VOLUME X SLICE II Fairbanks, Erastus to Fens (continued 3)

The Falkland Islands consist entirely, so far as is known, of the older Palaeozoic rocks, Lower Devonian or Upper Silurian, slightly metamorphosed and a good deal crumpled and distorted, in the low grounds clay slate and soft sandstone, and on the ridges hardened sandstone passing into the conspicuous white quartzites. There do not seem to be any minerals of value, and the rocks are not such as to indicate any probability of their discovery. Galena is found in small quantity, and in some places it contains a large percentage of silver. The dark bituminous layers of clay slate, which occur intercalated among the quartzites, have led, here as elsewhere, to the hope of coming upon a seam of coal, but it is contrary to experience that coal of any value should be found in rocks of that age.

Many of the valleys in the Falklands are occupied by pale glistening masses which at a little distance much resemble small glaciers. Examined more closely these are found to be vast accumulations of blocks of quartzite, irregular in form, but having a tendency to a rude diamond shape, from 2 to 20 ft. in length, and half as much in width, and of a thickness corresponding with that of the quartzite ridges on the hills above. The blocks are angular, and rest irregularly one upon another, supported in all positions by the angles and edges of those beneath. The whole mass looks as if it were, as it is, slowly sliding down the valley to the sea. These “stone runs” are looked upon with great wonder by the shifting population of the Falklands, and they are shown to visitors with many strange speculations as to their mode of formation. Their origin is attributed by some to the moraine formation of former glaciers. Another out of many theories1 is that the hard beds of quartzite are denuded by the disintegration of the softer layers. Their support being removed they break away in the direction of natural joints, and the fragments fall down the slope upon the vegetable soil. This soil is spongy, and, undergoing alternate contraction and expansion from being alternately comparatively dry and saturated with moisture, allows the heavy blocks to slip down by their own weight into the valley, where they become piled up, the valley stream afterwards removing the soil from among and over them.

The Falkland Islands correspond very nearly in latitude in the southern hemisphere with London in the northern, but the climatic influences are very different. The temperature is equable, the average of the two midsummer months being about 47° Fahr., and that of the two midwinter months 37° Fahr. The extreme frosts and heats of the English climate are unknown, but occasional heavy snow-falls occur, and the sea in shallow inlets is covered with a thin coating of ice. The sky is almost constantly overcast, and rain falls, mostly in a drizzle and in frequent showers, on about 250 days in the year. The rainfall is not great, only about 20 in., but the mean humidity for the year is 80, saturation being 100. November is considered the only dry month. The prevalent winds from the west, south-west and south blow continuously, at times approaching the force of a hurricane. “A region more exposed to storms both in summer and winter it would be difficult to mention” (Fitzroy, Voyages of “Adventure” and “Beagle,” ii. 228). The fragments of many wrecks emphasize the dangers of navigation, which are increased by the absence of beacons, the only lighthouse being that maintained by the Board of Trade on Cape Pembroke near the principal settlement. Kelp is a natural danger-signal, and the sunken rock, “Uranie,” is reputed to be the only one not buoyed by the giant seaweed.

Of aboriginal human inhabitants there is no trace in the Falklands, and the land fauna is very scanty. A small wolf, the loup-renard of de Bougainville, is extinct, the last having been seen about 1875 on the West Falkland. Some herds of cattle and horses run wild; but these were, of course, introduced, as were also the wild hogs, the numerous rabbits and the less common hares. All these have greatly declined in numbers, being profitably replaced by sheep. Land-birds are few in kind, and are mostly strays from South America. They include, however, the snipe and military starling, which on account of its scarlet breast is locally known as the robin. Sea-birds are abundant, and, probably from the islands having been comparatively lately peopled, they are singularly tame. Gulls and amphibious birds abound in large variety; three kinds of penguin have their rookeries and breed here, migrating yearly for some months to the South American mainland. Stray specimens of the great king penguin have been observed, and there are also mollymauks (a kind of albatross), Cape pigeons and many carrion birds. Kelp and upland geese abound, the latter being edible; and their shooting affords some sport.

The Falkland Islands form essentially a part of Patagonia, with which they are connected by an elevated submarine plateau, and their flora is much the same as that of Antarctic South America. The trees which form dense forest and scrub in southern Patagonia and in Fuegia are absent, and one of the largest plants on the islands is a gigantic woolly ragweed (Senecio candicans) which attains in some places a height of 3 to 4 ft. A half-shrubby veronica (V. decussata) is found in some parts, and has also received cultivation. The greater part of the “camp” (the open country) is formed of peat, which in some places is of great age and depth, and at the bottom of the bed very dense and bituminous. The peat is different in character from that of northern Europe: cellular plants enter but little into its composition, and it is formed almost entirely of the roots and stems of Empetrum rubrum, a variety of the common crow-berry of the Scottish hills with red berries, called by the Falklanders the “diddle-dee” berry; of Myrtus nummularia, a little creeping myrtle whose leaves are used by the shepherds as a substitute for tea; of Caltha appendiculata, a dwarf species of marsh-marigold; and of some sedges and sedge-like plants, such as Astelia pumila, Gaimardia australis and Bostkovia grandiflora. Peat is largely used as fuel, coal being obtained only at a cost of £3 a ton.

Two vegetable products, the “balsam bog” (Bolar glebaria) and the “tussock grass” (Dactylis caespitosa) have been objects of curiosity and interest ever since the first accounts of the islands were given. The first is a huge mass of a bright green colour, living to a great age, and when dead becoming of a grey and stony appearance. When cut open, it displays an infinity of tiny leaf-buds and stems, and at intervals there exudes from it an aromatic resin, which from its astringent properties is used by the shepherds as a vulnerary, but has not been converted to any commercial purpose. The “tussock grass” is a wonderful and most valuable natural production, which, owing to the introduction of stock, has become extinct in the two main islands, but still flourishes elsewhere in the group. It is a reed-like grass, which grows in dense tufts from 6 to 10 ft. high from stool-like root-crowns. It forms excellent fodder for cattle, and is regularly gathered for that purpose. It is of beautiful appearance, and the almost tropical profusion of its growth may have led to the early erroneous reports of the densely-wooded nature of these islands.

The population slightly exceeds 2000. The large majority of the inhabitants live in the East Island, and the predominating element is Scottish—Scottish shepherds having superseded the South American Gauchos. In 1867 there were no settlers on the west island, and the government issued a proclamation offering leases of grazing stations on very moderate terms. In 1868 all the available land was occupied. These lands are fairly healthy, the principal drawback being the virulent form assumed by simple epidemic maladies. The occupation of the inhabitants is almost entirely pastoral, and the principal industry is sheep-farming. Wool forms by far the largest export, and tallow, hides, bones and frozen mutton are also exported. Trade is carried on almost entirely with the United Kingdom; the approximate annual value of exports is £120,000, and of imports a little more than half that sum. The Falkland Islands Company, having its headquarters at Stanley and an important station in the camp at Darwin, carries on an extensive business in sheep-farming and the dependent industries, and in the general import trade. The development of this undertaking necessitated the establishment of stores and workshops at Stanley, and ships can be repaired and provided in every way; a matter of importance since not a few vessels, after suffering injury during heavy weather off Cape Horn, call on the Falklands in distress. The maintenance of the requisite plant and the high wages current render such repairs somewhat costly. A former trade in oil and sealskin has decayed, owing to the smaller number of whales and seals remaining about the islands. Communications are maintained on horseback and by water, and there are no roads except at Stanley. There is a monthly mail to and from England, the passage occupying about four weeks.

The Falkland Islands are a crown colony, with a governor and executive and legislative councils. The legislative council consists of the governor and three official and two unofficial nominated members, and the executive of the same, with the exception that there is only one unofficial member. The colony is self-supporting, the revenue being largely derived from the drink duties, and there is no public debt. The Falklands are the seat of a colonial bishop. Education is compulsory. The government maintains schools and travelling teachers; the Falkland Islands Company also maintains a school at Darwin, and there is one for those of the Roman Catholic faith in Stanley. There is also on Keppel Island a Protestant missionary settlement for the training in agriculture of imported Fuegians. Stanley was for some years a naval station, but ceased to be so in 1904.

The Falkland Islands were first seen, by Davis in the year 1592, and Sir Richard Hawkins sailed along their north shore in 1594. The claims of Amerigo Vespucci to a previous discovery are doubtful. In 1598 Sebald de Wert, a Dutchman, visited them, and called them the Sebald Islands, a name which they bear on some Dutch maps. Captain Strong sailed through between the two principal islands in 1690, landed upon one of them, and called the passage Falkland Sound, and from this the group afterwards took its English name. In 1764 the French explorer De Bougainville took possession of the islands on behalf of his country, and established a colony at Port Louis on Berkeley Sound. But in 1767 France ceded the islands to Spain, De Bougainville being employed as intermediary. Meanwhile in 1765 Commodore Byron had taken possession on the part of England on the ground of prior discovery, and had formed a settlement at Port Egmont on the small island of Saunders. The Spanish and English settlers remained in ignorance, real or assumed, of each other’s presence until 1769-1770, when Byron’s action was nearly the cause of a war between England and Spain, both countries having armed fleets to contest the barren sovereignty. In 1771, however, Spain yielded the islands to Great Britain by convention. As they had not been actually colonized by England, the republic of Buenos Aires claimed the group in 1820, and subsequently entered into a dispute with the United States of America concerning the rights to the products of these islands. On the representations of Great Britain the Buenos Aireans withdrew, and the British flag was once more hoisted at Port Louis in 1833, and since that time the Falkland Islands have been a regular British colony.

In 1845 Mr S. Lafone, a wealthy cattle and hide merchant on the river Plate, obtained from government a grant of the southern portion of the island, a peninsula 600,000 acres in extent, and possession of all the wild cattle on the island for a period of six years, for a payment of £10,000 down, and £20,000 in ten years from January 1, 1852. In 1851 Mr Lafone’s interest in Lafonia, as the peninsula came to be called, was purchased for £30,000 by the Falkland Islands Company, which had been incorporated by charter in the same year.

