We now pass on to another discovery of Morgan, which is at least as important as the reconstruction of the primitive form of the family on the basis of kinship systems. Morgan proved that the tribal alliances within the tribe of the American Indians, indicated by the names of animals, are essentially identical with the genea of the Greeks and the gentes of the Romans; that the American form is the original, and the Greco-Roman is a later derivative; that the whole social organization of the ancient Greeks and Romans, with its clan, phratry, and tribe, finds its exact parallel in the organization of the American Indian; that the genus is an institution common to all peoples, up to their entry into the era of civilization and even beyond.
We have already seen above, when considering the punaluan family, what is the composition of the genus in its original form. It consists of all persons who, by means of a punaluan marriage and in accordance with the ideas inevitably prevailing in this marriage, form the recognized offspring of one particular ancestor, the founder of the genus. Since in this form of family the father cannot be established with certainty, only the female line is recognized. Since brothers cannot marry their sisters, but only women of a different origin, then, by virtue of maternal law, the children born to them by these strange women are outside the given genus. Thus, only the offspring of the daughters of each generation remains within the clan union; offspring of sons pass into the birth of their mothers.
As a classic form of this original genus, Morgan takes the genus from the Iroquois, in particular from the Seneca tribe. This tribe has eight genera bearing the names of animals 1) Wolf, 2) Bear, 3) Turtle, 4) Beaver, 5) Deer, 6) Kulik, 7) Heron, 8) Falcon. In each clan, the following customs prevail:
1. The clan chooses its sachem (elder for peacetime) and chief (military leader). The sachem had to be chosen from among the gens itself, and his position was hereditary within the gens, since upon liberation it had to be immediately replaced again, the military leader could be chosen not from the members of the gens, and at times he might not exist at all. The son of the previous sachem was never elected as sachem, since motherhood prevailed among the Iroquois, and the son, therefore, belonged to another line, but often the brother of the previous sachem or the son of his sister was elected. Everyone participated in the elections - men and women. But the election was subject to approval by the remaining seven clans, and only after that the chosen one was solemnly introduced into office and, moreover, by the general council of the entire Iroquois union.
2. . The gens deposes the sachem and the military leader at its discretion. Again, this is decided jointly by men and women. Displaced officials then become, like others, simple warriors, private individuals. However, the tribal council can also remove sachems, even against the will of the clan.
3. . None of the members of the clan can marry within the clan. This is the basic rule of the genus, the bond that holds it together, it is the negative expression of that very definite blood relationship, by virtue of which the individuals united by it only become a genus. With the discovery of a gens based on consanguinity and the impossibility of marriage between its members resulting from this, this nonsense dissipated by itself - Of course, at the stage of development at which we find the Iroquois, the prohibition of marriage within the gens is inviolably observed.
4. The property of the dead passed to the rest of the members of the clan, it had to remain within the clan. In view of the insignificance of the objects that the Iroquois could leave behind, his inheritance was divided among his closest relatives; in the event of a man's death, his siblings and mother's brother; in the event of a woman's death, her children and sisters, but not brothers. For the same reason, husband and wife could not inherit each other, nor could children inherit from their father.
5. Members of the clan were obliged to provide each other with assistance, protection, and especially assistance in revenge for the damage caused by strangers. In protecting his safety, the individual relied on the protection of the clan and could count on it; whoever harmed him harmed the whole family.
6. The clan has certain names or groups of names that only it can use in the whole tribe, so that the name individual person also indicates to which genus it belongs. Family rights are inextricably linked with the family name.
7. . The clan can adopt strangers and in this way accept them as members of the whole tribe. The prisoners of war, who were not killed, thus became, by virtue of adoption in one of the clans, members of the Seneca tribe and thereby acquired all the rights of the clan and tribe. Adoption took place at the suggestion of individual members of the clan: at the suggestion of men who accepted an outsider as a brother or sister, or at the suggestion of women who accepted him as their child; for the approval of such an adoption, a solemn adoption into the clan was necessary. Often individual clans, numerically weakened due to exceptional circumstances, were thus again quantitatively strengthened by mass adoption of members of another clan, with the consent of the latter.
8. . It is difficult to establish the presence of special religious festivals among Indian families; but the religious ceremonies of the Indians are more or less connected with the genus
9. . Rod has common place burials. Among the Iroquois of the state of New York, pressed on all sides by whites, it has now disappeared, but it used to exist. Other Indians still retain it, such as, for example, the Tuscarora, who are closely related to the Iroquois, who, despite the fact that they are Christians, have a special row in the cemetery for each clan, so that the mother is buried in the same row with the children, but not a father.
10. . The clan has a council - a democratic assembly of all adult members of the clan, men and women, with equal voting rights. This council elected and removed the sachems and military leaders, as well as the rest of the "keepers of the faith"; he issued rulings on ransom (wergeld) or blood feud for the murdered members of the clan; he accepted strangers into the family. In a word, he was the supreme authority in the genus
The functions of the phratry among the Iroquois are partly social, partly religious. 1) In the game of ball, the phratries oppose one another; each nominates its best players, the rest follow the game, arranged in phratries, and bet with each other, betting on the victory of their players. - 2) In the tribal council, the sachems and the military chiefs of each phratry sit together, one group against another, each orator speaking, addressing the representatives of each phratry as a separate corporation. - 3) If a murder happened in a tribe, and the murderer and the murdered did not belong to the same phratry, then the affected clan often appealed to their fraternal clans; they then convened a council of the phratry and appealed to the other phratry as a whole, so that she, in turn, would gather her council to settle the matter. Here the phratry thus appears again as the original gens, and with greater chances of success than the weaker separate gens that descended from it. - 4) In the event of the death of prominent persons, the opposite phratry took care of the funeral and funeral celebrations, while the members of the phratry of the deceased participated in the funeral as relatives of the deceased. When a sachem died, the opposite phratry notified the allied council of the Iroquois of the vacancy. - 5) At the election of the sachem, the council of the phratry also came on the scene. The affirmation of the choice by fraternal clans was taken for granted, as it were, but the clans of another phratry could present objections. In such a case, the council of this phratry met; if he considered the objections to be correct, the election was invalidated. - 6) Previously, the Iroquois had special religious mysteries, called medicine-lodges by the whites. (*61) These mysteries among the Seneca tribe were organized by two religious brotherhoods that had special rules for initiating new members; each of the two phratries accounted for one such brotherhood. - 7) If, which is almost certain, the four lineages (tribes) that inhabited the four quarters of Tlaxcala at the time of the conquest were four phratries, then this proves that both the phratries among the Greeks and similar tribal unions among the Germans also had military significance. units; these four lineages went into battle, each as a separate detachment in its own form and with its own banner, under the command of its own leader.
What characterizes a separate Indian tribe in America?
1. Own territory and own name. Each tribe owned, in addition to the place of its actual settlement, a significant area for hunting and fishing.
2. . A special dialect peculiar only to this tribe. In reality, tribe and dialect are essentially the same; the new formation of tribes and dialects by division took place in America not long ago and has hardly ceased even now.
3. The right to solemnly inaugurate sachems and military leaders elected by the families.
4. . The right to depose them, even against the wishes of their kind. Since these sachems and war-chiefs are members of the tribal council, these rights of the tribe in relation to them are self-explanatory.
5. Are common religious performances(mythology) and cult rites.
6. . Tribal council to discuss common affairs. It consisted of all the sachems and military leaders of the individual families, their true representatives, because they could be removed at any time; he sat in public, surrounded by other members of the tribe, who had the right to enter into discussion and express their opinion; the council made the decision.
7. . Among some tribes we find a supreme leader, whose powers, however, are very small. This is one of the sachems, which, in cases requiring immediate action, must take provisional measures before the council can meet and make a final decision.
Thus, at the latest at the beginning of the 15th century, a formalized "eternal alliance" was formed - a confederation, which, realizing the strength it had acquired, immediately acquired an offensive character and, during the period of its highest power, around 1675, conquered the large areas surrounding it, partly driving it away, partly imposing tribute on local residents. The Iroquois Union represents the most advanced public organization, which only the Indians created, who did not cross the lowest stage of barbarism. The main features of the union were as follows:
1. The eternal union of five tribes related by blood on the basis of complete equality and independence in all internal affairs tribe. This blood relationship was the true basis of the union.
2. . The organ of the union was the allied council, which consisted of 50 sachems, equal in position and authority, this council made final decisions on all matters of the union.
3. . The places for these 50 sachems, as holders of new offices specially established for the purposes of the union, were distributed among the tribes and clans at its creation.
4. . These allied sachems were also sachems in their respective tribes and had the right to participate and vote in the tribal council.
5. All resolutions of the Union Council were to be adopted unanimously.
7 The Union Council could be convened by each of the councils of the five tribes, but could not meet on its own initiative.
8. Meetings took place in the presence of the assembled people, each Iroquois could take the floor, but the decision was made only by the council.
9. In the union there was no single head, no person who headed the executive branch.
10 On the other hand, the union had two higher military leaders with equal powers and equal power
Such was the social system in which the Iroquois lived for over four hundred years and still live. The state presupposes a special public authority, separated from the totality of the persons permanently included in its composition.
this organization was doomed. She did not go further than the tribe, the formation of a union of tribes already means the beginning of her destruction, as we will see later and as we have already seen in the examples of the Iroquois attempts to enslave other tribes. Everything that was outside the tribe was outside the law. In the absence of a formal peace treaty, warfare reigned between the tribes, and this warfare was waged with that cruelty which distinguishes man from other animals and which only later was somewhat softened under the influence of material interests. The tribal system, which was in full bloom, as we observed it in America, assumed an extremely undeveloped production, consequently, an extremely rare population over a vast area, hence the almost complete subordination of a person to a hostilely opposing and incomprehensible surrounding nature, which is reflected in childishly naive religious representations. The tribe remained a boundary for a person both in relation to a foreigner and in relation to himself: the tribe, clan and their institutions were sacred and inviolable, they were that higher power given by nature, to which the individual remained unconditionally subordinate in his feelings, thoughts and deeds. No matter how impressive the people of this era look in our eyes, they are indistinguishable from each other, they have not yet come off, in the words of Marx, from the umbilical cord of the primitive community. The power of this primitive community had to be broken - and it was broken. But it was broken under such influences, which directly appear to us as a decline, a fall in comparison with the high moral level of the old tribal society. The basest motives - vulgar greed, gross passion for pleasure, dirty stinginess, selfish desire to plunder the common property - are the heirs of a new, civilized, class society; the most vile means - theft, violence, deceit, betrayal - undermine the old classless tribal society and lead to its death. And the new society itself, during all the two and a half thousand years of its existence, has always presented only a picture of the development of an insignificant minority at the expense of an exploited and oppressed vast majority, and it remains so now to an even greater extent than ever before.
We now turn to another discovery by Morgan, which has at least
at least as important as the restoration of the primitive form of the family on
the basis of kinship systems. Morgan proved that the names of animals
tribal unions within the tribe of the American Indians are essentially the same
related to the genea of the Greeks and the gentes of the Romans; that the American form -
the original, and Greco-Roman - the latest, derivative; that all
public organization of Greeks and Romans of the most ancient era with its kind,
phratry and tribe finds an exact parallel in the organization
American Indian; that the genus is an institution common to all
peoples, right up to their entry into the era of civilization and even later
(as far as can be judged on the basis of the sources we now have).
The proof of this immediately elucidated the most difficult parts of the ancient
Greek and Roman history and at the same time gave us an unexpected
interpretation of the main features of the social order of the primitive era before
the emergence of the state. As simple as this discovery may seem, when it
already known, yet Morgan did it only in Lately; in his
previous book, published in 1871, he had not yet penetrated this mystery,
the disclosure of which has since then made it silent for a while [The words "on
time" were added by Engels in the edition of 1891. Ed.] usually so
self-confident English connoisseurs of primitive history.
The Latin word gens, which Morgan uses everywhere to mean
this generic union, comes, like the Greek equivalent genos, from
common Aryan root gan (in German kan, since here, as a general rule,
instead of the Aryan g there should be k), meaning "to give birth". Gens, genos,
Sanskrit dschanas, Gothic (according to the above rule) kuni,
Old Norse and Anglo-Saxon kyn, English kin,
Middle High German kunne both mean gender, origin. However
Latin gens and Greek genos are used specifically to refer to
such a tribal union that prides itself on a common origin (in this
case from one common ancestor) and forms by virtue of the binding
well-known public and religious institutions a special community,
whose origin and nature have remained, however, until now
obscure to all our historians.
