TOTEMISM
791
TOTEMISM
(Totomism and Exogamy, II, 103, u). Morgan
states tliat this condition is true of the Iroquois,
whose clans are jjermanent even with mother descent.
Hill-Tout, writes that in Norlh-Wcst Canada the
totem is hereditary either from father to son in the
paternal right, or from the man to his sister's children
in the maternal right. For even under maternal
right the head of the clan is invariably a inan — the
elder male relative on the maternal side. Thus the
founders of families and of totem-crests aie as invari-
ably men under matriarchy as under patriarchy; in
the former, indirectly through the man's sister, in
the latter, directly to his children (Trans. Roy. Soc.
Canada, IX, XI; B.A.A.S., London, 1889). Frazer
points out that among the Melanesians, where mother-
kin prevails, the nearest male relative of the children
is the mother's brother (loc. cit., II, 74). And
Swan ton says of the Tlingit shamans that spirits
descended from uncle to nephew. The great diffi-
culty with the real inheritance theory is that it does
not explain enough. It may account in places for
the change of the jiersoual totem of an ancestor into
the clan totem, but it fails to tell how or why the same
totem is held by different clans or tribes or stocks not
connected by ties of blood-relationship. The natural
explanation is that the fauna and flora of a country
are substantially the same, and individuals in different
parts belonging to different tribes could in the usual
way acquire a totem which they would transmit to
their descendants. Thus with members of the same
clan there would be the same totem with consanguin-
ity. With members of different clans having the
same totem there would not be consanguinity but a
kind of relationship based in the possession of the
same. Hence Dr. Fison writes of the AustraUans:
"All men of the same generation who bear the same
totem are tribally brothers, though they may belong
to different and widely separated tribes" (quoted
by Lang, "Secret of the Totem", 45). If therefore
real inheritance be supplemented by supposed inheri-
tance,' it can be safely maintained that the clan
totem, taken in its widest extent, is a development
or exten.?ion of the individual totem or manitou
through real or supposed inheritance. The nature
of the supposed inheritance becomes clear from the
following.
III. Nature. — The ba.sis of Totemism is the ani- mistic conception of nature. The hfe revealed in living things, the forces manifested by physical objects are ascribed to spirits animating them or dwelling therein. "There is indeed nothing in nature", mites Charlevoix, "if we can believe the savages, which has not its spirit" ("Histoire de la Nouv. France", Paris, 1744, VI, G7). The feehng of weakness in the midst of powers and forces greater than his own leads him to seek union with one or more of these powers. It becomes his guide and support; it.s power is added to his; its hfe or "essence" or "mystery" becomes part of his very own, he is called by its name, and .some part of its physical embodiment is viewed as his most valued possession, as the mark of his spirit protector and the sign of his strength- ened life, i. e. his "medicine" or "my.stery". Thus savages believe themselves endowed with the qualities of their totems. Thus we can understand the birth and death ceremonies of the totem tribes, the facts that in the tribal dances and ceremonies the individ- uals imitate in action or costume the appearance and habits of their totems. So also we can under- stand the respect or reverence which the individual has for his totem, the intimate relation existing between them, the fact that he regards them as his kin and calls them brothers, and as far as po.ssible identifies himself with them. Thus the savage with a totem has his own human life and strength plus the spirit-life and strength of the animal or object whose totem he possesses. For, as with the natives of Brit-
ish Columbia, the inua or uija, i. e. the "essence" or
"mystery", becomes the totem, not the mere outward
form of the animal or object. He either has this
spirit-life actually and habitually compenetrating
and augmenting liis own natural i)owers or at least
possesses the right to invoke the spirit-hfe to the
augtncntation of his natural powers m time of need,
e. g. an Indian in a canoe, seeing the enemy gaining
upon him, reverently calls upon his totem, e. g. saw-
bill duck, and receives such additional strength that
he soon escapes his pursuers (Frazer, "Totemism and
Exogamy", III, p. 385). In the former case the
possession of the spirit-life is habitual and can be
conceived as passing to his descendants; in the latter
case it is occasionally present and therefore need not
be hereditary. To possess intact this spirit-life, or
at least to keep the claim to its assistance clear and
unhampered, seems to be the reason for the regular
religious ceremonies practised in regard to the totem.
Furthermore, in studying the relation of the spirit- life of the totem to the natural life of the individual, we can conceive that the latter is at times more promi- nent and at times the spirit-life is principally con- sidered. In the former case the members of the totemic clan are united, not only in the possession of the same common spirit-life, but through ties of consanguinity, by participation in a common human life. In the latter case the members of the totem clan would not of necessity be related to one another by blood, but would consider themselves relatives by a common participation in the spirit-life of the same totem. Thus we can understand why some tribes have both clan and individual totems, and again why some clans have two or more totems. Finally, in the theory that the clan totem is the natural development of the individual totem, the con- tention of some scholars that the term totem should be reserved to the clan totem is of little moment. Thus van Gennep, E. B. Tylor, and Lang hold that the clan totem alone deserves the name; and Frazer now advocates the opinion of van Gennep (Totemism and Exogamy, III, 4.50).
Hence Totemism, Uke Fetishism and Shamanism, is based on Animism, but differs from them in the way the spirits are conceived to enter into the lives of men and manifest their power. Miss Kingsley, however, maintains that Totemism is based on the pantheistic conception of the universe, which she says was held by the American Indians. But this is not correct. The Indians always made a distinc- tion between the spirit-life of the totem and the ordi- nary human life or strength of men. The former was considered sacred, mysterious, mystic, supernatural. This is shown by the terms u.sed to designate the spirit-life, e. g. unk-rm of the Dakotas, orenda of the Iroquois, tloknnln of the Kwatiutl Indians. Dorsay says that an Indian's iriiknned is considered inspired and as possessing suix-rnatural power. Thus the Indian's "medicine bag" is his "mystery bag", writes Catlin, and Dr. Hoffman tells us that the young Algonquin receives from the Great Mystery the particular animal form he might adopt as his guardian mystery, and this becomes his advisor, monitor, and intercessor with the superior manidos.
The real nature of Totemism, therefore, is the savage conception of a twofold power or life or strength in the individual, i. e. his himian life plus the •spirit-life of the totem. But the measure in which the sjiirit-life enters into the human life of the totemic in(livi<hial varies in different tribes and races, giving ris(> to the difficulties experienced by students of this subject. Thus we have the spirit -life holding a sub- ordinate position in relation to the human life; or the spirit-life so prominent that the human life is absorbed by it and consequently ignored and for- gotten; or we find both the spirit life and the human life equally recognized but at times in a confused
