CHAPTER V

TOTEMISM AND TABOO

+421+. Totemism and taboo are both of them intimately connected with the

history of early religion, but in different ways. Totemism is not

essentially religious if religion be held to involve worship of

superhuman or extrahuman beings; it has, however, in many cases

coalesced with religious practices and ideas, and it is sometimes

difficult to draw the line distinctly between it and religion proper.

Taboo, on the other hand, is founded on magical conceptions, and these

are nearly allied to the basis of early religion; it is more or less

prominent in all early cults, and has survived in the higher religious

systems, though in these it is generally spiritualized. The two lines of

development, totemism and taboo, appear side by side in early cults, and

influence each the other; but their functions in the social organization

of religion have been different, and they are best treated separately.

As the collections of material for their history are still incomplete,

accounts of them must be regarded as, to a greater or less extent,

provisional.

TOTEMISM

+422+. The natural attraction of human beings for one another and the

necessity of providing effective means of defense against enemies have

led men to associate themselves together in clans and tribes. In such

associations some form of organization arose as a matter of course;

experience early showed that men could not live together except under

the guidance and control of authoritative regulations. Such regulations

dealt with fundamental facts of life, which in the beginnings of society

are mostly physical. The points requiring regulation are: the relation

of man to nonhuman things (animals, plants, and inanimate objects); the

maintenance of rights of life and property; and the sexual relations

between human beings, especially marriage as the basis of the family.

The determination of what things may be eaten belongs more particularly

under "taboo," and is considered below. Customs and rules designed to

protect life and property have always coalesced with religious systems;

they are mentioned in connection with the ethical element in

religion.[769] The other points--relations to nonhuman things and sexual

relations--may be conveniently considered together here; but, as the

second point belongs rather to sociology than to the history of

religion, it will be sufficient, with an introductory word on marriage

restrictions (under _Exogamy_), to give the facts in connection with the

various totemic organizations.

+423+. _Exogamy._[770] All over the savage world the general rule

prevails (though not without exceptions) that a man must not marry a

woman of his own clan; though the family proper (husband, wife, and

children) exists, the clan is the fundamental social unit. When a tribe

contains several clans it is commonly divided into groups (phratries),

each phratry including certain clans, and the rule then is that a man

shall not marry a woman of his phratry. Usually the number of phratries

is two, but in some cases (as among the Australian Arunta and adjoining

tribes) these are divided so that there are four or eight exogamous

groups (subphratries). When the totem is hereditary the totemic clans

are exogamous; otherwise (as among the Arunta) marriage between persons

of the same clan is permitted.

+424+. Whether the clan or the phratry preceded in time it is hardly

possible to determine--clans may have united to form a larger group, or

an original group may have been divided into clans. But in the latter

case this original group was practically a clan, so that the question of

precedence in time is not important. Where clan exogamy exists without

phratries it is possible that these also formerly existed and have been

dropped in the interests of freedom--that is, they limited the choice of

a wife to an extent that proved inconvenient.[771]

+425+. An almost universal feature of the marriage rules of low tribes

is the classificatory system of relationship. According to this system,

the community being divided into groups, terms of relationship indicate

not kinship in blood but tribal status in respect of marriageability;

thus, the same term is used for a child's real father and for every man

who might legally have become the husband of his mother, and the same

term for the real mother and for every woman whom the father might have

married; the children of such possible fathers and mothers are the

child's brothers and sisters; all possible spouses are called a man's

"wives" or a woman's "husbands"; and similarly with all

relationships.[772]

+426+. The system has many varieties of form, and gives way in time to

the formal recognition of blood kinship. It has been held to point to an

earlier system of "group marriage," in which all the men of one group

had marital relations with all the women of another group, and further

to a primitive custom of sexual promiscuity.[773] In the nature of the

case these hypotheses do not admit of proof or disproof. All that is

certain is that the classificatory system has been and is an

accompaniment of one stage of social and religious development.

+427+. The effect of exogamous arrangements has been to prevent marriage

between persons related in blood.[774] In totemic organizations, when

the totem is inherited, a division into two exogamous groups makes

marriage of brother to sister impossible, since all the children of one

mother are in the same group; and if there are four such groups and

children are assigned to a group different from that of the father and

that of the mother, marriage between parent and child is impossible.

When the totem is not inherited (as is the case among the Australian

Arunta) similar results are secured by a further subdivision.

+428+. The particular exogamic customs vary considerably among early

tribes, the differences following, in general, differences of social

organization. In some more settled savage communities (as, for example,

the Kurnai of Southeast Australia), in which there are neither classes

nor totemic clans, marriage is permitted only between members of certain

districts.[775] Well-organized social life tends to promote individual

freedom in marriage as in other things. Marriage with a half-sister was

allowed by the old Hebrew law,[776] and Egyptian kings often married

their sisters.

+429+. _Theories of the origin of exogamy._ Exogamy has been referred to

a supposed scarcity of women, which forced the young men to seek wives

abroad.[777] On the assumption of early sexual promiscuity it has been

regarded as a deliberate attempt to prevent the marriage of blood

relations.[778] It has been supposed to result from the absence of

sexual attraction between persons who have been brought up

together.[779] An original human horde being assumed, it has been

suggested that the patriarch, who had possession of all the women of the

horde, would, from jealousy, drive the young men off to seek wives

elsewhere.[780] From the point of view of the totem as divine ancestor,

exogamy has been supposed to arise from religious respect for the clan

blood, which is held to share the divinity of the totem, and would be

polluted (with danger to the clan) by outside marriages.[781]

+430+. Objections may be raised to all these theories. It is doubtful

whether a scarcity of women existed in early times; and supposing that

there were not women enough in a clan for the men of the clan, this

would not stand in the way of men's taking as wives their clan

women.[782] The assumption of primitive sexual promiscuity, likewise,

cannot be said to be distinctly borne out by known facts.[783] Morgan's

theory, however, is not dependent on this assumption--it need only

suppose repugnance to the marriage of blood relations. Such repugnance

granted, the main objection to the theory rests on the difficulty of

supposing savages capable of originating so thoughtful and elastic a

scheme as the exogamous system. This is a point on which it is not

possible to speak positively. The lowest tribes have produced languages

of wonderfully intricate and delicate construction, and, supposing the

process of constructing marriage regulations to have gone on during a

very long period, modifications introduced from time to time, to meet

conditions felt to be important, might conceivably result in such

exogamous systems as are now found.

+431+. As to absence of sexual attraction between persons brought up

together,[784] this seems to be a result rather than a cause of the

prohibition of sexual relations between certain classes of persons. The

argument from habits of the lower animals is indefinite--no general

habit has been proven. In orgies in India and elsewhere no repulsion

appears between persons of the same family. In the ancient world

marriage between such persons was legal and not uncommon.

+432+. The human horde, with its jealous patriarch, appears to be a

creation of the scientific imagination. It, again, was derived by its

author from the procedure of certain beast-herds in which the strongest

male drives away his rivals. It is supposed, however, that in the human

horde the young men, having found wives, are allowed to come back

bringing their wives with them, and these last the patriarch is supposed

not to appropriate. The theory is supported by no facts of actual usage.

+433+. The supposition that the young men of a clan or tribe go off to

seek food, and thus found a new clan, has more in its favor. Being

compelled to seek wives in their new surroundings, they might thus

initiate a habit of outside marriage that would in time become general

usage and therefore sacred. Secession from tribes does occur, and may

have been frequent in prehistoric times, but concerning these times we

have little or no information. It may be said that movements of this

sort would furnish a more probable starting-point for savage customs

than the ideas and schemes mentioned above.

+434+. Proof is lacking also for Durkheim's theory. It is not probable

that the totem was regarded as divine in the period in which exogamy

arose--by the tribes whose ideas on this point are known the totem is

looked on as a friend and an equal but not as a god. And, as is pointed

out above, there is no such general religious respect for the clan blood

as would forbid sexual intercourse between persons of the same clan. The

demand for revenge for the murder of a clansman arises from the sense of

clan solidarity and the necessity of self-defense--it is only in this

regard that the blood of the clan is regarded as sacred.

+435+. Horror of marriage or of sexual intercourse in general, within

the prohibited degrees or areas, is universal in low communities;

violation of the tribal law on this point is severely punished,

sometimes with death. Whence this feeling sprang is not clear.[785] It

cannot have arisen from respect for the purity of women or from a belief

in the sanctity of the family--intercourse with girls before their

marriage is freely allowed, and lending or exchange of wives is common.

Magical dangers are supposed to follow on infringement of marriage

rules, but, as such results come from violation of any tribal custom,

this throws no light on the origin of the feeling of horror in question.

