CHAPTER II

THE TOTEMIC AGE

1. THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF TOTEMISM.

The expression 'totemic age' involves a widened application of the

term 'totem.' This word is taken from the language of the Ojibways

or, as the English call them, the Chippewa Indians. To these Indians

of the Algonquin race, the 'totem' signified first of all a group.

Persons belong to the same totem if they are fellow-members in a group

which forms part of a tribe or of a clan. The term 'clan,' suggested

by the clan divisions of the Scottish Highlanders, is the one usually

employed by English ethnologists in referring to the smaller divisions

of a tribe. The tribe consists of a number of clans, and each clan may

include several totems. As a rule, the totem groups bear animal names.

In North America, for example, there was an eagle totem, a wolf totem,

a deer totem, etc. In this case the animal names regularly refer to

particular clans within a tribe; in other places, as, for example, in

Australia, they designate separate groups within a clan. Moreover, the

totem animal is also usually regarded as the ancestral animal of the

group in question. 'Totem,' on the one hand, is a group name, and, on

the other, a name indicative of ancestry. In the latter connection it

has also a mythological significance. These various ideas, however,

interplay in numerous ways. Some of the meanings may recede, so that

totems have frequently become a mere nomenclature of tribal divisions,

while at other times the idea of ancestry, or, perhaps also, the cult

significance, predominates. The idea gained ground until, directly or

indirectly, it finally permeated all phases of culture. It is in this

sense that the entire period pervaded by this culture may be called the

'totemic age.'

Even in its original significance--as a name for a group of members

of a tribal division or for the division itself--the conception of

the totem is connected with certain characteristic phenomena of this

period, distinguishing it particularly from the culture of primitive

man. I refer to _tribal division_ and _tribal organization_. The horde,

in which men are united purely by chance or at the occasional call

of some undertaking, only to scatter again when this is completed,

has disappeared. Nor is it any longer merely the single family that

firmly binds individuals to one another; in addition to it we find the

tribal division, which originates in accordance with a definite law of

tribal organization and is subject to specific norms of custom. These

norms, and their fixed place in the beliefs and feelings of the tribal

members, are connected with the fact that originally, at all events,

the totem animal was regarded, for the most part, as having not merely

given its name to a group of tribal members but as having actually been

its forefather. In so far, animal ancestors apparently preceded human

ancestors. Bound up with this is the further fact that these animal

ancestors possessed a cult. Thus, ancestor cult also began with the

cult of animals, not with that of human ancestors. Aside from specific

ceremonies and ceremonial festivals, this animal cult originally found

expression primarily in the relations maintained toward the totem

animal. It was not merely a particular animal that was to a certain

extent held sacred, but every representative of the species. The

totem members were forbidden to eat the flesh of the totem animal, or

were allowed to do so only under specific conditions. A significant

counter-phenomenon, not irreconcilable with this, is the fact that on

certain occasions the eating of the totem flesh constituted a sort of

ceremony. This likewise implies that the totem animal was held sacred.

When this conception came into the foreground, the totem idea became

extended so as to apply, particularly in its cult motives and effects,

to plants, and sometimes even to stones and other inanimate objects.

This, however, obviously occurred at a later time.

From early times on, the phenomena of totemism have been accompanied by

certain _forms of tribal organization_. Every tribe is first divided,

as a rule, into two halves. Through a further division, a fairly

large number of clans arise, which, in turn, eventually split up into

subclans and separate totem groups. Each of these groups originally

regarded some particular totem animal or other totem object as sacred.

The most important social aspect of this totemic tribal organization,

however, consists in the fact that it involved certain norms of custom

regulating the intercourse of the separate groups with one another.

Of these norms, those governing marriage relations were of first

importance. The tribal organization of this period was bound up with an

important institution, _exogamy_, which originated in the totemic age.

In the earliest primitive period every tribal member could enter into

marriage with any woman of the tribe whom he might choose; according to

the Veddahs, even marriage between brother and sister was originally

not prohibited. Thus, endogamy prevailed within the primitive horde.

This, of course, does not mean that there was no marriage except within

the narrow circle of blood relationship, but merely that marriage was

permitted between close relatives, more particularly between brothers

and sisters. The exogamy characteristic of totemic tribal organization

consists in the fact that no marriages of any kind are allowed except

between members of different tribal divisions. A member of one

particular group can enter into marriage only with one of another

group, not with a person belonging to his own circle. By this means,

totemic tribal organization gains a powerful influence on custom.

Through marriage it comes into relation with all phenomena connected

with marriage, with birth and death and the ideas bound up with them,

with the initiation ceremonies in which the youths are received into

the association of men, etc. As a result of the magical significance

acquired by the totem animal, special associations are formed. These

become united under the protection of a totem animal and give impetus

to the exoteric cult associations, which, in their turn, exercise a

profound influence upon the conditions of life. Though it is probable

that these associations had their origin in the above-mentioned men's

clubs, their organizing principle was the totem animal and its cult.

Besides its influence on matters connected with the relations of the

sexes, the totem animal was the source of several other ideas. After

the separate tribal group has come to feel itself united in the cult

of the totem animal, a single individual may acquire a particular

guardian animal of his own. Out of the tribal totem there thus

develops the individual totem. Then, again, the different sexes, the

men and the women of the tribe, acquire their special totem animals.

These irradiations of the totemic conception serve partly to extend

it and partly to give it an irregular development. Of the further

phenomena that gradually come to the foreground during the totemic

age, one of the most important is the growing influence of dominant

individual personalities. Such personalities, of course, were not

unknown even to the primitive horde, on the occasion of important

undertakings. But tribal organization for the first time introduces a

permanent leadership on the part of single individuals or of several

who share the power. Thus, totemism leads to _chieftainship_ as a

regular institution--one that later, of course, proves to be among the

foremost factors in the dissolution of the age that gave it birth.

For chieftainship gives rise to political organization; the latter

culminates in the State, which, though destroying the original tribal

organization, is, nevertheless, itself one of the last products of

totemic tribal institutions.

With the firmer union of tribal members there comes also _tribal

warfare_. So long as primitive man remains comparatively unaffected

by other peoples, and particularly by those of a different cultural

level, he lives, on the whole, in a state of peace. An individual

may, of course, occasionally raise his weapon against another person,

but there are no tribal wars. These do not appear until the period

of totemism, with whose firm social organization they are closely

connected. The tribe feels itself to be a unit, as does likewise each

subordinate clan and group. Hence, related tribes may unite in common

undertakings. More frequently, however, they fall into dissension, and

warfare must decide their claims to the possession of territory or

to a disputed hunting-ground. This warfare finds contributory causes

in tribal migrations. New peoples, some of them perhaps from strange

tribes, enter into a territory and crowd out its inhabitants. Thus,

war and migration are closely connected. Strife between tribes and

peoples--that is, warfare--begins with culture in general, particularly

with the most primitive social culture, as we may doubtless designate

totemism in distinction from the still more primitive life of the horde.

This leads to a number of further changes. Tribal ownership of the land

becomes more firmly established, as does also the custom of allotting a

particular share to the clan. Personal property, moreover, comes to be

more and more differentiated from the possessions of the group. Trade,

which in primitive times was almost entirely restricted to secret

barter, becomes public, and is finally widened into tribal commerce.

When this occurs, great changes in external culture are inaugurated.

Implements, weapons, and articles of dress and of adornment are

perfected. This stage having been attained, the totemic age advances

to a utilization of the soil in a way that is unknown to primitive

man. The land is cultivated by means of agricultural implements. Of

these, however, the hoe long continues to be the only one; though it

supplants the digging-stick, its use depends on human power alone. The

care and breeding of animals is also undertaken; the herdsman's or, as

it is usually called, the nomadic, life is inaugurated. The breeding

of useful domestic animals, in particular, is very closely connected

with totemism. The animal, which at the beginning of the period was

regarded as sacred, acquires the status of a work animal. It loses its

dominion over mankind; instead, it becomes a servant, and, as a result,

its cult significance gradually vanishes. The very moment, however,

that marks the passing of the sacred animal into the useful animal also

signalizes the end of the totemic era and the beginning of the age of

heroes and gods.

These various traits are far from giving us a complete picture of

the wide ramifications of totemic ideas and customs. Enough has been

said, however, to indicate how the totemic conception first widens and

deepens its influence, permeating the external social organization

no less than the separate phases of society, and then finally leads

on to its own dissolution. It is precisely this that justifies us in

calling the entire period the totemic age. Yet the boundaries of this

period are naturally much less clearly defined, or sharply demarcated

as to beginning and end, than are those of the preceding primitive

age. Man is primitive so long as he is essentially limited in his

immediate means of support to that which nature directly offers him

or to the labour of his own hands. But even in its beginnings the

totemic age transcends these conditions. Tribal organization and the

connected phenomena of war, migration, and the beginnings of open

trade relations are cultural factors which from the outset represent

an advance beyond the primitive state. But the lower limit of the age

cannot be definitely fixed; still less can we determine the point at

which it terminates. The chieftain of the totemic age is the forerunner

of the ruler who appears in the succeeding period. Similarly, totem

animals are even more truly the precursors of the later herd, and of

agricultural animals. Thus, it is not at all permissible to speak

merely of _a_ culture, as one may do in the case of the primitive

age. There are a number of different cultures--indeed, several levels

of culture, which are in part co-existent but in part follow upon

one another. Their only similarity is the fact that they all exhibit

the fundamental characteristics of the totemic age. Consider the

Veddahs of Ceylon, the Negritos of the Philippines, the inland and

forest-dwelling tribes of Malacca. When we have described the general

cultural conditions of one of these tribes, we have given the essential

features of all. This, however, is far from true in the case of

totemism, for this includes many forms of culture and various periods

of development. Even in speaking of levels of culture we may do so

only with the reservation that each level in its turn includes within

it a large number of separate forms of culture, of numerous sorts and

gradations. Moreover, the external culture, reflected in dress and

habitation, in personal decoration, in implements and weapons, in

food and its preparation, does not in the least parallel the social

phenomena represented by tribal organization, marriage relations, and

forms of rulership. Though the general character of the Polynesian

peoples permits their inclusion within the totemic age, their tribal

organization exhibits the characteristics of totemic society only

imperfectly. In other aspects of their culture, however, they rank far

higher than the Australians or some of the Melanesian tribes; these

possess a very complex social organization, but are, nevertheless,

only slightly superior, on the whole, to primitive peoples. Thus, the

various phases of totemic culture may develop in relative independence

of one another, even though they are in constant interaction. This is

true particularly in the sense that the more developed totemic customs

and cults occur even on low cultural levels, whereas, on the other

hand, they more and more disappear with the progress of culture.

