“It is not during life only, that a man looks for the service
of his sons. It is his consolation in declining years, to think
that they will continue the performance of the prescribed rites
in the hall of ancestors, and at the family tombs, when he is
no more: and it is the absence of this prospect which makes the
childless doubly miserable. The superstition derives influence
from the importance attached by the government to this species
of posthumous duty: a neglect of which is punishable, as we have
seen, by the laws. Indeed, of all the subjects of their care,
there are none which the Chinese so religiously attend to as the
tombs of their ancestors, conceiving that any neglect is sure to
be followed by worldly misfortune.”—(The Chinese, by John Francis
Davis, chap. ix, pp. 131-134. ed. Knight, 1840.)
Mr. Mill notices the same state of feeling among the
Hindoos.—(History of British India, book ii, chap. vii. p. 381,
ed. 8vo.)
[89] Xenoph. Hellen. i, 5, 8; Herodot. i, 147; Suidas,
Ἀπατουρία—Ζεὺς Φράτριος—Ἀθηναία φρατρία, the presiding god of the
phratric union.—Plato, Euthydem. c. 28, p. 302; Demosth. adv.
Makart. p. 1054. See Meier, De Gentilitate Atticâ, pp. 11-14.
The πάτριαι at Byzantium, which were different from θίασοι,
and which possessed corporate property (τά τε θιασωτικὰ καὶ τὰ
πατριωτικὰ, Aristot. Œconomic. ii, 4), are doubtless the parallel
of the Athenian phratries.
Such were the manifestations of Grecian sociality, as we read them in
the early constitution, not merely of Attica, but of other Grecian
states besides. To Aristotle and Dikæarchus, it was an interesting
inquiry to trace back all political society into certain assumed
elementary atoms, and to show by what motives and means the original
families, each having its separate meal-bin and fireplace,[90] had
been brought together into larger aggregates. But the historian
must accept as an ultimate fact the earliest state of things which
his witnesses make known to him; and in the case now before us, the
gentile and phratric unions are matters into the beginning of which
we cannot pretend to penetrate.
[90] Dikæarchus ap. Stephan. Byz. v. Πατρὰ; Aristot. Polit. i, 1,
6: Ὁμοσιπύος and ὁμοκάπνους are the old words cited by the latter
from Charondas and Epimenidês.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account