Absence of sexual attraction between persons brought up together,[786]

though the absence of such feeling is said to have been observed in some

of the lower animals, is not assured for savages; its existence in

civilized communities is due to the acceptance of the established

usage, which makes certain unions impossible, so that they are not

considered, and the germ of such a public opinion may perhaps be assumed

for early tribes. Probably the horror of incest is a derivation from

economic and other situations and laws that arose naturally in early

society--it is a habit hardened into an instinct.

+436+. Though exogamy differs from totemism in origin and function, the

two are often found associated--their conjunction may be said to be the

general rule. There are, however, exceptions.[787] Totemic clans are not

exogamous in Central Australia, the Melanesian Banks Islands, among the

Nandi of East Africa, and the Bakuana of South Africa. On the other

hand, exogamy is found without totemism in the tribes just mentioned,

among the Todas of Southern India, in Sumatra, among the African Masai

and Ashanti, and in Southern Nigeria, and local exogamy among tribes

(for example, the Kurnai of Southeast Australia, and the Californian

Maidu and Shasta) in which totemic divisions are not perceptible.

+437+. In all such cases, however, the absence of records makes the

history of the organizations uncertain--we do not know whether or not

one of the elements, totemism or exogamy, formerly existed and has

yielded to disintegrating influences. Thus local exogamy may have

superseded clan exogamy in many places, the former representing the more

settled habit of life, and the absence of the totemic constitution may

indicate a process of decay of totemism. No general rule for the

decision of the question can be laid down--every case must be judged for

itself.[788]

+438+. Since a custom of exogamy presupposes at least two social groups

(clans), and totemism appears to be connected originally with single

clans, the natural inference is that the latter has everywhere preceded

the former in time. Both have undergone great changes produced by

similar sets of circumstances, and in both cases the simplest form is

probably the oldest, though here again definite data are lacking.

However, comparison of the known exogamous systems points to a two-group

arrangement as that from which the existing forms have come.

+439+. Exogamy served a good purpose in early stages of society, both

by preventing marriages between blood relations and by inducing a sense

of the sacredness of the marriage bond. Its long persistence shows that

it was regarded by most tribes as necessary for the maintenance of the

tribal life. Its restriction of individual freedom in the choice of

wives was an evil, and was in time modified and finally thrown off; but

it seems to have been the only means, discoverable by early society, by

which clans and tribes could live peaceably side by side, and it paved

the way for the establishment of the family proper.

+440+. This brief account of the most important adjunct of totemism may

serve to clear the way for the consideration of the totemic system.

+441+. Among the various relations that undeveloped communities sustain

to nonhuman things totemism has the peculiarity that it is an alliance

between a human group (clan or tribe) and a species of animals or

plants, or an inanimate natural object (as sun or moon), or, rarely, an

artificial object (usually an implement of labor).[789] The nonhuman

thing is regarded as a friend, and is respected and cared for

accordingly. When it is a species (animal or plant) every individual of

the species is held to bear this friendly relation to every individual

of the allied human group. Generally there is believed to be not only

similarity or identity of nature between the two (such identity of

nature between man and nonhuman things is everywhere an article of the

creed of savages) but a special intimacy, commonly a kinship of blood.

While the men of a group respect their ally, it, on its part, is

supposed to refrain from injuring them, and even in some cases to aid

them. It is credited with great power, such as in savage life all

nonhuman things are supposed to possess. The members of the human group

regard one another as brothers; this feeling, however, can hardly be

said to be peculiar to totemic organizations--it exists, more or less,

in all early associations, particularly in any one association as

against others.

+442+. While, therefore, we may take a certain clan alliance as a

fundamental fact of totemism, we find in various communities other

features of organization more or less closely combined with this into a

social unity. In every such case it is necessary to inquire whether the

feature in question is a universal or general accompaniment of clan

alliance, and whether it is peculiar to the latter or is found in other

systems also.

+443+. (a) _Exogamy._ It is pointed out above[790] that totemism and

exogamy are mutually independent arrangements, differing in function and

origin, each being found without the other. Yet in many cases, perhaps

in the majority of cases, the two are found combined. Exogamy supposes a

body of clans, and, given a group of totemic clans, it would naturally

be attached to these, and so become an organic part of their social

constitution. Where there is no totemism the question of union, of

course, does not come up. Where totemism is not accompanied by exogamy

it is sometimes probable that the union of the two once existed,[791] or

that exogamy is excluded by the peculiar form of the totemism.[792]

Exogamy may thus be regarded as a natural and frequent accompaniment of

totemism, but it is not a universal and necessary element of the totemic

constitution.

+444+. (b) _Names._ As a general rule the totemic clan bears the name of

its totem. The exceptions appear to be found in somewhat advanced

communities, as the Fijians and the Kwakiutl (but not the northern

branch of this tribe).[793] There are also many larger exogamous groups

(as, for example, in Australia) the meaning of whose names is

obscure--they may or may not contain the name of the totem; but such

groups may have a different origin from that of the totemic clans.

+445+. In some cases clans and tribes have distinctive _crests_ or

_badges_, generally totemic figures or parts of such figures. These are

carved on beams of houses and on house poles, or cut or drawn on men's

persons, and are used as signs manual, serving thus to indicate to

strangers a man's clan connections. Such emblems are employed in the

Torres Straits islands and British New Guinea,[794] in the Aru Islands

(southwest of New Guinea), and in North America among the Lenâpé

(Delawares), the Pueblo tribes, the Tlingit, the Haidas, and the

Kwakiutl.[795]

+446+. In America the crest is not always identical in name with the

totem, and sometimes coalesces with the guardian animal-spirit. The

myths that give the origin of the crest usually describe some adventure

(marriage or other) of a man with the crest animal, involving sometimes,

but not always, the origin of the clan.[796] The relation between totem

and crest thus differs in different places, and its origin is not clear.

The simplest form of this relation (that found in the New Guinea region)

may indicate that the totem animal, being most intimately connected with

the clan, is chosen on that account as its badge. Or possibly totem and

crest have arisen, independently of each other, from some early

affiliation with animals, and therefore do not always coincide. Such a

mode of origination would help to explain the fact that in Northwestern

America a clan may have several crests, and a man also may acquire more

than one. The relation of crest to clan is looser than that of totem to

clan--the same crest or crests are found in different clans. When the

totemic constitution of the tribe or clan is weakened, the crest may

become more important than the totem, as is the case among the Haidas.

But the adoption of the crest name does not invalidate the general rule

that the clan bears the name of its totem.

+447+. Names of families and of persons do not come into consideration

here. They arise from various local and personal peculiarities that, as

a rule, have nothing to do with totemism, and they become more prominent

and important as the latter declines.

+448+. The origin of clan totemic names is closely connected with the

origin of the totemic organization, and will be more conveniently

considered in connection with this point.[797]

+449+. (c) _Descent from the totem._ Details so far reported as to this

belief are regrettably few and often indefinite, and it is not possible

to give more than a provisional sketch of it.[798] In Central Australia

it is held that all the members of a clan come into being as spirit

children, who are the creation of mythical half-human, half-animal

beings of the olden time; the clan bears the name of the mythical

ancestor (its totem), and its members regard themselves as identical in

blood and nature with the totem.[799] Similar beliefs are reported as

existing in New South Wales and West Australia, and a definite

conception of descent from the totem has been found in the Santa Cruz

group in Southern Melanesia, in Fiji in Eastern Melanesia, and

apparently in Tonga and Tikopia.[800] In North America the belief is

reported as existing among the Lenâpé (Delawares) and other Eastern

tribes.[801] In South America it appears among the Arawaks of

Guiana,[802] and perhaps elsewhere. For Africa there is little

information on this point, and what we have is not always definite;[803]

one of the clearest expressions of descent is found in the title

"grandfather" given to the chameleon by the Chameleon clan of the

Herrero of German Southwest Africa, but a comparison with the similar

title given by the Zulus to a sort of divine ancestor, and with the

Herrero mythical stories of the origins of certain clans, suggests that

the conception is vague.

+450+. In addition to the more direct statements there are traditions or

myths that connect the origin of clans with animals or plants through

the intermediation of gods or human beings, by marriage, or some other

relation. The Bushbuck clan of the East African Baganda worship a

lion-god, who is called an ancestor and is said to have turned into a

lion at his death. Fluctuating opinions (some persons holding to direct

descent from a nonhuman object, others to friendly relations between it

and the ancestor) are reported in Sumatra, Borneo, and the Moluccas.

