IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // 1.0 I.I 1^ 128 12.5 130 ""■ •■■ m m ■ 2.2 «« 140 112.0 I: I — 6' 1.8 L25 iU IIIIII.6 V] ^J^ *% %^w %.^^^' 7 «> '/ s PhotDgraphic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. M580 (716)872-4503 fl^^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques .-& Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques Th< to The Institute has attempted to obtain the best orloinal copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may after any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checlced below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagAe □ Covers restoi«d and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurAe et/ou pelliculAe D Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) D D D D Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrstions en couleur Bound wUh other material/ ReliA avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge IntArleure Blank leaves added during restoration may appeer within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouttes lors d'une restauratlon apparaissent dans le texte. mais, lorsque cela «tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas At6 fllmAes. L'Institut a microfllmA le mellleur exemplaire qu'il lul a *t« possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods norrhale de fiimage sont indiqute ci-dessous. D D D D D D D D D D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurtes et/ou pelllcultes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es. tacheties ou piquAes Pages detached/ Pages ditach^es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Quality intgale de I'lmpression inc.jdes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplAmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Mftion disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure. etc.. ont 4t6 film^es A nouveau de fafon A obtenir la meliieura image possible. Th( poi of fllr Orl bei th« slo oti fin sic or Th shi TIf wl Ml dif em be< rig rec mc D Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplAmentaires: This item is filmed et the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X n 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 7F 24X 28X 32X Ills Ju difiar ine lago Tha copy filmad hara hat baan raproducad thanks to tha ganarosity of: Library Division Provincial Archives of British Columbia Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha bast quality possibia consldaring tha condition and laglbillty of tha original copy and In kaaping with tha filming contract spacifications. L'axampiaira film* fut raprodult grica k la gAnArositA da: Library Division Provincial Archives of British Columbia Las imagas sulvantas ont Ati raprodultas avac la plus grand soln. compta tanu da la condition at da la nattat* da l'axampiaira film*, at 9n conformity avac las conditions du contrat da filmaga. Original copias in printad papar covars ara filmad baginning with tha front covar and anding on tha last paga with a printad or lllustratad impras* sion. or tha back covar whan appropriata. Ail othar original copias ara filmad baginning on tha first paga with a printad or lllustratad impras- sion. and anding on tha last paga with a printad or lllustratad imprassion. Las axamplairas origlnaux dont la couvertura an paplar ast imprimAa sont flimis an commanpant par la pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la darnlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'Imprassion ou d'iliustration, soit par la sacond plat, salon la cas. Tous las autras axamplairas origlnaux sont filmts an commandant par la pramiAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'Imprassion ou d'iliustration at an tarminant par ia darniira paga qui comporta una taiia amprainta. Tha last racordad frama on each microfiche shall contain tha symbol ^4<»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha iymbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboies suivants apparaitra sur la derniire image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: ie symboie — ► signifie A SUIVRE". le symbols V signifie "FIN ". Maps, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre film6s A des taux de reduction diffArents. Lorsque ie document est trop grand pour Atra reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film* A partir da Tangle supAriaur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bes, en prenent ie nombre d'images nAcesssire. Les diagrammes suivants iilustrent la mithode. rata leiura. id H 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ■Wl (■r w^v^ vr ( 1-3 ) ON THE TOTEM-POST FROM THE IIAIDA VILLAGE OF MA8SET, QUEEN CHARLOTTE ISLANDS, NOW ERECTED IX THK GROUNDS OF FOX WARREN, NEAR WEYIUUDGE. By Edwakd B. Tyi.or, D.C.L., F.RS., rrofessor of Anthropology in the University of Oxford. [with plate xii.] In the beautiful grounds of Fox Warren, near Weybridj^e, the rcsidennc of Mrs. Charles Bu.xton, there h set up a monument contrasting curiously with the surrounding landscape. This is one of the huge totem-posts of the Haidas, the sculptured trunk of a cedar, now rising 41 feet from the ground aa shown in Plate XII. It is understood to have been more than 10 feet longer, but the lower end embedded in the ground was sawn through about the ground-line, and