2. THE STAGES OF TOTEMIC CULTURE.

We cannot undertake to describe the extraordinarily rich external

culture attained by those groups of peoples who may, in the main, be

counted as belonging to the domain of totemism. This is the task of

ethnology, and is not of decisive importance for folk psychology.

True, in the case of primitive man, the conditions of external culture

were described in some detail. This was necessary because of the

close connection between these conditions and the psychical factors

fundamental to all further development. The beginning of the totemic

period marks a great change. New forces now come into play, such as are

not to be found among the universal motives that have controlled the

life of man from its very beginning. Of these forces there is _one_ in

particular that should be mentioned--one that is practically lacking

among primitive tribes. This consists in the reciprocal influences

exercised upon one another by peoples who occupy approximately the

same plane of culture but who nevertheless exhibit certain qualitative

differences. Migrations are also an important factor in the totemic

age, as well as is the tribal warfare with which migrations are

connected.

If we disregard these qualitative differences and attempt to introduce

a degree of order into the profusion of the totemic world solely on

the basis of general cultural characteristics, we may distinguish

_three great cultural stages_, of which the third, again, falls into

two markedly different divisions. We may ignore certain isolated

remnants of peoples that are scattered over almost all parts of the

world and exhibit very unlike stages of civilization, in order to

give our exclusive attention to those forms of culture that belong to

compact groups. In this event we shall find that the lowest stage is

unquestionably exemplified in the Australian region, as well as by

some of the Melanesian peoples. Above this, we have a second level of

culture, the Malayo-Polynesian. Wide as is the difference between these

cultures, they are nevertheless connected by numerous transitional

steps, to be found particularly in Melanesian and Micronesian regions.

The third stage of totemic culture itself falls into two essentially

different divisions, the American, on the one hand, and the African,

on the other. These divisions, of course, include only the so-called

natural peoples of these countries, or, more accurately expressed,

those tribes which, as regards the characteristics of their social and

particularly of their religious development, still belong to totemic

culture.

The fact that _Australian_ culture, in spite of its highly complex

tribal organization, occupies the lowest plane of all, itself indicates

how great may be the discrepancy between totemism in general and the

direct influence which it exerts upon tribal organization and external

culture. This explains why the Australian native was regarded, up to

very recent times, as the typical primitive man. As a matter of fact,

his general culture differs but slightly from that of primitive races.

The Australian also is a gatherer and a hunter, and shows no trace of

a knowledge of agriculture nor, much less, of cattle-raising. Even his

faithful domestic animal, the dog, is rarely used for hunting, but

is regarded solely as the companion of man. Among the Australians,

therefore, the woman still goes about with digging-stick in hand,

seeking roots and bulbs for food. Man's life still centres about the

chase, and, when one hunting-ground becomes impoverished, he seeks

another. Likewise, there is no systematic care for the future. The

food is prepared directly in the ashes of the fire or between hot

stones--for cooking is not yet customary--and fire is produced by

friction or drilling just as it is by primitive man. His utensils also

are in essential harmony with his general culture.

But there is _one_ important difference. There has come a change of

_weapon_. This change points to a great revolution inaugurated at

the beginning of the totemic age. Primitive man possesses only a

long-distance weapon; for the most part he uses bow and arrow. With

this weapon he kills his game; with it the individual slays his enemy

from ambush. On the other hand, war between tribes or tribal divisions,

in which large numbers are opposed, may scarcely be said to exist. This

would not be possible with bow and arrow. Thus, the very fact that

this is the only weapon indicates that relatively peaceful conditions

obtained in primitive culture. Quite otherwise with the Australian! His

weapons are markedly different from those of primitive man. Bow and

arrow are practically unknown to him; they are found only among the

tribes of the extreme north, having probably entered from Melanesia.

The real weapons of the Australian are the wooden missile and the

javelin. The wooden missile, bent either simply or in the form of a

boomerang, whose above-mentioned asymmetrical curve is designed to

cause its return to the thrower, is a long-distance weapon. For the

most part, however, it is employed only in hunting or in play. The

same remains true, to some extent, also of the javelin. The latter has

reached a perfected form, being hurled, not directly from the hand, but

from a grooved board. The pointed end of the javelin extends out beyond

this groove; at its other end there is a hollow into which is fitted a

peg, usually consisting of a kangaroo tooth. When the spear is hurled

from the board this peg insures the aim of the shot, just as does the

gun-barrel that of the bullet; the leverage increases the range. There

are also other weapons which are designed for use at close range--the

long spear, the club, and, what is most indicative of battle, the

shield. The latter cannot possibly be a hunting implement, as might

still be the case with the spear and the club, but is a form of weapon

specifically intended for battle. The shield of the Australian is long,

and usually raised toward the centre. It covers the entire body, the

enemy being attacked with spear or club. Thus, the weapons reflect a

condition of tribal warfare.

The second great stage of culture, which we may call, though somewhat

inaccurately, the Malayo-Polynesian, offers a radically different

picture. To a certain extent, the relation between tribal organization

and external culture is here the reverse of that which obtains in the

Australian world. In Australia, we find a primitive culture alongside

of a highly developed tribal organization; in the Malayo-Polynesian

region, there is a fairly well developed culture, but a tribal

organization which is partly in a state of dissolution and partly in

transition to further political and social institutions, including

the separation of classes and the rulership of chiefs. Evidently

these latter conditions are the result of extensive racial fusion,

which is incomparably greater in the Malayo-Polynesian region than

in Australia. True, we no longer harbour the delusion that Australia

is inhabited by a uniform population. It also has been subject

to great waves of immigration, particularly from New Guinea, from

whence came the Papuans, one of the races which itself attained to

the Malayo-Polynesian level of culture. Naturally the Papuan influx

affected chiefly the northern part of Central Australia. The Tasmanian

tribe, now extinct, was probably a remnant of the original Australian

population. But migrations and racial fusions have caused even greater

changes among those peoples who, culturally, must be classed with the

Malayo-Polynesians. Here likewise there are many different levels, the

lowest of which, as found among the Malayo-Polynesian mixed population,

was yet but slightly higher, in some respects, than Australian culture,

whereas the culture of the true Malays and Polynesians has already

assumed a more advanced character. Ethnology is not yet entirely able

to untangle the complicated problems connected with these racial

fusions. Much less, of course, can we undertake to enter into these

controversial points. We here call attention merely to certain main

stages exhibited by the external culture of these peoples, quite aside

from considerations of race and of tribal migrations. The Negritos and

the Papuans of various parts of Melanesia possess a culture bordering

on the primitive--indeed, they may even be characterized as primitive,

since they possess characteristics of pretotemic society. Of these

tribes, the Papuans of New Guinea and of the islands of the Torres

Straits clearly manifest totemic characteristics, while yet possessing

special racial traits that are exceptionally pronounced. They differ

but little from primitive man, however, so far as concerns either

their method of securing food or their dress, the latter of which is

exceedingly scanty and is made, for the most part, of plant materials.

But these peoples, just as do the Australians, have weapons indicative

of battles and migrations; moreover, they exhibit also other marks of

a somewhat developed culture. The Papuans are the first to change the

digging-stick into the hoe, a useful implement in tilling the soil.

In this first form of the hoe, the point is turned so as to form an

acute angle with the handle to which it is attached. Hence the soil

is not tilled in the manner of the later hoe-culture proper; nothing

more is done than to draw furrows into which the seeds are scattered.

In many respects, however, this primitive implement represents a great

advance over the method of simply gathering food as practised when the

digging-stick alone was known. It is the man who makes the furrows

with the hoe, since the loosening of the ground requires his greater

strength; he walks ahead, and the woman follows with the seeds, which

she scatters into the furrows. For the first time, thus, we discern a

provision for the future, and also a common tilling of the soil. The

gathering of the fruits generally devolves upon the woman alone. But

even among the Papuans this first step in the direction of agriculture

is found only here and there. The possibility of external influences

therefore remains.

Far superior to the Papuan race is the Micronesian population,

which, as regards its racial traits, is intermediate between the

Melanesians and the Polynesians. Migration and racial fusion here

become increasingly important cultural factors. In their beginnings,

these factors already manifest themselves in the wanderings of the

Papuan and Negrito tribes. One of the most striking discoveries of

modern ethnology is the finding of distinct traces of Papuan-Negritic

culture in regions, such as the west coast of Africa, which are very

remote from the original home of the culture in question. The Papuan

races likewise wandered far across the Indian Ocean. Obviously there

were Papuan migrations, probably in repeated trains, from New Guinea

across the Torres Strait to Northern Australia, where they seem to

have influenced social institutions and customs as well as external

culture. Above the level of the Negrito and Papuan peoples, who, in

their numerous fusions, themselves form several strata, we finally have

the Malayo-Polynesian population. The Malayo-Polynesians are widely

spread over the tropical and sub-tropical regions of the earth. Because

of their significance for the particular stage of totemism now under

discussion, we have called the entire cultural period by their name.

The fragments of the Negrito and Papuan races, which are scattered

here and there over limited sections of the broad territory covered by

the wanderings of these tribes, apparently represent remnants of the

original inhabitants. As the result of long isolation, certain groups

of these peoples have remained on a very primitive plane, as have, for

example, the above-described inland tribes of Malacca, or the peoples

of Ceylon and of other islands of the Indian archipelago. Others have

mingled with the Malays, who have come in from the mainland of India,

and with them have formed the numerous levels and divisions of the

Malayo-Polynesian race. This accounts for the fact that this Oceanic

group of peoples includes a great many forms of culture, which are

not, however, susceptible of any sharp demarcation. The culture of

the Negritos and the Papuans, on the one hand, is as primitive as is

that of the Australians--indeed, isolated fragments of perished races

were even more primitive than are the Australians; on the other hand,

however, some of the Malayo-Polynesian peoples are already decidedly in

advance of any other people whose culture falls within the totemic age.

The chief ethnological problem relating to these groups of peoples

concerns the origin of the Malays, who, without doubt, have given the

greatest impetus to the cultural development of these mixed races.

This problem is as yet unsolved, and is perhaps insolvable. The Malay

type, however, particularly on its physical side, points to Eastern

Asia. The resemblance to the Mongolians as regards eyes, skull,

and colour of skin is unmistakable. At the same time, however, the

original Malays probably everywhere mixed with the native inhabitants,

remnants of whom have survived in certain places, particularly in

the inaccessible forest regions of the Malayan archipelago. Now, the

Malays were obviously, even in very early times, a migratory people.

