CHAPTER VI.

TRIBES.

Tribes express the inner dif

As

S the races of mankind part into different peoples (Nationen), so peoples divide into tribes (Stämme). The ferences of careful observer can trace the kinship of peoples in their lana people. guage, customs, and laws; but they themselves, though they belong to the same race, have become foreigners to one another, and can no longer understand one another's language.

Their influence,

for good or evil.

On the other hand, the different tribes of one people feel themselves bound in a common life by common language and custom. No doubt even among tribes tribal distinctions and peculiarities come to disturb the sense of common nationality. But the national language, to which the ears of all the tribes are open, maintains the sense of national kinship and unity. In dialects we see both elements, national unity and tribal peculiarity. Dialects bear the same relation to a language as particular tribal laws to common national law. Tribes, like peoples, are the product of history, which tends to develope and bring to light internal differences. But they are only fractions of a people: they have no independent national type of their own, but are only expressions, variously coloured or accentuated, of the common national spirit.

They thus perpetuate their separate existence, and keep alive the inner differences which influence the character of the people. While they give a richness and variety to national life, they have often proved a hindrance to the unity of a State. Though Rome grew strong by the internal conflicts of parties, resting originally on tribal differences, it was

the violence of tribal antagonisms which prevented the Greeks from forming a durable collective State.

The antagonism of tribes has also had a strong influence Tribal anin modern Europe, especially among the Germans, whose tagonism. ancient constitution was nothing but an organisation of tribes. The medieval tendency to individualism found in it a strong support, as the modern tendency to unity found a strong hindrance. This appears in the history of Italy and Germany. In both countries, it is true, the old tribes were broken up at an early date, in Italy mainly by the independent development of the towns, in Germany chiefly by the policy of the kings and the separation of territorial lordships. But tribal feeling and individualism still continued to be a power in the cities, and although, when once the older tribal duchies came to an end, the different tribes combined to form large territories, tribal jealousy and enmity still played a considerable part in the downfall of the German Empire, and even now the opponents of German unity make use of tribal prejudices to embarrass, if they cannot prevent, the national development.

as the

History teaches us that a tribe may furnish the starting- The tribe point for the formation of a new nation. It is more likely to germ of a become a nation and form a new State, however small, than new nation. to form a new people. This last stage of development is only reached when a fusion takes place, and with it an alteration of language, as happened with the Teutonic tribe of the Lombards in Italy, or if the tribe developes its dialect into a new language of its own, as the Dutch have done.

CHAPTER VII.

Divisions within the nation and

tribe.

W

CASTES.

7ITHIN the geographical limits of people, nation or tribe, appear further differences which correspond to no geographical limits-we may call them different platforms, so to speak, in the structure of society, or different tendencies of the collective life, or different grades of political importance and development. Such are Castes, Privileged Classes or Estates (Stände), and Classes.

The system of Castes has been most fully worked out in India, but has not been without influence in Egypt and Persia. It belongs preeminently to the Aryans of Asia, and has never been acclimatised in Europe. But in America it found a new application in the difference between the white and coloured races. The system of Estates (Stände) appears among many nations, both ancient and modern, but was carried to its fullest development in the Europe of the middle ages among the Teutonic nations. The system of Classes presupposes a rationally organised State, such as those of China, Athens and Rome, and many modern States. Castes are regarded as the work of nature, or the unalterable creation of God; Estates appear as the product of national history, and differences of occupation; Classes are an institution of the State. In Castes we see the authority of religious faith: in Estates, the power of social life, of economical and educational conditions; in Classes, the organising capacity of statesmen.

Castes are of necessity hereditary and unchangeable, like courses of masonry firmly built one over the other. Estates grow like plants, and have an organic development, like peoples

and States. In them free choice of profession comes in to modify or crush hereditary rights. In earlier times Estates are still hereditary and akin to Castes, but as civilisation advances, freedom of occupation comes in, and they approach to Classes. Classes, like works of art, alter with the different aims of the State.

Castes.

Brahmans.

The Indian Caste-system, which may be regarded as typical, The Indian is represented in the Laws of Manu as a creation of Brahma. The belief, which Plato wished to implant in his State by the myth of the metals", is fully established among the Hindoos. The highest Caste, that of the Brahmans, in which the (1) The Aryan blood remained purest, though not quite untainted by other elements, came from the mouth of God. They are therefore, as it were, the living word of God, the purest and fullest expression of the Divine. Science, religion and law are their special care. The meanest Brahman, as such, ranks higher than the king. Their nature is preeminently divine, and though they are not forbidden to occupy secular offices, and mix in secular business, their purity is heightened by abstinence from material pleasures 1. The man who strikes a Brahman with a blade of grass, incurs the condemnation of hell.

Kshat

The second Caste, the Kshatriyas, from among whom comes (2) The the king, is created of the arm of God. They are the in- riyas. carnation of force and physical strength, and are a Caste of born warriors and nobles. Though trade is not forbidden them, their proper calling is to bear arms.

Visas.

The third Caste, the Visas or Visayas, proceeds from the (3) The thighs of God. The higher civil professions belong to them: they are called to agriculture, cattle-raising, and commerce. The fourth and lowest Caste, the Sudras, springs from the (4) The feet of God. They are the servile population: devoted to the material wants of life, and unworthy to read the sacred books.

i Laws of Manu, ii. 162 (edited by A. Loiseleur Deslongschamps, Paris, 1833): A Brahman shall shun worldly honour like poison, and thirst for the scorn of men as for nectar.' [c. ii. § 162 in Sir W. Jones' Transl, edit. by Grady, Lond. 1869, p. 33.]

Sudras.

Inter

course

between Castes.

The origin of Castes

in differences of Race

or of Re

ligion.

The higher kind of marriage presupposes equality of birth: but a man of higher Caste may marry a wife of lower Caste, though a wife may not marry beneath her. But numerous mésalliances have in course of time produced many inconveniences, and have given rise to new hereditary pseudo-castes (Misskasten) of rejected outcasts.

It is very rarely possible for an individual to pass from one Caste to another: rigid exclusiveness is the general rule. The system of Caste prevails even after death, dominating the future life as well as the present. It is only very rarely, and at the cost of many thousand years of effort, that even a Kshatriya can rise to the divine height of a Brahman. On the other hand, a false step at once thrusts him downward, almost beyond hope of recovery.

We know that the Hindoos are mistaken in their belief, and that the Castes are in great measure the product of human history. In the Vedas is preserved the memory of a time when there were privileged classes (Stände), but as yet no Castes. The opposition between the three higher Castes, called collectively Aryans, and the Sudras, can be traced back to original difference of race: the white Aryans conquered the land of the dark-skinned Sudras, and settled there as their lords, just as the white Europeans settled among the primitive red population in America. The old name for Caste, 'Varna,' meaning 'colour,' points to this original opposition between white and dark races. As we go higher in the Castes, we find the white race purer, as we go lower we find more mixture with the original dark race 2. The two highest Castes stand out above the third, as in most Aryan peoples we find an aristocracy above the demos.

Finally, the elevation of the Brahmans over the Caste of knights and nobles, and even over the kings, was the last in time; and can only be explained, in my opinion, by the rise of the new pantheistic religion of Brahma, which won a spiritual

2 For the history and nature of the Indian Castes, see Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, Book II. 11; Gobineau, De l'inégalité des races humaines, ii. p. 135; M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, Book V. ch. iv, Eng. ed. [See art. India' by W. Hunter, in Encyclopædia Britannica.]