[1678] Agassiz, ‘Essay on Classification,’ pp. 249-252.
[1679] Darwin, ‘Animals and Plants under Domestication,’ vol. ii. pp. 105, 181, 190, et seq.
[1680] Vogt, loc. cit. p. 421.
[1681] Sebright, loc. cit. pp. 17, et seq.
[1682] v. Langsdorf, loc. cit. vol. ii. p. 64.
[1683] Ross, in ‘Smithsonian Report,’ 1866, p. 310.
[1684] Wilken, ‘Verwantschap,’ &c., p. 22. Idem, in ‘Bijdragen,’ &c., ser. v. vol. i. p. 151. Riedel, quoted by Post, ‘Entwickelungsgeschichte des Familienrechts,’ p. 221. Garcilasso de la Vega, describing the Indians of Peru before the time of the Incas, says (loc. cit. vol. i. pp. 58, et seq.), ‘In many nations they cohabited like beasts, without any special wife, but just as chance directed. Others followed their own desires, without excepting sisters, daughters, or mothers. Others excepted their mothers but none else.’ It is said, according to Dr. Hickson (loc. cit. pp. 277, et seq.), that in olden times, in the southern districts of Minahassa, in the neighbourhood of Tonsawang, father and daughter, mother and son, brother and sister, frequently lived together in bonds of matrimony. As regards the Chippewas, Mr. Keating states (loc. cit. vol. ii. p. 170) that ‘incest is not unknown to them, but it is held in great abhorrence.'
[1685] Hübschmann, ‘Ueber die persische Verwandtenheirath,’ in ‘Zeitschr. d. Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellsch.,’ vol. xliii. p. 308.
[1686] Lisiansky, loc. cit. p. 83.
[1687] Lewin, loc. cit. p. 276.