Their wanderings, in fact, were far more extensive than any other

folk-migrations with which we are familiar in the history of Occidental

peoples. Starting, as we may suppose, in Central Asia, that great

cradle of the human race, they spread to the coasts, particularly

to Indo-China, and then to the large islands of Sunda, Sumatra, and

Borneo, to Malacca, and, farther, over the entire region of Oceania.

Here, by mixture with the native population, they gave rise to a new

race, the Polynesians proper. But the Polynesian portion of the race

also preserved the migratory impulse. Thus, the Malayans were the

first to create a perfected form of boat, and to it the Polynesians

added many new features. Thenceforth the Malay was not restricted to

dangerous coast voyages, as was the case with the use of such boats as

those of the Australians or the Papuans of New Guinea. It was a boat

of increased size, equipped with sails and oars and often artistically

fitted out, in which the Malay traversed the seas. With the aid of

these boats--which were, at best, small and inadequate for a voyage

on the open sea--and at a time when the compass was as yet unheard of

and only the starry heavens could give approximate guidance to their

course, the Malays and Polynesians traversed distances extending from

the Philippines to New Zealand. Of course, these expeditions advanced

only stage by stage, from island to island. This is shown by the

legends of the Maoris of New Zealand, who were clearly the first of the

Polynesians to migrate, and who therefore remained freest from mixture

with strange races. The same fact is attested by the great changes in

dialect which the Malayan language underwent even in the course of the

migrations of the Malays--changes which lead us to infer that to many

of the island regions settled by these peoples there were repeated

waves of immigration separated by intervals of centuries.

Connected with this is a further important factor--one which exercised

a destructive influence upon the original totemism, only a few traces

of which have survived among these tribes. The boatman, alone on the

broad seas, with only the starry firmament to direct his course, turns

his gaze involuntarily to the world of stars which serves as his

guide. Thus, particularly in Polynesia, there sprang up a celestial

mythology. This, in turn, again reacted upon the interpretation of

terrestrial objects. By breaking up tribes and their divisions,

furthermore, the migrations destroyed the former tribal organization

and, through the influence gained by occasional bold leaders on such

expeditions, gave rise to new forms of rulership. An added factor was

the change of environment, the effect of which was noticeable even at

the beginning of totemic culture in the influence which the Papuan

migration exercised upon the northern parts of Australia--the parts

most accessible to it. The Oceanic Islands are as poor in animal life

as they are rich in plants. The totemic ideas prevalent in these

regions, therefore, came more and more to lose their original basis.

This accounts for the fact that the entire domain is characterized by

_two_ phenomena which are far in advance of anything analogous that may

be found on similar cultural levels in other parts of the earth. One

of these--namely, the development of a celestial mythology--scarcely

occurs anywhere else in so elaborate a form. Of course, we also find

many clear traces of the influence of celestial phenomena in the

mythological conceptions of the Babylonians and Egyptians, of the

Hindoos, the Greeks, the Germans, etc. But the elements of celestial

mythology have here been so assimilated by terrestrial legend-material

and by heroic figures as to be inseparable from them. Thus, the

celestial elements have in general become secondary features of

mythological conceptions whose characteristic stamp is derived from the

natural phenomena of man's immediate environment. Even the celestial

origin of these elements has been almost entirely lost to the popular

consciousness which comes to expression in the legend. The case is

entirely different with the celestial mythology of the Polynesians,

particularly as it occurs in the legends of the Maoris. In the latter,

the celestial movements, as directly perceived, furnish a large part

of the material for the mythical tales. These deal with the ascent of

ancestors into the heavens or their descent from heaven, and with the

wanderings and destinies of the original ancestors, who are regarded

as embodied in the sun, moon, and stars; thus, they differ from the

mythologies of most cultural peoples, in that they are not simply deity

legends that suggest celestial phenomena in only occasional details.

Moreover, no mention of ancestral or totem animal occurs in Polynesian

mythology. There are only occasional legends, associated with the

mighty trees of this island-world, that may perhaps be traceable to

the plant totems of Melanesia. Such being the conditions, it might

seem that, in any case, we are not justified in including the entire

Malayo-Polynesian culture within the totemic age. Nevertheless, quite

apart from the fact that the other phases of external culture are

all such as indicate the totemic stage of development, the obviously

primitive character of the celestial legends themselves--for they

have not as yet developed true hero and deity conceptions--marks this

culture as one of transition. Its totemic basis has almost disappeared;

yet the earlier manner of securing food, the modes of dress, the

decoration, and the belief in spirits and magic have essentially

remained, even though decoration and weapons, particularly, have

undergone a far richer development. Thus, the external decoration of

the body reached its highest perfection in the artistic dot-patterns

exemplified in the tattooing of the Polynesians. The origin of this

bodily adornment is here again probably to be traced to magical

beliefs. The Polynesians also possess carved wooden idols and

fantastically shaped masks. To the bow and the lance they have added

the knife and the sword; to the long shield, the small, round shield,

which serves for defence in the more rapid movements of single combat.

Many localities also have a peculiar social institution, likewise bound

up with the development of warfare initiated by migration and strife.

This institution consists in an exclusive organization comprising

age-groups and the men's club. The latter, in turn, are themselves

symptomatic of the disintegration of the original totemic tribal

divisions. There is, moreover, _one_ further custom, _taboo_, which

has grown up under totemic influences and has received its richest

development with manifold transformations and ramifications within

this very transitional culture of Polynesia. The earliest form of

taboo, which consists in the prohibition of eating the flesh of the

totem animal, has, it is true, disappeared. But the idea of taboo has

been transferred to a great number of other things, to sacred places,

to objects and names, to the person and property of individuals,

particularly of chiefs and priests. The tremendous influence of these

phenomena, whose origin is closely intertwined with totemism, clearly

shows that this entire culture belongs essentially to the totemic age.

Very different is the _third_ stage of totemic culture. As was remarked

above, this falls into two essentially distinct divisions of apparently

very different origin. American culture, on the one hand, represents

a remarkable offshoot of totemic beliefs; besides this there is the

African culture, which, because of peculiar conditions, again connected

with racial fusion, is, in part, far in advance of the totemic age,

though in some details it clearly represents a unique development of

it. To one who wishes to gain a coherent picture of totemic culture,

nothing, indeed, is more surprising than the fact that foremost among

the peoples who may be regarded as the representatives of this great

epoch are the Australians. Strange to say, the condition of the

Australians approximates to that of primitive man. On the other hand,

the North American Indians, particularly those of the Atlantic Coast

regions, may be classed among semi-cultural peoples, and yet they seem,

at first glance, to have made exactly the same _social_ application of

totemic ideas as have the Australians. The typical tribal organization

of the Australians and that of the Iroquois tribes who formerly lived

in the present state of New York, are, in fact, so very similar that

a superficial view might almost cause them to appear identical. This

is all the more surprising since we have not the slightest ground

for supposing any transference of institutions. That which makes

the similarity so striking is primarily the fact that the single

groups or clans are designated by animal names, that they entertain

the conception of an animal ancestor, and that the regular tribal

organization is based on the principle of dual division. Nevertheless,

the more advanced culture of the Iroquois has already led to certain

changed conditions. The animal ancestor recedes to some extent. In

its stead, there are associated with the animal other conceptions,

such as are connected with more systematically conducted hunting. The

American Indian, in contrast to the Australian, no longer regards the

totem animal as a wonderful and superior being, to be hunted only with

fear and not to be used for food if this can possibly be avoided. He

requires for his subsistence all the game available. Hence he does

not practise the custom of abstaining from the flesh of the totem

animal. On the other hand, he observes ceremonies of expiation, such

as are unknown to the Australian. The totem ceremonies of the latter

are chiefly objective means of magic designed to bring about the

increase of the totem animals. This idea appears among the Indians

likewise. Their totem ceremony, however, has also an essentially

subjective significance and is concerned with the past no less than

with the future. Its object is to obtain forgiveness for the slaying

of the animal, whether this has preceded or is to follow the act of

expiation. Connected with these customs is a further difference, which

is seemingly insignificant but which is nevertheless characteristic.

Whereas the Australian, in many regions, thinks of the totem animal

as his ancestor, the Indian of the prairies speaks of the buffaloes

as his elder brothers. Thus, among the Indian tribes, man and animal

still stand on an equal footing. Hence the animal must be conciliated

if it is to serve as food for man. In many of the myths of the American

Indians, a man is transformed into an animal or, conversely, an animal

assumes the human form. Hand in hand with this change in cult ideas and

customs appear the richer forms of external culture. The weapons are

perfected; dress becomes more complete; decoration of the body itself,

though it does not disappear, more and more finds its substitute in

the rich embellishment of the clothing. Social organization becomes

stable, and advances beyond the original tribal limits. The tribes

choose permanent chieftains and, in times of war, enter into group

alliances with one another. Thus, tribal organization paves the way for

the formation of States, though fixed rulership has not as yet been

established. In so far, the democratic organization of North America

later instituted by the Europeans, shows a trace of similarity to the

free tribal alliances of the natives who had inhabited the country for

centuries. For the most part, moreover, the Indians were familiar with

agriculture, though, of course, in the primitive form of hoe-culture.

Man himself tilled his field with the hoe, since plough and draught

animals were wanting. But a firmer organization is revealed in the

fact that the individual did not go to the field alone, followed by

the woman who scatters the seed, but that the land was prepared by the

common labour of the clan. This caused the rise of great vegetation

festivals, with their accompanying ceremonies. In external details also

these far surpassed the cult festivals which the Australians hold in

connection with the adolescence of the youths or for the purpose of

multiplying the animal or plant totems which serve as human food.

The conditions differ in the southern and, to some extent also,

in the western portion of the great American continent. Closely

related as the various tribes are, the old hypothesis that they

migrated from Asia across Behring Strait is untenable. Moreover, in

spite of their physical relationship and, in part also, of their

linguistic similarities, their culture shows important differences.

