Ancient society - Lewis Henry Morgan

The idea of property has undergone a similar growth and development. Commencing at zero in savagery, the passion for the possession of property, as the representative of accumulated subsistence, has now become dominant over the human mind in civilized races.

The four classes of facts above indicated, and which extend themselves in parallel lines along the pathways of human progress from savagery to civilization, form the principal subjects of discussion in this volume.

There is one field of labor in which, as Americans, we have a special interest as well as a special duty. Rich as the American continent is known to be in material wealth, it is also the richest of all the continents in ethnological, philological and archæological materials, illustrative of the great period of barbarism. Since mankind were one in origin, their career has been essentially one, running in different but uniform channels upon all continents, and very similarly in all the tribes and nations of mankind down to the same status of advancement. It follows that the history and experience of the American Indian tribes represent, more or less nearly, the history and experience of our own remote ancestors when in corresponding conditions. Forming a part of the human record, their institutions, arts, inventions and practical experience possess a high and special value reaching far beyond the Indian race itself.

When discovered, the American Indian tribes represented three distinct ethnical periods, and more completely than they were elsewhere then represented upon the earth. Materials for ethnology, philology and archæology were offered in unparalleled abundance; but as these sciences scarcely existed until the present century, and are but feebly prosecuted among us at the present time, the workmen have been unequal to the work. Moreover, while fossil remains buried in the earth will keep for the future student, the remains of Indian arts, languages and institutions will not. They are perishing daily, and have been perishing for upwards of three centuries. The ethnic life of the Indian tribes is declining under the influence of American civilization, their arts and languages are disappearing, and their institutions are dissolving. After a few more years, facts that may now be gathered with ease will become impossible of discovery. These circumstances appeal strongly to Americans to enter this great field and gather its abundant harvest.

Rochester, New York, March, 1877.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PART I.
GROWTH OF INTELLIGENCE THROUGH INVENTIONS ANDDISCOVERIES.
CHAPTER I.
ETHNICAL PERIODS.
Progress of Mankind from the Bottom of the Scale.—Illustrated by Inventions,Discoveries and Institutions.—Two Plans of Government—oneGentile and Social, giving a Society (Societas); the other Political,giving a State (Civitas).—The former founded upon Persons andGentilism; the Latter upon Territory and Property.—The First, thePlan of Government of Ancient Society.—The Second, that of Modernor Civilized Society.—Uniformity of Human Experience.—ProposedEthnical Periods—I. Lower Status of Savagery; II. Middle Statusof Savagery; III. Upper Status of Savagery; IV. Lower Status ofBarbarism; V. Middle Status of Barbarism; VI. Upper Status ofBarbarism; VII. Status of Civilization.	[3]
CHAPTER II.
ARTS OF SUBSISTENCE.
Supremacy of Mankind over the Earth.—Control over Subsistence theCondition.—Mankind alone gained that Control.—Successive Arts ofSubsistence—I. Natural Subsistence; II. Fish Subsistence; III.Farinaceous Subsistence; IV. Meat and Milk Subsistence; V. UnlimitedSubsistence through Field Agriculture.—Long Intervals of Timebetween them.	[19]
CHAPTER III.
RATIO OF HUMAN PROGRESS.
Retrospect on the Lines of Human Progress.—Principal Contributions ofModern Civilization.—Of Ancient Civilization.—Of Later Period ofBarbarism.—Of Middle Period.—Of Older Period.—Of Period ofSavagery.—Humble Condition of Primitive Man.—Human Progressin a Geometrical Ratio.—Relative Length of Ethnical Periods.—Appearanceof Semitic and Aryan Families.	[29]
PART II.
GROWTH OF THE IDEA OF GOVERNMENT.
CHAPTER I.
ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY UPON THE BASIS OF SEX.
Australian Classes.—Organized upon Sex.—Archaic Character of the Organization.—AustralianGentes.—The Eight Classes.—Rule of Marriage.—Descentin the Female Line.—Stupendous Conjugal System.—TwoMale and Two Female Classes in each Gens.—Innovations upon theClasses.—Gens still Rudimentary.	[49]
CHAPTER II.
THE IROQUOIS GENS.