The Hurons regarded the rattlesnake as a kinsman of their ancestor. The

origin of the clan or family is referred to marriage with an animal by

the Borneo Dyaks and various tribes on the African Gold Coast, and to

marriage with a plant by some of the Upper Liluet;[804] and the origin

of the crests in Northwestern America is ascribed to adventures with

crest animals.[805] In the Trobriand group of islands (lying to the

northeast of British New Guinea) the totems are said to have been

brought by the first men; naturally it is not explained whence and how

the men got them.[806]

+451+. These instances of indirect origination (to which others of the

sort might be added) show a variety of points of view, and may be

variously interpreted. They may be regarded as declensions from an

earlier belief in the direct descent of the clan from the totem, or as

independent conceptions that never grew into this belief. Both these

ideas of the form of descent are found in widely separated regions and

in communities differing one from another in general culture and in the

degree of importance they attach to the totemic constitution. The

possibility of general agreement in myths, with difference in details,

between tribes remote from one another is illustrated by the creation

myths of the Australian Arunta (who have an elaborate totemism) and the

Thompson River Indians of Northwestern America (who have no clan totems,

secret societies, or dramatic ceremonies); both relate transformations

of primitive unformed persons, but in the former the creators are

half-human, half-animal, in the latter they are men who transform

half-human, half-animal beings. Such widespread variations point to

early differences in social conditions and in intellectual endowments

with the nature of which we are not acquainted.[807]

+452+. (d) _Refusal to kill or eat the totem._ The usages in regard to

killing or eating the totem are so diverse, and often so uncertain,

that it is not possible to lay down a general rule of prohibition. An

edible totem is only a peculiar sort of sacred animal or plant, and

respect for such objects often leads to refusal to kill or eat them--an

interdiction of this sort does not in itself show whether or not the

object in question is a totem. But within totemic areas the usage varies

in a remarkable manner, as, for example, in Australia. In the north

there is complete prohibition, sometimes including the totems of a man's

father, mother, and father's father. Among the central tribes a man

kills his clan totem only for the benefit of other clans, and eats a

little of it ceremonially. In the southeast the Dieri, it is said, kill

and eat their totems freely, while other tribes, the Wotjoballuk and

others, eat them only at a pinch.[808] The northeastern tribes have many

food taboos, which, however, relate not to the totemic clans but to the

exogamous subclasses. A modified regard for the totem or crest (kobong)

appears in West Australia, according to Sir George Grey's report[809];

it is not allowable to kill a family kobong while it is asleep, and it

is always with reluctance that it is killed.

+453+. Abstention from killing and eating the totem holds, as a rule, in

the Torres Straits islands, while in New Guinea the custom varies--the

totem is eaten by some tribes, not eaten by others.

+454+. In Melanesia the food restrictions connected with animal patrons

or friends of clans are less definite than in Australia. Here, also,

there are local differences of usage. Prohibition of eating or using the

totem (fish, grass, fowl, and so forth) was found by Rivers in the Santa

Cruz group (in Southern Melanesia) but not in the northern New

Hebrides.[810] In the central islands the prohibition refers to the

exogamous classes, and a similar usage is reported as existing in the

Duke of York group (in the north). The Fijians refrain from eating their

tribal sacred animals.

+455+. In Polynesia family gods appear instead of totems, and the

incarnations of gods (in animals and plants) are not eaten; such is the

rule in Samoa and Tonga, and this was formerly the practice in Hawaii.

The food restrictions in Borneo and Sumatra are not definitely totemic.

+456+. The non-Aryan tribes of India generally refrain from eating their

totems, or, in some cases, from injuring or using them; and this is true

even of those tribes (for example, the Khonds and Oraons of Bengal) that

have somewhat developed theistic systems. Occasionally exemptions from

the rule of abstention are procured, perhaps under Aryan influence; such

influence has affected many of the tribes, but has not usually destroyed

the old totemic customs. Among the Todas (in the south), however, Rivers

found only feeble suggestions of totemic objects and food restrictions;

the buffalo-cult seems to have ousted all others.[811]

+457+. Among the native tribes of Africa there is special respect for

the object with which the clan or tribe has particularly definite

relations. The Bakuana do not eat the animal whose name is borne by the

clan; if an animal (the lion, for example) is dangerous, it is killed

with an apology. The Herrero (of German Southeast Africa) abstain from

the flesh of the chameleon, and will not eat gray sheep or oxen. Among

the half-civilized Baganda, of the east, certain of the clans refrain

from eating the object from which a clan takes its name; the noteworthy

political organization of these people seems to have obliterated old

clan functions in part. In the west (Senegambia, Ashanti, Dahomi,

Nigeria, Congo) there are food restrictions, but these are not generally

connected with totemic social organizations.

+458+. There is little evidence for totemic food restrictions in North

America. The custom of apologizing to an animal on killing it, frequent

elsewhere, is reported as existing among the Algonkin Ottawas and

Menomini; but this is not necessarily totemic. The more advanced tribes

of the East and South (Algonkin, Iroquois, Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasas,

Cherokees, Natchez), the peoples of the Pacific Coast, and the

agricultural tribes of the middle of the continent (Pueblos, Mandans,

and others) appear to be free from restrictions as to eating. The

Navahos are said to refrain from the flesh of fish, turkeys, swine, and

bears, but the grounds of the interdiction are not clear.[812] The

distinctest evidence of totemistic clan food-taboos are found among the

Siouan Caddos (of the southern Mississippi Valley) and the Omahas (of

the Middle West). Both these groups are in part agricultural, and it

does not appear how they have come to differ from their neighbors in

this regard. Food restrictions are reported for the Northwest

region.[813]

+459+. There is no clear report of totemic food restrictions in Central

America or in South America;[814] but these regions have as yet not been

thoroughly examined for clan usages.

+460+. (e) _Magical ceremonies for increasing the supply of food._ Such

ceremonies exist, or have existed, in many regions and among peoples of

various grades of culture, civilized as well as savage, but the cases in

which they are, or were, conducted by totemistic clans are comparatively

few. This sort of economic function of the totem clan is most definite

and important in Central and parts of Southeast Australia, where every

clan is charged with the duty of increasing the supply of its totem for

the benefit of its connected clans; and magical rites are performed in

the fertile coast region no less than in the arid region about Lake

Eyre--that is, in these cases the employment of magic seems not to be

conditioned on the natural resources of the land. Similar totemic clan

functions appear in the islands of Torres Straits, the Turtle and Dugong

clans performing ceremonies to increase the supply of turtles and to

attract dugongs. Magical control of totems for the benefit of the whole

community is reported to be found in the Siouan Omaha clans (in the

center of the North American continent). The tribes just mentioned are

those in which the social organization is definitely totemistic.

+461+. Elsewhere the economic function attaches to other bodies than

totemic clans, as in parts of Southeast Australia, and in West Australia

(where the ceremonies are conducted by the exogamous classes). In New

Guinea the totemic character of the performances appears to be doubtful.

A single instance of clan action has been found among the East African

Baganda--the women of the Grasshopper clan undertake to increase the

supply of their totem; why this duty is assigned to the women is not

clear--the custom appears to involve a relaxation of totemistic rules.

The economic festivals and "dances" of the Siouan Mandans and Hidatsa

are general tribal ceremonies. Among the Pueblo Indians such rites are

the care of religious fraternities;[815] the Zuñi Frog clan performs a

ceremony to procure rain, but this duty is mainly committed to

rain-priests. In Northwestern America the magical performances are not

connected with totemic clans.

+462+. _Definition of totemism._ It appears, then, that not one of the

points just mentioned is found invariably in the systems of organization

commonly called totemic. Exogamy is an independent phenomenon; the clan

does not always bear the name of the totem, and is not always held to

have descended from it; usages in regard to eating it vary greatly;

magical economic ceremonies are performed by other than totemic bodies.

There is no known clan that includes all these elements in its

organization, though in Central Australia there is an approach to

complete inclusion; the features lacking are clan exogamy and absolute

prohibition of eating the totem, but practically a clan does not eat its

totem, and exogamy, for reasons given above, may be left out of

consideration. The Central Australian system may be said to be

substantially complete; with it the North American systems stand in

sharp contrast, and from it many others diverge.

+463+. But, with all these differences, the fact remains that in

totemism the human group stands in a peculiar relation to some nonhuman

object.[816] This general statement must, however, be defined in two

particulars: the relation is an alliance for the benefit of both

parties; and the nonhuman object is not regarded as a god and is not

worshiped. The first of these particulars marks totemism off from that

general regard that is paid by savages to animals, plants, certain

heavenly bodies, and other physical things;[817] the second particular

distinguishes it from the cult of ghosts and gods proper. We may

therefore define it as an alliance, offensive and defensive, between a

human group and a nonhuman group or object that is not worshiped, the

friendly relation existing between every member of the one group and

every member of the other group.[818]

+464+. This relation having been formed, the various features mentioned

above will naturally become attached to it in various ways and to

different extents. The clan will somehow get a name, when and how we

need not now ask; usually its name is that of the totem--this is in

keeping with the intimate connection between the two. To trace the

origin of the clan to the totem is only to do what is done abundantly

among uncivilized and civilized peoples (Hebrews, Greeks, and others);

the eponymous ancestor is constructed out of the current name of the

clan. To refrain from killing or eating a friendly animal or plant is a

simple mark of respect. The conception of special ability in a clan to

insure a supply of its totem for food is in accord with savage ideas of

magical endowment. When the custom of exogamy arose it would naturally

attach to the clan as the social unit.