See Pernety, Journal historique d’une voyage faite aux îles Malouines en 1763 et 1764 (Berlin, 1767); S. Johnson, Thoughts on the late Transactions respecting Falkland’s Islands (1771); L.A. de Bougainville, Voyage autour du monde (1771); T. Falkner, Description of Patagonia and the Falkland Islands (1774); B. Penrose, Account of the last Expedition to Port Egmont in the Falkland Islands (1775); Observations on the Forcible Occupation of Malvinas by the British Government in 1833 (Buenos Ayres, 1833); Reclamacion del Gobierno de las provincias Unidas de la Plata contra el de S.M. Britanica sobre la soverania y possesion de las Islas Malvinas (London, 1841); Fitzroy, Narrative of the Surveying Voyage of H.M.S. “Adventure” and “Beagle” (1839); Darwin, Voyage of a Naturalist round the World (1845); S.B. Sullivan, Description of the Falkland Islands (1849); W. Hadfield, Brazil, the Falkland Islands, &c. (1854); W. Parker Snow, Two Years’ Cruise off the Tierra del Fuego, the Falkland Islands, &c. (1857); Sir C. Wyville Thomson, Voyage of the “Challenger” (1877); C.P. Lucas, Historical Geography of the British Colonies, vol. ii. “The West Indies” (Oxford, 1890); Colonial Reports Annual; MS. Sloane, 3295.

1 See B Stechele, in Münchener geographische Studien, xx.(1906), and Geographical Journal (December 1907).

FALLACY (Lat. fall-ax, apt to mislead), the term given generally to any mistaken statement used in argument; in Logic, technically, an argument which violates the laws of correct demonstration. An argument may be fallacious in matter (i.e. misstatement of facts), in wording (i.e. wrong use of words), or in the process of inference. Fallacies have, therefore, been classified as: I. Material, II. Verbal, III. Logical Of Formal; II. and III. are often included under the general description Logical, and in scholastic phraseology, following Aristotle, are called fallacies in dictione or in voce, as opposed to material fallacies in re or extra dictionem.

I. Material.—The classification widely adopted by modern logicians and based on that of Aristotle, Organon (Sophistici elenchi), is as follows:—(1) Fallacy of Accident, i.e. arguing erroneously from a general rule to a particular case, without proper regard to particular conditions which vitiate the application of the general rule; e.g. if manhood suffrage be the law, arguing that a criminal or a lunatic must, therefore, have a vote; (2) Converse Fallacy of Accident, i.e. arguing from a special case to a general rule; (3) Irrelevant Conclusion, or Ignoratio Elenchi, wherein, instead of proving the fact in dispute, the arguer seeks to gain his point by diverting attention to some extraneous fact (as in the legal story of “No case. Abuse the plaintiff’s attorney”). Under this head come the so-called argumentum (a) ad hominem, (b) ad populum, (c) ad baculum, (d) ad verecundiam, common in platform oratory, in which the speaker obscures the real issue by appealing to his audience on the grounds of (a) purely personal considerations, (b) popular sentiment, (c) fear, (d) conventional propriety. This fallacy has been illustrated by ethical or theological arguments wherein the fear of punishment is subtly substituted for abstract right as the sanction of moral obligation. (4) Petitio principii (begging the question) or Circulus in probando (arguing in a circle), which consists in demonstrating a conclusion by means of premises which presuppose that conclusion. Jeremy Bentham points out that this fallacy may lurk in a single word, especially in an epithet, e.g. if a measure were condemned simply on the ground that it is alleged to be “un-English”; (5) Fallacy of the Consequent, really a species of (3), wherein a conclusion is drawn from premises which do not really support it; (6) Fallacy of False Cause, or Non Sequitur (“it does not follow”), wherein one thing is incorrectly assumed as the cause of another, as when the ancients attributed a public calamity to a meteorological phenomenon; (7) Fallacy of Many Questions (Plurium Interrogationum), wherein several questions are improperly grouped in the form of one, and a direct categorical answer is demanded, e.g. if a prosecuting counsel asked the prisoner “What time was it when you met this man?” with the intention of eliciting the tacit admission that such a meeting had taken place.

II. Verbal Fallacies are those in which a false conclusion is obtained by improper or ambiguous use of words. They are generally classified as follows. (1) Equivocation consists in employing the same word in two or more senses, e.g. in a syllogism, the middle term being used in one sense in the major and another in the minor premise, so that in fact there are four not three terms (“All fair things are honourable; This woman is fair; therefore this woman is honourable,” the second “fair” being in reference to complexion). (2) Amphibology is the result of ambiguity of grammatical structure, e.g. of the position of the adverb “only” in careless writers (“He only said that,” in which sentence, as experience shows, the adverb has been intended to qualify any one of the other three words). (3) Composition, a species of (1), which results from the confused use of collective terms (“The angles of a triangle are less than two right angles” might refer to the angles separately or added together). (4) Division, the converse of the preceding, which consists in employing the middle term distributively in the minor and collectively in the major premise. (5) Accent, which occurs only in speaking and consists of emphasizing the wrong word in a sentence (“He is a fairly good pianist,” according to the emphasis on the words, may imply praise of a beginner’s progress, or an expert’s depreciation of a popular hero, or it may imply that the person in question is a deplorable violinist). (6) Figure of Speech, the confusion between the metaphorical and ordinary uses of a word or phrase.

III. The purely Logical or Formal fallacies consist in the violation of the formal rules of the Syllogism (q.v.). They are (a) fallacy of Four Terms (Quaternio terminorum); (b) of Undistributed Middle; (c) of Illicit process of the major or the minor term; (d) of Negative Premises.

Of other classifications of Fallacies in general the most famous are those of Francis Bacon and J.S. Mill. Bacon (Novum organum, Aph. i. 33, 38 sqq.) divided fallacies into four Idola (Idols, i.e. False Appearances), which summarize the various kinds of mistakes to which the human intellect is prone (see Bacon, Francis). With these should be compared the Offendicula of Roger Bacon, contained in the Opus maius, pt. i. (see Bacon, Roger). J.S. Mill discussed the subject in book v. of his Logic, and Jeremy Bentham’s Book of Fallacies (1824) contains valuable remarks.

See Rd. Whateley’s Logic, bk. v.; A. de Morgan, Formal Logic (1847); A. Sidgwick, Fallacies (1883) and other text-books. See also article Logic, and for fallacies of Induction, see Induction.

FALLIÈRES, CLÉMENT ARMAND (1841- ), president of the French republic, was born at Mézin in the department of Lot-et-Garonne, where his father was clerk of the peace. He studied law and became an advocate at Nérac, beginning his public career there as municipal councillor (1868), afterwards mayor (1871), and as councillor-general of the department of Lot-et-Garonne (1871). Being an ardent Republican, he lost this position in May 1873 upon the fall of Thiers, but in February 1876 was elected deputy for Nérac. In the chamber he sat with the Republican Left, signed the protestation of the 18th of May 1877, and was re-elected in October by his constituency. In 1880 he became under-secretary of state in the department of the interior in the Jules Ferry ministry (May 1880 to November 1881). From the 7th of August 1882 to the 20th of February 1883 he was minister of the interior, and for a month (from the 29th of January 1883) was premier. His ministry had to face the question of the expulsion of the pretenders to the throne of France, owing to the proclamation by Prince Jérome Napoleon (January 1883), and M. Fallières, who was ill at the time, was not able to face the storm of opposition, and resigned when the senate rejected his project. In the following November, however, he was chosen as minister of public instruction by Jules Ferry, and carried out various reforms in the school system. He resigned with the ministry in March 1885. Again becoming minister of the interior in the Rouvier cabinet in May 1887, he exchanged his portfolio in December for that of justice. He returned to the ministry of the interior in February 1889, and finally took the department of justice from March 1890 to February 1892. In June 1890 his department (Lot-et-Garonne) elected him to the senate by 417 votes to 23. There M. Fallières remained somewhat apart from party struggles, although maintaining his influence among the Republicans. In March 1899 he was elected president of the senate, and retained that position until January 1906, when he was chosen by a union of the groups of the Left in both chambers as candidate for the presidency of the republic. He was elected on the first ballot by 449 votes against 371 for his opponent, Paul Doumer.

FALL-LINE, in American geology, a line marking the junction between the hard rocks of the Appalachian Mountains and the softer deposits of the coastal plain. The pre-Cambrian and metamorphic rocks of the mountain mass form a continuous ledge parallel to the east coast, where they are subject to denudation and form a series of “falls” and rapids in the river courses all along this line. The relief of the land below the falls is very slight, and this low country rarely rises to a height of 200 ft., so that the rivers are navigable up to the falls, while the falls themselves are a valuable source of power. A line of cities may be traced upon the map whose position will thus be readily understood in relation to the economic importance of the fall-line. They are Trenton on the Delaware, Philadelphia on the Schuylkill, Georgetown on the Potomac, Richmond on the James, and Augusta on the Savannah. It will be readily understood that the softer and more recent rocks of the coastal plain have been more easily washed away, while the harder rocks of the mountains, owing to differential denudation, are left standing high above them, and that the trend of the edge of this great lenticular mass of ancient rock is roughly parallel to that of the Appalachian system.

FALLMERAYER, JAKOB PHILIPP (1790-1861), German traveller and historical investigator, best known for his opinions in regard to the ethnology of the modern Greeks, was born, the son of a poor peasant, at Tschötsch, near Brixen in Tirol, on the 10th of December 1790. In 1809 he absconded from the cathedral choir school at Brixen and made his way to Salzburg, where he supported himself by private teaching while he studied theology, the Semitic languages, and history. After a year’s study he sought to assure to himself the peace and quiet necessary for a student’s life by entering the abbey of Kremsmünster, but difficulties put in his way by the Bavarian officials prevented the accomplishment of this intention. At the university of Landshut, to which he removed in 1812, he first applied himself to jurisprudence, but soon devoted his attention exclusively to history and philology. His immediate necessities were provided for by a rich patron. During the Napoleonic wars he joined the Bavarian infantry as a subaltern in 1813, fought at Hanau (30th October 1813), and served throughout the campaign in France. He remained in the army of occupation on the banks of the Rhine until Waterloo, when he spent six months at Orleans as adjutant to General von Spreti. Two years of garrison life at Lindau on Lake Constance after the peace were spent in the study of modern Greek, Persian and Turkish.