the upper portion, supported by an iron framing, now rests on a foundation of concrete. As usual, the front part is carved, the back lieing hollowed out so as to reduce the heavy labour of raising the post into its place. In a Haida village, native houses have such a totem-post erected centrally in front, often with an oval opening cut through near the base serving as a door. With these totem-posts and the memorial posts of the dead, a view of the villages has been compared to a harbour with its masts seen from a distance, or a j)iiie forest after a great fire. Among the most renuirkable of such villages now standing is Masset in the north of Queen Charlotte Islands, whence the post shown in Plate XII was sent over some years since by Mr. Bertrain Buxton. No other example of the wooden sculpture of the North-West Americans of dimensions comi)arable to this is to be seen in E dand, so that it is desirable to place a Hgure of it on record for the use of anthropologists, with such account as is available of the moaning of its designs. The Ilaitlas are socially organized on totemistic principles. Tiiey aie divided into clans named after animals, etc., which again fall into two clan-groups named after the Eagle and the Itaven. The Eagle group has as totems the eagle, raven, frog, beaver, moon, duck, codfish, waski (a fabulous whale), whale, owl. The Raven group consists of the totems wolf, bear, killer-whale, skate, mountain goat, sea lion, tsemaos fa sea monster), moon, sun, rain-bird, thunder-bird. It must not, however, be considered that this grouping as it stands is of remote antiquity or original invention. For though the Haidas are so closely connected in race language and religion with the Tlingit of Alaska that both may be taken as slightly varied branches of the same stock, the pair of groups, Raven and Eagle or lUven and Wolf, have a different arrangement of totems, and the curious anomaly that among the Haidas the raven totem belongs to the Eagle group and a T 134 E. B. TvLOn.— Ou the Totem- Post from the Ilaida Village of Mnsset, Queen not to the Itaven gi'oup ia not found among the Tlingit, who put the raven totem ill the group of the same mime. Other reasons seem to indicate tliat the totem system of the American tribes, while hi^reading over this part of tlie continent, lias undergone various alterations in accommodating itaalf to local circuniHtanccH, and even taken new lines of development. It has fully maintained its social importance in binding together the members of clan? in close nnion by the tie of birth. Every Indian looked for and found hospitality and protection in a house where he saw his own totem figured, and if he were taken captive in war his clansmen would ransom him. Clearly discernible also is the effect of the law of e.xogamy in compelling intermarriage between the groups, thus holding tlie whole people in solidarity. IJut wliile tlie usual tracing of clanship is by descent on tlie female side, some follow the male line, nnd among the Haidas themselves customs of adoption cause combinations of clanship. On the religious side, the animistic tiieories of the Haidas have led to a special development of the totem tliecjiy. It is to be clearly understood that the Haida and Tlingit (as also the Tshimshian and Heiltsuk) do not consider themselves, lus issocifuimon in America, to be descendants \ of the totem. The Tlingit liold that souls of ancestors are re-born in children, that a man will be born again as a man, a wolf as a wolf, a raven as a raven. Notwith- standing this the kind of animals which belong to the clan as totem or crest are - counted as their relatives and protectors, as when Indians of the Wolf gens or group will pray to the wolves, " We are your relations, pray don't hurt us ! " 'J'iiere are rules against eating the totem animals, but apparently not against killing them ; an Indian of the wolf totem goes wolf hunting like any other man. The ntjtion usual elsewhere that the connection between the totem species of aniiuitls and the totem ( liin of men is one of mi.xed generation or creation or somewhat of the sort between animals and men is, among these tribes, replaced by the doctrine of a human ancestor having had an ailvciiture with some mythic or divine being by which, in gift or commemoration, he acquired the totem or crest which became hereditary in his clan. It seems not unreasonable to consider this a special modification of the totem theory, made to tit with the belief in family descent by means of tiaiifiinigra- tion of ancestral souls. This di)ctrine of the totem myth is the key to the interpreta- tion of such totem monuments as that which is now under consideration. It is not enough to identify the animals represented as totems, but recourse must be had to the episode of its origin, which the sculptor commemorated in a way familiar to the Indian mind. The post is surmounted by a group of three sitting figures, whose rank is s'lown by their wearing the so-called "chief's hat." The original form of this uead-dress may be the native basketry hat, which passes into a wooden helmet surmounted by a cylindrical turret, tlie number of divisions {skil) indicating the wearer's rank or dignity, and being said to represent the number of potlatches or feasts given by the wearer. It is now only worn