The Gentile Organization.—Its Wide Prevalence.—Definition of a Gens.—Descentin the Female Line the Archaic Rule.—Rights, Privilegesand Obligations of Members of a Gens.—Right of Electing and Deposingits Sachem and Chiefs.—Obligation not to marry in the Gens.—MutualRights of Inheritance of the Property of deceased Members.—ReciprocalObligations of Help, Defense and Redress of Injuries.—Rightof Naming its Members.—Right of Adopting Strangers into theGens.—Common Religious Rites, Query.—A Common Burial Place.—Councilof the Gens.—Gentes named after Animals.—Number of Personsin a Gens.	[62]
CHAPTER III.
THE IROQUOIS PHRATRY.
Definition of a Phratry.—Kindred Gentes Reunited in a Higher Organization.—Phratryof the Iroquois Tribes.—Its Composition.—Its Usesand Functions.—Social and Religious.—Illustrations.—The Analogueof the Grecian Phratry; but in its Archaic Form.—Phratries of theChoctas.—Of the Chickasas.—Of the Mohegans.—Of the Thlinkeets.—TheirProbable Universality in the Tribes of the American Aborigines.	[88]
CHAPTER IV.
THE IROQUOIS TRIBE.
The Tribe as an Organization.—Composed of Gentes Speaking the sameDialect.—Separation in Area led to Divergence of Speech, and Segmentation.—TheTribe a Natural Growth.—Illustrations.—Attributesof a Tribe.—A Territory and Name.—An Exclusive Dialect.—TheRight to Invest and Depose its Sachems and Chiefs.—A ReligiousFaith and Worship.—A Council of Chiefs.—A Head-Chief of Tribein some Instances.—Three successive Forms of Gentile Government:First, a Government of One Power; Second, of Two Powers; Third,of Three Powers.	[102]
CHAPTER V.
THE IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
Confederacies Natural Growths.—Founded upon Common Gentes, and aCommon Language.—The Iroquois Tribes.—Their Settlement in NewYork.—Formation of the Confederacy.—Its Structure and Principles.—FiftySachemships Created.—Made Hereditary in certain Gentes.—Numberassigned to each Tribe.—These Sachems formed the Councilof the Confederacy.—The Civil Council.—Its Mode of TransactingBusiness.—Unanimity Necessary to its Action.—The Mourning Council.—Modeof Raising up Sachems.—General Military Commanders.—ThisOffice the Germ of that of a Chief Executive Magistrate.—IntellectualCapacity of the Iroquois.	[122]
CHAPTER VI.
GENTES IN OTHER TRIBES OF THE GANOWÁNIAN FAMILY.
Divisions of American Aborigines.—Gentes in Indian Tribes; with theirRules of Descent and Inheritance.—I. Hodenosaunian Tribes.—II.[Pg xii]Dakotian.—III. Gulf.—IV. Pawnee.—V. Algonkin.—VI. Athapasco-Apache.—VII.Tribes of North-west Coast.—Eskimos, a DistinctFamily.—VIII. Salish, Sahaptin, and Kootenay Tribes.—IX. Shoshonee.—X.Village Indians of New Mexico, Mexico and CentralAmerica.—XI. South American Indian Tribes.—Probable Universalityof the Organization in Gentes in the Ganowánian Family.	[151]
CHAPTER VII.
THE AZTEC CONFEDERACY.
Misconception of Aztec Society.—Condition of Advancement.—NahuatlacTribes.—Their Settlement in Mexico.—Pueblo of Mexico founded,A. D. 1325.—Aztec Confederacy established, A. D. 1426.—Extent ofTerritorial Domination.—Probable Number of the People.—Whetheror not the Aztecs were organized in Gentes and Phratries.—TheCouncil of Chiefs.—Its probable Functions.—Office held by Montezuma.—Electivein Tenure.—Deposition of Montezuma.—ProbableFunctions of the Office.—Aztec Institutions essentially Democratical.—TheGovernment a Military Democracy.	[186]
CHAPTER VIII.
THE GRECIAN GENS.
Early Condition of Grecian Tribes.—Organized into Gentes.—Changes inthe Character of the Gens.—Necessity for a Political System.—Problemto be Solved.—The Formation of a State.—Grote’s Descriptionof the Grecian Gentes.—Of their Phratries and Tribes.—Rights, Privilegesand Obligations of the Members of the Gens.—Similar to thoseof the Iroquois Gens.—The Office of Chief of the Gens.—WhetherElective or Hereditary.—The Gens the Basis of the Social System.—Antiquityof the Gentile Lineage.—Inheritance of Property.—Archaicand Final Rule.—Relationships between the Members of a Gens.—TheGens the Center of Social and Religious Influence.	[215]
CHAPTER IX.
THE GRECIAN PHRATRY, TRIBE AND NATION.