+465+. In view of the diverse physical surroundings of the tribes of the

earth and their intellectual differences, it cannot be surprising that

they have combined these elements of organization in various ways. In

their efforts to secure food, good marriage relations, protection of

property, and defense against enemies, they have from time to time

adopted such measures as the circumstances made desirable and possible.

There is evidence that in some instances clans have changed their social

regulations, sometimes by a process of internal growth, sometimes by

borrowing from without. It is not always possible to trace such

movements, and it is impossible now to say what the earliest social

constitution of men was. The probability is that the earliest state was

an unformed one, without governmental or other institutions, and that

totemism was one of the first attempts to introduce order into society.

In accordance with what is said above, the term 'totemism' may be used

to mean particularly a simple alliance between men and nonhuman things,

and then more generally to mean such an alliance combined in whatever

way, with one or more of the particular customs described in preceding

paragraphs.[819]

+466+. _Geographical survey of totemistic usages._ If totemism be taken

in the simpler sense, as a certain sort of intimate relation between men

and nonhuman things, it will be found to be widely distributed in the

noncivilized world. Its occurrence becomes rarer in proportion as

adjuncts are attached to it; as is remarked above, it is hardly possible

to find a clan whose constitution embraces all adjuncts. Where usages

like exogamy occur, or where there is reverence for an object, without

belief in a definite, nontheistic relation between a human clan and a

nonhuman object, we cannot recognize totemism proper; such usages must

be treated as belonging to man's general attitude toward his nonhuman

associates. The question whether they represent germinal or decadent

totemism, or neither, must be considered separately in every case.

+467+. The two great totemistic regions of the world are Australia and

North America, and in each of these the variations of custom run through

the gamut of possible differences. In each of them also the native

population may include different stocks, though on this point there is

uncertainty. Differences of climate and topographical situations there

are, but these do not always account for the diversities of culture and

custom.[820]

+468+. _Australia._ In the heart of Central Australia (the home of the

Arunta and other tribes) there are clans that bear the names of their

totems, and trace their descent from half-human totem ancestors, with

whom they consider themselves to be identical; totems, however, are not

hereditary, but are determined by the ancestor connected with the place

where the mother first becomes aware of the child within her; each clan

performs magical ceremonies to secure a supply of its totem for the

associated clans, and, when the totem is an animal or a plant, hunts or

gathers it and brings it to be distributed; at the distribution the

headman of the providing clan must eat a little of the food

ceremonially, and at other times clansmen eat of it sparingly;[821] the

rule of exogamy relates not to the totemic clans, but to the phratries

or subphratries.

+469+. In the South Central region these features are found, with an

exception in the rule concerning eating one's totem. Sometimes, as in

the Urabanna tribe, such eating is forbidden. But among the Warramunga

there is a relaxation of the rule in the case of old people--for them

the food restriction is removed (apparently a humanitarian provision);

on the other hand, for other clansfolk there is an extension of the

rule--the prohibition includes two subclasses of the moiety to which the

clan belongs, and conditionally includes the whole moiety (this is

perhaps a cautionary measure, to guard against the possibility of

unlawful eating on the part of clansmen).

+470+. The special feature in North Australia (on the shores of the Gulf

of Carpentaria) is the absolute prohibition of eating the totem. In

regard to the performance of magical ceremonies for increase of the

totem also there is the peculiarity that a clan is not bound to conduct

such performances--it is optional with it to do so or not; it has

magical power, but is not required by custom to exercise it. It is

suggested by Spencer and Gillen that this variation from the usage of

the Central region is to be attributed to the more regular rainfall on

the coast, which insures a more regular supply of food and thus does

away with the necessity for magic.[822] Possibly, also, this climatic

feature may account for the stricter rule of prohibition mentioned

above; as the rule is sometimes relaxed when it is hard to get food, so,

on the other hand, it may be strictly enforced when food is plentiful.

+471+. Still a different situation appears in the southeastern part of

the continent (New South Wales and Victoria)--several prominent features

of the Central system are absent. The Dieri clans bear the names of

their totems, from which also they think themselves descended, but they

eat them freely. Some adjacent tribes eat them only at a pinch, others

refrain from them. The clans of the Narrinyeri are mostly localized, and

the clan-names are not now those of the totems;[823] the totems are

eaten. The Kurnai show the greatest divergence from the ordinary

type--they have neither totemic clans nor exogamous classes; their rule

of exogamy relates to districts. Throughout the southeast the conduct of

magical economic ceremonies by clans, every clan being responsible for

its own totem, seems not to exist.

+472+. In certain tribes (the Wotjoballuk, the Yuin, the Kurnai, and

others) there are sex-patrons, animals intimately related to all the

males or all the females of the tribe; the belief is said to be that the

life of any individual of the animal group is the life of a man or a

woman, and neither sex group will kill its patron animal. So far as

regards the conception of identity with the animal and reverence for it,

the institution agrees with the usual totemic type; but since it is not

connected with clans, some such designation for the animal as "patron"

or "guardian" is to be preferred to "totem."[824] Such animals,

protectors of sexes, are of rare occurrence, having been certainly found

so far only in Southeast Australia, and they occur in a body of tribes

that show a disposition to discard the clan constitution. In this region

individual men also sometimes have animal guardians, so that a general

tendency toward individualism may be recognized. It is not unnatural to

connect this tendency with the fertility of the south coast, which may

weaken the clan organization. The organization by sex is a singular

phenomenon, of the history of which there are no records. It is

doubtless a special development of the widespread separation of the

sexes, combined with an increasing recognition of the property rights

and the social equality of women. At an early age boys were often kept

apart from girls. Special taboos, of food and other things, were imposed

on women. On the other hand, they were in some cases the owners of the

tribal property, and were sometimes admitted to membership in secret

societies. The organization of the sex would follow under peculiarly

favorable conditions.[825]

+473+. The remaining districts of Australia have been less carefully

investigated than the central and southern parts, and information about

their totemistic customs is not always satisfactory. So far as the

accounts go there is a widespread divergence from simple clan

organization in these districts. In Northeast Australia (Queensland)

there are exogamous subclasses, and no clan taboos. In the southwest not

clans but families are the social units; these trace their descent from

animals, and there are individual animal patrons. In the northwest no

clan organization is reported; there is class exogamy, and in the

magical ceremonies the performers are taken from the exogamous classes.

+474+. _Torres Straits Islands._ These noteworthy variations in the

totemism of the Australian continent appear to be connected in a general

way with differences of climate and the degree of isolation of the clans

and tribes. Similar variations appear in the Torres Straits islands and

in British New Guinea. In the western islands of the Straits (the only

part in which distinct totemism has been found) the social organization

is to a certain extent independent of totemic relations: the clans are

locally segregated, and marriage is mainly regulated by blood-kinship.

On the other hand, an intimate relation between a man and his totem is

recognized--the latter, as a rule, is not eaten by the related clansmen

(there are exceptions), magical economic ceremonies are performed by

certain clans, and there is clan exogamy. A possible survival of an

early social arrangement is the existence of subsidiary totems.

+475+. There is also a rudimentary cult of heroes: two of these (animal

in form) have shrines and effigies, annual dances are performed in their

honor, and stones are shown in which their souls are supposed to dwell.

The resemblance of this cult to certain forms of worship in Polynesia

(in Samoa, for example) is apparent; the stones may be compared with

similar abodes of superhuman animals or spirits in Central Australia and

elsewhere; the myths connect the two animal heroes with the origin of

totems--a common procedure. One hero, Kwoiam of Mabuiag, is said to have

been a real man, and to have been almost deified; divinization of dead

men is not unusual in Polynesia.

+476+. _New Guinea._ In the eastern portion of British New Guinea the

peculiarities of organization are[826] that the people live in hamlets;

that there is generally a combination of totems in a clan; and that

special regard is paid to the father's totem. There is no report of

belief in descent from the totem.[827] The hamlets tend to become family

groups, but clan exogamy is observed. The system of "linked totems"

seems to be designed to secure superhuman aid from all departments of

the nonhuman world: ordinarily there will be a bird, a fish, a snake,

and a plant--the bird has come to be the most important of these. A man

may kill his own totem but not his father's--a rule that has arisen

perhaps from a displacement of matrilineal descent (according to which a

man's totem is that of his mother) by descent through the father. So far

as appears, there are no magical ceremonies for increase of the supply

of food. In both New Guinea and the Straits the fact that old customs

are disappearing under foreign influence increases the difficulty of

determining whether certain usages are primitive or decadent.

