[233] In general on the Australian class-systems see further, Tylor, Early History of Mankind, 288; Wake, Marriage and Kinship, chap. iv; Kovalevsky, Tableau, 13 ff.; Lubbock, Origin of Civilization, 104 ff., Bernhöft, in ZVR., IX, 6 ff.; McLennan, Studies, II, 304 ff., where the reports of Grey, Ridley, and other observers are summarized; Grosse, Die Formen der Familie, 49 ff., 58 ff., who, in the main, accepts Curr's conclusions; Dawson, Australian Aborigines, 1, 2, 26-40; Forest, "Marriage Laws of N. W. Australia," Report 2d Meeting of Aust. Association Adv. Sci. (1890), 653, 654; Fison, "Group-Marriage and Relationships," ibid., 4th Meeting (Tasmania, 1893), 688-97, criticising Westermarck, 717-20, criticising McLennan; Mathew, "Australian Aborigines," Jour. R. S. N. S. Wales, XXIII, 335-49, criticising Morgan and McLennan. Consult also the references in the Bibliographical Note at the head of the chapter.
For further discussion of Morgan's researches see Bernhöft, Verwandtschaftsnamen und Eheformen; Posada, Théories modernes, 52-57; Schroeder, Das Recht in der geschlechtl. Ordnung, 18 ff.; Cunow, Australneger, v-vii, 11 ff.; Grosse, op. cit., 3 ff.; Hellwald, Die mensch. Familie, 158 ff.; Beauchamp, "Aboriginal Communal Life in America," Am. Antiquarian, IX, 343-50, attacking Morgan's views, holding that proper communism is not found among the red Indians; Giraud-Teulon, Les origines du mariage, 92-101, 169 ff.; Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 99, 101, 149, 316 ff., who, for the Australian groups, sustain Morgan as opposed to McLennan; Wake, op. cit., 15, 19, 112, 266 ff., 297 ff.; Letourneau, L'évolution du mariage, 432, 433, who accepts Morgan's five forms of the family; Kovalevsky, op. cit., 9, 10; Maine, Early Law and Custom, 195 ff., passim; Peschel, Races of Man, 224, 228 ff., who rejects Morgan's conclusions; Lubbock, "Development of Relationships," Jour. Anth. Inst., Feb., 1871.
[234] Studies in Ancient History, I, viii, 83-146. McLennan's views are somewhat modified and further developed in his Patriarchal Theory, notably in chaps. xii and xiii, 181-242; and a mass of new material is presented in his Studies, 2d ser. (1896).
[235] In his two earlier works McLennan is vague as to the exact meaning of "promiscuity" and "polyandry;" but in his letter to Darwin (1874), Studies, II, 50-56, he defines these terms, so that, in effect, he makes important concessions to the adherents of early monogamy and polygyny and to those critics who have questioned his theory of universal phases of progress. He says, referring to the first series of Studies: "The import of my reasoning is that more or less of it [promiscuity] and of indifference must appear in the hordes or their sections or some of them." It is used to "denote the general conduct as to sexual matters of men without wives.... Now I agree with you that from what we know of human nature we may be sure that each man would aim at having one or more women to himself, and cases would occur wherein for a longer or shorter time the aim would be realized, and there would be instances of what we may call polygyny and monogamy—your first stage.... I take it, polygyny, monogamy, and polyandry (or its equivalents) must have occurred in every district from the first;" but the cases of polyandry would be much more numerous. "Polyandry, in my view, is an advance from, and contraction of, promiscuity. It gives men wives. Till men have wives they may have tastes, but they have no obligations in matters of sex. You may be sure polygyny in the early stage never had the sanction of group opinion." This late explanation does not, however, relieve the author from responsibility for the misleading statements or obscurities of his earlier works. Cf. the rather too appreciative review of the second series of Studies by Professor Giddings, in Annals of the Am. Academy, IV, 97-100.
[236] Studies, I, 83, 88-90.
[237] Ibid., chap. viii.
[238] On the three systems of kinship see Post, Familienrecht, 6 ff.
[239] McLennan, op. cit., I, 83, 84.
[240] Ibid., 90, 91, 75-77; II, 77-80. After the appearance of totem groups, infanticide would be checked by the blood-feud: ibid., I, 145.
[241] Ibid., 91-93.