The tribes in the states of antiquity were constituted in two ways; either according to the houses which composed them, or to the ground which they occupied: it may seem as if these two kinds coincided, when at the settlement of a city a whole tract of land was assigned to a tribe consisting of certain houses; this however did not form the bond of union. Dionysius, a diligent investigator of antiquities, expressly makes this distinction between the earlier Roman tribes, which he calls genealogical, and those of Servius which he calls local; wherein he assuredly followed older authors. Aristotle, it is true, takes no notice of the constitution by hereditary tribes, any more than Polybius; for although in their times the ancient forms were still in existence here and there, no one any longer thought of arranging a state according to combinations of families.

The genealogical tribes are more ancient than the local, to which they almost everywhere give way. Their extreme of rigour is in the form of castes; where one is separated from another, without the right of intermarriage, and with an entire difference of rank; each having an exclusive unalterable calling; from which, where need requires it, an individual may be allowed to descend; but to rise is impossible.