat -

Do.

Bumagat Negritos •

+

Do.

Punans

E

_

Family
Grou]

?

Veddas -

Do.

HIGHER HUNTERS.

Topanaz -

+

+

Guaycurus

+

Charrua

+

Tehuelches

+

Pampas

+

+

+

Puelches -

?

?

9

Abipones -

+

S. Chaco -

+

Zaparos

+ ?E

Kedah Semang

Perak Sakai

+

•m

Manobos -

+

+

90

Public
punish-
ments
tribal

Public
punish-
ments

primes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu-

onable offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group

Fine to Fine
Primary With aggrieved to the

trial

party Court Ordeals Oath.-

Retaliation Collective Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled

Private
justice
assisted

Ghiliaks

+

Tuski

+

?

(38) Italmen

+

+

Ostyak

Halokmelen

(27) Similkameen

+

+

Klamaths S.W.Oregon

+

Karok

+

+

Hupa

+

+

+

Blackfeet

+

+

Etechemins

+

+

Montagnais

+

+

+

Micmacs -

+

+

Assiniboins

+

+

Seri ....

Comanche

+

+

Apache

+

Kiowa

+

Omaha

+

+

+

+

Luisenos -

+

S. Californians

+

(26) Carriers

+

Kelta

+

Petawet

?

Yuki

+

Porno

Shastika

+

+

+

Nishinan

+

Crimes
atonable

Public
punish-
ments
tribal

Public
punish-
ments
some

and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With

offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial

Fine to Fine
aggrieved to the

party Court Ordeals

Oaths

-f

93

Eetaliation Collective

and Composi- or
self-help tion vicarious No law

Private Private

Crime- Regulated justice justice
less fight controlled assisted

Yokut

Makh el Chel -

Gallinomero

+

+

+

Western Eskimo

+

Behring Straits Do. -

+

Central Eskimo

+

+

+

Greenland Eskimo •

+

+

E. Labrador Eskimo

+

(33) Oonalashka Aleuts -

(33) Atkha Aleuts -

+

+

Koniaga -

+

Chepewayans -

+

+

(25) Loucheux -

+

+

(25) Kutchin

+

Kenay

+

(26) Tsekhene

+

(26) Chilcotin -

+

(26) E. Nahane

+

(26)W.Nahane

+

Thlinkeet

+

+

+

Lillooet

+

+

Tsimshian

+

+

E. Shushwap -

+

W. Shushwap -

+

Bellacoola

+

Lkungen -

+

+

Kootenay

+

+

Kwakiutl -

+

94

Crimes
enable

Public
punish-
ments
tribal
and sacral
offences

Public

punish-
ments
some
private
offences

Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary

stated sional tration tive Regular group

Fine to Pine
With aggrieved to the
trial party Court Ordeals

Oaths

95

Retaliation

and Composi-
self-help tion

Collective Private Private

or Crime- Regulated justice justice

vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Nootka

+

+

Haida ...

+

+

Thompson River

+

Yurok

+

+

Kauralaig (Torres
Straits)

+

DEPENDENT HUNTERS.

Bhinyar

Beriya

Korwa

(34) Atkwar Chenchu

Nundail Chenchu

?

Nicobarese

+

+

Bonthuks

Korumbus

+

(36) Bataks of Palawan -

+

+

+

+

AGRICULTURE INCIPIENT.

Yanadi

Dakota

+

+

Hidatsa

_j_

Iowa

+

+

Algonquinsof Quebec

+

+

+

Huron

+

+

+

(28) Iroquois -

+

+

+

(29) Delaware -

+

+

+

Abnaqui -

O jib way

+

+

+

+

Lengua

?

Yuracares

+

Mattacco

+

96

Crimes
atonable

Public
punish-
ments
tribal
and sacral
offences

Public

punish-

ments

some

private

offences

Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary

stated sional tration tive Kegular group

Fine to Fine
With aggrieved to the
trial party Court Ordeals

Oaths

M

M

97

Retaliation

and Composi-
self-help tion

Collective Private Private

or Crime- Regulated justice justice

vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Ipurina

-H

British Guiana -

+

+

Paravilhana

Mataguayos

+

Karayaki

+

+

Paumaris

+

Western Torres Strts.

+

(41) Lushai

+

+

(35) Negritos of Zambales

+

Bheels

+

+

+

Manobos of Agusan -

+

+

Zambales or Tinos -

E

+

+

Bygas

(44) Jakun

Paniyans -

Arunese

+

Mantra

Orang Bukit

+

Ainu

Lepchas

Santals (Some)

(44) Kedah Semang

(44) Perak Sakai

+

+

(44) Central Sakai -

Candios

+

+

Veddahs -

i^amil

jTOU

y
'

PASTORAL

Kurds of Eriwan

+

+

• . .

98

Public Public

punish- punish-

raents ments

tribal some Fine to Fine

Crimes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With aggrieved to the

atonable offences offences stated sional tration tive Kegular group trial party Court Ordeals

Oaths

M

M

99

Retaliation Collective Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled

Private

justice
assisted

(37) Shahsewenses -

E

+

Aeneze

+

+

+

+

Ostyak

Chewssures

+

+

+

Bilochs

+

+

+

Navaho

?

Ova Herero

+

+

Batauana.

Dinka

+

+

+

+

Beni Amer

+

+

(49) Masai

+

+

Colonial Hottentots -

?

Khoi Khoin

i

?

Wambugu

+

+

Mundombe

+

AGRICULTURE.

Maoris

+

+

+

Rotumians

+

Tongans -

Raratongans

Hawaians

+

Tahiti

+

Fiji ....

+

Samoa

+

+

+

+

Marquesas

+

Savage Islands

+

Florida

Saa ....

100

Public

punish-

ments

tribal

Public

punish-
ments

mes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu-

Fine to Fine
Primary With aggrieved to the

able offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial party Court Ordeals Oaths

101

Retaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

rs.oro

+

Koita

+

+

Wagawaga & Tube-
tube

+

+

Bartle Bay

+

+

Trobriand Islands -

+

New Caledonia

Torres Group -

+

Gazelle Penin. (N.E.)

+

+

Gazelle Peninsular -

+

+

Sulka (New Pomm.)

+

+

Moanu (Admiralty
Islands)

+

Motu (New Guinea) -

+

Mowat

E

Bogadjim

E

Mafulu-

+

+

Jabim

+

E. Torres Straits

+

Marshall Islands
(Nauru)

+

+

+

Pelew Islands -

+

+

Gilbert Islands

Bangala

+

+

+

+

Bali Tribes

E

(45) Mundombe

+

Azande

+

+

+

IO2

ible

Public Public

punish- punish.

ments ments

tribal some

and sacral private

offences

Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With

offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial

Fine to Fine
aggrieved to the

party Court Ordeals

Oaths

103

Retaliation Collective Private Priva&

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assist*

Adio

+

+

+

Tuchilange

Baquiri

+

+

Mandja

+

+

Bondei

+

+

Azimba

+

Wawira

+

Maravis

+

+

Angoni

Latuka

Wafiomi

+

+

Quissama

t

Kunamaand Barea -

+

+

+

Bayanzi

+

+

+

Banaka and Bapuku -

+

+

4

Yaunde

+

+

+

4

Fang

E

+

+

Gallinas

Mayombe

Mangbetu

+

Wambugwe

+

Waheiei

+

+

+

Bageshu

E

+

+

Warega

+

+

Wadoe

Baluba

Bakongo -

(49) Massai

+

+

104

Crimes a
mable

Public
punish-
ments
tribal
nd sacral
offences

Public
punish-
ments
some
private
offences

Un-
stated

Occa-
sional

Arbi-
tration

Execu-
tive I

legular
+

Primary
group

With a
trial

Fine to
ggrievec
party

Fine
to the
Court

Ordeal

+

3 Oaths

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

1

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

?

105

Retaliation

Collective

Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

f-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Wyandot

+

+

+

+

(30) Creek

+

+

+

Pawnee

Illinois

?

Carib

+

(32) Tarahumare * -

(32) Tepehuanes *

(32)Huicols* -

Papago -

+

Sambioa -

+

+

LJaupe

+

Chiquito -

+

Chiriguano

Miranda -

+

Campas

+

Ges -

Youca and Boni

Tapuyas -

+

Chakma

Paharias -

E

Kandhs

+

+

+

Tagals

+

Subanos

+

Kharwars -

Kols ....

Majhwar -

Dhimals -

Nicobarese

+

+

106

Public Public
punish- punish-
ments
tribal

inents
some

Crimes and sacral private
atonable offences

Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu-

offences stated sional tration tive Regular group

Private

Fine to Fine
Primary With aggrieved to the

trial party Court Ordeals

Oaths

M

M

M
M

107

Retaliation Collective Private

and Compos!- or Crime- Regulated justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled

Private

justice

rLnganese

+

Arunese

Flores

?

Bajdus

+

+

Boksas (Dep.) .-

Calingas - 7

+

+

Kachari (Bodo)

Limbus & Karantes -

Pani-Kocch

+

N. Aracan Group

+

+

+

Tharu

Tharu of Bengal

Land Dyaks

Khonds

+

+

+

Kolya Nagas -

+

Dodonga

+

Sea Dyaks

+

+

Pathan

+

Kei -

+

+

Muruts

+

+

Bontoc

Kaupui Nagas

+

+

Kiangans

+

+

PASTORAL. +

Somal

+

+

Danakil

(48) Beduan

+

Bahima

108

Public Public

punish- punish-
ments mentH

tribal some Fine to Fine

Crimes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With aggrieved to the

atonable offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial party Court Ordeals Oaths

M

109

Eetaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Makololo •

Bechuana

Ama Xosa

+

Wataturu

+

Bogos

+

+

+

Gallas

+

+

+

+

+

Baqerewe

+

Midhi

+

(42) Kazak Kirghiz

+

+

+

+

(40) Yakut

+

+

Altaian Kalmucks -

Turcomans

+

+

Kalmucks

Araucanians

^Formerly

+

+

AGRICULTURE. +

Kasias

Kayans

?

+

Kayans ofMendalem

+

+

+ E

Kayans .of Mahakam

+

+

+ E

Kenyahs -

?

+

Ossetes

+

+

+

Miris

?

Suanes (Free) -

+

Suanes

+

Bagobos -

E

+

Garos ...

+

+

Igorottes

E

+

+

Angani Nagas -

+

no

Crimes
atonable

Public

punish-

ments

tribal

and sacral

offences

Public

punish-

ments

some

private

offences

Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary

stated sional tration tive Regular group

Fine fco Fine
With aggrieved to the
trial party Court Ordeals

Oaths

^

Retaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Eegulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Sonthals

Badagas -

Battas of Sumatra -

+

+

+

+

Tjumba

+

Makassares

+

+

Bugis

+

+

Padam Abor

Maguindanaos

Singpho -

+

+

+

Singkel

Nias

+

+

+

Passumahians

+

+

+

Khiva

Balinese

+

Daians

Malays of Padang -

+

+

+

Java

+

+

Tinguianes

+

Adighe or Tscher-
kasses -

+

+

Munda Kols

Timorese -

+

+

+

Hopi

+

Pima

+

Sia ....

Zuni

Zapotecs -

Guatemala

+

112

Public Public

punish- punish-
ments ments

tribal some Fine to Fine

Crimes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With aggrieved to the

nble offences offences stated sional tration live Regular group trial party Court Ordeals

Oaths

M

113

Retaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Apalachites

(31) Pueblo or New
Mexico

Marutse

Ondonga

+

+

Banyoro -

+

+

Bukoba Natives

+

Basutos

+

+

Alur

Takue

+

+

(50) Nandi

+

+

+

A-Kamba

+

Warangi -

+

+

+

(46) Kuku

+

+

+

+

Wasinja -

Waschambala

E

+

+

W^akikuyu

+

+

+

+

Wapare

+

Duallas

+

Marea

+

+

+

+

Amahlubi

+

Wafipa

Sereres

?

Fanti

+

+

Mbenga -

Wachagga

+

+

Bihenos

Indikki

+

114

Public

punish-

ments

tribal

Public

punish-

ments

some

Fine to Fine

Crimes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With aggrieved to the

.tonable offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial party Court Ordeals Oaths

Retaliation Collective Private Privat

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Cazembe -

Kilwa

+

Basonge -

+

+

Ababua

+

+

Ba-Yaka -

+

Bushongo

Ba-Huana

+

Bambala -

+

Yao ...

+

+

1

Basonge Meno -

i

i

Wapokomo

+

+

+

Waniamwesi

+

+

Wasiba

+

+

Anyanza -

+

+

Bamsalala

+

+

+

Wagogo -

Formerl;

+

+

Baganda -

+

Kimbunda

+

+

Baronga -

Bawenda -

+

(47) Ewe Peoples

+

+

+

+

Tshi Peoples -

+

+

+

+

Yoruba

Geges & Nagos

Jekris

+

Diakite Saracolays -

+

+

+

+

+

Warundi -

-f

+

+

Fiotes

116

Public Public

punish- punish-

ments ments

tribal some

es and sacral private

Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu-

Fine to Fine
Primary With aggrieved to the

lable offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial party Court Ordeals Oaths

ir

Retaliation Collective Private Private

and Composi- or Crime- Regulated justice justice

self-help tion vicarious No law less fight controlled assisted

Foulah

Segoo

Calabar

Benin Natives -

+

Nossi-be & Mayotte -

+

+

Bambaras

Noerforesen

?

+

118

Public Public

punish- punish-
ments ments

tribal some Fine to Fine

>mes and sacral private Un- Occa- Arbi- Execu- Primary With aggrieved to the

.able offences offences stated sional tration tive Regular group trial party Court Ordeals Oaths

APPENDIX C.

DETAILED CLASSIFICATION OF SOCITIES IN RESPECT TO METHODS OF

JUSTICE.

In order to draw up the Lists on which our Tables of Justice in
the text (pp. 68-9 and 72-3) are based it was necessary to
consider the Lower Hunters, and particularly the Australians in
some detail. Their classification presents great difficulties, state-
ments being often very vague and ambiguous in interpretation.
In many instances we have general references to self-redress which
do not make it clear whether it would be exercised upon (a)
members of the same group, (b) of the same tribe but another
group, (c) only on those of another tribe. Then, again, self-
redress may be mentioned in reference to particular offences,
such as abduction, but we do not feel justified in regarding it as a
regular institution, particularly as homicide, in the form of killing
an adult male, seems often to be treated as a public matter, whereas
others are private. Then, again, regulated fights and expiatory
combats may involve more or less of public interference. We have
therefore distinguished cases : —

(a) Where self-redress is alleged in general terms.

(b) Where it is alleged of certain offences, but homicide not
being mentioned, it may be that the most important are not
included.

(c) Where homicide, at least of an adult male, within the group
is definitely stated to be " publicly " punished.

(d) Where there is revenge or self-redress as between groups
of the same tribe.

(e) Where revenge is mentioned without any differentiation in
the account as between fellow-tribesmen and others.

(/) Where the only vengeance mentioned is outside " the tribe.*'
(g) Where an expiatory combat occurs. Under this head we
have where possible distinguished instances in which submission
is said to be definitely enforced, and those in which it is merely
said to be the " custom." The former we have regarded as cases
of public assistance, the latter not.

Having considered these points we draw up lists for Justice
within the group, excluding from our first column cases in which
it is not clear that the retaliation described by our authorities is
exercised on members of the same group, but taking any form of
self-help and retaliation as between individuals or kinsfolk as a
ground of inclusion, and regarding regulated fights as a restricted
form of retaliation. Any collective interference beyond the regula-

120

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

121

tion of a fight overrules the general practice of retaliation and
places the tribe in the second column.1

We thus arrive at the following provisional list for justice
within the group : —

JUSTICE WITHIN THE GROUP.2

(Australia.)

Col. II.
Yuin (3?).
N. Queensland (3).
N.W.C. Queensland (3).
Dieri (2).

Some Murray River Tribes (3).
Narrinyeri (3).
N.S. Wales tribes (2).
W. Victoria (?3>.
Riverina (2).
Rose Bay (2).
Geawegal (3).
Kamilaroi (2).
?Wotjobaluk (2).
? Yerkla Mining.
? Watchandee.

Col. I.

Herbert River (2).
Wakelbura (2).
Port Lincoln (2).
Swan River (i).
Bangerang (2).
King George's Sound (i).
Perth and W. Australia (2).
Tongaranka (i).
Kurnai (2).
Kabi (2).
Turrbal (2).
Adelaide (2).

12 i3t

i1) (2) (3) The number in brackets after any name gives the column to
which it belongs in Classification B. (Text, p. 71). The Watchandee and
Yerkla Mining are omitted from Classification B. because the references do
not enable us to distinguish retaliation proper from " External Retaliation."

1. There are two or three cases in which the only sign that we have of
any such interference is that all the men of the camp join in the pursuit
of an eloping couple. Here the abductor may be and most probably is
some one from another group, and those in the camp are not necessarily
the whole local group, but the friends and relatives who are living together.
These cases are queried under col. ii.

2. In drawing up this table we have omitted 3 N.S. Wales tribes
from Col. i. The specific accounts of them suggest retaliation and
self-help alone, but it is possible that Fraser's general account of New South
Wales, which asserts some public assistance within the group, might apply
fo them. For the same reason the Wudthaurung are omitted, as covered
by Dawson's description of West Victoria. Two possible additions to
Column ii are the Kaiabara and the Narrangi. Of the former Howitt,
(p. 353), says that if two men quarrel about a woman the tribe does not inter-
fere if they are of the same class, but if they are of different classes it does
so. This might be to keep the peace between the classes, or it may mean
merely that one class has a superior right by the marriage laws of his
tribe, but it has nothing to do with the redress of wrongs, nor is there
evidence of any sort of judicial proceeding. (It should be noted that J.

Al

122 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

The list, reduced as it is, includes doubtful cases on each side.
The twelve tribes in column i include all cases in which self-help is
alleged and no public interference is alleged. But in some of these
cases homicide is not mentioned, and homicide in many groups is
what is publicly punished. Now, we have numerous accounts of
revenge for homicide, but unfortunately few make it quite clear
whether it would be exercised on a member of the same group or
tribe. In a few instances, however, it is explicitly stated that
revenge is a purely personal or party matter, and in others this is the
only reasonable interpretation of our authorities. We therefore
make a second list, in which column i is confined to these cases, all
more doubtful ones being discarded. At the same time, we exclude
cases of doubtful reference from column 2, viz. (i) The three
instances in which the pursuit of eloping lovers is the only public
interference alleged. (2) Rose Bay, in which the nature of the
ordeal and the means of its enforcement are not free from ambi-
guity.1 (3) " Some Murray River " tribes and Riverina, which
are of doubtful interpretation.2 This leaves us the following table :

Column I. Column II.

Wakelbura. Yuin.

Port Lincoln. N. Queensland.

Swan River. N.W.C. Queensland.

Bangerang. Dieri.

King George's Sound. Narrinyeri.

Perth and other W. Australia. Kamilaroi.

Kurnai. Other N.S. Wales tribes.

Adelaide. W. Victoria.

Geawegal.

8 9

1. From Collins' account (Hist. N.S. Wales] it is clear that there was
in fact a great deal of indiscriminate murder, and spear-throwing appears
partly as a ritual and partly as an escape from serious vengeance rather
than as punishment.

2. See note at end of chapter.

Mathew describes the Kaiabara as no more than a family group.) The
Narrangi are described by Huhn (in Woods) under the name of the Turra,
and he says that the " class " punished adultery with death. But it is
impossible to make out what his class really was, as his account of classes
is incompatible with that of Howitt, who also assigns a perfectly different
basis for the law of marriage, and makes no mention of the punishment of
adultery. (Pp. 67, 258, etc.) For murder, trials in the form of the usual
spear-throwing ordeal are mentioned among the Euahlayi by Mrs. Parker
(p. 92), but the account refers only to cases of magic.

For considerations bearing on other tribes see notes at end of Appendix.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 123

Turning now to Justice within the wider society, we still have
considerable difficulty in many individual cases. But fortunately
we can be sure of enough instances to determine what is the pre-
ponderant system. The first point is to decide on the value to be
attached to Regulated Fights or Expiatory Exposures of a member
of one group to spear-throwing by another. Now, regarded as an
affair between groups, the latter institution rests on vengeance, and
is a party matter. It is either for the man himself or his group to
decide whether he shall stand the ordeal, and the ceremonial combat
is, in fact, always in danger of expanding into a fight between the
parties. A concrete case among the Mukjarawaint branch of the
Wotjo people will illustrate most of these points.

" When a serious offence occurred and the offender belonged to some one
of the other local divisions, the custom was to send a messenger (Wirri-gir)
to call on him to come forward and undergo punishment. In such a case,
if he were a man of consequence, or if the affair caused much feeling among
the people, all the totemites of each of the men assembled under their
respective Headmen at the place agreed on.

Such a case occurred at the Mukjarawaint tribe, and was reported to me
by a man of the Garchuka totem, whose brother and maternal grandfather
had for some matter of personal offence killed a man of the black snake
(Wulernunt) totem. They speared him at night, when sleeping in his
camp, and escaped, but were seen and recognised by his wife. The
relatives of the deceased sent a Wirri-gir to the offenders, telling them to
look out for themselves and be prepared for revenge. A messenger was
sent in reply saying that they should come with their friends, and that
they would be prepared to stand out and have spears thrown at them.
There was then a great meeting of the respective totems, the Garchuka
being that of the offenders and the Wulernunt that of the avengers.

Having met as arranged, at the time and place fixed, with their respec-
tive kindreds, the Garchuka Headman stood out between the opposed
totemites and made a speech, calling upon his men not to take any unfair
advantage in the encounter. Then he appointed a spot near at hand
where the expiatory encounter should take place that afternoon, it being
agreed that so soon as the offenders had been struck by a spear the combat
should cease. Then the offenders stood out, armed with shields, and
received the spears thrown at them by the dead man's kindred, until at
length one of them was wounded. The Headman of the Garchukas then
threw a lighted piece of bark, which he held, into the air, and the fight
ceased. If it had been continued there would have been a general fight
between the two totems."!

Now, such cases differ in detail from tribe to tribe. We may well
suppose that the challenged group may bring pressure on its accused
members, and so far they assist punishment. But as between the
groups it is a party affair unless and until the groups take combined
action or the whole tribe intervenes. We find a transition to this
stage among the Narrinyeri, and perhaps in West Victoria. Other-

i. Howitt, Native Tribes of S.E. Australia, p. 334 seq.

124 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

wise there is in these proceedings nothing really comparable to the
submission of an offender's case to an impartial authority. Yet
processes clearly of the same kind are sometimes spoken of as
"trials." l A further difficulty is to determine whether vengeance
for death is exercised on other groups within the tribe. Owing to
the vagueness of the use of the term we have had to leave out of
account many cases where there is probably no limitation intended.
We include cases where relation between groups is specifically
mentioned, or is exercised on those with whom intermarriage or
other social relations are habitual.

On this basis we draw up the following list : —

Column I. Column II.

Adelaide. Narrinyeri.

Bungyarlee W. Victoria.

Bangerang. Geawegal.

Wotjobaluk. Dieri.

Tongaranka. N. Queensland.

Maryborough

Kamilaroi.

Wiradjuri

Port Lincoln.

Kurnai.

King George's Sound.

Swan River.

Perth and other W. Australians.

Wu run jerri

Yuin.

Wakelbura.

Turrbal.

N.W.C. Queensland.

18 4

These lists, it will be seen, can only be taken as rough approxi-
mations. It is practically impossible to draw up a list of Austra-
lian tribes to which the nomenclature of different writers can be
accurately and systematically applied. Nor is it possible in all
cases to interpret with certainty the meaning of their accounts,

i. There is nothing to show that the " trials " described by Beveridge
among the Riverina peoples, or punishments mentioned by Le Souef among
some Murray River tribes, really differed from this type.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 125

particularly when they speak of trials. The evidence on which we
include a case under column i is necessarily negative and incon-
clusive. It is possible that in every case there would be some
collective action by the old men. On the other hand, it is possible
that in many of the cases in our column 2 such collective action was
only of the sort that we have called " occasional." What is clear
about the Australian is (i) that for many purposes retaliation was
general, both within the group and between groups and tribes, in
the two latter cases abductions and accusations of magic murder
being the most frequent causes of disputes.

(2) That within the group the older men, and possibly a head-
man, generally punished breaches of the marriage prohibitions and
other " tribal " offences, while in certain instances they seem also to
have dealt with adultery, or murder, or some other " private "
offences.

(3) As between groups, vengeance and a consequent feud was
frequently avoided by a regulated fight or by the submission of the
offender to the spear-throwing ordeal. In this case there might be
negotiations between groups. It would be for the offender's group
to decide whether they should expose him or fight it out, and we
can imagine these discussions dealing more or less with the merits
of the case, and so developing into the rudiments of a trial. But at
bottom it is a question of vengeance or averting it.

With this understanding our lists may remain as an approximate
measure of the two forms of justice. With regard to the tribe, we
may be confident that the number of cases of true systematic, collec-
tive intervention in private matters is very small.

The Lower Hunters in Asia are also very difficult to assign to
any group in Table I. They live in " enlarged families," with very
little organic relation between different groups, so that we have no
hesitation in entering them under "No Law " for the purpose of
our second table. But as to internal relations information is very
vague. We decide to exclude the Kubus altogether, as their
internal relations in the wild state appear from Hagen to be really
matter of mere conjecture. Nor are the internal relations of the
Negritos of Angat, the Veddas, or the Punan sufficiently definite.
Of the latter, Hose and McDougall state that the petty chief, or
family head, administers no substantial punishment, and if there is
a quarrel the offended family leave ; but when left to themselves the
people seem almost crimeless. We retain (i) the Negritos of
Alabat, who are described in a way that suggests some exercise of
authority, and we enter them with a query under " Public Justice,"
of course in the technical sense here given to the term ; (2) the
Semang and Sakai, among whom Martin speaks of fights about
women if the elders could not settle differences. We query these

126 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

two cases under our Group I. ; (3) the Negritos of Bumagat and the
Andamanese, where self-redress seems to be clear. We also add to
our Australian list a query for the Tasmanians, whose institutions
are insufficiently known, but, as far as known, fulfil the require-
ments.1

We thus get the following numbers for the Lower Hunters : —

JUSTICE WITHIN THE PRIMARY GROUP.

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

Australians i2\ ... 13^ ... o

N. America ... ... ... 3^ ... o ... o

S. America ... ... ... 2 ... o ... o

Africa ... ... ... ... 2 ... o ... o

Asia 3 ... o ... \

Totals 23 13^ \

Each column as fraction of all

the cases '62 '36 'or

Reducing the number of Australians by eliminating the more
doubtful cases we get : —

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

19 ... 9 ... \

As fraction of all the cases "67 ... '30 ... '02

We may now consider the Lower Hunters, taking the wider
view of the social unit. Among the Australians, we have 18 cases,
and the probable instance of the Tasmanians. On the other side
we have 4 cases. To make the total of the Lower Hunters we have
now to add to it the nine Asiatic cases, in which whatever law there
is is within the primary group, together with the North (3^), the
South Americans (2), and the Africans (2). The result is: —

Col. I. Col. II. Col. III.

Lower Hunters ... 35 ... 4 ... o

We now enumerate peoples of the remaining cultures in three
columns, bringing under Columns II or III, as the case may be,
cases where justice is found only within the primary group. The
figure after each name gives the column to which it belongs in
Classification B.

i. In Classification B. the Tasmanians and Botocudos are in Col II. as
having regulated fights. In the Asian groups the assignment can only be on
balance of probability. The Andamanese are placed in Col. II., and, with
queries, the Semang and Sakai. The Negritos of Alabat are in Col. IV.
Other Lower Hunters are in Col. I.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

127

I.

? Similkameen

Klamath

Karok

Hupa

Etechemins

Montagnais

Micmac

Assiniboins

Comanche

Apache

Kiowa

Luisenos

S. Californians

Carriers

Yuki

Nishinan

W. Eskimo

Behring St.

C. Eskimo

Greenland Eskimo

Labrador Eskimo

Atkha Aleuts

Koniaga

Nootka

Haida

Thompson River

Chepewayans

Loucheux

Kutchin

Kenai

Tsekhene

Chilcotin

E. Nahane

W. Nahane

Thlinkeet

Lillooet

Tsimshian

Shushwap

Lkungen

Kootenay

Kwakiutl

Yurok

Topanaz

Guaycuru

Charrua

Tehuelches

Aucas

? Puelches

Abipones

S. Chaco

Manobos

Ghiliaks

Tuski

Kauralaig

HIGHER HUNTERS.

II.

(2) Blackfeet
(i) Omaha

(1) Shastika

(2) Gallino Mero
(2) Italmen

III.

(3) Aleuts

(2) Kedah Semang

(2) Perak Sakai

(3)

(2)

128

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

DEPENDENT HUNTERS.

? Nundail
Nicobarese

Bhuiyar

Beriya

Korwa

Bonthuk

Korumbas

Bataksof Palawan

Yanadi ? (3)

(3

(3)

(3)

Atkwa Chenchu

AGRICULTURE.1

Bheels (2)
Manobos of

Agusan (i)

Candios (i)

Dakota (i)

Hidatsa (i)

Iowa (i)
Algonquins of

Quebec (i)

Huron (i)

Iroquois (i)

Delaware (i)

W. Torres St. (2)

Yuracares (2

Mataco (i

Ipurina (i

British Guiana (i

Mataguayo (i)

16

Lushai
Paniyans
Lepcha
? Santals
Abnaqui
O jib way
? Paravilhana
Karayaki

(2)

(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(2)
(3)
(2)

Jakun

Arunese

Ainu

Kedah Semang

Perak Sakai

? Lengua

? Paravilhana

PASTORAL.1

Beni Amer
Massai
Kurds of Eriwan
? Navaho
Chewssures
Biloch

(i)
(i)

(2)
(O
(2)

(0

Ovaherero (3)
Dinka (2)
? Colonial Hotten-
tots (3)
?Khoi Khoin (3)
Wambugu (3)
Aeneze (2)

Batauana
Shasewenses
?Col. Hottentots
?Khoi Khoin

5i

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

129

AGRICULTURE.2

Nicobarese

(i) Kandhs (2

) Chakma

Calingas

(i) Subanos (3

) Arunese

N. Araccan

(i) Kharwar (3) ? Flores

Kolya Nagas

(I

) Kols (3

) Land Dyaks

Pathan

(I

) Ma in war (3

) Bontoc

Muruts

(i) Dhimals (3) ? Bogadjim

? Kaupui Nagas

(i) Enganese (3) ? Gilbert Islands

Kiangans

(i

? Flores (3) Rotuma

Koita

Panikocch (3) Tongans

Waga Waga

(i

Khonds (2) Rarotongans

Bartle Bay

(i

?Sea Dyaks (3) Bali

Trobriands

(a) ?Kei (3) Tuchilange

Torres Group

(i) Florida (3

) Azimba

Gazelle Penin.

(2j

Roro (3

) Wawira

N. E. Gazelle

(I

New Caledonians (3

) Angoni

Sulka

(I

E. Torres Sts. (2

) Latuka

Moanu

(I

Hawaii (3

) Mayombe

Motu

(1

Fiji (3) Mangbetu

Mafulu

(I

Samoa (2) Bageshu

Jabim

(i) Bangala (2) Wadoe

Marshall Islands

(2) Azande (3

Baluba

Pelew Islands

(i) Adio (3

Wyandot

Maoris

(i) Baquiri (3

? Tarahumara

Tahiti

(i) Mandja (3

? Tepehuanes

Marquesas

(i) Maravis (3

? Huicols

Savage Island

(i) Banaka & Bapuku (3) ? Ges

AVafiomi

(2) Yaunde (2) Yonca & Boni

Quissama

(i)

Wambugwe (2

Barea & Kumana

(2)

Waheiei (3

Ba Yanzi

(0

Warega (2

Massai

(I)

Creeks (2

Caribs

(I)

Sambioa (2

Papago

(I)

Uaupe

(I)

Chiquito

(I)

Miranda

(I)

Campas

(I)

36^

30^

23i

PASTORAL.2

Midhi

(0

Kazak Kirghiz (3) Kalmucks

Yakut

(0

Somali (3)

Altaian Kalmucks

Turcomans

(2)

Gallas (2)

Danakil

Bogos

(2)

Bahima

Baquerewe

(0

? Makololo

Bechuana

Ama Xosa

Watatura

130

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Hopi (i)
Pima (i)
Suanes (free) (2)
Garo (i
Singpho (2
Passumahians (2)
Timorese (i)
Takue (i)
Nandi (i)
Warangi (i)
Wapokomo (i)
Wagogo (2)
Araucanians (for-
merly) (i)
? Noeforesen (2)

AGRICULTURE.3

Sonthals (3)

? Kayans (3)
Kayans of Menda-

lam (3)
Kayans of Maha-

kam (3)

Angami Nagas (2)

? Kenya (3)

Ossetes (3

Suanes (3

Battas (3)

Nias (3)

Balinese (3)
Malays of Padang (3)

Basonge Meno (2)

Java (3)

Adighe (2)

Munda Kols (3)

Ondonga (3)

Banyoro (2

Bukoba (3

Kuku (2)

Wakikuyu (3)

Duallas (3

Marea (2

Fanti (3

Wadshagga (3

Indikki (3

Basonge (3

Ababua (3

Bayaka (3

Yao (3)

Waniamwesi (3)

Wasiba (3)

Bamsalala (3)

Baganda (3)

Ewe (2)

Tshi (a)

Diakit£ (2)

Warundi (2)

Nossi b£ (3)

36

?Sia

Zuni

Zapothecs

Guatemala

Apalachites

Pueblos

Kasias

Badaga

Padam Abors

Maguindanaos

Singkel

Khiva

Marutse

Basutos

Alur

A-Kamba

Wasinja

Waschambala

Wapare

Amahlubi

Wafipa

Bihenos

? Cazembe

Kilwa

Bahuana

Bushongo

Bambala

Anyanja

Kimbunda

Baronga

Bawenda

Yoruba

Geges & Nagos

Fulah

Segoo

Calabar

Benin

Bambara

Araucanians

37*

In Classification B the totals for justice within the group are
derived from the above list, the figure following each name
indicating the column to which it belongs.

To obtain the corresponding figures for justice beyond this
group we transfer from a higher to a lower column cases in which

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 131

the elements of public justice are found within the group alone. On
this account we enter all the Asiatic Lower Hunters in Col. I.
Among the Australians we transfer from Col. III. to Col. II. the
Yuin, N.W. Central Queensland, the Narrinyeri, and W. Victoria.1
We add the Kaiabara, Maryborough, Wiradjuri, Wurunjerri, and
Bungyarlee, who fall clearly into this column for inter-group rela-
tions,2 and the Koynup, Whyook, and Milya Uppa, who practise
regulated fights, and may safely be placed here for relations beyond
the group. This gives for the Australians 26 and for the Lower
Hunters a total of 27 for Col. II.

Above the Lower Hunters alterations are few. In Asia (A1) the
Santals pass from Col. III. to Col. I., and the Ossetes (A3) likewise.
In Africa (P1) the Batauana and the Wawira (A2) are omitted from
Col. IV., but not placed elsewhere for lack of specific information,
while the-Bambala (A3) are moved from Col. IV to Col. II. Finally,
in North America (A2) the Wyandots pass from Col. IV. to Col. II.

1. We omit the Riverina and Murray R. tribes (see note following this
Appendix). We also omit "other N.S. Wales tribes" from col. ii because
numerous members of this group are included individually.

2. See notes following this Appendix.

132 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

NOTES TO APPENDIX C.

AUSTRALIAN TRIBES.

The sources from which the lists in the text have been compiled may be
very briefly indicated : —

1. Adelaide : — Eyre asserts private vengeance and denies knowledge of
any stated punishments, except spearing in expiation of death, which, as
he describes it, was a private matter. Though his statement is negative in
form his account is very clear and concise, and the only doubt is whether
it should not be extended further. He kn'ew large tracts of S. Australia,
and he applies this statement in particular to the Murray River natives as
well. We omit them however because the reference is vague, and in some
parts of that river show punishments did exist, so that the limits to which
Eyre's statement holds could not be ascertained.

2. Kaiabara, Maryborough, Wiradjuri, Turrbal, Wotjobaluk, Wurrun-
jerri, Yuin : — These form a set of tribes described by Howitt in which
ceremonial or expiatory encounters occur between groups. The details
given vary from case to case, but we may fairly refer to the same general
type in the Makjarawarib instance quoted from Howitt in the text. There
is no hint of any impartial body to which the two groups appeal, and we
take it that the object of the ceremonial combat or exposure is on the
part of the group to avoid a feud and on that of the offender to avoid private
vengeance or the alternative of being surrendered by his group.

Occasional traces of higher intervention appear, as among the Kaiabara if
two men of different clans quarrelled about a woman. They are omitted
from both columns.

The case of the Gringai (Howitt, p. 343) is probably the same, though
the description is less precise. Several of these tribes who fought out
some disputes within the group, but the Yuin would seem to have con-
trolled vengeance there. Among the Turrbal individual quarrels were
settled by a fight. (Howitt.)

3. Port Lincoln : — A similar system (spoken of in one place as a
" trial ") is described by Wilhelmi (apud Brough Smyth) and Scharman
(apud Woods), who also describes irregular vengeance, in terms which
we take as meaning that it was a purely personal or party affair.

4. Riverina and Murray River : — According to Beveridge (Aborigines of
Victoria) among the Riverina tribes no offence was criminal except murder.
Then the " whole tribe " sat in judgment. The criminal generally acknow-
ledged his offence and was exposed to spear throwing (which was rarely
fatal), and after it was received again as quite innocent. Perhaps every
5th man had killed his man. We do not know what Beveridge means by a
tribe. In all probability it is another case of expiation in lieu of vengeance
as between groups. This view is confirmed by the fact that the Riverina
was largely occupied by the Wiradjuri. Among these Howitt, who
knew the tribe personally, speaks of fights between sections, if a
man is not given up. Beveridge's "Murder trials" would then
be the ordinary ceremonial exposure as between district groups. We
have entered the Riverina in our provisional list for group justice but

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 133

omitted it from the 2nd list and from " tribal justice." Le Souef, writing
in Brough Smyth in reference to the Murray River and Goulburn River
tribes, speaks of enquiring into any theft or breach of tribal usage and
describes the exposure of an offender to a blow from the injured party.
This is subject to the same doubts, and, further, the reference is very vague.
We have entered this tribe on our first list under justice within the group
(p. 121), but have omitted them from our second as of doubtful interpreta-
tion. Under tribal justice we do not enter them at all. Le Souef in fact
asserts the occurrence of fights on murder charges at the corroborees.
These would be like the ordinary inter-group combats, the tribe as a whole
taking a part which is not clearly defined.

It should b'e noted that G. S. Lang (The Aborigines of Australia),,
writing of the Murray River basin generally, treats the justice done by the
council as nominal, and says of the spear throwing that " if applied it is
only to persons of little influence, or to avoid a war with some neighbouring
tribe, for which they would sacrifice any one . A man bold and formidable
with his weapons can do anything with impunity." This nearly coincides
with the view that the ordeal is essentially a substitute for a feud, while
beyond this it would come under what we mean by " occasional " inter-
vention.

5. Geawegal : — This tribe had the ordeal, spears being thrown by the
relatives, but as Rusden says that obedience would have been enforced if
necessary by the assembled tribes it is possible that here we have some-
thing more than the fear of feud. It is therefore entered under public
assistance. (Rusden writes in Kamilaroi and Kurnai, App. F, and is
quoted in Howitt.)

6. Euahlayi : — Mrs. Parker mentions prolonged tribal feuds arising from
accusations of " pointing the bone." They are probably waged between
groups of allied totems, but this is not properly clear, and the tribe is
therefore omitted from our list. There are also traces of public justice (i)
in connection with allegations of magic murder, when men of " all the
kins " throw spears at the accused, (2) in the punishment of an extrem'ely
wanton woman, who may be bound and tossed by members of any of the
clans and is abandoned by her relations to their pleasure. This would be
one of our " occasional " cases. The Euahlayi therefore are not entered
on either side.

