Morgan on the Stages of Human Progress

This is the text (and pagination) of the 1877 first edition of Lewis Henry Morgan's Ancient Society: or, Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery, through Barbarism to Civilization (New York: Henry Holt & Co.). Footnotes are omitted, including the one to Edwin Tylor (sic). Notice how he repeatedly distinguishes between inventions (technology), which distinguish "periods", and (social) institutions, which distinguish "statuses". And notice how careful he is to say this whole scheme is provisional: subject to change.

Chapter I:  Ethnical Periods.
Progress of Mankind from the Bottom of the Scale. -Illustrated by Inventions Discoveries and Institutions. -Two Plans of Government. -One Gentile and Social, giving a Society, (Societas); the Other Political, giving a State, (Civitas). -The former founded upon Persons and Gentilism; the latter upon Territory and Property. -The First, the Plan of Government of Ancient Society. -The Second, that of Modern or Civilized Society. -Uniformity of Human Experience. -Proposed Ethnical Periods. -I. Lower Status of Savagery; II. Middle Status of Savagery; III. Upper Status of Savagery; IV. Lower Status of Barbarism; V. Middle Status of Barbarism; VI. Upper Status of Barbarism; VII. Status of Civilization.
    The latest investigations respecting the early condition of the human race, are tending to the conclusion that mankind commenced their career at the bottom of the scale and worked their way up from savagery to civilization through the slow accumulations of experimental knowledge.
    As it is undeniable that portions of the human family have existed in a state of savagery, other portions in a state of barbarism, and still other portions in a state of civilization, it seems equally so that these three distinct conditions are connected with each other in a natural as well as necessary sequence of progress.  Moreover, that this sequence has been historically true of the entire human family, up to
the status attained by each branch respectively, is rendered probable by the conditions under which all progress occurs, and by the known advancement of several branches of the family through two or more of these conditions.
    An attempt will be made in the following pages to bring forward additional evidence of the rudeness of the early condition of mankind, of the gradual evolution of their mental and moral powers through experience, and of their protracted struggle with opposing obstacles while winning their way to civilization.  It will be drawn, in part, from the great sequence of inventions and discoveries which stretches along the entire pathway of human progress; but chiefly from domestic institutions, which express the growth of certain ideas and passions.
    As we re-ascend along the several lines of progress toward the primitive ages of mankind, and eliminate one after the other, in the order in which they appeared, inventions and discoveries on the one hand, and institutions on the other, we are enabled to perceive that the former stand to each other in progressive, and the latter in unfolding relations. While the former class have had a connection, more or less direct, the latter have been developed from a few primary germs of thought.  Modern institutions plant their roots in the period of barbarism, into which their germs were transmitted from the previous period of savagery.  They have had a lineal descent through the ages, with the streams of the blood, as well as a logical development.
    Two independent lines of investigation thus invite our attention.  The one leads through inventions and discoveries, and the other through primary institutions.  With the knowledge gained therefrom, we may hope to indicate the principal stages of human development.  The proofs to be adduced will be drawn chiefly from domestic institutions; the references to achievements more strictly intellectual being general as well as subordinate.
    The facts indicate the gradual formation and subsequent development of certain ideas, passions, and aspirations.  Those which hold the most prominent positions may be generalized
as growths of the particular ideas with which they severally stand connected.  Apart from inventions and discoveries they are the following:
                  I.  Subsistence,                                V.  Religion,
                 II.  Government,                             VI.  House Life & Architecture,
                III.  Language,                                VII.  Property.
                IV.  The Family,
    First.  Subsistence has been increased and perfected by a series of successive arts, introduced at long intervals of time, and connected more or less directly with inventions and discoveries.
    Second.  The germ of government must be sought in the organization into gentes in the Status of savagery; and followed down, through the advancing forms of this institution, to the establishment of political society.