+477+. _Melanesia._ The social organization in the vast mass of islands

called Melanesia[828] has not been fully investigated, but the existence

of some general features has been established. Society is divided not

into clans or tribes, but into exogamous classes, and the classificatory

system of relationships is general. The rules governing marriage are

less elaborate than in Australia, the method of initiation is simpler,

and the political organization is more definite. In regard to other

usages commonly associated with totemism the reported details are not

numerous. There appears to be a movement away from Australian totemism,

growing more pronounced as we go eastward, and culminating in Fiji, in

which totemic features are very rare.

+478+. In the Bismarck Archipelago every class has connected with it

certain animals regarded as relatives, but in New Britain, apparently,

not as ancestors.[829] In New Ireland dances imitating the movements of

the sacred animals are performed. Such animals are treated with great

respect, and the relation to them constitutes a bond of union between

members of a class.

+479+. Some peculiarities appear in the Solomon Islands. While there is

the usual regard for the sacred objects (called _buto_), so that these

are not to be eaten (in some cases not to be touched or seen), the names

of the classes are not always those of the sacred things, and there is

difference of opinion among the natives as to whether the latter are

ancestors or merely associated with an ancestor: a man (particularly a

chief) may announce that after death he will be incarnate in a given

thing, as, for example, a banana--this then becomes sacred. But in some

cases[830] the god of the class is regarded as the ancestor; instead of

a number of sacred animals there is a theistic system with regular

worship--a state of things quite distinct from totemism.[831]

+480+. In the New Hebrides group there is mention of a slight magical

ceremony performed by a member of a class to attract a class animal, but

there is no rule against eating the object whose name the class bears.

The usage in the Santa Cruz group in regard to eating, and the belief as

to descent from the sacred object, differ in different islands; they are

sometimes lax and vague, sometimes strict and definite.

+481+. Belief in a vital connection between a man and some object chosen

by himself is found in the Banks Islands; there is an obvious similarity

between such an object and the North American manitu. Further, the

belief is reported by Rivers that in these islands the character of a

child is determined by an edible object from which the mother, before

the birth of the child, received some sort of influence; the child will

resemble the object or be identified with it, and will not, throughout

life, eat of it.[832]

+482+. In the easternmost group, the Fijian, the relation between the

tribes and their associated sacred animals and plants was, and is,

various. The rule was that these should not be injured, and, if edible,

should not be eaten. But alongside of such sacred objects real gods are

found; these dwell or are incarnate in certain birds, fish, and plants,

and sometimes in men. In one district, in the interior of the large

island Viti Levu, Rivers learned that every village had its deity, which

in many cases might turn into an animal, and the animal would then

become taboo;[833] the familiar custom of not eating a sacred thing was

thus extended to any new object of this sort. The functions of the

tribal sacred animals approached in some points those of gods: they were

consulted by magicians on important occasions (war, sickness, marriage).

It was supposed (somewhat as in the Banks Islands) that the tribal

sacred animal appeared to a mother just before the birth of her child.

+483+. Thus in Melanesia, along with a large mass of sacred objects

connected more or less intimately with social units (but not with clans

proper), there are usages and ideas that are commonly found associated

with clan totemism (belief in descent from a sacred thing and refusal to

eat it when it is edible), but also other ideas and usages (omens from

animals; superhuman determination, before a child's birth, of its

character; creation of a new sacred thing by an individual man) that

look away from clan organization to an individualistic form of

society.[834]

+484+. _Micronesia and Polynesia._ The character of the social

organization in Micronesia (the Caroline and Pelew groups, with which

may be included the little island of Tikopia, southeast of the Santa

Cruz group) is not very well known, but the published reports indicate a

considerable divergence from clan totemism. The westernmost island of

the Carolines, Uap (or Yap), according to a recent observer,[835]

retains many old beliefs, is without an exogamous system, and has a

large apparatus of spirits and gods. Elsewhere in the Carolines and in

Tikopia there are non-exogamous social groups, sacred animals greatly

revered, and in some places belief in descent from an animal-god. Sacred

animals and village gods (with exogamous families) are found in the

Pelew group.[836] The diversity in Micronesian customs may be due in

part to mixture of tribes resulting from migrations.

+485+. In Polynesia the family is generally the social unit, and there

is a fairly good political organization, with more or less developed

pantheons. Gods are held to be incarnate in animals and trees, but there

are also great gods divorced to some extent from phenomena. The theistic

development is noteworthy in Hawaii, New Zealand, Samoa, Tahiti, and

Tonga, and there are elaborate forms of worship with priests and

temples. The existing organization is not totemic, but here, as

elsewhere in similar cases, the question has been raised whether or not

the gods have arisen from sacred (or, more definitely, totemic) animals

and plants,[837] and whether, in general, the existing organization was

preceded by one approaching totemism.[838]

+486+. _Indonesia._ The Battas of the interior of Sumatra have clan

exogamy (but the clans live mixed together), and every clan has sacred

animals which it is unlawful to eat. One clan on the west coast asserts

its descent from a tiger. In the Moluccas villages claim descent from

animals or plants, and these are taboo. The indications of totemic

organization in Borneo are slight: there are sacred animals that are not

eaten, and there is a vague feeling of kinship with animals--phenomena

that are not necessarily totemic. The belief of the Sea Dyaks in

individual guardians is to be distinguished from general respect for

sacred animals.

+487+. _India._ The non-Aryan peoples of India are divided into a large

number of exogamous clans, each with its sacred object, which it is

unlawful to injure or use.[839] A departure from ordinary totemic usage

appears in the fact that in many cases the sacred objects receive

worship. The social constitution of these peoples seems to have

undergone modifications, partly through adoption of agriculture (which

has occurred generally), partly by direct Hindu religious influence; the

history of the non-Aryans, however, is obscure in many points. The

Aryans of India have exogamy but not totemism, and this is true in part

of the Assamese. Totemism has not been observed in Burma[840] and China,

or in the Malay Peninsula.

+488+. _North America._ The North American native tribes, scattered over

a large territory, with widely different climatic and topographical

features, and themselves divided into half a dozen linguistic stocks,

show great diversities of social organization. While exogamous groups

(clans, phratries, and local groups) are found almost everywhere, there

is little precise information about certain fundamental points of

totemic systems, particularly customs of killing and eating the totem

and belief in descent from it. With a general apparatus that often

suggests an original totemism, the American social type differs

considerably from the Australian, resembling in some respects the

Melanesian and the Polynesian, but with peculiarities that difference it

from these. Among the Eskimo and the Californians no definite signs of

totemism have been discovered. Among the other peoples the Rocky

Mountain range makes a line of demarcation--the tribes of the Pacific

Coast differ in organization decidedly not only from their eastern

neighbors but also from all other known savage and half-civilized

peoples. There are points of similarity to these, but the general

Pacific Coast type is unique.

+489+. Beginning with the _Eastern_ tribes, we find that the Iroquois

and their allies (Mohawks, Senecas, and others),[841] mainly

agricultural, had the tribe or the phratry rather than the clan as their

political and religious unit. The Iroquois League, organized by the

great statesman Hiawatha in the fifteenth century, was a federal union

of five (later of six) tribes that showed remarkable political wisdom

and skill. The great festivals were tribal. The clan is recognized in a

myth that describes the metamorphosis of a turtle into a man who became

the progenitor of the clan of that name, and it was socially influential

by reason of the brotherhood that existed among members of clans having

the same name in different tribes, and through the fact that a man's

personal name was the property of the clan. The totem figure was used as

a badge. Whether or not the totem was killed and eaten is not known. In

the form, then, in which it is known, the Iroquois organization cannot

be called totemic--whether it was originally such must be left

undetermined.

+490+. The Cherokees, belonging to the southern division of the Iroquois

stock (living formerly in Tennessee and North Carolina), killed the

animals they respected, but with ceremonies. Their Green Corn dance,

the object of which was to insure a good crop, was expiatory, and was

accompanied by a general amnesty.[842]

+491+. Wyandot (Huron) myths[843] account for their Snake and Hawk clans

by stories of marriages between women and a snake or a hawk; here human

beings are assumed to have existed before the genesis of the clan (a

difference from the Australian scheme), but it is true that the clan is

held to have descended in part from an animal.

