# Folk-Lore/Volume 31/Presidential Address

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS.
The custom seems to be established that your President is expected to make his retirement as well as his election the occasion for an Address, quite irrespective of whether he has anything he particularly wishes to say. This burden was especially heavy on our late President, owing to his tenure of office lasting through the greater part of the duration of the war, but his nimble wit and ready pen found him equal to the occasion. A considerable spell of ill health and a marked increase in University work during the past year have precluded me from offering to you any elaborate essay, and I must content myself, if not yourselves, with a few desultory remarks.
I must confess myself rather in sympathy with the older folklorists when they regarded folklore simply as the lore of the folk—the folk being in this sense defined as the backward element in a more civilised community. This is a distinct line of study. The actions, oral traditions and beliefs of the folk were considered as “survivals.” Personally I should be inclined to speak of them as “vestiges.”
In biological nomenclature we may speak of certain ancient types which here and there persist as “survivals,” that is, forms which, owing to various conditions which need not here be specified, have survived to the present day. There is no reason to suppose them as being essentially different from their forebears of past geological ages, they still retain their individuality and functions.
​Further, in biology, we define “vestiges” as organs which were once active and essential, but which in process of evolution have become of very secondary or of negligible importance; their functions may have changed, but in true vestiges their function has become obsolete. They are relics of a vanished utility which have not yet been eliminated from the organism.
If these definitions be accepted it seems to be a necessary corollary that the lore of the folk belongs more to the latter category than to the former. A large proportion of the usages and beliefs classed as folklore certainly do not retain the individuality and functions which they once had, in this sense they are not survivals. They are attenuated, broken-down, and, so far as the folk are concerned, practically meaningless phenomena. They are functions which have had their day, but which still persist, partly by means of the inertia of the mind of the folk, but mainly because they evoke certain pleasurable sensations, such for example, as the satisfaction which is experienced when carrying on what is known or felt to be traditional, as is expressed in such a phrase as, “as we have done before.”
They thus more or less unconsciously strengthen a feeling of solidarity between the ages. The socialising effects of conjoint action whether in simple rite or play are true psychological survivals, attenuated they may be, but they still belong to the same category as those which permeated the social act when it was an important function of the community. It may be taken for granted that the persistence of almost any action or idea is due to the fact that it more or less satisfies some need, and thus from the point of view of psychology it may be regarded as a survival. On the other hand we now recognise that many elements in folklore are disrupted customs or parts only of culture complexes, which formerly were what might be described as “going concerns,” but now they ​have lost their social utility, and in this sense they are social vestiges.
Sir Laurence Gomme has stated that, “Survivals are carried along the stream of time by people whose culture-status is on a level with the culture in which the survivals originated. It matters not that these people are placed in the midst of a higher civilisation or alongside of a higher civilisation. When once the higher civilisation penetrates to them the survival is lost [or becomes an attenuated vestige]. There is not continuity between modern and primitive thought here, but, on the contrary, there is strong antagonism, ending with the defeat and death of the primitive survival. . . . It is, indeed, a mistake to suppose, as some authorities apparently do, that survivals can only be studied when they are embedded in a high civilisation. It is almost a more fruitful method to study them when they appear in the lower strata. . . . The doctrine of evolution is so strong upon us that we are apt to apply its leading ideas insensibly to almost every branch of human history. But folklore being what it is, namely, the survival of traditional ideas or practices among a people whose principal members have passed beyond the stage of civilisation which these ideas and practices once represented, it is impossible for it to have any development.” Elsewhere he says, “To deal adequately with these survivals is the accepted province of the science of folklore, and it must therefore account for their existence, must point out the causes for their arrested development, and the causes for their long continuance in a state of crystallisation or degradation after the stoppage has been effected.”
I do not desire to elaborate my point, but I would merely like to suggest that it might be useful if folklorists bore in mind the distinctions I have endeavoured to ​indicate. In any case it is essential that our terminology should be as precise as possible.