7. Bungyarlee and Parkinji : — Vengeance for alleged magic by the rela-
tives is described by Bonney (J.A.I., xiii). The victim may apparently
belong either to the same camp or to another, and this account implies that
the two parties may normally be friends.

8. Swan River, King George's Sound, Perth, and other W. Australians :
— According to Gray, the Matrilineal families are united for defence and
revenge. The sorcerer points out the man who has caused death by magic
and the relatives start to avenge the death. In case of wilful murder they
slay the murderer and any of his friends. In case of accident the practice
differs, e.g., if in ordeal spear-throwing on'e shall accidentally kill the
culprit he must be speared through both sides. All relatives are liable, if
the culprit escapes his own relatives often assist in finding him, for until
he is punished " the whole of his connexions are in danger." Wife steal-
ing, adultery and incest are generally punished with death, but any other
crime is cotnpoundable by ordeal of spear-throwing, which often gives rise
to further duels.

134 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

In addition to Gray we have statements from John Forest about the
C. and W. Australians pointing in the same directions though less explicit,
from Ph. Chauncy and Oldfield, both of whom describe retaliation mainly
as between different tribes. Gray's one exposition covered N.W. as well
as W. Australia.

Further we have Jones' statement in Dr. Petermann's Mittheilungen as
to King George's Sound, which alleges not only feuds between local groups,
but lawlessness and violence generally, Mrs. Bates' account of tribes within
a radius of 200 miles of Perth describing fights between families generally
appeased by spearing of the offender, and Salvados' account of the Swan
River tribes in the interior. In all this district it would seem that justice
is a private matter.

How to group the tribe over this large area is a question. We have
made those divisions, King George's Sound as described by Jones, Swan R.
as described by Salvados, Perth and other West Australians as described by
Gray and Mrs. Bates.

9. Bangerang : — The Bangerang group described fully by Curr, who
shows that there is nothing amounting to public justice in private matters.
In the first place the Father was absolute in the family. Secondly, offences
against custom sometimes had a " foreign " aspect, bringing about wars
with other tribes. Within the tribe they were generally of the nature of a
wrong to some individual who would make complaints in the camp. The
accused also stated his case, and then anyone who liked would proclaim his
views and the offender ought to make a customary reparation. If he did
not he would probably be murdered by the injured party and no one would
avenge his death. In cases of women disputes custom often compelled the
offender to submit to spear-throwing ordeal. Sections of the tribe did not
practise witchcraft against one another so that blood feuds were against
other tribes with which however they intermarried. We take the
Bangerang as a case where justice was private because the force behind
custom, apart from opinion, is that of the avenger.

10. Dieri : — While theft and wrongful accusations gave rise to fights,
magic murders were punished according to Gason (ap. Brough Smyth) by
the Pinga or avenging party sent out by the Council. Accidental death in
a fight would be avenged by the Pinga on the slayer's elder brother or
father. This looks as though the Pinga must be privately organised, for
while it is intelligible that one kindred should demand the elder brother's
life as inflicting a greater loss on his offending group, it is not easy to see
the way the council should take this view. Mr. Howitt (p. 821) adds
murder as well as death by witchcraft to the offences dealt with by the
council. Gason, who is Hewitt's authority, speaks in another place
(Woods, p. 259 seq.) of supposed murderer of any man with numerous
relatives being slain by the Pinga, which looks as though its intervention
apart from several matters were rather a matter of personal influence than
anything else. If so it would correspond to our " occasional " justice.
The tribe however is, in deference to Hewitt's description, entered in the
" public " side.

u. Central and North Central Australians : — Spencer and Gillen
describe feuds between local groups arising out of magic murders. They
also, particularlv in the North, assign to the tribal council the function of
dealing with offences, specifying in one place (C. Austr., p. 15) breaches of
the marriage laws and in another (N. Austr., p. 25) these and magic

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 135

murders. Possibly these councils may have dealt with other offences as
well but we do not observe instances. Very probably they would come
under our " occasional " justice.

Schulze describes family vendettas on the Fink R. But on the whole
we feel the evidence insufficient for the classification of these peoples.

12. West Victoria : — According to Dawson (Tribes of W. Viet., and cita-
tions in Howitt, p. 335, etc.) the blood feud is recognised, but if the avenger
escapes being killed in his turn he is summoned to the ordeal which takes
place before the assembled " tribes." Dawson 's " tribes " probably cor-
respond to our local groups, so that the assembly of them is equivalent to
a tribal meeting. As this meeting is said to enforce attendance we have
a beginning of tribal justice proper. But in them from Dawson the
group might elect to defend its man and bear the feud. From certain
statements, e.g., that a man would ask his dearest friend to avenge a
brother's death, we suppose that vengeance may be just personal and among
intimates, probably between the groups.

13. Kurnai : — From Howitt's Kamilaroi and Kurnai we learn that the
clan division protects its members and exercises the blood feud. An
ordeal may be substituted and the drawing of blood satisfies the relations.
Bulmer (ap. Brough Smyth) says that among the Lake Tyers people there
are no stated punishments, but that a man who is obnoxious to certain
members of the tribe may be killed or called to the ordeal. We have
entered them under private justice both in the group and in the tribe.

14. Tongaranka : — Offences against marriage law punished by the tribe.
Individual offences, e.g., theft, left to the sulferer to spear. (Howitt.)

15. N.W. Central Queensland : — Quarrels frequently lead to fights. At
the close of which the old men hold an inquiry. If the victor is found to
have been in the wrong he undergoes a similar injury to that which he
inflicted with a similar weapon and if he had killed his man would be put
to death. Quarrels are liable to spread to the whole camp. Hence the
determined efforts to stop them. The man who kills his wife would have
to deliver up one of his sisters to his wife's friends for death. If a man
is murdered by one of another tribe, his tribe is visited in force and he is
given up to stand the spear-throwing ordeal and a second life may be
demanded in addition. Death is inflicted by the Council for violation of
blood-relation, a group cester, or uninitiated girl. The blood brother of
the culprit is responsible for his appearance and may suffer vicariously.
Ordinary elopements are punished with an ordeal of knife-hacking, but
death is avoided owing to fear of vengeance by the victim's brothers, but
if the parties are of forbidden groups both are put to death with the tacit
consent of the blood-relations. It is clear that there is publicly assisted
justice within the camp and group retaliation beyond it. The question is
whether the camp corresponds to the local group or the tribe. Roth
describes them as " messmates " possessing in common trade routes,
markets, hunting grounds, being intermarriageable and making common
cause in war against an enemy. This is clearly within our definition of
one society. For N. Queensland Roth gives no details, but his general
ext)ressions are the same. For safety's sake we query this case under
tribal justice.

16. Port Darwin: — Murder, according to Foelsche (J.A.I., xxiv), is
punished with spearing if murderer is a fellow tribesman, if otherwise with

136 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

death. Serious quarrels and sometimes fights are, he says, the natural
result. Presumably therefore the punishment is inflicted by the aggrieved
friends. Unfortunately Foelsche makes no definite statement nor do other
authorities make clear that vengeance would be exercised within the tribe.
It is therefore not entered.

17. Kabi : — Quarrels were settled by a duel of endurance (Curr, iv, 131),
and according to Mathew (Two representative tribes) fights in the camp
were frequent. Elopement also led to fights (Howitt) . But we do not hear
of homicide, and enter them only upon the more doubtful list.

18. Herbert R. : — Lumholtz (Among Cannibals) describes duels for theft,
etc., but indicates that homicide would be differently treated. How it is
dealt with he does not explicitly say, but speaks of tribal wars in revenge
for witchcraft as well as for cannibal purposes, and witchcraft can, he says,
be exercised upon a fellow tribesman. He denies all organisation beyond
the " family tribe " so that for the purpose of tribal justice we might be
justified in regarding this as a case of " no law." We have not however
added it.

19. Rose Bay :— Collins, at end of i5th century, describes complicated
series of acts of vengeance mingled with ceremonial exposures. It may
be noted that in one case after the murderer had stood the ordeal he was
killed by one of those who had taken part in it.

20. Kamilaroi : — According to Ridley (J.A.I.) murder was avenged by a
man's totem class. A note in Howitt says that if serious complaints were
made of a man's conduct a council of the headmen ( ? of the tribe or of
the division in which there might be several) might desire his death. This
we call " occasional " justice, and we therefore enter the Kamilaroi under
col. i for tribal justice. Within the group there was promiscuous prostitu-
tion for adultery, so that it falls within col. ii.

We do not enter Ridley's other tribes separately under group i.

21. Wakelbura : — Hewitt's account (esp. p. 223) indicates that homi-
cide in fair fight or in a quarrel among comrades would be unpunished.
On the Belyando R. generally, according to Curr's informants (Austr.
Races, iii, 26) vengeance for alleged magic murders is exercised by the
priests and, it would seem, on members of the same group. Further Howitt
could hear of no headmen among the WakelBura (p. 303) . There is quasi-
exhortive punishment of unlawful marriages, but for other matters there
seems no regular restraint even within the group.

22. Narrinjeri : — Along with private vengeance there existed, according
to Taplin (ap. Woods), a system of punishments by the council of the clan
division. In case of murder of members of one clan by one of another the
aggrieved party might invite the others to a combined council to " try "
the case, and the murderer might then be handed over to his own clan for
execution. This is an incipient judicial process, though we must sup-
pose that the matter still really depended on the consent of the murderer's
clan.

23. Buntamura : — All offences are punished by the tribe. The relations
of the injured man fight and thrash the offender (Howitt, p. 333). We
should take this second sentence to be explanatory of the first, Kirkham
(Mr. Howitt's informant) probably meaning by the first sentence that the
people generally dealt with offences, but on the whole the statement is too
vague for entry.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 137

24. Waimbaio '• — Bulmer describes fights between relations arising out
of elopements and the ravishing of the girl if unprotected. (K. and K.
App. i.) Not sufficient for entry.

OTHER TRIBES.

25. Loucheux and Kutchin : — Bancroft, and Hardisty and Strachan Jones
in Smithsonian Reports for 1886. These people live in bands headed by a
chief or a medicine man. There is some discrepancy as between Hardisty
and Strachan, and as there are said to be 22 tribes variously called Loucheux
and Kutchin, either may be true of different peoples. (Bancroft^ p. 146,
treats the Loucheux as one tribe of the Kutchin.) There is however no
mention in either account of any public justice. Hardisty states that
among the Loucheux theft, lying and murder by shamanism are heinous
crimes (pp. 319-20), but he does not say by whom they are punished.
Killing an enemy in fair fight is honourable (ibid.). Strachan Jones says
of the Kutchin that there is little or no punishment for theft, and he
makes all redress definitely a private affair (p. 325). According to
Hardisty mourners may " in a fit of revenge against fate kill some poor
friendless person " (p. 317), and this is tabled for its ethical significance —
though in other respects not quite appropriately — as a case of vicarious
revenge.

26. Western D&ni : — The Tsekenne (or Sckanae) including the Beavers
and the Suanes, the East and West Nahane, the Carriers and the Chilcotin.
There is much confusion in the nomenclature of these peoples — the best
authority is Father Morice (Trans. Canadian Institute, 1893, etc., also
Proceedings, 1888-9), but even in his statements it is not always clear
whether the reference is to the whole group or only to certain tribes. The
Tsekenne and E- Nahane are very primitive and have apparently no law or
government (Trs., p. 28, cf. Proc., 143), but in regard to the latter the
author's reference is not perfectly clear. They are omitted from the table.
The other three are more advanced, presenting a distinction of class between
nobles and commoners. The former collectively constitute the authority in
the village, but except as to territorial rights they have no definite power.
They pacify belligerents and settle disputes, but rather by persuasion than
by other means. Instances afe however related in which notables have
shot dead disobedient villagers without having to answer " tooth for tooth."
(Proc., 142-3, cf. Trs. 28.) In the tables authority in relation to disputes
being devoid of regular powers of coercion is entered under the head of
arbitration. In a disconnected passage Morice mentions public flagellation
among the Chilcotin but without saying by whom administered or for what
offences. (Proc., p. 164.)

27. Semilkameen : — Mrs. Allison (J.A.L, xxi, p. 317) states that chiefs
formerly had the power of life and death, but for what offences is not stated.
vShe mentions summary vengeance or blood money for murder.

28. Iroquois : — The accounts of the Jesuits and of Loskiel (Hist. p. 16,
etc.) show that in the i7th and i8th centuries there was no law but that
based on retaliation. Morgan states that the council punished witchcraft
with death and the adulteress by whipping. The second at least must be of
later date, probably due to missionary influence. It is precisely what
missionaries would have noted if they had found it in existence.

B 1

138 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER: PEOPLES

29. Delawares : — We follow mainly Loskiel, who is clearer than Hecke-
walder, though in general agreement.

30. Creeks (Murkegees) : — Accounts differ according to period.

31. Pueblos of Mexico and Arizona : — The pueblo is taken as a unit
equivalent to the tribe rather than the primary social group among peoples
of lower organisation. Bancroft speaks of organised government, but has
little to say about justice except that the council supervises matrimony and
forces young people in case of incontinence to marry under penalty of
corporal punishment. This is probably due to missionary influence at some
period. But Miss Marreco writes that in the New Mexican pueblos
generally the council up to a recent period usually settled all disputes and
inflicted penalties such as beating and compulsory work for " what might
be called criminal cases." As to general administration the civil and
religious functionaries are distinct and the war chief, whose functions are
now small, is in some way intermediary. The system, Miss Marreco
writes, is loaded with Spanish i8th century ideas.

Among the Tewar and Kopis of Arizona, on the other hand, Miss
Marreco writes that there is really no one now charged with the administra-
tion of justice and of affairs generally (see her letter).

32. Tarahumara, Tepehuane and Huicols : — All previously under strong
missionary influence, on which account they are only reckoned as queried
cases in our additions. Floggings lavishly used for many offences, particu-
larly unchastity. Very little Christianity remains. The governors hold
authority from the Mexican Government. (Lumholtz, Unknown Mexico,
vol. v, ch. vii, p. 140 ; ch. xxiii, p. 463 ; vol. ii, p. 247.)

33. Aleuts : — The account of the Atkha Aleuts is due to Father Yakoff,
that of the Oonalashka is translated by Dr. Petroff in United States loth
Census from Veniaminov, but is given by him as a tradition only, the
system having entirely disappeared under Russian rule.

34. Chensuas : — In the account of these two peoples given in a report
by Captain Newbolt (J.R.A.S., vol. viii, p. 271 seq.) the author named 8
heads of clans, and stated that in case of murder they assembled and killed
the murderer. In robbery, restitution ; and if the thief had no property
nothing was done. For petty offences, beating and reprimand by the head.
The death penalty was executed in same manner and with same weapon
as the murder : a clear case of the public authority taking over the function
of retaliation (p. 275).

The Nundail, of whom there are 31 tribes, could not give the name of
any chief (p. 274) and say that in case of murder the perpetrators are put to
death in return (p. 273), while for theft and assault punishment corre-
sponded with that of the Akwar. For both cases we have the statement
that civil cases were disposed of by the heads, who had the parties before
them and examined witnesses. As the Nundail could mention no heads
it will be seen that with them justice was a matter of Retaliation — life for
life in case of murder and restitution for theft.

35. Negritos of Zambales, A i : — The Negritos of this district are
settled in rancherias within the jurisdiction of two Philippine towns in
small groups. (Reed, p. 30.) Murder is punishable with death but is
almost unknown (p. 13), theft said to be punishable with death, but the thief
is given time to pay a fine, or someone else pays it, in which case he
becomes a slave (p. 13.) Adultery is also punishable with death, but com-

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 139

position is generally accepted (p. 64). Unfortunately our authority does
not state by whom these punishments are inflicted. Martens says that in
case of adultery it is the husband who executes the sentence, though he
is usually satisfied if he recovers what he has paid for his wife. In the case
of a daughter the father exacts payment. They are therefore not tabled
except as allowing composition.

All the Negritos appear to live in very small groups, or " enlarged
families," numbering 20 to 30, or at the outside 50, and to recognise a
certain chieftainship in some elder of capacity, who settles disputes between
the constituent families whose heads otherwise appear to have autocratic
power.

36. Bataks of Palawan : — They have apparently taken to agriculture
only within the last 20 or 30 years, but they previously traded with Chris-
tians or Tagbanuas. (Venturillo, J.A.I., 18, p. 138.) Their institutions
appear to be in a similarly transitional state. Statements as to their mode
of government are conflicting. According to Venturillo the settlement is
governed by a capitan chosen either by the chiefs of the provinces or by the
local chiefs of the Barria, but authority is in the hands of an old man chosen
for his superior merit, who dispenses justice with aid of the old men of the
tribe. (P. 141.) According to Miller (p. 182), the old man is said to
take cases to the chief of the tribe. He also quotes Venturillo as saying
that in some districts there are no tribal chiefs (p. 185).

Alike in cases of murder, theft and adultery, the relatives may exercise
vengeance on the spot, but if the matter is reported there is intervention by
old men (p. 142). Murder may be compounded for a fine determined by
them. Theft is punishable by a flogging, and adultery and abduction by
fine. Rape if neither party is married is not an offence, but an effort will
be made to secure marriage (p. 142).

37. Schahsewenzes : — The whole system of government and justice is
overlaid by the Persian suzerainty. Disentangling the original system
from this as far as possible, we find the blood feud at least as between
different tribes, and retaliation in case of theft, subject to conciliation or to
composition. (Radde, p. 423-5.)

38. The Italmen : — The basis of justice is retaliation, but the statement
that the detected thief could not resist seems to imply a certain public
countenance of the avenger. (Steller, p. 356.)

39. Negritos of Alabat and Angat : — These are typical apparently of the
wilder Negritos of the Philippines but there is some difference in the descrip-
tion of them. Both live in very small groups of the enlarged family type.
Among those of Angat all power is attributed to elders of families. Among
those of Alabat we hear of punishment for crime which may possibly be
taken as 'exercised by the elders on behalf of the group and so be deemed
a sort of public punishment within the little kindred. We express this in the
table by entering them under " No Law " but querying public justice
within the group. (Meyer, Konig. Ethn. Mus. Public, 9, p. 33.)

40. The Yakuts : — The statement seems to refer to the time when they
were not subject to Russian influence.

41. Lushai (Kukis) : — Dalton, Lewin and Shakespear differ widely in
accounts of the Kuki, partly because there are many Kuki tribes, and partly
perhaps because they are considering different periods, before or after the
British occupation. We take only the Lushai, among whom the chief's

140 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

power over the criminal consisted apparently in offering him sanctuary.
Personal injuries were punished by the sufferer or his relatives. But we
have public justice as covering some private offences because some cases
of theft at least were dealt with by fines. (Shakespear, J.A.I., xxxix,
p. 374.) The Kookies were a warlike predatory people, hardly to be graded
adequately by their agriculture.

42. The Kazak Kirghiz : — Accounts of these people are not wholly con-
sistent, but as they are estimated at 2,000,000 there is room for considerable
difference. Some appear to be semi-civilised and have tanning, weaving
and metallic industries, and agriculture. (Radlov, p. 469.) They appear to
have had great khans and to one of them legislation on the basis of retalia-
tion is attributed. (Levschin, p. 399.) The practice of retaliation is said
to persist nevertheless.

43. The Ainu of Japan :— Public justice now prevails. Batchelor (p.
138) notes an earlier stage in which the power of the Father over wife and
family was absolute as contrasted with the present time when he can do
little or nothing without consulting his companions.

44. Semang Sakai and Jakun : — We have a great variety of statements
as to particular groups of Semang Sakai and allied races which are not easy
to reconcile. Bringing the statements of Martin, Skeat, Wilkinson and
others together, we first distinguish the wholly wild groups which
apparently live in small kindreds or possibly in groups including one or
two different families but seldom having more than two or three huts.
Whatever government there may be must be of purely patriarchal character,
and while disputes are rare, according to Martin they do occur in relation to
women, and if not settled by elders result in bloodshed. The groups seem
to be as nearly as possible anarchical, and are tabled as having no law.

Coming to those exposed to the influence of Malay or Indo-Nesian
culture, we have first the Central Sakai described by Wilkinson, who have
chiefs who maintain some sort of order and use ordeals in the settlement of
disputes, but have apparently no means of punishment. Then we have
several other groups distinguished as the Kedah and Perak Semang and
Sakai, the Sakai of Kuala Kernan, as well as the Mantras, the Jakun, the
Basisi, or the Sakai of Salangor. Of these the Basisi and the Salangor, who
have an elaborate government based apparently on Malay influences, are
not tabled, the former because they appear to be mixed with the rest of the
population without independent means of subsistence, the latter because
their economic status is not clear. The former have systems of government
and public justice of varying grades which, if we follow Martin may be
ascribed mainly to the influence of the more cultivated peoples with whom
they are in contact.

45. Mundombe : — Our only information about justice refers to adultery,
which is compounded. The death of a wife will from whatever cause entail
the payment of bloodmoney to her relatives by the husband. This appears
sufficient evidence of the prevalence of the idea of compensation. (Magyar,
P- 23.)

46. Kuku : — This is a complicated system in which the execution of
justice differs a good deal according to the relation of the parties. People
form clans with no chiefs and the clans form tribes which recognise a chef
de Ve.au, while there is also a landowner who is sometimes invoked in
judicial matters.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 141

Within the clan in the case of murder the kin go to the chef de Veau, who
forces the guilty party to pay compensation. In the case of rape the
ravisher caught red-handed may be killed, otherwise the kin obtain com-
pensation through the chef de I'eau, who is also appealed to in case of
adultery should the landowner fail to induce the guilty to indemnify. In
case of theft, if the thief will not pay an equivalent appeal is made to the
chef de I'eau.

As between the clans or tribes, in case of murder the clan of the victim
claim the murderer or a relation. In case of refusal a feud ensues. In
case of rape husband and kin claim compensation. In theft and adultery
appeal is made to the chef de I'eau.

Further, if collective action fail, individual vengeance may occur and
even develop into an endless feud. Presumably much depends on the
personality of the chef de I'eau. (Varden Plas, pp. 355-361.)

47. Ewe speaking peoples : — The government of these peoples is
monarchy controlled by an aristocracy who form a Council, except in
Dahomi where the king was absolute. (Ellis, p. 162.) Accounts as to
administration of justice are not altogether in agreement, but retaliation is
certainly recognised and responsibility is collective and vicarious. There are
some differences depending on the rank of the parties. If the injured party
is poor the family will usually accept compensation. Ellis states explicitly
that among the Tshi, Ga and Ewe peoples the State, i.e., the tribal or
village chief takes no cognisance of offences unless they are such as concern
the whole community, e.g., treason and witchcraft. In cases of homicide,
theft, rape, assault, injury, etc., the family alone exacts satisfaction from
the other family, and only if no agreement is arrived at is the case brought
before the chief, who until called upon cannot act. (Yoruba speaking
peoples, pp. 299-300.)

48. Beduans : — The account is not very clear. It denies knowledge of
genuine criminal justice. It says offences are generally settled in patri-
archal fashion. It also speaks of accusation before the Pasha and of
punishment by exile, but the Pasha acts very arbitrarily and interferes
but little. The Pasha has superseded a native chief, and the conditions
are probably transitional. (Munzinger, p. 156.)

49. Massed : — Our authority speaks of revenge and composition if there
are no judges, but who the judges would be or what power they would have
he does not tell us. (Hollis, p. 311.)

50. Nandi : — Administration of public justice is not clearly stated but
trials are mentioned. There is a clear distinction between murder inside
the clan and outside the clan. In the former case the offender is looked on as
unclean until he kills 2 outsiders ; in the latter there is vengeance and com-
position. (Hollis, p. 73-4.) They were formerly hunters (p. 17) and their
institutions are perhaps transitional.

142 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

CHAPTER III.
THE FAMILY.

The main questions which occur to the student of institutions
about marriage and family life include :

1. Kinship, and limitations of marriage.

2. The form of marriage.

3. The number of wives or husbands.

4. The stability of marriage.

5. The relations of husband and wife.

We will briefly explain the way in which we seek to tabulate
information on these points.

(i) Kinship.

The statistical method is difficult to apply here, because much
depends on detail, with regard to which it often happens that
information breaks off at the most interesting point. Even if we
had the facts in full, to table them in a satisfactory manner would
require a great number of headings, and would in fact necessitate
a specialised enquiry. Hence we have only endeavoured to note
certain broad features. Is the system of descent matrilineal, patri-
lineal, or both ? l Is marriage matrilocal, patrilocal, or both ? 2
The second question often yields ambiguous results. A young
couple live for a while with the wife's father and then return to the
husband's people. We think they are patrilocal, as the permanent

1. Often kinship is reckoned on both sides but further on one side than
on the other. Thus among the Bambala it is reckoned very far on the
female side, but in the male line not beyond the uncle and grandfather.
(J.A.I., 35, p. 410.)

The father's right to the children may depend on purchase. Thus,
among the Makololo (Livingstone, Zambesi, p. 285), cows are given for the
wife to secure the children for the husband's family. Similarly, among
the Wagogo, the wife normally enters the family of the husband, but if
he cannot pay the price he goes to her family and becomes virtually a slave
until his friends buy him out. (Beverley in Steinmetz, p. 208.)

2. In several Calif ornian tribes, e.g., the Yurok, the status of the
husband depends on the payment of the price. A " soft fellow " will only
pay half the purchase money and then enters the wife's tent in a servile
position (Powers, p. 56). Among the Hupa, the men might serve out half
the price, the children then going to the mother's people (Goddard, Life
and Culture of the Hupa, p. 56). We enter their system as both Patrilocal
and Matrilocal.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 143

dwelling is the more important of the two. But it may be that all
we are told is that after living for a time with the wife's people they
set up house for themselves. 1 In that case, though with some
doubt, we should class them as matrilocal, since our information as
far as it takes us associates the young couple with the mother's
rather than the father's family.

In association with this question we considered the bars to
marriage, but unfortunately found in the end that our information
was too incomplete to be worth tabulating.

(2) The Form of Marriage.

We may take next the question how a marriage is arranged and
the method by which a partner is obtained. Here there are several
questions to be distinguished. In the first place, the relations —
generally the parents, but sometimes brothers, uncles or the entire
kin — may be the authors of the marriage, and either the girl's kin
or the boy's may take the initiative. We have not discriminated
these two cases, but we table both as cases in which " relatives
arrange marriage." The instances tabled include numerous cases
of child and even infant betrothal, and it might be thought that in
none of these peoples would the woman have any say in the matter.
But this is not so. It is possible that the betrothed girl or boy
may repudiate the arrangement on coming to maturity, and even
if this is not definitely understood as a right, it may be settled
via facti by elopement.2 We therefore have had to tabulate
separately cases in which the " consent of the girl is required," the
negative sign meaning that it may clearly be over-ridden. When
consent is not required it may be pretty safely assumed that
marriage is arranged by the kinsfolk, and we might add the totals

1. e.g., among the Hottentots, the young people live for a year with
her people (Z.V.R., 15, p. 343).

2. Thus, among the Yuin in Australia, if the girl preferred another man
and eloped with him, nothing would be done if they could escape till a
child was born, particularly if there was a sister to give in exchange
(Howitt, p. 263). Among the Wiimbaio (Howitt, p. 194) the girl so eloping
would be pursued, and after the man had allowed her relatives to strike
him, he might be permitted to retain her, but there might also be a fight.
Among the Australians generally elopement in relation to betrothal is
treated with very varying degrees of seriousness, so that it is impossible
to say generally how far the consent of the parties was really a factor, and
we had to deal with each case as best we could. Among the Ainu of Japan,
infant betrothal occurred but was not binding (Batchelor, p. 141). Further,
when the institution is regularly recognised, it often coexists with the
exercise of consent by grown-up girls. Thus, among the Garo (Dalton,
Ethn. B., p. 64) there is frequent child betrothal but grown-up girls have
free choice. Among the Basonge Meno (Annales, Series III, Tome II, pp.
271-2) and the Tshi (Ellis) child betrothal is an institution (p. 282), but the
consent of an adult woman is necessary for her marriage (p. 285).

144 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

(allowing for those which are in fact entered under both heads) to
get the whole number of cases where marriage is arranged. We
cannot, however, for the reason already given, invert the argument,
so as to obtain the total of cases in which consent is not required.
But in dealing with consent, we come upon a considerable difficulty.
We often learn that though marriage is regarded as properly an
affair for the relatives, in practice it is settled by elopement or
possibly abduction. In this case, should we say that the woman's
consent, is a factor or not? We have to note (a) that elopement
shades off into abduction or capture in which consent is not a
factor ; (b) that in practice elopement may be more or less seriously
regarded ; (c) that it may or may not co-exist with other methods in
which the girl's views are disregarded. Where a girl may quite
clearly be forced into marriage against her will, we say that consent
is not required, even though elopement may in fact be common.
We should also deny it if elopement is seriously punished. On
the other hand, if elopement is the ordinary method, and is
punished formally rather than seriously, and if other methods
do not palpably over-ride the girl's wish, we should table the case
under * consent required.' The exceptional cases in which the
girl takes the initiative are not entered separately, but are added to
" consent required." x

i. To illustrate the very multifarious conditions affecting the problem of
consent, we may refer to the previous note, upon the Australians. Two
cases may serve to show the method in accordance with which the tables
are formed.

Among some Victorian tribes, according to a narrative recorded by
Howitt, p. 255, it would appear as though a girl might succeed in main-
taining her refusal of a man and then an exchange would be necessary.
This is a borderland case, which we table as " consent required."

Among the Yerkla Mining, on the other hand, if the betrothed husband
claims his wife, the dispute is settled by a regulated fight (Howitt, p. 258).
This, we think, is " consent not required."

Among the Hidatsa and the Dakota elopements occurred but were not
strictly honourable, marriage being properly arranged with the parents
(Dorsey, Smithsonian Reports, 1893, P- 242). In such cases we take consent
as being not required. This view is confirmed by Rigg, Contributions, p.
206, though among the Hidatsa, according to Mathews, the girl's wishes
would have weight.

Among the Gonds a different question arises. Elopement is a recog-
nised right, yet the deserted lover may carry a girl off by force, so we
have entered it on the negative side as "consent not required." (Crooke,
The Tribes and Castes of the North-western Provinces and Oudh, vol. ii,
P- 434-)

Among the Panikocch, the women take the initiative. Marriage is
settled by the mothers with the consent of the parties, or a grown-up girl
may take a husband for herself (Dalton, p. 91). Among the Garo the
initiative is with the girl (ib. p. 64).

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 145

Whether the parties or the family arrange the match the basis
may be of several kinds. There is a sprinkling of cases of real
capture, together with some in which capture is ceremonial. There
are cases where there is no ceremony but simple cohabitation.
Then there are a large number of cases in which some sort of
consideration is given for the bride. Here we may have (a) true
purchase. The bride is certainly bought and sold, (b) Gifts made
to her relatives. Here it is often difficult to say whether it is a true
purchase or not.i Sometimes we find that the gifts are very small
or that gifts of equal value are returned. The former we ignore.2
The latter we table as " exchange of presents," and regard the
transaction more as a mark of mutual courtesy and of friendliness
between the families rather than as a commercial affair. But the
return gifts may be very small while the original gifts are regarded
as the real means of securing the assent of the woman's family.3
In such cases we enter " G " (gifts) under the heading " considera-
tion for marriage," and this title must be understood to cover the
cases which we hold to be intermediate between the exchange of
presents and purchase proper, considerations of courtesy, the family
dignity, and the like, mixing with the desire of compensation for
the loss of the girl.4 Gifts to the bride herself are not considered.
If the bride has a dowry which exceeds the gifts made for her, .that
is separately entered,5 and if purchase or any consideration of the
nature of purchase is explicitly denied, a minus sign is entered.6
Further, in place of payment, service (S) may be rendered, or the
bridegroom's family may give a bride in exchange (E) for the one
they receive. A cursory comparison of the totals shows that the
rendering of some consideration for the bride is the normal mode of
securing marriage at all grades in the uncivilised world.

1. Thus, among the Porno in California, marriage, according to Powers
(op. cit., p. 157), is not strictly a purchase but is arranged by presents to
the parents. Among the Omaha there is free courtship with presents to
the parents (Dorsey, Smiths., iii, p. 260).

2. Thus the Wataturu bridegroom sends a pot of honey as a token
(Baumann, Massailand, p. 172). We enter a negative under Purchase.

3. In South Melanesia purchase or an exchange of presents verging on
purchase is the rule, but in Santa Cruz Codrington describes the transaction
as an exchange. In Bartle Bay there is exchange, but the bride's kin get
the more valuable presents.

4. Among the Bushongo we are told that a woman is not bought, but it
is considered just that compensation should be given for her and her con-
sent is necessary (Torday and Joyce, Annales, Series III, p. n).

5. e.g., among the Veddas.

6. Among the Wambugwe the suitor sends an ox to the father and if
it is accepted the marriage follows, but the bride's father endows her with
oxen so that he apparently gives more than he receives. They must, how-
ever, be returned in case of divorce, so we have entered a minus under
purchase but nothing under Dowry. (Baumann, Massailand, p. 187.)

146 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

(3) Number of Parties.

We distinguish "monogamy regular," which means that
polygamy and polyandry are alike forbidden by custom ; " poly-
gamy general," which means that anyone may have more than one
wife and that many in fact do so; and "polygamy occasional,"
which means either (a) that it is stated to be rare, or (b) that it is
confined to the chiefs, nobles, or wealthy, or (c) that it occurs under
certain conditions, e.g., barrenness. If we are told that monogamy
is the rule, even for chiefs, but that the chiefs have exceptionally
been known to have two wives, this is an exception within an
exception, and we enter it with a query.1 When the second and
other wives have a decidedly inferior status, we enter C (concubin-
age) under polygamy. If polygamy and concubinage are alike
deemed wrong we have " monogamy regular." 2 The rare cases of
polyandry are distinguished as "regular" ( + ), occasional, which
means that such marriage occurs but does not appear to be frequent,3
and servile, which means that a secondary husband has a status
roughly analogous to that of a concubine.4

(4) The Stability of Marriage.

A marriage being concluded, on what conditions may it be
annulled ? It would need a specialised enquiry to deal with the
great variety of cases. We distinguish (a) divorce at will of the
parties. These include (i) cases in which divorce is said to be
simple, easy or frequent.5 There may be some error under this

1. Such exceptions to the general rule of monogamy occur among the
Kayans (Hose and McDougall, i, p. 73). We cannot enter them as strictly
monogamous though our authors say that " public opinion does not easily
condone a second wife " (ibid).

2. Thus, among the Karok of California, all concubinage even with
female slaves is reprobated (Powers, p. 22). A more doubtful case is that
of the Bali tribes, where monogamy is the only legal form, but concubinage
with unmarried women of the slave class is in practice allowed. On the
whole this seems to be an instance of laxity rather than a recognised institu-
tion, and we have taken the Bali as monogamous (Hutter, p. 379).

3. Among the Punans the principal cause is that wives of elderly men
take a second husband to obtain children (Hose and McDougall, ii, 185).
Similarly, among the Bayaka, a childless man may introduce his brother
in secret (Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 36, p. 45). An analogous custom is
noted among the Santals by Risley (vol. ii, p. 229). Among several
Australian tribes men of the same totem or of the same class have certain
rights of access. Among the Massai adultery within the same age-class is
no offence, so that there is virtually polyandry as well as polygamy (Hollis,
p. 312).

4. Thus, among the Roucoyennes, the wife's lover enters the husband's
service as a peito — half client, half serf, and admitted paramour (Coudreau,
Rev. Ethnog., vii, p. 479).

5. e.g., among the Anyanja, marriage is regarded lightly and adultery
and divorce are common (Stannus, J.A.J., 40, p. 309).

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 14?

head, but it is not likely to be serious. (2) Cases in which the only
condition to be observed is the repayment of the bride price.1 These
are included unless we are specifically told that the price is so
heavy as in fact to make divorce difficult. (3) Cases in which
incompatibility, neglect or ill-treatment on either side is sufficient,
and (4) cases of mutual consent.2 From these we distinguish (b)
cases in which divorce is at the will of the husband, and here again
we do not take a pecuniary penalty as a bar unless it is a serious
practical obstacle. In some instances we are only told explicitly
that the wife can leave at will, but in general we presume from
the whole account of their relations that where she has this power,
the husband has the same.3 There are some instances, however,
in which this assumption is not warranted, and here we have divorce
at will of wife.4 Thirdly (c) divorce may be allowed only under
conditions — infidelity, desertion, barrenness, cruelty.5 These are
entered as " divorce conditioned." But the conditions may only
apply to one party, e.g., the husband may divorce his wife at will,

1. The Tagal wife must repay the price, and if she goes to another
husband, her acquired property as well. If the husband leaves her he loses
half the price (Blumentritt, Z.E., 25, p. 20).

2. Where, as among the Mayombe (Overbergh, p. 254), the consent of
the wife's father is required in addition to her own, we enter the case as
" Conditioned."

3. Latcham (J.A.I., 39, p. 359) implies that the Araucanian wife could
leave her husband on returning the bride price. As she is stated to be
definitely his property we presume that he could divorce her uncondition-
ally.

4. Among some of the Irulas Harkness shows that the option of dis-
solving rested mainly with the wife (Thurston, vol. ii, p. 379).

5. It is impossible to illustrate fully as there is every variety. A case
fairly typical of one group is that of the Basonge (Overbergh, p. 271),
where the wife may be repudiated for notorious laziness, sterility, or
adultery, and the husband for cruelty or attempting to sell her to a
stranger. Another class may be exemplified by the Mundombe (Magyar,
p. 23), where divorce is rare, only occurring when, after two years, there
is no child. The most difficult cases to tabulate are those in which divorce
is free till children are born and then limited or forbidden; e.g., among
the Natchez, according to Le Petit (Jesuit Relations, Ixviii, p. 143) the
husband could divorce at will till the child was born. After that there was
no divorce. This is entered as " Conditioned." The case of the Kootenay,
where the husband might return the bride within a year if dissatisfied, we
have entered both under " Will of husband " and under "Conditioned "
(Chamberlain, B.A. Report, 1892, p. 557). In British Guiana, according
to Im Thurn, the husband can set his wife free though he cannot merely
repudiate her after children are born (Im Thurn, p. 222). And among the
Karayaki and the Sambioa, according to Ehrenreich, he must exchange her
if he wishes to marry another (p. 27). In these cases we think the husband
must, on the balance, be regarded as having the dissolution in his hands.

148 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

while the wife may leave him only if he is cruel or unfaithful.1
We should table this as " divorce at will of the husband," and we
have not been able to table separately the cases in which the wife
has a compensatory conditional right. Lastly (d) marriage may
be indissoluble, or the exceptions so rare that (as e.g. among the
Veddas) they may be ignored.

Marriage and divorce are generally private affairs, concerning
at most the kindreds of the parties. But in some instances the
chief or the leading men are consulted about marriage, or the chief
performs the ceremony.2 In some cases too the chief or council
adjudicates in divorce. We group these cases together under the
head " Public control of Marriage." It must be admitted that the
term "public" is sometimes of doubtful import. The old men
whom we hear of frequently in Australia as being consulted, would
not perhaps from the constitution of the Australian group, include
more than the parents or grandparents — blood or " tribal " of the
parties. On the other hand, they represent as much public
authority as there is in the group, and it seems desirable in a first
study on this point to include all doubtful cases. The chief ground
of intervention by anyone other than the kindreds is probably the
fear of overstepping some tribal barrier, and the complication of
these in Australia would account for the frequency of such inter-
vention in that region. Public control of divorce, where the public
is really more than the elders of the two kindreds, is probably
motived by a desire to keep the peace, and is a step towards public
justice. We note also the cases where adultery of either party is
a matter of public punishment, and have been surprised to find how
numerous these are.

(5) Relations of Husband and Wife.

How are we to judge the relations of husband and wife, and the
general position of women ? The form of marriage throws some
light on the question. Where a wife is bought without her consent,
we cannot augur well of her status. Where marriage is by free
courtship, it is reasonable to view it more favourably. When
gifts are made to the parents and the girl's consent is required, the
case is intermediate. But we have also a good deal of direct
information as to the status of the wife. We do not indeed attach

1. The Yoruba husband can apparently divorce his wife at pleasure,
while she, if systematically neglected, can secure her freedom by calling a
palaver of her kindred (Ellis, Yoruba, pp. 186, 187).

