Anthropology/ in Australia. 17 



m-ibed to him the secret ceremonies of initintion to inunliood, 

 which must ccitainly exist, and which are most important as 

 furnishing a key to many otherwise puzzling customs. 



This, then, l>eing generally the case with those who have 

 })ersonally observed these savages, what can be expected 

 from those who have taken up the observations of others for 

 the ])urpose of generalisation as to the origin of social 

 institutions in the Australian tribes, or generally throughout 

 the world. This becomes clearly evident when one considers 

 the conclusions reached as to the origin of the family by 

 Bachofen, McLennan, Mayne, and Morgan, who may be 

 here taken as representing four well marked and j)rogressive 

 stages of opinion. 



Bachofen, working altogether from a classical standpoint, 

 elaborated a strange and somewhat grotesque hypothesis of 

 a former universal gynecocracy. He held that of old 

 mankind was found in a condition of universal hetarism, 

 from which it was raised by the establishment of 

 gynecocracy by women, as a continuous protest against 

 the degradation to which man's superior physical powers 

 had reduced her. It is evident that he saw, dull and 

 distorted, as through a glass clarkl}^, the traces of the 

 Matriarchal system which was once universal, and which 

 still exists among certain savage tribes. 



McLennan, advancing a step further, built his theory on a 

 wider foundation of classically extinct and modern existing 

 custom, and saw, as he believed, the origin of the family in 

 polyandry, which was brought about by a scarcity of 

 women, produced by female infanticide. The actual 

 existence of polyandry as a form of the family, the numbers 

 of facts marshalled by him with consummate ability, both 

 from ancient and modern sources, caused his theory to be 

 widely accepted, and to have an authority wdiich is still 

 recognised by a section of anthropologists. 



Mayne was led to form certain views by his investigation 

 into the true character of early institutions as handed down 

 to us by the archaic records of our own Aryan ancestors, 

 illustrated by the existing customs of some of their 

 descendants. He compared his results with the ancient 

 records of Semitic peoples, and he arrived at the conclusion 

 that the primitive form of the ftimily was that known as 

 the Patriarchal, in which the power of the father was 

 predominant, and which was characterised more or less by 

 polygamy. 



