[144] Westermarck, op. cit., 73.
[145] McLennan, op. cit., I, 337; Westermarck, op. cit., 76.
[146] The well-known theory of Starcke, op. cit., 121-27. It is not essential, according to this view, in early stages of development, that a child should be actually begotten by the father. It is enough that it should be borne by his legal wife and be accepted by him. Hence the jus primae noctis, exercised by a priest, king, or other distinguished person, is sometimes regarded as an honor: ibid., 125, 126; Westermarck, op. cit., 79.
[147] The first series of relationships is seen in the Arunta tribe, where "no man will lend his wife to anyone who does not belong to the particular group with which it is lawful for her to have marital relations—she is, in fact, only lent to a man whom she calls Unwana, just as she calls her own husband, and though this may undoubtedly be spoken of as an act of hospitality, it may with equal justice be regarded as evidence of the very clear recognition of group relationship, and as evidence also in favor of the former existence of group marriage." A native, it is true, will sometimes lend his wife "as an act of hospitality to a white man; but this has nothing to do with the lending of wives which has just been dealt with." It "does not imply the infringement of any custom." The second relationship in the series named is of a public nature, and it is strictly regulated by custom. It consists in the defloration of a girl just before her marriage by certain men who have access to her in a definite order. These men belong to forbidden groups; that is, groups into which the woman may not marry. "The ceremonies in question are of the nature of those which Sir John Lubbock has described as indicative of expiation for marriage;" and they may be regarded as "rudimentary customs" pointing back to a stage of wider marital rights than those which now exist in these tribes. The third relationship is the license allowed on "occasions when a large number of men and women are gathered together to perform certain corrobborees," the more important gatherings lasting perhaps "ten days or a fortnight." Every day "two or three women are told off to attend at the corrobboree ground, and, with the exception of men who stand in the relation to them of actual father, brother, or son, they are, for the time being, common property to all the men present." The explanations of similar usages advanced by McLennan and Westermarck, such as phallicism, are deemed inapplicable to these cases: Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes of Central Australia, 92-111. Compare especially Kohler, Zur Urgeschichte der Ehe, 64 ff., passim, who finds in the totem groups and classificatory systems of relationship, existing in Australia, America, and elsewhere, evidence of former group-marriage.
[148] Mystic Rose, 236-66, 294-317, 347 ff., 468-85, passim. Cf. Lang, Social Origins, 87-111, passim.
[149] According to Friedrichs, "Familienstufen und Eheformen," ZVR., X, 190 ff., the forms of the family are the following: (1) "die lose Familie;" (2) "die matriarchale, uterine Familie;" (3) "die patriarchale, agnatische Familie;" (4) "die moderne, zweiseitige Familie."
[150] Dargun, Mutterrecht und Raubehe, 12, 13. For exceptions, however, see his Mutterrecht und Vaterrecht, 29 ff., 35, 41, 46.
[151] Kohler, in ZVR., III, 393; IV, 266 ff.
[152] Lippert, Geschichte der Familie, 4 ff., 218 ff.; idem, Kulturgeschichte, I, 76 ff., 90.
[153] Bernhöft, "Zur Geschichte des eur. Familienrechts," ZVR., VIII, 401, 402.