We have already seen above, when considering the punaluan family, what is the composition
kind in its original form. It consists of all persons who, by way of
punaluan marriage and according to the inevitably prevailing in this marriage
representations form the recognized offspring of one particular
ancestor, founder of the family. Since in this form of family the father does not
can be established with certainty, then only the female line is recognized.
Since brothers cannot marry their sisters, only women
other origin, then by virtue of maternal law, children born from them
these strange women, are outside this kind. So inside
of the clan union there remains only the offspring of the daughters of each generation; offspring
sons passes into the generations of their mothers. What becomes this
consanguineous group, after it is constituted as a special
group in relation to other similar groups within the tribe:
As the classic form of this original genus, Morgan takes
genus among the Iroquois, in particular the Seneca tribe. This tribe has eight
genera bearing the names of animals 1) Wolf, 2) Bear, 3) Turtle, 4) Beaver,
5) Deer, 6) Sandpiper, 7) Heron, 8) Falcon. In every kind dominate
the following habits:
1. The clan chooses its sachem (an elder for peacetime) and leader
(military leader). The sachem was to be chosen from among the
clan, and his position was inherited within the clan, since according to
release, she had to immediately be replaced again, a military
the leader could be chosen not from members of the genus, but sometimes him in general
could not be. The son of the previous sachem was never elected sachem, because
among the Iroquois, maternal right prevailed, and the son, therefore,
belonged to a different gens, but often a brother of the previous sachem or
his sister's son. Everyone participated in the elections - men and women. But the election
subject to approval by the remaining seven genera, and only after that
the chosen one was solemnly inaugurated and, moreover, by the general council of all
Iroquois union. The significance of this act will be seen from what follows. Power
the sachem within the gens was paternal, of a purely moral order; means
he had no coercion. However, he was ex officio a member
the council of the Seneca tribe, as well as the general council of the Iroquois union. Military
the leader could order something only during military campaigns.
2. The gens deposes the sachem and war chief at its discretion. This
again decided jointly by men and women. Displaced officials
faces after that, like others, simple warriors, private
persons. However, the tribal council can also remove sachems, even against their will.
kind.
3. None of the members of the clan can marry within the clan. Takovo
the basic rule of the genus, the bond that holds it together is the negative
expression of that very definite consanguinity by virtue of which
the individuals united by it only become a genus. By opening this
simple fact Morgan first revealed the essence of the genus. How little is still
understood this essence, show the former reports of savages and barbarians,
where the various associations that form the constituent elements of the generic system,
without understanding and indiscriminately are mixed into one heap under the names: tribe,
clan, tum, etc., and it is often said about them that inside such
marriage is prohibited. This created a hopeless confusion, among
which Mr. McLennan was able to play the role of Napoleon to install
order without an appeal sentence: all tribes are divided into such, inside
in which marriage is prohibited (exogamous), and those in which it is allowed
(endogamous). Completely confusing the question in this way, he then launched into
most thoughtful investigations, which of his two absurd categories
more ancient - exogamy or endogamy. With the discovery of a genus based on
consanguinity and the resulting impossibility of marriage between his
members, this nonsense dissipated by itself - Of course, at that stage
development, on which we find the Iroquois, the prohibition of marriage within the clan
strictly observed.
4. The property of the dead passed to the rest of the members of the clan, it must
was to remain within the clan. Due to the insignificance of items that could
leave behind a mohawk, his inheritance was divided between his closest
relatives; in the event of a man's death, his siblings and brother
mothers, in the event of the death of a woman - her children and sisters, but not brothers. By
for the same reason, husband and wife could not inherit each other, and also children -
father.
5. Members of the clan were obliged to provide each other with assistance, protection and
especially assistance in avenging damage caused by strangers. In defense
for his safety, the individual relied on the protection of the clan and
could count on it; the one who harmed him, harmed everything
kind. From here, from the blood ties of the family, arose the obligation of blood vengeance,
unconditionally recognized by the Iroquois. If a member of the genus was killed by someone from
someone else's family, the whole family of the murdered was obliged to respond with blood feud. At first
an attempt was made to reconcile; the council of the murderer's kind gathered and made the council
kind of the murdered, a proposal to end the matter peacefully, most often expressing
regret and offering significant gifts. If the offer was accepted,
the matter was considered settled. Otherwise, the affected family
appointed one of several avengers who were required to hunt down and
kill the killer. If this was done, the genus of the slain had no right
to complain, the case was admitted in the end.
6. The genus has certain names or groups of names, to use which
in the whole tribe he can only be alone, so the name of an individual also
indicates to which genus it belongs. Inextricably with the generic name
related and tribal rights.
7. The gens may adopt outsiders and in this way admit them to membership.
the whole tribe. Prisoners of war who were not killed became, so
Thus, by virtue of adoption in one of the clans by members of the Seneca tribe and
thereby acquired all the rights of the clan and tribe. The adoption took place
at the suggestion of individual members of the genus: at the suggestion of men who took
a stranger as a brother or sister, or at the suggestion of women who received
him as his child; to approve such an adoption
a solemn acceptance into the genus was necessary. Often isolated, numerically
weakened due to exceptional circumstances childbirth thus again
quantitatively strengthened by mass adoption of members of a different kind,
with the consent of the latter. Among the Iroquois, solemn acceptance into the clan took place
at a public meeting of the tribal council, which actually made it
celebration in a religious ceremony.
8. It is difficult to establish the presence of special religious
festivities; but the religious ceremonies of the Indians are more or less connected with
born. During the six annual religious festivals of the Iroquois, the sachems and
military leaders of individual clans, by virtue of their position, were ranked as
"guardians of the faith" and performed priestly functions.
9. The clan has a common burial place. The Iroquois of New York State
constrained on all sides by whites, it has now disappeared, but earlier
existed. It is still preserved among other Indians, as, for example, among
closely related to the Tuscarora Iroquois, which, despite
that they are Christians, they have a special row in the cemetery for each clan, so
that in the same row with the children they bury the mother, but not the father. Yes, and the Iroquois all
the family of the deceased participates in the burial, takes care of the grave, funeral speeches and
etc.
10. The clan has a council - a democratic assembly of all adult members
gender, men and women with equal voting rights. This council chose
and deposed sachems and military leaders, as well as the rest of the "keepers of the faith";
he issued orders for ransom (wergeld) or blood feud for the dead
family members; he accepted strangers into the family. In a word, he was
supreme power in the clan.
Such are the functions of a typical Indian family.
"All its members are free people, obliged to defend the freedom of each
friend, they have equal personal rights - neither sachems nor military
the leaders do not claim any advantages, they constitute a brotherhood,
connected by blood ties. Liberty, equality, fraternity though this
never been formulated, were the basic principles of the genus, and the genus,
in turn, was a unit of a whole social system, the basis
organized Indian society. This explains the inexorable
a sense of independence and personal dignity that everyone recognizes
for the Indians" [See also Marx K., Engels F. Soch. 2nd ed., vol. 45, p.
280. Ed.]
By the time of the discovery of America, the Indians of all North America were
organized into genera on the basis of maternal law. Only a few
tribes, such as, for example, among the Dakotas, childbirth fell into decline, and among some
others, like the Ojibwe, Omaha, they were organized on the basis of their father's
rights.
A great many Indian tribes, numbering more than five or six
births, we meet special groups that combine three, four or more
childbirth; Morgan calls such a group a phratry (brotherhood), passing
the Indian name is exactly the corresponding Greek concepts. Yes, at
the Seneca tribe, two phratries; the first includes genera 1-4, the second - genera
5-8. A more detailed study shows that these phratries are more
partly represent the original genera, into which at first it broke up
tribe; for with the prohibition of marriages within the clan, each tribe, of necessity
had to cover at least two genders to be able to
exist independently. As the tribe grows, each clan, in its own
turn, split into two or more genera that act
now as independent, while the original genus, covering all
subsidiaries, continues to exist as a phratry. The Seneca tribe and
most other Indians, the clans of the same phratry are considered fraternal clans,
and the clans of another phratry are cousins for them, - designations that have in
American kinship system, as we have seen, is a very real and clear
expressed value. Initially, no Seneca could marry
also within his phratry, but this custom has long since fallen into disuse
and operates only within the genus. According to the Seneca tribe
the original genera from which the others descended were the genera "Bear" and
"Deer". As this new organization took root, it became
be modified according to need; if the births of one died out
phratries, it was not uncommon for whole families to be transferred to it to equalize with others
from other phratries. Therefore, in different tribes we find genera with the same
names, grouped differently in phratries.
The functions of the phratry among the Iroquois - partly public, partly
religious order. 1) In the game of ball, the phratries oppose one another;
each nominates its best players, the rest follow the game,
located in phratries, and bet with each other, betting on
the victory of their players.- 2) In the council of the tribe, the sachems and military leaders of each
the phratries sit together, one group against another, each speaker says,
addressing the representatives of each phratry as a special corporation.- 3) If
there was a murder in the tribe, and the murderer and the murdered did not belong to
the same phratry, the affected family often appealed to their
fraternal clans; they then convened a council of the phratry and appealed to another
phratry as a whole, so that she in turn muster her council for
settling the matter. Here the phratry thus appears again as
the original genus - and with greater chances of success than the weaker one
a separate genus descended from it. - 4) In case of death of prominent persons
the opposite phratry took care of funerals and funeral
celebrations, while members of the phratry of the deceased participated in the funeral in
as relatives of the deceased. When the sachem died, the opposite phratry
notified the Union Council of the Iroquois of the vacancy. - 5) At elections
the sachem also appeared on the stage of the council of the phratry. Fraternal Choice Approval
genera were taken for granted, but the genera of another phratry
could object. In such a case, the council of this phratry met;
if he considered the objections correct, the election was recognized
invalid. - 6) Previously, the Iroquois had special religious
mysteries, called by the whites medicine-lodges [witchcraft gatherings. Ed.].
These mysteries among the Seneca tribe were organized by two religious brotherhoods,
who had special rules for initiating new members; to each of the two phratries
accounted for one such brotherhood. - 7) If, which is almost certain,
four lineages (tribes) inhabited at the time of the conquest 159 four
quarter of Tlaxcala were four phratries, this proves that both
phratries among the Greeks, and similar tribal unions among the Germans, also had
the value of military units; these four lineages went into battle, each as
special detachment in their own uniform and with their own banner, under the command of
own leader.
As several gentes form a phratry, so several phratries, if
take the classical form, form a tribe; in some cases, significantly
weakened tribes lack the middle link - the phratry. What
characterizes a separate Indian tribe in America?
1. Own territory and own name. Each tribe owned
in addition to the place of his actual settlement, still a significant area for
hunting and fishing. Outside this area lay a vast neutral
a strip extending up to the possessions of the nearest tribe; with tribes from
related languages this band was already: among tribes not related to each other
a friend in language, - wider. This lane is the same as the border forest
Germans, an uninhabited area that they created around their territory
the Sueves of Caesar; this is the same as isarnholt (in Danish Jarnved, limes Danicus)
between Danes and Germans, the Saxon forest and branibor (in Slavic -
"protective forest"), from which Brandenburg got its name, - between
Germans and Slavs. A region separated by this kind of indeterminate
borders, constituted the common land of the tribe, was recognized as such by neighboring
tribes, and the tribe itself protected it from encroachment. On practice
the indeterminacy of boundaries was for the most part inconvenient only when
when the population grew strongly. - The names of the tribes, apparently, are more
partly arose by chance rather than consciously chosen, over time
time, it often happened that a tribe received from neighboring tribes a name different from
from what it called itself, just as the Germans had their first
the historical common name "Germans" was given by the Celts.
2. A special dialect peculiar only to this tribe. In fact
tribe and dialect are essentially the same; new formation of tribes and dialects
by division took place in America until recently, and hardly at all.
has stopped now. Where two numerically weakened tribes merge into
one thing, it happens that, as an exception, in the same tribe they speak
two very related dialects. Average number of American tribes
below 2000 people; however, the Cherokee tribe has 26,000 people -
the largest number of Indians in the United States who speak one
dialect.
3. The right to solemnly inaugurate sachems elected by the families and
military leaders.