+492+. In the great Algonkin stock[844] the evidence for a distinct

totemic organization is similarly indefinite. The Lenâpé (Delawares),

who were agricultural and well advanced in manufacture, gave prominence

to families rather than to clans, and the totem was a badge. The

Ojibwas, hunters (dwelling by the Great Lakes and in the valley of the

St. Lawrence),[845] also used their sacred animal forms as badges;

whether they ate such animals or claimed descent from them we are not

informed. The friendly relation existing between the Otter and Beaver

clans is explained by a story of a marriage between an Otter clansman

and a Beaver woman. For the Potawatamies it was lawful to kill and eat

the totem. The Ottawas (of Canada) and the combined Sauks and Foxes (of

the Mississippi Valley) had traditions of descent from the totem. The

Menomini (of the same region) would kill the totem, but always with an

apology to it; their myths embody varying conceptions of the relation of

eponymous animals to clans: sometimes the origin of a clan is referred

to the action of a supernatural being who changed a bear, for example,

into a man, or to adventures of animals; sometimes eponymous birds

(eagle and hawk) are described as being spirits or deities. Such

introduction of supernatural beings involves a deviation from the

conception of the eponymous animal as independent creator of a

clan.[846]

+493+. For the tribes bordering on the Gulf of Mexico no signs have

been preserved of an organization based on the relation between clans

and eponymous animals, plants, and other objects. The great Maskoki

stock (including Creeks, Seminoles, Choctaws, Chickasas, and some other

less important tribes) had a well-formed political system, and their

religion was represented by the Chief Magician or Priest (Medicine Man).

They performed magical ceremonies for increase of food, but these were

tribal, and the Creek annual fast (_puskita_, busk) had high religious

and ethical significance.[847]

+494+. The Caddoan group, dwelling formerly west of the Mississippi, in

Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas, had an approach to specific totemism. In

the Caddo tribe clansmen refrained from killing the eponymous animal;

but all members of the tribe refrained from killing eagles and panthers.

Whether this custom represents former clan restrictions is uncertain.

For the related Skidi Pawnee (who formerly dwelt in the Nebraska region)

there is evidence, from folk-tales, of a belief in the origin of clans

from marriages between human beings and animals, and of belief that

through such marriages benefits accrued to the people. But such beliefs

appear not to have affected the Pawnee social organization.[848]

+495+. The Nakchi (Natchez) people (of the lower Mississippi Valley)

dwelt in villages that had such names as "pond-lily people," "hickory

people," "swan people," "forest people." These are possibly survivals of

totemic names, but there is no account of the existence of totemic

groups among them. On the other hand, they had a highly developed

sun-worship, with human sacrifices.

+496+. Customs in the Siouan stock vary. In the Dakota tribe there is no

known evidence of totemism. The Omahas (of the Missouri Valley), who

are partly agriculturalists, partly hunters, refrain from eating or

using eponymous objects, certain clans are credited with magical power

over such objects, and there are traces, in ceremonies and myths, of the

descent of clans, each from its eponym. This combination of more

definite totemistic conceptions is not found in any other member of the

Siouan stock. The Osages had a tradition or myth of their descent from

animals, but their civil organization was nontotemic--they were divided

into two groups, termed respectively the Peace Side and the War Side,

and the members of the former group took no animal life, though they ate

flesh that they obtained from the War Side. The origin of this custom is

uncertain--the two divisions of the tribe, the hunters and the tillers

of the soil, exchanged products, but how this division of labor arose

(whether from a union of two tribes or otherwise) is not clear. Among

the Hidatsa, it is reported, there was a belief that spirit children

might enter into a woman and be born into the world. The resemblance to

the Central Australian belief is striking, but it does not appear that

such entrance of spirit children was supposed to be the only mode of

human birth. The Mandans (living on the Missouri River, in North Dakota)

now have no totemic system; but little or nothing is known of their

early history.[849] In the Siouan tribes the figure of the individual

animal guardian (the manitu or "medicine") plays a prominent 'rôle'.

+497+. There are indications that the institutions of the Pueblo tribes

(who are now wholly agricultural) have undergone modifications, perhaps

under foreign (Spanish) influence. Hopi myths represent clans as

descended from ancestors originally animal, and transformed into human

shape by deities. But the elaborate sun-worship and the complicated

solstice ceremonies are tribal.[850] The Zuñi economic ceremonies appear

to have passed from under clan control. Thus, the magical ceremony for

procuring rain, properly the function of the Frog clan, is now in the

hands of rain-priests; and the magical, dramatic performances for

insuring a supply of food are conducted by nontotemic religious

fraternities. The great Snake "dance" may have been originally a totemic

ceremony intended to secure rain and corn.[851]

+498+. For a former totemic organization among the Navahos, Apaches, and

Mohaves (these last live on the Colorado River) there are only vague

traditions and other faint traces; the taboos on foods now touch not a

particular clan but a whole tribe.

+499+. The coast tribes of Northwest America (in British Columbia and

the United States)[852] differ in social organization from the other

Indians in several respects, and particularly in the importance they

attach to rank, in their employment of the crest or badge, and in the

prominence they give to the individual guardian animal or spirit.

+500+. In the civil organization of the Carrier division of the Déné,

the Salish, the Kwakiutl, and other tribes, three or four castes or

groups are recognized: hereditary nobles; the middle class, whose

position is based on property; and the common folk; and to these is to

be added among some tribes the class of slaves. In the summer ceremonies

the men are seated according to class and rank. The family pride of the

nobles is great--every family has its traditions and pedigrees. In such

a scheme the zoönymous clan plays an insignificant part. Classes and

clans are mixed in the villages in which, for the most part, these

people live, and trade is prominent in their life. The curious custom of

the "potlatch"--a man invites his friends and neighbors to a gathering

and makes them magnificent presents, his reputation being great in

proportion to the extent of his gifts--appears to be a device for

laying up property; the host in his turn receives presents from friends

and neighbors.

+501+. The employment of a sacred object as a badge or crest, a sign of

tribal or clan position, is found, as is noted above,[853] in various

parts of the world: in the Torres Straits islands, in the Aru

archipelago (west of New Guinea), and in North America among the

Iroquois, the Lenâpé (Delawares), the Pueblos, and perhaps among the

Potawatamies. In these tribes, however, the rôle of the badge is

relatively unimportant--it is employed for decorative purposes, but does

not enter fundamentally into the organization of the clan or the tribe.

In Northwest America, on the other hand, it is of prime significance

both in decoration and in organization--it, to a great extent, takes the

place occupied elsewhere by the totem, and it is not always identical

with the eponymous object of the clan, though this may be an accidental

result of shifting social relations (new combinations of clans, or a

borrowing of a device from a neighbor).

+502+. _The crest._ The origin of this function of the crest and its

relation to the function of the totem is not clear; it may have arisen

in different ways in different places, or different conceptions may have

been combined in the same place. The decorative use is an independent

fact, having no necessary connection with clan organization; the demand

for decoration is universal among savages, and the employment of sacred

objects for this purpose is natural. Figures of such objects are used,

however, in magical procedures--abundantly, for example, in Central

Australia--and it is conceivable that such use by a clan may have

converted the totemic object into a symbol or device. The artistic

employment of figures of sacred objects has been developed on the

American Pacific Coast to a remarkable extent; the great poles standing

in front of houses or erected in memory of the dead have carved on them

histories of the relation of the family or of the deceased person to

certain animals and events. These so-called totem poles presuppose, it

is true, reverence for the sacred symbol, but the custom may possibly

have grown simply out of artistic and historical (or biographical)

motives.

+503+. Perhaps, however, we must assume or include another line of

development. The crest may be regarded either as the non-artistic

modification or degradation of an original true totem (due to diminished

reverence for animals and other causes), or as an employment of sacred

objects (for purposes of organization) that has not reached the

proportions of totemism proper. Which of these views will seem the more

probable will depend partly on the degree of importance assigned to

certain traditions and folk-stories of the Northwestern tribes, partly

on one's construction of the general history of totemistic observances.

In so obscure a subject a definite theory can hardly be maintained. The

large number of stories in which the beginnings of clan life are

attributed to marriages between clansmen and eponymous animals, or to

beneficent or other adventures with such animals, may appear to indicate

that there was an underlying belief in the descent of clans from

animals. On the other hand, in certain low tribes (in New Britain and

the Solomon Islands and elsewhere) the feeling of kinship with animals

is said to exist without the belief that they are ancestors, or the

animal is regarded as the representative of a human ancestor rather than

as itself the ancestor. This latter view may be a bit of euhemeristic

rationalism.[854]

+504+. While _guardian spirits_ (generally in animal form) are found

abundantly in America and elsewhere,[855] their rôle in the tribes of

the Pacific Coast appears to be specially important, for there they

largely take the place occupied in Central Australia by the clan totems.