In the southern and central parts of America particularly, we find

widely different cultural levels, ranging from the forest Indians

of Brazil, who have made scarcely any essential advance beyond the

primitive culture of the Veddahs or of the natives of Malacca,

to the tribes of New Mexico and Arizona, who have obviously been

influenced by the cultural peoples of the New World, and, under this

influence, have undergone an independent development. All advances

that they have made, however, clearly depend upon the development of

agriculture. In addition to numerous elements of celestial mythology

that have found their way from Mexico, we find vegetation cults and

agricultural ceremonies. The latter are often closely fused with the

borrowed mythology, particularly among the semi-cultural peoples of

the central region of America. These cults--sometimes governed by

totemic conceptions, while in other cases dominated by celestial

mythology--underlie the development of art throughout the whole of

America. Whereas the chief expression of the æsthetic impulse in

Polynesia is the decoration of the body, particularly by means of

tattooing, this practice is secondary, in the case of the American

Indian, to the possession of external means of adornment. It is

primarily the beautiful plumage of the bird kingdom that furnishes

the decorations of the head and of the garment. At the ceremonies of

the Zunis and other New Mexican tribes, the altars are decked with

the feathers of birds. These festivals exhibit a wealth of colour and

a complexity of ceremonial performances that have always aroused the

astonishment of the strangers who have been able to witness them. The

decoration of garments, of altars, and of festal places is paralleled

in its development by that of the pictorial decoration of clay vessels.

Here for the first time we have a developed art of ceramics which

employs ornamentations, pictures of totemic animals, and combinations

of the two or transitional forms. Originally, no doubt, these

ornamentations were intended as means of magic, but they came more and

more to serve the purposes of decoration. All of these factors exert

an influence on the numerous cult dances. All over America, from the

Esquimos in the north far down to the south, a very important part of

the equipment of the dancers is the mask. This mask reproduces either

animal features or some fantastic form intermediate between man and

animal. Thus, this culture is of a peculiar nature. Even externally it

combines the huntsman's culture with that of the tiller of the soil,

although in its agriculture it has not advanced beyond the level of

hoe-culture. As compared with Malayo-Polynesian culture, however,

it presents an important additional factor. This consists in the

community of labour, which is obviously connected with the more stable

tribal organization and with the development of more comprehensive cult

associations. It is this factor that accounts for those great cult

festivals that are associated with sowing and harvest and that extend

far down into the higher civilizations, as numerous rudimentary customs

still testify.

The changes which we likewise find in mythological conceptions also

carry us beyond the narrow circle of original totemism. Again there

appear elements of a nature-mythology, particularly of a celestial

mythology. These supplant the animal cult, but nevertheless retain

some connection with the totem animal; the culture is one in which the

totem animal never entirely loses its earlier significance. Thus, the

vegetation festivals, especially those of North and Central America,

exhibit many cult forms in which ideas that belong to a celestial

mythology combine with the worship of animals and of ancestors. The

conceptions of ancestors and of gods thus play over into one another,

and these god-ancestors are believed to have their seat in the clouds

and in the heavens above. However constantly, therefore, totemic ideas

may be in evidence within the field of external phenomena, a much

superior point of view is attained, by the American races, as regards

the inner life.

Among the _African_ peoples we find the second important form of

culture belonging to this third stage--a culture which in many respects

diverges from the one which we have just described. More clearly even

than in the case of America has the idea been disproven that the

inhabitants of the interior of Africa are essentially a homogeneous

race that has developed independently of external influences. Even

more than other peoples, the Africans show the effects of great and

far-reaching external influences. Hamitic and Semitic tribes entered

the country from the north at an early time; even from the distant

south of Asia, probably from Sumatra and its neighbouring islands,

great waves of immigration, crossing Madagascar in the distant past,

swept on towards the west even to the Gold Coast, introducing elements

of Papuan-Negritic culture into Africa. There were frequent fusions

between these tribes and the negro peoples proper, as well as with

the Hamites, the Semites, and also with those who were probably the

original inhabitants of this region, remnants of whom are still to be

found in the Bushmen. The negro race, which, relatively speaking, has

remained the purest, lives in the Soudan region; the Bantus inhabit the

south of Africa; the north is occupied mostly by Hamitic tribes, whose

advent into this region was followed by that of a people of related

origin, the Semites. Corresponding to the racial mixtures that thus

arose, there are various forms of culture. As regards the Bantus, it

is highly probable that they are a mixed people, sprung from a union

of the Soudan negroes with the Hamites. That the Hamites pressed on,

in very early times, into southern Africa, is proved by the Hottentot

tribe, whose language exhibits Hamitic characteristics, and the colour

of whose skin, furthermore, is lighter than that of the negro proper or

that of the Bantu. The language of the Bantus shows traits resembling

partly the negro idioms of the Soudan and partly Hamitic-Asiatic

characteristics. The element of culture, however, which is peculiar to

the Hamites and which was introduced by them into the northern part

of the continent, is the raising of cattle and of sheep. There can be

scarcely any doubt that the African cattle originally came from Asia.

Probably, however, cattle were brought to Africa on the occasion of

two different Hamitic migrations; this is indicated by the fact that

two breeds of cattle are found in Africa. Moreover, it is clear that,

at the time of their introduction, cattle were not totem animals, but

had already gained a position intermediate between the totem and the

breeding animal. The Hottentot, as well as the Bantu, prizes his cattle

as his dearest possession. Since, however, he slaughters them only

in times of extreme necessity, he has progressed only to the point

of obtaining a milk supply. Yet even this represents an important

advance. Owing to his efforts, the cow no longer merely provides the

calf with milk, as in the natural state, but, long after the time of

suckling has passed, places the milk at man's disposal. Everywhere

in the interior of Africa the cow is still a common milk animal. As

such, it is a highly prized source of nourishment, but it is not used

for agricultural purposes. Thus, its position is midway between that

of the original totem animal of cult and that of the draught animal.

For the Hottentot, cattle are objects of supreme value. As such, they

are accorded a certain degree of reverence. They are not utilized as

beasts of burden nor for slaughter, but only as a source of such means

of nourishment as do not cost their lives. South Africa, therefore,

has remained on the level of hoe-culture. The boundary between these

southern districts in which hoe-culture and the nomadic life prevail

and the northern regions into which the Hamites and Semites have

introduced plough-culture is, practically speaking, the desert of

Sahara. It is only when the animal is used to draw the plough that

it becomes in all respects a useful animal. Thenceforth it no longer

merely gives its milk for food, but it performs the work that is

too hard for man, and, finally, as an animal of slaughter, it takes

the place of the gradually disappearing wild animal of the chase.

Coincident with this development, totemic ideas and customs disappear.

Though these have still left distinct traces in the south, particularly

among the Bantus, it is, at most, isolated survivals that remain among

the Hamitic population of the north.

Thus, the animal has come to be a breeding and a work animal throughout

the whole of Africa, though this is particularly the case wherever

the cultural influences of the immigrant peoples from the East have

been operative. The relations of man to man have likewise undergone

a change in this locality, due, in part, to migrations and tribal

wars. No region so much as Africa has become the centre of despotic

forms of government. It is this factor, together with the potent

influence of ideas of personal property associated with it, that has

contributed, on the one hand, to the origin of polygyny, and, on the

other, to the rise of slavery. Long before Africa became the slave

market of the New World it harboured an intertribal traffic in human

beings. These changes in culture undermined the older cults, so that,

with the dissolution of the totemic tribal organization, the original

totem conceptions disappeared from all parts of this region. All the

more marked was the progress of animism and fetishism, of which the

former is closely connected, in its origin, with totem belief, while

the latter is a sort of degenerate totemism. In certain regions,

furthermore, as among the Bantus and the Hamitic tribes, another

outgrowth of the cult of the dead--namely, ancestor worship--has gained

great prominence alongside of elements of a celestial mythology.

To a far greater extent than in Africa, totemic culture has almost

entirely disappeared throughout the entire _Asiatic_ world. Only in the

extreme north among the Tchuktchis, the Yakutes, and Ghilyaks, and in

the far south among the Dravidian tribes of Hindustan who were pushed

back by the influx of Hindoos, have remnants of totemic institutions

survived. In addition to these, only scanty fragments of totemism

proper may be found in Asia--the home of the great cultural peoples

of the Old World. Surviving effects of totemic culture, however, are

everywhere apparent, no less in the sacred animals of the Babylonians,

Egyptians, Hindoos, Greeks, and the Germanic peoples, than in the

significance attached by the Romans to the flight of birds and to the

examination of entrails, and in the Israelitic law which forbids the

eating of the flesh of certain animals.

In the light of all these facts, the conclusion appears highly probable

that at some time totemic culture everywhere paved the way for a more

advanced civilization, and, thus, that it represents a transitional

stage between the age of primitive man and the era of heroes and gods.

3. TOTEMIC TRIBAL ORGANIZATION.[1]

As has already been stated, the beginning of the totemic age is not

marked by any essential change in external culture. As regards dress,

decoration, and the acquisition of food, the conditions that we meet,

particularly among the natives of Central Australia, differ scarcely at

all from those of the primitive races of the pretotemic age. It is only

in the weapons, which are already clearly indicative of tribal warfare,

that we find an unmistakable external indication of deeper-going

differences in social culture. At the same time, however, the totemic

age includes peoples whose general manner of life we are accustomed to

call semi-cultural. The greatest contrast occurs between the natives of

Australia and of some of the portions of Melanesia, on the one hand,

and those of North America, particularly of the eastern part, on the

other. While the former still live the primitive life of the gatherer

and the hunter, the latter possess the rudiments of agriculture, as

well as the associated cult festivals, the beginnings of a celestial

mythology, and richer forms of legend and poetry. Nevertheless, as

regards the most universal characteristic of totemic culture, namely,

the _form of tribal organization_, the two groups of peoples differ but

slightly, although conditions in Australia have on the whole remained

more primitive. This is most clearly shown by the fact that, among the

Australian natives, the totem animal possesses the significance of a

cult object, whereas in America, and particularly among the Atlantic

tribes, whose totemic practices have received the most careful study,

the totem animal has obviously come to be a mere coat of arms. The

difference might, perhaps, be briefly stated thus: In Australia,

the totem names signify groups of cult members within a clan; in

America, they are the designations of clans themselves, but these as

such possess no cult significance. In both regions, however, tribal

organization follows the principle of dual division. The tribe first

divides into two tribal halves (I and II); then each of these separates

into two clans (A and B, C and D); finally, the latter again break up

into subclans, so that eventually we may have eight tribal divisions.

In certain cases, the division has not advanced beyond the dual form;

the upper limit, on the other hand, seems to be eight distinct groups.

The schemata representing tribal organization in Australia and in

America are so similar that it is easy to

Kamilaroi

(Central Australians)

I II

/ \ / \

A B C D

mnop qrst mpqs nort

Seneca

(Iroquois)

I II

/ \ / \

/ \ / \

---- ---- ---- ----

| | | | | | | |

A B C D E F G H

understand how most authors have come to regard conditions in the

two countries as essentially identical. Yet the divergence in the

nomenclature of the tribal divisions points to significant differences.