Many folklorists pay almost as much attention to the facts of ethnology as to vestiges of older cultures in a civilised community, and not without reason, as from these data they hope to find an explanation of the vestiges, Our own excellent Handbook of Folklore (1914) is as much a textbook on certain aspects of ethnology as it is of folklore. It is also for this reason that the Society is justified in publishing papers on the manners and customs of primitive and backward peoples which might equally appropriately be published in journals devoted to ethnology. Such investigations are the comparative data which in certain cases may or may not prove to be necessary for the elucidation of the manners and customs of our remote ancestors. From this point of view they would have been welcomed by the founders of our science, but these probably would have regarded them as being purely ethnological data, since they recognised a clear-cut difference between ethnology and folklore. I think that at the present time there is a tendency to regard these two subjects as practically synonymous; if that be so there will be a danger of folklore proper being swamped by ethnology. I would like to insist that while folklorists may and should employ all the ethnological data that can be of service to them they should never lose sight of the fact that folklore is a definite line of enquiry, and that they should jealously preserve the claim that has been pegged out for them.
I now turn to the record of our Society, and when we look at the length of some ten feet which the bound volumes take up on the bookshelf we cannot but feel gratified at the amount which has been accomplished during the past years. Broadly speaking, the energies of our members and contributors have been directed along several main channels.
First and foremost I place the recorders of folklore in ​sense of the term I have indicated above. This is the foundation of our study, and we have only to glance through the volumes of the Journal, the various volumes of the County Folk-Lore and other additional publications of our Society, to see that a vast amount of these necessary data has been collected and recorded. A great deal doubtless yet remains to be garnered, and we cannot too urgently impress on all those interested in such subjects that delay spells oblivion.
The collection of folklore is a somewhat lengthy process and cannot be done in a satisfactory manner by a casual visitor to a given locality. Our honoured past President, Miss C. S. Burne, in the Handbook of Folklore, from the wealth of her own experience and from that of others, has indicated the difficulties of this kind of research and the special qualifications necessary for a successful investigator. My experience in this respect in the British Islands has been very limited in amount, but the conditions of work among our own folk have much in common with those among savages, and the methods of collecting and the qualifications necessary for the investigator are extremely similar.
I think all will agree that without doubt the first duty of our Society is to record the items of folklore in our own country and in Europe generally, such publication being based upon direct enquiries in the field. All that is now possible to collect should be collected and preserved by being printed. There are many persons who have a peculiar facility for the collection of folklore, and they should all be utilised, but should it be difficult or impossible for them to record their observations others may be found to do this for them. I have known in other fields of much valuable information being lost because the person who collected it lacked the power or the interest to write it down; even in this country co-operation may frequently be necessary.
​Having acquired the information, the next step is to determine what is to be done with it. Disconnected records appear to possess some interest for certain persons, but they have no real value, they are materials but not an edifice—they tell no story. There are several methods of dealing with such material, as for example:
1. All the data from a given area may be collected together, and we have such useful books as the County Folklores. These give us a general conception concerning the mentality and practices of the local folk, and we owe a deep debt of gratitude to those who make these compilations. But a collection of this kind is only a means to an end. Information quâ information is practically of no value unless it has some bearing with regard to other information. The County Folklores do enable us to compare the mentality and practices of various parts of the country, but, even so, this does not take us very far. We have yet to discover what is the significance of the resemblances and differences between the folklore of two or more areas.
2. Another method is to plot the data on maps, a mode of investigation to which I referred last year, which has been greatly neglected by folklorists though it is one which promises very interesting and suggestive results. It can be adapted practically for all the data of folklore, though doubtless only certain types or groups of the data would yield definite results.
3. A third method is to group together all the data of folklore which have a periodicity in a time sequence. This is the work which is being undertaken by our Brand Committee.
When one studies the ceremonies and lesser rites of backward peoples it becomes evident that many of them have their roots in the economic life of these peoples. There are the observations which are made on natural phenomena in order to indicate when operations should ​begin or end, there are ceremonies or rites to be observed just before or at the beginning of the operations, others may take place during their continuance, more especially in horticulture or agriculture, finally, others occur at their termination. Observances of this kind are usually regarded as being as necessary and practical as the technical operations themselves. Most frequently they are connected with tillage of the soil, but the opening of a fishing or hunting season is often ushered in with analogous observances, and the ripening of wild fruit may be the occasion for rites which we loosely term as magical.
What is so evident in the customs of savage and barbaric peoples must have held good for the ancestors of civilised peoples, and therefore they should be sought for among the lore of the folk. We may anticipate that many suggestive conclusions will be reached when various scattered items of folklore are grouped in chronological order, and it may be found that there is an unexpected connection between various apparently unrelated items of folklore, even in those in which periodicity is not now an essential feature. Our ultimate aim is not merely to reconstruct a ceremony or rite, but to establish it and all that is related to it in a culture complex and thus demonstrate its significance. After I had written this, I find, as so often has been the case, that Sir Laurence Gomme had previously expressed the idea that was in my mind. He says, “In India primitive economics and religion go hand in hand as part of the village life of the people; in England primitive economics and survivals of old religions, which we call folklore, go hand in hand as part of the village life of the people. And it is not in the province of students to separate one from the other when they are considering the question of origin.”
