lect08-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！




of　the　Sclavonic　Russians　and　Poles　which　has　only　lately


attracted　notice；　everywhere　we　discover　traces　of　passages　in


their　history　when　men　of　alien　descent　were　admitted　to；　and


amalgamated　with；　the　original　brotherhood。　Adverting　to　Rome


singly；　we　perceive　that　the　primary　group；　the　Family；　was　being


constantly　adulterated　by　the　practice　of　adoption；　while　stories


seem　to　have　been　always　current　respecting　the　exotic　extraction


of　one　of　the　original　Tribes；　and　concerning　a　large　addition　to


the　Houses　made　by　one　of　the　early　Kings。　The　composition　of　the


State　uniformly　assumed　to　be　natural　was　nevertheless　known　to


be　in　great　measure　artificial。'　（Ancient　Law；　pp。　129；　130。）　The


key　to　these　singular　phenomena　has　been　recently　sought　in　the


ancient　religions；　and　has　been　supposed　to　be　found　in　the


alleged　universal　practice　of　worshipping　dead　ancestors。　Very


striking　illustrations　of　them　are；　however；　supplied　by　the　law


and　usage　of　Ireland　after　it　had　been　Christianised　for


centuries；　and　long　after　any　Eponymous　progenitor　can　be


conceived　as　worshipped　。　The　Family；　House；　and　Tribe　of　the


Romans　　and；　so　far　as　my　knowledge　extends；　all　the　analogous


divisions　of　Greek　communities　　were　distinguished　by　separate


special　names。　But　in　the　Brehon　Law；　the　same　word；　Fine　（or


'family'）；　is　used　for　the　Family　as　we　ordinarily　understand　it


　that　is；　for　the　children　of　a　living　parent　and　their


descendants　　for　the　Sept　or；　in　phrase　of　Indian　law；　the


Joint　Undivided　Family；　that　is；　the　combined　descendants　of　an


ancestor　long　since　dead　　for　the　Tribe；　which　was　the


political　unit　of　ancient　Ireland；　and　even　for　the　large　Tribes


in　which　the　smaller　units　were　sometimes　absorbed。　Nevertheless


the　Irish　Family　undoubtedly　received　additions　through　Adoption。


The　Sept；　or　larger　group　of　kindred；　had　a　definite　place　for


strangers　admitted　to　it　on　stated　conditions；　the　Fine　Taccair。


The　Tribe　avowedly　included　a　number　of　persons；　mostly　refugees


from　other　Tribes；　whose　only　connection　with　it　was　common


allegiance　to　its　Chief。　Moreover　the　Tribe　in　its　largest


extension　and　considered　a　political　as　well　as　a　social　unit


might　have　been　absorbed　with　others　in　a　Great　or　Arch　Tribe；


and　here　the　sole　source　of　the　kinship　still　theoretically


maintained　is　Conquest。　Yet　all　these　groups　were　in　some　sense


or　other　Families。


　　　　Nor　does　the　artificiality　solely　consist　in　the　extension　of


the　sphere　of　kinship　to　classes　known　to　have　been　originally


alien　to　the　true　brotherhood。　An　even　more　interesting　example


of　it　presents　itself　when　the　ideas　of　kinship　and　the


phraseology　proper　to　consanguinity　are　extended　to　associations


which　we　should　now　contemplate　as　exclusively　founded　on


contract；　such　as　partnerships　and　guilds。　There　are　no　more


interesting　pages　in　Dr　Sullivan's　Introduction　（pp。　ccvi　et


seq。）　than　those　in　which　he　discusses　the　tribal　origin　of


Guilds。　He　claims　for　the　word　itself　a　Celtic　etymology；　and　he


traces　the　institution　to　the　grazing　partnerships　common　among


the　ancient　Irish。　However　this　may　be；　it　is　most　instructive　to


find　the　same　words　used　to　describe　bodies　of　co…partners；


formed　by　contract；　and　bodies　of　co…heirs　or　co…parceners　formed


by　common　descent。　Each　assemblage　of　men　seems　to　have　been


conceived　as　a　Family。　As　regards　Guilds；　I　certainly　think；　as　I


thought　three　years　ago；　that　they　have　been　much　too　confidently


attributed　to　a　relatively　modern　origin；　and　that　many　of　them；


and　much　which　is　common　to　all　of　them；　may　be　suspected　to　have


grown　out　of　the　primitive　brotherhoods　of　co…villagers　and


kinsmen。　The　trading　guilds　which　survive　in　our　own　country　have


undergone　every　sort　of　transmutation　which　can　disguise　their