The fact is that the clan names of the Australians are entirely

different from the totem names. The former have, as a rule, become

unintelligible to the present-day native, and, since many of them recur

among distinct tribes who now speak different dialects, they probably

derive from an older age. Words such as Ipai, Kumbo, Murri, Kubbi,

etc., may originally, perhaps, have possessed a local significance. At

any rate, clan names but rarely consist of the names of animals. On

the other hand, such words as emu, kangaroo, opossum, eagle-hawk, and

others, are the regular designations of the clans composing the totem

groups. The case is otherwise among the North American Indians. Here

the clans all have animal names. Nor can we anywhere find alongside of

the clans any particular totem groups which might be regarded as cult

alliances. The schema shown on p. 141 exhibits these relations. The

tribal halves are designated by I and II, the clans by A, B, C, etc,

and the independent totem groups existing within the individual clans

by _m, n, o, p,_ etc.

Owing to the external similarity of the tribal organizations, it has

generally been thought that the totem groups of the Australians are

merely clans or subclans, such as are, doubtless, the social groups

of the American Indians, designated by similar totem names. This

interpretation, however, has unquestionably led to serious confusion,

particularly in the description of the tribal organization of the

Australians. A study of the detailed and very valuable contributions of

Howitt and of other early investigators of the sociological conditions

of Australia, inevitably leaves the impression that, particularly as

regards the interpretation of the various group names, the scholars

were labouring under misconceptions which caused the relations to

appear more complex than they really are. Such misconceptions were

all the more possible because the investigators in question were

entirely ignorant of the languages of the natives, and were therefore

practically dependent upon the statements of their interpreters. Under

these circumstances we may doubtless be allowed a certain degree of

scepticism as to the acceptance of these reports, especially when they

also involve an interpretation of phenomena; and we may be permitted an

attempt to discover whether a different conception of the significance

of the various group names may not give us a clearer picture of

the phenomena, and one that is also more adequate when the general

condition of the inhabitants is taken into account. The conditions

prevalent among the American Indians are in general much easier to

understand than are those of the Australians, particularly where the

old tribal organization has been preserved with relative purity,

as among the Iroquois. In this case, however, the totem names have

obviously become pure clan designations without any cult significance.

Now this has not occurred among the Australians; for them, the totem

animal has rather the status of a cult object common to the members

of a group. The fact that the Australians have separate names for the

clans, as was remarked above, whereas the American Indians have come

to designate clans by totem names, provides all the more justification

for attributing essentially different meanings to the two groups

that bear totem names. In attempting to reach a more satisfactory

interpretation of totemic tribal organization, therefore, we shall

consider those totem groups which are obviously in a relatively early

stage of development--namely, the Australian groups--simply as _cult

associations_ which have found a place within the tribal divisions or

clans, but whose original significance is of an absolutely different

nature. In the above schema, therefore, A, B, C, D, etc., represent

tribal divisions or clans, _m, n, o, p,_ etc., cult groups. The latter

are lacking in the part of the diagram which refers to the American

Indians, since these have no cult associations that are independent

of the tribal divisions; indeed, the old totem names have lost their

former cult significance and have become mere clan names. Thus, the

conception here advanced differs from the usual one in that it gives

a different significance to the totem names on the two levels of

development. In the case of the Australians, we regard them as the

names of _cult groups_; in America, where the totem cult proper has

receded or has disappeared, we regard them as _mere clan names_.

But the extension of totem names to the entire clan organization in

the latter case is not, as it were, indicative of a more developed

totemism, but rather of _a totemism in the state of decline_. The

totem animal, though here also at one time an object of cult, is such

no longer, but has become a mere coat of arms. In support of this

view of American totem names, we might doubtless also refer to the

so-called totem poles. Such a pole consists of a number of human

heads representing the ancestors of the clan, and is crowned by the

head of the totem animal. This is obviously symbolic of the idea that

this succession of generations has as its symbol the totem animal that

surmounts it--that is, the totem pole is an enlarged coat of arms.

Because of the great regularity of its occurrence, the dual form of

tribal division must be regarded as everywhere due to the same cause.

Concerning its origin there can scarcely be any doubt. Obviously it has

no real connection with totemism itself. This explains why the tribal

divisions originally derived their names, not from the totem, but from

localities or from other external sources, as the conditions among

the Australians would seem to indicate. A phenomenon which recurs in

widely distant regions with such regularity as does dual division, is

scarcely intelligible except by reference to the general conditions

attendant upon the spread of peoples. A tribe leading the unsettled

life of gatherers and hunters must of inner necessity separate as

its numbers increase or as the food-supply begins to fail. It is but

natural that the tribe should first separate into two divisions on the

basis of the hunting-grounds which the members occupy; the same process

may then repeat itself in the case of each division. The fact that

when deviations from the principle of dual division are found, they

are most likely to occur in the subordinate groups, is also in harmony

with the view that the divisions are due to the natural conditions of

dispersion. For, in the case of the subordinate groups, one of the

smaller units might, of course, easily disintegrate or wander to a

distance and lose its connection with the tribe.

[1] The survey presented in this and in the following section aims

to give only a general outline of the relations between totemism and

tribal organization, as based particularly on several tribes of Central

Australia. For a more detailed account of the conditions and of their

probable interpretation, I would refer to a paper on "Totemism and

Tribal Organization in Australia," published, in 1914, in _Anthropos_,

an international journal.

4. THE ORIGIN OF EXOGAMY.

Though the dual organization of the tribe seems to admit of a

comparatively simple and easy explanation, the totemic exogamy which is

closely bound up with it offers great difficulties. As we have already

seen, totemic exogamy is characterized by the fact that a member of one

specific clan, or of a totem group belonging to the clan, may enter

into marriage only with a member of another clan or totem group.

This restriction of the marriage relationship is generally known as

'exogamy,' a term first introduced by the Scottish ethnologist and

historian, McLennan. In order to distinguish this custom from later

regulations of marriage, such, for example, as exist in present law,

in the prohibition of the union of relatives by blood or by marriage,

we may call it more specifically 'totemic exogamy.' Totemic exogamy

clearly represents the earliest form of marriage restriction found

in custom or law. The phenomena bound up with it may be regarded as

having arisen either contemporaneously with the first division of the

tribe or, at any rate, soon thereafter, for some of the Australian

and Melanesian tribes practise exogamy even though they have not

advanced beyond a twofold division of the tribe. On the other hand,

the primitive horde of the pretotemic age remains undivided, and, of

course, shows no trace of exogamy. True, marriages between parents

and children seem to have been avoided as early even as in pretotemic

times. But this could hardly have been due to the existence of firmly

established norms of custom. Such norms never developed except under

the influence of totemic tribal organization, and they are closely

related to its various stages of development.

Taking as the basis of consideration the above-mentioned conditions in

Australia, where an approximate regularity in the successive stages

of this development is most clearly in evidence, we may distinguish

particularly _three_ main forms of exogamy. The first is the simplest.

If we designate the two divisions of the tribe between which exogamic

relations obtain, by A and B, and the various subgroups of A by _l,

m, n, o,_ and of B by _p, q, r, s,_ we have, as this simplest form,

_unlimited exogamy_. It corresponds to the following schema:--

I. _Unlimited Exogamy._

A B

_l m n o p q r s_

|______________________________|

This means: A man belonging to Class A may take in marriage a woman

from any of the subgroups of Class B, and conversely. Marriage is

restricted to the extent that a man may not take a wife from his own

class; it is unrestricted, however, in so far as he may select her from

any of the subgroups of the other class. This form of exogamy does not

appear to occur except where the divisions of the tribe are not more

than two in number. The marriage classes, A and B, then represent the

two divisions of the tribe; the subgroups _l, m, n, o, p,..._ are totem

groups--that is to say, according to the view maintained above, cult

groups. For the most part, marriage relationships between the specific

cult groups meet with no further restrictions. A man of Class A may

marry a woman belonging to any of the totem groups _p, q, r, s,_ of

Class B--it is only union with a woman belonging to one of the totem

groups of Class A that is denied him. Nevertheless, as we shall notice

later, we even here occasionally find more restricted relations between

particular totem groups, and it is these exceptions that constitute

the transitional steps to limited exogamy. Such transitions to the

succeeding form of exogamy are to be found, for example, among the

Australian Dieri, some of whose totem groups intermarry, only with some

one particular group of the other tribal division.

The _second_ form of exogamy occurs when a member of Class A is not

allowed to take in marriage any woman he may choose from Class B, but

only one from some specific sub-group of B. For example, a man of group

_n_ is restricted to a woman of group _r_.

II. _Limited Exogamy with Direct Maternal or Paternal

Descent._

A B

_l m n o p q r s_

|________________________________|

Both forms of exogamy, the unlimited and the limited, observe the

same law with respect to the group affiliation of children. If, as

universally occurs in Australia, A and B are clans having exogamous

relations, and _l, m, n, o, p,..._ are totem groups within these

clans, then, if maternal descent prevails, the children remain both

in the clan and in the totem of the mother; in the case of paternal

descent, they pass over to the clan and to the totem of the father.

Of these modes of reckoning descent, the former is dominant, and was

everywhere, probably, the original custom. One indication of this is

the connection of paternal descent with other phenomena representing a

change of conditions due to external influences--the occurrence of the

same totem groups, for example, in the two clans, A and B, that enjoy

exogamous relations. The latter phenomenon is not to be found under

the usual conditions, represented by diagrams I and II. In the case

of unlimited exogamy (I), no less than in that of limited exogamy, we

find that if, for example, maternal descent prevails, and, the mother

belongs to clan B and to totem group _r_, the children likewise belong

to this group _r_. This condition is much simplified in the case of the

American Indians. With them, totem group and clan coincide, the totem

names having become the names of the clans themselves. The particular

totem groups, _l, m, n, o, p,..._ do not exist. Exogamous relations

between clans A and B consist merely in the fact that a man of the one

clan is restricted in marriage to women of the other clan. Wherever

maternal descent prevails, as it does, for example, among the Iroquois,

the children are counted to the clan of the mother; in the case of

paternal descent, they belong to the clan of the father.

In the Australian system, however, which distinguishes clan and totem,

and therefore, as we may suppose, still exemplifies, on the whole, an

uninterrupted development, we find also a _third_ form of exogamous

relationship. This last form of exogamy seems to be the one which is

most common in Australia, whereas, of course, it has no place in the

pure clan exogamy of the American Indians. The system indicated in

diagram II, in which children belong directly to the clan of the mother

in maternal descent and to that of the father in paternal descent, may

be designated as limited exogamy with direct maternal or paternal

descent. There developed from this a third system, in which, while

the children are counted to the _clan_ of the parent who determines

descent, they nevertheless become members of a different totem group.