4. The right to depose them, even against the wishes of their kind. Since these sachems and
war chiefs are members of the tribal council, these tribal rights are
attitude towards them are self-explanatory. Where the union of tribes was formed and
all the tribes included in it are represented in the union council, these rights
move on to the last one.
5. General religious ideas (mythology) and religious rites.
"The Indians were in their barbaric way a religious people"
The mythology of the Indians has not yet been subjected to critical scrutiny.
study; objects of their religious ideas - all kinds of spirits -
they already gave a human appearance, but the lowest stage of barbarism, on
which they were, does not yet know visual images, the so-called
idols. It was a cult of nature and the elements, which was on the way of development to
polytheism. Various tribes had their regular festivities with
certain forms of worship, namely dances and games; dancing in
features were an essential part of all religious celebrations;
each tribe held their festivals separately.
6. Council of the tribe to discuss common affairs. It consisted of all the sachems
and military leaders of individual clans, their true representatives, because
they could be removed at any time; he sat in public, surrounded
other members of the tribe who had the right to enter into discussion and
tell your opinion; the council made the decision. As a rule, each
those present could, if desired, speak out, women could also
present their views through their chosen speaker. For the Iroquois
the final decision required unanimity, as was the case in the German
communities of stamps when solving certain issues. In charge of the tribal council
included, in particular, the regulation of relations with other tribes; He
received and sent embassies, declared war and made peace. If the case
came to war, then it was mostly volunteers. Basically every
tribe was considered to be at war with every other tribe with which it
did not conclude a peace treaty in its entirety. military action against
such enemies were organized for the most part by individual prominent
warriors; they held a war dance, and everyone who took part in it
declared thereby his accession to the campaign. Detachment immediately
organized and performed. Protecting tribal territory from
attacks were also carried out for the most part by calling for volunteers.
The campaign and return from the campaign of such detachments have always served
occasion for public celebrations. Tribal council consent for such trips
it was not required, it was not asked for and it was not given. It's exactly the same
that the private military campaigns of the German squads, as Tacitus draws them for us,
only among the Germans the squads have already acquired a more permanent character,
constitute a stable core, which is organized already in peacetime and
around which, in case of war, the rest of the volunteers are grouped. Such
military detachments were rarely numerous; the largest military expeditions
Indians, even over long distances, were committed by minor combat
forces. If several such detachments united for some
large enterprise, each of them obeyed only his own
leader; the consistency of the campaign plan to one degree or another was ensured
the advice of these leaders. Such was the manner of warfare among the Alemanni on
Upper Rhine in the 4th century, according to the description of Ammianus Marcellinus.
7. Among some tribes we meet the supreme leader, powers
which, however, are very small. This is one of the sachems, which, in cases
requiring immediate action should take temporary measures until
how the council can meet and make a final decision. Here before
hardly outlined by us, but for the most part not received further
development of the prototype of an official with executive power;
such an official rather appeared, as we shall see, in the majority
cases, if not everywhere, as a result of the development of the power of the supreme
military leader.
Further tribalization of the vast majority of American
the Indians did not go. Their few tribes, separated from each other
vast border strips, weakened by eternal wars, occupied
a small number of people a huge space. Unions between kindred
tribes were here and there in case of temporary need and with
disintegrated by her disappearance. However, in some areas initially
related, but subsequently separated tribes again rallied in
permanent alliances, thus taking the first step towards the formation of nations. IN
United States, the most developed form of such an alliance is found in
Iroquois. Coming out of their places of settlement west of the Mississippi, where they are,
probably formed a branch of a large related group of yes-kota, they after
long wanderings settled in the current state of New York, divided into five
the Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, and Mohawk tribes. They existed through
fishing, hunting and primitive gardening, lived in villages, more
partly protected by palisades. Their number never exceeded 20,000,
in all five tribes there were several common clans, they spoke very
related dialects of the same language and inhabited a continuous
territory that was divided among the five tribes. Since the territory
this one was recently conquered by them, then the joint actions of these tribes against
the tribes displaced by them have become a natural phenomenon that has become customary. AND
thus, at the latest at the beginning of the 15th century, a formalized "eternal
union" - a confederation, which, realizing the strength it has acquired, immediately
acquired an offensive character in the period of its highest power,
about 1675, conquered large areas surrounding it, partly
driving away, partly imposing tribute on local residents. Iroquois Union Represents
the most developed social organization that the Indians have created, not
those who have crossed the lower stage of barbarism (hence, excluding
Mexicans, New Mexicans, and Peruvians). The main features of the union were
are:
1. The eternal union of the five tribes related by blood on the basis of a complete
equality and independence in all internal affairs of the tribe. This blood
kinship was the true basis of the union. Of the five tribes, three were called
paternal and were brothers among themselves; the other two were called filial and
were also fraternal tribes among themselves. Three genera - the oldest - were still
are represented by living members in all five tribes, three other genera - in three
tribes, members of each of these clans were all considered brothers in all five
tribes. Mutual language, which differed only in dialects, was an expression and
proof common origin.
2. The organ of the union was the allied council, which consisted of 50 sachems, equal
position and authority, this council made final decisions on all
affairs of the union.
3. Places for these 50 sachems, as holders of new offices,
specially established for the purposes of the union, were distributed during its creation
between tribes and clans. When a position is vacated, the corresponding kind
replaced her again by election; he could also at any time displace
his sachem, but the right of induction belonged to the allied council.
4. These allied sachems were also sachems in their own tribes and had
the right to participate and vote in the tribal council.
5 All resolutions of the Union Council were to be adopted
unanimously.
6. Voting was done by tribes, so that each tribe and in
each tribe, all members of the council were required to vote unanimously in order to
the decision was considered valid.
7 An allied council could be convened by each of the councils of the five tribes, but not
could assemble on his own initiative.
8. The meetings took place in the presence of the assembled people, each
the Iroquois could take the floor, but the decision was made only by the council.
9. There was no single head in the union, no person,
head of the executive branch.
10 On the other hand, the union had two high military leaders with equal powers and
equal power (two "kings" of the Spartans, two consuls in Rome).
Such was the social order in which the Iroquois lived from above.
four hundred years and still live. I have described this system in detail, following
Morgan, since here we have the opportunity to study the organization of society,
not yet known state. The state presupposes a special public
power, separated from the totality of the persons permanently included in its composition
Therefore, Maurer, who, guided by the right instinct, recognizes the German
the Mark system as a purely social institution, essentially different from
state, although for the most part and later served as the basis for
the latter, in all his works explores the gradual emergence
public authority from the original Markov, rural, household and
urban system and along with it. On the example of the North American Indians, we
we see how initially a single tribe gradually spreads across
vast continent, as tribes, dismembered, turn into peoples, into
entire groups of tribes, how languages change, becoming not only mutually
incomprehensible, but also losing almost every trace of the original unity; How
along with this, within the tribes, individual genera are divided into several genera,
and the old maternal gentes are preserved in the form of phratries, and, however,
the names of these oldest genera still remain the same among distant friends.
from a friend of territorially and long-separated tribes - "Wolf" and "Bear"
are also generic names for most of all Indian tribes. AND
all of them have, in general, the above-described system, except for the fact that
that many of them did not reach the union of kindred tribes.
But we also see that since the main social unit
a genus appears, from it with an almost irresistible necessity - for this is quite
Naturally, the whole system of clans, phratries and tribes develops. All three
groups represent different degrees of consanguinity, with each of
them is closed in itself and manages its own affairs, but also serves
complement for another. The range of cases to be handled covers the entire
the totality of the social affairs of a person standing at the lowest rung
barbarism. Therefore, meeting with some people the genus as the main
a social cell, we will have to look for a tribal organization from him
like that which is here described, and where there are sufficient sources,
like the Greeks and Romans, we will not only find it, but also make sure that even in
in cases where there are not enough sources, comparison with the American
social order will help us to resolve the most difficult doubts and riddles.
And what a wonderful organization this tribal system in all its naivety
and simplicity! Without soldiers, gendarmes and policemen, without nobles, kings,
governors, prefects or judges, no prisons, no trials - all
goes his way established order. Any disputes and strife are resolved jointly
those whom they concern - a clan or a tribe, or separate clans between
yourself; only as the most extreme, rarely used remedy threatens blood
revenge and our the death penalty is only its civilized form,
which has both positive and negative sides civilization.
Although there are much more common affairs than at present - household
carried out by a number of families together and on a communist basis, the land is
the property of the whole tribe, only small gardens are provided in
temporary use by individual farms - nevertheless there is no trace
our bloated and complicated apparatus of government. All questions are solved by themselves
interested parties, and in most cases the age-old custom is already all
settled. There can be no poor and needy - communist
the household and the clan know their duties towards the elderly, the sick
and mutilated in the war. Everyone is equal and free, including women. Slaves
does not yet exist, as a rule, there is also no enslavement of foreign tribes. When
the Iroquois around 1651 defeated the Erie tribe and the "neutral nation" 161, they
invited them to join their union as full members, only after
as the vanquished rejected this, they were expelled from their territory. A
what kind of men and women such a society gives rise to, enthusiastic
testimonies of all the whites who came into contact with the uncorrupted Indians about the feeling
dignity, straightforwardness, strength of character and courage of these
barbarians.
Examples of this courage we saw quite recently in Africa Zulu Kafra
a few years ago, like the Nubians a few months ago, the tribes
whose tribal institutions have not yet disappeared - they did what they could not
not a single European army is capable. 162 Armed only with spears and
darts, not having firearms, they are under a hail of bullets charging
from the breech of the guns of the English infantry - admittedly the first in
world in combat operations in close formation - moved forward by
the distance of a bayonet fight, more than once upset the ranks of this infantry and even
overturned it, despite the extreme inequality in armament,
despite the fact that they are not serving any military service and do not have
concept of military service. About what they are able to endure and
fulfill, testify to the lamentations of the British about the fact that kaffir in
a day passes more than a horse, and faster than it. He has the smallest muscle
strong as steel, stands out like a braided belt, says one
English artist.
This is what people and human society looked like before the
division into different classes. And if we compare their position with that of
vast majority of modern civilized people, the difference between
current proletarian or small peasant and ancient free member
kind will be colossal.
This is one side of the matter. But let's not forget that this organization was
doomed to death. She did not go further than the tribe, the formation of a union of tribes
means already the beginning of its destruction, as we shall see and how we
seen in examples of Iroquois attempts to enslave other tribes. Everything, that
was out of the tribe, out of the law. In the absence of a prisoner throughout
the form of a peace treaty reigned war between the tribes, and this war was fought with
the cruelty that distinguishes man from other animals and which
only subsequently was somewhat softened under the influence of material
interests. The tribal system, which was in full bloom, as we observed
him in America, assumed an extremely undeveloped production, therefore,
extremely rare population over a vast area, hence the almost complete
subordination of a person to a hostile opposing and incomprehensible environment
nature, which is reflected in childishly naive religious
representations. The tribe remained a boundary for man, both in relation to
to a foreigner, and in relation to oneself: a tribe, a clan and their institutions
were sacred and inviolable, were that supreme power given by nature,
to which the individual remained unconditionally subordinate in his
feelings, thoughts and actions. No matter how impressive they look in our eyes
people of this era, they are indistinguishable from each other, they have not come off yet, according to
Marx's expression, from the umbilical cord of the primitive community. The power of this primitive
community had to be broken - and it was broken. But she was
broken under influences that seem to us to be decadent,
fall into sin in comparison with the high moral level of the old tribal
society. The basest motives are vulgar greed, gross passion
to pleasures, dirty stinginess, selfish desire to rob the common
wealth - are the heirs of a new, civilized, class
society; the most vile means - theft, violence, deceit, treason -
undermine the old classless tribal society and lead to its death. A
the new society itself during all two and a half thousand years of its
existence has always presented only a picture of the development of an insignificant
minorities at the expense of the exploited and oppressed vast majority,
and it remains so now more than ever.
was before.
IV
GREEK ROD
The Greeks, like the Pelasgians and other tribal peoples, already in
prehistoric time were organized according to the same organic
in a row as the Americans: clan, phratry, tribe, union of tribes. The phratries could not
be, like the Dorians, an alliance of tribes could not be formed everywhere, but in all
cases, the main cell was the genus. By the time it appeared on
the historical arena, the Greeks stood on the threshold of civilization; between them and
American tribes, which were discussed above, lie almost two whole
large period of development, by which the Greeks of the heroic era were ahead of
Iroquois. The genus of the Greeks is therefore no longer the archaic genus of the Iroquois, print
group marriage [In the 1884 edition, instead of the words "group marriage"
printed "punalual family". Ed.] begins to noticeably fade.
