[347] _Ibid._, 26, 27, 30, 58 ff., 101; WESTERMARCK, _op. cit._, 98 ff.
[348] STARCKE, _op. cit._, 118; _cf. ibid._, 54. FRIEDRICHS agrees with Starcke on the essential point. The uterine system arises with the formation of families and _gentes_. In a very primitive state, the natural means of subsistence sufficing, the children leave the parents and look out for themselves; as it becomes more and more difficult to find food and shelter, family groups are formed, and the children remain a longer time with the mother. Hence naturally the name and kinship are taken from her: "Ueber den Ursprung des Matriarchats," _ZVR._, VIII, 378 ff. Compare _idem_, "Familienstufen und Eheformen," _ibid._, X, 197 ff., 201. DARGUN, _Mutterrecht und Vaterrecht_, 43-66, discusses the original mother-right, but rejects Starcke's theory of local causes, accepting uncertainty of fatherhood as a primary influence. Starcke is also criticised by HELLWALD, _Die mensch. Familie_, 456-58, 465, 484 ff.
Starcke's opinion that such rules of succession depend on local connections, those persons being each other's heirs "who dwell together in one place,"[349] seems to gain some support from the result of Dr. Tylor's examination of the so-called "beena"[350] marriage form, which requires the man to live in the family of his wife, usually serving for her as did Jacob for Laban's daughters. It is remarkable that this custom and the maternal system of kinship are commonly found together. "Thus the number of coincidences between peoples where the husband lives with the wife's family and where the maternal system prevails, is naturally large in proportion, while the full maternal system as naturally never appears among peoples whose exclusive custom is for the husband to take his wife to his own home."[351] Furthermore, adds Westermarck, "where both customs--the woman receiving her husband in her own hut, and the man taking his wife to his--occur side by side among the same people, descent in the former cases is traced through the mother, in the latter through the father."[352]
[349] _Op. cit._, 36, _passim_; summarized by WESTERMARCK, _op. cit._, 110.
[350] See above, p. 16, on "beena" marriage.
[351] TYLOR, _On a Method of Investigating the Development of Institutions_, 258. _Cf._ WESTERMARCK, _op. cit._, 109; also STARCKE, _op. cit._, 79, 80, who regards serving as a form of wife-purchase, and the migration of the husband as "due to the great cohesive power of the several families, which causes them to refuse to part with any of their members." Among various American peoples it is the custom for the husband to take up his abode permanently in the wife's family: SOUZA, "Tratado descriptivo do Brazil," _Revista Inst. Hist._, XIV, 311 ff.; STEVENSON, "The Sia," _XI. Rep. of Bureau of Eth._, 20, 22; or temporarily: DOBRIZHOFFER, _Account of Abipones_, II, 208, 209; POWELL, "Wyandotte Society," in _A. A. A. S._, XXIX, 681; MACCAULEY, "Seminole Indians," _V. Rep. of Bureau of Eth._, 496; MCGEE, "The Seri Indians," _XVII. Rep. of Bureau of Eth._, 280.