Thus arises a limited exogamy with _indirect_ maternal or paternal

descent, as represented in diagram III.

III. _Limited Exogamy, with Indirect Maternal or Paternal

Descent._

A B

_l m n o p q r s_

|____________________________|~

A man of clan A and totem group _l_ may marry only a woman of clan B

and totem group _p_; the children, however, do not belong to the totem

_p_, but to another specifically defined totem group, _q_, of clan B.

The way in which these various forms of exogamy affect the marriage

relations of the children that are born from such unions is fairly

obvious. Turning first to form I--unlimited exogamy--it is clear that,

in the case of maternal descent, which here appears to be the rule,

none of the children of the mother may marry except into the clan of

the father; in paternal descent, conversely, they may marry only into

the clan of the mother. Marriage between brothers and sisters, thus, is

made impossible. Nor may a son marry his mother where maternal descent

prevails, or a daughter her father in the case of paternal descent. In

the former case, however, the marriage of father and daughter would be

permitted, as would that of mother and son in the latter. The marriage

of a son or daughter with relatives of the mother who belong to the

same clan is not allowed in the case of maternal descent. The son,

for example, may not marry a sister of his mother, nor the daughter

a brother of the mother, etc. Since it is maternal descent that is

dominant in the case of unlimited exogamy, the most important result

of the latter is doubtless its prevention of the marriage of brother

and sister, in addition to that of a son with his mother. The system

of paternal descent, of course, involves a corresponding change in

marriage restrictions.

What, now, are the results of form II--limited exogamy with direct

maternal or paternal descent? It is at once clear that such exogamy

prohibits all the various marriage connections proscribed by unlimited

exogamy. Marriage between brothers and sisters is rendered impossible,

as is also, in the case of maternal descent, that between a son and

his mother or the relatives in her clan. Marriage between father and

daughter, however, is permitted. Where paternal descent prevails,

these latter conditions are reversed. Although forms I and II are

to this extent in complete agreement, they nevertheless show a very

important difference with respect to the prohibitions which they place

on marriage. In unlimited exogamy, a man is at liberty to marry into

any totem that belongs to the clan with which his own has exogamous

relations; in limited exogamy, however, he may marry into only _one_ of

the totems of such a clan. Thus, the circle within which he may select

a wife is very materially reduced. Limited exogamy with direct maternal

or paternal descent, accordingly, means a _reapproach to endogamy_.

The wife must be chosen from an essentially smaller group, narrowed

down, in the case of maternal descent, to the more immediate relatives

of the father, or, in paternal descent, to those of the mother. Such

a condition is not at all a strict form of exogamy, as is maintained

by some ethnologists, but is, on the contrary, something of a return

to endogamy. This point is of decisive importance in determining the

motives of the remarkable institution of exogamy.

What are the conditions, finally, which obtain in form III--limited

exogamy with _indirect_ maternal or paternal descent? It is at once

obvious that marriage between brother and sister is here also excluded.

Furthermore, another union is prohibited which was permitted in form

II. For son and daughter, in the case of maternal descent, no longer

belong to the totem group of the mother, _p_, but pass over into

another group, say _q_. Not only, therefore, is a son prevented from

marrying his mother because they both belong to the same clan, but a

father is forbidden to marry his daughter because he may take only a

woman of group _p_, to which his wife belongs. No less true is this

of the son, who now likewise belongs to group _q_, and may therefore

no longer marry a female relative of his father's, since the group

_q_ into which he has entered has exogamous connections with another

totem group of the paternal clan, say with _m_. With this change a step

to a _stricter exogamy_ is again taken; the earlier restrictions on

marriage remain, and the possibilities of marriage between relations

are further reduced by changing the totem of the children. Cousins may

not marry each other. Thus, the limits of exogamy are here narrower

than those, for example, which obtain in Germany. It is evident that

such limitations might become a galling constraint, particularly where

there is a scarcity of women, as is the case, for the most part, in

Australia. This has led some of the Australian tribes to the remarkable

expedient of declaring that a man is not to be regarded as the son of

his father, but, in the case of maternal descent, as the son of his

paternal grandfather--a step which practically amounts to transferring

him into the totem of his father and allowing him to enter into

marriage with his mother's relatives. This circumvention, reminding one

of the well-known fictions of Roman law, may have its justification in

the eyes of the Australians in the fact that they draw practically no

distinction between the various generations of ancestors.

The three forms of exogamy, accordingly, agree in prohibiting the

marriage of brothers and sisters and, in so far as maternal descent may

be regarded as the prevailing system, the marriage of a son with his

mother. Both these prohibitions, doubtless, and especially the latter,

reflect a feeling which was experienced by mankind at an early age.

The aversion to the marriage of a son with his mother is greater than

that to the marriage of brother and sister or even that of father and

daughter. Consider the tragedy of Œdipus. It might, perhaps, be less

horrible were it father and daughter instead of son and mother who

were involved in the incestuous relation. Marriages between brothers

and sisters have, of course, sometimes occurred. Thus, as has already

been remarked, the Peruvian Incas ordained by law that a king must

marry his sister. In the realm of the Ptolemies, likewise, the marriage

of brother and sister served the purpose of maintaining purity of

blood, and even to-day such marriages occur in some of the smaller

despotic negro states. The custom is probably always the result of the

subjugation of a people by a foreign line of rulers. Indeed, even the

Greeks permitted marriage between half-brothers and half-sisters.

Though these natural instincts were less potent in early times than

in later culture, they may not have been entirely inoperative in the

development from original endogamy to exogamy. Nevertheless, one would

scarcely attempt to trace to the blind activity of such instincts those

peculiar forms of exogamy that appear particularly among the Australian

tribes. On the contrary, we would here also at once be inclined to

maintain that the reverse is true, thus following a principle that has

approved itself in so many other cases. The aversion to marriage with

relatives has left its impress on our present-day legislation, not so

much, indeed, in the positive form of exogamy, as in the negative form

which forbids endogamy within certain limits. _This aversion, however,

is not the source so much as it is the effect--at least in great

measure--of the exogamous institutions of early culture._ All the more

important is the question concerning the origin of these institutions.

This question, in fact, has already received much attention on the

part of ethnologists, particularly since the beginning of the present

century, when it has become more and more possible to study the tribal

organization of the Australians. Here, however, we must distinguish

between the general theories that have been advanced concerning the

causes of exogamy as such--theories which date back in part even to

a fairly early period--and hypotheses concerning the origin of the

various forms of exogamy.

Exogamy as such has generally been approached from a rationalistic

point of view. It has been regarded as an institution voluntarily

created to obviate the marriage of relatives, and is supposed to have

arisen contemporaneously with another institution of like purpose,

namely, tribal division. This view is championed, among other scholars,

by the able American sociologist, Lewes Morgan, in his book "Ancient

Society" (1870), and even by Frazer in his comprehensive work "Totemism

and Exogamy" (1910), which includes in its survey all parts of the

earth. Frazer says explicitly: 'In the distant past, several wise

old men must have agreed to obviate the evils of endogamy, and with

this end in view they instituted a system that resulted in exogamous

marriage.' Thus, the determinant motive is here supposed to have

been aversion to the marriage of relatives. According to Morgan's

hypothesis--an extreme example of rationalistic interpretation--the

aversion was due to a gradually acquired knowledge that the marriage

of relatives was injurious in its effects upon offspring. The entire

institution, thus, is regarded as a eugenic provision. We are to

suppose that the members of these tribes not only invented this whole

complicated system of tribal division, but that they foresaw its

results and for this reason instituted exogamous customs. Were people

who possess no names for numbers greater than four capable of such

foresight, it would indeed be an unparalleled miracle. Great social

transformations, of which one of the greatest is unquestionably the

transition from the primitive horde to totemic tribal organization,

are never effected by the ordinances of individuals, but develop of

themselves through a necessity immanent in the cultural conditions.

Their effects are never foreseen, but are recognized in their full

import only after they have taken place. Moreover, as regards the

question of the injurious effects resulting from the marriage of

relatives, authorities even to-day disagree as to where the danger

begins and how great it really is. That the Australians should have

formed definite convictions in prehistoric times with reference to

these matters, is absolutely inconceivable. At most, they might

have felt a certain instinctive repugnance. Furthermore, if these

institutions were established with the explicit purpose of avoiding

marriage between relatives, the originators, though manifesting

remarkable sagacity in their invention, made serious mistakes in their

calculations. For, in the first place, the first two forms of exogamy

only partially prevent a union which even endogamous custom avoids,

namely, that between parents and children; in the second place, the

transition from unlimited to limited exogamy with direct maternal or

paternal descent does not involve an increased restriction of marriage

between relations, but, as we have already seen, marks a retrogression,

in the sense of a reapproach to endogamy.

The above view, therefore, was for the most part abandoned in favour

of other, apparently more natural, explanations. Of these we would

mention, as a second theory, the biological hypothesis of Andrew Lang.

This author assumes that the younger brothers of a joint family were

driven out by the stronger and older ones in order to ward off any want

that might arise from the living together of a large number of brothers

and sisters, and that these younger brothers were thus obliged to marry

outside the group. Even this, however, is not an adequate theory of

exogamy, since it does not explain how the custom has come to apply

also to the older members of the family group. As a final hypothesis,

we may mention one which may perhaps be described as specifically

sociological. In its fundamental aspects it was proposed by MacLennan,

the investigator who also gave us the word 'exogamy.' MacLennan does

not regard exogamy as having originated in times of peace, nor even as

representing voluntarily established norms of custom. He derives it

from war, and in so doing he appeals to the testimony both of history

and of legend. As is well known, even the Iliad, the greatest epic of

the past, portrays as an essential part of its theme a marriage by

capture. The dissension between Achilles and Agamemnon arose from the

capture of Briseis, for whom the two leaders of the Achæans quarrelled

with each other. According to MacLennan, the capture of a woman from a

strange tribe represents the earliest exogamy. The rape of the Sabines

is another incident suggesting the same conclusion. True, this is not

an event of actual history. Nevertheless, legend reflects the customs

and ideas of the past. Now, in the case under discussion, it is clear

that marriage by capture involves a foreign and hostile tribe, for this

is the relation which the Sabines originally sustained to the Romans.

A significant indication of the connection between marriage by capture

and war with hostile tribes occurs also in Deuteronomy (ch. xxi.),

where the law commands the Israelites: 'If in war you see a beautiful

woman and desire her in marriage, take her with you. Let her for

several weeks bewail her relatives and her home, and then marry her.

