« AnteriorContinuar »
almost unconscious exercise of a national instinct which has raised them within the present century to the first place among nations; they care little as a race about the technical processes through which their success has been won. This indifference is indirectly exemplified by the publication of the volume before us. Some thirty years ago the late Sir H. S. Maine, during a residence in India, discovered among the fragments of ancient society of which that country is a great assemblage, traces of village communities apparently resembling the agricultural groups familiar to students of early Teutonic institutions. Relying upon the basis of a common Aryan ancestry attributed to the Hindu and Germanic races, he propounded in a brilliant series of lectures delivered at Oxford in 1870 his famous theory of a parallel development of usage and legal thought in the East and West. Since that time Maine has been a recognized authority upon this subject, and his conclusions, though not undisputed elsewhere, have been generally accepted by his country men at home. Mr. Baden-Powell at length supplies English students for the first time with a document the necessity for which might have been obvious to persons of another race before the formulation of their theories. This consists of an account of the various forms of the village as it appears in India, giving proper attention in the investigation to the ethnical, climatic and geographical conditions under which these forms have developed.
This book has been referred to as (being the tardy collection of facts that ought to have preceded rather than followed a statement of theory) attesting a certain unscholarly impassiveness characteristic of the British rulers of India. Its bearing upon Maine's generalizations as to a supposed relationship between Asiatic and European village forms, and the probable collective or communal holding as typical of all primitive communities, may be dismissed in a word. Maine supposed the joint-village found in parts of northern India to be the unvarying type of the entire peninsula; it is found to occur in only restricted regions. He also ascribed to it a much greater antiquity than the facts warrant ; the raiyatwari, or individual-holding type, which he apparently knew nothing about, is both the older and more prevalent form. The joint-village was presumably introduced into India by Aryan and Scythian invaders; it is therefore of comparatively recent appearance there-which destroys the argument ascribing to all villages a common descent or evolution from this particular
type, but does not impair such deductions as can be traced to its possession by two widely separated branches of the same great family.
The real importance of Mr. Baden-Powell's work lies not in its relation to a rather outworn controversy but to the accessible information upon the subject of village constitution throughout India. He confesses, in his preface, "to have felt more concerned about marshalling the facts of the case and setting forth the conditions under which those facts are found, than with elaborating arguments and conclusions.” With a professional thoroughness now no longer limited to German scholarship he exhibits those physical and ethnical factors of the Indian continent which necessarily affect the problem. This inquiry-covering a third of the volume-leads to a discussion of such landholding customs as can be traced through their surviving representatives to the pre-Aryan occupants of the country. With a faithfulness that shows no consideration for the “general reader,' he searches out the remote and scattered descendants of the 'aborigines,'” and presents by a process of elimination a mass of material exhibiting vestiges of custom that can be traced to the period before Hindu influence was felt. The important deduction from this investigation—the labor of years—is summed up in a single modest paragraph: “It will be observed that nothing in any Kolarian or Dravidian custom as such, suggest a joint tribal holding of village or other areas ; nor does it show a village owned in shares by any particular group of families. Indeed the joint-family does not yet seem to be in existence.” The primitive village in this part of the world, therefore, was not the communistic Dorfgemeinde, but one of separate holdings, the original of the raiyatwari in its many forms. Sir J. B. Phear was, if we remember rightly, one of the first to show that if pre-historic man seems to have lived, like many of the higher mammals rather apart from his kind, it must have taken his descendants a long time to overcome this tendency and become gregarious. The tribal stage must in turn have existed long before it developed the settled village (as distinct from the encampment), and this presumably only as the product of circumstances; such were, in India, the need of clearing and fighting the jungle, of protection against beasts, etc. The close com munity of interest brought about by this process does not, as Mr. Baden-Powell shows, necessarily involve a knowledge of ownership in land in
a modern juridicial sense, but every tribesman was aware of his share in the labor or the conflict and was prepared to fight for his reward, i. e. his allotment, if necessary. It was a feeling for rather than an understanding of the idea of personal property ; it was not, however, the mere conception of co-partnership entertained by the Russian moujik in his mir; and herein seems to lie the fundamental difference between the separate holding and the joint-village. The universal type in the earliest known society of India was the former, not, as has been long held, the latter.
