158 SYSTEMS OP CONSANGUINITY AND AFFINITY 



system, but was developed subsequently by the more advanced nations to remove an 

 irreo-ularity which amounted to a blemish. It was, however, pre-determined by the 

 elements of the system that, if ever invented, it Avould be restricted to the children 

 of a brother and sister. The admission of the children of my cousins into the same 

 relationships as the children of my own brothers and sisters seems to be entirely 

 arbitrary, and yet it is not a departure from the general principles of the system. 



On the mother's side, in the same line, I being a male (Plate VII), my mother's 

 brother is my uncle, Hoc-nd -sell., and calls me his nephew. Herein is found a sixth 

 indicative feature. The relationship of uncle is restricted to the brothers of my 

 mother, to the exclusion of those of my father. It is also applied to the brothers of 

 such other persons, and no other, as stand to me in the relation of a mother. My 

 mother's brother's son and daughter are my cousins, Ah-gdre' -seJi, and call me tlie 

 same ; the son and daughter of my male consul are my son and daughter, each of 

 them calling me father, and their children are my grandchildren. On the other 

 hand, the son and daughter of my female cousin are my nephew and niece, each 

 of them calling me uncle ; and their children are my grandchildren, each of them 

 addressing me by the correlative term. Supposing myself a female, the relation- 

 ships of the children of these cousins are reversed as in the previous cases, whilst, 

 in other respects, there is no change. 



The relationship of uncle in Indian society is, in several particulars, more im- 

 portant than any other from the authority with which he is invested over his 

 nephews and nieces. He is, practically, rather more the head of his sister's family 

 than his sister's husband. It may be illustrated in several ways from present usages. 

 Amongst the Choctas, for example, if a boy is to be placed at school his uncle, 

 instead of his father, takes him to the mission and makes the arrangement. An 

 uncle, among the AVinncbagocs, may require services of a nephew, or administer 

 correction, which his own father would neither ask nor attempt. In like manner 

 with the lowas and Otoes, an uncle may appropriate to his own use his nephew's 

 horse or his gun, or other personal property, without being questioned, which his 

 o^vn father would have no recognized right to do. But over his nieces this same 

 authority is more significant, from his participation in their marriage contracts, 

 which, in many Indian nations, are founded upon a consideration in the nature of 

 presents. Not to enlarge upon this topic, the facts seem to reveal an idea familiar 

 as AveU on the Asiatic as the American Continent, and nearly as ancient as human 

 society, namely, the establishment of a brother in authority over his sister's chil- 

 dren.^ It finds its roots in the tribal organization, and that form of it which limits 

 ■descent to the female line, under which the children of a man's sister are of the 

 same tribe with himself. 



In the fourth and last branch of this line, myself a male, my mother's sister I 

 call my mother, Xo-)/e7i\ and she calls me her son. This constitutes a seventh 

 indicative feature of the system. All of several sisters are placed in the relation 

 of a mother to the children of each otlier. My mother's sister's son and daughter 



Amongst the Zulus or Kafirs of South Africa an nude occupies a similar position of authority. 