    Third.  Human speech seems to have been developed from the rudest and simplest forms of expression.  Gesture or sign language, as intimated by Lucretius, must have preceded articulate language, as thought preceded speech.  The monosyllabical preceded the syllabical, as the latter did that of concrete words.  Human intelligence, unconscious of design, evolved articulate language by utilizing the vocal sounds.  This great subject, a department of knowledge by itself does not fall within the scope of the present investigation.
    Fourth.  With respect to the family, the stages of its growth are embodied in systems of consanguinity and affinity, and in usages relating to marriage, by means of which, collectively, the family can be definitely traced through several successive forms.
    Fifth.  The growth of religious ideas is environed with such intrinsic difficulties that it may never receive a perfectly satisfactory exposition.  Religion deals so largely with the imaginative and emotional nature, and consequently with such uncertain elements of knowledge, that all primitive religions are
grotesque and to some extent unintelligible.  This subject also falls without the plan of this work excepting as it may prompt incidental suggestions.
    Sixth.  House architecture, which connects itself with the form of the family and the plan of domestic life, affords a tolerably complete illustration of progress from savagery to civilization.  Its growth can be traced from the hut of the savage, through the communal houses of the barbarians, to the house of the single family of civilized nations, with all the successive links by which one extreme is connected with the other.  This subject will be noticed incidentally.
    Lastly.  The idea of property was slowly formed in the human mind, remaining nascent and feeble through immense periods of time.  Springing into life in savagery, it required all the experience of this period and of the subsequent period of barbarism to develop the germ, and to prepare the human brain for the acceptance of its controlling influence.  Its dominance as a passion over all other passions marks the commencement of civilization.  It not only led mankind to overcome the obstacles which delayed civilization, but to establish political society on the basis of territory and of property.  A critical knowledge of the evolution of the idea of property would embody, in some respects, the most remarkable portion of the mental history of mankind.
    It will be my object to present some evidence of human progress along these several lines, and through successive ethnical periods, as it is revealed by inventions and discoveries, and by the growth of the ideas of government, of the family, and of property
    It may be here premised that all forms of government are reducible to two general plans, using the word plan in its scientific sense.  In their bases the two are fundamentally distinct. The first, in the order of time, is founded upon persons, and upon relations purely personal, and may be distinguished as a society (societas).  The gens is the unit of this organization giving as the successive stages of integration, in the archaic period, the gens, the phratry, the tribe, and the confederacy of tribes, which constituted a people or nation (populus).  At a
later period a coalescence of tribes in the same area into a nation took the place of a confederacy of tribes occupying independent areas.  Such, through prolonged ages, after the gens appeared, was the substantially universal organization of ancient society; and it remained among the Greeks and Romans after civilization supervened.  The second is founded upon territory and upon property, and may be distinguished as a state (civitas).  The township or ward, circumscribed by metes and bounds, with the property it contains, is the basis or unit of the latter, and political society is the result.  Political society is organized upon territorial areas, and deals with property as well as with persons through territorial relations.  The successive stages of integration are the township or ward, which is the unit of organization; the county or province, which is an aggregation of townships or wards; and the national domain or territory, which is an aggregation of counties or provinces; the people of each of which are organized into a body politic. It taxed the Greeks and Romans to the extent of their capacities, after they had gained civilization, to invent the deme or township and the city ward; and thus inaugurate the second great plan of government, which remains among civilized nations to the present hour.  In ancient society this territorial plan was unknown.  When it came in it fixed the boundary line between ancient and modern society, as the distinction will be recognized in these pages.
    It may be further observed that the domestic institutions of the barbarous, and even of the savage ancestors of mankind, are still exemplified in portions of the human family with such completeness that, with the exception of the strictly primitive period, the several stages of this progress are tolerably well preserved.  They are seen in the organization of society upon the basis of sex, then upon the basis of kin, and finally upon the basis of territory; through the successive forms of marriage and of the family, with the systems of consanguinity thereby created; through house life and architecture; and through progress in usages with respect to the ownership and inheritance of property.
    The theory of human degradation to explain the existence
of savages and of barbarians is no longer tenable.  It came in as a corollary from the Mosaic cosmogony, and was acquiesced in from a supposed necessity which no longer exists.  As a theory, it is not only incapable of explaining the existence of savages, but it is without support in the facts of human experience.