Mother's right gave way to father's; emerging private wealth
this made its first breach in the tribal system. The second gap was
a natural consequence of the first: since after the introduction of paternal right
the property of a wealthy heiress should have passed to her at her marriage
her husband, therefore, in a different kind, then the foundation of everything was undermined
tribal law and not only began to allow, but also made for such a case
obligatory that the girl you go to marry inside a kind of interest
preservation for the latter of this property.
According to the Greek history of the Grotto, the Athenian family, in particular, rested
on the following grounds:
1. General religious festivals and the exclusive right of the priesthood
perform sacred rites in honor of a particular god, supposed
the ancestor of the genus and designated as such by a special nickname.
2. Common place of burial (cf. "Evbulid" by Demosthenes).
3. The right of mutual inheritance.
4. Mutual obligation to provide assistance to each other in case of violence,
protection and support.
5. Mutual right and obligation in certain cases to marry
within the clan, especially when it came to orphans or heirs.
6. Possession, at least in some cases, of common property,
the presence of its own archon (elder) and treasurer.
Further, several genera were united into a phratry, but by less close
bonds; however, here we see the same kind of mutual rights and
duties, especially the joint performance of certain religious
ceremonies and the right to prosecute in the event of the murder of a member of the phratry. All
the phratries of one tribe had, in turn, common, regular
repeated sacred festivities led by a chosen one from
environment of the noble (eupatrids) filobasileus (tribe elder)
That's what Grot says. Marx adds to this: "However, even through
the Greek genus clearly peeps through the savage (for example, the Mohawk)" [Marx K.,
Engels F., Op. v. 45, p. 328. Ed.]. It will be even more visible
if we continue the study a little further.
In fact, the following features are also characteristic of the Greek genus:
7. Account of origin in accordance with paternal law.
8. The prohibition of marriages within the clan, with the exception of marriages with
heirs. This exception and its formalization as law confirm that
the old rule was still in effect. This also follows from the general
rules that a woman, when she marries, thereby refuses to participate in
religious rites of her kind and passed to the rites of her husband, to the phratry
which she enrolled. According to this, and also to a well-known place at
Dicaearchus, marriage outside of a kind was the rule, and Becker in "Charikla" directly
believes that no one could marry within his clan.
9. The right of adoption by birth, it was exercised through adoption
one of the families, but with observance of public formalities, and only in the form
exceptions.
10. The right to elect and remove elders. We know that every generation had
his archon; that this position was hereditary in
certain families, is not mentioned anywhere. Until the end of the era of barbarism always
should assume the absence of strict [The word "strict" added
Engels in the 1891 edition. Ed.] inheritance of positions, absolutely
incompatible with the order in which the rich and the poor within the gens
enjoyed complete equality.
Not only Grotto, but also Niebuhr, Mommsen and all other historians of the classical
antiquity has not yet dealt with the question of gender. No matter how true
they outlined many of its characteristics, they always saw in it a group of families and
because of this, they could not understand the nature and origin of the genus. At birth
the family has never been and could not be a cell of the social system,
because husband and wife necessarily belonged to two different families. Genus
was wholly part of the phratry, the phratry was part of the tribe, the family was half part of
the clan of the husband and half to the clan of the wife. The State in its public law also
does not recognize the family, and it still exists only as an object of private
rights. Meanwhile, all our historical science still proceeds from the absurd
assumption, which became, especially in the 18th century, unshakable, that monogamous
separate family, which is hardly ancient era civilization, was the core
around which society and the state gradually crystallized.
“Mr. Groth should further point out,” adds Marx, “that although the Greeks
and derived their clans from mythology, these clans are older than the one they created
mythology itself with its gods and demigods" [See Marx K., Engels F. Soch.
2nd ed., vol. 45, p. 330. Ed.]
Morgan prefers to refer to Grotto, since he is nevertheless recognized and
quite credible witness Grot goes on to say that each
the Athenian family bore a name that passed to it from its supposed
ancestor, which is before Solon in all cases, and after Solon with
in the absence of a will, the members of the gennetes of the deceased inherited him
property and that, in the event of a murder, prosecuting the perpetrator before the court
was the right and duty, first of all, of relatives, then of members
family and, finally, members of the phratry of the slain
"Everything we know about the oldest Athenian laws is based on
tribal and phraterial divisions"
The origin of childbirth from common ancestors delivered to the "learned philistines"
(Marx) [Ibid., p. 331. Ed.] puzzling work. Since they
of course, these ancestors are portrayed as purely mythological creatures, they have
there remains no possibility of explaining the origin of the genus from
living next to each other separate, initially not even related
among themselves, families, and yet they must do this in order to at least
somehow explain the existence of the genus. So they end up in
a vicious circle of meaningless phrases, without going beyond the statement"
the pedigree is, of course, a myth, but the genus exists in reality, and in the end
Finally, in Groth we find the following (the words in brackets are Marx's):
"We hear about this pedigree only occasionally, because it is publicly
mentioned only in famous, especially solemn occasions. But also less
significant families had their common religious rites "(as it is
strange, Mr. Groth), "as well as the common ancestor - the superman and
common genealogy in exactly the same way as the more famous genera" (as
this is strange, Mr. Groth, for less significant births) "scheme and
ideal basis" (sir, not ideal a carnal, or on
in our language - carnal!) "were the same for all generations" [Ibid., p.
332. Ed.]
Marx summarizes Morgan's answer to this question in the following words.
"The system of consanguinity corresponding to the genus in its original
form - and the Greeks, like other mortals, once had such a form -
provided knowledge of the relationship of all members of the clan to each other
From childhood, they learned in practice these extremely important for them
intelligence. With the advent of the monogamous family, this was forgotten. generic name
created a pedigree, next to which the pedigree of an individual family
seemed to be meaningless. This generic name should have now
testify to the fact of the common origin of its carriers, but
the genealogy of the clan went so far into the depths of time that its members could not
already to prove the relationship that really existed between them, except
few cases where there were later common ancestors. Most
the name was proof of common ancestry and proof indisputable,
apart from adoptions. On the contrary, the actual negation of any
kinship between members of the genus, as Grot does [In Marx's manuscript, instead of
Grot is named an ancient Greek scientist of the II century. AD Pollux, which is often
refers to Grotto. Ed.] and Niebuhr, who turn the genus into a product of pure fiction and
poetic creativity, worthy only of "ideal", that is, purely
armchair book scientists. Since the connection of generations, especially with
the emergence of monogamy, recedes into the depths of time and the past
reality appears in the reflection of fantastic images of mythology, then
well-meaning philistines have come and continue to come to the conclusion that
a fantastic pedigree created real births" [See Marx K., Engels F.
Op. 2nd ed. v. 45, p. 332. Ed.].
The phratry, like that of the Americans, was divided into several
child genera and the original genus uniting them, often indicating
even on the origin of them all from a common ancestor. So, according to Grotto,
"all peers, members of the phratry of Hecateus, recognized the same
god by his ancestor in the sixteenth generation"
All the clans of this phratry were therefore in the literal sense fraternal
by birth, Phratria is found in Homer as a military unit in
famous place where Nestor advises Agamemnon to build people according to tribes and
phratries so that the phratry helps the phratries, the tribe helps the tribe [Homer.
Iliad, second ode. Ed.] - Phratry, in addition, had the right and was
is obliged to prosecute for the murder of a member of the phratry, therefore, in more
in the early era, it also had the duty of blood feud. She has, further,
there were common shrines and festivities, and the self-development of the entire Greek
mythology from the traditional ancient Aryan cult of nature in essence
It was conditioned by gentes and phratries and took place within them. Further,
The phratry had an elder (phratriarchos) and, according to de Coulanges, convened
general meetings, made binding decisions, had judicial and
administrative authority. Even the later state, which ignored the clan,
left to the phratry some public administrative functions
character.
Several related phratries make up a tribe. There were four in Attica
tribe, in each of them - three phratries and in each phratry - thirty
childbirth. Such a precise definition of the composition of groups presupposes a conscious and
systematic intervention in the spontaneously established order of things. How when
and why it happened - is silent about this Greek history, memories
about which the Greeks themselves have survived only since the heroic era.
The formation of various dialects among the Greeks, crowded in a relatively
small territory, received less development than in vast
American forests, but here we see that only tribes with the same
the main dialect are combined into a larger whole, and even in a small
Attica, we meet a special dialect, which later became
dominant as a common language for all Greek prose.
In Homer's poems we find Greek tribes already in most cases
united in small nationalities, within which clans, phratries and
the tribes still fully retained their independence. They already lived in
cities fortified with walls, the population increased along with
the growth of herds, the spread of agriculture and the rudiments of crafts, at the same time
property differences grew, and with them the aristocratic element within
ancient, primitive democracy. Separate small nationalities led
continuous wars for possession the best lands, and also, of course, for
spoils of war, the slavery of prisoners of war was already a recognized institution.
The organization of government among these tribes and small nationalities was
next:
1. The permanent body of power was the council, bule, originally,
apparently, consisting of the elders of the clans, later cell, when the number
the latter increased too much - from a select part of these elders, which gave
opportunity for the development and strengthening of the aristocratic element, precisely
and depicts us Dionysius council of the heroic era, consisting of noble
(kratistoi). In important matters, the council made the final decisions; So,
for example, in Aeschylus, the council of the city of Thebes takes the decisive
position of the decision to arrange an honorable funeral for Eteocles, and the corpse
Throw Polyneice to be eaten by dogs [Aeschylus. Seven against Thebes. Ed.].
Subsequently, when the state was created, this council turned into
senate.
2. People's assembly (agora). Among the Iroquois, we saw that the people -
men and women - surrounds the assembly of the council and, in due course
participating in the discussion, thus influences his decisions. Homeric
Greeks is "environment", using the old German judicial
expression, has already developed into a real popular assembly, as it took place
also among the ancient Germans. It was convened by the council to decide important
questions; every man could take the floor. The decision was made by a show of hands
(in Aeschylus in The Petitioners) or exclamations. The meeting belonged
supreme power in the last resort, for, as Sheman says ("Greek
antiquities"),
"when it comes to a matter for which assistance is required
of the people of Homer does not show us any way in which one could
compel the people to do so against their will."
Indeed, at a time when every adult male in the tribe was a warrior, not
there was still a public authority separated from the people, which could
be opposed to it. Primitive democracy was still in full
flourishing, and from this we must proceed in judging the power and position
both council and basiley.
3. Warlord (basileus). Marx remarks on this
"European scientists, for the most part born court lackeys,
turn a basileo into a monarch modern sense words. Against it
protests Yankee Republican Morgan. He speaks very ironically, but
quite right about unctuous Gladstone and his book "The Youth of the World"
"Mr. Gladstone introduces us to the Greek leaders of the heroic age in
the form of kings and princes, portraying them in addition as gentlemen, but he himself
must admit that in general the custom or law of birthrights we find in
they seem to be enough, but not too reeco pronounced" [See:
Marx K., Engels F. Op. 2nd ed., vol. 45, p. 336. Ed.]
It must be assumed that the birthright, with such reservations,
Mr. Gladstone will introduce himself enough, even if it is not too abrupt
expressed without meaning.
We have already seen how matters stood with regard to the succession of the offices of the elders.
the Iroquois and other Indians. All positions were elective in the majority
cases within the genus and to that extent were hereditary within the latter.
When replacing vacant posts, they gradually began to give
preference for the closest relative - brother or sister's son, if there was none
reasons to bypass it. Therefore, if the Greeks, under the rule of paternal right,
the position of basileus usually passed to the son or to one of the sons, then this
only proves that the sons here could expect to inherit in
force of popular election, but by no means speaks of the recognition of the legitimate
succession other than such election. In this case we find among the Iroquois
and the Greeks are only the first germ of special noble families within the clan, and among the Greeks to
besides, the first germ of the future hereditary leadership, or
monarchy. Therefore, it should be assumed that among the Greeks the basileus was supposed to
either be elected by the people, or be approved by its recognized bodies -
council or agora, as practiced in relation to the Roman "king"
(geh).
