Tlie Primitive Democracij of the Germans. 37 



keep up their tribal organization, with a quasi authority over 

 the lands assigned to them by the national government. 



The structure of society forms, therefore, the first subject 

 of inquiry in the history of early institutions. And here we 

 notice a still more fundamental contrast with modern society. 

 Modern society, at least here in the United States, has no 

 structure at all beyond the loose institution of the family; 

 apart from these petty communities our society is composed 

 simply of individuals with no organic connection with one 

 another, except such as grows out of political relations or 

 private association. But all early societies are highly or- 

 ganized and closely coherent. The man does not exist 

 except as a member of an organization. Any person who 

 stands outside of the organization is in the strictest sense of 

 the term an outlaw. The structure of society must, there- 

 fore, be sought first, and the land system will necessarily be 

 an outgrowth of that. 



I will first examine the earliest writer, Cassar, by himself, 

 then see how far the statements of Tacitus agree with those 

 of Cfesar, and what system of society and land tenure may 

 be assumed for both periods. 



It has become a common place of political history that 

 early society was founded upon the Family; or, if we go 

 back to the rudest beginnings, where the Family as an insti- 

 tution did not exist, upon Kinship. That this was the case 

 among the ancient Germans, and that the occupation of the 

 land was based upon the family, is testified to in the most 

 positive manner by Caesar (B. G. vi. 22), where he says that 

 the lands are assigned by the magistrates to the several 

 clans and kindreds of men {gentihus cognationibusque 

 hoininton). This assignment, he adds, is made for a year at 

 a time {in annos singulos), and that it is made at a public 

 gathering, appears to follow from the words qui una coierunt, 

 " who have assembled together,'' where the relative must 

 refer to /tommwrn, "mien." Among the reasons mentioned 

 for this custom of annual division is the significant one that 

 thus they are able to maintain an equality of possessions 

 {cum suas quisque opes cum potentissimis aequari videat, 

 "each one of the community seeing his own possessions 



