CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY '"'"'* HQ 504.mT"i886""'"'* 3 1924 021 847 060 The original of tiiis book is in tile Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924021847060 STUDIES IN ANCIENT HISTOEY COMPRISING A EEPBINT OP PRIMITIVE MAERIAGE STUDIES IN ANCIENT HISTORY COMPRISING A RBPKINT OF PRIMITIVE MAREIAGE AN INQUIRY INTO THE ORIGIN OF THE FORM OF CAPTURE IN MARRIAGE CEREMONIES \ BY THE LATE JOHN FERGUSON McLENNAN A NEW EDITION ILontion MACMILLAN AND GO. AND NEW YORK 1886 The Right of Translation and Reproduction )> Reserved (f>lC>0> J) IL 4.z/Pf7 UNiV!::^S<TYl Richard Clay & Sons, bread street hill, london, Jinngnj/, Suffolk. — —; PKEFACE TO THE PEESENT EDITION. This volume is a reprint of Studies in Ancient History as published in 1876, with notes added only where they appeared to be indispensable. It is pro- posed to follow it up with a second volume containing other writings of the author—writings for the most part hitherto unpublished, and prepared for a work which was left unfinished—from which it will be possible to gather, in a considerable measure at least, how far the author's views had grown or been de- veloped, how far they had changed or been added to, subsequently to the appearance of Primitive Marriage. It seemed best therefore to attempt no statement about this at present. And there was equal reason against doing the same thing fragmentarily in notes. The notes have accordingly been confined to certain matters on which the author had announced a change of view and to some others e.g. Mr. Morgan's speculations where circumstances had made an additional statement vi PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION. imperative. No better opportunity could occur, how- ever, for doing what (as appears from the Preface to the former edition) the author had felt to be very desirable—making a pretty full collection of examples of the form of capture ; and this has been done in the Appendix to Primitive Marriage, upon the basis of a collection which the author published in 1866. The examples thus brought together suffice, at least, to show an extraordinary diflfusion for this marriage custom. A reminder may be given that Primitive Marriage was a first essay in a new field, and that the author (always hoping to be able either to supplement or supersede it) never revised it with a view to freeing it from defects that are unavoidable in such a case. There is, therefore (to say nothing of more im- portant things) a minor proposition or two, casually laid down and unrelated to the main purpose of the book, which he probably would not have repeated. There are cases, no doubt, in which he would have amended his language ; sometimes for exactness' sake, and sometimes on account of misconceptions which he had not foreseen as possible. There are cases, too, in which, with the fuller knowledge he subsequently had, he would have supplemented, or amended, or re- arranged his facts—and, indeed, our knowledge of gome PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION. vii barbarous and savage peoples has been much enlarged since 1865. There is nothing, however, he could have added to or varied in the facts which would have much affected the argument of the book ; and, for the peoples whose customs are most likely to be helpful in reasoning about early societies, the facts will be gone into pretty fully in the projected volume already spoken of. Of misapprehensions as to his language there is one which should be noticed here. This is a misapprehen- sion as to the words exogamy and endogamy. These terms were introduced on account of two particular things—two laws relating to marriage—for each of which a name seemed to be wanted. One of these laws, when at its widest, forbids marriage between all persons of the same blood-connection or kindred — whether such kindred forms a local tribe by itself ; or whether it is one of several different kindreds which together form a local tribe ; or whether (as often happens) it occurs, along with other kindreds, as an element in more than one local tribe. This law was, when Primitive Marriage was written, unnamed ; and the author termed it exogamy. It is not prohibition of marriage between persons of the same tribal com- munity because of tribesmanship, or of anything that viii PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION: is necessarily involved in tribesmanship. When at its widest, it is prohibition of marriage between all persons recognised as being of the same blood, because of their common blood—whether they form one community, or part only of a community, or parts of several com- munities ; and, accordingly, it may prevent marriage between persons who (though of the same blood) are of diflFerent local tribes, while it frequently happens that it leaves persons of the same local tribe (but who are not of the same blood) free to marry one another. Such is this law, and aU the author had to do was to find a name for it ; the sense of the term was not in his choice. That it was convenient the law should have a name will scarcely be disputed. Whether the term exogamy might have been applied with more propriety to something else is, no doubt, a different matter ; but that to which, whether by choice or through misconception, some later writers have applied it, does not seem to be much in need of any special name. The second marriage law for which a name was wanted, allows marriage only between persons who are recognised as being of the same blood-connection or kindred ; and if, where it occurs, it confines marriage to the tribe or community, it is because the tribe regards itself as comprising a kindred. This law the PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION. ix author termed endogamy ; and here again it is not his choice, but the nature of the law which had to be named, which makes the term as proposed by him inapplicable to local tribes in general. For the law occurs in those local tribes only which regard them- selves as one blood, and restrict intermarriage to men and women of the tribe because of their blood ; and it need not be said what a multitude of tribes are known in which those two conditions are not combined. The tribes which do present them are numerous enough nevertheless, to make it inconvenient that their marriage law should have no name. No doubt there is again the question whether the term proposed might not have been applied with more propriety to something else ; but that to which some later writers have applied it might be left unnamed—even with advantage. For they have used endogamy to denote the mere fact that marriages occur between persons belonging to the same local tribe ; thereby combining under one name the results in working of the marriage law last spoken of, with certain of the results of the marriage law which had been named exogamy—things which, being of different origin and of entirely different significance, it seems best to study apart from one another. With the uses to which the two words, exogamy and — X PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION. endogamy, have been turned, moreover, marriage laws have been forgotten altogether. In so far as this has been the result of miscon- ception, the author must have been in fault, no doubt. It seems, nevertheless, to be made perfectly clear in Primitive Marriage that it was two marriage laws he found in want of names, and that it was for them he proposed the terms exogamy and endogamy. The notes written for this edition are distinguished from the author's notes by being inclosed in brackets the notes on Mr. Morgan's system being also placed at the end of the Essay to which they refer. D. McLennan. San Remo, A'pril 1886. ; PREFACE TO THE OEIGINAL EDITION. [Bated 20th January, 1876.] I SHOULD have brought out a new edition, of Primitive Marriage long since had it not been my purpose to supersede it by a more comprehensive work, —a purpose defeated by circumstances, which have, for several years past, and till within the last few months, made literary work impossible for me. I now bring out a reprint, because the book, which has long been rare, is, for a work of its class, much in request and because, though I am again free to resume the studies necessary for its revision, it is uncertain whether I could soon revise it in a satisfactory manner—so that I am without an answer to representations made to me, that it is better it should be made accessible to students with its imperfections than that it should remain in- accessible to them. I have done this the more readUy that, on the whole, I still adhere to the conclusions I had arrived at more than eleven years ago, on the ; xii PEEFACE. various matters which are discussed in Primitive Marriage. With a little trouble, I might make a paper on examples of the form of capture, which I published in the Argosy in 1866, take the place of Chapter II. But that would be to depart from the idea of a reprint and, besides, the paper I refer to has itself ceased to be complete, so many examples of the form have since been collected. The speculation is accordingly reissued with the rather meagre list of cases which originally prompted me to it.^ ^ With Primitive Marriage I reprint a paper on Kinship in Ancient Greece, which was published in April and May, 1866, in the Fortnightly Review.