in ceremonial dances, but its repre- sentation is fre(iueut in paintings and carvings. It may be this kind of hat which is referred to in the Tlingit and Haida deluge myth, when the uncle of the divine ifmnoK^mmmmr ^, iibOSG ^ Jo)iriial of the Anthropologicol Initilute {U.S.), Vol. i, Flat* XI f. IIAIDA TOTKM-roST AT K(tX WAlilfKN. Charlutle Islandu, now erected in /he ijroumh of Fox Warren, near Wei/hr'uhje. lli'» Yr-tl, clmllenppil liy him in v('ii},'('iiiice for the; slayinji of Imh ItidMiPrs, iiiiulti tlie waters Hhc over tlui oiirtli, i»ut lf Oxforu. [with plate XIII.] The two house-posts represented in Plate XI 11, were sent over from British Coliiinlna in 1887. Tliey werj obUiiiu'.d by Mr. .Tnnies II. InneH, then Sujwrintt'n- dcnt of tlie Govor .aient Dock-Yard, Esquimult Harhour, from Mr. Hall, Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company at Port Simpson and now stand in tho Pitt-ltivers Collection in the Univereity Museum, Oxford. They dis])lay two totems, the Bear and the Killer-Whale (Orca ater) belonging to the Haida-Tsim-shiau group of tribes, whether Haidas of Quoon Charlotte Islands or Tsinisliians of the Mainland. In l)oth cases the figures go beyond mere repre-sentations of the t'llem animals, and dujiict a mythic incident in which the human ancestor is believed to have come into relation with the animal which was thence adopted as tlie totem of the clan. The myth of Hoorts the Bear and Toivats the Hunter (Fig. a) being also represented on the Fox Warren totem-post described in the previous paper, the story there told need not be repeated here. The story of the Killer-Whale, to which the carving {b) undoubtedly refers, is siibstantially as follows : Ages ago the Indians were out seal-hunting. A killer kept alongside of a canoe, and the Indians amused themselves by throwing stones from the canoe ballast and hitting the liack fin of the killer, which made for the shore and grounded on the beach. Soon a smoke was seen, and they found it was a large canoe and not the Killer-Whaie (Skana) on the l)each, and that a man was on shore cooking food, who asked them why they threw stones at his canoe. " You have brokiju it," he said, " now go into the woods and get some cedar withes and mend it." When they had done so he told them to turn their backs to the water and cover their heads with their skin l)lankets and not look till he called them. They heard it grate on the beach as it was hauled down into the surf, and tlie man said, " Look now." Then they saw the canoe going over the first breaker and the man sitting in the stern, but when it came to the second breaker it went under and came up outside a killer and not a canoe, and the man or demon was in its belly. The Killer-Whale or Skana is a great spiritual l)eing to the Haida-Tsimshinn tribes, who worshij) and pray to it, blending in their ideas the actual animal and the demon Skana embodied in it. The present sculpture, which represents the myth just related, is unlike the preceding group in being le.s8 naturalistic in treatment, I Journal of the Atithropohoirnl InftiMe (N.S.), Vol. T, Piatt XTTT. M 91 18K u. b, TOTEM H0U8E-l'f)STS IX I'lTT-IilVKltS MUSEUM, OXKOliD. f 'Jlp»flll\ E. B. TVLOR. — On Two British Culiimhian House- Posts uHth Totemic C<(rvin(jA. Vol indeed it displays well the conventinnaliaiii of local art. Both sides f)f tlu; killer's head are shown in a manner wliicli illnstrates the meaning,' uf tlie dii[)li<'r.t ! fi^^ires of ancient and even modern art, wliile. the distribution of lins, eyes, and tt'ctli shows tiie tendency of tlie native artist to put in parts of the object he is representing according to available space, regardless of their actual position. The stpiatting figure is often thought by white men to be Jonah in the fish's belly, but in fact the story it belongs to is earlier than missionary teaching, and illustrates a most important point in religious art. liepresentations of souls and good or evil demons in the act of entering or quitting a material body are familiar to the anthro- pologist, but such a portrait as the present, of a spirit in its actual embodiment, is rare if not unifiue. From another point of view, the theological development of the fierce Killer- Whale offers instructive evidence. Dr. Dawson records the native belief that he breaks the canoes, drownhig the Indians, who themselves become whales. Two Indians once went out and the wiiales attacked tlie canoe. One of the men, grasping his knife, said if he were drowned and became a whale, lie would hold his knife and kill the others. Accordingly he killed the chief and reigns in his stead. This seems a plain enough myth of transformation, but it bears on the uri,L;ia of the modern Indian belief in a Good and Evil Deity. While, it is recorded, their chief deity was a good lieing, Suniatlaidns, to whose happy region went warriors slain in battle, their principle of evil was Huidddna, chief of the lower regions, typified by or assuming the form of the dreaded Killer-Whale, the Orca atcr, by whom the drowned are taken and become his subjects. Where in this account of a Good and Evil Deity the native belief ends and the missionary teaching begins is not easy to determine, so perfect is the junction.