START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANCIENT SOCIETY*** E-text prepared by Julie Miller, Turgut Dincer, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made available by Internet Archive/American Libraries (https://archive.org/details/americana) Note: Images of the original pages are available through Internet Archive/American Libraries. See https://archive.org/details/ancientsociety00morg Some tables in this text file might be too wide to be read easily on screen. If this is a problem for the reader, we recommend the html version, in which these tables are easier to read. See 45950-h.htm or 45950-h.zip: (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/45950/45950-h/45950-h.htm) or (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/45950/45950-h.zip) Some characters might not display in this UTF-8 text version. If so, the reader should consult the html version referred to above or the iso-8859-1 (Latin-1) text file 45950-8.txt or 45950.zip: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/45950/45950-8.txt or http://www.gutenberg.org/files/45950/45950-8.zip ANCIENT SOCIETY Or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery, through Barbarism to Civilization by LEWIS H. MORGAN, LL.D. Member of the National Academy of Sciences. Author of âThe League of the Iroquois,â âThe American Beaver and his Works,â âSystems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family,â etc. _Nescit vox missa reverti._ HORACE. [Illustration] New York Henry Holt and Company 1877 Copyright, 1877, By Henry Holt. TO THE REVEREND J. H. McILVAINE, D.D., LATE PROFESSOR OF BELLES-LETTRES IN PRINCETON COLLEGE, THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED, IN RECOGNITION OF HIS GENIUS AND LEARNING, AND IN APPRECIATION OF HIS FRIENDSHIP. Cum prorepserunt primis animalia terris, Mutum et turpe pecus, glandem atque cubilia propter Unguibus et pugnis, dein fustibus, atque ita porro Pugnabant armis, quÃ¦ post fabricaverat usus: Donec verba, quibus voces sensusque notarent, Nominaque invenere: dehinc absistere bello, Oppida coeperunt munire, et ponere leges, Ne quis fur esset, neu latro, neu quis adulter. âHorace, _Sat._, I, iii, 99. âModern science claims to be proving, by the most careful and exhaustive study of man and his works, that our race began its existence on earth at the bottom of the scale, instead of at the top, and has been gradually working upward; that human powers have had a history of development; that all the elements of cultureâas the arts of life, art, science, language, religion, philosophyâhave been wrought out by slow and painful efforts, in the conflict between the soul and the mind of man on the one hand, and external nature on the other.ââWhitneyâs _Oriental and Linguistic Studies_, p. 341. âThese communities reflect the spiritual conduct of our ancestors thousands of times removed. We have passed through the same stages of development, physical and moral, and are what we are to-day because they lived, toiled, and endeavored. Our wondrous civilization is the result of the silent efforts of millions of unknown men, as the chalk cliffs of England are formed by contributions of myriads of foraminifera.ââDr. J. Kaines, _Anthropologia_, vol. i, No. 2, p. 233. PREFACE. The great antiquity of mankind upon the earth has been conclusively established. It seems singular that the proofs should have been discovered as recently as within the last thirty years, and that the present generation should be the first called upon to recognize so important a fact. Mankind are now known to have existed in Europe in the glacial period, and even back of its commencement, with every probability of their origination in a prior geological age. They have survived many races of animals with whom they were contemporaneous, and passed through a process of development, in the several branches of the human family, as remarkable in its courses as in its progress. Since the probable length of their career is connected with geological periods, a limited measure of time is excluded. One hundred or two hundred thousand years would be an unextravagant estimate of the period from the disappearance of the glaciers in the northern hemisphere to the present time. Whatever doubts may attend any estimate of a period, the actual duration of which is unknown, the existence of mankind extends backward immeasurably, and loses itself in a vast and profound antiquity. This knowledge changes materially the views which have prevailed respecting the relations of savages to barbarians, and of barbarians to civilized men. It can now be asserted upon convincing evidence that savagery preceded barbarism in all the tribes of mankind, as barbarism is known to have preceded civilization. The history of the human race is one in source, one in experience, and one in progress. It is both a natural and a proper desire to learn, if possible, how all these ages upon ages of past time have been expended by mankind; how savages, advancing by slow, almost imperceptible steps, attained the higher condition of barbarians; how barbarians, by similar progressive advancement, finally attained to civilization; and why other tribes and nations have been left behind in the race of progressâsome in civilization, some in barbarism, and others in savagery. It is not too much to expect that ultimately these several questions will be answered. Inventions and discoveries stand in serial relations along the lines of human progress, and register its successive stages; while social and civil institutions, in virtue of their connection with perpetual human wants, have been developed from a few primary germs of thought. They exhibit a similar register of progress. These institutions, inventions and discoveries have embodied and preserved the principal facts now remaining illustrative of this experience. When collated and compared they tend to show the unity of origin of mankind, the similarity of human wants in the same stage of advancement, and the uniformity of the operations of the human mind in similar conditions of society. Throughout the latter part of the period of savagery, and the entire period of barbarism, mankind in general were organized in gentes, phratries and tribes. These organizations prevailed throughout the entire ancient world upon all the continents, and were the instrumentalities by means of which ancient society was organized and held together. Their structure, and relations as members of an organic series, and the rights, privileges and obligations of the members of the gens, and of the members of the phratry and tribe, illustrate the growth of the idea of government in the human mind. The principal institutions of mankind originated in savagery, were developed in barbarism, and are maturing in civilization. In like manner, the family has passed through successive