hadbeengovernedbyeldestsonaftereldestson。
　　EvenwhentheTeutonicracesspreadoverWesternEuropethey
　　didnotbringwiththemPrimogenitureastheirordinaryruleof
　　succession。TheallodialpropertyoftheTeutonicfreeman，that
　　sharewhichhehadtheoreticallyreceivedattheoriginal
　　settlementofthebrotherhoodtowhichhebelongedontheir
　　domain，wasdividedathisdeath，whenitwasdividedatall，
　　equallybetweenhissonsorequallybetweenhissonsand
　　daughters。Itisquitecertain，however，thattheappearanceof
　　PrimogenitureintheWestanditsrapiddiffusionmustbe
　　connectedwiththeirruptionofthebarbarians，andwiththe
　　tribalideasre-introducedbythemintotheRomanworld。Atthis
　　point，however，weencounteranotherdifficulty。The
　　Primogeniturewhichfirstmeetsusisnotuniformlythe
　　Primogeniturewithwhichwearenowfamiliar。Therightofthe
　　eldestsonsometimesgiveswaytotherightoftheeldestmale
　　relativeofthedeceased，andoccasionallyitseemsasifneither
　　thesuccessionoftheeldestsonnorthatoftheeldestrelative
　　couldtakeeffectwithoutelectionorconfirmationbythemembers
　　oftheaggregategrouptowhichbothbelong。
　　Asusual，wehavetolookforlivingillustrationsofthe
　　ancientsystemtotheusagesoftheHindoos。TheFamily，
　　accordingtotheHindootheory，isdespoticallygovernedbyits
　　head；butifhediesandtheFamilyseparatesathisdeath，the
　　propertyisequallydividedbetweenthesons。If，however，the
　　Familydoesnotseparate，butallowsitselftoexpandintoa
　　JointFamily，wehavetheexactmixtureofelectionanddoubtful
　　successionwhichwefindintheearlyexamplesofEuropean
　　primogeniture。Theeldestson，andafterhimhiseldestson，is
　　ordinarilythemanageroftheaffairsoftheJointFamily，but
　　hisprivilegestheoreticallydependonelectionbythe
　　brotherhood，andmaybesetasidebyit，and，whentheyareset
　　aside，itisgenerallyinfavourofabrotherofthedeceased
　　manager，who，onthescoreofgreaterage，isassumedtobe
　　betterqualifiedthanhisnephewforadministrationandbusiness。
　　InancientIrishsocietytheJointFamily，continuedthroughmany
　　generations，hasgrownfirstintotheSeptandthenintothe
　　Clan，contractingagreaterdegreeofartificialityinproportion
　　toitsenlargement。Theimportance，meanwhile，oftheChiefto
　　theTribehasratherincreasedthandiminished，sinceheisno
　　longermerelyadministratorofitscivilaffairsbutitsleader
　　inwar。Thesystemproducedfromtheseelementsappearstome
　　sufficientlyintelligible。ThevenerationoftheTribeisnot
　　attractedbyindividualsoftheChieftain’sfamily，butbythe
　　familyitself，asrepresentingthepurestbloodoftheentire
　　brotherhood。Itchoosesitsheadandleadersaveonthevery
　　rarestoccasionsfromthisfamily，andthereareinstancesof
　　thechoicebeingsystematicallymadefromtwofamiliesin
　　alternation。Butthenecessityofhavingamilitaryleaderinthe
　　vigourofhisphysicalandmentalpowersismuchtooimperiousto
　　admitofhischoicebeinginvariablydeferredtothedeathofthe
　　rulingChief，ortoallowoftheelectionfallinguniversallyor
　　evengenerallyonhisson。’ItisacustomamongalltheIrish，’
　　saysSpenser，’thatpresentlyafterthedeathofanyoftheir
　　chieflordsorcaptains，theydopresentlyassemblethemselvesto
　　aplacegenerallyappointedandknownuntothemtochooseanother
　　inhisstead，wheretheydonominateandelectforthemostpart，
　　nottheeldestson，noranyofthechildrenofthelorddeceased，
　　butthenexttohimofbloodthatiseldestandworthiest，as
　　commonlythenextbrotherifhehaveany，orthenextcousin，and
　　soforth，asanyiselderinthatkindredorsept；andthen，next
　　tohim，theychoosethenextofthebloodtobeTanaist，who
　　shallsucceedhiminthesaidCaptaincyifhelivethereunto……
　　ForwhentheirCaptaindieth，iftheSignoryshoulddescendto
　　hischild，andheperhapsaninfant，anothermightperadventure
　　stepinbetweenorthrusthimoutbystronghandbeingthen
　　unabletodefendhisrightandtowithstandtheforceofa
　　forreiner；andthereforetheydoappointtheeldestofthekinto
　　havetheSignory，forthatcommonlyheisamanofstrongeryears
　　andbetterexperiencetomaintaintheinheritanceandtodefend
　　thecountry……AndtothisendtheTanaistisalwaysready
　　known，ifitshouldhappentotheCaptainsuddenlytodie，orto
　　beslaininbattle，ortobeoutofthecountry，todefendand
　　keepitfromallsuchdangers。’Spenser’s’ViewoftheStateof
　　Ireland。’
　　Primogeniture，therefore，consideredasaruleofsuccession
　　toproperty，appearstometobeaproductoftriballeadership
　　initsdecay。SomesuchsystemasthatrepresentedbytheIrish
　　Tanistrybelongedprobablyatonetimetoallthetribal
　　communitieswhichoverrantheRomanEmpire，butnoprecise
　　assertioncanbemadeastothestageintheirhistoryatwhich
　　itbegantobemodified，especiallysinceSohm’sinvestigations
　　inhis’Fr鋘kischeReichs-undGerichtsverfassung’haveshownus
　　howconsiderablythesocialorganisationofsomeofthese
　　communitieshadbeenaffectedbycentralorroyalauthorityin
　　theintervalbetweentheobservationsofTacitusandthewriting
　　oftheSalicLaw。ButIthinkwemaysafelyconjecturethatthe
　　transitionfromtheoldertothenewerPrimogenituretookplace
　　everywhereundercircumstancesnearlythereverseofthosewhich
　　keptTanistrysolongaliveinIreland。Whereversomedegreeof
　　internalpeacewasmaintainedduringtolerablylongperiodsof
　　time，whereveranapproachwasmadetotheformationofsocieties
　　ofthedistinctivemoderntype，wherevermilitaryandcivil
　　institutionsbegantogroupthemselvesroundthecentral
　　authorityofaking，thevalueofstrategicalcapacityinthe
　　humblerchiefswoulddiminish，andinthesmallerbrotherhoods
　　therespectforpurityofbloodwouldhaveuncheckedplay。The
　　mostnaturalobjectofthisrespectishewhomostdirectly
　　deriveshisbloodfromthelastruler，andthustheeldestson，
　　eventhoughaminor，comestobepreferredinthesuccessionto
　　hisuncle；and，indefaultofsons，thesuccessionmayeven
　　devolveonawoman。Therearenotafewindicationsthatthe
　　transformationofideaswasgradual。Thedisputesamonggreat
　　Highlandfamiliesaboutthetitletothechieftaincyof
　　particularclansappeartodatefromaperiodwhentherewas
　　stillaconflictbetweentheoldprincipleofsuccessionandthe
　　new；andatarelativelylaterperiod，whenthroughoutmostof