^ Erplnnation of Plate XIII. Two Totem House-post.s, in tlie Pitt-Rivei-s Museura, at Oxford. s ' Tlie principal literary authorities for Haida and Tsirashian Toteiiiism used in the previou paper and tliia are :— J. G. Swan, "Haidali ImW&m;' Smithwnian Contributions to Knonlcdgt', vol. xxi, 1876. George M. Dawson, " Haida iiidiaiis," [{eport of Geological Swvei/ of Canada fur 1878-9, App. A. Albert P. Niblack, "Coast Indians of Southern Alaska and Northern Britis Columbia," Smithsonian Reports, U.S. A'ational Museum, 1888. Franz Boas, "Reiiorta of Committee on North- Western Tribes of Canada," British Association, Section of Anthropology, 1880-1898 ; Bulletin American Museum of Natural History, vol. ix, 18i.i7. ( 138 ) REMARKS ON TOTEMISM, WITH ESPECIAL REFERENCE TO SOME MODERN THEORIES RESPECTING IT. By Edward B. Tylok, D.C.L., RR.S., Professor of Anthropology in the University of Oxford. It is desirable that I should state the purpose of my offering these remarks on Totemism. Though I have written very little about it, my first lines date as far back as 1867, and a little later I came to be well acquainted with J. F. McLennan, the beginner of the systematic study of tliis and kindred branches of anthropology. At that time he was engaged on his papers on Worship of Animals and Plants, and we had much conversation on the philosophy of totems. Tlie cause of my holding aloof from published discussions of the subject since has been a sense of its really bewildering complexity, coupled with tlie expectation that furtlier research among the races of the lower culture would clear its outlines, as indeed has been to some extent the case, especially in North America and Australia, the regions where totemism proper is most at home. The particular cause of my drawing up the present paper was my being invited to address a philosopliical society meeting in Oxford under the presidency of Professor Sanday, the subject assigned to me being certain views on the antliropology of religion contained in the works of Mr. J. G. Fi-azer and Dr. F. B. Jevons. Whatever my hearers may have learnt from my remarks, at any rate I became aware that the time had come for a closer examination than seems to have been hitherto made as to t!ie somewhat various and vague ideas wliich have become associated with the term totemistn. It was evident that till this was done, it would not eveu be possible to ascertain what place the totem may properly claim to occui)y in the theory of religion. My having undertaken to describe the great Totem- Post at, Fox Warren, made the present a suitable occasion for bringing the general principles which this monument illustrates under the consideration of the Anthropological Institute. It will be iieedful for me to dissent from some current views and, what is of more consequence tlian such critical objections, to draw attention to the confusion in terms and definitions in use, which interferes with distinct reasoning. May I say tliat as time prevents any attempt at fully arguing out the problems raised, all I positively undertake at present is to bring forward evidence shownig that particular conclusions are not really settled, and cannot be without further discussion. When McLennan in 1865 publiiihed his Primitive Marriayc, his interest in totems was merely incidental to his study of exogamy. The North American '■- '■- Professor E. T5. Tvmii. — Rciivirls on Totemivn. 139 totem animal only comes in as furnisliinjj tlie family name wliich classified clansliip within whose limits marriage is forbidden, and tliougli Sir George (hey had previously called attention to the close similarity between the kobong-clans of West Australia and tlie totem-clans of Nortii America, McLennan in refeiring to him only attends to tlie question of intermarriage. It was in 1809 that the conception of totemism took shape in McLennan's mind as a great principle, one may even say the great principle of early religion, as well as early society. As his articles on the " Worship of Animals and Phuits " in the Fortm(/htli/ liecicw in 1869-70 funiish the outsets of most of the lines along wliich the theory of totemism has been carried on to this day, as well as of some of its turns which have- obstructed progress, a brief indication must be giNcn of the tenour of these remarkable papei-s. McLennan begins : " The subjects of the inquiry are totems and totem-gods, or, speaking generally, animal and vegetable gods." The order of the e.xpositio'i, he continues, is to explain what totems are, and what are their usi ^l concomitants ; to throw light on the intellectual condition of men in the totem stage of development : to examine the evidence that mankind in prehistoric i,imes came through the totem stage, having animals and plants, and the heavenly bodies conceived as animals for gods before the anthropomorphic gods appeared; and to reach the conclusion that the hypothesis of the ancient nations having come through the totem stage is sound. Now McLerman was quite aware of what goes to make a totem in North America, that it involves the division of tribes into totem-clans each with its proper totem-animal, and the rule of exogamy forbidding marriage within the clan so as to necessitate intermarriage between clans ; the totem-animals being also regarded a.3 kinsfolk and protectors of the clansmen, who respect them and abstain from killing or eating