is prosecuted by the mockeries of the women.  If the infringement is grave, he is tortured day and night by the fear of having called a calamity upon his tribe.  If he has wounded by accident any one of his own clan, and thus has committed the greatest of all crimes, he grows quite miserable:  he runs away in the woods, and is ready to commit suicide, unless the tribe absolves him by inflicting upon him a physical pain and sheds some of his own blood.(45) Within the tribe everything is shared in common; every morsel of food is divided among all present; and if the savage is alone in the woods, he does not begin eating before he has loudly shouted thrice an invitation to any one who may hear his voice to share his meal.(46)

In short, within the tribe the rule of “each for all” is supreme, so long as the separate family has not yet broken up the tribal unity.  But that rule is not extended to the neighbouring clans, or tribes, even when they are federated for mutual protection.  Each tribe, or clan, is a separate unity.  Just as among mammals and birds, the territory is roughly allotted among separate tribes, and, except in times of war, the boundaries are respected.  On entering the territory of his neighbours one must show that he has no bad intentions.  The louder one heralds his coming, the more confidence he wins; and if he enters a house, he must deposit his hatchet at the entrance.  But no tribe is bound to share its food with the others:  it may do so or it may not.  Therefore the life of the savage is divided into two sets of actions, and appears under two different ethical aspects:  the relations within the tribe, and the relations with the outsiders; and (like our international law) the “inter-tribal” law widely differs from the common law.  Therefore, when it comes to a war the most revolting cruelties may be considered as so many claims upon the admiration of the tribe.  This double conception of morality passes through the whole evolution of mankind, and maintains itself until now.  We Europeans have realized some progress—­not immense, at any rate—­in eradicating that double conception of ethics; but it also must be said that while we have in some measure extended our ideas of solidarity—­in theory, at least—­over the nation, and partly over other nations as well, we have lessened the bonds of solidarity within our own nations, and even within our own families.

The appearance of a separate family amidst the clan necessarily disturbs the established unity.  A separate family means separate property and accumulation of wealth.  We saw how the Eskimos obviate its inconveniences; and it is one of the most interesting studies to follow in the course of ages the different institutions (village communities, guilds, and so on) by means of which the masses endeavoured to maintain the tribal unity, notwithstanding the agencies which were at work to break it down.  On the other hand, the first rudiments of knowledge which appeared at