The background of totemism / by E. Washburn Hopkins.

  • Edward Washburn Hopkins
Date:
1920
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The background of totemism / by E. Washburn Hopkins. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    10/30 page 574
    he was asked. “Certainly,” he replied, “for, look you, in this place is mentioned smoke, here they speak of fire, and here again they sing of a car, and what is a locomotive save a car with fire and smoke?” So, to prove the existence of totemisni, it is not enough to point to descent from a lion or to an individual name. In Africa clan-totem- ism often reverts to animal names given to one chief in flattery, “O thou elephant,” “O thou lion among men.” Totem is said to mean “token,” implying group relationship; but not blood relationship, since this would exclude plant totems, unless these are all secondary. But at present there is a tendency to deprive the word totem of every meaning it ever had. The totem of British Columbia is a protective spirit (often not animal) seen in a vision and has no relation to relationships it is individual, not clannish. An African chief, on dying, said that he would become a butterfly. Straightway the butterfly became the “totem” of his clan (i. e., they would not kill it). And what shall we say of totems defined as “odds and ends” and “knots” (in Samoa), or the “heart of all animals” and “intestines” (African Kiziba “totems”) ? What is the use of calling these totemic phenomena? Each is simply a case of taboo; to one clan “intestines,” qua taboo, became sacred; but that is not a totem. So sex totems, honorific totems, color totems, cloud totems (Austra¬ lian), twins as totems (Bantu Bahima)—are these totems at all? Oi shall we say with Doctor Goldenweiser that, since everj^ characteris¬ tic of totemisni is negligible,^ there remains as totemism nothing save a vague tendency for social gi’oups to become associated with objects and symbols of emotional value,” and that totemism is merely a “specific socialization of emotional values’ ? ould not this tenuous definition apply to a Baptist church as well as to a totemic clan? It may not be superfluous to remind the general student that totem¬ ism as the foundation of religion is only one of many suggested foundations, not one of which by itself will uphold the burden placed upon it. It was thought to be fundamental because it was said to be universal. But despite Bobertson Smith’s great work it has not been proved to be Semitic.^ Nor has it been foinid among the Aryans, where even in the Lupercalia it cannot be discovered.^ In Africa what is called totemism is not religious and is usually derived >Thc “invariable characteristics” of totemism are supposed to be exogamy, taboo, re¬ ligious veneration (totem worship), name, and descent. But none of these is a factor in totemism. Dr. River’s “ three essentials ” are in typical form exogamj, descent, and taboo (of totem flesh), whereas totemism may exist without any ot these character¬ istics and essentials. See “Totemism, an Analytical Study,” by A. A. Goldenweisei, Journal of American Folklore, 23 (1910), p. 182, 2GC, 275. = What Dr. Roliertsoii Smith showed to exist among the Semites were elements of a pos¬ sible totemism ; Init he could not show their combination. See his Religion of the Semites, p. 42 f. and 287; and (opposed) Lyall, in JRAS, 1904, p. 589. 3S('e L. Deuliner in the Archiv fiir Ueligionswisseiischatt, 1910, p. 481 t Aryan fields, see Saussaye, The Religion of the Teutons, p. 74, 98 ; and A. B. Keith. JRAS, 1907, p. 939.
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3