essays and lectures- 第5部分

spots　in　Greece；　as　well　as　by　the　negative　instance　of　the

undisturbed　state　in　primitive　time　of　Attica；　which　was　always

remarkable　for　the　dryness　and　poverty　of　its　soil。



Now；　while　undoubtedly　in　these　passages　we　may　recognise　the　first

anticipation　of　many　of　the　most　modern　principles　of　research；　we

must　remember　how　essentially　limited　is　the　range　of　the

ARCHAEOLOGIA；　and　how　no　theory　at　all　is　offered　on　the　wider

questions　of　the　general　conditions　of　the　rise　and　progress　of

humanity；　a　problem　which　is　first　scientifically　discussed　in　the

REPUBLIC　of　Plato。



And　at　the　outset　it　must　be　premised　that；　while　the　study　of

primitive　man　is　an　essentially　inductive　science；　resting　rather

on　the　accumulation　of　evidence　than　on　speculation；　among　the

Greeks　it　was　prosecuted　rather　on　deductive　principles。

Thucydides　did；　indeed；　avail　himself　of　the　opportunities　afforded

by　the　unequal　development　of　civilisation　in　his　own　day　in

Greece；　and　in　the　places　I　have　pointed　out　seems　to　have

anticipated　the　comparative　method。　　But　we　do　not　find　later

writers　availing　themselves　of　the　wonderfully　accurate　and

picturesque　accounts　given　by　Herodotus　of　the　customs　of　savage

tribes。　　To　take　one　instance；　which　bears　a　good　deal　on　modern

questions；　we　find　in　the　works　of　this　great　traveller　the　gradual

and　progressive　steps　in　the　development　of　the　family　life　clearly

manifested　in　the　mere　gregarious　herding　together　of　the

Agathyrsi；　their　primitive　kinsmanship　through　women　in　common；　and

the　rise　of　a　feeling　of　paternity　from　a　state　of　polyandry。　　This

tribe　stood　at　that　time　on　that　borderland　between　umbilical

relationship　and　the　family　which　has　been　such　a　difficult　point

for　modern　anthropologists　to　find。



The　ancient　authors；　however；　are　unanimous　in　insisting　that　the

family　is　the　ultimate　unit　of　society；　though；　as　I　have　said；　an

inductive　study　of　primitive　races；　or　even　the　accounts　given　of

them　by　Herodotus；　would　have　shown　them　that　the　＇Greek　text　which

cannot　be　reproduced＇　of　a　personal　household；　to　use　Plato's

expression；　is　really　a　most　complex　notion　appearing　always　in　a

late　stage　of　civilisation；　along　with　recognition　of　private

property　and　the　rights　of　individualism。



Philology　also；　which　in　the　hands　of　modern　investigators　has

proved　such　a　splendid　instrument　of　research；　was　in　ancient　days

studied　on　principles　too　unscientific　to　be　of　much　use。

Herodotus　points　out　that　the　word　ERIDANOS　is　essentially　Greek　in

character；　that　consequently　the　river　supposed　to　run　round　the

world　is　probably　a　mere　Greek　invention。　　His　remarks；　however；　on

language　generally；　as　in　the　case　of　PIROMIS　and　the　ending　of　the

Persian　names；　show　on　what　unsound　basis　his　knowledge　of　language

rested。



In　the　BACCHAE　of　Euripides　there　is　an　extremely　interesting

passage　in　which　the　immoral　stories　of　the　Greek　mythology　are

accounted　for　on　the　principle　of　that　misunderstanding　of　words

and　metaphors　to　which　modern　science　has　given　the　name　of　a

disease　of　language。　　In　answer　to　the　impious　rationalism　of

Pentheus　…　a　sort　of　modern　Philistine　…　Teiresias；　who　may　be

termed　the　Max　Muller　of　the　Theban　cycle；　points　out　that　the

story　of　Dionysus　being　inclosed　in　Zeus'　thigh　really　arose　from

the　linguistic　confusion　between　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be

