You say that you do not think the social pro
hibition a whit stronger that the class law that
prohibits intermarriage of brother + sister: In this I
concur. Further as you say that although
this is the case " the inability in a man to marry a
woman of the same class name as himself does
not appear either when he is single or
married, unless upon enquiry; the prohibition
between a man and his wife's mother instantly
stands out in bold relief when he obtains a
mother in law by his marriage." But I think
the prohibition between Father and daughter
stands out quite as prominently if not more so.

The argument does not apply in any
way to tribes divided with 4 classes because in
such cases the mother in law is not of a class
from which her [mother - crossed out] son in law could take
a wife. Again in tribes having agnatic descent
according to your rules the prohibition should
be between a man and his son's wife because she
is then of a class from which he might take a wife.

It may be said that the prohibition came
into existence before a agnatic descent was the law
of this tribe and before the tribe was subdivided
into four classes, but if this were the case I
think that the custom would have fallen

Page Notes

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page