They are not wholly lacking, however, in Australia. Among the nontotemic

Kurnai of Southeast Australia there are animal patrons of the sexes and

of shamans and other individuals. In like manner the shamans of the

Pacific Coast Haidas and Tlingit have their guardians, and sometimes

secret societies are similarly provided; in the winter ceremonies of the

Kwakiutl the youth is supposed to be possessed by the patron of the

society to which he belongs. We thus have, apparently, similar and

mutually independent developments in Australia and America out of the

early relations of men with animals.

+505+. The Eskimo live in small groups, and marriage is locally

unrestricted. There is the usual reverence for animals, with

folk-stories of animal creators and of transformations, but no

well-defined marks of totemism, and no recognition of individual

protecting animal-spirits.

+506+. In the Californian tribes, which are among the least developed in

America, no traces of totemistic organization have been found.[856] The

people live, or lived, in villages. The shamans, who are important

members of the communities, have their familiar spirits, acquired

through dreams and by ascetic observances; but these belong to the

widespread apparatus of magic, and differ in their social function from

guardian spirits proper.

+507+. There are no definite marks of totemism in Central and

Northeastern Asia, and few such marks in Africa. The Siberian Koryaks

believe in a reincarnation of deceased human beings in animals, but

their social organization is not determined by this belief. Certain

clans of the Ainu (inhabiting the northernmost islands of the Japan

archipelago) are said to regard as ancestors the animals whose names

they bear, but this belief appears to be socially unimportant. Marriage

is not controlled by clan relations.

+508+. Throughout savage Africa sacred animals, plants, and other

objects play a great part in life, but generally without assuming a

specifically totemistic rôle.

+509+. In the great Bantu family the usages vary greatly.[857] One of

the most interesting systems is that of the Bakuana (in the south). Here

the eponymous animal approaches divinity--not only is it killed with

regret, it is a thing to swear by, and has magical power; but

independence of the totem appears in the fact that it may be changed;

that is, it is a friend adopted by men at their convenience. It is in

accord with this conception that the Bakuana (who are pastoral and

agricultural) have clan gods. Beyond taboos on sacred objects there is

nothing in the Bantu territory that clearly indicates a totemistic

organization of society.

+510+. In the half-civilized and higher savage communities of the

eastern and western parts of the continent totemism proper, if it has

ever been predominant, has been expelled or depressed by higher forms of

organization. It seems not to exist among the Masai, a vigorous people

with an interesting theistic system. The neighboring Nandi, who have

clan totems, lay stress rather on the family than on the clan in their

marriage laws, and their taboos include more than their totems; their

excessive regard for the hyena may be due simply to their fear of the

animal.[858]

+511+. The half-civilized Baganda (of the British Uganda Protectorate)

refrain from injuring clan totems, but the functions of the clans are

now political and religious (relating, for example, to the building of

temples) under the control of a quasi-royal government; there is almost

complete absence of magical ceremonies for the multiplication or control

of sacred objects.[859] Old marriage laws are relaxed--a king may marry

his sister (as in ancient Egypt). Free dealing with totems is

illustrated by the adoption of a new cooking-pot as totem by one clan.

The cult of the python obtains here, as in West Africa. Among the

neighboring Banyoro, and among the Bahima (west of Victoria Nyanza), who

are herdsmen with a kingly government, there is the usual reverence for

animals, but eponymous animals are not important for the social

organization.

+512+. In West Africa also definite totemistic organization has not been

found. Everywhere there is reverence for the eponymous sacred thing,

and, when it is edible, refusal to eat it; but the taboos are sometimes,

as in Siena (which is agricultural), more extensive than the list of

sacred things. In Southern Nigeria at funerals (and sometimes on other

occasions) the totem animal or plant is offered, in the form of soup, to

the dead; the animal or plant in such cases is regarded, apparently,

simply or mainly as acceptable food for ghosts--the offering is a part

of ancestor-worship. In Congo families have sacred animals (as in Samoa)

which they abstain from eating. Here and there occurs belief in the

reincarnation of deceased human beings in animals. A negro fetish,

becoming intimately associated with a clan, sometimes resembles a totem.

The half-civilized Ashanti, Dahomi, and Yoruba have elaborate theistic

systems, with monarchical governments that leave no place for a

totemistic organization.[860]

+513+. Madagascar, before it came under European control, had a

well-defined religious and political hierarchy.[861] Along with its very

elaborate tabooism the island has beliefs concerning animals that are

found in totemic systems but do not take the form of totemism proper.

The animal is regarded as an ancestor or a patron, but clans do not take

their names from animals, there is no general rule of exogamy, and there

is no word corresponding exactly to the word 'totem.' The question

arises whether the Malagasy system is a stage antecedent to totemism

proper or an attenuated survival of it.[862]

+514+. _Alleged survivals of totemism among civilized peoples._ Though

totemism, as a system of social organization, is not recognizable in any

civilized community, ancient or modern, it is held by some scholars that

the fragments or hints of such a system that are certified bear witness

to its former existence in these communities.[863]

+515+. In fact certain ideas and customs that occur in connection with

savage totemism are found abundantly among ancient Semites, Greeks and

Romans, and in Celtic and Teutonic lands. They are such as the

following: a tribe or clan bears an animal name, and regards itself as

akin to the animal in question and as descended from it; this animal is

sacred, not to be killed or eaten (except ceremonially), and, when it

dies, is to be buried solemnly; sacred animals aid men by furnishing

omens, or even by protecting from harm; they are sacrificed on critical

occasions (sometimes once every year), and in some cases the killing of

the sacrificial animal is treated as a crime; animal-gods are worshiped,

and gods are thought to be incarnate in animals; men change into animals

and animals into men; certain animals are sacred to certain deities;

human worshipers dress in imitation of animal forms (by wearing skins of

beasts and by other devices); a man's tribal mark is derived from the

form of an animal; the death of the sacrificial animal comes to be

regarded as the death of a god; the form of social organization in

certain ancient communities is similar to that with which totemism is

usually found associated.

+516+. Not all of these points are found in any one case, but their

occurrence over so wide an area, it is argued, is most naturally

explicable by the assumption of an original totemism of which these are

the survivals. It is suggested also that they may be an inheritance from

savage predecessors of the civilized peoples.

+517+. It will be sufficient to mention a few examples of the beliefs

and usages that appear to point to an original totemism.[864] Names of

clans and tribes derived from animals or plants are not uncommon: Hebrew

Ra[h)]el (Rachel, ewe), perhaps Kaleb (dog) and Yael (Jael, mountain

goat);[865] Greek Kunnadai (dog), and perhaps Myrmidon (ant); Roman

Porcius (hog), Fabius (bean); Irish Coneely (seal); Teutonic clan-names

like Wolfing and the like. Belief in a general kinship of men and

animals existed among Semites, Greeks, and Romans. On the other hand,

belief in the descent of a clan from an animal rarely appears: it is

apparently not found in the Semitic area; the Ophiogeneis of Parium (in

Asia Minor) are said to have regarded themselves as akin to snakes and

to have traced their genos (family or clan) to a hero who was at first a

snake;[866] the Myrmidons, according to one tradition, were transformed

ants, and some of the Irish Coneely clan are said to have been changed

into seals. Transformations of men into animals are common in Greek

mythology. Taboos of certain foods were observed abundantly in the

ancient world: by Egyptians,[867] Hebrews,[868] Greeks,[869] and

Romans,[870] and by Celts.[871] Among the various omen-giving animals

some may have been totems. Solemn annual sacrifices, followed by

mourning for the victims, were performed in Egypt,[872] and the slaying

of the sacrificial animal was treated as murder in various Greek

cities.[873] Living animals were worshiped in Egypt, and everywhere in

antiquity gods assumed animal forms, and certain animals were sacred to

certain gods. Worshipers clothed themselves in the skins of sacrificed

animals in Egypt, Cyprus, and Rome.[874] Tribal marks and ensigns were

sometimes derived from figures of animals.[875] Finally, there are

traces, in the early history of the ancient civilized peoples, of the

form of social organization with which savage totemism is found

associated.[876]

+518+. It is possible that such facts as these may point to a primitive

totemistic stage of ancient civilized society. But it is to be noted

that the usages in question almost all relate to the general sacredness

of animals (or of plants), not to their specific character as totems.

They occur in lower tribes in cases where totemism does not exist.[877]

Animal clan-names and tribe-names, belief in kinship with animals and

plants and in descent from them, exogamy, transformations, refusal to

eat certain animals except ceremonially, apologies for killing them,

omens derived from them, worship of animal-gods, incarnations of gods in

animals, animals sacred to gods, tribal marks derived from animals--all

these are found in such diverse social combinations that it is

impossible to infer merely from the occurrence of this or that custom

the existence of the peculiar form of social organization to which the

name 'totemism' proper is given above. The same remark holds of

inferences from the general constitution of early society; a custom of

matrilineal descent, for example, by no means carries totemism with it.