reproduced＇　and　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇。



On　the　whole；　however　…　for　I　have　quoted　these　two　instances　only

to　show　the　unscientific　character　of　early　philology　…　we　may　say

that　this　important　instrument　in　recreating　the　history　of　the

past　was　not　really　used　by　the　ancients　as　a　means　of　historical

criticism。　　Nor　did　the　ancients　employ　that　other　method；　used　to

such　advantage　in　our　own　day；　by　which　in　the　symbolism　and

formulas　of　an　advanced　civilisation　we　can　detect　the　unconscious

survival　of　ancient　customs：　　for；　whereas　in　the　sham　capture　of

the　bride　at　a　marriage　feast；　which　was　common　in　Wales　till　a

recent　time；　we　can　discern　the　lingering　reminiscence　of　the

barbarous　habit　of　exogamy；　the　ancient　writers　saw　only　the

deliberate　commemoration　of　an　historical　event。



Aristotle　does　not　tell　us　by　what　method　he　discovered　that　the

Greeks　used　to　buy　their　wives　in　primitive　times；　but；　judging　by

his　general　principles；　it　was　probably　through　some　legend　or　myth

on　the　subject　which　lasted　to　his　own　day；　and　not；　as　we　would

do；　by　arguing　back　from　the　marriage　presents　given　to　the　bride

and　her　relatives。　（4）



The　origin　of　the　common　proverb　'worth　so　many　beeves；'　in　which

we　discern　the　unconscious　survival　of　a　purely　pastoral　state　of

society　before　the　use　of　metals　was　known；　is　ascribed　by　Plutarch

to　the　fact　of　Theseus　having　coined　money　bearing　a　bull's　head。

Similarly；　the　Amathusian　festival；　in　which　a　young　man　imitated

the　labours　of　a　woman　in　travail；　is　regarded　by　him　as　a　rite

instituted　in　Ariadne's　honour；　and　the　Carian　adoration　of

asparagus　as　a　simple　commemoration　of　the　adventure　of　the　nymph

Perigune。　　In　the　first　of　these　WE　discern　the　beginning　of

agnation　and　kinsmanship　through　the　father；　which　still　lingers　in

the　'couvee'　of　New　Zealand　tribes：　　while　the　second　is　a　relic　of

the　totem　and　fetish　worship　of　plants。



Now；　in　entire　opposition　to　this　modern　inductive　principle　of

research　stands　the　philosophic　Plato；　whose　account　of　primitive

man　is　entirely　speculative　and　deductive。



The　origin　of　society　he　ascribes　to　necessity；　the　mother　of　all

inventions；　and　imagines　that　individual　man　began　deliberately　to

herd　together　on　account　of　the　advantages　of　the　principle　of

division　of　labour　and　the　rendering　of　mutual　need。



It　must；　however；　be　borne　in　mind　that　Plato's　object　in　this

whole　passage　in　the　REPUBLIC　was；　perhaps；　not　so　much　to　analyse

the　conditions　of　early　society　as　to　illustrate　the　importance　of

the　division　of　labour；　the　shibboleth　of　his　political　economy；　by

showing　what　a　powerful　factor　it　must　have　been　in　the　most

primitive　as　well　as　in　the　most　complex　states　of　society；　just　as

in　the　LAWS　he　almost　rewrites　entirely　the　history　of　the

Peloponnesus　in　order　to　prove　the　necessity　of　a　balance　of　power。

He　surely；　I　mean；　must　have　recognised　himself　how　essentially

incomplete　his　theory　was　in　taking　no　account　of　the　origin　of

family　life；　the　position　and　influence　of　women；　and　other　social

questions；　as　well　as　in　disregarding　those　deeper　motives　of

religion；　which　are　such　important　factors　in　early　civilisation；

and　whose　influence　Aristotle　seems　to　have　clearly　apprehended；

when　he　says　that　the　aim　of　primitive　society　was　not　merely　life

but　the　higher　life；　and　that　in　the　origin　of　society　utility　is

not　the　sole　motive；　but　that　there　is　something　spiritual　in　it

if；　at　least；　'spiritual'　will　bring　out　the　meaning　of　that

complex　expression　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇。

Otherwise；　the　whole　account　in　the　REPUBLIC　of　primitive　man　will

always　remain　as　a　warning　against　the　intrusion　of　A　PRIORI

speculations　in　the　domain　appropriate　to　induction。



Now；　Aristotle's　theory　of　the　origin　of　society；　like　his

philosophy　of　ethics；　rests　ultimately　on　the　principle　of　final

causes；　not　in　the　theological　meaning　of　an　aim　or　tendency

imposed　from　without；　but　in　the　scientific　sense　of　function

corresponding　to　organ。　　'Nature　maketh　no　thing　in　vain'　is　the

text　of　Aristotle　in　this　as　in　other　inquiries。　　Man　being　the

only　animal　possessed　of　the　power　of　rational　speech　is；　he

asserts；　by　nature　intended　to　be　social；　more　so　than　the　bee　or

any　other　gregarious　animal。



He　is　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇；　and　the　national

tendency　towards　higher　forms　of　perfection　brings　the　'armed

savage　who　used　to　sell　his　wife'　to　the　free　independence　of　a

free　state；　and　to　the　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇；

which　was　the　test　of　true　citizenship。　　The　stages　passed　through

by　humanity　start　with　the　family　first　as　the　ultimate　unit。



The　conglomeration　of　families　forms　a　village　ruled　by　that

patriarchal　sway　which　is　the　oldest　form　of　government　in　the

world；　as　is　shown　by　the　fact　that　all　men　count　it　to　be　the

constitution　of　heaven；　and　the　villages　are　merged　into　the　state；

and　here　the　progression　stops。



For　Aristotle；　like　all　Greek　thinkers；　found　his　ideal　within　the

walls　of　the　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇；　yet　perhaps

in　his　remark　that　a　united　Greece　would　rule　the　world　we　may

discern　some　anticipation　of　that　'federal　union　of　free　states

into　one　consolidated　empire'　which；　more　than　the　＇Greek　text

which　cannot　be　reproduced＇；　is　to　our　eyes　the　ultimately　perfect

polity。



How　far　Aristotle　was　justified　in　regarding　the　family　as　the

ultimate　unit；　with　the　materials　afforded　to　him　by　Greek

literature；　I　have　already　noticed。　　Besides；　Aristotle；　I　may

remark；　had　he　reflected　on　the　meaning　of　that　Athenian　law　which；

while　prohibiting　marriage　with　a　uterine　sister；　permitted　it　with

a　sister…german；　or　on　the　common　tradition　in　Athens　that　before

the　time　of　Cecrops　children　bore　their　mothers'　names；　or　on　some

of　the　Spartan　regulations；　could　hardly　have　failed　to　see　the

universality　of　kinsmanship　through　women　in　early　days；　and　the

late　appearance　of　monandry。　　Yet；　while　he　missed　this　point；　in

common；　it　must　be　acknowledged；　with　many　modern　writers；　such　as

Sir　Henry　Maine；　it　is　essentially　as　an　explorer　of　inductive

instances　that　we　recognise　his　improvement　on　Plato。　　The　treatise

＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇；　did　it　remain　to　us　in　its

entirety；　would　have　been　one　of　the　most　valuable　landmarks　in　the

progress　of　historical　criticism；　and　the　first　scientific　treatise

on　the　science　of　comp