forms, and created great systems of consanguinity and affinity which have remained to the present time. These systems, which record the relationships existing in the family of the period, when each system respectively was formed, contain an instructive record of the experience of mankind while the family was advancing from the consanguine, through intermediate forms, to the monogamian. The idea of property has undergone a similar growth and development. Commencing at zero in savagery, the passion for the possession of property, as the representative of accumulated subsistence, has now become dominant over the human mind in civilized races. The four classes of facts above indicated, and which extend themselves in parallel lines along the pathways of human progress from savagery to civilization, form the principal subjects of discussion in this volume. There is one field of labor in which, as Americans, we have a special interest as well as a special duty. Rich as the American continent is known to be in material wealth, it is also the richest of all the continents in ethnological, philological and archÃ¦ological materials, illustrative of the great period of barbarism. Since mankind were one in origin, their career has been essentially one, running in different but uniform channels upon all continents, and very similarly in all the tribes and nations of mankind down to the same status of advancement. It follows that the history and experience of the American Indian tribes represent, more or less nearly, the history and experience of our own remote ancestors when in corresponding conditions. Forming a part of the human record, their institutions, arts, inventions and practical experience possess a high and special value reaching far beyond the Indian race itself. When discovered, the American Indian tribes represented three distinct ethnical periods, and more completely than they were elsewhere then represented upon the earth. Materials for ethnology, philology and archÃ¦ology were offered in unparalleled abundance; but as these sciences scarcely existed until the present century, and are but feebly prosecuted among us at the present time, the workmen have been unequal to the work. Moreover, while fossil remains buried in the earth will keep for the future student, the remains of Indian arts, languages and institutions will not. They are perishing daily, and have been perishing for upwards of three centuries. The ethnic life of the Indian tribes is declining under the influence of American civilization, their arts and languages are disappearing, and their institutions are dissolving. After a few more years, facts that may now be gathered with ease will become impossible of discovery. These circumstances appeal strongly to Americans to enter this great field and gather its abundant harvest. ROCHESTER, NEW YORK, March, 1877. TABLE OF CONTENTS. PART I. GROWTH OF INTELLIGENCE THROUGH INVENTIONS AND DISCOVERIES. CHAPTER I. ETHNICAL PERIODS. Progress of Mankind from the Bottom of the Scale.âIllustrated by Inventions, Discoveries and Institutions.âTwo Plans of Governmentâone Gentile and Social, giving a Society (_Societas_); the other Political, giving a State (_Civitas_).âThe former founded upon Persons and Gentilism; the Latter upon Territory and Property.âThe First, the Plan of Government of Ancient Society.âThe Second, that of Modern or Civilized Society.âUniformity of Human Experience.âProposed Ethnical PeriodsâI. Lower Status of Savagery; II. Middle Status of Savagery; III. Upper Status of Savagery; IV. Lower Status of Barbarism; V. Middle Status of Barbarism; VI. Upper Status of Barbarism; VII. Status of Civilization. 3 CHAPTER II. ARTS OF SUBSISTENCE. Supremacy of Mankind over the Earth.âControl over Subsistence the Condition.âMankind alone gained that Control.âSuccessive Arts of SubsistenceâI. Natural Subsistence; II. Fish Subsistence; III. Farinaceous Subsistence; IV. Meat and Milk Subsistence; V. Unlimited Subsistence through Field Agriculture.âLong Intervals of Time between them. 19 CHAPTER III. RATIO OF HUMAN PROGRESS. Retrospect on the Lines of Human Progress.âPrincipal Contributions of Modern Civilization.âOf Ancient Civilization.âOf Later Period of Barbarism.âOf Middle Period.âOf Older Period.âOf Period of Savagery.âHumble Condition of Primitive Man.âHuman Progress in a Geometrical Ratio.âRelative Length of Ethnical Periods.âAppearance of Semitic and Aryan Families. 29 PART II. GROWTH OF THE IDEA OF GOVERNMENT. CHAPTER I. ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETY UPON THE BASIS OF SEX. Australian Classes.âOrganized upon Sex.âArchaic Character of the Organization.âAustralian Gentes.âThe Eight Classes.âRule of Marriage.âDescent in the Female Line.âStupendous Conjugal System.âTwo Male and Two Female Classes in each Gens.âInnovations upon the Classes.âGens still Rudimentary. 49 CHAPTER II. THE IROQUOIS GENS. The Gentile Organization.âIts Wide Prevalence.âDefinition of a Gens.âDescent in the Female Line the Archaic Rule.âRights, Privileges and Obligations of Members of a Gens.âRight of Electing and Deposing its Sachem and Chiefs.âObligation not to marry in the Gens.âMutual Rights of Inheritance of the Property of deceased Members.âReciprocal Obligations of Help, Defense and Redress of Injuries.âRight of Naming its Members.âRight of Adopting Strangers into the Gens.âCommon Religious Rites, Query.âA Common Burial Place.âCouncil of the Gens.âGentes named after Animals.âNumber of Persons in a Gens. 62 CHAPTER III. THE IROQUOIS PHRATRY. Definition of a Phratry.âKindred Gentes Reunited in a Higher Organization.âPhratry of the Iroquois Tribes.âIts Composition.âIts Uses and Functions.âSocial and Religious.âIllustrations.âThe Analogue of the Grecian Phratry; but in its Archaic Form.âPhratries of the Choctas.âOf the Chickasas.âOf the Mohegans.âOf the Thlinkeets.âTheir Probable Universality in the Tribes of the American Aborigines. 88 CHAPTER IV. THE IROQUOIS TRIBE. The Tribe as an Organization.âComposed of Gentes Speaking the same Dialect.âSeparation in Area led to Divergence of Speech, and Segmentation.âThe Tribe a Natural Growth.âIllustrations.âAttributes of a Tribe.âA Territory and Name.âAn Exclusive Dialect.âThe Right to Invest and Depose its Sachems and Chiefs.âA Religious Faith and Worship.âA Council of Chiefs.âA Head-Chief of Tribe in some Instances.âThree successive Forms of Gentile Government: First, a Government of One Power; Second, of Two Powers; Third, of Three Powers. 102 CHAPTER V. THE IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY. Confederacies Natural Growths.âFounded upon Common Gentes, and a Common Language.âThe Iroquois Tribes.âTheir Settlement in New York.âFormation of the Confederacy.âIts Structure and Principles.âFifty Sachemships Created.âMade Hereditary in certain Gentes.âNumber assigned to each Tribe.