+519+. The evidence for the existence of totemism among the ancient

civilized peoples, consisting, as it does, of detached statements of

customs that are found elsewhere without totemism, is not decisive.

Animal-worship has played a great rôle in religious history, but the

special part assigned to totemism has often been exaggerated. It has

been held that the latter is at the base of all beliefs in the

sacredness of animals and plants, or that certain usages (such as those

mentioned above) are inexplicable except on the supposition of an

original totemism. These positions are not justified by known facts, and

it will conduce to clearness to give totemism its distinct place in that

general regard for animals and plants of which it is a peculiar part.

+520+. Totemistic forms of society, as far as our present knowledge

goes, are found only among the lower peoples, and among these a

perplexing variety of conditions exists. As our review of what may be

called totemistic features shows,[878] the one permanent element in the

relation between men and nonhuman, nondivine objects is reverence for

these last on men's part; and the conception of an alliance, defensive

and offensive, between the two groups has been proposed above as an

additional differentia of totemism, a sense of kinship being involved.

If we further add the condition that the social organization (not

necessarily exogamous) must be determined by this alliance, we have all

that can safely be demanded in a definition of totemism; but as much as

this seems necessary if totemism is to be marked off as a definite

institution.

+521+. From the point of view of religious history the important thing

in any social organization is its character as framework for religious

ideas and customs. If the central social fact is an intimate relation

between a human group and a nonhuman class of natural objects, then

conceptions regarding this relation may gather about it, and these will

be as various as the tribes of men. The elements of social and religious

institutions spring from the universal human nature and attach

themselves to any form of life that may have been suggested by

circumstances. Thus the term 'totemism' may be used loosely to denote

any combination of customs connected with the idea of an alliance

between man and other things, and the alliance itself may exist in

various degrees of intimacy. The restricted definition suggested above

is in part arbitrary, but it may serve as a working hypothesis and as a

norm by which to estimate and define the various systems or cults

involving a relation between human groups and individuals on the one

side and nonhuman things on the other side.

+522+. _Conditions favorable and unfavorable to totemistic

organization._ The questions whether totemism was the earliest form of

human social life and whether existing freer forms are developments out

of definite totemism may be left undetermined. Data for the construction

of primitive life are not accessible, and how far decay or decadence of

institutions is to be recognized must be determined in every case from

such considerations as are offered by the circumstances. We may,

however, distinguish between social conditions in connection with which

some sort of totemism flourishes and those under which it is nonexistent

or feeble; we may thus note unfavorable and, by contrast, favorable

general accompaniments. These may be roughly described as economic,

individualistic, political, and religious.

+523+. _Economic conditions._ Of savage and slightly civilized tribes

some live by hunting or fishing, some are pastoral (nomadic or settled),

some practice agriculture. Without undertaking to trace minutely the

history of these economic practices it may be assumed that they are

fixed in general by climatic and topographical conditions. Where food is

plentiful, thought and life are likely to be freer. In general, savage

peoples are constantly on the alert to discover supplies of food, and

they show ingenuity in devising economic methods--when one resource

fails they look for another. Hunters and fishers are dependent on wild

animals for food, and stand in awe of them. The domestication of animals

leads men to regard them simply as material for the maintenance of

life--the mystery that once attached to them vanishes; they are

considered not as man's equals or superiors but as his servants. The

same result follows when they are used as aids in tilling the soil or in

transportation. Agricultural peoples also have generally some knowledge

of the arts of life and a somewhat settled civil and political

organization, and these tend to separate them from the lower animals and

to diminish or destroy their sense of kinship with them.

+524+. We find, in fact, that in many cases totemic regulations are less

strict where the food supply is plentiful and where agriculture is

practiced. The correspondence is not exact--other considerations come

in, such as isolation and the unknown quantity of natural tribal

endowments; but the relation between the economic and totemic conditions

is so widespread that it cannot be considered as accidental.

+525+. Thus, for example, the contrast between the social system of

sterile Central Australia and that of certain tribes on the

comparatively fertile southeast coast is marked; the Kurnai have

practically no clan totemism. In the islands of Torres Straits and in

New Guinea agriculture marks a dividing line between stricter and looser

organizations based on regard for the totem. The agricultural Melanesian

and Polynesian tribes, with great regard for animal patrons, lay stress

on the family or on voluntary associations rather than on the clan. In

Africa the partially civilized peoples, such as the Baganda and adjacent

tribes in the east, and Yoruba, Dahomi, and Ashanti in the west, have

fairly well-developed religious organizations, in which totems play a

subordinate part. The customs of certain tribes in the south are

especially worthy of note: the pastoral Herrero have a double system of

clans, maternal and paternal, and their food restrictions are curiously

minute, relating to parts of animals or to their color; the Bakuana, who

are pastoral and agricultural, kill the clan eponymous animals, though

unwillingly, and appear not to regard them as ancestors. The non-Aryan

tribes of India have been so long in contact with Aryan civilization

that in many cases, as it seems, their original customs have been

obscured, but at present among such agricultural tribes as the Hos, the

Santhals, and the Khonds of Bengal, and some others, totemic

organizations are not prominent, and the Todas, with their buffalo-cult,

show no signs of totemism.

+526+. In North America the variety of climatic and other economic

conditions might lead us to expect clear testimony as to the relation

between these conditions and totemic development; but the value of such

testimony is impaired by the absence of information concerning early

forms of organization. In the period for which there are details it

appears that in the Eastern groups (Iroquois, Algonkin, Creek, Natchez,

Siouan, Pueblo) the effective rôle of totemism is in inverse proportion

to the development of agriculture and to stable civil organization:

there are clans bearing the names of animals and other objects, with

mythical stories of descent from such objects, and rules of exogamy, but

the civil, political, and religious life is largely independent of these

conditions; there are great confederations of tribes with well-devised

systems of government that look to the well-being of the whole

community, the clan-division being of small importance. The mode of life

appears to be determined or greatly influenced by climate, though

different climatic situations sometimes lead to similar results:

agriculture naturally arises from fertility of soil, but the Pueblo

tribes have been driven (perhaps under civilized influences), by the

aridness of their land, to till the soil. Throughout the East the known

facts suggest that a nontotemic organization has followed an earlier

form in which quasi-totemic elements are recognizable.

+527+. The interesting social organization of the Northern Pacific

Coast, on the other hand, appears to be independent of agriculture. The

people live by hunting and fishing; families and villages are the

important social units; instead of totems there are crests or badges;

society in some tribes is marked by a division into classes differing

in social rank. The history of all these tribes, however, is obscure:

there have been modifications of organization through the influence of

some tribes on others; the details of the various social schemes are not

all accurately known. The settled village life and the half-commercial,

half-aristocratic constitution of society must be referred to racial

characteristics and other conditions with which we are not acquainted.

As in the East, so here there is the suggestion of a movement away from

a form of organization that resembles true totemism. The Northwest has a

remarkable system of ceremonies, but in definiteness and elevation of

religious conceptions it is greatly inferior to the East.

+528+. The fact that some of the least-advanced American tribes,

particularly the Eskimo and the California tribes, show no signs of

totemistic organization[879] makes against the view that totemism was

the initial form of human society, but its historical background is not

known. In any case it does not invalidate what is said above of the rôle

of agriculture in the modification of savage institutions. The lines of

savage growth have been various--a general law of development cannot be

laid down; the history of every community must be studied for itself,

and its testimony must be given its appropriate value. In this way it

will be possible to give a sketch of totemistic forms and suggestions,

if not a history of totemism.

+529+. _Individualistic institutions._ The development of individualism,

a universal accompaniment of general social progress, is unfavorable to

totemism, since in this latter the individual is subordinated to the

clan. To assert one's self as an individual is practically to ignore the

totem, whose function pertains to the clan as a whole, without separate

recognition of its members. Revolt against the supremacy of the clan (if

that expression is allowable) has shown itself from an early social

stage and in all parts of the world. The principal forms in which it

appears are the institution of voluntary societies, and the adoption of

personal guardians by individuals.

+530+. _Secret societies._ It is a common custom in the lower tribes to

keep the sexes separate and to distinguish between the initiated and

the uninitiated. There are often men's houses in which the young

unmarried males are required to live.[880] Women and boys are forbidden

to be present at ceremonies of initiation when, as in some instances,

the secrets of the tribe are involved. Thus there arise frequently

secret associations of males, who conduct tribal affairs. But these

associations are not voluntary--all initiated men belong to them

perforce--and they are not divorced from totemic relations. The real

voluntary society is of a quite different character. In general, in its

most developed form, it ignores differences of age, sex, and clan. There

are, however, diversities in the constitution of the various

organizations that may be called voluntary;[881] conditions of

membership and functions vary.