These points of view will be applied hereafter to the discussion of the Australian parental kinship. But in order to illustrate here their theoretical bearing, a short discussion will be given of some of the ways in which the concept of kinship has been applied to low societies by sociologists. Morgan's way of dealing with the meaning of kinship must be first mentioned.[566] He assumes without further discussion that kinship was conceived always and in all societies, even the lowest ones, in terms of consanguinity.[567] Our discussion of consanguinity shows how great a mistake it was on the part of Morgan to impute to the primitive mind a whole series of ideas which absolutely and necessarily must have been foreign to it. As was said above, primitive mankind was certainly wholly ignorant of the process of procreation, and the relation of the sexes cannot possibly have been the source of kinship ideas. How great a part this assumption plays in Morgan's deductions it is easy to perceive.[568] And he was led to it by omitting to discuss and analyze the concept of kinship, and by applying to low societies our own social concept of it. [566] Compare also above, p. 171. [567] Compare especially _Systems, etc._, chap. ii. pp. 10 _sqq._ "The family relationships are as ancient as the _family_. They exist in virtue of the law of derivation, which is expressed by the perpetuation of the species through the marriage relations. A system of _consanguinity_, which is _founded upon a community of blood_, is but the formal expression and recognition of these relationships." (The italics are mine.) This is in other words the assumption that kinship was always conceived as consanguinity, or community of blood through procreation. Compare also _Ancient Society_, pp. 393, 395. [568] _Systems, etc._, pp. 474 _sqq._, where the only source of the classificatory system is attributed to different "customs" referring to the sexual aspect of marriage. As we saw, precisely this aspect is quite irrelevant to the formation of primitive kinship ideas, consequently also of primitive kinship terms. J. F. MacLennan uses also the kinship concept as identical with that of blood relationship.[569] But it must be emphatically stated that MacLennan recognizes both the importance of feelings in relation to kinship[570] and the fact that consanguinity was not known to primitive man,[571] although he unfortunately does not develop these two important ideas. [569] See _loc. cit._, pp. 83 _sqq._ It is difficult to pick out any one clear statement to show that the author identifies kinship with consanguinity. But a glance at the pages quoted is enough to prove this. I quote a phrase from the table of contents: "The most ancient system in which the _idea of blood relationship_ was embodied was a system of kinship through females only." (The italics are mine.)