¹ Thus, Frazer, : “In the case of ortho-cousins the related parents are of the same sex, whether both male or both female; whereas in the case of cross-cousins the related parents are of opposite sexes, the one being male and the other female.” Folk-lore in the Old Testament, vol. ii, p. 98.Google Scholar

¹ Folk-lore in the Old Testament, vol. ii, p. 263Google Scholar. The view expressed here is supported by ProfessorWestermarck, (History of Human Marriage, vol. ii, p. 68, n. 3)Google Scholar and is opposed to that of Robertson Smith.

¹ These conclusions are deduced from the relationship terms and avoidance customs given by the Rev. Roscoe, John, The Baganda, chap. v.Google Scholar

² There is much evidence for change in mode of reckoning descent among the Lango of Uganda (cf. Driberg, J. H., The Lango)Google Scholar, while my unpublished material dealing with Dinka, Shilluk, and Acholi support the view set forth.

³ This is noteworthy among the Shilluk who in their present state of contact with white civilization occasionally work for money. One informant presented a typical instance. He had worked for a period and bought a cast net with his savings. He returned to his village and caught fish for his father-in-law, but buying a canoe or paying his own bride-price had not occurred to him, because he depended on certain relatives to provide these necessities.

¹ One of the main economic obstacles to the acceptance of Christianity in Africa is the abolition of the bride-price, for normally this returns to the family and a bride's brother benefits by it. If a native Christian should not demand a bride-price for his daughters, his son cannot raise the necessary goods to obtain a wife. A young man cannot hope to obtain a wife without payment, so the young Christian or the pagan son of a Christian is forced to leave home and earn money working for the white man if he is ever to marry. This is probably a stronger deterrant from Christianity (at least among the younger men) than the enforcement of monogamy. It is noteworthy that among the Ashanti, where mass conversion to Christianity is taking place, the bride-price is practically nominal, and is to be regarded perhaps as a ceremonial survival.

¹ “Studies in Semitic Kinship,” I.Google Scholar

² Mistakes of the same kind have happened frequently, especially when writing the Gospels in hitherto unwritten language. A missionary who knows Dinka well told me that he has been horrified on discovering the native conception of words that he had used in his earlier days as translations of English words.

³ Gen. xi, 29.Google Scholar

¹ See footnote, p. 274.

² “The Kababish, a Sudan Arab tribe”: Harvard African Studies, Varia Africana, vol. ii, 1918Google Scholar; cf. genealogical table and pp. 137–9.

³ Burkhardt, L., Bedouin and Wahabys, vol. i, p. 113.Google Scholar

⁴ Hurgronje, Snouck, Mekka (The Hague, 1889), vol. ii, p. 107.Google Scholar

¹ Musil, Alois, Arabia Petraea (Wein, 1908), vol. iii, p. 174.Google Scholar

² Doughty, , op. cit., vol. i, p. 236Google Scholar. The girl was persuaded to return by her mother's sister.

³ Janssen, , Coutumes des Arabes au pays de Moab (Paris, 1908), p. 45.Google Scholar

⁴ Smith, Robertson, Kinship and Marriage, p. 163.Google Scholar

⁵ Op. cit. For an analysis of tifty-seven marriages see p. 138.

¹ The Sheykh of the Kababish had two wives both banat'amm, but before marrying the second he had divorced another who was not his bint'amm.

² Op. cit., pp. 104–5.

³ Smith, Robertson, op. cit., p. 107.Google Scholar

¹ Doughty, , Arabia Deserta (1888), vol. ii, chaps, i and ii.Google Scholar

² Westermarck, E., Marriage Ceremonies in Morocco (London), 1914, pp. 15–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ Among Arabs generally a woman's honour concerns her own kin and only in a lesser degree her husband. A woman who had committed adultery might be slain by her father or brother, but never by her husband.

⁴ Smith, Robertson, op. cit., pp. 101–2.Google Scholar

⁵ Smith, Robertson, op. cit., p. 101.Google Scholar

¹ Hughes, , Dictionary of IslamGoogle Scholar. Art. Guardianship.

² “Studies in Semitic Kinship”, I.Google Scholar

³ It is needless to go into the argument, but if this had been the case a similar development in other Semitic peoples might have been expected, in this ease the change of words for father-in-law (“Studies in Semitic Kinship,” I) would be the reverse of what has actually taken place. For examples of transference of rignt, see Junod, H., The Life of a South African Tribe, vol. i, p. 233.Google Scholar

⁴ See below evidence for polyandry.

¹ The Kababish, p. 137.Google Scholar

² Rabbinical Law recommends the marriage of uncle and niece. The legal importance of the levirate is still recognized. A curious case occurred recently in Palestine; a man who had married his brother's daughter died, it then became clear that legally his widow ought to marry her own father which, of course, she could not do.

³ “And marry not women whom your fathers have married: for this is a shame, and hateful, and an evil way: though what is passed may be allowed.” The Koran, Sura IV. It is clear that there were Believers living who had married women whom their fathers had married, but whether the latter were widows or divorcees it is not possible to say from the passage.

⁴ Op. cit., pp. 466–505.

¹ The main thesis of Kinship and Marriage may briefly be stated thus: Originally descent was reckoned in the female line, marriages were matrilocal, the husbands were merely visitors, so that a state of society existed which is compared to Nair polyandry. Later, captured women were shared by a group of brothers and there existed a state of society comparable to Tibetan polyandry. It was during this Tibetan or fraternal polyandrous stage that according to his hypothesis paternity was recognized and property and women were inherited in the male line.

² Rivers has shown how cross-cousin marriages in Melanesia came about in this way (History of Melanesian Society), and there is evidence for supposing that the same mechanism, that of transference, may have been at work in Africa.

³ The daughters of Zelophehad inherited their father's property because they had no brothers, and then in order to prevent the inheritance passing from tribe to tribe they were commanded to marry whom they thought best within the tribe of their father. This appears to have been a special case, and the law that arose from it applied to heiresses only. It is stated that they actually married their father's brother's sons; this, though not accounting for the custom, shows the trend of public opinion in its favour. See the daughters of Zelophehad, , Num. xxvi, 33, xxvi, 1–11, and xxxvi, 6–12.Google Scholar

¹ Op. cit., p. 161.

² Mackie Ethnological Expedition to Central Africa. Frazer, , Man, 06, 1920.Google Scholar

³ Op. cit., p. 162. Cf. above, marriage of divorced wives by near kinsmen of the husband.

¹ SirFrazer, James interprets these verses in the same way, op. cit., vol. i, p. 541, n. 3.Google Scholar

² Deut. xxii, 30.Google Scholar

³ Smith, Robertson, op. cit., p. 105.Google Scholar

⁴ This is not a case of prohibition to marriage, but a man and his father are forbidden to approach the same maid.

¹ I am indebted to Dr. G. Subhy for this information, who says that in spite of early encouragement by the Church there is no strong feeling in favour of cousin marriage to-day.

² Theal, G. McCall, The Yellow and Dark-Skinned People of Africa south of the Zambesi, London, 1910, p. 219.Google Scholar

¹ Journ. Boy. Anthrop. Inst., vol. ix, 1880, p. 50.Google Scholar