In the Iliad, the "lord of men" Agamemnon does not appear as the supreme king
Greeks, but as supreme commander allied army before the besieged
city. And this position of his is indicated in a well-known place by Odysseus, when
strife arose among the Greeks: polymany of command is not good, one must be
commander, etc. (followed by a popular verse mentioning the scepter,
but it was added later) [Homer. Iliad, second ode. Ed.]. "Odysseus
does not lecture here on the form of government, but demands obedience
commander in chief at war. For the Greeks, who under Troy represented
only an army, the agora is conducted quite democratically: Achilles, speaking
about gifts, that is, about the division of booty, always calls it a matter of not
Agamemnon or some other basileus, but "sons of the Achaeans", that is
people. Epithets. "born by Zeus", "fed by Zeus" nothing
prove, since each clan is descended from one of the gods,
and the clan of the head of the tribe is already from a "more noble" god, in this case - from
Zeus. Even those who are personally not free, such as Evmei the swineherd and others,
are "divine" (dioi and theioi), and this is in the Odyssey, hence
much later than the time described in the Iliad; in the same "Odyssey"
the name "hero" is given to the herald Mulius, as well as to the blind singer
Demodoc [In Marx's manuscript, the phrase "the term
"koiravos", which Odysseus applies to Agamemnon, along with
the term "basilei" also means only "commander of an army in war".
Ed.]. In short, the word basileia, which the Greek writers use for
designations of the Homeric so-called royal power (because the main
its distinguishing feature is military leadership), if there is, along with
her council of leaders and the people's assembly means only military democracy"
(Marx) [See. Marx K., Engels F. Op. 2nd ed., vol. 45, p. 337. Ed.].
The basileus, in addition to the military, also had priestly and judicial powers;
the latter were not precisely defined, the former he possessed as the supreme
representative of a tribe or union of tribes. About civil, administrative
powers are never out of the question, but, apparently, basil ex officio
was a member of the council. Thus, etymologically quite correct
translate the word "basilei" with the German word "Konig", since the word "Konig"
(Kuning) comes from Kuni, Kunne and means "elder of the family". But
the modern meaning of the word "Konig" (king) the ancient Greek "basileus" with
absolutely does not match. Thucydides definitely names the ancient basileia
patrike, that is, descended from childbirth, and says that she possessed precisely
established, therefore, limited powers. Aristotle also
indicates that the basileia of the heroic age was the leadership of
free, and the basilei was a commander, judge and high priest;
governmental power in the later sense, he therefore did not possess
[Just like the Greek basileus, they also depicted in the form of a modern monarch
Aztec commander Morgan for the first time subjected to historical criticism
initially misunderstood and exaggerated, and then
and outright false reports of the Spaniards and proves that the Mexicans stood on
the middle stage of barbarism, but somewhat outstripped in its development
New Mexican Pueblo Indians, and that their system, as far as one can conclude
according to distorted reports, it was distinguished by the following features; it was the union of three
tribes, subjugated and turned into his tributaries several others
tribes, it was governed by an allied council and an allied military leader, whom
the Spaniards turned into an "emperor".].
We see, therefore, in the Greek order of the heroic epoch, the ancient
tribal organization still in full force, but at the same time, already the beginning
destruction of it: paternal right with the inheritance of property by children, which
favored the accumulation of wealth in the family and made the family a force,
opposed to the genus; the reverse effect of property differences on the organization
administration through the formation of the first germs of hereditary nobility and
royal power; slavery at first only prisoners of war, but already
opening up the prospect of enslaving one's own tribesmen and even members
kind; already begun degeneration ancient war tribe against tribe
into systematic robbery on land and at sea in order to seize cattle, slaves and
treasures, the transformation of this war into a regular fishery, in a word,
praise and veneration of wealth as the highest good and abuse
ancient tribal orders in order to justify violent robbery
wealth. Only one thing was missing: an institution that not only
would protect the newly acquired wealth of individuals from
communist traditions of the tribal system, which would not only make
previously so little valued sacred private property, and this
sanctification would be declared the highest goal of every human society, but
would affix the stamp of universal public recognition to developing one
after another new forms of acquiring property, and hence to continuously
accelerating accumulation of wealth; lacked an institution that
would perpetuate not only the beginning division of society into classes, but also
the right of the propertied class to exploit the propertyless and the domination of the former over
last.
And such an institution appeared. The state was invented.
V
THE RISE OF THE STATE OF ATHENS
How the state developed, partly transforming the organs of the tribal system,
partly displacing them through the introduction of new organs and, in the end,
completely replacing them with real state authorities; like a place
genuine "armed people" who defended themselves with their own forces in
their clans, phratries and tribes, occupied an armed "public power",
which was subject to this government bodies, and therefore could
be applied against the people - all this, at least in the initial
stages, we can nowhere trace better than in ancient Athens. Change
forms is mainly depicted by Morgan, the analysis of the generative
I have to add economic content for the most part.
In the heroic era, the four tribes of the Athenians occupied more
isolated areas; even the twelve phratries that constituted them, apparently,
They also had separate settlements in the form of twelve cities of Kekrop.
The organization of management corresponded to the heroic era: the people's
assembly, people's council, basil. In the era from which writing begins
history, the land was already divided and passed into private ownership, as it
and characteristic of the comparatively already developed by the end of the highest stage of barbarism
commodity production and the corresponding trade in goods. Along with
grain also produced wine and vegetable oil; maritime trade
the Aegean Sea was more and more withdrawn from the hands of the Phoenicians and fell more
partly into the hands of the inhabitants of Attica. By buying and selling land,
due to the further development of the division of labor between agriculture and
craft, trade and navigation, members of clans, phratries and tribes should
were very soon to mix with each other; in the territory of the phratry and the tribe
residents settled who, although they were compatriots, still did not
belonged to these associations, therefore, were strangers in their
own place of residence. For every phratry and every tribe in peace
time they managed their own affairs, without turning to Athens to the people's council
or basil. But those who lived in the territory of a phratry or tribe did not
belonging to them, could not, of course, take part in this
management.
All this so disrupted the normal functioning of the organs of the birth
building that already in the heroic era it was necessary to take measures to
eliminating this. The device attributed to Theseus was introduced. Turn
consisted primarily in the fact that in Athens a central
management, that is, part of the affairs that were previously in independent
administered by the tribes, was declared to be of general importance and transferred to the jurisdiction
the general council in Athens. Thanks to this innovation, the Athenians
advanced further in their development than any of the indigenous peoples
America: instead of a simple union of neighboring tribes, their
merger into united people. In this regard, a common Athenian folk
law, which rose above the legal customs of individual tribes and clans;
the Athenian citizen, as such, received certain rights and a new
legal protection also in the territory where he was a foreigner. But
this was the first step towards the destruction of the tribal system, for it was the first
a step towards the later admission to the composition of citizens and those persons who
were foreigners throughout Attica and were completely and continued
stay outside the Athenian tribal structure. The second, attributed to Theseus,
innovation consisted in the division of the whole people, regardless of gender,
phratries or tribes, into three classes: eupatrides, or nobles, geomors,
or farmers, and demiurges, or artisans, and in providing
noble exclusive right to fill positions. However, this
the separation did not lead to any results other than the replacement of posts
noble, since it did not establish any other legal distinctions
between classes [In the 1884 edition, the end of the phrase was formulated as follows
way "because the other two classes have not received any special rights."
Ed.]. But it is important, as it reveals to us new,
imperceptibly developed social elements. It shows that what is included in
the custom of replacing tribal positions by members of certain families has become
already in the little disputed right of these families to occupy public
positions that these families, already powerful due to their
wealth, began to take shape outside their clans in a special privileged
class and that these claims of theirs were sanctified only by the nascent
state. It further shows that the division of labor between
peasants and artisans has already become so strong that it began to push back
to the background is the social significance of the former division into clans and tribes.
It finally proclaims an irreconcilable contradiction between the generic
society and state; The first attempt at state formation was
severing ancestral ties by dividing the members of each genus into
privileged and unprivileged and the separation of the latter, in their
turn, into two classes according to their occupation, which
pitted them against one another.
Further political history Athens up to Solon is known far
not enough. The office of basile has lost its significance; at the head
States became elected from among the noble archons. Dominance of the nobility
more and more intensified, until about 600 BC
became unbearable. The main means to suppress people's freedom
money and usury served at the same time. The main seat of the nobility
was in Athens and its environs, where maritime trade, and with it
sea robbery, which on occasion was still practiced, enriched this nobility
and concentrated monetary wealth in her hands. Hence the developing
the money economy penetrated the rural communities, influencing precisely
corrosive acid, on their ancestral, subsistence-based
Lifestyle. The tribal system is absolutely incompatible with the money economy;
the ruin of the small peasants of Attica coincided with the weakening of the old
family ties. IOU and mortgage on land (for the Athenians invented
even a mortgage) were not considered either with the clan or with the phratry. And the old family
The system knew neither money, nor loans, nor monetary debts. Therefore, as a result
the ever-widening monetary dominion of the nobility was developed
also new customary law for securing a creditor against
debtor to consecrate the exploitation of small peasants by the owners of money. On
In the fields of Attica, foundation stones stuck out everywhere, on which it was stated that
the plot was mortgaged to so-and-so for such-and-such a sum of money. fields, not
marked in this way, have already been sold for the most part due to
non-payment of a mortgage loan or interest on time and became the property
aristocratic usurer, the peasant could be satisfied if he was allowed
stay on the plot as a tenant and live on a sixth of the product
of his labour, paying the remaining five-sixths to the new master in the form
rent. Moreover. If the amount received from the sale of land
plot, did not cover the debt, or if the loan was not secured by collateral, then
the debtor was forced to sell his children into slavery in foreign countries in order to
pay off the creditor. The sale of children by the father - such was the first fruit
paternal rights and monogamy! And if the bloodsucker was still not
satisfied, he could sell the debtor himself into slavery. Such was
bright dawn of civilization among the Athenian people.
Before, when the living conditions of the people still corresponded to the tribal system,
such a coup was impossible; and now it was done, but no one knew
how. Let us return for a moment to our Iroquois. It was unthinkable
the situation now imposed on the Athenians, so to speak, without their participation and
undoubtedly against their will. There remained from year to year the same way
production of means of subsistence could never generate such as if from outside
imposed conflicts, such a contradiction between the rich and the poor, between
exploiters and exploited. The Iroquois were still very far from
power over nature, but in certain, for them certain natural
borders they were masters of their own production. If not
count crop failures in their small gardens, depletion of fish stocks in their
lakes and rivers and a sharp decrease in game in their forests, they knew in advance, on
what they can expect with their way of earning a livelihood. This
way was to provide a livelihood - sometimes meager, sometimes
more plentiful, but it could not lead to unforeseen public
coups, to the breaking of tribal ties, to the split of members of the clan and fellow tribesmen into
opposing classes fighting each other. Production took place in
the narrowest limits, but the product was entirely at the mercy of the producers.
This was the great advantage of barbarian production,
an advantage that was lost with the advent of the era of civilization.
The task of the next generations will be to conquer it back, but on the basis of
the now acquired mighty domination of man over nature and on the basis of
free association, which is now possible.
The Greeks were different. The emergence of private property
herds and luxury goods led to an exchange between individuals, to
turning products into goods. And this is the germ of everything that follows.
coup. As soon as the manufacturers themselves stopped directly
consume their product, but began to alienate it through exchange, they lost
his power over him. They no longer knew what would become of him. arose
the ability to use the product against the manufacturer, for its exploitation
and oppression. Therefore, no society can maintain long-term power over
own production and control over social consequences
its process of production, if it does not destroy the exchange between individual
persons.
How quickly after the exchange between individuals and
the transformation of products into commodities, the power of the product over its
manufacturer - this the Athenians had to experience first hand.
Along with commodity production came the cultivation of the land by individuals.
on their own, and soon after the landed property
individuals. Then came money, the universal commodity that could be used
exchange all other goods. But, inventing money, people did not suspect
that at the same time they create a new social force - the only one that has
universal influence, a force to which the whole society must bow.
And this new power, suddenly arising without the knowledge and desire of its own
creators, made the Athenians feel their dominance with all the rudeness
of his youth.