parentage。　They　are　artificial　to　begin　with；　though　the


hereditary　principle　has　a　certain　tendency　to　assert　itself。


They　have　long　since　relinquished　the　occupations　which　gave　them


a　name。　They　mostly　trace　their　privileges　and　constitution　to


some　royal　charter；　and　kingly　grants；　real　or　fictitious；　are


the　great　cause　of　interruption　in　English　History。　Yet　anybody


who；　with　a　knowledge　of　primitive　law　and　history；　examines　the


internal　mechanism　and　proceedings　of　a　London　Company　will　see


in　many　parts　of　them　plain　traces　of　the　ancient　brotherhood　of


kinsmen；　'joint　in　food；　worship；　and　estate；'　and　I　suppose　that


the　nearest　approach　to　an　ancient　tribal　holding　in　Ireland　is


to　be　found　in　those　confiscated　lands　which　are　now　the　property


of　several　of　these　Companies。


　　　　The　early　history　of　Contract；　I　need　scarcely　tell　you；　is


almost　exclusively　to　be　sought　in　the　history　of　Roman　law。　Some


years　ago　I　pointed　to　the　entanglement　which　primitive　Roman


institutions　disclose　between　the　conveyance　of　property　and　the


contract　of　sale。　Let　me　now　observe　that　one　or　two　others　of


the　great　Roman　contracts　appear　to　me；　when　closely　examined；　to


afford　evidence　of　their　having　been　gradually　evolved　through


changes　in　the　mechanism　of　primitive　society。　You　have　seen　how


brotherhoods　of　kinsmen　transform　themselves　into　alliances


between　persons　whom　we　can　only　call　partners；　but　still　at


first　sight　the　link　is　missing　which　would　enable　us　to　say　that


here　we　have　the　beginning　of　the　contract　of　partnership。　Look；


however；　at　the　peculiar　contract　called　by　the　Romans　'societas


omnium　（or　universorum）　bonorum。'　It　is　commonly　translated


'partnership　with　unlimited　liability；'　and　there　is　no　doubt


that　the　elder　form　of　partnership　has　had　great　effect　on　the


newer　form。　But　you　will　find　that；　in　the　societas　omnium


bonorum；　not　only　were　all　the　liabilities　of　the　partnership　the


liabilities　of　the　several　partners；　but　the　whole　of　the


property　of　each　partner　was　brought　into　the　common　stock　and


was　enjoyed　as　a　common　fund。　No　such　arrangement　as　this　is


known　in　the　modern　world　as　the　result　of　ordinary　agreement；


though　in　some　countries　it　may　be　the　effect　of　marriage。　It


appears　to　me　that　we　are　carried　back　to　the　joint　brotherhoods


of　primitive　society；　and　that　their　development　must　have　given


rise　to　the　contract　before　us。　Let　us　turn　again　to　the　contract


of　Mandatum　or　Agency。　The　only　complete　representation　of　one


man　by　another　which　the　Roman　law　allowed　was　the　representation


of　the　Paterfamilias　by　the　son　or　slave　under　his　power。　The


representation　of　the　Principal　by　the　Agent　is　much　more


incomplete；　and　it　seems　to　me　probable　that　we　have　in　it　a


shadow　of　that　thorough　coalescence　between　two　individuals　which


was　only　possible　anciently　when　they　belonged　to　the　same


family。


　　　　The　institutions　which　I　have　taken　as　my　examples　are


institutions　of　indigenous　growth；　developed　probably　more　or


less　within　all　ancient　societies　by　the　expansion　of　the　notion


of　kinship。　But　it　sometimes　happens　that　a　wholly　foreign


institution　is　introduced　from　without　into　a　society　based　upon


assumed　consanguinity；　and　then　it　is　most　instructive　to　observe


how　closely；　in　such　a　case；　material　which　antecedently　we


should　think　likely　to　oppose　the　most　stubborn　resistance　to　the


infiltration　of　tribal　ideas　assimilates　itself　nevertheless　to


the　model　of　a　Family　or　Tribe。　You　may　be　aware　that　the　ancient


Irish　Church　has　long　been　a　puzzle　to　ecclesiastical　historians。


There　are　difficulties　suggested　by　it　on　which　I　do　not　pretend


to　throw　any　new　light；　nor；　indeed；　could　they　conveniently　be


considered　here。　Among　perplexities　of　this　class　are　the


extraordinary　multiplication　of　bishops　and　their　dependence；


apparently　an　almost　servile　dependence；　on　the　religious