It is not only rites that are seasonal, games and toys may be equally so, as also costumes and other aspects of ​human activity. However this may be, the basic economic facts of life are seasonal. There is a time to sow and a time to reap, and it is of the utmost importance that man should know what is the best time for the execution of the various operations connected with hunting, fishing, horticulture, and the like, and, having by practical experience discovered the best time, then to know when it recurs. The solar clock records daily time at too frequent intervals to be of any practical value, and in the tropics at all events the variations in its apparent rising and setting at different times of the year are too slight to be of much practical importance unless a certain degree of culture has been attained. The Incas, for example, paid very little attention to the stars, but based their calendar on solar observations. They observed the seasonal risings and settings of the sun in relation to specially built small towers, regulated their season for sowing by the solar and not by the lunar year, and the equinoxes were also determined by means of the shadow of a pillar falling on a circle. The phases of the moon provide a method of dividing time by lunar periods, but these have to be counted if annual occurrences are to be noted. The lunar clock has, so-to-speak, a more varied and mysterious mechanism than the solar, and it certainly has impressed itself to a great extent in folklore, a fact to which Dr. Rivers has drawn the attention of the Society. Finally, the sidereal clock, by the rising and setting of stars and constellations with its annual periodicity, gives the precise information that is required, thus the agricultural and other operations are generally regulated by the very backward peoples by the movements of stars. Stars are grouped by most peoples into constellations representing human and animal forms, concerning which numerous tales have arisen, but always one finds that the basis of this interest in the heavenly ​bodies is its practical utility in the economic life of the people.
In a suggestive paper on “The Economic Study of Religion” Miss Margaretta Morris says, “It is only natural that the idea that most vitally touches a man’s whole life, the idea of God, there should be an idealization of what is necessary to his welfare. The primitive hunter worships an animal god; the totemic tribe living by the seaside or by a river, a fish god; the agriculturist, the principle of fertility, or perhaps the very sheaves of corn themselves; pastoral tribes have their sacred cattle, or a god who is represented in the form of a bull or sheep. The idea of God tends to assume the form of whatever is useful to the community. On the practical side of religion we find a similar effect of utilitarian influence. Those customs which are in themselves beneficial are given a religious sanction. . . . In tracing the relation of religion and economics, it is well to begin our interpretation of a people’s faith by asking what is their chief dependence, and then looking to see whether an idealization of it has been taken up and incorporated into the religious ideas; and our interpretation of a custom by looking to the practical effect it has. It is easy to see why even the most religious people’s moral ideas are often inconsistent with their beliefs. They have grown up separately in different relation to economic needs, and are so often estranged that even the most ardent desire for unity of life cannot harmonize them. . . . Although we must study creeds and cults separately on account of their separate origins, we cannot ignore their close connection. . . . The relation of religion to the life of a people is by no means a simple one. And it is further complicated by the well-known power of religious conservatism, which enables both ideas and practices to survive long after there is any reason for them. Past methods and manners of life, the good ​old times, proverbially have their stronghold in religion. . . . This force of conservatism warns us that we must be careful in relating ideas to their environment, to take into consideration past as well as present environments” (pp. 402-404). Miss Morris goes on to say that while men worship the animals most useful to them “it must not be forgotten that there is also a negative [side], which leads to the worship of harmful animals, such as the snake, the crocodile and the shark” (pp. 409-410); being a crocodile myself I am not likely to be oblivious to this aspect of religion. “The animal [or plant] is worshipped because it is useful to the community, because they have a feeling of dependence for life upon it. And on the other hand, the animal [or plant] is sacrificed because, again, it is useful. Sacrifice is the giving up of something really valuable to the worshipper” (p. 422).