What was to be done? The ancient tribal system not only turned out to be powerless
against the victorious march of money, he was also absolutely unable to find
at least there is room within oneself for something like money, creditors and
debtors, forced collection of debts. But new social force
existed, and pious wishes, a passionate desire to return
the good old days couldn't make the money disappear again and
usury. And moreover, a number of other
minor flaws. From generation to generation more and more mixed
among themselves members of various clans and phratries throughout the territory of Attica and
especially in the city of Athens itself, although even now an Athenian could not sell
persons belonging to their kind only land plots, but not their own
housing. With the further development of industry and exchange, more and more
the division of labor between different branches of production developed:
agriculture, craft, and in craft - between countless varieties
him, trade, shipping, etc.; the population was now divided according to its
classes for fairly stable groups; each of them had a number of new common
interests for which there was no place within the clan or phratry and for
maintenance of which appeared, therefore, the need for new
positions. The number of slaves increased significantly and probably at that time
already far exceeded the number of free Athenians; tribal system originally
did not know slavery at all, and therefore did not know the means by which
who could keep this mass of unfree people in check. And finally
trade attracted to Athens many foreigners who settled here
for easy money; due to the old order, they also remained
disenfranchised and defenseless and, despite traditional tolerance, were
restless, alien element in the people.
In a word, the tribal system was coming to an end. Society every day
more and more grew out of its framework; even the worst of the evils that arose before our eyes
in all, he could neither limit nor eliminate. But meanwhile imperceptibly
the state developed. New groups formed through division
labor, first between town and country, and then between different urban
branches of labor, created new bodies to protect their interests; were
established all sorts of jobs. And then the young state to conduct
separate small wars and for the protection of merchant ships were required before
only their own military forces, which the Athenians engaged in navigation
could have been originally only naval forces. Established unknown
how long before Solon, navcraria, small territorial districts,
twelve in each tribe; each navkraria had to deliver,
arm and crew one warship and, in addition, exhibited
two more riders. This institution undermined the tribal structure by twofold
way: firstly, it created a public authority that no longer
coincided simply with the totality of the armed people; Secondly,
for the first time it divided the people for social purposes not according to kindred
groups, but by living in the same territory. What did it matter
will be seen from what follows.
Since the tribal system could not render the exploited people any
assistance, it remained only to rely on the emerging state. And it
really provided this assistance in the form of management organization introduced
Solon, again strengthening at the same time due to the old order. Solon - us
here we are not interested in the way in which his reform was carried out, relating to
594 BC - opened a number of so-called political
revolutions, and made it an invasion of property relations. All
the revolutions hitherto have been revolutions for the protection of one species
property versus another type of property. They couldn't defend one
kind of property without encroaching on another. During the Great French
revolution, feudal property was sacrificed in order to save
bourgeois; in the revolution brought about by Solon, had to suffer
property of creditors in the interests of the property of debtors. Debts were
simply declared invalid. We don't know the exact details, but
Solon boasts in his verses that he removed the foundation stones from the burdened
debts of land plots and returned those sold due to debts to foreign
countries and the people who fled there. This could only be done through
open violation of property rights. And, indeed, everything is
called political revolutions, from the first to the last, were made
for the protection of property of one kind and carried out by confiscation,
also called theft, of another kind of property. So it is certain that
for two and a half thousand years, private property could
survive only through violations of property rights.
But now it was necessary to prevent the repetition of such an appeal in
slavery of the free Athenians. This was achieved primarily by general measures, such as,
for example, the prohibition of such debt obligations, which were pledged
the very person of the debtor. Next, the maximum dimensions were set
landed property that could be owned by an individual in order to
to limit at least some limits the insatiable desire of the nobility for
capture of peasant land. And then there were changes in the system itself;
For us, the most important are the following:
It was established that the council consisted of four hundred members, one hundred
each tribe; here, therefore, the tribe still remained the basis. But this
was the only aspect of the old system accepted by the new state.
As for everything else, Solon divided citizens into four classes according to
the size of land ownership and its profitability; 500, 300 and 150 grain medimns (1
medimn = approximately 41 liters) were minimum dimensions income for
the first three classes; those with lower incomes or none at all
landed property fell into the fourth class. All positions could
be replaced only by representatives of the upper three classes, and the highest
positions - only representatives of the first class; fourth grade had
only the right to speak and vote in the people's assembly, but it is here
all officials were elected, here they had to report in their
activities, all laws were developed here, and the fourth class was
here is the majority. Aristocratic privileges were partly renewed in
form of wealth privileges, but the people retained decisive power.
In addition, the division into four classes served as the basis for the new organization
troops. The first two classes supplied the cavalry, the third was to serve in
as heavily armed infantry, the fourth - as light, not
who had protective armor of the infantry or in the fleet, and, moreover, received, probably,
pay for your service.
Here, therefore, a completely new concept is introduced into the management organization.
item is private property. Rights and obligations of citizens of the state
began to be established in proportion to the size of their landed property, and in
to the same extent that the propertied classes began to gain influence, began to
old consanguine associations are being ousted; tribal system suffered
new defeat.
However, the granting of political rights in proportion to property is not at all
was one of those institutions, without which there can be no
state. Although this principle played an important role in the history
state structure, yet very many states, and just
the most developed, did without it. And in Athens, he only played
transitory role; since the time of Aristides, access to all positions has been open
to every citizen.
Over the next eighty years, the evolution of Athenian society
gradually took the direction in which it developed further on
over the next centuries. Thriving in the pre-Solon era
usurious transactions with the land was put a limit, as well as immense
concentration of land ownership. Trade, as well as more and more
developed on the basis of slave labor craft and artistic craft
became the dominant occupation. People have become more enlightened. Instead of
in order to cruelly exploit their own citizens in the old way, now
began to exploit mainly slaves and buyers of Athenian goods
outside of Athens. Movable property, wealth consisting in money, slaves and
ships, increased more and more, but now it no longer served only
means of acquiring landed property, as was the case in former
times of isolation and limitation - it has become an end in itself. As a result
this, on the one hand, in the face of a new class - the rich, engaged in
industry and trade, victorious competition arose for the old
the power of the nobility, and, on the other hand, the remnants of the old tribal system lost
last soil. Clans, phratries and tribes whose members were scattered
now all over Attica and finally mixed with each other, became
therefore completely unsuitable for the role of political associations; a bunch of
Athenian citizens did not belong to any kind; they were aliens
who, although they received citizenship rights, were not admitted to any of the
old tribal unions; along with this, there was also a continuously increasing
the number of foreign aliens who were under the protection of 163.
Meanwhile, the struggle of the parties continued; know tried to get their
former privileges and for a short time won the upper hand, while the revolution
Cleisthena (509 BC) did not overthrow her completely, but
with it, along with the last remnants of the tribal system.
The new organization of government, carried out by Cleisthenes, ignored
division into four ancient tribes based on clans and phratries. her place
occupied by a completely new organization on the basis of the already tested in navcraria
separation of citizens only according to their place of residence. Was of decisive importance
no longer belonging to tribal unions, but exclusively a place of permanent
residence; not the people were divided, but the territory; population in
politically turned into a mere appendage of the territory.
All Attica was divided into one hundred self-governing communal circles, or
demos. Citizens (demos) living in each deme elected their elder
(demarch) and treasurer, as well as thirty judges who had jurisdiction over small
litigation. Demons also received their own temple and patron god or hero,
for which they chose the clergy. Supreme power in deme
belonged to a collection of demotes. As Morgan rightly points out, this is
prototype of a self-governing American urban community. emerging
the state began in Athens with the same unit to which it comes
modern state as a result of its higher development.
Ten such units, dems, made up a tribe, which, however, in
difference from the old tribal tribe was now called territorial
tribe. It was not only self-governing political, but also
military association, it chose the philarch [- from the ancient Greek word
"fila" - tribe. Ed.] or the elder of the tribe, who commanded the cavalry,
taxiarch, who commanded the infantry, and the strategist, who commanded the entire army,
recruited from the territory of the tribe. It further equipped five warships with
crew and commander and received as his sacred patron
some Attic hero, by whose name it was called. Finally,
it elected fifty representatives to the Athenian council.
The crown of this was the Athenian state, which was ruled by
a council of five hundred elected representatives of ten tribes, and in
last resort - by the people's assembly, where he had access and where
every Athenian citizen enjoyed the right to vote; along with this, the archons
and other officials were in charge of various branches of government and
court cases. There was no chief executive in Athens.
With the introduction of this new organization of government and with the admission of
a large number of those under patronage - part of the aliens,
part of the freed slaves - the organs of the tribal system were pushed aside
public affairs; they have degenerated into private unions and religious
brotherhood. But moral influence, inherited attitudes and ways of thinking
of the old tribal era for a long time lived in traditions that died out only
gradually. This affected one of the later state
institutions.
We have seen that the essential feature of the state is the public
power separated from the masses of the people. Athens had at that time only
the people's army and fleet, which directly exposed the people; army
and the fleet was a defense against external enemies and kept slaves in subjection,
which already constituted the vast majority of the population. By
in relation to citizens, public authority originally existed only in
as a police force, which is as old as the state, so
the simple-hearted French of the 18th century did not speak of civilized peoples, but
about the peoples policed (nations policees) [Play on words: "police" -
"civilized", "police" - "police". Ed.]. The Athenians established such
Thus, simultaneously with their state, also the police, the real
gendarmerie of foot and horse archers - landjegers, as they are called in
Southern Germany and Switzerland. But this gendarmerie was formed from slaves.
This police service seemed to the free Athenian so
humiliating that he preferred to let himself be arrested by an armed slave,
so as not to engage in such a shameful deed. This also affected
way of thinking of ancient tribal life. The state could not exist without
police, but it was still young and did not yet enjoy sufficient moral
authority to inspire respect for an occupation that former members of the clans
inevitably it must have seemed vile.
To what extent is the state that has developed in its main features
corresponded to the new social position of the Athenians, testifies
rapid flourishing of wealth, trade and industry. class antagonism,
on which public and political institutions now rested, was already
not an antagonism between the nobility and the common people, but an antagonism between slaves
and free, between protected and full
citizens. By the time of the highest prosperity of Athens, the total number of free
citizens, including women and children, was approximately 90,000 people, and
slaves of both sexes numbered 365,000 and were under the patronage -
foreigners and freedmen - 45,000. For each adult citizen
males accounted for at least 18 slaves and more
two under patronage. Big number slaves were associated with
the fact that many of them worked together in manufactories, in large rooms
under the supervision of overseers. But with the development of trade and industry
there was an accumulation and concentration of wealth in a few hands, as well as
impoverishment of the mass of free citizens, who only had a choice: or
enter into competition with slave labor, taking up the craft ourselves, which
was considered a shameful, low occupation and did not promise, moreover, great success,
or become poor. They walked - under the given conditions inevitably - along
last way, and since they made up the bulk of the population, this led to
death and the entire Athenian state. It wasn't democracy that ruined Athens like this
assert European school pedants who grovel before monarchs, and
slavery, which made the work of a free citizen contemptible.
The emergence of the state among the Athenians is highly typical
an example of the formation of the state in general, because it, on the one hand,
occurs in its purest form, without any violent intervention,
external or internal, - the short-term usurpation of power by Peisistratus is not
left no traces - on the other hand, because in this case
very highly developed form of state, democratic republic,
arises directly from tribal society and, finally, because we
all the essential details of the formation of this
states.
The next important discovery is the tribal system and its influence on the development of human society. The genus is an institution common to all peoples, up to their entry into the era of civilization and even later (as far as we can judge from the sources now available to us). The proof of this immediately elucidated the most difficult sections of ancient Greek and Roman history and at the same time gave us an unexpected interpretation of the main features of the social structure of the primitive era before the rise of the state.