2. Thus, according to Risley (vol. ii, p. 234), the permission of the circle
Headman has to be obtained for every marriage among the Santals. The
interposition of the chief or the Panchayet is particularly frequent among
the Indian tribes. They also frequently deal with cases of adultery.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 149

much importance to such general statements as that women are well
treated, or ill-treated as the case may be. Such judgments depend
on the observer's own standard, and the observer is generally a
man. Further, how women are actually treated by the majority of
men is one question ; what rights are secured to them by custom
and law is another. We therefore break up the question as far as
possible. We ask (a) whether the husband has the right of
chastisement, whether for adultery or other acts, (b) Whether the
wife is protected either by law or by her kinsfolk. It will be found
that in some cases the answer to both these questions is in the
affirmative, the interpretation being that the husband's right of
chastisement is limited either in degree or in regard to the reason
justifying it.1 We ask (c) whether the women do the harder work
or whether the work is fairly divided.2 And we note (d) definite
statements as to the position of the wife being equal, inferior ( — )
or superior (sup.) to that of her husband.3 Finally, under
" Women in Government," we table cases where a woman may be
a chief or may take part in a tribal council.4

1. e.g., among the Kurnai, a husband might kill an unfaithful wife or
make her a prostitute. Cases, however, occurred in which her relatives
sought to avenge her. (Fison and Howitt, K. and K., p. 258, cf. p. 206.)

2. In a fair number of instances we get explicit statements on the one
side that women are drudges or do all the hard work, on the other that
work is fairly apportioned. In the absence of such statements we may
find that the men do the lighter or more interesting work such as hunting
or trade, e.g., among the Bali tribes (Hutter, p. 382) the land is worked by
the women, who also fetch wood, prepare the food, and look after the
children, while trade is said to be done by the men. Here we think the
women do the hard work ; but among the Bushongo, where the relations
are similar but the men are described as the best artizans in Africa
(Annales, Series III, Tome II, p. 175), we think work is fairly apportioned.
Among the Haida where, according to Boaz, the men, in addition to hunt-
ing and fishing, cut the fuel and build houses, we think the distribution is
fair. When Ehrenreich (p. 27) states that among the Karayaki certain
forms of labour fall on the women, that she is no beast of burden, but the
man also has his duties, we make no entry, nor do we think the statement
of Im Thurn (p. 215) that work is pretty equal between the sexes in British
Guiana, but women really do the more continuous drudgery, sufficient to
justify an entry under either head.

3. We should enter a negative when, in spite of the good position of the
woman, the man is definitely stated to be head of the family, e.g., among
the Karayaki and Sambioa (Ehrenreich, Veroff. KM., Bd. i, p. 27 loc. cit.).
In the case of the Warundi, where the husband and wife work together in
the field, where a woman would not tolerate any ill-treatment, and is said
to occupy a rank less inferior than among other negroes, we enter " Wife
equal." (Burgt, p. 241.)

4. e.g., among the Bushongo, the mother of the king is the first per-
sonage of the realm, women are represented among the chiefs, and in the
council there are several (Annales, Series III, Tome II, p. u). Among the

150 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

For bringing these results together the simplest available
method is a system of marking. Each point "favourable"1 to
the woman may be marked i, and each point that tells against
her —i. More doubtful points may be reckoned as \ either way.
The algebraic sum would represent the status of the woman. Thus
we should mark on the negative side i for a system of purchase,
| for gifts, \ for service, i for exchange, i for " consent not
required," \ for " relatives arrange marriage," i for divorce at will
of husband. Marriage indissoluble, divorce at will of either, and
"divorce conditioned " we do not reckon either way. We count
i in the negative for " husband can punish," i for " women do hard
work," i for "wife not equal," i for polygamy general, \ for
occasional. On the other or positive side, we should count i for
monogamy, \ for " wife protected " (as this may be only partial),
but i for the denial of the right of chastisement to the husband,
i for " work equal," i for " wife equal," 2 i for "women in govern-
ment." Thus if we have a case of occasional polygamy ( — |),
divorce at will of husband (— i), marriage by gifts ( — \\ wife
protected (\) and work equal (i), the sum would be — \ and the
status of women deemed on the whole slightly unfavourable. The
result would be of little value for any particular people, but would
seem to indicate the general condition in a group. It should be
said that when the result is o, it does not mean that the wife's
position is equal to the husband's. It means only that it is
moderately good.

To turn now to our results, we may take first the question of
descent and the allied question of the residence of the family with the
father's or mother's kin. We reckon every case of " matrilineal "
and " patrilineal " descent as i even if they are combined, but if

1. That is, as judged by the ordinary standards of modern civilisation.
Whatever the value of this standard the marking system will hold good
as a means of comparing simple with modern societies.

2. " Wife equal " or " Not equal " are not reckoned separately if a
point has been already counted on the same side in virtue of a statement
as to the power of the husband or the work of the wife.

Warega they are admitted to the Assemblies and attain grades in the social
hierarchy just like men (Delhaise, p. 193). Among the Bamsalala, though
they can be chiefs and act as witnesses, they are said otherwise to have no
rights (Desoignies in Steinmetz, p. 277). Among the Tsimshian, Boaz
states that they can be present at councils if they are heads of families
(see B.A. Reports, 1889, p. 812). Among the Oneida Iroquois, according to
the Jesuit Relations (vol. 21, p. 101), a man and woman alternately held
the rank of Peace-chief. Among the Wyandots (Powell, 5.M. Rep., i, p.
61) the gentile council consisted of four women chosen by the women who
selected a male chief; and the gentile councils together constituted the
council of the tribe.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 151

one is said to be occasional only, we count it J. We get the
following totals out of 552 cases in which we have some information
as to marriage : —

Matrilineal descent 87 J

Patrilineal „ 84

Matrilocal ,, 42^

Patrilocal „ 52

It emerges at once that descent by no means determines the associa-
tion of the children with the line through which descent is reckoned.
The cases in which the couple live with the wife's people are less
than half of those in which the descent is reckoned through the wife.
Apportioning cases of matrilineal and patrilineal. descent to each
economic grade, we get the following results : —

M£

Lower Hunters
Higher Hunters ...
Dependent Hunters

itrilineal.

21

Patrilineal

14

12

H...

Agriculture1

I

6

O

Pastoral1

1

6

Agriculture2 . i

21

Pastoral2 ..(

I

6

Apriculture3

20

24*

These figures as they stand suggest that the matrilineal system
on the whole slightly predominates among the Hunters and the
patrilineal decidedly among Pastoralists, while the two are nearly
balanced among Agricultural peoples — the difference between
successive grades within each class being of much smaller import-
ance. To test the matter a little further we may bring in the cases
of a matrilocal or patFilocal system, and, further, distinguish
instances in which the two principles are combined from those in
which they are separate. With this object we may make five
heads : —

(1) Under the first we bring cases of matrilineal or matrilocal
or both combined.

(2) Under the second patrilineal and patrilocal similarly.

(3) Under the third cases where matrilineal and patrilineal

descent are conjoined.

(4) Under the fourth cases of matrilineal kinship with patrilocal

marriage, and

(5) Under the last the converse case of patrilineal descent and

matrilocal marriage. Of these it will be seen there are only
two.

L

152 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

We get the following results :

I.

II.

III.

IV.

V.

L.H

2*1

... 8

... 7 -••

o

o

H.H

14

... 10

... 3 ...

4

o

A1

9s

... 7

o

0

0

P1 ... .

i

2

o

o

A2

19!

... 23

2

6\ ...

o

P2

0

... 6

I

0

0

A3

14

... 18

... 8 ...

i

l\

Grouping the last three columns as mixed systems, we have1 : —

L.H
H.H
A1

Mat.

22^
... 15
Ql

Pat.
... 8
10

7

Combined.
... 7 ...
... 7 ...
o

= 371
= 32

= i6J

PI

I

/

4

2

= 7

A2

IQi

22

8* ...

= 50

P2

*• :?2

o

6

i

— 7

A3

1C

18

ioi

= 431

L^g

... 75 ... 36 ... =193^

i. The peoples counted in each column are : —

I. MATRILINEAL AND MATRILOCAL.

Lower Hunters : — Darling River, Murray River, Port_Lincoln, Some
West Australians, DierT^ NjS. Wales, Kamilarpi, Euahlayi, Mycoolon,
Namoi River, Tatuthi, Wolgal, ~~S. Queensland, Maryborough (occ.),
Urabunna, Ngumba,^ Kabi and Waaka, ~"K. George's Sound, Punan,
Fuegians, Batua, Lushongo Batua, Veddahs.

Ttigher Hunters : — Kootenay, Kiowa, Seri, Montagnais, Yokuts, Point
Barjcow Eskimo, C. Eskimo, Chilcotin, Carriers, W. Nahane, Nootka,
T^itsaut, Abipones, Guaycurus, Italmen.

Agric. I : — Lengua, Yuracares, Roucoyennes; Shingu, Karayaki, British
Guiana (some), Iroquois. Huron, Arunese, Veddahs.

Pastoral I : — Navaho.

Agric. II : — Sambioa, Bororo, Ges, Wyandot, Creeks, Woolwa, Natchaz,
Seminole, Baquiri, S. Melanesians, Moanu, Caroline Islands, Maoris, Ton-
gans, Hawaians, Fijians, Arunese, 7 Kiangans, PaniJKpcch, Sea Dyaks.

AgricT~IIl : — Araiucajijans7 Zuni, Sia, Tshi, Ewe, Bav_aka, Wadigo,
Ondonga, Duallas, Anyanza, Yao, Kasias, Dusun, "Kajrans of Mindalam,
Garos.

II. PATRILINEAL AND PATRILOCAL.

Lower Hunters : — Narranga, Narrinjerri, Port Darwin, Powell's Creek,
Chepara, Arunta, E. Victoria, N.W. Australians.

Higher Hunters : — Klamaths, Oregon, Blackfeet, Assiniboins, Omaha,
Tsekhene, E. Nahane, Shushwap, Coast Salish, S. Kwakiutl, Kauralaig.

Agric. I : — Macusi, Paravilhane, Ojibways, Dakota, Mohave, W. Torres
Straits, C. Sakai.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 153

The preponderance of the maternal principle in the first three
stages comes out markedly, but it is subject to a certain discount in
the case of the Lower Hunters. The Australian tribes generally
seem, from the nature of their social structure to be patrilocal, i.e.,
the family belongs to the father's local group. But this is not often
explicitly recorded and therefore escapes our tables. If we trans-
ferred half the matrilineal Australians, of whom we have 16, to the
intermixed group, the figures for the Lower Hunters would be
15, 8 and 15. This would reduce the correlation which appears on
the surface of our figures, and for safety we may provisionally
adopt it. Nevertheless if, taking these reduced figures, we group
Hunting, Pastoral and Agricultural groups together, we get an
interesting result : —

Maternal. Paternal. Intermixed.

Hunters 30 18 22

Pastoral i 10 .*..... 3

Agricultural 44 47 19

B

roadly, if we omit the intermixed cases, we see that the maternal
principle predominates among the hunting peoples, the paternal in
the pastoral stage, while among agricultural peoples the two are
nearly balanced. The figures disprove the connection sometimes
alleged between agriculture and the maternal system. They are
not sufficiently marked to show that the maternal system is
decidedly characteristic of the lowest cultures, but they suggest on

Pastoral I : — Kurds of Eriwan, Toda, Samoyedes, Dinka.

Agric. II : — Uaupe, Pawnees, Warega, Mangbetu, Mandja, ? Angoni,
Limbu, Chakma, Santals, S.E. Solomons, Saa, Koita, Roro, Mekeo, Battle
Bay, New Caledonia, Woodlark Islands, Louisiades, Gazelle Peninsula,
Mowat, Maclay Coast, Mafulu, ? Gilbert Islands.

Pastoral II : — Karak Kirghiz, Altaian Kalmucks, Baquerewe, Gallas,
Somal, Danakil.

Agric. Ill : — Pima, Papago, Guatemala, Jekris, Warundi, Suaheli
Wachagga, Amahlubi, Washambala, Basoga Batamba, Akamba, Segoo,
Basonge, Waniamwesi, Wapokomo, Singpho, Ossetes, Suanes.

III. COMBINED.

Lower Hunters : — N.W.C. Queensland, W. Victoria, Kurnai, Gourn-
ditchmara, Patwin, Lopari Batua, Andamans.

Higher Hunters : — Haidah, Tsimshian, Hupa, Thlinkeet, Lillooet,
Bellacoola, Heiltsuk.

Pastoral I : — Khoi Khoin, Ova Herero.

Agric. II : — Banaka and Bapuku, Florida, Waga Waga, Trobriand
Islands, Marshall Bennetts, Sulka, Bogadjim, ? Jabim, Marshall Islands.

Pastoral II : — Bogos.

Agric. Ill: — Bamsalala, Wagogo, Diakite Saracolays,Bambala, Yoruba,
? Kuku, Nossi Be" (occ.), Basonge Meno (occ.), Ababua, Baganda, Bahuana.

cl

154 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

A the whole that it wears away in the higher before the level of
/ . civilisation is reached, rapidly in the pastoral world, less decidedly
' among tillers of the soil.

THE FORM OF MARRIAGE.

Far the commonest method at all grades is that of giving a
consideration for the wife, either in the form of true purchase, of
gifts, of service, or of the exchange of bride for bride. Other
methods are capture, free consent, the exchange of presents, the
arrangement by relatives (where nothing appears as to any con-
sideration, and consent may or may not be required) and arrange-
ment by a chief. For these we get the following gross numbers :

Considera- Exchange Arranged Public

All cases-, tion given. Capture. of gifts. Consent, by parents. control.

434 ••• 303i ••• 4jl ••• ^\ •- 30 ... 5oJ ... ii

These figures do not represent separate individual cases as some
tribes practise both purchase or exchange of brides and capture.
If we omit these tribes, we find 9 practising capture only with no
mention of any consideration or arrangement by parents, and if we
substitute that figure for 32^, we have a total of 422^ cases in
which the form of marriage is tabled.2 It should, however, be
remarked further that the consent of the parties is here entered only
in cases where it is the sole factor mentioned. This figure by no
means corresponds to the number in which consent is required.
The same thing is true of the 50^ cases arranged by parents, and
of the ii referred to public control.3 There are many other cases
in which the arrangement of the parents and relations enters in,
indeed it may be assumed in some degree or other in all the 303^
cases in which consideration is given, but the 50^ here tabled are
those in which all that our information shows us is that the parents
had in fact arranged the marriage. It is probable that these cases
should be added to the 303^, and if we do so, we shall find that out
of 434 cases in all as to which we have information, marriage is

1. Cases of " occasional " capture reckoned as one. Reckoning them at
J we get 32 J cases.

2. In addition there are 2 cases in which " no purchase " is our only
entry, making 424^. As in some cases an instance is only reckoned as J
we have rather a larger sum for the total cases in which the form of mar-
riage is recorded, viz., 434.

3. On the other hand it is possible that in some of these the element of
public control does not extend to the arrangement of marriage, but is
concerned with divorce, etc. The figure means simply that in n cases we
have no entry relative to the conclusion of marriage except public control
which may have to do with it. This small figure is therefore a maximum.
In any case it is exceedingly unlikely that public control is in reality the
only factor.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 155

either arranged by the parents, or arranged in virtue of a considera-
tion given to the parents or relatives, in 355. It is even possible
that the 18^ of exchange of gifts should be added to this number,
as on the whole belonging to the category in which marriage is an
affair between two families. These therefore exhaust by far the
greater number of cases. There remain 9, which are purely a
matter of capture, and 30 in which courtship or the consent of the
two parties is the only factor of which we are informed. There
is therefore little doubt that the general rule is that marriage in
the primitive world is a family matter, in which, in the majority of
cases, some consideration has to be given for the girl to her
relatives.

We next show the number of cases in which a consideration is
given in each grade, and the percentage which these constitute of
the total number of tribes about whose marriage form we have any
information :—

BASIS OF MARRIAGE.
CONSIDERATION GIVEN FOR THE BRIDE.

Consideration Fraction

Names.. All cases. given. of total.

Lower Hunters ... 61 28^ 47

Higher Hunters ... 67 44 66

Dependent Hunters 8 4 .5

Agriculture1 36 22 61

Pastoral1 18 13 .72

Agriculture2 131 99 .76

Pastoral2 20 17^ 88

Agriculture3 93 75^ .81

434 303! 79

The figures show a marked increase in this method of constitut-
ing marriage with the advance of economic culture. But the
increase is sharper in the pastoral as compared with the agricultural
stages, as may be seen by the graph below.

The same relations are even more strongly marked when we
distinguish purchase proper from other forms of consideration.
We then get the following figures : —

Purchase. All cases. Ratio.

L.H 6 61 10

H.H 28 67 42

Dep. 3 8 38

A1 ii 36 31

P1 ii 18 61

A2 69 131 53

P2 16^ 20 83

A3 64^ 93 ...... .69

156 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

The results may be displayed graphically.
"CONSIDERATION" AND "PURCHASE."

LH HH A1 P1 A2 P2 A3

100

90

Thus purchase, and more generally, "consideration " are devices
known to the lowest peoples, but increasing in importance with the
advance in industry, and becoming almost universal among the
higher pastoral peoples.

The exchange of gifts, on the other hand, bears no regular
relation to industrial development, and the same is true of
" consent " as the only condition. We find the following figures :

Exchange of

Gifts. Consent alone.

Lower Hunters 2 2

Higher Hunters io| 3^

Dependent Hunters 2

• Agriculture1 i *]\

Pastoral1 o 3

Agriculture2 6 8

Pastoral2 i o

Agricultural3 4 4

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 157

It is significant that there is only one case of exchange of gifts
among the pastoral peoples. Of the io| among the Higher
Hunters, all but one of which are in North America, it is possible
that several should be referred to "consideration." But where
gifts not amounting to purchase are made, it is not always possible
to determine their real significance. We may say that this is a
form which occurs sporadically everywhere.

Nearly the same thing is true of capture. We have altogether
32J cases of "real" capture as distinct from "ceremonial," of
which we have 19. We give the numbers in each grade with the
total number dealt with side by side for reference : —

Cases of Numbers of
Capture. Peoples.

Lower Hunters 14^ 61

Higher Hunters... 4^ 67

Dependent Hunters o 8

Agriculture1 2 36

Pastoral1 2 18

Agriculture2 2 131

Pastoral2 \ 20

Agriculture3 7 93

The figures show that capture is of importance only among the
Lower Hunters, and here it is substantially confined to the
Australians. It falls to a minimum with the second grade of
Agriculture, but there is a slight recrudescence in the Higher
Agriculture, 6 out of the 7 cases being in Africa.

The broad result of this part of the investigation is to show
(i) the preponderance of the principle of a " consideration " to the
kindred of the bride, (2) the growth of this preponderance with
industrial advance, (3) in particular the growth of purchase proper,
and (4) the peculiarly strong development of purchase in the
pastoral state.

We may next look at the facts from the point of view of the
bride and her relatives. We enumerate the cases in which the
woman's consent appears to be generally required and those in
which it is not required, and we have also the cases in which the
statements show that the kindreds arrange the match though the
question of the woman's consent is not clearly answered. We have
103 cases in which consent is required, and 81^ in which it is not
required. We have also 93 cases in which relatives arrange the
marriage which coincide in part only with one or other of the two

158 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

former headings. It will be best to confine ourselves to the two
alternatives as to consent which as a whole give a slight preponder-
ance to the side favourable to the woman. These are distributed
as follows : —

Second column

Consent Consent not as fraction

required required of total

Lower Hunters 8J ... 21 ... .71

Higher Hunters 14 ... n ... .44

Dependent Hunters ... 2 ... o ... .o

Agriculture1 14 ... 4 ... .22

Pastoral1 4 ... 7! ... .65

Agriculture2 28^ ... 19 ... .38

Pastoral2 i ... 6 ... .86

Agriculture3 31 ... 13 ... .30

103 8iJ

These figures at first sight bear no relation to the industrial state,
but if we distinguish the pastoral and agricultural peoples, we find
an interesting result. The curve falls heavily from the Lower to
the Higher Hunters, and again to the Lowest Agriculture. It rises
in the Middle Agriculture and falls again to Agriculture.3 On the
other hand, it rises sharply for the pastoral peoples, in the higher
grade of whom there seems to be only i people out of 7 which
allows the consent of the bride to be a factor in determining
marriage. Upon the whole there is a slow advance in the position
of women in this respect as we pass from the lowest hunters to the
agriculturists, with a pronounced reaction in the pastoral state.
Within the agriculturists, owing to the favourable position in the
lowest level there is no other correlation with the economic grade.

-

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

»59

CONSENT.
Ratio of cases when it is not required to all cases recorded :

L.H. H.H. A.1 A.3 A.3 P.1 P.2
100

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10

o — — i — — —

THE PARTNERS.

The following table shows for each grade the number of cases
of Polygamy General, Polygamy Occasional, and Monogamy
Regular. To the latter we subjoin the cases where Monogamy is
indissoluble : —

Polyg. Gen.

Lower Hunters ... 14
Higher Hunters ... 23
Dependent Hunters 3 ... 5

Agriculture1 8^ ... 27

Pastoral1 8 ... 6

Agriculture2 60 ... 54^

Pastoral2 13 ... 4!

Agriculture3 58^ ... 22^

Polyg. Occas. Monog. Reg. Monog. Indiss

'.'.' 4| •••

I

7

24
o

10

O
O

•i

4
o

i

Total..

1 88

190!

81

It will be seen at once that the permission of polygamy is by far
the most general rule, but (a) the extent of polygamy is much more
variable, (b) there are scattered cases of monogamy in all grades

i6o

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

except the higher pastoral, while (c) indissoluble monogamy is most
exceptional, but occurs in four grades.

In the following table the above figures are reduced to per-
centages of the total cases in which there is a record under this
head. The results are : —

CASES OF POLYGAMY, ETC., AS FRACTIONS OF THE TOTAL CASES

RECORDED.

Polyg. General Polyg. Occasional Monog. Regular

H H

•J/

**T
.06

Dep H

11

---

.11

A1

.18

=;o

.21

P1

4O

.07

A2

.4.1

• 1Q

.17

P2

74

.26

.O

A3

.64

.11

We exhibit the first and third of these columns and the sum of the
first and second in graphs.

LH

MONOGAMY AND POLYGAMY.
HH A1 P1 A2 P2

100
90
80

70

4 f>

/X

/ x

7

\/

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 161

\

It will be seen (a) that monogamy virtually disappears in the
pastoral state. The single exception is the Tobas of South America
as to whose classification we hesitated between the Higher Hunters
and the Pastoral, such pastoral life as they have being an importa-
tion from the whites, (b) There is a fall of monogamy among the
Higher Hunters and a rise among the lowest Agriculturists.
Otherwise it remains at nearly the same level throughout the
development from hunting to agriculture, the proportion among
the lowest Hunters and higher Agriculturists being not very
different.

On the other hand, the extent of polygamy as distinct from the
recognition of it as good custom, increases almost continuously,
only being more marked among the pastoral peoples.

As to monogamy, however, these results are subject to a doubt.
If we look at the details for the Lower Hunters, we find that the
great preponderance of polygamy is due to the Australians. But
it may be argued, substantially, the Australians only represent one
type of culture, and they ought not to be reckoned at least in this
proportion. It is only the accident of nomenclature that makes us
reckon the Semang as one people and the 31 Australian tribes, for
which we happen to have separate information under this head, as
31. We ought rather to count them both as i. This, however,
would be an extreme in the other direction. It is in fact impossible
to find any clear principle for enumeration except that on which our
table is based. But in order to arrive at some conception of the
possible limits of error it may be well to make a somewhat arbitrary
assumption. Let us equate the Australians as a whole with the
forest tribes of Asia and Africa as a whole, one culture type against
another. This involves the reduction of the Australian numbers to
the sum of the numbers for the Asiatic and African Lower Hunters
(except the Bushmen) as to whom we are informed on this point.
Then for the two forms of polygamy in Australia, instead of 3i|
we read only n. In consequence the total numbers would be : —

Polygamy Monogamy Monogamy

allowed regular per cent

Lower Hunters ... 22 5^ 20

This is a little less than the percentage for Agriculture1 (while
above that for Agriculture2), and would still leave the permission
of polygamy by far the preponderating custom among the Lower
Hunters.

But there is a further point. If instead of monogamy we
enquire into monogyny, we have the important case of the Punans
of Borneo, who are said by Hose to number 100,000 and to include

i6a INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

several groups, the Punans, Ukits, Sians, Bukitans, Lugats, and
Lisums. Among these people there is no polygamy known within
the tribe, but " polyandry occurs generally in cases in which a
woman married to an elderly man has no children by him." l
Polyandry therefore is not sporadic, but is a recognised custom.
On the other hand, the people are monogynous apart from the
influence of other tribes. If we suppose this statement to be true
of all the very numerous groups into which these populations could
be divided, it would be a heavy addition to monogyny in the scale
which would by no means be represented fairly by a single mark.
Considering the variations that we so often find even among closely
allied groups, we cannot assign any precise numerical value to the
Punans, but let us, for the sake of argument, take all the groups
mentioned above as separate instances. We should then have to
add six to our cases of monogamy to get the total for monogyny,
and the results would be : —

Polygamy Monogyny Monogyny

allowed regular per cent.

Lower Hunters ... 22 iii 34

This is a much higher percentage than is found in any other grade,
where the proportions would not be substantially affected by
substituting monogyny for monogamy. There is in fact a partial
tendency to monogyny, not throughout the Lower Hunters, but
among the forest tribes of Asia and Africa. Of the Africans we
have two cases of occasional polygamy and two of monogamy.
In Asia we have two of polygamy and three and a doubtful one
(the Sakai) of monogamy, besides the monogynous but polyandrous
Punans. Elsewhere among the Lower Hunters (with an alleged
exception in Australia) we have polygamy.

Thus the evidence does not make for the association of mono-
gamy with the lowest culture, but only of monogyny with one
particular form of that culture, and that only partially. We find
monogamy here and there in every grade of culture except the
pastoral, and the most that can be properly said is that there is
more of it, at any rate more of monogyny, under the conditions of
the jungle or forest life. On the explanation of this fact our
authorities throw very little light. Probably the forces making for
monogyny throughout the uncivilised world are two. One is the
relative number of the sexes, as to which, in the absence of a census,
we have no trustworthy information. The other is economic.
First, poverty is against polygamy, as is seen on the reverse side
by the constant gain of general over occasional polygamy as we

i. Hose and McDougall, ii, 183.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 163

advance on the industrial scale. Secondly, the special conditions
of the forest life, perhaps in particular the close association of
family groups, and the related practice of assigning a specific cousin
as a partner tells in favour of monogamy. Whether beyond these
there are physiological reasons associated with the mode of life
can only be matter of conjecture. But whatever the conditions
making for monogamy, they recur throughout the world, though
with less intensity in other forms of culture. In every grade,
however, when considered as a whole they are seen to be overborne
by the opposite forces making for polygamy. In a~ word, the
permission of polygamy is the rule throughout the uncivilised
world, its practice extending with industrial development but reach-
ing a maximum in the pastoral state.

We subjoin the figures for Polyandry,1 which show that it occurs
sporadically in all grades, but everywhere as an exception : —

Polyandry
(Each doubtful
and partial case
Polyandry reckoned as one)

Lower Hunters 3 5

Higher Hunters 4^ 7

Dependent Hunters i^ , 2

Agriculture1 i i

Pastoral1 i± 2

Agriculture2 6 9

Pastoral2 i i

Agriculture3 3^ 4

22 31

i. The instances are : —

POLYANDRY.

Lower Hunters : — Dieri (occ.) ; ? Wakelbura; Urabunna; Punan (occ.) ;
? Port Lincoln.

Higher Hunters : — Sen ( ? formerly) ; W. Eskimo (occ.) ; Greenland
Eskimo (occ.) ; Aleuts ; Tsekhene ; Koniagas.

Dependent Hunters : — Bataks of Palawan (occ.) ; Kommbus.
Agric. I : — Roucoyennes (servile).
Pastoral I : — Todas; ? Massai.

Agric. II: — Dophla (occ.); ?Santals; Lepchas (some); ? Massai ; Mar-
shall Islands ; ? Maoris ; Hawaians ; Tahitians ; ? Marquesas.

Pastoral II : — Bahima.

Agric. Ill : — Nossi Be; Kasias; Badaga; Miris of the Hills (occ.).

i$4 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

>

•• DIVORCE.

The following figures show the total cases of divorce under the
heads which we distinguish : —

Divorce At will of Condi- At will Marriage

at will husband tioned of wife indissoluble Total

L. H. ..
H.H. ..
Dep. H.

A1

PI

A2

P2

A3 ..

8

... 5

... 5

... 0

... 2

... 20

28

... 12

... 61

I

... O

.- 471

2

... 0

... 3

... —

...

... 5

J5i

- 7i

... 5

... —

... ll

... 291

6*

... 2\

... 3

... o

I

... 13

42

... 12

... 271

I

... 4

... 861

2

... 3

... 2

... o

... o

... 7

271

... 19*

... ,4

... —

... ,j

... 63

... 10

In fractions of the total numbers recorded these figures give the
following results : —

At will husband conditio

L.H. ...

... .40 ...

.25 ...

.25

H.H. ...

... .59 ...

.26 ...

.14

Dep. H. ...

... .4 ...

— ...

.6

A1

... -53 ...

.25 ...

-17

P1

... .5 ...

.19 ...

•23

A2

... .49 ...

.14 ...

•32

P2

... .29 ...

43 ...

.29

A3

... .44 ...

.31 ...

•23

At will

of wife Indissoluble

.IO
.02 .O

— .-. .05

— ... .08

.01 ... .05

— .02

Total 48 ... .23 ... .24 ... .007 ... .04

Considering the small figures in some of the grades these results
are more remarkable for constancy than for variation. Apart from
the Dependent Hunters the most notable irregularities are (i) the
relatively high proportion for indissoluble marriage among the
Lower Hunters, which depends on two cases only, and (2) the
lower rate for conditioned divorce among Higher Hunters. The
constancy is still more notable if we add together on the one hand
the fractions for divorce at will of the parties and at will of the
husband as cases of looseness in the marriage tie, and on the other

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 165

cases of conditioned divorce and indissolubility as instances of the
closer tie. We then get : —

Unstable marriage Stable marriage

L.H 65 35

H.H 86 14

Do. (including Dep. H.) ... .82 18

A1 78 22

P1 69 31

A2 67 36

P2 71 29

A3 75 .25

Total 72 28

Here, apart from the Higher Hunters, there is remarkably little
change. Marriage is perhaps slightly more stable among Pastoral
peoples than in the hunting and agricultural state. We may say
that in the simpler peoples divorce is in seven cases out of ten
either at the will of either party or by consent of both, subject
perhaps to adjustment of the bride price, or at the will of the
husband. In the remaining cases it is conditioned in various ways.
In a very few cases marriage is indissoluble. Substantially there is
no change in these respects as between one grade of culture and
another.

PUBLIC CONTROL OF MARRIAGE.

Some little further light on the conception of marriage may be
derived from studying the intervention of authorities other than
the kindred in the relation. This may be seen in the fact that
a chief or the council have some say either in the arrangement
of a marriage, or in divorce, or in the punishment of adultery. We
group the first two cases together as " Public Control of Marriage,"
but it must be understood that in effect this may be very slight.
Casting our net very wide we find only 41^ cases in all, very
irregularly distributed. Of these 12 are from the Lower Hunters,
and they must be regarded as very doubtful. We are told, e.g,
that the consent of the " old men " must be obtained. Probably
this means no more than that they decide whether the parties belong
to the right classes. Even if it is more than this, the few old men
in a little local group would probably be akin to one or other of
the parties. However, we set down the figures for what they are
worth, side by side with those for the "public" punishment of

166 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

adultery, which are larger than we expected to find. It is remark-
able that there are four among the Lower Hunters, but it must be
borne in mind that " public " here means in effect the elders of a
primary group. Apart from these, and from a drop in the Higher
Pastoral, they show a pretty regular increase with the industrial
advance : —

Public control Public punishment

L.H ................... i2J ...... 4

H.H ................... i ...... i

Dep. H ................ 2 ...... 4

A1 .................. 2 ...... 4i

P1 .................. 2 ...... 2

A2 .................. 17 ...... Hi

P2 .................. o ...... o

A3 5 ...... i8J

The figures are probably significant rather of the general develop-
ment of public justice than of any change in the nature of marriage.
Adultery is throughout a main source of internal disorder, and for
this reason, apart from any other, comes to be treated as a public
offence.

At the same time, we may perhaps trace a slight tendency to
increased regard for the chastity of women by bringing the above
figures into relation with (a) those for wife lending, and (b) the
condemnation, and (c) toleration of prenuptial unchastity.1 The
latter figures are affected by the manner in which we decide to treat
cases in which there may be no general toleration of prenuptial
relations, but a certain number of men have access to a bride, or to
a girl under certain conditions, e.g., in an Australian capture
marriage all the men of the captor's party claim their rights. We
treat these apart under the head of " ceremonial " — not enumerating

i. Under this head there are naturally many borderland cases. Often
prenuptial relations are winked at rather than tolerated. Thus among the
Bhuiyars, according to Crooke (vol. ii, p. 87), unmarried girls are free, but
the lover if detected is fined by the council and made to marry her. We
treat this on the whole as a formal prohibition of relations. On the other
hand, among the Lepchas (Risley, vol. ii, p. 8) and some of the Singpho
(Wehrli in I.A.E. Supplement, xvi, p. 28) a man may either marry a
pregnant girl or compensate her relations. This rule does not, we think,
override the general condonation of unchastity among this people and we
enter them on the negative side.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 167

all such cases, but only those in which such extra nuptial relations
as are sanctioned belong to this type. We then get the following
results : —

Prenuptial

Wife lending unchastity
or exchange condemned Do. condoned Ceremonial

L.H 17 ... 3 ... 6 ... 7

H.H 10 ... 3 ... 13 ... i

Dep. H o ... i ... i .—

A1 o ... 9 ... 2

P1 o ... 4 ... 2\ ' ...

A2 6 ... 16 ... 27 ... —

A3 6J ... i8| ... 15 ... —

P2 2 ... 2 ... i ... —

41* .- 56^ ... 67i ... 8

It will be seen that the cases in which prenuptial relations are
condemned or condoned are nearly equal in number. There is no
general tendency either way. To which side should we add the
eight " ceremonial " cases? If we think of them in relation to the
normal behaviour of men and women, to the first column; if in
relation to the attitude of the society to sex questions, and the
regard for the person of the woman, which is a matter going pretty
deep into the life and feeling of a people, to the other side. So
doing we may compare successive stages by putting the number of
cases of condemnation as a fraction of the whole. We then have :

CASES OF CONDEMNATION AS FRACTIONS OF ALL CASES RECORDED.

L.H 19

H.H I8

AI 81

P1 61

A2 48

P2 66

A3 55

There is no constant tendency, but the agricultural and pastoral
peoples, are decidedly above the hunters. The figures for the
Lower Agricultural and Pastoral stages are too small to be of any

168 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

special significance. But, taking the Pastoral stages together, it
is noteworthy that on this side of the sex relationship we have none
of that divergence of tendency from the agricultural stages which
we have noted elsewhere. The lowered status of women here does
not mean a disregard of their chastity, but probably a more pro-
prietary view of their persons.1

We bring the information regarding chastity together in the
following table. If in this table we adopt the device of assigning a
mark to each grade of culture for a favourable point and a negative
mark for an unfavourable point, we have a means of estimating the
advance or retrogression as between stage and stage (cases of
" ceremonial " unchastity are reckoned as a half point).

i. How far does prenuptial chastity depend on purchase or on the
consideration for a bride ? The following tables supply a partial answer :

" Consideration " and Prenuptial Relations.

Prenuptial Not Condoned as

Cases condoned* condoned* fraction of total

Marriage by Consideration 303 J ... 36 ... 40 ... .47

By other methods 131 J ... 15 ... 16 ... .48

* Partial cases ignored, and 15 cases omitted which have no corresponding
entry for basis of marriage.

This gives no advantage to marriage by consideration, so that if we
knew that we had all the cases of consideration recorded we could safely
deny that consideration has any effect on prenuptial chastity. But as there
may be and probably is consideration in many of these cases we hesitate to
draw any inference. Turning to purchase where the evidence being more
definite our list probably accounts for a larger proportion of the true total,
the figures are : —

Prenuptial Not Condoned as

Cases condoned condoned fraction of total

Marriage by Purchase 209 ... 30 ... 24 ... .56

Other forms of consideration 95 ... 6 ... 16 ... .27

All other methods 226 ... 21 ... 32 ... .40

This gives an advantage to purchase, but much too small to favour the
view that purchase is the cause of prenuptial chastity. At most, it would
seem, it tightens up a pre-existing prohibition.

Of cases where marriage is by exchange of gifts we have only 4 in which
the prenuptial relations are noted. In 3 of these they are condoned and in
one condemned. This is certainly less favourable, but the numbers are too
small to be significant. Of cases where consent is the only ground noted
(including one in which capture existed formerly) we have 6 cases of
condemnation and 3 of condonation), i.e., a proportion even more favour-
able than that under purchase.

No certain inference can be drawn but the balance of probability is
strongly adverse to any large claims on the part of purchase.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 169

CHASTITY — POINTS .

Positive Negative

Prenuptial Prenuptial

Punishment unchastity Wife unchastity
of adultery condemned lending condoned

L.H 4 ... 3 ••• 17 ••• 9i

H.H i ... 3 ... 10 ...

Dep. H. ... 4 ... i ... o ... i

A1 4| ... 9 ... o ... 2

P1 2 ... 4 ... o ... 2

A2 14^ ... 16 ... 6 ... 27

P2 o ... 2 ... 2 ... i

A3 i8J ... i8J ... 6J ... 15

The result is to show a marked advance from the hunting to the
highest stage of agriculture, broken only by a relapse in the second
agricultural stage. The improvement in the pastoral stage is less
marked, and in the higher pastoral stage there is a fall, but the
numbers here are far too small to be of weight. On the whole the
family life, as measured by this test, becomes more firmly consoli-
dated as we advance.

It may be said, however, that the punishment of adultery reflects
the growth of justice rather than the state of family life. If this be
omitted we get far less regularity. The results are : —

L.H -23*

H.H -2oJ

Dep.H o

A1 + 7

P1 + i\

A2 -17

P2 - i

A3 - 3

The exceptional position of the Lowest Agriculture disturbs what
would otherwise seem a fairly constant tendency to a greater insist-
ence on chastity. Perhaps the best view of the results is obtained
by combining the balances for the groups of Hunters, Pastoralists
and Agriculturists. We then have : —

Hunters —44

Pastoral + \

Agricultural —13

The superiority of the Pastoral peoples is unfortunately based on
very small numbers, but may very possibly reflect the general
development of the patriarchal power. The superiority of both the
higher stages to that of the Hunters seems clearly indicated.

170 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

THE POSITION OF THE WIFE.

Most of the points dealt with above affect the status of women
in greater or less degree. In addition we have certain heads
dealing specifically with the wife's position. The husband's right
of chastisement, the protection of the wife, the division of work,
general statements as to the equality or otherwise of the wife, and
the admission of women to the council, or on occasion to chieftain-
ship. Under these we get the following results : —

Husband's right Wife Women do Wife Not Women in

to chastise protected harder work Work fair equal equal Government

L.H. ... 18 ... 6 ... uj ... 2\ ... 2 ... 2 ... i

H.H. ... 23 ... i ... 16 ... 7 ... \ ... 2 ... 4

D.H. ... i ... i ... i ... — ... — ... — ... —

A1 9 ... o ... 10 ... o ... 2 ... 3 ... i

P1 3 ... 2 ... 4 ... o ... i ... o ... i

A2 H ••• 13 ••• 24 ... 9 ... 4^ ... 5 ... 6£

p2 i ... o ... 5 ... 3 ... 3 ... 4 ... i

AS 13 ... 6 ... 15 ... 5 ... 4 ... 5 ... 5

It will be noticed that the cases in which the harder work falls on
women are largely in excess of those in which it is said to be fairly
divided at every stage. Similarly the few cases in which the
equality of the wife is asserted are scattered through all the stages.
The heading " wife not equal " has, it should be said, been used
only to check entries under other columns. Thus, e.g., we may
have it stated that the wife is protected and that the work is fairly
apportioned but that the husband is admittedly master in his house.
In such a case we should enter a — under " wife equal." If, on the
other hand, the inequality is already manifest we have left it alone.
It will be seen that the cases in which we have found a clear state-
ment that women take some part in government are very few-
only 19 and one doubtful instance — and that they are scattered
through the stages.

