44 Detestation of Incest New Zealanders: Any one outside brother and sister could marry, although marriage of first cousins was greatly disliked. They seem aware of the weakening effects of the inbreeding."" "By the old custom of the Aht tribes (Indians of Vancouver Island), no marriage was permitted within the degree of second cousin. Intermarriage with other tribes is sought by the higher classes to strengthen the foreign connections of their own tribe, and, I think also, with some idea of preventing degeneracy of race." 2 Incest is thus made highly criminal, and the word incestuous the most disgraceful and opprobrious epithet in the language, by a race (the Australians), among whom promiscuous intercourse before marriage is quite permissible, and adultery, with the consent or by command of the husband, thoroughly honorable and customary.3 Indeed, among most savage peoples, the loose sexual intercourse with unmarried females that prevails, is strikingly in contrast with the utter social detestation and vengeance which destroys those who dare to commit incest. Thus Kolbe, who studied the Hottentots of South Africa in the early 18th century, writes: "They have a tradition which condemns both the man and woman who marry, or commit fornication, within the proscribed degrees, to death under the club; and they say that this law has always existed among them. It is certain, that any one convicted of such an act is punished without pity, whatever be his rank in the nation." + Also, Dobrizhoffer, missionary to the Abipones of South America early in the 19th century, states: "Long experience has convinced me, that the respect for consanguinity, by which they are deterred from marrying into their own Sproat. p. 99. 'Kolbe, i, 268-9. 1 Tregear. p. 102. families, is implanted by nature in the minds of most of the people of Paraguay. In this opinion I was greatly confirmed by the Cacique Roy, leader of the savages in the woods of Mbaevira, who, when I happened to make mention of incestuous nuptials, broke out into these words 'you say right, Father! marriage with relatives is a most shameful thing. This have we learned from our ancestors.' Such are the feelings of these wood savages, though they think it neither irrational nor improper to marry many wives and reject them whenever they like." Nor was witchcraft regarded as in any way sinful, although this became in later ages the very essence of the offence. Originally it was not traffic with evil spirits which was punished as crime. Almost all savage peoples fear and honor the wizard, and make use of his services freely. Witchcraft in itself was neither sin nor crime. But the evil wizard, who used his occult powers against a member of his own community, thereby breeding widespread suspicion, hatred and fear within the social group, he had to be destroyed, if the tribe was to continue strong and united. Thus evil-witchcraft became a most heinous crime. Again, the reason is essentially a social one. The tradition of the Dieyrie tribe, just given, affords strong evidence that some among the Australian Blackfellows believe in the existence of a good spirit interested in human welfare; but the same work from which this quotation is taken a work recognized as the best and practically the only good general comparative study of Australian tribes 2-arrives at the conclusion that the western tribes have no words at all to express God or good spirit, and it is very doubtful whether there was any such idea among the more intelligent tribes of the south and east until the coming of 1 Dobrizhoffer, ii, 212-13. Science of Man, Sidney, Australia, May 22, 1899. 46 the whites. Acts versus Motives "That nothing of the nature of worship, prayer or sacrifice has been observed is certain." " This same utter lack of the idea of a good God, and wise, all ruling Father of men, was found among the Indian tribes of North America at the coming of the French and English. "In no Indian language could the early missionaries find a word to express the idea of God. Manitou and Oki meant anything endowed with supernatural powers, from a snakeskin, or a greasy Indian conjurer, up to Manabozho and Jouskeha." The Jesuits introduced the idea of "The Great Chief of Men," and the Indians accepted it readily, even tribes in no sense Christian. "In the primitive Indian's conception of a God the idea of moral good has no part." He does not dispense justice here or hereafter, but leaves man under the power of a host of subordinate spirits. "Nor is the good and evil of these inferior beings a moral good and evil. The good spirit is the spirit that gives good luck and ministers to the necessities and desires of mankind; the evil spirit is simply a malicious agent of disease, death and mischance."3 "The primitive Indian believed in the immortality of the soul, but he did not always believe in a state of future reward and punishment. Nor, when such a belief existed, was the good to be rewarded a moral good, or the evil to be punished a moral evil. Skillful hunters, brave warriors, men of influence and consideration, went after death to the happy hunting-ground; while the slothful, the cowardly and the weak were doomed to eat serpents and ashes in dreary regions of mist and darkness." Yet, among all these people who possessed almost no idea of moral good and evil, crime existed and was punished, because essentially bad for the social welfare. Their good was a social good, and their evil a social evil. They possessed 1 Curr, The Australian Race. 'Parkman, p. lxxix. Ibid., p. lxxviii. • Ibid., p. lxxx. an ethical standard, but it was a social standard of right action, not a religious standard of right motive. We are told that the Bushmen of Africa have apparently not the least conception of a Supreme Being. They have been known to offer prayers to a caterpillar insect. These Bushmen are probably the earliest remaining aborigines of South Africa, and "rank with the savages of Australia as the lowest existing type of mankind," yet they unite to punish evil witchcraft with death. Intellectually very low in the scale of life, the Australians are morally even lower. Some writers have denied them any moral feelings, while others, like Sir John Lubbock, agree with Curr, that they have no religion.3 All their tribes believe in the existence of evil spirits, to whose malevolence and to the charms of sorcerers they attribute almost all their ills, including death; for they have no conception of death from natural causes. They believe also in the soul and in life beyond the grave, but all their thoughts on such subjects are very hazy and confused: indeed it is only with the greatest difficulty that they can grasp any abstract idea. Among the western Blackfellows there are no words for God or justice, and but few terms of endearment. Yet all their languages have words for theft, incest and cowardice, the last two being terms of greatest insult.* Words for "good" and "bad" are invariably found in use among Australian tribes, and they are applied to actions beneficial or injurious to the social group. Thus Collins writes: "On our speaking of cannibalism to the natives of New South Wales, they expressed great horror and said it 1 Lichtenstein, ii, 200. 'Wake, "Evolution of Morality," pp. 293-5. "Lubbock, "Prehistoric Times," p. 436. There are often no words for murder, adultery or rape, and no words for love, virtue and mercy. See Dr. Maudsley. 48 Social Standard of Right Action was 'wee-ree' (bad). When we punished some of our people for ill-treating them, they expressed their approbation and said it was 'bood-yer-re' (good). Midnight murders they reprobated, and applauded acts of kindness and generosity." Thieves, when detected, make no resistance, evidently considering their actions bad and deserving of punishment. "Their notions of duty relate mostly to neighborly service and social interest." "They are not at all thieves and liars, but capable of many good deeds." 3 They punish incest and evil-witchcraft with death, as awful crimes. Evidently they possess a social standard of right action, to which members of the tribe must conform. "With the customs of his tribe," writes Curr, " the Australian Aborigine must in a general way comply, and for exceptional infractions pay established penalties." Persistent disregard of tribal customs results in death or outlawry, which is sure to be speedily followed by death. "As amongst all savage tribes, the Australian native is bound hand and foot by custom. What his fathers did before him he must do." "Any infringement of custom, within certain limitations, is visited with sure and often severe punishment." 5 The tradi Yet, ultra conservative as the Blackfellows are, changes in custom have been introduced, however difficult. tions and festival customs of the tribes of Central Australia and of the natives dwelling near Perigundi Lake show this plainly. There has been some social growth, some upward progress, and this progress has been enforced and safeguarded by the production of a great new crime. The Deyerie tradition states that promiscuity and incestuous cohabitation were at one time generally practiced. (As the Bible puts it: "All flesh had corrupted his way upon the |