But if you do not wish to make her your wife, then let her go free;

you shall not sell her into slavery.' This is a remarkable passage in

that it forbids the keeping and the selling of female slaves, but, on

the other hand, permits marriage with a woman of a strange tribe. A

parallel is found in Judges (ch. xxi.), where it is related that the

elders of Israel, being prevented by an oath to Jahve from giving their

own daughters in marriage to the children of Benjamin, advised the

latter to fall, from ambush, upon a Canaanitic tribe and to steal its

maidens.

In spite of all these proofs, exogamy and the capture of women from

strange tribes differ as regards _one_ feature of paramount importance.

In both legend and history the captured woman is universally of a

_strange_ tribe, whereas totemic exogamy never occurs except between

clans of the same tribe. Added to this is a further consideration. The

above-mentioned passage from Deuteronomy certainly presupposes that the

Israelite who captures a wife in warfare with a strange tribe already

possesses a wife from among his own tribe. This is his chief wife, in

addition to whom he may take the strange woman as a secondary wife.

We may refer to Hagar, the slave, and to Sarah, Abraham's rightful

wife, who belonged to his own tribe. The resemblance between exogamy

and the capture of women in warfare is so far from being conclusive

that exogamy is permitted only between clans of the same tribal group;

hence, in cases where there are four or eight subgroups, it is not

even allowed between members of the two tribal halves. Indeed, the

essential characteristic of exogamous tribal organization, marriage

between _specific_ social groups, is entirely lacking in the marriage

by capture that results from war. Moreover, the woman married under

exogamous conditions is either the only wife or, if she is the first,

she is the chief wife; in the case of marriage by capture in war, the

captured woman is the secondary wife.

5. MODES OF CONTRACTING MARRIAGE.

Though the theory that exogamy originated in the capture of women

in warfare is clearly untenable, it has without doubt seized upon

_one_ element of truth. Marriage by capture may also occur within

one and the same tribe, and under relatively savage conditions this

happens very frequently. Indeed, it is precisely in the case of the

Australians, to judge from reports, that such marriage is probably

as old as the institution of exogamy itself, if not older. Early

accounts, in particular, give abundant testimony to this effect. That

later writings give less prominence to the phenomenon does not imply

its disappearance. The decreased emphasis is due rather to the fact

that in more recent years the attention of investigators has been

directed almost exclusively to the newly discovered conditions of

tribal organization. Even on a more advanced and semi-cultural stage

we find struggles for the possession of a wife. The struggle, however,

is regularly carried on, not between members of different groups, much

less between entirely strange peoples of widely differing language and

culture, but between members of one and the same tribe. Two or more

members of a tribe fall into a quarrel for the possession of a woman

who, though not belonging to their own clan, is nevertheless a member

of a neighbouring clan of the same tribe. Such conditions are doubtless

to be traced back to earliest times. The victor wins the woman for

himself. The custom of marriage by capture has left its traces even

down to the present, in practices that have for the most part assumed

a playful character. Originally, however, these practices were without

doubt of a serious nature, as were all such forms of play that

originated in earlier customs. Just as ancient exogamous restrictions

are still operative in the prohibitions which the statutes of all

cultural peoples place on the marriage of relatives, so the influence

of marriage by capture is reflected in some of the usages attending the

consummation of marriage, as well as in various customs, such as the

purchase of wives and its converse, the dowry, which succeeded marriage

by capture. Moreover, the fact that marriage by capture occasionally

occurs even in primitive pretotemic culture and that it is practised

beyond that circle of tribal organization whose totemic character can

be positively proved, indicates that it is presumably older than an

exogamy regulated by strict norms of custom. It is just in Australia,

that region of the earth where, to a certain extent, the various stages

of development of exogamy still exist side by side, that we find other

cultural conditions which make it practically impossible to hold that

marriage by capture originated in warfare between tribes. Though the

woman who is here most likely to become an object of dissension between

brothers or other kinsmen may not belong to the same clan and the

same totem as the latter, she is nevertheless a member of one of the

totems belonging to one of the most closely related clans. A woman of

their own clan is too close to the men of the group to be desired as a

wife; a woman of a strange tribe, too remote. In the ordinary course

of events, moreover, there is no opportunity for meeting women of

other tribes. The slave who is captured in war and carried away as a

concubine appears only at a far later stage of culture. The original

struggle for the possession of a woman, therefore, was not carried

on with members of a strange tribe, as though it were to this that

the woman belonged. Doubtless also it was only to a slight degree a

struggle with the captured woman herself--this perhaps represents a

later transference that already paves the way for the phenomena of mere

mock-struggles. The real struggle took place between fellow-tribesmen,

between men of the same clan, both of whom desired the woman. There is

a possibility, of course, that the kinsmen of the woman might oppose

her capture. This aspect of the struggle, however, like the opposition

of the woman herself, was probably unknown prior to the cultural stage,

when the female members of the clan came to be valued, as they are

among agricultural and nomadic peoples, because of the services which

they render to the family. The theory just outlined, moreover, readily

explains the further development of the conditions that precede the

consummation of marriage, whereas the theory that marriage by capture

originated in warfare is in this respect a complete failure. Valuable

information concerning the later stages in the development of the

marriage by capture which originates during a state of tribal peace,

is again furnished by Australian ethnology. Among these peoples, the

original capture has in many instances passed over into an exchange

in which the suitor offers his own sister to the brother of the woman

whom he desires for himself. If this proposal for exchange is accepted

and he has thereby won the kinsmen of the woman to his side, his

fellow-contestants may as well give up the struggle. Thus, exogamous

marriage by capture here gives way to _exogamous marriage by barter_,

an arrangement in entire harmony with the development of trade in

general, which always begins with barter. At the same time, the form

of this barter is the simplest conceivable: a woman is exchanged for a

woman; the objects of exchange are the same and there is no necessity

for estimating the values in order to equalize them.

There may be some, however, who do not possess sisters whom they may

offer in exchange to the men of other clans. What then occurs? In this

case also it is in Australia that we find the beginnings of a new

arrangement. In place of offering his sister in exchange, the suitor

presents a _gift_ to the parents of the bride, at first to the mother.

Gift takes the place of barter. Since there is no woman who may be

bartered in exchange, a present is given as her equivalent. Thus we

have _exogamous marriage by gift_, and, as the custom becomes more

general and the gift is fixed by agreement, this becomes _exogamous

marriage by purchase_. The latter, however, probably occurs only at

a later stage of culture. The man buys the woman from her parents.

Sometimes, as we know from the Biblical example of Jacob and from

numerous ethnological parallels, he enters into service in order to

secure her--he labours for a time in the house of her parents. In an

age unfamiliar with money, one who has possessions purchases the woman

with part of his herd or of the produce of his fields. Whoever owns no

such property, as, for instance, the poor man or the dependent son,

purchases the woman with his labour.

Marriage by purchase, however, does not represent the terminus of the

development. On the contrary, it prepares the way for _marriage by

contract_, an important advance that was already, to a certain extent,

made by the Greeks, and later particularly by the Romans. Not purchase,

but a contract between him who concludes the marriage and the parents

of the woman--this is an arrangement which still finds acceptance with

us to-day. Now, the marriage contract determines the conditions for

both bride and groom, and eventually also the marriage portion which

the man brings to the union, as well as the dowry of the wife. As soon,

therefore, as property considerations come to be dominant within the

field of marriage, marriage by contract opens the way for a twofold

marriage by purchase. The man may either buy the woman, as was done in

the case of the earlier marriage by purchase, or the woman may buy the

man with the dowry that she brings. At first, in the days of marriage

by capture, the struggle with fellow-clansmen or with strangers was

of decisive importance; at a later time, however, differences in

property, rank, and occupation came to be the determining factors in

the case of marriage. Thus, if we regard marriage by gift as a mode of

marriage by purchase, though, in part, more primitive, and, in part,

more spontaneous, our summary reveals three main stages: _marriage by

capture, marriage by purchase_, and _marriage by contract_. Between

these modes of marriage, of course, there are transitional forms,

which enable us to regard the course of development as constant. The

fact, however, that the entire development bears the character of a

more or less thorough-going exogamy, is due to the _oldest_ of these

modes of marriage--a mode which, as we may assume, was prevalent at the

beginning of the totemic age. This is a form of marriage by capture in

which the woman belonged, not to a strange tribe, but to a neighbouring

clan of the same tribe, or to one with which there were other lines of

intercourse. When capture disappeared, the exogamy to which it gave

rise remained. The old customs connected with the former passed over,

though more and more in the form of play, into the now peaceful mode of

marriage by purchase; their survivals continued here and there even in

the last form of marriage, that by contract.

6. THE CAUSES OF TOTEMIC EXOGAMY.

How does this general development of the modes of marriage account for

those peculiar laws of exogamy which are universally characteristic of

totemic culture, representing strict norms of custom that forbid all

marriage except that between specific clans of a tribe, or even only

between pairs of totem groups of different clans? Were these marriage

ordinances, which have evidently arisen in various places independently

of one another, intentionally invented? Or are they the natural outcome

of totemic tribal organization, resulting from its inherent conditions,

just as did the laws of dual tribal division from the natural growth

and partition of the tribes?

