Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/867

 TOTAL

789

TOTEMISM

pfforts with Gladstoiip, in favour of a rouninn of the Churches.

Bei-lesheim in Kntholik, I (1899), 136 sqq,; Capecelatro, Commemor. di D. Luigi Tosli (Monte Casaino, 1899); Cipolla, Luitfi Tosti ele liuf rdazioiii col Piemonte iu Atti d. R. acad. delle sc. di Torino, XXXVI (sSanceof 25 Nov., 1900); Ovidio, II padre Luigi Tcsli in Kit. d'llalia, I (1898), 24 sqq.; Gat, Le pire TosI, in Kerur dc Pans (Nov., 1904); Pistelli, // jjadre Tosli in Ar- chivio star, ital., series V, XXI, 241 sqq.; Quintavalle, La con- ciliazione /ra I'llalia e U papalo (Milan, 1907).

Giuseppe Gali.avresi.

Total Abstinence Union of America, Catho- lic. See Tempekance Movements.

Totemism, from ote, root ot, posses.si ve form olem, in the Ojibwuv dialect of the Algonquin stock of Ame- rican Indians; bj' some authorities spelled doikme (Father de 8met), todem (Father Petitot), Toodaim, dodaiin, totam (J. Long); the original signification was apparently a person's family or tribe, and in a nar- rower sense his belongings.

Totemism constitutes the group of superstitions and customs of which the totem is the centre. It is defined as the intimate relation supposed to exist be- tween an individual or a group of individuals and a class of natural objects, i. e. the totem, by which the former regard the latter as identified with them in a mystical manner and in a. peculiar sense their own belongings, so that t hey bear the name of the totem and show this belief in certain customs. The conviction of the intimate union constitutes the religious aspect of Totemi.sm; the customs which result therefrom form its sociological aspect. If the union exists be- tween an individual and a cla.ss of natural objects, w'e have individual Totemism. When it exists between a clan and a natural class we have clan TotemLsm. Frazer mentions sex Totemism, but that is peculiar to Au.straha. The totem is most frequently an ani- mal species, more rarely a plant, occasionally an in- animate object, e. g. sun, wind, rock, etc. Totemism is widespread and developed among the .\nierican Indians and the aborigines of Australia. Traces of it are found in South Africa, in the Polynesian Islands, and among the Dyaks of India. Mauss says it does not exist in all .savage races of our day (Ann(5e eociologique, IV, 1S99-1900); Reinach maintains that it existed among the Greeks and Celts (Cultes, Mythes et Rehgions, II, Paris, 190.5); Gomme, in the British Isles (.Archaeological Rev., Ill, 1889); Thomas, in Wales (Rev. de I'histoire des religions, XXXVIII, 1898); Renel, among the Romans (Cultes mihtaires de Rome, Lyons, 1903). It is doubtful whether Totemism existed among the Arj-an races, and the facts alleged can be explained by idolatry. Loret maintains that Totemism existed among the early Eg\-ptians, but evidently confounds this belief with animal-worship. Robertson Smith holds that Totemism lies at the basis of the Semitic religions. Zapletal has opened up anew this problem, and ques- tions Smith's conclusions. Evidence from animal names is now admitted to be a precarious support for the Totem theory. Frazer clearly shows that there are sacred animals and plants which are not totems; and Levy denies to Totemism any role among the early Hebrews. Hence the present writer rejects the opinion of A. Lang that in the education of man- kind Totemism has i)layed a part everywhere.

I. History. — The phenomena of Totemism were first brought to the knowle<lge of the civilized world by the Jesuit missionaries to North America in the seventeenth century. The earliest accounts in Eng- lish came from J. Long (Voyages and Travels, London, 1791). Following these are accounts of Major S. H. Long (ed. by Edwin .James, London, 1823), James, Warren, Morgan. Schoolcraft, and Cat- lin. Phenomena of the same kind were observed by travellers and misiiionaries in .Australia. The impor- tance of Totemism in the early history of society waa first pointed out by J. F. McLennan, who proposed as

a working hypothesis that the ancient nations of the world had passed through a peculiar kind of P'etishism or Animism which finds its typical representation in the totem-tribes of Australia' and of North America ("Fortnightly Rev.", Oct.-Nov., 18(59; Feb., 1870; "Studies in Ancient History", London, 1896). On these lines Robertson Smith attempted to show that Totemism lay at the root of the Semitic religions and thus was the basis of the faith now embraced by the most civilized nations of the world ("Animal Wor- ship among Arabs" in "Cambridge Jour, of Phil.", 1879; "Kinship and Marriage in early Arabia", 2nd ed., London, 1903; "Religion of the Semitics", Edin- burgh, 1889; "Sacrifice" in Encyc. Britannica, 9th ed.); F. B. Jevons went further and affirmed that here are found the germs out of which all religion and all material progress have been evolved (Introd. to the History of Religion, London, 1896); hence Totemism was regarded as an established theory with the foun- dation laid by McLennan and the superstructure by Frazer, Smith, and Jevons. This theory is now re- jected by scholars. Father Brun, writing of French West Africa, says that Totemism does not appear asa precise stage of religious evolution exclusive of all other beliefs; it is simpty an element of these beliefs. MuriUier criticises Jevons (Revue de I'hist. des re- ligions, XXXVI). The investigation of Franz Boas among the Indians of North-West Canada and of Spencer and Gillen among the .'Vustralian aborigines gave the decisive blow to the theory and opened a new phase in the study of Totemism. Hence Hill-Tout says that Totemism is not the ideal and exact social or religious system of savage regimentation which some writers have tried to show. It is found among races varying much in modes of living, e. g. hunting, pastoral, agricultural, and industrial, and, becoming part of their varied beliefs and customs, has appeared to assume differing forms.

II. Origin. — Totemism must be simple to the savage mind, yet it is a puzzle to anthropologists. A great mass of facts different and at times in seeming contradiction have been gathered in America and Australia, yet the resemblances are so many and so close as to justify the classification under one common name. Different explanations have been proposed, and these have varied as new data were added. There is scarcely any other class of social phenomena more diflScult to explain. Frazer says a definition is only provisional and A. Lang resorts to "conjectures" and "gues.ses" (Secret of the Totem, p. 28). The discus- sion has produced a wealth of literature which has served to exaggerate the real position and influence of Totemism. The difficulty is to define the nature of the relation between the individual or clan and their totem. Hence: —

(a) The Name-Theory. — Herbert Spencer classes Totemism under animal-worship and saj'S its exi)la- nation is found in the primitive custom of naming children after natural objects from some accidental circumstances or fiinciful resemblance, and then in confounding these metai)horical names or nicknames with the real objects, i. e. ancestors, and consequently paying to the animals the .same reverence they paid their ancestors. Hence a phase of ancestor-worship founded on mistaking metaphors for facts (Prin. of Sociol., I, xxii). Akin to the "nickname" theory of Si)encer is the explanation of Lord Avebury. He views Totemism as nature-worshij) and says it arose from the practice of naming individuals and then their families after particular animals; the individuals would look upon the .animals at first with interest, then with respect, and at length with a sort of awe (Marriage, Totemism, and Religion, London, 1911). A. Lang prop6ses the "sobriquet" theory. He adopts the opinion of de la Vega that totems were names impo.sed by outsiders to distinguish the indi- viduals or families from one another (Secret of the