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！
need hardly say； any Roman Empire。
The new knowledge which has been rapidly accumulating of late
years enables us to track precisely the same transmutation of
ideas amid the smaller groups of kinsmen settled on land and
forming； not Commonwealths； but Village…Communities。 The
historian of former days laboured probably under no greater
disadvantage than that caused by his unavoidable ignorance of the
importance of these communities； and by the necessity thus
imposed upon him of confining his attention to the larger
assemblages of tribesmen。 It has often； indeed； been noticed that
a Feudal Monarchy was an exact counterpart of a Feudal Manor； but
the reason of the correspondence is only now beginning to dawn
upon us； which is； that both of them were in their origin bodies
of assumed kinsmen settled on land and undergoing the same
transmutation of ideas through the fact of settlement。 The
history of the larger groups ends in the modern notions of
Country and Sovereignty； the history of the smaller in the modern
notions of Landed Property。 The two courses of historical
development were for a long while strictly parallel； though they
have ceased to be so now。
The naturally organised； self…existing； Village…Community can
no longer be claimed as an institution specially characteristic
of the Aryan races。 M。 de Laveleye； following Dutch authorities；
has described these communities as they are found in Java； and M
Renan has discovered them among the obscurer Semitic tribes in
Northern Africa。 But； wherever they have been examined； the
extant examples of the group suggest the same theory of its
origin which Mr Freeman （'Comparative Politics；' p。 103） has
advanced concerning the Germanic village…community or Mark； 'This
lowest political unit was at first； here （i。 e。 in England） as
elsewhere； formed of men bound together by a tie of kindred； in
its first estate natural； in a later stage either of kindred
natural or artificial。' The evidence； however； is now quite ample
enough to furnish us with strong indications not only of the mode
in which these communities began； but of the mode in which they
transformed themselves。 The world； in fact； contains examples of
cultivating groups in every stage； from that in which they are
actually bodies of kinsmen； to that in which the merest shadow of
consanguinity survives and the assemblage of cultivators is held
together solely by the land which they till in common。 The great
steps in the scale of transition seem to me to be marked by the
Joint Family of the Hindoos； by the House…Community of the
Southern Sclavonians； and by the true Village…Community； as it is
found first in Russia and next in India。 The group which I have
placed at the head； the Hindoo…Joint Family； is really a body of
kinsmen； the natural and adoptive descendants of a known
ancestor。 Although the modern law of India gives such facilities
for its dissolution that it is one of the most unstable of social
compounds； and rarely lasts beyond a couple of generations；
still； so long as it lasts； it has a legal corporate existence；
and exhibits； in the most perfect state； that community of
proprietary enjoyment which has been so often observed； and （let
me add） so often misconstrued； in cultivating societies of
archaic type。 'According to the true notion of a joint undivided
Hindoo family；' said the Privy Council； 'no member of the family；
while it remains undivided； can predicate of the joint undivided
property that he； that particular member； has a certain definite
share。。。。 The proceeds of undivided property must be brought；
according to the theory； into the common chest or purse； and then
dealt with according to the modes of enjoyment of the members of
an undivided family。' （Per Lord Westbury； Appovier v。 Rama Subba
Aiyan； 11 Moore's Indian Appeals； 75。） While； however； these
Hindoo families； 'joint in food； worship； and estate；' are
constantly engaged in the cultivation of land； and dealing with
its produce 'according to the modes of enjoyment of an undivided
family；' they are not village…communities。 They are only
accidentally connected with the land； however extensive their
landed property may be。 What holds them together is not land； but
consanguinity； and there is no reason why they should not occupy
themselves； as indeed they frequently do； with trade or with the
practice of a handicraft。 The House…Community； which comes next
in the order of development； has been examined by M。 de Laveleye
（P。 et 8。 F。 P。； p。 201）； and by Mr。 Patterson （'Fortnightly
Review；' No。 xliv。）； in Croatia； Dalmatia； and Illyria； countries
which； though newer to us than India； have still much in common
with the parts of the East not brought completely under Mahometan
influences； but there is reason to believe that neither Roman law
nor feudalism entirely crushed it even in Western Europe。 It is a
remarkable fact that assemblages of kinsmen； almost precisely the
counterpart of the House…Communities surviving among the
Sclavonians； were observed by M。 Dupin； in 1840； in the French
Department of the Ni鑦re； and were able to satisfy him that even
in 1500 they had been accounted ancient。 These House…Communities
seem to me to be simply the Joint…Family of the Hindoos； allowed
to expand itself without hindrance and settled for ages on the
land。 All the chief characteristics of the Hindoo institution are
here the common home and common table； which we always in
theory the centre of Hindoo family life； the collective enjoyment
of property and its administration by an elected manager。
Nevertheless； many instructive change s have begun which show how
such a group modifies itself in time The community is a community
of kinsmen； but； though the com m on ancestry is probably to a
great extent real； the tradition has become weak enough to admit
of considerable artificiality being introduced into the
association； as it is found at any given moment； through the
absorption of strangers from outside。 Meantime； the land tends to
beco