Resigning his commission in 1818, he was successively engaged as teacher in the gymnasium at Augsburg and in the progymnasium and lyceum at Landshut. In 1827 he won the gold medal offered by the university of Copenhagen with his Geschichte des Kaisertums von Trapezunt, based on patient investigation of Greek and oriental MSS. at Venice and Vienna. The strictures on priestcraft contained in the preface to this book gave offence to the authorities, and his position was not improved by the liberal views expressed in his Geschichte der Halbinsel Morea während des Mittelalters (Stuttgart, 1830-1836, 2 pts.). The three years from 1831 to 1834 he spent in travel with the Russian count Ostermann Tolstoy, visiting Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Cyprus, Rhodes, Constantinople, Greece and Naples. On his return he was elected in 1835 a member of the Royal Bavarian Academy of Sciences, but he soon after left the country again on account of political troubles, and spent the greater part of the next four years in travel, spending the winter of 1839-1840 with Count Tolstoy at Geneva. Constantinople, Trebizond, Athos, Macedonia, Thessaly and Greece were visited by him during 1840-1841; and after some years’ residence in Munich he returned in 1847 to the East, and travelled in Palestine, Syria and Asia Minor. The authorities continued to regard him with suspicion, and university students were forbidden to attend the lectures he delivered at Munich. He entered, however, into friendly relations with the crown prince Maximilian, but this intimacy was destroyed by the events following on 1848. At that period he was appointed professor of history in the Munich University, and made a member of the national congress at Frankfort-on-Main. He there joined the left or opposition party, and in the following year he accompanied the rump-parliament to Stuttgart, a course of action which led to his expulsion from his professorate. During the winter of 1849-1850 he was an exile in Switzerland, but the amnesty of April 1850 enabled him to return to Munich. He died on the 26th of April 1861.

His contributions to the medieval history of Greece are of great value, and though his theory that the Greeks of the present day are of Albanian and Slav descent, with hardly a drop of true Greek blood in their veins, has not been accepted in its entirety by other investigators, it has served to modify the opinions of even his greatest opponents. A criticism of his views will be found in Hopf’s Geschichte Griechenlands (reprinted from Ersch and Gruber’s Encykl.) and in Finlay’s History of Greece in the Middle Ages. Another theory which he propounded and defended with great vigour was that the capture of Constantinople by Russia was inevitable, and would lead to the absorption by the Russian empire of the whole of the Balkan and Grecian peninsula; and that this extended empire would constitute a standing menace to the western Germanic nations. These views he expressed in a series of brilliant articles in German journals. His most important contribution to learning remains his history of the empire of Trebizond. Prior to his discovery of the chronicle of Michael Panaretos, covering the dominion of Alexus Comnenus and his successors from 1204 to 1426, the history of this medieval empire was practically unknown.

His works are—Geschichte des Kaiserthums Trapezunt (Munich, 1827-1848); Geschichte der Halbinsel Morea im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1830-1836); Über die Entstehung der Neugriechen (Stuttgart, 1835); “Originalfragmente, Chroniken, u.s.w., zur Geschichte des K. Trapezunts” (Munich, 1843), in Abhandl. der hist. Classe der K. Bayerisch. Akad. v. Wiss.; Fragmente aus dem Orient (Stuttgart, 1845); Denkschrift über Golgotha und das heilige Grab (Munich, 1852), and Das Todte Meer (1853)—both of which had appeared in the Abhandlungen of the Academy; Das albanesische Element in Griechenland, iii. parts, in the Abhandl. for 1860-1866. After his death there appeared at Leipzig in 1861, under the editorship of G.M. Thomas, three volumes of Gesammelte Werke, containing Neue Fragmente aus dem Orient, Kritische Versuche, and Studien und Erinnerungen aus meinem Leben. A sketch of his life will also be found in L. Steub, Herbsttage in Tyrol (Munich, 1867).

FALLOPIUS (or Fallopio), GABRIELLO (1523-1562), Italian anatomist, was born about 1523 at Modena, where he became a canon of the cathedral. He studied medicine at Ferrara, and, after a European tour, became teacher of anatomy in that city. He thence removed to Pisa, and from Pisa, at the instance of Cosmo I., grand-duke of Tuscany, to Padua, where, besides the chairs of anatomy and surgery and of botany, he held the office of superintendent of the new botanical garden. He died at Padua on the 9th of October 1562. Only one treatise by Fallopius appeared during his lifetime, namely the Observationes anatomicae (Venice, 1561). His collected works, Opera genuina omnia, were published at Venice in 1584. (See Anatomy.)

FALLOUX, FRÉDÉRIC ALFRED PIERRE, Comte de (1811-1886), French politician and author, was born at Angers on the 11th of May 1811. His father had been ennobled by Charles X., and Falloux began his career as a Legitimist and clerical journalist under the influence of Mme Swetchine. In 1846 he entered the legislature as deputy for Maine-et-Loire, and with many other ultra-Catholics he gave real or pretended support to the revolution of 1848. Louis Napoleon made him minister of education in 1849, but disagreements with the president led to his resignation within a year. He had nevertheless secured the passage of the Loi Falloux (March 15, 1850) for the organization of primary and secondary education. This law provided that the clergy and members of ecclesiastical orders, male and female, might exercise the profession of teaching without producing any further qualification. This exemption was extended even to priests who taught in secondary schools, where a university degree was exacted from lay teachers. The primary schools were put under the management of the curés. Falloux was elected to the French Academy in 1856. His failure to secure re-election to the legislature in 1866, 1869, 1870 and 1871 was due to the opposition of the stricter Legitimists, who viewed with suspicion his attempts to reconcile the Orleans princes with Henri, comte de Chambord. In spite of his failure to enter the National Assembly his influence was very great, and was increased by the intimacy of his personal relations with Thiers. But in 1872 he offended both sections of the monarchical party at a conference arranged in the hope of effecting a fusion between the partisans of the comte de Chambord and of the Orleans princes, divided on the vexed question of the flag. He suggested that the comte de Chambord might recede from his position with dignity at the desire of the National Assembly, and not content with this encroachment on royalist principles, he insinuated the possibility of a transitional stage with the duc d’Aumale as president of the republic. His disgrace was so complete that he was excommunicated by the bishop of Angers in 1876. He died on the 16th of January 1886.

Of his numerous works the best known are his Histoire de Louis XVI (1840); Histoire de Saint Pie (1845); De la contre-revolution (1876); and the posthumous Mémoires d’un royaliste (2 vols., 1888).

FALLOW, land ploughed and tilled, but left unsown, usually for a year, in order, on the one hand, to disintegrate, aërate and free it from weeds, and, on the other, to allow it to recuperate. The word was probably early confused with “fallow” (from O. Eng. fealu, probably cognate with Gr. πολιός, grey), of a pale-brown or yellow colour, often applied to soil left unfilled and unsown, but chiefly seen in the name of the “fallow deer.” The true derivation is from the O. Eng. fealga, only found in the plural, a harrow, and the ultimate origin is a Teutonic root meaning “to plough,” cf. the German falgen. The recognition that continuous growing of wheat on the same area of land robs the soil of its fertility was universal among ancient peoples, and the practice of “fallowing” or resting the soil is as old as agriculture itself. The “Sabbath rest” ordered to be given every seventh year to the land by the Mosaic law is a classical instance of the “fallow.” Improvements in crop rotations and manuring have diminished the necessity of the “bare fallow,” which is uneconomical because the land is left unproductive, and because the nitrates in the soil unintercepted by the roots of plants are washed away in the drainage waters. At the present time bare fallowing is, in general, only advisable on stiff soils and in dry climates. A “green fallow” is land planted with turnips, potatoes or some similar crop in rows, the space between which may be cleared of weeds by hoeing. The “bastard fallow” is a modification of the bare fallow, effected by the growth of rye, vetches, or some other rapidly growing crop, sown in autumn and fed off in spring, the land then undergoing the processes of ploughing, grubbing and harrowing usual in the bare fallow.

FALLOW-DEER (that is, Dun Deer, in contradistinction to the red deer, Cervus [Dama] dama), a medium-sized representative of the family Cervidae, characterized by its expanded or palmated antlers, which generally have no bez-tine, rather long tail (black above and white below), and a coat spotted with white in summer but uniformly coloured in winter. The shoulder height is about 3 ft. The species is semi-domesticated in British parks, and occurs wild in western Asia, North Africa, the south of Europe and Sardinia. In prehistoric times it occurred throughout northern and central Europe. One park-breed has no spots. Bucks and does live apart except during the pairing-season; and the doe produces one or two, and sometimes three fawns at a birth. These deer are particularly fond of horse-chestnuts, which the stags are said to endeavour to procure by striking at the branches with their antlers. The Persian fallow-deer (C. [D.] mesopotamicus), a native of the mountains of Luristan, is larger than the typical species, and has a brighter coat, differing in some details of colouring. The antlers have the trez-tine near the small brow-tine, and the palmation beginning near the former. Here may be mentioned the gigantic fossil deer commonly known as the Irish elk, which is perhaps a giant type of fallow-deer, and if so should be known as Cervus (Dama) giganteus. If a distinct type, its title should be C. (Megaceros) giganteus. This deer inhabited Ireland, Great Britain, central and northern Europe, and western Asia in Pleistocene and prehistoric times; and must have stood 6 ft. high at the shoulder. The antlers are greatly palmated and of enormous size, fine specimens measuring as much as 11 ft. between the tips.