âThese Sachems formed the Council of the Confederacy.âThe Civil Council.âIts Mode of Transacting Business.âUnanimity Necessary to its Action.âThe Mourning Council.âMode of Raising up Sachems.âGeneral Military Commanders.âThis Office the Germ of that of a Chief Executive Magistrate.âIntellectual Capacity of the Iroquois. 122 CHAPTER VI. GENTES IN OTHER TRIBES OF THE GANOWÃNIAN FAMILY. Divisions of American Aborigines.âGentes in Indian Tribes; with their Rules of Descent and Inheritance.âI. Hodenosaunian Tribes.âII. Dakotian.âIII. Gulf.âIV. Pawnee.âV. Algonkin.âVI. Athapasco-Apache.âVII. Tribes of North-west Coast.âEskimos, a Distinct Family.âVIII. Salish, Sahaptin, and Kootenay Tribes.âIX. Shoshonee.âX. Village Indians of New Mexico, Mexico and Central America.âXI. South American Indian Tribes.âProbable Universality of the Organization in Gentes in the GanowÃ¡nian Family. 151 CHAPTER VII. THE AZTEC CONFEDERACY. Misconception of Aztec Society.âCondition of Advancement.âNahuatlac Tribes.âTheir Settlement in Mexico.âPueblo of Mexico founded, A. D. 1325.âAztec Confederacy established, A. D. 1426.âExtent of Territorial Domination.âProbable Number of the People.âWhether or not the Aztecs were organized in Gentes and Phratries.âThe Council of Chiefs.âIts probable Functions.âOffice held by Montezuma.âElective in Tenure.âDeposition of Montezuma.âProbable Functions of the Office.âAztec Institutions essentially Democratical.âThe Government a Military Democracy. 186 CHAPTER VIII. THE GRECIAN GENS. Early Condition of Grecian Tribes.âOrganized into Gentes.âChanges in the Character of the Gens.âNecessity for a Political System.âProblem to be Solved.âThe Formation of a State.âGroteâs Description of the Grecian Gentes.âOf their Phratries and Tribes.âRights, Privileges and Obligations of the Members of the Gens.âSimilar to those of the Iroquois Gens.âThe Office of Chief of the Gens.âWhether Elective or Hereditary.âThe Gens the Basis of the Social System.âAntiquity of the Gentile Lineage.âInheritance of Property.âArchaic and Final Rule.âRelationships between the Members of a Gens.âThe Gens the Center of Social and Religious Influence. 215 CHAPTER IX. THE GRECIAN PHRATRY, TRIBE AND NATION. The Athenian Phratry.âHow Formed.âDefinition of DikÃ¦archus.âObjects chiefly Religious.âThe Phratriarch.âThe Tribe.âComposed of Three Phratries.âThe Phylo Basileus.âThe Nation.âComposed of Four Tribes.âBoulÃª, or Council of Chiefs.âAgora, or Assembly of the People.âThe Basileus.âTenure of the Office.âMilitary and Priestly Functions.âCivil Functions not shown.âGovernments of the Heroic Age, Military Democracies.âAristotleâs Definition of a Basileus.âLater Athenian Democracy.âInherited from the Gentes.âIts Powerful Influence upon Athenian Development. 235 CHAPTER X. THE INSTITUTION OF GRECIAN POLITICAL SOCIETY. Failure of the Gentes as a Basis of Government.âLegislation of Theseus.âAttempted Substitution of Classes.âIts Failure.âAbolition of the Office of Basileus.âThe Archonship.âNaucraries and Trittyes.âLegislation of Solon.âThe Property Classes.âPartial Transfer of Civil Power from the Gentes to the Classes.âPersons unattached to any Gens.âMade Citizens.âThe Senate.âThe Ecclesia.âPolitical Society partially attained.âLegislation of Cleisthenes.âInstitution of Political Society.âThe Attic Deme or Township.âIts Organization and Powers.âIts Local Self-government.âThe Local Tribe or District.âThe Attic Commonwealth.âAthenian Democracy. 256 CHAPTER XI. THE ROMAN GENS. Italian Tribes Organized in Gentes.âFounding of Rome.âTribes Organized into a Military Democracy.âThe Roman Gens.âDefinition of a Gentilis by Cicero.âBy Festus.âBy Varro.âDescent in Male Line.âMarrying out of the Gens.âRights, Privileges and Obligations of the Members of a Gens.âDemocratic Constitution of Ancient Latin Society.âNumber of Persons in a Gens. 277 CHAPTER XII. THE ROMAN CURIA, TRIBE AND POPULUS. Roman Gentile Society.âFour Stages of Organization.â1. The Gens; 2. The Curia, consisting of Ten Gentes; 3. The Tribe, composed of Ten CuriÃ¦; 4. The Populus Romanus, composed of Three Tribes.âNumerical Proportions.âHow Produced.âConcentration of Gentes at Rome.âThe Roman Senate.âIts Functions.âThe Assembly of the People.âIts Powers.âThe People Sovereign.âOffice of Military Commander (Rex).âIts Powers and Functions.âRoman Gentile Institutions essentially Democratical. 300 CHAPTER XIII. THE INSTITUTION OF ROMAN POLITICAL SOCIETY. The Populus.âThe Plebeians.âThe Clients.âThe Patricians.âLimits of the Order.âLegislation of Servius Tullius.âInstitution of Property Classes.âOf the Centuries.âUnequal Suffrage.âComitia Centuriata. âSupersedes Comitia Curiata.âClasses supersede the Gentes.âThe Census.âPlebeians made Citizens.âInstitution of City Wards.âOf Country Townships.âTribes increased to Four.âMade Local instead of Consanguine.âCharacter of New Political System.âDecline and Disappearance of Gentile Organization.âThe Work it Accomplished. 323 CHAPTER XIV. CHANGE OF DESCENT FROM THE FEMALE TO THE MALE LINE. How the Change might have been made.âInheritance of Property the Motive.âDescent in the Female Line among the Lycians.âThe Cretans.âThe Etruscans.âProbably among the Athenians in the time of Cecrops.âThe Hundred Families of the Locrians.âEvidence from Marriages.âTuranian System of Consanguinity among Grecian Tribes.âLegend of the DanaidÃ¦. 343 CHAPTER XV. GENTES IN OTHER TRIBES OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. The Scottish Clan.âThe Irish Sept.âGermanic Tribes.âTraces of a prior Gentile System.âGentes in Southern Asiatic Tribes.âIn Northern.âIn Uralian Tribes.âHundred Families of Chinese.âHebrew Tribes.âComposed of Gentes and Phratries Apparently.âGentes in African Tribes.âIn Australian Tribes.âSubdivisions of Fejees and Rewas.âWide Distribution of Gentile Organization. 357 PART III. GROWTH OF THE IDEA OF THE FAMILY. CHAPTER I. THE ANCIENT FAMILY. Five successive Forms of the Family.âFirst, the Consanguine Family.âIt created the Malayan System of Consanguinity and Affinity.âSecond, the Punaluan.âIt created the Turanian and GanowÃ¡nian System.âThird, the Monogamian.âIt created the Aryan, Semitic, and Uralian System.âThe Syndyasmian and Patriarchal Families Intermediate.â Both failed to create a System of Consanguinity.âThese Systems Natural Growths.âTwo Ultimate Forms.âOne Classificatory, the other Descriptive.âGeneral Principles of these Systems.âTheir Persistent Maintenance. 383 CHAPTER II. THE CONSANGUINE FAMILY. Former Existence of this Family.âProved by Malayan System of Consanguinity.âHawaiian System used as Typical.âFive Grades of Relations.âDetails of System.âExplained in its origin by the Intermarriage of Brothers and Sisters in a Group.âEarly State of Society in the Sandwich Islands.âNine Grades of Relations of the Chinese.âIdentical in Principle with the Hawaiian.âFive Grades of Relations in Ideal Republic of Plato.