    The remote ancestors of the Aryan nations presumptively passed through an experience similar to that of existing barbarous and savage tribes.  Though the experience of these nations embodies all the information necessary to illustrate the periods of civilization, both ancient and modern, together with a part of that in the Later period of barbarism, their anterior experience must be deduced, in the main, from the traceable connection between the elements of their existing institutions and inventions, and similar elements still preserved in those of savage and barbarous tribes.
    It may be remarked finally that the experience of mankind has run in nearly uniform channels; that human necessities in similar conditions have been substantially the same; and that the operations of the mental principle have been uniform in virtue of the specific identity of the brain of all the races of mankind.  This, however, is but a part of the explanation of uniformity in results.  The germs of the principal institutions and arts of life were developed while man was still a savage. To a very great extent the experience of the subsequent periods of barbarism and of civilization have been expended in the further development of these original conceptions.  Wherever a connection can be traced on different continents between a present institution and a common germ, the derivation of the people themselves from a common original stock is implied.
    The discussion of these several classes of facts will be facilitated by the establishment of a certain number of Ethnical Periods; each representing a distinct condition of society, and distinguishable by a mode of life peculiar to itself.  The terms "Age of Stone," "of Bronze," and 'of Iron," introduced by Danish archaeologists, have been extremely useful for certain purposes, and will remain so for the classification of objects of ancient art; but the progress of knowledge has rendered
other and different subdivisions necessary.  Stone implements were not entirely laid aside with the introduction of tools of iron, nor of those of bronze.  The invention of the process of smelting iron ore created an ethnical epoch, yet we could scarcely date another from the production of bronze.  Moreover, since the period of stone implements overlaps those of bronze and of iron, and since that of bronze also overlaps that of iron, they are not capable of a circumscription that would leave each independent and distinct.
    It is probable that the successive arts of subsistence which arose at long intervals will ultimately, from the great influence they must have exercised upon the condition of mankind, afford the most satisfactory bases for these divisions.  But investigation has not been carried far enough in this direction to yield the necessary information.  With our present knowledge the main result can be attained by selecting such other inventions or discoveries as will afford sufficient tests of progress to characterize the commencement of successive ethnical periods. Even though accepted as provisional, these periods will be found convenient and useful.  Each of those about to be proposed will be found to cover a distinct culture, and to represent a particular mode of life.
    The period of savagery, of the early part of which very little is known, may be divided, provisionally, into three sub-periods.  These may be named respectively the Older, the Middle, and the Later period of savagery; and the condition of society in each, respectively, may be distinguished as the Lower, the Middle, and the Upper Status of savagery.
    In like manner, the period of barbarism divides naturally into three sub-periods, which will be called, respectively, the Older, the Middle, and the Later period of barbarism; and the condition of society in each, respectively, will be distinguished as the Lower, the Middle, and the Upper Status of barbarism.
    It is difficult, if not impossible, to find such tests of progress to mark the commencement of these several periods as will be found absolute in their application, and without exceptions upon all the continents.  Neither is it necessary, for the purpose in hand, that exceptions should not exist.  It will be
sufficient if the principal tribes of mankind can be classified, according to the degree of their relative progress, into conditions which can be recognized as distinct.
    I. Lower Status of Savagery.
    This period commenced with the infancy of the human race, and may be said to have ended with the acquisition of a fish subsistence and of a knowledge of the use of fire.  Mankind were then living in their original restricted habitat, and subsisting upon fruits and nuts.  The commencement of articulate speech belongs to this period.  No exemplification of tribes of mankind in this condition remained to the historical period.
    II. Middle Status of Savagery.
    It commenced with the acquisition of a fish subsistence and a knowledge of the use of fire, and ended with the invention of the bow and arrow.  Mankind, while in this condition, spread from their original habitat over the greater portion of the earth's surface.  Among tribes still existing it will leave in the Middle Status of savagery, for example, the Australians and the greater part of the Polynesians when discovered.  It will be sufficient to give one or more exemplifications of each status.