FALL RIVER, a city of Bristol county, Massachusetts, U.S.A., situated on Mount Hope Bay, at the mouth of the Taunton river, 49 m. S. of Boston. Pop. (1890) 74,398; (1900) 104,863; (estimated, 1906) 105,942;1 (1910 census) 119,295. It is the third city in size of the commonwealth. Of the population in 1900, 50,042, or 47.7%, were foreign-born, 90,244 were of foreign parentage (i.e. either one or both parents were foreign), and of these 81,721 had both foreign father and foreign mother. Of the foreign-born, 20,172 were French Canadians, 2329 were English Canadians, 12,268 were from England, 1045 were from Scotland, 7317 were from Ireland, 2805 were from Portugal, and 1095 were from Russia, various other countries being represented by smaller numbers. Fall River is served by the New York, New Haven & Hartford railway, and has good steamer connexions with Providence, Newport and New York, notably by the “Fall River Line,” which is much used, in connexion with the N.Y., N.H. & H. railway, by travellers between New York and Boston. The harbour is large, deep and easy of access. The city lies on a plateau and on slopes that rise rather steeply from the river, and is irregularly laid out. Granite underlying the city furnishes excellent building material; among the principal buildings are the state armoury, the county court house, the B.M.C. Durfee high school, the custom house, Notre Dame College, the church of Notre Dame, the church of St Anne, the Central Congregational church and the public library. The commonwealth aids in maintaining a textile school (the Bradford Durfee textile school), opened in 1904. The city library contained in 1908 about 78,500 volumes. There is considerable commerce, but it is as a manufacturing centre that Fall River is best known. Above the city, on the plateau, about 2 m. from the bay, are the Watuppa Lakes, 7 m. long and on an average three-fourths of a mile wide, and from them runs the Fall (Quequechan) river, with a constant flow and descending near its mouth through 127 ft. in less than half a mile. The conjunction of water transportation and water power is thus remarkable, and accounts in great part for the city’s rapid growth. The waters of the North Watuppa Lake (which is fed by springs and drains out a very small area) are also exceptionally pure and furnish an excellent water-supply. The Fall river runs directly through the city (passing beneath the city hall), and along its banks are long rows of cotton mills; formerly many of these were run by water power, and their wheels were placed directly in the stream bed, but steam power is now used almost exclusively. According to the special census of manufactures of 1905, the value of all factory products for the calendar year 1904 was $43,473,105, of which amount $35,442,581, or 81.5%, consisted of cotton goods and dyeing and finishing, making Fall River the largest producer of cotton goods among American cities.2 A large hat manufactory (the Marshall Brothers’ factory) furnishes the United States army with hats. Until forced by the competition of mills in the Southern states to direct attention to finer products, the cotton manufacturers of Fall River devoted themselves almost exclusively to the making of print cloth, in which respect the city was long distinguished from Lawrence and Lowell, whose products were more varied and of higher grade. The number of spindles increased from 265,328 in 1865 to 1,269,043 in 1875, 3,000,000 in 1900, and to about 3,500,000 in 1906. Excellent drainage and sewerage systems contribute to the city’s health. The birth-rate was in 1900 the highest (38.75) of any city in the country of above 30,000 inhabitants (three of the four next highest being Massachusetts towns). The social conditions and labour problems of Fall River have long been exceptional. The mills supplement the public schools in the mingling of races and the work for Americanization, and labour disturbances, for which Fall River was once conspicuous, have become less frequent and less bitter, the great strike of 1904-1905—perhaps the greatest in the history of the textile industry in the United States—being marked by little or no violence. Fall River has become a “city of homes,” and tenements are giving way to dwellings for one or two families. The lists of the city’s corporation stockholders show more than 10,000 names. The municipal police is controlled (as nowhere else in the state save in Boston) by a state board; this arrangement is generally regarded as having worked for better order. Lowell was about three times as large as Fall River in 1850, and Lawrence was larger until after 1870. Fall River was originally a part of Freetown; it was incorporated as a township in 1803 (being known as “Troy” in 1804-1834), and was chartered as a city in 1854. In 1861 it was increased by certain territory secured from Rhode Island, the city having spread across the state boundary and become subject to a divided jurisdiction. In 1902 the city received a new charter. Its manufactures amounted to little before the War of 1812. A disastrous fire occurred in 1843 (loss above $500,000). In 1904 Fall River became the see of the Roman Catholic diocese of that name.

See H.H. Earl, Centennial History of Fall River ... 1656-1876 (New York, 1877); and the report of Carroll D. Wright on Fall River, Lowell and Lawrence, in 13th annual report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor (1882), which, however, was regarded as unjust and partial by the manufacturers of Fall River.

1 The small increase between 1900 and 1906 was due in large part to the emigration of many of the inhabitants during the great strike of 1904-1905.

2 The above figures do not show adequately the full importance of Fall River as a cotton manufacturing centre, for during six months of the census year the great strike was in progress; this strike, caused by a reduction in wages, lasted from the 25th of July 1904 to the 18th of January 1905.

FALMOUTH, a municipal and contributary parliamentary borough and seaport of Cornwall, England, 306 m. W.S.W. of London, on a branch of the Great Western railway. Pop. (1901) 11,789. It is finely situated on the west shore of the largest of the many estuaries which open upon the south coast of the county. This is entered by several streams, of which the largest is the Fal. Falmouth harbour lies within Pendennis Point, which shelters the estuary from the more open Falmouth Bay. The Penryn river, coming in from the north-west, forms one of several shallow, winding arms of the estuary, the main channel of which is known as Carrick Roads. To the east Pendennis Castle stands on its lofty promontory, while on the opposite side of the roads the picturesque inlet of the Porthcuel river opens between Castle Point on the north, with St Mawes’ Castle, and St Anthony Head and Zoze Point on the south. The shores of the estuary as a rule slope sharply up to about 250 ft., and are beautifully wooded. The entrance is 1 m. across, and the roads form one of the best refuges for shipping on the south coast, being accessible at all times by the largest vessels. Among the principal buildings and institutions in Falmouth are the town hall, market-house, hall of the Cornwall Polytechnic Society, a meteorological and magnetic observatory, and a submarine mining establishment. The Royal Cornwall Yacht Club has its headquarters here, and in the annual regatta the principal prize is a cup given by the prince of Wales as duke of Cornwall. Engineering, shipbuilding, brewing and the manufacture of manure are carried on, and there are oyster and trawl fisheries, especially for pilchard. The inner harbour, under the jurisdiction partly of commissioners and partly of a dock company, is enclosed between two breakwaters, of which the eastern has 23 ft. of water at lowest tides alongside. The area of the harbour is 42 acres, with nearly 700 lineal yards of quayage. There are two graving docks, and repairing yards. Grain, timber, coal and guano and other manures are imported, and granite, china clay, copper ore, ropes and fish exported. Falmouth is also in favour as a watering-place. The parliamentary borough of Penryn and Falmouth returns one member. The municipal borough is under a mayor, 4 aldermen and 12 councillors. Area, 790 acres.

Falmouth (Falemuth) as a haven and port has had a place in the maritime history of Cornwall from very early times. The site of the town, which is comparatively modern, was formerly known as Smithick and Pennycomequick and formed part of the manor of Arwenack held by the family of Killigrew. The corporations of Penryn, Truro and Helston opposed the undertaking, but the lords in council, to whom the matter was referred, decided in Killigrew’s favour. In 1652 the House of Commons considered that it would be advantageous to the Commonwealth to grant a Thursday market to Smithick. This market was confirmed to Sir Peter Killigrew in 1660 together with two fairs, on the 30th of October and the 27th of July, and also a ferry between Smithick and Flushing. By the charter of incorporation granted in the following year the name was changed to Falmouth, and a mayor, recorder, 7 aldermen and 12 burgesses constituted a common council with the usual rights and privileges. Three years later an act creating the borough a separate ecclesiastical parish empowered the mayor and aldermen to assess all buildings within the town at the rate of sixteen pence in the pound for the support of the rector. This rector’s rate occasioned much ill-feeling in modern times, and by act of parliament in 1896 was taken over by the corporation, and provision made for its eventual extinction. The disfranchisement of Penryn, which had long been a subject of debate in the House of Commons, was settled in 1832, by uniting Penryn with Falmouth for parliamentary purposes and assigning two members to the united boroughs. By the Redistribution of Seats Act 1885, the number of members was reduced to one. The fairs granted in 1660 are no longer held, and a Saturday market has superseded the chartered market. In the 17th and 18th centuries Falmouth grew in importance owing to its being a station of the Packet Service for the conveyance of mails.

FALSE POINT, a landlocked harbour in the Cuttack district of Bengal, India. It was reported by the famine commissioners in 1867 to be the best harbour on the coast of India from the Hugli to Bombay. It derives its name from the circumstance that vessels proceeding up the Bay of Bengal frequently mistook it for Point Palmyras, a degree farther north. The anchorage is safe, roomy and completely landlocked, but large vessels are obliged to lie out at some distance from its mouth in an exposed roadstead. The capabilities of False Point as a harbour remained long unknown, and it was only in 1860 that the port was opened. It was rapidly developed, owing to the construction of the Orissa canals. Two navigable channels lead inland across the Mahanadi delta, and connect the port with Cuttack city. The trade of False Point is chiefly with other Indian harbours, but a large export trade in rice and oil-seeds has sprung up with Mauritius, the French colonies and France. False Point is now a regular port of call for Anglo-Indian coasting steamers. Its capabilities were first appreciated during the Orissa famine of 1866, when it afforded almost the only means by which supplies of rice could be thrown into the province. A lighthouse is situated a little to the south of the anchorage, on the point which screens it from the southern monsoon.

FALSE PRETENCES, in English law, the obtaining from any other person by any false pretence any chattel, money or valuable security, with intent to defraud. It is an indictable misdemeanour under the Larceny Act of 1861. The broad distinction between this offence and larceny is that in the former the owner intends to part with his property, in the latter he does not. This offence dates as a statutory crime practically from 1756. At common law the only remedy originally available for an owner who had been deprived of his goods by fraud was an indictment for the crime of cheating, or a civil action for deceit. These remedies were insufficient to cover all cases where money or other properties had been obtained by false pretences, and the offence was first partially created by a statute of Henry VIII. (1541), which enacted that if any person should falsely and deceitfully obtain any money, goods, &c., by means of any false token or counterfeit letter made in any other man’s name, the offender should suffer any punishment other than death, at the discretion of the judge. The scope of the offence was enlarged to include practically all false pretences by the act of 1756, the provisions of which were embodied in the Larceny Act 1861.

The principal points to notice are that the pretence must be a false pretence of some existing fact, made for the purpose of inducing the prosecutor to part with his property (e.g. it was held not to be a false pretence to promise to pay for goods on delivery), and it may be by either words or conduct. The property, too, must have been actually obtained by the false pretence. The owner must be induced by the pretence to make over the absolute and immediate ownership of the goods, otherwise it is “larceny by means of a trick.” It is not always easy, however, to draw a distinction between the various classes of offences. In the case where a man goes into a restaurant and orders a meal, and, after consuming it, says that he has no means of paying for it, it was usual to convict for obtaining food by false pretences. But R. v. Jones, 1898, L.R. 1 Q.B. 119 decided that it is neither larceny nor false pretences, but an offence under the Debtors Act 1869, of obtaining credit by fraud. (See also Cheating; Fraud; Larceny.)