Putting all these points together and connecting them with the
laws of marriage and divorce we have endeavoured to form a
general picture of the position of women on the lines indicated
above. The results are shown in the following tables. The first
gives (i) the number of cases in which the position of women is
good, this meaning that the sum of the points is positive ; indif-
ferent, meaning that it is zero; and bad, meaning that it is nega-
tive. (2) In brackets, the proportion per cent, of such cases to all
on which any relevant information was obtained. In the second
table (i) the net marks, positive or negative, assigned to each
people of each group are added up, and the sum is stated. Thus

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 171

for the Lower Hunters, while there are 13 positive cases, they share
among them 17^ points. There are 59 negative cases with 141^
points. Finally the sums so arrived at are combined so as to give
the total net mark of the group, and we then calculate what propor-
tion per cent, the negative and positive respectively bear to the
whole.1

POSITION OF WOMEN.

Cases.

Points.

L.H. Good.

Indifferent.

Bad.

Good.

Bad.

N.A. ...

2

... —

4

i|

81

S.A. ...

0

... —

2

...

5

Asia ...

6

i

3

io|

5

Africa

4

... —

3

5

3l

Australia

i

—

47

i ... i

i9i

13 (.18) i (.01) 59 (.81)

(.11) i4i|(.89)

H.H.

N.A. ...

6

3

55

. . .

5

...

98^

S.A. ...

i

...

2

ii

2

. . .

23

Asia ...

2

5

'i

...

IOJ

Oceania

...

i

...

...

I

9

(.10)

5

(-05)

72

(.86)

81

(.06)

133

(.94)

Dep. H. ...

i

(.08)

2

(-17)

9

(75)

I

(.09)

10

(.91)

A1

N.A. ...

2

2

7

2

I3i

S.A. ...

4

2

... 14

2\

20i

Asia ...

6

I

9

24\

Oceania

i

i

3

i

i3 (-24) 5 (-09) 36 (.67) i6i (.22) 59K78)

i. After drawing up these tables on the basis explained above (pp. 148-
150) > we took into account the points as to inheritance which we obtained in
dealing with property. We examined whether inheritance went to the
males only, or to females as well, and tabled the cases under each class.
There were two or three doubtful cases in which, in default of a long
series of heirs male, women might possibly inherit, and these we thought
ought on the whole to be tabled as " males only " rather than the reverse,
as in all ordinary instances that would be the rule. We then revised the
first tables, adding a plus mark when women might inherit and a minus
mark where they might not. But we found little material difference, and
we give the final table only in which inheritance is reckoned.

172

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Cases.

Points.

P1

Good

Indifferent. Bad.

Good.

Bad.

N.A. ..

—

i

...

—

—

S.A. ..

. 0

... —

I

...

o

...

3*

Asia ..

i

... —

8

\

22

Africa

2

... —

7

...

2

...

12

3

(.15) i

(.05) 1 6

(.80)

4

(.06)

37i (-94)

A2

N.A. ..

. 3

i

9

...

i*

...

IJI

S.A. ..

. 6

i

... 17

...

6

...

21

Asia ..

. 13

... 5

... 36

...

16

...

54

Africa

3

2

... 30

...

3*

...

64

Oceania

6

... 7

... 31

...

~2

...

48

3i

(.18) 16

(.09) 123

(.72)

3oij

(.15)

198! (-85)

P2

Asia ..

. o

... —

8

— •

...

23s

Africa

i

... —

ii

...

I

...

25

i

(.05) o

19

(-95)

I

(.02)

48^.98)

A3

N.A. ..

. 6

o

4

...

II*

...

61

S.A. ..

. o

... —

i

...

0

...

5

Asia ..

. 10

2

... 23

...

ioi

...

39!

Africa

5

.-. 3

... 56

...

5

I43i

Oceania

o

... —

i

...

—

...

*i

21

(.19) 5

(-05) 85

(-77)

27

(.12)

197 (-88)

Summarising the resulting fractions we have : —

Cases.

Points.

Good

. Indifferent

. Bad.

Good.

Bad.

L H

.18

.01

.81

.1 1

.80

H.H. .

... .10

... .05 ..

. .86

.06

.1^*..}
... .94

Dep. H

.

... .08

... .17 ..

. -75

.09

... .91

A1

.24

.00

.67

.22

.78

P1

.0^

.«_»/
. .80

.06

•/*•

.Q4

A2

. . . . .

... .18

... .09 ..

. .72

•15

... .85

P2

... .05

o

. -95

.02

... .98

A3

... .19

... .05 ..

• -77

.12

.. .88

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 173

The broad result of these tables is to show (a) that the position
of women is unfavourable at all stages ; (b) that the variations are
not very great, considering the inevitable roughness of our method ;

(c) that as far as our methods allow us to draw an inference, it is
slightly better in the agricultural societies than among the Hunters,
while among the Pastoral peoples it is, on the whole, rather worse ;

(d) that the variation is not constant in the direction of the more
advanced culture. While the first stage of agriculture is decidedly
more favourable than those of the hunting peoples, the higher
stages of agriculture show a partial reaction. We ought not,
however, to lay too much stress on this rjoint as it is largely depen-
dent on the special constitutive elements of the third agricultural
stage. Among the African agricultural peoples the position of
women is on the average much below their position in the corres-
ponding stages in Asia and America. But Africa supplies 64 out
of the in cases of A3 and no case of A1, and the African cases
account for no less than 56 out of the 85 " bad " cases of A3. The
difference between the two stages is thus dependent on a geogra-
phical and perhaps a racial factor, which we have not been able to
analyse further. However, on our figures, there is some decline in
the highest agricultural stages. In the higher pastoral stage the
decline is marked. In the two independent hunting stages also
the higher is less favourable than the lower.

But while there is no constant correlation with advance of
culture, there is a slight correlation with the general type of culture.
This appears more clearly if we combine the two independent
hunting stages, the two pastoral, and the three agricultural.

A more serious doubt affects the Lower Hunters. Their nega-
tive preponderance is almost entirely due to Australia which, as
we have seen, is overweighted numerically as compared with Asia
where the conditions are favourable. It is impossible to make any
accurate allowance for this unevenness, but to measure roughly
the discrepancies introduced by it we may adopt the same device as
above of reducing the Australian total to that of the Asian and
African forest tribes. We then get i2± positive cases, i indifferent,
and 28 negative for the Lower Hunters; or in fractions : —

.30 .02 .67

This would be the most favourable proportion in our list but would
still leave the main facts unchanged. Nor could we reasonably
infer that the condition of women is really better in the lowest
culture, since so many of the North and South American Higher
Hunters are separated by a very thin line from the Lower. The
best criterion is to take the Hunters as a whole and compare them

174

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

with the Pastoral and Agricultural as wholes. On our original
figures the results are : —

POSITION OF WOMEN.

Cases. Points.

Good. Indifferent. Bad. Good. Bad.

22 (.14) 6 (.04) 131 (.82) 26 (.09) 274 (.91)

4 (.10) i (.025) 35 (.875) 3J(.o4) 86 (.96)

65 (.19) 26 (.08) 244 (.73) 79 (-15) 456 (.85)

Hunters
Pastoral
Agric.

Total

(.17) 33 (-06) 411 (.76) io8J(.i2) 8i6(.88)

If we take the " reduced " figure for the Lower Hunters it will
give for the Independent Hunters combined : —

Cases
Proportions

Positive.

.. 2lJ
.. .17

Zero.

6

•05

Negative,
100
.78

The proportions are still somewhat less favourable than those of
the agricultural stages, but the difference is too small to emphasize.
We shall be safest in regarding the condition of women as apart
from local variations broadly the same throughout the hunting and
agricultural stages, and as varying for the worse in the pastoral.
The regional influence is in fact more marked than the cultural.
Adding together all the cases in each of six regions we obtain the
following proportions of positive, negative and zero results : —

Positive.

Asia

... .26

Oceania

... .15

S. America ...

... .18

N. America ...

... .18

Africa

... .12

Australia

.02

Zero.
.07

•15
.08
.07
.04
o

Negative.
.66
•7i

•74
•75
.84
.98

While the difference is not sufficient to disturb the heavy prepon-
derance of the negative cases in all the great regions, it is sufficient
to indicate that local causes of whatever kind have counted for
much. This would of course be still more apparent if we were to
divide Asia, for example, into compact cultural areas.

On the whole we may say that, in spite of minor local or cultural
variations, whether we take the great regional or cultural divisions,
the main results are the same. The position of women in the
simpler societies is not favourable as judged by modern standards ;

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 175

there is no substantial change according to grade or type of culture
except that the unfavourable tendency is accentuated in the pastoral
state; there are also regional variations, the difference between
Asia on the one hand and Africa and Australia on the other being
marked ; but the preponderance of the negative type holds through-
out.

Finally, we have considered the cases in which peoples are
entered as Patrilineal or Matrilineal in connection with the result-
ing mark in each for the position of women. The result we exhibit
in the following table1 : —

All Cases.

Patrilineal.

Matrilineal.

Good

... 92

5 (.08)

10 (.15)

Indifferent

... 35

2 (.03)

6 (.09)

Bad

... 419

56^ (.89)

50K76)

Total 546 ... 63! ... 66±

The relations may be simply seen by showing the favourable cases
as a fraction of the total under each head. The result is as follows :

FAVOURABLE CASES AS FRACTION OF THE TOTAL.
All Cases. Patrilineal. Matrilineal.
.17 ... .08 ... .15

Comparing the Patrilineal and Matrilineal only this would show
a considerable advantage for the Matrilineal, but this result is
discounted when we find that the proportion for all cases is higher
than that for the Matrilineal alone. The result is that no clear
inference can be drawn from the figures at our disposal.

i. Cases which are both patri- and matrilineal disregarded and locality
of marriage not considered.

APPENDIX I.

LOWER HUNTERS.

Poly-
gamy
general

Poly-

gamy
occas-
ional

Divorce Divorce Mar-

Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy at of of condi- indis-

regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchase

Swan River

(87) N.W.C. Queensland

Some

Some

+

Ex.

Som

(92) Victorian Tribes

"T

Ex.

Darling River -

Ex.

(97) Port Lincoln

+

+

W. Australia (Some)

+

Bangarang

+

(98) Dieri

4-

(88)N.S. Wales I. -

+

+

(89) W. Victoria

+

-f

Ex.

Kamilaroi

+

(90) Kurnai

+

Ex.

(96) Gournditch Mara

+

Ex.

Geawegal

+

Ex.

Narrangga

Ex.

(91) Waimbaio

+

(95) Narrinjerri

+

Ex.

Queensland (Some) -

Euahlayi -

+

+

Mycoolon

+

Port Darwin

+

Ex.

Powell's Creek -

+

+

N.S. Wales II. -

+

Tatathi

Theddora

Ex.

Wolgal -

176

Rela- Public

Ex- tions control

3hange arrange of

of mar- Consent mar-
resents riage required riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard Work

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Cere.

Cere.

Cere.

Occ.

Some

Some

Occ.

Occ.

Occ.

Occ.

Occ.

E 1

177

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Wallaroi

Ex

S. Queensland -

(99) Wakelbura

Ex

Maryborough -

+

Turbal

(101) Wotjobaluk

+

(101) Jupagalk

Ex

(101) Mukjarawint -

(93) Jerkla-Mining -

Yuin

+

Ex

Gringai

Chepara

+

Urabunna

+

Arunta

Ngumba -

+

(94) E. Victoria

+

Kabi and Waaka

'+

Ex.

Herbert River -

+

Ex

Tasmanians

+

+

K. George's Sound

+

N.W. Australia

N. Queensland -

+

Watchandee

Riverina -

+

+

Ex,

Kubu

+

+

(26) Semang

+

+

(26) Sakai

?

+

Negritos of Camarines

C.

P.

178

Rela-
c- tions
ige arrange
mar- Consent
mts riage required

Public
control
of
mar-
riage

Pre-
Public nuptial
Husband punish- Wife un-
Wife can ment lent or chastity
pro- punish of ex- con-
tected wife adultery changed demned Capture

Women
do the
hard
work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women
in
govern-
ment

+

Cere.

+

-

Occ.

+

+

+

+

-

Cere.

+

-

+

Occ.

+

+

+

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

Cere.

+

+•

Cere.

+

+

Occ.

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

4-

Occ.

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

-

+

-f

Cere.

Occ.

+

-

-

+

+

?

Cere.

?

Cere.

+

+

179

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchas

Negritos of Negros -

Negritos of Angat -

+

+

Negritos of Albay -

P. ,

Andamans

+

+

Punan

-

-

+

G. ;

Botocudos

+

+

G.

Fuegans

+

?

Patwin

P.

Wintun

+

+

Mi wok

L. Calif ornians
(Guaicuri, Cochuri)

+

Pericui

+

+

Shoshone

+

P.

Bushmen

+

+

G.

Batua

+

+

P.

(64) Tanganika Batua

+

(64) Wambuti of Ituri

+

Watua of Irundi

-

(64) Congo Pygmies

+

HIGHER HUNTERS.

Kootenay

formerly

+

+

P.

Haidah

+

+

P.

Tsimshian

+

Klamaths (Oregon) -

+

Karok

+

P.

Hupa

+

+

P.

S. Californians

+

+

Kiowa

+

+

G.

180

Rela-
Ex- tions
3hange arrange
of mar-
resents riage

Consent
required

Public
control
of
mar-
riage

Wife
pro-
tected

Pre-

Public nuptial
Husband punish- Wife un- Women
can ment lent or chastity do the
punish of ex- con- hard Work
wife adultery changed demned Capture work equal

: + Cere +

Women
in
Wife govern-
equal ment

Occ.

-

+

-

+

?

-

?

?

+

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

-

^

+

Occ.

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Occ.

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

E 1 2

181

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

(6) Seri

+

?
ormerl

Blackfeet

+

+

G.

Semilkameen

+

+

P.

Luisenos -

+

P.

Micmacs

+

G.

Etechemins

+

G.

(5) Montagnais

?

+

G.

Kiskikons

+

Otawa

+

Crees

+

Naskopie -

+

+

P.

Apache

+

Comanche

+

N. Mexicans

Some

Most. G

Thompson River

+

G.

Assiniboins

-l_

+

Petawet

P.S

(2) Porno

G.

Gallino Mero -

+

P.

Wappo

•f

P.

(3) Shastika

P.

(4) Pit River -

+

P.

Nishinan -

+

G.

Yokuts

P.

Omaha

+

+

G.

Kauralaig

+

?

P.

W. Eskimo

+

Pt. Barrow Eskimo

+

+

182

Pre-

Rela- Public Public nuptial

c- tions control Husband punish- Wife un- • Women Women

ige arrange of Wife can ment lent or chastity do the in

mar- Consent mar- pro- punish of ex- con- hard Work Wife govern-

jnts riage required riage tected wife "adultery changed demned Capture work equal equal ment

+

Cere

? : +

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

•f

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

Occ.

+

+

+

Occ.

+

-

+

+

-

-f

+

former

7

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

-

183

Poly-
gamy
general

Poly- Divorce Divorce

gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce

occas- gamy at of of condi-

ional regular will husband wife tional

Mar-
riage
indis-
soluble Purchasi

Behring Str. Eskimo

+

+

Central Eskimo

+

+

P.

Greenland Eskimo -

+

+

P.

Labrador Eskimo

+

+

P.

Aleuts

+

+

Loucheux

+

P.

Chepewayans

+

+

Kenai

+

+

sj

Chilcotin -

+

+

Carriers

+

+

S.

Tsekhene

+

+

E. Nahane

+

+

W. Nahane

+

+

Thlinkeet

+

G,

Nootka

+

+

Lkungen -

Shushwap

+

Lilooet

+

Nez Perces

+

Kaviaks

+

Malemutis

+

+

Some Koniagas

- ' •

Sarcees

+

+

Tsitsaut

G

Coast Salish

•f

Kowitchan

is

Balla Coola

+

Halokmelen

184

Rela-
tions
inange
mar-

Public

control

of
Consent mar-

riage required riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

185

P^ly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Pure

Niska

P.

Heiltsuk -

+

+

P.

(i)S. Kwakiutl

+

+

P.

(15) Pampas

+

P.

Puelches -

+

P.

(10) Abipones

+

+

P.

Coroados

+

Puri

+

Zaparo

+

?

+

(12) Guaycuru

+

+

Charrua

+

+

P.

Coyatacaz

+

Mura

+

Mocovi & Villela

(14) Tihuelches

+

?

Minuane -

+

+

Payuga

+

N. Chaco(Chamacoco>)

+

+

Ghiliaks

+

+

+

Tuski

+

Nicobarese

+

Manobos of Rio Bay

C.

P.;

Italmen

+

+

S

Gold

+

+

P.

Perak Sakai

?

+

G.

DEPENDENT HUNTERS.

Yanadi

+

+

Bhuiyar

+

+

P..<

186

Rela- Public

Ex- tions control

change arrange of Wife

of mar- Consent mar- pro-

>resents riage required riage tected

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

can ment lent or chastity do the
punish of ex- con- hard

wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Cere.

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

4-

Cere.

187

Pr>ly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of cpndi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchase

(23) Korwa

+

+

Niadi

+

Kardar

+

Bataks of Palawan -

+

+

G.

Katodi

P.

Chenchu -

+

Bonthuks

P.

Korumbus

(3ob) Irulas

C.

+

Villees

C.

AGRICULTURE I.

Guana

+

+

Lengfua ...

+

?

9

Paravilhane

+

Mauhes

_i_.

Marana

+

S.

Ucayali

+

Mbaevera

+

+

Karayaki

+

Ex.

Paumari

+

Ipurina

+

Yuracares

+

+

P.

Mataguayos

(n) Roucoyennes

-f

?

+

Charantes

+

Coropo

Manao

+

(16) Mataco

+

+

188

Rela-
5x- tions
ange arrange
of mar- Consent
sents riage required

Pre-

Public Public nuptial

control Husband punish- Wife un- Women

of Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

mar- pro- punish of ex- con- hard

riage tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Cere,

189

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Shingu

+

Some

British Guiana -

>ome

+

P.S.

(i7)Macusi

+

+

p.

Ojibways

+

+

G.

(7) Dacota

+

+

G.

Mandan

+

Iowa

+

Hidatsa

+

+

Mohave

Algonquins (Quebec)

+

+

(8) Iroqois

+

+

G.

Huron

+

+

Delaware

+

+

G.

Abnaqui

+

?

+

Guaymi

+

G.

W. Torres Straits -

+

?

P.

Baining

-

Ainu

+

+

Bheels

P.

(19) Lushai

+

P.

Soligas

+

Jakun

+

+

Negritos of Zambales

4-

+

P.

Manobos of Agusan -

c.

P.

Zambales or Tinos -

_i_

Paniyans

+

G.

Arunese

?

S.

Orang Bukit

+

+

190

Rela- Public

Ex- tions control
change arrange of

of mar- Consent mar-
presents riage required riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Some

Cere.

Cere.

191

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchase

Mantra

9

?

+

Cookies

c.

P.

Marias

P.

Juang

+

G.

Kubu

+

+

G.

Candios

-f

(26)Perak Sakai

?

+

G.

(26) Central Sakai -

+

Gen.

Some

(26) Kuala Kurnam Sakai

-f

Birhor

P.

Vedda

+

?

Dowry

PASTORAL I.

Aeneze

+

+

.

Kurds of Eriwan

+

+

P.

Youruk

+

P.

Toda

Now

+

P.

Samoyedes

+

+

P.

Abakan Tartars

+

P.

Chewessures

+

(30) Kabards -

?

P.

Buriats

+

P.

(49) Beni Amer

+

?

P.

(48) Masai

+

4

G.

(51) Colonial Hottentots

' +

(52) Khoi Khoin

+

_p

Batauana

+

(53) Dinka

+

+

P.

(54) Ovaherero

+

192

Rela- Public

Ex- tions control
change arrange of

of mar- Consent mar-
presents riage required riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Cere.

Cere.

Some

ormerly

193

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchase

Mundombe

+

+

P.

Tobas

+

+

G.

Navaho

+

+

P.

AGRICULTURE.

Sambioa -

+

Ex.

Guarayos -

i_

P.

Mundrucu

+

S.

Uaupe

+

Chiquito -

+

G.

Moxo

+

+

Bororo

+

Sivaros

+

Apiaca

+

+

Jumana

P.

Chambioze

+

_

Chiriguano

+

G.

Gagua

+

Manctanares

Tapuya

+

Yonca and Boni

+

+

(i3)Ges - - -

+

+

Icpanna

+

Guatos

+

Campas

+

Tapui

+

Curetu

+

Paressi

+

Uanambuas

+

194

Rela-

5x- tions

fange arrange
jtof mar- Consent
•Agents riage required

Pre-

Public Public nuptial

control Husband punish- Wife un- Women

of Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

mar- pro- punish of ex- con- hard

riage tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Cere.

Occ.

195

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Purcl

Chicknees

+

• +

Illinois

+

Wyandot

+

|

Towka

+

Continental Caribs -

+

(9) Creek

+

+

G.|

Pawnees -

Caribs (lyth cent.) -

+

+

Tarahumare

G.j

Tepehuane

•f

+

Woolwa

+

Natchaz

+

+

P.J

N. Mexicans (Some) -

+

G.

Seminole -

+

?

+

G

Bageshu

+

P.l

(68) Basoga

+

G.J

(69) Wafiomi

+

+

G.J

(70) Wambugwe

+

Bateke

P.l

(34) Warega -

+

+

G.j

(35) Mayombe

+

+

P.J

(37) Mangbetu

+

+

P.l

Bangala -

+

+

P.J

(55) Bali

+

P.J

Mandja

+

+

P.|

Tuchilange

+

P I

(56) Mundombe

+

+

P.I

(57) Azande -

+

+
1

P.I

196

Rela-
tions
ige arrange

mar- Consent
its riage required

Public
control

of

mar-
riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

"Husband punish- Wife un- "Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

197

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Adio

+

+

P.

(58) Abandia -

-f

+

Baquiri

+

+

P.

Bondei

+

+

P.

Wanyaturu

+

+

P.

Wawira -

+

G.

Maravis

+

9

P.

(59) Quissama

+

(60) Angoni

+

Lendu

P

Latuka -

+

F

(61) Kunama and Barea -

+

+

G

Fang

+

p.!

Yaunde -

+

p.

Niam Niam

+

p.

(63) Monbuttu -

+

Bayanzi -

+

Banaka and Bapuku -

+

+

p.

Wadoe -

p.

Baluba

+

(45) Masai

+

+

G.

(73) South Melanesia

+

+

Som>

Florida

+

+

+

Bugotu

+

+

S.E. Solomons -

+

+

Sa -

+

+

+

Malo

+

Koita

+

•4-

+

198

Rela-

'x- tions
inge arrange
jf mar- Consent
sents riage required

Public
control

of

mar-
riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

punish of ex- con- hard

wife adultery changed demned Capture work

pro-
tected

Work
equal

Women

in

Wife govern-
equal ment

ome

199

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mav-

'Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage

gainy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-

general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Roro

+ i

Mekeo

+

(74) Wagawaga and
Tubetube

+ 1

(75) Bartle Bay

+

+

Trobriand Islands -

+

Marshall Bennett Id.

+

G.

Woodlark Island

+

G.

Louisiades

+

New Hebrides -

+ :

(76) New Caledonia

+

+

G.

Gazelle Peninsula

+

+

+

Sulka

S.

N. New Mecklenburg

+

?

?

S. New Mecklenburg

+

+

Moanu

+

?

Motu

+

G.

(77) Mowat

+

E.

Naaiabui -

+

+

Bogadjim

+

+

Maclay Coast -

+

+

+

Mafulu

+

+

+

(78) Jabim

+

+

+

Caroline Islands

?

+

S,

Marshall Islands

+

?

?

?

(80) Pelew Islands -

+

+

(79) Gilbert Islands -

+

D

Murray Island -

+

200

Rela- Public

Ex- tions control

. hange arrange of

I of mar- Consent mar-
resents riage required riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the in

pro- punish of ex- con- hard Work Wife govern-

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work equal equal ment

Occ.

F 1

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchas

Maoris - - -•

+

+

(81) Rotumians

+

?

(82) Tongans -

+

+

(83) Rarotongans

+

+

(84) Hawaians

+

+

(85) Tahitians

C.

+

G.

(86) Marquesas

+

+

Fiji - - -

+

G.

Samoa

+

+

Paharia

+

Kandhs

P.

Kachari -

P

Limbus

P.*

(2i)Chakma -

+

P

Kols

+

+

P

Kharwar -

+

+

P

N.W. Kols

+

+

Majhwar -

+

+

P

Gonds (some) -

+

P.

(24) Dhimals -

+

P

Maghs

+

+

F

Kaupuinagas -

+

+

Kolyanagas

+

G

Sea Dyaks

+

+

G

Nicobarese

+

Waralis -

+

I!

Dodonga -

+

I

Mentawez

+

+

I

202

Rela-

Ex- tions "
•change arrange
of mar-
>resents riage

+ : +

Public
control
of Wife
Consent niar- pro-
required': riage tected

9 ;

Husban
can
punish
wife

+

Public
1 punish- Wife
ment lent or
of ex-
adultery changed

Pre-
nuptial
un-
chastity
con-
demned

Capture

Women
do the
hard Work Wife
work equal equal

+

Wonier
in
govern
ment

+

+

-

+

-

+

Occ.

+

+

+

+

-f

-

•Some

Some

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Cere.

+

-

+

+

+

4

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

Cere.

-

+

+

+

Occ. &
JDere

+

+

+

-

+

-f

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

203

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchase

Arunese •

?

S.

Irulas

+

+

P.

Kiangans

?

+

P.

Teleuts -

P.

Land Dyaks

+

+

Red Karens

+

P.

Samales -

+

P.

(28) Bontoc

+

-

(29) Tagals

+

P.

Subanos

+

P.

Dophla

+

Oraons

P.

(20) Pani Kocch

+

(22) Santals

+

+

P.S.

(24) Tharu N.W.

+

+

(24) Tharu of Bencal

+

?

p.

Khonds -

c.

+

p.'

Kei -

+

+

p.

Flores

+

P.S,

Engano

+

?

G.

Italones •

+

+

Catalaganes

+

Calinga

+

+

Lepchas -

+

+

S..

Toungtha

+

+

Tipperah -

+

s.

Lahupa Nagas -

+

+

Ao Nag-as -

+

204

Ex-

:hange
of
resents

Rela-
tions
arrange
mar- Consent
riage required

+

Public
control
of
mar-
riage

Pre-
Public nuptial
Husband punish- Wife un-
Wife can ment lent or chastity
pro- punish of ex- con-
tected wife adultery changed demned Capture

+

Women
do the
hard
work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women
in
govern-
ment

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

Sup.

i

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

-

Cere.

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

-

-

+

•f

+

-

+

205

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble Purchase

Lhota Nagas -

+

Sona Nagas

+

+

Guinane -

+

+

Milanous

+

Orang Bukit -

P.

Muruts

? +

+

G.S.

PASTORAL II.

Larba

+

-f-

P.

Uzbegs

+

P.

Midhi

+

P.

Turcoman

+

+

P.

Kazak Kirghiz

+

+

P.

Yakuts

+

P.

Altaian Kalmucks -

P.

Mishmi

+

P.

Ama Xosa

-f

+

P.

Ama Zulu

+

P.

Bechuana

+

G.

Baquerewe

+

+

P.

(67) Makololo

+

?P.

(71) Wataturu

-P.

Gallas

+

P.

Bogos

+

+

P.

Beduan

P.

Somal

+

P.

Danakie -

+

P.

(50) Bahima -

?

+

AGRICULTURE. III.

Araucanians

+

+

P.

206

Ex-

Rela-
tions
arrange
of mar- Consent
esents riage required

Pre-

Public Public nuptial

control Husband punish- Wife un- Women

of Wife can raent lent or chastity do the
mar- pro- punish of ex- con- hard

riage tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Women

in

Wife govern -
equal ment

Occ.

Cere

Cere.

207

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Pima

+

+

—

Zuni

+

+

Papago

+

Moqui

+

+

Hopi

Mayas

C.

s.

Sia -

+

G.

Zapothecs -

+

Guatemala

+

+

G.

Apalachites

c.

(42) Bamsalala

+

+

P.

(42) Wagogo -

+

+

P.

Diakite Sarocolays -

+

+

Jekris

+

P.

(44) Bawenda -

+

P.

Warundi -

+

+

P.

(45)Tshi • - -

+

?

?

P.

(46) Ewe -

+

+

P.

Baronga -

+

+

P.

(47) Bambala -

+

+

P.

Geges and Nagos -

c.

G.

Yoruba

c.

+

P.

Bafiote

+

P.

Bukoba Natives

+

P.

Swaheli

+

+

P.

Bongos

+

P.

Fanti

+

+

P.

(62) Bayaka -

•

+

-f

_ !

P.

208

Rela- Public

j Ex- tions control
llchange arrange of

I of mar- Consent mar-
«resents riage required riage

Pro-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

ormerl

rmerly

Some

Some

Some

ormerly

209

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Wanyakyusa -

Woloff -

C.

Sese Island

+

P.

Wachagga

+

+

P.

Wadigo

+

+

P.

Bihenos -

+

P.

Indikki

+

Sale

P.

Kilwa

+

P.

Noforesen

+

P.

Banyoro -

+

P. l

Ondonga -

4-

+

Basutos -

+

+

P"

Alur

+

P.f

Amahlubi

+

-r

p-

Washambala -

+

+

p.

Basoga Batamba

C.

+

p.l

(65) Wafipa -

?

?

(66) Sereres

+

Kuku

+

+

PJ

(72) Warangi -

+

+

PJ

Akamba -

+

PJ

Nandi

+

+

PI

Takue

+

+

Wakikuyu

+

1

Marea

+

+

Fj

Nossi b6 -

+

+

G'I

Marutse -

Bambara -

4-

II

210

Rela-

Sx- tiotis

ange arrange

of mar- Consent

jsents riage required

Pre-

Public Public nuptial

control Husband punish- Wife un- Women

of Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

mar- pro- punish of ex- con- hard

riage tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Traces

Trace

?Cere

Cere

211

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
Poly- gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
gamy occas- gamy at of of cpndi- indis-
general ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Pur

begoo ...

T

P.

Calabar -

+

Foota Tora

+

G.

Foota Jalon

+

+

(31) Bushongo

+

+

G.

(32) Bambala (Bushongo)

C.

+

+

Duallas

+

P't

(33) Bahuana -

?+

Basonge Meno -

+

+

P. ^

(36) Basonge -

+

+

p- i

Mbengas -

+

p-t

Waniamwesi

+

+

p.. i

(38) Anyanza

+

(39)Yao - - -

G.

(40) Ababua -

+

+

P.

Wapokomo

+

+

p.L

(41) Baganda -

+

+

p.[

Kasias

+

Kayans

?

+

G.fl

Singpho -

+

p4

Padam Abor -

+

Mundakols

+

+

G|

Dusun

+

[

Kayans of Mindalam

+

+

pf

Do. Mahakam -

+

+

i

Bongians

FI

Singkel

+

+

Nias

+

+

4

212

Rela- Public

tions control

i arrange of

mar- Consent mar-
ents riage required riage

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Sale

Som

Occ

213

Poly-
gamy
general

Poly- Divorce Divorce Mar-
gamy Mono- Divorce at will at will Divorce riage
occas- gamy at of of condi- indis-
ional regular will husband wife tional soluble

Passumahians -

P.S

Daians

p.

Malays of Padang -

+

P.S

Alfures -

+

p.

Balinese -

+

+

Java -

+

Some

Timorese -

C.

P.

Kafirs

+

+

(30) Badaga

+

+

P.

(25) Sonthal -

+

+

P.

Ossetes

+

+

P.

(27) Bagobos -

+

P.

Igorottes -

n

Suanes

+

+

P'
•.

Adighe

+

?

P

Battas of Sumatra -

+

+

P.S

Tjumba

Miris (plains) -

Miris (hills) -

+

P.

Garos

Tinguianes

+

1

Kharria

+

P

Augani Nagas -

Kenyan -

?

+

G.

214

Rela- Public

Ex- tions control
liange arrange of

of mar- Consent mar-

Pre-

Public nuptial

Husband punish- Wife un- Women

Wife can ment lent or chastity do the

pro- punish of ex- con- hard

•esents riage required riage tected wife adultery changed demned Capture work

Work
equal

Wife
equal

Women

in

govern-
ment

Some

Cere.

•Generally

215

APPENDIX II.

NOTES TO TABLES, CHAPTER III.

1. Kwakiutl : — Divorce is tabled as limited. The facts are that a man
buys his wife. When she has two children her price is redeemed and she
may leave him, but to keep her in subjection he often makes a new pay-
ment to her father. (Boas, Smiths. Rep., 1895, P- 359-)

2. Porno* : — Marriage is not strictly a purchase but is arranged by pre-
sents to the parents. Nothing is said, however, as to exchange. (Powers,
P- I57-)

3. Shastika : — According to Powers (p. 246) a council might be assem-
bled by the chiefs in case of flagrant wrongdoing, and a married man
committing adultery might be tied down naked for several nights. The
woman, if punished at all, is beaten by her husband.

4. Pit River : — According to Powers women are degraded and looked
upon merely as property. Marriage is by purchase. If she deserts her
husband she may be killed by him (p. 270).

5. Montagnais : — The references in the Jesuit relations are not always
clear, nor the statements of different missionaries fully reconcilable, but it
would seem that polygamy was permitted though at least in one district
disfavoured.

6. Seri : — Polygamy exists at present, but is perhaps of recent origin.
The husband must pass a year with his wife without marital relations,
during which time his class brethren have access to her. (McGee, Smiths.
Rep., 1895-6, pp. 279 seq.)

7. Dakotahs : — We have applied to the Dakotahs proper Schoolcraft's
notes on the Dakotahs generally, compared with Riggs's Contrib. to Ethn.,
1893. Though the consent of the woman was not required for marriage
elopements occurred. (Dorsey, Smiths. Rep., 1893-4, P- 222.)

8. Iroquois : — Morgan (League of the Iroquois, p. 321) denies that the
consent of the parties was required, but from Loskiel's account (p. 57) it
would seem to have been at least considered in the eighteenth century.
Morgan's statement that an adulteress was whipped by order of the council
can hardly be true of ancient times as he suggests (p. 331)-

9. Creeks : — Ordinary marriage could be dissolved at pleasure without
ceremony, but parties might not re-marry until after the annual " bust."
There was also an ancient form of marriage involving common tillage of
the land which was binding, any breach of fidelity being punishable by
the relatives with whipping and cropping of the hair. (Caleb Swan in
Schoolcraft, v, 268 — 273.)

10. Abipones : The consent of the bride does not seem in principle to

be required as Dobrizhofer describes her as flying and hiding herself if she
objects (E. Tr., ii, p. 207) It may be noted that though the husband might
repudiate his wife this might be resented by her family (ib., pp. 211, 212).

216

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 217

11. Roucoyennes : — Servile polyandry in the table refers to the custom
by which the lover of a wife becomes a peito or half client, half serf of the
husband, having access to his wife. (Coudreau, Rev. d'Ethnog., vii, p.
479-)

12. Guaycuru : — According to von Martius, Beitrdge, p. 233, divorce or
repudiation by the husband is rare, but Serra (Rivita Trimensal, vol. 77,
2nd series, vol. vi) says that marriage is permanent only when there are
children, and there seems to be great license.

13. Ges : — Marriage is indissoluble, and von Martius's (Beitrdge, p. 290)
account seems to imply monogamy though it is not distinctly statejd.

14. Tehuelches : — According to Masters (p. 177) marriage is always by
inclination. Separation is rare, and while monogamy is usual a man may
take as many wives as he can support (p. 178). D'Orbigny (Voyage, ii, p.
180) admits only one legitimate wife who is never abandoned, and one
concubine, who is abandoned at will unless she has children. He states
that the bride cannot refuse her consent beforehand, but may decline
cohabitation, and is then sent back to her parents or sold to her lover. If
she leaves her husband he reclaims her if he can. Ordinarily the affair is
compounded (p. 180).

16. Malaccas : — Marriage seems to be mainly by courtship. Thouar
(Explorations, p. 57) states that the parents have no voice in the matter,
while Pelleschi (p. 65, Eight months in the Grand Chaco) says that the
man makes gifts to the girl and secures the consent of the relations. The
same authority states (p. 65) that though a man may divorce his wife it
often leads to a feud. (Divorce limited.)

17. Macusis : — According to Im Thurm (p. 223) they are monogamous,
but Schomberg (Reisen, p. 401) alleges polygamy at least at one Macusi
village. The sister's daughter is a lawful wife but not to a father's brother.

18. Kalmucks : — According to the earlier Kalmuck law (Kohne, Z.V.R.,
9) there was marriage by purchase, but by the seventeenth century the
purchase price was equalled by the dowry substantially converting the
system into one of exchange (p. 461). Polygamy also formerly prevailed,
but in the time of Pallas had already disappeared (p. 461). Capture is said
to have occurred within the nineteenth century, and was probably formerly
a regular method (p. 462). In view of these changes we avoid tabling the
Kalmucks generally and deal only with the Altaian Kalmucks in accordance
with Radlov's account.

19. Cookies and Lushai : — Dalton (p. 95) states of the Cookies generally
that they were not polygamous but practised concubinage. Statements as
to divorce are based on Lewin's account of the Lushai.

20. Pani Kocch : — All property belongs to the women who also do all
the work. Marriages are settled by the mothers, or on the woman's
initiative. A man is fined for adultery and may be enslaved if his mother
does not pay. On the other hand, according to Hodgson, women have no
place on juries of elders who settle disputes. (Hodgson, On the Aborigines
of India, pp. 146 — 147.)

21. Chakma : — According to St. John, J.A.I., 2, p. 239, a price is paid
for the wife in N. Aracan, but according to Lewin this is only true among
the Chakma whom he places in this group. (Wild Races of S.E. India,
p. 176.)

A 2

2i8 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

22. Santals : — According to Dalton's account prenuptial chastity seems
at least nominally required (p. 214), but from Risley 's account this would
seem to be only to the extent that a young man must marry a pregnant girl
under penalty of being beaten by the headman's assistant (vol. ii, p. 228).
According to Risley divorce is at will of either party (p. 231), but Hunter
states it requires the consent of five of the husband's relatives. Risley
further states that the permission of the Circle headman has to be obtained
for every marriage (p. 234), but there is no mention of this in Hunter's
Rural Bengal. Hunter says that a fallen woman could never regain her
position (p. 203).

23. Korwa : — According to Crooke, vol. iii, p. 324, one wife is usual
and there is no concubinage, which seems to imply the possibility (though
not frequently employed) of polygamy.

24. Tharus : — In the N.W. Provinces in addition to divorce of a faithless
wife with the approval of the council there may be exchange of wives.
Wife capture was secretly practised but is now nearly obsolete, surviving
as a form. (Crooke, pp. 388, 389, 392.)

In Bengal, Risley says divorce is common but does not give the condi-
tions. (Vol. ii, p. 315.)

24. Dhimals : — According to Risley, i, p. 227, courtship is free and
divorce limited to unchastity or controlled by the Panchayet. According
to Hodgson courtship is not sanctioned and divorce is at will of either party

25. Sonthals : — The method of marriage is not directly stated, but in
case of elopement the woman's parents may take a man's cow or goat
while if it occurs after the licentious festival, it involves a fine. This seems
to imply that it is normally arranged by the parents for a consideration.
(Man, Sonthalia, p. 102.)

26. Sakai and Semang : — Statements are extremely difficult to disen-
tangle. Apparently monogamy is the regular custom of both the Semang
in their original condition and possibly also of the Sakai, but this is less
clear, while divorce was disliked if it existed. According to Wilkinson,
however, the morals of the Semang are lax (p. 10).