The broad economic conditions of a people imprint themselves on the customs and religious life of that people, for example, in Central and Western Asia and in Arabia the pastoral life of so many of the inhabitants affects the social grouping, and as we so commonly have a patriarchal organisation so a sublimated patriarch would readily be an attribute of a supreme god, who might persist for a long time as a tribal god. Should his followers become possessed with a lust of conquest and wide domain, the god follows suit, as in Islam. Should the followers of a tribal god, by captivity or otherwise, come into close relation with other forms of religion, their god may be freed from tribal shackles and become a god of a more universal nature. A fishing population projects its avocations into its magico-religious life. More markedly is this the case with sedentary agricultural peoples, and similarly in other cases. Certain peoples with mother-right, or those who have emerged therefrom, pay reverence to a mother goddess. Christianity, as is befitting to a religion that aspires to universal extension, is a regular museum of creeds and ​rites of this kind; its symbolism is drawn from herding, fishing, agriculture, arboriculture and other occupations.
So far I have considered certain aspects of the culture of any given people, but we know that there are very few, if any, peoples who have not been affected by intercourse with other peoples, and thereby a mixture of culture has resulted.
When this takes place, whether it be between two peoples of similar grades of culture or of different grades of culture some adjustment must take place. The adjustment that takes place, say, for example, between a matrilineal and a patrilineal people will have much the appearance of an evolution from one condition to the other. I do not say such an evolution has never taken place, indeed Dr. Hartland has adduced evidence that it does, but in all cases where a transition of such a nature occurs, it must be definitely ascertained whether these intermediate stages may not be due to an amalgamation. An adjustment introduces a new factor into each element of the population and the final result may eventually be different from either condition. Certain factors in one culture will prove themselves to be prepotent and they will characterise the resultant cultures; this seems always to be the case when a patrilineal community fuses with one with a matrilineal organisation, so that while the new condition is patrilineal there are persistent vestiges of matrilineal descent, and thus we come more directly within the field of folklore.
To take one out of many examples of syncretism in ethnology, it is well known what difficulties occur when one people with a lunar reckoning of time are merged with another with a solar method, of which our own almanac with the vagaries of Easter affords a good example.
A further complication may take place by various ceremonies and rites being performed on the occasion of ​an occasional important ceremony with which they have no necessary connection, as Williamson found among the Mafulu.
Comparative religion is saturated with examples of the intermixing and transformation of semi-sacred and sacred personages, whether they be ancestors, heroes, spirits, godlings, gods, or what not, and here we are well within the rightful domain of folklore, however we may define it.
Instead of the adjustment acting by integration it may act by inhibition, as is often the case in the struggle for existence between religions. The religious practices of the conquered or subordinate element of a mixed population may be, so-to-speak, trampled underground, and can be carried on only surreptitiously; in a short time degeneration must take place and may result in a travesty of religion as did the cult of witches of which Miss M. A. Murray has informed us in a series of valuable papers in Man.
A similar side-light on what has more or less obtained in Europe is afforded by the condition of Peru during the latter half of the sixteenth century as recorded by “The Ynca Garcilasso de la Vega,” the son of an Inca princess and a Spanish nobleman. As his account deals with earlier customs and their persistence into his time, and the imposition of Inca rule and religion upon a conquered population, it may be regarded as a handbook of folklore which had the inestimable advantage of being written while most of the customs were survivals and few had become vestiges, the mechanism by means of which such a change takes place is also clearly indicated.
​“For the better understanding of the idolatry, mode of life and customs of the Indians of Peru,” he says, “it will be necessary for us to divide those times into two epochs” (I. p. 46). This he does in order that the customs and gods of the Incas may not be confounded with those of the indigenous population. “It must be understood, then, that in the first epoch some of the Indians were little better than tame beasts, and others much worse than wild beasts. . . . Each province, each nation, each house had its gods, different from one another. . . . Thus they worshipped herbs, plants, flowers, all kinds of trees, high hills, great rocks. . . . hollow caves. . . . pebbles, . . . they worshipped different animals, some for their fierceness, such as the tiger [jaguar], lion [puma], and bear; and as they looked upon them as gods, they did not fly from them . . . and allowed themselves to be killed and eaten . . . They also adored other animals for their cunning, such as foxes and monkeys . . . some nations adored the eagle because they thought they were descended from it, as well as the cuntur [condor], pp. 47, 48.
“Some worshipped the earth, and called it Mother, because it yielded their fruits; others adored the air for its gift of breath to them, saying that it gave them life; others the fire for its heat, and because they cooked their food with it; others worshipped a sheep [llama], because of the great flocks they reared, . . . others adored maize or sara, as they call it, because it was their bread; others worshipped other kinds of corn and pulse, according to the abundance of the yield in each province.
