woman by betrothal becomes the specialised Noa (Tippa-malku) of a certain man, but subsequently becomes the Pirrauru, or group-wife, of a number of men who are his own or tribal brothers. This practice of betrothal, which specialises the female Noa, overrides temporarily the right of Pirrauru, or group-marriage, which is the practice of this tribe, and is evidently the more primitive one.
If we now look at Diagram XXVIII. by the light of the Dieri practice, we may be able to see why the sister of the widow and of the widow's mother should be introduced prominently, for under female descent and the classificatory system of relationships, the women 2 and 3 are own or tribal mothers of 5; and 5, 6, and 7, who are so likewise as to 9, 10, and 11, who are consequently in the fraternal relation to each other. The mother's brother (1) is properly included in the group, and the brother of the widow has personal rights over her. Such an association of persons as that under the Law of the Reippus would seem quite natural to an Australian savage living under maternal descent That the male members of such a group should participate in some benefit, to the exclusion of its females, would also seem to him quite proper.
Among the Teutonic tribes a woman was the property of her kindred, who exchanged her for a valuable consideration.[1] In the time of the Salic law it was a money payment, but in earlier times it was doubtless made in kind, as described by Tacitus, in the cases of compensation for homicide. If we imagine a still earlier period when these tribes were in a complete state of savagery, and when there was little or no personal property beyond the rude weapons of the individual, one may safely conjecture that the most probable bride-price would be a woman for a woman. Then we should reach the precise condition of very many, if not the majority, of the Australian tribes.
- ↑ In the earliest laws of the Anglo-Saxons the bride was sold by her father, a later social stage than that recorded by the Law of the Reippus.