United States.—American statutes on this subject are mainly copied from the English statutes, and the courts there in a general way follow the English interpretations. The statutes of each state must be consulted. There is no Federal statute, though there are Federal laws providing penalties for false personation of the lawful owner of public stocks, &c., or of persons entitled to pensions, prize money, &c. (U.S. Rev. Stats. § 5435), or the false making of any order purporting to be a money order (id. § 5463).

In Arizona, obtaining money or property by falsely personating another is punishable as for larceny (Penal Code, 1901, § 479). Obtaining credit by false pretences as to wealth and mercantile character is punishable by six months’ imprisonment and a fine not exceeding three times the value of the money or property obtained (id. § 481).

In Illinois, whoever by any false representation or writing signed by him, of his own respectability, wealth or mercantile correspondence or connexions, obtains credit and thereby defrauds any person of money, goods, chattels or any valuable thing, or who procures another to make a false report of his honesty, wealth, &c., shall return the money, goods, &c., and be fined and imprisoned for a term not exceeding one year (Crim. Code, 1903, ch. xxxviii. §§ 96, 97). Obtaining money or property by bogus cheques, the “confidence game” (Dorr v. People, 1907, § 228, Ill. 216), or “three card monte,” sleight of hand, fortune-telling, &c., is punishable by imprisonment for from one to ten years (id. §§ 98, 100). Obtaining goods from warehouse, mill or wharf by fraudulent receipt wrongly stating amount of goods deposited—by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years (id. § 124). Fraudulent use of railroad passes is a misdemeanour (id. 125a).

In Massachusetts it is simple larceny to obtain by false pretences the money or personal chattel of another (Rev. Laws, 1902, ch. ccviii. § 26). Obtaining by a false pretence with intent to defraud the signature of a person to a written instrument, the false making whereof would be forgery, is punishable by imprisonment in a state prison or by fine (id. § 27).

In New York, obtaining property by false pretences, felonious breach of trust and embezzlement are included in the term “larceny” (Penal Code, § 528; Paul v. Dumar, 106 N.Y. 508; People v. Tattlekan, 1907, 104 N.Y. Suppl. 805), but the methods of proof required to establish each crime remain as before the code. Obtaining lodging and food on credit at hotel or lodging house with intent to defraud is a misdemeanour (Pen. Code, § 382). Purchase of property by false pretences as to person’s means or ability to pay is not criminal when in writing signed by the party to be charged (Pen. Code, § 544).

FALTICHENI (Faltiçenĭ), the capital of the department of Suceava, Rumania, situated on a small right-hand tributary of the Sereth, among the hills of north-west Moldavia, and 2 m. S.E. of the frontier of Bukovina. Pop. (1900) 9643, about half being Jews. A branch railway runs for 15 m. to join the main line between Czernowitz in Bukovina, and Galatz. The Suceava department (named after Suceava or Suciava, its former capital, now Suczawa in Bukowina) is densely forested; its considerable timber trade centres in Falticheni. For five weeks, from the 20th July onwards, Russians and Austro-Hungarians, as well as Rumans, attend the fair which is held at Falticheni, chiefly for the sale of horses, carriages and cattle.

FALUN, a town of Sweden, capital of the district (län) of Kopparberg, 153 m. N.W. of Stockholm by rail. Pop. (1900) 9606. It is situated in a bare and rocky country near the western shore of lake Runn. Here are the oldest and most celebrated copper mines in Europe. Their produce has gradually decreased since the 17th century, and is now unimportant, but sulphate of copper, iron pyrites, and some gold, silver, sulphur and sulphuric acid, and red ochre are also produced. The mines belong to the Kopparberg Mining Company (Stora Kopparbergs Bergslags Aktiebolag, formerly Kopparbergslagen). This is the oldest industrial corporation in Sweden, and perhaps the oldest still existing in the world; it is known to have been established before 1347. Since its reorganization as a joint-stock company in 1890 many of the shares have been held by the crown, philanthropic institutions and other public bodies. The company also owns iron mines, limestone and quartz quarries, large iron-works at Domnarfvet and elsewhere, a great extent of forests and saw-mills, and besides the output of the copper mines it produces manufactured iron and steel, timber, wood-pulp, bricks and charcoal. Falun has also railway rolling-stock factories. There are museums of mineralogy and geology, a lower school of mining, model room and scientific library. The so-called “Gothenburg System” of municipal control over the sale of spirits was actually devised at Falun as early as 1850.

FAMA (Gr. Φήμη, Ὄσσα), in classical mythology, the personification of Rumour. The Homeric equivalent Ossa (Iliad, ii. 93) is represented as the messenger of Zeus, who spreads reports with the rapidity of a conflagration. Homer does not personify Pheme, which is merely a presage drawn from human utterances, whereas Ossa (until later times) is associated with the idea of divine origin. A more definite character is given to Pheme by Hesiod (Works and Days, 764), who calls her a goddess; in Sophocles (Oed. Tyr. 158) she is the immortal daughter of golden Hope and is styled by the orator Aeschines (Contra Timarchum, § 128) one of the mightiest of goddesses. According to Pausanias (i. 17. 1) there was a temple of Pheme at Athens, and at Smyrna (ib. ix. 11, 7), whose inhabitants were especially fond of seeking the aid of divination, there was a sanctuary of Cledones (sounds or rumours supposed to convey omens).

There does not seem to have been any cult of Fama among the Romans, by whom she was regarded merely as “a figure of poetical religion.” The Temple of Fame and Omen (Pheme and Cledon) mentioned by Plutarch (Moralia, p. 319) is due to a confusion with Aius Locutius, the divinity who warned the Romans of the coming attack of the Gauls. There are well-known descriptions of Fame in Virgil (Aeneid, iv. 173) and Ovid (Metam. xii. 39); see also Valerius Flaccus (ii. 116), Statius (Thebais, iii. 425). An unfavourable idea gradually became attached to the name; thus Ennius speaks of Fama as the personification of “evil” reputation and the opposite of Gloria (cp. the adjective famosus, which is not used in a good sense till the post-Augustan age). Chaucer in his House of Fame is obviously imitating Virgil and Ovid, although he is also indebted to Dante’s Divina Commedia.

FAMAGUSTA (Gr. Ammochostos), a town and harbour on the east cost of Cyprus, 2½ m. S. of the ruins of Salamis. The population in 1901 was 818, nearly all being Moslems who live within the walls of the fortress; the Christian population has migrated to a suburb called Varosia (pop. 2948). The foundation of Salamis (q.v.) was ascribed to Teucer: it was probably the most important town in early Cyprus. The revolt of the Jews under Trajan, and earthquakes in the time of Constantius and Constantine the Great helped in turn to destroy it. It was restored by Fl. Constantius II. (A.D. 337-361) as Constantia. Another town a little to the south, built by Ptolemy Philadelphus in 274 B.C., and called Arsinoe in honour of his sister, received the refugees driven from Constantia by the Arabs under Mu’awiyah, became the seat of the orthodox archbishopric, and was eventually known as Famagusta. It received a large accession of population at the fall of Acre in 1291; was annexed by the Genoese in 1376; reunited to the throne of Cyprus in 1464; and surrendered, after an investment of nearly a year, to the Turks in 1571. The fortifications, remodelled by the Venetians after 1489, the castle, the grand cathedral church of St Nicolas, and the remains of the palace and many other churches make Famagusta a place of unique interest. Acts ii. and v. of Shakespeare’s Othello pass there. In 1903 measures were taken to develop the fine natural harbour of Famagusta. Basins were dredged to give depths of 15 and 24 ft. respectively at ordinary low tides, and commodious jetties and quays were constructed.

FAMILIAR (through the Fr. familier, from Lat. familiaris, of or belonging to the familia, family), an adjective, properly meaning belonging to the family or household, but in this sense the word is rare. The more usual meanings are: friendly, intimate, well known; and from its application to the easy relations of intimate friends the term may be used in an invidious sense of “free and easy” conduct on the part of any one not justified by any close relationship, friendship or intimacy. “Familiar” is, however, also used as a substantive, especially of the spirit or demon which attended on a wizard or magician, and was summoned to execute his master’s wishes. The idea underlies the notion of the Christian guardian angel and of the Roman genius natalis (see Demonology; Witchcraft). In the Roman Church the term is applied to persons attached to the household of the pope or of bishops. These must actually do some domestic service. They are supported by their patron, and enjoy privileges which in the case of the papal familiars are considerable. “Familiars of the Holy Office” were lay officers of the Inquisition, whose functions were chiefly those of police, in making arrests, &c., of persons charged.

FAMILISTS, a term of English origin (later adopted in other languages) to denote the members of the Familia Caritatis (Hus der Lieften; Huis der Liefde; Haus der Liebe; “Family of Love”), founded by Hendrik Niclaes (born on the 9th or 10th of January 1501 or 1502, probably at Münster; died after 1570, not later than 1581, probably in 1580). His calling was that of a merchant, in which he and his son Franz prospered, becoming ultimately wealthy. Not till 1540 did he appear in the character of one divinely endowed with “the spirit of the true love of Jesus Christ.” For twenty years (1540-1560) Emden was the headquarters at once of his merchandise and of his propaganda; but he travelled in both interests to various countries, visiting England in 1552 or 1553. To this period belong most of his writings. His primary work was Den Spegel der Gherechticheit dorch den Geist der Liefden unde den vergodeden Mensch H.N. uth de hemmelische Warheit betüget. It appeared in an English form with the author’s revision, as An Introduction to the holy Understanding of the Glasse of Righteousness (1575?; reprinted in 1649). None of his works bear his name in full; his initials were mystically interpreted as standing for Homo Novus. His “glass of righteousness” is the spirit of Christ as interpreted by him. The remarkable fact was brought out by G. Arnold (and more fully by F. Nippold in 1862) that the printer of Niclaes’s works was Christopher Plantin, of Antwerp, a specially privileged printer of Roman Catholic theology and liturgy, yet secretly a steadfast adherent of Niclaes. It is true that Niclaes claimed to hold an impartial attitude towards all existing religious parties, and his mysticism, derived from David Joris, was undogmatic. Yet he admitted his followers by the rite of adult baptism, and set up a hierarchy among them on the Roman model (see his Evangelium Regni, in English A Joyfull Message of the Kingdom, 1574?; reprinted, 1652). His pantheism had an antinomian drift; for himself and his officials he claimed impeccability; but, whatever truth there may be in the charge that among his followers were those who interpreted “love” as licence, no such charge can be sustained against the morals of Niclaes and the other leaders of the sect. His chief apostle in England was Christopher Vitel, a native of Delft, an “illuminate elder,” living at Colchester and Southwark, who ultimately recanted. The society spread in the eastern counties, in spite of repressive measures; it revived under the Commonwealth, and lingered into the early years of the 18th century; the leading idea of its “service of love” was a reliance on sympathy and tenderness for the moral and spiritual edification of its members. Thus, in an age of strife and polemics, it seemed to afford a refuge for quiet, gentle spirits, and meditative temperaments.