Now, the forms of totemic exogamy unmistakably constitute a

developmental series. In the simplest arrangement, there are no

restrictions whatever upon marriage between members of one clan and

those of another with which marriage relations exist. Such exogamy,

however, is relatively rare in Australia, the land in which the

developmental forms of exogamy are chiefly to be found. It seems to

be limited to tribes that have merely a dual organization, in which

event the clan coincides with one-half the tribe. Even in such cases we

find transitions to the next form of exogamy. In this second system,

exogamy is restricted to particular totems of the two clans of one and

the same tribal division; and, just as in the first case, the children

are, as a rule, born directly into the totem group of the mother, or,

less commonly, into that of the father. Following this exogamy with

direct maternal or paternal descent and undeniably proceeding out of

it, we finally have, as the third main form, exogamy with indirect

maternal or paternal descent. In this form of exogamy, as in the

preceding ones, the children belong to the totem of the mother or to

that of the father so far as birth is concerned; as respects their

exogamous totem relation, however, they pass over into another totem of

the same clan. Thus, birth-totem and marriage-totem are here distinct,

and every member of a group belongs to two totems that differ in

significance. Now, in the case of a marriage by capture in which the

individuals belong to different clans, the question of the totem does

not enter. When, therefore, this mode of marriage remains undisturbed

by further conditions, we have exogamy of the first form. When a suitor

seeks to win the favour of the clan by means of a gift presented to

the parents or the kin, marriage by capture passes over directly and

without further change into the simple marriage by purchase. The two

more exclusive forms of exogamy, on the other hand, are obviously

connected with the rise of totemism; they are the result both of

the clan divisions which follow from tribal partition and of the

accompanying separation into totem groups. The question, therefore,

concerning the development of these forms of exogamy, dependent as they

are both upon clan divisions and upon totem groups, is essentially

bound up with the question concerning the temporal relation of the two

important phenomena last mentioned. An unambiguous answer to the latter

question, however, may be gathered precisely by a study of Australian

conditions, at least so far as the development in these regions is

concerned. If we recall our previous schema (p. 141), representing the

tribal organization of the Kamilaroi, and here, as there, designate

the totemic groups (emu, kangaroo, opossum, etc.) comprised within the

clan by _m n o p...,_ it is apparent that the totems must be at least

as old as the division into the two tribal halves. Unless this were the

case, we could not explain the fact that, with very minor exceptions,

precisely the same totems exist in the two tribal divisions. The

condition might be represented thus:--

I II

_mnopq opmsn_

It is also evident, however, that the totems could not have influenced

this first division, otherwise their members would not have separated

and passed over into the two tribal divisions, as they did in almost

every case. Remembering that the totemic groups are also cult

associations, we might express the matter thus: At the time of the

first tribal division, the cult groups were not yet strong enough to

offer resistance to the separation of the tribal divisions, or to

determine the mode of division; therefore, members of totem _m_, for

example, went here or there according as other external conditions

determined. Conditions were quite different at the time of the second

division, when the tribal half I separated into clans A and B, and II

into C and D, according to the schema:--

I II

/ \ / \

/ \ / \

A B C D

mnop qrst mpqs nort

These clans, as we see, separated strictly according to totems. The

bond of cult association had now become so strong that all members of

a particular totem regularly affiliated themselves with the same clan,

though the grouping of the totem divisions within the clans of the two

tribal halves proceeded along absolutely independent lines, as may be

concluded from the fact that the totems composing the clans within the

two tribal divisions are grouped differently. The formation of such

cult or totem groups, thus, may already have begun in the primitive

horde. At that time, however, these cult groups were probably loosely

knit, so that when the horde split up, its members separated, each of

the two tribal divisions, generally speaking, including individuals

of all the various tribes. Not so in the case of those divisions of

the tribe which originated later, after mankind had advanced further

beyond the condition of the horde. By this time the totem unions must

have become stronger, so that the members of a cult group no longer

separated but, together with other similar groups, formed a clan. When

the growth of the tribe, together with the conditions of food supply

and the density of population, led to a separation of the tribe,

certain totem groups invariably joined one division and others, the

other, but the more firmly organized groups remained intact.

A further phenomenon of great importance for the development of

exogamous marriage laws must here be mentioned--one that occurs

throughout the entire realm of totemic culture but is particularly

prominent among the Australian totem groups. This phenomenon consists

in _totem friendships_. Certain totem groups regard themselves as in

particularly close relations with certain other groups. Friendships

similar to these, in a general way, are to be found even in connection

with the highest forms of political organization. For modern States

themselves enter into political alliances or friendships, and these,

as is well known, are subject to change. Such alliances occur from

the beginnings of totemism on up to the advanced plane of modern

international culture. Though these affiliations eventually come

to be determined primarily by the commercial relations of peoples,

the determining factors at the outset were faith and cult. In both

cases, however, the friendships are not of a personal nature, but are

relations based on common interests. This common interest may consist,

for example, in the fact that, as has been observed among some of the

Australian totem alliances, the member of a totem may slay the totem

animal in the hunt, but may not eat of it, though the member of the

friendly totem may do so. Thus, the interest in cult becomes also a

means for the satisfaction of wants, as well as a bond that unites more

closely the particular totem groups.

These facts help to explain how the unlimited exogamy which first

arises from marriage by capture comes to pass over into a 'limited

exogamy,' as it does immediately upon the appearance of conditions

that regulate the forceful capture and substitute for it the friendly

exchange of women. These factors, however, always come into play

whenever the intercourse between tribal members becomes closer, and

particularly when the struggle with strange tribes keeps in check the

strife between individuals of the same tribal association. In such

cases, exchange, or, in later development, purchase, proves the means

of putting an end to force. Thus, blood revenge, which persists into

far later times, is displaced by the _wergild_ which the murderer pays

to the kin of his victim. This transition is precisely the same, in its

own field, as that which occurs in the institution of marriage, for in

the former case also the strife involves members of the same tribe. The

passion, however, which causes the murder and which creates the demand

for vengeance, sometimes prevented the introduction of peaceful means

of settlement. In the case of marriage by capture, however, a marriage

relationship, unrestricted and friendly in character, was doubtless

first developed between the two clans, particularly wherever tribal

division and clan were identical. And though marriage by capture was

for a time still occasionally practised--since all changes of this

sort are gradual--such marriages, nevertheless, more and more assumed

a playful character. The actual capture everywhere finally gave way

to exchange and later to the gift. When, however, the totem groups,

and with them the cult associations that established a bond between

clan and clan, gained the ascendancy, the totem groups naturally

displaced the clan in respect to marriage arrangements; those totems

who maintained close cult relations with one another, entered also into

a marriage relationship. Thus, exogamy became limited; the members of

a totem of clan A married only into the friendly totem of clan B, and

this usage became an established norm whose violation might result in

the death of the guilty person, unless he escaped this fate by flight.

This transition of exogamy from clan to totem group, and from the

unlimited to the limited form, came only gradually. This is clearly

shown by the conditions among the Dieri. Certain of their totems have

already entered upon the stage of limited marriage relationship,

whereas others have not advanced beyond unlimited exogamy.

But even after the development had reached its final form and limited

totemic exogamy was completely established, further changes ensued.

For the basis of such exogamy, we may conjecture, is the fact that

certain totem groups of associated clans enjoy particularly close

relations with one another. Even on these primitive levels, however,

the friendships of such groups are not absolutely permanent any more

than are the political friendships of modern civilized states, though

their degree of permanence is probably greater than that of the

latter. Migrations, changes in hunting-grounds, and other conditions,

were doubtless operative also in totemic culture, loosening the bonds

between friendly totems and cementing others in their stead. This led

to changes in the exogamous relations of totem groups. Instead of

groups _n_ and _r_ of clans A and B, _n_ and _q_ might then come to have

exogamous connections (see diagram III on p. 148). But the severance

of the old connection did not immediately obliterate the tradition of

the former relationship. The influence of the latter would naturally

continue to be felt, not in connection with acts of a transitory

nature, such as wooing and marriage, but in matters _permanent_ in

character and thus affecting the traditional organization of the

tribe. Such a permanent relation, however, is _totem affiliation_.

This explains how it happens that, even after the old totem connection

gave way to the new, it nevertheless continued to exercise a claim

on the totem membership of the children born under the new marriage

conditions; hence also the recognition of the claim on the part of

custom. In _one_ respect, indeed, such recognition was impossible.

More firmly established than any form of exogamy was the law that

children belonged to the mother, or, in the case of paternal descent,

to the father. This law could not be violated. Hence _exogamous_ and

_parental_ tribal membership became differentiated. The latter ordained

that children in every case belong to the totem of the parent who

determines descent; the tradition of the former decreed that children

belong, not to the parental totem, but to some other totem of the same

clan. Such a condition of dual totem membership might, of course,

arise from a great variety of conditions, just as may the similarly

overlapping social relations within our own modern culture--such, for

example, as the military and the so-called civil station of a man.

The customary designation of the first two forms of limited exogamy

as exogamy with direct maternal descent, and of the third as exogamy

with indirect maternal descent, is plainly inappropriate and may easily

give rise to misunderstandings. For it may suggest that the maternal

totem disposes of its rights in respect to marriage arrangements to

another totem group, and that eventually this even occurs in accordance

with a definite agreement. But this is certainly not the case. For

maternal descent or, speaking more generally, the fact that children

belong to the parents, obtains invariably. It would be preferable,

therefore, simply to distinguish the parental totem connection from the

traditional exogamous connection, or one system in which the exogamous

and the parental connections coincide, from a second in which they

differ.

The conjecture, therefore, that a traditional marriage relation,

differing from that based on parentage, grew up out of a previous

totem friendship, is based primarily on the importance which totemic

_cult_ alliances in general possessed within the totemic tribal

organization. Other causes, of course, may also have co-operated. Two

further points must be noticed. In the first place, it is not at all

likely that the transition from the parental exogamous relation to the

traditional form occurred at the same time in all the totem groups.

This is not only highly improbable in itself, but is also absolutely

irreconcilable with the fact, shown by the example of the Dieri, that

the earlier transition from unlimited to limited exogamy was gradual.

Moreover, one must bear in mind that the transition from parental to

traditional exogamy, represented by diagram III (p. 148), not only

underwent several repeated transformations, but that, due to the power

which tradition always exerts, a traditional exogamous union of two

totems, after it once arose, may have persisted throughout several

changing cult friendships. An existing marriage relation may not at

all have corresponded to the cult friendship that immediately preceded

it; it may have been based on any earlier friendship whatsoever that

had been favoured by conditions and that had received a firm place in

tradition. These facts show that the hypothetical 'wise ancestors'

of the present-day Australians--sages who are said to have invented

this complicated organization in the immemorial past for the purpose

of avoiding endogamy--are just as superfluous as they are improbable.

The phenomena arose in the course of a long period of time, out of

conditions immanent in the life and in the cult of these tribes. The

various forms of exogamy appearing in the course of this period were

not the causes but the effects of the phenomena in question.

7. THE FORMS OF POLYGAMY.

Unless external influences have changed his mode of life, primitive

man, as we have seen, is both monogamous and endogamous, the latter

term being used in a relative sense as denoting a condition in which

marriages are permitted between blood relations as well as between

non-relations. As a result of the external conditions of life,

however, particularly the common habitation of the same protective

cave and the use of adjacent hunting-grounds, unions within a wider

joint family generally predominate. Following upon the rise of

exogamy, polygamy also regularly appears. These two practices give to

the marriage and family relations of totemic society an essentially

different character from that which they possess under primitive

conditions. Even in the totemic era, indeed, polygamy is not universal;

monogamy continues to survive. Monogamy, however, ceases to be a norm

of custom. It is everywhere set aside, to a greater or less extent, in

favour of the two forms of polygamy--polygyny and polyandry.