[38] Wake, Marriage and Kinship, 244.
[39] According to Ewald the ancient Hebrew father might "sell his child to relieve his own distress, or offer it to a creditor as a pledge."—The Antiquities of Israel (London, 1876), 190; Westermarck, op. cit., 228; and the Levitical law prescribes death as the penalty for striking a parent (Leviticus 20:9; Exodus 21:15, 17); but the penalty could only be administered through appeal to the whole community, Westermarck, op. cit., 228. Cf. Michaelis, Commentaries on the Laws of Moses, I, 444, who shows that the mother, as well as the father, might sometimes choose wives for the sons; while McLennan and Locke prove that the position of the mother in Israel was higher than is consistent with Roman patriarchalism.
[40] Human Marriage, 97-104, notes. Cf. Friedrichs, "Ueber den Ursprung des Matriarchats," ZVR., VIII, 371-73; Kohler, ibid., VI, 403 (Korea); VII, 373 (Papuas).
[41] Compare Wake, Marriage and Kinship, 267 ff., 362 ff., 382, 396 ff.; especially Friedrichs, "Familienstufen und Eheformen," ZVR., X, 209-12; and Dargun, Mutterrecht und Vaterrecht, 3, 28, 118, who believes the so-called "mixed systems" are merely a consistent union of two entirely different principles—the principle of relationship with the principle of power or protection.
[42] Starcke, op. cit., 26, 27 (Australia), 30 (America), 58 ff., 101 ff. Compare the criticism of Hellwald, Die mensch. Familie, 456 ff.; and on the development of the patriarchal family, see Lippert, Kulturgeschichte, II, 505-54.
[43] Westermarck, op. cit., 224-35, gives an enumeration. Noteworthy examples of patriarchal power are afforded by the ancient Peruvians and Mexicans, and by the modern Chinese and Japanese. On the Nahua and Maya natives see Bancroft, Native Races, II, 247-53, 663-68. Cf. Kohler, "Das Recht der Azteken," ZVR., XI, 54, 55; also ibid., VI, 374 (Chinese), 333, 334; VII, 373 (Papuas).
[44] Op. cit., 225.
[45] Bachofen, Das Mutterrecht; McLennan, Studies, I, 121 ff., 195 ff.; idem, Patriarchal Theory, 50 ff., 71 ff., 96 ff., 120 ff., 250 ff.; Dargun, Mutterrecht und Raubehe, 8, 13, passim; Giraud-Teulon, Les orignes du mariage, 130 ff., 286 ff., 329 ff.; idem, La mère chez certaines peuples de l'antiquité; Lippert, Geschichte der Familie, 4 ff.; Lubbock, Origin of Civilization, 153, 154. Kohler, "Indisches Ehe- und Familienrecht," ZVR., III, 393 ff., holds that the primitive Aryans must necessarily have recognized relationship through the mother. For the literature of this subject see the next chapter.
[46] Delbrück, "Das Mutterrecht bei den Indogermanen," Preussiche Jahrbücher, XCVI, 14-27, a clear summary of the results of recent research. Cf. his Die Indogermanischen Verwandtschaftsnamen (Leipzig, 1889). According to Hellwald, Die mensch. Familie, 453-80, especially 459, 460, patriarchalism was fully established at the earliest dawn of Indic history; but there are nevertheless traces of earlier mother-right.
[47] Schrader, Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte (2d ed.), 536 ff.; Jevons's Translation, 369 ff.; Leist, Alt-arisches Jus Gentium, 51-58. Max Müller declares that "whether in unknown times the Aryas ever passed through that metrocratic stage in which the children and all family property belong to the mother, and fathers have no recognized position whatever in the family, we can neither assert nor deny."—Biographies of Words, xvii.