[Footnote 52: This is the view of Dr. Durkheim, who explains the blood superstition. Cf. Reinach, _L’Anthropologie_, x. 652.] [Footnote 53: _History of Human Marriage_, p. 352.] [Footnote 54: Compare Mr. Crawley, _Mystic Rose_, pp. 444-446.] CHAPTER II THE CLASS SYSTEM Under this name appear to be blended, (1) the prohibition to marry within a division, which, in its simplest form, is said to cut the tribe into two ‘classes’ or ‘phratries,’ or ‘groups;’[1] (2) the prohibition to marry within the totem name; (3) the prohibition to marry within the generation, and within certain recognised degrees (‘classes,’ ‘sections’) of real or inferred kinship--‘too near flesh,’ too close consanguinity, which, in their present condition, many Australian tribes undoubtedly regard as a bar to matrimony. But it does not follow that they _originally_ held this opinion. We shall first examine what authorities who differ from me, call the great ‘bisection’ of the tribe, into, say, Matthurie and Kirarawa, members of which must intermarry, the totem prohibition also remaining in force. It will here be suggested, in accordance with what has already been said, but contrary to general opinion, that the totemic prohibition is earlier than the prohibition of marriage between persons of the same segment of the ‘bisection.’ The opinions of most students appear, at present, to be divided thus. We hear that: 1. The exogamous division into two moieties, or ‘phratries,’ is _earlier_ than the division of each into numerous totem kins. The totem kins are regarded as later ‘subdivisions’ of, or additions to, the two ‘original’ moieties. 2. Totem groups are earlier than the ‘bisection’ (though somehow, according to the same authors, the two moieties of the bisection bore totem names), but, before the ‘bisection,’ these _totem groups were not exogamous_. They only became exogamous when six of them, say, were arranged in one of the two moieties (phratries), now forbidden to marry, and another six in the other. I venture to prefer, as already indicated, the system (3) that totem groups not only existed, but were already exogamous, before the great ‘bisection’ producing the ‘phratries’ came into existence, though I argue that ‘bisection’ is a misleading term, and that the apparent division was really the result of an amalgamation of two separate and independent local totem groups.