When they had mastered this I asked
can that boy and that girl marry?
The reply was emphatically no!
My next step was to indicate 7 and 8
of your Diagram; and when they fully
understood who these were I asked "could
that boy and that girl marry?"
The reply again was "No! not like it that".
I then said "Where can that boy (No 7) get
Lucy [then said - crossed out] who speaks good English
then said "Where Uncle to [my - crossed out] mother belong
to me" ? "I then ascertained that by this she
meant her "mother's, mother's brother"
To bring this relationship into view I
rearranged the diagram thus:
1 Grandmother brother 4
[Lucy - crossed out] 2 mother daughter 5 - son x
[daughter - crossed out] 3 daughter (Lucy) son (Doctor) 6
When they had grasped [this - crossed out] these relationships
I said "Lucy - which way you got husband?"
She said "Like it this - my husband one
belonging to my mother's uncle, always like it that."
I then said "that not right - that feller,
son belonging to your mother uncle, man, might be
old feller, not boy." She said not always
plenty boy too!" This was no doubt correct
because the man "x" [being one - crossed out] would be one of
a group the individuals of which might be of any age.
I thought that Doctor was a second husband
he being about 70 + she about 65 - and I said
"When you get him first husband?"
The reply was "Doctor my first husband - no
other." He take [??] me when he young man.
I have not yet found a rule exactly
like this but it is merely a [??] variation
of the Dieri rule which I [?explained?]
[written in left side margin]
[??] out a [??] [??]
+ explained the way I used diagrams
[written in right side margin]
Now referring to the Mūrawari tribe the following proposition and [?they?] [?justified?]
(1) The marriage rule cannot start with the children of [?two?] brother or [?two?] sisters because then
children are brothers and sisters.
(2) I may start from the children of a man and then of his sister - [?adding?] to the Diagram
(3) If not so then it could only be between those who cannot have either of these descents.
I think that in my letter of 12.7.06 I gave you [a lecture - crossed out] a hypothetical diagram found in the four sub class names
in which the marriage between "7 m muru-Tom and "8 f Bullia - Polly - is [??] to the class law. The question then remains
what is the small group of the "Bootha" women (a 1/4th of the women of the tribe) from which 7 m mur-Tom may have a wife?
Nobody has written a note for this page yet
Please sign in to write a note for this page