the ethnological notebooks of karl marx - Marxists Internet Archive

lived in polygamy; dies nicht the material principle o f the patriarchal institution.W as diese Familienform wesentlich charakterisirt: Organisation o f anumber o f person, bonds and free, into a fam ily, under paternal power, fo r thepurpose o f holding lands, and fo r the care o f flocks and herds. T hose held toservitude, and those employed as servants, lived in the marriage relation, andwith the patriarch as their chief, form ed a patriarchal family. Authority over~~its members and over its property was the material fa ct. D . Charakteristische:the incorporation o f numbers in servile and dependent relations, before that timeunknown. Paternal pow er over the group; w ith it a higher individualityo f persons.So auch d. Roman fam ily under patria potestas. M acht d. pater über Lebenu. T o d seiner K inder u. descendants, w ie über slaves und servants w hoform ed the nucleus o f the fam ily and furnished its name; his absolute ownershipo f a ll the property they created. W ithout polygam y, the Rom an pater fam iliaswas a patriarch and his fam ily a patriarchal fam ily. In mindrem G rad selbeCharakteristik der ancient fam ily der Grecian tribes.T he patriarchal fam ily marks the peculiar epoch in human progress w henthe individuality o f the person began to rise above the gens, in w hich it previouslyhad been m erged; its general influence tended pow erfully to the establishmento f the monogamian fam ily . . . Its Hebrew and Roman form s exceptionalin human experience. Paternal authority “ impossible” in the consanguineand punaluan fam ilies; began to appear as a feeble influence in thesyndyasmian fam ily, and fully established under monogamy u. beyond allbounds o f reason in the patriarchal fam ily o f the Roman type.P a rt I I I C h. V The Monogamian Family.M ode: patriarchal fam ily - in L atin or Hebrew form - zur typical fam ily41o f prim itive society zu machen. T h e gens, as it appeared in the later periodo f barbarism, was understood, but erroneously supposed to be subsequentin point o f time to the monogamian fam ily. T h e gens was treated as an aggregationo f fam ilies; aber gens entered gami in phratry, phratry in tribe,tribe into the n ation ; aber fam ily could not enter entirely into the gens, becausehusband and wife were necessarily o f different gentes. T he w ife, dow n to thelatest period, counted herself o f the gens o f her father, and bore the nameo f his gens under the Romans. A s all the parts must enter into the w hole,the fam ily could not becom e the unit o f the gentile organisation, that place washeld by the gens.Fam ily42 m odern appearance unter Rom an tribes; bew eist d. Bedeutg vonfam ilia, contains same element as famulus = servant. Festus sagt: “ Fam uliorigo ab O scis dependet, apud quod servus Fam ul nom inabun (?) tur,unde fam ilia vocata.” 43 A lso in seiner primairen Bedeutg fam ily unbezogenauf d. married pair od. dessen children, sondern in relation to the bodyo f slaves and servants w h o labored for its maintenance and w ere under thepow er o f the paterfamilias. In einigen testamentarischen dispositions istFam ilia used als Equivalent für patrimonium, the inheritance w hich passed”9