The land basis is always present, in spite of Morgan's artificial distinction between a theoretically landless _societas_, held together only by the bond of common blood, and the political _civitas_ based upon land.[82] Though primitive society found its conscious bond in common blood, nevertheless the land bond was always there, and it gradually asserted its fundamental character with the evolution of society.
The savage and barbarous groups which in Morgan's classification would fall under the head of _societas_ have nevertheless a clear conception of their ownership of the tribal lands which they use in common.

This idea is probably of very primitive origin, arising from the association of a group with its habitat, whose food supply they regard as a monopoly.[83] This is true even of migratory hunting tribes.

They claim a certain area whose boundaries, however, are often ill-defined and subject to fluctuations, because the lands are not held by permanent occupancy and cultivation.

An exceptional case is that of the Shoshone Indians, inhabiting the barren Utah basin and the upper valleys of the Snake and Salmon Rivers, who are accredited with no sense of ownership of the soil.

In their natural state they roved about in small, totally unorganized bands or single families, and changed their locations so widely, that they seemed to lay no claim to any particular portion.