“The inhabitants of the sea-coast, besides an infinity of other gods, worshipped the sea, which they called Mama-ccocha or, “Mother Sea,” meaning that it filled the office of a mother, by supplying them with fish. . . . Besides this ordinary .system of worship, which prevailed throughout the coast, the people of the different provinces adored the fish that they caught in greatest abundance. . . . ​For this reason they worshipped sardines in one region, where they killed more of them than any other fish; in others, the skate; in others, the dog fish; . . . in others, for want of larger gods, the crabs. . . . In short, they had whatever fish was most serviceable to them as their gods” (pp. 49, 50).
Thus hunters, fishers, herders, and tillers worshipped that which provided them with sustenance and to this extent their religion had an economic basis.
According to our author, “Our Father the Sun seeingthe human race in the condition I have described, had compassion upon them, and sent down from heaven to the earth a son and daughter to instruct them in the knowledge of our Father the Sun, that they might adore Him and adopt Him as their God; also to give them precepts and laws by which to live as reasonable and civilised men, and to teach them to live in houses and towns, to cultivate maize and other crops, to breed flocks, and to use the fruits of the earth like rational beings, instead of living like beasts. . . . Finally, He said to them:— ‘When you have reduced these people to our service, you shall maintain them in habits of reason and justice, by the practice of piety, clemency, and meekness. . . . And from this time I constitute and name you as kings and lords over all the tribes, that you may instruct them in your rational works and government’ ” (pp. 64, 65). Garcilasso admits there are other traditions concerning the origin of the Incas, but these do not concern us here.
The essential fact is that a new civilisation appeared in Peru which dominated the varied low indigenous cultures. According to Garcilasso de la Vega, “the Inca were influenced by the noblest motives in their work of empire-building, each war is shewn in the light of a crusade to spread good government and a spiritual religion among less enlightened tribes; forcible measures were only employed in the last resort when long and patient negotiation had ​failed. . . . Sarmiento de Gamboa, on the other hand, . . . gives quite a different picture. In his work the Inca appear as greedy beyond all else of power . . . their wars were wars of aggression pure and simple . . . towards their subjects they were cruel and unmerciful, holding them fettered in the bonds of a miserable oppression. . . . No doubt the Inca, as the Spaniards themselves, used the name of religion as a pretext for extending their power, but the power once gained was not abused, and the laws by which they governed, though strict, were not unnecessarily harsh, and were well suited to the psychology of their subjects.”
“The condition of the people under the Incas, though one of tutelage and dependence, at the same time secured a large amount of material comfort and happiness. . . . This was indeed socialism such as dreamers in past ages have conceived, and unpractical theorists now talk about.”
The deeds of the Inca Pachacutec epitomise the Inca policy, “he completely reformed the empire, as well as regards their vain religion, which he provided with new rites and ceremonies, destroying the numerous idols of his vassals, as by enacting new laws and regulations for the daily and moral life of the people, forbidding the abuses and barbarous customs to which the Indians were addicted before they were brought under his rule.”
He thus anticipated, but by more humane and states-manlike methods, the ruthless subjugation of the Peruvians by the Spaniards. The culture of the Incas was destroyed and their beneficent worship of the sun, which was gradually integrating the religions of the various peoples, was forcibly replaced by an unholy triple alliance of the sword, the cross, and the lust for gold.
​Sir Laurence Gomme in his interesting little book Ethnology in Folklore (1892), says, “The most important fact to note in the examination of each fragment of folklore is the point of arrested development” (p. 11). He finds that the stages of development at which the several items of folklore have been arrested are not at the same level; and they could not therefore have been produced by one arresting power. He goes on to point out that the conflict between Paganism and Christianity would account for one line of arrestment, but there is an earlier one which must be identified with “the arrival of the Aryan race into a country occupied by non-Aryans” (p. 14). The object of his book is to point out contrasted beliefs and practices in our own islands which lend support to the view that they belong to these two ethnic strata.
Sir Laurence was a pioneer in this method of research and blazed the trail for his successors,—doubtless further investigations will in time enable a finer analysis to be made, and certain folklore items may yet be allocated to some at least of the various cultural drifts which at different times reached our islands. The history of ancient England cannot be written without the aid of folklore, and even the historian of later dates requires the assistance of folklorists.