them. Such totems, he remarks, prevail among two distinct groups of tribes, the American Indians and the aborigines of Australia, and it may be believed that many more instances of their prevalence will be brought to light. I mention this to show that he started with a distinct idea of what may be calleil totemism proper, with its division of tribes into clans allied to species of animals, etc., between whom and the men there were rules of marriage, pro- tectior., and res{>ect. It will now be seen how, starting from this totemism proper, McLennan proceeded to take in with it other kinds of animal and plant •worship, and to form the result into an expanded doctrine which he continued to call totemism. In order to understand McLennan's argument, its starting point has to lie found in a narrative by J. Long, a trader and interpreter among the North American Indians in the last century. Of the Chippeways (Ojibwas^, Long writes, that one part of the religious superstition of the savages consists in eacli of them havi his totam, or favourite spirit, which he believes .vatohes over him. Tiiia totam they conceive assumes the shape of some beast or otlier, and therefore they never kill, hunt, or eat the animal whose form they think this totam bears. ^1 140 I'RorESSOK E. B. Tylor. — Remarks on Totemwn, One of the Indians, whose totam was a bear, dreamt (it seems) that he went to a piece of swampy ground about five days' march from Long's wigwam, and saw a large herd of elks, moose and other animals. He went accordingly, and seeing the animals he had dreamed of, fired and killed a bear. Shocked at the transaction, and dreading the displeasure of the Master of Life, whom he conceived he had highly offended, he fell down and lay senseless for some time ; recovering from his state of insensibility he got up and was making the best of his way to Long's house when he was met in the road by another large bear, who pulled him down and scratched his face. The Indian relating this event, at his return, added iu the simplicity of his nature that the bear asked him what could induce him to kill his totam, to which he replied that he did not know he was among the animals when he fired at the herd, that he was very sorry for the misfortune and hopeil he would have pity on him ; and tliat the bear then suffered him to depart, telling hun to be more cautious in future, and to acquaint all the Indians with the circumstance, that their totams might be safe and the Master of Life not angry with them. i*d he entered my house. Long coi. inues, he looked at me very earnestly and pronounced these words: " Amik hunjey ta Kitchce Anrmscarliosey nind Totam cawuncka nee wee gcossay sannegat dehwoye, or " Beaver ! (Long's Indian name) my faith is lost, my totam is angry, I shall never be able to hunt any more.'" CMcLennan's comment on this story is as follows : " Should one be surprised to find that admonitory bear of tlie man's imaf.'ination worshipped as a god further on in the history of Bear tribes advancing undisti;rbed by external influences, correlated with the Master of Life in tlie Olympus, or even preferred to, or identified with him ? " On examination, however, I venture to think that neither can the trader- interpreter's account be accepted as correct, nor taken as a foundation for the hypothesis of the development of totem-animals into gr(!at deities which the anthropologist builds upon it. Long evidently mixed up two articles of Ojibwa belief which are quite distii!ct. He knew the word tohm (o<-o/c-m= his ote, clan- name or clan-animal) and indeed his book very likel) introduced the word into European language ; also he knew of the rule against kdling or eating the totem- animal. But his book shows no sign of his having learnt tlie system of the Oi'bwa clan, without which knowledge he would not understand bow the totem-species of animal was common to the clan as a whole. When he describes it as a favourite spirit which watches over each Indian, he evidently confuses it with the guardian spirit in animal form, which the individual Ojibwa also had, and called not his totem but his manitu or spirit, in trapper's jargon his medicine. Then, as to the particular story in question, how does it prove that the imaginary bear, who, as the Indian declared, scratched his face and gave him u warning from the Master of Life, was a being in course of development into a god to rival or become the Master of Life himself ? It has to be noted as to these Ojibwas, that far from ■^px \\ • J. Long, Voyaget and travels of an Indian Interpreter and Trader. London, 1791. 8 PitOFESSOR E. B. TvLOK. — Eevwrks on Totemism. 