Monogamy on the whole persists in the various settlements of the
Malayised tribes. Thus the Orang Laut are strictly monogamous and
divorce is said to be unknown. (Annandale and Robinson, J.A.I., 32, p.
413.) So also the Orang Bukit (Knocker, J.A.I., 37, p. 293), who, however,
see no objection to polygamy except the difficulty of providing for more.
The Sakai of Kuala Kurnam are also monogamous (Knocker, J.A.I., 39, p.
146), 'but from statements given by Martin and Skeat both polygamy and
divorce occur sporadically. Skeat gives one case of polyandry among the
Orang Tanjong (Sakai of Salangor), (vol. ii, p. 18).. Wilkinson (pp. 56-7)
distinguishes the Northern and Central Sakai and gives particulars of the
marriage relations of the latter, distinguishing the Mai Darat where there
is child-betrothal but inclination is not forced, and the Mai Miloi, who are
said to leave everything to passion, to have no ceremony and to exchange
wives. Divorce is at will except among the Mai Darat of Kampar.

37. Bagobos : — Purchase. If the parties are satisfied the father pays
back half the price after six months. If not, the marriage can be dis-
solved. Rather a trial marriage than divorce. (Schadenberg, Z.E., 17, p.

12.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 219

28. Inhabitants of Bontoc : — Strict monogamy. Unfaithfulness on part
of the wife punished with death. No purchase. In order to make a
marriage binding the husband must give her family, if rich, the whole
rancheria, a feast or " canjao." (Schadenberg, Verh. Ges. fur Anthrop.,
1888, pp. 35-36.)

29. Tagals : — A price is paid to the woman but if she has parents it goes
to them. In case of divorce she must repay the price and all else earned by
her — in case she leaves her husband for another — -if not, only the price.
If he leaves her he loses half the price. If there are children it is given to
them and is administered by the grandparents. (Blumentritt, Z.E., 25,
pp. 19-20.)

30. Kabards : — If a husband finds his wife has not virginity he sends
her back to her family. The girl is sold or killed by her people. In case
of adultery the husband sends his wife back to her kin after having shaved
her head. She is killed by them. (Chantre, vol. 4, p. 128.)

300. Badagas : — In the Udaya caste consent is not required but in the
other castes there is apparently free courtship. (Thurston, Anthropology,
p. 3.) The brothers-in-law have access to the wife, and if the husband is
young she may cohabit with the paternal aunt's son or some one else whom
she may fancy. (Thurston, i, p. 106.)

3ob. Irulas : — Among the Irulas marriage seems doubtfully binding.
Among those of N. Arcot it is described as a voluntary association ter-
minated at will of either. (Thurston, vol. ii, p. 288.) Among others it is
said by Harkness to have been at the option mainly of the women to
dissolve. (Ib., p. 379.)

31. Bushongo : — Women are said to be not bought, but it is considered
just that a man who carries away a girl should pay compensation. Consent
is necessary. The fundamental idea of marriage is collaboration des epoux
(p. n). The mother of the king is the first personage of the realm.
Women are represented among the chiefs and in the council there are
several (p. n).

32. Bambala : — A branch or tribe of the above nation, the members of
which regard themselves as superior to the others. With the exception
of the royal family they have been monogamous since the eighteenth cen-
tury. They may have concubines for debts. (Torday and Joyce, Annales
du Muste du Congo Beige, Serie III, Tom. II, Fasc. I, p. 114.)

33. Bahuana : — Divorce is said to be unknown. (Torday and Joyce,
J.A.I., 36, p. 286.)

34. Warega : — Marriage is said to be not a purchase. The goods given
to the parents are a kind of guarantee, to be returned in case of divorce
(p. 173). The power of the husband is limited (p. 174). Married women
often enjoy consideration equal to that of the men — -are admitted to the
assemblies and attain grades in the social hierarchy just like men (p. 193).
(Delhaise, Les Warega.)

35. Mayombe : — For divorce the consent of the two parties and of the
father of the girl is necessary. (Overbergh, p. 254.)

36. Basonge : — The husband can repudiate his wife : — (i) If she is
notorious for laziness, etc. (2) Sterility. (3) Adultery. The wife can
repudiate him (i) in case of unjustifiable cruelty, (2) if her husband wishes
to sell her to a stranger. (Overbergh, p. 271.)

220 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

37. Mangbetn : — There is said to be no divorce among the Mangbetu,
but a man simply takes another wife when he is tired of the first. The
woman is sometimes sent back to her people by the husband because she
is sterile, in which case he receives the price back. The woman too may
take refuge with her kin because he is unfaithful or because the price is
not entirely paid. (Overbergh, p. 331.)

38. Anyanza : — There was no dowry nor giving of presents in the old
days, the latter being an innovation of the last twenty years. Marriage by
capture is referred to. At present marriage is regarded lightly. Adultery
and divorce are common. (Stannus, J.A.I., 40, p. 309.)

39. Yao : — No purchase except of course in case of a slave- woman.

(1) Child betrothal.

(2) Normal form of marriage. The consent of the bride is obtained, then
the consent of her relatives, above all of the maternal uncle, then of her
own people. The two families then meet and eat together, this being a
kind of marriage ceremony. Presents are usually given to the girl's uncle,

(3) Women may be captured in a raid in which case there are no par-
ticular formalities about the marriage.

(4) A young man's master or guardians provide him with a wife.
(Werner, pp. 129 — 133.)

40. Ababua : — Capture frequent. Child betrothal. The father can force
a husband on his girl but ordinarily he does not use this right unless she
wishes to live an irregular life. (Halkin in Overbergh, p. 213.) Divorce at
will of either party but not allowed \vhen the children have grown up and
exceed ten (p. 291). According to another account the woman must have
the consent of her father, and if there are children the husband alone can
effect a divorce, and the price is not repaid, she having fulfilled her duty
(p. 292).

41. Baganda : — Divorce. If a woman did not like her bridegroom she
would run back to her parents. The husband might fetch her back two
or three times. If she ran away repeatedly the husband would claim his
dowry-fee from the clan and she would be free. (Roscoe, p. 92.) A man
did not trouble to divorce his wife if she was unfaithful — he would merely
neglect her — reduce her to status of slave. (Roscoe, p. 97.)

Descent through the male line. The father's totem is observed except
by royalty (p. 129).

42. Bamsalala : — Women can be chiefs and can act as witnesses — other-
wise they have no rights. (Desoignies, p. 277.)

Forms of marriage : —

(1) Butosi. Purchase. This is usual.

(2) Kubotu. No price paid — generally a slave — if free the woman can
leave at will — her father can sell her again to a Butosi husband.

(3) Kuyanzwa— a kind of concubinage.
Tauschehen occur — but are rare (p. 272).

43. Wagogo : — The wife enters the family of her husband but if he
cannot pay the price he goes to her family and becomes virtually a slave
until his friends buy him out. In case of cruelty he then may dissolve
the marriage and send the price back. (Beverley, pp. 208-9.)

44. Bawenda : — The chief sends his wives daughters, sons and sisters to
rule in the provinces. (Gottschling, J.A.I., 35, p. 377.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 221

45. Tshi-peoples : — If a husband gravely maltreats or neglects his wife
she may leave him without restitution of head-money. A woman who is
ill-treated by her husband may return to her family on the repayment of
the head-money. If she wishes to leave him without any cause she can
do so with his permission on repayment of head-money and all expenses >
She takes the children with her but must pay a certain amount for each.
(Ellis, p. 284.)

46. Ewe-peoples : — Matrilineal, but among the upper classes in Dahomi
kinship is patrilineal. The change was brought about probably by exercise
of arbitrary power. (Ellis, p. 209.)

Divorce. A wife can leave with her husband's consent on payment of
price and expenses, but if ill-treated without doing so and by proving the
facts to the headman. The children go with her (p. 206).

Among the German Ewe peoples divorce is said to be at will of husband.
(Herold, M.D.S., 5, p. 161.)

Ellis 's account leaves the question of consent doubtful and we therefore
follow the account of Ziindel, Z.G. Erd., 12.

47. Bamballa : — Marriage : —

(1) Child marriage. A little boy of his own will may declare that a
little girl is his wife. He visits his future parents-in-law and makes them
insignificant presents. When he is old enough he gives them a large
present and is allowed to cohabit with her. No further ceremony. The
children belong to the eldest maternal uncle.

(2) Adult Marriage. Purchase. The children belong to the father.
Should the woman die the husband is often forced to undergo the poison
ordeal.

No polyandry, but a childless man may introduce his brother in secret.
(Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 35, p. 410.)

48. Massai : — Whether a man may marry a certain woman or not
depends on the age or generation to which the girl's father belongs, and
secondly on the gelat (clan or family) of her father.

No man may marry a woman belonging to the same subdivision if both
families live in same district, but he may marry one belonging to his clan
or other clans (p. 303).

Divorce appears to be unknown. (Hollis, p. 304.)

It is not an offence for a man to commit adultery with a woman or girl
of the same age. " From this it will appear that the Massai are polyandrous
as well as polygamous. A man may marry as many wives as he can afford
to purchase, and a woman may cohabit with any man belonging to her
husband's age." (Hollis, p. 312.)

49. Beni-Amer : — Marriage : —

(1) Through Purchase. Segad (Head-money) to the father, and Dekran,
i.e., small presents, to her relatives.

(2) Marriage with community of goods : —

(a) Dekran as above.

(b) Segad — usually a camel or four cows, property of the pair.

(c) Mitto — both parties contribute ; property of both.

(d) The bridegroom offers a sacrifice. (Munzinger, p. 319.)
Divorce. The man has the right of divorce. First of all the private

property of each party is separated out and the common goods are divided
in two parts. The house and everything in it goes to the woman but the
weapons go to the man.

222 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

The wife can separate from her husband in two ways : — She either
leaves him simply or claims separation on account of bad treatment or
unfaithfulness. In both cases she only receives a third. In case of impo-
tence a half.

The children, except sucklings, remain with the father (p. 320).

Polygamy is permitted but only practised by the richest. Most people
are satisfied with one wife — often till death (p. 326).

50. Bahima :— No man may marry into his father's clan (with the excep-
tion of princes). Rules of exogamy do not apply to the mother's clan. A
woman becomes the wife of two or three brothers when they are poor,
(Roscoe, J.A.I., 37, p. 105.)

Divorce seldom practised. A man may put away his wife if she becomes
a prostitute or allows her husband's enemy to have intercourse with her.
In rare cases also if she is quarrelsome or abusive (p. 106).

51. Colonial Hottentots : — Women do the greater part of the work, but
not so much as among the Bantus. The position of women is relatively
higher than among the Bantus (p. 329). Polygamy exists, but is not so
extended as among the Bantu (p. 329). Consent is not necessary, but in
point of fact the girl seldom objects. If she does she is said to resist and
win (p. 220). (Fritsch.)

52. Khoi-Khoin : — No purchase. The matter is arranged by the families.
Conflicting accounts as to polygamy. It seems that it was not the rule —
may have been allowed to rich people. (Wanderer in Steinmetz, p. 317.)

53. Dinka : — Divorce or (f breaking" of marriage. By return of cattle
or marriage price, by the husband (a) if the girl fails to give birth two
years after marriage; (b) if the girl runs away and refuses to live with him ;
(c) if there is quarrelling between the families. The wife may sue through
her father by refusing to live with the man. The father may sue for default
in payment of cattle as arranged. (Sullivan, J.A.I., 40, p. 182.)

54. Ova-Herero : — Pre-nuptial unchastity exists, but is considered a
Disgrace for the parents. (Dannert, p. 26.) Organisation intermediate
between mother right and father right. According to older organisation
they were divided into clans called " eanda," descent being matrilineal.
These are now being superseded by clans called oruzo, descent entirely
patrilineal. Hence every Herero belongs to two distinct stocks — to an
eanda through his mother and to an oruzo through his father, and kinship
is through both lines. (Hartland, p. 351.)

Divorce. Grounds : Sterility, lewdness, wilful desertion, attempted
murder, continual unfaithfulness on part of the wife. Can be instituted
by both parties. Formal : before the headman, or chief. Fine imposed on
the guilty party. (Dannert, p. 46.) " Marriage is looser than among the
Bantu for it can be more easily dissolved by either party, as there was
property at stake in the matter." At present the Herero marries within
the circle of his relatives, but children of two sisters or of two brothers
cannot marry, for if the former they belong to the same eanda and if the
latter to the same oruzo. (Hartland, p. 354.)

55. Bali tribes : — The legal form of marriage is monogamy, and from the
point of view of family rights and rights of inheritance this is strictly
honoured. At present there is a laxer arrangement but in a one-sided
manner. Unfaithfulness on the part of the wife is punished with death
and the seducer is also severely punished. The man is in practice allowed

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 2^3

polygamy, but only with women of the slave coast and only with unmarried
ones. These have no rights.
Marriage : —

(1) Free choice of parties.

(2) Agreement of the parents (often before birth).

(3) Pure purchase.

Kinship an obstacle. (Hutter, p. 379.)

The land is worked by the women. Trades by the men. Women fetch
wood, prepare food, look after the children (p. 382).

56. Mundombe : — Divorce rare. Only when two years after the mar-
riage there is no child. (Magyar, p. 23.)

57. Azanden — Usually the girl has her choice but her father has the
right to force a husband on her if he likes (p. 14). All kinship an obstacle
except in the case of the Avurn Gura (i.e., descendants of the founder of
the dynasty), (p. 15.)

Marriage can be dissolved at will of either party or of the father-in-law,
but there are certain conditions for Avurn Gura (p. 19).

Kin on the mother's side cannot inherit (p. 25). (Hutereau, Annales,
Series III, Tom. I.)

58. Abandia : — No marriage price, but the man gives one of his girls or
a sister. The father-in-law keeps the woman for himself or gives her to one
of his people.

After the marriage presents may be exchanged. (Hutereau, Annales,
Series III, Tom. I, p. 43.)

59. Quissama : — " The Quissama are a virtuous people, and so far as
Mr. Hamilton was able to ascertain practised monogamy." (Price, J.A.I.,
i, p. 189.)

There are few women in comparison with the number of men (p. 189).

60. Angoni : — Children take the name of the father. Amongst the full-
blooded Angoni the girl chooses her husband, but this is now disappearing
and she is given to the highest bidder. (Wiese, Z.E., 32, p. 191.)

61. Kunama and Barea : — Presents to bride's family.
Purchase ? (p. 487).

Polygamy permitted but is not usual (p. 524). (Munzinger, Ostafri-
kanische Studien.)

62. Bayaka : — Polyandry unknown, but a childless man may introduce
his brother — in secret. (Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 36, p. 45.)

63. Monbuttu : — " Towards their husbands they exhibit the highest
degree of independence. The position in the household occupied by the
men is illustrated by the reply which would be made if they were solicited
to sell anything : ' Oh, ask my wife; it is hers.' " (Schweinfurth, Heart
of Africa, ii, p. 91.)

64. Pygmies : — Most Batuans of Tanganika do not practise polygamy.
(Hutereau, Annales, Series III, Tom. I, p. 3.)

The Wambuti of Ituri deny with horror the existence of polygamy
among them. (David, Globus, 1914.)

Le Roy thinks they are usually monogamous.

Johnston (see G. Grenfell and the Congo, p. 674). Among the Pygmies
marriage is little more than the tendering of a gift of common beads or
knives or other objects of local value to the father of the girl who is thereby

224 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

acquired by the purchaser, though no doubt inclination accounts for much
in the bargain and fidelity thereto. Adultery does not seem to be greatly
resented, and indeed they seem to approach very near to promiscuity, and
even incest, in their marital relations, within each separate band or com-
munity.

Johnston, Uganda Protectorate, p. 539. Marriage is only the purchase
of a girl from her father. Polygamy depends on the extent of the barter
goods. There is much attachment between husband and wife.

65. Wafipa : — The chief is referred to as having several wives. (Thom-
son, vol. ii, p. 220.)

66. Sereres : — Polygamy. At Fadiouth mostly one wife. (Dr. Corre,
R.E., ii, p. 15.)

67. Makololo : — Marriage looks like a bargain but is not purchase.
Cows are given by the man so as to have the right to retain the children in
his family. A man may have control over his wife without payment but
not over children. (Livingstone, Zambesi, p. 285.)

68. Basoga : — According to Johnston marriage is simply a purchase
from the girl's father.

According to Cunningham, pp. 112 — 114, marriage is by elopement
(from a dance at night). The next day the brother of the girl calls at the
new home and receives a present.

Purchase has been heard of in cases of debt.

The men have no objection to helping the women in the cultivation of
their gardens, differing in this respect from the Uganda men (p. 120).

69. Wafiomi : — If a woman is not loved she is sent back to her father.
If she marries again the first child belongs to the first husband, the second
to the second husband, the third to the third, etc., until the eighth when
they all belong to the second. (Baumann, Massailand, p. 179.)

70. Wambugwe : — Almost the only case in Middle Africa of the absence
of polygamy. Even chiefs have only one wife.

The young man sends an ox to the father, if accepted the marriage is
celebrated by dancing and drinking of Pombe. No marriage price — it is
customary for the bride's father to give her some oxen. In case of divorce
the husband must return them. (Baumann, Massailand, p. 187.)

72. Warangi : — The girl is carried away (entfuhrt) by the relatives of
the man. Her father then sends people to seek him and negotiate. The
price is paid and the wedding celebrated. (Baumstarck, Mittheilungen der
deutschen Schutzgebieten, 13, pp. 53-4.)

OCEANIA.

73. South Melanesia : — Purchase or exchange of presents verging on
purchase is the rule, but in Santa Cruz Codrington describes it as exchange.
In Banks Is. also the bridegroom gets a return present.

74. Wagawaga Tubetube : — The husband goes to wife's hamlet and his
own alternately.

75. Bartle Bay : — Marriage is by exchange of presents, the bride's kin
getting more valuable ones (as at Mukana).

76. New Caledonia : — Marriage by a man's obtaining possession of a
girl for twenty-four hours or by secret cohabitation : this has been treated
as implying consent.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 225

77. Mowat (N. Guinea) : — Marriage often by brother-and-sister ex-
change.

78. Jabim : — Elopement makes marriage in general, especially if the
man's kin can pay.

79. Gilbert Islands : — Easy betrothals. The girl's adopted father gives
land to the boy's adopted father on her behalf. The husband may divorce
the wife, but if he ill-treats her, adopted father may take her away.

80. Peleu Islands : — Divorce is at will of either party, but if a man
abandons a rich wife of certain families he cannot marry again.

81. Rotumians : — Marriage usually arranged by the parents. The con-
sent of the Pure of the Hoag was necessary. (Gardiner, J.A.I., 27, p. 478.)
Meinicke says (p. 56) consent of the District chief was necessary.

Gardiner, J.A.I., 27, p. 481, says that divorce in former days could only
be brought about by the one who desired the separation buying off the
other with heavy presents of mats and food. On the other hand Meinicke
(p. 56) says " Marriages are often dissolved easily and quickly," but
probably he is referring to the present time.

82. Tongans : — According to West (Ten years in South Central Poly-
nesia, p. 270) polygamy is common. Meinicke (ii, p. 87), on the other
hand, says it is confined to the chiefs, whilst most people of the lower
classes have only one wife.

83. Rarotongans : — Polygamy seems to have been restricted to the Ariki,
the Mataipo and Rangatiro, whereas the lowest class usually have one wife.
(Meinicke, Pt. II, p. 148.)

84. Hawaians : — Polygamy permitted but apparently confined to chiefs,
or higher classes. (Meinicke, Pt. II, p. 305.) Rank descended through
the females. (Ib.f p. 302.) Among the reigning families kinship was no
obstacle at all — brothers and sisters could marry. Adultery among the
highest ranks was punished with decapitation. (Ellis, iv, p. 421.)

85. Tahitians : — The marriage tie was very loose and divorce easy and
frequent. (Ellis, i, p. 273.) Meinicke says that among the nobles (Vor-
nehmen) the divorced wife remained at least in name a married woman.
(Cf. also Ellis, i, p. 273-)

As to polyandry Ellis (vol. iii, p. 124) says that those among the middle
or higher ranks who practised polygamy allowed their wives other hus-
bands, and that it is reported that brothers or members of the same family
sometimes exchanged their wives, while the wife of every individual was
also the wife of his Taio or friend.

86. Marquesas : — Marriage tie loose. Unchastity frequent. Some even
assume polyandry. (Meinicke, Pt. II, p. 255.)

AUSTRALIA : MARRIAGE.

87. N.W.C. Queensland : — The statement as to polygamy refers to the
Bonlia and Kalkadoon districts only (pp. 141, 180). There is no statement
as to the other. The wife supplied by the camp may not be divorced
except by mutual consent (p. 181). Generally the consent of the woman
does not seem required, and though elopements occur they are punished
with an ordeal of hacking with knives. (Ibid.)

The statement as to prenuptial unchastity is based on the ritual sub-
mission of the girl at puberty to all the males in the camp outside her

2,26 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

own marriage group (p. 174), but an assault at an uninitiated girl was
punished by death (p. 182). A man who kills his own wife must deliver a
sister to his wife's friends for death. The wife has always her tribal
brother to protect her (p. 141).

88. N.S. Wales (Some), (Frazer) : — As to prenuptial unchastity Frazer
denies promiscuous intercourse (p. 27), but there is a regular subjection of
a girl who objects to marriage to all the companions of the man who catches
her (p. 28). As to protection of the wife, the elders may order some punish-
ment for an unfaithful husband (p. 34). On the other hand the husband
may kill her without suffering anything (p. 27).

As to the arrangement of marriage, there is child-betrothal, but after
persistent elopements the girl may be allowed her own way, while if a man
finds a girl of the right class to marry him the parents cannot refuse,
though a sister may be given in exchange (pp. 22, 8). From this case it
would seem marriage is really at the option of the man under the control
of the council.

89. W. Victoria : — When there are no children there may be divorce by
mutual consent. (Dawson, p. 35.) The man may also give up his wife to
another amicably with the consent of the chief. The woman may be
speared by her brother if the relations are disapproved. Further the woman
may go to another man who can then legalise the marriage with her by
defeating the husband in a duel before the chief. (Ibid.)

90. Kurnai : — Consent. The ordinary form of marriage is by elope-
ment. The girl, if found without delay, is speared, the man has to fight
her relatives, and on the original abduction the girl has to submit to all
the abductor's companions.

As to protection the man might kill an unfaithful wife, but in some
cases her relatives might avenge her. (K. and K., pp. 200 — 206.)

91. Waimbio : — If parents did not exactly arrange marriage their con-
sent was in strictness required, but elopements were frequent, and after
beatings and fightings the result would be accepted. If the eloping girl
was caught by men who are not related to her in the absence of her rela-
tives she would have to submit to them. (Bulmer in K. and K., p. 289.)

92. Some Victorian Tribes : — Brough Smyth's account seems to be
based mainly on tribes around Melbourne, five of which, including also
Golbourn river, are referred to also in Howitt.

Brough Smyth speaks of a woman as property.

93. Yerkla Mining : — The medicine men seem to exercise a certain
supervision since if an elopement occurs, the betrothed husband may claim
his bride and the matter is settled by a fight regulated by the medicine
men. (Howitt, p. 258.)

94. E. Victoria : — This is a group of tribes described by R. H. Mathews
within a line from Jeelong to Murray River up to its source and then to the
coast at Cape Howe. It would cover many of the tribes given in other
groups but which it is impossible to say with precision. It should be
noted that according to Mathews " in making the betrothals the old men
endeavour as far as practicable to arrange that the brothers and sisters in
certain families shall intermarry with the brothers and sisters of certain
neighbouring families whether in the same or in an adjoining tribe." He

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 227

points out that this has the effect of binding the two families together and
of strengthening their claims for consideration (p. 97).

The totems are patrilineal but the mother's brothers defend the boy
(p. 102).

95. Narrinyeri and Encounter Bay : — Dealt with separately in Woods by
Taplin and Meyer. The Encounter Bay tribes described by Meyer appear
to be certain divisions of the Narrinyeri, and details added by Meyer are
entered for " some " of the Narrinyeri.

96. Gournditch Mara : — Strictly these are covered by Dawson's West
Victoria groups, but the details given by Stahle in K. and K., pp. 276, 7,
do not wholly correspond.

97. Port Lincoln : — Brothers " may almost be said " to have wives in
qommon, and women call their husbands and brothers-in-law by the same
name, but husbands have different names for their own wives and those
on whom they have secondary claims. (Schumann, cf. Woods, p. 223.)

98. Dieri : — Closely similar conditions for other Cooper's Creek tribes.
With regard to polyandry the facts are that a man has one or more wives

assigned to him but he also may be Piraurum to a wife of another man
provided she is of right class. (Howitt, pp. 177 seq.)

99. Wakelbura : — The men of the same totem had access to a man's
wife. (Howitt, p. 224.)

100. Wotjobaluk : — In this tribe polygamy is not usual. (Howitt, p.
245-)

101. Wotjo nation, including Wotjo Baluk, Jupagalk and Mukjarawint :
Elopement is common and the matter is settled by an ordeal. The men of
the totem have access to the bride and to this extent prenuptial relations
are recognised. Class prohibitions are enforced with death by members of
tfce classes concerned.

The abductor of a wife is pursued by the husband with all the men of
the camp except the wife's relatives and beaten unless he compounds.
(Howitt, pp. 246, 7-)

228 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

CHAPTER IV.

WAR AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE.

I.— War.

The question has been raised whether the traditional view of
j early society as one of constant warfare is really justified by the
1 facts. There is, in fact, no doubt that to speak of a state of war as
I normal is in general a gross exaggeration. Relations between
neighbouring communities are in general friendly, but they are
pt to be interrupted by charges of murder owing to the belief in
witchcraft, and feuds result which may take a more or less organised
'orm. In the lower stages it is in fact not very easy to distinguish
>etween private retaliation when exercised by a kinsfolk or a body
of friends, and a war which is perhaps organised by a leader chosen
for the occasion, followed by a party of volunteers. Strictly, we
take it that external retaliation means a quarrel exercised by a part
of a community only upon members of another community, while
war means an operation conducted in the name of the community
as a whole. Feuds would thus also be the appropriate name for
reprisals exercised by one branch of a community upon another,
e.g., as between two clans or two local groups within a tribe. As
distinguished from a feud, war implies a certain development of
social organisation, and is probably not so common at the lowest
stages as it becomes higher up.

We have sought to distinguish wars and feuds, but must
confess that the evidence is often very inadequate for the purpose.
We have, however, set down the cases where one or other is
reported, together with those in which war is said to be non-
existent, and we have in the aggregate 298 cases of war or feuds
distributed through all the grades, and nine certain and four
doubtful cases of " no war." These are mainly confined to the
lowest grades, there being 4^ among the lower, 3^ among the
higher hunters, and 2 in the lowest agriculture. Thus there are a
few very primitive societies, mostly of the jungle folk, that seem
quite peaceful, but there is no indication of any association of
peaceful propensities with the lowest stage of culture as such. At
most it may be said that organised war develops with the advance
of industry and of social organisation in general.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 229

The Enemy.

The attitude to the enemy and the general character of war may
be best judged by the treatment of the vanquished, which may also
have important reactions on the structure of society. First of all,
quarter may be refused, and even women and children may be
massacred. Under the head " prisoners slain " we enter all cases
where there is no customary limitation in the slaughter, where
heads are taken, and w-here enemies are eaten. We should enter
the case as long as the slaughter is permitted, although, for
example, the enslavement of women or the adoption of children
might be alternatives also in practice. The customs of the people
would then appear under more than one head. Our next head is
'* Men only slain," i.e., women and children are by custom spared.
One alternative to death is slavery, and it may be applied to both
sexes — " prisoners enslaved," or — among adults to women only —
" Women and children enslaved." Of the latter case a variant is
that women may be taken as wives or concubines, and if that is the
only sense in which we hear of women being taken we write
' wives ' under the head slavery. This must, of course, not be
taken to imply that the position of the captured wife remains
servile, and we do not count these cases in reckoning the number
of slave-holding peoples. But the woman is undoubtedly treated
as a prize, i.e., as a chattel in the first instance, which sufficiently
justifies the entry here. Instead of being enslaved, prisoners may
be "adopted " into the conquering tribe, and this is especially
frequent in the case of children. Again they may be " ransomed,
exchanged, or set free," cases which we group under a single
heading. Lastly, in place of being merely put to death, they may
be tortured, while in some instances torture is antecedent to adoption
or liberation.

The cases coming under these heads are as follows : —

No WAR.
Lower Hunters.

? Winturn, Kubu, Sakai, Punan, Semang.

Higher Hunters.

? Ghiliaks, some Chepawyans (27), Point Barrow Eskimo,
Greenland Eskimo.

Agriculture I.

Paumari, Curetu.

Pastoral + .

Bahima (rare).

Agriculture + .
Tjumba (mild).

230 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

PRISONERS SLAIN (* Men only slain).
Lower Hunters.

N.W.C. Queensland,* Narrinjerri,* Kurnai,* Watchandi,
Bangarang, Botocudos, Patwin, Shoshones (2), Batua.

Higher Hunters.

Manobos Rio Bay, Abipoiies,* Puri, Zaparo,* Guaycuru,*
Charrua (21), Macus, Pitagoar, Payuga,* Tehuelches,* Akkek,*
Auca,* Kauralaig,* Komibo, Nishinan (6), Klamaths of S.W.
Oregon (i),* Blackfoot, Thompson River, Apache, Sen, Micmacs,
Etechemins, Montagnais, Omaha, S. Californians,* Shenaimak,*
Comanche,* Haida, Kutchin, Behring Straits Eskimo,* Koniagas,*
Chilcotin, Carriers, Thlinkeet,* Bellacoola,* Nootka,* Lasseks,
Yuki, Tatu, Porno (5).

Agriculture I.

Manobos of Agusan (42), Zambales or Tinos, Arunese, Lushai,
Other Kukis, Ainus (formerly),* Canea and Antioquia, Charantes,
Mataco (22), Arecuna, Maxerunas, Lengua, Mauhes,* Guana,*
Dacotah, Iroquois, Hurons, Abnaqui,* Delaware,* Ojibway, W.
Torres St.*

Agriculture II.

Bangala, Bali,* Wanyatura,* Mandja, Mangbetu, Warega,*
Bateke,* Oupoto, Land Dyaks, Sea Dyaks, Mentawez, Bontoc,
Flores, Arunese, Kiangans, Nagas, Italones, Guinanes, Jivaro,
Mundrucu,* Uaupes, Af>iaca, Senci,* Chiriguano, Illinois,
Wyandot, Natchez, Creeks, Winnebago, Some N. Mexicans,
Caribs,* Chikmees, S. Melanesia, Florida, Bagota, S.E. Solomons,
Saa, Koita, Mekeo, Waga Waga, Bartle Bay, Trobriands, New
Hebrides, New Caledonia, Gazelle Peninsula, Neu Mecklenburg1,
Moanu, Mafulu, Jabim, Caroline Islands, Teleu Islands.
Pastoral + .

Ama Xosa, Galla.*

Agriculture + .

Bahuana,* Wachagga,* Ababua, Baronga,* Ewe, Tshi,
Bambala (rare), Foolah,* Segoo,* Cazembe, Araucanians,*
Pueblos of New Mexico,* Apalachites, Neuforesen, Kayans (occ),
Kenya (occ), Bungians (38), Nias, Daians, Malays Padang, Miris
of Hills, Garos, Kafirs, Batta, Igorots.

PRISONERS ENSLAVED (* Women and children only).

Lower Hunters.

Kurnai (wives), Gournditchmara (? wives), Narranga (wives),
Maryborough (wives), Geawegal (wives), Shoshones,* Mucasse-
queres (for sale).

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 231

Higher Hunters.

Manobos Rio Bay, Italmen, Tuski (formerly), Abipones,
Zaparo,* Tehuelches,* Goyanaz, Akkek, Aucas,* Puelches,*
Klamaths S.W. Oregon,* Thompson River,* Semilkameen, S.
Calil'ornians,* Shenaimak,* Kohiagas,* E. Shushwap, W.
Shushwap, Bellacoola,* Kwakiutl, Nootka.

Agriculture I.

Manobos Agusan, Abkhases, Ainu (formerly),* ? Manaos (17),
Miranha, Guana.

Pastoral I.

Beni Amer, Khoi Khoin (formerly).

Agriculture II.

Bangala, Bali,* Azande, Augoni, Yaunde,* Gallinas, Mangbetu,
Bondei, Land Dyaks,* Sea Dyaks,* Toungtha, Mundrucu,*
Uaupes,* Senci,* Chiriguano, Illinois, Creeks, Caribs,* Moanu,
Tongans, Hawaians, Tahitians, Fijians.

Pastoral + .

Yakuts (wives), Galla.

Agriculture + .

Akamba, Kuku, Washambala, Wachagga,* Anyanza, Bayaka
(61), Suaheli, Wadigo, Bihenos (for sale), Indikki, Bushongo,
Dualla, Basonge, Ababua, Bambala, Yao, Bamsalala, Baganda,
Baronga (for sale),* Diakite Saracolays, Bambara, Foolah, Calabar,
Segoo,* Araucanians,* Pima, Pueblos of New Mexico,*
Newforesen,* Karo Bataks, Kayans, Kayans of Mahakam, Kayans
of Mindalam, Singphos, Maquinandaos (40), Nias, Balinese,
Adighe, Ossetes, Battas, Kenyah, Bagobos.

PRISONERS ADOPTED, EXCHANGED OR SET FREE.
(Ex. = Exchanged or set free; *= Either adopted or exchanged).
Lower Hunters.

Kurnai, Shoshones (ex.).
Higher Hunters.

Guaycura, Charrua, ? Payuga, Aucas, Blackfeet,* Kiowa,
Thompson River,* Apache (ex.), Montagnais, Nez Perces (ex.),
Comanches (children), Behring St. Eskimo (women), E. Shushwap
(ex.), W. Shushwap (ex.), Tolowa (3) (ex.), Omaha (?ex.).

Agriculture I.

Kukis (children), Karayaki (11), Mataco (22), British Guiana
(wives), Arecuna (wives), Mauhes, Guana, Lengua, Dacota,
Iroquois, Delaware, Ojibway.

Pastoral I.

Ovaherero (children servile).

232 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Agriculture II.

Bangala (ex.), Azande (ex. occ.), Mandja (some), Yaunde (ex.),
Warega (women and children), Wafiomi (ex.), Bondei (ex.), Land
Dyaks,* Sea Dyaks,* Sambioa (n), Uaupes (wives), Chiquito (23),
Illinois, Wyandot, Creeks/ Winnebago, Caribs, Waga Waga,
Bartle Bay.

Pastoral + . .

Yakuts (ex.).
Agriculture + .

Akamba (ex. some), Biheno (ex.), Baronga (wives), Apalachites.

The numbers under each head are as follows: —

L.H.
H.H.
A1 ..
P1 ..
A2 ..
P2 ..
A3

Total

Women

Ex-

Total

cases

Van-

Men

and

Gener-

changed

cases

of relevant quished

only

children

ally

or set

of war

information

slain

slain

slaves

slaves

Adopted

free

28}

14

6

3

5!

I

I

I

61

52

23

17

10

II

g\

7^

30

26

15

6

I

4i

12

0

7

4

O

o

O

2

i

o

92

65

44

7

8

15

H

7i

9

3

i

i

i

I

0

I

60

53

I61

7

6

35

2

1}

298!

214 105

4i

32i

60^

39i

18}

No

WAR,

4i

2

i (rare)

i (mild}

H.H
A1
P2
A3

Grouping together (i) the cases of " Generally slain " and
" Men only slain," (2) the cases of " Women and children slaves "
and " Generally slaves," (3) the cases of " Adoption, exchange,
and liberation," we get the following tables, in which the figure
in each column is also reduced to a fraction of the total number of
cases as to which we have information.

Total. Slain. Slaves. Equal.

L.H 14 9 (-64) 6} (.46) 2 (.14)

H.H 52 40 (.77) 21 (.40) 17 (.33)

A1 26 21 (.8l) 5}(-2l) 12 (.46)

P1 4 o(.o) 2 (.5) i (.25)

A2 65 51 (.78) 23 (.35) 21} (.33)

P2 3 2 (.66) 2 (.66) i (.33)

A3 53 23 (.45) 41

i. Omitting the Bambara.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 233

^~~~
Ignoring the Pastoral peoples, for whom the numbers are too

small to be of value, we find (a) that the practice of killing some or
all of the vanquished predominates and is nearly constant till we
reach the highest agricultural stage, where it drops by 50 per cent.
This remark is only to be qualified by the fact that the percentage
is rather lower among the Lower Hunters, which may be due to the
small number of whom we are informed, but possibly reflects
the fact that most fighting here is a matter of blood revenge in
which honour is satisfied by the slaying of one or two of the enemy
in hot blood, (b) The drop in the practice of killing prisoners in
A3 is the reverse side of the equally sudden rise in the practice of
enslavement. It will be noticed that this remains low in the first
two stages of agriculture. The moderately high figure among the
Lower Hunters is almost entirely due to the capture of wives.
we omit the enslavement of women and children, the fractions
(disregarding the Pastoral peoples) are : —

L.H 07

H.H 21

A1 15

A2 23

A3 66

This probably gives a better view of the conditions. Apart
from the capture of wives, the enslavement of captives is very rare
among the Lower Hunters, rises to about 20 per cent, of the cases
among the Higher Hunters, and remains about that level till we
come to the Highest Agriculture, where it becomes the normal
method.

(c) Considering that the capture of wives shades off into adop-
tion, we may, in spite of the low figure for Lower Hunters, regard
the milder methods brought together under the heading " Equal "
as nearly constant till we reach A3, where it almost disappears in
favour of slavery.

II. — Ranks.

When prisoners are taken as slaves it does not always follow
that they are held permanently as slaves.1 The women may be
married or, becoming first concubines, they may be set free on the
birth of a child.2 Prisoners generally may be taken to sell again

1. Sometimes the slavery of captives is so mild as to be barely distin-
guishable from adoption. Such is the case among the Abipones, described
by Dobrizhofer (vol. ii, p. 142, English Translation), and the Guaycuru,
who treated their captives as equal and absorbed them into the tribe, but
they also buy slaves for the same purpose. On balance both these peoples
have been classed as slave-holding.

2. Thus, on the Thompson River, a captive woman on bearing a child
was adopted into the tribe. The Aucas took women as concubines and
servants to their wives, but brought up the children as members of the
tribe.

B2

234 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

rather than to hold. Dr. Nieboer, in defining slavery, would rule
out these cases. He is dealing with slavery as an industrial system,
and he restricts it to cases where the slave performs part of the
regular industry of the community. We have taken in cases of
slave-concubinage x and the slave trade.2 Thus we include some
instances which he rejects. We try also to note the cases in which
the slave's life stands in the master's hands, including those other
cases in which he is liable to be sacrificed at a funeral or on some
other occasion.

Besides the distinction of slaves and free, there may be other
important social gradations. There may be a nobility, by which
we mean something more than a family from whom the chief is
chosen. We mean an order distinguished by certain privileges,
standing above the ordinary free man. We note separately whether
the privileges involve a different standing in point of legal or
customary rights to protection, e.g., if there is a difference in the
wer-gild between nobles, free, half-free, and slaves, or if revenge is

1. According to Ehrenreich (Veroff., Bd. II, p. 28), among the Sambioa,
there were no male slaves, but foreign women and even children were kept
in semi-slavery and as prostitutes. We enter " Women " under the head
" Slaves."

2. Thus we enter as Slaveholders the Manobos (Blumentritt, Z. Ges.
Erd., 19, p. 293), who made raids in order to kill or sell prisoners as slaves,
and the Kirghiz, who dealt continually in slaves, selling their prisoners
for the purpose, though whether they kept them themselves or not is not
clear. The Bungians, who occasionally sold their children to Christians
(Blumentritt, Ausland, 1893, p. 725), and the Suanes, where boys and girls
are sold in case of dearth (Bodenstedt, p. 74), are queried.