See F. Nippold, “H. Niclaes u. das Haus der Liebe,” in Zeitschrift für die histor. Theol. (1862); article “H. Niclaes” in A.J. van der Aa, Biog. Woordenboek der Nederlanden (1868); article “H. Nicholas,” by C. Fell Smith, in Dict. Nat. Biog. (1894); article “Familisten,” by Loofs, in Herzog-Hauck’s Realencyklopädie (1898).

(A. Go.*)

FAMILY, a word of which the etymology but partially illustrates the meaning. The Roman familia, derived from the Oscan famel (servus), originally signified the servile property, the thralls, of a master. Next, the term denoted other domestic property, in things as well as in persons. Thus, in the fifth of the laws of the Twelve Tables, the rules are laid down: SI · INTESTATO · MORITUR · CUI · SUUS · HERES · NEC · SIT · ADGNATUS · PROXIMUS · AMILIAM · ABETO, and SI · AGNATUS · NEC · ESCIT · GENTILIS · FAMILIAM · NANCITOR; that is, if a man die intestate, leaving no natural heir who had been under his potestas, the nearest agnate, or relative tracing his connexion with the deceased exclusively through males, is to inherit the familia, or family fortune of every sort. Failing an agnate, a member of the gens of the dead man is to inherit. In a third sense, familia was applied to all the persons who could prove themselves to be descended from the same ancestor, and thus the word almost corresponded to our own use of it in the widest meaning, as when we say that a person is “of a good family” (Ulpian, Dig. 50, 16, 195 fin.).

1. Leaving for awhile the Roman terms, to which it will be necessary to return, we may provisionally define Family, in the modern sense, as the small community formed by the union of one man with one woman, and by the Old theory. increase of children born to them. These in modern times, and in most European countries, constitute the household, and it has been almost universally supposed that little natural associations of this sort are the germ-cell of early society. The Bible presents the growth of the Jewish nation from the one household of Abraham. His patriarchal family differed from the modern family in being polygamous, but, as female chastity was one of the conditions of the patriarchal family, and as descent through males was therefore recognized as certain, the plurality of wives makes no real difference to the argument. In the same way the earliest formal records of Indian, Greek and Roman society present the family as firmly established, and generally regarded as the most primitive of human associations. Thus, Aristotle derives the first household (οἰκία πρώτη) from the combination of man’s possession of property—in the slave or in domesticated animals—with man’s relation to woman, and he quotes Hesiod: οἶκον μὲν πρώτιστα γυναῖκά τε βοῦν τ᾽ ἀροτῆρα (Politics, i. 2. 5). The village, again, with him is a colony or offshoot of the household, and monarchical government in states is derived from the monarchy of the eldest male member of the family. Now, though certain ancient terms, introduced by Aristotle in the chapters to which we refer, might have led him to imagine a very different origin of society, his theory is, on the face of it, natural and plausible, and it has been almost universally accepted. The beginning of society, it has been said a thousand times, is the family, a natural association of kindred by blood, composed of father, mother and their descendants. In this family, the father is absolute master of his wife, his children and the goods of the little community; at his death his eldest son succeeds him; and in course of time this association of kindred, by natural increase and by adoption, develops into the clan, gens, or γένος. As generations multiply, the more distant relations split off into other clans, and these clans, which have not lost the sense of primitive kinship, unite once more into tribes. The tribes again, as civilization advances, acknowledge themselves to be subjects of a king, in whose veins the blood of the original family runs purest. This, or something like this, is the common theory of the growth of society.

2. It was between 1866 and 1880 that the common opinion began to be seriously opposed. John Ferguson McLennan, in his Primitive Marriage and his essays on The Worship of Plants and Animals (see his Studies in Ancient History, Modern criticism second series), drew attention to the wide prevalence of the custom of inheriting the kinship name through mothers, not fathers; and to the law of “Exogamy” (q.v.). The former usage he attributed to archaic uncertainty as to fatherhood; the natural result of absolute sexual promiscuity, or of Polyandry (q.v.). Either practice is inconsistent, prima facie, with the primitive existence of the Family, whether polygamous or monogamous, whether patriarchal or modern. The custom of Exogamy, again,—here taken to mean the unwritten law which makes it incest, and a capital offence, to marry within the real or supposed kin denoted by the common name of the kinship,—pointed to an archaic condition of family affairs all unlike our Table of prohibited degrees. This law of Exogamy was found, among many savage races, associated with Totems, that is plants, animals and other natural objects which give names to the various kinships, and are themselves, in various degrees, reverenced by members of the kinships. (See Totem and Totemism.) Traces of such kinships, and of Totemism, also of alleged promiscuity in ancient times, were detected by McLennan in the legends, folk-lore and institutions of Greece, Rome and India. Later, Prof. Robertson Smith found similar survivals, or possible survivals, among the Semitic races (Kinship in Early Arabia). Others have followed the same trail among the Celts (S. Reinach, Cultes, mythes et religions, 1904).

If arguments founded on these alleged survivals be valid, it may be that the most civilized races have passed through the stages of Exogamy, Totemism and reckoning descent in the female line. McLennan explained Exogamy as a result of scarcity of women, due to female infanticide. Women being scarce, the men of a group would steal them from other groups, and it would become shameful, and finally a deadly sin, for a man to marry within his own group-name, or name of kinship, say Wolf or Raven. Meanwhile, owing to scarcity of women, one woman would be the mate of many husbands (polyandry); hence, paternity being undetermined, descent would be reckoned through mothers.

Such are the outlines of McLennan’s theory, which, as a whole, has been attacked by many writers, and is now, perhaps, accepted by none. McLennan’s was the most brilliant pioneer work; but his supply of facts was relatively McLennan’s value. scanty, and his friend Charles Darwin stated objections which to many seem final, as regards the past existence of a stage of sexual promiscuity. C.N. Starcke (The Primitive Family, 1889), Edward Alexander Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, 1891), Ernest Crawley (The Mystic Rose), Herbert Spencer, Emile Durkheim, Lord Avebury and many others, have criticized McLennan, who, however, in coining the term Exogamy, and drawing scientific attention to Totemism, and reckoning of kin through mothers, founded the study of early society. Here it must be observed that “Matriarchate” (q.v.) is a misleading term, as is “Gynaecocracy,” for the custom of deducing descent on the spindle side. Women among totemistic and exogamous savages are in a degraded position, nor does the deriving and inheriting of the kinship name, or anything else, on the spindle side, imply any ignorance of paternal relations; even where, as among Central Australian tribes, the facts of reproduction are said to be unknown.

3. Simultaneous with McLennan’s researches and speculations were the works of Lewis H. Morgan. He was the discoverer of a custom very important in its bearing on the history of society. In about two-thirds of the globe, persons Lewis Morgan. in addressing a kinsman do not discriminate between grades of relationship. All these grades are merged in large categories. Thus, in what Morgan calls the “Malayan system,” “all consanguinei, near or far, fall within one of these relationships—grandparent, parent, brother, sister, child and grandchild.” No other blood-relationships are recognized (Ancient Society). This at once reminds us of the Platonic Republic. “We devised means that no one should ever be able to know his own child, but that all should imagine themselves to be of one family, and should regard as brothers and sisters those who were within a certain limit of age; and those who were of an elder generation they were to regard as parents and grandparents, and those who were of a younger generation as children and grandchildren” (Timaeus, 18, Jowett’s translation, first edition, vol. ii., 1871). This system prevails in the Polynesian groups and in New Zealand. Next comes what Morgan chooses to call the Turanian system. “It was universal among the North American aborigines,” whom he styles Ganowanians. “Traces of it have been found in parts of Africa” (Ancient Society), and “it still prevails in South India among the Hindus, who speak the Dravidian language,” and also in North India, among other Hindus. The system, Morgan says, “is simply stupendous.” It is not exactly the same among all his miscellaneous “Turanians,” but, on the whole, assumes the following shapes. Suppose the speaker to be a male, he will style his nephew and niece in the male line, his brother’s children, “son” and “daughter,” and his grand-nephews and grand-nieces in the male line, “grandson” and “granddaughter.” Here the Turanian and the Malayan systems agree. But change the sex; let the male speaker address his nephews and nieces in the female line,—the children of his sister,—he salutes them as “nephew” and “niece,” and they hail him as “uncle.” Now, in the Malay system, nephews and nieces on both sides, brother’s children or sisters, are alike named “children” of the uncle. If the speaker be a female, using the Turanian style, these terms are reversed. Her sister’s sons and daughters are saluted by her as “son” and “daughter,” her brother’s children she calls “nephew” and “niece.” Yet the children of the persons thus styled “nephew” and “niece” are not recognized in conversation as “grand-nephew” and “grand-niece,” but as “grandson” and “granddaughter.” It is impossible here to do more than indicate these features of the classificatory nomenclature, from which the others may be inferred. The reader is referred for particulars to Morgan’s Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Race.