141 their religion "advancing undisturbed by external influences," it liad really suptv- l)()sed on the old native beliefs the Jesuit missionary teaching, especially as to this Master of Life, who was so distinctly the Christian Deity that, as Long more than once mentions, tlie Indian name for a Itoman Catliolic priest was Master of Life's man. Not only do we find a development hypothesis of deities read into a story which does not contain it, but tlie whole account is a warning of the risk of uncontrolled tlieory as to divine evolution. From an angry bear in the backwoods to a supreme deity of the world is too long a course to be mfipped out in merely ideal stages. In following out McLennan's original and suggestive if inconclusive attempt to interpret the great gods of the world as evolved from the humbler rank of totem- animals, it has to be noticed how other evidence of animal-worship had to be dealt with in order to people the Totem Olympus with totem-gods of superior tribes. In order to make a place for the Natchez Indians of Florida, who claimed to be descended from the sun, and were called suns accordingly, and took wives only from other clans, the fundamental idea of a totem-creature as one of a species is dropped without scruple, and tiiese people are incorporated as totemists whose totem was the sun. Another great province of religion is annexed by a theory that gols who have tlieir incarnations or embodiments in species of sacred animals may be considered as ,, deities evolved from these animals as totems. For e.xamples, the highest Fijian HI "^S^ deity is Ndengei, whose shrine is the serpent, and second to him is Tui Lakemba, \1 who claims the hawk as his shrine, this claim being indeed disputed by another god who clauns the hawk for himself. One god is supposed to inhabit the eel, wherefore the worshipper of the eel-god must never eat eels. The sacred animal receives food and reverence in the mmie of his god ; when a land-crab comes to V tlie island of Tiliva, where he is sacred, but now seldom seen, presents are made to him lest his god should bring dixjught or death on the islanders. On these 8t( .V .ants, derived from the Fiji and the Fijians of Thomas Williams, McLennan comments thus : — " These gods are tribal, and no one can doubt but they are totems who have made such progress as we above suggested the Jiear might / make, and are become the objects of a more or less regular worship — the Serpent tribe dominant, and the Hawk tribe in the second place." Yet considering that there is no evidence of totems or totem-clans proper in Fiji, this conjecture which " no one can doulit " is one which no one need believe. Indeed, if it is assumed that every sacred animal is a totem and every group of worshippers a totem- clan, this is to contradict McLennan himself, who in a passage close by defines totemism aa fetishism plus exogamy and maternal descent, a definition wiiich is in great measure throwing up his cai?e. Such want of consistency shows that the whole Fortnightly Jieview essay is rather to be treated as an introductory speculation tliaii as a system. It should be remembered that its author thought well to insert a note to the eflect that he only submitted an hypothesis whicii even if it failed would be useful in dealing with the evidence. What is still more to the pui-jjose is that he never reprinted these articles, though he spent \ lii^aOiio T 142 PnoFESSOR E. B. TvLon. — linnnrh on Totcmism. much time in his later years in gatherinjj further materials bearing on the question. Necessary as they are to every student of the subject, it is satisfactory that they are now published in tiie sui)i)leuientary volume of his works.' lUit it would not be needful to criticise their details so many years after date, were it not that JMclAMUian's authority has had weight enough to induce modern writers to roi)eat even his conjectures ns established principles. Mr. J. G. Frazer's little manual of Totemism* is as a classified collection of evidence of permanent value to Autliropologj'. The writer treats totems under three heads, the rhni-totnn, common to a whole clan; the so-totcm, an Australian variety ; and the imUviduul-totem, belonging to a single person and not hereditary. But the clan-totem being the most important, he explains that when totems and totemism are mentioned without qualitication, tlie clan-totem is always referred to. Now it has been just mentioned how i^lcl<«iman, when writing on animals, etc., in which Fijian gods become incarnate, treats these as equivalent to totems, with which in fact they bave but a partial aiul doubtful amdogy. Mr. Frazer not only follows this line of reasoning, but carries it further. His chief authority is Dr. Turner's Samoa.^ This book is familiar to me (in fact I wrote the preface to it), so that I was puzzled to read passages cited from it by Mr. Frazer, as to totems and clans connected with them, such being as foreign to Samoan as to Fijian inotitutions. Thus it is stated that the Samoans thought it death to injure or eat their totems, for the totem would take up his abode in tlie sinner's body till it caused his death ; if a Turtle man ate of a turtle, he grew very ill and the voice of the turtle was heard in his inside, saying, " he ate me, I am killing him." It is related as from J)r. Turner, that when among the cuttle-fi.sh clan an offence of this kind had been committed, the clan met and chose a person to go through the pretence of lieing bakeil as an expiation. But on reference to the original passages in Dr. Turner's book, it will be fountl that neither totems nor totem-clans are there, either by name or description. It was a family god who said from within the body of the offending turtle- eater, " I am killing this man, he ate my incarnation." As to the cuttle-fish, it was as a household god, that is, a god selected for one or more members of a family at their birth, that he was appeased by the ceremony of a human victim being baked in a cold oven. From these and other cases it api)ears t \t Mr. Frazer had so framed his mind on INIcLennan's theory, as to feel justified in altering liie wry terms of the account of Samoan religion, in order to make them tit with it. Yet Dr. Turner is an authority uf the first cla.'js, a'nl his understanding of the Samoan theology is confirmed by the Samoan Teds of Dr. Stiibel.