1GO SYSTEMS OF CONSANGUINITY AND AFFINITY 



and the same will hereafter be found to be the case with each of the remaining 

 collateral lines as far as the fact of consanguinity can be traced. This constitutes 

 a ninth indicative feature of the system. It prevents consanguinei, near and 

 remote, from falling without the relationship of grandfather in the ascending series, 

 that of grandson in the descending, and that of nephew and cousin in the greatest 

 divergence of the collateral lines from the lineal line. 



Each of the wives of these several collateral brothers, and of these several male 

 cousins, is my sister-in-law, Ah-ge^ah'-ne-ah, each of them calling me brother-in-law, 

 Ha-ya'-o. In like manner, each of the husbands of these several collateral sisters, 

 and of these several female cousins, is my brother-in-law, Ah-ge-ah'-ne^o, each of 

 them calling me brother-in-law, Ha-ya'-o, if I am a male, and Ka-ya'-o, if a female. 

 There are several different relationships which are classified together in our system 

 under the descriptive phrases brother-in-law and sister-in-law, which are discrimi- 

 nated from each other in the Indian system, and distinguished by independent 

 terms. 



The foregoing explanations dispose of the second collateral line in its four branches, 

 whether Ego be considered male or female, together with the marriage relationships. 

 It provides a place and a term for each and every person connected with either of 

 these branches, and holds them all within the degree of cousin and grandchild. 

 Not one is allowed to pass beyond the recognition of this all-embracing system of 

 relationship. 



Among ourselves our nearest kindred, as well as the greater portion of those 

 whose connection is recognized under our system, are found in the lineal and first 

 and second collateral lines. After they are properly classified the system would 

 answer the ordinary requirements of domestic life. Those beyond, as remote col- 

 laterals, might have been placed under general terms outside of the near degrees ; 

 but the theory of the Indian system is averse to the rejection of collaterals however 

 remote, and insists upon the unqualified, recognition of the bond of consanguinity. 

 Kindred are bound together in the family relationships in virtue of their descent 

 from common ancestors ; so that the differences in the degrees of nearness, which 

 are accidental, are subordinated to the blood-connection, which is indissoluble. 

 Wherever, then, the chain of consanguinity can be traced, and the connection of 

 persons ascertained, the system at once includes them in its comprehensive grasp. 

 Such at least is the system as it now appears considered in the light of existing 

 institutions. There may have been a state of society, as will be seen in the sequel, 

 when the relationships we have been considering were true to the nature of descents 

 as they actually existed when the system, in its present form, came into use. These 

 results, as they now exist, were apparently effected by adopting the principle of 

 classification established in the first and second collateral lines and extending it to 

 the third, fourth, and even others more remote, theoretically, without limit. This 

 established another principle equally fundamental in the system, which is the follow- 

 ing : The children of own brothers, as has been shown, are brothers and sisters to 

 each other, elder or younger, and^o are the children of own sisters. In like man- 

 ner the children of these collateral brothers are also brothers and sisters to each 

 other, and so are the children of these collateral sisters. Advancing downwards 