âTable of Malayan System of Consanguinity and Affinity. 401 CHAPTER III. THE PUNALUAN FAMILY. The Punaluan Family supervened upon the Consanguine.âTransition, how Produced.âHawaiian Custom of Punalua.âIts probable ancient Prevalence over wide Areas.âThe Gentes originated probably in Punaluan Groups.âThe Turanian System of Consanguinity.âCreated by the Punaluan Family.âIt proves the Existence of this Family when the System was formed.âDetails of System.âExplanation of its Relationships in their Origin.âTable of Turanian and GanowÃ¡nian Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity. 424 CHAPTER IV. THE SYNDYASMIAN AND THE PATRIARCHAL FAMILIES. The Syndyasmian Family.âHow Constituted.âIts Characteristics.âInfluence upon it of the Gentile Organization.âPropensity to Pair a late Development.âAncient Society should be Studied where the highest Exemplifications are found.âThe Patriarchal Family.âPaternal Power its Essential Characteristic.âPolygamy subordinate.âThe Roman Family similar.âPaternal Power unknown in previous Families. 453 CHAPTER V. THE MONOGAMIAN FAMILY. This Family comparatively Modern.âThe Term Familia.âFamily of Ancient Germans.âOf Homeric Greeks.âOf Civilized Greeks.âSeclusion of Wives.âObligations of Monogamy not respected by the Males.âThe Roman Family.âWives under Power.âAryan System of Consanguinity.âIt came in under Monogamy.âPrevious System probably Turanian.âTransition from Turanian into Aryan.âRoman and Arabic Systems of Consanguinity.âDetails of the Former.âPresent Monogamian Family.âTable of Roman and Arabic Systems. 468 CHAPTER VI. SEQUENCE OF INSTITUTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE FAMILY. Sequence in part Hypothetical.âRelation of these Institutions in the Order of their Origination.âEvidence of their Origination in the Order named.âHypothesis of Degradation Considered.âThe Antiquity of Mankind. 498 PART IV. GROWTH OF THE IDEA OF PROPERTY. CHAPTER I. THE THREE RULES OF INHERITANCE. Property in the Status of Savagery.âSlow Rate of Progress.âFirst Rule of Inheritance.âProperty Distributed among the Gentiles.âProperty in the Lower Status of Barbarism.âGerm of Second Rule of Inheritance.âDistributed among Agnatic Kindred.âImproved Character of Man.âProperty in Middle Status.âRule of Inheritance imperfectly Known.âAgnatic Inheritance Probable. 523 CHAPTER II. THE THREE RULES OF INHERITANCEâCONTINUED. Property in the Upper Status of Barbarism.âSlavery.âTenure of Lands in Grecian Tribes.âCulture of the Period.âIts Brilliancy.âThird Rule of Inheritance.âExclusively in Children.âHebrew Tribes.âRule of Inheritance.âDaughters of Zelophehad.âProperty remained in the Phratry, and probably in the Gens.âThe Reversion.âAthenian Inheritance.âExclusively in Children.âThe Reversion.âInheritance remained in the Gens.âHeiresses.âWills.âRoman Inheritance.âThe Reversion.âProperty remained in the Gens.âAppearance of Aristocracy.âProperty Career of the Human Race.âUnity of Origin of Mankind. 537 PART I. GROWTH OF INTELLIGENCE THROUGH INVENTIONS AND DISCOVERIES. ANCIENT SOCIETY CHAPTER I. ETHNICAL PERIODS. PROGRESS OF MANKIND FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE SCALE.âILLUSTRATED BY INVENTIONS DISCOVERIES AND INSTITUTIONS.âTWO PLANS OF GOVERNMENTâONE GENTILE AND SOCIAL, GIVING A SOCIETY, (_Societas_); THE OTHER POLITICAL, GIVING A STATE, (_Civitas_).âTHE FORMER FOUNDED UPON PERSONS AND GENTILISM; THE LATTER UPON TERRITORY AND PROPERTY.âTHE FIRST, THE PLAN OF GOVERNMENT OF ANCIENT SOCIETY.âTHE SECOND, THAT OF MODERN OR CIVILIZED SOCIETY.âUNIFORMITY OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE.âPROPOSED ETHNICAL PERIODSâI. LOWER STATUS OF SAVAGERY; II. MIDDLE STATUS OF SAVAGERY; III. UPPER STATUS OF SAVAGERY; IV. LOWER STATUS OF BARBARISM; V. MIDDLE STATUS OF BARBARISM; VI. UPPER STATUS OF BARBARISM; VII. STATUS OF CIVILIZATION. The latest investigations respecting the early condition of the human race, are tending to the conclusion that mankind commenced their career at the bottom of the scale and worked their way up from savagery to civilization through the slow accumulations of experimental knowledge. As it is undeniable that portions of the human family have existed in a state of savagery, other portions in a state of barbarism, and still other portions in a state of civilization, it seems equally so that these three distinct conditions are connected with each other in a natural as well as necessary sequence of progress. Moreover, that this sequence has been historically true of the entire human family, up to the status attained by each branch respectively, is rendered probable by the conditions under which all progress occurs, and by the known advancement of several branches of the family through two or more of these conditions. An attempt will be made in the following pages to bring forward additional evidence of the rudeness of the early condition of mankind, of the gradual evolution of their mental and moral powers through experience, and of their protracted struggle with opposing obstacles while winning their way to civilization. It will be drawn, in part, from the great sequence of inventions and discoveries which stretches along the entire pathway of human progress; but chiefly from domestic institutions, which express the growth of certain ideas and passions. As we re-ascend along the several lines of progress toward the primitive ages of mankind, and eliminate one after the other, in the order in which they appeared, inventions and discoveries on the one hand, and institutions on the other, we are enabled to perceive that the former stand to each other in progressive, and the latter in unfolding relations. While the former class have had a connection, more or less direct, the latter have been developed from a few primary germs of thought. Modern institutions plant their roots in the period of barbarism, into which their germs were transmitted from the previous period of savagery. They have had a lineal descent through the ages, with the streams of the blood, as well as a logical development. Two independent lines of investigation thus invite our attention. The one leads through inventions and discoveries, and the other through primary institutions. With the knowledge gained therefrom, we may hope to indicate the principal stages of human development. The proofs to be adduced will be drawn chiefly from domestic institutions; the references to achievements more strictly intellectual being general as well as subordinate. The facts indicate the gradual formation and subsequent development of certain ideas, passions, and aspirations. Those which hold the most prominent positions may be generalized as growths of the particular ideas with which they severally stand connected. Apart from inventions and discoveries they are the following: I. _Subsistence_, II. _Government_, III. _Language_, IV. _The