The composition of the genus in its original form is as follows. The genus consists of all persons who, by means of a punaluan marriage and according to the ideas inevitably prevailing in this marriage, form the recognized offspring of one specific ancestor, the founder of the genus. Since in this form of family the father cannot be established with certainty, only the female line is recognized. Since brothers cannot marry their sisters, but only women of a different origin, then, by virtue of maternal law, the children born to them by these strange women are outside the given genus. Thus, only the offspring of the daughters of each generation remains within the clan union; offspring of sons pass into the birth of their mothers. What does this kinship group become after it is constituted as a special group in relation to other similar groups within the tribe:
As a classic form of this original genus, Morgan takes the genus from the Iroquois, in particular from the Seneca tribe. In this tribe there are eight genera bearing the names of animals 1) Wolf, 2) Bear, 3) Turtle, 4) Beaver, 5) Deer, 6) Sandpiper, 7) Heron, 8) Falcon. In each clan, the following customs prevail:
- 1. The clan chooses its sachem (elder for peacetime) and chief (military leader). The sachem had to be chosen from among the gens itself, and his position was hereditary within the gens, since upon liberation it had to be immediately replaced again, the military leader could be chosen not from the members of the gens, and at times he might not exist at all. The son of the previous sachem was never elected as sachem, since motherhood prevailed among the Iroquois, and the son, therefore, belonged to another line, but often the brother of the previous sachem or the son of his sister was elected. Everyone participated in the elections - men and women. But the election was subject to approval by the remaining seven clans, and only after that the chosen one was solemnly introduced into office and, moreover, by the general council of the entire Iroquois union. The significance of this act will be seen from what follows. The power of the sachem within the gens was paternal, of a purely moral order; he had no means of coercion. At the same time, he was ex officio a member of the council of the Seneca tribe, as well as the general council of the Iroquois union. The military leader could order something only during military campaigns.
- 2. The gens deposes the sachem and war chief at its discretion. Again, this is decided jointly by men and women. Displaced officials then become, like others, simple warriors, private individuals. However, the tribal council can also remove sachems, even against the will of the clan.
- 3. None of the members of the clan can marry within the clan. This is the basic rule of the genus, the bond that holds it together, it is the negative expression of that very definite blood relationship, by virtue of which the individuals united by it only become a genus. This simple fact reveals the essence of the genus. Of course, at the stage of development at which we find the Iroquois, the prohibition of marriage within the clan is inviolably observed.
- 4. The property of the dead passed to the rest of the members of the clan, it had to remain within the clan. In view of the insignificance of the objects that the Iroquois could leave behind, his inheritance was divided among his closest relatives; in the event of a man's death, his siblings and mother's brother; in the event of a woman's death, her children and sisters, but not brothers. For the same reason, husband and wife could not inherit each other, nor could children inherit from their father.
- 5. Members of the clan were obliged to provide each other with assistance, protection, and especially assistance in avenging damage caused by strangers. In protecting his safety, the individual relied on the protection of the clan and could count on it; whoever harmed him harmed the whole family. Hence, from the blood ties of the clan, arose the obligation of blood vengeance, which was unconditionally recognized by the Iroquois. If a member of the clan was killed by someone from a foreign clan, the entire clan of the murdered was obliged to respond with blood feud. At first an attempt was made to reconciliation; the council of the murderer's family met and made a proposal to the council of the murdered's family to end the matter peacefully, most often expressing regret and offering significant gifts. If the proposal was accepted, then the case was considered settled. Otherwise, the injured family appointed one of several avengers who were obliged to hunt down and kill the killer. If this was carried out, the family of the murdered person had no right to complain, the case was recognized as finished.
- 6. The gens has certain names or groups of names which it alone can use in the whole tribe, so that the name of an individual also indicates to which gens he belongs. Family rights are inextricably linked with the family name.
- 7. The clan may adopt outsiders and in this way accept them as members of the whole tribe. The prisoners of war, who were not killed, thus became, by virtue of adoption in one of the clans, members of the Seneca tribe and thereby acquired all the rights of the clan and tribe. Among the Iroquois, solemn acceptance into the clan took place at a public meeting of the tribal council, which actually turned this celebration into a religious ceremony.
- 8. It is difficult to establish the presence of special religious festivities among the Indian clans; but the religious ceremonies of the Indians are more or less connected with the lineage. During the six annual religious festivals of the Iroquois, sachems and military leaders of individual clans, by virtue of their position, were ranked among the "guardians of the faith" and performed priestly functions.
- 9. The clan has a common burial place.
- 10. The clan has a council - a democratic assembly of all adult members of the clan, men and women, with equal voting rights. This council elected and removed the sachems and military leaders, as well as the rest of the "keepers of the faith"; he issued rulings on ransom (wergeld) or blood feud for the murdered members of the clan; he accepted strangers into the family. In a word, he was the supreme authority in the clan.
Such are the functions of a typical Indian family.
All its members are free people, obliged to defend each other's freedom, they have equal personal rights - neither sachems nor military leaders claim any advantages, they constitute a brotherhood connected by blood ties. Liberty, equality, brotherhood, although it was never formulated, were the basic principles of the clan, and the clan, in turn, was the unit of the whole social system, the basis of organized Indian society. This explains the inexorable sense of independence and personal dignity that everyone recognizes in the Indians.
By the time of the discovery of America, the Indians of all North America were organized into clans on the basis of maternal law. Only among a few tribes, such as the Dakotas, childbirth fell into decline, and among others, like the Ojibwe, Omaha, they were organized on the basis of paternal right.
Among very many Indian tribes, numbering more than five or six genera, we meet special groups that unite three, four or more genera, called phratries (brotherhoods) from the Greek term, denoting the corresponding Greek concept.
As several gentes form a phratry, so several phratries, if we take the classical form, form a tribe. The main characteristics of an individual Indian tribe in America are the following:
- 1. Own territory and own name.
- 2. A special dialect peculiar only to this tribe.
- 3. The right to solemnly inaugurate sachems and military leaders elected by the clans.
- 4. The right to depose them, even against the wishes of their kind. Since these sachems and war-chiefs are members of the tribal council, these rights of the tribe in relation to them are self-explanatory. Where an alliance of tribes has been formed and all the tribes included in it are represented in the allied council, these rights pass to the latter.
- 5. General religious ideas (mythology) and religious rites.
- 6. Council of the tribe to discuss common affairs. It consisted of all the sachems and military leaders of the individual families, their true representatives, because they could be removed at any time; he sat in public, surrounded by other members of the tribe, who had the right to enter into discussion and express their opinion; the council made the decision. As a rule, everyone present could, if desired, speak, women could also present their views through their chosen speaker. Among the Iroquois, unanimity was required for a final decision. The jurisdiction of the tribal council included, in particular, the regulation of relations with other tribes; he received and sent embassies, declared war and made peace. If it came to war, then it was mostly volunteers. In principle, each tribe was considered to be at war with every other tribe with which it had not concluded a peace treaty in full form. Military actions against such enemies were organized for the most part by individual outstanding warriors; they arranged a military dance, and everyone who took part in it declared thereby his accession to the campaign. The detachment immediately organized and acted. The protection of the territory belonging to the tribe from attack was also carried out for the most part by calling for volunteers. The marching and returning of such detachments from the campaign has always served as an occasion for public celebrations. The consent of the tribal council for such campaigns was not required, it was not asked for and was not given. Such military detachments were rarely numerous; the largest military expeditions of the Indians, even over long distances, were carried out by insignificant fighting forces. If several such detachments united for some great undertaking, each of them obeyed only his own leader; the coherence of the campaign plan was to some extent ensured by the advice of these leaders.
- 7. Among some tribes we find a supreme leader, whose powers, however, are very small. This is one of the sachems, which, in cases requiring immediate action, must take provisional measures before the council can meet and make a final decision. Here we have a barely outlined, but for the most part not further developed prototype of an official with executive power; such an official rather appeared, as we shall see, in most cases, if not everywhere, as a result of the development of the power of the supreme military leader.
The overwhelming majority of American Indians did not go further than uniting into a tribe. Their few tribes, separated from each other by vast border strips, weakened by eternal wars, occupied a huge space by a small number of people. Alliances between kindred tribes were concluded here and there in case of temporary necessity and disintegrated with its disappearance. However, in some localities, originally related, but subsequently separated tribes again rallied into permanent alliances, thus taking the first step towards the formation of nations. In the United States, the most developed form of such an alliance is found among the Iroquois. Emerging from their places of settlement west of the Mississippi, where they probably formed a branch of a large kindred group of da-kota, they settled after long wanderings in the present state of New York, divided into five tribes of the Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida and Mohawk. They subsisted on fishing, hunting, and primitive gardening, living in villages mostly protected by palisades.
Their number never exceeded 20,000 people, in all five tribes there were several common clans, they spoke very related dialects of the same language and inhabited a continuous territory that was divided between five tribes. Since this territory was recently conquered by them, the joint actions of these tribes against the tribes ousted by them became a natural phenomenon that became a custom. And thus, at the latest at the beginning of the 15th century, a formalized "eternal alliance" was formed - a confederation, which, realizing the strength it had acquired, immediately acquired an offensive character and, during the period of its highest power, around 1675, conquered large areas surrounding it, partly driving away , partly imposing tribute on local residents. The Iroquois Union represents the most developed social organization that the Indians have created who have not crossed the lowest stage of barbarism (hence, excluding Mexicans, New Mexicans and Peruvians).
The main features of the union were as follows:
- 1. The eternal union of five tribes related by blood on the basis of complete equality and independence in all internal affairs of the tribe. This blood relationship was the true basis of the union. Of the five tribes, three were called paternal and were brothers among themselves; the other two were called filial and were also fraternal tribes among themselves. Three clans - the oldest - were still represented by living members in all five tribes, three other clans - in three tribes, members of each of these clans were all considered brothers in all five tribes. The common language, which differed only in dialects, was the expression and proof of a common origin.
- 2. The organ of the union was the allied council, which consisted of 50 sachems, equal in position and authority, this council made final decisions on all matters of the union.
- 3. The seats for these 50 sachems, as holders of new offices specially established for the purposes of the union, were distributed among the tribes and clans at its creation. When a position was vacated, the corresponding clan again replaced it through elections; he could also remove his sachem at any time, but the power of induction was vested in the council of the union.
- 4. These allied sachems were also sachems in their respective tribes and had the right to participate and vote in the tribal council.
- 5. All resolutions of the Union Council were to be adopted unanimously.
- 6. Voting was done by tribes, so that each tribe and in each tribe all the members of the council had to vote unanimously for the decision to be valid.
- 7. An allied council could be convened by each of the councils of the five tribes, but could not meet on its own initiative.
- 8. Meetings took place in the presence of the assembled people, each Iroquois could take the floor, but the decision was made only by the council.
- 9. There was no single head in the union, no person who headed the executive branch.
- 10. But the union had two higher military leaders with equal powers and equal power (two "kings" of the Spartans, two consuls in Rome).
Such was the social system under which the Iroquois lived for over four hundred years.
So, since the gens is the basic social unit, the whole system of gentes, phratries and tribe develops from it with an almost irresistible necessity. All three groups represent different degrees of consanguinity, and each of them is closed in itself and manages its own affairs, but also serves as a complement to the other. The range of affairs subject to their conduct covers the entire set of public affairs of a person standing on the lowest rung of barbarism. Therefore, when we encounter a genus as the basic social unit of some people, we will have to look for a tribal organization similar to that described here, and where there are enough sources, like among the Greeks and Romans, we will certainly find it.
Farmers of the east and southeast of North America. N-in - Delovars, Mohicans, to the south - Iroquois, to the Caribbean Sea - Sioux.
Iroquois. Appear on the territory of the Great Lakes between the 13th and 15th centuries. attitude as a whole as to the alien population. Farmers. Cultivation is a women's business, hard work (burning the forest, etc.) is on men. M business - hunting, fishing, war. We went on hikes on foot - there were no domesticated animals. Slash-and-burn agriculture. Hunting for coastal animals. basic social institution- a large maternal family. Matrilineality. A group of women are hostesses. Ovachira - housing, food storage. There is no sustainable marriage, it depended on women whether I would leave or stay. There were also male communities associated with the conduct of the war. Owachira as a union w. Men did not participate in the distribution of food. Land use system: 6-8 times more land is in use than is cultivated in a given period. The result is huge distances between settlements. Protection and hunting are the functions of m. Men are more responsible for raising their nephews.
Social organization:
Level 1 - sachem council (2 meters from the community, meets on important issues).
2nd level - council of sachems of each group (pressing issues, land, war).
Level 3 - phratries - marriage levels.
Level 4 - generic group. Upon reaching a certain age, the m leaves the mother's house for the m-phratry. Women are not allowed to council. Not developed system of priesthood and religious beliefs.
The Iroquois are a group of Native American peoples living in the United States and Canada. The name comes from the Algonquian "iroku", which means "true vipers", and was given by the French in the early 16th century to five Indian tribes. The Iroquois themselves called themselves Hodinonkhsoni, which translates as "the people of the long house."
