68 SOCIAL SCIENTIST institutional developments have different stages but the fact is that all are determined by the whole sphere of property reflecting both inventions and discoveries.1 e Morgan observed the possibility of intermediate stages between the historical phases of society and institutions. He also said that the transitions may follow different paths in different societies.11 Likewise, history affords examples of stagnation when society reached a given form.12 Even, it is possible to find examples of regression running counter to the path of progress.l $ In short, Morgan's reasoning does not follow uniformity of human development, as his critics point out. But as his purpose was to "work out a science of history, he did not consider the rare characteristics. His attention was focused on the structure of such entities between which the transition was made and their logical relationship. Though the author dealt conspicuously on the first two epochs of human history he rightly analyzed the process of transformation to the third phase, which again is supposed to develop further. By the end of barbarism, over the increase of production and volume of disposal goods, wealth and property became the dominant forces in society and marked the commencement of civilization.14 And, .. since the advent of civilization, the outgrowth of property has been so immense, its forms so diversified, its uses so expanding and its management so intelligent in the interests of its owners... (However,) A mere property career is not the final destiny of mankind; if progress is to be the law of the future as it has been in the past... The dissolution of society bids fair to become the termination of a career of which property is the end and aim, because such a career contains the elements of self-destruction. ..It will be a revival in a higher form of the liberty, equality and fraternity of the ancient gentes. Materialist Interpretation Marx and Engels^s admiration of Morgan was not for his structural analysis, but for the interaction and the hierarchy of the various phases of social reality. Ancient Society was a work of supreme importance to them as it opened their thoughts to the complexity of primitive cultures. Engels described Morgan as the man who "rediscovered in America, In his own way, the materialist conception of history that had been discovered by Marx forty years ago, and in his comparison of barbarism and civilization was led by this conception to the same conclusions, in the main points, as Marx had arrived at."16 There could hardly be a higher praise. Morgan's main object was not simply to describe the different stages of human social evolution, but to construct a theory of primitive human history and a set of related propositions. His concepts and methods used for the understanding of human history are of special significance. His operational concepts—form, sequence, ethnic period, arts of subsistence, domination, intermediate stages—define the range of his enterprise. Leaving aside his evolution and structure, the concepts