Family_, V. _Religion_, VI. _House Life and Architecture_, VII. _Property_. _First._ Subsistence has been increased and perfected by a series of successive arts, introduced at long intervals of time, and connected more or less directly with inventions and discoveries. _Second._ The germ of government must be sought in the organization into gentes in the Status of savagery; and followed down, through the advancing forms of this institution, to the establishment of political society. _Third._ Human speech seems to have been developed from the rudest and simplest forms of expression. Gesture or sign language, as intimated by Lucretius,[1] must have preceded articulate language, as thought preceded speech. The monosyllabical preceded the syllabical, as the latter did that of concrete words. Human intelligence, unconscious of design, evolved articulate language by utilizing the vocal sounds. This great subject, a department of knowledge by itself, does not fall within the scope of the present investigation. _Fourth._ With respect to the family, the stages of its growth are embodied in systems of consanguinity and affinity, and in usages relating to marriage, by means of which, collectively, the family can be definitely traced through several successive forms. _Fifth._ The growth of religious ideas is environed with such intrinsic difficulties that it may never receive a perfectly satisfactory exposition. Religion deals so largely with the imaginative and emotional nature, and consequently with such uncertain elements of knowledge, that all primitive religions are grotesque and to some extent unintelligible. This subject also falls without the plan of this work excepting as it may prompt incidental suggestions. _Sixth._ House architecture, which connects itself with the form of the family and the plan of domestic life, affords a tolerably complete illustration of progress from savagery to civilization. Its growth can be traced from the hut of the savage, through the communal houses of the barbarians, to the house of the single family of civilized nations, with all the successive links by which one extreme is connected with the other. This subject will be noticed incidentally. _Lastly._ The idea of property was slowly formed in the human mind, remaining nascent and feeble through immense periods of time. Springing into life in savagery, it required all the experience of this period and of the subsequent period of barbarism to develop the germ, and to prepare the human brain for the acceptance of its controlling influence. Its dominance as a passion over all other passions marks the commencement of civilization. It not only led mankind to overcome the obstacles which delayed civilization, but to establish political society on the basis of territory and of property. A critical knowledge of the evolution of the idea of property would embody, in some respects, the most remarkable portion of the mental history of mankind. It will be my object to present some evidence of human progress along these several lines, and through successive ethnical periods, as it is revealed by inventions and discoveries, and by the growth of the ideas of government, of the family, and of property. It may be here premised that all forms of government are reducible to two general plans, using the word plan in its scientific sense. In their bases the two are fundamentally distinct. The first, in the order of time, is founded upon persons, and upon relations purely personal, and may be distinguished as a society (_societas_). The gens is the unit of this organization; giving as the successive stages of integration, in the archaic period, the gens, the phratry, the tribe and the confederacy of tribes, which constituted a people or nation (_populus_). At a later period a coalescence of tribes in the same area into a nation took the place of a confederacy of tribes occupying independent areas. Such, through prolonged ages, after the gens appeared, was the substantially universal organization of ancient society; and it remained among the Greeks and Romans after civilization supervened. The second is founded upon territory and upon property, and may be distinguished as a state (_civitas_). The township or ward, circumscribed by metes and bounds, with the property it contains, is the basis or unit of the latter, and political society is the result. Political society is organized upon territorial areas, and deals with property as well as with persons through territorial relations. The successive stages of integration are the township or ward, which is the unit of organization; the county or province, which is an aggregation of townships or wards; and the national domain or territory, which is an aggregation of counties or provinces; the people of each of which are organized into a body politic. It taxed the Greeks and Romans to the extent of their capacities, after they had gained civilization, to invent the deme or township and the city ward; and thus inaugurate the second great plan of government, which remains among civilized nations to the present hour. In ancient society this territorial plan was unknown. When it came in it fixed the boundary line between ancient and modern society, as the distinction will be recognized in these pages. It may be further observed that the domestic institutions of the barbarous, and even of the savage ancestors of mankind, are still exemplified in portions of the human family with such completeness that, with the exception of the strictly primitive period, the several stages of this progress are tolerably well preserved. They are seen in the organization of society upon the basis of sex, then upon the basis of kin, and finally upon the basis of territory; through the successive forms of marriage and of the family, with the systems of consanguinity thereby created; through house life and architecture; and through progress in usages with respect to the ownership and inheritance of property. The theory of human degradation to explain the existence of savages and of barbarians is no longer tenable. It came in as a corollary from the Mosaic cosmogony, and was acquiesced in from a supposed necessity which no longer exists. As a theory, it is not only incapable of explaining the existence of savages, but it is without support in the facts of human experience. The remote ancestors of the Aryan nations presumptively passed through an experience similar to that of existing barbarous and savage tribes. Though the experience of these nations embodies all the information necessary to illustrate the periods of civilization, both ancient and modern, together with a part of that in the Later period of barbarism, their anterior experience must be deduced, in the main, from the traceable connection between the elements of their existing institutions and