Before the arrival of Europeans in North America, the Iroquois lived south of the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario in an area extending west from Lake Erie and the headwaters of the Allegheny River to the Hudson River in the east.
The Seneca tribe lived in the west around Lake Erie. In the east, the tribes lived: Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida and Mohawks. The traditional dwelling of these tribes was a long house (ovachira), the building material for which was elm bark. The whole family lived in this house. In the settlements of the Iroquois, there were from twenty to one hundred houses. Gardens and fields were laid out around the settlements.
The main source of existence of the Iroquois was stick-and-hoe agriculture, which was practiced by women. The main agricultural crop was maize, as well as beans and pumpkins. An important role in their lives was played by hunting, which provided meat and skins. She was the business of men. In the spring and summer, the men were also engaged in fishing. Women and children were engaged in gathering. Iroquois weaving was limited to the manufacture of belts and belts from vegetable fibers.
The form of social organization among the Iroquois was the clan. It was based on the collective ownership of land, fishing and hunting grounds.
Around 1570, south of Lake Ontario, the Union of Iroquois Tribes, or the so-called Hodenosauni League, was formed, which included five tribes: Oneida, Mohawks, Onondaga, Seneca, Cayuga. In 1722, the Tuscarrora tribe joined them.
The league established trade with the Dutch who appeared here at the beginning of the 17th century. The Indians supplied the Dutch with beaver fur. When the beavers in the territory occupied by the Iroquois were exterminated, the Dutch, obsessed with a thirst for profit, pushed the Indians to seize new territories and began to supply them with guns. Numerous wars began, later called the Bobrovs. The basis of the military success of the Iroquois was the excellent tactics of forest combat and the use of guns. Gradually, the Iroquois are ousting the Hurons, Ottawa and Mohicans from the region.
In 1664, the British, having captured New Amsterdam, took the place of the Dutch in trading with the Indians.
During the American Revolution, the British persuaded most of the League's tribal councils to support them. This ended up with the Iroquois being placed on the reservations of America and Canada. Their population has decreased several times compared to the 17th century.
Today, many Iroquois demand recognition of the independence of their lands. The village of Onondaga is their main center.
The Iroquois, as mentioned above, is the indigenous population of America. We also invite you to get acquainted with the history, culture and life of the indigenous people of Australia. Australian Aborigines are few in number and make up only about one percent of the population of the continent.
The Iroquois lived in the so-called "long houses", where the tribal group was located, which led a common household and formed the basis of the economic and social organization of the tribe. The longhouse was 6-10 m wide and up to 8 m high; the length of the house depended on the number of hearths; The largest known length of a dwelling reached 90 m.
Such a dwelling was a quadrangular shape. Its base consisted of parallel racks driven into the ground. Longitudinal horizontal poles were tied to them with bast ropes; the tops of two opposite racks were bent towards one another and tied so that a rounded shape of the roof was obtained. Young trees were used for racks, later - rassohi, or pillars with forks at the top, which laid transverse horizontal beams; in the latter, rafters were strengthened, giving the roof a gable shape, with a ridge; this type of construction undoubtedly reflected European influence. The entire frame was sheathed with large plates of tree bark, pressed against the frame with an outer crate of poles.
The construction of the house was carried out collectively, for which all the youth of the village were convened, who received refreshments for their work; construction took one or two days,
In the middle of the house there was a passage about 2 m wide. In this passage, right on the ground, at a distance of about 6 m from one another, there were hearths: above each of them, a hole was left in the roof for smoke to escape. On both sides of the line of hearths, wide scaffolds, or bunks, were arranged: made of bark plates, fenced off to the right and left by walls of bark - each family had a separate room about 4 m long, open only to fire. Between two adjacent rooms, a free space was left, which served as a pantry. The scaffolds were covered with grass mats and skins, they slept and sat on them in their free time, they kept dry fuel for winter use under them; in winter, they mostly slept on the ground on bedding near the fire. At a height of about 2 m above the living platforms, a second tier was laid of bark plates in the form of continuous layers; families kept their household utensils here, and sometimes children slept here. Under the roof itself, a third tier was laid, forming, as it were, an attic, where stocks of unthreshed corn were stored. To each narrow end of the house was attached a small canopy with a flat roof, the width of the house; fuel was kept in the hallway in winter, and in summer the inhabitants of the house gathered for a conversation or games .
The entrance to the dwelling was through the vestibule and was hung from the outside with a piece of bark, and in cold weather additionally from the inside with skins and blankets. Above one of the entrances was placed a carved or drawn image of an animal - the totem of the clan to which the inhabitants of this house belonged.
If there was a need to add another hearth to the house, then one of the ends was taken apart and the building was lengthened.
A bark house could stand for 10-12 years; during this period, it began to rot and be destroyed by insects. Since during the same time all the brushwood was picked up in the surrounding forests and, consequently, the reserves of available fuel were exhausted, and the soil was depleted, the need for resettlement was brewing. G.
At first, these resettlements occurred every 10-15 years, then the duration of stay in one place increased.
In the XVI and XVII centuries. Iroquois villages were fenced with a high palisade to protect against neighboring tribes with whom the Iroquois fought wars. The villages consisted of 10-30 houses.
social organization
The form of social structure of the Iroquois was the clan. It was based on collective ownership of land, hunting and fishing grounds.
The fields were tribal property, and they were cultivated on a collective basis.
The genus had the right to a special generic name, which was usually the specific name of an animal, bird, reptile, and which in the past, apparently, was the name of the totem of the genus 2 . The genus TZyl is strictly exogamous. Its members had the right to inherit the property of deceased relatives, and the clan as a whole had the right to a share in the public property of their tribe (hunting and fishing grounds, places for collecting maple sap, etc.). Members of the clan participated in the clan council. The clan elected and dismissed the elder (sachem) and military leaders, and through them had representation in the council of their tribe and the Union Council. The relatives were soldered together by the duty of mutual assistance, protection and revenge of insults, and the clan as a whole had the right to seek protection from its tribe. In the event of a murder, the murderer's family was obliged to pay a ransom (ransom) to the affected family of their own or someone else's tribe. The clan could adopt captives or foreigners to replace the missing and killed. And, finally, the clan had a common separate from other clans 1 (graveyard .., All these rights and obligations were transferred exclusively through the female line, that is, the clan was strictly matrilineal.
The economic unit within the clan was a matrilineal family-related group that led a common household, called the Iroquois ovachira. The clan was divided into several ovachirs.
Members of the ovachira could only marry members of the ovachira of other clans, and initially the marriage did not lead to a joint settlement of the spouses; both husband and wife remained to live in their households, the husband only visited his wife, trying to do this at night, secretly from everyone. Sometimes a husband could settle in his wife's house, but this was allowed only after the birth of his wife's first child. The order of separation of spouses (dislocal marriage) was preserved among the Iroquois as early as the beginning of the 18th century. Later, men, entering into marriage, settled in the wife's house. This is the one characteristic of the 18th century. a form of matrilocal marriage that Morgan was able to reconstruct based on surveys of older Iroquois. In both dislocal and matrilocal marriages, the husband and wife retained belonging to their ovachirs, and, consequently, to their clans, performing social, religious (and for men, military) duties together with their relatives; in both cases the children belonged to the mother's ovachira and lived in her house.
Thus, the ovachira formerly (when dislocal marriage prevailed) consisted exclusively of persons related to each other by ties of consanguinity on the maternal side (including here persons of both sexes adopted into this ovachira); later, when a matrilocal marriage was established, in addition to this consanguineous group, the ovachira also included men from the ovachira of other clans who entered this household, but were related to the women of this ovachira by marriage.
All power within the ovachira, and therefore within each household, belonged to women. All land:, all buildings and inventory were the property of the maternal clan, which was disposed of exclusively by women. The main executive power was in the hands of the ruler. married women Those who had children met in Their council and chose a ruler from among the elderly, experienced women, usually the most influential, intelligent, energetic, industrious and with a good character. She was not always the oldest woman in the ovachira. The powers that the ruler had at her disposal were exercised by her with the consent of the women-mothers who chose her. If she acted together with the rulers of the sister ovachira of her family, she could not do this without the advice and approval of the mothers of her ovachira.
The assembly of women-mothers chose two or four more stewards; their duty was, together with their assistant warriors, to organize festivities at which several ovachirs united in a common tribal rite. These same stewards procured by means of public collection the supplies required for the festivities and general meetings or for public charity; they also took care of replenishing the public treasury, which consisted of corn and flour, dried and fresh or smoked meat, wampum shorts and belts, products from porcupine quills and bird feathers, furs and any other items that could serve to pay and bear public expenses. and obligations.
The account of relationship and inheritance of property were conducted on a female line; The husband had no right to children or property.
The owachira was required to ransom the life of its member if he was in danger if he violated customary law (for example, if a member of the owachira killed a member of his or a neighboring tribe); in turn, she was entitled to claim compensation for the damage caused to her. Owachira also had the right to spare or take the life of captives. A foreigner could be accepted into the clan only through adoption into one of the ovachirs.
Thus, ovachira acted as a part of the genus, based on the same public relations like the genus itself. Relations of domination and submission were alien to this system.
Ovachirs of the same clan could live in several villages. Territorially separated and expanded, they eventually became essentially sister clans of the original clans and themselves broke up into several ovachirs. At the same time, small Ovachirs could unite with other Ovachirs of their kind.
Similar processes of segmentation and association of the maternal clan and its constituent households were noted among the fishermen of the northwestern coast of North America, where, like the Iroquois, the maternal clan, described at the later stages of its development, was presented as a sister union of several matrilineal household communities. As far as can be judged from the materials cited by Morgan, the settled and expanded Iroquois clan by the 19th century. practically no idea of \u200b\u200bthe economic community.
The number of gentes into which each of the Iroquoian tribes fell apart varied from tribe to tribe. As a classic example of a generic device, Morgan took the Seneca tribe, which had eight genera. The same number of genera were counted among the Onondaga, Cayuga, Tuscarora: the Mohawks and Oneida fell into three genera each.
Phratries
As F. Engels pointed out, “the phratries for the most part represent the original clans into which the tribe first broke up; for with the prohibition of marriages within a clan, each tribe, of necessity, had to cover at least two clans in order to be able to exist independently ”2. With the growth of the tribe, the original clan, divided into several clans, already existed as a phratry.
The clans of each tribe were grouped into two phratries as follows:
|
First phratry * |
Second phratry* |
|
|
Genus name |
||
|
Wolf, Bear |
Turtle |
|
|
Wolf, Turtle |
||
|
Onondaga |
Wolf, Turtle, Beaver, Sandpiper, Hawk ** |
Deer, Bear, Eel *** |
|
Wolf, Bear, Turtle, Sandpiper, Eel |
Deer, Beaver, Hawk |
|
|
Wolf, Bear, Turtle, Beaver |
Deer, Sandpiper, Heron, Hawk *** |
|
|
Tuscarora |
Bear, Big Turtle, Beaver. Acne |
Deer, Wolf (sometimes separately Gray Wolf and Yellow Wolf), Small Turtle, Sandpiper |
The clans that made up the Iroquoian phratry considered themselves fraternal (or, more precisely, sisterly) in relation to each other and cousin in relation to the clans of another phratry. As a result, marriage within the phratry was initially forbidden. Later, the exogamy of the phratry gradually disappeared and only the genus remained exogamous; but the consciousness of kinship was retained for a long time between the clans of the same phratry, and in a surviving state it met until recently.
The phratry performed the functions of public and religious order. At the council of the tribe, the elders (sachems) and military leaders of each phratry sat on opposite sides of the imaginary or real fire of the council, and the speakers addressed each phratry separately. In the public ball game of the phratries, P1 played one against the other, putting forward their best players; the rest of the spectators broke into phratries and bet who would win. If a murder was committed in a tribe and the murderer and the murdered belonged to clans from opposite phratries, then the clan of the murdered man turned to the fraternal clans of his phratry, and the clan of the murderer to his own: councils of both phratries were convened in order to achieve reconciliation by common efforts. The fratrical organization played important role at the funerals of prominent people. The phratry of the deceased only mourned him, and the entire burial ceremony was performed by people of another phratry. During the election of sachems and military leaders, the chosen one had to be approved not only by fraternal clans, but also by the council of the opposite phratry. Finally, each of the two phratries had its own secret society medicine men, something like a brotherhood with special religious rites (see below).
