Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/869

 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 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