[531] How far Mr. Hartland's results appear incomplete on the sociological side will be discussed hereafter.
[532] Sir Laurence Gomme writes: "There is a wide difference between the mere physical fact of having a mother and father, and the political fact of using this kinship for social organization. Savages who have not learned the political significance have but the scantiest appreciation of the physical fact. The Australians, for instance, have no term to express the relationship between mother and child. This is because the physical fact is of no significance...." (loc. cit., p. 232).
[533] The terms child, father and mother being defined first broadly as explained above, [pp. 172] sqq.
[534] As an example may be quoted the "functions of kinship" described by Dr. Rivers for the Torres Straits Islanders. Cambridge Exp. to Torres Straits, v. pp. 144 sqq., and vi. pp. 100, 101. Also by Dr. Seligmann for the Melanesians of New Guinea, see passage under this heading in chap. iii. and chap. xxxvii. op. cit.
[535] Perhaps the best one is given by Dargun, loc. cit., pp. 22 sqq., where many other opinions are also quoted and criticized.
[536] The word descent is often used without any definition. Mr. E. S. Hartland, op. cit., i. p. 258, uses it in a sense synonymous with kinship. Mr. Thomas, too, does not define the meaning of this word, but he uses it more or less in the same way as is done in the text. Compare Thomas, loc. cit., pp. 11, 12 sqq.
[537] It is impossible to develop here this thought, which would require a volume if regard be had to the complexity of the fact. The references to higher societies are given by way of illustration only.
[539] Comparing what we have said [above] on consanguinity.
[540] [pp. 238] sqq.; and [pp. 254-256].