inventions, and similar elements still preserved in those of savage and barbarous tribes. It may be remarked finally that the experience of mankind has run in nearly uniform channels; that human necessities in similar conditions have been substantially the same; and that the operations of the mental principle have been uniform in virtue of the specific identity of the brain of all the races of mankind. This, however, is but a part of the explanation of uniformity in results. The germs of the principal institutions and arts of life were developed while man was still a savage. To a very great extent the experience of the subsequent periods of barbarism and of civilization have been expended in the further development of these original conceptions. Wherever a connection can be traced on different continents between a present institution and a common germ, the derivation of the people themselves from a common original stock is implied. The discussion of these several classes of facts will be facilitated by the establishment of a certain number of Ethnical Periods; each representing a distinct condition of society, and distinguishable by a mode of life peculiar to itself. The terms âAge of _Stone_,â âof _Bronze_,â and âof _Iron_â introduced by Danish archÃ¦ologists, have been extremely useful for certain purposes, and will remain so for the classification of objects of ancient art; but the progress of knowledge has rendered other and different subdivisions necessary. Stone implements were not entirely laid aside with the introduction of tools of iron, nor of those of bronze. The invention of the process of smelting iron ore created an ethnical epoch, yet we could scarcely date another from the production of bronze. Moreover, since the period of stone implements overlaps those of bronze and of iron, and since that of bronze also overlaps that of iron, they are not capable of a circumscription that would leave each independent and distinct. It is probable that the successive arts of subsistence which arose at long intervals will ultimately, from the great influence they must have exercised upon the condition of mankind, afford the most satisfactory bases for these divisions. But investigation has not been carried far enough in this direction to yield the necessary information. With our present knowledge the main result can be attained by selecting such other inventions or discoveries as will afford sufficient tests of progress to characterize the commencement of successive ethnical periods. Even though accepted as provisional, these periods will be found convenient and useful. Each of those about to be proposed will be found to cover a distinct culture, and to represent a particular mode of life. The period of savagery, of the early part of which very little is known, may be divided, provisionally, into three sub-periods. These may be named respectively the _Older_, the _Middle_, and the _Later_ period of savagery; and the condition of society in each, respectively, may be distinguished as the _Lower_, the _Middle_, and the _Upper Status_ of savagery. In like manner, the period of barbarism divides naturally into three sub-periods, which will be called, respectively, the _Older_, the _Middle_, and the _Later_ period of barbarism; and the condition of society in each, respectively, will be distinguished as the _Lower_, the _Middle_, and the _Upper Status_ of barbarism. It is difficult, if not impossible, to find such tests of progress to mark the commencement of these several periods as will be found absolute in their application, and without exceptions upon all the continents. Neither is it necessary, for the purpose in hand, that exceptions should not exist. It will be sufficient if the principal tribes of mankind can be classified, according to the degree of their relative progress, into conditions which can be recognized as distinct. I. _Lower Status of Savagery._ This period commenced with the infancy of the human race, and may be said to have ended with the acquisition of a fish subsistence and of a knowledge of the use of fire. Mankind were then living in their original restricted habitat, and subsisting upon fruits and nuts. The commencement of articulate speech belongs to this period. No exemplification of tribes of mankind in this condition remained to the historical period. II. _Middle Status of Savagery._ It commenced with the acquisition of a fish subsistence and a knowledge of the use of fire, and ended with the invention of the bow and arrow. Mankind, while in this condition, spread from their original habitat over the greater portion of the earthâs surface. Among tribes still existing it will leave in the Middle Status of savagery, for example, the Australians and the greater part of the Polynesians when discovered. It will be sufficient to give one or more exemplifications of each status. III. _Upper Status of Savagery._ It commenced with the invention of the bow and arrow, and ended with the invention of the art of pottery. It leaves in the Upper Status of Savagery the Athapascan tribes of the Hudsonâs Bay Territory, the tribes of the valley of the Columbia, and certain coast tribes of North and South America; but with relation to the time of their discovery. This closes the period of Savagery. IV. _Lower Status of Barbarism._ The invention or practice of the art of pottery, all things considered, is probably the most effective and conclusive test that can be selected to fix a boundary line, necessarily arbitrary, between savagery and barbarism. The distinctness of the two conditions has long been recognized, but no criterion of progress out of the former into the latter has hitherto been brought forward. All such tribes, then, as never attained to the art of pottery will be classed as savages, and those possessing this art but who never attained a phonetic alphabet and the use of writing will be classed as barbarians. The first sub-period of barbarism commenced with the manufacture of pottery, whether by original invention or adoption. In finding its termination, and the commencement of the Middle Status, a difficulty is encountered in the unequal endowments of the two hemispheres, which began to be influential upon human affairs after the period of savagery had passed. It may be met, however, by the adoption of equivalents. In the Eastern hemisphere, the domestication of animals, and in the Western, the cultivation of maize and plants by irrigation, together with the use of adobe-brick and stone in house building have been selected as sufficient evidence of progress to work a transition out of the Lower and into the Middle Status of barbarism. It leaves, for example, in the Lower Status, the Indian tribes of the United States east of the Missouri River, and such tribes of Europe and Asia as practiced the art of pottery, but were without domestic