Some authors designate such a band as a family group, but that is going a little too far, for when we have full data, these bands are found to contain many individuals not descended from the leader and not even his relatives. For these reasons, the term local group is preferable.[1] There is, however, a native tendency to consider all members of such a band as relatives in a figurative sense, and to apply blood relationship terms to them, as men of similar age-grades will speak of themselves as brothers, etc. As these groups have more or less permanency, it is conceivable that in time they may come to be largely blood groups.
In such a society, an individual is known by his personal name, together with the band name, but, as among us, each must keep track of his blood relationship by specific memory. We see then that the true family group, as we conceive it, exists somewhat independent of the band. All the world over, the prime importance of keeping track of blood relationship is recognized, particularly in respect to marriage, or sexual life. These bands, on the other hand, seem to have no specific function in the regulation of marriage, but to be economic or political groups.
Such bands, as we have just outlined, are characteristic of the great hunting areas (the caribou area, the bison area, and the guanaco area, though our data here are vague), and the interior of the salmon area. They may also prevail in the manioc area, but we lack good data. In these various areas, we have a great range of tribal organization, but the fundamental units are the loose bands, or local groups, we have just characterized.
CLANS AND GENTES
Now when we come to the centers of more intense culture, we find what is called a clan or gens, as the case may be. If we should take one of the preceding groups and make it permanent in the sense that everyone born in it is forever a member, we would have a somewhat different affair. The group name would now be firmly fixed to the individual and define his descent, for by it he could know, in theory, at least,
- ↑ Goldenweiser, 1910. I.
