親族制度（研究）の進化---モーガン、レヴィ＝ストロース、ニーダム
京都大学人文科学研究所進化班、00/06/23
引用不可
１ はじめに
１９世紀半ばという時代
未開の発見、親族の発見
先史時代の発見 1830's（地質学）, 1860's
Lyell, Charles, Principles of Geology (1830-33), Antiquity
of Man (1863) エデン、ギリシャ・ローマの歴史から人類史へ、堕落から進歩へ
人類のpolygenismをめぐる論争
人類学の古典とされる書物が相次いで出版される。
Maine, Ancient Law (1861), Village Communities
(1871),
Bachofen, Das Mutterrecht (1861)
Fustel de Couranges, La cite antique (1864)
McLennan, Primitive Marraige (1865)
Morgan, League of the Iroquois (1851), Systems of Consanguinity
and Affinity (1871), Ancient Society (1877), House
and House Life of the American Aborigines (1881)
→エンゲルス、Der Ursprung der Familie...(1884)
ダーウィンの影響・社会進化論、しかし
Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859)
1871 モーガンは渡英してダーウィンらに会う。同じ年,The Descent of Man, Tylor
Primitive Cultureが出版。
2 謎としての類別的親族名称
親族研究の位相： 名称、規則、儀礼、行動
例 ドラヴィダ型親族名称体系（図参照）
何を表しているのか？→ 交叉イトコ婚
交叉イトコ婚とは？ 双側交叉イトコ婚と母方交叉イトコ婚
→ 限定交換と一般交換
「交叉イトコ」は本当に交叉イトコか？
系譜かカテゴリーか？
集団間の婚姻か集団内の婚姻か？
３ Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881)の親族名称論
1844 弁護士、 1855 Director of the Iron Mountain Rail Road Co.
1859 タミル語の親族名称との出会い
1861-68議員、
1865に完成、1867に再提出、受理。
2-1 いくつかのテーマ
北米での調査と海外でのアンケート
記述的体系と類別的体系の発見
記述的--父母、夫婦、兄弟姉妹、息子と娘はそれ以外の人々に使用されない。
分布（起源）prevalence（北米インディアンのアジア起源）と進化（進歩）
地理的分布と普遍的人類史
未開と文明
乱婚から一夫一妻制へ、財の相続 → 『古代社会』
原始的乱婚から外婚制度へ
交叉イトコ婚の欠如
2-2 Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human
Family 1871 pp.xii, pp.558
● All the forms thus far discovered resolve themselves, in a comprehensive
sense, into two, the descriptive and classificatory, which are
the reverse of each other in their fundamental conceptions(vi).
● A comparison of these systems, and a careful study of the slight
but clearly marked changes through which they have passed, have
led, most unexpectedly, to the recovery, conjecturally at least,
of the great series or sequence of customs and institutions which
mark the pathway of manﾕs progress through the ages of Barbarism;
and by means of which he raised himself from a state of promiscuous
intercourse to final civilizationﾉ.Indeed, it seems probable that
the progress of mankind was greater in degree, and in the extent
of its range, in the age of barbarism than in the ages of civilization
(vi-vii).
● 目次の構成
part 1 Descriptive System of Relationship Aryan, Semitic, and
Uralian Families.
part 2 Classificatory System of Relationship, Ganowanian Family.
part 3 Classificatory System of Relationship, Turanian and Malayan
Families.
● Introduction IroquoisとOjibwa
Every term of relationship (of the Ojibwa Indians)was radically
different from the corresponding term in the Iroquois; but the
classification kindred was the same(3).
● In the system of relationship of the Aryan, Semitic, and Uralian
families, the collateral lines are maintained distinct and perpetually
divergent from the lineal, which results, theoretically as well
as practically, in a dispersion of the blood.... This divergence
is one of the characteristics of the descriptive system. On the
contrary, in that of the Turanian, American Indian, and Malayan
families, the several collateral lines, near and remote, are finally
brought into, and merged in the lineal line, thus theoretically,
if not practically, preventing a dispersion of the blood.... This
mergence is, in like manner, one of the characteristics of the
classificatory system (13).
● While the existence of two radically distinct forms appears
to separate the human family, so far as it is represented in the
tables, into two great divisions, the Indo-European and the Indo-American,
the same testimony seems to draw closer together the several families
of which these divisions are composed, without forbidding the
supposition that a common point of departure between the two may
yet be discovered. If the evidence deposited in these systems
of relationship tends, in reality, to consolidate the families
named into two great divisions, it is a tendency in the direction
of unity of origin of no inconsiderable importance(13).
● After the several forms of consanguinity and affinity, which
now prevail in the different families of mankind, have been presented
and discussed, the important question will present itself, how
far these forms become changed with the progressive changes of
society(13).
● There is one powerful motive which might, under certain circumstances,
tends to the overthrow of the classificatory form and the substitution
of the descriptive, but it would arise after the attainment of
civilization (14). This is the inheritance of estates.... The
protection of the law, or of the State, would become substituted
for that of kinsmen.... In Tamilian society, where my brother's
son and my cousin's son are both my sons, a useful purpose may
have been subserved by drawing closer, in this manner, the kindred
bond; but in a civilized sense it would be manifestly unjust to
place either of these collateral sons upon an equality with my
own son for the inheritance of my estate. Hence the growth of
property and the settlement of its distribution might be expected
to lead to a more precise discrimination of the several degrees
of consanguinity if they were confounded by the previous system(14).
● 日本について、一夫一妻制
● (T)he marriage between single pairs and the descriptive system
of relationship had become established institutions in the Aryan
and Semitic families prior to or simultaneous with the commencement
of the civilization of their several branches. Neither is it improbable
that in the preceding ages of barbarism they possessed a classificatory
system(474).
●conjectural solution of its origin(489),
乱婚promiscuous intercourseから一夫一妻制へ、親族から家族へ
1 Promiscuous Intercourse,
2 The Intermarriage or Cohabitation of Brothers and Sisters,
3 The Communal Family, 兄弟姉妹とその子供たちからなる家族
4 The Hawaiian Custom, 男は一夫多妻、女は一妻多夫
5 The Malayan Form of the Classificatory System of Relationship,
6 The Tribal Organization,(外婚制）
7 The Turanian and Ganowanian System of Relationship,
8 Marriage between Single Pairs,
9 The Barbarian Family,
10 Polygamy,
11 The Patriarchal Family,
12 Polyandria,
13 The Rise of Property with the Settlement of Lineal Succession
to Estates,
14 The Civilized Family,
15 The Overthrow of the Classificatory System of Relationship,
and the Substitution of the Descriptive.
３ レヴィ＝ストロース
『親族の基本構造』第２８章「複合的諸構造への移行」
基本構造から複雑構造へ
４ 進化から変容へ
ニーダムその他
参考文献
Godelier, Maurice, Thomas T. Trautmann, Franklin E. Tjon Sie Fat
(eds.) 1993. Transformation of Kinship. Washington: Smithsonian
Institute Press
Kuper, Adam 1988. The Invention of Primitive Society: Transformation
of an Illusion. London: Routledge.
Needham, Rodney 1974. The Evolution of Social Classification:
A Commentary on the Warao Case. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-,
en Volkenkunde. 130: 16-43.
Trautmann, Thomas R. 1981. Dravidian Kinship. London: Cambridge
University Press.
----- 1987. Lewis Henry Morgan and the Invention of Kinship.
Berkeley: University of California Press.