    III. Upper Status of Savagery.
    It commenced with the invention of the bow and arrow, and ended with the invention of the art of pottery.  It leaves in the Upper Status of Savagery the Athapascan tribes of the Hudson's Bay Territory, the tribes of the valley of the Columbia, and certain coast tribes of North and South America; but with relation to the time of their discovery.  This closes the period of Savagery.
    IV. Lower Status of Barbarism.
    The invention or practice of the art of pottery, all things considered, is probably the most effective and conclusive test that can be selected to fix a boundary line, necessarily arbitrary, between savagery and barbarism.  The distinctness of the two conditions has long been recognized, but no criterion of progress out of the former into the latter has hitherto been brought forward.  All such tribes, then, as never attained to the art of pottery will be classed as savages, and those possessing this art but who never attained a phonetic alphabet and the use of writing will be classed as barbarians.
    The first sub-period of barbarism commenced with the manufacture of pottery, whether by original invention or adoption. In finding its termination, and the commencement of the Middle Status, a difficulty is encountered in the unequal endowments of the two hemispheres, which began to be influential upon human affairs after the period of savagery had passed. It may be met, however, by the adoption of equivalents.  In the Eastern hemisphere, the domestication of animals, and in the Western, the cultivation of maize and plants by irrigation, together with the use of adobe-brick and stone in house building have been selected as sufficient evidence of progress to work a transition out of the Lower and into the Middle Status of barbarism.  It leaves, for example, in the Lower Status, the Indian tribes of the United States east of the Missouri River, and such tribes of Europe and Asia as practiced the art of pottery, but were without domestic animals.
    V. Middle Status of Barbarism.
    It commenced with the domestication of animals in the Eastern hemisphere, and in the Western with cultivation by irrigation and with the use of adobe-brick and stone in architecture, as shown.  Its termination may be fixed with the invention of the process of smelting iron ore.  This places in the Middle Status, for example, the Village Indians of New Mexico, Mexico, Central America and Peru, and such tribes in the Eastern hemisphere as possessed domestic animals, but were without a knowledge of iron.  The ancient Britons, although familiar with the use of iron, fairly belong in this connection.  The vicinity of more advanced continental tribes had advanced the arts of life among them far beyond the state of development of their domestic institutions.
    VI. Upper Status of Barbarism.
    It commenced with the manufacture of iron, and ended with the invention of a phonetic alphabet, and the use of writing in literary composition.  Here civilization begins.  This leaves in the Upper Status, for example, the Grecian tribes of the Homeric age, the Italian tribes shortly before the founding of Rome, and the Germanic tribes of the time of Caesar.
    VII. Status of Civilization.
    It commenced, as stated, with the use of a phonetic alphabet and the production of literary records, and divides into Ancient and Modern.  As an equivalent, hieroglyphical writing upon stone may be admitted.
  I. Older Period of Savagery   I. Lower Status of Savagery
 II. Middle Period of Savagery  II. Middle Status of Savagery
III. Later Period of Savagery III. Upper Status of Savagery
IV. Older Period of Barbarism IV. Lower Status of Barbarism
 V. Middle Period of Barbarism  V. Middle Status of Barbarism
VI. Later Period of Barbarism VI. Upper Status of Barbarism
VII. Status of Civilization

  I. Lower Status of Savagery, From the Infancy of the Roman Race to the commencement of the Next Period.
 II. Middle Status of Savagery, From the acquisition of a fish subsistence and a knowledge of the use of fire, to etc.
III. Upper Status of Savagery, From the Invention of the Bow and Arrow, to etc.
IV. Lower Status of Barbarism, From the Invention of the Art of Pottery, to etc.
 V. Middle Status of Barbarism, From the Domestication of animals on the Eastern hemisphere, and in the Western from the cultivation of maize and plants by Irrigation, with the use of adobe-brick and stone, etc. 
VI. Upper Status of Barbarism, From the Invention of the process of Smelting Iron Ore, with the use of iron tools, to etc.