The Athenian Phratry.—How Formed.—Definition of Dikæarchus.—Objectschiefly Religious.—The Phratriarch.—The Tribe.—Composedof Three Phratries.—The Phylo Basileus.—The Nation.—Composedof Four Tribes.—Boulê, or Council of Chiefs.—Agora, or Assembly ofthe People.—The Basileus.—Tenure of the Office.—Military andPriestly Functions.—Civil Functions not shown.—Governments of theHeroic Age, Military Democracies.—Aristotle’s Definition of a Basileus.—LaterAthenian Democracy.—Inherited from the Gentes.—ItsPowerful Influence upon Athenian Development.	[235]
CHAPTER X.
THE INSTITUTION OF GRECIAN POLITICAL SOCIETY.
Failure of the Gentes as a Basis of Government.—Legislation of Theseus.—AttemptedSubstitution of Classes.—Its Failure.—Abolition of theOffice of Basileus.—The Archonship.—Naucraries and Trittyes.—Legislationof Solon.—The Property Classes.—Partial Transfer ofCivil Power from the Gentes to the Classes.—Persons unattached toany Gens.—Made Citizens.—The Senate.—The Ecclesia.—PoliticalSociety partially attained.—Legislation of Cleisthenes.—Institutionof Political Society.—The Attic Deme or Township.—Its Organizationand Powers.—Its Local Self-government.—The Local Tribe orDistrict.—The Attic Commonwealth.—Athenian Democracy.	[256]
CHAPTER XI.
THE ROMAN GENS.
Italian Tribes Organized in Gentes.—Founding of Rome.—Tribes Organizedinto a Military Democracy.—The Roman Gens.—Definition ofa Gentilis by Cicero.—By Festus.—By Varro.—Descent in Male Line.—Marryingout of the Gens.—Rights, Privileges and Obligations ofthe Members of a Gens.—Democratic Constitution of Ancient LatinSociety.—Number of Persons in a Gens.	[277]
CHAPTER XII.
THE ROMAN CURIA, TRIBE AND POPULUS.
Roman Gentile Society.—Four Stages of Organization.—1. The Gens;2. The Curia, consisting of Ten Gentes; 3. The Tribe, composed ofTen Curiæ; 4. The Populus Romanus, composed of Three Tribes.—NumericalProportions.—How Produced.—Concentration of Gentesat Rome.—The Roman Senate.—Its Functions.—The Assembly ofthe People.—Its Powers.—The People Sovereign.—Office of MilitaryCommander (Rex).—Its Powers and Functions.—Roman Gentile Institutionsessentially Democratical.	[300]
CHAPTER XIII.
THE INSTITUTION OF ROMAN POLITICAL SOCIETY.
The Populus.—The Plebeians.—The Clients.—The Patricians.—Limits ofthe Order.—Legislation of Servius Tullius.—Institution of PropertyClasses.—Of the Centuries.—Unequal Suffrage.—Comitia Centuriata.[Pg xiv]—Supersedes Comitia Curiata.—Classes supersede the Gentes.—TheCensus.—Plebeians made Citizens.—Institution of City Wards.—OfCountry Townships.—Tribes increased to Four.—Made Localinstead of Consanguine.—Character of New Political System.—Declineand Disappearance of Gentile Organization.—The Work itAccomplished.	[323]
CHAPTER XIV.
CHANGE OF DESCENT FROM THE FEMALE TO THE MALE LINE.
How the Change might have been made.—Inheritance of Property theMotive.—Descent in the Female Line among the Lycians.—The Cretans.—TheEtruscans.—Probably among the Athenians in the time ofCecrops.—The Hundred Families of the Locrians.—Evidence fromMarriages.—Turanian System of Consanguinity among GrecianTribes.—Legend of the Danaidæ.	[343]
CHAPTER XV.
GENTES IN OTHER TRIBES OF THE HUMAN FAMILY.
The Scottish Clan.—The Irish Sept.—Germanic Tribes.—Traces of a priorGentile System.—Gentes in Southern Asiatic Tribes.—In Northern.—InUralian Tribes.—Hundred Families of Chinese.—Hebrew Tribes.—Composedof Gentes and Phratries Apparently.—Gentes in AfricanTribes.—In Australian Tribes.—Subdivisions of Fejees and Rewas.—WideDistribution of Gentile Organization.	[357]
PART III.
GROWTH OF THE IDEA OF THE FAMILY.
CHAPTER I.
THE ANCIENT FAMILY.