* Tliu doctrine of totem-animals and tlie doctrine of incarnation-animals no doubt both belong to the general theory of animal worship, but it does not follow ' J. F. McLennan, Stiidieti in Ancient Iliitory. Second Series, Appendix, 1896. » J. O. Prazer, Totemism, 1887. ' O. Turner, Sonwi, 1884. • O. Stuebel, Hamoanisc/ie I'exte, Veroffentlichungeu aus dem K. Mai=euiu flir Volkerkunde, Berlin, 1895. i PuoFESSOU E. B. Tylok. — Rciimrks on Totemum. 14:5 that a species of animals allieil to a clan of men is to be reyanled as the same as a species of animals iniiabited by a god. Yet the tl.eory of develoiJinent of gods from totems has its chief supjwrt in tiie Fijian and Samoan gods, wIkj, it is taken for granted, were tlms invented out of their own sacred animals. Let us test the value of such an assumption l)y the example of the great Malayo-Polynesian heaven-god T;'.::galoa, kncnvn from the Indian Archipelago down to New Zealand, and of whom tlie widespread myth is told of his creating the earth with the aid of his daughter, Turi the snipe. In Samoa he is called Tangaloa langi or Tangaloa of the Sky, and he becomes incarnate in the snipe as his sacred creature. Therefore, according to the totem-theory we are now discussing, this Polynesian Jupiter, as he has been called, may be set down as a highly developed snipe. Indeed, tlie tlieory has no limit in a religion in which any priest of authority need only give out that his god will appear in a rat or an eol, for rats or eels to be estiiblished as his incarnations, and claimed by European theorists as totems from which the god himself arose in days of old. In arguing against premature conjectures as to the origin of deities, I am anxious that the investigation of causes tending in this directi(m should not be restricted. The development of ideas of deity in early religion is but imperfectly understood, and so far as known seems to have resulted from various and complex causes. Among such it is necessary to consider the tendency of mankind to classify out the universe, supposing each class of objects or actions to be un(U;r the headship of a mythical being of suitable rank, its ancestor, creator, maintainor, ruler. Far from being prejudiced against this process of formation of gods, I did my best many years ago to collect a set of examples of such generalisation.' Thus among the American Indians, each kind of animals was believed to have an Elder Brother, as it were the principle and origin of all the individuals, and so marvellously great and powerful, that as the missionary who mentions them declares, the elder brother of the beaver is as big as our cabin. Again, in Slavonic folklore, we hear of the snake older than all snakes, and the raven ehler brother of all ravens, etc. These with otliers, such as the Peruvian stai- archetypes of tigers, sheep, etc., I classed under the heading of " species-deities." Mr. Frazer naturally seeks support for the theory of totem-gods in these cases, and to the two which appear in liis manual he adds a statement from Falkner's Description of J'at(Xliint, or othei- ol)je('t, and tliim cuiiMin^ a Hvnipatlietic connexion botwemi tho person nml the receptacle of his soul. This Wiikon' exeinplities from foilvlore by tlie Hindu tale of I'liiulikin, whose life was bound uj) witli the life of the little \!,vv\i\\ parrot, which wan in tiic litth' (rai;e, which was under the six water-jars, ami ho forth ; tiie RuHsian tale of KoHliclii tiu' deathless, whose death was in an egj,', and tlie egg in a duck; tiie Malay tale of Itidasari, whose soul was in a fish, etc. Thence we jiass to tho practice of sorcerers in the Malay nrchipelago of depositing the souls of people for security outside them at dangerous times, as when the soul of a woman in childbirth is transferred to an iron cloavei in charge of the scnc^rer. In this way Wilken accounts for the Mexican idea of the animal assigned to a child as its mnjunl or tutelary genius, tiiere being hence- forth symi»athy between the two, so that the death of tho one involves the death of the other. So he explains the sympathetic tree (tn which the life of a person or family depends, as so often is related in Euro]>caii folklore. This evidence and argument provide Mr. Krazer witli a tiieory of the origin of totems. He argues that the nuin's relation to the totem is derived from his S(jul (or one of his scads) residing for security in one of the totem-creatures, whence his worship of them and his oVijeetion to killing and eating them, and tiieir reci])rocal kindness to and protection of him, and the general conception that the man and his totem guardian are Icinsfolk l)y descent. It will be seen that this theory goes part of tlic way toward accounting for the peculiar qmilities of totems. 