VII. Status of Civilization, From the Invention of a Phonetic Alphabet, with the use of writing, to the present time.

    Each of these periods has a distinct culture and exhibits a mode of life more or less special and peculiar to itself  This specialization of ethnical periods renders it possible to treat a particular society according to its condition of relative advancement, and to make it a subject of independent study and discussion.  It does not affect the main result that different tribes and nations on the same continent, and even of the same linguistic family, are in different conditions at the same time, since for our purpose the condition of each is the material fact, the time being immaterial.
    Since the use of pottery is less significant than that of domestic animals, of iron, or of a phonetic alphabet, employed to mark the commencement of subsequent ethnical periods, the reasons for its adoption should be stated.  The manufacture of pottery presupposes village life, and considerable progress in the simple arts. Flint and stone implements are older than pottery, remains of the former having been found in ancient repositories in numerous instances unaccompanied by the latter. A succession of inventions of greater need and adapted to a lower condition must have occurred before the want of pottery would be felt.  The commencement of village life, with some degree of control over subsistence, wooden vessels and utensils, finger weaving with filaments of bark, basket making, and the bow and arrow make their appearance before the art of pottery.  The Village Indians who were in the Middle Status of barbarism, such as the Zunians the Aztecs and the Cholulans, manufactured pottery in large quantities and in many forms of considerable excellence; the partially Village Indians
of the United States, who were in the Lower Status of barbarism, such as the Iroquois the Choctas and the Cherokees, made it in smaller quantities and in a limited number of forms; but the Non-horticultural Indians, who were in the Status of savagery, such as the Athapascans the tribes of California and of the valley of the Columbia, were ignorant of its use.  In Lubbock's Pre-Historic Times, in Tylor's Early History of Mankind, and in Peschel's Races of Man, the particulars respecting this art, and the extent of its distribution, have been collected with remarkable breadth of research.  It was unknown in Polynesia (with the exception of the Islands of the Tongans and Fijians), in Australia, in California, and in the Hudson's Bay Territory.  Mr. Tylor remarks that "the art of weaving was unknown in most of the Islands away from Asia," and that "in most of the South Sea Islands there was no knowledge of pottery."  The Rev. Lorimer Fison, an English missionary residing in Australia, informed the author in answer to inquiries, that "the Australians had no woven fabrics, no pottery, and were ignorant of the bow and arrow."  This last fact was also true in general of the Polynesians.  The introduction of the ceramic art produced a new epoch in human progress in the direction of an improved living and increased domestic conveniences.  While flint and stone implements--which came in earlier and required long periods of time to develop all their uses--gave the canoe, wooden vessels and utensils, and ultimately timber and plank in house architecture, pottery gave a durable vessel for boiling food, which before that had been rudely accomplished in
baskets coated with clay, and in ground cavities lined with skin, the boiling being effected with heated stones.
    Whether the pottery of the aborigines was hardened by fire or cured by the simple process of drying, has been made a question.  Prof. E. T. Cox, of Indianapolis, has shown by comparing the analyses of ancient pottery and hydraulic cements, "that so far as chemical constituents are concerned it (the pottery) agrees very well with the composition of hydraulic stones."  He remarks further, that "all the pottery belonging to the mound-builders' age, which I have seen, is composed of alluvial clay and sand, or a mixture of the former with pulverized fresh-water shells.  A paste made of such a mixture possesses in a high degree the properties of hydraulic Puzzuolani and Portland cement, so that vessels formed of it hardened without being burned, as is customary with modern pottery.  The fragments of shells served the purpose of gravel or fragments of stone as at present used in connection with hydraulic lime for the manufacture of artificial stone." The composition of Indian pottery in analogy with that of hydraulic cement suggests the difficulties in the way of inventing the art, and tends also to explain the lateness of its introduction in the course of human experience.  Notwithstanding the ingenious suggestion of Prof. Cox, it is probable that pottery was hardened by artificial heat.  In some cases the fact is directly attested.  Thus Adair, speaking of the Gulf Tribes, remarks that "they make earthern pots of very different sizes, so as to contain from two to ten gallons, large pitchers to carry water, bowls, dishes, platters, basins, and a prodigious number of other vessels of such antiquated forms as would be tedious to describe, and impossible to name.  Their method of glazing
them is, they place them over a large fire of smoky pitch-pine, which makes them smooth, black and firm."