Five successive Forms of the Family.—First, the Consanguine Family.—Itcreated the Malayan System of Consanguinity and Affinity.—Second,the Punaluan.—It created the Turanian and Ganowánian System.—Third,the Monogamian.—It created the Aryan, Semitic, and UralianSystem.—The Syndyasmian and Patriarchal Families Intermediate.—[Pg xv]Both failed to create a System of Consanguinity.—These SystemsNatural Growths.—Two Ultimate Forms.—One Classificatory, theother Descriptive.—General Principles of these Systems.—Their PersistentMaintenance.	[383]
CHAPTER II.
THE CONSANGUINE FAMILY.
Former Existence of this Family.—Proved by Malayan System of Consanguinity.—HawaiianSystem used as Typical.—Five Grades ofRelations.—Details of System.—Explained in its origin by the Intermarriageof Brothers and Sisters in a Group.—Early State of Societyin the Sandwich Islands.—Nine Grades of Relations of the Chinese.—Identicalin Principle with the Hawaiian.—Five Grades of Relationsin Ideal Republic of Plato.—Table of Malayan System of Consanguinityand Affinity.	[401]
CHAPTER III.
THE PUNALUAN FAMILY.
The Punaluan Family supervened upon the Consanguine.—Transition,how Produced.—Hawaiian Custom of Punalua.—Its probable ancientPrevalence over wide Areas.—The Gentes originated probably inPunaluan Groups.—The Turanian System of Consanguinity.—Createdby the Punaluan Family.—It proves the Existence of this Family whenthe System was formed.—Details of System.—Explanation of itsRelationships in their Origin.—Table of Turanian and GanowánianSystems of Consanguinity and Affinity.	[424]
CHAPTER IV.
THE SYNDYASMIAN AND THE PATRIARCHAL FAMILIES.
The Syndyasmian Family.—How Constituted.—Its Characteristics.—Influenceupon it of the Gentile Organization.—Propensity to Pair a lateDevelopment.—Ancient Society should be Studied where the highestExemplifications are found.—The Patriarchal Family.—Paternal Powerits Essential Characteristic.—Polygamy subordinate.—The RomanFamily similar.—Paternal Power unknown in previous Families.	[453]
CHAPTER V.
THE MONOGAMIAN FAMILY.
This Family comparatively Modern.—The Term Familia.—Family of AncientGermans.—Of Homeric Greeks.—Of Civilized Greeks.—Seclusion[Pg xvi]of Wives.—Obligations of Monogamy not respected by the Males.—The Roman Family.—Wives under Power.—Aryan System of Consanguinity.—Itcame in under Monogamy.—Previous System probablyTuranian.—Transition from Turanian into Aryan.—Roman and ArabicSystems of Consanguinity.—Details of the Former.—Present MonogamianFamily.—Table of Roman and Arabic Systems.	[468]
CHAPTER VI.
SEQUENCE OF INSTITUTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE FAMILY.
Sequence in part Hypothetical.—Relation of these Institutions in the Orderof their Origination.—Evidence of their Origination in the Ordernamed.—Hypothesis of Degradation Considered.—The Antiquity ofMankind.	[498]
PART IV.
GROWTH OF THE IDEA OF PROPERTY.
CHAPTER I.
THE THREE RULES OF INHERITANCE.
Property in the Status of Savagery.—Slow Rate of Progress.—First Ruleof Inheritance.—Property Distributed among the Gentiles.—Propertyin the Lower Status of Barbarism.—Germ of Second Rule of Inheritance.—Distributedamong Agnatic Kindred.—Improved Character ofMan.—Property in Middle Status.—Rule of Inheritance imperfectlyKnown.—Agnatic Inheritance Probable.	[522]
CHAPTER II.
THE THREE RULES OF INHERITANCE—CONTINUED.
Property in the Upper Status of Barbarism.—Slavery.—Tenure of Landsin Grecian Tribes.—Culture of the Period.—Its Brilliancy.—ThirdRule of Inheritance.—Exclusively in Children.—Hebrew Tribes.—Ruleof Inheritance.—Daughters of Zelophehad.—Property remainedin the Phratry, and probably in the Gens.—The Reversion.—AthenianInheritance.—Exclusively in Children.—The Reversion.—Inheritanceremained in the Gens.—Heiresses.—Wills.—Roman Inheritance.—TheReversion.—Property remained in the Gens.—Appearance of Aristocracy.—PropertyCareer of the Human Race.—Unity of Origin ofMankind.	[537]