Apkil 24, 1885.] 



SCIENCE. 



347 



the kinds of kinship recognized in primitive 

 society. First, then, kinship by consanguinity 

 and kinship by affinity are clearly distinguished. 

 Then kinship by consanguinit} r , or ' cognation,' 

 as designated in Roman law, is divided into 

 parts. The consanguineal kindred of any 

 given person may constitute a large body. 

 There may be selected from this body all of 

 those persons whose kinship may be traced 

 exclusively through males. Such kinship was 

 called by the Romans ; agnation,' and the 

 body of included kindred, ' agnates.' From 

 the same body of cognates there may be se- 

 lected all those who can trace their kinship 

 exclusively through females. Let such kinship 

 be termed 'enation,' and the body thus con- 

 stituted, 'enates.' The agnates and enates 

 together constitute but a part of the whole 

 body of consanguinei or cognates. In all 

 tribal society, either the agnates or the enates 

 are clearly distinguished from the other cog- 

 nates, and organized into a bod} r politic, usually 

 called the clan or gens. 



Maine holds in that primitive society agna- 

 tion was the only kinship recognized, and 

 that enation is an accidental and infrequent 

 derivative ; that the true course of kinship 

 development is from agnation to cognation. 

 McLennan holds that in primitive society 

 enation only was known ; that agnation is an 

 accidental and infrequent derivative ; and that 

 the true course of evolution is from enation 

 to cognation. The fact is, that cognation, 

 including enation and agnation, is primitive ; 

 that is, that no societ}^ has yet been dis- 

 covered among the savage tribes still living 

 on the globe, or in recorded history, that 

 has not recognized cognation in its different 

 branches ; and in all cases different kinds of 

 kinship have been used for different organizing 

 purposes. 



In the simplest form above mentioned, where 

 the group constituting a tribal state is organ- 

 ized into sub-groups, sometimes the higher 

 group is bound together by affinity and general 

 cognation, while the smaller group has a kin- 

 ship bond of enation. And, again, sometimes 

 the higher group is bound together by affinity 

 and general cognation, while the smaller group 

 is organized on agnation. In either case, the 

 tribal bond is affinity with cognation ; and in 

 like manner the clan bond is either agnation 

 or enation. The evidence that cognation has 

 been recognized in all tribal peoples, is com- 

 plete. Not a single tribe has yet been found 

 to ignore it in its social organization ; and, in 

 every language that has been investigated, kin- 

 ship terms for it are discovered. The real 



question, therefore, is not whether agnation or 

 enation is the more primitive, but whether ag- 

 natic kinship or enatic kinship was the tie which 

 bound together the members of a clan or smaller 

 group in the tribal organization. Sir Henry 

 Maine and the McLennan brothers alike have 

 failed to discover this, one of the most patent 

 facts concerning primitive institutions ; and 

 this failure has led both parties into the most 

 radical errors. 



There is another institutional principle which 

 seems to be primordial ; at any rate, it is every- 

 where woven into primitive custom-law. This 

 principle will here be called ' elder-rule.' It 

 would seem that primitive men in the savage 

 state, groping for some means to prevent con- 

 troversy and secure peace, hit upon the very 

 obvious expedient of giving authority to 

 the elder ; so that, in all the relations of life, 

 superior age should confer authority. 



There are thus two primordial principles in 

 early law : the first is that kinship hy affinity 

 and consanguinity is the bond of society ; and 

 the second is that authority inheres in the 

 elder. These two principles have been worked 

 out in many and diverse wa}'s, and about them 

 have gathered many legal fictions ; but they 

 were primordial, and have been universal down 

 the whole course of histoiy, including the 

 highest civilization ; so that even now affinity 

 and consanguinity, both agnatic and enatic, 

 together with elder-rule, still continue, — the 

 one as the bond of the civilized family, and the 

 other as its rule of authority. But the history 

 of the application of these principles is long 

 and varied. 



The Roman patriarchate was defined by 

 agnation ; and the group was a body whose 

 kinship was reckoned only through males, and 

 over whom the patriarch, who was the highest 

 male ascendant, was the ruler. This ruler had 

 despotic power. He owned his wife, and by 

 legal fiction reckoned her as the elder sister of 

 his daughters. He also owned his sons, and 

 his sons' wives, and their children, and was 

 the owner or custodian of all the propert}- be- 

 longing to the group. This is patria potestas. 

 The patriarchy, therefore, is a despotic form 

 of elder-rule exercised by the eldest ascendani 

 over a group of agnatic descendants. On the 

 death of the patriarch, the group was dismem- 

 bered into as many parts as there were sons 

 with families. The patriarchal group, there- 

 fore, was dissolved and re-organized with every 

 passing generation. 



There is another form of elder-rule, which 

 I shall denominate ' presbiarclry,' in which the 

 ruler is the oldest man of the kinship group, 