Among borderland cases of Slavery we may note the Mangbetu, who
have servants for life and have certain rights over their wives and families.
The servant, however, may change his master. On the whole we have
entered this as a slave-system, with a negative under the head of Life and
Death Power (Overbergh, p. 501). Among the Warundi we enter slavery
as " Occasional " because chiefs sometimes have a few slaves, and also as
existing in the form of a " dependent " relation. A young person without
kindred will offer his or her services to a proprietor and becomes a member
of the household (Burgt, pp. 13, 212).

Among the Central Eskimo strangers, bachelors, cripples, and men
without property live with others in a dependent position but are clearly
not slaves (Boas, Smiths. Rep., 1884-5, P- 581). On the other hand, among
the Ojibways, the relatives of a murderer who could not pay the composi-
tion had to work it out in quasi-servitude, while captives might be adopted
or enslaved (Jones, History, pp. 109 and 131). We have taken this relation
as semi-servile.

Among the Roucoyennes, the relation of the Peito to the Tamouchi is a
case of " Dependence " and entered as such. (Coudreau, R. d'Ethnogra-
phie, vii, p. 479.)

On certain further borderland uses see notes at end of chapter, the Toba
note 20, the Baquiri note 68, the Wanyaturu note 70.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 235

allowed to a noble and forbidden to a commoner ; and we note cases
where there is a marriage bar. A rank distinguished by specific
rights and occupations, hereditary, and capable of fully legitimate
marriage,1 only within its own members is a caste, and classes
which have legal privileges and marriage barriers separating them
from others approximate to castes. Lastly, we note the cases in
which, either as an alternative or as an addition to true caste or
slavery, there are peoples held as tributary to other of superior
force.

The broad results may be set out in the following table2 : —

T fJ Bank by Serfs or Women Tribu- Life and

Nobles. wealth. slaves, slaves. taries. death power.

N.A (4)

S.A. (2)

Asia (6)

Africa (3) i

Australia (26)

(40 *

H.H.

S.A (16) i 4^ i

N.A (57) 8 4 i8i i 6

Asia (6) 3

Africa (— )

Oceania (i)

(80) 9 4 26 26
A1

N.A (6) i

S.A. (24) 61

Asia (13) i| 7^ ii

Oceania . (i) — — —

(44) il Hi I l
P1

Asia (7) 2 i 2 i

Africa (7) i 3^ 2

S.A -. (i) ------

(i5) 3 i 5l 3
A2

N.A (9) i

S.A (14) i 4 *

Asia (28) 6 2 17]- — 2

Africa (42) 3 2 26^ 5

Oceania (35) 9 i\ io\ i

(128) 19 5l 59i * 2 8

1. Marriage with a lower caste may be permitted, but the children then
are of the lower caste.

2. For the lists on which the figures for " nobles " and slaves are based
see appendix to this Section.

236 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

P2 Rank by Serfs or Women Tribu- Life and

Nobles, wealth slaves. slaves. taries. death power.

Asia (6) i 6 i

Africa (11) 3 — 6 — | —

A3 (17) 4 ~ 12 - i i

Africa (63) u 2\ 48 i 11

S.A (i) i _

N.A (4) i 3

Oceania (i) i

Asia (30) ii i 24 15

(99) 23 3i 77 2 16

It will be seen that the total number of tributary peoples is small,
and the cases in which women are held as slaves as distinct from
captive wives in a more or less inferior position are also negligible.
We may confine our analysis of the table to the two columns of
nobles on the one side and serfs and slaves on the other. The
distribution of slavery is instructive. We take all the cases in
which the existence of serfs or slaves is asserted or clearly implied,
as fractions of the total number of cases belonging to each group
of which we have had information in relation either to questions of
class or to questions of war and the treatment of captives, which
are closely connected with the making of slaves. The result is as
follows: —

Lower Hunters 02

Higher Hunters 32

Agriculture x 33

Pastoral1 37

Agriculture2 46

Pastoral2 , .71

Agriculture3 78

It will be seen that the increase is quite uniform from grade to
grade, except that the Higher Hunters and Lowest Agriculturists
are virtually equal.

For nobility the figures yield the following fractions: —

Lower Hunters o

Higher Hunters n

Agriculture1 03

Pastoral1 20

Agriculture2 15

Pastoral2 24

Agriculture3 23

These fractions are small throughout, but they indicate, as
might be expected, a rise in the higher cultures and also a slightly
greater tendency to distinction of rank among the Pastoral than
among the Agricultural peoples. The few cases among the Higher
Hunters, which somewhat disturb the uniformity of the relations,
are almost entirely due (8 out of 9) to the developed fisher peoples

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

237

of the Columbia region, who are also responsible for a large
proportion of the slave-holding cases in this division. But for this
group, the cases in which a nobility exists would be almost
negligible in the three lower cultures, while they rise to 23 and 24
per cent, in the two highest. With regard to the cases among the
Pastoral peoples, the numbers are certainly very small if we take
the Pastoral groups separately, but if we take them altogether we
find seven cases out of 32, or just under 22 per cent. — nearly as much
as in the highest Agricultural group alone.

THE RISE OF NOBILITY AND SERVILITY MAY BE SHOWN
GRAPHICALLY.

30

LH.

NOBLES

HH.

A1

P1

P2

A3

SLAVES

70

238 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

APPENDIX TO SEC. II.

We subjoin lists of the cases upon which the preceding con-
clusions are based.

A. NOBILITY AND SLAVE CLASS.

We find evidences of a nobility in the following cases: —
Higher Hunters.

Guaycuru, Tsimshian, Koniagas, Chilcotin, Carriers,
Thlinkeet, Lkungen, Kwakiutl, Nootka.

Agriculture.1

Arunese, ? Manthra.

Pastoral.1

Samoyeds of Siberia, Shasewenses (49), Beni Amer.
Agriculture.2

Bali, Azande, Mangbetu, Kei, Tagals, Flores, Arunese; Kiangan
(39), Dophla, Uaupes, Malo, New Caledonia, Marshall Islands,
Tongans, Rarotongans, Haiwaians, Tahiti, Marquesas, Fijians.
Pastoral.2

Kazak Kirghiz, Somal, Bogo, Galla.

Agriculture.3

Ondonga, Banyoro, Takue, Woloff, Bamsalala, Kimbunda,
Ewe (official), Diakite Saracolays, Bambara, Nosse be", Marea,
Guatemala, Kayans, Kenyah, Singpho, Maguindanaos (40), Nias,
Java Gorontalo, Balinese, Timorese, Adighe, Ossetes, Igorots.

B . CASES OF SLAVERY (* = Life and death power) .

Lower Hunters.

Mucasequeres (trade).

Higher Hunters.

Manobos Rio Bay, Italmen, Tuski, Abipones Guaycuru,
Goyanaz, Aucas, ? Puelches, Tsimshian,* Klamaths S.W. Oregon,
Thompson River, Apache, Similkameen, Kowitchen, Kutchin,
Aleuts, Koniagas, Atnas, ? Loucheux, Thlinkeet,* E. Shush-
waps, W. Shushwaps, Bellacoola,* Lkungen,* Kootenay,*
Kwakiutl, Nootka.*

Agriculture.1

Manobos Agusan, Zambales or Tinos,* Negritos of Zambales
(44), Arunese, C. Sakai (trade), Abkhases, Lushai (32), Aino
(formerly), Roilcoyennes (dep.), Miranha, Uanuma, Juri, Passe,
Arawak, Guana, Ojibway (some).
Pastoral.1

Aeneze (47), Kabards of Sivas, Ova Herero (formerly), Dinka,
Beni Amer, ? Khoi Khoin.

•*

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 239

Agriculture.2

Wajiji, Bangala,* Bali,* Azande, Azimba,* Maravis, Angoni,
Barea and Kunama (occ.), Ba-yanzi,* Banaka and Bapuku,
Yaunde, Gallinos (trade), Niam Niam, Mayombe, Mangbetu,
Bondei, Bateke (trade), Banyang, Bakundu, Mabun, Batom,
Wadoe,* Baluba, Bakongo, Oupoto, Mpongwe, Banyai, Muruts,
Kei, Kandhs, Land Dyaks, Sea Dyaks, Tagals, Samales,* Engano,
Flores, Arunese, Kiangans (39), Pani Kocch, Oraons, Nagas
(some, i.e., Ao) (31), Toungtha, Kami, Red Karens (34), Milanau
(formerly),* Sambioa (women) (u), Mundrucu, Chiquito, Secni,
Chirigirano, Creeks, S.E. Solomons (some), W. Solomons, Moanu,
Caroline Islands, Marshall Islands, Gilbert Islands, Maoris,
Tongans, Hawaians, Tahiti,* Fijians.

Pastoral.2

Turcomans, Midhi, Larbas, Yakuts, Kazak Kirghiz,* Kara
Kirghiz, Somal, Danakil (occ.), Beduan, ? Bahima, Bogo, Gallas,
Baquerewe.

Agriculture.3

Takue, Akamba, Kuku (occ.), Wasinji, Washambala,
Wakikuyu, Wapara, ? Sereres, Mbenga, Bahunana, Wachagga,
Fanti, Anyanza (60), Wasiba, Bayaka (61),* Suaheli, Kioko,
Woloff, Wadigo, Indikki,* Bushongo,* Duallas (formerly),'
Basonge, Ababua, Bambala (63),* Yao (formerly),* Basonge Meno,
Wapokomo, Waniamwesi (formerly),* Bamsalala, Wagogo (for-
merly),* Baganda, Kimbunda, Ewe,* Tshi,* Yoruba, Geges and
Nagos, Jekris, Diakite Saracolays, Fiote, Bambara, Foolah, Segoo,
Kalabar (formerly),* Nosse be, Marea, Kilwa, Lunda, Marutse,
Araucanians, Pima, Pueblos New Mexico, Guatemala, Neuforesen,
Kasias (28), Karo Bataks, Kayans (formerly),* Kayans of
Mahakam, Kayans of Mindalam (formerly),* Singpho, Padam
Abor, ? Bungians (38), Maguindanaos (40), Singkel, Nias,*
Khiva, Daians, Java Gorontalo (formerly), Balinese, Padang
Malays, Garos, Timorese, ? Suanes (50), Adighe, Ossetes,* Battas,
Kenyah, Bagobos,* Igorots.

C. PEOPLES HOLDING TRIBUTARIES.

Higher Hunters.
Guaycuru, Hupa.

Agriculture.1
Arunese.

Pastoral.1

Todas, Batauana, Beni Amer.

Agriculture.2

Arunese, Red Karens.

Pastoral.2
? Bahima.

Agriculture.3

Marea, Maguindanaos.

240 INSTITUTIONS OF THE) SIMPLER PEOPLES

III. — Cannibalism, Infanticide, and Human Sacrifice.

Allied with the question of the treatment of enemies, in fact in
many cases directly dependent on it, is the question of the extent
of cannibalism and also of human sacrifices. With regard to
cannibalism we have distinguished what may be called real canni-
balism from ceremonial cannibalism. We have not regarded the
question whether cannibalism is confined to enemies and strangers
on the one hand or to members of the same society on the other,
but we have drawn a distinction between the cases in which the
object is the material one of making a meal, and that in which it is
purely ceremonial, as is proved by the fact that only a small portion
of the body is eaten or that it is eaten as a mark of affection and
sympathy. We should, however, class under real cannibalism any
case in which a person is killed for the sake of eating, even though
the eating should only be of a particular organ with a view to
obtaining magical powers. Real cannibalism then for us includes :

(1) Cases of killing to eat, and

(2) Cases of eating for the sake of eating.

Ceremonial cannibalism includes only cases in which, death
having occurred either naturally or in war, the whole or portion of
the body is eaten for sacral reasons. This being understood, we
may give the following figures 1 : —

Cannibalism.

Names. Real. Ceremonial.

Lower Hunters 13 J 6^

Higher Hunters 7^ o

Agriculture1 8 2

Pastoral1 o o

Agriculture2 29 I

Pastoral 2 i \

Agriculture3 n 2\

The first point that emerges from these figures is that the total
number of cases of cannibalism is small in comparison with the
number of peoples of whose dealings in war-like matters we have
information. It is only among the Lower Hunters that they reach
nearly one-third of the whole, and this is almost entirely due to

i. CANNIBALISM. (* = Ceremonial.)
Lower Hunters.

N.W.C. Queensland, Dieri*, N. S. Wales, W. Victoria*, Kurnai, N.
Queensland*, Euahlayi*, Maryborough*, Mycoolon*, Pt. Darwin (occ.),
? Some W. Australians, Wotjobaluk, Kulin, Riverina, Ngarigo, Ngumba,
Herbert River, Kabi and Waaka, Watchandi, Botocudos, Shoshones* (and
occ.).
Higher Hunters.

Puri (occ.), Pitagoar, Goyatacaz, Tamajo, Kauralaig (occ.), ? Montag-
nais, Chepewayans, Kootenay, Nootka.
Agriculture I.

Canea and Antioquia, ? Manaos (17), Catanixi, Miranha, Arecuna,
Marana, Maxeruna, Dacota*, W. Torres St. (occ.), Birhor, Zambales or
Tinos.*.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 241

the Australian group.1 Among the Higher Hunters they fall to
about one-eleventh, rise somewhat in the lower stages of Agricul-
ture up to nearly one-quarter in Agriculture 2, and fall again to
one-ninth in Agriculture 3. Among the Pastoral peoples it is
noteworthy that we only have one case in all out of 31.

Otherwise no clear correlation with economic culture is
indicated. This negative result is still more apparent if we deal
with the Australians as we did in the case of monogamy and
polygamy. Equating them with the forest tribes as a whole, we
get a reduced figure of 4^ cases of cannibalism out of 22 separately
reckoned groups, or roughly one-fifth. This is about the same
as the proportion in the two lower stages of Agriculture, while
the fraction for the Higher Hunters approximates to that of the
highest Agriculture.

The distribution of cannibalism is in fact regional rather than
cultural, as the following table shows: —

Cases of " real "
cannibalism.

N.A 6

S.A 15

Asia 3

Africa 25

Oceania 9

Australia 12

From this table it appears that cannibalism barely exists in
Asia and is very rare in North America. In our other four regions
it appears in from 20 to 30 per cent, of the cases we have dealt with.
Whether this localisation is due to racial or environmental condi-
tions or to culture-contacts is a question on which our evidence does
not help us to decide. All we can say is that cannibalism occurs
in about one people in four in all grades of the lower cultures,
except the Pastoral, in which it is a vanishing quantity.

. — — - -

i. It also occurs in South America among the Botocudos and in North
America among the Shoshones as a ceremonial (Bancroft, p. 433).

Agriculture II.

Bangala, Azande, Lendu (?occ.), Quissama (some) (71), Tuchilange
(formerly), Mandja, ? Bayanzi, Fang, Monbutu, Niam Niam, Mangbetu
(formerly), Warega (formerly), Bateke, Bakundu, Mabum, Wadoc (Reli-
gious), Baluba (formerly), Oupoto, Italones, Icannas (some), Uaupes
(some), Apiaca, Chiriguano (formerly), Some North Mexicans, Caribs,
Waga Waga, Bartle Bay, New Caledonia, Gazelle Peninsula, N. Mecklen-
burg, Bogadjim, Mafulu, Maoris (formerly).

Pastoral II.

Ama Xosa (occ.), Gallas* (some), Ama Zulu (occ.).

Agriculture III.

Nandi*, Bahuana, ? Anyanza, Bongo, Mabode, Duallas (formerly),
Basonge, Ababua, Bambala (63), Yao (some), Dahomi, Warundi ? *,
Araucanians (formerly), Battas (recent), Igorots* (formerly).

242 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

With regard to human sacrifices the case is different. Our
table is as follows l : —

Names. Human Sacrifices.

Lower Hunters o

Higher Hunters 5

Agriculture1 o

Pastoral1 o

Agriculture2 13!

Pastoral2 o

Agriculture3 23^

Here, again, the record of the Pastoral peoples is perfectly
clean, and this, taken in conjunction with the almost complete
absence of cannibalism, can hardly be accidental. On the other
hand, the practice reaches its maximum in the two higher grades
of Agriculture, no doubt in response to well-known developments
of religious belief. It is remarkable that as between the second
and third grades of Agriculture the movement is exactly the reverse
of that of cannibalism. We may perhaps suppose that under the
better economic conditions the desire for human flesh is less but
that this influence is crossed by the growth of those special super-
stitions which connect the shedding of blood with the fertility of
the soil.

In the case of infanticide the cultural influence is more marked.
The figures are as follows2 :-—

All cases of family
Names. Infanticide. relations tabled.

Lower Hunters 18^ 78

Higher Hunters .... 8 90

Agriculture 1 3 56

Pastoral1 i 19

Agriculture2 8^ 170

Pastoral2 o 20

Agriculture3 6 109

i. CASES OF HUMAN SACRIFICE.
Higher Hunters.

Manobos Rio Bay, Cowitchen, Comanches (formerly), Koniagas (for-
merly), Thlinkeet.
Agriculture II.

Bangala, Azande (some), Azimba, Mara vis, Baquiri, Wadoc, Caroline
Islands, Tahitians, Milanau (formerly), Pawnees, Kandhs, Samales,
Khonds, Pankhos.
Agriculture III.

Duallas, Yao (formerly some), Waniamwesi (formerly), Wagogo (for-
merly), Bawenda (formerly), Ewe, Tshi, Warundi, Kalabar, Benin,
Marutse, Bukoba (Widow), Akamba (formerly), Indikki, Chevas, Cazetnbe,
Lunda, Kayans (formerly), Kayans of Mahakam, Kayans of Mindalam,
Nias, Daians, Garos, Bagobos.

2. INFANTICIDE.
Lower Hunters.

Narrinjeri, N.S. Wales, W. Victoria, N. Queensland (some), Mycoolon,
Pt. Darwin (some), N.W. Australians, Riverina, Ngumba, Herbert River,

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 243

/<fi IA

Again, to avoid possible exaggeration we " reduce " the
Australian figure, and get as the result 8^ cases of infanticide out
of a total of 44. This is still twice as high a ratio as any other.
Roughly we have among the Lower Hunters one case , in five,
among the Higher one in u, in the later Agricultural stages one
in 1 8 to 19, and in the two Pastorals one in 39. There is no
improvement in the Agricultural stages, but the Pastoral clearly
ranks first, the Agricultural as a whole second, while the Higher
Hunters are well above the Lower. On the whole, thena infanticide
appears to diminish with the advance of culture, but most markedly
in the Pastoral group. The favourable position of this group
under all the seven heads here examined is the most striking result
in this part of our work.

IV.— Property.

Private property in personal matters, weapons, dress, ornaments,
appears to exist everywhere. Sometimes, indeed, we hear that it
is very little regarded, theft being unpunished or regarded as a
jest, while people may borrow freely without the owner's leave.
We have kept a heading accordingly for " Property not regarded,"
but we have in fact found exceedingly few entries to make. What
seems almost to justify such an entry is often checked by further
information. Thus we are told of the Greenland Eskimo that if a
borrowed thing is injured the owner bears the loss, unless it was
borrowed without leave. If a man becomes rich needier neighbours
would have a claim on his support. Large game like walruses and
whales are divided among the whole village, and, in any case, if
there is a famine a well-to-do man must divide his food or give

Pt, Lincoln, Bungyarlee, C. Australians, Kabi and Waaka, Bangerang,

Wankamara, K. George's Sound, Botocudos (occ.), Patwin (occ.), Lower

Californians (occ.), Bushmen.

Higher Hunters.

Nicobarese (occ.), ? Guaycuru (25), Gallino Mero, Wappo (occ.), Pit River

(occ.), Yokut (occ.), Crees, Sitnilkameen, S. Californians (occ.), Some

Chepewayans (formerly), Behring St. Eskimo (formerly), Aleuts (rare).

Dependent Hunters.
Irulas,

Agriculture I.

Yuracares, Guana, Lengua.
Pastoral I.

Todas.

Agriculture II.

Banaka and Bapuku (occ. formerly), Bondei (occ.), Wadoc (occ.),
Kandhs, Nicobarese (occ.), Nagas, Khonds, Kalingas, Chiriguano (occ.),
E. Torres St. (occ.), Hawaians, Fijians (occ. formerly).

Agriculture III.

Takue (occ. formerly), Nandi (occ.), Waschambala (occ.), Wachagga
(occ.), Warangi (occ.), ? Ababua, Jekri (occ.), Nosse be, Araucanians,
Kayans (occ.).

244 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

feasts. It would seem that in such cases we are dealing not with
the negative fact of disregard of property, but with a positive custom
of neighbourliness and mutual aid, tending towards but not
reaching communism.1 This tendency shows itself most markedly
in rules for the distribution of food, sometimes of the harvest, more
often of the hunting booty. The kill may be distributed among
the hunting party — and sometimes etiquette assigns to the actual
killer the smallest share — or it may be divided among the whole
camp, or the village, or among the man's relations, or his wife's
relations. The rules of apportionment are sometimes very minute,
assigning a shoulder to one relative, a leg to another, and so on.
Under the head " Customary distribution " we enter all rules that
are to be found preventing the hunter from keeping the kill for
himself or his wife and children. When the crop is harvested in
common and distributed we enter the custom under the same head.2

We pass next to the ownership of land. We may be told that
no property in land is recognised. This probably comes to the
same thing as tribal ownership of land, for unless population is
exceedingly sparse tribes appear always to recognise their boun-
daries and to resent unauthorised intrusion. Howrever, we make
separate heads for " No property in land " and " Tribal ownership
of land." We should say that there is true tribal ownership of
land when, e.g., every individual and every section of a tribe is
free to hunt the entire area, but no outsider would be tolerated in
the area without special permission, and would be liable to be
killed at sight unless he satisfied the tribesmen that he came as a
suppliant, an envoy, or a trader. It cannot in such cases be denied
(a) that the tribe is exercising collective ownership as against
others; (b) that it admits no individual or sectional ownership
within its limits. Thus there is tribal ownership.

But within the tribe or secondary group a section, a local group,
a clan, a village, or a band may own defined portions of the area.
In grouping these cases we encounter the difficulties of nomen-
clature that we have discussed before. We have in the table used
the term " Gentile " for ownership, not only by a clan but by any
minor group within a tribe, but we must confess to a difficulty
in deciding in many instances between the two headings. For
instance, land may be owned by a village which is part of a tribe,
but contains clans, or at least organised kindreds, within it. So
far as possible we have dealt with such cases by writing " village "
under the heading " Gentile," but there may or may not be gentile
property also within the village, and we cannot, without over-
elaborating our tables, deal with all these cases. We would not,
therefore, lay much stress on the distinction between tribal and

1. The Aleuts are said to think it right to help themselves to things
that they seriously need — there is so little thieving that things are left
unprotected. (Weniaminow, Beitrdge zur Kenntniss des russischen Reiches,
Bd. I, p. 18.)

2. Among the Creeks planting and harvesting were carried out in
common. A portion was stored in the public granary for the use of the
necessitous, the rest was divided among the households. (Bartram, Trans.
American Ethn. Society, pp. 40, 41.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 245

gentile property in our tables, but would associate these heads —
adding to them the cases of "no property ): —in contrast to the
tenure by families and individuals. This last pair also tend to
run into one another. There is a clear distinction in thought
between land which belongs to a family and is held by the head
for the time being only as steward and administrator and land
which belongs to an individual out and out and therefore may be
fairly alienated.1 Often it is easy to distinguish them, and this is
done accordingly, but often also information is defective and there
is little to choose between the one head and the other. In using the
tables then we had best group the heads " no property," •* tribal,"
and " gentile " against the pair " family " and " individual " as
forms of what is on the whole common against what is either
individual property or property of the family in the narrower sense.

Very often we find both kinds of tenure combined, and the
combination may be of different kinds. Thus the land may belong
to the tribe, but within it any family may occupy and cultivate any
land it chooses, and may retain it as long as it is cultivated. We
deal with this by writing " Occ." (Occupational) under *' Family "
(or Individual, as the case may be).2 But the individual or family
possession may also become a permanent ownership of a plot small
or large within the tribal area. There is still tribal land; there
may even be tribal land cultivated or common for sacral purposes

1. Thus among the Negritos of Zambales the planting ground is the
personal property of the head of the family which cleared it, and he can
sell or otherwise dispose of it (Reed, p. 43). Among the Kurds of Eriwan
all the property of the family belongs to the family except the wife's dowry
(von Stenin, p. 223). On the other hand among the Baquerewe the family
chief is said to administer the common goods. (Hurel, Anthropos, vol. 6,
P- 285.)

2. Thus among the Basonge Meno (Annales, Series III, Tome II, p. 26)
each village owns a strip on the river, the harvest belongs to the family.
Among the Creeks everyone may hunt in the entire tribal area except the
land about the village which is apportioned by the community among its
members, according to the size and convenience. Among the Oraons there
is common ownership of land in some districts with a periodical redistri-
bution as between the classes (Hewitt, J.R.As.S., 1899, p. 336). Among
the Ossetes some lands are held in common, in others land is apportioned
to several families (Morgan, J.R.As.S., 20, p. 380). When the usufruct
belongs to the family, on its extinction the land returns to the tribe (p.
295)-

The Yakuts have a system of periodical redistribution (J.A.L, 31, p. 74).
Among the Kazak Kirghiz we find evidence of transition. Each division
of the tribe would resent intrusion on its land. For the winter abodes
there used to be constant quarrels. Now each family has a certain place
which is hereditary and alienable only by sale in the presence of witnesses
(Radlov, p. 415). Among the Khonds there is little restriction on individual
occupation, but ownership depends on occupation though it appears that
land may also pass by sale. (Macpherson, Memorials of Service in India,
pp. 62-63.)

246 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

or on behalf of the necessitous, but there is also family or individual
land.1 Such cases are entered under both heads.

The tribal (or gentile) land may be administered by a chief who
allots portions to families or individuals. Perhaps the chief may
be regarded as owner. Perhaps he may be simply administrator.2
In either case when we find him exercising such a function we make
an entry under the heading " Ownership by chief." Then if there
is clear evidence that the land is really held to belong to the tribe
we have an entry under that head as well. If there is no such
evidence the entry stands under " Chief " alone, and it may be
presumed that his control is at least so far the dominating fact that
it is the only thing that has impressed our reporter.

Again, land may belong to a special class, who will then be of
the nature of a privileged nobility, the rest of the community being
slaves, serfs, vassals, or at best labourers or tenants. We enter
these cases of ownership under ** Nobles." 3

1. Among the Hill Dyaks most of the land is tribal, but there are some
private plots near the houses (Ling Roth, Natives of Sarawak, vol. i, p.
419). Among the Navahos family ownership seems to have arisen with
the transition to pasture and agriculture. The water is still theoretically
common property, but through the family ownership in land public access
to watering places passes away (Mindeleff, Smiths. Rep., 1895-6, Pt. II,
p. 485).

Among the Waschambala (Steinmetz, p. 262) all uncultivated land was
common property but cultivated land had its owner. The most obscure
cases of the mingling of private and public ownership are in Australia.

2. Among the Bushongo (Annales, Series III, Tome II, p. 90) land
belongs to the chief as representative of the tribe and cannot be sold. A
stranger may take land by general consent. Among the Warega (Delhaise,
p. 303) land belongs to the inhabitants of a village in common represented
by their chief. Among the Bahuana (Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 36, p. 284)
land belongs nominally to the chief but really to the community. On the
other hand among the Somal (Paulitschke, ii, p. 44) land belongs to the

Sultan and nobles who give it out in fee to the tribes, and among the
Ondonga (Steinmetz, p. 343) land belongs to the chief; pastures and woods
are common and hunting is free. Among the Thlinkeets, according to
Boaz, the gentile property was vested in the chief. Among the Tolowa
each chief inherits a portion of the coast on behalf of his band (Powers,
pp. 65-6). The Singpho (Wehrli, I.A.E., 16, p. 34) land belongs nominally
to the chief but really to the community, and under the community to the
households. Among the Ainu the chiefs are said to have seen to the sub-
division of the land (Batchelor, p. 187). Among the Passumahians the land
is said to be owned .by the chief, but as his power is described as merely
nominal this must be mainly theoretical (Junghuhn, vol. ii, p. 307). The
chief, however, may control cultivation. Among the Warundi land belongs,
to the king and under him to the chiefs, to whom any one who wishes to
cultivate must apply (Burgt, p. 469). Similarly among the Bageshu it is
stated that to work the land the permission of the chief is necessary
(Roscoe, J.A.I., 39, p. 193).

3. Among the Thlinkeets Swanton speaks of clans that had no land,
having to resort to what was common or to wait till the owners of other
land were done with it (Smiths. Rep., xxvi, p. 425). Among the Maguin-

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 247

Lastly, it may or may not be possible to lease or let land at a
money or labour rent. We have noted carefully and entered the
few cases in which this custom is reported.

The results may be summarised as follows: —

No Prop. Tribal Gentile Family Indiv. Chief Nobles Leased

L.H.
N.A

S.A.
Asia
Africa

3* -

i
i

i

•

Australia . .

i 6

9i

7i

3-V - -

—

H.H.

N A

4* 6

I qi

H|

12

7i
2i

4i - -

I 4. ^

2

S.A

J2

2

2

T^ O

Asia . . .

I

I

Africa

Oceania ...

— — :

T

Dept. H. ...
A.1

N.A

I I0j

T

A.

H
I

3l

1

233
T

2

S.A
Asia

•f

2
I

O

I
I

2
IT £ —

Africa

1

1 2 2

Oceania . . .

*

T

i

P.1

N A

o 9i

3
j

5
j

5^ 1 o

i

S A

i

Asia
Africa

7i

i

i
j

2 I

02

A.2

N.A

o 3*
— c

3
i

3
it

4 i

1-1 —

S.A

I 24

o
6

02
I

1 2
I

Asia

el

it

12 's

2

Africa

^2

5 1

02
2

2

o
IO ^

I

Oceania ...

*J 1

4 7

7

8}

ii 6 4

I

10 28

«i

16

35i 12 4

4

danaos (Ausland, 1891, p. 889) we find a kind of a feudal system, the sub-
jects having to pay a tax in natura as well as to cut and fetch wood for
the Dattos. Among the Igorots there were a few families in each village
to whom the land belonged, the rest being serf-cultivators (Dr. Pet, 1882,
p. 41). Among the Tscherkesses land was owned by nobles and their vassals
the tillers paying duties in cattle (Bodenstedt, p. 104).

248 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

No Prop. Tribal Gentile Family Indiv. Chief Nobles Leased

Asia

Africa

1

2

3

2

5

i
1 i

4

—

i

5

5

ii i

4

— .

A.3

N.A — ij I i 2 — — ~

S.A i

Asia 6 2 5 4 5j 4 3

Africa 16 6 6 20 27 i 4

Oceania . . .

o 23^ 10 12 26 32^ 5 7

A feature which strikes the reader on the surface of these tables
is that among the Lower Hunters the only group supplying
instances of family or individual property in any number is the
Australian. Outside Australia we have, in fact, only one case of
individual, and none of family, property. On the other hand, in
Australia we have 12 cases under one head or the other. This is a
much larger number than we have for the Higher Hunters as a
whole, and more — though not in proportion to the size of the group
— than the number under Agriculture1. Moreover, apart from
the Lower Hunters, the number of instances of family and indivi-
dual property mount continuously from the Higher Hunters to
Agriculture3, falling off only in the Higher Pastoral stage. The
case of the Australians, therefore, presents an exception to what
otherwise would seem to be a fairly continuous tendency. We
have then to ask what really is the case with regard to tenure of
land in Australia. Unfortunately, no clear answer can be given.
The facts in many cases are involved in great obscurity. Among
the Central Australians the collective ownership of land by the local
group is made quite clear by Spencer and Gillen ; but in several
parts of Australia ownership by individuals or families is asserted.
The question, however, is what this ownership amounts to. J.
Browne (Dr. Petermann's Mittheilungen, 1856, p. 448) says of
the King George's Sound tribes that land was possessed by families
and individuals, but that it was difficult to say in what private
property consisted as the whole tribe could hunt over its area,
whereas a non-tribesman would not be allowed to trespass. The
only clear prerogative which he seemed able to attach to the owner
was that of taking the lead in this resistance.

A curious case is that of the Yuin, among whom the child
inherited the country in which he was born, and moreover endowed
his father with it at the same time if the birth happened to take
place away from the father's own locality.1 So also the head-man
of the Theddora said that the country in which he was born was
his, and would be just the same for anyone who was born there ;
while a similar remark is attributed to an old man of the Wplgal
tribe.2 In these cases there can be no such thing as real individual

1. Howitt, p. 83.

2. Ibid.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 249

ownership, because an indefinite number of people may be born in
any given locality, the habits of the people being nomadic and
visiting being frequent. But if we ask why a man should have a
certain right to the district in which he was born, perhaps we may
find the explanation in the belief, prevalent among the Central
Australians, that the child is the incarnation of an ancestral spirit
residing on the spot. It seems very probable that some modifica-
tion of this theory is at the back of the element of individual
ownership of land in Australia, and that this sacral conception of
ownership was blended in practice with possession by the local
group.

The Australian figures, therefore, are subject to this doubt, and
we have further to consider the frequency of the custom of sharing
the kill, which also points sometimes to family, sometimes to group
communism. We may therefore suspect that the exceptional
position of the Australians is more apparent than real.

In order to interpret these tables we have followed the method
of grouping different cases in such a way as to exhibit the prepon-
derance at various stages of the communal or the individual
principle, or, again, the power of the chief or the nobility. We
first make nine groups as follows :—

Group I. — Under this group we bring cases of " No property,"
tribal and gentile. All these are varieties of the communal prin-
ciple, and along with them we take cases of customary distribution
where they extend beyond the family.

Group II. — Tribal and gentile combined with chief; that is to
say, where we have property entered not only under the heading
tribal or gentile but also as belonging to the chief, whether it be
that the chief owns a part of the land or, as is somewhat more
frequent, is something between the administrator and the owner of
the gentile or tribal land as the case may be.

Group III. — No property, tribal property, and gentile property,
with or without the assignment of any special rights to the chief,
but combined with family or individual occupation only, as distinct
from family or individual ownership. This is a very common
combination. We include in this group cases where customary
distributions are asserted, taking them as evidence of tribal or
gentile property as the case may be.

Group IV. — No property, tribal or gentile, combined with
family or individual ownership as distinct from occupation.

Group V' — Family property only.
Group VI. — Individual property only.

Group VII. — Property attributed to chief only, or with
occupation by individuals or families.

Group VIII. — Property attributed to the chief, with family or
individual ownership.

250 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Group IX. — Property belonging to the nobility.
PROPERTY IN GROUPS.

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX.

L.H.

N.A.

— — — — — — — .

— —

S.A.

j — — — — — .

— —

Asia

4* i

— —

Africa

— —

Australia

'9i — — 5 3i 2\ —

— —

Total

27 6 3^ 2\

— —

H.H.

N.A.

22\ 3 I 2\ I

2

S.A.

— —

Asia

T ^^__ J

— —

Africa

Oceania

I

— • —

Total

26\ 3 I 2\ I I I

O 2

Dep. H.

I I

A.1

N.A.

3 *

S.A.

si iii

Asia

I \ II

Oceania

I

Total

6J 4321

P.1

N.A.

1 ~n ~n

S.A.

I — — — — —

Asia

j i ji

Africa

3i ~ - ~ 1 i -

Total

6| ij 2j

A.2

N.A.

4 2 i

S.A.

g\ i i

Asia

2 ij 6 4 |

I

Africa

3 9i 12

—

Oceania

3 i 3 7 ij 2-i —

2 3

Total

21^ I l6J 15 2^ 7^ 2^

3 3

P.2

Asia

5 i

— —

Africa

"2 1 3^

— —

Total 5 i i i 3i

»

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 251

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX.
A.3

N.A. 3 i

S.A. i

Asia 2 6 i 3* 4

Africa i^ 4 8 5* i 3 11 2 2

Oceania i

Total 5^ 4 8 14* 2 4 14* 2 6

We then re-group these groups. We take the first three as cases
in which the communal principle predominates; the fourth as the
typical inter-mixed system ; the fifth and sixth as the predominance
of family and individual property ; the seventh and eighth as the
predominance of the chief; the ninth that of the nobility. Calling
these groups A, B, C, D, and E, we get the following table,
showing : —

(1) The numbers at each stage.

(2) The percentage which that number constitutes of all the
peoples at that stage, of whose property customs we have infor-
mation.

L.H.

H.H,

Dep.

A.1

P.1

A.2

P.2

A.3

munal Intermixed

Private 'Chief Nobles

A

B

C

D

E

Total

27i ...

6 ...

6

O ...

O

... 39

2j ...

2

I

2

-. 38

2 ...

—

2

lo* ...

3 ...

3

—

i6|

6\ ...

4

... — ...

I

... iii

39 ...

15 ...

10

5i *-•

3

... 72|

6J ...

—

i

3i ...

i7i •••

i4i •

6

... ,61 ...

6

... 6o|

138* ... 40 ... 32* ... 26J ... 12 ... 248^

As FRACTION OF TOTAL.

A. B. C. D. E.

L.H. .69 ... .15 ... .15 ... .o ... .o

H.H. .80 ... .06 ... .05 ... .03 ... .05

A.1 .64 ... .18 ... .18 ... .o ... .o

P.1 .57 ... .o ... .35 ... .o ... .09

• 54 ... .21 ... .13 ... .08 ... .04

P.2 .62 ... .o .05 ... .33 ... .o

A.3 .29 ... .24 ... .10 ... .27 ... .10

Column B leans to the private side, since the principle is

certainly recognised and may in many cases predominate. In the

accompanying graph we snow the effect of combining it with
Column C, while D and E are also combined.

252 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

LH HH Ai Pi A2 P2 A3

100

In considering these curves the first point to be borne in mind
is the caution given above as to the value of the figures for private
and family property in Australia, and this would lead us to suspect
that the communal principle is somewhat more fully developed
among the Lower Hunters than our percentage shows, and if that
is so the general trend would be more continuous than appears
from our diagram.

Next we should read in conjunction with the diagram the
numbers of cases in which land is either leased or let. There are
two such instances among the Higher Hunters, but otherwise there
are none, except one case in A.1, until we come to A.2, where there
are four, while in A.3 there are seven. The two cases among the
Higher Hunters come from the specially differentiated group of
fisher peoples on the Pacific coast, which also supply us with the
cases in which land is held by nobles at this grade. But for these
exceptions, and for one case of the ownership of land by nobles
in the Lower Pastoral grade, we find no cases either of differen-
tiation in landed property as between classes, or of the correlative
system of leasing, until we get to the two Higher Agricultural
stages. Economic differentiation, in fact, only begins to set in at
about the second grade of Agriculture — at least it is only here that
it shows itself in land ownership. Among the Pastoral peoples
the wealth is in flocks and herds, and the ownership of land is
a matter of less importance.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 253

It will be seen that the communal principle loses ground rapidly
in the Agricultural stages, but not so much in the Pastoral, where
it remains but little below the level of A.1 The communal prin-
ciple, however, does not lose to the purely individual, which is
nearly stationary apart from a heavy drop among the Higher
Hunters and the Higher Pastoral. The gainers are the " chief >1
and the " nobles," who rise from almost the zero point in the three
lowest stages to over 30 per cent, in the two highest, and it is this
gain which checks the advance in the individual principle, for what
this principle gains from the communal it loses to the signorial.

This change, indicating as it does, the growing importance of
social differentiation, is accentuated by the increase in the cases in
which land is in some sense let or rented in the higher stages.
At the same time it is probable that private property, whether of
the individual or of the family, is also really extending. If we look
back at the earlier tables we find that in Agriculture l the cases
of family and individual ownership together are 10^ as against \2\
tribal and gentile together. In Agriculture 2 there are 51^ as
against 59^, and in Agriculture 3 there are 38 as against 33^. These
figures show an increase in the individual principle as Agriculture
advances, but the advance in the position of the chief is even more
marked — only one doubtful case of ownership by the chief is given
under A.1, 12 are tabled under A.2, and 32^ under A.3 Now \
these cases of ownership by the chief and individual or family \
overlap, two principles being combined as explained above, and
it is this combination which explains the sharp rise in the Highest
Agriculture of the cases of ownership by the chief. We may
express the whole tendency best by saying that communal principle
predominates in the lower stages of culture and retains a small
preponderance among the Pastoral peoples,1 and that private
ownership tends to increase in the higher Agricultural stages, but
partly in association with the communal principle, partly qualified
by dependence on the chief, or, in some instances, by something
of the nature of a feudal tenure. We seem in fact to get something
of that ambiguity as between signorial and popular ownership that
we find at the beginning of our own history. Over and over again,
at the stage in which barbarism is beginning to pass into civilisa-
tion, the communal, the individual and signorial principles are
found interwoven, and our figures simply reflect the proportions of
cases in which, as a whole, one of these principles tends to outweigh
the others. Judged by our figures, the communal and the signorial
tendencies are still fairly balanced, and it seems to be the next step
upwards in civilisation which gives its preponderance to the power
of the lord.