animals. V. _Middle Status of Barbarism._ It commenced with the domestication of animals in the Eastern hemisphere, and in the Western with cultivation by irrigation and with the use of adobe-brick and stone in architecture, as shown. Its termination may be fixed with the invention of the process of smelting iron ore. This places in the Middle Status, for example, the Village Indians of New Mexico, Mexico, Central America and Peru, and such tribes in the Eastern hemisphere as possessed domestic animals, but were without a knowledge of iron. The ancient Britons, although familiar with the use of iron, fairly belong in this connection. The vicinity of more advanced continental tribes had advanced the arts of life among them far beyond the state of development of their domestic institutions. VI. _Upper Status of Barbarism._ It commenced with the manufacture of iron, and ended with the invention of a phonetic alphabet, and the use of writing in literary composition. Here civilization begins. This leaves in the Upper Status, for example, the Grecian tribes of the Homeric age, the Italian tribes shortly before the founding of Rome, and the Germanic tribes of the time of CÃ¦sar. VII. _Status of Civilization._ It commenced, as stated, with the use of a phonetic alphabet and the production of literary records, and divides into _Ancient_ and _Modern_. As an equivalent, hieroglyphical writing upon stone may be admitted. RECAPITULATION. _Periods._ _Conditions._ I. _Older Period of Savagery_, I. _Lower Status of Savagery_, II. _Middle Period of Savagery_, II. _Middle Status of Savagery_, III. _Later Period of Savagery_, III. _Upper Status of Savagery_, IV. _Older Period of Barbarism_, IV. _Lower Status of Barbarism_, V. _Middle Period of Barbarism_, V. _Middle Status of Barbarism_, VI. _Later Period of Barbarism_, VI. _Upper Status of Barbarism_, VII. STATUS OF CIVILIZATION. I. _Lower Status of Savagery, From the Infancy of the Human Race to the commencement of the next Period._ II. _Middle Status of Savagery, From the acquisition of a fish subsistence and a knowledge of the use of fire, to etc._ III. _Upper Status of Savagery, From the Invention of the Bow and Arrow, to etc._ IV. _Lower Status of Barbarism, From the Invention of the Art of Pottery, to etc._ V. _Middle Status of Barbarism, From the Domestication of animals on the Eastern hemisphere, and in the Western from the cultivation of maize and plants by Irrigation, with the use of adobe-brick and stone, to etc._ VI. _Upper Status of Barbarism, From the Invention of the process of Smelting Iron Ore, with the use of iron tools, to etc._ VII. _Status of Civilization, From the Invention of a Phonetic Alphabet, with the use of writing, to the present time._ Each of these periods has a distinct culture and exhibits a mode of life more or less special and peculiar to itself. This specialization of ethnical periods renders it possible to treat a particular society according to its condition of relative advancement, and to make it a subject of independent study and discussion. It does not affect the main result that different tribes and nations on the same continent, and even of the same linguistic family, are in different conditions at the same time, since for our purpose the _condition_ of each is the material fact, the _time_ being immaterial. Since the use of pottery is less significant than that of domestic animals, of iron, or of a phonetic alphabet, employed to mark the commencement of subsequent ethnical periods, the reasons for its adoption should be stated. The manufacture of pottery presupposes village life, and considerable progress in the simple arts.[2] Flint and stone implements are older than pottery, remains of the former having been found in ancient repositories in numerous instances unaccompanied by the latter. A succession of inventions of greater need and adapted to a lower condition must have occurred before the want of pottery would be felt. The commencement of village life, with some degree of control over subsistence, wooden vessels and utensils, finger weaving with filaments of bark, basket making, and the bow and arrow make their appearance before the art of pottery. The Village Indians who were in the Middle Status of barbarism, such as the ZuÃ±ians, the Aztecs and the Cholulans, manufactured pottery in large quantities and in many forms of considerable excellence; the partially Village Indians of the United States, who were in the Lower Status of barbarism, such as the Iroquois, the Choctas and the Cherokees, made it in smaller quantities and in a limited number of forms; but the Non-horticultural Indians, who were in the Status of savagery, such as the Athapascans, the tribes of California and of the valley of the Columbia, were ignorant of its use.[3] In Lubbockâs _Pre-Historic Times_, in Tylorâs _Early History of Mankind_, and in Peschelâs _Races of Man_, the particulars respecting this art, and the extent of its distribution, have been collected with remarkable breadth of research. It was unknown in Polynesia (with the exception of the Islands of the Tongans and Fijians), in Australia, in California, and in the Hudsonâs Bay Territory. Mr. Tylor remarks that âthe art of weaving was unknown in most of the Islands away from Asia,â and that âin most of the South Sea Islands there was no knowledge of pottery.â[4] The Rev. Lorimer Fison, an English missionary residing in Australia, informed the author in answer to inquiries, that âthe Australians had no woven fabrics, no pottery, and were ignorant of the bow and arrow.â This last fact was also true in general of the Polynesians. The introduction of the ceramic art produced a new epoch in human progress in the direction of an improved living and increased domestic conveniences. While flint and stone implementsâwhich came in earlier and required long periods of time to develop all their usesâgave the canoe, wooden vessels and utensils, and ultimately timber and plank in house architecture,[5] pottery gave a durable vessel for boiling food, which before that had been rudely accomplished in baskets coated with clay, and in ground cavities lined with skin, the boiling being effected with heated stones.[6] Whether the pottery of the aborigines was hardened by fire or cured by the simple process of drying, has been made a question. Prof. E. T. Cox, of Indianapolis, has shown by comparing the analyses of ancient pottery and hydraulic cements, âthat so far as chemical constituents are concerned it (the pottery) agrees very well with the composition of hydraulic stones.