It is very rare that the passion of love is developed within the circle of individuals to whom marriage ought to be forbidden. There needs to give birth to that sentiment a certain degree of surprise, a sudden effect of novelty. . . . Individuals accustomed to see each other and to know each other, from an age which is neither capable of conceiving the desire nor of inspiring it, will see each other with the same eyes to the end of life.¹

Tylor’s position may first be examined as though it were correct. It would mean that the exchange of children in marriage between families was a starting point in the cultivation of social relations and cooperative enterprises among neighbors which were gradually extended and structuralized into a system of interpersonal, inter-familial, and intergroup relationships as complicated in its way as a language system. Exogamy and language would, in fact, from this standpoint have fundamentally the same function—com-munication and integration with others. From this standpoint primitive marriage had thus a social rather than an individual meaning.

¹Bentham, J.n/an/an/an/an/a, , 220.