按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
of the Sclavonic Russians and Poles which has only lately
attracted notice； everywhere we discover traces of passages in
their history when men of alien descent were admitted to； and
amalgamated with； the original brotherhood。 Adverting to Rome
singly； we perceive that the primary group； the Family； was being
constantly adulterated by the practice of adoption； while stories
seem to have been always current respecting the exotic extraction
of one of the original Tribes； and concerning a large addition to
the Houses made by one of the early Kings。 The composition of the
State uniformly assumed to be natural was nevertheless known to
be in great measure artificial。' （Ancient Law； pp。 129； 130。） The
key to these singular phenomena has been recently sought in the
ancient religions； and has been supposed to be found in the
alleged universal practice of worshipping dead ancestors。 Very
striking illustrations of them are； however； supplied by the law
and usage of Ireland after it had been Christianised for
centuries； and long after any Eponymous progenitor can be
conceived as worshipped 。 The Family； House； and Tribe of the
Romans and； so far as my knowledge extends； all the analogous
divisions of Greek communities were distinguished by separate
special names。 But in the Brehon Law； the same word； Fine （or
'family'）； is used for the Family as we ordinarily understand it
that is； for the children of a living parent and their
descendants for the Sept or； in phrase of Indian law； the
Joint Undivided Family； that is； the combined descendants of an
ancestor long since dead for the Tribe； which was the
political unit of ancient Ireland； and even for the large Tribes
in which the smaller units were sometimes absorbed。 Nevertheless
the Irish Family undoubtedly received additions through Adoption。
The Sept； or larger group of kindred； had a definite place for
strangers admitted to it on stated conditions； the Fine Taccair。
The Tribe avowedly included a number of persons； mostly refugees
from other Tribes； whose only connection with it was common
allegiance to its Chief。 Moreover the Tribe in its largest
extension and considered a political as well as a social unit
might have been absorbed with others in a Great or Arch Tribe；
and here the sole source of the kinship still theoretically
maintained is Conquest。 Yet all these groups were in some sense
or other Families。
Nor does the artificiality solely consist in the extension of
the sphere of kinship to classes known to have been originally
alien to the true brotherhood。 An even more interesting example
of it presents itself when the ideas of kinship and the
phraseology proper to consanguinity are extended to associations
which we should now contemplate as exclusively founded on
contract； such as partnerships and guilds。 There are no more
interesting pages in Dr Sullivan's Introduction （pp。 ccvi et
seq。） than those in which he discusses the tribal origin of
Guilds。 He claims for the word itself a Celtic etymology； and he
traces the institution to the grazing partnerships common among
the ancient Irish。 However this may be； it is most instructive to
find the same words used to describe bodies of co…partners；
formed by contract； and bodies of co…heirs or co…parceners formed
by common descent。 Each assemblage of men seems to have been
conceived as a Family。 As regards Guilds； I certainly think； as I
thought three years ago； that they have been much too confidently
attributed to a relatively modern origin； and that many of them；
and much which is common to all of them； may be suspected to have
grown out of the primitive brotherhoods of co…villagers and
kinsmen。 The trading guilds which survive in our own country have
undergone every sort of transmutation which can disguise their
parentage。 They are artificial to begin with； though the
hereditary principle has a certain tendency to assert itself。
They have long since relinquished the occupations which gave them
a name。 They mostly trace their privileges and constitution to
some royal charter； and kingly grants； real or fictitious； are
the great cause of interruption in English History。 Yet anybody
who； with a knowledge of primitive law and history； examines the
internal mechanism and proceedings of a London Company will see
in many parts of them plain traces of the ancient brotherhood of
kinsmen； 'joint in food； worship； and estate；' and I suppose that
the nearest approach to an ancient tribal holding in Ireland is
to be found in those confiscated lands which are now the property
of several of these Companies。
The early history of Contract； I need scarcely tell you； is
almost exclusively to be sought in the history of Roman law。 Some
years ago I pointed to the entanglement which primitive Roman
institutions disclose between the conveyance of property and the
contract of sale。 Let me now observe that one or two others of
the great Roman contracts appear to me； when closely examined； to
afford evidence of their having been gradually evolved through
changes in the mechanism of primitive society。 You have seen how
brotherhoods of kinsmen transform themselves into alliances
between persons whom we can only call partners； but still at
first sight the link is missing which would enable us to say that
here we have the beginning of the contract of partnership。 Look；
however； at the peculiar contract called by the Romans 'societas
omnium （or universorum） bonorum。' It is commonly translated
'partnership with unlimited liability；' and there is no doubt
that the elder form of partnership has had great effect on the
newer form。 But you will find that； in the societas omnium
bonorum； not only were all the liabilities of the partnership the
liabilities of the several partners； but the whole of the
property of each partner was brought into the common stock and
was enjoyed as a common fund。 No such arrangement as this is
known in the modern world as the result of ordinary agreement；
though in some countries it may be the effect of marriage。 It
appears to me that we are carried back to the joint brotherhoods
of primitive society； and that their development must have given
rise to the contract before us。 Let us turn again to the contract
of Mandatum or Agency。 The only complete representation of one
man by another which the Roman law allowed was the representation
of the Paterfamilias by the son or slave under his power。 The
representation of the Principal by the Agent is much more
incomplete； and it seems to me probable that we have in it a
shadow of that thorough coalescence between two individuals which
was only possible anciently when they belonged to the same
family。
The institutions which I have taken as my examples are
institutions of indigenous growth； developed probably more or
less within all ancient societies by the expansion of the notion
of kinship。 But it sometimes happens that a wholly foreign
institution is introduced from without into a society based upon
assumed consanguinity； and then it is most instructive to observe
how closely； in such a case； material which antecedently we
should think likely to oppose the most stubborn resistance to the
infiltration of tribal ideas assimilates itself nevertheless to
the model of a Family or Tribe。 You may be aware that the ancient
Irish Church has long been a puzzle to ecclesiastical historians。
There are difficulties suggested by it on which I do not pretend
to throw any new light； nor； indeed； could they conveniently be
considered here。 Among perplexities of this class are the
extraordinary multiplication of bishops and their dependence；
apparently an almost servile dependence； on the religious