CONCLUSION.

The degree of correlation between social institutions and
economic development, so far as can be judged from this experi-
mental tabulation of the data, varies very greatly from case to case.

i. We cannot lay stress on the high fraction for family and jndividual
ownership in PI which depends on four cases only.

254 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Upon the whole the variations accord with general probability,
for the economic development may be taken as a rough index of
the amount of intellect and organising power available for the
. shaping of the life of a society. Accordingly, we are prepared to
find that in the points indicative of social organisation there is a
certain correspondence with the economic advance. This we have
found in the development of government and of justice alike, in
the fact that as we mount the scale there is more of government
and more of the public administration of justice within society,
and in the fact that the unit for government and justice extends.
Both intensively and extensively there is a growth of order

r corresponding roughly to the industrial advance.

On the other hand economic development has no necessary
connection with improvement in the relations between members

^ of a society. It does not imply greater considerateness or a keener
sense of justice, and may in some ways be held even adverse to
them. Thus in relation to marriage and the position of women,
we find little change throughout the grades, and of those which
we do find the most marked are specifically connected with the
economic factor, viz., the extension of purchase and of general
polygamy. Apart from these we note an apparent tendency to a
consolidation of the family under the paternal system, which it
is perhaps not fanciful to compare with the growing organisation
of society. This tendency is especially marked in the Pastoral
peoples, but is there accompanied by a lowering in the status of
the woman, which again we may associate with her lower economic
value as compared with the Hunting and Agricultural stages. In
the main, however, the result of this part of pur work is to show
stability rather than^progress or deterioration/ For, though there
are remarkable minor variations in certain culture areas, if we
take great regional divisions or entire grades of culture the tendency
to uniformity of level is more striking than the departures from it.
The only serious exception is the case of Australia, which in so
many respects stands by itself.

/s Economic causes again are associated with the development of
organised warfare and the substitution of the enslavement of
prisoners for their slaughter, liberation, or adoption. With the
decline of infanticide, the better security for food, and the
extension of order, we may infer a growing population, in some
cases a desire for territorial extension, in others a demand for slave
labour. The mere extension of regular industry makes for social
differentiation, since the effects of energy and thrift become cumu-
lative. Hence we have the partial rise of a nobility and the more
extensive development of a servile or semi-servile class. Hence,
also, the communal tenure of land gives way, and while in some
cases it blends with individual occupation or ownership, in others
it passes more or less effectively into the hands of a chief or a
nobility. On all sides social and economic differentiation replace
the comparative equality of the hunting peoples. The extension
of order is also, upon the whole, an extension of subordination.

APPENDIX I.

C2

LOWEK HUNTERS.

No landed
property

Land tribal Land gentile Land family

Lam
individ

c^wan Kiver

r

r

Murray R.

+

N.S. Wales -

+

W. Victoria

+

Kurnai

+

Gournditch Mara

+

Some W. Australia -

+

Narrinjeri

Queensland

+

N. Queensland -

+

+

Euahlayi -

Yuin

+

Mycoolon

+

Dieri

+

+

Powell's Creek -

+

Port Darwin

+

+

Ngarigo -

Yerkla Mining -

Narranga

Karamundi

Wolgal -

Wiradjuri

Wotjobaluk

Mukjarawint

Wu run jerri

256

Land
ongs to
chief

Land

belongs to
nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Males only

Customary

Goods Private distribution

destroyed property of

at death regarded acquisitions

R

R

R

R

R

R

257

No landed
property

Land tribal Land gentile

Land
Land family individu

Kulin

+

Gringai -

Chepara -

Central Australians -

+

N.C. Australians

+

Kabbi and Waaka -

+

Herbert River -

?

Geawegal

Maryborough -

+

Watchandee

Newcastle

+

King George's Sound

+

+

N.W. Australians -

+

Kubu

+

Semang -

+

Sakai

+

Andamans

?

Punan

Veddas

+

+

Botocudos

+

Fuegans -

Occ.

Wintun -

Lower Californians -.

Batua

Lulongo Batua -

J

258

Land

belongs to

chief

Land

belongs to

nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Goods
destroyed
Males only at death

Customary

Private distribution
property of

regarded acquisitions

c.

Some

259

Bushmen

No landed
property

Land tribal Land gentile

Land
Land family individi

IIGHER HUNTERS.

Abipones

+

Guaycuru

Mura

N. Chaco -

+

Tehuelches

Kauralaig

+

Point Barrow Eskimo

Behring Str. Eskimo

+

Central Eskimo

+

Greenland Eskimo -

+

Chepewayans -

+

Loucheux

Chilcotin -

Carriers -

Tsekhene

+

Thlinkeet

+

+

+

Lilooet

+

+

E.S. Shushwap

+

W. Shushwap -

Some

Lkungen -

+

Coast Salish

+

Kootenay

+

Kwakiutl -

+

260

Land Land Land

belongs to belongs to leased or

chief nobles lent

Bequest

Males only

Goods
destroyed
at death

Private

property
regarded

Customary
distribution

of
acquisitions

26l

No landed
property Land tribal Land gentile Land family individua

INOOlKa

+

(4) Tolowa

+

(9) Hupa

Yuki

Tatu

Jt. House

•

(7) Tsimshian

-

+

Petawet -

Omaha

+

Occ.

Crees

Blackfeet

Thompson River

+

Apache

Seri -

Luisenos -

+

?

Micmacs -

Etechemins

Montagnais

Comanche

+

Haida

+

Nicobarese

+

Ghiliaks -

Koryaks -

+

EPENDENT HUNTERS.

Korwa

+

Occ.

Bhuiyar -

262

Land Land Land

belongs to belongs to leased or

chief nobles lent

Bequest Males only

Customary

Goods Private distribution

destroyed property of

at death regarded acquisitions

263

No landed

Land
individui

(36) Bataks of Palawan -

+

AGRICULTUKE INCIPIENT.

Negritos of Zambales

+

Jakun

Perak Semang -

Village

Central Sakai -

+

Ainu

?

Occ

Karayaki

+

(13) Roucoyennes -

+

+

Yuracares

Charantes

(22) Matacco -

+

(12) British Guiana -

?

Oc

Shingu

+

Mbaevera

House

Yamandi -

+

Ipurina

House

Lengua

Ojibway -

+

+

Dakota

+

Occ.

Iroquois -

+

Occ.

Delaware

+

Occ.

W. Torres Straits -

Some

+

PASTORAL.

Tobas

Jt. House

Navaho

Formerly

Now

Now

264

Land

belongs to

chief

Land

belongs to

nobles

Land

leased or
lent

Bequest

Males only

Customary

Goods Private distribution

destroyed property of

at death regarded acquisitions

Some

No landed Land

property Land tribal Land gentile Land family individui

wvaaerero

Batauana

+

Dinka

?

Beni Amer

+

Khoi Khoin

+

Wambugu

+

+

25) Samoyedes

+

+

Aeneze

49) Shasewenses

45) Kurds of Eriwan

+

Todas

+

.GRICULTURE.

Campas -

+

Occ

Tapuya

Jivaro

Jt. House

1 6) Uaupes -

+

Apiaca

+

15) Guarayos -

+

Chiquito -

Senci

+

26) Bororo

? +

Chiriguano

+

Gagua

Jt. House

1 8) Galibi

+

Sambioa -

+
1

266

Land
longs to
chief

Land

belongs to

nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Goods
destroyed
Males only at death

Customary

Private distribution
property of

regarded acquisitions

- Sbm

267

Wyandot

No landed
property

Land tribal Land gentile Land family

Occ. Occ.

Land
individu

'

V-' v> *

Natchaz -

-f

Seminole -

Occ.

Creeks -

+

+

+11

Woolwa -

Village

Winnibego

Jt. House

Tarahumare

+

? Occ.

? Occ

Huicols

+

S. Melanesia -

Bush

Some

Somn

Florida -

Bush

+

Occ.

Sorm

Saa -

Bush

Koita

Bush

+

Occ.

Waga Waga -

Bush

+

Louisiades

+

New Hebrides -

New Caledonia -

+

Gazelle Peninsula -

rlunting

+

Fishii

Mowat

Occ.

Bogadjim

4-

Gardens

Mafulu

Hunting

Houseland

Occ.

Jabim

Village

-

Motu

+

Marshall Islands

+

+

Peleu Islands -

Gilbert Islands

268

Land
ongs to
chief

Land

belongs to

nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Males only

Goods
destroyed
at death

Private
property
regarded

Customary
distribution

of
acquisitions

Some

Some

Land

Some

Some

Theft
disregarded

269

No landed Land

property Land tribal Land gentile Land family individua

E. Torres St. -

Maoris

Rotuma

Savage Islands -

Kei -

(30) Kandhs -

Dhimals -

Nicobarese

Land Dyaks

Sea Dyaks

Limbus

Karinthes

(4i)Tagals

Mountain Tagals

Mentawez

Bontoc
(55 )Engano
(58) Flores

270

Land

selongs to

chief

Land

belongs to
nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Males only

Goods
destroyed
at death

Private
property
regarded

Customary
distribution

of
acquisitions

King

Feudal

ng

ng

Feudal

lome

D2

371

No landed
property Land tribal Land gentile

Land

Land family individua

Badjus

+

+

Kiangans

-h

Pani Kocch

Lepchas -

29) Oraons

Some

Some

Some'

Nagas

+

59) Khonds -

+

Occ.

Kami

36) Bangala -

+

Occ.

Occ.

Occ.

Bali

+

Occ.

Azande

+

Occ.

Wawira -

12) Barea and Kunama -

+

>7) Mandja -

+

>8) Baquiri

+

Occ.

Occ.

Banaka and Bapuku

+

Occ.

Mayombe

+

Mangbetu

+

Wambugwe

+

Occ.

Bageshu -

Warega -

+

Occ.

Wafiomi -

+

Occ.

>9) Bondei

+

+

Basoga

Wadoc

+

Occ.

273

Land

belongs to
chief

Land

belongs to
nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Males only

Customary

Goods Private distribution

destroyed property of

at death regarded acquisitions

Some

273

PASTORAL

No landed
property Land tribal Land gentile Land family individi

.6) Kara Kalpaks -

+

Midhi

ft. House

Larbas

+

Mishmees -

Jt. House

i ) Yakuts

+

Occ.

2) Kazak Kirghiz -

+

+

Later

Altaian Kalmucks -

Somal

Occ.

Danakil -

Occ.

Bahima -

9

Bogos

Gallas

Occ.

^3) Baquerewe

9

3RICULTURE +

Bushongo

+

Basonge -

+

Village

+

Ababua

+

)3) Bambala -

Yao -

+

Occ.

Basonge Meno -

Village

Occ.

Wapokomo

+

Waniamwesi

Occ.

Bamsalala

55)Wagogo -

Occ.

Baganda -

274

Land

belongs to
chief

Land

belongs to

nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest

Males only

Customary

Goods Private distribution

destroyed property of

at death regarded acquisitions

Feudal

275

No landed
property Land tribal Land gentile Land family

Land
individual

54; oaronga -

ucc.

Dahomi -

Ewe (other tribes)

+

Tshi

+

Occ.

>2) Yoruba

+

Occ.

Geges and Nagos -

Diakite -

Warundi -

Fiote

Occ.

Benin

Nossi be" -

Amahlubi

Ondonga -

+

Bukoba

+

+

Basutos -

+

+

Occ.

74) Alur

+

Takue

+

77) Nandi

+

Aldai N.

Aldai N

Akamba -

+

+

76) Kuku

Occ.

75) Washambala -

+

Occ.

Wakikuyu

+

+

Wapare -

+

Bahuana -

+

Wadshagga

+

Occ.

276

Land Land Land

belongs to belongs to leased or

chief nobles lent

Bequest

Males only

Customary

Goods Private distribution

destroyed property of

at death regarded acquisitions

King

Landowner

277

No landed
property

Land tribal

Land
Land gentile Land family individual

Fanti

Occ.

Warangi -

5i) Bayaka

+

Sese Islanders -

Anyanza -

+

Occ.

Suaheli

Wadigo -

+

Chevas -

Kilwa

+

+

35) Karo Bataks -

Occ.

Kayans -

+

-f

Kayans of Mahakam

+

+

Kayams of Mindalam

+

+

Singphos

+

+

Padam Abor -

Tempora

Hos

Dusun

+

Manguinandaos

Singkel

Nias

+

56) Passumahians -

Alf tires

Daians

Jt. House

Javans of Palembang

Javans of Gorontalo -

278

Land
longs to
chief

Land

belongs to
nobles

Land

leased'or

lent

Bequest Males only

Goods
destroyed
at death

Private
property
regarded

Customary
distribution

of
acquisitions

Vassal tribe

279

No landed
property

Land tribal Land gentile

Land
Land family individua

Kharrias -

Garos -

Timorese

[43) Igorottes -

53)Adighe - - -

Osettes -

+

+

Kenyah -

+

+

Battas

19) Araucanians

+

Pima

Zuni -

+ii

Taos

Some

Inalienal

Apalachites

+

Some

Guatemala

+

+

•

280

to

Land

belongs to
nobles

Land

leased or

lent

Bequest Males only

Goods
destroyed
at death

Private
property
regarded

Customary

distribution

of

acquisitions

281

APPENDIX II.

NOTES TO TABLES, CHAPTER IV.

1. Klamaths of S.W. Oregon : — Took women and children in raids, but
largely it would seem to sell (Gatschet, p. 59). Or they might be taken to
their homes. But we may take it as probable that there would be a certain
number in a servile position. These people include the Modoc of Powers Js
Calif ornians.

2. Shoshones : — Prisoners, especially women, are said to be tortured,
though distinguished warriors are sometimes let go. Women and children
are sometimes carried ofi from neighbouring tribes, and as they may be
sold again or kept, this is entered as a case of the enslavement of women
captives, though not as a case of the regular holding of slaves. (Bancroft,
pp. 433-6.)

3. Tolowa : — These bands are said to raid the Yurok and carry ofi
women and children for ransom.

4. Each chief inherits a poition of the coast on behalf of his band. It is
owned in common, and ownership is tabled both under gentile (i.e., band)
and chief. (Powers, pp. 65, 66).

5. Porno : — Said to be a powerful people who pay the Tatu to bring
them Yuki scalps (Powers, p. 139), but they also kill women in war since
one woman equals five men, so apparently they sometimes fight on their
own account. (Powers, p. 160.)

6. Nishinan : — Male captives were tortured, females sometimes whipped
and then married, sometimes slain (Powers, p. 321). The boundaries of
tribal land said to be defined, but no statement as to ownership within it.
(Powers, p. 320.)

7. Tsimshian : — According to Boaz the gentile land was vested in the
chief and the clan retained the right to it even if 'it moved away, though
he does not say whether anything of the nature of rent could be obtained
for it. He attributes the same system to the Thlinkeet and the Haida.
(B.A., 1889, pp. 832-4.)

8. Aleuts : — They own very little personal property and think it right
to help themselves to what they seriously need. But there is no great
theft, so that things are left unprotected. (Weniaminow, Beitrdge zur
kenntniss des russischen Reiches, vol. i, p. 18.)

9. Hupa : — The chiefs had certain lands, and fed the people in case of
scarcity. It seems implied that the land generally was tribal. (Goddard,
Univ. California Publications, i.)

10. The Pawnees : — One tribe, the Skide, appear to have kept women
captives, as it was a custom to sacrifice one for the benefit of the crops.
None of the other tribes did this. (Farrand, Basis of American History,
p. 143.) (Not entered under Slavery.)

11. Karayaki and Sambioa : — We have no clear reference to slavery as
such, and probably there were no male slaves, but Papago women and
even children were kept in semi-slavery and as prostitutes, at least by the
Sambioa. Adopted prisoners are incidentally mentioned and it is said
that one might become a chief. (Ehrenreich, pp. 28, 29.)

282

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 283

12. British Guiana : System of cultivation is that a clearing is formed,

then a few crops are taken and the field then deserted. In case of failure
the family locate themselves in some other settlement, a system of mutual
support which implies a village communism. (Im Thurm, pp. 250-4.)

Marriage with women captives seems to have occurred in former times
so that in this sense some prisoners may be said to have been adopted. Von
Martius states that the Arawaks (p. 186), who are one of the British Guiana
tribes, held slaves, (von Martius, p. 693.)

13. Roucoyennes : — The man who starts a clearing may have sons-in-
law lovers of his wife or others living with him and working for him in a
dependent position which does not amount to slavery. (Coudreau, Chez
nos Indiens, p. 259.)

15. Guarayos : — Apparently the land must be in some way common to
the kindred as according to D'Orbigny relatives and friends work in
common. (D'Orbigny, vol. iii, p. 25.)

16. Uaupas : — Von Martius states that only one tribe is now cannibal
and they are therefore not entered (p. 600). The house contains numerous
inhabitants, sometimes a whole community (p. 597).

17. Manaos : — According to von Martius, pp. 577-8, they were formerly
warlike and man-hunters so that the Entrodas de resgate (" rescue expedi-
tion ") could often take over a hundred prisoners from them. Presumably
the object was cannibalism and possibly slavery.

18. G alibis : — Lived in joint houses up to 100 members and cultivated
land in common, (von Martius, p. 736.)

19. Araucanians : — All agriculture and other work was formerly for the
benefit of the clan, and property in general seems to have been largely in
common. (Latchan, J.A.I., 39, p. 344.)

20. Tobas : — Prisoners are made and given to the women. What is
finally done with them is not stated, and there is no mention of slaves.
(A. Thouar, p. 64.)

21. Charrua : — According to Heusser and Claraz (Z. All. Erdk., x.)
they generally treated their prisoners humanely, while according to Azara
(vol. ii, p. 19) they killed the men and adopted the women and younger
children. (See apud D'Orbigny, L'hornme Americain, ii, p. 89.)

22. Matacos : — Women captives generally killed as well as men —
children adopted (p. 79). The harvest was reaped in common (p. 118).
(Pelleschi.)

23. Chiquitos : — Made slaves in war but gave them wives, sometimes
their own daughters, which may be regarded as a form of adoption.
(D'Orbigny, L'homme Americain, ii, p. 166.)

25. Guaycurus : — The Mbyas, who are sometimes identified with them
(perhaps a name for certain tribes), practise infanticide, and Castelnau
speaks of infanticide as general. (Castelnau, Amerique de Sud, vol. ii,
p. 480.)

26. Bororo : — According to Fric and Rodin,' J.A.I., 36, p. 388, this is a
highly centralised tribe. The chief directs every man's work day by day.
It may be inferred that landed property is common for the tribe.

284 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

27. Some Chepewayans : — Ross's account of E. Dene, including the
Chepewayans, says they were unwarlike and that he had never seen
weapons used. (U.S. Nat. Museum, Smiths. Rep., 1866, p. 308.) Bancroft's
account of the N. Indians is that warfare was frequent. It is clear that Ban-
croft and Ross are partly dealing with the same peoples, but presumably
these statements would refer to different tribes, Bancroft's to the more
northerly Chepewayans.

28. Kasias : — For some offences the criminal and his family might
become slaves to the Rajah. (Dalton, p. 57.)

29. Oraons : — The Rajah's land is tilled by the Ryots. In some
districts there is common ownership of land with a redistribution as
between the clans. (/. Royal Asiatic Society, 1899, pp. 336-7.) Those who
had not land had formerly to do service to the landholders — now commuted
for low rents. (Dalton, p. 247.)

30. Kandhs : — Women could only share in personal property. (Dalton,
p. 294.)

31. Nagas : — In feuds between clans women were generally unmounted,
but it was otherwise in war. (Dalton, p. 44, and Godden, J.A.I., 27, p. 12.)
The Ao Nagas held slaves who might be sacrificed, while the Luhupas and
probably other tribes had no slaves. (Godden, J.A.I., 26, p. 184.)

32. Lhooshai : — Offenders take sanctuary with the chief and become his
slaves. (Lewin, pp. 251 — 256.) Orphans and destitute people could also
join the chief's household and afterwards buy their freedom. (Shakespear,
J.A.I., xxxix, p. 374.)

34. Red Karens : — Slave-hunters, and also have debt slaves and bought
slaves, but they also have free villagers who pay them blackmail. (Colqu-
houn, Among the Shans, p. 65.)

35. Karo Bataks : — There were joint houses for 4-12 families generally
built at common cost, rarely rented. Builder remains owner while he
lives in the village. On leaving he may sell it. (F. W. K. Mtiller, Batak
Sammlung. Veroff. Mus. fur Volk., 1893, p. i.)

36. Bataks of Palawan : — Several families live in joint houses (Miller,
p. 183). All assist in the harvest, each taking what he reaps to his own
house, which seems to imply common ownership of the land by the settle-
ment, or at least by the kindred. (Venturillo, I.A.E., 18, p. 142.)

37. Samoyedes : — The father administers all the family property, but
even unmarried sons may have their own property (von Stenin, p. 173).
The Samoyedes often fell into a kind of serfdom (Leibeigenschaft) to their
Russian creditors for their own debts or for those of their kin, but the
institution does not appear to be native (p. 187).

38. Bungians : — Three classes are said to be especially respected — the
rich, the old, and famous head-hunters. They occasionally sold their
children to the Christians. P. Malumbres speaks of a i6-year old boy who
was sold for eight buffalos. (Blumentritt, Ausland, 1893, P- 725-)

39. Kiangans : — Nobility not hereditary, but consists of rich people
and famous head-hunters. (Blumentritt, Ausland, 1891, p. 119.) Orphans
of a man who was ill for a long time which involved costly sacrifices were
sold as slaves, but it seems that this was the case only when there was no
chance of repayment (p. 132).

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 285

40. Maguindanaos : — At the beginning of the seventeenth century the
Maguindanaos had a single Sultan. The system was feudal. There were

three classes : (i) Katschil princes of the Sultan's family; (2) Prankaya,

or high nobles ; and (3) Tuans or nobles.

Now the regents of the "Lehenstatten" are called Dattos and are partly
independent. Some Dattos have more vassals than the Sultans, and some
Dattos and Sultans have under them other Dattos who pay them tribute.
The Sakopes, or direct subjects, have to pay a tax in natura and also to
cut down and fetch wood for the Dattos. (Blumentritt, Ausland, 1891, p.
889.) Slavery was the basis of the social order, and slaves consisted of
war prisoners, children, criminals and debtors.

41. Tagals : — Live in small groups of 100 — 130 huts under a chief. This
was called Barangay, originally probably a family of children, servants
and relations. Land was divided among individual members of a Barangay.
No man from another Barangay could cultivate unless he bought or
inherited land.

In the Tinguas or Mountain settlements the land was divided not
among individuals but among the Barangays. In other places a tax of
100 Guntas rice had to be paid to the Dattos. In some places the chiefs
had fishing places and markets where no one except a member of the
Barangay could fish or trade unless he paid duty. (Blumentritt, Z.E., 25,
pp. 10-11.)

42. Manobos : — Constant feuds with other tribes and among themselves,
Avoid open battles but make sudden raids in order to kill or sell as slaves.

There are three kinds of Baganis, or titled people, who wear special
clothes: (i) Persons who killed 7 people; (2) 14 people; (3) 21 people.
(Blumentritt, Z. der Ges. fur Erdkunde, Bd. 19, p. 293.)

43. Igorots : — In the small village states there are as a rule 4-6 Magnatic
families (Bacuans) to whom belongs all the land. The other inhabitants
are really serfs of these nobles whose fields they have to cultivate and
whose work they have to do, receiving food as payment. (Blumentritt,
Dr. Pet., 1882, p. 31.) At the beginning of the nineteenth century children
were sold to the Christians (p. 28).

44. Negritos of Zambales : — Slavery is said to exist but this is doubtful
and denied by many authors. (Reed, p. 63.)

45. Kurds of Eriwan : — All the property of the family belongs to the
father except the use of the cattle which the wife brought with her as
dowry. The sons have personal property in their horses and weapons,
(von Stenin, p. 223.)

46. Kara Kalpacks : — Arable land is divided among the clans and the
stranger must buy land. Only the homeless (Biwatan) are allowed tem-
porary cultivation. (Vambery, Das Turkenvolk, p. 379.)

47. Aeneze : — Property consists almost wholly in horses and cattle.
From proceeds wheat and barley are bought. (Burchardt, p. 39.)

Black slaves are common among the Arabs (p. 103).

48. Larbas : — " Slaves." It is stated that the name slaves for servants
bought by the nomads is inappropriate; they are rather " domestics," and
are never sold again. (Geoffroy, Ouvriers des deux Mondes, 1887, p. 428.)

49. Schahsewenzes : — There are two classes : (i) Bek and their children,
who are privileged, do no work, pay no taxes, and are owners of every-

286 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

thing; (2) Chunpa — workers — look after the cattle, do all the work and
pay taxes. (Radde, p. 425.) They are said to have no real sense of pro-
perty. Theft is regarded as sign of cleverness, 'but in this respect there
are differences in various tribes (p. 422).

50. Suanes : — In cases of dearth boys and girls are sold as slaves for
the benefit of the community. It is not stated to whom, and whether they
themselves keep slaves. (Bodenstedt, p. 74.)

They live in patriarchal fashion — in large families so close to one
another that often several families inhabit one " Court " (Gehoft) for
purposes of defence in their constant feuds (p. 72).

51. Yakuts : — Right of private property in the house did not exist, and
even now dwellings are regarded as common. In former times they were
nomadic and had no permanent dwellings. Land belonged to no one.
Herds were the property of the nomadic group, nominally that of the
head. (Sumner, J.A.I., 31, p. 70.)

Land-system. Re-allotments between the Naslegs within the same
Ulu are frequent and between the aga-ussa ( — sib) still more frequent, and
between the allotments of the same aga-ussa almost every year for the
purposes of equalisation. Every aga-ussa has a sworn functionary elected
for this purpose. Each Nasleg has an officer who has oversight over the
deputies. Allotments within the Ulus are made by an assembly of officers
and headman (p. 74).

52. Kasak Kirghiz : — Land was divided, and the tribes and divisions
of tribes would resent intrusion (Radlov, p. 414). For the winter abodes
there would be constant quarrels. Now each family has a certain winter
place (Kystan), hereditary or alienable only by sale in the presence of
witnesses (p. 415).

53. Tsherkesses or Adighe : — The land is owned by nobles and vassals,
the tillers paying duties in cattle. (Bodenstedt, p. 204.)

54: Andamans : — The whole account of property shows that personal
property amounts to very little and is regarded as largely at disposal of the
relatives. It seems a fair inference that there is at any rate no property
in land. (Man, J.A.I., 12, p. 340.)

55. Engano : — Individual ownership can be acquired by prolonged
occupation. (Rosenberg, p. 215.)

56. Passumahians : — The land is said to be owned by the chief, but as
the chief's power is merely nominal probably this is merely theoretical.
(Junghuhn, vol. 2, p. 307.)

57. Kirghiz : — They certainly dealt extensively in slaves and sold their
prisoners to other nations. Whether they kept slaves for permanent
service is not clear (though Nieboer, comparing the statements of
Levschin and Radlov, thinks that they did not), but Hagenmeister states
that they have slaves. In our view people who have slaves constantly
passing through their hands, even though they are ultimately destined for
sale, must be classed as slave-holding people. (Hagenmeister, " Essai sur
les resources territoriales, etc., de 1'Asie Occidentale." Beitrdge zur
Kenntniss des ntssischen Reiches, Bd. I, p. 270.)

58. Flores : — Land is held by the clan under supervision of the chief
owner, but cultivated land passes to the individual. (Riedel, Rev. Coloniale
Internationale, 1886, p. 69.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 287

59. Khonds : — Land apparently belongs to the tribe, but there is no
exclusive right to the waste, and few practical restrictions on occupation
by the individual. Ownership depends on occupation. Nevertheless land
may be sold though it is not rented. We have described this as tribal
ownership with individual occupying ownership. (Macpherson, Memorials
of Service in India, pp. 62-63.)

60. Anyanza : — In case a man has no property to pay " blood-money,'*
he himself, his mother and sisters will go as slaves to the uncle or brother
of the victim. (Stannus, J.A.I., 40, p. 290.)

61. Ba Yaka : — (Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 36.) Hunting grounds are
private property (p. 42). Only adult males can have property. Joint
ownership unknown. Produce belongs to the head of the family (p. 44).

Fifty per cent, of total poulation in slavery — regarded as so many cattle.
Sources : born slaves, debtors, prisoners of war (p. 46).

62. Yoruba : — Land belongs to the community collectively and is vested
in the chief, who distributes it. Usufruct hereditary. Cannot be sold.
Private property in land is beginning to appear. The chief can sell or give
away land.

Houses are family property, but can only be sold by permission of the
king or chief and the whole family. (Ellis, Yoruba, pp. 188-9.)

63. Bambala : — (Torday and Joyce, J.A.I., 35.) Three-quarters of the
population in slavery. Theoretically their owners have power of life and
death, but this is said to be merely nominal (p. 411). A case is given,
however, of a compact against bloodshed, when a slave is eaten (p. 409).

There are hardly any social distinctions, but there is a class of men
called Muri who may not eat human flesh nor fowls, who wear an iron
bracelet called Mwana and a head-covering to which great importance is
attached (p. 409).

Land belongs to the chiefs, or rather the man who owns land becomes
a chief (p. 411).

64. Ba-Ronga : — Land belongs in theory to the chief, but every settler
owns the land in practice by merely declaring himself a subject of the chief.
(Junod, Les Ba-Ronga, pp. 187-8.)

65. Wagogo : — The chief owns the land but he never interferes. No
purchase. Only one who cultivates land can claim it as his own as long
as he cultivates it, and when he dies it passes to the nearest relations.
(Cole, J.A.I., 32, pp. 314 — 325.)

66. Bangala : — (Overbergh and Jonghe, Les Bangala.) There is no
property in land. Each, whether as individual, family, village or tribe,
takes the land he can get and when he leaves it, it is free.

There are certain customary delimitations about rights to chase, but
these give rise to discussions. If any one leaves his place he takes his
house with him (p. 347).

At the death of a husband the wife manages aifairs until the eldest son
is able to do so : if he is indolent this will continue (p. 355).

67. Mandja : — No property in soil. No collective property beyond the
family. (Gaud, Les Mandja, p. 407.)

68. Baquiri : — Land belongs to him who makes it arable. Uncultivated
land belongs to the community. The individual or family have no private

E 2

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

property in land; they have " possessio " but not dominium. (Leuschner
in Steinmetz, pp. 24-5.)

There are no slaves nor classes.

It is stated, however, that at the death of a king a slave is brought from
abroad and killed (p. 21).

69. Bondei : — (Dale, J.A.I., 25.) Uncultivated land is common. Land
belongs to him who cultivates it (p. 230). A " Lord of the Manor" is
referred to (p. 231).

70. Wanyaturu : — Slavery unknown, but children are occasionally sold
through hunger. (Baumann, Massailand, p. 191.)

71. Quissama : — Among those who are cannibals insolvent debtors or
persons accused of crime are at once killed and eaten. Of late the more
enlightened consult the criminals as to what punishment they would
prefer — whether death or to be sold as slaves to the Portuguese. (Price,
J.A.I., i, p. 187.)

72. Barea and Kunama : — Land has its owner — may be sold for a time
or for always. Land may be cultivated by getting permission from the
owner. In the village every one can build where he likes. (Munzinger,
pp. 492-3-)

A woman cannot inherit unless she has no brother (p. 490).

73. Baquerewe : — Slavery exists at present only in isolated cases, but
existed no doubt to a considerable extent in former times (pp. 286-7).

The family-chief is said to administer the common goods (p. 285), but it
is not stated what goods are referred to. (Hurel, Anthropos, 6.)

74. Alur : — The eldest son inherits. He divides the movables among
the sons but the immovables are his exclusively. The mother and
daughters inherit only in the absence of sons and under the supervision of
her brothers. (Stuhlmann, p. 525.)

75. Waschambala : — The chief has the right of " Grund und Boden."
All uncultivated land is common property. Cultivated land has its pos-
sessor. Grass, wood, water, common. Hunting and fishing free. (Stein-
metz, p. 262.)

76. Kuku : — It is difficult to determine the nature of property in land.
It belongs to a single land-proprietor in each clan, but he is bound to keep
all the people who are on the land or who are born there. He can claim
from these a certain amount in kind and also make them work for him.
In practice alienation is almost impossible (p. 333).

Slaves are not of Kuku origin. War prisoners of a strange people are
slaves. They are well treated (p. 367). (Les Kuku, Vanden Plas.)

77. Nandi : — Daughters inherit their mother's animals and household
utensils. Sons and daughters inherit her plantation. On a man's death
his sons inherit his lands and flocks. It is customary for the Nandi to
distribute their stock among their wives during their lifetime. The sons
of each wife inherit the property thus placed in their mother's charge.
The eldest son of the first wife gets the lion's share. (Hollis, pp. 72, 73.)

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 289

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

ABBREVIATIONS.

B.A. British Association Reports.

l.A.E. Internationales Archiv fur Ethnographic.

J.A.I. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and

Ireland.

M.D.S. Mittheilungen aus den deutschen Schutzgebieten.
Pet., Dr. Dr. Petermann's Mittheilungen aus Justus Perthes' Geographis-

cher Anstalt.

R.E. Revue d 'Ethnographic.
SMITHS. REP. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution; after 1881,

Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology.
Z.E. Zeitschrift fur Ethnologic.
Z. Erd. Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Erdkunde.
Z. Ges. Erd. Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fur Erdkunde.
Z.V.R. Zeitschrift fur vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft.

Agostini, J. Revue de traditions populaires, vol. 8.

Albertis, L. M. D'. New Guinea.

Allison, S. S., Mrs. An account of the Similkameen Indians of British
Columbia, J.A.I., 21.

Almeida, S. Sobre os Indies Uarcurus e Guanas, etc., Revista Trimensal,
vol. 7.

Angus, H. C. A year in Azimba, etc. J.A.I., 27.

Annales du Musee du Congo Beige.

Annales de 1 'Extreme Orient.

Atkinson, J. J. Natives of New Caledonia, Folklore, vol. 14.

Azara, F. D. Voyage dans PAmerique Meridionale.

Bancroft, H. H. Native races of the Pacific States.

Bartram, W. Observations on the Creek and Cherokee Indians. Trans-
actions of American Ethnological Society, 1853.

Bates, D. M., Mrs. The West Australian Aborigines. (The West Aus-
tralian, April, 1906.)

Basset Smith, P. W. J.A.I., 33.

Batchelor, J. The Ainu of Japan.

Baumann, O. Durch Massailand zur Nilquelle.

Baumann, O. Usambara.

Baumstarck. Die Warangi. M.D.S., 13.

Beardmore, G. The Natives of Mowat. J.A.I., 19.

Bennett, A. L. Ethnographical Notes on the Fang. J.A.I., 29.

Bent, R. The Yourouks of Asia Minor. J.A.I., 20.

Beveridge, P. The Aborigines of Victoria and Riverina.

Beverley. Die Wagogo (in Steinmetz' " Rechtsverhaltnisse ").

Bibra, E. von. Reise in Siidamerika.

290

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Blumentritt, F. Versuch einer Ethnographic der Philippinen. Dr. Pet

Ergbd., 67

Die Bungianen. Ausland, 1893.
Die Kianganen. Ausland, 1891.
Die Maguindanaos. Ausland, 1891.
Sitten der Alten Tagalen. Z.E., 25.
Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Negritos. Z.G. Erd., 27.
Begleitworte zu meiner Karte der Insel Mindanao. Z.G. Erd., 19.
. Die Calingas. Ausland, 1891.

Die Tinguianes. Translation of D. J. de los Reyes. K. K. Geog.

Ges. Wien, 1887.

Boaz, F. The Tsitsaut. On the Indians of British Columbia. B.A., 1895.
Central Eskimo. Smiths. Rep., 6.
The Chilcotin. B.A., 1898.
Second general report on the Indians of British Columbia :— i, The

Lkungen. ii, The Nootka. iii, The Kwakiutl. iv, The

Shushwap. B.A., 1890.
The Bilquula. B.A., 1891.
The Niska. Fifth report of the Indians of British Columbia. B.A.,

1895-
The Kowitchen. The Indian Tribes of the Lower Frazer River.

B.A., 1894.

Die Tsimschian. Z.E., 20.
The Kwakiutl. Smiths. Rep., 1895.
Bodenstedt, F. M. Die Volker der Kaukasus.
Bonney, F. On some customs of the Aborigines of the River Darling,

N.S. Wales. J.A.I., 13.
Borie. Notice sur les Mantras, Tribu sauvage de la Peninsule Malaise.

Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal Land en Volkerkunde, x.
Brandt, Von. The Aino and Japanese. J.A.I., 3.
Brettes, de. L'Amerique inconnue.
Brinton, D. G. The Lenape and their legends.
Brough Smyth. The Aborigines of Victoria.
Brown, J. Die Eingeborenen Australiens. Dr. Pet., 1856.
Brown, W. New Zealand and its Aborigines.
Buchholz, R. Reisen in Westafrika.

Billow, W. Von. Das ungeschriebene Gesetz der Samoaner, Globus, 1896.
Burchell. Travels in South Africa.
Burckhardt, J. L. Notes on the Bedouins.
Burgdt, J. R. M. van der. Dictionaire-fransaise-Kirundi.
Capello, H., and Ivens, R. From Benguella to the Territory of Yacca.
Cassac, de. Renseignements ethnographiques sur les Comanches. R.E., i.
Casalis, E. The Basutos.
Castelnau. Amerique de Sud.
Chamberlain, A. E. Report on the Kootanay Indians of S.E. British

Columbia, B.A. 1892.

Chantre, E. Recherches anthropologiques dans le Caucase.
Charlevoix, de. Histoire de la Nouvelle France, 1744.
Christian, F. W. Explorations in the Caroline Islands. Geog. Journ., 13.
Church, G. E. Aborigines of South America.
Codrington, R. H. The Melanesians.
Cole, Rev. The Wagogo. J.A.I., 32.
Collins, D. An account of the English Colony in New South Wales

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 291

Colquhoun, A. R. Among the Shans.

Conrau, G. Uber das Gebiet zwischen Mundame und Baliburg.

Coquilhat, C. Sur le haut Congo.

Corre, A. Les Sereres de Joal et de Portadal. R.E., 2.

Condon, M. H. Basoga-Batamba, Anthropos, 5, 1910.

Coudrean, H. La haute Guiane. R.E., 7.

,, Chez nos Indiens.

Cranford, L. Victoria River Downs Station. Northern Territory, S. Aus-
tralia. J.A.I., 24.

Crooke, W. The North Western Provinces.
Cunningham, J. F. Uganda and its people.

Dale, G. An account of the principal customs, etc,, of the natives inhabit-
ing the Bondei Country. J.A.I., 25.
Dall. Contributions to Ethnology.
Dalton, E. T. Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal.
Dannert, E. Zum Rechte der Herero.

David, J., Dr. Notizen uber die Pygmaen des Ituri Waldes. Globus, 1904.
Dawson, J. Australian Aborigines.
Delhaise. Les Warega. (In Overbergh Monographies.)
Denian, A. Croyances, etc.,de Pile Malo. (In Les Missions catholiques,33.)
Deniker, J. Les Ghiliaks. R.E., 2.
Desognies. Die Bamsalala. In Steinmetz.
Dobrizhofer, M. Historia de Abiponibus.
Dorsey, J. A. Omaha Sociology. Smiths. Rep. 3.

,, Siouan Sociology. Smiths. Rep., 15.
Duloup, G. Huit Jours chez les Mbengas. R.E., 2.
Eberstein. Uber die Rechtsanschauungen der Kiistebewohner des Bezirkes

Kilwa. M.D.S., 9.
Ehrenreich, P. Beitrage zur Volkerkunde.