    Another advantage of fixing definite ethnical periods is the direction of special investigation to those tribes and nations which afford the best exemplification of each status, with the view of making each both standard and illustrative.  Some tribes and families have been left in geographical isolation to work out the problems of progress by original mental effort; and have, consequently, retained their arts and institutions pure and homogeneous; while those of other tribes and nations have been adulterated through external influence.  Thus, while Africa was and is an ethnical chaos of savagery and barbarism, Australia and Polynesia were in savagery, pure and simple, with the arts and institutions belonging to that condition.  In like manner, the Indian family of America, unlike any other existing family, exemplified the condition of mankind in three successive ethnical periods.  In the undisturbed possession of a great continent, of common descent, and with homogeneous institutions, they illustrated, when discovered, each of these conditions, and especially those of the Lower and of the Middle Status of barbarism, more elaborately and completely than any other portion of mankind.  The far northern Indians and some of the coast tribes of North and South America were in the Upper Status of savagery; the partially Village Indians east of the Mississippi were in the Lower Status of barbarism, and the Village Indians of North and South America were in the Middle Status.  Such an opportunity to recover full and minute information of the course of human experience and progress in developing their arts and institutions through these successive conditions has not been offered within the historical period.  It must be added that it has been indifferently improved.  Our greatest deficiencies relate to the last period named.
    Differences in the culture of the same period in the Eastern and Western hemispheres undoubtedly existed in consequence of the unequal endowments of the continents; but the condi-
tion of society in the corresponding status must have been, in the main, substantially similar.
    The ancestors of the Grecian Roman and German tribes passed through the stages we have indicated, in the midst of the last of which the light of history fell upon them.  Their differentiation from the undistinguishable mass of barbarians did not occur, probably, earlier than the commencement of the Middle Period of barbarism.  The experience of these tribes has been lost, with the exception of so much as is represented by the institutions inventions and discoveries which they brought with them, and possessed when they first came under historical observation.  The Grecian and Latin tribes of the Homeric and Romulian periods afford the highest exemplification of the Upper Status of barbarism.  Their institutions were likewise pure and homogeneous, and their experience stands directly connected with the final achievement of civilization.
    Commencing, then, with the Australians and Polynesians, following with the American Indian tribes, and concluding with the Roman and Grecian, who afford the highest exemplifications respectively of the six great stages of human progress, the sum of their united experiences may be supposed fairly to represent that of the human family from the Middle Status of savagery to the end of ancient civilization.  Consequently, the Aryan nations will find the type of the condition of their remote ancestors, when in savagery, in that of the Australians and Polynesians; when in the Lower Status of barbarism in that of the partially Village Indians of America; and when in the Middle Status in that of the Village Indians, with which their own experience in the Upper Status directly connects. So essentially identical are the arts institutions and mode of life in the same status upon all the continents, that the archaic form of the principal domestic institutions of the Greeks and Romans must even now be sought in the corresponding institutions of the American aborigines, as will be shown in the course of this volume.  This fact forms a part of the accumulating evidence tending to show that the principal institutions of mankind have been developed from a few primary germs of thought; and that the course and manner of their development
was predetermined, as well as restricted within narrow limits of divergence, by the natural logic of the human mind and the necessary limitations of its powers.  Progress has been found to be substantially the same in kind in tribes and nations inhabiting different and even disconnected continents, while in the same status, with deviations from uniformity in particular instances produced by special causes.  The argument when extended tends to establish the unity of origin of mankind.
    In studying the condition of tribes and nations in these several ethnical periods we are dealing, substantially, with the ancient history and condition of our own remote ancestors.
@back to list of readings