i/S The Origin of Exogamy and Toteniism.
The rule of one totem-kin wedding into only one other totem-kin in the opposite phratry must be earlier than marriage into any kin of the opposite phratry. When men, as among the Dieri, or any other tribe with female descent and two phratries, had once been permitted to seek wives in all of the totem-kins of the phratry not their own, they never could submit to a restriction limiting them, for no conceivable reason, to brides from a single totem-kin. The only reason for restrictions being, by the ordinary theory, closeness of consanguinity, there could be no objection to Water Hen, in phratry A, wedding into any totem-kin of phratry B. ?vlr. Howitt, however, writes- that "the Ura- bunna restriction " for " marriage to one or more totems") "is certainly later in origin than the Dieri rule." *3
This seems impossible. Men who had once enjoyed the wide freedom and ample latitude of choice of the Dieri would never limit themselves to brides from a single totem- kin, and do that for no conceivable reason, except that which I have suggested. Dingo, who may only marry Water Hen, is not consanguineous with any of the other totem-kins into which he may not marry : he is not barred from union with them for that cause. Reason, if there were a dislike of consanguine marriages, would urge a larger latitude of choice than a single kinship offers, for, when two small kinships marry exclusively with each other, they both become extremely consanguine. Therefore the Urabunna are forced to allow first cousins to marry, as far as the age-grades rules permit ; they have no choice if they are to marry at all. On the other hand, the Dieri, among whom members of any totem-kin of B phratry may marry into any totem-kins of A phratry, are able to indulge their consciences by forbidding all marriages between what we call " first cousins." Mr. Howitt himself sees that this rule, " the Dieri rule is evidently a development of that of the "C/. cit., p. 189.