In general terms we may conclude that to the Aryan and subsequent invaders of India with their monarchical institutions was due the introduction of the joint-family into that part of Asia. Therefore it is that the communal village is found only in Upper India, the special region of their domination. An inference from this of wider historical interest would be the corollary that the Aryan invaders constituted a much smaller group in proportion to the aboriginal' inhabitants than is generally supposed, and that their conquest of the land consisted chiefly in the introduction of a higher civilization and their gradual amalgamation with the older races ; even this only in the Indus and Gangetic basins. Their relation to Indian history is, therefore, analagous to the earlier civilizing work of the so-called Bak-Sings in China. But this is another subject. The point that especially concerns our present inquiry is the comparatively limited area in which village communities are found. And among these it is interesting to note fundamental varieties in character: (1) those due to the clan stage of society where each member enjoys the right to share equally in the tribal acquisition, (2) those due to the joint inheritance of a number of co-heirs of the founder or conqueror of the locality, and (3) those due to voluntary associations of colonists. The details and internal structure of these different forms are examined with some minuteness in the volume before us, and the infinite multiplicity of these forms, their partial intermixture, their co-existence in many places with the other or raiyatwari type, and their persistent tendency to degeneration and effacement, sufficiently explain the misapprehension of the subject on the part of early British investigators. One curious result of the British occupation of India has been to arrest the ever-changing phases of these villages in their relationship to their headmen, zamindars, overlords, suzerain, or each other, and by the extension of a permanent Revenue Settlement system to crystalize them, as it were, while in a condition of flux.
To the student of India, its history and institutions, this volume is as interesting and important as to the devotee of that department of historical jurisprudence to which it will by most European readers be regarded as contributive. Apart from the thoroughness with which a very difficult investigation has been carried out, the author deserves recognition for his reserve in pronouncing conclusive results and for a certain aspect of consistency in structure and spelling very grateful to those accustomed to the loose methods of many students in Asiatic fields and their vagaries in so-called phonetic systems of transliterating proper names. Probably all Mr. Baden-Powell will claim for his book is that it sets forth materials in a condition fit for examination; it will, it is to be hoped, serve a higher purpose than a mere repository of information. Its method might be employed with advantage in similar investigations in every country of Asia. Its pages are fertile in suggestive comparisons with legal and social practices in other lands that ought eventually to tempt students of other peoples and languages to begin much-needed work investigating such topics elsewhere. Its recommendations of certain easily attainable improvements in the present Agricultural Tenure Returns are pertinent enough to arouse the officials to better their system of collecting and arranging information, and, possibly, to quicken in all Englishmen in India that sympathetic interest in the history and tribal institutions of their Asiatic subjects, the evident lack of which is one cause of their unpopularity in the East.
F. W. WILLIAMS. Yale University.
Études d' Économie Sociale (Théorie de la Répartition de la Richesse
Sociale). Par Léon Walras. Lausanne and Paris, 1896-viii, 464 pp.
In his original plan for a magnum opus, Walras included three parts: economic theory, applied political economy, and social economy. Those who know the vast amount of work embodied in his Économie Politique Pure, which deals with the first of these sections, will not be surprised at his inability to handle the other two with thes ame thoroughness in the brief labor time of our human life. He has on this account decided to publish collections of his miscellaneous writings on political and social economy, arranging them as far as possible in such a shape as to form a connected whole.
There is always danger that such a course of action will result in a loss of clearness. Essays written in an earlier period are based on modes of thought which have become unfamiliar to later readers. For instance, much is made of the conception of personality in the earlier chapters of the book before us; personality and free will are made the starting points of the author's whole analysis. But the reader of the present day will probably find difficulty in understanding what he means by either of these assumptions. Is personality a psychical or a legal phenomenon ? In other words is continuity or is responsibility the starting point in the assumption? If we accept the former interpretation, it proves too little ; if we accept the latter it proves too much. There is the same difficulty with the various conceptions of free will.
Another illustration of what will give trouble to the modern reader is found in the treatment of property in ideas. The author seeks to base this, as he bases many other things, on natural justice rather than natural selection; and he deals with property in ideas rather than with property in the means of rendering ideas available for others. He also regards property as fundamentally a right of use rather than a right of exclusion; and thereby renders the treatment of complex problems of property extremely difficult.
But it would be unjust to criticize points like this without at the same time calling attention to the ability which is shown in the treatment of many subjects with which the book deals. As specially meritorious we may commend the analysis of the phrase "taxation on capital" and the proof that much of the supposed antithesis between different forms of taxation is based on a very superficial understanding of the subject. Whether we agree or disagree with the conclusions of the tax policy for the present day, there can be no question of the value and interest of the theoretical treatment given by M. Walras.
A. T. H.
Elementary Political Economy. By Edwin Cannan. London, Henry
Frowde, 2d edition, 1897-12mo, 152 pp.
The former edition of this remarkable little book is so slightly known to American readers, that we welcome the opportunity to call attention to the present reprint. In no other work known to us is so excellent an account given, in small compass, of the