â He remarks further, that âall the pottery belonging to the mound-buildersâ age, which I have seen, is composed of alluvial clay and sand, or a mixture of the former with pulverized fresh-water shells. A paste made of such a mixture possesses in a high degree the properties of hydraulic Puzzuolani and Portland cement, so that vessels formed of it hardened without being burned, as is customary with modern pottery. The fragments of shells served the purpose of gravel or fragments of stone as at present used in connection with hydraulic lime for the manufacture of artificial stone.â[7] The composition of Indian pottery in analogy with that of hydraulic cement suggests the difficulties in the way of inventing the art, and tends also to explain the lateness of its introduction in the course of human experience. Notwithstanding the ingenious suggestion of Prof. Cox, it is probable that pottery was hardened by artificial heat. In some cases the fact is directly attested. Thus Adair, speaking of the Gulf Tribes, remarks that âthey make earthern pots of very different sizes, so as to contain from two to ten gallons, large pitchers to carry water, bowls, dishes, platters, basins, and a prodigious number of other vessels of such antiquated forms as would be tedious to describe, and impossible to name. Their method of glazing them is, they place them over a large fire of smoky pitch-pine, which makes them smooth, black and firm.â[8] Another advantage of fixing definite ethnical periods is the direction of special investigation to those tribes and nations which afford the best exemplification of each status, with the view of making each both standard and illustrative. Some tribes and families have been left in geographical isolation to work out the problems of progress by original mental effort; and have, consequently, retained their arts and institutions pure and homogeneous; while those of other tribes and nations have been adulterated through external influence. Thus, while Africa was and is an ethnical chaos of savagery and barbarism, Australia and Polynesia were in savagery, pure and simple, with the arts and institutions belonging to that condition. In like manner, the Indian family of America, unlike any other existing family, exemplified the condition of mankind in three successive ethnical periods. In the undisturbed possession of a great continent, of common descent, and with homogeneous institutions, they illustrated, when discovered, each of these conditions, and especially those of the Lower and of the Middle Status of barbarism, more elaborately and completely than any other portion of mankind. The far northern Indians and some of the coast tribes of North and South America were in the Upper Status of savagery; the partially Village Indians east of the Mississippi were in the Lower Status of barbarism, and the Village Indians of North and South America were in the Middle Status. Such an opportunity to recover full and minute information of the course of human experience and progress in developing their arts and institutions through these successive conditions has not been offered within the historical period. It must be added that it has been indifferently improved. Our greatest deficiencies relate to the last period named. Differences in the culture of the same period in the Eastern and Western hemispheres undoubtedly existed in consequence of the unequal endowments of the continents; but the condition of society in the corresponding status must have been, in the main, substantially similar. The ancestors of the Grecian, Roman and German tribes passed through the stages we have indicated, in the midst of the last of which the light of history fell upon them. Their differentiation from the undistinguishable mass of barbarians did not occur, probably, earlier than the commencement of the Middle Period of barbarism. The experience of these tribes has been lost, with the exception of so much as is represented by the institutions, inventions and discoveries which they brought with them, and possessed when they first came under historical observation. The Grecian and Latin tribes of the Homeric and Romulian periods afford the highest exemplification of the Upper Status of barbarism. Their institutions were likewise pure and homogeneous, and their experience stands directly connected with the final achievement of civilization. Commencing, then, with the Australians and Polynesians, following with the American Indian tribes, and concluding with the Roman and Grecian, who afford the highest exemplifications respectively of the six great stages of human progress, the sum of their united experiences may be supposed fairly to represent that of the human family from the Middle Status of savagery to the end of ancient civilization. Consequently, the Aryan nations will find the type of the condition of their remote ancestors, when in savagery, in that of the Australians and Polynesians; when in the Lower Status of barbarism in that of the partially Village Indians of America; and when in the Middle Status in that of the Village Indians, with which their own experience in the Upper Status directly connects. So essentially identical are the arts institutions and mode of life in the same status upon all the continents, that the archaic form of the principal domestic institutions of the Greeks and Romans must even now be sought in the corresponding institutions of the American aborigines, as will be shown in the course of this volume. This fact forms a part of the accumulating evidence tending to show that the principal institutions of mankind have been developed from a few primary germs of thought; and that the course and manner of their development was predetermined, as well as restricted within narrow limits of divergence, by the natural logic of the human mind and the necessary limitations of its powers. Progress has been found to be substantially the same in kind in tribes and nations inhabiting different and even disconnected continents, while in the same status, with deviations from uniformity in particular instances produced by special causes. The argument when extended tends to establish the unity of origin of mankind. In studying the condition of tribes and nations in these several ethnical periods we are dealing, substantially, with the ancient history and condition of our own remote ancestors. CHAPTER II. ARTS OF SUBSISTENCE. SUPREMACY OF MANKIND OVER THE EARTH.âCONTROL OVER SUBSISTENCE THE CONDITION.âMANKIND ALONE GAINED THAT CONTROL.âSUCCESSIVE ARTS OF SUBSISTENCE.âI. NATURAL SUBSISTENCE; II. FISH SUBSISTENCE; III. FARINACEOUS SUBSISTENCE; IV. MEAT AND MILK SUBSISTENCE; V. UNLIMITED SUBSISTENCE THROUGH FIELD AGRICULTURE.âLONG INTERVALS OF TIME BETWEEN THEM. The important fact that mankind commenced at the bottom of the scale and worked up, is revealed in an expressive manner by their successive arts of subsistence. Upon their skill in this direction, the whole question of human supremacy on the earth depended. Mankind are the only beings who may
{'title': 'Ancient Society by Lewis Henry Morgan', 'source': 'Project Gutenberg', 'lang': 'en'}