15ut there are also objections to it which seem, to me at least, insuperable. One is that if tribes living under the totem-system really thought their souls were in the totem-aninmls,- we should have heard of it long before this, whereas there does not appear to be a single mention of such an idea. Also the rule that an exoganious savage under the maternal system abstains from killing or eating his totem-animal tor I'ear of losing his life, while his wife and children, being of a diH'erent totem, put him daily in such danger by devouring it, seems a hopeless inconsistency. I will not, however, l)ursue this line of criticism, being more anxious to call attention to Wilken's own view of the origin of totems, wliicli, if it does not completely solve the totem- problem, at any rate seems to mark out its main lines. This eminent anthrojwlogist htus collected in his Animism among the Peoples of the Mahuj Archipelago* accounts of the native animal-worship prevailing in that region, one of those where it is still possible to study the state of mind of ])eoples who frankly recognise in certain animals their s])iritual eiiualw and indeed, superiors; beings whose bodies not oidy has e limbs and organs corresitonding to their own, but who have, a* it were, human thought and speech, and may excel man not merely in strength but in wisdom. The crocodile is especially venerated ; he is Tuwan-besar, • G. A. Wilken, De Siimonsage ; De Iktrekking lusur/icii ,Ve)ischt:n-J)iercn-en PlantetUercn ; in IndUclie O'ifJs, 1884, 1888 : i'eher das llaarop/er, etc., in Rovue Coluniale Internatiunale, 1886-7. » (}. A. Wilken, Ilct Aninisme bij de Volken van den Indischen Archipel,, 1884-6, piirt I., pp. 74-6. ' ■•-^ riioFESSOH E. 13. Tylor. — Iiem'trk$ on Totemism. 147 Orent Lord, and regarded as e([ual in rank to the Dutch Resident. Crocodiles are kindly and protective beuigs, to kill whom is ninrder, indeed tliey may be nmn's near relatives; od'erings are made to them, nnd peoplj look forward to the great l)le.sHedneHfl of lieconiing (■riiciidik's when tJKty die. S) it is with tiger.s, wlioni the Sumatrans \v(jrHhij) and call ancestors (nine/,), whom their countrymen will not catch or wonnd but in self-defence, .so that when one has K-en trapped they try to jiersuatle him tliat it was not their doing. Wilken sees in this transmigration of souls the link v/hich connects totemism with ancestor-worship, and on considering his HUggeslion, we may see how nnich weight is to be given to the remarks made independently by Dr. Codrington' as to Melanesia. He found tiial tiie people in Ulawa would not eat or i)lant bananas, because an influential man hail prohibited the eating of the banana after his death because he would be in it; the elder natives would say, we cannot eat .so-and-so, and after a few years they would have said, we cannot eat our ancestor. In Malanta, a man will often say lie will be in a shark. J)r. Codrington has lately sent me a note from Mr. Sleigh, of Lifu, who writes: "When a father was about to die, surrounded by members of his family, ho miglit say what animal ho will be, say a butterfly or some kind of bird. That creature would be sacred to his family, who would not injure or kill it ; on seeing or falling in with such an object the person would say, ' That is k((f,a (jtapa),' and would, if po.ssible, oiler him a young cocoa-nut. But they did not adoi)t thus the name of a tribe." As to such detnih, we may, I think, accept the cautious remark of iJr. Codrington, tlint in the Solomon Islands there are indeed no totems, but what throws light on them elsewln;re. The ditliculty in understanding the relation of a clan of men to a .species of animals or jilants is met by the transnu^i.vCion of .souls, which bridges over the gap between the two, so tliat the men and the animals become united l)y kinship and mutual alliance ; an ancestor having lineal descen- dants among men and sharks, or men and owls, is thus the founder of a totem- family, which mere increa.se may convert into a totem-clan, already provided with its animal name. ]>y thus finding in the world-wide doctrine of soul-transference an actual cause producing the two collateral lines of man and beast which constitute the necessary franunvork of totemism, we seem to reach at least something analogous to its real cause. lUit considering the variations found even between neighbouring tril)es in the working of their ideas, it wouhl l)e incautious to lay down as yet a hard and fast scheme of their origin and development. As an example of this may l)e taken the remarkable new information by Professor Ualdwiu .Si)encer,' of Melbourne, as to the totem-system of the Arunta tribe, contained in papers communicated to the Koyal Society of Victoria in anticipation of his forthcoming work on the 2'iihcs of Central Australia. The exogamous arrange- ments of the Aruntas, as is common in the country, depend on classes or phratries, descent being on the father's side. Individuals are classed by totem-names, Hawk, Witchetty Grub, Emu, Kanguru, Grass Seed, etc., though these do not • R. H. Codrington, T/te Melanesiuns, pp. 32-.3. ' W. B. Spencer in Proc. Roy. Sue. Victoria, vol. x, N.S., 1807-8. I II I I IIW—F 148 PiioFfjssou E. n. TvLon. — Jiemnrks on Totfinivn. rt»milnto the mar.inges. The oxitlorers were much pcriiloxed to liml thiit siu'h toteni-imincH of thu chiMruti did not nucosHnrily folfow tlioHu of uither {xirent ; tims of two piiii'iitH, both Witchotty (Jnilts, oiio child iiii>