The existence of the classificatory system is not an entirely novel discovery. Nicolaus Damascenus, one of the inquirers into early society, who lived in the first century of our era, noticed this mode of address among the Galactophagi. Lafitau found it among the Iroquois. To Morgan’s perception of the importance of the facts, and to his energetic collection of reports, we owe our knowledge of the wide prevalence of the system. From an examination of the degrees of kindred which seem to be indicated by the “Malayan” and “Turanian” modes of address, he has worked out a theory of the evolution of the modern family. A brief comparison of this with other modern theories will close our account of the family. The main points of the theory are shortly stated in Systems of Consanguinity, &c., and in Ancient Society. From the latter work we quote the following description of the five different and successive forms of the family:—

“I. The Consanguine Family.—It was founded upon the intermarriage of brothers and sisters, own and collateral, in a group.

“II. The Punaluan Family.—It was founded upon the intermarriage of several sisters, own and collateral, with each others’ husbands, in a group—the joint husbands not being necessarily kinsmen of each other; also, on the intermarriage of several brothers, own and collateral, with each others’ wives in a group—these wives not being necessarily of kin to each other, although often the case in both instances (sic). In each case the group of men were conjointly married to the group of women.

“III. The Syndyasmian or Pairing Family.—It was founded upon marriage between single pairs, but without an exclusive cohabitation. The marriage continued during the pleasure of the parties.

“IV. The Patriarchal Family.—It was founded upon the marriage of one man with several wives, followed in general by the seclusion of the wives.

“V. The Monogamian Family.—It was founded upon marriage between single pairs with an exclusive cohabitation.

“Three of these forms, namely, the first, second, and fifth, were radical, because they were sufficiently general, and influential to create three distinct systems of consanguinity, all of which still exist in living forms. Conversely, these systems are sufficient of themselves to prove the antecedent existence of the forms of the family and of marriage with which they severally stand connected.”

Morgan makes the systems of nomenclature proofs of the existence of the Consanguine and Punaluan families. Unhappily, there is no other proof, and the same systems have been explained on a very different principle (McLennan, Studies in Ancient History). Looking at facts, we find the Consanguine family nowhere, and cannot easily imagine how early groups abstained from infringing on each other, and created a systematic marriage of brothers and sisters. St Augustine, however (De civ. Dei, xv. 16), and Archinus in his Thessalica (Odyssey, xi. 7, scholia B, Q) agree more or less with Morgan. Next, how did the Consanguine family change into the Punaluan? Morgan says (Ancient Society) brothers ceased to marry their sisters, because “the evils of it could not for ever escape human observation.” Thus the Punaluan family was hit upon, and “created a distinct system of consanguinity” (Ancient Society), the Turanian. Again, “marriages in Punaluan groups explain the relationships in the system.” But Morgan provides himself with another explanation, “the Turanian system owes its origin to marriage in the group and to the gentile organization.” He calls exogamy “the gentile organization,” though, in point of fact, the only gentes we know, the Roman gentes, show scarcely a trace of exogamy. Again, “the change of relationships which resulted from substituting Punaluan in the place of Consanguine marriage turns the Malayan into the Turanian system.” On the same page Morgan attributes the change to the “gentile organization,” and, still on the same page, uses both factors in his working out of the problem. Now, if the Punaluan marriage is a sufficient explanation, we do not need the “gentile organization.” Both, in Morgan’s opinion, were efforts of conscious moral reform. In Systems of Consanguinity the gentile organization (there called tribal), that is, exogamy, is said to have been “designed to work out a reformation in the intermarriage of brothers and sisters.” But the Punaluan marriage had done that, otherwise it would not have produced (as Morgan says it did) the change from the Malayan to the Turanian system, the difference in the two systems, as exemplified in Seneca and Tamil, being “in the relationships which depended on the intermarriage or non-intermarriage of brothers and sisters” (Ancient Society). Yet the Punaluan family, though itself a reform in morals and in “breeding,” “did not furnish adequate motives to reform the Malay system,” which, as we have seen, it did reform. The Punaluan family, it is suspected, “frequently involved own brothers and sisters”; had it not been so, there would have been no need of a fresh moral reformation,—“the gentile organization.” Yet even in the Punaluan family (Ancient Society) “brothers ceased to marry their own sisters.” What, then, did the “gentile organization” do for men? As they had already ceased to marry their own sisters, and as, under the gentile organization, they were still able to marry their half-sisters, the reformatory “ingenuity” of the inventors of the organizations was at once superfluous and useless. It is impossible to understand the Punaluan system. Its existence is inferred from a system of nomenclature which it does (and does not) produce; it admits (and excludes) own brothers and sisters. Morgan has intended, apparently, to represent the Punaluan marriage as a long transition to the definite custom of exogamy, but it will be seen that his language is not very clear nor his positions assured. He does not adduce sufficient proof that the Punaluan family ever existed as an institution, even in Hawaii. There is, if possible, a greater absence of historical testimony to the existence of the Consanguine family. It is difficult to believe that exogamy was a conscious moral and social reformation, because, ex hypothesi, the savages had no moral data, nothing to cause disgust at relations which seem revolting to us. It is as improbable that they discovered the supposed physical evils of breeding in and in. That discovery could only have been made after a long experience, and in the Consanguine family that experience was impossible. Thus, setting moral reform aside as inconceivable, we cannot understand how the Consanguine families ever broke up. Morgan’s ingenious speculations as to a transitional step towards the gens (as he calls what we style the totem-kindred), supposed to be found in the “classes” and marriage laws of the Kamilaroi, are vitiated by the weakness and contradictory nature of the evidence (see Pritchard; J.D. Lang’s Queensland, Appendix; Proceedings of American Academy of Arts, &c., vol. viii. 412; Nature, October 29, 1874). Further, though Morgan calls the Australian “gentile organization” “incipient,” he admits (Ancient Society) that the Narrinyeri have totem groups, in which “the children are of the clan of the father.” Far from being “incipient,” the gens of the Narrinyeri is on the footing of the ghotra of Hindu custom. Lastly, though Morgan frequently declares that the Polynesians have not the gens (for he thinks them not sufficiently advanced), W.W. Gill (Myths and Songs from the South Pacific, London, 1876) has shown that unmistakable traces of the totem survive in Polynesian mythology.

4. Morgan’s theory was opposed by McLennan (Studies in Ancient History, 1876), who maintained that the names of relationships, in the “classificatory system,” were merely terms of address, as among ourselves when a preacher calls any adult Rival theories. male “brother,” when an old woman is addressed as “mother,” when an elder man calls a junior “my son.” He also showed that his own system accounted for the terms. The controversy is still alive; one set of writers regarding the savage terms of relationship as indicating a state of things in which human beings dwelt in a “horde,” with promiscuous intercourse; another set holding that the terms do not indicate consanguineous kinship, but degrees of age, status, and reciprocal obligations in a local tribe, and therefore that they do not yield any presumption that there was a past of promiscuity or of what is called “group marriage.” On Morgan’s side (not of course accepting all his details) are L. Fison and A.W. Howitt, and Baldwin Spencer and F.J. Gillen. Against him are Starcke, Westermarck, A. Lang, Dr Durkheim, apparently, Crawley and many others.

5. A second presumption in favour of original promiscuity has been drawn by the eminent Australian students, Baldwin Spencer and F.J. Gillen, and by A.W. Howitt, from the customs of some Australian aborigines. In each Evidence of original promiscuity. tribe, owing to customary laws which are to be examined later, only men and women of a given status are intermarriageable (nupa, noa, unawa) with each other. Though child-betrothals are usual, and though the woman is specialized to one man, who protects and nourishes her and all her children, and though their union is immediately preceded by an extended jus primae noctis (such as Herodotus describes among the Nasamones), yet, among certain tribes, the following custom prevails. At great meetings the tribal leaders assign a woman as paramour (with what amount of permanence remains obscure) to a man (pirrauru); one woman may have several pirrauru men, one man several pirrauru women, in addition to their regularly betrothed (tippa malku) wives and husbands. The husband occasionally shows fight, and bitter jealousies prevail, but, at the great ceremonial meetings, complaisance is enforced under penalty of strangling. Thenceforth, if the husband permits, the male pirrauru has matrimonial rights over the other man’s tippa malku wife when they meet. A symbolic ceremony of union precedes the junction of the pirrauru people. This institution, as far as reported, is peculiar to a group of tribes near Lake Eyre, the Dieri, Urabunna, and their congeners,—or perhaps to all who have the same “phratry” names as the Dieri and Urabunna (Kiraru and Mattera, in various dialectic forms).

Elsewhere the pirrauru custom is not known: but almost everywhere there are licentious festivals, in which all marriage rules except those which forbid incest (in our sense of the word, namely between the closest relations) are thrown to the winds. Also a native travelling among alien tribes is lent women of the status into which he may legally marry.

Baldwin Spencer and F.J. Gillen, and A.W. Howitt, regard pirrauru as “group marriage” and as a proof that, at one time, all intermarriageable people were actually husbands and wives, while the other examples of licence are also Group marriage. survivals, in a later stage of decay, of promiscuity, and “group marriage.” To this it is replied that “group marriage” is a misnomer; that if pirrauru be in a sense marriage it is status, not group marriage. Again, it is urged, pirrauru is a modification of tippa malku, which comes first; a woman is “specialized” to a man before she can be made pirrauru to another, and her tippa malku husband continues to support her, and to recognize her children as his own, after she has become pirrauru to another man or other men. Without the foregoing tippa malku union, the pirrauru unions are not conceivable; they are mere legalized paramourships, modifying the tippa malku marriage (like the Italian cicisbeism); procuring a protector for a woman in her husband’s absence, and supplying legal loves for bachelors. The custom is peculiar to a given set of kindred tribes. The festivals are the legalized, restricted and more or less permanent modification of the casual orgies of feasts of licence, or Saturnalia, which have their analogies among many people, ancient and modern. Pirrauru is no more a survival of and a proof of primitive promiscuity, than is the legalized incest of ancient Egypt or ancient Peru. If these views be correct the argument for primitive promiscuity derived from pirrauru falls to the ground.

6. The questions at issue obviously are, was mankind originally promiscuous, with no objections to marriage between persons of the nearest kin; and was the first step in advance the prohibition of marriage (or of amatory intercourse) The historical problem. between brothers and sisters; or did mankind originally live in very small groups, under a jealous sire, who imposed restrictions on intercourse between the young males, his sons, and all the females of the “hearth-circle,” who constituted his harem? The problem has been studied, first, in the institutions of savages, notably of the most backward savages, the black natives of Australia; and next, in the light of the habits of the higher mammalia.