Very few historians recognise the sources of information that are available to them, even now they are too much obsessed by written documents. In 1908 Sir Laurence Gomme published an extremely valuable book entitled Folklore as an Historical Science, in which he further developed and added to the principles he laid down in his earlier book. He says, “Every nation has the right to go back as far in its history as it is possible to reach. It can only do this by the help of comparative folklore. In our own country we have seen how history breaks down, and yet historical records in Britain are perhaps the richest in Europe. The traditional materials known to us as folklore are the only means left to us, and we can only ​properly avail ourselves of these when we have mastered the method of science which it is necessary to use in their investigation” (p. 179). It is to Sir Laurence Gomme’s undying credit that he insisted upon scientific method, and did his best to construct such a method. His chapter on “Materials and Methods” is a masterly effort in this direction. In dealing with comparative folklore he makes the following remarks, “We must know the exact position of each item before we begin to compare, or we may be comparing absolutely unlike things. The exact position of each item of folklore is not to be found from one isolated example. It has first to be restored to its association with all the known examples of its kind, so that the earliest and most complete form may be recorded. That is the true position to which it has been reduced as a survival. This restored and complete example is then in a position to be compared either with similar survivals in other countries on the same level of culture, or within the same ethnological or political sphere of influence, or with living customs, rites, or beliefs of peoples of a more backward state of culture or in a savage state of culture. Comparison of this kind is of value. Comparison of a less technical or comprehensive kind may be of value in the hands of a great master; but it is often not only valueless but mischievous in the hands of less experienced writers, who think that comparison is justified wherever similarity is discovered. Similarity in form, however, does not necessarily mean similarity in origin. It does not mean similarity in motive. Customs and rites which are alike in practice can be shown to have originated from quite different causes, to express quite different motifs, and cannot therefore be held to belong to a common class, the elements of which are comparable” (p. 171).
Only those who have collected first hand information in the field, and more particularly in several fields, can fully realise the imperfections of the vast majority of the records ​enshrined in the accounts given us by residents and travellers. The mass of data that has not been seen, or very imperfectly seen, that has been misunderstood, or incorrectly recorded, the many pitfalls of omission and commission cause one at times to wonder at the temerity of those who feel confidence in what is termed the comparative method. Were all known, or even the greater part, the confidence might not be misplaced, but in the circumstances great caution is necessary. One is perhaps fairly safe so-to-speak in going from “Dan to Beersheba,” that is in comparisons within a fairly uniform cultural area, but it is quite another matter ranging from “China to Peru.” In this case the only real justification is the possibility that the customs in question may be part of a complex which has travelled over extended areas as an ethnical or a cultural migration. As I referred in my previous Presidential Address to the recent trend of ethnology which is concerned with this problem I need not now enlarge upon it.
In conclusion, one fact stands out prominently, and that is the extreme complexity of our science. The lore of the folk, may seem simple, possibly trivial, to most “superior persons,” but the problems that it opens out to the folklorist are bewildering in their complexity. They cannot be solved, as is too often attempted, by guesses; their significance cannot be satisfactorily explained by mere comparisons; the only sound procedure is by scientific methods, the grammar of the science has to be formulated, and its terms used with precision. A comprehensive study of folklore implies an adequate knowledge of the material, social, and psychical life of the people investigated, of their neighbours, and of all those who may at any time have influenced them. Who is sufficient for these things!
A. C. Haddon.
* ↑ Folklore as an Historical Science, 1908, pp. 156-7.
* ↑ Ethnology in Folklore, 1892, p. II.
* ↑ Folklore as an Historical Science, p. 360.
* ↑ Gaicilasso de la Vega, Royal Commentaries, i. pp. 177, 178, 180.
* ↑ “The Sociological Significance of Myth,” Folk-Lore, xxiii. 1912, p. 316.
* ↑ Journ. Amer. Oriental Soc. xxiv. 1903, pp. 394-426.
* ↑ “Matrilineal Kinship, and the Question of its Priority,” Mem. of the American Anthropological Association, iv. 1917, pp. 1-87.
* ↑ R. W. Williamson, The Mafulu Mountain People of British New Guinea, 1912, p. 147.
* ↑ Vols. xviii. 1918, Nos. 34, 50, 61, 81, 103; xix. 1919, Nos. 27, 74.
* ↑ First Part of the Royal Commentaries of the Yncas, by the Ynca Garcilasso de la Vega, translated by Clements R. Markham. London: Hakluyt Society, i. 1869, ii. 1871. First published in Lisbon in 1609.
* ↑ T. A. Joyce, South American Archæology. London, 1912, pp. 86, 87.
* ↑ Sir Clements Markham, The Incas of Peru. London, 1910, pp. 167, 169.
* ↑ Royal Commentaries, ii. p. 202.