,, Brasilien, Konig. Mus. Volkerkunde ii.

„ liber die Botocudos. Z.E., 19.
Ellis, A. Ewe-speaking peoples.

,, Tshi-speaking peoples.

,, Yoruba-speaking peoples.
Ellis, W. Polynesian Researches.
Erckert. Die Chewssuren. Ausland, 1891.
Eschwege, C. W. Van. Brasilien.
Eyre, E. J. Journals of Expeditions.
Farrand, L. Basis of American History.

Favre, P. An account of the Wild Tribes inhabiting the Malayan Pen-
insula, J. Ind. Archip., 2.

Featherman, A. Social history of the races of Mankind.
Fewkes. Porto Rio Indians. Smiths. Rep., 25.
Field, Barron. Geographical Memoirs in New South Wales.
Finsch, O. Die Goldkiiste und ihre Bewohner. Z.Erd., 1864.
Fison, L. Land tenure in Fiji. J.A.I., 10.
Fison and Howitt, A. W. Kamilaroi and Kurnai.
Fletcher, Miss, and La Fleche. The Omaha. Smiths. Rep., 27.
Foelsche, P. Manners, etc., of some tribes in the neighbourhood of Port

Darwin. J.A.I., 24.
Forbes, H. D. On the Ethnology of Timor Laut. J.A.I., 13.

,, On the Kubus of Sumatra. J.A.I., 13.
Forrest, John. On the natives of Central and Western Australia. J.A.I., 5.

292 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Forsyth. Highlands of Central India.

Fraser, J. The Aborigines of New South Wales.

Frazer, J. G. Notes on the Aborigines of Australia. J.A.I., 24.

Fric and Rodin. J.A.I., 36.

Fritsch, G. Die Eingeborenen Siidafrikas.

Fryer, G. E. A few words concerning the Hill-people inhabiting the forests

of the Cochin State. J.R.As.S., 1868.
Fiilleborn, F. Uber seine Reisen im Nyassa-Gebiet. Verh. Ges. Erdkunde,

1900.

Gardiner, J. S. Natives of Rotuma. J.A.I., 27.
Garson, J. G. On the Inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego. J.A.I., 15.
Gand, F. Les Mandja (in Overbergh).
Gatschet, A. S. The Klamaths— Contributions to N. American Ethnology,

vol. ii, pt. i.
Geoff roy, A. Arabes pasteurs nomades de la Tribu des Larbas. In Ouvriers

des deux Mondes, 1887. (Societe d 'Economic Sociale.)
Gibbs, G. Tribes of W. Washington, etc. Contr. N. American Ethn., i.
Goddard. Life and culture of Hupa. Pub. University of California, i.
Godden, G. M., Miss. Naga and other Frontier Tribes of N.E. India.

J.A.I., 26 and 27.

Godwin-Austin, H. H. On Garo Hill Tribes. J.A.I., 2.
Gonzalez. El gran Chaco Argentine.
Gottschling, Rev. The Bawendas. J.A.I., 35.
Grabowsky, F. Die Orang Bukit. Ausland, 1885.
Grafe, E. Die Carolineninsel Yap.

Granville, U., and Roth, F. N. Notes on the Jekris, etc. J.A.I., 28.
Grey, Sir G. Journals of two expeditions.
Grinnell, G. B. Blackfoot Lodge Tales.

„ Pawnee Lodge Tales.
Grubb, W. B. An unknown People.
Guival, L. Les Batekes. R.E., 5.
Guppy, H. B. The Solomon Islands.
Haddon, A. C. Cambridge Expedition to Torres Straits.
Hagen, B. Unter den Papuas.

,, Die Orang Kubu auf Sumatra.
Hagen. La colonie de Porto Novo. R.E., 6.
Hagenmeister, Jules de. Essay on Central Asia (in Beitrage zur Kenntniss

des russischen Reiches. Bd. i).
Hahl, A. Rechtsanschauungen der Eingeborenen der Blanchebucht. Nach-

richten liber K. Wilhelms Land, 1897.
Hale, H. British Columbia Peoples. B.A., 1890.
Halkin, J. Les Ababua (in Overbergh).
Hamilton. South Australian Aborigines. J.A.I., 24.
Hardisty, W. L. The Loucheux. Smiths. Rep., 1866.
Harris, J. M. Some remarks on the origin, etc., of the Gallinas. Memoirs

Anthrop. Society of London, ii.

Harrison, Rev. Ch. Religion and family among the Haidas. J.A.I., 21.
Hartland. Article on the Bantus in Encyclopedia for Religion and Ethics.
Hartt. Geology and Physical Geography of Brazil (Appendix).
Hasselt, von. Die Noeforezen. Z.E., 8.
Hawkins. Tr. Am. Eth. Soc., 1853.
Hawtrey, S. H. C. The Lengua Indians of the Paraguayan Chaco.

J.A.I., 51-

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 293

Heckewalder. History, Manners and Customs of the Indian Nations.

Hensel, R. Die Coroados. Z.E., i.

Herrmann. Die Wasiba und ihr Land. M.D.S., 7.

Herold. Bericht betreffend Rechtsgewohnheiten der deutschen Ewenegcr.

M.D.S., 5.
Heusser and Claraz. Auszug aug der Geschichte des Uruguay. Z. Erd.,

10, 1861.
Hewitt, J. F. The Pre-Aryan Communal Village in India and Europe.

J.R.As.S., 1899.
Hill-Tout, Ch. Report on the Ethnology of the Slatluhb of British

Columbia. J.A.I., 1905.
„ Report on the Ethnology of the S.E. Tribes of Vancouver Island.

J.A.I., 1907.

,, British North America.

Hodge. Handbook of North American Indians.

Hobley, Ch. Ethnology of the Akamba and other East African Tribes.
Hodgson, B. H. J.R.As.S., 1839.

Hoesmann. Ethnologisches aiis Kamerun. M.D.S., 16.
Hoffmann, A. Mittheilungen iiber die Bogadjim, Nachrichten iiber K.

Wilhelms Land.

Hohnel, L. Von. Zum Rudolph See und Stephanie See.
Holland, Lieut. S. C. The Ainos. J.A.I., 3.
Hollis, A. The Masai.

„ The Nandi.

Halten, Von. Das Land der Yurakaren und dessen Bewohner. Z.E., 9.
Holub, E. Sieben Jahre in Siidafrika.

Hore, E. C. On the twelve Tribes of Tanganyika. J.A.I., 12.
Hose, C. On the Natives of Borneo. J.A.I., 23.
Hose and McDougall. Pagan Tribes of Borneo.
Howitt, A. W. Native Tribes of S.E. Australia.
Hunter, W .W. The Indian Empire.

,, The Annals of Rural Bengal.
Hunter, W. Report on some of the rights, etc., of the Hill population in

Meywar. J.R.As.S., 8.

Hutchinson, T. J. Tribes of the Chaco. J. Ethn. Society, 1865.
Hutchinson, Th. J. Impressions of Western Africa.

Hutereau, A. Notes sur la vie familiale et juridique de quelques popula-
tions du Congo Beige. Annales du Musee du Congo Beige.
Hutter, F. Wanderungen im Nordhinterland von Kamerun.
Hurel, R. P. E. Die Bakerewe, Anthropos, 6.
Hyades, P., and Deniker, J. Mission Scientifique du Cap Horn,
im Thurm, E. F. Among the Indians of Guiana.

Irias, J. F. Rio Wanks and Mosco Indians. Tr. American Ethn. Soc., iii.
Jenks, A. E. The Bontoc Igorot. Dept. of the Interior Ethn. Pub., vol. i.
Jesuit Relations.

Jones, P. History of the Ojibway Indians.
Johnston, Sir H. H. George Grenfel and the Congo.

,, Uganda Protectorate.

Junghuhn, F. D. Die Battalander auf Sumatra.
Junod, H. H. Les Baronga.
Kannenberg. Reise durch die hamitischen Sprachgebiete um Kondoa.

M.D.S., 13
Keane, A. H. On the Botocudos. J.A.I., 13.

294 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Kingsley, M. West African Studies.

Klaproth, J. Von. Reise in den Kaukasus und nach Georgien.

Kohne, C. Das Recht der Kalmucken. Z.V.R., 9.

Knocker, F. W. The Aborigines of Sunjei hjong. J.A.I., 37.

„ Notes on the wild Tribes of the Ulu Perak. J.A.I., 39.
Kohler, J. Recht der Marshall Insulaner. Z.V.R., 12.

„ Uber das Negerrecht. Z.V.R., 1895.

„ Das Recht der Hottentotten. Z.V.R., 15.

„ Das Banturecht in Ostafrika. Z.V.R., 15.
Kraber. Types of Indian Culture.
Kramer, A. Die Samoa Inseln.
Kraft. Die Wapokomo (in Steinmitz).
Kroeber. Am. Anthr., 4.

,, The Californians. University of California Pub., vol. ii, pt. iii.
Kubary, J. Bericht uber meinen Aufenthalt in Palau. J. Mus. Godeffroy i.
Lang, G. S. Aborigines of Australia.
Lang, H. Die Washambala (in Steinmetz).
Lang, J. D., Dr. Queensland.

Latchan, R. E. Ethnology of the Araucanians. J.A.I., 39.
Laufer, B. Preliminary notes on exploration among the Amoor Tribes.

American Anthr., 2
Lenz, O. Skizzen aus West Afrika.
Leuschner. Die Baquiri (in Steinmetz).
Levschin, A. J. Descriptions des hordes et des Steppes des Kirghiz

Kazaks.

Lewin. Wild Tribes of S.E. India.
Lewis and Clark. Expedition up the Missouri.
Liadov, B. On the Kalmacks. J.A.I., i.
Lichtenstein. Travels in South Africa.
Ling, Roth. H. Natives of Sarawak.

,, Natives of Borneo. J.A.I., 21 and 22.

„ Aborigines of Tasmania.
Livingstone, D. Narrative of an Expedition to the Zambesi.

,, Missionary Travels.
Loen. Die Apaches. Z.E., 1877.

Loskiel, G. H. Geschichte der Mission unter den Indianern, 1789.
Lumholz, C. New Trails in Mexico.

,, Unknown Mexico.
Lumholz, Among Cannibals.

Macauley, Clay. The Seminoli Indians of Florida. Smiths. Rep. 5.
Macdonald, Duff. Africana.
Macklain, J. Canadian Savage Folk.
Maclean, J. Compendium of Kaffir laws.
Macpherson. Memorials of Service in India.
Magyar, L. Reisen in Siidafrika.
Man, E. G. Sonthalia.
Man, E. H. The Nicobar Islanders. J.A.I., 18.

,, The Aboriginal Inhabitants of the Andaman Islands. J.A.I., 12.
Marcuse, A. Die Hawaiischen Inseln.
Markham, C. R. A list of the Tribes of the Valley of the Amazon.

J.A.I., 24-

Martin, R. Die Inlandstamme der Malayisch'en Halbinsel.
Martius, Von. Zur Ethnographic Amerikas.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 295

Marx. Die Amahlubi (in Steinmitz).

Mathews, J. Two representative Tribes of Queensland.

„ Eagle-Hawk and Crow.

Mathews, R. H. Aboriginal Tribes of New South Wales and Victoria.
Maurault, J. A. Histoire des Abenakis.
McGee. The Seri Indians. Smiths. Rep., 17.

„ The Sioux. Smiths. Rep., 1893.
Meinicke, C. E. Die Inseln des stillen Oceans.

Melnikow, N. Die Burjaten des Irkutskischen Gouvernments.I.A.E., 12.
Metz, J. The Tribes inhabiting the Nilgherry Hills. J.A.I., 12.
Meyer, A. B. Die Philippines

Miklucho-Maclay, N. Von. Ethnologische Bemerkungen iiber die Papuas.
Miller, E. Y. Bataks of Palawan. Dept. Inter. Eth. Pub., vol. ii, pt. iii.
MindelefE. The Navahos. Smiths. Rep. 17.
Moffat. Labours and Scenes in South Africa.

Moncelon. Reponse pour les Neo-Caledoniens Bulletins de

1'Assoc. d'Anthrop., 9.

Moon'ey, J. Siouan Tribe of Virginia and South Carolina. Smiths. Rep.,
1894.

„ The Kiowa. Smiths. Rep., 17.

Morgan, L. H. Houses and Home-life of the American Indians.
Morgan, D. The Customs of the Ossetes. J.R.As.S., 1888.
Morice, Father. Western Dene. Trans. Canadian Institute, 1893.

,, Proceedings Can. Inst., vol. 7.

,, Canadian Journal of Science.
Moser, H. A Travers L'Asie Centrale.
Murdoch, J. Point Barrow Expd. Smiths. Rep., 1887.
Mou>ra. Les Candios. R.E., ii.
Miiller, F. W. K. Batak-Sammlung. Verof. aus dem K. Mus. fur Volker-

kunde, iii.
Munzinger, W. Uber die Sitten der Bogos.

,, Ostafrikanischen Studien.
Musters. At home with the Patagonians.
Nansen, F. Eskimo Life.
Nelson. Behring Straits. Smiths. Rep., 18.
Newbold, Captain. The Chenchwars : a wild Tribe inhabiting the forests

of the E. Ghauts. J.R.A.S., 8.
Niblack, A. P. The Coast Indians of S. Alaska.
Nieuwenhuis, A. W. Quer durch Borneo.

Niese, Richard. Das Personen— und Familienfecht der Suaheli. Z.V.R., 16.
Nikole. Diakite Sarakolays (in Steinmetz).

Nordenskiold, A. E. Von. Un chapitre d 'Ethnographic des Tschuchtschi.
R.E., iii.

,, Die Umseg'elung Asiens.
Ochsemus, C. Chili, Land und Leute.
Oertzen. Banaka und Bapuku (in Steinmitz).

Oldfield, A. The Aborigines of Australia. Tr. Ethn. Society, 1865.
Orbigny, Dessaline, A. D'. L'homme Americain.

„ Voyage dans I'Amerique Meridionale.
Ordinaire, O. Les Sauvages de Peru. R.E., 6.
Overbergh, Cyr Van. Collection de Monographies.
Overbergh and Jonghe. Les Mangbetu.

,, Les Mayombe.

„ Les Bangala.

296 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Pallas, P. S. Reisen durch verschiedenen Provinzen des russischen

Reiches, 1776.
„ Travels through the Southern Provinces of the Russian Empire,

1793-4-
Palmer, E. Notes on some Australian Tribes. J.A.I., 13.

Parker, G. H. The Burmo-Chinese Frontier and the Kakyen Indians.

Fortnightly Review, 1897.
Parker, K. L., Mrs. The Euahlayi Tribe.
Parkinson, R. Dreissig Jahre in der Siidsee.

,, Beitrage zur Ethnologic der Gilbert-Insulaner. I.A.E., 2.
Passarge, S. Das Okwangosumpfland. Z.E., 37.

,, Die Buschmanner der Kalahari. M.D.S., 18.
Paulitschke, Ph. Ethnographic Nord-Ost-Afrikas.
Pelleschi. Eight years in the Grand Chaco.
Peters, W. Der Muata Cazembe, etc. Z. Erd., 6 and 7.
Petroff, L. Population, Industries and Resources of Alaska. U.S. Census,

8, pt. 2.

Pickler, Dr. Die Aetas der Philippinen. Globus, xcvi.
Pinart, A. Les Indiens de Petat de Panama. R.E., 6.
Plas Varden. Les Kuku (in Overbergh).
Pogge, P. Beitrage zur Endeckungsg-eschichte Afrikas : Im. Reiche des

Muato Jamwo.

Posewitz. Die Badjus, eine Volksreliquie in Java. Ausland, 1891.
Powell, J. W. Wyandot Government. Smiths. Rep., i.
Powers, S. Tribes of California. Contrib. N. American Ethn., iii.
Price, F. G. H. The Quissama Tribe. J.A.I., i.
Radde, G. Reisen an der persisch-russischen Grenze.
Radlov, O. V. Aus Sibirien.

„ Beobachtungen iiber die Kirgisen. Dr. Pet., 1864.
Rannie, D. The Torres Group. Proceedings, Queensland Branch of

R.G.S. Australasia, vol. 5.
Rautanen. Die Ondonga (in Steinmetz).
Reed, W. A. Negritos of Zambales. Dept. Interior Ethn. Pub.,

vol. ii, pt.i.

Remy and Blenchley. Journey to the Great Salt Lake City.
Richter. Der Bezirk Bukoba. M.D.S., 12.

„ Einige weitere ethnographische Notizen iiber den Bezirk Bukoba.

M.D.S., 13.

Ridley, W,. Rev. Report on Australian languages and traditions. J.A.I. 2.
Riedel, G. F. The island of Flores. Rev. Colon, internat., 1886.
Riggs. The Dakota. Contributions to Ethnology, 1893.
Risley. Tribes of Bengal.
Rivers, W. H. The Todas.

Robertson, G. S. Kafiristan and its people. J.A.I., 27.
Rocheforte, de. History of the Antilles, 1665.
Roscoe, John. The Baganda.

„ The Bahima. J.A.I., 37.

„ The Bageshu. J.A.I., 39.

Rosenberg, C. B. H. von. Der malayische Archipel.

Ross, B. R. Notes on the Tinnehs and Chepewayans. Smiths. Rep., 1866.
Roth, W. E. North Queensland Ethnology. Bull., 1-8.

„ Ethnological Studies among the N.W.C. Queensland Aborigines.
Rowney, H. B. Wild Tribes of India.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 297

Salvado, Don Bishop : Carmichael, C. H. E. On a Benedictine Missionary's

account of the Natives of Australia and Oceania. J.A.I., 7.
Sampaio, F. X. R. de. Rio Branco Revista Trimensal, 1850.
Schadenberg, A. Die Bewohner von Siid-Mindanao. Z.E., 17.

„ Beitrage zur Kenntniss der im Innern Nordluzons lebenden Stamrne,
(Verh. Ges. fur Anth, 1888).

„ iiber die Negritos der Philippinen. Z.E., 12.
Schoolcraft, H. H. History, etc., of the Indian Tribes.
Schale, Von. Uhehe. M.D.S., 9.
Schintz. Deutsch Sud-west Afrika.

Schiitt, O. H. Reisen in sudwestlichen Becken des Congo.
Schweinfurth, G. The heart of Africa.

Seidlitz. Gemeinde und Familienleben der Chewssuren. Ausland, 1891.
Seligmann, C. G. The Melanesians of British New Guinea.

„ The Veddahs.

„ Article on the Dinkas in Encyclip. for Religion and Ethics.
Selinghaus, T. H. Munda Kols. Z.E., 3.
Serpa Pinto. How I crossed Africa.
Shakespear, Col. J. The Kuki-Lushai Tribes.
Short, J. Some rude tribes, etc; J. Ethn. Society, 1865.
Simson, A. Notes on the Zaparos. J.A.I., 7.

„ Notes on the Jivaros and Canelos Indians. J.A.I., 9.
Skeat, W. W. Wild Tribes of Malay Peninsula. J.A.I., 32.
Skeat and Blagden. Pagan Races of Malay Peninsula.
Smyth and Lowe. Journey from Lima to Para.
Salomon, V. Extracts from diaries kept in Car Nicobar.
Spencer, B., and Gillen, F. J. Native Tribes of Central Australia.

„ The Northern Tribes of Central Australia.

Stanaus, H. S. Notes on some Tribes of British Central Africa. J.A.I., 40.
St. John, H. C. The Ainos, Aborigines of Jeso. J.A.I., ii.

,, Hill Tribes of N. Aracan. J.A.I., ii.
Stein. Die Turkmenen.

Steinen, H. Von der. Unter der Naturvolkern Central Brasiliens.
Steinmetz, S. R. Rechtsverhaltnisse von eingeborenen Volkern in Afrika

and Ozeanien.

Steller, G. W. Beschreibung vom Lande Kamtschatka.
Stenin, P. Von. Das Gewohnheitsrecht der Samojeden. Globus, Ix, 1891.

„ Die Kurden des Gouvernments Eriwan. Globus, Ixx, 1896.
Stewart. The Boksas of the Bijnour district. J.As. Society, Bengal, 1865.
Stevenson, Miss. The Zuni Indians. Smiths. Rep., 23.
Stoll, O. Guatemala. J.A.E., 2.
Stow, G. W. Native races of South Africa.
Storch. Sitten und Gebraiiche, etc., bei den Bewohnern Usambaras.

M.D.S., 8.

Strachan, Jones. The Kowitchen. Smiths. Rep., 1866.
Stuhlmann, F. Mit Enim Pascha ins Herz von Afrika.
Sullivan, Cap. H. Dinka Laws and Customs. J.A.I., 40.
Summer, W. G. The Yakuts. Abridged from the Russian of Sieroshevsky.

J.A.I., 31.

Svoboda, W. Die Bewohner des Nikobaren Archipels. I.A.E., 5.
Swan, Caleb. The Creeks. Schoolcraft, 5.
Swanton, J. R. The Thlinkeet. Smiths. Rep., 26.
Taplin, G. The Folklore, etc., of S. Australian Aborigines.

298 INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES

Tautain, L. Etudes des peuples du Bassin du Senegal. R.E., iv.

Taylor, R. Te Ika a Maui.

Teit and Boaz. Jesup Expedition, 1900.

Teit. Memoirs of Ainer. Museum of Natural History.

Ten Kate H. Notes ethnographiques sur les Comanches. R.E., iv.

Thomson, B. Natives of the Savage Islands. J.A.I., 31.

Thomson, J. To the Central African Lakes and back.

Thouar, A. Exploration dans 1'Amerique du Sud.

Thurston, E. Castes and Tribes of Southern India.

,, Anthropology.
Torday, E., and Joyce, T. H. Notes on the Ethnography of the Bayaka.

J.A.I., 36.

,, Notes on the Ethnography of the Bambala. J.A.I., 35.
,, Notes on the Ethnography of the Bahuana. J.A.I., 36.
„ On the Ethnology of S.W. Congo. J.A.I,. 57.
Torday. Quelques peuplades appeles Bushongo (in Mus<§e du Congo).
Tregear, E. The Maoris of New Zealand. J.A.I., 19.
Tschudi, J. J. Von. Reisen durch Siidamerika.
Turner, G. Samoa.

Turner, L. M. Ethnology of the Ungava District. Smiths. Rep., n.
Turner, W. Y. Ethnology of the Mutu. J.A.I., 7.
Urquahrt. Among the Kaupui Indians. Scot. Geo. Mag., 1893.
Vambery, H. Das Tiirkenvolk.

Vaux, de L. Les Canaques d'e la Nouvelle Caledonie. R.E., ii.
Venturillo, M. H. The Batacs of the Island of Palawan. I.A.E., 18.
Verguet, L. Arossi on San Christoval et ses habitants. R.E., iv.
Vetter, K. Jabim. Nachrichten iiber Kaiser- Wilhelms-land, 1897.
Walker, J. B. Notes on the Politics, etc., of Old Calabar. J.A.I., 6.
Wallace, A. R. Travels on the Amazon.
Walter. Nossi be and Mayotte (in Steinmetz).
Wanderer. Khoi-Khoin (in Steinmitz).
Ward, H. Five years with the Congo Cannibals.

Warren. History of the O jib ways. (Collection of Minnesota Hist. Soc.)
Waterhouse, J. King and people of Fiji.

Watt, G., Dr. The Aboriginal Tribes of Manipur. J.A.I., 16.
Wehrli, H. J. Beitrage zur Ethnologic der Chingpaw. I.A.E., 16.
Werniaminow. Characterziige der Aleuten, etc., in Von Baer und Von

Helmersen. Beitrage zur Kenntniss des russischen Reiches, 1834.
Werner, A. Natives of British Central Africa.
West, Th. Ten years of S.C. Polynesia.
White, R. B. Notes on the Aboriginal races of the N.W. Provinces of

South America. J.A.I., 13.

Wickham, A. H. Notes on the Soumoo and Woolwa Indians. J.A.I., 24.
Wied, Prinz M. zu. Reise in Brasilien.
Wiese, C. Beitrage zur Geschichte der Zulu namentlich der Angoni,

Z.E., 32.
Williams, J. Some remarks on the island of Espirito Santo, New Hebrides.

Proc. R.G.S. Australasia. Queensl. travel, 6.
Williams, T. Fiji and the Fijians.
Williamson, R. W. The Mafulu.

Wilkinson, J. Papers on Malay subjects. The Aboriginal Tribes.
Wilson, J. An account of the Waralis and Katodis. J.R.A.S., 1843.

INSTITUTIONS OF THE SIMPLER PEOPLES 299

Wilson, E. F., Rev. On the N.W. Tribes of Canada. : Report on the Black-
feet Tribe. B.A., 1887. Report on the Sarcee Tribes. B.A., 1888.
Wissmann, H. Unter deutscher Flagge quer durch Afrika.

„ Im Innern Afrikas.
Woodthorpe, R. G. Notes on the wild Tribes inhabiting the so-called

Naga Hills. J.A.I., n.

Woods, J. B. Native Tribes of S. Australia.

Wrangel, de. Ethnographische Nachrichten, etc., in Von Baer und Von
Helmersens, Beitrage zur Kenntniss des russischen Reiches, .Bd. ii.
Zenker, G. Yaunde. M.D.S., 8.

Zundel, G. Land und Volk der Eweer. Z.O. Erd., 12.
Zollinger, M. H. J. Indian Archipelago.

LIST OF STUDIES IN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL

SCIENCE.

A Series of Monographs by Lecturers and Students connected with
the London School of Economics and Political Science.

EDITED BY THE

DIRECTOR OF THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
AND POLITICAL SCIENCE.

1. The History of Local Rates in England. The substance of
five lectures given at the School in November an<5 December, 1895.
By EDWIN CANNAN, M.A., LL.D. 1896; second, enlarged edition,
1912; xv. and 215 pp., Crown 8vo, cloth. 35. 6d. net.

P. S. King & Son.

2. Select Documents Illustrating the History of Trade Unionism.

I. — THE TAILORING TRADE. By F. W. GALTON. With a Preface
by SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B. 1896; 242 pp., Crown 8vo, cloth. 55.

P. S. King & Son.

3. German Social Democracy. Six lectures delivered at the
School in February and March, 1896. By the Hon. BERTRAND
RUSSELL, B.A., late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. With
an Appendix on Social Democracy and the Woman Question in
Germany. By ALYS RUSSELL, B.A. 1896; 204 pp., Crown 8vo,
cloth. 35. 6d. P. S. King & Son.

4. The Referendum in Switzerland. By M. SIMON DEPLOIGE,
University of Louvain. With a Letter on the Referendum in
Belgium by M. J. VAN DEN HEUVEL, Professor of International
Law in the University of Louvain. Translated by C. P.
TREVELYAN M.A., Trinity College, Cambridge, and edited with
Notes, Introduction, Bibliography, and Appendices, by LILIAN
TOMN (Mrs. Knowles), of Girton College, Cambridge, Research
Student at the School. 1898; x. and 334 pp., Cr. 8vo, cloth.
75. 6d. P. S. King & Son.

5. The Economic Policy of Colbert. By A. J. SARGENT, M.A.,
Senior Hulme Exhibitioner, Brasenose College, Oxford; and
Whately Prizeman, 1897, Trinity College, Dublin. 1899; viii.
and 138 pp., Crown 8vo, cloth. 2s. 6d. P. S. King & Son,

F 2

6. Local Variations in Wages. (The Adam Smith Prize,
Cambridge University, 1898.) By F. W. LAWRENCE, M.A.,
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 1899. viii- and 90 pp.,
with Index and 18 Maps and Diagrams. Quarto, n in. by 8^ in.,
cloth. 8s. 6d. Longmans, Green & Co.

7. The Receipt Roll of the Exchequer for Michaelmas Term of
the Thirty-first Year of Henry II. (1185). A unique fragment
transcribed and edited by the Class in Palaeography and Diplo-
matic, under the supervision of the Lecturer, HUBERT HALL,
F.S.A., of H.M. Public Record Office. With thirty-one Facsimile
Plates in Collotype and Parallel readings from the contemporary
Pipe Roll. 1899; vii. and 37 pp., Folio, 15^ in. by n^in., in
green cloth ; 2 Copies left. Apply to the Director of the London
School of Economics.

8. Elements of Statistics. By ARTHUR L. BOWLEY, M.A.,
Sc.D., F.S.S., Cobden and Adam Smih Prizeman, Cambridge;
Guy Silver Medallist of the Royal Statistical Society; Newmarch
Lecturer, 1897-98. 500 pp., and 40 Diagrams, Demy 8vo, cloth.
1901 ; Third edition, 1907; viii. and 336 pp. ros. 6d. net.

P. S. King& Son.

9. The Place of Compensation in Temperance Reform. By

C. P. SANGER, M.A., late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge;
Barrister-at-Law. 1901 ; viii. and 136 pp., Crown 8vo, cloth.
2S. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

10. A History of Factory Legislation. By B. L. HUTCHINS
and A. HARRISON (Mrs. Spencer), B.A., D.Sc. (Econ.), London.
With a Preface by SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B. 1903; new and revised
edition, 1911; xvi. and 298 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 6s. net.

P. S. King & Son.

1 1 . The Pipe Roll of the Exchequer of the See of Winchester
for the Fourth Year of the Episcopate of Peter Des Roches

(1207). Transcribed and edited from the original Roll in the
possession of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners by the Class in
Palasography and Diplomatic, under the supervision of the Lec-
turer, HUBERT HALL, F.S.A., of H.M. Public Record Office.
With a Frontispiece giving a Facsimile of the Roll. 1903 ; xlviii.
and 100 pp., Folio, 13* in. by 8| in., green cloth. 155. net.

P. S. King & Son.

12. Self-Go Yernment in Canada and How it was Achieved: The
Story of Lord Durham's Report. By F. BRADSHAW, B.A., D.Sc.
(Econ.), London; Senior Hulme Exhibitioner, Brasenose College,
Oxford. 1903; 414 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 35. 6d. net.

P. S. King & Son.

Ill

13. History of the Commercial and Financial Relations between
England and Ireland from the Period of the Restoration. By ALICE
EFFIE MURRAY (Mrs. Radice), D.Sc. (Econ.), former Student at
Girton College, Cambridge; Research Student of the London
School of Economics and Political Science. 1903 ; 486 pp., Demy
8vo, cloth. 35. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

14. The English Peasantry and the Enclosure of Common Fields.

By GILBERT SLATER, M.A., St. John's College, Cambridge; D.Sc.
(Econ.), London. 1906; 337 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. los. 6d. net.

Constable & Co.

15. A History of the English Agricultural Labourer. By Dr.

W. HASBACH, Professor of Economics in the University of Kiel.
Translated from the Second Edition (1908), by RUTH KENYON.
Introduction by SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B. 1908; xvi. and 470 pp.,
Demy 8vo, cloth. 75. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

1 6. A Colonial Autocracy: New South Wales under Governor
Macquarie, 1810-1821. By MARION PHILLIPS, B.A., Melbourne;
D.Sc. (Econ.), London. 1909; xxiii. and 336 pp., Demy 8vo,
cloth. los. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

17. India and the Tariff Problem. By H. B. LEES SMITH, M.A.,
M.P. 1909; 1 20 pp., Crown 8vo, cloth. 35. 6d. net.

Constable & Co.

18. Practical Notes on the Management of Elections. Three
Lectures delivered at the School in November, 1909, by ELLIS T.
POWELL, LL.B., B.Sc. (Econ.), Fellow of the Royal Historical
and Royal Economic Societies, of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-
Law. 1909; 52 pp., 8vo, paper, is. 6d. net.

P. S. King & Son.

19. The Political Development of Japan. By G. E. UYEHARA,
B.A., Washington, D.Sc. (Econ.), London, xxiv. and 296 pp.,
Demy 8vo, cloth. 1910. 8s. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

20. National and Local Finance. By J. WATSON GRICE, D.Sc.
(Econ.), London. Preface by SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B. 1910; 428
pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. los. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

21. An Example of Communal Currency. Facts about the
Guernsey Market-house. By J. THEODORE HARRIS, B.A., with
an Introduction by SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B. 1911 ; xiv. and 62 pp.,
Crown 8vo, cloth. is. 6d. net; paper, is. net.

P. S. King & Son.

IV

22. Municipal Origins. History of Private Bill Legislation.
By F. H. SPENCER, LL.B., D.Sc. (Econ.), London; with a Preface
by Sir EDWARD CLARKE, K.C. 1911 ; xi. and 333 pp., Demy 8vo,
cloth, i os. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

23. Seasonal Trades. By Various Authors. With an Intro-
duction by SIDNEY WEBB. Edited by SIDNEY WEBB, LL.B., and
ARNOLD FREEMAN, M.A. 1912 ; xi. and 410 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth.
7s. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

24. Grants in Aid: A Criticism and a Proposal. By SIDNEY
WEBB, LL.B. 1911; vii. and 135 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 55.
net- Longmans, Green & Co.

25. The Panama Canal: A Study in International Law. By
H. ARIAS, B.A., LL.D. 1911; xiv. and 188 pp., 2 maps, biblio-
graphy, Demy 8vo, cloth. IDS. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

26. Combination Among Railway Companies. By W. A.
ROBERTSON, B.A. 1912; 105 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth, is. 6d. net;
paper is. net. Constable & Co.

27. War and the Private Citizen: Studies in International Law.
By A. PEARCE HIGGINS, M.A., LL.D.; with Introductory Note by
the Rt. Hon. ARTHUR COHEN, K.C. 1912; xvi. and 200 pp.,
Demy 8vo, cloth. 55. net. P. S. King & Son.

28. Life in an English Village: an Economic and Historical
Survey of the Parish of Corsley, in Wiltshire. By M. F. DAVIES.
1909; xiii. and 319 pp., illustrations, bibliography, Demy 8vo,
cloth. IDS. 6d. net. T. Fisher Unwin.

29. English Apprenticeship and Child Labour: a History. By
O. JOCELYN DUNLOP, D.Sc. (Econ.), London; with a Supple-
mentary Section on the Modern Problem of Juvenile Labour, by
the Author and R. D. DENMAN, M.P. 1912 ; pp. 390, bibliography,
Demy 8vo, cloth. IDS. 6d. net. T. Fisher Unwin.

30. Origin of Property and the Formation of the Village
Community. By J. ST. LEWINSKI, D.Ec.Sc., Brussels. 191
xi. and 71 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 35. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

O J

31. The Tendency towards Industrial Combination (in some
Spheres of British Industry). By G. R. CARTER, M.A. 1913;
xxiii. and 391 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 6s. net. Constable & Co.

32. Tariffs at Work: an outline of Practical Tariff Administra-
tion. By JOHN HEDLEY HIGGINSON, B.Sc. (Econ.), Mitchell
Student of the University of London ; Cobden Prizeman and Silver
Medallist. 1913; 150 pp., Crown 8vo, cloth. 2s. net.

P. S. King & Son.

33. English Taxation, 1640-1799. An Essay on Policy and
Opinion. By WILLIAM KENNEDY, M.A., D.Sc. (Econ.), London;
Shaw Research Student at the London School of Economics and
Political Science. 1913; 200 pp., Demy 8vo. 75. 6d. net.

G. Bell & Sons.

34. Emigration from the United Kingdom to North America,

1763-1912. By STANLEY C. JOHNSON, M.A., Cambridge, D.Sc.
(Econ.), London. 1913; xvi. and 387 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth.
6s. net. G. Routledge & Sons.

35. The Financing of the Hundred Years' War, 1337-1360. By
SCHUYLER B. TERRY. 1913; xvi. and 199 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth.
6s. net. Constable & Co.

36. Kinship and Social Organisation. By W. H. R. RIVERS,
M.D., F.R.S., Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. 1914;
96 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 2s. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

37. The Nature and First Principle of Taxation. By ROBERT
JONES, D.Sc. (Econ.), London; with a preface by SIDNEY WEBB,
LL.B. 1914; xvii. and 299 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 75. 6d. net.

P. S. King & Son.

38. The Export of Capital. By C. K. HOBSON, M.A., F.S.S.,
Shaw Research Student at the London School of Economics and
Political Science. 1914; xxv. and 264 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth.
75. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

39. Industrial Training. By NORMAN BURRELL DEARLE, M.A.,
Fellow of All Souls' College, Oxford ; Shaw Research Student at
the London School of Economics and Political Science. 19 14;
610 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. IDS. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

40. Theory of Rates and Fares. From the French of Charles
Colson's "Transports et tarifs " (3rd edn., 1907), by L. R.
CHRISTIE, G. LEEDHAM, and C. TRAVIS. Edited and arranged
by CHARLES TRAVIS, with an introduction by W. M. ACWORTH,
M.A. 1914; viii. and 195 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 35. 6d. net.

G. Bell & Sons, Ltd.

VI

41. Advertising : a Study of a Modern Business Force. By G. W.
GOODALL, B.Sc. (Econ.), London; with an Introduction by SIDNEY
WEBB, LL.B. 1914; xviii. and 91 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 2s. 6d.
net; paper, is. 6d. net. Constable & Co.

42. English Railways: their Development and their Relation to
the State. By EDWARD CARNEGIE CLEVELAND-STEVENS, M.A.,
Christ Church College, Oxford; Shaw Research Student at the
London School of Economics and Political Science.

In the Press.

Monographs on Sociology.

3. The Material Culture and Social Institutions of the Simpler
Peoples. By L. T. HOBHOUSE, M.A., Martin White Professor
of Sociology in the University of London, G. C. WHEELER, B.A.,
and M. GINSBERG, B.A. 1915; 300 pp., paper. 2s. 6d. net.

Chapman & Hall.

4. Village and Town Life in China. By TAG Li KUNG, B.Sc.
(Econ.), London, and LEONG YEW KOH, B.Sc. (Econ.), London.
Edited by L. T. HOBHOUSE, M.A. 1915; pp. 153, Demy 8vo,
cloth. 55. net. George Allen & Unwin.

Series of Bibliographies by Students of the School.

1. A Bibliography of Unemployment and the Unemployed. By

F. ISABEL TAYLOR, B.Sc. (Econ.), London. Preface by SIDNEY
WEBB, LL.B. 1909; xix. and 71 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth, 2s. net;
paper, is. 6d. net. P. S. King & Son.

2. Two Select Bibliographies of Mediaeval Historical Study. By

MARGARET F. MOORE, M.A.; with Preface and Appendix by
HUBERT HALL, F.S.A. 1912; pp. 185, Demy 8vo, cloth. 55. net.

Constable & Co.

3. Bibliography of Roadmaking and Roads in the United
Kingdom. By DOROTHY BALLEN : an enlarged and revised edition
of a similar work compiled by Mr. and Mrs. SIDNEY WEBB in
1906. 1914; xviii. and 281 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 153. net.

P. S. King & Son.

4. A Select Bibliography for the Study, Sources, and Literature
of English Mediaeval Economic History. Edited by HUBERT HALL,
F.S.A. 1914; xiii. and 350 pp., Demy 8vo, cloth. 55. net.

P. S. King &Son.

Vll

Series of Geographical Studies.

i. The Reigate Sheet of the One-inch Ordnance Survey. A

Study in the Geography of the Surrey Hills. By ELLEN SMITH.
Introduction by H. J. MACKINDER, M.A., M.P. 1910; xix. and
no pp., 6 maps, 23 illustrations. Crown 8vo, cloth. 55. net.

A. & C. Black.

2. The Highlands of South-West Surrey. A Geographical
Study in Sand and Clay. By E. C. MATTHEWS. 1911 ; viii. and
124 pp., 7 maps, 8 illustrations, 8vo, cloth. 55. net.

A. & C. Black.

Series of Contour Maps of Critical Areas.

i. The Hudson-Mohawk Gap. Prepared by the Diagram Com-
pany from a map by B. B. Dickinson. 1913; i sheet 18 in. by
22^ in. Scale 20 miles to i inch. 6d. net; post free, folded yd.,
rolled 9d. Sifton, Praed & Co.

LIST OF STUDIES IN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL

SCIENCE.

A Series of Monographs by Lecturers and Students connected with
the London School of Economics and Political Science.

EDITED BY THE

DIRECTOR OF THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
AND POLITICAL SCIENCE.

RETURN TO

—ttftSffis:

-32