As regards Australian matrimonial institutions, it has been known since the date of the Journals of two Expeditions of Discovery, by Sir George Grey (1837-1839), that they are very complex and peculiar, in points strongly resembling the customary laws of the more backward Red Indian tribes of North America. Information came in, while McLennan was working, from G. Taplin (The Narrinyeri, 1874), from A.W. Howitt and L. Fison, and many other inquirers (in Brough Smyth’s Aborigines of Victoria, 1878), from Howitt and Fison again (in Kamilaroi and Kurnai, 1880), and many essays by these authors, and finally, in Native Tribes of Central Australia (1899) and Northern Tribes of Central Australia (1904), by Baldwin Spencer and F.J. Gillen; and in Howitt’s Native Tribes of South-East Australia (1904), with R. Roth’s North-West Central Queensland Aborigines (1897). All of these are works of very high merit. Knowledge is now much more wide, minute and securely based than it was when McLennan’s Studies in Ancient History, second series, was posthumously published (1896). We know with certainty that in Australia, among archaic savages who have neither metals, agriculture, pottery nor domesticated animals, a graduated scale of matrimonial institutions exists. First there are local tribes, each tribe having its own dialect; holding a recognized area of territory; and living on friendly terms with neighbouring tribes. Territorial conquest is never attempted. In many cases a knot of tribes of allied dialects and kindred rites may be, or at least is, spoken of as a “nation” by our authorities.

7. Customary law is administered by the Seniors, the wise, the magically skilled, who in many cases are “headmen” of local groups or of sets of kindred. As to marriage, Primitive restrictions on marriage. persons may wed within the local tribe, or into a neighbouring local tribe, at will, provided that they obey the restrictions of customary law. The local tribe is neither exogamous nor endogamous, any more than is an English county. The restrictions, except where they have become obsolete, fall into six main categories:—

(1) In the most primitive, each tribe consists of two intermarrying and exogamous divisions, which are often styled phratries. Each such division has a name, which, when it can be translated, is the name of an animal: in the majority of cases, however, the meaning of the phratry name is lost. In one instance, that of the Euahlayi tribe of north-west New South Wales, the phratry names are said (by Mrs Langloh Parker) to mean “Light Blood” and “Dark Blood.” This, as in the theory of the Rev. J. Mathews, Eagle and Crow, might be taken to indicate a blending of two distinct races.

Taking, for the sake of clearness, tribes whose phratry names mean “Crow” and “Eagle Hawk,” every member of the tribe belongs either to Eagle Hawk phratry or to Crow phratry: if to Crow, the man or woman can only marry an Eagle Hawk, if to Eagle Hawk, can only marry a Crow. The children invariably belong to the phratry of the mother, in this most primitive type. Within Eagle Hawk phratry is one set of totem kins, named usually after various species of animals and plants; within Crow phratry is another set of totem kins, named always (except in one region of Central Australia) after a different set of plants and animals. With the exception mentioned (that of the Arunta “nation”), in no tribe does the same totem ever occur in both phratries. Totems and totem names are inherited by the children from the mother, in this primitive type. Thus a man, Eagle Hawk by phratry, Snipe by totem, marries a woman Crow by phratry, Black Duck by totem. His children by her are of phratry Crow, of totem Black Duck. Obviously no person can marry another of his or her own totem, because, in the phratry into which he or she must marry, no man or woman of his or her totem exists. The prohibition extends to members of alien and remote tribes, if of the same totem name.

The same rules exist in the more primitive North American tribes, but as the phratry there has generally, though not always, decayed, the rule, where this has occurred, merely forbids marriage within the totem kin.

(2) We find this type of organization, where the child inherits phratry and totem from the father, not from the mother.

(3) We find tribes in which phratry and totem are inherited from the mother, but an additional rule prevails: the rule of “Matrimonial Classes.” By this device, in phratry “Dilbi,” there are two classes, “Muri” and “Kubi.” In phratry “Kupathin” are two classes, “Ipai” and “Kumbo” (all these names are of unknown meaning). Each child inherits its mother’s phratry name and totem name, and also the name of that class of the two in the mother’s phratry to which the mother does not belong. No person may marry into his or her own class—practically into his or her own generation: the rule makes parental and filial marriages impossible,—but these never occur even among more primitive tribes which have not the institution of classes. Suppose that the class names are really names of animals and other objects in nature—as in a few cases they actually are. Then the rules, where classes exist, would amount to this: no person may marry another who, by phratry, totem or generation, owns the same hereditary animal name as himself or herself. In practice, where phratries exist, a man who knows a woman’s phratry name knows whether or not he may marry her. Where class names exist (even though the phratry name be lost), a man who knows a woman’s class name knows whether or not he may marry her. Nothing can be simpler in practice.

(4) The same rules as under (3) exist, but the phratry, totem and class are inherited through the father: the class of the child of course not being the father’s, but the linked class in his phratry.

(5) In the fifth category (Central North Australia), while phratry name (if not lost) and totem name are inherited from the father, by a refinement of law which is spreading southwards there are four classes in each phratry (or main exogamous division unnamed), and the choice of a partner in life is thus more restricted than in more primitive tribes.

(6) Finally we reach the institutions of the group of tribes called, from the name of the most powerful tribe in the set, “the Arunta nation.” They occupy the Macdonnell Ranges and other territory in the very centre of Arunta customs. Australia. The Arunta reckon kinship in the male line: their phratry names they have forgotten, in place of phratries eight matrimonial classes regulate marriage. In these respects they resemble most of the central and northern tribes, but present this unique peculiarity, that the same totems may and do exist in both of the opposed intermarrying exogamous divisions consisting of four classes each. It thus results that a man, in the Arunta tribe, may marry a woman of his own totem, if she be in the class with which he may intermarry. This licence is unknown in every other part of the totemic world, and even in the Kaitish tribe of the Arunta nation intertotemic marriages, in practice, almost never occur.

Among the Arunta the totems are only prominent in magical ceremonies, unknown in South-Eastern Australia. At these ceremonies (Intichiuma) the men of the totem do cooperative magic for the benefit of their plant or animal, as part of the tribal food-supply. The members of the totem taste it sparingly on these occasions, apparently under the belief that to do so increases their magical power: the rest of the tribe eat freely. But, as far as denoting kinship or regulating marriage is concerned, the totems, among the Arunta, have no legally important existence. Men and women of the same totem may intermarry, their children need not belong to the totem of either father or mother.

The process by which Arunta totems came thus to differ from those of all other savages is easily understood. Like the other tribes from the centre to the north (including the Urabunna nation, which reckons descent through women), the Arunta believe that the souls of the primal semi-bestial ancestors of the Alcheringa or “dream time” are perpetually reincarnated. This opinion does not affect by itself the usual exogamous character of totemism among the other tribes. The Arunta nation, however, cultivates an additional myth, namely that the primal ancestors, when they sank into the ground, left behind them certain oval stone slabs, with archaic markings, called churinga nanja, or “sacred things of the nanja.” The nanja, again, is a tree or rock, fabled to have risen up to mark the spot where a group of primal ancestors, all of one and the same totem in each case (Cats here, Grubs there, Ducks elsewhere), “went into the ground.” The souls of these ancestors haunt such spots, especially they haunt the nanja tree or rock, and the stone churinga nanja. Each district, therefore, has its own oknanikilla (or local totem centre of the ghosts), Cat ghosts, Grub ghosts, Hakea flower ghosts and so on. These spirits enter into women and are reborn as children. When a child comes to birth, the mother names the oknanikilla in which she conceived it, and, whatever the ghost totem of that place may be, it is the child’s totem. Its mother may be a Grub, its father may be a Crow, but if the child was conceived in a Duck, or Cat, or Opossum or Kangaroo locality, it is, by totem, a Cat, Opossum, Duck or Kangaroo. The churinga nanja of its primal ancestor is sought for at the place of the child’s conception, and is put into the sacred repository of such objects.

Thus the child does not inherit its totem from father, or from mother, as everywhere else, but does inherit the right to do ceremonies for the paternal totem: a proof that, of old, totems were inherited, as elsewhere, and that in the male line. If totems among the Arunta, as everywhere else, were once arranged on the plan that the same totem never occurs in both exogamous moieties, that arrangement has been destroyed, as was inevitable, by the existing method of allotting totems to children,—not by inheritance,—but at haphazard. By this means (a consequence of the unique Arunta belief about churinga nanja) the same totems have got into both exogamous moieties, so that persons of the same totem, but of appropriate matrimonial classes, may marry. This licence is absolutely confined to the limited region in which stone churinga nanja occur.

The whole system is impossible except where descent is reckoned in the male line, for there alone is local totemism possible, and the Arunta system is based on local totemism, plus the churinga nanja and reincarnation beliefs. With reckoning of descent in the female line, no locality can possibly have its local totem: all the totems indiscriminately distributed everywhere: and thus no woman can say in what totemic locality her child was conceived, for there is not and cannot be, with female descent, any totemic locality. Now it is admitted that reckoning by female descent is the earlier method, and it is granted that in rites and ceremonies the Arunta are of a relatively advanced and highly organized pattern. Their social organization is local, and they have a kind of local magistracies, hereditary in the male line.

In spite of these facts, Spencer and Gillen conceive that the peculiar totemism of the Arunta is the most primitive type extant (cp. Spencer, J.A.I. (N.S.), vol. i. 275-281; and Frazer, ibid. 281-288). It is not easy to understand this position, as, without male kinship and consequent local totemism (which are not primitive), and without the churinga nanja (which exist only in a strictly limited area), the Arunta system of non-exogamous totems cannot possibly exist. Again, the other tribes cannot have passed through the Arunta stage, for, if they had, their totems would have existed, as among the Arunta, in both exogamous moieties, and would there remain when they came to be inherited; so that the totems of all these tribes would still be non-exogamous, like those of the Arunta. But this is not the case. Once more, it is clear that the Arunta system has but recently reached their neighbours, the Kaitish, for though they have the churinga nanja belief, and the haphazard method of acquiring totems by local accident, these things have not yet overcome the old traditional reluctance to marry within the totem name. It is not unlawful among the Kaitish; but it is hardly ever done.