At Sumatra there were three kinds of marriages--1st, the wife, or rather the family of the wife, bought the man, who henceforth became her property, worked for her, possessed nothing of his own, was liable to be dismissed, and could commit no fault without the proprietary family being responsible for it, exactly as the Roman master answered for his slaves; 2nd, the man and the woman could marry on a footing of equality; 3rd, the man bought his wife or wives.[1002] The first form of marriage, that of servitude of the man, who, instead of marrying, is married by the family of his wife, has fallen into desuetude in Malaya, but it has left behind it, in certain districts, the system of maternal filiation. It is the maternal uncle who is the head of the family, or, in default of him, the eldest son of the wife’s family. If there is neither uncle nor son old enough, it is the mother who becomes the head of the family, and the father only takes her place in case she has disappeared, and when all the children are minors. At the death of a man, his property does not go to his wife or children, but to his maternal family, and in the first place to his brothers and sisters. The married man also continues to live in his maternal family; it is the field of his own family that he cultivates, and he only accidentally assists his wife.[1003] In short, under this system the individual, whether man or woman, is not set free in the least from the family in which he is born; it is for this family that the woman bears children; filiation and inheritance must therefore follow the maternal line. But it is not at all the same throughout Malaya. Marsden tells us that a man sometimes buys his wife by giving a sister in exchange;[1004] he must therefore be the proprietor of his sister, and consequently of the wife whom he procures by means of this barter. In the Arroo Isles the men buy their wives, by giving gongs, clothes, etc., to the parents of the women.[1005] At Timor the son-in-law buys his wife thus from his father-in-law, and the latter can remain owner of the children if they are not included in the bargain;[1006] but these customs are not easily compatible with the system of the maternal family, and, taken altogether, they prove that in Malaya the family is not by any means constituted in a uniform manner. We shall see that it is the same with the primitive races of India. IV. _The Family among the Naïrs of Malabar._