from all Browns and Joneses, we should be justified in say-
ing that they formed a sib. If we deny to them that desig-
nation it is because in our society there is no bond whatso-
ever connecting even all those Smiths who are related by
blood; in inheritance a closely related Brown takes prece-
dence of a more remote Smith. But for purposes of illus-
tration we may assume a Smith sib founded on actual blood
relationship. Such a sib would include the ancestral Smith
with all his sons and unmarried daughters, his sons' sons
and unmarried daughters and so on ad infinitum. In order
to convert this unit into a typical primitive sib only one
change is required, viz., making affiliation (except for cases
of adoption) wholly dependent on birth and unaffected by
marriage. The father-sib thus embraces a male ancestor,
his children male and female, and the children of his
male descendants through males. Correspondingly, the
mother-sib includes a female ancestor with her children
and the children of her female descendants through
females.

From the foregoing there develops at once a significant
distinction between family and sib: the former is a loose,
the latter a fixed unit. Divorce and migration rend the
family asunder; but the sib bond is permanent. This trait
is well exemplified by the Hupa phenomena described in a
previous chapter. It was shown that through patrilocal
residence the children grow up in the paternal village, which
the daughters leave only on marriage. Until that time,
then, a number of brothers with their children would form
the core of a patrilineal sib, held together by a common resi-
dence. But owing to local exogamy the very rule that
cements the union of the group leads to its partial dissolu-
tion when the girls marry. The married woman, whatever
her sentiments, is no longer a member of the same social
unit when she has settled in her husband's locality. On
the other hand, in the anomalous case of a man's serving
for his bride the children are counted as belonging to her

-112-